ge of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
811412|NCT01065766|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Any Adverse Experience|An adverse event (AE) is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration whether or not considered related to the use of the product.|Up to 26 weeks|All participants who were included in the safety evaluation||Percentage of participants|||Number
811413|NCT01065779|Primary|Change From Baseline in Alkaline Phosphatase at End of Treatment|For efficacy evaluation, changes in Serum Alkaline Phosphatase were evaluated before study drug administration and at end of study drug treatment. Change was calculated as the later time point (at ~16 weeks) minus the earlier time point (baseline). The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used. That is, the last observed non-missing value was used to fill in missing values at the later point in the study.|Baseline and End of Treatment (Up to ~ 16 weeks)|Among 798 participants in safety evaluation, there was a total of 789 participants for efficacy evaluation excluding 8 participants who took study drug for < 4 weeks and 1 participant who did not enter efficacy evaluation. Only participants with lab values submitted to Sponsor were included.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811414|NCT01065779|Primary|Change From Baseline in Urine Deoxypyridinoline at End of Treatment|For efficacy evaluation, changes in Serum Deoxypyridinoline were evaluated before study drug administration and at end of study drug treatment. Change was calculated as the later time point (at ~16 weeks) minus the earlier time point (baseline). The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used. That is, the last observed non-missing value was used to fill in missing values at the later point in the study.|Baseline and End of Treatment (Up to ~ 16 weeks)|Among 798 participants in safety evaluation, there was a total of 789 participants for efficacy evaluation excluding 8 participants who took study drug for < 4 weeks and 1 participant who did not enter efficacy evaluation. Only participants with lab values submitted to Sponsor were included.||nmol/mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
811415|NCT01065779|Primary|Change From Baseline in Serum Osteocalcin at End of Treatment|For efficacy evaluation, changes in Serum Osteocalcin were evaluated before study drug administration and at end of study drug treatment. Change was calculated as the later time point (at ~16 weeks) minus the earlier time point (baseline). The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used. That is, the last observed non-missing value was used to fill in missing values at the later point in the study.|Baseline and End of Treatment (Up to ~ 16 weeks)|Among 798 participants in safety evaluation, there was a total of 789 participants for efficacy evaluation excluding 8 participants who took study drug for < 4 weeks and 1 participant who did not enter efficacy evaluation. Only participants with lab values submitted to Sponsor were included.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811416|NCT01065779|Primary|Change From Baseline in Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D at End of Treatment|For efficacy evaluation, changes in Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D were evaluated before study drug administration and at end of study drug treatment. Change was calculated as the later time point (at ~16 weeks) minus the earlier time point (baseline). The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used. That is, the last observed non-missing value was used to fill in missing values at the later point in the study.|Baseline and End of Treatment (Up to ~ 16 weeks)|Among 798 participants in safety evaluation, there was a total of 789 participants for efficacy evaluation excluding 8 participants who took study drug for < 4 weeks and 1 participant who did not enter efficacy evaluation. Only participants with lab values submitted to Sponsor were included.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811417|NCT01065779|Primary|Number of Participants With Improved, Unchanged, or Worsened Disease|"Evaluation of disease improvement was conducted in 3 categories of improved, unchanged, or worsened. Changes in biochemical markers and vitamin D levels were reviewed before (baseline) and after treatment using statistical analyses to determine disease status, which was reported as either improved, unchanged, or worsened."|Baseline and end of Treatment (Up to ~ 16 weeks)|Among 798 participants in safety evaluation, there was a total of 789 participants for efficacy evaluation excluding 8 participants who took study drug for < 4 weeks and 1 participant who did not enter efficacy evaluation.||Participants|||Number
811545|NCT01067105|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Experiencing Local Nasal AEs|Local Nasal adverse events are defined as adverse events occurring in the middle ear, nose, throat, and upper respiratory tract down to the larynx, anatomic regions.|Weeks 1-26|Intent to Treat Population||percentage of participants|||Number
811418|NCT01065779|Primary|Number of Participants With Non-Serious AEs|An AE was defined as any unfavorable & unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the product, was also considered an AE. There was no required routine visit scheduled for AE assessment. AEs were collected through participant self-reporting and assessed by investigators.|Up to ~ 16 weeks and 14 days after treatment discontinuation|Safety evaluation was performed in participants who took at least one dose of study medication and completed > 1 follow up visit.||Participants|||Number
811419|NCT01065779|Primary|Number of Participants With Unexpected Adverse Events|Number of participants that experienced unexpected Adverse Events (AEs) regardless of whether or not the AE was considered related to the use of the product. There was no required routine visit scheduled for AE assessment. An AE was defined as any unfavorable & unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product. Any worsening (any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the product, was also considered an AE.|Up to ~ 16 weeks and 14 days after treatment discontinuation|Safety evaluation was performed in participants who took at least one dose of study medication and completed > 1 follow up visit.||Participants|||Number
811420|NCT01065779|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events|"Number of participants that experienced Serious Adverse events (SAE). There was no required routine visit scheduled for AE assessment. AEs were collected through participant self-reporting and assessed by investigators.
SAEs were considered serious if the event resulted in:
death or was life-threatening
prolonged an existing inpatient hospitalization
a persistent or significant disability/ incapacity
a congenital anomaly/ birth defect
a significant medical situation, other important medical event based upon appropriate medical judgment of the investigator"|Up to ~ 16 weeks and 14 days after treatment discontinuation|Safety evaluation was performed in participants who took at least one dose of study medication and completed > 1 follow up visit.||Participants|||Number
811421|NCT01065818|Primary|Optimal Timepoint During the Course of Neoadjuvant Therapy [CRT, CT (Chemotherapy) or RT Radiotherapy)] That FLT-PET Imaging Can Predict Response||2.5 months|Due to poor enrollment, data was not analyzed. Adequate data was not collected and the only type of data that remained available was the total # enrolled, some information of the population demographics, and AE/SAE logs that were submitted to the IRB for review.|||||
811422|NCT01065844|Secondary|Quality of Life|Quality of life as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30 survey|every 1 to 3 months||||||
811423|NCT01065844|Primary|Tumor Progression|Tumor progression as defined by RECIST version v1.1 criteria with ordinal measurements of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), and progressive disease (PD).|Every 1 to 3 months|Those with adverse events necessitating interruption of intervention and removal from study were not assessed for outcome measures||Participants|||Count of Participants
811424|NCT01066000|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities|A marked laboratory abnormality is defined as above and/or below the normal range of a laboratory parameter which was considered to be potentially clinically relevant. The number of participants with marked laboratory abnormality are presented. Marked laboratory abnormalities were analyzed according to the Roche specified limits for the following reference range: Haemoglobin (Hb) (11.7-17.3 g/dL), Haematocrit (Hct) (35-47%), White blood cells (WBC) (3.6-11.0 10^3/µL), Red blood cells (RBC) (3.8– 5.9 10^6/µL), MCV (80-100 fL) Platelets (150-440 10^3/µL), Iron (37-158 µg/dL), Ferritin (10-365 ng/mL), Transferrin (170-340 mg/dL), TIBC (250-450 µg/dL), TSAT (15-50%), Albumin (3.4-4.8 g/dL), hs-CRP (<= 10.000 mg/dL), Potassium (3.5-5.1 mmol/L), and Phosphorus (2.7-4.5 mg/dL).|Up to Week 28|Safety population included all participants who entered into the study and took at least one dose of study drug.The ITT and safety population were identical. Data of maximum number of participants (33 participants) available at the time of analysis were analysed and reported.||Participants|||Number
811425|NCT01066000|Secondary|Mean Monthly Dose of Methoxy Polyethylene Glycol-epoetin Beta During the Dose Titration and Evaluation Periods|Mean monthly dose of methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta during the dose titration and evaluation periods was assessed and reported.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, and Week 20|ITT population was defined as all participants who entered into study and took at least one dose of study drug. The ITT and safety population were identical. Data of maximum number of participants (24 participants) available at the time of analysis were analysed and 9 participants discontinued the study before this analysis.||μg/month||Standard Deviation|Mean
811426|NCT01066000|Secondary|Mean Number of Months Per Participant Requiring Dose Adjustment During the Dose Titration and Evaluation Periods|Mean number of months per participant requiring dose adjustment during the dose titration and evaluation periods was assessed and reported.|Up to Week 24|ITT population was defined as all participants who entered study and took at least one dose of study drug. The ITT and safety population were identical. At Week 24, data of 24 participants were included whereas 9 participants were excluded from the analysis as they discontinued the study before analysis of this outcome measure.||Months||Standard Deviation|Mean
811427|NCT01066000|Secondary|Mean Time Spent by Participants in the Haemoglobin Range of 10 – 12 g/dL During the Efficacy Evaluation Period|Mean time spent in the haemoglobin range 10 – 12 g/dL during the efficacy evaluation period (EEP) was assessed and reported.|Up to Week 24|ITT population was defined as all participants who entered study and took at least one dose of study drug. The ITT and safety population were identical. At Week 24, data of 24 participants were included whereas 9 participants were excluded from the analysis as they discontinued the study before analysis of this outcome measure.||Weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
811428|NCT01066000|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Maintaining Haemoglobin Concentration Within the Haemoglobin Range 10-12g/dL Throughout the Efficacy Evaluation Period|The proportion of participants maintaining haemoglobin concentration within the haemoglobin range 10-12g/dL throughout the efficacy evaluation period (EEP) was assessed and reported.|Up to Week 24|ITT population was defined as all participants who entered study and took at least one dose of study drug. The ITT and safety population were identical. At Week 24, data of 24 participants were included whereas 9 participants were excluded from the analysis as they discontinued the study before analysis of this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
811546|NCT01067105|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Who Discontinue Due to AEs.||Weeks 1-26|Intent to Treat Population||percentage of participants|||Number
811429|NCT01066000|Secondary|Mean Change in Haemoglobin Concentration From Screening Period and Efficacy Evaluation Period|The mean haemoglobin (Hb) concentration (g/dL) change from the baseline (Week 0) till efficacy evaluation period (EEP) was assessed and reported.|Up to Week 24|ITT population was defined as all participants who entered study and took at least one dose of study drug. The ITT and safety population were identical. At Week 24, data of 24 participants were included whereas 9 participants were excluded from the analysis as they discontinued the study before analysis of this outcome measure.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811430|NCT01066000|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that occurred during the course of the trial after study treatment had started. An adverse event was therefore any unfavourable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of study drug, whether or not considered related to the study drug. A Serious adverse event (SAE) is any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in death, are life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or results in disability/incapacity, and congenital anomaly/birth defect. The AEs were assessed from baseline to every visit throughout the treatment, post study drug discontinuation, and follow up period.|Up to Week 28|Safety population included all participants who entered into the study and took at least one dose of study drug.The ITT and safety population were identical. Data of maximum number of participants (33 participants) available at the time of analysis were analysed and reported.||Participants|||Number
811431|NCT01066000|Primary|Proportion of Participants Maintaining Average Haemoglobin During the Efficacy Evaluation Period Within the Target Range (10-12 g/dl)|The proportion of participants with their mean haemoglobin (Hb) concentration (g/dL) within the target range during the efficacy evaluation period was assessed. The target range is the reference Hb not >12 g/dL and not < 10 g/dL.|Up to Week 24|Intent to treat (ITT) population was defined as all participants who entered study and took at least one dose of study drug. The ITT and safety population were identical. At Week 24, data of 24 participants were included whereas 9 participants were excluded from the analysis as they discontinued the study before analysis of this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
811432|NCT01066039|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An Adverse Event (AE) was defined as any new untoward medical occurrences/worsening of pre-existing medical condition without regard to possibility of causal relationship. A Serious Adverse Event (SAE) was an AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death; life threatening; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; congenital anomaly/birth defect.|Baseline up to Month 6|Safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of investigational product.||participants|||Number
811433|NCT01066039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Microalbumin Level at Month 6|The change in microalbumin level at Month 6 was calculated as microalbumin level at Month 6 minus microalbumin level at baseline.|Baseline, Month 6|"FAS included all participants who took the investigational product at least once and for whom the primary efficacy endpoint (HbA1c) was measured. Here, N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and n signifies those participants who were evaluable for the specified category."||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811434|NCT01066039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Albumin/Creatinine Ratio at Month 6|The change in albumin/creatinine ratio at Month 6 was calculated as albumin/creatinine ratio at Month 6 minus albumin/creatinine ratio at baseline.|Baseline, Month 6|"FAS included all participants who took the investigational product at least once and for whom the primary efficacy endpoint (HbA1c) was measured. Here, N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and n signifies those participants who were evaluable for the specified category."||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
811435|NCT01066039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol, Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol, High Density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol and Triglyceride Level at Month 6|The change in total cholesterol, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and triglyceride levels at Month 6 was calculated as total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and triglyceride levels at Month 6 minus total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and triglyceride levels at baseline, respectively.|Baseline, Month 6|"FAS included all participants who took the investigational product at least once and for whom the primary efficacy endpoint (HbA1c) was measured. Here, N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and n signifies those participants who were evaluable for the specified category."||milligram per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811436|NCT01066039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-Peptide Level at Months 3 and 6|The change in C-peptide level at Months 3 and 6 was calculated as C-peptide level at Months 3 and 6 minus C-peptide level at baseline.|Baseline, Months 3 and 6|FAS included all participants who took the investigational product at least once and for whom the primary efficacy endpoint (HbA1c) was measured.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811437|NCT01066039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Level at Months 3 and 6|The change in insulin level at Months 3 and 6 was calculated as insulin level at Months 3 and 6 minus insulin level at baseline.|Baseline, Months 3 and 6|FAS included all participants who took the investigational product at least once and for whom the primary efficacy endpoint (HbA1c) was measured.||mcIU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811438|NCT01066039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) at Months 3 and 6|HOMA-IR is as an indicator of insulin resistance in participants with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and comorbid hypertension. HOMA-IR was derived from fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and fasting insulin (FI) using the formula: (FI [micro international units per milliliter {mcIU/mL}] * FPG [millimole per liter {mmol/L}]) divided by 22.5. The change in HOMA-IR at Months 3 and 6 was calculated as HOMA-IR at Months 3 and 6 minus HOMA-IR at baseline.|Baseline, Months 3 and 6|FAS included all participants who received at least one dose of investigational product and for whom the primary efficacy endpoint (HbA1c) was measured.||mcIU/mL * mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
811439|NCT01066039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP), Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) and Mean Blood Pressure (BP) at Month 6|The change in SBP, DBP, and mean BP at Month 6 were calculated as SBP, DBP, and mean BP at Month 6 minus SBP, DBP, and mean BP at baseline, respectively. Mean BP was calculated using the formula: (DBP plus [{SBP minus DBP} divided by 3]).|Baseline, Month 6|FAS included all participants who received at least one dose of investigational product and for whom the primary efficacy endpoint (HbA1c) was measured.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811440|NCT01066039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Month 3|HbA1c represents the percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin. The change in HbA1c at Month 3 was calculated as HbA1c at Month 3 minus HbA1c at baseline.|Baseline, Month 3|FAS included all participants who received at least one dose of investigational product and for whom the primary efficacy endpoint (HbA1c) was measured.||Percent HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
811441|NCT01066039|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Month 6|HbA1c represents the percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin. The change in HbA1c at Month 6 was calculated as HbA1c at Month 6 minus HbA1c at baseline.|Baseline, Month 6|Full analysis set (FAS) included all participants who received at least one dose of investigational product and for whom the primary efficacy endpoint (HbA1c) was measured.||Percent HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
811442|NCT01066104|Secondary|Objective (b) the Effect on Volume of Polypoid Mucosal Tissue in the Nose and Sinuses on Rhinoscopic Examination.|"Improvement is defined as any reduction in the total nasal polyp score. Using rhinoscopic evaluation, Nasal Polyp Score will be assessed on the right and on the left, and added together.
Scoring system:
Score Definition 0 No polyps
Polyp in middle meatus, not reaching below the inferior border of the middle turbinate
Polyp reaching below the inferior border of the middle turbinate but not touching the inferior turbinate
Polyp reaching below the inferior border of the middle turbinate and touching the inferior turbinate
Polyp reaching to or below the lower border of the inferior turbinate
Range: minimum 0 (better outcome), maximum 8 (worse outcome)"|4 months|||Change in Total polyp score||Standard Deviation|Mean
811443|NCT01066104|Primary|Objective (a) the Effect on Polypoid Mucosal Thickening in the Anterior Ethmoid and Maxillary Sinuses as Measured on Sinus CT Scan.|"Improvement is defined as any decrease in sinus CT scores at end of study.
Quantification of polypoid mucosal thickening in the anterior ethmoid and maxillary sinuses on sinus CT scan (primary outcome variable):
A sinus CT scan will be performed on Day 0 and repeated on Day 112. The CT scans will be performed with consistent orientation of the patient’s head and landmarks to assure that both the pretreatment and posttreatment scans are done with identical orientation and sections. The CT scans will be scored using the established scoring system known as the Zinreich modification of the Lund Mackay scoring system.. As an exploratory measure, a 3-dimensional scoring system developed with the radiology department of Massachusetts General Hospital may also be used."|4 months|||% Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
811444|NCT01066143|Primary|Change From Baseline in GAD Symptomatology at the Week 12 Timepoint.|Changes in anxiety symptomatolgy|12 week|8 subjects signed the consent but were later found to be ineligible; the study didn't start|||||
811445|NCT01066156|Primary|Change From Baseline in PTSD Symptomatology at the Week 8 Timepoint.|"We will compare patients' symptomatology at baseline vs. at 8 week timepoint
Specify Full Scale Name and Construct (i.e., indicate what the scale measures if not clear from name): Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS)
Include all scale ranges (i.e., minimum and maximum scores) required to interpret any values in the data table: 0-136
For each scale range provided, specify which values are considered to be a better or worse outcome: 0-best, 136 worst
If subscales are combined to compute a total score, consider indicating how subscales are combined (summed, averaged, etc.): summed"|8 weeks|It was predicted that patients will show a change in PTSD symptoms as measured by the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811446|NCT01066520|Primary|Patient's Assessment of Ankle Pain (VAS)- Percentage Decrease on Day 7|"Pain evaluated by a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) where 0 means no pain and 100 means the highest, unbearable pain. The absolute values of VAS have been the basis of analysis.
The highest is the change in negative, the better are the results in percentages."|From baseline (day 1) visit to day 7|||Percentage change in scale VAS||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811447|NCT01066520|Secondary|Global Judgment of Efficacy||Day 14||||||
811448|NCT01066520|Secondary|Time to Normal Function (Training/Sports)||Day 1 to 4, 7, 14, 42||||||
811449|NCT01066520|Secondary|Physician's Assessment of Normal Function/Activity (5-point-scale)||Day 1 to 4, 7, 14, 42||||||
811450|NCT01066520|Secondary|Swelling ('Figure-of-eight')||Day 1 to 4,7,14||||||
811451|NCT01066520|Secondary|FAAM Sports Subscale||Day 1 to 4, 7, 14, 42||||||
811452|NCT01066520|Secondary|FAAM ADL Subscale||Day 1 to 4, 14, 42||||||
811453|NCT01066520|Primary|Change of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measurement (FAAM), Activity of Daily Living Subscale (ADL) From Baseline to Day 7|"The Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) is a self-report outcome instrument developed to assess physical function for individuals with foot and ankle related impairments. The Foot and Ankle Ability Measure is a 29-item questionnaire divided into two subscales: the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure, 21-item Activities of Daily Living Subscale and the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure, 8-item Sports Subscale.
Each item is scored on a 5-point Likert scale (4 to 0) from ‘no difficulty at all’ (score 4), ´slight difficulty´, ´moderate difficulty´, éxtreme difficulty´ to ‘unable to do’ (score 0). Responses marked as ´not applicable´were not counted.
Item score totals, which range from 0 to 84 for the ADL subscale and 0 to 32 for the Sports subscale, were transformed to percentage scores. Higher scores represent higher levels of function for each subscale, with 100% representing no dysfunction."|Day 1 to day 7|Changes to Baseline: absolute values. Primary analyses were based on the Intent-To-Treat sample. Only patients with intial VAS<30 mm were excluded from the analysis set. Missing data were handled by the ‘Last Observation Carried Forward’ method.||Scores on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811454|NCT01066520|Primary|Patient's Assessment of Ankle Pain (VAS)- Absolute Value Decrease on Day 7|"Pain evaluated by a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) where 0 means no pain and 100 means the highest, unbearable pain. The absolute values of VAS have been the basis of analysis.
The highest is the change in negative, the better are the results in absolute values."|From baseline (day 1) visit to day 7|Changes from baseline at day7: absolute values and in percentage. Primary analyses were based on the Intent-To-Treat sample. Only patients with intial VAS<30 mm were excluded from the analysis set. Missing data were handled by the 'Last Observation Carried Forward' method.||Absolute value units on a scale VAS||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811526|NCT01066871|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Cartilage Defect Volume at Month 12|Percent change in cartilage defect volume was calculated based on central magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): (volume at Month 12 minus volume at baseline)*100/volume at baseline.|Baseline, Month 12|"The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set included all participants from the ITT analysis set who had at least 1 post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging assessment. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies the participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
811455|NCT01066546|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life 5 Domain Scale (EQ-5D) at Week 12 and 16|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Total possible score is sum of individual items, ranged from 5 to 15; lower score indicated a better health state."|Baseline, Week 12, 26|Data was not analyzed due to early termination of study and no participants completed the pre-defined visit schedule.|||||
811456|NCT01066546|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Resource Utilization in Dementia - Lite Version (RUD-Lite) at Week 12 and 26|RUD Lite: instrument used to assess amount of both formal and informal resources used by demented participants and primary caregiver. It was completed by caregivers and compiles data on following resources: use of social services, frequency and duration of hospitalizations, all contacts with health care professionals, participant living accommodations, amount of time the caregiver spends giving care and the impact of care giving on the caregiver’s job. Overall cost of care was evaluated to quantify the resources utilized.|Baseline, Week 12, 26|Data was not analyzed due to early termination of study and no participants completed the pre-defined visit schedule.|||||
811457|NCT01066546|Secondary|Sum of Delusions and Hallucinations Sub-domain Scores of Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) at Week 26|NPI is a 12-domain caregiver assessment of behavioral disturbances occurring in dementia. Severity (1=Mild to 3=Severe) and frequency (1=occasionally to 4=very frequently) scales were recorded separately for each domain and their product gives individual domain score (range 0-12). Sum of delusions and hallucinations sub-domain scores of NPI was calculated as a measure of Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) related psychosis. Total possible score range: 0-24 with higher score indicating greater behavioral disturbances.|Week 26|Data was not analyzed due to early termination of study and no participants completed the pre-defined visit schedule.|||||
811458|NCT01066546|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) at Week 6, 12 and 26|NPI:12-domain caregiver assessment of behavioral disturbances occurring in dementia: delusions, hallucinations, agitation/aggression, depression/dysphoria, anxiety, elation/euphoria, apathy/indifference, disinhibition, irritability/lability, motor disturbance, appetite/eating, nighttime behavior. Severity(1=Mild to 3=Severe),frequency(1=occasionally to 4=very frequently) scales recorded for each domain; frequency*severity=each domain score(range 0-12). Total score=sum of each domain score(range 0-144);higher score=greater behavioral disturbances;negative change score from baseline=improvement.|Baseline, Week 6, 12, 26|Data was not analyzed due to early termination of study and no participants completed the pre-defined visit schedule.|||||
811459|NCT01066546|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) at Week 12 and 26|MMSE measured general cognitive functioning: orientation, memory, attention, concentration, naming, repetition, comprehension, and ability to create a sentence and to copy two intersecting polygons. Total score derived from sub-scores; ranged from 0 to 30, higher score indicates better cognitive state.|Baseline, Week 12, 26|Data was not analyzed due to early termination of study and no participants completed the pre-defined visit schedule.|||||
811460|NCT01066546|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study–Activities of Daily Living-Severe Version (ADCS-ADLsev) at Week 6, 12 and 26|ADCS-ADLsev: 19-item scale measures basic and instrumental abilities in participant population and had good metric properties and reliability in detecting change. Individual score range: 0 to 5 for telephone, 0 to 4 for dressing, watch television, get around outside home, 0 to 3 for eating, walking, toilet, bathing, grooming, conversation/small talk, clear dishes, find personal belongings, obtain beverages, dispose of garbage, left on own, 0 to 1 for run water from and turn off faucet to wash hands, turn on and off light. Total score range: 0 to 54 lower scores=greater functional impairment.|Baseline, Week 6, 12, 26|Data was not analyzed due to early termination of study and no participants completed the pre-defined visit schedule.|||||
811461|NCT01066546|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Severe Impairment Battery (SIB) at Week 6, 12 and 26|SIB developed for evaluation of cognitive function in participants, who demented to a degree that they cannot complete conventional neuropsychological testing. Test items consisted of simple, one-step commands presented with gestural cues and instructions that were repeated if necessary. SIB test consisted of 51-item scale, divided into 9 subscales: social interaction (0-6), memory (0-14), orientation (0-6), language (0-46), attention (0-6), praxis (0-8), visuospatial ability (0-8), construction(0-4), orienting to name(0-2). Total possible score:0-100; lower score=greater cognitive impairment.|Baseline, Week 6, 12, 26|Data was not analyzed due to early termination of study and no participants completed the pre-defined visit schedule.|||||
811462|NCT01066546|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship.|Baseline up to 4 weeks after last dose of study treatment|Safety analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment, including partial doses.||participants|||Number
811463|NCT01066585|Secondary|Summary of the Reported Skin/Scalp Irritation Before Treatment and Post-treatment With Either Ivermectin or Placebo (Vehicle Control)|"Severe skin/scalp irritations were defined as follows:
Severe Pruritus - Nearly constant, frequent scratching, very bothersome; Severe Erythema - large areas of the scalp are red; Severe Excoriation - Widespread breaking of the skin involving most of the scalp; Severe Pyoderma - Lesions with crusting or other evidence of infection, involving most of the scalp."|Day 1 up to Day 15 post-application|Skin/scalp irritation was assessed in the Intent-to-treat (Safety) population.||Participants|||Number
811464|NCT01066585|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Post-treatment With Either Ivermectin or Placebo (Vehicle Control)|"Severity of the adverse events were defined and classified as follows:
'Mild' - Awareness of signs or symptoms, but easily tolerated; 'Moderate' - Discomfort to a degree that adverse event/adverse drug reaction causes interference with normal daily life activities and/or requires medication; 'Severe' - Incapacity with regard to work or usual daily life activities. Requires medical attention/intervention."|Day 1 up to Day 15 post-application.|Adverse events were assessed in the Intent-to-treat (Safety) population.||Participants|||Number
811527|NCT01066897|Secondary|Mesolimibic Reward Activity Baseline Differences in Depression vs Healthy Controls|Because of the small number of depressed patients and noisy/unusable data, analyses were not run.|Baseline|Because of the small number of depressed patients and noisy/unusable data, analyses were not run.|||||
811465|NCT01066585|Secondary|Percentage of All Participants Who Were Lice-Free by Day 2 That Were Maintained Through Day 15 Post-treatment With Either Ivermectin or Placebo (Vehicle Control)|Treatment success, defined as absence of live lice, was assessed in all subjects. Treatment success was assessed by last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation and treatment failure imputation.|Day 2 up to Day 15 post-application|Treatment success was assessed in the Intent-to-treat population. Any participant with live lice on or after Day 2 received an FDA approved head lice treatment and was classified as a treatment failure, imputed as such for remaining assessments.||Percent of Participants|||Number
811466|NCT01066585|Primary|Percentage of Index Participants Who Were Lice-Free by Day 2 That Were Maintained Through Day 15 Post-treatment With Either Ivermectin or Placebo (Vehicle Control)|Treatment success defined as absence of live lice, was assessed in index participants, defined as the youngest person within each household who had at least 3 live lice present at Screening (Day 1). Treatment success was assessed by last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation and treatment failure imputation.|Day 2 up to Day 15 post-application|Treatment success was assessed in the Intent-to-treat population. Any participant with live lice on or after Day 2 received an FDA approved head lice treatment and was classified as a treatment failure, imputed as such for remaining assessments.||Percent of Participants|||Number
811467|NCT01066624|Primary|Incidence of Oral Mucositis|Incidence of grade I-IV oral mucositis|First 30 days post-tranplantation|||percentage of participants|||Number
811468|NCT01066780|Secondary|The AzBio Sentences Will be Administered in Recorded Format in Multi-talker Babble.||2-4 weeks||||||
811469|NCT01066780|Primary|Speech Perception of Standardized Sentences Presented From Recorded Format in Speech-spectrum Noise|This was a within subjects design where scores on the AzBio sentence test in speech spectrum noise were compared against quiet scores at the 2-Week and 4-Week Follow-up Visit. The AzBio corpus of sentences consists of 33 lists of 20 sentences each (6 to 10 words per sentence) that have been equated for intelligibility. Two AzBio sentence lists were scored at each follow-up visit (2-Week and 4-Week) with either ClearVoice MEDIUM or ClearVoice HIGH enabled and averaged together. Two AzBio sentence lists were also administered in quiet at each visit. The ClearVoice score minus the quiet score provided the difference in score for the analysis.|4 Weeks|||percentage of words scored correctly||Standard Deviation|Mean
811470|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Per Protocol Population at 24 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in their respective follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their mEOT-R. Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. The number of participants with relapse was reported in treatment naive PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
811471|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population at 24 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in the follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their mEOT-R. Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. The number of participants with relapse was reported in treatment naive mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a BL result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
811472|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Per Protocol Population at 12 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in their respective follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their mEOT-R. Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. The number of participants with relapse was reported in treatment naive PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 12 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
811480|NCT01066793|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response on Modified Sustained Virological Response After Treatment Initiation in Modified All Treated Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Week 4 and 12 and also achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the positive predictive value (PPV) of the VR by Wk 4 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 4 and 12 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the negative predictive value (NPV) of the VR by Wk 4 and 12 for mSVR. Predictive values of VR are reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT participants who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a BL result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811473|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population at 12 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in their respective follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their modified end of treatment response (mEOT-R). Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. The number of participants with relapse was reported in treatment naive mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 12 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a BL result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
811474|NCT01066793|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response by Disjoint Categories in Per-Protocol Population at Week 4 and Week 12|RVR was defined as as VR by Wk 4, mRVR was defined as mVR by Wk 4, cEVR was defined as VR by Wk 12, but no RVR, mcEVR was defined as mVR by Wk 12, but no mRVR, pEVR was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline (including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL) by Wk 12, but no RVR and no cEVR, mpEVR was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline by Wk 12, but no mRVR and no mcEVR. The data is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 4 and Week 12|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||number of participants|||Number
811475|NCT01066793|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response by Disjoint Categories in Modified All-Treated Population at Week 4 and Week 12|Rapid virological response (RVR) was defined as VR by Wk 4, Modified rapid virological response (mRVR) was defined as mVR by Wk 4, complete early virological response (cEVR) was defined as VR by Wk 12, but no RVR, modified complete early virological response (mcEVR) was defined as mVR by Wk 12, but no mRVR, partial early virological response (pEVR) was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline (including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL) by, Wk 12, but no RVR and no cEVR, modified partial early virological response (mpEVR) was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline by Wk 12, but no mRVR and no mcEVR. The data is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT participants who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 4 and Week 12|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a BL result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||number of participants|||Number
811476|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response on Modified Sustained Virological Response After Treatment Initiation in Per Protocol Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Wk 2 and achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the PPV of the VR by Wk 4 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 2 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the NPV of the VR by Wk 2 for mSVR. Predictive values of VR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811477|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response on Modified Sustained Virological Response After Treatment Initiation in Modified All Treated Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Wk 2 achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the PPV of the VR by Wk 4 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 4 and 12 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the NPV of the VR by Wk 4 and 12 for mSVR. Predictive Values of VR was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population participants who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a BL result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811478|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 1-logarithm 10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid in Per Protocol Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 1-log drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 1- log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 90%. The 1- log drop in HCV RNA was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811479|NCT01066793|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response on Modified Sustained Virological Response After Treatment Initiation in Per Protocol Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Week 4 and 12 and also achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the PPV of the VR by Wk 4 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 4 and 12 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the NPV of the VR by Wk 4 and 12 for mSVR. Predictive values of VR are reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811547|NCT01067105|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Experiencing Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||Weeks 1-26|Intent to Treat Population||percentage of participants|||Number
811481|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 1-logarithm10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid in Modified All Treated Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 1-log drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 1- log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 90%. The 1- log drop in HCV RNA was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a BL result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811482|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 2-logarithm10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid in Per Protocol Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 2-log drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 2 log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 99%. The 2 log drop in HCV RNA is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811483|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 2-logarithm10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid in Modified All Treated Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 2-logarithm (log) drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 2 log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 99%. The 2 log drop in HCV RNA is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a BL result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811484|NCT01066793|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Sustained Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Per Protocol Population|Modified sustained virological response is defined as mVR of HCV RNA <50 IU/mL at 24 weeks after EOT. The mSVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811485|NCT01066793|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Sustained Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Modified All Treated Population|Modified sustained virological response (mSVR) was defined as modified virological response (mVR) of HCV RNA <50 IU/mL at 24 weeks after EOT. The mSVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a BL result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811486|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Virological Response Over Time by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Per Protocol Population Over Time|Modified virological response (mVR) is defined as HCV RNA <50 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The mVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment. PEOT= Post End of Treatment|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and 12 Weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811487|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Modified All Treated Population Over Time|Modified virological response (mVR) was defined as HCV RNA <50 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The mVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment. PEOT= Post End of Treatment|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and 12 Weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a BL result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811488|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Per Protocol Population Over Time|Virological response (VR) was defined as HCV RNA <15 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The VR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment. PEOT= Post End of Treatment|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and 12 Weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811489|NCT01066793|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Modified All Treated Population Over Time|Virological response (VR) was defined as HCV RNA <15 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The VR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment. PEOT= Post End of Treatment|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and 12 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a BL result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811490|NCT01066793|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Per Protocol Population|Sustained virological response was defined as VR at 24 weeks after EOT. Virological response was defined as HCV RNA of <15 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The SVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected per protocol (PP) population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811491|NCT01066793|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Modified All Treated Population|Sustained virological response (SVR) was defined as virological response (VR) at 24 weeks after end of treatment (EOT). Virological response was defined as hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) of <15 international units per milliliter (IU/mL) as assessed by COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan (CAP/CTM) or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (lower limit of detection [LLOD] 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The SVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected modified all-treated (mTRT) population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a baseline (BL) result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811492|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Per-Protocol Population at 24 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in the follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their modified end of treatment response (mEOT-R). Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. It was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population receiving PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. EOT= 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment. No participants were analysed for arm 'Genotype Unknown'.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
811493|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Per-Protocol Population at 12 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in the follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their modified end of treatment response (mEOT-R). Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. It was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population receiving PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. EOT= 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 12 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
811494|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population at 24 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in the follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their modified end of treatment response (mEOT-R). Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. It was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population receiving PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. EOT= 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment. No participants were analysed for arm 'Genotype Unknown'.|24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) result. Participants with a baseline result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
811495|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population at 12 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in their respective follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their modified end of treatment response (mEOT-R). Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. The number of participants with relapse was reported in treatment naive mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 12 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a baseline result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
811496|NCT01066819|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response by Disjoint Categories in Per-Protocol Population at Week 4 and Week 12|RVR was defined as as VR by Wk 4, mRVR was defined as mVR by Wk 4, cEVR was defined as VR by Wk 12, but no RVR, mcEVR was defined as mVR by Wk 12, but no mRVR, pEVR was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline (including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL) by Wk 12, but no RVR and no cEVR, mpEVR was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline by Wk 12, but no mRVR and no mcEVR. The data is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|During first 12 weeks of treatment|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||participants|||Number
811497|NCT01066819|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response by Disjoint Categories in Modified All-Treated Population at Week 4 and Week 12|Rapid virological response (RVR) was defined as VR by Wk 4, Modified rapid virological response (mRVR) was defined as mVR by Wk 4, complete early virological response (cEVR) was defined as VR by Wk 12, but no RVR, modified complete early virological response (mcEVR) was defined as mVR by Wk 12, but no mRVR, partial early virological response (pEVR) was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline (including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL) by Wk 12, but no RVR and no cEVR, modified partial early virological response (mpEVR) was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline by Wk 12, but no mRVR and no mcEVR. The data is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT participants who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 4 and Week 12|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) result. Participants with a baseline result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||participants|||Number
811498|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response on Modified Sustained Virological Response After Treatment Initiation in Per Protocol Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Wk 2 and achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the PPV of the VR by Wk 4 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 2 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the NPV of the VR by Wk 2 for mSVR. Predictive values of VR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811499|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response on Modified Sustained Virological Response After Treatment Initiation in Modified All Treated Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Wk 2 achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the PPV of the VR by Wk 4 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 4 and 12 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the NPV of the VR by Wk 4 and 12 for mSVR. Predictive Values of VR was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population participants who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a baseline result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811500|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 1-log10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid in Per-Protocol Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 1-log drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 1- log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 90%. The 1- log drop in HCV RNA was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811501|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 1-log10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid in Modified All Treated Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 1-log drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 1- log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 90%. The 1- log drop in HCV RNA was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a baseline result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811548|NCT01067105|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Experiencing Adverse Events (AEs)||Weeks 1-26|Intent to Treat Population||percentage of participants|||Number
811502|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 2-log10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid in Per Protocol Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 2-log drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 2 log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 99%. The 2 log drop in HCV RNA is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Th PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811503|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 2-log10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid in Modified All Treated Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 2-logarithm (log) drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 2 log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 99%. The 2 log drop in HCV RNA is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b.|At Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a baseline result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811504|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Per Protocol Population Over Time|Modified virological response (mVR) is defined as HCV RNA <50 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The mVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment. PEOT= Post End of Treatment|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and at 12 Weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811505|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Modified All Treated Population Over Time|Modified virological response (mVR) was defined as HCV RNA <50 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The mVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment. PEOT= Post End of Treatment|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and at 12 Weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a baseline result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811506|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Per Protocol Population Over Time|Virological response (VR) was defined as HCV RNA <15 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The VR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment. PEOT= Post End of Treatment|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and at 12 Weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811507|NCT01066819|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Modified All Treated Population Over Time|Virological Response (VR) was defined as HCV RNA <15 IU/mL as assessed by COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan (HCV) (CAP/CTM) or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (lower limit of detection 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. PEOT= Post End of Treatment. EOT= 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and at 12 Weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a baseline result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811508|NCT01066819|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response by Week 4 and 12 on Modified Sustained Virological Response After Treatment Initiation in Per Protocol Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Week 4 and 12 and also achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the PPV of the VR by Wk 4 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 4 and 12 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the NPV of the VR by Wk 4 and 12 for mSVR. Predictive values of VR are reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811517|NCT01066871|Secondary|Number of Participants With Global Evaluation of Treatment Benefit|Participants were asked to evaluate and rate the treatment benefit as poor, fair, good, very good or excellent.|Months 3, 6 and 12|"The mITT analysis set included all participants from the ITT analysis set who had at least 1 post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging assessment. n signifies the participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure for each group, respectively."||participants|||Number
811509|NCT01066819|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response by Week 4 and 12 on Modified Sustained Virological Response After Treatment Initiation in Modified All Treated Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Week 4 and 12 and also achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the positive predictive value (PPV) of the VR by Wk 4 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 4 and 12 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the negative predictive value (NPV) of the VR by Wk 4 and 12 for mSVR. Predictive values of VR are reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT participants who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a baseline result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811510|NCT01066819|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Sustained Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Per Protocol Population|Modified sustained virological response is defined as mVR of HCV RNA <50 IU/mL at 24 weeks after EOT. The mSVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811511|NCT01066819|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Sustained Virological Response Over Time by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Modified All Treated Population|Modified sustained virological response (mSVR) was defined as modified virological response (mVR) of HCV RNA <50 IU/mL at 24 weeks after EOT. The mSVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a baseline result <50 international units per millilitre (IU/mL) were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811512|NCT01066819|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Per Protocol Population|Sustained virological response was defined as VR at 24 weeks after EOT. Virological response was defined as HCV RNA of <15 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The SVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected per protocol (PP) population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The per-protocol (PP) population included all participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811513|NCT01066819|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virological Response by Type of Peginterferon and Genotype in Modified All Treated Population|Sustained virological response (SVR) was defined as virological response (VR) at 24 weeks after end of treatment (EOT). Virological response was defined as hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) of <15 international units per milliliter (IU/mL) as assessed by COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan (CAP/CTM) or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (lower limit of detection [LLOD] 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The SVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected modified all-treated (mTRT) population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a and PEG-IFN alfa-2b. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks (Wk) after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA result. Participants with a baseline (BL) result <50 IU/mL were excluded. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811514|NCT01066871|Secondary|Number of Participants With Binding Antibodies (BAbs) and Neutralizing Antibodies (NAbs) to Fibroblast Growth Factor 18 (FGF18)|Number of participants with BAbs and NAbs to FGF18 at Week 1 (pre-dose), Week 2 (pre-dose), Week 4, Months 3 and 12 were reported.|Week 1 (pre-dose), Week 2 (pre-dose), Week 4, Months 3 and 12|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of trial treatment and who had at least 1 post injection safety assessment.||participants|||Number
811515|NCT01066871|Secondary|Number of Participants With Acute Inflammatory Reactions|Acute inflammatory reaction (AIR) is defined as an increase of pain by 30 millimeter (mm) on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) associated with a subject-reported synovial fluid effusion within 3 days following intra-articular injection.|Baseline up to Month 12|"Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of trial treatment and who had at least 1 post injection safety assessment. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies the participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||participants|||Number
811516|NCT01066871|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Local TEAEs, Systemic TEAEs, TEAEs Leading to Discontinuation and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a subject or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An SAE is an AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death; life threatening; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; congenital anomaly/birth defect. TEAEs are those AEs that either started or worsened in severity on or after the date of first dose of study drug and on or before Month 12. Local TEAEs are those only related to the target knee. Systemic TEAEs are those that are related to other parts of the body.|Baseline up to Month 12|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of trial treatment and who had at least 1 post injection safety assessment.||participants|||Number
828122|NCT01214824|Primary|Change in HbA1C From Baseline to 6 Months|HbA1c at baseline HbA1c at 6 months Change in HbA1c(%)(6 months – baseline)|Baseline and 6 months|Intention to treat analysis||HbA1c %||Standard Deviation|Mean
811518|NCT01066871|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Sub-scale Scores and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score at Months 3, 6 and 12|The KOOS is a knee-specific self-administered questionnaire that assesses symptoms and problems associated with knee injury and osteoarthritis. It consists of 42 items grouped into 5 sub-scales: symptoms, pain, function in daily living (FDL), function in sports and recreation activities (FSRA), and quality of life (QoL). Sub-scale scores range from 0-100, with 0 representing extreme knee problems and 100 no knee problems. The IKDC consists of 19 items to summarize symptoms such as highest level of activity without significant pain, frequency and severity of pain scales, stiffness and swelling, highest levels of activity without significant swelling or giving way, knee lock or catch, highest level of activity that can be performed on a regular basis, effect of knee on ability to perform set tasks, knee function prior to injury, and current knee function. The IKDC scores range from 0-100 where high score represents high levels of function.|Baseline, Months 3, 6 and 12|"The mITT analysis set included all participants from the ITT analysis set who had at least 1 post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging assessment. n signifies the participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure for each group, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811519|NCT01066871|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) Grade at Months 6 and 12|The ICRS grading is used to score the amount of cartilage repair and damage. The grades range from 1 to 4 where higher grades indicate more severity of injury. Number of participants with change value of -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, and 2 from baseline in ICRS grade at Months 6 and 12 were reported. Lower change value indicates less severity of injury.|Baseline, Months 6 and 12|"The mITT analysis set included all participants from the ITT analysis set who had at least 1 post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging assessment. n signifies the participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure for each group, respectively."||participants|||Number
811520|NCT01066871|Secondary|Number of Participants With Shift From Baseline in BLOKS Sub-Scales (Cartilage 1, Synovitis, Effusion) Scores at Month 12|The BLOKS scoring system assesses intra-articular regions within the knee according to the following features: BML size, cartilage 1, osteophyte size, synovitis, effusion, meniscal extrusion, and meniscal tear. Total number of participants with shift from baseline in various BLOKS sub-scales (cartilage 1 [patella medial, patella lateral, femur medial trochlea, femur lateral trochlea, medial weight bearing femur, lateral weight bearing femur, tibia medial, tibia lateral], synovitis, and effusion) scores at Month 12 were reported.|Month 12|The mITT analysis set included all participants from the ITT analysis set who had at least 1 post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging assessment.||participants|||Number
811521|NCT01066871|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Boston Leeds Osteoarthritis Knee Score (BLOKS) Sub-scale (Bone Marrow Lesion [BML] Size, Osteophyte Size, Meniscal Extrusion Score [MES], and Meniscal Tear Score [MTS]) Scores at Month 12|The BLOKS scoring system assesses intra-articular regions within the knee according to the following features: BML size, cartilage 1, osteophyte size, synovitis, effusion, meniscal extrusion, and meniscal tear. Change from baseline in summary scores for BML size, osteophyte size, MES, and MTS were reported. Summary scores for BML size range from 0 to 27, for osteophyte size range from 0 to 36, for MES range from 0 to 12, and for MTS range from 0 to 32, with lower scores corresponding to favorable outcomes.|Baseline, Month 12|"The mITT analysis set included all participants from the ITT analysis set who had at least 1 post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging assessment. n signifies the participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure for each group, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811522|NCT01066871|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response to Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART) Sub-scales|MOCART scoring system (comprising 9 variables) was used to describe the morphology & signal intensity of the repair tissue following MRI -degree of defect repair [DDR] score 0 (subchondral bone exposed) to 20 (complete repair); integration to the border zone [IBZ] score 0 (> 50% of length of repair tissue) to 15 (complete integration to border zone);surface of repair tissue [SRT] score 0 (>50% surface repair tissue/total degradation) to 10(surface intact);structure of repair tissue [StRT] score 0(inhomogenous/cleft formation) to 5 (homogenous);signal intensity [T2] Mapping Sequence [T2MS] and Hi-Res Sagittal Pharmacodynamic Sequence [Hi-Res SPS] score 0 (marked hyper intense for T2MS and hypo intense for Hi-Res SPS) to 15 (iso intense); subchondral lamina,subchondral bone score 0 (not impact) to 5 (intact);adhesions & effusion score 0 (yes) and 5 (no). Higher values represent more favorable outcome of repair.|Months 3 (M3), 6 (M6) and 12 (M12)|"The mITT analysis set included all participants from the ITT analysis set who had at least 1 post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging assessment. n signifies the participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure for each group, respectively."||participants|||Number
811523|NCT01066871|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cartilage Defect Thickness in the Target Knee at Months 3, 6 and 12|The change in cartilage defect thickness at Months 3, 6 and 12 based on central MRI was calculated as thickness at Months 3, 6 and 12 minus thickness at baseline, respectively.|Baseline, Months 3, 6 and 12|"The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set included all participants from the ITT analysis set who had at least 1 post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging assessment. n signifies the participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure for each group, respectively."||millimeter||Standard Deviation|Mean
811524|NCT01066871|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cartilage Defect Volume in the Target Knee at Months 3, 6 and 12|The change in cartilage defect volume at Months 3, 6 and 12 based on central MRI was calculated as volume at Months 3, 6 and 12 minus volume at baseline, respectively.|Baseline, Months 3, 6 and 12|"The mITT analysis set included all participants from the ITT analysis set who had at least 1 post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging assessment. n signifies the participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure for each group, respectively."||microliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
811525|NCT01066871|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Cartilage Defect Volume and Cartilage Defect Thickness in the Target Knee at Months 3 and 6|Percent change in cartilage defect volume and cartilage defect thickness at Months 3 and 6 based on central MRI was calculated as: ([volume or thickness at Months 3 and 6 minus volume or thickness at baseline, respectively]*100)/volume or thickness at baseline.|Baseline, Months 3 and 6|"The mITT analysis set included all participants from the ITT analysis set who had at least 1 post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging assessment. n signifies the participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure for each group, respectively."||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
829193|NCT01225055|Secondary|Bone Mineral Density (BMD) by DXA at Femoral Neck|The mean change in BMD of the femoral neck after 12 month of treatment|12 Month|||g/cm squared||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
811528|NCT01066897|Primary|Change in Mesolimbic Reward System Activity From Pre to Post Treatment (8 Weeks)|Because of the limited number of depressed patients who completed the study (n=5) and noisy/unusable imaging data at various time points, this data was unable to be examined.|baseline and Week 8|Because of the limited number of depressed patients who completed the study (n=5) and noisy/unusable imaging data at various time points, this data was unable to be examined.|||||
811529|NCT01066897|Primary|% Change in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale From Baseline to week8|"Utilized the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, 21-item version to assess depressive symptoms, with a range of 0-63. Higher scores equals more depression. For the change score, where higher equals greater improvement in depressive symptoms.
Healthy controls were not utilized in this analysis, as no week 8 ratings for health controls were obtained."|Baseline and weeks 8|For two drop outs, used LOCF||percentage reduction in depression score||Standard Deviation|Mean
811530|NCT01066897|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Due to Side-effects of the Medication||throughout the 8 weeks|# of participants who dropped out due to medication side-effects||Participants|||Count of Participants
811531|NCT01066923|Secondary|Hyperthermia and Hemoconcentration Identified by Retinal Imaging|This measure was not collected. Equipment was not available.|0, 30, 60, and 90 minutes post exercise||||||
811532|NCT01066923|Secondary|Activation of Coagulation|This measure was not collected. Equipment was not available.|0, 30, 60, and 90 minutes post exercise||||||
811533|NCT01066923|Primary|Vascular Function Measured by Peripheral Arterial Tonometry|Reactive Hyperemia Index|Baseline, 30, 60, and 90 minutes post exercise|||ratio (Reactive Hyperemia Index)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811534|NCT01066923|Primary|Platelet Closure Time||0, 30, 60, and 90 minutes post exercise|||seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811535|NCT01067105|Secondary|Number of Subjects Responding to the Subject Satisfaction Dose Indicator Survey|Participants responding to a survey that consisted of 7 questions assessing subject satisfaction with the dose indicator.|Weeks 6 and 12|Intent to Treat Population||participants|||Number
811536|NCT01067105|Secondary|Percentage of Devices With Major Discrepancies|A major discrepancy is defined as a discrepancy of >20 actuations between the dose indicator and subject self report of study medication administration|Weeks 0-6 and 6-12|Intent to Treat Population||percentage of devices|||Number
811537|NCT01067105|Secondary|Number of Devices With Major Discrepancies|A major discrepancy is defined as a discrepancy of >20 actuations between the dose indicator and subject self report of study medication administration|Weeks 0-6 and 6-12|Intent to Treat Population||devices|||Number
811538|NCT01067105|Secondary|Percentage of Devices With Actuation Consistency|Actuation consistency is defined as a dose indicator count within ±20% of the subject self report of study medication administration|Weeks 0-6 and 6-12|Intent to Treat Population||percentage of devices|||Number
811539|NCT01067105|Secondary|Number of Devices With Actuation Consistency|Actuation consistency is defined as a dose indicator count within ±20% of the subject self report of study medication administration|Weeks 0-6 and 6-12|Intent to Treat Population.||devices|||Number
811540|NCT01067105|Secondary|Ratio (Reported as Percentage) of Correct Advances of the Dose Indicator Out of Expected Advances|Ratio of correct advance is defined as the (number of doses actuated/number of doses reported) * 100% and therefore reported as a percentage.|Weeks 0-12|Intent to Treat Population. Subjects with missing dosing indicator data were excluded from these analyses.||percentage of correct advances||Standard Deviation|Mean
811541|NCT01067105|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daily Subject-reported AM Instantaneous TNSS at Each Month Over the 6-month Treatment Period.|"TNSS is the sum of individual symptoms of runny nose, sneezing, itchy nose, and nasal congestions. Subjects assess each individual symptoms on a scale of 0-3 where:
0 = absent
= mild
= moderate
= severe Therefore, iTNSS values range from 0-12 (with 0 representing an absence of symptoms and higher scores reflecting more severe symptoms). Instantaneous TNSS measures these symptoms over the previous 10 minute time interval. Difference was calculated as the month treatment average - baseline. Greater reductions in the change from baseline score indicate greater improvement."|Baseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6|Intent to Treat Population. Subjects with missing date were not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811542|NCT01067105|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daily Subject-reported AM Reflective TNSS at Each Month Over the 6-month Treatment Period.|"TNSS is the sum of individual symptoms of runny nose, sneezing, itchy nose, and nasal congestions. Subjects assess each individual symptoms on a scale of 0-3 where:
0 = absent
= mild
= moderate
= severe Therefore, rTNSS values range from 0-12 (with 0 representing an absence of symptoms and higher scores reflecting more severe symptoms). Reflective TNSS measures these symptoms over the previous 12-hour time interval. Difference was calculated as the month treatment average - baseline. Greater reductions in the change from baseline score indicate greater improvement."|Baseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6|Intent to Treat Population. Subjects with missing date were not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811543|NCT01067105|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daily Subject-reported AM Instantaneous TNSS Averaged Over the 6-month Treatment Period.|"TNSS is the sum of individual symptoms of runny nose, sneezing, itchy nose, and nasal congestions. Subjects assess each individual symptoms on a scale of 0-3 where:
0 = absent
= mild
= moderate
= severe Therefore, iTNSS values range from 0-12 (with 0 representing an absence of symptoms and higher scores reflecting more severe symptoms). Instantaneous TNSS measures these symptoms over the previous 10 minute time interval. Difference was calculated as the six month treatment average - baseline. Greater reductions in the change from baseline score indicate greater improvement."|Baseline and Weeks 1-26|Intent to Treat Population. Subjects with missing date were not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811544|NCT01067105|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daily Subject-reported AM Reflective TNSS Averaged Over the 6-month Treatment Period.|"TNSS is the sum of individual symptoms of runny nose, sneezing, itchy nose, and nasal congestions. Subjects assess each individual symptoms on a scale of 0-3 where:
0 = absent
= mild
= moderate
= severe Therefore, rTNSS values range from 0-12 (with 0 representing an absence of symptoms and higher scores reflecting more severe symptoms). Reflective TNSS measures these symptoms over the previous 12-hour time interval. Difference was calculated as the 6-month treatment average - baseline. Greater reductions in the change from baseline score indicate greater improvement."|Baseline and Weeks 1-26|Intent to Treat Population. Subjects with missing date were not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811549|NCT01067326|Primary|Reactive Hyperemia Index (RHI)|"RHI was measured by the noninvasive endothelial peripheral arterial tomography (EndoPat) test. EndoPAT results are reported as the Endoscore (range 0-3); a score of 1.67 and lower indicates the need for immediate medical attention; a score between 1.68 and 2 indicates a need to reduce risk factors; a score above 2.1 indicates a healthy heart."|Baseline, 4 Months|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811550|NCT01067326|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure||Baseline, 4 Months|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811551|NCT01067326|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure||Baseline, 4 Months|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811552|NCT01067326|Primary|Endothelial Progenitor Cells (EPC)|Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were stained for EPC markers (cell-surface antigens CD34/CD133/KDR) and counted by flow-cytometry.|Baseline, 4 Months|||counts per 100,000 gated events||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811553|NCT01067339|Primary|Percentage Change in Coronary Blood Flow (CBF)|The change in coronary blood flow was measured in response to maximal dose of acetylcholine administered intracoronary during an invasive coronary endothelial function assessment. Percentage change in coronary blood flow provides a measure of endothelium dependent microvascular function.|baseline, six months|||% change coronary blood flow||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
811554|NCT01067339|Primary|Percentage Change in Coronary Artery Diameter|The change of coronary artery diameter was measured in response to a maximal dose of acetylcholine administered intracoronary during an invasive coronary endothelial function assessment. Percentage change in coronary artery diameter provides a measure of endothelium dependent epicardial function.|baseline, six months|||% change coronary artery diameter||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
811555|NCT01067352|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and AEs Leading to Study Drug Discontinuation|AEs: any new untoward medical occurrences/worsening of pre-existing medical condition, whether or not related to study drug , SAE: any AE that resulted in death; was life threatening; resulted in persistent/significant disability/incapacity; resulted in/prolonged an existing in-patient hospitalization; was a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or was an overdose. Participants who discontinued from the study due to AE were also recorded.|Baseline through Week 96|Safety analysis population included all randomized participants with at least 1 post-baseline assessment.||participants|||Number
811556|NCT01067352|Secondary|Percentage of Untreated Participants Who Showed a Spontaneous Catch-up Growth|Spontaneous catch up growth was the growth shown by SGA participants having length more than third percentile at Week 96 without any study drug treatment.|Baseline through Week 96|Data was not analyzed due to small number of evaluable participants.|||||
811557|NCT01067352|Primary|Correlation Between Gene Expression Profiling and Catch-up Growth in Small for Gestational Age (SGA) Children|Gene expression profiling:analysis of ribonucleic acid (RNA) extracted from body tissue or fluids using Clontech Atlas Human Array to study level of activation of genes in tissue analyzed. Analysis was performed to identify possible correlation between catch-up growth (either spontaneous or drug-induced after Week 48) and therapeutic response to rhGH. Spontaneous catch up growth:shown by SGA participants having length more than third percentile at Week 96 without any treatment;drug induced growth was by SGA participants having length more than third percentile at Week 96 with drug treatment.|Baseline and Week 48|Gene expression profiling was not performed due to RNA degradation in nearly all of the blood samples and hence no comparison between gene expression and growth was made.|||||
811558|NCT01067456|Secondary|To Compare the Cost of Care Between the Comprehensive Cardiothoracic CT Arm and the Dedicated Aortic Dissection/Acute Coronary Syndrome/Pulmonary Embolism CT Protocol (Standard of Care) Arm||Index Hospitalization||||||
811559|NCT01067456|Primary|Length of Hospital Stay||up to 1 week|||Hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811560|NCT01058642|Primary|Change in Weekly Average Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) Score From Baseline to End of Treatment (Week 2 of Each Treatment Period)|The NPRS is an 11-point scale (0 to 10) with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating the worst possible pain. The mean of the daily average scores were calculated from the NPRS pain assessments obtained up to 3 times per day over a 7-day period.|Baseline, Week 2 of Treatment Period 1 or 2|Zero participants were analyzed, and no data was collected for this measure. Due to lack of efficacy of ADL5747, the study was terminated early.|||||
811561|NCT01058655|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) [Phase II]|OS based on the Kaplan-Meier method is defined as the time from study entry to death or date last known alive.|Long-term follow-up for survival was not specified per protocol. Participants were followed for up to 20 months on this study.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all evaluable phase II patients.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811562|NCT01058655|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR) [Phase II]|Disease Control Rate is defined as the percentage of patients who achieve confirmed stable disease (SD) or better on treatment based on RECIST 1.0 criteria. Per RECIST 1.0 for target lesions, complete response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions and partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference baseline sum LD. Progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% increase in sum LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started. SD is neither PR nor PD. For non-target lesions, PD is the appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Disease was assessed every 2 cycles on treatment. Median treatment duration on this study cohort was 2 months (range 1-16).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all evaluable phase II patients.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811563|NCT01058655|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) [Phase II]|PFS based on the Kaplan-Meier method is defined as the time from study entry to the earliest documentation of disease progression (PD) or death. Participants alive without evidence of PD were censored at the earliest date of last disease assessment. Per RECIST 1.0 criteria: progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% increase in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. PD for the evaluation of non-target lesions is the appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of non-target lesions.|Disease was assessed radiographically to document clinical progression every 2 cycles on treatment. Participants were followed for up to 16 months since study entry.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all evaluable phase II patients.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812571|NCT01072357|Primary|Number of Participants With Graft Failure at Week 39 and 52|Time from surgery to overall graft failure (regardless of cause). Graft failure was monitored throughout the entire study, but only the time points at which graft failure occurred are reported below.|12 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
811564|NCT01058655|Primary|Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT) [Phase I]|A DLT was defined as a treatment-related (attribution possible, probable, definite) adverse event that meets any of the following criteria: Grade 3 (G3) or higher non-hematologic toxicity (excluding, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, alopecia, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, or hypertriglyceridemia); G3 diarrhea, nausea or vomiting lasting > 48 hours or leading to hospitalization, despite aggressive anti-diarrheal or anti-emetic medications; G4 diarrhea, despite aggressive anti-diarrheal medications; G4 vomiting, despite aggressive anti-emetic medications; G3 hypertension, for which blood pressure cannot be reduced to <150/100 with anti-hypertensive therapies; G4 hypertension or severe hypertension, as defined by systolic blood pressure >180 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure > 110 mmHg; G4 hypercholesterolemia or hypertriglyceridemia lasting > 7 days, despite appropriate use of anti-hyperlipidemic medications; G4 hematologic toxicity lasting for >5 days, including leukopenia, neutropen|Patients were assessed continuously for toxicity while on study. The observation period for DLT evaluation was the first 28 days (cycle 1) of treatment.|All PI patients who received at least one dose of the study drug were evaluable for DLT. The 2 DLTs experienced by participants in dose level cohort 3 were grade 3 fatigue and dehydration.||Participants with DLT|||Number
811565|NCT01058655|Primary|Tivozanib Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) [Phase I]|The tivozanib MTD in combination with everolimus is determined by the number of patients who experience a dose limiting toxicity (DLT). See subsequent primary outcome measure for the DLT definition. The MTD is defined as the highest dose at which fewer than one-third of patients experience a DLT. If no DLTs are observed, the MTD is not reached.|Patients were assessed continuously for toxicity while on study. The observation period for MTD evaluation was the first 28 days (cycle 1) of treatment.|All PI patients who received at least one dose of the study drug were evaluable for MTD unless patient withdrew before completing 1 cycle of therapy for reason other than dose-limiting toxicity.||mg daily for 3 weeks of a 4 week cycle|||Number
811566|NCT01058655|Primary|Everolimus Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) [Phase I]|The everolimus MTD in combination with tivozanib is determined by the number of patients who experience a dose limiting toxicity (DLT). See subsequent primary outcome measure for the DLT definition. The MTD is defined as the highest dose at which fewer than one-third of patients experience a DLT. If no DLTs are observed, the MTD is not reached.|Patients were assessed continuously for toxicity while on study. The observation period for MTD evaluation was the first 28 days (cycle 1) of treatment.|All PI patients who received at least one dose of the study drug were evaluable for MTD unless patient withdrew before completing 1 cycle of therapy for reason other than dose-limiting toxicity.||mg daily for 4 weeks of a 4 week cycle|||Number
811567|NCT01058668|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Total Score at Week 3|The CGI-S measures the investigator’s assessment of overall severity of the participant’s illness compared with the severity of illness in other patients the physician has observed using a 7-point scale (1=Normal, not ill at all to 7= Among the most extremely ill participants). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement. Analysis is based on a MMRM using the observed cases data, with treatment group, pooled study center, visit, treatment group-by-visit interaction as factors, baseline value and baseline-by-visit interaction as covariates and an unstructured covariance matrix.|Baseline, Week 3|Intent-to-treat Population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who had at least 1 post-baseline YMRS assessment.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811568|NCT01058668|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) Total Score at Week 3|The YMRS is an 11-item scale that assesses manic symptoms based on the participant’s perception of his or her condition over the previous 48 hours, as well as the physician’s clinical observations during the interview. The 11-items are elevated mood, increased motor activity-energy, sexual interest, sleep, irritability, rate and amount of speech, language-thought disorder, content, disruptive-aggressive behavior, appearance, and insight. The severity of the abnormality for 7-items are rated on a five-point scale (0-4) and 4-items on a nine-point scale (0-8). The individual scores are summed for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 60 (worst). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement. Analysis is a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) using observed cases, with treatment group, pooled study center, visit, treatment group-by-visit interaction as factors, baseline value and baseline-by-visit interaction as covariates and an unstructured covariance matrix.|Baseline, Week 3|Intent-to-treat Population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who had at least 1 post-baseline YMRS assessment.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811569|NCT01058863|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events|Adverse events (AEs) summarized in this table are those that began or worsened after treatment with study drug (treatment-emergent AEs). An adverse event was defined in the protocol as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator. Serious AEs include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, OR an important medical event that jeopardized the patient and required medical intervention to prevent the previously listed serious outcomes.|Day 1 up to Day 37|Safety population of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of randomized study medication.||participants|||Number
811570|NCT01058863|Secondary|Baseline-adjusted Percent-Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (PPFEV1) Area Under the Curve (AUC 0-6)|"Percent-predicted FEV1 AUC 0-6 is the area under the effect-time curve from time 0 (pre-dose) up to 6 hours post-dose. Percent-predicted FEV1 is the expected FEV1 taking into account age, height, gender and race, as per the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (NHANES III) reference values.
The first baseline spirometry was obtained between 6-11 AM. The highest FEV1 value from two acceptable values was captured for calculation of the efficacy endpoints. Assessments were obtained at approximately 0.5 hours and immediately before dosing, and 5 minutes, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 hours after completion of dosing."|Day 1 up to Day 30|Intent to treat population: randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of randomized study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline assessment||% predicted * hour||Standard Error|Mean
811717|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Homeostasis Model Assessment-Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) When Fasting and Fed|HOMA-IR is used to measure the severity of insulin resistance. Healthy Range: 1.0 (0.5-1.4) Less than 1.0 is optimal Above 1.9 indicates early insulin resistance Above 2.9 indicates significant insulin resistance|Baseline and 3 days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811571|NCT01058863|Primary|Baseline-adjusted Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Area Under the Curve (AUC 0-6)|"FEV1 AUC 0-6 is the area under the effect-time curve from time 0 (pre-dose) up to 6 hours post-dose. The baseline for each study day was the average of the 2 pre-dose FEV1 measurements on that study day.
The first baseline spirometry was obtained between 6-11 AM. The highest FEV1 value from two acceptable values was captured for calculation of the efficacy endpoints. Assessments were obtained at approximately 0.5 hours and immediately before dosing, and 5 minutes, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 hours after completion of dosing."|Day 1 up to Day 30|Intent to treat population: randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of randomized study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline assessment||L*hour||Standard Error|Mean
811572|NCT01058941|Primary|Change From Baseline in Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-cog) at 18 Months|The ADAS-cog assesses general cognitive function over multiple domains and evaluates memory, attention, reasoning, language, orientation, and praxis. A higher score indicates greater impairment on a range of scores from 0 to 70. A total score of 70 indicates maximum severity.|Baseline and 18 months|Twenty participants discontinued from the study prior to completing all study visits. One placebo and one treatment participant did not complete the final ADAS-cog assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811573|NCT01058941|Primary|Change From Baseline in Activities of Daily Living (ADL) at 18 Months|The Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADCS-ADL) is used to assess activities of daily living in people with AD using a structured interview to ask the AD participant’s caregiver/study partner to assess functional ability over a wide range of performance measures. A higher ADL score indicates greater impairment in functional ability; scores range from 0 to 27.|Baseline and 18 months|Twenty participants discontinued from the study prior to completing all study visits. One treatment participant did not complete the final ADL assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811574|NCT01058993|Primary|Blood Neutrophil Counts.|Effectiveness of drug based on increases of blood neutrophil counts to greater than 2.0 x 10^9 per liter|up to 14 days, depending on when subject reached peak response, i.e., the highest count after the stimulus (plerixafor)|The number of participants (6) was determined by the fact that we were studying a rare form of neutropenia, WHIMS syndrome, and we therefore recruited subjects who have WHIMS who live on the West coast. Analysis was per protocol.||10^9 per Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
811575|NCT01059071|Secondary|AUC of DFMO in Pediatrics Using Pharmacokinetic (PK) Testing.||Cycle 1 Day 8 at hour 0 (pre-dose), 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3 hours, and 6 hours|Cohort at max dose of 1500mg/m2 BID||(mcg/ml) * hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811576|NCT01059071|Secondary|Cmax of DFMO in Pediatrics Using Pharmacokinetic (PK) Testing.||Cycle 1 Day 8 at hour 0 (pre-dose), 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3 hours, and 6 hours|Cohort at max dose of 1500mg/m2 BID||mcg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
811577|NCT01059071|Secondary|Tmax of DFMO in Pediatrics Using Pharmacokinetic (PK) Testing.||Cycle 1 Day 8 at hour 0 (pre-dose), 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3 hours, and 6 hours|Cohort at max dose of 1500mg/m2 BID||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
811578|NCT01059071|Secondary|Number of Patients With an Overall Response Rate (ORR) of PR or CR|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|1 year|18 subjects out of the 21 enrolled were evaluable. 3 subjects did not make it to an evaluable time point.||participants|||Number
811579|NCT01059071|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions|2 years|18 subjects out of the 21 enrolled were evaluable. 3 subjects did not make it to an evaluable time point.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811580|NCT01059071|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|To determine the safety, tolerability and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of DFMO as a single agent and in combination with etoposide in pediatric and young adult patients with refractory or recurrent neuroblastoma|length of study plus 30 days|Received at least one dose of DFMO||participants|||Number
811581|NCT01059175|Secondary|Changes in Quality of Life Score - Minesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire|Changes between baseline and 24 months follow up Minesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire: 21 questions - addition of scores from 1 (better) to 5 (worse) for each questions.|24 months|Number of patients with data available for analysis of this objective||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811582|NCT01059175|Secondary|Changes in Echocardiographic Indexes of Left Ventricle Remodeling|Changes between baseline and 24months follow up|24 months|Number of patients with data available for analysis of this objective||milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
811583|NCT01059175|Secondary|Overall Mortality||24 months|||participants|||Number
811584|NCT01059175|Secondary|Time to First Heart Failure Related Hospitalization||24 months|||days||Standard Error|Mean
811585|NCT01059175|Secondary|Number of Patients With at Least One Hospitalization Related to Heart Failure Between Randomization and the End of the Study||24 months|||participants|||Number
811586|NCT01059175|Secondary|Changes in 6 Minutes Hall Walk Distance Observed Between the Enrollment and the End of the Study|Changes between baseline and 24months follow up|24 months|||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
811587|NCT01059175|Secondary|Rate of Adverse Events||24 months|||participants|||Number
811588|NCT01059175|Secondary|"Distribution of Improved, Unchanged and Worsened Patients as Defined Per M. Packer's Clinical Composite Score"|"Distribution of improved, unchanged and worsened patients as defined per M. Packer's clinical composite score at 24 months post implantation of the second left ventricle lead in comparison to the control group M. Packer's clinical composite score: patients were classified into 1 of 3 response groups after 24 months follow up : worsened, unchanged, or improved.
Worsened : if death, hospitalization because of or associated with worsening HF, demonstrated worsening in NYHA functional class at their 24-month visit, or if investigator judges global clinical state has worsened.
Improved :if they had not worsened and had demonstrated improvement in NYHA functional class, or or if investigator judges global clinical state has improved.
Unchanged : if none of the previous definition applies."|24 months|||participants|||Number
811718|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Insulin When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
811589|NCT01059175|Primary|"Distribution of Improved, Unchanged and Worsened Patients as Defined Per M. Packer's Clinical Composite Score"|"M. Packer's clinical composite score: patients were classified into 1 of 3 response groups after 12 months follow up : worsened, unchanged, or improved.
Worsened : if death, hospitalization because of or associated with worsening HF, demonstrated worsening in NYHA functional class at their 12-month visit, or if investigator judges global clinical state has worsened.
Improved :if they had not worsened and had demonstrated improvement in NYHA functional class, or or if investigator judges global clinical state has improved.
Unchanged : if none of the previous definition applies."|12 months|||participants|||Number
811590|NCT01059305|Primary|Overall Response|Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria for CR = complete response, PR = partial response, SD = stable disease, PD = progressive disease, and NE = inevaluable. Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. Partial Response (PR): >30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, reference baseline sum diameters. Progressive Disease (PD): >20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, reference smallest sum on study (this includes baseline sum if is smallest on study). In addition to relative increase of 20%, sum must absolute increase at least 5 mm. (Note: appearance of 1/> new lesions also considered progression). Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, reference smallest sum diameters while on study. Not evaluable (NE): Inevaluable when no imaging/measurement done|4 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
811591|NCT01059344|Post-Hoc|To Achieve Clinical Remission in the Patient Population Confirmed by the Central Reader|Clinical Remission, defined as stool frequency score of 0, rectal bleeding score of 0 and absence of urgency in subjects with adequate disease extent at baseline confirmed by central reading.|6 weeks|modified ITT, eligibility confirmed by central reader||Participants|||Count of Participants
811592|NCT01059344|Secondary|Improvement|Improvement is defined as a reduction of at least 3 points from baseline in the modified UC-DAI score. (minumum 3, maximum 7, higher absolute UC-DAI scores indicate more severe disease)|10 weeks|ITT||Participants|||Count of Participants
811593|NCT01059344|Secondary|Improvement|Improvement is defined as a reduction of at least 3 points from baseline in the modified UC-DAI score. (minumum 3, maximum 7, higher absolute UC-DAI scores indicate more severe disease)|6 weeks|ITT||Participants|||Count of Participants
811594|NCT01059344|Secondary|Endoscopic Remission|Endoscopic remission is defined as a sigmoidoscopy score of 1 or less|10 weeks|ITT||Participants|||Count of Participants
811595|NCT01059344|Secondary|Endoscopic Remission|Endoscopic remission is defined as a sigmoidoscopy score of 1 or less|6 weeks|ITT||Participants|||Count of Participants
811596|NCT01059344|Secondary|Clinical Remission|Clinical remission defined as a score of 0 for stool frequency, 0 for rectal bleeding and no urgency|10 weeks|ITT||Participants|||Count of Participants
811597|NCT01059344|Primary|To Achieve Clinical Remission in Subjects With Active Ulcerative Colitis (UC).|Clinical remission defined as stool frequency score of 0, rectal bleeding score of 0, no urgency|6 weeks|ITT||participants|||Number
811598|NCT01059526|Secondary|Overall Patient Response Assessment|The Overall Response Assessment was to be completed every 30 minutes after treatment until patient discharge. Patients evaluated their response to treatment as “a lot better or resolved,” “a little better,” “the same,” “a little worse,” or “a lot worse.” The data presented is based on the best response achieved following a single dose of KALBITOR (Dose A) for the first HAE treatment episode. Responses of “a lot better or resolved” and “a little better” were combined to form a category of “Better.” Similarly, “a little worse” and “a lot worse” were combined to form a category of “Worse.” Patients treated in a clinic (study site) could have been discharged after an hour and hence may have only had 2 post-treatment evaluations (30 and 60 minutes); response assessments may not have been consistently provided when patients were treated at an alternate site outside of the study site.|within 4 hours post dose|Safety population; defined as all patients who received at least 1 treatment dose of KALBITOR. Analysis only includes episodes of patients who were treated at the study site.||participants|||Number
811599|NCT01059526|Primary|Occurrence of Adverse Events Related to Disordered Coagulation (Hypercoagulability and Hypocoagulability) Upon Exposure to KALBITOR|Events of ecchymosis, hemorrhage, petechiae, spontaneous hemorrhage, hematoma, gastrointestinal bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke and any other term indicative of a bleeding event or increased tendency for bleeding were reviewed to determine the occurrence of hypocoagulability. Events of clotting, thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, vaso-occlusive stroke, myocardial infarction, and any other term indicative of a clotting event or increased risk of clotting were reviewed to determine the occurrence of hypercoagulability.|12 months after first treatment|||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811600|NCT01059526|Primary|Occurrence of Seroconversion to Anti-ecallantide Antibodies Upon Exposure to KALBITOR.|"Seroconversion is the development of detectable specific antibodies in the blood serum. Serum was tested for development of antibodies (irrespective of immunoglobulin class) against ecallantide at screening and at all safety evaluations. Positive results were to undergo a confirmatory test. Confirmed positive samples were further titered. Patients who developed an antibody response were evaluated for the development of neutralizing antibodies.
Patients also had their serum analyzed for IgE-specific antibodies to ecallantide at screening and during safety evaluations. Positive results underwent a confirmatory test. Confirmed positive samples were further titered."|12 months after first treatment|Based on total number of patients who were not positive for the antibody class at study entry and had at least one post-baseline antibody evaluation. N=40 evaluable patients for all immunoglobulin antibody classes; N=41 evaluable patients for IgE to ecallantide antibodies; N=41 evaluable patients for neutralizing antibodies to ecallantide.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811616|NCT01059617|Secondary|Titers for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|Titers were expressed as geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs).|At Days 122, 129, 136, 143, 150, 157 and 164.|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811719|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Human Growth Hormone (HGH) When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811601|NCT01059526|Primary|Occurrence of Anaphylaxis or Other Adverse Events Suggestive of Hypersensitivity|Based on medical review of multiple preferred terms for treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) suggestive of Type 1 hypersensitivity; terms included adverse drug reaction, anaphylaxis, anaphylactic reaction, anaphylactoid reaction, hypersensitivity, erythema, flushing, hot flush, pharyngeal edema, laryngeal edema, pruritus, pruritus generalized, rash, rash erythematous, rhinitis allergic, rhinorrhea, throat irritation, urticaria, urticaria localized, dyspnea, and wheezing. Records of patients with any of these TEAE referred terms were reviewed further to assess potential hypersensitivity reactions, considering factors such as timing of TEAEs in relationship to dose (ie, occurred within 24 hours after start of KALBITOR treatment), accompanying symptoms, Investigator causality assessment (ie, reported as possibly, probably, or definitely related to study drug), and any other available clinical information. Anaphylaxis subset determined based on criteria established by the NIAID.|12 months after first treatment|Safety population; defined as all patients who received at least 1 treatment dose of KALBITOR||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811602|NCT01059565|Secondary|Percentage of Missed School or Work Days|The percentage of days participants missed school or work from baseline to Week 24 was analyzed.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
811603|NCT01059565|Secondary|Percent of Days Hospitalized|The percentage of days hospitalized from baseline to Week 24 was analyzed.|Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
811604|NCT01059565|Secondary|Percentage of Days Participants Used Antibiotics|The percentage of days participants used antibiotics from baseline to Week 24 was analyzed. Antibiotics ongoing at baseline or started on or after first dose date were included in the analysis. A single antibiotic course could represent the use of multiple antibiotics. Days of antibiotic use included unique days.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
811605|NCT01059565|Secondary|Change in Burkholderia Spp. CFU in Sputum From Baseline to Week 24|The change in Burkholderia spp. CFU in sputum from baseline to Week 24 was analyzed.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available change data were analyzed.||log_10 CFU per gram of sputum||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811606|NCT01059565|Secondary|Change in BMI From Baseline to Week 24|The change in BMI from baseline to Week 24 was analyzed.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available change data were analyzed.||kg/m^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811607|NCT01059565|Secondary|AUCave of the Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Treatment Burden Score as Assessed by the CFQ-R|"The change (AUCave) from baseline to Week 24 in the treatment burden score as assessed by the CFQ-R was analyzed.
The range of scores (units) in the CFQ-R treatment burden domain is 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better QOL."|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available change data were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811608|NCT01059565|Secondary|AUCave of the Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Weight Score as Assessed by the CFQ-R|"The change (AUCave) from baseline to Week 24 in the weight score as assessed by the CFQ-R was analyzed.
The range of scores (units) in the CFQ-R weight domain is 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better QOL."|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available change data were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811609|NCT01059565|Secondary|AUCave of the Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Physical Functioning Score as Assessed by the CFQ-R|"The change (AUCave) from baseline to Week 24 in the physical functioning score as assessed by the CFQ-R was analyzed.
The range of scores (units) in the CFQ-R physical functioning domain is 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better QOL."|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available change data were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811610|NCT01059565|Secondary|AUCave of Relative Change From Baseline to Week 24 in FEF25-75|The relative change (AUCave) from baseline to Week 24 in mean (SE) FEF25-75 was analyzed. FEF25-75 is defined as the forced expiratory flow from 25% to 75% of the FVC.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available change data were analyzed.||percent change in FEF25-75 (liters/sec)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811611|NCT01059565|Secondary|AUCave of Relative Change From Baseline to Week 24 in FVC|The relative change (AUCave) from baseline to Week 24 in mean (SE) FVC was analyzed. FVC is defined as the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out after taking a full breath.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available change data were analyzed.||percent change in FVC (liters)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811612|NCT01059565|Secondary|AUCave of Relative Change From Baseline to Week 24 in FEV1|The relative change (AUCave) from baseline to Week 24 in mean (SE) FEV1 was analyzed. FEV1 is defined as the maximal volume of air that can be exhaled in 1 second.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available change data were analyzed.||percent change in FEV1 (liters)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811613|NCT01059565|Secondary|AUCave of Change in CFQ-R RSS Scores From Baseline to Week 24|"The change (AUCave) in CFQ-R RSS scores from baseline to Week 24 was analyzed.
The range of scores (units) within the RSS domain is 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating fewer symptoms."|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available change data were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811614|NCT01059565|Secondary|Total Number of Systemic and/or Inhaled Antibiotic Courses for Respiratory Events|The total number of systemic and/or inhaled antibiotic courses for respiratory events from baseline to Week 24 was analyzed. A single antibiotic course may represent the use of multiple antibiotics.|Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set||antibiotic treatment courses|||Number
811615|NCT01059565|Primary|AUCave of Relative Change in FEV1 % Predicted From Baseline to Week 24|The relative change (AUCave) in FEV1 % predicted from baseline to Week 24 was analyzed. FEV1 % predicted is defined as FEV1 % of the patient divided by the average FEV1 % in the population for any person of similar age, sex and body composition. AUCave is the calculated area under the curve corrected for baseline and adjusted by the number of days on study through Week 24.|Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set||percent change in FEV1% predicted||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811720|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Glucose When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812870|NCT01074502|Secondary|Safety of Apremilast 20 Mgs BID for 12 Weeks Will be Assessed by Evaluating Adverse Events (AEs), Vital Signs, Laboratory Evaluations and Withdrawals From the Study|Number of participants with adverse events|Baseline to 16 weeks||||||
811617|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cut-off value of 1:10.|At Days 122, 129, 136, 143, 150, 157 and 164.|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811618|NCT01059617|Secondary|Titers for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|Titers were expressed as geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs). GMTs of H1N1 HI antibody titers in terms of humoral immune response was pooled by the vaccination received at Day 0 (i.e. Flulaval or Saline placebo) at Days 7, 14, 21 and 122 upto the administration of the first dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccine.|Before vaccination and at Days 7, 14, 21 and 122|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811619|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|"A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cut-off value of 1:10.
Seropositivity rates of H1N1 HI antibody titers in terms of humoral immune response was pooled by the vaccination received at Day 0 (i.e. Flulaval or Saline placebo) at Days 7, 14, 21 and 122 upto the administration of the first dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccine."|Before vaccination and at Days 7, 14, 21 and 122|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811620|NCT01059617|Secondary|Titers for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|Titers were expressed as geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs).|At Days 122, 129, 136, 143, 150, 157 and 164.|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811621|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cut-off value of 1:10.|At Days 122, 129, 136, 143, 150, 157 and 164.|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811622|NCT01059617|Secondary|Titers for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|Titers were expressed as geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs). GMTs of H1N1 HI antibody titers in terms of humoral immune response was pooled by the vaccination received at Day 0 (i.e. Flulaval or Saline placebo) at Days 7, 14, 21 and 122 upto the administration of the first dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccine.|Before vaccination and at Days 7, 14, 21 and 122|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811623|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|"A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cut-off value of 1:10.
Seropositivity rates of H1N1 HI antibody titers in terms of humoral immune response was pooled by the vaccination received at Day 0 (i.e. Flulaval or Saline placebo) at Days 7, 14 and 21 upto the administration of the first dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccine."|Before vaccination and at Days 7, 14, 21 and 122|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811624|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinical Laboratory Abnormalities in Biochemistry Parameters Assessed With Respect to Normal Laboratory Ranges.|Laboratory parameters assessed were alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), aspartate aminotransferase (ASAT), alkaline phosphatase (AP), creatinine (CREA), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and bilirubin (BIL) (total (T) and direct (D)). For each parameter and for each status at baseline it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or within the range (unkown values are also indicated).|At Day 304|"The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available
N (Number of participants analyzed)= number of subjects with laboratory results for the specified visit and laboratory parameter in a given baseline category Thus, there are subjects with missing results which have not been mentioned here."||Subjects|||Number
811635|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects. Related = symptom assed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|During the entire study period (up to Day 507).|||Subjects|||Number
812871|NCT01074502|Secondary|The Absolute Change in Lesion Counts (Total, Inflammatory, Non-inflammatory) From Baseline to Week 12||Baseline to12 weeks||||||
811625|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinical Laboratory Abnormalities in Haematological Parameters Assessed With Respect to Normal Laboratory Ranges.|Laboratory parameters assessed were white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NEU), lymphocytes (LYM), monocytes (MON), eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS), red blood cells (RBC), hemoglobin (Hgb), hematocrit (Hct) and platelets (PLA). For each parameter and for each status at baseline it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or within the range (unkown values are also indicated).|At Day 304|"The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.
N (Number of participants analyzed)= number of subjects with laboratory results for the specified visit and laboratory parameter in a given baseline category Thus, there are subjects with missing results which have not been mentioned here."||Subjects|||Number
811626|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinical Laboratory Abnormalities in Biochemistry Parameters Assessed With Respect to Normal Laboratory Ranges.|"Laboratory parameters assessed were alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), aspartate aminotransferase (ASAT), alkaline phosphatise (AP), creatinine (CREA), blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and bilirubin (BIL) (total (T) and direct (D)).
For each parameter and for each status at baseline it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or within the range (unkown values are also indicated)."|On Days 0, 21, 122 and 164|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
811627|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinical Laboratory Abnormalities in Haematological Parameters Assessed With Respect to Normal Laboratory Ranges.|Laboratory parameters assessed were white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NEU), lymphocytes (LYM), monocytes (MON), eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS), red blood cells (RBC), hemoglobin (Hgb), hematocrit (Hct) and platelets (PLA). For each parameter and for each status at baseline it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or within the range (unkown values are also indicated).|On Days 0, 21, 122 and 164|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
811628|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited General Symptoms From Flulaval/Arepanrix Group,Flulaval/Unadjuvanted Arepanrix Group, Placebo/Arepanrix Group and Placebo/Unadjuvanted Arepanrix Group.|"Solicited general symptoms assessed were fatigue, headache, joint pain at other location, muscle aches, shivering, sweating and temperature (= axillary temperature equal to or above 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C)) and were collected after the administration of the Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccine.
Any = any solicited general symptom reported irrespective of intensity and relationship to vaccination. Related = symptoms considered by the investigator to have a causal relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 symptoms = symptoms that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = axillary temperature above 39.0°C."|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination.|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
811629|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local Symptoms From Flulaval/Arepanrix Group,Flulaval/Unadjuvanted Arepanrix Group,Placebo/Arepanrix Group and Placebo/Unadjuvanted Arepanrix Group|"Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling and were collected after the administration of the Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccine.
Any was defined as any solicited local symptom reported irrespective of intensity. Grade 3 pain was defined as pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness and swelling were defined as redness/swelling above 100 millimeter (mm)."|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination.|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
811630|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited General Symptoms From Flulaval Group and Placebo Group.|"Solicited general symptoms assessed were fatigue, headache, joint pain at other location, muscle aches, shivering, sweating and temperature (= axillary temperature equal to or above 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C)) and data collected was pooled by administration of vaccination received at Day 0 (i.e. Flulaval or Saline placebo).
Any = any solicited general symptom reported irrespective of intensity and relationship to vaccination. Related = symptoms considered by the investigator to have a causal relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 symptoms = symptoms that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = axillary temperature above 39.0°C."|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination.|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
811631|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local Symptoms From Flulaval Group and Placebo Group.|"Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling and data collected was pooled by administration of vaccination received at Day 0 (i.e. Flulaval or Saline placebo).
Any was defined as any solicited local symptom reported irrespective of intensity. Grade 3 pain was defined as pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness and swelling were defined as redness/swelling above 100 millimeter (mm)."|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination.|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
811632|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Related Potential Immune-mediated Disease (pIMDs).|pIMDs are a subset of adverse events (AEs) that include both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology. Related = symptom assed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|Within Days 0-233|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
811633|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Related Medically Attended Adverse Events (MAEs).|MAEs refer to events that required medical attention defined as hospitalization, an emergency room visit or a visit to or from medical personnel (medical doctor) for any reason. Related = symptom assed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|Within Days 0-233|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
811634|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects. Related = symptom assed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination. Missing values will be added once they become available.|Up to Day 234|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
812872|NCT01074502|Primary|Mean Percentage Change From Baseline in Individual Lesion Counts (Total, Inflammatory, Non-inflammatory) at Week 12||Baseline to 12 weeks||||||
811636|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited AEs.|"Unsolicited AEs were collected after the administration of the Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccine.
An unsolicited adverse event is any adverse event (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms."|Within 84 days following first dose or 63 days following second dose of vaccine.|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
811637|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited AEs.|"An unsolicited adverse event is any adverse event (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.
Unsolicited AEs were collected after the administration of the Flulaval vaccine or the placebo dose and the data has been pooled based on the vaccination received at Day 0."|Up to 21-day (Days 0-20) after vaccination|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
811638|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Related Medically Attended Adverse Events (MAEs).|MAEs refer to events that required medical attention defined as hospitalization, an emergency room visit or a visit to or from medical personnel (medical doctor) for any reason. Related = symptom assed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|During the entire study period (up to Day 507).|||Subjects|||Number
811639|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Related Potential Immune-mediated Disease (pIMDs).|pIMDs are a subset of adverse events (AEs) that include both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology. Related = symptom assed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|During the entire study period (up to Day 507).|||Subjects|||Number
811640|NCT01059617|Secondary|Cell-mediated Immunogenicity (CMI) in Terms of Tcell Markers Related to A/California/7/2009, A/Brisbane/59/2007, B/Brisbane/59/2007 and A/Uruguay/716/2007 Antigens|CD4 T cell-mediated immune responses against the antigens A/California/7/2009, A/Brisbane/59/2007 and A/Uruguay/716/2007 were analyzed for cells expressing at least 2 of the following immune markers: CD40 Ligand, Interleukin2, Tumor Necrosis Factor alpha or Interferongamma. The frequency was presented as number of cytokineproducing CD4+ cells per million CD4+ cells. All doubles= T cell expressing at least 2 cytokines.|After the administration of Arepanrix vaccine (Day 125 to 304)|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 304 included all evaluable subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified or forbidden in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken at Day 304.||cells/million T cells||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811641|NCT01059617|Secondary|Cell-mediated Immunogenicity (CMI) in Terms of T-cell Markers Related to A/California/7/2009, A/Brisbane/59/2007, B/Brisbane/59/2007 and A/Uruguay/716/2007 Antigens|"CD4 T cell-mediated immune responses against the antigens A/California/7/2009, A/Brisbane/59/2007 and A/Uruguay/716/2007 were analyzed for cells expressing at least 2 of the following immune markers: CD40 Ligand, Interleukin-2, Tumor Necrosis Factor alpha or Interferon-gamma.
The frequency was presented as number of cytokine-producing CD4+ cells per million CD4+ cells. All doubles= T cell expressing at least 2 cytokines.
Subjects with missing results were not included."|Before administration of Arepanrix vaccine (Day 0 to Day 122)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who received protocol specified vaccine(s) during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164). Subjects with missing results were not included.||cells/million T cells||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811642|NCT01059617|Secondary|Vaccine Response Rate (VRR) for Microneutralization (MN) Antibodies Titers Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|VRR for microneutralization titers was defined as the incidence rate of vaccinees with at least a 4-fold increase in post vaccination reciprocal titer relative to Day 0. The cut-off value for microneutralization titers is 1:28.|For the entire study period up to Day 507|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 304 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at Day 304.||Subjects|||Number
811643|NCT01059617|Secondary|Titers for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|Titers were expressed as geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs).|At Day 0 and Day 304|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 304 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for blood sample taken at Day 304.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811644|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cut-off value of 1:10.|At Days 0 and 304|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 304 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for blood sample taken at Day 304.||Subjects|||Number
811645|NCT01059617|Secondary|Vaccine Response Rate (VRR) for Microneutralization (MN) Antibodies Titers Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|VRR for microneutralization titers was defined as the incidence rate of vaccinees with at least a 4-fold increase in post vaccination reciprocal titer relative to Day 0. The cut-off value for microneutralization titers is 1:28.|Entire study period up to Day 507|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 304 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at Day 304.||Subjects|||Number
831856|NCT01243320|Primary|Change in Urea Nitrogen Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
811646|NCT01059617|Secondary|Titers for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|Titers were expressed as geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs).|At Days 122 and 304|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 304 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for blood sample taken at Day 304.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811647|NCT01059617|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cut-off value of 1:10.|At Day 122 and Day 304|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 304 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for blood sample taken at Day 304.||Subjects|||Number
811648|NCT01059617|Primary|Vaccine Response Rate (VRR) for Microneutralization (MN) Antibodies Titers Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|VRR for microneutralization titers was defined as the incidence rate of vaccinees with at least a 4-fold increase in post vaccination reciprocal titer relative to Day 0. The cut-off value for microneutralization titers is 1:28.|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811649|NCT01059617|Primary|Titers for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|Titers were expressed as geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs).|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811650|NCT01059617|Primary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cut-off value of 1:10.|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811651|NCT01059617|Primary|Seroconversion Factor for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|Geometric mean fold-rise (GMFR), or seronversion factor (SCF), was defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titer to the pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer for the vaccine virus.|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 122 to Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811652|NCT01059617|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|Seroprotection rate (SPR) was defined as the number of subjects with H1N1 reciprocal HI titers ≥ 1:40 against the tested vaccine virus.|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811653|NCT01059617|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) Virus-heterologous Vaccine Strain.|Seroconversion rate (SCR) was defined as the number of subjects who have either a pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination reciprocal titer ≥ 1:40, or a pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer ≥ 10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post vaccination reciprocal titer against the vaccine virus.|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811654|NCT01059617|Primary|Vaccine Response Rate (VRR) for Microneutralization (MN) Antibodies Titers Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|VRR for microneutralization titers was defined as the incidence rate of vaccinees with at least a 4-fold increase in post vaccination reciprocal titer relative to Day 0. The cut-off value for microneutralization titers is 1:28.|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811674|NCT01059630|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time between the date of randomization and the date of death from any cause. OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Baseline until death (up to 4.5 years overall)|ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811675|NCT01059630|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died||Baseline until death (up to 4.5 years overall)|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
811655|NCT01059617|Primary|Titers for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|Titers were expressed as geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs).|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811656|NCT01059617|Primary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cut-off value of 1:10.|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811657|NCT01059617|Primary|Seroconversion Factor for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|Geometric mean fold-rise (GMFR), or seronversion factor (SCF), was defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titer to the pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer for the vaccine virus.|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 122 to Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Fold||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811658|NCT01059617|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|Seroprotection rate (SPR) was defined as the number of subjects with H1N1 reciprocal HI titers ≥ 40 against the tested vaccine virus.|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811659|NCT01059617|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)V-like Virus-homologous Vaccine Strain.|Seroconversion rate (SCR) was defined as the number of subjects who have either a pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer < 10 and a post-vaccination reciprocal titer ≥ 40, or a pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer ≥ 10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post vaccination reciprocal titer against the vaccine virus.|21 days following the second dose of Arepanrix or the unadjuvanted formulation of Arepanrix vaccines (At Day 164).|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 164 included subjects who had not received a vaccine not specified in the protocol during the primary vaccination course, for whom 3 doses were administered and assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen at day 21 after the second H1N1 vaccine dose (Day 164).||Subjects|||Number
811660|NCT01059630|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Definitive Improvement (DI) From Baseline in FACT-Lym Instrument Scores|FACT-Lym: 42-items in 5 subscales. Responses to each item range from 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). FACT-Lym Lymphoma subscale includes 15 items (total score range = 0-60). FACT-Lym TOI is sum of 3 subscales (physical well-being, functional well-being, lymphoma subscale) and includes 29 items (total score range = 0−116). FACT-Lym total score is sum of 42 items (total score ranges from 0−168). For all above, higher scores indicate a better PRO/QoL. DI from baseline: at least 3 point increase from baseline in FACT-Lym Lymphoma subscale; at least 6 point increase from baseline in FACT Lym TOI; at least 7 point increase from baseline in FACT Lym total scores. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after EOI (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after EOI; EOI = up to Month 6).|Baseline, Cycle 5 Day 1 (C5D1) (Cycle length = 28 days), Follow-up Months 6 (FUM6), and 12 (FUM12)|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified category.||Percentage of participants|||Number
811661|NCT01059630|Secondary|Time to Deterioration of FACT-Lym TOI|The median time, in month, from date of randomization until a clinically meaningful decline from baseline in TOI or death, whichever occurred first. TOI: sum of physical well-being score,functional well-being score, and Lymphoma sub-scale of FACT-Lym; total 29 items, responses to each item range from 0, “Not at all” to 4, “Very much”. Total score ranges from 0-116. Higher scores indicate a better PRO/QoL. A clinically meaningful decline in TOI score was defined as at least a 6 point decline from baseline. Time to deterioration was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (EOI) (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction) and extension follow-up months represents months after end of 2 years normal follow-up (e.g. extension follow-up Month 6 is 6 months after end of normal 2 year follow-up).|Baseline up to approximately 4 years (Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, EOI treatment [up to Month 6]; Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final Follow-up [up to 2 years after EOI]; Extension follow-up Months 6 and 18)|ITT population.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811676|NCT01059630|Secondary|Event-free Survival (EFS) as Assessed by IRC|EFS was defined as the time between the date of randomization and the date of PD/relapse based on IRC assessments (as per modified response criteria for iNHL [Modified Cheson et al, 2007]), death from any cause on study, or start of a new anti-lymphoma therapy. PD: appearance of any new lesion >1.5 cm in any axis during or at end of therapy, even if other lesions are decreasing in size; at least a 50% increase from nadir in SPD of any previously involved nodes, or in a single involved node, or size of other lesions. EFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline until PD or death, whichever occurred first (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cy 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1, then every 3 months up to 2 years and every 6 months for next 2 years [up to 4.5 years overall])|ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811662|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in FACT-Lym Total Score|FACT-Lym total score is the sum of physical well-being score (7 items), social/family well-being (7 items), emotional well-being (6 items), functional well-being (7 items), and Lymphoma sub-scale (15 items); responses to each item range from 0, “Not at all” to 4, “Very much”. Total score ranges from 0−168. Higher scores indicate a better PRO/QoL. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction) and extension follow-up months represents months after end of 2 years normal follow-up (e.g. extension follow-up Month 6 is 6 months after end of normal 2 year follow-up).|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, End of induction treatment (up to Month 6); Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final Follow-up (up to 2 years after end of induction); Extension follow-up Months 6 and 18|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811663|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in FACT-Lym Trial Outcome Index (TOI)|TOI is the sum of 3 sub-scales (physical well-being, functional well-being, and Lymphoma sub-scale) of FACT-Lym which includes total 29 items; responses to each item range from 0, “Not at all” to 4, “Very much”. Total score ranges from 0−116. Higher scores indicate a better PRO/QoL. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction) and extension follow-up months represents months after end of 2 years normal follow-up (e.g. extension follow-up Month 6 is 6 months after end of normal 2 year follow-up).|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, End of induction treatment (up to Month 6); Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final Follow-up (up to 2 years after end of induction); Extension follow-up Months 6 and 18|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811664|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Generic (FACT-G) Score|The FACT-G is the sum of 4 sub-scales (physical, social, emotional and functional well-being) of FACT-Lym which includes total 27 items; responses to each item range from 0, “Not at all” to 4, “Very much”. Total score ranges from 0-108. Higher scores indicate a better PRO/QoL. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction) and extension follow-up months represents months after end of 2 years normal follow-up (e.g. extension follow-up Month 6 is 6 months after end of normal 2 year follow-up).|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, End of induction treatment (up to Month 6); Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final Follow-up (up to 2 years after end of induction); Extension follow-up Months 6 and 18|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811665|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in EQ-5D VAS Score During Maintenance Phase|EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 mm (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state. Data for this outcome was planned to be reported only for ‘Obinutuzumab + Bendamustine’ arm. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction). Follow-up months were during maintenance phase.|Baseline, Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final Follow-up (up to 2 years after end of induction) (end of induction = up to Month 6)|ITT population (Obinutuzumab + Bendamustine arm only). Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811666|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score During Induction Phase|EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 millimeter (mm) (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction). For ‘Obinutuzumab + Bendamustine’ arm, participants who had their follow-up Month 2 and 4 visits before start of maintenance treatment were reported in induction phase results under “CFB at Follow-up Month 2” and “CFB at Follow-up Month 4” categories.|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, End of induction treatment (up to Month 6); Follow-up Months 2 and 4|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811667|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility Score During Maintenance Phase|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQoL Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state. Data for this outcome was planned to be reported only for ‘Obinutuzumab + Bendamustine’ arm. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction). Follow-up months were during maintenance phase."|Baseline, Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final follow-up (up to 2 years after end of induction) (End of induction = up to Month 6)|ITT population (Obinutuzumab + Bendamustine arm only). Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811695|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811696|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Total Cholesterol (TC) When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811697|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Creatinine When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811668|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in Euro Quality of Life 5 Dimension (EuroQoL-5D/EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility Score During Induction Phase|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQoL Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction). For ‘Obinutuzumab + Bendamustine’ arm, participants who had their follow-up Month 2 and 4 visits before start of maintenance treatment were reported in induction phase results under “CFB at Follow-up Month 2” and “CFB at Follow-up Month 4” categories."|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, End of induction treatment (up to Month 6); Follow-up Months 2, and 4|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811669|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in FACT-Lym-Lymphoma Sub-scale Score|"The FACT-Lym measures 5 sub-scales which includes 42 items; responses to each item range from 0, Not at all to 4, Very much. Total score ranges from 0-168. Lymphoma scale includes 15 items measured on 0-4 point scale. The total score for lymphoma sub-scale is sum of each 15 items (range: 0-60). Higher scores indicate a better PRO/QoL. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction) and extension follow-up months represents months after end of 2 years normal follow-up (e.g. extension follow-up Month 6 is 6 months after end of normal 2 year follow-up)."|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, End of induction treatment (up to Month 6); Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final Follow-up (up to 2 years after end of induction); Extension follow-up Months 6 and 18|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811670|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in FACT-Lym-Functional Well-Being Sub-scale Score|"The FACT-Lym measures 5 sub-scales which includes 42 items; responses to each item range from 0, Not at all to 4, Very much. Total score ranges from 0-168. Functional Well-being sub-scale includes 7 items measured on 0-4 point scale. The total score for functional well-being sub-scale is sum of each 7 items (range: 0-28). Higher scores indicate a better PRO/QoL. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction) and extension follow-up months represents months after end of 2 years normal follow-up (e.g. extension follow-up Month 6 is 6 months after end of normal 2 year follow-up)."|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, End of induction treatment (up to Month 6); Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final Follow-up (up to 2 years after end of induction); Extension follow-up Months 6 and 18|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811671|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in FACT-Lym-Emotional Well-Being Sub-scale Score|"The FACT-Lym measures 5 sub-scales which includes 42 items; responses to each item range from 0, Not at all to 4, Very much. Total score ranges from 0-168. Emotional Well-being sub-scale includes 6 items measured on 0-4 point scale. The total score for emotional well-being sub-scale is sum of each 6 items (range: 0-24). Higher scores indicate a better PRO/QoL. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction) and extension follow-up months represents months after end of 2 years normal follow-up (e.g. extension follow-up Month 6 is 6 months after end of normal 2 year follow-up)."|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, End of induction treatment (up to Month 6); Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final Follow-up (up to 2 years after end of induction); Extension follow-up Months 6 and 18|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811672|NCT01059630|Secondary|CFB in FACT-Lym-Social/Family Well-being Sub-scale Score|"The FACT-Lym measures 5 sub-scales which includes 42 items; responses to each item range from 0, Not at all to 4, Very much. Total score ranges from 0-168. Social/family Well-being sub-scale includes 7 items measured on 0-4 point scale. The total score for social/family well-being sub-scale is sum of each 7 items (range: 0-28). Higher scores indicate a better PRO/QoL. In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction) and extension follow-up months represents months after end of 2 years normal follow-up (e.g. extension follow-up Month 6 is 6 months after end of normal 2 year follow-up)."|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, End of induction treatment (up to Month 6); Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final Follow-up (up to 2 years after end of induction); Extension follow-up Months 6 and 18|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811673|NCT01059630|Secondary|Change From Baseline (CFB) in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym)-Physical Well Being Sub-scale Score|"The FACT-Lym measures 5 sub-scales which includes 42 items; responses to each item range from 0, Not at all to 4, Very much. Total score ranges from 0-168. Physical Well-being sub-scale includes 7 items measured on 0-4 point scale. The total score for physical well-being sub-scale is sum of each 7 items (range: 0-28). Higher scores indicate a better participant-reported outcome (PRO)/quality of life (QoL). In timeframe, follow-up months represents months after end of induction (e.g. Follow-up Month 2 is 2 months after end of induction) and extension follow-up months represents months after end of 2 years normal follow-up (e.g. extension follow-up Month 6 is 6 months after end of normal 2 year follow-up)."|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 4, 5, End of induction treatment (up to Month 6); Follow-up Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, Final Follow-up (up to 2 years after end of induction); Extension follow-up Months 6 and 18|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and “n” signified those participants who were evaluable for a specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811677|NCT01059630|Secondary|Disease-Free Survival (DFS) in Participants With CR as Assessed by IRC|DFS was defined as the time from the first occurrence of a documented CR until progression on the basis of the IRC assessments (as per modified response criteria for iNHL [Modified Cheson et al, 2007]) or death from any cause on study. CR: Complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present prior to therapy, liver and spleen have returned to normal size (if enlarged at baseline), If the bone marrow was involved by lymphoma prior to treatment, the infiltrate must have cleared on repeat bone marrow biopsy. PD: appearance of any new lesion >1.5 cm in any axis during or at end of therapy, even if other lesions are decreasing in size; at least a 50% increase from nadir in SPD of any previously involved nodes, or in a single involved node, or size of other lesions. DFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline until PD or death, whichever occurred first (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cy 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1, then every 3 months up to 2 years and every 6 months for next 2 years [up to 4.5 years overall])|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who had an objective response of CR.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811678|NCT01059630|Secondary|Duration of Response (DoR) as Assessed by IRC|DoR: time from first objective response of CR/PR to first occurrence of PD/relapse/death from any cause. CR: Complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present prior to therapy; liver, spleen returned to normal size (if enlarged at baseline); if bone marrow was involved by lymphoma prior to treatment, infiltrate must have cleared on repeat bone marrow biopsy. PR: at least 50% regression of measurable disease compared to baseline scan and no new sites; no increase in size of other nodes, liver, or spleen; with exception of splenic, hepatic nodules; involvement of other organs is usually assessable; no presence of measurable disease. PD: appearance of any new lesion >1.5 cm in any axis during or at end of therapy, even if other lesions are decreasing in size; at least 50% increase from nadir in SPD of any previously involved nodes, or in single involved node, or size of other lesions. DoR was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline until PD or death, whichever occurred first (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cy 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1, then every 3 months up to 2 years and every 6 months for next 2 years [up to 4.5 years overall])|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who had objective response at any time during the study.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811679|NCT01059630|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With BOR at the End of Induction Treatment as Assessed by IRC and Investigator|BOR: best response for a participant, observed during assessment period according to modified response criteria for iNHL (Modified Cheson et al, 2007). CR: complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present prior to therapy, PR: at least 50% regression of measurable disease compared to tumors measured by a baseline scan and no new sites; no increase in size of other nodes, liver, or spleen; with exception of splenic and hepatic nodules, involvement of other organs is usually assessable and no measurable disease should be present, SD: Failing to attain criteria needed for a CR or PR, but not fulfilling those for PD, PD: appearance of any new lesion more than 1.5 cm in any axis during or at the end of therapy, even if other lesions are decreasing in size; at least a 50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previously involved nodes, or in a single involved node, or the size of other lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules).|Baseline until end of induction treatment (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cy 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1)|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who had reached the end of induction treatment response assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811680|NCT01059630|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response at the End of Induction Treatment as Assessed by IRC and Investigator|Objective response was defined as having CR or PR as assessed according to the modified response criteria for iNHL (Modified Cheson et al, 2007). CR: Complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present prior to therapy, liver and spleen have returned to normal size (if enlarged at baseline), If the bone marrow was involved by lymphoma prior to treatment, the infiltrate must have cleared on repeat bone marrow biopsy. PR: at least 50% regression of measurable disease compared to tumors measured by a baseline scan and no new sites; no increase in the size of the other nodes, liver, or spleen; with the exception of splenic and hepatic nodules, involvement of other organs is usually assessable and no measurable disease should be present.|Baseline until end of induction treatment (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cy 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1)|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who had reached the end of induction treatment response assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811681|NCT01059630|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Best Overall Response (BOR) as Assessed by IRC and Investigator|BOR: best response for a participant, observed during assessment period according to modified response criteria for iNHL (Modified Cheson et al, 2007). CR: complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present prior to therapy, PR: at least 50% regression of measurable disease compared to tumors measured by baseline scan and no new sites; no increase in size of other nodes, liver, or spleen; with exception of splenic and hepatic nodules, involvement of other organs is usually assessable and no measurable disease should be present, SD: Failing to attain the criteria needed for a CR or PR, but not fulfilling those for PD, PD: appearance of any new lesion more than 1.5 cm in any axis during or at the end of therapy, even if other lesions are decreasing in size; at least a 50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previously involved nodes, or in single involved node, or the size of other lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules).|Baseline until PD or death, whichever occurred first (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cy 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1, then every 3 months up to 12 months overall)|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who had at least one post-baseline assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811698|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Potassium When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
811699|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Calcium When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811700|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811701|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Chloride When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
811682|NCT01059630|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response as Assessed by IRC and Investigator|Objective response was defined as having CR or PR as assessed according to the modified response criteria for iNHL (Modified Cheson et al, 2007). CR: Complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present prior to therapy, liver and spleen have returned to normal size (if enlarged at baseline), If the bone marrow was involved by lymphoma prior to treatment, the infiltrate must have cleared on repeat bone marrow biopsy. PR: at least 50% regression of measurable disease compared to tumors measured by a baseline scan and no new sites; no increase in the size of the other nodes, liver, or spleen; with the exception of splenic and hepatic nodules, involvement of other organs is usually assessable and no measurable disease should be present.|Baseline until PD or death, whichever occurred first (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cy 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1, then every 3 months up to 12 months overall)|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who had at least one post-baseline assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811683|NCT01059630|Secondary|PFS as Assessed by Investigator|PFS was defined as the time from randomization to the first occurrence of PD as assessed by an investigator according to the modified response criteria for iNHL (Modified Cheson et al, 2007), or death from any cause on study. PD was defined as appearance of any new lesion more than 1.5 cm in any axis during or at the end of therapy, even if other lesions are decreasing in size; at least a 50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previously involved nodes, or in a single involved node, or the size of other lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules). To be considered PD, a lymph node with a diameter of the short axis of <1.0 cm must increase by ≥ 50% and to a size of 1.5 multiplied by 1.5 cm or more than 1.5 cm in the long axis; at least a 50% increase in the longest diameter of any single previously identified node >1 cm in its short axis. PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Baseline until PD or death, whichever occurred first (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cy 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1, then every 3 months up to 2 years and every 6 months for next 2 years [up to 4.5 years overall])|ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811684|NCT01059630|Secondary|Number of Participants With PD or Death as Assessed by Investigator|PD was assessed by an investigator according to the modified response criteria for iNHL (Modified Cheson et al, 2007). PD was defined as appearance of any new lesion more than 1.5 cm in any axis during or at the end of therapy, even if other lesions are decreasing in size; at least a 50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previously involved nodes, or in a single involved node, or the size of other lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules). To be considered PD, a lymph node with a diameter of the short axis of <1.0 cm must increase by ≥ 50% and to a size of 1.5 multiplied by 1.5 cm or more than 1.5 cm in the long axis; at least a 50% increase in the longest diameter of any single previously identified node >1 cm in its short axis.|Baseline until PD or death, whichever occurred first (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cy 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1, then every 3 months up to 2 years and every 6 months for next 2 years [up to 4.5 years overall])|ITT population.||participants|||Number
811685|NCT01059630|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by IRC|PFS was defined as the time from randomization to the first occurrence of PD or death as assessed by an IRC according to the modified response criteria for iNHL (Modified Cheson et al, 2007). PD was defined as appearance of any new lesion more than 1.5 cm in any axis during or at the end of therapy, even if other lesions are decreasing in size; at least a 50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previously involved nodes, or in a single involved node, or the size of other lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules). To be PD, a lymph node with a diameter of the short axis of <1.0 cm must increase by ≥ 50% and to a size of 1.5 multiplied by 1.5 cm or more than 1.5 cm in the long axis; at least a 50% increase in the longest diameter of any single previously identified node >1 cm in its short axis. PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and 95% confidence interval (CI) for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Baseline until PD or death, whichever occurred first (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cy 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1, then every 3 months up to 2 years and every 6 months for next 2 years [up to 4.5 years overall])|ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811686|NCT01059630|Primary|Number of Participants With Progressive Disease (PD) as Assessed by Independent Review Committee (IRC) or Death|PD was assessed by an IRC according to the modified response criteria for indolent Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma (iNHL) (Modified Cheson et al, 2007). PD was defined as appearance of any new lesion more than 1.5 centimeters (cm) in any axis during or at the end of therapy, even if other lesions are decreasing in size; at least a 50 percent (%) increase from nadir in the sum of product diameter (SPD) of any previously involved nodes, or in a single involved node, or the size of other lesions (example: splenic or hepatic nodules). To be considered PD, a lymph node with a diameter of the short axis of less than (<) 1.0 cm must increase by greater than or equal to (≥) 50% and to a size of 1.5 multiplied by 1.5 cm or more than 1.5 cm in the long axis; at least a 50% increase in the longest diameter of any single previously identified node greater than (>) 1 cm in its short axis.|Baseline until PD or death, whichever occurred first (assessed at baseline, 14 days prior to Cycle [Cy] 4 Day 1 [1 Cy=28days], 28−42 days after Cy 6 Day 1, then every 3 months up to 2 years and every 6 months for next 2 years [up to 4.5 years overall])|ITT population.||participants|||Number
811687|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant High Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hsCRP) When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mg/L||Standard Error|Median
811688|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP), Supine When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811689|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP), Supine When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811690|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Waist Circumference When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
811691|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Weight When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811692|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant TC/HDL Ratio When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
811693|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant Triglycerides When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811694|NCT01059760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Participant High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) When Fasting and Fed||Baseline and 3 days|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811721|NCT01059773|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving PASI 90 Response|This is based on the number of participants achieving at least 90% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) (0 [best] - 72 [worst]). The PASI is a test of how bad a person's psoriasis is. The combination of redness, scaling, and thickness, as well as overall body involvement determine the PASI score.|at Weeks 2, 4, 12, 16, 28, 40 and 52|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of ustekinumab, regardless of their compliance with the protocol. Subjects who dropped out after randomization and before the first administration of ustekinumab were excluded from the mITT analysis.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811722|NCT01059773|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving PASI 75 Response|This is based on the number of participants achieving at least 75% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) (0 [best] - 72 [worst]). The PASI is a test of how bad a person's psoriasis is. The combination of redness, scaling, and thickness, as well as overall body involvement determine the PASI score.|at Weeks 2, 4, 12, 16, 28, 40 and 52|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of ustekinumab, regardless of their compliance with the protocol. Subjects who dropped out after randomization and before the first administration of ustekinumab were excluded from the mITT analysis.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811723|NCT01059773|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving PASI 50 Response|This is based on the number of participants achieving at least 50% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) (0 [best] - 72 [worst]). The PASI is a test of how bad a person's psoriasis is. The combination of redness, scaling, and thickness, as well as overall body involvement determine the PASI score.|at Weeks 2, 4, 12, 16, 28, 40 and 52|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of ustekinumab, regardless of their compliance with the protocol. Subjects who dropped out after randomization and before the first administration of ustekinumab were excluded from the mITT analysis.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811724|NCT01059773|Secondary|Change in Mean Psoriasis Area-and-severity Index (PASI) Score Compared to Baseline|Change from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) (0 [best] - 72 [worst]). The PASI is a test of how bad a person's psoriasis is. The combination of redness, scaling, and thickness, as well as overall body involvement determine the PASI score.|at Weeks 0, 2, 4, 12, 16, 28, 40 and 52|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of ustekinumab, regardless of their compliance with the protocol. Subjects who dropped out after randomization and before the first administration of ustekinumab were excluded from the mITT analysis||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811725|NCT01059773|Secondary|Rate of Malignancies and Other Events of Clinical Interest (Tuberculosis, Serious Cardiovascular Events, Anaphylactic/Serum Sickness Reaction)|The number of patients with a malignancy and other event of clinical interest (tuberculosis, serious cardiovascular events, anaphylactic/serum sickness reaction) were summarized through Week 12 and through Week 52, by treatment arm and body weight category (≤100 kg and >100 kg)|at week 12, 16, 28 40 and 52|All randomized patients who took at least one dose of study medication and set who had any post-baseline safety information||Number of patients|||Number
811726|NCT01059773|Secondary|Rate of Infections, Severe Infections and Infections Requiring Oral or Parenteral Antimicrobial Treatment During the Study Period|The number of patients with any of the following TEAEs were summarized through Week 12 and through Week 52, by treatment arm and body weight category (≤100 kg and >100 kg): infections, serious infections, and infections requiring oral or parenteral antimicrobial treatment (infections being considered any event that by the investigator was indicated as infection on the CRF).|at week 12, 16, 28 40 and 52|All randomized patients who took at least one dose of study medication and set who had any post-baseline safety information||Number of patients|||Number
811727|NCT01059773|Primary|Number of Patients Experiencing One or More Adverse Events Occurring From Week 0 Through Week 12||from week 0 to week 12|All randomized patients who took at least one dose of study medication and set who had any post-baseline safety information.||participants|||Number
811728|NCT01059773|Secondary|Rate of Severe AEs, Reasonably Related AEs, and AEs Leading to Discontination During the Study Period|The number of patients with any of the following TEAEs were summarized through Week 12 and through Week 52, by treatment arm and body weight category (≤100 kg and >100 kg): AE with severe intensity; AE or SAE reasonably related to ustekinumab (i.e., AEs classified by the investigator as ‘possibly’, ‘probably’, or ‘very likely’ related to study agent); AE or SAE leading to permanent discontinuation of ustekinumab.|at week 12, 16, 28 40 and 52|All randomized patients who took at least one dose of study medication and set who had any post-baseline safety information||Number of patients|||Number
811729|NCT01059773|Secondary|Rate of Adverse Events (AEs), Serious AEs (SAEs) and Deaths During the Study Period|The number of patients with any of the following Treatment Emergent AEs (TEAEs) were summarized through Week 12 and through Week 52, by treatment arm and body weight category (≤100 kg and >100 kg): AE; SAE and Death.|at week 12, 16, 28 40 and 52|All randomized patients who took at least one dose of study medication and set who had any post-baseline safety information.||Number of patients|||Number
811730|NCT01059799|Secondary|Mean of 9-point Self Measured Plasma Glucose Profile (SMPG)|Mean of SMPG after 26 weeks of treatment. Plasma glucose measured: before breakfast, 90 minutes after start of breakfast, before lunch, 90 minutes after start of lunch, before dinner, 90 minutes after start of dinner, before bedtime, at 4 am and before breakfast.|Week 26|The FAS included all randomised subjects.The missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 25 subjects all 9-point SMPG values were missing.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
811731|NCT01059799|Secondary|Rate of Nocturnal Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as requiring assistance to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L. Nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as occurring between 00:01 and 05:59 a.m.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|The Safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
811732|NCT01059799|Secondary|Rate of Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as requiring assistance to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|The Safety analysis set (SAS) included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
811733|NCT01059799|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c)|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|The Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
811734|NCT01059812|Secondary|Change in Body Weight|Change from baseline in body weight after 26 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 26|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811735|NCT01059812|Secondary|Rate of Nocturnal Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as requiring assistance to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L. Nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as occuring between 00:01 and 05:59 a.m.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
811736|NCT01059812|Secondary|Rate of Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as requiring assistance to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
811737|NCT01059812|Secondary|Mean of 9-point Self Measured Plasma Glucose Profile (SMPG) at Week 26|Mean of SMPG at 26 weeks of treatment. Plasma glucose measured: before breakfast, 90 minutes after start of breakfast, before lunch, 90 minutes after start of lunch, before dinner, 90 minutes after start of dinner, bedtime, at 4 am and before breakfast.|Week 26|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 24 subjects all 9-point SMPG values were missing.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
811738|NCT01059812|Primary|Change in HbA1c (Glycosylated Haemoglobin) After 26 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 26|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
811739|NCT01059825|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Medication Due to an AE|An adverse event is defines as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a product or medical device; the event need not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment or usage. Below table includes all data collected since the first dose of sponsor-provided metformin and excludes a temporary discontinuation of study medication.|Up to 84 days|All participants who received at least 1 dose of treatment (including sponsor-supplied metformin).||Participants|||Number
811740|NCT01059825|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced an Advere Event (AE)|An adverse event is defines as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a product or medical device; the event need not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment or usage. Below table includes all data collected since the first dose of sponsor-provided metformin.|Up to 98 days|All participants who received at least 1 dose of treatment (including sponsor-supplied metformin).||Participants|||Number
811741|NCT01059825|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving HbA1C <6.5% at Week 12|Laboratory measurements were performed after an overnight fast ≥8 hours in duration.|Week 12|Analysis population excludes participants with missing Week 12 HbA1c measurement.||Percentage of participants|||Number
811742|NCT01059825|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving HbA1c <7% at Week 12|Laboratory measurements were performed after an overnight fast ≥8 hours in duration.|Week 12|Analysis population excludes participants with missing Week 12 HbA1c measurement.||Percentage of participants|||Number
811743|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 8|The change from baseline is the Week 8 FPG minus the Week 0 FPG (LOCF). Laboratory measurements were performed after an overnight fast ≥8 hours in duration.|Baseline and Week 8|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline fasting plasma glucose measurement and at least 1 post-baseline fasting plasma glucose measurement up to Week 8.||mg/dL||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811744|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 4|The change from baseline is the Week 4 FPG minus the Week 0 FPG (LOCF). Laboratory measurements were performed after an overnight fast ≥8 hours in duration.|Baseline and Week 4|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline fasting plasma glucose measurement and at least 1 post-baseline fasting plasma glucose measurement up to Week 4.||mg/dL||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811745|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 2|The change from baseline is the Week 2 FPG minus the Week 0 FPG (LOCF). Laboratory measurements were performed after an overnight fast ≥8 hours in duration.|Baseline and Week 2|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline fasting plasma glucose measurement and at least 1 post-baseline fasting plasma glucose measurement up to Week 2.||mg/dL||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811802|NCT01059903|Secondary|AUC(0- ∞) Norm (Apparent Dose)|The AUC(0-inf) norm (apparent dose) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero up to infinity normalized by apparent dose (mg).|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||ng/ mL*h/ mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811746|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 12|The change from baseline is the Week 12 FPG minus the Week 0 fasting plasma glucose (LOCF). Laboratory measurements were performed after an overnight fast ≥8 hours in duration.|Baseline and Week 12|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline fasting plasma glucose measurement and at least 1 post-baseline fasting plasma glucose measurement up to Week 12.||mg/dL||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811747|NCT01059825|Secondary|Baseline Fasting Plasma Glucose|Laboratory measurements were performed after an overnight fast ≥8 hours in duration.|Baseline|All randomized participants.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
811748|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure at Week 8|Sitting blood pressure was measured in triplicate and the average of the measurements taken at a single assessment time was analyzed. The change from baseline is the Week 8 diastolic blood pressure minus the Week 0 diastolic blood pressure (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 8|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline diastolic blood pressure measurement and at least 1 post-baseline diastolic blood pressure measurement up to Week 8.||mmHg||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811749|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure at Week 4|Sitting blood pressure was measured in triplicate and the average of the measurements taken at a single assessment time was analyzed. The change from baseline is the Week 4 diastolic blood pressure minus the Week 0 diastolic blood pressure (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 4|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline diastolic blood pressure measurement and at least 1 post-baseline diastolic blood pressure measurement up to Week 4.||mmHg||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811750|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure at Week 2|Sitting blood pressure was measured in triplicate and the average of the measurements taken at a single assessment time was analyzed. The change from baseline is the Week 2 diastolic blood pressure minus the Week 0 diastolic blood pressure (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 2|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline diastolic blood pressure measurement and at least 1 post-baseline diastolic blood pressure measurement up to Week 2.||mmHg||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811751|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure at Week 12|Sitting blood pressure was measured in triplicate and the average of the measurements taken at a single assessment time was analyzed. The change from baseline is the Week 12 diastolic blood pressure minus the Week 0 diastolic blood pressure (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 12|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline diastolic blood pressure measurement and at least 1 post-baseline diastolic blood pressure measurement up to Week 12.||mmHg||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811752|NCT01059825|Secondary|Baseline Diastolic Blood Pressure|Sitting blood pressure was measured in triplicate and the average of the measurements taken at a single assessment time was analyzed.|Baseline|All randomized participants.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
811753|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure at Week 8|Sitting blood pressure was measured in triplicate and the average of the measurements taken at a single assessment time was analyzed. The change from baseline is the Week 8 systolic blood pressure minus the Week 0 systolic blood pressure (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 8|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline systolic blood pressure measurement and at least 1 post-baseline systolic blood pressure measurement up to Week 8.||mmHg||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811754|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure at Week 4|Sitting blood pressure was measured in triplicate and the average of the measurements taken at a single assessment time was analyzed. The change from baseline is the Week 4 systolic blood pressure minus the Week 0 systolic blood pressure (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 4|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline systolic blood pressure measurement and at least 1 post-baseline systolic blood pressure measurement up to Week 4.||mmHg||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811755|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure at Week 2|Sitting blood pressure was measured in triplicate and the average of the measurements taken at a single assessment time was analyzed. The change from baseline is the Week 2 systolic blood pressure minus the Week 0 systolic blood pressure (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 2|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline systolic blood pressure measurement and at least 1 post-baseline systolic blood pressure measurement up to Week 2.||mmHg||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811756|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure at Week 12|Sitting blood pressure was measured in triplicate and the average of the measurements taken at a single assessment time was analyzed. The change from baseline is the Week 12 systolic blood pressure minus the Week 0 systolic blood pressure (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 12|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline systolic blood pressure measurement and at least 1 post-baseline systolic blood pressure measurement up to Week 12.||mmHg||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811757|NCT01059825|Secondary|Baseline Systolic Blood Pressure|Sitting blood pressure was measured in triplicate and the average of the measurements taken at a single assessment time was analyzed.|Baseline|All randomized participants.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
811758|NCT01059825|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 8|The percent change from baseline is the ([Week 8 body weight minus the Week 0 body weight] divided by the Week 0 body weight) X 100 (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 8|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline body weight measurement and at least 1 post-baseline body weight measurement up to Week 8.||Percent change||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811759|NCT01059825|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 4|The percent change from baseline is the ([Week 4 body weight minus the Week 0 body weight] divided by the Week 0 body weight) X 100 (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 4|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline body weight measurement and at least 1 post-baseline body weight measurement up to Week 4.||Percent change||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811760|NCT01059825|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 2|The percent change from baseline is the ([Week 2 body weight minus the Week 0 body weight] divided by the Week 0 body weight) X 100 (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 2|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline body weight measurement and at least 1 post-baseline body weight measurement up to Week 2.||Percent change||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811761|NCT01059825|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 12|The percent change from baseline is the ([Week 12 body weight minus the Week 0 body weight] divided by the Week 0 body weight) X 100 (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 12|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline body weight measurement and at least 1 post-baseline body weight measurement up to Week 12.||Percent change||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811762|NCT01059825|Secondary|Baseline Body Weight||Baseline|All randomized participants.||kg||Standard Error|Mean
811763|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Week 8|HbA1c is measured as percent. The change from baseline is the Week 8 HbA1c percent minus the Week 0 HbA1c percent (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 8|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline HbA1c measurement and at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c measurement up to Week 8.||Percent||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811764|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Week 4|HbA1c is measured as percent. The change from baseline is the Week 4 HbA1c percent minus the Week 0 HbA1c percent (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 4|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline HbA1c measurement and at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c measurement up to Week 4.||Percent||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811765|NCT01059825|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1C at Week 2|HbA1c is measured as percent. The change from baseline is the Week 2 HbA1c percent minus the Week 0 HbA1c percent (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 2|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline HbA1c measurement and at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c measurement up to Week 2.||Percent||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811766|NCT01059825|Primary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Week 12|HbA1c is measured as percent. The change from baseline is the Week 12 HbA1c percent minus the Week 0 HbA1c percent (last observation carried forward [LOCF]).|Baseline and Week 12|Analysis population included randomized participants who were treated, had a baseline HbA1c measurement and at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c measurement up to Week 12.||Percent||80% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811767|NCT01059825|Primary|Baseline Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)|HbA1c is measured as percent.|Baseline|All randomized participants.||Percent||Standard Error|Mean
811768|NCT01059851|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Due to an AE|An AE is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to the study drug.|From administration of study drug through 14 days after administration of study drug|All Treated Participants||participants|||Number
811769|NCT01059851|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event (AE)|An AE is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to the study drug.|From administration of study drug through 14 days after administration of study drug|All Treated Participants||participants|||Number
811770|NCT01059851|Primary|AUC(0-∞) After Single Dose Suvorexant: Moderate and Mild Renal Impairment Participants Versus Healthy Participants (Part II)|Overall exposure was assessed by the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC[0-∞]). AUC(0-∞) was calculated as the sum of the AUC to the last time point with a detectable plasma concentration (AUC[0-last]) and the extrapolated area given by the quotient of the last detectable concentration and the apparent terminal rate constant (λ).|Predose and 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 96, and 120 hours post-dose|Per protocol, the decision to conduct Part II of study in moderate/mild renal impairment participants was conditional on results of AUC (0-∞) analysis in severe renal impairment participants (Part I). Based on results of Part I of study, Part II was not conducted and AUC(0-∞) analysis in moderate/mild renal impairment was not done.|||||
811771|NCT01059851|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC) From Time Zero to Infinity (0-∞) After Single Dose Suvorexant: Severe Renal Impairment Participants Versus Healthy Participants (Part I)|Overall exposure was assessed by the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC[0-∞]). AUC(0-∞) was calculated as the sum of the AUC to the last time point with a detectable plasma concentration (AUC[0-last]) and the extrapolated area given by the quotient of the last detectable concentration and the apparent terminal rate constant (λ).|Predose and 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 96, and 120 hours post-dose|All Treated Participants||μM•hr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811772|NCT01059864|Secondary|Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI)|HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 functional categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; and common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3, 0=least functional difficulty and 3=extreme functional difficulty.|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811773|NCT01059864|Secondary|Patient's Global Assessment (PtGA) of Arthritis Pain|"Participants answered: Considering all the ways your arthritis affects you, how are you feeling today? Participants responded by using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale where 0=no pain and 100=most severe pain."|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), Week 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
811774|NCT01059864|Secondary|Physician's Global Assessment (PhysGA) of Arthritis Pain|The physician evaluated participants disease signs, functional capacity and physical examination independent of the patient’s global assessment of arthritis. Physician’s response was recorded using 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0=no pain and 100=most severe pain.|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), Week 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
811803|NCT01059903|Secondary|AUC(0-tz) Norm (Body Weight) of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The AUC(0-tz) norm (BW) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero up to the last analytically quantifiable concentration normalized by body weight (kg).|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||ng*h*kg/ mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811775|NCT01059864|Secondary|Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain|Participants assessed the severity of their arthritis pain using a 100 millimeter (mm) visual analog scale (VAS). The scale ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (most severe pain), measurement on a scale corresponds to the magnitude of their pain.|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
811776|NCT01059864|Secondary|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)|ESR is a laboratory test that provides a non-specific measure of inflammation. The test assesses the rate at which red blood cells fall in a test tube. Normal range is 0-30 mm/hr. A higher rate is consistent with inflammation.|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811777|NCT01059864|Secondary|C-Reactive Protein (CRP)|The test for CRP is a laboratory measurement for evaluation of an acute phase reactant of inflammation. Normal range is 1-3 milligram per liter (mg/L).|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
811778|NCT01059864|Secondary|Swollen-Joint Count|Swollen joint count (SJC): an assessment of 66 joints (upper body, upper extremity, and lower extremity). Each joint was assessed for swelling using the following scale: Present/Absent/Not Done/Not Applicable (for artificial joints).|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), Week 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||swollen joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
811779|NCT01059864|Secondary|Tender-Joint Count|Tender joint count (TJC) is an assessment of 68 joints (upper body, upper extremity, and lower extremity). Each joint’s response to pressure/motion was assessed using the following scale: Present/Absent/Not Done/Not Applicable (for artificial joints).|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||tender joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
811780|NCT01059864|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response|ACR70 responses were defined as greater than or equal to 70% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts and 70% improvement in 3 of the 5 remaining ACR-core set measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participants assessment of disease activity, 3) participants assessment of pain, 4) participants assessment of functional disability via a health assessment questionnaire, and 5) C-reactive protein at each visit.|Week 6 (Baseline), 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||percentage of participants|||Number
811781|NCT01059864|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response|ACR50 responses were defined as greater than or equal to 50% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts and 50% improvement in 3 of the 5 remaining ACR-core set measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participants assessment of disease activity, 3) participants assessment of pain, 4) participants assessment of functional disability via a health assessment questionnaire, and 5) C-reactive protein at each visit.|Week 6 (Baseline), 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||percentage of participants|||Number
811782|NCT01059864|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response|ACR20 responses were defined as greater than or equal to 20% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts and 20% improvement in 3 of the 5 remaining ACR-core set measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participants assessment of disease activity, 3) participants assessment of pain, 4) participants assessment of functional disability via a health assessment questionnaire, and 5) C-reactive protein at each visit.|Week 6 (Baseline), 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||percentage of participants|||Number
811783|NCT01059864|Secondary|Disease Activity Score Using 28-Joint Count and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (4 Variables) (DAS28-4 [ESR])|DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated from the number of swollen joints (SJC) and painful joints (PJC) using the 28 joints count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) [mm/hr] and patient's global assessment (PtGA) of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment with transformed scores ranging from 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28-4 (ESR) <=3.2 indicated low disease activity, DAS28-4 (ESR) >3.2 to 5.1 indicated moderate to high disease activity.|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo). Here 'N' (Number of Participants Analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811784|NCT01059864|Secondary|Disease Activity Score Using 28-Joint Count and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (3 Variables) (DAS28-3 [ESR])|DAS28-3 (ESR) was calculated from the number of swollen joints (SJC) and painful joints (PJC) using the 28 joints count and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (millimeters per hour [mm/hr]). DAS28-3 (ESR) <=3.2 indicated low disease activity, DAS28-3 (ESR) >3.2 to 5.1 indicated moderate to high disease activity.|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), 12|Since DAS28-3(CRP) and DAS28-4(ESR) are summarized, data for DAS28-3(ESR) was collected and reported in individual participant listings, but not statistically summarized for analysis as planned.|||||
811785|NCT01059864|Secondary|Disease Activity Score Using 28-Joint Count and C-Reactive Protein (4 Variables) (DAS28-4 [CRP])|DAS28-4 (CRP) was calculated from the number of swollen joints (SJC) and painful joints (PJC) using the 28 joints count, C-reactive protein (CRP) [mg/L] and patient's global assessment (PtGA) of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28-4 [CRP] <=3.2 indicated low disease activity, DAS28-4 [CRP] >3.2 to 5.1 indicated moderate to high disease activity and DAS28 less than 2.6 indicates remission.|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), 12|Since DAS28-3(CRP) and DAS28-4(ESR) are summarized, data for DAS28-4(CRP) was collected and reported in individual participant listings, but not statistically summarized for analysis as planned.|||||
811786|NCT01059864|Secondary|Disease Activity Score Using 28-Joint Count and C-Reactive Protein (3 Variables) (DAS28-3 [CRP])|DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated from the number of swollen joints (SJC) and painful joints (PJC) using the 28 joints count and the CRP (milligram per liter [mg/L]). DAS28-3 (CRP) less than or equal to (<=)3.2 indicated low disease activity, DAS28-3 (CRP) more than (>) 3.2 to 5.1 indicated moderate to high disease activity.|Day 0, Week 6 (Baseline), 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811787|NCT01059864|Secondary|12-Hours Fasting Lipid Profile: Level of High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) Particles|Participants were required to fast for 12 hours prior to sampling for lipid profile which included following parameters: total, large, medium and small HDL-C particles.|Day 0, Week 2, 6 (Baseline), 10, 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||micromole per liter (mcmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811788|NCT01059864|Secondary|12-Hours Fasting Lipid Profile: Level of Lipoprotein Particles|Participants were required to fast for 12 hours prior to sampling for lipid profile which included following parameters: total and large VLDL-C and chylomicron particles (VLDLCP), medium and small VLDL-C particles; total, large, medium and small LDL-C particles; and intermediate density lipoprotein (IDL).|Day 0, Week 2, 6 (Baseline), 10, 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||nanomoles per liter (nmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811789|NCT01059864|Secondary|12-Hours Fasting Lipid Profile: Particle Size of Lipoproteins|Participants were required to fast for 12 hours prior to sampling for lipid profile which included following parameters: plasma lipoprotein VLDL-C, LDL-C and HDL-C particles size.|Day 0, Week 2, 6 (Baseline), 10, 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||nanometer (nm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811790|NCT01059864|Secondary|12-Hours Fasting Lipid Profile|Participants were required to fast for 12 hours prior to sampling for lipid profile which included following parameters: LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C), very low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (VLDL-C), total cholesterol, apolipoprotein A-1, apolipoprotein B, triglycerides (TGs) and Non-HDL-C.|Day 0, Week 2, 6 (Baseline), 10, 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo).||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811791|NCT01059864|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Low Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (LDL-C) at Week 12||Baseline (Week 6), Week 12|FAS population included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo). Here 'N' (Number of Participants Analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||milligram per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811792|NCT01059864|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline (Week 6) in Low Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (LDL-C) Level at Week 12||Baseline (Week 6), Week 12|Full analysis set (FAS) included all participants who were randomized to the study treatment groups and received at least one dose of the randomized investigational drug (atorvastatin or placebo). Here 'N' (Number of Participants Analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811793|NCT01059903|Secondary|Apparent Dose|Apparent dose of unconjugated rotigotine in mg. The apparent dose was calculated by subtraction of the determined residual content of each rotigotine patch from the nominal content of rotigotine in the patch.|24 hours|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811794|NCT01059903|Secondary|Apparent Total Body Clearance (CL/f) of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The CL/f of unconjugated rotigotine is the apparent total body clearance.|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||L/ h||Standard Deviation|Mean
811795|NCT01059903|Secondary|Terminal Half-Life (t1/2) of Unconjugated Rotigotine|the t1/2 of unconjugated rotigotine is the terminal half-life, calculated as t1/2=ln2/ λz.|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||hours (h)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811796|NCT01059903|Secondary|Rate Constant of Elimination (λz) of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The λz of unconjugated rotigotine is the rate constant of elimination.|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||1/ h||Standard Deviation|Mean
811797|NCT01059903|Secondary|Mean Residence Time (MRT) of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The MRT is the mean residence time.|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||hours (h)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811798|NCT01059903|Secondary|Tmax of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The tmax is the time to reach maximum plasma concentration after patch application.|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||hours (h)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811799|NCT01059903|Secondary|Cmax, Norm (Body Weight) of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The Cmax, norm (BW) is the maximum plasma concentration normalized by body weight (kg).|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||ng/ mL*kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811800|NCT01059903|Secondary|Cmax, Norm (Apparent Dose) of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The Cmax, norm (apparent dose) is the maximum plasma concentration normalized by apparent dose (mg).|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||ng/ mL/ mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811801|NCT01059903|Secondary|AUC(0- ∞) Norm (Body Weight)|The AUC(0-inf) norm (BW) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero up to infinity normalized by body weight (kg).|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||ng*h*kg/ mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811804|NCT01059903|Secondary|AUC(0-tz) Norm (Apparent Dose) of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The AUC(0-tz) norm (apparent dose) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero up to the last analytically quantifiable concentration normalized by apparent dose (mg).|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||ng/ mL*h/ mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811805|NCT01059903|Primary|AUC(0- ∞) of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The AUC(0- ∞) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero up to infinity|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||ng/ mL*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
811806|NCT01059903|Primary|Cmax of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The Cmax is the maximum plasma concentration.|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||ng/ mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811807|NCT01059903|Primary|AUC(0-tz) of Unconjugated Rotigotine|The AUC(0-tz) is the area under the concentration-time curve from zero up to the last analytically quantifiable concentration.|0 h (predose), 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 16 h, 24 h (before patch removal in the morning of Day 2), 25 h, 26 h, 28 h, 30 h, 32 h, 36 h, 40 h, and 48 h|Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS)||ng/ mL*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
811808|NCT01059994|Secondary|Protein Synthesis|Skeletal muscle protein synthesis, measured as the fractional synthesis rate (the percent of the total synthesized per unit time)|2 weeks|||% synthesized of total/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
811809|NCT01059994|Primary|Muscle Fatigue|successful isokinetic knee extension repetitions, % baseline day repetitions|2 weeks|||successful repetitions (% baseline day)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811810|NCT01060007|Secondary|Determine Quality of Anorectal Function|"Anorectal function was measured by the participant's response to the FACT-C questionnaire question I have control of my bowels. The answers ranged from 0=not at all to 4=very much."|Up to 1 year|Participants who had an ostomy were not included in this outcome measure. Participants who did not complete FACT-C questionnaire at a specific timepoint were not included in that timepoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
811811|NCT01060007|Secondary|Freedom From Disease Relapse|Kaplan-Meier projections.|30 months|These include all cMO evaluable cases only.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811812|NCT01060007|Secondary|Rate of Locoregional Control||1 year|||percentage of participants|||Number
811813|NCT01060007|Secondary|Rate of Overall Control||1 year|||percentage of participants|||Number
811814|NCT01060007|Secondary|Local Control|"Kaplan-Meier projections
Local control = control of primary tumor"|30 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811815|NCT01060007|Secondary|Incidence of Post Chemoradiotherapy Grade 3 or Higher Morbidity||1 year (completion of all treatment)|||participants|||Number
811816|NCT01060007|Secondary|Incidence of Any Late Grade 3 or Higher Morbidity||Preoperative (mean time from start of radiation to surgery 17.3 weeks (SD +/- 2.9 weeks)|One patient was inevaluable for primary objectives because patient withdrew consent after completing radiation therapy, refused chemotherapy, and underwent a lesion resection 7 weeks after radiation therapy.||participants|||Number
811817|NCT01060007|Primary|Preoperative Gastrointestinal Morbidity|As measured by participants who experience grade 3 or higher gastrointestinal morbidity|Mean number of weeks before surgery 17.3 (SD +/- 2.9 weeks)|One patient was inevaluable for primary objectives because patient withdrew consent after completing radiation therapy, refused chemotherapy, and underwent a lesion resection 7 weeks after radiation therapy.||participants|||Number
811818|NCT01060007|Primary|Rate of T Stage Downstaging|T stage downstaging is defined as clinical pretreatment American Joint Committee on Cancer T stage (cT) being greater than pathologic T stage at surgery (ypT).|Mean number of weeks before surgery 17.3 (SD +/- 2.9 weeks)|||percentage of participants|||Number
811819|NCT01060059|Secondary|Factors of Higher Creatinine, Higher Fasting High Density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol, Higher Fasting Cholesterol, and Higher Fasting Triglycerides Which Were Associated With Treatment Choice at Baseline|Factors of higher creatinine: 1 milligram per deciliter higher (mg/dL) and higher fasting lipids (HDL cholesterol: 1 mg/dL higher; total cholesterol: 1 mg/dL higher; triglycerides: 1 mg/dL higher) were analyzed for association with treatment choice at baseline. A total of 12 factors were evaluated. A multivariate logistic regression model using the full analysis set (FAS) population was performed for each of the factors to determine if exenatide treatment was more likely to be initiated in the presence of the specific factor. Creatinine and fasting lipids were measured in milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL).|baseline|Full analysis set (FAS) population: all patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfilled the study entry criteria. FASS=444 and 438 in each arm respectively but the number of patients with creatinine and fasting lipids data at baseline varied. N is presented with each category.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811820|NCT01060059|Secondary|Factor of Greater Height Associated With Treatment Choice at Baseline|Factor of greater height (1 centimeter higher) was analyzed for association with treatment choice at baseline. A total of 12 factors were evaluated. A multivariate logistic regression model using the full analysis set (FAS) population was performed for each of the factors to determine if exenatide treatment was more likely to be initiated in the presence of the specific factor. Height was measured in centimeters (cm) .|baseline|"Full analysis set (FAS) population: all patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfilled the study entry criteria.
FAS for basal insulin arm=438 but one patient did not provide height data so n=437."||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
811821|NCT01060059|Secondary|Factor of Higher Body Mass Index (BMI) Associated With Treatment Choice at Baseline|Factor of higher body mass index (BMI) (1 kilogram per meter squared (kg/m^2) higher) was analyzed for association with treatment choice at baseline. A total of 12 factors were evaluated. A multivariate logistic regression model using the full analysis set (FAS) population was performed for each of the factors to determine if exenatide treatment was more likely to be initiated in the presence of the specific factor. BMI measured as kg/m^2.|baseline|"Full analysis set (FAS) population: all patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfilled the study entry criteria.
FAS for basal insulin arm=438 but one patient did not have data in this arm so n=437."||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
813407|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Adding Concomitant Cardiovascular Medications at 6 Months|Presented by type of medication added.|6 Months|Evaluable participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with available data at given time point).||participants|||Number
811822|NCT01060059|Secondary|Factor of Older Age Associated With Treatment Choice at Baseline|Older age (1 year older) was analyzed for association with treatment choice at baseline. A total of 12 factors were evaluated. A multivariate logistic regression model using the full analysis set (FAS) population was performed for each of the factors to determine if exenatide treatment was more likely to be initiated in the presence of the specific factor. Age was measured in years.|baseline|Full analysis set (FAS) population: all patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfilled the study entry criteria.||years||Standard Deviation|Mean
811823|NCT01060059|Secondary|Factor of Longer Duration of Diabetes Associated With Treatment Choice at Baseline|The Factor of longer duration of diabetes at baseline (diagnosed 1 year longer) was analyzed for association with treatment choice at baseline. A total of 12 factors were evaluated. A multivariate logistic regression model using the full analysis set (FAS) population was performed for each of the factors to determine if exenatide treatment was more likely to be initiated in the presence of the specific factor. Duration of diabetes was measured in years since the date of diabetes diagnosis.|baseline|Full analysis set (FAS) population: all patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfilled the study entry criteria.||years||Standard Deviation|Mean
811824|NCT01060059|Secondary|Factor of 1 Percent (%) Higher Baseline HbA1c Associated With Treatment Choice at Baseline|Factor of 1% higher baseline HbA1c (from most recent HbA1c) was analyzed for association with treatment choice at baseline. A total of 12 factors were evaluated. A multivariate logistic regression model using the full analysis set (FAS) population was performed for each of the factors to determine if exenatide treatment was more likely to be initiated in the presence of the specific factor. HbA1c was measured as a percent of normal (%).|baseline|"Full analysis set (FAS) population: all patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfilled the study entry criteria.
FAS=444, however 1 patient in the exenatide arm was missing data for the most recent HbA1c at baseline so n=443."||Percentage of normal||Standard Deviation|Mean
811825|NCT01060059|Secondary|Factors of Gender, Baseline Presence of Medical Conditions, and Previous Gastrointestinal Symptoms Associated With Treatment Choice at Baseline|Number of patients per arm who were evaluated in 3 factors at baseline (gender, presence of medical conditions, and previous gastrointestinal symptoms) were analyzed for association with treatment choice at baseline. A total of 12 factors were evaluated. A multivariate logistic regression model using the full analysis set (FAS) population was performed for each of the factors to determine if exenatide treatment was more likely to be initiated in the presence of the specific factor.|baseline|All patients consented to release information; fulfilled study entry criteria. Analyses conducted on baseline arm assignment, irrespective of later treatment changes. Only those assigned to an arm were included. Missing values for numeric covariates replaced with means; categorical ones, with modes.||participants|||Number
811826|NCT01060059|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Hypoglycemia Episodes Between Baseline and Month 12|"Percentage of patients with Hypoglycemia Episodes Between Baseline and Month 12.
All episodes consistent with hypoglycemia with or without a confirmatory blood glucose reading were collected."|Baseline to Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||percentage of patients|||Number
811827|NCT01060059|Secondary|Changes in Systolic Blood Pressure Between Baseline and Month 12|Changes in Systolic Blood Pressure Between Baseline and Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811828|NCT01060059|Secondary|Changes in Diastolic Blood Pressure Between Baseline and Month 12|Changes in Diastolic Blood Pressure Between Baseline and Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811829|NCT01060059|Secondary|Changes in Fasting Triglycerides Between Baseline and Month 12|Changes in Fasting Triglycerides Between Baseline and Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811830|NCT01060059|Secondary|Changes in Fasting LDL Between Baseline and Month 12|Changes in Fasting LDL Between Baseline and Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811831|NCT01060059|Secondary|Changes in Fasting HDL Between Baseline and Month 12|Changes in Fasting HDL Between Baseline and Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811832|NCT01060059|Secondary|Changes in Fasting Total Cholesterol Between Baseline and Month 12|Changes in Fasting Total Cholesterol Between Baseline and Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811833|NCT01060059|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving a Weight Decrease >=5% Between Baseline and Month 12|Percentage of Patients Achieving a Weight Decrease >=5% between Baseline and Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||percentage of patients|||Number
811834|NCT01060059|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving a Weight Decrease >=3% Between Baseline and Month 12|Percentage of Patients Achieving a Weight Decrease >=3% between Baseline and Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||percentage of patients|||Number
811835|NCT01060059|Secondary|Changes in Weight From Baseline to Month 12|Changes in Weight From Baseline to Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811836|NCT01060059|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving HbA1c Concentration <6.5% at Month 12|Percentage of Patients Achieving HbA1c Concentration <6.5% at Month 12|Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||percentage of patients|||Number
811837|NCT01060059|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving HbA1c Concentration <=7.0% at Month 12|Percentage of Patients Achieving HbA1c Concentration <=7.0% at Month 12|Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||percentage of patients|||Number
811838|NCT01060059|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c Reduction From Baseline >= 1.0% at Month 12|Percentage of Patients with HbA1c Reduction from Baseline >= 1.0% at Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes"||percentage of patients|||Number
811839|NCT01060059|Secondary|Changes in Fasting Blood Glucose From Baseline to Month 12|Changes in Fasting Blood Glucose From Baseline to Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes."||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811840|NCT01060059|Secondary|Changes in HbA1c From Baseline to Month 12|Changes in HbA1c from Baseline to Month 12|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes."||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
811841|NCT01060059|Primary|Percentage of Patients Who Achieved Glycemic Target of HbA1c ≤ 7.0% With Minimal Weight Gain (≤ 1 Kg) at Month 12.|Percentage of patients who achieved glycemic target of HbA1c ≤ 7.0% with minimal weight gain (≤ 1 Kg) at month 12.|Baseline, Month 12|"All patients who provided consent to release information and who fulfill the study entry criteria were included in the analyses.
Patients were assigned to the exenatide BID or insulin cohort based on their initial injectable treatment started at baseline, and analyses were conducted irrespective of later treatment changes."||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811842|NCT01067716|Other Pre-specified|Induced Manifest Refractive Astigmatism Greater Than 2.0 D of Absolute Cylinder Power||1 Year|||percentage of eyes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
811843|NCT01067716|Other Pre-specified|Loss of More Than 2 Lines Best Spectacle Corrected Visual Acuity (BSCVA)|After surgery, with or without best spectacle prescription the subject is not expected to see worse than before surgery. As a metric for this safety endpoint, losses of 2 lines of vision on a standard eye chart, with best spectacle correction, after surgery compared to pre-operative baseline shall be evaluated. For example 20/20 is typically considered best vision and 2 lines worse than this will be 20/32).|1 Year|||percentage of eyes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
811844|NCT01067716|Other Pre-specified|Percent Manifest Refraction Spherical Equivalent Within 1.0D|Manifest refraction spherical equivalent is the required spectacle (or glass) prescription.|1 Year|As a measure of effectiveness of LASIK treatment with VSS, the required spectacle prescription, also called manifest refraction, will be measured under standardized conditions such as 4 meter testing distance, controlled ambient room lighting and standard eye charts.||percentage of eyes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
811845|NCT01067716|Primary|Percent of Eyes With Uncorrected Visual Acuity (UCVA) of 20/40 or Better||1 Year|As a measure of effectiveness of LASIK treatment with VSS, distance visual performance without spectacles, clinically measured as Uncorrected Visual Acuity (UCVA) will be measured under standardized conditions such as 4 meter testing distance, controlled ambient room lighting and standard eye charts.||percentage of eyes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
811846|NCT01067768|Secondary|Catheter Days|The duration of catheterization|withdrawal of the catheter|Analysis by intention to treat||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811847|NCT01067768|Primary|Rate of Catheter-associated Urinary Tract Infection||Until 7 days after the withdrawal of the catheter or at discharge (whichever comes first)|Analysis by intention to treat||infections per 1000 days||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811848|NCT01067781|Secondary|Characterization and Comparison of Group LT-specific Immune Responses to the TD Vaccine System: (1) Geometric Mean Titers (2) Geometric Mean Fold Ratios (3) Seroconversion Rates||Day 0 to Day 180||||||
811849|NCT01067781|Primary|Characterization and Comparison of the Safety of the TD Vaccine System: (1) Solicited and Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs) (2) Clinical Laboratory Safety (3) Serious AEs|Erythema, rash, pain, pruritus, hyperpigmentation, hypopigmentation and edema were solicited local AEs for the duration of the study. Fever, malaise, headache, and diarrhea were solicited systemic AEs for the first seven days following each vaccination; events reported outside this time frame were considered non-solicited.|Day 0 to Day 180|||participants|||Number
831857|NCT01243320|Primary|Change in Carbon Dioxide Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
811850|NCT01067846|Primary|Treatment Retention – Number of Visits During Treatment|Number of treatment visits attended prior to discontinuation of treatment|Treatment sessions included 3 visits per week for 4 weeks|Total possible sessions attended = 180 per arm. Some participants did not complete all sessions, therefore the units analyzed will not match the total possible.||visits|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
811851|NCT01067846|Primary|Drug Abstinence During Treatment and at Follow up Visits|Percentage of the overall number of drug abstinences of participants measured by urine drug testing|Participants provided urine samples for drug testing during treatment which occurred 3 times per week for 4 weeks, at the end of treatment, and at a 1 and 2 month follow up visit|Total possible urine samples = 225 per arm. Not all participants stayed in treatment, therefore the total units analyzed will not match the total possible.||percentage of drug abstinences|Participants||Number
811852|NCT01068158|Secondary|Summary of the Reported Skin/Scalp Irritation Before and Post-treatment With Either Ivermectin or Placebo (Vehicle Control)|"Severe skin/scalp irritations were defined as follows:
Severe Pruritus - Nearly constant, frequent scratching, very bothersome; Severe Erythema - large areas of the scalp are red; Severe Excoriation - Widespread breaking of the skin involving most of the scalp; Severe Pyoderma - Lesions with crusting or other evidence of infection, involving most of the scalp."|Day 2 up to Day 15 post-application|Skin/scalp irritation was assessed in the Intent-to-Treat (Safety) population.||Participants|||Number
811853|NCT01068158|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Post-treatment With Either Ivermectin or Placebo (Vehicle Control)|"Adverse events were defined and classified as follows:
'Mild' - Awareness of signs or symptoms, but easily tolerated; 'Moderate' - Discomfort to a degree that adverse event/adverse drug reaction causes interference with normal daily life activities and/or requires medication; 'Severe' - Incapacity with regard to work or usual daily life activities. Requires medical attention/intervention."|Day 2 up to Day 15 post-application|Adverse events were assessed in the Intent-to-treat (Safety) population. Any participant with live lice on or after Day 2 received an FDA approved head lice treatment and was classified as a treatment failure, imputed as such for remaining assessments.||Participants|||Number
811854|NCT01068158|Primary|Percentage of All Participants Who Were Lice-Free by Day 2 That Were Maintained Through Day 15 Post-treatment With Either Ivermectin or Placebo (Vehicle Control)|Treatment success, defined as absence of live lice, was assessed in all subjects. Treatment success was assessed by last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation and treatment failure imputation.|Day 2 up to Day 15 post-application|Treatment success was assessed in the Intent-to-treat 2 (All Participants) population. Any participant with live lice on or after Day 2 received an FDA approved head lice treatment and was classified as a treatment failure, imputed as such for remaining assessments.||Percent of Participants|||Number
811855|NCT01068158|Primary|Percentage of Index Participants Who Were Lice-Free by Day 2 That Were Maintained Through Day 15 Post-treatment With Either Ivermectin or Placebo (Vehicle Control)|Treatment success, defined as absence of live lice, was assessed in index subjects, defined as the youngest person within each household who had at least 3 live lice present at Screening (Day 1). Treatment success was assessed by last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation and treatment failure imputation.|Day 2 up to Day 15 post-application|Treatment success was assessed in a subset of the Intent-to-treat population (Index participants). Any participant with live lice on or after Day 2 received an FDA approved head lice treatment and was classified as a treatment failure, imputed as such for remaining assessments.||Percent of Participants|||Number
811856|NCT01068262|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Treatment Due to an AE|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the SPONSOR’s product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a pre-existing condition which is temporally associated with the use of the SPONSOR’s product, is also an AE. The study determined if the number of participants who discontinued treatment with Odanacatib 50 mg Qw for 4 consecutive weeks due to AEs was sufficiently low to permit continued clinical investigation.|Up to Week 4|All randomized participants who received ≥1 dose of study treatment||Participants|||Number
811857|NCT01068262|Secondary|Number of Participants With At Least One Adverse Event (AE) in the Baseline, Treatment, or Post-Treatment Periods|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the SPONSOR’s product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a pre-existing condition which is temporally associated with the use of the SPONSOR’s product, is also an AE. The study determined if the number of AEs experienced by participants receiving Odanacatib 50 mg Qw for 4 consecutive weeks was sufficiently low to permit continued clinical investigation. In addition to AEs during the treatment period and post-treatment follow-up period, AEs may have occurred prior to treatment in screened participants as a result of urine and blood sampling at Baseline.|Up to Day 58|All randomized participants who received ≥1 dose of study treatment||Participants|||Number
811858|NCT01068262|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Half-Life (t1/2) of Odanacatib in Healthy Male and Postmenopausal Female Participants at Week 4|Blood samples were obtained predose on Day 1 (Baseline) and at various timepoints up to 336 hr postdose on Day 22 (Week 4) to determine the similarity of the apparent t1/2 of odanacatib 50 mg administered Qw for 4 weeks in healthy males and postmenopausal females. Harmonic mean, jack-knife standard deviation reported for apparent terminal t1/2.|Baseline, Week 4 (1, 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168, 240, and 336 hours post-dose)|The population of male and postmenopausal female participants who received Qw treatment with Odanacatib 50 mg for 4 weeks and were compliant with the protocol.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811859|NCT01068262|Secondary|Overall Time to Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of Odanacatib in Healthy Male and Postmenopausal Female Participants at Week 4|Blood samples were obtained predose on Day 1 (Baseline) and at various timepoints up to 336 hr postdose on Day 22 (Week 4) to determine the similarity of steady-state Tmax of odanacatib 50 mg administered Qw for 4 weeks in healthy males and postmenopausal females.|Baseline, Week 4 (1, 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168, 240, and 336 hours post-dose)|The population of male and postmenopausal female participants who received Qw treatment with Odanacatib 50 mg for 4 weeks and were compliant with the protocol.||hr||Full Range|Median
824781|NCT01178268|Secondary|Follow-up In-segment Percent Diameter Stenosis (DS)||≥13 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percent Diameter stenosis|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
811860|NCT01068262|Secondary|Concentration of Odanacatib at 168 Hours (C168hr) in Healthy Male and Postmenopausal Female Participants at Week 4|Blood samples were obtained at 168 hours postdose on Day 22 (Week 4) to determine the similarity of steady-state C168hr (trough concentrations) of odanacatib 50 mg administered Qw for 4 weeks in healthy males and postmenopausal females.|Week 4 (168 hours postdose)|The population of male and postmenopausal female participants who received Qw treatment with Odanacatib 50 mg for 4 weeks and were compliant with the protocol.||nM||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811861|NCT01068262|Secondary|Overall Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Odanacatib in Healthy Male and Postmenopausal Female Participants at Week 4|Blood samples were obtained predose on Day 1 (Baseline) and at various timepoints up to 336 hr postdose on Day 22 (Week 4) to determine the similarity of steady-state Cmax of odanacatib 50 mg administered Qw for 4 weeks in healthy males and postmenopausal females.|Baseline, Week 4 (1, 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168, 240, and 336 hours post-dose)|The population of male and postmenopausal female participants who received Qw treatment with Odanacatib 50 mg for 4 weeks and were compliant with the protocol.||nM||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811862|NCT01068262|Secondary|Area Under the Curve of Plasma Concentration-time From 0 to 168 Hours (AUC0-168hr) of Odanacatib at Week 4|Blood samples were obtained predose on Day 1 (Baseline) and at various timepoints up to 336 hr postdose on Day 22 (Week 4) to determine the similarity of steady-state AUC0-168 hr of odanacatib 50 mg administered Qw for 4 weeks in healthy males and postmenopausal females. Characterization of AUC0-168hr after administration of the final, Qw dose of Odanacatib 50 mg at steady state is reflective of the clinical dosing interval.|Baseline, Week 4 (1, 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168, 240, and 336 hours post-dose)|The population of male and postmenopausal female participants who received Qw treatment with Odanacatib 50 mg for 4 weeks and were compliant with the protocol.||µM·hr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
811863|NCT01068262|Primary|Weighted Average Inhibition (WAI) of Urine Aminoterminal Crosslinked Telopeptide of Type I Collagen (u-NTx/Cr) After Administration of Odanacatib 50 mg or Placebo Qw for 4 Weeks in Healthy Males and Postmenopausal Females|uNTx/Cr is a biomarker of bone resorption. Urine samples were obtained predose on Day 1 (Baseline) and at various timepoints up to 336 hr postdose on Day 22 (Week 4). Fold change from baseline in time weighted average (TWA) of uNTx/Cr on log scale was analyzed via a linear mixed effect model. All analyses were carried out on the log-fold scale and final results were reported on the original percent scale in WAI after back transformation. The conversion used was weighted average inhibition (WAI) = (1-exp [mean])*100, where the mean was the least squares (LS) mean of log-transformed ratio (TWA/baseline) from the above model.|Baseline to Week 4|The population of male and postmenopausal female participants on Qw treatment with Odanacatib 50 mg for 4 weeks and were compliant with the protocol. The population of male participants on placebo are also included. Postmenopausal females on placebo were not analyzed for WAI due to there being too few participants in this group (N=2).||Percent inhibition||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
811864|NCT01068418|Secondary|The Change in Renal Blood Flow in Response to an Infusion of Angiotensin II||baseline and 1 month following vitamin D3 therapy|||mL/min/1.72m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
811865|NCT01068418|Primary|The Change in the Mean Arterial Blood Pressure in Response to an Infusion of Angiotensin II||baseline and 1 month following vitamin D3 therapy|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811866|NCT01068509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ICS of IL2, IL4, IL17, TNF, and IFNg in CD4+ and CD8+ Cells at Weeks 20, 56, and 104|Intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) for IL2, IL4, IL17, tumor necrosis factor (TNF), and interferon gamma (IFNg) was done in both CD4+ and CD8+ cells from serum samples collected at Weeks, 20, 56, and 104. Intracellular cytokine staining data were acquired with 8-color flow cytometry on a BD LSR II flow cytometer and a high-throughput screening microplate reader.|Baseline to Week 104|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized participants. Efficacy data were not collected on the initial cohort of 7 non-randomized participants.||Arbitrary units||Standard Deviation|Mean
811867|NCT01068509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mucin 1 Antibody Levels at Weeks 20, 56, and 104|Mucin 1 antibodies were assessed in serum samples using a quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Detection was achieved with electrochemiluminescence.|Baseline to Week 104|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized participants. Efficacy data were not collected on the initial cohort of 7 non-randomized participants.||Arbitrary units||Standard Deviation|Mean
811868|NCT01068509|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time from randomization until death from any cause.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 4 years 10 months)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized participants. Efficacy data were not collected on the initial cohort of 7 non-randomized participants.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811869|NCT01068509|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from randomization to the date of documented disease progression or death from any cause, whichever occurred earlier. Disease progression occurred when a patient met either the Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) cancer-antigen (CA)-125 definition or the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) radiological definition of progressive disease. The GCIG CA-125 definition of disease progression was defined as a CA-125 level ≥ 2 × the upper limit of normal documented on 2 occasions at least 1 week apart. The radiological RECIST criteria of disease progression was defined as the appearance of new lesions or an overall increase ≥ 20% or at least 5 mm in existing tumors.|Baseline to 48 weeks after the last visit or dose of Cvac (up to 104 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized participants. Efficacy data were not collected on the initial cohort of 7 non-randomized participants.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811870|NCT01068548|Secondary|Time to Change to Oral Antibiotics||1 month||||||
811871|NCT01068548|Primary|Length of Hospital Stay||1 month|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
811872|NCT01068600|Secondary|Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) Focal Score After 12 Weeks of Treatment|TDI focal score is based on three domains: functional impairment, magnitude of task and magnitude of effort. Each domain is scored from -3 (major deterioration) to 3 (major improvement) to give an overall TDI focal score of -9 to 9 with a negative score indicating a deterioration from baseline. A 1 unit difference in the TDI focal score is clinically significant. Mixed model used baseline dyspnoea index, FEV1 prior to and 10-15 minutes post inhalation of albuterol, and FEV1 prior to and 50-70 minutes post inhalation of ipratropium as covariates.|after 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication. If data were missing or insufficient for any one of the domains a focal score was not calculated. Missing focal scores after week 4 were imputed using last observation carried forward.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811873|NCT01068600|Primary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) After 12 Weeks of Treatment|Spirometry was conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Trough FEV1 was defined as the average of the 23 hour 10 minute and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose FEV1 readings. Mixed model used baseline FEV1, FEV1 prior to and 10-15 minutes post inhalation of albuterol, and FEV1 prior to and 50-70 minutes post inhalation of ipratropium as covariates.|after 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. The endpoint was analyzed only for those participants who had data for this outcome measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811874|NCT01068626|Secondary|Change in LDL||6 months|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
811875|NCT01068626|Secondary|Change in Body Weight||6 months|||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811876|NCT01068626|Secondary|Change in Hepatic Fat Infiltration Measured by CT.||6 months|||Hounsfield units||Standard Deviation|Mean
811877|NCT01068626|Secondary|Change in the Ratio Between Intra-abdominal and Subcutaneous Tissue Area Measured by CT.||6 months|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
811878|NCT01068626|Secondary|Change in Subcutaneous Adipose Tissue Area||6 months|||cm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
811879|NCT01068626|Primary|Change in Visceral Adipose Tissue Area Measured by Computed Tomography.||6 months|Per protocol||cm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
811880|NCT01068652|Secondary|Mean of 8-point Plasma Glucose (PG) Profile After 50 Weeks of Treatment|Observed overall mean of 8-point PG profile after 50 weeks of treatment (visit 32)|Week 50|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811881|NCT01068652|Secondary|Mean of 8-point Plasma Glucose (PG) Profile After 38 Weeks of Treatment|Observed overall mean of 8-point PG profile after 38 weeks of treatment (visit 25)|Week 38|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811882|NCT01068652|Secondary|Mean of 8-point Plasma Glucose (PG) Profile After 26 Weeks of Treatment|Observed overall mean of 8-point PG profile after 26 weeks of treatment (visit 18)|Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811883|NCT01068652|Secondary|Mean of 8-point Plasma Glucose (PG) Profile After 14 Weeks of Treatment|Observed overall mean of 8-point PG profile after 14 weeks of treatment (visit 11)|Week 14|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811884|NCT01068652|Secondary|Mean of Prandial Plasma Glucose (PG) Increment After 50 Weeks of Treatment|Observed overall mean of PG increment after 50 weeks of treatment (visit 32). Mean PG Increment was calculated using the average of difference between the Post Prandial and Pre Prandial Glucose values {ie .average of (Post Breakfast – Pre Breakfast), (Post Lunch – Pre Lunch) and (Post Dinner - Pre Dinner)}.|Week 50|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 19 subjects, PG (mg/dL) increment values were missing at all evaluations.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811885|NCT01068652|Secondary|Mean of Prandial Plasma Glucose (PG) Increment After 38 Weeks of Treatment|Observed overall mean of PG increment after 38 weeks of treatment (visit 25). Mean PG Increment was calculated using the average of difference between the Post Prandial and Pre Prandial Glucose values {ie .average of (Post Breakfast – Pre Breakfast), (Post Lunch – Pre Lunch) and (Post Dinner - Pre Dinner)}.|Week 38|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 19 subjects, PG (mg/dL) increment values were missing at all evaluations.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811886|NCT01068652|Secondary|Mean of Prandial Plasma Glucose (PG) Increment After 26 Weeks of Treatment|Observed overall mean of PG increment after 26 weeks of treatment (visit 18). Mean PG Increment was calculated using the average of difference between the Post Prandial and Pre Prandial Glucose values {ie .average of (Post Breakfast – Pre Breakfast), (Post Lunch – Pre Lunch) and (Post Dinner - Pre Dinner)}|Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 19 subjects, PG (mg/dL) increment values were missing at all evaluations.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811887|NCT01068652|Secondary|Mean of Prandial Plasma Glucose (PG) Increment After 14 Weeks of Treatment|Observed overall mean of PG increment after 14 weeks of treatment (Visit 11). Mean PG Increment was calculated using the average of difference between the Post Prandial and Pre Prandial Glucose values {ie .average of (Post Breakfast – Pre Breakfast), (Post Lunch – Pre Lunch) and (Post Dinner - Pre Dinner)}|Week 14|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 28 subjects, PG (mg/dL) increment values were missing at all evaluations.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
811888|NCT01068652|Secondary|Number of Subjects Achieving Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Below 7.0% After 50 Weeks of Treatment|Number of subjects achieving HbA1c below 7.0% after 50 weeks of treatment (visit 32)|Week 50|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects. For 35 subjects, values were missing.||Subjects|||Number
811889|NCT01068652|Secondary|Number of Subjects Achieving Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Below 7.0% After 38 Weeks of Treatment|Number of subjects achieving HbA1c below 7.0% after 38 weeks of treatment (visit 25)|Week 38|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects. For 31 subjects, values were missing.||Subjects|||Number
811890|NCT01068652|Secondary|Number of Subjects Achieving Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Below 7.0% After 26 Weeks of Treatment|Number of subjects achieving HbA1c below 7.0% after 26 weeks of treatment (visit 18)|Week 26|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects. For 29 subjects, values were missing.||Subjects|||Number
811891|NCT01068652|Secondary|Number of Subjects Achieving Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Below 7.0% After 14 Weeks of Treatment|Number of subjects achieving HbA1c below 7.0% after 14 weeks of treatment (visit 11)|Week 14|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects. For 20 subjects, values were missing.||Subjects|||Number
811892|NCT01068652|Secondary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 50|Observed mean change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 50 (visit 32)|Week 0, Week 50|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 20 subjects, values for change in HbA1c were missing.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
811893|NCT01068652|Secondary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) After 38 Weeks of Treatment|Observed mean change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 38 (visit 25)|Week 0, Week 38|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 20 subjects, values for change in HbA1c were missing.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
811894|NCT01068652|Secondary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) After 26 Weeks of Treatment|Observed mean change in from baseline in HbA1c at Week 26 (visit 18)|Week 0, Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 20 subjects, values for change in HbA1c were missing.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
811895|NCT01068652|Secondary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) After 14 Weeks of Treatment|Observed mean change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 14 (visit 11)|Week 0, Week 14|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 20 subjects, values for change in HbA1c were missing.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
811896|NCT01068652|Primary|Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c)|Estimated mean difference in HbA1c after 50 weeks of treatment|Week 50|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 20 subjects, HbA1c values were missing.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Error|Mean
811897|NCT01068665|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)|Change from baseline in FPG after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|The FAS included all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 3 subjects baseline values were missing.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
811898|NCT01068665|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c)|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 2 subjects were withdrawn prior to exposure to the study drug in the IDeg arm as they were randomised in error and 1 subject in the IGlar arm.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
811899|NCT01068678|Secondary|Change in Body Weight|Change from baseline in body weight after week 26|Week 26|The Safety analysis set (SAS) included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator. Missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 3 subjects baseline values were missing.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811900|NCT01068678|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c)|Change from baseline in HbA1c after week 26|Week 26|The Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).1 subject was randomised despite being a screening failure.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
811901|NCT01068717|Primary|Time to Achieve the Observed Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for Saxagliptin and Metformin, Tablets and FDC, Administered to Participants in the Fasted and Fed States||Days 1, 2, and 3 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4|All participants who received at least 1 of the 4 treatments and had sufficient plasma concentration data to facilitate the calculation of at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic parameter for at least 1 of the treatments.||Hours||Full Range|Median
811902|NCT01068717|Primary|AUC[0-inf] for Metformin, Tablets and FDC, Administered in the Fasted and Fed States||Days 1, 2, and 3 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4|All participants who received at least 1 of the 4 treatments and had sufficient plasma concentration data to facilitate the calculation of at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic parameter for at least 1 of the treatments.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811903|NCT01068717|Primary|AUC From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC[0-inf]) for Saxagliptin, Tablets and FDC, Given in the Fasted and Fed States||Days 1, 2, and 3 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4|All participants who received at least 1 of the 4 treatments and had sufficient plasma concentration data to facilitate the calculation of at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic parameter for at least 1 of the treatments.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811904|NCT01068717|Primary|AUC[0-t] for Metformin, Tablets and FDC, Given in the Fasted and Fed States||Days 1, 2, and 3 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4|All participants who received at least 1 of the 4 treatments and had sufficient plasma concentration data to facilitate the calculation of at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic parameter for at least 1 of the treatments.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811905|NCT01068717|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormalities in Body Temperature, Blood Pressure, or Heart Rate|Clinically significant was determined by the investigator. Blood pressure and heart rate were measured after the participant had been seated quietly for at least 5 minutes.|At screening visit, prior to dosing on Day 1 of Periods 1 through 4, and at study discharge.|All enrolled participants who received study medication.||Participants|||Number
811906|NCT01068717|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormalities in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Results|Clinically significant was determined by the investigator. ECGs were recorded after participants had been supine for at least 5 minutes.|At screening visit, Day -1 of Period 1, and at study discharge|All enrolled participants who received study medication.||Participants|||Number
811907|NCT01068717|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormalities in Hematology, Serum Chemistry, and Urinalysis Laboratory Test Results|Clinically significant was determined by the investigator. Hematology tests included hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell count, total leukocyte count (including differential), and platelet count. Serum chemistry tests included aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, lactate dehydrogenase, creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, uric acid, fasting glucose, total protein, albumin, sodium, potassium, chloride, calcium, phosphorus, and creatine kinase. Urinalysis included protein, glucose, blood, leukocyte esterase, specific gravity, and pH.|At screening visit, at Day -1 of Periods 1 through 4, and at discharge|All enrolled participants who received study medication.||Participants|||Number
811933|NCT01068743|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin PK Parameter Time to Achieve the Observed Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. Tmax is the time taken to reach the maximum observed plasma concentration.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811908|NCT01068717|Secondary|Number of Participants With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events, and Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation|An AE is any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. An SAE is any unfavorable medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency or abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization.|Continuously over Days 1 to 3 of treatment Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4|All enrolled participants who received study medication.||Participants|||Number
811909|NCT01068717|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-t]) for Saxagliptin, Tablets and FDC, Given in the Fasted and Fed States||Days 1, 2, and 3 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4|All participants who received at least 1 of the 4 treatments and had sufficient plasma concentration data to facilitate the calculation of at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic parameter for at least 1 of the treatments.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811910|NCT01068717|Primary|Terminal Half-life (t1/2) of Saxagliptin and Metformin, Tablets and FDC, Administered to Participants in the Fasted and Fed States||Days 1, 2, and 3 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4|All participants who received at least 1 of the 4 treatments and had sufficient plasma concentration data to facilitate the calculation of at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic parameter for at least 1 of the treatments.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
811911|NCT01068717|Primary|Observed Cmax of Metformin, Tablets and FDC, Administered to Participants in the Fasted and Fed States||Days 1, 2, and 3 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4|All participants who received at least 1 of the 4 treatments and had sufficient plasma concentration data to facilitate the calculation of at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic parameter for at least 1 of the treatments.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811912|NCT01068717|Primary|Observed Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Saxagliptin, Tablets and Fixed-dose Combination (FDC), Administered to Participants in the Fasted and Fed States||Days 1, 2, and 3 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4|All participants who received at least 1 of the 4 treatments and had sufficient plasma concentration data to facilitate the calculation of at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic parameter for at least 1 of the treatments.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811913|NCT01068730|Other Pre-specified|Metformin Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-t])|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. AUC[0-t] is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants with evaluable PK analyses.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811914|NCT01068730|Secondary|Participants With Clinical Laboratory Findings Considered Clinically Significant or Reported as an AE: Urinalysis|Clinically significant was determined by the investigator.|From study drug administration Day 1/Period 1 till study discharge. Duration of the study was approximately 45 days (including screening).|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||Participants|||Number
811915|NCT01068730|Secondary|Participants With Clinical Laboratory Findings Considered Clinically Significant or Reported as an AE: Serum Chemistry|Clinically significant was determined by the investigator.|From study drug administration Day 1/Period 1 till study discharge. Duration of the study was approximately 45 days (including screening).|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||Participants|||Number
811916|NCT01068730|Secondary|Participants With Clinical Laboratory Findings Considered Clinically Significant or Reported as an AE: Hematology|Clinically significant was determined by the investigator.|From study drug administration Day 1/Period 1 till study discharge. Duration of the study was approximately 45 days (including screening).|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||Participants|||Number
811917|NCT01068730|Other Pre-specified|Metformin Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter Terminal Half-life (T 1/2)|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. T 1/2 is the time required for the concentration of the drug to reach half of its original value in plasma|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants with evaluable PK analyses. In treatment D, T 1/2 was not analysed for 1 participant who did not have a clear terminal elimination phase.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811918|NCT01068730|Other Pre-specified|Metformin Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter Time to Achieve the Observed Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. Tmax is the time taken to reach the maximum observed plasma concentration.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants with evaluable PK analyses.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811919|NCT01068730|Secondary|Participants With Abnormal Vital Sign Findings Reported as an AE|per investigator|From Day 1/Period 1 to study discharge or premature discontinuation. Duration of study was approximately 45 days (including screening).|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||Participants|||Number
811920|NCT01068730|Secondary|Participants With Abnormal Physical Findings|Physical findings that were considered abnormal by the investigator.|From Day 1/Period 1 to study discharge or premature discontinuation. Duration of study was approximately 45 days (including screening).|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||Participants|||Number
811921|NCT01068730|Secondary|Participants With Electrocardiogram Abnormalities Considered Clinically Significant or Reported as an AE|Clinically significant was determined by the investigator. ECGs were recorded after participants had been supine for at least 5 minutes.|From study drug administration Day 1/Period 1 till study discharge. Duration of the study was approximately 45 days (including screening).|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||Participants|||Number
811934|NCT01068743|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin PK Parameter Terminal Half-life (T 1/2)|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. T 1/2 is the time required for the concentration of the drug to reach half of its original value in plasma.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811922|NCT01068730|Secondary|Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Discontinuations Due to AEs, Deaths, and Serious AEs (SAEs)|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a pre-existing medical condition in a subject administered an investigational product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires or prolongs inpatient hospitalization (including elective surgery), results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an important medical event.|AEs: from study drug administration Day 1/Period 1 till study discharge. SAEs: from date of written consent until 30 days after discontinuation of dosing or study participation. Duration of the study was approximately 45 days (including screening).|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||Participants|||Number
811923|NCT01068730|Primary|Metformin PK Parameter Observed Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. Cmax is the maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants with evaluable PK analyses.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811924|NCT01068730|Primary|Metformin Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC[0-inf])|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. AUC (0-inf) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinite time.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants with evaluable PK analyses. In treatment D, AUC (0-inf) was not analysed for 1 participant who did not have a clear terminal elimination phase.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811925|NCT01068743|Secondary|Safety: Clinically Significant Laboratory, Vital Sign, Physical Examination, and/or 12-Lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities|Abnormalities that were considered clinically significant and/or reported as an AE by the investigator.|From Day 1/Period 1 to study discharge or premature discontinuation. Duration of study was approximately 45 days (including screening).|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
811926|NCT01068743|Other Pre-specified|Metformin PK Parameter Tmax|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. Tmax is the time taken to reach the maximum observed plasma concentration.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811927|NCT01068743|Other Pre-specified|Metformin PK Parameter T1/2|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. T 1/2 is the time required for the concentration of the drug to reach half of its original value in plasma.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study. One participant in period 3 (treatment D) was excluded from the pharmacokinetic analysis due to a predose concentration greater than 5% of Cmax.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811928|NCT01068743|Other Pre-specified|Metformin PK Parameter AUC(0-t)|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. AUC(0-t) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811929|NCT01068743|Other Pre-specified|Saxagliptin PK Parameter Tmax|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. Tmax is the time taken to reach the maximum observed plasma concentration.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study. One participant in period 3 (treatment D) was excluded from the pharmacokinetic analysis due to a predose concentration greater than 5% of Cmax.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811930|NCT01068743|Other Pre-specified|Saxagliptin PK Parameter T1/2|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. T 1/2 is the time required for the concentration of the drug to reach half of its original value in plasma.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study. One participant in period 3 (treatment D) was excluded from the pharmacokinetic analysis due to a predose concentration greater than 5% of Cmax.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
811931|NCT01068743|Other Pre-specified|Saxagliptin PK Parameter AUC(0-t)|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. AUC(0-t) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study. One participant in period 3 (treatment D) was excluded from the pharmacokinetic analysis due to a predose concentration greater than 5% of Cmax.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811932|NCT01068743|Secondary|Safety: Adverse Events (AEs), Discontinuations Due to AEs, Deaths, and Serious AEs (SAEs).|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a pre-existing medical condition in a subject administered an investigational product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires or prolongs inpatient hospitalization (including elective surgery), results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an important medical event.|AEs: from study drug administration Day 1/Period 1 till study discharge. SAEs: from date of written consent until 30 days after discontinuation of dosing or study participation. Duration of the study was approximately 45 days (including screening).|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
811964|NCT01069003|Primary|Incidence of Major Bleeding (GUSTO Classification, Severe and Moderate Bleeding Combined) for Randomized Subjects||Placebo and Thienopyridine 12 - 30 months; Surveillance Arm (0 - 24 months)|||Percentage of participants|||Number
824782|NCT01178268|Secondary|Follow-up In-segment Minimum Lumen Diameter (MLD)||≥13 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||Millimeter|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
811935|NCT01068743|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin PK Parameter Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-t])|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. AUC[0-t] is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811936|NCT01068743|Primary|Metformin PK Parameter Cmax|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. Cmax is the maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811937|NCT01068743|Primary|Metformin PK Parameter AUC(0-inf)|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. AUC (0-inf) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinite time.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study. One participant in period 3 (treatment D) was excluded from the pharmacokinetic analysis due to a predose concentration greater than 5% of Cmax.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811938|NCT01068743|Primary|Saxagliptin PK Parameter Observed Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. Cmax is the maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study. One participant in period 3 (treatment D) was excluded from the pharmacokinetic analysis due to a predose concentration greater than 5% of Cmax.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811939|NCT01068743|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin PK Parameter Cmax|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. Cmax is the maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811940|NCT01068743|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin PK Parameter AUC(0-inf)|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. AUC (0-inf) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinite time.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811941|NCT01068743|Primary|Saxagliptin Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC[0-inf])|PK is the process by which a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. AUC (0-inf) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinite time.|Periods 1, 2, 3, & 4: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of the study. One participant in period 3 (treatment D) was excluded from the pharmacokinetic analysis due to a predose concentration greater than 5% of Cmax.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
811942|NCT01068769|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression-free survival is defined as the duration of time from start of study drug administration to time of objective disease progression or death due to any cause, whichever comes first. Progression is evaluated every 8 weeks using Response Criteria for Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1. Objective disease progression is defined as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesion(s).|From date of enrollment until date of first documented progression or date of death from any cause, whichever came first|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811943|NCT01068769|Primary|Clinical Benefit as Defined by the Composite of Complete Response, Partial Response and Stable Disease Lasting 16 Weeks or More Per RECIST 1.1 as a Measure of Disease Control|The composite of complete response, partial response, and stable disease lasting 16 weeks or more per RECIST 1.1 as a measure of disease control. This is for target lesions. Complete response is disappearance of all target lesions and partial response is >+30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions. Stable disease is neither shrinkage by greater than or equal to 30% of the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions or the increase of lesions by greater than or equal to 20% of the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions. Progressive disease is considered an increase of the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions by greater than or equal to 20%.|2 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
811944|NCT01068821|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting a Neurologic Deficit in Extremities After Surgery|The neurologic deficit was assessed as follows: Patients' postoperative care was unchanged from routine for this study. Any postoperative complaints regarding limb pain or weakness or numbness were recorded and assessed with neurologic exam to determine sensation or motor components. Absence of resolution was documented.|postoperative day 1 and postoperative week 3-8|Participants were analyzed per protocol if they returned for postoperative followup (59 of 60 were analyzed)||participants|||Number
811945|NCT01068821|Primary|Amount of Patient Movement on the Operating Room Table|Patients undergoing gynecologic surgery require steep (30 to 45 degree) Trendelenberg's position to allow adequate exposure of the pelvis. This position leads to a small amount of movement toward the head of the bed. The table was marked at the point of the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) and at the point where a vertical marker touching the acromioclavicular (AC) joint of the left shoulder drops to the table. At the end of the surgery, when the operating table is leveled, the final positions of ASIS and AC will be measured. Measurements were made in centimeters to the tenth position.|About 150 minutes after start of surgery|Study size calculation was performed for 80% power, and p=0.05||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
811979|NCT01069289|Secondary|Morning Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1)|The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||Liter (L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811946|NCT01068860|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Death, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Adverse Events (AEs) Above 5% Frequency, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|An adverse event is any unwanted event, whether related to study drug or not occuring during the study period. A Serious Adverse Event (SAE) is an event resulting in death, requiring or prolonging hospitalization, a congenital anomaly or other important medical event. AEs and SAEs were recorded at each visit.|Baseline, 4 weeks|Safety Population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment.||participants|||Number
811947|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Peak Plasma C-peptide Level, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|"Change in mean peak plasma C-peptide level measured from Baseline to 4 weeks of treatment.
A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT population."|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||nmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811948|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Peak Plasma Insulin, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|Change in mean peak plasma Insulin level as measured from Baseline to 4 weeks of treatment. A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT population.|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||pmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811949|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Peak Plasma Glucose, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|"Change in peak plasma glucose level as measured from Baseline to 4 weeks of treatment.
A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT population."|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811950|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Post-prandial Glucose Area Under the Curve (AUC)0-4 Hours, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|Blood samples were drawn after a test meal at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180 and 240 min. Insulin levels over 4 hrs were shown as Area Under the Curve,(AUC). AUC was calculated as: x=1 AUC ΣAx n Where Ax = AUC for the 240 min.interval, and X = 1 for the 1st interval. A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab vs placebo within each T2DM group. The mixed model didn't include the IGT group.|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||mmol*hr/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811951|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in C-peptide Area Under the Curve (AUC), 0-4 Hours, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|Blood samples were drawn after a test meal at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180 and 240 min. Insulin levels over 4 hrs were shown as Area Under the Curve,(AUC). AUC was calculated as: x=1 AUC ΣAx n Where Ax = AUC for the 240 min.interval, and X = 1 for the 1st interval. A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab vs placebo within each T2DM group. The mixed model didn't include the IGT group.|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||nmol*hour/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811952|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Insulin Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-4 Hours, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|Blood samples were drawn after a test meal at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180 and 240 min. Insulin levels over 4 hrs were shown as Area Under the Curve,(AUC). AUC was calculated as: x=1 AUC ΣAx n Where Ax = AUC for the 240 min.interval, and X = 1 for the 1st interval. A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab vs placebo within each T2DM group. The mixed model didn't include the IGT group.|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||pmol*hour/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811953|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Absolute Glucose Level at 2 Hours, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|"Change in glucose level measured after 2 hours of fasting. Blood sample was drawn at 0 minutes and at 240 minutes.
A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT population."|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811954|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Fasting Glucose Disposition Index(GDI)1 and Index 2, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|GDI 1 is the product of insulin sensitivity index (Si)during the 1st phase of insulin secretion and β-cell function as measured by the acute insulin response (AIR).GDI 2 is the product of (Si)during the 2nd phase of insulin secretion and β-cell function as measured by the acute insulin response (AIR). A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT group.|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||number||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811980|NCT01069289|Secondary|Total Number of Day With Exacerbation|Total number of days with COPD exacerbation for each treatment group|Daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||days|||Number
813408|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Adding Concomitant Cardiovascular Medications at 3 Months|Presented by type of medication added.|3 Months|Evaluable participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with available data at given time point).||participants|||Number
811955|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Quantitative Insulin Sensitivity Check Index (QUICKI) Score, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|"The Quantitative Insulin Sensitivity Check Index (QUICKI) score, measures insulin sensitivity which is the inverse of insulin resistance. The score is calculated by the equation: 1 /(log(fasting insulin µU/mL) + log(fasting glucose mg/dL)). In normal subjects the mean score ± SE is 0.366 ± 0.029.
A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT population."|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||number||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811956|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Fasting Plasma Insulin, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|"Change in Fasting Insulin level taken from plasma, measured at Baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment.
A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT population"|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||pmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811957|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Fructosamine, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|"Change in Fructosamine Level taken from plasma, measured at Baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment.
A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT population"|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811958|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|"Change in Fasting Glucose Level measured from plasma taken at Baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment.
A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT population"|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811959|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Meal Stimulated Insulin Secretion Rate (ISR) Relative to Glucose 0-4 Hours, From Baseline to 4 Weeks.|Change in Insulin Secretion Rate stimulated by Liquid mixed-meal challenge. Blood samples were taken prior to and after meal for glucose, insulin and C-peptide at sample times: -20, -10, -1 and 10, 20, 30, 60, 90, 120, 180, and 240 minutes relative to the start of the meal. A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT population.|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||pmol/min/m^2/mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811960|NCT01068860|Secondary|Mean Change in Meal Stimulated Insulin Secretion Rate (ISR) Relative to Glucose 2-4 Hours, From Baseline to 4 Weeks|Change in Insulin Secretion Rate stimulated by Liquid mixed-meal challenge Blood samples were taken prior to and after meal for glucose and insulin at sample times: -20, -10, -1 and 10, 20, 30, 60, 90, 120, 180, and 240 minutes relative to the start of the meal. A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include participants from the IGT population|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||pmol/min/m^2/mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811961|NCT01068860|Primary|Mean Change in Meal Stimulated Insulin Secretion Rate (ISR) Relative to Glucose 0-2 Hours, From Baseline to 4 Weeks.|Change in Insulin Secretion Rate stimulated by Liquid mixed-meal challenge. Blood samples were taken prior to and after meal for glucose and insulin at sample times: -20, -10, -1 and 10, 20, 30, 60, 90, 120, 180, and 240 minutes relative to the start of the meal.A mixed model with treatment fitted as fixed effect, and population and the interaction of population and treatment fitted as random effects were used for the comparison of Canakinumab versus placebo within each T2DM population. The mixed model did not include patients from the IGT population|Baseline, 4 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set who participated in the meal challenge and who had at least 1 post-baseline absolute glucose measurement at 2 hours.||pmol/min/m^2/mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
811962|NCT01068912|Primary|Clinical Efficacy of 2 Dose Regimens of Favipiravir Compared With Placebo in Treating Patients With Influenza|"Overall time required from first study drug administration to alleviation of the 6 primary influenza symptoms and for temperature (oral) measurements to be less than 38.0°C for patients aged 20 to less than 65 years and less than 37.8°C for patients aged 65 years or older. Alleviated was defined as all 6 symptom scores had to be decreased to 1 or below and the decrease remain unchanged for 21.5 hours."|22 weeks|The primary analysis population for efficacy analyses was the ITTI Population (N=333), defined as all patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug with any available efficacy data after randomization and who tested positive for influenza A or B by PCR assay or culture tests on Day 1 using determinations.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
811963|NCT01068964|Primary|The Difference of Change From Baseline of Mean Diurnal Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Between the Two Treatment Groups at Week 4|The difference of change from baseline of mean diurnal IOP between the 0.03% Bimatoprost/0.5% Timolol in Same Bottle and the 0.03% Bimatoprost and 0.5% Timolol in Separate Bottles at week 4. IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. Mean diurnal IOP is the average of the IOP values of the study eye (the eye with the highest IOP at baseline) over the 3 time points measured at 8AM, 12PM and 4PM. A negative number change from baseline indicated a reduction (improvement) in IOP. The difference of change from baseline in IOP is presented in the statistical analysis section.|Baseline, Week 4|Intent to Treatment population defined as all patients randomized. One patient in the 0.03% Bimatoprost/0.5% Timolol in Same Bottle group was not included in the analysis.||Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811965|NCT01069003|Primary|Percentage of Participants of Incidence of ARC Definite or Probable Stent Thrombosis (ST) for Randomized Subjects|"All definite and probable Stent Thrombosis (ST) are adjudicated by an independent committee according to the definition based on Academic Research Consortium (ARC)
Definite is defined as angiographic or pathologic confirmation of partial or total thrombotic occlusion within the peri-stent region and at least 1 of the following: Acute ischemic symptoms, Ischemic ECG changes, Elevated cardiac biomarkers
Probable defined as any unexplained death within the first 30 days of procedure and any myocardial infarction, which is related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the implanted stent without angiographic confirmation of stent thrombosis and in the absence of any other obvious cause"|Placebo and Thienopyridine 12 - 30 months; Surveillance Arm (0 - 24 months)|||percentage of participants|||Number
811966|NCT01069003|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Composite of All Death, Target Vessel Myocardial Infarction (MI) and Stroke (Defined as MACCE) for Randomized Subjects||Placebo and Thienopyridine 12 - 30 months; Surveillance Arm (0 - 24 months)|||Percentage of participants|||Number
811967|NCT01069120|Primary|To Assess the Incidence of Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||During two 4 month treatment periods||||||
811968|NCT01069172|Secondary|Cumulative Dissipated Energy (CDE)|"CDE (the amount of ultrasound energy delivered during phacoemulsification of the crystalline lens) used will be measured during surgery. CDE is a unit used for the Alcon Infinity System (the U/S phacoemulsification used in this study). It is not expressed in standard units such as watts or Joules. CDE, which accounts for the power and time of two ultrasound delivery modes (longitudinal and torsional), is calculated as follows:
CDE = (Phaco time x average phaco power) + (torsional time x average torsional aptitude x 0.4)
0.4 is a factor representing the approximate reduction of heat dissipated at the incision as compared to conventional phacoemulsification."|Day of Surgery|29 subjects had FS laser surgery in one eye (29 FS surgery eyes) and CCC with U/S surgery in their fellow eye (29 CCC surgery eyes). Analysis of CDE was done by eye group.||CDE||Standard Deviation|Mean
811969|NCT01069172|Primary|Deviation From Intended Capsulotomy Diameter|Capsulotomy diameter measured during surgery for both the experimental and control groups.|Day of Surgery|29 subjects had FS laser surgery in one eye (29 FS surgery eyes) and CCC with U/S surgery in their fellow eye (29 CCC surgery eyes). Analysis of capsulotomy size was done by eye group.||μm||Standard Deviation|Mean
811970|NCT01069185|Secondary|Mechanical Ventilation Length as Days.|Number of days under mechanical ventilation during ICU hospitalization length|Every day while patient really is intubated.|||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
811971|NCT01069185|Primary|Primary Composite End Point|All causes of morbidity. Clinically identified as hypoxaemia, unplanned extubation, cardiac arrythmias, cardiac arrest. Measured as any change in patient´s monitor identified for ancillary nurse and/or confirmed directly by pediatrician.|Every component for primary outcome can be assessed during or after suctioning is applied.For routine protocol, every 2 hours for necessity protocol will depend on patient´s necessity. The assessment was done in each patient during intubation period .|||event|suctioning||Number
811972|NCT01069289|Secondary|St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total Score|The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group. The SGRQ ranges from 0 (no impairment of quality of life) to 100 (highest impairment of quality of life).|Daily during run-in period and daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811973|NCT01069289|Secondary|Use of Rescue Medication|The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group.|Daily during run-in period and daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||inhalations/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
811974|NCT01069289|Secondary|Total Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Symptom Score|The Total COPD Symptom score is the sum of the measures night-time awakening, breathlessness and cough, ranges from 0 to 12 with 12 being the most severe. The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group.|Daily during run-in period and daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811975|NCT01069289|Secondary|Cough Due to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Symptoms|There are 5 alternatives (scored 0 to 4, with 4 being the most severe condition). The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811976|NCT01069289|Secondary|Breathlessness Due to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Symptoms|There are 5 alternatives (scored 0 to 4, with 4 being the most severe condition). The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811977|NCT01069289|Secondary|Night-time Awakening Due to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Symptoms|Scored 0 to 1 (0 = no awakening and 1 = awakening). The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||Nights with symptoms||Standard Deviation|Mean
811978|NCT01069289|Secondary|Evening Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1)|The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||Liter (L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811981|NCT01069289|Secondary|Evening Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF)|The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||Liter/minute (L/min)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811982|NCT01069289|Secondary|Morning Peak Expiratory Flow(PEF)|The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||Liter/minute (L/min)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811983|NCT01069289|Secondary|Number of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbation|A Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) exacerbation was defined as worsening in COPD symptoms requiring treatment with either a course of systemic steroid or hospitalisation. Number of COPD exacerbation during 12-week randomization treatment|Daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||event|||Number
811984|NCT01069289|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Exacerbations|A Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) exacerbation was defined as worsening in COPD symptoms requiring treatment with either a course of systemic steroid or hospitalisation. The percentage of participants who had experienced COPD exacerbation at the end of the study for each treatment group.|Daily during 12-week randomization treatment|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS).Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
811985|NCT01069289|Secondary|1 Hour Post-dose Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|The ratio, expressed as percentage, of the geometric mean of available data for Weeks 0, 4, 8 and 12 to the baseline for each treatment group|Before randomization, 0, 4, 8 and 12 weeks after randomization|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS. Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||percentage of Baseline||Full Range|Geometric Mean
811986|NCT01069289|Secondary|Pre-dose Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|The ratio, expressed as percentage, of the geometric mean of available data for Weeks 0, 4, 8 and 12 to the baseline for each treatment group|Before randomization, 0, 4, 8 and 12 weeks after randomization|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||percentage of Baseline||Full Range|Geometric Mean
811987|NCT01069289|Secondary|1 Hour Post Dose Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1)|The ratio, expressed as percentage, of the geometric mean of available data for Weeks 0, 4, 8 and 12 to the baseline for each treatment group|Before randomization, 0, 4, 8 and 12 weeks after randomization|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||percentage of Baseline||Full Range|Geometric Mean
811988|NCT01069289|Primary|Pre-dose Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1)|The ratio, expressed as percentage, of the geometric mean of available data for Weeks 0, 4, 8 and 12 to the baseline for each treatment group|Before randomization, 0, 4, 8 and 12 weeks after randomization|The analysis set for efficacy was based on the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Available data represent patients who had both baseline and on treatment data which is required to be included in the analysis.||percentage of Baseline||Full Range|Geometric Mean
811989|NCT01069341|Secondary|Mean Change in Intraocular Pressure (IOP)|Mean change in IOP (mm Hg) from baseline to months-3, 7, and 12.|at months-3,7, and 12|All subjects' data was analyzed, no subjects were excluded||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
811990|NCT01069341|Secondary|Mean Number of PRP Laser Treatments|Mean number of PRP laser treatments required through month 12|first 12 months|All subjects' data was analyzed, no subjects were excluded||PRP Laser treatments||Standard Deviation|Mean
811991|NCT01069341|Secondary|Mean Number of Ranibizumab Injections|Mean number of ranibizumab injections required through month 12|first 12 months|All subjects' data was analyzed, no subjects were excluded||Number injections||Standard Deviation|Mean
811992|NCT01069341|Secondary|Mean Time to Re-treatment|Mean time to re-treatment following the initial three monthly loading doses of ranibizumab (months)|first 12 months|All subjects' data was included||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
811993|NCT01069341|Secondary|Macular Volume|Macular volume (millimeters cubed [mm3]) by Stratus OCT|at months-1,3,7, and 12|All subjects' data was analyzed, no subjects were excluded||Macular volume (millimeters cubed)||Standard Deviation|Mean
811994|NCT01069341|Secondary|Presence of Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy (PDR)|Presence of proliferative diabetic retinopathy by fluorescein angiogram|at month-12|All subjects' data was analyzed, no subjects were excluded||participants|||Number
811995|NCT01069341|Secondary|Presence of Neovascularization of Iris (NVI) or Neovascularization of the Angle (NVA)|Presence of neovascularization of iris (NVI) or neovascularization of the angle (NVA) as assessed by gonioscopy at months 3, 7 and 12|months 3, 7 and 12|All subjects' data was analyzed, no subjects were excluded||participants|||Number
811996|NCT01069341|Primary|Adverse Event (AE)|Incidence and severity of AEs that were cataract surgery related (for instance, hyphema and vitreous hemorrhage) and AEs that occurred during the treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).|first 12 months|All subjects' data was analyzed, no subjects were excluded||participants|||Number
812009|NCT01069562|Secondary|Percentage of Time Mean Arterial Pressure Remained Within 25% of Pre-op Baseline|The duration of time mean arterial pressure remained within 25% of the pre-operative baseline value during the period isoflurane (general anesthetic) was administered to the study population. This value is expressed as percentage. This outcome is expressed as the mean of percentage of time per participant|8 hours (approximately)|All the patients who were randomized completed the study protocol and were included for analysis||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
812022|NCT01069627|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) - Percentage of Participants With an Event|OS was defined as the time from the starting day of the therapy up to death or the last date the participant was known to be alive.|Baseline, every 3 weeks to end-of-treatment, every 3 months during follow-up, to death or end-of-study (maximum of 36 months)|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
811997|NCT01069419|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Visit 9 (Around Week 104) in Disease Activity Measured by Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)|"The CDAI was calculated with the equation:
CDAI= Tender Joint Count + Swollen Joint Count + PtGADA/10 + PhGADA/10 where PtGADA (mm) is the Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from 0 to 100, and PhGADA (mm) is the Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity using a VAS ranging from 0 to 100. Thus, the CDAI ranges from 0 to 76, with higher values indicating higher disease activity. If any individual term was missing, then the CDAI was set to missing. A negative value in Change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline to Visit 9 (around Week 104)."|From Baseline to Visit 9 (around Week 104)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) using Mixed Model with Repeated Measures imputation (MMRM). FAS is defined as all patients with a DAS28 ≥ 2.6 at baseline who took at least 1 dose of Certolizumab Pegol and had at least 1 valid post-Baseline DAS28 value.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811998|NCT01069419|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Visit 9 (Around Week 104) in Patient's Physical Function as Measured by the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)|The HAQ-DI contains 20 items on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (without any difficulty) to 3 (unable to do). The 20 items are grouped in 8 categories with 2 to 3 items each. The category scores are averaged into an overall HAQ-DI from 0 to 3. Scores of 0 to 1 generally represent mild to moderate difficulty, 1 to 2 represent moderate to severe disability, and 2 to 3 indicate severe to very severe disability. A negative value in Change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline to Visit 9 (around Week 104).|From Baseline to Visit 9 (around Week 104)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) using Mixed Model with Repeated Measures imputation (MMRM). FAS is defined as all patients with a DAS28 ≥ 2.6 at baseline who took at least 1 dose of Certolizumab Pegol and had at least 1 valid post-Baseline DAS28 value.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
811999|NCT01069419|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Visit 9 (Around Week 104) in Patients's Arthritis Pain as Measured by Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain (PAAP) Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|Patients rated how much pain they were experiencing at the time of the visit caused by their Arthritis using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (no pain) to 100 (most severe pain). A negative value in Change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline to Visit 9 (around Week 104).|From Baseline to Visit 9 (around Week 104)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) using Mixed Model with Repeated Measures imputation (MMRM). FAS is defined as all patients with a DAS28 ≥ 2.6 at baseline who took at least 1 dose of Certolizumab Pegol and had at least 1 valid post-Baseline DAS28 value.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812000|NCT01069419|Primary|Clinical Remission at Visit 9 (Around Week 104) Measured by Achieving a Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) of < 2.6|"The DAS28 was calculated using the tender and swollen joint counts, c-reactive Protein (CRP), or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGADA). The joint assessment was carried out on 28 joints.
For the analysis, DAS28 values were categorized into the following groups:
DAS28 < 2.6: clinical remission
DAS28 from 2.6 to ≤ 3.2: low disease activity
DAS28 from > 3.2 to 5.1: moderate disease activity
DAS28 > 5.1: high disease activity"|From Baseline to Visit 9 (around Week 104)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) using Non-Responder Imputation (NRI). FAS is defined as all patients with a DAS28 ≥ 2.6 at baseline who took at least 1 dose of Certolizumab Pegol and had at least 1 valid post-Baseline DAS28 value.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812001|NCT01069484|Secondary|Urinary Incontinence (Positive Pad Test)|"Urinary incontinence assessed by pad test, as described by Mørkved and Bø (1997). The cutoff value for a positive test was 2 gram.
After voiding, the women drank one litre of water. Thirty minutes later they wore a pre-weighted pad and performed a stress test as follows:
Jumping up and down with maximal intensity for 30 seconds.
Jumping with the legs in alternate abduction and adduction (Jumping Jacks) with maximal intensity for another 30 seconds.
Coughing as hard as possible three times. As in the study by Mørkved and Bø (1997), a positive pad-test was set to a cut-off of 2 gram of leakage."|6 months postpartum (end of intervention)|Primiparous women who delivered a singleton baby vaginally after more than 32 weeks of gestation. They had to have Scandinavian language skills, no severe perineal tearing, no prior abortion or stillbirth after 16 weeks of gestation, and no illnesses interfering with the ability to follow-up.||participants|||Number
812002|NCT01069484|Primary|Urinary Incontinence (Prevalence)|Urinary incontinence was assessed by The International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI Short Form questionnaire, www.iciq.net). Women were considered as incontinent if they reported to leak urine (yes/no) at any frequency.|6 months postpartum (end of intervention)|Primiparous women who delivered a singleton baby vaginally after more than 32 weeks of gestation. They had to have Scandinavian language skills, no severe perineal tearing, no prior abortion or stillbirth after 16 weeks of gestation, and no illnesses interfering with the ability to follow-up.||participants|||Number
812003|NCT01069523|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression- Improvement|Blinded clinician overall assessment of the child global improvement in behavior-1 is very much improved, 2-much improved, 3- minimally improved, 4 no change, 5-minimally worse, 6- much worse, 7- very much worse|Week 4 of study|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812004|NCT01069523|Primary|Dupaul ADHD Rating Scale|54 point scales assessing ADHD symptoms in a dimensional manner. 0 is no ADHD symptoms while 54 is severe. A score of 18 or below is the normative range.|Baseline and Follow up|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812005|NCT01069562|Secondary|INTRA OPERATIVE PHENYLEPHRINE USED|The amount of phenylephrine used during the procedure.|8 hours (approximately)|All the patients who were randomized completed the study protocol and were included for analysis||.µg/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
812006|NCT01069562|Secondary|Intra Operative Adrenaline Used|The amount of adrenaline used during the procedure|8 hours (approximately)|All the patients who were randomized completed the study protocol and were included for analysis||µg/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
812007|NCT01069562|Secondary|Fentanyl Used|The total amount of fentanyl that was used during the procedure.|8 hours (approximately)|All the patients who were randomized completed the study protocol and were included for analysis||µg/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
812008|NCT01069562|Secondary|Intra-operative Awareness|The number of patients who were able to recall the intra-operative events when assessed postoperatively. This was assessed by a structured protocol|3 days (approximately)|All the patients who were randomized completed the study protocol and were included for analysis||participants|||Number
824783|NCT01178268|Secondary|Follow-up In-stent Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR)||≥13 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|Participants||Number
812010|NCT01069562|Secondary|Percentage of Time Heart Rate Remained Within 25% of Pre-op Baseline|The duration of time heart rate remained within 25% of the pre-operative baseline value during the period isoflurane (general anesthetic) was administered to the study population. This value is expressed as a percentage. This outcome is expressed as the mean of percentage of time per participant.|8 hours (approximately)|All the patients who were randomized completed the study protocol and were included for analysis||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
812011|NCT01069562|Secondary|Wobble|Wobble measures the intra-individual variability in performance error.The median of the difference between individual performance errors throughout anesthesia and the median performance error for each participant is the wobble of that participant. The mean value per participant is indicated in the outcome measure.|8 hours (approximately)|All the patients who were randomized completed the study protocol and were included for analysis||percentage of BIS||Standard Deviation|Mean
812012|NCT01069562|Secondary|Median Absolute Performance Error (MDAPE)|The median of the absolute values of performance errors (without considering the direction of error) is median absolute performance error. This outcome measures the magnitude of error or inaccuracy of the system studied. A lower value indicates a more precise system.This outcome is expressed as the mean of Median Absolute Performance Errors per participant.|8 hours (approximately)|All the patients who were randomized completed the study protocol and were included for analysis||percentage deviation of absolute BIS||Standard Deviation|Mean
812013|NCT01069562|Secondary|Median Performance Error (MDPE)|The difference between the observed and target of measure of depth of anesthesia (BIS) expressed as percentage of target BIS is calculated as performance error every 30 seconds. This value may be either ‘+’ or ‘_’ indicating whether the observed measure is above the target (overshoot-+) or below the target (undershoot-_). The median value of all performance errors during isoflurane anesthesia is median performance error and is a measure of bias of the system. This outcome is expressed as the mean of Median Performance Errors per participant.|8 hours (approximately)|All the patients who were randomized completed the study protocol and were included for analysis||percentage deviation of BIS from target||Standard Deviation|Mean
812014|NCT01069562|Primary|Percentage of Time Bispectral Index Remains Within 10 of Target BIS of 50|The duration of time depth of anesthesia was maintained in the recommended range (as measured by BIS) during the period isoflurane (general anesthetic) was administered to the study population. This value expressed as percentage is the primary outcome. BIS is an objective measure of depth of anesthesia derived from statistical(bispectral) analysis of electroencephalographic waves. BIS ranges from 0 to 100. It decreases monotonically from 100 in the awake state to lower values with sedation and anesthesia.|8 hours (approximately)|All the patients who were randomized completed the study protocol and were included for analysis||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
812015|NCT01069627|Secondary|Time to Overall Response of CR or PR - Time to Event|The time between date of start of treatment until first documented response of CR or PR. This analysis included all responders. Participants who did not achieve a confirmed CR or PR were censored at last adequate tumor assessment date or at maximum follow-up. Mean time to CR or PR was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT Population; only participants with a response of CR or PR were included in the analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
812016|NCT01069627|Secondary|Time to Overall Response of CR or PR - Percentage of Participants With an Event|The time between date of start of treatment until first documented response of CR or PR. This analysis included all responders. Participants who did not achieve a confirmed CR or PR were censored at last adequate tumour assessment date or at maximum follow-up.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT Population; data for 1 participant were not assessable as the participant was discontinued from the study due to a protocol violation.||percentage of participants|||Number
812017|NCT01069627|Secondary|Time to CR - Time To Event|The time between date of start of treatment until first documented CR. This analysis included all responders. Participants who did not achieve a confirmed CR were censored at last adequate tumour assessment date or at maximum follow-up. Mean time to CR was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; only participants with a CR were included in the analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
812018|NCT01069627|Secondary|Time to CR - Percentage of Participants With an Event|The time between date of start of treatment until first documented CR. This analysis included all responders. Participants who did not achieve a confirmed CR were censored at last adequate tumour assessment date or at maximum follow-up.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT Population; data for 1 participant were not assessable as the participant was discontinued from the study due to a protocol violation.||percentage of participants|||Number
812019|NCT01069627|Secondary|TTF - Time to Event|The time from date of start of treatment to the earliest among date of progression, date of death due to any cause, or date of discontinuation due to reason other than ‘Protocol Violation’ or ‘Administrative Problem’. For the participants who did not experience treatment failure, TTF was censored at last adequate tumour assessment. Median TTF was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; data for 1 participant were not assessable as the participant was discontinued from the study due to a protocol violation.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812020|NCT01069627|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure (TTF) - Percentage of Participants With an Event|The time from date of start of treatment to the earliest among date of progression, date of death due to any cause, or date of discontinuation due to reason other than ‘Protocol Violation’ or ‘Administrative Problem’. For the participants who did not experience treatment failure, TTF was censored at last adequate tumour assessment.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT Population; data for 1 participant were not assessable as the participant was discontinued from the study due to a protocol violation.||percentage of participants|||Number
812021|NCT01069627|Secondary|OS - Time to Event|The time from the starting day of the therapy up to death or the last date the participant was known to be alive. Median OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 3 weeks to end-of-treatment, every 3 months during follow-up, to death or end-of-study (maximum of 36 months)|ITT population||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812023|NCT01069627|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease - Time to Event|Stable disease was defined as achieving CR, PR, or SD. The start date was the date of first documented CR, PR, or SD and the end date was defined as the date of first documented progression of disease, or death. Participants who did not experience progression of disease were censored at last tumor assessment date or at maximum follow-up. Median duration of CR, PR, or SD was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; only participants with a best overall response of CR, PR, or SD were included in the analysis.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812024|NCT01069627|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease - Percentage of Participants With an Event|Stable disease was defined as achieving CR, PR, or SD. The start date was the date of first documented CR, PR, or SD and the end date was defined as the date of first documented progression of disease, or death. Participants who did not experience progression of disease were censored at last tumor assessment date or at maximum follow-up.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; only participants with a best overall response of CR, PR, or SD were included in the anlaysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
812025|NCT01069627|Secondary|Duration of Overall Response of CR or PR - Time to Event|The start date was the date of first documented CR or PR and the end date was defined as the date of first documented progression of disease. Participants who did not experience progression of disease were censored at last tumor assessment date or at maximum follow-up. Median duration of CR or PR was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; only participants with a best overall response of CR or PR were included in the analysis.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812026|NCT01069627|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Benefit of CR, PR, or Stable Disease (SD)|The percentage of participants with an objective response of CR, PR, or SD, as evaluated by RECIST criteria. CR: disappearance of all clinical and radiological evidence of tumor (both target and non-target), PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the LD of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD. SD: steady state of disease. Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for pregressive disease (PD). The clinical benefit was finally assessed by computing absolute frequencies and percentages participants with best overall tumor response equal to CR, PR, or SD.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; data for 1 participant were not assessable as the participant was discontinued from the study due to a protocol violation.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812027|NCT01069627|Secondary|Duration of Overall Response of CR or PR - Percentage of Participants With an Event|The start date was the date of first documented CR or PR and the end date was defined as the date of first documented progression of disease, or death. Participants who did not experience progression of disease were censored at last tumor assessment date or at maximum follow-up.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; only participants with a best overall response of CR or PR were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
812028|NCT01069627|Secondary|Duration of CR - Time to Event|The start date was the date of first documented CR and the end date was defined as the date of first documented progression of disease, or death. Participants who did not experience progression of disease were censored at last tumor assessment date or at maximum follow-up. Median duration of CR was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; only participants with a CR were included in the analysis||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812029|NCT01069627|Secondary|Duration of CR - Percentage of Participants With an Event|Evaluated only for participants whose best overall response was CR. The start date was the date of first documented CR and the end date was defined as the date of first documented progression of disease, or death. Participants who did not experience progression of disease were censored at last tumor assessment date or at maximum follow-up.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; only participants with a best overall response of CR were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
812030|NCT01069627|Secondary|TTP - Time to Event|TTP was defined as the time in days from the of first study treatment until the date of tumor progression or death. Failure events were defined as occurrence of death or progression of disease. Data for participants who were alive without tumor progression at the end of the study were censored at the end of the observation period. Median TTP was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; data for 1 participant were not assessable as the participant was discontinued from the study due to a protocol violation.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812031|NCT01069627|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP) - Percentage of Participants With an Event|TTP was defined as the time in days from the date of first study treatment until the date of tumor progression or death. Failure events were defined as occurrence of death or progression of disease. Data for participants who were alive without tumor progression at the end of the study were censured at the end of the observation period.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|ITT population; data for 1 participant were not assessable as the participant was discontinued from the study due to a protocol violation.||percentage of participants|||Number
812032|NCT01069627|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|The percentage of participants with an objective response, defined as achieving CR or PR, as evaluated by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. CR: disappearance of all clinical and radiological evidence of tumor (both target and non-target), PR: at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD.|Baseline, every 9 weeks during study treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up, up to 36 months|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who signed the informed consent form and were assigned a study patient number; data for 1 participant were not assessable as the participant was discontinued from the study due to a protocol violation.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812033|NCT01069861|Other Pre-specified|Duration of Study Medication|The duration of the infusion was determined as per investigator’s discretion up to Day 7 or Day 14.|Baseline up to Day 14|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis due to early study termination.|||||
812034|NCT01069861|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Sildenafil Metabolite (UK-103320)||Pre-dose, 5 and 30 minutes post-loading infusion, within 48 to 72, 96 to 120 hours during infusion, within 4 to 8, 18 to 24 and 44 to 48 hours post-maintenance infusion|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis due to early study termination.|||||
812035|NCT01069861|Secondary|Population Pharmacokinetics of Sildenafil|Data for this Outcome Measure are not reported here because the analysis population includes participants who were not enrolled in this study. ClinicalTrials.gov is designed for reporting results from only those participants who were enrolled in the study and described in the Participant Flow and Baseline Characteristics modules.|Pre-dose, 5 and 30 minutes post-loading infusion, within 48 to 72, 96 to 120 hours during infusion, within 4 to 8, 18 to 24 and 44 to 48 hours post-maintenance infusion||||||
812036|NCT01069861|Secondary|Time to Receipt of Standard Therapy (Inhaled Nitric Oxide [iNO] or Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation [ECMO])|Time from start of treatment up to introduction of standard therapy. If participants did not receive standard therapy within 14 days after initiation of the study treatment, then Day 14 was the censoring time.|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis due to early study termination.|||||
812037|NCT01069861|Secondary|Duration of Mechanical Ventilation|The number of days from the start to the stop of mechanical ventilation, if multiple ventilations occurred during the follow-up, the sum of the duration of each ventilation was used for analyses. Mechanical ventilation was defined as use of mechanical assistance or replacement of spontaneous breathing.|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis due to early study termination.|||||
812038|NCT01069861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ratio of Partial Pressure of Oxygen in Arterial Blood to the Fraction of Inspired Oxygen (P/F) at Hour 6 and 12|The ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen and fraction of inspired oxygen is a comparison between the oxygen level in the arterial blood and the oxygen concentration that is breathed. It helps to determine the degree of any problems with how the lungs transfer oxygen to the blood.|Baseline, Hour 6, 12|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis due to early study termination.|||||
812039|NCT01069861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Differential Saturation (Pre- And Post-ductal) at Hour 6 and 12|Differential oxygenation saturation between preductal and postductal sites as measured by pulse oximetry. A difference of greater than (>) 5 percent (%) to 10% in saturation indicates right-to-left shunt through the ductus arteriosus. Oxygenation saturation is measured as percentage of hemoglobin binding sites occupied by oxygen in the blood.|Baseline, Hour 6, 12|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis due to early study termination.|||||
812040|NCT01069861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Oxygenation Index at Hour 6 and 12|Oxygenation Index (OI) was calculated as the product of fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) and Mean Airway Pressure divided by partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood [(FiO2*Mean Airway Pressure)/PaO2] measured in centimeter of water/millimeter of mercury (cmH2O/mmHg). FiO2 is the measure of oxygen concentration that is breathed. Mean airway pressure is defined as an average of the airway pressure throughout the respiratory cycle. PaO2 is the measure of oxygen level in the arterial blood.|Baseline, Hour 6, 12|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis due to early study termination.|||||
812041|NCT01069861|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Data|Criteria for potentially clinically significant (PCS) laboratory values: hematocrit 29.2 percent (%); white blood cell (WBC) count 5.0*10^3, lymphocyte absolute 0.88*10^3, total neutrophils absolute 12.07*10^3, eosinophils absolute 0.50*10^3 per cubic millimeter (/mm^3); calcium 6.8 milligram/deciliter (mg/dL); venous bicarbonate 47.0 milliequivalent/liter (meq/L).|Screening, once daily for 3 days, every 48 hours thereafter till the end of infusion (up to Day 14)|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis due to early study termination.|||||
812042|NCT01069861|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) Based on Severity|AE:any untoward medical occurrence in participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE:AE resulting in any of following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial/prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Severity criteria: “mild=does not interfere with participant's usual function; moderate=interferes to some extent with participant's usual function and severe=interferes significantly with participant's usual function”.|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis due to early study termination.|||||
812043|NCT01069861|Primary|Percentage of Participants Requiring Inhaled Nitric Oxide (iNO) or Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO)|Percentage of participants who required standard therapy (iNO or ECMO) after failure of study treatment.|From start of infusion (baseline) up to Day 14|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis due to early study termination.|||||
812044|NCT01069900|Secondary|Bacteriological Response at the End of Treatment (EOT) Visit|Bacteriological response at EOT were grades as presumed persistence, presumed eradication or indeterminate. 'presumed persistence' was applicable for subjects judged to be clinical failures and appropriate culture material is not available for evaluation; 'presumed eradication' defined as the absence of appropriate culture material for evaluation because the subject has clinically responded (with a response as a resolution or cure) and invasive procedures are not warranted; 'indeterminate' is applicable when the bacteriological response to the study drug was not valid for any reason (eg, pretreatment culture was negative or culture was not obtained when material was available and the subject was not judged a clinical failure). Percentage of subjects with bacteriological response at EOT were reported.|Day 5 to Day 14|Safety analysis set with subjects evaluable for this outcome||Percentage of subjects|||Number
829194|NCT01225055|Secondary|Bone Mineral Density (BMD) by DXA at the Lumbar Spine.|Mean change in BMD at the lumbar spine from baseline after 12 month of treatment|12 months|||g/cm squared||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812045|NCT01069900|Secondary|Clinical Response at the End-of-Treatment (EOT) Visit|Clinical responses at EOT were graded as resolution, failure, or indeterminate. 'Resolution' defined as a disappearance of signs and symptoms related to the infection or sufficient improvement of clinical signs and symptoms related to the infection and the subject does not require any further antibiotic therapy or surgical intervention; 'failure' defined as worsening or insufficient lessening of the signs and symptoms of infection requiring a modification or addition of antibacterial therapy; 'indeterminate' is defined as those subjects in whom a clinical assessment is not possible to determine (eg, due to early withdrawal from the study because of adverse events, protocol violation, withdrawn consent; receipt of less than 3 full days of study drug; receipt of an effective concomitant antibacterial for an indication other than study indication; etc). Percentage of subjects with clinical response at EOT were reported.|Day 5 to Day 14|Safety analysis set with subjects evaluable for this outcome||Percentage of subjects|||Number
812046|NCT01069900|Secondary|Bacteriological Response at a ‘During Therapy’ Visit|Bacteriological response during therapy were graded as presumed persistence, presumed eradication, or indeterminate'Presumed persistence' is applicable for subjects judged to be clinical failures and appropriate culture material is not available for evaluation;'presumed eradication' is defined as the absence of appropriate culture material for evaluation because the subject has clinically responded (with a response as a resolution or cure) and invasive procedures are not warranted; 'indeterminate is applicable when the bacteriological response to the study drug is not valid for any reason (eg, pretreatment culture was negative or culture was not obtained when material was available and the subject is not judged a clinical failure). Percentage of subjects with bacteriological response during therapy visit were reported|Day 3 to Day 5|Safety analysis set with subjects evaluable for this outcome||Percentage of subjects|||Number
812047|NCT01069900|Secondary|Clinical Response at a ‘During Therapy’ Visit|"Clinical responses during therapy visit were graded as clinical improvement, clinical failure, or indeterminate. Clinical improvement defined as a reduction in the severity and/or the number of signs and symptoms of infection; 'clinical failure' defined as a failure to respond or insufficient lessening of the signs and symptoms of infection requiring a modification or addition of antibacterial therapy.
'Indeterminate' defined as those subjects in whom a clinical assessment is not possible to determine (eg, due to early withdrawal from the study because of adverse events, protocol violation, withdrawn consent, receipt of an effective concomitant antibacterial for an indication other than the study indication and receipt of less than 3 full days of study drug, etc). Percentage of subjects with clinical response during therapy visit were reported."|Day 3 to Day 5|Safety analysis set with subjects evaluable for this outcome||Percentage of subjects|||Number
812048|NCT01069900|Secondary|Clinical Response at Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in Subjects With Bacteriologically Confirmed Complicated Intra-abdominal Infection (cIAI)|Clinical responses were graded as clinical cure, failure or indeterminate. 'Clinical cure' defined as a resolution or sufficient improvement of clinical signs and symptoms related to the infection; 'failure' defined as a reappearance of the signs and symptoms of the original infection, or wound infection requiring further systemic antimicrobial therapy; 'indeterminate' defined as those subjects in whom a clinical assessment was not possible to determine (due to early withdrawal from the study because of adverse events, protocol violation, withdrawn consent). Percentage of subjects with clinical response at TOC were reported|28 to 42 days|Safety analysis set with subjects evaluable for this outcome||Percentage of subjects|||Number
812049|NCT01069900|Secondary|Bacteriological Response at Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit|"Bacteriological responses were graded as presumed persistence, presumed eradication or indeterminate.
'Presumed persistence' was applicable for subjects judged to be clinical failures, and appropriate culture material is not available for evaluation; 'presumed eradication' defined as the absence of appropriate culture material for evaluation because the subject has clinically responded and invasive procedures are not warranted; índeterminate' was applicable when the bacteriological response to the study drug was not valid for any reason (eg, pre-treatment culture was negative or culture was not obtained when material was available and the subject was not judged a clinical failure). Percentage of subjects with bacteriological response at TOC were reported."|28 to 42 days|Safety analysis set with subjects evaluable for this outcome||Percentage of subjects|||Number
812050|NCT01069900|Secondary|Clinical Response at Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit|Clinical responses were graded as clinical cure, failure or indeterminate. 'Clinical cure' defined as a resolution or sufficient improvement of clinical signs and symptoms related to the infection; 'failure' defined as a reappearance of the signs and symptoms of the original infection, or wound infection requiring further systemic antimicrobial therapy; 'indeterminate' defined as those subjects in whom a clinical assessment was not possible to determine (due to early withdrawal from the study because of adverse events, protocol violation, withdrawn consent). Percentage of subjects with clinical response at TOC were reported.|28 to 42 days|Safety analysis set with subjects evaluable for this outcome||Percentage of subjects|||Number
812051|NCT01069900|Secondary|Potentially Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) QTc Interval Prolongation - by QTc Calc Bazett Correction on Treatment Day 1 and During Therapy Day 3|"A significant QTc prolongation was considered when the QTc value was more than ULN range or was prolonged for 30 msec or 60msec in comparison with the pre-treatment value measured on Day 1. N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specified parameter for each arm, respectively. Percentage of subjects with potentially clinically significant ECG data was reported."|Baseline (Pre-dose), Day 1, Day 3|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
812052|NCT01069900|Secondary|Potentially Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) QTc Interval Prolongation - by QTc Interval Calc Fridericia Correction on Treatment Day 1 and During Therapy Day 3|"A significant QTc prolongation was considered when the QTc value was more than (>) upper limit of normal (ULN) range or was prolonged for 30 msec or 60msec in comparison with the pre-treatment value measured on Day 1. N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specified parameter for each arm, respectively. Percentage of subjects with potentially clinically significant ECG data was reported."|Baseline (Pre-dose), Day 1, Day 3|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
812363|NCT01064739|Primary|Urinary Dopa|Urinary dopa excreted 4-8 hours after breakfast was specified as a primary outcome. Other catechols (dihydroxyphenylglycol, norepinephrine, epinephrine, dopamine, dihydroxyphenylacetic acid) and other time points (0-4 hr, 8-12 hr after breakfast) are non-primary outcomes.|4-8 hours after breakfast|||micrograms/4hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812053|NCT01069900|Secondary|Corrected QT (QTc) Interval Calculated (Calc) Fridericia Changes in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Profiles From Pre-dose to Post-dose on Treatment Day 1 and Treatment Day 3|"QTc interval Calc Fridericia represent the interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) msec which was calculated by Fridericia's method. N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specified parameter for each arm, respectively."|Baseline (Pre-dose), Day 1, Day 3|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
812054|NCT01069900|Secondary|Corrected QT (QTc) Interval Calculated (Calc) Bazett Changes in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Profiles From Pre-dose to Post-dose on Treatment Day 1 and Treatment Day 3|"QTc interval Calc Bazett represent the interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) milliseconds (msec) which was calculated by Bazett’s method. N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specified parameter for each arm, respectively."|Baseline (Pre-dose), Day 1, Day 3|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
812055|NCT01069900|Secondary|QT Interval Changes in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Profiles From Pre-dose to Post-dose on Treatment Day 1 and Treatment Day 3|"The QT interval is the period that extends from the beginning of ventricular depolarization until the end of ventricular repolarization. N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specified parameter for each arm, respectively."|Baseline (Pre-dose), Day 1, Day 3|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
812056|NCT01069900|Secondary|QRS Interval Changes in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Profiles From Predose to Post-dose on Treatment Day 1 and Treatment Day 3|"The QRS interval represents the time it takes for ventricular depolarization to occur. N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specified parameter for each arm, respectively."|Baseline (Pre-dose), Day 1, Day 3|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
812057|NCT01069900|Secondary|RR Interval Changes in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Profiles From Pre-dose to Post-dose on Treatment Day 1 and Treatment Day 3|"The RR interval refers to the respective time interval in the Electrocardiogram. N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specified parameter for each arm, respectively."|Baseline (Pre-dose), Day 1, Day 3|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
812058|NCT01069900|Secondary|PR Interval Changes in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Profiles From Pre-dose to Post-dose on Treatment Day 1 and Treatment Day 3|"The PR interval is defined as the period that extends from the onset of atrial depolarization (beginning of the P wave) until the onset of ventricular depolarization. N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specified parameter for each arm, respectively."|Baseline (Pre-dose), Day 1, Day 3|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
812059|NCT01069900|Secondary|Heart Rate Changes in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Profiles From Pre-dose to Post-dose on Treatment Day 1 and Treatment Day 3|"N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specified parameter for each arm, respectively."|Baseline (Pre-dose), Day 1, Day 3|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||Beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812060|NCT01069900|Secondary|Incidence Rates of Musculoskeletal Adverse Events by Primary System Organ Class (SOC) and Preferred Term|"Musculoskeletal adverse events were classified as following SOCs (preferred terms): injury, poisoning and procedural complications (forearm fracture, joint injury, ligament sprain, muscle strain) musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders (arthralgia, joint swelling, musculoskeletal pain, myalgia). Incidence rates were reported as percentage of subjects categorized under preferred terms."|All AEs and SAE were recorded from treatment start to test of cure visit; musculoskeletal AEs were recorded up to 1 year post-end of treatment (EOT) visit; subjects with musculoskeletal AEs 1 year after EOT were followed up to 5 years or until resolution.|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812061|NCT01069900|Primary|Number of Subjects With Musculoskeletal Adverse Events||All AEs and SAE were recorded from treatment start to test of cure visit; musculoskeletal AEs were recorded up to 1 year post-end of treatment (EOT) visit; subjects with musculoskeletal AEs 1 year after EOT were followed up to 5 years or until resolution.|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||Subjects|||Number
812062|NCT01069900|Primary|Number of Subjects With Clinical Cardiac Adverse Events||Clinical cardiac event related to QT interval were recorded from treatment start until day 3 of treatment. All other clinical cardiac events were recorded from treatment start to test of cure visit, up to day 56.|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||Subjects|||Number
812063|NCT01069900|Primary|Number of Subjects With Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a subject who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|All AEs and SAE were recorded from treatment start to test of cure visit; musculoskeletal AEs were recorded up to 1 year post-end of treatment (EOT) visit; subjects with musculoskeletal AEs 1 year after EOT were followed up to 5 years or until resolution.|Safety analysis set; All subjects (N= 451) treated with at least one dose of study medication.||Subjects|||Number
812064|NCT01069939|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Participants who had at least adverse events (AE) which occurred after receiving study drug were counted.|Up to 70 weeks at the longest|All participants who received any study drug were included in this analysis.||Participants|||Number
812065|NCT01069939|Secondary|Change in the Severity of Discomfort in the Stomach From Baseline to Last Measurement up to Week 48|"The severity of Discomfort in the stomach at baseline and the last measurement up to 48 weeks was obtained (None, Mild, Moderate, Severe). If the value at the last was better in a participant, the participant was categorized into Improved. If the value was same, categorised into Unchanged. If the value was worsened, categorise into Worsened."|Up to 48 weeks (Baseline to last measurement)|||Participants|||Number
812873|NCT01074502|Primary|Percentage of Patients With a Minimum 2-grade Improvement in the Researcher Global Assessment (RGA) From Baseline to Week 12.|RGA measures the severity of acne. The scale goes from 0 (better)to 4 (worse). Score can only be whole numbers, ordinal.|Baseline to 12 weeks|small number of subjects to be analyzed|||||
812066|NCT01069939|Secondary|Change in the Severity of Nausea and/or Vomiting From Baseline to Last Measurement up to Week 48|"The severity of Nausea and/or Vomiting at baseline and the last measurement up to 48 weeks was obtained (None, Mild, Moderate, Severe). If the value at the last was better in a participant, the participant was categorized into Improved. If the value was same, categorised into Unchanged. If the value was worsened, categorise into Worsened."|Up to 48 weeks (Baseline to last measurement)|Participants who had the measurements of Nausea and/or Vomiting at baseline and post-dose up to 48 weeks were included in this analysis.||Participants|||Number
812067|NCT01069939|Secondary|Change in the Severity of Abdomen Enlarged Feeling From Baseline to Last Measurement up to Week|"The severity of abdomen enlarged feeling at baseline and the last measurement up to 48 weeks was obtained (None, Mild, Moderate, Severe). If the value at the last was better in a participant, the participant was categorized into Improved. If the value was same, categorised into Unchanged. If the value was worsened, categorise into Worsened."|Up to 48 weeks (Baseline to last measurement)|Participants who had the measurements of abdomen enlarged feeling at baseline and post-dose up to 48 weeks were included in this analysis.||Participants|||Number
812068|NCT01069939|Secondary|Change in the Severity of Anorexia From Baseline to Last Measurement up to Week 48|"The severity of anorexia at baseline and the last measurement up to 48 weeks was obtained (None, Mild, Moderate, Severe). If the value at the last was better in a participant, the participant was categorized into Improved. If the value was same, categorised into Unchanged. If the value was worsened, categorise into Worsened."|Up to 48 weeks (Baseline to last measurement)|Participants who had the measurements of anorexia at baseline and post-dose up to 48 weeks were included in this analysis.||Participants|||Number
812069|NCT01069939|Secondary|Change in the Severity of Heartburn From Baseline to Last Measurement up to Week 48.|"The severity of heartburn at baseline and the last measurement up to 48 weeks was obtained (None, Mild, Moderate, Severe). If the value at the last was better in a participant, the participant was categorized into Improved. If the value was same, categorised into Unchanged. If the value was worsened, categorise into Worsened."|Up to 48 weeks (Baseline to last measurement)|Participants who had the measurements of heartburn at baseline and post-dose up to 48 weeks were included in this analysis.||Participants|||Number
812070|NCT01069939|Secondary|Change in the Severity of Epigastric Pain From Baseline to Last Measurement up to Week 48|"The severity of epigastric pain at baseline and the last measurement up to 48 weeks was obtained (None, Mild, Moderate, Severe). If the value at the last was better in a participant, the participant was categorized into Improved. If the value was same, categorised into Unchanged. If the value was worsened, categorise into Worsened."|Up to 48 weeks (Baseline to last measurement)|Participants who had the measurements of epigastric pain at baseline and post-dose up to 48 weeks were included in this analysis.||Participants|||Number
812071|NCT01069939|Secondary|Number of Participants With Reflux Esophagitis Evaluated by the LA Classification up to Week 48.|Endoscopy was conducted at 12, 24, 36 and 48 weeks after randomisation. At the endoscopy, participants was evaluated whether they have reflux esophagitis or not.|12, 24, 36 and 48 weeks|Patients with endoscopy were included in the analyses at 12, 24, 36 and 48 weeks after randomisation.||Participants|||Number
812072|NCT01069939|Secondary|Change in Degree of Gastric Mucosal Lesion by Modified Lanza Scale From Baseline to Last Measurement up to Week 48|Modified Lanza scale attributes the degree of gastric mucosal lesion, graded on a 5 point scale (0=No hemorrhage, no erosion, 1=One hemorrhage or one erosions, 2=2-10 hemorrhages or erosions, 3=11-25 hemorrhages or erosions, 4=More than 25 hemorrhages or erosions, or ulcer). Higher scores indicate greater severity of gastric mucosal lesion.|Up to 48 weeks (Baseline to last measurement)|Participants who had LANZA scores at both baseline and post-dose were included into this analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812073|NCT01069939|Primary|Time From Randomization to Occurrence of Gastric and/or Duodenal Ulcers up to Data Cut-off Date for Interim Analysis.|Assessments for occurrence of gastric and/or duodenal ulcers were performed every 12 weeks after randomisation. The numbers of participants with recurrence of gastric and/or duodeal ulcers were analysed every 12 weeks up to 48 weeks.|From randomisation to up to 48 weeks (Maximum follow-up period at the interim analysis)|Participants not taking investigational drug were not included. In total 364 participants were included in the efficacy evaluation at the interim analysis. 24 of the 364 total participants had an occurrence of gastric and/or duodenal ulcers by the 48-week assessment.||Participants|||Number
812074|NCT01070043|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events During Double-blind Phase||8 weeks|Safety population included all patients who received at least one study medication during the study period.||Participants|||Number
812075|NCT01070043|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure (mDBP) From Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurement (ABPM) Over 24 Hours After 8 Weeks of Treatment During the Double-blind Phase|Validated automated ambulatory blood pressure monitors were dispensed to participants with instructions on correct use. Automated blood pressure readings were obtained every 15-30 minutes during waking hours and every 30-60 minutes during sleep for a total of 24 hours. The change in mean diastolic blood pressure (mDBP) over 24 hours was measured from baseline to 8 weeks of treatment during the double-blind.|Baseline and 8 weeks|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population includes all participants having taken at least one dose of study medication.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
812076|NCT01070043|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Systolic Blood Pressure (mSBP) From Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurement (ABPM) Over 24 Hours|Validated automated ambulatory blood pressure monitors were dispensed to participants with instructions on correct use. Automated blood pressure readings were obtained every 15-30 minutes during waking hours and every 30-60 minutes during sleep for a total of 24 hours. The change in mean systolic blood pressure (mSBP) over 24 hours was measured from baseline to 8 weeks of treatment during the double-blind phase.|Baseline and 8 weeks|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population includes all participants having taken at least one dose of study medication.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
812077|NCT01070043|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP) From Office Blood Pressure Measurement|Two arterial blood pressure (BP) determinations were made after the participant was in the sitting position for 5 minutes according to the American Heart Association guidelines using a calibrated standard aneroid or mercury sphygmomanometer or a calibrated standard sphygmomanometer. The change in mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (msDBP) was calculated comparing the Week 8 readings to the readings taken at Baseline.|Baseline and 8 weeks|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population includes all participants having taken at least one dose of study medication.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
812078|NCT01070043|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP) From Office Blood Pressure Measurement|Two arterial blood pressure (BP) determinations were made after the participant was in the sitting position for 5 minutes according to the American Heart Association guidelines using a calibrated standard aneroid or mercury sphygmomanometer or a calibrated standard sphygmomanometer. The change in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) was calculated comparing the Week 8 readings to the readings taken at baseline.|Baseline and 8 weeks|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population includes all participants having taken at least one dose of study medication.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
812079|NCT01070173|Primary|Acylated Ghrelin Level||Will be measured with baseline screening labs at enrollment.|All participants.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812080|NCT01070173|Primary|Total Ghrelin Level||Will be measured with baseline screening labs at enrollment.|All participants.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812081|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Fistula Remission at Week 260 (Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|A count of the number of cutaneous fistulas draining upon gentle compression was performed at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523) and at study visits. Among participants with draining fistulas at Baseline of NCT00055523, a participant was considered to have achieved fistula remission at a study visit if the participant had no draining cutaneous fistulas at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 260|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who draining fistulas at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had data on draining fistulas(yes or no) at Week 260.||Participants|||Number
812082|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Fistula Remission at Week 212 (3 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|A count of the number of cutaneous fistulas draining upon gentle compression was performed at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523) and at study visits. Among participants with draining fistulas at Baseline of NCT00055523, a participant was considered to have achieved fistula remission at a study visit if the participant had no draining cutaneous fistulas at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 212|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who draining fistulas at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had data on draining fistulas(yes or no) at Week 212.||Participants|||Number
812083|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Fistula Remission at Week 152 (2 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|A count of the number of cutaneous fistulas draining upon gentle compression was performed at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523) and at study visits. Among participants with draining fistulas at Baseline of NCT00055523, a participant was considered to have achieved fistula remission at a study visit if the participant had no draining cutaneous fistulas at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 152|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who draining fistulas at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had data on draining fistulas(yes or no) at Week 152.||Participants|||Number
812084|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Fistula Remission at Week 104 (1 Year of Participation in NCT01070303)|A count of the number of cutaneous fistulas draining upon gentle compression was performed at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523) and at study visits. Among participants with draining fistulas at Baseline of NCT00055523, a participant was considered to have achieved fistula remission at a study visit if the participant had no draining cutaneous fistulas at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 104|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who draining fistulas at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had data on draining fistulas(yes or no) at Week 104.||Participants|||Number
812085|NCT01070303|Secondary|Changes in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) Scores|"IBDQ is a validated disease−specific instrument that assesses the impact of IBD on patient quality of life during a 2−week recall period. It has 32 questions about bowel function and related symptoms, and their social and emotional impact. For each question, participants selected 1 of 7 responses, where 1=poor quality of life (e.g., feeling of fatigue all of the time) and 7=good quality on the item (e.g., feeling of fatigue none of the time). IBDQ scores range from 32 to 224. Higher scores indicate better quality of life, and increases in IBDQ indicate improved overall quality of life."|Change from Baseline of lead-in study at Weeks 104, 152, 200, and 248|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had an IBDQ score at the visit time point.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812086|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Steroid-free CR-100 at Week 260 (4 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|Among participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), steroid-free CR-100 was achieved if the participant stopped taking steroids before the visit and had a decrease from Baseline in CDAI score of 100 or more points at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 260|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had CDAI evaluation and documentation of concomitant corticosteroid use (yes or no) at Week 260.||Participants|||Number
812087|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Steroid-free CR-100 at Week 212 (3 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|Among participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), steroid-free CR-100 was achieved if the participant stopped taking steroids before the visit and had a decrease from Baseline in CDAI score of 100 or more points at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 212|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had CDAI evaluation and documentation of concomitant corticosteroid use (yes or no) at Week 212.||Participants|||Number
812088|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Steroid-free CR-100 at Week 152 (2 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|Among participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), steroid-free CR-100 was achieved if the participant stopped taking steroids before the visit and had a decrease from Baseline in CDAI score of 100 or more points at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 152|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had CDAI evaluation and documentation of concomitant corticosteroid use (yes or no) at Week 152.||Participants|||Number
812196|NCT01063764|Secondary|Number of Seizure-free Subjects Over the 10-weeks Evaluation Period|"Seizure-free means not having a seizure of type I (Partial seizure).
Partial seizures can be classified into one of the following three groups:
Simple partial seizures
Complex partial seizures
Partial seizures evolving to secondarily generalized seizures."|10-weeks Evaluation Period (Part of the first Period: Week 12 to Week 22)|Of the 73 subjects in the FAS, 68 subjects had available data over the Evaluation Period.||participants|||Number
812089|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Steroid-free CR-100 at Week 104 (1 Year of Participation in NCT01070303)|Among participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), steroid-free CR-100 was achieved if the participant stopped taking steroids before the visit and had a decrease from Baseline in CDAI score of 100 or more points at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 104|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had CDAI evaluation and documentation of concomitant corticosteroid use (yes or no) at Week 104.||Participants|||Number
812090|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Steroid-free Clinical Remission at Week 260 (4 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|Among participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), steroid-free remission was achieved if the participant stopped taking corticosteroids before the visit and had a CDAI score < 150 points at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 260|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had CDAI evaluation and documentation of concomitant corticosteroid use (yes or no) at Week 260.||Participants|||Number
812091|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Steroid-free Clinical Remission at Week 212 (3 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|Among participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), steroid-free remission was achieved if the participant stopped taking corticosteroids before the visit and had a CDAI score < 150 points at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 212|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had CDAI evaluation and documentation of concomitant corticosteroid use (yes or no) at Week 212.||Participants|||Number
812092|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Achieving Steroid-free Clinical Remission at Week 152 (2 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|Among participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), steroid-free remission was achieved if the participant stopped taking corticosteroids before the visit and had a CDAI score < 150 points at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 152|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had CDAI evaluation and documentation of concomitant corticosteroid use (yes or no) at Week 152.||Participants|||Number
812093|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Steroid-free Clinical Remission at Week 104 (1 Year of Participation in NCT01070303)|Among participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), steroid-free remission was achieved if the participant stopped taking corticosteroids before the visit and had a CDAI score < 150 points at that visit.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 104|The analysis population was observed cases, that is, all participants who were taking systemic corticosteroids at Baseline of NCT00055523 and who had CDAI evaluation and documentation of concomitant corticosteroid use (yes or no) at Week 104.||Participants|||Number
812094|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving CR-70 at Week 260 (4 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|A CR-70 is a decrease from Baseline of lead-in study (NCT00055523) in CDAI score of 70 or more points, indicating a significant improvement in disease severity. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. Scores at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), which were used to calculate clinical response, ranged from 201 to 450. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 260|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had CDAI evaluation at Week 260 are included.||Participants|||Number
812095|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving CR-70 at Week 212 (3 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|CR-70 is a decrease from Baseline of lead-in study (NCT00055523) in CDAI score of 70 or more points, indicating a significant improvement in disease severity. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. Scores at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), which were used to calculate clinical response, ranged from 201 to 450. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 212|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had CDAI evaluation Week 212 are included.||Participants|||Number
812096|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving CR-70 at Week 152 (2 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|A CR-70 is a decrease from Baseline of lead-in study (NCT00055523) in CDAI score of 70 or more points, indicating a significant improvement in disease severity. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. Scores at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), which were used to calculate clinical response, ranged from 201 to 450. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|From Baseline of lead-in Study to Week 152|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who CDAI evaluation at Week 152 are included.||Participants|||Number
812097|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving CR-70 at Week 104 (1 Year of Participation in NCT01070303)|A CR-70 is a decrease from Baseline of lead-in study (NCT00055523) in CDAI score of 70 or more points, indicating a significant improvement in disease severity. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. Scores at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), which were used to calculate clinical response, ranged from 201 to 450. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|Week 104|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had CDAI evaluation at Week 104 .||Participants|||Number
812098|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving CR-100 at Week 260 (4 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|A CR-100 is a decrease from Baseline of lead-in study (NCT00055523) in CDAI score of 100 or more points, indicating significant improvement in disease severity. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. Scores at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), which were used to calculate clinical response, ranged from 201 to 450. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 260|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had CDAI evaluation at Week 260 are included.||Participants|||Number
812099|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving CR-100 at Week 212 (3 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|A CR-100 is a decrease from Baseline of lead-in study (NCT00055523) in CDAI score of 100 or more points, indicating a significant improvement in disease severity. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. Scores at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), which were used to calculate clinical response, ranged from 201 to 450. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 212|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had CDAI evaluation at Week 212||Participants|||Number
812100|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving CR-100 at Week 152 (2 Years of Participation in NCT01070303)|A CR-100 is a decrease from Baseline of lead-in study (NCT00055523) in CDAI score of 100 or more points, indicating a significant improvement in disease severity. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. Scores at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), which were used to calculate clinical response, ranged from 201 to 450. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 152|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had CDAI evaluation at Week 152 are included.||Participants|||Number
812101|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving CR-100 at Week 104 (1 Year of Participation in NCT01070303)|A CR-100 is a decrease from Baseline of lead-in study (NCT00055523) in CDAI score of 100 or more points, indicating significant improvement in disease severity. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. Scores at Baseline of the lead-in study (NCT00055523), which were used to calculate clinical response, ranged from 201 to 450. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|From Baseline of lead-in study to Week 104|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had CDAI evaluation at Week 104 of Study NCT00055497 are included.||Participants|||Number
812102|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Clinical Remission (CDAI < 150 Points) at Week 260 (4 Years of Participation in NCT01070303).|Clinical remission is defined as CDAI score <150. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|Week 260|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had CDAI evaluation at Week 260 of Study NCT00055497 are included.||Participants|||Number
812103|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Clinical Remission (CDAI < 150 Points) at Week 212 (Through 3 Years of Participation in NCT01070303).|Clinical remission is defined as CDAI score <150. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|Week 212|Observed cases, that is, all participants who participating at Week 212 and had a CDAI measurement at that time point were included.||Participants|||Number
812104|NCT01070303|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Clinical Remission (CDAI < 150 Points) at Week 152 (Through 2 Years of Participation in NCT01070303).|Clinical remission is defined as CDAI score <150. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|Week 152|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had CDAI evaluation at Week 152 are included.||Participants|||Number
812105|NCT01070303|Primary|Number of Participants Achieving Clinical Remission (Crohn's Disease Activity Index[CDAI] <150 Points) at Week 104 of Study M02-433 (Starting From Week 0 of NCT00055497) (Through 1 Year of Participation in NCT01070303).|Clinical remission is defined as CDAI score <150. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's−related variables during a 1−week assessment period, yielding a composite score >/= 0 and without upper limit. The range of scores during Study NCT01070303 was 0 to 464. A lower score indicates less severe Crohn's disease activity.|Week 104|The analysis population is observed cases, that is, all participants who had CDAI evaluation at Week 104 are included.||Participants|||Number
812106|NCT01070316|Primary|Number of Participants Continuing Study Medication Over Time||Individual subjects will be assessed every 6 months for up to 48 months; aggregate analysis will take place at end of study|||participants|||Number
812107|NCT01070316|Primary|Reduction in Seizure Frequency|The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage of participants demonstrating a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency at the end of the maintenance phase (weeks 13-16) compared to baseline (weeks 1-4)|Baseline (Weeks 1-4), Week 16|||percentage|||Number
812108|NCT01070329|Secondary|Number of Participants With Suicidal Behaviors, Ideations, and Acts Based on the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) During the Double-Blind Treatment Phase|"The C-SSRS captures occurrence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors. Number of participants with suicidal behaviors, ideations, and acts are provided. Suicidal behavior: a yes answer to any of 5 suicidal behavior questions: preparatory acts or behavior, aborted attempt, and completed suicide. Suicidal ideation: a yes answer to any 1 of 5 suicidal ideation questions, which includes wish to be dead, and 4 different categories of active suicidal ideation. Suicidal acts: a yes answer to actual attempt or completed suicide."|Baseline through 8 weeks|All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline C-SSRS result.||participants|||Number
812109|NCT01070329|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) Score at Week 8|A scale that measures the participant's perception of improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment. The score ranges from 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse). The Least Squares (LS) Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, visit, and treatment*visit interaction.|8 weeks|All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812197|NCT01063764|Secondary|Number of Seizure-free Subjects Over the 14-weeks Treatment Period|"Seizure-free means not having a seizure of type I (Partial seizure).
Partial seizures can be classified into one of the following three groups:
Simple partial seizures
Complex partial seizures
Partial seizures evolving to secondarily generalized seizures."|14-weeks Treatment Period (First Period: 4 weeks Up-titration (Week 8-12) and 10 weeks Evaluation (Week 12-22))|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||participants|||Number
812110|NCT01070329|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Brief Pain Inventory Severity and Interference Scores (BPI-S/BPI-I) at Week 8|Measures pain severity and interference on function. Severity scores: 0 (no pain) to 10 (severe pain) on each question. Interference scores: 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes) on each question assessing interference of pain in past 24 hours for general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life. Average interference=average of nonmissing scores of individual interference items. LS Mean Value adjusted for treatment, investigator, visit, baseline, treatment*visit interaction, and baseline*visit interaction.|Baseline, 8 weeks|All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812111|NCT01070329|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Values During the Double-Blind Treatment Phase - High Creatinine|Laboratory assessment of creatinine during the double-blind treatment phase. Normal creatinine ranges for males are 40.00 micromoles per liter (µmol/L) (low) to 110.00 µmol/L (high). Normal creatinine ranges for females are 31.00 µmol/L (low) to 101.00 µmol/L (high).|Baseline through 8 weeks|All randomized participants with a normal baseline (respective to the specified direction) and at least 1 post-baseline result.||participants|||Number
812112|NCT01070329|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Weight up to Week 8|"The change from baseline in weight at week 8 is the primary analysis. For the primary analysis of weight, the Least Squares (LS) Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, baseline, treatment*visit interaction, and baseline*visit interaction.
The change from baseline in weight up to week 8 is the secondary analysis. The LS Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, and baseline."|Baseline, up to week 8|"Primary analysis: All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result.
Secondary analysis: All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 nonmissing post-baseline result, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)."||kilograms (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812113|NCT01070329|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score at Week 2|The MADRS is a rating scale for severity of depressive mood symptoms. The MADRS has a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale of 0-6, for a total score range from 0 (low severity of depressive symptoms) to 60 (high severity of depressive symptoms). The Least Squares (LS) Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, visit, baseline, treatment*visit interaction, and baseline*visit interaction.|Baseline, 2 weeks|All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812114|NCT01070329|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) Up to Week 8|"The change from baseline in SBP and DBP at week 8 is the primary analysis. For the primary analysis of SBP and DBP, the Least Squares (LS) Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, baseline, treatment*visit interaction, and baseline*visit interaction.
The change from baseline in SBP and DBP up to week 8 is the secondary analysis. The LS Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, and baseline."|Baseline, up to week 8|"Primary analysis: All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result.
Secondary analysis: Intent-to-treat (ITT) population with nonmissing baseline value and at least 1 nonmissing post-baseline value, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)."||mm Hg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812115|NCT01070329|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Pulse Rate up to Week 8|"The change from baseline in pulse rate at week 8 is the primary analysis. For the primary analysis of pulse rate, the Least Squares (LS) Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, baseline, treatment*visit interaction, and baseline*visit interaction.
The change from baseline in pulse rate up to week 8 is the secondary analysis. The LS Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, and baseline."|Baseline, up to week 8|"Primary analysis: All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result.
Secondary analysis: Intent-to-treat (ITT) population with nonmissing baseline value and at least 1 nonmissing post-baseline value, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)."||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812116|NCT01070329|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score at Week 4|The MADRS is a rating scale for severity of depressive mood and symptoms. The MADRS has a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale from 0-6, for a total score range of 0 (low severity of depressive symptoms) to 60 (high severity of depressive symptoms). The Least Squares (LS) Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, visit, baseline, treatment*visit interaction, and baseline*visit interaction.|Baseline, 4 weeks|All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812117|NCT01070329|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission up to Week 8|The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) is a rating scale for severity of depressive mood symptoms. The MADRS has a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale from 0-6, for a total score range of 0 (low severity of depressive symptoms) to 60 (high severity of depressive symptoms). Remission is defined as achieving a MADRS total score ≤12 at the last 2 nonmissing visits (for example, visit 3 [week 1] and visit 4 [week 2], or visit 4 [week 2] and visit 5 [week 4], or visit 5 [week 4] and visit 6 [week 8]).|Up to 8 weeks|All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value.||percentage of participants|||Number
812118|NCT01070329|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission up to Week 8|The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) is a rating scale for severity of depressive mood symptoms. The MADRS has a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale of 0-6, for a total score range of 0 (low severity of depressive symptoms) to 60 (high severity of depressive symptoms). Remission is defined as achieving a MADRS total score ≤12.|Baseline, up to 8 weeks|All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
812119|NCT01070329|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total and Item Scores at Week 8|SDS is completed by participant; used to assess effect of the participant's symptoms on their work/social/family life. Total scores range from 0 to 30; higher values indicate greater disruption in the participant's work/social/family life. Each item score ranges from 0 to 10 with higher values indicating greater disruption in the participant's work/school life (item 1), social life/leisure activities (item 2), or family life/home responsibilities (item 3). The LS Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, visit, baseline, treatment*visit interaction, and baseline*visit interaction.|Baseline, 8 weeks|All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812120|NCT01070329|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score at Week 8|The MADRS is a rating scale for severity of depressive mood symptoms. The MADRS has a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale of 0-6, for a total score range of 0 (low severity of depressive symptoms) to 60 (high severity of depressive symptoms). The Least Squares (LS) Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, visit, baseline, treatment*visit interaction, and baseline*visit interaction.|Baseline, 8 weeks|All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812121|NCT01070329|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) Average Pain Score During the 8-Week Treatment Period|A self-reported scale that measures the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine). The overall change is based on the estimated main treatment effect. The Least Squares (LS) Mean Value was adjusted for treatment, investigator, visit, baseline, treatment*visit interaction, and baseline*visit interaction.|Day 1 through 8 weeks|All randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline result.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812122|NCT01070381|Primary|Overall Comfort|Overall Comfort, as interpreted and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 1-week's wear time. Overall comfort is measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|1 week of wear|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812123|NCT01070394|Secondary|Psychometric Validation of AMSES|To perform secondary psychometric validations of the AMSES using Cronbach's alpha coefficients.|Weeks 0-12|||Cronbach's alpha coefficients|||Number
812124|NCT01070394|Secondary|Psychometric Validation of AMRS|To perform secondary psychometric validations of the AMRS using Cronbach's alpha coefficients.|Weeks 0-12|||Cronbach's alpha coefficients|||Number
812125|NCT01070394|Primary|ADHD-RS|The ADHD-RS is a clinician-administered, semistructured scale that is designed to assess current symtomatology. It consists of 18 items that directly correspond to the DSM-IV symptoms of ADHD and each item is scored on a 4-pt scale ranging from 0 (none) to 3 (severe). It has been standardized to children but has been shown to be sensitive to drug effects in adults with ADHD. Presented will be the change in score of the ADHD-RS Total Score from baseline to Visit 12 (positive score signifies that the Total Score was greater at baseline than at Visit 12).|12 weeks|||score change from baseline to visit 12||Standard Deviation|Mean
812126|NCT01070394|Secondary|Correlation Between In-Clinic AMRS and ASRS v.1.1 Symptom Checklist|To correlate symptom rebound throughout a single day (assessed via the AMRS, In Clinic) with a self-assessment of ADHD symptoms (the ASRS v.1.1 Symptom Checklist). Pearson's correlation coefficient will be presented.|Baseline to Week 12|||Pearson's correlation coefficient|||Number
812127|NCT01070394|Secondary|Correlation Between AMRS and TASS|To correlate symptom rebound through a single day (assessed via the AMRS) with a time-sensitive (TASS) measure of efficacy of LDX treatment. A Pearson's correlation coefficient will be presented.|Visits 0 and 12|||Pearson's correlation coefficient|||Number
812128|NCT01070394|Secondary|Correlation Between AMRS (In Clinic) and ADHD-RS|To correlate symptom rebound through a single day (assessed via the AMRS) with a global (ADHD-RS) measure of efficacy of LDX treatment. The Pearson's correlation coefficients for the In-Clinic assessment will be presented.|Visits 0 and 12|||Pearson's correlation coefficient|||Number
812129|NCT01070394|Secondary|Smoothness of Effect|To evaluate smoothness of effect throughout a single day (assessed via the AMSES) of LDX treatment. Presented will be the change in score of the ADHD-RS Total Score from baseline to Visit 12 (positive score signifies that the Total Score was greater at baseline than at Visit 12).|Visits 0 and 12|||score change from baseline to visit 12||Standard Deviation|Mean
812130|NCT01070394|Secondary|Symptom Rebound|To evaluate the symptom rebound throughout a single day (assessed via the AMRS) with LDX treatment. Presented will be the change in score of the AMRS Total Score from baseline to Visit 12 (positive score signifies that the Total Score was greater at baseline than at Visit 12).|Visits 0 and 12|||score change from baseline to visit 12||Standard Deviation|Mean
812131|NCT01063036|Secondary|Number of Participants on Treatment With Study Drug With Laboratory Test Abnormalities Meeting Selected Criteria on Treatment - Treated Population|Selected criteria presented in each category. Upper limit of normal among all laboratory ranges (ULN); Baseline (BL); alanine transaminase (ALT); milligram per deciliter (mg/dL); milliliters per minute (mL/min); greater than (>);greater than, equal to (>=); less than (<). Creatinine data presented below were confirmed, ie, at least 2 consecutive values. On-treatment = after Day 1 through last dose of study therapy + 5 days.|Day 1 to last dose of study drug plus 5 days; up to Week 96|N=treated participants with on-treatment laboratory test results.||participants|||Number
812132|NCT01063036|Secondary|Number of Participants With Emergence of Genotypic Resistance to Study Drugs at Weeks 48 and 96- Treated Population|Testing of HBV genotype was performed at baseline for all treated patients and for participants at Weeks 48 and 96 with primary non-response or virologic breakthrough. Emergent genotypic resistance to study drugs was defined as follows: Emergent = not detected at baseline; entecavir (ETV) resistance (ETVr): participant’s sample was to have rtM204V/I/S and any substitution at rtT184, rtS202, or rtM250; tenofovir (TDF) resistance (TDFr) which was based on adefovir (ADV)-mutations: participant’s sample was to have rtA181T/V, rtN236T, or (rtA194T and rtM204V/I/S). Primary non-response was defined as < 1 log10 decrease in HBV DNA from baseline on treatment at or after Week 12. Virologic breakthrough was defined as ≥ 1 log10 increase in HBV DNA over nadir on treatment, either confirmed or last on-treatment followed by discontinuation of study therapy.|Baseline to Weeks 48, 96|All treated participants who met resistance testing criteria (primary non-response or virologic breakthrough) and were tested for resistance to both study drugs were analyzed. n = number of participants analyzed at Weeks 48 and 96.||participants|||Number
812170|NCT01063348|Secondary|Skin Picking Self Assessment Scale (SP-SAS)|"The entire study for an individual subject will last 12 weeks. Every 3 weeks the subject will take the YBOCS for the duration of the 12 weeks. At each of these visits the outcome will be assessed.
The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 48 with higher scores meaning more severe skin picking. The total of all of the questions equals the total reported SP-SAS score."|Once every three weeks for the duration of the 12 week study for each subject|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812133|NCT01063036|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) on Treatment, and Discontinuation of Study Drug Due to Adverse Events (AE) - Treated Population|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Treatment-related=having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug. Grade (Gr) 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4=Life-threatening or disabling, Gr 5=Death. On-treatment = on Day 1 through last dose of study therapy + 5 days.|Day 1 to last dose of study drug plus 5 days; up to Week 96|All Treated participants were analyzed.||participants|||Number
812134|NCT01063036|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBsAg) Seroconversion at Weeks 24, 48, and 96 - Treated Population Who Were HBsAg-Positive at Baseline|HBsAg seroconversion was defined as being both HBsAg-negative and HBsAb-positive at Weeks 24, 48, and 96 in those participants who had been HBsAg-positive at baseline. Percentage was calculated as number of participants with HBs seroconversion at Weeks 24 and 48 divided by the number of treated participants who were HBsAg-positive at baseline. Positive result for HBsAg was one of the inclusion criteria. Treated participants (HBsAg positive at baseline) were evaluated using NC=F. The method used was an Immunoassay testing – ADVIA CENTAUR from SIEMENS: in vitro diagnostic immunoassay for the qualitative and quantitative determination of HBsAg in human serum and plasma [potassium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), lithium or sodium heparinized]. Baseline was Day 1, before start of study drug.|Baseline, Weeks 24, 48, and 96|All treated participants who were HBsAg-positive at baseline and were analyzed at Weeks 24, 48 and 96 (NC = F). An exact binomial 95% confidence interval was constructed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812135|NCT01063036|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBsAg) Loss at Weeks 24, 48, 96 - Treated Population Who Were HBsAg-Positive at Baseline|Loss of HBsAg was defined as being HBsAg-negative at Weeks 24, 48, 96 in those participants who had been HBsAg-positive at baseline. The method used: Immunoassay – ADVIA CENTAUR from SIEMENS: in vitro diagnostic immunoassay for the qualitative and quantitative determination of HBsAg in human serum and plasma (potassium ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid, lithium or sodium heparinized). Percentage calculated as number of participants with a HBsAg loss at Weeks 24, 48, and 96 divided by the number of treated participants who were HBsAg-positive at baseline (participants were not enrolled into the study unless they were positive for HBsAg). Treated participants (HBsAg-positive at baseline) were evaluated using NC=F. Baseline was Day 1, before start of study drug.|Baseline, Weeks 24, 48, 96|All treated participants who were HBsAg-positive at baseline and were analyzed at Weeks 24, 48, and 96 (NC = F). An exact binomial 95% Confidence Interval was constructed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812136|NCT01063036|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HBe Seroconversion at Weeks 24, 48, and 96 - Treated Population Who Were HBeAg-positive at Baseline|HBe seroconversion was defined as being both HBeAg-negative and HBeAb-positive at Weeks 24, 48, and 96 in those participants who had been HBeAg-positive at baseline. Method used was DiaSorin - Anti HBe enzyme immunoassay kit - procedure for qualitative determination of antibodies to HBeAg in human serum or plasma samples. Percentage was calculated as number of participants with HBe seroconversion at Weeks 24, 48, and 96 divided by the number of treated participants who were HBeAg-positive at baseline. Treated participants (HBeAg-positive at baseline) were evaluated using NC = F. Baseline was Day 1, before start of study drug.|Baseline, Weeks 24, 48, and 96|All treated participants who were HBeAg-positive at baseline were analyzed at Weeks 24, 48 and 96 (NC = F). An exact binomial 95% confidence interval was constructed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812137|NCT01063036|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis B e Antigen (HBeAg) Loss at Weeks 24, 48, and 96 - Treated Population Who Were HBeAg Positive at Baseline|Loss of HBeAg was defined as being HBeAg-negative at Weeks 24, 48, and 96 in those participants who had been HBeAg-positive at baseline. Method used for HBeAg was DiaSorin - Anti HBe enzyme immunoassay kit – procedure for qualitative determination of antibodies to HBeAg in human serum or plasma samples. Percentage was calculated as number of participants with HBeAg loss at Weeks 24 and 48 divided by the number of treated participants who were HBeAg-positive at baseline. Treated participants (HBeAg-positive at baseline) were evaluated using NC = F. Baseline was Day 1, before start of study drug.|Baseline to Weeks 24, 48, and 96|All treated participants who were HBeAg-positive at baseline were analyzed at Weeks 24, 48 and 96 (NC = F). An exact binomial 95% confidence interval was constructed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812138|NCT01063036|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HBV DNA Less Than the Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) at Weeks 24, 48, and 96 - Treated Population|HBV DNA less than (<) LLD (6 IU/mL) was defined/measured by the COBAS(REGISTERED) TaqMan HPS assay at Weeks 24, 48, and 96. Percentage was calculated as number of participants with HBV DNA < LLD at Weeks 24, 48, 96 divided by the number of treated participants. Treated participants were evaluated using non-completer (NC) = failure (F).|Weeks 24, 48, 96|All treated participants were analyzed at Weeks 24, 48 and 96 (NC = F). An exact binomial 95% confidence interval was constructed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812139|NCT01063036|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean log10 HBV DNA at Weeks 12, 24, 48, and 96 - Treated Evaluable Population|HBV DNA by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was measured using the Roche COBAS(REGISTERED) TaqMan - High Pure System (HPS) assay. The results were reported in log 10 IU/mL, with the limit of quantification (LOQ) = 29 IU/mL and lower limit of detection (LLD) = 6 IU/mL. HBV DNA measurements were transformed by the log10 scale when analyzed as a continuous variable, using log10(LOQ-1) for values below LOQ. Baseline was Day 1, prior to study drug administration.|Baseline to Weeks 12, 24, 48, 96|All treated participants with results at both baseline and on-treatment were analyzed. n=Number of treated participants with results at baseline and Week 12, Week 24, Week 48 and Week 96.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812171|NCT01063348|Primary|Yale Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS) Modified for PSP (NE-YBOCS)|"The entire study for an individual subject will last 12 weeks. Every 3 weeks the subject will take the YBOCS for the duration of the 12 weeks. At each of these visits the outcome will be assessed.
The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 40, with a higher score being more severe skin picking. There are two sub-scales: one for urges (ranges from 0 to 20) and one for behaviors (ranges from 0 to 20). The total of the scores of each of the sub-scales is the total YBOCS score. That is what will be reported."|Once every three weeks during the 12 week study for each subject|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812140|NCT01063036|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Virologic Response at Week 24 and at Week 96 - Treated Population|Virologic response was defined as Hepatitis B virus (HBV) Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) less than 50 international units per milliliter (IU/mL); approximately 300 copies/mL. Percentage was calculated as number of participants with virologic response at Week 24, Week 96 divided by the number of treated participants. Treated participants were evaluated using non-completer (NC) = failure (F). The HBV DNA by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was measured using the Roche COBAS(REGISTERED) TaqMan - High Pure System (HPS) assay. The results were reported in IU/mL, with the limit of quantification (LOQ) = 29 IU/mL and lower limit of detection (LLD) = 6 IU/mL. HBV DNA measurements were transformed by the log10 scale when analyzed as a continuous variable, using log10(LOQ-1) for values below LOQ.|Week 24, Week 96|All treated participants were analyzed at Weeks 24 and 96 (NC = F). An exact binomial 95% confidence interval was constructed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812141|NCT01063036|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Virologic Response at Week 48 - Treated Population|Virologic response was defined as Hepatitis B virus (HBV) Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) less than 50 international units per milliliter (IU/mL); approximately 300 copies/mL. Percentage was calculated as number of participants with virologic response at Week 48 divided by the number of treated participants. Treated participants were evaluated using non-completer (NC) = failure (F). The HBV DNA by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was measured using the Roche COBAS(REGISTERED) TaqMan - High Pure System (HPS) assay, in a central laboratory. The results were reported in IU/mL, with the limit of quantification (LOQ) = 29 IU/mL and lower limit of detection (LLD) = 6 IU/mL. HBV DNA measurements were transformed by the log10 scale when analyzed as a continuous variable, using log10(LOQ-1) for values below LOQ.|Week 48|All treated participants were analyzed (NC = F). An exact binomial 95% confidence interval was constructed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812142|NCT01063049|Secondary|The Ottawa Scale for Colonoscopy Preparation Will be Reported and Compared Among the 3 Groups to Allow for Comparisons to Some of the Older Literature|Ottawa scale measures colon cleanliness on a scale from 14 (very poor) to 0 (excellent).|After Colonoscopy|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812143|NCT01063049|Primary|The Quality of the Colon Preparation Will be Graded Using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale|The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale measures cleanliness of the colon on a scale of 0 (very poor) to 9 (excellent).|After Colonoscopy|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812144|NCT01063062|Secondary|Number of Participants With Elevated Triglyceride According to ATPIII Guidelines|Blood samples were collected for Triglyceride and were sent to a central laboratory for analysis. According to Adult Treatment Profile III (ATPIII) guidelines the Triglyceride level in milligram/deciliter (mg/dL) was categorized as: Normal (< 150), Borderline High (150- 199), High (200- 499) or Very High (≥ 500). The number of participants categorized Borderline High, High or Very High at each time-point is reported.|Weeks 0 (Baseline), 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|Safety population included all participants who received study drug and had post-dose safety data available.||participants|||Number
812145|NCT01063062|Secondary|Number of Participants With Elevated LDL Cholesterol According to ATPIII Guidelines|Blood samples were collected for Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol and were sent to a central laboratory for analysis. According to Adult Treatment Profile III (ATPIII) guidelines the LDL Cholesterol level in milligram/deciliter (mg/dL) was categorized as: Optimal (< 100), Near Optimal/Above Optimal (100- 129), Borderline High (130- 159), High (160-189) or Very High (≥ 190). The number of participants categorized Borderline High, High or Very High at each time-point is reported.|Weeks 0 (Baseline), 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|Safety population included all participants who received study drug and had post-dose safety data available.||participants|||Number
812146|NCT01063062|Secondary|Number of Participants With Elevated HDL Cholesterol According to ATPIII Guidelines|Blood samples were collected for High Density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol and were sent to a central laboratory for analysis. According to Adult Treatment Profile III (ATPIII) guidelines the HDL Total Cholesterol level in milligram/deciliter (mg/dL) was categorized as: Low (< 40) or High (≥ 60). The number of participants with category High at each time-point is reported.|Weeks 0 (Baseline), 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|Safety population included all participants who received study drug and had post-dose safety data available.||participants|||Number
812147|NCT01063062|Secondary|Number of Participants With Elevated Total Cholesterol According to ATPIII Guidelines|Blood samples were collected for Total Cholesterol and were sent to a central laboratory for analysis. According to Adult Treatment Profile III (ATPIII) guidelines the Total Cholesterol level in milligram/deciliter (mg/dL) was categorized as: Desirable ( < 200), Borderline High (200- 239) or High (≥ 240). The number of participants categorized Borderline High or High at each time-point is reported.|Weeks 0 (Baseline), 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|Safety population included all participants who received study drug and had post-dose safety data available.||participants|||Number
812148|NCT01063062|Secondary|Number of Participants With Elevated AST (SGOT) and ALT (SGPT)|Blood was collected for aspartate aminotransferase (serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase) [AST/SGOT] and alanine aminotransferase (serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase) [ALT/SGPT], liver function tests, and were analyzed at a central laboratory. The number of participants with High AST (SGOT) or ALT (SGPT) levels at Week 24 is reported.|Week 24|Participants from the safety population, all participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-dose safety assessment, with data available for analysis.||participants|||Number
812149|NCT01063062|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Infections|A serious infection was an infection that qualified as a Serious Adverse Event (SAE). A SAE was any experience that suggests a significant hazard, contraindication, side effect or precaution that: results in death, is life-threatening, required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is medically significant.|24 Weeks|Safety population included all participants who received study drug and had post-dose safety data available.||participants|||Number
812172|NCT01063517|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in QoL Anxiety Domain Score in the Overall Study Population|Time calculated from randomisation till worsening of anxiety domain score based on European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire data|Questionnaire data collected at Baseline ie on or before date of randomisation, every 4 weeks post baseline, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Randomised patients having anxiety domain score calculated at baseline and at least one post baseline visit||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
831858|NCT01243320|Primary|Change in Chloride Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812150|NCT01063062|Secondary|Number of Participants With AE and SAE Related Discontinuation|The number of participants who stopped using the study drug because of an AE or a SAE. An AE was considered any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Preexisting conditions that worsened during the study and laboratory or clinical tests that resulted in a change in treatment or discontinuation from study drug were reported as adverse events. A SAE was any experience that suggests a significant hazard, contraindication, side effect or precaution that: results in death, is life-threatening, required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is medically significant.|24 Weeks|Safety population included all participants who received study drug and had post-dose safety data available.||participants|||Number
812151|NCT01063062|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was considered any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Preexisting conditions that worsened during the study and laboratory or clinical tests that resulted in a change in treatment or discontinuation from study drug were reported as adverse events. A SAE was any experience that suggests a significant hazard, contraindication, side effect or precaution that: results in death, is life-threatening, required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is medically significant.|24 Weeks|Safety population included all participants who received study drug and had post-dose safety data available.||participants|||Number
812152|NCT01063062|Secondary|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)|Blood was collected for Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR), a test to assess inflammation, at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24 and was analyzed at a central laboratory. ESR was measured in millimeters/hour (mm/hr).|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|Participants from the intent-to-treat population, all participants who received study drug and had at least 1 follow-up variable, with data available at the given time point. Last observation carried forward.||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812153|NCT01063062|Secondary|C-Reactive Protein (CRP)|Blood was collected for C-Reactive Protein (CRP), a test for inflammation, at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24 and was analyzed at a central laboratory. The serum concentration of CRP was measured in milligrams/deciliter (mg/dL).|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|Participants from the intent-to-treat population, all participants who received study drug and had data for at least one follow-up variable, with data available for the given timepoint.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
812154|NCT01063062|Secondary|Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)|The DAS28 score is a measure of the patient's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity [visual analog scale: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity] and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 0 to approximately 10. Low Disease Activity was defined as a DAS28 score of < 3.2.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|Participants from the intent-to-treat population, all participants who received study drug and had at least 1 follow-up variable, with data available at the given time-point. Last observation carried forward.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812155|NCT01063062|Secondary|Time to DAS28 Remission|Time to DAS28 Remission was the Time in days from the first infusion of study drug to the achievement of a DAS28 score < 2.6 units. The DAS28 score is a measure of the patient's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity [visual analog scale: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity] and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 0 to approximately 10.|24 Weeks|Intent-to-treat population included all participants who received study drug and had at least 1 follow-up variable. Last observation carried forward.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812156|NCT01063062|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DAS28 Remission|DAS28 Remission was defined as a DAS28 score < 2.6 units. The DAS28 score is a measure of the patient's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity [visual analog scale: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity] and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 0 to approximately 10.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|Intent-to-treat population included all participants who received study drug and had at least 1 follow-up variable. Last observation carried forward.||percentage of participants|||Number
812157|NCT01063062|Secondary|Time to DAS28 Clinically Significant Improvement|Time to DAS28 Clinically Significant Improvement was the Time in days from the first infusion of study drug to the achievement of a DAS28 score reduction of at least 1.2 units. The DAS28 score is a measure of the patient's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity [visual analog scale: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity] and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 0 to approximately 10. Low Disease Activity was defined as a DAS28 score of < 3.2.|24 Weeks|Intent-to-treat population included all participants who received study drug and had at least 1 follow-up variable. Last observation carried forward.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812158|NCT01063062|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DAS28 Clinically Significant Improvement|DAS28 Clinically Significant Improvement was defined as a DAS28 score reduction of at least 1.2 units from Baseline. The DAS28 score is a measure of the patient's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity [visual analog scale: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity] and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 0 to approximately 10.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|Intent-to-treat population included all participants who received study drug and had at least 1 follow-up variable. Last observation carried forward.||percentage of participants|||Number
812173|NCT01063517|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in QoL Reflux Domain Score in the Overall Study Population|Time calculated from randomisation till worsening of reflux domain score based on European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire data|Questionnaire data collected at Baseline ie on or before date of randomisation, every 4 weeks post baseline, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Randomised patients having reflux domain score calculated at baseline and at least one post baseline visit||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812159|NCT01063062|Primary|Time to DAS28 Low Disease Activity|Time to DAS28 Low Disease Activity was defined as the time in days from the first infusion of study drug to the achievement of a DAS28 Score <3.2 units. The DAS28 score is a measure of the patient's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity [visual analog scale: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity] and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 0 to approximately 10. Low Disease Activity was defined as a DAS28 score of < 3.2.|24 Weeks|Intent-to-treat population included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had data for at least one follow-up variable available. Last observation carried forward.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812160|NCT01063062|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) Low Disease Activity|The DAS28 score is a measure of the patient's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity [visual analog scale: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity] and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 0 to approximately 10. Low Disease Activity was defined as a DAS28 score of < 3.2.|Baseline to Week 24 (Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all participants who received study drug and had at least 1 follow-up variable. Last observation carried forward was applied for missing data.||percentage of participants|||Number
812161|NCT01063075|Primary|Cetuximab PK: Confirmatory Serum Concentration||Group D: Prior to Carboplatin Infusion, Cycle 1, Day 1|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group D and had evaluable PK data. Study design by intent did not collect data from Groups A, B, and C.||micrograms per milliliters (µg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
812162|NCT01063075|Primary|Cetuximab PK: Time of Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Tmax,ss)||(Group B: Cycle 1 and Cycle 2+ ; Day 1, 8, 15 and Group C: Cycle 1, Day 8, 15 and 22; Cycle 2+, Day 1,8 and 15): Prior to Cetuximab Infusion, 1 Hour (H), 2 H, 4 H, 8 H, 24 H, 72 H, 120 H, and 168 H (after the start of Cetuximab Infusion)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group B and C and had evaluable PK data. Study design by intent did not collect data from Groups D and A.||Hour (h)||Full Range|Median
812163|NCT01063075|Primary|Total Carboplatin PK: Time of Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||Group D: Cycle 1, Week 1, Day 1; Prior to Carboplatin Infusion, 1hour (H), 1:30 H, 2 H, 3 H, 5 H, 8 H, 24 H, 72 H (after the Start of Carboplatin Infusion)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group(Grp)D & had evaluable PK data.Study design by intent did not collect data from Grp B.Due to participant recruitment & retention challenges,there were no PK study completers for Grp A & C.Participant recruitment & retention addressed by amending protocol to add Grp D.||Hour (h)||Full Range|Median
812164|NCT01063075|Primary|Cetuximab PK: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Cmax,ss)||(Group B: Cycle 1 and Cycle 2+ ; Day 1, 8, 15 and Group C: Cycle 1, Day 8, 15 and 22; Cycle 2+, Day 1,8 and 15): Prior to Cetuximab Infusion, 1 Hour (H), 2 H, 4 H, 8 H, 24 H, 72 H, 120 H, and 168 H (after the start of Cetuximab Infusion)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group B and C and had evaluable PK data. Study design by intent did not collect data from Groups D and A.||micrograms per milliliters (μg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
812165|NCT01063075|Primary|Total Carboplatin PK: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Group D: Cycle 1, Week 1, Day 1; Prior to Carboplatin Infusion, 1hour (H), 1:30 H, 2 H, 3 H, 5 H, 8 H, 24 H, 72 H (after the Start of Carboplatin Infusion)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group(Grp)D & had evaluable PK data.Study design by intent did not collect data from Grp B.Due to participant recruitment & retention challenges,there were no PK study completers for Grp A & C.Participant recruitment & retention addressed by amending protocol to add Grp D.||micrograms per milliliters (μg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
812166|NCT01063075|Primary|Cetuximab PK: Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve During One Dosing Interval at Steady State (AUC τ,ss)||(Group B: Cycle 1 and Cycle 2+ ; Day 1, 8, 15 and Group C: Cycle 1, Day 8, 15 and 22; Cycle 2+, Day 1,8 and 15): Prior to Cetuximab Infusion, 1 Hour (H), 2 H, 4 H, 8 H, 24 H, 72 H, 120 H, and 168 H (after the start of Cetuximab Infusion)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group B and C and had evaluable PK data. Study design by intent did not collect data from Groups D and A.||micrograms*hour/milliliters (μg•h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
812167|NCT01063075|Primary|Total Carboplatin Pharmacokinetics (PK): Area Under the Concentration (AUC) Versus Time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC[0-∞])||Group D: Cycle 1, Week 1, Day 1; Prior to Carboplatin Infusion, 1hour (H), 1:30 H, 2 H, 3 H, 5 H, 8 H, 24 H, 72 H (after the Start of Carboplatin Infusion)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group(Grp)D & had evaluable PK data.Study design by intent did not collect data from Grp B.Due to participant recruitment & retention challenges,there were no PK study completers for Grp A & C.Participant recruitment & retention addressed by amending protocol to add Grp D.||micrograms*hour/milliliters (μg•h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
812168|NCT01063153|Primary|Percent Errors in Visual Go/NoGo Task|The Go/NoGo visual task was completed by subjects with ADHD as well as healthy controls. The Go/NoGo task is used to assess inhibitory control, and targets response inhibition, executive functions, and sustained attention. The 'Go' stimulus occupies 80% of the trials, and requires the subject to perform a motor response each time it appears on the screen. A rare 'No Go' stimulus (occupies 20% of all trials) requires the subject to refrain from responding. The percentage of errors were measured for each group.|Single Point (Baseline)|Only subjects that met the a priori pre-defined EEG signal quality criteria were included.||percentage of errors|||Number
812169|NCT01063153|Primary|Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS)|An 18-item scale rating a subject's level of impairment from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) for each symptom of DSM-IV ADHD, with a maximum possible score of 54. The measure was collected at Baseline and 6 weeks, and a total score was calculated to gauge treatment response of ADHD subjects to open-label Concerta.|Baseline and 6 weeks|Subjects in the ADHD group who completed all 6 weeks of the trial were included in data analysis. Subjects who completed at least 3 weeks of treatment were also included regardless of the reason for withdrawal, and final-visit AISRS scores were used in ITT (intent-to-treat) analysis via last observation carried forward [LOCF] imputation.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812174|NCT01063517|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in QoL Stomach Pain Domain Score in the Overall Study Population|Time calculated from randomisation till worsening of stomach pain domain score based on European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire data|Questionnaire data collected at Baseline ie on or before date of randomisation, every 4 weeks post baseline, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Randomised patients having stomach pain domain score calculated at baseline and at least one post baseline visit||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812175|NCT01063517|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in QoL Eating Restriction Domain Score in the Overall Study Population|Time calculated from randomisation till worsening of eating restriction domain score based on European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire data|Questionnaire data collected at Baseline ie on or before date of randomisation, every 4 weeks post baseline, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Randomised patients having eating restriction domain score calculated at baseline and at least one post baseline visit||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812176|NCT01063517|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in QoL Dysphagia Domain Score in the Overall Study Population|Time calculated from randomisation till worsening of dysphagia domain score based on European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire data|Questionnaire data collected at Baseline ie on or before date of randomisation, every 4 weeks post baseline, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Randomised patients having dysphagia domain score calculated at baseline and at least one post baseline visit||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812177|NCT01063517|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in QoL Pain Domain Score in the Overall Study Population|Time calculated from randomisation till worsening of pain domain score based on European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire data|Questionnaire data collected at Baseline ie on or before date of randomisation, every 4 weeks post baseline, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Randomised patients having pain domain score calculated at baseline and at least one post baseline visit||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812178|NCT01063517|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in QoL Nausea & Vomiting Domain Score in the Overall Study Population|Time calculated from randomisation till worsening of nausea & vomiting domain score based on European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire data|Questionnaire data collected at Baseline ie on or before date of randomisation, every 4 weeks post baseline, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Randomised patients having nausea & vomiting domain score calculated at baseline and at least one post baseline visit||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812179|NCT01063517|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in QoL Fatigue Score in the Overall Study Population|Time calculated from randomisation till worsening of fatigue score based on European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire data|Questionnaire data collected at Baseline ie on or before date of randomisation, every 4 weeks post baseline, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Randomised patients having fatigue score calculated at baseline and at least one post baseline visit||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812180|NCT01063517|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in Global Quality of Life (QoL) Score in the Overall Study Population|Time calculated from randomisation till worsening of Global QoL score based on European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire data|Questionnaire data collected at Baseline ie on or before date of randomisation, every 4 weeks post baseline, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Randomised patients having global score calculated at baseline and at least one post baseline visit||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812181|NCT01063517|Secondary|Percentage Change in Tumour Size at Week 8 in the ATM Negative Patients|Percentage change in tumour size from baseline to Week 8 calculated as 100 X (week 8 tumour size - baseline tumour size) / (baseline tumour size)|Tumour scans done at Baseline and week 8|Evaluable for response population ATM negative patients - randomised ATM negative patients having measurable disease at baseline.||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
812182|NCT01063517|Secondary|Percentage Change in Tumour Size at Week 8 in the Overall Study Population|Percentage change in tumour size from baseline to Week 8 calculated as 100 X (week 8 tumour size - baseline tumour size) / (baseline tumour size)|Tumour scans done at Baseline and week 8|Evaluable for response population - randomised patients having measurable disease at baseline.||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
812183|NCT01063517|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) in the ATM Negative Patients|Objective response rate is the proportion of ATM negative patients with at least one measurable lesion at baseline, who experienced complete or partial response at least once during the assessment period, according to the definitions of Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1).|Tumour assessments carried out at baseline, 28 days before randomisation then every 8 weeks until week 40, after week 40 assessments will be carried out every 16 weeks until objective disease progression, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Evaluable for response population ATM negative patients - randomised ATM negative patients having measurable disease at baseline.||Participants|||Number
812184|NCT01063517|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) in the Overall Study Population|Objective response rate is the proportion of patients with at least one measurable lesion at baseline, who experienced complete or partial response at least once during the assessment period, according to the definitions of Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1).|Tumour assessments carried out at baseline, 28 days before randomisation then every 8 weeks until week 40, after week 40 assessments will be carried out every 16 weeks until objective disease progression, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Evaluable for response population - randomised patients having measurable disease at baseline.||Participants|||Number
812185|NCT01063517|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) in ATM Negative Patients|Overall survival is defined as the duration from randomisation till death. In absence of death, the time is calculated from randomisation till the date subject last known to be alive.|Survival follow up from randomisation till death of the patient or till end of study in absence of death, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Full analysis set including randomised ATM negative patients||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812186|NCT01063517|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) in the Overall Study Population|Overall survival is defined as the duration from randomisation till death. In absence of death, the time is calculated from randomisation till the date subject last known to be alive.|Survival follow up from randomisation till death of the patient or till end of study in absence of death, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Full analysis set including all randomised patients||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
831859|NCT01243320|Primary|Change in Potassium Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812187|NCT01063517|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) in Patients With Tumours Defined as Homologous Recombination Deficient by Loss of Ataxia-Telangiectasia Mutation (ATM) Protein [ATM Negative Patients]|PFS is defined as the time from randomisation till objective progression or death. In absence of progression or death, the time is calculated from randomisation till last evaluable scanning visit.|Tumour assessments are carried out at baseline and then follow up assessments taken every 8 weeks up to Week 40 and then every 16 weeks until objective disease progression as defined by RECIST 1.1, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Full analysis set including randomised ATM negative patients||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812188|NCT01063517|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) in the Overall Study Population|PFS is defined as the time from randomisation till objective progression or death. In absence of progression or death, the time is calculated from randomisation till last evaluable scanning visit.|Tumour assessments were carried out at baseline and then follow up assessments taken every 8 weeks up to Week 40 and then every 16 weeks until objective disease progression as defined by RECIST 1.1, assessed maximum up to 27 months|Full analysis set including all randomised patients||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812189|NCT01063595|Secondary|Concentration of Plasmin Inhibitor|Values of plasmin inhibitor were measured by validated assays from blood samples obtained 30 minutes before plasmapheresis, 5 minutes after the end of plasmapheresis, 15 minutes and 2 hours after the end of study drug administration, and 24 hours and 7 days after initiation of plasmapheresis. The concentration of plasmin inhibitor is reported as the percentage of plasmin inhibition. A higher concentration of plasmin inhibitor results in a higher percentage of plasmin inhibition.|From 30 minutes before plasmapheresis up to 24 hours after the end of plasmapheresis|Per protocol population: All participants who had evaluable efficacy measurements in both of the treatment periods.||Percentage inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
812190|NCT01063595|Primary|Recovery of the Haemostatic Parameters Prothrombin Time, Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time, and Protein C|Recovery was defined as the maximum (minimum for activated partial thromboplastin time) percentage change of the haemostatic parameter value measured 5 minutes after the end of plasmapheresis to the haemostatic parameter value measured at 15 minutes or 2 hours after the end of study drug administration. The haemostatic parameters were measured by validated assays from blood samples obtained 5 minutes after the end of plasmapheresis and 15 minutes and 2 hours after the end of study drug administration.|From 5 minutes after the end of plasmapheresis up to 2 hours after the end of study drug administration|Per protocol population: All participants who had evaluable efficacy measurements in both of the treatment periods.||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
812191|NCT01063595|Primary|Recovery of the Coagulation Factors I, II, V, VII, VIII, IX, X, and XI|Recovery was defined as the maximum percentage change of the coagulation factor value measured 5 minutes after the end of plasmapheresis to the coagulation factor value measured at 15 minutes or 2 hours after the end of study drug administration. The coagulation parameters were measured by validated assays from blood samples obtained 5 minutes after the end of plasmapheresis and 15 minutes and 2 hours after the end of study drug administration.|From 5 minutes after the end of plasmapheresis up to 2 hours after the end of study drug administration|Per protocol population: All participants who had evaluable efficacy measurements in both of the treatment periods.||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
812192|NCT01063712|Secondary|Number of Patients With a Decreased Dilation of the Left Heart Chamber (Time Frame: One Year After Treatment). Dilation of the Left Ventricle and Left Atrium Was Measured Before and One Year After Implantation by Echocardiography.|The patients were examined clinically and echocardiographically after 24 hours, one month, three months and six months after the percutaneous closure. Dilation of the left ventricle and left atrium are consequences of the hyperflow through the ducts. Regression of both ventricle and atrium are expected after closure of the ducts and can be documented by echocardiography. Additionally, the position of the device and the doppler flow in the descending aorta and left pulmonary artery were documented.|one year after percutaneous closure|"The patient selection was based in the consecutive case and intention to treat method. All patients recruited in the determinated time frame (June 2009 to May 2010) who met the initial inclusion criteria were treated in the catheterisation laboratory. There the definite inclusion criteria were applied."||participants|||Number
812193|NCT01063712|Primary|Number of Patients With a Closed Patent Ductus Arteriosus (Defect) Determinated by Echocardiography ( Time Frame: One Year After Treatment)|The closure rate is an effectiveness outcome. Complete closure without a residual shunt is defined as absence of color flow (an echocardiographic technique used to observe the flow of blood in the heart) between the aorta and the pulmonary artery through the duct. Additionally, the position of the device, regression of the dilation of the left ventricle and left atrium and assessing of unrestricted doppler flow in the descending aorta and left pulmonary artery were documented. Clinical status was also assessed.|up to one year after percutaneous closure|"29 patients were controled in a period of one year and were examinated by echocardiography.The number of patients who showed no more duct bloodflow (seen with color doppler echocardiography or color flow) in the control period is given as number and as percentage of the complete group."||Participants|||Number
812194|NCT01063764|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Partial Seizure Frequency Per Week for the Second Period (up to Three Years From Informed Consent Until the Time of Approval Granted)|"The outcome was also calculated for each 3-month Period but here only the result for the total Second Evaluation Period (Second Period without following 6-weeks Withdrawal Period for withdrawers) is presented.
Change in partial seizure frequency from Baseline (B) over Second Evaluation Period (E) is given as a percentage reduction computed as:
(B values- E values) / B values x 100. Positive values in percent reduction show a decrease from Baseline. Frequency per week of partial seizures = (Total number of partial seizures in a certain Period/number of observation days in the Period) x 7."|From Baseline (Week 0-8) until the time of approval granted (up to three years from date of informed consent (Week 0); without 6-weeks Withdrawal Period)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||Percent reduction||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812195|NCT01063764|Secondary|Incidence of Treatment-emergent Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) During the Second Period (up to Three Years Until the Time of Approval Granted)|An Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) is an Adverse Event for which a causal relationship between the product and the occurrence is suspected. Incidence of ADRs is reported by the number of subjects with at least one ADR.|During the second Period from Visit 8 (Week 22) to the end of the Follow-up Period (up to three years until the time of approval granted)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||participants|||Number
812198|NCT01063764|Secondary|Percentage of Partial Seizures 50 % Responders Over the 10-weeks Evaluation Period|"50 % responders are those subjects which have a 50 % or more reduction in the frequency of partial seizures from Baseline to the Evaluation Period. The results show the percentage of participants that are 50 % responders.
Partial seizures can be classified into one of the following three groups:
Simple partial seizures
Complex partial seizures
Partial seizures evolving to secondarily generalized seizures."|10-weeks Evaluation Period (Part of the first Period: Week 12 to Week 22)|Of the 73 subjects in the FAS, 68 subjects had available data over the Evaluation Period.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812199|NCT01063764|Secondary|Percentage of Partial Seizures 50 % Responders Over the 14-weeks Treatment Period|"50 % responders are those subjects which have a 50 % or more reduction in the frequency of partial seizures from Baseline to the Treatment Period. The results show the percentage of participants that are 50 % responders.
Partial seizures can be classified into one of the following three groups:
Simple partial seizures
Complex partial seizures
Partial seizures evolving to secondarily generalized seizures."|14-weeks Treatment Period (First Period: 4 weeks Up-titration (Week 8-12) and 10 weeks Evaluation (Week 12-22))|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812200|NCT01063764|Secondary|Partial Seizure Frequency Per Week Over the 10-weeks Evaluation Period|"The seizure frequency per week was calculated as:
Frequency per week of partial seizures = (Total number of partial seizures in the Evaluation Period/number of days for observation in the Evaluation Period) x 7. Partial seizures can be classified into one of the following three groups:
Simple partial seizures
Complex partial seizures
Partial seizures evolving to secondarily generalized seizures."|10-weeks Evaluation Period (Part of the first Period: Week 12 to Week 22)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). Only subjects having values unequal to zero over Baseline and values equal to or greater than zero over Treatment Period are included.||Seizures per week||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812201|NCT01063764|Secondary|Partial Seizure Frequency Per Week Over the 14-weeks Treatment Period|"The seizure frequency per week was calculated as:
Frequency per week of partial seizures = (Total number of partial seizures in the Treatment Period/number of days for observation in the Treatment Period) x 7. Partial seizures can be classified into one of the following three groups:
Simple partial seizures
Complex partial seizures
Partial seizures evolving to secondarily generalized seizures."|14-weeks Treatment Period (First Period: 4 weeks Up-titration (Week 8-12) and 10 weeks Evaluation (Week 12-22))|Full Analysis Set (FAS). Only subjects having values unequal to zero over Baseline and values equal to or greater than zero over Treatment Period are included.||Seizures per week||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812202|NCT01063764|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Partial Seizure Frequency Per Week Over the 10-week Evaluation Period|"The change in partial seizure frequency from Baseline (B) over the Evaluation Period (E) is given as a percentage reduction computed as:
(B values- E values) / B values x 100. Positive values in percent reduction mean that the value decreased from Baseline to the 10-week Evaluation Period.
Frequency per week of partial seizures = (Total number of partial seizures in a certain Period/number of observation days in the Period) x 7.
Partial seizures can be classified into:
Simple partial seizures
Complex partial seizures
Partial seizures evolving to secondarily generalized seizures."|From Baseline (Week 0-8) to the 10-weeks Evaluation Period (Part of the first Period: Week 12 to Week 22)|Of the 73 subjects in the FAS, 68 subjects had available data at Baseline and during the Evaluation Period.||Percent reduction||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812203|NCT01063764|Primary|Incidence of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) During the Second Period (up to Three Years Until the Time of Approval Granted)|An Adverse Event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the pharmaceutical product. Incidence of treatment-emergent AEs is reported by the percentage of subjects with at least one treatment-emergent AE.|During the second Period from Visit 8 (Week 22) to the end of the Follow-up Period (up to three years until the time of approval granted)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||percentage of participants|||Number
812204|NCT01063764|Primary|Change From Baseline in Partial Seizure Frequency Per Week Over the 14-weeks Treatment Period|"The change in partial seizure frequency from Baseline (B) over the Treatment Period (T) is given as a percentage reduction computed as:
(B values- T values) / B values x 100.
Positive values in percent reduction mean that the value decreased from Baseline during the first 14-week Period.
Frequency per week of partial seizures = (Total number of partial seizures in a certain Period/number of observation days in the Period) x 7.
Partial seizures can be classified into:
Simple partial seizures
Complex partial seizures
Partial seizures evolving to secondarily generalized seizures."|From Baseline (Week 0-8) to the 14-weeks Treatment Period (First Period: 4 weeks Up-titration (Week 8-12) and 10 weeks Evaluation (Week 12-22)); Week 0-22|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||Percent reduction||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812205|NCT01063855|Secondary|"The Percentage of Patients Reporting At Least a Slightly Better Response to Treatment"|"The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) was used to assess the degree of improvement the patient experienced with premature ejaculation (PE) since initiating treatment with study drug on a 7-point scale from Much worse, Worse, Slightly worse, No change, Slightly better, Better, to Much better”. The percentage of patients who reported improvement in PE of at least slightly better at Endpoint (after 12 weeks of treatment) is provided in the table below."|Endpoint (After 12 weeks of treatment)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set included all randomized patients. Missing efficacy data at Week 12 was imputed based on the last postbaseline observation carried forward (LPOCF) method.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
812206|NCT01063855|Secondary|The Percentage of Patients Who Reported At Least a 1-category Decrease (Improvement) in Interpersonal Difficulty Related to Ejaculation|"The Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), a patient-reported outcome measure was used to rate the patient's level of interpersonal difficulty related to ejaculation on a 5-point scale from Very poor, Poor, Fair, Good, to Very Good. The percentage of patients who reported at least a 1-category decrease (improvement) in interpersonal difficulty related to ejaculation is provided in the table below."|Endpoint (After 12 weeks of treatment)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set included all randomized patients. Missing efficacy data at Week 12 was imputed based on the last postbaseline observation carried forward (LPOCF) method.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
812293|NCT01064622|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Time from randomization to disease progression or death from any cause. Estimated in the two treatment groups by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using a stratified logrank test.|Up to 3 years|Phase I lead-in patients were not included in the efficacy analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812207|NCT01063855|Secondary|"The Percentage of Patients Reporting At Least a Better Response to Treatment"|"The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) was used to assess the degree of improvement the patient experienced with premature ejaculation (PE) since initiating treatment with study drug on a 7-point scale from Much worse, Worse, Slightly worse, No change, Slightly better, Better, to Much better”. The percentage of patients who reported improvement in PE of at least better at Endpoint (after 12 weeks of treatment) is provided in the table below."|Endpoint (After 12 weeks of treatment)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set included all randomized patients. Missing efficacy data at Week 12 was imputed based on the last postbaseline observation carried forward (LPOCF) method.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
812208|NCT01063855|Secondary|The Percentage of Patients Who Achieved a 1-category or Greater Increase in Satisfaction With Sexual Intercourse|"The Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), a patient-reported outcome measure was used to rate the patient's level of satisfaction with intercourse on a 5-point scale from Very poor, Poor, Fair, Good, to Very Good. The percentage of patients who achieved 1-category or greater increase in satisfaction with sexual intercourse is provided in the table below."|Endpoint (After 12 weeks of treatment)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set included all randomized patients. Missing efficacy data at Week 12 was imputed based on the last postbaseline observation carried forward (LPOCF) method.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
812209|NCT01063855|Secondary|The Percentage of Patients Reporting a Composite Score of At Least a 2-category Increase in Control Over Ejaculation and At Least a 1-category Decrease in Personal Distress|"The Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), a patient-reported outcome measure was used to rate the patient's level of distress related to the speed of ejaculation and control over ejaculation on a 5-point scale from Very poor, Poor, Fair, Good, to Very Good. The percentage of patients who reported a composite score of at least a 2-category increase in control over ejaculation and at least a 1-category decrease (improvement) in personal distress is provided in the table below."|At the end of treatment (Week 12)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set included all randomized patients. Missing efficacy data at Week 12 was imputed based on the last postbaseline observation carried forward (LPOCF) method.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
812210|NCT01063855|Secondary|The Percentage of Patients Who Achieved 1-category or Greater Decrease (Improvement) in Personal Distress Related to Ejaculation|"The Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), a patient-reported outcome measure was used to rate the patient's level of distress related to the speed of ejaculation on a 5-point scale from Very poor, Poor, Fair, Good, to Very Good. The percentage of patients who achieved 1-category or greater decrease (improvement) in personal distress related to the speed of ejaculation is provided in the table below."|At Endpoint (After 12 weeks of treatment)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set included all randomized patients. Missing efficacy data at Week 12 was imputed based on the last postbaseline observation carried forward (LPOCF) method.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
812211|NCT01063855|Secondary|The Percentage of Patients Reporting At Least a 2-category Increase in Control Over Ejaculation|"The Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), a patient-reported outcome measure was used to rate the patient's control over ejaculation on a 5-point scale from Very poor, Poor, Fair, Good, to Very Good. The percentage of patients who reported at least a 2-category increase in control over ejaculation is provided in the table below."|At the end of treatment (Week 12)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set included all randomized patients. Missing efficacy data at Week 12 was imputed based on the last postbaseline observation carried forward (LPOCF) method.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
812212|NCT01063855|Primary|The Average Intravaginal Ejaculatory Latency Time (IELT) at Week 12|The intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) is the time it takes for a man to ejaculate during sexual intercourse (as measured by stopwatch). The data below show the average IELT measured in minutes at Baseline (before treatment) to Endpoint (after 12 weeks of treatment). In this study, patients took placebo or dapoxetine along with a stable dose of a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor (PDE5I) prescribed prior to study entry for the treatment of erectile dysfunction.|Baseline, Week 12|The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set included all randomized patients. Missing efficacy data at Week 12 was imputed based on the last postbaseline observation carried forward (LPOCF) method.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
812213|NCT01063868|Primary|Number of Subjects With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAE)|The number of participants who reported a TEAE during the treatment period. TEAE was defined as any adverse event that started or worsened on or after the start of the study medication and up to 3 days after the discontinuation of the study medication.|Entire Study|Safety analysis set (All randomized participants who took at least one dose of study medication).||participants|||Number
812214|NCT01063881|Secondary|"The Number of Patients Who Described Their Premature Ejaculation (PE) as At Least Slightly Better in Response to Dapoxetine Treatment (Subgroups by Intravaginal Ejaculation Latency Time [IELT])"|"The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) was used to assess the patient's improvement with premature ejaculation (PE) since initiating treatment with dapoxetine. The data provided below represent the number of patients who reported at least a slightly better response to treatment when grouped by intravaginal ejaculation latency time (patients with an IELT of < 1 minute and patients with an IELT of > 1 minute). This was a single-arm, open-label, non-randomized study where patients were categorized based on IELT after enrollment in the study."|Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) included all patients who took at least one dose of study drug and completed at least one assessment of efficacy.||Patients|||Number
812215|NCT01063881|Secondary|"The Number of Patients Who Described Their Premature Ejaculation (PE) as At Least Slightly Better in Response to Dapoxetine Treatment (Subgroups by Disease Type)"|"The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) was used to assess the patient's improvement with premature ejaculation (PE) since initiating treatment with dapoxetine. The data provided below represent the number of patients who reported at least a slightly better response to treatment when grouped by type of PE disease (patients with life-long PE and patients with acquired PE). This was a single-arm, open-label, non-randomized study where patients were categorized based their PE disease after enrollment in the study."|Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) included all patients who took at least one dose of study drug and completed at least one assessment of efficacy.||Patients|||Number
812477|NCT01070810|Secondary|APACHE II Score at 24 Hours|"APACHE II (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II) is a severity-of-disease classification system; an integer score from 0 to 71 is computed based on several measurements; higher scores correspond to more severe disease and a higher risk of death"|24 hours|APACHE II was not available on 6 patients in each group at 24 hour mostly because of early death.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812216|NCT01063881|Secondary|"The Number of Patients Who Described Their Premature Ejaculation (PE) as At Least Slightly Better in Response to Dapoxetine Treatment (Subgroups by Dosage)"|"The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) was used to assess the patient's improvement with premature ejaculation (PE) since initiating treatment with dapoxetine. The data provided below represent the number of patients who reported at least a slightly better response to treatment by the dose of dapoxetine they received in the study. This was a single-arm, open-label, non-randomized study in which “subgroup by dosage” was categorized based on dose-titration patterns observed during the course of the treatment period."|Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) included all patients who took at least one dose of study drug and completed at least one assessment of efficacy.||Patients|||Number
812217|NCT01063881|Secondary|Patient Responses to Improvement With Their Premature Ejaculation After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Dapoxetine|"The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC), a patient-reported scale was used to assess the patient's improvement with premature ejaculation (PE) since initiating treatment with dapoxetine. Patients were asked: Compared to the start of the study, would you describe your premature ejaculation (PE) problem as: Much worse, Worse, Slightly worse, No change, Slightly better, Better, or Much better?” The number of patients reporting improvement in their PE by category of the CGIC scale after 12 weeks of treatment with dapoxetine are provided in the table below."|Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) included all patients who took at least one dose of study drug and completed at least one assessment of efficacy.||Patients|||Number
812218|NCT01063881|Secondary|The Patient's Degree of Interpersonal Difficulty Related to the Speed of Ejaculation|"The Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), a patient-reported outcome measure was used to rate the patient's level of interpersonal difficulty related to the speed of ejaculation. Patient's were asked: Over the past month, to what extent did how fast you/your partner ejaculated during sexual intercourse cause difficulty in your relationship with your partner? Not at all, A little bit, Moderately, Quite a bit, or Extremely? The number of patients who rated their level of interpersonal difficulty before treatment and after 12 weeks of treatment with dapoxetine are provided in the table below."|Baseline and Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) included all patients who took at least one dose of study drug and completed at least one assessment of efficacy.||Patients|||Number
812219|NCT01063881|Secondary|The Patient's Level of Personal Distress Related to the Speed of Ejaculation|"The Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), a patient-reported outcome measure was used to rate the patient's level of distress related to the speed of ejaculation. Patient's were asked: Over the past month, how distressed were you by how fast you ejaculated during sexual intercourse? Not at all, A little bit, Moderately, Quite a bit, Extremely. The number of patients who rated their level of personal distress related to the speed of ejaculation before treatment and after 12 weeks of treatment with dapoxetine are provided in the table below."|Baseline and Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) included all patients who took at least one dose of study drug and completed at least one assessment of efficacy.||Patients|||Number
812220|NCT01063881|Secondary|The Patient's Level of Satisfaction With Intercourse|"The Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), a patient-reported outcome measure was used to rate the patient's level of satisfaction with intercourse on a 5-point scale. Patients were asked: Over the past month, was your satisfaction with sexual intercourse Very poor, Poor, Fair, Good, or Very Good?” The number of patients who rated their level of satisfaction with control over ejaculation at before treatment and after 12 weeks of treatment with dapoxetine are provided in the table below."|Baseline and Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) included all patients who took at least one dose of study drug and completed at least one assessment of efficacy.||Patients|||Number
812221|NCT01063881|Secondary|The Patient's Level of Control Over Ejaculation|"The Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), a patient-reported outcome measure was used to rate the patient's level of control over intercourse on a 5-point scale. Patients were asked: Over the past month, was your level of control over ejaculation Very poor, Poor, Fair, Good, or Very Good?” The number of patients who rated their level of control over ejaculation before treatment and after 12 weeks of treatment with dapoxetine are provided in the table below."|Baseline and Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) included all patients who took at least one dose of study drug and completed at least one assessment of efficacy.||Patients|||Number
812222|NCT01063881|Primary|"The Number of Patients Who Described Their Premature Ejaculation (PE) as At Least Slightly Better in Response to Dapoxetine Treatment"|"The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC), a patient-reported scale was used to assess the patient's improvement with premature ejaculation (PE) since initiating treatment with dapoxetine. Patients were asked: Compared to the start of the study, would you describe your premature ejaculation (PE) problem as: Much worse, Worse, Slightly worse, No change, Slightly better, Better, or Much better?” The number of patients who described improvement with their PE of at least slightly better after 12 weeks of treatment with dapoxetine are provided in the table below."|Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) included all patients who took at least one dose of study drug and completed at least one assessment of efficacy.||Patients|||Number
812223|NCT01063907|Secondary|Phase 1: PK Elimination t½ hr Day 11|Descriptive summary statistics (number, arithmetic mean, standard deviation [SDev], coefficient of variation [CV%]) for concentration and PK data for KW-2478 and Bortezomib in Phase 1 were presented by cohort, dose level and day.|PK collected Day 11 of 21-day cycle|The PK of KW-2478 was characterized after single administrations through @25 hours post start of infusion dose on Day 1 and through @7 hours post start of infusion dose on Day 11in Phase 1 only.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812224|NCT01063907|Secondary|Phase 1: PK Exposure AUC0-t hr*ng/mL Day 11|Descriptive summary statistics (number, arithmetic mean, standard deviation [SDev], coefficient of variation [CV%]) for concentration and PK data for KW-2478 and Bortezomib in Phase 1 were presented by cohort, dose level and day.|PK collected Day 11 of 21-day cycle|The PK of KW-2478 was characterized after single administrations through @25 hours post start of infusion dose on Day 1 and through @7 hours post start of infusion dose on Day 11 in Phase 1 only.||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812225|NCT01063907|Secondary|Phase 1: PK Exposure Cmax ng/mL Day 11|Descriptive summary statistics (number, arithmetic mean, standard deviation [SDev], coefficient of variation [CV%]) for concentration and PK data for KW-2478 and Bortezomib in Phase 1 were presented by cohort, dose level and day.|PK collected Day 11 of 21-day cycle|The PK of KW-2478 was characterized after single administrations through @25 hours post start of infusion dose on Day 1 and through @7 hours post start of infusion dose on Day 11 in Phase 1 only.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812226|NCT01063907|Secondary|Phase 1: PK Absorption Tmax hr Day 11|Descriptive summary statistics (number, arithmetic mean, standard deviation [SDev], coefficient of variation [CV%]) for concentration and PK data for KW-2478 and Bortezomib in Phase 1 were presented by cohort, dose level and day.|PK collected Day 11 of 21-day cycle|The PK of KW-2478 was characterized after single administrations through @25 hours post start of infusion dose on Day 1 and through @7 hours post start of infusion dose on Day 11in Phase 1 only.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812227|NCT01063907|Primary|To Establish the Safety, Tolerability, and RP2D (Phase 1); To Assess the Overall Response Rate in Subjects With Advanced Multiple Myeloma (Phase 2).|"The safety of KW-2478 was determined by reported TEAEs, observed DLTs, changes in PEs, vital sign measurements, ECGs, and laboratory analyses.
The ORR, was defined as the best response over a specified number of cycles (calculated and summarized).
Disease control rate (DCR) was defined as the best response over a specified number of cycles (calculated and summarized). Progression-free survival was defined as the time from the first day of treatment until the date of disease progression or death is first reported (calculated and summarized)."|21 day cycle, up to 52 weeks|All subjects who received at least 1 dose, including a partial dose, of KW-2478 were evaluated for safety.||participants|||Number
812228|NCT01064076|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Pass Induced VF Conversion Test|Percentage of participants who pass induced VF conversion test was compared to a performance goal of 88%. Definition of a success was two consecutive successful 65 joule shocks out of four attempts in the same polarity.|Implant/Pre-Discharge|304 subjects had a complete VF conversion test recorded||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812229|NCT01064076|Primary|Percentage of Participants Free of Type I Complications at 180 Days.|Percentage of Participants Free of Type I Complications at 180 days compared to the performance goal of 79%. Type I complications are those caused by the S-ICD System.|180 days|The analysis cohort includes all subjects undergoing an implant attempt.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812230|NCT01064167|Secondary|Postoperative Chest Tube Drainage||24h postoperative|||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
812231|NCT01064167|Primary|Number of Patients Required Allogenic Red Blood Cells Transfusion||1month postoperative|As predefined by study protocol,Fourteen patients in the tranexamic acid group and Fifteen in the placebo group were withdrawn from the study due to conversion to on-pump surgery during the course of surgery.||participants|||Number
812232|NCT01064284|Secondary|To Evaluate the Incidence of All Other Adverse Events Related and Not Related to the Products Used||During the first 50 exposure days or first 3 years of enrollment, whichever occurs first|Data were not collected and the Outcome will never be analyzed|||||
812233|NCT01064284|Secondary|To Evaluate Laboratory Factors Potentially Associated to Inhibitor Development||During the first 50 exposure days or first 3 years of enrollment, whichever occurs first|Data were not collected and the Outcome will never be analyzed|||||
812234|NCT01064284|Secondary|To Evaluate Clinical Factors Potentially Associated to Inhibitor Development||During the first 50 exposure days or first 3 years of enrollment, whichever occurs first|Data were not collected and the Outcome will never be analyzed|||||
812235|NCT01064284|Secondary|To Evaluate the Modality of Occurrence of Inhibitors (Titre at Onset)|Inhibitor Titre at Onset|During 6 months of observation, from the inhibitor occurrence|||Bethesda Units||Full Range|Median
812236|NCT01064284|Secondary|To Evaluate the Modality of Occurrence of Inhibitors (Number of EDs)|Number of EDs: Number of Exposure Days (EDs) after which the inhibitors develop|During the first 50 exposure days or first 3 years of enrollment, whichever occurs first|||Exposure days||Full Range|Median
812237|NCT01064284|Secondary|To Evaluate the Frequency of Transient Inhibitors|Number of participants for each group who developed transient inhibitors (this means, those inhibitors which disappeared spontaneously within 6 months without immunotolerance treatment).|In the 6 months after inhibitor development|Data at 6‑month follow‑up were missing for two patients assigned to plasma‑ derived factor VIII and three patients assigned to recombinant factor VIII.||participants|||Number
812238|NCT01064284|Secondary|To Evaluate the Anamnestic Response of Inhibitor Patients||During the first 50 exposure days or first 3 years of enrollment, whichever occurs first|Data were not collected and the Outcome will never be analyzed.|||||
812239|NCT01064284|Primary|To Assess the Immunogenicity of Plasma Derived VWF/FVIII and rFVIII Concentrates by Determining the Frequency of Inhibitor Development in the First 50 EDs or in the First 3 Years From Enrolment, Whichever Comes First in PUPs and MBCTs|"Expressed with the numebr of patients for each group who developed FVIII inhibitors.
PUPs: Previously Untreated Patients MBCTPs: Minimally Blood Component-Treated Patients"|During the first 50 exposure days or first 3 years of enrollment, whichever occurs first|||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812240|NCT01064297|Primary|Number of Infants With the Indicated Major Congenital Malformations Following First Trimester of Exposure to Lamotrigine Polytherapy Without Valproate According to Dose of Lamotrigine Received|The number of infants with the reported MCM following first trimester exposure to lamotrigine polytherapy without valproate were counted.|Although reports and diagnoses of MCMs are accepted up to six years after the birth, the majority of malformations are reported after assessments made in the delivery room or shortly after birth|Among lamotrigine polytherapy without valproate exposures in the first trimester: live births, fetal deaths, induced abortions with defects, and live births without defects. Due to the likely inconsistent identification of defects among spontaneous losses, fetal deaths, and induced abortions without reported defects, those offspring were excluded.||infants|||Number
812241|NCT01064297|Primary|Number of Infants With the Indicated Major Congenital Malformations Following First Trimester of Exposure to Lamotrigine Polytherapy With Valproate According to Dose of Lamotrigine Received|The number of infants with the reported MCM following first trimester exposure to lamotrigine polytherapy with valproate were counted.|Although reports and diagnoses of MCMs are accepted up to six years after the birth, the majority of malformations are reported after assessments made in the delivery room or shortly after birth|Among lamotrigine polytherapy with valproate exposures in the first trimester: live births, fetal deaths, induced abortions with defects, and live births without defects. Due to the likely inconsistent identification of defects among spontaneous losses, fetal deaths, and induced abortions without reported defects, those offspring were excluded.||infants|||Number
812478|NCT01070810|Secondary|Number of Participants With Shock Reversal|Shock reversal was defined as > 24 hours off all vasopressors|Hospital stay, average 2 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
812479|NCT01070810|Primary|Lactate Level 24 Hours After the First Study Medication Dose||24 hours|||mmol/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812242|NCT01064297|Primary|Number of Infants With the Indicated Major Congenital Malformations Following the First Trimester of Exposure to Lamotrigine Monotherapy According to Dose Received|The number of infants with the reported MCM following first trimester lamotrigine monotherapy exposure were counted. Registry personnel contacted the enrolling physician to obtain information on the pregnancy outcome, lamotrigine dosing and duration of exposure, and use of concomitant antiepileptic drugs during pregnancy.|Although reports and diagnoses of MCMs are accepted up to six years after the birth, the majority of malformations are reported after assessments made in the delivery room or shortly after birth|Among lamotrigine monotherapy exposures in the first trimester: live births, fetal deaths, induced abortions with defects, and live births without defects. Due to the likely inconsistent identification of defects among spontaneous losses, fetal deaths, and induced abortions without reported defects, these offspring were not included in analyses.||infants|||Number
812243|NCT01064297|Primary|Number of Infants With Major Congenital Malformations (MCMs) by Earliest Trimester of Exposure to Lamotrigine Polytherapy Without Valproate|The number of infants with major congenital malformations were counted and are presented by earliest trimester of exposure to lamotrigine polytherapy without valproate.|Although reports and diagnoses of MCMs are accepted up to six years after the birth, the majority of malformations are reported following assessments made in the delivery room or shortly after birth|Among lamotrigine polytherapy without valproate exposures: live births, fetal deaths, induced abortions with defects, and live births without defects. Due to the likelihood of inconsistent identification of defects among spontaneous losses, fetal deaths, and induced abortions without reported defects, these offspring were not included in analyses.||infants|||Number
812244|NCT01064297|Primary|Number of Infants With Major Congenital Malformations (MCMs) by Earliest Trimester of Exposure to Lamotrigine Polytherapy With Valproate|The number of infants with major congenital malformations were counted and are presented by earliest trimester of exposure to lamotrigine polytherapy with valproate.|Although reports and diagnoses of MCMs are accepted up to six years after the birth, the majority of malformations are reported following assessments made in the delivery room or shortly after birth|Among lamotrigine polytherapy with valproate exposures: live births, fetal deaths, induced abortions with defects, and live births without defects. Due to the likelihood of inconsistent identification of defects among spontaneous losses, fetal deaths, and induced abortions without reported defects, these offspring were not included in analyses.||infants|||Number
812245|NCT01064297|Primary|Number of Infants With Major Congenital Malformations by Earliest Trimester of Exposure to Lamotrigine Monotherapy|Among lamotrigine monotherapy exposures: live births, fetal deaths, induced abortions with birth defects, and live births without defects. Due to the likelihood of inconsistent identification of birth defects among spontaneous losses, fetal deaths, and induced abortions without reported birth defects, these offspring were not included in analyses.|Although reports and diagnoses of MCMs are accepted up to six years after the birth, the majority of malformations are reported after assessments made in the delivery room or shortly after birth|Among lamotrigine monotherapy exposures: live births, fetal deaths, induced abortions with birth defects, and live births without defects. Due to the likelihood of inconsistent identification of birth defects among spontaneous losses, fetal deaths, and induced abortions without reported birth defects, these offspring were not included in analyses.||infants|||Number
812246|NCT01064297|Primary|Birth Outcomes by Earliest Pregnancy Trimester of Exposure to Lamotrigine Polytherapy Without Valproate|The number of live births, fetal deaths with pregnancy loss occurring >=20 weeks gestation, induced abortions, and spontaneous pregnancy losses were recorded according to the time at which women were first exposed to lamotrigine polytherapy without valproate. Due to inconsistent identification of major congenital malformations (MCMs) among spontaneous losses, no comment is made concerning the presence or absence of MCMs. Although birth defects may not have been reported, they cannot be ruled out.|Although reports and diagnoses of MCMs are accepted up to six years after the birth, the majority of malformations are reported following assessments made in the delivery room or shortly after birth|Prospectively enrolled pregnancies exposed to the lamotrigine polytherapy without valproate||infants|||Number
812247|NCT01064297|Primary|Birth Outcomes by Earliest Pregnancy Trimester of Exposure to Lamotrigine Polytherapy With Valproate|The number of live births, fetal deaths, induced abortions, and spontaneous pregnancy losses were recorded according to the time at which women were first exposed to lamotrigine polytherapy with valproate. Due to inconsistent identification of major congenital malformations (MCMs) among spontaneous losses, no comment is made concerning the presence or absence of MCMs.|Although reports and diagnoses of MCMs are accepted up to six years after the birth, the majority of malformations are reported following assessments made in the delivery room or shortly after birth|Prospectively enrolled pregnancies exposed to lamotrigine polytherapy with valproate.||infants|||Number
812248|NCT01064297|Primary|Birth Outcomes by Earliest Pregnancy Trimester of Exposure to Lamotrigine Monotherapy|The number of live births, fetal deaths, induced abortions, and spontaneous pregnancy losses were recorded according to the time at which women were first exposed to lamotrigine monotherapy. Due to inconsistent identification of major congenital malformations (MCMs) among spontaneous losses, no comment is made concerning the presence or absence of MCMs.|Although reports and diagnoses of major congenital malformations are accepted up to six years after the birth, the majority of malformations are reported after assessments made in the delivery room or shortly after birth|Prospectively enrolled pregnancies exposed to lamotrigine monotherapy.||infants|||Number
812249|NCT01064310|Secondary|Change From Baseline (BL) in Heart Rate|Heart rate (HR) is the number of heartbeats per unit of time, typically expressed as beats per minute. HR can vary as the body's need to absorb oxygen and excrete carbon dioxide changes, such as during exercise or sleep. A normal resting HR ranges from 60 to 100 beats per minute. Mean change from BL for each assessment week was calculated as the average change from period BL at the specified visits (combining data across P 1 and 2 for Weeks 2 and 6). Study weeks are approximate; participants could have crossed over from P 1 to P 2 at earlier time points than specified in the protocol.|Baseline of Period (P) 1 (Screening); Period 1 Weeks 2 and 6 (Study Weeks 2 and 6); Baseline of Period 2 (Washout=Study Week 12); Period 2 Weeks 2, 6, and 10 (Study Weeks 14, 18, and 22)|Safety-Randomized Study Population. All participants who received sunitinib or pazopanib either during Period 1 or Period 2 were counted in both treatment groups (sunitinib and pazopanib). Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were evaluated.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
812250|NCT01064310|Secondary|Change From Baseline (BL) in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic BP (DBP)|When the heart beats, it contracts and pushes blood through the arteries to the rest of body. This force creates pressure on the arteries called SBP. DBP is the pressure in the arteries when the heart rests between beats. Normal levels: SBP (120 mmHg or less); DBP (80 mmHg or less). Mean change from BL for each assessment week was calculated as the average change from period BL at the specified visits (combining data across P 1 and 2 for Weeks 2 and 6). Study weeks are approximate; participants could have crossed over from P 1 to P 2 at earlier time points than specified in the protocol.|Baseline of Period (P) 1 (Screening); Period 1 Weeks 2 and 6 (Study Weeks 2 and 6); Baseline of Period 2 (Washout=Study Week 12); Period 2 Weeks 2, 6, and 10 (Study Weeks 14, 18, and 22)|Safety-Randomized Study Population. All participants who received sunitinib or pazopanib either during Period 1 or Period 2 were counted in both treatment groups (sunitinib and pazopanib). Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were evaluated.||Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812251|NCT01064310|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated AEs Leading to Permanent Discontinuation of Study Treatment|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE that spans more than one period is considered to be an AE for each period during which the AE increased in grade. There is only one action with respect to study drug recorded for the whole event. As such, it is not always possible to determine in which study period treatment was discontinued due to the AE.|Baseline to end of study (maximum of 22 weeks)|Safety-Randomized Study Population. Only those participants with adverse events leading to permanent discontinuation of study treatment were evaluated.||participants|||Number
812252|NCT01064310|Secondary|Number of Participants With Grade 1 to Grade 5 Adverse Events (AEs)|AEs were graded using the Common Toxicity Criteria from the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Division of Cancer Therapy, National Cancer Institute. Grades: 0 = No AE or within normal limits; 1 = Mild AE; 2 = Moderate AE; 3 = Severe and undesirable AE; 4 = Life-threatening or disabling AE; 5 = Death related to AE.|Baseline to end of study (maximum of 22 weeks)|Safety-Randomized Study Population||participants|||Number
812253|NCT01064310|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Reason for Receiving a Dose Reduction|Dose reduction of study drug was a stepwise reduction of the dose of the study drug: one less capsule was received at each step reduction. Participants were monitored for approximately 10 to 14 days at each dose level. Participants are recorded under the treatment they were receiving at the time the dose reduction was reported.|End of second treatment period (maximum of 22 weeks)|"Safety-Randomized Study Population. Only those participants who had an dose reduction were evaluated. Participants may be counted multiple times for the same reason for a dose reduction if the participant had multiple reductions for the same reason."||participants|||Number
812254|NCT01064310|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Number of Dose Reductions|Participants are recorded under the treatment they were receiving at the time the dose reduction was reported.|End of second treatment period (maximum of 22 weeks)|Safety-Randomized Study Population. Only those participants who had an dose reduction were evaluated.||participants|||Number
812255|NCT01064310|Secondary|Time to Dose Modification|For the subset of participants who had a dose modification, time to dose modification was defined as the time from the first dose in each period until the first reduction in dose within a period.|End of second treatment period (maximum of 22 weeks)|Safety-Randomized Study Population. Only those participants who had a dose modification were evaluated.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812256|NCT01064310|Secondary|Quality of Life as Assessed by the EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Thermometer and Utility Scores|The EQ-5D is a participant-answered questionnaire measuring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The EQ-5D has two separate components: utility score and thermometer score. The EQ-5D total utility score ranges from 0 (worst health state) to 1 (perfect health state); 1 reflects the best outcome. The thermometer score ranges from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state).|Day 1 (Period 1 Pre-dose); during 2-week Wash-out Period (Study Weeks 11 and 12); and End of Study (Week 10 of Period 2 [Study Week 22])|Safety-Randomized Study Population. Participants (par.) who received mixed treatment within a period were excluded. Only those par. contributing data at the indicated time points were evaluated. In some instances, par. may have contributed data for one score, but not the other; thus, the number of par. analyzed reflects the entire population.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812257|NCT01064310|Secondary|Change From Period Baseline (BL) in Fatigue as Assessed by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score|Change from period (P) BL is computed as participants' (par.) average post-BL fatigue score within each P minus their P-specific BL score. P 1 BL is the P 1 Pre-Dose assessment; P 2 BL is the wash-out assessment. Crossover analyses compared par. average scores on each treatment, adjusting for sequence. FACIT-Fatigue Scale: overall score (0 to 52)=the sum of scores for 13 questions. For each question, par. rated their condition for the past week on a 5-point scale: 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). A high score indicates low fatigue. A negative change from BL represents a worsening of condition.|Day 1 (Period [P] 1 Pre-dose); Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 of P 1; during 2-week Wash-out Period (Study Weeks 11 and 12); Weeks 2, 4, 6, and 8 of P 2 (Study Weeks 14, 16, 18, 20, and 22, respectively); End of Study (Week 10 of P 2 [Study Week 22])|Safety-Randomized Study Population: participants who received at least one dose of either drug regardless of treatment period. Participants who received mixed treatment within a period were excluded. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were evaluated.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812258|NCT01064310|Primary|"Number of Participants Answering Yes, no, or Not Applicable (N/A) to the Question of Whether the Indicated Factors Influenced Their Preference for Sunitinib or Pazopanib Treatment as Assessed by the Patient Preference Questionnaire"|The PPQ is used to measure participants’ preference for pazopanib or sunitinib for renal cell carcinoma management and is used to determine a participant's preference for 1 of the 2 drugs given in the 2 double-blind treatment periods. Participants were asked to select 1 of the following: 1. prefer the drug taken as the first treatment; 2. prefer the drug taken as the second treatment; or 3, no preference. Those participants who indicated a preference were asked to select the factors that had an influence on their treatment preference, as well as the most important reason for their preference.|End of treatment of both study drugs (maximum of 22 weeks)|mITT Population. Responses to some categories of the PPQ may be missing for some participants.||participants|||Number
812259|NCT01064310|Primary|Number of Participants With Preference for Pazopanib Versus Sunitinib as Assessed by the Patient Preference Questionnaire (PPQ)|The PPQ is used to measure participants’ preference for pazopanib or sunitinib for renal cell carcinoma management and is used to determine a participant's preference for 1 of the 2 drugs given in the 2 double-blind treatment periods. Participants were asked to select 1 of the following: 1. prefer the drug taken as the first treatment; 2. prefer the drug taken as the second treatment; or 3, no preference. Those participants who indicated a preference were asked to select the factors that had an influence on their treatment preference, as well as the most important reason for their preference.|End of treatment of both study drugs (maximum of 22 weeks)|Modified-Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Population (used for the primary analysis): participants who received at least one dose of study treatment from each treatment period and who did not have documented progressive disease (PD) at the end of Treatment Period 1 and completed the patient preference questionnaire.||participants|||Number
812260|NCT01064323|Primary|Red Blood Cell Nitric Oxide|nM|1 hour after IPC|||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
812261|NCT01064323|Primary|Plasma S-nitrosothiols|nM|baseline|||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
812262|NCT01064323|Primary|Red Blood Cell Nitric Oxide|nM|1 hour after IPC|Data was not collected for 1 participant for this outcome measure.||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
812263|NCT01064323|Primary|Red Blood Cell Nitric Oxide|nM|baseline|Data was not collected for 1 participant for this outcome measure.||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
812264|NCT01064323|Primary|Plasma Nitrite|nM|1 hour after IPC|||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
812265|NCT01064323|Primary|Plasma Nitrite|nM|baseline|||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
812266|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Occlusion-mediated Constriction|Brachial Occlusion-mediated constriction measured via ultrasound, %|1 hour after IPC|Data for this outcome measure was only available for 8 out of 10 participants due to reduced image quality.||percentage of constriction||Standard Deviation|Mean
812267|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Occlusion-mediated Constriction|Brachial Occlusion-mediated constriction measured via ultrasound, %|baseline|Data for this outcome measure was only available for 8 out of 10 participants due to reduced image quality.||percentage of constriction||Standard Deviation|Mean
812268|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Occlusion-mediated Constriction|Brachial Occlusion-mediated constriction measured via ultrasound, mm|1 hour after IPC|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
812269|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Occlusion-mediated Constriction|Brachial Occlusion-mediated constriction measured via ultrasound, mm|baseline|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
812270|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Flow Dilation|Brachial Flow Mediated dilation, %|1 hour after IPC|||percentage of dilation||Standard Deviation|Mean
812271|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Flow Dilation|Brachial Flow Mediated dilation, %|baseline|||percentage of dilation||Standard Deviation|Mean
812272|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Flow Dilation|Brachial Flow Mediated dilation, mm|1 hour after IPC|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
812273|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Flow Dilation|Brachial Flow Mediated dilation, mm|baseline|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
812274|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Diameter|mm|1 hour after leg IPC|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
812275|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Diameter|mm|baseline|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
812276|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Flow Velocity|Measured using ultrasound, units cm/sec.|50 minutes into IPC|||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
812277|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Flow Velocity|Measured using ultrasound, units cm/sec.|5 minutes into leg intermittent pneumatic compression|||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
812278|NCT01064323|Primary|Brachial Flow Velocity|Brachial flow velocity measured using ultrasound. Units cm/sec.|Baseline|||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
812279|NCT01064362|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Haemorrhages During Hospitalization for Major Orthopaedic Surgery of Lower Limbs (MOSLL)|Haemorrhages during MOSLL hospitalization or follow-up as identified by ICD-9-CM codes were measured. The PHARMO medical record linkage system (RLS), in the Netherlands, is a population-based patient-centric data tracking system that includes high quality/ complete information of patient demographics, drug dispensing, and hospital morbidity records of approximately 2.3 million inhabitants in the Netherlands.|Follow-up continued until the date of first event, death, end of initial therapy, hospital discharge, end of follow-up in PHARMO RLS, or 60 days after discharge, whichever came first.|From the PHARMO RLS, all patients >=18 years of age with in-hospital pharmacy data, a primary discharge diagnosis for hip fracture and/or a hospitalization for MOSLL, and follow-up between January 2003 (introduction of Arixtra) and December 2008.||participants|||Number
812280|NCT01064362|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Types of Haemorrhages During Hospitalization or Follow-up for Major Orthopaedic Surgery of Lower Limbs (MOSLL)|Haemorrhages during MOSLL hospitalization or follow-up as identified by ICD-9-CM codes were measured. The PHARMO medical record linkage system (RLS), in the Netherlands, is a population-based patient-centric data tracking system that includes high quality/ complete information of patient demographics, drug dispensing, and hospital morbidity records of approximately 2.3 million inhabitants in the Netherlands.|Follow-up continued until the date of first event, death, end of initial therapy, hospital discharge, end of follow-up in PHARMO RLS, or 60 days after discharge, whichever came first|From the PHARMO RLS, all patients >=18 years of age with in-hospital pharmacy data, a primary discharge diagnosis for hip fracture and/or a hospitalization for MOSLL, and follow-up between January 2003 (introduction of Arixtra) and December 2008.||participants|||Number
812281|NCT01064401|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 7.5 Point Worsening From Baseline in the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) Physical Impact Score at 96 Weeks|The MSIS-29 is a 29-item disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure that has been developed and validated to examine the physical and psychological impact of MS from a patient’s perspective; it measures physical and psychological items. Worsening in the MSIS-29 physical score is defined as an increase of ≥ 7.5 points in the MSIS-29 physical score at 96 weeks compared to baseline. If a participant was missing data for less than 10 of the 20 items that make up the physical score, then the mean of the non-missing items were used for the missing items. If a participant was missing 10 or more of the 20 items that make up the physical score, or missing the questionnaire entirely, or if the questionnaire was completed after the participant switched to alternative MS medication, a random effects model was used to estimate the MSIS-29 physical score.|Baseline and 96 weeks|participants with a baseline and Week 96 assessment||percentage of participants|||Number
812282|NCT01064401|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Relapse-free at Week 144|Relapses are defined as new or recurrent neurological symptoms not associated with fever or infection, lasting at least 24 hours, and accompanied by new objective neurological findings upon examination by the examining neurologist. Only relapses confirmed by INEC are included in this analysis. Data after participants switched to alternative MS medications are excluded. The estimated proportion of subjects relapse-free at Week 144 is based on the Kaplan-Meier product limit method.|144 weeks|||proportion of participants|||Number
812283|NCT01064401|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With Sustained Disability Progression at 144 Weeks|Sustained disability progression is defined as: at least a 1.0-point increase on the EDSS from Baseline EDSS ≥ 1.0 that is sustained for 12 weeks, or at least a 1.5-point increase on the EDSS from baseline EDSS = 0 that is sustained for 12 weeks. The EDSS measures the disability status of people with MS on a scale that ranges from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating more disability. Estimated proportion of participants with progression is based on the Kaplan-Meier product limit method. Participants were censored at the time of withdrawal/switch if they withdrew from study or switched to alternative MS medication without a progression. Participants with a tentative progression at the End of Treatment Period Visit (or the last EDSS assessment prior to alternative MS start date) and no confirmation assessment were censored at their last EDSS assessment.|Baseline through 144 weeks|||proportion of participants|||Number
812284|NCT01064401|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Number of New or Newly Enlarging T2 Hyperintense Lesions up to Week 96|The quantity of lesions is assessed by brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The adjusted mean number is estimated from a negative binomial regression model, adjusted for baseline volume of T2 from a negative binomial regression model, adjusted for baseline volume of T2 hyperintense lesions, history of prior IFN beta use and baseline age (≤ 35 vs > 35 years). To account for the timing of the MRI measurement, the logarithmic transformation of the scan number of the MRI assessment is included in the model as the 'offset' parameter. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications are excluded. Missing data are not imputed. Only observed new or newly enlarging T2 lesions at the last visit of the participant up to Week 96 visit are used in this analysis.|up to 96 weeks|participants with baseline and at least one post-baseline MRI measurement||lesions||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812285|NCT01064401|Primary|Adjusted Annualized Relapse Rate (ARR)|Relapses are defined as new or recurrent neurological symptoms not associated with fever or infection, lasting at least 24 hours, and accompanied by new objective neurological findings upon examination by the examining neurologist. Only relapses confirmed by Independent Neurology Evaluation Committee (INEC) are included in this analysis. Adjusted ARR was estimated from a negative binomial regression model adjusted for the baseline relapse rate, history of prior IFN beta use, baseline Expanded Disability Status Scale score (EDSS; ≤ 2.5 vs > 2.5) and baseline age (≤ 35 vs > 35 years). Data after participants switched to alternative MS medications are excluded.|Up to 144 weeks|participants with a relapse||relapses per person-years|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
812286|NCT01064414|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in FPG from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812287|NCT01064414|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7% at Week 26|The table below shows the percentage of patients with HbA1c <7% at Week 26 in each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the percentage.|Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percentage of patients|||Number
812288|NCT01064414|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812289|NCT01064622|Secondary|Activity (Overall Response Rate) in Crossover Patients|RECIST response rate in patients after crossover from placebo to vismodegib arm. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by CT or MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 6 months|Phase I lead-in patients were not included in the efficacy analyses.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812290|NCT01064622|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events|Details are provided in Adverse Events section below. Reported here are percentage of patients in each arm with any grade 1 or higher adverse event, regardless of attribution.|Up to 3 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812291|NCT01064622|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by CT or MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 6 months|Phase I lead-in patients were not included in the efficacy analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812292|NCT01064622|Secondary|Overall Survival|Time from randomization to death from any cause. Estimated in the two treatment groups by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using a stratified logrank test.|Up to 3 years|Phase I lead-in patients were not included in the efficacy analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814515|NCT01088711|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing an Adverse Event (AE)||Up to Day 36|AEs were monitored in all obese healthy (Panel A) and Type 2 diabetes (T2D) (Panel B) participants who received omarigliptin 50 mg or placebo.||Participants|||Number
812294|NCT01064687|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics: Area Under the Concentration Curve (AUC) for LY2189265|Evaluable pharmacokinetic concentrations from the 4-week, 13-week, 26-week, and 52-week timepoints were combined and utilized in a population approach to determine the population mean estimate and standard deviation at steady-state.|4 weeks, 13 weeks, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable AUC data.||nanogram hours per milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812295|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks in N Terminal Pro Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP)||Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable NT-proBNP data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812296|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks in Hematological and Biochemical Lab Values||Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug.||||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812297|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks in Hematological and Biochemical Lab Values||Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo.||||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812298|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events at 52 Weeks|A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was defined as an event that first occurs or worsens (increases in severity) after baseline regardless of causality or severity. The number of participants with one or more TEAE is summarized cumulatively at 52 weeks, with the exception of the Placebo/1.5 mg LY2189265 and Placebo/0.75 mg LY2189265 treatment groups, which include only TEAEs that occurred during treatment with LY2189265 (26 weeks through 52 weeks). A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo and received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
812299|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events at 26 Weeks|A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was defined as an event that first occurs or worsens (increases in severity) after baseline regardless of causality or severity. The number of participants with one or more TEAE is summarized cumulatively at 26 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo.||participants|||Number
812300|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Participants With LY2189265 Antibodies at 52 Weeks and 4 Weeks After Last Dose of Study Drug|LY2189265 (Dulaglutide) anti-drug antibodies (ADA) were assessed. The number of participants with initial postbaseline detection of treatment emergent (defined as a 4-fold increase in the ADA titer from baseline) LY2189265 ADA were summarized.|26 weeks through 52 weeks and 53 weeks through 4 weeks after last dose|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable LY2189265 ADA data. In the clinically evaluated dose range of LY2189265, no dose effect on the magnitude of the anti-LY2189265 immune response was observed. Therefore, results were combined for the 0.75 mg and 1.5 mg LY2189265 groups.||participants|||Number
812301|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Participants With LY2189265 Antibodies at 26 Weeks|LY2189265 (Dulaglutide) anti-drug antibodies (ADA) were assessed. The number of participants with initial postbaseline detection of treatment emergent (defined as a 4-fold increase in the ADA titer from baseline) LY2189265 ADA were summarized.|Baseline through 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable LY2189265 ADA data. In the clinically evaluated dose range of LY2189265, no dose effect on the magnitude of the anti-LY2189265 immune response was observed. Therefore, results were combined for the 0.75 mg and 1.5 mg LY2189265 groups.||participants|||Number
812302|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Participants Requiring Rescue Therapy Due to Hyperglycemia at 52 Weeks|"Rescue therapy was defined as any additional therapeutic intervention in participants who developed persistent, severe hyperglycemia despite full compliance with the assigned therapeutic regimen, or initiation of an alternative antihyperglycemic medication following study drug discontinuation. Participants who had no rescue therapy within specified study period were considered as censored observations at the last available contact date up to specified study period. Time to start first new glucose-lowering intervention due to hyperglycemia (rescue therapy) was analyzed between the groups using the semi-parametric proportional hazard regression model with treatment group and country as fixed effects and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as a covariate."|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
812303|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Participants Requiring Rescue Therapy Due to Hyperglycemia at 26 Weeks|"Rescue therapy was defined as any additional therapeutic intervention in participants who developed persistent, severe hyperglycemia despite full compliance with the assigned therapeutic regimen, or initiation of an alternative antihyperglycemic medication following study drug discontinuation. Participants who had no rescue therapy within specified study period were considered as censored observations at the last available contact date up to specified study period. Time to start first new glucose-lowering intervention due to hyperglycemia (rescue therapy) was analyzed between the groups using the semi-parametric proportional hazard regression model with treatment group and country as fixed effects and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as a covariate."|Baseline through 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo.||participants|||Number
812312|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Pancreatitis at 52 Weeks|The number of participants with pancreatitis confirmed by adjudication is summarized cumulatively at 52 weeks, with the exception of the Placebo/1.5 mg LY2189265 and Placebo/0.75 mg LY2189265 treatment groups, which include only participants with confirmed pancreatitis during treatment with LY2189265 (26 weeks through 52 weeks). A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo and received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
824784|NCT01178268|Secondary|Follow-up In-stent Percent Diameter Stenosis (DS)||≥13 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percent Diameter stenosis|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
812304|NCT01064687|Secondary|Rate of Self-reported Hypoglycemic Events at 52 Weeks|Hypoglycemic events (HE) were classified as severe (defined as episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions), documented symptomatic (defined as any time a participant feels that he/she is experiencing symptoms and/or signs associated with hypoglycemia, and has a plasma glucose level of equal to or less than millimoles/liter [mmol/L]), asymptomatic (defined as events not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured plasma glucose of equal to or less than 3.9 mmol/L), nocturnal (defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurred between bedtime and waking), or probable symptomatic (defined as events during which symptoms of hypoglycemia were not accompanied by a plasma glucose determination). The 1-year adjusted rate of hypoglycemic events is summarized cumulatively at 52 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||events per participant per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
812305|NCT01064687|Secondary|Rate of Self-reported Hypoglycemic Events at 26 Weeks|Hypoglycemic events (HE) were classified as severe (defined as episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions), documented symptomatic (defined as any time a participant feels that he/she is experiencing symptoms and/or signs associated with hypoglycemia, and has a plasma glucose level of equal to or less than 3.9 millimoles/liter [mmol/L]), asymptomatic (defined as events not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured plasma glucose of equal to or less than 3.9 mmol/L), nocturnal (defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurred between bedtime and waking), or probable symptomatic (defined as events during which symptoms of hypoglycemia were not accompanied by a plasma glucose determination). The 1-year adjusted rate of hypoglycemic events is summarized cumulatively at 26 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||events per participant per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
812306|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Self-reported Hypoglycemic Events at 52 Weeks|Hypoglycemic events (HE) were classified as severe (defined as episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions), documented symptomatic (defined as any time a participant feels that he/she is experiencing symptoms and/or signs associated with hypoglycemia, and has a plasma glucose level of less than or equal to 3.9 millimoles/liter [mmol/L]), asymptomatic (defined as events not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured plasma glucose of less than or equal to 3.9 mmol/L), nocturnal (defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurred between bedtime and waking), or probable symptomatic (defined as events during which symptoms of hypoglycemia were not accompanied by a plasma glucose determination). The number of self-reported hypoglycemic events is summarized cumulatively at 52 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug.||events|||Number
812307|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Self-reported Hypoglycemic Events at 26 Weeks|Hypoglycemic events (HE) were classified as severe (defined as episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions), documented symptomatic (defined as any time a participant feels that he/she is experiencing symptoms and/or signs associated with hypoglycemia, and has a plasma glucose level of less than or equal to 3.9 millimoles/liter [mmol/L]), asymptomatic (defined as events not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured plasma glucose of less than or equal to 3.9 mmol/L), nocturnal (defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurred between bedtime and waking), or probable symptomatic (defined as events during which symptoms of hypoglycemia were not accompanied by a plasma glucose determination). The number of self-reported hypoglycemic events is summarized cumulatively at 26 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo.||events|||Number
812308|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks on Serum Calcitonin||Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable serum calcitonin data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812309|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks on Serum Calcitonin||Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable serum calcitonin data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812310|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks on Pancreatic Enzymes|Amylase (total and pancreas-derived) and lipase concentrations were measured.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable pancreatic enzyme data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units per liter||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812311|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks on Pancreatic Enzymes|Amylase (total and pancreas-derived) and lipase concentrations were measured.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable pancreatic enzyme data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units per liter||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812313|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Pancreatitis at 26 Weeks|The number of participants with pancreatitis confirmed by adjudication is summarized cumulatively at 26 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo.||participants|||Number
812314|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks on Blood Pressure|Seated systolic blood pressure (SBP) and seated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable blood pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Mean
812315|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks on Blood Pressure|Seated systolic blood pressure (SBP) and seated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable blood pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812316|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change in Baseline to 52 Weeks on Pulse Rate|Seated pulse rate was measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable seated pulse rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812317|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change in Baseline to 26 Weeks on Pulse Rate|Seated pulse rate was measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable seated pulse rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812318|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks on Electrocardiogram Parameters, Fridericia Corrected QT (QTcF) Interval and PR Interval|The QT interval is a measure of the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave and was calculated from electrocardiogram (ECG) data using Fridericia's formula: QTc = QT/RR^0.33. Corrected QT (QTc) is the QT interval corrected for heart rate and RR, which is the interval between two R waves. PR is the interval between the P wave and the QRS complex. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable ECG QTcF Interval or PR Interval data.||milliseconds (msec)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812319|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks on Electrocardiogram Parameters, Fridericia Corrected QT (QTcF) Interval and PR Interval|The QT interval is a measure of the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave and was calculated from electrocardiogram (ECG) data using Fridericia's formula: QTc = QT/RR^0.33. Corrected QT (QTc) is the QT interval corrected for heart rate and RR, which is the interval between two R waves. PR is the interval between the P wave and the QRS complex. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable ECG QTcF Interval or PR interval data.||milliseconds (msec)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812320|NCT01064687|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Cardiovascular Events at 52 Weeks|Information on cardiovascular (CV) risk factors was collected at baseline. Data on any new CV event was prospectively collected using a CV event electronic case report form. At prespecified visits, participants were asked about any new CV event since the previous inquiry. Deaths and nonfatal cardiovascular adverse events (AEs) were adjudicated by an external committee of physicians with cardiology expertise. Nonfatal cardiovascular AEs to be adjudicated included myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, hospitalization for heart failure, coronary interventions, and cerebrovascular events, including cerebrovascular accident (stroke) and transient ischemic attack. The number of participants with CV events confirmed by adjudication is summarized cumulatively at 52 weeks. Serious and all other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality are summarized in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug. The number of participants with adjudicated CV events was not collected at 26 weeks.||participants|||Number
812321|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks on the Impact of Weight on Self-Perception|The Impact of Weight on Self-Perception (IW-SP) questionnaire contains 3 items that assess how often the participants' body weight affects how happy they are with their appearance and how often they feel self-conscious when out in public. Items are scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale where 5 = never and 1 = always. A single total score is calculated by summing the scores for all 3 items. Total score ranges between 3 and 15, where a higher score is indicative of better self-perception. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable IW-SP data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. LOCF was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812334|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks for Daily Mean Blood Glucose Values From the 8-point Self-monitored Plasma Glucose (SMPG) Profiles|The SMPG data were collected at the following 8 time points: pre-morning meal; 2 hours post-morning meal; pre-midday meal; 2 hours post-midday meal; pre-evening; 2 hours post-evening meal; bedtime; and 3AM or 5 hours after bedtime. Least squares (LS) means of the mean of the 8 time points (daily mean) were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) analysis with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable SMPG data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812322|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks on the Impact of Weight on Self-Perception|The Impact of Weight on Self-Perception (IW-SP) questionnaire contains 3 items that assess how often the participants' body weight affects how happy they are with their appearance and how often they feel self-conscious when out in public. Items are scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale where 5 = never and 1 = always. A single total score is calculated by summing the scores for all 3 items. Total score ranges between 3 and 15, where a higher score is indicative of better self-perception. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable IW-SP data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812323|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks in the Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living|"The Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living (renamed the Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living [APPADL]) questionnaire contains 7 items that assess how difficult it is for participants to engage in certain activities considered to be integral to normal daily life, such as walking, standing and climbing stairs. Items are scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale where 5 = not at all difficult and 1 = unable to do. The individual scores from all 7 items are summed and a single total score is calculated and may range between 7 and 35. A higher score indicates better ability to perform activities of daily living. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate."|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable APPADL data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. LOCF was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812324|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks in the Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living|"The Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living (renamed the Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living [APPADL]) questionnaire contains 7 items that assess how difficult it is for participants to engage in certain activities considered to be integral to normal daily life, such as walking, standing and climbing stairs. Items are scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale where 5 = not at all difficult and 1 = unable to do. The individual scores from all 7 items are summed and a single total score is calculated and may range between 7 and 35. A higher score indicates better ability to perform activities of daily living. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate."|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable APPADL data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812325|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks in the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire Status (DTSQs) and Change (DTSQc) Versions|The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire status (DTSQs) and change (DTSQc) versions are used to assess participant treatment satisfaction at each study visit and relative change in satisfaction from baseline, respectively. Both questionnaires consist of 8 items, 6 of which (1, and 4 through 8) assess treatment satisfaction. Each item is rated on a 7-point Likert scale. The change version has the same 8 items as the status version with a small alteration of the wording of Item 7. Scores from the 6 treatment satisfaction items are summed to a Total Treatment Satisfaction Score, which ranges from 0 (very dissatisfied) to 36 (very satisfied) for the DTSQs and from -18 (much less satisfied) to +18 (much more satisfied) for the DTSQc. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline score as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable DTSQs or DTSQc data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. LOCF was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812326|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks in the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire Status (DTSQs) Version|The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire status version (DTSQs) is used to assess participant treatment satisfaction at each study visit. The questionnaire consists of 8 items, 6 of which (1, and 4 through 8) assess treatment satisfaction. Each item is rated on a 7-point Likert scale. Scores from the 6 treatment satisfaction items are summed to a Total Treatment Satisfaction Score, which ranges from 0 (very dissatisfied) to 36 (very satisfied). The DTSQ change version (DTSQc) was not collected at 26 weeks. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline score as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable DTSQs data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after randomization, endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812335|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks on Body Mass Index (BMI)|Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable BMI data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||kilograms per meter squared (kg/m^2)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812336|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks on Body Mass Index (BMI)|Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable BMI data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||kilograms per meter squared (kg/m^2)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812327|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks in the EuroQol 5|The European Quality of Life - 5 dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire is a generic, multidimensional, health-related, quality-of-life instrument. It consists of 2 parts: the first part assesses 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) that have 3 possible levels of response (no problem, some problem, or extreme problem). These dimensions are converted into a weighted health-state Index Score. The EQ-5D United Kingdom (UK) score ranges from -0.59 to 1.0, where a score of 1.0 indicates perfect health and negative values are valued as worse than dead. The second part of the questionnaire consists of a visual analog scale (VAS) on which the participants rated their perceived health state on that day from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health). Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and adjusted by treatment, country, and baseline.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable EQ-5D data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. LOCF was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812328|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks in the EuroQol 5|The European Quality of Life - 5 dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire is a generic, multidimensional, health-related, quality-of-life instrument. It consists of 2 parts: the first part assesses 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) that have 3 possible levels of response (no problem, some problem, or extreme problem). These dimensions are converted into a weighted health-state Index Score. The EQ-5D United Kingdom (UK) score ranges from -0.59 to 1.0, where a score of 1.0 indicates perfect health and negative values are valued as worse than dead. The second part of the questionnaire consists of a visual analog scale (VAS) on which the participants rated their perceived health state on that day from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health). Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and adjusted by treatment, country, and baseline.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable EQ-5D data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812329|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks in Updated Homeostasis Model Assessment of Beta-cell Function (HOMA2-%B) and Updated Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Sensitivity (HOMA2-%S)|The homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) quantifies insulin resistance and beta-cell function. HOMA2-B is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate steady-state beta cell function (%B) as a percentage of a normal reference population (normal young adults). HOMA2-S is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate insulin sensitivity (%S) as percentages of a normal reference population (normal young adults). The normal reference populations were set at 100%. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable HOMA2-%B or HOMA2-%S data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||percentage of HOMA2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812330|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks in Updated Homeostasis Model Assessment of Beta-cell Function (HOMA2-%B) and Updated Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Sensitivity (HOMA2-%S)|The homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) quantifies insulin resistance and beta-cell function. HOMA2-B is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate steady-state beta cell function (%B) as a percentage of a normal reference population (normal young adults). HOMA2-S is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate insulin sensitivity (%S) as percentages of a normal reference population (normal young adults). The normal reference populations were set at 100%. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable HOMA2-%B or HOMA2-%S data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||percentage of HOMA2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812331|NCT01064687|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Attaining Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Less Than 7% and Less Than or Equal to 6.5% at 52 Weeks|The percentage of participants achieving HbA1c level less than 7.0% and less than or equal to 6.5% was analyzed with a logistic regression model with baseline, country, and treatment as factors included in the model.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. LOCF was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of participants|||Number
812332|NCT01064687|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Attaining Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Less Than 7% and Less Than or Equal to 6.5% at 26 Weeks|The percentage of participants achieving HbA1c level less than 7.0% and less than or equal to 6.5% was analyzed with a logistic regression model with baseline, country, and treatment as factors included in the model.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of participants|||Number
812333|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks for Daily Mean Blood Glucose Values From the 8-point Self-monitored Plasma Glucose (SMPG) Profiles|The SMPG data were collected at the following 8 time points: pre-morning meal; 2 hours post-morning meal; pre-midday meal; 2 hours post-midday meal; pre-evening; 2 hours post-evening meal; bedtime; and 3AM or 5 hours after bedtime. Least squares (LS) means of the mean of the 8 time points (daily mean) were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) analysis with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable SMPG data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812337|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks for Body Weight|Least squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) analysis with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable body weight data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||kilograms (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812338|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks for Body Weight|Least squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) analysis with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable body weight data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||kilograms (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812339|NCT01064687|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks Endpoint in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|Least squares (LS) means were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline HbA1c as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized at baseline to LY2189265 or Exenatide and received at least 1 dose of study drug with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. LOCF was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812340|NCT01064687|Primary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks Endpoint in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|Least squares (LS) means were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline HbA1c as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of LY2189265, Exenatide, or Placebo with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812341|NCT01064739|Secondary|Urinary Sodium|urinary sodium 8-12 hours after breakfast|8-12 hours after breakfast|||mEq/4hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812342|NCT01064739|Secondary|Urinary Sodium|Urinary sodium excreted 0-4 hours after breakfast.|0-4 hours after breakfast|||mEq/4hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812343|NCT01064739|Secondary|Supine Heart Rate|Supine heart rate 6 hours after breakfast|6 hours after breakfast|||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
812344|NCT01064739|Secondary|Supine Systolic Blood Pressure|Supine systolic blood pressure 6 hours after breakfast|Supine-6 hours after breakfast on both study days.|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
812345|NCT01064739|Secondary|Urinary Norepinephrine|Urinary norepinephrine excreted 8-12 hours after breakfast|8 to 12 hours after breakfast|||micrograms/4hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812346|NCT01064739|Secondary|Urinary Norepinephrine|Urinary norepinephrine excreted 4-8 hours after breakfast|4 to 8 hours after breakfast|||micrograms/4hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812347|NCT01064739|Secondary|Urinary Norepinephrine|Urinary norepinephrine excreted 0-4 hours after breakfast|0 to 4 hours after breakfast|||micrograms/4 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
812348|NCT01064739|Secondary|Urinary Dopamine|Urinary dopamine excreted 8 to 12 hours after breakfast|8 to 12 hours after breakfast|||micrograms/4hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812349|NCT01064739|Secondary|Urinary Dopamine|Urinary dopamine excreted 4 to 8 hours after breakfast|4 to 8 hours after breakfast|||micrograms/4 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
812350|NCT01064739|Secondary|Urinary Dopamine|Urinary dopamine excreted 0 to 4 hours after breakfast|0 to 4 hours after breakfast|||micrograms/4hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812351|NCT01064739|Secondary|Urinary Dopa|Urinary dopa excreted 4-8 hours after breakfast was specified as a primary outcome. Other time points (0-4 hr, 8-12 hr after breakfast) are non-primary outcomes.|8-12 hours after breakfast|||micrograms/4hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812352|NCT01064739|Secondary|Urinary Dopa|Urinary dopa excreted 4-8 hours after breakfast was specified as a primary outcome. Other time points (0-4 hr, 8-12 hr after breakfast) are non-primary outcomes.|0-4 hours after breakfast|||ug/4hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812353|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Dopamine|Plasma dopamine 6 hours after breakfast|Plasma samplesPlasma dopamine 6 hours after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812354|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Dopamine|Plasma dopamine 4 hours after breakfast|4 hours after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812355|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Dopamine|Plasma dopamine 2 hours after breakfast|2 hours after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812356|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Dopamine|Plasma dopamine 1 hour after breakfast|1 hour after breakfast|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812357|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Norepinephrine|Plasma norepinephrine 6 hours after breakfast|6 hours after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812358|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Norepinephrine|Plasma norepinephrine 4 hours after breakfast|4 hours after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812359|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Norepinephrine|Plasma norepinephrine 2 hours after breakfast|2 hours after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812360|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Norepinephrine|Plasma norepinephrine 1 hour after breakfast|1 hour after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812361|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Dopa 6 Hrs After Breakfast|Subjects consumed the standard fixed sodium diet for at least two days prior to study and on study day one during an inpatient stay in the Vanderbilt Clinical Research Center. On study day two, participants ate 100 g of puréed fava beans and pods with study diet at breakfast (0800hr) and lunch (1200hr). Blood was sampled for catechol assays before and at 1, 2, 4 and 6 hours after breakfast. Plasma dopa 1 hour after breakfast was specified as a primary outcome. Other catechols (dihydroxyphenylglycol, norepinephrine, epinephrine, dopamine, dihydroxyphenylacetic acid) and other time points (2, 3, 4, 6hr after breakfast) are non-primary outcomes.|Plasma samples collected 6 hours after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812362|NCT01064739|Primary|Urinary Sodium|Urinary sodium excreted 4-8 hours after breakfast was designated as a primary outcome. Other urine samples (0-4 hr, 8-12 hr after breakfast) are considered as non-primary outcomes.|4 to 8 hours after breakfast|||mEq/4 hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
812364|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Dopa 4 Hrs After Breakfast|Subjects consumed the standard fixed sodium diet for at least two days prior to study and on study day one during an inpatient stay in the Vanderbilt Clinical Research Center. On study day two, participants ate 100 g of puréed fava beans and pods with study diet at breakfast (0800hr) and lunch (1200hr). Blood was sampled for catechol assays before and at 1, 2, 4 and 6 hours after breakfast. Plasma dopa 1 hour after breakfast was specified as a primary outcome. Other catechols (dihydroxyphenylglycol, norepinephrine, epinephrine, dopamine, dihydroxyphenylacetic acid) and other time points (2, 3, 4, 6hr after breakfast) are non-primary outcomes.|Plasma samples collected 4 hours after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812365|NCT01064739|Secondary|Plasma Dopa 2 Hrs After Breakfast|Subjects consumed the standard fixed sodium diet for at least two days prior to study and on study day one during an inpatient stay in the Vanderbilt Clinical Research Center. On study day two, participants ate 100 g of puréed fava beans and pods with study diet at breakfast (0800hr) and lunch (1200hr). Blood was sampled for catechol assays before and at 1, 2, 4 and 6 hours after breakfast. Plasma dopa 1 hour after breakfast was specified as a primary outcome. Other catechols (dihydroxyphenylglycol, norepinephrine, epinephrine, dopamine, dihydroxyphenylacetic acid) and other time points (2, 3, 4, 6hr after breakfast) are non-primary outcomes.|Plasma samples collected 2 hours after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812366|NCT01064739|Primary|Plasma Dopa 1 hr After Breakfast|Subjects consumed the standard fixed sodium diet for at least two days prior to study and on study day one during an inpatient stay in the Vanderbilt Clinical Research Center. On study day two, participants ate 100 g of puréed fava beans and pods with study diet at breakfast (0800hr) and lunch (1200hr). Blood was sampled for catechol assays before and at 1, 2, 4 and 6 hours after breakfast. Plasma dopa 1 hour after breakfast was specified as a primary outcome. Other catechols (dihydroxyphenylglycol, norepinephrine, epinephrine, dopamine, dihydroxyphenylacetic acid) and other time points (2, 3, 4, 6hr after breakfast) are non-primary outcomes.|Plasma samples collected 1 hour after breakfast on both study days.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812367|NCT01064817|Primary|Subjects With Safety Related Events or Findings|The number of Subjects with AEs, TEAEs, SAEs, decreased visual acuity, and worsened visual fields|First injection through end of study for AEs, SAEs, visual acuity and visual fields, and from first injection through Day 30 for TEAEs|||participants|||Number
812368|NCT01064817|Other Pre-specified|Bleb Scarring|Exploratory Efficacy Outcome measure: Bleb scarring is graded on a scale from 0-3. 0= none to minimal scarring, 1= mild, 2= moderate, 3= severe scarring.|Day 120|Number of subjects who had assessment of bleb scarring on Day 120||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812369|NCT01064817|Other Pre-specified|Successful Intra-ocular Pressure (IOP) Control|Exploratory efficacy outcome measure. Successful IOP control defined as IOP between 6 and 18 mm Hg or 25% reduction from pre-surgical IOP|Day 120|||participants|||Number
812370|NCT01064817|Primary|Safety of Subconjunctival Injection|Number of adverse events (AEs), treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs), non-ocular TEAEs, Ocular TEAEs, serious adverse events (SAEs), abnormal slit-lamp biomicroscopic findings, and abnormal dilated fundoscopy findings|AEs, slit-lamp, and fundoscopy findings from first injection through end of study; TEAEs from first injection through Day 30|All subjects enrolled in study; all subjects received all study treatment||Number of occurrences|||Number
812371|NCT01064830|Secondary|Patients Assessment of Satisfaction With Length of Fingernails|"the percentages of participants who were satisfied with the length of fingernails"|20 weeks|all patients enrolled who completed this response measure at week 20.||percentage of patients|||Number
812372|NCT01064830|Primary|• Number of Patients Receiving at Least a 1-grade Improvement in the Physicians Global Improvement Assessment (PGIA) of Two Target Nails.|IN a scale of 0-3 where 0 means normal nail and 3 means severe disease, the number of patients who received at least a decrease of 1 grade in the evaluation of two target nails|20 weeks|||patients|||Number
812373|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) at Week 12|The ASDAS is a continuous disease activity score: low score indicates lower disease activity and higher values indicate higher disease activity. The score ranges from 0 to no defined upper limit. It is categorized into 4 disease activity states based on score: inactive disease (< 1.3), moderate (≥ 1.3 to < 2.1), high (≥ 2.1 to ≤ 3.5), and very high (> 3.5). Clinically important and major improvements in ASDAS are defined as a reduction from Baseline of ≥ 1.1 and ≥ 2.0 points, respectively. Participants with non-missing Baseline and at least 1 non-missing post-Baseline value were included in post-Baseline visits. LOCF: missing value was imputed using the last non-missing post-Baseline value prior to missing value.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug and with non-missing values for both Baseline and post-baseline visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812374|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Count (SJC) at Week 12|Seventy-six joints were assessed for swelling by physical examination. Swelling of each joint was classified as present (1) or absent (0), for a total possible score SJC of 0 (0 joints with swelling) to 76 (worst possible score/76 joints with swelling). Participants with non-missing Baseline and at least 1 non-missing post-Baseline value were included in post-Baseline visits. LOCF: missing value was imputed using the last non-missing post-Baseline value prior to missing value.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812375|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Tender Joint Count (TJC) at Week 12|Seventy-eight joints were assessed for tenderness by physical examination. Tenderness of each joint was classified as present (1) or absent (0), for a total possible TJC score of 0 (0 joints with tenderness) to 78 (worst possible score/78 joints with tenderness). Participants with non-missing Baseline and at least 1 non-missing post-Baseline value were included in post-Baseline visits. LOCF: missing value was imputed using the last non-missing post-Baseline value prior to missing value.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812480|NCT01071915|Secondary|Number of Participants With Markedly Abnormal Values in Vital Signs and Body Weight|This outcome measure included incidence of markedly abnormal changes in blood pressure (systolic and diastolic), pulse, and body weight. The table presents the number of participants with normal baseline and at least one post-baseline markedly abnormal value.|To Day 196|Safety analyis population||participants|||Number
812376|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dactylitis at Week 12|Assessment of the presence or absence of dactylitis as well as grading of tenderness and swelling in all 20 of the participants' digits was performed. Tenderness at each site was quantified from absent to severe. Swelling was quantified from mild to severe. Total Dactylitis Assessment scores ranging from 0 (no digits with dactylitis) to 20 (worst possible score; 20 digits with dactylitis). Participants with non-missing Baseline and at least 1 non-missing post-Baseline value were included in post-Baseline visits. LOCF: missing value was imputed using the last non-missing post-Baseline value prior to missing value.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug and had non-missing values for both Baseline and the post-baseline.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812377|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) Enthesitis Score at Week 12|Assessment of enthesitis was performed in the following 16 domains: left and right (L/R) medial epicondyle; L/R lateral epicondyle; L/R supraspinatus insertion into the greater tuberosity of humerus; L/R greater trochanter; L/R quadriceps insertion into superior border of patella; L/R patellar ligament insertion into inferior pole of patella or tibial tubercle; L/R Achilles tendon insertion into calcaneum; L/R plantar fascia insertion into calcaneum. Tenderness at each site was quantified on a dichotomous basis. Each domain was graded for the presence (1) and absence (0) of tenderness yielding total SPARCC scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 16 (worst possible score; 16 sites with tenderness). Participants with non-missing Baseline and at least 1 non-missing post-Baseline value were included in post-Baseline visits. LOCF: missing value was imputed using the last non-missing post-Baseline value prior to missing value.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812378|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Leeds Enthesitis Index at Week 12|Assessment of enthesitis was performed in the following 6 domains: left and right lateral epicondyle, left and right medial femoral condyle, left and right Achilles tendon insertion. Tenderness at each site was quantified on a dichotomous basis: Each domain was graded for the presence (1) and absence (0) of tenderness yielding total Leeds Enthesitis Index scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness). Participants with non-missing Baseline and at least 1 non-missing post-Baseline value were included in post-Baseline visits. LOCF: missing value was imputed using the last non-missing post-Baseline value prior to missing value.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812379|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score (MASES) at Week 12|Assessment of enthesitis was performed in the following 7 domains: 1) 1st costochondral joint left and right, 2) 7th costochondral joint left and right, 3) posterior superior iliac spine left and right, 4) anterior superior iliac spine left and right, 5) iliac crest left and right, 6) 5th lumbar spinous process and 7) proximal insertion of Achilles tendon left and right. Each domain was graded for the presence (1) or absence (0) of tenderness yielding total MASES ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 13 (worst possible score; 13 sites with tenderness). Participants with non-missing Baseline and at least 1 non-missing post-Baseline value were included in post-Baseline visits. LOCF: missing value was imputed using the last non-missing post-Baseline value prior to missing value.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812380|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form-36 Health Status Survey™ Version 2 (SF-36™V2) Physical Component Score (PCS) at Week 12|The Short Form-36 Health Status Survey™ Version 2 (SF-36™V2) is a 36-item generic health-related quality of life measure to assess the participant's view of their health consisting of 2 components: physical and mental. For each component, a transformed summary score is calculated using 8 sub-domains: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Scores range from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate a better health state.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug and had non-missing values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812381|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire Modified for the Spondyloarthropathies (HAQ-S) Total at Week 12|The HAQ-S is a self-reported measure to assess the physical function and health-related quality of life. The Disability Index (DI) of HAQ-S is calculated as the mean of the following 8 category scores (range: 0 [without any difficulty] to 3 [unable to do]): Dressing and Grooming, Rising, Eating, Walking, Hygiene, Reach, Grip, and Activities. Five additional items in the functional status measure were included in the HAQ-S, including carrying heavy packages, sitting for long periods, able to work at a flat topped table, and (if the participant had a driver's license or a car) able to look in the rear view mirror and able to turn head to drive in reverse. The overall score ranges from 0 (no disability) to 3 (three very severe, high-dependency disability). Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement. LOCF: Missing value was imputed using the last non-missing post-baseline value prior to missing value.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812382|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) at Week 12|The BASDAI was to be completed at the designated study visits. The participant was to assess his/her disease activity using the BASDAI which consisted of a VAS scale used to answer 6 questions (Q1 through Q6) pertaining to symptoms experienced by the participant for the past week. Each question on the BASDAI was reported in centimeters (0 [none] to 10 [very severe] with one question's possible answers being in time increments [0 hours to ≥ 2 hours]). The overall BASDAI score ranges from 0 to 10 cm and was calculated as follows: BASDAI Score = 0.2 × (Q1 + Q2 + Q3 + Q4 + Q5/2 + Q6/2). Lower scores indicate less disease activity. LOCF: Missing value was imputed using the last non-missing post-baseline value prior to missing value.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812383|NCT01064856|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Disease Activity at Week 12|A VAS was to be used for the Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of disease activity (current status). The left end of the VAS scale (0 mm) signifies the absence of symptoms and the right end (100 mm) signifies maximum disease activity. Last observation carried forward (LOCF): missing values were imputed using the last non-missing post-baseline value prior to the missing value.|Baseline (last measurement prior to first DB dose), Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812384|NCT01064856|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. If an adverse event meets any of the following criteria, it is considered a serious adverse event (SAE): results in death or is life-threatening, results in admission or prolongation of hospitalization, results in congenital anomaly or persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or is an important medical event requiring medical or surgical intervention to prevent serious outcome. AEs were categorized by severity (mild, moderate, severe) and relationship to treatment (probably, possibly, probably not, not related). Please see Adverse Events section below for more details.|Baseline (day of first study drug administration) through Week 156 plus 70 days|Safety Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug.||participants|||Number
812385|NCT01064856|Primary|Percentage of Responders According to the Composite Peripheral SpA Response Criteria (PSpARC 40) at Week 12|Percentage of participants achieving the following composite response at Week 12: >= 40% improvement (minimum 20 mm absolute improvement) from Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PTGA) of Disease Activity as measured by a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) where 0=no symptoms and 100=maximum symptoms; >= 40% improvement (minimum 20 mm absolute improvement) from Baseline in PTGA – Pain as measured by a 100 mm VAS where 0=no pain and 100=maximum pain; and >= 40% improvement from Baseline in at least 1 of the following 3 criteria: swollen joint count (76 joints) and tender joint count (78 joints); total enthesitis count; or total dactylitis count. Non-responder imputation: missing response was imputed as non-response.|Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug (ITT).||percentage of participants|||Number
812386|NCT01064882|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire Score at Month 3|The Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire at Month 3 consisted of 2 questions that collected information regarding subject satisfaction with the treatment overall. The questions assessed the likelihood that the subject would use the product, as well as the likelihood that the subject would recommend the product to family and/or friends, if it were available. The score was based on the responses to each question. Questions were answered on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (very unlikely = worst) to 5 (very likely = best).|Month 3|Modified Intent-to-Treat: All randomized subjects who were treated with the intended study medication and completed at least one follow-up visit.(Note: 2 subjects in the Bim 0.015% treatment group, 1 subject in the Bim 0.005% treatment group, and 1 subject in the Bim 0.03% treatment group did not have Month 3 visit data for this outcome measure)||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812387|NCT01064882|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Confidence, Attractiveness, and Professionalism (CAP) Domain Scores at Month 3|Change from baseline in the CAP domain at Month 3 included responses to questions 7, 8, and 9. Responses to each question ranged from 1 (very much disagree = worst) to 5 (very much agree = best) with the minimum sum of the scores for the domain equal to 3 and the maximum sum of the scores for the domain equal to 15. Domain responses at Month 3 were compared to baseline. Positive values at Month 3 indicated an improvement from baseline, and negative values indicated a worsening from baseline.|Baseline, Month 3|Modified Intent-to-Treat: All randomized (started study) subjects who were treated with the intended study medication and completed at least one follow-up visit.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812388|NCT01064882|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Overall Eyelash Satisfaction at Month 3|"Change from baseline at Month 3 in question 3 overall, how satisfied are you with your eyelashes? Responses ranged from 1 (very unsatisfied = worst) to 5 (very satisfied = best). Individual responses at Month 3 were compared to baseline. Positive values at Month 3 indicated an improvement from baseline, and negative values indicated a worsening from baseline."|Baseline, Month 3|Modified Intent-to-Treat: All randomized (started study) subjects who were treated with the intended study medication and completed at least one follow-up visit.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812389|NCT01064882|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With a Clinical Response in Overall Eyelash Prominence on the Global Eyelash Assessment (GEA) at Month 3|Percentage of subjects with a clinical response in overall eyelash prominence at Month 3 was measured using a 4-point GEA scale with the aid of the photonumeric guide. The scale ranges from 1 (minimal = worst) prominence to 4 (very marked = best)prominence. Eyelash prominence was assessed and graded by the investigator over both eyes. A clinical response was defined as at least a 1-grade increase in GEA score from baseline to Month 3.|Month 3|Modified Intent-to-Treat: All randomized (started study) subjects who were treated with the intended study medication and completed at least one follow-up visit.||Percentage of Subjects|||Number
812390|NCT01064882|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Upper Eyelash Darkness (in Intensity Units) at Month 3|Change from baseline in upper eyelash darkness at Month 3 was determined by lash intensity within the spline (a narrow area approximately 5 pixels wide that bisects the area of interest). Upper eyelash darkness was measured in both eyes and averaged for analysis. Colors ranged from black=0 to white=255. Lower numbers on this continuum indicated darker colors. Therefore, a change from baseline to Month 3 represented by a negative value indicated increased eyelash darkening.|Baseline, Month 3|Modified Intent-to-Treat: All randomized (started study) subjects who were treated with the intended study medication and completed at least one follow-up visit. (Note that 2 subjects in the Bim 0.015% treatment group did not have baseline or Month 3 visit data for this outcome measure.)||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812405|NCT01065051|Secondary|Change in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) at Rest|The left ventricular ejection fraction work index (LVEF) is a calculated echocardiography parameter. LVEF is derived from the directly measured parameters left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV). These 2 parameters are acquired during a non-invasive echocardiography examination. Formula: LEVF = 100*(LVEDV - LVESV)/LVEDV|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812391|NCT01064882|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Upper Eyelash Thickness at Month 3|Change from baseline in upper eyelash thickness/fullness at Month 3 was measured within 3 preset areas. Eyelash thickness/fullness was assessed across both eyes as an average of the 3 preset areas measured in millimeters squared (mm^2). Changes from baseline to Month 3 represented by positive values indicated increased eyelash thickness, and changes from baseline represented by negative values indicated thinner eyelash thickness.|Baseline, Month 3|Modified Intent-to-Treat: All randomized (started study) subjects who were treated with the intended study medication and completed at least one follow-up visit. (Note that 2 subjects in the Bim 0.015% treatment group did not have baseline or Month 3 visit data for this outcome measure.)||Millimeters squared (mm^2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812392|NCT01064882|Primary|Change From Baseline in Eyelash Length at Month 3|Change from Baseline at Month 3 in eyelash length, measured in millimeters (mm). Data from both eyes were averaged for each subject for analysis. Changes from baseline represented by positive values indicated longer length, and changes from baseline represented by negative values indicated shorter length.|Baseline, Month 3|Modified Intent-to-Treat: All randomized (started study) subjects who were treated with the intended study medication and completed at least one-follow-up visit. (Note that one subject in the Bim 0.015% treatment group did not have baseline or Month 3 visit data for this outcome measure.)||millimeters (mm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812393|NCT01064947|Secondary|Local Tolerability|"The investigator assessed the following characteristics on a grading scale of 0-3 (none, mild moderate or severe): erythema, inflammation, infection, crusting, necrosis, peeling, swelling and contact dermatitis.
The subject assessed the following characteristics on a scale of 0-3 (none, mild, moderate or severe): irritation, itchiness burning, tenderness and pain."|Day 7|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812394|NCT01064947|Secondary|Investigator Assessment of Clinical Cure|The investigator assessed clinical cure at Day 7 as either total or improved cure, failure confirmed or failure by default|Day 7|||participants|||Number
812395|NCT01064947|Secondary|Skin Infection Rating Scale (SIRS)|The Primary Investigator rated the each of the following characteristics: exudate/pus, crusting, erythema/inflammation, tissue warmth, tissue edema, itching and pain on a scale of 0-6 (absent-severe) to create an overall SIRS score ranging from 0-42.|Day 1 and Day 7|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812396|NCT01064947|Primary|Bacteriological Culture|All participants were cultured for S.aureus (MRSA), S.aureus (MSSA) and S. pyogenes at Baseline. If positive at Baseline then they were cultured again at Day 7.|Day 1 and Day 7|||participants|||Number
812397|NCT01065051|Secondary|Change in the Ventilatory Efficiency (V’E/V’CO2) Measured From Baseline to the Anaerobic Threshold (AT) During the Cardiopulmonary Exercise Tests (CPET)|Ventilatory efficiency (V’E/V’CO2) and anaerobic threshold (AT) were parameters directly measured or derived by computed analysis from the spiroergometry system during the cardiopulmonary exercise test.|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812398|NCT01065051|Secondary|Change in the Slope of the Relationship Between Work Rate and Mean Pulmonary Arterial Pressure (PAPmean) During the Cardiopulmonary Exercise Tests|The slope of the relationship between work rate during cardiopulmonary exercise tests and PAPmean is derived from the directly measured hemodynamic parameter mean pulmonary arterial pressure (PAPmean). PAPmean is acquired during a right heart catheterization.|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812399|NCT01065051|Secondary|Change in Lateral Mitral Annular Peak Early Diastolic Velocity (E’) During the Cardiopulmonary Exercise Tests|The lateral mitral annular peak early diastolic velocity (E’) is a measured echocardiography parameter. It is acquired during a non-invasive echocardiography examination.|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812400|NCT01065051|Secondary|Change in Tricuspid Annular Plane Systolic Excursion (TAPSE) During the Cardiopulmonary Exercise Tests|The tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) is a measured echocardiography parameter. It is acquired during a non-invasive echocardiography examination.|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812401|NCT01065051|Secondary|Change in Peak Systolic Tricuspid Annular Velocity (RV-Sm) During the Cardiopulmonary Exercise Tests|The peak systolic tricuspid annular velocity (RV-Sm) is a measured echocardiography parameter. It is acquired during a non-invasive echocardiography examination.|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812402|NCT01065051|Secondary|Change in Lateral Mitral Annular Peak Systolic Velocity (Sm) During the Cardiopulmonary Exercise Tests|The lateral mitral annular peak systolic velocity (Sm) is a measured echocardiography parameter. It is acquired during a non-invasive echocardiography examination.|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812403|NCT01065051|Secondary|Change in Peak Power Index During the Cardiopulmonary Exercise Tests|The peak power index is a calculated hemodynamic parameter. It is derived from the directly measured parameters mean systolic arterial pressure (SAPmean) and mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWPmean). These 2 parameters are acquired during a right heart catheterization. Formula: Peak Power Index = (SAPmean - PCWPmean)*CO*16.667/LVEDV|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812404|NCT01065051|Secondary|Change in End-systolic Elastance at Rest|The end-systolic elastance is a calculated hemodynamic parameter. It is approximated by the directly measured hemodynamic parameter end-systolic pressure divided by the directly measured echocardiography parameter left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV). The end-systolic pressure is acquired during a right heart catheterization. The LVESV is acquired during a non-invasive echocardiography examination. Approximated by end-systolic pressure/LVESV|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812443|NCT01070784|Secondary|Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) symptoms_cough|There are 5 alternatives (scored 0 to 4, 0= unaware of coughing, 4= never free of cough or need to cough). The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily during 52-week randomization treatment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812406|NCT01065051|Secondary|Change in Left Ventricular Stroke Work Index (LVSWI) at Rest|The left ventricular stroke work index (LVSWI) is a calculated hemodynamic parameter. It is derived from the directly measured parameters mean systolic arterial pressure (SAPmean) and mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWPmean). These 2 parameters are acquired during a right heart catheterization. The LVSWI is also dependent of the calculated hemodynamic parameter stroke volume index (SVI). Formula: LVSWI = (SAPmean – PCWPmean)*SVI*0.0136|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812407|NCT01065051|Primary|Change in Peak Power Index at Rest|The peak power index is a calculated hemodynamic parameter. It is derived from the directly measured parameters mean systolic arterial pressure (SAPmean) and mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWPmean). These 2 parameters are acquired during a right heart catheterization. The peak power index is calculated from the maximal power (which also takes the calculated parameter cardiac output into account) divided by the left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV). Formula: Peak Power Index = (SAPmean - PCWPmean)*CO [cardiac output]*16.667/LVEDV|Before and 1 hour after administration of study drug|Due to the very low number of patients enrolled in the study, no statistical evaluation was done.|||||
812408|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response by Week 2 on Modified Sustained Virological Response by Genotype After Treatment Initiation in Per-Protocol Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Wk 2 and also achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the PPV of the VR by Wk 2 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 2 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the NPV of the VR by Wk 2 for mSVR. Predictive values of VR are reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812409|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response by Week 2 on Modified Sustained Virological Response by Genotype After Treatment Initiation in Modified All-Treated Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Wk 2 also achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the PPV of the VR by Wk 2 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 2 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the NPV of the VR by Wk 2 for mSVR. Predictive Values of VR was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population receiving PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result of <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812410|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Per Protocol Population at 24 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in the follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their mEOT-R. Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. The percentage of participants with relapse is reported in treatment naive PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.||Percentage of participants|||Number
812411|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population at 24 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in the follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their mEOT-R. Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. The percentage of participants with relapse was reported in treatment naive mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result of <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
812412|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Per Protocol Population at 12 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in their respective follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their mEOT-R. Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. The percentage of participants with relapse is reported in treatment naive PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 12 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
812444|NCT01070784|Secondary|Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) symptoms_Breathlessness|There are 5 alternatives (scored 0 to 4, 0= unaware of any difficulty and 4 =almost constant, present even when resting). The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily during 52-week randomization treatment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831860|NCT01243320|Primary|Change in Sodium Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812413|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse After Modified End of Treatment Response by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population at 12 Weeks After End of Treatment|Participants whose last test result in their respective follow-up time window showed mVR were considered to have maintained their modified end of treatment response (mEOT-R). Participants whose last test result in the respective follow-up time window did not show mVR, or who did not have a test result in the respective follow-up time window but whose last follow-up test result before the time window did not show mVR, were considered to have relapsed. Only participants with mEOT-R who had a HCV RNA measurement in the follow-up time window (without use of backward imputation), or whose last HCV RNA measurement at a follow-up time point before the time window did not show mVR, were included in the calculations. The percentage of participants with relapse is reported in treatment naive mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 12 Weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result of <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
812414|NCT01070550|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response by Disjoint Categories by Genotype in Per-Protocol Population at Week 4 and Week 12|RVR defined was as VR by Week 4, mRVR was defined as mVR by Week 4, cEVR was defined as VR by Week 12, but no RVR, mcEVR was defined as mVR by Week 12, but no mRVR, pEVR was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline (including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL) by Week 12, but no RVR and no cEVR, mpEVR was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline by Week 12, but no mRVR and no mcEVR. The data is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a.|At Week 4 and Week 12|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.||Participants|||Number
812415|NCT01070550|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response by Disjoint Categories by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population at Week 4 and Week 12|Rapid virological response (RVR) was defined as VR by Week 4, Modified rapid virological response (mRVR) was defined as mVR by Week 4, Complete early virological response (cEVR) was defined as VR by Week 12, but no RVR, Modified complete early virological response (mcEVR) was defined as mVR by Week 12, but no mRVR, Partial early virological response (pEVR) was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline (including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL) by, Week 12, but no RVR and no cEVR, Modified partial early virological response (mpEVR) was defined as at least a 2-log10 drop in HCV RNA as compared to baseline by Week 12, but no mRVR and no mcEVR. The data is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT participants who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a.|Week 4 and Week 12|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population.||Participants|||Number
812416|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With At Least 1 Log Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Deoxyribonucleic Acid by Genotype in Per-Protocol Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 1-log drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 1- log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 90%. The 1- log drop in HCV RNA was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a.|Week 2, Week 4, and Week 12|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812417|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With At Least 1-logarithm10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Deoxyribonucleic Acid by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 1-log drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 1- log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 90%. The 1- log drop in HCV RNA was reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a.|Week 2, Week 4, and Week 12|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result of <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812418|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With At Least a 2-logarithm10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Deoxyribonucleic Acid by Genotype in Per-Protocol Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 2-log drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 2 log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 99%. The 2 log drop in HCV RNA is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a.|Week 2, Week 4, and Week 12|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812419|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With At Least 2-logarithm10 Drop in Hepatitis C Virus Deoxyribonucleic Acid by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population at Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12|Participants with 2-logarithm (log) drop in HCV RNA including HCV RNA values <50 IU/mL in the serum from baseline to Week 2, Week 4 and Week 12, expressed in terms of a logarithmic scale with base 10 were evaluated and reported. A 2 log drop in HCV RNA was defined as drop of HCV viral load by 99%. The 2 log drop in HCV RNA is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a.|At Week 2, Week 4, and Week 12|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result of <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812445|NCT01070784|Secondary|Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) symptoms_Night-time Awakening|There are 5 alternatives (scored 0 to 4, 0= no awakening and 4 =did not sleep at all). The change from Run-in period average to Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily during 52-week randomization treatment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812446|NCT01070784|Primary|ECG Variables - RR Interval|Change from baseline|Baseline and 52 week after|||ms||Standard Deviation|Mean
812447|NCT01070784|Primary|ECG Variables - QTcF Interval|Change from baseline|Baseline and 52 week after|||ms||Standard Deviation|Mean
812420|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Virological Response by Genotype in Per-Protocol Population Over Time|Modified virological response is defined as HCV RNA <50 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The mVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and 12 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812421|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Virological Response by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population Over Time|Modified virological response was defined as HCV RNA <50 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The mVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and 12 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result of <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812422|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virological Response by Genotype in Per-Protocol Population Over Time|Virological response was defined as HCV RNA <15 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The VR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At Week 2, Week 4, Week 12, EOT, and 12 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812423|NCT01070550|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virological Response by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population Over Time|Virological response was defined as HCV RNA <15 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The VR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At Week 2, Week 4, and Week 12, EOT, and 12 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result of <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812424|NCT01070550|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response by Week 4 and 12 on Modified Sustained Virological Response by Genotype After Treatment Initiation in Per-Protocol Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Week 4 and 12 and also achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the PPV of the VR by Wk 4 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 4 and 12 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the NPV of the VR by Wk 4 and 12 for mSVR. Predictive values of VR are reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812425|NCT01070550|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Predictive Values of Virological Response by Week 4 and Week 12 on Modified Sustained Virological Response by Genotype After Treatment Initiation in Modified All-Treated Population|The probability that a participant who developed VR by Week 4 and 12 and also achieved mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the positive predictive value (PPV) of the VR by Wk 4 for mSVR. The probability that a participant who failed to develop VR by Wk 4 and 12 and also failed to achieve mSVR at 24 weeks after EOT was called the negative predictive value (NPV) of the VR by Wk 4 and 12 for mSVR. Predictive values of VR are reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT participants who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population. n = the number of participants analyzed at a given time point.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812426|NCT01070550|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Sustained Virological Response by Genotype in Per-Protocol Population|Modified sustained virological response is defined as mVR of HCV RNA <50 IU/mL at 24 weeks after EOT. The mSVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected PP population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812427|NCT01070550|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Sustained Virological Response by Genotype in Modified All-Treated Population|Modified sustained virological response (mSVR) was defined as modified virological response (mVR) of HCV RNA <50 IU/mL at 24 weeks after EOT. The mSVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected mTRT who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of PEG-IFN alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result of <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812448|NCT01070784|Primary|ECG Variables - QTcB Interval|Change from baseline|Baseline and 52 week after|||ms||Standard Deviation|Mean
812428|NCT01070550|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virological Response by Genotype in Per-Protocol Population|Sustained virological response was defined as VR at 24 weeks after EOT. Virological response was defined as HCV RNA of <15 IU/mL as assessed by CAP/CTM or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (LLOD 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The SVR is reported in treatment naive HCV mono-infected per protocol (PP) population who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The PP population included all participants who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812429|NCT01070550|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virological Response by Genotype in Modified All Treated Population|Sustained virological response (SVR) was defined as virological response (VR) at 24 weeks after end of treatment (EOT). Virological response was defined as hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) of <15 international units per milliliter (IU/mL) as assessed by COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan (CAP/CTM) or another HCV RNA test with at least the same degree of sensitivity. The CAP/CTM test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantification of HCV. This test possesses a high sensitivity (lower limit of detection [LLOD] 15 IU/mL) and a broad linear range of quantification (43 IU/mL up to 69 million IU/mL) in all HCV genotypes. The SVR is reported in treatment naive hepatitis C virus (HCV) mono-infected modified all-treated (mTRT) who received PEG-IFN alfa-2a. The EOT was 12, 24, 48 or 72 weeks after initiation of treatment.|At 24 weeks after EOT|The mTRT population included all participants who received at least one dose of peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin, and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA test result. Participants with a baseline test result <50 IU/mL were excluded from the mTRT population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812430|NCT01070693|Primary|Long-term Sequelae|Any pain at five years|5 years|||percentage of participants|||Number
812431|NCT01070771|Secondary|To Determine the Level of Agreement in Management Plans Regarding the Significance of Coronary Artery Narrowings When Comparing the MP Acquired by Standard Angiographic Assessment Alone and a MP Acquired Using Angiographic Assessment Plus FFR Data.|"This compared the number of vessels in which there was a discrepant result in relation to angiographically and FFR defined significance. Angiographic significance was visually assessed by operators whereas the pressure wire provided objective data as to a narrowing's significance: an FFR reading of <0.8 indicated a significant restriction in blood flow with a recommendation for revascularisation.
The difference in indication for revascularisation of each major coronary artery was also judged according to angiogram alone compared with angiogram plus FFR dtaa."|Up to hospital discharge. Most were day case procedures but no specific data relating to discharge was collected.|||participants|||Number
812432|NCT01070771|Primary|Estimation of Number of Cases Where FFR Data Results in a Change in the Management Strategy (Number of Vessel Requiring Treatment and/or PCI vs Medical vs CABG)|This outcome measure was assessing agreement in the management plan (MP) derived from angiographic assessment alone compared to a MP derived from angiographic assessment plus the use of FFR data acquired at the time of angiography. The study assessed the proportion of cases in which the angiogram directed MP changed after FFR data were disclosed.|Up until hospital discharge. Most cases were day cases but no specific data relating to length of stay collected.|||participants|||Number
812433|NCT01070784|Secondary|Evening FEV1 Measured by the Subjects at Home|The change from run-in period and daily during 52-week randomization treatment|Daily during run-in period and daily 52-week randomization treatment|||Liter(L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812434|NCT01070784|Secondary|Morning FEV1 Measured by the Subjects at Home|The change from run-in period and daily during 52-week randomization treatment|Daily during run-in period and daily 52-week randomization treatment|||Liter(L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812435|NCT01070784|Secondary|Evening Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Measured at Home|The change from Run-in period average to 52-week randomization Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily 52-week randomization treatment|||Liter/minute(L/min)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812436|NCT01070784|Secondary|Morning Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Measured at Home|The change from Run-in period average to 52-week randomization Treatment period average for each treatment group|Daily during run-in period and daily 52-week randomization treatment|||Liter/minute(L/min)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812437|NCT01070784|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) Based on the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)|The change from run-in period and daily during 52-week randomization treatment average for each treatment group. The SGRQ ranges from 0 (no impairment of quality of life) to 100 (highest impairment of quality of life).|Daily during run-in period and daily 52-week randomization treatment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812438|NCT01070784|Secondary|Rescue Medication Use|The change from run-in period and daily during 52-week randomization treatment|Daily during 52-week randomization treatment|||innhalation/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
812439|NCT01070784|Secondary|Number of COPD Exacerbations Over the Study Treatment Period|A Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) exacerbation was defined as worsening in COPD symptoms requiring treatment with either a course of systemic steroid or hospitalisation. Number of COPD exacerbation during 52-week randomization treatment|Daily during 52-week randomization treatment|||event|||Number
812440|NCT01070784|Secondary|Time to First COPD Exacerbation|A Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) exacerbation was defined as worsening in COPD symptoms requiring treatment with either a course of systemic steroid or hospitalisation. The percentage of participants who had experienced COPD exacerbation at the end of the study for each treatment group.|Daily during 52-week randomization treatment|||Percentage of participants|||Number
812441|NCT01070784|Secondary|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Measured With the Spirometer at the Clinic|The ratio of the average value of available data for Weeks 0, 4, 8, 17, 26, 34, 43 and 52 to the baseline for each treatment group. Ratio is being reported as a percentage in this Measure.|Before randomization, 0, 4, 8, 17, 26, 34, 43 and 52 weeks after randomization|||percentage of Baseline||Full Range|Geometric Mean
812442|NCT01070784|Secondary|Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Measured With the Spirometer at the Clinic|The ratio of the average value of available data for Weeks 0, 4, 8, 17, 26, 34, 43 and 52 to the baseline for each treatment group. Ratio is being reported as a percentage in this Measure.|Before randomization, 0, 4, 8, 17, 26, 34, 43 and 52 weeks after randomization|||percentage of Baseline||Full Range|Geometric Mean
812481|NCT01071915|Secondary|Number of Participants With Markedly Abnormal Values in Safety Laboratory Variables|The figures present the number of participants who had markedly abnormal levels of safety laboratory variables. Only the laboratory variables that had at least one percentage of participants in either group with abnormal value are presented, more variables were included in the study.|To Day 196|Safety analysis population||participants|||Number
812482|NCT01071915|Secondary|Cumulative Probability of no PSA Failure From Day 28 to Day 196|PSA failure was defined as two consecutive increases of 50%, and at least 5 ng/mL, compared to nadir.|To Day 196|152 participants for this outcome measure is the analysis population from day 28 to day 196||percent probability||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812483|NCT01071915|Secondary|Cumulative Probability of Testosterone at Castrate Level (≤0.5 ng/mL)From Day 56 to Day 196||Day 56 to Day 196|152 participants for this outcome measure is the analysis population from day 56 to day 196||percent probability||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812484|NCT01071915|Secondary|Percentage Change in Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) From Baseline to Day 28||To Day 28|152 participants for this outcome measure is the analysis population from day 0 to day 28||percent||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812485|NCT01071915|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Testosterone Level ≤0.5 ng/mL at Day 3||At day 3|Observed cases||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812486|NCT01071915|Primary|Cumulative Probability of Testosterone at Castrate Level (≤0.5 ng/mL) From Day 28 to Day 196||Day 28 to Day 196|152 participants for this outcome measure is the analysis population from day 28 to day 196||percent probability||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812487|NCT01071993|Primary|Primary Endpoint. Development of CIN (Contrast-induced Nephropathy) Defined as a Postprocedure Increase in Serum Creatinine of > 0.5 mg/dL or >25% Increase From Baseline at 24 & at 48 Hours.|Development of CIN (Contrast-induced Nephropathy) Defined as a Postprocedure Increase in Serum Creatinine of > 0.5 mg/dL or >25% Increase From Baseline at 24 & at 48 Hours|48 hours||||||
812488|NCT01072006|Secondary|Neuropsychological Testing (Wechsler Test of Adult Reading)|This test provides an estimate of pre-morbid IQ, which is important to report so that the patient sample can be compared to other similar studies for comparable IQ level and so that pre-morbid IQ can be considered as a potential variable. There are 50 items that are each given a score of 1, so the range of scores is 0-50. The raw score is then converted into an estimated IQ score based on age and education. The scores reported below reflect this estimated IQ score, where normal IQ scores range from 75 as low average to 125 as high average.|These are chronic patients and controls who will only be tested at one time point, which corresponds to their entry into the study (after signing consent forms). Data collected at this single time point will be reported.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812489|NCT01072006|Secondary|Psychodiagnostic Testing: Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Check List (PCL) Measures the Level of Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Symptoms|The PCL is a 17-item questionnaire that measures PTSD symptoms on a scale that ranges from 17-85 points. The total severity score is reported below. A higher score means a higher level of PTSD symptoms.|These are chronic patients and controls who will only be tested at one time point, which corresponds to their entry into the study (after signing consent forms). Data collected at this single time point will be reported.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812490|NCT01072006|Primary|Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) Correlation|Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is used to measure neural activity in participants during attentional task, specifically measured as a bold signal change from rest to attention task. We then calculate the correlation between the bold signal (fMRI) and the PTSD CheckList questionnaire score. (The bold signal from fMRI indirectly reflects the brain's use of glucose, the brain's main energy source.) Correlations are reflected in an R-value, and R-values can range from 0-1, where 0 means there is no correlation (or relationship) between the two measures (here, the two measures are the fMRI brain signal and the PTSD score) and 1 means there is a perfect correlation between the two measures. A high correlation in this study would suggest that the more severe a patient's PTSD symptoms are, the harder their brain is having to work to accomplish the attention task. Separate correlations were analyzed for each group, and the overall R-value for each group is reported below.|These are chronic patients and controls who will only be tested at one time point, which corresponds to their entry into the study (after signing consent forms). Data collected at this single time point will be reported.|||r-value|||Number
812491|NCT01072032|Secondary|EEG Spectral Coherence Estimates|EEG coherence reflects the degree to which brain regions communicate. It is derived from calculating the degree of association between regions in specified frequency bandwidths; it is like a correlation, except that the values range from 0-1 instead of -1 to 1, so technically there are no units as it is a coefficient. Higher coherence values indicate stronger associations between regions.|3 weeks|||Coherence ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
812492|NCT01072032|Secondary|Functional Walking Measures|Preferred, self-selected walking velocity measured in centimeters/second (i.e., cm/s).|3 weeks|||cm/s||Standard Deviation|Mean
812493|NCT01072032|Primary|Motor Control|Normalized jerk is a measure of movement smoothness, derived from jerk [(meters)/(second cubed)] divided by the peak velocity (meters/second), leaving values in units of 1/second squared (ie., 1/s^2)|3 weeks|||1/s^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
812494|NCT01072136|Secondary|Determine the Clinical Cure, Partial Response and Failure Proportions for Mucopurulent Cervicitis at 2-3 Weeks for Each Study Arm.|"Clinical Failure:
Persistent cervical mucopus and/or easily induced cervical bleeding, and the presence of > 30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain OR
Signs of pelvic inflammatory disease, including cervical motion tenderness, uterine tenderness or adnexal tenderness.
Partial Response:
Persistent cervical mucopus and/or easily induced cervical bleeding and <30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain OR
The presence of ≥ 30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain in the absence of both cervical mucopus and easily induced cervical bleeding.
Clinical Cure:
• Absence of cervical mucopus and absence of easily induced cervical bleeding and < 30 WBC's per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain."|At 2-3 weeks follow-up.|Received study product, met all eligibility criteria, and had complete outcome data at 2-3 weeks.||percentage of participants|||Number
812521|NCT01072175|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) in Part B BRAFi Naïve Melanoma Participants|OS is defined as the interval of time between the date of randomization until the date of death due to any cause. For the participants who did not die, overall survival was censored at the date of last contact.|From the date of first dose until date of death due to any cause (up to approximately 22 months)|All Treated Population.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812495|NCT01072136|Secondary|Determine the Clinical Cure, Partial Response and Failure Proportions for Mucopurulent Cervicitis at 2 Months for Each Study Arm.|"Clinical Failure:
Persistent cervical mucopus and/or easily induced cervical bleeding, and the presence of > 30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain OR
Signs of pelvic inflammatory disease, including cervical motion tenderness, uterine tenderness or adnexal tenderness.
Partial Response:
Persistent cervical mucopus and/or easily induced cervical bleeding and <30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain OR
The presence of ≥ 30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain in the absence of both cervical mucopus and easily induced cervical bleeding.
Clinical Cure:
• Absence of cervical mucopus and absence of easily induced cervical bleeding and < 30 WBC’s per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain."|At 2 month ( Day 50-70) follow-up.|Per protocol. Received study product, met all eligibility criteria, had complete primary outcome data, and absence of any major protocol violations.||percentage of participants|||Number
812496|NCT01072136|Secondary|Evaluate Microbiological Cure of Mycoplasma Genitalium in Women Treated With Cefixime and Azithromycin Versus Placebo.|The proportion of participants with mycoplasma genitalium at baseline who clear mycoplasma genitalium in either the vagina or cervix at their last follow-up visit.|At 2-3 weeks and 2 month (Day 50-70) follow-up.|Participants who were positive for mycoplasma genitalium in either the cervix or vagina at baseline and who met eligibility criteria and who returned for at least one of the follow-up visits.||participants|||Number
812497|NCT01072136|Secondary|Explore the Role of Mycoplasma Genitalium in Persistent Mucopurulent Cervicitis (MPC).|"Proportion of participants with clinical failure, partial response, or clinical cure for mucopurulent cervicitis at 2 months according to mycoplasma genitalium status(positive cervical or vaginal swabs versus both negative) at 2 months.
Clinical Failure:
Persistent cervical mucopus and/or easily induced cervical bleeding, and the presence of > 30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain OR
Signs of pelvic inflammatory disease, including cervical motion tenderness, uterine tenderness or adnexal tenderness.
Partial Response:
Persistent cervical mucopus and/or easily induced cervical bleeding and <30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain OR
The presence of ≥ 30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain in the absence of both cervical mucopus and easily induced cervical bleeding.
Clinical Cure:
• Absence of cervical mucopus and absence of easily induced cervical bleeding and < 30 WBC’s per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain."|At 2 month (Day 50-70) follow-up.|Participants who met eligibility criteria and were not positive for chlamydia, gonorrhea, cervical trichomonas at 2-month follow-up.||percentage of participants|||Number
812498|NCT01072136|Secondary|Explore the Role of Bacterial Vaginosis (BV) in Persistent Mucopurulent Cervicitis (MPC).|"Proportion of participants with clinical failure, partial response, or clinical cure for mucopurulent cervicitis at 2 month follow-up according to asymptomatic bacterial vaginosis status at 2 month follow-up.
Clinical Failure:
Persistent cervical mucopus and/or easily induced cervical bleeding, and the presence of > 30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain OR
Signs of pelvic inflammatory disease, including cervical motion tenderness, uterine tenderness or adnexal tenderness.
Partial Response:
Persistent cervical mucopus and/or easily induced cervical bleeding and <30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain OR
The presence of ≥ 30 WBCs per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain in the absence of both cervical mucopus and easily induced cervical bleeding.
Clinical Cure:
• Absence of cervical mucopus and absence of easily induced cervical bleeding and < 30 WBC’s per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain."|At 2 month (Day 50-70) follow-up.|Participants who met eligibility criteria and were not positive for chlamydia, gonorrhea, cervical trichomonas or cervical mycoplasma genitalium at 2 month follow-up.||percentage of participants|||Number
812499|NCT01072136|Secondary|Examine Adverse Events in Patients Empirically Treated With Cefixime and Azithromycin for Mucopurulent Cervicitis (MPC) in Comparison to no Treatment.|The proportion of participants experiencing one or more adverse events after randomization.|At 2-3 week and 2 month (Day 50-70) follow-up.|Participants who were randomized and received study product.||percentage of participants|||Number
812500|NCT01072136|Secondary|Determine Pelvic Inflammatory Disease (PID) in Patients Empirically Treated With Cefixime and Azithromycin for Mucopurulent Cervicitis (MPC) in Comparison to no Treatment.|The number of participants experiencing PID after randomization.|At 2-3 week and 2 month (Day 50-70) follow-up.|Participants who were randomized and received study product.||participants|||Number
812501|NCT01072136|Primary|Evaluate Clinical Cure in Participants Not Treated Versus Participants Empirically Treated With Cefixime and Azithromycin for Mucopurulent Cervicitis (MPC).|The proportion of participants who have cleared MPC by the second follow-up visit. Clinical cure is defined as: absence of cervical mucopus and absence of easily induced cervical bleeding and < 30 white blood cells per oil immersion field on cervical gram stain.|Visit 2 - 2 months (Day 50-70).|Per protocol. Received study product, met eligibility criteria, had complete primary outcome data, and absence of any major protocol violations.||percentage of participants|||Number
812502|NCT01072149|Secondary|Change From Period Baseline in 25-hour Serial FEV1 at the End of Each 28 Day-treatment Period|Change from period Baseline in 0-25 hour serial FEV1 (0 to 25 hours) over Period Days 28-29 was measured. Mean Baseline FEV1 for a given participant is defined as the mean of all available period Baseline FEV1 values. Data are presented as the mean of change from Baseline for all three treatment periods. Analysis was performed using a mixed effects repeated measures model with covariates of period treatment group, period Baseline, mean Baseline, period and time after dosing (nominal), in addition to time after dosing by period Baseline, time after dosing by mean Baseline, and time after dosing by period treatment interaction terms as fixed effects and participant as a random effect.|Baseline; pre-dose; 5 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 60 minutes, and 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 22, 23, 24, and 25 hours post-dose on Day 28 and Day 29 of each 28-day treatment period (up to 19 weeks)|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812530|NCT01072175|Secondary|The AUC [0-tau] of Dabrafenib (DAB) and Its Metabolite in Combination With Trametinib (T) in Part B|Area under the concentration-time curve from time zero (predose) until the last time of quantifiable concentration (AUC [0-tau]) was assessed. Blood samples for PK analysis of dabrafenib and its the metabolites hydroxy-dabrafenib (GSK2285403), carboxy-dabrafenib (GSK2298683) and desmethyl-dabrafenib (GSK2167542) were obtained at Day 15 pre-dose and Day 21 pre-dose and at 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours post-dose administration.|Day 15 and Day 21|PK Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time point were analyzed.||ng*hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812503|NCT01072149|Secondary|Change From Period Baseline in Clinic Visit Trough FEV1 at the End of Each 28-day Treatment Period|Trough FEV1 is defined as the mean of the 23- and 24-hour post-dose assessments. For each treatment period, period Baseline is defined as the mean of the -30 and -5 minute measurements taken on Period Day 1. Mean Baseline FEV1 for a given participant is defined as the mean of all available period Baseline FEV1 values. Data are presented as the mean of change from Baseline for all three treatment periods. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Period Day 29 minus the value at Baseline. Analysis was performed using a mixed effects model with covariates of period treatment group, period Baseline, mean Baseline, and period as fixed effects and participant as a random effect.|From Baseline to the end of each 28-day treatment period (up to 19 weeks)|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812504|NCT01072149|Primary|Time-adjusted Area Under the Curve (AUC) (i.e., Weighted Mean) for 24-hour Serial Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at the End of Each 28-day Treatment Period|FEV1 is defined as the amount of air that can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs in the first second of a forced exhalation. The weighted mean was calculated from pre-dose FEV1 (calculated as the mean of the -30 and -5 minute measurements) and post-dose FEV1 after 5, 15, 30, and 60 minutes and after 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 22, 23, and 24 hours. Data are provided as the Least Squares Mean of the weighted mean for all three treatment periods. Analysis was performed using a mixed effects model with covariates of period treatment group, period Baseline, mean Baseline (defined as the mean of all available period Baseline FEV1 values), and period as fixed effects and participant as a random effect.|Pre-dose and the end of each 28-day treatment period (up to 19 weeks)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized to and received at least one dose of trial medication in any treatment period. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812505|NCT01072175|Secondary|Overall Survival in Part D|OS is defined as the interval of time between the date of randomization until the date of death due to any cause. For the participants who did not die, overall survival was censored at the date of last contact. Validation of OS is currenlty ongoing; thus, data are not available at this time.|From the date of first dose until date of death due to any cause (up to approximately 14 months)||06/2017||||
812506|NCT01072175|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by the Investigator in Part D|PFS is defined as the interval between the first dose of study medication and the earliest date of PD or death due to any cause. PD was based on radiographic or photographic evidence, and assessments were made by the investigator according to RECIST, version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm.|From the date of randomization to the earliest date of disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause (up to approximately 13 months)|ITT Population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812507|NCT01072175|Secondary|Duration of Response as Assessed by the Investigator in Part D|Duration of response for participants with either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of a PR or CR until the first documented sign of disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm.|First documented evidence of PR or CR until the earlier of date of disease progression or date of death due to any cause (up to approximately 13 months)|ITT Population. Only those participants who had CR or PR were considered.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812508|NCT01072175|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Best Overall Response as Assessed by the Investigator in Participants in Part D|Best overall response is defined as complete response (CR: the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 milimeter [mm] in the short axis.) or partial reponse (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]). To be assigned a status of PR or CR, a confirmatory disease assessment should be performed no less than 28 days after the criteria for response are first met. Response was evaluated by an investigator as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1.|From the date of first dose of study medication to the first documented evidence of a confirmed complete response or partial response (up to approximately 280 days )|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
812509|NCT01072175|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve Assessment of Trametinib in Part D|AUC(0-tau) after single and repeat dose of teametinib alone and in combination with dabrafenib was observed at Day 1 and Day 21. Blood samples for PK analysis of dabrafenib were obtained at pre-dose Day 1 and Day 21 pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 24 hours (Day 1 only) post-dose administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter tmax was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin.Participants receiving DAB 75 mg to DAB 75 mg + Trametinib 2 mg and those receiving DAB 150 mg to DAB 150 mg + Trametinib 2 mg did not receive Trametinib until Day 29; therefore, AUC(0-tau) was not analyzed in these participants at Days 1 and 21.|Day 1: pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours post dose. Day 21: pre-dose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 hours post-dose|PK Population. Only participants who were available at the indicated timepoints were analyzed.||ng*h/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812531|NCT01072175|Secondary|Steady State Concentration of Trametinib With Concomitant Administration of Dabrafenib in Part A|The steady state plasma concentration (Css) of trametinib with concomitant dabrafenib administration was assessed at Day 15 and Day 16. At steady state the amount of drug administered (in a given time period) is equal to the amount of drug eliminated.|Day 15 and Day 16|PK Population||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
812874|NCT01074502|Primary|Percentage of Patients With a Success Rate (Based on the Researcher's Global Assessment (RGA) Sum of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1))|RGA measures the severity of acne. The scale goes from 0-4. 0 will be better and 4 will be worse. Scores can only be whole numbers (0,1,2,3,4)ordinal.|Baseline to 16 weeks|small number of subjects to analyze|||||
812510|NCT01072175|Secondary|The Tmax Assessment of Trametinib in Part D|The tmax of trametinib after single and repeat dose in combination with dabrafenib (DAB) was observed at Day 1 and Day 21. Blood samples for PK analysis of dabrafenib were obtained at pre-dose Day 1 and Day 21 pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 24 hours (Day 1 only) post-dose administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter tmax was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin.Participants receiving DAB 75 mg to DAB 75 mg + Trametinib 2 mg and those receiving DAB 150 mg to DAB 150 mg + Trametinib 2 mg did not receive Trametinib until Day 29; therefore, tmax was not analyzed in these participants at Days 1 and 21.|Day 1: pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours post dose. Day 21: pre-dose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 hours post-dose|PK Population. Only participants who were available at the indicated timepoints were analyzed.||Hours||Full Range|Median
812511|NCT01072175|Secondary|The Cmax Assessment of Trametinib in Part D|Cmax of trametinib after single and repeat dose in combination with DAB was observed at Day 1 and Day 21. Blood samples for PK analysis of dabrafenib were obtained at pre-dose Day 1 and Day 21 pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 24 hours (Day 1 only) post-dose administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter tmax was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin.Participants receiving DAB 75 mg to DAB 75 mg + Trametinib 2 mg and those receiving DAB 150 mg to DAB 150 mg + Trametinib 2 mg did not receive Trametinib until Day 29; therefore, Cmax was not analyzed in these participants at Days 1 and 21.|Day 1: pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours post dose. Day 21: pre-dose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 hours post-dose|PK Population. Only participants who were available at the indicated timepoints were analyzed.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812512|NCT01072175|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Dabrafenib Metabolites in Part D|Area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from pre-dose to dosing interval (AUC[0-tau]), from pre-dose to the last time of quantifable concentration (AUC[0-tau]), and from pre-dose extrapolated to infinity (AUC[0-inf]) of DAB metabolites hydroxy-dabrafenib (GSK2285403), carboxy-dabrafenib (GSK2298683) and desmethyl-dabrafenib (GSK2167542) after single and repeat doses of DAB alone and in combination with trametinib was measured at Day 1 and Day 21.|Day 1: pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours post dose. Day 21: pre-dose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 hours post-dose|PK Population. Only participants who were available at the indicated timepoints were analyzed.||ng*hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812513|NCT01072175|Secondary|The Tmax of Dabrafenib Metabolites in Part D|The time to Cmax (tmax) of DAB metabolites hydroxy-dabrafenib (GSK2285403), carboxy-dabrafenib (GSK2298683) and desmethyl-dabrafenib (GSK2167542) after single and repeat doses of DAB alone and in combination with trametinib was measuered at Day 1 and Day 21.|Day 1: pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours post dose. Day 21: pre-dose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 hours post-dose|PK Population. Only participants who were available at the indicated timepoints were analyzed.||Hours||Full Range|Median
812514|NCT01072175|Secondary|Cmax of Dabrafenib Metabolites in Part D|The maximum concentration (Cmax) of dabrafenib metabolites hydroxy-dabrafenib (GSK2285403), carboxy-dabrafenib (GSK2298683) and desmethyl-dabrafenib (GSK2167542) after single and repeat doses of DAB alone and in combination with trametinib was measured at Day 1 and Day 21.|Day 1: pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours post dose. Day 21: pre-dose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 hours post-dose|PK Population. Only participants who were available at the indicated timepoints were analyzed.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812515|NCT01072175|Secondary|Oral Volume of Distribution (V/F) of Dabrafenib and Trametinib|Oral volume of distribution (V/F) of dabrafenib and trametinib were assessed using a population approach. Oral volume of distribution (V/F) is defined as the apparent volume of distribution in the central compartment.|Day 15, Week 8, Week 16, Week 24, Week 32, Week 40, and Week 48|PK Population||Liters (L)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812516|NCT01072175|Secondary|Oral Clearance (CL/F) of Dabrafenib and Trametinib|Oral clearance (CL/F) of dabrafenib and trametinib were assessed using a population approach. Oral clearance (CL/F) is defined as the apparent volume of plasma in the vascular compartment cleared of drug per unit time by the processes of metabolism and excretion. For dabrafenib, population CL/F is defined as inducible and non-inducible CL/F. As dabrafenib induces its own metabolism, total oral clearance at steady state includes a non-induced (Day 1) component and an induced component, as estimated by a population PK model.|Day 15, Week 8, Week 16, Week 24, Week 32, Week 40, and Week 48|PK Population||Liters per hour (L/hr)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812517|NCT01072175|Secondary|Plasma Concentrations of Trametinib in Part C|Plasma concentrations of trametinib was assessed following daily dose of dabrafenib and trametinib.|Day 15, Week 8, Week 16, Week 24, Week 32, Week 40, Week 48, and Week 56|PK Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
812518|NCT01072175|Secondary|Plasma Concentrations of Dabrafenib and Its Metabolites in Part C|Plasma concentrations of dabrafenib and its metabolites hydroxy-dabrafenib (GSK2285403), carboxy-dabrafenib (GSK2298683) and desmethyl-dabrafenib (GSK2167542) were assesed following daily dose of dabrafenib and trametinib.|Day 15, Week 8, Week 16, Week 24, Week 32, Week 40, Week 48, and Week 56|PK Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
812519|NCT01072175|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) in Part C|OS is defined as the interval of time between the date of randomization until the date of death due to any cause. For the participants who did not die, overall survival was censored at the date of last contact. When calculating overall survival, deaths following crossover were included.|From the date of randomization until date of death due to any cause (up to approximately 17 months)|ITT Population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812520|NCT01072175|Secondary|Pre- and Post-dose H-scores for Individual Participants in Part B|p-ERK and p-AKT, biomarkers in tumor biopsies, were assessed for participants with BRAF mutant colorectal cancer. The H-score, which is a composite score that comprises intensity and percentage of staining, is a method of assessing the amount of protein or phospho-protein present in a biopsy sample. The score is obtained by the formula: (3 * percentage of strongly staining nuclei) + (2 * percentage of moderately staining nuclei) + (percentage of weakly staining nuclei). The H-score ranges from 0 to 300, with a score of 0 representing the absence of any of the target protein and an H-score of 300 representing maximum staining and intensity of the target protein.|Screening and at disease progression (up to approximately 8 months)|Biomarker Population: participants with H-score data for pre- and post-biopsy pairs||scores on a scale|||Number
812522|NCT01072175|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by the Investigator in Participants With BRAFi-naïve Mutant Metastatic Melanoma in Part B|PFS is defined as the interval between the first dose of study medication and the earliest date of PD or death due to any cause. PD was based on radiographic or photographic evidence, and assessments were made by the investigator according to RECIST, version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm. BRAFi-naïve were the participants with BRAF-mutation positive melanoma who had not received prior therapy with a BRAF-inhibitor..|From the date of first dose to the earliest date of disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause (up to approximately 22 months)|All Treated Population.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812523|NCT01072175|Secondary|Duration of Response as Assessed by the Investigator in Participants With BRAFi-naïve Mutant Metastatic Melanoma in Part B|Duration of response for participants with either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of a PR or CR until the first documented sign of disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm. BRAFi-naïve participants were those with BRAF-mutation-positive melanoma who had not received prior therapy with a BRAF inhibitor.|First documented evidence of PR or CR until the earlier of date of disease progression or date of death due to any cause (up to approximately 22 months)|All Treated Population. Only those participants who had a CR or PR were analyzed.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812524|NCT01072175|Secondary|Number of Participants With BRAFi-naïve Mutant Metastatic Melanoma With the Best Overall Response as Assessed by Investigator in Part B|Best overall response is defined as complete response (CR: the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 milimeter [mm] in the short axis.) or partial reponse (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]). Participants with unknown or missing response were considered as non-responders. To be assigned a status of PR or CR, a confirmatory disease assessment should have been performed no less than 28 days after the criteria for response were first met. Response was evaluated by an investigator as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1. BRAFi-naïve participants were those with BRAF-mutation-positive melanoma who had not received prior therapy with a BRAF inhibitor.|From the first dose of study medication to the first documented evidence of a confirmed complete response or partial response (up to 103 weeks)|All Treated Population||Participants|||Number
812525|NCT01072175|Secondary|The Tmax Assessment of Trametinib in Combination With Dabrafenib in Part B (Analyte=GSK1120212)|The tmax is defined as the time of occurrence of Cmax. The PK parameter for tmax was assessed for plasma trametinib following repeat dosing of trametinib in combination with dabrafenib. Blood samples for PK analysis of the metabolites of dabrafenib were obtained at Day 15 pre-dose or Day 21 pre-dose and at 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours post-dose administration.|Day 15 and Day 21|PK Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time point were analyzed.||Hours||Full Range|Median
812526|NCT01072175|Secondary|The Ctau and Cmax Assessments of Trametinib in Combination With Dabrafenib in Part B (Analyte=GSK1120212)|Pre-dose (trough) concentration at the end of the dosing interval (Ctau) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) were assessed for plasma trametinib following repeat dosing of trametinib in combination with dabrafenib. Blood samples for PK analysis of the metabolites of dabrafenib were obtained at Day 15 pre-dose or Day 21 pre-dose and at 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours post-dose administration.|Day 15 and Day 21|PK Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time point were analyzed.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812527|NCT01072175|Secondary|The AUC (0-tau) Assessment of Trametinib in Combination With Dabrafenib in Part B (Analyte=GSK1120212)|AUC (0-tau) is defined as area under the concentration-time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to last time of quantifiable concentration. AUC (0-tau) was assessed for plasma trametinib following repeat dosing of trametinib in combination with dabrafenib. Blood samples for PK analysis of the metabolites of dabrafenib were obtained at Day 15 pre-dose and Day 21 pre-dose and at 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours post-dose administration.|Day 15 and Day 21|PK Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||ng*hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812528|NCT01072175|Secondary|The Tmax of Dabrafenib and Its Metabolite in Combination With Trametinib in Part B|The tmax is defined as the time of occurenceof Cmax. Tha tmax was assessed for plasma dabrafenib (DAB) following repeat dosing of dabrafenib 75 and 150 mg BID administered in combination with trametinib. Blood samples for PK analysis of the metabolites hydroxy-dabrafenib (GSK2285403), carboxy-dabrafenib (GSK2298683) and desmethyl-dabrafenib (GSK2167542) of dabrafenib were obtained at Day 15 pre-dose and Day 21 pre-dose and at 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours post-dose administration.|Day 15 and Day 21|PK Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Hours||Full Range|Median
812529|NCT01072175|Secondary|Pre-dose (Trough) Concentration at the End of the Dosing Interval (Ctau) and Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Dabrafenib and Its Metabolite in Combination With Trametinib in Part B|Pre-dose (trough) concentration at the end of the dosing interval (Ctau) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) were assessed for plasma dabrafenib (DAB) following repeat dosing of DAB administered in combination with trametinib (T). The trough concentration is defined as the plasma level of a pharmaceutical product measured just before the next dose. Blood samples for PK analysis of the metabolites hydroxy-dabrafenib (GSK2285403), carboxy-dabrafenib (GSK2298683) and desmethyl-dabrafenib (GSK2167542) of dabrafenib were obtained at Day 15 pre-dose and Day 21 pre-dose and at 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours post-dose administration.|Day 15 and Day 21|PK Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824785|NCT01178268|Secondary|Follow-up In-stent Minimum Lumen Diameter (MLD)||≥13 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||Millimeter|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
812532|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Change From Baseline in Heart Rate and Blood Pressure in Part D|Blood pressure were summarized according to National Cancer Institutes (NCI) CTCAE grade, version 4.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3 (G3), Severe; Grade 4 (G4), Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to G3 or G4 occurred.lood pressure measurement included systolic blood pressure (BP, milimeter of mercury [mmHg]) and diastolic BP (DBP). Worst case change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Heart Rate is the measure of heartbeats per minute (bpm). Changes in heart rate, either decrease to <60 bpm, change to normal or no change, or increase to >100 bpm are presented|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximately 61 weeks)|ATP Population||Participants|||Number
812533|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Grade Change From Baseline in the Indicated Hematology Parameters in Part D|Hematology parameters were summarized according to NCI CTCAE grade, version 4.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3 (G3), Severe; Grade 4 (G4), Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to Grade 3 or Grade 4 occurred. For hematology parameters that were not graded according to NCI CTCAE criteria, changes above (High) and below (Low) the normal range were evaluated. Hematology parameters included lymphocytes, total neutrophils, hemoglobin, white blood cell count, platelet count, monocytes, mean corpuscle hemoglobin concentration, eosinophils, basophils, mean corpuscle hemoglobin, mean corpuscle volume, red blood cell count, hematocrit, erythrocyte sedimentation, reticulocytes. Worst case change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximately 61 weeks)|ATP Population. Only those participants available at indicated timepoints were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
812534|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Grade (G) Change From Baseline in the Indicated Clinical Chemistry Parameters in Part D|Clinical chemistry parameters were summarized according to NCI CTCAE grade, version 4.0. G1, Mild; G2, Moderate; G3, Severe; G4, Life-threatening or disabling; G5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to G3 or G4 occurred. Changes above (High) and below (Low) the normal range were evaluated for parameters not graded. Included:hyponatremia,gamma glutamyltransferase (GGT),aspartate aminotransferase (AST),hyperglycemia,alkaline phosphatase,hypokalemia,alanine aminotransferase (ALT),phosphorus inorganic,creatine kinase,total bilirubin,albumin,hyperkalemia, hypomagnesemia,lipase,hypokalemia,hyponatremia,urea/blood urea nitogen (BUN),bicarbonate,creatine clearance,chloride,C-reactive protein,total protein,uric acid,troponin I,direct bilirubin,creatine kinase MB mass, chloride,total protein,bicarbonate,uric acid,creatine clearance,lactate dehydrogenase. Worst case change from BL was calculated as the post-BL value minus the BL value.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximately 61 weeks)|ATP Population. Only those participants available at indicated timepoints were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
812535|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE) in Part D|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an event for possible drug-induced liver injury. Refer to the general Adverse AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs and SAEs.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximately 61 weeks)|ATP Population||Participants|||Number
812536|NCT01072175|Primary|AUC (0-tau) and AUC (0-inf) of Single and Repeat Doses of Dabrafenib Alone and in Combination With Trametinib in Part D (Analyte=GSK2118436)|The PK parameters were determined for area under the concentration-time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to last time of quantifiable concentration AUC (0-tau) and from time zero (pre-dose) extrapolated to infinite time AUC (0-inf). Blood samples for PK analysis of the metabolites of dabrafenib were obtained at Day 1 and Day 21 pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 24 hours (24 hour only on Day 1) post-dose administration.|Day 1 and Day 21|PK Population. Only participants available at the indicated timepoints were analyzed.||ng*hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812537|NCT01072175|Primary|The Tmax of a Single and Repeat Dose of Dabrafenib Alone and in Combination With Trametinib in Part D (Analyte=GSK2118436)|tmax is defined as the time of occurenceof Cmax. Blood samples for PK analysis of dabrafenib were obtained at Day 1 and Day 21 pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours (24 hour on Day 1 only) post-dose administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter tmax was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin.|Day 1 and Day 21|PK Population. Only participants available at the indicated timepoints were analyzed.||Hours||Full Range|Median
812538|NCT01072175|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of a Single and Repeat Dose of Dabrafenib Alone and in Combination With Trametinib in Part D (Analyte=GSK2118436)|The PK parameter Cmax was assessed. Blood samples for PK analysis of dabrafenib were obtained at pre-dose Day 1 and Day 21 pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 24 hours (24 hour on Day 1 only) post-dose administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter tmax was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin. Cmax data are reported as geometric least squares means.|Day 1 and Day 21|PK Population: all participants who received at least one dose of either dabrafenib or trametinib and for whom a PK sample was obtained and analyzed||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812539|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Change From Baseline in Heart Rate and Blood Pressure in Part C (Randomized)|Blood pressure were summarized according to National Cancer Institutes (NCI) CTCAE grade, version 4.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3 (G3), Severe; Grade 4 (G4), Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to G3 or G4 occurred.lood pressure measurement included systolic blood pressure (BP, milimeter of mercury [mmHg]) and diastolic BP (DBP). Worst case change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Heart Rate is the measure of heart beats per minute (bpm). Changes in heart rate, either decrease to <60 bpm, change to normal or no change, or increase to >100 bpm are presented.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximlately 75 weeks)|ATP Population||Participants|||Number
813129|NCT01077024|Secondary|Point-prevalence Abstinence (Smoking Outcome) 3 Month Visit|point-prevalence abstinence defined as not smoking in the previous seven days based on self-report and confirmed with a Carbon Monoxide (CO) level ≤ 8 ppm|3- month follow-up visits|||percentage of participants|||Number
812540|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Grade Change From Baseline in the Indicated Hematology Parameters in Part C (Randomized)|Hematology parameters were summarized according to National Cancer Institutes (NCI) CTCAE grade, version 4.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3, Severe; Grade 4, Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to any grade, Grade 3 or Grade 4 occurred. For hematology parameters that were not graded according to NCI CTCAE criteria, changes above (High) and below (Low) the normal range were evaluated. Hematology parameters included: hemoglobin, lymphocytes, Total absolute neutrophil count (ANC), platelet count, white blood cells (WBC) count. Worst case change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximately 75 weeks)|ATP Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
812541|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Grade (G) Change From Baseline in the Indicated Clinical Chemistry Parameters in Part C (Randomized)|Clinical chemistry parameters were summarized according to National Cancer Institutes (NCI) CTCAE grade, version 4.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3, Severe; Grade 4, Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to any grade, Grade 3 or Grade 4 occurred. For clinical chemistry parameters that were not graded according to NCI CTCAE criteria, changes above (High) and below (Low) the normal range were evaluated. Clinical chemistry parameters included: albumin, alkaline phosphate (ALKP), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), total Bilirubin, calcium, creatine kinase, creatinine, gamma glutamyltransferase (GGT), glucose, potassium, magnesium, sodium, inorganic phosphorus. Worst case change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximately 75 weeks)|ATP Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
812542|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE) in Part C (Randomized)|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury. Refer to the general Adverse AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs and SAEs.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximatley 75 weeks)|ATP Population||Participants|||Number
812543|NCT01072175|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by the Investigator in Part C (Crossover)|PFS is defined as the interval between the first dose of study medication and the earliest date of PD or death due to any cause. PD was based on radiographic or photographic evidence, and assessments were made by the investigator according to RECIST, version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm. Participants received anti-cancer therapy prior to the date of documented events, and censored at the last adequate assessment, prior to the initiation of therapy. If the participant did not have a documented date of events, PFS and survival were censored at the date of the last adequate assessment.|From the first dose of study medication to the earliest date of disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause (up to approximately 9 months)|Crossover Population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812544|NCT01072175|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by the Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) in Part C (Randomized)|PFS is defined as the interval between the first dose of study medication and the earliest date of PD or death due to any cause. PD was based on radiographic or photographic evidence, and assessments were made by the BICR according to RECIST, version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm. Participants who received anti-cancer therapy prior to the date of documented events, were censored at the last adequate assessment prior to the initiation of therapy. If the participant did not had a documented date of events, PFS and survival were censored at the date of the last adequate assessment|From the first dose of study medication to the earliest date of disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause (up to approximately 17 months)|ITT Population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812545|NCT01072175|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by the Investigator in Part C (Randomized)|PFS is defined as the interval between the first dose of study medication and the earliest date of PD or death due to any cause. PD was based on radiographic or photographic evidence, and assessments were made by the investigator according to RECIST, version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm. Participants who received anti-cancer therapy prior to the date of documented events, were censored at the last adequate assessment prior to the initiation of therapy. If the participant did not had a documented date of events, PFS and survival were censored at the date of the last adequate assessment.|From the first dose of study medication to the earliest date of disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause (up to approximately 17 months)|ITT Population||Months||Full Range|Median
812567|NCT01072344|Secondary|Frequency, Severity, and Duration of Treatment-emergent Adverse Events.|We will report the frequency, severity, and duration of treatment-emergent adverse events by treatment arm.|26 weeks|During phase II consolidation phase, treatment responders were randomized to either 26 weeks of continuation chamomile therapy or placebo.||Participants|||Count of Participants
812568|NCT01072344|Secondary|The Proportion of Subjects in Each Treatment Condition Who Relapse.|The proportion of subjects in each treatment condition who relapsed after randomization|26 weeks|During phase II consolidation phase, treatment responders were randomized to either 26 weeks of continuation chamomile therapy or placebo.||Participants|||Count of Participants
812546|NCT01072175|Primary|Duration of Response as Assessed by the Investigator and Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) in Part C (Randomized)|Duration of response for participants with either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of a PR or CR until the first documented sign of disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm.|First documented evidence of PR or CR until the date of the first documented sign of disease progression or the date of death due to any cause (up to approximately 17 months)|ITT Population. Only those participants who had a CR or PR were analyzed for duration of response.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812547|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With BRAF Mutant Metastatic Melanoma With Best Overall Response as Assessed by the Investigator in Part C (Crossover)|Best overall response is defined as complete response (CR: the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or partial reponse (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]). Participants with unknown or missing responses were considered as non-responders. To be assigned a status of PR or CR, a confirmatory disease assessment should have been performed no less than 28 days after the criteria for response were first met. Response was evaluated by an investigator as per RECIST, version 1.1.|From the first dose of study medication to the first documented evidence of a confirmed complete response or partial response (up to approximately 15 weeks)|Crossover Population: participants who were randomized to and received at least one dose of dabrafenib monotherapy, and who elected to crossover to combination therapy following disease progression while on monotherapy||Participants|||Number
812548|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With BRAF Mutant Metastatic Melanoma With Best Overall Response Assessed by Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) in Part C (Randomized)|Best overall response is defined as complete response (CR: the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or partial reponse (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]). Participants with unknown or missing responses were considered as non-responders. To be assigned a status of PR or CR, a confirmatory disease assessment should have been performed no less than 28 days after the criteria for response were first met. Response was evaluated by BICR as per RECIST, version 1.1.|From the first dose of study medication to the first documented evidence of a confirmed complete response or partial response (up to approximately 36 weeks)|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
812549|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With BRAF Mutant Metastatic Melanoma With Best Overall Response as Assessed by the Investigator in Part C (Randomized)|Best overall response is defined as complete response (CR: the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 millimeters [mm] in the short axis.) or partial reponse (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]). Participants with unknown or missing responses were considered as non-responders. To be assigned a status of PR or CR, a confirmatory disease assessment should have been performed no less than 28 days after the criteria for response were first met. Response was evaluated by an investigator as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1.|From the first dose of study medication to the first documented evidence of a confirmed complete response or partial response (up to approximately 47 weeks)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants regardless of whether or not treatment was administered||Participants|||Number
812550|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Change From Baseline in Heart Rate and Blood Pressure in Part B|Blood pressure and heart rate were summarized according to NCI CTCAE grade, version 4.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3 (G3), Severe; Grade 4 (G4), Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to G3 or G4 occurred. Blood pressure measurement included systolic blood pressure (SBP, millimeters of mercury [mmHg]) and diastolic BP (DBP). Heart rate is the measure of heart beats per minute (bpm). Changes in heart rate, either decrease to <60 bpm, change to normal or no change, or increase to >100 bpm are presented.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximately 103 weeks)|ATP Population||Participants|||Number
812551|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Grade Change From Baseline in the Indicated Hematology Parameters in Part B|Hematology parameters were summarized according to NCI CTCAE grade, version 4.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3 (G3), Severe; Grade 4 (G4), Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to Grade 3 or Grade 4 occurred. For hematology parameters that were not graded according to NCI CTCAE criteria, changes above (High) and below (Low) the normal range were evaluated. Hematology parameters included: lymphocytes decreased, total neutrophils, hemoglobin decreased, white blood cell counts, platelet counts, monocytes, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC), eosinophils, basophils, mean corpuscular hemoglobin, mean corpuscular volume, red blood cell count, hemotocrit, and reticulocytes.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximately 103 weeks)|ATP Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
812569|NCT01072344|Primary|Time to Relapse in Each Treatment Condition.|The primary outcome was time to relapse during continuation therapy, analyzed using Cox proportional hazards. Relapse is dichotomously defined as an increase in CGI/S (a clinician-rated global measure of anxiety's severity) score from ≤ 3 (at study visit 6) to ≥ 4 (on two consecutive scheduled or unscheduled study visits ≥ 2 weeks apart) plus meeting DSM IV-TR criteria for GAD (minus the 6-month time criterion).|26 weeks|All 93 subjects started randomization phase of the study were included in the analysis||weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
812570|NCT01072357|Secondary|Endothelial Cell Density|Endothelial Cell Density (Assessed at Weeks 26 & 52). Measure of the number of cells present within the endothelium that are responsible for providing the cornea with nourishment.|52 Weeks|||Number of cells per millimeters squared||Standard Deviation|Mean
812552|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Grade (G) Change From Baseline in the Indicated Clinical Chemistry Parameters in Part B|Clinical chemistry parameters were summarized according to National Cancer Institutes (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade, version 4.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3 (G3), Severe; Grade 4 (G4), Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to Grade 3 or Grade 4 occurred. For clinical chemistry parameters that were not graded according to NCI CTCAE criteria, changes above (High) and below (Low) the normal range were evaluated. Clinical chemistry parameters included: hyponatremia, gamma glutamyltransferase (GGT), phosphorous inorganic, alkaline phosphatase, hyperglycemia, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), hypokalemia, albumin, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), total bilirubin, hyperkalemia, hypoglycemia, creatinine, lactate dehydrogenase, urea/blood urea nitrogen (BUN), bicarbonate, chloride, creatine clearance, total protein, uric acid, and troponin T.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximately 103 weeks)|ATP Population. Only those participants who were available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
812553|NCT01072175|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE) in Part B|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury. Refer to the general Adverse AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs and SAEs.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Follow-up visit (up to approximately 103 weeks )|All Treated Participants (ATP) Population: all participants who received at least one dose of either dabrafenib or trametinib||Participants|||Number
812554|NCT01072175|Primary|AUC (0-t) and AUC (0-inf) of Dabrafenib and Its Metabolites in Part A|Blood samples for PK analysis of dabrafenib and its metabolites hydroxy-dabrafenib (GSK2285403), carboxy-dabrafenib (GSK2298683) and desmethyl-dabrafenib (GSK2167542) were obtained at pre-dose and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours after dabrafenib administration. AUC is defined as the area under the dabrafenib concentration-time curve as a measure of drug exposure. AUC (0-inf) is defined as the area under the concentration-time curve from time zero (pre-dose) extrapolated to infinite time. AUC (0-t) is defined as area under the concentration-time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the last time of quantifiable concentration. Date are reported as geometric least square means.|Day 15|PK Population||ng*hour/mL (ng*hr/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812555|NCT01072175|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of a Single Dose of Dabrafenib Administered Alone and in Combination With Trametnib in Part A|Blood samples for PK analysis of dabrafenib and its the metabolites hydroxy-dabrafenib (GSK2285403), carboxy-dabrafenib (GSK2298683) and desmethyl-dabrafenib (GSK2167542) were obtained at pre-dose and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours after dabrafenib administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter Cmax was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin. Cmax data are reported as geometric least squares means.|Day 15|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population: all participants who received at least one dose of either dabrafenib or trametinib and for whom a PK sample was obtained and analyzed||Nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812556|NCT01072188|Primary|Air Blast|Units on a scale using Schiff Cold Air Sensitivity Scale. Response to a constant (duration, pressure, temperature, distance from target) jet of air applied to a hypersensitive tooth. According to this analog scale hypersensitivity scores for the stimulated tooth is 0, 1, 2 or 3(The lower the score, the lower the hypersensitivity). 0=No subject response to stimulus, 1=responds but will continue, 2=responds and moves or requests discontinuation, 3=Painful response to stimulus, discontinuation requested.|Immediately after product application|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812557|NCT01072188|Primary|Hypersensitivity to Touch (Tactile)|Units on a scale: Measured with an electronic force sensing probe (Yeaple Probe): 10, 20, 30, 40, up to 50 grams of force are applied to hypersensitive tooth until pain elicited. Grams of force needed to elicit pain are recorded as hypersensitivity score for the tooth. The higher the score, the higher the hypersensitivity.|Immediately after product application|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812558|NCT01072201|Primary|Mean Percentage of Plaque Scores|Mean Percentage (%) of dental plaque on all tooth surfaces, including implants and natural teeth. Plaque Scale is 0=no plaque and 1= dental plaque present. Percentage is derived from sum of all plaque scores divided by the number of tooth surfaces scored.|6 Months|||percentage of dental plaque||Standard Deviation|Mean
812559|NCT01072201|Primary|Mean Pocket Depth|Measurement scale: 0 millimeter measurement= no pocket depth. 3, 4, 5, & 6 millimeter are indications of deeper Pocket depth.|6 Months|||Millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
812560|NCT01072201|Primary|Bleeding on Probing|Percentage of Bleeding Scale: The bleeding sites are identified by either a 0 or 1. (0=no bleeding & 1= bleeding) The number of spots between teeth that bleed are divided by number of spots between teeth that are scored.|6 months|||Percentage of bleeding sites||Standard Deviation|Mean
812561|NCT01072331|Primary|Change From Baseline in Plasma Glucose Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0 to 2h (Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner)||4 weeks|||mg・h / dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812562|NCT01072331|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose||4 weeks|||mg / dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812563|NCT01072331|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 24-h Mean Glucose||4 weeks|||mg / dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812564|NCT01072331|Primary|Change From Baseline in 2-h Postprandial Glucose (Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner)||4 weeks|||mg / dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812565|NCT01072344|Secondary|Frequency of Early Study Discontinuation in Each Treatment Condition.|This is the # of subjects who discontinued the study during randomization phase due to other reasons.|26 weeks|These are responders at the end of Phase II of the study and were then randomized into Phase III of the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
812566|NCT01072344|Secondary|Frequency of Discontinuation Symptoms at the Start of Double-blind Therapy in Each Treatment Condition.|Discontinuation emergent signs and symptoms checklist (DESS) is a patient-rated measure of the presence and severity of discontinuation symptoms occurring after medication discontinuation. %|26 weeks|These are responders at the end of Phase II of the study and then were randomized in Phase III of the study||Participants|||Count of Participants
812572|NCT01072396|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Modified Borg Scale Ratings for Dyspnea Intensity at Isotime|Modified Borg Scale is a participant rating of the intensity of dyspnea measured on a scale ranging from 0 (Nothing at all) to 10 (Maximal, most severe ever experienced).|baseline, six weeks of treatment|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all patients with at least one baseline (at Visit 3 or 5) and two non-missing post-dosing data (at Visits 4 and 6) for the primary endpoint.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812573|NCT01072396|Secondary|Constant Work Rate (CWR) Endurance Time|CWR exercise duration calculated as the length of time of the exercise period|six weeks of treatment|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all patients with at least one baseline (at Visit 3 or 5) and two non-missing post-dosing data (at Visits 4 and 6) for the primary endpoint.||seconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812574|NCT01072396|Primary|Change From Baseline in Inspiratory Capacity (IC) at Isotime|Inspiratory capacity (IC) during CWR exercise testing measured at isotime (isotime was established during CWR exercise testing at baseline). Isotime is the minimum exercise time among all tests. Constant work rate exercise means the exercise is done under constant work rate.|baseline, six weeks of treatment|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all patients with at least one baseline (at Visit 3 or 5) and two non-missing post-dosing data (at Visits 4 and 6) for the primary endpoint.||liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812575|NCT01072409|Primary|CNC Monosyllabic Word Performance - Treated Ear|CNC Word Test is a validated test of open-set word recognition. The test consists of 10 lists with 50 monosyllabic words in each list. Subject responses are scored for both words and phonemes correct in the correct sequence. Subjects will be tested using a configuration of speech at 0º azimuth in quiet.|12 months|||percent correct||Standard Error|Mean
812576|NCT01072448|Secondary|Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) Total Score at the End of the Study (Week 12, Day 84)|An independent (where feasible), trained assessor interviewed the patient and rated the degree of impairment due to dyspnea on a scale from -3 (major deterioration) to 3 (major improvement) on 3 domains (functional impairment, magnitude of task, and magnitude of effort) in comparison with baseline. A total score of the 3 domains ranged from -9 to 9; minus scores indicate deterioration. The analysis included baseline dyspnea index, FEV1 pre-dose and 10-15 minutes post-dose of albuterol during screening, and FEV1 pre-dose and 50-70 minutes post-dose of ipratropium during screening as covariates.|End of the study (Week 12, Day 84)|Full analysis set: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812577|NCT01072448|Primary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) 24 Hours Post-dose at the End of the Study (Week 12 + 1 Day, Day 85)|FEV1 was measured with spirometry conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Trough FEV1 was defined as the average of measurements made 23 hours 10 minutes and 23 hours 45 minutes post-dose at the end of treatment. The analysis included baseline FEV1, FEV1 pre-dose and 10-15 minutes post-dose of albuterol during screening, and FEV1 pre-dose and 50-70 minutes post-dose of ipratropium during screening as covariates.|24 hours post-dose at the end of the study (Week 12 + 1 day, Day 85)|Full analysis set: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812578|NCT01072500|Secondary|Persistent Mobility Disability (Assessed Every 6 Months)|The assessment of major mobility disability (the inability to complete a 400-m walk test within 15 minutes without sitting and without the help of another person or walker. Use of a cane was acceptable. Participants were asked to walk 400m at their usual pace, without overexerting, on a 20 meter course for 10 laps (40 meters/lap). Participants were allowed to stop for up to 1 minute for fatigue or related symptoms. When MMD could not be objectively measured because of the inability of the participant to come to the clinic and absence of a suitable walking course at the participant’s home, institution, or hospital, an alternative adjudication of the outcome was based on objective inability to walk 4 meters in less than 10 seconds, or self-, proxy-, or medical record–reported inability to walk across a room. If participants met these alternative criteria, they would not be able to complete the 400 m walk within 15 minutes.) at two consecutive time points or MMD followed by death.|Median 2.7 years/Average 2.6 years|||participants|||Number
812579|NCT01072500|Primary|Major Mobility Disability, Defined as Incapacity to Walk 400 Meters|The primary outcome of major mobility disability was defined as the inability to complete a 400-m walk test within 15 minutes without sitting and without the help of another person or walker. Use of a cane was acceptable. Participants were asked to walk 400 m at their usual pace, without overexerting, on a 20 meter course for 10 laps (40 meters/lap). Participants were allowed to stop for up to 1 minute for fatigue or related symptoms. When major mobility disability could not be objectively measured because of the inability of the participant to come to the clinic and absence of a suitable walking course at the participant’s home, institution, or hospital, an alternative adjudication of the outcome was based on objective inability to walk 4 meters in less than 10 seconds, or self-, proxy-, or medical record–reported inability to walk across a room. If participants met these alternative criteria, they would not be able to complete the 400 meter walk within 15 minutes.|Median 2.7 years/Average 2.6 years|||participants|||Number
812580|NCT01072526|Other Pre-specified|Change in Severity of Ocular Discomfort|This will be calculated using a composite score of the primary and secondary outcome measures.|Baseline, 6 weeks|Any data collected was not analyzed because the study was terminated after the PI left the institution. No data is available for reporting as all study personnel have left the institution.|||||
812581|NCT01072526|Secondary|Change in Schirmer Tear Test With Anesthesia Result|Assesses how quickly tears are produced, measured in millimeters (mm) on blotting paper. Greater than 15 mm indicates normal tear production; lower measurement indicates presence of dry eye disease.|Baseline, 6 weeks|Any data collected was not analyzed because the study was terminated after the PI left the institution. No data is available for reporting as all study personnel have left the institution.|||||
812582|NCT01072526|Secondary|Change in Fluorescein Staining Scale|Demonstrates abrasions on cornea and extent of disease. Graded on a scale of 0-5 with 5 being the worst score.|Baseline, 6 weeks|Any data collected was not analyzed because the study was terminated after the PI left the institution. No data is available for reporting as all study personnel have left the institution.|||||
812583|NCT01072526|Secondary|Change in Tear Film Breakup Time|Interval between last blink and break-up of tear film, measured in seconds. Less than 10 seconds = dry eye disease; lower score indicates worse disease.|Baseline, 6 weeks|Any data collected was not analyzed because the study was terminated after the PI left the institution. No data is available for reporting as all study personnel have left the institution.|||||
812584|NCT01072526|Primary|Change in Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI)|Measures dry eye disease and effect on vision-related function. Measured on a scale of 0-100, with higher scores indicating greater disability.|Start of treatment, 6 weeks|Any data collected was not analyzed because the study was terminated after the PI left the institution. No data is available for reporting as all study personnel have left the institution.|||||
812585|NCT01072539|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by Microbiologic Response at the Participant Level (Prospective Study Phase)|Definitions: Eradication: None of the baseline isolates were present in a repeat culture taken from the original site of infection (documented) or a clinical response of cure precluded the availability of a specimen for culture (presumed). Persistence: Any baseline isolates were present in a repeat culture obtained from the original site of infection (documented) or culture data were not available for a participant with a clinical response of failure (presumed). Unevaluable: participants who died during therapy for non-infection-related reasons, died for any reason within 2 days after first administration of Tygacil, were lost to follow-up (ie, clinical response was not able to be assessed), or had no baseline isolates.|At the TOC or EOT assessment|Effectiveness Analysis Set from the prospective study phase; n refers to the total munber of participants who had evaluable data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
812586|NCT01072539|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events by Baseline and Treatment Characteristics|Baseline and treatment characteristics included: prospectively/retrospectively collected data, geriatric status (<65 years or >=65 years), age categories, sex, duration of disease, infection site, severity of infection, general, present and past medical history, kidney disorder, liver disorder, total administration period of Tygacil, mean daily dose of Tygacil, past medication and therapy, and concomitant medications.|From the time of the participant’s first dosing in the observational period as per study design through and including 28 calendar days after the last administration of the study drug within the observational period.|Safety Analysis Set.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812587|NCT01072539|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Cure or Improvement at the TOC or EOT Assessment by Infection Site|Participants whose clinical response was assessed as cure or improvement at the TOC or EOT assessment were considered as “effective” to the treatment of Tygacil .|At the TOC or EOT assessment|Effectiveness Analysis Set.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812588|NCT01072539|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Cure or Improvement at the Test-of-Cure(TOC) or End-of-Treatment (EOT) Assessment|Participants whose clinical response was assessed as cure or improvement at the TOC or EOT assessment were considered as “effective” to the treatment of Tygacil .|At the TOC or EOT assessment|Effectiveness Analysis Set: Participants who received at least one dose of Tygacil and had related effectiveness endpoints evaluated at least.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812589|NCT01072539|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)/Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs), Serious AEs (SAEs)/Serious ADRs (SADRs), and Unexpected AEs/ADRs|All AEs reported after start of administration of Tygacil were considered as on treatment and summarized. All AEs, except for those with causal relationship to the study drug assessed as “unlikely”, were considered as ADRs. Unexpected AEs/ADRs were classified by medical review with reference to the approved local product document and confirmed by Pfizer.|From the time of the participant's first dosing in the observational period as per study design through and including 28 calendar days after the last administration of the study drug within the observational period.|Safety Anaysis Set||Percentage of Participants|||Number
812590|NCT01072617|Secondary|Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) - General Subscale|Potential therapeutic efficacy was evaluated with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) General Subscale, a 16 item subscale measuring the presence/absence and severity of general psychopathology of schizophrenia. The minimum score is 16 and the maximum score is 112, with higher values representing greater psychopathology severity. Therapeutic efficacy was assessed at baseline, after 5 days of treatment, and 1 week post treatment. The overall PANSS total score (minimum = 30, maximum = 210) is computed by summing the positive, negative, and general subscales; and higher values represent more severe schizophrenia psychopathology.|Baseline, 5 days (post-treatment), 1 week post treatment|||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
812591|NCT01072617|Secondary|Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) - Negative Subscale|Potential therapeutic efficacy was evaluated with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Negative Subscale, a 7 item subscale measuring the presence/absence and severity of negative symptoms of schizophrenia. The minimum score is 7 and the maximum score is 49, with higher values representing greater symptom severity. Therapeutic efficacy was assessed at baseline, after 5 days of treatment, and 1 week post treatment. The overall PANSS total score (minimum = 30, maximum = 210) is computed by summing the positive, negative, and general subscales; and higher values represent more severe schizophrenia psychopathology.|Baseline, 5 days (post-treatment), 1 week post treatment|||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
812592|NCT01072617|Secondary|Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) - Positive Subscale|Potential therapeutic efficacy was evaluated with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Positive Subscale, a 7 item subscale measuring the presence/absence and severity of positive symptoms of schizophrenia. The minimum score is 7 and the maximum score is 49, with higher values representing greater symptom severity. Therapeutic efficacy was assessed at baseline, after 5 days of treatment, and 1 week post treatment. The overall PANSS total score (minimum = 30, maximum = 210) is computed by summing the positive, negative, and general subscales; and higher values represent more severe schizophrenia psychopathology.|Baseline, 5 days (post-treatment), 1 week post treatment|||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
812593|NCT01072617|Primary|Adverse Events|Adverse event collection at baseline, daily for 5 days during treatment, every other day by phone until the final assessment at week 1 follow up visit.|3 weeks|||event|||Number
812632|NCT01072773|Primary|Number of Participants With a Confirmed Hematologic Response|"Response that was confirmed on 2 consecutive evaluations during treatment.
Complete Response(CR): Complete disappearance of M-protein from serum and urine on immunofixation, normalization of Free Light Chain (FLC) ratio and <5% plasma cells in bone marrow.
Very Good Partial Response(VGPR): >=90% reduction in serum M-component; Urine M-Component <=100 mg per 24 hours.
Partial Response(PR): >=50% reduction in serum M-component and/or Urine M-Component >=90% reduction or <200 mg per 24 hours; or >=50% decrease in difference between involved and uninvolved FLC levels."|Duration of treatment (up to 12 cycles/months)|||participants|||Number
812594|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Specific Plan and Intent Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Specific Plan and Intent question records whether the participant has active suicidal thoughts of killing oneself with details of plan fully or partially worked out and the participant has some intent to carry out the plan since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. This question is asked if the answer to the 'Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts' question was YES, or based on the judgment of the assessor. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812595|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Some Intent to Act Without a Specific Plan Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Some Intent to Act Without a Specific Plan question records whether the participant has active suicidal thoughts of killing oneself and reports having some intent to act on such thoughts since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. This question is asked if the answer to the 'Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts' question was YES, or based on the judgment of the assessor. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812596|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Any Methods (Not Plan) Without Intent to Act Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Any Methods (Not Plan) Without Intent to Act question records whether the participant endorses thoughts of suicide and has thought of at least one method but has no specific plan of action since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. This question is asked if the answer to the 'Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts' question was YES, or based on the judgment of the assessor. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812597|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts question records whether the participant shares general non-specific thoughts of wanting to end one's life/commit suicide since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812598|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Wish to Be Dead Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Wish to Be Dead question records whether the participant endorses thoughts about a wish to dead or not alive anymore, or a wish to fall asleep and not wake up since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812599|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Completed Suicide Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Completed Suicide question records whether the participant intentionally causing his/her's own death since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812600|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Preparatory Acts or Behavior Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Preparatory Acts or Behavior question records whether the participant exhibited acts or preparations towards imminently making a suicide attempt since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812601|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Suicidal Behavior Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Suicidal Behavior question records whether in the clinician's opinion, the participant exhibited suicidal behavior since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812602|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Aborted Attempt Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Aborted Attempt question records whether the participant began to take steps toward making a suicide attempt but stops themselves before starting the potentially self-injurious act since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812603|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Interrupted Attempt Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Interrupted Attempt question records whether the participant was interrupted by an outside circumstance from starting the potentially self-injurious act with at least some wish to die since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812604|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Non-Suicidal Self-Injurious Behavior Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Non-Suicidal Self-Injurious Behavior question records whether the participant committed a potentially self-injurious act that was not associated with a wish to die since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812605|NCT01072630|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Actual Attempt Question|The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation. The Suicidal Behavior - Actual Attempt question records whether the participant committed a potentially self-injurious act with at least some wish to die since the last visit.|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812606|NCT01072630|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) Total Score|The ISI is a participant-rated, 7-item questionnaire designed to assess the severity of the participant's insomnia. Each item is ranked 0 (none) through 4 (very severe) and has a descriptor associated with each severity level. Total range is 0 (no insomnia) to 28 (very severe insomnia). Responses to each item are added to obtain a total score to determine the severity of insomnia. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of insomnia.|Day 0 (baseline), Week 8 or last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with both baseline and during treatment assessments.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812607|NCT01072630|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) Total Score|HAM-A measures the severity of anxiety symptoms. The scale consists of 14 items, each defined by a series of symptoms, and measures both psychic anxiety (mental agitation and psychological distress) and somatic anxiety (physical complaints related to anxiety). Each item is scored on a scale of 0 (not present) to 4 (severe), with a total score range of 0-56, where <17 indicates mild severity, 18-24 mild to moderate severity and 25-30 moderate to severe. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of anxiety.|Day 0 (baseline), Week 8 or last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with both baseline and during treatment assessments.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812670|NCT01073163|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in QTcF at 1 Hour Postinfusion|On Day 2 of Cycle 1, three ECGs were collected 15 minutes prior to any study drug administration. The baseline ECG interval value was obtained by averaging these 3 ECGs, and was compared to the average of the 3 ECGs taken on treatment with bendamustine 1 hour postinfusion.|Baseline ECGs (Day 2 of Cycle 1): 15 minutes prior to bendamustine infusion. Postinfusion ECGs (Day 2 of Cycle 1): 1 hour postinfusion.|ECG Analysis Set: all enrolled participants in study who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with at least 1 available baseline and 1 on-treatment ECG.||ms||Standard Deviation|Mean
812608|NCT01072630|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Young Mania Rating Scale Total Score|The YMRS is a clinician-rated, 11-item checklist used to measure the severity of manic episodes. Information for assigning scores is gained from the participant's subjective reported symptoms over the previous 48 hours and from clinical observation during the interview. Seven items are ranked 0 through 4 and have descriptors associated with each severity level. Four items (irritability, speech, content, and disruptive-aggressive behavior) are scored 0 through 8 and have descriptors for every second increment. The total scale is 0-60. A score of ≤12 indicates remission of manic symptoms, and higher scores indicate greater severity of mania. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of mania.|Day 0 (baseline), Week 8 or last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812609|NCT01072630|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE)|"AEs were graded by the investigator for severity on a three-point scale: mild, moderate and severe. Causality is graded as either related or not related. A serious adverse event (SAE) is an AE resulting in death, a life-threatening adverse event, hospitalization, a persistent or significant disability/incapacity, a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or an important medical event that may require medical intervention to prevent any of the previous results.
Protocol-defined adverse events requiring expedited reporting included skin rash, hypersensitivity reaction, emergent suicidal ideation or suicide attempt, and psychosis."|Day 1 to Week 9|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug||participants|||Number
812610|NCT01072630|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 8 and Endpoint in the Global Assessment for Functioning (GAF) Scale|The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) is a numeric scale (1 through 100) used by mental health clinicians and physicians to rate subjectively the social, occupational, and psychological functioning of adults, e.g., how well or adaptively one is meeting various problems-in-living. Ratings of 1 - 10 mean the participant is in persistent danger of severely hurting self or others (e.g., recurrent violence) or persistent inability to maintain minimal personal hygiene or serious suicidal act with clear expectation of death. Ratings of 91 - 100 indicate no symptoms, and the participant exhibits superior functioning in a wide range of activities, life's problems never seem to get out of hand, is sought out by others because of his or her many positive qualities. Positive change from baseline values indicate improvement in functioning.|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The number of participants is those with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812611|NCT01072630|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Different Treatment Weeks in the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) for Depression|The CGI-S is an observer-rated scale that measures illness severity on a 7-point scale, with the severity of illness scale using a range of responses from 1 (normal) through to 7 (amongst the most severely ill patients). Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression.|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The number of participants is those with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812612|NCT01072630|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Different Treatment Weeks in the Total Score From the 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (QIDS-C16)|The QIDS-C16 was derived from specified items in the IDS-C30, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Total scores range from 0-27, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 27 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression.|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The number of participants at each visit is those with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812613|NCT01072630|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Different Treatment Weeks in the Total Score From the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (IDS-C30)|"The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression."|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. Participants are included in the analysis at each timepoint if they have a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint for analyses was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812614|NCT01072630|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Remission At Different Treatment Weeks According to the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated (IDS-C30) Total Score|"A participant in remission was defined as a participant with an IDS-C30 total score of 11 or less.
The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The denominator for calculating the percentages at each visit is the number of participants with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||percentage of participants|||Number
812723|NCT01073930|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: Were You Able to Consume the Entire Prep As Instructed?|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 2-point scale: yes, no|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Two participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812615|NCT01072630|Secondary|Percentage of Responders At Different Treatment Weeks According to the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated (IDS-C30) Total Score|"A responder is a participant with a ≥50% decrease or greater from baseline in the total score of the IDS-C30. The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression."|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The denominator for calculating the percentages at each visit is the number of participants with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||percentage of participants|||Number
812616|NCT01072630|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 8 in the Total Score From the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (IDS-C30)|"The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression."|Day 0 (baseline), Week 8|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812617|NCT01072643|Secondary|To Demonstrate That DEX is a Safe Sedative in Pediatric Subjects With PHTN||24 hours||||||
812618|NCT01072643|Secondary|To Obtain Pharmacokinetic Data in This Population||6 hours||||||
812619|NCT01072643|Secondary|To Quantify the Effect of DEX on PVR in Pediatric Subjects With Pulmonary Hypertension and Its Dependence on Baseline PVR||Every individual patient will be studied over maximum of 4 hours during the dose escalation phase. This part of the study will be completed in 1 year||||||
812620|NCT01072643|Secondary|Efficacy of Sedation With DEX||Subjects will participate in a dose escalation study which will define minimal effective dose that results in effective sedation in ≥ 7 out of 8 patients in that dose cohort. Maximum upto 4 hours||||||
812621|NCT01072643|Primary|The Primary Endpoint Will be the Change in PVR in Wood Units|Pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) in Wood units calculated during cardiac catheterization;|For each subject PVR will be measured by cardiac catheterization at T0 ( baseline measurement) , after DEX bolus (T1) which is given over 10 minutes and after 30 mins after start of the DEX infusion (T2) - Maximum upto 4 hours|||wood units|||Number
812622|NCT01072656|Secondary|Number of Patient Who Had >50% Reduction in VAS.|Patients report reduction in the VAS (Visual Analogue Scale Ranging from 0-10, 0 meaning no pain and 10 meaning worst pain imaginable) at the end of the open label phase (24 months post randomization f/u) compared to the pre-implantation baseline.|Baseline and 24 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
812623|NCT01072656|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Would Undergo the Procedure Again.|A positive answer from patients receiving active stimulation at the end of the open label phase of the study to the question: ‘would you undergo this procedure again if you were to get the same benefits you experienced?’|End of Open Label Phase (24 months)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
812624|NCT01072656|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had 50% Improvement in PDI|A 50% improvement in pain related disability (as assessed by the pain disability index) at the end of the open label phase compared to the pre-implantation baseline. The PDI ranges from 0-10 with 0 equaling no disability and 10 equaling worst disability.|24 months post randomization follow up|||Participants|||Count of Participants
812625|NCT01072656|Primary|Number of Participants With 50% Improvement in Pain Related Disability (as Assessed by the Pain Disability Index)|Pain Disability Index (PDI) directly measures disability related to the main components of daily life function and has been validated for thalamic pain syndrome. Range is 0 (no disability) to 10 (worst disability). The components are Family/Home Responsibilities, Recreation, Social Activity, Sexual Behavior, Life-support Activity, Occupation, & Self-care. This is an average score of the 3 month period for each Active and Sham phase.|Blinded stimulation phase (3 Months)|||participants|||Number
812626|NCT01072669|Primary|Digital Micro-vascular Flow|Change in digital micro-vascular flow measured by LDPI in patients with Raynaud’s phenomenon (RP) and digital ischemia secondary to SSc at 1 week and 12 weeks|Baseline and 12 weeks|Assuming a standard deviation of 0.40, and use of a two-sample t-test with significance level of 0.05, there will be 80% power to detect differences in the change from baseline of at least 0.65 units if moderate correlation (r=0.50) exists, and 0.45 units if strong correlation (r=0.75) exists between treated||perfusion unit||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812627|NCT01072773|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response will be calculated from the date of first evidence of response until the date of progression in the subset of patients with confirmed hematologic responses.|Duration of Study (up to 5 years)|Neither participant achieved a response. Therefore, no duration of response calculation was performed.|||||
812628|NCT01072773|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|Time to disease progression is defined as the time from registration to the earliest date of documented disease progression. If a patient dies without a documentation of disease progression the patient will be considered to have had tumor progression at the time of their death|Duration of Study (up to 5 years)|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812629|NCT01072773|Secondary|Overall Survival|Survival time is defined as the time from registration to death due to any cause.|Duration of Study (up to 5 years)|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812630|NCT01072773|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Organ Response.|The number of patients that acheived a response in an affected organ.|Duration on treatment (up to 12 cycles/months)|||participants|||Number
812631|NCT01072773|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Related Adverse Events.|"Adverse events (AE) that are classified as either possibly, probably, or definitely related to study treatment according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE version 3.0). The maximum grade for each type of AE will be recorded for each patient. Grade refers to the severity of the AE.
Grade 1: Mild AE, Grade 2: Moderate AE, Grade 3: Severe AE, Grade 4: Life-threatening or disabling AE, Grade 5: Death related AE
Adverse events will be assessed using NCI Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Effects (CTCAE) v3.0."|Duration on treatment (up to 12 cycles/months)|||participants|||Number
812633|NCT01072877|Secondary|Change From Baseline at 8 Weeks Post Treatment in IPR-V3 Score- Physician Photographic Review of Appearance|The Independent Photography Review – Visible Varicose Veins (IPR-V3) instrument is a 5-point scale used to assess the appearance of a patient’s visible varicose veins. At baseline and Week 8, standardized digital photographs were taken of the medial view of the patient's target leg, from groin to ankle. An independent photography review panel, consisting of 3 trained, blinded clinicians evaluated the appearance of the patient's visible varicose veins using the IPR-V3 instrument's 5-point scale (where 0=none to 4=very severe visible varicose veins).|8 weeks post treatment|Population consists of all patients who had a baseline and on-treatment assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
812634|NCT01072877|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 8 Weeks in Appearance as Rated by Patient (PA-V3)|The Patient Self-assessment of Visible Varicose Veins (PA-V3) instrument is a 5-point scale used by patients to evaluate the appearance of their visible varicose veins. On this single-item paper questionnaire, the instructions included a diagram of the medial view of a leg with the area between the ankle and the groin circled. The patient was instructed to choose 1 of 5 response options that best described the appearance of the visible varicose veins of the leg that was treated in the study. The patient was instructed not to consider the appearance of the leg outside the circled area or of any spider veins. Possible responses ranged from “Not at all noticeable” (a score of 0) to “Extremely noticeable” (a score of 4).|8 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
812635|NCT01072877|Primary|Change in Patient-reported Symptoms of Varicose Veins (VVSymQ Score)|"The 9 varicose vein symptoms were to be assessed and graded on a 6-point (i.e., 0-5) duration scale and an 11-point (i.e., 0-10) intensity scale, and the patient’s level of activity for that day was to be assessed and graded on the 6-point (i.e., 0-5) duration scale. The 9 varicose vein symptoms assessed using the e-diary were derived from the first question of the modified Venous Insufficiency Epidemiologic and Economic Study-Quality of Life/Symptoms (VEINES-QOL/Sym) instrument. The VVSymQ is a subset of 5 VEINESQOL/ Sym items that have been determined in earlier studies to be most important to patients (heaviness, achiness, swelling, throbbing, and itching).
The daily VVSymQ score is the sum of the duration scores for these 5 symptoms (scores range from 0 to 25, with the lower end of the range being an indicator of less symptom intensity, and the higher end being an indicator of higher intensity).
At Visit 2/baseline, Week 8, scores were calculated"|Week 8|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
812636|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Specific Plan and Intent Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Specific Plan and Intent question records whether the participant has active suicidal thoughts of killing oneself with details of plan fully or partially worked out and the participant has some intent to carry out the plan since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. This question is asked if the answer to the 'Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts' question was YES, or based on the judgment of the assessor. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812637|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Some Intent to Act Without a Specific Plan Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Some Intent to Act Without a Specific Plan question records whether the participant has active suicidal thoughts of killing oneself and reports having some intent to act on such thoughts since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. This question is asked if the answer to the 'Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts' question was YES, or based on the judgment of the assessor. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812638|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Any Methods (Not Plan) Without Intent to Act Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Any Methods (Not Plan) Without Intent to Act question records whether the participant endorses thoughts of suicide and has thought of at least one method but has no specific plan of action since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. This question is asked if the answer to the 'Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts' question was YES, or based on the judgment of the assessor. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812639|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts question records whether the participant shares general non-specific thoughts of wanting to end one's life/commit suicide since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
824786|NCT01178268|Secondary|Follow-up Late Loss|This is one of the Secondary Angiographic Endpoint.|≥13 months.|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||Millimeter|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
812640|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Wish to Be Dead Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Wish to Be Dead question records whether the participant endorses thoughts about a wish to dead or not alive anymore, or a wish to fall asleep and not wake up since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812641|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Completed Suicide Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Completed Suicide question records whether the participant intentionally causing his/her's own death since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812642|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Preparatory Acts or Behavior Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Preparatory Acts or Behavior question records whether the participant exhibited acts or preparations towards imminently making a suicide attempt since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812643|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Suicidal Behavior Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Suicidal Behavior question records whether in the clinician's opinion, the participant exhibited suicidal behavior since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812644|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Aborted Attempt Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Aborted Attempt question records whether the participant began to take steps toward making a suicide attempt but stops themselves before starting the potentially self-injurious act since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812645|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Interrupted Attempt Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Interrupted Attempt question records whether the participant was interrupted by an outside circumstance from starting the potentially self-injurious act with at least some wish to die since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812646|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Non-Suicidal Self-Injurious Behavior Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Non-Suicidal Self-Injurious Behavior question records whether the participant committed a potentially self-injurious act that was not associated with a wish to die since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812724|NCT01073930|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: How Easy or Difficult Was It To Consume the Study Drug?|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 5-point scale: very easy, easy, tolerable, difficult, very difficult|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Three participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812647|NCT01072929|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Actual Attempt Question|The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation. The Suicidal Behavior - Actual Attempt question records whether the participant committed a potentially self-injurious act with at least some wish to die since the last visit.|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
812648|NCT01072929|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) Total Score|The ISI is a participant-rated, 7-item questionnaire designed to assess the severity of the participant’s insomnia. Each item is ranked 0 (none) through 4 (very severe) and has a descriptor associated with each severity level. Total range is 0 (no insomnia) to 28 (very severe insomnia). Responses to each item are added to obtain a total score to determine the severity of insomnia. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of insomnia.|Day 0 (baseline), last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with both baseline and during treatment assessments.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812649|NCT01072929|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) Total Score|HAM-A measures the severity of anxiety symptoms. The scale consists of 14 items, each defined by a series of symptoms, and measures both psychic anxiety (mental agitation and psychological distress) and somatic anxiety (physical complaints related to anxiety). Each item is scored on a scale of 0 (not present) to 4 (severe), with a total score range of 0–56, where <17 indicates mild severity, 18–24 mild to moderate severity and 25–30 moderate to severe. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of anxiety.|Day 0 (baseline), last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with both baseline and during treatment assessments.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812650|NCT01072929|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) Total Score|The YMRS is a clinician-rated, 11-item checklist used to measure the severity of manic episodes. Information for assigning scores is gained from the participant's subjective reported symptoms over the previous 48 hours and from clinical observation during the interview. Seven items are ranked 0 through 4 and have descriptors associated with each severity level. Four items (irritability, speech, content, and disruptive-aggressive behavior) are scored 0 through 8 and have descriptors for every second increment. The total scale is 0-60. A score of ≤12 indicates remission of manic symptoms, and higher scores indicate greater severity of mania. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of mania.|Day 0 (baseline), last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with both baseline and during treatment assessments.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812651|NCT01072929|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE)|"AEs were graded by the investigator for severity on a three-point scale: mild, moderate and severe. Causality is graded as either related or not related. A serious adverse event (SAE) is an AE resulting in death, a life-threatening adverse event, hospitalization, a persistent or significant disability/incapacity, a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or an important medical event that may require medical intervention to prevent any of the previous results.
Protocol-defined adverse events requiring expedited reporting included skin rash, hypersensitivity reaction, emergent suicidal ideation or suicide attempt, and psychosis."|Day 1 to Week 9|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug.||participants|||Number
812652|NCT01072929|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 8 and Endpoint in the Global Assessment for Functioning (GAF) Scale|The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) is a numeric scale (1 through 100) used by mental health clinicians and physicians to rate subjectively the social, occupational, and psychological functioning of adults, e.g., how well or adaptively one is meeting various problems-in-living. Ratings of 1 - 10 mean the participant is in persistent danger of severely hurting self or others (e.g., recurrent violence) or persistent inability to maintain minimal personal hygiene or serious suicidal act with clear expectation of death. Ratings of 91 - 100 indicate no symptoms, and the participant exhibits superior functioning in a wide range of activities, life's problems never seem to get out of hand, is sought out by others because of his or her many positive qualities. Positive change from baseline values indicate improvement in functioning.|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 4, 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The number of participants is those with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812653|NCT01072929|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Different Treatment Weeks in the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) for Depression|The CGI-S is an observer-rated scale that measures illness severity on a 7-point scale, with the severity of illness scale using a range of responses from 1 (normal) through to 7 (amongst the most severely ill patients). Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression.|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The number of participants is those with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812736|NCT01073943|Primary|Percentage of Participants Classified as Successes (Excellent and Good Ratings) According to the Aronchick Scale As Assessed by a Blinded Gastroenterologist|Overall colon cleansing was assessed by a blinded gastroenterologist during the colonoscopy using the Aronchick scale. The Aronchick scale is a 4-step rating scale: inadequate, fair, good, and excellent. Excellent is defined as >90% of mucosa seen, mostly liquid stool, minimal suctioning needed for adequate visualization. Good is defined as >90% of mucosa seen, mostly liquid stool, significant suctioning needed for adequate visualization.|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed.||percentage of participants|||Number
812654|NCT01072929|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Different Treatment Weeks in the Total Score From the 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (QIDS-C16)|The QIDS-C16 was derived from specified items in the IDS-C30, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Total scores range from 0-27, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 27 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression.|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The number of participants at each visit are those with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812655|NCT01072929|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Different Treatment Weeks in the Total Score From the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (IDS-C30)|"The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression."|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. Participants are included in the analysis at each timepoint if they have a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint for analyses was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812656|NCT01072929|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Remission At Different Treatment Weeks According to the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated (IDS-C30) Total Score|"A participant in remission was defined as a participant with an IDS-C30 total score of 11 or less.
The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The denominator for calculating the percentages at each visit is the number of participants with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||percentage of participants|||Number
812657|NCT01072929|Secondary|Percentage of Responders At Different Treatment Weeks According to the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated (IDS-C30) Total Score|"A responder is a participant with a ≥50% decrease or greater from baseline in the total score of the IDS-C30. The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression."|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The denominator for calculating the percentages at each visit is the number of participants with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||percentage of participants|||Number
812658|NCT01072929|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 8 in the Total Score From the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (IDS-C30)|"The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression."|Day 0 (baseline), Week 8|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812659|NCT01073163|Secondary|Worst Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 3.0 Grades for Hematology Laboratory Tests Results Overall|Grade 1=Mild, 2=Moderate, 3=Severe/medically significant, 4=Life-threatening. Overall is defined as the worst postbaseline grade value for each patient and laboratory test across all cycles. Only postbaseline grades are summarized. If absolute neutrophil count (ANC) and neutrophils absolute (ABS) were both measured, the worse grade value from the two was summarized. Otherwise the worst ANC grade value or the worst neutrophils ABS grade value was summarized. WBC=white blood cell; LLN=lower limit of normal|Adverse events were collected throughout the study and up to 30 days after the last dose of study drug. The median number of 28-day cycles was 6.0. The median duration of the treatment period was 143 days.|Safety Analysis Set: enrolled participants who received 1 or more doses of study drug.||participants|||Number
812660|NCT01073163|Secondary|Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status at Endpoint|The investigator assessed each patient’s ECOG performance status according to the ECOG scale at screening, on Day 1 of each treatment cycle, and at the end-of-treatment visit. Scale scores were: 0=fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction; 1=restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature; 2=ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours; 3=capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours; 4=completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair; 5=dead. Any change in score to a higher value signifies worsening, and any change to a lower value signifies improvement.|End of study. The median number of 28-day cycles was 6.0. The median duration of the treatment period was 143 days.|Safety Analysis Set: enrolled participants who received 1 or more doses of study drug.||participants|||Number
812875|NCT01074554|Secondary|Change in Modified Sarcoidosis Activity and Severity Index (SASI) at Completion of Therapy.|Characterization of lesion severity was conducted using Modified Sarcoidosis Activity and Severity Index (SASI), measuring erythema, induration and desquamation. The modification was that the same scale was applied to any part of the body, instead of the face alone. The scale range is 0 (no problem) to 72 (very severe).|Baseline to 8 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812661|NCT01073163|Secondary|Overview of Adverse Events|Adverse event (AE)=any untoward medical occurrence in a patient administered study drug that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study of a pharmaceutical product and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Treatment-related AEs=those that began or worsened after treatment with study drug. AE severity was graded according to the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for AEs (grade 1=mild, grade 2=moderate, grade 3=severe, grade 4=life-threatening, grade 5= death). Relationship of an AE to study drug was categorized as definite, probable, possible, unlikely, or not related. Serious AE (SAE)=one that occurred at any dose that resulted in any of the following outcomes or actions: death; a life-threatening adverse event; inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; a persistent or significant disability/incapacity; a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or an otherwise important medical event.|Adverse events were collected throughout the study and up to 30 days after the last dose of study drug. The median number of 28-day cycles was 6.0. The median duration of the treatment period was 143 days.|Safety Analysis Set: enrolled participants who received 1 or more doses of study drug.||participants|||Number
812662|NCT01073163|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Response|Overall Response was comprised of those participants who had Complete Response (CR) plus those who had Partial Response (PR), as defined by the International Working Group (IWG) Revised Response Criteria For Malignant Lymphoma. Results are presented for participants with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and mantle cell lymphoma as well as all participants.|The median number of 28-day cycles was 6.0. The median duration of the treatment period was 143 days.|Full Analysis Set: all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of both bendamustine and rituximab and who had both a baseline and at least 1 postbaseline tumor response evaluation.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812663|NCT01073163|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR)|Complete response, as defined by the International Working Group (IWG) Revised Response Criteria For Malignant Lymphoma. Results are presented for participants with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and mantle cell lymphoma as well as all participants.|The median number of 28-day cycles was 6.0. The median duration of the treatment period was 143 days.|Full Analysis Set: all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of both bendamustine and rituximab and who had both a baseline and at least 1 postbaseline tumor response evaluation.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812664|NCT01073163|Secondary|Rituximab Concentrations at 0.5 Hours, 24 Hours, and 7 Days Postinfusion||Day 1 of Cycle 1: prior to start of rituximab infusion, immediately postinfusion. Day 2 of Cycle 1: 15 minutes prior to the start of the bendamustine infusion. Day 7 and Day 14: anytime. Day 1 of Cycle 2: prior to start of rituximab infusion.|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set: all enrolled participants in study who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with at least 1 quantifiable serum concentration of rituximab.||mcg/mL||Full Range|Median
812665|NCT01073163|Secondary|Model-predicted Bayesian Bendamustine Clearance in the Presence of Rituximab|Boxplots of model-predicted Bayesian bendamustine clearance (CL) values in the presence of rituximab were generated based on the administered bendamustine doses, rate of infusion, and sample times.|Day 1 of Cycle 1: prior to start of bendamustine infusion, immediately postinfusion, 15 minutes and 30 minutes postinfusion. Day 2 of Cycle 1: 15 minutes prior to start of bendamustine infusion, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 3, and 5 hours postinfusion.|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set: all enrolled participants in study who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with at least 1 quantifiable bendamustine plasma concentration.||L/h||Full Range|Median
812666|NCT01073163|Secondary|Change From Baseline in QTcF at Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Bendamustine and Its Metabolites (M3 and M4)|Results from a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model to show the relationship of the overall predicted change from Baseline in QTcF at the average Cmax of bendamustine and its metabolites M3 and M4.|Baseline ECGs (Day 2 of Cycle 1): 15 minutes prior to bendamustine infusion. Postinfusion ECGs (Day 2 of Cycle 1): at the end of the 30-minute infusion and 1 hour postinfusion.|Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic Analysis Set: all enrolled participants in study who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with at least 1 available baseline and 1 on-treatment ECG and at least 1 ECG with a time-matched plasma concentration pair.||ms||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812667|NCT01073163|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Cardiac Disorders|Number of participants with cardiac disorders overall, with severity from grades 1 (mild) to grade 4 (severe), according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 3.0 (grade 1=mild, grade 2=moderate, grade 3=severe, grade 4=life-threatening, grade 5= death). Participants may have reported more than 1 event.|Adverse events were collected throughout the study and up to 30 days after the last dose of study drug. The median number of 28-day cycles was 6.0. The median duration of the treatment period was 143 days.|Safety Analysis Set: enrolled participants who received 1 or more doses of study drug.||participants|||Number
812668|NCT01073163|Secondary|Number of Participants With New Onset ECG Waveform Morphological Changes|The core ECG laboratory cardiologist assessed all leads in the ECGs and defined morphological changes. Changes from baseline (looking at each of the 3 ECGs at Day 2 Cycle 1 individually and the ECGs at all on-treatment time points individually) were noted for the following events: atrial fibrillation or flutter; second degree heart block; third degree heart block; complete right bundle branch block; complete left bundle branch block; ST segment depression; T wave abnormalities (negative T waves only); myocardial infarction pattern; any new abnormal U waves.|Baseline ECGs (Day 2 of Cycle 1): 15 minutes prior to bendamustine infusion. Postinfusion ECGs (Day 2 of Cycle 1): at the end of the 30-minute infusion and 1 hour postinfusion.|ECG Analysis Set: all enrolled participants in study who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with at least 1 available baseline and 1 on-treatment ECG.||participants|||Number
812669|NCT01073163|Secondary|Number of Participants With QTcF New Outlier Events at End of Infusion and 1 Hour Postinfusion|Participants were considered to have an outlier ECG value based on the most extreme value across each of the time points. “New” means not present at baseline and becomes present on at least 1 on-treatment ECG time point. A participant had a new outlier event (500) if the maximum QTcF was >500 ms while their baseline was <=500 ms, or had an outlier event (480) if the maximum QTcF was >480 ms while their baseline was <= 480 ms. QTcF in the 30-60 ms or >60 ms categories were also considered outliers.|Baseline ECGs (Day 2 of Cycle 1): 15 minutes prior to bendamustine infusion. Postinfusion ECGs (Day 2 of Cycle 1): at the end of the 30-minute infusion and 1 hour postinfusion.|ECG Analysis Set: all enrolled participants in study who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with at least 1 available baseline and 1 on-treatment ECG; n=number of participants with measurement at given time point.||participants|||Number
812671|NCT01073163|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in QT Interval as Corrected by the Fridericia Method (QTcF) at End of Infusion|On Day 2 of Cycle 1, three electrocardiograms (ECGs) were collected 15 minutes prior to any study drug administration. The baseline ECG interval value was obtained by averaging these 3 ECGs, and was compared to the average of the 3 ECGs taken on treatment with bendamustine at the end of the infusion.|Baseline ECGs (Day 2 of Cycle 1): 15 minutes prior to bendamustine infusion. Postinfusion ECGs (Day 2 of Cycle 1): at the end of the 30-minute infusion.|ECG Analysis Set: all enrolled participants in study who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with at least 1 available baseline and 1 on-treatment ECG; n=number of participants with measurement at given time point.||milliseconds (ms)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812672|NCT01073267|Primary|Objective Response Rate|"Objective response rate defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete clinical response (CCR) and partial response (PR) (i.e. overall response (OR)) as assessed by the modified Severity-Weighted Assessment Tool (mSWAT).
Clinical response (according to mSWAT) are documented as stable disease (SD), partial response (PR), complete clinical response (CCR), or progressive disease (PD) as defined: Complete clinical response (CCR): no evidence of cutaneous disease on exam, confirmed at 4 week time point; Partial response (PR): ≥ 50% decrease of modified SWAT score compared to baseline score, confirmed at 4 week time point; Stable disease (SD): Neither CR, PR, or PD, i.e. change from baseline is less than 50% decrease, but also less than 25% increase in mSWAT score compared to nadir score; Progressive disease (PD): ≥ 25% increase in modified SWAT score compared with nadir score."|Baseline and at least 2 months|Intent to treat population.||proportion of participants|||Number
812673|NCT01073293|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Seroconvert for Each of the HPV Types|Blood was drawn at Month 7 and assayed to determine whether or not a participant had achieved seroconversion for the HPV types. The lower limit of the titer (milli Merck U/mL) considered seropositive was as follows: HPV Type 6: >=30, HPV Type 11: >=16; HPV Type 16: >=20, HPV Type 18: >=24, HPV Type 31: >=10, HPV Type 33: >=8, HPV Type 45: >=8, HPV Type 52: >=8, and HPV Type 58: >=8.|Month 7|The per-protocol population included participants who received all study vaccinations, were seronegative to HPV on Day 1, and had serum samples available for evaluation of the endpoint||Percentage of participants|||Number
812674|NCT01073293|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve Acceptable Titers of Anti-Poliovirus Antibody|For the Concomitant Vaccination group, serum samples were collected 4 weeks after the Day 1 vaccination; for the Non-concomitant Vaccination group, serum samples were collected 4 weeks after the Month 1 vaccination. Titers of neutralizing antibody to poliovirus type 1, 2, and 3 were measured using a microneutralization assay. Serial dilutions of sera were incubated with type-specific standard poliovirus and sensitive cells. Neutralization of the virus was measured by cell staining. Acceptable titers were defined as neutralization at >=1:8 dilution of serum.|4 weeks following Day 1 (Concomitant) or Month 1 (Non-concomitant) vaccination|The per-protocol population included participants who received vaccination and had serum samples available for evaluation of the endpoint||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812675|NCT01073293|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers of Pertussis Antibody Responses|For the Concomitant Vaccination group, serum samples were collected 4 weeks after the Day 1 vaccination; for the Non-concomitant Vaccination group, serum samples were collected 4 weeks after the Month 1 vaccination. Titers of anti-pertussis toxin (PT), anti-filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA), anti-pertactin (PRN), and anti-fimbriae 2/3 (FM 2/3) antibodies were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Titers are expressed as enzyme-linked immunoassay units/mL (ELU/mL).|4 weeks following Day 1 (Concomitant) or Month 1 (Non-concomitant) vaccination|The per-protocol population included participants who received vaccination and had serum samples available for evaluation of the endpoint||ELU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
812676|NCT01073293|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve Acceptable Titers of Anti-Diphtheria and Anti-Tetanus Antibody|For the Concomitant Vaccination group, serum samples were collected 4 weeks after the Day 1 vaccination; for the Non-concomitant Vaccination group, serum samples were collected 4 weeks after the Month 1 vaccination. Titers of neutralizing antibody to diphtheria toxin were measured using a cell-based Diphtheria Micrometabolic Inhibition assay. Serum titers of neutralizing antibody to tetanus toxin were measured using an enzyme immunoassay. The lower limits of quantitation of the assays was 0.01 International Units (IU)/mL and 0.04 IU/mL, respectively. Acceptable titers refer to the World Health Organization-defined protective titer of >=0.1 IU/mL.|4 weeks following Day 1 (Concomitant) or Month 1 (Non-concomitant) vaccination|The per-protocol population included participants who received vaccination and had serum samples available for evaluation of the endpoint||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812677|NCT01073293|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Systemic Adverse Experience|For the Concomitant Vaccination group, systemic AEs were collected after the Day 1 vaccination and the Month 1 visit; for the Non-concomitant Vaccination group, systemic AEs were collected after the Day 1 vaccination and the Month 1 vaccination. An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body that is temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the vaccine. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the vaccine is also an adverse experience. A systemic AE was an AE that was not associated with the injection site.|Up to 15 days following the Day 1 and Month 1 vaccination / visit|The population analyzed included all vaccinated participants with follow-up||Percentage of participants|||Number
812678|NCT01073293|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Maximum Temperature >=37.8 °C (>=100.0 °F) (Oral or Oral Equivalent)|For the Concomitant Vaccination group, temperatures were collected after the Day 1 vaccination and the Month 1 visit; for the Non-concomitant Vaccination group, temperatures were collected after the Day 1 vaccination and the Month 1 vaccination.|Up to 5 days following the Day 1 and Month 1 vaccination / visit|The population analyzed included all vaccinated participants with follow-up||Percentage of participants|||Number
812709|NCT01073605|Primary|Change From Baseline in Annual Growth Rate Measured at 2 Years Following Treatment With Genotonorm|Annual growth rate was expressed as height velocity (centimeter [cm]/year). This was derived by substracting annual growth rate at Baseline from 2-year value. (Annual growth rate was calculated each year and rescaled to 1 year if the interval between x and x-1 was not 365 days, as long as a subject remains in the study): ANGRYx = (Height Yx – Height Y{x-1}) / {(Date of Yx – Date of Y{x-1}) /365.25}|Baseline, 2 years|All subjects who received at least 1 study dose of Genotonorm were included in the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with change in annual growth rate at 2 years.||cm/year||Standard Deviation|Mean
812679|NCT01073293|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Repevax™ Injection-site Adverse Experience|For the Concomitant Vaccination group, injection-site AEs are reported following Day 1 vaccination; for the Non-concomitant Vaccination group, injection-site AEs are reported following Month 1 vaccination. An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the vaccine. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the vaccine is also an AE. Only injection-site AEs in the arm that received Repevax™ vaccination were reported for this endpoint.|Day 1 through Day 5 following Day 1 (Concomitant) or Month 1 (Non-concomitant) vaccination|The population analyzed included all vaccinated participants with follow-up||Percentage of participants|||Number
812680|NCT01073293|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a V503 Injection-site Adverse Experience|An adverse experience (AE) is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the vaccine. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the vaccine is also an AE. Only injection-site AEs in the arm that received V503 vaccination were reported for this endpoint.|Day 1 through Day 5 following Day 1 vaccination|The population analyzed included all vaccinated participants with follow-up||Percentage of participants|||Number
812681|NCT01073293|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) of the Antibody Response to Each of the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Types Contained in V503|Serum antibody titers for HPV types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58 were measured using a competitive Luminex immunoassay. Titers are reported in milli Merck Units/mL.|4 weeks following Month 6 vaccination|The per-protocol population included participants who received all study vaccinations, were seronegative to HPV on Day 1, and had serum samples available for evaluation of the endpoint||milli Merck Units/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
812682|NCT01073449|Secondary|Number of Patients - Amongst Those Implanted With an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD)- in Whom Something (Therapy, Device Programming ...) Has Been Changed During In-hospital Follow-up||4 months|693 represents the number of patients implanted with an ICD within the whole population||Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812683|NCT01073449|Primary|Number of Patients of the Whole Population in Whom Something (Therapy, Device Programming ...) Has Been Changed During In-hospital Follow-up||4 months|||Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812684|NCT01073449|Secondary|Number of Patients -Amongst Those Implanted With a Pacemaker - in Whom Something (Therapy, Device Programming ...) Has Been Changed During In-hospital Follow-up||4 months|2246 represents the number of patients in the whole population that were implanted with a PM||Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812685|NCT01073462|Secondary|Number of Participants With Cardiac Disease Progression|Cardiac disease progression was determined by the Investigator.|Month 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24|Intent-to-treat||participants|||Number
812686|NCT01073462|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Hospitalization|The percentage of participants with at least one hospitalization, at least one cardiac-related hospitalization and at least one non-cardiac-related hospitalization during the course of the study.|24 months|Intent-to-treat||percentage of participants|||Number
812687|NCT01073462|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least One Concomitant Medication|"The percentage of participants with at least one concomitant medication during the course of the study, by the following types:
Phosphate binder
Epoetin
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System (RAAS) inhibitors
Cinacalcet
Other"|24 months|Intent-to-treat||percentage of participants|||Number
812688|NCT01073462|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 30%-Reduction in iPTH Levels in at Least Two Consecutive Measurements|The percentage of participants with at least a 30% reduction in intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) level from Baseline in at least 2 consecutive visits.|Baseline to Month 24|Intent-to-treat||percentage of participants|||Number
812689|NCT01073462|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 30%-Reduction in iPTH Levels|The percentage of participants with at least a 30% reduction in intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) levels from Baseline level.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24|Intent-to-treat; LOCF was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
812690|NCT01073462|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hyperphosphatemia|Hyperphosphatemia was defined as a phosphate value of > 2.1 mmol/L (6.5 mg/dL) in one measurement. Serum phosphate was measured at every study visit.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24|"Intent-to-treat; LOCF was used. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
812691|NCT01073462|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hypercalcemia|Hypercalcemia was defined as a calcium value of > 2.625 mmol/L (10.5 mg/dL) in one measurement. Serum calcium was measured at every study visit.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24|Intent-to-treat; LOCF was used||percentage of participants|||Number
812692|NCT01073462|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) Level Within the Target Range|Target range of intact parathyroid hormone was defined according to the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) treatment guidelines as between 15.9 – 31.8 pmol/L (150 to 300 pg/mL).|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24|Intent-to-treat population; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
812693|NCT01073566|Secondary|Self-reported Hypoglycemic Episodes|Severe hypoglycemia is defined as episodes in which the patient experienced coma, seizure, or suspected seizure or impairment sufficient to require the assistance of another person and either the blood glucose level is measured and found to be <50 mg/dl or the clinical manifestations were reversed by oral carbohydrate, subcutaneous glucagon, or intravenous glucose.|6 weeks|Intent to treat||episodes|||Number
812694|NCT01073566|Secondary|Insulin Delivery System Rating|Subject satisfaction with insulin delivery was assessed by self-report on the validated Insulin Delivery System Rating Questionnaire. Scale is 0-100. Higher score is better.|6 weeks|Per Protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812695|NCT01073566|Secondary|Glucose Profiles Per Day|Standard deviation of 7 daily blood glucose values (3 pre-meal, 3 post-meal, and bedtime) for 3 days|6 weeks|Intent to Treat||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812696|NCT01073566|Primary|Mean Daily Blood Glucose|Equivalence of Finesse to Usual Injection Device in Mean Daily Blood Glucose|6 weeks|Intent to treat||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812876|NCT01074554|Primary|Granuloma Burden|Number of patients with a decrease in Granuloma Burden (only in those patients having granulomas present at baseline biopsy)|Baseline to 8 weeks|||participants|||Number
812697|NCT01073605|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reaching Puberty|The defined criteria for reaching puberty were: boy=if right or left testes volume ≥4 ml; girl=if breast development ≥2. Tanner Adolescent Pubertal Staging Questionnaire documents the stage of development of secondary sexual characteristics rated in 5 stages: stage 1 (no development) to 5 (adult-like development in quantity and size). Onset of puberty was defined as the visit where the data recorded first met the above criteria for starting puberty.|Baseline, 1 to 6 years|Safety population. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline. Data beyond 6 years are not reported due to the low proportion of subjects followed up beyond 6 years. Started = started puberty; Not Started = not started puberty yet as per Tanner scale.||participants|||Number
812698|NCT01073605|Secondary|Chronological Age at Onset of Puberty|Chronological age (years) at first study visit with onset of puberty = (Date of study visit minus Date of Birth) divided by 365.25.|Onset of puberty|Safety population. Number of participants analyzed = number of subjects who started puberty by the end of the study.||Years||Standard Deviation|Mean
812699|NCT01073605|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bone Age/Change From Baseline in Chronological Age Ratio|Bone age was determined by the Greulich-Pyle method. Chronological Age (years) was calculated as: (Date minus Date of Birth) divided by 365.25. Chronological Age used was the age at the date that the corresponding Bone Age X-ray was performed. Ratio was calculated by change from Baseline in bone age divided by change from Baseline in chronological age.|1 to 3 years|Safety population = all subjects who received at least 1 study dose of GH. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at 1 year. n = number of subjects with evaluable data at each time point.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
812700|NCT01073605|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bone Age|Bone age was determined by the Greulich-Pyle method. Calculated by substracting bone age at Baseline from bone age at each year|Baseline, 1 to 3 years|Safety population = all subjects who received at least 1 study dose of GH. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline. n = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline and each time point.||Years||Standard Deviation|Mean
812701|NCT01073605|Secondary|Weight||Baseline, 1 to 6 years|FAS. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline. n = number of subjects with evaluable data at each time point. Data beyond 6 years are not reported due to the low proportion of subjects followed up beyond 6 years.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
812702|NCT01073605|Secondary|Body Mass Index (BMI)|BMI was calculated by weight divided by height squared.|Baseline, 1 to 6 years|FAS. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline. n = number of subjects with evaluable data at each time point. Data beyond 6 years are not reported due to the low proportion of subjects followed up beyond 6 years.||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
812703|NCT01073605|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Height (SDS)|Calculated by substracting height SDS at Baseline from height SDS at each year. Final Height: Children are defined as reaching their final height when annual Growth Rate is less than 2 cm in the previous year and bone age is equal to or greater than 17 years in boys and equal to or greater than 15 years in girls.|Baseline, 1 to 6 years, final height|FAS. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline. n = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline and each time point. Data beyond 6 years are not reported due to the low proportion of subjects followed up beyond 6 years.||SDS||Standard Deviation|Mean
812704|NCT01073605|Secondary|Height (SDS)|Calculated using Sempe reference means and standard deviations for height. Final Height: Children are defined as reaching their final height when annual Growth Rate is less than 2 cm in the previous year and bone age is equal to or greater than 17 years in boys and equal to or greater than 15 years in girls.|Baseline, 1 to 6 years, final height|FAS. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline. n = number of subjects with evaluable data at each time point. Data beyond 6 years are not reported due to the low proportion of subjects followed up beyond 6 years.||SDS||Standard Deviation|Mean
812705|NCT01073605|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Height (cm)|Calculated by substracting height at Baseline from height at each year. Final Height: Children are defined as reaching their final height when annual Growth Rate is less than 2 cm in the previous year and bone age is equal to or greater than 17 years in boys and equal to or greater than 15 years in girls.|Baseline, 1 to 6 years, final height|FAS. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline. n = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline and each time point. Data beyond 6 years are not reported due to the low proportion of subjects followed up beyond 6 years.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
812706|NCT01073605|Secondary|Height (cm)|Performed by use of a wallmounted device (eg, Harpenden Stadiometer). Each subject was measured 3 times and the mean of these measurements was recorded as the present height. Final Height: Children are defined as reaching their final height when annual Growth Rate is less than 2 cm in the previous year and bone age is equal to or greater than 17 years in boys and equal to or greater than 15 years in girls.|Baseline, 1 to 6 years, final height|FAS. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline. n = number of subjects with evaluable data at each time point. Data beyond 6 years are not reported due to the low proportion of subjects followed up beyond 6 years.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
812707|NCT01073605|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Annual Growth Rate SDS|Calculated corresponding to the gender and chronological age by substracting annual growth rate SDS at Baseline from annual growth rate SDS at each year.|Baseline, 1 to 3 years|FAS. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at 1 year. n = number of subjects with evaluable data at each time point.||SDS||Standard Deviation|Mean
812708|NCT01073605|Secondary|Annual Growth Rate Standard Deviation Score (SDS)|Calculated using Sempe reference means and standard deviations for growth rate according to age and sex. Standardization was performed for chronological age.|Baseline, 1 to 6 years|FAS. Number of Participants Analyzed = number of subjects with evaluable data at Baseline. n = number of subjects with evaluable data at each time point. Data beyond 6 years are not reported due to the low proportion of subjects followed up beyond 6 years.||SDS||Standard Deviation|Mean
812722|NCT01073930|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: Please Describe Your Overall Experience With the Study Preparation|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 5-point scale: Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, Bad|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Four participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812710|NCT01073618|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Cultivated Strain Mycological Response: Eradication, Persistence, Superinfection, or Not Evaluable|In case cultivation performed, cultivated strain before and after Vfend administration recorded, and the improvement of mycological outcomes after administration evaluated. Mycological response defined as: Eradication=absence of signs and symptoms of fungal infection; Persistence=(no eradication) presence of fungal infection; Superinfection=existence of different strains from strains separated prior to study medication; Not evaluable=a follow-up mycological cultivation is not performed.|Baseline (Day 1) up to 2 years|ITT; N=number of subjects evaluated for mycological response.||percentage of participants|||Number
812711|NCT01073618|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Categorical Clinical Response: Cure, Improvement, Failure, or Unevaluable|Clinical response defined as: Cure=resolution of all baseline signs and symptoms of fungal infection(s); Improvement=lessening of baseline signs and symptoms or absence of one or more, but not all baseline findings; Failure=no improvement or deterioration of baseline condition; Unevaluable=incomplete therapy (efficacy could not be evaluated or discontinuation was not followed up).|Baseline (Day 1) up to 2 years|Safety population: participants received at least 1 dose of study drug for the approved indication (=Intent to treat [ITT] population plus all unevaluable participants); ITT=participants received study drug for the approved indication and had been evaluated for related parameters at least once.||percentage of participants|||Number
812712|NCT01073631|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Cultivated Strain Mycological Response: Eradication, Persistence, Superinfection, or Not Evaluable|In case cultivation performed, cultivated strain before and after Vfend administration recorded, and the improvement of mycological outcomes after administration evaluated. Mycological response defined as: Eradication=absence of signs and symptoms of fungal infection; Persistence=(no eradication) presence of fungal infection; Superinfection=existence of different strains from strains separated prior to study treatment; Not evaluable=a follow-up mycological cultivation not performed.|Baseline (Day 1) up to 2.1 Years|ITT; N=number of participants evaluated for mycological response.||Percentage of participants|||Number
812713|NCT01073631|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Categorical Clinical Response: Cure, Improvement, Failure, or Unevaluable|Clinical response defined as: Cure=resolution of all baseline signs and symptoms of fungal infection(s); Improvement=lessening of baseline signs and symptoms or absence of one or more, but not all baseline findings; Failure=no improvement or deterioration of baseline condition; Unevaluable=incomplete therapy (efficacy could not be evaluated or discontinuation was not followed up).|Baseline (Day 1) up to 2.1 Years|Safety population: participants received at least 1 dose of study drug for approved indication (= Intent to treat [ITT] population plus all unevaluable participants); ITT=participants received study drug for the approved indication and had been evaluated for related paramenters at least once.||Percentage of participants|||Number
812714|NCT01073657|Primary|"Supported Education Process Measure"|"Number of quarter hours spent in activities related to acquiring an education goal e.g., preparing applications, attending classes. Hours will be logged on a tally sheet adapted from the Supported Education Process Measure (Corrigan, 2009)."|6 months|Comparison of means||number of quarter hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
812715|NCT01073865|Secondary|Oestradiol (E2) Serum Concentrations at 24 Weeks|E2 serum concentrations (pg/mL) at 24 weeks|24 weeks after the first dosing|Full Analysis Set||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812716|NCT01073865|Secondary|Number of Responders at 24 Weeks|Responders are defined as those patients with a best objective tumour response of CR or PR during the first 24 weeks of therapy. Tumour response is assessed according to the RECIST version 1.1. ORR is defined as the proportion of patients who are responders.|24 weeks after the first dosing|Full Analysis Set||Patients|||Number
812717|NCT01073865|Primary|Number of Patients With Progression-free Survival (PFS) at 24 Weeks|A patient is judged as progression-free survive at Week 24 if their PFS time is at least 24 weeks with no progression event prior to Week 24 (ie, overall visit response is complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) at a tumour assessment at least 24 weeks after randomization). Overall visit response is assessed according to the RECIST version 1.1. %PFS is the proportion of patients with PFS.|24 weeks after the first dosing|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
812718|NCT01073930|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Counts of participants who had TEAEs are summarized in a variety of categories. Severity and relatedness to study drug are in the opinion of the investigator. Severity is rated on a 3-point scale: mild (awareness of signs or symptoms, but no disruption of usual activity), moderate (event sufficient to affect usual activity), and severe (inability to work or perform usual activities). Only severe TEAEs are summarized. Relatedness is assessed on a 4-point scale: unrelated, unlikely, possibly and probably. Both possibly and probably answers are reported as 'related' to study medication.|up to one month|Safety population of participants who were treated.||participants|||Number
812719|NCT01073930|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: Would You Refuse the Same Preparation Again if it Were to be Prescribed to You in the Future?|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 2-point scale: yes, no|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Four participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812720|NCT01073930|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: Would You Ask Your Doctor for This Preparation Again if You Need Another Colonoscopy in the Future?|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 2-point scale: yes, no|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Three participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812721|NCT01073930|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: The Taste of This Study Preparation Was|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 5-point scale: Excellent, Good, Tolerable, Poor, Bad|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. One participant either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812877|NCT01074554|Primary|Change in Lesion Size at the Completion of Antibiotic Therapy, Measured on a Continuous Scale; Change Will be Determined by Change in Diameter of the Lesions||Baseline to 8 weeks|||mm||Standard Deviation|Median
812725|NCT01073930|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Classified as Successes (Excellent, Good and Fair Ratings) According to the Ottawa Scale As Assessed by a Blinded Gastroenterologist|Overall colon cleansing was assessed by a blinded gastroenterologist during the colonoscopy using the Ottawa scale, a 5-step rating scale: inadequate, poor, fair, good, and excellent. Excellent is defined as mucosal detail clearly visible; if fluid is present, it is clear and there is almost no stool residue. Good - some turbid fluid or stool residue but mucosal detail still visible; washing and suctioning is not necessary. Fair - turbid fluid or stool residue obscuring mucosal detail. However, mucosal detail becomes visible with suctioning and washing is not necessary.|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed.||percentage of participants|||Number
812726|NCT01073930|Primary|Percentage of Participants Classified as Successes (Excellent and Good Ratings) According to the Aronchick Scale As Assessed by a Blinded Gastroenterologist|Overall colon cleansing was assessed by a blinded gastroenterologist during the colonoscopy using the Aronchick scale. The Aronchick scale is a 4-step rating scale: inadequate, fair, good, and excellent. Excellent is defined as >90% of mucosa seen, mostly liquid stool, minimal suctioning needed for adequate visualization. Good is defined as >90% of mucosa seen, mostly liquid stool, significant suctioning needed for adequate visualization.|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed.||percentage of participants|||Number
812727|NCT01073943|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Classified as Successes (Excellent, Good and Fair Ratings) For Colon Cleansing According to the Ottawa Scale As Assessed by a Blinded Gastroenterologist|Colon cleansing was assessed by a blinded gastroenterologist during the colonoscopy using the Ottawa scale, a 5-step rating scale: inadequate, poor, fair, good, and excellent. See Outcome #2 for definitions of the scale. Assessment of mid colon, recto-sigmoid, and overall (ascending, mid, and recto-sigmoid) cleansing is summarized here.|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed.||percentage of participants|||Number
812728|NCT01073943|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Counts of participants who had TEAEs are summarized in a variety of categories. Severity and relatedness to study drug are in the opinion of the investigator. Severity is rated on a 3-point scale: mild (awareness of signs or symptoms, but no disruption of usual activity), moderate (event sufficient to affect usual activity), and severe (inability to work or perform usual activities). Only severe TEAEs are summarized. Relatedness is assessed on a 4-point scale: unrelated, unlikely, possibly and probably. Both possibly and probably answers are reported as 'related' to study medication.|up to one month|Safety population of participants who were treated.||participants|||Number
812729|NCT01073943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: Would You Refuse the Same Preparation Again if it Were to be Prescribed to You in the Future?|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 2-point scale: yes, no|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Three participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812730|NCT01073943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: Would You Ask Your Doctor for This Preparation Again if You Need Another Colonoscopy in the Future?|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 2-point scale: yes, no|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Three participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812731|NCT01073943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: The Taste of This Study Preparation Was|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 5-point scale: Excellent, Good, Tolerable, Poor, Bad|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Three participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812732|NCT01073943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: Please Describe Your Overall Experience With the Study Preparation|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 5-point scale: Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, Bad|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Four participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812733|NCT01073943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: Were You Able to Consume the Entire Prep As Instructed?|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 2-point scale: yes, no|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Three participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812734|NCT01073943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants' Responses to the Acceptability and Tolerability Questionnaire: How Easy or Difficult Was It To Consume the Study Drug?|Participants answered the question above on Day 2 prior to the colonoscopy procedure. Answers were on a 5-point scale: very easy, easy, tolerable, difficult, very difficult|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed. Three participants either did not complete the questionnaire or did not answer this question.||percentage of participants|||Number
812735|NCT01073943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Classified as Successes (Excellent, Good and Fair Ratings) For Ascending Colon Cleansing According to the Ottawa Scale As Assessed by a Blinded Gastroenterologist|Cleansing of the ascending colon was assessed by a blinded gastroenterologist during the colonoscopy using the Ottawa scale, a 5-step rating scale: inadequate, poor, fair, good, and excellent. Excellent is defined as mucosal detail clearly visible; if fluid is present, it is clear and there is almost no stool residue. Good - some turbid fluid or stool residue but mucosal detail still visible; washing and suctioning is not necessary. Fair - turbid fluid or stool residue obscuring mucosal detail. However, mucosal detail becomes visible with suctioning and washing is not necessary.|Day 2|Intent-to-treat population of randomized and treated participants with efficacy assessments performed.||percentage of participants|||Number
812737|NCT01074008|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS)|The Mental Component Summary (MCS) of the SF-36 was used to measure the overall mental health status of participants. The aggregated score of the SF-36 MPS was standardized using a linear T-score transformation with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10; a higher score indicated better mental function and well-being. Data presented are the summaries across all participants, for each treatment arm, regardless of dose. Data are presented as the group mean change from baseline ± standard deviation.|Baseline and Post-treatment Week 24|Participants received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) and have both baseline and at least one post-baseline measurement of HCV RNA levels during monotherapy treatment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812738|NCT01074008|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS)|The Physical Component Summary (PCS) of the SF-36 was used to measure the overall physical health status of a participant. The aggregated score of the SF-36 PCS score was standardized using a linear T-score transformation with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10; a higher score indicated better physical function and well-being. Data presented are the summaries across all participants, for each treatment arm, regardless of dose. Data are presented as the group mean change from baseline ± standard deviation.|Baseline and Post-treatment Week 24|Participants received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) and have both baseline and at least one post-baseline measurement of HCV RNA levels during monotherapy treatment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812739|NCT01074008|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D (3 Level) Health Index Score|The EQ-5D was a health state questionnaire used to measure five health dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). The combination of responses from all five dimensions were derived into an index score ranging from 0 to 1; a higher score indicated a more preferable health utility value from the societal perspectives. Data presented are the summaries across all participants, for each treatment arm, regardless of dose. Data are presented as the group mean change from baseline ± standard deviation.|Baseline and Post-treatment Week 24|Participants received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) and have both baseline and at least one post-baseline measurement of HCV RNA levels during monotherapy treatment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812740|NCT01074008|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in ED-5D Visual Analog Scale (ED-5D VAS) Score|The ED-5D VAS was a self-rating survey used to capture the current health status of a participant and ranged from 0 (the worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). Data presented are the summaries across all participants, for each treatment arm, regardless of dose. Data are presented as the group mean change from baseline ± standard deviation.|Baseline and Post-treatment Week 24|Participants received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) and have both baseline and at least one post-baseline measurement of HCV RNA levels during monotherapy treatment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812741|NCT01074008|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Hepatitis C Virus Patient-reported Outcomes (HCV-PRO) Total Score|The Hepatitis C Virus Patient-report Outcomes (HCV-PRO, formerly known as HCV Quality of Life) survey was used to assess disease-specific function and well-being on a scale from 0 to 100; a higher score indicated relatively good function and well-being of treated participants. Data presented are the summaries across all participants, for each treatment arm, regardless of dose. Data are reported as the group mean change from baseline ± standard deviation.|Baseline up to Post-treatment Week 24|Participants received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) and have both baseline and at least one post-baseline measurement of HCV RNA levels during monotherapy treatment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812742|NCT01074008|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Resistance-Associated Variants and Phenotypic Resistance to ABT-333 in Non-structural Viral Protein 5B (NS5B)|Baseline samples were analyzed for resistance-associated amino acid variants using population and clonal sequencing and were compared with the appropriate reference sequence (1a-H77 or 1b-Con1). Phenotypic resistance to ABT-333 at baseline was assessed by calculating the fold difference in the half maximal effective concentration (EC50) compared with the EC50 for the appropriate reference replicon (1a-H77 or 1b-Con1). Available samples at Day 4 with HCV RNA ≥ 1000 IU/mL were analyzed for the presence of resistance-associated variants using population and clonal sequencing and were compared with the baseline sequences to assess amino acid changes. Phenotypic resistance to ABT-333 at Day 4 was assessed by calculating the fold difference in the EC50 compared with the EC50 for the corresponding baseline sample. The number of participants with variants at resistance-associated amino acid positions and phenotypic resistance are presented.|Baseline and Day 4|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the analysis. When the number of participants used to analyze the data at a specific time point differs from the Number of Participants Analyzed, the n (number of participants) is denoted in the Category Title.||participants|||Number
812743|NCT01074008|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Resistance-Associated Variants and Phenotypic Resistance to ABT-072 in Non-structural Viral Protein 5B (NS5B)|Baseline samples were analyzed for resistance-associated amino acid variants using population and clonal sequencing and were compared with the appropriate reference sequence (1a-H77 or 1b-Con1). Phenotypic resistance to ABT-072 at baseline was assessed by calculating the fold difference in the half maximal effective concentration (EC50) compared with the EC50 for the appropriate reference replicon (1a-H77 or 1b-Con1). Available samples at Day 4 with HCV RNA ≥ 1000 IU/mL were analyzed for the presence of resistance-associated variants using population and clonal sequencing and were compared with the baseline sequences to assess amino acid changes. Phenotypic resistance to ABT-072 at Day 4 was assessed by calculating the fold difference in the EC50 compared with the EC50 for the corresponding baseline sample. The number of participants with variants at resistance-associated amino acid positions and phenotypic resistance are presented.|Baseline and Day 4|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the analysis. When the number of participants used to analyze the data at a specific time point differs from the Number of Participants Analyzed, the n (number of participants) is denoted in the Category Title.||participants|||Number
812878|NCT01074658|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Procedural Success|Procedural success, defined as device success with absence of in-hospital MACCE|up to 30 days|All attempted population in which the separate variables related to procedural success (see outcome measure description) were analyzable.||percentage of participants|||Number
812744|NCT01074008|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Resistance-Associated Variants and Phenotypic Resistance to ABT-450 in Non-structural Viral Protein 3 (NS3)|Baseline samples were analyzed for resistance-associated amino acid variants using population and clonal sequencing and were compared with the appropriate reference sequence (1a-H77 or 1b-Con1). Phenotypic resistance to ABT-450 at baseline was assessed by calculating the fold difference in the half maximal effective concentration (EC50) compared with the EC50 for the appropriate reference replicon (1a-H77 or 1b-Con1). Available samples at Day 4 with HCV RNA ≥ 1000 IU/mL were analyzed for resistance-associated variants using population and clonal sequencing and were compared with the baseline sequences to assess amino acid changes. Phenotypic resistance to ABT-450 at Day 4 was assessed by calculating the fold difference in the EC50 compared with the EC50 for the corresponding baseline sample. The number of participants with variants at resistance-associated amino acid positions and phenotypic resistance are presented.|Baseline and Day 4|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the analysis. When the number of participants used to analyze the data at a specific time point differs from the Number of Participants Analyzed, the n (number of participants) is denoted in the Category Title.||participants|||Number
812745|NCT01074008|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR) at Week 12|Plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) levels were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay that had a lower limit of detection of 10 IU/mL and a lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) of 25 IU/mL. Complete EVR was defined as HCV RNA levels < LLOQ (< 25 IU/mL) at Week 12. Data are reported as the percentage of participants with cEVR.|Week 12|To be included in the efficacy analysis, participants received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) and have at least one post-baseline measurement of HCV RNA levels.||percentage of participants|||Number
812746|NCT01074008|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 12 Hours (AUC12) Post-dose of ABT-333|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours) and at 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours after the morning dose on Day 1. The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-333 using validated analytical methods. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC; measured in ng*hr/mL) is a method of measurement to determine the total exposure of a drug in blood plasma. The AUC12 of ABT-333 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours) and at 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours after the morning dose on Day 1|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812747|NCT01074008|Primary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of ABT-333|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-333 using validated analytical methods. The time to maximum plasma concentration (Tmax; measured in hours) is the time it takes for a drug to achieve Cmax. The Tmax of ABT-333 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
812748|NCT01074008|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of ABT-333|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-333 using validated analytical methods. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax; measured in ng/mL) is the highest concentration that a drug achieves in the blood after administration in a dosing interval. The Cmax of ABT-333 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812749|NCT01074008|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 24 Hours (AUC24) Post-dose of ABT-072|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-072 using validated analytical methods. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC; measured in ng*hr/mL) is a method of measurement to determine the total exposure of a drug in blood plasma. The AUC24 of ABT-072 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812750|NCT01074008|Primary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of ABT-072|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-072 using validated analytical methods. The time to maximum plasma concentration (Tmax; measured in hours) is the time it takes for a drug to achieve Cmax. The Tmax of ABT-072 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
812767|NCT01074047|Secondary|Healthcare Resource Utilization (HRU): Number of Inpatient Hospitalizations|HRU was defined as any consumption of healthcare resources directly or indirectly related to the treatment of the patient. HRU Analysis may help in evaluating potential costs and budget impact of new treatments from a payer perspective.|Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months|HRU was analyzed for the HRQoL Evaluable Population, a smaller sample than either the ITT population or safety population. Duration of therapy differed between treatment groups. Rate-per-patient year values adjust for these differences.||participants|||Number
812751|NCT01074008|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of ABT-072|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-072 using validated analytical methods. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax; measured in ng/mL) is the highest concentration that a drug achieves in the blood after administration in a dosing interval. The Cmax of ABT-072 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812752|NCT01074008|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 24 Hours (AUC24) Post-dose of Ritonavir|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ritonavir using validated analytical methods. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC; measured in ng*hr/mL) is a method of measurement to determine the total exposure of a drug in blood plasma. The AUC24 of ritonavir was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812753|NCT01074008|Primary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Ritonavir|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ritonavir using validated analytical methods. The time to maximum plasma concentration (Tmax; measured in hours) is the time it takes for a drug to achieve Cmax. The Tmax of ritonavir was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
812754|NCT01074008|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Ritonavir|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ritonavir using validated analytical methods. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax; measured in ng/mL) is the highest concentration that a drug achieves in the blood after administration in a dosing interval. The Cmax of ritonavir was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812755|NCT01074008|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 24 Hours (AUC24) Post-dose of ABT-450|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-450 using validated analytical methods. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC; measured in ng*hr/mL) is a method of measurement to determine the total exposure of a drug in blood plasma. The AUC24 of ABT-450 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812756|NCT01074008|Primary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of ABT-450|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-450 using validated analytical methods. The time to maximum plasma concentration (Tmax; measured in hours) is the time it takes for a drug to achieve Cmax. The Tmax of ABT-450 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
812757|NCT01074008|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of ABT-450|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-450 using validated analytical methods. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax; measured in ng/mL) is the highest concentration that a drug achieves in the blood after administration in a dosing interval. The Cmax of ABT-450 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812825|NCT01074307|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Global Assessment of Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) Score at Week 26|Global assessment of CHF: The Investigator defined, graded, and recorded the participant’s symptoms and signs by using a 6-point CHF scale ranging from 0 (unassessable), 1 (worsened), 2 (no change), 3 (mildly improved), 4 (moderately improved) and 5 (markedly improved).|Baseline and Week 26|ITT population included all the randomized participants who had at least one dose of the investigational product. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'n' signifies number of participants who were evaluable for specified categories at different time points.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812758|NCT01074008|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Partial Early Virologic Response (EVR) at Week 12|Plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) levels were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay that had a lower limit of detection of 10 IU/mL and a lower limit of quantification of 25 IU/mL. Partial early virologic response (EVR) was defined as HCV RNA levels that decreased > 2 log10 IU/mL at Week 12 as compared to baseline. The baseline value was the last measurement before the first dose on Day 1. Data are reported as the percentage of participants with partial EVR.|Baseline and Week 12|To be included in the efficacy analysis, participants received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) and at least one post-baseline measurement of HCV RNA levels.||percentage of participants|||Number
812759|NCT01074008|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Rapid Virologic Response (RVR) at Week 4|Plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) levels were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay that had a lower limit of detection of 10 IU/mL and a lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) of 25 IU/mL. Rapid virologic response was defined as HCV RNA level < LLOQ (< 25 IU/mL) at Week 4. Data are reported as the percentage of participants with RVR.|Week 4|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline HCV RNA value were included in this efficacy analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
812760|NCT01074008|Primary|Maximal Change From Baseline in Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) Levels During ABT-450/r, ABT-333, or ABT-072 Monotherapy Treatment|Plasma HCV RNA levels (reported as log10 IU/mL) were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay that had a lower limit of detection of 10 IU/mL and a lower limit of quantification of 25 IU/mL. The baseline value was the HCV RNA level before the first dose of study drug on Day 1. The maximal change during monotherapy was the difference from baseline to the lowest log10 HCV RNA level anytime after the first dose of study drug on Day 1 through the last log10 HCV RNA level before the first dose of study drug on Day 4. Data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Prior to dosing on Day 1 to before the morning dose on Day 4|Participants received at least one dose of study drug (direct-acting antiviral agent) and have both baseline and at least one post-baseline measurement of HCV RNA levels during monotherapy treatment.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812761|NCT01074034|Secondary|Conversion Success Rate up to Three Months Post-implant|For a pacemaker patient who experiences a spontaneous high rate ventricular arrhythmia, the ASSURE device may provide rescue shocks, a faster and more effective response than external methods of rescue. Successful conversion of an episode is defined by conversion to either; sinus rhythm, sinus tachycardia or atrial pacing by one minute post therapy delivery.|Three months post-implant|||% of conversion rates|||Number
812762|NCT01074034|Primary|Inappropriate Shock Free Rate|Incidences of ventricular shock therapy up to three months post implant. Rescue shocks are intended for the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias detected in the ventricle at rates greater than 220 bpm, including arrhythmias that originate in the atria if they are conducted at rates greater than 220 bpm as this can be life threatening if persistent. Shocks delivered for other reasons will be considered inappropriate shocks.|Three months post-implant|||% of shock free rates|||Number
812763|NCT01074047|Secondary|Number of Participants in the Extension Phase With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|AEs = any noxious, unintended, or untoward medical occurrence that may appear or worsen during the course of a study. It may be a new intercurrent illness, a worsening concomitant illness, an injury, or any concomitant impairment of the participant’s health, regardless of cause. Serious AE (SAE) = any AE which results in death; is life-threatening; requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; constitutes an important medical event. The severity of AEs were graded based upon the participants symptoms according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, Version 4.0); AEs were evaluated for severity according to the following scale: Grade 1 = Mild – transient or mild discomfort; no medical intervention required; Grade 2 = Moderate – mild to moderate limitation in activity; Grade 3 = Severe; Grade 4 = Life threatening; Grade 5 = Death|From the date of informed consent for the Extension Phase through to the date of last dose of study drug + 28 days up to last visit completed 24 July 2016; maximum duration of exposure to Azacitidine was 871 days|Safety population includes those enrolled in the extension phase who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|participants||Number
812764|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRU: Rate of Transfusions Per Patient Year|HRU is defined as any consumption of healthcare resources directly or indirectly related to the treatment of the patient. HRU Analysis may help in evaluating potential costs and budget impact of new treatments from a payer perspective. The rate of transfusions per patient year was calculated as the total number of transfusions divided by the total number of patient-years followed in the study period. Patient-years (PY) were calculated as the duration from baseline to last available HRQL assessment for each patient.|Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months|HRU was analyzed for the HRQoL Evaluable Population, a smaller sample than either the ITT population or safety population. Duration of therapy differed between treatment groups. Rate-per-patient year values adjust for these differences.||transfusions per patient year|||Number
812765|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRU: Number of Participants Receiving Transfusions|Count of study participants who had transfusions during the treatment phase. HRU is defined as any consumption of healthcare resources directly or indirectly related to the treatment of the patient. HRU Analysis may help in evaluating potential costs and budget impact of new treatments from a payer perspective.|Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months|HRU was analyzed for the HRQoL Evaluable Population, a smaller sample than either the ITT population or safety population. Duration of therapy differed between treatment groups. Rate-per-patient year values adjust for these differences.||participants|||Number
812766|NCT01074047|Secondary|Healthcare Resource Utilization (HRU): Rate of Inpatient Hospitalizations Per Year|HRU was defined as any consumption of healthcare resources directly or indirectly related to the treatment of the patient. HRU Analysis may help in evaluating potential costs and budget impact of new treatments from a payer perspective. The rate of inpatient hospitalizations per patient year was calculated as the total number of hospitalizations divided by the total number of patient-years followed in the study period. Patient-years (PY) were calculated as the duration from baseline to last available HRQL assessment for each patient.|Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months|HRU was analyzed for the HRQoL Evaluable Population, a smaller sample than either the ITT population or safety population. Duration of therapy differed between treatment groups. Rate-per-patient year values adjust for these differences.||hospitalizations per patient year|||Number
812768|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status-/Quality of Life Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better Global Health Status/QOL. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in Global Health Status/QOL and positive values indicate improvement.|Baseline to end of study, at approximately 11-12 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812769|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status-/Quality of Life Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better Global Health Status/QOL. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in Global Health Status/QOL and positive values indicate improvement.|Baseline to Cycle 9, at approximately 9 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812770|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status-/Quality of Life Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better Global Health Status/QOL. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in Global Health Status/QOL and positive values indicate improvement.|Baseline to Cycle 7, at approximately 7 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812771|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status-/Quality of Life Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better Global Health Status/QOL. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in Global Health Status/QOL and positive values indicate improvement.|Baseline to Cycle 5, at approximately 5 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812772|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status-/Quality of Life Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better Global Health Status/QOL. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in Global Health Status/QOL and positive values indicate improvement.|Baseline to Cycle 3, at approximately 3 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812773|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 PhysicalFunctioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Baseline to end of study, at approximately 11-12 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812826|NCT01074307|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in the form of signs, symptoms, abnormal laboratory findings, or diseases that emerges or worsens relative to baseline during a clinical study with an Investigational Medicinal Product (IMP), regardless of causal relationship and even if no IMP has been administered.|Baseline up to Week 26|Safety analysis population included all the randomized participants who had at least one dose of the investigational product had post-dose safety data confirmed at least once by the Investigator.||Participants|||Number
812774|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 PhysicalFunctioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Baseline to Cycle 9, at approximately 9 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812775|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 PhysicalFunctioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Baseline to Cycle 7, at approximately 7 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812776|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 PhysicalFunctioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Baseline to Cycle 5, at approximately 5 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812777|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 PhysicalFunctioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Baseline to Cycle 3, at approximately 3 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812778|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate decreased dyspnea (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increased dyspnea (i.e. worsening of symptom).|Baseline to end of study, at approximately 11-12 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812779|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate decreased dyspnea (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increased dyspnea (i.e. worsening of symptom).|Baseline to Cycle 9, at approximately 9 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population. The analysis included 157 from the azacitidine group and 134 in the CCR group, a smaller number than the ITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812827|NCT01074307|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were Re-hospitalized Due to Heart Failure and Who Died Due to Cardiovascular Disorder||Baseline up to Week 26|ITT population included all the randomized participants who had at least one dose of the investigational product.||Participants|||Number
813006|NCT01075815|Secondary|Total Number of Births|Total number of births per reporting group was calculated.|Up to 2 months after OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day {end of stimulation cycle} [approximately 28 days])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here N represents number of participants evaluated for this measure."||births|||Number
812780|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate decreased dyspnea (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increased dyspnea (i.e. worsening of symptom).|Baseline to Cycle 7, at approximately 7 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812781|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate decreased dyspnea (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increased dyspnea (i.e. worsening of symptom).|Baseline to Cycle 5, at approximately 5 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812782|NCT01074047|Secondary|HRQoL: Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate decreased dyspnea (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increased dyspnea (i.e. worsening of symptom).|Baseline to Cycle 3, at approximately 3 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812783|NCT01074047|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Fatigue Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate reduction in fatigue (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increases in fatigue (i.e. worsening of symptom).|Baseline to End of Study; at approximately 11-12 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812784|NCT01074047|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Fatigue Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate reduction in fatigue (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increases in fatigue (i.e. worsening of symptom).|Baseline to Cycle 9, at approximately 9 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population. .||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812785|NCT01074047|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Fatigue Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate reduction in fatigue (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increases in fatigue (i.e. worsening of symptom).|Baseline to Cycle 7, at approximately 7 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812786|NCT01074047|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Fatigue Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate reduction in fatigue (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increases in fatigue (i.e. worsening of symptom).|Baseline to Cycle 5, at approximately 5 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812787|NCT01074047|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Fatigue Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate reduction in fatigue (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increases in fatigue (i.e. worsening of symptom).|Baseline to Cycle 3; at approximately 3 months|The HRQoL Evaluable population included only participants with a baseline QoL assessment and at least 1 follow-up assessment. Time windows were applied post-hoc to increase the size of the analyzable population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812788|NCT01074047|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|AEs = any noxious, unintended, or untoward medical occurrence that may appear or worsen during the course of a study. It may be a new intercurrent illness, a worsening concomitant illness, an injury, or any concomitant impairment of the participant’s health, regardless of cause. Serious AE (SAE) = any AE which results in death; is life-threatening; requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; constitutes an important medical event. The severity of AEs were graded based upon the participants symptoms according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, Version 4.0); AEs were evaluated for severity according to the following scale: Grade 1 = Mild – transient or mild discomfort; no medical intervention required; Grade 2 = Moderate – mild to moderate limitation in activity; Grade 3 = Severe; Grade 4 = Life threatening; Grade 5 = Death|Day 1 (randomization) up to last visit completed; final data cut off of 28 Feb 2017|Safety population = all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had 1 post-dose safety assessment. Because the BSC only regimen consisted of blood products or antibiotics given as needed, those assigned to BSC only were included in the safety population if they had at least 1 post-randomization safety assessment.||participants|||Number
812789|NCT01074047|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved a Cytogenetic Complete Response (CRc-10) as Determined by the IRC.|The CRc is a normal karyotype defined as no clonal abnormalities after review of at least 10 metaphases using conventional cytogenetic techniques. Cytogenetic complete remission rate (CRc) is when the following criteria are met: 1) CR criteria met and 2) an abnormal karyotype is present at baseline and 3) there is reversion to normal karyotype at the time of CR (based on ≥ 10 metaphases), where date of cytogenetic sample = date of BM sample used for the CR assessment|Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not. Includes participants who died and participants who were censored||participants|||Number
812790|NCT01074047|Secondary|Duration of Remission Assessed by the IRC Based on Kaplan-Meier Estimates|The time from the date CR or CRi was first documented until the date of documented relapse from CR/CRi. Duration of remission was defined only for those participants who achieved a CR or CRi, as determined by the IRC. Participants who were lost to follow-up without documented relapse, or were alive at last follow-up without documented relapse were censored at the date of their last response assessment.|Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months; date of the first documented CR or CRi until date of first documented relapse.|Includes those who achieved a CR or CRi and assessed by the IRC; numbers of ITT participants in each treatment group||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812791|NCT01074047|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Morphologic CR + CRi as Determined by the Independent Review Committee (IRC) Based on International Working Group (IWG) Response Criteria for Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)|A complete remission (CR) is defined as a leukemia-free state defined as less than 5% blasts in a BM aspirate with marrow spicules and with at least 200 nucleated cells (there should be no blasts with Auer rods), an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of ≥ 1 x 10^9/L, a platelet count ≥ 100 x 10^9/L, and transfusion independence (no transfusions for 1 week prior to each assessment). No duration of these findings is required for confirmation of this response. A CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) is defined as <5% BM blasts with the ANC count < 1 x 10^9/L and/or the platelet count may be < 100 x 10^9/L. Where the date of the hematology assessment used is the earliest on or following the date of the BM sample up to 8 days after the BM date.|Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not. Includes participants who died and participants who were censored||percentage of participants|||Number
812792|NCT01074047|Secondary|Relapse-Free Survival (RFS) for Participants Who Achieved a Complete Remission (CR) or Complete Remission With Incomplete Blood Count Recovery (CRi)|Relapse-free survival was defined as the interval from the date of first documented CR or CRi to the date of relapse, death from any cause, or lost to follow-up, whichever occurred first. Participants who were still alive and in continuous CR or CRi were censored at the date of their last response assessment.|Day 1 of first documented CR or CRi to the date of relapse, death from any cause, or lost to follow-up. Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months|Participants who achieved a CR or CRi||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812793|NCT01074047|Secondary|Event-free Survival (EFS)|Event-free survival was defined as the interval from the date of randomization to the date of treatment failure, progressive disease, relapse after complete remission (CR) or complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi), death from any cause, or lost to follow-up, whichever occurs first. Participants who were still alive without any of these events were censored at the date of their last response assessment.|Day 1 (randomization) to date of treatment failure, progressive disease, relapse after Complete Remission (CR) or Complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi), death from any cause. Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not. Includes participants who died and participants who were censored||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812794|NCT01074047|Secondary|One-year Overall Survival Rate|Kaplan Meier methods were used to estimate the 1-year survival probabilities for time to death from any cause. Estimates of the 1-year (365 day) survival probabilities and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were presented by treatment group. The CI for the difference in the 1-year survival probabilities was derived using Greenwoods variance estimate.|From Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not. Includes participants who died and participants who were censored||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812795|NCT01074047|Primary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Overall Survival|Overall Survival was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Overall survival was calculated by the formula: date of death - date of randomization + 1. Participants surviving at the end of the follow-up period or who withdrew consent to follow-up were censored at the date of last contact. Participants who were lost to follow-up were censored at the date last known alive.|Day 1 (randomization) to 40 months|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not. Includes participants who died and participants who were censored||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812796|NCT01074099|Primary|Safety|as measured by frequency and severity of adverse events|through 1 Year post tx|||participants|||Number
812797|NCT01074099|Primary|Change in Cardiac Status (Classification)|A change in cardiac status as determined by the New York Heart Association (NYHA) or Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) classification evaluation|Through 12 months post treatment|Study was terminated after enrollment of only 5 patients. The data were not analyzed for efficacy.|||||
812798|NCT01074125|Secondary|Proportion of Patient With a Serum Phosphorus ≤5.5 mg/dL at the End of Treatment|proportion was calculated separately for each treatment arm|Baseline and day 28|Intent-to-Treat||% of Participants|||Number
812799|NCT01074125|Secondary|Pairwise Comparison of the Mean Change in Serum Phosphorus From Baseline to the End of Treatment|Mean change from baseline was calculated separately for each treatment arm. Only subjects that have both baseline and end of treatment serum phosphorus scores were analyzed for this outcome.|Baseline and day 28|Intent-to-Treat, includes only subjects that had both baseline and end of study actual values||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812800|NCT01074125|Primary|Change in Serum Phosphorus From Baseline to End of Treatment|Mean change from baseline was calculated separately for each treatment arm (LOCF)|Baseline and day 28|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812801|NCT01074164|Secondary|Change in Severity of Atopic Dermatitis (AD) as Measured by a Change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI): Lichenification Subscale Score|"The EASI is a composite score assessing four key clinical signs of AD and the area of skin involvement in four main body regions (head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs). The 5 EASI subscales are: erythema, infiltration/papulation, excoriation, lichenification, and percent area of skin involvement. For determining the lichenification subscale score, lichenification is assessed in each main body region and assigned a score of 0 to 3, where a score of 0 is associated with no expression of the clinical sign and a score of 3 is associated with severe expression of the clinical sign. Possible scores range from 0 to 3, where 0 correlates with better disease severity and 3 correlates with worse disease severity.
Hanifin JM, Thurston M, Omoto M, et al (2001) The eczema area and severity index (EASI): assessment of reliability in atopic dermatitis. Exp Dermatol; 10: 11-18."|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
812802|NCT01074164|Secondary|Change in Severity of Atopic Dermatitis (AD) as Measured by a Change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI): Excoriation Subscale Score|"The EASI is a composite score assessing four key clinical signs of AD and the area of skin involvement in four main body regions (head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs). The 5 EASI subscales are: erythema, infiltration/papulation, excoriation, lichenification, and percent area of skin involvement. For determining the excoriation subscale score, excoriation is assessed in each main body region and assigned a score of 0 to 3, where a score of 0 is associated with no expression of the clinical sign and a score of 3 is associated with severe expression of the clinical sign. Possible scores range from 0 to 3, where 0 correlates with better disease severity and 3 correlates with worse disease severity.
Hanifin JM, Thurston M, Omoto M, et al (2001) The eczema area and severity index (EASI): assessment of reliability in atopic dermatitis. Exp Dermatol; 10: 11-18."|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
812803|NCT01074164|Secondary|Change in Severity of Atopic Dermatitis (AD) as Measured by a Change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI): Infiltration/Papulation Subscale Score|"The EASI is a composite score assessing four key clinical signs of AD and the area of skin involvement in four main body regions (head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs). The 5 EASI subscales are: erythema, infiltration/papulation, excoriation, lichenification, and percent area of skin involvement. For determining the infiltration/papulation subscale score, infiltration/papulation is assessed in each main body region and assigned a score of 0 to 3, where a score of 0 is associated with no expression of the clinical sign and a score of 3 is associated with severe expression of the clinical sign. Possible scores range from 0 to 3, where 0 correlates with better disease severity and 3 correlates with worse disease severity.
Hanifin JM, Thurston M, Omoto M, et al (2001) The eczema area and severity index (EASI): assessment of reliability in atopic dermatitis. Exp Dermatol; 10: 11-18."|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
813062|NCT01076179|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in HIV-1 Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Viral Load|Changes in participants' HIV-1 RNA viral load were assessed by measuring the change from Baseline at scheduled visits planned as part of routine care.|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 144|Participants with an assessment at Baseline. Number analyzed=participants with an assessment at given time point.||log copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812804|NCT01074164|Secondary|Change in Severity of Atopic Dermatitis (AD) as Measured by a Change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI): Erythema Subscale Score|"The EASI is a composite score assessing four key clinical signs of AD and the area of skin involvement in four main body regions (head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs). The 5 EASI subscales are: erythema, infiltration/papulation, excoriation, lichenification, and percent area of skin involvement. For determining the erythema subscale score, erythema is assessed in each main body region and assigned a score of 0 to 3, where a score of 0 is associated with no expression of the clinical sign and a score of 3 is associated with severe expression of the clinical sign. Possible scores range from 0 to 3, where 0 correlates with better disease severity and 3 correlates with worse disease severity.
Hanifin JM, Thurston M, Omoto M, et al (2001) The eczema area and severity index (EASI): assessment of reliability in atopic dermatitis. Exp Dermatol; 10: 11-18."|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
812805|NCT01074164|Secondary|Change in Severity of Atopic Dermatitis (AD) as Measured by a Change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI): Area Subscale Score|"The EASI is a composite score assessing four key clinical signs of AD and the area of skin involvement in four main body regions (head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs). The 5 EASI subscales are: erythema, infiltration/papulation, excoriation, lichenification, and percent area of skin involvement. For determining area subscale score, the percent area of skin involvement is determined and assigned a score of 0 to 6, where 0 correlates with no skin involvement, 1 represents < 10% skin involvement, 2 represents 10-29% skin involvement, 3 represents 30-49% skin involvement, 4 represents 50-69% skin involvement, 5 represents 70-89% skin involvement, and 6 represents 90-100% skin involvement. Possible scores range from 0 to 6, where 0 correlates with better disease severity and 6 correlates with worse disease severity.
Hanifin JM, Thurston M, Omoto M, et al (2001) The eczema area and severity index (EASI): assessment of reliability in atopic dermatitis. Exp Dermatol; 10: 11-18."|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
812806|NCT01074164|Secondary|Change in Severity of Atopic Dermatitis (AD) as Measured by a Change in Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) Score|The IGA score is an assessment of AD severity. It is an assessment of the patient's disease state at the time of examination and does not attempt a comparison with any of the patient's previous disease states. Possible scores range from 0 to 5. A score of 0 is associated with no evidence of AD and a score of 5 is associated with severe AD.|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
812807|NCT01074164|Primary|Change in Itch Intensity as Measured by a Change in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score|The VAS score assesses itch intensity in subject’s with AD. The VAS consists of a 21.5 cm horizontal line with its left and right boundaries marked by vertical lines. The left boundary vertical line is labeled “Least Itch,” and the right boundary vertical line is labeled “Worst Itch.” Subjects are instructed to draw a vertical line across this scale that represents the intensity of itch that they are currently experiencing. Vertical lines drawn by subjects towards the left boundary of the horizontal line are associated with less itch intensity, and vertical lines drawn by subjects towards the right boundary of the horizontal line are associated with worse itch intensity. A ruler is then used to measure distance from the left boundary vertical line to the vertical line drawn by the subject to the nearest millimeter. Possible values range from 0 to 21.5 centimeters, with 0 centimeters associated with less itch intensity and 21.5 cm associated with worse itch intensity.|Baseline and 4 weeks|||centimeters||Full Range|Mean
812808|NCT01074216|Primary|To Achieve Target Vitamin D Level|To determine the ability of achieving the target serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D level of 40 ng/ml within 6 weeks of beginning vitamin D supplements in patients with metastatic colon cancer. A response is defined as achieving serum vitamin D levels ≥40 ng/ml at least once at any point during the first 6 weeks|Within 6 weeks of beginning vitamin D|||participants|||Number
812809|NCT01074229|Secondary|24 Total Morphine Consumption|Total 24 total morphine consumption post operative.|1 day|||miligrams of morphine||Standard Deviation|Mean
812810|NCT01074229|Primary|QoR40 on the Day After Surgery|QoR40 on the day after surgery. Quality of recovery is based on a score of 40-200. 40 being a poor recovery and 200 being a good recovery score.|1 day|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812811|NCT01074242|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Any Adverse Drug Reaction|An adverse drug reaction was an adverse experience for which a causal relationship to the study drug could not be ruled out|Up to 42 days after any Rotateq vaccination|All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine were included in the analysis||Percent of participants|||Number
812812|NCT01074242|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Any Adverse Experience|An adverse experience is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine is also an adverse experience.|Up to 42 days after any Rotateq vaccination|All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine were included in the analysis||Percent of participants|||Number
812813|NCT01074255|Primary|Investigator Global Assessment of Participants' Response to Therapy With EMEND (Aprepitant) for the Prevention of Acute and Delayed Nausea Following Chemotherapy|The investigators assessed a participant's response to therapy with EMEND to prevent acute and delayed nausea and vomiting associated with initial and repeat courses of chemotherapy when used concomitantly with other antiemetics. The response categories were: excellent (best possible anticipated response, considering the severity and stage of disease), good (good response, but less than the best possible anticipated response), fair (definite response, but could be better), poor (minimal response, unacceptable), or none (no response, absence of drug effect).|Up to 14 days following the cessation of treatment|The Efficacy Evaluable Population consisted of participants treated with EMEND for 3 days and assessed by an investigator for efficacy. Participants were excluded from efficacy analysis for having a EMEND administration period less than 3 days (143 participants) or unavailability of final efficacy evaluation (1 participant).||participants|||Number
812839|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Blinded Readers: Inter-reader Agreement on Categorical Accuracy Based on Assessment for UMRM vs CMRM - Breast Region Level|Inter-reader agreement was assessed by considering each breast region to have 2 possibilities (malignant disease / no malignant disease) for an assessment by the 2 image sets (UMRM and CMRM). Kappa value varies from 0 (no agreement) to 1 (perfect agreement).|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure.||kappa|Participants||Number
812814|NCT01074268|Primary|Extension Trial (Primary Endpoint): Rate of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|Rate of AEs per 100 patient years of exposure. Severity assessed by investigator. Mild: no/transient symptoms, no interference with subject's daily activities. Moderate: marked symptoms, moderate interference with subject's daily activities. Severe: considerable interference with subject's daily activities, unacceptable. Serious AE: AE that at any dose results in any of the following death, a life-threatening experience, in-subject hospitalization/prolongation of existing hospitalisation, persistent/significant disability/incapacity/congenital anomaly/birth defect or important medical issues|Week 0 to Week 52 + 7 days follow up|The SAS included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator in the main trial including subjects carried through to the extension trial.||Events/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
812815|NCT01074268|Secondary|Extension Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Rate of Nocturnal Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes: episodes requiring active assistance of another person to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes: episodes where subject was able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L, with or without symptoms. Nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as occuring between 00:01 and 05:59 a.m.|Week 0 to Week 52 + 7 days follow up|The SAS included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator in the main trial including subjects carried through to the extension trial.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
812816|NCT01074268|Secondary|Extension Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Rate of Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes: episodes requiring active assistance of another person to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes: episodes where the subject was able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L with or without symptoms|Week 0 to Week 52 + 7 days follow up|The SAS included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator in the main trial including subjects carried through to the extension trial.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
812817|NCT01074268|Secondary|Main Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Rate of Nocturnal Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes: episodes requiring active assistance of another person to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes: episodes where subject was able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L, with or without symptoms. Nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as occuring between 00:01 and 05:59 a.m.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|The SAS included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
812818|NCT01074268|Secondary|Main Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Rate of Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes: episodes requiring active assistance of another person to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes: episodes where the subject was able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L, with or without symptoms.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|The SAS included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
812819|NCT01074268|Secondary|Extension Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in FPG after 52 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 52|The FAS included all randomised subjects in the main trial including subjects carried through to the extension trial and missing data was imputed using LOCF. For 6 subjects change in FPG values were missing.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
812820|NCT01074268|Secondary|Main Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) After 26 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in FPG after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|The FAS included all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using LOCF. For 6 subjects change in FPG values were missing.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
812821|NCT01074268|Secondary|Extension Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Mean of 9-point Self Measured Plasma Glucose Profile (SMPG) at Week 52|Mean of 9-point self-measured plasma glucose profile (SMPG) at week 52. Plasma glucose was measured before breakfast, 90 minutes after the start of breakfast, before lunch, 90 minutes after the start of lunch, before main evening meal, 90 minutes after the start of main evening meal, before bedtime, at 04:00 AM and before breakfast on the following day.|Week 52|The FAS included all randomised subjects in the main trial including subjects carried through to the extension trial and missing data was imputed using LOCF. For 4 subjects all 9-point SMPG values were missing.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
812822|NCT01074268|Secondary|Main Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Mean of 9-point Self Measured Plasma Glucose Profile (SMPG) at Week 26|Mean of 9-point self-measured plasma glucose profile (SMPG) after week 26. Plasma glucose was measured before breakfast, 90 minutes after the start of breakfast, before lunch, 90 minutes after the start of lunch, before main evening meal, 90 minutes after the start of main evening meal, before bedtime, at 04:00 AM and before breakfast on the following day.|Week 26|The FAS included all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using LOCF. For 5 subjects, all 9-point SMPG values were missing.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
812823|NCT01074268|Secondary|Extension Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 52 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 52|The FAS included all randomised subjects in the main trial including subjects carried through to the extension trial and missing data was imputed using LOCF.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
812824|NCT01074268|Primary|Main Trial (Primary Endpoint): Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) After 26 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
812828|NCT01074307|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Echocardiographic Left Ventricular Size at Week 26|Left ventricle size was measured as systolic and diastolic Left Ventricular Internal Dimension (LVID). Diastolic dimension was measured of the left ventricle at the level of the chordae tendineae. The systolic dimension was measured as the smallest dimension between the left septal endocardium and the posterior wall endocardium during systole, whether or not the two walls were exactly apposed.|Baseline and Week 26|ITT population included all the randomized participants who had at least one dose of the investigational product. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'n' signifies number of participants who were evaluable for specified categories at different time points.||Milliliter LVID||Standard Deviation|Mean
812829|NCT01074307|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Echocardiographic Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) at Week 26|LVEF was defined as the fraction of blood (in percent) pumped out of the heart's left ventricular chamber with each heart beat and it is used to measure the cardiac output for the heart.|Baseline and Week 26|ITT population included all the randomized participants who had at least one dose of the investigational product. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'n' signifies number of participants who were evaluable for specified categories at different time points.||Percent LVEF||Standard Deviation|Mean
812830|NCT01074307|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 6-minute Walking Test (6-MWT) Distance at Week 26|6-minute Walking Test (6-MWT) distance was the distance that a participant could walk in 6 minutes. Participants were asked to perform the test at a pace that was comfortable to them, with as many breaks as they needed.|Baseline and Week 26|ITT population included all the randomized participants who had at least one dose of the investigational product. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'n' signifies number of participants who were evaluable for specified categories at different time points.||Meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
812831|NCT01074307|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Classified as Class I to IV According to New York Heart Association (NYHA)|New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification of heart failure: Class I: No limitation: ordinary physical exercise does not cause undue fatigue, dyspnea, or palpitations. Class II: Slight limitation of physical activity: comfortable at rest but ordinary activity results in fatigue, palpitations, or dyspnea. Class III: Marked limitation of physical activity: comfortable at rest but less than ordinary activity results in symptoms. Class IV: Unable to carry out any physical activity without discomfort: symptoms of heart failure are present even at rest with increased discomfort with any physical activity.|Baseline and Week 26|ITT population included all the randomized participants who had at least one dose of the investigational product.||Percentage of participants|||Number
812832|NCT01074307|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in N-terminal Pro B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) at Week 26|B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) is a substance secreted from the ventricles or lower chambers of the heart in response to changes in pressure that occur when heart failure develops and worsens. The level of BNP in the blood increases when heart failure symptoms worsen, and decreases when the heart failure condition is stable. The BNP level in a person with heart failure is higher than in a person with normal heart function. The percent change of NT-pro BNP was calculated according to the formula: N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) reduction ratio = 100*(Baseline NT-proBNP - Week 26 NT-proBNP)/Baseline NT-proBNP.|Baseline and Week 26|ITT population included all the randomized participants who had at least one dose of the investigational product. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
812833|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With at Least One Laboratory Parameter Change From Low or Normal at Baseline to Abnormally High at Follow–up 24 Hours Post Injection|Number of participants with at least one occurrence of changing from low or normal at baseline to high at follow-up.|Baseline, Follow–up visit (24 hours post injection)|Safety Analysis Set (SAF): The analysis of safety data was performed using all available data from all participants who administered any amount of gadobutrol.||participants|||Number
812834|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Vital Signs Change From Baseline and Follow–up 24 Hours Post Injection - Heart Rate|Heart rate was measured in a supine position.|Baseline, Follow–up visit (24 hours post injection)|Safety Analysis Set (SAF): The analysis of safety data was performed using all available data from all participants who administered any amount of gadobutrol.||beats/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
812835|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Vital Signs Change From Baseline and Follow–up 24 Hours Post Injection - Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure|Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were measured in a supine position. Blood pressure was not to be measured on the arm used for the injection.|Baseline, Follow–up visit (24 hours post injection)|Safety Analysis Set (SAF): The analysis of safety data was performed using all available data from all participants who administered any amount of gadobutrol.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
812836|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Blinded Reader 3: Intra-reader Variability Based on Assessment for CMRM - Breast Level|Intra-reader variability was assessed using a kappa on the match to SoT for the different regions within each participant (match, no match SoT). For each of the 3 readers, intra-reader agreement was assessed by considering each breast region to have 2 possibilities for an assessment by CMRM: matched SoT or did not match SoT. Kappa value varies from 0 (no agreement) to 1 (perfect agreement).|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure.||Kappa|Participants||Number
812837|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Blinded Reader 2: Intra-reader Variability Based on Assessment for CMRM - Breast Level|Intra-reader variability was assessed using a kappa on the match to SoT for the different regions within each participant (match, no match SoT). For each of the 3 readers, intra-reader agreement was assessed by considering each breast region to have 2 possibilities for an assessment by CMRM: matched SoT or did not match SoT. Kappa value varies from 0 (no agreement) to 1 (perfect agreement).|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||Kappa|Participants||Number
812838|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Blinded Reader 1: Intra-reader Variability Based on Assessment for CMRM - Breast Level|Intra-reader variability was assessed using a kappa on the match to SoT for the different regions within each participant (match, no match SoT). For each of the 3 readers, intra-reader agreement was assessed by considering each breast region to have 2 possibilities for an assessment by CMRM: matched SoT or did not match SoT. Kappa value varies from 0 (no agreement) to 1 (perfect agreement).|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure.||Kappa|Participants||Number
812840|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Difference of Confidence in Diagnosis for Breast Region Diagnosis Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM and CMRM+XRM vs XRM by Majority Reader, Participant Level|The 3 blinded readers each recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for each breast region based on a 4-point scale (1=not confident, 2=somewhat confident, 3=confident, and 4=very confident). The majority read value for the 3 readers was determined at the disease state level (no disease, unifocal, multifocal). If 2 of 3 or all 3 readers gave the same categorical determination of malignant disease for a breast region, the majority reader response was that category. If all 3 readers gave different categorical determination, the majority reader response was the most severe disease category given by any of the 3 readers, i.e. multifocal. For each participant, the mean of the confidence responses for the diagnosed breast regions was calculated, and rounded to the nearest 0.5. value respectively. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments by the majority reader for both modalities in the comparison for this assessment. Majority reader results are based on the average of the 3 blinded readers’s assessment.||difference of scores on a scale|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Mean
812841|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Accuracy Difference of Presence of Bilateral Malignant Disease Verified by SoT by Majority Reader, Participant Level|The disease state “bilateral malignant disease” was derived from the assessment of the different regions for each breast (right and left) for investigators for each imaging modality (UMRM, CMRM, XRM, UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM) based on the following rule: If the participant had at least one breast with no malignant region, the assessment of bilateral malignant disease was categorized as “No”. If the participant had at least one malignant lesion in both breasts, the assessment of bilateral malignant disease was categorized as “Yes”. The proportion of correct matches of each different image set to the SoT for the existence of bilateral malignant disease was derived. The analysis was based on the difference in accuracy for the evaluation of bilateral malignant disease for the following image comparisons on a participant level. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 388 participants; evaluable subjects with at least one region verified by SoT in each breast with available CMRM, UMRM, CMRM+XRM, UMRM+XRM and XRM assessment.||difference in accuracy (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812842|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Sensitivity Difference of Detection of Multicentric Malignant Disease Verified by SoT by Majority Reader, Breast Level|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the reader using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the sensitivity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants. The majority read value for the 3 blinded readers was determined at the disease state level (evaluable regions for sensitivity). If 2 of 3 or all 3 readers gave the same categorical determination of malignant disease for a breast region, the majority reader response was that category. If all 3 readers gave a different categorical determination, the majority response was the most severe disease category given by any of the 3 readers. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on a total number of 53 evaluable breasts with multicentric malignant disease.||difference in sensitivity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812843|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Specificity Difference in the Determination of Multifocal Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|A malignant breast was defined as FP, when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as TN. Specificity was then defined as TN/(TN+FP). The majority read value for the 3 blinded readers was determined at the disease state level (evaluable regions for specificity). If 2 of 3 or all 3 readers gave the same categorical determination of malignant disease for a breast region, the majority reader response was that category. If all 3 readers gave a different categorical determination, the majority reader response was the most severe disease category given by any of the 3 readers. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Single examination|For multifocal malignant disease, specificity analyses were based on a total number of 3816 regions, 390 participants in FAS.||difference in specificity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812844|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Specificity Difference in the Determination of Unifocal Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|A malignant breast was defined as FP, when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as TN. Specificity was then defined as TN/(TN+FP). The majority read value for the 3 blinded readers was determined at the disease state level (evaluable regions for specificity). If 2 of 3 or all 3 readers gave the same categorical determination of malignant disease for a breast region, the majority reader response was that category. If all 3 readers gave a different categorical determination, the majority reader response was the most severe disease category given by any of the 3 readers. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|For unifocal malignant disease, specificity analyses were based on a total number of 3307 regions (i.e. regions with no disease or multifocal malignant disease), 390 participants in FAS.||difference in specificity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812851|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Breast Level Specificity for All Breasts by Imaging Modality and by Reader|A non-malignant breast was defined as FP when the reader assessed at least one breast region as malignant. A malignant breast was defined as FP, when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as TN. Specificity was then defined as (N–FP)/N, where N was total number of breasts.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 390 participants; evaluable for specificity were breasts with or without malignant disease verified by SoT for which assessment by the imaging modality were available.||specificity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
824831|NCT01178268|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiac Event (Cardiac Death, All MI and TLR)||9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
812845|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Specificity Difference in the Determination of Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|A malignant breast was defined as FP, when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as TN. Specificity was then defined as TN/(TN+FP). The majority read value for the 3 blinded readers was determined at the disease state level (evaluable regions for specificity). If 2 of 3 or all 3 readers gave the same categorical determination of malignant disease for a breast region, the majority reader response was that category. If all 3 readers gave a different categorical determination, the majority reader response was the most severe disease category given by any of the 3 readers. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were performed for a total number of 3240 regions, 390 participants in FAS.||difference in specificity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812846|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Sensitivity Difference in the Determination of Multifocal Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the reader using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the sensitivity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants. The majority read value for the 3 blinded readers was determined at the disease state level (evaluable regions for sensitivity). If 2 of 3 or all 3 readers gave the same categorical determination of malignant disease for a breast region, the majority reader response was that category. If all 3 readers gave a different categorical determination, the majority response was the most severe disease category given by any of the 3 readers. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|For multifocal malignant disease, sensitivity analyses were performed for a total number of 67 regions.||difference in sensitivity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812847|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Sensitivity Difference in the Determination of Unifocal Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the reader using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the sensitivity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants. The majority read value for the 3 blinded readers was determined at the disease state level (evaluable regions for sensitivity). If 2 of 3 or all 3 readers gave the same categorical determination of malignant disease for a breast region, the majority reader response was that category. If all 3 readers gave a different categorical determination, the majority response was the most severe disease category given by any of the 3 readers. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|For unifocal malignant disease, sensitivity analyses were performed for a total number of 576 regions (i.e. regions with unifocal disease verified by SoT), 390 participants in FAS.||difference in sensitivity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812848|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Sensitivity Difference in the Determination of Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the reader using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the sensitivity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants. The majority read value for the 3 blinded readers was determined at the disease state level (evaluable regions for sensitivity). If 2 of 3 or all 3 readers gave the same categorical determination of malignant disease for a breast region, the majority reader response was that category. If all 3 readers gave a different categorical determination, the majority response was the most severe disease category given by any of the 3 readers. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were performed for a total number of 643 regions, 390 participants in FAS. Regions with malignant disease verified by SoT comprise unifocal and multifocal regions.||difference in sensitivity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812849|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Categorical Accuracy Difference of Extent of Malignant Disease Verified by Histopathology by Majority Reader, Breast Region Level|For each region the reader chose the category which best described the extent of malignant disease, i.e. no, unifocal, or multifocal malignant breast disease. The proportion of correct matches of each defined image set to the SoT for the extent of malignant breast disease was referred to as the categorical accuracy. The majority read value for the 3 blinded readers was determined at the disease state level (no disease, unifocal, multifocal). If 2 of 3 or all 3 readers gave the same categorical determination of malignant disease for a breast region, the majority reader response was that category. If all 3 readers gave different categorical determination, the majority reader response was the most severe disease category given by any of the 3 readers. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were performed for a total number of 1120 regions, 390 participants from FAS.||percent difference|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812850|NCT01067976|Other Pre-specified|Categorical Accuracy Difference of Extent of Malignant Disease Verified by SoT by Majority Reader, Breast Region Level|For each region the reader chose the category which best described the extent of malignant disease, i.e. no, unifocal, or multifocal malignant breast disease. The proportion of correct matches of each defined image set to the SoT for the extent of malignant breast disease was referred to as the categorical accuracy. The majority read value for the 3 blinded readers was determined at the disease state level (no disease, unifocal, multifocal). If 2 of 3 or all 3 readers gave the same categorical determination of malignant disease for a breast region, the majority reader response was that category. If all 3 readers gave different categorical determination, the majority reader response was the most severe disease category given by any of the 3 readers. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were performed for a total number of 3883 regions, 390 participants in FAS.||percent difference|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812852|NCT01067976|Secondary|Percentage Difference of Participants Whose Additional Cancers Were Detected Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM vs XRM, and CMRM vs CMRM+XRM|Additional cancer was defined as cancer which was present according to SoT, but which was not defined as index cancer, i.e. was not known when the participant was enrolled into the study. The difference in percentage of participants was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM value minus XRM value, CMRM value minus CMRM+XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 87 participants in FAS who had at least one additional cancer region according to SoT.||difference in percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812853|NCT01067976|Secondary|Percentage Difference of Participants Whose Index Cancers Were Detected Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM vs XRM, and CMRM vs CMRM+XRM|Index cancer is defined as the cancer confirmed by histology prior to inclusion which made the participants eligible for the study. The difference in percentage of participants was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM value minus XRM value, CMRM value minus CMRM+XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 382 participants in FAS. Index cancer was defined as the cancer confirmed by histology prior to inclusion which made the participant eligible for the study.||difference in percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812854|NCT01067976|Secondary|Breast Level Specificity of CMRM Based on Malignant Breasts|A malignant breast was defined as false positive (FP), when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as true negative (TN). Specificity was then defined as TN/(TN+FP).|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 388 participants in FAS; evaluable for specificity were breasts with malignant disease verified by SoT for which an assessment by the imaging modality was available.||specificity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812855|NCT01067976|Primary|Breast Level Specificity of CMRM for Non-malignant Breasts by Reader|A non-malignant breast was defined as false positive (FP), when the reader assessed at least one breast region as malignant. When all breast regions were assessed as non-malignant, the breast was defined as true negative (TN). Breast level specificity was first defined in participant as number of TN-breasts in participant divided by number of non-malignant breasts in participant. Subsequently the specificity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the specificities across all participants who contributed with at least one non-malignant breast.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 372 participants in FAS; evaluable for specificity were breasts without malignant disease as verified by Standard of Truth (SOT).||specificity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812856|NCT01067976|Primary|Sensitivity for Detection of Full Extent of Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM Per Reader|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the clinical investigators and the 3 blinded readers using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the sensitivity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 388 participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) who had regions with malignant disease verified by Standard of Truth (SOT).||sensitivity %||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812857|NCT01067976|Primary|Difference for Sensitivity for Detection of Full Extent of Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM Per Reader|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the clinical investigators and the 3 blinded readers using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the sensitivity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value. For ease of expression, the following abbreviations will be used: Magnetic Resonance Mammography (MRM), Unenhanced MRM (UMRM), combined unenhanced and contrast (gadobutrol)-enhanced MRM (CMRM), X-ray mammography (XRM).|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 388 participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) who had regions with malignant disease verified by Standard of Truth (SOT).||difference in sensitivity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812858|NCT01074437|Primary|Lesion Regression|measure of change in lesion area or volume|12 months|Insufficient enrollment for data analysis to be meaningful.|||||
812859|NCT01074437|Secondary|Demonstrate How Duplex Scanning to Assess Blood Vessel Density and Qualitative Color Ratings of Cutaneous Lesions From Photographs Can be Used to Measure and Quantify Changes in IH Size and Vascularity in a Clinically Relevant Manner.||1, 2 and 6 months after treatment initiation||||||
812860|NCT01074437|Secondary|Assess the Safety of Propranolol With Corticosteroids and Corticosteroids Alone in the Treatment of IH.||1, 2 and 6 months after treatment initiation||||||
812861|NCT01074437|Secondary|Determine Therapeutic Response of IH to Propranolol Among Patients Who Switch to Corticosteroids Plus Propranolol Therapy After Failing to Respond to Corticosteroids Alone.||1, 2, and 6 months after treatment initiation||||||
812862|NCT01074437|Primary|Compare Changes in IH Size and Vascularity for Subjects Randomized to Receive Initial Treatment With Corticosteroid-only Therapy Versus Combination Therapy With Corticosteroids Plus Propranolol||1, 2, and 6 months after treatment initiation||||||
812863|NCT01074450|Primary|AUC0-inf (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812864|NCT01074450|Primary|AUC0-t (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812865|NCT01074450|Primary|Cmax (Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812866|NCT01074463|Primary|AUC0-inf (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812867|NCT01074463|Primary|AUC0-t (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812879|NCT01074658|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Device Success|"Device Success is defined as a composite of:
Successful device delivery;
Stable device placement;
Intact retrieval of delivery catheter;
Successful device function as assessed immediately post-procedure by angiography including non-compromised flow in coronary arteries (without obstruction) device position (no migration) and a mean gradient as determined invasively of <15mmHg and ≤ 2 aortic regurgitation"|up to 24 hours|All attempted population in which the separate variables related to device success (see outcome measure description) were analyzable.||percentage of participants|||Number
812880|NCT01074658|Primary|Major Adverse Cardiac & Cerebrovascular Events (MACCE)|"MACCE is defined as a composite of:
All cause mortality
Myocardial Infarction (Q-wave and non-Q-wave)
Emergent cardiac surgery or percutaneous re-intervention
Stroke
The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to derive the freedom from MACCE at 30 days."|30 days|All attempted population.||Freedom from MACCE (%) @30days|||Number
812881|NCT01075074|Secondary|Time to Hospital Discharge Readiness|Elapsed time from post anesthesia care unit to readiness to hospital discharge. Assessment were made using the modified post anesthetic discharge scoring system. This assess 5 criteria: vital signs, activity and mental status, pain nausea and/or vomiting, surgical bleed, and intake and output. A score greater than or equal to 9 (on a 0 to 10 scale) is considered ready for discharge.|24 hours|75 subjects were randomized in 3 groups of 25, 5 were excluded from analysis because the surgeon had to proceed to an open incision from a laparoscopic case during the procedure.||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812882|NCT01075074|Secondary|Opioid Pain Medications Consumed During the First 24 Hours Post Surgery|Opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents taken by the subject for pain during the first 24 hours post hospital discharge|24 hours|75 subjects were randomized in 3 groups of 25, 5 were excluded from analysis because the surgeon had to proceed to an open incision from a laparoscopic case during the procedure.||mEq of PO morphine equivalent||Full Range|Mean
812883|NCT01075074|Secondary|Pain Burden During Early Recovery From Anesthesia|Area under the numeric rating scale for pain versus time (min) curve during the post anesthesia care admission. Numeric rating scale 0 to 10 with 0 equals no pain and 10 equals worst pain imaginable.|Post Operative|75 subjects were randomized in 3 groups of 25, 5 were excluded from analysis because the surgeon had to proceed to an open incision from a laparoscopic case during the procedure.||score on a scale * minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812884|NCT01075074|Primary|The Quality of Recovery Questionnaire (QoR40) on the Day (24 Hours) After Surgery|The quality of recovery questionnaire (QOR40) is a 40 question assessment of patient recovery following surgery. It evaluates 5 domains of recovery: pain, emotional status, physical comfort, physical independence, and support. Each question is scores on a 1 to 5 Likert scale with total scores ranging for 40, representing poor recovery, to 200, representing outstanding recovery.|24 hours after surgery|75 subjects were randomized in 3 groups of 25, 5 were excluded from analysis because the surgeon had to proceed to an open incision from a laparoscopic case during the procedure.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
812885|NCT01075087|Secondary|24 Hour Total Opioid Consumption.|24 Hour total opioid consumption translated into IV morphine equivalents.|24 hours|||miligram IV morphine equivalents||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812886|NCT01075087|Primary|Quality of Recovery 40 Score|Quality of Recovery 40 Score at 24 hours postoperative.|24 hours post operatively|||units on scale 40 (low) - 200 (high)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812887|NCT01075100|Secondary|Duration of Response|The duration of response is measured from the time measurement criteria are first met for CR/PR until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented.|30 months|Patients who achieved CR or PR.||months||Full Range|Median
812888|NCT01075100|Secondary|Time to Response|For patients who achieve a major objective response (CR or PR) the time to response will be assessed as the date of registration to the date of response.|24 months|Patients who achieve a major objective response (CR or PR).||months||Full Range|Median
812889|NCT01075100|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is measured from the date of randomization to the date of death for a dead patient. If a patient is still alive or is lost to follow up, the patient will be censored at the last contact date.|24 months|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812890|NCT01075100|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|"PFS is measured from the date of randomization to the date of first documented disease progression or date of death, whichever comes first. If a patient neither progresses nor dies, this patient will be censored at last contact date.
Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions"|24 months|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
812891|NCT01075100|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR)|Clinical benefit rate (CBR) defined as objective response rate (ORR, CR + PR) + SD >= 6 months|24 months|Evaluable population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812892|NCT01075100|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|"Evaluate the objective response rate calculated as CR+ PR in the population evaluable for response, as well as the 2 subgroups (hormone receptor positive [ER+/PR+/HER2-, ER+/PR-/HER2-, ER-/PR+/HER2-]) and ER-/PR-HER2-, separately).
Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR."|24 months|Evaluable population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812893|NCT01075152|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants, Per CSF WBC Subgroup, Who Died by Week 26|Percentage of Participants who died by week 26 based on CSF white blood cell (WBC) count at study entry (time of randomization at a median of 8 days of anti-fungal therapy).|26 weeks|among persons with a measured CSF white cell count at randomization (Day 7-11 of amphotericin treatment)||percentage of participants|||Number
812894|NCT01075152|Secondary|Microbiologic Clearance|Microbiologic clearance of cryptococcus as measured by serial quantitative cryptococcal cultures collected at diagnosis through 14 days of amphotericin therapy. The early fungicidal activity (EFA) of the rate of clearance is expressed as log10 colony forming units (CFU) of Cryptococcus neoformans per mL of CSF per day.|4 weeks|All participants with >2 quantitative CSF cultures obtained||log10 CFU/mL/day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813986|NCT01083602|Secondary|Responders to Treatment|The primary endpoint for this phase II study of patients with bortezomib-refractory MM is response after a maximum of 8 cycles of therapy as defined by the modified EBMT criteria.|after eight cycyles of treatment (24 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
812895|NCT01075152|Secondary|Karnofsky Functional Status|"Functional status via Karnofsky performance status score at 4, 26, 46 weeks.
Karnofsky Scale:
100 - Normal; no complaints; no evidence of disease. 90 - Able to carry on normal activity; minor signs or symptoms of disease. 80 - Normal activity with effort; some signs or symptoms of disease. 70 - Cares for self; unable to carry on normal activity or to do active work. 60 - Requires occasional assistance, but is able to care for most of his personal needs.
50 - Requires considerable assistance and frequent medical care. 40 - Disabled; requires special care and assistance. 30 - Severely disabled; hospital admission is indicated although death not imminent.
20 - Very sick; hospital admission necessary; active supportive treatment necessary.
10 - Moribund; fatal processes progressing rapidly. 0 - Dead"|46 weeks|Analysis is of persons alive at the time point.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812896|NCT01075152|Secondary|Antiretroviral Therapy Tolerability|Incidence of antiretroviral therapy interruption by >=3 consecutive days|26 weeks|Analysis is of persons who survived to initiate HIV therapy.||participants|||Number
812897|NCT01075152|Secondary|HIV-1 Viral Suppression|HIV-1 virologic suppression to <400 copies/mL at 26-weeks after enrollment|26 weeks|Among persons alive at 26 weeks. 1 participant in the early ART arm had consent withdrawn by their family on day 2 after study entry. 3 participants in the deferred ART arm missing their 26 week viral load sampling.||participants|||Number
812898|NCT01075152|Secondary|46-week Survival|46-week survival by time-to-event analysis of all subjects enrolled|46 weeks|||participants|||Number
812899|NCT01075152|Secondary|Safety of ART Initiation|Incidence of Adverse Events (Grade 3,4,5) through 46-weeks, as defined by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Division of AIDS toxicity classification scale, version 2009.|46 weeks|||participants|||Number
812900|NCT01075152|Secondary|Incidence of Cryptococcal-relapse|Incidence of culture positive cryptococcal meningitis relapse|46 weeks|||participants|||Number
812901|NCT01075152|Secondary|Incidence of Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome|Incidence of cryptococcal-related immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome through 46 weeks after enrollment.|46 weeks|analysis is of persons who survived to initiate HIV therapy||participants|||Number
812902|NCT01075152|Primary|Mortality|Intention to treat analysis of 26 week survival of all subjects enrolled. Reported below are the numbers of participants who died by Week 26.|26 weeks from study entry|||participants|||Number
812903|NCT01075178|Primary|Comparison Between CASES and CONTROLS of the Occurrence of Specific Clinical Outcomes of Death|The number of subjects who died|8-month chart review period in CASES and CONTROLS|The population analyzed included the full analysis set.||participants|||Number
812904|NCT01075178|Primary|Comparison Between CASES and CONTROLS of the Occurrence of Specific Clinical Outcomes of Serious Arrhythmia|The number of subjects who experienced at least 1 event of arrhythmia meeting any of the criteria for a serious adverse event|8-month chart review period in CASES and CONTROLS|The population analyzed included the full analysis set.||participants|||Number
812905|NCT01075178|Primary|Comparison Between CASES and CONTROLS of the Occurrence of Specific Clinical Outcomes of Serious Infection.|The number of subjects who experienced at least 1 event of infection meeting any of the criteria for a serious adverse event|8-month chart review period in CASES and CONTROLS|The population analyzed included the full analysis set.||participants|||Number
812906|NCT01075178|Primary|Comparison Between CASES and CONTROLS of the Occurrence of Specific Clinical Outcomes of Serious Infection, Serious Arrhythmia and/or Death|The number of subjects who experienced at least 1 event of infection, arrhythmia, or death meeting any of the criteria for a serious adverse event|8-month chart review period in CASES and CONTROLS|The population analyzed included the full analysis set.||participants|||Number
812907|NCT01075191|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4/CD8 T-cell Ratio|The CD4/CD8 T-cell ratio, also known as the T-lymphocyte helper/suppressor profile, presents the number of lymphocytes in the blood positive for CD4 cells compared with the number positive for CD8 cells. Changes in participants' CD4/CD8 T-lymphocyte ratio were assessed by measuring the change from Baseline in the ratio at scheduled study visits.|Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144|Evaluable participants. n=number of evaluable participants with given measurement at time point.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
812908|NCT01075191|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Relative CD8 Cell Count|Decreases in relative CD8 count (the percentage of total lymphocytes that are CD8 cells) are a biomarker for antiretroviral treatment effectiveness in restoring immunologic function. Changes in participants' CD8-positive (CD8+) T-lymphocyte counts were assessed by measuring the change from Baseline in the percentage of CD8+ cells at scheduled study visits.|Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144|Evaluable participants. n=number of evaluable participants with given measurement at time point.||percentage of cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
812909|NCT01075191|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Absolute CD8 Cell Count|Decreases in CD8 count are a biomarker for antiretroviral treatment effectiveness in restoring immunologic function. Changes in participants' CD8-positive (CD8+) T-lymphocyte counts were assessed by measuring the change from Baseline in the number of CD8+ cells at scheduled study visits.|Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144|Evaluable participants. n=number of evaluable participants with given measurement at time point.||cells/µL||Standard Deviation|Mean
812910|NCT01075191|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Relative CD4 Cell Count|Increases in relative CD4 count (the percentage of total lymphocytes that are CD4 cells) are a biomarker for antiretroviral treatment effectiveness in restoring immunologic function. Changes in participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts were assessed by measuring the change from Baseline in the percentage of CD4+ cells at scheduled study visits.|Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144|Evaluable participants. n=number of evaluable participants with given measurement at time point.||percentage of cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
812911|NCT01075191|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Absolute CD4 Cell Count|Increases in CD4 count are a biomarker for antiretroviral treatment effectiveness in restoring immunologic function. Changes in participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts were assessed by measuring the change from Baseline in the number of CD4+ cells at scheduled study visits.|Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144|Evaluable participants. n=number of evaluable participants with given measurement at time point.||cells/µL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814051|NCT01083758|Primary|Change in Albumincorrected Serum Calcium From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4, Week 8, and End of Treatment.|Change in albumincorrected serum calcium from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4, Week 8, and end of treatment.|Baseline and end of treatment (up to 8 weeks)|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
812912|NCT01075191|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Human Immunodeficiency Virus -1 Ribonucleic Acid (HIV-1 RNA) <50 Copies/mL|Viral load (number of HIV-1 RNA copies in the blood) was measured at baseline and scheduled study visits. A decrease in viral load is a measure used to assess the effectiveness of antiviral treatments. The percentage of participants with HIV RNA less than 50 copies/mL at each time point is presented.|Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144|Evaluable participants. n=number of evaluable participants with given measurement at time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
812913|NCT01075204|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Compliant With Treatment|Treatment compliance was assessed by the study physician at each study visit. The percentage of participants who were compliant with study treatment for 6 days, 7 days and 8 days is reported.|10 days|All enrolled patients.||percentage of participants|||Number
812914|NCT01075204|Secondary|Post-nasal Discharge Status at End of Study|Participants with post-nasal discharge at any time during the study were classified at the end of study as resolved, improved, or no change. 'No post-nasal discharge' indicates participants with no post-nasal discharge symptoms during the study period.|10 days|Enrolled patients with post-nasal discharge data available.||participants|||Number
812915|NCT01075204|Secondary|Rhinorrhea Status at End of Study|Participants with rhinorrhea (runny nose) at any time during the study were classified at the end of study as resolved, or no change. 'No rhinorrhea' indicates participants with no rhinorrhea during the study period.|10 days|All enrolled patients||participants|||Number
812916|NCT01075204|Secondary|Abnormal Breathing Sounds Status at End of Study|Participants with abnormal breathing sounds such as wheezing or rales at any time during the study were classified at the end of study as resolved, improved, or no change. 'No abnormal breath sounds' indicates participants with no abnormal breathing sounds during the study period.|10 days|All enrolled patients||participants|||Number
812917|NCT01075204|Secondary|Dyspnea Status at End of Study|Participants with dyspnea (shortness of breath) at any time during the study were classified at the end of study as resolved, improved, became worse, or no change. 'No dyspnea' indicates participants with no dyspnea symptoms during the study period.|10 days|All enrolled patients||participants|||Number
812918|NCT01075204|Secondary|Sputum Status at End of Study|Participants with sputum symptoms at any time during the study were classified at the end of study as resolved, improved, became worse, or no change. 'No sputum' indicates participants with no sputum symptoms during the study period.|10 days|Enrolled patients with sputum data available.||participants|||Number
812919|NCT01075204|Secondary|Cough Status at End of Study|Participants with cough at any time during the study were classified at the end of study as resolved, improved, became worse, or no change. 'No cough' indicates participants with no cough symptoms during the study period.|10 days|Enrolled patients with cough data available.||participants|||Number
812920|NCT01075204|Secondary|Fever Status at End of Study|Participants with fever (temperature over 37.0 degree of Celsius) at any time during the study were classified at the end of study as resolved, improved or no change. 'No fever' indicates participants with no fever during the study period.|10 days|All enrolled patients||participants|||Number
812921|NCT01075204|Primary|Classification of Overall Response|"Based on the participant and physician's assessment, overall symptom response was classified as follows:
Fast Responders: participants showing clinical recovery of all symptoms within the first 5 days of treatment.
Slow Responders: participants showing clinical recovery between Day 6 & Day 10 (includes participants with a fast response for some symptoms and slow response for the remaining symptoms).
Failure response: participants showing no clinical success by Day 10, or showing need for another anti-infective treatment to resolve aggravated symptoms (includes participants with a failure response for some symptoms and either a slow or fast response for the remaining symptoms)."|10 days|All enrolled patients||participants|||Number
812922|NCT01075204|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Success|Clinical success is defined as the disappearance of cough and other symptoms within 10 days or less from the start of clarithromycin treatment.|10 days|All enrolled patients.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
812923|NCT01075204|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a patient, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with their treatment.
If an adverse event meets any of the following criteria, it is considered a serious adverse event (SAE):
Results in death or is life-threatening, results in admission or prolongation of hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly or persistent or significant disability/incapacity or is an important medical event requiring medical or surgical intervention to prevent any of the outcomes listed above.
Please see Adverse Events section below for more details."|10 days|All enrolled patients.||participants|||Number
812924|NCT01075204|Secondary|Factors Affecting the Speed of Recovery|Factors affecting the speed of recovery were examined and tested for association with the speed of recovery. Logistic regression was conducted to assess whether the following nine variables; age, gender, body mass index (BMI), concomitant tobacco use, steroid use, bronchial asthma, allergic rhinitis, nasal septum deviation and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) act as predictors for speed of recovery of respiratory tract infections. Data shown are the beta regression coefficients for each variable.|10 days|All enrolled patients||coefficient|||Number
812925|NCT01075204|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment Failure|"Treatment failure is defined as failure to return to baseline symptom status (symptom status prior to the onset of the respiratory tract infection) within 10 days or the need for new treatments or medications during the first 10 days for persistence or aggravation of symptoms.
Participants with treatment failure were further categorized as:
All symptoms improved but not resolved within the study period;
Some symptoms improved and some resolved;
Some symptoms resolved or improved while other symptoms did not improve (unchanged);
Some symptoms resolved or improved while other symptoms became worse."|10 days|All enrolled patients||percentage of participants|||Number
812926|NCT01075204|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Fast Recovery|"Fast recovery is defined as the resolution of symptoms within 5 days or less from the start of clarithromycin modified release treatment. Recovery is defined as returning to the symptom status prior to the onset of the respiratory tract infection, based on the participant and physician's assessment.
Data are reported for all symptoms taken together (all symptoms resolved within 5 days) and for each individual symptom."|Day 1 to Day 5|All enrolled participants. For the individual symptoms, N indicates the number of participants with that symptom at Baseline and with available recovery data.||percentage of participants|||Number
812927|NCT01075217|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Adequate Quality of Opacification Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA|"The Investigator assessed all study images obtained for each patient using a 2-point scale (1 = adequate quality; 2 = inadequate quality); assessment was independent of factors or problems relating to the underlying patient condition or the imaging parameters selected.
Results are provided for patients with adequate quality."|Immediately postdose|Patients who did not deviate from the planned protocol and had the corresponding endpoint evaluations available were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
812928|NCT01075217|Secondary|The Number of Participants Requiring Repeat Injection(s) Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA.|The Investigator assessed the images and recorded the number of repeat power injections required due to motion artifacts for each participant.|Immediately postdose|Patients who did not deviate from the planned protocol and had the corresponding endpoint evaluations available were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
812929|NCT01075217|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Significant Motion Artifacts (Scores of 3 or 4) Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA.|Using the following 5-point scale, the Investigator reviewed the images for motion artifact in vessels distal to the knee: 0 = None; 1 = Mild, not significant; 2 = Significant, but correctable; 3 = Degrades image quality; 4 = Images uninterpretable. Scores of 3 and 4 were counted as significant motion artifacts.|Immediately postdose|Patients who did not deviate from the planned protocol and had the corresponding endpoint evaluations available were included in the analysis. Patients with significant motion artifact were those with a score of 3 or 4 for motion artifacts in vessels distal to the knee||participants|||Number
812930|NCT01075217|Secondary|Level of Heat in the Lower Extremities Scored by Group 2 as Assessed on the Heat VAS Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA|"The 10-centimeter Heat VAS was completed by the Group 2 patients to assess his/her heat level (separately from pain) in the lower extremity of interest. The scale was 0 to 10 cm, with the left end (0 cm)of the scale indicating no heat and the right end (10 cm) of the scale indicating the worst heat.
The Heat VAS was completed by the patient before completing the Pain VAS to assess pain."|Immediately after administration of agent using a power injector for the administration|Patients who did not deviate from the planned protocol and had the corresponding endpoint evaluations available were included in the analysis. Group 2 patients provided an assessment of heat by the Heat VAS prior to assessing pain by the Pain VAS.||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
812931|NCT01075217|Primary|Level of Pain/Heat in the Lower Extremities Scored by the Participants on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Following Intra-arterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA|"The 10-centimeter Pain VAS was completed by the Group 1 patients to assess his/her pain level (not scoring heat separately from pain) in the lower extremity of interest. The scale was 0 to 10 cm, with the left end (0 cm)of the scale indicating no pain and the right end (10 cm) of the scale indicating the worst pain.
The 10-centimeter Pain VAS (excluding Heat assessment, which was separately assessed) was completed by the Group 2 patients to assess his/her pain level in the lower extremity of interest. The scale was 0 to 10 cm, with the left end (0 cm)of the scale indicating no pain and the right end (10 cm) of the scale indicating the worst pain.
Group 1 completed the Pain VAS (heat not separate from pain). Group 2 completed the Pain VAS for pain only and, separately, the Heat VAS for heat only."|immediately after administration of agent using a power injector for the administration|Patients who received study agent, had the corresponding endpoint evaluations available and had no deviations from the planned protocol were included in the analysis.||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
812932|NCT01075243|Secondary|Participants Global Assessment to Response to Treatment (PGART)|PGART was measured by a score in a scale from 0-4: 0- Poor; 1- Fair 2- Good; 3- Very Good; 4- Excellent.|Baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812933|NCT01075243|Secondary|SPID Scores at 6 Hours|"SPID was calculated as sum of products of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120, 120-240, 240-300 and 300-360. Positive and higher scores indicate greater reduction in pain.
SPIDt = ∑PID x (timet - timet-1)
Pain Intensity was assessed at baseline and at each time-point based on a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) scale: 0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain.
If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from pain scores taken at baseline."|Every two hours from baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812934|NCT01075243|Secondary|SPID Scores at 4 Hours|"SPID was calculated as sum of products of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120, 120-240. Positive and higher scores indicate greater reduction in pain.
SPIDt = ∑PID x (timet - timet-1)
Pain Intensity was assessed at baseline and at each time-point based on a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) scale: 0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain.
If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from pain scores taken at baseline."|Every two hours from baseline to 4 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812942|NCT01075243|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication at 2 Hours|Percentage of participants who received rescue medication at different time points post dose.|Baseline to 2 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||Percentage of participants|||Number
812935|NCT01075243|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) Scores at 2 Hours|"SPID was calculated as sum of products of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120. Positive and higher scores indicate greater reduction in pain.
SPIDt = ∑PID x (timet - timet-1)
Pain Intensity was assessed at baseline and at each time-point based on a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) scale: 0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain.
If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from pain scores taken at baseline."|Every two hours from baseline to 2 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812936|NCT01075243|Secondary|TOTPAR at 6 Hours|"TOTPAR was calculated as sum of products of pain relief (PR) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120, 120-240, 240-300 and 300-360. Higher score indicated greater pain relief.
TOTPARt = ∑PR x (timet – timet-1).
PR score was assessed at each of the above time-points based on a 5-point categorical scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-meaningful relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief]."|Every two hours from baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812937|NCT01075243|Secondary|TOTPAR at 4 Hours|"TOTPAR was calculated as sum of products of pain relief (PR) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120, 120-240. Higher score indicated greater pain relief.
TOTPARt = ∑PR x (timet – timet-1).
PR score was assessed at each of the above time-points based on a 5-point categorical scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-meaningful relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief]."|Every two hours from baseline to 4 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812938|NCT01075243|Secondary|Total Pain Relief Score (TOTPAR) at 2 Hours|"TOTPAR was calculated as sum of products of pain relief (PR) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120. Higher score indicated greater pain relief.
TOTPARt = ∑PR x (timet – timet-1).
PR score was assessed at each of the above time-points based on a 5-point categorical scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-meaningful relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief]."|Every two hours from baseline to 2 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812939|NCT01075243|Secondary|SPRID at 4 Hours|SPRID:Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) and Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) at each post-dosing time-point. SPRID score ranged from -3.8 (least pain relief) to 26.3 (highest pain relief). SPID and TOTPAR were calculated as weighted sums of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) and Pain Relief Scores (PRS) at each measurement time, respectively. PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time-point from the baseline [pain severity score range:0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain using a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS)]. If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from baseline pain scores. PRS was assessed on 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-some relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief|Every two hours from baseline to 4 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812940|NCT01075243|Secondary|SPRID at 2 Hours|SPRID:Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) and Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) at each post-dosing time-point. SPRID score ranged from -1.8 (least pain relief) to 12.3 (highest pain relief). SPID and TOTPAR were calculated as weighted sums of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) and Pain Relief Scores (PRS) at each measurement time, respectively. PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time-point from the baseline [pain severity score range:0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain using a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS)]. If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from baseline pain scores. PRS was assessed on 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-some relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief|Every two hours from baseline to 2 hours post dose|All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812941|NCT01075243|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication at 6 Hours|Percentage of participants who received rescue medication at different time points post dose.|Baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||Percentage of participants|||Number
812943|NCT01075243|Secondary|Time to Start Using Rescue Medication|Median time of use of rescue medication by participants.|Baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored.||minutes||Full Range|Median
812944|NCT01075243|Secondary|Time to Onset of Meaningful Pain Relief|Participants recorded the time to meaningful relief by stopping a second stopwatch when they first began to experience meaningful relief.|Baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
812945|NCT01075243|Secondary|Time to Confirmed First Perceptible Relief|Participants recorded the time to first perceptible relief by starting the first stopwatch at the time of dosing and stopping it when he/she experienced the first perceptible pain relief. The first perceptible pain relief was confirmed if the participant also stopped the second stopwatch indicating meaningful relief.|Baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
812946|NCT01075243|Primary|Sum of Pain Relief and Pain Intensity Differences From 0 to 6 Hours (SPRID 6 Hours)|SPRID:Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) and Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) at each post-dosing time-point. SPRID score ranged from -5.8 (least pain relief) to 40.3 (highest pain relief). SPID and TOTPAR were calculated as weighted sums of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) and Pain Relief Scores (PRS) at each measurement time, respectively. PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time-point from the baseline [pain severity score range:0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain using a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS)]. If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from baseline pain scores. PRS was assessed on 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-some relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief]|Every two hours from Baseline to 6 hours post dose|Intent to Treat (ITT) population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812947|NCT01075256|Other Pre-specified|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Cold Water Sensitivity Pain Response on a VAS at Day 3|Response of exposed dentine surface to application of 1 ml freshly melted ice cold water was evaluated using a 100 mm VAS pain response scale. According to this analog scale, pain response for stimulated tooth ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (intense pain). Change from baseline in pain response was calculated using VAS score and a change of greater than 25 mm in VAS indicates potential relevant clinical significance of treatment.|Baseline to Day 3|ITT population subset: A subset of randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product who have at least one post-baseline efficacy measure. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812948|NCT01075256|Other Pre-specified|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Evaporative Air Sensitivity Pain Response on a VAS at Day 3|Response to a constant jet of air applied to a hypersensitive tooth was evaluated using a 100 mm VAS pain response scale. According to this analog scale, pain response for stimulated tooth ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (intense pain). Change from baseline in pain response was calculated using VAS score and a change of greater than 25 mm in VAS indicates potential relevant clinical significance of treatment.|Baseline to Day 3|ITT population subset: A subset of randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product who have at least one post-baseline efficacy measure. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812949|NCT01075256|Other Pre-specified|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Cold Water Sensitivity Pain Response on a VAS at Day 10|Response of exposed dentine surface to application of 1 ml freshly melted ice cold water was evaluated using a 100 mm VAS pain response scale. According to this analog scale, pain response for stimulated tooth ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (intense pain). Change from baseline in pain response was calculated using VAS score and a change of greater than 25 mm in VAS indicates potential relevant clinical significance of treatment.|Baseline to Day 10|ITT population subset: A subset of randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product who have at least one post-baseline efficacy measure. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812950|NCT01075256|Other Pre-specified|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Evaporative Air Sensitivity Pain Response on a VAS at Day 10|Response to a constant jet of air applied to a hypersensitive tooth was evaluated using a 100mm VAS pain response scale. According to this analog scale, pain response for stimulated tooth ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (intense pain). Change from baseline in pain response was calculated using VAS score and a change of greater than 25 mm in VAS indicates potential relevant clinical significance of treatment.|Baseline to Day 10|ITT population subset: A subset of randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product who have at least one post-baseline efficacy measure. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812951|NCT01075256|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Cold Water Sensitivity Pain Response on a VAS at Day 7|Response of exposed dentine surface to application of 1 ml freshly melted ice cold water was evaluated using a 100 mm VAS pain response scale. According to this analog scale, pain response for stimulated tooth ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (intense pain). Change from baseline in pain response was calculated using VAS score and a change of greater than 25 mm in VAS indicates potential relevant clinical significance of treatment.|Baseline to Day 7|ITT population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product who have at least one post-baseline efficacy measure. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812961|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks on Serum Calcitonin||Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable serum calcitonin data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
831861|NCT01243320|Secondary|Mean Change in Heart Rate|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||bpm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812952|NCT01075256|Primary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Cold Water Sensitivity Pain Response on a VAS at Day 15|Response of exposed dentine surface to application of 1 ml freshly melted ice cold water was evaluated using a 100 mm VAS pain response scale. According to this analog scale, pain response for stimulated tooth ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (intense pain). Change from baseline in pain response was calculated using VAS score and a change of greater than 25 mm in VAS indicates potential relevant clinical significance of treatment.|Baseline to Day 15|ITT population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product who have at least one post-baseline efficacy measure. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812953|NCT01075256|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Evaporative Air Sensitivity Pain Response on a VAS at Day 7|Response to a constant jet of air applied to a hypersensitive tooth was evaluated using a 100 millimeter (mm) VAS pain response scale. According to this analog scale, pain response for stimulated tooth ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (intense pain). Change from baseline in pain response was calculated using VAS score and a change of greater than 25 mm in VAS indicates potential relevant clinical significance of treatment.|Baseline to Day 7|ITT population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product who have at least one post-baseline efficacy measure. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812954|NCT01075256|Primary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Evaporative Air Sensitivity Pain Response on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Day 15|Response to a constant jet of air applied to a hypersensitive tooth was evaluated using a 100 millimeter (mm) VAS pain response scale. According to this analog scale, pain response for stimulated tooth ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (intense pain). Change from baseline in pain response was calculated using VAS score and a change of greater than 25 mm in VAS indicates potential relevant clinical significance of treatment.|Baseline to Day 15|Intention to treat (ITT) population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product who have at least one post-baseline efficacy measure. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812955|NCT01075282|Secondary|Number of Participants With LY2189265 Antibodies at 26, 52, 78 Weeks and 4 Weeks After Last Dose of Study Drug (83 Weeks Maximum)|LY2189265 (Dulaglutide) anti-drug antibodies (ADA) were assessed at baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks, and at the safety follow-up visit 30 days after study drug discontinuation (83 weeks). The number of participants with initial postbaseline detection of treatment emergent (defined as a 4-fold increase in the ADA titer from baseline) LY2189265 ADA at each time point were summarized.|Baseline, 26, 52, 78, and 83 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 with evaluable LY2189265 ADA data.||participants|||Number
812956|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks on Electrocardiogram Parameters, Fridericia Corrected QT (QTcF) Interval and PR Interval|The QT interval is a measure of the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave and was calculated from electrocardiogram (ECG) data using Fridericia's formula: QTc = QT/RR^0.33. Corrected QT (QTc) is the QT interval corrected for heart rate and RR, which is the interval between two R waves. PR is the interval between the P wave and the QRS complex. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable ECG QTcF or PR Interval data.||milliseconds (msec)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812957|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks on Electrocardiogram Parameters, Heart Rate|Electrocardiogram (ECG) heart rate was measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable ECG heart rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812958|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52, and 78 Weeks on Blood Pressure|Sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) and sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable blood pressure data.||milliliter of mercury (mmHG)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812959|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change in Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks on Pulse Rate|Sitting pulse rate was measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable sitting pulse rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812960|NCT01075282|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Cardiovascular Events at 26, 52 and 78 Weeks|Information on cardiovascular (CV) risk factors was collected at baseline. Data on any new CV event was prospectively collected using a CV event electronic case report form. At prespecified visits, participants were asked about any new CV event. Deaths and nonfatal cardiovascular adverse events (AEs) were adjudicated by a committee of physicians with cardiology expertise external to the Sponsor. The nonfatal cardiovascular AEs to be adjudicated include myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, hospitalization for heart failure, coronary interventions (such as coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention), and cerebrovascular events including cerebrovascular accident (stroke) and transient ischemic attack. The number of participants with adjudicated CV events is summarized cumulatively at 26, 52, and 78 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine.||participants|||Number
814961|NCT01092663|Primary|Fasting Plasma Glucose Clearance|Change from baseline in fasting plasma glucose clearance after 12 weeks of colesevelam alone or colesevelam plus sitagliptin treatments.|baseline and 12 weeks|||ml per kg FFM per minute (min)||Standard Deviation|Mean
812962|NCT01075282|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Pancreatitis at 26, 52 and 78 Weeks|The number of participants with pancreatitis confirmed by adjudication is summarized cumulatively at 26, 52, and 78 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine.||participants|||Number
812963|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks on Pancreatic Enzymes|Amylase (total and pancreas-derived) and lipase concentrations were measured.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable pancreatic enzyme data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units/liter||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812964|NCT01075282|Secondary|Number of Participants Requiring Additional Intervention Due to Hyperglycemia at 26, 52 and 78 Weeks|Additional intervention was defined as any additional therapeutic intervention in participants who developed persistent, severe hyperglycemia despite full compliance with the assigned therapeutic regimen, or initiation of an alternative antihyperglycemic medication following study drug discontinuation. The number of participants requiring additional intervention due to hyperglycemia is summarized cumulatively at 26, 52, and 78 weeks.|26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine.||participants|||Number
812965|NCT01075282|Secondary|Rate of Self-reported Hypoglycemic Events at 26, 52 and 78 Weeks|Hypoglycemic events (HE) were classified as severe (defined as episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions), documented symptomatic (defined as any time a participant feels that he/she is experiencing symptoms and/or signs associated with hypoglycemia, and has a plasma glucose level of =<3.9 mmol/L), asymptomatic (defined as events not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured plasma glucose of =<3.9 mmol/L), nocturnal (defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurred between bedtime and waking), or probable symptomatic (defined as events during which symptoms of hypoglycemia were not accompanied by a plasma glucose determination). The 1-year adjusted rate of hypoglycemic events is summarized cumulatively at 26, 52, and 78 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine.||events per participant per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
812966|NCT01075282|Secondary|Number of Self-reported Hypoglycemic Events at 26, 52 and 78 Weeks|Hypoglycemic events (HE) were classified as severe (defined as episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions), documented symptomatic (defined as any time a participant feels that he/she is experiencing symptoms and/or signs associated with hypoglycemia, and has a plasma glucose level of =<3.9 mmol/L), asymptomatic (defined as events not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured plasma glucose of =<3.9 mmol/L), nocturnal (defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurred between bedtime and waking), or probable symptomatic (defined as events during which symptoms of hypoglycemia were not accompanied by a plasma glucose determination). The number of self-reported hypoglycemic events is summarized cumulatively at 26, 52, and 78 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine.||events|||Number
812967|NCT01075282|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events at 26, 52 and 78 Weeks|A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was defined as an event that first occurs or worsens (increases in severity) after baseline regardless of causality or severity. The number of participants with one or more TEAE is summarized cumulatively at 26, 52, and 78 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine. The number of participants with at least 1 TEAE is reported.||participants|||Number
812968|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks in the Low Blood Sugar Survey|The Low Blood Sugar Survey (LBSS) contains 33 items comprised of 2 subscales (behavior and worry), each of which is rated on a 5-point numeric rating scale from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). It captures behavioral changes associated with the concerns and experiences of hypoglycemia and the degree to which participants are worried about certain aspects associated with hypoglycemia during the previous 4 weeks. The behavior (or avoidance) subscale has 15 items, and the worry (or affect) subscale has 18 items. Subscale scores are calculated by summing participant responses to items (behavior range 0-60; worry range 0-72). A total score is calculated as the sum of both subscales (range 0-132). Higher scores indicate greater negative impact on subscales and total score. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable LBSS data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812969|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks in the Impact of Weight on Self-Perception|The Impact of Weight on Self-Perception (IW-SP) questionnaire contains 3 items that assess how often the participants' body weight affects how happy they are with their appearance and how often they feel self-conscious when out in public. Items are scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale where 5 = never and 1 = always. A single total score is calculated by summing the scores for all 3 items. Total score ranges between 3 and 15, where a higher score is indicative of better self-perception. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable IW-SP data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831862|NCT01243320|Secondary|Mean Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||mmhg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
812970|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks in the Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living|The Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living questionnaire (renamed the Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire [APPADL]) contains 7 items that assess how difficult it is for participants to engage in certain activities considered to be integral to normal daily life, such as walking, standing and climbing stairs. Items are scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale where 5 = “not at all difficult” and 1 = “unable to do”. The individual scores from all 7 items are summed and a single total score is calculated and may range between 7 and 35. A higher score indicates better ability to perform activities of daily living. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable APPADL data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812971|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks in the EuroQol 5 Dimension|The European Quality of Life - 5 dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire is a generic, multidimensional, health-related, quality-of-life instrument. It consists of 2 parts: the first part assesses 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) that have 3 possible levels of response (no problem, some problem, or extreme problem). These dimensions are converted into a weighted health-state Index Score. The EQ-5D United Kingdom (UK) score ranges from -0.59 to 1.0, where a score of 1.0 indicates perfect health and negative values are valued as worse than dead. The second part of the questionnaire consists of a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) on which the participants rated their perceived health state on that day from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health). Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and adjusted by treatment, country, and baseline.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable EQ-5D data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812972|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks for Body Mass Index|Body mass index (BMI) is an estimate of body fat based on body weight divided by height squared. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable BMI data.||kilograms per square meter (kg/m^2)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812973|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks for Body Weight|Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable body weight data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||kilogram (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812974|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 and 78 Weeks in Glucagon Concentration|Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable glucagon data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||picomoles per liter (pmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812975|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52 and 78 Weeks in Updated Homeostasis Model Assessment of Beta-cell Function (HOMA2-%B) and Updated Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Sensitivity (HOMA2-%S)|The homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) is a method used to quantify insulin resistance and beta (β)-cell function. HOMA2-B is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate steady state beta cell function (%B) as a percentage of a normal reference population (normal young adults). HOMA2-S is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate insulin sensitivity (%S), as percentages of a normal reference population (normal young adults). The normal reference population for both HOMA2-B and HOMA-2S were set at 100%. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline of C-peptide based HOMA2-%B and HOMA2-%S were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 with evaluable HOMA2-%B or HOMA2-%S data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||percentage of HOMA2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812976|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26, 52 and 78 Weeks for Daily Mean Blood Glucose Values From the 8-point Self-monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Profiles|The self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) data were collected at the following 8 time points: pre-morning meal; 2 hours post-morning meal; pre-midday meal; 2 hours post-midday meal; pre-evening meal; 2 hours post-evening meal; bedtime; and 3 AM or 5 hours after bedtime. Least Squares (LS) means of the mean of the 8 time points (Daily Mean) were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable SMBG data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812994|NCT01075763|Secondary|Global Deterioration Scale Score|Global deterioration scale includes seven different diagnostic stages ranging between “no cognitive deterioration” and “very serious cognitive deterioration”. It investigates the cognitive impairment. Scores range between 1 (no cognitive deterioration) and 7 (very severe cognitive decline).|Baseline, Week 28 and 52|Per protocol population included all participants who received treatments as scheduled and were followed up to week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812977|NCT01075282|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Less Than or Equal to 6.5% at 26, 52 and 78 Weeks|Number of participants achieving HbA1c levels less than or equal to 6.5% was analyzed with a logistic regression model with baseline, country, and treatment as factors included in the model.|26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||participants|||Number
812978|NCT01075282|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Less Than 7% at 26, 52 and 78 Weeks|Number of participants achieving HbA1c levels less than 7.0% was analyzed with a logistic regression model with baseline, country, and treatment as factors included in the model.|26, 52, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||participants|||Number
812979|NCT01075282|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks and 78 Weeks Endpoint in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline HbA1c as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 78 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812980|NCT01075282|Primary|Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks Endpoint in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country and treatment as fixed effects and baseline HbA1c as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
812981|NCT01075347|Secondary|Patients With Corneal Complications Due to Delayed Surface Re-epithelization (e.g. Infectious Corneal Ulcer, Corneal Melting, Sterile Corneal Ulcer, Corneal Neovascularization)||every day till total re-epithelization up to 14 days|||participants|||Number
812982|NCT01075347|Primary|Patients With Corneal Epithelial Healing Time Within 14 Days|Patients were hospitalized and examined daily for graft re-epithelialization, which was the main outcome measure.Corneal epithelial healing(the process which the new corneal epithelial cells regenerated to cover the bare cornea lost of its epithelium, the cornea's outer layer) was recorded daily by slit-lamp examination with fluorescein staining.Patients with post-operative chronic persistent epithelial defects for >14 days after the operation were treated with therapeutic contact lens (TCL) application and followed up as outpatients.|every day till total re-epithelization up to 14 days|||participants|||Number
812983|NCT01075399|Primary|Reproducibility of [F18]HX4 PET Imaging in Measuring Hypoxia in Tumors|Primary tumor uptake of [F 18]HX4 was measured on PET images by onsite radiologist or nuclear medicine physician for 1st and 2nd PET scans. Values measured were: SUV (Standard Uptake Value), SUV Max (Maximum standard uptake value), SUV Mean (Mean standard uptake value), and T/B ratio (Tumor to background ratio). Pearson's correlation coefficient was calculated for each of the parameter.|Time between 1st and 2nd scan was 1 to 6 days|Based upon inclusion/exclusion criteria||participants|||Number
812984|NCT01075646|Secondary|Contamination of the Catheter (Microbiologist Analysis)||at 48 hours|||participants|||Number
812985|NCT01075646|Secondary|Local Reaction in the Wound and Insertion Point of the Catheter (Inflammation Signs and Infection)||During 8-15 days|||participants|||Number
812986|NCT01075646|Secondary|Secondary Effects Due to Morphine: Nausea and Vomiting||during 48 hours|||participants|||Number
812987|NCT01075646|Secondary|Time Spent Sitting in a Chair, Deambulation, Solid Ingestion.||7 Days (from Day 8-15)|||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812988|NCT01075646|Secondary|Intensity of Pain Measured by Verbal Pain Scale.|Verbal pain scale is a numeric measure of intensity pain, values range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (excruciating pain), Each patient rate the paín that feel with a number from 0 to 10.|At interval periods during 48 hours|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812989|NCT01075646|Primary|Mg of Morphine Consumption During 48 Hours Administered by Patient Controlled Analgesia System||48 hours|||mg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
812990|NCT01075685|Secondary|Change in the Number of Excessive Drinkers|The number of excessive drinkers is the number of participants whose weekly alcohol intake exceeds guidelines, i.e. 21 or 14 standard drinks (male/female) per week|baseline and 6 weeks|||participants|||Number
812991|NCT01075685|Secondary|Category of Change in Weekly Alcohol Intake|"Category of change in weekly alcohol intake (WAI) is a 3-level categorical variable whose values are:
clinically significant reduction in WAI, defined as a decrease of 10% or over;
clinically significant increase in WAI, defined as an increase of 10% or over if WAI at baseline is positive, or any increase if WAI at baseline is 0);
and no clinically significant change, which includes all other cases."|baseline and 6 weeks|||participants|||Number
812992|NCT01075685|Secondary|Relative Change in Weekly Alcohol Intake|(6 weeks minus baseline)/baseline|baseline and 6 weeks|Participants with weekly alcohol consumption baseline at 0 were excluded from this analysis||percent of baseline consumption||Standard Deviation|Mean
812993|NCT01075685|Primary|Change in Weekly Alcohol Intake|"The unit of standard drink is a drink containing 10g of pure alcohol. Participants had to report their weekly alcohol intake in a diary, in which they could choose among 21 glasses of various capacities and containing various alcoholic drinks. Each of those glasses was then converted into standard drinks."|baseline and 6 weeks|Only participants who completed the study were included in this analysis||standard drinks||Standard Deviation|Mean
813005|NCT01075815|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship.|Baseline up to 2 months after OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day {end of stimulation cycle} [approximately 28 days])|Safety population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||participants|||Number
812995|NCT01075763|Secondary|Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) Score|The GDS consists of 30 'yes' or 'no' items aimed to assess depression. One point is assigned to each answer and the cumulative score is rated on a scoring grid. Scores are grouped as follows: 0-9 'normal', 10-19 'mildly depressed', and 20-30 'severely depressed'.|Baseline, Week 28 and 52|Per protocol population included all participants who received treatments as scheduled and were followed up to week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812996|NCT01075763|Secondary|Clinician's Interview Based Impression of Change (CIBIC-PLUS) Score|CIBIC-PLUS: structured instrument based on comprehensive evaluation of 3 domains: participant cognition, behavior and functioning, including assessment of daily living activities. It includes 15 items and represents assessment of skilled clinician using validated scales based on the observation at interviews conducted separately with participant and caregiver familiar with behavior of participant. According to comparison between baseline and follow-up assessments, scores can range between 1 (markedly improved) and 7 (markedly worsened), with 4 indicating no change observed between two visits.|Week 28 and 52|Per protocol population included all participants who received treatments as scheduled and were followed up to week 52.||participants|||Number
812997|NCT01075763|Secondary|Physical Self-Maintenance Scale (PSMS) Score|PSMS designed as a disability measure for use in planning and evaluating treatment in elderly participants living in community or in institutions, is Guttman scale containing 6 items of self-care. The scale is based on theory that human behavior can be ordered in a hierarchy of complexity, within each category, a further hierarchy of complexity runs from basic to complex activities. It includes 6 items, testing the following areas: toilet use, eating, dressing, physical appearance, deambulation and bath. Scores range between 0 (excellent performance) and 30 (worst performance).|Baseline, Week 28 and 52|Per protocol population included all participants who received treatments as scheduled and were followed up to week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812998|NCT01075763|Secondary|Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) Score|IADL is used to evaluate participants with early-stage disease, both to assess level of disease and to determine participant's ability of self-care. IADL scale measures functional impact of emotional, cognitive, and physical impairments. It provides information about participants' compromising rate and care he might need. It includes 8 items: testing ability to use telephone, shopping, food preparation, housekeeping, laundry, mode of transportation, responsibility for own medication and ability to handle finances. Scores range between 0 (impairment) and 8 (full independence).|Baseline, Week 28 and 52|Per protocol population included all participants who received treatments as scheduled and were followed up to week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
812999|NCT01075763|Secondary|Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, Non-cognitive Subscale (ADAS-NonCog) Score|ADAS-NonCog is a subscale of ADAS aimed to evaluate the non-cognitive features such as mood state and behavioral changes. It takes about 10 minutes to be performed and includes 10 items: testing tearful, depressed mood, concentration/distractibility, uncooperative to testing, delusions, hallucinations, pacing, motor activity increase, tremors and appetite change. Scores range between 0 (excellent performance) and 35 (worst performance).|Baseline, Week 12, 28 and 52|Per protocol population included all participants who received treatments as scheduled and were followed up to week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813000|NCT01075763|Secondary|Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE) Score|MMSE is a tool for screening cognitive decline associated with dementia. It is a brief examination intended to evaluate an adult participant's level of cognitive functioning. The test is performed in following areas: orientation in time and place, learning and immediate recall, mental control and concentration, short-term recall, naming ability, language expression, verbal comprehension, writing comprehension, writing ability and visual-spatial coordination. Scores range between 0 (maximum cognitive deficit) and 30 (no cognitive deficit).|Baseline, Week 12, 28 and 52|Per protocol population included all participants who received treatments as scheduled and were followed up to week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813001|NCT01075763|Secondary|Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) Score|ADAS: global rating scale created to evaluate both cognitive and functional aspects linked with disease progression. ADAS-Cog: subscale of ADAS which consists in a series of short tests aimed to evaluate possible cognitive impairment due to disease progression. It includes 11 items, testing word-finding difficulty, following commands, naming: objects and fingers, orientation, word recognition, recall of test instructions, constructions, ideational praxis, spoken language ability, comprehension of spoken language and word recall. Scores range from 0 (no impairment) to 70 (serious deficit).|Week 12 and 28|Per protocol population included all participants who received treatments as scheduled and were followed up to week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813002|NCT01075763|Primary|Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) Score|ADAS: global rating scale created to evaluate both cognitive and functional aspects linked with disease progression. ADAS-Cog: subscale of ADAS which consists in a series of short tests aimed to evaluate possible cognitive impairment due to disease progression. It includes 11 items, testing word-finding difficulty, following commands, naming: objects and fingers, orientation, word recognition, recall of test instructions, constructions, ideational praxis, spoken language ability, comprehension of spoken language and word recall. Scores range from 0 (no impairment) to 70 (serious deficit).|Baseline and Week 52|Per protocol population included all participants who received treatments as scheduled and were followed up to week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813003|NCT01075815|Secondary|Number of Cycles Cancelled Due to Risk of Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome (OHSS)|OHSS is a syndrome which can manifest with enlarged ovaries, advanced ascites with increased vascular permeability, pleural fluid accumulation, hemoconcentration, and increased blood clotting.|Baseline up to 2 months after OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day {end of stimulation cycle} [approximately 28 days])|Safety population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||cycles|||Number
813004|NCT01075815|Secondary|Number of Participants With Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome (OHSS)|OHSS is a syndrome which can manifest with enlarged ovaries, advanced ascites with increased vascular permeability, pleural fluid accumulation, hemoconcentration, and increased blood clotting.|Baseline up to 2 months after OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day {end of stimulation cycle} [approximately 28 days])|Safety population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||participants|||Number
814052|NCT01083758|Primary|Change in Albumincorrected Serum Calcium From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4, Week 8, and End of Treatment.|Change in albumincorrected serum calcium from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4, Week 8, and end of treatment.|Baseline and week 8|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813007|NCT01075815|Secondary|Number of Recombinant Human Choriogonadotropin (r-hCG) Cycles Cancelled Due to Poor Response|Poor response was defined as 3 or less follicles of greater than or equal to 12 mm developing following at least 7 days of study treatment.|Up to 2 months after OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day {end of stimulation cycle} [approximately 28 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||cycles|||Number
813008|NCT01075815|Secondary|Number of Ovarian Stimulation Days|Ovarian stimulation included from first rFSH injection (S1) until day on which r-hCG was administered (r-hCG day). This period was divided into 2 parts: the first period in which 300 International Unit (IU) rFSH dose was constant and which covered from S1 to Day 4 of stimulation period (S4); the second period in which the rFSH dose could be adjusted depending on the ovarian response and which began on S4 and finished on the day on which the criteria for administration of r-hCG to induce the final follicular maturation were met.|S1 up to r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 28 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813009|NCT01075815|Secondary|Estradiol (E2) Levels on r-hCG Day||r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 28 days])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here N represents the number of participants with plasma E2 levels at r-hCG day."||picogram/milliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813010|NCT01075815|Secondary|Total Dose of Recombinant Follicle Stimulating Hormone (r-FSH)||2 months after OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day {end of stimulation cycle} [approximately 28 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||IU||Standard Deviation|Mean
813011|NCT01075815|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Pregnancies|Clinical pregnancy was defined as pregnancy diagnosed by ultrasonographic visualization of one or more gestational sacs or definitive clinical signs of pregnancy. It includes ectopic pregnancy.|2 months after OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day {end of stimulation cycle} [approximately 28 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||participants|||Number
813012|NCT01075815|Secondary|Number of Participants With Biochemical Pregnancies|Biochemical pregnancy was defined as a pregnancy diagnosed only by the detection of hCG in serum or urine and that does not develop into a clinical pregnancy.|2 months after OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day {end of stimulation cycle} [approximately 28 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||participants|||Number
813013|NCT01075815|Secondary|Number and Quality of Embryos|Embryos were graded according to Spanish Association for the Study of Reproductive Biology (ASEBIR) criteria into different categories: (A) optimal quality with maximum capacity for implantation, (B) good quality with a high capacity for implantation, (C) regular with low possibility of implantation and (D) poor quality with very little possibility of implantation.|Day 2-3 post OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day {end of stimulation cycle}[approximately 28 days])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here N represents the number of participants who had at least one fertilized oocyte."||embyros|||Number
813014|NCT01075815|Secondary|Number of Fertilized Oocytes (2 Pronuclei [PN])|Oocytes were fertilized using Intra-cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) technique which is an in-vitro fertilization procedure in which a single sperm is injected directly into an egg under a microscope. The appearance of two 2PN is the first sign of successful fertilization as observed during in vitro fertilization, and is usually observed after ICSI. The zygote is then termed 2PN.|34-38 hours post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 28 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||2PN oocytes|||Number
813015|NCT01075815|Secondary|Number of Mature Oocytes Retrieved|Number of mature oocytes retrieved per reporting group on the day of OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 28 days]) was calculated. Oocyte retrieval is a technique used in in-vitro fertilization in order to remove oocytes from the ovary of the female, enabling fertilization outside the body. The nuclear maturity was evaluated based on the presence of a germinal vesicle (GV) or whether oocytes were in metaphase I (Meta-I) or II (Meta-II) stage.|34-38 hours post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 28 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||mature oocytes|||Number
813016|NCT01075815|Secondary|Mean Number of Oocytes Retrieved|Mean number of oocytes retrieved per reporting group on the day of OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 28 days]) was calculated. Oocyte retrieval is a technique used in in-vitro fertilization in order to remove oocytes from the ovary of the female, enabling fertilization outside the body.|34-38 hours post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 28 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
813017|NCT01075815|Secondary|Mean Number of Follicles Greater Than or Equal to 14 Millimeter (mm) on Recombinant Human Choriogonadotropin (r-hCG) Day||r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 28 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||follicles||Standard Deviation|Mean
813018|NCT01075815|Primary|Implantation Rate|Implantation rate was measured as the number of gestational sacs observed, divided by the number of embryos transferred.|Day 35-42 post ovum pick-up (OPU) (34-38 hours post recombinant human choriogonadotropin day {end of stimulation cycle}[approximately 28 days])|Intention to treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||sacs per embryo||Standard Deviation|Mean
813019|NCT01075958|Primary|Word Recognition (Episodic Memory)|The original 15 words plus 15 distractor words were presented one at a time in a random order. For each word the participant indicated whether or not it was included in the original list of words by pressing appropriate ‘yes’ and ‘no’ keys as quickly as possible. Stimuli remained on screen until an appropriate response had been made.|Single visit|||percent of correct responses||Standard Error|Mean
813020|NCT01075958|Primary|Delayed Word Recall (Episodic Memory)|The participant was again given 60 seconds to write down as many of the words presented previously as possible.|Single visit|||Number of words recalled||Standard Error|Mean
814053|NCT01083758|Primary|Change in Albumincorrected Serum Calcium From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4, Week 8, and End of Treatment.|Change in albumincorrected serum calcium from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4, Week 8, and end of treatment.|Baseline and week 4|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813021|NCT01075958|Primary|Immediate Word Recall (Episodic Memory)|A unique set of fifteen words is presented. Words were selected at random from a large bank of words derived from the MRC Psycholinguistic Database matched for word length, frequency, familiarity and concreteness. Stimulus duration was one second, as was the inter-stimulus duration. Following word presentation, the participant was allowed 60 seconds to write down as many of the words as possible.|Single visit|||Number of words recalled||Standard Error|Mean
813022|NCT01075958|Primary|3-back Task (Working Memory)|A continuous string of letters (upper and lower case; inter-stimulus interval of 2.5 seconds) was presented; 45 letters in total with 15 target pairs. For each stimulus, participants were instructed to indicate whether this was the same letter that appeared three letters before.|Single visit|||percent of correct responses||Standard Error|Mean
813023|NCT01075958|Primary|Corsi Blocks Span (Spatial Working Memory)|In this task nine identical blue squares appeared on screen in non-overlapping random positions. A set number of blocks changed colour from blue to red in a randomly generated sequence. Participants were instructed to repeat the sequence by clicking on the blocks using the mouse and cursor. The task was repeated five times at each level of difficulty. The sequence span increased from 4, until the participant could no longer correctly recall the sequence, resulting in a span measure of nonverbal working memory, calculated by averaging the level of the last five correctly completed trials.|Single visit|||Blocks remembered in sequence||Standard Error|Mean
813024|NCT01075958|Primary|Alphabetic Working Memory (Working Memory)|Five random letters (A-Z) were presented sequentially for the participant to hold in memory. This was followed by a series of 30 probe digits (15 targets and 15 distractors) for each of which the participant indicated whether or not it had been in the original series by a simple key press. The task consisted of 3 separate trials.|Single visit|||percent of correct responses||Standard Error|Mean
813025|NCT01075958|Primary|Numeric Working Memory (Working Memory)||Single visit|||percent of correct responses||Standard Error|Mean
813026|NCT01075958|Primary|Four Choice Reaction Time (Attention)|A visual representation of the four direction arrow keys of a standard keyboard was presented on screen. The arrows ‘lit up’ at random on screen until the corresponding key press was made. In all, each arrow was the target stimulus 12 times, forming a total of 48 stimuli for this task in all.|Single visit|||ms||Standard Error|Mean
813027|NCT01075958|Primary|Choice Reaction Time (Attention)|An arrow appeared on the screen pointing to the left or to the right. Participants responded with a left or right key press corresponding to the direction of the arrow. There was a randomly varying inter-stimulus interval of between 1 and 3 seconds for a total of fifty stimuli.|Single visit|||ms||Standard Error|Mean
813028|NCT01075958|Secondary|Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS)|The DASS is a set of three self-report scales designed to measure the negative emotional states of depression, anxiety and stress. Each of the three DASS scales contains 14 items. Subjects are asked to use 4-point (0-3) severity/frequency scales to rate the extent to which they have experienced each state over the past week. Scores for Depression, Anxiety and Stress (0-42) are calculated by summing the scores for the relevant items, with higher scores indicating higher incidence of negative emotional symptoms. A total score can be derived by adding scores from each of the subscales (0-126).|Single visit-90 minutes|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813029|NCT01075958|Primary|Simple Reaction Time (Attention)|The participant was instructed to press the ‘space bar’ on the laptop keyboard as quickly as possible every time an upwards pointing arrow appeared on screen. Fifty stimuli were presented with an inter-stimulus duration that varied randomly between 1 and 3.5 seconds.|Single visit|Only those participants for whom a venous blood sample was obtained (N=239) were entered into the analysis. A further 20 participants were excluded on the basis that their BMI exceeded 30, and could not be considered 'healthy individuals'.||ms||Standard Error|Mean
813030|NCT01075971|Primary|The Overall Preference Between Two Buprenorphine Sublingual Formulations, After a Switch From the Marketed Tablet (Subutex®) to the New Fast Dissolving Tablet (FDT), in Opioid-dependent Patients With Buprenorphine 8 mg or 16 mg Daily Maintenance Therapy.|"Patient's overall satisfaction on Day 1 to Day 5 postdose. Marketed sublingual tablet (Marketed SL): Days 1 and 2; Fast dissolving tablet (FTD): Days 3, 4, and 5. Within 1 hour after complete dissolution of the tablet(s), overall satisfaction towards the study treatment was to be scored by the patient himself / herself using a 10-cm visual analogic scale (VAS) ranging from Not at all satisfied (score = 0) to Totally satisfied (score = 10)."|Daily, Day 1 to Day 5|||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813031|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Apparent Total Body Clearance of Oral Posaconazole (CL/F)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 3, 5, 8 and 12 hours after dosing on Day 7 (Cohort 0), or Day 28 (Cohorts 1 and 2)|CL/F for posaconazole was not calculated in this study because it was collected in other studies more appropriate for evaluation of this parameter|||||
813032|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Average Concentration of Oral Posaconazole (Cavg)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration. Cavg was calculated as steady state AUC / dosing interval (12 hours).|Predose and 3, 5, 8 and 12 hours after dosing on Day 7 (Cohort 0), or Day 28 (Cohorts 1 and 2)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens. Cohort 3 was not evaluated for this outcome measure.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813033|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve of Oral Posaconazole (AUC)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 3, 5, 8 and 12 hours after dosing on Day 7 (Cohort 0), or Day 28 (Cohorts 1 and 2)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens. Cohort 3 was not evaluated for this outcome measure.||hour*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813034|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Time of Observed Maximum Concentration of Oral Posaconazole (Tmax)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 3, 5, 8 and 12 hours after dosing on Day 7 (Cohort 0), or Day 28 (Cohorts 1 and 2)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens. Cohort 3 was not evaluated for this outcome measure.||Hours||Full Range|Median
814083|NCT01084005|Secondary|Number of Patients With Rescue Therapy|The use of rescue therapy was planned for patients failing to achieve preset criteria based on glucose levels during the randomised treatment period of the trial|week 24|FAS (OC)||Number of patients|||Number
813035|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Maximum Concentration of Oral Posaconazole (Cmax)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 3, 5, 8 and 12 hours after dosing on Day 7 (Cohort 0), or Day 28 (Cohorts 1 and 2)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens. Cohort 3 was not evaluated for this outcome measure.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813036|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Trough Concentration of Oral Posaconazole (Cmin)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|12 hours after dosing on Day 7 (Cohort 0), or Day 28 (Cohorts 1 and 2)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens. Cohort 3 was not evaluated for this outcome measure.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813037|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Total Body Clearance of IV Posaconazole (CL)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 1, 1.5, 1.75, 4, 8, and 12 hours after start of infusion on Day 14 (Cohorts 1 and 2), or Day 10 (Cohort 3)|CL for posaconazole was not calculated in this study because it was collected in other studies more appropriate for evaluation of this parameter.|||||
813038|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Average Concentration of IV Posaconazole (Cavg)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration. Cavg was calculated as steady state AUC / dosing interval (24 hours).|Predose and 1, 1.5, 1.75, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after start of infusion on Day 14 (Cohorts 1 and 2), or Day 10 (Cohort 3)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813039|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve of IV Posaconazole (AUC)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 1, 1.5, 1.75, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after start of infusion on Day 14 (Cohorts 1 and 2), or Day 10 (Cohort 3)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens.||hour*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813040|NCT01075984|Primary|Single Dose Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve of IV Posaconazole (AUC)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 1, 1.5, 1.75, 4, 8, and 12 hours after start of infusion on Day 1 (Cohorts 0, 1 and 2)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens. Cohort 3 was not evaluated for this outcome measure.||hour*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813041|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Time of Observed Maximum Concentration of IV Posaconazole (Tmax)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 1, 1.5, 1.75, 4, 8, and 12 hours after start of infusion on Day 14 (Cohorts 1 and 2), or Day 10 (Cohort 3)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens.||Hours||Full Range|Median
813042|NCT01075984|Primary|Single Dose Time of Observed Maximum Concentration of IV Posaconazole (Tmax)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 1, 1.5, 1.75, 4, 8, and 12 hours after start of infusion on Day 1 (Cohorts 0 and 1)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens. Cohort 3 was not evaluated for this outcome measure.||Hours||Full Range|Median
813043|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Maximum Concentration of IV Posaconazole (Cmax)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 1, 1.5, 1.75, 4, 8, and 12 hours after start of infusion on Day 14 (Cohorts 1 and 2), or Day 10 (Cohort 3)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813044|NCT01075984|Primary|Single Dose Maximum Concentration of IV Posaconazole (Cmax)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|Predose and 1, 1.5, 1.75, 4, 8, and 12 hours after start of infusion on Day 1 (Cohorts 0, 1 and 2)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens. Cohort 3 was not evaluated for this outcome measure.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813045|NCT01075984|Primary|Steady State Trough Concentration of IV Posaconazole (Cmin)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|24 hours after start of infusion on Day 14 (Cohorts 1 and 2), or Day 10 (Cohort 3)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813046|NCT01075984|Primary|Single Dose Trough Concentration of IV Posaconazole (Cmin)|Blood samples were collected from participants for the determination of plasma POS concentration.|12 hours after start of infusion on Day 1 (Cohorts 0, 1 and 2)|The PK-evaluable population included participants who had no major protocol violations and had documented adherence to the dosing and PK regimens. Cohort 3 was not evaluated for this outcome measure.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813047|NCT01076036|Primary|Procedural Technical Success|Successful robotic delivery and retraction of all PCI devices during CorPath PCI procedure.|Intervention|Total number of PCI devices.||percentage of PCI devices|||Number
813048|NCT01076036|Primary|Clinical Procedural Success|The percentage of Participants with <30% final diameter stenosis of the target lesion without in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (defined as the composite of death, recurrent MI, and target vessel revascularization)|48-hrs or hospital discharge, whichever occurs first|||percentage of participants|||Number
813049|NCT01076075|Primary|Number of Participants Discontinuing Study Drug Due to An Adverse Event||Week 0 to Week 54|The All Patients as Treated Population took at least 1 dose of study drug. Participants received glycemic rescue medication if they met specific glycemic goals up to Week 24. Participants discontinued due to adverse events are reported regardless of rescue medication. Five participants were excluded from analyses due to 1 site's non-compliance.||participants|||Number
813050|NCT01076075|Primary|Number of Participants With One or More Adverse Events (AEs) - Week 0 to Week 54||Week 0 to Week 54|The All Patients as Treated Population took at least one dose of study drug. Participants received glycemic rescue medication if they met specific glycemic goals up to Week 24. Adverse events include those that occurred prior to a receiving rescue medication. Five participants were excluded from analyses due to 1 site's non-compliance.||participants|||Number
813051|NCT01076075|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 24|Change from baseline reflects the Week 24 value minus the baseline value.|Baseline to Week 24|The Full Analysis Set Population received at least one dose of study treatment and had baseline data and at least one post-baseline treatment endpoint observation for the analysis endpoint. Missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). Five participants were excluded from analyses due to one site's non-compliance.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813052|NCT01076075|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 2-hour Post-Meal Glucose at Week 24|Change from baseline reflects the Week 24 value minus the baseline value. Two-hour post-meal glucose was measured following a standard meal.|Baseline and Week 24|The Full Analysis Set Population received at least one dose of study treatment and had baseline data and at least one post-baseline treatment endpoint observation for the analysis endpoint. Missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). Five participants were excluded from analyses due to one site's non-compliance.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813053|NCT01076075|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1C (%) at Week 24|Change from baseline reflects the Week 24 value minus the baseline value. A1C represents the percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin.|Baseline and Week 24|The Full Analysis Set Population received at least one dose of study treatment and had baseline data and at least one post-baseline treatment endpoint observation for the analysis endpoint. Missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). Five participants were excluded from analyses due to one site's non-compliance.||Percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813054|NCT01076088|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 24|Change from baseline in FPG at Week 24 is defined as Week 24 FPG minus Week 0 FPG.|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set, all randomized participants except those who: failed to take at least 1 dose of study treatment, lacked all post-randomization data for FPG subsequent to at least 1 dose of study treatment, or lacked baseline data for FPG. Last observation carried forward (missing data approach).||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813055|NCT01076088|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 2-hour Post Meal Glucose (2-h PMG) at Week 24|Change from baseline in 2-h PMG at Week 24 is defined as Week 24 2-h PMG minus Week 0 2-h PMG.|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set, all randomized participants except those who: failed to take at least 1 dose of study treatment, lacked all post-randomization data for 2-h PMG subsequent to at least 1 dose of study treatment, or lacked baseline data for 2-h PMG. Last observation carried forward (missing data approach).||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813056|NCT01076088|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1C (A1C) at Week 24|A1C is measured as percent. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 24 A1C percent minus the Week 0 A1C percent.|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set, all randomized participants except those who: failed to take at least 1 dose of study treatment, lacked all post-randomization data for the A1C subsequent to at least 1 dose of study treatment, or lacked baseline data for the A1C. Last observation carried forward (missing data approach).||Percent of glycosylated hemoglobin||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813057|NCT01076153|Secondary|Number and Type of Adverse Events|Adverse events were collected during the course of the study up to 30 days or 5 half-lives following the last dose of Klacid. The number of participants experiencing a serious or non-serious adverse event is summarized. See the Reported Adverse Event section for details.|Baseline to 14 days|The safety population included all participants who took at least 1 dose of Klacid.||Events|||Number
813058|NCT01076153|Primary|Average Time From Baseline to Recovery From Cough and Other Symptoms|Study participants were seen at an initial visit (baseline) and received Klacid treatment for 5 to 14 days. A medical appointment (visit or phone call) was made 6 to 14 days after the first visit. Participants' symptoms were rated using one of the following categories: resolved, improved, not changed, or worse. Associated dates were also recorded. Symptoms included, but were not limited to, cough, fever, and sore throat. Recovery was defined as the disappearance of all signs and symptoms of infection.|Baseline to 14 days|The per-protocol population consisted of 694 participants as 66 participants were excluded for protocol deviations (some more than 1): Age less than 18 years (22), took excluded drugs (17), took Klacid more than 14 days (16), took Klacid less than 5 days (11), added 250 mg Klacid to Klacid MR (5), and used injectable drugs (3).||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813059|NCT01076166|Secondary|Number and Type of Adverse Events|Adverse events were collected during the course of the study up to 30 days or 5 half-lives following the last dose of Klacid. The number of participants experiencing a serious or non-serious adverse event are summarized. See the Reported Adverse Event section for details.|Baseline to 14 days|The safety population included all participants who took at least 1 dose of Klacid.||Participants|||Number
813060|NCT01076166|Primary|Average Time From Baseline to Recovery From Fever and Other Symptoms|Participants were observed during his/her Klacid treatment (5 to 14 days). A medical appointment was made 6 to 14 days after the first visit. Participants' symptoms were rated using one of the following categories: resolved, improved, not changed, or worse. Associated dates were also recorded. Symptoms included, but were not limited to, fever, cough, chest/abdominal pain, and vomiting. Recovery was defined as the disappearance of all signs and symptoms of infection.|Baseline to 14 days|A total of 29 patients were excluded for protocol deviations: Took Klacid less than 5 days (9), took Klacid more than 14 days (4), Klacid intravenous formulation used instead of granules (9), participants enrolled prior to signed study agreement (5), and age less than 6 months (2). Average time to recovery was based on 171 recovered patients.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813061|NCT01076179|Other Pre-specified|Time to Virologic Failure|"Time to virologic failure was defined by the earliest occurrence of:
HIV-1 RNA > 400 copies/mL confirmed on 2 consecutive occasions after achieving at least 1 HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL,
HIV-1 RNA > 400 copies/mL at the final on-study visit if the participant had previously experienced at least 1 HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL but subsequently did not have HIV-1 RNA > 400 copies/mL on 2 consecutive occasions, or
Day 1 if the participant never achieved HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL during study participation.
A participant who prematurely discontinued study drug with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL was censored from analysis at the time of discontinuation provided that he/she did not previously experience either (a), (b) or (c)."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 144|Participants with an assessment||weeks||Standard Error|Mean
813103|NCT01076348|Primary|Model 4965 Complication Free Rate|A 4965 lead-related complication is an adverse event requiring invasive intervention to resolve. The complication-free rate is based on the number of leads analyzed.|1 year|Patients ≥ 19 yrs at implant of MDT 4965 Epicardial Lead.||Model 4965 complication free rate|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
813063|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With HIV-1 Coreceptor Tropism During Follow-up|Participants with CCR5 tropic virus, CXC motif chemokine receptor 4 (CRCX4) tropic virus, or dual/mixed tropic virus at Follow-up.|up to Week 144|Since this was an observational study, resistance testing was performed at the discretion of the treating physician. No follow-up data on tropism was collected.|||||
813064|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With HIV-1 Coreceptor Tropism at Baseline|Participants with CCR5 tropic virus, CXC motif chemokine receptor 4 (CRCX4) tropic virus, or dual/mixed tropic virus at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0)|Participants with an assessment at Baseline||Participants|||Count of Participants
813065|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With NRTI Resistance During Follow-Up|"Characterization of baseline resistance and development of resistance using the interpretation system HIV-GRADE (available at www.hiv-grade.de. Genotypic interpretation was performed using the HIV-GRADE algorithm updated in December 2015). Susceptible indicates full susceptibility of a virus to a certain drug without any limitations in terms of resistance. Partial resistance is indicated if severe limitations in susceptibility have to be expected and the drug can not count for a fully active drug any more. However, these drugs can still be very useful in situations with generally limited options (salvage). Resistant indicates that high level drug resistance has to be expected."|up to Week 144|Participants with an assessment at follow-up; since this was an observational study, resistance testing was performed at the discretion of the treating physician.||Participants|||Count of Participants
813066|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With Nucleoside Analog Reverse-Transcriptase Inhibitor (NRTI) Resistance at Baseline|"Characterization of baseline resistance and development of resistance using the interpretation system HIV-GRADE (available at www.hiv-grade.de. Genotypic interpretation was performed using the HIV-GRADE algorithm updated in December 2015). Susceptible indicates full susceptibility of a virus to a certain drug without any limitations in terms of resistance. Partial resistance is indicated if severe limitations in susceptibility have to be expected and the drug can not count for a fully active drug any more. However, these drugs can still be very useful in situations with generally limited options (salvage). Resistant indicates that high level drug resistance has to be expected."|Baseline (Week 0)|Participants with an assessment at Baseline||Participants|||Count of Participants
813067|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With NNRTI Resistance During Follow-Up|"Characterization of baseline resistance and development of resistance using the interpretation system HIV-GRADE (available at www.hiv-grade.de. Genotypic interpretation was performed using the HIV-GRADE algorithm updated in December 2015). Susceptible indicates full susceptibility of a virus to a certain drug without any limitations in terms of resistance. Partial resistance is indicated if severe limitations in susceptibility have to be expected and the drug can not count for a fully active drug any more. However, these drugs can still be very useful in situations with generally limited options (salvage). Resistant indicates that high level drug resistance has to be expected."|up to Week 144|Participants with an assessment at follow-up; since this was an observational study, resistance testing was performed at the discretion of the treating physician.||Participants|||Count of Participants
813068|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With NNRTI Resistance at Baseline|"Characterization of baseline resistance and development of resistance using the interpretation system HIV-GRADE (available at www.hiv-grade.de. Genotypic interpretation was performed using the HIV-GRADE algorithm updated in December 2015). Susceptible indicates full susceptibility of a virus to a certain drug without any limitations in terms of resistance. Partial resistance is indicated if severe limitations in susceptibility have to be expected and the drug can not count for a fully active drug any more. However, these drugs can still be very useful in situations with generally limited options (salvage). Resistant indicates that high level drug resistance has to be expected."|Baseline (Week 0)|Participants with an assessment at Baseline||Participants|||Count of Participants
813069|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With INI Resistance During Follow-Up|"Characterization of baseline resistance and development of resistance using the interpretation system HIV-GRADE (available at www.hiv-grade.de. Genotypic interpretation was performed using the HIV-GRADE algorithm updated in December 2015). Susceptible indicates full susceptibility of a virus to a certain drug without any limitations in terms of resistance. Partial resistance is indicated if severe limitations in susceptibility have to be expected and the drug can not count for a fully active drug any more. However, these drugs can still be very useful in situations with generally limited options (salvage). Resistant indicates that high level drug resistance has to be expected."|up to Week 144|Participants with an assessment at follow-up (neither had available Baseline testing); since this was an observational study, resistance testing was performed at the discretion of the treating physician.||Participants|||Count of Participants
813070|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With INI Resistance at Baseline|"Characterization of baseline resistance and development of resistance using the interpretation system HIV-GRADE (available at www.hiv-grade.de. Genotypic interpretation was performed using the HIV-GRADE algorithm updated in December 2015). Susceptible indicates full susceptibility of a virus to a certain drug without any limitations in terms of resistance. Partial resistance is indicated if severe limitations in susceptibility have to be expected and the drug can not count for a fully active drug any more. However, these drugs can still be very useful in situations with generally limited options (salvage). Resistant indicates that high level drug resistance has to be expected."|Baseline (Week 0)|Participants with an assessment at Baseline||Participants|||Count of Participants
813071|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With PI Resistance During Follow-Up|"Characterization of baseline resistance and development of resistance using the interpretation system HIV-GRADE (available at www.hiv-grade.de. Genotypic interpretation was performed using the HIV-GRADE algorithm updated in December 2015). Susceptible indicates full susceptibility of a virus to a certain drug without any limitations in terms of resistance. Partial resistance is indicated if severe limitations in susceptibility have to be expected and the drug can not count for a fully active drug any more. However, these drugs can still be very useful in situations with generally limited options (salvage). Resistant indicates that high level drug resistance has to be expected."|Up to Week 144|Participants with an assessment during follow-up; since this was an observational study, resistance testing was performed at the discretion of the treating physician.||Participants|||Count of Participants
814279|NCT01084551|Secondary|Average Duration of RLS Symptoms|Change of average duration of RLS symptoms in a week from baseline to the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period. Only the days with RLS symptoms are used for calculation.|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (weeks 13)|FAS, LOCF||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
813072|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With Protease Inhibitor (PI) Resistance at Baseline|"Characterization of baseline resistance and development of resistance using the interpretation system HIV-Genotypic Resistance-Algorithm Deutschland (GRADE; available at www.hiv-grade.de.
Genotypic interpretation was performed using the HIV-GRADE algorithm updated in December 2015). Susceptible indicates full susceptibility of a virus to a certain drug without any limitations in terms of resistance. Partial resistance is indicated if severe limitations in susceptibility have to be expected and the drug can not count for a fully active drug any more. However, these drugs can still be very useful in situations with generally limited options (salvage). Resistant indicates that high level drug resistance has to be expected."|Baseline (Week 0)|Participants with an assessment at Baseline||Participants|||Count of Participants
813073|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With LPV Resistance During Follow-Up|"Characterization of baseline resistance and development of resistance using the interpretation system HIV-GRADE (available at www.hiv-grade.de. Genotypic interpretation was performed using the HIV-GRADE algorithm updated in December 2015). Susceptible indicates full susceptibility of a virus to a certain drug without any limitations in terms of resistance. Partial resistance is indicated if severe limitations in susceptibility have to be expected and the drug can not count for a fully active drug any more. However, these drugs can still be very useful in situations with generally limited options (salvage). Resistant indicates that high level drug resistance has to be expected."|up to Week 144|Participants with an assessment during follow-up; since this was an observational study, resistance testing was performed at the discretion of the treating physician.||Participants|||Count of Participants
813074|NCT01076179|Secondary|Number of Participants With Lopinavir (LPV) Resistance at Baseline|"Characterization of baseline resistance and development of resistance using the interpretation system HIV-Genotypic Resistance-Algorithm Deutschland (GRADE; available at www.hiv-grade.de.
Genotypic interpretation was performed using the HIV-GRADE algorithm updated in December 2015). Susceptible indicates full susceptibility of a virus to a certain drug without any limitations in terms of resistance. Partial resistance is indicated if severe limitations in susceptibility have to be expected and the drug can not count for a fully active drug any more. However, these drugs can still be very useful in situations with generally limited options (salvage). Resistant indicates that high level drug resistance has to be expected."|Baseline (Week 0)|Participants with an assessment at Baseline||Participants|||Count of Participants
813075|NCT01076179|Secondary|Time to CD4 Cell Count Increase From Baseline of ≥ 100/ Cells/μL||From Week 0 to Week 144|Participants with an assessment||weeks||Standard Error|Mean
813076|NCT01076179|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Absolute CD4 Cell Count Increases From Baseline of ≥ 100 Cells/μL at All Time Points, As Treated Analysis|Changes in participants' CD4 cell counts were assessed by measuring the number of CD4 cells at scheduled visits planned as part of routine care.|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 144|'As treated' analyses: participants with an assessment, missing data excluded. Number analyzed=participants with an assessment at given time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
813077|NCT01076179|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Absolute CD4 Cell Count Increases From Baseline of ≥ 100 Cells/μL at All Time Points, Modified Intent-to-Treat Analysis|Changes in participants' CD4 cell counts were assessed by measuring the number of CD4 cells at scheduled visits planned as part of routine care.|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 144|Modified 'intent-to-treat' analysis: missing values were replaced by the last observed value of that variable (last observation carried forward method).||percentage of participants|||Number
813078|NCT01076179|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Absolute Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) Cell Count|Changes in participants' CD4 cell counts were assessed by measuring the change from Baseline in the number of CD4 cells at scheduled visits planned as part of routine care.|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 144|Participants with an assessment at Baseline. Number analyzed=participants with an assessment at given time point.||cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813079|NCT01076179|Primary|Prevalence of Adverse Events (Weeks 0-144), Per Participant|Percentage of participants who experienced at least 1 adverse event during Weeks 0-144 by adverse event type. Doctors asked participants for adverse events, grouped them into categories given in the eCRF. The list of adverse events included in the eCRF were hypertriglyceridemia, hypercholesterolemia, low HDL cholesterol, high LDL cholesterol, hyperglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, elevated AST, elevated ALT, elevated γGT, elevated alkaline phosphatase, stomatitis, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, mood disorder, neurocerebellar disorder, headache, fatigue, fever, other (listed as 'not specified').|Weeks 0 to 144|||percentage of participants|||Number
813080|NCT01076179|Primary|Prevalence of Adverse Events (Weeks 0-144), Per Event|Percentage of overall number of adverse events experienced during Weeks 0-144 by adverse event type. Doctors asked participants for adverse events, grouped them into categories given in the electronic case report form (eCRF). The list of adverse events included in the eCRF were hypertriglyceridemia, hypercholesterolemia, low high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, high low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, hyperglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST), elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT), elevated gamma glutamyl transferase (γGT), elevated alkaline phosphatase, stomatitis, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, mood disorder, neurocerebellar disorder, headache, fatigue, fever, other (listed as 'not specified').|Weeks 0 to 144|||percentage of adverse events|Adverse Events||Number
813081|NCT01076192|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|"SAEs are adverse event with any of the following severity criteria: Potentially fatal/endangers life, Hospitalisation or prolonging of hospitalisation, a medically important event that requires medical or surgical intervention to prevent a serious outcome, Disability or persistent incapacitation, death, congenital anomalies and/or miscarriage or abortion.
See the Reported Adverse Events Section for more details."|From time of informed consent to the final visit after 2 years of observation|Analysis included safety analysis population i.e., all participants who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab with evaluable safety data.||participants|||Number
813082|NCT01076192|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement From Baseline in Physician's Global Assessment (PGA)|The PGA was used to measure participants’ disease status at the time of assessment. This tool is a horizontal visual analogue 6-point scale measuring the degree of overall psoriatic lesion severity, and scores range from 0 (clear) to 5 (very severe). The percentage of patients who showed an improvement from baseline in their PGA scores is presented. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.|Baseline, month 1 and every 3 months the first year and every 6 months up to month 24|Efficacy analyses included ITT population with evaluable data.||percentage of participants|||Number
813083|NCT01076192|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected|Body Surface Area (BSA) affected or the psoriasis area is determined by the direct calculation of the affected body surface area. This determination was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment during each of the study visits. The change was calculated by deducting the final score from the baseline score. Increased scores correspond to reduction of severity and reduction of BSA. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.|Baseline, month 1 and every 3 months the first year and every 6 months up to month 24|Efficacy analyses included ITT population with evaluable data.||percentage of body surface area||Standard Deviation|Mean
813084|NCT01076192|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Reduction in PASI Score of 100% (PASI 100)|PASI is a measurement of the severity of psoriasis. It is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). PASI 100 response is the percentage of participants who achieved a 100% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.|Baseline, month 1 and every 3 months the first year and every 6 months up to month 24|Efficacy analyses included ITT population with evaluable data.||percentage of participants|||Number
813085|NCT01076192|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Reduction in PASI Score of at Least 90% (PASI 90)|PASI is a measurement of the severity of psoriasis. It is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). PASI 90 response is the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 90% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.|Baseline, month 1 and every 3 months the first year and every 6 months up to month 24|Efficacy analyses included ITT population with evaluable data.||percentage of participants|||Number
813086|NCT01076192|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs)|AESIs are adverse events of special interest, including infection, neoplasm, lupus-like, demyelinating disease, serious hepatic and/or haematological event.|From time of informed consent to the final visit after 2 years of observation|Analysis included safety analysis population i.e., all participants who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab with evaluable safety data.||participants|||Number
813087|NCT01076192|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Percentage of Lost Productivity Assessed Using Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP)|WPAI-SHP is a questionnaire used to evaluate lost productivity. The scores on the WPAI questionnaire are presented as percentages (multiplying the scores by 100), with 0% representing no impact on productivity and 100% representing complete impact on productivity. Change in WPAI-SHP was calculated by deducting the final score from the baseline score. Increased (positive) scores correspond to a reduction in the percentage of lost work productivity. Missing data were imputed using LOCF. n=the number of participants with data at each time point.|Baseline and every 6 months up to month 24|Analysis included ITT population with evaluable data.||units on a scale (a derived score)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813088|NCT01076192|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Questionnaire (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)|The EQ-5D VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where increased scores correspond to better HRQL. 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state' and 100 is the 'best imaginable health state'. Change in EQ-5D VAS score was calculated by deducting the final score from the baseline score. Increased scores correspond to better health state. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.|Baseline and every 6 months up to month 24|Analysis included ITT population with evaluable data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813089|NCT01076192|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)|DLQI is a self-administered Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) questionnaire specifically for patients with dermatological diseases, adapted and validated in the Spanish population. It consists of 10 items with a Likert response scale for 4 categories and uses a 7 day time reference. It generates a global score that ranges from 0 (better HRQL) to 30 (worse HRQL) points. Change in DLQI was calculated by deducting the final score from the baseline score. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.|Baseline and every 6 months up to month 24|Efficacy analyses included ITT population with evaluable data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813090|NCT01076192|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Reduction in PASI Score of at Least 75% (PASI 75)|PASI is a measurement of the severity of psoriasis. It is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). PASI 75 response is the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.|Baseline, month 1 and every 3 months the first year and every 6 months up to month 24|Efficacy analyses included ITT population with evaluable data.||percentage of participants|||Number
813091|NCT01076192|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Reduction in PASI Score of at Least 50% (PASI 50)|PASI is a measurement of the severity of psoriasis. It is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). PASI 50 response is the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 50% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.|Baseline, month 1 and every 3 months the first year and every 6 months up to month 24|Efficacy analyses included ITT population with evaluable data.||percentage of participants|||Number
813104|NCT01076361|Primary|Survival Probability of the Model 4968 Lead Based on Lead-related Complications|The survival analysis takes into account: Enrolled participants, lead follow-up time, and adjudicated lead related complications. The life-table method was used to analyze lead survival probability.|The requirement to satisfy the PMA condition of Approval of model 4968 was to have 100 participants followed for a minimum of 5 years to assess the long-term safety.|22 Model 4968s (in 21 participants) was not available for analysis||percentage of Model 4968 Leads|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
824832|NCT01178268|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiac Event (Cardiac Death, All MI and TLR)||6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
813092|NCT01076192|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)|PASI is a measurement of the severity of psoriasis. It is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). A lower (and negative) value of change indicates an increase in the severity of the psoriasis, while a positive value indicates an improvement in the severity of the PS. Missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).|Baseline, month 1 and every 3 months the first year and every 6 months up to month 24|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab and had at least one follow-up visit (ITT) with evaluable data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813093|NCT01076244|Secondary|Quality of Life as Measured by Physical Function Scale of the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ).|For this ZCQ domain, a mean score of 1 is the best possible outcome representing 'no limitation' in physical function, whereas a mean score of 4 indicates worst physical function. Zurich Claudication physical function scale from this validated lumbar spine-specific measurement questionnaire are reported below as change from baseline to month 6. A positive value represents the baseline value minus the 6 month value. Treatment is considered clinically relevant when at least a 0.5 improvement is achieved.|Baseline and month 6|All available patients at the month 6 reporting period were analyzed.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813094|NCT01076244|Primary|Pain as Measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS).|A validated ten point scale was used where ten is the worst possible pain and zero represents complete lack of pain. The change from baseline to six months is presented below, where a positive value represents the baseline value minus the 6 month value.|Baseline and six months|all available patients reporting at Month 6||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813095|NCT01076244|Secondary|Quality of Life as Measured by the Symptom Severity Scale of the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ).|As a validated patient outcome tool specific to lumbar spinal stenosis, Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) captures symptom severity as a quality of life indicator. A mean score of 1 is the best possible outcome representing 'no pain' in symptom severity, whereas higher mean scores up to a maximum of 5 indicate worse patient symptoms. The symptom severity outcomes are presented below as change from baseline to month 6 where a positive value represents the baseline value minus the 6 month value. Treatment is considered 'successful' or 'clinically relevant' if the patient population has at least a 0.5 improvement in symptom severity.|Baseline and month 6|All patients having a month six report report were analyzed.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813096|NCT01076244|Secondary|Improvement in Functional Mobility|Measured subjectively by the Oswestry Disability Index. Extent of disturbance in activities of daily living is subjectively reported using this validated instrument.Higher score indicate greater limitations in activity. The questionnaire is divided into 10 topics including pain intensity, personal care, lifting walking standing sitting, sleeping social life, traveling, employment/homemaking. Each topic is rated zero (no pain or no limitation) to 5 (high pain or very limited physically) based on typical pain and/or physical limitations. The worst possible score is 50 (100% disability) and the best score is zero (0% disability).Change from baseline to month 6 is reported below, where a positive value represents the baseline value minus the month 6 value.|baseline and month 6|All available patients at six months were analyzed.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813097|NCT01076270|Secondary|CD34-positive Cells Collected|Number of CD34-positive cells collected per kg recipient body weight|At the end of apheresis for cell collection|Trial terminated; only one patient enrolled||CD34-positive cells collected/kg|||Number
813098|NCT01076270|Primary|Successful Collection of Stem Cells|Percentage of donors from whom at least 2 x 10^6 CD34+ cells/kg body weight were collected based on actual recipient body weight|At the end of apheresis for cell collection|Study terminated early. Results are for the one donor enrolled.||Participants|||Count of Participants
813099|NCT01076283|Primary|Alcohol Drinking|"Whether baclofen, as compared to active placebo, results in lower quantity of alcohol consumed during the Alcohol Self-Administration (ASA).
Consistent with O'Malley et al. 2002, the ASA paradigm allows to use a fixed-dose (the priming drink), followed by a 2-hour “free-choice” phase when subjects may choose to drink or not up to 8 mini-drinks. Participants receive a monetary compensation of $3 dollars per each mini-drink not consumed; therefore the amount of minidrinks consumed during the 2-hour sessions ranges 0-8, and the monetary compensation ranges $0-24. The quantity of alcohol consumed during the free-choice session is expressed as standard drinking unit, where a standard drink unit contains about 14 grams of pure alcohol (about 0.6 fluid ounces or 1.2 tablespoons)."|approximately 8 days after drug administration|||standard drinking units||Standard Deviation|Mean
813100|NCT01076283|Primary|Alcohol Urge|"Whether baclofen, as compared to active placebo, results in diminished cue-reactivity responses to alcohol cues in terms of urge to drink [as measured by the Alcohol Urge Questionnaire (AUQ)] during the Cue Reactivity.
The Alcohol Urge Questionnaire (AUQ) consists of eight statements about the respondent’s feelings and thoughts about drinking as they are completing the questionnaire (i.e., right now). The respondent is asked to respond to each statement about alcohol craving via a 7-item Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Each item is scored on a 1 to 7 scale (Strongly Disagree = 1 and Strongly Agree = 7). Items 2 and 7 are reverse scored. A total score is computed by summing the item scores and ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). Higher scores reflect greater craving (i.e. worse outcome)."|approximately 8 days after drug administration|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813101|NCT01076296|Primary|Percentage of Correct Diagnosis|A comparison of the percentages of correct diagnosis by VSCAN and clinical exam using a McNemar test for matched pairs with ECHO used as the gold standard.|2 years|||percentage of correct diagnosis||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813102|NCT01076335|Primary|Number of Participants Progression Free at 1 Year|Participants prostatic specific antigen (PSA) progression-free or event-free survival (that is, freedom from treatment failure) 1 year postoperatively. Treatment failure defined as objective tumor progression during therapy or in year after surgery, confirmed postoperative PSA ⩾1 ngml − 1, or any postoperative radiation, hormonal or other systemic therapy. Participants who did not undergo surgery within 8 weeks of completing 1 year of therapy on protocol (for any reason, including participant refusal) were counted as treatment failure, as were participants whose surgery was begun and aborted.|1 Year|One participant of 40 enrolled declined presurgical therapy after enrollment and was excluded from analysis.||participants|||Number
813105|NCT01076452|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in the UPDRS Scores Part IV (Complication of Therapy) at 24 Months.|The UPDRS has four parts (Parts I-IV) in which a total of 42 disease characteristics are assessed. Most characteristics are assessed according to their severity on a 0-4 scale (0 = normal, 4 = most substantial impairment), and some are assessed only for absence (score = 0) or presence (score = 1). Part IV includes four categories (11 items) related to dyskinesias, clinical fluctuations of symptoms, and other complications. A summary score ranging from 0 to 23 is generated by adding the four items. The higher score indicates worse condition.|Baseline and 24 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813106|NCT01076452|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in the UPDRS Scores Part II (Activity of Daily Living) at 24 Months.|The UPDRS has four parts (Parts I-IV) in which a total of 42 disease characteristics are assessed. Most characteristics are assessed according to their severity on a 0-4 scale (0 = normal, 4 = most substantial impairment), and some are assessed only for absence (score = 0) or presence (score = 1). Part II has 13 items focusing on activities of daily living including walking, writing, dressing and speech. A summary score ranging from 0 to 52 is generated by adding the 13 items. The higher score indicates worse condition.|Baseline and 24 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813107|NCT01076452|Primary|The Change From Baseline in the UPDRS-III Score at 24 Months With Deep-brain Stimulation and Without Medication.|The primary outcome measure for the comparison of GPi deep brain stimulation (DBS) to STN DBS is the motor function score of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS Part III) measured while the patient is off medications and on stimulation at follow-up visits post surgery. UPDRS Part III has 14 items assessing motor skills including facial expression and speech, tremors, rigidity, posture, gait, and bradykinesia. Left and right sides (arms, legs, and hands) are assessed separately for seven of the functions. The motor function (UPDRS part III) assessments are done by turning on the stimulation with and without taking PD medications (on/off) at each in-person visit. A summary score ranging from 0 to 108 is generated by adding the 14 specific motor function responses. The higher score indicates the worse motor function.|Baseline and 24 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813108|NCT01076452|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in the UPDRS Scores Part I (Mentation) at 24 Months.|The UPDRS has four parts (Parts I-IV) in which a total of 42 disease characteristics are assessed. Most characteristics are assessed according to their severity on a 0-4 scale (0 = normal, 4 = most substantial impairment), and some are assessed only for absence (score = 0) or presence (score = 1). Part I has four items assessing intellectual impairment, thought disorder, depression and motivation. A summary score ranging from 0 to16 is generated by adding the four items. The higher score indicates worse condition.|Baseline and 24 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813109|NCT01076504|Secondary|Toxicity/Safety|Grade 3/4 toxicities|36 months|All enrolled and treated patients||participants|||Number
813110|NCT01076504|Secondary|Overall Survival|The Length of Time, in Months, That Patients Were Alive From Their First Date of Protocol Treatment Until Death|84 months|All enrolled and treated patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813111|NCT01076504|Secondary|Time to Progression|Time to progression will be defined as the time from first treatment until objective tumor progression (PD). Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|36 months|Includes all enrolled and treated patients||weeks||Full Range|Median
813112|NCT01076504|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|The Percentage of Patients Who Experience an Objective Benefit From Treatment. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI or CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Objective Response (OR) = CR + PR.|36 months|Includes all patients who were treated and evaluated for response (74 patients - 6 were deemed not evaluable)||percentage of evaluable participants|||Number
813113|NCT01076504|Primary|1-year Survival|Percentage of patients still alive one year after their first treatment|12 months|All enrolled and treated patients||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813114|NCT01076647|Secondary|Change in Body Weight|Change from baseline in body weight after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|The FAS included all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813115|NCT01076647|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c)|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|The Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
813117|NCT01076959|Primary|Patient Effectiveness Response Rating and Effective Rate of Humira With DAS 28 at Week 24|Effectiveness was assessed according to European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. The investigator rated patient response as good, moderate, or none from baseline to Week 24. The DAS 28 index is a measure of activity derived from the number of swollen or tender joints, laboratory tests of inflammation, and patient assessment of global health (10 cm line ranging from very good to very bad).|Week 24|Of the 7740 subjects treated, 938 patients were removed; 16 patients used Humira for another indication, 812 patients had data missing at baseline or at least 1 other time point, and 254 patients were treated with Humira for less than 2 weeks. Patients may have been in more than 1 category.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
813118|NCT01076959|Primary|Patient Effectiveness Response Rating and Effective Rate of Humira With DAS 28 at Week 12|Effectiveness was assessed according to European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. The investigator rated patient response as good, moderate, or none from baseline to Week 12. The DAS 28 index is a measure of activity derived from the number of swollen or tender joints, laboratory tests of inflammation, and patient assessment of global health (10 cm line ranging from very good to very bad).|Week 12|Of the 7740 subjects treated, 938 patients were removed; 16 patients used Humira for another indication, 812 patients had data missing at baseline or at least 1 other time point, and 254 patients were treated with Humira for less than 2 weeks. Patients may have been in more than 1 category.||percentage of patients|||Number
813119|NCT01076959|Primary|Patient Effectiveness Response Rating and Effective Rate of Humira With Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28 at Week 4|Effectiveness was assessed according to European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. The investigator rated patient response as good, moderate, or none from baseline to Week 4. The DAS 28 index is a measure of activity derived from the number of swollen or tender joints, laboratory tests of inflammation, and patient assessment of global health (10 cm line ranging from very good to very bad).|Week 4|Of the 7740 subjects treated, 938 patients were removed; 16 patients used Humira for another indication, 812 patients had data missing at baseline or at least 1 other time point, and 254 patients were treated with Humira for less than 2 weeks. Patients may have been in more than 1 category.||Percentage of patients|||Number
813120|NCT01076959|Secondary|Physicians' Overall Effectiveness Response Rating|"Physicians' rated the level of overall patient improvement as markedly improved, improved, not changed, or not assessable by comparing clinical conditions at Week 24 or at discontinuation with baseline conditions."|Week 24|Of the 7740 subjects treated, 938 patients were removed; 16 patients used Humira for another indication label, 812 patients had data missing at baseline or at least 1 other time point, and 254 patients were treated with Humira for less than 2 weeks. Patients may have been in more than 1 category.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
813121|NCT01076959|Primary|Total Number of Patients With Adverse Events|Adverse events were assessed from the time treatment began until treatment ended after 24 weeks. Details about the adverse events and serious adverse events are presented with the adverse event section of the disclosure. This outcome is measured as a percentage of patients with adverse events.|Baseline to Week 24|The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of Humira, had one set of case report forms, and were registered with PMDA during the review period.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
813122|NCT01076972|Primary|Number of Patients Included in Each Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Classification Category for HIV-infected Adults and Adolescents|Number of patients in each CDC category at Baseline (last assessment within 30 days prior to first dose of Kaletra) and after treatment. CDC categories defined as: Category A (asymptomatic acute HIV infection), Category B (symptomatic HIV infection; not Categories A and C), Category C (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome [AIDS] indicator status), Class P-0 (children not confirmed for HIV infection), Class P-1 (children with asymptomatic HIV infection), or Class P-2 (children with symptomatic HIV infection).|Baseline (Month 0) and following last treatment dose during the course of the survey period|Available data for all patients were included.||participants|||Number
813123|NCT01076972|Primary|Mean Number of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Copies Per Milliliter (mL) Using a Logarithmic (Base 10) Transformation at Each Visit|Number of HIV RNA copies per mL is presented by the mean per visit for patients that were naive to previous antiretroviral treatment and those that were not. HIV-RNA data reported as < 400 copies/mL were considered 399 copies/mL in calculations. The mean and standard deviation of HIV-RNA levels were thus calculated after logarithmic (base 10) transformation (log10 399 is 2.6). Only observed cases were included in analyses; no data were imputed. n = xx, xx is the number of treatment-naive, treatment-experienced participants who had CD4+ T-cell counts available for analysis at each study visit.|Baseline (Month 0), every 3 months thereafter up to Month 12 and every year thereafter up to Year 8 (Month 96) during the course of the survey period|Available data at each visit for each subgroup of patients who had not received and who had received prior antiretroviral drug therapy were included in the analyses. Data for patients for whom either baseline data or treatment data were missing for a given visit were excluded from the analysis for that visit.||copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813124|NCT01076972|Primary|Cluster of Differentiation 4 Lymphocyte Count (CD4)|The evolution of patients' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts after starting treatment with Kaletra was assessed by measuring the number of CD4+ cells at baseline and each subsequent study visit. CD4+ counts are reported as the number of CD4+ cells per cubic millimeter (cmm) and presented by the mean at each visit. Only observed cases were included in analyses; no data were imputed. n = xx, xx is the number of patients naive to previous antiretroviral treatment and those that were not who had CD4+ T-cell counts available for analysis at each study visit.|Baseline (Month 0), every 3 months thereafter up to Month 12 and every year thereafter up to Year 8 (Month 96) during the course of the survey period|Available data at each visit for each subgroup of patients who had not received and received prior antiretroviral drug therapy were included in the analyses. Data for patients for whom either baseline or treatment data were missing for a given visit were excluded from the analysis for that visit.||cells per cubic millimeter||Standard Deviation|Mean
813125|NCT01076972|Primary|Total Number of Patients With Adverse Drug Reactions|"Number of patients with adverse drug reactions, defined as adverse events for which the causal relationship with Kaletra was something other than not related by the investigator (i.e., probable, possible, or unclear), that occurred in ≥ 5% of patients. Adverse drug reactions are reported by preferred term and inclusive of all those reported at each visit. Although a patient may experience a particular preferred term more than once, each patient was counted only once for each preferred term."|During the course of the survey period up to Year 8|Available data for all patients were included.||participants|||Number
813126|NCT01076985|Primary|Number of Patients With Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs)|"The number of patients (mothers and infants) with adverse drug reactions, defined as adverse events for which the causal relationship with Kaletra was something other than not related by the investigator (i.e., probable, possible, or unclear). ADRs are reported by preferred term and inclusive of all those reported at any visit. Although a patient may experience a particular preferred term more than once, each patient was counted only once for each preferred term."|During pregnancy and for one year after birth|All available observed data for all participants and their resulting infants/live births are included.||participants|||Number
813127|NCT01077024|Secondary|Point-prevalence Abstinence (Smoking Outcome) 6 Month Visit|point-prevalence abstinence defined as not smoking in the previous seven days based on self-report and confirmed with a Carbon Monoxide (CO) level ≤ 8 ppm|6 month visit|||percentage of participants|||Number
813128|NCT01077024|Secondary|Stimulant-free Results at 6-month Visit|At the 6-month follow-up visit, percentage of participants with a negative urine drug screen for stimulant use and no stimulant use days reported during the past 28 days based on Timeline Follow-back.|6 - months follow-up visit|This outcome was only compared for participants who attended the 6-month follow-up visit (n=210 and n=218, respectively).||percentage of participants|||Number
813130|NCT01077024|Secondary|Stimulant-free Results at 3-month Visit|At the 3-month follow-up visit, percentage of participants with a negative urine drug screen for stimulant use and no stimulant use days reported during the past 28 days based on Timeline Follow-back.|3-month follow-up visit|This outcome was only compared for participants who attended the 3-month follow-up visit (n=226 and n=240, respectively).||percentage of participants|||Number
813131|NCT01077024|Secondary|Four Week Continuous Smoking Abstinence|A combination of daily self-reported smoking data and weekly carbon monoxide levels were used to determine continuous abstinence during post-quit days 15 – 42.|Post-quit days 15-42|||percentage of participants|||Number
813132|NCT01077024|Secondary|Point-prevalence Abstinence (Smoking Outcome)|point-prevalence abstinence defined as not smoking in the previous seven days based on self-report and confirmed with a Carbon Monoxide (CO) level ≤ 8 ppm|Week 10 assessment|||percentage of participants|||Number
813133|NCT01077024|Primary|Stimulant-free Weeks Assessed by Self-report and Twice-weekly Urine Drug Screens|Stimulant-free week results (no cocaine, methamphetamine and amphetamine use) were obtained by combining the urine drug screens (UDS) and the self-reported Timeline Follow-Back (TLFB). At the group level, this outcome translates into the percentage of weeks in each study arm that are stimulant-free.|Week 16|||percentage of weeks|||Number
813134|NCT01077050|Secondary|Sensitivity and Specificity|"Secondary confirmatory objective included two co-secondary endpoints that were defined similarly to the co-primary endpoints, but used the Secondary definition of dichotomous reference diagnosis.
Positive Reference Diagnosis: Melanoma, Squamous Cell Carcinoma, Basal Cell Carcinoma, Severe Dysplastic Nevus (High grade dysplasia)
Negative Reference Diagnosis: All other skin lesions."|Post data lock||08/2013||||
813135|NCT01077050|Primary|SciBase Sensitivity and Specificity|"This study has two co-primary objectives, aiming to demonstrate the accuracy of SciBase device:
Sensitivity ≥ 0.90 to detect Melanoma
Sensitivity – (1-Specificity) > 0.00
Sensitivity is the proportion of correctly identified cases of Melanoma. Specificity is the proportion of correctly identified cases of non-melanoma."|Post data lock|Biopsied Skin Lesions||Percentage of total lesions|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813136|NCT01077063|Primary|Safety of Pleurx Catheter or Paracentesis|"Primary Outcome: Safety of the Pleurx catheter procedure or paracentesis
Safety of the pleurx catheter procedure or paracentesis. Safety will be assessed by the degree of unacceptable toxicities, defined as life threatening complications related to the procedure. These include peritonitis, perforation, or death related to the procedure."|3 years|||events|||Number
813137|NCT01077076|Primary|Percent Time With Intragastric pH>4 During the First 4 Hours Following Administration on Day 4 of Treatment|Early effectiveness of treatment is evaluated as the percent time with intragastric pH>4 during the first 4 hours following administration of respective treatments|4 hours after dose on Day 4|"Pharmacodynamic-Evaluable Population: All participants who presented valid data from all three study periods.
One participant was dropped from the Pharmacodynamic-Evaluable Population in the Prilosec OTC Tablets group because of invalid pH tracings at Day 4. Therefore, the number of participants included at Day 4 in this group was 26."||Percentage of Time||Standard Deviation|Mean
813138|NCT01077128|Secondary|Assessment of Long Term Use and Safety of Adalimumab as Prescribed by the Dermatologist in a Normal Clinical Setting and in Accordance With the Terms of the European Marketing Authorization|An adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, which did not necessarily have a causal relationship with their treatment. Any worsening of a pre-existing condition or illness was considered an adverse event.|12-month period (Month 0, Month 1, Month 4, Month 8, Month 12)|||Participants|||Number
813139|NCT01077128|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline of European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Health Questionnaire (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores|"EQ-5D (European Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions Questionnaire) is a standardized instrument for use as a measure of health outcome.
It has two components:
the EQ-5D descriptive system (i.e., the EQ-5D Index Score, comprised of five items), and
the EQ-5D VAS. EQ-5D Index Score has five dimensions of health (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Patients reported either “problem” or “no problem” with each of the five dimensions of health. The EQ-5D VAS is a 20-cm scale with endpoints labeled best imaginable health and worst imaginable health anchored at 100 and 0, respectively."|12-month period (Month 0, Month 1, Month 4, Month 8, Month 12)|Participants with available data at each time point||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813140|NCT01077128|Secondary|"Percentage of Patients Reporting No Problem on the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Health Questionnaire (EQ-5D)"|"EQ-5D (European Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions Questionnaire) is a standardized instrument for use as a measure of health outcome.
It has two components:
the EQ-5D descriptive system (i.e., the EQ-5D Index Score, comprised of five items), and
the EQ-5D VAS. The EQ-5D Index Score has five dimensions of health (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Patients reported either “problem” or “no problem” with each of the five dimensions of health. The EQ-5D VAS is a 20-cm scale with endpoints labeled best imaginable health and worst imaginable health anchored at 100 and 0, respectively."|12-month period (Month 0, Month 1, Month 4, Month 8, Month 12)|Participants with available data at each time point||Percentage of patients with no problem|||Number
813141|NCT01077128|Secondary|Mean Change in the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score by Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity (PGA) Response Groups and by Geographical Region|The average change in the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score during the 12-month study was analyzed by the Physician’s Global Assessment of disease severity (PGA) response and also by geographical location of study participants. DLQI scores range from 0 to 30, with a higher score indicating a more impaired quality of life. . In this table, a higher number means a greater improvement in the participants’ quality of life.|12-month period (Month 0, Month 1, Month 4, Month 8, Month 12)|Participants with available data at each time point||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813142|NCT01077128|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Experienced an Improvement in Disease Severity as Determined by the Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity (PGA) Scores|The Physician's Global Assessment of disease severity (PGA) was used to measure participants’ disease status at the time of assessment. This tool is a horizontal visual analogue 6-point scale measuring the degree of overall psoriatic lesion severity, and scores range from 0 (clear) to 5 (very severe). The percentage of patients who showed an improvement from baseline in their PGA scores was recorded.|12-month period (Month 0, Month 1, Month 4, Month 8, Month 12)|Participants with available data at each time point||Percentage of patients improving|||Number
813143|NCT01077128|Primary|Mean Change of Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Scores|DLQI (Dermatology Life Quality Index) assesses symptoms and impacts of dermatologic diseases on quality of life. DLQI scores range from 0 to 30, with a higher score indicating a more impaired quality of life.|12-month period, (Month 0, Month 1, Month 4, Month 8, Month 12)|Participants with available data at each time point||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813144|NCT01077193|Primary|Mean Percent Excess Weight Loss at 3 Years With Last Observation Carried Forward|"Percent excess weight change from baseline to 3 years was calculated as (the baseline weight minus the weight at 3 years) divided by the (baseline weight minus the ideal body weight (using the upper limit of the midpoint range in the Metropolitan Tables for Life Insurance, 1983) x 100). Last observation carried forward was used for early terminated subjects.
One-sided, alpha=0.025, t-test of the Percent Excess Weight Loss (EWL) at 3-years to demonstrate non-inferiority to the target weight loss value of 41.1%EWL"|3 years|||percentage of baseline excess weight||Standard Deviation|Mean
813145|NCT01077258|Secondary|Percentage of Participants on Concomitant Rheumatoid Arthritis and Pain Relief/Anti-inflammatory Medication||Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||percentage of participants|||Number
813146|NCT01077258|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With In-patient Hospitalization|The percentage of participants with in-patient hospitalization in the prior 6 months. Baseline data includes in-patient hospitalizations that occurred within the prior 12 months.|Month 6, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||percentage of participants|||Number
813147|NCT01077258|Secondary|Number of Days Missed From Work Due to Rheumatoid Arthritis|Participants reported the number of days they had missed from work in the prior 6 months. The Baseline measurement includes data for the prior 12 months.|Baseline and Months 6, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set participants who were employed and with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813148|NCT01077258|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Impairment in Daily Activities|Participants were asked to report how many days of impairment in daily activities they had experienced in the last 4 weeks.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point||percentage of participants|||Number
813149|NCT01077258|Secondary|Participants Assessment of Pain Over Time|Participants indicated their level of pain over the last 7 days on a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 (best) to 10 (worst) cm; lower scores indicate better patient status.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
813150|NCT01077258|Secondary|Participants Assessment of Fatigue Over Time|Participants indicated their level of fatigue over the last 7 days on a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 (best) to 10 (worst) cm; lower scores indicate better patient status.|Baseline and Month 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
813151|NCT01077258|Secondary|Patients Global Assessment of Disease Activity Over Time|Participants indicated their global assessment of disease activity over the last 7 days on a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 (best) to 10 (worst) cm; lower scores indicate better patient status.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
813152|NCT01077258|Secondary|Hannover Functional Questionnaire (FFbH) Over Time|"A self-administered patient questionnaire used to assess patient function based on 18 questions. The numerically coded responses to the questions are added to provide a total patient score. The FFbH was calculated from this patient score by the following formula:
FFbH = (patient score x 100) ÷ 2 (number of valid responses). The resulting FFbH score reflects the degree of remaining functional capacity where 0 indicates maximal impairment and 100 indicates maximal functional capacity."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813153|NCT01077258|Secondary|Swollen Joint Count (SJC) Over Time|Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||swollen joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
813154|NCT01077258|Secondary|Tender Joint Count (TJC) Over Time|Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||tender joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
813155|NCT01077258|Secondary|C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Levels Over Time|C-Reactive Protein (CRP) was measured from blood samples as a marker for inflammation. Higher levels are indicative of more inflammation. Normal concentration in healthy human serum is usually lower than 10 mg/L, slightly increasing with age.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813156|NCT01077258|Secondary|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) Over Time|Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) indirectly measures how much inflammation is in the body. A higher ESR is indicative of increased inflammation.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||mm/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
813157|NCT01077258|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Low, Moderate and High Disease Activity|"The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the patient's assessment of global disease activity (assessed on a visual analog scale [VAS] from 0 to 10 cm) are included in the DAS28. If the ESR value is missing, the C-reactive protein (CRP) value can be substituted. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10; higher scores indicate more disease activity.
Low disease activity is defined as a DAS28 score ≤ 3.2; Moderate disease activity as a DAS28 >3.2 to ≤5.1; High disease activity as a DAS28 >5.1."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point||percentage of participants|||Number
813169|NCT01077284|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 6 in the Number of Calcium Oxalate Stones|Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT) was used to visualize and count calcium oxalate kidney stones at Baseline and after 6 months of treatment. All MDCT images were analyzed independently by a Central Reader.|Baseline and Month 6|Full analysis set for whom both Baseline and Month 6 MDCT data were available. Measurements more than 1 day after a patient’s last dose of study drug were not included.||stones||Standard Deviation|Mean
813158|NCT01077258|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Significant Therapeutic Response|"Significant therapeutic response was determined by DAS28 critical difference (Dcrit). A Dcrit response is a statistically determined value that exceeds the threshold of random fluctuation and signifies a positive individual response during treatment. A DAS28-Dcrit individual therapeutic response is defined as a decrease (improvement) in DAS28 from Baseline of ≥ 1.8.
The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the patient's assessment of global disease activity (assessed on a visual analog scale [VAS] from 0 to 10 cm) are included in the DAS28. If the ESR value is missing, the C-reactive protein (CRP) value can be substituted. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10; higher scores indicate more disease activity."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||percentage of participants|||Number
813159|NCT01077258|Primary|Percentage of Participants in DAS28 Remission|Clinical remission is defined as a disease activity score (DAS) 28 score of < 2.6. The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the patient’s assessment of global disease activity (assessed on a visual analog scale [VAS] from 0 to 10 cm) are included in the DAS28. If the ESR value is missing, the C-reactive protein (CRP) value can be substituted. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10; higher scores indicate more disease activity.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Full analysis set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||percentage of participants|||Number
813160|NCT01077258|Primary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28|The Disease Activity Score 28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the patient's assessment of global disease activity (on a visual analog scale [VAS] from 0 to 10 cm) are included in the DAS28 score. If the ESR value is missing, the C-reactive protein (CRP) value can be substituted. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10; higher scores indicate more disease activity. A DAS28 score >5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score <3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score <2.6 indicates clinical remission.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813161|NCT01077271|Secondary|Effectiveness of Palivizumab at the End of the Observation Period is Checked by the Physician by Ranking in a Visible Analog Scale|The therapeutic effect of palivizumab was assessed by the treating physician using a visual analog scale from 0 to 10, where 0 indicated that palivizumab did not match expectations at all and 10 indicated that palivizumab met all expectations. The physician rated palivizumab treatment for each participant at the last study visit (LSV) or, in the case of participants withdrawing from the study, at the early termination (ET) visit.|One RSV season (5 months), end of study|The analysis included participants who were administered palivizumab and had data available for the study visits listed. A total of 100 participants were rated at the last study visit; 2 did not have ratings. A total of 18 participants who discontinued from the study were rated at the early termination visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813162|NCT01077271|Secondary|Parents Knowledge of Burden of RSV Disease Via Interview by Physician|"An informational brochure was given to parents of participants. Parents were interviewed by the treating physician at the first study visit (V1) and last study visit (LSV) (or early termination visit [ET]) for those participants discontinuing from the study). Parental knowledge of the burden of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease was assessed using a questionnaire. Parents were considered to have “good RSV awareness if all questions were answered and at least 3 of the 4 questions regarding the burden of RSV disease were answered correctly."|One RSV season (5 months)|The analysis included parents of participants who were administered and had data available for the study visits listed.||Parents of participants|||Number
813163|NCT01077271|Secondary|Assessment of Pain During Injection According to Pain Scores (VAS and Modified Behavioral Pain Scale)|The clinician who administered the palivizumab injection was asked to rate pain during injection using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the Modified Behavior Pain Scale (MBPS) as published by Carbajal et al., 2008. The VAS ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (maximum pain). The Modified Behavioral Pain Scale ranged from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain) through the evaluation of 3 items: Facial expressions, cry, and movements. If more than one injection was given at a visit, then the first injection was rated.|One RSV season (5 months)|The analysis included participants who were administered palivizumab and had data available for the study visits listed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813164|NCT01077271|Primary|Dosage Per Administration|The median dose and range of palivizumab (milligrams) that was administered at each study visit.|One RSV season (5 months)|The analysis population includes participants who were administered palivizumab and had data available for the study visits listed.||milligrams||Full Range|Median
813165|NCT01077271|Primary|Interval Between Administrations|The average number of days that elapsed between palivizumab injections administered at the previous study visit.|One RSV season (5 months)|The analysis population includes participants who were administered palivizumab and had data available for the study visits listed.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813166|NCT01077271|Primary|Body Site of Injections Per Administration|The body site of injection administration for participants at each study visit.|One RSV season (5 months)|The analysis population includes participants who were administered palivizumab and had data available for the study visits listed.||participants|||Number
813167|NCT01077271|Primary|Number of Injections Per Patient Per Season|The average number of injections administered per participant within a respiratory syncytial virus season.|One RSV season (5 months)|Participants who were administered palivizumab were included in the analysis.||Injections administered||Standard Deviation|Mean
813168|NCT01077284|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 6 in 24-hour Measured Creatinine Clearance|Creatinine clearance is a measure of how well the kidneys are filtering creatinine, a waste product produced by the muscles. Measured creatinine clearance was calculated according to the following: Urine 24 hour Creatinine/Serum Creatinine x (total Urine volume/elapsed time) x (1.73/body surface area).|Baseline and Month 6|Full analysis set. Missing Month 6 Visit 24-hour mCLcr values are imputed by Month 3 values if the Month 3 value was available otherwise the patient was excluded from the analysis.||mL/min/1.73m²||Standard Deviation|Mean
813170|NCT01077284|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline to Month 6 in the In-plane Diameter of the Largest Calcium Oxalate (CaOx) Stone|Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT) was used to visualize and measure calcium oxalate kidney stones at Baseline and after 6 months of treatment. All MDCT images were analyzed independently by a Central Reader. The change from Baseline to month 6 is expressed as a percentage of the Baseline largest in-plane diameter.|Baseline and Month 6|Full analysis set, for whom Baseline and Month 6 MDCT data were available. Measurements more than 1-day after a patient's last dose of study drug were not included.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
813171|NCT01077284|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline to Month 6 in 24-hour Urine Uric Acid (uUA) Excretion|The change from Baseline to Month 6 in 24-hour urine uric acid is expressed as a percentage of the Baseline uUA value.|Baseline and Month 6|The full analysis set (patients who took at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug and had a baseline 24-hour uUA >700 mg and at least 1 kidney CaOx stone ≥3 mm in its longest inplane diameter). Missing Month 6 values were imputed with baseline values if patient discontinued due to an AE; or otherwise with the last available post-baseline value.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
813172|NCT01077310|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change in CD4 Cell Count (Cells/mL)|Baseline labs will be drawn while subjects is in prison, one to three months prior to release. Additionally, blood will be drawn every 3 months for 1 year to monitor changes in CD4 cell count.|Baseline and every 3 months for 1 year|These data were not able to be collected for analysis.|||||
813173|NCT01077310|Secondary|Alcohol Treatment Outcome: Change in Percent of Heavy Drinking Days|change in the percent of heavy drinking days from 12 weeks prior to incarceration to 6 months post release from incarceration.|change in percent of heavy drinking days12 weeks prior to release from prison (baseline), day of release, to 6 months post-release|||percent of heavy drinking days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813174|NCT01077310|Secondary|Alcohol Treatment Outcome: Change in Average Drinks Per Drinking Day|The mean change from 12 weeks pre incarceration to 6 months post release from incarceration in average drinks per drinking day|12 weeks prior to release from prison (baseline) to 6 months post release|||standard units of alcohol||Standard Deviation|Mean
813175|NCT01077310|Secondary|Alcohol Treatment Outcome: Time to Alcohol Relapse|Self reported time to first heavy drinking day after release from incarceration, up to 6 months|Post release|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813176|NCT01077310|Primary|Percentage of Those Maintain or Improve to HIV RNA-1 Viral Load Less Then 400 Copies/mL|Percentage of participants that maintained or improved a level of undetectable HIV viral load from baseline (closest viral load to time of release from incarceration) to 6 months post release. Missing lab values were considered to have a detectable HIV viral load.|Baseline to month 6 post release|Logistic regression backward stepwise models were used to find predictors of HIV viral suppression.||percent of participants|||Number
813177|NCT01077323|Primary|"Incidence Rates Per 100,000 Person-Years of Likely Acute Pancreatitis (During Past Use Period) - Time on Drug Analysis"|"Crude time-on-drug incidence rate per 100,000 person-years of likely acute pancreatitis in initiators of exenatide, initiators of other antidiabetic drugs and the non-diabetes cohort. Analysis period is past use period, described as time following recent use excluding subsequent current or recent use."|43 months|Time on Drug Analysis||Cases per 100,000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813178|NCT01077323|Primary|"Incidence Rates Per 100,000 Person-Years of Likely Acute Pancreatitis (Among Recent Use Period) - Time on Drug Analysis"|"Crude time-on-drug incidence rate per 100,000 person-years of likely acute pancreatitis in initiators of exenatide, initiators of other antidiabetic drugs and the non-diabetes cohort. Analysis period is the recent use period, described as time following current use plus an additional 31 days excluding subsequent current use."|43 months|Time on Drug Analysis||Cases per 100,000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813179|NCT01077323|Secondary|Incidence Rates Per 100,000 Person-Years of Likely Acute Pancreatitis Among Initiators of Exenatide, Diabetics Initiating Other Antidiabetic Drugs, and the Non-diabetes Cohort - Intent to Treat Analysis|Crude intent-to-treat incidence rate per 100,000 person-years of likely acute pancreatitis in initiators of exenatide, initiators of other antidiabetic drugs and the non-diabetes cohort.|43 months|Intent to Treat Analysis||Cases per 100,000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813180|NCT01077323|Primary|"Incidence Rates Per 100,000 Person-Years of Likely Acute Pancreatitis (During Current Use Period) - Time on Drug Analysis"|"Crude time-on-drug incidence rate per 100,000 person-years of likely acute pancreatitis in initiators of exenatide, initiators of other antidiabetic drugs and the non-diabetes cohort. Analysis period is current use period, described as time during current day's supply plus 31 days."|43 months|Time on Drug Analysis||Cases per 100,000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813181|NCT01077362|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 Response at Week 24|"An ACR 70 response is defined as a greater than or equal to 70 percent improvement from baseline in swollen (66 joints) and tender (68 joints) joint counts and greater than or equal to 70 percent improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: 1) Participant's assessment of pain by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (0-10 cm), 2) Participant's global assessment of disease activity by VAS (0-10 cm), 3) Physician's global assessment of disease activity by VAS (0-10 cm) 4) Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by the Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI) (score of 0-3 in 8 functional areas) and 5) C reactive protein."|Week 24|All participants randomly assigned to a treatment group were included in the efficacy analysis regardless of whether they received the assigned treatment. For early escaped, data at or prior to Week 16 were carried forward through Week 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813192|NCT01070888|Primary|Mean Difference Between Maximal Percentage Decrease in FEV1 After the Exercise Challenge Compared to the Run in Period, Budesonide/Formoterol - Budesonide|"Mean difference between maximal percentage decrease in FEV1 after the exercise challenge compared to the run in period, budesonide/formoterol - budesonide, calculated as follows:
(max fall in FEV1(baseline) - maximal fall in FEV1(bud/form) - (max fall in FEV1(baseline) - maximal fall in FEV1(bud))"|8 weeks|||percentage of fall in FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
813193|NCT01070953|Primary|Overall Efficacy Evaluation of EZETROL®|Participants who received EZETROL over 4 weeks and then have been evaluated for overall efficacy assessment by investigator showing to be improved, unchanged or worsened.|Baseline to 4 weeks|3,309 subjects were analyzed for the efficacy evaluation; 227 of the enrolled subjects did not complete the study and were excluded||participants|||Number
831863|NCT01243320|Secondary|Change Systolic Blood Pressure|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||mmhg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813182|NCT01077362|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Total Modified Van Der Heijde-Sharp (vdH-S) Score for the Combined Radiographic Data From Studies CNTO1275PSA3001 and CNTO1275PSA3002|The modified vdH-S score is a radiographic evaluation of hand and feet erosions and joint space narrowing (JSN) for 20 joints per hand and 6 joints per foot with a total score ranging from 0 (best) to 528 (worst = worst possible erosion score of 320 + worst possible JSN score of 208). Higher scores and positive score changes indicate more radiographic damage and radiographic progression, respectively. As per protocol, the analysis for this outcome measure used pooled data from 2 studies (CNTO1275PSA3001 and PSA3002) because initial power assumptions showed that 900 participants would be required to evaluate the impact of ustekinumab on structural damage (SD) progression. The 2 studies, (which had similar study designs and dosing regimens and differed only with regards to prior exposure to anti-TNFα therapies), were intended to independently measure efficacy in terms of signs, symptoms and physical function, while effects on SD progression would be provided from an integrated analysis.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 24|Analysis included: (1) combined data from studies CNTO1275PSA3001 (NCT01009086) and CNTO1275PSA3002 (NCT01077362) and (2) all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813183|NCT01077362|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response at Week 24|"An ACR 50 response is defined as a greater than or equal to 50 percent improvement from baseline in swollen (66 joints) and tender (68 joints) joint counts and greater than or equal to 50 percent improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: 1) Participant's assessment of pain by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (0-10 cm), 2) Participant's global assessment of disease activity by VAS (0-10 cm), 3) Physician's global assessment of disease activity by VAS (0-10 cm) 4) Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by the Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI) (score of 0-3 in 8 functional areas) and 5) C reactive protein."|Week 24|All participants randomly assigned to a treatment group were included in the efficacy analysis regardless of whether they received the assigned treatment. For early escape, data at or prior to Week 16 were carried forward through Week 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813184|NCT01077362|Secondary|Percentage of Participants (With >= 3% Baseline Body Surface Area (BSA) Psoriatic Involvement) Who Achieved a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response at Week 24|The PASI is a physician-administered assessment tool used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. The PASI produces a numeric score that can range from 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease). A PASI 75 response is defined as greater than or equal to 75 percent improvement in PASI score from baseline.|Week 24|All participants randomly assigned to a treatment group were included in the efficacy analysis regardless of whether they received the assigned treatment. For early escape, data at or prior to Week 16 were carried forward through Week 24. Only participants with >=3% baseline BSA psoriatic involvement were included in this analysis.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813185|NCT01077362|Secondary|"Change From Baseline to Week 24 in the Disability Index Score as Measured With the Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI)"|HAQ-DI is 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 (no difficulty), to 3 (inability to perform a task in that area). The average score across the functional areas yields an overall HAQ-DI score which ranges from 0 (no disability) to 3 (completely disabled). In psoriatic arthritis, a decrease in score of 0.30 indicates clinically meaningful improvement.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 24|All participants randomly assigned to a treatment group were included in the efficacy analysis regardless of whether they received the assigned treatment. For early escape, data at or prior to Week 16 were carried forward through Week 24.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813186|NCT01077362|Primary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 24.|"An ACR 20 response is defined as a greater than or equal to 20 percent improvement from baseline in swollen (66 joints) and tender (68 joints) joint counts and greater than or equal to 20 percent improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: 1) Participant's assessment of pain by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (0-10 cm), 2) Participant's global assessment of disease activity by VAS (0-10 cm), 3) Physician's global assessment of disease activity by VAS (0-10 cm) 4) Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by the Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI) (score of 0-3 in 8 functional areas) and 5) C reactive protein."|Week 24|All participants randomly assigned to a treatment group were included in the efficacy analysis regardless of whether they received the assigned treatment. For early escape, data at or prior to Week 16 were carried forward through Week 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813187|NCT01077375|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Visit 5 (Week 13) in the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) 1-week Pain Recall Score|The VAS assessment ranges from a scale of 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst possible pain).|Change from Baseline (Week 3) to Visit 5 (Week 13)|ITT Population: patients in the Double-blind Safety Population with ≥ 1 PGIC post-baseline assessment. Double-blind Safety Population includes 6 patients who were not included in ITT population. Presented results generated via LOCF approach. No statistical comparisons between groups are presented; study was exploratory, not hypothesis-testing.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813188|NCT01077375|Primary|Responder Status Based on Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Score at Visit 5 (Week 13)|The PGIC is a patient-reported measure of improvement in pain sensation and quality of life scored on a scale from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). To meet the criteria for a responder in this study, patients must report a score of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) on the PGIC.|Assessed at Visit 4 (Week 9) and Visit 5 (Week 13) or early termination. Presented results generated via LOCF approach.|ITT Population: patients in the Double-blind Safety Population with ≥ 1 PGIC post-baseline assessment. Double-blind Safety Population includes 6 patients who were not included in ITT population. Presented results generated via LOCF approach. No statistical comparisons between groups are presented; study was exploratory, not hypothesis-testing.||participants|||Number
813189|NCT01077401|Secondary|Mean Change in Retinal Thickness at Month 6||baseline to6 Months|Data was not collected for 4 participants in the Ranibizumab 0.5mg group for this outcome measure.||µm||Standard Deviation|Mean
813190|NCT01077401|Secondary|Mean Change in Best Corrected Visual Acuity From Baseline to Month 6|Mean change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (ETDRS) at 4 meters in the study eye over time through month 6.|baseline 6 Months|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
813191|NCT01077401|Primary|Deaths Due to Myocardial Infarction||6 Months|||participants|||Number
813194|NCT01070953|Primary|Mean Percent Change From Baseline to Treatment in Lipid Parameters|The mean percent change from baseline to treatment in lipid parameters (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol, triglycerides[TG]) in participants who received EZETROL over 4 weeks and then had available laboratory results in Lipid Parameters.|Baseline to 4 weeks|"3,309 subjects were analyzed for the efficacy
evaluation; 227 of the enrolled subjects did not complete the study and were excluded"||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
813195|NCT01070953|Primary|Participants With Any Clinical and/or Laboratory Adverse Experience While Being Treated With EZETROL® Within 14 Days After Treatment Discontinuation|Participants who recieved EZETROL® and experienced any adverse event related or unrelated to EZETROL®, within 14 days after treatment.|Up to 14 days after treatment discontinuation|||participants|||Number
813196|NCT01070966|Primary|Mean Percent Change From Baseline to Treatment in Lipid Parameters|The mean percent change from baseline to treatment in lipid parameters (total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, triglycerides[TG]) and overall efficacy was evaluated by the investigator to show if there was any(improved, unchanged, worsened) lipid parameters over a period of approximately 5 years.|Baseline and up to 5 years|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
813197|NCT01070966|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Any Clinical and/or Laboratory Adverse Experiences While Taking VYTORIN® Within 14 Days After Treatment Discontinuation|Participants who recieved VYTORIN and experienced any adverse event related or unrelated to VYTORIN®, within 14 days after treatment.|Up to 14 days after the treatment discontinuation|||Percentage of Participants|||Number
813198|NCT01070979|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Urogenital Symptom Score, Week 12, ITT Population|Urogenital Symptom Severity scored none=0, mild=1, moderate=2, severe=3.|Baseline to Week 12|Intention to Treat (ITT) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||Change in Score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813199|NCT01070979|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Urogenital Symptom Score, Week 8, ITT Population|Urogenital Symptom Severity scored none=0, mild=1, moderate=2, severe=3.|Baseline to Week 8|Intention to Treat (ITT) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||Change in Score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813200|NCT01070979|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Total Urogenital Symptom Score, Week 4, ITT Population|Urogenital Symptom Severity scored none=0, mild=1, moderate=2, severe=3.|Baseline to Week 4|Intention to Treat (ITT) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||Change in Score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813201|NCT01070979|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Severity of Moderate to Severe Hot Flushes, Week 12, ITT Population|Patient self-reported outcome. Severity of hot flush definitions: mild (1) - sensation of heat without perspiration, moderate (2) - sensation of heat with perspiration, able to continue activity, severe (3) - sensation of heat with perspiration, causing the subject to stop activity or awaken from sleep. Minimum 0/no hot flushes, Maximum 3/all severe hot flushes. Lower the score the greater the improvement in reducing hot flushes.|Baseline to Week 12|Intention to Treat (ITT) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||Change in Score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813202|NCT01070979|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Number of Moderate to Severe Hot Flushes, Week 12, ITT Population|Severity of hot flush definitions: mild - sensation of heat without perspiration, moderate - sensation of heat with perspiration, able to continue activity, severe - sensation of heat with perspiration, causing the subject to stop activity or awaken from sleep|Baseline to Week 12|Intention to Treat (ITT) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||Change in Hot Flush Count||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813203|NCT01070979|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Severity of Moderate to Severe Hot Flushes, Week 4, ITT Population|Patient self-reported outcome. Severity of hot flush definitions: mild (1) - sensation of heat without perspiration, moderate (2) - sensation of heat with perspiration, able to continue activity, severe (3) - sensation of heat with perspiration, causing the subject to stop activity or awaken from sleep. Minimum 0/no hot flushes, Maximum 3/all severe hot flushes. Lower the score the greater the improvement in reducing hot flushes.|Baseline to Week 4|Intention to Treat (ITT) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||Change in Score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813204|NCT01070979|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Number of Moderate to Severe Hot Flushes, Week 4, ITT (Intention to Treat) Population|Severity of hot flush definitions: mild - sensation of heat without perspiration, moderate - sensation of heat with perspiration, able to continue activity, severe - sensation of heat with perspiration, causing the subject to stop activity or awaken from sleep|Baseline to Week 4|Intention to Treat (ITT) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||Change in Hot Flush Count||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813205|NCT01071044|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression (Severity)|The Clinical Global Impression (Severity) is a one-item clinician-rated measure. The item is a likert scale on which the clinician rates the subject based on perceived severity of psychopathology, with higher numbers indicating higher severity. In this study, we compared the mean change in severity from baseline to endpoint.|Every visit|All participants were included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813206|NCT01071044|Secondary|Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale (ADHD-RS)|The Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) is an 18-item scale based on DSM-IV criteria for ADHD. Each item is rated using a likert scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe), with a total score range of 0-54, with higher scores indicating more symptoms/severity. In this study, we compared mean change in ADHD-RS total score from baseline to endpoint of the study.|Every 2 weeks|All participants were included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813207|NCT01071044|Secondary|Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ)|"The Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) is an assessment that quantifies the impact of fibromyalgia on an individual, including questions on pain level, fatigue, sleep disturbance, and psychological distress, among others. The score range is 0 to 100, with higher number indicating higher Fibromyalgia severity/impact.
Below, we compare the mean change in the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) from baseline to week 6 between LDX and placebo treated patients."|Every 2 weeks|All participants were included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813237|NCT01071200|Secondary|Mean Total Number of Retrieved Oocytes|Mean number of oocytes retrieved on the day of ovum pick up (OPU) was counted. Oocyte retrieval is a technique used in in-vitro fertilization in order to remove oocytes from the ovary of the female, enabling fertilization outside the body.|34-36 hours post-hCG (OPU)|mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8.||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
813208|NCT01071044|Secondary|Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire|The McGill Pain Questionniare (Short Form) consists of 15 pain descriptors (11 sensory; 4 affective) which are rated on an intensity scale. 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate or 3 = severe. The sum of the intensity scores of the words chosen for sensory, affective and total descriptors are added for a total score. The score range is 0-45. In this study, we compared the change in the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) from baseline to week 6 between LDX and placebo treated patients.|Every 2 weeks|All participants were included in analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813209|NCT01071044|Secondary|Hamiliton Anxiety Inventory|The Hamilton Anxiety Scale is a 14-items clinician-rated scale designed to measure anxiety severity. Each of the 14 items is scored from 0 (symptom not persent) to 4 (severe symptom). The total range is 0-56. A total score of less than 17 indicates mild severity, 18-24 indicates mild to moderate severity, and a score of 25-30 indicates moderate to severe symptoms. In this study, we compared the mean change in the Hamilton Anxiety scale from baseline to week 6 between LDX and placebo-treated patients.|Every 2 weeks|All participants were included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813210|NCT01071044|Secondary|Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS)|The Fatigue Severity Scale is designed to measure the impact of fatigue on the life of the subject. It is a nine-question likert scale survey with a raw score range of 0-63. Scores of 36 and above indicate significant fatigue. In this study, we compared the mean change in the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) from baseline to endpoint between LDX and placebo treated patients.|Every 2 weeks|All participants were included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813211|NCT01071044|Primary|BRIEF-A|The BRIEF-A (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-- Adult Form) is comprised of the following sub-scales: Metacognition Index, Behavioral Regulation Index, Inhibit, Shift, Emotional Control, Self-Monitor, Initiate, Working Memory, Plan/Organize, Task Monitor, and Organziation of Material. These subscales are summed to provide the GEC or Global Executive Composite. Listed below are the mean improvement scores on the GEC index from baseline to endpoint. The Global Executive Composite raw score range is 70-182, with higher scores indicating more compromised executive functioning. The scores listed in the table depict mean improvement on the GEC from the beginning to the end of the study.|Every 2 weeks|All participants were included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813212|NCT01071070|Secondary|The Proportion of Subjects With 2 Consecutive Calcium Measurements Greater Than 11.0 mg/dL (2.75 mmol/L)|The number of subjects with (Yes) or without (No) two consecutive calcium measurements greater than 11.0 mg/dL (2.75 mmol/L)|Baseline to 12 weeks|The analysis was based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
813213|NCT01071070|Secondary|The Change From Baseline to the Final Observation in the Vital Sign of Heart Rate||Baseline to 12 Weeks|The analysis was based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
813214|NCT01071070|Secondary|The Change From Baseline to the Final Observation in the Vital Sign of Diastolic Blood Pressure||Baseline to 12 Weeks|The analysis was based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813215|NCT01071070|Secondary|The Change From Baseline to the Final Observation in the Vital Sign of Systolic Blood Pressure||Baseline to 12 Weeks|The analysis was based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813216|NCT01071070|Secondary|The Change From Baseline to the Final Observation in Calcium-phosphorus Product||Baseline to 12 Weeks|The analysis was based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||mg^2/dL^2||Standard Error|Mean
813217|NCT01071070|Secondary|The Change From Baseline to the Final Observation in Calcium||Baseline to 12 Weeks|The analysis was based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
813218|NCT01071070|Secondary|The Change From Baseline to the Final Observation in Intact Parathyroid Hormone Value||Baseline to 12 Weeks|The analysis was based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
813219|NCT01071070|Secondary|The Proportion of Subjects Achieving a Final Intact Parathyroid Hormone Value Between 150 and 300 pg/mL|The number of subjects with (Yes) or without (No) final intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) values between 150 and 300 pg/mL|Baseline to 12 Weeks|The analysis was based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
813220|NCT01071070|Primary|The Achievement of Two Consecutive Greater Than or Equal to 30% Decreases From Baseline Intact Parathyroid Hormone Levels|The number of participants who achieved (Yes) or did not achieve (No) two consecutive decreases of greater than or equal to 30% from baseline in intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) values|Baseline to 12 Weeks|The analysis was based on the per-protocol population, which consisted of all randomized participants who completed at least 6 weeks of treatment and met the conditions that defined the per-protocol population.||participants|||Number
813221|NCT01071083|Secondary|Time Course to Return of Radiological Activity, as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Met Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Rescue Criteria.|MRI rescue criteria were the presence of 1 new gadolinium-enhancing (Gd+) lesion of >0.8 cubic centimeters in volume or 2 or more Gd+ lesions of any size, according to the central MRI reader.|28 Weeks|Of the randomized subjects, data from 167 subjects were used in efficacy analyses. Eight subjects were excluded from the analyses: 3 subjects had major protocol deviations and 5 subjects discontinued study participation prior to Week 4 Visit.||Percentage of subjects meeting criteria|||Number
813236|NCT01071200|Secondary|Mean Number of Mature Oocytes (Metaphase II)|Mean number of metaphase II oocytes was counted for participants undergoing ovum pick up for IntraCytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI). ICSI is a procedure in which a single spermatozoon is injected into the oocyte cytoplasm. Metaphase II stage of the oocyte was classified as the time at which the first polar body was observed microscopically. Metaphase II oocytes are a sub-group of the total number of oocytes.|34-36 hours post-hCG (OPU)|"mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8. Here N represents those participants undergoing ICSI whose oocytes were assessed for maturity (Metaphase II) using a microscope."||Metaphase II Oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
813222|NCT01071083|Primary|Time Course to Return of Radiological and/or Clinical Evidence of Multiple Sclerosis Activity, as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Met Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and/or Clinical Relapse Rescue Criteria.|Rescue criteria were: 1) central reader MRI finding of 1 new gadolinium-enhancing (Gd+) lesion of >0.8 cubic centimeters in volume or 2 or more Gd+ lesions of any size 2) clinical relapse. Clinical relapse was new or recurrent neurological symptoms not associated with fever or infection, lasting at least 24 hours, as defined by: an increase of ≥1 grade in ≥2 functional scales of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS); an increase of ≥2 grades in 1 functional scale of the EDSS; or an increase of >0.5 in EDSS if the previous EDSS was ≤5.5, or ≥0.5 if the previous EDSS was >5.5|28 Weeks|Of the randomized subjects, data from 167 subjects were used in efficacy analyses. Eight subjects were excluded from the analyses: 3 subjects had major protocol deviations and 5 subjects discontinued study participation prior to Week 4 Visit.||Percentage of subjects meeting criteria|||Number
813223|NCT01071096|Secondary|Changes Between Inter-ictal (Baseline) Levels Between Responders and Non-responders|Only cytokines with a mean densimetric value 1.65 times the background grey value in a minimum of 3 patients were considered detectable. These are reported below. Values normalized to positive control array spots after background subtraction: C5/C5a, CD40 Ligand, Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factor (G-CSF), Growth Regulated Oncogene(GRO)-alpha, Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM)-1, Interferon gamma (IFN-y), Interleukin(IL)-1alpha, 1beta, 1ra, 8, 16, 17E, & 23, Interferon Gamma-Induced Protein 10 (IP-10), Interferon-inducible T cell alpha chemoattractant (I-TAC), Macrophage Migration Inhibitory Factor (MIF), Serpin E1, and Regulated Upon Activation Normal T-cell Expressed (RANTES)|For OnabotulinumtoxinA and Saline treatment months 1, 2 and 3 at Baseline level (inter-ictal) and at onset of headache that is one degree worse than Baseline level and that will be treated with acute therapy|Number of Participants Analyzed is low due to some unusable samples and missing samples making comparison between months impossible. 5 Responders and 5 Non-Responders provided enough samples at all time points for comparisons.||Florescent Units (FU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813224|NCT01071096|Secondary|Saliva CGRP Levels for OnabotulinumtoxinA Responders (Reduction of Headache Days Greater Than 30%) vs. Non-responders and Saline|Saliva samples collected at Baseline (at no headache or lowest level of headache), at headache attack directly before taking rescue medication and 2 hours after treating with rescue medication.|For OnabotulinumtoxinA and Saline treatment months 1, 2 and 3|||pmol/mg total protein||Standard Deviation|Mean
813225|NCT01071096|Secondary|Inter-ictal (Baseline) Levels of Saliva Calcitonin Gene-related Peptide (CGRP)|CGRP Level collected each month when subject did not have a headache or was at lowest pain level of headache that month.|Baseline levels collected for OnabotulinumtoxinA and Saline treatment during Months 1 through 7|||pmol/mg total protein||Standard Error|Mean
813226|NCT01071096|Primary|Change in Number of Headache Days Per Month From Baseline to Month 1 (M1), Month 1 to Month 2 (M2), and Month 2 to Month 3 (M3).|Baseline number of headache days per month collected historically at screening. Post-treatment number of headache days collected per month via diary.|Baseline (collected historically at screening) vs. Mo 1, Mo 1 vs. Mo 2, Mo 2 vs. Mo 3, Mo 3 vs. Mo 4, Mo 4 vs. Mo 5, Mo 5 vs. Mo 6, and Mo 6 vs. Mo 7|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813227|NCT01071096|Primary|Change in Number of Headache Days Per Month From Baseline (BL) to Months 1 Through 7.|Baseline number of headache days per month collected historically at screening. Post-treatment number of headache days collected per month via diary.|Baseline (collected historically at screening) versus (vs.) Month (Mo) 1, Mo 2, Mo 3, Mo 4, Mo 5, Mo 6, and Mo 7|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813228|NCT01071200|Secondary|Number of Cycles Cancelled Due to Risk of OHSS|OHSS is an exaggerated systemic response to ovarian stimulation characterized by a wide spectrum of clinical and laboratory manifestations. It is classified as mild, moderate or severe according to the degree of abdominal distention, ovarian enlargement and respiratory, haemodynamic and metabolic complications.|Baseline (S8) until 12-18 day post-hCG and/or Week 7|Safety population included all the randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.||cycles|||Number
813229|NCT01071200|Secondary|Number of Participants With Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome (OHSS)|OHSS is an exaggerated systemic response to ovarian stimulation characterized by a wide spectrum of clinical and laboratory manifestations. It is classified as mild, moderate or severe according to the degree of abdominal distention, ovarian enlargement and respiratory, haemodynamic and metabolic complications.|Baseline (S8) until 12-18 day post-hCG and/or Week 7|Safety population included all the randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.||participants|||Number
813230|NCT01071200|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Implantation|Implantation is the attachment and subsequent penetration by the zona-free blastocyst (usually in the endometrium) that starts five to seven days after fertilization.|12-18 day post-hCG and/or Week 7|mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8.||percentage of participants|||Number
813231|NCT01071200|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Pregnancy|Clinical pregnancy is defined as pregnancy diagnosed by ultrasonographic visualization of one or more gestational sacs or definitive clinical signs of pregnancy. It includes ectopic pregnancy.|12-18 day post-hCG and/or Week 7|mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8.||percentage of participants|||Number
813232|NCT01071200|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pregnancy||12-18 day post-hCG and/or Week 7|mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8.||percentage of participants|||Number
813233|NCT01071200|Secondary|Number of Transferred Embryos|Embryo transfer is the procedure in which one or more embryos are placed in the uterus or Fallopian tube.|Day 3 post-hCG (ET)|mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8.||embryos|||Number
813234|NCT01071200|Secondary|Number of Obtained Embryos|Total number of obtained embryos with maximum 3 inseminated oocytes was calculated.|Day 3 post-hCG (Embryo transfer [ET])|mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8.||embryos|||Number
813235|NCT01071200|Secondary|Fertilization Rate|Fertilization rate was measured as the ratio between number of fertilized oocytes and number of inseminated oocytes (maximum 3).|12-18 day post-hCG and/or Week 7|mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
814962|NCT01092663|Primary|Fasting Glycogenolysis|Change from baseline in fasting glycogenolysis after 12 weeks of colesevelam alone or colesevelam plus sitagliptin treatment|baseline and 12 weeks|||umol per kg Fat-Free Mass (FFM) per min||Standard Deviation|Mean
813238|NCT01071200|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Oestradiol (E2) Levels at Human Choriogonadotropin (hCG) Day||Baseline (S8) and hCG day|"mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8. Here “N” represents number of participants analyzed and n represents the number of participants with plasma E2 levels at specified time points for respective treatment groups."||picogram/milliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813239|NCT01071200|Secondary|Mean Number of Ovarian Stimulation Days||Baseline (S8) until hCG day|mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8.||Days||Full Range|Mean
813240|NCT01071200|Secondary|Mean Total Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) and Recombinant Human Luteinizing Hormone (r-hLH) Dose||Baseline (S8) until hCG day|mITT population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8.||IU||Standard Deviation|Mean
813241|NCT01071200|Primary|Total Dose of Follicular Stimulating Hormone (FSH) for Retrieved Oocytes||Baseline (Stimulation day 8 [S8]) until hCG day|"Modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population included all randomized participants who entered in the experimental phase at S8. Here N represents number of participants analyzed for this measure."||IU||Standard Deviation|Mean
813242|NCT01071252|Secondary|To Assess the Time to Relapse|Relapse is defined as the loss of at least 50% of the maximum PASI change from baseline achieved at any time before that visit and analyzed only for the active treatment groups.|37 weeks|The full analysis set (FAS), identical to the randomized set, also consisted of all randomized patients.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813243|NCT01071252|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 50, PASI 75 or PASI 90)|PASI is a combined assessment of lesion severity and affected area into a single score: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease). Body is divided into 4 areas for scoring (head, arms, trunk, legs; each area is scored by itself and scores are combined for final PASI. For each area, percent of skin involved is estimated: 0 (0%) to 6 (90-100%), and severity is estimated by clinical signs, erythema, induration and desquamation; scale 0 (none) to 4 (maximum). Final PASI = sum of severity parameters for each area* area score weight of section (head: 0.1, arms: 0.2 body: 0.3 legs: 0.4).|Week 2, 3, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37|The full analysis set (FAS), identical to the randomized set, also consisted of all randomized patients.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
813244|NCT01071252|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) Response|IGA treatment response is defined as achievement of IGA 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) and improvement of at least 2 points on the IGA scale compare with baseline.|Week 2, 3, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37|The full analysis set (FAS), identical to the randomized set, also consisted of all randomized patients.||percentage of participants|||Number
813245|NCT01071252|Primary|Percentage of Participants of Reponders of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 Achievement at Week 13|PASI is a combined assessment of lesion severity and affected area into a single score: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease). Body is divided into 4 areas for scoring (head, arms, trunk, legs; each area is scored by itself and scores are combined for final PASI. For each area, percent of skin involved is estimated: 0 (0%) to 6 (90-100%), and severity is estimated by clinical signs, erythema, induration and desquamation; scale 0 (none) to 4 (maximum). Final PASI = sum of severity parameters for each area* area score weight of section (head: 0.1, arms: 0.2 body: 0.3 legs: 0.4).|week 13|The full analysis set (FAS), identical to the randomized set, also consisted of all randomized patients.||percentage of participants|||Number
813246|NCT01071278|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Reported Adverse Events||Up to 22 weeks|||participants|||Number
813247|NCT01071278|Primary|Number of Participants With Lipid Panel Control|Lipid Panel Control was defined as achieving target for one or more of the following parameters: low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) at goal (<100mg/dL), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) within normal range (40mg/dL for males and 50mg/dL for females), and/or triglycerides within normal range (≤ 150mg/dL).|From Visit 1 entrance evaluation (Week 0) to Visit 2 (between Weeks 8-22)|Results are for the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population. Information regarding the participation in a disease management program was not reported for 63 participants in the ITT Population.||participants|||Number
813248|NCT01071395|Secondary|Safety Monitoring Will be Operative Throughout the Study||18 months||||||
813249|NCT01071395|Secondary|Correlations Between Scale Values and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-s) and Correlations Between Scale Changes and Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-c)||18 months||||||
813250|NCT01071395|Secondary|Correlations Among the Scales||18 months||||||
813251|NCT01071395|Secondary|If Sufficient Number Are Maintained on 200 mg/Day, Differences in Change Scores Between 200 mg/Day and 300 mg/Day Amantadine. (This Analysis Will be BL vs End of Study)||18 months||||||
813252|NCT01071395|Secondary|Change Score Differences Between Week 4 and 8 to Measure Stability of Scales Over Two Visits on Stable Doses of Amantadine or Placebo||18 months||||||
813253|NCT01071395|Secondary|Differences in Slope From Baseline (BL) to End of Study (Data Will Include the 4 Week Scores) Between Placebo and Amantadine to Determine Which Scales Demonstrate Sensitivity Across Time.||18 months||||||
813254|NCT01071395|Primary|The Investigators Will Assess Effect Size With Each Scale for Detecting Change From Baseline and Change Between Amantadine and Placebo; Allowing Assessment of Sensitivity and Specificity for Each Scale Based on Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC).|Analyses of primary outcome measures tested sensitivity to change in dyskinesia (time effect) as well as sensitivity to differences in treatment effect (time-by-treatment interaction). These analyses were conducted using repeated-measures ANOVA (RM-ANOVA) or nonparametric analyses (Friedman’s ANOVA with follow-up Wilcoxon tests). The RM-ANOVAs tested for changes in scale scores over baseline, week 4, and week 8 visits across the entire sample (time effect), as well as differences in these changes over time between treatment groups (time-by-treatment interaction). Effect size of time to change was compared using a partial eta-square estimate of effect size. An eta-squared less than or equal to 0.01 is considered small; 0.06 is considered medium; and, 0.14 is considered large.|18 months|||unitless|||Number
813260|NCT01071538|Primary|Heart Rate|Heart Rate (Beats per minute) 60-100 beats per minute is considered normal lower heart rate represent healthier outcome|8 weeks|||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
813261|NCT01071538|Secondary|Pain Numeric Rating Scale (20 Item)|measure of average physical pain score range 0-20 Higher scores indicate worse outcome|8 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813262|NCT01071538|Secondary|Positive and Negative Affect Scale|"Positive Affect Score: Scores can range from 10 – 50, with higher scores representing higher levels of positive affect.
Negative Affect Score: Scores can range from 10 – 50, with lower scores representing lower levels of negative affect."|8 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813263|NCT01071538|Secondary|Brief Symptom Inventory -- Anxiety Subscale|measure of anxiety Lower numbers indicate better outcome Theoretical Range 0-2.4|8 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813264|NCT01071538|Primary|UKU Side Effect Rating Scale|measure of side effects 46 items with scores of 0,1,2,3 possible. Theoretical range 0-138 Lower scores indicate fewer side effects|8 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813265|NCT01071538|Primary|Blood Pressure|Blood Pressure- systolic and diastolic 140/90 or lower is considered normal and indicates a better outcome.|8 weeks|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813266|NCT01071538|Primary|Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale|measure of depression severity theoretical scale range 0-60 Lower values represent better outcome|8 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813267|NCT01071798|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Received Two Cycles With Clinically Relevant Changes in HAQ-Score at Last Visit During Therapy Compared to Baseline (Categorized)|In the Subpopulation With Two Cycles, the HAQ score was categorized for 12 subgroups as Clinically relevant improvement of HAQ-Score ≥0.3, Other or no clinical relevant change of HAQ Score, or Clinically relevant worsening of HAQ Score ≥0.3. Subgroups are defined as Anti-Cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) and Rheumatoid factor (RF) negative (-), positive (+), or Non-specified (n.sp.) and Seropositive Non-specified (n.sp.), Seronegative, or Seropositive.|24 weeks after starting Cycle 2|Subpopulation With Two Cycles with HAQ Score||participants|||Number
813268|NCT01071798|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Received Only One Treatment Cycle With Clinically Relevant Changes in HAQ-Score at Last Visit During Therapy Compared to Baseline (Categorized)|In the Main Analysis Set participants with only one treatment cycle, the HAQ score was categorized for 12 subgroups as Clinically relevant improvement of HAQ-Score ≥0.3, Other or no clinical relevant change of HAQ Score, or Clinically relevant worsening of HAQ Score ≥0.3. Subgroups are defined as Anti-Cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) and Rheumatoid factor (RF) negative (-), positive (+), or Non-specified (n.sp.) and Seropositive Non-specified (n.sp.), Seronegative, or Seropositive.|24 weeks after starting Cycle 1|Main Analysis Set with HAQ Score||participants|||Number
813269|NCT01071798|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Treatment-Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE)||during Cycle 1, during Cycle 2, during the trial (within 12 months)|||percentage of participants|||Number
813270|NCT01071798|Primary|HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI)|The HAQ-DI score consists of questions referring to 8 categories: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and common daily activities. For each of the categories, participants reported the amount of difficulty they had in performing 2 or 3 specific subcategory items. The standard disability score is calculated from the 8 categories by dividing the sum of the individual categories by the number of categories answered, yielding a score from 0 (without any difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).|at baseline of each cycle and approximately 15 days, 6 weeks (only cycle 1), 12 weeks (3 months), 18 weeks (only cycle 1), and 24 weeks (6 months) after the start of the respective cycle|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813271|NCT01071798|Primary|DAS28 Score|The DAS28 consists of swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC) measurements, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) in millimeters per hour (mm/hr), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant-rated rheumatoid arthritis [RA] activity assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicate greater affectation due to disease activity.|at baseline of each cycle and approximately 15 days, 6 weeks (only cycle 1), 12 weeks (3 months), 18 weeks (only cycle 1), and 24 weeks (6 months) after the start of the respective cycle|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813272|NCT01077544|Secondary|Efficacy Endpoints for Ph+ ALL Patients|Best Response in Ph+ ALL patients was defined as either Complete Remission (CR) with platelet recovery, Complete Remission (CR) with incomplete platelet recovery, Partial Remission (PR) or Stable disease. Stable disease was defined is defined as failure to qualify for either CR, PR, or progressive disease.|minimum of 12 cycles (28 days per cycle)|Full analysis set (FAS): consists of all patients who passed the screening and are enrolled into the study. Patients may or may not have taken study drug.||Participants|||Number
813273|NCT01077544|Secondary|Number of Ph+ CML Participants With Major Molecular Response (MMR)|The bcr-abl gene fusion encodes for a BCR-ABL fusion protein. Depending on the precise location of the fusion, the molecular weight of this protein can range from 185 to 210 kDa. Consequently BCR-ABL is referred to as p185 or p210 transcript. For the patients expressing the major BCR-ABL transcript p210, molecular response was defined and reported as the percent ratio of BCR-ABL transcripts/control gene transcripts converted to a reference standard according to the International Scale (IS). A major molecular response (MMR) is defined as a BCR-ABL/control gene ratio ≤ 0.1% (equal to a 3 log reduction in BCR-ABL transcripts) on the IS. In this study, the control gene was abl.|minimum of 12 cycles (28 days per cycle)|Full analysis set (FAS): consists of all patients who passed the screening and are enrolled into the study. Patients may or may not have taken study drug.||Participants|||Number
813274|NCT01077544|Secondary|Number of Ph+ CML Participants With Cytogenic Response|Cytogenetic response was initially assessed as the percentage of Ph+ metaphases in the bone marrow (BM) and performed within 21 days prior to study entry. A major cytogenetic response (0% to 35% Ph+ metaphases test positive for the Philadelphia chromosome) combines both complete cytogenetic (CCyR) and partial cytogenetic response (PCyR). CCyR implies 0% Ph+ metaphases in the BM, PCyR is > 0% to 35%, minor cytogenetic response (mCyR) is > 35% to 65%, minimal response is > 65% to 95% and no response is > 95% Ph+ metaphases in the BM.|minimum of 12 cycles (28 days per cycle)|FAS consist of all patients (pts) who passed screening & are enrolled into study. Patients may or may not have taken study drug. One (1) Ph+ CML patient in Group 2 was Ph+ at baseline & discontinued study prior to subsequent cytogenetic assessment. This pt doesn’t appear in any cytogenic response category.||Participants|||Number
813275|NCT01077544|Primary|Summary of Nilotinib Steady-state PK Parameters: Cmin|The full PK profiles of nilotinib in pediatric patients were assessed using serial sampling following a single 230 mg/m2 dose.|Cycle 1 Day 8 - Cycle 1 Day 28|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PAS) consists of all patients who received the nilotinib dose on Day 1, had an evaluable Day 1 PK profile or provided at least one evaluable steady state trough concentration.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
813276|NCT01077544|Primary|Summary of Nilotinib Steady-state PK Parameters: CLF (Body Surface Area (BSA) Adjusted)|The steady-state PK profiles of nilotinib in pediatric patients were estimated using trough sampling following multiple 230 mg/m2 bid doses|Cycle 1 Day 8 - Cycle 1 day 28|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PAS) consists of all patients who received the nilotinib dose on Day 1, had an evaluable Day 1 PK profile or provided at least one evaluable steady state trough concentration.||L/h/m^2)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
813277|NCT01077544|Primary|Summary of Nilotinib Steady-state PK Parameters: AUCss|The steady-state PK profiles of nilotinib in pediatric patients were estimated using trough sampling following multiple 230 mg/m2 bid doses|Cycle 1 Day 8 - Cycle 1 Day 28|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PAS) consists of all patients who received the nilotinib dose on Day 1, had an evaluable Day 1 PK profile or provided at least one evaluable steady state trough concentration.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
813278|NCT01077544|Primary|Summary of Nilotinib Non-compartmental PK Parameters: AUC0-12h|The full PK profiles of nilotinib in pediatric patients were assessed using serial sampling following a single 230 mg/m2 dose on Cycle 1 Day 1.|Cycle 1 Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PAS) consists of all patients who received the nilotinib dose on Day 1, had an evaluable Day 1 PK profile or provided at least one evaluable steady state trough concentration.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
813279|NCT01077544|Primary|Summary of Nilotinib Non-compartmental PK Parameters: AUClast (Last = 24h)|The full PK profiles of nilotinib in pediatric patients were assessed using serial sampling following a single 230 mg/m2 dose on Cycle 1 Day 1.|Cycle 1 Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PAS) consists of all patients who received the nilotinib dose on Day 1, had an evaluable Day 1 PK profile or provided at least one evaluable steady state trough concentration.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
813280|NCT01077544|Primary|Summary of Nilotinib Non-compartmental PK Parameters: Tmax|The full PK profiles of nilotinib in pediatric patients were assessed using serial sampling following a single 230 mg/m2 dose on Cycle 1 Day 1.|Cycle 1 Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PAS) consists of all patients who received the nilotinib dose on Day 1, had an evaluable Day 1 PK profile or provided at least one evaluable steady state trough concentration.||h||Full Range|Median
813281|NCT01077544|Secondary|Number of Ph+ CML Participants With Confirmed Complete Hematologic Response (CHR)|A confirmed complete hematological response (CHR) is defined when all of the following criteria are achieved at two consecutive assessments, at least 4 weeks apart: white blood cell (WBC) count < 10 × 109/L; platelet < 450 × 109/L; basophils < 5%; no blasts and promyelocytes in peripheral blood (PB); myelocytes + metamyelocytes < 5% in PB; and no extramedullary involvement. The information used for hematological assessment was to be obtained from the laboratory and extramedullary data, all merged by patient and date.|minimum of 12 cycles (28 days per cycle)|Full analysis set (FAS): consists of all patients who passed the screening and are enrolled into the study. Patients may or may not have taken study drug.||Participants|||Number
813282|NCT01077544|Primary|Summary of Nilotinib Non-compartmental PK Parameters: Cmax|The full PK profiles of nilotinib in pediatric patients were assessed using serial sampling following a single 230 mg/m2 dose on Cycle 1 Day 1.|Cycle 1 Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PAS) consists of all patients who received the nilotinib dose on Day 1, had an evaluable Day 1 PK profile or provided at least one evaluable steady state trough concentration.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
813283|NCT01077596|Secondary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Prostate Cancer Who Were Regularly Exposed to the Indicated Antidepressant|In this outcome, prostate cancer is under investigation: Cancer case were nested within a cohort of new antidepressant users. New antidepressant users were defined as no previous antidepressant prescription in the previous 6 months. Prostate cancer cases were identified and matched with controls from the same new-user cohort. Cal year, calendar year; dx, diagnosis; IBD, Inflammatory Bowel Disease; OC, oral contraceptive; HRT/ERT, hormone replacement therapy/estrogen replacement therapy; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.|January 1, 1996 – December 31, 2006|Participants diagnosed with prostate cancer who were new antidepressant users.||participants|||Number
813284|NCT01077596|Secondary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Breast Cancer Who Were Regularly Exposed to the Indicated Antidepressant|In this outcome, breast cancer is under investigation: Cancer case were nested within a cohort of new antidepressant users. New antidepressant users were defined as no previous antidepressant prescription in the previous 6 months. Breast cancer cases were identified and matched with controls from the same new-user cohort. Cal year, calendar year; dx, diagnosis; IBD, Inflammatory Bowel Disease; OC, oral contraceptive; HRT/ERT, hormone replacement therapy/estrogen replacement therapy; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.|January 1, 1996 – December 31, 2006|Participants diagnosed with breast cancer who were new antidepressant users.||participants|||Number
813319|NCT01077622|Secondary|Mean Laboratory Data for Lymphocytes at the Indicated Weeks as Assessed by a SERC|SERC assessed lymphocytes based on the data provided by trial sites.|Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
824833|NCT01178268|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiac Event (Cardiac Death, All MI and TLR)||30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
813285|NCT01077596|Secondary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Uterine Cancer Who Were Regularly Exposed to the Indicated Antidepressant|In this outcome, uterine cancer is under investigation: Cancer case were nested within a cohort of new antidepressant users. New antidepressant users were defined as no previous antidepressant prescription in the previous 6 months. Uterine cancer cases were identified and matched with controls from the same new-user cohort. Cal year, calendar year; dx, diagnosis; IBD, Inflammatory Bowel Disease; OC, oral contraceptive; HRT/ERT, hormone replacement therapy/estrogen replacement therapy; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.|January 1, 1996 – December 31, 2006|Participants diagnosed with uterine cancer who were new antidepressant users.||participants|||Number
813286|NCT01077596|Secondary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Bladder Cancer Who Were Regularly Exposed to the Indicated Antidepressant|In this outcome, bladder cancer is under investigation: Cancer case were nested within a cohort of new antidepressant users. New antidepressant users were defined as no previous antidepressant prescription in the previous 6 months. Bladder cancer cases were identified and matched with controls from the same new-user cohort. Cal year, calendar year; dx, diagnosis; IBD, Inflammatory Bowel Disease; OC, oral contraceptive; HRT/ERT, hormone replacement therapy/estrogen replacement therapy; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.|January 1, 1996 – December 31, 2006|Participants diagnosed with bladder cancer who were new antidepressant users.||participants|||Number
813287|NCT01077596|Secondary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Lung Cancer Who Were Regularly Exposed to the Indicated Antidepressant|In this outcome, lung cancer is under investigation: Cancer case were nested within a cohort of new antidepressant users. New antidepressant users were defined as no previous antidepressant prescription in the previous 6 months. Lung cancer cases were identified and matched with controls from the same new-user cohort. Cal year, calendar year; dx, diagnosis; IBD, Inflammatory Bowel Disease; OC, oral contraceptive; HRT/ERT, hormone replacement therapy/estrogen replacement therapy; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.|January 1, 1996 – December 31, 2006|Participants diagnosed with lung cancer who were new antidepressant users.||participants|||Number
813288|NCT01077596|Secondary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Colorectal Cancer Who Were Regularly Exposed to the Indicated Antidepressant|In this outcome, colorectal cancer is under investigation: Cancer case were nested within a cohort of new antidepressant users. New antidepressant users were defined as no previous antidepressant prescription in the previous 6 months. Colorectal cancer cases were identified and matched with controls from the same new-user cohort. Cal year, calendar year; dx, diagnosis; IBD, Inflammatory Bowel Disease; OC, oral contraceptive; HRT/ERT, hormone replacement therapy/estrogen replacement therapy; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.|January 1, 1996 – December 31, 2006|Participants diagnosed with colorectal cancer who were new antidepressant users.||participants|||Number
813289|NCT01077596|Primary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Any of the Cancers Under Investigation Who Were Regularly Exposed to the Indicated Antidepressant|The following are the cancers under investigation: colorectal, lung, bladder, uterus, breast, and prostate. Cancer case were nested within a cohort of new antidepressant users. New antidepressant users were defined as no previous antidepressant prescription in the previous 6 months. Cases were identified and matched with controls from the same new-user cohort. Cal year, calendar year; dx, diagnosis; IBD, Inflammatory Bowel Disease; OC, oral contraceptive; HRT/ERT, hormone replacement therapy/estrogen replacement therapy; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.|January 1, 1996 – December 31, 2006|Participants diagnosed with colorectal, lung, bladder, uterus, breast, or prostate cancer who were new antidepressant users||participants|||Number
813290|NCT01077622|Other Pre-specified|Serum Hemolytic Complement Titer at Weeks 36 and 48: CH50|The CH50 is the serum complement to lyse 50% of sensitized red blood cells; it's is a marker of complement activation. A high CH50 level suggests evidence for complement activation, whereas a low CH50 level suggests lack of complement activation.|Weeks 36 and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Kilo units per liter (KU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813291|NCT01077622|Secondary|Mean Residence Time (MRTinf) of Ofatumumab|MRTinf is the average amount of time that ofatumumab spends in the body. Blood sampling on Day 1 and at Weeks 7 and 24 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), and 120 hr (5 days) after infusion of ofatumumab. At Weeks 7 and 24, blood sampling was also performed 168 hr (7 days) and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Day 1; Weeks 7 and 24|PK Parameter Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||hr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813292|NCT01077622|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss) for Ofatumumab|Vss for ofatumumab was calculated as a ratio of the amount of ofatumumab in the body in equilibrium conditions to steady-state plasma concentrations. Blood sampling on Day 1 and at Weeks 7 and 24 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), and 120 hr (5 days) after infusion of ofatumumab. At Weeks 7 and 24, blood sampling was also performed 168 hr (7 days) and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Day 1; Weeks 7 and 24|PK Parameter Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813293|NCT01077622|Secondary|Volume of Distribution (Vz) During the Terminal Phase for Ofatumumab|Vz for ofatumumab was calculated as a ratio of the amount of ofatumumab in the body during the terminal phase to the plasma concentration during the terminal phase. Blood sampling on Day 1 and at Weeks 7 and 24 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), and 120 hr (5 days) after infusion of ofatumumab. At Weeks 7 and 24, blood sampling was also performed 168 hr (7 days) and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Day 1; Weeks 7 and 24|PK Parameter Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813305|NCT01077622|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Immunoglobulin (Ig) Antibodies IgA, IgG, and IgM at Weeks 8, 24, and 48|Immunoglobulins, or antibodies, are large proteins used by the immune system to identify and neutralize foreign particles such as bacteria and viruses. Their normal blood levels indicate proper immune status. Low levels indicate immuno-suppression. IgA, IgG, and IgM were measured in the blood samples of the participants.|Baseline and Weeks 8, 24, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813294|NCT01077622|Secondary|Clearance (CL) of Ofatumumab From Plasma|CL of ofatumumab from plasma of participants was evaluated. Blood sampling on Day 1 and at Weeks 7 and 24 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), and 120 hr (5 days) after infusion of ofatumumab. At Weeks 7 and 24, blood sampling was also performed 168 hr (7 days) and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Day 1; Weeks 7 and 24|PK Parameter Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mL/hr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813295|NCT01077622|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC[0-infinity]) for Ofatumumab|Blood sampling on Day 1 and at Weeks 7 and 24 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), and 120 hr (5 days) after infusion of ofatumumab. At Weeks 7 and 24, blood sampling was also performed 168 hr (7 days) and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Day 1; Weeks 7 and 24|PK Parameter Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||hr*mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813296|NCT01077622|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to 672 hr (AUC[0-672]) for Ofatumumab at Week 24|Blood sampling at Week 24 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), 120 hr (5 days), 168 hr (7 days), and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Week 24|PK Parameter Population. Only participants contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||hr*mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813297|NCT01077622|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to 168 hr (AUC[0-168]) for Ofatumumab at Week 7|Blood sampling at Week 7 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), 120 hr (5 days), 168 hr (7 days), and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Week 7|PK Parameter Population||hr*mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813298|NCT01077622|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time t (AUC[0-t]) for Ofatumumab|AUC(0-t) was evaluated from the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero to the last measurable time point (time t). Blood sampling on Day 1 and at Weeks 7 and 24 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), and 120 hr (5 days) after infusion of ofatumumab. At Weeks 7 and 24, blood sampling was also performed 168 hr (7 days) and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Day 1; Weeks 7 and 24|PK Parameter Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||hr*mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813299|NCT01077622|Secondary|Half-life (t1/2) of Ofatumumab|t1/2 of ofatumumab is the time required for the plasma concentration of ofatumumab to decrease by half. Blood sampling on Day 1 and at Weeks 7 and 24 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), and 120 hr (5 days) after infusion of ofatumumab. At Weeks 7 and 24, blood sampling was also performed 168 hr (7 days) and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Day 1; Weeks 7 and 24|PK Parameter Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||hr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813300|NCT01077622|Secondary|Time to Reach Cmax (Tmax) Following Ofatumumab Administration|Blood sampling on Day 1 and at Weeks 7 and 24 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), and 120 hr (5 days) after infusion of ofatumumab. At Weeks 7 and 24, blood sampling was also performed 168 hr (7 days) and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Day 1; Weeks 7 and 24|PK Parameter Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||hr||Full Range|Median
813301|NCT01077622|Secondary|Minimum Plasma Concentration (Cmin) of Ofatumumab|Blood sampling at Weeks 7 and 24 for PK evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hr before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), 120 hr (5 days), 168 hr (7 days), and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Weeks 7 and 24|PK Parameter Population||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813302|NCT01077622|Secondary|Maximum (Peak) Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Ofatumumab|Blood sampling on Day 1 and at Weeks 7 and 24 for pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluation was performed at the following time points: 0.5 hour (hr) before infusion; end of infusion; and 10 minutes (min), 1 hr, 2 hr, 24 hr (1 day), 72 hr (3 days), and 120 hr (5 days) after infusion of ofatumumab. At Weeks 7 and 24, blood sampling was also performed 168 hr (7 days) and 336 hr (14 days) after infusion of ofatumumab.|Day 1; Weeks 7 and 24|PK Parameter Population: all participants who received at least one dose of investigational drug, and in whom PK data were available and allowed parameter estimations. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Micrograms per milliliter (mcg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
813303|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Change From Baseline in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status (PS)|ECOG PS is used to assess how a participant's disease is progressing, to assess how the disease affects the daily living abilities of the participant, and to determine appropriate treatment and prognosis. The grades for the scale range from 0 (fully active) to 4 (completely disabled), with increasing severity.|Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
813304|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Tested Positive/Negative for Human Anti-human Antibodies (HAHA) at Screening and at Weeks 24 and 48|HAHA are indicators of immunogenicity to ofatumumab.|Screening; Weeks 24 and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
813318|NCT01077622|Secondary|Mean Laboratory Data for Lymphocytes as a Percentage in the Bone Marrow at the Indicated Weeks as Assessed by a SERC|SERC assessed lymphocytes in the bone marrow (BM) based on the data with BM smears provided by trial sites.|Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||percentage of lymphocytes in BM||Standard Deviation|Mean
813306|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Shift From Baseline (BL) in Extreme Fatigue at the Indicated Weeks|Extreme fatigue is one of the clinical characteristics of CLL. B symptoms are systemic symptoms of fever, night sweats, weight loss, and extreme fatigue, which can be associated with CLL. Participants who had extreme fatigue at BL, and still had extreme fatigue at Week 1, for example, are represented in the BL, yes; Week 1, yes category. Participants who had extreme fatigue at BL, but did not have extreme fatigue at Week 1 are represented in the BL, yes; Week 1, no category.|Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
813307|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Shift From Baseline (BL) in Fever at the Indicated Weeks|Fever is one of the clinical characteristics of CLL. B symptoms are systemic symptoms of fever, night sweats, weight loss, and extreme fatigue, which can be associated with CLL. Participants who had fever at BL, and still had fever at Week 1, for example, are represented in the BL, yes; Week 1, yes category. Participants who had fever at BL, but did not have fever at Week 1 are represented in the BL, yes; Week 1, no category.|Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
813308|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Shift From Baseline (BL) in Weight Loss at the Indicated Weeks|Weight loss is one of the clinical characteristics of CLL. B symptoms are systemic symptoms of fever, night sweats, weight loss, and extreme fatigue, which can be associated with CLL. Participants who had weight loss at BL, and still had weight loss at Week 1, for example, are represented in the BL, yes; Week 1, yes category. Participants who had weight loss at BL, but did not have weight loss at Week 1 are represented in the BL, yes; Week 1, no category.|Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
813309|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Shift From Baseline (BL) in Night Sweats at the Indicated Weeks|Night sweats are one of the clinical characteristics of CLL. B symptoms are systemic symptoms of fever, night sweats, weight loss, and extreme fatigue, which can be associated with CLL. Participants who had night sweats at BL, and still had night sweats at Week 1, for example, are represented in the BL, yes; Week 1, yes category. Participants who had night sweats at BL, but did not have night sweats at Week 1 are represented in the BL, yes; Week 1, no category.|Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
813310|NCT01077622|Secondary|Ratio of Immunoglobulin (Ig) Kappa/Ig Lambda|Peripheral blood Ig kappa and Ig lambda were measured using flow cytometry. Abnormality of a ratio of Ig kappa and Ig lambda indicates clonality of lymphocytes. A normal range of this parameter is between 1.0 and 3.2.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Ratio of Ig kappa/Ig lambda||Standard Deviation|Mean
813311|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Peripheral Blood CD23+ CD5+ Cells|CD23+ CD5+ cells in the peripheral blood were counted as measures of malignant B-cells and were measured by flow cytometry. Flow cytometry is a technique for counting and examining microscopic particles with an electronic detection apparatus.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813312|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Peripheral Blood CD20+ CD5+ Cells|CD20+ CD5+ cells in the peripheral blood were counted as measures of malignant B-cells and were measured by flow cytometry. Flow cytometry is a technique for counting and examining microscopic particles with an electronic detection apparatus.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813313|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Peripheral Blood CD19+ CD5+ Cells|CD19+ CD5+ cells in the peripheral blood were counted as measures of malignant B-cells and were measured by flow cytometry. Flow cytometry is a technique for counting and examining microscopic particles with an electronic detection apparatus.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813314|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Peripheral Blood CD19+ CD23+ Cells|CD19+ CD23+ cells in the peripheral blood were counted as measures of malignant B-cells and were measured by flow cytometry. Flow cytometry is a technique for counting and examining microscopic particles with an electronic detection apparatus.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813315|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Peripheral Blood CD20+ CD23+ Cells|CD20+ CD23+ cells in the peripheral blood were counted as measures of malignant B-cells and were measured by flow cytometry. Flow cytometry is a technique for counting and examining microscopic particles with an electronic detection apparatus.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813316|NCT01077622|Secondary|Number of Peripheral Blood Cluster of Differentiation (CD) CD19+ CD20+ Cells|CD19+ CD20+ cells in the peripheral blood were counted as measures of malignant B-cells and were measured by flow cytometry. Flow cytometry is a technique for counting and examining microscopic particles with an electronic detection apparatus.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813317|NCT01077622|Secondary|Mean Laboratory Data for Total Neutrophils (Total ANC) at the Indicated Weeks as Assessed by a SERC|SERC assessed total neutrophils based on the data provided by trial sites.|Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813320|NCT01077622|Secondary|Percentage of Bone Marrow Infiltration at the Indicated Weeks as Assessed by a SERC|SERC assessed bone marrow infiltration with the bone marrow smears of participants provided by trial sites.|Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Percentage of bone marrow infiltration||Standard Deviation|Mean
813321|NCT01077622|Secondary|Mean Laboratory Data for Platelet Count at the Indicated Weeks as Assessed by the Investigator|Blood samples of the participants were collected for the assessment of platelets.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813322|NCT01077622|Secondary|Mean Laboratory Data for Total Neutrophils (Total Absolute Neutrophil Count [ANC]) at the Indicated Weeks as Assessed by the Investigator|Blood samples of the participants were collected for the assessment of total neutrophils.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813323|NCT01077622|Secondary|Mean Laboratory Data for Lymphocytes as a Percentage in the Bone Marrow at the Indicated Weeks as Assessed by the Investigator|Bone marrow (BM) aspiration was performed, and the bone marrow smears were prepared for the assessment of lymphocytes in the BM.|Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Percentage of lymphocytes in the BM||Standard Deviation|Mean
813324|NCT01077622|Secondary|Mean Laboratory Data for Lymphocytes at the Indicated Weeks as Assessed by the Investigator|Blood samples of the participants were collected for the assessment of lymphocytes.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Giga (10^9) per liter (GI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813325|NCT01077622|Secondary|Mean Laboratory Data for Hemoglobin at the Indicated Weeks as Assessed by the Investigator|Blood samples of the participants were collected for the assessment of hemoglobin.|Day 1; Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, and 48|All Subjects Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Grams per liter (g/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813326|NCT01077622|Secondary|Time to Next Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) Therapy as Assessed by a SERC|Time to next CLL therapy is defined as the time from the first infusion of investigational drug to the first administration of the next CLL treatment. CLL therapy includes anti-cancer chemotherapy, anti-cancer radiotherapy, radio-immunotherapy, and antibody therapy.|Up to Week 48|All Subjects Population: only those participants who received CLL therapy were evaluated.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813327|NCT01077622|Secondary|Time to Response as Assessed by a SERC|Time to response is defined as the time from the first infusion of investigational drug to the first response (PR or better).|Up to Week 48|All Subjects Population: only those participants classified as responders for the assessment of objective response were evaluated.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813328|NCT01077622|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from the first infusion of investigational drug to death due to any cause.|Up to Week 48|All Subjects Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813329|NCT01077622|Secondary|Duration of Response as Assessed by a SERC|Duration of response is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of PR or better until the first documented sign of PD or death due to any reason in participants with PR or better.|Up to Week 48|All Subjects Population: only those participants classified as responders for the assessment of objective response were evaluated.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813330|NCT01077622|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by a SERC|PFS is defined as the time from the start of treatment to the first documented sign of progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause (whichever occurs earlier).|Up to Week 48|All Subjects Population: only those participants who progressed or died during the study were evaluated.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813331|NCT01077622|Primary|Percentage of Participants (Par.) With Objective Response (OR), Defined as Complete Remission (CR), CR Incomplete (CRi), Partial Remission (PR), and Nodular PR (nPR) as Assessed by a Safety and Evaluation Review Committee (SERC) and the Investigator|Par. were evaluated in accordance with the National Cancer Institute-sponsored Working Group. CR: no lymphadenopathy (Ly)/hepatomegaly/splenomegaly/constitutional symptoms; neutrophils >=1.5*10^9/liter (L), platelets >100*10^9/L, hemoglobin >11.0 grams/deciliter, lymphocytes (LC) <4.0*10^9/L, bone marrow (BM) sample must be normocellular for age, <30% LC, no lymphoid nodule. CRi: CR criteria, persistent anemia/thrombocytopenia/neutropenia unrelated to chronic lymphocytic leukemia but related to drug toxicity. PR: >=50% decrease in LC, Ly, size of liver and spleen, etc. nPR: nodules in BM.|Up to Week 48|All Subjects Population||Percentage of participants|||Number
813332|NCT01077622|Primary|Number of Participants With a Dose-limiting Toxicity (DLT)|A DLT was defined as the following toxicological findings, according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (AE) v3.0: any treatment-related Grade (G) >=3 non-hematotoxic AE, occurrence of G3 infusion reaction (treatment-related AE) at the day of infusion in a participant who received pre-medication or appropriate management during infusion (glucocorticoid) (the severity of the AE must have remained as >= G3 until the next day); and any of following: >= G4 hematotoxic treatment-related AEs (neutropenia lasting 7 days or more, febrile neutropenia).|Up to Week 8|All Subjects Population: all participants who received at least one dose of investigational drug. The first 3 participants enrolled in the study were evaluated for DLT according to study design.||participants|||Number
813353|NCT01077830|Primary|Crude Rate of Newly Diagnosed Cancer-Follow-up Primary Cohort|Any incidence of cancer reported during follow-up that was assessed by the Expert Review Committee to be a new case of cancer. The crude new cancer rates for each arm were calculated as follows: Number of participants in the arm was multiplied by the Duration of Follow-up (days) and divided by 365 (days per year) to establish the Total Participant-years for the arm. The Number of New Cancers reported was then divided by the Total Participant-years and the resultant quotient was then multiplied by 100 to determine the Crude New Cancer Rate.|up to 21 Months after the end of the SEAS (base) study|Analysis population was Follow-up Primary Cohort defined as all participants in the follow-up study without a history of cancer before the start of the follow-up period.||per 100 participant-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813333|NCT01077713|Secondary|Duration of Response (DoR)|DoR was defined for participants who had achieved an objective response (CR/PR) (whichever status was recorded first) as the time period from first documentation of a response to the date of first occurrence of investigator documented disease progression or death. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions, all pathological lymph nodes must have decreased to <10 mm in short axis. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. Disease progression was defined as increase by at least 20% in the sum of the longest diameters of each target lesion, taking as a reference the smallest sum of the longest diameters or appearance of one or more new lesions. DoR was estimated using Kaplan Meier method.|Baseline; Day 15 of Cycles 3 and 6; Month 6 and then every 3 months until disease progression, death or consent withdrawal (up to 53 months)|ITT set.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813334|NCT01077713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control|Disease control was defined as having CR/PR/SD as per RECIST criteria v 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions, all pathological lymph nodes must have decreased to <10 mm in short axis. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. PD was defined as at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions.|Cycle 3 Day 15, Cycle 6 Day 15 and at Month 6|ITT set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813335|NCT01077713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response|Objective response was defined as having a CR or PR according to a RECIST criteria v 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions, all pathological lymph nodes must have decreased to <10 mm in short axis. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions.|Cycle 3 Day 15, Cycle 6 Day 15 and at Month 6|ITT set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813336|NCT01077713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by Best Overall Response|Best overall response was defined as the best response recorded from the start of the treatment until disease progression/recurrence, assessed according to RECIST criteria v 1.1. Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions, all pathological lymph nodes must have decreased to less than (<) 10 millimeter (mm) in short axis; Partial Response (PR): at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesion, and no new lesions; Progressive Disease (PD): at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions; Stable Disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.|Baseline; Day 15 of Cycles 3 and 6; Month 6 and then every 3 months until disease progression, death or consent withdrawal (up to 53 months)|ITT set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813337|NCT01077713|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the interval between the date of randomization and death from any cause. OS was estimated using Kaplan Meier method.|From randomization to death or end of the study (up to 53 months)|ITT set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813338|NCT01077713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died||From randomization to death or end of the study (up to 53 months)|ITT set||percentage of participants|||Number
813339|NCT01077713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Alive at 12 Months After Randomization||1 year|ITT set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813340|NCT01077713|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the interval between the date of randomization and the first documentation of progressive disease or death from any cause. Disease progression was assessed according to RECIST criteria v 1.1. Disease progression was defined at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. PFS was estimated using Kaplan Meier method.|Baseline; Day 15 of Cycles 3 and 6; Month 6 and then every 3 months until disease progression, death, or consent withdrawal (up to 53 months)|ITT set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813341|NCT01077713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression or Death|Disease progression was assessed according to RECIST criteria v1.1. Disease progression was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions.|Baseline; Day 15 of Cycles 3 and 6; Month 6 and then every 3 months until disease progression, death, or consent withdrawal (up to 53 months)|ITT set||percentage of participants|||Number
813342|NCT01077713|Primary|Percentage of Participants Alive and Without Progressive Disease at Month 6|Disease progression was assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria version 1.1 (v 1.1). Disease progression was defined at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 millimeter (mm), progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions.|Month 6|Intent-to-treat (ITT) set included all participants in the RND set who received at least one dose of any study medication; participants were classified according to treatment received.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813343|NCT01077739|Secondary|Geometric Mean Values of Pro-Angiogenic Cytokine Concentrations at Baseline and Prior to Progression|Pro-angiogenic cytokine concentrations of placental growth factor (PlGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) in participant sera were measured and reported in units of picograms/milliliter (pg/mL). The geometric mean was calculated as exp10 (mean of log10 transformed concentration) and the standard deviation (SD) is SD of log10 transformed concentration.|Baseline, every 9 weeks until disease progression, at final visit or at withdrawal, for up to 24 months|ITT Population. Number (n) equals (=) number of participants assessed for the given parameter at the specified visit.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813344|NCT01077739|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Overall Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|"Percentage of participants with an overall response of CR or PR according to RECIST criteria.
CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease. All nodes, both target and non-target, must have decreased to normal (short axis less than [<]10 millimeters [mm]). No new lesions. PR was defined as greater than or equal to (≥)30 percent (%) decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions. The short axis was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No unequivocal progression of non-target disease. No new lesions."|Baseline, every 9 weeks until disease progression, at end of treatment or withdrawal, for up to 24 months|ITT population; only participants with RECIST evaluations were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
813345|NCT01077739|Secondary|PFS From the Start of First-Line Therapy|PFS from the start of first-line therapy was defined as the interval between the start of first-line therapy and the date at which second disease progression (after the start of beyond progression therapy) was documented. Progression of disease was evaluated using RECIST version 1.1 and abdominal/pelvic CT or MRI scanning. The same method of assessment and the same technique were to be used to evaluate each lesion throughout the entire study. If more than one method was used, data from the most accurate method according to RECIST were recorded. Median PFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 9 weeks until disease progression, at end of treatment or withdrawal, for up to 24 months|ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813346|NCT01077739|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) From the Start of Treatment Beyond Progression|PFS from the start of treatment beyond progression was defined as the interval between the start of beyond-progression therapy and the date at which disease progression was documented. Progression of disease was evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria version 1.1 and abdominal/pelvic computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. The same method of assessment and the same technique were to be used to evaluate each lesion throughout the entire study. If more than one method was used, data from the most accurate method according to RECIST were recorded. Median PFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 9 weeks until disease progression, at end of treatment or withdrawal, for up to 24 months|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813347|NCT01077804|Secondary|Incidence Rate of Herpes Zoster Infection|Herpes zoster cases were physician-diagnosed.|From 6 weeks to 168 months (14 years) post vaccination|||Rate per 1000 person years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813348|NCT01077804|Primary|Incidence Rate of Breakthrough Varicella|"Parents/guardians of Varivax vaccinated children were interviewed every 6 months after vaccination. The number of participants with varicella (referred to as varicella with any symptoms) were reported by parents during the interview. No medical confirmation of the diagnosis was required."|From 6 weeks to 168 months (14 years) post vaccination|||Rate per 1000 person years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813349|NCT01077804|Primary|Number of Participants With an Occurrence of Breakthrough Varicella|"Parents/guardians of Varivax vaccinated children were interviewed every 6 months after vaccination. The number of participants with varicella (referred to as varicella with any symptoms) were reported by parents during the interview. No medical confirmation of the diagnosis was required."|From 6 weeks to 168 months (14 years) post vaccination|||Participants|||Number
813350|NCT01077804|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Occurrence of Herpes Zoster Infection|Herpes zoster cases were physician-diagnosed cases.|From 6 weeks to 168 months (14 years) post vaccination|||Participants|||Number
813351|NCT01077817|Primary|Number of Cases of Esophageal Cancer Per 100,000 Woman-Years (Intent-to-Treat Analysis)|To assess the relative risk of esophageal cancer associated with osteoporosis study drugs (alendronate, etidronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and raloxifene), initiators of osteoporosis drugs and non-initiators (comparators, women sharing match criteria with the initiator) entered an inception cohort for every three-month period, beginning in the first quarter of 1996. Assignment to study drug exposure group remained fixed from the start of follow-up, analogous to an intent-to-treat analysis. The risk of esophageal cancer among initiators of study drug compared to non-initiators of study drug was estimated through calculation of a hazard ratio. For calculation of 721+ day hazard ratios, only esophageal cancer cases occurring at least 721 days from initiation of study drug were used. For calculation of 1441+ day hazard ratios, only esophageal cancer cases occurring at least 1441 days from initiation of study drug were used.|Up to approximately 7.3 years of follow-up|Inception Cohort came from the Overall Study Population beginning treatment with an osteoporosis study drug (initiators, 78,630 women) and 300,610 matched control women, who did not receive study drug (noninitiators). Participants may have been exposed to more than one study drug. Also, one comparator may have been used for multiple study drugs.||Number of cases per 100,0000 woman-years|||Number
813352|NCT01077817|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Exposure to Study Drugs (Case-Cohort Analysis)|To determine the use of study drugs (alendronate, etidronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and raloxifene) among female participants with esophageal cancer (cases) and a comparison subcohort, a case-cohort analysis was performed using women meeting criteria from the General Practice Research Database (GPRD, United Kingdom). Exposure to osteoporosis drugs administered 720 days before cancer onset was determined in cases and compared to contemporaneous assessments in a comparison subcohort matched by year of birth and membership in the GPRD on the case's onset date. Cases were confirmed and case onset dates determined by electronic algorithm (based on electronic medical record data) or by medical record review.|Exposure to study drug at least 720 days before disease onset|Case-Cohort analysis population came from the Overall Study Population and comprised 929 women with esophageal cancer (cases) and a Comparison Sample of 338,911 matched control women. Participants may have been exposed to more than one study drug. Also, one comparator may have been used for multiple study drugs.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813392|NCT01078571|Secondary|Radiological Evaluation of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA).|Treating physicians were asked to obtain a structural damage assessment by performing x-rays of the hands and feet approximately 1 year after the previous structural damage assessment that was done prior to the participant entering the study. The number of participants with radiological erosions evaluated at baseline and the 12-month visit are summarized by subgroup.|Baseline and 12 months|This analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat population (591 participants total).||Participant|||Number
813354|NCT01077830|Secondary|Crude Rate of Death Due to Cancer - Follow-up Primary Cohort|All deaths reported during follow-up were reviewed by the Expert Review Committee to ascertain if cancer was cause of death. The crude rates of death due to cancer for each arm were calculated as follows: Number of participants in the arm was multiplied by the Duration of Follow-up (days) and divided by 365 (days per year) to establish the Total Participant-years for the arm. The Number of Deaths due to Cancer reported was divided by the Total Participant-years and the resultant quotient was then multiplied by 100 to determine the Crude Rate of Death Due to Cancer.|up to 21 Months after the end of the base study|Analysis population was Follow-up Primary Cohort defined as all participants in the follow-up study without a history of cancer before the start of the follow-up period.||per 100 participant-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813355|NCT01077830|Secondary|Crude Rate of Death (Any Cause) - Follow-up Total Cohort|All deaths reported during follow-up were reviewed by the Expert Review Committee to ascertain cause of death. The crude rates of death for each arm were calculated as follows: Number of participants in the arm was multiplied by the Duration of Follow-up (days) and divided by 365 (days per year) to establish the Total Participant-years for the arm. The Number of Deaths (any cause) reported was divided by the Total Participant-years and the resultant quotient was then multiplied by 100 to determine the Rate of Death.|up to 21 Months after the end of the base study|Primary analysis population was Follow-Up Total Cohort defined as all participants enrolled in the study.||per 100 participant-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813356|NCT01077856|Secondary|Prevalence of HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18 Infection by Gardasil Vaccination Status|The percentage of participants with liquid-based cervical cytology samples positive for HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18 was to be analyzed by Gardasil vaccination status.|Four years to 5 years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was to be women who underwent cervical screening. A joint decision was made by the study team to forgo the stratified analysis by vaccination status because there were few women who had both been vaccinated with Gardasil and undergone cervical cancer screening. Thus, the number of participants analyzed is zero.|||||
813357|NCT01077856|Secondary|Incidence of Other HPV-related Genital Diseases by Gardasil Vaccination Status|The incidence of other HPV-related genital diseases, including vulvar and vaginal cancers, by Gardasil vaccination status was to be assessed.|Four years to 5 years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was to be women who underwent cervical screening. A joint decision was made by the study team to forgo the stratified analysis by vaccination status because there were few women who had both been vaccinated with Gardasil and undergone cervical cancer screening. Thus, the number of participants analyzed is zero.|||||
813358|NCT01077856|Secondary|Incidence of Cervical Cancer by Gardasil Vaccination Status|The incidence of other cervical cancers by Gardasil vaccination status was to be assessed.|Four years to 5 years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was to be women who underwent cervical screening. A joint decision was made by the study team to forgo the stratified analysis by vaccination status because there were few women who had both been vaccinated with Gardasil and undergone cervical cancer screening. Thus, the number of participants analyzed is zero.|||||
813359|NCT01077856|Secondary|Incidence of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia by Gardasil Vaccination Status|The incidence of CIN by Gardasil vaccination status was to be assessed.|Four years to 5 years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was to be women who underwent cervical screening. A joint decision was made by the study team to forgo the stratified analysis by vaccination status because there were few women who had both been vaccinated with Gardasil and undergone cervical cancer screening. Thus, the number of participants analyzed is zero.|||||
813360|NCT01077856|Primary|Percentage of Live Born Babies With a Major Congenital Anomaly|The percentage of live born babies with major congenital anomalies (MCA) born to women vaccinated with Gardasil during pregnancy and to women in the general population was assessed. For Denmark and Sweden diagnoses of congenital anomaly within 1 year of birth are included; for Norway diagnoses at birth are included.|Up to 5 years after Gardasil licensure (2007 to 2011)|The analysis population represents the babies born to participating mothers, instead of female participants, because the number of babies represents the denominator for the percentage calculation, not female participants (i.e., mothers)||Percentage of babies with a MCA|||Number
813361|NCT01077856|Primary|Prevalence of HPV Infection for High-risk Types Other Than 16/18 for Participants >26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The percentage of liquid-based cervical cytology samples positive for high-risk HPV Types other than 16 or 18, and not co-infected with Types 16 or 18, was analyzed.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants >26 years of age with liquid-based cytology samples analyzed for HPV types||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813362|NCT01077856|Primary|Prevalence of HPV Infection for High-risk Types Other Than 16/18 for Participants <=26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The percentage of liquid-based cervical cytology samples positive for high-risk HPV Types other than 16 or 18, and not co-infected with Types 16 or 18, was analyzed.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants <=26 years of age with liquid-based cytology samples analyzed for HPV types||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813409|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Diabetic and Non-diabetic (Blood Pressure [BP]-Controlled and BP-Uncontrolled) Participants With Dose Increases After 12 Months|"The percentage of non-diabetic and diabetic participants whose systolic and diastolic blood pressures were “controlled” versus “uncontrolled” was assessed using 2008 CHEP-specified targets (non-diabetics: BP <140/90 mm Hg; diabetics: BP <130/80 mm Hg). The percentage of these controlled and uncontrolled participants who underwent or did not undergo a dose increase is presented."|12 Months|Evaluable participants (diabetic and non-diabetic ITT participants with available data at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813363|NCT01077856|Primary|Prevalence of HPV 6/11/16/18 Infection in Participants >26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The percentage of liquid-based cervical cytology samples positive for HPV 6, 11, 16, or 18 was analyzed.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants >26 years of age with liquid-based cytology samples analyzed for HPV types||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813364|NCT01077856|Primary|Prevalence of HPV 6/11/16/18 Infection in Participants <=26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The percentage of liquid-based cervical cytology samples positive for HPV 6, 11, 16, or 18 was analyzed.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants <=26 years of age with liquid-based cytology samples analyzed for HPV types||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813365|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of HPV-related Histologically Confirmed Female Genital Diseases, Including Vulvar and Vaginal Cancer and Their High-grade Precursors|The incidence of HPV-related histologically confirmed female genital diseases, including vulvar and vaginal cancer and their high-grade precursors was to be assessed.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|Analysis of this endpoint was not planned nor were the data collected. Thus, the number of participants analyzed is zero.|||||
813366|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Cervical Cancer Associated With High-risk HPV Types Other Than 16/18 in Participants >26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The percentage of new cases of cervical cancer associated with high-risk HPV types other than 16 and 18 was estimated based on the proportion of HPV 16/18 in all cervical cancer in a representative sample. Incidence was age-adjusted according to Nordic Standard Population.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants >26 years of age with newly-diagnosed cervical cancer and lesional tissue samples analyzed for HPV types||Cases per 100,000 women|||Number
813367|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Cervical Cancer Associated With High-risk HPV Types Other Than 16/18 in Participants <=26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The percentage of new cases of cervical cancer associated with high-risk HPV types other than 16 and 18 was estimated based on the proportion of HPV 16/18 in all cervical cancer in a representative sample. Incidence was age-adjusted according to Nordic Standard Population.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants <=26 years of age with newly-diagnosed cervical cancer and lesional tissue samples analyzed for HPV types||Cases per 100,000 women|||Number
813368|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of HPV 6/11/16/18-related Cervical Cancer in Participants >26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The number of new cases of HPV 6/11/16/18-related cervical cancer was estimated based on the proportion of HPV 6/11/16/18 in all cervical cancers in a representative sample. Incidence was age-adjusted according to Nordic Standard Population.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants >26 years of age with newly-diagnosed cervical cancer and lesional tissue samples analyzed for HPV types||Cases per 100,000 women|||Number
813369|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of HPV 6/11/16/18-related Cervical Cancer in Participants <=26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The number of new cases of HPV 6/11/16/18-related cervical cancer was estimated based on the proportion of HPV 6/11/16/18 in all cervical cancers in a representative sample. Incidence was age-adjusted according to Nordic Standard Population.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants <=26 years of age with newly-diagnosed cervical cancer and lesional tissue samples analyzed for HPV types||Cases per 100,000 women|||Number
813393|NCT01078571|Secondary|Life Quality Assessment Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ Questionnaire) Percentage Change From Baseline.|Quality of life was assessed using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). The HAQ is a self-reported scale used in studies of rheumatoid arthritis to assess areas such as dressing/grooming arising, eating, walking, reach, grip, maintaining hygiene, and daily activities. The global HAQ questionnaire was scored as follows: <1 = no/mild disability, 1 to 2 = moderate disability, and >2 = severe disability. An increased score indicates a worsening of the disability. The percentage change from baseline to 12 months (12-month score minus baseline score divided by baseline score) is presented.|Baseline and 12 Months|The analysis was conducted for participants who had both baseline and 12-month global HAQ assessments.||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
813370|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of HPV 6/11/16/18-related Cervical Cancer in Participants of All Ages|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The number of new cases of HPV 6/11/16/18-related cervical cancer was estimated based on the proportion of HPV 6/11/16/18 in all cervical cancers in a representative sample. Incidence was age-adjusted according to Nordic Standard Population.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants with newly-diagnosed cervical cancer and lesional tissue samples analyzed for HPV types||Cases per 100,000 women|||Number
813371|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Associated With High-risk HPV Types Other Than 16/18 in Participants >26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The percentage of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN related to high-risk HPV types other than 16 and 18 was analyzed. High-risk HPV types include 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, and 68. Incidence was age-adjusted according to Nordic Standard Population.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants >26 years of age with newly-diagnosed high-grade CIN and lesional tissue samples analyzed for HPV types||Cases per 100,000 women|||Number
813372|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Associated With High-risk HPV Types Other Than 16/18 in Participants <=26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The percentage of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN related to high-risk HPV types other than 16 and 18 was analyzed. High-risk HPV types include 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, and 68. Incidence was age-adjusted according to Nordic Standard Population.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants <=26 years of age with newly-diagnosed high-grade CIN and lesional tissue samples analyzed for HPV types||Cases per 100,000 women|||Number
813373|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of HPV 6/11/16/18-related Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants >26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The number of new cases of HPV 6/11/16/18-related high-grade (2/3) CIN was estimated based on the proportion of HPV 6/11/16/18 in all CIN in a representative sample. Incidence was age-adjusted according to Nordic Standard Population.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants >26 years of age with newly-diagnosed high-grade CIN and lesional tissue samples analyzed for HPV types||Cases per 100,000 women|||Number
813374|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of HPV 6/11/16/18-related Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants <=26 Years of Age|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The number of new cases of HPV 6/11/16/18-related high-grade (2/3) CIN was estimated based on the proportion of HPV 6/11/16/18 in all CIN in a representative sample. Incidence was age-adjusted according to Nordic Standard Population.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants <=26 years of age with newly-diagnosed high-grade CIN and lesional tissue samples analyzed for HPV types||Cases per 100,000 women|||Number
813375|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) 6/11/16/18-related Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants of All Ages|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. In addition, lesional tissue samples were routinely collected and stored; the 2004 to 2006 period was chosen because it was sufficiently recent to reflect HPV type status immediately before licensure of Gardasil. The number of new cases of HPV 6/11/16/18-related high-grade (2/3) CIN was estimated based on the proportion of HPV 6/11/16/18 in all CIN in a representative sample. Incidence was age-adjusted according to Nordic Standard Population.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006) and two years after Gardasil licensure (2011 to 2012)|The analysis population was participants of all ages with newly-diagnosed high-grade CIN and lesional tissue samples analyzed for HPV types||Cases per 100,000 women|||Number
813376|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Histologically-confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants >26 Years of Age in Sweden|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. The collection of such data in these registries is mandated by law and compliance is generally very high. The number of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN registered during the assessment periods in Sweden was recorded. Incidence rates are for women >26 years of age and were age-adjusted using the European Standard Population. The incidence before Gardasil licensure is an average over the 3-year period.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006 combined) and annually after Gardasil licensure (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011)|The analysis population was the entire population of qualifying women >26 years of age in Sweden and thus changed throughout the analysis. The number of participants analyzed given below is an estimate calculated from the number of reported cases and the incidence data.||Cases per 100,000 women|cases||Number
813377|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Histologically-confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants <=26 Years of Age in Sweden|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. The collection of such data in these registries is mandated by law and compliance is generally very high. The number of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN registered during the assessment periods in Sweden was recorded. Incidence rates are for women <=26 years of age and were age-adjusted using the European Standard Population. The incidence before Gardasil licensure is an average over the 3-year period.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006 combined) and annually after Gardasil licensure (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011)|The analysis population was the entire population of qualifying women <=26 years of age in Sweden and thus changed throughout the analysis. The number of participants analyzed given below is an estimate calculated from the number of reported cases and the incidence data.||Cases per 100,000 women|cases||Number
813378|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Histologically-confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants of All Ages in Sweden|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. The collection of such data in these registries is mandated by law and compliance is generally very high. The number of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN registered during the assessment periods in Sweden was recorded. Incidence rates are for all age groups and were age-adjusted using the European Standard Population. The incidence before Gardasil licensure is an average over the 3-year period.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006 combined) and annually after Gardasil licensure (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011)|The analysis population was the entire population of qualifying women in Sweden and thus changed throughout the analysis. The number of participants analyzed given below is an estimate calculated from the number of reported cases and the incidence data.||Cases per 100,000 women|cases||Number
813379|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Histologically-confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants >26 Years of Age in Norway|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. The collection of such data in these registries is mandated by law and compliance is generally very high. The number of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN registered during the assessment periods in Norway was recorded. Incidence rates are for women >26 years of age were age-adjusted using the European Standard Population. The incidence before Gardasil licensure is an average over the 3-year period.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006 combined) and annually after Gardasil licensure (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011)|The analysis population was the entire population of women >26 years of age in Norway and thus changed throughout the analysis. The number of participants analyzed given below is an estimate calculated from the number of reported cases and the incidence data.||Cases per 100,000 women|cases||Number
813380|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Histologically-confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants <=26 Years of Age in Norway|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. The collection of such data in these registries is mandated by law and compliance is generally very high. The number of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN registered during the assessment periods in Norway was recorded. Incidence rates are for women <=26 years of age and were age-adjusted using the European Standard Population. The incidence before Gardasil licensure is an average over the 3-year period.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006 combined) and annually after Gardasil licensure (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011)|The analysis population was the entire population of qualifying women <=26 years of age in Norway and thus changed throughout the analysis. The number of participants analyzed given below is an estimate calculated from the number of reported cases and the incidence data.||Cases per 100,000 women|cases||Number
813381|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Histologically-confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants of All Ages in Norway|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. The collection of such data in these registries is mandated by law and compliance is generally very high. The number of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN registered during the assessment periods in Norway was recorded. Incidence rates are for all age groups and were age-adjusted using the European Standard Population. The incidence before Gardasil licensure is an average over the 3-year period.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006 combined) and annually after Gardasil licensure (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011)|The analysis population was the entire population of qualifying women in Norway and thus changed throughout the analysis. The number of participants analyzed given below is an estimate calculated from the number of reported cases and the incidence data.||Cases per 100,000 women|cases||Number
813382|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Histologically-confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants >26 Years of Age in Denmark|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. The collection of such data in these registries is mandated by law and compliance is generally very high. The number of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN registered during the assessment periods in Denmark was recorded. Incidence rates are for women >26 years of age and were age-adjusted using the European Standard Population. The incidence before Gardasil licensure is an average over the 3-year period.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006 combined) and annually after Gardasil licensure (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011)|The analysis population was the entire population of qualifying women >26 years of age in Denmark and thus changed throughout the analysis. The number of participants analyzed given below is an estimate calculated from the number of reported cases and the incidence data.||Cases per 100,000 women|cases||Number
813405|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Discontinuing Concomitant Cardiovascular Medications at 3 Months|Presented by type of medication discontinued.|3 Months|Evaluable participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with available data at given time point).||participants|||Number
813406|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Adding Concomitant Cardiovascular Medications at 12 Months|Presented by type of medication added.|12 Months|Evaluable participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with available data at given time point).||participants|||Number
813383|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Histologically-confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia for Participants <=26 Years of Age in Denmark|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. The collection of such data in these registries is mandated by law and compliance is generally very high. The number of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN registered during the assessment periods in Denmark was recorded. Incidence rates are for women <=26 years of age and were age-adjusted using the European Standard Population. The incidence before Gardasil licensure is an average over the 3-year period.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006 combined) and annually after Gardasil licensure (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011)|The analysis population was the entire population of qualifying women <=26 years of age in Denmark and thus changed throughout the analysis. The number of participants analyzed given below is an estimate calculated from the number of reported cases and the incidence data.||Cases per 100,000 women|cases||Number
813384|NCT01077856|Primary|Incidence of Histologically-confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN) for Participants of All Ages in Denmark|All Nordic countries participating in this study have national cervical cancer screening programs and registry systems that routinely collect information on cervical cytology, histology, and/or definitive therapy results. The collection of such data in these registries is mandated by law and compliance is generally very high. The number of new cases of high-grade (2/3) CIN registered during the assessment periods in Denmark was recorded. Incidence rates are for all age groups and were age-adjusted using the European Standard Population. The incidence before Gardasil licensure is an average over the 3-year period.|Three years before Gardasil licensure (2004 to 2006 combined) and annually after Gardasil licensure (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011)|The analysis population was the entire population of qualifying women in Denmark and thus changed throughout the analysis. The number of participants analyzed given below is an estimate calculated from the number of reported cases and the incidence data.||Cases per 100,000 women|cases||Number
813385|NCT01078441|Primary|One-year Survival in Patients Treated With This Regimen.|Proportion of patients who are still alive at 1 year after registration.|Assessed at 1 year|All eligible and treated patients are included in this analysis.||Proportion of patients||90% Confidence Interval|Number
813386|NCT01078454|Primary|Proportion of Patients With Hematologic Overall Response (Partial Response [PR]+ Very Good PR [VGPR]+ Amyloid Complete Response [ACR]+ Stringent Complete Response [sCR]) After 3 Months (3 Cycles) of Therapy|sCR: ACR and no clonal cells in bone marrow (BM) ACR: Negative serum/urine immunofixation (IF), <5% plasma cells in BM, and normal serum FLC ratio VGPR: 1. PR and any of the following; 2. serum/urine M-protein detectable by IF but not measurable (NM) on electrophoresis (EP); (3) ≥90% reduction in serum M-component and urine M-protein <100 mg/24 hr if baseline serum measurable; (4) urine M-component <100 mg/24 hr and NM serum M-protein on serum protein EP if baseline urine measurable; (5) ≥90% drop in the difference between involved and uninvolved FLC levels if only FLC measurable PR: (1) ≥50% drop of serum M-protein and 24-hr urinary M-protein drop by ≥90% or to <200 mg/24 hr if baseline serum/urine measurable; or (2) ≥50% drop of serum M-protein if only serum measurable at baseline; or (3) 24-hr urinary M-protein drop by ≥90% or to <200 mg/24 hr if baseline urine measurable; or (4) ≥ 50% drop in the difference between involved and uninvolved FLC if only FLC measu|Assessed at 3 months|All enrolled patients are included in this analysis.||Proportion of patients||90% Confidence Interval|Number
813387|NCT01078545|Secondary|Reported Adverse Events/Serious Adverse Events|Adverse events (AEs) were collected during the course of the study from the first visit (Baseline) through the last visit (12 months). The number of participants experiencing a non-serious or serious adverse event or both types of events are summarized. See the Reported Adverse Event section for details.|Baseline to 12 months|Analysis conducted in the intent-to-treat population.||Participants|||Number
813388|NCT01078545|Secondary|Changes in the Intensity of Symptoms Connected With Prostate Cancer From Baseline to Month 3, 6, 9, and 12.|Changes in the intensity of the following symptoms connected with prostate cancer: hematospermia (blood in the sperm), lower abdominal pain, urine incontinence, erectile dysfunction, crotch pain, anal pain or bleeding, lumbar/back pain, bone pain, spinal compression symptoms, peripheral lymph node enlargement, and lymphatic oedema of lower extremities. The intensity of each symptom was rated by the participant from 1 (minimum) to 7 (maximum). Zero indicates that the symptom was not present.|Baseline to 3, 6, 9, and 12 months.|Analysis conducted in the intent-to-treat population.||Units on a scale||Full Range|Median
813389|NCT01078545|Secondary|Percentage of Patients at Baseline With One of the Symptoms Connected With Prostate Cancer.|Percentage of participants at baseline with one of the following symptoms connected with prostate cancer: hematospermia (blood in the sperm), lower abdominal pain, urine incontinence, erectile dysfunction, crotch pain, anal pain or bleeding, lumbar/back pain, bone pain, spinal compression symptoms, peripheral lymph node enlargement, and lymphatic oedema of lower extremities. The intensity of each symptom was rated by the participant from 1 (minimum) to 7 (maximum). Zero indicates that the symptom was not present.|Baseline|Analysis conducted in the intent-to-treat population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813390|NCT01078545|Secondary|The Change in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) From Baseline to 3, 6, 9, and 12 Months.|The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) is used to assess the severity of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and to monitor disease progression. The IPSS is calculated from 7 questions regarding incomplete emptying, frequency, intermittency, urgency, weak stream, and straining [rated as 0 (not at all) to 5 (almost always)], as well as how many times on average a participant has to get up to urinate at night (0=none to 5=5 times or more). The total score is classified as follows: 0 to 7 = mildly symptomatic; 8 to 19 = moderately symptomatic; and 20 to 35 = severely symptomatic.|Baseline to 3, 6, 9, and 12 months.|Analysis conducted in the intent-to-treat population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813391|NCT01078545|Primary|The Change in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) From Baseline to Month 12. The IPSS Has a Range From 0 to 35.|The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) is used to assess the severity of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and to monitor disease progression. The IPSS is calculated from 7 questions regarding incomplete emptying, frequency, intermittency, urgency, weak stream, and straining [rated as 0 (not at all) to 5 (almost always)], as well as how many times on average a participant has to get up to urinate at night (0=none to 5=5 times or more). The total score is classified as follows: 0 to 7 = mildly symptomatic; 8 to 19 = moderately symptomatic; and 20 to 35 = severely symptomatic.|Baseline to 12 months|Analysis conducted in the intent-to-treat population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813394|NCT01078571|Secondary|Life Quality Assessment Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ Questionnaire) Mean Change From Baseline.|Quality of life was assessed using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). The HAQ is a self-reported scale used in studies of rheumatoid arthritis to assess areas such as dressing/grooming arising, eating, walking, reach, grip, maintaining hygiene, and daily activities. The global HAQ questionnaire was scored as follows: <1 = no/mild disability, 1 to 2 = moderate disability, and >2 = severe disability. An increased score indicates a worsening of the disability. The mean change in global HAQ score from baseline to 12 months is reported (baseline value - final value).|Baseline and 12 months|The analysis was conducted for participants who had both baseline and 12-month global HAQ assessments.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813395|NCT01078571|Secondary|Clinical Evaluation of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). Clinical Evaluation in the Inclusion Visit and in Each One of the Study Visits.|The treating physician was to clinically assess each participant at each study visit and report the number of painful and swollen joints. The mean number of painful or swollen joints for participants evaluated at each time point are presented by subgroup. The number of participants evaluated in each subgroup at each time point are also reported.|Baseline, 1, 4, 6, and 12 months|This analysis was conducted in the ITT population of 591 participants who had assessments at each time point. The number of de novo participants and participants treated greater than 4 months who were analyzed at each time point are given in parentheses.||Joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
813396|NCT01078571|Secondary|Disease Activity Score (DAS 28) Index Percentage Change From Baseline. The Disease Activity Score (DAS) is a Combined Index That Has Been Developed to Measure the Disease Activity in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA).|"The DAS 28 index measures disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis and is derived from the number swollen/tender joints, laboratory tests of inflammation, and participant assessment of global health (by marking a 10 cm line from very good to very bad). Ranges were used to classify participants, with a higher score indicating worse control of disease: Remission (<= 2.6), Low Disease Activity (>2.6 to <=3.2), Moderate Disease Activity (>3.2 to <= 5.1) and High Disease Activity (>5.1). The percentage reduction of baseline values is presented."|Baseline and 12 months|Mean reduction from baseline to 12 months was calculated for the ITT population of 310 de novo and 279 participants treated greater than 4 months.||Percentage reduction||Standard Deviation|Mean
813397|NCT01078571|Secondary|Disease Activity Score (DAS 28) Index Mean Change From Baseline. The Disease Activity Score (DAS) is a Combined Index That Has Been Developed to Measure the Disease Activity in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA).|"The DAS 28 index measures disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis and is derived from the number swollen/tender joints, laboratory tests of inflammation, and participant assessment of global health (by marking a 10 cm line from very good to very bad). Ranges were used to classify participants, with a higher score indicating worse control of disease: Remission (<= 2.6), Low Disease Activity (>2.6 to <=3.2), Moderate Disease Activity (>3.2 to <= 5.1) and High Disease Activity (>5.1). The mean change in DAS 28 score from baseline to final is presented."|Baseline and 12 months|Mean change from baseline to 12 months included the ITT population of 310 de novo and 281 participants treated greater than 4 months.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813398|NCT01078571|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of Adalimumab Treatment. Adverse Events: Medical Occurrence in a Patient or Clinical Investigation Subject Administered a Pharmaceutical Product and Which Does Not Necessarily Have a Causal Relationship With the Treatment|The safety and tolerability of adalimumab was assessed at each study visit. The overall number of participants experiencing serious adverse events (SAEs), non-serious adverse events (AEs) and AEs that led to discontinuation are presented. The number of participants presenting with any serious or non-serious event at each particular study visit is also reported. Note that for the incidence data participants were counted multiple times if they experienced an adverse event at more than 1 visit. For additional information see Reported Adverse Events.|Baseline, 1, 4, 6, and 12 months|This analysis was performed in the safety population of all participants who took at least 1 dose of adalimumab (675 participants).||Participants|||Number
813399|NCT01078584|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Defined Levels of Satisfaction With Current Therapy at Baseline Versus After 12 Months of Therapy|"Satisfaction with therapy at baseline (BL) versus 12 months, using a 5-point Likert scale where participants responded to the question “Are you satisfied with your current hypertension therapy?”. The range of responses varied from “1 = not at all satisfied” to “5 = extremely satisfied.” Responses 2 through 4 were not otherwise defined, but represented increments of more or less satisfaction with current therapy, respectively."|Day 0 (Baseline), 12 months|Subset of participants from the ITT cohort who answered the satisfaction questions at both the Baseline and 12-Month visits.||percentage of participants|||Number
813400|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Diabetic and Renal Dysfunction Participants Achieving the Target of Blood Pressure (BP) <140/90 mm Hg at 12 Months|"Participants achieving the target of blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg were considered controlled."|12 Months|Evaluable participants (ITT participants in the Diabetic or Renal Dysfunction cohorts with BP measurement at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813401|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Diabetic and Renal Dysfunction Participants Achieving the Target of Blood Pressure (BP) <140/90 mm Hg at 6 Months|"Participants achieving the target of blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg were considered controlled."|6 Months|Evaluable participants (ITT participants in the Diabetic or Renal Dysfunction cohorts with blood pressure measurement at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813402|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Diabetic and Renal Dysfunction Participants Achieving the Target of Blood Pressure (BP) <140/90 mm Hg at 3 Months|"Participants achieving the target of blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg were considered controlled."|3 Months|Evaluable participants (ITT participants in the Diabetic or Renal Dysfunction cohorts with BP measurement at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813403|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Discontinuing Concomitant Cardiovascular Medications at 12 Months|Presented by type of medication discontinued.|12 Months|Evaluable participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with available data at given time point).||participants|||Number
813404|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Discontinuing Concomitant Cardiovascular Medications at 6 Months|Presented by type of medication discontinued.|6 Months|Evaluable participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with available data at given time point).||participants|||Number
829195|NCT01225055|Primary|Bone Mineral Density BMD of the Total Hip as Assessed by DXA.|The mean change in BMD of the total hip after 12 month of treatment|12 Months|||g/cm squared||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813410|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Diabetic and Non-diabetic (Blood Pressure [BP]-Controlled and BP-Uncontrolled) Participants With Dose Increases After 6 Months|"The percentage of non-diabetic and diabetic participants whose systolic and diastolic blood pressures were “controlled” versus “uncontrolled” was assessed using 2008 CHEP-specified targets (non-diabetics: BP <140/90 mm Hg; diabetics: BP <130/80 mm Hg). The percentage of these controlled and uncontrolled participants who underwent or did not undergo a dose increase is presented."|6 Months|Evaluable participants (diabetic and non-diabetic ITT participants with available data at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813411|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Diabetic and Non-diabetic (Blood Pressure [BP]-Controlled and BP-Uncontrolled) Participants With Dose Increases After 3 Months|"The percentage of non-diabetic and diabetic participants whose systolic and diastolic blood pressures were “controlled” versus “uncontrolled” was assessed using 2008 CHEP-specified targets (non-diabetics: BP <140/90 mm Hg; diabetics: BP <130/80 mm Hg). The percentage of these controlled and uncontrolled participants who underwent or did not undergo a dose increase is presented."|3 Months|Evaluable participants (diabetic and non-diabetic ITT participants with available data at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813412|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Dose Changes at 12 Months||12 Months|Evaluable participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with data available at given time point).||participants|||Number
813413|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Dose Changes at 6 Months||6 Months|Evaluable participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with data available at given time point).||participants|||Number
813414|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Dose Changes at 3 Months||3 Months|Evaluable participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with data available at given time point).||participants|||Number
813415|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Compliant With Therapy After 12 Months|Compliance after 12 months of treatment was derived using responses to the question “How many trandolapril doses have been missed since the subject’s last visit?” at Visit 2, Visit 3 and Visit 4, as follows: if the response was “zero” at all of the Visits 2 through 4 assessments, the participant was classified as “compliant” after 12 months of treatment; if the response was any value greater than zero at any of the Visits 2 through 4 assessments, regardless of the number of missed doses, the participant was classified as “non-compliant” after 12 months of treatment.|12 Months|Evaluable participants (participants in the ITT cohort with compliance data available at given time point).||participants|||Number
813416|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Compliant With Therapy After 6 Months|Compliance after 6 months of treatment was derived using responses to the question “How many trandolapril (Mavik®) doses have been missed since the subject’s last visit?” at both Visit 2 and Visit 3, as follows: If the response was “zero” at both the Visit 2 and Visit 3 assessments, participant was classified as “compliant” after 6 months of treatment; If the response was any value greater than zero at either of the Visit 2 or Visit 3 assessments, regardless of the number of missed doses, participant was classified as “non-compliant” after 6 months of treatment|6 Months|Evaluable participants (participants in the ITT cohort with compliance data available at given time point).||participants|||Number
813417|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Compliant With Therapy After 3 Months|Compliance after 3 months of treatment was derived using responses to the Visit 2 question “How many trandolapril (Mavik®) doses have been missed since the subject’s last visit?” If the response was “zero”, the participant was classified as “compliant.” If the response was any value greater than zero, regardless of the number of missed doses, the participant was classified as “non-compliant.”|3 Months|Evaluable participants (participants in the ITT cohort with compliance data available at given time point).||participants|||Number
813418|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) in Non-Diabetic, Diabetic, ISH, and Renal Dysfunction Cohorts at Month 12||Day 0 (Baseline), Month 12|Evaluable participants (ITT participants in the non-diabetic, diabetic, ISH, and renal dysfunction cohorts with blood pressure measurement at timepoint).||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813419|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) in Non-Diabetic, Diabetic, ISH, and Renal Dysfunction Cohorts at Month 6||Day 0 (Baseline), Month 6|Evaluable participants (ITT participants in the non-diabetic, diabetic, ISH, and renal dysfunction cohorts with blood pressure measurement at timepoint).||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813420|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) in Non-Diabetic, Diabetic, ISH, and Renal Dysfunction Cohorts at Month 3||Day 0 (Baseline), Month 3|Evaluable participants (ITT participants in the non-diabetic, diabetic, ISH, and renal dysfunction cohorts with blood pressure measurement at timepoint).||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813421|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Mean Baseline Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) in Non-Diabetic, Diabetic, ISH, and Renal Dysfunction Cohorts||Day 0 (Baseline)|Evaluable participants (ITT participants in the non-diabetic, diabetic, ISH, and renal dysfunction cohorts with blood pressure measurement at timepoint).||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813422|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) in ITT Cohort at 12 Months||Day 0 (Baseline), 12 Months|Evaluable participants (participants in the ITT cohort with blood pressure measurements at given timepoint).||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813423|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) in ITT Cohort at 6 Months||Day 0 (Baseline), 6 Months|Evaluable participants (participants in the ITT cohort with blood pressure measurements at given time point).||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813424|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) in ITT Cohort at 3 Months||Day 0 (Baseline), 3 Months|ITT cohort. n = all evaluable participants in the ITT cohort with blood pressure measurement at given timepoint.||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813440|NCT01078584|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) in Blood Pressure (BP)-Controlled and BP-Uncontrolled Diabetics at 3 Months|"Diabetics were considered to be BP-controlled if BP <130/80 mm Hg. Diabetics were considered to be BP-uncontrolled if BP >/=130/80 mm Hg."|Baseline, 3 Months|Evaluable participants (diabetic ITT participants with eGFR measurement at given time point).||mL/min||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813425|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With Renal Dysfunction Achieving 2008 CHEP Targets After 12 Months of Therapy|"Blood pressure (BP) targets, as specified in the 2008 CHEP recommendations, were systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) <130/80 mm Hg. Where a participant had both an SBP and DBP less than the target, the participant's BP was defined as controlled."|12 Months|Evaluable participants (ITT participants with renal dysfunction who had blood pressure measurements at given timepoint).||percentage of participants|||Number
813426|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With Renal Dysfunction Achieving 2008 CHEP Targets After 6 Months of Therapy|"Blood pressure (BP) targets, as specified in the 2008 CHEP recommendations, were systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) <130/80 mm Hg. Where a participant had both an SBP and DBP less than the target, the participant's BP was defined as controlled."|6 Months|Evaluable participants (ITT participants with renal dysfunction who had blood pressure measurements at given timepoint).||percentage of participants|||Number
813427|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With Renal Dysfunction Achieving 2008 CHEP Targets After 3 Months of Therapy|"Blood pressure (BP) targets, as specified in the 2008 CHEP recommendations, were systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) <130/80 mm Hg. Where a participant had both an SBP and DBP less than the target, the participant's BP was defined as controlled."|3 Months|Evaluable participants (ITT participants with renal dysfunction who had blood pressure measurements at given timepoint).||percentage of participants|||Number
813428|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Achieving 2008 CHEP Targets After 12 Months of Therapy|Blood pressure (BP) targets, as specified in the 2008 CHEP recommendations, were systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) <140/90 mm Hg. Where a participant had both an SBP and DBP less than the target, the participant's BP was defined as “controlled.”|12 Months|Evaluable participants (participants in the ITT cohort with blood pressure measurements at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813429|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Achieving 2008 CHEP Targets After 6 Months of Therapy|Blood pressure (BP) targets, as specified in the 2008 CHEP recommendations, were systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) <140/90 mm Hg. Where a participant had both an SBP and DBP less than the target, the participant's BP was defined as “controlled.”|6 Months|Evaluable participants (participants in the ITT cohort with blood pressure measurements at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813430|NCT01078584|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Achieving 2008 CHEP Targets After 3 Months of Therapy|Blood Pressure (BP) targets, as specified in the 2008 CHEP recommendations, were systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) <140/90 mm Hg. Where a participant had both an SBP and DBP less than the target, the participant's BP was defined as “controlled.”|3 Months|Evaluable participants (participants in the ITT cohort with blood pressure measurements at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813431|NCT01078584|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Defined Levels of Satisfaction With Current Therapy at Baseline and After 12 Months of Therapy|"Satisfaction with therapy at baseline (BL) and 12 months, using a 5-point Likert scale where participants responded to the question Are you satisfied with your current hypertension therapy?. The range of responses varied from 1 = not at all satisfied to 5 = extremely satisfied. Responses 2 through 4 were not otherwise defined, but represented increments of more or less satisfaction with current therapy, respectively."|Day 0 (Baseline), 12 months|ITT cohort. n=evaluable participants from the ITT cohort who answered the satisfaction questions at Baseline and 12-Month visits.||percentage of participants|||Number
813432|NCT01078584|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Isolated Systolic Hypertension (ISH) Reaching 2008 CHEP Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) Target After 12 Months of Therapy|The 2008 CHEP systolic BP (SBP) target is <140 mm Hg. Where a participant had an SBP less than the target, the participant's SBP was defined as “controlled.”|12 Months|Evaluable participants (ITT participants with ISH who had blood pressure measurements at given timepoint).||percentage of participants|||Number
813433|NCT01078584|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Isolated Systolic Hypertension (ISH) Reaching 2008 CHEP Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) Target After 6 Months of Therapy|The 2008 CHEP systolic BP (SBP) target is <140 mm Hg. Where a participant had an SBP less than the target, the participant's SBP was defined as “controlled.”|6 Months|Evaluable participants (ITT participants with ISH who had blood pressure measurements at given timepoint).||percentage of participants|||Number
813434|NCT01078584|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Isolated Systolic Hypertension (ISH) Reaching 2008 CHEP Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) Target After 3 Months of Therapy|The 2008 CHEP systolic BP (SBP) target is <140 mm Hg. Where a participant had an SBP less than the target, the participant's SBP was defined as “controlled.”|3 Months|Evaluable participants (ITT participants with ISH who had blood pressure measurements at given timepoint).||percentage of participants|||Number
813435|NCT01078584|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Microalbuminuria (MAU) at 12 Months||Baseline, 12 months|Evaluable Participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with MAU measurement at given time point).||mg/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813436|NCT01078584|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Microalbuminuria (MAU) at 6 Months||Baseline, 6 Months|Evaluable Participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with MAU measurement at given time point).||mg/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813437|NCT01078584|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Microalbuminuria (MAU) at 3 Months||Baseline, 3 Months|Evaluable participants (all participants in the ITT cohort with MAU measurement at given time point).||mg/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813438|NCT01078584|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) in Blood Pressure (BP)-Controlled and BP-Uncontrolled Diabetics at 12 Months|"Diabetics were considered to be BP-controlled if BP <130/80 mm Hg. Diabetics were considered to be BP-uncontrolled if BP >/=130/80 mm Hg."|Baseline,12 Months|Evaluable participants (diabetic ITT participants with eGFR measurement at given time point).||mL/min||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813439|NCT01078584|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) in Blood Pressure (BP)-Controlled and BP-Uncontrolled Diabetics at 6 Months|"Diabetics were considered to be BP-controlled if BP <130/80 mm Hg. Diabetics were considered to be BP-uncontrolled if BP >/=130/80 mm Hg."|Baseline, 6 Months|Evaluable participants (diabetic ITT participants with eGFR measurement at given time point).||mL/min||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813560|NCT01079936|Primary|Participants With Grade 3 =/> Adverse Events|Number of participants experiencing adverse events above a Grade 3 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 2.|Day 90 after stem cell transplant|||participants|||Number
813441|NCT01078584|Primary|Percentage of Non-Diabetic and Diabetic Participants Meeting Blood Pressure Targets at 12 Months|Blood pressure (BP) targets, as specified in the 2008 CHEP recommendations, were systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) <140/90 mm Hg for non-diabetic participants, and SBP/DBP <130/80 mm Hg for diabetic participants.|12 months|Evaluable participants (diabetic and non-diabetic ITT participants with blood pressure measurement at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813442|NCT01078584|Primary|Percentage of Non-Diabetic and Diabetic Participants Meeting Blood Pressure Targets at 6 Months|Blood pressure (BP) targets, as specified in the 2008 CHEP recommendations, were systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) <140/90 mm Hg for non-diabetic participants, and SBP/DBP <130/80 mm Hg for diabetic participants.|6 months|Evaluable participants (diabetic and non-diabetic ITT participants with blood pressure measurement at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813443|NCT01078584|Primary|Percentage of Non-Diabetic and Diabetic Participants Meeting Blood Pressure Targets at 3 Months|Blood pressure (BP) targets, as specified in the 2008 CHEP recommendations, were systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) <140/90 mm Hg for non-diabetic participants, and SBP/DBP <130/80 mm Hg for diabetic participants.|3 months|Evaluable participants (diabetic and non-diabetic ITT participants with blood pressure measurement at given time point).||percentage of participants|||Number
813444|NCT01078623|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Morning Peak FEV1 at Day 14|FEV1 was measured via spirometry: 2 sets of tests prior to morning dose separated by 30 minutes, and then 1 set at 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 hours post-morning dose|0 and 30 minutes and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 hours post-morning dose at Day 14|Intent to treat (ITT) population: all randomized patients who took at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 baseline and 1 post-baseline assessment of value of FEV1||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813445|NCT01078623|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Morning Pre-dose FEV1 at Day 14|FEV1 was measured via spirometry: 2 sets of tests prior to morning dose separated by 30 minutes|Day 14|Intent to treat (ITT) population: all randomized patients who took at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 baseline and 1 post-baseline assessment of value of FEV1||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813446|NCT01078623|Primary|Change From Baseline in Normalized Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Area Under the Curve Over 12 Hours (AUC0-12h) After Morning Study Drug Administration at Day 14|FEV1 was measured via spirometry: 2 sets of tests prior to morning dose separated by 30 minutes, and then 1 set at 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 hours post-morning dose|0 and 30 minutes and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 hours post-morning dose at Day 14|Intent to treat (ITT) population: all randomized patients who took at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 baseline and 1 post-baseline assessment of value of FEV1||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813447|NCT01078662|Secondary|Disease Control Rate at Week 16|Disease control rate is the proportion of patients with best response of complete or partial response or stable disease according to definitions of Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1) till week 16.|Tumour assessments carried out at baseline ie 28 days before first study drug dose and then at week 8 and week 16|Full analysis set - all treated patients||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813448|NCT01078662|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response is calculated from the date of first documented response (complete or partial) until date of documented progression (as defined by RECIST 1.1) or death (by any cause) in the absence of disease progression.|From onset of first occurrence of complete or partial response till documented progression or death by any cause in the absence of progression, assessed maximum up to 29 months|Full analysis set - all treated patients who had at least one complete or partial response during the assessment period.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
813449|NCT01078662|Secondary|Overall Survival Rate at 12 Months|Overall survival rate at 12 months is defined as the proportion of patients who are alive 12 months after date of first dose|Survival follow-up from first dose till death of the patient or till end of study in absence of death, assessed maximum up to 29 months|Full analysis set - all treated patients. The Other cancer group was not analysed in accordance with the protocol.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813450|NCT01078662|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the duration from first dose till death. In absence of death, the time is calculated from first dose till the date subject last known to be alive.|Survival follow-up from first dose till death of the patient or till end of study in absence of death, assessed maximum up to 29 months|Full analysis set - all treated patients. The Other cancer group was not analysed in accordance with the protocol.||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
813451|NCT01078662|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|Progression free survival is defined as the duration from first dose till objective progression or death. In absence of progression or death, the time is calculated from first dose till last evaluable scanning visit.|Tumour assessments are carried out at baseline ie 28 days before first study drug dose and then every 8 weeks up to 6 months after starting study treatment, then every 12 weeks until objective disease progression, assessed maximum up to 29 months|Full analysis set - all treated patients. The Other cancer group was not analysed in accordance with the protocol.||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
813452|NCT01078662|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|Objective response rate is the proportion of patients with at least one measurable lesion at baseline, who experienced complete or partial response at least once during the assessment period, according to the definitions of Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1).|Tumour assessments carried out at baseline ie 28 days before first study drug dose and then every 8 weeks up to 6 months after starting study treatment, then every 12 weeks until objective disease progression, assessed maximum up to 29 months|Measurable disease analysis set - all treated patients having at least one measurable lesion at baseline||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813453|NCT01078662|Primary|Tumour Response Rate|Tumour response rate is the proportion of patients who experienced complete or partial response at least once during the assessment period, according to the definitions of Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1).|Tumour assessments carried out at baseline ie 28 days before first study drug dose and then every 8 weeks up to 6 months after starting study treatment, then every 12 weeks until objective disease progression, assessed maximum up to 29 months|Full analysis set - all treated patients||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813561|NCT01079936|Primary|Number of Participants With Day 30 DLT (Overall Study, Phase I/Phase II)|Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as regimen-related death, graft failure, grade 3 or 4 atrial fibrillation, grade 4 deep venous thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism before day 30 after auto-HCT.|Day 30 following transplant|||participants|||Number
813454|NCT01078675|Secondary|Overal Treatment Adherence|Overall adherence rate was calculated as the weighted mean of adherence rates of all consecutive visits after baseline, in which the adherence rate between 2 consecutive visits was a percentage of the number of rosuvastatin taken divided by duration of exposure. One patient received 1 dose of study drug but was not included in the efficacy and safety analyses due to a lack of follow-up data.|2-year study period|Safety analysis set||Percent of doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
813455|NCT01078675|Primary|Single Dose PK - AUC(0-24)|Serial plasma samples were taken at baseline (Week 0) at: 0.5 hours pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12 hours and on Day 1 at 24 hours after the single 10 mg dosing|Serial blood samples over 24 hours|Single dose PK analysis set||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813456|NCT01078675|Primary|Single Dose PK - Tmax|Serial plasma samples were taken at baseline (Week 0) at: 0.5 hours pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12 hours and on Day 1 at 24 hours after the single 10 mg dosing|Serial blood samples over 24 hours|Single dose PK analysis set||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
813457|NCT01078675|Primary|Sexual Maturation by Tanner Staging at Month 24|Tanner stages (I-V) was used to characterize physical development in children and adolescent. The stages was based on external primary and secondary sex characteristics, such as the size of the breasts, genitalia, and development of pubic hair. Tanner stage is considered going up when the organs grow bigger.|At Baseline|Safety analysis set||Participants|||Number
813458|NCT01078675|Primary|Sexual Maturation by Tanner Staging at Month 12|Tanner stages (I-V) was used to characterize physical development in children and adolescent. The stages was based on external primary and secondary sex characteristics, such as the size of the breasts, genitalia, and development of pubic hair. Tanner stage is considered going up when the organs grow bigger.|At Baseline|Safety analysis set||Participants|||Number
813459|NCT01078675|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Height|One patient received 1 dose of study drug but was not included in the efficacy and safety analyses due to a lack of follow-up data.|At Month 12 and Month 24|Safety Population||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
813460|NCT01078675|Secondary|Total Duration of Exposure|Total duration of exposure was calculated as [last dose date of rosuva - first dose date of rosuva + 1 day]. One patient received 1 dose of study drug but was not included in the efficacy and safety analyses due to a lack of follow-up data.|2-year study period|Safety analysis set||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813461|NCT01078675|Secondary|Adverse Events|Number of participants with Various Categories of AE's. One patient received 1 dose of study drug but was not included in the efficacy and safety analyses due to a lack of follow-up data.|2-year study period|Safety analysis set||Participant|||Number
813462|NCT01078675|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Max and Mean Carotid Intima and Media Wall Thickness (cIMT)|One patient received 1 dose of study drug but was not included in the efficacy and safety analyses due to a lack of follow-up data.|At Month 12 and Month 24|Intent-to-treat analysis set (LOCF) and healthy siblings||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
813463|NCT01078675|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in HDL-C, TC, TG, Non-HDL-C, LDL-C/HDL-C, TC/HDL-C, Non HDL C/HDL-C, ApoB, ApoA-1, and ApoB/ApoA-1|One patient received 1 dose of study drug but was not included in the efficacy and safety analyses due to a lack of follow-up data.|At Month 3, Month 12 and Month 24|Intent-to-treat analysis set (LOCF)||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
813464|NCT01078675|Primary|Single Dose PK - Cmax|Serial plasma samples were taken at baseline (Week 0) at: 0.5 hours pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12 hours and on Day 1 at 24 hours after the single 10 mg dosing|Serial blood samples over 24 hours.|Single dose PK analysis set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813465|NCT01078675|Primary|Sexual Maturation by Tanner Staging at Baseline|Tanner stages (I-V) was used to characterize physical development in children and adolescent. The stages was based on external primary and secondary sex characteristics, such as the size of the breasts, genitalia, and development of pubic hair. Tanner stage is considered going up when the organs grow bigger.|At Baseline|Safety analysis set||Participants|||Number
813466|NCT01078675|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in LDL-C|Negative values represent a decrease and positive values represent an increase. In total, 198 patients were treated. One patient received 1 dose of study drug but was not included in the efficacy and safety analyses due to a lack of follow-up data.|At Month 3, Month 12 and Month 24|Intent-to-treat analysis set and Per-protocol analysis set||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
813467|NCT01078753|Secondary|Change in Number of Wet Nights Between Treatment Periods I and II|The number of wet nights was recorded by participants (or their caregivers) in a daily diary. The difference was calculated from the number of wet nights during the 14-day Treatment Period I minus the number of wet nights during the 14-day Treatment Period II.|Treatment Period I (weeks 1-2) and Treatment Period II (weeks 3-4)|The full analysis set.||wet nights||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813468|NCT01078753|Secondary|Change in Number of Wet Nights Between Baseline and Treatment Period I|The number of wet nights was recorded by participants (or their caregivers) in a daily diary. The difference was calculated from the number of wet nights during the 14-day Baseline Period minus the number of wet nights during the 14-day Treatment Period I.|Baseline (14-day period prior to starting study treatment) and Treatment Period I (weeks 1-2 after treatment initiation).|The Full analysis set.||wet nights||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813469|NCT01078753|Primary|Change in the Number of Wet Nights Between Baseline and Treatment Period II|The number of wet nights was recorded by participants (or their caregivers) in a daily diary. The difference was calculated from the number of wet nights during the 14-day Baseline Period minus the number of wet nights during the 14-day Treatment Period II.|Baseline (14-day period prior to starting study treatment) and Treatment Period II (weeks 3-4 after treatment initiation).|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, satisfied all the major eligibility criteria and for whom efficacy data was obtained.||wet nights||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813470|NCT01078805|Secondary|Physician Criteria for Initiating FORTEO Therapy|Study investigators were provided a questionnaire that was populated with specific criteria they could choose from when they initiated Forteo therapy for their patients. They could have chosen more than one criteria, thus participants could have been counted multiple times. As this was actually a baseline characteristic rather than an outcome measure, data are presented in the baseline characteristic table rather than here.|Baseline|Participants are those who took at least one dose of study drug and had reasons documented to initiate Forteo therapy. This is a baseline characteristic; therefore data are presented in the section of Baseline Characteristics.||participants|||Number
813471|NCT01078805|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Bone Area at Month 24 Endpoint|Bone area is a defined region of interest of bone.|Baseline, up to month 24|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had non-missing start/stop date, and did not discontinue study drug more than 3 consecutive months at onetime during treatment phase. At least one post-baseline measurement within 24 month, last observation carried forward.||percent change of centimeter square||Standard Error|Mean
813472|NCT01078805|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Content (BMC) at Month 24 Endpoint|BMC is an estimate of the amount of mineral (such as calcium) in the bone.|Baseline, up to month 24|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had non-missing start/stop date, and did not discontinue study drug more than 3 consecutive months at onetime during treatment phase. At least one post-baseline measurement within 24 month, last observation carried forward.||percentage (%) change of grams (g)||Standard Error|Mean
813473|NCT01078805|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Month 24 Endpoint|A BMD test measures the amount of mineral (such as calcium) in a defined area of bone, grams per square centimeter (g/cm²).|Baseline, up to month 24|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had non-missing start/stop date, and did not discontinue study drug more than 3 consecutive months at onetime during treatment phase. At least one post-baseline measurement within 24 month, last observation carried forward.||percentage (%) change of BMD||Standard Error|Mean
813474|NCT01078805|Secondary|Treatment Adherence|Treatment adherence is the duration of time participants were on Forteo therapy during the 24-month treatment phase of the study.|up to 24 months|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had non-missing start/stop date, and did not discontinue study drug more than 3 consecutive months at onetime during treatment phase.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813475|NCT01078805|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Pain Score by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 24 Month Endpoint|Visual analog pain scale is a measurement instrument to measure the level of pain. Scores range from 0 to 100. Higher score indicates greater pain. Mean percentage change is (Pain score at baseline visit - Pain score at Month 24)/Pain score at baseline visit*100%.|Baseline, Month 24|Participants with at least a VAS score of 40 at baseline and at least one post-baseline measurement.||percentage change of pain score||Standard Error|Mean
813476|NCT01078805|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Back Pain Score by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 24 Month Endpoint|Visual analog pain scale is a measurement instrument to measure the level of pain. Scores range from 0 to 100. Higher score indicates greater pain. Mean percentage change is (Pain score at baseline visit - Pain score at Month 24)/Pain score at baseline visit*100%.|Baseline, Month 24|Participants with at least a VAS score of 40 at baseline and at least one post-baseline measurement.||percentage change of pain score||Standard Error|Mean
813477|NCT01078805|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Vertebral Fractures|Clinical vertebral fracture was defined as a fracture that caused pain and/or discomfort, came to medical attention, and was confirmed by the investigator. Vertebral fracture sites included thoracic vertebra number 4 (T4) through lumbar spine vertebra number 4 (L4). Vertebral fracture is binary outcome (Yes/No). Percentage of participants= number of participants with new vertebral fracture/ number of participants at risk * 100.|up to 24 months|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had non-missing start/stop date, and did not discontinue study drug more than 3 consecutive months at onetime during treatment phase.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813478|NCT01078805|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Non-Vertebral Fragility Fractures|Non-vertebral fragility fracture is defined as low trauma fracture, such as a fall from standing height. It is binary outcome (Yes/No). Percentage of participants = number of participants with new Non-Vertebral Fragility Fracture/ number of participants at risk * 100.|up to 24 months|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had non-missing start/stop date, and did not discontinue study drug more than 3 consecutive months at onetime during treatment phase.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813479|NCT01078844|Primary|Clinical Global Impression-Scale(CGI-S)||12 weeks|This study was terminated prematurely and data was not collected for this outcome measure.|||||
813483|NCT01078922|Secondary|Overall Clinical Benefit (OCB)|"OCB = # patients with a CR + # of patients with a PR + # patients with Stable Disease (SD) divided by the number of evaluable patients CR and PR is defined in Outcome Measure #1
SD is defined as:
Failure to attain CR/PR or Progressive Disease (PD)
PET remains positive.
PD is defined as:
Any new lesion > 1.5 cm in longest axis
An increase 50% or more of previously involved sites from nadir
50% increase in SPD of more than one node or 50% increase in the longest diameter of a previously identified node that is > 1 cm in shortest axis
PET remains positive if it was positive before therapy."|Evaluated every 2 cycles (every 2 months), up to 80 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
813484|NCT01078922|Primary|Overall Response (OR)|"OR = # of patients with a Complete Response (CR) plus # of patients with a Partial Response (PR) divided by the total # of evaluable patients.
A CR is defined as:
Disappearance of all disease.
If nodal masses that Positron Emission Tomography (PET)- positive prior to therapy; they must be PET negative
If the nodal masses were Variably or PET negative; they must regress to normal.
No palpable liver or spleen
Palpable nodal masses are no longer palpable
Negative bone marrow biopsy
A PR is defined as:
Regression of measurable disease and no new sites of disease.
> 50% decrease in Sum of Product of Diameters (SPD) of up to 6 largest masses with no increase in the size of other nodes. If the nodal masses were PET positive prior to therapy then PET positive at previously involved sites is allowed. If they were Variably or PET negative then regression on CT is required.
No increase in the size of the liver or spleen"|evaluated every 2 months up to 80 weeks|Analysis was per protocol. Patients were evaluated every 2 cycles for Overall Response, up to 80 weeks.||percentage of participants|||Number
813485|NCT01078974|Primary|Tolerability of Pomalidomide|Number of participants with dose limiting toxicities which resulted in being removed from pomalidomide therapy|2 years|||participants|||Number
813486|NCT01078974|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose of Pomalidomide|To determine the MTD of pomalidomide administered orally in patients with Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia in combination with dexamethasone and rituximab. Because maximum tolerated dose was not determined due to study termination, the highest dose of pomalidomide administered is presented below.|2 years|The maximum tolerated dose was not determined due to study termination. Three participants experienced IgM flare causing them to be removed from the study early.||mg|||Number
813487|NCT01079130|Secondary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) After 1 Day of Treatment|Spirometry was conducted according to internationally accepted standards. The trough FEV1 was defined as the average of the FEV1 measurements taken at 23 hours 10 minutes and 23 hours 45 minutes post dose on day 2. The mixed model used baseline FEV1 and FEV1 prior to and 30 minutes post inhalation of albuterol as covariates.|Day 2 (after 1 day of treatment)|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, who had efficacy data for this outcome measure.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813488|NCT01079130|Primary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) After 2 Weeks of Treatment|Spirometry was conducted according to internationally accepted standards. The trough FEV1 was defined as the average of the FEV1 measurements taken at 23 hours 10 minutes and 23 hours 45 minutes post dose. The mixed model used baseline FEV1 and FEV1 prior to and 30 minutes post inhalation of albuterol as covariates.|Day 15 (after 2 weeks of treatment)|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, who had efficacy data for this outcome measure. Missing data were imputed last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813489|NCT01079143|Secondary|Incidence (Number) of Participants With Graft Losses|If a participant underwent a graft nephrectomy, then the day of nephrectomy was considered as the day of graft loss.|M6 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment.||Participants|||Number
813490|NCT01079143|Secondary|Incidence (Number) of BPAR|A biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR) is defined as a biopsy graded IA, IB, IIA, IIB or III as per 2005/2007 Banff histological classification system.|M6 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment.||Number of participants|||Number
813491|NCT01079143|Secondary|Severity of BPAR|"A biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR) is defined as a biopsy graded IA, IB, IIA, IIB or III as per 2005/2007 Banff histological classification system.
Biopsy graded IA: Significant interstitial infiltration (> 25% of parenchyma) and foci of moderate tubulitis (> 4 mononuclear cells/tubular cross section or group of 10 tubular cells).
Biopsy grade IB: Significant interstitial infiltration (> 25% of parenchyma) and foci of severe tubulitis (> 10 mononuclear cells/tubular cross section or group of 10 tubular cells).
Biopsy grade IIA: Mild to moderate intimal arteritis. Biopsy graded IIB: Severe intimal arteritis comprising > 25% of the lumenal area.
Biopsy graded III: Transmural (full vessel wall thickness) arteritis and/or arterial fibrinoid change and necrosis of medial smooth muscle cells (with accompanying lymphocytic inflammation)."|M6 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment.||Participants|||Number
813492|NCT01079143|Secondary|Type of Biopsy Proven Acute Rejection (BPAR)|"A biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR) is defined as a biopsy graded IA, IB, IIA, IIB or III as per 2005/2007 Banff histological classification system.
Biopsy graded IA: Significant interstitial infiltration (> 25% of parenchyma) and foci of moderate tubulitis (> 4 mononuclear cells/tubular cross section or group of 10 tubular cells).
Biopsy grade IB: Significant interstitial infiltration (> 25% of parenchyma) and foci of severe tubulitis (> 10 mononuclear cells/tubular cross section or group of 10 tubular cells).
Biopsy grade IIA: Mild to moderate intimal arteritis. Biopsy graded IIB: Severe intimal arteritis comprising > 25% of the lumenal area.
Biopsy graded III: Transmural (full vessel wall thickness) arteritis and/or arterial fibrinoid change and necrosis of medial smooth muscle cells (with accompanying lymphocytic inflammation)."|M6 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment.||Participants|||Number
813493|NCT01079143|Secondary|Treatment Failures|A treatment failure is defined as biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR), a graft loss, a death or a loss to follow up. It was assessed between randomization and 6 and 12 months post-transplantation.|M6 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment.||Number of Participants|||Number
813494|NCT01079143|Secondary|Change in Urine Protein/Creatinine Ratio (Without Imputation)|One of the factors associated with EMT progression between M3 and M12 according to univariate analysis (ITT biopsies M3 & M12).|Month 3 (baseline), Month 12|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment.||mg/mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
813495|NCT01079143|Secondary|Change in Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) at M12 From Baseline (M3) - ANCOVA Model|The average patient renal function was evaluated on the basis of eGFR was calculated according to the abbreviated MDRD formula and creatinine clearance according to the Cockcroft-Gault formula (mL/min/1.73m²).|Baseline (M3), M12|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment.||mL/min/1.73m²||Standard Deviation|Mean
813496|NCT01079143|Secondary|Change From Baseline (M3) in Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR)|"eGFR was calculated according to the abbreviated Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Formula and creatinine clearance according to the Cockcroft-Gault formula (mL/min/1.73m²).
LOCF = Last observation carried forward"|M3 (baseline) to M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment.||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813497|NCT01079143|Secondary|Incidence (Number) of Subclinical Rejections and Borderline Lesions|"Incidence of subclinical rejections and borderline lesions with regards to histological evidence of rejection with clinical findings.
Subclinical rejections: rejection without clinical symptoms which is diagnosed by chance when a graft biopsy is performed.
Clinically suspected BPAR: rejection suspected because of the presence of clinical symptoms (fever, pain, increase of creatinine) and then confirmed by the graft biopsy.
Borderline lesions: suspicious for acute T-cell mediated rejection. This category is used when no intimal arteritis is present, but there are foci of tubulitis with minor interstitial infiltration or interstitial infiltration with mild tubulitis."|M3|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment.||Participants|||Number
813498|NCT01079143|Secondary|Change in EMT Score|"Change (M12 - M3) in EMT Score. Progression in EMT score is defined as an increase by >=1 of EMT score from M3 to M12.
EMT score 0 (the best): <1 EMT score 1 (the better) : 1-10% of tubular atrophy EMT score 2 : 10-25% of tubular atrophy EMT score 3 : 25-50% of tubular atrophy EMT score 4 (the worst): >50% of tubular atrophy"|M3 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Among the 194 participants in the ITT group, 58 patients in the EMT+ group completed the study providing a graft biopsy for analysis at M3 and M12.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813499|NCT01079143|Secondary|Number of Participants With Epithelial-mesenchymal Transition (EMT) Score|"Incidence and severity of EMT score. The intensity of EMT markers expression present and detectable in the renal graft at an early stage following transplantation is known as EMT score.
EMT score 0 (the best): <1 EMT score 1 (the better): 1-10% of tubular atrophy EMT score 2: 10-25% of tubular atrophy EMT score 3: 25-50% of tubular atrophy EMT score 4 (the worst): >50% of tubular atrophy"|M3 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Among the 194 participants in the ITT group, 58 patients in the EMT+ group completed the study providing a graft biopsy for analysis at M3 and M12.||participants|||Number
813500|NCT01079143|Secondary|Number of Participants With Epithelial-mesenchymal Transition (EMT) Status|Incidence and severity of EMT status. EMT status was determined centrally using the graft biopsy taken at 3 months. The result was quickly obtained (within 7 to 15 days) and sent to the company in charge of randomization in order to allocate each patient to a treatment group and to provide the investigator with this information without confirming EMT status.|M3 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Among the 194 participants in the ITT group, 58 patients in the EMT+ group completed the study providing a graft biopsy for analysis at M3 and M12.||Participants|||Number
813501|NCT01079143|Secondary|Number of Participants With Progression of Renal Fibrosis Using Numerical Quantification|Comparisons according to epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) profile and immunosuppressive treatment|M3 to M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Among the 194 participants in the ITT group, 58 patients in the EMT+ group completed the study providing a graft biopsy for analysis at M3 and M12.||Participants|||Number
813502|NCT01079143|Secondary|Change in Percentage of Interstitial Fibrosis (IF) by Numerical Quantification|Percentage of IF measured by numerical quantification. The IF percentage was transposed in grade according to the following rule: grade 0 for an IF % ≤5%, grade I for an IF % ranging from >5% to < 25%, grade II for an IF % ranging from 25 to 50%, grade III for an IF % >50%. Interstitial graft fibrosis has been identified as the primary cause of graft loss following death with a functional graft [3-5].|M3 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Among the 194 participants in the ITT group, 58 patients in the EMT+ group completed the study providing a graft biopsy for analysis at M3 and M12.||Percentage of IF||Standard Deviation|Mean
813503|NCT01079143|Secondary|Risk Factors of IF/TA Progression|"Composite factors regarding fibrosis progression at 12 months using a logistic regression model; the parameters initially considered concerned the demographic characteristics of both recipient and donor, transplantation characteristics, hypertension, diabetes, study treatments, immunosuppression, EMT, IF/TA, function at M3, the onset of acute rejection, the presence of anti-donor antibodies at M12, infections and BK virus viremia.
Arteriolar hyaline thickening is thickening of the walls of arterioles by the deposition of homogeneous pink hyaline material.
BPAR is biopsy proven acute rejection. TEM progression is the increase ≥ 1 of TEM score between Month 3 and Month 12"|M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Among the 194 participants in the ITT group, 58 patients in the EMT+ group completed the study providing a graft biopsy for analysis at M3 and M12.||Participants|||Number
813504|NCT01079143|Secondary|Change in Interstitial Fibrosis/Tabular Atrophy (IF/TA) Grade|Difference (M12 - M3) in IF/TA grade. IF/TA grade was assessed during centralized reading according to the Banff 2005/2007 classification comprising grade I (<25%), grade II (25-50%) and grade III (>50% of lesions).|M3 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Among the 194 participants in the ITT group, 58 patients in the EMT+ group completed the study providing a graft biopsy for analysis at M3 and M12.||Number of Participants|||Number
813505|NCT01079143|Secondary|Interstitial Fibrosis/Tabular Atrophy (IF/TA)|Incidence and severity of IF/TA according to 2005/2007 Banff classification system grades (grades l to lll). IF/TA grade was assessed during centralized reading according to the Banff 2005/2007 classification comprising grade I (<25%), grade II (25-50%) and grade III (>50% of lesions).|M3 and M12 post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Among the 194 participants in the ITT group, 58 patients in the EMT+ group completed the study providing a graft biopsy for analysis at M3 and M12.||Number of participants|||Number
813506|NCT01079143|Primary|Number of Participants With Progression of Renal Graft Fibrosis (Primary Comparison - ITT Population|"Progression of Interstitial Fibrosis/Tabular Atrophy (IF/TA) is the percentage (%) of participants with an increase >= 1 in IF/TA grade according to Banff (2005 - 2007)according to Epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) profile and by treatment groups.
Grade I (the better): mild interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (<25% of cortical area) Grade II : moderate interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (26-50% of cortical area) Grade III (the worse) : severe interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (>50% of cortical area)"|Month 3 (M3) and Month 12 (M12) post transplantation|ITT population: All patients randomized in the study who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Among the 194 participants in the ITT group, 58 patients in the EMT+ group completed the study providing a graft biopsy for analysis at M3 and M12. The primary comparison concerned only the Certican and the Neoral EMT+ groups.||Participants|||Number
813507|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Equivalent Dose of Prednisolone|The mean equivalent dose of prednisolone was calculated based on the International Standard for comparison of different glucocorticoid products.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||mg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
814963|NCT01092663|Primary|Fasting Gluconeogenesis|Change from baseline in fasting gluconeogenesis after 12 weeks of colesevelam alone or colesevelam plus sitagliptin treatment|baseline and 12 weeks|||umol per kilogram (kg) FFM per min||Standard Deviation|Mean
813508|NCT01079182|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Concomitant Pain Relief/Anti-Inflammatory Agents|Participants with concomitant pain relief/anti-inflammatory agents like analgesics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, and systemic glucocorticoids were assessed during the study period.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813509|NCT01079182|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Concomitant Non-Biologic Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (DMARDs)||At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813510|NCT01079182|Secondary|Percentage of Participants on Adalimumab Monotherapy||At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813511|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Days of In-Patient Hospitalization Due to Ankylosing Spondylitis in the Previous 12 Months||At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813512|NCT01079182|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With In-Patient Hospitalization Due to Ankylosing Spondylitis in the Previous 12 Months||At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813513|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Missed Work Days Due to Ankylosing Spondylitis in the Previous 12 Months||At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813514|NCT01079182|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Missed Work Days Due to Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) in the Previous 12 Months||At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813515|NCT01079182|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Impairment in Daily Activities During the Last 4 Weeks|The impairment of daily activities was based on participant recall of events that occurred over the 4 weeks before the visit. Percentage of participants with impairment for 0, less than 7, 7 to 14, and greater than 14 days was assessed.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813516|NCT01079182|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ASAS Partial Remission Criteria|This is a four domain (participant global assessment of disease activity, assessment of spinal pain, assessment of function (BASFI), and assessment of duration/severity of morning stiffness (mean of BASDAI questions 5 and 6)), participant-reported assessment scored on a scale from 0 (best) to 10 (worst). To qualify for a partial remission, participants had to have values of 2 or less (on a scale of 10) in each of the 4 domains.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813517|NCT01079182|Primary|Number of Participants With Drug-Related Adverse Events (AEs)|An adverse event/adverse experience was any reaction, side effect or other untoward event associated with the use of a drug in humans, whether or not the event was considered drug related. This included adverse events occurring from accidental or deliberate drug overdose, from drug abuse, or from drug withdrawal. Exacerbations of pre-existing conditions are also considered adverse events. Data presented are adverse events that are drug-related and are detailed in the adverse event section of this report.|From signing of informed consent up to 24 months|Safety analysis set: Participants who received at least one dose of adalimumab.||Participants|||Number
813518|NCT01079182|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) Improvement Criteria|This is a four domain (participant global assessment of disease activity, assessment of spinal pain, assessment of function (BASFI), and assessment of duration/severity of morning stiffness (mean of BASDAI questions 5 and 6)), participant-reported assessment scored on a scale from 0 (best) to 10 (worst). To qualify for a 20% improvement, participants were required to have an improvement of greater than or equal to 20% and greater than or equal to 1 unit in at least 3 domains, and no worsening of greater than or equal to 20% and greater than or equal to 1 unit in the remaining domain. To achieve a 40% improvement, participants were required to have an improvement of greater than or equal to 40% and greater than or equal to 2 units in at least 3 domains, and no worsening at all in the remaining domain.|At 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813519|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Duration of Morning Stiffness|Participants accessed the duration of morning stiffness in 15 minute intervals from 0 to 2 hours. Data are reported as the mean duration of morning stiffness ± standard deviation.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
813520|NCT01079182|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Morning Stiffness|Morning stiffness was a participant-reported assessment. The number of participants with morning stiffness were assessed at each visit.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813521|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Participant Pain Score|Using the BASDAI questionnaire, participants assessed the overall level of AS neck, back or hip pain experienced by him/her. It was scored on a numerical rating scale from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (severe symptoms).|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813522|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Participant Fatigue Score|Using the BASDAI questionnaire, participants assessed the overall level of fatigue/tiredness experienced by him/her. It was scored on a numerical rating scale from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (severe symptoms).|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813674|NCT01080794|Primary|Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D)|"To evaluate the depressive mood symptoms in PD.
The HAM-D mean scores were reported for each group at each time point. The HAM-D Score Range is 0 - 56, where higher the score indicates greater severity of depressive mood symptoms."|Pre-treatment; Post-treatment 0,1,3, and 6 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813523|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Global Assessment of Disease Activity Score|Global Assessment of Disease Activity was a participant-reported measure that evaluated disease activity. It was scored on a scale that ranged from 0 to 10; lower scores indicated better patient status.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813524|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis-Global (BAS-G) Score|The BAS-G was a participant-reported instrument with two items. In the first item, the participant rated the effect of their disease over the last week, and in the second item, the participant rated the effect of their disease over the previous 6 months. Each item of the BAS-G was scored on a scale ranging from 0 (no effect) to 10 (very severe effect). The mean of the two scores was the total BAS-G score and the MCID was 1.5.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||BAS-G score||Standard Deviation|Mean
813525|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Plasma Concentrations of C-Reactive Protein (CRP)|Plasma concentrations of CRP were assessed as a marker of systemic inflammation that provided insights into the overall anti-inflammatory effect of rheumatologic therapies.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813526|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)|Plasma concentrations of ESR were assessed as a marker of systemic inflammation that provided insights into the overall anti-inflammatory effect of rheumatologic therapies.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||mm/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
813527|NCT01079182|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) Score|The BASFI was a ten question, participant-reported measure that evaluated physical function. Each question was scored on a numerical rating scale that ranged from 0 (no functional impairment) to 10 (maximal impairment), and the MCID was 0.7. The mean of the ten questions was the total BASFI score. Data are reported as the mean change of total score from baseline (Month 0).|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||BASFI score||Standard Deviation|Mean
813528|NCT01079182|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) Score|The BASDAI was a six question, participant-reported measure of overall disease activity that probed the level of fatigue, neck/back/hip pain, peripheral joint swelling and pain, localized tenderness, as well as morning stiffness severity and duration. It was scored on a numerical rating scale that ranged from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (severe symptoms), and the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was 1.0. The final BASDAI score was calculated using the following equation, in which 01 - 06 represents the question number: (BASDAI01 + BASDAI02 + BASDAI03 + BASDAI04 + BASDAI05/2 + BASDAI06*1.25/2)/5. The scale for question 6 was reduced to 0-8 since BASDAI06 was multiplied by 1.25. Data are reported as the mean change total score from baseline (Month 0).|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||BASDAI score||Standard Deviation|Mean
813529|NCT01079182|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Extraspinal Manifestations|Extraspinal manifestations (enthesitis, dactylitis, uveitis, psoriasis, and Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)) were assessed by investigators and reported on the basis of their clinical evaluation and participant records.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813530|NCT01079182|Secondary|Mean Number of Involved Peripheral Joints|Peripheral joints were assessed by Tender Joint Counts (TJC) and Swollen Joint Counts (SJC), using pressure and joint manipulation during physical examination. Seventy-eight TJC and 76 SJC were evaluated and a score of 0 (not tender or swollen) or 1 (tender or swollen) was assigned for each joint with a higher total score indicating a greater number of involved joints.|At Baseline (Month 0), 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months|Full analysis set: Participants with adequate data available for evaluation of effectiveness.||Joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
813531|NCT01079195|Secondary|Evaluation of Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation of Tarka and a Summary of All AEs Possibly or Probably Related to Tarka by Frequency and Severity|The number of AEs leading to Tarka discontinuation are summarized. AEs that were considered by the investigator to be possibly or probably related to Tarka are summarized by the severity of the AE (classified as mild, moderate, or severe). AEs considered possibly or probably related to Tarka that led to the discontinuation of Tarka are also presented by severity.|6 months|This analysis used the safety analysis population, which included any participant who took at least one dose of Tarka and had at least one follow-up visit.||Events|||Number
813532|NCT01079195|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Target Blood Pressure (Less Than 140/90) at Study End and the Need for Other Antihypertensive Drugs, Clustered by Type(s) of Drugs Added to Tarka.|The percentages of participants achieving and not achieving the target blood pressure of less than 140/90 mmHg at the end of the study are presented. Percentages of participants taking Tarka only or taking Tarka plus another antihypertensive drug are summarized by type of drug: beta blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, calcium antagonists, diuretics, and angiotensin II (AT-II) receptor antagonists. Participants taking drugs that did not fit any of the above groups (Other), unknown drugs (Unknown), or more than one additional antihypertensive agent are also summarized.|6 months|2122 participants were excluded from the analysis for the following reasons: age less than 18 years (1), no diagnosis of hypertension (18), not at risk for diabetes (1650), no follow-up blood pressure values (48), no baseline blood pressure values (360), and started Tarka at/after first follow-up visit (45).||Percentage of participants|||Number
813533|NCT01079195|Primary|Reduction in Systolic Blood Pressure and Diastolic Blood Pressure From Baseline to Study End|"Participants were to be followed for 6 months. Changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure were assessed by comparing the blood pressure measurements obtained at the end of Tarka treatment (approximately 6 months) to baseline values. For this analysis of effectiveness the last available value was considered the analysis time point end of study."|Baseline to 6 months/study end|2122 participants were excluded from this analysis for the following reasons: age less than 18 years (1), no diagnosis of hypertension (18), not at risk for diabetes (1650), no follow-up blood pressure values (48), no baseline blood pressure values (360), and started Tarka at/after first follow-up visit (45).||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813534|NCT01079234|Primary|Extension Trial (Primary Endpoint): Rate of Nocturnal Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as requiring assistance to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L. Nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as occurring between 00:01 and 05:59 a.m.|Week 0 to Week 52 + 7 days follow up|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.The subjects randomised to 2 IDeg arms during the main trial were pooled into the IDeg OD F in extension trial.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
813535|NCT01079234|Primary|Extension Trial (Primary Endpoint): Rate of Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as requiring assistance to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L.|Week 0 to Week 52 + 7 days follow up|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator. The subjects randomised to 2 IDeg arms during the main trial were pooled into the IDeg OD F in extension trial.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
813536|NCT01079234|Secondary|Extension Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in FPG after 52 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 52|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). FPG baseline values were missing for 6 subjects. The subjects randomised to 2 IDeg arms during the main trial were pooled into the IDeg OD F in extension trial.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813537|NCT01079234|Secondary|Main Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) After 26 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in FPG after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 6 subjects baseline values were missing.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813538|NCT01079234|Secondary|Extension Trial (Secondary Endpoint): Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 52 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 52|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). The subjects randomised to 2 IDeg arms during the main trial were pooled into the IDeg OD F in extension trial.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
813539|NCT01079234|Primary|Main Trial (Primary Endpoint): Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) After 26 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
813540|NCT01079299|Primary|Median Time to Wound Closure at 9 Months|Median number of days for complete healing in each treatment group|9 months|||median number of days for complete heali||Standard Error|Median
813541|NCT01079390|Primary|Cortical Thickness Changes at 5-7 Weeks Post-Treatment|All eligible patients were scanned using fMRI while receiving treatment during acupuncture sessions 1, 3, and 6. Structural MRI data were only compared between Session 1 (pre-treatment) and Session 6 (post-treatment). The structural data was analyzed using FreeSurfer software.|2 days; one at baseline and another post-treatment measurement taken 5-7 weeks after baseline|We combined low and high dose acupuncture into one group because we found there were not clinical differences between the two group.||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
813542|NCT01079390|Primary|Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS Pain Rating) at 5-7 Weeks Post-Treatment|The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was used to measure clinical outcomes. KOOS is measured on a scale from 0-4 with 0 being no pain and 4 being extreme pain (the worst). The KOOS is comprised of 5 subscales, each of which produces an outcome score. These subscales include pain, other symptoms, function in daily living (ADL), function in sport and recreation, and knee-related quality of life (QOL). Based on previous studies, subscale scores of the KOOS related to pain, function in daily living, and function in sport and recreation were selected as the primary outcome of the present study. For each subscale, a normalized score was calculated, where 0 indicated the most extreme symptoms/pain and 100 indicated no symptoms/pain.|One post-treatment measurement 5-7 weeks after baseline|||units on KOOS scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813543|NCT01079598|Secondary|Cessation of Flow Reflux Through the Perforator Vein|Cessation of incompetent flow and reflux is defined as the absence of blood flow within the treated segment of the perforator vessel at the level the vessel crosses the superficial fascia. Key measures that will be used to evaluate the intervention that are a focus of the study.|6 months|Analysis was not able to be completed due to very low enrollment and limited data available. No results available.|||||
813544|NCT01079598|Secondary|CEAP Classification (Clinical Severity, Etiology or Cause, Anatomy, Pathophysiology)|CEAP Classification at Month 6 will be reported.|6 months|Analysis was not able to be completed due to very low enrollment and limited data available. No results available.|||||
813545|NCT01079598|Secondary|Cessation of Flow Through the Perforator Vein|Cessation of incompetent flow and reflux is defined as the absence of blood flow within the treated segment of the perforator vessel at the level the vessel crosses the superficial fascia. Key measures that will be used to evaluate the intervention that are a focus of the study.|6 months|Analysis was not able to be completed due to very low enrollment and limited data available. No results available.|||||
813546|NCT01079598|Primary|Quality of Life and Clinical Assessments Compared to Pretreatment Baseline.|QOL and clinical assessments measured by periodic CIVIQ2 and VCSS assessments were planned to be compared at each follow-up visit to pretreatment baseline. However, with the very low enrollment and limited data available, analysis and study results are inconclusive.|6 months|Analysis was not able to be completed due to very low enrollment and limited data available. No results available.|||||
813675|NCT01080794|Primary|Motor Subscale of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS Part III)|"To evaluate the motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease.
The UPDRS-III mean scores were reported for each group at each time point. The UPDRS-III Score Range is 0 - 56, where higher the score indicates greater severity of the motor symptoms."|Pre-treatment; Post-treatment 0,1,3, and 6 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813555|NCT01079832|Secondary|Clinical Response Rate|Percentage of patients with a clinical response following RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) Criteria: Confirmed complete response(CR), Stable disease (SD), partial response (PR), or without progressive disease (PD).|at 6 months from study entry|Intent to treat||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813556|NCT01079832|Secondary|Quality of Life||After completion of study treatment, patients are followed at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months.|Participant surveys were unreliably returned to investigators, making this analysis not meaningful.|||||
813557|NCT01079832|Secondary|Median Overall Survival|Length of time patients survived at study end.|24 months|Intent to treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813558|NCT01079832|Secondary|Disease-free Survival|Median disease free survival|completion of study at 24 months|Intent to treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813559|NCT01079832|Primary|Acute Toxicity Rate|The incidence of grade 3 or 4 possible SBRT-related non-hematological toxicities observed during a 6 month period.|at 6 months after treatment|Intent to treat||percentage of participants|||Number
829231|NCT01225354|Secondary|Aesthetic Improvement|Subject and Investigator will complete GAIS at Visits 2-4 comparing overall appearance of current visit’s photo to baseline photo|Visit 2-4||||||
813562|NCT01079936|Primary|Number of Participants With Response (CR at Day 90)|Response is defined as the event that the participant is alive with complete response (CR) at day 90 (+/-30 days). CR defined as: A) Absence of monoclonal protein in urine and serum when analyzed by immunofixation electrophoresis. B) The bone marrow should be normal by morphological examination with <5% plasma cells. There should be < 1% aneuploid light chain restricted population by flow cytometry for DNA/cIg. C) While healing of bone lesions not required, no new lytic lesion should appear. Further compression fracture of spine will be not considered as progressive disease.|Day 90 after stem cell transplant|||participants|||Number
813563|NCT01079936|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Lenalidomide|There were 4 doses of lenalidomide in the dose escalation phase: 25 mg, 50 mg, 75 mg, and 100 mg. The first 12 patients were treated at these dose levels (3 patients per level) and safety assessed at each level. The MTD dose level was to be the level at which participants at each lenalidomide dose level had no dose limiting toxicity (DLT). DLT defined as as regimen-related death, graft failure, grade 3 or 4 atrial fibrillation, grade 4 deep venous thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism before day 30 after auto-HCT. Each participant received a fixed dose of Melphalan plus one of the four doses 25, 50, 75 or 100 mg of Lenalidomide orally for each of 7 days, -8 to -2 pre transplant.|Assessed at 21-28 Day Cycle|Of the 16 participants in Phase I, two participants were not eligible for study due to first remission status, and two were eligible but did not receive stem cell transplant due to other issues.||mg/day|||Number
813564|NCT01079949|Secondary|Follicular Levels of Testosterone (T) at Ovum Pick up (OPU)||OPU day (34-38 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 9 days}])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure."||nanogram/milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813565|NCT01079949|Secondary|Follicular Levels of Estradiol (E2) at Ovum Pick up (OPU)||OPU day (34-38 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 9 days}])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813566|NCT01079949|Secondary|Follicular Levels of Luteinizing Hormone (LH), Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) and Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (hCG) at Ovum Pick up (OPU)||OPU day (34-38 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 9 days}])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure."||milli international unit (mIU)/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813567|NCT01079949|Secondary|Estradiol (E2) Levels on r-hCG Day||r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants with plasma E2 levels at r-hCG day."||picogram/milliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813568|NCT01079949|Secondary|Total Dose of Recombinant Human Follicle Stimulating Hormone (r-hFSH)||Day 1 of stimulation period (S1) up to r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||IU||Standard Deviation|Mean
813569|NCT01079949|Secondary|Number of Ovarian Stimulation Days|Ovarian stimulation included from first r-hFSH injection (S1) until day on which r-hCG was administered (r-hCG day).|Day 1 of stimulation period (S1) up to r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
813570|NCT01079949|Secondary|Number of Participants in Whom Recombinant Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (r-hCG) Was Not Administered Due to Poor Response|Poor response was defined as 3 or less follicles of greater than or equal to 12 mm developing following at least 7 days of study treatment.|r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||participants|||Number
813571|NCT01079949|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Pregnancies|Clinical pregnancy was defined as pregnancy diagnosed by ultrasonographic visualization of one or more gestational sacs or definitive clinical signs of pregnancy. It includes ectopic pregnancy.|Day 35-42 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||participants|||Number
813572|NCT01079949|Secondary|Implantation Rate|Implantation rate was measured as the number of gestational sacs observed, divided by the number of embryos transferred multiplied by 100.|Day 35-42 post OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day {end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days]})|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure."||percent sacs per embryo||Standard Deviation|Mean
813573|NCT01079949|Secondary|Number and Quality of Embryos|Embryos were classified into 5 different grades (1 to 5) based on their capacity of implantation. Grade 1 embryos were those with best capacity of implantation and Grade 5 embryos were those with worst capacity of implantation.|Day 2-3 post OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 9 days}])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who continued with follicular development."||embryos|||Number
813574|NCT01079949|Secondary|Number of Fertilized Oocytes at Stage 2 Pronuclei (2PN) or Higher Than 2PN|Oocytes were fertilized using ICSI technique which is an in-vitro fertilization procedure in which a single sperm is injected directly into an egg under a microscope. The appearance of 2PN is the first sign of successful fertilization as observed during in vitro fertilization, and is usually observed after ICSI. The zygote is then termed 2PN. Fertilized oocytes at stage higher then 2PN are those oocytes which consist more than 2 pronuclei like oocyte having 3 pronuclei termed as 3PN, oocyte having 4 pronuclei termed as 4PN.|Day 35-42 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who underwent ovum pick up."||oocytes|||Number
814280|NCT01084551|Secondary|Incidence of RLS Symptoms|Incidence rate of RLS symptoms is calculated as the number of days with RLS symptoms in the week / the number of evaluation days in the week* 100%|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (week 13)|FAS, LOCF||percentage of days with RLS symptom||Standard Deviation|Mean
813575|NCT01079949|Secondary|Number of Fertilized Oocytes (2 Pronuclei [PN])|Oocytes were fertilized using Intra-cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) technique which is an in-vitro fertilization procedure in which a single sperm is injected directly into an egg under a microscope. The appearance of 2PN is the first sign of successful fertilization as observed during in vitro fertilization, and is usually observed after ICSI. The zygote is then termed 2PN.|OPU day (34-38 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 9 days}])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who underwent ovum pick up."||2PN oocytes|||Number
813576|NCT01079949|Secondary|Endometrial Thickness on Recombinant Human Choriogonadotropin (r-hCG) Day|Endometrial thickness measurement was performed on the day of r-hCG administration.|r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure."||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
813577|NCT01079949|Secondary|Number of Follicles Greater Than or Equal to 14 Millimeter (mm) on Recombinant Human Choriogonadotropin (r-hCG) Day||r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||follicles||Standard Deviation|Mean
813578|NCT01079949|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in the form of signs, symptoms, abnormal laboratory findings, or diseases that emerges or worsens relative to baseline during a clinical study with an Investigational Medicinal Product (IMP), regardless of causal relationship and even if no IMP has been administered.|S1 to 1 month ± 1 week post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|Safety population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||participants|||Number
813579|NCT01079949|Primary|Number of Cycles Cancelled Due to Risk of Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome (OHSS)|Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome (OHSS) is a syndrome which can manifest with enlarged ovaries, advanced ascites with increased vascular permeability, pleural fluid accumulation, hemoconcentration, and increased blood clotting.|S1 to 1 month ± 1 week post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|Safety population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||cycles|||Number
813580|NCT01079949|Primary|Number of Participants With Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome (OHSS)|Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome (OHSS) is a syndrome which can manifest with enlarged ovaries, advanced ascites with increased vascular permeability, pleural fluid accumulation, hemoconcentration, and increased blood clotting.|S1 to 1 month ± 1 week post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 9 days])|Safety population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||participants|||Number
813581|NCT01079949|Primary|Number of Mature Oocytes Retrieved|Number of mature oocytes retrieved per reporting group on the day of OPU (34-38 hours post r-hCG day) was calculated. Oocyte retrieval is a technique used in in-vitro fertilization in order to remove oocytes from the ovary of the female, enabling fertilization outside the body. The nuclear maturity is assessed based on the presence of a germinal vesicle (GV) or whether oocytes were in metaphase I (Meta-I) or II (Meta-II) stage or atretic.|OPU day (34-38 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 9 days}])|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who underwent ovum pick up."||mature oocytes|||Number
813582|NCT01079949|Primary|Number of Oocytes Retrieved|Number of oocytes retrieved per reporting group on the day of ovum pick-up (OPU) (34-38 hours post r-hCG day) was calculated. Oocyte retrieval is a technique used in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) in order to remove oocytes from the ovary of the female participant, enabling fertilization outside the body.|Ovum pick-up (OPU) day (34-38 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 9 days}])|"Intention to treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who underwent ovum pick up."||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
813583|NCT01079962|Primary|Change From Baseline in Aortic Pulse Pressure (APP) in Per Protocol (PP) Population at Week 12|The APP was calculated as aortic systolic pressure minus aortic diastolic pressure. The change in APP at Week 12 was calculated as APP at Week 12 minus APP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12|Per protocol (PP) population included those participants for whom primary and secondary efficacy endpoints were all measured, and who did not meet the withdrawal criteria and showed 75 percent of medication compliance.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813584|NCT01079962|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in the form of signs, symptoms, abnormal laboratory findings, or diseases that emerges or worsens relative to baseline during a clinical study with an Investigational Medicinal Product (IMP), regardless of causal relationship and even if no IMP has been administered.|Baseline up to Week 14 (follow-up visit)|ITT population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication or comparator and at least 1 post-dose measurement of aortic pulse pressure.||Participants|||Number
813585|NCT01079962|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Brachial Blood Pressure (BP) at Week 4 and Week 12|The change in brachial BP (brachial SBP, brachial DBP and brachial mean BP) at Week 4 and Week 12 was calculated as brachial BP (brachial SBP, brachial DBP and brachial mean BP) at Week 4 and Week 12 minus brachial BP (brachial SBP, brachial DBP and brachial mean BP) at baseline.|Baseline, Week 4 and Week 12|"ITT population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication or comparator and at least 1 post-dose measurement of aortic pulse pressure. n signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the specified time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813586|NCT01079962|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Levels at Week 12|The change in blood glucose level at Week 12 was calculated as blood glucose level at Week 12 minus blood glucose level at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication or comparator and at least 1 post-dose measurement of aortic pulse pressure.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813803|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: Mean Weight|The mean weight of all participants at baseline is provided.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set consisting of all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded. Data for age was available for 2,691 patients and for weight for 2,116 patients.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813587|NCT01079962|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Lipid Levels at Week 12|The lipid levels evaluated were total cholesterol, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol blood concentrations. The change in lipid levels at Week 12 was calculated as lipid levels at Week 12 minus lipid levels at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication or comparator and at least 1 post-dose measurement of aortic pulse pressure.||Milligram/decilitre (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813588|NCT01079962|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Aortic Pulse Pressure (APP) at Week 4|The APP was calculated as aortic systolic pressure minus aortic diastolic pressure. The change in APP at Week 4 was calculated as APP at Week 4 minus APP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4|ITT population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication or comparator and at least 1 post-dose measurement of aortic pulse pressure.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813589|NCT01079962|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Week 4 and Week 12|The change in heart rate at Week 4 and Week 12 was calculated as heart rate at Week 4 and Week 12 minus heart rate at baseline.|Baseline, Week 4 and Week 12|"ITT population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication or comparator and at least 1 post-dose measurement of aortic pulse pressure. n signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the specified time point."||Beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813590|NCT01079962|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Carotid-femoral Pulse Wave Velocity (cfPWV) at Week 4 and Week 12|Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is used as a measure of arterial stiffness, which is a measure of the cushioning functioning of major vessels like the aorta. The velocity of the Pulse wave (PW) along an artery is dependent on the stiffness of that artery. The change in cfPWV at Week 4 and Week 12 was calculated as cfPWV at Week 4 and Week 12 minus cfPWV at baseline.|Baseline, Week 4 and Week 12|"ITT population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication or comparator and at least 1 post-dose measurement of aortic pulse pressure. n signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the specified time point."||Meters per second (m/s)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813591|NCT01079962|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Aortic Augmentation Index (AIx) at Week 4 and Week 12|Augmentation index is a composite measure of wave reflection and systemic arterial stiffness which was calculated as the difference between the second and first systolic peaks. The change in AIx at Week 4 and Week 12 was calculated as AIx at Week 4 and Week 12 minus AIx at baseline.|Baseline, Week 4 and Week 12|"ITT population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication or comparator and at least 1 post-dose measurement of aortic pulse pressure. n signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the specified time point."||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
813592|NCT01079962|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Aortic Blood Pressure (BP) at Week 4 and Week 12|The change in aortic BP (aortic systolic blood pressure [SBP], aortic diastolic blood pressure [DBP] and aortic mean blood pressure [BP]) at Week 4 and Week 12 was calculated as aortic BP (aortic SBP, aortic DBP and aortic mean BP) at Week 4 and Week 12 minus aortic BP (aortic SBP, aortic DBP and aortic mean BP) at baseline.|Baseline, Week 4 and Week 12|"ITT population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication or comparator and at least 1 post-dose measurement of aortic pulse pressure. n signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the specified time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813593|NCT01079962|Primary|Change From Baseline in Aortic Pulse Pressure (APP) in Intention to Treat (ITT) Population at Week 12|The APP was calculated as aortic systolic pressure minus aortic diastolic pressure. The change in APP at Week 12 was calculated as APP at Week 12 minus APP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12|"ITT population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication or comparator and at least 1 post-dose measurement of aortic pulse pressure. n signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the specified time point."||Millimeter of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813594|NCT01079988|Secondary|Patient's Global Psoriasis Assessment (PGPA)|"The PGPA consisted of a single self-explanatory item:
On a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 being no psoriasis and 10 the worst psoriasis that you can imagine, please rate the state of your psoriasis right now.
Note: Consider only your skin condition and do not consider other aspects that may be related to your psoriasis (such as psoriatic arthritis)."|12 weeks|One patient withdrew||PGPA score||Standard Deviation|Mean
813595|NCT01079988|Primary|Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of Change Over Time (Good or Better)|"The PGA response was classified according to the following categories by changes in all clinical signs and symptoms as compared to baseline:
Cleared: Remission except for residual manifestations such as mild erythema (100% improvement) Excellent: Improvement of 75%-99% except for residual manifestations such as mild erythema Good: Improvement of 50%-74%"|12 weeks|||participants|||Number
813596|NCT01080118|Secondary|Time to Intubation|Time to intubation is the time interval of blade insertion until the removal of the laryngoscope.|120 seconds|The sample analysis was all of the medical students or interns who consented to participate in this study. All participants data was used for the analysis.||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813597|NCT01080118|Primary|Successful Endotracheal Intubation|A successful placement of the endotracheal tube as defined by the presence of bilateral breath sounds and positive recording of end tidal carbon dioxide.|120 seconds|The sample analysis was all of the medical students or interns who consented to participate in this study. All participants data was used for the analysis.||% successful|||Number
813598|NCT01080131|Secondary|Serum Amyloid A Protein (SAA) Levels for Participants Re-treated With or Switched to Canakinumab|"Serum Amyloid A Protein (SAA) levels in blood serum were measured by a central laboratory in order to identify the presence of inflammation, to determine its severity, and to monitor the response to treatment.
Data are reported for the last post-baseline flare for participants who were randomized to and re-treated with canakinumab, and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab for participants randomized to triamcinolone acetonide and who were switched to canakinumab in extension study 2."|24 hours, 72 hours, 7 days, 4, 8 and 12 weeks post-dose for the last post-baseline flare for the canakinumab re-treated arm and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab in the triamcinolone acetonide arm during the overall 72 weeks.|Modified Analysis Set (MAS) consisting of all FAS patients who were either re-treated or switched to canakinumab during the 72 weeks. At each timepoint only patients with a value at both baseline flare and the new flare are included.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813599|NCT01080131|Secondary|High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (hsCRP) Levels for Participants Re-treated With or Switched to Canakinumab|"High sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels in blood serum were measured by a central laboratory in order to identify the presence of inflammation, to determine its severity, and to monitor the response to treatment.
Data are reported for the last post-baseline flare for participants who were randomized to and re-treated with canakinumab, and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab for participants randomized to triamcinolone acetonide and who were switched to canakinumab in extension study 2."|24 hours, 72 hours, 7 days, 4, 8 and 12 weeks post-dose for the last post-baseline flare for the canakinumab re-treated arm and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab in the triamcinolone acetonide arm during the overall 72 weeks.|Modified Analysis Set (MAS) consisting of all FAS patients who were either re-treated or switched to canakinumab during the 72 weeks. At each timepoint only patients with a value at both baseline flare and the new flare are included.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813600|NCT01080131|Secondary|Physician's Assessment of Erythema for Participants Re-treated or Switched to Canakinumab|"The study physician assessed the most affected joint for erythema (redness of the skin) as either present, absent or not assessable.
Data are reported for the last post-baseline flare for participants who were randomized to and re-treated with canakinumab, and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab for participants randomized to triamcinolone acetonide and who were switched to canakinumab in extension study 2."|72 hours post-dose and 7 days post dose for the last post-baseline flare for the canakinumab re-treated arm and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab in the triamcinolone acetonide arm during the overall 72 weeks.|Modified Analysis Set (MAS) consisting of all FAS patients who were either re-treated or switched to canakinumab during the 72 weeks. At each timepoint only patients with a value at both baseline flare and the new flare are included.||percentage of participants|||Number
813601|NCT01080131|Secondary|Physician's Assessment of Joint Swelling for Participants Re-treated or Switched to Canakinumab|"The study physician assessed the most affected joint for swelling on the following 4-point scale:
no swelling;
palpable;
visible;
bulging beyond the joint margins.
Data are reported for the last post-baseline flare for participants who were randomized to and re-treated with canakinumab, and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab for participants randomized to triamcinolone acetonide and who were switched to canakinumab in extension study 2."|72 hours post-dose and 7 days post dose for the last post-baseline flare for the canakinumab re-treated arm and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab in the triamcinolone acetonide arm during the overall 72 weeks.|Modified Analysis Set (MAS) consisting of all FAS patients who were either re-treated or switched to canakinumab during the 72 weeks. At each timepoint only patients with a value at both baseline flare and the new flare are included.||percentage of participants|||Number
813602|NCT01080131|Secondary|Physician's Assessment of Joint Tenderness for Participants Re-treated or Switched to Canakinumab|"The study physician assessed the most affected joint for tenderness on the following 4-point scale:
no pain;
participant states that there is pain;
participant states there is pain and winces;
participant states there is pain, winces and withdraws on palpation or passive movement of the affected study joint.
Data are reported for the last post-baseline flare for participants who were randomized to and re-treated with canakinumab, and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab for participants randomized to triamcinolone acetonide and who were switched to canakinumab in extension study 2."|72 hours post-dose and 7 days post dose for the last post-baseline flare for the canakinumab re-treated arm and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab in the triamcinolone acetonide arm during the overall 72 weeks.|Modified Analysis Set (MAS) consisting of all FAS patients who were either re-treated or switched to canakinumab during the 72 weeks. At each timepoint only patients with a value at both baseline flare and the new flare are included.||percentage of participants|||Number
813603|NCT01080131|Secondary|Physician's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment for Participants Re-treated or Switched to Canakinumab|"The study physician made a global assessment of the patient’s response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: very good, good, fair, poor or very poor.
The physician completed the physician’s global assessment of response to treatment without viewing any of the patient’s assessments.
Data are reported for the last post-baseline flare for participants who were randomized to and re-treated with canakinumab, and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab for participants randomized to triamcinolone acetonide and who were switched to canakinumab in extension study 2."|72 hours post-dose and 7 days post dose for the last post-baseline flare for the canakinumab re-treated arm and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab in the triamcinolone acetonide arm during the overall 72 weeks.|Modified Analysis Set (MAS) consisting of all FAS patients who were either re-treated or switched to canakinumab during the 72 weeks. At each timepoint only patients with a value at both baseline flare and the new flare are included.||percentage of participants|||Number
813604|NCT01080131|Secondary|Patient's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment for Participants Re-treated or Switched to Canakinumab|Participants made a global assessment of response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, good, acceptable, slight or poor. Data are reported for the last post-baseline flare for participants who were randomized to and re-treated with canakinumab, and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab for participants randomized to triamcinolone acetonide and who were switched to canakinumab in extension study 2.|72 hours post-dose and 7 days post dose for the last post-baseline flare for the canakinumab re-treated arm and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab in the triamcinolone acetonide arm during the overall 72 weeks.|Modified Analysis Set (MAS) consisting of all FAS patients who were either re-treated or switched to canakinumab during the 72 weeks. At each timepoint only patients with a value at both baseline flare and the new flare are included.||percentage of participants|||Number
813613|NCT01080131|Secondary|Physician’s Assessment of Tenderness, Swelling, and Erythema of the Most Affected Joint|The study physician assessed the most affected joint for: Tenderness on a 0-3 point scale: No pain, patient states that “there is pain”, patient states “there is pain and winces”, and patient states “there is pain, winces, and withdraws” on palpation or passive movement of the affected study joint; Swelling on a 0-3 point scale: No swelling, palpable, visible, and bulging beyond the joint margins; and Erythema: Present or absent. The percentage of participants in each category is reported.|72 hours post-dose and 24 weeks post-dose|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug. 'N' in each category indicates participants with observations available at the specified time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
813605|NCT01080131|Secondary|Patient's Assessment of Gout Pain Intensity for Participants Re-treated or Switched to Canakinumab|"Participants scored their current pain intensity in the most affected joint of the gout flare on a 5-point Likert Scale (none, mild, moderate, severe or extreme).
Data are reported for the last post-baseline flare for participants who were randomized to and re-treated with canakinumab, and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab for participants randomized to triamcinolone acetonide and who were switched to canakinumab in extension study 2."|72 hours post-dose and 7 days post dose for the last post-baseline flare for the canakinumab re-treated arm and for the first post-baseline flare treated with canakinumab in the triamcinolone acetonide arm during the overall 72 weeks.|Modified Analysis Set (MAS) consisting of all FAS patients who were either re-treated or switched to canakinumab during the 72 weeks. At each timepoint only patients with a value at both baseline flare and the new flare are included.||percentage of participants|||Number
813606|NCT01080131|Secondary|Flare Rate Per Year|"Flare rate was calculated as the number of new flares over the period of observation in years. Flare rate was calculated using only those new flares before switching to canakinumab.
Participants met the definition of new flare if they had:
Flare in joint, not a previously affected joint (at baseline or during study)
Flare in joint previously affected (at baseline or during study) after previous flare in joint has resolved completely.
Participants did not meet criterion of having new gout flare if:
• Increasing/renewed gout pain in an affected joint before the flare has resolved completely.
Flare rates were estimated from a negative binomial model with body mass index at baseline as a covariate."|From randomization to the end of the second extension period (72 weeks).|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug.||flares per patient per year||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813607|NCT01080131|Secondary|Time to First New Flare: Survival Analysis by Treatment Over 72 Weeks|"Kaplan-Meier estimates of time to first new flare and confidence intervals were determined. For patients with event, time to event = (date of event - date of first dose of study drug + 1).
Patients met definition of new flare if they had:
Flare in joint, not a previously affected joint (at baseline or during study)
Flare in joint previously affected (at baseline or during study) after previous flare in joint has resolved completely.
Patients did not meet criterion of having new gout flare if:
• Increasing/renewed gout pain in an affected joint before flare has resolved completely."|From randomization to the end of the second extension period (72 weeks).|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813608|NCT01080131|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Maximum Severity of New Gout Flares as Severe or Extreme|For each new flare, participants scored the maximum amount of acute gout pain in the most affected joint since the onset of the new flare and the time they were re-dosed on a 5 point Likert scale as None, Mild, Moderate, Severe or Extreme. The percentage of participants with a maximum new flare severity of severe or extreme is reported for the first post-baseline flare that occurred during the 12-week core study and for the last post-baseline flare that occurred up until the end of the first extension period.|From the onset of a new flare until re-dosing. First post-baseline new flare during 12 week core study and the last post-baseline flare that occurred up until the end of the first extension study (24 weeks).|The number of participants analyzed (indicated by 'N') for the first new post-baseline flare includes patients who were re-treated for a new flare during the 12-week core study. For the last post-baseline flare the population analyzed includes patients re-treated for at least one new flare during the first 24 weeks.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813609|NCT01080131|Secondary|Patient's Assessment of Gout Pain Intensity in the Most Affected Joint|Participant scored their current pain intensity in the most affected joint of the gout flare on a 5-point Likert Scale (none, mild, moderate, severe, extreme).|72 hours post-dose and 24 weeks post-dose|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug. 'N' in each category indicates participants with observations available at the specified time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
813610|NCT01080131|Secondary|High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (hsCRP) and Serum Amyloid A Protein (SAA) Levels|High sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) and serum amyloid A (SAA) were determined in blood serum in order to identify the presence of inflammation, to determine its severity, and to monitor the response to treatment. Analyses were measured by a central laboratory. The analysis included treatment group, log-transformed protein level at baseline, and body mass index (BMI) at baseline as covariates.|72 hours after the first dose for the baseline flare and 72 hours post-dose for the last post-baseline flare that occurred up until the end of the first extension study (24 weeks).|"For the Baseline flare the population analyzed consisted of the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For the last post-baseline flare the population analyzed consisted of patients re-treated for at least one new flare. N indicates the number of participants with available data in each analysis."||mg/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813611|NCT01080131|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Death and Serious Adverse Events (72 Weeks Overall)|This was the primary endpoint of extension study 2. An adverse event was defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptom sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, syndrome or disease which either occurs during the study, having been absent at baseline, or, if present at baseline, appears to worsen. Serious adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that results in death, is life threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.|72 weeks|Safety population consisted of all patients who received study drug in the core study and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment.||participants|||Number
813612|NCT01080131|Secondary|Physician’s Assessment of Range of Motion of the Most Affected Joint|The study physician assessed the range of motion of the most affected joint for range of motion on a 5-point Likert scale: Normal, mildly restricted, moderately restricted, severely restricted, immobilized. The percentage of participants in each category is reported.|72 hours post-dose and 24 weeks post-dose|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug. 'N' in each category indicates participants with observations available at the specified time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
814964|NCT01092663|Primary|Fasting Endogenous Glucose Production|Change from baseline in fasting endogenous glucose production after 12 weeks of colesevelam alone or colesevelam plus sitagliptin treatment|baseline and 12 weeks|||micromoles (umol) per kg FFM per min||Standard Deviation|Mean
813614|NCT01080131|Secondary|Patient’s Global Assessment of Response to Treatment|Participants made a global assessment of response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, good, acceptable, slight, poor. The percentage of participants in each category is reported.|72 hours post-dose and 24 weeks post-dose|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug. 'N' in each category indicates participants with observations available at the specified time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
813615|NCT01080131|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Death and Serious Adverse Events During 24 Weeks|This was primary endpoint of extension study 1. Adverse event is defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptom sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, syndrome or disease which either occurs during the study, having been absent at baseline, or, if present at baseline, appears to worsen. A serious adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that results in death, is life threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.|During 24 weeks overall|Safety population consisted of all patients who received study drug in the core study and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment||Participants|||Number
813616|NCT01080131|Secondary|Physician’s Global Assessment of Response to Treatment|The study physician made a global assessment of the patient’s response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Very good, good, fair, poor, very poor. The percentage of patients in each category is reported. The physician completed the assessment without viewing any of the patient’s own assessments (pain intensity and patient’s global assessment of response to treatment).|72 hours post-dose and 24-weeks post-dose.|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug. 'N' in each category indicates participants with observations available for this endpoint at the specified time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
813617|NCT01080131|Secondary|Amount of Rescue Medication Taken|"Patients who had difficulty in tolerating their pain were allowed to take rescue medication after the 6-hour post-dose pain assessments as follows:
Acetaminophen (paracetamol) 500 mg and/ or codeine 30 mg as required. A maximum of 1 g/dose or 3 g/day of acetaminophen and 30 mg/ dose or 180 mg/day of codeine was allowed.
If they had insufficient pain relief, patients were allowed to take a maximum of 30 mg of oral prednisolone as required per day for 2 days followed by up to 20 mg of prednisolone as required subsequent days within 7 days of a gout flare."|For 7 days after the first dose for the baseline flare and 7 days post-dose for the last post-baseline flare that occurred up until the end of the first extension study (24 weeks).|For the Baseline flare the population analyzed consisted of the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For the last post-baseline flare the population analyzed consisted of patients re-treated for at least one new flare.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
813618|NCT01080131|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication|"Participants who had difficulty in tolerating their pain were allowed to take rescue medication after the 6-hour post-dose pain assessments as follows:
Acetaminophen (paracetamol) 500 mg and/ or codeine 30 mg as required. A maximum of 1 g/dose or 3 g/day of acetaminophen and 30 mg/ dose or 180 mg/day of codeine was allowed.
If they had insufficient pain relief, participants were allowed to take a maximum of 30 mg of oral prednisolone as required per day for 2 days followed by up to 20 mg of prednisolone as required subsequent days within 7 days of a gout flare.
Use of these treatments during the first 7 days of a gout flare was recorded as rescue medication."|For 7 days after the first dose for the baseline flare and 7 days post-dose for the last post-baseline flare that occurred up until the end of the first extension study (24 weeks).|For the Baseline flare the population analyzed consisted of the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For the last post-baseline flare the population analyzed consisted of patients re-treated for at least one new flare.||percentage of participants|||Number
813619|NCT01080131|Secondary|Time to First Intake of Rescue Medication|"Participants who had difficulty in tolerating their pain were allowed to take rescue medication after the 6-hour post-dose pain assessments as follows:
Acetaminophen (paracetamol) 500 mg and/ or codeine 30 mg as required. A maximum of 1 g/dose or 3 g/day of acetaminophen and 30 mg/ dose or 180 mg/day of codeine was allowed.
If they had insufficient pain relief, participants were allowed to take a maximum of 30 mg of oral prednisolone as required per day for 2 days followed by up to 20 mg of prednisolone as required subsequent days within 7 days of a gout flare.
Use of these treatments during the first 7 days of a gout flare was recorded as rescue medication.
Kaplan-Meier estimates of the time to first intake of rescue medication, in hours, and the confidence interval were determined for the flare experienced at study entry (Baseline flare) and the last new flare (last post-baseline flare) that occurred up until the end of the first extension period (24 weeks)."|For 7 days after the first dose for the baseline flare and 7 days post-dose for the last post-baseline flare that occurred up until the end of the first extension study (24 weeks).|For the Baseline flare the population analyzed consisted of the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For the last post-baseline flare the population analyzed consisted of patients re-treated for at least one new flare. Patients who did not take rescue medication had the time-to-first rescue medication intake censored at 7 days post dosing and re-dosing.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813620|NCT01080131|Secondary|Mean Number of New Gout Flares Per Patient During 24 Weeks|"Patients met definition of new flare if they had:
Flare in joint, not a previously affected joint(at baseline or during study)
Flare in joint previously affected (at baseline or during study) after previous flare in joint has resolved completely.
Participants did not meet the criterion of having a new gout flare if they had increasing/renewed gout pain in an affected joint before the flare had resolved completely."|24 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug.||new flares per patient||Standard Deviation|Mean
813621|NCT01080131|Secondary|Time to the First New Gout Flare During 24 Weeks|"Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates of the time to first new flare and confidence intervals were determined. Participants met the definition of a new flare if they had:
Flare in joint, not a previously affected joint (at baseline or during study)
Flare in joint previously affected (at baseline or during study) after previous flare in joint has resolved completely.
Participants did not meet the criterion of having a new gout flare if they had increasing/renewed gout pain in an affected joint before the flare had resolved completely."|From randomization to the end of the first extension period (24 weeks).|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813622|NCT01080131|Secondary|Self-assessed Pain Intensity in the Joint Most Affected at Last Post-Baseline Measured on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|Patient’s assessment of gout pain intensity in the most affected joint (on a 0-100 mm VAS) for the last post-baseline flare, ranging from no pain (0) to unbearable pain (100), was summarized up to 7 days after receiving a re-dose of study drug by time point. Scores on the 100 mm linear scale were measured to the nearest millimeter from the left. The covariance analysis included treatment group, Baseline VAS score at that flare, and body mass index (BMI) at Baseline as covariates.|6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours; and 4, 5, 6, and 7 days post-dose for last post-baseline flare that occurred up until the end of the first extension study (24 weeks).|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug. For assessments made up to 7 days after re-dosing, pain values were imputed using the Last- Observation-Carried-Forward (LOCF) method.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813623|NCT01080131|Secondary|Self-assessed Pain Intensity in the Joint Most Affected at Baseline Measured on a Visual Analog Scale (0-100 mm VAS)|Patients scored their pain intensity in the joint most affected at Baseline on a 0-100 mm VAS, ranging from no pain (0) to unbearable pain (100), from 6 hours to 7 days post-dose. Scores on the 100 mm linear scale were measured to the nearest millimeter from the left. The ANCOVA analysis included treatment group, Baseline VAS score, and body mass index (BMI) at Baseline as covariates.|6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours; and 4, 5, 6, and 7 days post-dose (randomization)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813624|NCT01080131|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Concentrations|Canakinumab concentration was analyzed in serum by means of a competitive Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) assay with a lower limit of quantification (LOQ) at 100 ng/mL.|12 weeks post-dose|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug.||µg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813625|NCT01080131|Primary|Self-assessed Pain Intensity in the Joint Most Affected at Baseline Measured on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 72 Hours Post-dose|Patients scored their pain intensity in the joint most affected at Baseline on a 0-100 mm VAS, ranging from no pain (0) to unbearable pain (100), at 72 hours post-dose. Scores on the 100 mm linear scale were measured to the nearest millimeter from the left. The analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) analysis included treatment group, Baseline VAS score, and body mass index (BMI) at Baseline as covariates.|72 hours post-dose (randomization)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute post dose measurement.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813626|NCT01080131|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 1 New Gout Flare During the 12 Weeks of the Study|The percentage of participants who experienced at least 1 new gout flare during the 12 week study treatment period.|Baseline to Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
813627|NCT01080131|Secondary|SF 36 Physical Function Score at Week 12|SF-36 measures impact of disease on overall quality of life (QoL). 36-item survey has 8 subscales that can be aggregated into physical and mental component summary scores. Scores are standardized with the use of norm-based methods based on assessment of the general U.S. population free of chronic conditions. Scores range from 1-100 with a mean=50 and a standard deviation=10. A higher score indicates less impact on QoL. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model was used with treatment group and baseline SF-36 physical function subscore as covariates.|Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug. Participants with observations at Week 12 were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813628|NCT01080131|Secondary|Time to Complete Resolution of Pain; Survival Analysis|Kaplan-Meier estimates of the time to complete resolution of self-assessed pain intensity in the joint most affected and the confidence interval was determined. Patients scored their pain intensity on a 5-point Likert scale (none, mild, moderate, severe, extreme). Pain was scored at Baseline; 6 and 12 hours; 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 days post-dose.|Baseline to 7 days post-dose (randomization)|Full Analysis Set (FAS): All patients that received study drug.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813629|NCT01080131|Secondary|Time to at Least a 50% Reduction in Self-assessed Pain Intensity in the Joint Most Affected at Baseline Measured on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|Kaplan-Meier estimates of the time to at least a 50% reduction in self-assessed pain intensity in the joint most affected at Baseline and the confidence intervals were determined along with 95% confidence interval. Patients scored their pain intensity on a 0-100 mm VAS, ranging from no pain (0) to unbearable pain (100). Scores on the 100 mm linear scale were measured to the nearest millimeter from the left. Pain was scored at Baseline; at 6 and 12 hours post-dose; and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 days post-dose.|Baseline to 7 days post-dose (randomization)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute post dose measurement.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813630|NCT01080131|Primary|Time to First New Flare: Survival Analysis During the 12 Weeks of Study|Kaplan-Meier estimates of time to first new flare and confidence intervals were determined. For patients with event, time to event = (date of event - date of first dose of study drug + 1). Patients met definition of new flare if they had: •Flare in joint, not a previously affected joint (at baseline or during study) •Flare in joint previously affected (at baseline or during study) after previous flare in joint has resolved completely. Patients did not meet criterion of having new gout flare if: • Increasing/renewed gout pain in an affected joint before flare has resolved completely.|Baseline to 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients as randomized in the core study who had taken at least one dose of study drug.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813631|NCT01080209|Secondary|Number of Patients With Vision Loss in the Study Eye|Vision loss is assessed by Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the study eye. BCVA is measured using an eye chart and is reported as the number of letters read correctly (ranging from 0 to 100 letters). The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or visual acuity). Severe vision loss is a ≥30 letter decrease in BCVA. Moderate vision loss is a ≥15 and <30 letter decrease in BCVA. No or mild vision loss is <15 letter decrease in BCVA. Baseline of the parent study is defined as the point of the first study treatment.|Baseline of Parent Study, Month 36|Safety Population: all enrolled patients, who received a sham or active study treatment of intravitreal Brimonidine Tartrate PS DDS in the parent study||Patients|||Number
813632|NCT01080209|Primary|Number of Patients With No Visible Implants in the Study Eye|Implants administered during the parent study are evaluated during this study to determine if they have completely degraded. The time frame is evaluated from the point of the first treatment in the parent study.|Month 36|Safety Population: all enrolled patients, who received a sham or active study treatment of intravitreal Brimonidine Tartrate PS DDS in the parent study||Patients|||Number
813633|NCT01080248|Secondary|Overall Survival||1 year|||participants|||Number
813634|NCT01080248|Secondary|Median Survival||Length of follow-up was 35 weeks|||weeks||Full Range|Median
813635|NCT01080248|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|"PFS is defined as the duration of time from start of treatment to time to progression.
Progressive disease - at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of the target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions."|Follow-up was approximately 9 weeks|One participant was removed from study for adverse event prior to first response assessment.||weeks|||Number
813636|NCT01080248|Primary|Response Rate by RECIST Criteria.|"Response rate = complete response + partial response per RECIST
Complete response - disappearance of all target and non-target lesions.
Partial response - at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of the target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum longest diameter"|Follow-up was approximately 9 weeks|One participant was removed from study for adverse event prior to first response assessment. The remaining participant had progressive disease per RECIST while on treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
813637|NCT01080261|Secondary|Clinical Procedural Success (Percentage of Participants)|Expressed as percentage of participants in whom mean lesion diameter stenosis was <30% with TIMI 3 flow (visually assessed) and who did not experience an occurrence of in-hospital myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or cardiac death.|While participant is in the hospital|Analysis was intention to treat; all patients in the study underwent clinical follow up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813638|NCT01080261|Secondary|Technical Success (Percentage of Stents)|Defined as successful delivery and deployment of the study stent to the target vessel, without balloon rupture or stent embolization; expressed per stent|At time of index procedure|Analysis was intention to treat||percentage of stents|Participants||Number
813639|NCT01080261|Secondary|Definite + Probable Stent Thrombosis (ST) Based on Academic Research Consortium (ARC) Definition (Percentage of Participants With an Event)|DEFINITE ST: acute coronary syndrome and angiographic or pathologic evidence of stent thrombosis; PROBABLE ST: unexplained death within 30 days or target-vessel infarction without angiographic information ARC ST is reported as a cumulative value at different time points and within the different separate time points. Time 0 is the time point after the guide catheter has been removed. Acute ST: 0-24 hours after stent implantation; Subacute ST: >24 hours to 30 days post; late ST: >30 days to 1 year post; Very late ST: >1 year post; NOTE: Acute/subacute can be replaced by early ST (0-30 days)|>30 days - 9 months|Analysis was intention to treat; all patients in the study underwent clinical follow up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813640|NCT01080261|Secondary|Definite + Probable Stent Thrombosis (ST) Based on Academic Research Consortium (ARC) Definition (Percentage of Participants With an Event)|DEFINITE ST: acute coronary syndrome and angiographic or pathologic evidence of stent thrombosis; PROBABLE ST: unexplained death within 30 days or target-vessel infarction without angiographic information ARC ST is reported as a cumulative value at different time points and within the different separate time points. Time 0 is the time point after the guide catheter has been removed. Acute ST: 0-24 hours after stent implantation; Subacute ST: >24 hours to 30 days post; late ST: >30 days to 1 year post; Very late ST: >1 year post; NOTE: Acute/subacute can be replaced by early ST (0-30 days)|0-30 Days (Early)|Analysis was intention to treat; all patients in the study underwent clinical follow up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813641|NCT01080261|Secondary|Target Lesion Failure (TLF) (Percentage of Participants With an Event)|Target lesion failure (TLF) is defined as any ischemia-driven revascularization of the target lesion, myocardial infarction (Q-wave and non–Q-wave) related to the target vessel, or cardiac death related to the target vessel. Reported as percentage of participants who experienced a TLF event.|9 months|Analysis was intention to treat; all patients in the study underwent clinical follow up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813642|NCT01080261|Secondary|Target Vessel Failure (TVF) (Percentage of Participants With an Event)|Includes any ischemia-driven revascularization of the target vessel, myocardial infarction (MI, Q-wave and non–Q-wave) related to the target vessel or death related to the target vessel. For the purposes of this protocol, if it cannot be determined with certainty whether the MI or death was related to the target vessel, it will be considered a TVF. Reported as percentage of participants who experienced a TVF event.|9 months|Analysis was intention to treat; all patients in the study underwent clinical follow up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813643|NCT01080261|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization (Percentage of Participants With an Event)|Target lesion revascularization (TLR) is any ischemia-driven repeat percutaneous intervention, to improve blood flow, of the successfully treated target lesion or bypass surgery of the target vessel with a graft distally to the successfully treated target lesion. Reported as percentage of participants who experienced a TLR.|9 months|Analysis was intention to treat; all participants underwent clinical follow-up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813644|NCT01080261|Secondary|Target Vessel Revascularization (Percentage of Participants With an Event)|Target vessel revascularization (TVR) is any ischemia-driven repeat percutaneous intervention to improve blood flow, or bypass surgery of not previously existing lesions with diameter stenosis ≥50% by quantitative coronary angiography in the target vessel, including the target lesion.Reported as percentage of participants who experienced a TVR.|9 months|Analysis was intention to treat; all patients in the study underwent clinical follow up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813673|NCT01080794|Secondary|Clinical Anxiety Scale (CAS)|To evaluate anxiety in Parkinson's Disease. The CAS mean scores were reported for each group at each time point. The CAS Score Range is 0 - 100, where higher the score indicates greater severity of the anxiety symptoms.|Pre-treatment; Post-treatment 0,1,3, and 6 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813645|NCT01080261|Secondary|Cardiac Death (Percentage of Participants With an Event)|Cardiac death is defined as death due to any of the following: acute myocardial infarction; cardiac perforation/pericardial tamponade; arrhythmia or conduction abnormality; cerebrovascular accident (CVA) through hospital discharge or CVA suspected of being related to the procedure; complication of the procedure including bleeding, vascular repair, transfusion reaction, or bypass surgery or any death in which a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. Reported as percentage of participants who experienced cardiac death.|9 months|Analysis was intention to treat; all patients in the study underwent clinical follow up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813646|NCT01080261|Secondary|All-cause Death (Percentage of Participants With an Event)|Participants who died from any cause|9 months|Analysis was intention to treat; all patients in the study underwent clinical follow up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813647|NCT01080261|Secondary|Myocardial Infarction (MI) (Percentage of Participants With an Event)|New Q-waves in ≥2 leads lasting ≥0.04 sec with creatine kinase- myoglobin band (CK-MB) or troponin above upper limit of normal (ULN) (baseline troponin <ULN); if no new Q-waves total CK or troponin >3× ULN (baseline troponin <ULN) plus at least one of the following: electrocardiogram changes indicating new ischemia (new ST-T changes, left bundle branch block), imaging evidence of new loss of viable myocardium, or new regional wall motion abnormality. Similar for MI diagnosis post coronary artery bypass graft with CK-MB or troponin >5× ULN|9 months|Analysis was intention to treat; all patients in the study underwent clinical follow up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813648|NCT01080261|Primary|Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) (Percentage of Participants With an Event)|A major adverse cardiac event (MACE) is defined as any ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR), myocardial infarction (MI, Q-wave and non-Q-wave), or cardiac death. Reported as percentage of participants who have experienced a MACE event.|9 months|Analysis was intention to treat; all patients in the study underwent clinical follow up to provide the information needed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
813649|NCT01080300|Primary|Evaluate Efficacy of G-ER at 1800mg Daily Compared With Placebo in Reducing the Average Daily Severity Score of Moderate to Severe Hot Flashes at Weeks 4 & 12 of the Efficacy Treatment Period, Compared With Baseline.|"To assess the efficacy of G-ER dosed at 1800mg daily(600mg AM, 1200mg PM), compared with placebo in reducing the average daily severity score of moderate to severe hot flashes in post menopausal women (score defined as Mild (1), Moderate (2), and Severe (3)) at Week 4 of the efficacy treatment period compared with Baseline and at Week 12 of the efficacy treatment period compared with Baseline."|Baseline, Week 4, and Week 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population||scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813650|NCT01080300|Secondary|Evaluate Safety of G-ER|Evaluate safety of G-ER,change from average daily frequency & severity score of HFs from baseline to end point(wk 24),assess sleep interference, depression,suicidal ideation, quality of life, patient and investigator global impression of change|6mt treatment, 1mt f/u||||||
813651|NCT01080300|Primary|Evaluate Efficacy of G-ER at 1800mg Daily Compared With Placebo in Reducing the Average Daily Frequency of Moderate to Severe Hot Flashes at Weeks 4 & 12 of the Efficacy Treatment Period, Compared With Baseline.|To assess the efficacy of G-ER dosed at 1800mg daily(600mg AM, 1200mg PM), compared with placebo in reducing the average daily frequency of moderate to severe hot flashes in post menopausal women at Week 4 of the efficacy treatment period compared with Baseline and at Week 12 of the efficacy treatment period compared with Baseline.|Baseline, Week 4, and Week 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population||hot flashes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
813652|NCT01080326|Primary|Number of Participants Completing Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgical (NOTES) Repair|"At the time of surgery the repair was pressure tested using endoscopic insufflation. Two days post-operation all participants receiving the NOTES repair underwent a water-soluble contrast study to demonstrate leakage.
Note: The NOTES procedure was attempted first if the subject had no contraindication. If this proved unsuccessful the surgical team proceeded with conversion to laparoscopic or open standard surgical therapy as indicated."|2 days post-operation|||participants|||Number
813653|NCT01080391|Secondary|QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/Quality of Life Scores|European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Core Module QLQ-C30 (QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL) is a validated instrument in multiple myeloma patients. Scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health related quality of life. The minimal important difference for between group differences is 5 points.|Day 1 of Cycles 3, 6, 12, 18|ITT analysis set comprised of all randomized participants.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813654|NCT01080391|Secondary|Duration of Disease Control|Duration of disease control (DDC) was calculated for participants who achieved disease control.DDC was defined as the time in months from randomization to the earlier of documented Progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause. Participants who had not progressed or died were censored according to the censoring rules defined previously for PFS.|From randomization through the data cutoff date of 16 June 2014. Longest follow-up time was approximately 46 months.|The Intent to treat (ITT) population with participantants who achieved disease control.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813655|NCT01080391|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response (DOR) was calculated for subjects who achieved a best response of stringent complete response (sCR), complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), or partial response (PR). Duration of response was defined as the time in months from the initial start of response (PR or better) to the earlier of documented Progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause. Participants who had not progressed or died were censored according to the censoring rules defined previously for PFS.|From randomization through the data cutoff date of 16 June 2014. Longest follow-up time was approximately 42 months.|The Intent to treat (ITT) population with participantant with participants who achieved a best overall response of PR or better.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813656|NCT01080391|Secondary|Disease Control|Number of participants who achieved a best response of stringent complete response (sCR), complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), partial response (PR), minimal response (MR), or stable disease (SD) lasting ≥ 8 weeks according to International Myeloma Working Group - Uniform Response Criteria (IMWG-URC) (MR was determined using European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria).|From randomization through the data cutoff date of 16 June 2014. Median follow-up time was approximately 31 months.|ITT analysis set comprised of all randomized participants||participants|||Number
813657|NCT01080391|Secondary|Overall Response|Number of participants who achieved confirmed stringent complete response (sCR), complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), or partial response (PR) as their best response based on the Independent Review Committee (IRC) assessed response outcome. Response was determined using the International Myeloma Working Group - Uniform Response Criteria (IMWG-URC).|From randomization through the data cutoff date of 16 June 2014.Median follow-up time was approximately 31 months.|ITT analysis set comprised of all randomized participants||participants|||Number
813658|NCT01080391|Secondary|Overall Survival|Time elapsed between the randomization date and the date of death. Participants who were still alive were censored at the date when the subject was last known to be alive or the data cutoff date, whichever occurs earlier. The median and all but one of the 95% confidence limits were not estimable. Instead, the number of participants who died or were censored are reported.|From randomization through the data cutoff date of 16 June 2014. Median follow up time was approximiately 32 months.|ITT analysis set comprised of all randomized participants||participants|||Number
813659|NCT01080391|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Kaplan-Meier estimate of median time from randomization to progressive disease (PD) or all-cause death. PD was assessed using International Myeloma Working Group-Uniform Response Criteria (IMWG-URC). 1 or more conditions were required to meet PD: 2 consecutive rising serum or urine M-protein from central lab; documented new bone lesion(s) or soft tissue plasmacytoma(s) or increased size of existing bone lesion(s) or plasmacytoma(s); or confirmed hypercalcemia due solely to plasma cell proliferative disorder (local lab greater than 11.5 mg/dL on 2 separate occasions). Censoring conditions (censoring dates) were: no post-baseline disease assessment (DA) (randomization date); started non-protocol systemic anticancer treatment before PD or death (last DA date before such treatment); died or had PD after more than 1 missed DA (last DA date without PD before the first missed visit); or were alive and without documentation of PD, including lost to follow-up without PD (last DA date).|From randomization through the data cutoff date of 16 June 2014. Median follow-up time was approximately 31 months.|ITT analysis set comprised of all randomized participants||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813660|NCT01080625|Primary|Occurrence of Postreperfusion Syndrome (PRS)|the number of patients who showed PRS (hypotension defined as < 30% of baseline mean arterial pressure [MAP] lasting over 1 min immediately after reperfusion of liver graft) was divided by the total number of patients enrolled for each group|immediately after reperfusion|Initial assessment for eligibility: n=128 32 patients who did not meet the criteria were excluded 96 patients were randomized Contorol (32 patients) --> 1 patient was excluded because of portalvein rupture Epinephrine (33 patients) --> data recording error (1 patient) practice error (1 patient) Phenylephrine group (31 patient)||percentage of participants|||Number
813661|NCT01080677|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment Satisfaction|Following up to 24 hours after treatment, participants were asked to report whether they were satisfied with level of pain relief provided by treatment|24 hours|||percentage of participants|||Number
813662|NCT01080677|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing at Least One Adverse Event of Interest|Adverse events may have included abdominal pain, flushing, dizziness, insomnia, or anxiety|24 hours|||percentage of participants|||Number
813663|NCT01080677|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Pain Free at 2 Hrs Post First Administration of Caffeine/Propranolol||2 hours|||percentage of participants|||Number
813664|NCT01080677|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pain Relief at 2 Hrs Post First Administration of Caffeine/Propranolol (Defined as a Decrease in Headache Pain Intensity From Severe or Moderate Headache Pain at Baseline to Mild or no Pain at 2 Hrs)||2 hours|||percentage of participants|||Number
813665|NCT01080768|Primary|Change in the Ankle Foot Volume (AFV) as Measured by Displacement Method|AFV (mL) was measured using the principle of water displacement using a commercially available foot volumeter. The amount of water displaced in milliliters (mL) equals the volume of the foot/ankle. The study was terminated due to the publication of the results of a near identical study by Fogari et al. Hence, for the current study, no analysis was performed.|Baseline, 4 weeks|The study was terminated due to the publication of the results of a near identical study by Fogari et al. Hence, for the current study, no analysis was performed.||mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813666|NCT01080794|Secondary|The Number All Types of Adverse Events.|To establish the safety and tolerability of rTMS in Parkinson's Disease.|Baseline through Month 6|||incidents of an adverse event|||Number
813667|NCT01080794|Secondary|Global Impression Scales|To assess symptom severity and treatment response in Parkinson's Disease. The CGI mean scores were reported for each group at each time point. The CGI Score Range is 1 - 8, where higher the score indicates greater severity of illness or worsening of illness.|Pre-treatment; Post-treatment 0,1,3, and 6 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813668|NCT01080794|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II)|To assess mood symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. The BDI-II mean scores were reported for each group at each time point. The BDI-II Score Range is 0 - 63, where higher the score indicates greater severity of the mood symptoms.|Pre-treatment; Post-treatment 0,1,3, and 6 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813669|NCT01080794|Secondary|Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Parts I, II, and IV|"To assess apathy, cognition, depression, activities of daily living (ADL), quality of life (QOL), and motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease.
The UPDRS I, II, IV total mean scores were reported for each group at each time point. The UPDRS I, II, IV scores were added together for each patient, with a total score range of 0 - 91, where higher the score indicates greater severity of the symptoms."|Pre-treatment; Post-treatment 0,1,3, and 6 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813670|NCT01080794|Secondary|Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)|To screen and follow cognitive function in Parkinson's Disease. The MoCA mean scores were reported for each group at each time point. The MoCA Score Range is 0 - 30, where 26-30 indicates normal cognition.|pre-treatment; 0,1,3, and 6 months post-treatment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813671|NCT01080794|Secondary|Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 (PDQ-39)|To assess the quality of life (QOL) in Parkinson's Disease. The PDQ-39 mean scores were reported for each group at each time point. The PDQ-39 Score Range is 0 - 156, where higher the score indicates greater impact on quality of life.|Pre-treatment; Post-treatment 0,1,3, and 6 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813672|NCT01080794|Secondary|Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES)|To evaluate apathy in Parkinson's Disease. The AES mean scores were reported for each group at each time point. The AES Score Range is 0-42, where higher the score indicates greater severity of the apathy symptoms.|Pre-treatment; Post-treatment 0,1,3, and 6 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813676|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ-10) Intimacy|FOSQ-10 consists of 10 questions rated on a scale of 1-4 (1=extreme difficulty, 4=no difficulty), and is used to measure the impact of daytime sleepiness on activities of daily living and quality of life. A total score and 5 subscale (vigilance, general productivity, social outcome, intimacy, and activity level) scores are calculated from the responses. Worst subscale score is 1 (maximum difficulty) and the best score is 4 (no difficulty). This score represents the CHANGE from Baseline in the Intimacy subscale. Positive change scores represent improvement (possible range -3 to +3).|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with FOSQ-10 at baseline and at endpoint||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813677|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ-10) Social Outcome|FOSQ-10 consists of 10 questions rated on a scale of 1-4 (1=extreme difficulty, 4=no difficulty), and is used to measure the impact of daytime sleepiness on activities of daily living and quality of life. A total score and 5 subscale (vigilance, general productivity, social outcome, intimacy, and activity level) scores are calculated from the responses. Worst subscale score is 1 (maximum difficulty) and the best score is 4 (no difficulty). This score represents the CHANGE from Baseline in the Social Outcome subscale. Positive change scores represent improvement (possible range -3 to +3).|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with FOSQ-10 at baseline and at endpoint||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813678|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ-10) Vigilance Score|FOSQ-10 consists of 10 questions rated on a scale of 1-4 (1=extreme difficulty, 4=no difficulty), and is used to measure the impact of daytime sleepiness on activities of daily living and quality of life. A total score and 5 subscale (vigilance, general productivity, social outcome, intimacy, and activity level) scores are calculated from the responses. Worst subscale score is 1 (maximum difficulty) and the best score is 4 (no difficulty). This score represents the CHANGE from Baseline in the Vigilance subscale. Positive change scores represent improvement (possible range -3 to +3).|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with FOSQ-10 at baseline and at endpoint||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813679|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ-10) General Productivity Score|FOSQ-10 consists of 10 questions rated on a scale of 1-4 (1=extreme difficulty, 4=no difficulty), and is used to measure the impact of daytime sleepiness on activities of daily living and quality of life. A total score and 5 subscale (vigilance, general productivity, social outcome, intimacy, and activity level) scores are calculated from the responses. Worst subscale score is 1 (maximum difficulty) and the best score is 4 (no difficulty). This score represents the CHANGE from Baseline in the General Productivity subscale. Positive change scores represent improvement (possible range -3 to +3).|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with FOSQ-10 at baseline and at endpoint||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813680|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ-10) Activity Level Score|FOSQ-10 consists of 10 questions rated on a scale of 1 to 4 (1=extreme difficulty and 4=no difficulty), and is used to measure the impact of daytime sleepiness on activities of daily living and quality of life. A total score and 5 subscale (vigilance, general productivity, social outcome, intimacy, and activity level) scores are calculated from the responses. Worst subscale score is 1 (maximum difficulty) and the best score is 4 (no difficulty). This score represents the CHANGE from Baseline in the Activity level subscale. Positive change scores represent improvement (possible range -3 to +3).|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with FOSQ-10 at baseline and at endpoint||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813681|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ-10) Total Score|FOSQ-10 consists of 10 questions, on a scale of 1-4(1=extreme difficulty 4=no difficulty), measures impact of sleepiness on activities of daily living. Lower score = more difficulty with activity due to lack of sleep. Total score = MEAN of subscale scores (vigilance, productivity, social outcome, intimacy, activity) multiplied by 5. Worst total score is 5 (maximum difficulty) the best is 20 (no difficulty). This data reports CHANGE in total score from baseline to endpoint, with higher (positive) values representing improvement. Worst possible CHANGE value would be -15 best would be +15.|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with FOSQ-10 at baseline and at endpoint||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813682|NCT01080807|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM)- Global Satisfaction Score at Endpoint|TSQM is a 14 question questionnaire assessing satisfaction with the medication. 4 scales are generated: side effects, effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction. Subjects responded to the questionnaire at Week 3, Week 6, and last observation after baseline. Optional responses are: Extremely Dissatisfied, Very Dissatisfied, Dissatisfied, Somewhat Satisfied, Satisfied, Very Satisfied, and Extremely Satisfied. From the responses, a scale score from 0 - 100 is calculated, with a higher score indicating greater satisfaction. Results from the Global Satisfaction scale are presented here.|Endpoint|Full analysis set defined as subjects who completed the TSQM at Endpoint (Week 6 or last observation after baseline)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813683|NCT01080807|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM)- Convenience Score at Endpoint|TSQM is a 14 question questionnaire assessing satisfaction with the medication. 4 scales are generated: side effects, effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction. Subjects responded to the questionnaire at Week 3, Week 6, and last observation after baseline. Optional responses are: Extremely Dissatisfied, Very Dissatisfied, Dissatisfied, Somewhat Satisfied, Satisfied, Very Satisfied, and Extremely Satisfied. From the responses, a scale score from 0 - 100 is calculated, with a higher score indicating greater satisfaction. Results from the Convenience scale are presented here.|Endpoint|Full analysis set defined as subjects who completed the TSQM at Endpoint (Week 6 or last observation after baseline)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813773|NCT01081145|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With an Assessment of Normal/Borderline Mentally Ill on CGI-S Scale During the Open-Label Phase - LOCF|CGI-S assesses the severity of the subject's condition on a 7-point scale: 1 (normal, not at all ill), 2 (borderline mentally ill), 3 (mildly ill), 4 (moderately ill), 5 (markedly ill), 6 (severely ill), 7 (among the most extremely ill)|13 weeks|Open-label FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
813684|NCT01080807|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM)- Side Effects Score at Endpoint|TSQM is a 14 question questionnaire assessing satisfaction with the medication. 4 scales are generated: side effects, effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction. Subjects responded to the questionnaire at Week 3, Week 6, and last post-baseline observation. Optional responses are: Extremely Dissatisfied, Very Dissatisfied, Dissatisfied, Somewhat Satisfied, Satisfied, Very Satisfied, and Extremely Satisfied. From the responses, a scale score from 0 - 100 is calculated, with a higher score indicating greater satisfaction. Results from the Side Effects scale are presented here.|Endpoint|Full analysis set defined as subjects who completed the TSQM at Endpoint (Week 6 or last observation after baseline)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813685|NCT01080807|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM)- Effectiveness Score at Endpoint|TSQM is a 14 question questionnaire assessing satisfaction with the medication. 4 scales are generated: side effects, effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction. Subjects responded to the questionnaire at Week 3, Week 6, and last observation after baseline. Optional responses are: Extremely Dissatisfied, Very Dissatisfied, Dissatisfied, Somewhat Satisfied, Satisfied, Very Satisfied, and Extremely Satisfied. From the responses, a scale score from 0 - 100 is calculated, with a higher score indicating greater satisfaction. Results from the Effectiveness scale are presented here.|Endpoint|Full analysis set defined as subjects who completed the TSQM at Endpoint (Week 6 or last observation after baseline)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813686|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS) Score - Number of Days of Reduced Productivity|"Mental-health related disability was assessed with the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS). The MSDS has three 11-point items, and the participant is asked to rate, on a numerical scale, the extent to which emotional problems have disrupted her/his work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities over the last month. Each item is rated from 0, indicating not at all, to 10, indicating extremely. Scores for the items are summed for a possible score of 0 to 30. The MSDS was performed by the patient at the baseline visit, at Week 3, and at Week 6."|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with MSDS at baseline and at Endpoint.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813687|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS) Score - Days Missed Work or Unable to Carry Out Responsibilities|"Mental-health related disability was assessed with the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS). The MSDS has three 11-point items, and the participant is asked to rate, on a numerical scale, the extent to which emotional problems have disrupted her/his work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities over the last month. Each item is rated from 0, indicating not at all, to 10, indicating extremely. Scores for the items are summed for a possible score of 0 to 30. The MSDS was performed by the patient at the baseline visit, at Week 3, and at Week 6."|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with MSDS at baseline and at Endpoint.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813688|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS) Family Life Item Score|"Mental-health related disability was assessed with the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS). The MSDS has three 11-point items, and the participant is asked to rate, on a numerical scale, the extent to which emotional problems have disrupted her/his work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities over the last month. Each item is rated from 0, indicating not at all, to 10, indicating extremely. Scores for the items are summed for a possible score of 0 to 30. The MSDS was performed by the patient at the baseline visit, at Week 3, and at Week 6."|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with MSDS at baseline and at Endpoint.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813689|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS) Social Life Item Score|"Mental-health related disability was assessed with the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS). The MSDS has three 11-point items, and the participant is asked to rate, on a numerical scale, the extent to which emotional problems have disrupted her/his work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities over the last month. Each item is rated from 0, indicating not at all, to 10, indicating extremely. Scores for the items are summed for a possible score of 0 to 30. The MSDS was performed by the patient at the baseline visit, at Week 3, and at Week 6."|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation (or last observation after baseline))|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with MSDS at baseline and at Endpoint.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813690|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS) Work Item Score|"Mental-health related disability was assessed with the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS). The MSDS has three 11-point items, and the participant is asked to rate, on a numerical scale, the extent to which emotional problems have disrupted her/his work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities over the last month. Each item is rated from 0, indicating not at all, to 10, indicating extremely. Scores for the items are summed for a possible score of 0 to 30. The MSDS was performed by the patient at the baseline visit, at Week 3, and at Week 6."|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with MSDS at baseline and at Endpoint.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813691|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS) Composite Score|"Mental-health related disability was assessed with the Modified Sheehan Disability Scale (MSDS). The MSDS has three 11-point items, and the participant is asked to rate, on a numerical scale, the extent to which emotional problems have disrupted her/his work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities over the last month. Each item is rated from 0, indicating not at all, to 10, indicating extremely. Scores for the items are summed for a possible score of 0 to 30. The MSDS was performed by the patient at the baseline visit, at Week 3, and at Week 6."|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with MSDS at baseline and at Endpoint.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813739|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Mean Spleen Volume at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52||Baseline, Week 26, Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations. Here 'n' signifies number of participants with available data for specified category for each arm respectively.||MN||Standard Deviation|Mean
813692|NCT01080807|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With at Least Minimal Improvement From Baseline in the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) Rating as Related to Late Shift Sleepiness at Week 6|The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) is an assessment performed by the clinician, evaluating the change in the patient's symptoms over time. The clinician categorizes the change as: very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse, or very much worse. The data presented here represents the percentage of patients whose condition showed at least minimal improvement in the CGI-C rating as related to late shift sleepiness (defined as the period 0400-0800, including the commute home).|Baseline and week 6|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with CGI-C at baseline and at week 6||Percentage of participants|||Number
813693|NCT01080807|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With at Least Minimal Improvement From Baseline in the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) Rating as Related to Late Shift Sleepiness at Week 3|The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) is an assessment performed by the clinician, evaluating the change in the patient's symptoms over time. The clinician categorizes the change as: very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse, or very much worse. The data presented here represents the percentage of patients whose condition showed at least minimal improvement in the CGI-C rating as related to late shift sleepiness (defined as the period 0400-0800, including the commute home).|Baseline and week 3|Full analysis set defined as subjects who were assessed with CGI-C at baseline and at week 3||Percentage of participants|||Number
813694|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 6 in the Mean Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) Score|"The Karolinska sleepiness scale is a 10-point scale, on which the participant has to mark his sleepiness during the previous 10 minutes. The scale ranges from 1, which indicates extremely alert, to 10, which indicates extremely sleepy, can't stay awake. The KSS was performed by the participant at the baseline visit, week 3, and week 6 (or early termination visit). The score recorded is the average of 3 assessments within ±15 minutes at 0400, 0600, and 0800. The data presented here represents the mean change from baseline in the KSS scores of each group."|Baseline and week 6|The number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants with evaluable data.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813695|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 3 in the Mean Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) Score|"The Karolinska sleepiness scale is a 10-point scale, on which the participant has to mark his sleepiness during the previous 10 minutes. The scale ranges from 1, which indicates extremely alert, to 10, which indicates extremely sleepy, can't stay awake. The KSS was performed by the participant at the baseline visit, week 3, and week 6 (or early termination visit). The score recorded is the average of 3 assessments within ±15 minutes at 0400, 0600, and 0800. The data presented here represents the mean change from baseline in the KSS scores of each group."|Baseline and week 3|The number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants with evaluable data.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813696|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Mean Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) Score|"The Karolinska sleepiness scale is a 10-point scale, on which the participant has to mark his sleepiness during the previous 10 minutes. The scale ranges from 1, which indicates extremely alert, to 10, which indicates extremely sleepy, can't stay awake. The KSS was performed by the participant at the baseline visit, week 3, and week 6 (or early termination visit). The score recorded is the average of 3 assessments within ±15 minutes at 0400, 0600, and 0800. The data presented here represents the mean change from baseline in the KSS scores of each group."|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|The number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants with evaluable data.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813697|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 6 in Global Assessment of Functioning|The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) is a numeric scale (0 through 100) used by the clinician to rate the social, occupational, and psychological functioning of the patient. A higher score indicates superior functioning and fewer symptoms. The data presented here represents the mean change from baseline in the GAF scores of each group.|Baseline and Week 6|The number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants with evaluable data.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813698|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 3 in Global Assessment of Functioning|The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) is a numeric scale (0 through 100) used by the clinician to rate the social, occupational, and psychological functioning of the patient. A higher score indicates superior functioning and fewer symptoms. The data presented here represents the mean change from baseline in the GAF scores of each group.|Baseline and Week 3|The number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants with evaluable data.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813699|NCT01080807|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Global Assessment of Function (GAF) Score|The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) is a numeric scale (0 through 100) used by the clinician to rate the social, occupational, and psychological functioning of the patient. A higher score indicates superior functioning and fewer symptoms. The data presented here represents the mean change from baseline to endpoint in the GAF scores of each group.|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|The number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants with evaluable data.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813700|NCT01080807|Primary|Percentage of Patients With at Least Minimal Improvement From Baseline in the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) Rating as Related to Late Shift Sleepiness at Endpoint|The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) is an assessment performed by the clinician, evaluating the change in the patient's symptoms over time. The clinician categorizes the change as: very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse, or very much worse. The data presented here represents the percentage of patients whose condition showed at least minimal improvement in the CGI-C rating as related to late shift sleepiness (defined as the period 0400-0800, including the commute home).|Baseline and week 6 (or last observation after baseline)|The number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants with evaluable data.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813701|NCT01074931|Secondary|The Duration on Treatment Until Development of an Adverse Event Leading to Treatment Discontinuation or Until Escape From Treatment|As so few participants withdrew from lopinavir/ritonavir treatment, durations of lopinavir/ritonavir therapy required for 25 percent, 50 percent and 75 percent of participants could not be established. The numbers of participants in each subgroup who discontinued from treatment due to an adverse event are presented.|Month 3, 6, 12, 18|All participants who took at least one dose of lopinavir/ritonavir.||Participants|||Number
813702|NCT01074931|Secondary|Adverse Events Observed and Development of Lipodystrophy Lesion and Their Locations|The types of adverse events reported are summarized. The presence of lipodystrophy (abnormal body fat distribution) and its location was to be recorded. However, due to an oversight, there was not a place to record the location of lipodystrophy on the case report form. Doctors used clinical judgment to rate lipodystrophy in treatment-experienced participants. Study visits were to occur at approximately 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after starting treatment. The exact dates of each visit depended on the physician’s judgment, so data are reported for Visits 1 through 4 rather than by month.|Month 3, 6, 12, 18|The adverse event population includes all participants who took at least one dose of lopinavir/ritonavir (98). Lipodystrophy evaluations were performed in treatment-experienced participants (90), not treatment-naive participants (8).||Participants|||Number
813703|NCT01074931|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Missed Doses, Interrupt or Discontinue Regimen, and Experience Changes in Dosage or of Combination Regimen|Visits were to occur at approximately 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after starting treatment. The frequency with which each participant forgot to take their medication since the last visit and discontinuations of treatment and the reasons were documented at each visit and are summarized. The number of participants changing from lopinavir/ritonavir soft gel capsule to tablet are also presented. The exact dates of each visit depended on the physician’s judgment, so data are reported for Visits 1 through 4 rather than by month. Note: participants may have had multiple missed doses or therapy changes.|Month 3, 6, 12, 18|All participants who took at least one dose of lopinavir/ritonavir.||Participants|||Number
813704|NCT01074931|Primary|Evolution of the Tolerance Issues|At each study visit, treating physicians evaluated participants and used their clinical judgment to determine if they were tolerating the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing regimen. Study visits were to occur at approximately 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after starting treatment. The exact dates of each visit depended on the physician’s judgment, so data are reported for Visits 1 through 4 rather than by month.|Month 3, 6, 12, 18|All participants taking at least one dose of lopinavir/ritonavir.||Participants|||Number
813705|NCT01074931|Primary|Evolution of CD4 Count|The evolution of participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts after starting the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing regimen was to be assessed by measuring the number of CD4+ cells at baseline and each subsequent study visit. CD4+ count results are reported as the number of CD4+ cells per cubic millimeter (cmm). Study visits were to occur at approximately 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after starting treatment. The exact dates of each visit depended on the physician’s judgment, so data are reported for Visits 1 through 4 rather than by month.|Month 3, 6, 12, 18|Includes all participants taking at least one dose of lopinavir/ritonavir who had CD4+ count results at each particular time point.||cells per cmm||Standard Deviation|Mean
813706|NCT01074931|Primary|Evolution of the HIV Viral Response|The protocol recommended that HIV viral load tests be performed at baseline and each study visit. Test results indicate the number of HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) copies per milliliter (mL). The number of participants who underwent testing and had detectable levels (greater than 50 copies/mL) or undetectable levels (less than 50 copies/mL) are presented by subgroup. Study visits were to occur at approximately 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after starting treatment. The exact dates of each visit depended on the physician’s judgment, so data are reported for Visits 1 through 4 rather than by month.|Month 3, 6, 12, 18|All participants who took at least one dose of lopinavir/ritonavir and had HIV viral load testing.||participant|||Number
813707|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Mean Biomarker (MIP1-beta) Value at Baseline, 1 Year, and 2 Years|MIP1-beta biomarker was assayed from plasma.|Baseline, 1 year, and 2 years|All participants who received at least one dose of eliglustat during the LTTP.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813708|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Mean Biomarker (GL-1 on DBS) Value at Baseline, 1 Year, and 2 Years|GL-1 on DBS biomarker was assayed from dried blood spot.|Baseline, 1 year, and 2 years|All participants who received at least one dose of eliglustat during the LTTP.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813709|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Mean Biomarker (Chitotriosidase) Value at Baseline, 1 Year, and 2 Years|Chitotriosidase biomarker was assayed from plasma.|Baseline, 1 year, and 2 years|All participants who received at least one dose of eliglustat during the LTTP.||nmol/hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813710|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Total Bone Marrow Burden Score (BMB) at Baseline, 1 Year, and 2 Years|BMB Score was measured using MRI, range from 0 (no abnormalities) to 8 points (severe disease) for the lumbar spine and from 0 (no abnormalities) to 8 points (severe disease) for the femurs. The total score was calculated as the sum of scores for femur and lumbar spine regions which ranged from 0 (no abnormalities) -16 (severe disease) points. A higher BMB score signified more severe bone marrow involvement.|Baseline, 1 year, and 2 years|All participants who received at least one dose of eliglustat during the LTTP.||BMB Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
813711|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Total Z-scores for BMD at Baseline, 1 Year, and 2 Years|Images of the spine and bilateral femur were obtained by DXA to determine Z-score for each bone area and total bone mineral density. The Z-score bone density categories are: normal (score >-2) and below normal (score <=-2).|Baseline, 1 year, and 2 years|All participants who received at least one dose of eliglustat during the LTTP.||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
813712|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Total T-Scores for BMD at Baseline, 1 Year, and 2 Years|Images of the spine and bilateral femur were obtained by DXA to determine T-score for each bone area and total bone mineral density. The T-score bone density categories were: normal (score >-1), osteopenia (score -2.5 to <=-1), and osteoporosis (score <= -2.5).|Baseline, 1 year, and 2 years|All participants who received at least one dose of eliglustat during the LTTP.||T-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
813713|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Baseline, 1 Year, and 2 Years|BMD measurements of the spine and bilateral femur were acquired by DXA scan.|Baseline, 1 year, and 2 years|All participants who received at least one dose of eliglustat during the LTTP.||g/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
813714|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Number of Participants With Bone Pain Levels During the Past 4 Weeks at Baseline, 1 Year, and 2 Years|Bone pain was assessed as a part of Gaucher disease assessment in participants. Participants were categorized as none (no bone pain), very mild bone pain, mild bone pain, moderate bone pain, severe bone pain and extreme bone pain. In this outcome, number of participants with different level of bone pain during the past 4 weeks at specified time points were reported.|Baseline, 1 year and 2 years|All participants who received at least one dose of eliglustat during the LTTP.||participants|||Number
829232|NCT01225354|Secondary|Assessment of Malar Deficiency|Live subject malar deficiency severity will be rated by PI at Visits 1-4 according to the SOBER scale.|Visit 1-4||||||
813715|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Number of Participants With Bone Crises Assessment at Baseline, 1 Year and 2 Years|Bone crises was assessed as a part of Gaucher disease assessment in participants. Acute, excruciating episodic bone pain is characteristic of Gaucher bone crises, which typically causes debilitation lasting several days or longer and requires treatment with immobilization, hydration, and opioid analgesics. Participants were categorized as 0= no bone crises, 1= 1 bone crisis during the assessment period. In this outcome, number of participants with different bone crises levels at specified time points were reported.|Baseline, 1 year and 2 years|All participants who received at least one dose of eliglustat during the LTTP.||participants|||Number
813716|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Number of Participants With Mobility Status (MS) at Baseline, 1 Year and 2 Years|Mobility, i.e., ability to walk was assessed as a part of Gaucher disease assessment in participants. In this outcome, number of participants with their different mobility status along with the use of mobility aids (unrestricted mobility, walks with difficulty, walks with orthopaedic aid, requires wheelchair, bedridden) at specified time points were reported.|Baseline, 1 year, and 2 years|All participants who received at least one dose of eliglustat during the LTTP.||participants|||Number
813717|NCT01074944|Secondary|LTTP: Percentage of Participants Who Maintained a Stable Bone Criterion ,Hemoglobin Level, Platelet Count, Liver Volume and Spleen Volume at 1 Year and 2 Years|Participant were considered as stable if they met the following criteria: hemoglobin level did not decrease >1.5 g/dL from baseline for PAP, platelet count does not decrease >25% below Baseline for PAP, liver volume does not increase >20% above Baseline for PAP, spleen volume does not increase >25% above Baseline for PAP. Baseline for PAP was defined as last available assessment prior to randomization.|1 Year, 2 Years|Analysis was performed on intent to treat (ITT) population which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat after randomization. Here ‘n’ signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813718|NCT01074944|Secondary|LIP: Number of Participants With Bone Pain Levels During the Past 4 Weeks at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52 and 78|Bone pain was assessed as a part of Gaucher disease assessment in participants. Participants were categorized as none (no bone pain), very mild bone pain, mild bone pain, moderate bone pain, severe bone pain and extreme bone pain. In this outcome, number of participants with different type of bone pain during the past 4 weeks at specified time points were reported.|Baseline, Week 26, Week 52, Week 78|Analysis was performed on AT analysis set which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat during LIP.||participants|||Number
813719|NCT01074944|Secondary|LIP: Number of Participants With Bone Crises Assessment at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52 and 78|Bone crises was assessed as a part of Gaucher disease assessment in participants. Acute, excruciating episodic bone pain is characteristic of Gaucher bone crises, which typically causes debilitation lasting several days or longer and requires treatment with immobilization, hydration, and opioid analgesics. Participants were categorized as 0= no bone crisis, 1= 1 bone crisis, 2= 2 bone crises, 6= 6 bone crises, and 24= 24 bone crises during the assessment period. In this outcome, number of participants with different bone crises levels at specified time points were reported.|Baseline, Week 26, Week 52, Week 78|Analysis was performed on AT analysis set which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat during LIP.||participants|||Number
813720|NCT01074944|Secondary|LIP: Number of Participants With Mobility Status (MS) at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52 and 78|Mobility, i.e., ability to walk was assessed as a part of Gaucher disease assessment in participants. In this outcome, number of participants with their different mobility status along with the use of mobility aids (unrestricted mobility, walks with difficulty, walks with orthopaedic aid, requires wheelchair, bedridden) at specified time points were reported.|Baseline, Week 26, Week 52, Week 78|Analysis was performed on AT analysis set which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat during LIP.||participants|||Number
813721|NCT01074944|Secondary|LIP: Mean Biomarker (MIP1-beta) Value at Baseline, Week 78|MIP1-beta biomarker was assayed from plasma.|Baseline and Week 78|Analysis was performed on AT analysis set which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat during LIP. Here ‘n’ signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813722|NCT01074944|Secondary|LIP: Mean Biomarker (GL-1 on DBS) Value at Baseline, Week 26, Week 52, and Week 78|GL-1 on DBS biomarker was assayed from dried blood spot.|Baseline, Week 26, Week 52 and Week 78|Analysis was performed on AT analysis set which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat during LIP. Here ‘n’ signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813723|NCT01074944|Secondary|LIP: Mean Biomarker (Chitotriosidase) Value at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52, and 78|Chitotriosidase biomarker was assayed from plasma.|Baseline, Week 26, Week 52 and Week 78|Analysis was performed on AT analysis set which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat during LIP. Here ‘n’ signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points.||nmol/hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813724|NCT01074944|Secondary|LIP: Mean Spleen Volume at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52 and 78||Baseline, Week 26, Week 52, Week 78|Analysis was performed on AT participants which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat during lead in period. Here 'n' signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points.||MN||Standard Deviation|Mean
813725|NCT01074944|Secondary|LIP: Mean Liver Volume at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52 and 78||Baseline, Week 26, Week 52, Week 78|Analysis was performed on AT participants which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat during lead in period. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points.||MN||Standard Deviation|Mean
813726|NCT01074944|Secondary|LIP: Mean Platelet Count at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52 and 78||Baseline, Week 26, Week 52, Week 78|Analysis was performed on AT analysis set which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat during LIP. Here ‘n’ signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points.||platelets*10^9 /L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813727|NCT01074944|Secondary|LIP: Mean Hemoglobin (Hb) Level at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52 and 78||Baseline, Week 26, Week, 52, and Week 78|Analysis was performed on all treated (AT) analysis set which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of eliglustat during lead in period. Here 'n' signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829622|NCT01227421|Secondary|Time Loss From Work|Time loss from work|28 days|Analysis conducted on 241 patients with laboratory confirmed influenza excluding those who are unemployed||days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813728|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Total Bone Marrow Burden Score (BMB) at Baseline and Week 52|BMB Score was measured using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), range from 0 (no abnormalities) to 8 points (severe disease) for the lumbar spine and from 0 (no abnormalities) to 8 points (severe disease) for the femurs. The total score was calculated as the sum of scores for femur and lumbar spine regions which ranged from 0 (no abnormalities) -16 (severe disease) points. A higher BMB score signified more severe bone marrow involvement.|Baseline, Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points for each arm respectively.||BMB Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
813729|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Number of Participants With Bone Pain Levels During the Past 4 Weeks at Baseline, Weeks 26 and 52|Bone pain was assessed as a part of Gaucher disease assessment in participants. Participants were categorized as none (no bone pain), very mild bone pain, mild bone pain, moderate bone pain, severe bone pain and extreme bone pain during the past 4 weeks. In this outcome, number of participants with different level of bone pain during the past 4 weeks at specified time points were reported.|Baseline, Week 26, and Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations.||participants|||Number
813730|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Number of Participants With Bone Crises at Baseline, Weeks 26 and 52|Bone crisis was assessed as a part of Gaucher disease assessment in participants. Acute, excruciating episodic bone pain is characteristic of Gaucher bone crisis, which typically causes debilitation lasting several days or longer and requires treatment with immobilization, hydration, and opioid analgesics. Participants were categorized as 0= no bone crisis, 1= 1 bone crisis, and 2= 2 bone crises during the assessment period. In this outcome, number of participants with different bone crises levels at specified time points were reported.|Baseline, Week 26, and Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations.||participants|||Number
813731|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Number of Participants With Mobility Status Asessments (MS) at Baseline, Weeks 26, and 52.|Mobility, i.e., ability to walk was assessed as a part of Gaucher disease assessment in participants. In this outcome, number of participants with their different mobility status along with the use of mobility aids (unrestricted mobility, walks with difficulty, walks with orthopaedic aid, requires wheelchair, bedridden) at specified time points were reported.|Baseline, Week 26 and Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations.||participants|||Number
813732|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Total Z-scores for BMD at Baseline and Week 52|Images of the spine and bilateral femur were obtained by DXA to determine Z-score for each bone area and total bone mineral density. The Z-score bone density categories are: normal (score >-2) and below normal (score <=-2).|Baseline, Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations. Here 'n' signifies number of participants with available data for specified category for each arm respectively||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
813733|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Total T-Scores for BMD at Baseline and Week 52|Images of the spine and bilateral femur were obtained by DXA to determine T-score for each bone area and total bone mineral density. The T-score bone density categories were: normal (score >-1), osteopenia (score -2.5 to <=-1), and osteoporosis (score <= -2.5).|Baseline, Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations. Here 'n' signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points for each arm respectively.||T-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
813734|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Baseline and Week 52|BMD measurements of the spine and bilateral femur were acquired by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan.|Baseline, Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points for each arm respectively.||g/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
813735|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Mean Biomarker Macrophage Inflammatory Protein-1 Beta (MIP1-beta) Value at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52|MIP1-beta biomarker was assayed from plasma.|Baseline, Week 26, Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with available data for specified category for each arm respectively.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813736|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Mean Biomarker (GL-1 on DBS) Value at Baseline, Week 26 and Week 52|GL-1 on DBS biomarker was assayed from dried blood spot (DBS).|Baseline, Week 26 and week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations. Here 'n' signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points for each arm respectively.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813737|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Mean Biomarker (Chitotriosidase) Value at Baseline, Weeks 26 and Week 52|Chitotriosidase biomarker was assayed from plasma.|Baseline, Week 26, Week 52|PP population which all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with available data for specified category for each arm respectively.||nmol/hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813738|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Mean Liver Volume at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52||Baseline, Week 26 and Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations.||MN||Standard Deviation|Mean
813740|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Mean Platelet Count at Baseline, Weeks 26, 52||Baseline, Week 26, Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations. Here 'n' signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points for each arm respectively.||platelets*10^9 /L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813741|NCT01074944|Secondary|PAP: Mean Hemoglobin (Hb) Level at Baseline, Weeks 26 and 52||Baseline, Week 26, Week 52|PP population included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with IMP dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations. Here 'n' signifies number of participants with available data at specified time points for each arm respectively.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813742|NCT01074944|Primary|PAP: Percentage of Participants Who Remained Stable for 52 Weeks During the PAP|Participants were considered as stable if they met all of the following criteria: 1) no more than 2 bone crisis during PAP (with no more than 1 bone crisis during either the first 6 months or the later 6 months of the period), and were free of other clinically symptomatic bone disease during the entire 52-week PAP; 2) hemoglobin level not decreased >1.5 g/dL from Baseline for PAP; 3) platelet count not decreased >25% from Baseline for PAP; 4) spleen volume (in multiples of normal [MN]) did not increase >25% from Baseline for PAP; 5) liver volume (in MN) did not increase >20% from Baseline for PAP. Baseline for PAP was defined as the last assessment prior to randomization.|PAP Baseline up to the end of PAP (Week 52)|Analysis was performed on per protocol (PP) population which included all participants who were at least 80% compliant with investigational medicinal product (IMP) dosing during PAP, had all of the necessary Baseline and Week 52 assessments to evaluate the primary endpoint, and did not have major protocol deviations.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813743|NCT01081041|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration Curve (AUC) of Cetuximab at Steady State|A total of 4 samples were collected during combination therapy, from the first dose of 250 mg/m^2 cetuximab in Cycle 1 (Day 1) through the final dose in Cycle 3 (Week 3) and used to report AUC of cetuximab at steady state during Part 2 of the study. As specified in the protocol, PK samples were not collected during Part 1 of the study, Safety Lead-In, or during Part 2 monotherapy.|Part 2: Weekly from Cycle 1, Day 1 through Cycle 3, Week 3: 0 h (immediately postdose), 24 h, 96 h, and 168 h postdose|Participants who received at least 1 dose of cetuximab (250 mg/m^2) and had valid serum cetuximab concentrations during the specified time frame. No participant was analyzed during Part 1 of the study, Safety Lead-In, or during Part 2 monotherapy.||micrograms*hours/milliliter (μg*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
813744|NCT01081041|Secondary|Cmax of Cetuximab at Steady State|A total of 4 samples were collected at various times during combination therapy, from the third dose of 250 mg/m^2 cetuximab in Cycle 1 (Week 3) through the final dose in Cycle 3 (Week 3) and used to report Cmax of cetuximab at steady state during Part 2 of the study. As specified in the protocol, PK samples were not collected during Part 1 of the study, Safety Lead-In, or during Part 2 monotherapy.|Part 2: Weekly from Cycle 1, Week 3 through Cycle 3, Week 3: 0 h (immediately postdose), 24 h, 96 h, and 168 h postdose|Participants who received at least 1 dose of cetuximab (400 mg/m^2) and had valid serum cetuximab concentrations during the specified time frame. No participant was analyzed during Part 1 of the study, Safety Lead-In, or during Part 2 monotherapy.||micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
813745|NCT01081041|Secondary|Maximum Serum Concentration (Cmax) of Cetuximab Following 400 mg/m² Cetuximab Dosing|The Cmax of cetuximab following 400 mg/m² cetuximab dosing during Part 2 of the study is reported. As specified in the protocol, pharmacokinetics (PK) samples were not collected during Part 1 of the study, Safety Lead-In or during Part 2 monotherapy.|Part 2: Cycle 1, Day 1: 0 hours [(h); immediately postdose], 1 h, 2 h, and 24 h postdose|Participants who received at least 1 dose of cetuximab (400 mg/m²) and had valid serum cetuximab concentrations during the specified time frame. No participant was analyzed during Part 1 of the study, Safety Lead-In or during Part 2 monotherapy..||micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
813746|NCT01081041|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Having a Best Response of CR, PR, or Stable Disease (SD) - Disease Control Rate (DCR)|Response was defined using RECIST, v1.0 criteria. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions. PR was defined as having at least a 30% decrease in sum of longest diameter of target lesions. Progressive Disease (PD) was defined as having at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions. Stable Disease (SD) was defined as small changes that did not meet the above criteria.|Parts 1 and 2: Randomization to Progression of Disease (Up to 32.7 Months)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813747|NCT01081041|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-Cetuximab Antibodies||Day 1, Week 1 of Cycles 3 and 5 (postbaseline samples were collected prior to infusion).|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable data for antibodies.There was no pre-specified analysis plan for trial to report immunogenicity results separately for each arm,as results were intended to be pooled and combined with other cetuximab trials data.Data was pooled for the three arms for cetuximab in this trial.||participants|||Number
813748|NCT01081041|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Having a Confirmed Best Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) (Overall Response Rate [ORR])|Response was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST, version [v]1.0) criteria. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions. PR was defined as having at least a 30% decrease in sum of longest diameter of target lesions. Percentage of participants with a confirmed CR or PR=(number of participants whose best overall response was CR or PR)/(number of participants treated)*100.|Parts 1 and 2: Randomization to Progression of Disease (Up to 32.7 Months)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813758|NCT01081132|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With Improvement on Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Scores at the Last On-Treatment Assessment|Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) consists of a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Improvement is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) on the scale.|weeks 1 through 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
814965|NCT01092663|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Total Glucose-dependent Insulinotropic Peptide (GIP)|To evaluate the effect of treatments on plasma Glucose-dependent Insulinotropic Peptide (GIP) concentrations.|Baseline and 12 weeks|||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813749|NCT01081041|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as duration from the date of randomization to the first date of objective progressive disease (PD) or death from any cause. For each participant who was not known to have died or to have had objective PD as of the 23 October 2014 data cutoff date for the analysis, PFS was censored at the date of the participant’s last complete tumor assessment prior to that cutoff date. In addition, any participant in Arm B who was switched from BI-manufactured cetuximab to ImClone-manufactured cetuximab was censored at the time of the switch.|Parts 1 and 2: Randomization to Progression of Disease or Death from any Cause (Up to 32.7 Months)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 participants were censored in Safety Lead-In ,12 participants were censored in Cetuximab (US Commercial) and 15 in Cetuximab (Manufactured by BI).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813750|NCT01081041|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as duration from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. For each participant not known to have died as of the 23 October 2014 data cutoff date for the analysis, OS was censored at the date last known to be alive. In addition, any participants on Arm B who was switched from BI-manufactured cetuximab to ImClone-manufactured cetuximab was censored at the time of the switch.|Parts 1 and 2: Randomization to Date of Death from any Cause (Up to 36.3 Months)|All participants who received at least on dose of study drug. 4 participants were censored in Safety Lead-In, 17 participants were censored in Cetuximab (US Commercial) and 15 in Cetuximab (Manufactured by BI).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813751|NCT01081041|Primary|Number of Participants Who Had TEAEs; Data Analysis Cut-Off: January 23, 2013|January 23, 2013 is the date when the first participant in the BI-manufactured cetuximab treatment arm switched to US commercial cetuximab due to changes in the manufacturing process for the BI-manufactured cetuximab necessitating the need to switch participants to US commercial cetuximab. Each participant who switched treatments received at least 2 cycles of BI-manufactured cetuximab before switching. All other components of their treatment regimen remained unchanged. The number of participants who had TEAEs during combination therapy is reported. Using January 23 cut-off, data is un-confounded by lack of BI-manufactured cetuximab. TEAEs were defined as serious and other non-serious adverse events (AEs) that occurred or worsened after study treatment (regardless of causality). TEAE information for Safety Lead-in group available in Reported Adverse Event module which is summary of serious and other non-serious AEs regardless of causality.|Part 2: Baseline to end of combination therapy or date first participant switched to US commercial cetuximab (up to 18 weeks)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (cetuximab, cisplatin, carboplatin, or 5-FU) according to the treatment arm to which they were assigned or randomized.||participants|||Number
813752|NCT01081041|Primary|Number of Participants Who Had Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs); Data Analysis Cut-Off: September 27, 2013|September 27, 2013 is the date when data was last collected for the primary endpoint. Prior to this date, the manufacturing process for the BI-manufactured cetuximab was changed necessitating the need to switch participants to US commercial cetuximab. All other components of their treatment regimen remained unchanged and participants stayed in their original reporting group. Therefore, the number of participants in the BI-manufactured cetuximab treatment arm who had TEAEs includes TEAEs while participants received BI-manufactured and US-commercial cetuximab. Using September 27 cut-off, the analysis of TEAEs is confounded by the switch from BI-manufactured to US commercial cetuximab. TEAEs were defined as serious and other non-serious AEs that occurred or worsened after study treatment (regardless of causality). TEAE information for Safety Lead-In group available in Reported Adverse Events module which is summary of serious and other non-serious AEs regardless of causality.|Part 2: Baseline to end of combination therapy (up to 18 weeks)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (cetuximab, cisplatin, carboplatin, or 5-FU) according to the treatment arm to which they were assigned or randomized. Data is confounded for 9 participants in BI-manufactured cetuximab treatment arm who switched to US commercial cetuximab.||participants|||Number
813753|NCT01081132|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|C-SSRS is a semi-structured interview that captures the occurence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors during the assessment period. The interview includes definitions and suggested questions to solicit the type of information needed to determine if a suicide-related thought or behaviour occurred. The assessment is done by the nature of the responses, not by a numbered scale.|Through week 16|Safety Population consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||participants|||Number
813754|NCT01081132|Secondary|Structure Side-Effect Questionnaire (SSEQ)|The Structured Side-effect Questionnaire is a simple checklist of 17 side effects. The subject indicates whether a side effect has occurred since the last visit by marking ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on the checklist for each of the events listed.|Through week 16|Safety Population consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||participants|||Number
813755|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale for Children (BPRS-C) Total Score at Last On-Treatment Assessment|The BPRS-C characterizes childhood behavioral and emotional symptomatology. A total of 21 items are rated on a scale from 0 (not present) to 6 (extremely severe) with a total score ranging from 0 to 126. A decrease in score indicates a reduction in psychopathology.|Baseline and week 13|Safety Population consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813756|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pediatric Daytime Sleepiness Scale (PDSS) Total Score at Week 13|The Pediatric Daytime Sleepiness Scale (PDSS) is an 8 item questionnaire scored on a scale from 0 (never) to 4 (always/very often). Total scores range from 0 to 32, with increasing score reflecting greater sleepiness.|Baseline through week 13|Safety Population consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813757|NCT01081132|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) Scores at Week 13|Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) is a questionnaire composed of three indices: Global Executive Composite, Behavioral Regulation Index, and Metacognition Index. Items are rated 1 (never), 2 (sometimes), and 3 (often). The Global Executive Composite consists of 72 items with scoring ranging from 72 to 216. The Behavioral Regulation Index score is the total of 28 items and ranges from 28 to 84. The Metacognition Index score is the total of 44 items and ranges from 44 to 132. Lower scores reflect better functioning.|Baseline and week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813759|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Academic Performance Domain Score at Week 13|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813760|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Life Skills Domain Score at Week 13|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). The Life Skills Domain consists of 10-items. Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813761|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Child Self-Concept Domain Score at Week 13|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). The Child Self-Concept Domain consists of 3-items. Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813762|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Social Domain Score at Week 13|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). The Social Domain consists of 7-items. Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813763|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Risk Domain Score at Week 13|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). The Risk Domain consists of 10-items. Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813764|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Global Domain Score at Week 13|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813765|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Behavior in School Domain Score at Week 13|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813766|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Family Domain Score at Week 13|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). The Family Domain consists of 10-items. Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813767|NCT01081132|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale - Parent Report (WFIRS-P) Learning and School Domain Scores at Week 13|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). The Learning and School Domain consists of 10-items. Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813768|NCT01081132|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With an Assessment of Normal/Borderline Mentally Ill on Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) Scale at the Last On-Treatment Assessment|CGI-S assesses the severity of the subject's condition on a 7-point scale: 1 (normal, not at all ill), 2 (borderline mentally ill), 3 (mildly ill), 4 (moderately ill), 5 (markedly ill), 6 (severely ill), 7 (among the most extremely ill)|Baseline through week 13|Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
813769|NCT01081132|Primary|Change From Baseline in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-fourth Edition (ADHD-RS-IV) Total Score at Week 13|The ADHD-RS-IV consists of 18 items scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (severe symptoms) with total score ranging from 0 to 54.|Baseline through week 13|The Full Analysis Set consisted of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product. A mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) was used to analyze the observed change from the Baseline Visit scores at all post-baseline, pre-taper, on-treatment visits.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813770|NCT01081145|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale During Open-Label Phase|C-SSRS is a semi-structured interview that captures the occurence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors during the assessment period. The interview includes definitions and suggested questions to solicit the type of information needed to determine if a suicide-related thought or behaviour occurred. The assessment is done by the nature of the responses, not by a numbered scale.|13 weeks|Open-label Safety Population defined as all subjects who took at least 1 dose of any investigational product during the study.||participants|||Number
813771|NCT01081145|Secondary|HUI 2/3 Scores During the Open-Label Phase - LOCF|HUI is used to describe health status and to obtain utility scores by collecting data using one or more questionnaires in formats selected to match the specific study design criteria. Scoring ranges from 0.00 (dead) to 1.00 (perfect health). Higher scores represent better health status.|13 weeks|Open-label FAS||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813772|NCT01081145|Secondary|Change From Open-Label Baseline in WFIRS-P Global Score at Week 13 of the Open-Label Phase - LOCF|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 13|Open-label FAS||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814966|NCT01092663|Secondary|Fasting Active Plasma Glucagon Like-Peptide 1 (GLP-1)|To evaluate the effect of treatments on plasma GLP-1 concentrations.|Baseline and 12 weeks|||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813774|NCT01081145|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With Improvement on Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Scores During Open-Label Phase - LOCF|Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) consists of a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Improvement is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) on the scale.|13 weeks|Open-label FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
813775|NCT01081145|Secondary|Percentage of Responders in the Open-Label Phase - LOCF|Response is defined as a percentage decrease (improvement) from Baseline in the ADHD-RS-IV total score of >=30% and a CGI-S score of 1 or 2.|13 weeks|Open-label FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
813776|NCT01081145|Secondary|Change From Open-Label Baseline in ADHD-RS-IV Total Score at Week 13 of the Open-Label Phase - LOCF|The ADHD-RS-IV consists of 18 items scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (severe symptoms) with total score ranging from 0 to 54.|Baseline and 13 weeks|Open-label Full Analysis Set (FAS) defined as all subjects who took at least 1 dose of any investigational product during the study. The Subjects from Site 801 were excluded from the Open-label FAS.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813777|NCT01081145|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale During Double-Blind Randomized-Withdrawal Phase|C-SSRS is a semi-structured interview that captures the occurence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors during the assessment period. The interview includes definitions and suggested questions to solicit the type of information needed to determine if a suicide-related thought or behaviour occurred. The assessment is done by the nature of the responses, not by a numbered scale.|26 weeks|Randomized Safety Population defined as all subjects who were randomized and who took at least 1 dose of investigational product during the Double-blind Randomized-withdrawal Phase.||participants|||Number
813778|NCT01081145|Secondary|Health Utilities Index-2/3 (HUI 2/3) Scores During the Double-Blind Randomized-Withdrawal Phase - LOCF|HUI is used to describe health status and to obtain utility scores by collecting data using one or more questionnaires in formats selected to match the specific study design criteria. Scoring ranges from 0.00 (dead) to 1.00 (perfect health). Higher scores represent better health status.|26 weeks|Randomized FAS||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813779|NCT01081145|Secondary|Change From Double-Blind Randomized-Withdrawal Baseline in the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale - Parent Report (WFIRS-P) Global Score at Week 26 of the Double-Blind Randomized-Withdrawal Phase - LOCF|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and week 26|Randomized FAS||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813780|NCT01081145|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With an Assessment of Normal/Borderline Mentally Ill on Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) Scale During the Double-Blind Randomized-Withdrawal Phase - LOCF|CGI-S assesses the severity of the subject's condition on a 7-point scale: 1 (normal, not at all ill), 2 (borderline mentally ill), 3 (mildly ill), 4 (moderately ill), 5 (markedly ill), 6 (severely ill), 7 (among the most extremely ill)|26 weeks|Randomized FAS||percentage of subjects|||Number
813781|NCT01081145|Secondary|Change From Double-Blind Randomized-Withdrawal Baseline in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-fourth Edition (ADHD-RS-IV) Total Score at Week 26 of the Double-Blind Randomized-Withdrawal Phase - Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|The ADHD-RS-IV consists of 18 items scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (severe symptoms) with total score ranging from 0 to 54.|Baseline and week 26|Randomized FAS||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813782|NCT01081145|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure During the Double-Blind Randomized-Withdrawal Phase|Treatment failure was defined as >= 50% increase (worsening) in ADHD-RS-IV total score and a >= 2 point increase (worsening) in CGI-S score compared with the respective scores at the Double-blind Randomized-withdrawal Baseline Visit at 2 consecutive Double-blind Randomized-withdrawal Phase visits. Subjects meeting these criteria were regarded as treatment failures regardless of whether or not they were withdrawn. All subjects who discontinued the study for any reason were regarded as treatment failures for the primary analysis.|26 weeks|Randomized FAS||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813783|NCT01081145|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment Failures During the Double-Blind Randomized-Withdrawal Phase|Treatment failure was defined as >= 50% increase (worsening) in ADHD-RS-IV total score and a >= 2 point increase (worsening) in CGI-S score compared with the respective scores at the Double-blind Randomized-withdrawal Baseline Visit at 2 consecutive Double-blind Randomized-withdrawal Phase visits. Subjects meeting these criteria were regarded as treatment failures regardless of whether or not they were withdrawn. All subjects who discontinued the study for any reason were regarded as treatment failures for the primary analysis.|26 weeks|Randomized Full Analysis Set (FAS) defined as all subjects who were randomized and took at least 1 dose of investigational product during the Double-blind Randomized-withdrawal Phase. Subjects from Site 801 were excluded from the Randomized FAS.||percentage of treatment failures||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813784|NCT01081249|Secondary|Subjective Ratings of Anxiety and Trust of the Therapist|Patient will fill out ratings of subjective anxiety (STAI), mood and energy (PANAS), and trust (Likert scale) in the therapist before and after the session.|measured before drug, immediately before session, and after the session||||||
813785|NCT01081249|Secondary|Heart Rate Variability (HRV)|HRV will be measured before, during and after the therapy session.|continuously monitored from time before drug delivery to 20 minutes after session||||||
813786|NCT01081249|Secondary|Salivary Cortisol|Salivary cortisol will be measured after the treatment, and before, during and after the therapy session.|before drug, before session, and 20 minutes after session||||||
813787|NCT01081249|Primary|Verbal and Nonverbal Behavior in Therapy Session: Effects of Drug|Videotapes of 2 therapy session (PBO/OT) were reviewed by blinded raters to determine differences in two treatments. There were nine aspects analyzed using the Ethological Coding System for Interviews: eye contact, affiliation, submission, prosocial, flight, assertion, displacement, relaxation, and gesture.|videotapes of session were reviewed and scored 1-3 months after the patient completes the study|||Number of behaviors exhibited||Standard Deviation|Mean
813802|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: Mean Age|The mean age of all participants at baseline is provided.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set consisting of all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded. Data for age was available for 2,691 patients and for weight for 2,116 patients.||years||Standard Deviation|Mean
813788|NCT01081301|Secondary|SF12: Physical Health|The SF12 was developed to be a shorter yet valid alternative to the SF 36 as a measure of quality of life. The SF12 measures 7 concepts: Physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health problems, bodily pain, general healthy vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems and mental health. It produces a physical component summary score (PCS), and a mental health component summary score (MCS). Scores range from 0 (poor health) to 100 (perfect health).|Baseline, 1week, 2 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813789|NCT01081301|Secondary|Non-Death Revised Grief Experience Inventory|The Non-Death Revised Grief Experience Inventory measures grief that is not associated with the death of a person. It is a 22-item scale measuring four domains (existential concerns, depression, tension and guilt, and physical distress) of the grief experience. Responses are scored on a 6-point scale, ranging from slight disagreement to strong agreement, with higher total score indicating more grief and loss. The Non-Death Revised Grief Experience Inventory has a minimum score of 22 and a maximum score of 132.|Baseline, 1week, 2 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813790|NCT01081301|Secondary|General Self-Efficacy Score (GSES)|The scale consists of 10 items with responses from 1-4. The higher the Scores on the General Self Efficacy Scale (which has a range from 10 - 40), indicate higher participant feelings of self-efficacy. The General Self Efficacy Scale was chosen as a measure for this study because it has been found to be a reliable and valid measure in many populations.|Baseline, 1week, 2 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813791|NCT01081301|Secondary|SF12 Mental Health|The SF12 was developed to be a shorter yet valid alternative to the SF 36 as a measure of quality of life. The SF12 measures 7 concepts: Physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health problems, bodily pain, general healthy vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems and mental health. It produces a physical component summary score (PCS), and a mental health component summary score (MCS). Scores range from 0 (poor health) to 100 (perfect health).|baseline, 1 and 2 wks, 3, 6 and 12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813792|NCT01081301|Primary|Herth Hope Index|The Herth Hope Index is a 12 item (1-4 point) Likert scale that delineates three sub-scales of hope: a) temporality and future, b) positive readiness and expectancy, and c) interconnectedness. These three subscales are consistent with descriptions of hope by caregivers in the preliminary work completed by the research team. The subscales also include measures of relationships and spirituality that are considered factors that influence hope. Summative scores range from 12-48, with a higher score denoting greater hope.|Baseline, 1week, 2 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813793|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: Metastasis Staging (M0 or M1) at Baseline|The number of participants at baseline reported to be in metastasis stage M0 or M1 is summarized. M0: no distant metastasis. M1: metastasis to distant organs beyond regional lymph nodes.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data.||participants|||Number
813794|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: Bone Scan at Baseline|The number of participants at baseline with a positive or negative bone scan was summarized. Determination of bone scan status was based on the interpretation of the Investigator or radiologist.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data.||participants|||Number
813795|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: Node Staging - the Number of Participants With a N0 or N1 Stage at Baseline.|N0: tumor cells absent from regional lymph nodes. N1: regional lymph node metastasis present.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data.||participants|||Number
813796|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: Node Staging - the Number of Participants With a Positive or Negative Computerized Tomography (CT) Scan or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Test|In this case, a CT or MRI is considered positive when lymph nodes are detectable. A CT or MRI is considered negative when lymph nodes are not detectable.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data.||participants|||Number
813797|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: the Number of Participants With Tumor Stages T0, T1, T2, T3, and T4.|The number of participants with tumor stages T0, T1, T2, T3, and T4 as reported by the physician or pathologist is summarized. T0: no evidence of primary tumor. T1: histologic tumor confined to prostate; clinically unapparent tumor, undetectable by digital rectal examination or by ultrasound. T2: tumor is confined to prostrate and can be detected by digital rectal examination. T3: tumor extends through the prostate capsule but has not spread to other organs. T4: tumor has invaded adjacent structures/organs other than seminal vesicles.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data.||participants|||Number
813798|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: Tumor Staging (Positive or Negative) Via a Rectal Examination, Prostate Biopsy, Echograph, or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Test.|The number of participants at baseline who were positive or negative for tumors via a rectal examination, prostate biopsy, echograph of the hyperechogenic zones, or MRI are provided.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data.||participants|||Number
813799|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: PSA at Baseline|The median, minimum, and maximum PSA values in ng/mL at baseline are provided. The mean PSA at baseline is reported in the Primary Outcome Measure section above.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set consisting of all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded. Data for PSA at baseline was available for 2,532 patients.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
813800|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: Tumor Staging - Among Participants With a Positive Biopsy, the Number of Participants With Adenocarcinoma Tissue or Other Tissues Recorded for the Positive Biopsy.|Among those participants with a positive biopsy at baseline, the number of participants with adenocarcinoma tissue or other tissue type is summarized.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data.||participants|||Number
813801|NCT01081873|Secondary|Epidemiological Data: Race|The number of participants by race at baseline is presented.|at time 0 (Baseline)|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set consisting of all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded. Data for race was available for 2,217 patients.||participants|||Number
813804|NCT01081873|Secondary|Safety Parameter: Number of Participants Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|The number of participants experiencing a serious adverse event during the course of the study is summarized. See the Reported Adverse Event section for details.|Baseline to disease progression or 24 months, whichever came first|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set consisting of all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded.||participants|||Number
813805|NCT01081873|Primary|Treatment Patterns for Prostate Cancer Treatments: Number of Participants at Each Visit Who Took Lucrin/Lucrin Tridepot, Luteinizing Hormone-releasing Hormone (LHRH) Agonists, Anti-androgens, or Other Drug Treatments, or Who Had Surgery or Radiotherapy.|Prostate cancer treatment for all participants is summarized by the number of participants at each visit who took any Lucrin/Lucrin Tridepot, LHRH agonist, anti-androgens, or other drug treatments, or who had any type of surgery or radiotherapy (external radiation or brachytherapy).|time 0 (Baseline), month 3, and every 3 months until disease progression or up to 24 months, whichever came first|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data at each visit.||participants|||Number
813806|NCT01081873|Primary|Effectiveness Parameter for Prognosis: the Number of Participants With a Survival Prognosis of > 10 Years, 5 - 10 Years, 1 - 5 Years, 6 - 12 Months, and < 6 Months|The prognosis for participants is summarized for each visit by the number of participants at each visit with a survival prognosis of 10 years, 5 - 10 years, 1 - 5 years, 6 - 12 months, and < 6 months. Methods for determining survival prognosis were not prespecified, but were based on the judgement of each Investigator.|time 0 (Baseline), month 3, and every 3 months thereafter until disease progression or up to 24 months, whichever came first|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data at each visit.||participants|||Number
813807|NCT01081873|Primary|Effectiveness Parameter: the Number of Participants With a Complete or Partial Response, Stable Disease, or Progressive Disease Following Treatment at Each Visit|Response to treatment is summarized by the number of participants at each visit with a complete or partial response, stable disease, or progressive disease. Disease status determination was not predefined, but was based on the judgement of each Investigator.|month 3, and every 3 months until disease progression or up to 24 months, whichever came first|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data at each visit.||participants|||Number
813808|NCT01081873|Primary|Effectiveness Parameter for Screening or Recurrence of Prostate Cancer: Mean Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) at Each Visit|The mean PSA in ng/mL to screen and assess for the recurrence of prostate cancer at each visit is presented.|time 0 (Baseline), month 3, and every 3 months until disease progression or up to 24 months, whichever came first|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data at each visit.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813809|NCT01081873|Primary|Effectiveness Parameter for Staging of Prostate Cancer: Metastases at Each Visit|The number of participants with metastases that are absent, local tumor, single metastases, multiple metastases in 1 organ, and multiple metastases in multiple organs at each visit is summarized.|time 0 (Baseline), month 3, and every 3 months until disease progression or up to 24 months, whichever came first|Analysis was performed on the full analysis set (all patients for whom at least baseline data were recorded) and all available data at each visit.||participants|||Number
813810|NCT01081886|Secondary|Operative Metrics: Operative Time, Estimated Blood Loss, Skin Scarring, Knee Society Score (KSS)||Intraoperatively and 1-2 weeks postoperatively|An integrity audit found that the data for this study could not be analyzed owing to unverifiable source documentation.|||||
813811|NCT01081886|Primary|Post-operative Pain|Wong-Baker FACES Visual Analog Scale, 0 (no hurt) to 10 (hurts worst). The results represent the mean of each subject's mean pain scores over 10 days.|Postoperative (0 to 10 days)|An integrity audit found that the data for this study could not be analyzed owing to unverifiable source documentation.|||||
813812|NCT01081912|Secondary|Mean Change of the Clinic NRS Pain Intensity|The change in pain intensity as measured in the clinic by a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)|Baseline to Day 85 visit||||||
813813|NCT01081912|Primary|Mean Change in 24-hour Pain Intensity Ratings Scale (NRS).|Change in average pain intensity as measured daily by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for Pain (0-10; where 0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain imaginable) comparing HC-ER with Placebo. Lower number equals better outcome.|Baseline to Day 85 (Treatment Phase)|The primary efficacy analysis used the Intent to treat (ITT) population which included all 302 randomized subjects.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813814|NCT01081951|Secondary|Percentage Change in Tumour Size|The total tumour size was defined as the sum of the longest diameters of the target lesions. At week 9, the percentage change in tumour size was calculated as [(week 9 sum of target lesions - baseline sum of target lesions)/baseline sum of target lesions]*100 for each patient. Imputations were used for missing data where possible.|Week 9 (+/- 1 week)|FAS, but including only patients with target lesions at baseline||Percentage change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813815|NCT01081951|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from randomisation until death by any cause. Patients who had not died at the time of analysis were censored at the last date the patient was known to be alive.|Following disease progression, patients will be contacted every 12 weeks to assess survival status until the final analysis (approximately 50 months)|FAS||Participants (Number of deaths)|||Number
813816|NCT01081951|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS (based on independent central review) was defined as the time from randomisation until objective disease progression as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST) v1.1 (≥20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions from minimum, clinically significant progression in non-target lesions or the presence of a new lesion) or death (by any cause in the absence of progression).|Radiologic scans performed at weeks 9 and 18 (+/-1 week) and every 12 weeks thereafter relative to the date of randomisation until the primary analysis (approximately 20 months)|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813817|NCT01082081|Secondary|Participants Global Assessment to Response to Treatment (PGART)|PGART was measured by a score in a scale from 0-4: 0- Poor; 1- Fair 2- Good; 3- Very Good; 4- Excellent.|Baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814967|NCT01092663|Secondary|Fasting Plamsa Glucagon|To evaluate the effect of treatments on plasma glucagon concentrations.|Baseline and 12 weeks|||picograms (pg)/milliliter (ml)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813818|NCT01082081|Secondary|SPID Scores at 6 Hours|"SPID was calculated as sum of products of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120, 120-240, 240-300 and 300-360. Positive and higher scores indicate greater reduction in pain.
SPIDt = ∑PID x (timet - timet-1)
Pain Intensity was assessed at baseline and at each time-point based on a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) scale: 0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain.
If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from pain scores taken at baseline."|Every two hours from baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813819|NCT01082081|Secondary|SPID Scores at 4 Hours|"SPID was calculated as sum of products of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120, 120-240. Positive and higher scores indicate greater reduction in pain.
SPIDt = ∑PID x (timet - timet-1)
Pain Intensity was assessed at baseline and at each time-point based on a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) scale: 0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain.
If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from pain scores taken at baseline."|Every two hours from baseline to 4 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813820|NCT01082081|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) Scores at 2 Hours|"SPID was calculated as sum of products of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120. Positive and higher scores indicate greater reduction in pain.
SPIDt = ∑PID x (timet - timet-1)
Pain Intensity was assessed at baseline and at each time-point based on a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) scale: 0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain.
If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from pain scores taken at baseline."|Every two hours from baseline to 2 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813821|NCT01082081|Secondary|TOTPAR at 6 Hours|"TOTPAR was calculated as sum of products of pain relief (PR) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120, 120-240, 240-300 and 300-360. Higher score indicated greater pain relief.
TOTPARt = ∑PR x (timet – timet-1).
PR score was assessed at each of the above time-points based on a 5-point categorical scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-meaningful relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief]."|Every two hours from baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813822|NCT01082081|Secondary|TOTPAR at 4 Hours|"TOTPAR was calculated as sum of products of pain relief (PR) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120, 120-240. Higher score indicated greater pain relief.
TOTPARt = ∑PR x (timet – timet-1).
PR score was assessed at each of the above time-points based on a 5-point categorical scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-meaningful relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief]."|Every two hours from baseline to 4 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813823|NCT01082081|Secondary|Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) at 2 Hours|"TOTPAR was calculated as sum of products of pain relief (PR) at a given time-point (t) with the time-interval from that time-point to the previous time-point (t-1). The time-intervals used were 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, 60-90, 90-120. Higher score indicated greater pain relief.
TOTPARt = ∑PR x (timet – timet-1).
PR score was assessed at each of the above time-points based on a 5-point categorical scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-meaningful relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief]."|Every two hours from baseline to 2 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813824|NCT01082081|Secondary|SPRID at 4 Hours|SPRID:Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) and Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) at each post-dosing time-point. SPRID score ranged from -3.8 (least pain relief) to 26.3 (highest pain relief). SPID and TOTPAR were calculated as weighted sums of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) and Pain Relief Scores (PRS) at each measurement time, respectively. PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time-point from the baseline [pain severity score range:0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain using a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS)]. If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from baseline pain scores. PRS was assessed on 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-some relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief]|Every two hours from baseline to 4 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813835|NCT01082211|Secondary|Treatment-related Adverse Events Occurring After One Year From Completion of Re-irradiation|AEs were graded with CTCAE version 4. The overall highest grade for each patient is computed from reported adverse events definitely, probably, or possibly related to protocol treatment occurring after one year from completion of re-irradiation.|After 1 year from the end of radiation.|All eligible patients||percentage of participants|||Number
813836|NCT01082211|Secondary|Overall Survival|Failure is death due to any cause. Three-year overall survival rate was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From registration to date of death or last follow-up. Analysis occurs after all patients have been potentially followed for 3 years.|All eligible patients.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829997|NCT01235195|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Predose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose|All participants.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813825|NCT01082081|Secondary|SPRID at 2 Hours|SPRID:Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) and Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) at each post-dosing time-point. SPRID score ranged from -1.8 (least pain relief) to 12.3 (highest pain relief). SPID and TOTPAR were calculated as weighted sums of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) and Pain Relief Scores (PRS) at each measurement time, respectively. PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time-point from the baseline [pain severity score range:0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain using a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS)]. If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from baseline pain scores. PRS was assessed on 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-some relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief]|Every two hours from baseline to 2 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813826|NCT01082081|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication During 2 to 6 Hours|Percentage of participants who took rescue medication during 2 to 6 hours|Within 2 to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813827|NCT01082081|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication Within 2 Hours|Percentage of participants who received rescue medication within 2 hours|Baseline to 2 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813828|NCT01082081|Secondary|Time to Start Using Rescue Medication|Median time of use of rescue medication by participants was calculated.|Baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored.||minutes||Full Range|Median
813829|NCT01082081|Secondary|Time to Onset of Meaningful Pain Relief|Participants evaluated the time to meaningful relief by stopping a second stopwatch when they first began to experience meaningful relief.|Baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
813830|NCT01082081|Secondary|Time to Confirmed First Perceptible Pain Relief|Participants recorded the time to first perceptible relief by starting the first stopwatch at the time of dosing and stopping it when he/she experienced the first perceptible pain relief. The first perceptible pain relief was confirmed if the participant also stopped the second stopwatch indicating meaningful relief.|Baseline to 6 hours post dose|ITT population: All participants who received one study treatment and have at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants who did not achieve first perceptible pain relief during the 6 hours of the study period or took rescue medication were censored at the time 360 minutes.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
813831|NCT01082081|Primary|Sum of Pain Relief and Pain Intensity Differences From 0 to 6 Hours (SPRID 6 Hours)|SPRID:Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) and Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) at each post-dosing time-point. SPRID score ranged from -5.8 (least pain relief) to 40.3 (highest pain relief). SPID and TOTPAR were calculated as weighted sums of Pain Intensity Differences (PID) and Pain Relief Scores (PRS) at each measurement time, respectively. PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time-point from the baseline [pain severity score range:0-no pain, 1-mild pain, 2-moderate pain, 3-severe pain using a 4-point categorical Verbal Rating Scale (VRS)]. If the subject rated pain intensity as 2 or 3, pain was assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [0 (no pain), 100 (worst pain)]. VAS scores were converted into PID scores by subtracting them from baseline pain scores. PRS was assessed on 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale [0-no relief, 1-little relief, 2-some relief, 3-a lot of relief, 4-complete relief]|Every two hours from baseline to 6 hours post dose|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813832|NCT01082159|Primary|Quality of Life Changes as Determined by Short Form 12-question (SF-12) Survey Specifically Related to Physical Component Score (PCS).|The SF-12 is a validated norm-based scoring tool used to determine treatment outcomes. The PCS summary measure shows the impact of the treatment on the patients abilities to conduct their usual physical activities. Clinical relevance of PCS is established by baseline to post-treatment improvement of 2 to 3 points. Norm-based scoring is used so that each scale has the same mean (50 points) and the same standard deviation (10 points) as the general US population in 1998. Scores below 50 indicate a decline in health status, with lower scores representing worse health status. Minimally Important Difference (MID) is a measure of true clinical relevance of a difference, with suggested MID for the Physical Component Summary (PCS) being 2 to 3 points. Change from baseline to 6 months is presented, where a positive value represents the 6 month value minus the baseline value.|Baseline and Month 6|All participants at month 6 who completed all questionnaire fields necessary to analyze PCS data according to guidelines.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813833|NCT01082159|Primary|Function as Measured Subjectively by the Oswestry Disability Index Questionnaire|Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) measures permanent functional disability using questions regarding activities of daily living (ADL), specifically disturbance of ADL related to chronic back pain. Higher scores indicate a 'more limited' life. The ten topics of the ODI are rated from zero (no pain/limitation) to five (high pain/very limited physically). The worst possible score is 50 (100% disability) with the best score being zero (0% disability).Change from baseline to 6 months is presented below, where a positive value represents the baseline value minus the 6 month value.|Baseline and Month 6|All available patients at 6 months are reported below.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813834|NCT01082159|Primary|Changes in Back Pain as Measured by a 10-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS).|"The 10-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS)rates 'no pain' as zero and 'worst pain imaginable' as ten. VAS mean improvement greater than or equal to 2 points is considered clinically relevant.
The change from baseline to Month 6 is presented below where a positive value represents the baseline value minus the 6 month value."|Baseline and Month 6|All available participants who reported Month 6 outcomes are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
814968|NCT01092663|Primary|Fasting Plasma Glucose|Change from baseline in fasting plasma glucose concentrations after 12 weeks of colesevelam or colesevelam plus sitagliptin treatments.|Baseline and 12 weeks|||millimoles (mmol)/Liter (L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813837|NCT01082211|Secondary|Mastectomy-free Survival|Failure is mastectomy of the treated breast or death due to any cause. Mastectomy-free survival rate at three years was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From registration to date of mastectomy, death or last follow-up. Analysis occurs after all patients have been potentially followed for 3 years.|All eligible patients.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813838|NCT01082211|Secondary|Distant Metastasis-free Survival|Failures are appearance of ipsilateral axillary, infraclavicular, internal mammary, or supraclavicular recurrences; distant metastases confirmed radiographically and/or pathologically; or death due to any cause. Note that a distant metastases was only considered a treatment failure if accompanied by an in-breast recurrence.|From registration to date of distant metastasis, death or last follow-up. Analysis occurs after all patient have been potentially followed for 3 years.|All eligible patients.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813839|NCT01082211|Secondary|Cosmesis||After surgery prior to the start of radiation, 1 year from the end of radiation and 3 years from the end of radiation. Analysis occurs after all patients have been potentially followed for 3 years.||01/2018||||
813840|NCT01082211|Secondary|Treatment-related Adverse Events Any Time|AEs were graded with CTCAE version 4. The overall highest grade for each patient is computed from all reported adverse events definitely, probably, or possibly related to protocol treatment.|From the end of radiation to end of follow-up. Will be evaluated at the time of the primary analysis.|All eligible patients||percentage of participants|||Number
813841|NCT01082211|Secondary|Rate of Circulating Tumor Cells||Prior to the start of radiation and 3 weeks after last radiation treatment.||04/2017||||
813842|NCT01082211|Secondary|Freedom From Mastectomy|Failure is mastectomy of the treated breast. Mastectomy rate at 3 years is reported, using the cumulative incidence with death as competing risk. Mastectomy-free survival is reported in outcome measure 10.|From registration to date of mastectomy or last follow-up. Analysis occurs after all patients have been potentially followed for 3 years.|All eligible patients.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813843|NCT01082211|Secondary|In-breast Recurrence|The definition of treatment failure is histologic evidence of recurrent carcinoma, either invasive or non-invasive (except LCIS) in the ipsilateral breast. Clinical evidence of carcinoma by physical examination and/or mammograms and/or MRI will not be construed as evidence of treatment failure without biopsy proof but will be considered as suspicious for recurrence. Ipsilateral breast recurrences will be considered local (infield) if they occur within the prescription isodose volume; they will be considered peripheral if they occur between the prescription isodose volume and a volume 2 cm outside of the prescription isodose volume. Ipsilateral recurrences will be considered non-contiguous or extra field if they are beyond the peripheral volume described above.|From registration to date of recurrence or last follow-up. Analysis occurs after all patients have been potentially followed for 3 years.|All eligible patients.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813844|NCT01082211|Primary|Grade 3+ Treatment-related Skin, Fibrosis, and Breast Pain Adverse Events|To evaluate the rate of grade 3+ treatment-related skin, fibrosis, and breast pain adverse events (AEs) occurring within 1 year from the completion of reirradiation. Based on a rate of 4% for these AEs, a rate of ≥ 13% for these AEs with re-irradiation would be unacceptable. A sample size of 55 evaluable pts (eligible & started protocol treatment [tx]) will provide: 86% power to conclude an unacceptable rate of the specified AEs, if the true AE rate is at least 13% & 93% probability to not conclude an unacceptable rate of the specified AEs, if the true AE rate is 4%. If ≥ 5 pts have tx-related AEs, then tx-related AE rate considered unacceptable.|From the end of radiation to 1 year.|The first 55 eligible patients who completed treatment and achieved 1 year of follow-up.||participants|||Number
813845|NCT01082328|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Blood Phenylalanine-to-tyrosine Ratio|Phenylalanine-to-tyrosine ratio is the best indicator of dopamine availability in PKU. The change in blood phenylalanine-to-tyrosine ratio at Day 28 was calculated as blood phenylalanine-to-tyrosine ratio at Day 28 minus blood phenylalanine-to-tyrosine ratio at Baseline.|Baseline, Day 28|FAS population included all the participants with a valid Baseline blood Phe level measure and who received at least one dose of Kuvan®. ‘n’ signifies number of participants who were evaluable for specified categories at different time points.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
813846|NCT01082328|Secondary|Percentage of Early-, Late- and Partial-Responders According to Phenotype|The PKU is categorized as per phenotype into classical PKU: (blood Phe levels > 1200 mcmol/l), mild PKU (blood Phe levels 600 to 1200 mcmol/l), mild HPA (blood Phe levels 300 to 600 mcmol/l). Early responders defined as percentage of participants with at least 30 percent reduction in Phe levels within the first seven days of treatment. Late responders defined as percentage of participants with less than 30 percent reduction in Phe levels within first seven days of treatment, but at least 30 percent reduction in Phe levels within 28 +/- 1 days of treatment. Partial responders defined as percentage of participants with Phe levels reduction between 10 and 30 percent at any blood measurement within the 28 +/- 1 days of treatment.|Baseline up to Day 28 +/- 1|FAS population included all the participants with a valid Baseline blood Phe level measure and who received at least one dose of Kuvan®. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'n' signifies number of participants who were evaluable for specified categories at different time points.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813847|NCT01082328|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 30 Percent, 20 to 30 Percent, 10 to 20 Percent and Less Than (<) 10 Percent Reduction in Blood Phe Levels According to Phenylketonuria (PKU) Phenotypes|The Phenylketonuria (PKU) is categorized as per phenotype into classical PKU: (blood Phe levels greater than [>] 1200 micromole per liter [mcmol/l]), mild PKU (blood Phe levels 600 to 1200 mcmol/l), mild Hyperphenylalaninaemia (HPA) (blood Phe levels 300 to 600 mcmol/l).|Baseline up to Day 28 +/- 1|FAS population included all the participants with a valid Baseline blood Phe level measure and who received at least one dose of Kuvan®. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure. ‘n’ signifies number of participants who were evaluable for specified categories at different time points.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813873|NCT01082380|Primary|Maximum Observed Concentration in Plasma Radioactivity (Cmax)|Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||nanogram-equivalent/milliliter(ng-eq/mL)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813848|NCT01082328|Secondary|Percentage of Early-, Late-, Partial-Responders and Non-responders to Treatment With Kuvan®|Early responders defined as percentage of participants with at least 30 percent reduction in Phe levels within the first seven days of treatment. Late responders defined as percentage of participants with less than 30 percent reduction in Phe levels within first seven days of treatment, but at least 30 percent reduction in Phe levels within 28 +/- 1 days of treatment. Partial responders defined as percentage of participants with Phe levels reduction between 10 and 30 percent at any blood measurement within the 28 +/- 1 days of treatment. Non-responders defined as percentage of participants with a Phe level reduction of less than 10 percent within 28 +/- 1 days.|Baseline up to Day 28 +/- 1|FAS population included all the participants with a valid Baseline blood Phe level measure and who received at least one dose of Kuvan®.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813849|NCT01082328|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Treatment Emergent Adverse Events, Treatment Related Adverse Events and AEs Leading to Withdrawal|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in the form of signs, symptoms, abnormal laboratory findings, or diseases that emerges or worsens relative to Baseline during a clinical study with an investigational medicinal product (IMP), regardless of causal relationship and even if no IMP has been administered.|Baseline up to Day 42 +/- 3|Safety population included all the participants with a valid Baseline blood Phe level measure and who received at least one dose of Kuvan®.||Participants|||Number
813850|NCT01082328|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 30 Percent Reduction From Baseline in Blood Phenylalanine (Phe) Level|Response to treatment was defined as 30 percent reduction from Baseline in blood phenylalanine (Phe) Level during the 28 +/- 1 days.|Baseline up to Day 28 +/- 1|Full analysis set (FAS) population included all the participants with a valid Baseline blood Phe level measure and who received at least one dose of Kuvan®.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813851|NCT01082367|Secondary|Percentage of Participants P Aeruginosa-free at Termination of the Double Blind Period|Sputum/throat swab cultures were assessed.|Day 91|Participants from the ITT population, who were tested for microbiology, were included in the analysis.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813852|NCT01082367|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Free From P. Aeruginosa 28 Days After Termination of the Second Treatment Cycle|Sputum/throat swab cultures were assessed.|Day 91|Cross-over participants from the ITT population were analyzed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813853|NCT01082367|Primary|Percentage of Participants P Aeruginosa-free After Completion of the First Treatment Cycle|Sputum/throat swab cultures were assessed.|Day 29|Intent-to-treat (ITT): The ITT included all randomized participants who received at least dose of study treatment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
813854|NCT01082380|Primary|Identification and Profiling of Metabolites of [14C]PF-02341066 in Urine|In urine, metabolite abundance (profiling) was calculated by multiplying the fractional contribution of radioactive response for the peak in the Radio-HPLC chromatogram to the total radioactivity detected by the percent of administered dose recovered in the matrix. Only those metabolites that were a component of a chromatographic peak that accounted for an average of >=1% of the administered dose, were summarized. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C] PF-02341066.|Predose, 0 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 16, 16 to 24 to 36, 36 to 48 hrs and then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||Percentage of radioactive dose|||Number
813855|NCT01082380|Primary|Identification and Profiling of Metabolites of [14C]PF-02341066 in Feces|In feces, metabolite abundance (profiling) was calculated by multiplying the fractional contribution of radioactive response for the peak in the Radio-HPLC chromatogram to the total radioactivity detected by the percent of administered dose recovered in the matrix. Only those metabolites that were a component of a chromatographic peak that accounted for an average of >=1% of the administered dose, were summarized. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C] PF-02341066.|From Day 0 through pre-dose (Day1) and as passed through until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||Percentage of radioactive dose|||Number
813856|NCT01082380|Primary|Identification and Profiling of Metabolites of [14C]PF-02341066 in Plasma|Identification was done by Radio-High Performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) chromatogram. Relative abundance (profiling) of metabolites in chromatogram were determined by dividing sum of radioactive content of fractions contributing to particular peak by sum of radioactive content of all fractions constructing the radio chromatogram. Metabolites accounting for an average of greater than or equal to (>=) 10% of total recoverable radioactivity in plasma were summarized. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C] PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||Percentage of recovered radioactivity|||Number
813857|NCT01082380|Primary|Overall Cumulative Percent Recovery of Radioactivity|Overall cumulative percent of radioactive dose recovered in urine, feces and toilet tissue at specified intervals after administration of a single 250-mg (100 μCi) oral dose of [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 0 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 16, 16 to 24 to 36, 36 to 48 hrs and then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose for urine and Day 0 through pre-dose (Day1) and as passed through until up to 480 hrs post-dose for feces|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||Percent recovery of radioactivity||Standard Deviation|Mean
813858|NCT01082380|Primary|Total [14C] Data in Feces|Cumulative amount excreted in feces at specified intervals after administration of a single 250-mg (100 μCi) oral dose of [14C]PF-02341066.|From Day 0 through pre-dose (Day1) and as passed through until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||ng-eq||Standard Deviation|Mean
813859|NCT01082380|Primary|Total [14C] Data in Urine|Cumulative amount excreted in urine at specified intervals after administration of a single 250-mg (100 μCi) oral dose of [14C]PF-02341066.|Predose, 0 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 16, 16 to 24 to 36, 36 to 48 hrs and then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||ng-eq||Standard Deviation|Mean
813860|NCT01082380|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution of Radioactivity in Whole Blood (V/F)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (V/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|Data was insufficient to analyze as only 2 participants were evaluable for the parameter.||L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813861|NCT01082380|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance of Radioactivity From Whole Blood (CL/F)|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|Data was insufficient to analyze as only 2 participants were evaluable for the parameter.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813862|NCT01082380|Primary|Decay Half-life (t1/2) of Radioactivity in Whole Blood|Decay half life (t1/2) is the time measured for the concentration to decrease by one half in whole blood. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|Data was insufficient to analyze as only 2 participants were evaluable for the parameter.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
813863|NCT01082380|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)] of Radioactivity in Whole Blood|Area under the concentration curve from time zero to extrapolated infinite time [AUC (0 - ∞)] in whole blood. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|Data was insufficient to analyze as only 2 participants were evaluable for the parameter.||ng-eq*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813864|NCT01082380|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) of Radioactivity in Whole Blood|Area under the concentration time-curve from zero to the last measured concentration (AUClast) in whole blood. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||ng-eq*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813865|NCT01082380|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Concentration (Tmax) of Radioactivity in Whole Blood|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Concentration (Tmax) of Radioactivity in whole blood. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||hr||Full Range|Median
813866|NCT01082380|Primary|Maximum Observed Concentration of Radioactivity in Whole Blood (Cmax)|Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||ng-eq/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813867|NCT01082380|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (V/F) in Plasma Radioactivity|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (V/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|Data was insufficient to analyze as only 2 participants were evaluable for the parameter.||L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813868|NCT01082380|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F) of Plasma Radioactivity|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|Data was insufficient to analyze as only 2 participants were evaluable for the parameter.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813869|NCT01082380|Primary|Decay Half Life (t1/2) of Radioactivity in Plasma|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma radioactivity concentration to decrease by one half. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|Data was insufficient to analyze as only 2 participants were evaluable for the parameter.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
813870|NCT01082380|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Radioactivity Concentration Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)]|Area under the concentration curve from time zero to extrapolated infinite time [AUC (0 - ∞)] in plasma. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|Data was insufficient to analyze as only 2 participants were evaluable for the parameter.||ng-eq*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813871|NCT01082380|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Plasma Radioactivity Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the concentration time-curve from zero to the last measured plasma concentration. Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||ng-eq*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813872|NCT01082380|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Radioactivity Concentration (Tmax)|Radioactivity corresponds to 100 μCi [14C]PF-02341066.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The radioactivity parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the radioactivity parameters of primary interest.||hr||Full Range|Median
813947|NCT01083186|Secondary|Glycosylated Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) Values Throughout the Study|The HbA1c normal range was 4.3-6.1%.|Baseline, Enrollment Visit, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
813874|NCT01082380|Primary|Total Amount of Unchanged Drug Excreted in the Urine Expressed as Percent of Dose From Time Zero to Infinite Time [Ae(%)]||Predose, 0 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 16, 16 to 24 to 36, 36 to 48 hrs and then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||Percent dose of unchanged drug||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813875|NCT01082380|Primary|Total Amount of Unchanged Drug Excreted in the Urine From Time Zero to Infinite Time (Ae)|Ae = concentration of unchanged drug excreted in the urine multiplied by volume of unchanged drug excreted in urine.|Predose, 0 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 16, 16 to 24 to 36, 36 to 48 hrs and then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||mg||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813876|NCT01082380|Primary|Renal Clearance (CLr) of PF-02341066|CLr is the volume of plasma from which a substance is completely removed by the kidney in a given amount of time.|Predose, 0 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 16, 16 to 24 to 36, 36 to 48 hrs and then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813877|NCT01082380|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (V/F) in Plasma|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (V/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813878|NCT01082380|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F) of Plasma PF-02341066|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813879|NCT01082380|Primary|Plasma Decay Half Life (t1/2)|Plasma Decay half-life is the time measured for the concentration to decrease by one half.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
813880|NCT01082380|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)]|AUC (0 - ∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813881|NCT01082380|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Plasma Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the concentration time-curve from zero to the last measured plasma concentration (AUClast).|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813882|NCT01082380|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||hr||Full Range|Median
813883|NCT01082380|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 hours (hrs), 36 hrs, 48 hrs, then after every 24 hrs until up to 480 hrs post-dose|The Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
813884|NCT01082575|Primary|Number of General Care Floor Patients Exhibiting a Saturation Pattern Detection (SPD) Alert.|Number of patients on the General care Floor in which a SPD (Saturation Pattern Detection) Alert occurs. Each patient wore a sensor on their finger continuously after surgery for up to 5 days. The sensor was attached to a Nellcor N600X oximeter which measures blood oxygen level. A SPD alert detects a patient's blood oxygen level that is increasing and decreasing in a pattern that is associated with periods of no breathing.|5 days|93 evaluable patients out of 100 enrolled.||participants|||Number
813885|NCT01082575|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE) Caused by no Breathing|Number of participants with Airway Obstruction that caused the patient to stop breathing Number of participants with Cardiac arrest w/resuscitation caused by the patient not breathing|Five Nights|All enrolled patients||participants|||Number
813886|NCT01082588|Primary|Change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) General Score From Baseline to Week 12|This is a subscale of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The range for this subscale is 15-105. All items are summed to calculate the total score. Better outcomes have lower numbers and worse outcomes have higher numbers.|Baseline, week 12|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813887|NCT01082588|Primary|Change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Negative Score From Baseline to Week 12|This is a subscale of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The range for this subscale is 7-49. All items are summed to calculate the total score. Better outcomes have lower numbers and worse outcomes have higher numbers.|Baseline, week 12|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813888|NCT01082588|Primary|Change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Positive Score From Baseline to Week 12|This is a subscale of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The range for this subscale is 7-49. All items are summed to calculate the total score. Better outcomes have lower numbers and worse outcomes have higher numbers.|Baseline, week 12|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814256|NCT01078376|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity (AUC[0-inf]) for TAK-536|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity, calculated as AUC(0-inf)=AUC(0-tlqc) + Clast/λz.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||ng.hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813889|NCT01082588|Primary|Change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Total Score From Baseline to Week 12|The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) is a scale used to rate severity of schizophrenia. All items are summed to calculate the total score. The scale range is 30-210. Better outcomes have lower numbers and worse outcomes have higher numbers.|Baseline, week 12|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813890|NCT01082588|Primary|Change in MATRICS Neuropsychological Battery Composite Score From Baseline to Week 12|"The Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery measures cognitive functioning within 7 domains: speed of processing, attention/vigilance, working memory (non verbal and verbal), verbal learning, visual learning, reasoning and problem solving and social cognition.
The composite score is calculated by the MATRICS computer program, which equally weights each of the 7 domain scores. The range of composite scores is 20-80. Higher scores indicate higher levels or cognitive functioning, while lower scores indicate lower levels of cognitive functioning."|Baseline, week 12|One participant from the placebo group refused to complete the MATRICS assessment at week 12; therefore, we could only analyze 24 placebo participants for the final analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813891|NCT01082588|Primary|Change in C-Reactive Protein (CRP) From Baseline to Week 12||Baseline, week 12|||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813892|NCT01082588|Primary|Change in LDL-cholesterol Between Baseline and Week 12||Baseline, week 12|One participant from the pravastatin group and two from the placebo group had triglyceride levels above 400. Per Massachusetts General Hospital Laboratories policy, LDL is not run as a part of the complete metabolic panel (CMP) when triglycerides are above 400, and therefore could not be included in the final analysis.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
813893|NCT01082614|Secondary|Quality of Recovery Score|Measure of quality of recovery using scoring system; assessed by patient and nursing team|From end of surgery to within one month||||||
813894|NCT01082614|Primary|Length of Postoperative Hospital Stay|time in days from end of surgery to hospital discharge|within one month|||Days||Full Range|Mean
813895|NCT01082640|Secondary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve During the Dosing Interval (AUC[0-τ]) of Febuxostat at Steady State|Mean AUC during the dosing interval at steady state was estimated using a population pharmacokinetic (PK) approach, based on 2 PK samples collected prior to dosing, and 4 PK samples collected postdose.|The 2 pre-dose PK samples collected were collected at any 2 of the following visits: Months 3, 6, 9, and/or 12, at -0.25 to 0 hours. The 4 postdose PK samples were collected at Months 3, 6, and/or 9, at 0.25; 0.75 to 2.0; 2.5 to 4.0; and 5 to 12 hours.|Participants who received febuxostat and had available data for PK analysis.||hr*µg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813896|NCT01082640|Secondary|Mean Clearance (CL/F) of Febuxostat at Steady State|Mean CL/F at steady state were estimated using a population pharmacokinetic (PK) approach, based on 2 PK samples collected prior to dosing, and 4 PK samples collected postdose.|The 2 pre-dose PK samples collected were collected at any 2 of the following visits: Months 3, 6, 9, and/or 12, at -0.25 to 0 hours. The 4 postdose PK samples were collected at Months 3, 6, and/or 9, at 0.25; 0.75 to 2.0; 2.5 to 4.0; and 5 to 12 hours.|Participants who received febuxostat and had available data for PK analysis.||liters/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
813897|NCT01082640|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Serum Urate (sUA) Less Than 6 mg/dL at Month 12|Serum urate concentrations were determined using the enzymatic method as performed by the Central Laboratory.|Month 12|Full analysis set, including all patients who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication. A patient was included in the analysis only when there was at least 1 value during the double-blind treatment period. Missing data were imputed as carrying forward the last observed post-baseline value.||percentage of participants|||Number
813898|NCT01082640|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 12 in Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR)|Change from baseline to Month 12 in estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula (as calculated by the central laboratory).|Baseline and Month 12|Full analysis set with available data at Baseline. and at least 1 post-baseline value. Missing data was imputed as carrying forward the last post-baseline value.||mL/min/1.73m²||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813899|NCT01082640|Primary|Change From Baseline to Month 12 in Serum Creatinine|Renal function was assessed by measuring the change from Baseline in serum creatinine. Analyses were conducted by the Central Laboratory.|Baseline and Month 12|Full analysis set, including all patients who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication. Only patients with both a baseline value and at least 1 value during the double-blind treatment period are included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed as carrying forward the last observed post-baseline value.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
813900|NCT01082874|Secondary|Individual Secondary Outcomes at 1 Year|All cause mortality, vascular mortality, MI, nonfatal cardiac arrest, cardiac revascularization procedure, stroke, pulmonary emboli, deep venous thrombosis, amputation, peripheral arterial thrombosis, new diagnosis of cancer, diagnosis of recurrent cancer and rehospitalization for vascular reason.|1 year||||||
813901|NCT01082874|Secondary|Composite Outcome at 1 Year|All-cause mortality, nonfatal MI, and nonfatal stroke.|1 year||||||
813902|NCT01082874|Secondary|Safety Outcomes in Clonidine Trial|Stroke, clinically important hypotension, clinically important bradycardia, and congestive heart failure.|30 days||||||
813903|NCT01082874|Secondary|Safety Outcomes in ASA Trial|Stroke, congestive heart failure, life-threatening bleeding, and major bleeding.|30 days||||||
813904|NCT01082874|Secondary|Composite Outcome by ASA Stratum|Composite outcome of all-cause mortality, nonfatal MI, cardiac revascularization procedure, nonfatal pulmonary emboli, and nonfatal deep venous thrombosis.|30 days||||||
813905|NCT01082874|Secondary|Individual Secondary Outcomes|All-cause mortality, vascular mortality, MI, nonfatal cardiac arrest, cardiac revascularization procedure, pulmonary emboli, deep venous thrombosis, clinically important atrial fibrillation, amputation, peripheral arterial thrombosis, infection/sepsis, rehospitalization for vascular reasons, length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit / cardiac care unit (ICU/CCU) stay, and new acute renal failure requiring dialysis.|30 days||||||
813906|NCT01082874|Secondary|Composite of All-cause Mortality, Nonfatal MI, and Nonfatal Stroke||30 days||||||
813907|NCT01082874|Primary|All-cause Mortality and Nonfatal MI||1 year||||||
813908|NCT01082874|Primary|Composite of All-cause Mortality and Nonfatal MI||30 days|||participants|||Number
813909|NCT01082939|Primary|Number of Participants With an Overall Response|Overall (OR) is the total number of participants with any response: Complete remission (CR), is defined as > 30% lymphocytes in the bone marrow, recovery of blood counts and no clinical symptoms; Nodular partial remission (NPR), is the same as CR but with nodules; Partial remission (PR) is > 50% decrease of clinical symptoms from baseline and recovery from blood counts.|6 cycles of treatment (28 days per cycle)|||Participants|||Number
813910|NCT01082952|Secondary|Fold Increase in ASM Cells Proliferation Following Treatment With Cysteinyl Leukotrienes|The effect of Eosinophil release of Cysteinyl Leukotrienes on ASM proliferation was determined using blocking agents. This was determined using Ki-67 staining and flowcytometry.|one day|Eosinophils were collected from all the participants and used to trigger ASM proliferation.||Fold increase in ASM proliferation||Standard Deviation|Mean
813911|NCT01082952|Primary|Fold Increase in ASM Proliferation Following Incubation With Eosinophils.|Airway Smooth Muscle (ASM) cell proliferation was measured 24 hrs following their co-culture with eosinophil. This was determined using Ki-67 staining and flowcytometry. The fold increase in ASM proliferation was then determined.|one day|The number of participants for each group was determined to insure proper statistical significance when analysing the effect of isolated eosinophils on ASM cells proliferation||Fold increase in ASM cell proliferation||Standard Deviation|Mean
813912|NCT01082965|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CogState Test Battery at Hour 5 on Day 1 and at Hour 0, 5 on Day 8|Computerized test battery used to assess detection and identification task. CogState detection task: a measure of simple reaction time, provided valid assessment of psychomotor function. Participants were required to press a “YES” response key as soon as they detected an event (a card turning face up presented in center of the computer screen). The software measured the response time to detect each event. CogState identification task: measure of choice reaction time, provided a valid assessment of visual attention. Participants were required to decide “YES” or “NO” as to whether the event met a predefined and unchanging criterion (is the color of the card red?) while the event (a card turning face up) occurred in the center of the computer screen. The software measured the speed and accuracy of each response.|Baseline, 5 hours post-dose on Day 1; 1, 5 hours post-dose on Day 8|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (donepezil or placebo). Here, 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. n=participants who were evaluable at specific time points for each arm group, respectively.||log10 milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
813913|NCT01082965|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT): Immediate and Delayed Recall at Hour 5 on Day 8|RAVLT, in immediate recall (IR) list of 15 words (list A) was read aloud to participant 5 times followed by a test of spontaneous retrieval (A1 to A5). After fifth attempt a list of interference, comprising 15 words (list B) was read to participant followed by its retrieval (B1). After attempt B1 examiner asked individual to recall words from list A, without reading it again (A6). Score range: 0-105, higher scores=less impairment. Delayed recall (DR):after a 20-minute interval examiner asked individual to remember words from list A without reading this list; in recognition performance a list comprising 15 words from list A, 15 words from list B, 20 distracting words (similar to words in list A, B) was read to individual. Upon each word read aloud, individual asked to indicate if it belonged to list A, or not. Score range: 0-30, higher scores=less impairment.|Baseline, 5 hours post-dose on Day 8|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (donepezil or placebo). Here, 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. n=participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm group, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813914|NCT01082965|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CogState Continuous Paired Associate Learning (CPAL) at Hour 5 on Day 1 and at Hour 1, 5 on Day 8|CPAL: a cognitive test which assessed visual episodic learning. Participant was to learn and remember picture locations on the screen and was to tap the target on the central location to begin. As each picture was revealed, the participant was to remember where the picture was located and tap that location. After 4 pictures were placed correctly, second round started. In second round pictures remain in the same locations, but their order of presentation in the center of the screen was different to that of the first round (randomized). The same process was repeated for round 3 and round 4. The outcome was the number of errors made in correctly placing each of the 4 patterns in their location 4 times.|Baseline, 5 hours post-dose on Day 1; 1, 5 hours post-dose on Day 8|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (donepezil or placebo). Here, 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. n=participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm group, respectively.||errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
813915|NCT01082965|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Arterial Spin Label (ASL) Perfusion at Hour 4 on Day 1 and at Hour 0, 4 on Day 8|Perfusion in anterior cingulate cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, precuneus, inferior parietal cortex and other regions of interest (whole brain gray, superior, medial and inferior temporal cortex; inferior and superior prefrontal cortex; insula, amygdala, thalamus, basal ganglia, hippocampus, Landau) was measured by ASL technique. ASL is a completely noninvasive magnetic resonance method to measure regional cerebral perfusion. Results are reported for relative perfusion rate. Relative perfusion rate is defined as the absolute perfusion rate divided by the whole brain absolute perfusion rate at the same time point.|Baseline, 4 hours post-dose on Day 1, 1 minute post-dose (Hour 0), 4 hours post-dose on Day 8|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (donepezil or placebo). Here, 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
813916|NCT01082965|Primary|Change From Baseline in Posterior Cingulate Cortex Perfusion at Hour 4 on Day 8|Posterior cingulate cortex perfusion was measured by ASL. ASL is a completely noninvasive magnetic resonance method to measure regional cerebral perfusion. Results are reported for average relative perfusion rate. Average relative perfusion rate is defined as the average absolute perfusion rate divided by the whole brain absolute perfusion rate at the same time point. Average absolute perfusion rate is the average of left absolute perfusion rate and right absolute perfusion rate at the same time point.|Baseline, 4 hours post-dose on Day 8|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (donepezil or placebo). Here, 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
814969|NCT01092663|Secondary|Fasting Plasma C-peptide|To evaluate the effect of treatments on plamsa C-peptide concentrations.|Baseline and 12 weeks|||picomoles (pmol)/Liter (L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
813917|NCT01082965|Primary|Change From Baseline in Posterior Cingulate Cortex Perfusion at Hour 0 on Day 8|Posterior cingulate cortex perfusion was measured by ASL. ASL is a completely noninvasive magnetic resonance method to measure regional cerebral perfusion. Results are reported for average relative perfusion rate. Average relative perfusion rate is defined as the average absolute perfusion rate divided by the whole brain absolute perfusion rate at the same time point. Average absolute perfusion rate is the average of left absolute perfusion rate and right absolute perfusion rate at the same time point.|Baseline, 1 minute post-dose (Hour 0) on Day 8|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (donepezil or placebo). Here, 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
813918|NCT01082965|Primary|Change From Baseline in Posterior Cingulate Cortex Perfusion at Hour 4 on Day 1|Posterior cingulate cortex perfusion was measured by arterial spin labeling (ASL). ASL is a completely noninvasive magnetic resonance method to measure regional cerebral perfusion. Results are reported for average relative perfusion rate. Average relative perfusion rate is defined as the average absolute perfusion rate divided by the whole brain absolute perfusion rate at the same time point. Average absolute perfusion rate is the average of left absolute perfusion rate and right absolute perfusion rate at the same time point.|Baseline, 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (donepezil or placebo). Here, 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
813919|NCT01083121|Secondary|Physician's Global Assessment for Effectiveness|The investigator's overall assessment for effectiveness was recorded as 'Improved', 'No change', 'Aggravated,' or 'Not assessable'.|After 3-month treatment|Effectiveness evaluation was performed in 1,471 participants who received adalimumab for at least 3 months and in whom investigator's assessment at 3 months was available. No participants were available in the Psoriasis group for effectiveness evaluation.||participants|||Number
813920|NCT01083121|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. An Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) is any noxious and undesired reaction related to an experimental drug or experiment. A serious AE (SAE) is an AE that results in death, is life-threatening, results in or prolongs hospitalization, results in congenital anomaly, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, spontaneous or elective abortion, or requires intervention to prevent a serious outcome. AEs were rated for severity as either Mild: transient and easily tolerated; Moderate: causes discomfort and interrupts usual activities; or Severe: causes considerable interference with usual activities, may be incapacitating or life-threatening. AEs related to adalimumab were assessed as being either probably or possibly related by the investigator. An Unexpected ADR is an ADR for which the nature or gravity is not consistent with the applicable product information.|From Baseline until up to 70 days after the 3 month study period (total of 160 days).|Safety analysis population||participants|||Number
813921|NCT01083160|Secondary|Evaluate the Compliance and Clinical Tolerability With Adalimumab|To assess compliance, participants were asked at the Week 8 and Week 16 visits how many doses they had missed since their previous visit. Adverse events were collected throughout the study, from the time the participant signed the informed consent form until 30 days or 5 half-lives after the last dose of study drug. For additional information see the Reported Adverse Event section.|Baseline to Week 24|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study who took at least one dose of adalimumab.||Participants|||Number
813922|NCT01083160|Primary|Severity of Pain in a 100mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS 100mm)|Participants assessed the severity of their pain using a 0 to 100 mm horizontal visual analogue scale (VAS). The far left end indicated no pain (0 mm) and the far right meant the worst possible pain (100 mm). Participants drew a vertical line on the horizontal scale to indicate their current level of pain at each visit.|Baseline and Weeks 8,16 and 24|Analysis conducted in participants with results at each time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813923|NCT01083160|Primary|Tender Joint Count and Swollen Joint Count|The treating physician was to clinically assess each participant at each study visit and report the number of tender and swollen joints. The mean number of painful or swollen joints for participants evaluated at each time point are presented.|Baseline and Weeks 8,16 and 24|Analysis conducted in participants with results at each time point.||Joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
813924|NCT01083160|Primary|DAS28 (Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints)|"The DAS 28 index measures disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis and is derived from the number swollen/tender joints, laboratory tests of inflammation, and participant assessment of global health (by marking a 10 cm line from very good to very bad). Ranges were used to classify participants, with a higher score indicating worse control of disease: Remission (<= 2.6), Low Disease Activity (>2.6 to <=3.2), Moderate Disease Activity (>3.2 to <= 5.1) and High Disease Activity (>5.1). The mean change in DAS 28 score from baseline to each visit is presented."|Baseline and Weeks 8,16 and 24|Analysis conducted in participants with results at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813925|NCT01083173|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Viral Load Below 50 Copies/mL|Blood samples were obtained from participants 48 weeks after the start of Kaletra treatment, and analyzed for human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) RNA levels.|Week 48|Participants with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
813926|NCT01083173|Secondary|Mean Time to Treatment Failure|Blood samples were obtained from participants at initiation of Kaletra treatment and at follow up visits through weeks 24 and 48 and analyzed for human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) RNA levels. Treatment failure was defined as HIV RNA level > 400 copies/mL at week 24 and HIV RNA level > 50 copies/mL at week 48.|From baseline through weeks 24 and 48|Participants with available data||days||Standard Error|Mean
813927|NCT01083173|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Viral Resistance|Blood samples were obtained from participants at initiation of Kaletra treatment and follow up visits through weeks 24 and 48 and analyzed for genotypic viral resistance.|From baseline through weeks 24 and 48|Participants with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
813948|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change in Dipstick Albuminuria Grade From Baseline to Month 12|The values “-, Trace, +, ++, and +++” are taken directly from the dipstick measurements, and represent a range from none to highest albuminuria. Data presented shows the number of participants with each value both at Baseline and at Month 6.|Baseline, Month 12|Number of participants with evaluable data at both Baseline and Visit 5 (12 Months Post-Enrollment)||participants|||Number
813928|NCT01083173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) Cell Counts|Blood samples were obtained from participants at baseline, 24, and 48 weeks after the start of Kaletra treatment and analyzed for CD4 cell counts. Change in CD4 cell counts in the main surveillance population was calculated by subtracting the value at baseline from the value at 24 weeks. Change in CD4 cell counts in the long-term surveillance population was calculated by subtracting the value at baseline from the value at 48 weeks.|From baseline to Weeks 24 and 48|Participants with available data||cells/mm˄3||Standard Deviation|Mean
813929|NCT01083173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Viral Load|This variable, change from baseline in viral load, was not included in the final protocol. Therefore, these data were not calculated.|Week 24 & 48||||||
813930|NCT01083173|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Viral Load Below 400 Copies/mL|Blood samples were obtained from participants 24 weeks after the start of Kaletra treatment, and analyzed for human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) RNA levels.|Week 24|Participants with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
813931|NCT01083173|Primary|Number of Participants Who Interrupted or Discontinued Kaletra Treatment|At 24 and 48 weeks after initiation of Kaletra treatment or upon permanent discontinuation of Kaletra treatment, the investigator documented Kaletra status (on-going, permanently discontinued, lost to follow-up, etc).|Weeks 24 and 48 after initiation of Kaletra treatment or upon permanent discontinuation of Kaletra treatment|Participants with available data||participants|||Number
813932|NCT01083173|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Adverse events were recorded during the 48-week surveillance period and until 30 days following the last dose.|From the start of treatment until 30 days after the last dose, up to 52 weeks|Participants with available data||participants|||Number
813933|NCT01083186|Secondary|Homocysteine Values Throughout the Study|The homocysteine normal range 3.5-20 μmol/L.|Baseline, Enrollment Visit, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=the number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||μmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813934|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Levels at Months 6 and 12|The CRP normal range was 0-0.6 mg/dL.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813935|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change From Enrollment in High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) Levels at Months 6 and 12|The HDL-C normal range was 35-90 mg/dL.|Enrollment, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813936|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change From Enrollment in Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) Levels at Months 6 and 12|The LDL-C normal range was 0-150 mg/dL.|Enrollment, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813937|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change From Enrollment in Triglyceride Levels at Months 6 and 12|The normal range for triglycerides was 0-200 mg/dL.|Enrollment, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813938|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change From Enrollment in Total Cholesterol Levels at Months 6 and 12|The total cholesterol normal range was 130-200 mg/dL.|Enrollment, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813939|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP) Levels at Months 6 and 12|The alkaline phosphatase normal range was 40-129 IU/L.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813940|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urea Levels at Months 6 and 12|The urea normal range was 10-50 mg/dL.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813941|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine Levels at Months 6 and 12|The creatinine normal range was 0.6-1.4 mg/dL.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813942|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) Levels at Months 6 and 12|The aspartate aminotransferase normal range was 11-38 IU/L.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813943|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Months 6 and 12|The alanine aminotransferase normal range was 11-43 IU/L.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
813944|NCT01083186|Secondary|Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Values Throughout the Study|The eGFR normal range was 90-120 mL/min/1.73m^2.|Baseline, Enrollment Visit, Month 3, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
813945|NCT01083186|Secondary|Distribution of Participants by Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) Stage Throughout Study|Change in CKD stage throughout the study period was assessed by the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) levels recorded by the physicians at each study time point. Classification of eGFR into CKD stages as follows: CKD stage 2: 60-89 mL/min/1.73m^2; CKD stage 3: 30-59 mL/min/1.73m^2; CKD stage 4: 15-29 mL/min/1.73m^2; CKD stage 5: <15 mL/min/1.73/m^2. Table presents the number of participants by stage at each study visit.|Baseline, Enrollment Visit, Month 3, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-points.||participants|||Number
813946|NCT01083186|Secondary|Non-serious Adverse Events (nSAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|In order to establish the safety profile of oral paricalcitol in daily clinical practice, non-serious adverse events (nSAEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were collected during the course of the study. An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a patient, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with their treatment. If an adverse event meets any of the following criteria, it is considered a serious adverse event (SAE): results in death or is life-threatening, results in admission or prolongation of hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly or persistent or significant disability/incapacity or is an important medical event requiring medical or surgical intervention to prevent any of the outcomes listed above. Please see Adverse Events section below for more details.|From time of enrollment throughout the study up to 12 months for nSAEs. SAEs from time of enrollment throughout the study up to + 30 days after end of study.|All participants||participants|||Number
813949|NCT01083186|Secondary|Change in Dipstick Albuminuria Grade From Baseline to Month 6|The values “-, Trace, +, ++, and +++” are taken directly from the dipstick measurements, and represent a range from none to highest albuminuria. Data presented shows the number of participants with each value both at Baseline and at Month 6.|Baseline, Month 6|Number of participants with evaluable data at both Baseline and Visit 3 (6 Months Post-Enrollment)||participants|||Number
813950|NCT01083186|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serum Phosphorus Level Abnormalities|Normal serum phosphorus range was 2.7-4.6 mg/dL.|Baseline, Enrollment Visit, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-point||participants|||Number
813951|NCT01083186|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serum Calcium Level Abnormalities|Normal serum calcium range was 8.4-10.2 mg/dL.|Baseline, Enrollment Visit, Month 6, Month 12|All participants. n=number of participants with evaluable data at given time-point.||participants|||Number
813952|NCT01083186|Secondary|Distribution of Participants by Achievement of Intact Parathormone (iPTH) Levels Within the Target Range|Number of participants with iPTH levels within the target range of Kidney Disease Quality Outcome Initiative (K/DOQI) treatment guidelines at each study measurement after oral paricalcitol treatment onset. K/DOQI treatment guidelines: CKD Stage 3: 35–70 pg/mL; CKD Stage 4: 70–110 pg/mL during a 12-month period of treatment with oral paricalcitol.|Enrollment Visit, Month 3, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12|All participants. n=participants with evaluable data at given time point.||participants|||Number
813953|NCT01083186|Secondary|Mean Duration of Effect Sustainability (Months)|The effect was considered sustainable if: the participant’s intact parathormone (iPTH) value remained equal or lower to the upper limit of the target range according to Kidney Disease Quality Outcome Initiative (K/DOQI) guidelines (CKD Stage 3: ≤ 70 pg/mL; CKD Stage 4: ≤ 110 pg/mL); or iPTH levels continued to decrease 30% from the previous available measurement.|Measured from start of study, up to a maximum of 12 months|All evaluable participants||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
813954|NCT01083186|Secondary|Median Time to Attain the First Lower Intact Parathormone (iPTH) Levels|The time to attain the first lower iPTH levels was considered as the time from the date of oral paricalcitol treatment onset until the date when any of the following conditions were initially met: a 30% reduction from iPTH levels prior to treatment onset had been achieved, for patients who were still outside the target range; or iPTH levels equal or lower to the upper limit of the target range according to Kidney Disease Quality Outcome Initiative (K/DOQI) guidelines (CKD Stage 3: ≤ 70 pg/mL; CKD Stage 4: ≤ 110 pg/mL; CKD Stage 5: ≤ 300 pg/mL).|Measured from start of study, up to a maximum of 12 months|Subset of participants with baseline CKD stage ≥ 3 as well as with available iPTH values greater than the upper limit of the target range, prior to paricalcitol treatment onset. Target range for this specific analysis was defined based on patient’s CKD stage (per baseline eGFR) prior to paricalcitol treatment onset.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813955|NCT01083186|Primary|Intact Parathormone (iPTH) Changes During the Study Time-Points for Subpopulation of Renal Transplanted Participants|iPTH levels before and after oral paricalcitol treatment onset were recorded at each study visit, and corresponding changes were calculated for the subpopulation of renal transplanted participants.|Baseline, Enrollment Visit, Month 3, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12|Participants with renal transplantation history. n=number of participants with available data at given time-point.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813956|NCT01083186|Primary|Intact Parathormone (iPTH) Changes During the Study Time-Points for Overall Study Population|iPTH levels before and after oral paricalcitol treatment onset were recorded at each study visit, and corresponding changes were calculated for the overall study population.|Baseline, Enrollment Visit, Month 3, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12|Overall study population. n=number of participants with available data at given time-point.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813957|NCT01083199|Secondary|Bladder Neck Contracture (BNC) Rate||Subjects that develop BNC between the scheduled follow-up visits at 6 weeks, 6 and 12 months post-device removal||||||
813958|NCT01083199|Secondary|Incontinence Rate and I-QOL Score||Baseline, 6-week, 6 and 12-month evaluations||||||
813959|NCT01083199|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Demonstrating Functionally Adequate Anastomosis at the 1st and 2nd Device Removal Visits||7 and 14 days post-Device placement||||||
813960|NCT01083199|Secondary|Intraoperative/Postoperative Parameters||At Device placement||||||
813961|NCT01083199|Primary|Functionally Adequate Vesico-urethral Anastomosis Within 21 Days Post-procedure in Subjects With Successful Device Placement|"Device removal was first attempted at the 7-day window; if extravasation was noted, the subject returned for a second attempt at the 14-day window. If extravasation was noted at the first and second attempts, the subject could then return for a 3rd and final removal at the 21-day window.
The following defines the timeframe of each removal attempt:
7-day window (7-10 days post-implant)
14-day window (13-15 days post-implant)
21-day window (19-21 days post-implant)"|7-21 days post-Device placement|||participants with device removal by 21d|||Number
813962|NCT01083199|Primary|Successful Device Placement|Successful Device placement was defined as the establishment of a water-tight anastomosis immediately post-Device placement.|During Radical Prostatectomy|||participants|||Number
813963|NCT01083316|Secondary|Number of Participants Surviving at 5 Years||5 years||12/2018||||
813964|NCT01083316|Primary|Number of Participants Proceeding to Transplant Following Induction||2 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
813965|NCT01083316|Primary|Number of Participants Surviving at 100 Days Post Transplant||100 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
813966|NCT01083316|Primary|Number of Participants With Disease Response|Complete response: Normal serum free light chain ratio and Negative serum and urine immunofixation electrophoresis Very good partial response: Difference in serum free light chains less than 40 mg/L Partial Response: >50% Reduction in the difference in serum free light chains|One year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
813967|NCT01083472|Primary|Hernia Occurrence|Hernia occurrence will be assessed by clinical evaluation. At Month 12 and at any time during the study if hernia occurrence is clinically suspected, a magnetic resonance image (MRI) will be obtained.|Month 12 after repair|Due to early termination of the study and the low enrollment number (only 37 subjects out of the planned 200 subjects being enrolled), all planned analyses of study endpoints were not performed. The only study results obtained focused on safety. Due to the small sample size these safety results should be interpreted with caution.|||||
814970|NCT01092663|Primary|Hemoglobin A1C|Change from baseline in hemoglobin A1C after 12 weeks of colesevelam or colesevelam plus sitagliptin treatments|Baseline and 12 weeks|||percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
813968|NCT01083485|Secondary|Mean Dose (mg) of Rescue Analgesia for the Treatment Phase for Subjects Taking 20/10mg OXN PR Tablets or 20mg OXY PR Tablets|To compare the use of rescue analgesia for the 2 groups (OXN 20/10mg tablets and OXY 20mg tablets) during the double blind treatment phase. Rescue medication was given (OXY Immediate Release, 5mg capsules) if the subjects pain score on the (Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain)), was greater than or equal to 4. The value presented is the mean dose over the double blind phase.|Mean dose during the whole double blind treatment phase (2.5 days)|This is the per protocol population (PP), which is a subset of the full analysis population. The data presented is only for those subjects taking the higher dose (20/10 mg OXN or 20 mg OXY) in the study.||mg of rescue analgesia||Standard Deviation|Mean
813969|NCT01083485|Primary|Mean of 4 NRS Scores for 24 Hour Pain Intensity at Rest, Shown as Absolute Change From Baseline (i.e. a Decrease From the Baseline Value)|"The primary efficacy variable was the 24hr pain intensity score at rest, on a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst possible pain. This was assessed 1 hour after dosing on Day 1 (evening only), Day 2(morning and evening) and Day 3 (morning only). The primary efficacy end point (absolute change from baseline) was analysed on the per protocol (PP) data. The mean of these scores is shown as a value that is a mean change (a decrease in pain score) from the baseline value."|Mean of 24 hour pain intensity (absolute change from baseline)|The primary efficacy end point (absolute change from baseline) was analysed on the PP data using a mixed model repeated measures of analysis of covariance (RMANCOVA).||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813970|NCT01083576|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: AUC/D|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 hrs divided by topical dose (AUC/D) of paromomycin following administration of paromomycin alone or WR 279,396 to adults in Panama|Days 1 and 20|Adults ages >= 17 years with measurable samples.||hr/ML||Standard Deviation|Mean
813971|NCT01083576|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: Cmax/D|Maximum observed plasma concentration divide by topical dose (Cmax/D) of paromomycin following administration of paromomycin alone or WR 279,396 to adults in Panama|0, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 8.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours on both Days 1 and 20|Adults ages >= 17 years with measurable samples.||1/ML||Standard Deviation|Mean
813972|NCT01083576|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: t(1/2)|t(1/2) of paromomycin following administration of paromomycin alone or WR 279,396 to adults in Panama|0, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 8.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours on both Days 1 and 20|Adults ages >= 17 years with measurable samples. Paromomycin Alone Treatment had only 5 measureable samples on Day 1, and WR 279,396 had only 4 measureable samples on Day 20.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
813973|NCT01083576|Other Pre-specified|Serum Creatinine Levels|Blood creatinine was measured to assess possible nephrotoxicity associated with aminoglycosides|Day 1 and Day 20|All randomized subjects were included in the mITT Analysis. All subjects met criteria for the evaluable subset.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813974|NCT01083576|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: Area Under the Curve (AUC)|Area under the curve (AUC) of paromomycin following administration of paromomycin alone or WR 279,396 to adults in Panama|0, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 8.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours on both Days 1 and 20|Adults ages >= 17 years with measurable samples.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813975|NCT01083576|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: Tmax|Tmax of paromomycin following administration of paromomycin alone or WR 279,396 to adults in Panama|0, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 8.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours on both Days 1 and 20|Adults ages >= 17 years with measurable samples. Both groups had only 6 measureable samples each on Day 1.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
813976|NCT01083576|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: Cmax|Cmax of paromomycin following administration of paromomycin alone or WR 279,396 to adults in Panama|0, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 8.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours on both Days 1 and 20|Adults with measurable samples.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813977|NCT01083576|Secondary|Paromomycin Plasma Concentrations in Children|Paromomycin plasma concentrations 4 hours following administration of paromomycin alone or WR 279,396 in children|Days 1 and 20|Children ages 7 to 16||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813978|NCT01083576|Secondary|Paromomycin Plasma Concentrations in Adults|Paromomycin plasma concentrations following administration of paromomycin alone or WR 279,396 in adults|Day 4 to Day 28|Adults ages >= 17 years||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
813979|NCT01083576|Secondary|Detectable Paromomycin or Gentamicin Plasma Levels|Proportion of subjects with any detectable Paromomycin or Gentamicin plasma levels on a study day when blood for PK was collected|20 days|Adults ages >= 17 years||Participants|||Number
813980|NCT01083576|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Obtained a Modified Final Clinical Cure of All Lesions|Final cure as defined by the primary outcome measure AND and cure of all other lesions by Day 168. (100% re-epithelialization of all ulcerated lesions and resolution of all other type of lesions)|168 days|All randomized subjects were included in the mITT Analysis. All subjects met criteria for the evaluable subset.||Participants|||Number
813981|NCT01083576|Primary|Number of Participants Who Obtained Final Clinical Cure of Index Lesion|Number of participants who had initial clinical cure (100% re-epithelialization of index lesion by Day 63) OR initial clinical improvements (> 50% re-epithelialization of index lesion followed by Day 63 by 100% re-epithelialization of the index lesion on or before Day 100), AND no relapse of index lesion.|168 days|All randomized subjects were included in the mITT Analysis. All subjects met criteria for the evaluable subset.||Participants|||Number
813982|NCT01083602|Secondary|Over All Survival|Kaplan Meier estimates- median time to event|24 weeks|FAS||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813983|NCT01083602|Secondary|Time to Progression|Time from randomization until objective tumor progression; does not include deaths-- Kaplan-Meier estimates|24 weeks|FAS||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813984|NCT01083602|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from the date of first study treatment to first occurrence of documented progressive disease /relapse or death. Time from randomization until disease progression or death by Kaplan-Meier estimates|24 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813985|NCT01083602|Secondary|Time to Response (Greater Than or Equal to PR) Based on Investigator Assessment|Time to response is defined as the time from the date of first administration of study treatment to the date of first documented evidence of CR or nCR or PR (whichever status is recorded first). Patients who do not have a response of PR or better by the data cut-off date are censored.|after eight cycyles of treatment (24 weeks)|FAS||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
824834|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of All Death (Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular) and All MI||24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
813987|NCT01083602|Primary|Overall Response Rate (PR+nCR+CR)|Overall response rate=(PR+nCR+CR) CR= < 5% plasma cells in bone marrow. No confirmation on bone marrow plasma cell (additional assessment) is needed to document CR except patients with non-secretory myeloma where the bone marrow examination must be repeated after an interval of at least 6 weeks, Absence of M-protein in serum and urine by immunofixation,nCR same as CR without out Absence of M-protein in serum and urine by immunofixation,PR+ 50% reduction of serum M-protein and sofft tissue Plasmacytomas all for more than 6 weeks.|after eight cycyles of treatment (24 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813988|NCT01083641|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (OS)||Up to 4 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813989|NCT01083641|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)||Up to 4 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
813990|NCT01083641|Secondary|Clinical Benefit (CB)|Defined as complete response, partial response, or stable disease at > 16 weeks|Up to 4 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
813991|NCT01083641|Primary|Determine Tumor Objective Response (OR) Rates|OR=complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) as defined by RECIST version 1.1, where CR=disappearance of all target lesions, and PR=At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|Up to 4 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813992|NCT01083654|Primary|7-day Point-prevalence Smoking Abstinence|Self-reported abstinence (versus smoking) during the past 7 days at the 6-month follow-up time-point, verified by exhaled breath carbon monoxide (CO) measurement (< 10 parts per million CO is indicative of no smoking).|6 months|||Number of abstinent participants|||Number
813993|NCT01083667|Secondary|Appel ALS Score|an objective and timed measurement of strength and function of subjects including muscle testing, respiratory function and fine motor function, all summed together for a total value, and is measured at baseline, visit 2, visit 6 and end of study. The scale ranges from 30 in a healthy person to to 164 in a maximally impaired person; an increase in score indicates progression and is expected in disease progression.|Week 0, 6, 18, and end of study|22 subjects completed to visit 9 and had a final score for Appel Score. Reported is the mean change from Baseline to week 36||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Number
813994|NCT01083667|Primary|Mean Change in SOD1 CSF|Reported change in mean SOD1 CSf from baseline to visit 6 (week 18) and end of study for all subjects who completed the measure|baseline, Visit 6 week 18, end of study|24 subjects completed up to visit 6 and 21 subjects for final study visit. Reported is the change in SOD1 CSF from baseline to week 36.||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
813995|NCT01083680|Secondary|Compliance With the Self-injection Via the Humira®-PEN|Adalimumab will be self-administered by participants using Humira®-PEN. Analysis of compliance was not performed as outlined in the protocol.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54 and 60|Compliance data were not collected.|||||
813996|NCT01083680|Secondary|4.Mean Harvey Bradshaw Index (HBI) in Full Analysis Set (FAS) Participants Over Time|The HBI is a simplified version of the CDAI; HBI scores correlate well with CDAI scores. The HBI consists of 5 items encompassing patient-reported (well-being, symptoms)and objective (presence of abdominal mass or complications) variables. Symptom scores are based on symptom status on the previous day rather than the total of 7 days as for the CDAI. The total HBI score is the sum of the values for each of the five items. Higher HBI scores indicate greater disease activity; 0 would the lower limit with no set upper limit. Scores < 5 indicate remission, 5 – 7 indicate mild disease, 8 – 16 indicate moderate disease, and 16 indicate severe disease. Each HBI unit is equivalent to approximately 27 CDAI units. Higher scores indicate greater disease activity.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54 and 60|Effectiveness analyses included all participants with evaluable data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813997|NCT01083680|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (Excluding Serious Adverse Events)|"An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with their treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not the event is considered causally related to the use of the product.
For more details on adverse events please see the AE section below."|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54 and 60|Analysis included safety analysis population with incidence of greater than 1% during the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
813998|NCT01083680|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ) at Each Visit in FAS Participants|The Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ) is an abbreviated version of the Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) Questionnaire, a Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) assessment tool for patients with IBD. The SIBDQ utilizes 10 items concerning patient well-being during the last 2 weeks, each of which is scored on a scale of 1 (poor HRQOL) to 7 (optimum HRQOL). The individual sub scores are added to produce the total SIBDQ score. SIBDQ scores range from 10 to 70 with higher values indicating better HRQOL. Positive changes indicate reductions in disease activity.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54 and 60|Effectiveness analyses included all participants with evaluable data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
813999|NCT01083680|Primary|Percentage of Full Analysis Set (FAS) Participants in Each CDAI Disease Classification Over Time|The CDAI is a measure of clinical response and remission that was developed for use in clinical trials. The CDAI includes 8 variables encompassing both participant-reported (symptoms, general well-being) and objective (medication usage, laboratory variables, presence of abdominal mass or complications, and weight) variables. For symptoms scores, patients keep track of daily symptoms on a diary card, and the daily symptom scores are summed for the week. Each item in the CDAI is assigned a specific weight, and the weighted values of the items are totaled to produce the CDAI score. Higher CDAI scores indicate greater disease activity; there is no set upper limit. The scale for the scores is as follows: < 150 to indicate remission, 150 - 219 to define mildly active disease, 220 - 450 to define moderately active disease, and > 450 to define severely active disease.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54 and 60|Effectiveness analyses included all participants with evaluable data.||percentage of participants|||Number
814033|NCT01083758|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (Defined as Clear or Very Mild) According to the Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 5-point scale, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation.|week 8|||% of participants w/ controlled disease|||Number
814000|NCT01083680|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Each Visit|The CDAI is a measure of clinical response and remission that was developed for use in clinical trials. The CDAI includes 8 variables encompassing both patient-reported (symptoms, general well-being) and objective (medication usage, laboratory variables, presence of abdominal mass or complications, and weight) variables. For symptoms scores, patients keep track of daily symptoms on a diary card, and the daily symptom scores are summed for the week. Each item in the CDAI is assigned a specific weight, and the weighted values of the items are totaled to produce the CDAI score. Higher CDAI scores indicate greater disease activity; 0 would the lower limit with no set upper limit. The scale for the scores is as follows: < 150 to indicate remission, 150 – 219 to define mildly active disease, 220 – 450 to define moderately active disease, and > 450 to define severely active disease. Negative changes indicate reductions (improvement) in disease activity.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54 and 60|Effectiveness analyses included all participants with evaluable data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814001|NCT01083693|Secondary|C-Reactive Protein|The test for C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is a laboratory measurement for evaluation of an acute phase reactant of inflammation through the use of an ultrasensitive assay. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement.|Baseline, months 3,6,9,12|Mean (average) value is based on the number of participants included in the analysis (N =161) who completed the lab assessment at each timepoint (Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and early termination [for participants who discontinued the study early]) in each disease group.||milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814002|NCT01083693|Secondary|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate|Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is a nonspecific lab value that measures inflammation from arthritic disease. A decrease in the level indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement.|Baseline, months 3,6,9,12|Mean (average) value is based on the number of participants included in the analysis (N=161) who completed the lab assessment at each timepoint (Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and early termination [for participants who discontinued the study early]) in each disease group.||milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814003|NCT01083693|Secondary|Physician´s / Patient's Global Assessment of State of Health (GH) Measured on a Visual Analogue Scale, for RA and PsA Patients Only|Physician's and Patient's Global Assessment of State of Health was measured using a visual analogue scale with scores from 0 to 100 (higher scores indicate worse health state).|Baseline, months 3,6,9,12|Mean (average) score is based on the number of participants included in the analysis (N =121) who completed the assessment at each timepoint (Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and early termination [for participants who discontinued the study early]) in each disease group.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814004|NCT01083693|Secondary|Physician´s /Patient's Global Assessment on Disease Activity Measured on a Visual Analogue Scale, for RA and PsA Patients Only|Physician's and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PGA) are measured using a visual analogue scale with scores ranging from 0 to 100 (higher scores indicate worse disease activity).|Baseline, months 3,6,9,12|Mean (average) score is based on the number of participants included in the analysis (N=121) who completed the assessment at each timepoint (Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and early termination [for participants who discontinued the study early]) in each disease group.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814005|NCT01083693|Secondary|Changes in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index in Patients With AS: Measures Patients Fatigue, Pain (Neck, Hip, Other Joints), Tender Sensitive Body Sites, Morning Stiffness|Bath as Disease Activity Index (BASDI) measures fatigue, pain (neck, hip, other joints), tender sensitive body sites, and morning stiffness for patients suffering from AS. Scores range from 0 to 10 with higher scores representing worse disease activity.|Baseline, months 3,6,9,12|Mean (average) score is based on the number of participants included in the analysis (N=40) who completed the assessment at each timepoint (Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and early termination [for participants who discontinued the study early]).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814006|NCT01083693|Secondary|DAS28: Changes in Disease Activity Score 28 in Patients With RA and if Reasonable in PsA: Measures the no. of Swollen and Tender Joints (28 Joints), Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate, Patients Global Assessment of Disease Activity on a Visual Scale|The Disease Activity Score 28 measures disease activity based on the number of swollen and tender joints (28 joints), erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and patient's global assessment of disease activity on a visual scale. DAS28 is a unit scale from 0 (best value) to 10.0 (worst value).|Baseline,months 3,6,9,12|Mean (average) score is based on the number of participants included in the analysis (N=121) who completed the assessment at each timepoint (Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and early termination [for participants who discontinued the study early]) in each disease group.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814007|NCT01083693|Primary|EQ-5D for RA,PsA,AS, as Measure of Health Outcome. Self Reported Health Status: Measures Mobility, Self Care, Usual Activities, Pain Discomfort, Anxiety Depression|"European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) is a self-reported health outcome which measures mobility, self care, usual activities, pain discomfort, anxiety depression. An overall score is derived that measures from -0.59 (worst) to +1 (best).
In addition, health state is measured on the thermometer scale (score 0 to 100) with higher scores representing better health status."|Baseline, months 3,6,9,12|Mean (average) score is based on the number of participants included in the analysis (N=161) who completed the assessment at each timepoint (Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and early termination [for participants who discontinued the study early]) in each disease group.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814008|NCT01083693|Primary|SF-36 as Generic Measure of Health Status for RA, PsA, AS Physical Score Measures How Decrements in Physical Function Affect Day-to-day Activities Impact of Physical Impairment/Disability on QoL ,Mental Score: Impact of Mental Effect, Symptoms of Pain|Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (MOS SF-36) is generic assessment of health status that consists of 36 questions within 8 domains including Physical Functioning (PF), Role Functioning - Physical (RP), Bodily Pain (BP), General Health (GH), Vitality (VT), Social Functioning (SF), Role Functioning - Emotional (RE), Mental Health (MH) and Reported Health Transition (HT). Results from each domain are summarized and transformed into a scale ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) with the exception of HT. The score range for HT is 0 (worst) to 5 (best).|Baseline, months 3,6,9,12|Mean (average) score is based on the number of participants included in the analysis (N=161) who completed the assessment at each timepoint (Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and early termination [participants who discontinued the study early]) in each disease group. No participants in the PsA or the AS group attended an early termination visit.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814009|NCT01083693|Primary|RA and if Reasonable for PsA Patients Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index HAQ-DI|The HAQ-DI is a questionnaire that measures functional status (disability) and health-related quality of life. It measures a patient's ability to perform everyday tasks. The index consists of 20 questions regarding the function of the upper and lower extremities. These questions are summarized in 8 categories: dressing and grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene,reach, grip, activities. Each question is evaluated according to the degree of severity on a scale ranging from 0 (without any difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).|Baseline, months 3,6,9,12|Mean (average) score is based on the number of participants included in the analysis (N =121) who completed the assessment at each timepoint (Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and early termination [for participants who discontinued the study early]) in each disease group.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814010|NCT01083706|Secondary|Incidence of Grades II-IV Graft-versus-host Disease (GVHD)||6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
814011|NCT01083706|Secondary|Rate of Response by IWG Criteria|Count of participants achieving a complete or partial remission at 6 months.|6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
814012|NCT01083706|Primary|Overall Survival|Count of surviving participants at 6 months.|6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
814013|NCT01083732|Secondary|Global Assessment of Tolerability of Study Medication|The investigator was to provide a global clinical assessment of tolerability of study medication by the patient.This assessment was based on 5-point scale (good, satisfactory, not satisfactory, bad, not assessable).|Day 1 (immediately after dosing)|Treated set||Percentage of participants|||Number
814014|NCT01083732|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Changes in Laboratory and Clinical Parameters Such as Liver Enzymes and Physical Examination|"Percentage of patients with changes in laboratory and clinical parameters such as liver enzymes and physical examination.
Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Laboratory Parameters were reported."|During the treatment period, Up to 6 days|Treated set||Percentage of participants|||Number
814015|NCT01083732|Secondary|Global Assessment of Tolerability of Study Medication- Taste Assessment|The investigator was to provide a global clinical assessment of tolerability including patient taste assessment.This assessment was based on 6-point scale (Very good, good, satisfactory, bad, very bad, missing). The taste assessment was only provided when the patient was old enough to evaluate the taste.|Day 1 (immediately after dosing)|Treated set||Percentage of participants|||Number
814016|NCT01083732|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Any Adverse Events During the Treatment Period|Percentage of patients with any adverse events during the treatment period. For patients with multiple dosing, all AEs with an onset date after the date of first dose until the end of trial treatment including 3 days after the last treatment were assigned to the on-treatment period. For patients with single dosing, all AEs with an onset during the 48-h-period after study medication intake were assigned to the on-treatment period.|Up to 6 days|Treated set||Percentage of participants|||Number
814017|NCT01083732|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Incidence of Any Bleeding Events (Major, Clinically Relevant Non-major (CRNM) and Minor) During the Treatment Period.|Major: Fatal bleeding, Clinically overt bleeding associated with decrease in haemoglobin of at least 2 g/dL in 24-h-period,bleeding that was retroperitoneal,pulmonary,intracranial,or otherwise involved the central nervous system,bleeding that required surgical intervention in an operating suite. CRNM: Overt bleeding for which a blood product was administered & which was not directly attributable to the patient’s underlying medical condition,bleeding that required medical or surgical intervention to restore haemostasis,other than in an operating suite. Minor: Any overt or macroscopic evidence of bleeding that did not fulfil the criteria for either major bleeding or CRNM bleeding. For multiple dosing,all events with an onset date after the date of first dose until the end of trial treatment including 3 days after the last treatment and for single dosing,all events with an onset during the 48-h-period after study medication intake were assigned to the on-treatment period.|Up to 6 days|Treated set||Percentage of participants|||Number
814018|NCT01083732|Primary|AUC0-tz (Area Under the Concentration Time Curve of the Free Dabigatran in Plasma Over the Time Interval 0 up to the Last Quantifiable Data Point)|"AUC0-tz (area under the concentration time curve of the free dabigatran in plasma over the time interval 0 up to the last quantifiable data point).
Endpoint can only be calculated for single dose patients. For multiple dose patients the time points do not allow calculation of AUC0-tz (no profile, only one measurement after selected doses, refer to primary outcome no. 1 and 2)."|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate|Pharmacokinetic set (PKS): This patient set included all treated patients who provided at least one pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) observation and had no important protocol violations (PVs) with respect to the statistical analysis of PK or PD endpoints.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814019|NCT01083732|Primary|Tmax (Time From Dosing to Maximum Measured Concentration of Free Dabigatran in Plasma)|"tmax (time from dosing to maximum measured concentration of free dabigatran in plasma).
Endpoint can only be calculated for single dose patients. For multiple dose patients the time points do not allow calculation of tmax (no profile, only one measurement after selected doses, refer to primary outcome no. 1 and 2)."|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate|Pharmacokinetic set (PKS): This patient set included all treated patients who provided at least one pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) observation and had no important protocol violations (PVs) with respect to the statistical analysis of PK or PD endpoints.||hours||Full Range|Median
814020|NCT01083732|Primary|Cmax (Maximum Measured Concentration of Free Dabigatran in Plasma)|Cmax (maximum measured concentration of free dabigatran in plasma). Endpoint can only be calculated for single dose patients. For multiple dose patients the time points do not allow calculation of Cmax (no profile, only one measurement after selected doses, refer to primary outcome no. 1 and 2).|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate|Pharmacokinetic set (PKS): This patient set included all treated patients who provided at least one pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) observation and had no important protocol violations (PVs) with respect to the statistical analysis of PK or PD endpoints.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814034|NCT01083758|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (Defined as Clear or Very Mild) According to the Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 5-point scale, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation.|week 4|||% of participants w/ controlled disease|||Number
814021|NCT01083732|Primary|AUC0-tz (Area Under the Concentration Time Curve of the Total Dabigatran in Plasma Over the Time Interval 0 up to the Last Quantifiable Data Point)|"AUC0-tz (area under the concentration time curve of the total dabigatran in plasma over the time interval 0 up to the last quantifiable data point).
Endpoint can only be calculated for single dose patients. For multiple dose patients the time points do not allow calculation of AUC0-tz (no profile, only one measurement after selected doses, refer to primary outcome no. 1 and 2)."|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate|Pharmacokinetic set (PKS): This patient set included all treated patients who provided at least one pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) observation and had no important protocol violations (PVs) with respect to the statistical analysis of PK or PD endpoints.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814022|NCT01083732|Primary|Tmax (Time From Dosing to Maximum Measured Concentration of Total Dabigatran in Plasma)|"tmax (time from dosing to maximum measured concentration of total dabigatran in plasma).
Endpoint can only be calculated for single dose patients. For multiple dose patients the time points do not allow calculation of tmax (no profile, only one measurement after selected doses, refer to primary outcome no. 1 and 2)."|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate|Pharmacokinetic set (PKS): This patient set included all treated patients who provided at least one pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) observation and had no important protocol violations (PVs) with respect to the statistical analysis of PK or PD endpoints.||hours||Full Range|Median
814023|NCT01083732|Primary|Cmax (Maximum Measured Concentration of Total Dabigatran in Plasma)|Cmax (maximum measured concentration of total dabigatran in plasma). Endpoint can only be calculated for single dose patients. For multiple dose patients the time points do not allow calculation of Cmax (no profile, only one measurement after selected doses, refer to primary outcome no. 1 and 2).|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate|Pharmacokinetic set (PKS): This patient set included all treated patients who provided at least one pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) observation and had no important protocol violations (PVs) with respect to the statistical analysis of PK or PD endpoints.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814024|NCT01083732|Primary|Central Measurement of Diluted Thrombin Time (dTT) at Predose and 2 and 10 h After Intake of Study Medication.|Central measurement of dTT (diluted thrombin time) at predose and 2 and 10 h after intake of study medication. The Standard Deviation presented below are actually the % coefficient of variation|at predose and 2 and 10 h after intake of study medication.|PKS (evaluable cases)||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814025|NCT01083732|Primary|Central Measurement of Ecarin Clotting Time (ECT) at Predose and 2 and 10 h After Intake of Study Medication.|Central measurement of ECT (ecarin clotting time) at predose and 2 and 10 h after intake of study medication. ECT was not planned to be measured in the multiple dose group. The Standard Deviation presented below are actually the % coefficient of variation|at predose and 2 and 10 h after intake of study medication.|PKS (evaluable cases)||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814026|NCT01083732|Primary|Central Measurement of Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) at Predose and 2 and 10 h After Intake of Study Medication.|Central measurement of aPTT (activated partial thromboplastin time) at predose and 2 and 10 h after intake of study medication. For multiple dose patients only local measurements were planned. The Standard Deviation presented below is actually the % coefficient of variation.|at predose and 2 and 10 h after intake of study medication.|Pharmacokinetic set (PKS): This patient set included all treated patients who provided at least one pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) observation and had no important protocol violations (PVs) with respect to the statistical analysis of PK or PD endpoints.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814027|NCT01083732|Primary|Plasma Concentration of Metabolite BIBR 1087 SE|Plasma concentration of metabolite BIBR 1087 SE|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate and at 2 h, 50 h, and 72 h after multiple dose administration of dabigatran etexilate|Pharmacokinetic set (PKS): This patient set included all treated patients who provided at least one pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) observation and had no important protocol violations (PVs) with respect to the statistical analysis of PK or PD endpoints.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814028|NCT01083732|Primary|Plasma Concentration of Metabolite BIBR 951 BS|Plasma concentration of metabolite BIBR 951 BS|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate and at 2 h, 50 h, and 72 h after multiple dose administration of dabigatran etexilate|PKS (evaluable cases)||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814029|NCT01083732|Primary|Plasma Concentration of Unchanged Dabigatran Etexilate (BIBR 1048 BS)|"Plasma concentration of unchanged dabigatran etexilate (BIBR 1048 BS).
Some values are NA because Values were below the limit of quantification. Not calculated as reliable estimation can only be performed when at least 2/3 of the data are available and thus the Geometric Mean (gMean) and Geometric Coefficient of Variation (gCV) is not calculated according to internal rules."|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate and at 2 h, 50 h, and 72 h after multiple dose administration of dabigatran etexilate|PKS (evaluable cases)||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814030|NCT01083732|Primary|Plasma Concentration of Free Dabigatran (BIBR 953 ZW).|Plasma concentration of free dabigatran (BIBR 953 ZW)|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate and at 2 h, 50 h, and 72 h after multiple dose administration of dabigatran etexilate|PKS (evaluable cases)||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814031|NCT01083732|Primary|Plasma Concentration of Total Dabigatran (SUM BIBR 953 ZW)|Plasma concentration of total dabigatran (SUM BIBR 953 ZW)|At 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 10 h after single administration of dabigatran etexilate and at 2 h, 50 h, and 72 h after multiple dose administration of dabigatran etexilate|"Pharmacokinetic set (PKS): This patient set included all treated patients who provided at least one pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) observation and had no important protocol violations (PVs) with respect to the statistical analysis of PK or PD endpoints.
PKS (evaluable cases)"||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814032|NCT01083758|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (Defined as Clear or Very Mild) According to the Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 5-point scale, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation.|End of treatment|||% of participants w/ controlled disease|||Number
814035|NCT01083758|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (Defined as Clear or Very Mild) According to the Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 5-point scale, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation. The scale scores are based on the following; 1 = clear, 2 = very mild, 3 = mild, 4 = moderate, 5 = severe.|week 2|||% of participants w/ controlled disease|||Number
814036|NCT01083758|Secondary|Percentage Change in Total Sign Score (TSS; Sum of Severity Scores for Each Individual Clinical Sign,Redness, Thickness, and Scaliness) From Baseline to Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Investigator assessment of scalp psoriasis lesions in terms of the three clinical signs: redness, thickness, and scaliness. Each clinical sign, a single score (ranging from 0 to 4), reflecting the average severity of all psoriatic lesions on the scalp, were determined. The sum of the three scores (redness, thickness, and scaliness) constitutes the Total Sign Score of the psoriasis on scalp, ranging from 0 (best possible outcome) to 12 points (worst possible outcome).|Baseline and end of treatment (up to 8 weeks)|||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
814037|NCT01083758|Secondary|Percentage Change in Total Sign Score (TSS; Sum of Severity Scores for Each Individual Clinical Sign, Redness, Thickness, and Scaliness) From Baseline to Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Investigator assessment of scalp psoriasis lesions in terms of the three clinical signs: redness, thickness, and scaliness. Each clinical sign, a single score (ranging from 0 to 4), reflecting the average severity of all psoriatic lesions on the scalp, were determined. The sum of the three scores (redness, thickness, and scaliness) constitutes the Total Sign Score of the psoriasis on scalp, ranging from 0 (best possible outcome) to 12 points (worst possible outcome).|Baseline and week 8|||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
814038|NCT01083758|Secondary|Percentage Change in Total Sign Score (TSS; Sum of Severity Scores for Each Individual Clinical Sign, Redness, Thickness, and Scaliness) From Baseline to Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Investigator assessment of scalp psoriasis lesions in terms of the three clinical signs: redness, thickness, and scaliness. Each clinical sign, a single score (ranging from 0 to 4), reflecting the average severity of all psoriatic lesions on the scalp, were determined. The sum of the three scores (redness, thickness, and scaliness) constitutes the Total Sign Score of the psoriasis on scalp, ranging from 0 (best possible outcome) to 12 points (worst possible outcome).|Baseline and week 4|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
814039|NCT01083758|Secondary|Percentage Change in Total Sign Score (TSS; Sum of Severity Scores for Each Individual Clinical Sign, Redness, Thickness, and Scaliness) From Baseline to Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Investigator assessment of scalp psoriasis lesions in terms of the three clinical signs: redness, thickness, and scaliness. Each clinical sign, a single score(ranging from 0 to 4), reflecting the average severity of all psoriatic lesions on the scalp, were determined. The sum of the three scores (redness, thickness, and scaliness) constitutes the Total Sign Score of the psoriasis on scalp, ranging from 0 (best possible outcome) to 12 points (worst possible outcome).|week 2|||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
814040|NCT01083758|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (i.e., Clear or Almost Clear) According to the Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of Disease Severity at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 6-point scale IGA, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation.|End of treatment|||percentage of participants|||Number
814041|NCT01083758|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (i.e., Clear or Almost Clear) According to the Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of Disease Severity at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 6-point scale IGA, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation.|week 8|||percentage of participants|||Number
814042|NCT01083758|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (i.e., Clear or Almost Clear) According to the Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of Disease Severity at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 6-point scale IGA, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation.|week 4|||percentage of participants|||Number
814043|NCT01083758|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (i.e., Clear or Almost Clear) According to the Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of Disease Severity at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and End of Treatment.|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 6-point scale IGA, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation. The IGA scale: 1 = clear, 2 = almost clear, 3 = mild, 4 = moderate, 5 = severe, and 6 = very severe.|week 2|||percentage of participants|||Number
814044|NCT01083758|Secondary|Change in Plasma PTH From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4 and Week 8|Change in plasma PTH (parathyroid hormone) from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4 and Week 8|Baseline and week 8|||ng/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
814045|NCT01083758|Primary|Change in Urinary Calcium:Creatinine Ratio From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4, Week 8 and, End of Treatment.|Change in urinary calcium:creatinine ratio from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4, Week 8 and, end of treatment.|Baseline and end of treatment (up to 8 weeks)|||mmol/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
814046|NCT01083758|Primary|Change in Urinary Calcium:Creatinine Ratio From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4, Week 8 and, End of Treatment.|Change in urinary calcium:creatinine ratio from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4, Week 8 and, end of treatment.|Baseline and week 8|||mmol/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
814047|NCT01083758|Primary|Change in Urinary Calcium:Creatinine Ratio From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4, Week 8 and, End of Treatment.|Change in urinary calcium:creatinine ratio from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4, Week 8 and, end of treatment.|Baseline and week 4|||mmol/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
814048|NCT01083758|Primary|Change in 24-hour Urinary Calcium Excretion From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4, Week 8, and End of Treatment.|Change in 24-hour urinary calcium excretion from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4, Week 8, and end of treatment.|Baseline and end of treatment (up to 8 weeks)|||mmol/24h||Standard Deviation|Mean
814049|NCT01083758|Primary|Change in 24-hour Urinary Calcium Excretion From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4, Week 8, and End of Treatment.|Change in 24-hour urinary calcium excretion from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4, Week 8, and end of treatment.|Baseline and week 8|||mmol/24h||Standard Deviation|Mean
814050|NCT01083758|Primary|Change in 24-hour Urinary Calcium Excretion From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4, Week 8, and End of Treatment.|Change in 24-hour urinary calcium excretion from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4, Week 8, and end of treatment.|Baseline and week 4|||mmol/24h||Standard Deviation|Mean
814054|NCT01083758|Primary|Subjects With Serum Cortisol Concentration of ≤18 mcg/dl at 30 and 60 Minutes After ACTH-challenge at Week 8.|Adrenal function can be measured by injecting a synthetic subunit of ACTH (Adrenocorticotropic hormone), and then measure the production of cortisol by the adrenal glands in response to this at 30 and 60 minutes after the injection.|week 8|Per protocol population||participants|||Number
814055|NCT01083758|Primary|Subjects With Serum Cortisol Concentration of ≤18 mcg/dl at 30 and 60 Minutes After ACTHchallenge at Week 4.|Adrenal function can be measured by injecting a synthetic subunit of ACTH Adrenocorticotropic hormone), and then measure the production of cortisol by the adrenal glands in response to this at 30 and 60 minutes after the injection.|week 4|Per Protocol Population||participants|||Number
814056|NCT01083758|Primary|Subjects With Serum Cortisol Concentration of ≤18 mcg/dl at 30 Minutes After ACTH-challenge at Week 8|Adrenal function can be measured by injecting a synthetic subunit of ACTH Adrenocorticotropic hormone), and then measure the production of cortisol by the adrenal glands in response to this at 30 minutes after the injection.|week 8|Per Protocol Population||participants|||Number
814057|NCT01083758|Secondary|Change in Plasma PTH From Baseline (SV2) to Week 4 and Week 8|Change in plasma PTH (parathyroid hormone) from Baseline (SV2 = screening visit 2) to Week 4 and Week 8|Baseline and week 4|||ng/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
814058|NCT01083758|Primary|Subjects With Serum Cortisol Concentration of ≤18 mcg/dl at 30 Minutes After ACTH-challenge at Week 4|Adrenal function can be measured by injecting a synthetic subunit of ACTH (Adrenocorticotropic hormone), and then measure the production of cortisol by the adrenal glands in response to this at 30 minutes after the injection.|Week 4|Per Protocol Population (based on the Full Analysis Set, but excluding subjects who did not apply any study medication, meet the inclusion criterion concerning adrenal function at baseline, or provide any results for the ACTH-challenge test after receiving study treatment)||participants|||Number
814059|NCT01083758|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs)|Adverse events for which the investigator did not describe the causal relationship to IP as not related|Throughout trial, up to 8 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
814060|NCT01083771|Secondary|To Assess Changes in the Body After 8 Weeks of Following a Mediterranean Diet|Post diet waist circumference|8 weeks|||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
814061|NCT01083771|Primary|Changes in the Blood Chemistry (Fasting Triglycerides) After 8 Weeks of Following a Mediterranean Diet|Based on overall percentage change at baseline versus post diet|eight weeks|||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
814062|NCT01083810|Secondary|Change in Absolute CD4 Cell Count [CD4+ Cells/µL]|The evolution of participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts after starting the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing regimen was to be assessed by measuring the number of CD4+ cells at baseline and each subsequent study visit. Study visits were to occur at approximately Weeks 4, 12, 24, followed by 12-week intervals up to Week 144 in therapy-naive participants and up to Week 240 in the pre-treated and non-B subtype groups. CD4+ cell count results are reported as the change from Baseline in the absolute number of CD4+ cells per microliter.|Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24, followed by 12-week intervals up to 144/240 weeks|All participants with CD4+ measurements at Baseline and any subsequent time point are included.||CD4+ cells/µL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814063|NCT01083810|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HIV-1 RNA >500 Copies/ml|All 3 protocols recommended that HIV viral load tests be performed at Baseline and each study visit. Study visits were to occur at approximately Weeks 4, 12, and 24, followed by 12-week intervals up to Week 144 in therapy-naive participants and up to Week 240 in the pre-treated and non-B subtype groups. The percentage of participants with more than 500 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL at each time point is presented by subgroup.|Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24, followed by 12-week intervals up to 144/240 weeks|All participants with HIV-1 RNA measurements at Baseline and any subsequent time point are presented, including those who discontinued due to virologic failure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814064|NCT01083810|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HIV-1 RNA 200 to <500 Copies/ml|All 3 protocols recommended that HIV viral load tests be performed at Baseline and each study visit. Study visits were to occur at approximately Weeks 4, 12, and 24, followed by 12-week intervals up to Week 144 in therapy-naive participants and up to Week 240 in the pre-treated and non-B subtype groups. The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA levels of 200 to less than 500 copies/mL at each time point is presented by subgroup.|Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24, followed by 12-week intervals up to 144/240 weeks|All participants with HIV-1 RNA measurements at Baseline and any subsequent time point are presented, including those who discontinued due to virologic failure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814065|NCT01083810|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HIV-1 RNA 50 to <200 Copies/ml|All 3 protocols recommended that HIV viral load tests be performed at Baseline and each study visit. Study visits were to occur at approximately Weeks 4, 12, and 24, followed by 12-week intervals up to Week 144 in therapy-naive participants and up to Week 240 in the pre-treated and non-B subtype groups. The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA levels of 50 to less than 200 copies/mL at each time point is presented by subgroup.|Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24, followed by 12-week intervals up to 144/240 weeks|All participants with HIV-1 RNA measurements at Baseline and any subsequent time point are presented, including those who discontinued due to virologic failure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814066|NCT01083810|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HIV-1 RNA <50 Copies/ml|All 3 protocols recommended that HIV viral load tests be performed at Baseline and each study visit. Study visits were to occur at approximately Weeks 4, 12, and 24, followed by 12-week intervals up to Week 144 in therapy-naive participants and up to Week 240 in the pre-treated and non-B subtype groups. The percentage of participants with HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) less than 50 copies/mL at each time point is presented by subgroup.|Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24, followed by 12-week intervals up to 144/240 weeks|All participants with HIV-1 RNA measurements at Baseline and any subsequent time point are presented, including those who discontinued due to virologic failure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814084|NCT01084005|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Have a HbA1c Lowering by at Least 0.5% at Week 24|The percentage of patients with an HbA1c reduction of ≥0.5% at week 24 from baseline was calculated for each treatment arm. If a patient did not have an HbA1c value at week 24 they were considered a failure, so HbA1c reduction less than 0.5%|Baseline and week 24|FAS (NCF)||percentage of patients|||Number
814085|NCT01084005|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7.0% at Week 24|The percentage of patients with an HbA1c value below 7% at week 24 were calculated for each treatment arm. If a patient did not have an HbA1c value at week 24 they were considered a failure, so HbA1c above 7%.|Baseline and week 24|FAS (NCF)||percentage of patients|||Number
814067|NCT01083810|Primary|Number of Patients With Virus That Develop Mutations Conferring Resistance to Lopinavir/Ritonavir, NRTIs or NNRTIs|Standard genotypic resistance assays were developed for HIV-1 viral load levels greater than 500 to 1000 copies per milliliter (mL). All 3 protocols recommended this testing be done at Baseline prior to lopinavir/ritonavir therapy and (if possible) in cases of virologic failure. The exact timing varied and depended on whether there was an adequate viral load and physician clinical judgment. Participants with resistance to lopinavir/ritonavir, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) at Baseline and follow-up are reported.|Baseline and at any timepoint where testing is possible|All participants with resistance testing at baseline and follow-up are presented.||Participants|||Number
814068|NCT01083849|Secondary|Mean Calcium-Phosphate Product Levels by Visit||Months 0, 3, 6, 9, and 12|The Pre-Dialysis and Dialysis groups were split into subgroups. Secondary endpoint investigations were done for the 733 participants in these Pre-Dialysis or Dialysis subgroups; 26 out of the 759 participants had a missing subgroup allocation.||mmol²/l²||Standard Deviation|Mean
814069|NCT01083849|Secondary|Mean Intact Parathormone (iPTH) Levels by Visit||Months 0, 3, 6, 9, and 12|The Pre-Dialysis and Dialysis groups were split into subgroups. Secondary endpoint investigations were done for the 733 participants in these Pre-Dialysis or Dialysis subgroups; 26 out of the 759 participants had a missing subgroup allocation.||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
814070|NCT01083849|Primary|Time to Achieve Target Range of Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) Levels Within the Target Range After 12 Months|Participants achieved Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) levels within the target range of Kidney Disease Quality Outcome Initiative (K/DOQI) treatment guidelines (Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD), stage 3: 35 to 70 pg/mL; CKD stage 4: 70 to 110 pg/mL; CKD stage 5: 150 to 300 pg/mL).|Up to 12 months|Participants with a determined chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814071|NCT01083849|Secondary|Mean Duration of Disability by Visit||Months 0, 3, 6, 9, and 11|The Pre-Dialysis and Dialysis groups were split into subgroups. Secondary endpoint investigations were done for the 733 participants in these Pre-Dialysis or Dialysis subgroups; 26 out of the 759 participants had a missing subgroup allocation.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814072|NCT01083849|Secondary|Mean Duration of Hospitalization by Visit||Months 0, 3, 6, 9, and 11|The Pre-Dialysis and Dialysis groups were split into subgroups. Secondary endpoint investigations were done for the 733 participants in these Pre-Dialysis or Dialysis subgroups; 26 out of the 759 participants had a missing subgroup allocation.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814073|NCT01083849|Secondary|Number of Participants With Elevated Calcium-Phosphorus Product|Elevated Calcium-Phosphorus Product was defined as having a calcium-phosphate product level greater than 65 mg^2/dL^2, in one measurement. Serum calcium-phosphorus product was measured at every study visit.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, and 12|The Pre-Dialysis and Dialysis groups were split into subgroups. Secondary endpoint investigations were done for the 733 participants in these Pre-Dialysis or Dialysis subgroups; 26 out of the 759 participants had a missing subgroup allocation.||participants|||Number
814074|NCT01083849|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hyperphosphatemia|Hyperphosphatemia was defined as having a serum phosphate level greater than 6.5 mg/dL (2.10 mmol/L), in one measurement. Serum phosphate was measured at every study visit.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, and 12|The Pre-Dialysis and Dialysis groups were split into subgroups. Secondary endpoint investigations were done for the 733 participants in these Pre-Dialysis or Dialysis subgroups; 26 out of the 759 participants had a missing subgroup allocation.||participants|||Number
814075|NCT01083849|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hypercalcemia|Hypercalcemia was defined as having a serum calcium level greater than 11.2 mg/dL (2.79 mmol/L), in one measurement. Serum calcium was measured at every study visit.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, and 12|The Pre-Dialysis and Dialysis groups were split into subgroups. Secondary endpoint investigations were done for the 733 participants in these Pre-Dialysis or Dialysis subgroups; 26 out of the 759 participants had a missing subgroup allocation.||participants|||Number
814076|NCT01083849|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) Levels Within the Target Range After 12 Months|Participants achieved Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) levels within the target range of Kidney Disease Quality Outcome Initiative (K/DOQI) treatment guidelines (Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD), stage 3: 35 to 70 pg/mL; CKD stage 4: 70 to 110 pg/mL; CKD stage 5: 150 to 300 pg/mL).|Up to 12 Months|Participants with a determined chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage||percentage of participants|||Number
814077|NCT01083901|Secondary|Change in Lower Body Strength|Strength was measured using the one-repetition maximum method. Lower body strength was a composite of knee flexion, knee extension, and leg press strength.|16 weeks|||lbs||Standard Error|Mean
814078|NCT01083901|Secondary|Changes in Upper Body Strength.|Strength was measured using the one-repetition maximum method. Upper body strength was a composite of bench press, overhead press, seated row, and lateral pull-down strength.|16 weeks|||lbs||Standard Error|Mean
814079|NCT01083901|Secondary|Change in Total Body Fat Mass|Change from baseline to 16 weeks in total body fat mass.|16 weeks|||kg||Standard Error|Mean
814080|NCT01083901|Primary|Change in Total Body Fat-free Mass|change from baseline to 16 weeks in fat-free mass measured by DXA (Hologic Discovery W, version 12.6)|16 weeks|All participants with baseline and 16 week data were included in the analysis (i.e., intention-to-treat).||kg||Standard Error|Mean
814081|NCT01083979|Secondary|Bladder Appearance|The secondary objective to assess treatment efficacy will compare the number of bladder ulcers pre-treatment to the number of ulcers visualized at 12 weeks, the end of the study.|Baseline to 12 Weeks|||Ulcers|||Number
814082|NCT01083979|Primary|Change in Symptom and Problem Severity|The primary objective is to determine the impact of 4 weekly bladder instillations of liposomes on symptoms in one patient with ulcerative interstitial cystitis (IC). The primary endpoint will be assessed at the end of the study, 8 weeks after the last bladder instillation, and will be measured by the O'Leary-Sant IC Symptom and Problem Indices (ICSI-PI) questionnaire. The ICSI is composed of 4 questions that address the occurrence of IC symptoms, specifically urinary urgency, frequency, nocturia, and bladder pain. Scores range from 0 (Not at All) to 5 (Almost Always). The IC Problem Indices questionnaire is also composed of 4 questions. Each question asks the patient to indicate how big a problem each of the 4 symptoms are to them. Scores range from 0 (No Problem) to 4 (Big Problem). Responses to all 8 questions are added together to create a total ICSI-PI score. The total ICSI-PI scores ranges from 0 to 36. A lower score indicates less IC symptoms and/or related problem|Baseline to 12 weeks|||units on a scale|||Number
814086|NCT01084005|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7.0% at Week 24|The percentage of patients with an HbA1c value below 7% at week 24 was calculated for each treatment arm. If a patient did not have an HbA1c value at week 24 they were considered a failure, so HbA1c above 7%. Only patients with baseline HbA1c >= 7%|Baseline and week 24|FAS with baseline HbA1c >=7% and non-completers considered as failure imputation (NCF)||percentage of patients|||Number
814087|NCT01084005|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline to Week 18|This change from baseline reflects the Week 18 FPG minus the baseline FPG. Means are treatment-adjusted for baseline HbA1c, baseline FPG and prior use of insulin, week repeated within patient and week by treatment interaction.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (OC)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
814088|NCT01084005|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline to Week 12|This change from baseline reflects the Week 12 FPG minus the baseline FPG. Means are treatment-adjusted for baseline HbA1c, baseline FPG and prior use of insulin, week repeated within patient and week by treatment interaction.|Baseline and week 12|FAS (OC)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
814089|NCT01084005|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline to Week 6|This change from baseline reflects the Week 6 FPG minus the baseline FPG. Means are treatment-adjusted for baseline HbA1c, baseline FPG and prior use of insulin, week repeated within patient and week by treatment interaction.|Baseline and week 6|FAS Observed cases (OC)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
814090|NCT01084005|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline to Week 24|This change from baseline reflects the Week 24 FPG minus the baseline FPG. Means are treatment-adjusted for baseline HbA1c, baseline FPG and prior use of insulin.|Baseline and week 24|FAS (LOCF)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
814091|NCT01084005|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline to Week 18|HbA1c is measured as a percentage. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 18 HbA1c percent minus the baseline HbA1c percent. Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and prior use of insulin.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF)||Percent||Standard Error|Mean
814092|NCT01084005|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline to Week 12|HbA1c is measured as a percentage. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 12 HbA1c percent minus the baseline HbA1c percent. Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and prior use of insulin.|Baseline and week 12|FAS (LOCF)||Percent||Standard Error|Mean
814093|NCT01084005|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline to Week 6|HbA1c is measured as a percentage. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 6 HbA1c percent minus the baseline HbA1c percent. Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and prior use of insulin.|Baseline and week 6|FAS (LOCF)||Percent||Standard Error|Mean
814094|NCT01084005|Primary|HbA1c Change From Baseline to Week 24|HbA1c is measured as a percentage. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 24 HbA1c percent minus the baseline HbA1c percent. Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and prior use of insulin.|Baseline and week 24|FAS consisting of all randomised patients who were treated with at least one dose of study drug, had a baseline, and at least 1 on-treatment HbA1c measurement. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||Percent||Standard Error|Mean
814095|NCT01084083|Secondary|Primary Clinical Response Rate|Primary clinical response rate is defined as the proportion of patients with complete response or partial response at their primary sites after induction therapy. Response status for the primary site was classified by clinical examination using endoscopy. If, however, the clinical response status of the primary was unclear based on endoscopy, then the CT or MRI (required at the end of induction) was used to determine status of the primary. If clinical and radiological evaluation of the primary was unclear, a biopsy was considered at the discretion of the treating physician.|assessed within 14 days after delivery of the third cycle of induction therapy|eligible and treated patients||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814096|NCT01084083|Secondary|24-months Overall Survival|OS was defined as the time from registration to death, or censored at last date known alive. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the overall survival rate at 24 months.|assessed within 14 days after delivery of the third cycle of induction therapy, and 8 weeks and 6 months after completion of concurrent therapy, then every 6 months until progression or until 3 years from study entry|eligible and treated patients||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814097|NCT01084083|Primary|24-month Progression-free Survival|24-month progression-free survival is defined as the proportion of patients who were alive and progression-free at 24 months post registration. The primary study population for this endpoint is patients who were confirmed post-induction clinical complete response (CR) at their primary sites and subsequently received 5400 cGy radiation therapy to their primary sites.|assessed within 14 days after delivery of the third cycle of induction therapy, and 8 weeks and 6 months after completion of concurrent therapy, then every 6 months until progression or until 3 years from study entry|patients who were confirmed post-induction clinical complete response (CR) at their primary sites and subsequently received 5400 cGy radiation therapy to their primary sites||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814098|NCT01084135|Secondary|Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Preschool (BRIEF-P)|The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Preschool Version (BRIEF-P) is a parent report measure of executive function behaviors in children in their home setting. It yields an overall score (Global Executive Composite, GEC) that is based on its five clinical scales. Raw scores range from 63 to 189. Higher scores suggest that an individual’s executive function skills are more problematic. In this study, the change between each subject’s raw score at Baseline and the Final Visit was computed for the Global Executive Composite. A decline in raw scores from Baseline to the Final Visit indicates improvement.|Baseline and Final (Week 20) visit|All subjects who completed the 20 week period were included in analysis except for 1 subjects whose form was completed incorrectly.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814099|NCT01084135|Primary|Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition (Survey Interview Form)|The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition (Survey Interview Form) is a measure of adaptive behavior in children, adolescents and adults. It yields an overall standard score (Adaptive Behavior Composite, ABC) and age standard scores in four domains. ABC scores have a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 (range = 20 to 160). Higher scores suggest a higher level of adaptive functioning. In this study, the change between each subject’s ABC at Baseline and the Final Visit was computed. A rise in standard scores from Baseline to the Final Visit indicates improvement.|Baseline & Study termination (Week 20)|All subjects who completed the 20 week period were included in analysis except for 2 subjects whose form was completed incorrectly.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814100|NCT01084148|Secondary|Local Tolerance of V0034 CR 01B After Long-term Use and Patient's Benefit and Acceptability of V0034 CR 01B||133 days||||||
814101|NCT01084148|Primary|Treatment Response of Xerosis|"Treatment response rate of uremic xerosis on 5 test areas (right lower leg, left lower leg, forearm having no arterio-venous shunt, chest, dorsum of the neck), using a defined 5-point severity scale:
0 = smooth skin
= patches of fine, powdery scales
= diffuse ashy appearance with many fine scales
= moderate scaling with beginning cracks
= intense scaling, moderate cracks Treatment response was defined as a score of 0 or 1 on all test areas at the end of Period I, and a reduction of at least 2 grades on at least one test area (primary efficacy parameter, Period I)."|28 days|One patient in V0034 CR 01B Vehicle arm randomized but not treated||participants|||Number
814102|NCT01084174|Secondary|Between Arm Change in IgE From Baseline to 12 Months|IgE levels are measured in kilo units of Antibody per liter (kUa/L) and were collected at baseline and at 12 months|Baseline and 12 months|||kUa/L||Full Range|Median
814103|NCT01084174|Secondary|Between Arm Change in IgE From Baseline to 6 Months|Serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels are measured in kilo units of Antibody per liter (kUa/L) and were collected at baseline and at 6 months|Baseline and 6 months|||kUa/L||Full Range|Median
814104|NCT01084174|Secondary|Between Arm Change in IgE From Baseline to End of Dose Build-up (up to 16 Weeks)||Baseline to end of dose build-up (up to 16 weeks)|||kUa/L||Full Range|Mean
814105|NCT01084174|Secondary|Between Arm Change in IgG4 From Baseline to 12 Months|IgG4 levels are measured in milligrams of Antibody per liter (mga/L) and were collected at baseline and at 12 months|Baseline and 12 months|One participant in the Active SLIT/Placebo OIT arm and 4 participants in the Active OIT/Placebo SLIT arm discontinued prior to month 12.||mga/L||Full Range|Median
814106|NCT01084174|Secondary|Between Arm Change in IgG4 From Baseline to 6 Months|IgG4 levels are measured in milligrams of Antibody per liter (mga/L) and were collected at baseline and at 6 months|Baseline and 6 months|One participant in the Active sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)/Placebo oral immunotherapy (OIT) arm and 4 participants in the Active OIT/Placebo SLIT arm discontinued prior to month 6.||mga/L||Full Range|Median
814107|NCT01084174|Secondary|Between Arm Change in IgG4 From Baseline to End of Dose Build-up (up to 16 Weeks)|Serum immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) levels are measured in milligrams of Antibody per liter (mga/L) and were collected at baseline and at the end of dose build-up (up to 16 weeks)|Baseline and end of dose build-up (up to 16 weeks)|||mga/L||Full Range|Median
814108|NCT01084174|Primary|Number of Participants With Induced Peanut Desensitization at 12 Months|Peanut desensitization was defined as a greater than 10-fold increase in oral food challenge (OFC) threshold after 12 months of therapy.|12 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
814109|NCT01084239|Secondary|Rate of ED Discharge|Direct discharge from Emergency Department|Duration of stay in the hospital during the initial visit|||participants|||Number
814110|NCT01084239|Secondary|Cost-effectiveness|Total cost during index hospitalization|Duration of stay in the hospital during the initial visit|||US Dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
814111|NCT01084239|Secondary|MACE|Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events, All though these events are called MACE they do not qualify as adverse or serious adverse events. As these events are expected in some individuals in this population. Only MACE that occured within 72 hours after hospital discharge were considered serious adverse events in this trial. There were no such events.|72 hours after discharge up to 28 days after enrollment.|||events|||Number
814112|NCT01084239|Secondary|Healthcare Utilization|Number of patients with diagnostic testing (CCTA, ETT, SPECT, stress echocardiography, and invasive coronary angiography)|Duration of stay in the hospital during the initial visit|||participants|||Number
814113|NCT01084239|Secondary|Time to Diagnosis||Time from ED arrival to first positive test (all tests except Echocardiography Rest and including troponins ) if discharge diagnosis is ACS, otherwise time to performance of last test (all tests except Echocardiography Rest and including troponins ).|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
814114|NCT01084239|Primary|Length of Hospital Stay||Duration of stay in the hospital during the initial visit|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
814115|NCT01084265|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|AE: any new untoward medical occurrence/worsening of pre-existing medical condition, whether or not related to study drug. SAE: any AE that resulted in death; was life threatening; resulted in persistent/significant disability/incapacity; resulted in/prolonged an existing in-patient hospitalization; was a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or was a medically important condition.|Day 14|Safety analysis set included all participants who received investigational drug for at least one time.||participants|||Number
814116|NCT01084265|Secondary|Number of Participants With Confirmed Pregnancies: Biochemical Pregnancies and Clinical Pregnancies|Biochemical pregnancy was defined as a pregnancy diagnosed only by the detection of hCG in serum or urine and that does not develop into a clinical pregnancy. Clinical pregnancy was defined as a pregnancy diagnosed by ultrasonographic visualization of one or more gestational sacs or definitive clinical signs of pregnancy. It includes ectopic pregnancy.|Day 14|Per protocol set included all participants who completely met all the requirements of clinical trial protocol.||participants|||Number
814117|NCT01084265|Secondary|Average Change of E2 Level in Participants Per Day up to Day 14|The average change was calculated by assessing the E2 levels on 4 timepoints until day 14 (day 1, day 5, day 10, day 14 [hCG administration day]).|up to Day 14|Per protocol set included all participants who completely met all the requirements of clinical trial protocol.||pg/mL per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
814118|NCT01084265|Secondary|Mean Number of Follicles With the Diameter Above 17 mm on the Day of hCG Injection in Treatment Cycle||Day 14|Per protocol set included all participants who completely met all the requirements of clinical trial protocol.||follicles||Standard Deviation|Mean
814119|NCT01084265|Secondary|Mean Number of Follicles With Diameter in the Range of 10-17 mm on the Day of hCG Injection in Treatment Cycle||Day 14|Per protocol set included all participants who completely met all the requirements of clinical trial protocol.||follicles||Standard Deviation|Mean
814120|NCT01084265|Primary|Number of Participants Who Refused to Take hCG Injection|Participant refused to take hCG injection for the concern of OHSS or the participant was pregnant.|Day 14|Per protocol set included all participants who completely met all the requirements of clinical trial protocol.||participants|||Number
814121|NCT01084265|Primary|Number of Participants With E2 Level in Blood Serum Above 109 pg/mL on the Day of hCG Injection||Day 14|Per protocol set included all participants who completely met all the requirements of clinical trial protocol.||participants|||Number
837710|NCT01307631|Secondary|Duration of Overall Survival|Estimated by using Kaplan-Meier analysis.|Up to 3 years|Overall survival of all patients on study.||months||Full Range|Median
814123|NCT01084265|Primary|Number of Participants Who Met Both Index 1 and Index 2|The three indices were defined as; Index 1: diameter of at least one follicle is greater than 17 mm; Index 2: serum oestradiol (E2) level in blood serum above 109 picogram/ milliliter (pg/mL) on human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) injection day; Index 3: participant refuses to take hCG injection for the concern of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) or participant is pregnant. A subset of these participants met Index 3.|Day 14|Per protocol set included all participants who completely met all the requirements of clinical trial protocol.||participants|||Number
814139|NCT01077921|Secondary|Overall Change of Diastolic Blood Pressure Levels|Overall change of Diastolic Blood Pressure levels from baseline to post intervention (Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14) Placebo vs. Propranolol treated|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||mmHg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
814140|NCT01077921|Secondary|Overall Change of Systolic Blood Pressure Levels|Overall change of Systolic Blood Pressure levels from baseline to post intervention (Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14) Placebo vs. Propranolol treated|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||mmHg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
814141|NCT01077921|Secondary|Overall Change of Oxygen Saturation (02Sat) Levels|Overall change of Oxygen Saturation (02Sat) levels from baseline to post intervention( Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14) Placebo vs. Propranolol treated|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||percentage of oxygen saturation||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
814142|NCT01077921|Secondary|Overall Change of Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH) Levels|Overall change of LDH levels from baseline to post intervention( Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14) Placebo vs. Propranolol treated|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||IU/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
814143|NCT01077921|Secondary|Overall Change of Hematocrit (Hct) Levels|Overall change of Hematocrit (Hct) levels from baseline to post intervention( Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14) Placebo vs. Propranolol treated|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||percentage of red blood cells||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
814144|NCT01077921|Secondary|Overall Change of Hemoglobin (Hgb) Levels|Overall change of Hemoglobin (Hgb) levels from baseline to post intervention( Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14) Placebo vs. Propranolol treated|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||gm/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
814145|NCT01077921|Secondary|Overall Change of Plasma Levels of sVCAM-1|Biomarkers of Endothelial Activation and Dysfunction: Overall change of Plasma levels of sVCAM-1 measured in triplicate on plasma samples using commercially available ELISA kits from baseline to post intervention ( Week 0 to 6 or week 8 to 14)|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
814146|NCT01077921|Secondary|Overall Change of Plasma Levels of sICAM-1|Biomarkers of Endothelial Activation and Dysfunction: Overall change of Plasma levels of sICAM-1 measured in triplicate on plasma samples using commercially available ELISA kits from baseline to post intervention ( Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14)|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
814147|NCT01077921|Secondary|Overall Change of Plasma Levels of sP-selectin|Biomarkers of Endothelial Activation and Dysfunction: Overall change of Plasma levels of sP-selectin measured in triplicate on plasma samples using commercially available ELISA kits from baseline to post intervention ( Week 0 to 6 and weeks 8 to 14).|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
814148|NCT01077921|Primary|SS RBC Adhesion (Epi -3d/cm2- vs. Sham) by Treatment|The stickiness of SS RBC will be evaluated by a well-established in vitro assay of adhesion of SS RBCs to cultured endothelial cells using a flow chamber. Overall change of adhesion from baseline to post intervention( Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14) in unstimulated cells (Sham treated) vs. Stimulated Red Blood Cells (Epi-treated) at 3 dyne/cm2|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||Percentage of total RBC||Standard Deviation|Mean
814149|NCT01077921|Primary|SS RBC Adhesion (Epi -2d/cm2- vs. Sham) by Treatment|The stickiness of SS RBC will be evaluated by a well-established in vitro assay of adhesion of SS RBCs to cultured endothelial cells using a flow chamber. Overall change of adhesion from baseline to post intervention( Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14) in unstimulated cells (Sham treated) vs. Stimulated Red Blood Cells (Epi-treated) at 2 dyne/cm2|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||Percentage of total RBC||Standard Deviation|Mean
814150|NCT01077921|Secondary|Overall Change of Plasma Levels of sE-selectin|Biomarkers of Endothelial Activation and Dysfunction: Overall change of Plasma levels of sE-selectin measured in triplicate on plasma samples using commercially available ELISA kits from baseline to post intervention ( Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14).|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815074|NCT01096680|Secondary|Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) Scores|PVT assesses behavioral alertness. Subjects were required to respond to a visual stimulus by pressing a button on a mechanical device and the reaction time was measured. Higher scores indicate attention lapses.|Over a period of 12 hours|FAS||msec||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814151|NCT01077921|Primary|SS RBC Adhesion (Epi -1d/cm2- vs. Sham) by Treatment|The stickiness of SS RBC will be evaluated by a well-established in vitro assay of adhesion of SS RBCs to cultured endothelial cells using a flow chamber. Overall change of adhesion from baseline to post intervention( Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14) in unstimulated cells (Sham treated) vs. Stimulated Red Blood Cells (Epi-treated) at 1 dyne/cm2|Week 0 to 6 and week 8 to 14|||Percentage of total RBC||Standard Deviation|Mean
814152|NCT01077960|Secondary|Oral Glucose Tolerance Testing - Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Fasting Glucose|Oral glucose testing|baseline to 12 weeks|The analysis population reported here comprised the subjects who received at least one dose of study drug||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814153|NCT01077960|Secondary|Oral Glucose Tolerance Testing - Change From Baseline to Week 12 in 120 Minute Glucose|Oral glucose testing|baseline to 12 weeks|The analysis population reported here comprised the subjects who received at least one dose of study drug||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814154|NCT01077960|Secondary|Oral Glucose Tolerance Testing - Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Fasting Insulin|Oral glucose tolerance testing|baseline to 12 weeks|The analysis population reported here comprised the subjects who received at least one dose of study drug||mcIU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814155|NCT01077960|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Insulin-like Growth Factor I|Circulating levels of IGF-I|baseline to 12 weeks|The analysis population reported here comprised the subjects who received at least one dose of study drug||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814156|NCT01077960|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Waist Circumference|Measured by anthropometry|baseline to 12 weeks|The analysis population reported here comprised the subjects who received at least one dose of study drug||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814157|NCT01077960|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Trunk Fat as Assessed by Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DXA) Scan||baseline to 12 weeks|The analysis population reported here comprised the subjects who received at least one dose of study drug||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
814158|NCT01077973|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Complete Relief|Complete relief was defined as a PRR of 4. PRR was assessed on a 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale where 0=No relief to 4=Complete relief.|1, 2, 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814159|NCT01077973|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Treatment Failure|Percentage of participants who withdrew from the study due to lack of efficacy or received rescue medication.|0 to 3 hours|Data was not analyzed as there were no treatment failures observed and no participant received rescue medication in the study.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814160|NCT01077973|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure|Median time of dropping out of the participants from the study due to lack of efficacy or received rescue medication, whichever came first.|0 to 3 hours|Data was not analyzed as there were no treatment failures observed and no participant received rescue medication in the study.||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814161|NCT01077973|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Confirmed First Perceptible Relief|"Percentage of participants with first perceptible relief evaluated by stopping a stopwatch labeled 'first perceptible relief' at the moment the participant first began to experience any relief. Stopwatch was active up to 3 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered. First perceptible relief was considered confirmed by meaningful relief if the participant achieved both first perceptible and meaningful relief by either depressing the second stopwatch or by indicating that his/her first perceptible relief was also meaningful."|0.5, 1, 2, 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814162|NCT01077973|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Meaningful Relief|Percentage of participants with meaningful relief evaluated by stopping a second stopwatch labeled ‘meaningful relief' at the moment the participant first began to experience meaningful relief. It was also considered achieved if the participant stated “meaningful relief” at the time the first stopwatch was depressed. Stopwatch was active up to 3 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered.|0.5, 1, 2, 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814163|NCT01077973|Secondary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Relief Rating and Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID)|SPRID: time-weighted sum of PRID over 2 and 3 hours. SPRID score range was -2(worst) to 14(best) for SPRID 0-2 and -3 (worst) to 21 (best) for SPRID 0-3. PRID: sum of PID and PRR at each time point. Total score range for PRID: -1=worst to 7=best. PID: baseline pain severity score minus pain severity score at a given time point (score range 0=none to 3=severe; baseline score range 2=moderately severe to 3=severe). Total score range for PID: -1(worst) to 3(best), PRR: assessed on 5-point pain relief rating scale (0=No relief to 4=Complete relief).|0 to 2, 0 to 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814164|NCT01077973|Secondary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Relief Rating (TOTPAR)|TOTPAR: time-weighted sum of PRR over 2 and 3 hours. TOTPAR score range was 0 (worst) to 8 (best) for TOTPAR 0-2 and 0 (worst) to 12 (best) for TOTPAR 0-3. PRR was assessed on a 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale wherein 0=No relief to 4=Complete relief.|0 to 2, 0 to 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814165|NCT01077973|Secondary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID)|SPID: time-weighted sum of PID over 2 and 3 hours. SPID score range was -2(worst) to 6 (best) for SPID 0-2 and -3 (worst) to 9 (best) for SPID 0-3. PID: baseline pain severity score minus pain severity score at a given time point (score range 0=none to 3=severe; baseline score range 2=moderately severe to 3=severe). Total score range for PID: -1(worst) to 3 (best).|0 to 2, 0 to 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814179|NCT01078090|Secondary|Patients Global Assessment of Disease Activity Over Time|Participants indicated their global assessment of disease activity over the last 7 days on a visual analog scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (best) to 10 (worst) cm; lower scores indicate better patient status.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814166|NCT01077973|Secondary|Sum of Pain Relief Rating and Pain Intensity Difference (PRID)|PRID was sum of PID and PRR at each post-dosing time point. The overall possible score range, for PRID was -1 (worst) to 7 (best). PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time point [pain severity score range 0 (none) to 3 (severe)] from the baseline score [Baseline pain severity score range 2 (moderately severe) to 3 (severe)]. Total possible score range for PID: -1 (worst) to 3 (best). PRR was assessed on 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale (0=No relief to 4=Complete relief).|1, 2, 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814167|NCT01077973|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID)|PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time point [pain severity score range 0 (none) to 3 (severe)] from the baseline score [Baseline pain severity score range 2 (moderately severe) to 3 (severe)]. Total possible score range for PID: -1 (worst) to 3 (best).|1, 2, 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814168|NCT01077973|Secondary|Pain Relief Rating (PRR)|PRR was assessed on a 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale wherein 0=No relief to 4=Complete relief.|1, 2, 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814169|NCT01077973|Secondary|Time to Confirmed First Perceptible Relief|"Participants evaluated the time to first perceptible relief by stopping a stopwatch labeled 'first perceptible relief' at the moment the participant first began to experience any relief. Stopwatch was active up to 3 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered. First perceptible relief was considered confirmed by meaningful relief if the participant achieved both first perceptible and meaningful relief by either depressing the second stopwatch or by indicating that his/her first perceptible relief was also meaningful."|0 to 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814170|NCT01077973|Secondary|Time to Onset of Meaningful Relief: Remaining Comparisons|Participants evaluated the time to meaningful relief by stopping a second stopwatch labeled ‘meaningful relief' at the moment the participant first began to experience meaningful relief. It was also considered achieved if the participant stated “meaningful relief” at the time the first stopwatch was depressed. Stopwatch was active up to 3 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered.|0 to 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814171|NCT01077973|Primary|Time to Onset of Meaningful Relief for Ibuprofen Sodium Versus Ibuprofen (Motrin IB) Tablet|Participants evaluated the time to meaningful relief by stopping a second stopwatch labeled ‘meaningful relief' at the moment the participant first began to experience meaningful relief. It was also considered achieved if the participant stated “meaningful relief” at the time the first stopwatch was depressed. Stopwatch was active up to 3 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered.|0 to 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814172|NCT01077973|Primary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Relief Rating and Pain Intensity Difference From 0-3 Hours (SPRID 0-3) for Ibuprofen Sodium Versus Placebo Tablet|SPRID:time-weighted sum of pain relief rating combined with pain intensity difference (PRID) over 3 hours. SPRID score range:-3 (worst) to 21 (best) for SPRID 0-3. PRID: sum of pain intensity differences (PID) and pain relief rating(PRR) at each time point. PRID score range: -1=worst to 7=best. PID: baseline pain severity score minus pain severity score at a given time point (score range 0=none to 3=severe; baseline score range 2=moderately severe to 3=severe). Total score range for PID: -1(worst) to 3 (best). PRR:assessed on 5-point pain relief rating scale (0=No relief to 4=Complete relief).|0 to 3 hours|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814173|NCT01078090|Secondary|Percentage of Participants on Concomitant Rheumatoid Arthritis and Pain Relief/Anti-inflammatory Medication||Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
814174|NCT01078090|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With In-patient Hospitalization|The percentage of participants with in-patient hospitalization in the prior 6 months. Baseline data includes in-patient hospitalizations that occurred within the prior 12 months.|Baseline and Months 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|Full analysis set participants who were employed and with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||percentage of participants|||Number
814175|NCT01078090|Secondary|Number of Days Missed From Work Due to Rheumatoid Arthritis|Participants reported the number of days they had missed from work in the prior 6 months due to rheumatoid arthritis. The Baseline measurement includes data for the prior 12 months.|Baseline and Months 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|Full analysis set participants who were employed and with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814176|NCT01078090|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Impairment in Daily Activities|Participants were asked to report how many days of impairment in daily activities they had experienced in the last 4 weeks.|Baseline and Months 6, 18, 24, and 30|Full analysis set (FAS) participants with available data at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
814177|NCT01078090|Secondary|Participants Assessment of Fatigue Over Time|Participants indicated their level of fatigue over the last 7 days on a visual analog scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (best) to 10 (worst) cm; lower scores indicate better patient status.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814178|NCT01078090|Secondary|Participants Assessment of Pain Over Time|Participants indicated their level of pain over the last 7 days on a visual analog scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (best) to 10 (worst) cm; lower scores indicate better patient status.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814180|NCT01078090|Secondary|Hannover Functional Questionnaire (FFbH) Over Time|A self-administered patient questionnaire used to assess patient function based on 18 questions. The numerically coded responses to the questions are added to provide a total patient score. The FFbH was calculated from this patient score by the following formula: FFbH = (patient score x 100) ÷ 2 (number of valid responses). The resulting FFbH score reflects the degree of remaining functional capacity where 0% indicates maximal impairment and 100% indicates maximal functional capacity.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814181|NCT01078090|Secondary|Swollen Joint Count (SJC) Over Time|Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||swollen joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
814182|NCT01078090|Secondary|Tender Joint Count (TJC) Over Time|Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||tender joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
814183|NCT01078090|Secondary|C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Levels Over Time|C-reactive protein (CRP) was measured from blood samples as a marker for inflammation. Higher levels are indicative of more inflammation. Normal concentration in healthy human serum is usually lower than 10 mg/L, slightly increasing with age.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
814184|NCT01078090|Secondary|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) Over Time|Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) indirectly measures how much inflammation is in the body. A higher ESR is indicative of increased inflammation.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||mm/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
814185|NCT01078090|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Low, Moderate and High Disease Activity|"Low disease activity is defined as a DAS28 score ≤ 3.2; Moderate disease activity as a DAS28 >3.2 to ≤5.1; High disease activity as a DAS28 >5.1.
The Disease Activity Score (DAS28) is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity calculated from the 28 tender joint count, 28 swollen joint count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the patient's assessment of global disease activity (measured on a visual analog scale [VAS] from 0 to 10 cm). Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10; higher scores indicate more disease activity."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|Full analysis set (FAS) participants with available data at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
814186|NCT01078090|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Significant Therapeutic Response|"Significant therapeutic response was determined by DAS28 critical difference (Dcrit). A Dcrit response is a statistically determined value that exceeds the threshold of random fluctuation and signifies a positive individual response during treatment. A DAS28-Dcrit individual therapeutic response is defined as a decrease (improvement) in DAS28 from Baseline of ≥ 1.8.
The Disease Activity Score (DAS28) is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity calculated from the 28 tender joint count, 28 swollen joint count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the patient's assessment of global disease activity (measured on a visual analog scale [VAS] from 0 to 10 cm). Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10; higher scores indicate more disease activity."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
814187|NCT01078090|Primary|Percentage of Participants in DAS28 Remission|Clinical remission is defined as a DAS28 score of < 2.6. The Disease Activity Score (DAS28) is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity calculated from the 28 tender joint count, 28 swollen joint count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the patient's assessment of global disease activity (measured on a visual analog scale [VAS] from 0 to 10 cm). Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10; higher scores indicate more disease activity.|Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
814188|NCT01078090|Primary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28|"The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and general health (measured on a visual analog scale [VAS] from 0 to 10 cm) are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10.
A DAS28 score >5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score <3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score <2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, and 60|"Full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS. n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814189|NCT01078116|Primary|Cost-Utility Relationship of Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Treated With Adalimumab Using Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Approach (ICER)|The ICER calculation is based on comparison of differences in costs and utilities (based on Quality of Life Adjusted years [QALYs]) between Baseline and the 12 month visit. The ICER represents the extra costs that have to be incurred for one extra unit of perfect health to be produced. A treatment is determined to be cost-effective if the ICER is below a certain threshold (National Health Systems of European Union have suggested a threshold of 50,000 euros).|12 months|Cost-utility analysis is based on the 76 participants who completed the study through 12 months.||Euros|||Number
815075|NCT01096680|Secondary|KSS Scores by Timepoint|The KSS is a 9-point scale on which the subject rates sleepiness from 1 (very alert) to 9 (very sleepy/fighting sleep). Lower score is better.|Over a period of 15 hours|FAS||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814190|NCT01078116|Primary|Health Related Quality of Life (Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36)|Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36 (MOS SF-36) is a generic health related quality of life assessment that consists of 36 questions within 8 domains. Results from each domain are summarized and transformed into a scale ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 (best).|Enrollment visit (Baseline), month 3, month 6, month 12|Analysis is based on the number of participants completing the assessment at each time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814191|NCT01078116|Primary|Health Related Quality of Life (Health Assessment Questionnaire)|Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) is designed to assess patients’ abilities to perform activities of daily living. Scores range between 0 and 3, where higher values represent worse outcomes.|Enrollment visit (Baseline), month 3, month 6, month 12|Analysis is based on the number of participants completing the assessment at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814192|NCT01078116|Primary|Health Related Quality of Life (European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions)|European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) is a generic health related quality of life instrument which assesses 5 health dimensions on a scale of 1 (no problems) to 5 (worst health). An overall score is derived ranging from -.59 to +1; a higher score indicates better health.|Enrollment visit (Baseline), month 3, month 6, month 12|Analysis is based on the number of participants completing the assessments at each visit.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814193|NCT01078116|Primary|Estimation of the Direct and Indirect Cost Incurred by Adalimumab Treatment|Direct and indirect per-participant costs were estimated at Baseline (enrollment visit) for the 3-month period prior to initiation of adalimumab treatment, and at 3, 6 and 12 months following initiation of treatment. Direct costs included pharmaceutical costs, diagnostic and monitoring test costs, hospitalization costs, rheumatologist's costs, social insurance rheumatologist's costs, other specialists costs, physiotherapy costs, rehabilitation cost, home care cost, equipment cost and transportation cost. Indirect costs refer to loss of income due to rheumatoid arthritis disability.|Enrollment visit (Baseline), month 3, month 6, month 12|Analysis is based on the number of participants completing the assessments at each visit.||Euros||Standard Deviation|Mean
814194|NCT01078155|Secondary|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) at Baseline, Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|ESR was recorded as per local clinical practice. Normal findings are up to 20 mm/hr for females and up to 15 mm/hr for males.|Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with evaluable data at time point.||mm/1 hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
814195|NCT01078155|Secondary|Visual Analogue Scale (VAS): Subject’s Assessment of Pain at Baseline, Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Subject’s Assessment of Pain VAS was reported on a 100 mm scale, where 0 = no pain through 100 = severe pain.|Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with evaluable data at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814196|NCT01078155|Secondary|Visual Analogue Scale (VAS): Subject’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Baseline, Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Subject’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS was reported on a 100 mm scale, reporting the subject's evaluation of his/her difficulties as 0 = without any difficulty to 100 = significant difficulties.|Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with evaluable data at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814197|NCT01078155|Primary|Tender Joint Count at Baseline, Month 3, Month 12, and Month 24|The investigator counted the number of tender joints at each study visit (28 joints are routinely examined).|Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with evaluable data at time point.||joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
814198|NCT01078155|Primary|Mean Duration of Morning Stiffness at Baseline, Month 3, Month 12, and Month 24|"Participant-reported the existence and duration of morning stiffness, defined as morning stiffness in and around the joints, lasting at least 1 hour before maximal improvement."|Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with evaluable data at time point.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
814199|NCT01078155|Primary|Change in Bone Turnover Marker C-telopeptide of Type I Collagen (CTX-I) From Baseline Through Month 3, Month 12, and Month 24||Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with bone turnover markers at time point.||µg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
814200|NCT01078155|Secondary|Visual Analogue Scale (VAS): Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Baseline, Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS was reported on a 100 mm scale, where 0 = very good to 100 = very bad.|Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit, with evaluable data at time points.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814201|NCT01078155|Secondary|Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints (DAS28) at Baseline, Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10. DAS 28 ≥ 5.1= high RA disease activity; DAS 28 ≥ 3.2 = middle RA disease activity; DAS 28 ≤ 3.2 = lower disease activity; DAS 28 ≤ 2.6 = remission of disease.|Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with evaluable data at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814202|NCT01078155|Secondary|Swollen Joint Count at Baseline, Month 3, Month 12, and Month 24|The investigator counted the number of swollen joints at each study visit (28 joints are routinely examined).|Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with evaluable data at time point.||joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
814203|NCT01078155|Primary|Change in Bone Turnover Marker C-terminal Type I Procollagen Peptide (CICP) From Baseline Through Month 3, Month 12, and Month 24||Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with bone turnover markers at time point.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814204|NCT01078155|Primary|Change in Bone Turnover Marker Osteocalcin (OC) From Baseline Through Month 3, Month 12, and Month 24||Baseline (Day 0), Month 3, Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with bone turnover markers at time point.||µg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
815076|NCT01096680|Secondary|Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) Scores|The KSS is a 9-point scale on which the subject rates sleepiness from 1 (very alert) to 9 (very sleepy/fighting sleep). Lower score is better.|Over a period of 15 hours|FAS||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814205|NCT01078155|Primary|Spine and Hip T-score and Z-score by DEXA at Baseline, Month 12, and Month 24|T-score and Z-score of spine and hip (L1-L4 and proximal femur) by DEXA. T-score is the number of standard deviations that bone density is above or below the average. A score of ≥ -1 = normal bone density; < -1 and > -2.5 = a sign of osteopenia (bone density below normal); ≤ -2.5 = a sign of osteoporosis. Z-score is the number of standard deviations above or below what's normally expected for someone of matching age, sex, weight, and ethnic or racial origin. A Z-score ≤ -2 may suggest abnormal bone loss due to conditions other than aging.|Baseline (Day 0), Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with evaluable data at time point.||standard deviations||Standard Deviation|Mean
814206|NCT01078155|Primary|Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Spine and Hip by Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) at Baseline, Month 12, and Month 24|BMD of spine and hip (L1-L4 and proximal femur) by DEXA, evaluated according to standard clinical guidelines.|Baseline (Day 0), Month 12, Month 24|Per-Protocol Set: all participants who participated in every study visit; n=participants with evaluable data at time point.||g/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
814207|NCT01078207|Secondary|Relationship Between the Oxygen Desaturation Patterns and Repetitive Reductions in Nasal Airflow as Measured by Inductance Plethysmography and Nasal Pressure.|The number of patients with a positive repetitive reduction in nasal airflow which correlates with positive oxygen desaturation pattern as measured by photoplethysmography sensors.|12 hours after discharge form the recovery room|All patients with a positive repetitive reduction in nasal airflow.||participants|||Number
814208|NCT01078207|Primary|Presence of Repetitive Reductions in Nasal Airflow Patterns in the Pulse Oximetry Saturation Trend Data.|Number of patients exhibiting the presence of repetitive reductions in airflow patterns in the pulse oximetry trend data collected on subjects|12 hour after released from the recovery room|All patients with complete data were analyzed.||participants|||Number
814209|NCT01078220|Primary|Incidence Rate of Cellulitis|Cellulitis was defined as the presence of a cellulitis or abscess diagnosis code in the emergency room or hospital setting in the vaccination risk period or in the post-vaccination self-comparison period. These codes could have represented a new event, a pre-existing event, a prior history of the event, a “rule out” diagnosis, miscoding, or a misdiagnosis. Consistent with the study's design, diagnosis codes for general safety analyses were not confirmed in this study.|Within 14 days and within 60 days immediately after each vaccination|||Rate per 1000 person years|||Number
814210|NCT01078220|Secondary|Number of Cases of New Onset Autoimmune Conditions in Females Receiving at Least One Dose of Gardasil|"Autoimmune cases were defined as newly diagnosed cases within 6 months after any
dose of Gardasil, as confirmed by medical record review by panels of physicians specializing in the 16 autoimmune conditions of interest."|within 6 months immediately after each vaccination|Number of females with at least 12 months' membership at a MCO prior to Gardasil.||Number of autoimmune cases|||Number
814211|NCT01078220|Secondary|Number of Miscarriages Among Females Who Received Gardasil During Pregnancy|Pregnancy exposure was defined as receipt of Gardasil at any time from 1 month prior to conception through end of pregnancy.|First dose of Gardasil in pregnancy up to pregnancy resolution|Number of females potentially exposed to Gardasil during potential pregnancy as identified from unconfirmed diagnosis codes in electronic medical records.||Number of miscarriages|||Number
814212|NCT01078220|Secondary|Number of Congenital Anomalies Among Females Who Received Gardasil During Pregnancy|Pregnancy exposure was defined as receipt of Gardasil at any time from 1 month prior to conception through end of pregnancy.|First dose of Gardasil in pregnancy up to 6 months after birth|Number of females potentially exposed to Gardasil during potential pregnancy as identified from unconfirmed diagnosis codes in electronic medical records.||Number of congenital anomalies|||Number
814213|NCT01078220|Primary|Incidence Rate of Syncope|Syncope was defined as the presence of a syncope diagnosis code in the emergency room or hospital setting in the vaccination risk period or in the post-vaccination self-comparison period. These codes could have represented a new event, a pre-existing event, a prior history of the event, a “rule out” diagnosis, miscoding, or a misdiagnosis. Consistent with the study's design, diagnosis codes for general safety analyses were not confirmed in this study.|On day of each vaccination|||Rate per 1000 person years|||Number
814214|NCT01078233|Primary|Incidence of All-Cause Mortality|All participant deaths were recorded|Historical Cohort: up to 24 months (January 2006 to December 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 68 months (December 2007 to July 2013)|Intention-to-Treat analysis included follow-up until the end of the follow-up period for the cohort, regardless of whether or not raltegravir or other drugs were discontinued.||Events per 100 person-years of follow-up|Person years of follow-up|95% Confidence Interval|Number
814215|NCT01078233|Primary|Incidence of Lipodystrophy|Lipodystrophy events were defined as the first report for either 1) loss of fat from extremities, buttocks, or face, or 2) accumulation of fat in abdomen, neck, breasts, or other defined location.|Historical Cohort: up to 24 months (January 2006 to December 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 68 months (December 2007 to July 2013)|Intention-to-Treat analysis included follow-up until the end of the follow-up period for the cohort, regardless of whether or not raltegravir or other drugs were discontinued.||Events per 100 person-years of follow-up|Person years of follow-up|95% Confidence Interval|Number
814216|NCT01078233|Primary|Incidence of Clinically Important Hepatic Events|Clinically important hepatic events were defined as either 1) hepatic encephalopathy (stage III or IV), or 2) discontinuation of raltegravir use where liver toxicity was listed as the reason for discontinuation.|Historical Cohort: up to 24 months (January 2006 to December 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 68 months (December 2007 to July 2013)|Intention-to-Treat analysis included follow-up until the end of the follow-up period for the cohort, regardless of whether or not raltegravir or other drugs were discontinued.||Events per 100 person-years of follow-up|Person years of follow-up|95% Confidence Interval|Number
814217|NCT01078233|Primary|Incidence of Malignancy|All-type malignancy, including both Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS)-defining and non-AIDS-defining malignancy, was evaluated. Only the first occurrence of any malignancy type was counted for each participant.|Historical Cohort: up to 24 months (January 2006 to December 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 68 months (December 2007 to July 2013)|Intention-to-Treat analysis included follow-up until the end of the follow-up period for the cohort, regardless of whether or not raltegravir or other drugs were discontinued.||Events per 100 person-years of follow-up|Person years of follow-up|95% Confidence Interval|Number
814218|NCT01078246|Secondary|Incidence of All-cause Mortality|All-cause mortality occurring during the risk period was identified through the use of computer-stored records of Emergency Department visits, hospitalizations, and state death certificates. Deaths were identified from administrative Kaiser Permanente databases, including Kaiser Permanente regional research and respective state(s) mortality files as well as the Social Security Administrative files. Incidence is reported as unadjusted, crude rates.|Historical Cohort: up to 33 months (January 2005 to October 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 69 months (October 2007 to June 2013)|The analysis includes all eligible participants.||Events per 1000 person-years of followup||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814219|NCT01078246|Secondary|Incidence of Clinically Important Cardiovascular Events|Significant cardiovascular events occurring during the risk period were identified through the use of computer-stored records and defined as inpatient events based on algorithms that utilize a combination of diagnosis and/or procedure codes. The identification of potential significant cardiovascular events was based on the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) which include acute myocardial infarction (MI), ischemic stroke, unstable angina, revascularization (e.g. percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary bypass graft surgery (CABG)), and cardiovascular death. Incidence is reported as unadjusted, crude rates.|Historical Cohort: up to 33 months (January 2005 to October 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 69 months (October 2007 to June 2013)|The analysis includes all eligible participants.||Events per 1000 person-years of followup||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814220|NCT01078246|Primary|Incidence of Lipodystrophy|Lipodystrophy (e.g. lipoatrophy, facial wasting) occurring during the risk period was identified through the use of computer-stored records of outpatient visits, Emergency Department visits and hospitalizations. The identification of potential lipodystrophy was based on two coded diagnoses codes indicative of lipodystrophy appearing at least 6 months apart over the course of patient care, the identification of interventions to treat such conditions (e.g. sculptra therapy), or procedural codes for Computerized Tomography indicating incident neck or abdominal lipoaccumulation. Incidence is reported as unadjusted, crude rates.|Historical Cohort: up to 33 months (January 2005 to October 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 69 months (October 2007 to June 2013)|The analysis includes all eligible participants.||Events per 1000 person-years of followup||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814221|NCT01078246|Primary|Incidence of Clinically Important Muscle Events|Significant muscle events (e.g. rhabdomyolysis) occurring during the risk period were identified through the use of computer-stored records of laboratory values, outpatient visits, Emergency Department visits and hospitalizations. The identification of potential significant muscle events was based on algorithms utilizing a combination of diagnoses, procedures and/or laboratory results for creatinine kinase. The number of muscle events did not meet the threshold for statistical analysis per protocol. Incidence is reported as unadjusted, crude rates.|Historical Cohort: up to 33 months (January 2005 to October 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 69 months (October 2007 to June 2013)|The analysis includes all eligible participants.||Events per 1000 person-years of followup||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814222|NCT01078246|Primary|Incidence of Clinically Important Skin Events|Significant skin events (e.g. Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis) occurring during the risk period were identified through the use of computer-stored records of outpatient visits, Emergency Department visits and hospitalizations. The identification of potential significant skin events was based on algorithms utilizing a combination of diagnoses, procedures and/or medications. Surveillance of outpatient visits was limited to rashes coded as drug-related and requiring use of steroid (e.g. prednisone) administration. Incidence is reported as unadjusted, crude rates.|Historical Cohort: up to 33 months (January 2005 to October 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 69 months (October 2007 to June 2013)|The analysis includes all eligible participants.||Events per 1000 person-years of followup||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814223|NCT01078246|Primary|Incidence of Clinically Important Hepatic Events|Hepatic events occurring during the risk period were identified through computer-stored records of laboratory values, outpatient visits, Emergency Department visits, and hospitalizations. Significant hepatic events were identified based on algorithms utilizing a combination of diagnoses, procedures, and laboratory results. Incidence is reported as unadjusted, crude rates.|Historical Cohort: up to 33 months (January 2005 to October 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 69 months (October 2007 to June 2013)|The analysis includes all eligible participants.||Events per 1000 person-years of followup||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814224|NCT01078246|Primary|Incidence of AIDS-defining and Non-AIDS-defining Malignancy|All new malignancies occurring during the risk period, including Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS)-defining and non-AIDS-defining malignancies, were identified through the Kaiser Permanente cancer registries. The registry data was supplemented by the use of computer-stored records of outpatient visits, Emergency Department visits and hospitalizations to identify cancers that would not be captured through the cancer registries (e.g. cutaneous Kaposi’s sarcoma).The AIDS-defining malignancies reported for any cohort were invasive cervical cancer, Kaposi's sarcoma, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Incidence is reported as unadjusted, crude rates.|Historical Cohort: up to 33 months (January 2005 to October 2007); Raltegravir and Concurrent Cohorts: up to 69 months (October 2007 to June 2013)|The analysis includes all eligible participants.||Events per 1000 person-years of followup||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814225|NCT01078298|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Categorical Scores on the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|C-SSRS assessed if participant experienced following: completed suicide (1), suicide attempt (2)(response of “Yes” on “actual attempt”), preparatory acts toward imminent suicidal behavior (3)(“Yes” on “preparatory acts or behavior”), suicidal ideation (4)(“Yes” on “wish to be dead”, “non-specific active suicidal thoughts”, “active suicidal ideation with methods without intent to act or some intent to act, without or with specific plan and intent), any suicidal behavior or ideation, self-injurious behavior (7)(“Yes” on “Has participant engaged in non-suicidal self-injurious behavior”).|Baseline, Week 1 up to 30 days after Week 12 (treatment-emergent [TE]), thereafter up to Week 52 (follow-up [FU])|Safety analysis population included all participants who took at least 1 dose of randomized study medication, including partial doses, and had a safety measurement.||participants|||Number
814254|NCT01078376|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for TAK-536|Maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) is the peak plasma concentration of a drug after administration, obtained directly from the plasma concentration-time curve.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814226|NCT01078298|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) - Total Score|The BIS-11 is a self-administered 30 items questionnaire to assess measure of impulsivity. Items are scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (rarely/never) to 4 (almost always/always). Total score range from 30 to 120. Barratt suggested that a total score of greater than or equal to 75 could indicate an impulse-control disorder, whereas a total score in the range of 70 to 75 could indicate pathological impulsivity.|Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16|Safety analysis population included all participants who took at least 1 dose of randomized study medication, including partial doses, and had a safety measurement. 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the satisfaction level for each group respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814227|NCT01078298|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) - Total Score|HAM-A measures treatment-related changes in generalized anxiety symptoms; 14 item questionnaire scored 0 (not present) to 4 (very severe); possible range 0 to 56. Lower score indicates less affected. Change: mean score at observation minus mean score at baseline.|Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16|Safety analysis population included all participants who took at least 1 dose of randomized study medication, including partial doses, and had a safety measurement. 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the satisfaction level for each group respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814228|NCT01078298|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) - Total Score|Measures the overall severity of depressive symptoms. The MADRS has a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale of 0-6, for a total score range of 0 (low severity of depressive symptoms) to 60 (high severity of depressive symptoms). Change: mean score at observation minus mean score at baseline.|Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16|Safety analysis population included all participants who took at least 1 dose of randomized study medication, including partial doses, and had a safety measurement. 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the satisfaction level for each group respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814229|NCT01078298|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) Score|CGI-S: 7-point clinician rated scale to assess severity of participant's current illness state; range: 1 (normal - not ill at all) to 7 (among the most extremely ill patients). Higher score = more affected|Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 24, 32, 40, 52|Safety analysis population included all participants who took at least 1 dose of randomized study medication, including partial doses, and had a safety measurement. Here, the ‘n’ is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure at the specific categories for each arm group.||participants|||Number
814230|NCT01078298|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Categorical Scores on Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I)|CGI-I: 7-point clinician rated scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Improvement from baseline is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), or 3 (minimally improved) on the scale. Higher score = more affected|Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 24, 32, 40, 52|Safety analysis population. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the time point for each group respectively.||participants|||Number
814231|NCT01078298|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (Including Solicited Neuropsychiatric Adverse Events)|Adverse Event (AE):any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in participant who received study drug.SAE:AE causing:death;initial/prolonged inpatient hospitalization;life-threatening experience(immediate risk of dying);persistent/significant disability/incapacity;congenital anomaly.Solicited AEs collected by semi-structured neuropsychiatric AEs interview inquiring about AEs:delusions,hallucinations,paranoia,psychosis,mania,panic,agitation,hostility,aggression,homicidal ideation. If participant had positive response,investigator determined if it met AE criteria.|Baseline up to Week 16|Safety analysis population included all participants who took at least 1 dose of randomized study medication, including partial doses, and had a safety measurement.||participants|||Number
814232|NCT01078298|Secondary|Number of Participants With 4-Week Point Prevalence (PP) of Abstinence|Number of participants at Week 52 visit reporting no smoking and no use of other tobacco products in the last 4 weeks confirmed by a measurement of an end-expiratory exhaled CO measurement less than or equal to 10 ppm.|Week 52|All participants analysis set included all the participants who were randomized and took at least one dose of randomized study medication.||participants|||Number
814233|NCT01078298|Secondary|Number of Participants With 7-day Point Prevalence (PP) of Abstinence|Number of participants reporting no use of nicotine-containing products in the last 7 days confirmed by a measurement of an end-expiratory exhaled CO measurement less than or equal to 10 ppm.|Weeks 12, 24, 52|All participants analysis set included all the participants who were randomized and took at least one dose of randomized study medication.||participants|||Number
814234|NCT01078298|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Continuous Abstinence Rate (CAR)|Percentage of participants who remained abstinent from the period defined as start of the primary endpoint (Week 9) through Week 24 and the end of follow-up (Week 52) by reporting no use of nicotine-containing products confirmed by a measurement of an end-expiratory exhaled CO measurement less than or equal to 10 ppm.|Week 9 through Week 24, Week 9 through Week 52|All participants analysis set included all the participants who were randomized and took at least one dose of randomized study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814235|NCT01078298|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Four-Week Continuous Quit Rate (CQR)|"Percentage of participants who reported no use of nicotine-containing products by answering No to the nicotine use inventory (NUI) questions: ‘Has the participant smoked cigarettes’ and ‘Has the participant used other nicotine-containing products’ in the last 7 days (Week 9) or since last study visit (Week 9 through 12) confirmed by a measurement of an end-expiratory exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) measurement less than or equal to 10 parts per million (ppm)."|Week 9 through Week 12|All participants analysis set included all the participants who were randomized and took at least one dose of randomized study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814255|NCT01078376|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity (AUC[0-inf]) for TAK-536 Metabolite M-II|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity, calculated as AUC(0-inf)=AUC(0-tlqc) + Clast/λz.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||ng.hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814236|NCT01078363|Secondary|Index of Microcirculatory Resistance at One Year Post Heart Transplant|The index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) is a pressure-temperature sensor guidewire-based measurement, performed during cardiac catheterization, of the minimum microcirculatory resistance in a specific coronary artery. The IMR provides a quantitative measure of coronary microvasculature status.|one year|Only a subset of participants (adult patients enrolled at Stanford University) underwent index of microcirculatory resistance assessment.||mmHg x seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814237|NCT01078363|Secondary|Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) at One Year Post Transplant|FFR is a technique used in coronary catheterization to measure pressure differences across a coronary artery stenosis (narrowing, usually due to atherosclerosis) to determine the likelihood that the stenosis impedes oxygen delivery to the heart muscle (myocardial ischemia). It is defined as the ratio of the distal coronary pressure to the proximal coronary pressure.|at one year post Transplant|Only a subset of participants (adult patients enrolled at Stanford University) underwent fractional flow reserve assessment.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
814238|NCT01078363|Secondary|The Percentage of Endothelial Progenitor Cells ( EPC) in Peripheral Blood in Patients One Year After Transplant|The determination of the percentage of EPC in peripheral blood involved surface staining peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with appropriate fluorescently-labeled antibodies to delineate EPCs from other blood cells, followed by analysis by conventional flow cytometry.|at one year|Not all blood samples obtained were adequate for EPC determination which explains the discrepancy in number of participants analyzed.||percentage of EPC||Standard Deviation|Mean
814239|NCT01078363|Secondary|ADMA Level at One Year Post Transplant|asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA), is an inhibitor of endothelial nitric oxide synthase which is a primary regulator of endothelial function.|1 year post Transplant|Blood samples were not acquired in all participants which accounts for the discrepancy in number of participants analyzed.||micromole||Standard Deviation|Mean
814240|NCT01078363|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ≥20% Coronary Artery Diameter Reduction After Acetylcholine|The percent change in diameter of the left anterior descending artery was measured by quantitative angiography after acetylcholine and compared to baseline angiography. The percentage of participants who had ≥20% coronary artery diameter reduction after acetylcholine at one year is presented.|At Baseline and 1 Year|Only a subset of participants (those adult patients enrolled at Stanford University) underwent the acetylcholine measurements.||percentage of participants|||Number
814241|NCT01078363|Primary|Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy(CAV) Defined as Change in IVUS-assessed Plaque Volume From Baseline to One Year|also called transplant coronary artery disease or cardiac transplant vasculopathy defined as coronary artery stenosis(narrowing) ranging from 30 to 70 percent by coronary angiography. Measured in this study as change in IVUS-assessed Plaque Volume from baseline to one year.|Baseline and 1 Year|||mm3/mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814242|NCT01078376|Primary|Renal Clearance (CLr) From 0 to 24 Hours Postdose (for Cohorts 1 and 2 Urine Pharmacokinetic Endpoint for TAK-536 Metabolite M-II)|Renal clearance, calculated as CLr=Ae(0-24)/AUC(0-24).|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
814243|NCT01078376|Primary|Renal Clearance (CLr) From 0 to 24 Hours Postdose (for Cohorts 1 and 2 Urine Pharmacokinetic Endpoint for TAK-536)|Renal clearance, calculated as CLr=Ae(0-24)/AUC(0-24).|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
814244|NCT01078376|Primary|Fraction of Unchanged Drug Excreted in Urine From 0 to 24 Hours Postdose (Fe%) (for Cohorts 1 and 2 Urine Pharmacokinetic Endpoint for TAK-536 Metabolite M-II)|Fe=[Ae(0-24)/dose]×100 (molecular weight adjusted for metabolites.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
814245|NCT01078376|Primary|Fraction of Unchanged Drug Excreted in Urine From 0 to 24 Hours Postdose (Fe%) (for Cohorts 1 and 2 Urine Pharmacokinetic Endpoint for TAK-536)|Fe=[Ae(0-24)/dose]×100 (molecular weight adjusted for metabolites.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
814246|NCT01078376|Primary|Total Amount of Drug Excreted in Urine From Time 0 to 24 Hours Postdose (Ae[0-t]) (for Cohorts 1 and 2 Urine Pharmacokinetic Endpoint for TAK-536 Metabolite M-II)||Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
814247|NCT01078376|Primary|Total Amount of Drug Excreted in Urine From Time 0 to 24 Hours Postdose (Ae[0-t]) (for Cohorts 1 and 2 Urine Pharmacokinetic Endpoint for TAK-536)||Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
814248|NCT01078376|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F) for TAK-536|CL/F is apparent clearance of the drug from the plasma, expressed in L/hr.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
814249|NCT01078376|Primary|Terminal Elimination Half-life (T1/2) for TAK-536 Metabolite M-II|Terminal phase elimination half-life (T1/2) is the time required for half of the drug to be eliminated from the plasma.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
814250|NCT01078376|Primary|Terminal Elimination Half-life (T1/2) for TAK-536|Terminal phase elimination half-life (T1/2) is the time required for half of the drug to be eliminated from the plasma.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
814251|NCT01078376|Primary|Time to Reach Cmax (Tmax) for TAK-536 Metabolite M-II|Tmax: Time to reach the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), equal to time (hours) to Cmax, as observed on Day 1.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||hr||Full Range|Median
814252|NCT01078376|Primary|Time to Reach Cmax (Tmax) for TAK-536|Tmax: Time to reach the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), equal to time (hours) to Cmax, as observed on Day 1.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||hr||Full Range|Median
814253|NCT01078376|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for TAK-536 Metabolite M-II|Maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) is the peak plasma concentration of a drug after administration, obtained directly from the plasma concentration-time curve.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815113|NCT01097005|Secondary|Bacteriological Relapse Related to Duration of Clarithromycin Administration|Number of patients who have bacteriological relapse related to duration of Clarithromycin (CLR) administration after initial negative conversion|36 months|End of study (completers). Analysis of bacteriological relapse.||participants|||Number
814257|NCT01078376|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to Time of Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-tlqc]) for TAK-536 Metabolite M-II.|AUC(0-tlqc) is a measure of total plasma exposure to the drug from Time 0 to Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-tlqc]).|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||ng.hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814258|NCT01078376|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to Time of Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-tlqc]) for TAK-536|AUC(0-tlqc) is a measure of total plasma exposure to the drug from Time 0 to Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-tlqc]).|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic Set; Results are presented by individual dose for Cohorts 1 and 2.||ng.hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814259|NCT01078389|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 in the Modified Sharp/Van Der Heijde Total Score of the Single Affected Joint|The single affected joint was defined as the joint with the history of the first acute gout flare. Radiographs (X-rays) of the single affected joint in the hands or feet were evaluated using the modified Sharp/van der Heijde method. Each erosion was assessed using a 4-point scale where 0=no erosions (best) to 3=large erosion passing the mid-line (worst) and Joint space narrowing (JSN) was assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=normal (best) to 4=absence of joint space, presumptive evidence of ankyloses, or complete luxation (worst). The Erosion Score and the JSN Score were summed for the Total Score. Higher scores indicated more joint damage. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline and Month 24|Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they actually received. Participants with data available at Baseline and Month 24 are included in the analysis.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814260|NCT01078389|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 in the Rheumatoid Arthritis MRI Scoring System (RAMRIS) Score of the Single Affected Joint|The single affected joint was defined as the joint with the history of the first acute gout flare. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was evaluated using the Rheumatoid Arthritis MRI Score (RAMRIS). Bone erosion in the proximal and distal location were each assessed in the affected joint using an 11-point scale where 0=no erosion (best) to 10=91-100% bone eroded (worst) for a bone erosion score range of 0 to 20. Bone marrow edema in the proximal and distal location were each assessed using a 4-point scale where 0=no edema (best) to 3=67-100% edema (worst) for a bone marrow edema (BME) score range of 0 to 6. Synovitis was assessed in the affected joint using a 4-point scale where 0=normal (best) to 3=severe (worst). Higher scores indicated more joint damage. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline and Month 24|Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they actually received. Participants with data available at Baseline and Month 24 are included in the analysis.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814261|NCT01078389|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 in the Modified Sharp/Van Der Heijde Erosion Scores From Full Hands and Feet Radiographs|Radiographs (X-rays) of 40 joints in the hands and 12 joints in the feet were evaluated using the modified Sharp/van der Heijde method. Each erosion was assessed using a 4-point scale where 0=no erosions (best) to 3=large erosion passing the mid-line (worst) for a total erosion score range of 0 to 320. Higher scores indicated more joint damage. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline and Month 24|Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they actually received. Participants with data available at Baseline and Month 24 are included in the analysis.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814262|NCT01078389|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 in the Modified Sharp/Van Der Heijde Total Scores From Full Hands and Feet Radiographs|Radiographs (X-rays) of 40 joints in the hands and 12 joints in the feet were evaluated using the modified Sharp/van der Heijde method. Each erosion was assessed using a 4-point scale where 0=no erosions (best) to 3=large erosion passing the mid-line (worst) for a total erosion score range of 0 to 320. Joint space narrowing (JSN) was assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=normal (best) to 4=absence of joint space, presumptive evidence of ankyloses, or complete luxation (worst) for a total JSN score range of 0 to 208. The Erosion Score and the JSN Score were combined for a total possible score of 0 to 528. Higher scores indicated more joint damage. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline and Month 24|Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they actually received. Participants with data available at Baseline and Month 24 are included in the analysis.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814263|NCT01078389|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 in the Modified Sharp/Van Der Heijde Erosion Score of the Single Affected Joint|The single affected joint was defined as the joint with the history of the first acute gout flare. Radiographs (X-rays) of this single joint in the hands or feet were evaluated using the modified Sharp/van der Heijde method. Each erosion was assessed using a 4-point scale where 0=no erosions (best) to 3=large erosion passing the mid-line (worst). Individual erosion scores were summed to a maximum erosion score of 5 for joints in the hands and 10 for joints in the feet. Higher scores indicated more joint damage. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline and Month 24|Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they actually received. Participants with data available for analysis and missing values at Month 24 imputed using linear extrapolation are included in the analysis.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814264|NCT01078402|Secondary|Tolerability: Overall Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Tolerability was measured by AEs and SAEs, collected during the course of the study. See the Reported Adverse Event section for details.|From the time participant gave authorization to use and disclose information (or gave informed consent) until 5 half-lives following the last dose of physician-prescribed therapy. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of therapy was 49.0 (16.0) weeks.|SES=participants fulfilling both of the following criteria: a primary diagnosis of specified rheumatic disease (RA, PsA, AS); at least one recorded Humira treatment is documented.||participants|||Number
814277|NCT01084551|Secondary|Average Duration of RLS Symptoms in the Evening and Night in a Week|Change of average duration of RLS symptoms in a week from baseline to the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period. Only the days with RLS symptoms are used for calculation.|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (weeks 13)|FAS, LOCF||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
814265|NCT01078402|Secondary|Tolerability: Duration of Humira Therapy in Participants Who Discontinued Therapy|Tolerability was evaluated by assessing the mean duration (in weeks) of treatment with Humira until the development of an adverse event leading to treatment discontinuation or until early discontinuation for any other reason.|From first treatment until study discontinuation, up to 13 months.|Participants in the SES who discontinued therapy and had evaluable records. SES=participants fulfilling both of the following criteria: a primary diagnosis of specified rheumatic disease (RA, PsA, AS); at least one recorded Humira treatment is documented.||weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
814266|NCT01078402|Secondary|Compliance With the Humira Administration Schedule at Month 13 (End of Study)|Compliance with the Humira therapy was assessed by the number of missed injections among participants. Documentation of injections missed or delayed by more than 7 days was made at each study visit.|Month 13|Participants in the SES with evaluable values. SES=participants fulfilling both of the following criteria: a primary diagnosis of specified rheumatic disease (RA, PsA, AS); at least one recorded Humira treatment is documented.||participants|||Number
814267|NCT01078402|Secondary|Participant Acceptability of Self-injection at Month 13 (End of Study)|Participant acceptability of self-injection was assessed by the percentage of participants able to appropriately execute self-injection after initial training in the medical center, per investigator’s opinion and documentation of necessity of re-training. Those participants able to self-inject also reported their experience of self-injection as convenient or inconvenient.|13 months|Participants in the SES with evaluable values. SES=participants fulfilling both of the following criteria: a primary diagnosis of specified rheumatic disease (RA, PsA, AS); at least one recorded Humira treatment is documented.||percentage of participants|||Number
814268|NCT01078402|Secondary|Physical Function: Mean Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Baseline, and After 4, 7 and 13 Months of Humira Therapy|HAQ-DI score was calculated using the standard questionnaire covering 8 category scores: Dressing and Grooming, Rising, Eating, Walking, Hygiene, Reach, Grip, and Activities. Each category score is calculated as the maximum of the scores for the questions within the category. The HAQ-DI is expressed on a scale from 0 (without any difficulty) to 3 (unable to do) representing an average score across the category. Scores for at least 6 categories are needed to compute the HAQ score. Changes to lower scores indicate improvement in physical function.|Baseline, 4, 7 and 13 months|SES=participants fulfilling both of the following criteria: a primary diagnosis of specified rheumatic disease (RA, PsA, AS); at least one recorded Humira treatment is documented. n=number of participants with evaluable records at given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814269|NCT01078402|Primary|Clinical Outcome (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] Decrease ≥50%) After 3 Months of Humira Therapy Relative to Baseline in Participants With PsA and AS|BASDAI score was calculated using a questionnaire with 6 questions that the participant completes by marking answers on a 10-centimeter visual analog scale with responses that range from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe) and measures severity of fatigue, spinal and peripheral joint pain, localized tenderness and morning stiffness. The final BASDAI score ranges from 0 to 10. A positive clinical outcome was defined as a 50% or more decrease in BASDAI score after 3 months of Humira therapy relative to baseline.|Baseline, 3 months|Clinical Outcome Analysis Set (COS): all participants in the SES, who had a non-missing assessment of clinical outcome at baseline and not less than one follow-up visit with a non-missing assessment of clinical outcome. In addition, patients with unclear visit schedule were excluded from the COS.||participants|||Number
814270|NCT01078402|Primary|Clinical Outcome (Disease Activity Score [DAS28] Decrease ≥1.2) After 3 Months of Humira Therapy Relative to Baseline in Participants With RA|DAS28 score was calculated using the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) level, and the participant's global assessment of disease activity. The calculated range of DAS28 is 0.49 to 9.07, with scores below 3.2 indicating low disease activity. A positive clinical outcome was defined as a DAS28 decrease by 1.2 or more after 3 months of Humira therapy relative to baseline.|Baseline, 3 months|Clinical Outcome Analysis Set (COS): all participants in the SES, who had a non-missing assessment of clinical outcome at baseline and not less than one follow-up visit with a non-missing assessment of clinical outcome. In addition, patients with unclear visit schedule were excluded from the COS.||participants|||Number
814271|NCT01084538|Secondary|Clinically Meaningful Hypercalcemia, Defined as Corrected Serum Calcium Greater Than 11.0 Milligrams Per deciLiter (mg/dL) Taken at Two Consecutive Measurements.|Number of participants with clinically meaningful hypercalcemia, defined as corrected serum calcium greater than 11.0 milligrams per deciLiter (mg/dL) taken at two consecutive measurements (visits) during the study.|Baseline through 12 months|Analysis was based on the number of subjects included in the full analysis set (N=175).||participants|||Number
814272|NCT01084538|Secondary|Time (Measured in Days) to Achieve Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) Levels Less Than or Equal to 300 pg/mL|The average time (measured in days) to achieve target iPTH levels.|Baseline through 12 months|Of the 175 participants in the full analysis set, one participant was excluded from the analysis due to missing data.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814273|NCT01084538|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Serum iPTH Level Less Than or Equal to 300 Picograms Per Milliliter (pg/mL)|Percentage of subjects achieving a serum iPTH level less than or equal to 300 pg/mL on the final visit.|Baseline through 12 months|Of the 175 participants in the full analysis set, one participant was excluded from the analysis due to missing data.||percentage of participants|||Number
814274|NCT01084538|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving at Least a 40% Reduction of iPTH (Intact Parathyroid Hormone) From Baseline||Baseline through 12 months|Of the 175 participants in the full analysis set, one participant was excluded from the analysis due to missing data.||percentage of participants|||Number
814275|NCT01084551|Secondary|Average Sleep Time in a Week|Change of average sleep time in a week from baseline to the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period.|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (weeks 13)|FAS, LOCF||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
814276|NCT01084551|Secondary|Nocturnal Awakenings Due to RLS Symptoms in a Week|Nocturnal awakening rate is calculated as the number of days with nocturnal awakenings / the number of days of evaluation * 100%.|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (week 13)|FAS, LOCF||percentage of days/week with awakening||Standard Deviation|Mean
814278|NCT01084551|Secondary|Incidence of RLS Symptoms in the Evening and Night|Incidence rate of RLS symptoms is calculated as the number of days with RLS symptoms / the number of days of evaluation * 100%.|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (week 13)|FAS, LOCF||percentage of days/week with symptoms||Standard Deviation|Mean
814281|NCT01084551|Secondary|Each Item of IRLS (10 Items)|"IRLS is a scale for assessing severity of restless legs syndrome symptoms. IRLS consists of ten questions. Each question is scored from 4 for the first (top) answer (usually 'very severe') to 0 for the last answer (usually none).
Numbers of subjects with -4 or -3 score change from baseline in each item of IRLS. A decrease in the scores means improvement."|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (week 13)|FAS, LOCF||percentage of participants|||Number
814282|NCT01084551|Secondary|The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)|"Change of PSQI from baseline to the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period.
PSQI is a scale for assessing severity of sleep disorders. The score ranges from 0 to 21. 0 indicates “no difficulty” and 21 indicates “severe difficulty”. A decrease in the scores means improvement."|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (week 13)|FAS, LOCF||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814283|NCT01084551|Secondary|Patient Global Impression (PGI) Improvement|"PGI improvement is a patient-reported scale for assessing how much the patient's illness has improved or worsened from baseline.
The scale scoring criteria are 1: very much better, 2: much better, 3: a little better, 4: no change, 5: a little worse, 6: much worse, 7: very much worse."|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (week 13)|FAS, LOCF||Percentage of Participants|||Number
814284|NCT01084551|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Improvement|"CGI improvement is a clinician-reported scale for assessing how much the patient's illness has improved or worsened from baseline.
The scale scoring criteria are 1: very much improved, 2: much improved, 3: minimally improved, 4: no change, 5: minimally worse, 6: much worse, 7: very much worse."|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (week 13)|FAS, LOCF||Percentage of Participants|||Number
814285|NCT01084551|Primary|International Restless Legs Syndrome Rating Scale (IRLS) Total Score|"Change from the baseline to the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period. IRLS is a scale for assessing severity of restless legs syndrome symptoms. IRLS consists of ten questions. Each question is scored from 4 for the first (top) answer (usually ‘very severe’) to 0 for the last answer (usually none).
The sum of the score of each question serves as the scale score. The scale scoring criteria are: Mild (score 1-10); Moderate (score 11-20); Severe (score 21-30); Very severe (score 31-40). A decrease in the scores means improvement."|Baseline, the end of dose-titration/dose-maintenance period (week 13)|Full analysis set (FAS), last observation carried forward (LOCF)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814286|NCT01084603|Primary|Bioavailability|A measure of how much of the drug reaches a person’s bloodstream within a given period of time for the body to use. The extent of product bioavailability is estimated by the area under the blood concentration vs time curve. The area under the curve (AUC) is calculated by plotting the drug’s blood levels on a graph at different times during the set period to form a curve. The area under this curve reflects the amount of drug exposure in the set time period, calculated as hour*nanograms/milliliter (h*ng/ml).|12 hours|||h*ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
814287|NCT01084603|Secondary|Released Nicotine|The amount of nicotine released from Nicorette® gum 4 mg during 30 minutes' chewing|After 30 minutes' chewing|ITT||(ng/ml)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814288|NCT01084603|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Rate Constant|The terminal nicotine elimination rate constant (Lamda z)|During 12 hours after start of administration|ITT||(1/hr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814289|NCT01084603|Secondary|Time of Maximum Concentration|The time at which maximum concentration is reached (Tmax)|During 12 hours after start of administration|ITT||(hours)||Full Range|Median
814290|NCT01084603|Secondary|Nicotine Plasma Concentration|Area under the nicotine plasma concentration curve at 10 minutes (AUC10 min)|During 10 minutes after start of administration|ITT||(h*ng/ml)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
814291|NCT01084603|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration|Cmax, which is the maximum (peak) concentration (amount of drug) measurable in blood plasma after a dose is administered measured in nanograms/milliliter (ng/ml)|During 12 hours after start of administration|ITT||(ng/ml)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
814292|NCT01084668|Secondary|Tolerability and Safety Assessed by Collection and Classification of Adverse Reactions|Tolerability and safety were assessed by collecting adverse events during the course of the study up to 70 days following the last dose of physician-prescribed adalimumab. The number of participants experiencing a serious or non-serious adverse event is summarized. See the Reported Adverse Event section for details.|From the time of participant consent until 70 days after last dose of study drug|Analysis was performed on the All Treated population.||participants|||Number
814293|NCT01084668|Secondary|Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score|The nails are graded for nail matrix psoriasis and nail bed psoriasis. The sum of these two scores is the total score for that nail. Per nail, the NAPSI score ranges from 0 (no nail psoriasis) to 4 (most severe nail psoriasis).|Inclusion visit (Week 0), Week 4, Week 36, and Week 52|Analysis was performed using an observed case approach. For the All Treated population, NAPSI was assessed at Weeks 0, 4, 36, and 52 in 34, 30, 24, and 25 participants, respectively. For the Subgroup with nail psoriasis, NAPSI was assessed at Weeks 0, 4, 36, and 52 in 18, 16, 12, and 13 participants, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814294|NCT01084668|Secondary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much, a lot, a little, or not at all. The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst).|Inclusion visit (Week 0), Week 4, Week 36, Week 52|Analysis was performed on the All Treated population using an observed case approach. DLQI score was assessed at Weeks 0, 4, 36, and 52 in 36, 34, 26, and 27 participants, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814295|NCT01084668|Primary|Reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index Score of at Least 75% (PASI75)|PASI75 is the number of participants who achieved at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at Week 52 (final visit). PASI score is based on assessment of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling), and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (best outcome) to 72 (worst outcome).|Inclusion visit (Week 0) to Week 52|Analysis was performed on the All Treated population using an observed case approach. PASI response was assessed in 26 participants at Week 52.||participants|||Number
815268|NCT01097694|Secondary|Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI)|Change in patient reported ASUI score The asthma symptom utility index (ASUI) is a 10-item weighted scale with a range from 0.2 to 1 with a higher value indicating improvement. The minimal important difference is 0.09.|6 months after start of treatment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814296|NCT01084668|Primary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score is based on assessment of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling), and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (best outcome) to 72 (worst outcome).|Inclusion visit (Week 0), Week 4, Week 36, Week 52|Analysis was performed on the All Treated population using an observed case approach. PASI score was assessed at Weeks 0, 4, 36, and 52 in 41, 36, 28, and 27 participants, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814300|NCT01086410|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pulse Rate at Days 14, 28, 42, and Maximum Post-Baseline|Heart rate was measured at Baseline and at Days 14, 28, 42, and EW. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 42/EW value minus the Baseline value. Scheduled, unscheduled, and early withdrawal visits were used for the maximum post-Baseline assessment.|Days 14, 28, 42, and EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
814301|NCT01086410|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) at Days 14, 28, 42, and Maximum Post-Baseline|SBP and DBP were measured at Baseline and at Days 14, 28, 42, and EW. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 42/EW value minus the Baseline value. Scheduled, unscheduled, and early withdrawal visits were used for the maximum post-Baseline assessment.|Days 14, 28, 42, and EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814302|NCT01086410|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Chloride, Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Content/Bicarbonate, Glucose, Potassium, Sodium, and Urea/Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) Values at Day 42/EW|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of chloride, carbon dioxide (CO2) content/bicarbonate, glucose, potassium, sodium, and urea/blood urea nitrogen (BUN) at Baseline and Day 42/EW. For all laboratory assessments, Baseline is the most recent recorded value at Screening or prior to Day -1/1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 42/EW value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 42/EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814303|NCT01086410|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Direct Bilirubin, Indirect Bilirubin, Total Bilirubin, and Creatinine Values at Day 42/EW|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of direct bilirubin, indirect bilirubin, total bilirubin, and creatinine at Baseline and Day 42/EW. For all laboratory assessments, Baseline is the most recent recorded value at Screening or prior to Day -1/1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 42/EW value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 42/EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Micromoles per liter (µmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814304|NCT01086410|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Albumin and Total Protein Values at Day 42/EW|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of albumin and total protein at Baseline and Day 42/EW. For all laboratory assessments, Baseline is the most recent recorded value at Screening or prior to Day -1/1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 42/EW value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 42/EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Grams per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
814315|NCT01086410|Secondary|Cmax for FF on Day 42|Cmax is defined as the maximum observed concentration on Day 42. Samples were collected at the following times: 0 (immediately pre-dose inhaled study drug); post-dose at 5 minutes (min), 15 min, 30 min, and 1 hour (hr), 2 hr, 4 hr, 9 hr, 12 hr, 16 hr, 20 hr, and 24 hr post-dose on Day 42.|Day 42|PK Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814305|NCT01086410|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Alanine Amino Transferase (ALT), Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP), Aspartate Amino Transferase (AST), Creatine Kinase (CK), and Gamma Glutamyl Transferase (GGT) Values at Day 42/EW|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of ALT, ALP, AST, CK, and GGT at Baseline and Day 42/EW. For all laboratory assessments, Baseline is the most recent recorded value at Screening or prior to Day -1/1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 42/EW value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 42/EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||International units per liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814306|NCT01086410|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hematocrit Values at Day 42/EW|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of hematocrit at Baseline and Day 42/EW. For all laboratory assessments, Baseline is the most recent recorded value at Screening or prior to Day -1/1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 42/EW value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 42/EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Proportion of 1||Standard Deviation|Mean
814307|NCT01086410|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin Values at Day 42/EW|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of hemoglobin at Baseline and Day 42/EW. For all laboratory assessments, Baseline is the most recent recorded value at Screening or prior to Day -1/1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 42/EW value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 42/EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Grams per liter (g/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814308|NCT01086410|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Eosinophil, Total Neutrophil, Platelet, and White Blood Cell (WBC) Count Values at Day 42/EW|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of eosinophils, total neutrophils, platelets, and WBC count at Baseline and Day 42/EW. For all laboratory assessments, Baseline is the most recent recorded value at Screening or prior to Day -1/1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 42/EW value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 42/EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||10^9 cells per liter (GI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814309|NCT01086410|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Basophil, Eosinophil, Lymphocyte, Monocyte, and Segmented Neutrophil Values at Day 42/Early Withdrawal (EW)|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, and segmented neutrophils at Baseline and Day 42/EW. For all laboratory assessments, Baseline is the most recent recorded value at Screening or prior to Day -1/1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 42/EW value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 42/Early Withdrawal (EW)|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
814310|NCT01086410|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE) During the Treatment Period|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. A serious adverse event (SAE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. Medical or scientific judgment should be exercised in deciding whether reporting is appropriate in other situations. Refer to the General Adverse AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs and SAEs.|From the start of study medication until Day 42 (Visit 5)/Early Withdrawal|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
814311|NCT01086410|Secondary|Tmax and Tlast of VI at Day 42|tmax is defined as the time to reach the observed maximum concentration, and tlast is defined as the time of the last observed quantifiable VI concentration on Day 42. Samples were collected at the following times: 0 (immediately pre-dose inhaled study drug); post-dose at 5 minutes (min), 15 min, 30 min, and 1hour (hr), 2 hr, 4 hr, 9 hr, 12 hr, 16 hr, 20 hr, and 24 hr post-dose on Day 42.|Day 42|PK Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||hours||Full Range|Median
814312|NCT01086410|Secondary|Cmax for VI on Day 42|Cmax is defined as the maximum observed concentration on Day 42. Samples were collected at the following times: 0 (immediately pre-dose inhaled study drug); post-dose at 5 minutes (min), 15 min, 30 min, and 1 hour (hr), 2 hr, 4 hr, 9 hr, 12 hr, 16 hr, 20 hr, and 24 hr post-dose on Day 42.|Day 42|PK Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814313|NCT01086410|Secondary|AUC(0-t) for VI on Day 42|Area under the concentration-time (AUC[0-t]) curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the last time of quantifiable VI concentration on Day 42 was measured. Samples were collected at the following times: 0 (immediately pre-dose inhaled study drug); post-dose at 5 minutes (min), 15 min, 30 min, and 1 hour (hr), 2 hr, 4 hr, 9 hr, 12 hr, 16 hr, 20 hr, and 24 hr post-dose on Day 42.|Day 42|PK Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||picograms*hour per milliliter (pg*hr/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814314|NCT01086410|Secondary|Tmax and Tlast of FF at Day 42|tmax is defined as the time to reach the observed maximum concentration, and tlast is defined as the time of the last observed quantifiable concentration on Day 42. Samples were collected at the following times: 0 (immediately pre-dose inhaled study drug); post-dose at 5 minutes (min), 15 min, 30 min, and 1hour (hr), 2 hr, 4 hr, 9 hr, 12 hr, 16 hr, 20 hr, and 24 hr post-dose on Day 42.|Day 42|PK Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||hours||Full Range|Median
824835|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of All Death (Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular) and All MI||12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
814316|NCT01086410|Secondary|AUC(0-t) and AUC(0-24) for FF on Day 42|Area under the plasma drug concentration-time (AUC[0-t]) curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the last time of quantifiable FF concentration and AUC(0-24) is the concentration time curve from zero (pre-dose) to 24 hours of quantifiable FF concentration on Day 42 was measured. AUC reflects the actual body exposure to drug over a specified period of time after administration of a dose. Samples were collected at the following times: 0 (immediately pre-dose inhaled study drug); post-dose at 5 minutes (min), 15 min, 30 min, and 1 hour (hr), 2 hr, 4 hr, 9 hr, 12 hr, 16 hr, 20 hr, and 24 hr post-dose on Day 42.|Day 42|PK Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the PK Population.||picograms*hour per milliliter (pg*hr/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814317|NCT01086410|Secondary|Plasma FF and VI Pharmacokinetic (PK) Concentration|Plasma FF and VI Pharmacokinetic (PK) Concentration were estimates at the following time points:0 (immediately pre-dose inhaled study drug), and post-dose at 5 min, 15 min, 30 min, and 1 hr, 2 hr, 4 hr, 9 hr, 12 hr, 16 hr, 20 hr, 24 hr on Day 42. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the Pharmacokinetic Population.|Day 42|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population: all participants in the ITT Population for whom a pharmacokinetic sample was obtained and analyzed.||picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814318|NCT01086410|Secondary|Ratio From Baseline of 0-24 Hour Urinary Free Cortisol Excretion on Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42|A 24-hour urine sample was collected for the measurement of 24-hour urinary cortisol excretion at Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed. Because values are on a logged scale, the ratio of the endpoint to Baseline is presented, as it is a measure of the difference from Baseline.|Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42|Urine Cortisol (UC) Population: all participants in the ITT Population who did not have protocol deviations that were considered to affect the urine cortisol endpoint and whose urine samples were not considered to have confounding factors that would affect the interpretation of the results.||ratio from Baseline||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814319|NCT01086410|Secondary|Ratio From Baseline of Serum Cortisol Trough (0-24 Hours) at Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42|Serum cortisol trough is defined as the minimum value of serum cortisol measured over the 24-hour period. Samples were collected at the following times: 0 (immediately pre-dose inhaled study drug); post-dose at 5 minutes (min), 15 min, 30 min, and 1 hour (hr), 2 hr, 4 hr, 9 hr, 12 hr, 16 hr, 20 hr, and 24 hr. Because values are on a logged scale, the ratio of the endpoint to Baseline is presented, as it is a measure of the difference from Baseline.|Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42|SC Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||ratio from Baseline||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814320|NCT01086410|Secondary|Ratio From Baseline of the Serum Cortisol Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) (0-24 Hour) on Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42|Area under the plasma drug concentration-time (AUC[0-24 hour]) curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the last time of quantifiable serum cortisol concentration at 24 hours post-dose on Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42 was measured. AUC reflects the actual body exposure to drug over a specified period of time after administration of a dose. Samples were collected at the following times: 0 (immediately pre-dose inhaled study drug); post-dose at 5 minutes (min), 15 min, 30 min, and 1 hour (hr), 2 hr, 4 hr, 9 hr, 12 hr, 16 hr, 20 hr, and 24 hr. Because values are on a logged scale, the ratio of the endpoint to Baseline is presented, as it is a measure of the difference from Baseline.|Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42|SC Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||ratio from Baseline||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814321|NCT01086410|Primary|Ratio From Baseline of the Serum Cortisol Weighted Mean (0–24 Hours) on Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42|"Serum cortisol weighted mean was determined for each participant over the time period 0–12 hours on Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42. Serum cortisol weighted mean was derived by dividing the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC; defined as thearea under the concentration-time curve from time zero up to 24 hours) by the sample collection time interval. The sample collection time interval is defined as the difference between the time of the last cortisol sample and the time of the first cortisol sample. Samples were collected at the following time points: 0 (first blood draw/pre-dose); 2, 4, 9, 12, 14, 16, 20, 22, and 24 hours (relative to the 0 time point). Because values are on a logged scale, the ratio of the endpoint to Baseline is presented, as it is a measure of the difference from Baseline."|Day -1/1 (Baseline) and Day 42|Serum Cortisol (SC) Population: all participants in the Intent-to-Treat Population who did not have protocol deviations that were considered to affect the SC endpoint and whose serum samples were not considered to have confounding factors affecting results interpretation. Only those participant available at the specified time points were analzyed.||ratio from Baseline||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814322|NCT01086423|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|During the entire study period (from Month 0 to Month 4/5)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
814323|NCT01086423|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) post-vaccination period after any dose|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
814855|NCT01085318|Secondary|Change in Volume (in Millimeters Cubed) of Normal Appearing Brain Tissue (NABT) With Decreasing (Indicative of Demyelination) Voxel-wise Magnetization Transfer Ratio (VW-MTR)From Baseline to 6 Months|To characterize the effect of Rebif on demyelination using VW-MTR dynamic mapping of NABT in subjects ith RRMS over 6 months of treatment compared to a group of healthy Control (HC).|Baseline to Month 6|||mm^3||Full Range|Median
814324|NCT01086423|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above 37.0 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade or relationship to study vaccination.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period after each vaccine dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented, who had their symptom sheets filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
814325|NCT01086423|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period after each vaccine dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented, who had their symptom sheets filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
814326|NCT01086423|Secondary|Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in EL.U/mL.|Before (Month 0) and one month after the third dose of study vaccine (Month 3 or Month 4)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included a subset of evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814327|NCT01086423|Secondary|Anti-polio Types 1, 2 and 3 Antibody Titers|Antibody titers were presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|Before the first dose (Month 0) and one month after the third dose of study vaccine (Month 3 or Month 4)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included a subset of evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814328|NCT01086423|Secondary|Anti-PRP Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in µg/mL.|Before the first dose (Month 0) and one month after the third dose of study vaccine (Month 3 or Month 4)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included a subset of evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component were available.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814329|NCT01086423|Secondary|Anti-D and Anti-T Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in IU/mL.|Before the first dose (Month 0) and one month after the third dose of vaccination (Month 3 or Month 4)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included a subset of evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component were available.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814330|NCT01086423|Primary|Number of Subjects With a Vaccine Response to Pertussis Toxoid (PT), Filamentous Haemagglutinin (FHA) and Pertactin (PRN) Antibodies|"Vaccine response was defined as:
For PT and FHA response, antibody concentration ≥ 20 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units per milliliter (EL.U/mL) at post-vaccination.
For PRN response: for initially seronegative subjects [antibody concentration lower than (<) 5 EL.U/mL], post-vaccination antibody concentration ≥ 20 EL.U/mL; for initially seropositive subjects (antibody concentration ≥ 5 EL.U/mL), at least a 4-fold increase in antibody concentration from pre to post-vaccination."|One month after the third vaccine dose (Month 3 or Month 4)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included a subset of evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
814331|NCT01086423|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3 Antigens|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with anti-poliovirus (anti-polio) types 1, 2 and 3 antibody titres ≥ the value of 8.|One month after the third vaccine dose (Month 3 or Month 4)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included a subset of evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
814332|NCT01086423|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Polyribosyl-ribitol-phosphate (PRP) Antigen|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with anti-PRP antibody concentrations ≥ 0.15 micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL).|One month after the third vaccine dose (Month 3 or Month 4)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included a subset of evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
814333|NCT01086423|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Diphtheria (D) and Tetanus (T) Antigens|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with anti-D and anti-T antibody concentrations greater than or equal to (≥) 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|One month after the third vaccine dose (Month 3 or Month 4)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included a subset of evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
814334|NCT01086475|Primary|Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) at Follow-Up|"The 65-item SRS is a standardized measure of the core symptoms of autism. Each item is scored on a 4-point Likert scale. The score of each individual item is summed to create a total raw score. A total scores results are as follows:
0-62: Within normal limits 63-79: Mild range of impairment 80-108: Moderate range of impairment 109-149: Severe range of impairment"|Completed at Week 22|Each group included up to four children with ASD and two typically-developing peer models (TPs) in the same age group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814370|NCT01087502|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Change From Baseline to Week 12|This change from baseline reflects the Week 12 FPG minus the baseline FPG. Means are treatment-adjusted for baseline HbA1c, baseline FPG and prior use of insulin, week repeated within patient and week by treatment interaction.|Baseline and week 12|One patient in the Placebo/Glimepiride arm and one patient in the Linagliptin arm without FPG on-treatment value. Results do not contain data of patients from the excluded study site.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
814335|NCT01086475|Secondary|Clinical Global Impressions Improvement Scale Responder Analysis|The CGI Global Improvement (CGI-I) is a clinician-rate scale designed to take into account all factors to arrive at an assessment of severity and response to treatment, including parent report, parent-rated measures, teacher-rated measures, and clinician-rated measures. The CGI-I is rated from 1 to 7 (1 = very much improved; 2 = much improved; 3 = minimally improved; 4 = no change; 5 = minimally worse; 6 = much worse; 7 = very much worse) at a single time-point. The CGI-I was completed at each visit, but only at week 11 were those subjects classified as “much” or “very much improved” defined as responders and all other classifications will be regarded as non-responders.|Week 11|Each social skills group included up to four children with ASD and two typically-developing peer models (TPs) in the same age group.||percentage of participants|||Number
814336|NCT01086475|Primary|Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) Change|"The 65-item SRS is a standardized measure of the core symptoms of autism. Each item is scored on a 4-point Likert scale. The score of each individual item is summed to create a total raw score. A total scores results are as follows:
0-62: Within normal limits 63-79: Mild range of impairment 80-108: Moderate range of impairment 109-149: Severe range of impairment"|Completed at Baseline and Week 11|Each group included up to four children with ASD and two typically-developing peer models (TPs) in the same age group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814337|NCT01086605|Secondary|Toxicity|For this secondary endpoint, toxicity is defined as a grade 3 or higher adverse events that is classified as either possibly, probably, or definitely related to study treatment. The assignment of attribution to study treatment and grade (or degree of severity) of the adverse event are classified using the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. The number of participants reporting a grade 3 or higher toxicity is reported. For a list of all reported adverse events, please refer to the Adverse Events Section below.|Up to 1 year after treatment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
814338|NCT01086605|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response is defined for all evaluable patients with measurable disease who have achieved a confirmed response as the date at which the patient’s earliest best objective status is first noted to be either a CR or PR to the earliest date progression is documented at each dose level. If a patient dies subsequent to the confirmed response without a documentation of disease progression, the patient will be considered to have had disease progression at the time of their death. In the case of a patient failing to return for evaluations before a documentation of disease progression, the patient will be censored for progression on the date of last evaluation. The distribution of duration of response will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier at each dose level.|Up to 5 years|||months||Full Range|Mean
814339|NCT01086605|Secondary|Overall Survival Time|Survival time is defined as the time from registration to death due to any cause. The distribution of survival time will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier at each dose level.|Up to 5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814340|NCT01086605|Secondary|6-month Progression-free Survival Rate|The 6-month progression free survival (6-mo PFS) rate is the proportion of efficacy-evaluable patients progression-free 6 months from registration. The 6-mo PFS rate is defined as the total number of efficacy-evaluable patients on study without documentation of disease progression 6 months from registration divided by the total number of efficacy-evaluable patients enrolled on study. Patients who died without documentation of progression will be considered to have progressed on the date of their death. The true 6-mo PFS rate will be estimated by the proportion of efficacy-evaluable patients on study without documentation of disease progression 6 months from registration at each dose level. Binomial confidence intervals for 6-mo PFS rate will be constructed for each dose level. Progression is defined using the revised Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines (version 1.1).|At 6 months|||proportion||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814341|NCT01086605|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|Time to disease progression is defined as the time from registration to the earliest date of documentation of disease progression. If a patient dies without a documentation of disease progression the patient will be considered to have had disease progression at the time of their death. If the patient is declared to be a major treatment violation, the patient will be censored on the date the treatment violation was declared to have occurred. In the case of a patient starting treatment and then never returning for any evaluations, the patient will be censored for progression one day post-registration. The distribution of time to progression will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier at each dose level. Progression is defined using the revised Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines (version 1.1).|Up to 5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814342|NCT01086605|Primary|Proportion of Confirmed Tumor Responses (Complete or Partial Response)|The proportion of confirmed responses will be estimated by the number of women who achieve a CR or PR on two consecutive evaluations at least 6-8 weeks apart depending on the dose level. The proportion of successes will be estimated by the number of successes divided by the total number of evaluable patients at each dose level. Confidence intervals for the true success proportion at each dose level will be calculated according to the approach of Duffy and Santner. Response will be evaluated in this study using the revised Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines (version 1.1); Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all non-nodal target lesions, each target lymph node must have reduction in short axis to <1.0 cm. and normalization of tumor biomarkers. Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameters of the non-nodal target lesions and the short axis of the target lymph nodes taking as reference the Baseline Sum of Diameters.|Up to 5 years|||proportion||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814343|NCT01086761|Secondary|Number of Participants With Positive Binding Anti-MP0112 Antibodies|Blood samples were collected Pre-treatment (Baseline) and Weeks 4, 8 and 12. Samples were analyzed for Anti-MP0112 antibodies using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.|12 weeks|Safety Population included all treated participants.||Participants|||Number
814344|NCT01086761|Secondary|Maximum Serum Concentration (Cmax) of MP0112 at Day 3|Blood samples were collected for MP0112 levels on Day 3. The serum samples (liquid portion of the blood after cells and clotting factors were removed) were sent to a laboratory and were analyzed for MP0112 levels using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Maximum concentration at Day 3 was calculated.|Day 3|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population included all treated participants with PK data.||Nanomolar (nM)|||Number
814915|NCT01085968|Secondary|Task Errors and Variability|Left, right and bimanual errors in external cue and internally generated tasks for four-digit trials|time of enrollment and 2 months following enrollment (before and after training)|||Number of Errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
814345|NCT01086761|Secondary|Area of Lesion as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography|Fluorescein angiography (FA) is a technique for examining the circulation of the retina (and detecting any leakage) using a dye-tracing method. Photographs are taken with a specialized low-power microscope with an attached camera designed to photograph the interior of the eye, including the retina and optic disc. FA was performed on the dilated study eye after fluorescein application at Baseline and Week 4. A lower number indicated a smaller lesion area.|Baseline, Week 4|All treated participants with data available for analysis.||mm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
814346|NCT01086761|Secondary|Area of Leakage as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography|Fluorescein angiography (FA) is a technique for examining the circulation of the retina (and detecting any leakage) using a dye-tracing method. Photographs are taken with a specialized low-power microscope with an attached camera designed to photograph the interior of the eye, including the retina and optic disc. FA was performed on the dilated study eye 10 minutes after fluorescein application at Baseline and Week 4. A lower number indicated a smaller area of leakage.|Baseline, Week 4|All treated participants.||mm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
814347|NCT01086761|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Central Area Retinal Thickness|Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT), a laser based non-invasive diagnostic system providing high-resolution imaging sections of the retina, was performed in the study eye after pupil dilation at Baseline and Week 4. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement (less retinal thickness). A positive change from Baseline indicated worsening (definite retinal thickening).|Baseline, Week 4|All treated participants.||μm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814348|NCT01086761|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Stable or Improved Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA)|BCVA was measured using an eye chart and was reported as the number of letters read correctly (ranging from 0 to 100 letters) in the study eye at Baseline and Week 4. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or visual acuity). The higher the letters read correctly on the eye chart the better the vision. Stable or Improved BCVA was defined as a loss of <15 letters read correctly compared to Baseline.|Baseline, Week 4|All treated participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814349|NCT01086761|Primary|Maximal Tolerated Dose (MTD) Following a Single Injection|MTD was defined as one dose level below the lower of the dose level in which a severe (sight-threatening) drug-related Adverse Event occurred or the dose level at which more than 2 patients experienced a moderate ocular (eye) drug-related toxicity.|16 weeks|All treated participants.||mg|||Number
814350|NCT01086852|Primary|Number of Participants With Degree of Bleeding Control Rated as Excellent.|"Investigators made an overall assessment of FACTOR X in controlling bleeding at the End of Treatment Assessment. The degree of bleeding control was rated as excellent, good, poor or unassessable, in accordance with the following criteria listed below:
Excellent -Parameters were similar to those in subjects without a bleeding disorder.
Good -Parameters were inferior to those in subjects without a bleeding disorder, but no other factor X containing agents were required to restore haemostasis.
Poor - Blood loss was excessive (defined as more than twice the pre defined amount that would be expected in a subject without a bleeding disorder for this type of surgery) and/or Haemostasis was not achieved and/or Additional factor X containing agents were required to restore haemostasis.
Unassessable -Efficacy was not possible to assess, or Additional factor X containing agents (excluding blood transfusions) were required before efficacy of FACTOR X could be assessed."|During and till end of treatment|The ITT population will be defined as all surgical procedures in which subjects were treated with at least one dose of FACTOR X and have undergone surgery.||Participants|||Number
814351|NCT01086852|Secondary|Dose Per Infusion (IU/kg)|weight adjusted dose per infusion until a subject was no longer at risk of bleeding due to surgery|before surgery, during the post operative period|The ITT population will be defined as all surgical procedures in which subjects were treated with at least one dose of FACTOR X and have undergone surgery.||IU/kg||Full Range|Median
814352|NCT01086852|Primary|Change of Haemoglobin From Pre-surgery Till End of Treatment|The subject’s haemoglobin was measured pre operatively, within 2 hours post operatively and at the End of Treatment Assessment. Changes in the subject’s haemoglobin from pre to post operatively and from post operatively to the End of Treatment Assessment were assessed, taking into account the volume of fluid infused into the subject during the intervening periods, any blood transfusions in the intervening periods, the subject’s haematocrit at the same time points and the subject’s pre dose serum ferritin|2 hrs pre-operatively till end of treatment|The ITT population will be defined as all surgical procedures in which subjects were treated with at least one dose of FACTOR X and have undergone surgery.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
814353|NCT01086852|Primary|Number of Post Operative Bleeding Episodes (See Table Below)|Bleeding was assessed at least once each day by the investigator, more frequently if indicated by the severity of the operation or the subject’s response. This included all bleeding episodes from the end of the surgical procedure until the subject was no longer at risk of bleeding due to surgery|End of surgery till end of study|The ITT population will be defined as all surgical procedures in which subjects were treated with at least one dose of FACTOR X and have undergone surgery.||number of bleeds|||Number
814354|NCT01086852|Primary|Requirement for Blood Transfusion|Number of blood transfusions required (units of packed red blood cells or units of whole blood) or infusion of autologous red cells during and after surgery|during and after surgery|The ITT population will be defined as all surgical procedures in which subjects were treated with at least one dose of FACTOR X and have undergone surgery.||number of transfusions|||Number
814355|NCT01086852|Primary|Clinical Assessment of Blood Loss During Surgery Against the Volume of Blood Loss Expected in Patients Without a Bleeding Disorder.|The investigator's estimation of the volume of blood loss during surgery compared to the volume of blood loss expected in patients without a bleeding disorder undergoing the same surgical procedure and reported as greater than, equal to or less than.|After wound closure|All subjects treated with FACTOR X||participants|||Number
814356|NCT01086852|Secondary|Incremental Recovery After Bolus Dose of FACTOR X|"Incremental Recovery of FX:C after the Pre surgery Bolus Infusion The factor X increment is calculated by subtracting the pre-infusion factor X level from the post-dose value.
Incremental recovery is calculated by FX increment (IU/dL)/ FX dose (IU/kg)"|incremental recovery was assessed at approximately 30 minutes after the pre surgery bolus|The ITT population will be defined as all surgical procedures in which subjects were treated with at least one dose of FACTOR X and have undergone surgery.||IU/dL per IU/kg||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
814357|NCT01086852|Primary|Clinical Estimation of Volume of Blood Loss During Surgery|"As soon as possible after wound closure, the investigator estimated the volume of blood loss during surgery and made a clinical assessment against the volume of blood loss typically expected in a normal patient (i.e. one without a bleeding disorder and undergoing the same surgical procedure). The assessment may have been supported by a swab and pad count.
The clinical assessment was rated as follows:
Blood loss less than expected
Blood loss as expected
Blood loss more than expected
Blood loss excessive (defined as more than twice the pre defined amount that would be expected in a normal patient for this type of surgery)"|Blood loss is measured during and after surgery, the overall assessment is made after the last dose of FACTOR X.|The ITT population will be defined as all surgical procedures in which subjects were treated with at least one dose of FACTOR X and have undergone surgery.||ml||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
814358|NCT01086969|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting a Solicited Injection Site or Systemic Reactions Following Menactra Vaccination|Solicited injection site: Pain, Erythema (Redness), and Swelling. Solicited Systemic reaction: Fever (Temperature), Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia|Day 0 to 7 post-vaccination|Safety parameters were assessed in the safety analysis set||Participants|||Number
814359|NCT01086969|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 4-fold Increase in Antibodies to Menactra Vaccine Antigens Post Vaccination|Antibodies to Menactra antigens determined by the serum bactericidal assay baby rabbit complement (SBA-BR) test.|Day 0 to 30 post-vaccination|Four-fold antibody increase were determined in the immunogenicity analysis set||Percentage of Participants|||Number
814360|NCT01086969|Primary|Serum Bactericidal Assay Baby Rabbit Complement (SBA BR) Geometric Mean Titers Before and Post Menactra Vaccination|Antibodies to Menactra antigens determined by the serum bactericidal assay baby rabbit complement (SBA-BR) test.|Day 0 and Day 30 post-vaccination|Geometric mean titers were determined in the immunogenicity analysis set||1/dilution (1/dil)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814361|NCT01086969|Primary|Number of Participants With Vaccine Antibody Titers at ≥ 8 Before and After Menactra Vaccination|Antibodies to Menactra vaccine were measured by the Serum bactericidal assay baby rabbit complement (SBA BR) Test.|Baseline and 21 days post-vaccination|Menactra vaccine antibody titers were determined in the immunogenicity analysis set.||Participants|||Number
814362|NCT01087489|Secondary|Presence and Severity of Keratopathy and the Size of Subconjunctival Hemorrhage|"Presence of corneal staining after the injection:
Quadrants of fluorescein staining: 0 1 2 3 4
Density of staining: 0- None 1- Mild 2- Moderate 3- Severe 4- corneal abrasion
Size of subconjunctival hemorrhage:
in clock hours"|within 10 minutes of the injection|all eyes for which data were available were included||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
814363|NCT01087489|Secondary|Intraocular Pressure Change After Intravitreal Injection With Each Anesthetic Method, Results Reported in mmHg|intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured immediately after the injection, and at 5, 10, and 15 minutes after the injection (until it was 30 mmHg or below). Prior to injection IOP and post-injection IOP were compared to find the IOP change after injection.|immediately after injection, at 5, 10, 15 minutes|48 participants were included in each arm, i.e. each participant received both methods, one eye twice if unilateral or both eyes if bilateral disease were randomily assigned to alternate prep on consecutive or same visit respectively||mmHg|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
814364|NCT01087489|Primary|Discomfort Level and Patient Satisfaction With the Preparation Protocol and Intravitreal Injection|"Discomfort according to the Eye Sensation Scale: 1-none, 2- mild, 3- moderate, 4- severe, 5- extremely severe
Patient satisfaction scale: 1=very unsatisfied, 2=unsatisfied, 3=neutral, 4=satisfied, 5= extremely satisfied"|immediately after injection, 1- hour later, and next day|all 50 patients who completed the study were included in the analysis, each patient received both anesthetic preparations prior to two consecutive (if unilateral disease) intravitreal injections on consecutive visits or in fellow eyes (if bilaterla disease) on the same day||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814365|NCT01087502|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of Linagliptin at Trough|Trough levels of concentration of Linagliptin in plasma.|Week 12, 24 and 52|FAS original results (OR). Original results analysis means that data is analyzed exactly as observed, values after rescue medication are not set to missing and no imputation rule is applied for replacing the missing values.||Nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814366|NCT01087502|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Have a HbA1c Lowering by at Least 0.5%|The percentage of patients with an HbA1c reduction of ≥0.5% at week 12 and week 52 from baseline was calculated for each treatment arm. If a patient did not have an HbA1c value at week 12 or 52 respectively they were considered a failure, so HbA1c reduction less than 0.5%.|Baseline, week 12 and week 52|FAS with non-completers considered as failure imputation (NCF). Results after Week 12 include patients from the excluded study site.||percentage of patients|||Number
814367|NCT01087502|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <6.5%|The percentage of patients with an HbA1c value below 6.5% at week 12 and week 52 was calculated for each treatment arm. If a patient did not have an HbA1c value at week 12 or 52 respectively they were considered a failure, so HbA1c above 6.5%.|Baseline, week 12 and week 52|FAS with baseline HbA1c >=6.5% and non-completers considered as failure imputation (NCF). Results after Week 12 include patients from the excluded study site.||percentage of patients|||Number
814368|NCT01087502|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7.0%|The percentage of patients with an HbA1c value below 7% at week 12 and week 52 were calculated for each treatment arm. If a patient did not have an HbA1c value at week 12 or 52 respectively, they were considered a failure, so HbA1c above 7%.|Baseline, week 12 and week 52|FAS with baseline HbA1c >=7% and non-completers considered as failure imputation (NCF). Results after Week 12 include patients from the excluded study site.||percentage of patients|||Number
814369|NCT01087502|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Change From Baseline Over Time|This change from baseline reflects the FPG over time minus the baseline FPG. This outcome measure only provides descriptive statistics without any modelling.|Baseline, week 4, week 8, week 12, week 20, week 24, week 28, week 34, week 40, week 46, week 52|FAS. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule. Results do not contain data of patients from the excluded study site.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814419|NCT01087918|Secondary|Pain on a Visual Analogue Scale|Pain was scored on a visual analogue scale from 0 (= no pain) to 100 (= maximal pain). Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Negative values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|Only 8 patients participated at pain assessments as 1 patient did not suffer from pain.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814371|NCT01087502|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline Over Time|HbA1c is measured as a percentage. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the HbA1c percent over time minus the baseline HbA1c percent. This outcome measure only provides descriptive statistics without any modelling.|Baseline, week 4, week 8, week 12, week 16, week 20, week 24, week 28, week 34, week 40, week 46, week 52|FAS. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule. Results do not contain data of patients from the excluded study site.||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
814372|NCT01087502|Primary|HbA1c Change From Baseline to Week 12|HbA1c is measured as a percentage. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 12 HbA1c percent minus the baseline HbA1c percent. Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c, renal function impairment and prior use of antidiabetic agents.|Baseline and week 12|"FAS consisting of all randomised patients who were treated with at least one dose of study drug, had a baseline, and at least 1 on-treatment HbA1c measurement. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.
Results for primary endpoint below are the ones reproduced without patients from the excluded study site."||Percent||Standard Error|Mean
814373|NCT01087528|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Scoring Index 3 or 4|"Overall colon cleanliness was judged for capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy on a four-point grading index scale as follows:
poor cleansing level (Large amount of fecal residue.)
fair cleansing level (Enough feces or dark fluid present to preclude a completely reliable examination.)
good cleansing level (Small amount of feces or dark fluid, but not enough to interfere with examination.)
excellent cleansing level (No more than small bits of adherent feces.)"|within 7 days||||||
814374|NCT01087528|Primary|Specificity of Capsule Endoscopy for Indicated Polyps|Readings of videos from the PillCam COLON were performed by trained physicians who identified polyps (types and sizes). Specificity was calculated as the percentage of participants who had negative findings on capsule endoscopy (of a specified category) among participants with negative colonoscopy findings of the same category (reported in Outcome Measure 1). This corresponds to 1 - the false positive rate.|within 7 days||||||
814375|NCT01087528|Primary|Sensitivity of Capsule Endoscopy for Indicated Polyps|Readings of videos from the PillCam COLON were performed by trained physicians who identified polyps (types and sizes). Sensitivity was calculated as the percentage of participants who had positive findings on capsule endoscopy (of a specified category) among those participants who had positive findings on colonoscopy of the same category .The false negative rate is equal to 1 - sensitivity and indicated the percentage of polyps missed by capsule endoscopy.|within 7 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814376|NCT01087541|Secondary|Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure||6 months|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
814377|NCT01087541|Secondary|Blood Pressure ( Systolic / Diastolic )||Baseline|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
814378|NCT01087541|Primary|Glycosylated Haemoglobin A1c at 6 Months|Glycohemoglobin A1c at 6 months.|6 months|||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
814379|NCT01087541|Secondary|BMI at 6 Months||6 months|||kg/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
814380|NCT01087541|Secondary|BMI ( Body Mass Index ) at Start||Baseline|||kg/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
814381|NCT01087541|Primary|Glycosylated Haemoglobin A1c at Start||Baseline|||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
814382|NCT01087723|Secondary|The Incidence of Stroke|Incidence=the number of participants to experience the event/total number of at risk participants x 100. Stroke was defined as a sudden, focal neurological defect resulting from a cerebrovascular cause, resulting in death or lasting greater than 24 hours that was not due to a readily identifiable cause, such as a tumor, infection, or trauma.|Within 30 days|Participants who were randomized and signed an ICF; ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814383|NCT01087723|Secondary|The Incidence of Thrombocytopenia|Incidence=the number of participants to experience the event/total number of at risk participants x 100. Thrombocytopenia was defined as a post-procedural platelet count <100,000 cells/millimeter cubed (cells/mm^3) in a participant with a baseline or pre-procedural platelet count >100,000 cells/mm^3.|Within 30 days|Participants who were randomized and signed an ICF; ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814384|NCT01087723|Secondary|The Incidence of Stent Thrombosis (Academic Research Consortium [ARC Definition])|Incidence=the number of participants to experience the event/total number of at risk participants x 100. Stent thrombosis, based on the ARC definition, was defined as angiographic confirmation of stent thrombosis, non-occlusive thrombus, occlusive thrombus, or pathological confirmation of stent thrombosis.|Within 30 days|Participants who were randomized and signed an ICF; ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814385|NCT01087723|Secondary|The Incidence of Minor Bleeding: TIMI and GUSTO|Incidence=the number of participants to experience the event/total number of at risk participants x 100. Minor bleeding based on TIMI criteria was defined as any clinically overt sign of bleeding (including observation by imaging techniques) that was associated with a fall in Hb of ≥3 g/dL and ≤5 g/dL (or, when Hb was not available, an absolute drop in Hct of ≥9% and ≤15%). Minor bleeding based on GUSTO criteria was defined as other bleed not requiring blood transfusion or causing hemodynamic compromise.|Within 30 days|Participants who were randomized and signed an ICF; ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814386|NCT01087723|Secondary|The Incidence of Major Bleeding: Thrombolysis in MI (TIMI) and Global Utilization of Streptokinase and tPA for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO)|Incidence=the number of participants to experience the event/total number of at risk participants x 100. Major bleeding based on TIMI criteria was defined as any intra-cranial bleeding, or any bleeding associated with clinically overt signs associated with a drop in Hb of >5 g/dL (or, when Hb was not available, an absolute drop in hematocrit [Hct] >15%). Major bleeding based on GUSTO criteria was defined as severe/life-threatening: intra-cranial hemorrhage or resulting in substantial hemodynamic compromise requiring treatment.|Within 30 days|Participants who were randomized and signed an ICF; ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814387|NCT01087723|Secondary|The Incidence of Death at 1 Year|Incidence=the number of participants to experience the event/total number of at risk participants x 100. Death was defined as death from any cause at any time.|Within 1 Year|Participants who were randomized and signed an ICF; ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814420|NCT01087918|Secondary|Manual Muscle Test of the Lower Extremity|With the manual muscle test, we examined strength of the lower extremities. Five key muscles on each side are evaluated from 0 (= total paralysis) to 5 (= normal strength). Values for left and right were then averaged. Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Positive values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814388|NCT01087723|Secondary|The Incidence of Death, Re-infarction, Non-CABG-related Major Bleeding, or Ischemia-driven Revascularization (IDR)|Incidence=number of participants to experience the event/total number of at risk participants x 100. Death from any cause at any time. Re-infarction was a positive diagnosis of re-infarction not associated with index PCI. Non-CABG major bleeding was any 1 of: intracranial, retroperitoneal, intraocular, access site hemorrhage requiring radiological or surgical intervention, reduction in Hb concentration of >4 g/dL without an overt source of bleeding, reduction in hemoglobin concentration of >3 g/dL with an overt source of bleeding, re-intervention for bleeding, use of any blood product transfusion. IDR was any refractory ischemia-driven repeat percutaneous intervention or bypass graft surgery involving any native coronary or pre-existing bypass graft vessel. In the absence of pain, new ST segment changes indicative of ischemia, acute pulmonary edema, ventricular arrhythmias, or hemodynamic instability presumed to be ischemic in origin, will constitute sufficient evidence of ischemia.|Within 30 days|Participants who were randomized and signed an ICF; ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814389|NCT01087723|Secondary|The Composite Incidence of Death, Re-infarction (MI), or Non-CABG Major Bleeding|A participant had a composite event if the participant experienced at least 1 of the 3 components (death, re-infarction [MI], or non-CABG major bleeding) of the composite. Incidence=the number of participants to experience the event/total number of at risk participants x 100. Death was defined as death from any cause at any time. Non-CABG major bleeding was defined as any one of the following: intracranial, retroperitoneal, intraocular, access site hemorrhage requiring radiological or surgical intervention, reduction in Hb concentration of >4 g/dL without an overt source of bleeding, reduction in hemoglobin concentration of >3 g/dL with an overt source of bleeding, re-intervention for bleeding, use of any blood product transfusion. MI was defined as a positive diagnosis of re-infarction (new event) not associated with index PCI.|Within 30 days|Participants who were randomized and signed an ICF; ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814390|NCT01087723|Primary|The Composite Incidence of Death and Non-coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) Major Bleeding|A participant was defined to have had a composite event if the participant experienced at least 1 of the 2 components (death or non-CABG major bleeding) of the composite. Incidence=the number of participants to experience the event/total number of at risk participants x 100. Death was defined as death from any cause at any time. Non-CABG major bleeding was defined as any 1 of the following: intra-cranial, retroperitoneal, intraocular, access site hemorrhage requiring radiological or surgical intervention, reduction in hemoglobin (Hb) concentration of >4 grams/deciliter (g/dL) without an overt source of bleeding, reduction in hemoglobin concentration of >3 g/dL with an overt source of bleeding; re-intervention for bleeding, or use of any blood product transfusion.|Within 30 days|Participants who were randomized and signed an ICF; ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814391|NCT01087736|Other Pre-specified|PTSD Symptom Severity|The average PTSD symptom severity score during treatment (weeks 4, 8, 12). The PTSD Checklist (PCL) is a self-report measure of the 17 DSM-IV symptoms of PTSD. Respondents rate on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely) how much they were bothered by each symptom in the past month. A total symptom severity score (range = 17 - 85) can be obtained by summing the scores from the 17 items, with higher scores indicating greater severity of PTSD symptoms. Mean scores may be calculated for subscales of intrusion (range 5-25), avoidance (range 7-35), and arousal (range 5-25).|Weeks 4, 8, 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814392|NCT01087736|Primary|Percent Drinking Days (%DD)|"Alcohol consumption was assessed at baseline and weekly during the treatment phase (12 weeks) using the Time Line Follow Back (TLFB) interview which yields number of days of alcohol use (DD).
DD: day on which alcohol was consumed Standard alcoholic drink defined as containing 13.6 g of pure alcohol."|Weekly, weeks 1-12, average|||percent days in a week||Standard Deviation|Mean
814393|NCT01087762|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sacroiliac Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) Score at Week 12|The SPARCC scoring method for lesions found on the Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is based on an abnormal increased signal on the Short-Tau-Inversion Recovery (STIR) sequence, representing bone marrow edema. Total Sacroiliac (SI) joint SPARCC score can range from 0 to 72 with higher scores indicating higher joint inflammation. A negative value in SPARCC change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline. The higher the negative value the higher the reduction of inflammation.|From Baseline to Week 12|The analysis was performed in the Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Set, a subgroup of subjects participating in an imaging substudy, where MRI measurements at Baseline and Week 12 were performed. Of the 325 patients randomized, 153 participated in the imaging substudy. Of these 153 subjects in the MRI Set, 140 are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814394|NCT01087762|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Spine Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Scoring System for Disease Activity (ASspiMRI-a) in the Berlin Modification at Week 12|The Berlin modification of the ASspiMRI-a is a scoring system with a concentration on Short-Tau-Inversion Recovery (STIR) sequences without other fat saturation techniques. It quantifies changes in 23 Vertebral Units (VU) of the spine. A VU is defined as the region between 2 virtual lines through the middle of each vertebra. Active inflammation is scored by grading the degree of bone marrow edema from 0 to 3 in 1 dimension on 1 or more consecutive slices that represent the highest level of inflammation in a particular VU. Total spine ASspiMRI-a score in the Berlin modification can range from 0 to 69 with higher scores indicating higher disease activity. A negative value in total spine ASspiMRI-a score change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline. The higher the negative value the higher the reduction of inflammation.|From Baseline to Week 12|The analysis was performed in the Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Set, a subgroup of subjects participating in an imaging substudy, where MRI measurements at Baseline and Week 12 were performed. Of the 325 patients randomized, 153 participated in the imaging substudy. Of these 153 subjects in the MRI Set, 148 are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814421|NCT01087918|Secondary|Mean Latency of the Averaged Motor Evoked Potentials of the Right and the Left M. Tibialis|Motor evoked potential was elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Negative values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814422|NCT01087918|Secondary|Spinal Cord Independence Measure III|The SCIM assesses functional independence after spinal cord injury. It is scored from 0 (= total dependence in everyday life) to 100 points (= complete independence in everyday life). Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Positive values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814395|NCT01087762|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) at Week 24|The BASMI characterizes the spinal mobility of subjects with axial SpA and AS. It is a disease-specific measure consisting of 5 clinical measures to reflect subject axial status: cervical rotation; tragus to wall distance; lateral lumbar flexion; lumbar flexion (modified Schober test); intermalleolar distance. According to the linear definition of the BASMI a score of 0 to 10 is calculated for each item based on the measurement. The mean of the sum of the 5 scores provides the BASMI score. The higher the BASMI score the more severe the patient’s limitation of movement due to their axial SpA. A negative value in BASMI change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline. The higher the negative value the better the improvement.|From Baseline to Week 24|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF): for subjects who withdrew for any reason, or subjects with missing Week 24 measurements, or placebo subjects who used escape medication, last observation prior to early withdrawal or Week 24 or before receiving CZP is carried forward to Week 24.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814396|NCT01087762|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) at Week 12|The BASMI characterizes the spinal mobility of subjects with axial Spondyloarthritis (SpA) and Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). It is a disease-specific measure consisting of 5 clinical measures to reflect subject axial status: cervical rotation; tragus to wall distance; lateral lumbar flexion; lumbar flexion (modified Schober test); intermalleolar distance. According to the linear definition of the BASMI a score of 0 to 10 is calculated for each item based on the measurement. The mean of the sum of the 5 scores provides the BASMI score. The higher the BASMI score the more severe the patient’s limitation of movement due to their axial SpA. A negative value in BASMI change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline. The higher the negative value the better the improvement.|From Baseline to Week 12|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF): for subjects who withdrew for any reason, or subjects with missing Week 12 measurements, last observation prior to the early withdrawal or Week 12 is carried forward to Week 12.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814397|NCT01087762|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) at Week 24|The BASDAI is a validated self-reported instrument which consists of six 10 unit horizontal Numerical Rating Scales (NRSs) to measure severity of fatigue, spinal and peripheral joint pain and swelling, enthesitis, and morning stiffness (both severity and duration, respectively) over the last week. The final BASDAI score ranges from 0 to 10, with lower scores indicating lower disease activity. A negative value in BASDAI change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline. The higher the negative value the better the improvement.|From Baseline to Week 24|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF): for subjects who withdrew for any reason, or subjects with missing Week 24 measurements, or placebo subjects who used escape medication, last observation prior to early withdrawal or Week 24 or before receiving CZP is carried forward to Week 24.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814398|NCT01087762|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) at Week 12|The BASDAI is a validated self-reported instrument which consists of six 10 unit horizontal Numerical Rating Scales (NRSs) to measure severity of fatigue, spinal and peripheral joint pain and swelling, enthesitis, and morning stiffness (both severity and duration, respectively) over the last week. The final BASDAI score ranges from 0 to 10, with lower scores indicating lower disease activity. A negative value in BASDAI change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline. The higher the negative value the better the improvement.|From Baseline to Week 12|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF): for subjects who withdrew for any reason, or subjects with missing Week 12 measurements, last observation prior to the early withdrawal or Week 12 is carried forward to Week 12.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814399|NCT01087762|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) at Week 24|The BASFI assesses physical function in comprising 10 items relating to activities during the past week. Each item ranges from 0 (“Easy”) to 10 (“Impossible”). The BASFI is the mean of the 10 scores such that the total score ranges from 0 to 10, with lower scores indicating better physical function. A negative value in BASFI change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline. The higher the negative value the better the improvement.|From Baseline to Week 24|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF): for subjects who withdrew for any reason, or subjects with missing Week 24 measurements, or placebo subjects who used escape medication, last observation prior to early withdrawal or Week 24 or before receiving CZP is carried forward to Week 24.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814400|NCT01087762|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) at Week 12|The BASFI assesses physical function in comprising 10 items relating to activities during the past week. Each item ranges from 0 (“Easy”) to 10 (“Impossible”). The BASFI is the mean of the 10 scores such that the total score ranges from 0 to 10, with lower scores indicating better physical function. A negative value in BASFI change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline. The higher the negative value the better the improvement.|From Baseline to Week 12|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF): for subjects who withdrew for any reason, or subjects with missing Week 12 measurements, last observation prior to the early withdrawal or Week 12 is carried forward to Week 12.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814423|NCT01087918|Secondary|Berg Balance Scale|The Berg Balance Scale is a performance-based measure of balance. It is scored from 0 (= failed all items) to 56 points (= scored maximally in all items). Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Positive values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814424|NCT01087918|Secondary|Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury II|The WISCI II describes whether a patients requires waling aids, braces or personal assistance to walk 10 meters. It is an ordinal scale varying from 0 (= not able to walk 10 meters) to 20 (= able to walk 10 meters with no walking aids, braces or personal assistance). Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Positive values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814401|NCT01087762|Secondary|Assessment in Axial Spondyloarthritis International Society 20 % (ASAS20) Response Criteria at Week 24|"The ASAS20 is defined as an improvement of at least 20 % and absolute improvement of at least 1 unit on a 0 to 10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) in at least 3 of the 4 following domains:
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity
Pain assessment (total spinal pain)
Function (represented by Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI))
Inflammation (the mean of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) questions 5 and 6 concerning morning stiffness intensity and duration)
and absence of deterioration in the potential remaining domain (deterioration is defined as a relative worsening of at least 20 % and an absolute worsening of at least 1 unit)."|Week 24|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with non-responder imputation: subjects who withdrew for any reason or placebo subjects who used escape medication are considered as non-responders from drop out timepoint or when escape therapy was initiated. Subjects with missing data at a visit are non-responders for that visit, too.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814402|NCT01087762|Primary|Assessment in Axial Spondyloarthritis International Society 20 % (ASAS20) Response Criteria at Week 12|"The ASAS20 is defined as an improvement of at least 20 % and absolute improvement of at least 1 unit on a 0 to 10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) in at least 3 of the 4 following domains:
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity
Pain assessment (total spinal pain)
Function (represented by Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI))
Inflammation (the mean of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) questions 5 and 6 concerning morning stiffness intensity and duration)
and absence of deterioration in the potential remaining domain (deterioration is defined as a relative worsening of at least 20 % and an absolute worsening of at least 1 unit)."|Week 12|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with non-responder imputation: subjects who withdrew for any reason or placebo subjects who used escape medication are considered as non-responders from drop out timepoint or when escape therapy was initiated. Subjects with missing data at a visit are non-responders for that visit, too.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814403|NCT01087788|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) at Week 48|"Van der Heijde modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) is a methodology to assess the degree of joint damage by quantifying the extent of bone erosions and joint space narrowing for 64 and 52 joints, respectively, with higher scores representing greater damage. mTSS (bone erosions) ranges from 0 (best possible outcome) to 320 (worst possible outcome); mTSS (joint space narrowing) ranges from 0 (best possible outcome) to 208 (worst possible outcome); and total score ranges from 0 (best possible outcome) to 528 (worst possible outcome).
For the analysis of this outcome measure, the change from Baseline to Week 48 was imputed using the median change from Baseline among all subjects for those subjects, which had less than 2 radiographs. The post-hoc analysis presented here is based on the subgroup of subjects which had a Baseline mTSS value greater than 6."|From Baseline to Week 48|Randomized Set (RS) with imputation: for subjects who withdrew for any reason, or subjects with missing Week 48 measurements, and for all placebo subjects after the switch to CZP, Week 48 scores are linearly extrapolated from the last two available radiographs prior to early withdrawal or Week 24 or before receiving CZP.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814404|NCT01087788|Secondary|Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI75) Response at Week 24 in the Subgroup of Subjects With Psoriasis (PSO) Involving at Least 3 % Body Surface Area (BSA) at Baseline|The PASI75 response assessments are based on at least 75 % improvement in the PASI score from Baseline. The PASI score is a measure of the average redness, thickness, and scaliness of the psoriatic skin lesions (each graded on a 0 to 4 scale), weighted by the area of involvement.|Week 24|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with non-responder imputation: subjects who withdrew for any reason or placebo subjects who used escape medication are considered as nonresponders from drop out timepoint or when escape therapy was initiated. Subjects with missing data at a visit are non-responders for that visit, too.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814405|NCT01087788|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 24|The HAQ-DI is a measure of function in Arthritis. There are 20 items in eight categories that represent a comprehensive set of functional activities on a scale from 0 (without difficulty) to 3 (unable to perform without assistance). The category scores are averaged into an overall HAQ-DI from 0 to 3. Scores of 0 to 1 generally represent mild to moderate difficulty, 1 to 2 represent moderate to severe disability, and 2 to 3 indicate severe to very severe disability. A negative value in HAQ-DI change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline. The higher the negative value, the higher the improvement.|From Baseline to Week 24|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF): for subjects who withdrew for any reason, or subjects with missing Week 24 measurements, or placebo subjects who used escape medication, last observation prior to early withdrawal or Week 24 or before receiving CZP is carried forward to Week 24.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814406|NCT01087788|Secondary|American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 24|ACR20 responders are those subjects with at least 20 % improvement from Baseline for Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale (PAAP-VAS), 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS), 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PhGADA-VAS).|Week 24|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with non-responder imputation: subjects who withdrew for any reason or placebo subjects who used escape medication are considered as nonresponders from drop out timepoint or when escape therapy was initiated. Subjects with missing data at a visit are non-responders for that visit, too.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814425|NCT01087918|Primary|10 Meter Walking at Preferred Speed|The 10 meter walk test assesses the time required to walk 10 meters at the patient's preferred speed (in seconds). Results were converted to walking speed [m/s]. Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Positive values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|||meters per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
814426|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE)|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product.|Upto Day 36|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814407|NCT01087788|Primary|Change From Baseline in Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) in Modification for Psoriatic Arthritis at Week 24|Van der Heijde modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) is a methodology to assess the degree of joint damage by quantifying the extent of bone erosions and joint space narrowing for 64 and 52 joints, respectively, with higher scores representing greater damage. mTSS (bone erosions) ranges from 0 (best possible outcome) to 320 (worst possible outcome); mTSS (joint space narrowing) ranges from 0 (best possible outcome) to 208 (worst possible outcome); and total score ranges from 0 (best possible outcome) to 528 (worst possible outcome). For the pre-defined analysis of this outcome measure, 0 was used for Baseline and the maximum observed mTSS value was used for Week 24 for those subjects which had less than 2 radiographs. The re-analysis is restricted to those subjects in the Randomized Set who have at least 2 x-ray values at scheduled visits, which are at least 8 weeks apart.|From Baseline to Week 24|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with imputation: for subjects who withdrew for any reason, or subjects with missing Week 24 measurements, or placebo subjects who used escape medication, scores are linearly extrapolated from the last two radiographs prior to early withdrawal or Week 24 or before receiving CZP.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814408|NCT01087788|Primary|American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 12|ACR20 responders are those subjects with at least 20 % improvement from Baseline (BL) for Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale (PAAP-VAS), 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS), 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PhGADA-VAS).|Week 12|Intention-to-treat dataset was the Randomized Set (RS). RS with non-responder imputation: subjects who withdrew for any reason or placebo subjects who used escape medication are considered as nonresponders from drop out timepoint or when escape therapy was initiated. Subjects with missing data at a visit are non-responders for that visit, too.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814409|NCT01087801|Primary|Volume of Fluid ≥ 3.5mL (Boolean Expression Evaluated as Yes or no).|Volume of pancreatic fluid. The volume is the number of mL of pancreatic fluid.|First 5 minutes after treatment administration|||Participants|||Number
814410|NCT01087801|Primary|Endoscopic Sample|"Is Volume ≥ 3.5 mL Is HCO3 concentration ≥ 40 mEq/L Is DNA mutational analysis (K-ras-2 gene Fluorescence peak height ≥ 50 Relative Florescence Units panel assessable markers informative ≥ 8).
(Note- The outcome value is boolean (yes or no) as an answer)."|First 5 minutes after treatment administration||||||
814411|NCT01087814|Primary|Serum Levels of Efavirenz|Serum levels of efavirenz were measured on the fifth day of taking efavirenz (tablet) and the fifth day of taking an overencapsulated efavirenz.|5th day of taking drug|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814412|NCT01087905|Secondary|Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio for 7-Day Point Prevalence Abstinence From Smoking at 26 Weeks Post-Quit by Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) Group|For cost analyses, we computed the costs of intervention per caller, the cost per quit based on the 6-month ITT 7-day PPA, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER. Intervention costs included direct costs associated with registration, provision of NRT and counseling (standard and MAC), and mailing of a quit guide (all participants) and a MAC information sheet (MAC participants only). Facility space, supplies, and physician supervision time were included in the call costs; research-related costs were excluded. ICER ratio is a measure of the added cost per added quit for two treatments. ICER was computed as the cost difference between the least intensive treatment group (2 weeks of nicotine patch only) and a more intensive comparison group divided by the difference in the quit rates of the two groups being compared; e.g., the ICER for the group that received 2 weeks of nicotine patch and nicotine gum = (213-178)/(.482-.384) = $357.|26 weeks after the target quit smoking date|"No a priori power analysis was conducted for this secondary outcome."||U.S. Dollars|||Number
814413|NCT01087905|Primary|7-Day Point Prevalence Abstinence From Smoking by Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) Group|Self-reported total abstinence from any tobacco use (even a single puff) for the seven days preceding the target follow-up day.|26 weeks after the target quit smoking date|The study was originally powered to detect at least a 6.4% increase in the abstinence rate due to an enhanced intervention (e.g., 6 wks NRT); this effect size was based on prior quitline studies; we predicted that abstinence rates at 6 months would be approximately 12% in a standard intervention vs. 18.4% in an enhanced intervention.||Percentage of participants not smoking|||Number
814414|NCT01087905|Primary|7-Day Point Prevalence Abstinence From Smoking by Intervention|Self-reported total abstinence from any tobacco use (even a single puff) for the seven days preceding the target follow-up day.|26 weeks after the target quit smoking date|The study was originally powered to detect at least a 6.4% increase in the abstinence rate due to an enhanced intervention (e.g., 6 wks NRT); this effect size was based on prior quitline studies; we predicted that abstinence rates at 6 months would be approximately 12% in a standard intervention vs. 18.4% in an enhanced intervention.||Percentage of participants not smoking|||Number
814415|NCT01087918|Secondary|Figure of Eight Test|The Figure of Eight Test is a 10m Walk Test in the shape of a figure of eight. Time for completion of one lap is recorded and converted to [m/s]. Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Positive values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|||meters per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
814416|NCT01087918|Primary|10 Meter Walking at Maximal Speed|The 10 meter walking speed assesses the time needed to walk 10 meters at maximal speed (in seconds). Results were converted to walking speed [m/s]. Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Positive values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|||meters per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
814417|NCT01087918|Secondary|Falls Efficacy Scale|The Falls Efficacy Scale evaluates fear of falling in everyday life situations. It is scored from 16 (= no fear at all) to 64 points (= maximal fear in all items). Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Negative values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814418|NCT01087918|Secondary|Response Time of the Lower Extremities|We measured choice stepping response time on a plate in a standing position. Participant had to move their feet to flashing LEDs as fast as possible. Valid values of the right and the left foot were averaged. Displayed are values after each intervention (RAGT or strength training) minus value at baseline. Negative values denote improvements.|Baseline, after intervention (4 weeks)|||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814427|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Electrocardiograms|A 12-lead ECG was recorded after the participant had been in a semi-supine position for at least 10 minutes. Any clinically significant abnormalities noted on an ECG after the first dose of study drug were captured as AEs|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), and Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814428|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Pulse Rate, Temperature, and Blood Pressure|The pulse rate, temperature and blood pressure was assessed during a physical examination. Pulse rate was assessed in beats per minute (bpm), temperature was assessed in degree Celsius (°С), and blood pressure was assessed in millimeters of mercury (mmHg). Vital signs were taken while the participant was supine.|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 2 (Day 8 ± 2 days), Week 3 (Day 15 ± 2 days), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), Week 5 (Day 29 ± 2 days), Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814429|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities in Creatinine|A marked abnormality was defined as a test result which was outside of the marked abnormality range, and which represented a clinically relevant change from baseline of at least the designated amount. The marked reference range for Creatinine was 0- 154 (micromoles/liter [umol/L]). The clinical relevant change (decrease/ increase) for Creatinine was (n.d, 50%).|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), and Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814430|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities in Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN), Chloride, Potassium, Sodium, Calcium, Glucose|A marked abnormality was defined as a test result which was outside of the marked abnormality range, and which represented a clinically relevant change from baseline of at least the designated amount. The marked reference range for BUN was 0.0-14.3 (millimoles per Liter [mmol/L]), Chloride was 95-115 (mmol/L), Potassium was 2.9-5.8 (mmol/L), Sodium was 130-150 (mmol/L), Calcium was 2.00-2.90 (mmol/L), and Glucose was 2.80-11.10 (mmol/L). The clinical relevant change (decrease/ increase) for BUN was (n.d, 50%), Chloride was (7%, 7%), Potassium was (20%, 20%), Sodium was (7%, 7%), Calcium was (10%, 10%), and Glucose was (75%, 75%) respectively.|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), and Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814431|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities in Serum Glutamic Oxaloacetic Transaminase (SGOT), Serum Glutamic-Pyruvic Transaminase (SGPT), and Alkaline Phosphatase|A marked abnormality was defined as a test result which was outside of the marked abnormality range, and which represented a clinically relevant change from baseline of at least the designated amount. The marked reference range for SGOT was 0-80 (Units Per Litre [U/L]), SGPT was 0-110 U/L, and alkaline phosphatase was 0-220 U/L. The clinical relevant change (decrease/ increase) for SGOT was (n.d, 50%), SGPT was (n.d, 50%), and ALP was (n.d, 50%) respectively.|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), and Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814432|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities in Prothrombin Time (PT) International Normalized Ratio (INR)|A marked abnormality was defined as a test result which was outside of the marked abnormality range, and which represented a clinically relevant change from baseline of at least the designated amount. The marked reference range for PT-INR was n.d.-2.00. The clinical relevant change (decrease/ increase) for PT-INR was (n.d, 30%).|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), and Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814433|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities in Right Blood Cell (RBC)|A marked abnormality was defined as a test result which was outside of the marked abnormality range, and which represented a clinically relevant change from baseline of at least the designated amount. The marked reference range for RBC was 3.80-6.10 (10*12/L). The clinical relevant change (decrease/ increase) for RBC was (15%, 15%).|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), and Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814434|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities in Platelet, White Blood Cell (WBC), Basophil, Eosinophil, Lymphocyte, Monocyte and Neutrophil|A marked abnormality was defined as a test result which was outside of the marked abnormality range, and which represented a clinically relevant change from baseline of at least the designated amount. The marked reference range for Platelets was 100-550 (10*9/L), for WBC was 3.0-18.0 (10*9/L), for Basophils was 0.00-0.40 (10*9/L), for Eosinophil was 0.00-0.90 (10*9/L), for Lymphocytes was 0.70-7.60 (10*9/L), Monocyte was 0.00-1.70 (10*9/L), and Neutrophil 1.50-9.25 (10*9/L). The clinical relevant change (decrease/increase) for platelet was (30%, 50%), WBC was (30%, 30%), Basophil was (n.d, 100%), Eosinophil was (n.d, 100%), Lymphocyte was (30%, 30%), Monocyte was (n.d, 100%) and Neutrophil was (20%, 20%) respectively.|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), and Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814435|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities in Hematocrit|A marked abnormality was defined as a test result which was outside of the marked abnormality range, and which represented a clinically relevant change from baseline of at least the designated amount. The marked reference range for hematocrit was 0.31-0.56 fraction. The clinical relevant change (decrease/ increase) for hematocrit was (15%, 15%).|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), and Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814436|NCT01087944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities in Hemoglobin, Albumin and Total Protein|A marked abnormality was defined as a test result which was outside of the marked abnormality range, and which represented a clinically relevant change from baseline of at least the designated amount. The marked reference range for hemoglobin was 110-200 (gram per liter [g/L]), albumin was 30.0-n.d g/L, and total protein was 55-87 g/L. The clinical relevant change (decrease/ increase) for hemoglobin was (15%, 15%), albumin was (20%, n.d) and total protein was (20%, 20%) respectively.|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), and Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The ITT population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814466|NCT01088399|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Died While in the Study||Study enrollment up to approximately 10 years|All participants with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit.||participants|||Number
814437|NCT01087944|Primary|Feasibility of Peginterferon Alfa-2a Administration by Autoinjector|The feasibility of PEG-INF administration by AI was assessed by Injection Method Observational Survey questions, based on following pre-defined questions using a “Yes” or “No” response: 1) Did the participant exhibit any nervousness prior to the injection? 2) Did the participant exhibit any difficulty initiating the injection? 3) Did the participant appear confident performing the injection? 4) Did the participant follow the instructions for performing the injection without the need for additional instructions or guidance? 5) Did the participant experience any technical problems with the device or syringe during the injection? 6) Did the participant withdraw the device/syringe before the injection was complete? 7) Did the participant exhibit any visible pain or physical discomfort? 8) Did the participant appear to be satisfied using the device or syringe? 9) Did the participant exhibit any frustration using the syringe or device?|Week 1, Day 1 (Baseline), Week 2 (Day 8 ± 2 days), Week 3 (Day 15 ± 2 days), Week 4 (Day 22 ± 2 days), Week 5 (Day 29 ± 2 days), Week 6 (Day 36 ± 2 days)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all participants who received at least one injection||participants|||Number
814438|NCT01087957|Secondary|Berg Balance Scale|The Berg Balance Assessment is a 14 item scale designed to measure balance in adults in a clinical setting. Each item is scored on a scale of 0-4 with a score of 0 indicating the most difficulty with the balance task. A score from 0 to 20 represents balance impairment, 21 to 40 represents acceptable balance, and 41-56 represents good balance.|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
814439|NCT01087957|Secondary|Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile Stair Time|The Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile (mEFAP) Stair time sub-task is composed of ascending and descending 4 Stairs with the score consisting of the number of seconds required to complete the task. The Stair time sub-task score is added to the other 4 subtask scores to calculate the total mEFAP score .|6 months|||seconds||Standard Error|Mean
814440|NCT01087957|Secondary|Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile Obstacle Course|The Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile (mEFAP) Obstacle course sub-task is composed navigating a Standardized Obstacle Course with the score consisting of the number of seconds required to complete the task. The obstacle course sub-task is added to the other 4 sub-tasks to calculate the total mEFAP score.|6 months|||seconds||Standard Error|Mean
814441|NCT01087957|Secondary|Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile Timed up and Go|The Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile (mEFAP) Timed up and Go subtask is composed of rising from a chair, walking 3-meters, and returning to a seated position with the score consisting of the number of seconds required to complete the task. The Timed up and Go subtask is added to the other 4 sub-task scores to calculate the total mEFAP score.|6 months|||seconds||Standard Error|Mean
814442|NCT01087957|Secondary|Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile Carpet Time|The Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile (mEFAP) Carpet time sub-task is composed of a 5 meter walk on a carpeted surface with the score consisting of the number of seconds required to complete the task. The score on the Carpet time sub-task is added to the other 4 sub-tasks to calculate the total mEFAP score .|6 months|||seconds||Standard Error|Mean
814443|NCT01087957|Secondary|Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile Floor Time|The Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile (mEFAP) Floor time sub-task is composed a timed 5 meter walk on a hard Floor. The score consists of the number of seconds required to complete the task. The Floor Time sub-task is added to the other 4 sub-tasks to make up the total mEFAP score.|6 months|||seconds||Standard Error|Mean
814444|NCT01087957|Secondary|Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile Total Score|The Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile (mEFAP) is composed of 5 subtasks: (1) 5 meter walk on a hard Floor, (2) 5 meter walk on a carpeted surface, (3) Timed Up & Go (rising from a chair, a 3-meter walk, and return to a seated position), (4) Navigating a Standardized Obstacle Course, and (5) ascending and descending 4 Stairs. Each is a timed task with the score consisting of the number of seconds required to complete the task. Upon completion of the entire data collection session, a total mEFAP score is calculated by adding the score on each subtask.|6 months|||seconds||Standard Error|Mean
814445|NCT01087957|Secondary|Six Minute Walk Test||6 months|||meters||Standard Error|Mean
814446|NCT01087957|Primary|Device Related Serious Adverse Events|The device related serious adverse event (SAE) measure is a count of the incidences of adverse events defined as serious (Incapacitating with inability to do work or usual activities; signs and symptoms may be systemic in nature or require medical evaluation and/or treatment; requiring additional hospitalization or intensive care (prolonged hospitalization) and device related (any AE for which a causal relationship between the event and the presence of the device, or the performance of the device system, is at least a reasonable possibility (i.e., the relationship cannot be excluded).|6 months|Intention to treat||number of device related SAEs|||Number
814447|NCT01087957|Primary|Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) Composite Score|The SIS Composite score is equal to sum of scores for Mobility, ADL/IADL, and Social Participation domains. The questions for each domain are scored on a scale of 1-5, the higher the score the less the impact of Stroke on that domain question. The Mobility domain has 9 questions with scores ranging from 9 to 45. The ADL/IADL domain has 10 questions with scores ranging from 10-150- and the Social Participation domain has 8 question with a score of 8-40.|6 months|Intention to treat||points||Standard Error|Mean
814448|NCT01087957|Primary|Gait Velocity|Improved ambulation status, specific to increase in gait velocity (m/s)|6 months|Intention to treat||m/sec||Standard Error|Mean
814449|NCT01087970|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Died While on Treatment and Died During 30-Day Post-Treatment Discontinuation Follow-Up (FU)|Presented are the number of participants who died due to adverse events (AEs) while on treatment and participants who died due to progressive disease (PD) during the 30-day post-treatment discontinuation FU.|From enrollment to 30 days post-treatment discontinuation up to 26.4 months|All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
814489|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: Cmax of Necitumumab After Multiple Doses|Cmax at steady state (after the last dose of the initial 6-week treatment cycle).|Cycle 1, Day 29; For Cohorts 1, 2 and 3: predose (prior to fourth infusion for Cohorts 1 and 3; prior to third infusion for Cohort 2), immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|All participants who received multiple doses of study drug and had Cmax values for Day 29 of Cycle 1.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814925|NCT01086215|Secondary|Concomitant Treatments Used With the AngioJet® System|The # of patients exposed to each treatment option at least once in the given thrombotic condition during the Index Procedure|Day 1|||participants|||Number
814450|NCT01087970|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer (PSS-HNC)|PSS-HNC is a clinician-rated instrument designed to measure speaking and eating disabilities of participants with head and neck cancer and consists of 3 subscales: normalcy of diet (NOD) subscale measures the ability of the participants to eat a normal diet, subscale ranges from 0 (non-oral feeding) to 100 (unrestricted diet); understandability of speech (UOS) subscale measures the degree a clinician is able to understand the participant’s speech, subscale ranges from 0 (never understandable) to 100 (always understandable); eating in public (EIP) subscale, rating based on the participant’s response to the questions of whom he/she eats with and in what setting, subscale ranges from 0 (always eats alone) to 100 (no restriction of place, food, or companion). Change from baseline: negative value represents a decrease in function and a positive value represents an increase in function.|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 2, 4, 6, cetuximab monotherapy Cycles 2 and 4 (21-day cycle)|All treated participants who had PSS-HNC assessments at baseline and in Cycles 2, 4, 6, cetuximab monotherapy Cycles 2 and 4. Exclude those from a noncompliant study site.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814451|NCT01087970|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Participant-Reported European-Quality of Life-5 Dimension Instrument-3 Levels (EQ-5D-3L)|EQ-5D-3L is a descriptive system of health-related quality of life states consisting of 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) and each of which has 3 levels of severity (no problems/some or moderate problems/extreme problems) within a particular EQ-5D dimension. A regression equation defines a utility value for these health states to generate an index score. The possible values for index score range from -0.594 (severe problems in all 5 dimensions) to 1 (no problem in all dimensions) on a scale where 1 represents the best possible health state. The EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale (VAS) is used to record a participant’s rating for his/her current health-related quality of life state on the day of questionnaire administration and is captured on a scale of 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state).|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycles 2, 4, 6, cetuximab monotherapy Cycles 2 and 4 (21-day cycle)|All treated participants who completed the EQ-5D-3L and VAS at baseline and in Cycles 2, 4, 6, cetuximab monotherapy Cycles 2 and 4. Exclude those from a noncompliant study site.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814452|NCT01087970|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Having a Confirmed Partial Response (PR) or Complete Response (CR)|PR or CR is classified by the investigators according to RECIST criteria version 1.0. PR is a ≥30% decrease in sum of longest diameter of target lesions without new lesion and progression of non-target lesions; CR is the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions. Percentage of participants having a PR or CR is calculated as a total number of participants with PR or CR from enrollment until disease progression or recurrence divided by the total number of participants treated, then multiplied by 100.|From enrollment to objectively determined progressive disease up to 15.3 months (tumor assessments performed every other cycle during study treatment until progressive disease)|All treated participants excluding those from a noncompliant study site.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814453|NCT01087970|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is defined as the duration from the date of enrollment to the date of death from any cause. For participants who were alive at the time of the data inclusion cutoff, OS was censored at the date of last contact prior to that cut-off date.|From enrollment to the date of death from any cause up to 26.4 months (assessment completed during trial period at least every 3 months)|All treated participants excluding those from a noncompliant study site. The number of participants censored was 22.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814454|NCT01087970|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the duration from the date of enrollment to the first date of documented objective progressive disease (PD) or death from any cause. PD was determined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria version 1.0. PD is ≥20% increase in sum of longest diameter of target lesions or the appearance of new lesions. For participants who were not known to have died or to have had objective PD at the time of the data inclusion cutoff, PFS was censored at their last objective progression-free disease assessment prior to the cutoff date or the date of initiation of subsequent systemic anticancer therapy.|From enrollment to measured progressive disease up to 15.3 months (tumor assessments performed every other cycle during study treatment, and then every 6 weeks during follow-up)|All treated participants excluding those from a noncompliant study site. The number of participants censored was 9.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814455|NCT01087996|Secondary|Change in New York Heart Association Class at 12-months||12 months|||participants|||Number
814456|NCT01087996|Secondary|Change in Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Total Score|The Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire uses a 6-point, zero to five, Likert scale. The total score is the sum of the 21 responses. The total score is considered the best measure of how heart failure and treatments impact a patients quality of life. The max score is 105, minimum score is 0. A lower score is considered a better quality of life.|12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
814457|NCT01087996|Secondary|Change in Distance Walked in 6-minutes From Baseline.||12-months|||meters||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
814458|NCT01087996|Secondary|CT Measure of Scar Size as % of LV Mass||Baseline Month 13 post-catheterization|||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
814459|NCT01087996|Secondary|CT Measure of End Systolic Volume||Baseline Month 13 post-catheterization|||ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
814460|NCT01087996|Secondary|CT Measure of End Diastolic Volume||Baseline Month 13 post-catheterization|||ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
814461|NCT01087996|Secondary|CT Measure of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction||Baseline Month 13 post-catheterization|||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
814462|NCT01087996|Secondary|CT Infarct Size From Early Enhanced Defect: - Difference Between the Baseline and 13-month|Percentage change from 13-months post-catheterization to baseline.|Baseline Month 13 post-catheterization|||percent change from baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
814463|NCT01087996|Primary|Incidence of TE-SAE Define as Composite of Death, Non-fatal MI, Stroke, Hospitalization for Worsening Heart Failure, Cardiac Perforation, Pericardial Tamponade, Ventricular Arrhythmias >15 Sec. or With Hemodynamic Compromise or Atrial Fibrillation||One month post-catheterization|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814464|NCT01088295|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability of Telmisartan||24 weeks||||||
814465|NCT01088295|Primary|Median Change in Visceral Adipose Tissue (VAT) Volume|VAT volume was quantified at each timepoint by L4-L5 single slice computed tomography|Baseline and 24 weeks|as-treated analysis||cm^2||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
814467|NCT01088399|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Total Z Score of the Disease-specific Module of the Questions of Life Satisfaction (QLS-H).|QLS-H is a self-administered, weighted, quality of life (QoL) questionnaire consisting of 9 items developed for participants with growth hormone deficiency. Scores were corrected for age, gender, and country differences, and expressed as Z-scores based on country-specific reference ranges. Participants indicate how important a certain dimension of QoL is to them and are then questioned as to their degree of satisfaction with that dimension. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from not important (1) to extremely important (5) and from dissatisfied (1) to very satisfied (5). The weighted score for the degree of satisfaction (weighted satisfaction) with a particular dimension=(importance - 1)x(2 x satisfaction - 5). Total Z-score is obtained by adding the individual item scores of the 9 dimensions, and range from -108 (representing very low satisfaction) to +180 (representing very high satisfaction).|Baseline, interim time point (5 years), and study completion (10 years)|All participants with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit whose study therapy was known (treated or untreated) and has a Total Z Score.||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
814468|NCT01088399|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Bone Fracture (Fracture Incidence)||Baseline through 10 years|All participants with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit and who provided bone fracture information.||percentage of participants|||Number
814469|NCT01088399|Secondary|Cardiovascular Risk Factor-Change From Baseline in Waist Circumference|Change in waist circumference was used as an indicator of cardiovascular risk.|Baseline, interim time point (5 years), and study completion (10 years)|All participants with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit whose study therapy was known (treated or untreated) and had waste circumference data.||centimeters (cm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814470|NCT01088399|Secondary|Cardiovascular Risk Factor-Change From Baseline in Cholesterol and Triglycerides|Change from baseline in total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and triglycerides were used as an indicator of cardiovascular risk and are presented.|Baseline, interim time point (5 years), and study completion (10 years)|All participants with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit whose study therapy was known (treated or untreated) and had cholesterol or triglyceride data.||milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814471|NCT01088399|Secondary|Cardiovascular Risk Factor-Change From Baseline in Systolic (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|Change in SBP and DBP were used as an indicator of cardiovascular risk.|Baseline, interim time point (5 years), and study completion (10 years)|All participants with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit whose study therapy was known (treated or untreated) and BP data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814472|NCT01088399|Secondary|Cardiovascular Risk Factor-Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI)|Change in BMI was used as an indicator of cardiovascular risk. Body mass index (BMI) is an estimate of body fat based on body weight divided by height squared.|Baseline, interim time point (5 years), and study completion (10 years)|All participants with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit whose study therapy was known (treated or untreated) and had BMI data.||kilogram per square meter (kg/m^2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814473|NCT01088399|Primary|Clinically Significant Adverse Events|A summary of all reported serious adverse events (SAE) and other adverse events regardless of causality are provided in the Adverse Events module of this record.|Baseline to study completion (approximately 10 years)|All participants with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit whose study therapy was known (treated or untreated).||percentage of participants|||Number
814474|NCT01088438|Primary|Probing for Biomedical Issues|Probability that the learner probes biomedical red flags raised in standardized patient encounters undertaken at assessment at end of subinternship. Each learner undertakes four encounters, each of which presents a biomedical red flag that may or may not be probed; in a small number of cases, the standardized patient was ill and the learner undertook fewer than four encounters as a result. Assessment of probing is made by an investigator blinded to learner's assignment to group.|1 month|ITT||proportion of encounters|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
814475|NCT01088438|Primary|Probing for Contextual Issues|Probability that the learner probes contextual red flags raised in standardized patient encounters undertaken at assessment at end of subinternship. Each learner undertakes four encounters, each of which presents a contextual red flag that may or may not be probed; in a small number of cases, the standardized patient was ill and the learner undertook fewer than four encounters as a result. Assessment of probing is made by an investigator blinded to learner's assignment to group.|1 month|ITT||proportion of encounters|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
814476|NCT01088438|Primary|Developing an Appropriate Treatment Plan (for Contextual Variant of Encounters)|Probability that the learner writes a correct treatment plan for the standardized patient encounters undertaken at assessment at end of subinternship that include contextual red flags. All learners are scheduled to see 4 encounters, based on combinations of four cases and four potential variants (baseline, biomedical, contextual, biocontextual) with counterbalancing by study month; each has a single contextual variant encounter. Treatment plans are assessed by an investigator blinded to the learner's assignment to intervention or control group.|1 month|ITT. In one case, a participant did not receive a contextual variant encounter because the standardized patient was ill, and this encounter is excluded.||proportion of contextual encounters|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
814477|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: Vss of Necitumumab After Multiple Doses|Vss is that amount of plasma in which the study drug needs to be dissolved to attain a steady state drug concentration. Data did not allow calculation of Vss for participants in Cohorts 1 and 3.|Cycle 1, Day 29; For Cohorts 1, 2 and 3: predose (prior to fourth infusion for Cohorts 1 and 3; prior to third infusion for Cohort 2), immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|All participants who received multiple doses of study drug and had Vss values for Day 29 of Cycle 1. Vss of necitumumab was not assessed for participants in Cohorts 1 and 3, due to the irregular dosing regimen.||mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814490|NCT01088464|Primary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Necitumumab After a Single Dose||Cycle 1, Day 1; Cohorts 1 and 3: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 6, 24, 96 and 168 hours (h) after end of infusion. Cohort 2: predose, immediately after infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|All participants who received single dose of study drug and had Cmax values for Day 1 of Cycle 1.||micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814478|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: Steady-State Volume of Distribution (Vss) of Necitumumab After Single Dose|Vss is that amount of plasma in which the study drug needs to be dissolved to attain a steady state drug concentration. Vss was not analyzed for participants in Cohorts 1 and 3 as Vss is derived from AUC (0-∞). AUC(0-∞) was calculated only for participants in Cohort 2 as the percentage of AUC extrapolated beyond tlast was greater than 30% for the remaining participants.|Cycle 1, Day 1; Cohorts 1 and 3: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 6, 24, 96 and 168 h after end of infusion. Cohort 2: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|All participants who received single dose of study drug and had Vss values for Day 1 of Cycle 1. Vss of necitumumab was not assessed for participants in Cohorts 1 and 3, due to the irregular dosing regimen.||milliliters (mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814479|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: CL of Necitumumab After Multiple Doses|CL is defined as the volume of plasma that is cleared of study drug per unit time. Data did not allow calculation of CL for participants in Cohorts 1 and 3.|Cycle 1, Day 29; For Cohorts 1, 2 and 3: predose (prior to fourth infusion for Cohorts 1 and 3; prior to third infusion for Cohort 2), immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|All the participants who received multiple doses of study drug and had CL values for Day 29 of Cycle 1. CL of necitumumab was not assessed for participants in Cohorts 1 and 3, due to the irregular dosing regimen.||mL/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814480|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: Clearance (CL) of Necitumumab After a Single Dose|CL is defined as the volume of plasma that is cleared of study drug per unit time. CL was not analyzed for participants in Cohorts 1 and 3 as CL is derived from AUC(0-∞). AUC(0-∞) was calculated only for participants in Cohort 2 as the percentage of AUC extrapolated beyond tlast was greater than 30% for the remaining participants.|Cycle 1, Day 1; Cohorts 1 and 3: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 6, 24, 96 and 168 h after end of infusion. Cohort 2: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|All the participants who received single dose of study drug and had CL values for Day 1 of Cycle 1. No participant of Cohorts 1 and 3 were analyzed for CL on Day 1 of Cycle 1, due to fraction of data outside tlast >30%||milliliters per hour (mL/h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814481|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: t½ of Necitumumab After Multiple Doses|The t½ is defined as the time taken for study drug in blood to decrease to half of its concentration.|Cycle 1, Day 29; For Cohorts 1, 2 and 3: predose (prior to fourth infusion for Cohorts 1 and 3; prior to third infusion for Cohort 2), immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|All the participants who received multiple doses of study drug and had t½ values for Day 29 of Cycle 1.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814482|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: Half-Life (t½) of Necitumumab After a Single Dose|The t½ is defined as the time taken for study drug in blood to decrease to half of its concentration.|Cycle 1, Day 1; Cohorts 1 and 3: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 6, 24, 96 and 168 h after end of infusion. Cohort 2: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|All participants who received single dose of study drug and had t½ values for Day 1 of Cycle 1.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814483|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to 336 h Postdose [AUC(0-336)] of Necitumumab After Multiple Doses|Steady state AUC(0-336) values are reported.|Cycle 1, Day 29; For Cohorts 1, 2 and 3: predose (prior to fourth infusion for Cohorts 1 and 3; prior to third infusion for Cohort 2), immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|All the participants who received multiple doses of study drug and had AUC(0-336) values for Day 29 of Cycle 1.||µg*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814484|NCT01088464|Secondary|Immunogenicity (IK): Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Anti-IMC-11F8 Antibodies|Treatment-emergent samples were defined as samples which showed at least 4-fold difference (2 dilution increase) at post-baseline in IK titer over the baseline titer, or participants who tested negative at baseline and positive post-baseline (at titer of ≥1:20).|For Cohorts 1, 2 and 3: Prior to first infusions of Cycles 1, 2, and 4 and at the 30-day follow-up visit (+7 days) after the last dose of study drug|All participants who received any quantity of study drug.||participants|||Number
814485|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity [AUC(0-∞)] of Necitumumab After a Single Dose|AUC(0-∞) was calculated only for participants in Cohort 2 as the percentage of AUC extrapolated beyond tlast was greater than 30% for all the remaining participants.|Cycle 1, Day 1; Cohorts 1 and 3: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 6, 24, 96 and 168 h after end of infusion. Cohort 2: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|"All participants who received single dose of study drug and had evaluable AUC(0-∞) values for Day
1 of Cycle 1. No participant of Cohorts 1 and 3 were analyzed for AUC(0-∞) on Day 1 of Cycle 1, due to fraction of data outside tlast >30%"||µg*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814486|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to Last Time Point [AUC (0-tlast)] of Necitumumab After a Single Dose||Cycle 1, Day 1; Cohorts 1 and 3: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 6, 24, 96 and 168 h after end of infusion. Cohort 2: predose, immediately after end of infusion, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 96, 168, 264 and 336 h after end of infusion|All participants who received single dose of study drug and had evaluable AUC(0-∞) values for Day 1 of Cycle 1.||micrograms*hour/milliliter (µg*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814487|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: Cmin of Necitumumab After Multiple Doses|Cmin was calculated prior to the last dose of the initial 6-week treatment cycle.|Cycle 1; Cohorts 1and 3: prior to fourth infusion. Cohort 2: prior to third infusion|All participants who received multiple doses of study drug and had Cmin serum concentrations prior to last dose of Cycle 1.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814488|NCT01088464|Primary|PK: Minimum Concentration (Cmin) of Necitumumab After a Single Dose|Cmin is defined as the minimum concentration the drug achieved after administration of first infusion and prior to the administration of second infusion.|Cycle 1; Cohorts 1, 2 and 3: prior to second infusion|All participants who received single dose of study drug and had Cmin serum concentrations analyzed prior to administration of second dose.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814926|NCT01086215|Primary|Rethrombosis|The number of patients affected by rethrombosis of the treated vessels (first episode) throughout a 12 Month Follow-Up.|3 Month , 6 Month and 12 Month Follow Up|||participants|||Number
814491|NCT01088464|Primary|Number of Participants With 1 or More Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Data presented are the number of participants who experienced 1 or more TEAEs or SAEs regardless of causality. An adverse event was considered as TEAE if it occurred any time after the administration of the first dose of study drug or up to 30 days after the last dose of study treatment or if it occurred prior to the first dose and worsened while on treatment. A summary of SAEs and other non-SAEs regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline up to 24 weeks plus 30 days post last dose of study drug|All participants who received any quantity of study drug.||participants|||Number
814492|NCT01088503|Primary|Factors Associated With Initial ADP Receptor Inhibitor Selection at Enrollment: Duke Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) Index|The Duke CAD Index is a validated composite measure of angiographic burden, which assigns prognostic weights 1 through 100. Higher scores indicate greater angiographic burden and are associated with poorer prognosis.|Day 0 (study enrollment)|All enrolled participants who had Duke CAD Index completed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814493|NCT01088503|Primary|Factors Associated With Initial ADP Receptor Inhibitor Selection at Enrollment: Pre-Procedure Hemoglobin||Day 0 (study enrollment)|All enrolled participants who had pre-procedure hemoglobin evaluation.||grams/deciliter (g/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814494|NCT01088503|Secondary|Resource Use Patterns, Cumulative Total Medical Costs, and Cost Effectiveness||15 months|Zero participants were analyzed. Exploratory analysis of resource use patterns, cumulative total medical costs, and cost effectiveness was dependent on effectiveness in the primary outcome. As there was no effectiveness on the primary outcome demonstrated, no analysis of these outcome measure was conducted.|||||
814495|NCT01088503|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Definite or Probable Stent Thrombosis (ST) Events|Academic Research Consortium (ARC) criteria were used to define ST. Definite ST is angiographic or pathologic confirmation of partial or total thrombotic occlusion within the peri-stent region, and at least 1 of the following additional criteria: acute ischemic symptoms; ischemic electrocardiogram changes; elevated cardiac biomarkers. Probable ST is any unexplained death within 30 days of stent implantation; any MI, which is related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the implanted stent without angiographic confirmation of ST and in the absence of any other obvious cause. Events that occurred more than 7 days after medication was switched or discontinued were excluded from the analysis. Observed (unadjusted) percentages of participants with ST events are presented. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate the percentage of participants with a definite or probable ST event.|Baseline through 15 months|Participants who were treated with prasugrel or clopidogrel.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814496|NCT01088503|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MACE Over 1, 6 and 15 Months|MACE is defined as a composite of all-cause death, MI, stroke, or unplanned coronary revascularization. Events that occurred more than 7 days after medication was switched or discontinued were excluded from the analysis. Observed (unadjusted) percentages of participants with MACE are presented. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate the percentage of participants with a MACE event.|Baseline through 1, 6 and 15 months|Participants who were treated with prasugrel or clopidogrel. Participants with MACE events dated prior to index PCI were excluded from the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814497|NCT01088503|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MACE and Who Had No Prior History of Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA)/Stroke, Weigh ≥60 Kilograms (kg), and Are Age <75 Years|MACE is defined as a composite of all-cause death, MI, stroke, or unplanned coronary revascularization. Events that occurred more than 7 days after medication was switched or discontinued were excluded from the analysis. Observed (unadjusted) percentages of participants with MACE, as well as the statistical analyses adjusted for baseline cohort differences, are presented. Percentage of participant = (number of participants with events / number of participants treated) * 100.|Baseline through 12 months|Participants who were treated with prasugrel or clopidogrel. Participants with MACE events dated prior to index PCI were excluded from the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814498|NCT01088503|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Severe or Moderate Bleeding Events|Bleeding events were collected utilizing the Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) definition of bleeding. Non-coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)-related GUSTO severe or life-threatening bleeding is any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) OR any bleeding event resulting in substantial hemodynamic compromise requiring treatment. Non-CABG-related GUSTO moderate bleeding is any bleeding event resulting in the need for transfusion that is not considered a GUSTO severe or life-threatening bleed. Additional bleeding events are fatal bleeding or ICH, or any non -fatal surgical-related bleeding events leading to ≥4 units of red cell transfusion. Observed (unadjusted) percentages of participants with bleeding events, as well as the statistical analyses adjusted for baseline cohort differences, are presented. Percentage of participants = (number of participants with events / number of participants treated) * 100.|Baseline, 1, 6, 12 and 15 months|Participants who were treated with prasugrel or clopidogrel. Participants with bleeding events dated prior to index PCI were excluded from the analysis. The analysis was based on the initial treatment assignment, regardless of whether or not the participants switched or discontinued that treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814499|NCT01088503|Primary|Factors Associated With Initial Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) Receptor Inhibitor Selection at Enrollment|Factors are drug-eluting stent (DES) vs. bare metal stent (BMS) placement, other (no stent) vs. BMS, STEMI, other race, cardiogenic shock occurred within 24 hours, male, European Quality of Life Questionnaire-5 Dimension Health State Score (EQ-5D) - United States (US) Index =1 vs. <1, married, diabetes, and other vs. BMS placement. The EQ-5D US index is a participant-rated, health-related, quality-of-life instrument based on US population. Scores range from -0.11 to 1.0 with 1.0 = perfect health.|Day 0 (study enrollment)|All enrolled participants||participants|||Number
814500|NCT01088503|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE)|MACE is defined as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or unplanned coronary revascularization. Events that occurred more than 7 days after medication was switched or discontinued were excluded from the analysis. Observed (unadjusted) percentages of participants with MACE, as well as the statistical analyses adjusted for baseline cohort differences, are presented. Percentage of participants = (number of participants with events in 12 months/ number of participants treated) * 100.|Baseline through 12 months|Participants who were treated with prasugrel or clopidogrel. Participants with MACE events dated prior to index PCI were excluded from the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814501|NCT01088529|Secondary|Number of Participants With Prostate-Specific Antigen Response|The table below shows number of participants in each treatment group who achieved a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response defined as a drop in PSA value to less than or equal to 0.2 ng/mL.|Cycle 3 Day 1|"Intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set, which included all participants who were randomized to study. Here, N (Number of Participants Analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||participants|||Number
814502|NCT01088529|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Positive Surgical Margin at Radical Prostatectomy|The table below shows number of participants in each treatment group who had positive surgical margins. A positive surgical margin is defined as tumor extending to the inked-surface or margin of the prostate.|At the end of Cycle 3 (at radical prostatectomy)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set, which included all participants who were randomized to study.||participants|||Number
814503|NCT01088529|Primary|Number of Participants With a Pathology Tumor Stage of Less Than or Equal to Prostate Cancer Stage at Which the Tumor is Confined to the Prostate (pT2)|The table below shows number of participants in each treatment group with a pathology tumor stage less than or equal to pT2.|At the end of Cycle 3 (at radical prostatectomy)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set, which included all participants who were randomized to study.||participants|||Number
814504|NCT01088646|Primary|Percentage of Capsule Placement Success Using PillCam® Express Capsule Endoscopy Delivery System||up to 7 days||||||
814505|NCT01088646|Primary|Number of Participants With Successful Capsule Placment Into the Duodenum Using Capsule Delivery System|The number of capsules that successfully were in the duodenum as indicated by video images|up to 7 days|||participants|||Number
814506|NCT01088672|Secondary|Mortality at 90 Days|All cause mortality through 90 days post procedure.|90-day|||participants|||Number
814507|NCT01088672|Secondary|Clinical Outcomes at 90 Days|"Good clinical outcome is defined as an modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-2 at 90 days.
mRS 0-2 indicates functional independence 0 - No symptoms.
- No significant disability. Able to carry out all usual activities, despite some symptoms.
- Slight disability. Able to look after own affairs without assistance, but unable to carry out all previous activities.
- Moderate disability. Requires some help, but able to walk unassisted.
- Moderately severe disability. Unable to attend to own bodily needs without assistance, and unable to walk unassisted.
- Severe disability. Requires constant nursing care and attention, bedridden, incontinent.
- Dead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Rankin_Scale"|90-day|||percentage of subjects with mrs 0-2|||Number
814508|NCT01088672|Primary|Revascularization Status|"Revascularization, defined as at least TICI 2a in the vascular territory treated at end of the neuro interventional procedure
Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) grading system for perfusion (ie blood flow through a vessel) Grade 0:No Perfusion. No antegrade flow beyond the point of occlusion. Grade 1:Penetration With Minimal Perfusion. Grade 2:Partial Perfusion. Grade 2a:Only partial filling (<2/3) of the entire vascular territory is visualized.
Grade 2b:Complete filling of all of the expected vascular territory is visualized, but slower ...
Grade 3:Complete Perfusion. For complete info see Higashida RT, Furlan AJ, Roberts H, Tomsick T, Connors B et al. (2003) Trial design and reporting standards for intra-arterial cerebral thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 34: e109-e137.10.1161/01.STR.0000082721.62796.09 PubMed: 12869717[PubMed]"|Post-procedure, immediate=at the end of the procedure, per last angiogram during treatment|||percentage of subjects TICI 2 or >|||Number
814509|NCT01088711|Secondary|Plasma Glucose Concentration|Post-prandial glucose concentration is presented as a weighted average of the 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 hour post-dose time points. Glucose concentration was calculated as area under the curve (AUC) for the 4-hr post-dose time period (AUC0-4 hrs); this AUC was then divided by the time interval of 4 hours to obtain weighted average glucose concentration. Log scale data were then back-transformed to obtain LS means.|Through 4 hours post dose on Day 21|Data from obese healthy participants (Panel A) and obese T2D participants (Panel B) 4 hours post dose on Day 21 were pooled according to treatment. All participants who received omarigliptin or placebo are included.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814510|NCT01088711|Secondary|WAA Total GLP-1 Concentration|WAA total GLP-1 concentration was based on the 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 hour timepoints. WAA was calculated as AUC0-4 hrs; this AUC was then divided by the time interval of 4 hours to obtain WAA. Log scale data were then back-transformed to obtain LS means.|Through 4 hours post dose on Day 21|Data from obese healthy participants (Panel A) and obese T2D participants (Panel B) 4 hours post dose on Day 21 were pooled according to treatment. All participants who received omarigliptin or placebo are included.||pmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814511|NCT01088711|Secondary|WAA Active Glucagon-like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Concentration|Weighted average augmentation (WAA) active GLP-1 concentration was based on the 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 hour timepoints. WAA was calculated as area under the curve (AUC) for the 4-hr post-dose time period (AUC0-4 hrs); this AUC was then divided by the time interval of 4 hours to obtain WAA. Log scale data were then back-transformed to obtain LS means.|Through 4 hours post dose on Day 21|Data from obese healthy participants (Panel A) and obese T2D participants (Panel B) 4 hours post dose on Day 21 were pooled according to treatment. All participants who received omarigliptin or placebo are included.||pmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814512|NCT01088711|Secondary|Percent Inhibition of DPP-4 After Day 22|Percent DPP-4 inhibition at 168 hours after the Day 22 dose (from baseline [pre-dose on Day 1]) was compared in healthy and T2D participants receiving omarigliptin or placebo.|168 hours post dose on Day 22|No data from obese healthy participants (Panel A) were collected after pre-dose on Day 22. Therefore, data are presented only for obese T2D participants (Panel B) 168 hours post-dose on Day 22.||Percent DPP-4 inhibition||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814513|NCT01088711|Secondary|Percent Inhibition of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 (DPP-4) After Day 15|Percent DPP-4 inhibition at 168 hours after the Day 15 dose (from baseline [pre-dose on Day 1]) was compared in healthy and T2D participants receiving omarigliptin or placebo.|168 hours post-dose on Day 15|Data from obese healthy participants (Panel A) and obese T2D participants (Panel B) 168 hours post-dose on Day 15 were pooled according to treatment. Predose data from Day 1 were missing from 2 participants.||Percent DPP-4 inhibition||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814514|NCT01088711|Primary|Number of Participants Withdrawing From Study Therapy Due to an AE||Up to Day 22|AEs were monitored in all obese healthy (Panel A) and T2D (Panel B) participants who received omarigliptin 50 mg or placebo.||Participants|||Number
830143|NCT01227629|Secondary|D-dimer: Difference From Baseline|Difference in D-dimer from baseline to last available value|baseline and 12 weeks|All randomised patients, only per-protocol data included.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
814516|NCT01081626|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Answered Ease of Use of Gonal-f® Pen Questionnaire|Ease of use of Gonal-f® pen was assessed through a questionnaire consisting of 23 questions and the number of participants who responded to the questionnaire was recorded.|On hCG administration day (end of stimulation cycle {less than or equal to [<=] 35 days})|The ITT population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had 1 efficacy assessment and did not have any protocol criteria violations or did not receive a wrong treatment.||participants|||Number
814517|NCT01081626|Secondary|Total Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) Dose||End of stimulation cycle (less than or equal to [<=] 35 days|The ITT population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had 1 efficacy assessment and did not have any protocol criteria violations or did not receive a wrong treatment. Number of participants analyzed (N) included participants who were evaluated for this particular measure.||IU||Standard Deviation|Mean
814518|NCT01081626|Secondary|Duration of Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH)||End of stimulation cycle (less than or equal to [<=] 35 days)|The ITT population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had 1 efficacy assessment and did not have any protocol criteria violations or did not receive a wrong treatment. Number of participants analyzed (N) included participants who were evaluated for this particular measure.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814519|NCT01081626|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Pregnancies|Clinical pregnancy was defined as pregnancy diagnosed by ultrasonographic visualization of one or more gestational sacs or definitive clinical signs of pregnancy. It includes ectopic pregnancy.|Day 0 (first dose) up to Days 35-42 post hCG administration (end of stimulation cycle {less than or equal to [<=] 35 days})|The ITT population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had 1 efficacy assessment and did not have any protocol criteria violations or did not receive a wrong treatment. Number of participants analyzed (N) included participants who were evaluated for this particular measure.||participants|||Number
814520|NCT01081626|Secondary|Number of Participants With Cancelled Cycles|Participants with cancelled cycles were those who did not achieve adequate follicular formation (at least 17 mm) for hCG administration.|End of stimulation cycle (less than or equal to [<=] 35 days)|The ITT population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had 1 efficacy assessment and did not have any protocol criteria violations or did not receive a wrong treatment.||participants|||Number
814521|NCT01081626|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Received Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (hCG)||End of stimulation cycle (less than or equal to [<=] 35 days)|The ITT population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had 1 efficacy assessment and did not have any protocol criteria violations or did not receive a wrong treatment.||participants|||Number
814522|NCT01081626|Secondary|Number of Participants With Injection Tolerability|Participants who did not show any injection site reactions such as pain, redness, bruises, swelling and irritation were considered to have injection tolerability.|Day 0 (first dose) up to Days 35-42 post hCG administration (end of stimulation cycle {less than or equal to [<=] 35 days})|The safety population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had 1 follow-up visit. Number of participants analyzed (N) included participants who were evaluated for this particular measure.||participants|||Number
814523|NCT01081626|Secondary|Number of Participants With Multiple Pregnancies|Multiple pregnancy is a pregnancy where more than one fetus develops simultaneously in the womb. There are two types of twinning—identical and fraternal. Identical twins represent the splitting of a single fertilized zygote (union of two gametes or male/female sex cells that produce a developing fetus) into two separate individuals.|Day 0 (first dose) up to Days 35-42 post hCG administration (end of stimulation cycle {less than or equal to [<=] 35 days})|The ITT population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had 1 efficacy assessment and did not have any protocol criteria violations or did not receive a wrong treatment. Number of participants analyzed (N) included participants who were evaluated for this particular measure.||participants|||Number
814524|NCT01081626|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|AE: any new untoward medical occurrence/worsening of pre-existing medical condition, whether or not related to study drug.|Day 0 (first dose) up to Days 35-42 post hCG administration (end of stimulation cycle {less than or equal to [<=] 35 days})|The safety population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had 1 follow-up visit.||participants|||Number
814525|NCT01081626|Secondary|Number of Participants With Multi-follicular Development|Multi-follicular development was defined as the development of more than 3 follicles >= 15 mm in diameter at or before Days 35-42 of stimulation period assessed by means of a transvaginal ultrasound scan.|Day 0 (first dose) up to Days 35-42 post hCG administration (end of stimulation cycle {less than or equal to [<=] 35 days})|The ITT population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had 1 efficacy assessment and did not have any protocol criteria violations or did not receive a wrong treatment.||participants|||Number
814526|NCT01081626|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Mono-follicular Development|Mono-follicular development was defined as the development of only 1 follicle of greater than or equal to (>=) 17 millimeter (mm) diameter and no more than 2 other follicles larger than 14 mm in diameter at or before Days 35-42 of stimulation period assessed by means of a transvaginal ultrasound scan.|Day 0 (first dose) up to Days 35-42 post human chorionic gonadotropin [hCG] administration (end of stimulation cycle {less than or equal to [<=] 35 days})|The Intention-To-Treat (ITT) population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had 1 efficacy assessment and did not have any protocol criteria violations or did not receive a wrong treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
814527|NCT01081665|Primary|Safety Evaluation of Paricalcitol by Recording the Number of Days Hospitalized|The mean (average) number of days hospitalized per participant for those hospitalized during the study.|Baseline to Month 24 Visit|Based on participant hospitalizations during the study where the length of hospitalization was known (82 participants total).||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814592|NCT01089023|Secondary|Time to DAS28 Response by DAS28 Category|Time to response is the number of days from date of first infusion to date of event. DAS28 response was defined as achievement of Low Disease Activity (DAS28 ≥2.6 to ≤3.2), Remission (DAS28 <2.6), or Clinically Meaningful Improvement (change of >1.2 from baseline).|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|All the participants who were administered treatment at each visit were considered during the analysis.||days||Standard Error|Mean
814528|NCT01081665|Secondary|To Estimate the Incidence of (S)AEs/(S)ADRs|The number of adverse events, serious adverse events (including death), adverse drug reactions, and serious adverse drug reactions experienced by participants during the study are summarized. Adverse events include any events reported regardless of whether or not they were considered related to the study drug. Adverse drug reactions include events where a causal relationship between the drug and the occurence of the event is suspected. For additional details see the Reported Adverse Events section.|Baseline to Month 24 Visit|Analysis included all enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
814529|NCT01081665|Secondary|The Incidence of Clinically Significant Elevation of Calcium-phosphorous (Ca x P) Product|The number of participants with clinically significant levels of calcium-phosphorous product (Ca x P), defined as serum calcium-phosphorous product levels greater than 65 milligrams squared per deciliters squared (mg^2/dL^2) at 2 consecutive measurements.|Baseline to Month 24 Visit|Analysis included all enrolled participants.||Participants|||Number
814530|NCT01081665|Secondary|The Incidence of Clinically Significant Hyperphosphatemia|The number of participants with clinically significant hyperphosphatemia (too much phosphorous in the blood), defined as serum phosphorous levels greater than 6.5 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) at 2 consecutive measurements.|Baseline to Month 24 Visit|Analysis included all enrolled participants.||Participants|||Number
814531|NCT01081665|Secondary|The Incidence of Clinically Significant Hypercalcemia|The number of participants with clinically significant hypercalcemia (too much calcium in the blood), defined as a corrected serum calcium level greater than 11.0 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) at 2 consecutive measurements.|Baseline to Month 24 Visit|Analysis included all enrolled participants.||Participants|||Number
814532|NCT01081665|Secondary|The Proportion of Patients Achieving Therapeutic Success (Defined as 40% Reduction in Base Parathormone Level and/or Parathormone Level <300 pg/ml)|Therapeutic success of paricalcitol treatment was defined as a 40% decrease from the baseline measurement in the level of intact parathyroid hormone (also known as iPTH or parathormone) and/or a serum intact parathyroid hormone level less than 300 picograms per milliliter (pg/mL) for at least 2 consecutive available measurements during the 24-month follow-up period.|Baseline to Month 24 Visit|Analysis based on the evaluable population, defined as participants with baseline and at least 2 post-baseline parathormone measurements at the 24-month post-treatment follow-up visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
814533|NCT01081665|Primary|Safety Evaluation of Paricalcitol by Recording the Number of Hospitalizations|The number of participants who were hospitalized during the study and the number of hospitalizations are summarized.|Baseline to Month 24 Visit|Analysis included all enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
814534|NCT01081769|Primary|Number of Participants With a Relapse Event|Number of participants with a relapse event with relapses evaluated according the Csernansky criteria. A patient was considered to have relapsed if they met one or more of the following criteria: (1) psychiatric hospitalization; (2) an increase in the level of psychiatric care and an increase of 25% from baseline in the PANSS total score (or an increase of 10 points if the baseline score was 40 or less); (3) deliberate self-injury; (4) suicidal or homicidal ideation that was clinically significant in the investigator’s judgment; (5) violent behavior resulting in clinically significant injury to another person or property damage; (6) substantial clinical deterioration, defined as a change score of 6 (“much worse”) or 7 (“very much worse”) on the Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI-C); and/or (7) the required dose of the antipsychotic exceeds the maximum approved dose.|from baseline (Day 1 of core phase) up to maximally 24 months|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||number of participants|||Number
814535|NCT01081769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Physician’s Treatment Satisfaction|Physician’s treatment satisfaction was assessed using the physician’s treatment satisfaction scale which is designed to rate 4 aspects of treatment (efficacy, safety, mode of administration, and overall satisfaction), each on a scale ranging from 1 (extremely satisfied) to 7 (extremely dissatisfied).|baseline (day 1 of core phase), month 12 and 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814536|NCT01081769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient’s Treatment Satisfaction|Patient’s satisfaction with medication was assessed using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM). The TSQM is divided into 4 subscales (effectiveness, side effects, convenience, and global satisfaction), with the value of each subscale ranging from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate greater treatment satisfaction.|baseline (day 1 of core phase), month 12 and 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814537|NCT01081769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Subjective Well-Being Under Neuroleptics-Short Form (SWN-S) Total Score|The SWN-S is a patient self-rated scale developed to measure the subjective well-being for the previous 7 days of a patient under neuroleptic treatment. The SWN-S consists of 20 items (each item is rated from 1=not at all to 6=very much). The total score ranges from 20 to 120 with higher score indicating greater subjective well-being.|baseline (day 1 of core phase), month 6, 12 and 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814538|NCT01081769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQol 5-Dimensional Questionnaire (EQ-5D) Index Score|"The EuroQol-5 is a five dimensional health state classification. Each dimension is assessed on a 3-point ordinal scale (1=no problems, 2=some problems, 3=extreme problems). The responses to the five EQ-5D dimensions were scored using a utility-weighted algorithm to derive an EQ-5D health status index score between 0 to 1, with 1.00 indicating full health and 0 representing dead. A higher score indicates an improvement in health in the Health Status Index."|baseline (day 1 of core phase), month 6, 12 and 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814539|NCT01081769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQol 5-Dimensional Questionnaire (EQ-5D) VAS Score|The EQ-5D VAS records the respondent’s self-rated health on a vertical, visual analog scale, with 0 representing the worst imaginable health state and 100 representing the best imaginable health state. The EQ VAS is used as a quantitative measure of health outcome as judged by the individual respondent.|baseline (day 1 of core phase), month 6, 12 and 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814540|NCT01081769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36)|The Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) is a measure of Participant-reported health status. It is a 36-item questionnaire measuring 8 domains (physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional, and mental health). Two summary scale scores are computed based on weighted combinations of the 8 subscale scores: the Physical Component Summary and the Mental Component Summary. Each summary scale score ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores reflecting better health-related functional status.|baseline (day 1 of core phase), month 6, 12 and 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814541|NCT01081769|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Personal and Social Performance (PSP) Total Score|The Personal and Social Performance (PSP) scale assesses degree of a participant’s dysfunction within 4 domains of behavior: socially useful activities, personal and social relationships, self-care, and disturbing and aggressive behavior. Score ranges from 1 to 100, divided into 10 equal intervals to rate degree of difficulty (1, absent to 6, very severe) in each of the 4 domains. Based on 4 domains there will be 1 total score. Participants with score of 71 to 100 have mild degree of difficulty; from 31 to 70, varying degrees of disability; less than or equal to 30, functioning so poorly as to require intensive supervision.|baseline (day 1 of core phase), month 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21 and 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814542|NCT01081769|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression-Change (CGI-C)|The Clinical Global Impression-Change (CGI-C) rating scale is used to rate the change in severity of the patient's illness compared to baseline (day 1 of core phase) on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse).|Month 24 and endpoint|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||percentage of participants|||Number
814543|NCT01081769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression Severity (CGI-S) Score|"The Clinical Global Impression Severity (CGI-S) rating scale is a 7 point global clinical assessment that measures the clinician's impression of the severity of illness exhibited by a participant. A rating of 1 is equivalent to Normal, not at all ill and a rating of 7 is equivalent to Among the most extremely ill participants. Higher scores indicate higher impression of illness severity."|Baseline (day 1 of core phase), day 8, month 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814544|NCT01081769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Factor Scores|Change from baseline in schizophrenia symptoms were assessed through the following PANSS factor scores as described by Marder: (1) positive symptoms (range 8-56): sum of delusions, hallucinatory behavior, grandiosity, suspiciousness, stereotyped thinking, somatic concern, unusual thought content, lack of judgment and insight; (2) negative symptoms (range 7-49): sum of blunted affect, emotional withdrawal, poor rapport, passive social withdrawal, lack of spontaneity, motor retardation, and active social avoidance; (3) disorganized thoughts (range 7-49): sum of conceptual disorganization, difficulty in abstract thinking, mannerisms and posturing, disorientation, poor attention, disturbance of volition, and preoccupation; (4) uncontrolled hostility/excitement (range 4-28): sum of excitement, hostility, uncooperativeness and poor impulse control; (5) anxiety/depression (range 4-28): sum of anxiety, guilt feelings, tension, and depression. Higher scores indicate higher severity of symptoms|Baseline (day 1 of core phase), day 8, month 12 and 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814545|NCT01081769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Subscale Score|Change from baseline in positive symptom, negative symptom and general psychopathology subscales of the PANSS scale. The PANSS scale is designed to assess symptoms of schizophrenia by means of the 30-items. The PANSS scale provides subscores for 3 subscales, that is, the positive symptoms subscale (7 items, range 7-49), the negative symptoms subscale (7 items, range 7-49), and the general psychopathology subscale (16 items, range 16-112). Each item of the scale is to be scored on a scale of 1 (absent) to 7 (extreme). Higher scores indicate higher severity of schizophrenia symptoms.|Baseline (day 1 of core phase), day 8, month 12, 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814546|NCT01081769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Total Score|Change from baseline in the PANSS: The PANSS is a 30-item scale (Range 30-210) designed to assess various symptoms of schizophrenia including delusions, grandiosity, blunted affect, poor attention, and poor impulse control. The 30 symptoms are rated on a 7-point scale that ranges from 1 (absent) to 7 (extreme psychopathology). The PANSS total score consists of the sum of all 30 PANSS items. Higher scores indicate worsening.|Baseline, day 8, month 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814547|NCT01081769|Secondary|Percentage of Treatment Responders|The proportion of patients achieving a treatment response, defined as a ≥30% decrease (i.e., improvement) in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score from baseline to endpoint. The PANSS is a 30-item scale (Range 30-210) designed to assess various symptoms of schizophrenia including delusions, grandiosity, blunted affect, poor attention, and poor impulse control. The 30 symptoms are rated on a 7-point scale that ranges from 1 (absent) to 7 (extreme psychopathology). The PANSS total score consists of the sum of all 30 PANSS items. Higher scores indicate increased severity of schizophrenia symptoms.|from baseline (day 1 of core phase) up to maximally 24 months|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814548|NCT01081769|Primary|Time to First Relapse Event|Number of days from baseline (day 1 of core phase) to relapse as evaluated according the Csernansky criteria. A patient was considered to have relapsed if they met one or more of the following criteria: (1) psychiatric hospitalization; (2) an increase in the level of psychiatric care and an increase of 25 percent (%) from baseline in the Positive And Negative Syndrome Score (PANSS) total score (or an increase of 10 points if the baseline score was 40 or less); (3) deliberate self-injury; (4) suicidal or homicidal ideation that was clinically significant in the investigator’s judgment; (5) violent behavior resulting in clinically significant injury to another person or property damage; (6) substantial clinical deterioration, defined as a change score of 6 (“much worse”) or 7 (“very much worse”) on the Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI-C); and/or (7) the required dose of the antipsychotic exceeds the maximum approved dose.|from baseline (Day 1 of core phase) up to maximally 24 months.|all randomized subjects who responded at the end of the 2-week initial acute oral treatment phase, who also received at least one dose of study medication during the 24-month core treatment phase and provided at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment||days||Standard Error|Mean
814549|NCT01081795|Secondary|Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) Score|The SF-36 is a survey of participant health. It consists of 8 scaled scores, which are weighted sums of the questions in their section. The 8 sections are: vitality, physical functioning, bodily pain, general health perceptions, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, social role functioning and mental health. Each item is scored on a 0-100 range so that total score ranges from 0-100 with high score indicating more favorable health state. Final evaluation was done at Day 155 or at discontinuation for those participants who discontinued before Day 155.|Baseline (28 days before randomization), Day 29, 85 and final evaluation (FE) (Day 155/early withdrawal [EW])|The FAS included all participants randomly assigned to study treatment excluding those who did not meet eligibility criteria, did not receive study treatment at all and did not provide any efficacy data after randomization. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814550|NCT01081795|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Response to Study Treatment|Responders were the participants who had at least 50 percent reduction in the average number of monthly migraine attacks.|Month 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|The FAS included all participants randomly assigned to study treatment excluding those who did not meet eligibility criteria, did not receive study treatment at all and did not provide any efficacy data after randomization.||Percentage of participants|||Number
814551|NCT01081795|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Average Number of Rescue Drug Treatment Days at Month 6|Rescue medications are medicines that may be administered to the participants when efficacy of study drug is not satisfactory, or the effect of study drug is too great and is likely to cause a hazard to the participant, or to manage an emergency situation. If an aura of migraine, a migraine attack or a non-migraine headache attack occurred during the study period, use of following rescue drugs was permitted: analgesics, NSAIDs, ergotamines, triptans and anti-emetics. Average at Month 6 was calculated by dividing total number of rescue drug treatment days until that month by the total number of days of assessment, multiplied by 28 (a month was equal to 28 days).|Month 6|The FAS included all participants randomly assigned to study treatment excluding those who did not meet eligibility criteria, did not receive study treatment at all and did not provide any efficacy data after randomization.||Days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814552|NCT01081795|Secondary|Average Number of Rescue Drug Treatment Days|Rescue medications are administered to participants when efficacy of study drug is not satisfactory, or effect of study drug is too great and is likely to cause a hazard to participant, or to manage an emergency situation. If an aura of migraine, a migraine attack or a non-migraine headache attack occurred during the study period, use of following rescue drugs was permitted: analgesics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), ergotamines, triptans and anti-emetics (drug used to stop vomiting). Average at baseline was calculated by dividing total number of rescue drug treatment days until baseline by the total number of days of assessment, multiplied by 28 (a month was equal to 28 days).|Baseline (28 days before randomization)|The FAS included all participants randomly assigned to study treatment excluding those who did not meet eligibility criteria, did not receive study treatment at all and did not provide any efficacy data after randomization.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814553|NCT01081795|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Migraine Attacks (According to 24-Hour Rule) Over Week 19 to Week 22 Period|The change from baseline in average number of migraine attacks (as per 24-hour rule) over Week 19 to Week 22 period was calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the average value of the Week 19 to Week 22 period.|Baseline (28 days before randomization), Week 19 to Week 22 Period|The FAS included all participants randomly assigned to study treatment excluding those who did not meet eligibility criteria, did not receive study treatment at all and did not provide any efficacy data after randomization.||Migraine attacks||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814554|NCT01081795|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Monthly Migraine Attacks (According to 48-Hour Rule) at Month 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|As per 48-hour rule, if the symptom of pain due to migraine continues for more than 48 hours, it should be considered as 2 or more migraine attacks considering the maximum duration up to 48 hours. If the interval between the latest migraine attack (ending time) and the previous migraine attack (onset time) is less than 48 hours, the 2 migraine attacks should be considered as 1 migraine attack. If the onset of the migraine was prevented by a rescue drug, it should be considered as 1 migraine attack even if the aura had started.|Baseline (28 days before randomization), Month 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|The FAS included all participants randomly assigned to study treatment excluding those who did not meet eligibility criteria, did not receive study treatment at all and did not provide any efficacy data after randomization.||Migraine attacks||Standard Deviation|Mean
814555|NCT01081795|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average Number of Monthly Migraine Attacks (According to the Diagnostic Criteria of the International Headache Society) at Month 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|Migraine is a headache disorder with 2 subtypes: migraine without aura (at least 5 attacks lasting 4-72 hours with at least 2 following characteristics: unilateral location, pulsating quality, moderate/severe pain and either nausea/vomiting or photophobia and phonophobia) and migraine with aura (reversible focal neurological symptoms that develop over 5-20 minutes and last for less than 60 minutes); average at given month was calculated by dividing total number of migraine attacks until that month by the total number of days of assessment, multiplied by 28 (a month was equal to 28 days).|Baseline (28 days before randomization), Month 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|The FAS included all participants randomly assigned to study treatment excluding those who did not meet eligibility criteria, did not receive study treatment at all and did not provide any efficacy data after randomization.||Migraine attacks||Standard Deviation|Mean
814556|NCT01081795|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average Number of Monthly Headache Days at Month 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|Headache days were the days when at least 30-minute migraine and non-migraine headache occurred and were calculated from the headache diaries kept by the participants. Average at given month was calculated by dividing total number of headache days until that month by the total number of days of assessment, multiplied by 28 (a month was equal to 28 days).|Baseline (28 days before randomization), Month 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|The FAS included all participants randomly assigned to study treatment excluding those who did not meet eligibility criteria, did not receive study treatment at all and did not provide any efficacy data after randomization.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814557|NCT01081795|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average Number of Monthly Migraine Attack Days at Month 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|Migraine is a headache disorder with 2 subtypes: migraine without aura (at least 5 attacks lasting 4-72 hours with at least 2 following characteristics: unilateral location, pulsating quality, moderate/severe pain and either nausea/vomiting or photophobia and phonophobia) and migraine with aura (reversible focal neurological symptoms that develop over 5-20 minutes and last for less than 60 minutes); average at given month was calculated by dividing total number of migraine attack days until that month by the total number of days of assessment, multiplied by 28 (a month was equal to 28 days).|Baseline (28 days before randomization), Month 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|The FAS included all participants randomly assigned to study treatment excluding those who did not meet eligibility criteria, did not receive study treatment at all and did not provide any efficacy data after randomization.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814558|NCT01081795|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Monthly Migraine Attacks (According to 24-Hour Rule) Through Month 6|As per 24-hour rule, if symptom of pain due to migraine continues for more than 24 hours, it should be considered as 2 or more migraine attacks considering the maximum duration up to 24 hours. If the interval between latest migraine attack (ending time) and previous migraine attack (onset time) is less than 24 hours, 2 migraine attacks should be considered as 1 migraine attack. If the onset of migraine was prevented by a rescue drug, it should be considered as 1 migraine attack even if aura had started. Mean change was calculated by subtracting baseline value from the mean of 6 months value.|Baseline (28 days before randomization) through Month 6|Full analysis set (FAS) included all participants randomly assigned to study treatment excluding those who did not meet eligibility criteria, did not receive study treatment at all and did not provide any efficacy data after randomization.||Migraine attacks||Standard Deviation|Mean
814559|NCT01081834|Secondary|Percent Change in High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) From Baseline to Week 26 (High Glycemic Substudy)|The table below shows the least-squares mean percent change in HDL-C from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the High Glycemic Substudy.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814560|NCT01081834|Secondary|Percent Change in Triglycerides From Baseline to Week 26 (High Glycemic Substudy)|The table below shows the least-squares mean percent change in triglycerides from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the High Glycemic Substudy.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814561|NCT01081834|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline to Week 26 (High Glycemic Substudy)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in SBP from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the High Glycemic Substudy.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814562|NCT01081834|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 26 (High Glycemic Substudy)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in body weight from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the High Glycemic Substudy.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814563|NCT01081834|Secondary|Change in 2-hour Post-prandial Glucose From Baseline to Week 26 (High Glycemic Substudy)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in 2-hour post-prandial glucose from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the High Glycemic Substudy.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814564|NCT01081834|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 26 (High Glycemic Substudy)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in FPG from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the High Glycemic Substudy.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814565|NCT01081834|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7% at Week 26 (High Glycemic Substudy)|The table below shows the percentage of patients with HbA1c <7% at Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the High Glycemic Substudy.|Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||Percentage of patients|||Number
814566|NCT01081834|Secondary|Percent Change in High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) From Baseline to Week 26 (Main Study)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in HDL-C from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814567|NCT01081834|Secondary|Percent Change in Triglycerides From Baseline to Week 26 (Main Study)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in triglycerides from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814568|NCT01081834|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline to Week 26 (Main Study)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in SBP from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814569|NCT01081834|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 26 (Main Study)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in body weight from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814570|NCT01081834|Secondary|Change in 2-hour Post-prandial Glucose From Baseline to Week 26 (Main Study)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in 2-hour post-prandial glucose from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814571|NCT01081834|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 26 (Main Study)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in FPG from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814572|NCT01081834|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7% at Week 26 (Main Study)|The table below shows the percentage of patients with HbA1c <7% at Week 26. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the percentage.|Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||Percentage of patients|||Number
814573|NCT01081834|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 26 (High Glycemic Substudy)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the High Glycemic Substudy.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816299|NCT01107418|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to 24 Hours (AUC[0-24h]) of Vemurafenib on Day 1||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 24 hours post-dose on Day 1|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mcg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814574|NCT01081834|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 26 (Main Study)|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814575|NCT01088984|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Drug Concentration by Time Curve From Time 0 Until 24 Hours After Study Drug Administration (AUC0-24) for Bendamustine and Its Metabolites (M3 and M4)||Cycle 1, Day 1: before infusion, immediately following the infusion, and 3, 6, 10(±2), and 24 hours after the start of infusion. The 24-hour postinfusion sample was obtained before the start of the infusion on Day 2.|The pharmacokinetic analysis set included all participants who were in the safety analysis set (ie, those treated at any dose of bendamustine) who had valid pharmacokinetic data; n=number of participants with valid data for this assessment.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814576|NCT01088984|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Drug Concentration by Time Curve From Time 0 Until the Last Measurable Plasma Concentration (AUC0-t) for Bendamustine and Its Metabolites (M3 and M4)||Cycle 1, Day 1: before infusion, immediately following the infusion, and 3, 6, 10(±2), and 24 hours after the start of infusion. The 24-hour postinfusion sample was obtained before the start of the infusion on Day 2.|The pharmacokinetic analysis set included all participants who were in the safety analysis set (ie, those treated at any dose of bendamustine) who had valid pharmacokinetic data; n=number of participants with valid data for this assessment.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814577|NCT01088984|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Drug Concentration (Tmax) for Bendamustine and Its Metabolites (M3 and M4)||Cycle 1, Day 1: before infusion, immediately following the infusion, and 3, 6, 10(±2), and 24 hours after the start of infusion. The 24-hour postinfusion sample was obtained before the start of the infusion on Day 2.|The pharmacokinetic analysis set included all participants who were in the safety analysis set (ie, those treated at any dose of bendamustine) who had valid pharmacokinetic data; n=number of participants with valid data for this assessment.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814578|NCT01088984|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Drug Concentration (Cmax) for Bendamustine and Its Metabolites (M3 and M4)||Cycle 1, Day 1: before infusion, immediately following the infusion, and 3, 6, 10(±2), and 24 hours after the start of infusion. The 24-hour postinfusion sample was obtained before the start of the infusion on Day 2.|The pharmacokinetic analysis set included all participants who were in the safety analysis set (ie, those treated at any dose of bendamustine) who had valid pharmacokinetic data; n=number of participants with valid data for this assessment.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814579|NCT01088984|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR)|DOR was determined for the participants with CR or CRp in the primary analysis set, defined as the time from first achieving remission to the time when progression was diagnosed, the participant died, or the participant started receiving new antineoplastic therapy. Data from participants who do not progress were censored at the last valid assessments. Median DOR and its 95% confidence interval was determined based on the Kaplan-Meier method. Data from participants who received a transplant were censored at the time of the transplant.|At each treatment cycle (21 to 35 days), for a maximum of 12 cycles|No duration of remission (defined as CR or CRp) analysis was performed for participants in the primary analysis since none achieved remission.|||||
814580|NCT01088984|Secondary|Best Overall Tumor Response Rate, by Phase|Biological activity of bendamustine was defined as achieving a best response of partial response (PR), CRp, or CR. Rate was calculated as follows: number of participants in the primary analysis set achieving a best overall response of PR, CRp, or CR, divided by the number of participants in the primary analysis set. The most positive response for each patient during the study was counted. The 95% CI was calculated using binomial parameter exact method. Response was determined by the investigator, and evaluated per Jeha et al, 2006: A PR had to meet the following criteria: complete disappearance of circulating blasts and an M2 marrow (≥ 5% and ≤ 25% bone marrow blasts) and appearance of normal progenitor cells or an M1 marrow that did not qualify for CR or CRp. See Outcome Measure 2 for full definitions for CRp and CR.|At each treatment cycle (21 to 35 days), for a maximum of 12 cycles|The safety analysis set included all participants treated at any dose of bendamustine.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814581|NCT01088984|Secondary|Best Overall Tumor Response Rate|Biological activity of bendamustine was defined as achieving a best response of partial response (PR), CRp, or CR. Rate was calculated as follows: number of participants in the primary analysis set achieving a best overall response of PR, CRp, or CR, divided by the number of participants in the primary analysis set. The most positive response for each patient during the study was counted. The 95% CI was calculated using binomial parameter exact method. Response was determined by the investigator, and evaluated per Jeha et al, 2006: A PR had to meet the following criteria: complete disappearance of circulating blasts and an M2 marrow (≥ 5% and ≤ 25% bone marrow blasts) and appearance of normal progenitor cells or an M1 marrow that did not qualify for CR or CRp. See Outcome Measure 2 for full definitions for CRp and CR.|At each treatment cycle (21 to 35 days), for a maximum of 12 cycles|The primary analysis set for efficacy included all participants treated at the RP2D in Phase 2.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814582|NCT01088984|Primary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|ORR was calculated as follows: number of participants in the primary analysis set achieving a best overall response of complete remission without platelet recovery (CRp) or complete remission (CR), divided by the number of participants in the primary analysis set. The most positive response for each patient during the study was counted. The 95% CI was calculated using binomial parameter exact method. Response was determined by the investigator, and evaluated per Jeha et al, 2006: A CR required no evidence of circulating blasts or extramedullary disease, an M1 marrow (≤ 5% bone marrow blasts), and recovery of peripheral counts (platelets ≥ 100 × 10^9/L and absolute neutrophil count ≥ 1.0 × 10^9/L). A CR without platelet recovery (CRp) required all of the criteria for a CR with the exception of platelet recovery.|Assessed at each treatment cycle (21 to 35 days), for a maximum of 12 cycles|The primary analysis set for efficacy included all participants treated at the RP2D in Phase 2.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814583|NCT01088984|Primary|Recommended Phase II Dose (RP2D) of Bendamustine|RP2D was determined by a traditional 3+3 dose escalation design, with the following restrictions: only doses of 60, 90, 120, and 150 mg/m^2 were explored, and escalation to 150 mg/m^2 would only occur if the 120 mg/m^2 dose was deemed safe and pharmacokinetic data indicate subtherapeutic exposure as compared with adults. The first cohort was administered bendamustine at the 90 mg/m^2 dose; de-escalation to the 60 mg/m^2 dose would only occur if the starting dose led to dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in 2 or more participants. A DLT was defined as any study drug-related nonhematologic adverse event (AE) that was grade 4 for toxicity by National Cancer Institute's Common Toxicity Criteria for AEs, version 4. In addition, grade 3 or above allergic reaction or skin rash were considered DLTs. Hematologic AEs were not considered DLTs. The dose level at which at least 2 of 3 or 2 of 6 participants had a DLT was considered as exceeding the RP2D. The RP2D was the dose 1 step below that level.|Induction Cycle (21- to 35-day cycle)|All participants enrolled in Phase 1 of the study.||mg/m^2|||Number
814584|NCT01088997|Secondary|Change in Myocardial Performance Index (MPI) From Baseline to up to 24 Hours After Start of Milrinone Infusion|An echocardiogram obtained while on milrinone was obtained with the goal of attempting to look for improvements in parameters associated with pulmonary hypertension. The primary parameter measured was the myocardial performance index (MPI). An Echocardiogram was performed at baseline (pre-infusion) and repeated 12-24 hours ater the initiation of the Milrinone infusion. Also known as the Tei index, the MPI is an index that incorporates both systolic and diastolic time intervals in expressing global systolic and diastolic ventricular function. Systolic dysfunction prolongs preejection (isovolumic contraction time, IVCT) and a shortening of the ejection time (ET). Both systolic and diastolic dysfunction result in abnormality in myocardial relaxation which prolongs the relaxation period (isovolumic relaxation time, IVRT). Normal value for MPI is 0.39+/-0.05 with dilated cardiomyopathy value of MPI at 0.59+/-0.10 (both units on a scale)|Up to 24 hours after start of infusion|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814585|NCT01088997|Primary|Define Plasma Concentration-time Profile of Milrinone in Neonates With Persistent Pulmonary Hypertension of the Newborn (PPHN) - Clearance (CL, mL/Min)|The schedule of milrinone pharmacokinetic (PK) sampling varied by weight to minimize blood sampling. For babies weighing less than 3kg, samples were drawn at the end of the bolus, 15 minutes prior to the end of infusion (EOI) and 20 minutes, 1, 2, 6 and 12 hours after EOI. For babies weighing 3kg or more, samples were drawn at the end of the bolus, 6 hours after start of infusion, 15 minutes prior to the EOI and 30 minutes, 1, 3, 9 and 15 hours after EOI. Milrinone plasma concentrations were determined using a validated high-performance mass spectrometry assay.|End of bolus dose, 15 minutes prior to end of infusion (EOI), at four time points after EOI with final sample at 12-15 hours after EOI (timing based on infant's weight)|The pharmacokinetic analysis, including the primary outcome parameter, Clearance, was planned a priori to include all the participants pooled together. A PK analysis by arm wouldn't be appropriate. The randomization arms were only created to explore the secondary clinical and pharmacodynamic outcomes.||mL/min/3.4 kg||Standard Error|Mean
814586|NCT01088997|Secondary|Change in Oxygenation Index (OI) From Baseline to up to 24 Hours After Start of Milrinone Infusion|Oxygenation Index (mean airway pressure*Fraction of Inspired Oxygen/Partial Pressure of Oxygen in the blood) was calculated at baseline and every 6 hours after start of infusion until 12-24 hours after initiation of milrinone infusion.|for up to 24 hours after start of infusion|OI was calculated every 6 hours after start of infusion for 24 hours.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814587|NCT01089023|Secondary|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate|ESR (measured in mm/hr) is an inflammation marker used to determine acute phase response.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|All the participants who were administered treatment at each visit were considered during the analysis.||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
814588|NCT01089023|Secondary|C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Values by Study Visit|CRP is an acute phase inflammatory marker. The serum concentration of CRP is measured in milligrams per liter (mg/L). A reduction in the level is considered an improvement.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|All the participants who were administered treatment at each visit were considered during the analysis.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
814589|NCT01089023|Secondary|HAQ-DI Score by Visit|HAQ includes 20 questions concerning participant’s activities of daily life, grouped in 8 scales of 2 to 3 questions for each activity. To respond to each question, a four-level response (score of 0 to 3 points), with higher scores showing larger functional limitations, was chosen. Scoring was as follows with respect to performance of participant’s everyday activities: 0=without difficulties; 1= with some difficulties; 2=with great difficulties; and 3=unable to perform these actions at all. Minimum score was 0, maximum score was 3..|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|"All the participants who were administered treatment at each visit were considered during the analysis.
n at Week 24 = number of participants in that visit; n at Other Visits = number of participants with treatment administered"||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814590|NCT01089023|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Physical Function by HAQ-DI Category|Physical function scoring was as follows with respect to performance of participant’s everyday activities: 0=without difficulties; 1= with some difficulties; 2=with great difficulties; and 3=unable to perform these actions at all. Minimum score was 0, maximum score was 3. The HAQ-DI score at every visit was categorized into none to mild disability (HAQ-DI <1), moderate disability (1≤ HAQ-DI <2) and severe disability (HAQ-DI ≥2). The percentages of the participants falling in each of these categories with respect to the visits were determined.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|"All the participants who were administered treatment at each visit were considered during the analysis.
n at Week 24 = number of participants in that visit; n at Other Visits = number of participants with treatment administered"||percentage of participants|||Number
814591|NCT01089023|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) of at Least 0.22 Units|HAQ includes 20 questions concerning participant’s activities of daily life, grouped in 8 scales of 2 to 3 questions for each activity. To respond to each question, a four-level response (score of 0 to 3 points), with higher scores showing larger functional limitations, was chosen. Scoring was as follows with respect to performance of participant’s everyday activities: 0=without difficulties; 1= with some difficulties; 2=with great difficulties; and 3=unable to perform these actions at all. Minimum score was 0, maximum score was 3.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|"All the participants who were administered treatment at each visit were considered during the analysis.
n at Week 24 = number of participants in that visit; n at Other Visits = number of participants with treatment administered"||percentage of participants|||Number
814593|NCT01089023|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Clinically Meaningful Improvement as Measured by DAS28|DAS28 was calculated from the number of swollen joints and tender joints using the 28-joint count, the ESR (mm/hr) and global health assessment (participant rated global assessment of disease activity using 10-mm VAS); DAS28 score ranged from 0 to 10, where higher scores correspond to greater disease activity. Participants achieved a clinically meaningful improvement in DAS28 if there was a reduction of at least 1.2 units from baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|"All the participants who were administered treatment at each visit were considered during the analysis.
n at Week 24 = number of participants in that visit; n at Other Visits = number of participants with treatment administered"||percentage of participants|||Number
814594|NCT01089023|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count (DAS28) Category|DAS28 was calculated from the number of swollen joints and tender joints using the 28-joint count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (millimeters per hour [mm/hr]) and global health assessment (participant rated global assessment of disease activity using 10-mm Visual analog scale - VAS); DAS28 score ranged from 0 to 10, where higher scores correspond to greater disease activity. A DAS28 score of greater than (>)5.1 indicated high disease activity, a score of >3.2 but less than or equal to (≤)5.1 indicated moderate disease activity, a score of greater than or equal to (≥)2.6 but ≤3.2 indicated low disease activity, and a score of less than <2.6 indicated disease remission. Week 24 is the Follow-Up visit.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|"All the participants who were administered treatment at each visit were considered during the analysis.
n (number) at Week 24 equals (=) number of participants in that visit; n at Other Visits = number of participants with treatment administered"||percentage of participants|||Number
814595|NCT01089023|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Any Adverse Event - Overall Summary of Events|Percentage of participants with a serious adverse event (SAE), who died, with an adverse event (AE), or study drug related AE during the study.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|All the participants who were administered treatment at each visit were considered during the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
814596|NCT01089062|Secondary|Change From Baseline in QTc Interval at 14 Minutes After the 1st and 2nd Dose|The corrected QT interval (QTc) is a measurement of the electrical impulses through the largest part of the heart muscle. A negative change is a shortening of the QTc interval, a positive change is a lengthening of the QTc interval.|baseline, 14 minutes from time of 1st dose, 14 minutes from time of 2nd dose|Patients with available data at the required time point were included in the analysis population.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814597|NCT01089062|Secondary|Change in Blood Pressure From Baseline After the Two 2-hour Post Dosing Periods|Systolic and diastolic blood pressure measure the lowest and highest pressures against the walls of the arteries. Changes were calculated from 30 minutes pre dose (baseline) to 10 minutes post first and second dose. A positive change from baseline indicates an increase in blood pressure and a negative change indicates a decrease in blood pressure.|baseline, 10 minutes post 1st dose, 10 minutes post 2nd dose|Patients with available data at the required time point were included in the analysis population.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
814598|NCT01089062|Secondary|AUC(0-4hrs) of Pulmonary Arterial Systolic Pressure (PASP) From the Start of the First Dose to Two Hours After the Second Dose|AUC(0-4hrs) (Area Under the Curve, time 0-4 hours post-1st dose) in PASP millimeters of mercury times minutes (mmHg*min). PASP is the highest pressure exerted on the walls of the pulmonary artery.|4 hours from the time of first dose|Patients with available data at the required time point were included in the analysis population.||mmHg*min||Standard Deviation|Mean
814599|NCT01089062|Secondary|Maximum Change in PASP From Baseline to the Two Hour Period Following the First Dose|Pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) is the highest pressure exerted on the walls of the pulmonary artery.|baseline and 2 hours from the time of first dose|Patients with available data at the required time point were included in the analysis population.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
814600|NCT01089062|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With an Increase in PASP Greater Than 10mmHg From Baseline to 2 Hours From the First Dose|Pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) is the highest pressure exerted on the walls of the pulmonary artery.|baseline and 2 hours from the time of first dose|Patients with available data at the required time point were included in the analysis population.||percentage of participants|||Number
814601|NCT01089062|Primary|AUC(0-2hrs) of Pulmonary Arterial Systolic Pressure (PASP) Over Time Post 1st Dose|AUC(0-2hrs) (Area Under the Curve, time 0-2 hours post-1st dose) in PASP millimeters of mercury times minutes (mmHg*min). PASP is the highest pressure exerted on the walls of the pulmonary artery.|2 hours from time of first dose|Patients with available data at the required time point were included in the analysis population.||mmHg*min||Standard Deviation|Mean
814602|NCT01089127|Secondary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) 24 Hours Post-dose on Day 2|FEV1 was measured with spirometry conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Trough FEV1 was defined as the average of measurements made 23 hours 10 minutes and 23 hours 45 minutes post-dose on Day 2. The analysis included baseline FEV1, FEV1 pre-dose and 10-15 minutes post-dose of salbutamol/albuterol during screening, and FEV1 pre-dose and 1 hour post-dose of ipratropium during screening as covariates.|24 hours post-dose on Day 2|Full analysis set: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814603|NCT01089127|Primary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) 24 Hours Post-dose at the End of the Study (Week 2 + 1 Day, Day 15)|FEV1 was measured with spirometry conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Trough FEV1 was defined as the average of measurements made 23 hours 10 minutes and 23 hours 45 minutes post-dose at the end of treatment. The analysis included baseline FEV1, FEV1 pre-dose and 10-15 minutes post-dose of salbutamol/albuterol during screening, and FEV1 pre-dose and 1 hour post-dose of ipratropium during screening as covariates.|24 hours post-dose at the end of the study (Week 2 + 1 day, Day 15)|Full analysis set: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
814604|NCT01090011|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Time|Progression-Free Survival was defined as the duration of time from start of treatment until the day of objective tumour progression confirmed by tumour imaging (PD according to RECIST 1.1) or death.|up to 116 weeks|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814605|NCT01090011|Secondary|Duration of Disease Control (According to RECIST v1.1)|Duration of disease control was defined as the time from the start of treatment to the time of progression or death (whichever occurred first), among patients with evidence SD, PR or CR.|up to 116 weeks|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
814606|NCT01090011|Secondary|Duration of Objective Response (According to RECIST v1.1)|Duration of objective response was measured from the time measurements criteria were met for CR/PR (whichever was first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or PD was objectively documented (taking as reference for PD the smallest measurements recorded since treatment started).|up to 116 weeks|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
814607|NCT01090011|Secondary|Objective Tumor Response (Complete Response [CR] and Partial Response [PR]) Determined by RECIST v1.1)|"Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Progressive Disease (PD), At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions or the appearance of new lesion(s); Stable Disease (SD), Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD.
Objective tumor response = CR + PR."|up to 116 weeks|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||percentage of patients|||Number
814608|NCT01090011|Secondary|Disease Control (CR, PR and Stable Disease (SD) Determined by RECIST v1.1)|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Progressive Disease (PD), At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions or the appearance of new lesion(s); Stable Disease (SD), Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD. Disease control = CR + PR + SD.|up to 116 weeks|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814609|NCT01090011|Secondary|Predose Plasma Concentrations of Afatinib for the Combination Arm|Predose plasma concentrations (Cpre,ss) of Afatinib at Course 1, Visit 2, 3, 4 and 5, at Course 2, Visit 1 and 2 and at Course 3, Visit 1.|Up to 57 days|Pharmacokinetic dataset (PKS)||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814610|NCT01090011|Secondary|Vz/F,ss|Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase λz at steady state following extravascular administration (Vz/F,ss) for 15 days|Course 1, Visit 3 and 4, Day 15 and 16, Hours: -0:05,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,8, and 23:55|Pharmacokinetic dataset (PKS)||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814611|NCT01090011|Secondary|CL/F,ss,15|Apparent clearance of afatinib in plasma at steady state after extravascular multiple dose administration (CL/F,ss)|Course 1, Visit 3 and 4, Day 15 and 16, Hours: -0:05,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,8, and 23:55|Pharmacokinetic dataset (PKS)||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814612|NCT01090011|Secondary|MRTpo,ss|mean residence time of Afatinib in the body at steady state after oral administration (MRTpo,ss) for 15 days|Course 1, Visit 3 and 4, Day 15 and 16, Hours: -0:05,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,8, and 23:55|Pharmacokinetic dataset (PKS)||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814613|NCT01090011|Secondary|t1/2,ss|Terminal half-life of Afatinib in plasma at steady state (t1/2,ss)|Course 1, Visit 3 and 4, Day 15 and 16, Hours: -0:05,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,8, and 23:55|Pharmacokinetic dataset (PKS)||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814614|NCT01090011|Secondary|Peak-trough Fluctuation (PTF)|Peak-trough fluctuation (PTF) of plasma afatinib for the combination arm. PTF = 100*(Cmax-Cmin)/Caverage where Caverage = AUC/time, where time equals 24 hours.|Course 1, Visit 3 and 4, Day 15 and 16, Hours: -0:05,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,8, and 23:55|Pharmacokinetic dataset (PKS)||% of average concentration||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814615|NCT01090011|Secondary|Concentration of Afatinib in Plasma for the Combination Arm|Minimum measured concentration of Afatinib in plasma at steady state over 15 day dosing interval (Cmin,ss). Maximum measured concentration of Afatinib in plasma at steady state over 15 day dosing interval (Cmax,ss).|Course 1, Visit 3 and 4, Day 15 and 16, Hours: -0:05,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,8, and 23:55|Pharmacokinetic dataset (PKS)||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814616|NCT01090011|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) on Day 15 of Plasma Afatinib for the Combination Arm|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Afatinib in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval tau (15 days) (AUCtau,ss) after oral administration of Afatinib and cetuximab combination therapy|Course 1, Visit 3 and 4, Day 15 and 16, Hours: -0:05,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,8, and 23:55|Pharmacokinetic dataset (PKS)||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
814617|NCT01090011|Secondary|Frequency (%) of Patients With Related Serious Adverse Events|Frequency (%) of patients with drug-related serious adverse events|From first drug administration to 28 days after discontinuation of drug intake up to 915 days|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||percentage of patients|||Number
814618|NCT01090011|Secondary|Frequency (%) of Patients With Adverse Events Leading to Death||From first drug administration to 28 days after discontinuation of drug intake up to 915 days|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||percentage of patients|||Number
814619|NCT01090011|Secondary|Frequency (%) of Patients With Adverse Events Leading to Treatment Discontinuation|Frequency (%) of patients with adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation|From first drug administration to 28 days after discontinuation of drug intake up to 915 days|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||percentage of patients|||Number
814620|NCT01090011|Secondary|Frequency (%) of Patients With Adverse Events Leading to Dose Reduction||From first drug administration to 28 days after discontinuation of drug intake up to 915 days|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||percentage of patients|||Number
814621|NCT01090011|Secondary|Frequency of Patients [N(%)] With Possible Clinically Significant Abnormalities for Selected Laboratory Parameters||From first drug administration to 28 days after discontinuation of drug intake up to 915 days|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||percentage of patients|||Number
814622|NCT01090011|Secondary|Highest CTCAE Grade|Safety of afatinib when administered together with cetuximab as indicated by intensity and incidence of adverse events, graded according to the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version (v) 3.0|From first drug administration to 28 days after discontinuation of drug intake up to 915 days|Treated set. 32 patients in the Afa40-mono group had disease progression and were transitioned to treatment with Afa40+Ctx500. Thus the total of 203 patients (4+126+37+36) minus the 32 patients counted in both 'Afa-mono' and 'Afa40+Ctx500' treatments arms equals 171, the total number of patients started in participant flow section.||percentage of patients|||Number
814623|NCT01090011|Primary|The Primary Endpoint is the Occurrence of Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT).|"A DLT was defined as an AE or laboratory abnormality that a) related to the study regimen; b) or met any of the following criteria:
CTCAE Grade 2 or higher decrease in cardiac left ventricular function
CTCAE Grade 2 diarrhea lasting for 7 or more days, despite appropriate use of standard anti-diarrheal therapy
CTCAE Grade ≥3 diarrhea despite appropriate use of standard anti-diarrheal therapy for at least 2 days
CTCAE Grade ≥3 nausea and/or vomiting despite appropriate use of standard anti-emetics for at least 3 days
CTCAE Grade ≥3 rash despite standard medical management
CTCAE Grade ≥3 fatigue lasting for more than 7 days
CTCAE Grade 4 hypomagnesaemia or Grade 3 hypomagnesaemia with clinical significant sequelae
All other toxicities of CTCAE Grade ≥3 (except alopecia, and allergic reaction) leading to an interruption of afatinib and/or cetuximab for more than 14 days until recovery to baseline or Grade 1, whichever was higher."|from day 1 treatment until progression or undue toxicity, up to 28 days|Treated set for Cohort One. Cohort one was based on the data from the first treatment cycle where four patients received 'Afatinib 40+Cetuximab 250' and six patients received 'Afatinib 40+Cetuximab 500'.||participants|||Number
814624|NCT01090050|Secondary|Compliance With Lifestyle Changes|Self-assessed grade of compliance with lifestyle modification changes (where A=1, B=2, C=3, D=4, and F=5) in the Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm. Lower scores indicate a better outcome. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.|Day 121|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814625|NCT01090050|Secondary|Migraine Disability Assessment(MIDAS)Questionnaire Total Score|"Change in Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) total score (effect migraine headaches have on subjects daily function) from Baseline (Day 31) to 3 months after Baseline to end of Treatment Period Month 3(Day 121) following final dose of study medication in the Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. the Naproxen Sodium arm.
Total score of disability ranges:
0 to 5, MIDAS Grade I, Little or no disability
6 to 10, MIDAS Grade II, Mild disability
11 to 20, MIDAS Grade III, Moderate disability
21+, MIDAS Grade IV, Severe disability Score ranges from 0-450. No subscales are present."|Baseline MIDAS collected at Day 31, Post final dose study at Day 121.|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814626|NCT01090050|Secondary|Percent Change of Doses of Study Medication|"Comparing the number of doses of study medication taken during Baseline Period(days 1-30) of triptans(Group A) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs(NSAIDS)(Group B)to the number of doses of study medication taken during Treatment Period Months 1(days 31-60), 2(days 61-90), and 3(days 91-120)in the Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm.
e.g.Percent change=[(number of doses of study medication during Treatment Period Month 3(days 91-120)-number of doses of study medication during Baseline(days 1-30)/number of doses of study medication during Baseline(days 1-30)]*100%)."|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 92, and 121 respectively.|||percent doses of study medication||Standard Deviation|Mean
814627|NCT01090050|Secondary|Migraine Headache Days With Greater Than 50% Reduction|Number of subjects with at least 50% reduction in number of migraine headache days reported in Baseline vs. Treatment Period months 1(days 31-60), 2(days 61-90), and 3(days 91-120)in the Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm.|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 92, and 121 respectively.|||participants|||Number
814628|NCT01090050|Secondary|Migraine Headache Duration From Time of Treatment to Pain Free|"Comparing mean migraine duration from time of treatment to pain free from Baseline Period (Days 1-30), to each of the Treatment Period Months 1(days 31-60), 2(days 61-90), and 3(days 91-120) in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm. Percent change was calculated by determining percent change in each subject, from each Treatment Period month compared to Baseline. The following formula was used for each treatment period month calculation.
e.g. Percent change=[(mean migraine duration from time of treatment to pain free during Treatment Period Month 3(days 91-120)-mean migraine duration from time of treatment to pain free during Baseline(days 1-30)/mean duration from time of treatment to pain free during Baseline(days 1-30)]*100%)"|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121 respectively.|||percent hours of migraine duration||Standard Deviation|Mean
816894|NCT01116232|Primary|Incidence and Severity of Acute Graft-vs-host Disease (GVHD)||During the first six months post transplant|Study terminated due to lack of funding. No analysis, patient data on this protocol due to the fact that only four patients was able to be accrued.|||||
814629|NCT01090050|Secondary|Migraine Headache Duration From Onset to Pain Free|"Comparing mean migraine duration from onset to pain free from Baseline Period (Days 1-30), to each of the Treatment Period Months 1(days 31-60), 2(days 61-90), and 3(days 91-120) in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm. Percent change was calculated by determining percent change in each subject, from each Treatment Period month compared to Baseline. The following formula was used for each treatment period month calculation.
e.g. Percent change=[(mean migraine duration from onset to pain free during Treatment Period Month 3(days 91-120)-mean migraine duration from onset to pain free during Baseline(days 1-30)/mean duration from onset to pain free during Baseline(days 1-30)]*100%)"|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121 respectively.|||percent hours of migraine duration||Standard Deviation|Mean
814630|NCT01090050|Secondary|Percent Change of Migraine Headache Days in All Treatment Periods Compared to Baseline|"Comparing number of migraine headache days from Baseline to Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 in the Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm.
Comparing the number of migraine headache days reported from Baseline Period days 1-30 to number of migraine headache days reported in Treatment Period days Months 1(days 31-60), 2(days 61-90),and 3(days 91-120)in the Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm versus (vs.) Naproxen Sodium arm. Each treatment period month percent change was individually compared to Baseline. The following formula was used for each treatment period calculation.
e.g. percent change=[(total headache days during Treatment Period Month 3(days 91-120)-total headache days during Baseline(days 1-30)/total headache days during Baseline(days 1-30)]*100%)"|Baseline Period (days 1-30) collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121, respectively.|||percent migraine headache days per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
814631|NCT01090050|Primary|Percent Change of Migraine Headache Days Compared to Baseline|Comparing the number of migraine headache days during Baseline Period days 1-30 to number of migraine headache days reported in Treatment Period days 91-120 in the Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm versus (vs.) Naproxen Sodium arm. Percent change=[(total headache days during Treatment Period Month 3(days 91-120)-total headache days during Baseline(days 1-30)/total headache days during Baseline(days 1-30)]*100%)|Day 121 (following 30 day Baseline Period and Treatment Period days 91-120.|||percent migraine headache days per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
814632|NCT01090063|Secondary|Safety Outcome Measures|All adverse events (AE's) will be recorded and monitored. At each of the study visits, patients will be questioned about the occurrence of new AE's since the last visit, or the outcome of any AE's that were reported at previous visits. Upon study completion of the first 10 subjects the principal investigator will review all adverse events to check for trends.|24 weeks|All participants who enrolled. Participants terminating prior to week 24 had their data carried forward as lost to follow-up.||participants|||Number
814633|NCT01090063|Secondary|Pain Visual Analog Scale From Baseline to Week 24|"Patient's score on the questionnaire of how much pain are you experiencing from your disease of your hands and feet, as measured in mm from the left end of scale. Maximum score is 100, minimum score is 0. Visual Analog Scale (VAS). 100 indicates maximum pain (worse outcome), 0 indicates minimum pain (better outcome)."|Baseline, 24 weeks|All participants who enrolled. Early terminations were carried as last observation carried forward.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814634|NCT01090063|Secondary|Pruritus Visual Analog Scale From Baseline to Week 24|"Patient's score on the questionnaire of how itchy are you, as measured in mm from the left end of scale. Maximum score is 100, minimum score is 0. 100 indicates maximum itch (worse outcome), 0 indicates minimum itch (better outcome)."|Baseline, 24 weeks|All participants who enrolled. Early terminations were carried as last observation carried forward.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814635|NCT01090063|Secondary|Fissure Count (if Present at Baseline) From Baseline to Week 24|Number of discrete fissures on the hands and feet of each subject.|Baseline, 24 weeks|All participants who enrolled. Early terminations were carried as last observation carried forward.||fissures||Standard Deviation|Mean
814636|NCT01090063|Secondary|Pustule Count (if Present at Baseline) From Baseline to Week 24|Number of pustules present in each subject|Baseline, 24 weeks|All participants who enrolled. Early terminations were carried as last observation carried forward.||pustules||Standard Deviation|Mean
814637|NCT01090063|Secondary|PGA Score Over Time From Baseline to Week 24|Measurement of subject's palmar and plantar psoriasis severity as measured by the Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) scale, which rates the severity of psoriasis using the measures of erythema, scaling and induration. Scores are from 0 to 4, in 1 unit increments. A score of 4 is very severe, and a score of 0 is clear.|Baseline, 24 weeks|All participants who enrolled. Early terminations were carried as last observation carried forward.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
814638|NCT01090063|Primary|Percentage of Patients Achieving a Palmar/Plantar PGA Score of 0 or 1 at Week 16.||16 weeks|Number of participants completing enrollment. Lost values carried forward as last observation carried forward||percentage of participants|||Number
814639|NCT01090076|Primary|% Wound Area Week 2|Percentage change in wound area after week 2|Weeks 1 to 2|||Percentage change||Standard Error|Mean
814640|NCT01090076|Primary|% Wound Area Week 1|Percentage change in wound area after week 1|week 0 to 1|||percent change||Standard Error|Mean
814641|NCT01090076|Primary|% Viable Tissue|"-Percentage viable tissue after 2 weeks
The estimated change in proportion of viable and non-viable tissue was determined using area derived from planimetry via acetate tracings. The description of viable tissue was taken to mean granulating (red) or epithelising (pink) tissue, and non-viable tissue were taken as necrotic (black) or sloughy (green or yellow) tissue."|weeks 1 to 2|||Percentage of viable tissue||Standard Error|Mean
814642|NCT01090102|Secondary|Log(10) Change in % Activated (CD38+HLA-DR+)CD8+ T Cells After Treatment Crossover|Log(10) change in the percentage of activated T cells during the second 12 weeks of the study|Week 12, Week 24|||Log10(percentage of T cells)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
814643|NCT01090102|Primary|Log(10) Change in % Activated (CD38+HLA-DR+)CD8+ T Cells During the First 12 Weeks of Study||Week 0, Week 12|1 participant assigned to first receive Mesalamine was excluded from analysis due to having withdrawn participation without receiving the allocated intervention||Log10(percentage of T cells)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
814644|NCT01090180|Secondary|Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology- Self Report (QIDS-SR). Because Depression Can be Comorbid With PTSD (70% Comorbidity Found in Pilot Sample), This Assessment Will be Used to Measure Depressive Symptoms Over a 1 Week Timeframe|The QIDS-SR is a 16-item measure of depression symptom severity with a range from 0-27. Each item is rated from 0-3 with higher scores are indicative of higher symptom severity. Scores of the items are aggregated (with the highest score on overlapping items chosen; e.g., sleep disturbances, changes in eating) to generate the total score..|This measure will be administered at all study visits: Baseline, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months follow up.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814645|NCT01090180|Primary|PTSD Checklist (PCL). A Self-report, Face Valid Measure of PTSD Symptoms Over a 1 Week Time Period|The PCL is a 17-item measure of PTSD symptom severity with a range from 17-85. Each item is rated from 1-5 with higher scores are indicative of higher symptom severity. Scores of the 17 items are summed in order to generate the total score.|This measure will be administered at all study visits: Baseline, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months follow up.|Male veterans with combat-related PTSD||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814646|NCT01090310|Secondary|Composite Immunosuppressive Medication Score From Baseline to Week 52, Core and Extension|IMS is a combined, single numeric score derived on the basis of the total daily dose of specific immunosuppressive agents per unit body weight, ranged on a scale from 0 to 9 for the total daily dose in milligrams per kilogram. The total IMS is the sum of the scores derived for the agents included into the score. The treatment groups will be compared using an analysis of covariance with treatment, region, and baseline IMS as covariate. The total IMS is the sum of scores derived from the agents included into the score, and ranged from 0 to 55. Treatment groups compared using analysis of covariance with treatment & baseline IMS as covariate, where the lower IMS showed better clinical outcome.|Baseline to 52 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS): all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug in the core study and had at least one post-baseline assessment for the primary efficacy parameter or any of its components. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment they were assigned to at randomization||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814647|NCT01090310|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Recurrence in in Any Eye of Active Intermediate, Posterior, or Panuveitis From Baseline During the Core and Extension Studies|Evaluation of recurrence until resolution is ascertained, based on the first criteria (a >2 step increase in vitreous haze with or without an increase in anterior chamber cell grade in either eye). A 2 step increase is defined as any of the following changes: 0-2, 0.5-2, 1-3, 2-4|Baseline to 52 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS): all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug in the core study and had at least one post-baseline assessment for the primary efficacy parameter or any of its components. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment they were assigned to at randomization||Number of participants|||Number
814648|NCT01090310|Secondary|Mean Change in Best Corrected Visual Acuity From Baseline, Core and Extension|The Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) is tested using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Visual Acuity (VA) testing protocol. VA measurements are taken in a sitting position at an initial test distance of 4 meters using ETDRS charts. The overall BCVA score is calculated using the BCVA worksheet 0-100 letter score|Baseline to 52 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS): all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug in the core study and had at least one post-baseline assessment for the primary efficacy parameter or any of its components. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment they were assigned to at randomization||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
814649|NCT01090310|Secondary|Change in Vitreous Haze Score for the Study Eye From Baseline to the Highest Post-baseline Value|The changes in steps (0, 1, or >= 2) from previous visit for vitreous haze, where the score is evaluated based on NEI Vitreous Haze Grading Scale (0 -4). Vitreous haze was recorded as 0-clear; to 4+ as dense opacity obscuring the optic nerve head. A 1 step increase is defined as any of the following changes: 0-1, 0.5-1, 1-2, 2-3, 3-4. A 2 step increase is defined as any of the following changes: 0-2, 0.5-2, 1-3, 2-4. A recurrent episode of active intermediate, posterior or panuveitis was considered to be resolved, if the eye returns and maintains in a quiescent state (<1+ anterior chamber cell grade and <1+ vitreous haze) for at least 2 weeks|Baseline to 52 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS): all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug in the core study and had at least one post-baseline assessment for the primary efficacy parameter or any of its components. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment they were assigned to at randomization||Number of participants|||Number
814650|NCT01090310|Primary|The Time to the First Recurrence in Any Eye of Active Intermediate, Posterior, or Panuveitis From Baseline|Kaplan-Meier estimates for the time to the first recurrence in any eye of active intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis from baseline defined by either: ≥ 2 step increase in vitreous haze with or without an increase in anterior chamber cell grade or decrease in best corrected visual acuity, core and extension|Baseline to 52 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS): all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug in the core study and had at least one post-baseline assessment for the primary efficacy parameter or any of its components. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment they were assigned to at randomization||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814651|NCT01090323|Secondary|Change in Serum Ferritin From Start of ICL670 to End of Study|The main efficacy variable was change in serum ferritin in response to therapy with ICL670. Due to variability of serum ferritin, end of study was considered as the mean of at most the last 3 available observations after the start of ICL670.|0 - 60 months|The primary analysis was on Full Analysis Set which comprised all participants who received at least one dose of ICL670 during the core or the extension phase of the study. All participants previously treated with ICL670 or DFO for 52 weeks in the core study were eligible for enrollment.||µg/L||Full Range|Median
814652|NCT01090323|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events After Start of ICL670|Safety as assessed by the number of participants with adverse event or death after the start of ICL670.|0 - 60 months|The primary analysis was on Safety Analysis Set which comprised all participants who received at least one dose of ICL670 during the core/extension phase of the study. All participants previously treated with ICL670/DFO for 52weeks in the core study.||participants|||Number
814807|NCT01091948|Secondary|Successful Intubation on 1st Attempt||from start of first intubation to end of first intubation attempt|||participants|||Number
814661|NCT01090453|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects. Any SAE = any SAE regardless of assessment of relationship to study vaccination.|During the entire study period (Month 0 to Month 11)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
814808|NCT01091948|Secondary|Intubation Difficulty Score|Intubation difficulty score is a 100-mm-long visual analogue scale (100 mm = extremely difficult);|from start of intubation to successfully intubated|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816919|NCT01116882|Secondary|Any Repeat Revascularization||30 days|The denominator for any repeat revascularization at 30 days is defined as patients who either had the event to 30d or had follow up of at least 23 days.||participants|||Number
814662|NCT01090453|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE is any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any = occurrence of an AE regardless of intensity grade or relationship to study vaccination.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) follow up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
814663|NCT01090453|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Solicited General Symptoms.|Solicited local symptoms assessed were drowsiness, irritability/fussiness, loss of appetite and fever [axillary temperature above (≥) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of any local symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 8-day (Days 0-7) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and the symptom sheet completed.||Subjects|||Number
814664|NCT01090453|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Solicited Local Symptoms.|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of any local symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 8-day (Days 0-7) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and the symptom sheet completed.||Subjects|||Number
814665|NCT01090453|Secondary|Anti-PRP and rSBA-MenC Fold Increase Distribution.|The fold increase distribution cut-offs were: ≥2, ≥4, ≥6, ≥8 and ≥10.|At Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||Subjects|||Number
814666|NCT01090453|Secondary|Concentrations for Anti-PNE Serotypes.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentreations (GMCs). The reference cut-off value was ≥ 0.2 µg/mL.|At Month 3 and Month 11|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814667|NCT01090453|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-pneumococcal (Anti-PNE) Serotypes Above the Cut-offs.|The anti-PNE antibody concentrations reference cut-offs were ≥ 0.2 and ≥ 0.05 micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The anti-PNE serotypes assessed were 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F and 23F.|At Month 3 and Month 11|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||Subjects|||Number
814668|NCT01090453|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Booster Response to Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN.|Booster response defined as: for initially seronegative subjects, antibody concentration ≥ 5 EL.U/mL at Month 11; for initially seropositive subjects: antibody concentration at Month 11 ≥ 2 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration|At Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||Sujects|||Number
814669|NCT01090453|Secondary|Concentrations for Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The reference cut-off value was ≥ 5 EL.U/mL.|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814670|NCT01090453|Secondary|Number Subjects With Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA) and Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) Above the Cut-off.|The reference cut-off for anti-PT, anti-FHA and anti-PRN antibody concentrations was ≥ 5 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units per milliliters (EL.U/mL).|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||Subjects|||Number
814671|NCT01090453|Secondary|Titers for Anti-polio 1, 2 and 3.|Titers were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was ≥ 1:8.|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814672|NCT01090453|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-poliovirus (Anti-polio) Types 1, 2 and 3 Above the Cut-off.|The anti-polio 1, 2 and 3 antibody concentrations cut-off value was ≥ 1:8.|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||Subjects|||Number
814673|NCT01090453|Primary|Number of Subjects With Neisseria Meningitidis Using Baby Rabbit Complement (rSBA-MenC) Antibodies Above the Cut-offs.|The rSBA-MenC cut-offs were ≥ 1:8 and ≥ 1:128. The results for Month 3 ≥ 1:8 were the primary efficacy variables.|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||Subjects|||Number
814674|NCT01090453|Secondary|Concentrations for Anti-HBs.|A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis.|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814675|NCT01090453|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-hepatitis B (Anti-HBs) Antibody Concentration Equal to or Above (≥) 10 and 100 Milli-International Units Per Milliliter (mIU/mL)|A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis.|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||Subjects|||Number
814676|NCT01090453|Secondary|Concentrations for Anti-T and Anti-D.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The reference cut-off value was ≥ 0.1 IU/mL.|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814677|NCT01090453|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-diphtheria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus (Anti-T) Antibodies Above the Cut-off.|The anti-D and anti-T antibody cut-off was ≥ 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||Subjects|||Number
814678|NCT01090453|Secondary|Titers for rSBA-MenC.|Titers were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMCs). The seropositivity reference cut-off values were ≥ 1:8 and ≥ 1:128.|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814679|NCT01090453|Secondary|Concentrations for Anti-PRP.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seroprotection reference cut-off values were ≥ 0.15 µg/mL and ≥ 1.0 µg/mL.|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814680|NCT01090453|Primary|Number of Subjects With Anti-polyribosylribitol Phosphate (Anti-PRP) Above the Cut-offs.|The anti-PRP antibody concentrations cut-off was ≥ 0.15 and ≥ 1.0 micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The results for Month 3 ≥ 0.15 µg/mL were the primary efficacy variables.|At Month 3, Month 10 and Month 11.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component at the post-vaccination time points.||Subjects|||Number
814681|NCT01090479|Secondary|Qualitative and Quantitative Bacterial Cultures of the Operative Shoulder Just Prior to Surgery||7 days||||||
814682|NCT01090479|Primary|Number of Patients With a Clinically Diagnosed Infection||2 months post-operatively|||participants|||Number
814683|NCT01090739|Other Pre-specified|Change in Health Resource Usage: # Physician Visits Due to FI|Change in health resource usage using sponsor-created questionnaire|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All implanted subjects||physician visits||Standard Deviation|Mean
814684|NCT01090739|Other Pre-specified|Change in Health Resource Usage: # Days in Hospital, Took Off Work, or Others Took Off Work Due to FI|Change in health resource usage using sponsor-created questionnaire|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All implanted subjects||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814685|NCT01090739|Other Pre-specified|Change in Health Resource Usage: # Pads Per Day Subject Took for FI|Change in health resource usage using sponsor-created questionnaire: # days in hospital due to FI|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All implanted subjects||pads per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
814686|NCT01090739|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Haff Surgical Satisfaction Questionnaire (SSQ-8)|The SSQ-8 is an 8 item questionnaire to assess subject surgical satisfaction as described by Murphy M, Sternschuss G, Haff R, van Raalte H, Saltz S, Lucente V. Quality of life and surgical satisfaction after vaginal reconstructive vs. obliterative surgery for the treatment of advanced pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 May;198(5):573.e1-7. The SSQ-8 was collected as an optional one-time assessment from implanted subjects between the 3 and 36 month visits. Scale is scored on 0-100 with higher scores are better|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All implanted subjects||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814687|NCT01090739|Secondary|Change in Numeric Pelvic Pain Scale (NPPS)|Numeric Pelvic Pain Scale (NPPS) adapted from McCafferty M, Pasero C. Pain: Clinical Manual. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Inc.; 1999. Chapter 3, Assessment Tools; p. 58-75. The NPPS is scored on a 0-10 scale with higher scores indicating more severe pain. Since the NPPS was introduced later in the study, earlier implanted subjects did not have the baseline NPPS score and a change from baseline could not be calculated.|12 Month Follow-up Visit|All subjects implanted at the time the NPPS was implemented in the study||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814688|NCT01090739|Secondary|Change in Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12)|Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12) as described by Rogers RG, Coates KW, Kammerer-Doak D, Khalsa S, Qualls C. A short form of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003 Aug;14(3):164-8; discussion 168. Measured on a 0-48 scale with higher scores equal to better sexual function.|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All subjects implanted||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814689|NCT01090739|Secondary|Change in Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) Scores|"Short-form version of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) as described by Barber et al., 2005 (Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Jul;193(1):103-13).
The short-form version of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire has a total of 7 questions and 3 scales (Urinary Impact, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Impact, and Colorectal-Anal Impact). Total PFIQ score measured on a 0-300 scale with higher scores equal to greater pelvic floor impact. Subscales scored on 0-100 scale and the higher the score the greater pelvic floor impact, exactly like the Total PFIQ score."|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All subjects implanted||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814690|NCT01090739|Secondary|Change in Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) Scores|"Short-form version of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) as described by Barber et al., 2005 (Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Jul;193(1):103-13).
The short-form version of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory has a total of 20 questions and 3 scales (Urinary Distress Inventory, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory, and Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory). Total PFDI score measured on a 0-300 scale with higher scores equal to greater pelvic floor distress. As with the Total PFDI Score, higher subscale scores equal greater pelvic floor distress, on a 0-100 scale."|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All subjects implanted||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814691|NCT01090739|Secondary|Change in Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Score|Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Score as described by Rockwood et al., 2000 (Rockwood TH, Church JM, Fleshman JW, Kane RL, Mavrantonis C, Thorson AG, Wexner SD, Bliss D, Lowry AC. Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale: quality of life instrument for patients with fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000 Jan;43(1):9-16; discussion 16-7). Four domains of lifestyle, coping, depression, and embarrassment. Measured on a 0-4 scale with higher scores equal to better quality of life.|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All subjects implanted||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814692|NCT01090739|Secondary|Change in Wexner Symptom Severity Score|Wexner Symptom Severity Score for fecal incontinence (also known as the Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score) as described by Jorge and Wexner, 1993 (Jorge JM, Wexner SD. Etiology and management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 1993 Jan;36(1):77-97). Measured on a 0-20 scale with lower scores equal to less fecal incontinence.|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All subjects implanted||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814693|NCT01090739|Secondary|Change in Urge Fecal Incontinence Episodes|Number of urge fecal incontinence episodes in a 14 day period|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All subjects implanted||urge fecal incontinent episodes/14 days||Full Range|Median
814694|NCT01090739|Secondary|Change in Fecal Incontinence Days|Number of fecal incontinence days in a 14 day period|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All subjects implanted||fecal incontinent days/14 days||Full Range|Median
814695|NCT01090739|Secondary|Change in Fecal Incontinence Episodes|Number of fecal incontinence episodes in a 14 day period|36 Month Follow-up Visit|All subjects implanted||fecal incontinent episodes/14 days||Full Range|Median
814696|NCT01090739|Primary|Percentage of Responders|The primary endpoint for efficacy is the 14 day bowel diary documenting liquid or solid fecal incontinence episodes. A 50% reduction in the number of FI episodes is considered a treatment responder.|12 Months|All subjects implanted||percentage of treatment responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814697|NCT01090752|Secondary|Effects of Pioglitazone on Salt Sensitivity||2009||06/2010||||
814698|NCT01090752|Primary|Effects of Pioglitazone on 24h Blood Pressure Control|24 hour blood pressure measurements were performed after each treatment/diet phase|march 2009|||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
814699|NCT01090752|Primary|Effects of Pioglitazone on Sodium and Lithium Clearances|At the end of each treatment and diet phase, 24 urine collections were collected for the determination of sodium and lithium clearances|2007|||ml/min||Standard Error|Mean
814700|NCT01090752|Primary|Effects of Pioglitazone on Renal Hemodynamics|At the end of each treatment diet phase, renal clearances were performed for the determination of GFR and RBF|2008|||ml/min/1.73m2||Standard Error|Mean
814701|NCT01090765|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|43 months, 5 days|||participants|||Number
814702|NCT01090765|Primary|Phase I: Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of TRC105 Given Every Two Weeks.|The MTD, to be administered in the phase II portion, is defined as the highest dose studied for which the incidence of dose limiting toxicity (DLT) was less than 33%. TRC105 was administered at 20 mg/kg intravenous every two weeks until MTD was achieved.|6 months|||mg/kg every 2 weeks|||Number
814703|NCT01090973|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|"Investigators intended to evaluate the safety and tolerability profile of LBH589. Assessments would consist of monitoring and recording all adverse events and serious adverse events, the regular monitoring of hematology, blood chemistry and urine values, vital signs, ECOG performance status, and the regular physical examinations and ECG assessments.
Adverse events will be assessed according to the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 3.0. CTCAE v3.0 can be accessed on the National Institute of Health (NIH)/NCI website at http://ctep.cancer.gov/forms/CTCAEv3.pdf."|8 weeks (2 cycles) unless treatment continues due to partial or complete response|"The study was abandoned after only one patient due to low accrual and the sponsor losing interest in the single-agent.
The one patient had disease progression requiring more aggressive treatment and did not complete the study."||participants|||Number
814809|NCT01091948|Primary|Time to Intubation (TTI) as Measured in Seconds|Time from insertion of either the GlideScope or in the case of fibreoptic intubation, a Williams airway (SunMed, Largo, FL, USA) into the mouth, to the time when end-tidal PCO2 exceeded 2.7 kPa (20 mmHg).|from start of intubation to successfully intubated up to 100 seconds|||seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816920|NCT01116882|Secondary|Rate of Stent Thrombosis||30 days|||participants|||Number
814704|NCT01090973|Secondary|Number of Participants With Improved Blood and Lymphatic Evaluation Results|Investigators intended to evaluate histone acetylation, cytotoxic mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) activity, cytokine profiles, and immunologic synapse alterations through peripheral blood correlative studies|8 weeks (2 cycles) unless treatment continues due to partial or complete response|"The study was abandoned after only one patient due to low accrual and the sponsor losing interest in the single-agent.
The one patient had disease progression requiring more aggressive treatment and did not complete the study."|||||
814705|NCT01090973|Secondary|Number of Participants With Prolonged Corrected QT (QTc) Interval|Investigators intended to monitor the QTc interval in patients receiving oral LBH589|8 weeks (2 cycles) unless treatment continues due to partial or complete response||||||
814706|NCT01090973|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) Estimate|Investigators intended to estimate the progression free survival time|8 weeks (2 cycles) unless treatment continues due to partial or complete response|"The study was abandoned after only one patient due to low accrual and the sponsor losing interest in the single-agent.
The one patient had disease progression requiring more aggressive treatment and did not complete the study."|||||
814707|NCT01090973|Secondary|Response Duration|Investigators intended to determine the duration of responses.|8 weeks (2 cycles) unless treatment continues due to partial or complete response|"The study was abandoned after only one patient due to low accrual and the sponsor losing interest in the single-agent.
The one patient had disease progression requiring more aggressive treatment and did not complete the study."|||||
814708|NCT01090973|Secondary|Number of Participants With Complete Response (CR) and Partial Response (PR)|"Investigators intended to determine the complete and partial responses. Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL): Using the NCI criteria - - See definitions in the Detailed Description section for a Complete hematologic Remission, and Partial Response.
Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL): Based on the International Workshop to Standardize Response Criteria to NHL (Cheson, JCO 1999) - See definitions in the Detailed Description section for a Complete hematologic Remission, and Partial Response."|8 weeks (2 cycles) unless treatment continues due to partial or complete response|"The study was abandoned after only one patient due to low accrual and the sponsor losing interest in the single-agent.
The one patient had disease progression requiring more aggressive treatment and did not complete the study."|||||
814709|NCT01090973|Primary|Number of Participants With Desired Response|"Investigators intended to assess the rate of overall and complete response by World Health Organization (WHO) classification in patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).
WHO Performance Scale Measures levels of patient capability: 0 Normal activity; 1 Symptoms, but nearly fully ambulatory; 2 Some bed time, but needs to be in bed <50% of normal daytime; 3 Needs to be in bed >50% of normal daytime; 4 Unable to get out of bed."|8 weeks (2 cycles) unless treatment continues due to partial or complete response|"The study was abandoned after only one patient due to low accrual and the sponsor losing interest in the single-agent.
The one patient had disease progression requiring more aggressive treatment and did not complete the study."|||||
814710|NCT01091103|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary N-Telopeptide|Samples for measurement of urinary N-telopeptide were collected at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at Week 65.|Baseline, Week 65|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had urinary N-telopeptide measurements at baseline and at Week 65.||mmol/mmol creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
814711|NCT01091103|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary N-Telopeptide|Samples for measurement of urinary N-telopeptide were collected at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at Week 57.|Baseline, Week 57|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had urinary N-telopeptide measurements at baseline and at Week 57.||mmol/mmol creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
814712|NCT01091103|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary N-Telopeptide|Samples for measurement of urinary N-telopeptide were collected at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at Week 49.|Baseline, Week 49|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had urinary N-telopeptide measurements at baseline and at Week 49.||mmol/mmol creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
814713|NCT01091103|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary N-Telopeptide|Samples for measurement of urinary N-telopeptide were collected at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at Week 41.|Baseline, Week 41|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had urinary N-telopeptide measurements at baseline and at Week 41.||mmol/mmol creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
814714|NCT01091103|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary N-Telopeptide||Baseline, Week 33|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had urinary N-telopeptide measurements at baseline and at Week 33.||mmol/mmol creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
814715|NCT01091103|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary N-Telopeptide|Samples for measurement of urinary N-telopeptide were collected at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at Week 25.|Baseline, Week 25|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had urinary N-telopeptide measurements at baseline and at Week 25.||mmol/mmol creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
814716|NCT01091103|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary N-Telopeptide|Samples for measurement of urinary N-telopeptide were collected at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at Week 17.|Baseline, Week 17|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had urinary N-telopeptide measurements at baseline and at Week 17.||mmol/mmol creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
814717|NCT01091103|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary N-Telopeptide|Samples for measurement of urinary N-telopeptide were collected at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at Week 9.|Baseline, Week 9|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had urinary N-telopeptide measurements at baseline and at Week 9.||mmol/mmol creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
814718|NCT01091103|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary N-Telopeptide|Samples for measurement of urinary N-telopeptide were collected at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at Week 5.|Baseline, Week 5|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had urinary N-telopeptide measurements at baseline and at Week 5.||mmol/mmol creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
814719|NCT01091103|Secondary|Median Time to Study Drug Discontinuation|Exposure to study drug through the data cutoff of 26AUG2011 only. Fifteen participants (25.0%) were still on study drug as of the data cut-off date and were censored at this date.|Duration of study treatment through the data cutoff, up to 3 years.|All participants who received any amount of enzalutamide. Fifteen (25.0%) participants were still on study drug as of the data cutoff date and were censored at the data cutoff date.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814720|NCT01091103|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bone Marrow Dihydrotestosterone at Week 9 by Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Response Status|"Bone marrow biopsies were performed at the Day 1 visit prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration. Repeat bone marrow biopsies were performed at the Week 9 visit. If a repeat bone marrow was not performed at the Week 9 visit or if a patient discontinued the study before the Week 9 visit, a bone marrow biopsy was obtained at the Safety Follow-up visit. Assessment of intratumoral dihydrotestosterone was assessed by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry.
Serum samples for measurement of PSA levels were obtained at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at the Week 9 visit.
The change from baseline in bone marrow dihydrotestosterone levels at Week 9 was correlated with PSA response status at Week 9."|Baseline, Week 9|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had bone marrow dihydrotestosterone measurements at baseline and at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Note that the documentation of bone marrow involvement with cancer was not required.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814721|NCT01091103|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bone Marrow Testosterone at Week 9 by Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Response Status|"Bone marrow biopsies were performed at the Day 1 visit prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration. Repeat bone marrow biopsies were performed at the Week 9 visit. If a repeat bone marrow was not performed at the Week 9 visit or if a patient discontinued the study before the Week 9 visit, a bone marrow biopsy was obtained at the Safety Follow-up visit. Assessment of intratumoral testosterone was assessed by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry.
Serum samples for measurement of PSA levels were obtained at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at the Week 9 visit.
The change from baseline in bone marrow testosterone levels at Week 9 was correlated with PSA response status at Week 9."|Baseline, Week 9|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had bone marrow testosterone measurements at baseline and at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Note that the documentation of bone marrow involvement with cancer was not required.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814722|NCT01091103|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bone Marrow Dihydrotestosterone|"Bone marrow biopsies were performed at the Day 1 visit prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration. Repeat bone marrow biopsies were performed at the Week 9 visit. If a repeat bone marrow was not performed at the Week 9 visit or if a patient discontinued the study before the Week 9 visit, a bone marrow biopsy was obtained at the Safety Follow-up visit.
Assessment of intratumoral dihydrotestosterone was assessed by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry."|Baseline, Week 9|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had bone marrow dihydrotestosterone measurements at baseline and at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Note that the documentation of bone marrow involvement with cancer was not required.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814723|NCT01091103|Secondary|Percentage of Participants at Week 9 With a Response in Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)|Serum samples for measurement of PSA levels were obtained at baseline prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration and at the Week 9 visit.|Baseline, Week 9|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had PSA values at baseline and at the Week 9 Visit.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814724|NCT01091103|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bone Marrow Testosterone|"Bone marrow biopsies were performed at the Day 1 visit prior to initiation of enzalutamide administration. Repeat bone marrow biopsies were performed at the Week 9 visit. If a repeat bone marrow was not performed at the Week 9 visit or if a patient discontinued the study before the Week 9 visit, a bone marrow biopsy was obtained at the Safety Follow-up visit.
Assessment of intratumoral testosterone was assessed by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry."|Baseline, Week 9|Participants who received any amount of enzalutamide and had bone marrow testosterone measurements at baseline and at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Note that the documentation of bone marrow involvement with cancer was not required.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
814725|NCT01091116|Secondary|Clinically Significant Abnormal Laboratory Tests|"Percentage of patients with Abnormal Laboratory Tests judged Clinically Significant by Investigators.
The following hematochemical and urinary parameters were analysed:
Red Blood Cells Count, Haematocrit, Haemoglobin, Platelets, MCV, MCH, MCHC, White Blood Cells, Sodium, Chloride, Potassium, Total calcium, AST (SGOT), ALT (SGPT), GGT, Alkaline phosphatase, Total Bilirubin, Direct Bilirubin, Creatinine, BUN, CPK, LDH, Glucose, Total proteins, Albumin."|up to 4 months from screening|Percentage of patients with clinically significant abnormal laboratory tests||participants|||Number
814726|NCT01091116|Secondary|Adverse Event Reports|Incidence of spontaneously reported adverse events|up to 4 months after screening|The number of patients reflects all patients administered at least one dose of the investigational product.||participants|||Number
814727|NCT01091116|Secondary|WOMAC VA 3.1A - Total Pain Score by Body Mass Index -[BMI > 25]|"Analysis in over-weight population (BMI > 25) of the WOMAC VA 3.1A score (range 0-500 mm) is reported.
A decrease of the WOMAC VA 3.1 A score following treatment administration indicates a reduction of pain symptom."|over the 3 weeks after the first administration|Population of Over Weight patients (BMI >25)||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814728|NCT01091116|Secondary|WOMAC VA 3.1A - Total Pain Score by Body Mass Index [BMI <= 25]|"Analysis in normal-weight population (BMI <= 25) of the WOMAC VA 3.1A score (range 0-500 mm) is reported.
A decrease of the WOMAC VA 3.1 A score following treatment administration indicates a reduction of pain symptom."|over the 3 weeks after the first administration|Population of Normal Weight patients (BMI <=25)||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814729|NCT01091116|Secondary|Patient Global Assessment|"Patient global assessment evaluated using a VAS scale score attributed by the patient (range 0-100 mm).
Efficacy assessed as change at each time-point post-dosing (week 1, 2 ,3, 13) versus baseline (week 0).
A decrease of patient global assessment score indicates an improvement of osteoarthritis symptoms."|up to 3 months after first dose|intention to treat (ITT) population||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814730|NCT01091116|Secondary|Percentage of Treatment Responders According to OMERACT-OARSI Responder Criteria|"Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI).
Response defined as:
a decrease in WOMAC pain or physical-function score by 50% or more and by 20 or more points on the visual analogue scale
OR if two of the following three findings are recorded:
a decrease in the WOMAC pain score by 20% or more and by 10 or more points on the visual analogue scale; a decrease in the WOMAC physical-function score by 20% or more and by 10 or more points on the scale; an improvement in the score on the patient’s global assessment by 20% or more and by 10 or more points on the scale."|up to 3 months after first dose|intention to treat (ITT) population||percentage of patients|||Number
814833|NCT01085045|Secondary|Peak Change From BL IC on Day 7|Peak Change from Baseline Inspiratory Capacity on following 7-day dose administration|Day 7|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814731|NCT01091116|Secondary|WOMAC VA 3.1. C Score (Function)|"Knee function evaluated by WOMAC VA 3.1 C score (range 0-1700) is the sum of VAS scores (range 0-100 mm) attributed by the patient to each of 17 questions referring to difficulty in performing daily activities experienced during the preceding 48 hours.
The higher is the WOMAC VA 3.1 C score, the higher is functional impairment in daily activities (0 = no difficulty ; 1700 = extreme difficulty).
A decrease of the WOMAC VA 3.1 C score following treatment administration indicates an improvement in performing daily activities.
WOMAC VA 3.1.C scores at baseline and at Week 13 are reported."|up to 3 months after first dose|Intention to Treat (ITT) population||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814732|NCT01091116|Secondary|WOMAC VA 3.1.B Score (Knee Stiffness)|"WOMAC VA 3.1.B score(range 0-200) is the sum of VAS scores (0-100 mm)attributed by the patient to each of the 2 questions referring to joint stiffness experienced during the preceding 48 hours. The higher is the WOMAC VA 3.1 B score, the higher is joint stiffness (0 = no stiffness ; 200 = extreme stiffness).
A decrease of the WOMAC VA 3.1 B score following treatment administration indicates a reduction of joint stiffness.
The change at Week 13 from baseline is reported."|up to 3 months after first dose|Intention to Treat (ITT) population||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814733|NCT01091116|Primary|WOMAC VA 3.1 A Score (Total Pain)|"Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC). The WOMAC VA 3.1 A score (total pain , range 0-500 mm) is the sum of VAS scores (0-100 mm) attributed by the patient to each of the 5 questions referring to osteoarthritic pain experienced during the preceding 48 hours.
The higher is the WOMAC VA 3.1 A score, the higher is the intensity of pain symptoms (0 = no pain ; 500 = extreme pain).
A decrease of the WOMAC VA 3.1 A score following treatment administration indicates a reduction of pain symptom.
The change from baseline was assessed along 3 weeks after first drug administrations."|over the 3 weeks after the first administration|analysis of the intention to treat (ITT) population||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814734|NCT01091155|Primary|Device Related Leak Rate up to 30 Days Post op|Anastomotic leakage will be defined as clinical symptoms such as fever or sepsis in combination with pelvic abscess, rectovaginal fistula or peritonitis within 30 days postoperatively leading to a clinical and / or radiological interventional procedure of the subject, or operation that confirms the leakage which has been determined to be related to the device.|30 days post op|||participants|||Number
814735|NCT01091155|Secondary|Rate of Other Device Related Complications and Other Parameters During Hospitalization and Post Procedure.|"The post operative parameters that will be measured during hospitalization period:
Hospitalization time (two dates will be recorded: ready for discharge and discharge). The later noting where the subject was discharged to - e.g. nursing home or home
First day to first postoperative flatus
First day to first postoperative bowel movements
First day of first postoperative toleration of liquids and solids (time to keeping them down)"|30 days post op||||||
814736|NCT01091155|Primary|To Evaluate Rate of Anastomotic Leaks Related to the Use of the ColonRing™ Device, at 1 Month|Anastomotic leakage will be defined as clinical symptoms such as fever or sepsis in combination with pelvic abscess, rectovaginal fistula or peritonitis within 30 days postoperatively leading to a clinical and / or radiological interventional procedure of the subject, or operation that confirms the leakage which has been determined to be related to the device.|Approx. 1 year||||||
814737|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of All Participants Reporting Any New Onset Chronic Disease (NOCD) From Administration of Investigational Product Through 180 Days Post Last Dose|An NOCD was a newly diagnosed medical condition that was of a chronic, ongoing nature and was assessed by the investigator as medically significant.|Days 0-180 Post Last Dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927) and for whom any safety data were recorded during the summarized period (Q=1382; All FM=923).||Percent of participants|||Number
814738|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of All Participants Reporting Any SAE From Administration of Investigational Product Through 180 Days Post Last Dose|SAEs were those AEs that resulted in death; were immediately life threatening; resulted in inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in persistent or significant disability or incapacity; were a congenital anomaly in the offspring of a participant; or were an important medical event that may not have resulted in death, threatened life, or required hospitalization and that, based on appropriate medical judgement, may have jeopardized the participant and may have required medical or surgical intervention to prevent on the outcomes listed above.|Days 0-180 Post Last Dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927) and for whom any safety data were recorded during the summarized period (Q=1382; All FM=923).||Percent of participants|||Number
814739|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Two-dose Participants Reporting Any SAE From Administration of Dose 2 During Days 0-28 Post Dose 2|SAEs were those AEs that resulted in death; were immediately life threatening; resulted in inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in persistent or significant disability or incapacity; were a congenital anomaly in the offspring of a participant; or were an important medical event that may not have resulted in death, threatened life, or required hospitalization and that, based on appropriate medical judgement, may have jeopardized the participant and may have required medical or surgical intervention to prevent on the outcomes listed above.|Days 0-28 Post Dose 2|All two-dose participants who received any investigational product (Q=1083; All FM=719) and for whom any post Dose 2 safety data were recorded during the summarized period (Q=1041; All FM=693).||Percent of participants|||Number
814740|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of All Participants Reporting Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE) From Administration of Investigational Product Through Day 28 Post Dose 1|SAEs were those AEs that resulted in death; were immediately life threatening; resulted in inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in persistent or significant disability or incapacity; were a congenital anomaly in the offspring of a participant; or were an important medical event that may not have resulted in death, threatened life, or required hospitalization and that, based on appropriate medical judgement, may have jeopardized the participant and may have required medical or surgical intervention to prevent on the outcomes listed above.|Days 0-28 Post Dose 1|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927) and for whom any safety data were recorded during the summarized period (Q=1382; All FM=923).||Percent of participants|||Number
814834|NCT01085045|Secondary|Peak Change From BL in Inspiratory Capacity on Day 1|Peak change from Baseline in Inspiratory Capacity (IC) on Day 1|Day 1|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816921|NCT01116882|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Vessel Revascularization||12 months|||participants|||Number
814741|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Two-dose Participants Experiencing Any Adverse Event From Administration of Dose 2 Through 28 Days Post Dose 2|Any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation in a subject administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product.|Days 0-28 Post Dose 2|All two-dose participants who received any investigational product (Q=1083; All FM=719) and for whom any post Dose 2 safety data were recorded during the summariezed period (Q=1041; All FM=693).||Percent of participants|||Number
814742|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Two-dose Participants Experiencing Any Adverse Event From Administration of Investigational Product Through Day 28 Post Dose 1|Any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation in a subject administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product.|Days 0-28 Post Dose 1|All two-dose participants who received any investigational product (Q=1083; All FM=719) and for whom any safety data were recorded during the summarized period (Q=1083; All FM=719).||Percent of Participants|||Number
814743|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of All Participants Experiencing Any Adverse Event From Administration of Investigational Product Through Day 28 Post Dose 1|Any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation in a subject administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product.|Days 0-28 Post Dose 1|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927) and for whom any safety data were recorded during the summarized period (Q=1382; All FM=923).||Percent of Participants|||Number
814744|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Two-dose Participants Experiencing Each Solicited Symptom From Administration of Dose 2 During Days 0-14 Post Dose 2|Solicited symptoms were fever ≥ 100.4°F (38.0°C), runny/stuffy nose, sore throat, cough, headache, generalized muscle aches, decreased activity level (lethargy) OR tiredness/weakness, decreased appetite. Collection of specific solicited symptoms (sore throat, headache, generalized muscle aches) was omitted when, according to the judgment of the investigator, the subject was too young to reliably report a particular symptom.|Days 0-14 Post Dose 2|All two-dose participants who received any investigational product (Q=1083; All FM=719) and for whom any follow-up solicited symptom safety data were recorded during the summarized period (Q=1039; All FM=692).||Percent of Participants|||Number
814745|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Two-dose Participants Experiencing Each Solicited Symptom From Administration of Investigational Product Through 14 Days Post Dose 1|Solicited symptoms were fever ≥ 100.4°F (38.0°C), runny/stuffy nose, sore throat, cough, headache, generalized muscle aches, decreased activity level (lethargy) OR tiredness/weakness, decreased appetite. Collection of specific solicited symptoms (sore throat, headache, generalized muscle aches) was omitted when, according to the judgment of the investigator, the subject was too young to reliably report a particular symptom.|Days 0-14 Post Dose 1|All two-dose participants who received any investigational product (Q=1083; All FM=719) and for whom any follow-up solicited symptom safety data were recorded during the summarized period (Q=1078; All FM=716).||Percent of Participants|||Number
814746|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of All Participants Experiencing Each Solicited Symptom From Administration of Investigational Product Through 14 Days Post Dose 1|Solicited symptoms were fever ≥ 100.4°F (38.0°C), runny/stuffy nose, sore throat, cough, headache, generalized muscle aches, decreased activity level (lethargy) OR tiredness/weakness, decreased appetite. Collection of specific solicited symptoms (sore throat, headache, generalized muscle aches) was omitted when, according to the judgment of the investigator, the subject was too young to reliably report a particular symptom.|Days 0-14 Post Dose 1|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927) and for whom any follow-up solicited symptom safety data were recorded during the summarized period (Q=1377; All FM=920).||Percent of Participants|||Number
814747|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Seronegative Participants Who Achieved a B/Victoria HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seronegative was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 4.|Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FY=464), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were seronegative to the strain (Q=487; FV=159).||Percent of Participants|||Number
814748|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Seronegative Participants Who Achieved a B/Yamagata HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seronegative was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 4.|Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FY=464), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were seronegative to the strain (Q=483; FY=165).||Percent of participants|||Number
814749|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Seronegative Participants Who Achieved an A/H3N2 HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seronegative was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 4.|Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were seronegative to the strain (Q=364; All FM=244).||Percent of participants|||Number
814750|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Seronegative Participants Who Achieved an A/H1N1 HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seronegative was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 4.|Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were seronegative to the strain (Q=460; All FM=321).||Percent of participants|||Number
814835|NCT01085045|Secondary|Peak Change From BL in FEV1 on Day 7|Peak change from Baseline (BL) in FEV1 on Day 7|Day 7|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816922|NCT01116882|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Vessel Revascularization||30 days|||participants|||Number
814751|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Serosusceptible Participants Who Achieved a B/Victoria HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose|Serosusceptible was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 8.|Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FV=463), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were serosusceptible to the strain (Q=620; FV=191).||Percent of participants|||Number
814752|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Serosusceptible Participants Who Achieved a B/Yamagata HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose|Serosusceptible was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 8.|Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FY=464), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were serosusceptible to the strain (Q=588; FY=192).||Percent of participants|||Number
814753|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Serosusceptible Participants Who Achieved an A/H3N2 HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose|Serosusceptible was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 8.|Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were serosusceptible to the strain (Q=435; All FM=298).||Percent of participants|||Number
814754|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Serosusceptible Participants Who Achieved an A/H1N1 HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose|Serosusceptible was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 8.|Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were serosusceptible to the strain (Q=569; All FM=392).||Percent of participants|||Number
814755|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Participants (Regardless of Serostatus) Who Achieved a B/Victoria HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose||Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FV=463), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, and had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response (Q=1327; FV=437).||Percent of participants|||Number
814756|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Participants (Regardless of Serostatus) Who Achieved a B/Yamagata HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose||Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FY=464), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, and had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response (Q=1327; FY=445).||Percent of participants|||Number
814757|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Participants (Regardless of Serostatus) Who Achieved an A/H1N1 or A/H3N2 Strain-specific HAI Antibody Titer ≥ 32 Post Immunogenicity Dose||Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, and had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response (Q=1327; All FM=883).||Percent of participants|||Number
814758|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Seronegative Participants Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experienced a Seroresponse to the B/Victoria Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seronegative was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 4. Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FV=463), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were seronegative to the strain (Q=487; FV=159).||Percent of participants|||Number
814759|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Seronegative Participants Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experienced a Seroresponse to the B/Yamagata Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seronegative was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 4. Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FY=464), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were seronegative to the strain (Q=483; FY=165).||Percent of participants|||Number
814760|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Seronegative Participants Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experienced a Seroresponse to the A/H3N2 Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seronegative was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 4. Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time and had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response and were seronegative to the strain (Q=364; All FM=244).||Percent of participants|||Number
814761|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Seronegative Participants Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experienced a Seroresponse to the A/H1N1 Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seronegative was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 4. Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, and had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response and were seronegative to the strain (Q=460; All FM=321).||Percent of participants|||Number
814762|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Serosusceptible Participants Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experience Seroresponse to the B/Victoria Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Serosusceptible was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 8. Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FV=463), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were serosusceptible to the strain (Q=620; FV=191).||Percent of participants|||Number
816923|NCT01116882|Secondary|All Cause Mortality at 12 Months||12 months|||participants|||Number
814763|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Serosusceptible Participants Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experience Seroresponse to the B/Yamagata Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Serosusceptible was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 8. Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FY=464), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were serosusceptible to the strain (Q=588; FY=192).||Percent of participants|||Number
814764|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Serosusceptible Participants Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experience Seroresponse to the A/H3N2 Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Serosusceptible was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 8. Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were serosusceptible to the strain (Q=435; All FM=298).||Percent of participants|||Number
814765|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Serosusceptible Participants Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experienced a Seroresponse to the A/H1N1 Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Serosusceptible was defined as a baseline HAI titer ≤ 8. Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response, and were serosusceptible to the strain (Q=569; All FM=392).||Percent of participants|||Number
814766|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Participants (Regardless of Serostatus) Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experienced a Seroresponse to the B/Victoria Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FV=463), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, and had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response (Q=1321; FV=437).||Percent of participants|||Number
814767|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Participants (Regardless of Serostatus) Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experienced a Seroresponse to the B/Yamagata Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI antibody titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FY=464), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, and had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response (Q=1321; FY=441).||Percent of participants|||Number
814768|NCT01091246|Secondary|Percent of Participants (Regardless of Serostatus) Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experienced a Seroresponse to the A/H3N2 Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI antibody titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time and had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response (Q=1321; All FM=879).||Percent of participants|||Number
814769|NCT01091246|Secondary|The Percent of Participants (Regardless of Serostatus) Within Each Treatment Arm Who Experienced a Seroresponse to the A/H1N1 Strain Post Immunogenicity Dose|Seroresponse was defined as a ≥ 4-fold rise in HAI antibody titer from baseline.|Day 0 and Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time, and had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response (Q=1320; All FM=878).||percent of participants|||Number
814770|NCT01091246|Primary|The 4 Post-dose Strain-specific Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) Antibody Geometric Mean Titers (GMT) in the Q/LAIV (MEDI3250) Arm Are Noninferior to Those in the Comparator FluMist Group.|Noninferior immune response was defined as having the upper bound of the 2-sided 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the HAI antibody GMT ratio (FluMist comparator divided by Q/LAIV) ≤ 1.5 for each of the 4 strains. .|Day 28 post immunogenicity dose|All participants who received any investigational product (Q=1385; FY=464; FV=463; All FM=927), had post dose HAI antibody measurement at the appropriate time and had no protocol deviation judged to have the potential to interfere with the generation or interpretation of an immune response (Q=1327; FY=445; FV=437; All FM=883).||Geometric mean titer||Full Range|Geometric Mean
814771|NCT01091259|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Experienced Grade 3 and Higher Toxicities||up to 3 years|Any patients who had at least one dose of treatment||participants|||Number
814772|NCT01091259|Secondary|Median Overall Survival|Defined as the length of time from the start of treatment that half of the patients are still alive.|up to 3 years|Intent-to-treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814773|NCT01091259|Secondary|Median Progression Free Survival|Defined as the length of time from the start of treatment that half of the patients are still alive and without disease progression. Progression is evaluated by RECIST 1.0 or CA125 if no measurable disease (PR: CA125 decreases by > 50%; CR: CA125 decreases to the normal range; progression is defined on the basis of a confirmed doubling of CA125 levels from either the upper limit of normal or the nadir CA125 level)|up to 3 years|Intent-to-treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814774|NCT01091259|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|ORR is defined as the percentage of all patients with confirmed partial response (PR) or complete response (CR). PR and CR are evaluated by RECIST 1.0 or CA125 if no measurable disease (PR: CA125 decreases by > 50%; CR: CA125 decreases to the normal range).|up to 3 years|Intent-to-treat population||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814836|NCT01085045|Secondary|Peak Change From BL in FEV1 on Day 1|Peak change from Baseline in FEV1 on Day 1|Day 1|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814837|NCT01085045|Primary|FEV1 AUC 0-12 on Day 7|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-12 (normalized) relative to baseline FEV1 following 7-day dose administration|"Pre-dose, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11.5, and 12 hours post-dose on Day 7"|Modified Intent to Treat (MITT) Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814775|NCT01091259|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) Rate at 6 Months|The PFS rate at 6 months is the percentage of patients that experience a PFS event during the first 6 months in the study. The PFS is defined as the time from date of first dose of study medication to the date of first documented disease progression, or death from any cause, whichever is first. Patients who die without a reported prior progression will be considered to have progressed on the day of their death. Progression is evaluated by Response and Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST) 1.0 or CA125 criteria if no measurable disease as doubling of CA125 levels from either the upper limit of normal or the nadir CA125 level.|6 months from the start of treatment|Intent-to-treat population.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814776|NCT01091454|Secondary|Survival Time|Survival time is defined as the time from registration to death due to any cause. The distribution of survival time will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.|Up to 5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814777|NCT01091454|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|Time to disease progression is defined as the time from registration to the earliest date of documentation of disease progression. If a patient dies without a documentation of disease progression the patient will be considered to have had disease progression at the time of their death. If the patient is declared to be a major treatment violation, the patient will be censored on the date the treatment violation was declared to have occurred. The distribution of time to progression will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier. Progression is defined using the revised RECIST guideline (v1.1) as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm.|up to 5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814778|NCT01091454|Secondary|6-month Progression-free Survival (6-mo PFS) Rate|6-month progression-free survival. A patient is considered to be a 6-month progression-free survivor if the patient is on study treatment 6 months from registration without a documentation of disease progression. The 6-month progression-free survival rate incorporating censoring will be computed using the method of Kaplan-Meier. Progression is defined using the revised RECIST guideline (v1.1) as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm.|At 6 months|||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814779|NCT01091454|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response is defined for all evaluable patients with measurable disease who have achieved a confirmed response as the date at which the patient’s earliest best objective status is first noted to be either a CR or PR to the earliest date progression is documented. If a patient dies subsequent to the confirmed response without a documentation of disease progression, the patient will be considered to have had disease progression at the time of their death. The distribution of duration of response will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <1 cm.; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814780|NCT01091454|Secondary|Confirmed Response Rate|A confirmed response is defined to be either a CR or PR noted as the objective status on 2 consecutive evaluations at least 6 weeks apart. All patients meeting the eligibility criteria who have signed a consent form and have begun treatment will be evaluable for response. The confirmed response rate will be estimated by the number of confirmed responses in evaluable patients with measurable disease divided by the total number of evaluable patients with measurable disease. The appropriate confidence interval will be calculated. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <1 cm.; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 5 years|Out of the total number of participants who completed the study and were evaluable for the primary endpoint and adverse events (as provided in the Participant Flow), only a subset of participants (Overall Number of Participants Analyzed specified above) were evaluable for the Confirmed Response Rate.||percentage of confirmed responses||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814781|NCT01091454|Primary|3-month Progression-free Survival (3-mo PFS) Rate|A patient is considered to be a 3-month progression-free survivor if the patient is on study treatment 3 months from registration without a documentation of disease progression. The proportion of successes will be estimated by the number of successes divided by the total number of evaluable patients and 95% confidence intervals for the true success proportion will be calculated according to the approach of Duffy and Santner. If some patients are lost to follow-up not having been observed for at least 3 months, an estimate and confidence interval for the 3-month PFS rate incorporating censoring will be computed using the method of Kaplan-Meier. Progression is defined using the revised RECIST guideline (v1.1) as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm.|3 months|||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814782|NCT01091519|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Treatment Satisfaction Question (TSQ) at Week 4 and Month 4|Participant’s response to the treatment was based on treatment satisfaction questionnaires (TSQ). TSQ was rated on a 5–point scale, participant was asked: “overall how satisfied are you with your over active bladder (OAB) medication?” 1=very satisfied, 2=somewhat satisfied, 3=neither dissatisfied nor satisfied, 4=somewhat dissatisfied, 5=very dissatisfied. Change from baseline results categorized as deterioration (Positive change from baseline);no change (scores change=0);minor improvement (negative score change in magnitude of 1);major improvement (negative score change in magnitude of >=2).|Baseline, Week 4, Month 4|FAS included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication and had provided at least 1 efficacy endpoint at baseline and during the study. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. n=number of participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point.||participants|||Number
838804|NCT01313182|Secondary|Measure Hospital Length of Stay and Re-admission Rates in the Mupirocin and Povidone-iodine Groups.|Re-admission for infection within 12 months of procedure|12 months||||||
814783|NCT01091519|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Patient Perception of Urgency Scale (PPUS) at Week 4 and Month 4|PPUS: single-item, self-administered validated questionnaire. Rated on a 3–point scale: participant was asked: “Which of the following would typically describe your experience when you have a desire to urinate?” 1=usually not able to hold urine; 2=usually able to hold urine (without leaking) until I reach a toilet if I go to the toilet immediately; 3= usually able to finish what I am doing before going to the toilet (without leaking). Change from baseline results categorized as deterioration (Negative change); no change (Score change=0); improvement (Positive change).|Baseline, Week 4, Month 4|FAS included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication and had provided at least 1 efficacy endpoint at baseline and during the study. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. n=number of participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point.||participants|||Number
814784|NCT01091519|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) at Week 4 and Month 4|"PPBC: single-item, self-administered validated questionnaire. Rated on a 6–point scale: participant was asked: “Which of the following statements describes your bladder condition best at the moment? 1=no problems at all; 2=some very minor problems; 3=some minor problems; 4=some moderate problems; 5=severe problems; 6=many severe problems. Change from baseline results categorized as deterioration (Positive change from baseline); no Change (scores change=0); minor Improvement (negative score change in magnitude of 1); major improvement (negative score change in magnitude of >=2)."|Baseline, Week 4, Month 4|FAS included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication and had provided at least 1 efficacy endpoint at baseline and during the study. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. n=number of participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point.||participants|||Number
814785|NCT01091519|Primary|Percentage of Participants Satisfied With Treatment at Month 4|Participant’s response to treatment was based on treatment satisfaction questionnaires (TSQ). Participants answered: “overall, how satisfied are you with your OAB medication?” and were asked to rate this question on 5 point scale as 1=very satisfied, 2=somewhat satisfied, 3= neither dissatisfied nor satisfied, 4=somewhat dissatisfied and 5=very dissatisfied. Five categorical responses were grouped to satisfied (including “very satisfied” and “somewhat satisfied”) and dissatisfied (including “very dissatisfied”, “somewhat dissatisfied”, and “neither dissatisfied nor satisfied”).|Month 4|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication and had provided at least 1 efficacy endpoint at baseline and during the study. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814786|NCT01091662|Secondary|Standardized Seizure Frequency (SSF) by Period|Seizure frequency was evaluated by using a standardized frequency per 4 weeks (28 days). It was evaluated for five periods: baseline (Weeks -8 to -1), titration (Weeks 1 to 2), AED taper/conversion (Weeks 3 to 8), monotherapy (Weeks 9 to 18), and double-blind (Weeks 1 to 18).|Double-blind: week to 18; Baseline: weeks -8 to -1; titration: weeks 1 to 2; AED taper/conversion weeks 3 to 8; monotherapy: weeks 9 to 18|efficacy population (ESL 1200 mg) Double-blind: 54; Baseline: 54; Titration: 54; AED taper/conversion; 54; Monotherapy: 48 (ESL 1600 mg) Double-blind: 100; Baseline: 98; Titration: 100; AED taper/conversion; 100; Monotherapy: 88||seizures in 28 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814787|NCT01091662|Secondary|Proportion (%) of Events in Each Classification of the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C SSRS).||18 Week Double-blind treatment period|ITT population||Percent of particiants|||Number
814788|NCT01091662|Secondary|Proportion (%) of Subjects With Normal Baseline Sodium Reaching Blood Sodium ≤135 mmol/L, ≤130 mmol/L, and ≤125 mmol/L.|Proportion (%) of Subjects With Normal Baseline Sodium Reaching Blood Sodium ≤135 mmol/L, ≤130 mmol/L, and ≤125 mmol/L|Week 0 to Week 18|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814789|NCT01091662|Secondary|Proportion (%) of Subjects With Increase of Body Weight >= 7% From Baseline||18 Week Double-blind treatment period|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
814790|NCT01091662|Secondary|Change in Total Score of MADRS From Baseline in Those Subjects With a MADRS Score of ≥14 at Randomization.|The total score of MADRS is defined as the sum of all individual item scores. From 0-60, higher score indicates more severe|Week 0 to Week 18, baseline:day 0;end of AED taper/conversion period; end of week 8; end of monotherapy period: end of week 18|efficacy population (ESL 1200 mg) Change from baseline to end of AED taper/conversion period: 7; Change from baseline to end of monotherapy period: 7 (ESL 1600 mg) Change from baseline to end of AED taper/conversion period: 16; Change from baseline to end of monotherapy period: 18||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814791|NCT01091662|Secondary|Change in Total Score in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS),From Baseline .|The total score of MADRS is defined as the sum of all individual item scores. From 0-60, high score indicates more severe|Week 0 to Week 18,baseline day 0; end of AED taper/conversion period; end of week 8; end of monotherapy period; end of week 18|Efficacy Population (ESL 1200 mg) Change from baseline to end of AED taper/conversion period: 48; Change from baseline to end of monotherapy period: 54 (ESL 1600 mg) Change from baseline to end of AED taper/conversion period: 88; Change from baseline to end of monotherapy period: 98||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814792|NCT01091662|Secondary|Change in Total Score From Baseline in 31-Item Quality of Life in Epilepsy (QOLIE-31).|The QOLIE-31 overall score was obtained by using a weighted average of multi-item scale scores. The recorded responses were converted to 0-100 point scales. The mean of the individual item scores in each subgroup were calculated, with higher converted scores reflecting better quality of life.|Week 0 to Week 18, Baseline: Day 0: End of AED taper/conversion period: end of week 8; End of monotherapy period: end of week 18|Efficacy Population (ESL 1200 mg) Change from baseline to end of AED taper/conversion period: 45; Change from baseline to end of monotherapy period:50 (ESL1600 mg) Change from baseline to end of AED taper/conversion period: 85; Change from baseline to end of monotherapy period:96||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814852|NCT01085214|Primary|Overall Response Rate|Overall Response: Stringent Complete Response (sCR) + Complete Response (CR) + Very Good Partial Response (VGPR) + Partial Response (PR).|Up to 2 years|All participants who received study treatment||participants|||Number
814853|NCT01085318|Other Pre-specified|Time to First Clinical Relapse|Time to First Clinical Relapse|Months|||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
814854|NCT01085318|Other Pre-specified|Clinical Relapses|Clinical Relapses|Over 6 months|||relapses per participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
814793|NCT01091662|Secondary|Proportion (%) of Subjects Reaching Each Exit Criteria|"The proportion (%) of subjects reaching each of the 5 exit criteria-1.One episode of status epilepticus.2.One secondary gen. partial seizure (in subjects who did not have gen.seizures during 6 mo. prior to screening).3.A two fold increase in any consecutive 28 day seizure rate compared to the highest consecutive 28 day seizure rate during the 8 week baseline period. 4.A two fold increase in any consecutive 2 day seizure rate compared to the highest consecutive 2 day seizure rate during the 8 week baseline period. If the highest number of seizures in any consecutive 2 day period during the 8 week baseline was 1 then 3 seizures in a consecutive 2 day period was required to exit.
5.Worsening of seizures or increase in seizure frequency considered serious or requiring intervention as judged by the investigator"|Week 1 to Week 18, (beginning of week 1 to end of week 18)|Efficacy population||percentage of participants|||Number
814794|NCT01091662|Secondary|Responder Rate (Proportion [%] of Subjects With a ≥50% Reduction of Seizure Frequency From Baseline).|Responder rate was defined as the proportion (%) of subjects with a ≥ 50% reduction of seizure frequency from baseline. This analysis was done for the titration (Weeks 1 to 2), AED taper/conversion (Weeks 3 to 8), monotherapy (Weeks 9 to 18), and double-blind (Weeks 1 to 18) periods.|Week 0 to Week 18, Double-blind weeks 1-18; baseline: weeks -8 to -1; Titration: weeks 1-2; AED taper/conversion; weeks 3-8; monotherapy weeks 9-18|Efficacy population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814795|NCT01091662|Secondary|Change in Seizure Frequency From Baseline.|The relative (%) change in standardized seizure frequency was evaluated for four periods: titration (Weeks 1 to 2), AED taper/conversion (Weeks 3 to 8), monotherapy (Weeks 9 to 18), and double-blind (Weeks 1 to 18).|18 weeks, Double-blind:weeks 1-18; Baseline: weeks -8to -1; titration: weeks 1 to 2; AED taper/conversion: weeks 3 to 8; monotherapy; weeks 9 to 18|Efficacy population (ESL 1200mg) Double-blind: 54; Titration: 54; AED taper/conversion:54; Monotherapy: 48 (ESL1600 mg) Double-blind:98; Titration: 98; AED taper/conversion: 98; Monotherapy: 87||Percent change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
814796|NCT01091662|Secondary|Time on Eslicarbazepine Acetate Monotherapy.|The start of the monotherapy period was defined as the date of termination of all other AEDs while taking study monotherapy medication. Time on monotherapy was defined from the start of monotherapy period to the last dose of monotherapy treatment.|Week 8 to Week 18|Efficacy population||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814797|NCT01091662|Secondary|Completion Rate During the 10 Weeks of Monotherapy (% of Subjects Entering the Monotherapy Period Who Complete).|Monotherapy completion rate was defined as the proportion (%) of subjects entering the monotherapy period who completed the 10 weeks of monotherapy treatment.|Week 8 through 18|Efficacy population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814798|NCT01091662|Secondary|Completion Rate (% of Subjects Completing the 18 Weeks of Double-blind Treatment).|Subjects completing the study were determined as subjects who completed the 18 weeks of double-blind treatment.|18 weeks|Efficacy population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814799|NCT01091662|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Seizure-free During the Last 4 Weeks on Eslicarbazepine Acetate Monotherapy.|Percentage of participants that were Seizure-free during the last four weeks of monotherapy were determined as subjects who had seizure assessments during the 4 weeks between Visits 8 and 9 (Weeks 15 through 18), and did not have any seizures.|Week 15 through 18|Efficacy population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814800|NCT01091662|Secondary|Proportion (%) of Subjects That Are Seizure-free During the 10-week Double-blind Monotherapy Treatment Period.|Seizure-free subjects during the monotherapy period were determined as subjects who had seizure assessments during the monotherapy period, and did not have any seizures in the 10 weeks between Visits 6 and 9 (Weeks 9 through 18). Subjects who discontinued during this period were considered not seizure-free even if they were seizure-free at the time of discontinuation, i.e., to be considered seizure-free, subjects must complete the 10-week period without any seizures.|Week 9 through 18|Efficacy population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814801|NCT01091662|Primary|Cumulative 112-day Exit Rate as Estimated by Kaplan-Meier Method|"Cumulative exit rate was defined as the proportion of subjects meeting at least one of the following five exit criteria over a 16-week study period (from start of AED taper/con. period (Wk 3) to end of double blind monotherapy period (Wk 18)).1.One episode of status epilepticus.2.One secondary gen. partial seizure (in subjects who did not have gen.seizures during 6 mo. prior to screening).3.A two fold increase in any consecutive 28 day seizure rate compared to the highest consecutive 28 day seizure rate during the 8 week baseline period. 4.A two fold increase in any consecutive 2 day seizure rate compared to the highest consecutive 2 day seizure rate during the 8 week baseline period. If the highest number of seizures in any consecutive 2 day period during the 8 week baseline was 1 then 3 seizures in a consecutive 2 day period was required to exit.
5.Worsening of seizures or increase in seizure frequency considered serious or requiring intervention as judged by the investigator"|From beginning of Week 3 to end of Week 18|Efficacy population||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814802|NCT01091675|Primary|the Percentage of Patients Fulfilling the Assessment Study (ASAS) Response Criteria Were Determined|"BASDAI Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, is the gold standard for measuring and evaluating disease activity in Ankylosing Spondylitis consists of a one through 10 scale which is used to answer 6 questions pertaining to the 5 major symptoms of AS.
BASDAI has been used to assess the efficacy of the treatment. Possible Patients were considerate respond to ASABIO criteria when presented a change of 2 in the BASDAI score range."|the ASAS response were evaluated at week 2 and 4 and after 6 months treatment|Patients with physician-diagnosed Ankylosing Spondylitis at 6 months before study start||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814803|NCT01091948|Secondary|Number of Intubation Attempts||from start of intubation to successfully intubated|||participants|||Number
814804|NCT01091948|Secondary|Sore Throat Grade||On the first postoperative day|This outcome was not collected for 1 patient in each group.||participants|||Number
814805|NCT01091948|Secondary|Trace Bleeding|Trace bleeding is a binary outcome: yes or no, which is determined based on amount of post-intubation bleeding present in the suction tube|Right after intubation|||participants|||Number
814806|NCT01091948|Secondary|Occurrence of Hypoxaemia|Arterial oxygen saturation was recorded at 1 min prior to intubation, intubation, and 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 min after; hypoxaemia was defined as occurrence of arterial oxygen saturation <90% at any of the above measurements.|at 1 min prior to intubation, intubation, and 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 min after|||participants|||Number
814810|NCT01091974|Secondary|Fatigue Will be Assessed by the Total Score of the Revised Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) .|The revised Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) is a 9-item, patient-report instrument with established reliability and validity. The BFI allows for the rapid assessment of fatigue level in cancer patients and identifies those patients with severe fatigue. Three items ask patients to rate their fatigue “now,” and fatigue at its “worst” and “usual” for the last 24 hours. The 11-point scales are bounded by 0 = “no fatigue” and 10 = “fatigue as bad as you can imagine.” Using the same type of scales, the remaining questions ask patients to rate how their fatigue interferes with several functional domains, including general activity, walking, mood, work, and relations with others. These scales are bounded by 0 = “does not interfere” and 10 = “interferes completely.” A global fatigue score (ranging from 0-10) can be obtained by averaging all the items on the BFI.|ANCOVA was employed with multiple imputation on the post-intervention score (average of the two post-intervention weeks), controlling for the score at the time of consent (pre).|Note: One patient randomized to the placebo only condition failed to provide data and was not included in the analyses.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
814811|NCT01091974|Primary|Change in Insomnia Severity Index From Baseline to Post-intervention|The Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) is a commonly used, 7-item psychometrically validated measure used to rate insomnia with 0-7 = absence of insomnia, 8-14 = subthreshold insomnia symptoms, 15-21 = moderate insomnia, and 22-28 = severe insomnia.|ANCOVA was employed with multiple imputation on the post-intervention score (average of the two post-intervention weeks), controlling for the score at the time of consent (pre).|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
814812|NCT01092338|Primary|Efficacy of the Two Doses (4000 and 7000 IU/d)|Daily D3 supplementation will result in 25D >= to 32/ng/ml|12 weeks|Number of subjects with serum 25D concentration levels >= 32 ng/ml after 12 weeks of supplementation.||participants|||Number
814813|NCT01092338|Primary|Safety|Determined by incidence of elevated serum calcium (above age specific range) associated with elevated serum 25D concentrations (>160ng/ml).|12 weeks|Number of subjects with elevated serum calcium (above age specific range) associated with elevated serum 25D concentrations (>160ng/ml)||participants|||Number
814814|NCT01084707|Primary|Average Concentration|Pharmacokinetic measurement - average concentration during the last dosing interval (AUCtau)|During the last dosing interval (hour 11-12 post-dose)|ITT||(ng/ml)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
814815|NCT01084707|Secondary|Nicotine Plasma Concentration|The nicotine concentration in plasma (area under the nicotine plasma concentration curve) 1 hour after start of treatment|One hour after start of treatment|ITT||(ng/ml)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
814816|NCT01084707|Secondary|Peak-Trough Fluctuation|Percent of peak-trough fluctuation over one dosing interval at steady state (PTF)|During the last dosing interval (hour 11-12 post-dose)|ITT||Percent Fluctuation||Standard Deviation|Mean
814817|NCT01084707|Secondary|Minimum Plasma Concentration|The minimum nicotine plasma concentration during the last dosing interval (Cmin)|During the last dosing interval (hour 11-12 post-dose)|ITT||(ng/ml)||Standard Deviation|Mean
814818|NCT01084707|Secondary|Time of Maximum Concentration|The time at which maximum concentration is reached (Tmax)|During the last dosing interval (hour 11-12 post-dose)|ITT||(minutes)||Full Range|Median
814819|NCT01084707|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration|Cmax, which is the maximum (peak) concentration (amount of drug) measurable in blood plasma after a dose is administered measured in nanograms/milliliter (ng/ml)|During the last dosing interval (hour 11-12 post-dose)|||(ng/ml)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
814820|NCT01084759|Secondary|Number of Participants With RECIST Response (i.e. Complete Response or Partial Response)|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by CT scan or MRI. Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|2 years|||participants|||Number
814821|NCT01084759|Primary|Time to PSA Progression|Time to a PSA increase above the PSA level obtained after 3 months on testosterone treatment over two successive measurements 2 weeks apart.|2 years|||days||Full Range|Median
814822|NCT01084759|Primary|Percentage of Patients Completing at Least 3 Months of Therapy With a PSA Below Baseline.||3 months|||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814823|NCT01085006|Secondary|Amount of Hemorrhage in the First 24 Hour After Cesarean Delivery||First 24 hours||||||
814824|NCT01085006|Primary|The Amount of Hemorrhage During Cesarean Delivery and Within 2 Hours Afterward||During the procedure and within 2 hours afterwards|||ml||Full Range|Median
814825|NCT01085045|Secondary|Change From BL in Mean Evening Post-dose Daily Peak Flow Rate on Day 7|Change from BaseLine in mean evening post-dose daily peak flow rate on Day 7|Day 7|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters / Minute||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814826|NCT01085045|Secondary|Change From BL in Mean Evening Pre-dose Daily Peak Flow Rate on Day 7|Change from BaseLine in mean evening pre-dose daily peak flow rate on Day 7|Day 7|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters / Minute||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814827|NCT01085045|Secondary|Change From BL in Mean Morning Post-dose Daily Peak Flow Rate on Day 7|Change from BaseLine in mean morning post-dose daily peak flow rate on Day 7|Day 7|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters / Minute||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814828|NCT01085045|Secondary|Change From BL in Mean Morning Pre-dose Daily Peak Flow Rate on Day 7|Change from BaseLine in mean morning pre-dose daily peak flow rate on Day 7|Day 7|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters / Minute||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814829|NCT01085045|Secondary|12 hr Post-dose Trough FEV1 on Day 7|12 hour post-dose trough Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second on Day 7|Day 7|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814830|NCT01085045|Secondary|Change in Morning Pre-dose FEV1 on Day 7|Change from Baseline in morning pre-dose FEV1 on Day 7|Day 7|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
814831|NCT01085045|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving >=12% Improvement in FEV1 on Day 1|Time to Onset of Action where the improvement in FEV1 on Day 1 was >= 12%|Day 1|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
814832|NCT01085045|Secondary|Time to Onset of Action >=10% Improvement in FEV1 on Day 1|Time to Onset of Action where the improvement in FEV1 on Day 1 was >=10%|Day 1|MITT Population - not including the 4 sentinel patients.||Participants|||Number
814838|NCT01085136|Secondary|Intensity and Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) for Part A & Part B.|Safety of Afatinib as indicated by intensity and incidence of adverse events, graded according to United States National Cancer Institute Common terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (US NCI CTCAE) Version 3.0 both for Part A and Part B. The CTCAE grades are: 1 (mild AE), 2 (moderate AE), 3 (severe AE), 4 (life-threatening or disabling AE), 5 (death related to AE).|From first administration of treatment until 28 days after last drug administration, up to 51 Months (Part A) and from randomization until 28 days after last drug administration of Trial medication, up to 32 Months (Part B)|Treated Set||Percentage of participants|||Number
814839|NCT01085136|Secondary|Objective Response (Part B)|Objective response (CR, PR) of Afatinib/paclitaxel combination therapy and comparator chemotherapy in Part B after progression in Part A according to RECIST 1.1 .|Post baseline tumour-imaging was performed at every 8 weeks thereafter until disease progression; up to 32 Months|Randomized Set||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814840|NCT01085136|Secondary|Objective Response (Part A)|Objective response defined as the best overall response of complete response [CR]: disappearance of all target lesion & partial response [PR]: ≥30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions , taking as reference the baseline sum longest diameter of Afatinib monotherapy according to RECIST 1.1 for Part A.|Post baseline tumour-imaging was performed at every 6 weeks thereafter until disease progression; upto 51 months|Treated set||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814841|NCT01085136|Secondary|Overall Survival (Part B)|"Overall survival (OS) as determined by the time from randomization to death in part B.
Median was calculated from the Kaplan−Meier curve."|From randomization until death; Up to 32 months|Randomised Set||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814842|NCT01085136|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (Part A)|"Progression free survival (PFS) as determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) 1.1 for Part A.
Median was calculated from the Kaplan−Meier curve."|From first dose administration until disease progression or death; Up to 51 months|Treated set||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814843|NCT01085136|Primary|Progression Free Survival (Part B)|"Progression free survival (PFS) time as determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), Version 1.1 from day of randomization until disease progression or death for patients randomised to combination therapy with afatinib plus paclitaxel or to investigator's choice of chemotherapy.
Median was calculated from the Kaplan−Meier curve."|From randomization until disease progression or death; Up to 32 months|Randomised Set: This analysis set consist of all randomised patients irrespective of whether treated or not.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814844|NCT01085201|Secondary|Pain Levels During a Vaso-occlusive Event in Children and Adults With SCD.|Pain was measured using a standardized pain scale. The scale is a 10-cm visual analogue scale (10 cm-long line printed on white paper), where 0 is no pain and 10 is maximum pain. Participants were asked to indicate their pain level by marking on the line prior to each blood draw.|pre-drug to 54 hours|The number of participants was determined per protocol following a 3+3 design. Stages 1, 2 and 2b were excluded because this outcome measure is specific to the experience of a vaso-occlusive event, which was studied in Stages 3 and 4.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Median
814845|NCT01085201|Secondary|Percentage of Activated iNKT Cells and/or Activation Markers on iNKT Cells in Individuals With SCD.|Percentage of activated iNKT cells after receiving a 24-hour infusion of Lexiscan was compared to pre-drug. iNKT cell activation was evaluated using antibodies targeting the p65 subunit of nuclear factor-kappa B (phospho-NF-kB p65). Measures are given as percentage of change in phospho-NF-kB p65 activation in iNKT cells compared to pre-drug after a 24-hour infusion. iNKT cell activation in Stages 1, 2b, and 4 was not analyzed (see analysis population description).|pre-drug to 54 hours|The number of subjects was determined per protocol. Stage 1 was excluded as the goal was to determine the optimal markers for iNKT cells. Only 4 subjects were analyzed in Stage 2 because 24-hour samples were not obtained for 2 subjects. Stages 2b and 4 were not completely analyzed because these stages were completed early after studying 3 subjects.||percentage of change in activation||Standard Deviation|Median
814846|NCT01085201|Primary|Dose Limiting Toxicities as a Measure of Whether Infusional Lexiscan is Safe in Individuals With SCD.|"Per protocol, Lexiscan was considered safe if well tolerated based on number of DLTs reported. Stage 1 of the study was a 3+3 dose escalation study. Three doses were tested: 0.24 mcg/kg/hr (dose level 0), 0.6 mcg/kg/hr (dose level 1), and 1.44 mcg/kg/hr (dose level 2). Dose escalation continued until 6 participants were treated at the maximum planned dose (dose level 2). We studied a total of 15 patients in Stage 1. In Stages 2 and 3, if at least 2/3 participants tolerated the dose, an additional 3 participants were studied. We studied 6 participants in each of stages 2 and 3. In stage 2b, Lexiscan was studied for a longer (48 hr) duration in 3 participants. In stage 4, Lexiscan was studied in 3 pediatric participants."|30 to 54 hours plus 30-day follow-up|The number of participants was determined per protocol following a 3+3 design. In Stages 2b and 4, we received permission from the FDA, IRB, and DSMB to study only 3 subjects because we did not observe any prior DLT. One patient enrolled in Stage 2b withdrew consent during the infusion due to an unrelated toothache, and was excluded from analysis.||number of DLT|||Number
814847|NCT01085214|Other Pre-specified|Level of Key Regulators|The level of key regulators of the MEK/MAPK and PI3K pathways and HSP90 and cell cycle regulators may determine the anti-tumor response to AZD6244 in vivo in multiple myeloma (MM).|Up to 20-30 hours after receiving the first dose of selumetinib||||||
814848|NCT01085214|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Bone Marrow Microenvironment|Effect of AZD6244 on the bone marrow microenvironment in MM.|Baseline to up to 20-30 hours after receiving the first dose of AZD6244||||||
814849|NCT01085214|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|Median PFS in months. Progressive Disease (PD): Increase of >= 25% from baseline. Estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.|From registration to progression or death, assessed up to 2 years|All participants who received study treatment||months||Full Range|Median
814850|NCT01085214|Secondary|Incidence of Toxicity That May Be Treatment Emergent|Participants with Grade 3, 4, and 5 toxicities possibly, probably, or definitely related to study treatment. Toxicity graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE).|1 year, 11 months|All participants who received study treatment||participants|||Number
814851|NCT01085214|Secondary|Duration of Response|Mean duration of response in months. Estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.|From response to disease progression or death, assessed up to 2 years|All participants with response||months||Full Range|Mean
814856|NCT01085318|Primary|Change in Volume (in Millimeters Cubed) of Normal Appearing Brain Tissue (NABT) With Increasing (Indicative of Remyelination) Voxel-wise Magnetization Transfer Ratio (VW-MTR) From Baseline to 6 Months|To characterize the effect of Rebif on remyelination using VW-MTR dynamic mapping of NABT in subjects ith RRMS over 6 months of treatment compared to a group of healthy Control (HC).|Baseline to Month 6|The analysis were run on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set defined as all RRMS subjects with at least one injection of Rebif and all HC who signed the informed consent form. Missing data were not imputed.||mm^3||Full Range|Median
814857|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 2 or Phase 2 Randomized Part: Number of Subjects With TEAEs, Serious TEAEs, TEAEs Leading to Discontinuation and TEAEs Leading to Death|An AE is defined as any new untoward medical occurrences/worsening of pre-existing medical condition without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death; life threatening; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; congenital anomaly/birth defect. TEAES between first dose of study drug administration and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.|From the first dose of study drug administration up to 28 days after the last dose of study drug administration|Part 2 or Phase 2 Randomized Part of the trial was not conducted. Hence, safety outcome measure could not be performed.|||||
814858|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 2 or Phase 2 Randomized Part: Best Overall Response|BOR was defined based on Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Version 1.0 (RECIST V1.0) as following: Complete response (CR) was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no appearance of new lesions. Partial response (PR) was defined as at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of the longest diameters (SLD) of the targeted lesions. CR and PR had to be documented on 2 occasions separated by at least 4 weeks (28 days). Stable disease (SD) was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify as progressive disease (PD) being demonstrated during the first 4 weeks. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the SLD of target lesions compared to the smallest SLD since the study treatment started.|Up to 2 years|Part 2 or Phase 2 Randomized Part of the trial was not conducted. Hence, Best overall response was not evaluated.|||||
814859|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 2 or Phase 2 Randomized Part: Circulating Biomarkers||Predose, Day 1, 2 and 16 of cycle 1 followed by Day 1 pre-dose of every second cycle up to 2 years|Part 2 or Phase 2 Randomized Part of the trial was not conducted. Hence, circulating biomarkers were not evaluated.|||||
814860|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Circulating Biomarkers in Serum||Predose, Day 1, 2 and 16 of cycle 1 followed by Day 1 pre-dose of every second cycle up to 2 years|Number of subjects enrolled in the safety run-in part of the trial was less and it would not provide sufficient statistical power to perform any analysis. Hence, the biomarker samples were not analyzed as part of the trial.|||||
814861|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Number of Subjects With Best Overall Response (BOR)|BOR was defined based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Version 1.0 (RECIST V1.0) as following: Complete response (CR) was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no appearance of new lesions. Partial response (PR) was defined as at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of the longest diameters (SLD) of the targeted lesions. CR and PR had to be documented on 2 occasions separated by at least 4 weeks (28 days). Stable disease (SD) was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify as progressive disease (PD) being demonstrated during the first 4 weeks. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the SLD of target lesions compared to the smallest SLD since the study treatment started.|Up to 2 years|The efficacy analysis set included all subjects who received at least 1 trial drug dose (any of the three FOLFIRI drugs and pimasertib) and had a baseline tumor assessment and at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment.||Subjects|||Number
814862|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Ratio of AUC0-inf of Pimasertib (Day 1/Day 8), Irinotecan and SN-38 (Day 1/Day 15)|The AUC(0-inf) was estimated by determining the total area under the concentration time curve extrapolated to infinity.|Day 1 and Day 8 for pimasertib; Day 1 and Day 15 for Irinotecan|"The PK analysis population set included all subjects who had an evaluable plasma concentration-time profile on any of the PK sampling days (Day 1 or 8 or 15). Here, N (total number of subjects analyzed) signifies number of evaluable subjects for this outcome measure. n signifies number of subjects evaluable per each category, respectively."||Ratio||Full Range|Median
814863|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Ratio of Cmax for Pimasertib (Day 1/Day 8), Irinotecan and SN-38 (Day 1/Day 15)||Day 1 and Day 8 for pimasertib; Day 1 and Day 15 for Irinotecan and SN-38|"The PK analysis population set included all subjects who had an evaluable plasma concentration-time profile on any of the PK sampling days (Day 1 or 8 or 15). Here, N (total number of subjects analyzed) signifies number of evaluable subjects for this outcome measure. n signifies number of subjects evaluable per each category, respectively."||Ratio of Cmax||Full Range|Median
814864|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Apparent Oral Volume of Distribution (Vz f) Pimasertib, (Vz) of Irinotecan and SN-38|Volume of distribution was defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired serum concentration. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (Vz/f) was influenced by the fraction absorbed.|Day 1 and Day 8 for pimasertib; Day 1 and Day 15 for Irinotecan and SN-38|"The PK analysis population set included all subjects who had an evaluable plasma concentration-time profile on any of the PK sampling days (Day 1 or 8 or 15). Here, N (total number of subjects analyzed) signifies number of evaluable subjects for this outcome measure. n signifies number of subjects evaluable per each category, respectively."||Liter||Full Range|Median
814865|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/f) of Pimasertib, (CL) Irinotecan and SN-38|Clearance of a drug was a measure of the rate at which drug was metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Apparent clearance after oral dose (CL/f) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|Day 1 and Day 8 for pimasertib; Day 1 and Day 15 for Irinotecan and SN-38|"The PK analysis population set included all subjects who had an evaluable plasma concentration-time profile on any of the PK sampling days (Day 1 or 8 or 15). Here, N (total number of subjects analyzed) signifies number of evaluable subjects for this outcome measure. n signifies number of subjects evaluable per each category, respectively."||Liter per hour||Full Range|Median
816925|NCT01116882|Secondary|Complete Revascularization|Complete revascularization was defined as the successful treatment, according to the criteria of procedural success, of all epicardial vessels with more than 70% and less than 100% stenosis.|Post-Procedure|||participants|||Number
814866|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Apparent Terminal Half Life (t1/2) of Pimasertib, Irinotecan and SN-38|The t1/2 was defined as the time required for the plasma concentration of pimasertib and irinotecan to decrease 50% in the final stage of elimination.|Day 1 and Day 8 for pimasertib; Day 1 and Day 15 for Irinotecan and SN-38|"The PK analysis population set included all subjects who had an evaluable plasma concentration-time profile on any of the PK sampling days (Day 1 or 8 or 15). Here, N (total number of subjects analyzed) signifies number of evaluable subjects for this outcome measure. n signifies number of subjects evaluable per each category, respectively."||hour||Full Range|Median
814867|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC0-inf) of Pimasertib, Irinotecan and SN-38|The AUC(0-inf) of pimasertib and irinotecan was estimated by determining the total area under the concentration time curve extrapolated to infinity.|Day 1 and Day 8 for pimasertib; Day 1 and Day 15 for Irinotecan and SN-38|"The PK analysis population set included all subjects who had an evaluable plasma concentration-time profile on any of the PK sampling days (Day 1 or 8 or 15). Here, N (total number of subjects analyzed) signifies number of evaluable subjects for this outcome measure. n signifies number of subjects evaluable per each category, respectively."||ng/mL*hour||Full Range|Median
814868|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to the Time of Last Observation (AUC0-t) of Pimasertib, Irinotecan and SN-38|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to the last sampling time (AUC0-t) at which the concentration is at or above the lower limit of quantification.|Day 1 and Day 8 for pimasertib; Day 1 and Day 15 for Irinotecan and SN-38|"The pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluation set included subjects who had an evaluable plasma concentration-time profile on any of the PK sampling days (Day 1 or 8 or 15). n signifies number of subjects evaluable in each category, respectively."||(nanogram/milliliter)*hour([ng/mL]*hour)||Full Range|Median
814869|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Time to Reach Maximum Observed Concentration (Tmax) of Pimasertib, Irinotecan and SN-38||Day 1 and Day 8 for pimasertib; Day 1 and Day 15 for Irinotecan and SN-38|"The pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluation set included subjects who had an evaluable plasma concentration-time profile on any of the PK sampling days (Day 1 or 8 or 15). n signifies number of subjects evaluable in each category, respectively."||hour||Full Range|Median
814870|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Pimasertib, Irinotecan and SN-38||Day 1 and Day 8 for pimasertib; Day 1 and Day 15 for Irinotecan and SN-38|"The pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluation set included subjects who had an evaluable plasma concentration-time profile on any of the PK sampling days (Day 1 or 8 or 15). n signifies number of subjects evaluable in each category, respectively."||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Full Range|Median
814871|NCT01085331|Secondary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Number of Subjects With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs, TEAEs Leading to Discontinuation and TEAEs Leading to Death|An AE is defined as any new untoward medical occurrences/worsening of pre-existing medical condition without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death; life threatening; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; congenital anomaly/birth defect. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.|From the first dose of study drug administration up to 28 days after the last dose of study drug administration|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one (non-zero) administration of the trial medication (any of the 3 FOLFIRI drugs and pimasertib).||Subjects|||Number
814872|NCT01085331|Primary|Part 2 or Phase 2 Randomised Part: Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as time (in months) from the date of randomization to the first documentation of disease progression as reported and documented by the Investigator (i.e. radiological progression per RECIST v1.0) or death for any cause.|From randomization up to first documented disease progression maximum up to 2 years|Part 2 or Phase 2 Randomized Part of the trial was not conducted. Hence, PFS was not evaluated for this study.|||||
814873|NCT01085331|Primary|Part 1 or Safety Run-in Part: Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)|MTD was defined as the dose level, at which the treatment-related dose limiting toxicity (DLT) occurred in >1 of 3 subjects or in >1 of 6 subjects. DLT was defined using the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v3.0. Any Grade >=3 non-hematological toxicity except for Grade 4 asymptomatic increases in liver function tests (LFTs) reversible within 7 days in subjects with liver involvement, Grade 3 asymptomatic increases in LFTs reversible within 7 days in subjects without liver involvement, Grade 3 vomiting controlled with adequate and optimal therapy and prophylaxis, and Grade 3 diarrhea controlled with adequate and optimal anti-diarrhea therapy; any Grade 4 neutropenia lasing >5 days/ febrile neutropenia lasting >1 day; any Grade 4 thrombocytopenia/Grade 3 with bleeding; any treatment delay >2 weeks due to trial treatment-related adverse effects at any dose level and judged to be possibly or probably related to the trial treatment.|Baseline up to Day 28 (Part 1)|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one (non-zero) administration of the trial medication (any of the 3 FOLFIRI drugs and pimasertib).||mg|||Number
814874|NCT01085357|Secondary|Proportion of Eyes With Postoperative IOP ≥ 6 and ≤ 18 mmHg, as Measured by Goldmann Tonometry, at the Hypotensive Medication-free 24-month Postoperative Examination Using Non-responder Imputation for Missing Data|IOP was assessed using Goldmann applanation tonometry and reported in mmHg. One eye (study eye) contributed to the analysis. Proportion of eyes is reported as a percentage. Non-responders include subject eyes for which, prior to the relevant outcome time point: 1) Use of ocular hypotensive medication was not terminated; 2) IOP-affecting secondary surgical procedure was performed; 3) CyPass was explanted; or 4) CyPass was repositioned. IOP-affecting secondary surgical procedures include: Iridotomy, iridectomy, trabeculectomy, glaucoma shunt implantation, argon laser trabeculoplasty, selective laser trabeculoplasty, or other surgery that would affect IOP. Subject eyes for which CyPass implantation was attempted but not completed were treated as non-responders.|Month 24 postoperative|ITT||percentage of eyes|Eyes||Number
814958|NCT01092663|Primary|Postprandial Rate of Total Glucose Disposal Area Under the Curve (AUC)|"Change from baseline in postprandial rate of total glucose disposal (AUC) after 12 weeks of colesevelam alone or colesevelam plus sitagliptin treatments
AUC was calculated by the trapezoid method using all results measured between 0 and 300 min during the meal tolerance test."|baseline and 12 weeks|||umol per kg per min||Standard Deviation|Mean
816926|NCT01116882|Secondary|Major Vascular Complications||30 days|||participants|||Number
814875|NCT01085357|Secondary|Mean Change in IOP Between Baseline and Hypotensive Medication-free 24-month Postoperative Examination Using Baseline Value Imputation for Missing Data|IOP was assessed using Goldmann applanation tonometry and reported in mmHg. A negative value indicates an improvement. One eye (study eye) contributed to the analysis. Proportion of eyes is reported as a percentage. Baseline IOP was used for subject eyes for which, prior to the relevant outcome time point: 1) Use of ocular hypotensive medication was not terminated; 2) IOP-affecting secondary surgical procedure was performed; 3) CyPass was explanted; or 4) CyPass was repositioned. IOP-affecting secondary surgical procedures include: Iridotomy, iridectomy, trabeculectomy, glaucoma shunt implantation, argon laser trabeculoplasty, selective laser trabeculoplasty, or other surgery that would affect IOP. Subject eyes for which CyPass implantation was attempted but not completed were treated as non-responders.|Baseline; Month 24 postoperative|ITT||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
814876|NCT01085357|Primary|Proportion of Eyes With ≥ 20% Decrease in Intraocular Pressure (IOP) From Baseline to the Hypotensive Medication-free 24-month Postoperative Examination Using Non-responder Imputation for Missing Data|IOP (fluid pressure inside the eye) was assessed using Goldmann applanation tonometry and reported in millimeters mercury (mmHg). A reduction in IOP from baseline indicates an improvement. One eye (study eye) contributed to the analysis. Proportion of eyes is reported as a percentage. Non-responders include subject eyes for which, prior to the relevant outcome time point: 1) Use of ocular hypotensive medication was not terminated; 2) IOP-affecting secondary surgical procedure was performed; 3) CyPass was explanted; or 4) CyPass was repositioned. IOP-affecting secondary surgical procedures include: Iridotomy, iridectomy, trabeculectomy, glaucoma shunt implantation, argon laser trabeculoplasty, selective laser trabeculoplasty, or other surgery that would affect IOP. Subject eyes for which CyPass implantation was attempted but not completed were treated as non-responders.|Baseline; Month 24 postoperative|Intent-to-treat (ITT)||percentage of eyes|Eyes||Number
814877|NCT01085500|Secondary|Number of Hernia Repair Subjects With Post-Operative Urinary Retention|Urinary retention is the inability to empty the bladder. This is an educational study for surgeons. The participants in the study are surgeons, and the participant flow, baseline characteristics and first two outcome measures are for the surgeons. During the part of the study reported for the third outcome measure, the first surgical procedure (TEP) after randomization, each surgeon had one subject. Therefore, this outcome measure is for the hernia patients or subjects.|at first TEP procedure post-randomization, subjects were followed for the duration of hospital stay, an average of 1 night|||Subjects|||Number
814878|NCT01085500|Secondary|Operative Performance|The trained observer and the staff supervising surgeon graded operative performance independently using a global rating scale, Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) immediately after each case, (1 rating per case if bilateral repair). The GOALS tool has been shown to be a valid and reliable tool to measure generic laparoscopic skills in the simulated environment and in the operating room, with good agreement between live and video-review ratings. The scores range from 6 to 30, a higher score indicates greater operative performance.|at first TEP procedure post-randomization; due to surgical scheduling variability this can be anytime from 1 to 2 days following randomization to a week or two|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814879|NCT01085500|Primary|Participation-Corrected Operative Time|Operative time was recorded with a standard stopwatch, began at the start of the operative case and ended when procedure was terminated. We realized that the operative time for poorly performing trainees could be faster than the time for more skilled trainees because the supervising surgeon would perform a greater proportion of the procedure. We calculated participation-corrected time as raw total time + the time of staff involvement: time_corrected = time_raw + (1-participation) x time_raw.|at first TEP procedure post-randomization; Due to surgical scheduling variability this can be anytime from 1 to 2 days following randomization to a week or two|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
814880|NCT01085513|Secondary|CE-EIA Scores for Dysmotility||within 7 days||||||
814881|NCT01085513|Secondary|Clinical Symptoms||within 7 days||||||
814882|NCT01085513|Secondary|Features Detected by CE-EIA: Contractile Patterns; Non Contractile Patterns - Wall and Tunnel Patterns; Luminal Content - Turbid Pattern; Endoluminal Motion; Capsule Displacement.||within 7 days||||||
814883|NCT01085513|Primary|Test Characteristics (i.e., Sensitivity, Specificity, NPV, PPV) of CE-EIA, as Compared to SB Manometry Which Will be Considered as an Imperfect Gold standard14.||within 7 days|The study was terminated without achieving the needed sample size due to very low recruitment rate. therefore, no statistical analysis has been performed. T|||||
814884|NCT01085539|Primary|Detection of Oxygen Alarms That Resulted in Clinicians Changing the Care of the Infant.|Sat Secs is an oxygen alarm with 5 settings:0,10,25,50,and 100. At each setting,using the units of seconds,it filters nusiance alarms & identifies important alarms that result in the clinicians changing the care of the infant.|4 hours|All patients with complete data||percentage of interventions|||Number
814885|NCT01085591|Primary|Number of Participants With a Clinical Response Outcome of Failure or Unable to Evaluate at the End of Study Treatment|The number of participants with investigator assessed clinical response of failure or unable to evaluate is presented. Clinical response was determined by the participant’s condition on the second day following the last dose of study medication, unless considered a treatment failure. Treatment failures were assessed whenever they occurred and were carried forward to the end-of-treatment (EOT). The information to assess clinical response was collected at any time up to and including Day 19.|Baseline (Day 0) through Study Day 19|All participants who received any amount of study drug and had a confirmed diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI).||participants|||Number
814886|NCT01085591|Secondary|Median Time to Resolution of Diarrhea|The median time to resolution of diarrhea is presented for evaluable participants in each treatment group. The time in days from the start of treatment (time of first dose of study drug) to resolution (time of the last UBM on the day before the first of 2 consecutive days of < 4 UBMs and sustained through the second day following the last dose of study drug).|Baseline (Day 0) through Study Day 12|All participants who received any amount of study drug, had a confirmed diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), and who achieved resolution of their diarrhea.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
814959|NCT01092663|Primary|Postprandial Endogenous Glucose Production|"Change from baseline in postprandial endogenous glucose production after 12 weeks of colesevelam alone or colesevelam plus sitagliptin treatments
Mean value was calculated using all results measured between 10 and 300 min post meal."|baseline and 12 weeks|||umol per kg per min||Standard Deviation|Mean
814887|NCT01085591|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Recurrence of Clostridium Difficile Infection at the End of Study Treatment With and Without Infection Caused by C. Difficile BI/NAP1/027 Strain at Baseline|The number of participants with and without infection caused by C. difficile BI/NAP1/027 strain as determined at baseline with a recurrence of CDI is presented along with the number of participants without a recurrence and who were unable to be evaluated. Participants with a favorable outcome at the EOT (cure) were evaluated for recurrence of CDI. If diarrheal symptoms returned, participants were asked to indicate the number of UBM they had and have an additional C. difficile toxin test. The information to assess recurrence in participants who were deemed a cure at EOT was collected at any time during the 4-week FUP. Strain at Baseline=SAB.|Study Day 10 up to Study Day 40|All participants who received any amount of study drug and had a confirmed diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI).||participants|||Number
814888|NCT01085591|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Clinical Response Outcome at the End of Study Treatment With and Without Infection Caused by C. Difficile BI/NAP1/027 Strain at Baseline|The number of participants with investigator assessed clinical response of cure, failure or unable to evaluate is presented and shown separately for participants with and without infection caused by C. difficile BI/NAP1/027 strain as determined at baseline. Clinical response was determined by the participant’s condition on the second day following the last dose of study medication, unless considered a treatment failure. Treatment failures were assessed whenever they occurred and were carried forward to the EOT. The information to assess clinical response for infection caused by C. difficile BI/NAP1/027 strain at Baseline was collected at any time up to and including Day 12. Strain at Baseline=SAB|Baseline (Day 0) through Study Day 12|All participants who received any amount of study drug and had a confirmed diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI).||participants|||Number
814889|NCT01085591|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Recurrence of Clostridium Difficile Infection Through the 4-week Follow-up Period|The number of participants with a recurrence of CDI is presented along with the number of participants without a recurrence and who were unable to be evaluated. Participants with a favorable outcome at the EOT (cure) were evaluated for recurrence of CDI. Only subjects deemed a cure at EOT were assessed for recurrence. This is the denominator used for all percentages. If diarrheal symptoms returned, participants were asked to indicate the number of unformed bowel movements (UBM) they had and have an additional C. difficile toxin test. The information to assess recurrence in participants who were deemed a cure at EOT was collected at any time during the 4-week Follow-up Period (FUP).|Study Day 10 up to Study Day 40|All participants who received any amount of study drug and had a confirmed diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI).||Participants|||Number
814890|NCT01085591|Primary|Number of Participants With a Clinical Response Outcome of Clostridium Difficile Infection Cure at the End of Study Treatment|The number of participants with an Investigator-assessed clinical response of cure is presented. The information to assess clinical response was collected at any time up to and including Day 19.|Baseline (Day 0) through Study Day 19|All participants who received any amount of study drug and had a confirmed diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI).||participants|||Number
814891|NCT01085643|Secondary|A Change in Length of Spread of Retrograde Contractions After Lubiprostone|Pressure waves are considered to represent contractions if the rise in intraluminal pressure is >10mmHg above the baseline. They are considered propagating if they are recorded in more than one channel and occur within a time frame that allowed a minimal velocity of 0.7cm/sec and maximum velocity of 4cm/sec. All contractions, their direction (antegrade, stationary or retrograde) and the length of spread will be determined for each sequence at baseline (after taking Lubiprostone)and within the following 3 hours.|baseline and within the following 3 hours|Considering the fact that this is a pilot study, per protocol a total of 20 subjects should have been recruited; however, due to the limited time and complexity of the study, only 4 subjects completed the study. Due to that fact an analysis of the outcome measures was not submitted, since the results will not provide a meaningful data.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814892|NCT01085643|Secondary|A Change in Length of Spread of Long Distance Propagating Contractions After Lubiprostone|Pressure waves are considered to represent contractions if the rise in intraluminal pressure is >10mmHg above the baseline. They are considered propagating if they are recorded in more than one channel and occur within a time frame that allowed a minimal velocity of 0.7cm/sec and maximum velocity of 4cm/sec. All contractions, their direction (antegrade, stationary or retrograde) and the length of spread will be determined for each sequence at baseline (after taking Lubiprostone)and within the following 3 hours.|baseline and within the following 3 hours|Considering the fact that this is a pilot study, per protocol a total of 20 subjects should have been recruited; however, due to the limited time and complexity of the study, only 4 subjects completed the study. Due to that fact an analysis of the outcome measures was not submitted, since the results will not provide a meaningful data.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814893|NCT01085643|Primary|A Change in Length of Spread of Antegrade Contractions After Lubiprostone|Pressure waves are considered to represent contractions if the rise in intraluminal pressure is >10mmHg above the baseline. They are considered propagating if they are recorded in more than one channel and occur within a time frame that allowed a minimal velocity of 0.7cm/sec and maximum velocity of 4cm/sec. All contractions, their direction (antegrade, stationary or retrograde) and the length of spread will be determined for each sequence at baseline (after taking Placebo)and within the following 3 hours.|baseline and within the following 3 hours|Considering the fact that this is a pilot study, per protocol a total of 20 subjects should have been recruited; however, due to the limited time and complexity of the study, only 4 subjects completed the study. Due to that fact an analysis of the outcome measures was not submitted, since the results will not provide a meaningful data.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814894|NCT01085643|Secondary|A Change in Length of Spread of Retrograde Contractions After Placebo|Pressure waves are considered to represent contractions if the rise in intraluminal pressure is >10mmHg above the baseline. They are considered propagating if they are recorded in more than one channel and occur within a time frame that allowed a minimal velocity of 0.7cm/sec and maximum velocity of 4cm/sec. All contractions, their direction (antegrade, stationary or retrograde) and the length of spread will be determined for each sequence at baseline (after taking Placebo)and within the following 3 hours.|baseline and within the following 3 hours|Considering the fact that this is a pilot study, per protocol a total of 20 subjects should have been recruited; however, due to the limited time and complexity of the study, only 4 subjects completed the study. Due to that fact an analysis of the outcome measures was not submitted, since the results will not provide a meaningful data.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814895|NCT01085643|Primary|A Change in Length of Spread of Antegrade Contractions After Placebo.|Pressure waves are considered to represent contractions if the rise in intraluminal pressure is >10mmHg above the baseline. They are considered propagating if they are recorded in more than one channel and occur within a time frame that allowed a minimal velocity of 0.7cm/sec and maximum velocity of 4cm/sec. All contractions, their direction (antegrade, stationary or retrograde) and the length of spread will be determined for each sequence at baseline (after taking Placebo)and within the following 3 hours.|baseline and within the following 3 hours|Considering the fact that this is a pilot study, per protocol a total of 20 subjects should have been recruited; however, due to the limited time and complexity of the study, only 4 subjects completed the study. Due to that fact an analysis of the outcome measures was not submitted, since the results will not provide a meaningful data.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814896|NCT01085643|Secondary|A Change in Length of Spread of Long Distance Propagating Contractions After Placebo.|Pressure waves are considered to represent contractions if the rise in intraluminal pressure is >10mmHg above the baseline. They are considered propagating if they are recorded in more than one channel and occur within a time frame that allowed a minimal velocity of 0.7cm/sec and maximum velocity of 4cm/sec. All contractions, their direction (antegrade, stationary or retrograde) and the length of spread will be determined for each sequence at baseline (after taking Placebo)and within the following 3 hours.|baseline and within the following 3 hours|Considering the fact that this is a pilot study, per protocol a total of 20 subjects should have been recruited; however, due to the limited time and complexity of the study, only 4 subjects completed the study. Due to that fact an analysis of the outcome measures was not submitted, since the results will not provide a meaningful data.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
814897|NCT01085682|Primary|Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus|Incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus|one year follow up|||participants|||Number
814898|NCT01085734|Secondary|Change in Macular Thickness and Macular Volume|OCT central subfield thickness measured in microns|6 months|||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
814899|NCT01085734|Secondary|Number of Injections Needed|number of Avastin and Ozurdex injections needed|baseline to 6 months|||injections|||Number
814900|NCT01085734|Primary|Change From Baseline Visual Acuity at 6 Months|Visual Acuity was measured with ETDRS visual acuity test. Unit of measure is based on the ETDRS letter score scale, 0-97, where 0 = worst and 97 = best.|6 months|||ETDRS score||Standard Deviation|Mean
814901|NCT01085760|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-Reactive Protein Following 12 Weeks of Treatment||baseline, 12 weeks|Per protocol analysis done||mg/L||Full Range|Median
814902|NCT01085760|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mayo PSC Risk Score Following 12 Weeks of Treatment|The Mayo PSC risk score was calculated for each patient at baseline and at 12 weeks, where Risk = 0.03 (age [years]) + 0.54 Ln (total bilirubin [mg/dL]) + 0.54 Ln (AST [IU/L]) + 1.24 (variceal bleeding) – 0.84 (albumin [g/dL]). There is no range, minimum, or maximum value but greater values indicate worse disease.|baseline, 12 weeks|Per protocol analysis||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
814903|NCT01085760|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Bilirubin Following 12 Weeks Treatment||baseline, 12 weeks|Per protocol analysis done||mg/dl||Full Range|Median
814904|NCT01085760|Primary|Change From Baseline in Alkaline Phosphatase Following 12 Weeks of Treatment||baseline, 12 weeks|The number of participants was based on a per protocol analysis.||U/L||Full Range|Median
814905|NCT01085786|Secondary|Compliance Rate|Good compliance is defined as taking equal or more than 90% of eradication medicines|Dec 2010||||||
814906|NCT01085786|Secondary|Adverse Events|by standardized questionnaire|Dec 2010||||||
814907|NCT01085786|Primary|Number of Participants in Which H. Pylori Was Eradicated|evaluate eradication outcome by endoscopy with urease test or urea breath test|Dec 2010|||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814908|NCT01085825|Primary|Accurate Confirmation of Completed Abortion|Accurate confirmation of completed abortion, as determined by urine pregnancy test at following, appropriately falling serum hCG levels, or patient report of returned menses|2 weeks - 6 months|||participants|||Number
814909|NCT01085903|Secondary|Time to Swallow Puree Food|This is a behavioral measure of swallowing - the time it takes for pureed food to transition across a part of the throat. The difference score is calculated as CPS - placebo and as modafinil - placebo (for stroke subjects only).|baseline and after three days of intervention|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814910|NCT01085903|Secondary|Power Function Exponent for Oral Bolus Estimation|This is a behavioral measure of sensation in the oral cavity. The power function exponent is equal to the slope of a regression equation relating bolus size to a person's estimate of that size. An exponent below one implies an underestimate of bolus size. The difference score is calculated as CPS - baseline and as modafinil - placebo (stroke subjects only).|baseline and after three days of intervention|||exponent||Standard Deviation|Mean
814911|NCT01085903|Secondary|PVT Fastest 10 Percent of Reaction Times|This is a behavioral measure of arousal - the fastest 10 percent of all cued reaction time trials. The difference score is calculated as CPS - baseline and as modafinil - placebo (stroke subjects only).|baseline and after three days of intervention|||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814912|NCT01085903|Primary|P50 Percent Habituation Score|This is an electrophysiological measure of arousal - a percent change in the P50 evoked response potential amplitudes with a 250 ms inter stimulus interval. The difference score is calculated as CPS - baseline and as modafinil - placebo (stroke subjects only).|baseline and after three days of intervention|||percentage of change in amplitude||Standard Deviation|Mean
814913|NCT01085968|Secondary|Symbol Digit Modality Test (SDMT)|"Symbol Digit Modality Test (SDMT): Participants are given a key of numbers (1-9) corresponding to symbols for reference.
Task: Participants are given a page of symbols and are instructed to say aloud the number corresponding to each symbol on the page.
This task is timed for completion and the score is reported as the number of symbol to number matching correct in 90 seconds."|time of enrollment and 2 months following enrollment (before and after training)|||Number of Correct Matches in 90 seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814914|NCT01085968|Secondary|Functional Dexterity Test (FDT)|"Functional Dexterity test (FDT): a motor dexterity measurement for hands. Task: Pick up and flip wooden pegs on a 4x4 pegboard in a zig-zag pattern; timed. Task is performed 2 times per hand Modified Task: Interchange 2 columns of of pegs (4 pegs each side) simultaneously. No flipping is required.
5 second penalty to time score for 1.) using the pegboard to help with flipping and 2.) supinating of the hand; per occurrence. 10 second penalty to time score for dropping a peg, per occurrence."|time of enrollment and 2 months following enrollment (before and after training)|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814916|NCT01085968|Secondary|Neuropsychological Measures of Cognitive Function, Including Reaction Time and Time to Completion|"Modified Emory Functional Ambulatory Profile (mEFAP); mobility test Task 1: 5 meter walk on hard surface; timed. Task 2: 5 meter walk on carpeted surface, timed. Task 3: Timed up and go; rise from chair, walk 3 meters, walk back, sit down in chair, timed.
Task 4: Obstacle course, similar to the Timed up and go, with 2 obstacles to be stepped over while walking forward and coming back; timed.
Task 5: Ascend and descend 5 steps of stairs; timed."|time of enrollment and 2 months following enrollment (before and after training)|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814917|NCT01085968|Primary|Reaction Time and Variability for Movement Task|Before and after computer training outcome measures: left, right, bimanual external cue reaction time; left, right, bimanual external cue error; left, right, bimanual internally generated reaction time; left, right, bimanual internally generated error for four-digit trials.|time of enrollment and 2 months following enrollment (before and after training)|PD Subjects: total number of subjects: 29, 8 withdrew from study, 2 had incomplete data. CO Subjects: total number of subjects: 25, 4 withdrew from study||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
814918|NCT01086033|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Missed at Least One Dose of Humira|Compliance to study treatment was measured by the percentage of participants who missed at least one dose of Humira during each time interval between study visits.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36|"Safety population; n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
814919|NCT01086033|Primary|Number of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 Response|"American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [HAQ-DI]);
Acute phase reactant value (C-reactive protein [CRP])."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36|"Safety population; the analysis was performed on the basis of non-missing information and no imputation methods were used. n indicates the number of patients for whom ACR70 could be calculated at each time point."||participants|||Number
814920|NCT01086033|Primary|Number of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response|"American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [HAQ-DI]);
Acute phase reactant value (C-reactive protein [CRP])."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36|"Safety population; the analysis was performed on the basis of non-missing information and no imputation methods were used. n indicates the number of patients for whom ACR50 could be calculated at each time point."||participants|||Number
814921|NCT01086033|Primary|Number of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response|"American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [HAQ-DI]);
Acute phase reactant value (C-reactive protein [CRP])."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36|"Safety population; the analysis was performed on the basis of non-missing information and no imputation methods were used. n indicates the number of patients for whom ACR20 could be calculated at each time point."||participants|||Number
814922|NCT01086033|Primary|European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response|"A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS28 score. The DAS28 score ranges from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more disease activity.
A Good EULAR Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of > 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of ≤ 3.2.
A Moderate EULAR Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2 from Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of ≤ 5.1, or
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of > 1.2 from Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of > 3.2.
No Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of ≤ to 0.6, or
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 of > 5.1."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36|Safety population;||participants|||Number
814923|NCT01086033|Primary|Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28 Over Time|The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, C reactive protein, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10. A DAS28 score >5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score <3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score <2.6 indicates clinical remission.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36|"Safety population; n indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
814924|NCT01086033|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment.
If an adverse event meets any of the following criteria, it is considered a serious adverse event (SAE): Results in death, is life-threatening, results in hospitalization or the prolongation of hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly or a persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is an event that results in a condition that substantially interferes with the activities of daily living of the participant, is an important medical event requiring medical or surgical intervention to prevent a serious outcome, spontaneous abortion or miscarriage experienced by the participant, or an elective abortion performed on the participant."|3 years|The safety population, including all patients that received at least one dose of the study drug.||participants|||Number
814927|NCT01086215|Primary|Change in Degree of Occlusion From Baseline to Final Angiogram/Venogram.|"From the Index Procedure's Baseline (pre-endovascular treatment) and Final (post-endovascular treatment) angiograms/venograms, each vessel was assigned a value by the treating physician.
complete occlusion (>90% occlusion);
substantial occlusion (50-90% occlusion OR <50% occlusion and >3cm in length);
partial occlusion (<50% occlusion AND <3cm in length)
patent (without visable thrombus or occlusion) The levels of change (improvement) were calculated by subtracting the baseline assigned angiographic/venographic value from the final value."|Day 1|Intention to Treat (ITT)||Units on a Scale||Standard Error|Mean
814928|NCT01092416|Primary|Primary Efficacy Endpoint: Procedural Success|Procedural success was defined as success in facilitating stent delivery with a residual stenosis of <50% and without the occurrence of an in-hospital MACE in de novo, severely calcified coronary lesions.|Participants were followed from baseline procedure through the duration of hospital stay, an average of 33.6 hours.|||Percentage of procedures||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814929|NCT01092416|Secondary|12-Month Freedom From Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE)|The safety of the OAS was measured for the secondary safety endpoint consisting of a composite of freedom from MACE through 12 months of follow-up.|12 months|A Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to determine the percent probability that a study participant is free from major adverse cardiac events at 12 months.||Percent probability of Freedom from MACE||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814930|NCT01092416|Secondary|Severe Angiographic Complications|Severe angiographic complications were defined as severe dissection (Type C to F), perforation, abrupt closure, and persistent slow flow or persistent no reflow.|Baseline procedure, with a mean total procedure time of 52.5 minutes.|||Participants|||Number
814931|NCT01092416|Secondary|Angiographic Success|Angiographic success was defined as success in facilitating stent delivery with <50% residual stenosis and without severe angiographic complications.|Baseline procedure, with a mean total procedure time of 52.5 minutes.|||Percentage of procedures|||Number
814932|NCT01092416|Primary|Primary Safety Endpoint: 30-Day Freedom From Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE)|"OAS safety was measured by a composite of MACE at 30-days post procedure. MACE is composed of:
Cardiac death.
MI - defined as a CK-MB level > 3 times the upper limit of lab normal (ULN) value with or without new pathologic Q wave.
TVR - defined as revascularization at the target vessel (inclusive of the target lesion) after the completion of the index procedure."|30 days|A Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to determine the percent probability that a study participant is free from major adverse cardiac events at 30 days.||Percent probability of Freedom from MACE||95% Confidence Interval|Number
814933|NCT01092442|Primary|Safety Assessment|"Evaluation of the following adverse events
Mortality (all cause and valve-related)
Reoperation/reintervention
Explant
Endocarditis
Structural valve deterioration (defined as >40 mmHg peak pulmonary gradient or >30 mmHg mean pulmonary gradient or moderately severe to severe pulmonary insufficiency)
Thrombosis
Thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism)
Non-structural dysfunction
Perivalvular leak
Bleeding
Hemolysis
Calcification"|Since Implant of the Valve to a Maximum of 13.0 years|||percentage of patients|||Number
814934|NCT01092442|Primary|Hemodynamic Performance|Pulmonary Insufficiency Grade|Most Recent Follow-up (average of 4 to 6 years post implant)|The number of participants was limited to those participants with a hemodynamic measurement provided. Therefore, the total number in each group is less than the total participants in each group.||participants|||Number
814935|NCT01092442|Primary|Hemodynamic Performance|Peak Pulmonary Gradient Mean Pulmonary Gradient|Most Recent follow-up (average of 3-6 years post implant)|The number of participants was limited to those participants with a hemodynamic measurement provided. Therefore, the total number in each group is less than the total participants in each group.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
814936|NCT01092507|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting a Solicited Injection Site or Systemic Reaction Following Vaccination With One Dose of Either Japanese Encephalitis Chimeric Virus Vaccine (JE-CV) or Japanese Encephalitis Live Vaccine (SA14-14-2 Vaccine) (CD.JEVAX®)|"Solicited Injection Site Reactions: Tenderness, Erythema, Swelling. Solicited Systemic Reactions: Fever (Temperature), Vomiting, Crying Abnormal, Drowsiness, Appetite Loss, Irritability.
Grade 3 Reactions defined as: Tenderness - crying when injected limb was moved, or movement of the injected limb was reduced; Erythema and Swelling - ≥ 5 cm; Fever - temperature > 39.5ºC; Vomiting - ≥ 6 episodes per 24 hours or requiring parenteral hydration; Crying Abnormal - > 3 hours; Drowsiness - Sleeping most of the time or difficult to wake up; Appetite loss - refused ≥ 3 feeds or refused most feeds; and Irritability - inconsolable."|Day 0 through Day 14 post-vaccination|Solicited injection site and systemic reactions were assessed in all participants who received a study vaccination and for whom safety data were available, according to the vaccine actually received (Safety Population).||Participants|||Number
814937|NCT01092507|Secondary|Summary of Geometric Mean Titers of Vaccine Antibodies Before and Following One Dose of Vaccination With Either Japanese Encephalitis Chimeric Virus Vaccine (JE-CV) or Japanese Encephalitis Live Vaccine (SA14-14-2; CD.JEVAX®)|Immunogenicity was assessed by JE-CV virus 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50) or SA14-14-2 virus PRNT50.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and up to 12 months post-vaccination|Japanese encephalitis antibody titers were assessed in all participants that received a vaccine and with available immunogenicity data (Full Analysis Set)||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814938|NCT01092507|Secondary|Summary of Participants With Japanese Encephalitis Seroprotection After Vaccination With One Dose of Either Japanese Encephalitis Chimeric Virus Vaccine (JE-CV) or Japanese Encephalitis Live Vaccine (SA14-14-2, CD.JEVAX®)|"Immunogenicity was assessed by JE-CV virus 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50) or SA14-14-2 virus PRNT50.
Japanese encephalitis seroprotection defined as participant with antibody titer ≥ 1:10 at baseline (D0) and on Day 28, Month 6, and Month 12."|Day 28 up to 12 months post-vaccination|Japanese encephalitis antibody titers were assessed in all vaccinated participants with available immunogenicity data (Full Analysis Set)||Participants|||Number
814939|NCT01092507|Secondary|Summary of Geometric Mean Titers of Vaccine Antibodies Before and Following One Dose of Vaccination With Either Japanese Encephalitis Chimeric Virus Vaccine (JE-CV) or Japanese Encephalitis Live Vaccine (SA14-14-2; CD.JEVAX®)|Immunogenicity was assessed by JE-CV virus 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50) or SA14-14-2 virus PRNT50.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Antibody titers were assessed in all participants with any immunogenicity data who did not have any protocol violations that might have interfered with primary criteria evaluation (Per-Protocol Population)||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
814940|NCT01092507|Secondary|Number of Participants With Seroconversion After Vaccination With Either Japanese Encephalitis Chimeric Virus Vaccine (JE-CV) or Japanese Encephalitis Live Vaccine (SA14-14-2) (CD.JEVAX®)|"Immunogenicity was assessed by JE-CV virus 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50) or SA14-14-2 virus PRNT50.
Seroconversion was defined as a pre-vaccination titer < 10 1/dil and post vaccination titer ≥ 10 1/dil, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥ 10 and a 4-fold increase from pre- to post-vaccination."|Day 28 post-vaccination|Antibody titers were assessed in all participants with any immunogenicity data who did not have any protocol violations that might have interfered with primary criteria evaluation (Per-Protocol Population)||Participants|||Number
814941|NCT01092507|Secondary|Number of Participants With Japanese Encephalitis Seroprotection 28 Days After Vaccination With One Dose of Either Japanese Encephalitis Chimeric Virus Vaccine (JE-CV) or Japanese Encephalitis Live Vaccine (SA14-14-2, CD.JEVAX®)|"Immunogenicity was assessed by JE-CV virus 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50) or SA14-14-2 virus PRNT50.
Japanese encephalitis seroprotection defined as participant with antibody titer ≥ 1:10 at baseline (D0) and on Day 28, Month 6, and Month 12."|Day 28 post-vaccination|Japanese encephalitis antibody titers were assessed in all participants with any immunogenicity data who did not have any protocol violations that might have interfered with primary criteria evaluation (Per-Protocol Population)||Participants|||Number
814942|NCT01092507|Primary|Number of Participants With Japanese Encephalitis Seroconversion After Vaccination With One Dose of Either Japanese Encephalitis Chimeric Vaccine (JE-CV) or Japanese Encephalitis Live Vaccine (SA14-14-2) (CD.JEVAX®)|"Immunogenicity was assessed by the JE-CV virus and the SA14-14-2 virus 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50).
Japanese Encephalitis seroconversion was defined as a pre-vaccination titer <10 1/dil and post-vaccination titer ≥ 10 1/dil; or a pre-vaccination titer ≥ 10 1/dil and a 4-fold increase from pre- to post-vaccination."|Day 0 through Day 28 after vaccination|Japanese encephalitis antibody titers were assessed in all participants with immunogenicity data and who did not have any protocol violations that might have interfered with primary criteria evaluation (Per-Protocol Population)||Participants|||Number
814943|NCT01092546|Secondary|"Standard Uptake Value Ratio (SUVR) at the Site of the Biopsy Based on the Pons as the Reference Region."|The level of association between SUVR and the quantitative estimates (area percents) of amyloid levels for the following regions: Biopsy site and Contralateral and Composite Regions.|Post flutemetamol administration|"The correlation coefficient listed in the table is between SUVR-Pons and the percent area of Amyloid.
Stain IHC 4G8 was used as the Standard of Truth. Standard Uptake Value Ratio (SUVR) at the site of the biopsy was based on the Pons as the reference region."||Correlation Coefficient of the site|||Number
814944|NCT01092546|Primary|"Standard Uptake Value Ratio (SUVR) at the Site of the Biopsy Based on the Cerebellum (CER) as the Reference Region."|The level of association between the quantitative estimates of brain uptake of [18F]flutemetamol and the quantitative immunohistochemical estimates of amyloid levels in biopsy samples obtained during shunt placement in patients who have Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus (NPH). The quantitative estimates of brain uptake of [18F]flutemetamol (SUVR) will be made from the analysis of PET images.|Post flutemetamol Injection|"The correlation coefficient listed in the table is between SUVR-CER and the percent area of Amyloid.
Stain IHC 4G8 was used as the Standard of Truth. Standard Uptake Value Ratio (SUVR) at the site of the biopsy was based on the cerebullum (CER) as the reference region."||Correlation Coefficient of the Site|||Number
814945|NCT01092559|Primary|Adequacy of Device Design and Suitability of the Instructions for Use by the Clinician Using a Device Performance Evaluation||through Treatment Period|||participants|||Number
814946|NCT01092559|Primary|Incidence and Severity of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events; Unanticipated Adverse Device Effects and Changes From Baseline to End-of-study in Clinical Lab Parameters and Vital Signs.|"Adverse Event Severity [through Day 30 Follow-Up Period]
Unanticipated Device Effects: any system malfunction, damage or NO2 threshold monitor alarms [through discharge from Treatment Period]
Laboratory Tests: Hematology (CBC with differential), Chemistry (glucose, BUN, creatinine, sodium, potassium, carbon dioxide, creatinine kinase), Activated Clotting Test or Prothrombin Time, arterial blood gas, and methemoglobin.
[through discharge from Treatment Period]
Vital Signs: pulse, blood pressure, respiratory rate [through discharge from Treatment Period]"|through Day 30 Follow-up Period|||participants|||Number
814947|NCT01092637|Secondary|Number of Survivors With Cerebral Palsy|Number of participants diagnosed with Cerebral Palsy|7 years 3 months|Number of participants with cerebral palsy||participants|||Number
814948|NCT01092637|Secondary|Number of Survivors Without Disability|IQ =>85, no neurological abnormalities, normal hearing, normal vision|7 years 3 months|Number of participants without disability. Two particpants in the cooled group and three in the non-cooled group could not be classified.||participants|||Number
814949|NCT01092637|Primary|Number of Survivors With an IQ > 84|IQ was measured using WPPSI III core tests|7 years 3 months|Children for whom IQ data at age 6-7 yr were available||participants|||Number
814950|NCT01092663|Secondary|Postprandial Glucagon (AUC)|To evaluate the effects of treatment on postprandial glucagon (AUC)|Baseline and 12 weeks|||picograms (pg)/milliter (ml) x min||Standard Deviation|Mean
814951|NCT01092663|Secondary|Postprandial Total GIP (AUC)|To evaluate the effects of treatment on postprandial total GIP (AUC)|Baseline and 12 weeks|||pmol/l x min||Standard Deviation|Mean
814952|NCT01092663|Secondary|Postprandial Active GLP-1 (AUC)|To evaluate the effects of treatments on postprandial active GLP-1 (AUC)|Baseline and 12 weeks|||pmol/l x min||Standard Deviation|Mean
814953|NCT01092663|Secondary|Postprandial C-peptide (AUC)|To evaluate the effect of treatments on postprandial C-peptide (AUC)|Baseline and 12 weeks|||pmol/l x min||Standard Deviation|Mean
814954|NCT01092663|Secondary|Postprandial Insulin (AUC)|To evaluate the effect of treatments on postprandial insulin (AUC)|Baseline and 12 weeks|||pmol/l x min||Standard Deviation|Mean
814955|NCT01092663|Secondary|Fasting Insulin|To evaluate the effect of treatments on fasting insulin concentrations|Baseline and 12 weeks|||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
814956|NCT01092663|Primary|Postprandial Glucose (AUC)|Comparison between baseline and 12 weeks values of postrandial glucose (AUC).|Baseline and 12 weeks|||millimoles (mmol)/l x min||Standard Deviation|Mean
814957|NCT01092663|Primary|Whole-body Glycolytic Disposal of Oral Glucose|Change in baseline in whole-body glycolytic disposal of oral glucose after 12 weeks of colesevelam alone or colesevelam plus glucose treatments|baseline and 12 weeks|||Percent of Load||Standard Deviation|Mean
814971|NCT01092702|Primary|Biochemically Confirmed Abstinence From Smoking|The primary endpoint of this trial is biochemically confirmed 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence at the end of the medication phase (week 12). Self-reported abstinence from smoking (not even a puff) over the last 7-days will be considered biochemically confirmed by an expired air CO of <8 ppm. Subjects who discontinue the study or have a missed visit for any reason will be classified as smoking for that visit.|12 weeks from start of medication|||participants|||Number
814972|NCT01095094|Secondary|Grade 3-5 Toxicity as Assessed by NCI CTC v3.0|Number of participants with adverse events grades 3-5. For a detailed list of adverse events see the adverse event module.|at 6 months from start of treatment|||participants|||Number
814973|NCT01095094|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Number of patients that remained disease free at 6 months from start of treatment.|At 6 months|||participants|||Number
814974|NCT01095250|Secondary|Change in Immunosuppressive Medication Score From Baseline to Week 28|No patients of Study CAIN457C2303 achieved the milestone of the primary endpoint in non-infectious uveitis patients with Behçet’s disease. Study CAIN457C2302 (active uveitis study) was terminated to avoid continuing patients on a study with a low probability of success.Since patients did not reach the endpoint of analysis there can be no meaningful interpretation of data and data will be not provided.|baseline to 28 weeks||||||
814975|NCT01095250|Secondary|Mean Change in Vitreous Haze Grade and Anterior Chamber Cell Grade From Baseline to 28 Weeks|No patients of Study CAIN457C2303 achieved the milestone of the primary endpoint in non-infectious uveitis patients with Behçet’s disease. Study CAIN457C2302 (active uveitis study) was terminated to avoid continuing patients on a study with a low probability of success.Since patients did not reach the endpoint of analysis there can be no meaningful interpretation of data and data will be not provided.|baseline to 28 weeks||||||
814976|NCT01095250|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quality of Life/Patient Reported Outcome Assessments|No patients of Study CAIN457C2303 achieved the milestone of the primary endpoint in non-infectious uveitis patients with Behçet’s disease. Study CAIN457C2302 (active uveitis study) was terminated to avoid continuing patients on a study with a low probability of success.Since patients did not reach the endpoint of analysis there can be no meaningful interpretation of data and data will be not provided.|baseline to 28 weeks||||||
814977|NCT01095250|Secondary|Mean Change in Best Corrected Visual Acuity From Baseline to 28 Weeks|No patients of Study CAIN457C2303 achieved the milestone of the primary endpoint in non-infectious uveitis patients with Behçet’s disease. Study CAIN457C2302 (active uveitis study) was terminated to avoid continuing patients on a study with a low probability of success.Since patients did not reach the endpoint of analysis there can be no meaningful interpretation of data and data will be not provided.|baseline to 28 weeks||||||
814978|NCT01095250|Secondary|Proportion of Responders With no Recurrence of Active Intermediate, Posterior, or Panuveitis in the Study Eye at 28 Weeks|No patients of Study CAIN457C2303 achieved the milestone of the primary endpoint in non-infectious uveitis patients with Behçet’s disease. Study CAIN457C2302 (active uveitis study) was terminated to avoid continuing patients on a study with a low probability of success.Since patients did not reach the endpoint of analysis there can be no meaningful interpretation of data and data will be not provided.|baseline to 28 weeks||||||
814979|NCT01095250|Primary|Mean Change in Vitreous Haze Grade in the Study Eye From Baseline to 28 Weeks or at Time of Rescue, if Earlier.|No patients of Study CAIN457C2303 achieved the milestone of the primary endpoint in non-infectious uveitis patients with Behçet’s disease. Study CAIN457C2302 (active uveitis study) was terminated to avoid continuing patients on a study with a low probability of success.Since patients did not reach the endpoint of analysis there can be no meaningful interpretation of data and data will be not provided.|baseline to 28 weeks|The results of Study CAIN457C2303 did not meet the primary endpoint in non-infectious uveitis patients with Behçet’s disease. Study CAIN457C2302 (active uveitis study) was terminated to avoid continuing patients on a study with a low probability of success.|||||
814980|NCT01095497|Secondary|Number of Subjects With C1INH Antibodies||18 days in each treatment period||||||
814981|NCT01095497|Secondary|C1 Inhibitor (C1INH) and C4 Levels||18 days in each treatment period||||||
814982|NCT01095497|Primary|Incidence and Severity of Adverse Events, Number of Subjects With Local Injection Site Reactions, and Number of Subjects Who Discontinue Study Drug or Withdraw From the Study.||18 days in each treatment period|||Participants|||Number
814983|NCT01095510|Secondary|Change in C1 Inhibitor (C1 INH) Antigen and Functional C1 INH Concentrations|Data was not reported due to change in planned analysis.|Pre-dose, 2, 4, 8 hours post dose on Day 1; Day 2, 3, 5, 8|No participant agreed to obtain pharmacokinetic (PK) blood sampling for antigenic and functional C1 INH levels. Hence, it was planned not to be analyzed.|||||
814984|NCT01095510|Secondary|Time to Complete Resolution of the Attack||Within 1 week following treatment|ITT-E population.||hours||Full Range|Median
814985|NCT01095510|Secondary|Time to Unequivocal Beginning of Relief of the Defining Attack Symptom||Within 4 hours following treatment|ITT-E population||hours||Full Range|Median
814986|NCT01095510|Primary|Presence of Unequivocal Beginning of Relief of the Defining Attack Symptom||Within 4 hours following treatment|Intent-to-treat efficacy (ITT-E) population included all participants with baseline and at least one post-infusion investigator assessment of the hereditary angioedema (HAE) attack.||participants|||Number
814987|NCT01095653|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Therapeutic Glycemic Response (Hemoglobin A1c [HbA1C]) <7.0% at Week 24 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|Secondary endpoints were tested using sequential testing procedure and are presented in hierarchical order. Percent adjusted for baseline HbA1c. Therapeutic glycemic response is defined as HbA1c <7.0%. Data after rescue medication was excluded from this analysis. HbA1c was measured as a percent of hemoglobin. Mean and standard error for percentage of participants were estimated by modified logistic regression model.|From Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received study medication and had nonmissing values at baseline and Week 24 (LOCF)||Percentage of participants||Standard Error|Mean
815011|NCT01095835|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Lamivudine Genotype Resistance During PEG-IFN+LAM96 Combined Therapy|Lamivudine resistance mutations were assessed by detection of the following mutations: rtL80V, rtL80I, rtV173G, rtV173L, rtL180M, rtA181T, rtA181V, rtM204V, rtM204I and rtN236T.|At the end of the treatment period at Week 96|The ITT population for arm PEG-IFN+LAM96 included all participants randomized to PEG-IFN+LAM96 who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
814988|NCT01095653|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Total Body Weight (kg) at Week 24 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|Secondary endpoints were tested using sequential testing procedure and are presented in hierarchical order. Adjusted mean change from baseline in total body weight at Week 24 (or the last postbaseline measurement prior to Week 24 if no Week 24 assessment was available was determined. Data after rescue medication was excluded from this analysis. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. In cases where time of the first dose or time of the assessment was not available, baseline was defined as the last assessment on or prior to the date of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. Body weight measurements were obtained during the qualification and lead-in periods and on Day 1 and Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 of the double-blind period.|From Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received study medication and had nonmissing body weight values at baseline and Week 24 (LOCF)||kg||Standard Error|Mean
814989|NCT01095653|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in 2-hour Post Liquid Meal Glucose (PLMG) (mg/dL) at Week 24 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|Secondary endpoints were tested using sequential testing procedure and are presented in hierarchical order. Post Liquid Meal Glucose was measured as milligrams per deciliter(mg/dL) by a central laboratory. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. In cases where time of the first dose or time of the assessment was not available, baseline was defined as the last assessment on or prior to the date of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. PLMG measurements were obtained on Day 1 and week 24 in the double-blind period.|From Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received study medication and had nonmissing PLMG values at baseline and Week 24 (LOCF)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
814990|NCT01095653|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 24 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|Secondary endpoints were tested using sequential testing procedure and are presented in hierarchical order. Fasting plasma glucose was measured as milligrams per deciliter(mg/dL) by a central laboratory. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. In cases where time of the first dose or time of the assessment was not available, baseline was defined as the last assessment on or prior to the date of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. FPG measurements were obtained during the qualification and lead-in periods and on Day 1 and Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the double-blind period.|From Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received study medication and had nonmissing FPG values at baseline and Week 24 (LOCF)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
814991|NCT01095653|Primary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) at Week 24 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|HbA1c was measured as percent of hemoglobin by a central laboratory. Data after rescue medication was excluded from this analysis. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. In cases where time of the first dose or time of the assessment was not available, baseline was defined as the last assessment on or prior to the date of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. HbA1c measurements were obtained during the qualification and lead-in periods and on Day 1 and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the double-blind period.|From Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received study medication and had nonmissing HbA1c values at baseline and Week 24 (LOCF)||% of hemoglobin||Standard Error|Mean
814992|NCT01095666|Secondary|Participants Achieving a Therapeutic Glycemic Response (Hemoglobin A1c [HbA1C]) <7.0% at Week 24 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|Secondary endpoints were tested using sequential testing procedure and are presented in hierarchical order. Therapeutic glycemic response is defined as HbA1c <7.0%. Data after rescue medication was excluded from this analysis. HbA1c was measured as a percent of hemoglobin. Percentage of participants were estimated by modified logistic regression model, adjusted for baseline HbA1c.|From Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received study medication and had nonmissing HbA1C values at Week 24 (LOCF)||Percentage of Participants|||Number
814993|NCT01095666|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Total Body Weight (kg) at Week 24 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|Secondary endpoints were tested using sequential testing procedure and are presented in hierarchical order. Adjusted mean change from baseline in total body weight at Week 24 (or the last postbaseline measurement prior to Week 24 if no Week 24 assessment was available was determined. Data after rescue medication was excluded from this analysis. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. In cases where time of the first dose or time of the assessment was not available, baseline was defined as the last assessment on or prior to the date of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. Body weight measurements were obtained during the qualification and lead-in periods and on Day 1 and Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 of the double-blind period.|From Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received study medication and had nonmissing body weight values at baseline and Week 24 (LOCF)||kg||Standard Error|Mean
814994|NCT01095666|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in 2-hour Post Meal Glucose (PMG) (mg/dL) at Week 24 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|Secondary endpoints were tested using sequential testing procedure and are presented in hierarchical order. Post Meal Glucose was measured as milligrams per deciliter(mg/dL) by a central laboratory. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. In cases where time of the first dose or time of the assessment was not available, baseline was defined as the last assessment on or prior to the date of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. PMG measurements were obtained on Day 1 and week 24 in the double-blind period.|From Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received study medication and had nonmissing PMG values at baseline and Week 24 (LOCF)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
815012|NCT01095835|Secondary|Change From Baseline of Quantitative Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HbsAg) Level at the End of Treatment||At the end of treatment at Week 48 or 96 depending on the study arm|The ITT population included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study medication. Baseline values are included for those participants for whom a baseline value was measured. Change from baseline values includes only those participants with both a baseline value and a value for the summarized time period.||IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816927|NCT01116882|Secondary|Procedural Success|Procedural success is defined as residual stenosis of the target lesion of less than 20%|Post-Procedure|||participants|||Number
814995|NCT01095666|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 24 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|Secondary endpoints were tested using sequential testing procedure and are presented in hierarchical order. Fasting plasma glucose was measured as milligrams per deciliter(mg/dL) by a central laboratory. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. In cases where time of the first dose or time of the assessment was not available, baseline was defined as the last assessment on or prior to the date of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. FPG measurements were obtained during the qualification and lead-in periods and on Day 1 and Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the double-blind period.|From Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received study medication and had nonmissing FPG values at baseline and Week 24 (LOCF)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
814996|NCT01095666|Primary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) at Week 24 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|HbA1c was measured as percent of hemoglobin by a central laboratory. Data after rescue medication was excluded from this analysis. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. In cases where time of the first dose or time of the assessment was not available, baseline was defined as the last assessment on or prior to the date of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. HbA1c measurements were obtained during the qualification and lead-in periods and on Day 1 and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the double-blind period.|From Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received study medication and had nonmissing HbA1c values at baseline and Week 24 (LOCF)||% of hemoglobin||Standard Error|Mean
814997|NCT01095757|Primary|Patients Achieving >= 3 X 10^6 CD34+ Cell/Kg||Within the first 4 days following the first dose of Plerixafor|||participants|||Number
814998|NCT01095757|Secondary|Average Number of Days for Engraftment (Engraftment Defined as Absolute Neutrophil Count>500)||Within the first 4 days following the first dose of Plerixafor|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
814999|NCT01095757|Primary|Patients Achieving Greater Than or Equal to 5 x 10^6 of CD34+ Cells/kg in a Single Day of Apheresis||Within the first 4 days following the first dose of Plerixafor|||participants|||Number
815000|NCT01095796|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48||Week 48|ITT Analysis Set. The missing = failure (M = F) method was used in which all missing data were considered as failure (HIV-1 RNA ≥ 50 copies/mL).||percentage of participants|||Number
815001|NCT01095796|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Cluster Determinant 4 (CD4) Cell Count at Weeks 48, 96, 144, and 192|Change = value of the relevant time point minus the baseline value|Baseline; Weeks 48, 96, 144, and 192|ITT Analysis Set. The missing = excluded (M = E) method was used in which all participants with missing data were excluded from analysis.||cells/µL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815002|NCT01095796|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving and Maintaining Confirmed HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48 Using the FDA-defined Time to Loss of Virologic Response (TLOVR) Algorithm||Week 48|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
815003|NCT01095796|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Virologic Success Using the FDA-Defined Snapshot Analysis as Determined by the Achievement of HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 192||Week 192|Week 192 Modified Intent-to-treat (MITT) Analysis Set: Participants in the ITT analysis set, excluding those who either 1) transferred to other Gilead-sponsored studies after completing their Week 144 Visit and before the lower limit of the Week 192 analysis window, or 2) prematurely discontinued study drug prior to the Week 144 Visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
815004|NCT01095796|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Virologic Success Using the FDA-Defined Snapshot Analysis as Determined by the Achievement of HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 144||Week 144|ITT Analysis Set: participants who were randomized into the study and received at least 1 dose of study drug||percentage of participants|||Number
815005|NCT01095796|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Virologic Success Using the FDA-Defined Snapshot Analysis as Determined by the Achievement of HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 96||Week 96|ITT Analysis Set: participants who were randomized into the study and received at least 1 dose of study drug||percentage of participants|||Number
815006|NCT01095796|Primary|The Percentage of Participants With Virologic Success Using the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-Defined Snapshot Analysis as Determined by the Achievement of HIV-1 Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48||Week 48|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Analysis Set: participants who were randomized into the study and received at least 1 dose of study drug||percentage of participants|||Number
815007|NCT01095835|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With Loss of Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HbsAg) and Hepatitis B Surface Antibodies (Anti-HBs) Seroconversion|This outcome measure presents percentage of participants with a combined response of HBsAg < 5 IU/mL and anti-HBs positive. Positive anti-HBs represents antibodies produced against Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBsAg) and is an indication of recovery and immunity from HBV infection.|At end of treatment at Week 48 or 96 depending on the study arm, at the end of 24 weeks of follow-up at Week 120 and at the end of the follow-up period at Week 144|The ITT population included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
815008|NCT01095835|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With HBV-DNA Below Limit of Quantification|HBV-DNA limit < 6 IU/mL was defined as below quantification.|At end of treatment at Week 48 or 96 depending on the study arm, at the end of 24 weeks of follow-up at Week 120 and at the end of the follow-up period at Week 144|The ITT population included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
815009|NCT01095835|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With HBV-DNA Lowering to <3,400 IU/mL and to < 2,000 IU/mL||At end of treatment at Week 48 or 96 depending on the study arm, at the end of 24 weeks of follow-up at Week 120 and at the end of the follow-up period at Week 144|The ITT population included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
815010|NCT01095835|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With ALT Normalization||At end of treatment at Week 48 or 96 depending on the study arm, at the end of 24 weeks of follow-up at Week 120 and at the end of the follow-up period at Week 144|The ITT population included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
816928|NCT01116882|Secondary|Emergency or Urgent Revascularization||30 days|The denominator for emergency or urgent revascularization at 30 days is defined as patients who either had the event to 30d or had follow up of at least 23 days.||participants|||Number
815013|NCT01095835|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Histological Response|Histological response was defined as an improvement by >/= 2 in the Necroinflammatory Grading and/or by an improvement by >/= 1 score in Fibrosis Staging according to Ishak. Necroinflammatory Grading ranges 0-14 and is the combined score for necrosis, range 0-10 and inflammation, range 0-4. The participant is scored for only one inflammatory condition. A higher score indicates worse condition. Fibrosis Staging according to Ishak ranges 0-6 and a higher score indicates greater fibrosis.|At the end of the 48-week follow-up period at Week 144|The ITT population included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
815014|NCT01095835|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Combined Response Using a Cut-Off for HBV-DNA Levels to 2,000 IU/mL|Combined response was defined here as ALT normalization plus lowering HBV-DNA levels to a cutt-off <2,000 IU/mL. In case of missing end of treatment measurements, the next available post-treatment value was used. In case of missing week-24 post-treatment measurements, the nearest value with respect to the schedule time point in the time window 12 weeks post treatment until study end was used. Participants with missing 48 weeks follow-up measurements were considered as non-responders. However, if the scheduled 48-weeks post-treatment tests were performed earlier or later than 48 weeks post-treatment, but not earlier than 36 weeks post-treatment, the corresponding results were considered to determine response.|At end of treatment at Week 48 or 96 depending on the study arm, at the end of 24 weeks of follow-up at Week 120 and at the end of the follow-up period at Week 144|The ITT population included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
815015|NCT01095835|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving the Combined Response at 24 Weeks of Follow-up|Combined response was defined as ALT normalization plus lowering of HBV-DNA levels to <20,000 copies/mL (<3,400 IU/mL). In case of missing week-24 post-treatment measurements, the nearest value with respect to the schedule time point in the time window 12 weeks post treatment until study end was used.|At the end of 24 weeks of follow-up at Week 120|The ITT population included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
815016|NCT01095835|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving the Combined Response at the End of Treatment|Combined response was defined as ALT normalization plus lowering of HBV-DNA levels to <20,000 copies/mL (<3,400 IU/mL). In case of missing end of treatment measurements, the next available post-treatment value was used.|At end of treatment at Week 48 or 96 depending on the study arm|The ITT population included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
815017|NCT01095835|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving the Combined Response at the End of the Follow-up Period|Combined response was defined as alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization plus lowering of hepatitis B virus (HBV) deoxyribo nucleic acid (DNA) levels to <20,000 copies/mL (<3,400 IU/mL) and was measured at the end of the 48-week follow-up period. Participants with missing 48 weeks follow-up measurements were considered as non-responders. However, if the scheduled 48-weeks post-treatment tests were performed earlier or later than 48 weeks post-treatment, but not earlier than 36 weeks post-treatment, the corresponding results were considered to determine response.|At the end of the 48-week follow-up period at Week 144|The ITT population included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
815018|NCT01095887|Primary|Number of Subjects With Antibody-Mediated Rejection (AMR) Within 3 Months of Kidney Transplant||3 months after kidney transplant surgery|||participants|||Number
815019|NCT01095978|Secondary|Termination of Treatment|The number of participants who discontinued treatment is summarized.|Visit 2 (10th-16th day or any other day after Visit 1 defined by physician)|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
815020|NCT01095978|Secondary|Compliance (Was the Dosage and Duration of Therapy Followed or Not; if Not - Explain the Reason)|Compliance was assessed by asking physicians if participants took their medication as directed. If participants did not take their medication as directed, physicians were asked to give the reason.|Visit 2 (10th-16th day or any other day after Inclusion Visit defined by physician)|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
815021|NCT01095978|Secondary|Adverse Effects|The number of participants experiencing adverse events, including serious adverse events, adverse events leading to study discontinuation, or adverse events leading to a dose reduction/temporarily stopping medication are summarized. See Reported Adverse Events for additional details.|Visit 2 (10th-16th day or any other day after Visit 1 defined by physician)|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
815022|NCT01095978|Primary|Therapeutic Response|Therapeutic response (yes or no) was determined by the treating physician at Visit 2 based on the disappearance or significant alleviation of symptoms and regression of chest xray findings. The data are summarized by total number of participants and by age subgroups.|Visit 2 (10th-16th day or any other day after Visit 1 defined by physician)|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
815023|NCT01095978|Primary|Previous Prescription of Other Antibiotic (Answer Whether Klacid SR is Given as the First or as Second Antibiotic)|Treating physicians were asked if Klacid SR was the first or second antibiotic prescribed to treat the participant. Results are presented for all participants and age subgroups.|Visit 1 (Initial visit)|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
815024|NCT01095978|Primary|Chest Xray - Necessary for Verification of the Diagnosis of Pneumonia , Community-acquired Pneumonia|Chest xrays were taken at Visit 1 to determine the presence of absence of community-acquired pneumonia. Findings are presented for all participants and by age subgroups.|Visit 1 (Initial visit)|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
815025|NCT01095978|Primary|Auscultation Findings|Participants were evaluated at Visit 1 (initial visit) and Visit 2 (10 to 16 days later or as defined by the treating physician). The presence of abnormal breathing sounds such as wheezing or crackles was determined by the treating physician using auscultation (listening for sounds within the body, usually with a stethoscope in the chest, neck, or abdomen) combined with their clinical judgment. Results are reported at Visit 1 and Visit 2 for all participants and by age subgroups. For participants with abnormal breathing sounds at Visit 1, resolution was noted at Visit 2.|Visit 1 (initial visit), Visit 2 (10th-16th day or any other day after Visit 1 defined by physician)|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
816929|NCT01116882|Secondary|Any Repeat Revascularization||12 months|||participants|||Number
816930|NCT01116882|Secondary|Rate of Stent Thrombosis||12 months|||participants|||Number
815026|NCT01095978|Primary|Dyspnoea|Participants were evaluated at Visit 1 (initial visit) and Visit 2 (10 to 16 days later or as defined by the treating physician). The presence or absence of dyspnoea (difficulty breathing) was determined based on the clinical judgment of the treating physician and is reported for all participants and by age subgroup at Visit 1 and Visit 2. For participants with dyspnoea at Visit 1, whether the dyspnoea occurred at rest, after exercise, or both are reported. For those with dyspnoea at Visit 1, the number of participants whose original type of dyspnoea subsequently resolved at Visit 2 is noted.|Visit 1 (initial visit), Visit 2 (10th-16th day or any other day after Visit 1 defined by physician)|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
815027|NCT01095978|Primary|Cough and Its Character|Participants were evaluated at Visit 1 (initial visit) and Visit 2 (10 to 16 days later or as defined by the treating physician). The presence of cough and the type of cough (productive, irritating, or both) was determined based on the clinical judgment of the treating physician. The presence or absence of cough are reported at Visits 1 and 2 for all participants and by age subgroups. For those participants who had a cough at Visit 1, the number of participants whose original type of cough subsequently resolved at Visit 2 is also presented.|Visit 1 (initial visit), Visit 2 (10th-16th day or any other day after Visit 1 defined by physician)|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
815028|NCT01095978|Primary|Body Temperature|Body temperature was measured at Visit 1 (initial visit) and at Visit 2 (approximately 10 to 16 days later, or as defined by the treating physician). Fever was defined as body temperature greater than or equal to 37 degrees Celsius/98.6 Fahrenheit. The presence or absence of fever is reported at Visit 1 and 2 for all participants and by age subgroups.|Visit 1 (initial visit), Visit 2 (10th-16th day or any other day after Visit 1 defined by physician)|The per-protocol population was analyzed. Visit 2 results are shown for those who had fever at Visit 1.||Participants|||Number
815029|NCT01096017|Secondary|Time to Change More Than or Equal to 15% (Time to Onset Response) Within 4 Hours After Drug Inhalation|Time to change more than or equal to 15% (time to onset response) within 4 hours after drug inhalation|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
815030|NCT01096017|Secondary|Number of Patients With % Change in FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) >15% Within 4 Hours After Drug Inhalation|Number of patients with % change in FEV1 >15% within 4 hours after drug inhalation.|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Participants|||Number
815031|NCT01096017|Secondary|Time to Peak FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) Within 4 Hours After Drug Inhalation|Time to peak measurement of FEV1 (min)|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Minutes||Full Range|Median
815032|NCT01096017|Secondary|Maximum % Change in FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) Within 4 Hours After Drug Inhalation|percent of pre-dose (ratio)|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Percent change||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815033|NCT01096017|Secondary|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) at 240 Minutes After Inhalations of Study Drug as Percentage of Pre-dose|percent of pre-dose (ratio)|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Percentage of Pre-Dose FEV1||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815034|NCT01096017|Secondary|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) at 180 Minutes After Inhalations of Study Drug as Percentage of Pre-dose|percent of pre-dose (ratio)|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Percentage of Pre-Dose FEV1||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815035|NCT01096017|Secondary|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) at 120 Minutes After Inhalations of Study Drug as Percentage of Pre-dose|percent of pre-dose (ratio)|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Percentage of Pre-Dose FEV1||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815036|NCT01096017|Secondary|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) at 60 Minutes After Inhalations of Study Drug as Percentage of Pre-dose|percent of pre-dose (ratio)|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Percentage of Pre-Dose FEV1||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815037|NCT01096017|Secondary|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) at 30 Minutes After Inhalations of Study Drug as Percentage of Pre-dose|percent of pre-dose (ratio)|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Percentage of Pre-Dose FEV1||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815038|NCT01096017|Secondary|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) at 15 Minutes After Inhalations of Study Drug as Percentage of Pre-dose|percent of pre-dose (ratio)|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Percentage of Pre-Dose FEV1||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815039|NCT01096017|Secondary|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) at 5 Minutes After Inhalations of Study Drug as Percentage of Pre-dose|percent of pre-dose (ratio)|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days|||Percentage of Pre-Dose FEV1||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815040|NCT01096017|Primary|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second) Area Under Curve (AUC) 0-4 Hours After Drug Inhalation|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second) AUC 0-4 hours after drug inhalation|At two visits during a maximum of 15 days. FEV1 timepoints: all time points t=5, 15, 30, 60, 120, 180 and 240 minutes.|||milliLiters x minutes||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815041|NCT01096056|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject. Any was defined as occurrence of any symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination and related was event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|Day 0 up to Month 7|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815042|NCT01096056|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Potential Immune-Mediated-Diseases (pIMDs)|pIMDs are a subset of AEs that include both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology.|Day 0 up to Month 7|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815043|NCT01096056|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related AEs With a Medically Attended Visit (MAEs)|For each solicited and unsolicited AE the subject experienced, the subject was asked if they had received medical attention defined as hospitalization, an emergency room visit or a visit to or from medical personnel (medical doctor) for any reason. Any was defined as occurrence of any symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination, grade 3 was defined as symptom that prevented normal activity and related was symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|Day 0 up to Month 7|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815044|NCT01096056|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited AEs|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 was event that prevented normal activities and Related was defined as unsolicited AE assessed by the investigator to be causally related to the study vaccination.|Within 21 days after any vaccination with New generation influenza vaccine GSK2186877A|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815045|NCT01096056|Secondary|Duration of Solicited General AEs|Duration was defined as number of days with any grade of local symptoms following each dose of New generation influenza vaccine GSK2186877A. Dose 1 application of vaccine involved subjects in Influenza vaccine GSK2186877A formulation 1 Group and Influenza vaccine GSK2186877A formulation 2 Group while Dose 2 application of vaccine involved only subjects in the Influenza vaccine GSK2186877A formulation 1 Group.|Within 7 days following any vaccination with New generation influenza vaccine GSK2186877A|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented and symptom sheet completed only on subjects that reported the specific symptom.||Days||Full Range|Median
815046|NCT01096056|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General AEs|Any temperature was defined as axillary temperature ≥37.5°C, grade 3 temperature was axillary temperature >39.0°C. For other symptoms, any was defined as occurrence of any symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 drowsiness was defined as general symptom that prevented normal activity, grade 3 irritability was crying that cannot be comforted/prevented normal activity, grade 3 loss of appetite was not eating at all and grade 3 vomiting was defined as ≥3 episode of vomiting/day. Related was symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to vaccination.|Within 7 days following any vaccination with New generation influenza vaccine GSK2186877A|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815047|NCT01096056|Secondary|Duration of Solicited Local AEs|Duration was defined as number of days with any grade of local symptoms following each dose of New generation influenza vaccine GSK2186877A. Dose 1 application of vaccine involved Influenza vaccine GSK2186877A formulation 1 Group and Influenza vaccine GSK2186877A formulation 2 Group while Dose 2 involved only Influenza vaccine GSK2186877A formulation 1 Group.|Within 7 days following any vaccination with New generation influenza vaccine GSK2186877A|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented and symptom sheet completed only on subjects that reported the specific symptom.||Days||Full Range|Median
815048|NCT01096056|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Adverse Events (AEs)|Grade 3 redness and swelling was > 50 millimeter (mm) and grade 3 pain was subjects crying when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Any was occurrence of any local symptom regardless of their intensity grade.|Within 7 days following any vaccination with New generation influenza vaccine GSK2186877A|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815049|NCT01096056|Secondary|HI Antibody Geometric Mean Fold Rise (GMFR)|GMFR was defined as the fold increase in serum HI GMTs post-vaccination compared to pre-vaccination. The vaccine strains included Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1, Flu A/Uru/716/07 H3N2 and FluB/Bri/60/08 Victoria antigens.|Day 42|The immunogenicity analysis was based on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
815050|NCT01096056|Secondary|The Number of Subjects Seroconverted to HI Antibodies|A seroconverted subject was defined as a subject who had either a pre-vaccination titer below 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The vaccine strains included Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1, Flu A/Uru/716/07 H3N2 and FluB/Bri/60/08 Victoria antigens.|Day 42|The immunogenicity analysis was based on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Subjects|||Number
815051|NCT01096056|Secondary|The Number of Subjects Seroprotected to HI Antibodies|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with a serum HI titre greater than or equal to 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection. The vaccine strains included Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1, Flu A/Uru/716/07 H3N2 and FluB/Bri/60/08 Victoria antigens.|At Day 0 and Day 42|The immunogenicity analysis was based on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Subjects|||Number
815052|NCT01096056|Secondary|The Number of Subjects Seropositive to HI Antibodies|A seropositive subject was defined as a subject with antibody titer greater than or equal to 1:10. The vaccine strains included Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1, Flu A/Uru/716/07 H3N2 and FluB/Bri/60/08 Victoria antigens.|At Day 0 and Day 42|The immunogenicity analysis was based on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Subjects|||Number
815053|NCT01096056|Secondary|Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers|Antibody titers were expressed as Geometric mean titers (GMTs). The vaccine strains included Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1, Flu A/Uru/716/07 H3N2 and FluB/Bri/60/08 Victoria antigens.|At Day 0 and Day 42|The immunogenicity analysis was based on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
815054|NCT01096056|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Fever Grade 2 or Higher|Fever grade greater than or equal to 2 i.e. ≥2 was defined as axillary temperature >38 degree centigrade (°C).|Within 7 days following any vaccination with New generation influenza vaccine GSK2186877A|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
815055|NCT01096186|Secondary|Patient Global Impression (PGI)|"Satisfaction of IPX066 using Patient Global Impression (PGI) 7-point scale.
Patient Global Impression 0-7 – higher value indicates increased improvement from study start"|9 months|All enrolled subjects with available data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815073|NCT01096680|Secondary|PVT Scores by Timepoint|PVT assesses behavioral alertness. Subjects were required to respond to a visual stimulus by pressing a button on a mechanical device and the reaction time was measured. Higher scores indicate attention lapses.|Over a period of 12 hours|FAS||msec||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
815056|NCT01096186|Secondary|Total UPDRS Parts I-IV|"Analysis of the Change from Baseline in the sum of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I (Mentation, Behavior and Mood), Part II (Activities of Daily Living), UPDRS Part III (Motor Examination), and Part IV (Complications of Therapy [In the past week]) at End of Study. Includes both scoring by a clinician and a historical report of mental functioning, activities of daily living and complications of therapy in the past week obtained by questioning the patient.
Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) – Four Parts Higher score values represent a worse outcome.
Subscales II and III were summed:
Part I: Mentation, Behavior and Mood – 4 questions 1-4 Score range: 1-16 Part II: Activities of Daily Living – 13 questions 5-17 Score range: 0-52 Part III: Motor Examination – 19 questions 18-31 and 25 total assessments Score range: 0-100 Part IV: Complications of Therapy (In the past week) – 11 questions Score range: 0-25"|9 months|All enrolled subjects with available data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815057|NCT01096186|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Sum of UPDRS Part II + UPDRS Part III|"Analysis of the Change from Baseline in the sum of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II (Activities of Daily Living) + UPDRS Part III (Motor Examination) at End of Study.
Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) – Four Parts Higher score values represent a worse outcome.
Subscales II and III were summed:
Part I: Mentation, Behavior and Mood – 4 questions 1-4 Score range: 1-16 Part II: Activities of Daily Living – 13 questions 5-17 Score range: 0-52 Part III: Motor Examination – 19 questions 18-31 and 25 total assessments Score range: 0-100 Part IV: Complications of Therapy (In the past week) – 11 questions Score range: 0-25"|9 months|All enrolled subjects with available data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815058|NCT01096316|Secondary|Potential Facilitators and Barriers to Sustainability|Providers' and administrators' perceived barriers and facilitators to continue providing the intervention after study end.|18 months||||||
815059|NCT01096316|Secondary|Quality of Depression Care Indicators|Intervention impact on quality of depression care indicators and satisfaction with depression care. Number of participants receiving 4 or more mental health visits are reported. Receiving 4 or more mental health visits has previously been used in depression randomized control trials as a measure of the quality of depression treatment received by a patient|12 months|||participants|||Number
815060|NCT01096316|Primary|Functional Outcome|Impact of the intervention on functional outcomes of patients. Functional impairment was measured using the Sheehan Disability Scale. The Sheehan disability scale is the average of 3 items assessing impairment in social, work and family responsibilities. Each item is rated 0 (no impairment) to 10 (totally impaired) and the 3 ratings are averaged for the Sheehan disability scale reported below.|12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815061|NCT01096316|Primary|Depression Treatment Outcome|Impact of the intervention on depression treatment outcomes, including change in depressive symptoms and treatment response. In particular, the depression scale from the Hopkins Symptom Checklist 20 (SCL-20) was used to assess depression severity at the assessments. The SCL-20 ranges from 0 (no depression) to 4 (severe depression),|12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815062|NCT01096342|Secondary|Duration of Response|The distribution of duration of response will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.|Date at which the patient's objective status is first noted to be either an sCR, CR, PR, or VGPR to the earliest date progression is documented, assessed up to 3 years|Duration of Response was not analyzed due to lack of responses.|||||
815063|NCT01096342|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|The distribution of progression-free survival will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.|Time from registration to progression or death due to any cause, assessed up to 3 years|All 15 evaluable participants were analyzed for Progression-Free Survival.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815064|NCT01096342|Primary|Number of Confirmed Responses, Defined to be an sCR, CR, VGPR, or PR Noted as the Objective Status on Two Consecutive Evaluations.|"Complete Response (CR):
Negative immunofixation of serum and urine Normalization of FLC ratio < 5% plasma cells in bone marrow Disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas
Stringent Complete Response (sCR):
CR, as above, with absence of clonal cells in bone marrow
Partial Response (PR):
One of the following:
A ≥ 50% reduction of measurable serum M-protein.
A reduction in 24h measurable urinary M-protein by ≥ 90% or to <200 mg per 24h.
A ≥ 50% decrease in the difference between involved and uninvolved FLC levels.
≥50% reduction in bone marrow plasma cells is required in place of Mprotein, provided baseline percentage was ≥ 30%
A ≥50% reduction in the size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
Very Good Partial Response (VGPR):
PR as defined above in addition to having serum and urine M-component detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis."|Up to 3 years|Fifteen of the 16 accrued Phase II participants were analyzed (1 participant was a protocol violation).||participants|||Number
815065|NCT01096446|Secondary|Initiation of Glucose|Infants were monitored to see if insulin was started to control hyperglycemia.|First 7 days of life||||||
815066|NCT01096446|Secondary|Maintain Appropriate for Gestational Age Status at Discharge|Recorded all infant's weights at discharge and plotted the anthropometric values on the Fenton Growth Charts.|Entire hospital stay||||||
815067|NCT01096446|Secondary|Infants Will Achieve 90 Calories/Kilogram/Day|Monitored the calorie intake of infants to see which group was able to acheive 90 cal/kg/day from the total parenteral nutrition.|First 14 days of Life||||||
815068|NCT01096446|Secondary|Regain Birthweight|Infants in both groups weights were monitored to determine if giving higher infusions of intravenous fat emulsion helped the infants regain their birthweight sooner.|First 2 weeks of life||||||
815069|NCT01096446|Primary|Number of Infants Serum Triglyceride Level Higher Than 200 mg/dl|Each day the infants have a serum triglyceride level drawn to assess their tolerance of the intravenous fat emulsion being given.|First 7 days of life|This study was ended early due to 100% of the infants in the experimental group developed hypertriglyceridemia of 200 mg/dl or greater||participants|||Number
815070|NCT01096550|Primary|Percentage of Participants Meeting Diagnosis of Opioid Dependence on Composite International Diagnostic Interview-2 (CIDI-2)||6 months post-baseline|||percentage of opioid dependent subjects|||Number
815071|NCT01096589|Secondary|Assessment of Safety by Incidence of Adverse Events.||3 weeks||||||
815072|NCT01096589|Primary|Percent Volume Change of Affected Limb at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline.||baseline and after 3 weeks of treatment|Patients must have completed the first week.||% volume change measured in mL.||Standard Deviation|Mean
816931|NCT01116882|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Lesion Revascularization||12 months|||participants|||Number
815077|NCT01096680|Primary|Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT)|"The MWT was conducted to determine the subjects' ability to stay awake. Subjects sat in a darkened room and were told to stay awake as long as possible during the 30 minute session. This is an indicator of how well you are able to function and remain alert in quiet times of inactivity. Higher times are better."|Over a period of 8 hours|Full Analysis Set (FAS) is defined as all randomized subjects with any primary efficacy assessment.||Minutes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
815078|NCT01096771|Secondary|Hypertriglyceridemia|Defined as triglyceride level >400|96 hours|||participants|||Number
815079|NCT01096771|Secondary|Allergic Reactions||96 hours|||participants|||Number
815080|NCT01096771|Secondary|Hospital Length of Stay||30 days|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
815081|NCT01096771|Secondary|Biomarkers (C-reactive Protein)||96 hours|||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
815082|NCT01096771|Secondary|Organ Failures||30 days|||participants|||Number
815083|NCT01096771|Secondary|New Infection|We will use standard clinical criteria including but not limited to: fever, pyuria, new inflitrate on chest x-ray, positive blood cultures, abscess detected on imaging, leukocytosis, and positive skin or soft-tissue cultures to identify presence of new bacterial infections occurring after enrollment.|30 days|||participants|||Number
815084|NCT01096771|Secondary|30 Day Mortality||30 days|||participants|||Number
815085|NCT01096771|Secondary|PaO2:FiO2 Ratio|PaO2:FiO2 ratio at time of 2nd Bronchoalveolar Lavage (BAL) or end of study drug administration.|4 days|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
815086|NCT01096771|Secondary|Ventilator Days||30 days|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
815087|NCT01096771|Primary|Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid Interleukin-8 Concentrations||96 hours|Each arm has one less subject than specified in the participate flow module. One is secondary to the fact that the subject refused the 2nd bronchoscopy and the other is because the primary physician felt the subject was too sick to undergo the 2nd bronchscopy.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815088|NCT01096784|Secondary|Serum Concentrations of Acid Labile Sub-unit (ALS) After Intravenous (IV) Infusion of rhIGF-1/rhIGFBP-3||Day 7 and Week 40 Post Menstrual Age|FAS.||microgram per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
815089|NCT01096784|Secondary|Serum Concentrations of IGFBP-3 After Intravenous (IV) Infusion of rhIGF-1/rhIGFBP-3||Day 0 and Week 40 Post Menstrual Age|FAS.||microgram per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
815090|NCT01096784|Secondary|Percentage of Serum IGF-1 Concentrations Falling Within Target Range After Infusion of rhIGF-1/rhIGFBP-3|Serum samples were collected from treated and control participants for quantification of IGF-1 using validated immunoassays. Target range of serum IGF-1 was 28-109 mcg/L. The percentage of serum IGF-1 levels across treated participants that fall within the range was reported.|Day 0 to 40 Weeks Post Menstrual Age (EOS)|FAS was analysed.||percentage of serum concentration|||Number
815091|NCT01096784|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) and Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Event (TESAE)|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. A serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent adverse event was defined as the onset of any AE or if the severity of a pre-existing AE worsened any time on or after the date of first dose of investigational product.|Day 0 to 40 Weeks Post Menstrual Age (EOS)|Safety Analysis Set (SAF) included all randomized participants who received the study drug and participants in the control group who received standard of care, and for whom at least 1 safety assessment was completed.||participants|||Number
815092|NCT01096784|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Maximum Severity of ROP Stage Greater Than or Equal to 3 at Any Time During the Study|ROP was measured by central exams with fundus photography. Maximum severity of ROP stage across all retinal examinations included International Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity, a 5 stage system, for the classification of ROP with 7 different outcomes of the ROP stage in each retinal examination: 0, 1, 2, 3, 3+, 4, and 5. This is an ordinal scale with higher numbers indicating a more severe outcome.|Day 0 to 40 Weeks Post Menstrual Age (EOS)|FAS.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815093|NCT01096784|Secondary|Area Under Curve for Maximum Severity of ROP Stage (AUC for ROP)|Integration of the maximum severity of ROP stage and the duration of the time interval with respect to each retinal examination. AUC for the maximum severity of ROP was calculated using the trapezoidal rule. The area between each 2 visits was calculated by multiplying the average of the maximum severities of the 2 visits by the difference in days and analyzed using the van Elteren test. ROP is classified according to the International Classification and is subdivided into 5 stages (1-5) with higher values representing greater severity.|Every 1-2 weeks starting at 31 weeks PMA/ EOS +/- 4 days|Full analysis set with number of participants evaluable for this outcome.||ROP severity score*days||Standard Deviation|Mean
815094|NCT01096784|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Intraventricular Hemorrhage (IVH)|Development of intraventricular hemorrhage was assessed by cerebral ultrasound and coded as a binary endpoint (presence or absence of IVH).|Day 0 to 40 Weeks Post Menstrual Age (EOS)|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
815095|NCT01096784|Secondary|Brain Development Assessed by Brain Volume at 40 Weeks PMA/EOS|Brain volume was measured using cerebral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Brain volume included cerebrospinal volume, gray matter volume, white matter volume, and total cerebellar volume|40 Weeks PMA/ (EOS) +/- 4 days|FAS||cubic centimeter||Standard Deviation|Mean
815096|NCT01096784|Secondary|Rate of Change in Head Circumference|The rate of change is the head circumference change per day in centimetre (cm).|Day 0 to 40 Weeks Post Menstrual Age (EOS)|FAS||cm/day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815097|NCT01096784|Secondary|Rate of Change in Length|The rate of change is the length change per day in centimeter (cm).|Day 0 to 40 Weeks Post Menstrual Age (EOS)|FAS||centimeter per day (cm/day)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815098|NCT01096784|Secondary|Rate of Change in Body Weight|The rate of change is the rate of specific body weight change per day in kilogram (kg).|Day 0 to 40 Weeks Post Menstrual Age (EOS)|FAS||kilogram per day (kg/day)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815192|NCT01089569|Primary|HbA1c Change|"Measure the changes in HbA1C attributable to exenatide, insulin glargine and their combination.
Employ CGM with AGP analysis to determine if there is an incremental benefit for subjects who do not reach target to add exenatide to insulin glargine or insulin glargine to exenatide in patients taking metformin."|baseline to final visit (32 weeks)|||%HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
815099|NCT01096784|Secondary|Number of Participants With Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia (BPD)|"Severity of BPD as mild, moderate and severe were based on the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) guidelines for preterm infants born at gestational age (GA) less than (<) 32 weeks.
Mild: oxygen requirement during the first 28 days but in room air at PMA 36 weeks or discharge to home, whichever comes first.
Moderate BPD: oxygen requirement during the first 28 days and oxygen <30 percent (%) at PMA 36 weeks or discharge to home, whichever comes first.
Severe BPD: oxygen requirement during the first 28 days and oxygen greater than equal (≥)30% through head hood or nasal canula, or continuous positive airway pressure, or mechanical ventilation, or high flow nasal cannula ≥2 L/min at PMA 36 weeks or discharge to home, whichever comes first."|At 36 Weeks Post Menstrual Age|FAS with participants evaluable for this outcome.||participants|||Number
815100|NCT01096784|Secondary|Time to Discharge From Neonatal Intensive Care (TDNIC)||Day 0 to 40 Weeks Post Menstrual Age (EOS)|FAS with number of participants evaluable for this outcome.||Days||Full Range|Median
815101|NCT01096784|Primary|Severity of Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) as Compared to the Severity of ROP in an Untreated Control Population|ROP was measured by central exams with fundus photography. Maximum severity of ROP stage across all retinal examinations included International Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity, a 5 stage system, for the classification of ROP with 7 different outcomes of the ROP stage in each retinal examination: 0, 1, 2, 3, 3+, 4, and 5. This is an ordinal scale with higher numbers indicating a more severe outcome. The maximum severity of ROP across all time points was assessed from 31 PMA weeks up to 40 PMA Weeks +/- 4 days (end of study).|End of study|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all randomized participants who received the study drug and participants in the control group who received Standard of Care.||participants|||Number
815102|NCT01096810|Secondary|Antitumor Effect|To study the possible mechanisms involved in the clinical antitumor effect with determination of inhibition of angiogenesis|Antitumor effect|immunophenotyping was not performed in this study|||||
815103|NCT01096810|Primary|Response Rate|"The response rate - percentage of participants with overall response.
Overall response for any participants that has achieved at least a PR or better (PR, VGPR, CR, sCR) is defined using the International Uniform Response Criteria for Multiple Myeloma (Leukemia (2006)20:1467-1473) . Which requires the following: at least >50% reduction in SPEP, at least >90% reduction or <200 mg in UPEP, at least >50% reduction in the size of soft tissue plasmacytomas, no lytic bone lesions or similar definition that is accurate and appropriate."|from date of start of treatment until the date of best documented response up to date of progression|||percentage of participants|||Number
815104|NCT01096810|Primary|Time to Progression|"To determine the time to progression of asymptomatic multiple myeloma patients receiving TBL 12. The time to progression will be measured in units of a cycle (28 day cycles).
Progression is defined using the International Uniform Response Criteria for Multiple Myeloma (Leukemia (2006)20:1467-1473). Which requires one or more of the following: >25% increase in SPEP (must also be an absolute increase of at least 5 g/dL), >25% increase in UPEP (must also be an absolute increase of at least 200 mg/24 hours), >25% increase in bone marrow plasma cells (must also be an absolute increase of at least 10%), new lytic bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytomas, or development of hypercalcemia (not attributable to any other cause)."|From date of treatment until the date of first documented progression|||cycles||Full Range|Median
815105|NCT01096823|Primary|Disease Activity Scale (DAS)28|"is a combined index that measures disease activity in patients with RA and remains a more thorough, established alternative to standard medical exams. This index includes a 28 tender joint count, 28 swollen joint count, Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR), and general health assessment using a visual analogue scale. The ESR indirectly measures inflammation in the body and involves collecting blood samples, which will be performed by a qualified phlebotomist.
The DAS score is a complicated formula based on many factors so there are no set ranges, but the published standards are as follows:
A DAS28 score of higher than 5.1 is indicative of high disease activity, whereas a DAS28 below 3.2 indicates low disease activity. A patient is considered to be in remission if they have a DAS28 lower than 2.6. Source: DAS-Score.nl. Available at http://www.das-score.nl/www.das-score.nl/index.html. Accessed February 5, 2009."|post intervention (within 2 weeks of completing intervention)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815106|NCT01096823|Primary|Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)|"Items include questions about dressing and grooming, rising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, grip and making activities. The HAQ is one of the most widely recognized measures of patient functioning, with acceptable reliability and validity. It has been used successfully with adolescents as young as 13 years of age
Range: 0-100, lower scores indicate better health"|post intervention (within 2 weeks of completing intervention)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815107|NCT01096823|Primary|Pain Disability Index (PDI)|"The PDI assess the impact of pain on ability to participate in basic life activities, including social activity, sexual behavior, self-care and life-support activity. The PDI has been used with patients as young as 15. Good internal reliability (α = .82) and validity have been reported. It takes less than 5 minutes to complete.
7 items, total measure range: 0-70, higher scores = higher interference/disability"|post intervention (within 2 weeks of completing intervention)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815108|NCT01096823|Primary|Health Related Quality of Life - Short Form-36 (SF-36)|"The Health Related Quality of Life - Short Form-36 (SF-36) is a generic core HRQOL measure yielding an 8-scale profile of functional health and well being. The SF-36 performs comparatively better than other HRQOL measures in terms of reliability, validity, lightness of respondent/administrative burden. It can be completed in 5-10 minutes and has been used with children as young as 10 years of age.
Subscales - all ranges 0-100 with higher scores indicating increased quality of life Bodily Pain, 2 items General Health, 5 items Vitality, 4 items Mental Health, 5 items"|post intervention (within 2 weeks of completing intervention)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815109|NCT01096875|Secondary|High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (hsCRP mg/L)||5 days postoperatively|||mg/L||Standard Error|Mean
815110|NCT01096875|Secondary|High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (hsCRP mg/L)||Postoperative 6th hours|||mg/L||Standard Error|Mean
815111|NCT01096875|Secondary|Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF %) Measured at 30 Days Postoperatively||Change between statin and placebo groups at 30 days postoperatively|||percentage of LVEF||Standard Deviation|Mean
815112|NCT01096875|Primary|Endothelial Progenitor Cells (EPCs) Count (Cells/µl)||Postoperative 6th hours|||cells/µl||Standard Error|Mean
816932|NCT01116882|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Lesion Revascularization||30 days|||participants|||Number
815114|NCT01097005|Secondary|"Efficacy Evaluation Using the 4-rank Scale of Effective, Ineffective, Deterioration, or Impossible by the Investigator"|"Number of participants who evaluated for efficacy of clarithromycin with the 4-rank Scales (Effective, Ineffective, Deterioration, Impossible)"|When treatment with clarithromycin is discontinued, from 40 days to 1232 days|Analysis of Clinical Global Improvement (CGI). Number of patients with each rank scale.||Number of patients|||Number
815115|NCT01097005|Primary|Bacilli Negative Conversion Rate|Number of participants who tested positive for Bacilli before treatment and converted to Bacilli Negative at any point during the treatment with clarithromycin|During the treatment with clarithromycin, from 40 days to 1232 days|Analysis of the bacilli negative conversion||participants|||Number
815116|NCT01097057|Primary|Total Number of Participants Who Did Not Collect ≥5 x 10^6 CD34 Cells/kg in a Maximum of Four Apheresis Days|Number of participants who did not collect ≥5 x 10^6 CD34 cells/kg in up to four apheresis days|Up to Four Apheresis Days|Note: No patients were in this category.||Participants|||Count of Participants
815117|NCT01097057|Primary|Number of Participants Requiring One or Two Apheresis Collection Days to Reach ≥5 x 10^6 CD34 Cells/kg|Number of participants requiring one or two apheresis collection days to reach collection goal.|Up to Four Apheresis Days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
815118|NCT01097057|Primary|Number of Patients Who Achieved ≥5 x 10^6 CD34 Cells/kg in ≤4 Apheresis Days|Number of patients to collect at least 5 x 10^6 CD34 cells/kg in under 4 apheresis procedures.|Up to Four Apheresis Days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
815119|NCT01097057|Primary|Number of Patients to Mobilize ≥5 x 10^6 CD34 Cells/kg Autologous PBSC (Efficacy)|Number of patients who achieved ≥5 x 10^6 CD34 cells/kg autologous PBSC collection by apheresis.|One Month|||Participants|||Count of Participants
815120|NCT01097304|Secondary|Changes in Cell Proliferation in BE Epithelium From Baseline to Post-intervention as Assessed by Proliferation-related Ki-67 Antigen (Ki67) Immunostaining, Percentage of Positively Stained Nuclei, in BE Tissue Sections|Results will be analyzed using paired t-tests. Results (mean values and changes during intervention) will be reported along with the corresponding confidence intervals.|Baseline and 6 months||||||
815121|NCT01097304|Secondary|Changes in Gastric Bile Acid Composition, Measured by Liquid Chromatography-tandem Mass Spectrometry, From Baseline to Post-intervention|Results will be analyzed using paired t-tests. Results (mean values and changes during intervention) will be reported along with the corresponding confidence intervals.|Baseline and 6 months||||||
815122|NCT01097304|Primary|Reversal of Oxidative DNA Damage as Assessed by Changes in 8-hydroxy-2' -Deoxyguanosine (8OHdG) Immunostaining|8OHdG will be assessed by percentage of positively stained nuclear area. A paired t-test at a one-sided 0.05 significance level will be used to assess change during intervention. The observed results will be reported along with the corresponding confidence intervals.|Baseline to 6 months|participants with fewer than 500 total nuclei in longitudinally sectioned crypts opening to the lumen were excluded from analysis||% of strongly/moderately stained nuclei||Standard Deviation|Mean
815123|NCT01097343|Primary|Clopidogrel Resistance, Defined by P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU)Value >230|P2Y12 Reaction Units are measured using the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay. Percent of patients with clopidogrel resistance defined by PRU value will be compared among low and high dose clopidogrel groups after 30 days of therapy.|Approximately 90 days|All patients completed the clinical protocol.||Number of Patients with PRU>230|||Number
815124|NCT01097421|Secondary|Patients Global Impressions (PGI)|Assessed by asking the patient at the final visit which alternative described how they had felt during the last 7 days as compared to how they felt at the baseline observation.|8-12 weeks|FAS||Participants|||Number
815125|NCT01097421|Secondary|Clinical Global Impressions (CGI)|Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale at final visit|8-12 weeks|FAS||Participants|||Number
815126|NCT01097421|Secondary|Pramipexole (PPX) Dose|mean Pramipexole (PPX) dose|pre-treatment and after 8-12 weeks|FAS||mg/24 hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
815127|NCT01097421|Secondary|Adverse Events (AE) Considered Related to Observed Medication|Some patients had not related AEs as well as related AEs.|8-12 weeks|Safety Analysis Set (SAS) defined as all treated patients with a documented baseline observation.||Patients|||Number
815128|NCT01097421|Secondary|Patient Preference|Patients were asked about their preference regarding frequency of intake (once daily or three times daily)|8-12 weeks|FAS||Participants|||Number
815129|NCT01097421|Primary|Level of Adherence|Points on Morisky scale|8-12 weeks|FAS||Participants|||Number
815130|NCT01097421|Primary|Patients With a Score of 4 in Morisky Scale After 8-12 Weeks of Treatment|Morisky scale: 4 Yes/No Questions: Do you ever forget to take your medicine? Are you careless at times about taking your medicine? When you feel better do you sometimes stop taking your medicine? Sometimes if you feel worse when you take the medicine, do you stop taking it? Score one point for every NO: 0-1 points = low adherence, 2-3 points = moderate, 4 points = high adherence Confidence interval computed using the Clopper-Pearson (exact) method.|8-12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) defined as all patients who had taken at least one dose of the investigational medicinal product (IMP) and had a post-baseline assessment.||Percent||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815131|NCT01097460|Secondary|To Determine the Recommended Phase 2 Doses of MM-111 + Herceptin in Combination||2 years||||||
815132|NCT01097460|Primary|Incidence of Treatment-emergent AE’s||2 years|Patients that received at least one dose||participants|||Number
815133|NCT01089231|Secondary|Blood Lipids|Fasting venous blood samples were collected and blood lipid levels were determined by an external contract laboratory (LADR, Hannover; Germany) at baseline (t0), after one week (t1) and after 12 weeks (t12) of supplementation.|baseline and after 12 weeks|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
815134|NCT01089231|Secondary|Fatty Acid Composition of Erythrocyte Membranes (Omega-3 Index)|Fasting venous blood samples were collected and RBC membrane FA composition including the omega-3 index, given as EPA + DHA, was analyzed at baseline and after 12 weeks according to the omega-3 index methodology (Harris & von Schacky, 2004). Results are presented as a percentage of the total identified FAs after response factor correction. The coefficient of variation for EPA + DHA was 5%. Quality was assured according to DIN ISO 15189.|baseline and after 12 weeks|||percentage of total fatty acids||Standard Deviation|Mean
815193|NCT01089582|Secondary|Number of Participants for the Physician's Assessment of Tolerance to ARICEPT at Week 12|The physician rated tolerance to ARICEPT as very good, good, adequate, unsatisfactory, or unevaluable.|Baseline to Week 12.|FAS.||participants|||Number
815194|NCT01089582|Secondary|Change in ARICEPT Dosing: Number of Participants at Each Final Dose of ARICEPT||Week 12.|FAS.||participants|||Number
815135|NCT01089231|Primary|Gene Expression Changes|Gene expression changes were measured by using whole genome microarrays. The expression values of all genes were compared between baseline and 4 hours, 7 days and twelve weeks after supplementation with FO or CO and differentially expressed genes were detected by standard two-state pooled-variance t-test (p<0,05). The number of differentially expressed genes (regulated genes)compared to the baseline values were determined for every study group in total as well as for every time point (4 hours, 7 days, 12 weeks)in total and specifically.|Gene expression changes (number of regulated genes)|||number of regulated genes|||Number
815136|NCT01089361|Other Pre-specified|PCR Substudy|PCR analysis on serum samples for presence of bacterial and mitochondrial DNA; This substudy was not done.|Daily up to 7 days|Not done|||||
815137|NCT01089361|Secondary|28 Day Mortality||28 days|||deaths|||Number
815138|NCT01089361|Secondary|Length of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Stay||28 days|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
815139|NCT01089361|Secondary|Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) Scores|Difference in average APACHE-II score between the intervention and placebo groups. APACHE II (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II) is a severity of disease classification system for patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit. It uses an integer score from 0 to 71 that is computed based on age, 12 routine physiological measurements (i.e. heart rate, temperature, laboratory values), and previous health status obtained during the first 24 hours after ICU admission. Higher scores correspond to more severe disease and a higher risk of death.|First 24 hours after ICU admission|||APACHE score||Standard Deviation|Mean
815140|NCT01089361|Secondary|Organ Failures|Incidence of new organ failure as detected by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA] score. Definitions are as follows. Central nervous system: delirium, coma, uncontrollable seizures, ICP>20cm H2O Cardiac: MAP <60mmHg, blood pressure supported with pressors, 50 > HR > 120 Respiratory: vented, RR>30, PaO2<60, PaCO2 > 55, Sat<92% Kidney: RIFLE criteria Anemia: Hct<27, transfusion of PRBC Thrombocytopenia: platelet < 50k, platelet transfusion Liver: biopsy, ALT>200, AST>200, t.bil>2.0, ALP>300 Coagulation failure: INR>2 if no anticoagulation therapy|7 days|||participants with increase in SOFA score|||Number
815141|NCT01089361|Secondary|Adverse Effects Attributable to Ketamine||7 days|||adverse events|||Number
815142|NCT01089361|Primary|Serum Levels of IL-6, IL-10 and TNFα||first 7 days of admission, Baseline and Day 7 reported|||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
815143|NCT01089413|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status|ECOG performance status measured on a 6 point scale to assess participant's performance status. 0=Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease activities without restriction; 1=Restricted in physically strenuous activity, ambulatory and able to carry out light or sedentary work; 2=Ambulatory (>50% of waking hours), capable of all self-care, unable to carry out any work activities; 3=Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed/chair >50% of waking hours; 4=Completely disabled, cannot carry on any self-care, totally confined to bed/chair; 5=Dead. 0=Best status, 5=Worst status. For each time-point, only categories with available data are reported.|Baseline up to Cycle 51 (1 cycle = 21 days)|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this outcome and n = participants with available data for specified category, for each arm, respectively. No participants were evaluable for Cycles 48-50; hence, no data reported for these cycles.||percentage of participants|||Number
815144|NCT01089413|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Best Overall Response|Tumor response was assessed using RECIST. Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all target and non-target lesions; Partial Response (PR): at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD; Progressive Disease (PD): at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions or appearance of one or more new non-target lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions; Stable Disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started or persistence of one or more non-target lesion(s) or/and maintenance of tumor marker level above the normal limits. Results are reported as per age groups (<70 years, 70-80 years, and >80 years) as well as for overall participants.|Baseline up to disease progression or death (up to approximately 3 years)|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
815145|NCT01089413|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS (in months) was defined as: (date of progression or censored date - first date of treatment + 1)/30.44. Date of progression was derived from Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) evaluation or from last available date for participant who withdrew the study for progressive disease without progression according to RECIST evaluation. Progression was defined (as per RECIST) as at least a 20 percent (%) increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions or appearance of one or more new non-target lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. Results are reported as per age groups (<70 years and ≥70 years) as well as for overall participants.|Baseline up to disease progression or death (up to approximately 3 years)|FAS.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815146|NCT01089413|Primary|Duration of Bevacizumab Treatment|Duration of bevacizumab treatment (in months) was defined as: (last treatment date - first treatment date plus [+] 1)/30.44. Duration of treatment was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. Results are reported as per age groups (<70 years and greater than or equal to [≥] 70 years) as well as for overall participants.|Baseline up to end of treatment (up to approximately 3 years)|FAS.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815147|NCT01089504|Secondary|Number of Participants With One or More Seizures|Any clinical or electrographic seizures occurring between study entry and all follow-up examinations and contacts.|18-22 months|Due to low enrollment, there was limited data available for analysis and therefore insufficient power to provide meaningful results for our primary or secondary analysis.||participants|||Number
815148|NCT01089504|Secondary|Mean Bayley Scales of Infant Development (BSID) Score - Motor|This part of the BSID assesses the degree of body control, large muscle coordination, finer manipulatory skills of the hands and fingers, dynamic movement, postural imitation, and the ability to recognize objects by sense of touch.|18-22 months|Due to low enrollment, there was limited data available for analysis and therefore insufficient power to provide meaningful results for our primary or secondary analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815149|NCT01089504|Primary|Mean Bayley Scales of Infant Development (BSID) Score - Cognitive|The Bayley Scales of Infant Development (BSID) measure the mental and motor development and test the behavior of infants from one to 42 months of age. The test is intended to measure a child's level of development in three domains: cognitive, motor, and behavioral. The primary outcome is the Bayley assessment of development at 2 years of age. This is a standardized developmental exam that is normalized to the age of the child in months. The mean adjusted score is 100 with a standard deviation of 15 (higher being better) – very similar to the more familiar IQ score.|18-22 months|Due to low enrollment, there was limited data available for analysis and therefore insufficient power to provide meaningful results for our primary or secondary analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815150|NCT01089517|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With at Least 1 Adverse Event||24 weeks|Safety Analysis Population||% of patients with adverse events|||Number
815151|NCT01089517|Secondary|The Proportion of Subjects Gaining 15 or More ETDRS Letters From Baseline at the Week 24 Visit|The proportion of subjects gaining 15 or more ETDRS letters from baseline at the Week 24 visit|24 weeks|Intent to Treat Population (last observation carried forward)||% subjects (i.e gaining >/=15 letters)|||Number
815152|NCT01089517|Primary|Mean Change in Visual Acuity From Baseline at the Week 24 Visit|The primary efficacy endpoint is the mean change in visual acuity from baseline at the Week 24 visit|24 Weeks|Intent to Treat Population (last observation carried forward)||ETDRS Letters||Standard Error|Mean
815153|NCT01089543|Secondary|Rate of Satisfactory Symptom Relief|"The rate of satisfactory symptom relief according to the DSQ defined as scores of <= 2 for all four major dyspepsia symptoms at week 8 and the diary recordings defined as a frequency of <= 1 day for all four major dyspepsia symptoms during the 7 days before week 8. Lastly, treatment success according to the participants' impression questionnaire where participants answered yes or no when asked if given the choice, whether they would want to continue to take the study drug after clinical trial completion. Values presented as percentage of participants."|Up to 8 Weeks (including 7 days prior)|Per Protocol Set (PPS) Population: defined as those participants who complied with the study protocol.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815154|NCT01089543|Primary|Rate of Complete Dyspepsia Symptom Relief|The rate of complete dyspepsia symptom relief according to the Dyspepsia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) was defined as a score of 1 for all four major dyspeptic symptoms at week 8 and according to the diary defined as all four dyspepsia symptoms recorded absent during the 7 days prior to week 8. Values presented as percentage of participants.|Up to 8 Weeks (including 7 days prior)|Per Protocol Set (PPS) population defined as those participants who complied with the study protocol.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
815155|NCT01089556|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued From Study Between Week 8 and Week 16 Endpoint||Week 8 through Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III).||participants|||Number
815156|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Discontinued From Study Between Baseline and Week 8 Endpoint||Baseline through Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II).||participants|||Number
815157|NCT01089556|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Between Week 8 and Week 16 Endpoint|TEAEs in Study Period III are events that began or worsened after Week 8 compared with the period before Week 8.|Week 8 through Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III).||participants|||Number
815158|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) Between Baseline and Week 8 Endpoint|TEAEs in Study Period II are events that began or worsened after Week 0 compared with the period before Week 0.|Baseline through Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II).||participants|||Number
815159|NCT01089556|Secondary|Mean Change in Heart Rate From Week 8 to Week 16 Endpoint|Least Squares (LS) mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, treatment*site and treatment in Study Period II.|Week 8, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had Week 8 and at least one heart rate measurement during Weeks 9- 16 (Study Period III). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||beats per minute (bpm)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815160|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change in Heart Rate From Baseline to Week 8 Endpoint|Least Squares (LS) mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, and treatment*site.|Baseline, Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline heart rate measurement during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||beats per minute (bpm)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815161|NCT01089556|Secondary|Mean Change in Blood Pressure (BP) From Week 8 to Week 16 Endpoint|Least Squares (LS) mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, treatment*site and treatment in Study Period II.|Week 8, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had Week 8 and at least one BP measurement during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||millimeter of mercury (mm Hg)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815162|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change in Blood Pressure (BP) From Baseline to Week 8 Endpoint|Least Squares (LS) mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, and treatment*site.|Baseline, Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline BP measurement during Week 1-8 (Study Period II). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||millimeter of mercury (mm Hg)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815163|NCT01089556|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) Score at Week 16 Endpoint|Measures participant's perception of improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment for Study Period III. The score ranges from 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse). Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, visit, treatment*visit, baseline*visit and treatment in Study Period II.|Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and at least one PGI-I measurement during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816933|NCT01116882|Secondary|All Cause Mortality at 30 Days||30 days|The denominator for MACE at 30 days is defined as patients who either died to 30d or had follow up of at least 23 days.||participants|||Number
815164|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) Score at Week 8 Endpoint|Measures participant's perception of improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment. The score ranges from 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse). Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, visit, and treatment*visit.|Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and at least one post-baseline PGI-I measurement during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815165|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Average Number of Hours Worked for Pay Per Week Week 8 Through Week 16|Data presented are the average number of hours worked for pay per week during the last 8 weeks.|Week 8 through Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had worked for pay during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III).||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
815166|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Average Number of Hours Worked for Pay Per Week Baseline Through Week 8|Data presented are the average number of hours worked for pay per week during the last 8 weeks.|Baseline through Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had worked for pay during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II).||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
815167|NCT01089556|Secondary|Resource Utilization (Number of Days Hospitalized, Number of Days of Sick Leave) Week 8 Through Week 16|Data presented are the number of days hospitalized and work/school missed (sick leave) due to diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP) during the last 8 weeks.|Week 8 through Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and provided information of hospitalization and sick leave during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III).||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
815168|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Resource Utilization (Number of Days Hospitalized, Number of Days of Sick Leave) Baseline Through Week 8|Data presented are the number of days hospitalized and work/school missed (sick leave) due to diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP) during the last 8 weeks.|Baseline through Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and provided information of hospitalization and sick leave during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II).||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
815169|NCT01089556|Secondary|Mean Change From Week 8 to Week 16 Endpoint in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)|A 14-item questionnaire with 2 subscales: anxiety and depression. Each item is rated on a 4-point scale (0-3), giving maximum scores of 21 for anxiety and for depression. Scores of 11 or more on either subscale are considered to be a significant case of psychological morbidity, while scores of 8-10 represent 'borderline' and 0-7 represent 'normal.' Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, visit, treatment*visit, baseline*visit and treatment in Study Period II.|Week 8, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had Week 8 and at least one HADS measurements during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815170|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 8 Endpoint in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)|A 14-item questionnaire with 2 subscales: anxiety and depression. Each item is rated on a 4-point scale (0-3), giving maximum scores of 21 for anxiety and for depression. Scores of 11 or more on either subscale are considered to be a significant case of psychological morbidity, while scores of 8-10 represent 'borderline' and 0-7 represent 'normal.' Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, visit, treatment*visit and baseline*visit.|Baseline, Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline HADS measurements during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815171|NCT01089556|Secondary|Mean Change From Week 8 to Week 16 Endpoint in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS)|The SDS is completed by the participant and is used to assess the effect of the participant's symptoms on their work (Item 1), social (Item 2), and family life (Item 3). Each item is measured on a 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely) point scale with higher values indicating greater disruption. Total scores is the sum of the 3 items and range from 0 to 30 with higher values indicating greater disruption in the participant's work/social/family life. Least Squares (LS) Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, treatment*site and treatment in Study Period II.|Week 8, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had Week 8 and at least one SDS measurement during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815172|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 8 Endpoint in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS)|The SDS is completed by the participant and is used to assess the effect of the participant's symptoms on their work (Item 1), social (Item 2), and family life (Item 3). Each item is measured on a 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely) point scale with higher values indicating greater disruption. Total scores is the sum of the 3 items and range from 0 to 30 with higher values indicating greater disruption in the participant's work/social/family life. Least Squares (LS) mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value and treatment*site.|Baseline, Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline SDS measurement during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815173|NCT01089556|Secondary|Mean Change From Week 8 to Week 16 Endpoint on the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) Questionnaire|The NPSI is a 12-item self-administered questionnaire to assess 5 different dimensions of neuropathic pain: superficial spontaneous burning pain, deep spontaneous pressing pain, paroxysmal pain, evoked pains, and paresthesias/dysesthesias. A total score ranges from 0 to 100. Higher score indicates a greater intensity of pain. Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, visit, treatment*visit, baseline*visit and treatment in Study Period II.|Week 8, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had Week 8 and at least one NPSI measurements during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816934|NCT01116882|Primary|12-month Composite Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE)||12 month|||participants|||Number
815174|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 8 Endpoint on the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) Questionnaire|The NPSI is a 12-item self-administered questionnaire to assess 5 different dimensions of neuropathic pain: superficial spontaneous burning pain, deep spontaneous pressing pain, paroxysmal pain, evoked pains, and paresthesias/dysesthesias. A total score ranges from 0 to 100. Higher score indicates a greater intensity of pain. Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, visit, treatment*visit and baseline*visit.|Baseline, Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline NPSI measurements during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815175|NCT01089556|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) at Week 16 Endpoint|Measures clinician's perception of participant improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment for Study Period III. Scores range from 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse). Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, visit, treatment*visit, baseline*visit and treatment in Study Period II.|Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one CGI-I measurement during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815176|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) at Week 8 Endpoint|Measures clinician's perception of participant improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment. Scores range from 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse). Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, visit, and treatment*visit.|Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one post-baseline CGI-I measurement during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815177|NCT01089556|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Decrease of Greater Than or Equal to 2 Points on Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Modified Short Form 24-Hour Average Pain Item Score at Week 16 Endpoint|BPI Modified Short Form 24-Hour average pain item score is a self-reported scale that measures the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine).|Week 8 through Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had Week 8 and at least one BPI measurements during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
815178|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With a Decrease of Greater Than or Equal to 2 Points on Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Modified Short Form 24-Hour Average Pain Item Score at Week 8 Endpoint|BPI Modified Short Form 24-Hour average pain item score is a self-reported scale that measures the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine).|Baseline through Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline BPI measurements during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
815179|NCT01089556|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Reduction of Greater Than or Equal to 50% on Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Modified Short Form 24-Hour Average Pain Item Score at Week 16 Endpoint|BPI Modified Short Form 24-Hour average pain item score is a self-reported scale that measures the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine).|Week 8 through Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had Week 8 and at least one BPI measurements during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
815180|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With a Reduction of Greater Than or Equal to 50% on Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Modified Short Form 24-Hour Average Pain Item Score at Week 8 Endpoint|BPI Modified Short Form 24-Hour average pain item score is a self-reported scale that measures the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine).|Baseline through Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline BPI measurements during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
815181|NCT01089556|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Reduction of Greater Than or Equal to 30% on Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Modified Short Form 24-Hour Average Pain Item Score at Week 16 Endpoint|BPI Modified Short Form 24-Hour average pain item score is a self-reported scale that measures the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine).|Week 8 through Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had Week 8 and at least one BPI measurements during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
815182|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With a Reduction of Greater Than or Equal to 30% on Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Modified Short Form 24-Hour Average Pain Item Score at Week 8 Endpoint|BPI Modified Short Form 24-Hour average pain item score is a self-reported scale that measures the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine).|Baseline through Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline BPI measurements during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
815195|NCT01089582|Secondary|Change in ARICEPT Dosing: Number of Participants for Time to First ARICEPT Dose Escalation|The starting dose of ARICPET was 5 mg once daily (QD), which could be increased to 10 mg QD during the study.|Baseline to Week 12.|FAS. Starting dose of ARICEPT was not summarized.||participants|||Number
816935|NCT01116882|Primary|30-day Composite Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE)||30 days|The denominator for MACE at 30 days is defined as patients who either had MACE to 30d or had follow up of at least 23 days.||participants|||Number
815183|NCT01089556|Secondary|Mean Change From Week 8 to Week 16 Endpoint in Items of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Modified Short Form Worst Pain Score|BPI Modified Short Form worst pain score is a self-reported scale that measures the severity of pain based on the worst pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine). Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, visit, treatment*visit, baseline*visit and treatment in Study Period II.|Week 8, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had Week 8 and at least one BPI measurements during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815184|NCT01089556|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 8 Endpoint in 24 Hour Average Pain Item Score on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Modified Short Form|BPI Modified Short Form 24-Hour average pain item score is a self-reported scale that measures the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine). Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, visit, treatment*visit and baseline*visit.|Baseline, Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline BPI measurements during Weeks 1-8 (Study Period II).||units on a scale||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815185|NCT01089556|Primary|Change From Week 8 to Week 16 Endpoint in 24 Hour Average Pain Item Score on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Modified Short Form|BPI Modified Short Form 24-Hour average pain item score is a self-reported scale that measures the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine). Mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was used to calculate Least Squares (LS) Mean and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). LS Mean values are controlled for treatment, site, baseline value, visit, treatment*visit, baseline*visit and treatment in Study Period II.|Week 8, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had Week 8 and at least one BPI measurements during Weeks 9-16 (Study Period III).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815186|NCT01089569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weight Changes|"Measure the changes in weight attributable to exenatide, insulin glargine and their combinations.
Employ CGM with AGP analysis to determine if there is an incremental benefit for subjects who do not reach target to add exenatide to insulin glargine or insulin glargine to exenatide in patients taking metformin.
Change from baseline was calculated as weight in pounds at baseline minus weight in pounds at final visit (32 weeks)."|baseline - final visit (32 weeks)|||lbs (pounds)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815187|NCT01089569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucose Exposure (Area Under the Diurnal Median Curve or AUC)|"Employ Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) with Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) analysis to characterize the diurnal patterns produced by oral medications (metformin) used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.
Employ CGM to measure the effect of exenatide, insulin glargine and exenatide plus insulin glargine in terms of underlying physiological defects and alter medications in a manner that improves- i. Glucose exposure (area under the diurnal median curve) Change from baseline was calculated as area under the diurnal median curve at baseline minus AUC value at final visit (32 weeks).
AUC is calculated using modified rectangle method AUC = sum of superscript 23, subscript i=0 P subscript 50i I = hour of day P subscript 50i = smoother 50th percentile value for ith hour of day"|baseline - final visit (32 weeks)|||mg/dL*24hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
815188|NCT01089569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CGM Glucose Variability|"Employ Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) with Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) analysis to characterize the diurnal patterns produced by oral medications (metformin) used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.
Employ CGM to measure the effect of exenatide, insulin glargine and exenatide plus insulin glargine in terms of underlying physiological defects and alter medications in a manner that improves- ii. Glucose variability (inter-quartile range)
IQR is the difference between the 75th and 25th percentiles. Change from baseline was calculated as IQR at baseline minus IQR value at final visit (32 weeks)."|baseline to final visit (32 weeks)|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815189|NCT01089569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucose Stability (Absolute Hourly Rate of Change in Median Curve)|"Employ Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) with Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) analysis to characterize the diurnal patterns produced by oral medications (metformin) used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.
Employ CGM to measure the effect of exenatide, insulin glargine and exenatide plus insulin glargine in terms of underlying physiological defects and alter medications in a manner that improves iii. Glucose stability (absolute hourly rate of change in median curve)
Change from baseline was calculated as mean absolute hourly rate of change in median curve at baseline minus rate at final visit (32 weeks). Mean absolute hourly rate of change in the smoothed median curve is calculated as delta subscript MC = (|p subscript 50 zero - p subscript 50 23|+Sum superscript 23 subscript i = 1| p subscript 50i - p subscript 50 i-1| over T.
i = hour of day p subscript 50i = smoothed 50th percentile value for ith hour of day T = total # of non-missing hourly smoothed percentiles"|baseline to final visit (32 weeks)|||mg/dL/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
815190|NCT01089569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Incidence of Hypoglycemia (Degree)|"Employ Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) with Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) analysis to characterize the diurnal patterns produced by oral medications (metformin) used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.
Employ CGM to measure the effect of exenatide, insulin glargine and exenatide plus insulin glargine in terms of underlying physiological defects and alter medications in a manner that improves- iv. Incidence of hypoglycemia (degree) Change from baseline was calculated as mean incidence percentage at baseline minus mean incidence percentage at final visit (32 weeks)"|baseline to final visit (32 weeks)|||percentage of measures under 70 mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815191|NCT01089569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Incidence of Hypoglycemia (Frequency)|"Employ Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) with Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) analysis to characterize the diurnal patterns produced by oral medications (metformin) used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.
Employ CGM to measure the effect of exenatide, insulin glargine and exenatide plus insulin glargine in terms of underlying physiological defects and alter medications in a manner that improves- iv. Incidence of hypoglycemia (frequency)
Change from baseline was calculated as mean incidence rate at baseline minus mean incidence rate at final visit (32 weeks)"|baseline to final visit (32 weeks)|||episodes/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
815196|NCT01089582|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Caregiver's Assessment for Quality of Life for Alzheimer's Dementia (QoL-AD) Overall and Subscale Scores at Week 12|QoL-AD was comprised of 13 individual items, each measured on a 4-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 [poor] to 4 [excellent]). Overall QoL-AD score was the sum of the scores for the 13 individual items and ranged from 13 to 52, with higher scores indicating a higher health related quality of life.|Baseline, Week 12.|FAS; (n)=number of participants evaluable at baseline and Week 12.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815197|NCT01089582|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Participant's Assessment for Quality of Life for Alzheimer's Dementia (QoL-AD) Overall and Subscale Scores at Week 12|QoL-AD was comprised of 13 individual items, each measured on a 4-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 [poor] to 4 [excellent]). Overall QoL-AD score was the sum of the scores for the 13 individual items and ranged from 13 to 52, with higher scores indicating a higher health related quality of life.|Baseline, Week 12.|FAS; (n)=number of participants evaluable at baseline and Week 12.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815198|NCT01089582|Primary|Number of Participants for Change From Baseline for the Caregiver's Assessment of Improvement at Week 12|The caregiver's assessment improvement was a 5-point rated scale ranging from much improved to much worse to the question ‘compared to the severity of your relative’s condition at baseline, how much do you feel it has changed?’.|Baseline, Week 12.|FAS.||participants|||Number
815199|NCT01089582|Primary|Number of Participants for Change From Baseline for Clinical Global Impressions of Improvement (CGI-I) at Week 12|CGI-I is a 7-point physician rated scale ranging from very much improved to very much worse.|Baseline, Week 12.|Full Analysis Set (FAS): all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose (including partial doses) of ARICEPT.||participants|||Number
815200|NCT01089595|Secondary|Best Overall Response Using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, Choi Criteria, and Positron Emission Tomography Imaging||Every 8 weeks for up to 5 years|Too few participants to provide meaningful analysis||Participants|||Count of Participants
815201|NCT01089595|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) is defined as the duration of time from start of treatment to time of progression. It will be determined for both RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) and CHOI criteria.|6 months until death or for 5 years|||weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
815202|NCT01089608|Primary|Visual Analogue Scale (VAS - Ranges 0-100 mm)|The primary objective is to evaluate the efficacy of the treatment by the change from baseline (Day 0) to Day 63 (± 3 Days) of the global ocular discomfort (Visual Analogue Scale) (Decrease of VAS value = better outcome)|Baseline and D63 (D63 minus baseline)|Modified ITT set: all randomised patients with at least one eligible treated eye, for whom any follow-up efficacy data are available.||units on a scale (from 0 to 100 mm)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815203|NCT01089751|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urgency Urinary Incontinence (UUI)|Urgency urinary incontinence is identified if the patient marks “Yes” for both Accidental Leakage and Urgency Associated Void in the 3-day bladder diary, and the Urgency Severity score is ≥ 1. Average daily episodes of UUI is calculated as the sum of all UUI episodes over 3-day diary period divided by the number of valid diary days with at least one valid bladder diary entry during the 3-day period. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who were incontinent at Baseline with at least one urinary episode marked “Yes” for both Accidental leakage and Urgency associated void, and an Urgency severity rating ≥ 1 in the bladder diary.||UUI episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
815204|NCT01089751|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urgency Severity|The urgency severity per toilet void is based on the Indevus Urgency Severity Scale (IUSS). The patient recorded urinary urgency severity in a 3-day bladder diary using a 4-point scale: 0=None-no urgency (best), 1=Slight-aware of urgency but is tolerable, 2=Moderate-urgency discomfort interferes with activities/tasks, 3=Severe-extreme urgency discomfort that abruptly stops activities/tasks (worst). Urgency Severity is calculated as the sum of all IUSS scores during the 3-day diary period divided by the number of toilet voids recorded during that period. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who were incontinent at Baseline with at least one urinary episode marked “Yes” for both Accidental leakage and Urgency associated void, and an Urgency severity rating ≥ 1 in the bladder diary.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815205|NCT01089751|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Voided Volume|Average volume of urine voided per toilet void is calculated by total volume collected in a 24-hour diary period divided by the number of individual entries of volume voided in that period. A positive change from Baseline (greater volume voided) indicated improvement. A negative change from Baseline (less volume voided) indicated a worsening.|Baseline, Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who were incontinent at Baseline with at least one urinary episode marked “Yes” for both Accidental leakage and Urgency associated void, and an Urgency severity rating ≥ 1 in the bladder diary.||cubic centimeters (cc)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815206|NCT01089751|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daily Average Overactive Bladder-Symptom Composite Score (OAB-SCS)|The OAB-SCS is derived from the 3-day bladder diary which includes: 1) 24-hour voiding frequency; 2) the Indevus Urgency Severity Scale (IUSS) Score (0=no urgency, 1=aware of urgency but is tolerable, 2=urgency discomfort interferes with activities/tasks, 3=extreme urgency discomfort that abruptly stops activities/tasks associated with each toilet void); and 3) the frequency of Urgency Urinary Incontinence episodes. Each toilet void is then assigned a point value from 1 (IUSS Score=0) to 5 (UUI episode not associated with a toilet void). The daily average OAB-SCS is then calculated based on the diary entries and assigned point values. The lowest possible daily average OAB-SCS is 0 (corresponding to no urgency in every void). There is no upper limit since the score is based on the number of voids per day. Scores <= 30 indicate mild OAB, scores > 30 to 39 indicate moderate OAB, and scores >= 40 indicate severe OAB. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who were incontinent at Baseline with at least one urinary episode marked “Yes” for both Accidental leakage and Urgency associated void, and an Urgency severity rating ≥ 1 in the bladder diary.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815260|NCT01097694|Secondary|Airway Wall Area|Change in airway wall area as assessed by computerized tomography (CT)|6 months after start of treatment|||% of area||Standard Deviation|Mean
815261|NCT01097694|Secondary|Airway Wall Thickness|Change in airway wall thickness as assessed by computerized tomography (CT)|6 months after start of treatment|||% of airway||Standard Deviation|Mean
815207|NCT01089751|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urgency-Related Toilet Voids|Urgency-related toilet void (or urinary urgency) is identified if the patient marks “Yes” for both Urgency Association Void and Toilet Voiding in the 3-day bladder diary. The daily average number of urgency-related voids is calculated as the sum of all urgency episodes over the 3-day bladder diary period divided by the number of valid diary days with at least one valid bladder diary entry during the 3-day period. A negative change from Baseline (fewer urgency related toilet voids) indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who were incontinent at Baseline with at least one urinary episode marked “Yes” for both Accidental leakage and Urgency associated void, and an Urgency severity rating ≥ 1 in the bladder diary.||Toilet void||Standard Deviation|Mean
815208|NCT01089751|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nocturic Toilet Voids|A nocturic (nighttime) toilet void is identified if the patient marks “Yes” for both Toilet Voiding and Sleep Interruption in the 3-day bladder diary. The daily average number of nocturic toilet voids is obtained as the sum of all nighttime toilet voids over the 3-day bladder diary period divided by number of valid diary days with at least one valid bladder diary entry during the 3-day period. A negative change from Baseline (fewer nocturic toilet voids) indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who were incontinent at Baseline with at least one urinary episode marked “Yes” for both Accidental leakage and Urgency associated void, and an Urgency severity rating ≥ 1 in the bladder diary.||Nocturic toilet void||Standard Deviation|Mean
815209|NCT01089751|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Continent Days Per Week (CDW)|Continent Days per Week is the average of the number of times an individual has no incontinence episodes in a day within the 3-day collection period calculated as 7 x (number of dry days within the 3-day diary period) divided by the number of valid diary days with at least one valid bladder diary entry during the 3-day period. A positive change from Baseline (more continent/fewer incontinent days per week ) indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who were incontinent at Baseline with at least one urinary episode marked “Yes” for both Accidental leakage and Urgency associated void, and an Urgency severity rating ≥ 1 in the bladder diary.||Continent days per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
815210|NCT01089751|Primary|Percentage of Patients Continent (PPC)|PPC is the percentage of patients with complete continence (without any urgency urinary incontinence episodes) during the 3-day bladder diary period associated with the Week 14 visit.|Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who were incontinent at Baseline with at least one urinary episode marked “Yes” for both Accidental leakage and Urgency associated void, and an Urgency severity rating ≥ 1 in the bladder diary.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815211|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in LPS at Month 3|"LPS is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of time from the beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) to the first interval of 10 consecutive minutes of sleep. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. Only suvorexant LD-placebo comparison included, as suvorexant HD-placebo comparison is included in Primary hypothesis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815212|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in LPS at Month 1|"LPS is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of time from the beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) to the first interval of 10 consecutive minutes of sleep. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. Only suvorexant LD-placebo comparison included, as suvorexant HD-placebo comparison is included in Primary hypothesis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815213|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD/HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in LPS at Night 1|"LPS is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of time from the beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) to the first interval of 10 consecutive minutes of sleep. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Night 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815214|NCT01097616|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an AE Occurring During Initial 3-Month DB TRT Phase|An AE is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Participants who discontinued study drug treatment due to an AE occurring during the initial 3-month DB TRT Phase are counted once in this summary.|Up to 3 months|All Patients as Treated (APaT) population, consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication||participants|||Number
815215|NCT01097616|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event (AE) During Initial 3-Month DB TRT Phase|An AE is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Participants with an AE occurring during the initial 3-month DB TRT Phase are counted once in this summary.|Up to 3 months|All Patients as Treated (APaT) population, consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication||participants|||Number
815262|NCT01097694|Secondary|Blood Eosinophils|Change in blood eosinophil count|6 months after start of treatment|||eosinophils per microliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
815216|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSOm at Month 3|sTSOm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the duration of time that it took to fall asleep, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Month 3 range is Days 76-90 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. Only suvorexant LD-placebo comparison included, as suvorexant HD-placebo comparison is included in Primary hypothesis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815217|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSOm at Month 1|sTSOm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the duration of time that it took to fall asleep, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Month 1 range is Days 23-30 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. Only suvorexant LD-placebo comparison included, as suvorexant HD-placebo comparison is included in Primary hypothesis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815218|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD/HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSOm at Week 1|sTSOm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the duration of time that it took to fall asleep, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Week 1 range is Days 2-8 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Week 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815219|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in WASO at Month 3|"WASO is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of wakefulness from the onset of persistent sleep (i.e., 10 consecutive minutes of sleep) to the end of PSG assessment the following morning. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. Only suvorexant LD-placebo comparison included, as suvorexant HD-placebo comparison is included in Primary hypothesis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815220|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in WASO at Month 1|"WASO is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of wakefulness from the onset of persistent sleep (i.e., 10 consecutive minutes of sleep) to the end of PSG assessment the following morning. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. Only suvorexant LD-placebo comparison included, as suvorexant HD-placebo comparison is included in Primary hypothesis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815221|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD/HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in WASO at Night 1|"WASO is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of wakefulness from the onset of persistent sleep (i.e., 10 consecutive minutes of sleep) to the end of PSG assessment the following morning. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Night 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815222|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSTm at Month 3|sTSTm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the total amount of time spent asleep before waking for the day, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Month 3 range is Days 76-90 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. Only suvorexant LD-placebo comparison included, as suvorexant HD-placebo comparison is included in Primary hypothesis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816936|NCT01116921|Secondary|Incidence of Chronic Lung Disease||Measured at hospital discharge|||Participants|||Count of Participants
815223|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSTm at Month 1|sTSTm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the total amount of time spent asleep before waking for the day, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Month 1 range is Days 23-30 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. Only suvorexant LD-placebo comparison included, as suvorexant HD-placebo comparison is included in Primary hypothesis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815224|NCT01097616|Secondary|Suvorexant LD/HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSTm at Week 1|sTSTm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the total amount of time spent asleep before waking for the day, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Week 1 range is Days 2-8 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Week 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815225|NCT01097616|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in LPS at Month 3|"LPS is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of time from the beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) to the first interval of 10 consecutive minutes of sleep. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The Primary hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815226|NCT01097616|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in Latency to Onset of Persistent Sleep (LPS) at Month 1|"LPS is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of time from the beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) to the first interval of 10 consecutive minutes of sleep. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The Primary hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815227|NCT01097616|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSOm at Month 3|sTSOm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the duration of time that it took to fall asleep, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Month 3 range is Days 76-90 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The Primary hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815228|NCT01097616|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in Mean Subjective Time to Sleep Onset (sTSOm) at Month 1|sTSOm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the duration of time that it took to fall asleep, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Month 1 range is Days 23-30 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The Primary hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815229|NCT01097616|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in WASO at Month 3|"WASO is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of wakefulness from the onset of persistent sleep (i.e., 10 consecutive minutes of sleep) to the end of PSG assessment the following morning. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The Primary hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815263|NCT01097694|Secondary|Endobronchial Biopsy Smooth Muscle Tryptase-positive Mast Cells|Change in the biopsy smooth muscle tryptase-positive mast cells from baseline at 6 months|6 months after start of treatment|||mast cells per mm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
815230|NCT01097616|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in Wakefulness After Persistent Sleep Onset (WASO) at Month 1|"WASO is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of wakefulness from the onset of persistent sleep (i.e., 10 consecutive minutes of sleep) to the end of PSG assessment the following morning. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The Primary hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815231|NCT01097616|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSTm at Month 3|sTSTm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the total amount of time spent asleep before waking for the day, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Month 3 range is Days 76-90 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The Primary hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815232|NCT01097616|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in Mean Subjective Total Sleep Time (sTSTm) at Month 1|sTSTm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the total amount of time spent asleep before waking for the day, as recorded in a daily electronic diary (e-diary). Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any polysomnography [PSG] nights) falling within the day range; Month 1 range is Days 23-30 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The Primary hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815233|NCT01097629|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an AE Occurring During 3-Month DB TRT Phase|An AE is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Participants who discontinued study drug treatment due to an AE occurring during the 3-month DB TRT Phase are counted once in this summary.|Up to 3 months|All Patients as Treated (APaT) population, consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication||participants|||Number
815234|NCT01097629|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event (AE) During 3-Month DB TRT Phase|An AE is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Participants with an AE occurring during the 3-month DB TRT Phase are counted once in this summary.|Up to 3 months|All Patients as Treated (APaT) population, consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication||participants|||Number
815235|NCT01097629|Secondary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in LPS at Night 1|"LPS is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of time from the beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) to the first interval of 10 consecutive minutes of sleep. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Night 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815236|NCT01097629|Secondary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSOm at Week 1|sTSOm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the duration of time that it took to fall asleep, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Week 1 range is Days 2-8 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Week 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815237|NCT01097629|Secondary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in WASO at Night 1|"WASO is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of wakefulness from the onset of persistent sleep (i.e., 10 consecutive minutes of sleep) to the end of PSG assessment the following morning. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Night 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815238|NCT01097629|Secondary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSTm at Week 1|sTSTm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the total amount of time spent asleep before waking for the day, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Week 1 range is Days 2-8 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Week 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815239|NCT01097629|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in LPS at Month 3|"LPS is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of time from the beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) to the first interval of 10 consecutive minutes of sleep. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815240|NCT01097629|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in Latency to Onset of Persistent Sleep (LPS) at Month 1|"LPS is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of time from the beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) to the first interval of 10 consecutive minutes of sleep. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815241|NCT01097629|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSOm at Month 3|sTSOm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the duration of time that it took to fall asleep, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Month 3 range is Days 76-90 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815242|NCT01097629|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in Mean Subjective Time to Sleep Onset (sTSOm) at Month 1|sTSOm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the duration of time that it took to fall asleep, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Month 1 range is Days 23-30 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815243|NCT01097629|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in WASO at Month 3|"WASO is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of wakefulness from the onset of persistent sleep (i.e., 10 consecutive minutes of sleep) to the end of PSG assessment the following morning. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815244|NCT01097629|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in Wakefulness After Persistent Sleep Onset (WASO) at Month 1|"WASO is measured during overnight sleep laboratory (PSG) assessments at baseline, Night 1, Month 1 and Month 3, and is defined as the duration of wakefulness from the onset of persistent sleep (i.e., 10 consecutive minutes of sleep) to the end of PSG assessment the following morning. Beginning of PSG assessment (Lights-Off) is at approximately the participant's habitual bedtime. The participant is awakened, or allowed to get out of bed if already awake, after 8 hours of PSG recording (Lights-On). PSG assessments consist of electronic measurement of brain activity and eye and muscle movements. PSG data was scored by a Centralized PSG reading center."|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization PSG observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815264|NCT01097694|Secondary|Endobronchial Biopsy Total Tryptase-positive Mast Cells|Change in endobronchial biopsy total tryptase-positive mast cells from baseline at 6 months|6 months after start of treatment|||mast cells per mm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
815245|NCT01097629|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in sTSTm at Month 3|sTSTm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the total amount of time spent asleep before waking for the day, as recorded in a daily e-diary. Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any PSG nights) falling within the day range; Month 3 range is Days 76-90 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 3|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815246|NCT01097629|Primary|Suvorexant HD Versus Placebo: Change From Baseline in Mean Subjective Total Sleep Time (sTSTm) at Month 1|sTSTm is the average over a defined day range of the participant's report of the total amount of time spent asleep before waking for the day, as recorded in a daily electronic diary (e-diary). Averages were derived by taking the mean of all available daily measurements (excluding the mornings following any polysomnography [PSG] nights) falling within the day range; Month 1 range is Days 23-30 (Day 1 is day of first double-blind dose). A participant must have at least 3 days of data during the defined day range to calculate an average for the day range; otherwise, the mean value was considered missing for that day range. The baseline value is the mean of the last 7 daily measurements obtained during the placebo Run-in period.|Baseline and Month 1|Randomized participants with ≥1 post-randomization e-diary observation after ≥1 dose of study drug, and baseline data were included in this analysis. The hypothesis included only the suvorexant HD-placebo comparison.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815247|NCT01097655|Other Pre-specified|Prevalence of Adverse Events (Weeks 0-144), Per Participant|Percentage of participants who experienced at least 1 adverse event during Weeks 0-144 by adverse event type. Doctors asked participants for adverse events, grouped them into categories given in the eCRF. The list of adverse events included in the eCRF were hypertriglyceridemia, hypercholesterolemia, low HDL cholesterol, high LDL cholesterol, hyperglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, elevated AST, elevated ALT, elevated γGT, elevated alkaline phosphatase, stomatitis, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, mood disorder, neurocerebellar disorder, neurocontrol disorder, headache, fatigue, fever, other (listed as 'not specified').|Weeks 0 to 144|||percentage of participants|||Number
815248|NCT01097655|Other Pre-specified|Prevalence of Adverse Events (Weeks 0-144), Per Event|Percentage of overall number of adverse events experienced during Weeks 0-144 by adverse event type. Doctors asked participants for adverse events, grouped them into categories given in the electronic case report form (eCRF). The list of adverse events included in the eCRF were hypertriglyceridemia, hypercholesterolemia, low high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, high low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, hyperglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST), elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT), elevated gamma glutamyl transferase (γGT), elevated alkaline phosphatase, stomatitis, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, mood disorder, neurocerebellar disorder, neurocontrol disorder, headache, fatigue, fever, other (listed as 'not specified').|Weeks 0 to 144|||percentage of adverse events|Adverse Events||Number
815249|NCT01097655|Primary|Change From Baseline in HIV-1 Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Viral Load|Changes in participants' HIV-1 RNA viral load were assessed by measuring the change from Baseline at scheduled visits planned as part of routine care.|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 144|Participants with an assessment at Baseline. Number analyzed=participants with an assessment at given time point.||log copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815250|NCT01097655|Primary|Change From Baseline in Absolute Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) Cell Count|Changes in participants' CD4 cell counts were assessed by measuring the change from Baseline in the number of CD4 cells at scheduled visits planned as part of routine care.|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 144|Participants with an assessment at Baseline. Number analyzed=participants with an assessment at given time point.||cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815251|NCT01097668|Secondary|The Effect of ATX-MS-1467 on Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI).|Number of new or persisting Gadolinium-enhancing lesions at week 16 and 20 when compared to baseline.|16 and 20 weeks|ITT population at week 16 and 20 n=21 (Intradermal injection) ITT population at week 16 and 20 n=22 (Subcutaneous injection) MRI population at week 16 and 20 n=17 (Intradermal injection) MRI population at week 16 and 20 n=20 (Subcutaneous injection)||MRI lesions||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815252|NCT01097668|Primary|Safety and Tolerability|Occurrence of treatment emergent Adverse Events (AE), Serious Adverse Events, and laboratory abnormalities up to week 48 compared to baseline.|48 weeks|The Safety population will be denoted as the ‘ITT population’ for the summarisation of safety endpoints.||participants|||Number
815253|NCT01097694|Secondary|Change in Number of Self-Reported Asthma Symptom Free Days||baseline to week 24|Self-reported asthma symptom free days were not entered into the study database.|||||
815254|NCT01097694|Secondary|Change in Inflammatory Mediators in Exhaled Breath Condensate|Assessment of change in eicosanoids in the exhaled breath condensate|baseline to week 24|The exhaled breath condensate was not processed for inflammatory mediators.|||||
815255|NCT01097694|Secondary|Change in Sputum Supernatant Differential, Supernatant Tryptase and IL-13|Change in sputum eosinophil and neutrophil percentage. Change in sputum supernatant tryptase as measured by ELISA. Change in sputum IL-13 level as measured by ELISA.|baseline to 24 weeks|"Sputum sample slide preparation quality was poor and samples meeting quality control were insufficient for analysis of sputum differential.
Insufficient study funds prevented assessment of sputum tryptase. IL-13 was below the detection limit of assay in sputum supernatant."|||||
815256|NCT01097694|Secondary|Urinary Leukotriene E4|Change in urinary leukotriene E4 levels from baseline|6 months after start of treatment|||ng/mg Creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
815257|NCT01097694|Secondary|Bronchoalveolar Lavage Cysteinyl Leukotrienes|Change in bronchoalveolar lavage cysteinyl leukotrienes levels from baseline|6 months after start of treatment|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815258|NCT01097694|Secondary|Urinary Prostaglandin D2|Change in urinary Prostaglandin D2 levels from baseline|6 months after start of treatment|||ng/mg Creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
815259|NCT01097694|Secondary|Bronchoalveolar Lavage Histamine|Change in bronchoalveolar lavage histamine levels from baseline|6 months after start of treatment|||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
815269|NCT01097694|Secondary|Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ)|Change in patient-reported Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) score The asthma quality of life questionnaire (AQLQ) is a 32-item scale with a range from 1-7 with a higher value denoting improvement. The minimal important difference is 0.5.|6 months after start of treatment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815270|NCT01097694|Secondary|Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)|Change in patient-reported ACQ score The six-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-6) is a scale from 0 to 6 with a lower value denoting an improvement in asthma control. The minimal important difference is 0.5.|6 months after start of treatment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815271|NCT01097694|Secondary|Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO)|Change in Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide Measurement (ppb)|6 months after start of treatment|||parts per billion||Standard Deviation|Mean
815272|NCT01097694|Secondary|Evening Peak Flow|Change in patient-reported evening peak flow measurement (L/s)|6 months after start of treatment|||L/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
815273|NCT01097694|Secondary|Morning Peak Flow Measurement|Change in patient-reported morning peak flow measurement (L/s)|6 months after start of treatment|||L/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
815274|NCT01097694|Secondary|FEV1%|Change in FEV1% of predicted|6 months after start of treatment|||% of predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
815275|NCT01097694|Secondary|FEV1 in Liters|Change in FEV1 in treatment group compared to placebo group|6 months after start of treatment|||L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815276|NCT01097694|Secondary|Number of Asthma Exacerbations|Number of asthma exacerbations experienced from randomization to study completion.|Up to 24 weeks|||events|||Number
815277|NCT01097694|Secondary|Change in Maximum Post-Bronchodilator (BD) Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) %||6 months after start of treatment|||% of predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
815278|NCT01097694|Secondary|Bronchoalveolar Lavage (BAL) Fluid Tryptase Level|Change in BAL fluid tryptase levels after 24 weeks of imatinib vs. placebo|6 months after start of treatment|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815279|NCT01097694|Secondary|Serum Total Tryptase|Change in serum total tryptase after 24 weeks of imatinib vs placebo treatment|6 months after start of treatment|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815280|NCT01097694|Primary|Change in Mean Methacholine Responsiveness as Assessed by the Provocation Concentration Causing a 20% Fall in Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) (PC20) at Month 3 and 6 Versus Baseline|"Our primary outcome was change in airway hyperresponsiveness, as assessed by PC20, from baseline to 3 and/or 6 months of therapy in imatinib treated participants as compared with controls. Change in PC20 was assessed using log2-transformed ratios of PC20 at month 3 and /or month 6 vs PC20 at baseline. Our null hypothesis was that the mean of this ratio will be 0 after log2-transformed. We used a linear mixed-effects model for a repeated-measures analysis to compare the primary outcome between the two groups.
PC20 is determined by the provocation concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)."|Over 6 months from beginning of treatment|||Log2 Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
815281|NCT01097785|Secondary|Change in Measures of Reactive Oxygen Species in the Blood|Reactive Oxygen Species will be assessed after one month of placebo and statin therapy; measured using electron parametric resonance spectroscopy (EPR).|Baseline and 30 days|||EPR Arbitrary Units||Standard Error|Mean
815282|NCT01097785|Primary|Change in Muscle Sympathetic Nerve Activity in Bursts Per 100 Heartbeats|Muscle sympathetic nerve activity will be assessed after one month of placebo and statin therapy; measured in bursts/100 heartbeats.|Baseline and 30 days|||bursts/100 heartbeats||Standard Error|Mean
815283|NCT01097863|Primary|Visibility of the Inversion Indicator on Lens When Lens Was on Participant's Finger, for Example, During Lens Insertion.|"As assessed by the participant retrospectively after one week of wear and recorded on a questionnaire as a yes or no response to the question, Did you notice an OK mark on the study lens while it was on your finger, for example, during lens insertion? The positive yes responses are reported."|1 week|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to protocol deviations as determined by masked review (9), and unavailable data due to discontinuations (3).||participants|||Number
815284|NCT01098032|Secondary|The Cost-effectiveness Ratio.|Assessement of the cost-effectiveness ratio is important when testing a new strategy of both therapy and prophylaxis. The Renalguard system is more expensive than the conventional hydration regimen. The cost of RenalGuard system is approximately 800 $. This cost will be justified only if the system is more effective in preventing CI-AKI and improving the clinical outcome, expecially reducing the lenght of ospedalization and the rate of dialysis.|1 month||||||
815285|NCT01098032|Secondary|The Rate of In-hospital Major Adverse Events (i.e. Acute Myocardial Infarction, c) Renal Failure Requiring Dialysis, and d) Acute Pulmonary Edema)|Assessment of the rate of in-hospital major adverse events (i.e. acute myocardial infarction, c) renal failure requiring dialysis, and d) acute pulmonary edema) will give important informantion on the clinical relevance of prophylactic strategies in preventing CI-AKI|1 month||||||
815286|NCT01098032|Secondary|the Rate of Acute Renal Failure Requiring Dialysis|occurrence of renal failure requiring dialysis represents the haard endpoint of the study. Actually this represents the worst clinical consequence of CI-AKI.|1 month||||||
815287|NCT01098032|Secondary|Changes in the Urine and Serum NGAL Concentration After Contrast Exposure|NGAL is a new biomarker which seems to be very promising in detecting kidney injury. prelimiary data suggest that urine and serum NGAL increase very early (within few horurs) after the occurrence og acute kidney damage. Therefore, NGAL may be a real marker of acute kidney injury.|7 days||||||
815288|NCT01098032|Secondary|Changes in the Serum Cystatin C Concentration at 24 and 48 Hours After Contrast Exposure|Cystatin C is an alternative biomarker of kidney damage. Cystatin C seems to be superior to serum creatinine an identifying kidney function and damage.|7 days||||||
815289|NCT01098032|Secondary|Rate of Kidney Injury and Major Adverse Events|an increase in the serum creatinine concentration >=0.25% and >=0.5 mg/dl at 48 hours after contrast exposure|7 days||||||
815306|NCT01098110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impressions -Severity of Illness (CGI-S) Score.|The CGI-S is a score that measures the severity of overall bipolar illness. The score ranges on a scale from 1 to 7, where 1 is normal, and 7 is very severely ill. Change from baseline values that are negative represent an improvement in symptoms.|Baseline and Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815290|NCT01098032|Primary|Number of Participants With Contrast-induced Acute Kidney Injury|The primary outcome measure will be the rate of development of CI-AKI in the 2 study arms (number of participants). CI-AKI is defined as an increase in the serum creatinine concentration >=0.3 mg/dL from the baseline value at 48 hours after administration of the contrast media or the need for dialysis.|at 48 hours following contrast exposure|all consecutive patients with chronic kidney disease scheduled for coronary and/or peripheral angiography and/or angioplasty with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≤30 ml/min/1.73 m2 and/or a risk score ≥11 were considered eligible for the study||participants|||Number
815299|NCT01098097|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Who Achieve Undetectable Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV-RNA)|Participant's blood was tested for HCV-RNA by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. The limit of detection for the assay was 50 IU/mL.|Week 12|The population analyzed was 920 participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had data collected at the Week 12 visit||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815300|NCT01098097|Primary|Incidence of Dose Modifications Due to Adverse Events|All dose modifications due to an AE were reported. See Outcome Measure 1 for definition of AEs.|Up to 12 Weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
815301|NCT01098097|Primary|Incidence of Particular Adverse Events Resulting in Treatment Discontinuation|"All treatment discontinuations due to particular AEs were reported. These discontinuations included treatment stopped (TS) and dose reduced followed by treatment stopped (DR/TS).
The particular AE evaluated were anemia (low red blood cells), leucopenia (low white blood cells), neutropenia (low blood neutrophils), thrombocytopenia (low blood platelets), esophageal varices (dilated veins in lower esophagus), splenomegaly (enlarged spleen), portal hypertensive gastropathy (changes in stomach mucosa), and hepatomegaly (enlarged liver)"|Up to 12 Weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
815302|NCT01098097|Primary|Incidence of Treatment Discontinuations Due to Adverse Events|All treatment discontinuations due to an AE were reported. See Outcome Measure 1 for definition of AEs.|Up to 12 Weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
815303|NCT01098097|Primary|Incidence of Thrombocytopenia|Thrombocytopenia is a low blood platelet count|Up to 12 Weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
815304|NCT01098097|Primary|Incidence of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and/or Clinically Significant Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a medicinal product which did not necessarily have a causal relationship to the treatment. All AEs reported in the study were judged by the investigator to be clinically significant. An SAE was any adverse drug experience that resulted in death, was life-threatening, caused or prolonged hospitalization, caused persistent or significant disability or incapacity, caused a congenital anomaly or birth defect, or may have required medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of these outcomes.|Up to 12 Weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
815305|NCT01098110|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Were Clinical Global Impressions - Improvement (CGI-I) Responders.|The CGI-I is a score on a 7-point scale for assessing the change from preceding phase of overall symptoms of bipolar disorder during the treatment of an acute episode or in longer term illness prophylaxis. Compared to the baseline, the CGI-I score ranges from 1 = very much improved since initiating treatment, to 7 = very much worse since initiating treatment. The CGI-I score was assessed at baseline and Day 42. Compared to the baseline measurement, a CGI-I responder had a score at Day 42 of 3 (minimally improved), 2 (much improved) or 1 (very much improved).|Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815307|NCT01098110|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Were PANSS Responders.|PANSS total score measures symptoms of schizophrenia and consists of responses to 30 items: 7 items from the positive subscale (P1-P7), 7 items from the negative subscale (N1-N7) and 16 items from the general psychopathology subscale (G1-G16). Responses to each item range from 1 = absence of symptom, to 7 = most extreme symptoms. The PANSS total score is the sum of the scores for all 30 items, and ranges from 30 to 210, with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The PANSS total score was determined at baseline and then at Day 42, and a participant with a 30% or greater reduction from baseline in PANSS total score at Day 42 was considered a PANSS responder.|Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815308|NCT01098110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Factor Anxiety/Depression Symptom Score.|PANSS Marder Factor Anxiety/Depression symptom score measures symptoms of schizophrenia and consists of responses to 4 items (G2,G3,G4,G6). Responses to each item range from 1 = absence of symptom, to 7 = most extreme symptoms. The PANSS Marder Factor Anxiety/Depression symptom score is the sum of the scores for all 4 items and ranges from 4 to 28, with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. An improvement in symptoms is represented by change from baseline values that are negative.|Baseline and Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815309|NCT01098110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Factor Hostility/Excitement Symptom Score.|PANSS Marder Factor Hostility/Excitement symptom score measures symptoms of schizophrenia and consists of responses to 4 items (P4,P7,G8,G14). Responses to each item range from 1 = absence of symptom, to 7 = most extreme symptoms. The PANSS Marder Factor Hostility/Excitement symptom score is the sum of the scores for all 4 items and ranges from 4 to 28, with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. An improvement in symptoms is represented by change from baseline values that are negative.|Baseline and Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815310|NCT01098110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Factor Disorganized Thought Symptom Score.|PANSS Marder Factor Disorganized Thought symptom score measures symptoms of schizophrenia and consists of responses to 7 items (P2,N5,G5,G10,G11,G13,G15). Responses to each item range from 1 = absence of symptom, to 7 = most extreme symptoms. The PANSS Marder Factor Disorganized Thought symptom score is the sum of the scores for all 7 items and ranges from 7 to 49, with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. An improvement in symptoms is represented by change from baseline values that are negative.|Baseline and Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. One participant from the 5 mg BID arm was missing a post-baseline measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815311|NCT01098110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Factor Negative Symptom Score.|PANSS Marder Factor Negative symptom score measures symptoms of schizophrenia and consists of responses to 7 items (N1,N2,N3,N4,N6,G7,G16). Responses to each item range from 1 = absence of symptom, to 7 = most extreme symptoms. The PANSS Marder Factor Negative symptom score is the sum of the scores for all 7 items and ranges from 7 to 49, with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. An improvement in symptoms is represented by change from baseline values that are negative.|Baseline and Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815312|NCT01098110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Factor Positive Symptom Score.|PANSS Marder Factor Positive symptom score measures symptoms of schizophrenia and consists of responses to 8 items (P1,P3,P5,P6,N7,G1,G9,G12). Responses to each item range from 1 = absence of symptom, to 7 = most extreme symptoms. The PANSS Marder Factor Positive symptom score is the sum of the scores for all 8 items and ranges from 8 to 56, with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. An improvement in symptoms is represented by change from baseline values that are negative.|Baseline and Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815313|NCT01098110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS General Psychopathology Score.|PANSS General Psychopathology subscale measures symptoms of schizophrenia and consists of responses to 16 items (G1-G16). Responses to each item range from 1 = absence of symptom, to 7 = most extreme symptoms. The PANSS General Psychopathology subscale is the sum of the scores for all 16 items and ranges from 16 to 112, with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms.. An improvement in symptoms is represented by change from baseline values that are negative.|Baseline and Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815314|NCT01098110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Negative Symptom Score.|PANSS Negative subscale measures symptoms of schizophrenia and consists of responses to 7 items (N1-N7). Responses to each item range from 1 = absence of symptom, to 7 = most extreme symptoms. The PANSS Negative subscale sums all 7 items and ranges from 7 to 49, with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. . An improvement in symptoms is represented by change from baseline values that are negative.|Baseline and Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. One participant from the 5 mg BID arm was missing a post-baseline measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815497|NCT01100073|Primary|Change From Baseline in Spiralometry Measurement at the End of Maintenance (Right Hand)|Change (reduction) in tremor amplitude from baseline to end of study for the right hand|Week 0 to weeks 9-16 (Visit 3)|Full analysis set (FAS) - Patients for whom baseline and end of study spiralometry measurement (right hand) available||millimeters of tremor amplitude||Standard Deviation|Mean
815315|NCT01098110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Positive Symptom Score.|PANSS Positive subscale measures symptoms of schizophrenia and consists of responses to 7 items (P1-P7). Responses to each item range from 1 = absence of symptom, to 7 = most extreme symptoms. The PANSS Positive subscale sums all 7 items and ranges from 7 to 49, with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. An improvement in symptoms is represented by change from baseline values that are negative.|Baseline and Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the LOCF method.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815316|NCT01098110|Primary|Change From Baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Total Score.|PANSS total score measures symptoms of schizophrenia and consists of responses to 30 items: 7 items from the positive subscale (P1-P7), 7 items from the negative subscale (N1-N7) and 16 items from the general psychopathology subscale (G1-G16). Responses to each item range from 1 = absence of symptom, to 7 = most extreme symptoms. The PANSS total score is the sum of the scores for all 30 items, and ranges from 30 to 210, with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. Change from baseline values that are negative represent an improvement in symptoms.|Baseline and Day 42|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of trial medication, and had baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement. Dropout or missing data are imputed by the last observation carried forward (LOCF) method.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815317|NCT01098162|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events During the Study|The number of subjects affected by any Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) during the course of the study from Day 0 up to Month 6 is presented below.|From Inclusion Visit (Day 0) up to Month 6|"All 571 subjects in the Safety Set are included in the analysis of this outcome measure.
Safety Set comprises all patients included who have been treated with Vimpat® at least once."||participants|||Number
815318|NCT01098162|Secondary|Change in Number (Frequency) of Seizures With Secondary Generalization From Baseline to Month 6|"Baseline values for the seizure frequency (SF) during the 12 weeks time period prior to inclusion ('historical baseline'), and the post-baseline values of seizure frequency reported after 6 months were normalized to a 28 days interval.
Change in number of partial-onset seizures with secondary generalization was derived as follows:
Change in SF per 28 days = (SF at 6 months per 28 days) – (SF at Baseline per 28 days).
A negative value in change from Baseline means that the value has decreased from Baseline to Month 6.
Partial-onset seizures with secondary generalization can be classified into one of the following three groups:
Simple partial seizures evolving to generalized seizures
Complex partial seizures evolving to generalized seizures
Simple partial seizures evolving to Complex partial seizures evolving to generalized seizures."|From Baseline to Month 6|"Of the 520 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 500 subjects are included in the analysis of this outcome measure.
FAS comprises all subjects who have been treated with Vimpat® at least once, who fulfill the inclusion criteria and for whom a valid baseline and post-baseline value of seizure frequency is available."||Seizures per 28 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
815319|NCT01098162|Secondary|Change in Number (Frequency) of Seizures With Secondary Generalization From Baseline to Month 3|"Baseline values for the seizure frequency (SF) during the 12 weeks time period prior to inclusion ('historical baseline'), and the post-baseline values of seizure frequency reported after 3 months were normalized to a 28 days interval.
Change in number of partial-onset seizures with secondary generalization was derived as follows:
Change in SF per 28 days = (SF at 3 months per 28 days) – (SF at Baseline per 28 days).
A negative value in change from Baseline means that the value has decreased from Baseline to Month 3.
Partial-onset seizures with secondary generalization can be classified into one of the following three groups:
Simple partial seizures evolving to generalized seizures
Complex partial seizures evolving to generalized seizures
Simple partial seizures evolving to Complex partial seizures evolving to generalized seizures."|From Baseline to Month 3|"Of the 520 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 447 subjects are included in the analysis of this outcome measure.
FAS comprises all subjects who have been treated with Vimpat® at least once, who fulfill the inclusion criteria and for whom a valid baseline and post-baseline value of seizure frequency is available."||Seizures per 28 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
815320|NCT01098162|Secondary|Change in Number (Frequency) of Partial-onset Seizures Without Secondary Generalization From Baseline to Month 6|"Baseline values for the seizure frequency (SF) during the 12 weeks time period prior to inclusion ('historical baseline'), and the post-baseline values of seizure frequency reported after 6 months were normalized to a 28 days interval.
Change in number of partial-onset seizures was derived as follows:
Change in SF per 28 days = (SF at 6 months per 28 days) – (SF at Baseline per 28 days).
A negative value in change from Baseline means that the value has decreased from Baseline to Month 6.
Partial-onset seizures can be classified into one of the following three groups:
Simple partial seizures
Complex partial seizures
Partial seizures evolving to secondarily generalized seizures."|From Baseline to Month 6|"Of the 520 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 500 subjects are included in the analysis of this outcome measure.
FAS comprises all subjects who have been treated with Vimpat® at least once, who fulfill the inclusion criteria and for whom a valid baseline and post-baseline value of seizure frequency is available."||Seizures per 28 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
815321|NCT01098162|Secondary|Change in Number (Frequency) of Partial-onset Seizures Without Secondary Generalization From Baseline to Month 3|"Baseline values for the seizure frequency (SF) during the 12 weeks time period prior to inclusion ('historical baseline'), and the post-baseline values of seizure frequency reported after 3 months were normalized to a 28 days interval.
Change in number of partial-onset seizures was derived as follows:
Change in SF per 28 days = (SF at 3 months per 28 days) – (SF at Baseline per 28 days).
A negative value in change from Baseline means that the value has decreased from Baseline to Month 3.
Partial-onset seizures can be classified into one of the following three groups:
Simple partial seizures
Complex partial seizures
Partial seizures evolving to secondarily generalized seizures."|From Baseline to Month 3|"Of the 520 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 449 subjects are included in the analysis of this outcome measure.
FAS comprises all subjects who have been treated with Vimpat® at least once, who fulfill the inclusion criteria and for whom a valid baseline and post-baseline value of seizure frequency is available."||Seizures per 28 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
815548|NCT01100437|Secondary|Average Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) in Titration/Stabilization and Maintenance Phases|Average pain scores in the previous 24 hours using an 11 point NPRS ranging from no pain (0) to worst pain (10).|Baseline up to Day 63|ITT; N=number of participants with evaluable data; n=number of participants evaluated at the specific time point||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815322|NCT01098162|Primary|Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) at Month 6|"For the assessment of the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C), the investigator provided his/her assessment of the subject's clinical status compared to Baseline. He/she was asked to check the category that best describes the subject's condition over the past 6 months compared to Baseline:
Very much improved
Much improved
Minimally improved
No change
Minimally worse
Much worse
Very much worse"|Month 6|"Of the 520 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 515 subjects are included in the analysis of this outcome measure.
FAS comprises all subjects who have been treated with Vimpat® at least once, who fulfill the inclusion criteria and for whom a valid baseline and post-baseline value of seizure frequency is available."||participants|||Number
815323|NCT01098240|Other Pre-specified|The Sheehan Suicidality Tracking Scale (STS)|The Sheehan Suicidality Tracking Scale (STS) measures treatment-emergent suicidal ideation as well as behaviors. It can be administered by a clinician or filled in by a participant. Prior to analysis, the STS was mapped to the Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment(C-CASA) categories, which has 9-item including completed suicide, suicide attempt, preparatory acts, suicidal ideation, self-injurious behavior, self-injurious no intent, unknown fatal,unknown non-fatal or other not deliberate. Participants who were mapped to C-CASA items were reported.|Week 8 (double-blind baseline) and weeks 9 through 14|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Participants|||Number
815324|NCT01098240|Secondary|Plasma CP-601,927 Concentration|Blood samples were collected for plasma CP-601,927 concentration analysis which was summarized by mean and standard deviation.|Week 11, 12 and 14|All randomized participants with at least one dose of study medication in DB (double blind) phase and one valid plasma concentration measurement collected during the DB phase was be included in the analyses of the PK endpoints. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815325|NCT01098240|Secondary|Population Pharmacokinetics|Population pharmacokinetic analysis involved mixed effects modeling using nonlinear mixed effects modeling (NONMEM) software. The intent of this analysis was to establish a basic population pharmacokinetic model for CP-601,927 and to determine inter-individual and residual variability in population clearance, and volume of distribution of drug. Relationship of demographic variables (gender, age, body weight, height and ethnicity), concomitant medications and measures of altered hepatic and renal function were examined by fitting measured CP-601,927 concentrations|Weeks 11,12 and 14||||||
815326|NCT01098240|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response at Weeks 9 Through 14|Response was defined as greater than 50 percent reduction from double-blind baseline in MADRS total score.|Weeks 9 through 14|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Participants|||Number
815327|NCT01098240|Secondary|Number of Participants With Remission at Weeks 9, 10, 12 and 14|Remission was defined as response plus an absolute MADRS total score of less than or equal to 10 plus a CGI-I score less than 2 (’much’ or ’very much’ improved).|Weeks 9, 10, 12 and 14|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Participants|||Number
815328|NCT01098240|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Total Score at Weeks 9, 10, 12 and 14|CGI-I was defined as a 7-point clinician rated scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Improvement was defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), or 3 (minimally improved) on the scale. Higher score = more affected.|Weeks 8 (double-blind baseline) 9, 10, 12 and 14|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815329|NCT01098240|Secondary|Change From Double-blind Baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Subscale Score at Weeks 11 and 14|SDS subscale is defined as a self-administered tool that measures functional impairment in 3-item including work/school, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. Items are rated on a scale of 0-10 visual analog scale, for a total numeric range of scores from 0 (not at all impaired) to 30 (extremely impaired).|Weeks 8 (double-blind baseline), 11 and 14|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815330|NCT01098240|Secondary|Change From Double-blind Baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score at Weeks 11 and 14|SDS is defined as a self-administered tool that measures functional impairment including work/school, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. Items are rated on a scale of 0-10 visual analog scale (0=not at all impaired, 10=extremely impaired), for a total numeric range of scores from 0 (not at all impaired) to 30 (extremely impaired).|Weeks 8 (double-blind baseline), 11 and 14|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815331|NCT01098240|Secondary|Change From Double-blind Baseline in Sheehan Irritability Scale (SIS) Total Score at Weeks 11 and 14|The SIS is to rate suffering with regard to irritability symptoms. The degree to which irritability interferes with work, social and family function is also queried. The total SIS score is the sum of 7 items. Each item is rated on a scale of 0-10, for a total numeric range of scores from 0 (not at all) to 70 (extremely). The SIS also records the number of days impaired by irritability.|Weeks 8 (double-blind baseline), 11 and 14|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815376|NCT01098500|Primary|Number of Patients With ALT (Alanine Transaminase) >=3x (Times) Upper Limit of Normal (ULN)|Prevalence of patients with an ALT elevation >=3x ULN among patients who had liver function testing during the baseline period (30 days prior to initiation of TKI drug).|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had liver function testing within 30 days prior to the initiation of TKI drug.||participants|||Number
815332|NCT01098240|Secondary|Change From Double-blind Baseline in Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) at Weeks 9, 10, 12, and 14|CGI-S was defined as 7-point clinician rated scale to assess severity of participant's current illness state; range: 1 (normal - not ill at all) to 7 (among the most extremely ill participants). Higher score = more affected.|Week 8 (double-blind baseline) and weeks 9, 10, 12, 14|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815333|NCT01098240|Secondary|Change From Double-blind Baseline in Bech Melancholia Subscale Score at Weeks 9 Through 14|The Bech Melancholia is sum of scores on 6 items (items 1, 2, 7, 8, 10 and 13) pertaining to melancholia within HAM-D. The items are rated on a scale of 0-4, higher scores reflecting greater severity. Total possible score is 0-24.|Weeks 8 (double-blind baseline) through 14|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815334|NCT01098240|Secondary|Change From Double-blind Baseline in Hamilton Depression Scale 25-item (HAM-D25) - Total Score at Weeks 9 Through 14|The HAM-D25 is the 25-item version of a scale used to assess the range of depressive symptoms including depressed mood, work and activities, sleep, suicidal thinking, psychomotor agitation/retardation, appetite, sexual interest, anxiety, somatic symptoms, and cognitive symptoms. The items on the HAM-D were rated on a scale of 0-2 or 0-4, for a total numeric range of scores from 0 (depressive symptoms absent) to 72 (numerically highest level of depressive symptoms).|Weeks 8 (double-blind baseline) through 14|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815335|NCT01098240|Secondary|Change From Double-blind Baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) - Total Score at Weeks 9 Through 13|MADRS measures the overall severity of depressive symptoms. The MADRS had a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale of 0-6, for a total numeric range of scores from 0 (depressive symptoms absent) to 60 (numerically highest level of depressive symptoms).|Week 8 (double-blind baseline) and weeks 9 through 13|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815336|NCT01098240|Primary|Change From Double-blind Baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) - Total Score at Week 14|MADRS measures the overall severity of depressive symptoms. The MADRS had a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale of 0-6, for a total numeric range of scores from 0 (depressive symptoms absent) to 60 (numerically highest level of depressive symptoms).|Week 8 (double-blind baseline ) and week 14 (week 6 of double-blind phase)|The full analysis set, which was defined as the set of all participants who consumed at least one dose of randomized study medication, was applied for the analysis. n = number of participants with evaluable data at each timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815337|NCT01098253|Secondary|Nine Item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9)|Depressive symptoms were measured using the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). PHQ-9 scored on a range from 0 to 27, where lower scores represent fewer depressive symptoms.|3 months|Analysis proceeded at the patient level and patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized (intent-to-treat).||Percentage of participants with PHQ-9 <5|||Number
815338|NCT01098253|Primary|Hemoglobin A1C|HbA1c levels will be obtained in accordance with ADA guidelines (1) employing the in2it A1C Analyzer. The Analyzer offers accurate point of care HbA1c testing. Point of care testing using this device has acceptable precision and agreement in comparison with laboratory services|3 months|Analysis proceeded at the patient level and patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized (intent-to-treat).||Percentage of participants with HbA1c <7|||Number
815339|NCT01098305|Secondary|Nicotine Withdrawal and Craving, Negative Affect, Positive Affect, and Side Effects.|Side Effects|Ongoing throughout the treatment period (Baseline to the end of treatment, 12 weeks)|||participants|||Number
815340|NCT01098305|Primary|7-day Point Prevalence Smokeless Tobacco Abstinence Biochemically Confirmed With Urine Cotinine at the End of 12 Weeks of Treatment.||At the end of treatment (12 weeks)|||participants|||Number
815341|NCT01098318|Secondary|Treatment Emergent Side Effects Scale Will be Used to Assess Treatment-related Side Effects as a Secondary Outcome Measure.||12 weeks||||||
815342|NCT01098318|Secondary|Change in Suicide Ideation as Determined by the Columbia Suicide Form Will be a Secondary Outcome Measure.||12 weeks||||||
815343|NCT01098318|Secondary|Change in Sexual Function Will be a Secondary Outcome Measure.||12 weeks||||||
815344|NCT01098318|Secondary|Reduction in Depressive Symptoms as Measured by the Beck Depression Inventory Will be a Secondary Outcome Measure.||12 weeks||||||
815345|NCT01098318|Secondary|The Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Severity and Change Ratings Will be Secondary Outcome Measures.||12 weeks||||||
815346|NCT01098318|Primary|Depressive Symptoms as Measured by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (17-items) at Week 8 and Week 12.|Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) is a validated, clinician-rated instrument for ascertaining the severity of MDD symptoms. The 28-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale was used to determine the primary outcome of 17-item HAM-D score. The HAM-D will serves as the primary outcome measure. HAM-D17 score ranges from 0 to 68. Higher score indicates more depressed symptom.|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815373|NCT01098500|Primary|Incidence of Hy’s Law (ALT or AST >=3x ULN and ALP <2x ULN and BIL >=2x ULN)|Number of patients with Hy’s Law (ALT or AST >= 3x ULN and ALP <2x ULN and BIL >= 2x ULN) among patients with normal ALT, AST, ALP, and BIL measurements during the baseline period (30 days prior to initiation of TKI drug). Normal is defined as an ALT AST, ALP, and BIL <1 times ULN at baseline.|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had normal ALT, AST, ALP, and BIL (<1x ULN) during baseline (within 30 days prior to the initiation of TKI drug).||participants|||Number
815458|NCT01099579|Secondary|Mean CD4 Percent Changes From Baseline at Week 48 by Treatment/Weight||From Baseline to Week 48|Participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir (ATV) and who had CD4 percent at baseline and Week 48 while taking ATV powder||Percentage of lymphocytes||Standard Error|Mean
815347|NCT01098461|Secondary|Mean Half-maximal Effective Concentration (EC50) of Albiglutide for HbA1c and FPG|EC50 is defined as the concentration of albiglutide that give a half-maximal HbA1c and FPG response. Samples were collected prior to the administration of study medication on dosing days (Weeks 0, 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, and 13) and on the day of the clinic visit at Weeks 16, 20, and 24. At Weeks 0, 1, 4, 8, and 12, PK samples were collected immediately prior to dosing if a dose was scheduled for that week. At Weeks 16, 20, and 24, PK samples were collected at any time during the visit. The Week 5 post-dose PK sampling was performed any time between Weeks 4 and 6, within 2 to 5 days after administration of a dose; Week 13 post-dose PK sampling was performed any time between Weeks 12 and 14, within 2 to 5 days after administration of a dose of study medication. EC50 estimates used PK data as well as HbA1c and FPG efficacy data. EC50 was estimated from an inhibitory Emax (maximal possible effect of albiglutide) model.|Weeks 0, 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, 13, 16, 20, and 24|PK/PD Analysis Pop: all participants in the PK Analysis Pop with sufficient dosing history for inclusion in the PK/PD analysis. Modeled population PK data (analyzed using a non-linear mixed effect modeling approach) are presented. A one-compartment PK model with first-order absorption/elimination processes was selected to describe GSK716155 PK.||nanograms per milliliter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815348|NCT01098461|Secondary|Mean Absorption Rate of Albiglutide|Absorption rate is defined as the rate at which albiglutide enters the blood circulation. Samples were collected prior to the administration of study medication on dosing days (Weeks 0, 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, and 13) and on the day of the clinic visit at Weeks 16, 20, and 24. At Weeks 0, 1, 4, 8, and 12, PK samples were collected immediately prior to dosing if a dose was scheduled for that week. At Weeks 16, 20, and 24, PK samples were collected at any time during the visit. The Week 5 post-dose PK sampling was performed any time between Weeks 4 and 6, within 2 to 5 days after administration of a dose; Week 13 post-dose PK sampling was performed any time between Weeks 12 and 14, within 2 to 5 days after administration of a dose of study medication. Modeled population PK data are presented; data were analyzed using a non-linear mixed effect modeling approach. A one-compartment PK model with first-order absorption and elimination processes was selected to describe GSK716155 PK.|Weeks 0, 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, 13, 16, 20, and 24|PK Analysis Population (Pop)||hour^-1||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815349|NCT01098461|Secondary|Mean Volume of Distribution of Albiglutide|Volume of distribution is defined as the apparent volume in which albiglutide is distributed. Samples were collected prior to the administration of study medication on dosing days (Weeks 0, 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, and 13) and on the day of the clinic visit at Weeks 16, 20, and 24. At Weeks 0, 1, 4, 8, and 12, PK samples were collected immediately prior to dosing if a dose was scheduled for that week. At Weeks 16, 20, and 24, PK samples were collected at any time during the visit. The Week 5 post-dose PK sampling was performed any time between Weeks 4 and 6, within 2 to 5 days after administration of a dose; Week 13 post-dose PK sampling was performed any time between Weeks 12 and 14, within 2 to 5 days after administration of a dose of study medication. Modeled population PK data are presented; data were analyzed using a non-linear mixed effect modeling approach. A one-compartment PK model with first-order absorption and elimination processes was selected to describe GSK716155 PK.|Weeks 0, 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, 13, 16, 20, and 24|PK Analysis Population||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815350|NCT01098461|Secondary|Mean Clearance of Albiglutide|Clearance is defined as the volume of plasma cleared of albiglutide per unit time. Samples were collected prior to the administration of study medication on dosing days (Weeks 0, 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, and 13) and on the day of the clinic visit at Weeks 16, 20, and 24. At Weeks 0, 1, 4, 8, and 12, pharmacokinetic (PK) samples were collected immediately prior to dosing if a dose was scheduled for that week. At Weeks 16, 20, and 24, PK samples were collected at any time during the visit. The Week 5 post-dose PK sampling was performed any time between Weeks 4 and 6, within 2 to 5 days after administration of a dose; Week 13 post-dose PK sampling was performed any time between Weeks 12 and 14, within 2 to 5 days after administration of a dose of study medication. Modeled population PK data are presented; data were analyzed using a non-linear mixed effect modeling approach. A one-compartment PK model with first-order absorption and elimination processes was selected to describe GSK716155 PK.|Weeks 0, 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, 13, 16, 20, and 24|PK Analysis Population: all participants for whom a PK sample was obtained and analyzed||milliliters per hour||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815351|NCT01098461|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved Clinically Meaningful HbA1c Response Levels of <6.5% and <7% at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|The number of participants who achieved the HbA1c treatment goal (i.e., HbA1c response levels of <6.5% and <7%) were assessed.|Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, and Week 16|ITT Population with LOCF. Only those participants with a value available at Baseline and at the specified visit were analyzed. Values were carried forward for participants who were discontinued from active treatment before Week 16.||Participants|||Number
815352|NCT01098461|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 4, 8, 12, and 16|The Baseline value is the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline weight minus the Baseline weight. The LOCF method was used to impute missing post-Baseline weight values.|Baseline; Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, and Week 16|ITT Population with LOCF. Only those participants with a value available at Baseline and at the specified visit were analyzed. Values were carried forward for participants who were discontinued from active treatment before Week 16.||Kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
815353|NCT01098461|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|The FPG test measures blood sugar levels after the participant has not eaten (fasted) for 12 to 14 hours. The Baseline FPG value is the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. The LOCF method was used to impute missing post-Baseline FPG values. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, and Week 16|ITT Population with LOCF. Only those participants with a value available at Baseline and at the specified visit were analyzed. Values were carried forward for participants who were discontinued from active treatment before Week 16.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815374|NCT01098500|Primary|Number of Hy’s Law Patients (ALT or AST >= 3x ULN and ALP <2x ULN and BIL >= 2x ULN)|Prevalence of patients with Hy’s Law (ALT or AST >=3x ULN and ALP <2x ULN and BIL >=2x ULN, where AST = aspartate transaminase, ALP = alkaline phosphatase, BIL= bilirubin) among patients who had liver function testing during the baseline period (30 days prior to initiation of TKI drug).|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had liver function testing within 30 days prior to the initiation of TKI drug).||participants|||Number
816937|NCT01116921|Secondary|Incidence of Severe IVH or PVL||During hospitalization|||Participants|||Count of Participants
815354|NCT01098461|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin that is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over a 2- to 3-month period. The Baseline HbA1c value is defined as the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 16 minus the value at Baseline. The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing.|Baseline; Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, and Week 16|ITT Population with LOCF. Only those participants with a value available at Baseline and at the specified visit were analyzed. Values were carried forward for participants who were discontinued from active treatment before Week 16.||Percentage of HbA1c in the blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
815355|NCT01098461|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 16|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin that is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over a 2- to 3-month period. The Baseline HbA1c value is defined as the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 16 minus the value at Baseline. Based on Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA): Change = treatment + Baseline HbA1c + prior therapy. The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing.|Baseline and Week 16|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants with at least one post-Baseline assessment of the primary endpoint, HbA1c. Only those participants with a value available at Baseline and at the specified visit were analyzed. Values were carried forward for participants who were discontinued from active treatment before Week 16.||Percentage of HbA1c in the blood||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
815356|NCT01098487|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE) Started On-therapy + 1 Day, >1 to 30 Days Post Therapy and >30 Days Post Therapy|On-therapy + 1 day is defined as AEs started between the first dose of eltrombopag and up to the day after the last dose of eltrombopag; >1 to 30 days post therapy is defined as AEs that started more than 1 day and up to 30 days after the last dose of eltrombopag; >30 days post therapy is defined as AEs started that started more than 30 days after the last dose of eltrombopag. An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. A SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose: results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly or birth defect. Medical or scientific judgment should be exercised in other situations.|From Week 1 up to Week 104 and up to 6 months follow-up (4 weeks for most participants) (up to approximately 2.5 years)|ATS Population||Participants|||Number
815357|NCT01098487|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Maximum Toxicity Grade for the Indicated Hematology Parameters at Any Time Post-Baseline During the Study|Hematology parameters were summarized according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE), version 4.0: G0, none; G1, mild; G2, moderate; G3, severe; G4, life-threatening or disabling. Hematology parameters included: hemoglobin (increased), hemoglobin (anemia), lymphocyte count (increased), lymphocyte count (decreased), total absolute neutrophil count (ANC), platelet count and white blood cell (WBC) count. Baseline values were obtained at Day 1. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles). The maximum post-Baseline toxicity grade includes any scheduled or unscheduled post-Baseline assessment during.|From Week 1 up to Week 104 and up to 6 months follow-up (4 weeks for most participants) (up to approximately 2.5 years)|ATS Population||Participants|||Number
815358|NCT01098487|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Maximum Toxicity Grade for the Indicated Clinical Chemistry Parameters at Any Time Post-Baseline During the Study|Clinical chemistry parameters were summarized according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE), version 4.0: G0, none; G1, mild; G2, moderate; G3, severe; G4, life-threatening or disabling. Clinical chemistry parameters included: albumin, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), alanine amino transferase (ALT), aspartate amino transferase (AST), total bilirubin, calcium (hypercalcemia), calcium (hypocalcemia), potassium (hyperkalemia), potassium (hypokalemia), sodium (hypernatremia), sodium (hyponatremia), inorganic phosphorus and creatinine. Baseline values were obtained at Day 1. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles). The maximum post-Baseline toxicity grade includes any scheduled or unscheduled post-Baseline assessment during.|From Week 1 up to Week 104 and up to 6 months follow-up (4 weeks for most participants) (up to approximately 2.5 years)|ATS Population||Participants|||Number
815359|NCT01098487|Primary|Number of Participants With a Positive or Negative Collagen Level at 2 Year|The change from Baseline to on-treatment assessments of collagen level was analyzed. On-treatment is defined as during the treatment period (including dose interruptions) and up to 14 days after the end of the treatment period.|2 years|ATS Population. Participants with bone marrow biopsy data available in the relevant time period were included.||Participants|||Number
815360|NCT01098487|Primary|Number of Participants With a Positive or Negative Collagen Level at 1 Year|The change from Baseline to on-treatment assessments of collagen level was analyzed. On-treatment is defined as during the treatment period (including dose interruptions) and up to 14 days after the end of the treatment period.|1 year|ATS Population. Participants with bone marrow biopsy data available in the relevant time period were included.||Participants|||Number
815375|NCT01098500|Primary|Incidence of ALT >=3x ULN|Number of patients with ALT >=3 times ULN among patients with a normal ALT measurement during the baseline period (30 days prior to initiation of TKI drug). Normal is defined as an ALT <1 times ULN at baseline.|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had normal ALT (<1x ULN) during baseline (within 30 days prior to the initiation of TKI drug)||participants|||Number
815459|NCT01099579|Secondary|CD4 Cell Count Changes From Baseline at Week 48 by Prior Antiretroviral (ARV) Treatment Status||From Baseline to Week 48|Participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir (ATV) and who had CD4 at baseline and Week 48 while taking ATV powder||Cells/mm^3||Standard Error|Mean
816938|NCT01116921|Secondary|Incidence of Pulmonary Airleaks||First 7 days of life|||Participants|||Count of Participants
815361|NCT01098487|Primary|Number of Participants With Indicated Change From Baseline in the EC Grading Scale at 2 Years|The change from baseline to on-treatment assessments of European Consensus (EC) scale was analyzed. On-treatment is defined as during the treatment period (including dose interruptions) and up to 14 days after the end of the treatment period. MF-0 is scattered linear reticulin with no intersections (cross-overs) corresponding to normal BM; MF-1 is loose network of reticulin with many intersections, especially in perivascular areas; MF-2 is diffuse and dense increase in reticulin with extensive intersections, occasionally with only focal bundles of collagen and/or focal osteosclerosis; MF-3 is diffuse and dense increase in reticulin with extensive intersections with coarse bundles of collagen, often associated with significant osteosclerosis. Baseline is defined as the most recent centrally-reviewed BM biopsy prior to first dose of eltrombopag in the study.|Baseline and 2 years|ATS Population. Participants with bone marrow biopsy data available in the relevant time period were included.||Participants|||Number
815362|NCT01098487|Primary|Number of Participants With Indicated Grade Change From Baseline in the EC Grading Scale at 1 Year|The change from baseline to on-treatment assessments of European Consensus (EC) scale was analyzed. On-treatment is defined as during the treatment period (including dose interruptions) and up to 14 days after the end of the treatment period. MF-0 is scattered linear reticulin with no intersections (cross-overs) corresponding to normal BM; MF-1 is loose network of reticulin with many intersections, especially in perivascular areas; MF-2 is diffuse and dense increase in reticulin with extensive intersections, occasionally with only focal bundles of collagen and/or focal osteosclerosis; MF-3 is diffuse and dense increase in reticulin with extensive intersections with coarse bundles of collagen, often associated with significant osteosclerosis. Baseline is defined as the most recent centrally-reviewed BM biopsy prior to first dose of eltrombopag in the study.|Baseline and 1 year|ATS Population. Participants with bone marrow biopsy data available in the relevant time period were included.||Participants|||Number
815363|NCT01098487|Primary|Number of Participants With a Positive or Negative Collagen Level at Baseline|The number of participants with a positive or negative collagen level was analyzed. Baseline is defined as the most recent centrally-reviewed BM biopsy prior to first dose of eltrombopag in the study.|Baseline|ATS Population. Participants with bone marrow biopsy data available in the relevant time period were included.||Participants|||Number
815364|NCT01098487|Primary|Number of Participants With Bone Marrow (BM) Fibers of MF Grade 0, 1, 2 and 3 on the European Consensus (EC) Scale at Baseline|The evaluation of fibrosis was performed using BM biopsies in which the amount of fibrosis was assessed by the EC Grading Scale. This method distinguishes four degrees of fibrosis (myelofibrosis [MF]-0 to MF-3). MF Grade (G) 0 is scattered linear reticulin with no intersections (cross-overs) corresponding to normal BM; MF Grade 1 is loose network of reticulin with many intersections, especially in perivascular areas; MF Grade 2 is diffuse and dense increase in reticulin with extensive intersections, occasionally with only focal bundles of collagen and/or focal osteosclerosis; MF Grade 3 is diffuse and dense increase in reticulin with extensive intersections with coarse bundles of collagen, often associated with significant osteosclerosis. Baseline is defined as the most recent centrally-reviewed BM biopsy prior to first dose of eltrombopag in the study.|Baseline|All Treated Subjects (ATS) Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study medication excluding the 5 participants from Center 082877. Participants with bone marrow biopsy data available in the relevant time period were included.||Participants|||Number
815365|NCT01098500|Secondary|Median Time to the Maximum BIL Elevation During Follow-up|Median time (in months) between index date and date of maximum BIL elevation|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had at least one incident BIL elevation during follow-up.||months||Full Range|Median
815366|NCT01098500|Secondary|Maximum BIL Elevation Reached During Follow-up|Number of patients whose maximum BIL elevations fell within the indicated ULN range among patients with at least one incident BIL elevation during follow-up|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had at least one incident BIL elevation during follow-up.||participants|||Number
815367|NCT01098500|Secondary|Median Time to the Maximum ALP Elevation During Follow-up|Median time (in months) between index date and date of maximum ALP elevation|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had at least one incident ALP elevation during follow-up.||months||Full Range|Median
815368|NCT01098500|Secondary|Maximum ALP Elevation Reached During Follow-up|Number of patients whose maximum ALP elevation fell within the indicated ULN range among patients with at least one incident ALP elevation during follow-up|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had at least one incident ALP elevation during follow-up.||participants|||Number
815369|NCT01098500|Secondary|Median Time to the Maximum AST Elevation During Follow-up|Median time (in months) between index date and date of maximum AST elevation|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had at least one incident AST elevation during follow-up.||months||Full Range|Median
815370|NCT01098500|Secondary|Maximum AST Elevation Reached During Follow-up|Number of patients whose maximum AST elevation fell within the indicated ULN range among patients with at least one incident AST elevation during follow-up|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had at least one incident AST elevation during follow-up.||participants|||Number
815371|NCT01098500|Secondary|Median Time to the Maximum ALT Elevation During Follow-up|Median time (in months) between index date and the date of maximum ALT elevation.|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had at least one incident ALT elevation during follow-up.||months||Full Range|Median
815372|NCT01098500|Secondary|Maximum ALT Elevation Reached During Follow-up|Number of patients whose maximum ALT elevation fell within the indicated ULN range among patients with at least one incident ALT elevation during follow-up|Study period was October 1, 2004-June 30, 2009. Patients had at least 91 days of follow-up post index date.|Members of the TKI cohort who had at least one incident ALT elevation during follow-up.||participants|||Number
815475|NCT01099761|Secondary|Change in Pulmonary Function Tests (FVC)|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC); 1 of 3 separate tests employed to assess pulmonary function in this study|Baseline to End-of-Study Visit, approximately 24 weeks later.|||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815377|NCT01098539|Secondary|Plasma Concentrations (Conc.) of Albiglutide at Week 8 and Week 16|Sparse population pharmacokinetic (PK) data were collected for population PK and PK/pharmacodynamic (PD) analyses. Participants (par.) who received albiglutide were initiated on a 30 mg weekly dosing regimen. Beginning at Week 4, uptitration of albiglutide was allowed based on glycemic parameters. As such, albiglutide plasma conc. achieved at each sampling time represent a mixed population of par. who received either 30 mg or 50 mg weekly for various durations. The PK and PK/PD of albiglutide were characterized using a population modeling approach. Mean albiglutide plasma conc. observed at Weeks 8 and 16 are presented. Par. came to the clinic at Weeks 8 and 16 without taking albiglutide/matching placebo. The pre-dose PK sample was taken immediately prior to dosing. The Week 8 post-dose sample was taken between Weeks 8 and 10, >=2 days after a dose of medication. The Week 16 post-dose PK sample was taken any time between Weeks 16 and 20, >=2 days after the previous dose of albiglutide.|Week 8 Pre-dose (immediately prior to dose), Week 8 Post-dose (at least 2 days after a dose of medication), Week 16 Pre-dose (immediately prior to dose), and Week 16 Post-dose (at least 2 days after previous dose of albiglutide)|ITT population. Only participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815378|NCT01098539|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight Through Week 52: OC|Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline weight minus the Baseline weight. The Baseline weight value is defined as the last non-missing value prior to treatment. This analysis used observed weight values excluding those obtained after hyperglycemia rescue; no missing data imputation was performed.|Baseline; Week 1, Week 2 , Week 3, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20, Week 26, Week 36, Week 48, and Week 52|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
815379|NCT01098539|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight Through Week 26: LOCF|Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline weight minus the Baseline weight. The Baseline weight value is defined as the last non-missing value prior to treatment. This analysis used the LOCF method for missing post-Baseline weight values. Weight values obtained after hyperglycemia rescue werre treated as missing and were replaced with pre-rescue values.|Baseline; Week 1, Week 2 , Week 3, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20, and Week 26|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
815380|NCT01098539|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 26: LOCF|Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline weight minus the Baseline weight. The Baseline weight value is defined as the last non-missing value prior to treatment. This analysis used the LOCF method for missing post-Baseline weight values. Weight values obtained after hyperglycemia rescue werre treated as missing and were replaced with pre-rescue values. Based on ANCOVA: Change = treatment + Baseline weight + renal impairment + prior myocardial infarction history + age category + region.|Baseline; Week 26|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Kilograms||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
815381|NCT01098539|Secondary|Time to Hyperglycemic Rescue Through Week 52|Hyperglycemic rescue was defined as meeting one of the following criteria, confirmed by a second sample drawn within 7 days and analyzed by the central laboratory: for the Week 2 to Week 4 visit, a single FPG value >=280 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL); for the >Week 4 and <Week 12 visits, a single FPG value >=250 mg/dL and previous titration for >=4 weeks; for the >=Week 12 and <Week 26 visits, HbA1c >=8.5% and a <=0.5% reduction from Baseline and previous titration for >=4 weeks; for the >=Week 26 and <Week 48 visits, HbA1c >=8.5% and previous titration for >=4 weeks; for the >=Week 48 and <Week 52 visits, HbA1c >=8.0% and previous titration for >=4 weeks. Time to hyperglycemia rescue is the time between the date of first dose and the date of hyperglycemia rescue plus 1 day, or the time between the date of first dose and the date of last visit during active treatment period plus 1 day for participants not requiring rescue. This time is divided by 7 to express the result in weeks.|Week 2 to Week 52|ITT Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815382|NCT01098539|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Time to Hyperglycemic Rescue Through Week 52|Hyperglycemic rescue was defined as meeting one of the following criteria, confirmed by a second sample drawn within 7 days and analyzed by the central laboratory: for the Week 2 to Week 4 visit, a single FPG value >=280 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL); for the >Week 4 and <Week 12 visits, a single FPG value >=250 mg/dL and previous titration for >=4 weeks; for the >=Week 12 and <Week 26 visits, HbA1c >=8.5% and a <=0.5% reduction from Baseline and previous titration for >=4 weeks; for the >=Week 26 and <Week 48 visits, HbA1c >=8.5% and previous titration for >=4 weeks; for the >=Week 48 and <Week 52 visits, HbA1c >=8.0% and previous titration for >=4 weeks. Time to hyperglycemia rescue is the time between the date of first dose and the date of hyperglycemia rescue plus 1 day, or the time between the date of first dose and the date of last visit during active treatment period plus 1 day for participants not requiring rescue.|Week 2 to Week 52|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
815383|NCT01098539|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved a Clinically Meaningful Improvement in the HbA1c Response Level of >=1.0%, >=1.5%, and >=2.0% at Week 52: OC|The number of participants who a clinically meaningful improvement from Baseline in the HbA1c response level of >=1.0%, >=1.5%, and >=2.0% at Week 52 assessed. The OC method (no imputation of missing data) was used. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing.|Week 52|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Participants|||Number
815384|NCT01098539|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved a Clinically Meaningful HbA1c Response Level of <6.5% and <7.0% at Week 52: OC|The number of participants who acheieved the HbA1c treatment goal (i.e., number of participants who achieved HbA1c <7% and <6.5% at Week 26) was assessed. The OC method (no imputation of missing data) was used. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing.|Week 52|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Participants|||Number
815476|NCT01099761|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Time to Travel 10 Meters (Standardized 10-Meter-Walk/Run Test).||Baseline to End-of-Study Visit, approximately 24 weeks later.|||Change (sec) in 10MWT from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
815385|NCT01098539|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved a Clinically Meaningful Improvement in the HbA1c Response Level of >=1.0%, >=1.5%, and >=2.0% at Week 26: LOCF|The number of participants who a clinically meaningful improvement from Baseline in the HbA1c response level of >=1.0%, >=1.5%, and >=2.0% at Week 26 were assessed. The LOCF method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing.|Week 26|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Participants|||Number
815386|NCT01098539|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved Clinically Meaningful HbA1c Response Levels of <6.5% and <7.0% at Week 26: LOCF|The number of participants who acheieved the HbA1c treatment goal (i.e., the number of participants who achieved HbA1c <7% and <6.5% at Week 26) was assessed. The LOCF method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing.|Week 26|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Participants|||Number
815387|NCT01098539|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 26, 36, 48, and Week 52: OC|The FPG test measures blood sugar levels after the participant has not eaten (fasted) for 12 to 14 hours. The Baseline FPG value is defined as the last non-missing value prior to treatment. Change from Baseline in FBG was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The OC method (no imputation of missing data) was used. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing. Participants were analyzed in a particular treatment week if they had received at least one dose in that treatment week.|Baseline; Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 26, 36, 48, Week 52|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815388|NCT01098539|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in FPG at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 26: LOCF|The FPG test measures blood sugar levels after the participant has not eaten (fasted) for 12 to 14 hours. The Baseline FPG value is the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline in FBG was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The LOCF method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing. Participants were analyzed in a particular treatment week if they had received at least one dose in that treatment week.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 26|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815389|NCT01098539|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 26|The FPG test measures blood sugar levels after the participant has not eaten (fasted) for 12 to 14 hours. The Baseline FPG value is define as the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline in FBG was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The LOCF method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing. Participants were analyzed in a particular treatment week if they had received at least one dose in that treatment week. Based on ANCOVA: Change = treatment + Baseline FPG + renal impairment + prior myocardial infarction history + age category + region.|Baseline; Week 26|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
815390|NCT01098539|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 26, 36, 48, and Week 52: Observed Cases|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin that is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over a 2- to 3-month period. The Baseline HbA1c value is defined as the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline in HbA1c was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The Observed Cases (OC) method (no imputation of missing data) was used. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing. Participants were analyzed in a particular treatment week if they had received at least one dose in that treatment week.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 26, 36, 48, and 52|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Percentage of HbA1c in the blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
815391|NCT01098539|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20: LOCF|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin that is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over a 2- to 3-month period. The Baseline HbA1c value is defined as the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline in HbA1c was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The LOCF method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing. Participants were analyzed in a particular treatment week if they had received at least one dose in that treatment week.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Percentage of HbA1c in the blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
815477|NCT01099761|Secondary|Change in Distance Traveled in 6 Minutes (Standardized 6-Minute-Walk Test).|Change in distance traveled in 6 minutes (standardized 6-Minute-Walk Test); stratified by baseline age (<10 years vs. >=10 years)|Baseline to End-of-Study Visit, approximately 24 weeks later.|||change (m) in 6MWT from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
815392|NCT01098539|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 26|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin that is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over a 2- to 3-month period. The Baseline HbA1c value is defined as the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline in HbA1c was calculated as the value at Week 26 minus the value at Baseline. The analysis was performed using an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment group, region, history of prior myocardial infarction (yes versus no), and age category (<65 years versus >=65 years) as factors and Baseline HbA1c as a continuous covariate. The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing.|Baseline; Week 26|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and who had at least one post-Baseline assessment of the primary endpoint, HbA1c. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Percentage of HbA1c in the blood||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
815393|NCT01098578|Other Pre-specified|Total Institutional Cost Savings|Difference between the total institutional cost of successfully treating 20 study patients with Floseal compared to the total institutional cost of treating the same number of patient with endoscopic surgery|End of study. Cost calculated after 20 patients were treated with Floseal|||US Dollars|||Number
815394|NCT01098578|Secondary|Cost Savings of Floseal Treatment in Comparison to Posterior Packing, Surgical, and Embolisation Treatments for Posterior Epistaxis.|The institutional cost for the treatment of posterior epistaxis patients with posterior packing, endoscopic surgery, and endovascular embolization, at TOH were calculated and compared with the institutional cost of a patient visit for posterior epistaxis successfully treated with the study protocol using Floseal. All costs were calculated in Canadian dollars (CAD), they were converted to US dollars (USD) using the current monetary exchange rate (total CAD x 1.03= total USD). For all of the patients treated in this study, the total institution cost was $24487.53 (USD). The minimal institutional cost of successfully treating all of the study patients with endoscopic surgery, would have been $53933.89 (USD) or 2.2 times the actual expense. (Total cost 20 participants Floseal/expected total cost 20 endoscopic surgery*100)This represents savings of $29446.39 (USD) or 45.40%|30 days|||percentage of expected cost|||Number
815395|NCT01098578|Primary|Effectiveness of Floseal for the Treatment of Posterior Epistaxis.|Successful treatment using the gelatin-thrombin matrix protocol (Floseal) was any case of posterior epistaxis that stopped following the immediate application of either one or two syringes of Floseal® and the epistaxis did not resume within fourteen days of the treatment date.|Immediate effect with 1 hour observation and follow-up at 5 and 30 days following treatment.|||participants|||Number
815396|NCT01098747|Secondary|Participant Global Evaluation of Study Medication|Participant global evaluation of study medication was performed at the 8-hour time point or immediately before taking the rescue medication. It was scored on a 6-point categorical scale where 0 = Very poor, 1 = Poor, 2 = Fair, 3 = Good, 4 = Very Good, and 5 = Excellent.|8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815397|NCT01098747|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Complete Relief|Complete relief was defined as a PRR of 4. PRR was assessed on a 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale where 0=No relief to 4=Complete relief.|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815398|NCT01098747|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Treatment Failure|Percentage of participants who withdrew from the study due to lack of efficacy or received rescue medication.|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815399|NCT01098747|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure|Median time of dropping out of the participants from the study due to lack of efficacy or rescue medication, whichever came first.|0 to 8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815400|NCT01098747|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Confirmed First Perceptible Relief|Percentage of participants with first perceptible relief was evaluated by stopping a stopwatch labeled 'first perceptible relief' at the moment the participant first began to experience any relief. Stopwatch was active up to 8 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered. The first perceptible relief was considered confirmed if the participant also stopped the second stopwatch indicating meaningful relief.|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815401|NCT01098747|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Meaningful Relief|Percentage of participants with meaningful relief evaluated by stopping the stopwatch labeled ‘meaningful relief' at the moment the participant first began to experience meaningful relief. Stopwatch was active up to 8 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered.|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815402|NCT01098747|Secondary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Relief Rating and Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID)|SPRID: time-weighted sum of PRID over 2, 3, 6 and 8 hours. SPRID score range:-2 (worst) to 14(best) for SPRID 0-2, -3(worst) to 21(best) for SPRID 0-3, -6(worst) to 42(best) for SPRID 0-6, -8(worst) to 56(best) for SPRID 0-8. PRID:sum of PID and PRR at each time point. Total score range for PRID: -1=worst to 7=best. PID:baseline pain severity score minus pain severity score at given time(score range 0=none to 3=severe; baseline score range 2=moderate to 3=severe). Total score range for PID: -1(worst) to 3(best), PRR: scored on 5-point pain relief rating scale(0=No relief to 4=Complete relief).|0-2, 0-3, 0-6, 0-8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815496|NCT01100073|Primary|Change From Baseline in Spiralometry Measurement at the End of Maintenance (Left Hand)|Change (reduction) in tremor amplitude from baseline to end of study for the left hand|Week 0 to weeks 9-16 (Visit 3)|Full analysis set (FAS) - Patients for whom baseline and end of study spiralometry measurement (left hand) available||millimeters of tremor amplitude||Standard Deviation|Mean
815403|NCT01098747|Secondary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Relief Rating (TOTPAR)|TOTPAR: time-weighted sum of PRR scores over 2, 3, 6 and 8 hours. TOTPAR score range was 0 (worst) to 8 (best) for TOTPAR 0-2, 0 (worst) to 12 (best) for TOTPAR 0-3, 0 (worst) to 24 (best) for TOTPAR 0-6, 0 (worst) to 32 (best) for TOTPAR 0-8. PRR was evaluated at different time points during the study up to 8 hours, and immediately after taking rescue medication (if necessary). PRR was assessed on a 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale wherein 0=No relief to 4=Complete relief.|0-2, 0-3, 0-6, 0-8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815404|NCT01098747|Secondary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID)|SPID: time-weighted sum of PID over 2, 3, 6 and 8 hours. SPID scores range was -2 (worst) to 6 (best) for SPID 0-2, -3 (worst) to 9 (best) for SPID 0-3, -6 (worst) to 18 (best) for SPID 0-6, -8 (worst) to 24 (best) for SPID 0-8. PID: baseline pain severity score minus pain severity score at a given time point (pain severity score range 0=none to 3=severe; baseline score range 2=moderate to 3=severe). Total score range for PID: -1(worst) to 3 (best).|0-2, 0-3, 0-6, 0-8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815405|NCT01098747|Secondary|Sum of Pain Relief Rating and Pain Intensity Difference (PRID)|PRID was sum of PID and PRR at each post-dosing time point. The overall possible score range, for PRID was -1 (worst) to 7 (best). PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time point (pain severity score range 0 [none] to 3 [severe]) from the baseline score (Baseline pain severity score range 2 [moderate] to 3 [severe]). Total possible score range for PID: -1 (worst) to 3 (best). PRR was assessed on 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale (0=No relief to 4=Complete relief).|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815406|NCT01098747|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID)|PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time point (pain severity score range 0 [none] to 3 [severe]) from the baseline score (Baseline pain severity score range 2 [moderate] to 3 [severe]). Total possible score range for PID: -1 (worst) to 3 (best).|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815407|NCT01098747|Secondary|Pain Relief Rating (PRR)|PRR was evaluated at different time points during the study up to 8 hours after taking the study medication, and immediately before rescue medication was taken (if necessary). PRR was assessed on a 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale where 0=No relief to 4=Complete relief.|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815408|NCT01098747|Secondary|Time to Confirmed First Perceptible Relief|Participants evaluated the time to first perceptible relief by stopping a stopwatch labeled 'first perceptible relief' at the moment they first began to experience any relief. Stopwatch was active up to 8 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered. The first perceptible relief was considered confirmed if the participant also stopped the second stopwatch indicating meaningful relief.|0 to 8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815409|NCT01098747|Primary|Time to Onset of Meaningful Relief|Participants evaluated the time to meaningful relief by stopping a second stopwatch labeled ‘meaningful relief' at the moment they first began to experience meaningful relief. Stopwatch was active up to 8 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered.|0 to 8 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815410|NCT01098747|Primary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Relief Rating and Pain Intensity Difference From 0-8 Hours (SPRID 0-8)|SPRID: time-weighted sum of pain relief rating combined with pain intensity difference (PRID) over 8 hours. SPRID 0-8 score range: -8 (worst) to 56 (best). PRID: sum of Pain intensity differences (PID) and pain relief rating (PRR) at each time point. PRID score range: -1=worst to 7=best. PID: baseline pain severity score minus pain severity score at a given time point (pain severity score range 0=none to 3=severe; baseline score range 2=moderate to 3=severe). PID score range: -1(worst) to 3 (best). PRR: assessed on 5-point pain relief rating scale (0=No relief to 4=Complete relief).|0 to 8 hours|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815411|NCT01098812|Secondary|Uncorrected Distance Visual Acuity (UCDVA)|Postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity as measured by LogMAR acuity. For comparison: LogMAR value of 0.0 = Snellen 20/20; LogMar 0.10 = Snellen 20/25; LogMAR 0.20 = Snellen 20/32; LogMAR 0.30 = Snellen 20/40. Uncorrected distance visual acuity as measured by LogMAR acuity was assessed in the first eye (per participant) for contribution to the mean.|6 months after second eye implant|Available subjects at the final visit with measured uncorrected distance visual acuity.||LogMAR acuity values||Standard Deviation|Mean
815412|NCT01098812|Primary|Mean Percent Reduction in Cylinder|Reduction in cylinder postoperatively vs. preoperatively (baseline) as measured by keratometry and manifest refraction. Mean percent reduction in cylinder = (postoperative refractive cylinder minus preoperative keratometric cylinder)/(target refractive cylinder minus preoperative keratometric cylinder). Reduction in cylinder was assessed in the first eye (per participant) for contribution to the mean.|6 months after second eye implant compared to baseline|Subjects at the final visit with preoperative keratometric cylinder, intended/target cylinder and postoperative refractive cylinder.||percentage of reduction in cylinder||Standard Deviation|Mean
815413|NCT01098851|Primary|Number of Participants Requiring Airway Support|Drugs during surgery may cause the throat to relax and block breathing. To treat this, the caregiver administers airway support. Airway support is moving the jaw forward, inserting a plastic tube (nasal-oral airway) or applying a mask with positive pressure.|3 hours|||Participants|||Number
815414|NCT01098851|Primary|Number of Participants With Saturation Pattern Detection (SPD) Indicative of Repetitive Reductions in Air Flow|Saturation Pattern Detection (SPD) is the pattern of oxygen saturation values plotted against time that occurs when patients have cyclical reduced air movement during breathing. Their blood oxygen level decreases and increases as they slow and increase their breathing.|3 hours|||Participants|||Number
815415|NCT01099111|Primary|Colonic-Mucosa Associated Microbial Species Per Compiled Participants in 5 Different Arms|"The entire mucosal microbial community were profiled using high-throughput DNA sequencing and microarray technology. The microarray approach is based on 16S rRNA gene targeted oligonucleotide allowing the rapid detection of thousands of DNA sequences simultaneously and thus constitutes an ideal tool to generate a comprehensive and holistic view of the gut microbial community in all participants of all study arms.
Then they will be analysed between different colonic segments in each participant, pooled results of participants in each of the 5 arms will be compared to the measurable outcomes of other arms in general."|1 - 2 weeks|Each participant colonic mucosal microbiota populations pattern were analysed, and then compared to control to look for specific enrichments. If the DNA extract was not enough for sequencing, then the participant sample was excluded, however analysis calculation was based on all enrolled participants. The number analyzed here represent all enrolled||microbial species population||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815416|NCT01099202|Primary|Number of PRBC Transfusions During Initial 5 Months of Treatment|Total number of all packed red blood cells (PRBCs) transfusions (events) given to a participant throughout the 6 courses of chemotherapy treatment, collected and reported by participant from fifth week beginning baseline to 5 months.|5 weeks to 5 Months|Transfusion data was available in 79 of the 81 (98%) evaluable patients who completed the treatment/observation period.||transfusions||Standard Deviation|Mean
815417|NCT01099202|Primary|Mean Number of RBC Units Transfused During Initial 5 Months of Treatment|Total number of packed red blood cell (PRBCs) units transfused to participant beginning at fifth week, up until 5-months compared between the evaluable study group subsets.|5 weeks to 5 Months|Transfusion data was available in 79 of the 81 (98%) evaluable patients who completed the treatment/observation period.||PRBC Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
815418|NCT01099215|Secondary|The Fontaine Class of Peripheral Artery Disease|CLASSIFICATION OF PERIPHERAL ATERIAL DISEASE ACCORDING TO FONTAINE Stage Clinical description I Asymptomatic IIA Mild claudication IIB Moderate –severe claudication III Ischemic rest pain IV Ulceration or gangrene|change from baseline to 48 weeks|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis||participants|||Number
815419|NCT01099215|Secondary|The Fontaine Class of Peripheral Artery Disease|CLASSIFICATION OF PERIPHERAL ATERIAL DISEASE ACCORDING TO FONTAINE Stage Clinical description I Asymptomatic IIA Mild claudication IIB Moderate –severe claudication III Ischemic rest pain IV Ulceration or gangrene|change from baseline to 24 weeks|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis||participants|||Number
815420|NCT01099215|Secondary|The Fontaine Class of Peripheral Artery Disease|CLASSIFICATION OF PERIPHERAL ATERIAL DISEASE ACCORDING TO FONTAINE Stage Clinical description I Asymptomatic IIA Mild claudication IIB Moderate –severe claudication III Ischemic rest pain IV Ulceration or gangrene|change from baseline to 4 weeks|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis||participants|||Number
815421|NCT01099215|Secondary|Changes in Physical Exam|Changes in physical examination were compared to baseline: numbers of subjects presenting any new finding or worsening of abnormal findings compared to the screening examination are reported|within 4, 24 and 48 weeks from baseline|Safety Population Analysis||participants|||Number
815422|NCT01099215|Secondary|Resting Ankle-brachial Index|ABI was calculated by dividing the systolic blood pressure at the ankle by the systolic blood pressures in the arm. This test is used to predict the severity of PAD.|within 4, 24 and 48 weeks from study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
815423|NCT01099215|Secondary|Number of Patients Requiring Reintervention of Target Lesion / Target Vessel|Survival analysis - outcome reported as patients requiring reintervention of the target lesion / vessel|up to 48 Weeks from study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis||participants|||Number
815424|NCT01099215|Secondary|Rate of Binary In-stent Restenosis|"Binary restenosis relied on duplex ultrasound data with a Yes/No assessment with 0–49% being No (peak systolic velocity [PSV] ratio ≤2.4) and Yes being 50–99% (PSV ratio >2.4), with the PSV ratio calculated as PSV from stenosis divided by the PSV from a normal segment of artery proximal to the stenosis.
Ultrasound data was obtained for each patient at each time point and had to be considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab; if it was not, then this analysis could not be done for that particular subject."|within 48 weeks from study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis (Data was not available for all 21 subjects because it includes only ultrasound data obtained that was considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab)||participants|||Number
815425|NCT01099215|Secondary|Rate of Binary In-stent Restenosis|"Binary restenosis relied on duplex ultrasound data with a Yes/No assessment with 0–49% being No (peak systolic velocity [PSV] ratio ≤2.4) and Yes being 50–99% (PSV ratio >2.4), with the PSV ratio calculated as PSV from stenosis divided by the PSV from a normal segment of artery proximal to the stenosis.
Ultrasound data was obtained for each patient at each time point and had to be considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab; if it was not, then this analysis could not be done for that particular subject."|within 24 weeks from study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis (Data was not available for all 21 subjects because it includes only ultrasound data obtained that was considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab)||participants|||Number
815426|NCT01099215|Secondary|Rate of Binary In-stent Restenosis|"Binary restenosis relied on duplex ultrasound data with a Yes/No assessment with 0–49% being No (peak systolic velocity [PSV] ratio ≤2.4) and Yes being 50–99% (PSV ratio >2.4), with the PSV ratio calculated as PSV from stenosis divided by the PSV from a normal segment of artery proximal to the stenosis.
Ultrasound data was obtained for each patient at each time point and had to be considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab; if it was not, then this analysis could not be done for that particular subject."|within 4 weeks from study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis (Data was not available for all 21 subjects because it includes only ultrasound data obtained that was considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab)||participants|||Number
815427|NCT01099215|Secondary|Maintenance of Primary Patency of Superficial Femoral Artery (SFA)|Primary patency was defined as duplex ultrasound peak systolic velocity [PSV] ratio ≤2.4.Ultrasound data was obtained for each patient at each time point and had to be considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab; if it was not, then this analysis could not be done for that particular subject.|within 48 weeks from study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis (Data was not available for all 21 subjects because it includes only ultrasound data obtained that was considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab)||participants|||Number
815559|NCT01092832|Secondary|Time to Death||Baseline up to 1 month follow-up|No participants died within the safety reporting period, therefore time to death was not applicable.|||||
815428|NCT01099215|Secondary|Maintenance of Primary Patency of Superficial Femoral Artery (SFA)|Primary patency was defined as duplex ultrasound peak systolic velocity [PSV] ratio ≤2.4.Ultrasound data was obtained for each patient at each time point and had to be considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab; if it was not, then this analysis could not be done for that particular subject.|within 24 weeks from study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis (Data was not available for all 21 subjects because it includes only ultrasound data obtained that was considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab)||participants|||Number
815429|NCT01099215|Secondary|Maintenance of Primary Patency of Superficial Femoral Artery (SFA)|Primary patency was defined as duplex ultrasound peak systolic velocity [PSV] ratio ≤2.4.Ultrasound data was obtained for each patient at each time point and had to be considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab; if it was not, then this analysis could not be done for that particular subject.|within 4 weeks from study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis (Data was not available for all 21 subjects because it includes only ultrasound data obtained that was considered diagnostic and evaluable by the core lab)||participants|||Number
815430|NCT01099215|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events, Laboratory Abnormalities||Up to 48 weeks from study procedure|Safety Population Analysis||participants|||Number
815431|NCT01099215|Secondary|Incidence of Serious Adverse Events||Up to 48 weeks from study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis||participants|||Number
815432|NCT01099215|Secondary|Incidence of Major Adverse Events (MAEs)|"Major Adverse Events are:
Death
Major amputation
Procedural related serious adverse events
Investigational product related serious adverse events"|within 24 and 48 weeks from study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis||participants|||Number
815433|NCT01099215|Primary|Incidence of Major Adverse Events (MAEs)|"Major Adverse Events are:
Death
Major amputation
Procedural related serious adverse events
Investigational product related serious adverse events"|within 4 weeks after study procedure|Intention-to-Treat Population Analysis||participants|||Number
815434|NCT01099267|Primary|Cause of Death for Participants Who Died|Summary of the cause of death for participants from MDS-003 who died as of the time of the extension study follow-up.|up to 7 years|Safety population of participants who died||participants|||Number
815435|NCT01099267|Primary|Kaplan Meier Estimate for Progression to Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)|Progression to AML was measured from the start of therapy in CC-5013-MDS-003 to the date AML was diagnosed. Results include data collected during the extension follow-up.|up to 7 years|Intent to treat population. One participant was diagnosed by central reviewer as having AML at entry to the MDS-003 study (baseline) so was excluded from this analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815436|NCT01099267|Primary|Participants Status Regarding Progression to Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) as of the Time of the Extension Study Follow-up|Count of participants who progressed to AML at the time of the extension study follow-up.|up to 7 years|Intent to treat population. One participant was diagnosed by central reviewer as having AML at entry to the MDS-003 study (baseline) so was excluded from this analysis.||participants|||Number
815437|NCT01099267|Primary|Kaplan Meier Estimate for Overall Survival|Overall survival was measured from the start of therapy in CC-5013-MDS-003 to the date of death from any cause. Results include data collected during the extension follow-up.|up to 7 years|Intent to treat population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815438|NCT01099267|Primary|Participants Survival Status as of the Time of the Extension Study Follow-up|Count of participants who were alive or deceased at the time of the extension study follow-up.|up to 7 years|Intent to treat population||participants|||Number
815439|NCT01099358|Primary|Cetuximab Pharmacokinetics: Confirmatory Serum Concentration||Group D:Cycle 1, Day 1: Prior to Cisplatin Infusion.|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group D and had evaluable PK data.||micrograms per milliliters (μg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
815440|NCT01099358|Primary|Cetuximab Pharmacokinetics: Measurement of the Time After Administration When the Maximum Plasma Concentration is Reached (Tmax)||Group B:Cycle 1,Day 15 and Cycle 2, Day 1 and Group C: Cycle 1, Day 22 and Cycle 2, Day 1: Baseline (Prior to Cetuximab Infusion),1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 72, 120, and 168 hours (After the Start of Cetuximab Infusion).|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group B and C and had evaluable PK data. Study design by intent did not collect data from Group A or Group D.||Hours (h)||Full Range|Median
815441|NCT01099358|Primary|Total Cisplatin Pharmacokinetics: Measurement of the Time After Administration When the Maximum Plasma Concentration is Reached (Tmax)||Groups A and C: Cycle 1,Day 1 and Cycle 2 Day 1; Baseline (Prior to Cisplatin Infusion), 1, 1.50, 2, 3, 5, 8, 24, 72 hours (After the Start of Cisplatin Infusion).|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group A or C and had evaluable PK data. Study design by intent did not collect data from Group B or Group D.||Hours (h)||Full Range|Median
815442|NCT01099358|Primary|Cetuximab Pharmacokinetics: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Cmax,ss)||Group B:Cycle 1,Day 15 and Cycle 2, Day 1 and Group C: Cycle 1, Day 22 and Cycle 2, Day 1: Baseline (Prior to Cetuximab Infusion),1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 72, 120, and 168 hours (After the Start of Cetuximab Infusion).|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group B and C and had evaluable PK data. Study design by intent did not collect data from Group A or Group D.||micrograms per milliliters (μg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
815443|NCT01099358|Primary|Total Cisplatin Pharmacokinetics: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Groups A and C: Cycle 1,Day 1 and Cycle 2 Day 1; Baseline (Prior to Cisplatin Infusion), 1, 1.50, 2, 3, 5, 8, 24, 72 hours (After the Start of Cisplatin Infusion).|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group A or C and had evaluable PK data. Study design by intent did not collect data from Group B or Group D.||micrograms/milliliters(μg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
815444|NCT01099358|Primary|Cetuximab Pharmacokinetics: Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve During One Dosing Interval at Steady State (AUC τ,ss)||Group B:Cycle 1,Day 15 and Cycle 2, Day 1 and Group C: Cycle 1, Day 22 and Cycle 2, Day 1: Baseline (Prior to Cetuximab Infusion),1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 72, 120, and 168 hours (After the Start of Cetuximab Infusion).|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group B or C and had evaluable PK data. Study design by intent did not collect data from Group A or Group D.||micrograms*hour/milliliters (μg*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
815560|NCT01092832|Secondary|All-Cause Mortality - Number of Participant Deaths||Day 28 and 1 Month Follow-up|Safety population||participants|||Number
815445|NCT01099358|Primary|Total Cisplatin Pharmacokinetics (PK): Area Under the Concentration (AUC) Versus Time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC[0-∞])||Groups A and C: Cycle 1,Day 1 and Cycle 2 Day 1; Baseline (Prior to Cisplatin Infusion), 1, 1.50, 2, 3, 5, 8, 24, 72 hours (After the Start of Cisplatin Infusion).|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who were enrolled in Group A or C and had evaluable PK data. Study design by intent did not collect data from Group B or Group D.||micrograms*hour/milliliters (μg*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
815446|NCT01099397|Primary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Prediabetes or Normal Glucose, by 2 Measurements (Fasting Glucose Measurement and Glucose Measurement After a 2-hour Oral Glucose Tolerance Test [OGTT]), at Three Timepoints During Antihypertensive Treatment|A single cohort of patients was followed through participation in the parent study, PEAR, and had both fasting and 2-hour OGTT labs evaluated at three time points. At each of these time points the two methods for evaluating prediabetes were compared. Consistent with the definition for prediabetes recommended by the American Diabetes Association, a fasting glucose above 99mg/dL or 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test glucose above 139mg/dL was considered prediabetic for this study.|Baseline, 9 weeks, and 18 weeks after initiation of PEAR intervention(s)|Only including participants with data at each time point||participants|||Number
815447|NCT01099475|Secondary|Hepatocellular Damage Reflected by Alanine Aminotransferase (ALAT) Levels|At specific time points before, during and after liver surgery, plasma samples will be obtained to analyse the amount of hepatocellular damage reflected by ALAT level. These timepoints include: baseline (before operation), just before intermittent pedicle clamping, just before end of 15 or 30 minutes pedicle clamping, end of 5 minutes reperfusion, end of liver surgery, 8 hours after start liver surgery, postoperative day 1, 2 and 3.|ALAT area under curve from start of surgery up until postoperative day 3|||IU*h/L||Standard Error|Mean
815448|NCT01099475|Secondary|Amount of Blood Loss|amount of blood in the suction container (and, if applicable, in the weighted gauzes)|at the end of liver surgery, an average of 225 minutes|||mL||Full Range|Median
815449|NCT01099475|Secondary|Post-resectional Complications|morbidity and mortality occuring after liver surgery graded according to Clavien-Dindo's grading system. In short, any deviation from the postoperative course without the need for pharmacological, radiological or surgical intervention was classified as Clavien-Dindo grade 1; complications requiring pharmacological treatment were graded as grade 2; complications requiring surgical or radiological intervention not under general anesthesia as grade 3a and under general anesthesia as grade 3b; grade 4 complications were life-threatening complications requiring intensive care unit care because of single organ dysfunction (grade 4a) or multiple organ dysfunction (grade 4b); mortality was classed as grade 5.|within 90-days after initial liver surgery|||participants|||Number
815450|NCT01099475|Primary|Hepatocellular Damage Reflected by Liver Fatty-acid Binding Protein (L-FABP) Levels|At specific time points before, during and after liver surgery, plasma samples will be obtained to analyse the amount of hepatocellular damage reflected by L-FABP) level. These timepoints include: baseline (before operation), just before intermittent pedicle clamping, just before end of 15 or 30 minutes pedicle clamping, end of 5 minutes reperfusion, end of liver surgery, 8 hours after start liver surgery, postoperative day 1, 2 and 3. This continuous variable with repeated measurements was summarized as area under the curve (AUC) from baseline to postoperative day 3 (as described in Matthews JN, Altman DG, Campbell MJ, Royston P. Analysis of serial measurements in medical research. Bmj 1990;300:230-5).|L-FABP area under curve from start of surgery up until postoperative day 3|||ng*h/mL||Standard Error|Mean
815451|NCT01099579|Secondary|Apparent Total Body Clearance Per Body Weight (CLT/F) Per Kilogram of Atazanavir and Ritonavir|Calculated as CLT/F divided by body weight|At Week 2|All participants who had received study drug and had adequate pharmacokinetic profiles (n=number evaluable)||L/h per kilogram||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815452|NCT01099579|Secondary|Apparent Total Body Clearance (CLT/F) of Atazanavir and Ritonavir|Calculated as dose divided by AUC(TAU). AUC(TAU)=area under the concentration-time curve in 1 dosing interval from time 0 to 24 hours post observed dose.|At Week 2|All participants who had received study drug and had adequate pharmacokinetic profiles (n=number evaluable)||L/h||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815453|NCT01099579|Secondary|Time to Maximum Observed Concentration (Tmax) of Atazanavir and Ritonavir||At Week 2 at Hour 0 predose and at Hours 1.5, 2.5, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 postdose|All participants who had received study drug and had adequate pharmacokinetic profiles (n=number evaluable)||Hours||Full Range|Median
815454|NCT01099579|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration Curve (in 1 Dosing Interval From Time 0 to 24 Hours Post Observed Dose) (AUC[TAU])of Atazanavir and Ritonavir||At Week 2 at Hour 0 predose and at Hours 1.5, 2.5, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 postdose|All participants who had received study drug and had adequate pharmacokinetic profiles (n=number evaluable)||ng*h/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815455|NCT01099579|Secondary|Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) and Minimum Observed Concentration (Cmin) of Atazanavir and Ritonavir||At Week 2 at Hour 0 predose and at Hours 1.5, 2.5, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 postdose|All participants who had received study drug and had adequate pharmacokinetic profiles (n=number evaluable)||ng/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
815456|NCT01099579|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Acquired Phenotypic Resistance to Atazanavir or Atazanovir/Ritonavir|Criteria for resistance testing= meeting at least 1 of the following: <1 log10 drop from baseline in HIV RNA level by Week 16 and confirmed by a second HIV RNA level; an HIV RNA level >200 copies/mL after Week 24, confirmed by a second HIV RNA level; repeated HIV RNA levels ≥50 copies/mL after Week 48; an HIV RNA level ≥400 copies/mL confirmed by a second HIV RNA level of ≥400 copies/mL at any time in a participant who had previously achieved a plasma HIV RNA level <50 copies/mL; or discontinued due to lack of efficacy. Virologic failure was defined as an incomplete virologic response to therapy or as a viral rebound after the achievement of virologic suppression. The phenotypic resistance to a drug is defined as a fold change (ie, ratio of the 50% inhibitory concentration [IC50] of the clinical isolate to the IC50 of the reference strain) greater than the cut-off for reduced susceptibility.|From Day 1 to Week 48|Participants who met the criteria for virologic failure||Participants|||Number
815457|NCT01099579|Secondary|Mean CD4 Percent Changes From Baseline at Week 48 by Antiretroviral (ARV) Treatment Status||From Baseline to Week 48|Participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir (ATV) and who had CD4 percent at baseline and Week 48 while taking ATV powder||Percentage of lymphocytes||Standard Error|Mean
816939|NCT01116921|Secondary|Duration of Oxygen Therapy||During first seven days of life|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
816940|NCT01116921|Secondary|Duration of CPAP Therapy||During first seven days of life|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
815460|NCT01099579|Primary|Number of Participants With Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Class C AIDS Events|CDC Class C events are AIDS-defining events that include recurrent bacterial pneumonia (>=2 episodes in 12 months); candidiasis of the bronchi, trachea, lungs, or esophagus; invasive cervical carcinoma; disseminated or extrapulmonary coccidioidomycosis; extrapulmonary cryptococcosis; chronic intestinal cryptosporidiosis (>1 month); cytomegalovirus disease; HIV-related encephalopathy; herpes simplex: chronic ulcers, or bronchitis, pneumonitis, or esophagitis; disseminated or extrapulmonary histoplasmosis; chronic intestinal isosporiasis; Kaposi sarcoma; immunoblastic or primary brain Burkitt lymphoma; mycobacterium avium complex, kansasii, or tuberculosis; mycobacterium, other species; Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia; progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy; Salmonella septicemia; recurrent toxoplasmosis of brain; HIV wasting syndrome (involuntary weight loss >10% of baseline body weight) with chronic diarrhea or chronic weakness and documented fever for ≥1 month.|From Day 1 to Week 48|||Participants|||Number
815461|NCT01099579|Primary|Electrocardiogram Changes From Baseline in PR Interval, QTC Bazett, and QTC Fridericia at Week 48||From Baseline to Week 48|All participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir and were evaluable||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
815462|NCT01099579|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Results With Worst Toxicity of Grade 3-4|ALT=alanine aminotransferase; SGPT=serum glutamic-pyruvic transaminase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; SGOT=serum glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase; ULN=upper limit of normal. Grading by the National Institute of Health Division of AIDs and World Health Organization criteria. Hemoglobin (g/dL): Grade (Gr)1=9.5-11.0; Gr 2=8.0-9.4; Gr 3=6.5-7.9; Gr 4=<6.5. Neutrophils, absolute (/mm^3): Gr 1=>=1000-<1500; Gr 2= >=750-<1000; Gr 3=>=500-<750; Gr 4=<500. ALT/SGPT (*ULN): Gr 1=1.25-2.5; Gr 2=2.6–5; Gr 3=5.1-10; Gr 4=>10. AST/SGOT (*ULN): Gr 1=1.25-2.5; Gr 2=2.6-5; Gr 3=5.1-10; Gr 4=>10. Alkaline phosphatase(*ULN): Gr 1=1.25-2.5; Gr 2=2.6–5: Gr 3=5.1-10; Gr 4=>10. Total bilirubin (*ULN): Gr 1=1.1-1; Gr 2=1.6-2.5; Gr 3=2.6-5; Gr 4=>5. Amylase (*ULN): Gr 1=1.10-39; Gr 2=1.40-2; Gr 3=2.10-5.0; Gr 4=>5.0. Lipase (*ULN): Gr 1=1.10-1.39: Gr 2=1.40-2; Gr 3=2.10-5.0; Gr 4=>5.0. Uric acid (mg/dL): Gr 1=7.5-10.0; Gr 2=10.1-12.0; Gr 3=12.1-15.0; Gr 4=>15.|From Day 1 to Week 48|All participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir; n=number of evaluable participants.||Participants|||Number
815463|NCT01099579|Secondary|CD4 Cell Count Changes From Baseline at Week 48 by Treatment/Weight||From Baseline to Week 48|Participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir (ATV) and who had CD4 at baseline and Week 48 while taking ATV powder||Cells/mm^3||Standard Error|Mean
815464|NCT01099579|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in HIV RNA Levels at Week 48 by Prior Antiretroviral (ARV) Treatment Status||From Baseline to Week 48|Participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir (ATV) and who had an HIV RNA measurement on ATV powder at Week 48||Log10 c/mL||Standard Error|Mean
815465|NCT01099579|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in HIV RNA Levels at Week 48 by Treatment/Weight|Participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir (ATV) and had an HIV RNA measurement on ATV powder at did not switch to the capsule formulation before Week 48|From Baseline to Week 48|Participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir and who had HIV RNA while taking atazanavir powder at Week 48||Log10 c/mL||Standard Error|Mean
815466|NCT01099579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV RNA Levels <50 c/mL and <400 c/mL at Week 48 by Prior Antiretroviral (ARV) Treatment Status|The definition of virologic success included HIV RNA levels <50 c/mL or <400 c/mL at the Week 48 analysis.|From Day 1 to Week 48|Participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir (ATV) and who did not switch to the ATV capsule formulation on or before Week 48||Percentage of participants|||Number
815467|NCT01099579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV RNA Levels <50 c/mL and <400 c/mL at Week 48 by Treatment/Weight|The definition of virologic success included HIV RNA levels <50 c/mL or 400 c/mL at the Week 48 analysis window.|From Day 1 to Week 48|Participants who received at least 1 dose of atazanavir and who did not switch to the capsule formulation at or before Week 48||Percentage of participants|||Number
815468|NCT01099579|Primary|Number of Participants With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization.|From Day 1 to Week 48|All participants who received at least 1 dose of active atazanavir powder.||Participants|||Number
815469|NCT01099618|Primary|Length of Remission|For those patients that are able to discontinue insulin therapy at or <12 weeks, how long were they able to well controlled with an A1c <7% on the agent that they were randomized to.|3 years|||days||Full Range|Median
815470|NCT01099709|Primary|AUC0-t - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Non-zero Plasma Concentration|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-t|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815471|NCT01099709|Primary|AUC0-inf - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (Extrapolated)|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-inf|Blood samples collected over a 72-hour time period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815472|NCT01099709|Primary|Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration|Bioeqivalence based on Cmax.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815473|NCT01099761|Secondary|Change in Pulmonary Function Test (MEP)|Maximum Expiratory Pressure (MEP); 3 of 3 separate tests employed to assess pulmonary function in this study|Baseline to End-of-Stuidy Visit, approximately 24 weeks|||cm H2O||Standard Deviation|Mean
815474|NCT01099761|Secondary|Change in Pulmonary Function Test (MIP)|Maximum Inspiratory Pressure (MIP); 2 of 3 separate tests employed to assess pulmonary function in this study|Baseline to End-of-Study Visit. approximately 24 weeks|||cm H2O||Standard Deviation|Mean
815478|NCT01099761|Secondary|Percent Change in Muscle Strength Score by Hand-held Myometry.|Manual Muscle Testing (MMT) is a procedure to measure the function and strength of individual muscles and muscle groups. Hand-held myometry, using a device known as a dynamometer, is one method used for MMT. The dynamometer is held against the patient's limb by the examiner and the patient is asked to resist the force applied by the examiner. The dynamometer measures the force applied by the patient, providing a quantitative and objective assessment of strength of the particular muscle or muscle group. The effectiveness of a therapeutic intervention on muscle strength, as measured by hand-held myometry, can be assessed by comparing post-treatment to pre-treatment (baseline) measurements.|Baseline to End-of-Study Visit, approximately 24 weeks later.|||percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
815479|NCT01099761|Secondary|Percent Change in Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density by DXA Scan.||Baseline to End-of-Study Visit, approximately 24 weeks later.|||percentage change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
815480|NCT01099761|Secondary|Percent Change in Total Lean Body Mass by DXA Scan.||Baseline to End-of-Study Visit, approximately 24 weeks later.|||percentage change in lean body mass||Standard Error|Mean
815481|NCT01099761|Primary|Number of Subjects With Clinical Laboratory Adverse Reactions.|Number of subjects in each cohort with treatment-emergent adverse laboratory values judged to be at least possibly related to study drug|Baseline to End-of-Study Visit, approximately 24 weeks later.|||Number of subjects|||Number
815482|NCT01099761|Primary|Number of Subjects With Adverse Reactions.|Number of subjects in each cohort with a treatment-emergent adverse event considered at least possibly related to study drug|From treatment initiation to End-of-Study Visit, approximately 24 weeks later|||Number of subjects|||Number
815483|NCT01099774|Primary|Average Eye IOP at Week 2|Average Eye IOP at Week 2 . IOP is a measurement of fluid pressure inside the eye. IOP measurements were evaluated at hours 0, 2, and 8 in both eyes and the average IOP of both eyes at each time point were reported.|Week 2|Intent to Treat Population: all randomized patients.||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815484|NCT01099774|Primary|Average Eye IOP at Week 6|Average Eye IOP at Week 6 . IOP is a measurement of fluid pressure inside the eye. IOP measurements were evaluated at hours 0, 2, and 8 in both eyes and the average IOP of both eyes at each time point were reported.|Week 6|Intent to Treat Population: all randomized patients.||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815485|NCT01099774|Primary|Average Eye IOP at Week 12|Average Eye IOP at Week 12 . IOP is a measurement of fluid pressure inside the eye. IOP measurements were evaluated at hours 0, 2, and 8 in both eyes and the average IOP of both eyes at each time point were reported. Baseline data are included for reference only.|Baseline, Week 12|Intent to Treat Population: all randomized patients.||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815486|NCT01099774|Primary|Change From Baseline in Worse Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP) at Week 12|Change from baseline in worse eye IOP at Week 12 . IOP is a measurement of fluid pressure inside the eye. IOP measurements in the worse eye were evaluated at hours 0, 2, and 8. A negative number change from baseline indicated a reduction in IOP, and a positive number change from baseline indicated an increase in IOP.|Baseline, Week 12|Per Protocol Population: All randomized patients who did not have a protocol violation that significantly affected the conduct or the results of the trial.||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815487|NCT01099917|Primary|Changes in Neutrophil Counts|The main criterion for study response is ability of the study agent to show a statistically significant improvement in neutrophil count and neutrophil function (as measured by the respiratory burst test). Changes in neutrophil counts will also be described as defined by the International Working Group (IWG) criteria for response in MDS patients|baseline and week 12|||cells/mm^3||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815488|NCT01100073|Secondary|Number of Premature Discontinuations|Number of patients discontinuing the study prematurely|Week 0 to weeks 9-16 (end of study)|Total patients||Participants|||Number
815489|NCT01100073|Secondary|Incidence, Relationship and Seriousness of Adverse Events|Total number of adverse events (AEs), causality and level of seriousness|Week 0 to weeks 9-16 (end of study)|Total patients||Number of events|||Number
815490|NCT01100073|Secondary|Change in Tremor Score (UPDRS Items 16, 20, 21) at the End of Up-titration|Change (reduction) from baseline in tremor score, derived from UPDRS from baseline to Visit 2. Score ranging from 0 - 32 (0=no tremor, 32=high tremor)|Enter Week 0 to weeks 1-8 (Visit 2)|Patients for whom baseline and Visit 2 UPDRS Part II and III scores available||Points on a UPDRS scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815491|NCT01100073|Secondary|Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part III Score at the End of Up-titration|Change (reduction) in UPDRS Part III score (motor function) from baseline to Visit 2. Score ranging from 0 - 108 (0=no disability, 108=maximum disability)|Enter Week 0 to weeks 1-8 (Visit 2)|Patients for whom baseline and Visit 2 UPDRS Part III scores available||Points on a UPDRS scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815492|NCT01100073|Secondary|Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part II Score at the End of Up-titration|Change (reduction) in UPDRS Part II score (activities of daily living) from baseline to Visit 2. Score ranging from 0 - 52 (0=no disability, 52=maximum disability)|Enter Week 0 to weeks 1-8 (Visit 2)|Patients for whom baseline and Visit 2 UPDRS Part II scores available||Points on a UPDRS scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815493|NCT01100073|Secondary|Final Dose Distribution|Final Mirapexin® dose distribution at the end of study|Enter Week 0 to weeks 9-16 (Visit 3)|Total patients. Number of participants analysed differs for each outcome measure because not all evaluations were performed / documented on every patient.||milligrams of Mirapexin® (salt)||Full Range|Median
815494|NCT01100073|Primary|Change From Baseline in 39 Item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Score at the End of Maintenance|Change (reduction) in PDQ-39 score (quality of life) from baseline to end of study. Score ranging from 0-100 (0=perfect health, 100=worst health as assessed by the measure)|Week 0 to weeks 9-16 (Visit 3)|Full analysis set (FAS) - Patients for whom baseline and end of study PDQ-39 score available||unit on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815495|NCT01100073|Primary|Change From Baseline in Tremor Score From UPDRS (Items 16, 20, 21) at the End of Maintenance (Visit 3)|Change (reduction)in tremor score from baseline to end of study. Score ranging from 0 - 32 (0=no tremor, 32=high tremor)|Week 0 to weeks 9-16 (Visit 3)|Full analysis set (FAS) - Patients for whom baseline and end of study UPDRS tremor score (UPDRS items 16, 20, 21) available||Points on UPDRS scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817592|NCT01112579|Primary|Evaluate the Reduction in Left-ventricular End Systolic Volume Index (LVESVi) After 6 Months of Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) Therapy in the Treatment Arm Compared to the Control Arm.||Baseline and 6 months|||mL/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
815498|NCT01100073|Primary|Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part III Score at the End of Maintenance|Change (reduction) in UPDRS Part III score (motor function) from baseline to end of study. Score ranging from 0 - 108 (0=no disability, 108=maximum disability)|Week 0 to weeks 9-16|Full analysis set (FAS) - Patients for whom baseline and end of study UPDRS Part III scores available||Points on UPDRS scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815499|NCT01100073|Primary|Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at the End of Maintenance|Change (reduction) in UPDRS Part II score (activities of daily living) from baseline to end of study. Score ranging from 0 - 52 (0=no disability, 52=maximum disability)|Week 0 to weeks 9-16 (Visit 3)|Full analysis set (FAS) - Patients for whom baseline and end of study UPDRS Part II scores available||Points on UPDRS scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815500|NCT01100086|Primary|AUC0-t - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Non-zero Plasma Concentration|AUC0-t is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last non-zero plasma concentration and bioequivalence is based on AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815501|NCT01100086|Primary|AUC0-inf - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (Extrapolated)|AUC0-inf is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (extrapolated) and bioequivalence is based on AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815502|NCT01100086|Primary|Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration|Cmax is the maximum observed plasma concentration and bioequivalence is based on Cmax.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815503|NCT01100112|Secondary|Endoscopic Improvement|"Greater or equal to a 1 point improvement in the mucosal appearance subscore of the ulcerative colitis disease activity index (UCDAI), from baseline to week 8.
The UCDAI mucosal appearance subscore is graded as follows: 0 = normal, 1 = mild friability, 2 = moderate friability, 3 = exudation, spontaneous bleeding."|8 weeks|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of patients|||Number
815504|NCT01100112|Secondary|Safety Evaluations: the Numbers of Patients Who Experience Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) or Other Nonserious Adverse Events (AEs) During the Course of the Study.|Safety will be assessed by evaluating SAEs and AEs. The outcome measure data are the numbers of patients who experienced SAEs or other nonserious AEs.|Throughout the 8 week treatment period|All patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
815505|NCT01100112|Secondary|The Secondary Efficacy Endpoint is Clinical Improvement|The secondary efficacy endpoint is clinical improvement, defined as a drop in the Ulcerative Colitis Disease Activity Index score of > or = 3 points from baseline.|After 8 weeks treatment period|All patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||percentage of patients|||Number
815506|NCT01100112|Primary|The Percentage of Patients Achieving Clinical Remission|"The primary efficacy endpoint is clinical remission at 8 weeks, defined as a Ulcerative Colitis Disease Activity Index score of < or = 1 with a score of 0 for both rectal bleeding and stool frequency, and > or = 1 point reduction from baseline in endoscopy score, without any sign of mucosal friability (a score of 0 for mucosal appearance).
The UCDAI has 4 components. Each component is scored on scale of 0 to 3 (total maximum [worst] score = 12). Definitions of component scores are as follows: stool frequency: 0 = normal frequency, 1 = 1 - 2 stools per day greater than normal frequency, 2 = 3 - 4 stools per day greater than normal frequency, and 3 = > 4 stools per day greater than normal frequency; rectal bleeding: 0 = none, 1 = streaks of blood, 2 = obvious blood, 3 = mostly blood; physician's rating of disease activity: 0 = normal, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe; mucosal appearance: 0 = normal, 1 = mild friability, 2 = moderate friability, 3 = exudation, spontaneous bleeding."|At the end of the 8 week treatment period|All patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||percentage of patients|||Number
815507|NCT01100242|Secondary|Toxicity Profile|Toxicity is assessed using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 3.0. Toxicity profile is reported as the number of patients who received at least one dose of on-study treatment and experienced a grade 3 or grade 4 adverse event (AE). For a more complete listing of all AEs experienced by patients on study, please see the Adverse Event section.|42 days|||participants|||Number
815508|NCT01100242|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|Tumor response is evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.0). Target lesions are assessed by computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI:) Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions. Overall response rate (ORR) is the percentage of patients who achieve a CR or PR|42 days|||percentage of participants|||Number
815509|NCT01100242|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|Progression free survival will be measured from the beginning of treatment until there is evidence of progressive disease or death from any cause. Progression is evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.0). Target lesions are assessed by computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): Progressive Disease (PD), 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|36 weeks|||weeks||Full Range|Median
815510|NCT01100255|Primary|Number of Patients Who Met and Exceeded Response Criteria of Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale.|Patients given YBOCS (Yale Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale), a gold standard measure of obsessions and compulsions. For the YBOCS the minimum units are 0 and Maximum units on the total scale are 40. The higher the number on the YBOCS, the more severe the symptoms. Response was defined as at least a 35% reduction on the YBOCS.|1 week|||participants|||Number
817593|NCT01112670|Other Pre-specified|Atorvastatin Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours post-dose|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815511|NCT01100268|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Met Response Criteria for the Saving Inventory-Revised.|Patients given Saving Inventory-Revised (SI-R), an evidence-based measure of three features of hoarding: excessive acquisition, difficulty discarding, and clutter. For the SI-R the minimum units are 0 and Maximum units on the total scale are 92. The higher the number on the SI-R, the more severe the symptoms. Response was defined as at least a 25% reduction on the SI-R.|4 weeks|||participants|||Number
815512|NCT01100268|Primary|Number of Patients Who Met and Exceeded Response Criteria of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Symptom Scale|Patients given Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Symptom Scale (ADHDSS), a measure of the features of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder including inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. This scale has shown excellent reliability in prior studies of individuals with HD. For the ADHDSS the minimum units are 0 and Maximum units on the total scale are 54 (adult). The higher the number on the ADHDSS, the more severe the symptoms. Response was defined as at least a 30% reduction on the ADHDSS.|4 weeks|||participants|||Number
815513|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in The 25-Item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ-25) Composite Score/Sub-scale Score at Week 54: Open Phase|"NEI-VFQ 25, Japanese version v.1.4 for self-administering questionnaires consisted of the base set of 25 questions and 12 subscale scores.
Response categories to each question were converted to a 0 to 100 scale so that the lowest and highest possible scores were set at 0 and 100 points, respectively. A higher score represented better functioning. Questions within each sub-scale were averaged together to create the 12 sub-scale scores. The overall composite score was calculated by averaging the vision-targeted subscale scores excluding the general health-rating question.
Positive change indicated improvement."|Baseline and Week 54|Full Analysis Set 2: participants who received at least 1 injection and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in open phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815514|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Exhibiting a Decrease From Baseline in Retinal Thickness at the Center Point by ≥25 Percent and ≥50 Percent Using Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) at Week 54: Open Phase|Retinal thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography or OCT3000, a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.|Baseline and Week 54|Full Analysis Set 2: participants who received at least 1 injection and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in open phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815515|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Experience a ≥15, ≥5, or ≥0 Letter Improvement of Visual Acuity in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart From Baseline at Week 54: Open Phase|Best-corrected visual acuity (VA) measurements were performed using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts.|Baseline and Week 54|Full Analysis Set 2: participants who received at least 1 injection and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in open phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815516|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Experience a ≥10 Letter Improvement of Visual Acuity in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart From Baseline: Open Phase|Best-corrected visual acuity (VA) measurements were performed using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts.|Baseline, Weeks 30, 36, 42, 48, and 54|Full Analysis Set 2: participants who received at least 1 injection and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in open phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815517|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Distribution of Change From Baseline of Visual Acuity (VA) at Each Time Point: Open Phase|"Best-corrected VA measurements were performed using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey ETDRS charts.
Change from baseline in VA was categorized as follows: Lost 15 letters or more; Lost 10 – 14 letters; Lost 1 - 9 Letters; No change or gained 1 – 9 letters; Gained 10 – 14 letters; Gained 15 letters or more."|Baseline, Weeks 30, 36, 42, 48, and 54|Full Analysis Set 2: participants who received at least 1 injection and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in open phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815518|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Mean Visual Acuity Over Time at Each Time Point: Open Phase|Best-corrected visual acuity (VA) measurements were performed using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts.|Baseline, Weeks 30, 36, 42, 48, and 54|Full Analysis Set 2: participants who received at least 1 injection and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in open phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815519|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ-25) Composite Score/Sub-scale Score at Week 24: Double Masked Phase|"NEI-VFQ 25, Japanese version v.1.4 for self-administering questionnaires consisted of the base set of 25 questions and 12 subscale scores.
Response categories to each question were converted to a 0 to 100 scale so that the lowest and highest possible scores were set at 0 and 100 points, respectively. A higher score represented better functioning. Questions within each sub-scale were averaged together to create the 12 sub-scale scores. The overall composite score was calculated by averaging the vision-targeted subscale scores excluding the general health-rating question.
Positive change indicated improvement."|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set 1: participants who received at least 1 injection after randomized to study treatment and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in the double-masked phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815531|NCT01100320|Primary|AUC0-t - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Non-zero Plasma Concentration|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-t|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815520|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Exhibiting a Decrease From Baseline in Retinal Thickness at the Center Point by ≥25 Percent and ≥50 Percent Using Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) at Week 24: Double Masked Phase|OCT, a noninvasive, noncontact, transpupillary imaging technology, was utilized to image retinal structures in vivo. The anatomic layers within the retina, retinal thickness could be measured.|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set 1: participants who received at least 1 injection after randomized to study treatment and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in the double-masked phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815521|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Experience a ≥15, ≥5, or ≥0 Letter Improvement of Visual Acuity in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart From Baseline at Week 24: Double Masked Phase|Best-corrected visual acuity (VA) measurements were performed using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts.|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set 1: participants who received at least 1 injection after randomized to study treatment and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in the double-masked phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815522|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Experience a ≥10 Letter Improvement of Visual Acuity in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart From Baseline: Double Masked Phase|Best-corrected visual acuity (VA) measurements were performed using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts.|Baseline, Weeks 6, 12, 18, and 24|Full Analysis Set 1: participants who received at least 1 injection after randomized to study treatment and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in the double-masked phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815523|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Distribution of Change From Baseline of Visual Acuity (VA) at Each Time Point: Double Masked Phase|"Best-corrected VA measurements were performed using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey ETDRS charts.
Change from baseline in VA was categorized as follows: Lost 15 letters or more; Lost 10 – 14 letters; Lost 1 - 9 Letters; No change or gained 1 – 9 letters; Gained 10 – 14 letters; Gained 15 letters or more."|Baseline, Weeks 6, 12, 18, and 24|Full Analysis Set 1: participants who received at least 1 injection after randomized to study treatment and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in the double-masked phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815524|NCT01100307|Other Pre-specified|Mean Visual Acuity Over Time at Each Time Point: Double Masked Phase|Best-corrected visual acuity (VA) measurements were performed using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts.|Baseline, Weeks 6, 12, 18, and 24|Full Analysis Set 1: participants who received at least 1 injection after randomized to study treatment and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in the double-masked phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815525|NCT01100307|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Underwent Focal/Grid Laser, or Vitrectomy: Open Phase|Included focal laser photocoagulation, grid laser photocoagulation, and vitrectomy.|Weeks 24 to 54|Full Analysis Set 2: participants who received at least 1 injection and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in open phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815526|NCT01100307|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Visual Acuity (VA): Open Phase|Changes in VA were monitored through refraction and best-corrected VA measurements using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts.|Baseline, Weeks 30, 36, 42, 48 and 54|Full Analysis Set 2: participants who received at least 1 injection and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in open phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815527|NCT01100307|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experience a ≥10 Letter Improvement of Visual Acuity in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart From Baseline at Week 54: Open Phase|Best-corrected visual acuity (VA) measurements were performed using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts.|Baseline and Week 54|Full Analysis Set 2: participants who received at least 1 injection and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in open phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815528|NCT01100307|Secondary|Number of Participants Underwent Focal/Grid Laser, or Vitrectomy: Double Masked Phase|Included focal laser photocoagulation, grid laser photocoagulation, and vitrectomy.|Up to 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set 1: participants who received at least 1 injection after randomized to study treatment and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in the double-masked phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815529|NCT01100307|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Visual Acuity (VA): Double Masked Phase|Changes in VA were monitored through refraction and best-corrected VA measurements using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey ETDRS charts|Baseline, Weeks 6, 12, 18, and 24|Full Analysis Set 1: participants who received at least 1 injection after randomized to study treatment and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in the double-masked phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815530|NCT01100307|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experience a ≥10 Letter Improvement of Visual Acuity (VA) in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart From Baseline at Week 24: Double Masked Phase|Best-corrected visual acuity (VA) measurements were performed using retro-illuminated, modified Ferris-Bailey Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts.|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set 1: participants who received at least 1 injection after randomized to study treatment and had VA assessments both at baseline and at least once at post-dose in the double-masked phase. Missing values except for baseline value were imputed using a last observation carried forward approach (LOCF).||Participants|||Number
815532|NCT01100320|Primary|AUC0-inf - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (Extrapolated)|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-inf|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815533|NCT01100320|Primary|Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration|Bioequivalence based on Cmax|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815534|NCT01100437|Other Pre-specified|Maximum Post-dose COWS in the Treatment Phase|COWS is an 11 section clinical assessment of withdrawal symptoms, each section is rated from 0 (no symptom) to 4 or 5 (most severe symptom). Total score is classified into a 4 point rating scale (mild 5-12, moderate 13-24, moderately severe 25-36 and severe more than 36 points).|Between 0.5 and 24 hours post-dose|ITT||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815535|NCT01100437|Other Pre-specified|6-β-Naltrexone Plasma Concentration at First COWS ≥ 13 in Treatment Phase||Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|ITT; Subset of all participants with COWS ≥ 13||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815536|NCT01100437|Other Pre-specified|Naltrexone Plasma Concentration at First COWS ≥ 13 in the Treatment Phase||Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|ITT; Subset of participants with COWS ≥ 13||picogram/milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815537|NCT01100437|Other Pre-specified|Morphine Plasma Concentration at First COWS ≥ 13 in the Treatment Phase||Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|ITT; Subset of participants with COWS ≥ 13||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815538|NCT01100437|Other Pre-specified|Time to First Occurrence of a COWS Score ≥ 13 for Each Treatment During the Treatment Phase|Average time to first occurrence of a COWS score ≥ 13|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hr post-dose and UA|ITT; Subset of participants with COWS >= 13||h||Standard Error|Mean
815539|NCT01100437|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)] During the Treatment Phase|AUC (0 - ∞)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞). Average AUC 0-∞ for Morphine, Naltrexone and 6-β-Naltrexol reported.|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|PK population; N=number of participants with evaluable data; n=number of participants with evaluable data for the specific category||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815540|NCT01100437|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to the Time of Last Measurable Concentration (AUC0-last) During the Treatment Phase|Average AUC0-last for Morphine, Naltrexone and 6-β-Naltrexol. Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from time zero to the last measured concentration.|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|PK population; n=number of participants with evaluable data for the specific category||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815541|NCT01100437|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to End of Dosing Interval (AUC0-τ) During the Treatment Phase|Average AUC0-τ for Morphine, Naltrexone and 6-β-Naltrexol reported. τ=24 hours|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|PK population; n=number of participants with evaluable data for the specific category||ng times h divided by mL (ng*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815542|NCT01100437|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2) During the Treatment Phase|Average plasma decay half-life of morphine, naltrexone and 6-β-Naltrexol. Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|PK population; N=number of participants with evaluable data; n=number of participants with evaluable data for the specific category||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
815543|NCT01100437|Secondary|Volume of Distribution (Vd/F)During the Treatment Phase|Average Vd/F for Morphine, Naltrexone and 6-β-Naltrexol|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|PK population; N=number of participants with evaluable data; n=number of participants with evaluable date for the specific category||liter (L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815544|NCT01100437|Secondary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F) During the Treatment Phase|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Clearance was estimated from population pharmacokinetic (PK) modeling. Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood.|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|PK population; N=number of participants with evaluable data; n=number of participants with evaluable data for the specific category||liters/hour (L/h)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815545|NCT01100437|Secondary|Minimum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmin) During the Treatment Phase|Average Cmin for Morphine, Naltrexone and 6-β-Naltrexol|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|PK population; n=number of participants with evaluable data for specific category||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815546|NCT01100437|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) During the Treatment Phase|Average Cmax for Morphine, Naltrexone and 6-β-Naltrexol|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|PK population; n=number of participants with evaluable data for specific category||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815547|NCT01100437|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) During the Treatment Phase|Average Tmax for Morphine, Naltrexone and 6-β-Naltrexol|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hr post-dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of EMBEDA (whole or crushed) in the Treatment Phase and had at least one PK assessment completed in the Treatment Phase; n=number of participants with evaluable data for the specific category||hours (h)||Standard Deviation|Mean
824836|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of All Death (Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular) and All MI||9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
815549|NCT01100437|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) Score Greater Than or Equal to (≥) 13 in the Treatment Phase|COWS is an 11 section clinical assessment of withdrawal symptoms, each section is rated from 0 (no symptom) to 4 or 5 (most severe symptom). Total score is classified into a 4 point rating scale (mild 5-12, moderate 13-24, moderately severe 25-36 and severe more than 36 points).|Prior to dose, 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours (hr) post-dose and unscheduled assessment (UA)|Intent-to-treat population (ITT): all randomized participants who received at least one dose of double-blind treatment in the Treatment Phase and had at least one post-dose pharmacodynamic assessment completed in the Treatment Phase.||participants|||Number
815550|NCT01092728|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) is defined as the duration of time from start of treatment to date of first evidence of progression or the date of last follow-up for patients who do not progress.|Evaluated every 2 cycles (8 weeks) until disease progression or last follow-up, up to two years|None of the participants in the Resectable arm were evaluable, and one participant in the second Unresectable arm was inevaluable due to early departure from study.||Weeks||Full Range|Median
815551|NCT01092728|Primary|Biologic Response Evaluation of Tumors With and Without Resectable Tumors|"Biologic response defined as either (complete or partial) metabolic tumor response after 7 days dasatinib treatment by positron emission tomography (PET) scan, >/= 25% decrease in Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) activity on PET without >15% increase in tumoral Ki-67 expression or >/=25% decrease in tumoral Ki-67 expression without >15% increase in FDG activity on PET scan. Complete Metabolic Response (CMR): FDG-avidity all lesions reduced to background FDG-avidity level. Partial Metabolic Response (PMR): >/=25% decrease in FDG-avidity as represented by change in mean Standardized Uptake Values (SUV) max. SUVmax measured by drawing region of interest slightly outside each lesion corresponding to those on CT image & adjusted for body weight. Measureable disease by PET scan defined as lesions that can be determined to have FDG-avidity of SUVmax of 3 and 2 x background.
PR or CR confirmatory disease assessment performed >4 weeks (28 days) after criteria for response first met."|Assessment at 7 Days with confirmatory disease assessment performed no less than 4 weeks (28 days) afterwards|Of 4 participants in first arm, none were evaluable for response (1 inevaluable, 2 withdrawals, 1 disease progression); and of the second arm, one was inevaluable (withdrawal).||participants|||Number
815552|NCT01092767|Primary|All-cause Mortality Within 30-days of the Index Procedure||30 days|||participants|||Number
815553|NCT01092780|Secondary|Mean Score on SDLP Driving Test for Participants Taking Modafinil Versus Placebo|Study drug was administered at 08:00. Driving performance was measured by the SDLP test which is a 45-minute driving simulation country vigilance test and was performed by participants at 10:00, 12:00 and 14:00. An LS mean of the 2 SDLP driving test results performed at 10:00 and 14:00 was calculated. A lower value is considered a better outcome.|2, 4 and 6 hours post dose|The PP population consisted of all participants who were compliant with the protocol and had available data from at least one treatment period.||Meters||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815554|NCT01092780|Secondary|Mean Sleep Latency Score on the MWT for Participants Taking Modafinil Versus Placebo|Study drug was administered at 08:00. MWT, an objective measure of the participant's ability to maintain wakefulness, was administered at 09:00, 11:00, 13:00 and 15:00. A least squares (LS) mean of the 4 MWTs performed at 09:00, 11:00, 13:00 and 15:00 was calculated. Latency for each MWT is defined as the time to onset of the first 16 continuous seconds of any stage of sleep; if no sleep has been observed according to these rules, then the latency is defined as 30 minutes. A higher MWT value is considered a better outcome.|1, 3, 5 and 7 hours post dose|The PP population consisted of all participants who were compliant with the protocol and had available data from at least one treatment period.||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815555|NCT01092780|Secondary|Mean Sleep Latency Score on the MWT for Participants Taking MK-7288 Versus Modafinil|Study drug was administered at 08:00. MWT, an objective measure of the participant's ability to maintain wakefulness, was administered at 09:00, 11:00, 13:00 and 15:00. A least squares (LS) mean of the 4 MWTs performed at 09:00, 11:00, 13:00 and 15:00 was calculated. Latency for each MWT is defined as the time to onset of the first 16 continuous seconds of any stage of sleep; if no sleep has been observed according to these rules, then the latency is defined as 30 minutes. A higher MWT value is considered a better outcome.|1, 3, 5 and 7 hours post dose|The PP population consisted of all participants who were compliant with the protocol and had available data from at least one treatment period.||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815556|NCT01092780|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing Clinical and Laboratory Adverse Events (AEs)|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the use of the study drug. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a pre-existing condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study drug, is also an AE.|Up to 36 days|All Participants as Treated (APaT) population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
815557|NCT01092780|Primary|Mean Score on Standard Deviation of Lane Position (SDLP) Driving Test for Participants Taking MK-7288 Versus Placebo|Study drug was administered at 08:00. Driving performance was measured by the SDLP test which is a 45-minute driving simulation country vigilance test and was performed by participants at 10:00, 12:00 and 14:00. An LS mean of the 2 SDLP driving test results performed at 10:00 and 14:00 was calculated. A lower value is considered a better outcome.|2, 4 and 6 hours post dose|The PP population consisted of all participants who were compliant with the protocol and had available data from at least one treatment period.||Meters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815558|NCT01092780|Primary|Mean Sleep Latency Score on the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) for Participants Taking MK-7288 Versus Placebo|Study drug was administered at 08:00. MWT, an objective measure of the participant's ability to maintain wakefulness, was administered at 09:00, 11:00, 13:00 and 15:00. A least squares (LS) mean of the 4 MWTs performed at 09:00, 11:00, 13:00 and 15:00 was calculated. Latency for each MWT is defined as the time to onset of the first 16 continuous seconds of any stage of sleep; if no sleep has been observed according to these rules, then the latency is defined as 30 minutes. A higher MWT value is considered a better outcome.|1, 3, 5 and 7 hours post dose|The Per-Protocol (PP) population consisted of all participants who were compliant with the protocol and had available data from at least one treatment period.||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815561|NCT01092832|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Global Response of Success at End of Treatment (EOT)|Global response was determined programmatically based on investigator assessment of clinical and microbiological response. Global response of success was defined as clinical cure or improvement AND microbiological eradication or presumed eradication. Exact 95 percent (%) confidence interval for binomial proportions using Clopper-Pearson method.|EOT (from 7 to 42 days of treatment)|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and who have confirmed ICC, EC or participants with EC who do not have confirmation of EC by esophagoscopy, but who had at least confirmation of oropharyngeal candidiasis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815562|NCT01092832|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events - Overall Summary|Percentage of participants with adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), severe AEs, who discontinued due to AEs, or who had dose redued or temporarily discontinued due to AEs.|Baseline up to 1 month follow-up|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
815563|NCT01092910|Primary|Assessment of Cochlear Function|Comparison of the bone conduction threshold with forehead placement at the 4 month post-activation follow-up compared to the pre-implant bone conduction threshold.|4 and 10 Months Post-Activation|10-month results for difference in BC PTA (pre-implant minus post-Esteem) are shown||dB difference||Standard Error|Mean
815564|NCT01092910|Primary|SADEs|The incidence of Serious Adverse Device Effects (SADE) and the incidence rate of device failures and replacements|10 Months Post-Activation|Includes all events, cumulatively, from enrollment through 10-month followup||events|||Number
815565|NCT01092910|Secondary|Esteem Questionnaire|To gain subject feedback and comments on the use of the Esteem System relative to the pre-implant hearing aid (aided condition) as shown by the Esteem Questionnaire.|4 and 10 Months Post Activatio-||||||
815566|NCT01092910|Secondary|APHAB|To assess whether the Esteem System improves Quality-of-Life when compared to the baseline aided condition as shown by APHAB results|4 and 10 Months Post-Activation||||||
815567|NCT01092910|Secondary|QuickSIN|To assess whether the Esteem System is as effective as or better than the pre-implant hearing aid for improving speech discrimination (intelligibility) as shown by the QuickSIN (speech in noise) test results.|4 and 10 Months Post-Activation||||||
815568|NCT01092910|Secondary|PTA Improvement|Comparison of the 3-frequency (500, 1000, and 2000 Hz) pure-tone average (PTA) using the Esteem System to the PTA measured in the baseline unaided condition|4 and 10 Months Post-Activation|10 month data reported||dB improvement||Standard Error|Mean
815569|NCT01092910|Primary|Word Recognition Score Improvement|Comparison of the word recognition score using the Esteem compared to the pre-implant aided condition|10 Months Post Activation|||improvement in % correct||Standard Error|Mean
815570|NCT01092910|Primary|Word Recognition Score Improvement|Comparison of the word recognition score using the Esteem compared to the pre-implant aided condition|4 Months Post Activation|||improvement in % correct||Standard Error|Mean
815571|NCT01092910|Primary|SRT Improvement|Comparison of the speech reception threshold (SRT) using the Esteem System as compared to the pre-implant aided condition|10 Months Post-Activation|||dB improvement||Standard Error|Mean
815572|NCT01092910|Primary|SRT Improvement|Comparison of the speech reception threshold (SRT) using the Esteem System as compared to the pre-implant aided condition|4 Months Post Activation|||dB improvement||Standard Error|Mean
815573|NCT01092923|Primary|PA t/PA0 Sevo (End Tidal Partial Pressure of Sevoflurane), t=Time (Minutes)|Rate of fall in the end-tidal partial pressure of sevoflurane relative to baseline at 2 minutes (PA2/PA0 sevo) and 5 minutes (PA5/PA0 sevo)|Baseline, 2 minutes, and 5 minutes after emergence|based on data collected during previous pilot study investigating the magnitude of the second gas effect on sevoflurane partial pressures after anaesthesia induction, we expected an effect of roughly similar magnitude would be present during elimination of nitrous oxide.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
815574|NCT01092923|Secondary|Time to Eye Opening|The time to eye opening to command after cessation of inhalational anaesthetic administration|20 Minutes|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
815575|NCT01092923|Primary|Pa t/Pa0 Sevo (Arterial Partial Pressure of Sevoflurane), t=Time(Minutes)|Rate of fall in the arterial partial pressure of sevoflurane relative to baseline at 2 minutes (Pa 2/Pa0 Sevo), 5 minutes (Pa 5/Pa0 Sevo, and 30 minutes (Pa 30/Pa0 Sevo)|Baseline, 2 minutes, 5 minutes, and 30 minutes after emergence|based on data collected during previous pilot study investigating the magnitude of the second gas effect on sevoflurane partial pressures after anaesthesia induction, we expected an effect of roughly similar magnitude would be present during elimination of nitrous oxide.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
815576|NCT01093014|Primary|Skeletal Muscle Gene Expression: PPARGC1A|Messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) expression fold-change for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, coactivator 1 alpha (PPARGC1A). Fold change: post-intervention expression / pre-intervention expression. Values greater than 1.0 indicate up-regulation. Values less than 1.0 indicate down-regulation.|up to 1 year|Only a subset of Arm 1 and Arm 3 participants underwent biopsy: we achieved statistical power with these subsets and further biopsies were not warranted.||fold-change||Standard Deviation|Mean
815577|NCT01093014|Primary|Skeletal Muscle Gene Regulation: MSTN|Messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) expression fold-change for myostatin (MSTN). Fold change: post-intervention expression / pre-intervention expression. Values greater than 1.0 indicate up-regulation. Values less than 1.0 indicate down-regulation.|up to 1 year|Only a subset of Arm 1 and Arm 3 participants underwent biopsy: we achieved statistical power with these subsets and further biopsies were not warranted.||fold-change||Standard Deviation|Mean
815578|NCT01093014|Primary|LF Muscle Force|Muscle force evoked during low-force muscle stimulation|up to 1 year|||N (newtons)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815579|NCT01093014|Primary|HF Muscle Force|Muscle force evoked during high-force muscle stimulation|up to 1 year|||Newtons (N)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815580|NCT01093027|Secondary|Tremor Rating Scale|Arm tremor severity was rated on a scale from 0=None to 4=Severe during each of four conditions: arm outstretched, hand close to mouth and arm abducted, performing a finger to nose maneuver, and holding a mug. The Tremor Rating Scale score was the mean of the scores for the four conditions, and ranged from a score of 0=None to 4=Severe.|After 10 minutes of limb cooling treatment.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815581|NCT01093027|Primary|Tremor Amplitude|Average tremor amplitude during the Outstretched, Abducted, Nose, and Mug conditions of the Tremor Rating Scale test.|After 10 minutes of limb cooling treatment.|||cm/s^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
815582|NCT01093222|Secondary|Number of Patients With Grade 3 Through 5 Adverse Events That Are Related to Study Drug|Only adverse events that are possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug are reported.|Up to 3 years|Eligible patients who received any treatment and were assessed for toxicity were included in the adverse event summaries. Any CTCAE v4.0 event of Grade 3 (severe), Grade 4 (life threatening), or Grade 5 (fatal) which were deemed to be related to protocol treatment are included.||Participants|||Number
815583|NCT01093222|Secondary|Objective Response|Complete response (CR) is complete disappearance of all target and non-target lesions, no new lesions and no disease related symptoms. Partial response (PR) is a greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. Confirmed response is two or more objective statuses of CR a minimum of four weeks apart documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration. Partial response is two or more objective statuses of PR or better a minimum of four weeks apart documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration. Unconfirmed CR is one objective status of CR documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration but not qualifying as CR or PR. Unconfirmed PR is one objective status of PR documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration but not qualifying as CR, PR or unconfirmed CR.|Up to 3 years|Eligible patients who began protocol therapy||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815584|NCT01093222|Primary|Progression-free Survival|From date of registration to date of first documentation of progression or symptomatic deterioration (as defined in protocol), or death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive and progression free are censored at date of last contact.|Up to 3 years|Eligible patients who began protocol therapy||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815585|NCT01093222|Secondary|Overall Survival|From date of registration to date of death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive are censored at date of last contact.|Up to 3 years|Eligible patients who began protocol therapy||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815586|NCT01093417|Secondary|Change in Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D Concentration in Both Groups||Baseline and 12 weeks|||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
815587|NCT01093417|Primary|Change in Endothelial Function|Endothelial function measured by flow mediated brachial artery dilation|Baseline and 12 weeks|||percent change in endothelial function||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
815588|NCT01093469|Primary|Investigator Global Assessment of Improvement|This measures the overall response to treatment and quantifies disease on a 6 point scale from “completely clear” to “worsening of disease”.0= Completely clear: except for possible residual hyperpigmentation, 1= Almost clear: very significant clearance (about 90%), 2 = Marked improvement: significant improvement (about 75%), 3= Moderate improvement: intermediate between slight and marked; representing about 50% improvements , 4= Slight improvement: some improvement (about 25%); however, significant disease remaining, 5 = No change from baseline, 6 = Worse|Day 21|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Median
815589|NCT01093521|Primary|Number of Events When Study Drug Infusion Was Stopped Early|Tolerability as measured by adverse events of a 5 day continuous infusion of IV Gallium as assessed by stopping study drug infusion|6 days from starting dose|||Number of times study drug interupted|||Number
815590|NCT01093521|Primary|Number of Serious Adverse Events|Safety as measured by serous adverse events|56 days from starting dose|ITT||Serious Adverse Events|||Number
815591|NCT01093521|Secondary|Change in P. Aeruginosa Density From Baseline to Day 56|Change in sputum microbiology (specifically P. aeruginosa density based on quantitative cultures) from baseline to day 56|56 days from starting dose|All available specimens||colony counts in millions per gm sputum||Standard Deviation|Mean
815592|NCT01093521|Secondary|Change in Sputum P. Aeruginosa Density From Baseline to Day 15|Change in sputum microbiology (specifically P. aeruginosa density based on quantitative cultures) from baseline to day 15|15 days from starting dose|||colony counts in millions per gm sputum||Standard Deviation|Mean
815593|NCT01093521|Secondary|Change in P. Aeruginosa Density From Baseline to Day 8|Change in sputum microbiology (specifically P. aeruginosa density based on quantitative cultures) from baseline to day 8|8 days from starting dose|All available specimens||colony counts in millions per gm sputum||Standard Deviation|Mean
815594|NCT01093521|Secondary|Change in Spirometry as Measured by FVC From Baseline to Day 8|Change from baseline in lung function assessed by FVC in liters after treatment with IV Ga at day 8|8 days from starting dose|||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815595|NCT01093521|Secondary|Change in Spirometry From Baseline to Day 56|Change in lung function as measured by FEV1 in liters from baseline to day 56|56 days from starting dose|all those subjects enrolled after the amendment to add a day 56 (ITT)||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815596|NCT01093521|Secondary|Change in Spirometry From Baseline to Day 28|Change in lung function as measured by FEV1 in liters from baseline to day 28|28 days from starting dose|||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815597|NCT01093521|Secondary|Change in Lung Function From Baseline to Day 15|Change in FEV1 in liters from baseline to day 15|15 days from starting dose|||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815598|NCT01093521|Secondary|Change in Spirometry From Baseline to Day 8|Change in spirometry as measured by FEV1 in liters from baseline to day 8|8 days|ITT||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815599|NCT01093521|Primary|Pharmacokinetic Assessment of a 5 Day Infusion of Gallium Nitrate (IV Ganite®)|"To assess the summed area under the curves of a 5 day infusion of IV Ga from day 1 to day 28 at two doses: 100 mg/m2/day in adult subjects with CF; 200 mg/m2/day in adult subjects with CF.
To assess the safety of a 5 day infusion of IV Ga at two doses: 100 mg/m2/day in adult subjects with CF; 200 mg/m2/day in adult subjects with CF.
Safety and tolerability of 5 days of treatment with IV administered gallium nitrate (IV Ganite®) at a doses of 100 mg/m2/day and 200 mg/m2/day."|Day 1 at t=1, 2 and 6 hours, Day 3, Day 6 at t= 1, 2, 8, and 12, Day 14 and Day 28|||ug*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815651|NCT01094119|Primary|Time Weighted Average Core Temperature|Time weighted average core temperature (esophogeal temperature) from tracheal intubation to 3 hours after or tracheal extubation|from tracheal intubation to 3 hours after or tracheal extubation|Randomized patients.||Degrees C||Standard Deviation|Mean
815625|NCT01093599|Secondary|Changes in Self Reported Measures of Depression, Anxiety and Stress in Study Subjects vs Controls||6 months post quit day||||||
815626|NCT01093599|Primary|Smoking Abstinence|Smoking abstinence is measured by Carbon Monoxide Breath Testing in Controls vs Study Group subjects six months after the quit day.|6 months post quit day|intent to treat analysis||participants|||Number
815627|NCT01093625|Secondary|Comfortable Wearing Time|Average numbers of overall average daily contact lens wear hours and average daily comfortable wear hours as reported at each follow-up visit.|1 Year|Subjects analyzed were those who were enrolled, randomized to the test group, and completed the study.||Hours||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815628|NCT01093625|Primary|Differences in Subjective Comfort From the Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE) Questionnaire|The subjective comfort questionnaire CLUE, assesses the overall lens comfort. The CLUE Questionnaire is a validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response, with a range of 0-120. The differences between: (final visit and first visit) and then (final visit and 6 months) are reported.|1 Year|Subjects analyzed were those who were enrolled, randomized to the test group, and completed the study.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815629|NCT01093625|Primary|Corneal Neovascularization|New vascularization of the Cornea. Comparison between the two study arms will be assessed using data generated from a slit-lamp examination, using an Efron scale with 0.1 unit increments. The Efron scale has a range of 0 (normal) to 4 (Severe) and is subjectively assessed for 0.1 increments by the clinician, with the higher the magnitude of the number the worse the score.|1 Year|Subjects analyzed were those who were enrolled, randomized to the study groups, and completed the study.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815630|NCT01093625|Primary|Conjunctival Staining|Mild abrasions of the conjunctival area of the eye. Comparison between the two study arms will be assessed using data generated from a slit-lamp examination, using an Efron scale with 0.1 unit increments. The Efron scale has a range of 0 (normal) to 4 (Severe) and is subjectively assessed for 0.1 increments by the clinician, with the higher the magnitude of the number the worse the score.|1 Year|Subjects analyzed were those who were enrolled, randomized to the study groups, and completed the study.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815631|NCT01093625|Primary|Corneal Staining|Abrasions in the cornea area of the eye using a slit lamp. Comparison between the two study arms will be assessed using data generated from a slit-lamp examination, using an Efron scale with 0.1 unit increments.|1 Year|Subjects analyzed were those who were enrolled, randomized to the study groups, and completed the study.||Efron Scale (0.1 Unit increments)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815632|NCT01093625|Primary|Limbal Hyperemia|Swelling of the vessels in the limbal area of the eye using a slit lamp. Comparison between the two study arms will be assessed using data generated from a slit-lamp examination, using an Efron scale with 0.1 unit increments. The Efron scale has a range of 0 (normal) to 4 (Severe) and is subjectively assessed for 0.1 increments by the clinician, with the higher the magnitude of the number the worse the score.|1 Year|Subjects analyzed were those who were enrolled, randomized to the study groups, and completed the study.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815633|NCT01093625|Primary|Conjunctival Hyperemia|Comparison of the amount of redness in the conjunctival area of the eye, between the two study arms will be assessed using data generated from a slit-lamp examination, using an Efron scale with 0.1 unit increments. The Efron scale has a range of 0 (normal) to 4 (Severe) and is subjectively assessed for 0.1 increments by the clinician, with the higher the magnitude of the number the worse the score.|1 Year|Subjects analyzed were those who were enrolled, randomized to the study groups, and completed the study.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815634|NCT01093625|Primary|Papillary Conjunctivitis|Swelling of the papillary (Papillary conjunctivitis) area of the eye was assessed using a slit-lamp. Comparison between the two study arms will be assessed using data generated from a slit-lamp examination, using an Efron scale with 0.1 unit increments. The Efron scale has a range of 0 (normal) to 4 (Severe) and is subjectively assessed for 0.1 increments by the clinician, with the higher the magnitude of the number the worse the score.|1 Year|Subjects analyzed were those who were enrolled, randomized to the study groups, and completed the study.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815635|NCT01093651|Secondary|Self-reported Symptoms|Cumulative number of self-reported symptoms based on the Division of AIDS Grading Scale for the Severity of Adult Adverse Events (0-4 scale where 0 is no new symptoms, 4 is serious adverse event or toxicity)|Monthly for 4 months|Cumulative frequency over 16 weeks of any self-reported symptoms on the DAIDS scale||total number of self reported symptoms|||Number
815636|NCT01093651|Secondary|Oral Glucose Tolerance|Area under the 75-gr oral glucose tolerance curve (AUCg) based on plasma glucose values measured at 0, 30, 60, 90, and 120 mins post-glucose challenge.|Baseline, week 8, week 16|||mg*min/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815637|NCT01093651|Secondary|RANTES; Serum Biomarkers of Immune Activation|serum Regulated on Activation, Normal T cell Expressed and Secreted concentration|Baseline, week 8, week 16|RANTES||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815638|NCT01093651|Secondary|SDF1α; Serum Biomarkers of Immune Activation|serum stromal cell-derived factor-1α concentration|Baseline, week 8, week 16|SDF1α||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815639|NCT01093651|Secondary|Soluble TNFR2; Serum Biomarkers of Immune Activation|serum soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor-2 concentration|Baseline, week 8, week 16|sTNFR2||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815640|NCT01093651|Primary|Plasma HIV Viremia (Viral Load)|Percentage of participants with plasma HIV RNA copy number less than 48 copies/mL|Monthly for 6 months|||percentage of participants below 48 c/mL|||Number
815641|NCT01093651|Primary|CD4+ T-cell Count||Monthly for 4 months|CD4+ T-cell count||cells/µL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815642|NCT01093690|Secondary|Toxicities and Severity of Nausea and Vomiting||5 days after receiving chemotherapy||||||
815643|NCT01093690|Primary|Number of Patients Who Had Complete Response|number of patients who experience no emesis and need no rescue treatment in 5-day period|5 days after receiving chemotherapy|intention to treat||participants|||Number
815644|NCT01093755|Primary|Change in Esophageal Inflammation Biomarker COX-2 Gene Expression|Change from baseline in esophageal issue biopsy cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) gene expression, as determined by Western blot.|3 months, 6 months|||% of tubulin||Standard Deviation|Mean
815645|NCT01093755|Primary|Change in Inflammation Biomarker Tissue PGE2 Level|Change from baseline in esophageal tissue biopsy prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) level, as determined by enzyme immunoassay|3 months, 6 months|||nanograms/gram of tissue||Standard Deviation|Mean
815646|NCT01093794|Primary|Cmax for Sitagliptin and Metformin|Cmax is the peak serum concentration of a therapeutic drug after administration; and is used to determine the rate and extent of drug absorption. Cmax is reported for sitagliptin 50 mg, metformin 500 mg and metformin 850 mg.|baseline through 72 hours postdose|Per-Protocol (PP) set: Participants who completed the study according to the protocol. One participant who discontinued after Treatment Period 1 was not included in the analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815647|NCT01093794|Primary|Area Under the Curve (AUC(0-t)) for Sitagliptin|AUC (0-t) is the area under the curve for the plot showing plasma concentration against time from time zero to the time of the last quantifiable concentration for sitagliptin 50 mg, metformin 500 mg and metformin 850 mg.|baseline through 72 hours postdose|Per-Protocol (PP) set: Participants who completed the study according to the protocol. One participant who discontinued after Treatment Period 1 was not included in the analysis.||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815648|NCT01093846|Primary|The Effect of Continuous Treatment With Subcutaneous AIN457 Compared to Placebo in Reducing the Rate of Recurrent Ocular Exacerbations in Behçet’s Patients With Intermediate Uveitis, Posterior Uveitis or Panuveitis in Group 1.|The primary objective of the study was to determine the effect of continuous treatment with subcutaneous AIN457 compared to placebo in reducing the rate of recurrent ocular exacerbations in Behçet’s patients with intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis or panuveitis in patients who completed the core study and continued treatment in the extension study (Group 1).Due to early termination of the study AIN457C2303E1, the analysis of extension period was changed. No efficacy analyses were completed, the safety analyses are available in the summary of AEs which occurred during the extension and safety follow-up periods and are shown in the safety section .|62 weeks||||||
815649|NCT01093976|Primary|Massachusetts General Hospital Hairpulling Scale (MGH-HPS) Total Score|The MGH-HPS is a 7-item, self-report scale that rates urges to pull hair, actual amount of pulling, perceived control over behavior, and distress associated with hair pulling over the past seven days. Total possible score is a 28 indicating the highest level of severity out of a scale from 0-28.|Subjects were followed for their duration of participation in the study (12-weeks)|Mean score reported below is the endpoint MGH-HPS score (at 12-weeks or last-observation carried forward).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815650|NCT01094119|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Temperatures Above 36 Degree|Proportion of patients with esophogeal temperatures above 36 degree at the end of surgery|at the end of surgery|Enrolled patients||Participants|||Count of Participants
815652|NCT01094171|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed included medical occurrences that resulted in death, was life threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, resulted in disability/incapacity or was a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject. Any was defined as occurrence of any symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination and related was an event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|During the entire study period (Day 0 – Month 4)|||Subjects|||Number
815653|NCT01094171|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 31-day (Days 0 - 30) post vaccination period|||Subjects|||Number
815654|NCT01094171|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed were Drowsiness, Irritability, Loss of appetite and Fever [Axillary temperature greater than or equal to (≥) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of any specified solicited general symptoms reported irrespective of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Any fever = oral temperature ≥ 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C). Grade 3 symptoms = symptoms that prevented normal activities. Grade 3 fever = oral temperature > 39.0°C.|During the 4-day (Days 0 - 3) post vaccination period|||Subjects|||Number
815655|NCT01094171|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any was defined as occurrence of any specified solicited local symptoms reported irrespective of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain was defined as considerable pain that prevented normal everyday activities. Grade 3 redness and swelling were defined as redness and swelling greater than (>) 20 millimeters (mm)|During the 4-day (Days 0 - 3) post vaccination period|||Subjects|||Number
815656|NCT01094522|Primary|Maximum Concentration of Methadone Including Its Metabolites (EDDP and EMDP)||0, 15, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 4, 6 hrs, every 6 hrs up to 24 hrs|||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
815657|NCT01094522|Secondary|•Amount of Study Drug Administered During the 24-hour Dosing Period||24 hours|||mg||Full Range|Mean
815658|NCT01094522|Secondary|•Pain Scores (FLACC) During the 24 Hours Study Period|"Average of hourly FLACC score for each subject over 24 hours was calculated, followed by median and full range for total subjects in each arm.
FLACC (Face, Leg, Activity, Cry, Consolability) score ranges from 0-10 with 0 representing no pain"|24 hours|Hourly FLACC score was calculated for 16 subjects in Methadone group and 19 subjects in morphine group||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
815659|NCT01094522|Primary|Maximum Concentration of Morphine Including Its Metabolites (Morphine-3-glucuronide and Morphine-6-glucuronide)||0, 15, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 4, 6 hrs, every 6 hrs up to 24 hrs|||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
815660|NCT01094548|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs),Serious TEAEs, TEAEs of Grade 3 or 4 According to NCI-CTCAE v3.0, TEAEs Leading to Discontinuation and Injection Site Reactions (ISRs)|TEAEs occurred between the first dose of study drug administration and up to 42 days after the last dose of study drug administration that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. A Serious TEAE was an AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death; life threatening; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; congenital anomaly/birth defect.Grade 3 and 4 TEAES as per National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Experience version 3 (NCI-CTCAE v3.0) were presented. Grade 3 refers to severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self-care and Activity of daily living (ADL).Grade 4 refers to Life-threatening consequences; where urgent intervention indicated. Injection site reactions, term used per NCI-CTCAE, were also presented.|From the first dose of study drug administration up to 42 days after the last dose of study drug administration or clinical data cut-off date (07 March 2012)|Safety analysis set included all the randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of trial treatment.||participants|||Number
815661|NCT01094548|Secondary|Time to Anti-tumor Therapy|Time from date of randomization to the date of first anti-tumor therapy since end of study treatment. In case a concomitant or concurrent procedure was identified as anti-tumor therapy during the medical review process, the start date of that anti-tumor therapy was used instead. Participants in the survival follow-up phase without subsequent anti-tumor therapy at the time of the analysis were censored at the latest available follow-up date. Participants without anti-tumor therapy and still on treatment at the time of analysis were censored at the data cut-off date if any trial treatment administration was recorded after the data cut-off date. In case no such record exists, the subject was censored at the last available administration date prior or equal to the data cut-off date. Participants dying before start of subsequent anti-tumor therapy were treated as censored observations at time of death.|From the date of randomization up to Month 48|Immunological diagnostic analysis set was defined as the subset of safety analysis set consisting of all the participants with at least one complete set of baseline (baseline/cyclophosphamide infusion visit or both), Week 5, and Week 9 data of either ELISPOT, proliferation assay or cytokine assay.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815662|NCT01094548|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP)|Progression was defined as follows per Blade criteria: The disease was considered to be progressive if it met 1 or more of the following: >25% increase in the level of serum monoclonal paraprotein (M-protein);>25% increase in the 24 h urinary light chain excretion; >25% increase in plasma cells in the bone marrow- definite increase in the size of existing bone lesions or soft tissues plasmacytomas (STP); Development of new bone lesions or STP, or development of hypercalcemia. TTP was defined as time from randomization to disease progression. Participants without events were censored on the date of last tumor assessment. Participants without PD at time of treatment discontinuation were censored at the date of discontinuation. Participants without PD at the time of the analysis but still on treatment were censored at the date of the latest available multiple myeloma status assessment. Participants dying from causes other than PD were treated as censored observations at time of death.|From the date of randomization up to Month 48|Immunological diagnostic analysis set was defined as the subset of safety analysis set consisting of all the participants with at least one complete set of baseline (baseline/cyclophosphamide infusion visit or both), Week 5, and Week 9 data of either ELISPOT, proliferation assay or cytokine assay.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815663|NCT01094548|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Clinical Response (Complete Response [CR], or Partial Response [PR], or Minimal Response [MR]|OCR (CR, or PR, or MR or NC or PD or NE) was defined per Blade Criteria. OCR rate (CR, or PR, or MR) was defined as the number of participants having experienced at least once a CR, PR, or MR, divided by the number of all participants. CR: negative immunofixation on serum and urine monoclonal paraprotein (M-protein), disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas (STP), <=5% plasma cells in bone marrow (BM); PR: >=50% reduction in serum M-protein, plasma cells in BM, size of STP; >=90% reduction of urinary M-protein in 24 hours, no increase in size/number of the lytic bone lesions (LBL). MR: 25%-49% reduction in serum M-protein, plasma cells in BM aspirate in non-secretory myeloma participants, size of STP; 50%-89% reduction in 24 h urinary light chain reaction (LCR), and no increase in size/number of LBL. PD: >25% increase in the serum M-protein level, 24 hour urinary LCR. Increase in size of existing BL or STP, development of new BL or STP, or development of hypercalcemia|From the date of randomization up to Month 48|Immunological diagnostic analysis set was defined as the subset of safety analysis set consisting of all the participants with at least one complete set of baseline (baseline/cyclophosphamide infusion visit or both), Week 5, and Week 9 data of either ELISPOT, proliferation assay or cytokine assay.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815664|NCT01094548|Secondary|Number of Participants With Overall Induced Immune Response by Human Leukocyte-associated Antigen (HLA) Type|Relationship between immune response with HLA subtypes was determined by analyzing the number of participants with overall induced immune response grouped by the presence versus absence of the given HLA type.|From the date of randomization up to Week 104|Immunological diagnostic analysis set was defined as the subset of safety analysis set consisting of all the participants with at least 1 complete set of baseline, Week 5, and Week 9 data of either ELISPOT, proliferation assay or cytokine assay. “n” signifies number of participants evaluable for the particular HLA type, respectively.||participants|||Number
815665|NCT01094548|Secondary|Number of Participants With Baseline Immune Response and Initial Increase of MUC1 Specific Immune Response|Baseline immune response towards MUC1 was defined as an immune response towards BP25, MUC-A2 or MUC-A11 peptide stimulation which was present in at least one of the two baseline assessments; the specific immune responses at baseline were based on the averaged baseline values across the two baseline visits. Initial increase of MUC1-specific immune response was defined as an increase of MUC1-specific immune response during the primary treatment period (up to Week 9).|Baseline and Week 9|Immunological diagnostic analysis set was defined as the subset of safety analysis set consisting of all the participants with at least one complete set of baseline (baseline/cyclophosphamide infusion visit or both), Week 5, and Week 9 data of either ELISPOT, proliferation assay or cytokine assay.||participants|||Number
815666|NCT01094548|Primary|Number of Participants With Overall Induced Mucinous Glycoprotein-1 (MUC-1)-Specific Immune Response|The overall immune response was achieved at least for 2 timepoints; that is at least 1 parameter in at least 1 assay (Lymphoproliferation assay, enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) for interferon [IFN] gamma, and intracellular IFN gamma cytokine assay in peripheral blood mononuclear cell [PBMC]) with ratio to background >=2, and ratio of background-corrected value to baseline >=2;Specific immune response at a given timepoint 't' was considered as differences of log-scale values under stimulation (X vax,t ) to those of the respective unstimulated controls (Xneg,t, background values)were computed after certain assay-specific pre-processing steps: Yt = Xvax,t – Xneg,t; A participant was considered to show positive stimulation-induced immune response at timepoint 't' (POS[t]=1), upon fulfilling the following criteria: Yt =>1 (That is at least a 2-fold higher value under stimulation than without stimulation). AVvax,t–1SEM vax,t > AVneg,t+1SEMneg,t (ELISPOT and proliferation assay only).|From the date of randomization up to Week 104|Immunological diagnostic analysis set was defined as the subset of safety analysis set consisting of all the participants with at least one complete set of baseline (baseline/cyclophosphamide infusion visit or both), Week 5, and Week 9 data of either ELISPOT, proliferation assay or cytokine assay.||participants|||Number
815667|NCT01094561|Secondary|The Positive Predictive Value of S-MRCP|"The secondary outcome endpoints of our study will be positive predictive value of S-MRCP, in comparison with EUS/S-EUS and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), utilizing surgical pathology as the gold standard. In addition, we will also be looking at the utility of Cancer Antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) and oral glucose tolerance tests.
Due to poor enrollment, inadequate data was collected for data analysis and therefore data analysis was not conducted. There is no data to report."|Up to 1 year||||||
815668|NCT01094561|Primary|S-MRCP and S-EUS Concordance|"The primary outcome studied will be the concordance of S-MRCP and S-EUS. Screening will consist of two diagnostic imaging modalities. First, all patients will have S-MRCP in conjunction with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). All images will be analyzed by a radiologist. Within thirty days, all patients will also undergo EUS with and without secretin enhancement (S-EUS).If the S-EUS shows abnormalities, EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration will be performed. The S-MRCP and EUS image findings will be classified as benign or suspicious/malignant to determine the concordance between imaging techniques.
Due to poor enrollment, inadequate data was collected for data analysis and therefore data analysis was not conducted. There is no data to report."|Day 1 and up to 30 days after S-MRCP||||||
815669|NCT01094574|Secondary|Change in Arbitrary Perfusion Units From Baseline During Drug Infusion|Laser Doppler images were recorded at baseline and at 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion to provide measurements of peripheral blood flow as an objective measure of inflammation. Blood flow was quantified by arbitrary perfusion units. Baseline measurements were subtracted from the average measurements obtained 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion.|Laser doppler images were recorded at baseline and at 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion|||relative flux||Standard Deviation|Mean
815670|NCT01094574|Secondary|IL-12 (ng/mL) Change From Baseline During Infusion|IL-12 (ng/mL) was measured in interstitial fluid after collecting samples as follows: Microdialysis catheters (very small, custom-made, sterile, semi-permeable, micro-dialysis catheters) were placed after the 1st laser Doppler measurement. Two catheters were placed at an experimentally inflamed skin site on the left leg. A continuous infusion of sterile 1% albumin solution was started using a programmable pump set at a rate of 2.5µl/min. Samples were collected hourly throughout the remainder of the study day. Samples for analysis were collected before, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion. Difference form baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline concentration form the average concentration determined in samples collected during drug infusion.|Tissue samples were collected at baseline, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion.|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815671|NCT01094574|Secondary|IL-10 (ng/mL) Change From Baseline During Infusion|IL-10 (ng/mL) was measured in interstitial fluid after collecting samples as follows: Microdialysis catheters (very small, custom-made, sterile, semi-permeable, micro-dialysis catheters) were placed after the 1st laser Doppler measurement. Two catheters were placed at an experimentally inflamed skin site on the left leg. A continuous infusion of sterile 1% albumin solution was started using a programmable pump set at a rate of 2.5µl/min. Samples were collected hourly throughout the remainder of the study day. Samples for analysis were collected before, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion. Difference form baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline concentration form the average concentration determined in samples collected during drug infusion.|Tissue samples were collected at baseline, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion.|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815672|NCT01094574|Secondary|IL-8 (ng/mL) Change From Baseline During Infusion|IL-8 (ng/mL) was measured in interstitial fluid after collecting samples as follows: Microdialysis catheters (very small, custom-made, sterile, semi-permeable, micro-dialysis catheters) were placed after the 1st laser Doppler measurement. Two catheters were placed at an experimentally inflamed skin site on the left leg. A continuous infusion of sterile 1% albumin solution was started using a programmable pump set at a rate of 2.5µl/min. Samples were collected hourly throughout the remainder of the study day. Samples for analysis were collected before, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion. Difference form baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline concentration form the average concentration determined in samples collected during drug infusion.|Tissue samples were collected at baseline, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion.|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815673|NCT01094574|Secondary|GMCSF (ng/mL) Change From Baseline During Infusion|GMCSF (ng/mL) was measured in interstitial fluid after collecting samples as follows: Microdialysis catheters (very small, custom-made, sterile, semi-permeable, micro-dialysis catheters) were placed after the 1st laser Doppler measurement. Two catheters were placed at an experimentally inflamed skin site on the left leg. A continuous infusion of sterile 1% albumin solution was started using a programmable pump set at a rate of 2.5µl/min. Samples were collected hourly throughout the remainder of the study day. Samples for analysis were collected before, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion. Difference form baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline concentration form the average concentration determined in samples collected during drug infusion.|Tissue samples were collected at baseline, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion.|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815674|NCT01094574|Secondary|IL-6 (ng/mL) Change From Baseline During Infusion|IL-6 (ng/mL) was measured in interstitial fluid after collecting samples as follows: Microdialysis catheters (very small, custom-made, sterile, semi-permeable, micro-dialysis catheters) were placed after the 1st laser Doppler measurement. Two catheters were placed at an experimentally inflamed skin site on the left leg. A continuous infusion of sterile 1% albumin solution was started using a programmable pump set at a rate of 2.5µl/min. Samples were collected hourly throughout the remainder of the study day. Samples for analysis were collected before, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion. Difference form baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline concentration form the average concentration determined in samples collected during drug infusion.|Tissue samples were collected at baseline, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion.|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815675|NCT01094574|Secondary|IL-2 (ng/mL) Change From Baseline During Infusion|IL-2 (ng/mL) was measured in interstitial fluid after collecting samples as follows: Microdialysis catheters (very small, custom-made, sterile, semi-permeable, micro-dialysis catheters) were placed after the 1st laser Doppler measurement. Two catheters were placed at an experimentally inflamed skin site on the left leg. A continuous infusion of sterile 1% albumin solution was started using a programmable pump set at a rate of 2.5µl/min. Samples were collected hourly throughout the remainder of the study day. Samples for analysis were collected before, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion. Difference form baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline concentration form the average concentration determined in samples collected during drug infusion.|Tissue samples were collected at baseline, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion.|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815676|NCT01094574|Secondary|IL-1β (ng/mL) Change From Baseline During Infusion|IL-1β (ng/mL) was measured in interstitial fluid after collecting samples as follows: Microdialysis catheters (very small, custom-made, sterile, semi-permeable, micro-dialysis catheters) were placed after the 1st laser Doppler measurement. Two catheters were placed at an experimentally inflamed skin site on the left leg. A continuous infusion of sterile 1% albumin solution was started using a programmable pump set at a rate of 2.5µl/min. Samples were collected hourly throughout the remainder of the study day. Samples for analysis were collected before, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion. Difference form baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline concentration form the average concentration determined in samples collected during drug infusion.|Tissue samples were collected at baseline, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion.|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815677|NCT01094574|Secondary|TNFα (ng/mL) Change From Baseline During Infusion|TNFα (ng/mL) was measured in interstitial fluid after collecting samples as follows: Microdialysis catheters (very small, custom-made, sterile, semi-permeable, micro-dialysis catheters) were placed after the 1st laser Doppler measurement. Two catheters were placed at an experimentally inflamed skin site on the left leg. A continuous infusion of sterile 1% albumin solution was started using a programmable pump set at a rate of 2.5µl/min. Samples were collected hourly throughout the remainder of the study day. Samples for analysis were collected before, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion. Difference form baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline concentration form the average concentration determined in samples collected during drug infusion.|Tissue samples were collected at baseline, and 2 and 3 hours after starting the drug infusion.|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815678|NCT01094574|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mechanical Pain Threshold During Infusion in Inflamed Skin|A metal rod of 0.24 mm diameter mounted onto 10 different weights (1.0, 2.0, 4.1, 8.2,16.3, 20, 32.7,49.0, 65.3, and 81.3g) will be placed perpendicularly onto the skin. Starting with the lightest probe, consecutively heavier probes will be used until a subject reports pain. Subsequently, the same or the next lighter probe will be used if pain is reported for the preceding stimulus, or the same or the next heavier probe will be used if no pain is reported for the preceding stimulus.The procedure will be repeated until seven perceptional changes (painful/non-painful) are registered. Measurements for anti-hyperalgesia were taken at the sites of tissue injury. Change form baseline was calculated by subtracting baseline values from the average values obtained 1 and 2 hours after starting the drug infusion.|Participants underwent the pain testing measures at baseline and at 1 and 2 hours after startingthe drug infusion.|||weight in grams||Standard Deviation|Mean
815679|NCT01094574|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mechanical Pain Threshold During Infusion in Non-Inflamed Skin|A metal rod of 0.24 mm diameter mounted onto 10 different weights (1.0, 2.0, 4.1, 8.2,16.3, 20, 32.7,49.0, 65.3, and 81.3g) will be placed perpendicularly onto the skin. Starting with the lightest probe, consecutively heavier probes will be used until a subject reports pain. Subsequently, the same or the next lighter probe will be used if pain is reported for the preceding stimulus, or the same or the next heavier probe will be used if no pain is reported for the preceding stimulus.The procedure will be repeated until seven perceptional changes (painful/non-painful) are registered. Measurements for analgesia were taken at the sites of non-injured skin. Change form baseline was calculated by subtracting baseline values from the average values obtained 1 and 2 hours after starting the drug infusion.|Participants underwent the pain testing measures at baseline and at 1 and 2 hours after startingthe drug infusion.|||weight in grams||Standard Deviation|Mean
815680|NCT01094574|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heat Pain Threshold During Infusion in Inflamed Skin|Degrees Centigrade Heat pain was induced with a thermal sensory analyzer (TSA-II, Medoc Advanced Medical Systems, Durham, North Carolina). A thermode was placed in contact with skin on the upper thigh. Starting at a comfortable temperature, the thermode temperature was increased at a measured rate. Study participants pushed a button of a hand-held device at the onset of pain at which point the thermode immediately reduced the temperature. Measurements for anti-hyperalgesia were taken at the sites of tissue injury. Change form baseline was calculated by subtracting baseline values from the average values obtained 1 and 2 hours after starting the drug infusion.|Participants underwent the pain testing measures at baseline and at 1 and 2 hours after startingthe drug infusion.|||degrees centigrade||Standard Deviation|Mean
815681|NCT01094574|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heat Pain Threshold During Infusion in Non-Inflamed Skin|Degrees Centigrade Heat pain was induced with a thermal sensory analyzer (TSA-II, Medoc Advanced Medical Systems, Durham, North Carolina). A thermode was placed in contact with skin on the upper thigh. Starting at a comfortable temperature, the thermode temperature was increased at a measured rate. Study participants pushed a button of a hand-held device at the onset of pain at which point the thermode immediately reduced the temperature. Measurements for analgesia were taken at the sites of non-injured skin. Change form baseline was calculated by subtracting baseline values from the average values obtained 1 and 2 hours after starting the drug infusion.|Participants underwent the pain testing measures at baseline and at 1 and 2 hours after startingthe drug infusion.|||degree centigrade||Standard Deviation|Mean
815682|NCT01094704|Primary|Change in Average Mucociliary Clearance (0-90 Minutes) at 1 and 4 Hrs Post Dose (MCC4hr - MCCbaseline; MCC1hr - MCCbaseline)|Duration of action of hypertonic saline as determined by measurements of mucociliary clearance/cough clearance 4 hours post dose.|1-4 hours post-dose|ITT||Absolute % change||Standard Deviation|Mean
815683|NCT01094730|Secondary|Subject Reported Overall Lens Comfort at Day 14|The overall lens comfort was assessed at Day 14 using the CLUE questionnaire. CLUE is a validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging)in a contact lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable /positive response. 97% of the scores fall within 0 and 120 (mean +/-3*SD).|Evaluated at Day 14|Analysis was conducted on subjects who successfully completed the study.||CLUE points||Standard Error|Mean
815684|NCT01094730|Primary|Lens Front Surface Deposits at Day 14|Deposits on the front surface of each lens were examined by the investigator after 14 days of lens wear, and graded on a 5-point scale; 0 = 0% deposits, 1 = 1%-5% deposits, 2 = 6%-15% deposits, 3=16%-25% deposits, and 4= 25% or more deposits. The grades were categorized into binary variable: grade 0 or 1 vs. grade 2 or higher.|Evaluated at Day 14|Analysis was conducted on subjects who successfully completed the study.||dichtomized grading scale|Contact Lenses|Standard Deviation|Mean
815685|NCT01094730|Secondary|Subject Reported Overall Lens Comfort at Day 7|The overall lens comfort was assessed at Day 7 using the Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE) questionnaire. CLUE is a validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging)in a contact lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable /positive response. 97% of the scores fall within 0 and 120 (mean +/-3*SD).|Evaluated at Day 7|Analysis was conducted on subjects who successfully completed the study.||CLUE points||Standard Error|Mean
815686|NCT01094730|Primary|Lens Front Surface Deposits at Day 7|Deposits on the front surface of each lens were examined by the investigator after 7 days of lens wear, and graded on a 5-point scale; 0 = no deposit, 1 = 1%-5% deposits, 2 = 6%-15% deposits, 3 = 16%-25% deposits, and 4 = 25% or more deposits. The grades were categorized into binary variable: grade 0 or 1 Vs. grade 2 or higher.|Evaluated at Day 7|Analysis was conducted on subjects who successfully completed the study.||dichotomized grading scale|eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
832414|NCT01255423|Secondary|Pain on Movement|"Pain on movement at 24 hours and 7 days assessed on a 100 mm visual analog scale with anchors at 0= No pain and 100= Extreme pain"|24 hours and 7 days|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
815694|NCT01094808|Secondary|Pain Sensation Rating Averaged Across 4 Distension Pressures (16, 24, 30, and 36 mg Hg)|The mm Hg distensions refer to the barostat balloon, which was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon. Pain sensation was measured by a 100 mm long Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS does not have any pre-set marks between the extremes. For the pain VAS, 0 means no pain and 100 mm means extreme pain. The investigator measures the mark made by the participant in mm and records this for the value of pain. The values across the 4 distension pressures were averaged for this outcome measure.|Approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
815695|NCT01094808|Secondary|Gas Sensation Rating Averaged Across 4 Distension Pressures (16, 24, 30, and 36 mg Hg)|The mm Hg distensions refer to the barostat balloon, which was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon. Gas sensation was measured by a 100 mm long Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS does not have any pre-set marks between the extremes. For the gas VAS, 0 means no gas sensation and 100 mm means extreme gas sensation. The investigator measures the mark made by the participant in mm and records this for the value of gas. The values across the 4 distension pressures were averaged for this outcome measure.|Approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
815696|NCT01094808|Secondary|Sensation Ratings for Gas at 16, 24, and 36 mm Hg Distension|The mm Hg distensions refer to the barostat balloon, which was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon. Gas sensation was measured by a 100 mm long Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS does not have any pre-set marks between the extremes. For the gas VAS, 0 means no gas sensation and 100 mm means extreme gas sensation. The investigator measures the mark made by the participant in mm and records this for the value of either pain or gas.|Approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
815697|NCT01094808|Secondary|Sensation Ratings for Pain at 16, 24, and 36 mm Hg Distension|The mm Hg distensions refer to the barostat balloon, which was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon. Pain sensation was measured by a 100 mm long Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS does not have any pre-set marks between the extremes. For the pain VAS, 0 means no pain and 100 mm means extreme pain. The investigator measures the mark made by the participant in mm and records this for the value of pain.|Approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
815698|NCT01094808|Secondary|Sensory Threshold for Gas|The sensory threshold for first perception of gas was measured by stepwise inflation of the balloon in increments of 4 mm Hg at 60 second intervals. (The balloon was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon.) During this assessment participants were asked to report when they had the first perception of gas. The investigator recorded the threshold pressure at which the participants reported this sensation.|Approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
815699|NCT01094808|Primary|Postprandial Motility Index Over 30 Minutes|The first 30 minute postprandial motility index (MI), MI = log_e [(number of contractions * sum of amplitudes)+1]|30 minutes after the meal|||log mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
815700|NCT01094808|Primary|Postprandial Colonic Tone [Reported] as the Symmetric Percent [Change]in Baseline Colonic Barostat Balloon Volume|The symmetric percent reduction in baseline colonic barostat balloon volume during the first 30 minutes postprandially (PP) corrected for the preprandial (30 min) tone, (symmetric percent change= 100*log_e[fasting/PP]). A positive symmetric percent change reflects a decrease in barostat balloon volume indicating a reduction in colonic tone. (The balloon was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon.)|The first 30 minutes postprandially, and preprandial (30 minutes)|||Symmetric percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
815701|NCT01094808|Primary|Colonic Compliance|"Colonic compliance is a measure of the stiffness of the colon, that is, what pressure was needed to reach half the maximum value of the colon. After the barostat balloon catheter was inserted in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon, the balloon was inflated. After an initial conditioning distension to 20 mm Hg, colonic compliance was measured by step-wise inflation with increments of 4 mm Hg. Colonic compliance was analyzed by a validated linear interpolation method. The pressure at half maximum volume serves as a summary of colonic compliance."|Approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
815702|NCT01094808|Primary|Sensation Ratings for Pain and Gas at 30 mm Hg Distension Above Baseline Operating Pressure|The 30 mm Hg distension refers to inflation of the balloon placed in placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon. Pain and gas were individually measured by a 100 mm long Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS does not have any pre-set marks between the extremes. For the pain VAS, 0 means no pain and 100 mm means extreme pain. For the gas VAS, 0 means no gas sensation and 100 mm means extreme gas sensation. The investigator measures the mark made by the participant in mm and records this for the value of either pain or gas.|Approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
815703|NCT01094808|Primary|Sensory Threshold for Pain|The sensory threshold for first perception of pain was measured by stepwise inflation of the balloon in increments of 4 mm Hg at 60 second intervals. The balloon was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon. During this assessment participants were asked to report when they had the first perception of pain. The investigator recorded the threshold pressure at which the participants reported this sensation.|approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
815704|NCT01094886|Secondary|Summary of Change From Day 1 to Day 3 in AUC of Prothrombin Time|Descriptive statistics for AUC on Study Day 1 and Day 3 for prothrombin time, based on the 7 consecutive blood draws at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose|Day 1, Day 3|ITT population: All subjects who received study drug and had valid post-dose data collected for efficacy analysis||sec*hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
815705|NCT01094886|Secondary|Summary of Change From Day 1 to Day 3 in Area Under the Curve (AUC) of aFXa|Descriptive statistics for Area Under the Curve (AUC) on Study Day 1 and Day 3 for Anti-Factor Xa, based on the 7 consecutive blood draws at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose|Day 1, Day 3|ITT population: All subjects who received study drug and had valid post-dose data collected for efficacy analysis||IU/ml*hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
815706|NCT01094886|Primary|Summary of Change From Day 3 to Day 1 in Maximum Prothrombin Time|Descriptive statistics for per-patient maximum prothrombin time laboratory value selected from the 7 consecutive blood draws (0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hrs post dose) on Day 1 and Day 3|Day 1, Day 3|ITT population: All subjects who received study drug and had valid post-dose data collected for efficacy analysis||sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
815707|NCT01094886|Primary|Summary of Change From Day 3 to Day 1 in Maximum Anti-Factor Xa (aFXa)|Descriptive statistics for per-patient maximum Anti-Factor Xa laboratory value selected from the 7 consecutive blood draws (0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hrs post dose) on Day 1 and Day 3|Day 1, Day 3|ITT population: All subjects who received study drug and had valid post-dose data collected for efficacy analysis.||IU/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815708|NCT01100502|Secondary|Incidence of Anti-therapeutic Antibodies (ATA) to Brentuximab Vedotin||Up to 12 months|ATA-evaluable patients (patients with a baseline and at least 1 postbaseline sample)||participants|||Number
815709|NCT01100502|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events or Laboratory Abnormalities||Up to 12 months|Safety Analysis Set includes all patients who received at least 1 dose of brentuximab vedotin or only received placebo: 2 patients randomized to placebo received a single dose of brentuximab vedotin and are included in the brentuximab vedotin arm; 2 patients randomized to placebo received no study treatment and are not included in the analysis||participants|||Number
815710|NCT01100502|Secondary|Overall Survival|Time from date of randomization to date of death due to any cause|Up to approximately 10 years||04/2021||||
815711|NCT01100502|Primary|Progression-free Survival by Independent Review|Time from date of randomization to the first documentation of disease progression by independent review or to death due to any cause, whichever comes first|Up to approximately 4 years|Intention-to-Treat analysis set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815712|NCT01100567|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase||baseline to 5 days|||ug/L/day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815713|NCT01100567|Primary|Change From Baseline in C-telopeptides||Baseline to 5 days|||ng/mL/day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815714|NCT01100606|Primary|Question 6 (Previous Pancreatic Enzyme Product [PEP])|"Acceptability questionnaire consists of 9 questions (Q) to assess the ease, time, overall satisfaction of study drug. Q6 included name of previous PEP administered. Q6 was reported as number of participants who used any PEP prior to screening."|Baseline|Safety analysis population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
815715|NCT01100606|Primary|Treatment Difference for Acceptability of Treatment|Acceptability questionnaire consists of 9 question (Q) to assess ease, time, overall satisfaction of study drug. Rated on 5-point scale for Q1-Q5 and Q7-Q9; Q6 was not rated and asked for name of previous PEP administered. Q1=overall ease of administration (1=not at all easy,2=somewhat,3=easy,4=very,5=extremely); Q2=time of administration (1=very short[<2 min],2=short[2-5 min],3=moderate[5-15 min],4=long[15-25 min],5=very long[>25 min]);Q3=overall infant acceptance(1=very easily,2=easily,3=same,4=with difficulty,5=with great difficulty);Q4=clear/complete instructions(1=not clear,2=somewhat,3=clear,4=very,5=extremely);Q5=overall satisfaction with dosing method (1=not satisfied,2=somewhat,3=satisfied,4=very,5=extremely);Q7=comparative ease of administration (1=much worse,2=worse,3=same,4=better,5=much better);Q8=comparative infant acceptance (1=much more difficult,2=more,3=same,4=easier,5=much easier);Q9=comparative overall satisfaction (1=much less,2=less,3=same,4=more,5=much more).|Baseline up to end of study (Day 21)|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had data (partial or complete) on acceptability questionnaire and clinical signs and symptoms of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI). Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) =participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
815716|NCT01100606|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Findings With Respect to Oral Mucosa|Safety assessed by the presence of lesions observed during a physical examination at each visit. Severity of lesions measured by investigator's assessment using the following scale: mild = asymptomatic or mild symptoms and treatment not indicated; moderate = moderate pain but not interfering with oral intake, modified diet indicated; severe = severe pain, interfering with oral intake and life threatening or fatal.|Baseline up to end of study (Day 21)|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
815717|NCT01100606|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Clinical Laboratory and Vital Signs Findings||Baseline up to end of study (Day 21)|Data was reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis as planned.|||||
815718|NCT01100606|Secondary|Number of Abdominal Pain Symptoms|Symptoms of pain was classified by severity as 0=none, 1=mild (no impairment of daily activities), 2=moderate (slight impairment of daily activities), and 3=severe (unable to perform daily activities). Average number of symptoms of specific severity for each participant was calculated from frequency of symptoms by the participant per day. Average number of symptoms during the first treatment period, second treatment period and end of study for total participants was summarized.|Up to Day 10 in first and second treatment periods, end of study (Day 21)|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had data (partial or complete) on acceptability questionnaire and clinical signs and symptoms of EPI. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) =participants who were evaluable for this measure.||average number of pain symptoms per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
815719|NCT01100606|Secondary|Number of Abdominal Symptoms: Flatulence|Flatulence is presence of excessive gas in the digestive tract. Symptoms of flatulence were classified by severity as 0=none, 1=mild (no impairment of daily activities), 2=moderate (slight impairment of daily activities), and 3=severe (unable to perform daily activities). Average number of symptoms of specific severity for each participant was calculated from frequency of symptoms by the participant per day. Average number of symptoms during the first treatment period, second treatment period and end of study for total participants was summarized.|Up to Day 10 in first and second treatment periods, end of study (Day 21)|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had data (partial or complete) on acceptability questionnaire and clinical signs and symptoms of EPI. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) =participants who were evaluable for this measure.||average number of flatulence per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
815731|NCT01100723|Primary|Percent of Patients Achieving Parathyroid Hormone Target ≤ 300|Compare the percent of patients achieving an intact Parathyroid hormone (PTH) target of ≤ 300 pg/ml before and after the application of a computerized dosing protocol for management of chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder (CKD-MBD). If multiple values were obtained within a specified evaluation time frame the values were averaged and the average value was then evaluated as to whether it was within or outside the target range.|1 year|Subjects who had at least one laboratory measurement during the assessment phase.||percentage of subjects meeting target|||Number
839181|NCT01324622|Secondary|Quality of Life Improvement Using the SF-12 Scale||up to 24 months|Due to the study’s early termination, no data were collected for this outcome|||||
815720|NCT01100606|Secondary|Number of Abdominal Symptoms: Bloating|Bloating is swelling of the intestinal tract caused by excessive gas formation. Symptoms of bloating were classified by severity as 0=none, 1=mild (no impairment of daily activities), 2=moderate (slight impairment of daily activities), and 3=severe (unable to perform daily activities). Average number of symptoms of specific severity for each participant was calculated from frequency of symptoms by the participant per day. Average number of symptoms during the first treatment period, second treatment period and end of study for total participants was summarized.|Up to Day 10 in first and second treatment periods, end of study (Day 21)|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had data (partial or complete) on acceptability questionnaire and clinical signs and symptoms of EPI. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) =participants who were evaluable for this measure.||average number of bloating per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
815721|NCT01100606|Secondary|Number of Stools With Signs of Blood and Visible Oil or Grease|Average number of stools with signs of blood and visible oil or grease of each participant was calculated from number of stools with signs of blood and visible oil or grease by the participant per day. Average number of stools with signs of blood and visible oil or grease during the first treatment period, second treatment period and end of study for total participants was summarized.|Up to Day 10 in first and second treatment periods, end of study (Day 21)|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had data (partial or complete) on acceptability questionnaire and clinical signs and symptoms of EPI. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) =participants who were evaluable for this measure.||average number of stools per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
815722|NCT01100606|Secondary|Number of Stools Categorized as Per Consistency|Stool consistency was categorized as hard, formed/normal, soft and diarrhea. Average number of stools categorized as per consistency of each participant was calculated from number of stools of specific consistency by the participant per day. Average number of stools categorized as per consistency during the first treatment period, second treatment period and end of study for total participants was summarized.|Up to Day 10 in first and second treatment periods, end of study (Day 21)|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had data (partial or complete) on acceptability questionnaire and clinical signs and symptoms of EPI. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) =participants who were evaluable for this measure.||average number of stools per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
815723|NCT01100606|Secondary|Daily Number of Stools|Average daily number of stools of each participant was calculated from frequency of stools by the participant per day. Average daily number of stools during the first treatment period, second treatment period and end of study for total participants was summarized.|Up to Day 10 in first and second treatment periods, end of study (Day 21)|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had data (partial or complete) on acceptability questionnaire on and clinical signs and symptoms of EPI. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) =participants who were evaluable for this measure.||average number of stools per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
815724|NCT01100658|Secondary|Changes in Parent and Teacher Ratings of Attention, Executive Functioning and Behavior|Parent and teacher ratings of attention, executive function and behavior (i.e., Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function [BRIEF -a parent questionnaire and a teacher questionnaire-designed to assess executive functioning in home and school environments. Conners Parent Rating Scale-3 Short Form [CPRS-3 research and clinical tool for obtaining parental reports of childhood behavior problems.] Standard scores average = 50 + or - 10. Higher scores indicate more severe difficulty. Scores > or = 60 represent areas of significant behavior concern.|Week 1 and Week 2|No patients received treatment, therefore analysis was not done.|||||
815725|NCT01100658|Primary|Effectiveness of Methylphenidate on Neurocognitive Components|Child performance on neuropsychological testing (i.e., using Test of Variables of Attention [TOVA] which is a computerized test of attention that assists in the screening, diagnosis, and treatment monitoring of attention disorders, like Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder [ADHD], and working memory index of the WisSC IV. Standard scores average = 100 +/- 15. Higher scores indicate better performance. Scores < or = 1 SD below the mean represent area of deficit.|Week 1 and Week 2|No patients received treatment, therefore analysis was not done.|||||
815726|NCT01100723|Secondary|Percent of Patients on Cinacalcet and Vitamin D Analogues|Compare the percent of patients on cinacalcet and vitamin D analogues at baseline and at 6 and 12 months after the application of a computerized dosing protocol for management of CKD-MBD. If multiple values were obtained within a specified evaluation time frame the values were averaged and the average value was then evaluated as to whether it was within or outside the target range.|6 months and 1 year|Number of subjects with at least 1 laboratory analysis during the evaluation period.||percentage of subjects receiving med|||Number
815727|NCT01100723|Secondary|Percent of Patients Achieving Calcium Target ≤ 10.1|Compare the percent of patients achieving a calcium ≤ 10.1 mg/dL before and after the application of a computerized dosing protocol for management of CKD-MBD. If multiple values were obtained within a specified evaluation time frame the values were averaged and the average value was then evaluated as to whether it was within or outside the target range.|1 year|Subjects with at least one laboratory value during evaluation period.||percentage of subjects in target|||Number
815728|NCT01100723|Secondary|Percent of Patients Achieving Phosphorous Target ≤ 4.5|Compare the percent of patients achieving a phosphorus of ≤ 4.5 mg/dL before and after the application of a computerized dosing protocol for management of CKD-MBD. If multiple values were obtained within a specified evaluation time frame the values were averaged and the average value was then evaluated as to whether it was within or outside the target range.|1 year|||percent of participants in target|||Number
815729|NCT01100723|Secondary|Percent of Patients Achieving Parathyroid Hormone Target ≤ 450|Compare the percent of patients achieving an intact PTH target of ≤ 450 pg/ml before and after the application of a computerized dosing protocol for management of CKD-MBD. If multiple values were obtained within a specified evaluation time frame the values were averaged and the average value was then evaluated as to whether it was within or outside the target range.|1 year|||percent of participants in target|||Number
815730|NCT01100723|Primary|Percent of Patients Achieving Phosphorous Target ≤ 5.5|Compare the percent of patients achieving a phosphorus of ≤ 5.5 mg/dL before and after the application of a computerized dosing protocol for management of CKD-MBD. If multiple values were obtained within a specified evaluation time frame the values were averaged and the average value was then evaluated as to whether it was within or outside the target range.|1 year|||percent of participants in target|||Number
815733|NCT01100762|Primary|First Step Length|First step length was measured in meters from the starting position of the foot to the maximum displacement of the foot after the first step. Measurements were taken separately for forward and backward first step.|Data collection occurred before and immediately after each training session|||m||Standard Deviation|Mean
815734|NCT01100762|Primary|Number of Steps to Regain Balance|Steps to regain balance were measured by the number of steps needed to recover standing balance. The steps were counted using a custom software of the motion capture system.|Data collection occurred before and immediately after each training session|||steps||Standard Deviation|Mean
815735|NCT01100762|Primary|Cadence|Cadence was measured in steps per minute|Data collection occurred before and immediately after each training session|||steps/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
815736|NCT01100762|Primary|Gait Velocity|Gait Velocity was measured in meters per second|Data collection occurred before and immediately after each training session|||m/s||Standard Deviation|Mean
815737|NCT01100762|Primary|Stride Length|Stride Length was measured in centimeters|Data collection occurred before and immediately after each training session|||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
815738|NCT01101165|Primary|AUC0-t - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Non-zero Plasma Concentration|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-t|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis. Note:One subject in period 2 was excluded from this PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815739|NCT01101165|Primary|AUC0-inf - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (Extrapolated)|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-inf|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis. Note:One subject in Period 2 was excluded from this PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815740|NCT01101165|Primary|Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration|Bioequivalence based on Cmax|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815741|NCT01101178|Primary|AUC0-t - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Non-zero Plasma Concentration|AUC0-t is the Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Non-zero Plasma Concentration and bioequivalence based on AUC0-t|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for Pharmacokinetic (PK) Metrics; Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects experiencing emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815742|NCT01101178|Primary|AUC0-inf - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (Extrapolated)|AUC0-inf is the Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (Extrapolated)and bioequivalence is based on AUC0-inf values.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for pharmacokinetic (PK) Metrics: Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects experiencing emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815743|NCT01101178|Primary|Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration|Cmax is the Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration and bioequivalence is based on Cmax.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for Pharmacokinetic (PK) Metrics: Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects experiencing emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815744|NCT01101191|Primary|AUC0-t - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Non-zero Plasma Concentration|AUC0-t is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last non-zero plasma concentration and bioequivalence is based on AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815745|NCT01101191|Primary|AUC0-inf - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (Extrapolated)|AUC0-inf is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (extrapolated) and bioequivalence is based on AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis.Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815746|NCT01101191|Primary|Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration|Cmax is the maximum observed plasma concentration and bioequivalence is based on Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 72-hour period.|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis.Subjects who experienced emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815747|NCT01101308|Primary|AUC0-t - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Non-zero Plasma Concentration|AUC0-t is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last non-zero plasma concentration and bioequivalence is based on AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects experiencing emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815803|NCT01102218|Primary|Change in Erythropoietin Dose|Erythropoietin dose is amount needed to maintain a hemoglobin between 11 and 12 mg/dL.|Baseline and 6 months|The number of patients for analysis was based on those patient who had completed 6 months of treatment. The analysis was per protocol.||Units EPO||Standard Deviation|Mean
815748|NCT01101308|Primary|AUC0-inf - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (Extrapolated)|AUC0-inf is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (extrapolated) and bioequivalence is based on AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects experiencing emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815749|NCT01101308|Primary|Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration|Cmax is the maximum observed plasma concentration and bioequivalence is based on Cmax.|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis. Subjects experiencing emesis within 12 hours after dosing were excluded from PK analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815750|NCT01101321|Primary|AUC0-t - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Non-zero Plasma Concentration|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-t|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815751|NCT01101321|Primary|AUC0-inf - Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (Extrapolated)|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-inf|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815752|NCT01101321|Primary|Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration|Bioequivalence based on Cmax|Blood samples collected over 72-hour period|Full Analysis Population for PK Metrics. Data from all subjects who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK metric variable were included in the statistical analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815753|NCT01101464|Primary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter of Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Two Differing Tablet Strengths (3 x 5 mg and 1 x 15 mg) of Sublingually Administered Org 5222 (Asenapine)|"The primary objective is to compare the bioavailability using pharmacokinetic parameter of area under the curve (AUC) of two differing tablet strengths (3 x 5 mg and 1 x 15 mg) of sublingually administered Org 5222.
Measurements were performed after each cross-over period: Day 5 measurement for 3x5mg for participants from Sequence 1 and 1x15mg for participants from Sequence 2; Day 7 measurement for 1x15mg for participants from Sequence 1 and 3x5mg for participants from Sequence 2."|Day 5 & Day 7|All participants were included in both treatment comparisons (as per cross over design).||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815754|NCT01101464|Primary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter of Time of Occurrence of Cmax (Tmax) of Two Differing Tablet Strengths (3 x 5 mg and 1 x 15 mg) of Sublingually Administered Org 5222 (Asenapine)|"The primary objective is to compare the bioavailability using pharmacokinetic parameter of time of occurrence of Cmax (Tmax) of two differing tablet strengths (3 x 5 mg and 1 x 15 mg) of sublingually administered Org 5222.
Measurements were performed after each cross-over period: Day 5 measurement for 3x5mg for participants from Sequence 1 and 1x15mg for participants from Sequence 2; Day 7 measurement for 1x15mg for participants from Sequence 1 and 3x5mg for participants from Sequence 2"|Day 5 & Day 7|All participants were included in both treatment comparisons (as per cross over design).||Hours||Full Range|Mean
815755|NCT01101464|Primary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter of Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Two Differing Tablet Strengths (3 x 5 mg and 1 x 15 mg) of Sublingually Administered Org 5222 (Asenapine)|"The primary objective is to compare the bioavailability using pharmacokinetic parameter of maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) of two differing tablet strengths (3 x 5 mg and 1 x 15 mg) of sublingually administered Org 5222
Measurements were performed after each cross-over period: Day 5 measurement for 3x5mg for participants from Sequence 1 and 1x15mg for participants from Sequence 2; Day 7 measurement for 1x15mg for participants from Sequence 1 and 3x5mg for participants from Sequence 2."|Day 5 & Day 7|All participants were included in both treatment comparisons (as per cross over design).||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815756|NCT01101477|Secondary|The Global Tolerance for Flexible Bronchoscopy|After the recovery, patients will be asked about the tolerance of bronchoscopy performed to them by 10-point Verbal Analogus Scale (0: best tolerance, 10: worst tolerance)|After recovery||||||
815757|NCT01101477|Secondary|The Cooperation of Patients From the View of Bronchoscopists|After the bronchoscopy, the bronchoscopist will be asked by 10-point Verbal Analogus Scale (0: the best cooperation, 10: the worst cooperation) to express how they fell about the cooperation of patients undergoing the bronchoscopy.|After bronchoscopy||||||
815758|NCT01101477|Secondary|The Total Doses of Propofol During Induction and Overall Procedures|The dosses of propofol used during induction and overall flexible bronchoscopy will be recored from the screen of the TCI pump.|after bronchoscopy||||||
815759|NCT01101477|Secondary|The Recovery Time to Orientation|The recovery time to orientation was defined as the time between finishing bronchoscopy to the time when the patients could spontaneously open their eyes, recall their date of birth, and correctly perform finger-nose test.|after bronchosocpy||||||
815760|NCT01101477|Primary|The Number of Changes in Target Effect Site Concentration During Flexible Bronchoscopy|The investigator will titrate the target effect site concentration (Cet) during bronchoscopy according to protocol to keep stable vital signs and sedative levels. The numbers of adjustment will be recorded to show which regimen required less adjustment to keep stable sedative levels and vital signs.|During sedative induction and bronchoscopy||||||
815761|NCT01101477|Primary|The Number of Patients With Hypoxemia During Flexible Bronchoscopy|"Hypoxemia is defined as:
Oxyhemoglobin saturation (SPO2) is less than 90 % with any duration"|During sedative induction and bronchoscopy|The participants who received intervention completely were analyzed.||participants|||Number
815804|NCT01102257|Primary|Change in REd Blood Cell(RBC) Membrane Fatty Acid(FA) Content||Baseline and 3 Months|||Percentage Total Fatty Acids||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
815805|NCT01102257|Secondary|Change in Relevant Biomarkers: HLA-DR, MUC 5A, Cytokines||90 +/- 14 days following initiation of drug regimen||||||
815806|NCT01102257|Secondary|Change in Schirmer’s||90 +/- 14 days following initiation of drug regimen||||||
815807|NCT01102257|Secondary|Change in the Ocular Surface||90 +/- 14 days following initiation of drug regimen||||||
815808|NCT01102257|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life Associated With Chronic Pain||90 +/- 14 days following initiation of drug regimen||||||
815762|NCT01101542|Primary|Number of Subjects With Medically Significant Conditions.|MSC include AEs prompting emergency room or physician visits that are not related to common diseases or routine visits for physical examination or vaccination, or serious adverse events (SAEs) that are not related to common diseases. Common diseases include upper respiratory infections, sinusitis, pharyngitis, gastroenteritis, urinary tract infections, cervico-vaginal yeast infections, menstrual cycle abnormalities and injury.|During the entire Post Marketing Surveillance period up to one month after the third vaccine dose (During the 4th, 5th and 6th year of surveillance)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort that included all vaccinated subjects with at least one dose of Cervarix vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815763|NCT01101542|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Event (SAEs) and SAE(s) Causally Related to Vaccination.|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects.|During the entire Post Marketing Surveillance period up to one month after the third vaccine dose (During the 6th year of surveillance).|||Subjects|||Number
815764|NCT01101542|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Event (SAEs) and SAE(s) Causally Related to Vaccination.|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects.|During the entire Post Marketing Surveillance period up to one month after the third vaccine dose (During the 5th year of surveillance).|||Subjects|||Number
815765|NCT01101542|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited adverse event is any adverse event (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.|During the 30-day period (Day 0 to Day 29) following any vaccination (During the 6th year of surveillance).|||Subjects|||Number
815766|NCT01101542|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited adverse event is any adverse event (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.|During the 30-day period (Day 0 to Day 29) following any vaccination (During the 5th year of surveillance).|||Subjects|||Number
815767|NCT01101542|Primary|Number of Subjects With Medically Significant Conditions.|*Note: For Surveillance Year 3 the analysis was not performed for this outcome since it was not a requirement of the Korean regulatory authority.|During the entire Post Marketing Surveillance period up to one month after the third vaccine dose (During the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th year of surveillance)|*Note: the analysis was not performed for this outcome since it was not a requirement of the Korean regulatory authority.|||||
815768|NCT01101542|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Event (SAEs) and SAE(s) Causally Related to Vaccination.|"SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects.
Note: Results for the 5th and 6th year of surveillance will be added when they become available."|During the entire Post Marketing Surveillance period up to one month after the third vaccine dose (During the 4th year of surveillance).|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort that included all vaccinated subjects with at least one dose of Cervarix vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815769|NCT01101542|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Event (SAEs) and SAE(s) Causally Related to Vaccination.|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects.|During the entire Post Marketing Surveillance period up to one month after the third vaccine dose (During the 3rd year of surveillance).|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort that included all vaccinated subjects with at least one dose of Cervarix vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815770|NCT01101542|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|"An unsolicited adverse event is any adverse event (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.
Note: Results for the 5th and 6th year of surveillance will be added when they become available."|During the 30-day period (Day 0 to Day 29) following any vaccination (During the 4th year of surveillance).|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort that included all vaccinated subjects with at least one dose of Cervarix vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815771|NCT01101542|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited adverse event is any adverse event (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.|During the 30-day period (Day 0 to Day 29) following any vaccination (During the 3rd year of surveillance).|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort that included all vaccinated subjects with at least one dose of Cervarix vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
815809|NCT01102257|Secondary|Change on Impact of Dry Eye on Everyday Life (IDEEL)||90 +/- 14 days following initiation of drug regimen||||||
815810|NCT01102257|Secondary|Change on Brief Ocular Discomfort Inventory (BODI)||90 +/- 14 days following initiation of drug regimen||||||
815811|NCT01102257|Primary|Change on Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI)||90 +/- 14 days following initiation of drug regimen||||||
815812|NCT01102270|Secondary|Sleep Duration|total sleep duration|8 hour In-Laboratory Polysomnogram (PSG)|||hours of sleep||Standard Error|Mean
815772|NCT01101841|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hot Flash Severity at Week 4 and Week 12.|"Subjects recorded the number of hot flashes per week using an electronic diary. Severity score for hot flashes for each subject was calculated as the sum of 2 times the number of moderate hot flashes, plus 3 times the number of severe hot flashes, divided by the total number of moderate and severe hot flashes.
Weekly Severity Score = (2•Fm +3•FS)/(Fm + FS) Daily Severity Score = {(2•F) m +3•FS)/(Fm + FS)}/7 Where, Fm= Frequency of Moderate Hot Flashes Fs = Frequency of Severe Hot Flashes"|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Hot Flash Severity Score per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
815773|NCT01101841|Secondary|BMI Change From Baseline (kg/m2), Median|"Subjects were weighed at each clinic visit and reported the number of hot flashes using an electronic diary.
Assessment of the effect of Brisdelle compared with placebo on body mass index."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||kg/m2||Full Range|Median
815774|NCT01101841|Secondary|Assessment of Mood|"Mood was measured by using the Profile of Mood States (POMS) questionnaire. The Profile of Moods States (POMS) is a 65-item multi-dimensional measure that provides a method of assessing transient, fluctuating active mood states. Key areas that are measured include: tension-anxiety, anger-hostility, fatigue-inertia, depression-dejection, vigor-activity, confusion-bewilderment. Responses to questions are scored with the following numerical values: Not at all = 1, A little = 2, Moderate = 3, Quite a bit = 4, Extremely = 5. A total score for a domain was obtained by summing the responses of individual items in the domain. The total POMS score can range from 65 to 325. Each subject’s total POMS score at baseline and at Week 4 and Week 12 were used to calculate the percent of participants with less disturbance in mood at Week 4 and Week 12 compared to baseline. The percent of participants with less disturbance in mood is reported below."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Percent of participants|||Number
815775|NCT01101841|Secondary|Effect of Brisdelle (Paroxetine Mesylate) Capsules on Anxiety and Depression|"Depression & anxiety were measured by using the Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale (HADS).
The HADS was developed to assess anxiety & depression. It is meant to differentiate symptoms of depression with those of anxiety.
Number of items: 14 (7 questions relating to anxiety; 7 questions relating to depression).
Responses are based on the relative frequency of symptoms over the past week, using a four point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very often indeed).
Responses are summed to provide separate scores for anxiety and depression symptomology with possible scores ranging from 0 to 21 for each scale.
The results presented below are the percentage of participants with abnormal HADS Scores for both Abnormal Anxiety & Abnormal Depression at Week 4 and Week 12."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815776|NCT01101841|Secondary|Percent Responders Improvement in VMS From Baseline Using the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Scale.|"Proportion of NRS Responders: Subject’s overall improvement in VMS from Baseline was assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)
The Clinical Global Impression - Severity scale (CGI-S) is a 7-point scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment, relative to the clinician's past experience with patients who have the same diagnosis. Considering total clinical experience, a patient is assessed on severity of mental illness at the time of rating 1, normal, not at all ill; 2, borderline mentally ill; 3, mildly ill; 4, moderately ill; 5, markedly ill; 6, severely ill; or 7, extremely ill.
Responders: Subjects Achieving a Score of “Very Much Improved” Or “Much Improved” Or “Minimally Improved”.
Non Responders: Subjects with a Score of “No Change” Or “Minimally Worse” Or “Much Worse” Or “Very Much Worse”."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||percentage of participants|||Number
815777|NCT01101841|Secondary|Effect of Paroxetine Mesylate Capsules on Percent Improvement of Hot Flash Interference From Baseline at Week 4 and Week 12, Hot Flash Related Daily Interference Scale (HFRDIS)|"Interference of hot flashes was measured by using the hot flash-related daily interference scale (HFRDIS). The HFRDIS is a 10-item scale that measures the degree to which hot flashes interfere with 9 daily activities and the tenth item measures the degree to which hot flashes interfere with each of the other items. Subjects can score for each item on a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 = Do not interfere and a score of 10 = Completely interferes.
The measure being reported below is percentage of responders who had an improvement in HFRDIS score at Week 4 and Week 12 compared to baseline. A responder is defined as a subject who had an improvement in the HFRDIS score. An improvement is defined as a score ≤3 on each question."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Percent of participants|||Number
815813|NCT01102270|Primary|Apnea Hypopnea Index|number of respiratory events per hour of sleep Respiratory events last for at least 10 seconds and are associated with a decrease in blood oxygenation or a cortical arosual from sleep. AHI values are typically categorized as 5-15/hr = mild; 15-30/hr = moderate; and > 30/h = severe|8 hour In-Laboratory Polysomnogram (PSG)|||events per hour of sleep||Standard Error|Mean
815814|NCT01102270|Secondary|Nadir Overnight Oxygen Saturation|Nadir overnight oxygen saturation (%)|8 hour In-Laboratory Polysomnogram (PSG)|||% oxygen saturation||Standard Error|Mean
815815|NCT01102270|Secondary|Arousal Threshold|quantified using an epiglottic pressure transducer in CmH2O|8 hour In-Laboratory Polysomnogram (PSG)|||cmH2O||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
815778|NCT01101841|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX, Week 4 and Week 12) Total Score, Median|The Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale (ASEX) is a 5-item rating scale that quantifies sex drive, arousal, vaginal lubrication/penile erection, ability to reach orgasm, and satisfaction from orgasm. Possible total scores range from 5 to 30, with the higher scores indicating more sexual dysfunction.The sum of the scores for all 5 items was calculated at Week 4 and Week 12.|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Units on a scale||Full Range|Median
815779|NCT01101841|Secondary|Percent Daytime and Nighttime Responders, Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)|"Subject's overall improvement in VMS from Baseline assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) The NRS is measured on a scale of 0 to 10 on how bothered the subject was by her VMS (0=not bothered at all and 10=very much bothered).
Responders: Subjects with NRS Score of 5 Or Less. Non-Responders: Subjects With NRS Score of Greater than Or Equal to 6."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||percentage of total number of subjects|||Number
815780|NCT01101841|Secondary|Percentage of Responders|Participants reported the number of hot flashes using an electronic diary. Participants who hd a ≥50% reduction in hot flash frequency were defined as responders. The percent of responders is presented below.|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||percentage of participants|||Number
815781|NCT01101841|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Greene Climacteric Scale (GCS) at Week 4 and Week 12, Total Score, Median|"The Greene Climacteric Scale (GCS) was used for this measurement. The scale has 21 questions and measures symptoms in 4 areas; these are psychological (anxiety and depression), physical, vasomotor, and libido.
The severity of the symptom was scored as: 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate, and 3=severe. Anxiety was determined by using the sum of scores 1 to 6, and depression was determined by using the sum of scores 7 to 11. Physical aspects were determined by using the sum of scores 12 to 18; vasomotor aspects were determined by using the sum of scores 19 to 20; and libido was determined by using the score for question 21.
The total GCS score ranges from 0 to 63 which is the sum of all the scores for the 21-symptom assessment questions in this scale. Each subject’s total GCS score at baseline and at Week 4 and Week 12 were used to calculate change from baseline in these symptoms. The change from baseline is reported below."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
815782|NCT01101841|Secondary|Change in Severity of Moderate to Severe Hot Flashes From Baseline (BMI ≥32 kg/m2, Week 4 and Week 12), Median|"Subjects were weighed at each clinic visit and reported the number of hot flashes using an electronic diary.
For the BMI ≥32 kg/m2 subgroup, the mean weekly reduction in the severity of moderate to severe hot flashes from Baseline was calculated at Week 4 and Week 12.
Subjects recorded the number of hot flashes per week using an electronic diary. Severity score for hot flashes for each subject was calculated as the sum of 2 times the number of moderate hot flashes, plus 3 times the number of severe hot flashes, divided by the total number of moderate and severe hot flashes.
Weekly Severity Score = (2•Fm +3•FS)/(Fm + FS) Daily Severity Score = {(2•F) m +3•FS)/(Fm + FS)}/7 Where, Fm= Frequency of Moderate Hot Flashes Fs = Frequency of Severe Hot Flashes The calculated severity score is reported below."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Hot Flash Severity scores per week||Full Range|Median
815783|NCT01101841|Secondary|Change in Severity of Moderate to Severe Hot Flashes From Baseline (BMI <32 kg/m2, At Week 4 and Week 12), Median|"Subjects were weighed at each clinic visit and reported the number of hot flashes using an electronic diary.
For the BMI <32 kg/m2 subgroup, the mean weekly reduction in the severity of moderate to severe hot flashes from Baseline was calculated at Week 4 and Week 12.
Subjects recorded the number of hot flashes per week using an electronic diary. Severity score for hot flashes for each subject was calculated as the sum of 2 times the number of moderate hot flashes, plus 3 times the number of severe hot flashes, divided by the total number of moderate and severe hot flashes.
Weekly Severity Score = (2•Fm +3•FS)/(Fm + FS) Daily Severity Score = {(2•F) m +3•FS)/(Fm + FS)}/7 Where, Fm= Frequency of Moderate Hot Flashes Fs = Frequency of Severe Hot Flashes The calculated severity score is reported below."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Hot Flash Severity scores per week||Full Range|Median
815784|NCT01101841|Secondary|Change in Frequency of Moderate to Severe Hot Flashes Frequency From Baseline (BMI ≥32 kg/m2, Week 4 and Week 12), Median|"Subjects were weighed at each clinic visit and reported the number of hot flashes using an electronic diary.
For the BMI ≥32 kg/m2 subgroup, the mean weekly reduction in frequency of moderate to severe hot flashes from Baseline was calculated for Week 4 and Week 12."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Hot flashes per week||Full Range|Median
815816|NCT01102374|Secondary|Number of Other Infections||12 months|||events|||Number
815817|NCT01102374|Secondary|Number of Urinary Tract Infections||12 months|||events|||Number
815818|NCT01102374|Secondary|Death||12 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
815819|NCT01102374|Secondary|Incident Hypercalcemia||12 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
815785|NCT01101841|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Number of Awakenings Due to Hot Flashes, Median|"Participants completed a electronic diary to report nightime awakenings. Subjects took study drug once daily at bedtime and they were instructed to complete daily hot flash and sleep diaries to record the number of hot flashes daily, the severity of each episode of hot flash and total number of awakenings due to hot flashes.
The diary data was used to evaluate and compare the treatment groups, on the change from baseline to Week 4 and Week 12, in the total number of awakenings due to hot flashes. The total number of awakenings due to hot flashes in the run-in period was used as baseline."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Awakenings||Full Range|Median
815786|NCT01101841|Secondary|Change in Frequency of Moderate to Severe Hot Flashes Frequency From Baseline (BMI <32 kg/m2, Week 4 and Week 12), Median|"Subjects were weighed at each clinic visit and reported the number of hot flashes using an electronic diary.
For the BMI <32 kg/m2 subgroup, the mean weekly reduction in frequency of moderate to severe hot flashes from Baseline was calculated for Week 4 and Week 12."|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Hot flashes per week||Full Range|Median
815787|NCT01101841|Secondary|Percent Persistence of Benefit, Statistically Significant Difference in Having 50% or More Reduction Compared to Baseline at Week 24.|"Persistence of treatment benefit to 24 weeks post treatment was assessed by using the following responder analysis. Responders were defined as those subjects who achieved ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in moderate to severe hot-flash frequency at Week 24; the percent change in hot flash frequency is calculated using the formula:
Percent reduction at week 24 = [(number of moderate to severe hot flash frequency at baseline – number of moderate to severe hot flash frequency at week 24) / number of moderate to severe hot flash frequency at baseline ]*100%."|Week 24|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||percentage of total number of subjects|||Number
815788|NCT01101841|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hot Flash Frequency at Week 4 and Week 12.|"Subjects recorded the number of hot flashes per week using an electronic diary. The results reported are not hot flashes per week.
The results reported are:
Mean Baseline frequency of moderate to severe VMS
Mean change in frequency of moderate to severe VMS from baseline to Week 4
Mean change in frequency of moderate to severe VMS from baseline to Week 12"|Week 4 and Week 12|The outcome data presented for these measurements were obtained using a scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed only from participants who completed and turned in the questionnaire. Therefore, the number of participants analyzed is not consistent with numbers provided in any of the rows in the participant flow module.||Hot flashes per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
815795|NCT01101958|Primary|Lung Volume Change||30 Days|Per protocol population analyzed [16 subjects have been excluded due to the following reasons: lacked HRCT(n=6), Lost to Follow-Up (n=8) or died (n=2) of unrelated causes].||percent decrease in lung volume||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
815796|NCT01101971|Primary|Score on Pelvic Exam Assessment Tool|A pelvic exam assessment score out of 30 is recorded by a Resident examiner immediately after a student completes their first pelvic examination on a mock patient. Pass = 15/30 (50%).|15 minutes|||points||Standard Deviation|Mean
815797|NCT01102140|Secondary|Asymmetric Dimethylarginine (ADMA)|ADMA is a serum enzyme involved in metabolism of endothelium derived nitric oxide (NO). NO's has an important role in maintaining endothelial homeostasis. Elevated ADMA levels suggest impaired endothelial function.|baseline and 12 weeks|Serum samples were obtained and frozen but never analyzed to obtain ADMA values due to PI departure from study center prior to any batches being sent for analysis|||||
815798|NCT01102140|Secondary|Procollagen Types I (PINP) and III (PIIINP)|This is a serum marker of collagen turnover (fibrosis/scar formation).|baseline and 12 weeks|Serum samples were obtained and frozen but never analyzed to obtain procollagen values due to PI departure from study center prior to any batches being sent for analysis|||||
815799|NCT01102140|Secondary|F-8 Isoprostanes|This is a serum marker of oxidative stress.|Baseline and 12 weeks|Serum samples were obtained and frozen but never analyzed to obtain isoprostane values due to PI departure from study center prior to any batches being sent for analysis|||||
815800|NCT01102140|Primary|Thiobarbituric Reactive Substances (TBARS)|This is a serum marker of oxidative stress.|baseline and after 12 weeks|Serum samples were obtained and frozen but never analyzed to obtain isoprostane values due to PI departure from study center prior to any batches being sent for analysis.|||||
815801|NCT01102218|Secondary|Observe Changes in Markers of Inflammation Including But Not Limited to TNF-α and IL-6||6 months||||||
815802|NCT01102218|Secondary|Examine the EPO Resistance Index (Erythropoietin Dose/kg/Week/Hgb) or ERI Over Time||6 months||||||
815820|NCT01102374|Secondary|Incident Kidney Stones||12 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
815821|NCT01102374|Secondary|Number of Influenza-like Illnesses||12 months|collected together with lower respiratory infections (not as a separate category)|||||
815831|NCT01102413|Secondary|Change in Hemoglobin Concentration From Baseline to Week 8||Baseline to week 8|The FAS population included all the subjects who were randomised into the study, received at least one dose of the study drug, and had at least one post-baseline Hb assessment. The subjects were considered as randomised, regardless of which treatment they actually received.||g/dL||Full Range|Mean
815832|NCT01102413|Primary|Change in Hemoglobin (Hb) Concentration From Baseline to Week 4.||Baseline, 4 weeks|The FAS population included all the subjects who were randomised into the study, received at least one dose of the study drug, and had at least one post-baseline Hb assessment. The subjects were considered as randomised, regardless of which treatment they actually received.||g/dL||Full Range|Mean
815833|NCT01102491|Secondary|Incidence of Rescue Antiemetic Administration|outcome assessor assessed the incidence of rescue antiemetic administration|within 48 hours after surgery||||||
815834|NCT01102491|Primary|Incidence of Nausea and Vomiting|outcomes assessor who is blinded to randomization assessed the incidence of postoperative nausea which was defined as subjectively unpleasant sensation associated with awareness of the urge to vomit and an emetic episode and vomiting|within 48 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
815835|NCT01102764|Secondary|Prior Experience With Computer and Audiovisual Technology: Short Measure to Learn More About Participants' Prior Experience and Comfort Level With Computers and Audiovisual Technology||1 year||||||
815836|NCT01102764|Secondary|Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV: Interview to Diagnosis Depression, Panic Disorder, and Substance Abuse||1 year||||||
815837|NCT01102764|Secondary|Service Delivery Perceptions Questionnaire: Assess Subjects' Perceptions About Variables Specifically Related to the Mode of Service Delivery (Quality of Communication, Ease of Use, Willingness to Use Treatment)||1 year||||||
815838|NCT01102764|Secondary|Treatment Credibility: to Assess for Differences in Outcome Expectancy, Treatment Credibility Scales||1 year||||||
815839|NCT01102764|Secondary|Charleston Psychiatric Outpatient Satisfaction Scale (CPOSS-VA): 16 Item Self Report Scale, General Measure of Patient Satisfaction of Treatment||1 year||||||
815840|NCT01102764|Secondary|Health Related Functioning: Medical Outcome Study Short Study Forms-36 Health Survey (SF 36): Self Report Scale Measures Health Status and Functioning Over the Past Four Weeks||1 year||||||
815841|NCT01102764|Secondary|Deployment Risk and Resiliency Inventory (DRRI): Self Report Measure Assessing 14 Key Deployment-related Risk and Resilience Factors With Demonstrated Implications for Veterans' Long Term Health||1 year||||||
815842|NCT01102764|Secondary|Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS): PTSD Diagnosis||1 year||||||
815843|NCT01102764|Primary|BDI Scores at Pre and Post Treatment|Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II): (BDI; Beck et al., 1961): The BDI-II is a 21-item self-report scale, is among the most widely used instruments to measure depression. Beck and Steer (1984) demonstrated that the BDI-I has high internal consistency (α = .86 - .91). Lower scores indicate less symptom severity, and higher scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms. Raw scores of 0-13 indicates minimal depression; 14-19 indicates mild depression; 20-28 indicates moderate depression; 29-63 indicates severe depression. The lowest possible score on this measure is 0, and the highest possible score is 63.|6 months|There were 150 participants enrolled in the study, and 132 completed at least one session and were thus analyzed. The numbers here reflect those participants who completed at least one session.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
815844|NCT01102764|Primary|PCL Scores at Pre and Post Treatment|PTSD Checklist-Military (PCL-M): The PCL is a 17 Item Self Report Measure of PTSD Symptoms Based on the DSM-IV Criteria. The PCL uses a 5-point Likert scale response format ranging from not at all to frequently. Total scores on the PCL range from 17 to 85 (lower scores indicate less symptom severity). The instrument is highly correlated with the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (r = .93), has good diagnostic efficiency (> .70), and robust psychometrics with a variety of trauma populations (Blanchard, 1996), including combat veterans (Magruder, Frueh, et al, 2005). The minimum score possible on this measure is 17, and the highest possible score is 85.|6 months|There were 150 participants enrolled in the study, and 132 completed at least one session and were thus analyzed. The numbers here reflect those participants who completed at least one session.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
815845|NCT01102764|Primary|The Major Objective of This Study is to Determine if PE Delivered Via Telemedicine is as Effective as In Person PE in Terms of (1) Clinical (PTSD and Depression); (2) Process (Treatment Satisfaction and Attrition); and (3) Economic (Cost) Outcomes.|Per protocol treatment completers completed at least 6 90-minute sessions of Prolonged Exposure either In Person or via Telemedicine. Treatment dropout is defined as initiating treatment but completing fewer than 6 sessions. Per protocol, participants could have as many as 12 treatment sessions.|6 months|There were 150 participants enrolled in the study, and 132 completed at least one session and were thus analyzed. The numbers here reflect those participants who completed at least one session.||sessions||Full Range|Mean
815846|NCT01102777|Secondary|Change in Participant Satisfaction|"Change in participation satisfaction with the Intervention group from four to twelve months on a Likert scale of 1-5, where 1 is Definitely True 5 is Definitely False to the question, I would recommend the Taking Healthy Steps walking program to another person with COPD. A negative change value indicates higher satisfaction score."|four to twelve months of study participation|This was only assessed on Intervention group participants who answered the question at either four or twelve months.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815847|NCT01102777|Secondary|Participant Retention|The last valid day of pedometer data or the last login day to the study website for both arms, whichever day was last, from 1-366.|during study participation, up to twelve months|||day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815848|NCT01102777|Secondary|Study Reach Among Rural Participants|Calculated by dividing the total number of eligible rural responders by the total number of rural responders to create an eligibility rate, then multiplying the eligibility rate with the total number of letters sent to rural individuals to create a possible rural eligible pool. The total number of eligible rural responders was divided by the possible rural eligible pool.|At baseline|number of rural participants.||percentage of possible eligible rural|||Number
815905|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Neonates With Congenital Abnormalities at Birth|Neonates with congenital abnormalities at birth were noted.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age.|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of total live births.||Percentage of neonates||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815849|NCT01102777|Secondary|Goal Commitment for Intervention Participants|"Change in goal commitment for intervention participations on a Likert scale from 1-5, with 1 as Strongly Disagree and 5 is Strongly Agree to the question, I am strongly committed to pursuing my step count goal. A negative change value indicates lower goal commitment."|change from four months and twelve months from enrollment|This measure was only assessed on the Intervention group, and only 146 participants answered the question at either time points.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815850|NCT01102777|Secondary|Change in Average Daily Step Counts|Change in daily step counts compared to baseline and those captured in the final two weeks of the intervention and the two weeks post intervention.|baseline and final two weeks of the intervention and the two weeks post intervention.|One Intervention participant was dropped from analysis due to being an extreme outlier.||steps||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815851|NCT01102777|Secondary|Days of Hospitalization|Number of days of all-cause hospitalization during study participation.|during study participation, up to 12 months|||days|||Number
815852|NCT01102777|Secondary|Self Reported Dyspnea|"Change in Self Reported Dyspnea from Baseline to 12 months. (Scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating more shortness of breath. For example, 0 - I only get breathless with strenuous exercise. and 4 - I am too breathless to leave the house or I am breathless when dressing.)"|twelve months from randomization|One Intervention participant was dropped from analysis due to being an extreme outlier. Nine Control and seventeen Intervention participants were missing data at 12 months.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815853|NCT01102777|Secondary|Self Reported Dyspnea|"Change in Self Reported Dyspnea from Baseline to 4 months. (Scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating more shortness of breath. For example, 0 - I only get breathless with strenuous exercise. and 4 - I am too breathless to leave the house or I am breathless when dressing.)"|four months from randomization|One Intervention participant was dropped from analysis due to being an extreme outlier. Three Control and ten Intervention were missing values at 4 months.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815854|NCT01102777|Primary|Self-Reported Respiratory-Specific Quality of Life|Change in St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total Score from Baseline to twelve months. (Scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more limitations.)|twelve months from randomization|One Intervention participant was dropped from analysis due to being an extreme outlier.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
815855|NCT01102777|Primary|Self-Reported Respiratory-Specific Quality of Life|Change in St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total Score from Baseline to four months. (Scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more limitations.)|four months from randomization|One Intervention participant was dropped from analysis due to being an extreme outlier. In addition, not all participants had complete SGRQ data at both time points for analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815856|NCT01102803|Secondary|Behavioral Avoidance Test (BAT)|During the initial screen, at post-treatment, and at follow-up, participants underwent a behavioral avoidance test in the virtual reality height environment. Participants reported on a 0–100 scale (100 being the most intense fear) their SUDS for floors 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 19 of the virtual glass elevator and balconies. This test has been used successfully as a measure of treatment gains in previous studies of acrophobia research (Ressler et al., 2004). For the outcome analyses, we included the level of fear reported at the highest floor of the virtual elevator environment (19th floor). Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815857|NCT01102803|Secondary|Clinical Global Improvement Scale (CGI)|Clinician-rated measure of improvement in acrophobia symptoms and severity. Will be assessed at each visit throughout the 2 month protocol. The CGI-S and CGI-I are widely used measures of global psychopathology severity and improvement initially developed for the study of psychotropic drugs (Guy, 1970). In order to obtain CGI ratings, the therapists (blind to study condition) interviewed the participant and used the SCID (including the specific phobia module) as well as the additional measures of acrophobia symptoms (BAT, AAQ, AAVQ, and ATHQ). In the current study, response was defined as either “very much improved” or “much improved” on CGI-I (score ≤ 2). Remission was defined as either “normal” or “minimally ill” on CGI-S (score ≤ 2). The minimum rating is a 1 and the highest is a 7. Lower scores indicate a better outcome.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815858|NCT01102803|Secondary|Attitudes Towards Heights Questionnaire (ATHQ)|Self-report measures that assesses thoughts and feelings towards heights situations. This questionnaire (Abelson and Curtis, 1989) includes six heights situations and assesses attitudes toward these situations using a 0–10 scale. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome and total scores are summed over subscales. Will be assessed at each visit throughout the 2 month protocol. The minimum score is a 0; the maximum is a 60.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815859|NCT01102803|Primary|Acrophobia Questionnaire With Avoidance (AAVQ)|Self-report measure that assesses fear and avoidance of a variety of heights situations. This questionnaire (Cohen, 1977) describes 20 situations and assesses levels of avoidance (0–3) and anxiety (0–6). These scales widely used measure of acrophobia with adequate retest reliability (r = .82–.86) and validity (Baker et al., 1973). Higher scores indicate higher levels of avoidance/anxiety (i.e., worse outcome). All subscales are summed for a total score. AAVQ will be assessed at each visit throughout the 2 month protocol. The minimum score is 0, the maximum is 90.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815860|NCT01102894|Secondary|Food Intake Diary|Total dietary fiber consumed.|Day 1|Day 1 of each treatment subjects completed a 24 hour food record to determine baseline dietary fiber intake||g||Standard Deviation|Mean
815861|NCT01102894|Secondary|Gastrointestinal Tolerance|Subjects scored their gastrointestinal tolerance based on 7 questions on a 0-10 scale on day 4 of each treatment period and the sum score was reported. 0 being the best and 10 being the worst. Each question has a value of 1-10 for a total of 70 points as value.|Day 4|Each participant completed a gastrointestinal tolerance questionnaire during each treatment period.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815862|NCT01102894|Primary|Whole Gut Transit Time|The time required for the SmartPill to travel through the entire gastrointestinal tract and be present in the feces.|5 days|All participants had their transit time assessed.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
815946|NCT01103479|Primary|Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Completion|CRC screening completion via FOBT, FIT or Colonoscopy|within 6 months of provider recommendation|||participants|||Number
832415|NCT01255423|Primary|Pain on Movement|"Pain on movement at 72 hours assessed on a 100 mm visual analog scale with anchors at 0= No pain and 100= Extreme pain"|72 hours|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
815863|NCT01102972|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Grade 2 to Grade 4 Adverse Events (AEs) Occurring at a Frequency of >=3% in Either Treatment Group|The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 3.0 is a descriptive terminology that can be utilized for AE reporting. A grading (severity) scale is provided for each AE. Grade refers to the severity of the adverse event (AE). The CTCAE v3.0 displays Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each AE based on this general guideline: Grade 1, mild AE; Grade 2, moderate AE; Grade 3, severe AE; Grade 4, life-threatening or disabling AE; Grade 5, death related to the AE.|From Baseline to Week 48|Safety Population||participants|||Number
815864|NCT01102972|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Grade 2 to Grade 4 Adverse Events (AEs) Occurring at a Frequency of >=3% in Either Treatment Group|The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 3.0 is a descriptive terminology that can be utilized for AE reporting. A grading (severity) scale is provided for each AE. Grade refers to the severity of the adverse event (AE). The CTCAE v3.0 displays Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each AE based on this general guideline: Grade 1, mild AE; Grade 2, moderate AE; Grade 3, severe AE; Grade 4, life-threatening or disabling AE; Grade 5, death related to the AE.|From Baseline to Week 24|Safety Population||participants|||Number
815865|NCT01102972|Secondary|Number of Confirmed Virologic Failure Participants (PAR) From Baseline Through Week 48 With the Indicated Treatment-emergent Reductions in Susceptibility to Abacavir, Lamivudine, Tenofovir, Emtricitabine, Atazanavir, or Ritonavir|A blood sample was drawn for participants failing to respond to therapy, and changes in drug susceptibility for HIV isolated from the participants for each drug used in the study were assessed. For each participant, the changes in drug susceptibility detected by phenotypic assay in virus from the sample collected at the time of failure was compared with drug susceptibility in the virus from the blood sample at Baseline.|From Baseline to Week 48|ITT-E Population. Only those participants who met the confirmed VF criteria with viral phenotype obtained at the time of virologic failure were assessed.||participants|||Number
815866|NCT01102972|Secondary|Number of Confirmed Virologic Failure Participants (PAR) From Baseline Through Week 24 With the Indicated Treatment-emergent Reductions in Susceptibility to Abacavir, Lamivudine, Tenofovir, Emtricitabine, Atazanavir, or Ritonavir|A blood sample was drawn for participants failing to respond to therapy, and changes in drug susceptibility for HIV isolated from the participants for each drug used in the study were assessed. For each participant, the changes in drug susceptibility detected by phenotypic assay in virus from the sample collected at the time of failure was compared with drug susceptibility in the virus from the blood sample at Baseline.|From Baseline to Week 24|ITT-E Population. Only those participants who met the confirmed VF criteria with viral phenotype obtained at the time of virologic failure were assessed.||participants|||Number
815867|NCT01102972|Secondary|Number of Confirmed Virologic Failure (VF) Participants (PAR) With Treatment-emergent HIV Genotypic Resistance in Reverse Transcriptase and Protease From Baseline Through Week 48|A blood sample was drawn for particiapants with confirmed VF >=400 c/mL. For each participant, the mutations found at the time of failure were compared with any mutations found in the blood sample at Baseline. New resistance-associated viral mutations defined by the International Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome Society-United States of America guidelines present at the time of failure were tabulated by drug class. NRTI, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor; NNRTI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor; PI, protease inhibitor.|From Baseline to Week 48|ITT-E Population. Only those participants who met the confirmed VF criteria and had a viral genotype obtained at the time of VF were assessed.||participants|||Number
815868|NCT01102972|Secondary|Number of Confirmed Virologic Failure (VF) Participants (PAR) With Treatment-emergent HIV Genotypic Resistance in Reverse Transcriptase and Protease From Baseline Through Week 24|A blood sample was drawn for particiapants with confirmed VF >=400 c/mL. For each participant, the mutations found at the time of failure were compared with any mutations found in the blood sample at Baseline. New resistance-associated viral mutations defined by the International Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome Society-United States of America guidelines present at the time of failure were tabulated by drug class. NRTI, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor; NNRTI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor; PI, protease inhibitor.|From Baseline to Week 24|ITT-E Population. Only those participants who met the confirmed VF criteria and had a viral genotype obtained at the time of VF were assessed.||participants|||Number
815869|NCT01102972|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Death and/or Disease Progression|Death and clinical disease progression (as per CDC classification) were assessed from Baseline through Week 48. Disease progression is defined as progression from CDC Class A to B, Class A to C, or from Class B to C. AIDS CDC classifications are: Class A, Asymptomatic/lymphadenopathy/acute HIV; Class B, Symptomatic, not AIDS; Class C, AIDS indicator conditions. The CDC categorization of HIV/AIDS is based on the lowest documented CD4 cell count (Class A, >=500 cells per microliter [µl]; Class B, 200-499 cells/µl; Class C, <200 cells/µl) and on previously diagnosed HIV-related conditions.|From Baseline to Week 48|ITT-E Population||participants|||Number
815870|NCT01102972|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Met the Protocol-defined Confirmed Viral Failure Criteria Through Week 48|The number of participants that failed to remain virologically suppressed from baseline through 48 weeks on treatment was assessed. Viral failure is defined per protocol as confirmed HIV-1 RNA >=400 c/mL.|From Baseline to Week 48|ITT-E Population||participants|||Number
815871|NCT01102972|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Met the Protocol-defined Confirmed Viral Failure Criteria Through Week 24|The number of participants that failed to remain virologically suppressed through 24 weeks on treatment was assessed. Viral failure is defined per protocol as confirmed HIV-1 RNA >=400 c/mL.|From Baseline to Week 24|ITT-E Population||participants|||Number
815872|NCT01102972|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cholesterol/HDL Ratio at Week 48|A fasting blood sample was drawn to analyze for lipids. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 48 value minus the Baseline value for each parameter.|Baseline and Week 48|Safety Population: all randomized participants, with the exception of those with documented evidence of not having consumed any Investigational Product. Participants withdrew as the study progressed; participants could only be included in the analysis if they had completed a Week 48 visit and had a measurement taken during that visit period.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
815947|NCT01103479|Primary|Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Completion|CRC screening completion via Fecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT), Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) or Colonoscopy|within 6 months of provider recommendation|||participants|||Number
815873|NCT01102972|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Triglycerides, Total Cholesterol, High-density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol, and Low-density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol at Week 48|Triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol levels were measured or calculated at Week 48. A fasting blood sample was drawn to analyze for lipids. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 48 value minus the Baseline value for each parameter.|Baseline and Week 48|Safety Population: all randomized participants, with the exception of those with documented evidence of not having consumed any Investigational Product. Participants withdrew as the study progressed; participants could only be included in the analysis if they had completed a Week 48 visit and had a measurement taken during that visit period.||milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815874|NCT01102972|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cholesterol/HDL Ratio at Week 24|A Fasting blood sample was drawn to analyze for lipids. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 24 value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 24|Safety Population: all randomized participants, with the exception of those with documented evidence of not having consumed any Investigational Product. Participants withdrew as the study progressed; participants could only be included in the analysis if they had completed a Week 24 visit and had a measurement taken during that visit period.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
815875|NCT01102972|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Triglycerides, Total Cholesterol, High-density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol, and Low-density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol at Week 24|Triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol levels were measured at Week 24. A Fasting blood sample was drawn to analyze for lipids. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 24 value minus the Baseline value for each parameter.|Baseline and Week 24|Safety Population: all randomized participants, with the exception of those with documented evidence of not having consumed any Investigational Product. Participants withdrew as the study progressed; participants could only be included in the analysis if they had completed a Week 24 visit and had a measurement taken during that visit period.||milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815876|NCT01102972|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ Cell Count at Week 48|Blood was drawn to analyze for CD4+ cell count. A CD4+ cell is a T lymphocyte that carries the CD4 antigen. Immunologic response was assessed by CD4+ counts. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 48 value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 48|ITT-E Population. Observed Population. Participants withdrew as the study progressed; participants could only be included in the analysis if they had completed a Week 48 visit and had a CD4+ cell count obtained during that visit period.||cells per cubic millimeter (mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815877|NCT01102972|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ Cell Count at Week 24|Blood was drawn to analyze for CD4+ cell count. A CD4+ cell is a T lymphocyte that carries the CD4 antigen. Immunologic response was assessed by CD4+ counts. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 24 value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT-E Population. Observed Population. Participants withdrew as the study progressed; participants could only be included in the analysis if they had completed a Week 24 visit and had a CD4+ cell count obtained during that visit period.||cells per cubic millimeter (mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815878|NCT01102972|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HIV-1 RNA at Week 48|Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 48 value minus the Baseline value. Blood was drawn to analyze for plasma HIV viral load.|Baseline and Week 48|ITT-E Population. Observed Population. Participants withdrew as the study progressed; participants could only be included in the analysis if they had completed a Week 48 visit and had a viral load result obtained during that visit period.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815879|NCT01102972|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HIV-1 RNA at Week 24|Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 24 value minus the Baseline value. Blood was drawn to analyze for plasma HIV viral load.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT-E Population. Observed Population. Participants withdrew as the study progressed; participants could only be included in the analysis if they had completed a Week 24 visit and had a viral load result obtained during that visit period.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815880|NCT01102972|Secondary|Percentage of Participants (PAR) Who Achieved Plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 c/mL at the Week 48 Visit: Observed, MD=F, and SNAPSHOT Analyses|The percentage of PAR with HIV-1 RNA virus <400 c/mL determined from blood samples drawn at Week 48 was tabulated by treatment arm with stratification by initial antiretroviral treatment using specific analysis methods.|Week 48|ITT-E Population. Analysis methods: (1) Observed: all observed data; (2) MD=F: PAR with missing data/data collected after study medication discontinuation (DC) were failures; (3) SNAPSHOT: PAR with missing data at Week 24/data collected after study medication DC/viral load >=400 c/mL were failures.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815881|NCT01102972|Secondary|Percentage of Participants (PAR) Who Achieved Plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 c/mL at the Week 24 Visit: Observed, MD=F, and SNAPSHOT Analyses|The percentage of PAR with HIV-1 RNA virus <400 c/mL determined from blood samples drawn at Week 24 was tabulated by treatment arm with stratification by initial antiretroviral treatment using specific analysis methods.|Week 24|ITT-E Population. Analysis methods: (1) Observed: all observed data; (2) MD=F: PAR with missing data/data collected after study medication discontinuation (DC) were failures; (3) SNAPSHOT: PAR with missing data at Week 24/data collected after study medication DC/viral load >=400 c/mL were failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
815882|NCT01102972|Secondary|Percentage of Participants (PAR) Who Achieved Plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 c/mL at the Week 48 Visit: TLOVR Analysis|The percentage of PAR with HIV-1 RNA virus <400 c/mL determined from blood samples drawn at Week 48 was tabulated by treatment arm with stratification by initial antiretroviral treatment. Per TLOVR algorithm, responders were PAR with confirmed viral load <400 c/mL who had not met any non-responder criterion. Non-responders were PAR who never achieved confirmed HIV RNA <400 c/mL, prematurely discontinued study or study medication for any reason, had confirmed rebound to at least 400 c/mL, or had an unconfirmed HIV RNA of at least 400 c/mL at the last visit.|Week 48|ITT-E Population||Percentage of participants|||Number
815893|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Trichomonas Vaginalis Infection at 36-38 Weeks of Gestation|Participants positive for Trichomonas vaginalis infection was diagnosed based on laboratory result at 36-38 weeks of gestation. A vaginal swab was collected for the laboratory test.|At 36-38 weeks of gestation|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with laboratory test results at 36-38 weeks of gestation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815883|NCT01102972|Secondary|Percentage of Participants (PAR) Who Achieved Plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 c/mL at the Week 24 Visit: TLOVR Analysis|The percentage of PAR with HIV-1 RNA virus <400 c/mL determined from blood samples drawn at Week 24 was tabulated by treatment arm with stratification by initial antiretroviral treatment. Per TLOVR algorithm, responders were PAR with confirmed viral load <400 c/mL who had not met any non-responder criterion. Non-responders were PAR who never achieved confirmed HIV RNA <400 c/mL, prematurely discontinued study or study medication for any reason, had confirmed rebound to at least 400 c/mL, or had an unconfirmed HIV RNA of at least 400 c/mL at the last visit.|Week 24|ITT-E Population. The primary analysis method was time to loss of virologic response (TLOVR) for the proportion of participants HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/mL at Week 24.||percentage of participants|||Number
815884|NCT01102972|Secondary|Percentage of Participants (PAR) Who Achieved Plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL at the Week 48 Visit: TLOVR, Observed, M/D=F, and SNAPSHOT Analyses|The percentage of PAR with HIV-1 RNA virus <50 c/mL determined from blood samples drawn at Week 48 was tabulated by treatment arm with stratification by initial antiretroviral treatment using specific analysis methods.|Week 48|ITT-E Population. Analysis methods: (1) Observed: all observed data; (2) missing or discontinuation equals failure (M/D=F): PAR with missing data/data collected after study medication discontinuation (DC) were failures; (3) SNAPSHOT: PAR with missing data at Week 24/data collected after study medication DC/viral load >=50 c/mL were failures.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815885|NCT01102972|Secondary|Percentage of Participants (PAR) Who Achieved Plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL at the Week 24 Visit: Observed, M/D=F, and SNAPSHOT Analyses|The percentage of PAR with HIV-1 RNA virus <50 c/mL determined from blood samples drawn through Week 24 was tabulated by treatment arm with stratification by initial antiretroviral treatment using specific analysis methods.|Week 24|ITT-E Population. Analysis methods: (1) Observed: all observed data; (2) missing or discontinuation equals failure (M/D=F): PAR with missing data/data collected after study medication discontinuation (DC) were failures; (3) SNAPSHOT: PAR with missing data at Week 24/data collected after study medication DC/viral load >=50 c/mL were failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
815886|NCT01102972|Primary|Percentage of Participants (PAR) Who Achieved Plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 Copies (c)/Milliliter (mL) at the Week 24 Visit: TLOVR Analysis|The percentage of PAR with HIV-1 RNA virus <50 c/mL determined from blood samples drawn at Week 24 was tabulated by treatment arm with stratification by initial antiretroviral treatment. Per TLOVR algorithm, responders were PAR with confirmed viral load <50 c/mL who had not met any non-responder criterion. Non-responders were PAR who never achieved confirmed HIV RNA <50 c/mL, prematurely discontinued study or study medication for any reason, had confirmed rebound to at least 50 c/mL, or had an unconfirmed HIV RNA of at least 50 c/mL at the last visit.|Week 24|Intent-to-Treat (ITT)-Exposed Population: all participants exposed to at least one dose of study medication. The primary analysis method was time to loss of virologic response (TLOVR) for the proportion of participants HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at Week 24.||percentage of participants|||Number
815887|NCT01103063|Secondary|Nasopharyngeal Swabs Positive for Penicillin Resistant Streptococcus Pneumoniae|This outcome measure evaluated the Streptococcus pneumoniae sensitivity against penicillin antibiotics.|Visits 6 and 7|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participant with nasopharyngeal swabs isolating Streptococcus pneumoniae at the specified visit.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815888|NCT01103063|Secondary|Nasopharyngeal Swabs Positive for Macrolide Resistant Streptococcus Pneumoniae|This outcome measure evaluated the Streptococcus pneumoniae sensitivity against macrolide antibiotics.|Visits 6 and 7|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participant with nasopharyngeal swabs isolating Streptococcus pneumoniae at the specified visit.||Percentage of participants|||Number
815889|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-eclampsia From Week 20 to Delivery|Pre-eclampsia was diagnosed as systolic blood pressure of at least 140 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure of at least 90 mmHg on two separate readings taken at least 4 hours apart and proteinuria at least 300 mg protein in a 24 hour urine collection.|From Week 20 to approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N= Number of participants with available data.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815890|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Bacterial Infections Including Pneumonia and Other Lower Respiratory Tract Infections From First Dose to Delivery|Participants positive for bacterial infections including other lower respiratory tract infections were measured anytime from first dose administration to delivery.|Up to approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with available data.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815891|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Neonates With Ophthalmia Neonatorum at Birth Period|Ophthalmia neonatorum was diagnosed at birth. The laboratory diagnosis was performed among neonates with purulent discharge.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Total live births.||Percentage of neonates||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815892|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Bacterial Vaginosis Infection at 36-38 Weeks of Gestation.|Bacterial vaginosis was diagnosed based on laboratory result at 36-38 weeks of gestation. A vaginal swab was collected for the Gram staining.|At 36-38 weeks of gestation|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with laboratory test results at 36-38 weeks of gestation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815948|NCT01103492|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|As this is a feasibility trial, the plan is to evaluate safety and efficacy in relation to adverse events in a small population (20 max) of patients.|1 year|There was no analysis of the data. Feasibility study with only one subject enrolled||partipants|||Number
815894|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treponema Pallidum Infection at 36-38 Weeks of Gestation|Participants positive for Treponema pallidum infection was diagnosed based on laboratory result at 36-38 weeks of gestation. Treponema Pallidum particle Agglutination Assay was used.|At 36-38 weeks of gestation|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with laboratory test results at 36-38 weeks of gestation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815895|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Neisseria Gonorrhoeae Infection at 36-38 Weeks of Gestation|Participants positive for Neisseria gonorrhoeae infection was diagnosed based on laboratory result at 36-38 weeks of gestation. A vaginal swab was collected and PCR assay was used for analysis.|At 36-38 weeks of gestation|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with laboratory test results at 36-38 weeks of gestation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815896|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Chlamydia Trachomatis Infection at 36-38 Weeks of Gestation|Participants positive for Chlamydia trachomatis infection was diagnosed based on laboratory result at 36-38 weeks of gestation. A vaginal swab was collected and PCR assay was used for analysis.|At 36-38 weeks of gestation|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with lab test results at 36-38 weeks of gestation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815897|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sexually Transmitted Infections From First Dose to 36-38 Weeks of Gestation|Sexual transmitted disease included Treponema pallidum, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Chlamydia trachomatis infections. This was diagnosed based on clinical presentation prior to Week 36-38 and/or lab test results between Week 36-38.|Upto 36-38 weeks of gestation|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815898|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Cord Blood Parasitemia at Delivery|This outcome measure evaluated the percentage of participants positive for cord blood parasitemia at delivery. A participant was positive for parasitemia if the number of asexual parasites per μL was >0.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N = Number of participants with cord blood smear parasite counts at delivery.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815899|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Peripheral Parasitemia at Delivery|This outcome measure evaluated the percentage of participants positive for peripheral parasitemia at delivery. A participant was positive for parasitemia if the number of asexual parasites per μL was >0.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N = Number of participants with peripheral blood smear parasite counts at delivery.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815900|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Peripheral Parasitemia at 36-38 Weeks of Gestation|This outcome measure evaluated the percentage of participants positive for peripheral parasitemia at 36-38 weeks of gestation. A participant was positive for parasitemia if the number of asexual parasites per μL was >0.|At 36-38 weeks of gestation|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N = Number of participants with peripheral blood smear parasite counts at 36-38 weeks of gestation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815901|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Requiring Additional Treatment for Symptomatic Malaria From First Dose to Delivery|This outcome measure evaluated the participants requiring additional treatments for malaria during the study period following the first dose (diagnosed based on clinical presentation and/or lab test results).|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815902|NCT01103063|Secondary|Number of Episodes of Symptomatic Malaria Per Participant From First Intermittent Preventive Treatment of Falciparum Dose to Delivery|This outcome measure determined if an episode of malaria started within the time period of first dose to delivery. Clinical episode of malaria was determined if the participant presented with clinical symptoms of malaria (fever >37.5°C, oral) and diagnosed (either by rapid diagnostic tests or microscopy) with malaria.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 is considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus.||Number of episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815903|NCT01103063|Secondary|Birth Weight of Live Borne Neonate|Birth weight of live borne neonates were calculated in grams.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age.|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of live births with available data.||grams||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815904|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Perinatal or Neonatal Deaths|Percentage of perinatal or neonatal deaths were noted.|Day 28 after delivery.|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of total live births.||Percentage of neonates||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816219|NCT01100853|Secondary|Amphetamine Craving Scale|The Amphetamine Craving Scale is a visual analogue scale, which is scored by indicating the level of craving on a 100 mm line, where 0 is no craving at all and 100 is the highest level of craving experienced. Scores are derived from measuring their placement on the line, yielding scores from 0 to 100.|24 weeks|||VAS Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
815906|NCT01103063|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 36-38 Weeks of Gestation in Hb Concentration.|Change from Baseline to 36-38 weeks of gestation in Hb concentration was noted.|Baseline, at 36-38 weeks of gestation.|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with available data.||g/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815907|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sub-optimal Pregnancy Outcome Including Neonatal Death and Congenital Malformation|Sub-optimal pregnancy outcome including neonatal deaths and congenital malformations, defined as any of the following: live-borne neonate (singleton) with low birth-weight (or LBW for short, defined as live birth weight <2,500g), premature birth (<37 weeks), abortion (≤28 weeks), still birth (>28 weeks), neonatal death, congenital malformation, lost to follow-up prior to termination of pregnancy or delivery, or missing birth weight of the neonates.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age.|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Total Outcomes.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815908|NCT01103063|Secondary|Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) Episodes Per Participant|Number of episodes of sexually transmitted infection episodes per participant were noted. The STI's including Treponema pallidum, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, from first dose to delivery (diagnosis was based on clinical presentation and lab results).|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age .|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with available data.||Number of episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
815909|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Placental Malaria at Delivery Based on Histology|Participants positive for placental malaria at delivery were evaluated based on placental histology.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with a histology parasite evaluation at delivery.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815910|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Placental Parasitemia at Delivery|Participants with placental parasitemia at delivery were diagnosed using Placental blood smear at birth from participants who deliver at hospital.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with placental parasite counts at delivery.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815911|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Maternal Anemia (Hb <11 g/dL) at 36-38 Weeks of Gestation|Anemia was defined as Hb <11 g/dL.|At 36-38 weeks of gestation.|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with Hb measurement at 36-38 weeks gestation.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815912|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Severe Maternal Anemia (Hemoglobin [Hb] <8 g/dL) at 36-38 Weeks of Gestation|Severe maternal anemia was defined as Hb <8 g/dL.|At 36-38 weeks of gestation.|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Number of participants with Hb measurement at 36-38 weeks gestation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815913|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Neonates With LBW (<2500 g) in Efficacy Analyzable PP Population|LBW was defined as live birth weight <2500 g (up to and including 2499 g).|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|Subset of ITT participants: outcome or withdrawal occurred on or before 8/27/2013 (date of study termination), compliant with study medication, birth weight measured on or before 7 days after birth if not already a failure, and did not switch to standard of care. N=Total Live Births.||Percentage of neonates||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815914|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Neonates With LBW (<2500 g) in ITT Population|LBW was defined as live birth weight <2500 g (up to and including 2499 g).|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus. N=Total live births.||Percentage of neonates||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815915|NCT01103063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sub-optimal Pregnancy Outcome in Efficacy Analyzable Per Protocol (PP) Population|Adverse pregnancy outcomes were defined as live-borne neonate (singleton) with LBW (<2,500g), premature births (<37 weeks as confirmed by the Ballard score), abortion (≤28 weeks), still birth (>28 weeks), lost to follow-up prior to termination of pregnancy or delivery, or missing birth weight of the neonates.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|Subset of ITT participants: outcome or withdrawal occurred on or before 8/27/2013 (date of study termination), compliant with study medication, birth weight measured on or before 7 days after birth if not already a failure, and did not switch to standard of care.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815916|NCT01103063|Primary|Percentage Participants With Sub-optimal Pregnancy Outcome in Intent-to-Treat (IIT) Population|Adverse pregnancy outcomes were defined as live-borne neonate (singleton) with low birth weight (LBW) (<2,500 g), premature births (<37 weeks as confirmed by the Ballard score), abortion (≤28 weeks), still birth (>28 weeks), lost to follow-up prior to termination of pregnancy or delivery, or missing birth weight of the neonates.|Approximately 40 weeks of gestational age|ITT set was used which consisted of participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study medication (Day 0 at Visit 1 was considered the first dose of study medication), and who had a single fetus.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815949|NCT01097915|Secondary|Taste Perception of Sweet, Sour, Salty, Bitter and Umami and Changes Due to L-Arginine Supplementation, as a Functin of Genetic Ability to Taste PROP.|Taste perception was assessed by testing the ability to recognize, and the responsiveness to, representative solutions of the five taste qualities, also when supplemented with L-Arg, in subjects classified as PROP-tasters.|8 months||12/2017||||
815917|NCT01103141|Primary|Major Peripheral Vascular Events|Major peripheral vascular events occurring during femoral catheterization followed by Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI), which include any of the following: Groin bleeding, including oozing or spurting after standard compression time necessitating further compression; Groin hematoma ≥ 5 cm at any time during or after the procedure; Pseudoaneurysm, confirmed by Doppler ultrasound; Arteriovenous (AV) fistula, confirmed by Doppler ultrasound; Arterial dissection, thrombosis, or embolism; Retroperitoneal bleeding defined by Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA) or surgery; Significant drop in hemoglobin ≥ 3 g/dL, or a drop in hematocrit ≥ 10% within 24-48 hours after the procedure compared to baseline without an obvious non-groin source; Any groin complication delaying hospital discharge; Large ecchymosis (> 15 cm) at the site of vascular access on follow-up (dark purple to black and confluent ecchymoses); Obvious extravascular extravasation of contrast as noted on the femoral|7 - 14 days|||participants|||Number
815918|NCT01103232|Primary|Changes in Muscle Strength in the Contralateral Untrained Wrist Muscles|Isokinetic torque was measured in the contralateral untrained wrist muscles with the Cybex (Humac 2004/Norm) extremity-testing system before and after experiment.|6 weeks (The change calculated as 6 months minus baseline)|||Newton meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815919|NCT01103271|Secondary|Pre-Post Efficacy|The magnitude of the pre-post effect across 4 weeks of treatment, as measured by the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-17 (HAMD-17). The HAMD-17 measures depression severity, and has a minimum value of 0 and a maximum value of 52 units on a scale, where higher scores indicate more severe depression.|Screen and 4 weeks (immediate treatment); Baseline and 4 weeks (waitlist treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815920|NCT01103271|Primary|Feasibility|The primary outcome measure is feasibility, which was operationalized as the number of in-person screens for this study.|One year|The number of participants analyzed is the number of participants screened.||screens|||Number
815921|NCT01103284|Secondary|Mean Number of Days With at Least One Hypoglycemic Event||Baseline to 25 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) All subjects randomized who had a baseline visit and at least one scheduled post-baseline visit||days||Standard Error|Mean
815922|NCT01103284|Secondary|Frequency of Hypoglycemic Events|Total number of days with at least one hypoglycemic event recorded|Baseline to 25 Months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) All subjects randomized who had a baseline visit and at least one scheduled post-baseline visit||days|||Number
815923|NCT01103284|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Subjects Requiring a Daily Insulin Dose ≤ 0.5 IU/kg at End of Study|Percentage of subjects requiring a daily insulin dose ≤ 0.5 IU/kg at end of study (25 Months). If insulin dose was missing at Month 25, but the Month 24 value was available, then the Month 24 value was used to calculate the percentage of subjects with a daily insulin dose ≤ 0.5 IU/kg at study end.|24 and 25 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) All subjects randomized who had a baseline visit and at least one scheduled post-baseline visit.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815924|NCT01103284|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects That Achieve Good Glycemic Control: HbA1c<7%|The percentage of subjects achieving good glycemic control, i.e. an HbA1c <7% at study end (Month 25). If HbA1c was missing at Month 25, but the Month 24 value was available, then the Month 24 value was used to calculate the percentage of subjects with an HbA1c ≤ 7% at study end.|24 and 25 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) All subjects randomized who had a baseline visit and at least one scheduled post-baseline visit.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815925|NCT01103284|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon-Stimulated C-Peptide AUC at 24 Months|Change in Beta-cell function, measured as stimulated C-peptide secretion 0, 2, 6, 10 and 20 minutes post administration [area under the curve (AUC), 0-20 minutes] at baseline and 24 months, during a glucagon stimulation test (GST). The change in AUC was calculated per patient by subtracting the baseline AUC from the 24 month AUC.|Baseline and 24 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) All subjects randomized who had a baseline visit and at least one scheduled post-baseline visit||nmol*min/L||Standard Error|Mean
815926|NCT01103323|Secondary|Tumor Response|A tumor response (best overall response) was defined for all patients, using the RECIST criteria, version 1.1. Categories: complete response (CR, tumor disappears), partial response (PR, sum of lesion sizes decreased at least 30% from baseline), stable disease (SD, steady state of disease), progressive disease (PD, sum of lesion sizes increased at least 20% from smallest sum on study or new lesions). Clinical PD considered when radiographic imaging not possible.|From randomization of the first subject until the database cut-off approximately 14 months later (19May2010 - 21Jul2011) used for 2nd planned formal interim analysis. Tumor assessed at 8 week intervals.|ITT||Percentage of participants|||Number
815927|NCT01103323|Secondary|Disease Control|Disease control was defined as the percentage of patients whose best response was not PD [sum of lesion sizes increased at least 20% from smallest sum on study or new lesions] (ie, CR [tumor disappears], PR [sum of lesion sizes decreased at least 30% from baseline] or SD (stable disease)). SD included if at least 6 weeks after randomization.|From randomization of the first subject until the database cut-off approximately 14 months later (19May2010 - 21Jul2011) used for 2nd planned formal interim analysis. Tumor assessed at 8 week intervals.|ITT||Percentage of participants|||Number
815928|NCT01103323|Secondary|Objective Tumor Response|The objective tumor response was defined as the percentage of patients with complete response (CR, tumor disappears) or partial response (PR, sum of lesion sizes decreased at least 30% from baseline) as best overall response. A best overall response was defined for all patients, using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria, version 1.1. Patients whose best overall response was not CR or PR, and any patients with no post-baseline assessments were considered nonresponders for the analysis.|From randomization of the first subject until the database cut-off approximately 14 months later (19May2010 - 21Jul2011) used for 2nd planned formal interim analysis. Tumor assessed at 8 week intervals.|ITT||Percentage of participants|||Number
815929|NCT01103323|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (Based on Investigator’s Assessment)|Progression-free survival was defined as the time (days) from date of randomization to date of first observed disease progression (radiological or clinical) or death due to any cause, if death occurred before progression was documented.|From randomization of the first subject until the database cut-off approximately 14 months later (19May2010 - 21Jul2011) used for 2nd planned formal interim analysis. Tumor assessed at 8 week intervals.|ITT||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815950|NCT01097915|Secondary|Association Between PROP Sensitivity and BMI|Since individual ability to taste PROP may be correlated with BMI, we determined BMI (kg/m^2) in subjects classified as super-taster, medium taster and non-taster.Weight (kg) and height (m) were recorded for each subject.|7 months|||Kg/m^2||Standard Error|Mean
815930|NCT01103323|Primary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time (days) from randomization to death due to any cause. Patients alive at the time of analysis were censored at the last date known to be alive. If a patient was lost to follow-up and there was no contact after randomization, this patient was censored at Day 1.|From randomization of the first subject until the database cut-off approximately 14 months later (19May2010 - 21Jul2011) used for 2nd planned formal interim analysis (IA).|Intent to treat (ITT)||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
815931|NCT01103362|Primary|The Frequency of Adverse Events||A 28-week, open-label, safety, extension trial of flibanserin in premenopausal and postmenopausal women with HSDD|||percentage of patients-any adverse event|||Number
815932|NCT01103414|Secondary|Changes in LDL Particle Size Subfractions From Baseline to Week 12|Effects of 3 different doses of Mitoglitazone and pioglitazone as compared to placebo on LDL particle size profile as characterized by changes in NMR analysis of subfractions following once-daily dosing for 12 weeks|12 week|The Modified Per-Protocol Population included all ITT patients who completed the 12-week, double-blind treatment period with no major deviations from protocol procedures, without any study medication non-compliance issues based on their pharmacokinetic data, and with both baseline and post-baseline NMR analysis of lipoprotein particle subfractions.||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
815933|NCT01103414|Secondary|Changes in HDL Particle Size Subfractions From Baseline to Week 12|Effects of 3 different doses of Mitoglitazone and pioglitazone as compared to placebo on HDL particle size profile as characterized by changes in NMR analysis of subfractions following once-daily dosing for 12 weeks|12 weeks|The Modified Per-Protocol Population included all ITT patients who completed the 12-week, double-blind treatment period with no major deviations from protocol procedures, without any study medication non-compliance issues based on their pharmacokinetic data, and with both baseline and post-baseline NMR analysis of lipoprotein particle subfractions.||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
815934|NCT01103414|Secondary|Presence of Edema Post Baseline During 12 Weeks Active Treatment|Effects of 3 different doses of Mitoglitazone and pioglitazone as compared to placebo on presence of edema following once-daily dosing for 12 weeks|12 weeks|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of randomized study medication and had both a baseline and post baseline edema assessment||participants|||Number
815935|NCT01103414|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Waist Circumference at Week 12 Endpoint|Effects of 3 different doses of Mitoglitazone and pioglitazone as compared to placebo on waist circumference following once-daily dosing for 12 weeks|12 weeks|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of randomized study medication and had both baseline and week 12 waist circumference assessments||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
815936|NCT01103414|Secondary|Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 12 Endpoint|Effects of 3 different doses of Mitoglitazone and pioglitazone as compared to placebo on body weight following once-daily dosing for 12|12 weeks|The Modified Per-Protocol Population included all per-protocol patients (all ITT patients who completed the 12-week, double-blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures) without any study medication non-compliance issues based on their pharmacokinetic data.||kg||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
815937|NCT01103414|Secondary|Change From Baseline in RBC|Change from baseline at week 12 endpoint in red blood cell concentration|12 week|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of randomized study medication and who had both baseline and week 12 assessments||10e-6 cells per uL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815938|NCT01103414|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin|Change from baseline at week 12 endpoint in hemoglobin concentration|12 weeks|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of randomized study medication and who had both baseline and week 12 assessments.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815939|NCT01103414|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 Endpoint in Hematocrit|Change from baseline to week 12 endpoint in hematocrit as an indication of fluid retention|12 weeks|The Modified Per-Protocol Population included all per-protocol patients (all ITT patients who completed the 12-week, double-blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures) without any study medication non-compliance issues based on their pharmacokinetic data.||percentage of volume||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
815940|NCT01103414|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline to Week 12 Endpoint in HMW Adiponectin|Percent change from baseline to week 12 endpoint in high molecular weight adiponectin|12 weeks|The Modified Per-Protocol Population included all per-protocol patients (all ITT patients who completed the 12-week, double-blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures) without any study medication non-compliance issues based on their pharmacokinetic data.||percentage of baseline values||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
815941|NCT01103414|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c|Change from baseline in plasma glucose measured by hemoglobin A1c in response to three different doses of Mitoglitazone and pioglitazone as compared to placebo following once-daily dosing for 84 consecutive days (12 weeks) in patients with Type 2 diabetes.|12 weeks|The Modified Per-Protocol Population included all per-protocol patients (all ITT patients who completed the 12-week, double-blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures) without any study medication non-compliance issues based on their pharmacokinetic data.||percentage of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
815942|NCT01103414|Primary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 12.|Change from baseline in fasting plasma glucose in response to three different doses of Mitoglitazone as compared to pioglitazone following once-daily dosing for 84 consecutive days (12 weeks) in patients with Type 2 diabetes.|Baseline, Week 12|The Modified Per-Protocol Population included all per-protocol patients (all ITT patients who completed the 12-week, double-blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures) without any study medication non-compliance issues based on their pharmacokinetic data.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
815943|NCT01103466|Primary|Leakage Under the Base Plate|"Area of leakage under the base plate is recorded on a circular scale going from 0 fields to 24 fields where 0 is no leakage and 24 is complete leakage under the base plate."|At every change of base plate|ITT||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
815944|NCT01103479|Secondary|Provider Recommendation of CRC Screening|Provider recommendation of CRC Screening based on chart review|6 months following patient enrollment into study|||participants|||Number
815945|NCT01103479|Secondary|Provider Recommendation of CRC Screening|Provider recommendation of CRC Screening based on chart review|6 months following patient enrollment into study|||participants|||Number
815951|NCT01097915|Secondary|Electrophysiological Recordings From the Tongue for the Objective Evaluation of Individual Variations of 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) Sensitivity|electrophysiological recordings from the tongue of 43 subjects classified for their taste sensitivity to 6-n- propyltiouracil (PROP) and genotyped for the specific receptor gene, TAS2R38. Density of fungiform papillae was also determined in each subject. The biopotentials were recorded by means of differential electrophysiological derivations between two silver electrodes, one in contact with the ventral surface of the tongue and one in perfect adhesion with the dorsal surface.|1 year||06/2017||||
815952|NCT01097915|Secondary|Association Between PROP Sensitivity and Saliva Zinc Ion Concentration|Since the enzymatic function of gustin (CA6) depends upon the presence of Zn at its active site we measured the salivary zinc ion concentration in subjects classified as super-taster, medium taster and non-taster.The salivary Zn2+ concentration was measured with a QuantiChromTM zinc Assay kit (Gentaur, Brussels, Belgium) where the color intensity is directly proportional to the Zn2+ concentration in the sample.|7 months|||microg/dl||Standard Error|Mean
815953|NCT01097915|Primary|Association Between Gustin Gene Polymorphism and PROP Sensitivity|"We examine associations between PROP status and the polymorphism rs2274333 (A/G) of the gene that codify for the salivary protein, gustin/CA6, Which has been suggested as a trophic factor that promotes growth and development of taste buds by acting on taste bud stem cells.
The intensity of taste perception evoked by PROP and NaCl solutions was estimated to evaluate PROP taster status and molecular analysis of the gustin gene polymorphism was performed in individuals classified by PROP status using PCR techniques."|7 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
815954|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Plasma Desethylchloroquine Concentration Versus Time|CQ concentrations in the plasma were determined at specified time points as PK endpoints|"Planned time: 0 (Day 0), 48 (Day 2), 50 (Day 2), 56 (Day 2), 168 (Day 7), 336 (Day 14), 504 (Day 21) and 672 (Day 28) post first dose. Note: Assuming hour not specified as 0 hours on Days 7, 14, 21 and 28 for planned time post first dose calculation."|Analyses population included all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one blood sample collected for PK analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815955|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Plasma Chloroquine Concentration Versus Time|CQ concentrations in the plasma were determined at specified time points as PK endpoints|"Planned time: 0 (Day 0), 48 (Day 2), 50 (Day 2), 56 (Day 2), 168 (Day 7), 336 (Day 14), 504 (Day 21) and 672 (Day 28) post first dose. Note: Assuming hour not specified as 0 hours on Days 7, 14, 21 and 28 for planned time post first dose calculation."|Analyses population included all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one blood sample collected for PK analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815956|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Serum Azithromycin Concentration Versus Time|AZ concentrations in the serum was determined at specified time points as PK endpoints|"Planned time: 0 (Day 0), 48 (Day 2), 50 (Day 2), 56 (Day 2), 168 (Day 7), and 336 (Day 14) hours post the first dose. Note: Assuming hour not specified as 0 hours on Day 7 and Day 14 for planned time post first dose calculation."|Analyses population included all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one blood sample collected for PK analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
815957|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Hemoglobin Concentration: Abnormal Hemoglobin Level|Abnormal hemoglobin level on Day 42 was measured. The hemoglobin levels were measured with HemoCueTM, via finger stick or peripheral blood collection. The reference range was 10-16g/dL. Any value <0.8 times lower limit of normal was considered clinically significant.|Day 42|The safety analysis set consists of participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
815958|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Incidence of Fever Based on Oral Temperature|Oral temp was taken by the fieldworker through Day 42.|Baseline, Days 1, 2, 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42|ITT is defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and who had a baseline blood smear positive for Plasmodium falciparum monoinfection, asexual parasitemia. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Participants|||Number
815959|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Pregnancy Outcome: Outcome of Birth|All participants were followed up for EIU safety assessments following delivery or termination of pregnancy.|Following delivery or pregnancy termination|The safety analysis set consists of participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Data was available for 160 participants only.||Participants|||Number
815960|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Pregnancy Outcome: Complications During Delivery?|All participants were followed up for EIU safety assessments following delivery or termination of pregnancy.|Following delivery or pregnancy termination|The safety analysis set consists of participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Data was available for 159 participants only.||Participants|||Number
815961|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Pregnancy Outcome: Labor Induced?|All participants were followed up for EIU safety assessments following delivery or termination of pregnancy.|Following delivery or pregnancy termination|The safety analysis set consists of participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Data was available for 158 participants only.||Participants|||Number
815962|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Pregnancy Outcome: Delivery Assisted by Trained Obstetric Personnel?|All participants were followed up for EIU safety assessments following delivery or termination of pregnancy.|Following delivery or pregnancy termination|The safety analysis set consists of participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Data was available for 159 participants only.||Participants|||Number
815963|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Pregnancy Outcome: Mode of Delivery|All participants were followed up for EIU safety assessments following delivery or termination of pregnancy.|Following delivery or pregnancy termination|The safety analysis set consists of participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Data was available for 160 participants only.||Participants|||Number
815964|NCT01103713|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Pregnancy Outcome: Location of Delivery|All participants were followed up for exposure-in-utero (EIU) safety assessments following delivery or termination of pregnancy.|Following delivery or pregnancy termination|The safety analysis set consists of participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Data was available for 160 participants only.||Participants|||Number
816220|NCT01100853|Primary|Number Negative Urines (Proportion Negative Urines)||24 Weeks|Urine drug screens negative amphetamine||Urine Drug Screen|||Number
815965|NCT01103713|Secondary|Number of Asexual P. Falciparum Per Microliter of Blood at Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42 Post First Dose of Study Medication|Parasite counts (actual counts per microliter of blood) was measured at various time points.|Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42|PP population was used. PP is a subset of MITT population who received all 3 days of study medication. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Parasite count per microliter||Standard Error|Mean
815966|NCT01103713|Secondary|Number of Asexual P. Falciparum Per Microliter of Blood at Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42 Post First Dose of Study Medication|Parasite counts (actual counts per microliter of blood) was measured at various time points.|Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42|MITT population was used. MITT is a subset of the ITT population who had Plasmodium falciparum monoinfection (confirmed by microscopy) parasite count in the range of 80-100,000/microlitre on their baseline blood smear. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Parasite count per microliter||Standard Error|Mean
815967|NCT01103713|Secondary|Number of Asexual P. Falciparum Per Microliter of Blood at Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42 Post First Dose of Study Medication|Parasite counts (actual counts per microliter of blood) was measured at various time points.|Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42|ITT population was used. ITT is defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had a baseline blood smear positive for Plasmodium falciparum monoinfection, asexual parasitemia. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Parasite count per microliter||Standard Error|Mean
815968|NCT01103713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Parasitologic Response (PCR Uncorrected) at Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42 Post First Dose of Study Medication|The proportion of participants with parasitological response was estimated from the Kaplan Meier curve based on the time to the first occurrence of parasitological failure (PCR uncorrected). A participant will be a parasitological responder if she has a zero parasite count on the Day 7 visit without subsequent recurrence (PCR uncorrected) through the day of consideration, otherwise she is a parasitological failure.|Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42|ITT population was used. ITT is defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had a baseline blood smear positive for Plasmodium falciparum monoinfection, asexual parasitemia. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815969|NCT01103713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Parasitologic Response (PCR Uncorrected) at Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42 Post First Dose of Study Medication|The proportion of participants with parasitological response was estimated from the Kaplan Meier curve based on the time to the first occurrence of parasitological failure (PCR uncorrected). A participant will be a parasitological responder if she has a zero parasite count on the Day 7 visit without subsequent recurrence (PCR uncorrected) through the day of consideration, otherwise she is a parasitological failure.|Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42|PP population was used. PP is a subset of MITT population who received all 3 days of study medication. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815970|NCT01103713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Parasitologic Response (PCR Uncorrected) at Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42 Post First Dose of Study Medication|The proportion of participants with parasitological response was estimated from the Kaplan Meier curve based on the time to the first occurrence of parasitological failure (PCR uncorrected). A participant will be a parasitological responder if she has a zero parasite count on the Day 7 visit without subsequent recurrence (PCR uncorrected) through the day of consideration, otherwise she is a parasitological failure.|Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42|MITT population was used. MITT is a subset of the ITT population who had Plasmodium falciparum monoinfection (confirmed by microscopy) parasite count in the range of 80-100,000/microlitre on their baseline blood smear. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815971|NCT01103713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Parasitologic Response (PCR Corrected) at Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42 Post First Dose of Study Medication|The proportion of participants with parasitological response was estimated from the Kaplan Meier curve based on the time to the first occurrence of parasitological failure (PCR corrected). A participant will be a parasitological responder if she has a zero parasite count on the Day 7 visit without subsequent recurrence (PCR corrected) through the day of consideration, otherwise she is a parasitological failure.|Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42|ITT population was used. ITT is defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and who had a baseline blood smear positive for Plasmodium falciparum monoinfection, asexual parasitemia. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815972|NCT01103713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Parasitologic Response (PCR Corrected) at Days 7, 14, 21, 35, and 42 , Post First Dose of Study Medication|The proportion of participants with parasitological response was estimated from the Kaplan Meier curve based on the time to the first occurrence of parasitological failure (PCR corrected). A participant will be a parasitological responder if she has a zero parasite count on the Day 7 visit without subsequent recurrence (PCR corrected) through the day of consideration, otherwise she is a parasitological failure.|Days 7, 14, 21, 35, and 42|PP population was used. PP is a subset of MITT population who had received all 3 days of study medication. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815973|NCT01103713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Parasitologic Response (PCR Corrected) at Days 7, 14, 21, 35, and 42 Post First Dose of Study Medication|The proportion of participants with parasitological response was estimated from the Kaplan Meier curve based on the time to the first occurrence of parasitological failure (PCR corrected). A participant will be a parasitological responder if she has a zero parasite count on the Day 7 visit without subsequent recurrence (PCR corrected) through the day of consideration, otherwise she is a parasitological failure.|Days 7, 14, 21, 35, and 42|MITT population was used. MITT is a subset of the ITT population who had Plasmodium falciparum monoinfection (confirmed by microscopy) parasite count in the range of 80-100,000/microlitre on their baseline blood smear. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815974|NCT01103713|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Parasitologic Response (PCR Corrected) at Day 28 Post First Dose of Study Medication|The proportion of participants with parasitological response was estimated from the Kaplan Meier curve based on the time to the first occurrence of parasitological failure (PCR corrected). A participant will be a parasitological responder if she has a zero parasite count on the Day 7 visit without subsequent recurrence (PCR corrected) through the day of consideration, otherwise she is a parasitological failure.|Day 28|PP population was used. PP is a subset of MITT population who had received all 3 days of study medication. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815975|NCT01103713|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Parasitologic Response (Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Corrected) at Day 28 Post First Dose of Study Medication|The proportion of participants with parasitological response was estimated from the Kaplan Meier curve based on the time to the first occurrence of parasitological failure (PCR corrected). A participant will be a parasitological responder if she has a zero parasite count on the Day 7 visit without subsequent recurrence (PCR corrected) through the day of consideration, otherwise she is a parasitological failure.|Day 28|MITT population was used. MITT is a subset of the ITT population who had Plasmodium falciparum monoinfection (confirmed by microscopy) parasite count in the range of 80-100,000/microlitre on their baseline blood smear. Two participants were excluded because they had protocol deviations regarding the informed consent process.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
815976|NCT01104701|Secondary|Number of Chemistry Laboratory Values of Potential Clinical Importance Observed During Treatment Period - ITT Population|Potential clinical importance (PCI): triacylglycerol lipase high values were > 3* upper limit of normal (ULN); creatinine high values in males >1.6 mg/dL, females >1.4 mg/dL; gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT) high value >3* ULN; bilirubin high value > 2 mg/dL; Urate high values > 10 (males), >8 (females) mg/dL; potassium low value < 3 milliequivalents per liter (mEq/L), high value >5.5 mEq/L; calcium low value < 8 mg/dL and high value > 11 mg/dL. Laboratory samples were obtained at baseline (Day 1 or if unavailable, last measurement prior to first study drug dose), Weeks 6, 12, 20, and at study termination (Week 24) or early termination. Number of laboratory values of potential clinical importance (values could be either low or high) are presented for Weeks 6 - Week 24 or early termination. Note: those tests with no values meeting the PCI criteria, ie, 0 values observed across all treatment arms, are not presented.|Day 1 to Study Termination (Week24) or early termination|All participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug were analyzed in the intent to treat (ITT) population. n= all participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had available laboratory measurements.||laboratory values|||Number
815977|NCT01104701|Secondary|Number of Hematology Laboratory Values of Potential Clinical Importance Observed During Treatment Period - ITT Population|Potential clinical importance are the following: Hematocrit values for males less than (<) 36%, females < 30%; hemoglobin for males <12 grams per deciliter (g/dL), females < 10 g/dL; low platelet values <75,000/micro liter (µL), high values greater than (>) 500,000 µL. Laboratory samples were obtained at baseline (Day 1 or if unavailable, last measurement prior to first study drug dose), Weeks 6, 12, 20, and at study termination (Week 24) or early termination. Number of laboratory values of potential clinical importance presented for Weeks 6 - Week 24 or early termination.|Day 1 to study termination (24 weeks) or early termination|n= all participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had available laboratory measurements.||laboratory values|||Number
815978|NCT01104701|Secondary|Participants Negative or Positive for Anti-exenatide Antibodies - ITT Population|Serum titers of antibodies to exenatide were evaluated using a validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Covance Method No. ELISA-0308). Positive antibody to exenatide titer: observed at the indicated visit following a negative or missing titer at baseline, or a positive titer that has increased by at least 3 dilutions at the indicated visit from a detectable baseline. Baseline=Day 1.|Day 1 to Study Termination (24 weeks) or early termination|n=all participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had available titer.||participants|||Number
815979|NCT01104701|Secondary|Number of Participants With Injection Site Reaction Treatment Emergent Adverse Events - ITT Population|"AE is any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. Injection site related adverse events were defined as the adverse events with 'injection site' phrase in preferred term excluding 'injection site nodule'. The following events were Injection Site Reaction AEs: erythema, hematoma, hemorrhage, site pain, site papule, site pruritus, site warmth.
Participants receiving study drug monthly received 5 injections with last injection at Week 16; Participants receiving study drug weekly received 20 injections with last injection at Week 19."|Day 1 through study termination (Week 24) or early termination.|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were analyzed in the ITT population.||participants|||Number
815980|NCT01104701|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs), Serious AEs (SAEs), and AEs Leading to Discontinuation - ITT Population|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the ITT analysis. Treatment-emergent (TE) adverse events were defined as those with onset at or after initiation of study medication on Day 1 through study termination or early termination.|Day 1 to Study Termination (24 Weeks) or early Termination|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the ITT analysis.||participants|||Number
815981|NCT01104701|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Week 20 - Intent to Treat (ITT) Population|Baseline was Day 1, or last measurement prior to first dose of study drug. Heart rate was measured after the participant had rested for approximately 5 minutes and with the participant in a sitting position. Measurement was recorded in beats per minute (bpm). The measurement was repeated after at least 30 seconds and the average of the two readings recorded. ITT population was defined as all participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.|Baseline (Day 1), Week 20|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug were analyzed in the ITT population.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
816221|NCT01100931|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events see the adverse event module.|31.5 months|||Participants|||Number
815982|NCT01104701|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Diastolic and Systolic Blood Pressure at Week 20 - Intent to Treat (ITT) Population|Baseline was Day 1, or last measurement prior to first dose of study drug. Vital signs were measured after the participant had rested for approximately 5 minutes and with the participant in a sitting position. Measurement was recorded in millimeters of mercury (mmHg). The blood pressure measurement was repeated after at least 30 seconds and the average of the two readings recorded. ITT population was defined as all participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.|Baseline (Day 1), Week 20|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug were analyzed in the Intent to Treat (ITT) population.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
815983|NCT01104701|Secondary|Time Weighted Average Concentration and Peak to Trough of Exenatide From Week 12 Through Week 16 - Pharmacokinetic Evaluable - Steady State Population|All participants received an initial blood draw prior to the first dose and a single blood sample was collected at all other subsequent visits, for plasma exenatide assessments and the characterization of pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters following multiple monthly doses over the study period. Exenatide was measured using a validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Time weighted average concentration (Cave (2016-2688 h) and Peak to Trough were measured in picograms per milliliter (pg/mL).|Day 1 to Week 20|PK Evaluable- Steady-State: from trough to trough following Week 12 through Week 16, 3 or more values.||pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
815984|NCT01104701|Secondary|Mean Change in Fasting Glucose From Baseline to Week 20 - Evaluable Population|Fasting glucose was measured in milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) at screening, Baseline, and during treatment at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 9-11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17-19, and 20. Baseline was Day 1, or last measurement prior to first dose of study drug. Evaluable population was defined as all participants who completed study procedures in compliance with the protocol and had adequate exposure to the study drug.|Baseline (Day 1) to Week 20|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug, complied with the protocol, had adequate study drug exposure, and had a measurement value on the specified week were included in the analysis of the evaluable population. n=number of participants with measurement value.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
815985|NCT01104701|Secondary|Mean Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 20 - Evaluable Population|Body weight was measured in kilograms (kg) at Baseline, and during treatment at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 9-11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17-19, and 20. Baseline was Day 1, or last measurement prior to first dose of study drug. Evaluable population was defined as all participants who completed study procedures in compliance with the protocol and had adequate exposure to the study drug.|Baseline (Day 1) to Week 20|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug, complied with the protocol, had adequate study drug exposure, and had a measurement value on the specified week were included in the analysis. n=number of participants with measurement value.||kg||Standard Error|Mean
815986|NCT01104701|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving HbA1c Target Values at Week 20 - Evaluable Population|HbA1c was measured as a percent (%) of total hemoglobin. The Target values for HbA1c were <7% and ≤ 6.5% at Week 20. Evaluable population was defined as participants who completed study procedures in compliance with the protocol and had adequate exposure to the study drug.|Week 20|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug, complied with the protocol, had adequate study drug exposure, and had a measurement value for Week 20 were included in the analysis of the evaluable population. n=number of participants with measurement value.||percentage of Participants|||Number
815987|NCT01104701|Primary|Mean Change in HbA1c From Baseline to End of Treatment (Week 20) - Evaluable Population|HbA1c was measured as a percent of total hemoglobin at screening, Baseline, and during treatment on Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20. Baseline was Day 1, or last measurement prior to first dose of study drug. The Evaluable population was defined as participants who completed study procedures in compliance with the protocol and had adequate exposure to the study drug.|Baseline (Day 1) to 20 weeks|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug, complied with the protocol, had adequate study drug exposure, and had a measurement value on the specified week were included in the analysis of the evaluable population. n=number of participants with measurement value.||Percent of Hemoglobin||Standard Error|Mean
815988|NCT01104870|Secondary|Change in N-terminal Pro-B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) Concentrations From Baseline to Week 12|The N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP) serum concentration was assessed to compare the severity of heart failure at Baseline and Week 12.|Baseline and Week 12|All subjects with Baseline and Week 12 NT-proBNP values recorded were included in the analysis.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
815989|NCT01104870|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Change From Baseline World Health Organization (WHO) Functional Classification at Week 12|The WHO Functional Class of pulmonary hypertension is a physical activity rating scale as follows: Class I: No limitation of physical activity. Class II: Slight limitation of physical activity. Class III: Marked limitation of physical activity. Class IV: Inability to carry out any physical activity without symptoms. Only participants who experienced a change in WHO functional classification from Baseline to Week 12 are described by class change below; all other participants maintained their Baseline WHO functional classification at Week 12.|Change from Baseline at Week 12|All subjects with Baseline and Week 12 WHO functional classifications recorded were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
815990|NCT01104870|Secondary|Change in PH Symptoms From Baseline to Week 12|Symptoms of PH including fatigue, dyspnea, edema, dizziness, syncope, chest pain and orthopnea were assessed and severity grade values (i.e., 0, 1, 2 or 3) for each symptom were assigned for subjects. A severity of 0 indicated no symptoms, the maximum severity was 3, indicating severe symptoms. Median change in symptom severity from Baseline to Week 12 is described.|Change from Baseline at 12 Weeks|All subjects with Baseline and Week 12 values recorded for symptoms of PH were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
815991|NCT01104870|Secondary|Change in Borg Dyspnea Score (Following 6MWT) From Baseline to Week 12|The Borg dyspnea score is a 10-point scale rating the maximum level of dyspnea (difficulty in breathing) experienced during the six-minute walk test (6MWT). The Borg dyspnea score was assessed immediately following the 6MWT. Scores ranged from 0 (for no shortness of breath) to 10 (for the greatest shortness of breath ever experienced).|Baseline and Week 12|All subjects with Baseline and Week 12 Borg dyspnea scores recorded were included in the analysis.||score||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816489|NCT01108835|Secondary|Lung Function|Measurement of change of spirometry (FEV1 % predicted) from baseline to 12 month. The range is from 0% to 100%. The change was calculated by 12 month value minus the baseline value. Positive value indicated improvement in lung function.|12 months|Percentage of predicted FEV1||Percentage of Predicted FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
815992|NCT01104870|Secondary|Change in 6-minute Walk Distance (6MWD) From Baseline to Week 12|The intent of the 6MWD test is to evaluate exercise capacity associated with carrying out activities of daily living. Change in 6MWD from Baseline to Week 12, correlates with the current clinical standard for assessing patient functional status in the treatment of PH and is considered an objective measure of patient functional status by the American Thoracic Society (ATS). Subjects were instructed to walk down a corridor at a comfortable speed as far as they could manage for six minutes. Distance <500 meters suggests considerable exercise limitation; Distance 500-800 meters suggests moderate limitation; Distance >800 meters (with no rests) suggests mild or no limitation.|Baseline and Week 12|All subjects with Baseline and Week 12 6MWD values recorded were included in the analysis.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
815993|NCT01104870|Secondary|Change in Cardiac Index (CI) From Baseline to Week 12|Cardiac Index (CI) relates the cardiac output (CO) from left ventricle to body surface area (BSA), thus relating heart performance to the size of the individual. The CI values and their respective changes from Baseline to Week 12 at peak exercise will be summarized by treatment group and measured by Swan-Ganz right heart catheterization.|Baseline and Week 12|All subjects with Baseline and Week 12 CI values recorded were included in the analysis.||L/min/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
815994|NCT01104870|Secondary|Change in Mean Pulmonary Artery Pressure (PAPm) From Baseline to Week 12|Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is an increase in pressure in the pulmonary vasculature defined as a mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAPm) greater than 25 mmHg at rest or greater than 30 mmHg with exercise, as measured by right heart catheterization. The PAPm values and their respective changes from Baseline to Week 12 at peak exercise will be summarized by treatment group and measured by Swan-Ganz right heart catheterization.|Baseline and Week 12|All subjects with Baseline and Week 12 PAPm values recorded were included in the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
815995|NCT01104870|Primary|Change in Peak Total Pulmonary Resistance Index (TPRI) During Exercise From Baseline to Week 12|"The effects of 12-week treatment with different doses of UT-15C on peak TPRI during exercise will be evaluated by comparing the change from Baseline to Week 12 at peak wattage on a pairwise basis between treatment groups.
The primary measure of efficacy was the change from Baseline to Week 12 in peak TPRI during exercise assessed 3 to 6 hours after the subject’s morning dose of UT-15C to obtain measurements at peak concentrations of treprostinil. The equation used to determine the Total Pulmonary Resistance Index (TPRI) (mmHg/[L/min/m^2]) is Mean Pulmonary Artery Pressure (PAPm)/ Cardiac Index (CI)."|Baseline and Week 12|All subjects with Baseline and Week 12 TPRI values recorded were included in the analysis.||mmHg/(L/min/m^2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
815996|NCT01105065|Secondary|Frequency Doubling Perimetry|Frequency doubling perimetry was measured pre- and post treatment with brimonidine for 8 weeks.We used the full-threshold N-30 protocol to determine the visual field mean deviation, pattern standard deviation, and test duration in the eye that had hemodynamic testing. The results that are reported below are the mean deviation values recorded as part of the frequency doubling perimetry as these are the most significant.|8 weeks|||dB||Standard Deviation|Mean
815997|NCT01105065|Primary|Presence of Retinal Blood Flow Autoregulation|We defined retinal vascular dysregulation based on the percentage change between the retinal blood flow measured while reclining for 30 minutes and the baseline seated measures. In a prior study, we found that healthy subjects exhibited a +6.5%±12% blood flow change induced by 30 minutes of reclining. Thus, we defined the normal range of blood flow autoregulation as within 2 standard deviations of the mean percentage change found in this group, or -17.5% to +30.5%.|8 weeks|||participants|||Number
815998|NCT01105091|Primary|Body Weight - Baseline and Day 28|Body weight was measured both at baseline and day 28.|Baseline and 28 days|Patients who had both baseline and Day 28 assessments were included in the analysis. The analysis was conducted without replacement of missing values.||kg||Full Range|Median
815999|NCT01105091|Primary|Heart Rate - Baseline and Day 28|Heart rate was measured indirectly using an automatic oscillometric device, on the same arm for each measurement. The Heart Rate was assessed at Baseline and at Day 28 (End of Study Treatment visit).|Baseline and 28 days|Patients who had both baseline and Day 28 assessments were included in the analysis. The analysis was conducted without replacement of missing values.||Beats per minute||Full Range|Median
816000|NCT01105091|Primary|Blood Pressure - Baseline and Day 28|Blood pressure (systolic and diastolic) were measured indirectly using an automatic oscillometric device, on the same arm for each measurement. The Blood Pressure was assessed at baseline and at Day 28 (End of Study Treatment visit).|Baseline and 28 days|Patients who had both baseline and Day 28 assessments were included in the analysis. The analysis was conducted without replacement of missing values.||mm Hg||Full Range|Median
816001|NCT01105091|Primary|Percentage Central Venous Blood Oxygen Saturation (ScVO2) - Baseline and Day 28|Central venous blood oxygen saturation assessment was performed only in specific centers. Measurements for ScVO2 were performed during the inpatient hospitalization period on Day 1 (prior to drug initiation) and on Day 28 (EOT). Samples for ScVO2 were obtained by aspirating blood from the indwelling central venous catheter. After the sample had been drawn, the catheter was primed with study drug in order to refill the lumen to avoid interruption in treatment and sudden decompensation.|Baseline and 28 days|Patients who had both baseline and Day 28 assessments were included in the analysis. The analysis was conducted without replacement of missing values.||percentage oxygen saturation||Full Range|Median
816002|NCT01105091|Primary|Patients With New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Class Change (Improved or Worsened) From Baseline to Day 28|Disease severity was assessed by NYHA classification of PAH criteria: Class I: no limitation of physical activity (PA). Ordinary PA: no undue dyspnea/fatigue, chest pain, near syncope. Class II: slight limitation of PA. Comfortable at rest. Ordinary PA: undue dyspnea/fatigue, chest pain, near syncope. Class III: marked limitation of PA. Comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary PA: undue dyspnea/fatigue, chest pain, near syncope. Class IV: inability to carry out PA without symptoms. Right heart failure. Dyspnea/fatigue may even have been present at rest. Discomfort increased by any PA.|From baseline to 28 days (+3 days)|Patients who had both baseline and Day 28 assessments were included in the analysis. The analysis was conducted without replacement of missing values.||participants|||Number
816076|NCT01106092|Secondary|Anti-D and Anti-T Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in IU/mL.|Prior to (At Month 0) and one month after booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
816003|NCT01105091|Primary|Six-minute Walk Distance (6MWD) - Baseline and Day 28|The 6-minute walk test (6MWT) was to be performed prior to initiating study treatment either during the screening visit or on Day 1 prior to drug initiation, and Day 28 (End of treatment (EOT)). This assessment is a non-encouraged test that measures the distance walked for a duration of 6 minutes. The 6MWD was recorded in the Case Report Form (CRF).|Baseline and 28 days (+3 days)|Patients who had both baseline and Day 28 assessments were included in the analysis. The analysis was conducted without replacement of missing values.||meters||Full Range|Median
816004|NCT01105091|Primary|Dose Normalized Pharmacokinetics of 6-keto-Prostacyclin F1alpha at 4 ng/kg/Min|The plasma concentration for the epoprostenol metabolite 6-keto-Prostacyclin F1alpha was measured at 4 ng/kg/min just prior to the next up-titration. Dose-normalized concentrations are used to summarize the results.|Day 1|A per-protocol analysis set that included all patients in the treated set who did not violate the protocol in a way that might affect the evaluation of the effect of the study drug(s) on the pharmacokinetic endpoints.||(pg/ml)/(ng/kg/min)||Full Range|Median
816005|NCT01105091|Primary|Dose Normalized Pharmacokinetics of 6-keto-Prostacyclin F1alpha at 2 ng/kg/Min|The plasma concentration for the epoprostenol metabolite 6-keto-Prostacyclin F1alpha was measured at 2 ng/kg/min just prior to the next up-titration. Dose-normalized concentrations are used to summarize the results.|Day 1|A per-protocol analysis set that included all patients in the treated set who did not violate the protocol in a way that might affect the evaluation of the effect of the study drug(s) on the pharmacokinetic endpoints.||(pg/ml)/(ng/kg/min)||Full Range|Median
816006|NCT01105091|Primary|Dose Normalized Pharmacokinetics of 6,15-diketo-13,14-dihydro-Prostacyclin F1alpha at 4 ng/kg/Min|The plasma concentration for the epoprostenol metabolite 6,15-diketo-13,14-dihydro-Prostacyclin F1alpha was measured at 4 ng/kg/min just prior to the next up-titration. Dose-normalized concentrations are used to summarize the results.|Day 1|A per-protocol analysis set that included all patients in the treated set who did not violate the protocol in a way that might affect the evaluation of the effect of the study drug(s) on the pharmacokinetic endpoints.||(pg/ml)/(ng/kg/min)||Full Range|Median
816007|NCT01105091|Primary|Dose Normalized Pharmacokinetics of 6,15-diketo-13,14-dihydro-Prostacyclin F1alpha at 2 ng/kg/Min|The plasma concentration for the epoprostenol metabolite 6,15-diketo-13,14-dihydro-Prostacyclin F1alpha was measured at 2 ng/kg/min just prior to the next up-titration. Dose-normalized concentrations are used to summarize the results.|Day 1|A per-protocol analysis set that included all patients in the treated set who did not violate the protocol in a way that might affect the evaluation of the effect of the study drug(s) on the pharmacokinetic endpoints.||(pg/ml)/(ng/kg/min)||Full Range|Median
816008|NCT01105117|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of ACT-385781A and Flolan in Injectable Prostanoid Treatment-naïve Patients With PAH - Number of Deaths||Up to 39 days. Day 1 - until patients transition from study medication to commercially-obtained medication|Study population||participants|||Number
816009|NCT01105117|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of ACT-385781A and Flolan in Injectable Prostanoid Treatment-naïve Patients With Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH) - Number of Patients With Adverse Events Leading Discontinuation of Study Treatment||Up to 39 days. Day 1 - until patients transition from study medication to commercially-obtained medication|Study population||participants|||Number
816010|NCT01105130|Secondary|Quality of Life|Quality of life is quantified by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Prostate (FACT_P) questionnaire. The FACT questionnaire is comprised of four subscales – social, emotional, functional, and physical. Each subscale is obtained by summing over 6-7 items, each of which is coded on a 0 to 4 scale. Negatively worded questions are reverse scored and higher scores for each subscale indicate better HRQOL. The social, functional, and physical subscales range from 0 to 28 while the emotional subscale ranges from 0 to 24. The overall score (FACT-G) is the sum over the four subscales and ranges from 0 to 108. Patients also completed 12 questions related to prostate cancer, and the prostate subscale score is the sum of those responses (with some items reverse scored). Scores range from 0 to 48, and as with the other FACT subscales higher scores indicate better HRQOL. FACT-P is the sum of FACT-G and the prostate subscale. This questionnaire was added half-way through the study.|8 weeks|All participants who completed the FACT_P at any time.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816011|NCT01105130|Secondary|Adherence|Adherence is the percentage of prescribed pills taken by the participants|8 weeks|Participants who returned pill diaries.||percentage of prescribed pills||Full Range|Mean
816012|NCT01105130|Secondary|Retention|Retention is the percentage of participants who complete the 8 week visit.|8 weeks|All randomized participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816013|NCT01105130|Primary|Erectile Function|The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire consists of 15 questions, each of which is scored on a 0 to 5 or 1 to 5 scale. It is comprised of five domains, each scored as the sum of 2 to 5 questions. Erectile function is the sum of six questions with a range from 1 to 30. Higher scores indicate better functioning.|8 weeks|All participants providing data at any time.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816014|NCT01105247|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Response|Response criteria are as outlined in the IWCLL 2008 criteria (Hallek 2008) and as assessed by investigator, e.g. response requires 50% reduction in lymph node size.|The median follow-up time for all treated patients are 21 month, range (0.7 month, 29 months).|||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816015|NCT01105247|Secondary|Progression Free Survival Rate at 24 Months|Criteria for progression are as outlined in the IWCLL 2008 criteria (Hallek 2008) and as assessed by investigator, e.g. progression defined as a 50% increase in lymph node size.|The median follow-up time for all treated patients are 21 month, range (0.7 month, 29 months).|||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816016|NCT01105247|Secondary|Food Effect Cohort Assessments|Geometric mean ratio (Fed/Fasted) for PCI-32765 AUClast. The data were collected at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 24 h post-dose. The AUClast was calculated from 0 up to 24 hours post-dose.|Fed was assessed on either Day 8 or Day 15 and Fasted was assessed on the remaining day as cross-over design.|Note: 16 subjects were participated in food effect cohort. However, the PK parameters for 1 subject under Fasted treatment period cannot be reliably estimated. The data for this subject were excluded from Fed/Fasted comparison.||||90% Confidence Interval|Number
816017|NCT01105247|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|Number of participants who had experienced at least one treatment emergent AEs.|From first dose to within 30 days of last dose of PCI-32765|||Participants|||Number
816018|NCT01105312|Secondary|Confirmed Response Rate (Phase I)|A confirmed response is defined to be a CR or PR (as determined by RECIST criteria) noted as the objective status on 2 consecutive evaluations at least 4 weeks apart. Response will be evaluated using all cycles of treatment. All patients meeting the eligibility criteria who have signed a consent form and have begun treatment will be evaluable for response. The number of confirmed responses will be reported here.|from baseline up to 5 years|All 12 eligible phase I patients were treated and analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816019|NCT01105312|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure|Time to treatment failure (TTF) is defined as the time from the date of registration to the date at which the patient is removed from treatment due to progression, unacceptable adverse events, or refusal. The distribution of TTF will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier|from baseline up to 5 years post-registration|13 of the 16 phase II patients were eligible, treated, and analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816020|NCT01105312|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate|Clinical benefit rate will be estimated by the total number of patients with an objective status of CR, PR, or SD for duration of at least 6 months divided by the total number of evaluable patients. All evaluable patients will be used for this analysis. Exact binomial 95% confidence intervals for the true clinical benefit rate will be calculated.|from baseline up to 6 months|13 of the 16 phase II patients were eligible, treated, and analyzed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816021|NCT01105312|Secondary|Duration of Response (Phase II)|Duration of response is defined for all evaluable patients who have achieved a confirmed response as the date at which the patient’s objective status is first noted to be a CR or PR to the earliest date progression is documented. The distribution of duration of response will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.|from baseline up to 5 years post-registration|13 of the 16 phase II patients were treated and analyzed||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816022|NCT01105312|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (Phase II)|Progression-free survival (PFS) is defined as the time from registration to progression or death due to any cause. PFS at 6 months will be estimated. The distribution of PFS will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.|from baseline up to 6 months|13 of the 16 phase II patients were eligible, treated, and analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816023|NCT01105312|Secondary|Time-to-disease Progression (Phase II)|"Time-to-disease progression (TTP) is defined as the time from registration to documentation of disease progression. If a patient dies without a documentation of disease progression, the patient will be considered to have had tumor progression at the time of their death unless there is sufficient documented evidence to conclude no progression occurred prior to death. The distribution of TTP will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier. Progression is defined as at least one of the following:
At least one new malignant lesion or a lymph node whose short axis has increased to >1.5 cm
At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the MSD. In addition, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 0.5 cm"|from baseline up to 6 months|13 of the 16 phase II patients were eligible, treated, and analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816024|NCT01105312|Secondary|Survival Time (Phase II)|Survival time is defined as the time from registration to death due to any cause. The distribution of survival time will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier|from baseline up to 5 years post-registration|13 of the 16 phase II patients were eligible, treated, and analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816025|NCT01105312|Primary|Response Rate (Phase II)|"A confirmed response is defined to be a CR or PR (as determined by RECIST (version 1.1 criteria) noted as the objective status on 2 consecutive evaluations at least 4 weeks apart. Response will be evaluated using all cycles of treatment. All patients meeting the eligibility criteria who have signed a consent form and have begun treatment will be evaluable for response.
A CR is defined as:
All of the following must be true:
Disappearance of all non-nodal target lesions
Each target lymph node must have reduction in short axis to <1.0 cm
A PR is defined as:
At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameters of the non-nodal target lesions and the short axes of the target lymph nodes taking as reference the BSD (Section 11.41)"|from baseline up to 5 years post-registration|13 of the 16 patients enrolled were eligible, treated, and analyzed for this endpoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816026|NCT01105312|Primary|Maximum-tolerated Dose (Phase I)|MTD is defined as the dose level below the lowest dose that induces dose limiting toxicity in at least one-third of patients (at least 2 of a maximum of 6 > new patients). If dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) is not seen in any of the 3 patients, 3 new patients will be accrued and treated at the next higher dose level. If DLT are seen in 2 or 3 of 3 patients treated at a given dose level, then the next 3 patients will be treated at the next lower dose level, if only 3 patients were enrolled and treated at this lower dose level. The number of DLT's will be reported here.|Up to 2.5 months|All 12 phase I patients were eligible and analyzed for MTD.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816027|NCT01105377|Secondary|Time to Progression|Time to disease progression (TTP) is defined as the time from the start of treatment to the earliest of the date documenting disease progression or most recent assessment for patients having no progression. The distribution of TTP is estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.|From the start of treatment to the earliest of the date documenting disease progression, assessed up to 3 years|Analysis for this endpoint was “per protocol” and two participants were excluded. One participant in Cohort I was ineligible and one participant in Cohort II refused to start their 1st cycle of study treatment (ie, cancelled). Therefore, 23 participants in Cohort I and 22 participants in Cohort II were analyzed for this secondary endpoint.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816028|NCT01105377|Primary|Confirmed Tumor Response|Each evaluable patient is classified as having a confirmed tumor response if they have either a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) lasts at least 4 weeks. Tumor response is measured by using RECIST v1.1 (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors). A CR is defined as a disappearance of all target lesions, and each target lymph node must have reduction in short axis to <1.0 cm. A PR is defined as a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter for all target lesions plus the sum of the short axis of all the target lymph nodes at current evaluation, compared to pre-treatment measurements. The confirmed response rate is calculated as the number of confirmed CR+PR, divided by the total number of evaluable patients, with 95% confidence intervals estimated using the approach of Duffy and Santner.|At 6 month evaluation|Analysis was performed “per protocol” using only Cohort II participants, except those deemed ineligible, cancelled, or in major treatment violation during cycle 1. One of the 23 Cohort II participants was excluded in the analysis due to cancelling before initiating treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816029|NCT01105533|Other Pre-specified|Effect of Food on Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration [AUC (0-24)]|AUC (0-24)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (0-24).|Pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,18,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 29 (fasted state), Day 30 (fed state) for once daily groups, pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8 hrs post-dose on Day 29 Day 29 (fasted state), Day 30 (fed state) for twice daily groups|Formal quality-assured, quality-controlled, PK analysis was not performed and hence, food effect on AUC (0-24) was not assessed.|||||
816030|NCT01105533|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Biomarkers at Day 1 of Each Cycle up to Cycle 25|Biomarkers included soluble plasma proteins associated with angiogenesis (vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF], soluble vascular endothelial growth factor-2 receptor [sVEGFR2], soluble vascular endothelial growth factor-3 receptor [sVEGFR3], soluble beta type platelet-derived growth factor [sPDGFR beta]) and tumor proliferation (soluble stem-cell factor receptor [sKIT])|Baseline, Day 1 of Cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25|Results are not reported as the data were not statistically summarized but available in individual participant listing.|||||
816031|NCT01105533|Secondary|Number of Participants With Objective Response of Complete Response or Partial Response|Number of participants with objective response based on assessment of confirmed complete response (CR) or confirmed partial response (PR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Confirmed CR defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no appearance of new lesions. Confirmed PR defined as at least 30 percent decrease in sum of the longest dimensions (LD) of the target lesions, taking as a reference the baseline sum LD, without progression of non-target lesions and no appearance of new lesions. Confirmed responses are those that persist on repeat imaging study >=4 weeks after initial documentation of response.|Baseline, every 8 weeks up to Cycle 25 (Week 100)|Full Analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
816032|NCT01105533|Secondary|Systemic Clearance (CL)|CL is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body.|Pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,10,16,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1(0.67 mg group);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,18,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29(once daily groups);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29 (twice daily groups);pre-dose on Day 43, 57|Formal quality-assured, quality-controlled, PK analysis was not performed and hence, CL was not calculated.|||||
816033|NCT01105533|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vss)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|Pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,10,16,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1(0.67 mg group);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,18,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29(once daily groups);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29 (twice daily groups);pre-dose on Day 43, 57|Formal quality-assured, quality-controlled, pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was not performed and hence, Vss was not calculated.|||||
816034|NCT01105533|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)]|AUC (0 - ∞)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|Pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,10,16,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1(0.67 mg group);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,18,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29(once daily groups);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29 (twice daily groups);pre-dose on Day 43, 57|Formal quality-assured, quality-controlled, pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was not performed and hence, AUC (0 - ∞) was not calculated.|||||
816035|NCT01105533|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration [AUC (0-24)]|AUC (0-24)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (0-24).|Pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,10,16,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1(0.67 mg group);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,18,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29(once daily groups);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29 (twice daily groups);pre-dose on Day 43, 57|Formal quality-assured, quality-controlled, pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was not performed and hence, AUC (0-24) was not calculated.|||||
816036|NCT01105533|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,10,16,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1(0.67 mg group);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,18,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29(once daily groups);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29 (twice daily groups);pre-dose on Day 43, 57|Formal quality-assured, quality-controlled, pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was not performed and hence, t1/2 was not calculated.|||||
816037|NCT01105533|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,10,16,20,24 hours(hrs) post-dose on Day 1(0.67 mg group);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8,18,20,24 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29(once daily groups);pre-dose,0.5,1,2,4,6,8 hrs post-dose on Day 1,15,29 (twice daily groups);pre-dose on Day 43, 57|Formal quality-assured, quality-controlled, pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was not performed and hence, Cmax was not calculated.|||||
816038|NCT01105533|Primary|Recommended Phase-2 Dose (RP2D)|RP2D was determined based on the safety profile and pharmacodynamic findings. The twice daily dosing was preferred over once daily dosing for RP2D, as per investigator's discretion, due to more consistent changes in pharmacodynamic markers and greater clinical benefit observed in twice daily dosing.|Day 28|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||mg twice daily|||Number
816039|NCT01105533|Primary|Maximum Administered Dose (MAD)|MAD: dose level at which 2 or more out of 6 participants experienced DLT during Cycle 1. DLTs: blood pressure of 180/110 mmHg or higher for 3 readings over 3 hours regardless of use of anti-hypertensive drugs or >160/100 mmHg for 3 readings over 3 days on maximum anti-hypertensive drugs; afebrile Grade 4 neutropenia >=7 days or >= Grade 3 neutropenia associated with fever (1 reading of oral temperature >38.5 degree C or 3 readings of oral temperature >38.0 degree C in 24-hour period); Grade 4 thrombocytopenia; hemoptysis of >1/2 teaspoon of bright red blood per day; proteinuria of >=2 grams/24 hours; inability to resume PF-00337210 dosing at current dose level within 14 days of stopping due to treatment-related toxicity; >=Grade 3 nonhematological toxicities (except alopecia and blood pressure/hypertension); Grade 3 nonhematological toxicities that could be controlled to Grade 2 or less with appropriate treatment were not considered dose limiting.|Day 28|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||mg once daily|||Number
816490|NCT01108835|Secondary|Mortality|From contacting the patient/their family and hospital record retrieval.|12 months|||participants|||Number
816040|NCT01105533|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)|MTD: dose level at which no more than 1 of 6 participants experienced DLT during Cycle 1. DLTs: blood pressure of 180/110 mmHg or higher for 3 readings over 3 hours regardless of use of anti-hypertensive drugs or >160/100 mmHg for 3 readings over 3 days on maximum anti-hypertensive drugs; afebrile Grade 4 neutropenia >=7 days or >= Grade 3 neutropenia associated with fever (1 reading of oral temperature >38.5 degree C or 3 readings of oral temperature >38.0 degree C in 24-hour period); Grade 4 thrombocytopenia; hemoptysis of >1/2 teaspoon of bright red blood per day; proteinuria of >=2 grams/24 hours; inability to resume PF-00337210 dosing at current dose level within 14 days of stopping due to treatment-related toxicity; >=Grade 3 nonhematological toxicities (except alopecia and blood pressure/hypertension); Grade 3 nonhematological toxicities that could be controlled to Grade 2 or less with appropriate treatment were not considered dose limiting.|Day 28|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||mg once daily|||Number
816041|NCT01105533|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose-limiting Toxicities (DLTs)|DLTs included events occurring in Cycle 1: blood pressure of 180/110 millimeters of mercury (mmHg) or higher for 3 readings over 3 hours regardless of use of anti-hypertensive drugs or greater than (>) 160/100 mmHg for 3 readings over 3 days on maximum anti-hypertensive drugs; afebrile Grade 4 neutropenia for greater than or equal to (>=) 7 days or >=Grade 3 neutropenia associated with fever (1 reading of oral temperature >38.5 degree Celsius [degree C] or 3 readings of oral temperature >38.0 degree C in 24-hour period); Grade 4 thrombocytopenia; hemoptysis of >1/2 teaspoon of bright red blood per day; proteinuria of >=2 grams/24 hours; inability to resume PF-00337210 dosing at current dose level within 14 days of stopping due to treatment-related toxicity; >=Grade 3 nonhematological toxicities (except alopecia and blood pressure/hypertension); Grade 3 nonhematological toxicities that could be controlled to Grade 2 or less with appropriate treatment were not considered dose limiting.|Baseline up to Day 28|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
816042|NCT01105650|Secondary|Overall Survival|Number of participants alive at 1 year.|1 Year|||participants|||Number
816043|NCT01105650|Secondary|Number of Participants With Progressive Disease at One Year||1 Year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
816044|NCT01105650|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|Time from study entry until progressive disease or data collection cutoff.|1 Year|"Number of participants with progressive disease at one year:
Arm 1: 2 out of 3; Arm 2: 1 out of 3; Arm 3: 5 out of 7"||days||Full Range|Median
816045|NCT01105650|Primary|Response Rate|Response includes Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), and Stable Disease (SD) as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v.1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT or MRI. Complete Response (CR), disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD), neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for Progressive Disease.|Month 3|||participants|||Number
816046|NCT01105702|Secondary|Number of Patients With Grade 3 or 4 Adverse Events|Adverse events evaluated per CTCAE 3|The whole time while on treatment and 30 days after the treatment|all the patients with treatment||participants|||Number
816047|NCT01105702|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (OS)|OS defined as time from diagnosis to most recent follow up or death.|Up to 50 months|intent-to-treat population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816048|NCT01105702|Primary|Median Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS defined as time from date of diagnosis to most recent follow up, disease progression, or death. Disease progress defined as either clinical deterioration or radiographic progressive disease on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) per updated response assessment in neuro-oncology criteria (Wen, et al).|Up to 50 months|Intent-to-treat population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816049|NCT01105754|Secondary|Number of Children Who Received Guideline-based Asthma Care During the Intervention Visit.|The number of children who received guideline-based asthma care (eg: inhaled steroid prescription, counseling for triggers, counseling for adherence) at the intervention visit based on parent interview at the 2-week follow-up and medical record review.|2 week follow-up, and medical record review|||participants|||Number
816050|NCT01105754|Primary|Symptom Free Days|The primary outcome is asthma morbidity measured by the number of symptom-free asthma days (SFD) reported over 2 weeks at the 2-month follow-up assessment.|2 month follow-up assessment|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816051|NCT01105767|Primary|Incidence of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA)-Associated SSTI||At the end of the 20 month study|||participants|||Number
816052|NCT01105767|Primary|Incidence of Skin and Soft Tissue Infection (SSTI)||At the end of the 20 month study|||participants|||Number
816053|NCT01105936|Secondary|Subjective NRS Response for Treatment Effect on Patello-femoral Stimulation After the fMRI Scan: [NRS (P-f Post-scan)]|Subjective NRS response for each participant for treatment effect on tibio-femoral stimulus after the fMRI scan was calculated as difference of pre-treatment pain assessment after stimulus and post-treatment post-scan pain assessment after stimulus on patello-femoral. NRS responses was based on an 11 scale rating (0-10), with 0 corresponding to “No Pain” and 10 corresponding to “Extreme Pain or Pain as bad as you can imagine”.|Baseline and post-dose post-scan after stimulus|ITT population: all participants per period who received at least one treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816054|NCT01105936|Secondary|Subjective NRS Response for Treatment Effect on Tibio-femoral Stimulation After the fMRI Scan: [NRS (T-f Post-scan)]|Subjective NRS response for treatment effect on tibio-femoral stimulus after the fMRI scan was calculated for each participant as difference of pre-treatment pain assessment after stimulus and post-treatment post-scan pain assessment after stimulus on tibio-femoral. NRS responses was based on an 11 scale rating (0-10), with 0 corresponding to “No Pain” and 10 corresponding to “Extreme Pain or Pain as bad as you can imagine”.|Baseline and post-dose post-scan after stimulus|ITT population: all participants per period who received at least one treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816300|NCT01107418|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to 8 Hours (AUC[0-8h]) of Vemurafenib on Day 1||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 hours post-dose on Day 1|Pharmacokinetic (PK) population included all participants who provided essential PK data up to and including the pre-dose PK sample taken on Cycle 1, Day 22, without major protocol violation.||micrograms*hour/milliliter (mcg*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816055|NCT01105936|Secondary|Subjective NRS Response for Treatment Effect on Patello-femoral Stimulation Prior the fMRI Scan: [NRS (P-f Pre-scan)]|Subjective NRS response was calculated for each participant as difference of pre-treatment pain assessment after stimulus and post-treatment pre-scan pain assessment after stimulus on patello-femoral. NRS responses was based on an 11 scale rating (0-10), with 0 corresponding to “No Pain” and 10 corresponding to “Extreme Pain or Pain as bad as you can imagine”.|Baseline and post-dose pre-scan after stimulus|ITT population: all participants per period who received at least one treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816056|NCT01105936|Secondary|Subjective NRS Response for Treatment Effect on Tibio-femoral Stimulation Prior the fMRI Scan: [NRS (T-f Pre-scan)]|Subjective NRS response was calculated for each participant as difference of pre-treatment pain assessment after stimulus and post-treatment pre-scan pain assessment after stimulus on tibio-femoral joint. NRS responses was based on an 11 scale rating (0-10), with 0 corresponding to “No Pain” and 10 corresponding to “Extreme Pain or Pain as bad as you can imagine”.|Baseline and post-dose pre-scan after stimulus|ITT population: all participants per period who received at least one treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816057|NCT01105936|Secondary|Subjective Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Response for Treatment Effect on OA Knee Before Stimulation: [NRS (TRT)]|Subjective NRS response for each participant was calculated as difference of pre-treatment NRS pain assessment before stimulus and post-treatment NRS pain assessment before stimulus. NRS responses was based on an 11 scale rating (0-10), with 0 corresponding to “No Pain” and 10 corresponding to “Extreme Pain or Pain as bad as you can imagine”.|Baseline and post-dose before stimulus|ITT population: all participants per period who received at least one treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816058|NCT01105936|Secondary|BOLD Response in the Patello-femoral Joint of Knee Osteoarthritis: [BOLD (P-f)]|BOLD response to painful pressure stimuli was evaluated using fMRI. Voxel-wise BOLD scores were reported on a Z-scale (Gaussian,mean=0,SD=1); range -3 (worst score, lowest connectivity) to +3 (best score, highest connectivity). The software derived scores compared the intensity reading in the region to a template, specifically the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) Echo-Planar Image (EPI) template. The template provides, for each region, expected (mean/median) intensity for that region, along with expected variation. The BOLD score on the Z-scale represents how far the actual measured intensity is from the expected in the template. A score of 0 would correspond to the mean/median, a score of 1.65 would represent the 90-percentile, -1.65 the 10-percentile, and so on, according to a standard normal distribution|Baseline to 2-5 hours post last dose administration|ITT population: all participants per period who received at least one treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed.||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816059|NCT01105936|Primary|Blood Oxygen Level-Dependent (BOLD) Response in the Tibio-femoral Joint of Knee Osteoarthritis (OA): [BOLD (T-f)]|BOLD response to painful pressure stimuli was evaluated using fMRI. Voxel-wise BOLD scores were reported on a Z-scale (Gaussian,mean=0,SD=1); range -3 (worst score, lowest connectivity) to +3 (best score, highest connectivity). The software derived scores compared the intensity reading in the region to a template, specifically the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) Echo-Planar Image (EPI) template. The template provides, for each region, expected (mean/median) intensity for that region, along with expected variation. The BOLD score on the Z-scale represents how far the actual measured intensity is from the expected in the template. A score of 0 would correspond to the mean/median, a score of 1.65 would represent the 90-percentile, -1.65 the 10-percentile, and so on, according to a standard normal distribution.|Baseline to 2-5 hours post last dose administration|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population: all participants per period who received at least one treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed.||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816060|NCT01106014|Secondary|Absence of Worsening From Baseline to Week 26 in Modified NYHA/WHO Functional Class (WHO FC)||Week 26|Full analysis set. Patients with WHO FC IV at baseline were excluded from this analysis as they could not shift to a worse category||Percentage of patients|||Number
816061|NCT01106014|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 26 in 6-minute Walk Distance (6MWD) at Trough|The 6-minute walk distance test (6MWD) is a non-encouraged test performed in a 30 m long flat corridor, where the patient is instructed to walk as far as possible, back and forth around two cones, with the permission to slow down, rest, or stop if needed. If the patient was used to taking bronchodilators before a walk, he/she was given them 5 to 30 min before the test. Also if the patient was on chronic oxygen therapy, oxygen was given at their standard rate during the test. Absolute change from baseline to Week 26 in 6MWD was measured at trough, i.e., either on the next day after the last study drug administration or at least 12 hours after study drug administration if on the same day.|Week 26|Full analysis set||Meters||Full Range|Median
816062|NCT01106014|Primary|Time From Randomization to the First Morbidity Event or Death (All Causes) up to 7 Days After the Last Study Drug Intake|"Time from randomization to the first occurrence of a morbidity event or death (all causes) was analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method (event-free KM estimates at different time points).
Morbidity event was defined as any of the following events confirmed by the Critical Event committee:
Hospitalization for worsening of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH),
Worsening of PAH resulting in need for lung transplantation or balloon atrial septostomy,
Initiation of parenteral prostanoid therapy or chronic oxygen therapy due to worsening of PAH,
Disease progression which was defined by a decrease in 6-minute walk distance from baseline (>=15%, confirmed by a 2nd test on a different day) combined with worsening of WHO FC for patients belonging to WHO FC II/III at baseline, or combined with the need for additional PAH-specific therapy for patients belonging to WHO FC III/IV at baseline.
Note: The number of patients at risk decreased over time but this cannot be captured below"|Up to 7 days after end of double-blind treatment (maximum: 4.3 years)|The primary endpoint was analyzed using the full analysis set, which includes all randomized patients evaluated according to the study drug to which they have been randomized (intention-to treat analysis set).||Percentage of patients free of events||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816077|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Diphteria (D) and Tetanus (T)|Seroprotection was defined as anti-D and anti-T antibody concentration ≥ 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|Prior to (At Month 0) and one month after booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816063|NCT01106040|Secondary|Reverse Concordance of Blue Dye and Lymphoseek|The proportion of lymph nodes detected intraoperatively by Lymphoseek that were also detected by blue dye.|Surgery after injections of Lymphoseek and blue dye|All enrolled patients who were injected with both Lymphoseek and blue dye, who underwent surgery and had at least one lymph node detected by Lymphoseek (at ≥ 3σ count) in vivo, and for whom the tissue type (lymphatic/non-lymphatic) and pathology status (presence/absence of tumor cells) was confirmed.||Proportion of Lymph Nodes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
816064|NCT01106040|Primary|Concordance of Blue Dye and Lymphoseek|The proportion of lymph nodes detected intraoperatively by blue dye that were also detected by Lymphoseek.|Surgery after injections of Lymphoseek and blue dye|All enrolled patients who were injected with both Lymphoseek and blue dye, who underwent surgery and had at least one lymph node stained intraoperatively by blue dye, and for whom the tissue type (lymphatic/non-lymphatic) and pathology status (presence/absence of tumor cells) was confirmed.||Proportion of Lymph Nodes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
816065|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|During the entire study period (from Month 0 to Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816066|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 31-day (Day 0-Day 30) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816067|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above (≥) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 8-day (Days 0-7) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816068|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 8-day (Days 0-7) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816069|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Booster Response for Anti-BPT|Booster response was defined as: For initially seronegative subjects, antibody concentration ≥ 15 EL.U/mL one month after the booster dose. For initially seropositive subjects: antibody concentration one month after the booster dose ≥ 2 fold the pre-booster antibody concentration.|One month after booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816070|NCT01106092|Secondary|Anti-BPT Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in EL.U/mL.|Prior to (At Month 0) and one month after booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
816071|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-Bordetella Pertussis (Anti-BPT)|Seropositivity was defined as anti-BPT antibody concentration ≥ 15 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units per milliliter (EL.U/mL).|Prior to (At Month 0) and one month after the booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816072|NCT01106092|Secondary|Anti-PRP Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in μg/mL.|Prior to (At Month 0) and one month after booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
816073|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Polyribosil-ribitol-phosphate (PRP)|Seprotection was defined as anti-PRP antibody concentration ≥ 0.15 micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL).|Prior to (At Month 0) and one month after booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subject for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816074|NCT01106092|Secondary|Anti-HBs Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in mIU/mL.|Prior to (At Month 0) and one month after the booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
816075|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected and Seropositive Subjects for Anti-hepatitis B (Anti-HBs)|Seropositivity was defined as anti-HBs antibody concentration ≥ 3.3 milli-international units per milliliter (mIU/mL). Seprotection was defined as anti-HBs antibody concentration ≥ 10 mIU/mL. Note that percentage of subjects with concentration ≥ 10 mIU/mL was over-estimated due to the use of in-house assay overestimating concentrations between 10-100 mIU/mL. Accordingly GMCs were also overestimated. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB ELISA assay had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis. Some of the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the new assay, CLIA.|Prior to (At Month 0) and one month after the booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816078|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3|Seroprotection was defined as anti-polio types 1, 2 and 3 antibody titres ≥ 8 effective dose (ED50), for 50% of vaccinated subjects.|Prior to booster vaccination (At Month 0)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816079|NCT01106092|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Anti-polio Types 1, 2 and 3|Seroconversion was defined as: For initially seronegative subjects, antibody titer ≥ 8 ED50 one month after the booster dose. For initially seropositive subjects: antibody titer one month after the booster dose ≥ 4 fold the pre-booster antibody titer. For subjects with pre-booster antibody titer below the highest dilution tested (reciprocal < 8192 ED50): highest dilution tested one month after the booster dose (reciprocal > 8192 ED50).|One month after booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816080|NCT01106092|Primary|Anti-polio Types 1, 2 and 3|Antibody titers were presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|One month after booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
816081|NCT01106092|Primary|Anti-polio Types 1, 2 and 3|Antibody titers were presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|Prior to booster vaccination (At Month 0)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
816082|NCT01106092|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3|Seroprotection was defined as anti-polio types 1, 2 and 3 antibody titres ≥ 8 effective dose (ED50), for 50% of vaccinated subjects.|One month after booster vaccination (At Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816083|NCT01106157|Secondary|Change in White Blood Count (WBC) From Baseline to 12 Months|Change in WBC over 12 months|Change from baseline to 12 months|||Change in percentage of WBC||Standard Deviation|Mean
816084|NCT01106157|Secondary|Percentage of Neutrophils|Change in Neutrophil Count over 12 months|Change from baseline to 12 months|||Percentage of neutrophils||Standard Deviation|Mean
816085|NCT01106157|Secondary|Change in Zinc Transporter 8 Autoantibodies (ZnT8A) From Baseline to 12 Months|Change in Zinc Transporter 8 Autoantibodies (ZnT8A) over 12 months|Change from baseline to 12 months|||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
816086|NCT01106157|Secondary|Change in Insulinoma Associated 2 Autoantibodies (IA-2A) From Baseline to 12 Months|Change in Insulinoma Associated 2 Autoantibodies (IA-2A)|Change from baseline to 12 months|||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
816087|NCT01106157|Secondary|Change in Insulin Autoantibodies (IAA) From Baseline to 12 Months|Change in Insulin Autoantibodies (IAA) over 12 months|Change from baseline to 12 months|||Units/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816088|NCT01106157|Secondary|Change in Glutamic Acid Decarboxylase Antibodies (GADA) From Baseline to 12 Months|Change in Glutamic Acid Decarboxylase Antibodies (GADA) over 12 months|Change from baseline to 12 months|||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
816089|NCT01106157|Secondary|Change in Insulin Requirements, Baseline to 12 Months|Change in Insulin Requirements, baseline to 12 months|Change from baseline to 12 months|Insulin use data was not provided by all subjects resulting in sampling for analysis that was smaller than the cohort for the entire study.||units/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
816090|NCT01106157|Secondary|A1c|Change in A1c baseline to 12 months|Change in baseline to 12 months|||% change||Standard Deviation|Mean
816091|NCT01106157|Secondary|Percent Change in Regulatory T Cells (Treg) Baseline to 12 Months|Change in regulatory T cells (Treg) baseline to 12 months|Change in Baseline to 12 months|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
816092|NCT01106157|Primary|Change in Metabolic Function Baseline to 12 Months.|Area Under Curve (AUC) C-peptide production. Subjects underwent a 2 hour mixed meal tolerance test (MMTT) using a 6ml/kg load of boost to stimulate insulin production. Samples were collected at baseline, 10 minutes, 20 minutes, 30 minutes, 60 minutes, 90 minutes, and 120 minutes. AUC was then calculated. Subjects repeated the MMTT at baseline, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months following ATG/GCSF or placebo. The primary outcome for the study was the change over 12 months in AUC C-peptide (1 year - baseline) for those who received ATG/GCSF versus the change in AUC C-peptide (1 year - baseline) for those who received placebo|Baseline and 12 months|||nmol/L/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
816093|NCT01106248|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Profile of Eribulin Mesylate: Time to Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax).|Pharmacokinetic profile of eribulin mesylate (tmax).|Days 1 and 8|Pharmacokinetic Population||hours||Full Range|Median
816094|NCT01106248|Secondary|To Further Explore the Safety and Tolerability of Eribulin Mesylate When Administered on Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day Cycle in Patients With Solid Tumors.||21 day cycle||||||
816095|NCT01106248|Secondary|To Assess Best Overall Response Using RECIST Criteria in Patients With Measurable Disease.||21 day cycle||||||
816096|NCT01106248|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Profile of Eribulin Mesylate: Observed Maximal Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|Pharmacokinetic profile of eribulin mesylate (Cmax).|Days 1 and 8|Pharmacokinetic Population||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816097|NCT01106248|Primary|Mean Time-matched, Baseline Corrected QTcF at Any Time Point Postdosing.|The primary endpoint is mean time-matched, baseline corrected QTcF at any time point postdosing. This was to determine the effect of eribulin on cardiac repolarization as measured by QT/QTc interval.|48 hours postdose after Day 1 and after Day 8|Per Protocol Population||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
816098|NCT01106287|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an Adverse Event|Only treatment-emergent adverse events were examined for this outcome measure.|Up to 6 weeks after the first dose of study drug|All participants receiving any dose of MK-0941 of placebo.||participants|||Number
816099|NCT01106287|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced One or More Adverse Events During the Study||Up to 30 days after the last dose of study drug|All participants receiving any dose of MK-0941 or placebo||participants|||Number
816100|NCT01106326|Secondary|Additional Asthma Morbidity Measures|We also will compare additional baseline asthma morbidity measures, quality of life, health care utilization, cotinine, and exhaled nitric oxide with outcomes at the follow-up assessments.|2 month, 4 month, final follow-up assessments||||||
816101|NCT01106326|Primary|Number of Symptom-free Days Over Two Weeks|We will measure number of symptom-free days at 2-months (at the end of the directly observed therapy phase) and 4-months (after their transition to independence with preventive medications). We anticipate that teens will experience more symptom-free days compared to baseline assessment.|2 and 4 month follow-up assessments|Analysis conducted per protocol.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816102|NCT01106352|Other Pre-specified|Number of Subjects Who Responded to Interactive Voice Response System (IVRS) Pain|The subject completed the full BPI (short form) paper questionnaire, and clinical staff completed the analgesic log. The test consists of 10 questions addressing severity, location, chronicity, and amount of relief. In question 3, subjects with pain are asked to evaluate the severity of pain at worst in the past 24 hours in a 0 to 10 scale, with 0 indicating no pain, and 10 indicating the worst pain.|From start of study treatment until 12 months|Subjects included in the per protocol: All subjects in the ITT population who received at least 40% of the specified number of administrations of radium-223 dichloride (in the radium-223 dichloride cohort) or of docetaxel (in the docetaxel cohort), and who did not have any major protocol violations.||Participants|||Number
816103|NCT01106352|Other Pre-specified|Overall Survival Rate|The overall survival (OS) time in days was calculated as number of days since the day of first dose of study medication until the date of death.|12 months|Subjects included in the per protocol: All subjects in the ITT population who received at least 40% of the specified number of administrations of radium-223 dichloride (in the radium-223 dichloride cohort) or of docetaxel (in the docetaxel cohort), and who did not have any major protocol violations.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816104|NCT01106352|Other Pre-specified|Progression Free Survival (PFS) End Point|PFS defined as the time from randomization (randomization referred to the date of treatment assignment) to disease progression (radiological or clinical, whichever was earlier) or death (if death occurred before progression was documented). Subjects without progression or death at the time of analysis were censored at their last date of tumor evaluation.|From start of study treatment to 12 months, at every 12 weeks|Subjects included in the per protocol: All subjects in the ITT population who received at least 40% of the specified number of administrations of radium-223 dichloride (in the radium-223 dichloride cohort) or of docetaxel (in the docetaxel cohort), and who did not have any major protocol violations.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816105|NCT01106352|Other Pre-specified|Exploratory Efficacy: Time to Clinical or Radiographic Progression|"Time to first radiologic or clinical progression is determined by one of the following:
For soft tissue lesions, the determination is based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1.
For bone disease, the determination is based on Prostate Cancer Working Cohort 2 (PCWG2) definitions, which require the appearance of at least 2 new lesions with a confirmatory bone scan at least 6 or more weeks later. For clinical progression, the investigators followed the recommendations of the PCWG25 and used their clinical judgment to determine clinical progression."|From start of study treatment to 12 months, at every 12 weeks|Subjects included in the per protocol: All subjects in the ITT population who received at least 40% of the specified number of administrations of radium-223 dichloride (in the radium-223 dichloride cohort) or of docetaxel (in the docetaxel cohort), and who did not have any major protocol violations.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816106|NCT01106352|Other Pre-specified|Exploratory Efficacy: Percent Change From Baseline in Circulating Tumor Cells at Day 85|CTCs were measured to follow the evolution of the level of CTCs after treatment.|Baseline, Day 85, expanded safety cohort|Subjects included in the per protocol: All subjects in the ITT population who received at least 40% of the specified number of administrations of radium-223 dichloride (in the radium-223 dichloride cohort) or of docetaxel (in the docetaxel cohort), and who did not have any major protocol violations.||Percent Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
816107|NCT01106352|Other Pre-specified|Exploratory Efficacy: Time to Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) Progression|Serum PSA progression defined as two consecutive increases in PSA over a previous reference value within 6 months of first study treatment, each measurement at least 1 week apart.|12 months|Subjects included in the per protocol: All subjects in the ITT population who received at least 40% of the specified number of administrations of radium-223 dichloride (in the radium-223 dichloride cohort) or of docetaxel (in the docetaxel cohort), and who did not have any major protocol violations.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816108|NCT01106352|Other Pre-specified|Exploratory Efficacy: Weighted Mean Area Under the Curve for Bone Turnover Biomarkers|Weighted mean area under the curve for the below bone turnover biomarkers were evaluated, ICTP = pyridinoline cross-linked carboxyterminal telopeptide P1NP = N-terminal peptide of procollagen type 1 uCTX-1 = urine C-telopeptide 1|From start of study treatment to 6 weeks after study treatment (maximum 12 weeks in dose escalation; 30 weeks in the expanded safety cohort)|Subjects included in the per protocol: All subjects in the ITT population who received at least 40% of the specified number of administrations of radium-223 dichloride (in the radium-223 dichloride cohort) or of docetaxel (in the docetaxel cohort), and who did not have any major protocol violations.||mcg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
816109|NCT01106352|Primary|Number of Subjects With Signs of Long-Term Radiation Toxicity|Long-term radiation toxicity included incidence of potential late toxicity, such as new primary cancers and bone marrow changes (acute myelogenous leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome, and aplastic anemia).|From start of study treatment upto 12 months|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||Participants|||Number
816110|NCT01106352|Primary|Number of Subjects With Physical Examination During the Treatment Period|Any physical examination finding that was classified by the investigator as a clinically significant change (compared with previous examination) was considered an AE, documented on the eCRF, and followed until the outcome was known. The below physical examination findings were recorded and reported. GDASC = General disorders and administration site conditions MND = Metabolism and nutrition disorders SSTD= Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders MCTD = Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders IPPC = Injury, poisoning and procedural complications RTMD = Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders NBMU = Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (include cysts and polyps) In the below table.|From start of study treatment to 6 weeks after study treatment (i.e., maximum 12 weeks in dose escalation; 30 weeks in the expanded safety cohort)|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||Participants|||Number
816124|NCT01106391|Primary|Rate of Technical Success Through the One Month Follow up.|Technical success is defined as the successful deployment of the stent-graft to the desired location in the absence of Types I, III or IV endoleaks at the conclusion of the procedure and through the one month follow up.|From procedure to one month follow up|All enrolled subjects||participants|||Number
816111|NCT01106352|Primary|Changes From Baseline in Weight During the Treatment Period|In the below table, ‘n’ signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group.|From start of study treatment to 6 weeks after study treatment (that is, maximum 12 weeks in dose escalation; 30 weeks in the expanded safety cohort)|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||kilogram(s)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816112|NCT01106352|Primary|Changes From Baseline in Heart Rate During the Treatment Period|In the below table, ‘n’ signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group.|From start of study treatment to 6 weeks after study treatment (that is, maximum 12 weeks in dose escalation; 30 weeks in the expanded safety cohort)|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||beats per min||Standard Deviation|Mean
816113|NCT01106352|Primary|Changes From Baseline in Respiratory Rate During the Treatment Period|In the below table, ‘n’ signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group.|From start of study treatment to 6 weeks after study treatment (that is, maximum 12 weeks in dose escalation; 30 weeks in the expanded safety cohort)|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||breaths/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
816114|NCT01106352|Primary|Changes From Baseline in Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure During the Treatment Period|In the below table, ‘n’ signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group.|From start of study treatment to 6 weeks after study treatment (that is, maximum 12 weeks in dose escalation; 30 weeks in the expanded safety cohort)|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816115|NCT01106352|Primary|Change From Baseline in Serum Biochemistry (Erythrocytes) During the Treatment Period|In the below table, ‘n’ signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group.|Baseline, Day 106 (dose escalation period), and Day 190 (expanded safety cohort)|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||tetra per liter (TI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816116|NCT01106352|Primary|Change From Baseline in Serum Biochemistry (Platelets, Leukocytes, Lymphocytes, Neutrophils, Monocytes, Eosinophils, Basophils) During the Treatment Period|In the below table, ‘n’ signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group.|Baseline, Day 106 (dose escalation period), and Day 190 (expanded safety cohort)|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||giga per liter (GI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816117|NCT01106352|Primary|Change From Baseline in Serum Biochemistry (Calcium, Chloride, Magnesium, Potassium, Phosphate, Sodium, Urea) During the Treatment Period|In the below table, ‘n’ signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group.|Baseline, Day 106 (dose escalation period), and Day 190 (expanded safety cohort)|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||millimole(s)/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
816118|NCT01106352|Primary|Change From Baseline in Serum Biochemistry (Bilirubin, Creatinine) During the Treatment Period|In the below table, ‘n’ signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group.|Baseline, Day 106 (dose escalation period), and Day 190 (expanded safety cohort)|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||micromole(s)/litre||Standard Deviation|Mean
816119|NCT01106352|Primary|Change From Baseline in Serum Biochemistry (Alkaline Phosphatase [AP], Alanine Aminotransferase [AAT], Lactate Dehydrogenase [LD]) During the Treatment Period|In the below table, ‘n’ signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group.|Baseline, Day 106 (dose escalation period), and Day 190 (expanded safety cohort)|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||units per liter (U/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816120|NCT01106352|Primary|Change From Baseline in Serum Biochemistry (Albumin, Protein, Hemoglobin) During the Treatment Period|In the below table, ‘n’ signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group.|Baseline, Day 106 (dose escalation period), and Day 190 (expanded safety cohort)|Only randomized participants who have this outcome measure tested were assessed||gram per liter (G/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816121|NCT01106352|Primary|Number of Subjects With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE), Treatment-Emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAE) With a CTCAE Grade of 3 or 4|Treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAEs) were defined as events that occur following the first injection of study treatment, or that started prior to the first injection and worsened during treatment. An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a subject who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An Serious Adverse Event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged in patient hospitalization; lifethreatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent adverse events were defined as adverse events/serious adverse events that started or worsened after the study drug treatment.|From start of study treatment to 6 weeks after study treatment (that is maximum 12 weeks in dose escalation; 30 weeks in the expanded safety cohort) and 8 weeks for serious AEs|Only participants who received treatment were assessed||Participants|||Number
816122|NCT01106352|Primary|Number of Subjects With Dose-Limiting Toxicities – Dose Escalation Part|DLT was defined as - Absolute neutrophil count grade greater than or equal to (>=) 4 (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE], Version 4.0: less than [<] 0.5 × 109 per Liter) lasting longer than 7 days without fever despite granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support). Platelet count Grade >= 4 (CTCAE, v4.0: < 25× 109/L) lasting longer than 7 days. Diarrhea Grade >= 3 (CTAE, v4.0: increase of >= 7 stools per day over baseline; incontinence; hospitalization indicated; severe increase in ostomy output compared with baseline; limiting self-care in activities of daily living) in spite of optimal use of antidiarrheal medication. Vomiting or constipation Grade >= 4 (CTCAE, v4.0: life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated). Febrile neutropenia Grade >= 3 (CTCAE, v4.0).|From randomization until 6 weeks post-injection in all dose cohort of dose-escalation part|||Participants|||Number
816123|NCT01106391|Primary|Rate of Primary Safety Endpoint Within 1 Month Post-procedure.|Primary safety is defined by the absence of Types I, III or IV endoleaks and device and/or procedural related major adverse events within 1 month post-procedure. Major adverse events include death, MI, stroke and renal failure.|One month follow-up|The analysis population consists of subjects with complete core laboratory data at 1 month.||participants|||Number
817124|NCT01119768|Secondary|Symptom Relief Rate After 2 Weeks and 8 Weeks in 8 Weeks Treatment Group.|Symptom relief is defined as no more than 1 day of mild symptoms of GERD during previous 7 days after 8 weeks or 2 weeks of treatment.|2 and 8 weeks|ITT in 8 weeks treatment group||percentage of participants|||Number
816125|NCT01106404|Secondary|NPRS Scores From Baseline to Follow-up Visits at 10 Weeks and 16 Weeks Post-implant|The 11-point (ie, 0-10) numeric rating scale of pain intensity (NPRS) was used to assess the overall pain at baseline and follow-up visits. In the pain diary, subjects were presented a numeric scale with numbers from 0 to 10, with 0 meaning “No pain” and 10 meaning “Pain as bad as you can imagine,” accompanied by the instructions “Please rate your pain by indicating the number that best describes your pain on average in the last 24 hours.” The subjects were asked to complete a diary for 7 consecutive days before implant, 10 weeks, and 16 weeks post-implant visits.|Baseline, 10 weeks and 16 weeks post-implant|69 of the 76 subjects completed pain diary for both baseline and 10 weeks. 69 of the 76 subjects completed pain diary for both baseline and 16 weeks. Since 2 datasets had 2 different pairs of data due to different subjects who completed the pain diary, baseline NPRS in two analyses varied slightly.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816126|NCT01106404|Secondary|Manual Adjustments Presented as Button Presses|The number of individual adjustments, ie, button presses, were recorded automatically in the patient programmer, which was specifically designed for this study. The number of button presses per day for manual patient programmer adjustments during the manual programming arm and the AdaptiveStim programming arm of the study were compared.|Baseline, 10 weeks and 16 weeks post-implant|Subjects with manual adjustments data from patient programmer were included in the analysis.||Button presses per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
816127|NCT01106404|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Worsened Pain Relief When Using AdaptiveStim Compared to Manual Programming|The pain relief question was a 5-point Likert scale question comparing pain relief when using AdaptiveStim programming relative to manual programming after subjects finished both programming periods. The choices were much worse pain relief with AdaptiveStim, somewhat worse pain relief with AdaptiveStim, no difference in pain relief, somewhat better pain relief with AdaptiveStim, and much better pain relief with AdaptiveStim. Subjects who had worsening pain relief were defined as subjects who responded “much worse pain relief with AdaptiveStim” or “somewhat worse pain relief with AdaptiveStim”.|16 weeks post-implant|A total of 71 subjects with completed data were included in this analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
816128|NCT01106404|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Improved Pain Relief and/or Convenience During the AdaptiveStim Programming Arm Relative to the Manual Programming Arm|After subjects experienced both AdaptiveStim and manual programming at 16 weeks post-implant, subjects were asked to compare pain relief and convenience when they had AdaptiveStim ON to AdaptiveStim OFF in two separate domains using two 5-point Likert scales. The outcome measure for the primary objective is the percentage of subjects who report improved pain relief with no loss of convenience or improved convenience with no loss of pain relief during the AdaptiveStim programming arm relative to the manual programming arm. These subjects were considered successful for the primary objective.|16 weeks post-implant|"The ITT analysis included 74 subjects; 2 randomized subjects, who discontinued early due to infections, were excluded per protocol. The 3 other subjects who discontinued early were included in ITT analysis and imputed as failures for the primary objective.
No imputation method was used for 71 subjects included in the completed case analysis."||percentage of participants|||Number
816129|NCT01106430|Secondary|Udvalg for Kliniske Undersogelser Side Effect Rating Scale - Clinician (UKU-SERS-Clin) With Side Effects Scores >=1|UKU-SERS-Clin is composed of 48 items each of which asks about a single side effect. Each side effect is rated based on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (no or doubtful presence) to 3 (the least favorable rating). The rating is independent of whether the symptom is regarded as related to the investigational product.|9 weeks|Safety Population defined as all subjects who were randomized and who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product.||participants|||Number
816130|NCT01106430|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|C-SSRS is a semi-structured interview that captures the occurence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors during the assessment period. The interview includes definitions and suggested questions to solicit the type of information needed to determine if a suicide-related thought or behaviour occurred. The assessment is done by the nature of the responses, not by a numbered scale.|9 weeks|Safety Population defined as all subjects who were randomized and who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product.||participants|||Number
816131|NCT01106430|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale for Children (BPRS-C) Total Score at Up to 9 Weeks|The BPRS-C characterizes psychopathology. A total of 21 items are rated on a scale from 0 (not present) to 6 (extremely severe) with a total score ranging from 0 to 126. A decrease in score indicates a reduction in psychopathology.|Baseline and up to 9 weeks|Safety Population defined as all subjects who were randomized and who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816132|NCT01106430|Secondary|Health Utilities Index-2 (HUI-2) Scores at Up to 9 Weeks|HUI is used to describe health status and to obtain utility scores by collecting data using one or more questionnaires in formats selected to match the specific study design criteria. Scoring ranges from 0.00 (dead) to 1.00 (perfect health). Higher scores represent better health status.|up to 9 weeks|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who were randomized and who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816133|NCT01106430|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale - Parent Report (WFIRS-P) Global Score at Up to 9 Weeks|The WFIRS-P is a 50-item scale with each item scored from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Mean scores range from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment.|Baseline and up to 9 weeks|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who were randomized and who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816134|NCT01106430|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-Fourth Edition (ADHD-RS-IV) Total Score at 9 Weeks - LOCF|ADHD-RS-IV consists of 18 items scored on a 4-point scale from 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (severe symptoms) with total score ranging from 0 to 54. A decrease in score indicates an improvement in ADHD symptomology.|Baseline and 9 weeks|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who were randomized and who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816235|NCT01100944|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|Duration of time from start of treatment to time of progression or death whichever occurs first.|Start of treatment to time of disease progression or death whichever occurs first, assessed up to 43 months|One patient hospitalized for viral meningoencephalitis during the first cycle was not evaluable. The reason median was not reached is that patients with thymoma have a more indolent disease with a longer survival, therefore a longer duration of response.||months||Full Range|Median
816135|NCT01106430|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Improvement on Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Scores - Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) consists of a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Improvement is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) on the scale.|9 weeks|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who were randomized and who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product.||percentage of participants|||Number
816136|NCT01106430|Primary|Time to First Response|Time to first response was defined as a Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) value of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) first recorded following first dose of investigational product. CGI-I consists of a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse).|9 weeks|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who were randomized and who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product. One subject was randomized to receive Strattera, but actually received Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate. For all efficacy analyses this subject is included in the Strattera arm per the intention to treat principle.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816137|NCT01106456|Primary|7-Day Point Prevalence Abstinence From Smoking for 6 Months|The primary outcome of the study was salivary cotinine-verified 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence at 6 months (Have you smoked at least part of a cigarette in the past 7 days?) using responders-only analyses.|6 months|"The difference in the overall number of participants analyzed, from the number analyzed, in the ANBL arm, is due to missing data."||Participants|||Count of Participants
816147|NCT01106586|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48||Week 48|ITT analysis set. The missing = failure (M = F) method was used in which all missing data were considered as failure (HIV-1 RNA ≥ 50 copies/mL).||percentage of participants|||Number
816148|NCT01106586|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Cluster Determinant 4 (CD4) Cell Count at Weeks 48, 96, 144, and 192|Change = value of the relevant time point minus the baseline value|Baseline; Weeks 48, 96, 144, and 192|ITT analysis set. The missing = excluded (M = E) method was used in which participants with missing data were excluded from analysis.||cells/µL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816149|NCT01106586|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving and Maintaining Confirmed HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48 Using the FDA-defined Time to Loss of Virologic Response (TLOVR) Algorithm||Week 48|ITT analysis set||percentage of participants|||Number
816150|NCT01106586|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Virologic Success Using the FDA-Defined Snapshot Analysis as Determined by the Achievement of HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 192||Week 192|Week 192 modified intent-to-treat (MITT) Analysis Set: Participants in the ITT analysis set, excluding those who either 1) transferred to other Gilead-sponsored studies after completing their Week 144 Visit and before the lower limit of the Week 192 analysis window, or 2) prematurely discontinued study drug prior to the Week 144 Visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
816151|NCT01106586|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Virologic Success Using the FDA-Defined Snapshot Analysis as Determined by the Achievement of HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 144||Week 144|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
816152|NCT01106586|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Virologic Success Using the FDA-Defined Snapshot Analysis as Determined by the Achievement of HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 96||Week 96|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
816153|NCT01106586|Primary|The Percentage of Participants With Virologic Success Using the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-Defined Snapshot Analysis as Determined by the Achievement of HIV-1 Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48||Week 48|ITT analysis set: participants who were randomized into the study and received at least 1 dose of study drug||percentage of participants|||Number
816154|NCT01106625|Secondary|Percent Change in High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in HDL-C from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816155|NCT01106625|Secondary|Percent Change in Triglycerides From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in triglycerides from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816156|NCT01106625|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in SBP from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816157|NCT01106625|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in body weight from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816158|NCT01106625|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in FPG from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816159|NCT01106625|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7% at Week 26|The table below shows the percentage of patients with HbA1c<7% at Week 26 in each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the percentage.|Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percentage of patients|||Number
816160|NCT01106625|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816161|NCT01106651|Secondary|Percent Change in Total Hip Bone Mineral Density (BMD) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change from Baseline to Week 26 in total hip BMD for each treatment group as assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816162|NCT01106651|Secondary|Percent Change in Femoral Neck Bone Mineral Density (BMD) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change from Baseline to Week 26 in femoral neck BMD for each treatment group as assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816191|NCT01106690|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in SBP from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816163|NCT01106651|Secondary|Percent Change in Distal Forearm Bone Mineral Density (BMD) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change from Baseline to Week 26 in distal forearm BMD for each treatment group as assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816164|NCT01106651|Secondary|Percent Change in Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density (BMD) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change from Baseline to Week 26 in lumbar spine BMD for each treatment group as assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816165|NCT01106651|Secondary|Percent Change in High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in HDL-C from Baseline to Week 26 or each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816166|NCT01106651|Secondary|Percent Change in Triglycerides From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in triglycerides from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816167|NCT01106651|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in SBP from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816168|NCT01106651|Secondary|Change in Tissue Percent Total Fat From Baseline to Week 26 in a Subset of Patients Undergoing Specific Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) Analysis for Body Composition|Tissue percent total fat = body fat as a percentage of body fat + lean body mass. The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in tissue percent total fat from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the subset of patients undergoing specific DXA analysis for body composition. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816169|NCT01106651|Secondary|Change in Region Percent Total Fat From Baseline to Week 26 in a Subset of Patients Undergoing Specific Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) Analysis for Body Composition|Region percent total fat = body fat as a percentage of (body fat + lean body mass + bone mass content). The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in region percent total fat from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the subset of patients undergoing specific dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) analysis for body composition. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816170|NCT01106651|Secondary|Change in Total Fat From Baseline to Week 26 in a Subset of Patients Undergoing Specific Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) Analysis for Body Composition|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in total fat from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group in patients randomized to the subset of patients undergoing specific DXA analysis for body composition. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816218|NCT01100853|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory|The Beck Depression Inventory is a self-administered questionnaire that assess the severity of depressive symtpoms. It consists of 21 items about how the subject has been feeling in the last week, and each item has a set of at least four possible answer choices, ranging in intensity, yielding scores from 0-3, with a total possible score of 63. Higher scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms.|24 weeks|||BDI Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816171|NCT01106651|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in body weight from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816172|NCT01106651|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in FPG from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816173|NCT01106651|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7% at Week 26|The table below shows the percentage of patients with HbA1c <7% at Week 26 in each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the percentage.|Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percentage of patients|||Number
816174|NCT01106651|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816175|NCT01106677|Secondary|Percent Change in High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in HDL-C from Baseline to Week 52 for each active treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus sitagliptin) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 52 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816176|NCT01106677|Secondary|Percent Change in Triglycerides From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in triglycerides from Baseline to Week 52 for each active treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus sitagliptin) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 52 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816177|NCT01106677|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in SBP from Baseline to Week 52 for each active treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus sitagliptin) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 52 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816178|NCT01106677|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in body weight from Baseline to Week 52 for each active treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus sitagliptin) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 52 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816179|NCT01106677|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in FPG from Baseline to Week 52 for each active treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus sitagliptin) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 52 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816180|NCT01106677|Secondary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from Baseline to Week 52 for each active treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus sitagliptin) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 52 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816181|NCT01106677|Secondary|Percent Change in High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in HDL-C from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin or sitagliptin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816182|NCT01106677|Secondary|Percent Change in Triglycerides From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in triglycerides from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin or sitagliptin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816183|NCT01106677|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in SBP from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin or sitagliptin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816184|NCT01106677|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in body weight from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin or sitagliptin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816185|NCT01106677|Secondary|Change in 2-hour Post-prandial Glucose From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in 2-hour post-prandial glucose from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin or sitagliptin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816186|NCT01106677|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in FPG from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin or sitagliptin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816187|NCT01106677|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7% at Week 26|The table below shows the percentage of patients with HbA1c <7% at Week 26 in each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences between each canagliflozin or sitagliptin group and placebo.|Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percentage of patients|||Number
816188|NCT01106677|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin or sitagliptin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816189|NCT01106690|Secondary|Percent Change in High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in HDL-C from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816190|NCT01106690|Secondary|Percent Change in Triglycerides From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in triglycerides from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816192|NCT01106690|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in body weight from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816193|NCT01106690|Secondary|Change in Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA2-%B) From Baseline to Week 26|HOMA2-%B is a measure of beta cell function (the cells in the pancreas that produce and store insulin). The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HOMA2-%B from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||HOMA2-%B||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816194|NCT01106690|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in FPG from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816195|NCT01106690|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7% at Week 26|The table below shows the percentage of patients with HbA1c<7% at Week 26 in each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the percentage.|Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percentage of patients|||Number
816196|NCT01106690|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 26|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from Baseline to Week 26 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 26|Analysis used mITT analysis set (all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug). Last-observation-carried-forward method used for missing Week 26 values. Measurements taken pre-rescue used as last observation in patients receiving glycemic rescue therapy. Table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816197|NCT01106846|Primary|Quality of Recovery Score Post Operative at 24 Hours|Quality of recovery 40 score at 24 hours after the surgical procedure. 40 being a poor recovery and 200 being a good recovery.|24 hours post operative|||units on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816198|NCT01106859|Secondary|Probability of Differences From Placebo Exceeding The 3.5 cm Threshold in Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) Following Administration of Active Therapy|"This table represents the probability of driving performance changes summarized in the previous table. It answers the question: What is the chance that # participants out of the total number of participants had better (or worse) driving performance? Probability values of <.001 are listed in the data table as 0.000.
A symmetry analysis was conducted for the probability of difference in mean SDLP (treatment) - mean SDLP (placebo) exceeding thresholds. Statistically significant asymmetries indicate a decrement in driving performance."|3-9 hours post dose|Intent to treat population||proportion|||Number
816199|NCT01106859|Secondary|Number of Participants Whose Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) Following Active Treatment As Compared to Placebo In Relation To The 3.5 cm SDLP Threshold|SDLP was measured by an infrared camera mounted on the car's roof during a highway driving test. Lateral position of the car relative to the left lane boundary was recorded. The data summarizes the number of participants whose driving performance was worse, neutral or improved as compared to placebo at the 3.5 cm threshold. A neutral driving performance shows a difference of SDLP >= 3.5 cm and <= -3.5 cm when compared to placebo. A worse performance is when the difference of SDLP > 3.5 cm, and an improved performance is when the difference of SDLP < -3.5 cm.|3-9 hours post dose|Intent to treat population||participants|||Number
816200|NCT01106859|Secondary|Probability of Differences From Placebo Exceeding The 2.0 cm Threshold in Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) Following Administration of Active Therapy|"This table represents the probability of driving performance changes summarized in the previous table. It answers the question: What is the chance that # participants out of the total number of participants had better (or worse) driving performance? Probability values of <.001 are listed in the data table as 0.000.
A symmetry analysis was conducted for the probability of difference in mean SDLP (treatment) - mean SDLP (placebo) exceeding thresholds. Statistically significant asymmetries indicate a decrement in driving performance."|3-9 hours post dose|Intent to treat population||proportion|||Number
816201|NCT01106859|Secondary|Number of Participants Whose Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) Following Active Treatment As Compared to Placebo In Relation To The 2.0 cm SDLP Threshold|SDLP was measured by an infrared camera mounted on the car's roof during a highway driving test. Lateral position of the car relative to the left lane boundary was recorded. The data summarizes the number of participants whose driving performance was worse, neutral or improved as compared to placebo at the 2.0 cm threshold. A neutral driving performance shows a difference of SDLP >= 2.0 cm and <= -2.0 cm when compared to placebo. A worse performance is when the difference of SDLP > 2.0 cm, and an improved performance is when the difference of SDLP < -2.0 cm.|3-9 hours post dose|Intent to treat population||participants|||Number
816292|NCT01107418|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to 24 Hours (AUC[0-24h]) of Vemurafenib on Day 15||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 24 hours post-dose on Day 15|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mcg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816202|NCT01106859|Primary|Probability of Differences From Placebo Exceeding The 2.5 cm Threshold in Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) Following Administration of Active Therapy|"This table represents the probability of driving performance changes summarized in the previous table. It answers the question: What is the chance that # participants out of the total number of participants had better (or worse) driving performance? Probability values of <.001 are listed in the data table as 0.000.
A symmetry analysis was conducted for the probability of difference in mean SDLP (treatment) - mean SDLP (placebo) exceeding thresholds. Statistically significant asymmetries indicate a decrement in driving performance."|3-9 hours post dose|Intent to treat population||proportion|||Number
816203|NCT01106859|Primary|Number of Participants Whose Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) Following Active Treatment As Compared to Placebo In Relation To The 2.5 cm SDLP Threshold|SDLP was measured by an infrared camera mounted on the car’s roof during a highway driving test. Lateral position of the car relative to the left lane boundary was recorded. The data summarizes the number of participants whose driving performance was worse, neutral or improved as compared to placebo at the 2.5 cm threshold. A neutral driving performance shows a difference of SDLP >= 2.5 cm and <= -2.5 cm when compared to placebo. A worse performance is when the difference of SDLP > 2.5 cm, and an improved performance is when the difference of SDLP < -2.5 cm.|3-9 hours post dose|Intent to treat population||participants|||Number
816204|NCT01106859|Secondary|Summary of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Experiences (TEAEs)|Adverse Events were graded by the investigator using the World Health Organization (WHO) Adverse Event Grading Scale and were assessed for severity (mild, moderate, severe) and relatedness (summarized as 'unrelated' and 'related') to study treatment. Also included are counts of participants with serious AEs, AEs leading to discontinuation of study treatment, and deaths.|Day 1 -6 weeks|Safety population (participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug)||participants|||Number
816205|NCT01106859|Secondary|Mean Standard Deviation of Speed (SDS) in the Highway Drive Test|Mean standard deviation of speed (SDS) is a common measure of the driver's ability to maintain a constant driving speed. Variations in driving speed are recorded and analyzed.|3-9 hours post dose|Intent to treat population. In one Zopiclone case, the velocity of the car was not recorded due to technical problems, and therefore SDS could not be calculated in this drive.||kilometers/hour||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816206|NCT01106859|Secondary|Mean Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) in the Highway Driving Test|Standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP) in a highway-driving lane is a surrogate measure for driving performance. It measures the driver's ability to stay in a constant position within the driving lane. Variations in the lateral position are recorded and analyzed.|3-9 hours post dose|Intent to treat population||centimeters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816207|NCT01106911|Primary|Number of Participants Without Cancer Who Were Recalled|Recall rates of digital breast tomosynthesis and full field digital mammography in younger women undergoing their initial screening mammogram will be assessed and compared.|upon recruitment/enrollment phase completion|Includes only participants who were not diagnosed as having a breast malignancy.||participants|||Number
816208|NCT01106950|Secondary|Percent of Patients With Natural Killer Cell Expansion Versus KIR Genotype Versus Treg Depletion|Association between in vivo natural killer (NK) cell expansion and complete response without platelet recovery (CRp) with donor killer immunoglobulin-like (KIR) genotype and Treg depletion. In vivo donor NK cell expansion was correlated with regulatory T-cell (Treg) depletion as detected on flow cytometry.|Day 14|||Percentage of patients|||Number
816209|NCT01106950|Secondary|Number of Patients With Treatment-Related Death|Number of patients who died within the first 100 days of treatment due to toxicity.|Day 100|||Percentage of patients|||Number
816210|NCT01106950|Secondary|Percent of Patients With Incidence of Relapse|Number of patients who have had a relapse(the return of disease after its apparent recovery/cessation) after obtaining a complete remission of their disease.|Month 6|||Percentage of patients|||Number
816211|NCT01106950|Secondary|Percent of Patients With Disease Free Survival|Number of patients alive and disease free at 6 months. The length of time after treatment ends that a patient survives without any signs or symptoms of that cancer or any other type of cancer. In a clinical trial, measuring the disease-free survival is one way to see how well a new treatment works.|Month 6|||Percentage of patients|||Number
816212|NCT01106950|Secondary|Percent of Patients With Complete Remission of Disease|Disease response was defined as complete remission (disease response) by morphologic criteria including <5% blasts in a moderately cellular or cellular marrow. Complete remission was also correlated with NK cell expansion in vivo, IL-15 levels and donor/recipient KIR B genotyping, and Treg depletion.|At least 4 weeks after last dose (28 days)|||Percentage of patients|||Number
816213|NCT01106950|Primary|Percent of Patients With Successful Expansion of Natural Killer Cells After Infusion|The primary objective of this study was to estimate the incidence of in vivo expansion of natural killer (NK) cells 14 days after infusion of an allogeneic donor product enriched for NK progenitors. Successful in vivo donor NK cell expansion was defined by measuring an absolute circulating donor-derived NK cell count of >100 cells/ul in the patient's peripheral blood 14 days after infusion.|Day 14|||Percentage of patients|||Number
816214|NCT01106976|Primary|AChE PET Neuroimaging|AChE PMP PET hydrolysis rate outcome measure. AChE [11C]PMP hydrolysis rates (k3) were estimated using the striatal volume of interest (defined by manual tracing on the MRI scan of the putamen and caudate nucleus) as the tissue reference for the integral of the precursor delivery. This measure is a proxy measure for the count of cholinergic nerve terminals in the basal forebrain innervation the cortical mantle.|4 yr|Parkinson disease.||1/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
816215|NCT01100853|Primary|Number Negative Urines (Proportion Negative Urines) Amphetamine||24 weeks|||Urine Drug Screen|||Number
816216|NCT01100853|Secondary|Prior Admissions to Vogur Hospital|Number of prior admissions due to substance dependence. The term “prior admissions” refers to admissions before enrollment, thus Baseline is the appropriate Time Frame.|Baseline|||Number of admissions||Standard Deviation|Mean
816217|NCT01100853|Secondary|Risk Assessment Battery|The Risk Assessment Battery is a 41 item self-report questionnaire that assess risk behaviors related to HIV infection over the past 6 months. The measure yields a Drug risk score ranging from 0-22 and a Sex risk score ranging from 0-18, with higher scores indicating more risk; these scores are added to yield a Total RAB score ranging from 0-40. This total scores is then divided by 40 to yield a RAB Scale Score from 0-1.|24 weeks|||Total Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816222|NCT01100931|Primary|Phase 2 Objective Response Rate (Partial Response (PR) + Complete Response (CR)).|Response was assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Complete response (CR) is the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm.Partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|up to 18 weeks|Phase I is not included here because this outcome measure is for phase II only.||Participants|||Number
816223|NCT01100931|Primary|Phase 1 Safe and Tolerable Phase 2 Dose.|"Phase I: Doses were given at different dose levels until the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was reached. Dose level 1: 3.6 mg/m^2, dose level 2:5 mg/m^2 , dose level 3:6 mg/m^2, dose level 4:8 mg/m^2, dose level 5:10 mg/m^2 (MTD), dose level 6:12 mg/m^2. Doses were given by continuous intravenous infusion over 72 hours every 21 days.Three patients were enrolled at each dose level in the absence of dose limiting toxicity (DLT). A DLT is defined as adverse events occurring during the first cycle of therapy (e.g. every 21 days).
Phase 2 dose is based upon dose limiting toxicities experienced during cycle 1."|1 year|Phase I dose was variable dosing schedule to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) with 22 patients analyzed. Dose was variable with MTD at 10mg/m^2.||mg/m^2|||Number
816224|NCT01100944|Secondary|Relative Changes in T Cell Immunoglobulin Domain and Mucin Domain-3 (TIM3)-Expressing Cluster of Differentiation 8 (CD8)+Tcells|Changes in marker levels from baseline. All pre values were set to 1 so that we could measure changes relative to the baseline.|Baseline Cycle 1 Day 1 (C1D1), Cycle 1 Day 2 (C1D2), Cycle 1 Day 3 (C1D3), and Cycle 2 Day 1 (C2D1)|One patient hospitalized for viral meningoencephalitis during the first cycle was not evaluable. Three samples could not be analyzed since they were of poor quality with too few cells for immune cell subset analysis or the samples could not be collected in time for pharmacodynamics analysis.||Relative fold change||Full Range|Median
816225|NCT01100944|Secondary|Relative Changes in the Number of Tregs With Treatment|Changes in marker levels from baseline. All pre values were set to 1 so that we could measure changes relative to the baseline.|Baseline Cycle 1 Day 1 (C1D1), Cycle 1 Day 2 (C1D2), Cycle 1 Day 3 (C1D3), and Cycle 2 Day 1 (C2D1)|One patient hospitalized for viral meningoencephalitis during the first cycle was not evaluable. Three samples could not be analyzed since they were of poor quality with too few cells for immune cell subset analysis or the samples could not be collected in time for pharmacodynamics analysis.||relative fold change||Full Range|Median
816226|NCT01100944|Secondary|Relative Change Observed in Total Protein Hyperacetylation of Cluster of Differentiation 3 (CD3)+T Cells With Belinostat|Changes in marker levels from baseline. All pre values were set to 1 so that we could measure changes relative to the baseline.|Baseline Cycle 1 Day 1 (C1D1), Cycle 1 Day 2 (C1D2), Cycle 1 Day 3 (C1D3), and Cycle 2 Day 1 (C2D1)|One patient hospitalized for viral meningoencephalitis during the first cycle was not evaluable. Two samples could not be analyzed since they were of poor quality with too few cells for immune cell subset analysis or the samples could not be collected in time for pharmacodynamics analysis.||Relative fold change||Full Range|Median
816227|NCT01100944|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration vs. Time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC(INF)/Dose|AUC is a measure of the serum concentration of Belinostat over time. It is used to characterize drug absorption.|on day 1: pre-belinostat and 0, 0.5, 1 and 2 hours after belinostat infusion, on day 3: 0, 0.8, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-last belinostat dose|||hr*ng/ml/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816228|NCT01100944|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration vs. Time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC(INF))|AUC is a measure of the serum concentration of Belinostat over time. It is used to characterize drug absorption.|on day 1: pre-belinostat and 0, 0.5, 1 and 2 hours after belinostat infusion, on day 3: 0, 0.8, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-last belinostat dose|||hr*ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
816229|NCT01100944|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|Time to reach peak concentration after drug administration.|on day 1: pre-belinostat and 0, 0.5, 1 and 2 hours after belinostat infusion, on day 3: 0, 0.8, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-last belinostat dose|||Hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
816230|NCT01100944|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)/Dose|Plasma concentrations of Belinostat were measured using a newly designed and validated ultra high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with tandem mass spectrometric (MS/MS) assay, with a lower limit of quantification of 5ng/mL.|on day 1: pre-belinostat and 0, 0.5, 1 and 2 hours after belinostat infusion, on day 3: 0, 0.8, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-last belinostat dose|||ng/ml/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816231|NCT01100944|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Belinostat|Plasma concentrations of Belinostat were measured using a newly designed and validated ultra high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with tandem mass spectrometric (MS/MS) assay, with a lower limit of quantification of 5ng/mL.|on day 1: pre-belinostat and 0, 0.5, 1 and 2 hours after belinostat infusion, on day 3: 0, 0.8, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-last belinostat dose|One patient was excluded from pharmacokinetic analysis due to insufficient sampling in dose level 2. Dose normalized parameters are normalized to absolute total dose (over 48 hours continuous intravenous infusion (CIVI)) for that patient, not dose level.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
816232|NCT01100944|Secondary|Total Clearance (CL) of Belinostat|Clearance is the amount of time for the drug to be eliminated from the body.|on day 1: pre-belinostat and 0, 0.5, 1 and 2 hours after belinostat infusion, on day 3: 0, 0.8, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-last belinostat dose|||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
816233|NCT01100944|Secondary|Time to Half Life (t1/2) of Belinostat|Half life is the duration of time for the drug to be reduced to half the original amount.|on day 1: pre-belinostat and 0, 0.5, 1 and 2 hours after belinostat infusion, on day 3: 0, 0.8, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-last belinostat dose.|||Hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
816234|NCT01100944|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival is defined as the on-study date until the date of death or progression as appropriate.|Start of treatment to time of death, assessed up to 43 months|One patient hospitalized for viral meningoencephalitis during the first cycle was not evaluable. The reason median was not reached is that patients with thymoma have a more indolent disease with a longer survival, therefore a longer duration of response.||months||Full Range|Median
816293|NCT01107418|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to 8 Hours (AUC[0-8h]) of Vemurafenib on Day 15||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 hours post-dose on Day 15|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mcg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816236|NCT01100944|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response is measured from the time measurement criteria (e.g. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)) are met for complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) (whichever is first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented (taking as reference for progressive disease the smallest measurements recorded since the treatment started).|From the time of first response until date of progression, assessed up to 43 months|One patient hospitalized for viral meningoencephalitis during the first cycle was not evaluable for response. The reason median was not reached is that patients with thymoma have a more indolent disease with a longer survival, therefore a longer duration of response||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816237|NCT01100944|Secondary|Time to Response|Time to response is the time between the first day of treatment until first date of response (complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)) (whichever is first recorded).|From the first day of treatment until the date of first documented response, assessed up to 43 months|One patient hospitalized for viral meningoencephalitis during the first cycle was not evaluable for response.||days||Full Range|Median
816238|NCT01100944|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|DCR is defined as stable disease (SD) + partial response (PR) + complete response (CR) per the Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST).|43 months|One patient hospitalized for viral meningoencephalitis during the first cycle was not evaluable for response.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816239|NCT01100944|Secondary|Clinical Response|Response is defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Complete response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. Partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progressions). Stable disease (SD) is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.|43 months|One patient hospitalized for viral meningoencephalitis during the first cycle was not evaluable for response.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816240|NCT01100944|Secondary|Treatment-related Grade 3 and 4 Adverse Events (Highest Grade Per Event Per Patient)|Here are the number of patients with treatment -related grade 3 and 4 adverse events (highest grade per event per patient).|up to 122 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
816241|NCT01100944|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious and Non-serious Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with serious and non-serious adverse events. For a detailed list of events, see the adverse event module.|up to 122 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
816242|NCT01100944|Primary|Objective Response Rate (Partial Response (PR) + Complete Response (CR) of Belinostat in Combination With Cisplatin, Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide in the First Line Treatment of Patients With Advanced Thymic Malignancies|Objective response rate is the number of participants with a best objective response of partial response (PR) + complete response (CR) per the Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) divided by the number of participants who had treatment.|43 months|One patient hospitalized for viral meningoencephalitis during the first cycle was not evaluable for response.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816243|NCT01100944|Primary|Number of Participants With Grade 3 and 4 Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT) at 2000mg/m(2) Belinostat|A DLT is defined as grade 4 neutropenia lasting more than 7 days despite prophylactic or therapeutic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), febrile neutropenia defined as absolute neutrophil count (ANC) less than 1000/mm(3) and temperature more than 38.5 degrees Celsius or 100.4 degrees Fahrenheit or life threatening sepsis, grade 4 thrombocytopenia or grade 3 thrombocytopenia associated with bleeding during the first cycle of therapy. Any grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic toxicity was considered dose limiting with the following exceptions: grade 3 diarrhea lasting less than 48 hours, grade 3 nausea and/or vomiting lasting less than 48 hours, grade 3 electrolyte abnormalities lasting less than 48 hours, grade 3 creatinine elevation lasting less than 48 hours.|up to 122 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
816244|NCT01100944|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Belinostat|The MTD is defined as the highest dose at which less than 2 out of 6 patients experienced a dose limiting toxicity (DLT). A DLT is defined as grade 4 neutropenia lasting more than 7 days despite prophylactic or therapeutic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), febrile neutropenia defined as absolute neutrophil count (ANC) less than 1000/mm(3) and temperature more than 38.5 degrees Celsius or 100.4 degrees Fahrenheit or life threatening sepsis, grade 4 thrombocytopenia or grade 3 thrombocytopenia associated with bleeding during the first cycle of therapy. Any grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic toxicity was considered dose limiting with the following exceptions: grade 3 diarrhea lasting less than 48 hours, grade 3 nausea and/or vomiting lasting less than 48 hours, grade 3 electrolyte abnormalities lasting less than 48 hours, grade 3 creatinine elevation lasting less than 48 hours.|2 years|||mg/m(2)|||Number
816245|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Adult ADHD Quality of Life (AAQoL) Scale Total Score at up to 10 Weeks|AAQoL is a validated 29-item scale consisting of 4 subscales. The AAQoL yields a total score and 4 subscale scores. Subjects rate each item on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all/never) to 5 (extremely/very often). These scores are then transformed to a 0-100 point scale with higher scores indicating better quality of life.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|FAS||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816246|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CAARS-O:S Factor-derived Subscale T-scores at up to 10 Weeks|The CAARS-O:S is an assessment tool with prompts provided to an observer who describes ADHD-related symptoms in an adult subject. The 26-item scale is scored on a 4-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much, very frequently). There is no range for a total score. Raw scale scores are used to generate T-scores. A reduction in score indicates less impairment.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|FAS||T-scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816294|NCT01107418|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Vemurafenib on Day 9||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 hours post-dose on Day 9|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||hours||Full Range|Median
824837|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of All Death (Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular) and All MI||6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
816247|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Conner's Adult ADHD Rating Scale-Observer: Short Version (CAARS-O:S) ADHD Index T-score at up to 10 Weeks|The CAARS-O:S is an assessment tool with prompts provided to an observer who describes ADHD-related symptoms in an adult subject. The 26-item scale is scored on a 4-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much, very frequently). There is no range for a total score. Raw scale scores are used to generate T-scores. A reduction in score indicates less impairment.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|FAS||T-scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816248|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in AIM-A Quality of Life Questions 1 and 4 Scores at up to 10 Weeks|"Question 1: 'On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate the overall quality of life right now?' It is rated on a scale of 1 (worst) to 10 (best). Higher scores representing a more positive rating.
Question 4: 'How much do you agree with this statement: Over the past few weeks, I've had more good days than bad days?' This is rated on a scale of 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). Lower scores represent better quality of life."|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|FAS||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816249|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in AIM-A Multi-Item Scales of Living With ADHD and General Well-being Score at up to 10 Weeks|The AIM-A was developed to assess impact of core ADHD symptoms on daily functioning and quality of life. For multi-item scales, subjects respond to items using a Likert scale with responses ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). Scores were computed by deriving the mean of the item sets and transforming the scale score on a continuum from 0 to 100 using a standard formula. Higher scores indicate a better quality of life.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|FAS||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816250|NCT01101022|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Improvement on Clinical Global Impression - Global Improvement (CGI-I) at up to 10 Weeks|Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) consists of a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Improvement is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) on the scale.|Up to 10 weeks post-dose|FAS||Percent of participants|||Number
816251|NCT01101022|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Clinical Global Impression - Severity of Illness (CGI-S) at up to 10 Weeks|CGI-S assesses the severity of the subject's condition on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill)|Up to 10 weeks post-dose|FAS||Percent of participants|||Number
816252|NCT01101022|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Clinical Global Impression - Severity of Illness (CGI-S) at Baseline|CGI-S assesses the severity of the subject's condition on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill)|Baseline|FAS||Percent of participants|||Number
816253|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) With Adult Prompts Total Score at up to 10 Weeks|The ADHD-RS consists of 18 items scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (severe symptoms) with total score ranging from 0 to 54. Lower scores indicate reduction in symptoms.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|FAS||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816254|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Informant-reported BRIEF-A Clinical Subscales T-scores at up to 10 Weeks|BRIEF-A clinical subscales items are rated 1 (never), 2 (sometimes), and 3 (often). There is no range for a total score. Raw scale scores are used to generate T-scores. A reduction in score indicates less impairment.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|FAS||T-scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816255|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Subject-reported BRIEF-A Clinical Subscales T-scores at up to 10 Weeks|BRIEF-A clinical subscales items are rated 1 (never), 2 (sometimes), and 3 (often). There is no range for a total score. Raw scale scores are used to generate T-scores. A reduction in score indicates less impairment.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|FAS||T-scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816256|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Subject-reported BRIEF-A T-scores at up to 10 Weeks|BRIEF-A is a validated 75-item questionnaire composed of three indexes (Global Executive Composite, Behavioral Recognition Index, and Metacognition Index). Global Executive Composite was reported as the Primary Outcome. Items are rated 1 (never), 2 (sometimes), and 3 (often). There is no range for a total score. Raw scale scores are used to generate T-scores. A reduction in score indicates less impairment.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|FAS||T-scores||Standard Error|Mean
816257|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Informant-reported BRIEF-A T-scores at up to 10 Weeks|BRIEF-A is a validated 75-item questionnaire composed of three indexes (Global Executive Composite, Behavioral Recognition Index, and Metacognition Index). Items are rated 1 (never), 2 (sometimes), and 3 (often). Raw scale scores are used to generate T-scores. A reduction in score indicates less impairment.|Baseline and up to10 weeks|FAS||T-scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816258|NCT01101022|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Adult ADHD Impact Module (AIM-A) Multi-Item Scales Total Score at up to 10 Weeks|The AIM-A was developed to assess impact of core ADHD symptoms on daily functioning and quality of life. For multi-item scales, subjects respond to items using a Likert scale with responses ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). Scores were computed by deriving the mean of the item sets and transforming the scale score on a continuum from 0 to 100 using a standard formula. Higher scores indicate a better quality of life.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|FAS||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816259|NCT01101022|Primary|Change From Baseline in Subject-reported Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function - Adult Version Global Executive Composite T-score (BRIEF-A GEC T) at up to 10 Weeks|BRIEF-A Global Executive Composite assesses behavioral aspects of executive function. Items are rated 1 (never), 2 (sometimes), and 3 (often). There is no range for a total score. Raw scale scores are used to generate T-scores. A reduction in score indicates less impairment.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) defined as all subjects who took 1 dose of investigational product in the double-blind evaluation phase and had 1 primary efficacy assessment.||T-scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816260|NCT01107197|Secondary|the Percentage of Change in Area|the reduction in ulcer area (%) observed at 4 weeks|4 weeks of nutritional support (baseline and week 4)|||percent change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816261|NCT01107197|Secondary|Dressings|The number of dressings used throughout the intervention period|8 weeks of nutritional support (baseline and week 8)|||dressings||Standard Deviation|Mean
816295|NCT01107418|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Vemurafenib on Day 9||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 hours post-dose on Day 9|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816262|NCT01107197|Secondary|Cost-effectiveness|Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated by dividing the difference between total costs (active – control) by the difference in the mean reduction (%) of ulcer area. Costs are derived from oral nutritional supplements, dressings, antibiotics, PU swab sampling, nurse visits for wound dressing (according to their duration and cost per hour), medical consultations (unitary cost of the visit for prescription of antibiotic therapy).|8 weeks of nutritional support (baseline and week 8)|||Euros||Standard Deviation|Mean
816263|NCT01107197|Secondary|Incidence of Infections|defined as local (ulcer)|8 weeks of nutritional support (baseline and week 8)|||participants|||Number
816264|NCT01107197|Secondary|Rate of Healing|complete healing|8 weeks of nutritional support (baseline and week 8)|||participants|||Number
816265|NCT01107197|Secondary|Rate of Healing|reduction in ulcer area >=40%|8 weeks of nutritional support (baseline and week 8)|||participants|||Number
816266|NCT01107197|Primary|Rate of Healing|healing is defined as reduction in ulcer area (the percentage of change)|8 weeks of nutritional support (baseline and week 8)|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
816267|NCT01107353|Primary|Bioequivalence Determined by Statistical Comparison Cmax|Blood samples were collected pre-dose and at intervals over 120 hours after each dose|33 Days|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816268|NCT01107379|Primary|Mean Intra-patient Change in Lund-Mackay CT Scan Score|"Change in Lund-Mackay CT score for paired baseline and 24 week data.
The Lund-MacKay (LMK) CT (computed tomography) score is a scoring system to evaluate radiographic opacification of the paranasal sinuses. The LMK score will be evaluated at 24 weeks post-procedure compared to baseline. The LMK scoring system rates each of both the left and right frontal, maxillary, sphenoid, ostiomeatal complex, anterior ethmoid and posterior ethmoid sinuses on a scale of 0 to 2, where '0' is 'no opacification' and '2' is 'complete opacification'. The scores for a given subject are totaled and expressed as the LMK score, where zero is the minimum score, and 24 is the maximum score. A higher score represents greater sinus disease burden."|Baseline and 24 weeks|The 24 week follow-up was optional for 83 of the 203 enrolled subjects. Additionally, for those who were expected per protocol to return for the 24 week follow-up, not all did return so that data could be collected. Data are available for 111 subjects.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816269|NCT01107379|Secondary|Mean Number of Days to Return to Normal Activities|Quality Of Life (QoL) evaluated by analysis of time to return to usual activities of daily living|2 weeks|Not all subjects were compliant with reporting the Number of Days to Return to Normal Activities post procedure. Data are available for 181 subjects.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816270|NCT01107379|Secondary|Proportion of Sinuses Successfully Treated in the Absence of Serious, Procedural Adverse Events.|Procedure success is defined as achievement of the goal of the treatment. The physician will determine procedure success by visual endoscopic exam and absence of serious, procedural adverse events.|Day 0 (Day of Procedure)|||number of sinuses|Participants||Number
816271|NCT01107379|Secondary|Proportion of Sinuses Successfully Treated in the Office Using Balloon Catheter Tools and Traditional Endoscopic Tools as Necessary|Technical success of the procedure is defined as successful treatment of sinuses intended for treatment in the office, using balloon catheter tools and traditional endoscopic tools, as necessary|Day 0 (Day of Procedure)|||number of sinuses|Participants||Number
816272|NCT01107379|Secondary|Procedure Tolerability|Procedure Tolerability: Proportion of Subjects rating procedure as tolerable or highly tolerable.|Day 0 (Day of Procedure)|Not all subjects were compliant will filling out tolerability questionnaires. Data are available for 198 subjects.||number of participants|||Number
816273|NCT01107379|Primary|Mean Intra-patient Change in SNOT-20 Score|"Change in patient-reported quality of life survey, Sino-Nasal Outcome Test -20 (SNOT-20), using paired baseline and 24 week data.
The 20 question Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20) will be used to evaluate sinus symptoms and sinus-symptom related quality of life (QOL) at baseline and 24 weeks post-procedure. The change in SNOT-20 score at 24 months will be compared to the baseline SNOT-20 score. Each of the 20 questions in the SNOT-20 survey is scored on a scale of 0 to 5, where '0' represents 'no problem' and '5' represents 'problem as bad as it can be'. The 20 questions are expressed as a mean of the scores. Therefore, the minimum mean score is zero and the maximum mean score is 5."|Baseline and 24 weeks|The 24 week follow-up was optional for 83 of the 203 enrolled subjects. Additionally, for those who were expected per protocol to return for the 24 week follow-up, not all did return so that data could be collected. Data are available for 113 subjects.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816274|NCT01107392|Secondary|Duration of Effect|Duration of effect was calculated from the time of the first follow-up visit with a ≥ 4-point reduction from Baseline in IPSS to the next visit when the IPSS change from Baseline was < 4-points.|24 Weeks|Modified Intent-to-treat population included all randomized and treated patients with at least one post-baseline IPSS measurement. Only patients with at least a 4-point reduction from Baseline in total IPSS were included in the analysis.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816275|NCT01107392|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Peak Urine Flow Rate|Urinary flow was determined by uroflowmetry measured in milliliters/second (mL/sec). An increase from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Weeks 6, 12 and 24|Modified Intent-to-treat population included all randomized and treated participants with at least one post-baseline IPSS measurement with data available for this outcome measure.||mL/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
816276|NCT01107392|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Total International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS)|IPSS is a disease-specific outcome measure based on the American Urological Association Symptom Index. The questionnaire consisted of seven items. The patient evaluated their urinary symptoms (incomplete emptying, frequency, hesitancy, urgency, weak stream, straining, and nocturia) during the previous 4 weeks. The total symptom score ranged from 0 (no symptoms) to 35 (most severe symptoms). A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 6, Week 24|Modified Intent-to-treat population included all randomized and treated participants with at least one post-baseline IPSS measurement.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816296|NCT01107418|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to 8 Hours (AUC[0-8h]) of Vemurafenib on Day 9||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 hours post-dose on Day 9|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mcg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816297|NCT01107418|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Vemurafenib on Day 1||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 hours post-dose on Day 1|PK population.||hours||Full Range|Median
816277|NCT01107392|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Total International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at Week 12|IPSS is a disease-specific outcome measure based on the American Urological Association Symptom Index. The questionnaire consisted of seven items. The patient evaluated their urinary symptoms (incomplete emptying, frequency, hesitancy, urgency, weak stream, straining, and nocturia) during the previous 4 weeks. The total symptom score ranged from 0 (no symptoms) to 35 (most severe symptoms). A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified Intent-to-treat population included all randomized and treated participants with at least one post-baseline IPSS measurement.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816278|NCT01107405|Secondary|Conjunctival Redness|Evaluated by investigator at 7, 15 and 20 minutes post challenge on a scale of 0-4 where 0= no redness and 4=extremely severe redness.|Visit 4 (initial challenge)|Visit 4 Conjunctival Hyperemia Scores – ITT Population with LOCF included data from all randomized subjects who received treatment and had at least 1 post-CAC assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816279|NCT01107405|Secondary|Ocular Itching|Evaluated by the subject at 3, 5 and 7 min post-challenge on a scale of 0-4 where 0=no itching and 4=incapacitating itch.|Visit 4 (initial challenge)|Visit 4 Ocular Itching Scores – ITT Population with LOCF included data from all randomized subjects who received treatment and had at least 1 post-CAC assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816280|NCT01107405|Secondary|Conjunctival Redness|Evaluated by investigator at 7, 15 and 20 minutes post challenge on a scale of 0-4 where 0= no redness and 4=extremely severe redness.|Visit 3 (initial challenge)|Visit 3 Conjunctival Hyperemia Scores – ITT Population with LOCF included data from all randomized subjects who received treatment and had at least 1 post-CAC assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816281|NCT01107405|Secondary|Ocular Itching|Evaluated by the subject at 3, 5 and 7 min post-challenge on a scale of 0-4 where 0=no itching and 4=incapacitating itch.|Visit 3 (initial challenge)|Visit 3 Ocular Itching Scores – ITT Population with LOCF included data from all randomized subjects who received treatment and had at least 1 post-CAC assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816282|NCT01107405|Primary|Conjunctival Redness|Evaluated by investigator at 7, 15 and 20 minutes post challenge on a scale of 0-4 where 0= no redness and 4=extremely severe redness.|Visit 4 (8 hr re-challenge)|Visit 4, Re-challenge Conjunctival Hyperemia Scores, ITT Population with LOCF included data from all randomized subjects who received treatment and had at least 1 post-CAC assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816283|NCT01107405|Primary|Ocular Itching|Evaluated by subject at 3, 5, and 7 min post challenge on a scale of 0-4 where 0=no itching and 4=incapacitating itch.|Visit 4 (8 hr re-challenge)|Visit 4, Re-challenge Ocular Itching Scores – Primary Analysis ITT Population with LOCF included data from all randomized subjects who received treatment and had at least 1 post-CAC assessment.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816284|NCT01107418|Primary|Accumulation Ratio of Vemurafenib on Day 15|Accumulation ratio was calculated as, AUC(0-8) on Day 15 divided by AUC(0-8) on Day 1.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 hours post-dose on Day 1 and 15|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
816285|NCT01107418|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time, in months, from the date of the first study drug administration to the date of death, regardless of the cause of death.|Up to approximately 3 years (assessed at Cycle 1 Day 1, Cycle 3 Day 1, Cycle 5 Day 1, thereafter every 2 cycles and then every 4 cycles after Cycle 13)|Data for this outcome measure was not collected as the outcome was removed as per changes in planned analysis (protocol amendment).|||||
816286|NCT01107418|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Confirmed Best Overall Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|Confirmed best overall response was defined as having best objective response as CR or PR, as assessed by investigator and confirmed at least 28 days after initial response. Tumor response was assessed according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, Version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1). CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) were required to demonstrate a reduction to normal (short axis less than [<] 10 millimeters [mm]). PR was defined as a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of the diameters of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum diameter. Percentage of participants with best overall response of confirmed CR or PR are reported.|Up to approximately 3 years (assessed at Cycle 1 Day 1, Cycle 3 Day 1, Cycle 5 Day 1, thereafter every 2 cycles and then every 4 cycles after Cycle 13)|Efficacy population: all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of vemurafenib, had measurable target lesions at baseline based on RECIST 1.1 criteria, had no major protocol violations of inclusion/exclusion criteria, and had no other violations affecting efficacy assessments.||percentage of participants|||Number
816287|NCT01107418|Primary|Terminal Elimination Half-Life (t1/2) of Vemurafenib on Day 15|Time measured for vemurafenib plasma concentrations to decrease by one-half (t1/2) was calculated as 0.693 divided by apparent first-order terminal elimination rate constant (0.693/kel).|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 24, 28, 72, 76, 168 hours post-dose on Day 15|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
816288|NCT01107418|Primary|Apparent Clearance (CL/F) of Vemurafenib on Day 15|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed.|Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 24, 28, 72, 76, 168 hours post-dose on Day 15|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||liters/hour (L/h)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816289|NCT01107418|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Vemurafenib on Day 15||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 24, 28, 72, 76, 168 hours post-dose on Day 15|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||hours||Full Range|Median
816290|NCT01107418|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Vemurafenib on Day 15||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 24, 28, 72, 76, 168 hours post-dose on Day 15|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816291|NCT01107418|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to 168 Hours (AUC[0-168h]) of Vemurafenib on Day 15||Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 24, 28, 72, 76, 168 hours post-dose on Day 15|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mcg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816301|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)|"The DLQI is a 10-item, participant-administered dermatology-specific questionnaire that assess health related quality of life that covers 6 domains including symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure, work and school, personal relationships, and treatment. The DLQI items response categories are scored 0 (not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 to 30; higher scores indicate poor quality of life and a 5-point change from baseline is considered clinically relevant.
Baseline is defined as the last available value prior to the first dose in Part A of the study."|Baseline Up to 240 Weeks|All enrolled participants who had PASI 75 response at Week 20.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816302|NCT01107457|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index ≥75% (PASI 75) Improvement|PASI combines the extent of body surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs). For each region the percent area of skin involved was estimated from 0 (0%) to 6 (90%-100%) and severity was estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration and scaling with a scores range from 0 (none) to 4 (very severe). Each area is scored separately and the scores then combined for the final PASI. Final PASI calculated as: sum of severity parameters for each region * area score * weighing factor (head [0.1], upper limbs [0.2], trunk [0.3], lower limbs [0.4]). Overall scores range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (the most severe disease).Participants achieving PASI 75 were defined as having an improvement of ≥75% in the PASI score compared to baseline.|Week 240|All enrolled participants who had PASI 75 response at Week 20.||percentage of participants|||Number
816303|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline up to 240 Weeks in Palmoplantar Psoriasis Severity Index (PPASI) in Participants With Palmoplantar Psoriasis|The PPASI is a physician-assessed composite score derived from the summed scores for erythema, induration, and desquamation multiplied by a score for the extent of palm and sole area involvement. The PPASI score ranges from 0 to 72, with higher scores representing greater severity of palmoplantar psoriasis.LS mean was calculated using MMRM with baseline score as covariate, visit, treatment and visit by treatment interaction as fixed effects, with variance-covariance structure set to symmetric.|Baseline Up to 240 Weeks|All enrolled participants with baseline palmoplantar psoriasis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816304|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline up to 240 Weeks in Scalp Psoriasis Severity Index (PSSI) in Participants With Scalp Psoriasis|"The PSSI is a physician-assessed composite score derived from the summed scores for erythema, induration, and desquamation multiplied by a score for the extent of scalp area involved. The PSSI score ranges from 0 to 72, with higher scores representing greater severity of scalp psoriasis.
Baseline is defined as the last available value prior to the first dose in Part A of the study."|Baseline Up to 240 Weeks|All enrolled participants with baseline scalp psoriasis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816305|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline up to 240 Weeks in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) in Participants With Nail Psoriasis|"The NAPSI is physician-rated and quantifies the severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix and nail bed. Each finger nail is divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). Participant's fingers and toes were evaluated and the sum of the scores was added resulting in a range of 0 to 160; higher scores indicate greater severity. If an individual toe or finger assessment was missing (not done), the average of the remaining measured digits was imputed and added to the sum. If <50% of the toes or finger assessments were missing, the imputation was performed. If >50% of the assessments were missing, then the sum of the scores was left as missing.
Baseline is defined as the last available value prior to the first dose in Part A of the study."|Baseline Up to 240 Weeks|All enrolled participants with baseline nail psoriasis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816306|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|The pain VAS is a participant-administered single-item scale designed to measure current joint pain from psoriatic arthritis (PsA) using a 100- millimeter (mm) horizontal VAS. Overall severity of participant's joint pain from PsA is indicated by placing a single mark on the horizontal 100-mm scale from 0mm (no pain) to 100 mm (pain as severe as you can imagine). A mixed effects model for repeated measures analysis was used.|Baseline Up to 240 Weeks|All enrolled participants with data available.||Millimeters (mm)||Standard Error|Mean
816307|NCT01107457|Secondary|Number of Participants With Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PatGA)|"The PatGA is a single-item self-reported instrument asking the participant to rate the severity of their psoriasis today by circling a number on the numeric rating scale from 0 (Clear = no psoriasis) to 5 (Severe = the worst their psoriasis has ever been)."|Week 240|All enrolled participants who had PASI 75 response at Week 20.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816308|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)|The HADS is a 14-item, participant self-reported scale that consists of an anxiety scale and a depression scale, each with 7 items. Items are rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (low level of anxiety or depression) to 3 (high level of anxiety or depression). Each subscale score ranges from 0 to 21 with higher scores indicating greater symptom severity. The classification is defined: 0-7 normal, 8-10 Borderline, 11-21 Abnormal.|Baseline Up to 240 Weeks|All enrolled participants who had PASI 75 response at Week 20.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816309|NCT01107457|Secondary|Number of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events up to 344 Weeks|Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are events which were not present at baseline or pre-existing conditions at baseline that worsened in severity following the start of treatment. A summary of other non-serious Adverse Events (AEs), and all Serious Adverse Events (SAE's), regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events section.|Baseline Up to 344 Weeks|All enrolled participants.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816310|NCT01107457|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) of (0,1)|The sPGA of psoriasis is scored on a 6-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 6-point severity scale (0 [clear] to 5 [severe]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the sPGA score and category (0=clear; 1=minimal; 2=mild; 3=moderate; 4=marked; 5 = severe). As defined by protocol, a responder is a participant who has a post-baseline sPGA score of '0' or a post-baseline score of '1' with at least a 2 point improvement from baseline.|Baseline Up to 240 Weeks|All enrolled participants who had PASI 75 response at Week 20.||percentage of participants|||Number
816311|NCT01107457|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Anti-Ixekizumab Antibodies|Percentage of participants with treatment-emergent positive anti-ixekizumab antibodies was summarized by treatment group. Percentage was calculated based on the number of evaluable participants and was calculated by number of participants with treatment-emergent positive anti-ixekizumab antibodies / number of evaluable participants * 100%.|Baseline through Week 20|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline antibody assessment.||percentage of participants|||Number
816312|NCT01107457|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) Score of Cleared (0) or Minimal (1) With at Least a 2 Point Improvement|The sPGA of psoriasis is scored on a 6-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 6-point severity scale (0 [clear] to 5 [severe]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the sPGA score and category (0=clear; 1=minimal; 2=mild; 3=moderate; 4=marked; 5 = severe). As defined by protocol, a responder is a participant who has a post-baseline sPGA score of '0' or a post-baseline score of '1' with at least a 2 point improvement from baseline.|Week 32|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, completed study treatment in Part A, achieved PASI 75 at Week 20 and who were followed for treatment durability up to Week 32. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values. Zero participants in the placebo arm had data.||percentage of participants|||Number
816313|NCT01107457|Secondary|Percentage of PASI Improvement From Baseline Through 32 Weeks|The PASI combines the extent of body surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs). For each region the percent area of skin involved was estimated from 0 (0%) to 6 (90%-100%) and severity was estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration and scaling with a scores range from 0 (none) to 4 (very severe). Each area is scored by itself and the scores were then combined for the final PASI. Final PASI calculated as: sum of severity parameters for each region * area score * weighing factor (head [0.1], upper limbs [0.2], trunk [0.3], lower limbs [0.4]). Overall scores range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (the most severe disease). Improvement in PASI is defined as improvement in the PASI calculated score at a visit as compared to the score calculated at the baseline visit.|Baseline Through 32 Weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, completed study treatment in Part A, achieved PASI 75 at Week 20 and who were followed for treatment durability up to Week 32. Zero participants in the placebo arm had data.||Percentage PASI improvement||Standard Deviation|Mean
816314|NCT01107457|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve a 75% Improvement in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75)|PASI combines the extent of body surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs). For each region the percent area of skin involved was estimated from 0 (0%) to 6 (90%-100%) and severity was estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration and scaling with a scores range from 0 (none) to 4 (very severe). Each area is scored separately and the scores then combined for the final PASI. Final PASI calculated as: sum of severity parameters for each region * area score * weighing factor (head [0.1], upper limbs [0.2], trunk [0.3], lower limbs [0.4]). Overall scores range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (the most severe disease). Participants achieving PASI 75 were defined as having an improvement of ≥75% in the PASI score compared to baseline.|Week 32|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, completed study treatment in Part A, achieved PASI 75 at Week 20 and who were followed for treatment durability up to Week 32. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||percentage of participants|||Number
816315|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score at Week 12|PASI combines the extent of body surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions(head,trunk,arms,and legs).For each region the percent area of skin involved was estimated from 0(0%) to 6(90%-100%) and severity was estimated by clinical signs of erythema,induration and scaling with a scores range from 0(none) to 4(very severe).Each area is scored by itself and the scores were then combined for the final PASI.Final PASI calculated as:sum of severity parameters for each region*area score*weighing factor (head[0.1],upper limbs[0.2],trunk[0.3],lower limbs [0.4]).Overall scores range from 0(no psoriasis) to 72(most severe disease).The LS mean are presented for each treatment versus placebo comparison at each visit and use ANCOVA model including baseline PASI covariate and treatment as fixed effect in the model.Results at Week 12 are summarized as Improvement in PASI which is defined as a reduction in the PASI calculated score at a visit as compared to the score calculated at the baseline visit.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816316|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Total Score Total Score at Week 16|The DLQI is a 10-item, participant-administered dermatology-specific questionnaire that assess health related quality of life that covers 6 domains including symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure, work and school, personal relationships, and treatment. The DLQI items response categories are scored 0 (not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 to 30; higher scores indicate poor quality of life and a 5-point change from baseline is considered clinically relevant. The LS Mean(no multiplicity adjustments) are presented for each treatment versus placebo comparison at each visit and use an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model including baseline as a covariate and treatment as fixed effect in the model.|Baseline, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816317|NCT01107457|Secondary|Ixekizumab Systemic Clearance (CL) (Serum Concentrations of Ixekizumab From Baseline Through 32 Weeks)|The population pharmacokinetic (PK) modeling value for systemic clearance was based on data from week 1 to week 32 for all participants in all ixekizumab treatment arms.|Week 1, Week 2, Week 4, Week 6, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20, Week 24, Week 28 and Week 32|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK data.||liters per hour (L/hr)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816491|NCT01108835|Secondary|Quality of Life|Measured by change in St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score from baseline to 12 month. SGRQ total score ranged from 0-100. The change was calculated by the 12 month SGRQ total score minus the baseline value. Negative values indicated improvement in quality of life.|12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816318|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Scalp Psoriasis Severity Index (PSSI) in Participants With Scalp Psoriasis at Week 12|The PSSI is a physician-assessed composite score derived from the summed scores for erythema, induration, and desquamation multiplied by a score for the extent of scalp area involved. The PSSI score ranges from 0 to 72, with higher scores representing greater severity of scalp psoriasis.LS mean was calculated using MMRM with baseline score as covariate, visit, treatment and visit by treatment interaction as fixed effects, with variance-covariance structure set to unstructured.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Only participants with baseline scalp involvement were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816319|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Palmoplantar Psoriasis Severity Index (PPASI) in Participants With Palmoplantar Psoriasis at Week 12|The PPASI is a physician-assessed composite score derived from the summed scores for erythema, induration, and desquamation multiplied by a score for the extent of palm and sole area involvement. The PPASI score ranges from 0 to 72, with higher scores representing greater severity of palmoplantar psoriasis.LS mean was calculated using MMRM with baseline score as covariate, visit, treatment and visit by treatment interaction as fixed effects, with variance-covariance structure set to symmetric.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Only participants with palmoplantar involvement were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816320|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) in Participants With Nail Psoriasis at Week 12|The NAPSI is physician-rated and quantifies the severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix and nail bed. Each finger nail is divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). Participant's fingers and toes were evaluated and the sum of the scores was added resulting in a range of 0 to 160; higher scores indicate greater severity. If an individual toe or finger assessment was missing (not done), the average of the remaining measured digits was imputed and added to the sum. If <50% of the toes or finger assessments were missing, the imputation was performed. If >50% of the assessments were missing, then the sum of the scores was left as missing. LS mean was calculated using MMRM with baseline score as covariate, visit, treatment and visit by treatment interaction as fixed effects.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Only participants with baseline nail involvement were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816321|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 (SF-36) - Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS) at Week 16|The SF-36 is a participant-reported outcome measure evaluating participant's health status. It comprises 36 items covering 8 domains: physical functioning, role physical, role emotional, bodily pain, vitality, social functioning, mental health, and general health. Items are answered on Likert scales of varying lengths. The 8 domains are regrouped into the PCS and MCS scores. The summary scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better levels of function and/or better health. The recall period was the past 4 weeks. The LS Mean was calculated using ANCOVA model including baseline as a covariate and treatment as fixed effect in the model.|Baseline, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816322|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI Q) at Week 16|The WPAI questionnaire has six questions to assess whether the participant was currently employed (Q1); how many hours from work were missed due to problems associated with psoriasis (Q2) or any other reason (Q3); hours actually worked (Q4); degree that psoriasis affected productivity while working (Q5); and degree that psoriasis affected regular activities (Q6) over the past 7 days. Four separate overall scores were calculated, Absenteeism (work time missed) = (Q2/(Q2+Q4))*100, Presenteeism(impairment at work/reduced on-the-job effectiveness) = (Q5/10) *100, Work productivity loss(overall work impairment /absenteeism plus presenteeism) = (Q2/(Q2+Q4)+[(1-Q2/(Q2+Q4))x(Q5/10)]) * 100 and Activity Impairment = (Q6/10) * 100. Each score ranges from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating greater impairment and less productivity ( worse outcomes). The LS Mean was calculated using ANCOVA model including baseline as a covariate and treatment as fixed effect in the model.|Baseline, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816323|NCT01107457|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Received Medical Care Measured by Medical Care Resource Utilization (PMRU))|The PMRU is a 3‑item participant-reported questionnaire on health care resource utilization due to psoriasis for physician/clinic visits, emergency room visits, and inpatient hospital admissions since the last study visit.|Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment.||participants|||Number
816324|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-S) at Week 16|MOS-S provides a concise assessment of important dimensions of sleep, including initiation, maintenance, respiratory problems, quantity, perceived adequacy, and somnolence during the past 4 weeks. Scoring based on 7 subscales: sleep disturbance, snoring, awakened short of breath or with headache, sleep adequacy, and somnolence (range:0-100,with higher scores for more impairment); sleep quantity (range:0-24), and optimal sleep (yes:1, no:0). Six(6) and 9 item index measures of sleep disturbance were constructed to provide composite scores. Scores are transformed (actual raw score minus lowest possible score divided by possible raw score range * 100); total score range: 0 to 100; higher score = higher scores indicate greater problems with the attribute.The LS Mean (no multiplicity adjustments) was calculated using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model including baseline as a covariate and treatment as fixed effect in the model.|Baseline, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824838|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of All Death (Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular) and All MI||30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
816325|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Week 12|The pain VAS is a participant-administered single-item scale designed to measure current joint pain from psoriatic arthritis (PsA) using a 100- millimeter (mm) horizontal VAS. Overall severity of participant's joint pain from PsA is indicated by placing a single mark on the horizontal 100-mm scale from 0mm (no pain) to 100 mm (pain as severe as you can imagine). A mixed effects model for repeated measures analysis was used. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were calculated using MMRM and were controlled for baseline as a covariate, visit, treatment and visit by treatment interaction as fixed effects, with variance-covariance structure set to unstructured.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Only participants with self-reported psoriatic arthritis at baseline were included in the analysis. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||millimeter (mm)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816326|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PatGA) at Week 12|"The PatGA is a single-item self-reported instrument asking the participant to rate the severity of their psoriasis today by circling a number on the numeric rating scale from 0 (Clear = no psoriasis) to 5 (Severe = the worst their psoriasis has ever been). The LS Mean (no multiplicity adjustments) are presented for each treatment versus placebo comparison at each visit and use an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model including baseline as a covariate and treatment as fixed effect in the model."|Baseline, 12 Weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816327|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms- Self Rated (QIDS-SR16) Total Score at Week 16|The QIDS-SR16 is a self-administered, 16-item instrument in which a participant is asked to consider each statement as it relates to the way they have felt for the past 7 days. There is a 4-point scale for each item ranging from 0 (best) to 3 (worst). The 16 items are scored to give 9 individual depression domains (sad mood, concentration, self-criticism, suicidal ideation, interest, energy/fatigue, sleep disturbance [initial, middle and late insomnia or hypersomnia], decrease/increase in appetite/weight, and psychomotor agitation/retardation), which are summed to give a single score ranging from 0 to 27, with higher scores denoting greater symptom severity. The LS Mean (no multiplicity adjustments) are presented for each treatment versus placebo comparison at each visit and use an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model including baseline as a covariate and treatment as fixed effect in the model.|Baseline, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816328|NCT01107457|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Score at Week 16|The HADS is a 14-item, participant self-reported scale that consists of an anxiety scale and a depression scale, each with 7 items. Items are rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (low level of anxiety or depression) to 3 (high level of anxiety or depression). Each subscale score ranges from 0 to 21 with higher scores indicating greater symptom severity. The classification is defined: 0-7 normal, 8-10 Borderline, 11-21 Abnormal. LS mean was calculated using the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model including treatment as fixed effect and baseline as covariate.|Baseline, Week 16|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816329|NCT01107457|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events Up to 20 Weeks|Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are events which were not present at baseline or pre-existing conditions at baseline that worsened in severity following the start of treatment. A summary of other non-serious Adverse Events (AEs), and all Serious Adverse Events (SAE's), regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events section.|Baseline Up to 20 Weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
816330|NCT01107457|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants With a Static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) Score of Cleared (0) or Minimal (1) With at Least a 2 Point Improvement at Week 12"|The sPGA of psoriasis is scored on a 6-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 6 point severity scale (0 [clear] to 5 [severe]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the sPGA score and category (0=clear; 1=minimal; 2=mild; 3=moderate; 4=marked; 5 = severe). As defined by protocol, a responder is a participant who has a post-baseline sPGA score of '0' or a post-baseline score of '1' with at least a 2 point improvement from baseline.|Week 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||percentage of participants|||Number
816331|NCT01107457|Primary|Percentage of PASI Improvement From Baseline to 12 Week Endpoint|The PASI combines the extent of body surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs). For each region the percent area of skin involved was estimated from 0 (0%) to 6 (90%-100%) and severity was estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration and scaling with a scores range from 0 (none) to 4 (very severe). Each area is scored by itself and the scores were then combined for the final PASI. Final PASI calculated as: sum of severity parameters for each region * area score * weighing factor (head [0.1], upper limbs [0.2], trunk [0.3], lower limbs [0.4]). Overall scores range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (the most severe disease). Least squares (LS) mean values were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) and controlled for baseline as a covariate, visit, treatment and visit by treatment interaction as fixed effects, with variance-covariance structure set to unstructured.|Baseline to Week 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment.||Percentage of improvement in PASI score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816343|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Angina Pectoris -Renal Dysfunction.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Renal Dysfunction is significant risk factor for Angina Pectoris.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Angina Pectoris in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816332|NCT01107457|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index ≥75% (PASI 75) Improvement|PASI combines the extent of body surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs). For each region the percent area of skin involved was estimated from 0 (0%) to 6 (90%-100%) and severity was estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration and scaling with a scores range from 0 (none) to 4 (very severe). Each area is scored separately and the scores then combined for the final PASI. Final PASI calculated as: sum of severity parameters for each region * area score * weighing factor (head [0.1], upper limbs [0.2], trunk [0.3], lower limbs [0.4]). Overall scores range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (the most severe disease).Participants achieving PASI 75 were defined as having an improvement of ≥75% in the PASI score compared to baseline.|Week 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline PASI assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||percentage of participants|||Number
816333|NCT01107730|Primary|Incidence of Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation|The incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation in cardiac surgery patients, using 2 different prophylaxis regimens with vitamin C, as compared to placebo.|Within the first 30 days (plus or minus 3 days)|||participants|||Number
816334|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia -Concomitant Drugs.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Concomitant Drugs is significant risk factor for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816335|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia -Complications.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Complications is significant risk factor for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816336|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia -Renal Dysfunction.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Renal Dysfunction is significant risk factor for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816337|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia -Hepatic Dysfunction.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Hepatic Dysfunction is significant risk factor for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816338|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factor for the Proportion of Responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia - Hypercholesterolemia Expression Type.|"Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether Hypercholesterolemia expression type, Ⅰ, Ⅱa, Ⅱb, Ⅲ, Ⅳ, or Ⅴ is significant risk factor for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia. Hypercholesterolemia expression types are defined by Japan Atherosclerosis Society Guideline for Prevention of Atherosclerosis Cardiovascular Diseases."|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816339|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia -Age.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether <65 years or >=65 is significant risk factor for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816340|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia -Gender.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether male or female is significant risk factor for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816341|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Angina Pectoris -Concomitant Drugs.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Concomitant Drugs is significant risk factor for Angina Pectoris.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Angina Pectoris in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816342|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Angina Pectoris -Complications.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Angina Pectoris is significant risk factor for Angina Pectoris.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Angina Pectoris in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816492|NCT01108835|Primary|Hospital Readmission|To investigate the effectiveness of a comprehensive care programme in reducing hospital admission in COPD patients who have been discharged from hospital for an episode of AECOPD.|12 months|||hospital readmissions||Standard Deviation|Mean
816344|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Angina Pectoris -Hepatic Dysfunction.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Hepatic Dysfunction is significant risk factor for Angina Pectoris.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Angina Pectoris in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816345|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Angina Pectoris -Angina Pectoris Severity.|"Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether Angina Pectoris functional classification Severity, Class1, Class2, Class3, or Class4 is significant risk factor for Angina Pectoris. Angina Pectoris functional classification Severity is defined by Canadian Cardiovascular Society functional Classification of Angina."|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Angina Pectoris in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816346|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Angina Pectoris -Age.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether <65 years or >=65 is significant risk factor for Angina Pectoris.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Angina Pectoris in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816347|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Angina Pectoris -Gender.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether male or female is significant risk factor for Angina Pectoris.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Angina Pectoris in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816348|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypertension -Concomitant Drugs.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Concomitant Drugs is significant risk factor for Hypertension.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypertension in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816349|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypertension -Complications.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Complications is significant risk factor for Hypertension.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypertension in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816350|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypertension -Renal Dysfunction.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Renal Dysfunction is significant risk factor for Hypertension.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypertension in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816351|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypertension -Hepatic Dysfunction.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Hepatic Dysfunction is significant risk factor for Hypertension.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypertension in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816352|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypertension -Hypertension Severity.|"Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether Hypertension severity, ClassⅠ, ClassⅡ, or ClassⅢ is significant risk factor for Hypertension. Hypertension severity is defined by Guideline for the Management of hypertension (The Japan Society of Hypertension)."|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypertension in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816353|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypertension -Age.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether <65 years or >=65 is significant risk factor for Hypertension.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypertension in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816354|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Proportion of Responders for Hypertension -Gender.|Number of Participants with responders of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether male or female is significant risk factor for Hypertension.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypertension in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816355|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Concomitant Drugs.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether Concomitant Drugs is significant risk factor.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816356|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Complications.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Complications is significant risk factor.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816416|NCT01108185|Secondary|Dyspnoea|Participants were evaluated at Day 0 (Baseline) and 10 to 16 days later (Visit 2). The treating physicians used their clinical judgment to determine the presence of dyspnoea (difficulty breathing) and whether it occurred while resting or after exertion. The number of participants with each type of dyspnoea or with no dyspnoea at Visit 2 is presented.|Day 10 - 16|||Participants|||Number
816357|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Renal Dysfunction.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Renal Dysfunction is significant risk factor.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816358|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Hepatic Dysfunction.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events (TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Hepatic Dysfunction is significant risk factor.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816359|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Familial Hypercholesterolemia.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Familial Hypercholesterolemia is significant risk factor.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816360|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Hypercholesterolemia Expression Type.|"Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether Hypercholesterolemia expression type, Ⅰ, Ⅱa, Ⅱb, Ⅲ, Ⅳ, or Ⅴ is significant risk factor. Hypercholesterolemia expression types are defined by Japan Atherosclerosis Society Guideline for Prevention of Atherosclerosis Cardiovascular Diseases."|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the participants conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816361|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Hypercholesterolemia.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Hypercholesterolemia is significant risk factor.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the participants conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816362|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Angina Pectoris.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Angina pectoris is significant risk factor.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the participants conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816363|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Hypertension Severity.|"Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether Hypertension severity, ClassⅠ, ClassⅡ, or ClassⅢ is significant risk factor. Hypertension severity is defined by Guideline for the Management of hypertension (The Japan Society of Hypertension)."|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the participants conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816364|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Hypertension.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether with or without Hypertension is significant risk factor.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the participants conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816365|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Age.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events (TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether <65 years or >=65 years is significant risk factor.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816366|NCT01107743|Secondary|Risk Factors for Incidence Rate of Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets -Gender.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Combination Tablets to determine whether male or female is significant risk factor.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816367|NCT01107743|Secondary|Number of Treatment Related Unlisted Adverse Events in Japanese Package Insert.|Adverse events mean all unfavorable events that occur in patients after administration of Caduet, irrespective of causal relationship to Caduet (including clinically problematic abnormal changes in laboratory test values). Number of Treatment Related Adverse Events were evaluated in company with the causal relationship to Caduet. Unlisted treatment related adverse events were confirmed with listed adverse drug reaction in Japanese package insert.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the participants conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816368|NCT01107743|Primary|Number of Participants That Responded to Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Treatment With Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia.|The physician performed efficacy evaluations at the end of the observation period (or the time of discontinuing administration), compared with the data before the start of administration of this drug, and entered the results for Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypercholesterolemia or Familial Hypercholesterolemia in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
817594|NCT01112670|Other Pre-specified|Atorvastatin Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC) Over the Dosing Interval (0-24 Hours)||0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours post-dose|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study.||ng*h/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
816369|NCT01107743|Primary|Number of Participants That Responded to Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Treatment With Angina Pectoris.|The physician performed efficacy evaluations at the end of the observation period (or the time of discontinuing administration), compared with the data before the start of administration of this drug, and enteterd the results for Angina Pectoris.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Angina Pectoris in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816370|NCT01107743|Primary|Number of Participants That Responded to Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Treatment With Hypertension.|The physician performed efficacy evaluations at the end of the observation period (or the time of discontinuing administration), compared with the data before the start of administration of this drug, and entered the results for Hypertension.|8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases with Hypertension in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
816371|NCT01107743|Primary|Number of Treatment Related Adverse Events.|Adverse events mean all unfavorable events that occur in patients after administration of Caduet, irrespective of causal relationship to Caduet (including clinically problematic abnormal changes in laboratory test values). Treatment related Adverse Events were evaluated in company with the causal relationship to Caduet.|8 weeks|The safety analysis population consist of the cases that satisfy the participants conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
816372|NCT01107834|Secondary|Myocardial Wall Velocity During Early Diastole|Myocardial wall velocity during early diastolemeasured by tissue Doppler imaging|Baseline|||cm/s||Standard Error|Mean
816373|NCT01107834|Secondary|Early to Late Diastolic Filling Ratio|Early to late diastolic filling ratio measured by tissue Doppler echocardiography|Baseline|||ratio, unitless||Standard Deviation|Mean
816374|NCT01107834|Secondary|Systolic Myocardial Velocity During Systole (S')|Systolic myocardial velocity during systole measured by tissue Doppler echocardiography|Baseline|||cm/s||Standard Deviation|Mean
816375|NCT01107834|Secondary|Global Strain Rate|Myocardial deformation (a measure of heart contractility) measured by speckel tracking echocardiography|Baseline|||percentage of full deformation||Standard Deviation|Mean
816376|NCT01107834|Primary|Fractional Shortening|Fractional shortening measured by M-mode cardiography|Baseline|||percentage of full contraction||Standard Deviation|Mean
816377|NCT01107834|Primary|Left Ventricular Mass Index|left ventricular mass index measured by 2D echocardiography|Baseline|||g/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
816378|NCT01107886|Secondary|Participants With Event of Death|Participants with event of death. If no event, censoring occurs at the patient withdrawal of consent, or last contact —whichever was later.|Randomization (day 0) up to 2.9 years|Intention To Treat (ITT) analysis of randomized population. Events were adjudicated by the Clinical Event Adjudication Committee.||participants|||Number
816379|NCT01107886|Secondary|Participants With Any Event From the Composite of CV Death, Non-fatal MI, Non-fatal Ischaemic Stroke, Hospitalisation for Heart Failure, Hospitalisation for Unstable Angina Pectoris, or Hospitalisation for Coronary Revascularisation|Participants with CV death, non-fatal MI, non-fatal ischaemic stroke, hospitalisation for heart failure, hospitalisation for unstable angina pectoris, or hospitalisation for coronary revascularisation. If no event, censoring occurs at the patient withdrawal of consent, last contact, or death (when applicable)—whichever was later.|Randomization (day 0) up to 2.9 years|Intention To Treat (ITT) analysis of randomized population. Events were adjudicated by the Clinical Event Adjudication Committee.||participants|||Number
816380|NCT01107886|Primary|Participants With Any Event From the Composite of Cardiovascular Death (CV Death), Non-fatal Myocardial Infarction (MI), or Non-fatal Ischaemic Stroke|Participants with CV death, non-fatal MI or non-fatal ischaemic stroke. If no event, censoring occurs at the patient withdrawal of consent, last contact, or death (when applicable)—whichever was later.|Randomization (day 0) up to 2.9 years|Intention To Treat (ITT) analysis of randomized population. Events were adjudicated by the Clinical Event Adjudication Committee.||participants|||Number
816381|NCT01107899|Secondary|Platelet Function by Multiplate® ADP Test and ADP Test HS|The Multiplate analyzer was used to assess platelet aggregation based on impedance aggregometry in whole blood. After adding 6.4 µM ADP (ADP test) or 6.4 µM ADP plus 9.4 nM PGE1 (ADP test HS), area under the aggregation curve (AUC) were calculated.|24 hours post-loading dose|LD ITT Population: All randomized participants who received an LD with evaluable PD measurements 24 hours post-LD.||aggregation units*minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
816382|NCT01107899|Secondary|Platelet Function by LTA at 5 and 20 μM ADP|MPA to 5 and 20 μM ADP were assessed by LTA.|24 hours post-loading dose|LD ITT population: All randomized participants who received an LD with evaluable PD measurements 24 hours post-LD.||percent aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
816383|NCT01107899|Secondary|Mean Number of Days to the Return of Baseline Platelet Function in All Treatment Arms (Adjusted for Level of Inhibition 24 Hrs Post-LD) by Multiplate® ADP Test and ADP Test High Sensitivity (HS)|The Multiplate analyzer was used to assess platelet aggregation based on impedance aggregometry in whole blood. After adding 6.4 µM ADP (ADP test) or 6.4 µM ADP plus 9.4 nM Prostaglandin E1 (PGE1) (ADP test HS), area under the aggregation curve (AUC) was calculated. This outcome measure was not analyzed due to limited sample size.|Up through 11 days|Since this outcome measure was not analyzed due to the limited sample size, zero participants were included in the analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816384|NCT01107899|Secondary|Mean Number of Days to the Return of Baseline Platelet Function in All Treatment Arms (Adjusted for Level of Inhibition 24 Hours Post-LD) by LTA (5 and 20 μM ADP)|Maximum platelet aggregation (MPA) to 5 and 20 μM ADP were assessed by LTA. This outcome measure was not analyzed due to limited sample size.|Up through 11 days|Since this outcome measure was not analyzed due to the limited sample size, zero participants were included in the analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816417|NCT01108185|Secondary|Dyspnoea|Participants were evaluated at Day 0 (Baseline) and 10 to 16 days later (Visit 2). The treating physicians used their clinical judgment to determine the presence of dyspnoea (difficulty breathing) and whether it occurred while resting or after exertion. The number of participants with each type of dyspnoea or with no dyspnoea at Baseline is presented.|Day 0|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
817659|NCT01113580|Secondary|Frequency of Any Solicited Adverse Events (AEs)|The number of participants reporting any solicited AEs.|During the 4 days after vaccination (Day 0 plus 3 days)|The Safety Population comprised all participants who received study vaccine and provided follow-up safety data.||participants|||Number
816385|NCT01107899|Secondary|Extent of Initial Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation to the Return of Baseline Platelet Function: Multiplate® ADP Test and ADP Test High Sensitivity (HS)|Return of baseline platelet function was assessed by Multiplate® ADP test and ADP test High Sensitivity (HS). Multiplate analyzer was used to assess platelet aggregation based on impedance aggregometry in whole blood. The agonist ADP was added to stirred whole blood after dilution (1:2 with 0.9% NaCl solution) in a final concentration of 6.4 µM (ADP Test) or in final concentration of 6.4 µM ADP plus 9.4 nM Prostaglandin E1 (PGE1) (ADPtest HS). Platelet aggregation was continuously recorded for 5 minutes and quantified as area under the aggregation curve (AUC=AU*min) of aggregation units (AU).|Up through 11 days|ITT Washout Population: All randomized participants who received the study drug LD, had an evaluable baseline PD measurement (pre-LD), and had at least 1 evaluable PD measurement post-LD.||Aggregation Units * minutes||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
816386|NCT01107899|Secondary|Extent of Initial Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation on the Return of Baseline Platelet Function: Light Transmission Aggregometry (LTA)|Initial inhibition of platelet aggregation was measured by LTA at 5 and 20 μM ADP. Maximum platelet aggregation (MPA) is reported by day.|Up through 11 days|ITT Washout Population: All randomized participants who received the study drug LD, had an evaluable baseline PD measurement (pre-LD), and had at least 1 evaluable PD measurement post-LD.||percent platelet aggregation||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
816387|NCT01107899|Secondary|Percentage of Poor Pharmacodynamic Responders by Platelet Aggregation at 24 Hours Post-LD|Platelet aggregation was assessed by Accumetrics Verify Now™ P2Y12, and poor responders were those with PRU greater than or equal to 230.|24 hours post-loading dose|LD ITT Population: All randomized participants who received an LD with evaluable PD measurements.||percentage of participants|||Number
816388|NCT01107899|Secondary|Platelet Function 24 Hours Post Loading Dose|PRU was assessed by Accumetrics Verify Now™ P2Y12. PRU represents the rate and extent of ADP-stimulated platelet aggregation.|24 hours post-loading dose|LD ITT population: All randomized participants who received an LD with evaluable PD measurements 24 hours post-LD.||P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816389|NCT01107899|Secondary|Mean Number of Days to the Return of Baseline Platelet Function in All Treatment Arms (Adjusted for Level of Inhibition 24 Hrs Post-LD) by VN-PRU|PRU was assessed by Accumetrics Verify Now™ P2Y12. PRU represents the rate and extent of adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-stimulated platelet aggregation. This outcome measure was not analyzed due to the limited sample size.|Up through 11 days|Since this outcome measure was not analyzed due to the limited sample size, zero participants were included in the analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816390|NCT01107899|Secondary|Effect of Initial Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation on the Day to Return to Baseline Platelet Function: VN-PRU|To show effect of initial inhibition of platelet aggregation as measured by Accumetrics Verify Now™ P2Y12 on the day to return to baseline platelet function, a regression model was fitted with day to return as outcome variable and initial inhibition as fixed effect. Results are reported as the predicted day to return to baseline platelet function by derived VN-PRU percent (%) inhibition at 24 hours post LD. The derived VN-PRU % inhibition is calculated as a percent decrease of PRU from baseline using the following formula: ([PRU at baseline - PRU at 24 hours post LD]/PRU at baseline) x 100%.|Up through 11 days|ITT Washout Population: All randomized participants who received study drug LD, had an evaluable baseline PD measurement (pre-LD), and had at least 1 evaluable PD measurement post-LD. One participant discontinued on Day 3 without returning to baseline and is not included in analysis.||days|||Number
816391|NCT01107899|Secondary|Number of Days to the Return of Baseline Platelet Function Following One Loading Dose (LD)|The return of baseline platelet function following one LD of prasugrel (30 mg or 60 mg) or 600 mg LD of clopidogrel assessed by Verify Now™ P2Y12 Reaction Units (VN-PRU). This outcome measure was not analyzed because it was not appropriate to estimate the days based on the non-inferiority approach due to the limited sample size.|Up through 11 days|Since this outcome measure was not analyzed due to the limited sample size, zero participants were included in the analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816392|NCT01107899|Secondary|The Day When the Proportion of Participants Who Return to Baseline Platelet Function in the 30-mg and 60-mg Prasugrel Groups is Similar to the 600-mg Clopidogrel Group at Day 5 and Day 7|The day at which the proportion of participants who return to baseline platelet P2Y12 receptor function in the prasugrel 30 mg and 60 mg LD groups is similar (within 10% absolute difference) to the proportion of subjects who return to baseline platelet P2Y12 receptor function at day 5 and day 7 in the clopidogrel 600 mg LD group, obtained from Kaplan Meier curves for the primary washout population, was to be presented. This outcome measure was not analyzed due to the limited sample size.|Up through 11 days|Since this outcome measure was not analyzed due to the limited sample size, zero participants were included in the analysis.||day|||Number
816393|NCT01107899|Secondary|The Day on Which 50%, 75% and 90% of Subjects Return to Baseline Platelet Function Following a Single LD of 30-mg or 60-mg Prasugrel or 600-mg Clopidogrel|This outcome measure was not analyzed due to the limited sample size.|Up through 11 days|Since this outcome measure was not analyzed due to the limited sample size, zero participants were included in the analysis.||days|||Number
816394|NCT01107899|Primary|Percentage of Participants Returning to Baseline Platelet Function|Participants were classified as having platelet function return to baseline after loading dose (LD) on the first day that P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) was no more than 60 PRU below baseline and remained in this range. PRU was assessed by Accumetrics Verify Now™ P2Y12. PRU represents the rate and extent of adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-stimulated platelet aggregation.|Days 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11|Primary Washout Population: Included participants who completed the study, had evaluable pharmacodynamic (PD) data through Day 11. Participants with a missed visit were not included in the Primary Washout Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
816395|NCT01107912|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maximum Platelet Aggregation (MPA) as Measured by Light Transmission Aggregometry (LTA) From Baseline at Day 12 of Therapy|Maximum Platelet Aggregation (MPA) to 20 μM ADP was assessed by light transmission aggregometry (LTA), an assay that measures platelet aggregation by determining the amount of light transmitted through a cuvette containing the platelet-rich plasma stimulated with a platelet activator, such as ADP, relative to platelet-poor plasma (100% light transmittance). A lower MPA reflects stronger platelet inhibition, whereas a higher MPA reflects weaker inhibition.|Baseline, Day 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and provided at least 1 evaluable pharmacodynamic (PD) measure at 1 of the 3 periods. Participants were analyzed based on the treatment they received for each period regardless of their randomized treatment assignment.||percentage of aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
816396|NCT01107912|Secondary|Active Metabolite Blood Levels to Drug Exposure as Measured by Pharmacokinetics (PK) Through 4 Hours After Dosing|A descriptive pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) analysis comparing prasugrel and clopidogrel active metabolite exposures to MPA in response to 20 µM ADP (by LTA) was conducted as originally intended; however, the graphic output from that analysis is not possible here. Therefore, the PK portion is presented here as AUC and the PD portion is presented in Secondary Outcome Measure #5. AUC was calculated through the last scheduled sampling time of 4 hours [AUC (0-4)] or through the sampling time of the last quantifiable concentration prior to 4 hours. AUC values were denoted AUC(0-tlast) in both instances.|Baseline up to 4 hours post-dose|All available PK sample data from all treated participants who contributed complete PK profiles.||nanogram*hour/milliliter (ng*hr/mL)|Participants|Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
816397|NCT01107912|Secondary|Change in VerifyNow P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) From Baseline to 12 Days of Therapy|The Accumetrics VerifyNow® P2Y12 assay measures platelet aggregation in whole blood and is reported in P2Y12 reaction units (PRU). PRU report the extent of P2Y12 receptor-mediated platelet aggregation calculated as a function of the rate and extent of platelet aggregation in the presence of adenosine phosphate ADP. A lower PRU reflects stronger inhibition of P2Y12, whereas a higher PRU reflects weaker inhibition of P2Y12.|Baseline, Day 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and provided at least 1 evaluable pharmacodynamic (PD) measure at 1 of the 3 periods. Participants were analyzed based on the treatment they received for each period regardless of their randomized treatment assignment.||P2Y12 reaction units (PRU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816398|NCT01107912|Secondary|Change in Vasodilator-associated Stimulated Phosphoprotein (VASP) From Baseline to 12 Days of Therapy|Vasodilator-associated stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) phosphorylation levels, expressed as the platelet reactivity index (PRI), reflect the degree of thienopyridine-mediated P2Y12 receptor inhibition. A lower PRI reflects stronger inhibition of P2Y12, whereas a higher PRI reflects weaker inhibition of P2Y12.|Baseline, Day 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and provided at least 1 evaluable pharmacodynamic (PD) measure at 1 of the 3 periods. Participants were analyzed based on the treatment they received for each period regardless of their randomized treatment assignment.||percentage platelet reactive index (PRI)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816399|NCT01107912|Primary|Change in Maximum Platelet Aggregation (MPA) to 20 Micromoles (μM) Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) as Measured by Light Transmission Aggregometry (LTA) From Baseline to 12 Days of Therapy in the First Treatment Period|Maximum Platelet Aggregation (MPA) to 20 μM ADP was assessed by light transmission aggregometry (LTA), an assay that measures platelet aggregation by determining the amount of light transmitted through a cuvette containing the platelet-rich plasma stimulated with a platelet activator, such as ADP, relative to platelet-poor plasma (100% light transmittance). Lower MPA values reflect stronger platelet inhibition, whereas higher MPA values reflect weaker inhibition.|Baseline, 12 days|All randomized participants who continued in the study through the Day 12 visit, and who had at least 1 evaluable PD assessment at the Day 12 visit. Participants were analysed based on randomized treatment assignment, regardless of the study drug they took.||percentage of aggregation||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816400|NCT01107925|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maximum Platelet Aggregation (MPA) as Measured by Light Transmission Aggregometry (LTA) at Day 12 of Therapy|MPA to 20 micromolar (μM) adenosine diphosphate (ADP) was assessed by LTA, an assay that measures platelet aggregation by determining the amount of light transmitted through a cuvette containing platelet-rich plasma stimulated with a platelet activator, such as ADP, relative to platelet-poor plasma (100% light transmittance). A lower MPA reflects stronger platelet inhibition, whereas a higher MPA reflects weaker inhibition.|Baseline , Day 12|As-treated pharmacodynamic (PD) population: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and provided at least 1 evaluable PD measure at 1 of the 3 periods. Participants were analyzed based on the treatment they received for each period regardless of their randomized treatment assignment.||percent aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
816401|NCT01107925|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis of the Concentration-Time Curve (AUC)|A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) analysis comparing MPA (LTA) and AUC was conducted as originally intended, however the graphic output is not possible here. Therefore, the PK portion is presented here as AUC and the PD portion is presented in Secondary Outcome Measure #5. AUC was calculated through the last scheduled sampling time of 4 hours [AUC (0-4)] or through the sampling time of the last quantifiable concentration prior to 4 hours. AUC values were denoted AUC(0-tlast) in both instances.|baseline (pre-dose) up to 4 hours post-dose|All available PK sample data from all treated participants who contributed complete PK profiles.||nanogram•hour/milliliter (ng•hr/mL)|Participants|Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
816402|NCT01107925|Secondary|Change From Baseline in VerifyNow® P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) at Day 12 of Therapy|The Accumetrics VerifyNow® P2Y12 assay measures platelet aggregation in whole blood and is reported in PRU. PRU indicates the extent of P2Y12 receptor-mediated platelet aggregation calculated as a function of rate and extent of platelet aggregation in an adenosine phosphate (ADP)-containing channel of the device. A lower PRU reflects stronger inhibition of platelet aggregation, whereas a higher PRU reflects weaker inhibition of platelet aggregation.|Baseline, Day 12|As-treated pharmacodynamic (PD) population: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and provided at least 1 evaluable PD measure at 1 of the 3 periods. Participants were analyzed based on the treatment they received for each period regardless of their randomized treatment assignment.||P2Y12 reaction units (PRU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816403|NCT01107925|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Vasodilator-Associated Stimulated Phosphoprotein (VASP) at Day 12 of Therapy|VASP phosphorylation levels, expressed as the platelet reactivity index (PRI), reflect the degree of thienopyridine-mediated P2Y12 receptor inhibition and were used to compare prasugrel versus clopidogrel, in low body weight (LBW) participants compared to higher body weight (HBW) participants. PRI was calculated by VASP. The PRI indicates the level of P2Y12 receptor inhibition. A lower PRI reflects stronger inhibition of P2Y12 receptor thus stronger platelet inhibition, whereas a higher PRI reflects weaker inhibition of P2Y12 receptor and weaker platelet inhibition.|Baseline, Day 12|As-treated pharmacodynamic (PD) population: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and provided at least 1 evaluable PD measure at 1 of the 3 periods. Participants were analyzed based on the treatment they received for each period regardless of their randomized treatment assignment.||percentage PRI||Standard Deviation|Mean
833437|NCT01258049|Secondary|PRR 12 [MITT Population]|The percentage reduction in parasite counts 12 hours after first dose|28 days after start of treatment|||percentage of baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
816404|NCT01107925|Primary|Change From Baseline in Maximum Platelet Aggregation (MPA) to 20 Micromolar (µM) Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) at Day 12 (Period 1)|MPA to 20 micromolar (μM) ADP was assessed by light transmission aggregometry (LTA), an assay that measures platelet aggregation by determining the amount of light transmitted through a cuvette containing platelet-rich plasma stimulated with a platelet activator, such as ADP, relative to platelet-poor plasma (100% light transmittance). A lower MPA reflects stronger platelet inhibition, whereas a higher MPA reflects weaker inhibition.|Baseline, Day 12|Primary intent-to-treat (ITT) pharmacodynamic (PD) population: all randomized participants who continued in the study through Day 12, and had at least 1 evaluable PD assessment at Day 12. Participants were analyzed based on the treatment group they were randomized to irrespective to the treatment they received.||percent aggregation||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816405|NCT01108003|Secondary|Apoptosis, Cell Proliferation, and Microvessel Density||1 year|Due to the study's early termination and low accrual, data were not collected for this assessment.|||||
816406|NCT01108003|Primary|Toxicity as Assessed by National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Toxicity Criteria Version 3.0|Number of participants with an adverse event.|14 days|All treated and eligible patients.||participants|||Number
816407|NCT01108055|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (OS) by Bellmunt Score|"Comparison between the participant's baseline Bellmunt prognostic risk factor score and survival rates.
The Bellmunt prognostic risk factor score is a tool that is often used to predict treatment outcomes before initiating a secondline treatment regimen.
The risk factors used to calculate the Bellmunt score include:
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status less than or equal to 1
Presence of liver metastases
Presence of visceral involvement (defined as liver, lung, bone or any non-lymph node)
Lymph node-only involvement
Hemoglobin concentration < 10 g/dL
The score is calculated based on the presence of 0; 1; 2; or 3 of the above prognostic factors. This outcome reports median overall survival based on whether the participant had 0; 1; 2; or 3 prognostic factors."|4 years|Include all 32 participants, regardless of completing 2 cycles of treatment.||Months||Full Range|Median
816408|NCT01108055|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is reported as the median survival of the evaluable subjects (ie, completed 2 cycles of treatment).|4 years|Does not include participants who did not complete 2 cycles of treatment.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816409|NCT01108055|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|"The tumor response rate was assessed per the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST). RECIST criteria are a set of published rules that define when cancer patients improve (respond); stay the same (stable); or worsen (progression) during treatments. RECIST criteria offer a simplified and conservative extraction of imaging data suitable for wide application in clinical trials. The criteria presume that linear measures are an adequate substitute for 2-dimensional (2D) methods and includes 4 response categories:
Complete response (CR) = Disappearance of all target lesions
Partial response (PR) = 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions
Progressive disease (PD) = 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions
Stable disease (SD) = Small changes that do not meet above criteria Tumor response rate by each response criteria."|4 years|Does not include participants who did not complete 2 cycles of treatment.||Participants|||Count of Participants
816410|NCT01108055|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)||4 years|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816411|NCT01108055|Primary|Objective Tumor Response|"The tumor response rate was assessed per the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST). RECIST criteria are a set of published rules that define when cancer patients improve (respond); stay the same (stable); or worsen (progression) during treatments. RECIST criteria offer a simplified and conservative extraction of imaging data suitable for wide application in clinical trials. The criteria presume that linear measures are an adequate substitute for 2-dimensional (2D) methods and includes 4 response categories:
Complete response (CR) = Disappearance of all target lesions
Partial response (PR) = 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions
Progressive disease (PD) = 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions
Stable disease (SD) = Small changes that do not meet above criteria Objective tumor response means those with response better than stable disease, ie, complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)."|Every 8 weeks|The outcome is reported as subjects with CR (complete response) + PR (partial response).||Participants|||Count of Participants
816412|NCT01108081|Secondary|Change Over 6 Months in Quality of Life|Quality of life as assessed by the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire, change from baseline to 6 months. The potential range of scores for the Functional Outcomes of Sleep total score is 5-20 where higher scores indicate better quality of life. The total score is the sum of the 5 subscale scores (general productivity, social outcome, activity level, vigilance, intimate relationships), which are weighted means ranging from 1-4.|baseline and 6 months|Two participants did not complete the questionnaire and therefore had missing Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire scores. One participant in Diet arm and one participant in Health education arm.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
816413|NCT01108081|Primary|Change Over 6 Months in Epworth Sleepiness Scale Score|Epworth Sleepiness Scale score, change in score from baseline to 6 months. Total scores range from 0-24, where higher scores indicate more sleepiness.|baseline and 6 months|Two participants did not complete the questionnaire and therefore had missing Epworth Sleepiness Scale scores. One participant in Diet arm and one participant in Health education arm.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
816414|NCT01108185|Secondary|Auscultation|Participants were evaluated at Day 0 (Baseline) and 10 to 16 days later (Visit 2). The treating physician used their clinical judgment to determine the presence of abnormal breathing sounds such as wheezing or crackles using auscultation (listening for sounds within the body, usually with a stethoscope in the chest, neck or abdomen). The number of participants with each type of breath sound at Visit 2 is summarized.|Day 10 - 16|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
816415|NCT01108185|Secondary|Auscultation|Participants were evaluated at Day 0 (Baseline) and 10 to 16 days later (Visit 2). The treating physician used their clinical judgment to determine the presence of abnormal breathing sounds such as wheezing or crackles using auscultation (listening for sounds within the body, usually with a stethoscope in the chest, neck or abdomen). The number of participants with each type of breath sound at Baseline is summarized.|Day 0|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
817125|NCT01119768|Secondary|Symptom Relief Rate in 2 Treatment Regimens.|Symptom relief is defined as no more than 1 day of mild symptoms of GERD during previous 7 days after 8 weeks or 2 weeks of treatment.|8 weeks for arm 1, 2 weeks for arm 2|ITT was defined as all randomized subjects who took at least one dose of treatment.||percentage of participans|||Number
816418|NCT01108185|Secondary|Cough and Its Character|Participants were evaluated at Day 0 (Baseline) and 10 to 16 days later (Visit 2). The presence of cough and the type of cough (productive or irritating) was determined by the treating physician based on clinical judgment. The number of participants with each type of cough or no cough at Visit 2 is presented.|Day 10 - 16|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
816419|NCT01108185|Secondary|Cough and Its Character|Participants were evaluated at Day 0 (Baseline) and 10 to 16 days later (Visit 2). The presence of cough and the type of cough (productive or irritating) was determined by the treating physician based on clinical judgment. The number of participants with each type of cough or no cough at Baseline is presented.|Day 0|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
816420|NCT01108185|Secondary|Body Temperature|Body temperature was measured at Day 0 (Baseline) and 10 to 16 days later (Visit 2). Increased body temperature was defined as body temperature greater than or equal to 37 degrees Celsius/98.6 Fahrenheit. The percentage of participants with increased or normal body temperature at Visit 2 is summarized.|Day 10 - 16|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Percentage|||Number
816421|NCT01108185|Secondary|Body Temperature|Body temperature was measured at Day 0 (Baseline) and 10 to 16 days later (Visit 2). Increased body temperature was defined as body temperature greater than or equal to 37 degrees Celsius/98.6 Fahrenheit. The percentage of participants with increased or normal body temperature at Day 0 (Baseline) is summarized.|Day 0|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Percentage|||Number
816422|NCT01108185|Primary|The Tolerability of Klacid SR Will be Assessed by Evaluation of Adverse Events|The number of participants experiencing adverse events, serious adverse events, or adverse events leading to study discontinuation are summarized. See Reported Adverse Events for additional details.|Day 0 through Days 10 - 16|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
816423|NCT01108185|Primary|Compliance (Was the Dosage Followed - Yes, no)|Compliance was assessed by asking physicians if participants took their medication as directed and if not, the reason for noncompliance. The number of participants that completed their course of therapy or did not complete due to noncompliance is reported.|Day 10 - 16|The per-protocol population was analyzed.||Participants|||Number
816424|NCT01108237|Secondary|Sagittal Component Alignment||Pre-Op, 3 months||||||
816425|NCT01108237|Secondary|Compare AP Tibial/Femoral Component Alignment||Pre-op, 3 months||||||
816426|NCT01108237|Secondary|Compare Intraoperative Time Data (Skin-to-skin, Tourniquet, Tourniquet to Bone)||During the Procedure||||||
816427|NCT01108237|Primary|Mechanical Axis Alignment(Absolute Value Measured in Degrees)Using 51 Inch Long Leg Films|Limb alignment in TKR is important for accurate implant positioning. It is measured by looking at the mechanical axis of the limb. This axis is an imaginary line that starts at center of the femoral head and ends in the center of the talus. In a knee with normal alignment, this line (axis) passes near the joint center. Before surgery, the planned joint angle is recorded. This study measured the difference between the mechanical axis angle reached after surgery and the planned angle. Subjects with a mechanical alignment within 3 degrees of the planned angle were considered a success.|12 weeks postoperatively (when subject has reached full knee extension)|||Absolute value in degrees||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
816428|NCT01108263|Secondary|Decreased Peak Plantar Pressures in Both the Static and Dynamic Phases of Gait as Compared to Pre-operative Pressure Values.||12 weeks|||participants|||Number
816429|NCT01108263|Primary|Overall Decrease in Wound Size||12 weeks|||participants|||Number
816430|NCT01108341|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of Complete Response (CR), as Determined by the International Working Group (IWG) Criteria As Assessed by Investigators|The IWG criteria (Cheson et al 2007) for a CR is a complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present before therapy.|up to Week 32|Safety population of participants who were treated||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816431|NCT01108341|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR), as Determined by the International Working Group (IWG) Criteria As Assessed by Investigators|The IWG criteria (Cheson et al 2007) for a CR is a complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present before therapy. A PR is at least a 50% decrease in sum of the product of the diameters (SPD) of up to 6 of the largest dominant nodes or nodal masses, no increase should be observed in the size of other nodes, liver or spleen, and no new sites of disease should be observed.|up to Week 32|Safety population of participants who were treated||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816432|NCT01108406|Secondary|Measurement of Device Benefit With the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB)|The measure of the benefit of the device was assessed using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) , a 24-item self-assessment inventory in which the amount of difficulty in everyday situations is reported with larger numbers indicating more difficulty. Device benefit is calculated by subtracting the score obtained after using a device from the score obtained before using the device. Software is used to score the APHAB and results are compared from the different timepoints. The APHAB is well characterized and broadly used as a quantifiable measurement. The APHAB benefit scores can range from -99 (treatment worse than no treatment) to +99 (treatment better than no treatment).|3 months and 6 months|||Global Benefit Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816433|NCT01108406|Primary|Long Term Safety|The safety outcomes were defined as no changes in medical, auditory, or dental status and no device or procedure related adverse events during the study period. Safety was evaluated by conducting a Comprehensive Medical evaluation at Enrollment and at study termination; Comprehensive Dental evaluation at Enrollment and at 3 and 6 months, with interim dental checks in between if necessary and Comprehensive Audiological evaluation at Enrollment and at 6 months.|6 months|||participants|||Number
816488|NCT01108835|Secondary|Exercise Capacity|Exercise capacity was measured by change in 6 minutes walk test distance from baseline to 12 month. 6 minute walk test is the distance that the patient can walk over 6 minutes and it can range to 0 meters to few hundred meters. This was calculated by the 12 month 6 minutes walk test distance minus that of the baseline. Positive values indicated improvement in exercise capacity.|12 month|||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
816451|NCT01108458|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With 50% Decrease in Tumor Marker|Change in tumor marker CA19-9, assessed as a 50% decrease from baseline|3 weeks||||||
816452|NCT01108458|Secondary|No. of Events of Drug-related Toxicity|Number of incidences of serious and non-serious drug-related adverse events|3 weeks|||Drug-related adverse events|||Number
816453|NCT01108458|Secondary|Quality of Life (QoL)|Quality of life as assessed by EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire|3 weeks||||||
816454|NCT01108458|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)||1 year||||||
816455|NCT01108458|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|"Disease status evaluated by computed tomography (CT) scan and progression-free survival assessed per RECIST criteria.
Tumor response was assessed by the IRF according to RECIST v1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and (if applicable) normalization of tumor marker levels. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to less than (<) 10 millimeters (mm). PR was defined as greater than or equal to (≥) 30 percent (%) decrease in sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions in reference to Baseline sum LD. Response was to be confirmed ≥4 weeks after the initial assessment of CR or PR. The percentage of participants with a confirmed objective response of CR or PR was reported."|9 weeks||||||
816456|NCT01108458|Primary|Overall Response Rate by RECIST Criteria||CT imaging every 9 weeks while on protocol||||||
816457|NCT01108510|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4 Cell Count at Week 192||Baseline to Week 192|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with available change data at Week 192 were analyzed.||cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816458|NCT01108510|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4 Cell Count at Week 144||Baseline to Week 144|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with available change data at Week 144 were analyzed.||cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816459|NCT01108510|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4 Cell Count at Week 96||Baseline to Week 96|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with available change data at Week 96 were analyzed.||cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816460|NCT01108510|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4 Cell Count at Week 48||Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with available change data at Week 48 were analyzed.||cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816461|NCT01108510|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 192|The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 192 was analyzed using the snapshot algorithm.|Week 192|Week 192 Modified ITT Analysis Set: includes participants in the ITT analysis set excluding those who either (1) transferred to other Gilead-sponsored studies after completing their Week 144 visit and before the lower limit of the Week 192 analysis window, or (2) prematurely discontinued study drug prior to the Week 144 visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
816462|NCT01108510|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 144|The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 144 was analyzed using the snapshot algorithm.|Week 144|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
816463|NCT01108510|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 96|The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 96 was analyzed using the snapshot algorithm.|Week 96|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
816464|NCT01108510|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48|The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 48 was analyzed using the snapshot algorithm, which defines a participant's virologic response status using only the viral load at the prespecified time point within an allowed window of time, along with study drug discontinuation status.|Week 48|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Analysis Set: participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug||percentage of participants|||Number
816465|NCT01108523|Secondary|Rating Scores of Skin Erythema, Skin Pallor, Skin Maceration, Skin Denudation at Day 4, 8, and 12. Proportion of Subjects With no Denuded Skin Area at Day 4, 8, 12, and 15. Pre- and Post-Treatment Surveys||4, 8, 12, and 15 days||||||
816466|NCT01108523|Primary|Rating Scores of Skin Erythema, Skin Pallor, Skin Maceration, Skin Denudation at Day 15.||15 Days||||||
816467|NCT01108718|Primary|Mattress Preference of Fibromyalgia Patients|Study patients were asked to rate each test mattress after 2 months of use, based on their quality of sleep and severity of symptoms relating to fibromyalgia. The various stages of sleep were monitored via polysomnography(PSG) and scored to indicate the degree to which they reflect a normal sleep pattern. Change in severity of fibromyalgia symptoms were assessed by chi-squared and t-test.|6 months|Following 2 months use of each test mattress, the study patients' sleep patterns and severity of fibromyalgia symptoms were assessed. At the end of the study, study patients were asked to rate each mattress in order of preference.||percentage of study participants|||Number
816468|NCT01108731|Secondary|Change in Widespread Pain|Pain was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain ever). The baseline value recorded was widespread pain at the time of assessment and the 2 months follow value recorded was widespread pain over the week prior to assessment.|2 months|Data from all 26 participants were used for analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816469|NCT01108731|Secondary|Change in Cognitive Function Assessed by the no Cue Condition of the Attention Network Test (ANT).|The Attention Network Test (ANT) is a computerized test designed to evaluate the efficiency of the attention network. The ANT consists of a set of cued reaction time tasks to assess vigilance and efficiency to detect novel visual stimuli. The ANT also includes a set of flanker tasks during which a decision needs to be made about whether the orientation of a central stimulus is congruent or incongruent with a set of flanking arrows. Scores on the cued reaction time tasks (no cue, centre cue, double cue) reflect latency to respond measured in milliseconds (slower performance equals greater values). The score on the flanker task reflecting executive attention is derived by subtracting obtained latencies on the congruent flanker from the incongruent condition. Based on our prior work, we are hypothesizing that drug treated Ss will show improved performance on the no cue reaction time condition and on the derived executive attention variable compared to placebo treated.|Baseline and 2 months|Data from 4 were excluded due to 2 having error rates greater than 50%, indicating that they did not understand the task and 2 having simple reaction times longer than those for the complex reaction times on the ANT, suggesting their need for additional practice trials on the simple motor reaction time task.||latency to respond (msecs.)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816470|NCT01108731|Primary|Change in Ventricular Lactate Levels in the Brain|Ventricular lactate levels will be assessed before and at the end of the trial using a scanning method known as magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), which is used to determine the presence and quantity of a number of chemicals in the brain.|Baseline and 2 months|One drug treated and two placebo treated could not be analyzed due to excessive head motion||international units (iu)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816471|NCT01108796|Secondary|Assessment of Metabolic Effect|Metabolic effect was rated by the investigators as 'positive', 'neutral' and 'negative'|24 weeks (Visit 1 to Visit 3)|||Participants|||Number
816472|NCT01108796|Secondary|Changes in Laboratory Parameters: Blood Glucose|Changes in the fasting blood glucose levels from baseline to final visit in patients with both laboratory values valid, by treatment and by Tool/No Tool|24 weeks (Visit 1 to Visit 3)|||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
816473|NCT01108796|Secondary|Changes in Laboratory Parameters: Triglycerides|Changes in the triglyceride levels from baseline to final visit in patients with both laboratory values valid, by treatment and by Tool/No Tool|24 weeks (Visit 1 to Visit 3)|||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
816474|NCT01108796|Secondary|Changes in Laboratory Parameters:High Density Lipoprotein (HDL)|Changes in LDL cholesterol levels from baseline to final visit in patients with both laboratory values valid, by treatment and by Tool/No Tool|24 weeks (Visit 1 to Visit 3)|||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
816475|NCT01108796|Secondary|Changes in Laboratory Parameters:Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL)|Changes in LDL cholesterol levels from baseline to final visit in patients with both laboratory values valid, by treatment and by Tool/No Tool|24 weeks (Visit 1 to Visit 3)|||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
816476|NCT01108796|Primary|Changes in Mean Blood Pressure (Diastolic) After Treatment, Compared to Baseline|Changes in blood pressure in patients with diastolic values, measured at baseline and final visit, by treatment and by Tool/No Tool|24 weeks (Visit 1 to Visit 3)|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816477|NCT01108796|Primary|Changes in Mean Blood Pressure (Systolic) After Treatment, Compared to Baseline|Changes in blood pressure in patients with systolic values, measured at baseline and final visit, by treatment and by Tool/No Tool|24 weeks (Visit 1 to Visit 3)|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816478|NCT01108809|Secondary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AE)||6 months|Treated patients||Number of participants|||Number
816479|NCT01108809|Secondary|Number of Participants Not Completing Study|Number of participants discontinuing study early for given reason|3rd visit (6 months)|Patients with data at 3rd visit||Number of participants|||Number
816480|NCT01108809|Secondary|Change in Heart Rate From Baseline to Study End||From baseline to visit 3 (6 months)|Patients with data both at baseline and on 3rd visit||beats / minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
816481|NCT01108809|Secondary|Additional Antihypertensive Treatment Pattern at Visit 3 (End of Study)||6 Months|Patients with data at 3rd visit||Percentage of participants|||Number
816482|NCT01108809|Secondary|Percentage of Patients That Achieve Target Blood Pressure Values According to the European Society of Hypertension/European Society of Cardiology (ESH/ESC)|ESH/ESC a goal of treatment to be below values 130/80 mm/Hg for diabetic patients and below 140/90 mmHg for non-diabetic patients|Visit 3 (6 months from baseline)|Patients with data at 3rd visit||Percentage of participants|||Number
816483|NCT01108809|Primary|Evolution of the European Society of Hypertension / European Society of Cardiology (ESH/ESC) Based Cardiovascular Risk Factor From Baseline to Study End|ESH is the European society of hypertension, and ESC is the European society of cardiology. Investigator judgement of evolution of CV risk based on ESH/ ESC criteria from baseline to end of study. (Positive = reduction in CV risk; Neutral = no change in CV risk; Negative = deterioration in CV risk; Missing = no data available)|From baseline to visit 3 (6 months)|Patients with data both at baseline and on 3rd visit||Percentage of participants|||Number
816484|NCT01108809|Primary|Evolution of the Cardiovascular Risk Factor Framingham From Baseline to Study End|10-year risk for hard coronary heart disease (CHD) outcomes (Myocardial Infarction and coronary death), according to Framingham Heart Study, measured in percent. Low risk (10 or less CHD risk at 10 years), intermediate risk (10-20), high risk (20 or more). Investigator judgement of evolution of Framingham risk score from baseline to end of study. (Positive = reduction in CV risk; Neutral = no change in CV risk; Negative = deterioration in CV risk; Missing = no data available)|From baseline to visit 3 (6 months)|Patients with data both at baseline and on 3rd visit||Percentage of participants|||Number
816485|NCT01108809|Primary|Evolution of the Cardiovascular Risk Factor SCORE From Baseline to Study End|A 10 year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease (CVD) in populations at high risk. Minimum 0 percent risk to Maximum 47 percent risk. Investigator judgement of evolution of SCORE from baseline to end of study. (Positive = reduction in CV risk; Neutral = no change in CV risk; Negative = deterioration in CV risk; Missing = no data available)|From baseline to visit 3 (6 months)|Patients with data both at baseline and on 3rd visit||Percentage of participants|||Number
816486|NCT01108809|Primary|Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure From Baseline to Study End||From baseline to visit 3 (6 months)|Patients with data both at baseline and on 3rd visit||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816487|NCT01108809|Primary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure From Baseline to Study End||From baseline to visit 3 (6 months)|Patients with data both at baseline and on 3rd visit||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816493|NCT01109056|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ocular Surface Disease Index© (OSDI©) Questionnaire Score at Week 16|Change from baseline in Ocular Surface Disease Index© (OSDI©) Questionnaire score at Week 16. The OSDI© is a 12-question survey for patients to document their dry eye disease symptoms. Each question is rated on a 5-point scale (0=none of the time and 4 = all of the time). The scores are totaled over the 12 questions and normalized/converted to a score of 0-100 (0=no disability and 100=complete disability). A negative number change from baseline represents an improvement.|Baseline, Week 16|Modified Intent to Treat: All randomized patients who received study treatment and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of pterygium hyperemia||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816494|NCT01109056|Primary|Change From Baseline in Severity Grade of Pterygium Hyperemia at Week 16|Change from Baseline in Severity Grade of Pterygium Hyperemia at Week 16. The Pterygium Hyperemia Grading Scale is a 6-point scale (0=absent, 1=trace, 2=mild, 3=moderate, 4=moderately severe, 5=severe). A negative number change from baseline is an improvement and a positive number change from baseline is a worsening.|Baseline, Week 16|"Modified Intent to Treat:
All randomized patients who received study treatment and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of pterygium hyperemia"||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816495|NCT01109056|Primary|Number of Pterygium Hyperemia Responders at Week 16|Number of pterygium hyperemia responders at Week 16 as measured by the Pterygium Hyperemia Grading Scale. The Pterygium Hyperemia Grading Scale is a 6-point scale (0=absent, 1=trace, 2=mild, 3=moderate, 4=moderately severe, 5=severe). A responder is defined as a patient demonstrating at least a 2-grade decrease from baseline in pterygium hyperemia.|Week 16|"Modified Intent to Treat:
All randomized patients who received study treatment and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of pterygium hyperemia"||Participants|||Number
816496|NCT01109108|Primary|Nasopharngeal Colonization With PCV13 S. Pneumoniae|Proportion of PCV13 serotypes among n=1851 children colonized with any S. pneumoniae|Study years 1-5|Children colonized with any S. pneumoniae (PCV and non-PCV serotypes)||Participants|||Count of Participants
816497|NCT01109147|Primary|Identification of Brain Circuits Involved in a Task of Emotional Congruence (With fMRI)|"During the fMRI session, the activation of each brain circuits is measured by a Bold signal (an arbitrary measure of contrast: numbers of voxels highlighted/activated in the region of interest).
The emotional task is composed by congruent and incongruent images. Three effects were caused by the task: congruence, attention and valence effects. Each of them affect, involve and activate the regions of interests differentially within the differents arms.
The region of interests who were mainly observed are: Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC), Prefrontal dorso-lateral Cortex (PFdlC) and the Amygdala (A)."|3 days after the decision of inclusion|||arbitrary units of activation||Standard Error|Mean
816498|NCT01109147|Secondary|Investigate the Level of Expression of Candidate Genes||one blood sample||||||
816499|NCT01109147|Secondary|Assessment of Personality Traits||3 days after the decision of inclusion||||||
816500|NCT01109147|Secondary|Assessment of Cognitive and Attentional Abilities||3 days after the decision of inclusion||||||
816501|NCT01109147|Secondary|Assessment of Emotional Reactivity||3 days after the decision of inclusion||||||
816502|NCT01109173|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Pain-Free at Day 14|Ocular pain as assessed by the investigator on a scale ranging from 0 (none) to 5 (severe). Pain-free was defined as a score of 0 on the investigator's assessment of ocular pain.|Day 14|All randomized patients with at least one postoperative assessment (ITT), last observation carried forward.||percentage of participants|||Number
816503|NCT01109173|Primary|Percentage of Patients Cured at Day 14|Ocular inflammation was assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination. Aqueous cells were scored on a 5-unit scale from 0 (none) to 4 (> 30 cells), and aqueous flare (protein escaping from dilated vessels) was scored on a 4-unit scale from 0 (no visible flare when compared with the normal eye) to 3 (severe – very dense flare). To be considered cured, the patient must have had a score of 0 for both cells and flare.|Day 14|All randomized patients with at least one postoperative assessment (ITT), last observation carried forward.||percentage of participants|||Number
816504|NCT01109316|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 8 Weeks Endpoint for Each Treatment in Blood Pressure||Baseline, 8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both baseline and post-baseline blood pressure measurements for the respective treatment period.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816505|NCT01109316|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 8 Weeks Endpoint for Each Treatment in Weight||Baseline, 8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both baseline and post-baseline weight measurements for the respective treatment period.||kilograms (kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816506|NCT01109316|Secondary|Hypoglycemia Episode Rate Per 30 Days|"Hypoglycemia was defined as an event which was associated with
reported signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia, and/or
a documented blood glucose (BG) concentration of ≤ 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L). Rate is presented as the number of hypoglycemic episodes adjusted for 30 days."|8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Participants included in hypoglycemia analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding hypoglycemia.||hypoglycemic episodes per 30 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816507|NCT01109316|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hypoglycemia|"Hypoglycemia was defined as an event which was associated with
reported signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia, and/or
a documented blood glucose (BG) concentration of ≤ 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L)."|8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Participants included in hypoglycemia analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding hypoglycemia.||percentage of participants|||Number
816508|NCT01109316|Secondary|Pump Complication Rate Per 30 Days|Overall Pump Complications were any combination of: tubing clogged, kinked, disconnected, pulled out, blood in tubing; too much heat, too much cold, empty reservoir, low battery, occlusion alarm, no delivery alarm; at site - skin abscess, excessive redness, swelling (not nodule), bleeding, bruising; reservoir change (infusion set change reason only); and other. When either a reservoir change or an infusion set change was reported, participants were questioned whether change was early (prior to 6 days for L6D or A6D, or prior to 2 days for L2D). If 'yes', then recorded as premature change.|8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit. Participants included in pump complication analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding pump complications.||pump complications per 30 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816509|NCT01109316|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pump Complications|Overall Pump Complications were any combination of: tubing clogged, kinked, disconnected, pulled out, blood in tubing; too much heat, too much cold, empty reservoir, low battery, occlusion alarm, no delivery alarm; at site - skin abscess, excessive redness, swelling (not nodule), bleeding, bruising; reservoir change (infusion set change reason only); and other. When either a reservoir change or an infusion set change was reported, participants were questioned whether change was early (prior to 6 days for L6D or A6D, or prior to 2 days for L2D). If 'yes', then recorded as premature change.|8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit. Participants included in pump complication analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding pump complications.||percentage of participants|||Number
816510|NCT01109316|Secondary|Hyperglycemic Episode Rate Per 30 Days|Hyperglycemia was defined as an episode with (1) a measured blood glucose concentration >250 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) (13.9 mmol/L) and ≥3 hours after eating, or (2) a measured blood glucose concentration >300 mg/dL (16.7 mmol/L) and <3 hours after eating. Rate is presented as the number of hyperglycemic episodes adjusted for 30 days.|8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Participants included in hyperglycemia analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding hyperglycemia.||hyperglycemic episodes per 30 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816511|NCT01109316|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hyperglycemia|Hyperglycemia was defined as an event with (1) a measured blood glucose concentration >250 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) (13.9 mmol/L) and ≥3 hours after eating, or (2) a measured blood glucose concentration >300 mg/dL (16.7 mmol/L) and <3 hours after eating.|8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Participants included in hyperglycemia analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding hyperglycemia.||percentage of participants|||Number
816512|NCT01109316|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieve or Maintain an HbA1c Less Than or Equal to 6.5% and Less Than 7%||8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who completed a post-randomization visit and had an HbA1c measurement for the respective treatment period.||participants|||Number
816513|NCT01109316|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 8 Weeks Endpoint for Each Treatment in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) Values||Baseline, 8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit, and had a baseline and a post-randomization HbA1c measurement for the respective treatment period. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was utilized in this analysis.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
816514|NCT01109316|Secondary|Mean Daily Insulin Dose (Total, Basal, and Bolus)||8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit. Participants included in insulin analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding insulin dose.||Units (U) of insulin||Standard Deviation|Mean
816515|NCT01109316|Secondary|Mean SMBG|Mean SMBG for combined periods; all reported SMBG values on days 1-6 for Insulin Lispro 6 Day and Insulin Aspart 6 Day, and days 1-2 for Insulin Lispro 2 Day.|8 weeks for each treatment|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit and one SMBG measurement on Day 2 for insulin lispro 2 day or Day 6 for the respective treatment arm: insulin lispro 6 day and insulin aspart 6 day.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
816516|NCT01109316|Primary|Mean of Last Five 7-point Self Monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Taken on Day 6 for Insulin Lispro 6D and Day 2 for Insulin Lispro 2D and Day 6 for Insulin Aspart 6D Pump Reservoir In-use||8 weeks of each treatment|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit. Those included in the Primary analysis had to have at least one reservoir in-use cycle with an SMBG measurement on Day 6 during the pre-specified collection period.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816517|NCT01109381|Secondary|Assessment of Adverse Events (AE)|Adverse event data will be collected in response to neutral questioning.|AE commencing within 30 days of initiation of treatment, followed until resolution|All participants entering the study are included in the safety analysis||participants|||Number
816518|NCT01109381|Primary|Absence of Significant Gastric Abnormality Post-treatment (Initial Phase)|Gastroscopy pre- and post-treatment will be performed in the Initial Phase (20 participants), with the goal of excluding significant gastric abnormality at baseline and after treatment (e.g. gastric ulceration arising following the treatment).|up to 14 days of treatment|All 21 Initial Phase participants had a pretreatment gastroscopy, and 20 had post-treatment gastroscopy (one participant prematurely discontinued the study prior to receiving GT08, and the participant later lost to follow up had a post-treatment gastroscopy before being lost to follow up)||participants|||Number
816519|NCT01109381|Primary|Number of Participants With Eradication of H.Pylori Infection|Eradication as measured by negative Urea Breath Test 4-6 weeks following completion of treatment|4-6 weeks following treatment|Two participants did not complete the study, one discontinuing after experiencing adverse events while receiving only the initial study omeprazole, and the other participant left Singapore before they had their final urea breath test. All other study participants were analysed for efficacy.||participants|||Number
816520|NCT01109524|Primary|Number of Participants With Grades 3 and 4 Drug-Related Treatment-emergent AEs of Special Interest - Treated Population|Drug-related AEs (investigator assessment): those with relationship to study drug(s)reported as related and those of unknown relationship. Special interest AEs: acneform rash, infusion reaction, cardiac adverse event, febrile neutropenia, infection (all terms except sepsis), sepsis, interstitial lung disease, renal failure, and thromboembolic events. Except for interstitial lung disease, these were composite terms combining several MedDRA terms (MedDRA version 14.0). Except for Gr 3 and 4 infusion reactions, AE severity per NCI-CTC, version 3.0: Gr 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4=Life-threatening or disabling, Gr 5=Death. Gr 3 - 4 infusion reactions: Gr 3=symptomatic bronchospasm, requiring parenteral medication(s), with or without urticaria; allergy-related edema/angioedema; Gr 4=life-threatening event with same Gr 3 symptomatology, complicated by symptomatic hypotension/oxygen saturation 70% or less. Day 1=start of study drug; to 30 days after last dose of any treatment.|Day 1 up to 30 days after last dose|Treated population: All participants who received at least one dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
816529|NCT01109602|Primary|Balance - Measured With the Berg Balance Scale|Balance was assessed with the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), a 14-item physical performance measure of static and dynamic balance found to be reliable and valid after stroke. Scoring ranges from 0-56, with higher scores indicating better balance. A score of <46 identifies an individual at risk for falls after stroke.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816521|NCT01109524|Primary|Number of Participants With Drug-Related Treatment-emergent AEs, Drug-Related SAEs, and Drug-Related AEs Leading to Discontinuation of at Least One Study Drug, - Treated Population|Drug-related AEs and drug-related SAEs (by investigator assessment) were those with a relationship to study drug(s) reported to Sponsor as related and those of unknown relationship. AE was defined as any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE was defined as a medical event that results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. MedDRA version 14.0. Severity of AEs were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) version 3.0: Grade (Gr) 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4=Life-threatening or disabling, Gr 5=Death. Day 1 (start of study drug) to 30 days after last dose of any study drug, including monotherapy.|Day 1 up to 30 days after last dose|Treated population: All participants who received at least one dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
816522|NCT01109524|Primary|Number of Participants With Renal Function Serum Chemistry Laboratory Abnormalities - Treated Population|ULN=Upper limit of normal among all laboratory ranges; LLN=Lower limit of normal. CTC grade criteria: Sodium high (H) Grade (Gr) 1:>ULN - 150 millimoles per liter (mmol/L); Gr 2: >150 – 155 mmol/L; Gr 3: >155 – 160mmol/L; Gr 4: >160 mmol/L. Sodium low(L) Gr 1:<LLN – 130mmol/L; Gr 3: <130 – 120 mmol/L; Gr 4: <120 mmol/L. Potassium (H) Gr 1: >ULN – 5.5 mmol/L; Gr 2: >5.5 – 6.0 mmol/L; Gr 3: > 6.0 – 7.0 mmol/L; Gr 4: >7.0 mmol/L. Potassium (L) Gr 1: <LLN – 3.0 mmol/L; Gr 2: <LLN – 3.0 mmol/L; Gr 3: < 3.0 – 2.5 mmol/L; Gr 4: <2.5 mmol/L. Serum creatinine (H) Gr 1: >1 – 1.5*baseline (BL)to >ULN – 1.5*ULN; Gr 2: >1.5 – 3.0*BL to > 1.5 – 3.0*ULN; Gr 3: >3.0*BL to > 3.0 – 6.0*ULN; Gr 4: >6.0*ULN. Day 1 (start of study drug) to 30 days after last dose of any study drug, including monotherapy.|Day 1 up to 30 days after last dose|Treated population: All participants who received at least one dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
816523|NCT01109524|Primary|Number of Participants With Hematology Laboratory Abnormalities - Treated Population|Hematology laboratories included hemoglobin, platelets, white blood cell (WBC) count, and absolute neutrophil count (ANC) and values were per CTC grading, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. On-study laboratory tests were those performed after the start of study drug (from Day 2 of cycle 1) and up to 30 days after the last dose of study drug. WBC normal range: 4.1-12.3 x 10^3 /microliter (µL); platelets normal range: 140-450 x 10^9 /Liter (L); hemoglobin normal range 14-18 grams per deciliter (g/dL); ANC normal range: 2.03-8.36 x 10^9/μL.|Day 2 up to 30 days after last dose|Treated population: all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug. Participants with at least one on-study laboratory measurement available were analyzed.||participants|||Number
816524|NCT01109524|Primary|Number of Participants With Liver Function Serum Chemistry Laboratory Abnormalities - Treated Population|ULN=Upper limit of normal among all laboratory ranges. ALT=alanine transaminase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; ALP=alkaline phosphatase. CTC grade criteria: ALT Grade 1:>ULN 2.5*ULN; Grade 2: >2.5 - 5.0*ULN; Grade 3: >5.0 - 20.0*ULN; Grade 4: >20.0*ULN. AST Grade 1: >ULN - 2.5*ULN; Grade 2: >2.5 - 5.0*ULN; Grade 3: >5.0 - 20.0*ULN; Grade 4: >20.0*ULN. Total bilirubin Grade 1: >ULN - 1.5*ULN; Grade 2: >1.5 - 3.0*ULN; Grade 3: >3.0 - 10.0*ULN; Grade 4: >10.0*ULN. Albumin (low) Grade 1:<LLN - 3 grams per deciliter (g/dL)to <LLN - 3 g/dL; Grade 2: <3 - 2 g/dL to < 3.0 - 2.0 g/dL; Grade 3: < 2 g/dL to <2 g/L. Day 1 (start of study drug) to 30 days after last dose of any treatment therapy, including cetuximab monotherapy.|Day 1 up to 30 days after last dose|Number (N) of participants with laboratory data available and who could be analyzed for total bilirubin was 49. All other liver function laboratories N=57. Treated population: all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
816525|NCT01109524|Primary|Number of Participants With Grades 3 and 4 Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (AEs) of Special Interest - Treated Population|Special interest AEs: acneform rash, infusion reaction, cardiac adverse event, febrile neutropenia, infection (includes all terms except sepsis), sepsis, interstitial lung disease, renal failure, and thromboembolic events. Except for interstitial lung disease, these were composite terms combining several preferred/other level MedDRA terms (MedDRA version 14.0). Except for Grade (GR)3 and 4 infusion reactions, AE severity were graded per the NCI-CTC, version 3.0: Gr 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4=Life-threatening or disabling, Gr 5=Death. Severity of Gr 3 - 4 infusion reactions were: Gr 3=symptomatic bronchospasm, requiring parenteral medication(s), with or without urticaria; allergy-related edema/angioedema; Gr 4=a life-threatening event characterized by the same symptomatology as a Gr 3, complicated by symptomatic hypotension or oxygen saturation 70% or less. Day 1 (start of study drug) to 30 days after last dose of any treatment therapy, including cetuximab monotherapy.|Day 1 to 30 days after last dose|Treated population: all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
816526|NCT01109524|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Deaths, and AEs Leading to Discontinuation of at Least One Study Drug, - Treated Population|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=medical event that results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. MedDRA version 14.0. Severity of AEs were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) version 3.0: Grade (Gr) 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4=Life-threatening or disabling, Gr 5=Death. Day 1 (start of study drug) to 30 days after last dose of any treatment therapy, including cetuximab monotherapy.|Day 1 up to 30 days after last dose|Treated population: all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
816527|NCT01109576|Primary|Change in Profile of Mood States Total Score.|The change in Profile of Mood States total score is defined as the 8 week follow-up total score minus the baseline POMS total score. The scale measures change in mood states before and after treatment. The change score can range from -232 to 232, with negative values indicating greater reduction in emotional distress.|Change in Profile of Mood States Score from Baseline to 8 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816528|NCT01109602|Secondary|Quality of Life - Measured With the Stroke Specific Quality of Life|Quality of Life was measured using the validated 49 items of the Stroke Specific QoL scale (SSQoL). The SSQoL includes assessment of 12 domains: self-care; vision; language; mobility; work; upper extremity; thinking; personality; mood; family; social; and energy. Prior work indicates good psychometric properties. Higher scores indicate increased QoL. Range of scores is 13 to 65 for the total score.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816530|NCT01109602|Secondary|Balance Self-efficacy - Measured With the Activities Balance Confidence Scale|The 16 item Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC) was used to measure balance self-efficacy. The ABC is a self-report of a participant's self-efficacy in maintaining static and dynamic balance control during functional tasks. The validity and reliability of the ABC have been previously demonstrated in individuals with stroke. Scoring is 'no confidence' (0%) to 'completely confident' (100%).|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816531|NCT01109849|Post-Hoc|Change in BMI z Score During Weight Recovery Period (Second Randomization) Based on Actual Usage|"difference in height z score from entry into weight recovery phase to exit from that phase (exact duration varied by participant). Randomization could not occur before month 6 (so max of 24 month duration) but could start as late as month 29 (equaling a 1 month duration) based on the pattern of zBMI change. In this post hoc analysis we grouped participants by what they did (caloric supplementation, drug holiday or monitoring) not what they were randomly assigned to. The most common change was from drug holiday to monitoring for participants who were not using medication on weekends before assignment to drug holiday (family stopped weekend med by own accord prior to 2nd randomization) so assignment to drug holiday did not alter actual frequency of use as was designed to.Therefore they were reclassified as monitoring as frequency of med use did not change.
Z score used to account for differences in age and gender between groups. Higher values reflect greater incremental BMI increase."|between 1 month and 24 months|all participants prescribed an ER stimulant and also assigned to one of the weight recovery treatments. Arms from first randomization are not included as not all of those participants progressed to the second randomization which was done adaptively based on change in zBMI. Those arms are reported on for outcome 15.||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816532|NCT01109849|Post-Hoc|Change in Weight z Score During Weight Recovery Phase (Second Randomization) Based on Actual Usage|"difference in height z score from entry into weight recovery phase to exit from that phase (exact duration varied by participant). Randomization could not occur before month 6 (so max of 24 month duration) but could start as late as month 29 (equaling a 1 month duration) based on the pattern of zBMI change. In this post hoc analysis we grouped participants by what they did (caloric supplementation, drug holiday or monitoring) not what they were randomly assigned to. The most common change was from drug holiday to monitoring for participants who were not using medication on weekends before assignment to drug holiday (family stopped weekend med by own accord prior to 2nd randomization) so assignment to drug holiday did not alter actual frequency of use as was designed to.Therefore they were reclassified as monitoring as frequency of med use did not change.
Z score used to account for differences in age and gender between groups. Higher values reflect greater incremental weight gain."|between 1 month and 24 months|participants using an ER stimualnt and also randomized to one of the weight recovery treatments. Arms from first randomization are not included as not all of those participants progressed to the second randomization which was done adaptively based on change in zBMI. Those arms are reported on for outcome 14.||zscore||Standard Deviation|Mean
816533|NCT01109849|Post-Hoc|Difference in Height z Score During Weight Recovery Phase (Second Randomization) by Actual Usage|"difference in height z score from entry into weight recovery phase to exit from that phase (exact duration varied by participant). Randomization could not occur before month 6 (so max of 24 month duration) but could start as late as month 29 (equaling a 1 month duration) based on the pattern of zBMI change. In this post hoc analysis we grouped participants by what they did (caloric supplementation, drug holiday or monitoring) not what they were randomly assigned to. The most common change was from drug holiday to monitoring for participants who were not using medication on weekends before assignment to drug holiday (family stopped weekend med by own accord prior to 2nd randomization) so assignment to drug holiday did not alter actual frequency of use as was designed to.Therefore they were reclassified as monitoring as frequency of med use did not change.
Z score used to account for differences in age and gender between groups. Larger values reflect greater height change."|between 1 month and 24 months|all participants using an ER stimulant and were also assigned to a weight recovery arm. Arms from first randomization are not included as not all of those participants progressed to the second randomization which was done adaptively based on change in zBMI. Those arms are reported on for outcome 13.||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816534|NCT01109849|Post-Hoc|Change in BMI z Score by Actual Medication Usage|measures change in BMI z score from baseline to last assessment with participants grouped based on actual medication usage versus randomly assigned group since participants were allowed to cross treatment arms after 6 months and not all participants assigned to medication used it consistently. The rarely med group (n=44) used med <12.5% of the study duration (with most using not at all). The consistent med group (N=38 used med for at least 87.5% of their time in the study with most using the entire time). The inconsistent med group (N=111, 27.5% used medication 45% of the time in the study. The other 37 participants did not have one year of growth data so were excluded from this analysis. Z scores used to account for differences in age and gender between groups. Higher values represent a larger BMI|baseline to month 30 or last assessment point|Includes all participants with at least one year of growth data as goal was to assess impact of extended treatment on growth. These same outcomes are reported elsewhere for the first randomization arms of Behavior Therapy and Med as well as the second randomization arms of cal supplement, drug holiday and monitoring (see outcomes 3 and 12).||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816535|NCT01109849|Post-Hoc|Change in Weight z Score by Actual Medication Usage|measures change in weight z score from baseline to last assessment with participants grouped based on actual medication usage versus randomly assigned group since participants were allowed to cross treatment arms after 6 months and not all participants assigned to medication used it consistently. The rarely med group (n=44) used med <12.5% of the study duration (with most using not at all). The consistent med group (N=38 used med for at least 87.5% of their time in the study with most using the entire time). The inconsistent med group (N=111, 27.5% used medication 45% of the time in the study. The other 37 participants did not have one year of growth data so were excluded from this analysis. Z scores used to account for differences in age and gender between groups. Higher values represent a greater incremental weight gain.|baseline to month 30 or last assessment point|Includes all participants with at least one year of growth data as goal was to assess impact of extended treatment on growth. These same outcomes are reported elsewhere for the first randomization arms of Behavior Therapy and Med as well as the second randomization arms of cal supplement, drug holiday and monitoring (see outcomes 2 and 11).||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816536|NCT01109849|Post-Hoc|Change in Height z Score by Actual Medication Usage|measures change in height z score from baseline to last assessment with participants grouped based on actual medication usage versus randomly assigned group since participants were allowed to cross treatment arms after 6 months and not all participants assigned to medication used it consistently. The rarely med group (n=44) used med <12.5% of the study duration (with most using not at all). The consistent med group (N=38 used) med for at least 87.5% of their time in the study with most using the entire time. The inconsistent med group (N=111), used medication between 12.5 to 87.5 of the time (mean time on med was 45% of the time in the study) The other 37 participants did not have one year of growth data so were excluded from this analysis. Z scores used to account for differences in age and gender between groups. More negative values reflecting a smaller incremental height gain.|baseline to month 30 or last assessment point|Includes all participants with at least one year of growth data as goal was to assess impact of extended treatment on growth. These same outcomes are reported elsewhere for the first randomization arms of Behavior Therapy and Med as well as the second randomization arms of cal supplement, drug holiday and monitoring (see outcomes 1 and 10).||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816537|NCT01109849|Secondary|Change in Zscore for BMI During Weight Recovery Phase (Second Randomization)|"difference in BMI z score from entry into weight recovery phase to exit from weight recovery phase (exact duration varied by participant). Randomization could not occur before month 6 (equaling a 24 month duration) but could start as late as month 29 (equaling a 1 month duration) of treatment based on the pattern of zBMI change by the individual participant.
Z scores used to account for differences in age and gender. Larger values reflecting a greater incremental BMI gain."|between 1 month and 24 months|all participants prescribed an ER stimulant who were also went through the second randomization to one of three weight recovery interventions. First randomization arms not included as not all of those participants had a second randomization as it was adaptively based on change in zBMI.||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816538|NCT01109849|Secondary|Change in Weight z Score During Weight Recovery Phase (Second Randomization)|"difference in weight z score from entry into weight recovery phase to exit from weight recovery phase (exact duration varied by participant). Randomization could not occur before month 6 (equaling a 24 month duration) but could start as late as month 29 (equaling a 1 month duration) of treatment based on the pattern of zBMI change by the individual participant.
Z scores used to account for differences in age and gender. Larger values reflect a greater incremental weight gain."|1 to 24 months duration|all participants prescribed an ER stimulant who were also went through the second randomization to one of three weight recovery interventions.First randomization arms not included as not all of those participants had a second randomization as it was adaptively based on change in zBMI.||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816539|NCT01109849|Secondary|Change in Height z Score During Weight Recovery Phase (Second Randomization)|"difference in height z score from entry into weight recovery phase to exit from weight recovery phase (exact duration varied by participant). Randomization could not occur before month 6 (equaling a 24 month duration) but could start as late as month 29 (equaling a 1 month duration) of treatment based on the pattern of zBMI change by the individual participant.
Z scores used to account for differences in age and gender. More negative values reflecting less incremental height gain."|between 1 month and 24 months|all participants prescribed an ER stimulant who were also went through the second randomization to one of three weight recovery interventions. One monitoring participant never prescribed med was excluded.First randomization arms not included as not all of those participants had a second randomization as it was adaptively based on change in zBMI.||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816540|NCT01109849|Secondary|Number of Behavior Therapy Sessions|Raw number of behavior therapy sessions attended; participants could cross over to other treatment arm if moderately impaired after 6 months in initial randomly assigned arm|months 0 through 30|those with at least one follow up assessment. The second randomization arms are not included as all participants in those arms are derived from these two groups and this assessment period includes the entire duration of the second randomization. Also, the second randomization addressees weight gain, not ADHD treatment.||sessions attended||Standard Deviation|Mean
816541|NCT01109849|Secondary|Medication Adherence|% of study days that study ADHD medication was taken when prescribed to be taken; behavior group could be prescribed medication if moderately impaired still after month 6. Once prescribed, all medication was prescribed to be taken 7 days a week except for in the drug holiday weight recovery arm.|denominator is number of days in study for which study med was prescribed|any participants with at least one dose of med prescribed. The second randomization arms are not included as all participants in those arms are derived from these two groups and this assessment period includes the entire duration of the second randomization. Also, the second randomization addressees weight gain, not ADHD treatment.||% of days dose taken as prescribed|||Number
816542|NCT01109849|Secondary|ADHD Symptoms- Teacher Rated|sum of items on 10 item IOWA Conners with range from 0-30 and larger values indicating greater symptoms. Collected at endpoint or last assessment point.|month 30 or last assessment point|those assigned to either Behavior therapy or ER stimulant with at least one post baseline assessment of ADHD symptoms. Second randomization arms (drug holiday, cal supplement, monitoring) not included as only relevant outcomes are ht, wt and BMI. All subjects in these arms are either in behavior therapy or er stimulant arm from 1st randomization.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816543|NCT01109849|Secondary|Change Score for Zheight Months 0 to 6|"in addition to the primary outcome of height at month 30, change in z-height from baseline to study month 6 post is also reported. Subjects who were still moderately impaired after 6 months in their initial treatment arm were allowed to cross over and receive the treatments in the other arm so prior to month 6 no participants randomized to behavior arm were prescribed study medication.
This outcome includes all participants with 2+ growth assessments from the behavior therapy and ER stimulant arms. Doesn't include adaptive randomization arms (drug holiday, cal supplement, monitoring) as they didn't exist until 2nd randomization which did not occur until after this assessment period was over.
Height converted to z score to account for differences in age and gender. More negative values reflecting smaller incremental height gain.
If participant dropped out prior to month 6, then the last assessment point was used."|baseline to month 6|participants with at height measurement at month 6||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816544|NCT01109849|Secondary|ADHD Symptoms- Parent Rated|sum of score on 10 item IOWA Conners with range from 0 to 30 and higher values indicating more symptoms. Collected at end point or last assessment point.|at month 30 or last collected assessment point|those assigned to either Behavior therapy or ER stimulant with at least one post baseline assessment of ADHD symptoms. Second randomization arms (drug holiday, cal supplement, monitoring) not included as only relevant outcomes are ht, wt and BMI. All subjects in these arms are either in behavior therapy or er stimulant arm from 1st randomization.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816545|NCT01109849|Secondary|Treatment Adherence for Caloric Supplement|percent of days caloric supplement were taken versus prescribed in caloric supplement arm|from entry to exit of caloric supplement arm|those assigned to caloric supplement group||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816546|NCT01109849|Secondary|Change in zBody Mass Index (BMI)|BMI will be calculated at endpoint (month 30). Difference between baseline and endpoint (month 30 or last assessment point if did not finish study). Measured as a zscore with more negative units reflecting less BMI gain. Z units used to account for differences between groups in gender and age with both impact BMI at a fixed time.|baseline to month 30 or last assessment point|includes all with 2+ growth assessments from the behavior therapy and ER stimulant arms. Doesn't include adaptive randomization arms (drug holiday, caloric supplement, monitoring) as they did not exist until 2nd randomization. See outcome #12 for change in zBMI from beginning to end of second randomization.||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816547|NCT01109849|Secondary|Change Score for z Weight|difference between baseline and endpoint (month 30 or last assessment point if did not finish study). Measured as a zscore with more negative units reflecting lesser weight gain. Z units used to account for differences between groups in gender and age with both impact weight at a fixed time.|baseline to month 30 or to last assessment point|includes all with 2+ growth assessments from the behavior therapy and ER stimulant arms. Doesn't include adaptive randomization arms (drug holiday, caloric supplement, monitoring) as they did not exist until 2nd randomization. See outcome #11 for change in zwt from beginning to end of second randomization.||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816548|NCT01109849|Primary|Change Score for Z-height Baseline to Endpoint|"The primary endpoint will be change in z-height at month 30 which is study endpoint.
Measured as a zscore with more negative units reflecting smaller incremental height gain. Z units used to account for differences between groups in gender and age with both impact height at a fixed time."|month 30 or last assessment point|includes all with 2+ growth assessments from the behavior therapy and ER stimulant arms. Doesn't include adaptive randomization arms (drug holiday, cal supplement, monitoring) as they didn't exist until 2nd randomization. See outcome #10 for change in zht from beginning to end of second randomization.||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
816549|NCT01109979|Primary|Brachial Artery Reactivity % Flow Mediated Dilation (BAR %FMD)|This crossover study examined the effects of E+MPA versus E+DRSP on brachial artery reactivity (BAR) assessed after six weeks of treatment. BAR is a noninvasive measure of endothelium-dependent flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD) of the brachial artery. With this technique, inflation of an arm blood pressure cuff to suprasystolic blood pressure causes relative ischemia downstream to the cuff. Upon deflation, a brief state of increased blood flow occurs (reactive hyperemia), and the resulting increase in shear stress causes nitric oxide release and resulting vasodilation of the brachial artery (flow-mediated vasodilation). The flow-mediated changes in brachial artery diameter can be imaged by ultrasound and measured as an index of peripheral vasomotor function. BAR correlates with invasive assessments of coronary endothelial function as well as multiple cardiovascular risk factors.|%FMD after 6 weeks of treatment|The number of participants for analysis includes only the participants that completed a baseline assessment and at least one of the treatment arms.||% FMD after 6 weeks of treatment||Standard Deviation|Mean
816550|NCT01110005|Secondary|Time to Delivery|Compare time to delivery between the D5LR and LR treatment groups|From onset of labor to delivery|||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816551|NCT01110005|Secondary|Oxytocin Augmentation|Compare augmentation rates between the D5LR and LR treatment groups|From onset of labor to delivery|||Participants|||Count of Participants
816552|NCT01110005|Primary|C-Section|Compare c-section rates between the D5LR and LR treatment groups|From onset of labor to delivery|||Participants|||Count of Participants
816553|NCT01103934|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daytime Nasal Symptom Score (DNSS) Over 2 Week Randomized Treatment Period|Patients recorded the severity of sneezing, runny nose, stuffy nose, and other symptoms (e.g. itchy nose/throat) twice a day on a scale from 0 to 3 (0 = no symptoms, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, and 3 = severe). The DNSS was calculated as the sum of all scores for morning with a range of 0 to 12. The change from baseline for each day of treatment was then calculated for each subject. So that each subject only had one observation, the average of these changes was calculated for each subject, and this summary measure was used in the analysis comparing the two treatment groups. We report the median and full range of these average changes for each group. A negative value indicates an improvement in daytime symptoms.|Baseline and 2 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
816554|NCT01103934|Primary|Change From Baseline in Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) Over 2 Week Randomized Treatment Period|Patients recorded the severity of sneezing, runny nose, stuffy nose, and other symptoms (e.g. itchy nose/throat) twice a day on a scale from 0 to 3 (0 = no symptoms, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, and 3 = severe). The TNSS was calculated as the sum of all scores for morning and evening recordings with a range of 0 to 24. The change from baseline for each day of treatment was then calculated for each subject. So that each subject only had one observation, the average of these changes was calculated for each subject, and this summary measure was used in the analysis comparing the two treatment groups. We report the median and full range of these average changes for each group. A negative value indicates an improvement in symptoms.|Baseline and 2 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
816555|NCT01103960|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, Pulse Rate, Laboratory Parameters and ECG.|Clinically relevant abnormalities for Physical examination, pulse rate, laboratory parameters and ECG. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as Adverse Events.|From drug administration until end of treatment plus one day|Treated set included patients who were randomised and took at least one dose of the trial medication in the double-blind treatment period.||participants|||Number
817910|NCT01121666|Secondary|E2 Concentration at Day 8 and at Day of hCG Administration|The serum concentration of oestradiol was assessed at day 8 and the day of hCG administration.|Day 8 of stimulation and at the day of hCG administration (after max. 16 days of r-FSH treatment)|All participants were analyzed.||pmol/ L||Standard Deviation|Mean
816556|NCT01103960|Secondary|Number of Patients in Blood Pressure Categories at 4 Weeks|BP optimal: SBP <120 mmHg and DBP <80 mmHg, BP normal: SBP <130 mmHg and DBP <85 mmHg but not optimal, BP high-normal: SBP <140 mmHg and DBP <90 mmHg but not normal. Grade 1 hypertension: SBP <160 mmHg and DBP <100 mmHg but not high-normal, Grade 2 hypertension: SBP <180 mmHg and DBP <110 mmHg but not grade 1, Grade 3 hypertension: SBP >=180 mmHg or DBP >=110 mmHg.|4 weeks|FAS with LOCF||Number of participants|||Number
816557|NCT01103960|Secondary|DBP and SBP Control and Response After 4 Weeks of Treatment|DBP control is defined as DBP <90 mmHg or <80 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment. SBP control is defined as SBP <140 mmHg or <130 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment. DBP response is defined as DBP <90 mmHg or <80 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment or a reduction from baseline >=10mmHg. SBP response is defined as SBP<140 mmHg or <130 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment or a reduction from baseline >=15mmHg.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with LOCF||Number of participants|||Number
816558|NCT01103960|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SBP After 4 Weeks of Treatment|Seated trough SBP after 4 weeks.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with LOCF||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816559|NCT01103960|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DBP After 4 Weeks of Treatment|Seated trough DBP after 4 weeks.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with LOCF||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816560|NCT01103960|Secondary|Number of Patients in Blood Pressure Categories Over Time|BP optimal: SBP <120 mmHg and DBP <80 mmHg, BP normal: SBP <130 mmHg and DBP <85 mmHg but not optimal, BP high-normal: SBP <140 mmHg and DBP <90 mmHg but not normal. Grade 1 hypertension: SBP <160 mmHg and DBP <100 mmHg but not high-normal, Grade 2 hypertension: SBP <180 mmHg and DBP <110 mmHg but not grade 1, Grade 3 hypertension: SBP >=180 mmHg or DBP >=110 mmHg.|8 weeks|FAS with LOCF||Number of participants|||Number
816561|NCT01103960|Secondary|DBP and SBP Control and Response After 8 Weeks of Treatment|DBP control is defined as DBP <90 mmHg or <80 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment. SBP control is defined as SBP <140 mmHg or <130 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment. DBP response is defined as DBP <90 mmHg or <80 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment or a reduction from baseline >=10mmHg. SBP response is defined as SBP<140 mmHg or <130 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment or a reduction from baseline >=15mmHg.|Baseline and 8 weeks|FAS with LOCF||Number of participants|||Number
816562|NCT01103960|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SBP After 8 Weeks of Treatment|Seated trough SBP after 8 weeks or LOCF. Analysis will be adjusted for treatment, country, and baseline measurement of endpoint.|Baseline and 8 weeks|FAS with LOCF||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816563|NCT01103960|Primary|Change From Baseline in DBP After 8 Weeks of Treatment in Chinese Patients|Seated trough DBP after 8 weeks or LOCF in Chinese patients. Analysis will be adjusted for treatment and baseline measurement of endpoint.|Baseline and 8 weeks|FAS with LOCF and further restricted to the Chinese subgroup||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816564|NCT01103960|Primary|Change From Baseline in DBP After 8 Weeks of Treatment|Seated trough DBP after 8 weeks or last observation carried forward (LOCF). Analysis will be adjusted for treatment, country, and baseline measurement of endpoint.|Baseline and 8 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) defined as patients randomised, treated, with a baseline endpoint measurement and at least one post-dose endpoint measurement during the double blind (DB) phase.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816565|NCT01103973|Primary|Clinical Pregnancy Rates|Presence of normal fetal heart rate and fetal size at 7 weeks gestation.|1 year|||percentage of participants|||Number
816566|NCT01104103|Secondary|First Stick Success|This outcome will report the number of IV attempts as defined by the tip of the needle piercing the skin. The results for each IV attempt will be an ordinal number between one and three. We will compare the number and percentage of patients in each group (1, 2, or 3 sticks) between the two therapies.|Five minutes (average)|||participants|||Number
816567|NCT01104103|Primary|Success|This outcome will measure self-reported success at starting the peripheral intravenous lines in the upper extremity of adults. Success is defined as an IV line through which blood may be aspirated and flushes freely without evidence of fluid extravasation. To be successful, the IV must be placed within a maximum of three attempts. We will report the number and percentage of patients with successful for both therapies.|five minutes (average)|||participants|||Number
816568|NCT01104116|Secondary|Change in Lesion Characteristics to Assess Benefit of PET Scans|The secondary outcome that we are interested in studying is the benefit of PET scan as compared to other imaging modalities, such as CT, MRI, and EUS. Thus, Patients will also have CT, MRI, and EUS imaging. We will look at how size, location, and branch of the IPMN lesion on PET compare to these other imaging modalities. The location, size, and pathology results of the actual surgical specimen will serve as the gold standard.|1 month|The principal investigator has left the institution. Data will not be analyzed. Only the demographic information on 1 enrolled subject is available.|||||
816569|NCT01104116|Primary|Positive and Negative Predictive Value of PET Imaging for Identifying Malignant IPMN|The primary outcome will be to determine the positive and negative predictive values of [18F]-FDG PET imaging for identifying malignant IPMN lesions in patients who are to undergo surgical resection. We will determine the mean SUV that would provide optimal positive predictive value for malignant IPMN. IPMN lesions will be classified categorically as benign (adenoma or borderline ) or malignant (in situ or invasive carcinoma) and PET imaging will be classified categorically as negative or positive, with focal FDG uptake corresponding to pancreatic lesion.|1 month|The principal investigator has left the institution. Data will not be analyzed. Only the demographic information on 1 enrolled subject is available.|||||
816570|NCT01104155|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the length of time in months from the date of first administration of study drug until the date of death from any cause, and was based on the data cutoff date. In the absence of confirmation of death, participants were censored either at the date that the participant was last known to be alive or the date of study cutoff, whichever came first. OS and the corresponding 2-sided 95% CI was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From date of first dose of study drug until date of death from any cause or up to data cutoff (31 May 2013), up to approximately 3.25 years|FAS||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816633|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Vital Signs Change From Baseline and Follow–up 24 Hours Post Injection - Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure|Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were measured in a supine position. Blood pressure was not to be measured on the arm used for the injection.|Baseline, 24 hours post injection|Safety Analysis Set (SAF): The analysis of safety data was performed using all available data from all participants who administered any amount of gadobutrol.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816571|NCT01104155|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|DCR was defined as the percentage of participants who had a BOR of CR or PR, or stable disease (SD; duration of SD lasted for at least 7 weeks). To be assigned a BOR of SD, the time from the first administration of study drug until the date of documented SD was to be greater than or equal to 7 weeks (49 days). A participant's tumor assessment had to be at least 7 weeks following the randomization date to be consider SD. DCR and the corresponding exact Clopper-Pearson 95% CI were computed by treatment regimen. (CR + PR + SD)|From date of first dose of study drug until documentation of disease progression or death from any cause (whichever occurred first) or up to data cutoff (31 May 2013), up to approximately 3.25 years|FAS||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816572|NCT01104155|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was measured as the time from the date of first administration of study treatment until the first documentation of disease progression or death (due to any cause), whichever occurred first, as determined by investigator assessment based on RECIST v1.1. Disease progression per RECIST v1.1 was defined as at least a 20% relative increase and 5 mm absolute increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the smallest sum on study) recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions. For participants who did not have an event (i.e. those who had not progressed, and were alive at the date of data cut-off or lost to Follow-up), progression-free survival was censored. Participants who did not progress in their disease were censored on the date of their last tumor assessment preceding the start of any additional anticancer therapy. PFS was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From date of first dose of study drug until documentation of disease progression or death from any cause (whichever occurred first), or up to data cutoff (31 May 2013) up to 3.25 years|FAS||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816573|NCT01104155|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR)|DOR was assessed for participants with a BOR of CR or PR, and was defined as the time from first documented evidence of CR or PR (whichever status was recorded first) until the first documented sign of disease progression or death (due to any cause), whichever was first. DOR was defined for participants with a confirmed CR or PR. For participants in the subset of responders who did not progress or die, duration of response was censored. DOR was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From date of first document CR or PR (whichever was recorded first) until first documentation of disease progression or death due to any cause, or up to data cutoff (31 May 2013) up to 3.25 years|FAS||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816574|NCT01104155|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|ORR was defined as the percentage of participants whose best overall response (BOR) was either a confirmed complete response (CR) or a partial response (PR) based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 criteria for target lesions assessed by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and based on investigator assessment. CRs and PRs had to be confirmed by a repeat assessment of response (CR or PR) separated by at least 4 weeks (28 days). CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (target or non-target) had to have a reduction in short axis to less than 10 millimeters. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. ORR and the corresponding 95% two-sided confidence intervals (CI) were estimated for each treatment regimen using the Clopper-Pearson method for calculating the exact binomial CI. (CR + PR)|From date of first dose of study drug until, or up to the date of data cutoff (07 Apr 2011)|Full analysis set (FAS) (Intent-to-treat population) included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816575|NCT01104207|Primary|Change in Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI) Score|The TFI is a 25-item questionnaire that assesses tinnitus severity. The possible range of scores for the TFI is 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe tinnitus.|26 weeks post-treatment|||units on TFI scale; change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
816576|NCT01104246|Primary|Time-average (Cavg) Steady State Testosterone Concentration Over 24 Hours|A 24-hour pharmacokinetic sampling was performed on Day 28/29 after the start of dosing.|Day 28/29|Per-protocol Population was used for the analysis. PP population included subjects who completed the treatment period of the study, who did not have more than two consecutive missing data, and who did not have any major protocol deviations.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816577|NCT01104285|Primary|Total Days of Mechanical Ventilatory Support||days|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816578|NCT01104311|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Number of Participants with Adverse Events|24 Weeks|The number of participants are analyzed by Safety population.||participants|||Number
816579|NCT01104311|Secondary|Number of Participants With Vascular Death From Screening to Week 24 in ITT Population.||24 Weeks|The number of participants are analyzed by ITT population.||participants|||Number
816580|NCT01104311|Secondary|Total Number of Cardiovascular Events Form Screening to Week 24 in ITT Population.||24 Week|The number of participants are analyzed by ITT population.||events|||Number
816581|NCT01104311|Secondary|Number of Participants With Cardiovascular Events From Screening to Week 24 in ITT Population.||24 weeks|The number of participants are analyzed by ITT Population.||participants|||Number
816582|NCT01104311|Secondary|The Number of Patients With New Ischemic Lesion in the Whole Forebrain on FLAIR MRI||24 weeks|The Number of Participants are analyzed by ITT (Intent to treat) Population. ITT Population (Aggressive BP Lowering: 66, Modest BP Lowering: 63)||participants|||Number
816583|NCT01104311|Secondary|Change of the Ischemic Lesion Volume in Cerebral Hemisphere on FLAIR From Screening to Week 24 in FAS Population|the difference between final ischemic lesions volume and base ischemic lesions in the territory of symptomatic intracranial disease on FLAIR MRI|24 weeks|The number of participants are analyzed by FAS population.||cc||Standard Deviation|Mean
816584|NCT01104311|Primary|Ischemic Lesion Volume Change in the Whole Forebrain on Fluid Attenuation Inversion Recovery (FLAIR) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)|The difference between final ischemic lesions volume and base ischemic lesions of both hemisphere on FLAIR MRI|Screening to 24 weeks|The Number of Participants Analyzed by FAS(Full analysis)Population. FAS Population (Aggressive BP Lowering: 59, Modest BP Lowering: 52)||cc||Standard Deviation|Mean
816585|NCT01104376|Primary|Measure Efavirenz Clearance|Effect of steady-state voriconazole on efavirenz Clearance in healthy volunteers (n=61) administered a single 100 mg oral dose of efavirenz at baseline (control phase) and after treatment with voriconazole to steady-state.|Baseline, 30 min, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16 and 24h after efavirenz|||ml/min/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816586|NCT01104493|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting at Least One Serious Adverse Event (SAE) or New Onset Chronic Disease (NOCD), Study Days 1-181|SAEs were those that resulted in death; were life-threatening; resulted in inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in persistent or significant disability or incapacity; were a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study participant; or were a medical event that may have jeopardized the subject and may have required medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above. An NOCD was a newly diagnosed medical condition of a chronic, ongoing nature and assessed by the investigator as medically significant.|Study Days 1-181|All subjects who received a single dose of investigational product (monovalent vaccine = 240; placebo = 60)||Percentage of participants|||Number
816587|NCT01104493|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting at Least One Serious Adverse Event (SAE) or New Onset Chronic Disease (NOCD), Study Days 1-29|SAEs were those that resulted in death; were life-threatening; resulted in inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in persistent or significant disability or incapacity; were a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study participant; or were a medical event that may have jeopardized the subject and may have required medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above. An NOCD was a newly diagnosed medical condition of a chronic, ongoing nature and assessed by the investigator as medically significant.|Study Days 1-29|All subjects who received a single dose of investigational product (monovalent vaccine = 240; placebo = 60)||Percentage of participants|||Number
816588|NCT01104493|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Any Adverse Event.|An adverse event (AE) was defined as: Any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product.|Study Days 1-15|All subjects who received a single dose of investigational product (monovalent vaccine = 240; placebo = 60)||Percentage of participants|||Number
816589|NCT01104493|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Any Solicited Symptom.|Solicited symptoms were events that were considered likely to occur post dosing. Solicited symptoms for this study are listed below.|Study Days 1-15|All subjects who received a single dose of investigational product (monovalent vaccine = 240; placebo = 60)||Percentage of participants|||Number
816590|NCT01104493|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Any Adverse Event.|An adverse event (AE) was defined as: Any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product.|Study Days 1-8|All subjects who received a single dose of investigational product (monovalent vaccine = 240; placebo = 60)||Percentage of participants|||Number
816591|NCT01104493|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Any Solicited Symptom|Solicited symptoms were events that were considered likely to occur post dosing. Solicited symptoms for this study are listed below.|Study Days 1-8|All subjects who received a single dose of investigational product (monovalent vaccine = 240; placebo = 60)||Percentage of participants|||Number
816592|NCT01104493|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Fever, Defined as Oral Temperature ≥ 101°F|A comparison of the rate of fever (oral temperature ≥ 101°F) reported during the 7 days post administration of investigational product between the monovalent vaccine and placebo groups.|Study Days 1-8|All subjects who received a single dose of investigational product (monovalent vaccine = 240; placebo = 60)||Percentage of participants|||Number
816593|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pro-BNP Levels According to the Genetic Polymorphism of GRK5-AG at Week 26 or EOT|BNP is a substance secreted from the ventricles or lower chambers of the heart in response to changes in pressure that occur when heart failure develops and worsens. The level of BNP in the blood increases when heart failure symptoms worsen, and decreases when the heart failure condition is stable. The BNP level in a person with heart failure is higher than in a person with normal heart function.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population: all enrolled participants; treated with study drug; did not violate inclusion/exclusion criteria; and received primary efficacy assessment at least once after administration. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816594|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pro-BNP Levels According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|BNP is a substance secreted from the ventricles or lower chambers of the heart in response to changes in pressure that occur when heart failure develops and worsens. The level of BNP in the blood increases when heart failure symptoms worsen, and decreases when the heart failure condition is stable. The BNP level in a person with heart failure is higher than in a person with normal heart function.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population: all enrolled participants; treated with study drug; did not violate inclusion/exclusion criteria; and received primary efficacy assessment at least once after administration. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816595|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pro-BNP Levels According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-AG at Week 26 or EOT|BNP is a substance secreted from the ventricles or lower chambers of the heart in response to changes in pressure that occur when heart failure develops and worsens. The level of BNP in the blood increases when heart failure symptoms worsen, and decreases when the heart failure condition is stable. The BNP level in a person with heart failure is higher than in a person with normal heart function.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population: all enrolled participants; treated with study drug; did not violate inclusion/exclusion criteria; and received primary efficacy assessment at least once after administration. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816676|NCT01110252|Primary|Forced Expiratory Volume (FEV1)|A pulmonary function test that measures the volume and speed of the exhaled air.|baseline and 30 days after procedure|all patients were evaluated prior and after the procedure||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
816596|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pro-B-type Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) Levels According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-1 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|BNP is a substance secreted from the ventricles or lower chambers of the heart in response to changes in pressure that occur when heart failure develops and worsens. The level of BNP in the blood increases when heart failure symptoms worsen, and decreases when the heart failure condition is stable. The BNP level in a person with heart failure is higher than in a person with normal heart function.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population: all enrolled participants; treated with study drug; did not violate inclusion/exclusion criteria; and received primary efficacy assessment at least once after administration. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||picograms (pg)/ milliliter (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816597|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DBP (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of GRK5-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in DBP was calculated as 6-MWT after walking DBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking DBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816598|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DBP (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in DBP was calculated as 6-MWT after walking DBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking DBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816599|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DBP (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in DBP was calculated as 6-MWT after walking DBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking DBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816600|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DBP (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-1 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in DBP was calculated as 6-MWT after walking DBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking DBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816601|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DBP (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of GRK5-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in DBP was calculated as 6-MWT before walking DBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking DBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816602|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DBP (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in DBP was calculated as 6-MWT before walking DBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking DBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816603|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DBP (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in DBP was calculated as 6-MWT before walking DBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking DBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816604|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-1 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in DBP was calculated as 6-MWT before walking DBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking DBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816605|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SBP (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of GRK5-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in SBP was calculated as 6-MWT after walking SBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking SBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816606|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SBP (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in SBP was calculated as 6-MWT after walking SBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking SBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816607|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SBP (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in SBP was calculated as 6-MWT after walking SBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking SBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816608|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SBP (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-1 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in SBP was calculated as 6-MWT after walking SBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking SBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816609|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SBP (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of GRK5-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in SBP was calculated as 6-MWT before walking SBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking SBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816610|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SBP (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in SBP was calculated as 6-MWT before walking SBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking SBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816611|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SBP (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in SBP was calculated as 6-MWT before walking SBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking SBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816612|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-1 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in SBP was calculated as 6-MWT before walking SBP at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking SBP at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816613|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of GRK5-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in heart rate was calculated as 6-MWT after walking heart rate at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking heart rate at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
816614|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in heart rate was calculated as 6-MWT after walking heart rate at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking heart rate at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
816615|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in heart rate was calculated as 6-MWT after walking heart rate at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking heart rate at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
816616|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (6 MWT- After Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-1 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in heart rate was calculated as 6-MWT after walking heart rate at Week 26 minus 6-MWT after walking heart rate at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
816617|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of GRK5-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in heart rate was calculated as 6-MWT before walking heart rate at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking heart rate at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
816618|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in heart rate was calculated as 6-MWT before walking heart rate at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking heart rate at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
816619|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-AG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in heart rate was calculated as 6-MWT before walking heart rate at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking heart rate at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
816677|NCT01110252|Primary|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|A pulmonary function test that measures the volume and speed of the inhalated air.|baseline and 30 days after procedure|all patients were evaluated prior and after the procedure||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
816620|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (6 MWT- Before Walking) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-1 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|The change in heart rate was calculated as 6-MWT before walking heart rate at Week 26 minus 6-MWT before walking heart rate at baseline.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||Beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816621|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 6-minute Walking Test (6-MWT) Distance According to the Genetic Polymorphism of GRK5-AG at Week 26 or EOT|6 MWT distance was the distance that a participant could walk in 6 minutes. Participants were asked to perform the test at a pace that was comfortable to them, with as many breaks as they needed.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||Meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
816622|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 6-MWT Distance According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|6 MWT distance was the distance that a participant could walk in 6 minutes. Participants were asked to perform the test at a pace that was comfortable to them, with as many breaks as they needed.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||Meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
816623|NCT01104558|Primary|Change From Baseline in Echocardiographic LVEF According to the Genetic Polymorphism of G Protein-coupled Receptor Kinase 5 (GRK5)-AG at Week 26 or EOT||Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population: all enrolled participants; treated with study drug; did not violate inclusion/exclusion criteria; and received primary efficacy assessment at least once after administration. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||Percent LVEF||Standard Deviation|Mean
816624|NCT01104558|Primary|Change From Baseline in Echocardiographic LVEF According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT||Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population: all enrolled participants; treated with study drug; did not violate inclusion/exclusion criteria; and received primary efficacy assessment at least once after administration. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||Percent LVEF||Standard Deviation|Mean
816625|NCT01104558|Primary|Change From Baseline in Echocardiographic LVEF According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-AG at Week 26 or EOT||Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population: all enrolled participants; treated with study drug; did not violate inclusion/exclusion criteria; and received primary efficacy assessment at least once after administration. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||Percent LVEF||Standard Deviation|Mean
816626|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 6-MWT Distance According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-2 Adrenergic Receptor-AG at Week 26 or EOT|6 MWT distance was the distance that a participant could walk in 6 minutes. Participants were asked to perform the test at a pace that was comfortable to them, with as many breaks as they needed.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||Meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
816627|NCT01104558|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 6-minute Walking Test (6-MWT) Distance According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-1 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or EOT|6 MWT distance was the distance that a participant could walk in 6 minutes. Participants were asked to perform the test at a pace that was comfortable to them, with as many breaks as they needed.|Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy ITT population. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||Meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
816628|NCT01104558|Secondary|Duration of Hospitalization Due to Heart Failure||Baseline to Week 26 (or EOT)|Participant analyzed included 1 participant from the efficacy ITT population who was hospitalized once due to heart failure.||Days|||Number
816629|NCT01104558|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hospitalization Due to Heart Failure||Baseline to Week 26 (or EOT)|Efficacy ITT population: all enrolled participants; treated with study drug; did not violate inclusion/exclusion criteria; and received primary efficacy assessment at least once after administration.||Participants|||Number
816630|NCT01104558|Primary|Change From Baseline in Echocardiographic Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) According to the Genetic Polymorphism of Beta-1 Adrenergic Receptor-CG at Week 26 or End of Treatment (EOT)||Baseline and Week 26 (or EOT)|"Efficacy intention to treat (ITT) population: all enrolled participants; treated with study drug; did not violate inclusion/exclusion criteria; and received primary efficacy assessment at least once after administration. n signifies number of participants with particular genotype and were evaluated for this outcome at particular time point."||Percent LVEF||Standard Deviation|Mean
816631|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With at Least One Laboratory Parameter Change From Low or Normal at Baseline to Abnormally High at Follow–up 24 Hours Post Injection|Number of participants with at least one occurrence of changing from low or normal at baseline to high at follow-up.|Baseline, Follow–up visit (24 hours post injection)|Safety Analysis Set (SAF): The analysis of safety data was performed using all available data from all participants who administered any amount of gadobutrol.||Participants|||Number
816632|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Vital Signs Change From Baseline and Follow–up 24 Hours Post Injection - Heart Rate|Heart rate was measured in a supine position.|Baseline, Follow–up visit (24 hours post injection)|Safety Analysis Set (SAF): The analysis of safety data was performed using all available data from all participants who administered any amount of gadobutrol.||beats/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
816694|NCT01114945|Primary|Glottis View Using the Cormack Lehane Score|"Cormack Lehane score classification:
Grade 1: Most of the glottis is visible Grade 2: At best almost half of the glottis is seen, at worst only the posterior tip of the arytenoids is seen Grade 3: Only the epiglottis is visible Grade 4: No laryngeal structures are visible"|Up to 1 minute|Cormack Lehane score (grade:1/2/3/4 [n])||participants|||Number
816634|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Categorical Accuracy Difference of Extent of Malignant Disease Verified by Histopathology by Majority Reader, Breast Region Level||Immediately before injection and after injection|"The Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP) amendment re-defined study objectives and replaced protocol-defined parameters such as categorical accuracy prior to database closure and breaking the blind. The SAP amendment is based upon review of results of an identical clinical study within the GEMMA program and also includes advice from the FDA."|||||
816635|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Categorical Accuracy Difference of Extent of Malignant Disease Verified by SoT by Majority Reader, Breast Region Level||Immediately before injection and after injection|"The Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP) amendment re-defined study objectives and replaced protocol-defined parameters such as categorical accuracy prior to database closure and breaking the blind. The SAP amendment is based upon review of results of an identical clinical study within the GEMMA program and also includes advice from the FDA."|||||
816636|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Blinded Reader 3: Intra-reader Variability Based on Assessment for CMRM - Breast Level|Intra-reader variability was assessed using a kappa on the match to SoT for the different regions within each participant (match, no match SoT). For each of the 3 readers, intra-reader agreement was assessed by considering each breast region to have 2 possibilities for an assessment by CMRM: matched SoT or did not match SoT. Kappa value varies from 0 (no agreement) to 1 (perfect agreement).|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||Kappa|Participants||Number
816637|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Blinded Reader 2: Intra-reader Variability Based on Assessment for CMRM - Breast Level|Intra-reader variability was assessed using a kappa on the match to SoT for the different regions within each participant (match, no match SoT). For each of the 3 readers, intra-reader agreement was assessed by considering each breast region to have 2 possibilities for an assessment by CMRM: matched SoT or did not match SoT. Kappa value varies from 0 (no agreement) to 1 (perfect agreement).|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure.||Kappa|Participants||Number
816638|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Blinded Reader 1: Intra-reader Variability Based on Assessment for CMRM - Breast Level|Intra-reader variability was assessed using a kappa on the match to SoT for the different regions within each participant (match, no match SoT). For each of the 3 readers, intra-reader agreement was assessed by considering each breast region to have 2 possibilities for an assessment by CMRM: matched SoT or did not match SoT. Kappa value varies from 0 (no agreement) to 1 (perfect agreement).|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure.||Kappa|Participants||Number
816639|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Blinded Readers: Inter-reader Agreement on Sensitivity Based on Assessment for UMRM vs CMRM - Breast Region Level|Inter-reader agreement was assessed by considering each breast region to have 2 possibilities (malignant disease / no malignant disease) for an assessment by the 2 image sets (UMRM and CMRM). Kappa value varies from 0 (no agreement) to 1 (perfect agreement).|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||Kappa|Participants||Number
816640|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Accuracy Difference of Presence of Bilateral Malignant Disease Verified by SoT by Clinical Investigator, Participant Level|The disease state “bilateral malignant disease” was derived from the assessment of the different regions for each breast (right and left) for investigators for each imaging modality (UMRM, CMRM, XRM, UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM) based on the following rule: If the participant had at least one breast with no malignant region , the assessment of bilateral malignant disease was categorized as “No”. If the participant had at least one malignant lesion in both breasts, the assessment of bilateral malignant disease was categorized as “Yes”. The proportion of correct matches of each different image set to the SoT for the existence of bilateral malignant disease were derived. The analysis was based on the difference in accuracy for the evaluation of bilateral malignant disease for the following image comparisons on a participant level. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 380 participants in FAS; evaluable subjects with at least one region verified by SoT in each breast with available CMRM, UMRM, CMRM+XRM, UMRM+XRM and XRM assessment.||difference in accuracy (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816641|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Sensitivity of Detection of Multicentric Malignant Disease Verified by SoT, Breast Level|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the reader using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the point estimates were calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||difference in sensitivity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816642|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Specificity Difference in the Determination of Multifocal Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|A malignant breast was defined as FP, when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as TN. Specificity was then defined as TN/(TN+FP). The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||difference in specificity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816643|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Specificity Difference in the Determination of Unifocal Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|A malignant breast was defined as FP, when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as TN. Specificity was then defined as TN/(TN+FP). The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||difference in specificity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816744|NCT01115582|Secondary|Blood Pressure|Systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP)|At baseline and after 30 days of treatment|All patients entered and treated||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816644|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Specificity Difference in the Determination of Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|A malignant breast was defined as FP, when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as TN. Specificity was then defined as TN/(TN+FP). The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||difference in specificity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816645|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Sensitivity Difference in the Determination of Multifocal Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the reader using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the point estimates were calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants. The difference in sensitivity is calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||difference in sensitivity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816646|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Sensitivity Difference in the Determination of Unifocal Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the reader using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the point estimates were calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants. The difference in sensitivity is calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||difference in sensitivity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816647|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Sensitivity Difference in the Determination of Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM, and CMRM+XRM vs XRM Verified by SoT, Breast Region Level|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the reader using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the point estimates were calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants. Regions with malignant disease verified by SoT comprise unifocal and multifocal regions. Difference in sensitivity is calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||difference in sensitivity (%)|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816648|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Breast Level Specificity for All Breasts by Imaging Modality and by Reader|A non-malignant breast was defined as FP when the reader assessed at least one breast region as malignant. A malignant breast was defined as FP, when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as TN. Specificity was then defined as (N-FP)/N, where N was total number of breasts.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 395 participants in FAS; evaluable for specificity were breasts with or without malignant disease verified by SoT with available assessments by the imaging modality.||specificity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816649|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Breast Level Specificity in Malignant Breasts Using UMRM, XRM, CMRM+XRM and UMRM+XRM by Reader|A malignant breast was defined as FP, when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as TN. Specificity was then defined as TN/(TN+FP).|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 390 participants; evaluable for specificity were breasts with malignant disease verified by SoT for which an assessment by the imaging modality was available.||specificity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816650|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Breast Level Specificity of in Non-malignant Breasts Using UMRM, XRM, CMRM+XRM and UMRM+XRM by Reader|A non-malignant breast was defined as false positive (FP), when the reader assessed at least one breast region as malignant. When all breast regions were assessed as non-malignant, the breast was defined as true negative (TN). Breast level specificity was first defined in participant as number of TN-breasts in participant divided by number of non-malignant breasts in participant. Subsequently the specificity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the specificities across all participants who contributed with at least one non-malignant breast.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 367 participants; evaluable for specificity were breasts with no malignant disease verified by SoT for which an assessment of the imaging modality was available.||specificity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816651|NCT01104584|Other Pre-specified|Sensitivity for Detection of Full Extent of Malignant Breast Disease Using XRM, CMRM+XRM and UMRM+XRM Per Reader|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the reader using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the sensitivity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were performed for a total number of 390 participants who had regions with malignant disease verified by SoT with available assessment by the imaging modality.||sensitivity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816652|NCT01104584|Secondary|Difference of Confidence in Diagnosis for Breast Region Diagnosis Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM+XRM vs UMRM+XRM and CMRM+XRM vs XRM by Reader, Participant Level|The investigator and the blinded readers each recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for each breast region based on a 4-point scale (1 = not confident, 2 = somewhat confident, 3 = confident, and 4 = very confident). For each participant, the mean of the confidence responses for the diagnosed breast regions was calculated, and rounded to the nearest 0.5. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus UMRM+XRM value, CMRM+XRM value minus XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|All participants in the FAS with assessments for this outcome measure||difference of scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816745|NCT01115582|Secondary|Adverse Events|Total number of patients with any adverse events|Total of 30 days, i.e. from the time point the patients entered into the study up to the end of treatment|All patients entered and treated||participants|||Number
816653|NCT01104584|Secondary|Percentage Difference of Participants Whose Additional Index Cancers Were Detected Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM vs XRM, and CMRM vs CMRM+XRM|Additional cancer was defined as cancer which was present according to SoT, but which was not defined as index cancer, i.e. was not known when the participant was enrolled into the study. The difference in percentage of participants was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM value minus XRM value, CMRM value minus CMRM+XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The evaluation was based on the 84 participants in the FAS who had at least one additional cancer region according to SoT.||difference in percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816654|NCT01104584|Secondary|Percentage Difference of Participants Whose Index Cancers Were Detected Using CMRM vs UMRM, CMRM vs XRM, and CMRM vs CMRM+XRM|Index cancer was defined as the cancer confirmed by histology prior to inclusion which made the participants eligible for the study. The difference in percentage of participants was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value, CMRM value minus XRM value, CMRM value minus CMRM+XRM value respectively.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 388 participants in FAS; index cancer was defined as the cancer confirmed by histology prior to inclusion which made the participant eligible for the study.||difference in percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816655|NCT01104584|Secondary|Breast Level Specificity of CMRM Based on Malignant Breasts|A malignant breast was defined as FP, when the reader using the respective imaging modality assessed more breast regions as malignant as were present according to SoT. Otherwise the breast was assessed as TN. Specificity was then defined as TN/(TN+FP).|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 390 participants in FAS; evaluable for specificity were breasts with malignant disease verified by SoT for which an assessment by the imaging modality was available.||specificity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816656|NCT01104584|Primary|Breast Level Specificity of CMRM for Non-malignant Breasts by Reader|A non-malignant breast was defined as false positive (FP), when the reader assessed at least one breast region as malignant. When all breast regions were assessed as non-malignant, the breast was defined as true negative (TN). Breast level specificity was first defined in participant as number of TN-breasts in participant divided by number of non-malignant breasts in participant. Subsequently the specificity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the specificities across all participants who contributed with at least one non-malignant breast.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 367 participants in FAS; evaluable for specificity were breasts without malignant disease as verified by Standard of Truth (SoT) for which a CMRM assessment was available.||specificity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816657|NCT01104584|Primary|Sensitivity for Detection of Full Extent of Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM Per Reader|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the clinical investigators and the 3 blinded readers using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the sensitivity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants.|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 390 participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) who had regions with malignant disease verified by Standard of Truth (SoT).||sensitivity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816658|NCT01104584|Primary|Difference of Sensitivity for Detection of Full Extent of Malignant Breast Disease Using CMRM vs UMRM Per Reader|For a single participant the sensitivity was defined as the proportion of malignant breast regions that were recognized by the clinical investigators and the 3 blinded readers using the respective imaging modality as malignant. Subsequently the sensitivity percentage was calculated based on the mean of the sensitivities across all participants. The difference was calculated as CMRM value minus UMRM value. For ease of expression, the following abbreviations will be used: Magnetic Resonance Mammography (MRM), Unenhanced MRM (UMRM), combined unenhanced and contrast (gadobutrol)-enhanced MRM (CMRM), X-ray mammography (XRM).|Immediately before injection and after injection|The analyses were based on 390 participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) who had regions with malignant disease verified by Standard of Truth (SoT).||difference in sensitivity (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816659|NCT01104636|Secondary|Level of Nicotine Dependence Measured by the Fagerstrom Test|Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) was designed to provide measure of nicotine dependence related to cigarette smoking. It contains 4 yes-no and 2 multiple choice questions. Items are scored 0-3 for multiple choice items, items are summed to yield total score of 0-10 (0=minimum to 10=maximum nicotine dependence).|Baseline|The all participants’ population included all enrolled participants who had received at least 1 dose (including partial doses) of study medication. Missing observations were not imputed and hence the participants analyzed are the ones without missing values.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Median
816660|NCT01104636|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Abstained From Smoking at Week 12|The use of nicotine was recorded using Nicotine Use Inventory (NUI) to determine the participants who abstained from smoking for the previous 7 days. A responder for the 7-day point prevalence was defined as those with ‘no’ answers to the following two questions: Did the participant smoke any cigarettes (even a puff) in the last 7 days; and did participant use any other tobacco products (example pipe, cigars, snuff, chewing tobacco) in the last 7 days.|Week 12|The all participants' population included all enrolled participants who had received at least 1 dose (including partial doses) of study medication. Missing observations were not imputed and hence the participants analyzed are the ones without missing values.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816661|NCT01104662|Secondary|Overall Therapeutic Outcome at Test of Cure (TOC)/Safety Visit|"Participants were assigned a Sponsor-assessed clinical outcome based on the following definitions at the TOC/Safety visit:
Failure: Assessed as a failure at any time by the Investigator or received non-study antimicrobial therapy for lack of efficacy or had the primary site of infection removed completely by surgery or underwent surgery to treat the infection >4 days after starting study medication.
Success: Were not assessed as a failure at any time and were assessed as a cure or improvement by the Investigator at the TOC visit.
Non-evaluable: Received potentially effective antimicrobial therapy during the study period for reasons other than lack of efficacy or received <4 days of study medication or were not assessed by the Investigator."|Baseline through TOC/Safety Visit|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 Gram-positive baseline infecting pathogen for cSSSI participants or S. aureus bacteremia for bacteremia participants.||participants|||Number
833438|NCT01258049|Secondary|PRR 24 [MITT Population]|The percentage reduction in parasite counts 24 hours after first dose|28 days after start of treatment|||percentage of baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
816662|NCT01104662|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Creatine Phosphokinase (CPK) Elevations Through End of Therapy/Early Termination (EOT/ET)|The number of participants with CPK elevations of >500 units per liter (U/L) above baseline at any time from Day 1 through the EOT/ET visit are presented.|Baseline through EOT/ET|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline CPK value and at least 1 post-baseline CPK assessment between Day 1 post-dosing and EOT visit.||participants|||Number
816663|NCT01110135|Primary|Successful Mobilization and Collection of PBSCs|Count of participants with successful mobilization and collection of PBSCs. Defined as collection of > 2 x 10^6 CD34/kg. The current study will be deemed to be potentially efficacious if the observed rate of success is at least 80%.|Within 7 days of apheresis and within 6 weeks of receiving bendamustine hydrochloride|||Participants|||Count of Participants
816664|NCT01110187|Secondary|Number of Participants With Seizures|Number of seizures in the first 72 hours based on EEG recording|baseline to 72 hours|||number of participants with seizures|||Number
816665|NCT01110187|Primary|Number of Adverse Events|The primary outcome measure is the incidence of clinical adverse events. These will be followed by daily clinical observations during the hospital stay. Subjects will be evaluated for e.g., seizures, fever, neurological changes, cardiovascular, hematologic and dermatologic abnormalities, liver failure, renal failure, and death; EKGs will be requested as per ICU routines through day 7.|baseline to 7 days|all participants in each arm were available for analyses||number of events experienced|||Number
816666|NCT01110200|Secondary|Number of EXs of COPD Requiring Treatment With OCSs, Treatment With ABs, and/or Hospitalization (Alone and in Combination)|A COPD EX was defined as the worsening of >=2 major symptoms (dyspnoea, sputum volume, sputum purulence [containing/discharging pus]) or the worsening of any 1 major symptom together with any 1 minor symptom (sore throat, cold [nasal discharge and/or nasal conjestion], fever without other cause, increased cough or wheeze) for at least 2 consecutive days. COPD EXs were identified by symptom review, and/or were based on investigator judgment (via phone contact or at a clinic visit).|From Baseline up to Week 29, approximately|ITT Population. Only those participants with an EX were assessed for hospitalization, treatment with OCSs, and treatment with ABs.||exacerbations|||Number
816667|NCT01110200|Secondary|Number of Participants With an EX of COPD Requiring Treatment With OCSs, Treatment With ABs, and/or Hospitalization|A COPD EX was defined as the worsening of >=2 major symptoms (dyspnoea, sputum volume, sputum purulence [containing/discharging pus]) or the worsening of any 1 major symptom together with any 1 minor symptom (sore throat, cold [nasal discharge and/or nasal conjestion], fever without other cause, increased cough or wheeze) for at least 2 consecutive days. COPD EXs were identified by symptom review, and/or were based on investigator judgment (via phone contact or at a clinic visit).|From Baseline up to Week 29, approximately|ITT Population||participants|||Number
816668|NCT01110200|Primary|Number of EXs of COPD Requiring Hospitalization That Occurred More Than 21 Days Post-discharge or Physician's Office Visit for an EX of COPD Requiring Treatment With OCSs or OCSs and ABs|A COPD EX was defined as the worsening of >=2 major symptoms (dyspnoea, sputum volume, sputum purulence [containing/discharging pus]) or the worsening of any 1 major symptom together with any 1 minor symptom (sore throat, cold [nasal discharge and/or nasal conjestion], fever without other cause, increased cough or wheeze) for at least 2 consecutive days. COPD EXs were identified by symptom review, and/or were based on investigator judgment (via phone contact or at a clinic visit). Hospitalization had to occur more than 21 days post-discharge or physician’s office visit for a prior COPD EX.|From 21 days post-discharge (hospital or emergency room) or physician's office visit, up to 29 weeks|ITT Population. Only those participants with an EX requiring hospitalization were assessed.||Exacerbations|||Number
816669|NCT01110200|Primary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Number of EXs of COPD Requiring Hospitalization That Occurred More Than 21 Days Post-discharge or Physician's Office Visit for an EX of COPD Requiring Treatment With OCSs or OCSs and ABs|A COPD EX was defined as the worsening of >=2 major symptoms (dyspnoea, sputum volume, sputum purulence [containing/discharging pus]) or the worsening of any 1 major symptom together with any 1 minor symptom (sore throat, cold [nasal discharge and/or nasal conjestion], fever without other cause, increased cough or wheeze) for at least 2 consecutive days. COPD EXs were identified by symptom review, and/or were based on investigator judgment (via phone contact or at a clinic visit). Hospitalization had to occur more than 21 days post-discharge or physician’s office visit for a prior COPD EX.|From 21 days post-discharge (hospital or emergency room) or physician's office visit, up to 29 weeks|ITT Population||participants|||Number
816670|NCT01110200|Primary|Number of Par. With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) EXs Requiring Hospitalization That Occurred >21 Days Post-discharge/Physician's Office Visit for a COPD EX Requiring Treatment With Oral Corticosteroids (OCSs) or OCSs and Antibiotics (ABs)|A COPD exacerbation (EX) was defined as the worsening of >=2 major symptoms (dyspnoea, sputum volume, sputum purulence [containing/discharging pus]) or the worsening of any 1 major symptom together with any 1 minor symptom (sore throat, cold [nasal discharge and/or nasal conjestion], fever without other cause, increased cough or wheeze) for at least 2 consecutive days. COPD EXs were identified by symptom review, and/or were based on investigator judgment (via phone contact or at a clinic visit). Hospitalization had to occur >21 days post-discharge/physician’s office visit for a prior COPD EX.|From 21 days post-discharge (hospital or emergency room) or physician's office visit, up to 29 weeks|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to study drug||participants|||Number
816671|NCT01110239|Primary|Visual Analog Scale Score as a Measure of Tolerability|The visual analogue scale is a pain scale from 0-10, with 10 being maximum pain and is frequently used in research studies assessing patient discomfort.|90 days|We escalated the ischemia times in cohorts of 6. Cohorts of 6 were prespecified at the beginning to the study. All analysis was intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816672|NCT01110239|Primary|Number of Patients With Deep Vein Thrombosis for Safety Assessment.||90 days|||participants|||Number
816673|NCT01110252|Primary|Vital Capacity - VC|A pulmonary function test that measures the volume and speed of the inhalated and exhaled air.|baseline and 30 days after the procedure|all patients were evaluated prior and after the procedure.||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
816674|NCT01110252|Secondary|Arterial Blood Gases Test - Pa CO2|presence of CO2 in the arterial blood.|baseline and 30 days after the procedure|all patients were evaluated prior and after the procedure||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816675|NCT01110252|Secondary|Arterial Blood Gases Test - Pa O2|presence of oxygen in the blood gases.|baseline and 30 days after procedure|all patients were evaluated prior and after the procedure.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816678|NCT01110330|Secondary|The Number of Patients in the Positive Baseline Culture Set (PBCS) With Overall Cure (OC) at Week 6|Overall Cure (OC) was defined as Mycological Cure (MC) in addition to a global clinical evaluation of either ‘Completely Cleared’ (clearance of all signs and symptoms of Tinea pedis) or ‘Marked Improvement’ (significant improvement of signs and symptoms of Tinea pedis; residual signs and symptoms only), assessed at Week 6.|Week 6|Only patients who had a positive Tinea pedis culture at baseline, ie 281 patients, were included in the Positive Baseline Culture Set (PBCS), which was the set used for analysis of the Secondary Outcome Measure.||participants|||Number
816679|NCT01110330|Primary|The Number of Patients in the Positive Baseline Culture Set (PBCS) With Mycological Cure (MC) at Week 6|Mycological Cure (MC) was defined as having a negative potassium hydroxide (KOH) microscopy and negative fungal culture at Week 6.|Week 6|Only patients who had a positive Tinea pedis culture at baseline, ie 281 patients, were included in the Positive Baseline Culture Set (PBCS), which was the set used for analysis of the Primary Outcome Measure.||participants|||Number
816680|NCT01110382|Secondary|Number of Participants With Favorable Per-pathogen Microbiological Outcome Rate at Late Follow-Up (LFU) Visit|A total of 24 pathogens in the doripenem group and 6 pathogens in the meropenem group were isolated at baseline from the intra-abdominal culture and were susceptible to the study drug received. The most common pathogens isolated at baseline from the intra-abdominal culture are listed in the table below; the numbers in parenthesis next to each pathogen represent the number of participants with the pathogen isolated in the doripenem and meropenem treatment groups, respectively. The favorable per-pathogen microbiological outcome was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment).|LFU (28 to 42 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of CITT with at least 1 baseline bacterial pathogen isolated from the intra-abdominal cavity that was susceptible to both doripenem and meropenem. 8 and 2 participants from doripenem and meropenem, respectively had no susceptible intra-abdominal pathogen at baseline and were excluded from this set.||participants|||Number
816681|NCT01110382|Secondary|Number of Participants With Favorable Per-pathogen Microbiological Outcome Rate at Test Of Cure (TOC) Visit|A total of 24 pathogens in the doripenem group and 6 pathogens in the meropenem group were isolated at baseline from the intra-abdominal culture and were susceptible to the study drug received. The most common pathogens isolated from the intra-abdominal culture are listed in the table below; the numbers in parenthesis next to each pathogen represent the number of participants with the pathogen isolated at baseline in the doripenem and meropenem treatment groups, respectively. The favorable per-pathogen microbiological outcome was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment).|TOC (7 to 14 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of CITT with at least 1 baseline bacterial pathogen isolated from the intra-abdominal cavity that was susceptible to both doripenem and meropenem. 8 and 2 participants from doripenem and meropenem, respectively had no susceptible intra-abdominal pathogen at baseline and were excluded from this set.||participants|||Number
816682|NCT01110382|Secondary|Number of Participants With Favorable Per-pathogen Microbiological Outcome Rate at End of IV (EIV) Visit|A total of 24 pathogens in the doripenem group and 6 pathogens in the meropenem group were isolated at baseline from the intra-abdominal culture and were susceptible to the study drug received. The most common pathogens isolated from the intra-abdominal culture are listed in the table below; the numbers in parenthesis next to each pathogen represent the number of participants with the pathogen isolated at baseline in the doripenem and meropenem treatment groups, respectively. The favorable per-pathogen microbiological outcome was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment).|EIV (within 24 hours after completion of the last dose of IV study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of CITT with at least 1 baseline bacterial pathogen isolated from the intra-abdominal cavity that was susceptible to both doripenem and meropenem. 8 and 2 participants from doripenem and meropenem, respectively had no susceptible intra-abdominal pathogen at baseline and were excluded from this set.||participants|||Number
816683|NCT01110382|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Favorable Per-participant Microbiological Response|Favorable per-participant microbiological response rate was evaluated at the at End of IV (EIV) visit, Test Of Cure (TOC) visit, and Late Follow-Up (LFU) visit. The favorable per-participant microbiological response was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment).|EIV (within 24 hours after completion of the last dose of IV study medication therapy), TOC (7 to 14 days after the last dose of study medication therapy), and LFU (28 to 42 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of CITT with at least 1 baseline bacterial pathogen isolated from the intra-abdominal cavity that was susceptible to both doripenem and meropenem. 8 and 2 participants from doripenem and meropenem, respectively had no susceptible intra-abdominal pathogen at baseline and were excluded from this set.||participants|||Number
816684|NCT01110382|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Clinical Cure Rate at Late Follow-Up (LFU) Visit|The participants were considered as clinical cure if they had clinical improvement in signs and symptoms of the intra-abdominal infection such that no additional antibacterial therapy or surgical or percutaneous intervention is/was required for the treatment of the index infection, no fever, and a favorable response at End of IV visit.|LFU (28 to 42 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Clinical Intent-to-Treat (CITT): All randomized participants who met the minimal disease definition of complicated intra-abdominal infection regardless if a baseline pathogen was isolated from the intra-abdominal cavity.||participants|||Number
816685|NCT01110382|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Clinical Improvement Rate at End of IV (EIV) Visit|The participants were considered as clinical improved if they had clinical improvement in signs and symptoms of the intra-abdominal infection, no fever, decrease in WBC, and not received any nonstudy antibiotics for the treatment of intra-abdominal infection after IV study drug therapy had begun.|EIV (within 24 hours after completion of the last dose of IV study medication therapy)|Clinical Intent-to-Treat (CITT): All randomized participants who met the minimal disease definition of complicated intra-abdominal infection regardless if a baseline pathogen was isolated from the intra-abdominal cavity.||participants|||Number
816686|NCT01110382|Primary|The Number of Participants With Clinical Cure Rate at Test Of Cure (TOC) Visit|The participants were considered as clinical cure if they had clinical improvement in signs and symptoms of the intra-abdominal infection such that no additional antibacterial therapy or surgical or percutaneous intervention is/was required for the treatment of the index infection, no fever, and a favorable response at End of IV visit.|TOC (7 to 14 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Clinical Intent-to-Treat (CITT): All randomized participants who met the minimal disease definition of complicated intra-abdominal infection regardless if a baseline pathogen was isolated from the intra-abdominal cavity.||participants|||Number
816687|NCT01110408|Secondary|Number of Participants With Sustained Favorable Per-pathogen Microbiological Outcome Rate at Late Follow-Up (LFU) Visit|The sustained favorable per-pathogen microbiological outcome was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment). A total of 4 pathogens in the doripenem group and 2 pathogens in the cefepime group were isolated at baseline from urine culture and were susceptible to the study drug received (see listed in the table below; the numbers in parenthesis next to each pathogen represent the number of participants with the pathogen isolated at baseline in the doripenem and cefepime treatment groups, respectively).|LFU (28 to 42 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of all CITT with at least 1 baseline bacterial pathogen isolated from the pretreatment urine culture, susceptible to both doripenem and cefepime. 6 and 2 participants from doripenem and cefepime, respectively had no susceptible urine pathogens at baseline and were excluded from this set.||Participants|||Number
816688|NCT01110408|Secondary|Number of Participants With Favorable Per-pathogen Microbiological Outcome Rate at Test Of Cure (TOC) Visit|The favorable per-pathogen microbiological outcome was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment). A total of 4 pathogens in the doripenem group and 2 pathogens in the cefepime group were isolated at baseline from urine culture and were susceptible to the study drug received (see listed in the table below; the numbers in parenthesis next to each pathogen represent the number of participants with the pathogen isolated at baseline in the doripenem and cefepime treatment groups, respectively).|TOC (7 to 14 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of all CITT with at least 1 baseline bacterial pathogen isolated from the pretreatment urine culture, susceptible to both doripenem and cefepime. 6 and 2 participants from doripenem and cefepime, respectively had no susceptible urine pathogens at baseline and were excluded from this set.||Participants|||Number
816689|NCT01110408|Secondary|Number of Participants With Favorable Per-pathogen Microbiological Outcome Rate at End of IV (EIV) Visit|The favorable per-pathogen microbiological outcome was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment).A total of 4 pathogens in the doripenem group and 2 pathogens in the cefepime group were isolated at baseline from urine culture and were susceptible to the study drug received (see listed in the table below; the numbers in parenthesis next to each pathogen represent the number of participants with the pathogen isolated at baseline in the doripenem and cefepime treatment groups, respectively).|EIV (within 24 hours after completion of the last dose of IV study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of all CITT with at least 1 baseline bacterial pathogen isolated from the pretreatment urine culture, susceptible to both doripenem and cefepime. 6 and 2 participants from doripenem and cefepime, respectively had no susceptible urine pathogens at baseline and were excluded from this set.||Participants|||Number
816690|NCT01110408|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Favorable Per-participant Microbiological Response|Favorable per-participant microbiological response rate was evaluated at the at End of IV (EIV) visit, Test Of Cure (TOC) visit, and Late Follow-Up (LFU) visit. The favorable per-participant microbiological response was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment).|EIV (within 24 hours after completion of the last dose of IV study medication therapy), TOC (7 to 14 days after the last dose of study medication therapy), and LFU (28 to 42 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of all CITT with at least 1 baseline bacterial pathogen isolated from the pretreatment urine culture, susceptible to both doripenem and cefepime. 6 and 2 participants from doripenem and cefepime, respectively had no susceptible urine pathogens at baseline and were excluded from this set.||Participants|||Number
816691|NCT01110408|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Clinical Cure Rate at Late Follow-Up (LFU) Visit|The participants were classified as clinical cure if all pretreatment signs and symptoms of complicated urinary tract infection showed no evidence of recurrence after test of cure.|LFU (28 to 42 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Clinical Intent-to-Treat (CITT): All randomized participants who met the minimal disease definition of complicated urinary tract infection regardless if a baseline pathogen was isolated from the pretreatment urine culture.||Participants|||Number
816692|NCT01110408|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Clinical Improvement Rate at End of IV (EIV) Visit|The participants were considered as clinical improved if they had clinical improvement in signs and symptoms from baseline; no fever for at least the 24 hours before discontinuing the IV study drug; and not received nonstudy antibiotics for the treatment of urinary tract infection after IV study drug therapy had begun.|EIV (within 24 hours after completion of the last dose of IV study medication therapy)|Clinical Intent-to-Treat (CITT): All randomized participants who met the minimal disease definition of complicated urinary tract infection regardless if a baseline pathogen was isolated from the pretreatment urine culture.||Participants|||Number
816693|NCT01110408|Primary|The Number of Participants With Clinical Cure Rate at Test Of Cure (TOC) Visit|The participants were classified as cure if they had resolution or clinical improvement in signs and symptoms of complicated urinary tract infection; had no fever; no additional antimicrobial therapy was required for the treatment of the infection; and a clinical response assessment of improvement at End of IV visit.|TOC (7 to 14 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Clinical Intent-to-Treat (CITT): All randomized participants who met the minimal disease definition of complicated urinary tract infection regardless if a baseline pathogen was isolated from the pretreatment urine culture.||Participants|||Number
833439|NCT01258049|Secondary|PCT 50 [MITT Population]|Time for parasite counts to fall by 50%|28 days after start of treatment|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
816695|NCT01114945|Primary|Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO) [%]|"POGO score of 100% denotes visualization of the entire glottic opening in linear fashion from the anterior commissure to the posterior cartilages. If none of the glottic opening is seen, then the POGO score is 0%.
View of the glottic opening (0-100%) during the intubation process."|up to 1 minute|||percentage of glottis opening||Standard Deviation|Mean
816696|NCT01114945|Primary|Time to Obtain Glottis Visualization (Seconds)|"It is the time (seconds) following initial insertion of laryngoscope blade to obtain a glottic view.
Start of intubation procedure to Glottic view (the opening between the vocal cords at the upper part of the larynx) visualization comparison between the four devices in patients undergoing bariatric surgery"|up to 1 minute|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
816697|NCT01114945|Primary|Intubation Time Using a Stop Watch|Evaluate if the time it takes to achieve successful tracheal intubation in patients undergoing bariatric surgery (weight loss surgery) will be reduced using the video-mac, glidescope, and McGrath vs direct laryngoscopy.|up to 3 minutes|"Times following initial insertion of laryngoscope blade:
to obtain glottic view (sec) to placement of tracheal tube (sec) to confirm with CO2 waveform (sec)"||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
816698|NCT01114997|Secondary|Post-anesthesia Care Unit (PACU) Stay||1 day|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
816699|NCT01114997|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction|Patient satisfaction using a verbal rating scale from 0 to 10 0= Not satisfied 10= Excellent|1 month|||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816700|NCT01114997|Secondary|Return to Normal Activities of Daily Living Using Follow up Questionnaires|Description: return to normal activities of daily living(including dietary intake, bowel and bladder function, physical activities)|1 month|||participants|||Number
816701|NCT01114997|Secondary|Number of Participants With Postoperative Nausea One Day After Surgery|Postoperative nausea using a Verbal Rating Scale Outcomes measured at the first day after surgery|1day|||participants|||Number
816702|NCT01114997|Secondary|Opioid Consumption Obtained From the Recorded Data|Postoperative use of opioid consumption inside hospital (recorded by study staff and data obtained from patient charts)|1 day|Opioid: Hydromorphone||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816703|NCT01114997|Primary|Number of Participants With Post Operative Pain One Month After Surgery|"Highest Post Operative pain one month after surgery, using a verbal rating score from 0 (no pain) to 10 (highest level of pain).
Patient received a post-operative follow-up call one month after surgery."|1 month|Experience of pain at home||participants|||Number
816704|NCT01114997|Primary|Post Operative Pain|Outcome had a duration of one day at post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) Postoperative pain measured using a Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) Postoperative pain VRS scores: 0 = none pain to 10 = intolerable pain.|1 day|||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816705|NCT01115101|Secondary|Costs|Evaluation costs between groups|6 month||||||
816706|NCT01115101|Secondary|Mobilisation|Evaluation of time to post surgical mobilization|6 month||||||
816707|NCT01115101|Secondary|Side Effects|Evaluation of side effects|6 month||||||
816708|NCT01115101|Secondary|Subgroups|Secondary Outcome Measures were to identify subgroups in benefit of either therapy.|6 month||||||
816709|NCT01115101|Primary|Difference of Pain Scores on the Visual Analog Scale|"The primary outcome measure was the change in patients assessment of pain after cesarean (CS) from baseline.
For pain assessment a visual analog scale (VAS) was used. Women were asked to quantify pain using an eleven point numerical rating score from 0 to 10, with 0 indicating no pain, and 10 the worst pain.
Single value were calculated (averaged)."|Pain level was evaluated before therapy (2h after CS), 12h, 24h, 32h, 40h, 48 and 72h after CS.|The sample size (intention to treat) was computed to detect a difference in VAS score at 24h of 1.2 (30% reduction) at a power of 80%, a two-sided significance level of 0.05.||VAS score at 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
816710|NCT01115166|Other Pre-specified|Fluid Extravasation|Rate of fluid transfer from the intravascular to the extravascular compartment during two distribution half-times. Graph derived from the hemoglobin change during 20 to 30 minutes after start of cardio pulmonary by-pass.|Two distribution half-times. Approximately 16 minutes.|The study was mainly an observational study, and 10 patients was regarded as a sufficient number to register general changes.||mL/kg/min||Standard Deviation|Median
816711|NCT01115166|Secondary|Intracellular Edema|"Mass balance based on repeated Sodium concentration, fluid volume given, given and excreted Sodium.
A positive value indicating intracellular fluid accumulation and a negative value indicating cell dehydration. This is the change that will occur during the first 30 min after start of cardio pulmonary bypass."|30 minutes after CPB|Mainly observational. 10 patients were regarded to be a sufficient number to se a tendency.||Litre||Standard Deviation|Mean
816712|NCT01115166|Primary|Blood Volume|"volume kinetic technique: During start of cardio pulmonary by-pass a known amount of fluid will expand the blood volume and dilute the hemoglobin.
The hemoglobin variation is used to calculate the blood volume. The last hemoglobin value before CPB and the hemoglobin value directly after start (extrapolated from the following 30 minutes after start) of CPB are used in the calculation.
The value for the blood volume directly prior to CPB will be influenced by intra venous fluids given during early stages of the anesthesia.
To achieve the blood volume prior to anesthesia a hemoglobin value before anesthesia and the last hemoglobin value before CPB are used to correct the blood volume calculation. In this way blood volume prior to anaesthesia can be calculated."|30 minutes after start of CPB|The study was mainly an observational study, and 10 patients was regarded as a sufficient number to register general changes.||Litre||Standard Deviation|Mean
816713|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli at 20 Mins Post Treatment on Day 5 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and 20 mins post treatment on Day 5|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
818395|NCT01125930|Secondary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Signs: Facial Edema|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic signs include redness (non-transient erythema), telangiectasia, facial edema, and dry skin.|2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
816714|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli at 10 Mins Post Treatment on Day 5 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and 10 mins post treatment on Day 5|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816715|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli Immediately Following Treatment on Day 5 Using a VAS in 5% Potassium Nitrate Solution and Water; 2.5% Potassiun Nitrate Solution and Water|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and immediately after treatment on Day 5|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816716|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli 20 Mins Post Treatment on Day 4 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and 20 mins post treatment on Day 4|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816717|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli at 10 Mins Post Treatment on Day 4 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and 10 mins post treatment on Day 4|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816718|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli Following Treatment on Day 4 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and immediately after treatment on Day 4|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816719|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli at 20 Mins Post Treatment on Day 3 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and 20 mins post treatment on Day 3|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816720|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli at 10 Mins Post Treatment on Day 3 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and 10 mins post treatment on Day 3|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816746|NCT01115582|Primary|Serum and Urine Bile Acids|Concentration of bile acids in serum (S) and urine (U). (abbreviations: chol.=cholenoic; monohydro=monohydroxy; dihydro=monohydro)|At baseline (BL) and after 30 days of treatment (D30)|All patients entered and treated||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
816747|NCT01115582|Primary|Serum Transaminases|Concentration of serum alanine transaminase (ALT) and aspartate transaminase (AST)|At baseline and after 30 days of treatment|All patients entered and treated||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
816721|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli Immediately Following Treatment on Day 3 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and immediately after treatment on Day 3|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816722|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli at 20 Mins Post Treatment on Day 2 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and 20 mins post treatment on Day 2|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816723|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli at 10 Mins Post Treatment on Day 2 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and 10 mins post treatment on Day 2|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816724|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli Following Treatment on Day 2 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and immediately after treatment on Day 2|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816725|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli at 20 Mins Post Treatment on Day 1 Using a VAS.|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and 20 mins post treatment on Day 1|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816726|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli at 10 Mins Post Treatment on Day 1 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and 10 mins post treatment on Day 1|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816727|NCT01115452|Secondary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli Immediately Following Treatment on Day 1 Using a VAS|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and immediately after treatment on Day 1|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816748|NCT01115660|Secondary|Follow up Appointment With MD|Follow up appointment with primary care provider since stroke|3 months|Patients who were contacted at 3 months||participants|||Number
816749|NCT01115660|Primary|Feasibility of Intervention (Ability to Reach Patients at 3 Months)|Number of patients contacted at 3 months|3 months|All eligible patients who also were available at 3 months for post-intervention follow-up call.||number of patients contacted|||Number
833440|NCT01258049|Secondary|PCT 90 [MITT Population]|Time for parasite counts to fall by 90%|28 days after start of treatment|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
816728|NCT01115452|Primary|Between Treatment Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline of Response to Evaporative (Air) Stimuli Immediately Following Treatment on Day 5 Using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) in 5% Potassium Nitrate Solution and 2.5% Potassium Nitrate Solution|"Response to a one second application of air from a standard dental unit syringe applied to the surface of hypersensitive tooth. After each stimuli participant rated the intensity of pain on a 100 millimeter VAS, on which 0 represented no pain and 100 represented the worst pain imaginable. Change from baseline was calculated as mean score at the given time point minus mean score at baseline."|Baseline and immediately after treatment on Day 5|Intent to treat (ITT) population: All participants who were randomized, receive at least one dose of treatment, and had at least one post baseline efficacy evaluation. There was no imputation for missing data. Analysis population was less than the randomized population because 2 participants had one tooth which was not treated||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
816729|NCT01115491|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Overall Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|Overall response was defined as the percentage of participants who obtained CR or PR using adapted MacDonald criteria. CR: disappearance of all index and non-index lesions, confirmed no less than 4 weeks after assessment, no evidence of disease progression; corticosteroid dosage at or below 20 mg hydrocortisone daily; no neurological changes or an improvement as compared to last disease assessment. PR was defined as: Fifty percent or greater decrease in the sum of products of the larger diameter and the larger perpendicular diameter of all index lesions confirmed no less than 4 weeks after assessment, no evidence of disease progression and the absence of progressive, or non-evaluable disease status for non-index legions; unchanged, or decreased corticosteroid dose as compared to the last disease assessment; no neurological changes or an improvement as compared to the neurological examination at last disease assessment.|BL, every 28 days, until progression, death or end-of-study, an average of 32 weeks|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
816730|NCT01115491|Primary|PFS: Probability of Remaining Progression Free at 24 Weeks After Beginning the Study||BL, 24 weeks (after 6th cycle)|ITT population||survival probability|||Number
816731|NCT01115491|Secondary|Overall Survival - Time to Event|Overall survival was defined as the time transpired (in weeks) between the date of the participant's inclusion in the trial until the date of his/her death by any cause. Participants that were alive at the time the analysis was performed were censored on the date of last contact. Median overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|BL, every 28 days, until death or end-of-study, an average of 32 weeks|ITT population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816732|NCT01115491|Secondary|Overall Survival - Percentage of Participants With an Event|Overall survival was defined as the time transpired (in weeks) between the date of the participant's inclusion in the trial until the date of his/her death by any cause. Participants that were alive at the time the analysis was performed were censored on the date of last contact.|BL, every 28 days, until death or end-of-study, an average of 32 weeks|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
816733|NCT01115491|Primary|PFS - Time to Event|PFS was defined as the time, in weeks, from the date of inclusion in the study to the date of the first documentation of disease progression or death of the participant due to any cause. Participants that did not have an event at the time the analysis was performed were censored at the date of last contact. Participants that began a treatment other than those planned in this study (bevacizumab or temozolomide) were censored on the start date of the new treatment. PFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|BL, every 28 days, until progression, death or end-of-study, an average of 32 weeks|ITT population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816734|NCT01115491|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) - Percentage of Participants With an Event|PFS was defined as the time, in weeks, from the date of inclusion in the study to the date of the first documentation of disease progression or death of the participant due to any cause. Participants that did not have an event at the time the analysis was performed were censored at the date of last contact. Participants that began a treatment other than those planned in this study (bevacizumab or temozolomide) were censored on the start date of the new treatment.|Baseline (BL), every 28 days, until progression, death or end-of-study, an average of 32 weeks|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
816735|NCT01115517|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had Related Serious Adverse Events From the Time of Treatment to 1 Year||1 year|||participants|||Number
816736|NCT01115517|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had Complications From the Time of Treatment to Recurrence||1 year|||participants|||Number
816737|NCT01115517|Primary|Number of Participants Who Had Recurrence of Pterygia up to 1 Year||1 year|||participants|||Number
816738|NCT01115556|Secondary|Mean Change in Visual Acuity (VA) From Baseline at Month 12|"Mean change in Visual Acuity (VA) from Baseline at Month 12
Mean change in central foveal thickness (RPE to ILM) as measured by SD-OCT (Spectralis HRA + OCT (Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany) at Months 6 and 12
Mean change in leakage as determined by FA at Months 6 and 12
Mean number of ranibizumab injections at Months 6 and 12
Mean time to first re-treatment following the initial 3 monthly loading doses
Mean duration of fluid-free interval
Safety and tolerability of 2.0mg using the incidence and severity of adverse events"|one year|||ETDRS Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
816739|NCT01115556|Primary|Mean Change in Visual Acuity (VA) From Baseline at Month 6||Baseline and 6 months|||ETDRS Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
816740|NCT01115569|Secondary|Maintenance of Efficacy|Clinic Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), Oswestry Disability Index, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Rescue Doses and Subject Global of Medication|1 year||||||
816741|NCT01115569|Primary|Mean Change in Average Daily Pain|Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for Pain (0-10; where 0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain imaginable) recorded up to 54 weeks, starting at screening through end of study. Lower number equals better outcome.|1 year|The number of participants for analysis was determined by the safety population. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for Pain assessment was used. Measure is mean change in average daily pain intensity. Total number of participants providing end of study pain intensity score = 391.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816742|NCT01115582|Secondary|Total Bilirubin|Concentration of total bilirubin in serum|At baseline and after 30 days of treatment|All patients entered and treated||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816743|NCT01115582|Secondary|Physical Examination|Total number of patients with abnormal findings from general physical examination|At baseline (BL) and after 30 days of treatment (D30)|All patients entered and treated||participants|||Number
816750|NCT01115673|Secondary|Patient Global Evaluation|Patient Assessment of the Pain Medication – Number of Subjects rating the medication they received as a pain reliever on a score of 0-4, where 0=poor, 1=fair, 2=good, 3=very good, 4=excellent|6 Hours|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816751|NCT01115673|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With >50% of the Maximum Possible TOTPAR6 Score|Percentage of Subjects with >50% of the Maximum Possible TOTPAR6 Score - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 600 so >50% is >300 out of 600|6 Hours|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
816752|NCT01115673|Secondary|Rescue Rates Through Six Hours|Percentage of subjects using rescue medication.|through 6 Hours|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
816753|NCT01115673|Secondary|Rescue Rates Through Four Hours|Percentage of subjects using rescue medication.|through 4 Hours|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
816754|NCT01115673|Secondary|Duration of Analgesia – Time to Rescue|Minutes until rescue medication was given.|within 6 Hours|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||Minutes||Full Range|Median
816755|NCT01115673|Secondary|Time to Confirmed Perceptible Pain Relief|Minutes until confirmed perceptible pain relief was achieved. A stopwatch was provided to the subject after ingestion of the study medication. The subject was instructed to stop the stopwatch when they first began to feel any pain relieving effect whatsoever of the drug, that was when they first felt any pain relief. It did not necessarily mean they felt completely better, although they might have, but when they first felt any difference in the pain.|within 6 Hours|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||Minutes||Full Range|Median
816756|NCT01115673|Secondary|Time to Meaningful Pain Relief|Minutes until meaningful pain relief was achieved. A stopwatch was provided to the subject after ingestion of the study medication. The subject was instructed to stop the stopwatch when the relief from the starting pain was meaningful to them.|within 6 Hours|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||Minutes||Full Range|Median
816757|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 360 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|360 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816758|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 300 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|300 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816759|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 240 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|240 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816760|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 180 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|180 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816761|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 120 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|120 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817911|NCT01121666|Secondary|Number and Size of Follicles ≥ 12 mm at Day 8 of Stimulation|The number and size of follicles 12 mm or over in diameter at day 8 of stimulation were evaluated as secondary end-point.|Day 8 of stimulation|All participants were analyzed.||Number of follicles||Standard Deviation|Mean
816762|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 90 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|90 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816763|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 75 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|75 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816764|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 60 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|60 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816765|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 45 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|45 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816766|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 30 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|30 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816767|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores (PRID) at 15 Minutes|Sum of PID and PAR Scores (PRID) at each Assessment Time point - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief|15 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816768|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 360 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|360 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816769|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 300 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|300 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816770|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 240 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|240 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816771|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 180 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|180 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816772|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 120 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|120 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816773|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 90 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|90 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816774|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 75 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|75 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816775|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 60 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|60 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816776|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 45 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|45 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816777|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 30 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|30 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816778|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Relief (PAR) Scores at 15 Minutes|Pain Relief Scores at each Assessment Timepoint - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief with a highest possible score of 100|15 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816779|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 360 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|360 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816780|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 300 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|300 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, and did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816781|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 240 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|240 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816782|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 180 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|180 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816783|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 120 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|120 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, and did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816784|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 90 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|90 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816785|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 75 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time Point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|75 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816786|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 60 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|60 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816787|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 45 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|45 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816788|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 30 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|30 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816789|NCT01115673|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) at 15 Minutes|Pain Intensity Difference (PID) from Baseline at Each Assessment Time point - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain with a highest possible score of 100. The pain intensity difference was calculated at each time point as the pain intensity score at baseline minus the pain intensity score at the stated time point.|15 Minutes|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816790|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Relief Scores Over Six Hours (TOTPAR6)|Weighted Sum of the Pain Relief Scores Over Six Hours (TOTPAR6) - pain relief was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief. The total possible minimum value is 0 (worst) and the total possible maximum value is 600 (best). The weights used in the calculation of weighted sums were equal to the elapsed time (hour) between the time point of interest and the preceding time point.|6 Hours|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816791|NCT01115673|Secondary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference Over Six Hours (SPID6)|Weighted Sum of the Pain Intensity Difference from Baseline Over Six Hours (SPID6) - pain intensity was evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain. The total possible minimum value is -300 (worst) and the total possible maximum value is 600 (best). The weights used in the calculation of weighted sums were equal to the elapsed time (hour) between the time point of interest and the preceding time point.|6 Hours|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816792|NCT01115673|Primary|Overall Analgesic Efficacy – Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores Over Six Hours (SPRID6)|Weighted Sum of Pain Intensity Difference and Pain Relief Scores Over Six Hours (SPRID6) - pain intensity and pain relief were evaluated using a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) where 0 = no pain and 100 = very severe pain for pain intensity and 0 = no relief and 100 = complete relief for pain relief. For SPRID6, the total possible minimum value is -300 (worst) and the total possible maximum value is 1200 (best). The weights used in the calculation of weighted sums were equal to the elapsed time (hour) between the time point of interest and the preceding time point.|6 Hours|Analysis is based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set, which included all subjects who were randomized, took study medication, did not vomit within 60 minutes after dosing, and had a baseline pain score and at least one post-randomization assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816793|NCT01115699|Secondary|Change in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms - Clinician Rating 16 Item (QIDS-C16)|"The QIDS-C16 measures 16 factors across 9 different criterion domains for major depression. Each of the four possible answers to each quiz is given an ascending numerical value from 0 to 3, and the total test score is the sum of the following:the highest number from questions 1-4 + the number from question 5 + the highest number from questions 6-9 + the total of each question from 10-14 + the highest number from questions 15-16.
Screening test scoring ranges:
0-5, No Depression Likely
6-10, Possibly Mildly Depressed
11-15, Moderate Depression
16-20, Severe Depression
21 or Over, Very Severe Depression"|baseline, 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, 4 weeks, 5 weeks, and 6 weeks|This study was stopped early due to funding constraints and recruitment was slower than was expected.|||||
817944|NCT01123941|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||During the 6-month period after vaccination|||participants|||Number
817945|NCT01123941|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Adverse Events||During the 28-day period after vaccination|||participants|||Number
816794|NCT01115699|Primary|Change in Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRS-D17)|The HRS-D17 questionnaire has 17 items. Each item on the questionnaire is scored on a 3 or 5 point scale, depending on the item. A score of 0-7 is considered to be normal. Scores of 20 or higher indicate moderate, severe, or very severe depression.|baseline, 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, 4 weeks, 5 weeks, and 6 weeks|This study was stopped early due to funding constraints and recruitment was slower than was expected.|||||
816795|NCT01115738|Secondary|P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) at 6 Hours Post-Prasugrel Loading Dose (LD) by Cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19)-Predicted Functional Groups - Extensive Metabolizers (EM) and Reduced Metabolizers (RM)|CYP2C19 is a drug metabolizing enzyme. CYP2C19 Extensive metabolizers (EM) are individuals with two fully active / normal function CYP2C19 alleles (*1/*1, *1/*17). CYP2C19 Reduced metabolizers (RM) are individuals with at least one reduced-function CYP2C19 allele (*2/*2, *1/*2). Least Squares (LS) Mean values were controlled for CYP2C19 genetic group.|6 hours after prasugrel loading dose|All randomized participants who received prasugrel LD and had PRU measurements 6 hours after prasugrel LD and provided a DNA sample.||PRU||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816796|NCT01115738|Secondary|P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) of Clopidogrel Treated Participants at Baseline by Cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19)-Predicted Functional Groups - CYP2C19 Extensive Metabolizers (EM) and Reduced Metabolizers (RM)|CYP2C19 is a drug metabolizing enzyme. CYP2C19 Extensive metabolizers (EM) are individuals with two fully active / normal function CYP2C19 alleles (*1/*1, *1/*17). CYP2C19 Reduced metabolizers (RM) are individuals with at least one reduced-function CYP2C19 allele (*2/*2, *1/*2). Least Squares (LS) Mean values were controlled for CYP2C19 genetic group.|Baseline|All randomized participants who were treated with Clopidogrel and had PRU measurement at Baseline and provided a DNA sample.||PRU||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816797|NCT01115738|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|TEAE is a worsening or new occurrence of adverse event (AE) during treatment compared to baseline. A summary of serious adverse events (SAE) and other nonserious AE are located in the Reported Adverse Events section.|Baseline through 72 hours after prasugrel loading dose|Participants who received any treatment.||participants|||Number
816798|NCT01115738|Secondary|Percentage of Poor Responders|Poor responders are those who had P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU)≥ 240.|Baseline and 2 and 6 and 24 and 72 hours after loading dose|All randomized participants who received prasugrel loading dose (LD) and had at least one evaluable PRU measurement after prasugrel LD.||percentage of participants|||Number
816799|NCT01115738|Secondary|Percentage of Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation|Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP)-induced P2Y12 receptor mediated platelet aggregation serves as a biomarker of platelet function. It is measured in P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) with lower PRU reflecting stronger inhibition of P2Y12 and reduced platelet aggregation. The internal BASE standard is an independent measurement and serves as an estimate of the participant’s baseline platelet aggregation independent of P2Y12 receptor inhibition. Percent Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation=(1-[PRU/BASE) x 100%, high numbers represent increased platelet inhibition. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were controlled for treatment, visit, treatment and visit interaction, and country.|Baseline and 2 and 6 and 24 and 72 hours after loading dose|All randomized participants who received prasugrel loading dose (LD) and had at least one evaluable PRU measurement after prasugrel LD.||percentage of inhibition||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816800|NCT01115738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to 72 Hours in Laboratory Measurements - Hemoglobin||Baseline, 72 hours|All randomized participants who received prasugrel loading dose (LD) and had a Hemoglobin measurement 72 hours after LD.||gram per deciliter (g/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816801|NCT01115738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to 72 Hours in Laboratory Measurements - Hematocrit||Baseline, 72 hours|All randomized participants who received prasugrel loading dose (LD) and had a Hematocrit measurement 72 hours after LD.||proportion of 1.0||Standard Deviation|Mean
816802|NCT01115738|Secondary|Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP)-Induced P2Y12 Receptor-Mediated Platelet Aggregation at Baseline, 2, 24 and 72 Hours After Prasugrel Loading Dose (LD)|ADP-induced P2Y12 receptor mediated platelet aggregation serves as a biomarker of platelet function. It is measured in P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) with lower PRU reflecting stronger inhibition of P2Y12 and reduced platelet aggregation. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were controlled for treatment, visit, treatment and visit interaction, and country.|Baseline and 2 hours and 24 hours and 72 hours after prasugrel loading dose|All randomized participants who received prasugrel LD and had at least one evaluable PRU measurement after prasugrel LD.||PRU||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816803|NCT01115738|Primary|Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP)-Induced P2Y12 Receptor-Mediated Platelet Aggregation 6 Hours After Prasugrel Loading Dose (LD)|ADP-induced P2Y12 receptor mediated platelet aggregation serves as a biomarker of platelet function. It is measured in P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) with lower PRU reflecting stronger inhibition of P2Y12 and reduced platelet aggregation. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were controlled for treatment, visit, treatment and visit interaction, and country.|6 hours after prasugrel loading dose|All randomized participants who received the prasugrel LD and had at least one evaluable PRU measurement after LD.||PRU||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
816804|NCT01115855|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Specific Activity Scale (SAS) Score at Week 4, Months 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 13, 17 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48 and Final Visit|Specific activity scale was estimated by pre-specified questionnaire (for different activities) to assess the exercise capability of the participants. Answers provided by participants were transformed in terms of number of metabolic equivalents (METs).1 MET was defined as the amount of oxygen consumed while sitting at rest and is equal to 3.5 ml oxygen per kg body weight* minute. Scale ranged from 1 (less than (<) 2 METs) = lowest level of exercise tolerance to 6 (>=8METs) = highest level of tolerance and higher score indicated more tolerance.|Baseline, Week 4, Months 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48, Final Visit (up to Month 48)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Here, ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||metabolic equivalents (METs)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816817|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Cardiovascular (CV) Hospitalization|CV hospitalization, which was defined as any hospitalization due to CV events including HF, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, angina pectoris. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
817946|NCT01123941|Secondary|Anti-Vi ELISA Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC)||At 28 days after vaccination|||ELISA Units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
816805|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Classification at Weeks 1, 4, Months 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 13, 17 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48 and Final Visit|NYHA: classified as ‘class I’ (participants with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity), ‘class II’ (participants with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity), ‘class III’ (participants with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity), ‘class IV’ (participants with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort). Participants with change from baseline were classified as ‘improved' (positive change), ‘no change’ or ‘worsened' (negative change).|Baseline, Weeks 1, 4, Months 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48 and Final Visit (up to Month 48)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Here, ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||participants|||Number
816806|NCT01115855|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urine Albumin-to-Creatinine Ratio at Months 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48 and Final Visit||Baseline, Months 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48, Final Visit (up to Month 48)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Here, ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||microgram per gram creatinine (mg/gCr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816807|NCT01115855|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) at Months 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48 and Final Visit|LVEF was calculated based on end-diastolic volume measured by two-dimensional echocardiography.|Baseline, Months 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48, Final Visit (up to Month 48)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Here, ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of LVEF||Standard Deviation|Mean
816808|NCT01115855|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Plasma Concentration of Serum N-terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) at Months 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48 and Final Visit||Baseline, Months 5, 9, 13, 17, 21 ,25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48 and Final Visit (up to Month 48)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Here, ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816809|NCT01115855|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Plasma Concentration of Brain Natriuretic Peptide at Months 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 42, 48 and Final Visit||Baseline, Months 5,9,13,17,21,25,29,33,37,42,48, Final Visit (up to Month 48)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Here, ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||picogram/milliliter (pg/ml)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816810|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Hospitalization for Hyperkalemia|Hospitalization due to hyperkalemia (as per physician’s decision) was defined as an overnight stay, or longer, in a hospital environment (emergency room, observation unit or in-patient care, or similar facility including admission to a day care facility) due to hyperkalemia as the primary reason for hospitalization. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816811|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Hospitalisation Due to Worsening Renal Function|Hospitalization due to worsening renal function (as per physician’s decision) was defined as an overnight stay, or longer, in a hospital environment (emergency room, observation unit or in-patient care, or similar facility including admission to a day care facility) due to worsening renal function as the primary reason for hospitalization. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816812|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of New Onset Diabetes Mellitus|New onset diabetes mellitus was defined as the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus in a participant after randomization. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816813|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of New Onset Atrial Fibrillation/Flutter|New onset of atrial fibrillation or flutter was defined as the diagnosis of atrial fibrillation or flutter in a participant after randomization. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816814|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Fatal/Non-Fatal Myocardial Infarction (MI)|Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816815|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Fatal/Non-Fatal Stroke|Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816816|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Addition/Increase of Heart Failure (HF) Medication Due to Heart Failure (HF) Worsening|Addition/ increase of HF medications was defined as administration of new HF medication or increase of 50 percent or more in dose of HF medication for >= 3 days. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816890|NCT01116232|Secondary|Incidence of Infections Including Cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr Virus Reactivation, and Post-transplant Lymphoproliferative Disorder||At one year||||||
816891|NCT01116232|Secondary|Incidence of Chronic GVHD||Within two years after transplant||||||
816818|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Heart Failure (HF) Mortality or Heart Failure (HF) Hospitalization|HF mortality was defined as any death due to HF. Hospitalization due to HF was defined as an overnight stay, or longer, in a hospital environment (emergency room, observation unit or in-patient care, or similar facility including admission to a day care facility) due to HF. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816819|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of All-cause Mortality or All-cause Hospitalization|All cause hospitalization included all hospitalizations as CV hospitalization, which was defined as any hospitalization due to CV events including HF, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, angina pectoris and non-CV hospitalizations which was defined as any hospitalization due to non-CV events including renal dysfunction, hyperkalaemia, malignant tumor and pulmonary disease. All-cause mortality was defined as any CV mortality, Non-CV mortality, including malignant tumor, pulmonary disease and trauma.CV mortality was defined as death due to HF, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrhythmia, stroke or cerebral vascular accident, other CV cause (such as aneurysm or pulmonary embolism). Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816820|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Hospitalization Due to Heart Failure (HF)|Hospitalization due to HF was defined as an overnight stay, or longer, in a hospital environment (emergency room, observation unit or in-patient care, or similar facility including admission to a day care facility) due to HF. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816821|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of All-cause Hospitalization|All cause hospitalization included all hospitalizations as CV hospitalization, which was defined as any hospitalization due to CV events including HF, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, angina pectoris and non-CV hospitalizations which was defined as any hospitalization due to non-CV events including renal dysfunction, hyperkalaemia, malignant tumor and pulmonary disease. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816822|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With With First Occurrence of Cardiovascular Mortality|CV mortality was defined as death due to HF, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrhythmia, stroke or cerebral vascular accident, other CV cause (such as aneurysm or pulmonary embolism). Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816823|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With With First Occurrence of All-Cause Mortality|All-cause mortality was defined as any CV mortality, Non-CV mortality, including malignant tumor, pulmonary disease and trauma.CV mortality was defined as death due to HF, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrhythmia, stroke or cerebral vascular accident, other CV cause (such as aneurysm or pulmonary embolism). Mortality during treatment, within 30 days of treatment discontinuation and after 30 days of discontinuation was reported. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816824|NCT01115855|Secondary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Cardiovascular (CV) Mortality, Hospitalization Due to Heart Failure (HF), or Addition/Increase of Heart Failure (HF) Medication|CV mortality was defined as any death due to HF, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrhythmia, stroke or cerebral vascular accident, other CV cause (such as aneurysm or pulmonary embolism). Hospitalization due to HF was defined as an overnight stay, or longer, in a hospital environment (emergency room, observation unit or in-patient care, or similar facility including admission to a day care facility) due to HF. Addition/ increase of HF medications was defined as administration of new HF medication or increase of 50 percentage (%) or more in dose of HF medication for >= 3 days. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816825|NCT01115855|Primary|Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Cardiovascular (CV) Mortality or Hospitalization Due to Heart Failure (HF)|CV mortality was defined as any death due to HF, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrhythmia, stroke or cerebral vascular accident, other CV cause (such as aneurysm or pulmonary embolism). Hospitalization due to HF was defined as an overnight stay, or longer, in a hospital environment (emergency room, observation unit or in-patient care, or similar facility including admission to a day care facility) due to HF. Hazard ratio of Eplerenone versus placebo for first occurrence of the event was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|Randomization up to the date when the last enrolled participant had been followed up for 1 year (up to 1744 days)|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
816826|NCT01115933|Secondary|Overall Stent Thrombosis|Stent thrombosis was defined according to the ARC guidelines as follows: definite: acute coronary syndrome and angiographic or pathological confirmation of ST; probable: unexplained death ≤30 days or target vessel MI without angiographic information; and possible: unexplained death >30 days after stent placement.”|0 - 298 days|FAS population||percentage of participants|||Number
816827|NCT01115933|Secondary|Late Stent Thrombosis|Stent thrombosis was defined according to the ARC guidelines as follows: definite: acute coronary syndrome and angiographic or pathological confirmation of ST; probable: unexplained death ≤30 days or target vessel MI without angiographic information; and possible: unexplained death >30 days after stent placement.”|31 - 298 days|FAS population||percentage of participants|||Number
816892|NCT01116232|Primary|Safety Assessment||During the first six months post transplant||||||
816828|NCT01115933|Secondary|Acute/Subacute Stent Thrombosis|Stent thrombosis was defined according to the ARC guidelines as follows: definite: acute coronary syndrome and angiographic or pathological confirmation of ST; probable: unexplained death ≤30 days or target vessel MI without angiographic information; and possible: unexplained death >30 days after stent placement.”|0-30 days|FAS population||percentage of participants|||Number
816829|NCT01115933|Secondary|Subacute Stent Thrombosis|Stent thrombosis was defined according to the ARC guidelines as follows: definite: acute coronary syndrome and angiographic or pathological confirmation of ST; probable: unexplained death ≤30 days or target vessel MI without angiographic information; and possible: unexplained death >30 days after stent placement.”|1-30 days|FAS population||percentage of participants|||Number
816830|NCT01115933|Secondary|Acute Stent Thrombosis|Stent thrombosis (ST) was defined according to the ARC guidelines as follows: definite: acute coronary syndrome and angiographic or pathological confirmation of ST; probable: unexplained death ≤30 days or target vessel MI without angiographic information; and possible: unexplained death >30 days after stent placement.”|<24 hours|FAS population||percentage of participants|||Number
816831|NCT01115933|Secondary|All Coronary Revascularization||9 months|FAS population||percentage of participants|||Number
816832|NCT01115933|Secondary|All Coronary Revascularization||1 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816833|NCT01115933|Secondary|Composite Endpoint of Cardiac Death, All MI and CI-TLR (MACE)|Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial-infarction, and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR).|9 months|FAS population||percentage of participants|||Number
816834|NCT01115933|Secondary|Composite Endpoint of Cardiac Death/All MI/CI-TLR (MACE)|Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial-infarction, and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR).|1 month|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816835|NCT01115933|Secondary|Composite Endpoint of Cardiac Death/TV-MI/CI-TLR (TLF)|Target lesion failure (TLF) is defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel related myocardial infarction (TV-MI) and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR).|1 month|FAS population||percentage of participants|||Number
816836|NCT01115933|Secondary|Composite Endpoint of All Death/All MI/All Revascularization (DMR)|DMR event (all death, all MI (per protocol or per ARC), all revascularization, respectively).|9 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816837|NCT01115933|Secondary|Composite Endpoint of All Death/All MI/All Revascularization (DMR)|DMR event (all death, all MI (per protocol or per ARC), all revascularization, respectively).|1 month|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816838|NCT01115933|Secondary|Composite Endpoint of Cardiac Death/All MI||9 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816839|NCT01115933|Secondary|Composite Endpoint of Cardiac Death/All MI||1 month|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816840|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR, Per ARC Definition) Not Clinically-indicated TVR (NCI-TVR)|TVR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel is defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion which includes upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|9 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816841|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR, Per ARC Definition) Not Clinically-indicated TVR (NCI-TVR)|TVR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel is defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion which includes upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|1 month|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816842|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR, Per ARC Definition) Clinically-indicated TVR (CI-TVR)|TVR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel is defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion which includes upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|9 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816843|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR, Per ARC Definition) Clinically-indicated TVR (CI-TVR)|TVR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel is defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion which includes upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|1 month|Full analysis set (FAS) population||percentage of participants|||Number
816844|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR, Per ARC Definition)|TVR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel is defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion which includes upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|9 months|FAS population||percentage of participants|||Number
816845|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR, Per ARC Definition)|TVR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel is defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion which includes upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|1 month|FAS Population||percentage of participants|||Number
816846|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR, Per ARC Definition) Not Clinically-indicated TLR (NCI-TLR)|Any revascularization for in-segment restenosis will be considered TLR. “Segment” is defined as the area within the margins of the stent and 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|9 months|FAS population||percentage of participants|||Number
816847|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR, Per ARC Definition) Not Clinically-indicated TLR (NCI-TLR)|Any revascularization for in-segment restenosis will be considered TLR. “Segment” is defined as the area within the margins of the stent and 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|1 month|Full analysis set (FAS) population||percentage of participants|||Number
816848|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR, Per ARC Definition) Clinically-indicated TLR (CI-TLR)|Any revascularization for in-segment restenosis will be considered TLR. “Segment” is defined as the area within the margins of the stent and 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|9 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816849|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR, Per ARC Definition) Clinically-indicated TLR (CI-TLR)|Any revascularization for in-segment restenosis will be considered TLR. “Segment” is defined as the area within the margins of the stent and 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|1 month|Full analysis set (FAS) population||percentage of participants|||Number
816850|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR, Per ARC Definition)|Any revascularization for in-segment restenosis will be considered TLR. “Segment” is defined as the area within the margins of the stent and 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|9 months|FAS Population||percentage of participants|||Number
816851|NCT01115933|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR, Per ARC Definition)|Any revascularization for in-segment restenosis will be considered TLR.“Segment” is defined as the area within the margins of the stent and 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent. Revascularization was considered clinically indicated if there was >70% diameter stenosis on angiography or >50% stenosis together with a positive stress test or ischaemic symptoms.|1 month|Full analysis set (FAS) population||percentage of participants|||Number
816852|NCT01115933|Secondary|Myocardial Infarction (MI: QMI and NQMI, Both Per SPIRIT III Protocol and Per ARC Definitions) Not Attributable to Target Vessel (NTV-MI)|"Definitions in SPIRIT III Study:
Q wave MI: Development of new, pathological Q wave on the ECG Non-Q wave MI: Elevation of CK levels to >=two times the upper limit of normal (ULN) with elevated CK-MB in the absence of new pathological Q waves Per ARC definition as published in 'Academic Research Consortium., Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions.' Circulation 2007; 115: 2344-2351"|9 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816853|NCT01115933|Secondary|Myocardial Infarction (MI: QMI and NQMI, Both Per SPIRIT III Protocol and Per ARC Definitions) Not Attributable to Target Vessel (NTV-MI)|"Definitions in SPIRIT III Study:
Q wave MI: Development of new, pathological Q wave on the ECG Non-Q wave MI: Elevation of CK levels to >=two times the upper limit of normal (ULN) with elevated CK-MB in the absence of new pathological Q waves Per ARC definition as published in 'Academic Research Consortium., Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions.' Circulation 2007; 115: 2344-2351"|1 month|FAS Population||percentage of participants|||Number
816854|NCT01115933|Secondary|Myocardial Infarction (MI: QMI and NQMI, Both Per SPIRIT III Protocol and Per ARC Definitions) Attributable to Target Vessel (TV-MI)|"Definitions in SPIRIT III Study:
Q wave MI: Development of new, pathological Q wave on the ECG Non-Q wave MI: Elevation of CK levels to >=two times the upper limit of normal (ULN) with elevated CK-MB in the absence of new pathological Q waves Per ARC definition as published in 'Academic Research Consortium., Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions.' Circulation 2007; 115: 2344-2351"|9 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816855|NCT01115933|Secondary|Myocardial Infarction (MI: QMI and NQMI, Both Per SPIRIT III Protocol and Per ARC Definitions) Attributable to Target Vessel (TV-MI)|"Definitions in SPIRIT III Study:
Q wave MI: Development of new, pathological Q wave on the ECG
Non-Q wave MI: Elevation of CK levels to >=two times the upper limit of normal (ULN) with elevated CK-MB in the absence of new pathological Q waves
Per ARC definition as published in 'Academic Research Consortium., Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions.' Circulation 2007; 115: 2344-2351"|1 month|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816856|NCT01115933|Secondary|Myocardial Infarction (MI: QMI and NQMI, Both Per SPIRIT III Protocol and Per ARC Definitions)|"Definitions in SPIRIT III Study:
Q wave MI: Development of new, pathological Q wave on the ECG Non-Q wave MI: Elevation of CK levels to >=two times the upper limit of normal (ULN) with elevated CK-MB in the absence of new pathological Q waves Per ARC definition as published in 'Academic Research Consortium., Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions.' Circulation 2007; 115: 2344-2351"|9 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816857|NCT01115933|Secondary|Myocardial Infarction (MI: QMI and NQMI, Both Per SPIRIT III Protocol and Per ARC Definitions)|"Definitions in SPIRIT III Study:
Q wave MI: Development of new, pathological Q wave on the ECG Non-Q wave MI: Elevation of CK levels to >=two times the upper limit of normal (ULN) with elevated CK-MB in the absence of new pathological Q waves Per ARC definition as published in 'Academic Research Consortium., Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions.' Circulation 2007; 115: 2344-2351"|1 month|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816893|NCT01116232|Primary|Time to Engraftment||During the first six months post transplant|Study terminated due to lack of funding. No analysis, patient data on this protocol due to the fact that only four patients was able to be accrued.|||||
816858|NCT01115933|Secondary|Death (Cardiac, Vascular, Non-Cardiovascular, Per ARC Definition)|DEATH (Per ARC Circulation 2007; 115: 2344-2351) All deaths are considered cardiac unless an unequivocal non-cardiac cause can be established. Specifically, any unexpected death even in patients with coexisting potentially fatal non-cardiac disease (e.g. cancer, infection) should be classified as cardiac.|9 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816859|NCT01115933|Secondary|Death (Cardiac, Vascular, Non-Cardiovascular, Per ARC Definition)|"DEATH (Per ARC Circulation 2007; 115: 2344-2351)
All deaths are considered cardiac unless an unequivocal non-cardiac cause can be established. Specifically, any unexpected death even in patients with coexisting potentially fatal non-cardiac disease (e.g. cancer, infection) should be classified as cardiac."|1 month|||percentage of participants|||Number
816860|NCT01115933|Secondary|Angiographic Binary Restenosis (ABR), In-segment, In-stent, Proximal and Distal|"IN-STENT is defined as within the margins of the stent. IN-SEGMENT is defined as within the margins of the stent and 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent.
PROXIMAL is defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to stent placement DISTAL is defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to stent placement"|8 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816861|NCT01115933|Secondary|Late Loss (LL), In-segment, In-stent, Proximal and Distal|"LATE LOSS (LL) calculated as MINIMUM LUMEN DIAMETER [MLD] post-procedure MINUS MLD at follow-up:
In-segment Late Loss: in-segment MLD post-procedure – in segment MLD at follow-up In-stent Late Loss: in-stent MLD post-procedure – in-stent MLD at follow-up Proximal Late Loss: proximal MLD post-procedure – proximal MLD at follow-up (proximal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to stent placement) Distal Late Loss: distal MLD post-procedure – distal MLD at follow-up (distal defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to stent placement)"|8 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
816862|NCT01115933|Secondary|Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS), In-segment, In-stent, Proximal and Distal|"IN-STENT is defined as within the margins of the stent. IN-SEGMENT is defined as within the margins of the stent and 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent.
PROXIMAL is defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue proximal to stent placement DISTAL is defined as within 5 mm of healthy tissue distal to stent placement"|8 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of DS||Standard Deviation|Mean
816863|NCT01115933|Secondary|Procedural Success(Subject Base Analysis)|Procedure success is defined as achievement of a final in-stent diameter stenosis of < 50% (by QCA) using the investigational device (AVJ-09-385), without the occurrence MACE during the hospital stay (up to 7 days if a subject still in the hospital). If QCA %DS is not available, the data is not included in analyses.|The period during an in-hospital stay of less than or equal to 7 days post index procedure.|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816864|NCT01115933|Secondary|Device Success (Lesion Based Analysis, Only for XIENCE PRIME SV)|Device success is achievement final in-stent residual diameter stenosis of < 50% (by QCA). If adjunct treatment devices other than protocol defined device is used for target lesion treatment, malfunction of the investigational device occurring during the index procedure, are not regarded as device success. Use of a bail-out stent is still regarded as device success unless a device malfunction has occured. If QCA %DS is not available, the data is not included in analyses.|The period during an in-hospital stay of less than or equal to 7 days post index procedure.|Intent to Treat Population (ITT)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816865|NCT01115933|Primary|Composite Endpoint of Cardiac Death/TV-MI/CI-TLR (TLF)|Target lesion failure (TLF) is the composite of any of the following adverse events: Cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI) (per Protocol definition), Clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR)|9 Months|Full Analysis Set (FAS population)||percentage of participants|||Number
816866|NCT01115998|Primary|Early Coping Inventory|We used the reactive and self-initiated behavior scales. We used change in raw scores for analyses. The worst possible raw score for each scale is 16 and the best possible score is 80.|Baseline and 12 months|We did a per protocol analysis for 22 children who completed the study and an intention to treat (ITT) analysis for the 28 children for whom we had complete data at 12 months. The overall results of the ITT analysis did not differ from the per protocol analysis.||Units on scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816867|NCT01115998|Primary|Battelle Developmental Inventory (BDI)|Items measure adaptive, cognitive, communication, motor, and personal-social development using 3-point ordinal scales (0 = does not complete; 1 = partially completes; 2 = completes item). We used change in age equivalent scores for each area and the total scores for analyses. The worst possible scores are 0 months age equivalent and the best possible scores are 95 months age equivalent.|Baseline and 12 months|We did a per protocol analysis for 22 children who completed the study and an intention to treat (ITT) analysis for the 28 children for whom we had complete data at 12 months. The overall results of the ITT analysis did not differ from the per protocol analysis.||Units on scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816868|NCT01115998|Primary|Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory|Items measure mobility, self-care, and social function using a 2-point scale (0 = unable or limited ability; 1 = capable in most situations). Items measure caregiver assistance on a 6-point scale (0 = total assistance; 5 = independent). We used the change in scaled scores in each area and total scores for analyses. Worst possible scaled score is 0 and the best possible score is 100.|Baseline and 12 months|We did a per protocol analysis for 22 children who completed the study and an intention to treat (ITT) analysis for the 28 children for whom we had complete data at 12 months. The overall results of the ITT analysis did not differ from the per protocol analysis.||Units on scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816869|NCT01116024|Primary|Hemodynamics - Effective Orifice Area Index|The effective orifice area index is a measure of how much the heart valve prosthesis impedes blood flow through the aortic valve.|Five Years|At discharge Effective Orifice Area index data was collected for 61 subjects.||EOAi (cm2/m2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816870|NCT01116024|Primary|Hemodynamics - Effective Orifice Area|"Effective orifice area (EOA) data.
The effective orifice area is a measure of how much the heart valve prosthesis impedes blood flow through the aortic valve."|Five Years|At discharge Effective Orifice Area data was collected for 61 subjects.||EOA (cm2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816871|NCT01116024|Primary|Hemodynamic|Mean and peak pressure gradients from discharge through 5 years follow up. The gradient represents the difference in blood pressure across the valve.|Five Years|At discharge, gradient data was collected of 103 subjects.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816872|NCT01116024|Primary|Effectiveness Endpoint - NYHA Classification, Hemodynamic Performance|"New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification to asses improvement of the cardiac status, Hemodynamic Performance analysis based on Doppler echocardiographic studies.
Class I: Patients with cardiac disease but without limitations of ordinary activity.
Class II: Patients with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. Comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea or anginal pain.
Class III: Patients with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitations or anginal pain.
Class IV: Patients with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry out any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken discomfort is increased."|Five Years|||participants|||Number
816873|NCT01116024|Primary|Re-operation, Explant, Repair|"Reoperation was defined in the protocol as any operation to repair, alter, or replace the study valve. Included is reoperation for repair of paravalvular leak and explant.
The results are reported as linearized rate (percentage of participants per patient-year)."|Five Years|||percentage of participants/patient-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816874|NCT01116024|Primary|Non-Structural Dysfunction|"Any abnormality resulting in stenosis or regurgitation at the operated valve that is not intrinsic to the valve itself. Non-structural dysfunction refers to non-structural problems that result in dysfunction of an operated valve exclusive of thrombosis and infection diagnosed by reoperation, autopsy, or clinical investigation.
The results are reported as linearized rate (percentage of participants per patient-year)."|Five Years|||percentage of participants/patient-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816875|NCT01116024|Primary|Structural Valve Deterioration|"Structural deterioration was defined as any change in the study valve function which resulted from an intrinsic abnormality that caused stenosis or regurgitation.
There were no cases of structural deterioration reported for the study.
The results are reported as linearized rate (percentage of participants per patient-year)."|Five Years|||percentage of participants/patient-year|||Number
816876|NCT01116024|Primary|Hemolysis|Blood data analysis was performed in order to identify whether particular complications and serious adverse events such as hemolysis occurred. Hemolysis in subjects with tissue valves – as evidenced by increased serum lactate dehydrogenase concentrations, decreased serum haptoglobin concentration, erythrocytopenia and reticulocytosis – is usually associated with paravalvular leakage or infection.|Five Years|||participants|||Number
816877|NCT01116024|Primary|Endocarditis|"Endocarditis was defined in the protocol as any infection involving the study valve. Any structural/non-structural valvular dysfunction, thrombosis, or embolic event associated with study valve endocarditis was captured as endocarditis only.
The results are reported as linearized rate (percentage of participants per patient-year)."|Five Years|||percentage of participants/patient-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816878|NCT01116024|Primary|Paravalvular Leaks (All and Major)|"Paravalvular leak was defined as any evidence of leakage of blood around the prosthesis (between the sewing ring and native annulus). Major Paravalvular leak was defined as any evidence of leakage of blood around the prosthesis, i.e. between the sewing ring and native annulus that requires surgical intervention.
The results are reported as linearized rate (percentage of participants per patient-year)."|Five Years|||percentage of participants/patient-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816879|NCT01116024|Primary|Hemorrhage/Bleeding-Anticoagulant/Antiaggregant (All and Major)|"Any episode of internal or external bleeding in subjects receiving anticoagulant and/or antiaggregant therapy.
Hemorrhage/Bleeding (No Anticoagulant/Antiaggregant):
Any episode of internal or external bleeding in subjects not receiving anticoagulant and/or antiaggregant therapy.
The results are reported as linearized rate (percentage of participants per patient-year)."|Five Years|||percentage of participants/patient-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816880|NCT01116024|Primary|Thromboembolism/Thrombosis|"Valve related thromboembolism and valvular thrombosis.
Thrombosis was defined as any thrombus attached to or near the study valve that interfered with valve function in the absence of infection. The results are reported as linearized rate (percentage of participants per patient-year)"|Five Years|||percentage of participants/patient-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
816881|NCT01116037|Secondary|Safety Analysis Will be Based on the Occurence of Cardiovascular Complications.|Safety Analysis will be based on the the number of participants with cardiovascular complications.|Six Years|||participants|||Number
816882|NCT01116037|Primary|Primary Efficacy Goal is to Assess the Freedom From Clinically Significant (Moderate or Greater) Aortic Regurgitation for the Patients Implanted With 3f Aortic Bioprothesis, Model 1000|Freedom from clinically significant (moderate or greater) aortic regurgitation will be determined through echocardiography and compared against the freedom from regurgitation event rates from the previous IDE study, G010284 used for PMA approval.|Six Years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
816883|NCT01116102|Secondary|Technical Challenges Encountered During Fluid Infusion|Observed challenges, including catheter kinking, catheter/needle dislodgement/pull-out, infusion pump alarm, other technical problems|at any occurence of a defined challenge or at end of infusion if no challenges occurred|Per Protocol (two subjects excluded due to technical error in in-line fluid pressure measurement)||participants|||Number
816884|NCT01116102|Secondary|Cumulative Fluid Volume Delivered||each minute for the first 15 minutes of fluid infusion, every 5 minutes for the next 45 minutes of infusion, and every 15 minutes thereafter until the end of infusion|Per Protocol (two subjects excluded due to technical errors in fluid pressure measurement)||mL||Full Range|Mean
816885|NCT01116102|Secondary|Number of Attempts Needed for Successful Subcutaneous Catheter/Needle Placement||end of catheter/needle placement|Per Protocol (two subjects excluded due to technical error in in-line fluid pressure measurements)||Subjects|||Number
816886|NCT01116102|Primary|Maximum Measured In-line Fluid Pressure|Maximum fluid pressure measured (15 sec period) in delivery line during subcutaneous fluid infusion at specified time point after start of infusion|each minute for the first 15 minutes of fluid infusion, every 5 minutes for the next 45 minutes of infusion, and every 15 minutes thereafter until the end of infusion|Per protocol (two subjects excluded due to technical error in in-line fluid pressure measurement)||psi||Full Range|Mean
816887|NCT01116232|Secondary|Immunocorrelative Studies Pre- and Periodically Post-transplantation||Using flow cytometry at 30, 60, 90, and 180 days post transplant.||||||
816888|NCT01116232|Secondary|Overall and Disease-free Survival||At 1 year||||||
816889|NCT01116232|Secondary|Incidence of Thrombotic Microangiopathy||Within 100 days of HCT||||||
816924|NCT01116882|Secondary|Met Indication Criteria for PCI|Included here are the number of treated lesions that met the class I or II recommendations for anatomical indications for PCI, according to the PCI guidelines fo the American College of Cardiology Foundation-American Heart Association-Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions.|Post-Procedure|||lesions|Participants||Number
816909|NCT01116466|Secondary|Change in MRI of Affected Leg and Implant Post-implantation|MRI will be conducted to evaluate the impact of the implant on the common peroneal nerve (e.g. positioning of the nerve cuff along the nerve, path of the lead wire and the common peroneal nerve, estimation of the cross-sectional area of the common peroneal nerve compared to the pre-operative MRI recording, etc.)|Week 3 post-implantation||||||
816910|NCT01116466|Secondary|Nerve Conduction Velocity of the Peroneal Nerve|Measured: Nervus peroneus communis (CPN) and Nervus peroneus superficialis (SPN)|Baseline, week 12 post-implantation|Two subjects were unavailable for the test.||m/s||Standard Deviation|Mean
816911|NCT01116466|Secondary|Four Square Step Test (FSST)|It is a test of dynamic balance that clinically assesses the person's ability to step over objects forward, sideways, and backwards. The patient's time to perform the test is measured which shorter time representing better performance. At baseline this test was done with subject's conventional walking aid. At 12 weeks post-implantation it was done with and without stimulation.|Baseline, week 12 post-implantation|||s||Standard Deviation|Mean
816912|NCT01116466|Secondary|Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) Score|A semi-structured interview is conducted in order to identify subject's limitations with daily occupations of importance in categories self-care, productivtiy or leisure. The subject is then asked to rate the imporance of each of the occupations using a 10-point rating scale. Afterwards the subject chooses up to 5 of the most important occupations (problems) (basis for identifying intervention goals). The subject is asked to use a 10 point scale to rate level of performance and satisfaction with performance for each of the five identified problems. Average COPM performance score and satisfaction score are calculated. The scores range between 1 and 10, where 1 indicates poor performance and low satisfaction, respectively, while 10 indicates very good performance and high satisfaction.|Baseline,12 weeks post-implantation|Two subjects were not available for the test.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816913|NCT01116466|Secondary|Walking Speed During 10 Meter Gait Test|The test assesses walking speed in meters per second over a short duration. At baseline this test was done with subject's conventional walking aid. At 6 and 12 weeks post-implantation this was done with and without stimulation.|Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks post-implantation|||m/s||Standard Deviation|Mean
816914|NCT01116466|Primary|Distance Walked in 6 Minutes|The test assesses distance walked over 6 minutes as a sub-maximal test of aerobic capacity (endurance). At baseline this test was done with subject's conventional walking aid. At 6 and 12 weeks post-implantation this was done with and without stimulation.|Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks post-implantation|||m||Standard Deviation|Mean
816915|NCT01116687|Secondary|Number of Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Study drug related grade 3-4 toxicities. To measure Adverse Events, investigators used the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0.|Study duration of 12 months|All evaluable participants||events|||Number
816916|NCT01116687|Secondary|Participant Progression Free Survival (PFS) Rate|Progression-Free Survival defined as the time from start of treatment until disease progression or death as a result of any cause. Patients were re-evaluated for response every 8 weeks. Response and progression were evaluated using the new international criteria proposed by the revised Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guideline (version 1.1) [Eur J Ca 45:228-247, 2009]. Changes in the largest diameter (unidimensional measurement) of the tumor lesions and the shortest diameter in the case of malignant lymph nodes are used in the RECIST criteria.|Study duration of 12 months|All evaluable participants||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816917|NCT01116687|Secondary|Participant Overall Survival (OS) Rate|Overall Survival defined as the time from start of treatment until death as a result of any cause, with patients censored at the date of last follow-up if still alive. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate all time-to-event functions. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata SE 9.0 software and SAS 9.2 software.|Study duration of 12 months|All evaluable participants||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816918|NCT01116687|Primary|Number of Participants With Objective Radiographic Response (ORR)|To determine the objective radiographic response rate associated with RO4929097 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who have progressed following at least 2 prior treatments in the metastatic setting. Radiologic assessment of tumor burden (CT scans of the chest, abdomen and pelvis, or MRI of the abdomen and pelvis and CT of the chest) was scheduled every 8 weeks. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST version 1.1) were used for evaluation of the primary endpoint.|2 months from enrollment for each participant|All evaluable participants||participants|||Number
816941|NCT01116921|Primary|Need for Intubation and Mechanical Ventilation in the First Seven Days of Life.|“Treatment Failure” criteria were the same for both groups. “Treatment Failure” required two of the following: 1) FiO2 >40% for longer than 30 minutes (to maintain SaO2 88-92%), 2) PCO2 >65mmHg on ABG/CBG or >70 on VBG, or 3) pH<7.22 on ABG/CBG/VBG or one of the following: 1) recurrent or severe apnea, 2) hemodynamic instability requiring pressors, 3) repeat surfactant dose at appropriate time with FiO2 >40%, or 4) deemed necessary by medical provider.|Seven days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
816942|NCT01116934|Primary|Serum Concentrations of Interleukin (IL)-1 Beta|Concentrations of IL-8, IL-6, IP-10, interferon (IFN)-gamma, and IL-1 beta, in plasma/RPMI samples were determined by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) according to the manufacturers’ instructions|2006|Samples were stimulated with 100 ng/ml lipopolysaccharide (LPS)||pg/ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
816943|NCT01116986|Primary|Self-Reported 7-Day Point-Prevalence Abstinence|"Self-Reported 7-Day Point-Prevalence Abstinence is a dichotomous outcome with values of 0 and 1 where 0=smoking on one or more of the past 7 days at the assessment endpoint (16 weeks post-quit) and 1=no smoking on any of the past 7 days at the assessment endpoint (i.e., abstinent for the past 7 days); this outcome will be analyzed in a logistic regression analysis model.
Note: This abstinence primary outcome replaces latency to relapse (now designated as a secondary outcome) because reviewers of the now-accepted manuscript (at the journal Addiction) advised us to change the primary outcome to the current week 16 Self-Reported 7-Day Point-Prevalence Abstinence outcome."|16 weeks post-quit|||participants|||Number
816944|NCT01116986|Secondary|Latency to Relapse|Latency to Relapse during the first 6 months post-quit, with relapse defined as 7 consecutive days of smoking; this outcome will be analyzed in a Cox regression survival analysis model with non-relapsers coded as right-censored.|During the first 6 months post-quit|||participants|||Number
816945|NCT01117012|Secondary|Absolute Change From Study 105 Baseline in Weight Through Week 96|Weight is a measurement of nutritional status. Absolute change in weight, measured in kilograms (kg), at Week 48 and Week 96 are reported.|Study 105: Baseline through Week 96|Full Analysis Set. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and n signifies participants who were evaluable for specified categories for each arm, respectively.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816946|NCT01117012|Secondary|Annualized Duration of Pulmonary Exacerbation Events||Study 105: Day 1 through Week 96|Full Analysis Set.||Days per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
816947|NCT01117012|Secondary|Annualized Pulmonary Exacerbation Event Rate|Annualized event rate was calculated by regression with negative binomial distribution.|Study 105: Day 1 through Week 96|Full Analysis Set.||events per year|||Number
816948|NCT01117012|Secondary|Absolute Change From Study 105 Baseline in Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) Respiratory Domain Score Through Week 96|The CFQ-R is a validated patient-reported outcome measuring health-related quality of life for subjects with cystic fibrosis. Respiratory domain assessed respiratory symptoms (for example, coughing, congestion, wheezing), score range: 0-100; higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and better health-related quality of life. Absolute Change at Week 48 and Week 96 are reported.|Study 105: Baseline through Week 96|Full Analysis Set. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and n signifies participants who were evaluable for specified categories for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
816949|NCT01117012|Secondary|Absolute Change From Study 105 Baseline in Percent Predicted FEV1 Through Week 96|FEV1 is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out in one second, after full inspiration. Predicted FEV1 (for age, gender, and height) was calculated using the Knudson method. Baseline was defined as the most recent measurement prior to intake of the first dose of study drug in Study 105. Absolute Change at Week 48 and Week 96 are reported.|Study 105: Baseline through Week 96|Full Analysis Set. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and n signifies participants who were evaluable for specified categories for each arm, respectively.||percent predicted of FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
816950|NCT01117012|Secondary|Annualized Rate of Decline From Study 105 Baseline in Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Through Week 96|FEV1 is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out in one second, after full inspiration. Predicted FEV1 (for age, gender, and height) was calculated using the Knudson method. Baseline was defined as Study 105 Day 15.|Study 105: Baseline through Week 96|Full Analysis Set.||percent predicted of FEV1 per year||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
816951|NCT01117012|Primary|Number of Participants With Non-Serious Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Adverse Event: any untoward medical occurrence in a participant during the study, including any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease whether or not it was considered to be study drug related. This included any newly occurring event or previous condition that increased in severity or frequency after obtaining informed consent and assent (where applicable). SAE: medical event or condition, which resulted in any of following, regardless of its relationship to the study drug: death, life threatening adverse experience, in-patient hospitalization/prolonged hospitalization, persistent/significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, important medical event. Non-Serious AEs included all AEs except SAEs.|Study 105: Day 1 up to Week 168|Safety Set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Study 105.||participants|||Number
816952|NCT01117051|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of Prucalopride at Week 8||Week 8|ITT (subjects in the ITT whose post-dose samples were collected outside the 5-hour sampling window were not used in the plasma concentration calculation)||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
816953|NCT01117051|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of Prucalopride at Week 2||Week 2|ITT (subjects in the ITT whose post-dose samples were collected outside the 5-hour sampling window were not used in the plasma concentration calculation)||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
816954|NCT01117051|Primary|Percent of Subjects With an Average Frequency of >=3 Spontaneous Bowel Movements Per Week|A bowel movement (BM) was defined as spontaneous if no laxatives were taken in the 24 hours preceding that BM.|12 weeks|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population includes all subjects who were randomized into the study and who had received at least 1 dose of investigational medication.||percentage of subjects|||Number
816992|NCT01117428|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|The AEs were used as a primary endpoint. AEs were summarized using descriptive statistics and presented overall by system organ class and preferred term. The frequencies of AEs were presented including number and percentages of participants with events and the total number of events.|Visit 2 until first follow-up visit (up to 66 weeks)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
816955|NCT01117090|Secondary|The Relationship Between CSF Pressure Data and Physician's Standard Trouble-shooting Diagnosis During Physical Task Protocol: Valsalva|Collect and characterize, by comparison with the physician's standard trouble-shooting diagnosis, the mean change in CSF pressure data during the physical task of a valsalva maneuver|1 day|Subjects were excluded if the needle was not in the CAP, if they had a ventricular catheter, if the pressure sensor malfunctioned, if there was an issue with the equipment, if the subject was unable to perform the valsalva, or if data were missing.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816956|NCT01117090|Secondary|The Relationship Between CSF Pressure Data and Physician's Standard Trouble-shooting Diagnosis During Physical Task Protocol: Cough|Collect and characterize, by comparison with the physician's standard trouble-shooting diagnosis, the mean change in CSF pressure data during the physical task of a cough|1 day|Subjects were excluded if the needle was not in the CAP, if they had a ventricular catheter, if the pressure sensor malfunctioned, if there was an issue with the equipment, or if the subject was unable to cough.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816957|NCT01117090|Secondary|The Relationship Between Catheter Flow Resistance Check Data and Physician's Standard Trouble-shooting Diagnosis|Characterize the relationship between pressure decay-to-baseline time (in seconds) and the physician's standard trouble-shooting diagnosis|1 day|Subjects were excluded if the needle was not in the CAP, if they had a ventricular catheter, if the pressure sensor malfunctioned, if there was an issue with the equipment, if the clamp was not open, or if the resistance check data were missing.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
816958|NCT01117090|Primary|Classification of Catheter Function by CSF Signatures vs. Physician's Standard Trouble-shooting Diagnosis|Collect and characterize, by comparison with the physician's standard trouble-shooting diagnosis, CSF signatures recorded in subjects who have an infusion system who present with signs and/or symptoms of possible catheter-related problems or failure.|1 day|Subjects were excluded if the needle was not in the CAP, if they had a ventricular catheter, if the pressure sensor malfunctioned, or if there was an issue with the equipment||Subjects whose CSF data agree with MD Dx|||Number
816959|NCT01117181|Secondary|Electrocardiogram (ECG)|Abnormal electrocardiogram results at 6 weeks|6 weeks|||participants with abnormal ECG|||Number
816960|NCT01117181|Secondary|Electrolytes|Percent abnormal at 6 weeks as assessed by local lab|6 weeks|One patient in the active group completed all visit 6 assessments except for the blood collection for the electrolyte sample. This patient refused this procedure.||percentage of abnormal electrolyte value|||Number
816961|NCT01117181|Secondary|Vital Status|vital status as measured by death|vital status at 6 weeks|||number of participants who died|||Number
816962|NCT01117181|Secondary|Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI): Apathy Subscale|Change from baseline to 6 weeks in neuropsychiatric symptoms in apathy subscore. Frequency (ranges from 1=occasionally, less than once/week to 4 = very frequently, once or more/day or continuously) and severity (1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe) scales are scored based on responses from an informed caregiver involved in the patient's life. To obtain the NPI score, the severity score is multiplied by the frequency score. Range is 0 to 12. Larger numbers indicate more severe behavioral disturbance.|baseline to week 6|||change in NPI apathy score||Standard Error|Mean
816963|NCT01117181|Secondary|Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE)|Change in Mini-Mental State Exam score from baseline to 6 weeks; this cognitive test estimates of dementia severity. Domains included orientation, memory, working memory, naming, following verbal and written commands, spontaneously writing a sentence, and copying two overlapping pentagons. The minimum MMSE score is 0; the maximum MMSE score is 30. Lower MMSE scores indicate more severe cognitive impairment.|baseline and 6 weeks|||change in MMSE score||Standard Error|Mean
816964|NCT01117181|Secondary|Digit Span|Change in Digit Span at baseline and 6 weeks; this assessment is used to assess auditory attention and working memory. Higher numbers indicate better functioning.|baseline and 6 weeks||08/2013||||
816965|NCT01117181|Primary|Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study- Clinical Global Impression of Change|"Proportion of individuals improving on Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study- Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) from baseline to 6 weeks; the CGIC is a 7-point Likert scale used to rate each patient with the following scores: marked worsening(7), moderate worsening (6), minimal worsening(5), no change(4), minimal improvement(3), moderate improvement(2), marked improvement(1). Ratings were based on an interview with the caregiver and an examination of the patient. The CGIC requires the clinician to consider a number of aspects of apathy, such as level of initiative, level of interest, and emotional engagement."|baseline to 6 weeks|||% patients moderate/marked improvement|||Number
816966|NCT01117181|Primary|Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES)|Change in score of Apathy Evaluation Scale from baseline to 6 weeks; the minimum score is 18; the maximum score is 72. Higher scores indicate more severe apathy.|baseline to 6 weeks|||change in score on AES||Standard Error|Mean
816967|NCT01117311|Secondary|Gastric Emptying Half-time|Gastric emptying half time is the time for half of the ingested solids or liquids to leave the stomach.|approximately 2 hours after radiolabeled meal is ingested|||minutes||Standard Error|Mean
816968|NCT01117311|Primary|Disposition Index|Total Disposition Index (DI) is a calculated value which represents the ability of a person's pancreas to lower blood glucose. A higher number means the pancreas is better able to lower blood glucose and a lower number means the pancreas is less able to lower blood glucose.|baseline, 2 weeks|||10^-14dl/kg/min^2 per pmol/l||Standard Error|Mean
816969|NCT01117337|Secondary|Seroma Formation|A seroma was defined as a non tender, irreducible hemispherical swelling with a fluctuant or firm consistency at the hernia site, examined and found during the first year. The diagnosis was based on the clinical finding of a palpable fluid collection without a size limit. One could get above the upper border of the swelling and there was usually absence of a cough impulse. To detect seroma, the clinical examination was carried at the first follow-up visit on the 7th postoperative day.|One year|||Participant|||Number
816970|NCT01117337|Primary|Proportion of Patients Having Pain in the Post Operative Period|To compare the proportion of patients having pain in the mesh fixation and non fixation group at one month postoperatively.|1 month|||Participant|||Number
816993|NCT01107535|Secondary|Number of Serious Adverse Events|The number participants experiencing a serious adverse event. For additional information see the Reported Adverse Events section.|Enrollment until 100 days after the last Synagis (palivizumab) dose|Analysis included all enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
825580|NCT01192139|Secondary|Metformin Tmax||Periods 1, 2, and 3 (before dosing, 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
816971|NCT01117337|Primary|Recurrence of Inguinal Hernia on the Operated Side in Mesh Non-fixation and Mesh Fixation Group.|Patients in both the arms will be followed up post operatively at 24 hours, 1 week, 1 month and 1 year to check for recurrence or persistence of inguinal hernia on the operated side. At these follow up visits, the patients would be asked about reoccurence of bulge on the operated side and will be examined clinically. In case, there is a suspicion of recurrence, the patient would be examined by a second surgeon and undergo Ultrasound and/or CT to confirm the recurrence of hernia.|1 year|||Participant|||Number
816972|NCT01117350|Secondary|Hypoglycemia Occurence: Number of Patients With at Least One Episode of Symptomatic / Severe Symptomatic Hypoglycemia During the Extension Period|"Symptomatic hypoglycemia was defined as an event with clinical symptoms that were considered to result from hypoglycemia.
Severe symptomatic hypoglycemia was defined as an event with clinical symptoms that were considered to result from hypoglycemia, requiring the assistance of another person for active administration of carbohydrate, glucagon or other countermeasure because the patient could not treat him/herself due to acute neurological impairment directly resulting from the hypoglycemia (assistance by another person when the patient could have treated him/herself was not considered as requiring assistance)and one of the following criteria:
The event was associated with a measured PG level < 36 mg/dL (2 mmol/L),
Or, in absence of PG value, the event was associated with neurological recovery attributable to the restoration of PG to normal, after oral carbohydrate, intravenous glucose or glucagon administration."|all across the extension period (from week 24 to week 48)|The population analyzed was the safety population (extension) i.e. all treated patients during the extension period.||participants|||Number
816973|NCT01117350|Secondary|Hypoglycemia Occurence: Number of Patients With at Least One Episode of Symptomatic / Severe Symptomatic Hypoglycemia During the Comparative Period|"Symptomatic hypoglycemia was defined as an event with clinical symptoms that were considered to result from hypoglycemia.
Severe symptomatic hypoglycemia was defined as an event with clinical symptoms that were considered to result from hypoglycemia, requiring the assistance of another person for active administration of carbohydrate, glucagon or other countermeasure because the patient could not treat him/herself due to acute neurological impairment directly resulting from the hypoglycemia (assistance by another person when the patient could have treated him/herself was not considered as requiring assistance)and one of the following criteria:
The event was associated with a measured PG level < 36 mg/dL (2 mmol/L),
Or, in absence of PG value, the event was associated with neurological recovery attributable to the restoration of PG to normal, after oral carbohydrate, intravenous glucose or glucagon administration."|all across the comparative period (from week 0 to week 24)|The population analyzed was the safety population i.e. all randomized and treated patients.||participants|||Number
816974|NCT01117350|Secondary|Daily Dose of Insulin Glargine Administered During the Extension Period||week 30, week 36, week 48|The population considered was the mITT population (extension) but due to missing values, different subsets of this mITT population were analyzed at each week.||Unit (U)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816975|NCT01117350|Secondary|Daily Dose of Liraglutide||week 1, week 2, week 6, week 12, week 24|The population considered was the mITT population but due to missing values, different subsets of this mITT population were analyzed at each week.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816976|NCT01117350|Secondary|Daily Dose of Insulin Glargine||week 1, week 2, week 6, week 12, week 24|The population considered was the mITT population but due to missing values, different subsets of this mITT population were analyzed at each week.||Unit (U)||Standard Deviation|Mean
816977|NCT01117350|Secondary|Body Weight: Change From Beginning to End of the Extension Period|Change = Last weight value measured during the extension period (LOCF value) - weight value at beginning of the Extension Period (Week 24)|week 24, week 30, week 36, week 48|The population analyzed for this outcome measure consisted of the mITT population (extension).||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816978|NCT01117350|Secondary|Body Weight: Change From Baseline to the End of the Comparative Period|Change = Last weight value measured during the comparative period (LOCF value) - weight value at baseline|baseline (week 0), week 2, week 6, week 12, week 18, week 24|The population analyzed for this outcome measure consisted of the subset of mITT patients who had at least one weight value on treatment during the comparative period.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816979|NCT01117350|Secondary|Self-Monitored 7-point Plasma Glucose (PG) Profile: Change From Beginning to the End of the Extension Period|"Self-monitored 7-point plasma glucose profiles (before and 2 hours after the start of breakfast, lunch and dinner, and at bedtime) recorded on 3 consecutive days in the week before each visit
Value at the end of the extension period defined as last available value during the extension period (i.e. last-observation-carried-forward [LOCF] value)
Change = LOCF value - week 24 value"|week 24, week 36, week 48|The population considered was the mITT population (extension) but due to missing values, different subsets of this population were analyzed for each time point of the profile.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816980|NCT01117350|Secondary|Self-Monitored 7-point Plasma Glucose (PG) Profile: Change From Baseline to the End of the Comparative Period|"Self-monitored 7-point plasma glucose profiles (before and 2 hours after the start of breakfast, lunch and dinner, and at bedtime) recorded on 3 consecutive days in the week before each visit
Value at the end of the comparative period defined as last available value during the comparative period (i.e. last-observation-carried-forward [LOCF] value)
Change = LOCF value - baseline value"|baseline (week 0), week 12, week 24|The population considered was the mITT population but due to missing values, different subsets of this mITT population were analyzed for each time point of the profile.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816981|NCT01117350|Secondary|Self-Monitored Fasting Plasma Glucose (SMFPG) Measurements: Change From Beginning to the End of the Extension Period|"SMFPG = mean value of Self-Monitored Fasting Plasma Glucose measurements over 3 consecutive days in the week before each visit
Value at the end of the extension period defined as last available value during the extension period (i.e. last-observation-carried-forward [LOCF] value)
Change = LOCF value - week 24 value"|week 24, week 30, week 36, week 48|The population analyzed for this outcome measure consisted of the subset of mITT (extension) patients who had SMFPG value both at beginning of the extension and at least one value on treatment during the extension period.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817073|NCT01119443|Secondary|Cmin,ss (Fed Conditions)|Minimum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
816982|NCT01117350|Secondary|Self-Monitored Fasting Plasma Glucose (SMFPG) Measurements: Change From Baseline to the End of the Comparative Period|"SMFPG = mean value of Self-Monitored Fasting Plasma Glucose measurements over 3 consecutive days in the week before each visit
Value at the end of the comparative period defined as last available value during the comparative period (i.e. last-observation-carried-forward [LOCF] value)
Change = LOCF value - baseline value"|baseline (week 0), week 6, week 12, week 18, week 24|The population analyzed for this outcome measure consisted of the subset of mITT patients who had at least one SMFPG value on treatment during the comparative period.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
816983|NCT01117350|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Whose Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) <7% at the End of the Extension Period|Value at the end of the extension period defined as last available HbA1c value measured during the extension period (i.e. last observation carried forward (LOCF) value)|week 36, week 48|The population analyzed for this outcome measure consisted of the mITT patients who had at least one HbA1c value on treatment during the extension period.||percentage of participants|||Number
816984|NCT01117350|Secondary|Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c): Change From Beginning to the End of the Extension Period|Change in HbA1C from beginning of the extension period (week 24) to the last observation carried forward (LOCF) measured during the extension period = LOCF value - week 24 value|week 24, week 36, week 48|The population analyzed for this outcome measure consisted of the subset of mITT population (extension) who had HbA1c value both at beginning of the extension and at least one value on treatment during the extension period.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
816985|NCT01117350|Secondary|Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c): Change From Baseline to the End of Comparative Period|Change in HbA1C from baseline to the last observation carried forward (LOCF) measured during the comparative period = LOCF value - baseline value|baseline (week -2), week 12, week 24|The population analyzed for this outcome measure consisted of the subset of mITT patients who had at least one HbA1c value on treatment during the comparative period.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
816986|NCT01117350|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Whose Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Has Increased at the End of the Comparative Period|Percentage of patients with HbA1c value at end of the comparative period (LOCF) higher than HbA1c baseline value|baseline (week -2), week 12, week 24|The population analyzed for this outcome measure consisted of the subset of mITT patients who had at least one HbA1c value on treatment during the comparative period.||percentage of participants|||Number
816987|NCT01117350|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Whose Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Has Decreased But Remains ≥7% at the End of the Comparative Period|"Percentage of patients with:
* HbA1c value at end of the comparative period (LOCF) lower than HbA1c baseline value
AND
* HbA1c value at end of the comparative period (LOCF) ≥7%"|baseline (week -2), week 12, week 24|The population analyzed for this outcome measure consisted of the subset of mITT patients who had at least one HbA1c value on treatment during the comparative period.||percentage of participants|||Number
816988|NCT01117350|Primary|Percentage of Patients Whose Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) <7% at the End of the Comparative Period|The value at the end of the comparative period was defined as the last available HbA1c value measured during the comparative period plus 14 days after the last dose of Investigational Product (i.e. last-observation-carried-forward [LOCF] value).|week 12, week 24|The population analyzed for this outcome measure consisted of the subset of mITT patients who had at least one HbA1c value on treatment during the comparative period.||percentage of participants|||Number
816989|NCT01117428|Secondary|Terminal Half-Life (T½)|"For Part A, the endpoint was not calculated. For Parts B, C and F, the endpoint was calculated for each patient following the first and fourth Sym004 infusions.
For Parts D and E, the endpoint was calculated for each patient following the first and third Sym004 infusions.
T½ was estimated using non-compartmental methods and actual time points.
Outcome Measure Time Frame:
Parts B, C and F (Weekly dosing): Sample collection at Visit 2 (1st dose from end of infusion, 1-, 2-, 4-, 8-, 24-, 48-hours) until 1 week post-infusion (168-hours) and at Visit 5 (4th dose from end of infusion, 1-, 2-, 4-, 8-, 24-hours) until 1 week post-infusion (168-hours).
Parts D, E (Dosing every second week): Sample collection at Visit 2 (1st dose from end of infusion, 1-, 2-, 4-, 8-, 24-, 48-hours) to end of 3rd dose (from end of infusion, 1-, 2-, 4-, 8-, 24-hours) until 2 weeks post-infusion (336 hours)."|See Time Frame in the Outcome Measure Description|For Part A, data could not be reported as the endpoint was not calculated and no pharmacokinetics (PK) analysis set was defined. For Parts B to F, a PK analysis set was used.||Hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
816990|NCT01117428|Secondary|Antitumor Activity Endpoints - Time-to-event Endpoints|"Median Progression Free Survival (PFS) was defined as the time interval without PD from start of first infusion until death or documented PD (i.e. at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions) according to RECIST v1.1. Patients who died without confirmed PD were considered as progressed. Patients who died or showed PD more than 21 days after last treatment were censored (i.e. were considered alive without progression on Day 21 after last treatment). Patients without events were censored at date of last scan or 22 days after last treatment, whichever occurred first.
Median Overall Survival (OS) was defined as the time from start of first infusion until date of death from any cause. Patients alive at the time of the analysis or prematurely withdrawn from the trial (e.g. lost to follow-up or consent withdrawn) were censored for the OS analysis. In any case of censoring, the date of censoring was the last time point documenting survival status."|Up to 62 weeks|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
816991|NCT01117428|Secondary|Antitumor Activity|Best Overall Response (OR) on the Full Analysis Set (FAS) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1, based on central evaluation with confirmatory CT scan or MRI [Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR): at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions; Progressive Disease (PD): at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD; Overall Response (OR): CR + PR]. Baseline was defined as Visit 2 (pre-infusion). The outcome measure was measured from screening until PD.|Up to 62 weeks|Data for Part A were presented only for the FAS. For Parts B to F, analyses and summaries were performed both for the FAS and for the per protocol population. The FAS was considered the primary analysis population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817116|NCT01119755|Primary|Mean Difference of Systolic Night-time Ambulatory Blood Pressure Between Summer and Winter|Mean difference of systolic night-time ambulatory blood pressure measurement during summer and winter period|1 year|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
816994|NCT01107535|Secondary|Number of Ventilation Support Days (Supplemental Oxygen and Mechanical Ventilation) During the Hospital Admission|The mean (average) number of days participants required supplemental oxygen during any hospital stay and the mean number of days participants required mechanical ventilation while in the intensive care unit.|Hospital admission to hospital discharge|Analysis of supplemental oxygen included participants with any hospital stay during the study (n=10) and analysis of mechanical ventilation included the subgroup of participants with intensive care unit stays during the study (n=2).||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816995|NCT01107535|Secondary|Number of Intensive Care Unit Days During the Hospital Admissions by Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection|The number of days spent in a hospital intensive care unit (ICU) are summarized for those participants requiring that type of care. An indirect immunofluorescence test (a laboratory technique used to detect the presence of viruses) was used to determine if hospitalized participants had respiratory syncytial virus infection.|Hospital admission to hospital discharge|Two participants with a total of 3 intensive care unit stays were analyzed. One participant was negative for respiratory syncytial virus during their first stay in the intensive care unit and was positive for respiratory syncytial virus at their second stay.||days|||Number
816996|NCT01107535|Secondary|Number of Hospital Admission Days (All Causes)|The mean (average) number days participants were hospitalized.|Hospital admission to hospital discharge|Analysis included all participants who were hospitalized during the study. This includes 2 participants hospitalized due to respiratory syncytial virus infection and 8 participants hospitalized for other respiratory diseases.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
816997|NCT01107535|Primary|Number of Hospital Admissions by Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection|The number of participants hospitalized for respiratory syncytial virus infection from the first dose of study drug up to the visit coinciding with the first birthday of the participant. An indirect immunofluorescence test (a laboratory technique used to detect the presence of viruses) was used to determine if hospitalized participants had respiratory syncytial virus infection.|First year of life (up to 12 months)|Analysis included all enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
816998|NCT01117454|Primary|Number of Patients With Ventricular Ectopy or VT During Exercise Treadmill Testing|Hypothesis: the addition of oral flecainide to standard therapy will reduce ventricular ectopy and/or VT on treadmill exercise treadmill testing in patients with CPVT, compared to placebo plus standard therapy.|3 months|1 participant did not complete treadmill test||Participants|||Count of Participants
816999|NCT01117480|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Month 0) in Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index (RADAI)|The RADAI is a questionnaire for participants used for measuring disease activity. The index consists of 6 questions. The items ask the participants about (1) global disease activity in the last 6 months, (2) disease activity in terms of current swollen and tender joints, (3) arthritis pain, (4) the current status of health, (5) duration of morning stiffness and (6) tender joints to be rated in a joint list. The joint list asks about pain in the left and right shoulders, elbows, wrists, fingers, hips, knees, ankles and toes. The first 3 items are all rated on a numeric rating scale from 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate more disease activity. The RADAI total score is the sum of individual items divided by 5 (range 0-10), with a higher score signifying more disease activity.|Month 0, 6, 12, 18 and 24|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab (ITT) with baseline data available for RADAI.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817000|NCT01117480|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Month 0) in Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)|Physical function was evaluated using the Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI), a participant-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from baseline in the disability index of the HAQ-DI indicated improvement.|Month 0, 6, 12, 18 and 24|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab (ITT) with baseline data available for HAQ.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817001|NCT01117480|Primary|Percentage of Participants That Achieved a Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) < 2.6|The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the Subject’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity (subject rates disease activity using a likert scale from 0 [low activity] to 10 [high activity]) are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10. A DAS28 score >5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score <3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score <2.6 indicates clinical remission.|Month 0, 6, 12, 18 and 24|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab (ITT) with baseline data available for DAS-28.||percentage of participants|||Number
817002|NCT01117623|Other Pre-specified|Tumor Response in Expansion Cohort|Tumor Response (= Best Overall Response) of a participant was defined as the best tumor response (Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), Stable Disease (SD), or Progressive Disease (PD)) observed during trial period assessed according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. CR was defined as disappearance of tumor lesions, PR was defined as a decrease of at least 30% in the sum of tumor lesion sizes, SD was defined as steady state of disease, PD was defined as an increase of at least 20% in the sum of tumor lesions sizes.|From the screening visit of the first participant until the last evaluation of the final participant over 6 years later, assessed at the screening visit, end of cycle 2, end of each even cycle and during the final visit (end of treatment)|ITT efficacy analysis (set), expansion cohorts only||Participants|||Number
817012|NCT01117623|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Tmax,ss)|Tmax,ss refers to the time after multiple dose administration and after a steady state concentration has been reached when a drug attains its highest measurable concentration (Cmax). It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 2, Day 1 and on Cycle 3, Day 1 for expansion cohort. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10 and 24h post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable Tmax,ss in at least one analyte were 6 in 40mg; 6 in 100 mg; 2 in 120 mg; 3 in 140 mg; 0 in HCC Child Pugh A; 1 in HCC Child Pugh B; 5 in NSCLC||h||Full Range|Median
817003|NCT01117623|Other Pre-specified|Tumor Response in Dose Escalation Cohort|Tumor Response (= Best Overall Response) of a participant was defined as the best tumor response (Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), Stable Disease (SD), or Progressive Disease (PD)) observed during trial period assessed according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. CR was defined as disappearance of tumor lesions, PR was defined as a decrease of at least 30% in the sum of tumor lesion sizes, SD was defined as steady state of disease, PD was defined as an increase of at least 20% in the sum of tumor lesions sizes.|From the screening visit of the first participant until the last evaluation of the final participant over 6 years later, assessed at the screening visit, end of cycle 2, end of each even cycle and during the final visit (end of treatment)|ITT efficacy analysis (set)||Participants|||Number
817004|NCT01117623|Other Pre-specified|Tumor Progression in Expansion Cohort|Tumor progression evaluates changes in a tumor or tumors over time due to worsening of disease. Measurements and observations of the tumor status were performed before, during and after treatment. Tumor progression evaluates changes in a tumor or tumors over time due to worsening of disease. Measurements and observations of the tumor status were performed before, during and after treatment. Progression for solid tumors was evaluated based on the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.0) criteria. Tumor dimensions were measured in millimeters and the longest diameter (LD) was recorded for up to 5 lesions per organ and 10 lesions total. A sum of the LD for all target lesions was recorded. The use of a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions from the smallest sum or appearance of a new lesion was assessed as progression of disease.|From the screening visit of the first participant until the last evaluation of the final participant over 6 years later, assessed at the screening visit, end of cycle 2, end of each even cycle and during the final visit (end of treatment)|ITT efficacy analysis (set), expansion cohorts only||Participants|||Number
817005|NCT01117623|Other Pre-specified|Tumor Progression in Dose Escalation Cohort|Tumor progression evaluates changes in a tumor or tumors over time due to worsening of disease. Measurements and observations of the tumor status were performed before, during and after treatment. Progression for solid tumors was evaluated based on the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.0) criteria. Tumor dimensions were measured in millimeters and the longest diameter (LD) was recorded for up to 5 lesions per organ and 10 lesions total. A sum of the LD for all target lesions was recorded. The use of a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions from the smallest sum or appearance of a new lesion was assessed as progression of disease.|From the screening visit of the first participant until the last evaluation of the final participant over 6 years later, assessed at the screening visit, end of cycle 2, end of each even cycle and during the final visit (end of treatment)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) efficacy analysis (set)||Participants|||Number
817006|NCT01117623|Secondary|Biomarker Soluble Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor 2 (sCEGFR-2) Plasma Levels|The analysis of Biomarker sCEGFR-2 plasma levels is not done.|No data obtained|ITT|||||
817007|NCT01117623|Secondary|Biomarker Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Plasma Levels|The analysis of Biomarker VEGF plasma levels is not done|No data obtained|ITT|||||
817008|NCT01117623|Secondary|Ratio of AUCt,ss/AUC (RLIN)|RLIN is the ratio of the measure of systemic drug exposure at steady state to the measure of systemic drug exposure after single dose administration. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1 and Cycle 2, Day 1. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10 and 24h post-dose|PK population; Number of Participants with an evaluable AUCt,ss and AUC in at least one analyte were 0 in 20mg; 3 (regorafenib) and 4 (M2) in 40mg; 3 in 100 mg; 2 (regorafenib) and 0 (M2) in 120 mg; 3 (regorafenib) and 2 (M2) in 140 mg; 0 in HCC Child Pugh A; 1 in HCC Child Pugh B; 4 in NSCLC; No participants have evaluable data for M5.||Ratio|||Number
817009|NCT01117623|Secondary|Ratio of AUCt,ss/AUCt (RAAUC)|RAAUC is the ratio of the measure of systemic drug exposure over a specific dosing interval at steady state to the measure of systemic drug exposure over a specific dosing interval after single dose administration. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1 and Cycle 2, Day 1 and on Cycle 3, Day 1 for expansion cohort. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10 and 24h post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable AUCt,ss and AUCt in at least one analyte were 0 (M5) in 20mg; 5 (regorafenib and M2) and 4 (M5) in 40mg; 6 in 100 mg; 2 in 120 mg; 3 in 140 mg; 0 in HCC Child Pugh A; 1 in HCC Child Pugh B; 5 in NSCLC||Ratio|||Number
817010|NCT01117623|Secondary|Ratio of Cmin,ss/Cmin (RACmin)|RACmin is the ratio of the lowest drug concentration at steady state to the lowest drug concentration after single dose administration. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1 and Cycle 2, Day 1 and on Cycle 3, Day 1 for expansion cohort. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10 and 24h post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable Cmin,ss and Cmin in at least one analyte were 0 (M5) in 20mg; 6 (regorafenib and M2) and 4 (M5) in 40mg; 6 in 100 mg; 2 in 120 mg; 3 in 140 mg; 0 in HCC Child Pugh A; 1 in HCC Child Pugh B; 5 in NSCLC||Ratio|||Number
817011|NCT01117623|Secondary|Ratio of Cmax,ss/Cmax (RACmax)|RACmax is the ratio of the highest drug concentration at steady state to the highest drug concentration after single dose administration. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1 and Cycle 2, Day 1 and on Cycle 3, Day 1 for expansion cohort. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10 and 24h post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable Cmax,ss and Cmax in at least one analyte were 1 (M5) in 20mg; 5 (regorafenib and M2) and 4 (M5) in 40mg; 6 in 100 mg; 2 in 120 mg; 3 in 140 mg; 0 in HCC Child Pugh A; 1 in HCC Child Pugh B; 5 in NSCLC||Ratio|||Number
817057|NCT01119222|Primary|Interpolated Average Pain (0-8 Hours)|Interpolated average pain (0 to 8 hours): area under the curve (AUC) of average pain (0 to 120 seconds) recorded at each of the time points taken over 8 hour time period divided by 8.|Pre-dose to 8 hours post-dose|Participants for analysis = participants who completed all of the four treatment periods.||hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817117|NCT01119755|Primary|Mean Difference of Diastolic Daytime Ambulatory Blood Pressure Between Summer and Winter|Mean Difference of Diastolic Daytime Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurement During Summer and Winter Period|1 year|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817013|NCT01117623|Secondary|AUC From Time 0 to 24 Hours at Steady State Divided by Dose (AUC(0-24)ss/D)|AUC(0-24)ss/D is a measure of systemic drug exposure (AUC) over 24 hours after multiple dose administration and after a steady state concentration has been reached, which is then divided by the administered dose. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 2, Day 1 and on Cycle 3, Day 1 for expansion cohort. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10 and 24h post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable AUC(0-24)ss/D in at least one analyte were 6 in 40mg; 6 in 100 mg; 2 in 120 mg; 3 in 140 mg; 0 in HCC Child Pugh A; 1 in HCC Child Pugh B; 5 in NSCLC||h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817014|NCT01117623|Secondary|Cmax at Steady State During a Dosing Interval Divided by Dose (Cmax,ss/D)|Cmax,ss/D refers to the highest measured drug concentration after multiple dose administration and after a steady state concentration has been reached, which is then divided by the administered dose. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected at on Cycle 2, Day 1 and on Cycle 3, Day 1 for expansion cohort. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10 and 24h post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable Cmax,ss/D in at least one analyte were 6 in 40mg; 6 in 100 mg; 2 in 120 mg; 3 in 140 mg; 0 in HCC Child Pugh A; 1 in HCC Child Pugh B; 5 in NSCLC||1/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817015|NCT01117623|Secondary|Half-life Associated With the Terminal Slope (T1/2)|T1/2 is the period of time required for the concentration or amount of drug in the body to be reduced to exactly one-half of a given concentration or amount. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 24, and 48 h post-dose.|PK population; Number of Patients with at least an evaluable T1/2 were 5 (regorafenib) and 6 (M2) in 40mg; 5 (regorafenib and M2) in 100 mg; 3 (regorafenib and M2) in 120 mg; 6 (regorafenib and M2) in 140 mg; 9 (regorafenib), 10(M2) and 1 (M5) in HCC Child Pugh A; 3 (regorafenib) and 2 (M2) in HCC Child Pugh B; 19 (regorafenib) and 16 (M2) in NSCLC||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817016|NCT01117623|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|Tmax refers to the time after dosing when a drug attains its highest measurable concentration (Cmax). It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 24, and 48 h post-dose.|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable Tmax in at least one analyte were 1 (M-5) in 20 mg; 5 (M-5) in 40mg; 13 (M-5) in HCC Child Pugh A; 22 (M-5) in NSCLC||h||Full Range|Median
817017|NCT01117623|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration After Single Dose Administration Divided by Dose (Cmax/D)|Cmax/D refers to the highest measured drug concentration after a single dose administration, which is then divided by the administered dose. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 24, and 48 h post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable Cmax/D in at least one analyte was 1 (M5) in 20mg; 7 (regorafenib and M2) and 5 (M5) in 40mg; 13 (M5) in HCC Child-Pugh A; 22 (M5) in NSCLC||1/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817018|NCT01117623|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration vs. Time Curve From Zero to Infinity After Single (First) Dose Divided by Dose (AUC/D)|The AUC/D is a measure of systemic drug exposure (AUC) after the first single dose, which is then divided by that dose. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 24, and 48 h post-dose|PK population; Number of Participants with at least one evaluable AUC/D were 5 (regorafenib) and 6 (M-2) in 40mg; 5 (regorafenib and M-2) in 100 mg; 3 (M-2) in 120 mg; 6 (regorafenib and M-2) in 140 mg; 9 (regorafenib), 10 (M-2) and 1 (M5) in HCC Child Pugh A; 3 (regorafenib) and 2 (M-2) in HCC Child Pugh B; 19 (regorafenib) and 16 (M-2) in NSCLC||h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817019|NCT01117623|Secondary|AUC From Time 0 to the Last Data Point > Lower Limit of Quantification (LLOQ) (AUC(0-tlast))|The AUC(0-tlast) is a measure of systemic drug exposure from time 0 up to the time point at which the last measurable drug could be detectable, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 24, and 48 h post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable AUC(0-tlast) in at least one analyte were 1(M-5) in 20mg; 7 (regorafenib and M-2) and 5 (M-5) in 40mg; 13 (M-5) in HCC Child Pugh A; 22 (M5) in NSCLC||mg*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817020|NCT01117623|Primary|AUC From Time 0 to 24 Hours at Steady State(AUC(0-24),ss)|AUC(0-24),ss is a measure of systemic drug exposure over 24 hours, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample, after multiple dose administration and after a steady state concentration has been reached.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 2, Day 1 and on Cycle 3, Day 1 for expansion cohort. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10 and 24h post-dose.|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable AUC(0-24),ss in at least one analyte in at least one analyte were 6 in 40mg; 6 in 100 mg; 2 in 120 mg; 3 in 140 mg; 0 in HCC Child Pugh A; 1 in HCC Child Pugh B; 5 in NSCLC||mg*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817021|NCT01117623|Primary|Cmax at Steady State During a Dosing Interval (Cmax,ss)|Cmax,ss refers to the highest measured drug concentration, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample, after multiple dose administration and after a steady state concentration has been reached.|Blood samples were collected at on Cycle 2, Day 1 and on Cycle 3, Day 1 for expansion cohort. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10 and 24h post-dose.|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable Cmax,ss in at least one analyte were 6 in 40mg; 6 in 100 mg; 2 in 120 mg; 3 in 140 mg; 0 in HCC Child Pugh A; 1 in HCC Child Pugh B; 5 in NSCLC||mg/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817022|NCT01117623|Primary|Area Under the Concentration vs. Time Curve From Zero to Infinity After Single (First) Dose (AUC)|The AUC is a measure of systemic drug exposure, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 24, and 48 h post-dose|PK population; Number of Participants with at least one evaluable AUC were 5 (regorafenib) and 6 (M2) in 40mg; 5 (regorafenib and M2) in 100 mg; 3 (M2) in 120 mg; 6 (regorafenib and M2) in 140 mg; 9 (regorafenib), 10 (M2) and 1 (M5) in HCC Child Pugh A; 3 (regorafenib) and 2 (M2) in HCC Child Pugh B; 19 (regorafenib) and 16 (M2) in NSCLC||mg*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817023|NCT01117623|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration After Single Dose Administration (Cmax)|Cmax refers to the highest measured drug concentration, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample.|Blood samples were collected on Cycle 1, Day 1. Samples were drawn at the following time points: 0 h pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 24, and 48 h post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population; Number of Participants with an evaluable Cmax in at least one analyte was 1 (M5) in 20mg; 7 (regorafenib and M2) and 5 (M5) in 40mg; 13 (M5) in HCC Child-Pugh A; 22 (M5) in NSCLC||mg/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817024|NCT01117623|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)|The MTD was defined as the highest dose level, which could be given to 6 participants such that no more than 1 participant (less than 33%) experienced a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT).|Within first 4 weeks of treatment|Safety Population; dose escalation cohorts only||mg|||Number
817025|NCT01117727|Primary|Accuracy of Using the BCI as a Switch to Select From 4 Targets Using Scanning|Average accuracy for selecting one of 4 targets with a switch operated by a brain-computer interface controlled by power in the sensorimotor rhythms. The 8 sessions were conducted over a 2 month period. Accuracy was calculated as the percentage of trials in which the target was correctly selected. Trials for all sessions were combined to create the overall average. Therefore, there is no standard deviation. .|8 sessions over 2 months|||percent of correct targets selected|||Number
817026|NCT01117766|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) Total Score at Visits 4 and 7|NPSI: 10-item self-administered questionnaire assessing 5 dimensions of pain (burning superficial spontaneous pain, pressing deep spontaneous pain, paroxysmal pain, evoked pain, and paresthesia/dysesthesia). Each item consists of a question about the specific qualities of pain and an 11-point numerical scale range: 0 (absence of pain) to 10 (maximum intensity imaginable), and 2 temporal items related to spontaneous and paroxysmal pain. Maximum total score possible = 100.|Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period|FAS. n=18, 18; number of participants contributing to the mean.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817027|NCT01117766|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Test-Day Global Pain Intensity at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7|Global pain: participant-rated pain using the test-day global pain scale, consisting of an 11-point NRS where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst possible pain. Participants described intensity of pain in response to “How intense is your pain today?”|Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period|FAS. n=number of participants contributing to the mean.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817028|NCT01117766|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7|PGIC: participant-rated assessment measuring change in participant's overall status on a 7-point scale from 1=very much improved to 7=very much worse.|Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period|FAS. n=number of participants contributing to the mean.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817029|NCT01117766|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Weekly Pain Score From the Daily Diary at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7|Daily pain diary: participant-rated pain during the past 24 hours rated on an 11 point NRS scale where 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain. For a given week, the pain response was the average of the 7 daily entries for that week, or average of the available data for that week if fewer than 7 entries were recorded (>=1 daily pain score for any given week required). The endpoint for each week consisted of the change from baseline in average pain score (follow-up value minus baseline).|Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period|FAS. n=number of participants contributing to the mean. Missing weeks within a period were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817030|NCT01117766|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Heat Pain Sensitivity at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7|Duration of thermal stimuli was 2 seconds and an intensity that is increased in steps of 4 degrees celsius for heat stimuli (between 40 and 50 degrees celsius). Thermal pain sensitivity was participant-rated using 11-point NRS where 0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable. The average of 2 ratings was calculated to get the mean score.|Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period|FAS. n=number of participants contributing to the mean. Missing values were imputed using a single imputation regression method.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817031|NCT01117766|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Cold Pain Sensitivity at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7|Duration of thermal stimuli was 2 seconds and an intensity that is increased in steps of 5 degrees celsius for cold stimuli (between 5 and 20 degrees celsius). Thermal pain sensitivity was participant-rated using 11-point NRS where 0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable. The average of 2 ratings was calculated to get the mean score.|Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period|FAS. n=number of participants contributing to the mean. Missing values were imputed using a single imputation regression method.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817032|NCT01117766|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Punctate Allodynia Area (Von Frey) at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7|Punctate allodynia area in cm^2: calculated from 8 measured distances by calculating the area of an octagon. The angle between each pair of lines was 45 degrees at point c. The area of the octagon was found by totaling the areas of the 8 triangles. Octagon with 8 radial lengths from center to the outside. Area = Σ ( ½ length * perpendicular height); Σ ( ½ ri * sin(45) r(i+1) ) = Σ ( (ri * r(i+1) )/2√2)). (where ri, i=1 to 8, were the eight radial lengths)|Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period|FAS. n=number of participants contributing to the mean.||cm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
817072|NCT01119443|Secondary|Tmax,ss (Fed Conditions)|Time from dosing to the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||hour||Full Range|Mean
817033|NCT01117766|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Mechanical Pain Sensitivity (Von Frey) at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7|Sensitivity to mechanical pain stimuli was tested using calibrated Von Frey monofilaments. To obtain a stimulus-response-function, seven different Von Frey monofilaments (size 8 to 512 mN, force increased by a factor of two from filament to filament) applied three times each; each stimulus was participant-rated using 11-point NRS where 0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable. If a score of 8 or more was reported for a given intensity no stronger stimuli was applied. Von Frey stimulus was applied to the skin for 1 to 2 seconds. The average of 3 ratings was calculated for the mean score.|Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period|FAS. n=number of participants contributing to the mean. Missing values were imputed using a single imputation regression method.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817034|NCT01117766|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Dynamic Allodynia Area at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7|Dynamic area brush in cm^2: calculated from 8 measured distances by calculating the area of an octagon. The angle between each pair of lines was 45 degrees at point c. The area of the octagon was found by totaling the areas of the 8 triangles. Octagon with 8 radial lengths from center to the outside. Area = Σ ( ½ length * perpendicular height); Σ ( ½ ri * sin(45) r(i+1) ) = Σ ( (ri * r(i+1) )/2√2)). (where ri, i=1 to 8, were the eight radial lengths)|Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period|FAS. n=number of participants contributing to the mean.||cm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
817035|NCT01117766|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Dynamic Allodynia Intensity at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7|Five strokes applied with a standardized brush (somedic) across the painful site, 6cm long and at a control site to allow the participants to appreciate any difference. A painful and clearly dysaesthetic (unpleasant) sensation was considered as representing brush allodynia (whereas a “strange” or “tickly” sensation provoked by the brush was not). After each brush stimuli participants were asked to give a pain rating using 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) where 0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable. The average of 5 brush strokes was calculated to obtain the mean score.|Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period|Full analysis set (FAS)=participants with present pain intensity score >=4 out of 10 for brush evoked allodynia at screening and randomization, >=4 out of 7 non missing values in week prior to randomization, >4 for weekly average daily pain score, and who did not withdraw/discontinue. n=number of participants contributing to the mean.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817036|NCT01119001|Primary|Accuracy of Typing With a BCI Keyboard by ALS Patients.|"Accuracy for the sentence typed in each environment was calculated as the percentage of characters for which the result character matched the target character. The target characters were determined based on the next character needed to complete the sentence to be copied. In the case of errors, the next character was therefore a backspace to correct the error. The target characters were modified by subject comments to account for errors in selecting the next character.
Once sentence was typed in each environment in each session on a separate day. From the three repeated sessions, there were therefore 9 total sentences per subject with 3 measures for each environment. These were treated as repeated measures for the analysis."|3 times over 2-4 weeks|||percentage accuracy||Full Range|Mean
817037|NCT01119040|Primary|Number of Participants With Successful Replacements of Dislodged PEG Tubes With NOTES Procedures in Lieu of Traditional Surgical Methods.|Successful replacement will be determined via the number of patients requiring conversion from NOTES PEG rescue to conventional incision-based surgery.|30 day follow-up|Only 1 subject due to low accrual||participants|||Number
817038|NCT01119118|Secondary|Number of Subjects With PSA Response||6 months|||participants|||Number
817039|NCT01119118|Secondary|Number of Subjects Whose Tumor Lesion Size Changed Using Iterative Decomposition of Water and Fat With Echo Asymmetry and Least-squares Estimation (IDEAL)-MRI Imaging Alone||Week 6|||participants|||Number
817040|NCT01119118|Secondary|The Number of Subjects Whose Tumor Lesion Size Changed Using Diffusion-weighted Imaging (DWI)-Magnetic Resonant Imaging (MRI) Alone||Week 6|||participants|||Number
817041|NCT01119118|Secondary|The Number of Subjects Whose Tumor Lesion Size Changed Using Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Imaging Alone.||Week 6|||participants|||Number
817042|NCT01119118|Primary|The Number of Subjects Whose Tumor Lesion Size Changed After 6 Weeks of Treatment With ZD4054 Using PET and MRI Scans.|Multimodal Positron Emission Tomography (PET) and Magnetic Resonant Imaging (MRI) imaging were used to evaluate changes in the tumor lesion size following 6 weeks of treatment with ZD4054.|Week 6|||participants|||Number
817043|NCT01119131|Secondary|Change in Parkinsonism as Measured by the UPDRS|This is the motor subsection of the UPDRS and is a commonly used tool to rate the symptoms of Parkinson‘s disease. This scale rates from 0 (normal) to 4 (Can barely perform the task) several motor areas including speech, facial expression, tremor, rigidity, hand movements, agility, posture, and gait. A sum score represents motor function with higher values on this scale represent a more severe stage of the disease. Change is measurement at 16 weeks minus baseline measurement, negative scores indicate an improvement in Parkinson's motor symptoms.|Baseline, 16 weeks|Missing data (N = 2), invalid sum due to missing rating (N = 1), not completed due to scheduling conflicts (N = 1).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817044|NCT01119131|Primary|Change in Strength as Recorded by Measuring Knee Extension Using Biodex (Total Work)|Defined as the total muscular force output for the repetition with the greatest amount of work. The equation for work is: W = F x D. Change score is measurement at 16 weeks minus measurement at baseline.|Baseline, 16 weeks|Missing data N=4, test not performed due to participant fatigue (N = 2), mechanical/computer issues (N = 1), illness of operator (N = 1).||foot pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817045|NCT01119131|Primary|Change in Dynamic Balance as Recorded Using Dynamic Posturography With the Sensory Organization Test (SOT 4-6)|Sensory organization test (SOT) is a form of posturography. which is designed to assess quantitatively an individual`s ability to use visual, proprioceptive and vestibular cues to maintain postural stability in stance. The SOT measures sway during 6 scenarios. In 4-6 the base moves and the subject has eyes open, then closed, then the visual surround moves. SOT 4-6 is an average measurement of equilibrium - the average center of gravity sway for each condition. It generates a score of 0 (fall) up to 100 for each scenario and an overall composite score. Change score is measurement at 16 weeks minus measurement at baseline.|Baseline, 16 weeks|Missing data N=3, test not performed due to participant fatigue (N = 2) or computer/mechanical error (N = 1).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817118|NCT01119755|Secondary|Mean Difference of Systolic Clinic Blood Pressure Between Summer and Winter||1 year|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817046|NCT01119131|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life as Recorded Using Quality of Life Scales (PDQ39)|"The PDQ39 is a 39 item patient completed survey targeting well-being and functioning in PD. This scale address 8 dimensions (mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognitions, communication, and bodily discomfort). The PDQ39 dimension scores are on a scale of 0 (Never) to 4 (Always/Cannot Do). Scale scores are summed and range from 0 to 100 with 100 being the maximum level of problems. For a single index figure to characterize the impact of Parkinson’s disease upon PD patients (PDSI), all 39 items of the PDQ39 can be summed. The PDQ39 and the use of a PDSI have shown adequate reliability and convergent validity. Change score is measurement at 16 weeks minus baseline measurement, negative scores indicate an improvement in quality of life."|Baseline, 16 weeks|Missing data (N = 3), patient forgot form and did not return mailed form (N = 3).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817047|NCT01119131|Secondary|Change in Cognition (Trail Making Test B-A)|The Trail Making Test (TMT) consists of two parts (A & B) in which the subject is instructed to connect a set of 25 dots as quickly as possible while still maintaining accuracy. The test provides information about visual search speed, scanning, speed of processing, and executive functioning. Part A measures processing speed and part B measures executive functioning. The TMT is time to complete each part of the test in seconds. Higher scores indicate greater impairment. Subtracting part A from part B is theorized to reduce the influence of the working memory and visuospatial demands and, therefore, provides a relatively pure indicator of executive function. Change score is measurement (Part B - Part A) at 16 weeks minus measurement (Part B - Part A) at baseline, negative scores indicate a improvement in executive functioning.|Baseline, 16 weeks|Missing data (N = 8) due to scheduling difficulties (N = 3), neuropsychological administration errors (N = 2), patient discontinuing (N = 1), maximum time allowance met and discontinued test (N = 2).||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817048|NCT01119131|Primary|Change in Strength as Recorded by Measuring Knee Flexion Using Biodex (Total Work)|Defined as the total muscular force output for the repetition with the greatest amount of work. The equation for work is: W = F x D. Change score is measurement at 16 weeks minus measurement at baseline.|Baseline, 16 weeks|Missing data N=4, test not performed due to participant fatigue (N = 2), mechanical/computer issues (N = 1), illness of operator (N = 1).||foot pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817049|NCT01119131|Primary|Change in Ambulatory Balance Measured by Instrumented Timed up and go (iTUG) Turn Duration|"This is a test that measures ambulatory balance and mobility. The instrumented timed up and go (iTUG) is an average time (seconds) of three trials that involve the participant arising from a chair, walking 25 feet turning around, walking back to the chair, and sitting down. The turn duration is the average time to turn at the end of the 25 foot walk. Longer duration of time (seconds) indicates more rigidity, a proxy measure for ON time in Parkinson’s disease. Change score is measurement at 16 weeks minus measurement at baseline."|Baseline and 16 weeks|Missing data N=14, test not performed due to either participant fatigue (N = 2) or mechanical/computer issues (N = 12).||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817050|NCT01119131|Primary|Change in Static Balance as Recorded Using Dynamic Posturography With the Sensory Organization Test (SOT 1-3)|Sensory organization test (SOT) is a form of posturography. which is designed to assess quantitatively an individual`s ability to use visual, proprioceptive and vestibular cues to maintain postural stability in stance. The SOT measures sway during 6 scenarios. In scenarios 1-3 the base is stable and eyes are open, then closed, and then the visual surround moves. SOT 1-3 is an average measurement of equilibrium - the average center of gravity sway for each condition. It generates a score of 0 (fall) up to 100 for each scenario and an overall composite score. Change score is measurement at 16 weeks minus measurement at baseline.|Baseline, 16 weeks|Missing data N=2, test not performed due to participant fatigue.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817051|NCT01119222|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Pulse Oxymetry Results|Pulse oxymetry to monitor percentage of hemoglobin saturated with oxygen during intervenous (IV) infusion dosing (morphine or placebo).|Predose through duration of IV infusion dosing|Safety population: all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Although pulse oxymetry was performed throughout IV dosing, results were not captured for inclusion in the study database.||participants|||Number
817052|NCT01119222|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Cardiac Monitoring Results|Continuous cardiac monitoring during intervenous (IV) infusion dosing (morphine or placebo).|Pre-dose through duration of IV infusion dosing|Safety population: all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Although continuous cardiac monitoring was performed throughout IV dosing, results were not captured for inclusion in the study database.||participants|||Number
817053|NCT01119222|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Haematology, Clinical Chemistry, Urinalysis Results|Standard haematology, clinical chemistry, and urinalysis safety laboratory tests.|Pre-dose, follow-up visit (at least 7 days after last dosing)|Safety population: all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Although individual subject data were collected and monitored, summary statistics were not generated for this outcome measure.||particpants|||Number
817054|NCT01119222|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Findings on Electrocardiogram (ECG)|Standard 12-lead ECG performed after subject had rested quietly for at least 10 minutes in a supine position.|Pre-dose and follow-up visit (at least 7 days after last dosing)|Safety population: all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Although individual subject data were collected and monitored, summary statistics were not generated for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
817055|NCT01119222|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Findings on Physical Examination|Full physical examination consisting of an examination of the abdomen, cardiovascular systems, lungs, lymph nodes, mouth, musculoskeletal and neurological systems, skin, extremities, head, ears, eyes, nose, throat and thyroid gland.|Pre-dose and follow-up visit (at least 7 days after last dosing)|Safety population: all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Although individual subject data were collected, results were not captured for inclusion in the study database.||participants|||Number
817056|NCT01119222|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Findings in Vital Signs|Supine blood pressure measured to nearest millimeter of mercury (mmHg), pulse rate measured with automated device or manually in the brachial/radial artery for at least 30 seconds.|Predose, Day 1, Day 2 each treatment period, follow-up visit (at least 7 days after last dosing)|Safety population: all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Although individual listing data for vital signs were collected, summary statistics were not generated for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
817058|NCT01119222|Primary|Average Pain (0-120 Seconds): Cold Pain Test Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"Area under the cold pain test Visual Analog Scale (VAS) time curve (AUCcpt 0 to 120 seconds [sec]) averaged over the 120 sec for each time point assessed. Participant adjusted 100 millimeter (mm) electronic VAS with range of no pain (0) to maximum pain (100) at the anchor endpoints of the scale and moderate pain at the midpoint. Pain reported while non-dominant hand was placed in thermostatically controlled water bath at 2±1°C for a maximum of 120 sec."|Pre-dose, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, and 8 hours post-dose|Participants for analysis = participants who completed all of the four treatment periods.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
817059|NCT01119287|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline Patient-Assessed Ocular Itching, Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Hour 3 [AUC (0-3)], Patanol and Placebo|Ocular itching was scored a scale from 0 (none) to 4 (incapacitating itch with irresistible urge to rub) in 0.5 unit steps. The AUC computation was based on the score at each time point (pre-treatment, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, and 3 hours in the EEC). The patient was dosed AM 30 minutes prior to entering the EEC (Visit 5). This outcome measure evaluates an early-phase effect, for which Patanol vs. Placebo is the meaningful comparison.|Baseline (Visit 2, pre-treatment), Visit 5 (Day 8 of treatment)|Number of subjects with data available in the specific treatment group||hours x units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817060|NCT01119287|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Staff-Assessed Ocular Redness, Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Hour 10 [AUC (0-10)], Maxidex and Placebo|Ocular redness ratings were collected for nasal and temporal areas of each eye and scored on a scale from 0 (none) to 4 (extremely severe), 0.5 unit steps permitted. The AUC computation was based on peak redness score (maximum of four areas of redness) at each time point (pre-treatment, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3 hours in the EEC and 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 hours in the Clinic). The patient was dosed AM 30 minutes prior to entering the EEC (Visit 6). This outcome measure evaluates a late-phase effect, for which Maxidex vs. Placebo is the meaningful comparison.|Baseline (Visit 3, pre-treatment); Visit 6 (Day 9 of treatment)|Number of subjects with data available in the specific treatment group||hours x units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817061|NCT01119443|Secondary|MRTpo,ss (Fasted Conditions)|Mean residence time of the analyte in the body at steady state after oral administration|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||hour||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817062|NCT01119443|Secondary|t1/2,ss (Fasted Conditions)|Terminal half-life of the analyte in plasma at steady state|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||hour||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817063|NCT01119443|Secondary|λz,ss (Fasted Conditions)|Terminal rate constant of the analyte in plasma at steady state|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||/hour||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817064|NCT01119443|Secondary|Tmax,ss (Fasted Conditions)|Time from dosing to the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||hour||Full Range|Mean
817065|NCT01119443|Secondary|Cmin,ss (Fasted Conditions)|Minimum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817066|NCT01119443|Secondary|Cτ,ss (Fasted Conditions)|Concentration of the analyte in plasma at time τ at steady state|pharmacokinetic blood samples collected at τ (23.833 hours) after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||ng/mL||Standard Error|Geometric Mean
817067|NCT01119443|Primary|Cmax,ss (Fasted Conditions)|maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817068|NCT01119443|Primary|AUCτ,ss (Fasted Conditions)|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817069|NCT01119443|Secondary|MRTpo,ss (Fed Conditions)|Mean residence time of the analyte in the body at steady state after oral administration|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||hour||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817070|NCT01119443|Secondary|t1/2,ss (Fed Conditions)|Terminal half-life of the analyte in plasma at steady state|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||hour||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817071|NCT01119443|Secondary|λz,ss (Fed Conditions)|Terminal rate constant of the analyte in plasma at steady state|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||per hour||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817074|NCT01119443|Secondary|Cτ,ss (Fed Conditions)|Concentration of the analyte in plasma at time τ at steady state|pharmacokinetic blood samples collected at τ (23.833 hours) after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||ng/mL||Standard Error|Geometric Mean
817075|NCT01119443|Primary|Cmax,ss (Fed Conditions)|maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817076|NCT01119443|Primary|AUCτ,ss (Fed Conditions)|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 23.833 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on Day 1 of Visit 4 (the first day of the first crossover period) was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set||ng·h/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
817077|NCT01119625|Secondary|Titers of Antibodies Against Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3.|Titers were expresses as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay was 8.|Before and one month after booster vaccination (at Month 0 and Month 1)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after booster vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817078|NCT01119625|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Polyribosyl-ribitol Phosphate (PRP).|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in microgram per millilitre (µg/mL). The cut-off of the assay was 0.15 µg/mL.|Before and one month after booster vaccination (at Month 0 and Month 1)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after booster vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817079|NCT01119625|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Pertussis Toxoid (PT), Filamentous Haemagglutinin (FHA) and Pertactin (PRN).|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in ELISA units per millilitre (EU/mL). The cut-off of the assay was 5 EU/mL.|Before and one month after booster vaccination (at Month 0 and Month 1)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after booster vaccination.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817080|NCT01119625|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Diphtheria and Tetanus.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in International units per millilitre (IU/mL). The cut-off of the assay was 0.1 IU/mL.|Before and one month after booster vaccination (at Month 0 and Month 1)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after booster vaccination.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817081|NCT01119625|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Protein D (PD).|Anti-PD antibodies were determined using an ELISA assay. Concentration of specific PD antibodies was determined, using a standard reference serum. The cut-off of the assay is 100 ELISA units per millilitre (EU/mL).|Before and one month after booster vaccination (at Month 0 and Month 1)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after booster vaccination.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817082|NCT01119625|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Cross-reactive Pneumococcal Serotypes.|"Cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes assessed were serotypes 6A and 19A. Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in microgram per millilitre (µg/mL).
The antibody concentrations against the cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 6A and 19A were determined by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The cut-off of the assay was 0.05 µg/mL."|Before and one month after booster vaccination (at Month 0 and Month 1)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after booster vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817083|NCT01119625|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Vaccine Pneumococcal Serotypes.|"Vaccine pneumococcal serotypes assessed were serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F.
Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in microgram per millilitre (µg/mL).
Pneumococcal serotype specific total imunoglobuline G (IgG) antibodies were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The cut-off of the assay was 0.05 µg/mL."|Before and one month after booster vaccination (at Month 0 and Month 1)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after booster vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817084|NCT01119625|Secondary|Titers of Antibodies Against Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3.|Titers were expresses as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay was 8.|Before booster vaccination at Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for analysis of antibody persistence which included subjects primed in the primary study (NCT00808444) and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 vaccine antigen component for the blood sampling taken before the administration of the booster dose.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817085|NCT01119625|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Polyribosyl-ribitol Phosphate (PRP).|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in microgram per millilitre (µg/mL). The cut-off of the assay was 0.15 µg/mL.|Before booster vaccination at Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for analysis of antibody persistence which included subjects primed in the primary study (NCT00808444) and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 vaccine antigen component for the blood sampling taken before the administration of the booster dose.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817119|NCT01119755|Primary|Mean Difference of Systolic Daytime Ambulatory Blood Pressure Between Summer and Winter.|Mean difference of systolic daytime ambulatory blood pressure measurement during summer and winter period|1 year|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
818740|NCT01121900|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration vs. Time Data Pairs, for the First 24 Hours [AUC(0-24)]||24 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 23 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||h*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817086|NCT01119625|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Pertussis Toxoid (PT), Filamentous Haemagglutinin (FHA) and Pertactin (PRN).|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in ELISA units per millilitre (EU/mL). The cut-off of the assay was 5 EU/mL.|Before booster vaccination at Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for analysis of antibody persistence which included subjects primed in the primary study (NCT00808444) and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 vaccine antigen component for the blood sampling taken before the administration of the booster dose.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817087|NCT01119625|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Diphtheria and Tetanus.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in International units per millilitre (IU/mL). The cut-off of the assay was 0.1 IU/mL.|Before booster vaccination at Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for analysis of antibody persistence which included subjects primed in the primary study (NCT00808444) and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 vaccine antigen component for the blood sampling taken before the administration of the booster dose.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817088|NCT01119625|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Cross-reactive Pneumococcal Serotypes.|"Cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes assessed were serotypes 6A and 19A. Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in microgram per millilitre (µg/mL).
The antibody concentrations against the cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 6A and 19A were determined by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The cut-off of the assay was 0.05 µg/mL."|Before booster vaccination at Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for analysis of antibody persistence which included subjects primed in the primary study (NCT00808444) and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 vaccine antigen component for the blood sampling taken before the administration of the booster dose.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817089|NCT01119625|Secondary|Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Cross-reactive Pneumococcal Serotypes 6A and 19A.|Opsonophagocytic activity (OPA) testing was not performed.|Before and one month after booster vaccination (at Month 0 and Month 1)||12/2099||||
817090|NCT01119625|Secondary|Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Pneumococcal Serotypes.|Opsonophagocytic activity (OPA) testing was not performed.|Before and one month after booster vaccination (at Month 0 and Month 1)||12/2099||||
817091|NCT01119625|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects.|During the entire study period, from the booster vaccination, at Month 0, up to the study end, at Month 1|The analysis of safety was performed on the Total vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with booster dose administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
817092|NCT01119625|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|Unsolicited AEs = Any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study. Also any “solicited” symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms was reported as an unsolicited adverse event.|Within 31 days (Days 0-30) after booster vaccination|The analysis of safety was performed on the Total vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with booster dose administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
817093|NCT01119625|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Adverse Events (AEs).|"Solicited general symptoms assessed were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever (= axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)).
Any= occurrence of any general symptom regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination Grade 3 drowsiness = drowsiness which prevented normal activity. Grade 3 irritability = crying that could not be comforted/ prevented normal activity. Grade 3 loss of appetite = not eating at all. Grade 3 fever = temperature >39.5°C.
Related = solicited symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to study vaccination."|Within 4 days (Days 0-3) after booster vaccination.|The analysis of safety was performed on the Total vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with booster dose administration documented. The analysis of the solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included subjects with documented safety data.||Subjects|||Number
817094|NCT01119625|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Adverse Events (AEs).|"Solicited AEs = AEs to be recorded as endpoints in the clinical study. The presence/occurrence/intensity of these events is actively solicited from the subject or an observer during a specified post-vaccination follow-up period.
Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of any local symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling above 30 millimetre (mm)."|Within 4 days (Days 0-3) after booster vaccination.|The analysis of safety was performed on the Total vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with booster dose administration documented. The analysis of the solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included subjects with documented safety data.||Subjects|||Number
817095|NCT01119625|Primary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Protein D (PD).|Anti-PD antibodies were determined using an ELISA assay. Concentration of specific PD antibodies was determined, using a standard reference serum. The cut-off of the assay is 100 ELISA units per millilitre (EU/mL).|Before booster vaccination at Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for analysis of antibody persistence which included subjects primed in the primary study (NCT00808444) and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 vaccine antigen component for the blood sampling taken before the administration of the booster dose.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817120|NCT01119768|Secondary|Symptom Control Rate at 16 Weeks Assessed by Gerd Q Questionnaire|GerdQ Scores ranging from 0 to 3 were applied for the positive predictors and from 3 to 0 (reversed order, where 3 = none) for negative predictors. The GerdQ score was calculated as the sum of these scores, giving a total score ranging from 0 to 18. When GerdQ ≥8, the patients could be symptom based diagnosed as GERD. GerdQ was consisted of 3 categories: A, B and C. Each category has two questions with sum of score ranging from 0 to 6. Symptom controlled was defined as patients with all items ≤1 in A and C category of GerdQ.|16 weeks|MITT was defined as patients in ITT population with symptom relief after 8 weeks or 2 weeks esomeprazole treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
817096|NCT01119625|Primary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Vaccine Pneumococcal Serotypes.|"Vaccine pneumococcal serotypes assessed were serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F.
Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in microgram per millilitre (µg/mL).
Pneumococcal serotype specific total imunoglobuline G (IgG) antibodies were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The cut-off of the assay was 0.05 µg/mL."|Before booster vaccination at Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for analysis of antibody persistence which included subjects primed in the primary study (NCT00808444) and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 vaccine antigen component for the blood sampling taken before the administration of the booster dose.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817097|NCT01119703|Secondary|Antibody Titer Responses to Oral Cholera Vaccine (WC/rBS), Measured and Predicted Based on Early Post-vaccination Biomarkers in Healthy, Elderly Participants.|"Healthy elderly participants were simultaneously vaccinated at baseline with hepatitis vaccine, tetanus-diphtheria booster vaccine, and cholera vaccine. Antibody titers to cholera were then measured 3 weeks after final vaccination, based on ELISA, and are defined as standardized international units of reactivity converted from optical densities, transformed to natural log (ln). In order to predict antibody responses blood samples were collected 7 days post-baseline vaccination to measure a wide variety of biomarkers by mRNA profiling, biochemical and flow cytometric assays. These biomarkers were then used in a machine-learning (random-forest based) model to predict antibody titers, transformed to natural log(ln)."|Day 7 and 3 weeks after final vaccination|Healthy participants 65 years of age and older who were treated with all three vaccines, and had their post-vaccination titers measured. Results from comparing titers and biomarker responses between younger and older cohorts are exploratory, and therefore not reported.||ln International Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
817098|NCT01119703|Secondary|Antibody Titer Responses to Reduced Diphtheria Toxin Vaccine, Measured and Predicted Based on Early Post-vaccination Biomarkers in Healthy, Elderly Participants.|"Healthy elderly participants were simultaneously vaccinated at baseline with hepatitis vaccine, tetanus-diphtheria booster vaccine, and cholera vaccine. Antibody titers to diphtheria were then measured 1 month after final vaccination, based on ELISA, and are defined as standardized international units of reactivity converted from optical densities, transformed to natural log (ln). In order to predict antibody responses blood samples were collected 7 days post-baseline vaccination to measure a wide variety of biomarkers by mRNA profiling, biochemical and flow cytometric assays. These biomarkers were then used in a machine-learning (random-forest based) model to predict antibody titers, transformed to natural log(ln)."|Day 7 and 1 month after final vaccination|Healthy participants 65 years of age and older who were treated with all three vaccines, and had their post-vaccination titers measured. Results from comparing titers and biomarker responses between younger and older cohorts are exploratory, and therefore not reported.||ln International Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
817099|NCT01119703|Secondary|Antibody Titer Responses to Tetanus Booster Vaccine, Measured and Predicted Based on Early Post-vaccination Biomarkers in Healthy, Elderly Participants.|"Healthy elderly participants were simultaneously vaccinated at baseline with hepatitis vaccine, tetanus-diphtheria booster vaccine, and cholera vaccine. Antibody titers to tetanus were then measured 1 month after final vaccination, based on ELISA, and are defined as standardized international units of reactivity converted from optical densities, transformed to natural log (ln). In order to predict antibody responses blood samples were collected 7 days post-baseline vaccination to measure a wide variety of biomarkers by mRNA profiling, biochemical and flow cytometric assays. These biomarkers were then used in a machine-learning (random-forest based) model to predict antibody titers, transformed to natural log(ln)."|Day 7 and 1 month after each final vaccination|Healthy participants 65 years of age and older who were treated with all three vaccines, and had their post-vaccination titers measured. Results from comparing titers and biomarker responses between younger and older cohorts are exploratory, and therefore not reported.||ln International Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
817100|NCT01119703|Secondary|Antibody Titer Responses to Hepatitis B Virus Surface Antigen (HBV sAg) Vaccine, Measured and Predicted Based on Early Post-vaccination Biomarkers in Healthy, Elderly Participants.|"Healthy elderly participants were simultaneously vaccinated at baseline with hepatitis vaccine, tetanus-diphtheria booster vaccine, and cholera vaccine. Antibody titers to HBV sAg were then measured 1 month after final vaccination, based on ELISA, and are defined as standardized international units of reactivity converted from optical densities, transformed to natural log (ln). In order to predict antibody responses blood samples were collected at 7 days post-baseline vaccination to measure a wide variety of biomarkers by mRNA profiling, biochemical and flow cytometric assays. These biomarkers were then used in a machine-learning (random-forest based) model to predict antibody titers, transformed to natural log (ln)."|Day 7 and 1 month after final vaccination|Healthy participants 65 years of age and older who were treated with all three vaccines, and had their post-vaccination titers measured. Results from comparing titers and biomarker responses between younger and older cohorts are exploratory, and therefore not reported.||ln International Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
817101|NCT01119703|Primary|Post-vaccination Antibody Titer Responses to Different Vaccines in Healthy, Elderly, Participants.|"Healthy elderly participants were simultaneously vaccinated at baseline with hepatitis vaccine, tetanus-diphtheria booster vaccine, and cholera vaccine. Antibody titers to each of these four antigens were then measured 1 month after each final vaccination (3 weeks for cholera toxin), based on ELISA, and are defined as standardized international units of reactivity converted from optical densities, transformed to natural log (ln)."|3 weeks or 1 month after each final vaccination|Healthy participants 65 years of age and older who were treated with all three vaccines, and had their post-vaccination titers measured. Results from comparing titers and biomarker responses between younger and older cohorts are exploratory, and therefore not reported.||ln International Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
817121|NCT01119768|Secondary|Symptom Control Rate at 8 Weeks Assessed by Gerd Q Questionnaire|GerdQ Scores ranging from 0 to 3 were applied for the positive predictors and from 3 to 0 (reversed order, where 3 = none) for negative predictors. The GerdQ score was calculated as the sum of these scores, giving a total score ranging from 0 to 18. When GerdQ ≥8, the patients could be symptom based diagnosed as GERD. GerdQ was consisted of 3 categories: A, B and C. Each category has two questions with sum of score ranging from 0 to 6. Symptom controlled was defined as patients with all items ≤1 in A and C category of GerdQ.|8 weeks|Modified Intension To Treat defined as patients in ITT population with symptom relief after 8 weeks or 2 weeks esomeprazole treatment||percentage of participants|||Number
817102|NCT01119703|Primary|Antibody Titer Responses to Oral Cholera Vaccine (WC/rBS), Measured and Predicted Based on Pre-vaccination Biomarkers in Healthy, Elderly Participants.|"Healthy elderly participants were simultaneously vaccinated at baseline with hepatitis vaccine, tetanus-diphtheria booster vaccine, and cholera vaccine. Antibody titers to cholera were then measured 3 weeks after final vaccination, based on ELISA, and are defined as standardized international units of reactivity converted from optical densities, transformed to natural log (ln). In order to predict antibody responses blood samples were collected prior to vaccination at baseline, to measure a wide variety of biomarkers by mRNA profiling, biochemical and flow cytometric assays. These biomarkers were then used in a machine-learning (random-forest based) model to predict antibody titers, transformed to natural log (ln)."|Baseline and 3 weeks after final vaccination|Healthy participants 65 years of age and older who were treated with all three vaccines, and had their post-vaccination titers measured. Results from comparing titers and biomarker responses between younger and older cohorts are exploratory, and therefore not reported.||ln International Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
817103|NCT01119703|Primary|Antibody Titer Responses to Reduced Diphtheria Toxin Vaccine, Measured and Predicted Based on Pre-vaccination Biomarkers in Healthy, Elderly Participants.|"Healthy elderly participants were simultaneously vaccinated at baseline with hepatitis vaccine, tetanus-diphtheria booster vaccine, and cholera vaccine. Antibody titers to diphtheria were then measured 1 month after final vaccination, based on ELISA, and are defined as standardized international units of reactivity converted from optical densities, transformed to natural log (ln). In order to predict antibody responses blood samples were collected prior to vaccination at baseline, to measure a wide variety of biomarkers by mRNA profiling, biochemical and flow cytometric assays. These biomarkers were then used in a machine-learning (random-forest based) model to predict antibody titers, transformed to natural log (ln)."|Baseline and 1 month after final vaccination|Healthy participants 65 years of age and older who were treated with all three vaccines, and had their post-vaccination titers measured. Results from comparing titers and biomarker responses between younger and older cohorts are exploratory, and therefore not reported.||ln International Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
817104|NCT01119703|Primary|Antibody Titer Responses to Tetanus Booster Vaccine, Measured and Predicted Based on Pre-vaccination Biomarkers in Healthy, Elderly Participants.|"Healthy elderly participants were simultaneously vaccinated at baseline with hepatitis vaccine, tetanus-diphtheria booster vaccine, and cholera vaccine. Antibody titers to tetanus were then measured 1 month after final vaccination, based on ELISA, and are defined as standardized international units of reactivity converted from optical densities, transformed to natural log (ln). In order to predict antibody responses blood samples were collected prior to vaccination at baseline, to measure a wide variety of biomarkers by mRNA profiling, biochemical and flow cytometric assays. These biomarkers were then used in a machine-learning (random-forest based) model to predict antibody titers, transformed to natural log (ln)."|Baseline and 1 month after final vaccination|Healthy participants 65 years of age and older who were treated with all three vaccines, and had their post-vaccination titers measured. Results from comparing titers and biomarker responses between younger and older cohorts are exploratory, and therefore not reported.||ln International Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
817105|NCT01119703|Primary|Antibody Titer Responses to Hepatitis B Virus Surface Antigen (HBV sAg) Vaccine, Measured and Predicted Based on Pre-vaccination Biomarkers in Healthy, Elderly Participants.|"Healthy elderly participants were simultaneously vaccinated at baseline with hepatitis vaccine, tetanus-diphtheria booster vaccine, and cholera vaccine. Antibody titers to HBV sAg were then measured 1 month after final vaccination, based on enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and are defined as standardized international units of reactivity converted from optical densities, transformed to natural log (ln). In order to predict antibody responses blood samples were collected prior to vaccination at baseline, to measure a wide variety of biomarkers by messenger RNA (mRNA) profiling, biochemical and flow cytometric assays. These biomarkers were then used in a machine-learning (random-forest based) model to predict antibody titers, transformed to natural log (ln)."|Baseline and 1 month after final vaccination|Healthy participants 65 years of age and older who were treated with all three vaccines, and had their post-vaccination titers measured. Results from comparing titers and biomarker responses between younger and older cohorts are exploratory, and therefore not reported.||ln International Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
817106|NCT01119716|Primary|Complications Experienced by Participants Who Underwent a Cardioversion for Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation||up to 60 days from day of treatment (cardioversion)|All enrolled participants with follow-up data available||Participants|||Number
817107|NCT01119716|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Had a Successful Electrical or Pharmacological Cardioversion|Pharmacological cardioversion was considered successful if sinus rhythm or atrial rhythm was obtained within 24 hours after its initiation. Electrical cardioversion was considered successful if sinus rhythm was obtained and maintained for at least 10 minutes after the last shock was administered.|At time of treatment (up to 1 day from admission)|Participants who had artrial fibrillation treated by either electrical or pharmacological cardioversion.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
817108|NCT01119716|Primary|Treatments Utilized for Participants for Atrial Fibrillation||At time of Treatment (up to 1 day from admission)|All enrolled participants with available data pertaining to type of therapy(s) used to treat the participants atrial fibrillation.||Participants|||Number
817109|NCT01119716|Primary|Clinical Type of Atrial Fibrillation at Baseline (Admission)||Baseline (time of admission)|All enrolled participants with admission (baseline) atrial fibrillation data available.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
817110|NCT01119716|Primary|Co-Morbidity in Participants Presenting With Atrial Fibrillation at Baseline (Admission)||Baseline (time of admission)|All enrolled participants with co-morbity data available.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
817111|NCT01119716|Primary|Cardiovascular Disease History of Participants Presenting With Atrial Fibrillation at Baseline (Admission)||Baseline (time of admission)|All enrolled participants with baseline cardiovascular history data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
817112|NCT01119755|Secondary|Mean Difference of Diastolic Home Blood Pressure Between Summer and Winter||1 year|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817113|NCT01119755|Secondary|Mean Difference of Systolic Home Blood Pressure Between Summer and Winter||1 year|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817114|NCT01119755|Secondary|Mean Difference of Diastolic Clinic Blood Pressure Between Summer and Winter||1 year|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817115|NCT01119755|Primary|Mean Difference of Diastolic Night-time Ambulatory Blood Pressure Between Summer and Winter||1 year|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817126|NCT01119768|Secondary|Time to First Relapse.|"Time to first relapse is from the last dose during the treatment period to date of first time patient comes to the investigator due to symptom recure and need for treatment.
Time to first relapse is actually the time when 50% of patients had relapse. Up to the end of study, there were less than 50% of the patients in arm esomeprazole 2 weeks group had relapse so was unable to compute this endpoint"|From baseline to 24 weeks after end of treatment|MITT was defined as patients in ITT population with symptom relief after 8 weeks or 2 weeks esomeprazole treatment.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817127|NCT01119768|Secondary|The Success Rate in Whole Study Duration.|Success is defined as patients with symptom relief after 8 weeks or 2 weeks esomeprazole treatment, and also get symptom controlled during maintenance treatment / follow-up period.|24 weeks after end of treatment|Intension to Treat (ITT) was defined as all randomized subjects who took at least one dose of treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
817128|NCT01119768|Primary|Symptom Control Rate at 24 Weeks Assessed by Gerd Q Questionnaire.|GerdQ Scores ranging from 0 to 3 were applied for the positive predictors and from 3 to 0 (reversed order, where 3 = none) for negative predictors. The GerdQ score was calculated as the sum of these scores, giving a total score ranging from 0 to 18. When GerdQ ≥8, the patients could be symptom based diagnosed as GERD. GerdQ was consisted of 3 categories: A, B and C. Each category has two questions with sum of score ranging from 0 to 6. Symptom controlled was defined as patients with all items ≤1 in A and C category of GerdQ.|24 weeks|MITT was defined as patients in ITT population with symptom relief after 8 weeks or 2 weeks esomeprazole treatment||percentage of participants|||Number
817129|NCT01119794|Primary|Overall Response Rate (ORR) of the Combination of Ofatumumab and Bortezomib in Patients Receiving Study Treatment|"Response was assessed based on Bone marrow biopsy and CT scan. Best responses are used for Response Rate and CR and PR only.
Complete Response – CR:
• Complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present before therapy.
Partial Response - PR:
• At least a 50% decrease in sum of the product of the diameters (SPD) of up to six of the largest dominant nodes or nodal masses.
Stable Disease – SD:
• A patient is considered to have SD when he or she fails to attain the criteria needed for a CR or PR, but does not fulfill those for progressive disease
Relapsed Disease:
• Lymph nodes should be considered abnormal if the long axis is more than 1.5 cm regardless of the short axis."|Bone Marrow Biopsy: Every 2 months for 1 year then every 4 months until progression for approximately 1 year/Via CT scan: every 4 months until progression, for a total of approximately 2 years|8/10 patients were evaluable as 2 withdrew||participants|||Number
817130|NCT01119859|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With a European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good or Moderate Response at Week 24|Change of the Disease Activity Score 28 score from baseline was used to determine EULAR responses of good, moderate, or no response. For a post-baseline score ≤ 3.2, a change from baseline of < -1.2 was a good response, < -0.6 to ≥ -1.2 was a moderate response, and ≥ -0.6 was no response. For a post-baseline score > 3.2 to ≤ 5.1, a change from baseline of < -0.6 was a moderate response and ≥ -0.6 was no response. For a post-baseline score > 5.1, a change from baseline < -1.2 was a moderate response and ≥ -1.2 was no response. A good response could not be achieved for post-baseline scores > 3.2.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of tocilizumab or adalimumab and had at least 1 efficacy assessment.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817131|NCT01119859|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With a European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good Response at Week 24|Change of the Disease Activity Score 28 score from baseline was used to determine EULAR responses of good, moderate, or no response. For a post-baseline score ≤ 3.2, a change from baseline of < -1.2 was a good response, < -0.6 to ≥ -1.2 was a moderate response, and ≥ -0.6 was no response. For a post-baseline score > 3.2 to ≤ 5.1, a change from baseline of < -0.6 was a moderate response and ≥ -0.6 was no response. For a post-baseline score > 5.1, a change from baseline < -1.2 was a moderate response and ≥ -1.2 was no response. A good response could not be achieved for post-baseline scores > 3.2.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of tocilizumab or adalimumab and had at least 1 efficacy assessment.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817132|NCT01119859|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With an Improvement of at Least 20%, 50%, or 70% in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Score (ACR20/50/70) From Baseline at Week 24|Improvement must be seen in tender and swollen joint counts (28 assessed joints) and in at least 3 of the following 5 parameters: Separate patient and physician assessments of patient disease activity in the previous 24 hours on a visual analog scale (VAS, the extreme left end of the line “no disease activity” [symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms] and the extreme right end “maximum disease activity”; patient assessment of pain in previous the 24 hours on a VAS (extreme left end of the line “no pain” and the extreme right end “unbearable pain”); Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (20 questions, 8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities, 0=without difficulty to 3=unable to do); and erythrocyte sedimentation rate.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of tocilizumab or adalimumab and had at least 1 efficacy assessment.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817133|NCT01119859|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Low Disease Activity (Disease Activity Score 28 [DAS28] ≤ 3.2) at Week 24|The percentage of patients who had low rheumatic arthritis disease activity at Week 24, as measured by a DAS28 score of 3.2 or less, is reported.|Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of tocilizumab or adalimumab and had at least 1 efficacy assessment.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817134|NCT01119859|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With a Remission Response (Disease Activity Score 28 [DAS28] < 2.6) at Week 24|The percentage of patients who achieved remission of their rheumatic arthritis at Week 24, as measured by a DAS28 score < 2.6, is reported.|Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of tocilizumab or adalimumab and had at least 1 efficacy assessment.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817187|NCT01120184|Secondary|OS at Clinical Cutoff Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels|OS was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Median duration of OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.|Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)|ITT Population (High HER2 mRNA Subpopulation).||months||Full Range|Median
834865|NCT01280604|Secondary|Alanine Aminotransferase(ALT)|ALT levels will be assessed in study participants 6-10 weeks after entry into study.|6-10 weeks|||international units/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817135|NCT01119859|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 24 in the Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)|The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in rheumatic arthritis (RA) and includes swollen and tender joint counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and general health (GH) status. The index is calculated with the following formula: DAS28 = (0.56 × √(TJC28)) + (0.28 × √(SJC28)) + (0.7 × log(ESR)) + (0.014 × GH), where TJC28 = tender joint count and SJC28 = swollen joint count, each on 28 joints. GH = a patient’s global assessment of disease activity in the previous 24 hours on a 100 mm visual analog scale (left end = no disease activity [symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms], right end = maximum disease activity [maximum arthritis disease activity]). When ESR equaled 0 mm/hr, it was set to 1 mm/hr. The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A negative change score indicates improvement. The analysis was adjusted for stratification factors of duration of RA (≤ 2 years and > 2 years) and region (US and non-US).|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of tocilizumab or adalimumab and had at least 1 efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817136|NCT01119937|Secondary|Number of Patients With Notable Change From Baseline in Fridericia's QTc Values at Any Timepoint Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable change from baseline was and increase from baseline of 30 or greater milliseconds (ms).|52 weeks|Safety population - all patients who received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
817137|NCT01119937|Secondary|Number of Patients With Newly Occurring or Worsening Clinically Notable Vital Signs Values at Any Timepoint Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable vital sign values were: pulse rate - low, <40 bpm or <=50 bpm and decrease from baseline >=15bpm; pulse rate high, >130 bpm or >=120bpm and increase from baseline >=15 bpm. Systolic blood pressure - low, <75 mmHg or <=90 mmHg and decrease from baseline >=20 mmHg; high, >200 mmHg or >=180 mmHg and increase from baseline >=20 mmHg. Diastolic blood pressure - low, <40 mmHg or <=50 mmHg and decrease from baseline >=15 mmHg; high, >115 mmHg or >=105 mmHg and increase from baseline >=15 mmHg.|52 weeks|Safety population - all patients who received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
817138|NCT01119937|Secondary|Number of Patients With Newly Occurring or Worsening Clinically Notable Biochemistry Values at Any Timepoint Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable biochemistry values were: total protein - <4.0 g/dL or >9.5 g/dL; albumin <2.5 g/dL; bilirubin (total) >1.9 mg/dL; BUN >27 mg/dL; creatinine >1.99 mg/dL; AST >3 x ULN U/L; ALT >3 x ULN U/L; ALP >3 x ULN U/L; y-GTP >3 x ULN U/L; sodium <125 mEq/L or >160 mEq/L; potassium <3.0 mEq/L or >6.0 mEq/L; glucose <51.0 mg/dL or >180.0 mg/dL|52 weeks|Safety population - all patients who received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
817139|NCT01119937|Secondary|Number of Patients With Newly Occurring or Worsening Clinically Notable Hematology Values at Any Timepoint Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable hematology values were: hemoglobin - male <11.5g/dL, female <9.5 g/dL; hematocrit - male <37%, female <32%; white cell count - <2800µL or >16000µL; platelets - <7.5 10*4/µL or >70.0 10*4/µL|52 weeks|Safety population - all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Only participants with the required measurements were included for each specific value.||participants|||Number
817140|NCT01119937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Daily Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication Over the Whole Treatment Period|Patients recorded rescue medication use in a paper patient diary. If a patient required the use of salbutamol as rescue medication due to an increase in COPD symptoms, the number of inhalations (puffs) taken was recorded in the patient diary.|52 weeks|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population - included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug||change in puffs||Standard Deviation|Mean
817141|NCT01119937|Secondary|Change in St. George Respiratory Questionnaire From Baseline|SGRQ is a health related quality of life questionnaire consisting of 51 items in three components: symptoms, activity, and impacts. The lowest possible value is zero and the highest 100. Higher values correspond to greater impairment in quality of life.|Weeks 12, 24, 36, 52|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population - included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Only participants with measurements at both baseline and the specified timepoint were included in the analysis for the specific timepoint.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817142|NCT01119937|Secondary|Number of Patients With Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbations|Moderate COPD exacerbations were defined as: worsening of 2 or more of the following major symptoms for at least 2 consecutive days - dyspnea, sputum volume and sputum purulence; OR a worsening of any 1 major symptom with any 1 of the following minor symptoms for at least 2 consecutive days - sore throat, colds, fever without other cause, increased cough or increased wheeze, requiring treatment with systemic glucocorticosteroids or antibiotics or both. Severe COPD exacerbations were defined as: conditions for Moderate COPD exacerbation and hospitalization was required.|52 weeks|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population - included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
817143|NCT01119937|Secondary|Time From Randomization Until the Start of the First Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbation|Moderate COPD exacerbations were defined as: worsening of 2 or more of the following major symptoms for at least 2 consecutive days - dyspnea, sputum volume and sputum purulence; OR a worsening of any 1 major symptom with any 1 of the following minor symptoms for at least 2 consecutive days - sore throat, colds, fever without other cause, increased cough or increased wheeze, requiring treatment with systemic glucocorticosteroids or antibiotics or both. Severe COPD exacerbations were defined as: conditions for Moderate COPD exacerbation and hospitalization was required. Participants who withdraw from the study and do not experience a moderate or severe exacerbation are censored at the date of withdrawal. Participants who complete the study and do not experience a moderate or severe exacerbation are censored at the completion visit date.|52 weeks|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population - included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug||days|||Number
817144|NCT01119937|Secondary|Change in Pre-dose FVC From Baseline|Pre-dose FVC is defined as the average of the measurements at 45 and 15 minutes pre-dose.|Weeks 12, 24, 36 and 52|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population - included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Only participants with measurements at both baseline and the specified timepoint were included in the analysis for the specific timepoint.||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817145|NCT01119937|Secondary|Change in Pre-dose FEV1 From Baseline|Pre-dose FEV1 is defined as the average of the measurements at 45 and 15 minutes pre-dose.|Weeks 12, 24, 36 and 52|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population - included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Only participants with measurements at both baseline and the specified timepoint were included in the analysis for the specific timepoint.||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817146|NCT01119937|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events or Death|Adverse events are defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptom, sign (including an abnormal lab finding), syndrome or disease which either occurs during study, having been absent at baseline, or, if present at baseline, appears to worsen. Serious adverse events are any untoward medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require (or prolong) hospitalization, cause persistent or significant disability/incapacity, result in congenital anomalies or birth defects, or are other conditions which in judgments of the investigators represent significant hazards.|52 weeks|Safety population - all patients who received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
817147|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Trough Forced Vital Capacity on Days 1, 7 and 14|"Trough Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) on Days 1, 7 and 14. FVC is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. FVC was assessed via spirometry. (see Outcome Measure #23).
Trough FVC was defined as the mean of the 23 hour 15 minute and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose values."|Days 1, 7 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817148|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Peak Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second on Days 1, 7 and 14 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Peak FEV1 is the maximum FEV1 recorded in a pre-determined period of time.
Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on Peak FEV1 was measured on days 1, 7 and 14 of treatment."|Days 1, 7, and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817149|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second at 12 Hours on Days 1 and 14 of Treatment|Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on FEV1 at 12 hours was measured on days 1 and 14.|Days 1 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817150|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second of Area Under the Curve 12-24 Hours Over Days 1, and 14 of Treatment|Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 on FEV1 Area under the curve (AUC) 12-24 hours was calculated from measurements taken at 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on Days 1 and 14. FEV1 AUC was calculated as the sum of trapezoids divided by the length of time.|11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on Days 1 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817151|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Area Under the Curve 0-12 Hours at Day 1 and 14 of Treatment|Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses was calculated on FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-12 hours from measurements taken at at 5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11h 55 min (postdose) on days 1 and 14. FEV1 AUC was calculated as the sum of trapezoids divided by the length of time.|5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11h 55 min (postdose) on days 1 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817152|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second of Area Under the Curve 0-8 Hours Days 1, 7, and 14|Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-8 was calculated from measurements taken at 5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8 hours (postdose) on days 1, 7, and 14. FEV1 AUC was calculated as the sum of trapezoids divided by the length of time.|at 5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8 hours (postdose) on days 1, 7 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817153|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Area Under the Curve 0-4 Hours on Days 1, 7 and 14 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards.
FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) measurements were taken at 5 min, 15 min, 1,2,3,4 hours (postdose) on days 1, 7 and 14 of treatment. FEV1 AUC was calculated as the sum of trapezoids divided by the length of time."|5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4 hours (postdose) on Days 1, 7 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817154|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Area Under the Curve 0-24 Hours on Days 1 and 14 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards.
FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) measurements were taken at 5 min, 15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on days 1 and 14 of treatment. FEV1 AUC was calculated as the sum of trapezoids divided by the length of time."|5 min, 15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on days 1 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817188|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels|The percentage of participants who died prior to clinical cutoff was calculated as [number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)|ITT Population (High HER2 mRNA Subpopulation).||percentage of participants|||Number
817155|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second at Days 1, 7 and 14|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards.
Trough FEV1 was measured on Days 1, 7 and 14 of treatment. Trough FEV1 was defined as the mean of the FEV1 values measured at 23 hours 15 mins and 23 hours 45 mins post-dose."|23 hours 15 mins and 23 hours 45 mins post-dose on Days 1, 7 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817156|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Trough Forced Vital Capacity After 28 Days of Treatment|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) after 28 days of treatment. FVC is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. FVC was assessed via spirometry. Trough FVC was defined as the mean of the FVC values measured at 23 hours 15 mins and 23 hours 45 mins post-dose.|23 hours 15 mins and 23 hours 45 mins post-dose on Day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817157|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Peak Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second at Day 28 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards.
Peak FEV1 is the maximum FEV1 recorded in a pre-determined period of time. Measurements were taken at 25 min , 15 min pre-dose, 5 min, 15 min, 1 , 2 ,3 , 4 , 6 , 8 , 10 hours , 11 hour 55 min and 14 hour post-dose on day 28."|25 min , 15 min pre-dose, 5 min, 15 min, 1 , 2 ,3 , 4 , 6 , 8 , 10 hours , 11 hour 55 min and 14 hour post-dose on day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817158|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second at 12 Hours on Day 28 of Treatment|Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards.|12 hours on day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817159|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Area Under the Curve at Different Time Points (0-4 Hours, 0-8 Hours, 0-12 Hours, 12-24 Hours)|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards.
FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) measurements were taken at: 5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose). FEV1 AUC was calculated as the sum of trapezoids divided by the length of time."|5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817160|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Area Under the Curve 0-24 Hours at Day 28 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards.
FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) measurements were taken at 5 min, 15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on day 28. FEV1 AUC was calculated as the sum of trapezoids divided by the length of time."|5 min, 15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817161|NCT01119950|Other Pre-specified|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second by Treatment at Day 28|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards.
Trough FEV1 was defined as the mean of the 23 hour 15 minute and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose values."|Day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817162|NCT01119950|Primary|Maximal Response of Incremental Once Daily and Twice Daily Doses of NVA237 That Each Dose Achieves in Relation to the Maximal Effect of NVA237 on Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second at Day 28|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. The maximal response of incremental once daily and twice daily doses of NVA237 that each dose achieves in relation to the maximal effect of NVA237 on Trough FEV1 was measured at Day 28. FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #19).
All trough FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All trough FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response.
Trough FEV1 was defined as the mean of the 23 hour 15 minute and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose values."|Day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817163|NCT01119950|Secondary|Mean Daily Use of Rescue Medication by Treatment at Different Time Points|Mean daily use of rescue medication by treatment and time points. Baseline was defined as the average of the total number of puffs of rescue medication during the week prior to treatment start, divided by the total number of days with non-missing rescue data during that week, then puffs were counted during weeks 1, 2, 3 and 4 postdose.|Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3 and 4|Only patients with a non-missing value at both period baseline and the respective post-baseline visit were included. The modeling approach is not suitable for these data as the modeling assumptions do not hold.||Number of Puffs||Standard Deviation|Mean
819412|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Plasma Glucose Measurements Within Range 71 to 179 mg/dL by Hospital Day|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Day 1 up to day 10 of hospital study period|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
817164|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Trough Forced Vital Capacity on Days 1, 7 and 14|"Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 Doses on Trough Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) on Days 1, 7 and 14. FVC is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. Trough FVC was assessed via spirometry. (see Outcome Measure #33).
Trough FVC is defined as the mean of the FVC values measured at 23 hours 15 mins and 23 hours 45 mins post-dose."|Days 1, 7 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817165|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Peak Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second on Days 1, 7 and 14 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Peak FEV1 is the maximum FEV1 recorded in a pre-determined period of time.
Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on Peak FEV1 was measured on days 1, 7 and 14 of treatment.
Peak FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #32). All FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|Days 1, 7, and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817166|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second at 12 Hours on Days 1 and 14 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on FEV1 at 12 hours was measured on days 1 and 14.
FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #31). All FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|Days 1 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817167|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second of Area Under the Curve 12-24 Hours Over Days 1, and 14 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 on FEV1 Area under the curve (AUC) 12-24 hours was calculated from measurements taken at 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on Days 1 and 14.
AUC FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #30). All FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on Days 1 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response* hours||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817168|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Area Under the Curve 0-12 Hours at Day 1 and 14 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses was calculated on FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-12 hours from measurements taken at at 5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11h 55 min (postdose) on days 1 and 14 in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #29).
All AUC FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11h 55 min (postdose) on days 1 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response* hours||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817169|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second of Area Under the Curve 0-8 Hours Days 1, 7, and 14|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-8 was calculated from measurements taken at 5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8 hours (postdose) on days 1, 7, and 14.
AUC FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #28). All FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|at 5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8 hours (postdose) on days 1, 7 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response* hours||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817170|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Area Under the Curve 0-4 Hours on Days 1, 7 and 14 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer.
Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-4 hours was calculated from measurements taken at 5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4 hours (postdose) on Days 1, 7 and 14, in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #27).
All AUC FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4 hours (postdose) on Days 1, 7 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response* hours||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817171|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Effect of NVA237 Doses on Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Area Under the Curve 0-24 Hours on Days 1 and 14 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer.
Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-24 hours, was calculated from measurements taken at 5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on days 1 and 14.
FEV1 AUC 0-24 hours was measured on days 1 and 14 of treatment in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #26). All FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on days 1 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response* hours||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817172|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second at Days 1, 7 and 14|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on Trough FEV1 was measured on Days 1, 7 and 14.
Through FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #25). All FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response.
Trough FEV1 was defined as the mean of the 23 hour 15 minute and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose values."|Days 1, 7 and 14|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817173|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Forced Vital Capacity at Day 28 of Treatment|"Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 within different doses/regimens of NVA237 on Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) was measured at day 28 of treatment. FVC is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible.
FVC at day 28 of treatment was measured via spirometry (see Outcome Measure #24). All FVC responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FVC data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817174|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Peak Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second at Day 28 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Peak FEV1 is the maximum FEV1 recorded in a pre-determined period of time.
Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 within different doses/regimens of NVA237 on Peak FEV1 was measured at day 28 of treatment.
Peak FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #23). All FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817175|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second at 12 Hours at Day 28 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. Percentage of the maximal response within different doses/regimens of NVA237 was measured using FEV1 at 12 hours on day 28 of treatment.
FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #22). All FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|12 hours on day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817176|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Area Under the Curve at Different Time Points (0-4 Hours, 0-8 Hours, 0-12 Hours, 12-24 Hours) on Day 28|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer.
Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-4 Hours, 0-8 Hours, 0-12 Hours, 12-24 Hours were calculated from measurements taken at: 5 min, 15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on day 28.
AUC FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #21). All FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response* hours||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817220|NCT01120184|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) at Clinical Cutoff|OS was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Median duration of OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.|Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)|ITT Population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827176|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received 100 mg Dose on Day 2||Day 2|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817177|NCT01119950|Secondary|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second AUC 0-24 Hours for Once and Twice Daily Regimens of NVA237 for the Same Total Daily Dose of NVA237, After 28 Days of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer.
The Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-24 hours FEV1 between dosing regimens over the range 20 micrograms to 55 micrograms total daily dose at -25 min,-15 min (predose); 5 min, 15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on day 28.
AUC 0-24 hours FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (12.5 µg q.d., 25.0 µg q.d., 12.5 µg b.i.d., 50 µg q.d., 25 µg b.i.d., 100 µg q.d., 50.0 µg b.i.d., and Placebo; see Outcome Measure # 20), and was used to compute modeled dose-response curves for once-daily and twice-daily regimens separately. The difference between those curves was computed at pre-specified theoretical doses (20 µg, 25 µg, 30 µg, 35 µg, 40 µg, 45 µg, 50 µg, and 55 µg) chosen at points likely to show the largest differences between the once-daily and twice-daily regimens."|-25 min,-15 min (predose); 5 min,15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817178|NCT01119950|Secondary|Percentage of the Maximal Response of NVA237 Doses on Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Area Under the Curve 0-24 Hours at Day 28 of Treatment|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer.
Percentage of the maximal response of NVA237 doses on FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0-24 hours at day 28 of treatment was calculated from measurements taken at 5 min, 15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on day 28.
AUC FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (see Outcome Measure #20). All FEV1 responses to active doses were corrected using the placebo response. A modeled dose response curve was fit to the placebo-corrected data, and extrapolated to estimate the maximal response. All FEV1 data are reported as a percentage of the theoretical maximal response."|5 min, 15 min, 1,2,3,4,6,8,10 hours, 11 hours 55 min, 14,20,22 hours; 23 hours 15 min, 23 hours 45 min (postdose) on day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Percentage of maximal response * hours||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817179|NCT01119950|Secondary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second for Once and Twice Daily Regimens of NVA237 for the Same Total Daily Dose of NVA237|"Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) is calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer.
FEV1 was measured between dosing regimens (over the range 20 micrograms to 55 micrograms total daily dose) after 28 days of treatment.
Mean trough FEV1 was measured in response to all doses administered (12.5 µg q.d., 25.0 µg q.d., 12.5 µg b.i.d., 50 µg q.d., 25 µg b.i.d., 100 µg q.d., 50.0 µg b.i.d., and Placebo; see Outcome Measure # 19), and was used to compute modeled dose-response curves for once-daily and twice-daily regimens separately. The difference between those curves was computed at pre-specified theoretical doses (20 µg, 25 µg, 30 µg, 35 µg, 40 µg, 45 µg, 50 µg, and 55 µg) chosen at points likely to show the largest differences between the once-daily and twice-daily regimens. The theoretical responses to each dosing schedule separately and the difference between the once-daily and twice-daily regimens are represented below."|day 28|Full analysis set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data available for analysis. Only patients with non-missing values were included.||Liters||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817180|NCT01120067|Primary|McGill Pain Questionnaire|McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ; Melzack, 1975): is a self-report questionnaire consisting of 102 words separated into three major classes; the sensory, affective, and evaluative aspects of pain. Respondents are asked to circle the word that best describes their pain. The stability, reliability, and validity of the MPQ have been established (Reading, Everitt, & Sledmere, 1982). The MPQ total score ranges from 0 to 78 with higher values indicating more significant pain.|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817181|NCT01120093|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Morning Pre-dose Forced Expiratory Volume in First Second (FEV1) at Day 7 on Treatment||Day 7|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population; patients were included who took at least one dose of Investigational Medicinal Product and had at least a baseline and one post-dose value of FEV1||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817182|NCT01120093|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in First Second (FEV1) Area Under Curve (AUC) 0-24h at Day 7 on Treatment||Day 7|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population; patients were included who took at least one dose of Investigational Medicinal Product and had at least a baseline and one post-dose value of FEV1||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817183|NCT01120093|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in First Second (FEV1) Area Under Curve (AUC) 12-24h at Day 7 on Treatment||Day 7|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population; patients were included who took at least one dose of Investigational Medicinal Product and had at least a baseline and one post-dose value of FEV1||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817184|NCT01120093|Primary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in First Second (FEV1) Area Under Curve (AUC) 0-12h at Day 7 on Treatment||Day 7|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population; patients were included who took at least one dose of Investigational Medicinal Product and had at least a baseline and one post-dose value of FEV1||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817185|NCT01120184|Secondary|OS at Clinical Cutoff Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels|"OS was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Median duration of OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Reported upper bound of confidence interval for Trastuzumab Emtansine + Placebo and confidence interval values for Trastuzumab + Taxane and Trastuzumab Emtansine + Pertuzumab are censored values."|Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)|ITT Population (Low HER2 mRNA Subpopulation).||months||Full Range|Median
817186|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels|The percentage of participants who died prior to clinical cutoff was calculated as [number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)|ITT Population (Low HER2 mRNA Subpopulation).||percentage of participants|||Number
817189|NCT01120184|Secondary|PFS According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels|Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population (Low HER2 mRNA Subpopulation).||months||Full Range|Median
817190|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels|Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as [number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population (Low HER2 mRNA Subpopulation).||percentage of participants|||Number
817191|NCT01120184|Secondary|PFS According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels|Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population (High HER2 mRNA Subpopulation).||months||Full Range|Median
817192|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High HER2 mRNA Levels|Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as [number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population (High HER2 mRNA Subpopulation).||percentage of participants|||Number
817193|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR According to IRF Assessment Among Those With Low HER2 mRNA Levels|Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to <10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the ORR) was calculated as [number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population (Low HER2 mRNA Subpopulation): All randomized participants with below-the-median HER2 mRNA expression (value less than or equal to [≤] 59.71). Only participants with measurable disease at Baseline were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
817194|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR According to IRF Assessment Among Those With High Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) Messenger Ribonucleic Acid (mRNA) Levels|Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to <10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the ORR) was calculated as [number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population (High HER2 mRNA Subpopulation): All randomized participants with above-the-median HER2 mRNA expression (value greater than [>] 59.71). Only participants with measurable disease at Baseline were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
817221|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died Prior to Clinical Cutoff|The percentage of participants who died prior to clinical cutoff was calculated as [number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 70 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 15-May-2016 (every 3 months until death, loss to follow-up, withdrawal, or study termination)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
817271|NCT01120236|Secondary|Accuracy of the Prognostic Model of Undetectable PSA (Developed From SWOG-9346)|The logistic regression algorithm for predicting undetectable PSA that was developed for SWOG-9346 using its baseline risk factors (age at registration, performance status, baseline PSA, and bone pain) will be applied to each arm of this trial to evaluate the level of agreement between the observed and predicted undetectable PSA rates.|Up to 5 years||||||
817195|NCT01120184|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Activity Impairment According to Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire Score|The WPAI is a patient-reported measure which assesses the effect of general health and symptom severity on work productivity and regular activities. The General Health questionnaire asks participants to estimate the number of hours missed from work due to reasons related and unrelated to their health problems, as well as the total number of hours actually worked in the preceding 7-day period. The percentage of participants reporting that they were employed (working for pay) was assessed at baseline was assessed along with Absenteeism (work time missed), Presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness), Work productivity loss (overall work impairment / absenteeism plus presenteeism), and Activity Impairment. The reported changes represent change from baseline at Cycle 7. The score range for the scales of the WPAI is between 0 (no effect) to 100% (max effect).|Baseline, Cycle 7 (Week 18)|Number of participants analysed=participants from ITT population who reported conduct of daily activities. Here, 'n' signifies the number of participants with available data at specified category.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817196|NCT01120184|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Work Productivity According to Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire Score|The WPAI is a patient-reported measure which assesses the effect of general health and symptom severity on work productivity and regular activities. The General Health questionnaire asks participants to estimate the number of hours missed from work due to reasons related and unrelated to their health problems, as well as the total number of hours actually worked in the preceding 7-day period. The percentage of participants reporting that they were employed (working for pay) was assessed at baseline was assessed along with Absenteeism (work time missed), Presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness), Work productivity loss (overall work impairment / absenteeism plus presenteeism), and Activity Impairment. The reported changes represent change from baseline at Cycle 7. The score range for the scales of the WPAI is between 0 (no effect) to 100% (max effect)|Baseline, Cycle 7 (Week 18)|Number of participants analysed=participants from ITT population who were employed at baseline. Here, 'n' signifies the number of participants with available data at specified category.||percent of work||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817197|NCT01120184|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) Activity Level Scale Score|The RSCL is a self-reported instrument which consists of 4 domains including physical symptom distress, psychological distress, activity level, and overall global life quality. Only the activity level scale was collected and assessed. Scores may range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating increased burden of disease. Mean RSCL activity scale score changes were calculated as [mean score at the assessment visit minus mean score at Baseline]. The higher the score, the higher the level of impairment or burden.|Baseline, Cycle 7 (Week 18)|ITT Population. Here, 'n' signifies the number of participants with available data at baseline and Cycle 7 (Week 18).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817198|NCT01120184|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in HRQoL as Assessed by FACT-B TOI-PFB Score|The FACT-B is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL of participants with breast cancer. It consists of 5 subscales including PWB, SWB, EWB, FWB, and BCS. The TOI-PFB score is taken by adding the scores from the PWB (7 items), FWB (7 items), and BCS (9 items) subscales. Items are rated from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) and a total score is derived. Scores may range from 0 to 92, with higher scores indicating better HRQOL. A 5 point change has been identified as the clinically minimal important difference (CMID) on the FACT-TOI-PFB scale. Time to deterioration was defined as the time from Baseline until the first decrease in FACT-B TOI-PFB score. Median time to deterioration was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.|Baseline up to 39 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014|ITT Population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with baseline and at least one post baseline FACT-B TOI-PFB score.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817199|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Significant Deterioration in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) as Measured by FACT Breast (FACT-B) Trial Outcome Index-Physical Function Breast (TOI-PFB) Score|The FACT-B is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL of participants with breast cancer. It consists of 5 subscales including physical well-being (PWB), social well-being (SWB), emotional well-being (EWB), functional well-being (FWB), and a breast cancer subscale (BCS). The TOI-PFB score is taken by adding the scores from the PWB (7 items), FWB (7 items), and BCS (9 items) subscales. Items are rated from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) and a total score is derived. Scores may range from 0 to 92, with higher scores indicating better HRQOL. A 5 point change has been identified as the clinically minimal important difference (CMID) on the FACT-TOI-PFB scale. The percentage of participants with deterioration was calculated as [number of participants meeting the above threshold divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 39 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Baseline, on Day 1 of Cycles 2 to 8 and every even-numbered cycle thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with baseline and at least one post baseline FACT-B TOI-PFB score.||percentage of participants|||Number
817200|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Diarrhea According to the Relevant Single Items of The FACT-C Module|The FACT-C is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL pertaining to colorectal cancer. Response options on each question may range from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The percentage of participants with diarrhea was calculated using following formula: [number of participants with any level of either symptom divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|At Baseline, Day 8 of Cycle 1, and Days 1 and 8 of Cycle 2|ITT Population (Protocol Amendment C Subpopulation). Only participants with a FACT-C score at the designated visit (n) were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
817201|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Nausea According to the Relevant Single Items of The FACT Colorectal Cancel (FACT-C) Module|The FACT-C is a self-reported instrument which measures HRQOL pertaining to colorectal cancer. Response options on each question may range from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The percentage of participants with nausea was calculated using following formula: [number of participants with any level of either symptom divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|At Baseline, Day 8 of Cycle 1, and Days 1 and 8 of Cycle 2|ITT Population (Protocol Amendment C Subpopulation). Only participants with a FACT-C score at the designated visit (n) were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
819836|NCT01138475|Secondary|Serum Phosphorus|This secondary outcome measure is change in serum phosphorus from baseline to final measure at 6 weeks differences in the 3 arms were compared|6 weeks|missing data from all 3 participant arms||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817202|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Clinically Significant Increase in Taxane-Related Treatment Symptoms as Measured by Taxane Subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Taxane (FACT-TaxS) Score|The FACT-Taxane is a self-reported instrument which measures the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of participants receiving taxane-containing chemotherapy. The FACT-TaxS consists of 16 items including 11 neurotoxicity-related questions and 5 additional questions assessing arthralgia, myalgia, and skin discoloration. Items are rated from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) and a total score is inversely derived. Scores may range from 0 to 64, with higher scores indicating fewer/no symptoms. A minimally clinically important difference in treatment-related symptoms was defined as a ≥5% decrease (ie, 3.2 points) in FACT-TaxS score from Baseline. The percentage of participants with treatment-related symptoms was calculated using following formula: [number of participants meeting the above threshold divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100. Corresponding CIs were computed using the Blyth-Still-Casella exact method.|Up to 39 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Baseline, on Day 1 of Cycles 2 to 8 and every even-numbered cycle thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population (Protocol Amendment C Subpopulation): All randomized participants who entered the study after Protocol Amendment C.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817203|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR, PR, or Stable Disease (SD) According to IRF Assessment|Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to <10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to quality for PR nor sufficient (20%) increase to qualify for disease progression. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR, PR, or SD was calculated as [number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|Data were not analyzed. Protocol Amendment E removed this outcome measure as a secondary endpoint, because it was redundant to another prespecified secondary endpoint.|||||
817204|NCT01120184|Secondary|Duration of Response According to IRF Assessment|Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Duration of response was defined as the time from confirmed PR or CR to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to <10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. Median duration of response was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.|Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population. Only participants achieving CR or PR were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817205|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to Investigator Assessment|Objective response was defined as having CR or PR, assessed according to RECIST version 1.1, by investigator. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to <10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the ORR) was calculated as [number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100. Corresponding CIs were computed using the Blyth-Still-Casella exact method.|Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817206|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to IRF Assessment|Objective response was defined as having complete response (CR) or partial response (PR), assessed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction in pathological lymph nodes to <10 mm. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the Baseline sum. Response was determined using 2 consecutive tumor assessments at least 4 weeks apart. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR (ie, the objective response rate [ORR]) was calculated as [number of participants meeting the respective criteria divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100. Corresponding CIs were computed using the Blyth-Still-Casella exact method.|Up to 46 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population. Only participants with measurable disease at Baseline were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817207|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hospitalization|Hospitalization was defined as a non-administration-related hospitalization due to serious adverse event, while on study treatment.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014|Safety population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817208|NCT01120184|Secondary|Hospitalization Days|Hospitalization was defined as a non-administration-related hospitalization due to serious adverse event, while on study treatment. Reported values represent number of days admitted per participants.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014|Safety population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with hospitalization and data available for calculation of the parameter.||days||Full Range|Median
817947|NCT01123941|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Post Immunization Reactions|Solicited reactions collected during the 7-day period after vaccination are pain, erythema, induration, chills, malaise, myalgia, headache, arthralgia and fatigue.|During the 7-day period after vaccination|||participants|||Number
817209|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Decline of ≥2 Points From Baseline in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status|The ECOG performance status is a scale used to quantify cancer participants' general well-being and activities of daily life. The scale ranges from 0 to 5, with 0 denoting perfect health and 5 indicating death. The 6 categories are 0=Asymptomatic (Fully active, able to carry on all predisease activities without restriction), 1=Symptomatic but completely ambulatory (Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature), 2=Symptomatic, < 50% in bed during the day (Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours), 3=Symptomatic, > 50% in bed, but not bedbound (Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair 50% or more of waking hours), 4=Bedbound (Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair), 5=Death.|Baseline, Day 1 of every Cycle up to Clinical Data Cut (up to 48 months)|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
817210|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Grade 3-4 Laboratory Parameters|Laboratory results were graded according to NCI CTCAE version 4.0. Grade 3: Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care activity of daily living with inability to perform bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications but not bedridden. Grade 4: An immediate threat to life. Urgent medical intervention is required in order to maintain survival.|Day 1, 8, and 15 of Cycle 1–3 and on Day 1 of each subsequent cycle up to 50 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014|Safety population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for the outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
817211|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Grade 5 Adverse Events|Adverse events were graded according to NCI CTCAE version 4.0. Grade 5 adverse events are those events which led to death.|Up to 50 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (continuously until 28 days after last dose)|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
817212|NCT01120184|Secondary|Overall Survival Truncated at 2 Years|Overall Survival truncated at 2 years was defined as the percentage of participants alive at 2 years.|From randomization until 2 years|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
817213|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died at 2 Years||From randomization until 2 years|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
817214|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Grade ≥3 Adverse Events|Adverse events were graded according to National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. Grade 3: Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care activity of daily living with inability to perform bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications but not bedridden. Grade 4: An immediate threat to life. Urgent medical intervention is required in order to maintain survival. Grade 5: Death.|Up to 50 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (continuously until 28 days after last dose|Safety Population: All treated participants. Additionally, 2 participants randomized to trastuzumab+taxane received 3 cycles of trastuzumab emtansine and were included in trastuzumab emtansine+placebo arm. 6 participants randomized to trastuzumab emtansine+placebo received pertuzumab and were included in trastuzumab emtansine+pertuzumab arm.||percentage of participants|||Number
817215|NCT01120184|Secondary|One-Year Survival Rate|The percentage of participants alive at 1 year after randomization was estimated as the one-year survival rate using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using Greenwood's estimate of the standard error.|From randomization until 1 year|ITT Population.||percentage probability of being alive||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817216|NCT01120184|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure (TTF)|Treatment failure was defined as the discontinuation of all study medications in the treatment arm for any reason including disease progression, treatment toxicity, death, physician decision, or participant withdrawal. TTF was defined as the time from randomization to treatment failure. Median TTF was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014|ITT Population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817217|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Treatment Failure|Treatment failure was defined as the discontinuation of all study medications in the treatment arm for any reason including disease progression, treatment toxicity, death, physician decision, or participant withdrawal. The percentage of participants with treatment failure was calculated as [number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
817218|NCT01120184|Secondary|PFS According to Investigator Assessment|Tumor assessments were performed by the investigator according to RECIST version 1.1. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding CIs were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817219|NCT01120184|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to Investigator Assessment|Tumor assessments were performed by the investigator according to RECIST version 1.1. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as [number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
817272|NCT01120236|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Who do Not Achieve a Partial PSA Response|A partial PSA response is considered <= 4 ng/mL|Up to 5 years|One patient from Arm II (androgen deprivation therapy) was ineligible because of lack of a demonstrable radiographic metastasis. This patient was excluded from analyses.||participants|||Number
817222|NCT01120184|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) According to IRF Assessment|Tumor assessments were performed according to RECIST version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and 5-mm increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). Median duration of PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817223|NCT01120184|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to Independent Review Facility (IRF) Assessment|Tumor assessments were performed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, using radiographic images submitted to the IRF up to and including the confirmatory tumor assessment 4 to 6 weeks after study drug discontinuation. Disease progression was defined as a greater than or equal to (≥) 20 percent (%) and 5-millimeter (mm) increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum obtained during the study, or appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants with death or disease progression was calculated as [number of participants with event divided by the number analyzed] multiplied by 100.|Up to 48 months from randomization until clinical cutoff of 16-Sept-2014 (at Screening, every 9 weeks for 81 weeks, then every 12 weeks thereafter and/or up to 42 days after last dose)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
817224|NCT01120197|Secondary|Falls-Efficacy Scale-International|A 16- item self report or interview- based questionnaire assessing the fear of falling during basic and more demanding activities of daily living (Yardley et al. 2005). Each item is scored on a four point scale. Minimun score indicating low concern about falling is 16. The maximun score indication high concern about falling is 64.|Baseline, 3 months follow-up, 12 months follow up||||||
817225|NCT01120197|Secondary|General Health Questionnaire 20 (GHQ20).|GHQ-20 is a generic instrument and registers distress and psychopathology. GHQ-20 is self-administered and the answers to each item may be treated as a “Likert Scale” and have weights assigned to each position (0-1-2-3) where 0 is no distress, and 3 is severe distress. This gives a possible range for the total GHQ-20 score of 0-60. Higher scores indicating poor qol.|At baseline, 3 and 12 months after baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817226|NCT01120197|Secondary|QUALEFFO 41|"Quality of Life Questionnaire issued by the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-41), is a disease-specific questionnaire to be used by patients with vertebral fractures attributed to osteoporosis. QUALEFFO-41 is self-administered and contains questions in five domains: pain, ability to perform physical functions, social functioning, general health perception and mental performance. These five domains can be evaluated individually or be represented in a total score. All scores in all the domains are expressed in values ranging from 0-100, where 0 represents the best and 100 the worst. The total QALEFFO score is calculated as a sum of all answers to items and then linearly transformed on the scale 0-100.
High scores indicate poor quality of life."|At baseline, 3 and 12 months after the baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817227|NCT01120197|Secondary|Functional Reach|"The maximum distance in centimetres that can be reached forward in a standing position while maintaining a fixed base of support. Subjects will be instructed to stand sideways against a wall in a natural position and stretch one arm forward level with the shoulder. The position of the third metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint was taken as the zero point. With the body tilted forward as far as possible, the subjects continued to stretch the arm parallel to the ground.
Amount of cm indicate better balance."|At baseline, 3 and 12 months after the baseline|||Centimetres||Standard Deviation|Mean
817228|NCT01120197|Secondary|Timed Up & Go Test (TUG)|The subject will be instructed to rise from a chair with a seat height of 43 cm, walk 3 m, turn around, return and sit down again, wearing ordinary footwear and use customary walking aids if necessary.|At baseline, 3 and 12 months after the baseline.|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817229|NCT01120197|Primary|Time Used to Walk 20 m at Maximal Speed.|Times (measured in seconds) used walking at maximum speed for 20m indoors. No acceleration or deceleration phase used. The type of walking aids used during the test will be recorded. The participants walk as fast as possible wearing their ordinary shoes. The test perform once, the time measured with a stopwatch and the time used on 20 m will be recorded|At baseline, 3 and 12 months after the baseline|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817230|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 1-, 2-, and 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/Min Infusions]) in Calculated Systemic Vascular Resistance (SVR)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in Calculated Systemic Vascular Resistance (SVR) at the end of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/min Infusions as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||dyn.s.cm-5||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817231|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 1-, 2-, and 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/Min Infusions]) in Pulmonary Arterial Diastolic Pressure (PADP)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Square (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in Pulmonary Arterial Diastolic Pressure (PADP) at the end of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/min Infusions as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817232|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 1-, 2-, and 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/Min Infusions]) in Pulmonary Arterial Systolic Pressure (PASP)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in Pulmonary Arterial Systolic Pressure (PASP) at the end of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/min Infusions as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817233|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 1-, 2-, and 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/Min Infusions]) in Stroke Volume (SV)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in Stroke Volume (SV) at the end of the 30 ng/kg/min infusion as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||mL/beat||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817234|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of the 30 ng/kg/Min Infusion]) in Fractional Shortening (FS)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in Fractional Shortening (FS) at the end of the 30 ng/kg/min infusion as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||percentage||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817235|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of the 30 ng/kg/Min Infusion]) in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) at the end of the 30 ng/kg/min infusion as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||percentage||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817236|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of 30 ng/kg/Min Infusion]) in Left Ventricular End Diastolic Volume (LVEDV)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in Left Ventricular End Diastolic Volume (LVEDV) at the end of the 30 ng/kg/min infusion as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817237|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of the 30 ng/kg/Min Infusion]) in Left Ventricular End Systolic Volume (LVESV)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in left ventricular end systolic volume (LVESV) at the end of the 30 ng/kg/min infusion as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817238|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 1-, 2-, and 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/Min Infusions]) in Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of LS mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in Least Square (LS) means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in diastolic blood pressure(DBP) at each time point as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817948|NCT01123980|Secondary|Number of Hypoglycaemic Episodes|All episodes classified into nocturnal (time of onset between 00:00 (included) and 05:59 (included)).|Weeks 0-24|The safety analysis set contains all subjects exposed to at least one dose of investigational product(s).||episodes|||Number
817239|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 1-, 2-, and 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/Min Infusions]) in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in systolic blood pressure (SBP) at each time point as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817240|NCT01120210|Secondary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 1-, 2-, and 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/Min Infusions]) in Heart Rate (HR)|The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in heart rate (HR) at each time point as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|At 1-hour, 2 hours and 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817241|NCT01120210|Primary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 1-, 2-, and 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/Min Infusions]) in Pulmonary Capillary Wedge Pressure (PCWP)|The effect of JNJ-39588146 on pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) was evaluated by administering multiple ascending doses of JNJ-39588146 or placebo over a 3-hour intravenous (IV) infusion period to patients with heart failure. The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from baseline in PCWP at each time point as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817242|NCT01120210|Primary|Post-baseline Changes Compared to Placebo (at 1-, 2-, and 3-hours Post Infusion Initiation [ie, at the End of 5, 15 and 30 ng/kg/Min Infusions]) in Cardiac Index (CI)|The effect of JNJ-39588146 on cardiac index (CI), a hemodynamic parameter that relates heart performance to the size of the individual measured in liters per minute per square metre (l/min/m2) was evaluated in patients with heart failure (HF). The primary analysis of this study focused on the differences between the treatment groups in terms of Least Squares (LS) mean change from Baseline at each time point; thus, the results provided below consist of the JNJ-39588146 minus placebo differences in LS means (and associated confidence intervals) for change from Baseline in CI at each time point as well as treatment group LS means and Standard Errors.|Baseline up through 3 hours post infusion initiation|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline measurement and at least 1 post-baseline measurement value of at least 1 of the primary endpoints. The efficacy analysis was to be performed using the MITT analysis set.||L/min/m2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817243|NCT01120223|Secondary|Withdrawal|"How many subjects withdrew from the study. Reasons for withdrawal:
due to exclusion criteria emerging, due to AE(s), or due to other reason"|Week 4 and 8|||participants|||Number
817244|NCT01120223|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (Defined as Clear or Very Mild) According to the Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at End of Treatment|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 5-point scale, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation.|End of treatment (up to 8 weeks)|||participants|||Number
817245|NCT01120223|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (Defined as Clear or Very Mild) According to the Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Week 8|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 5-point scale, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation.|Week 8|||participants|||Number
817246|NCT01120223|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (Defined as Clear or Very Mild) According to the Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Week 4|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 5-point scale, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation.|Week 4|||participants|||Number
817247|NCT01120223|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (Defined as Clear or Very Mild) According to the Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Week 2|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 5-point scale, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation. The scale: 1 = clear, 2 = very mild, 3 = mild, 4 = moderate, 5 = severe.|Week 2|||participants|||Number
817248|NCT01120223|Secondary|Percentage Change in Total Sign Score (TSS; Sum of Severity Scores for Each Individual Clinical Sign, Redness, Thickness, and Scaliness) From Baseline to End of Treatment.|Investigator assessment of scalp psoriasis lesions in terms of the three clinical signs: redness, thickness, and scaliness. Each clinical sign, a single score (ranging from 0 to 4), reflecting the average severity of all psoriatic lesions on the scalp, were determined. The sum of the three scores (redness, thickness, and scaliness) constitutes the Total Sign Score of the psoriasis on scalp, ranging from 0 (best possible outcome) to 12 points (worst possible outcome).|Baseline and End of treatment (up to 8 weeks)|||percent of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
817370|NCT01120990|Primary|Systolic Blood Pressure Measured by Tested Device.|Mean Systolic Blood pressure value of all BP measurements made by the tested device in all patients included in the analysis.|3 months|According to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol 2010, recruitment is continued until 33 subjects that meet the entry criteria complete all the measurements.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817249|NCT01120223|Secondary|Percentage Change in Total Sign Score (TSS; Sum of Severity Scores for Each Individual Clinical Sign, Redness, Thickness, and Scaliness) From Baseline to Week 8|Investigator assessment of scalp psoriasis lesions in terms of the three clinical signs: redness, thickness, and scaliness. Each clinical sign, a single score (ranging from 0 to 4), reflecting the average severity of all psoriatic lesions on the scalp, were determined. The sum of the three scores (redness, thickness, and scaliness) constitutes the Total Sign Score of the psoriasis on scalp, ranging from 0 (best possible outcome) to 12 points (worst possible outcome).|Baseline and week 8|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
817250|NCT01120223|Secondary|Percentage Change in Total Sign Score (TSS; Sum of Severity Scores for Each Individual Clinical Sign, Redness, Thickness, and Scaliness) From Baseline to Weeks 4|Investigator assessment of scalp psoriasis lesions in terms of the three clinical signs: redness, thickness, and scaliness. Each clinical sign, a single score (ranging from 0 to 4), reflecting the average severity of all psoriatic lesions on the scalp, were determined. The sum of the three scores (redness, thickness, and scaliness) constitutes the Total Sign Score of the psoriasis on scalp, ranging from 0 to 12 points.|Baseline and week 4|||percent of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
817251|NCT01120223|Secondary|Percentage Change in Total Sign Score (TSS; Sum of Severity Scores for Each Individual Clinical Sign, Redness, Thickness, and Scaliness)From Baseline to Week 2|Investigator assessment of scalp psoriasis lesions in terms of the three clinical signs: redness, thickness, and scaliness. Each clinical sign, a single score (ranging from 0 to 4), reflecting the average severity of all psoriatic lesions on the scalp, were determined. The sum of the three scores (redness, thickness, and scaliness) constitutes the Total Sign Score of the psoriasis on scalp, ranging from 0 (best possible outcome) to 12 points (worst possible outcome).|Baseline and week 2|||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
817252|NCT01120223|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (i.e., Clear or Almost Clear) According to the Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of Disease Severity at End of Treatment|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 6-point scale IGA, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation at end of treatment|End of treatment (up to 8 weeks)|||participants|||Number
817253|NCT01120223|Primary|Change in Urinary Calcium:Creatinine Ratio From Baseline to End of Treatment|Change in urinary calcium:creatinine ratio from Baseline to end of treatment|Baseline and End of treatment (up to 8 weeks)|||mmol/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
817254|NCT01120223|Primary|Change in Urinary Calcium:Creatinine Ratio From Baseline to Week 8|Change in urinary calcium:creatinine ratio from Baseline to week 8|Baseline and week 8|||mmol/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
817255|NCT01120223|Primary|Change in Urinary Calcium:Creatinine Ratio From Baseline to Week 4|Change in urinary calcium:creatinine ratio from Baseline to week 4|Baseline and week 4|||mmol/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
817256|NCT01120223|Primary|Change in 24-hour Urinary Calcium Excretion From Baseline to End of Treatment|Change in 24-hour urinary calcium excretion from Baseline to end of treatment|Baseline and End of treatment (up to 8 weeks)|||mmol/24hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
817257|NCT01120223|Primary|Change in 24-hour Urinary Calcium Excretion From Baseline to Week 8|Change in 24-hour urinary calcium excretion from Baseline to week 8|Baseline and week 8|||mmol/24hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
817258|NCT01120223|Primary|Change in 24-hour Urinary Calcium Excretion From Baseline to Week 4|Change in 24-hour urinary calcium excretion from Baseline to week 4|Baseline and week 4|||mmol/24hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
817259|NCT01120223|Primary|Change in Albumincorrected Serum Calcium From Baseline to End of Treatment|Change in albumincorrected serum calcium from Baseline to end of treatment|Baseline and End of treatment (up to 8 weeks)|||mmol/L||Standard Error|Mean
817260|NCT01120223|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (i.e., Clear or Almost Clear) According to the Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of Disease Severity at Week 8|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 6-point scale IGA, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation at week 8|Week 8|||participants|||Number
817261|NCT01120223|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (i.e., Clear or Almost Clear) According to the Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of Disease Severity at Week 4|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 6-point scale IGA, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation at week 4|Week 4|||participants|||Number
817262|NCT01120223|Secondary|Subjects With Controlled Disease (i.e., Clear or Almost Clear) According to the Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of Disease Severity at Week 2|Disease severity of the scalp psoriasis as assessed by the 6-point scale IGA, based on the condition of the disease at the time of evaluation at week 2. The IGA Scale: 1 = clear, 2 = almost clear, 3 = mild, 4 = moderate, 5 = severe, and 6 = very severe.|Week 2|||participants|||Number
817263|NCT01120223|Secondary|Change in Plasma PTH From Baseline to Week 8|Change in plasma PTH (parathyroid hormone) from Baseline to week 8|Baseline and week 8|||ng/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
817264|NCT01120223|Secondary|Change in Plasma PTH From Baseline to Week 4|Change in plasma PTH (parathyroid hormone) from Baseline to week 4|Baseline and week 4|||ng/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
817265|NCT01120223|Primary|Change in Albumincorrected Serum Calcium From Baseline to Week 8|Change in albumincorrected serum calcium from Baseline to week 8|Baseline and week 8|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
817266|NCT01120223|Primary|Change in Albumincorrected Serum Calcium From Baseline to Week 4|Change in albumincorrected serum calcium from Baseline to week 4|Baseline and week 4|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
817267|NCT01120223|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs)|Adverse events for which the investigator did not describe the causal relationship to IP as not related|Throughout trial, up to 8-weeks|||percent subjects|||Number
817268|NCT01120236|Other Pre-specified|Change in microRNA Measures|Pearson and Spearman correlations will be initially evaluated between microRNA measures and CTC counts. Analysis of covariance will be used to assess the relationship between microRNA and CTC, after adjusting for stratification factors.|Baseline to 12 weeks||||||
817269|NCT01120236|Other Pre-specified|Change in Level of CTCs|Will be correlated with undetectable PSA and normalized PSA response.|Baseline to 12 weeks||||||
817270|NCT01120236|Other Pre-specified|Change in Level of Serum Biomarkers||Baseline to 12 weeks||||||
818141|NCT01125202|Primary|Time Specific Interdialytic Weight Gain (12 Weeks)|Average interdialytic weight gains (kg/day) were calculated for the 1 week period prior to the 12 week measurement time point.|12 weeks|Some participants have missing interdialytic weight gains due to missed hemodialysis treatments.||kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
817273|NCT01120236|Secondary|Toxicity|Only adverse events that are possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug are reported.|Up to 28 weeks|All participants receiving at least some protocol treatment were included in toxicity analysis. Four patients on Arm I (androgen deprivation and cixutumumab) and two patients on Arm II (androgen deprivation therapy) did not receive any protocol treatment and were therefore excluded from this analysis.||Participants|||Number
817274|NCT01120236|Primary|Undetectable PSA Rate|Undetectable PSA rate (<= 0.2 ng/mL) after seven cycles (28 weeks) of protocol treatment|7 months|One patient from Arm II (androgen deprivation therapy) was ineligible because of lack of a demonstrable radiographic metastasis. This patient was excluded from analyses.||participants|||Number
817275|NCT01120275|Secondary|Number of Patients With Gr 3 Through 5 Adverse Events That Are Related to Study Drugs|Adverse Events (AEs) are reported by CTCAE version 4.0. Only adverse events that are possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug are reported.|Toxicity assessment was evaluated at least every 3 weeks at the beginning of each cycle, up to 3 years|Eligible patients who had received the protocol treatments were included in the adverse event summaries. Any CTCAE 4.0 event of Grade 3 (severe), Grade 4 (life threatening) or Grade 5 (fatal) which were deemed to be related to protocol treatment are included.||Participants|||Number
817276|NCT01120275|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Confirmed and Unconfirmed Complete or Partial Response|Complete disappearance of all measurable and non-measurable disease, or greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of the longest diameters of all target measurable lesions.|Disease assessments for response were performed every 6 weeks, up to 3 years|||portation of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817277|NCT01120275|Primary|Overall Survival|From date of registration to date of death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive are censored at date of last contact.|Weekly, up to 3 years.|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817278|NCT01120275|Primary|Progression-free Survival According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Version 1.1|From date of registration to date of first documentation of progression or symptomatic deterioration, or death due to any cause.|Disease assessments were performed every 6 weeks, up to 3 years.|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817279|NCT01120379|Secondary|Dual Antiplatelet Medication Usage|Patient is included if medications (both aspirin and thienopyridine) were taken for at least 1 day during the visit window. The visit window for 4-year visit is 1502 days.|4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
817280|NCT01120379|Secondary|Dual Antiplatelet Medication Usage|Patient is included if medications (both aspirin and thienopyridine) were taken for at least 1 day during the visit window. The visit window for 3-year visit is 1053-1137 days.|3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
817281|NCT01120379|Secondary|Dual Antiplatelet Medication Usage|Patient is included if medications (both aspirin and thienopyridine) were taken for at least 1 day during the visit window. The visit window for 2-year visit is 688-772 days.|2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
817282|NCT01120379|Secondary|Major Bleeding Complications|Major bleeding complications consisted of CEC-adjudicated TIMI major bleeding through 2-year follow-up and site reported major bleeding after 2 years.|4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817283|NCT01120379|Secondary|Major Bleeding Complications (Site Reported)|Major bleeding complications consisted of CEC-adjudicated TIMI major bleeding through 2-year follow-up and site reported major bleeding after 2 years.|3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817284|NCT01120379|Secondary|Major Bleeding Complications|Major bleeding complications consisted of Clinical Events Committee (CEC)-adjudicated Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major bleeding through 2-year follow-up and site reported major bleeding after 2 years.|2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817285|NCT01120379|Secondary|Revascularization (Target Lesion, Target Vessel [TVR], and Non-target Vessel) (PCI and CABG)||4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817286|NCT01120379|Secondary|Revascularization (Target Lesion, Target Vessel [TVR], and Non-target Vessel) (PCI and CABG)||3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817287|NCT01120379|Secondary|Revascularization (Target Lesion, Target Vessel [TVR], and Non-target Vessel) (PCI and CABG)||2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817288|NCT01120379|Secondary|Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave)||4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817289|NCT01120379|Secondary|Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave)||3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817290|NCT01120379|Secondary|Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave)||2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817291|NCT01120379|Secondary|Death (Cardiac Death, Vascular Death, and Non-cardiovascular Death)||4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817292|NCT01120379|Secondary|Death (Cardiac Death, Vascular Death, and Non-cardiovascular Death)||3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817293|NCT01120379|Secondary|Death (Cardiac Death, Vascular Death, and Non-cardiovascular Death)||2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817294|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of Cardiac Death and MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel, and Clinically-indicated Target Lesion Revascularization (CI-TLR) (PCI and CABG) (This Composite Endpoint is Also Denoted as TLF)||4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817295|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of Cardiac Death and MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel, and Clinically-indicated Target Lesion Revascularization (CI-TLR) (PCI and CABG) (This Composite Endpoint is Also Denoted as TLF)||3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817296|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of Cardiac Death and MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel, and Clinically-indicated Target Lesion Revascularization (CI-TLR) (PCI and CABG) (This Composite Endpoint is Also Denoted as TLF)||2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817297|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of Cardiac Death, Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel, and Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR) (PCI and CABG)||4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817298|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of Cardiac Death, Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel, and Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR) (PCI and CABG)||3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817299|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of Cardiac Death, Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel, and Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR) (PCI and CABG)||2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819837|NCT01138475|Secondary|Serum 25 OH Vitamin D|This secondary outcome measure is change in serum hydroxy-vitaminD from baseline to final measure at 6 weeks differences in the 3 arms were compared|6 weeks|missing data from participant in paricalcitrol arm||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817300|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of All Death, Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave) and Any Repeat Revascularization (Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft [CABG]||4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817301|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of All Death, Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave) and Any Repeat Revascularization (Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft [CABG]||3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817302|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of All Death, Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave) and Any Repeat Revascularization (Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft [CABG]||2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817303|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of All Death and Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave)||4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817304|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of All Death and Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave)||3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817305|NCT01120379|Secondary|Composite Rate of All Death and Any MI (Q-wave and Non Q-wave)||2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817306|NCT01120379|Primary|Composite Rate of Cardiac Death and Any Myocardial Infarction (ARC Defined).||4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817307|NCT01120379|Primary|Composite Rate of Cardiac Death and Any Myocardial Infarction (ARC Defined).||3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817308|NCT01120379|Primary|Composite Rate of Cardiac Death and Any Myocardial Infarction [MI] (ARC Defined).||2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817309|NCT01120379|Primary|Stent Thrombosis (Definite and Probable) as Defined by ARC|Stent thrombosis was defined by ARC criteria as definite (angiographic confirmation with at least one of the following: acute onset of ischemic symptoms at rest, new ischemic ECG changes that suggest acute ischemia or typical rise and fall of cardiac biomarkers OR pathological confirmation at autopsy or via examination of tissue retrieved following thrombectomy), probable (any unexplained death within the first 30 days or, regardless of the time after the index procedure, any MI related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the implanted stent without angiographic confirmation and in the absence of any other obvious cause), and possible (any unexplained death from 30 days after intracoronary stenting until end of trial follow-up). Stent thrombosis was categorized as acute (0-24 hours post stent implantation), Subacute (>24 hours to 30 days post stent implantation), late (>30 days to 1 year post stent implantation), or very late (>1 year post stent implantation).|4 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817322|NCT01120405|Secondary|Number of Participants With Cardiac Troponin I or T Above the 99th Percentile (Local Laboratories)|At least 1 value of serum cardiac troponin I or T above the 99th percentile (measurements performed by local laboratories using different techniques)|3 Postoperative days|Full analysis set (FAS): Randomised patients who started general anaesthesia induction. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as randomised, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment allocated by randomisation.||participants|||Number
817323|NCT01120405|Primary|Number of Participants With Myocardial Necrosis (MN)|Myocardial Necrosis: at least 1 value of serum cardiac troponin I above the 99th percentile (measurement performed by a central laboratory using the ABBOTT-ARCHITECT technique)|3 Postoperative Days|Per protocol set (PPS): Randomised patients who started general anaesthesia induction and with no major protocol violations. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as randomised, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment allocated by randomisation.||participants|||Number
817310|NCT01120379|Primary|Stent Thrombosis (Definite and Probable) Rate as Defined by ARC (Academic Research Consortium)|Stent thrombosis was defined by ARC criteria as definite (angiographic confirmation with at least one of the following: acute onset of ischemic symptoms at rest, new ischemic ECG changes that suggest acute ischemia or typical rise and fall of cardiac biomarkers OR pathological confirmation at autopsy or via examination of tissue retrieved following thrombectomy), probable (any unexplained death within the first 30 days or, regardless of the time after the index procedure, any MI related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the implanted stent without angiographic confirmation and in the absence of any other obvious cause), and possible (any unexplained death from 30 days after intracoronary stenting until end of trial follow-up). Stent thrombosis was categorized as acute (0-24 hours post stent implantation), Subacute (>24 hours to 30 days post stent implantation), late (>30 days to 1 year post stent implantation), or very late (>1 year post stent implantation).|3 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817311|NCT01120379|Primary|Stent Thrombosis (Definite and Probable) Rate as Defined by ARC (Academic Research Consortium)|Stent thrombosis was defined by ARC criteria as definite (angiographic confirmation with at least one of the following: acute onset of ischemic symptoms at rest, new ischemic ECG changes that suggest acute ischemia or typical rise and fall of cardiac biomarkers OR pathological confirmation at autopsy or via examination of tissue retrieved following thrombectomy), probable (any unexplained death within the first 30 days or, regardless of the time after the index procedure, any MI related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the implanted stent without angiographic confirmation and in the absence of any other obvious cause), and possible (any unexplained death from 30 days after intracoronary stenting until end of trial follow-up). Stent thrombosis was categorized as acute (0-24 hours post stent implantation), subacute (>24 hours to 30 days post stent implantation), late (>30 days to 1 year post stent implantation), or very late (>1 year post stent implantation).|2 years|Number of participants analyzed excludes patients who are truly lost-to-follow-up, defined as patients who are lost to follow-up through given timepoint without any ARC Defined Patient-Oriented Endpoint (all death, all MI, all revascularization, respectively). Number of participants analyzed includes patients with valid data at the given timepoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817312|NCT01120405|Secondary|Urine Output|Urine volume in milliliter (mL) during the first postoperative hours|From Day 0 until Postoperative Day 1|Treated set (TS): Randomised patients who received the study medication. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as treated, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment actually received.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817313|NCT01120405|Secondary|Number of Participants With Chest Pain During the 3 Postoperative Days|Patients with Chest Pain reported at least once per day during the 3 Postoperative Days|From Day 0 until Postoperative Day 3|Treated set (TS): Randomised patients who received the study medication. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as treated, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment actually received.||participants|||Number
817314|NCT01120405|Secondary|Vital Signs (Heart Rate Changes)|Changes from baseline for Heart Rate (HR)|From pre-induction to Postoperative Day 3|Treated set (TS): Randomised patients who received the study medication. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as treated, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment actually received.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
817315|NCT01120405|Secondary|Vital Signs (SBP and DBP Changes)|Changes from baseline for Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure (SBP and DBP)|From pre-induction to Postoperative Day 3|Treated set (TS): Randomised patients who received the study medication. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as treated, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment actually received.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817316|NCT01120405|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|Repeated Systolic Blood Pressure measurements during the perioperative period|From pre-induction to recovery of anesthesia|Full analysis set (FAS): Randomised patients who started general anaesthesia induction. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as randomised, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment allocated by randomisation.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817317|NCT01120405|Secondary|Number of Participants With Composite Endpoint|Patients with at least 1 event among MN assessed by central laboratory, MI, Cerebro-Vascular event, Life-Threatening Arrhythmia and Death from Cardiac Origin|3 postoperative days|Full analysis set (FAS): Randomised patients who started general anaesthesia induction. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as randomised, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment allocated by randomisation.||participants|||Number
817318|NCT01120405|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Died From Cardiac Origin|No patient died from a cardiac cause during the 3 postoperative days.|3 postoperative days|Full analysis set (FAS): Randomised patients who started general anaesthesia induction. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as randomised, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment allocated by randomisation.||participants|||Number
817319|NCT01120405|Secondary|Number of Participants With Life-Threatening Arrhythmia|Patients with Life-Threatening Arrhythmia in the FAS|3 Postoperative Days|Full analysis set (FAS): Randomised patients who started general anaesthesia induction. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as randomised, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment allocated by randomisation.||participants|||Number
817320|NCT01120405|Secondary|Number of Participants With Cerebro-Vascular Event|Patients with Cerebro-Vascular Event in the FAS|3 postoperative days|Full analysis set (FAS): Randomised patients who started general anaesthesia induction. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as randomised, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment allocated by randomisation.||participants|||Number
817321|NCT01120405|Secondary|Number of Participants With Myocardial Infarction (MI)|Patients with Confirmed Myocardial Infarction (MI) by the Investigators|3 Postoperative Days|Full analysis set (FAS): Randomised patients who started general anaesthesia induction. Patients were assigned to the treatment groups as randomised, i.e. the treatment groups were based on the treatment allocated by randomisation.||participants|||Number
818142|NCT01125202|Primary|Time Specific Interdialytic Weight Gain (8 Weeks)|Average interdialytic weight gains (kg/day) were calculated for the 1 week period prior to the 8-week measurement time point.|8 weeks|Some participants have missing interdialytic weight gains due to missed hemodialysis treatments.||kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
817324|NCT01120626|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC)|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist is a 58-item symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors. The ABC was rated by each participant's parent. Each item is rated on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all a problem) to 3 (the problem is severe in degree). The ABC Total score (range 0-174) is the sum of all individual item scores. Higher score indicates more maladaptive behaviors/worse outcome.|Week 12|41 of 42 randomized participants completed the 12-week randomized controlled trial. 39 of 42 participants were administered the ABC at week 12.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817325|NCT01120626|Primary|Contingency Naming Test (CNT) Performance Score|Week 12 Contingency Naming Test (CNT) performance score on Rule 2 (naming shapes) and on Rule 3 (If the inside shape matches the outside shape, name the color, otherwise, name the outside shape). Performance score is the number of correct responses per minute, calculated by dividing the number of correct responses by the time taken to complete the 27 items, and multiplying by 60. Higher scores indicate faster and more accurate responding.|Week 12|41 of 42 randomized participants completed the 12-week randomized controlled trial. 37 of 42 randomized participants completed CNT Rule 2 at week 12. 34 of 42 randomized participants completed CNT Rule 3 at week 12.||correct responses per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
817326|NCT01120691|Secondary|St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Scores Between QVA149, NVA237 and Open Label Tiotropium Over 12, 26, 38, 52 and 64 Weeks of Treatment|St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) is a health related quality of life questionnaire consisting of 51 items in three components: symptoms, activity, and impacts. The lowest possible value is zero and the highest 100. Higher values correspond to greater impairment in quality of life. Mixed model used baseline SGRQ, baseline inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use, Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) prior to inhalation of short acting beta-agonist (SABA), and FEV1 45 minutes post-inhalation of SABA as covariates. SGRQ total score is the sum of the scores from the three components; symptoms, activity and impacts.|12, 26, 38, 52 and 64 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set (mFAS) included all patients in the Full analysis set except patients from a site, which had major issues with GCP compliance. The Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data was available for analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817327|NCT01120691|Secondary|Change From Baseline of Percentage of Days Without Rescue Therapy Use Between QVA149,NVA237 and Open Label Tiotropium Over the 64 Week Treatment Period|A day with no rescue medication use is defined from the diary data as any day where the patient recorded no rescue medicine use during the previous 12 hours. The percentage of days is calculated by the number of days with no rescue medicine use/total number of days with evaluable data X 100. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline number of puffs and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|Baseline (14 day run-in), 64 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set(mFAS)included all patients in the Full analysis set except patients from a site,which had major issues with GCP compliance. The Full Analysis Set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data was available for analysis. Patients with evaluable data were included in this analysis||percentage of days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817328|NCT01120691|Secondary|Change in Mean Daily Use (Number of Puffs) of Rescue Therapy Between QVA149, NVA237 and Open Label Tiotropium From Baseling Over the 64 Week Treatment Period|The severe or less FEV1 % predicted (post bronchodilator)>=30%; very severe=> FEV1 % predicted(the post bronchodilator)<30%.Number of puffs of rescue medication taken in the previous 12 hours was recorded in patient diary in the morning and in the evening for 26 weeks.The total number of puffs per day was calculated and divided by the number of days with data to determine the mean daily number of puffs of rescue medication for each patient.Rescue medication data recorded during the 14 day run-in was used to calculate the baseline.A negative change from baseline indicates improvement. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline number of puffs and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates.|Baseline (14 day run-in), 64 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set mFAS included all patients in the Full analysis set except patients from a site,which had major issues with GCP compliance. The Full Analysis Set includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data was available for analysis. Patients with evaluable data were included in this analysis||# puffs||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817329|NCT01120691|Secondary|Pre-dose Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)After 4, 12, 26, 38, 52 and 64 Weeks of Treatment Between QVA149, NVA237 and Open Label Tiotropium|"Pulmonary function assessments were performed using centralized spirometry. The spirometer was customized and programmed according to the requirements of the study protocol in accordance with American Thoracic Society (ATS) standards.
Pre-dose Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) is defined as the average of the -15 minutes and the -45 minutes FVC values. Baseline is defined as the average of the -45 minutes and -15 minutes FVC values taken on day 1 prior to first dose. FVC data taken within 6h of rescue medication or within 7 days of systemic corticosteroid is excluded from this analysis"|4, 12, 26, 38, 52 and 64 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set(mFAS) included all patients in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) except patients from a site, which had major issues with GCP compliance. FAS include all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data was available for analysis. Each category has patients with assessable data at that particular time.||L (liters)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817346|NCT01120717|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events or Death|Adverse events are defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptom, sign (including an abnormal lab finding), syndrome or disease which either occurs during study, having been absent at baseline, or, if present at baseline, appears to worsen. Serious adverse events are any untoward medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require (or prolong) hospitalization, cause persistent or significant disability/incapacity, result in congenital anomalies or birth defects, or are other conditions which in judgments of the investigators represent significant hazards.|52 weeks + Follow-up (Up to Day 394)|Safety population - all patients who received at least one dose of study drug whether or not they were randomized. Only patients with safety assessments were included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
817330|NCT01120691|Secondary|Pre-dose Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV-1) After 4, 12, 26, 38, 52 and 64 Weeks of Treatment Between QVA149, NVA237 and Open Label Tiotropium|"Pulmonary function assessments were performed using centralized spirometry. The spirometer was customized and programmed according to the requirements of the study protocol in accordance with American Thoracic Society (ATS) standards.
Spirometry measurements taken were FEV1 at -45 minutes and -15 minutes pre-dose. Three acceptable maneuvers had to be performed for each time point. The FEV1 values recorded had to be the highest values measured irrespective of whether or not they occurred on the same curve.
The mixed model for analysis contained treatment as a fixed effect with average of the 45 minutes and 15 minutes pre dose FEV1 measurements at day 1 as the baseline measurement, FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at -14 Day) as covariates."|4, 12, 26, 38, 52 and 64 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set(mFAS) included all patients in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) except patients from a site, which had major issues with GCP compliance. FAS include all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data was available for analysis. Each category has patients with assessable data at that particular time.||L (liters)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817331|NCT01120691|Secondary|Cumulative Rates of Moderate or Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbations for Multiple COPD Exacerbation at Different Time Points|Cumulative rates were estimated using Anderson and Gill method. Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) exacerbations are considered to be moderate if treatment with systemic corticosteroids and/or antibiotics was required. COPD exacerbations are considered to be severe if treatment for moderate severity and hospitalization were required. Rate of moderate or severe exacerbations per year = total number of moderate or severe exacerbations / total number of treatment years|26, 52, 64, 76 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set(mFAS) included all patients in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) except patients from a site, which had major issues with GCP compliance. FAS include all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data was available for analysis.||exacerbations per year|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
817332|NCT01120691|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Study Withdrawal or Premature Discontinuation for Any Reason Between QVA149 (110/50 µg q.d.), NVA237 (50 µg q.d.) and Open Label Tiotropium (18 µg q.d.)During the Treatment Period|Percentage of Patients With Study Withdrawal or Premature Discontinuation for Any Reason was analyzed for each treatment group using a Kaplan-Meier estimation for the modified safety set. Patients who did not discontinue early were censored at the final visit of the treatment phase.|64 weeks|Modified safety set (mSAF set) includes all patients in the safety set except patients from a site who had major GCP issues. The Safety set includes all patients who received at least one dose of study drug whether or not being randomized||percentage of participants|||Number
817333|NCT01120691|Secondary|Time to Study Withdrawal or Premature Discontinuation for Any Reason Between QVA149 (110/50 µg q.d.), NVA237 (50 µg q.d.) and Open Label Tiotropium (18 µg q.d.) During the Treatment Period.|Time to Study Withdrawal or Premature Discontinuation for Any Reason was analyzed for each treatment group using a Kaplan-Meier estimation for the modified safety set. Patients who did not discontinue early were censored at the final visit of the treatment phase.|64 weeks|Modified safety set (mSAF set) includes all patients in the safety set except patients from a site who had major GCP issues. The Safety set includes all patients who received at least one dose of study drug whether or not being randomized. Analysis population included patients with study withdrawal or premature discontinuation for any reason.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817334|NCT01120691|Secondary|Number of Days With Moderate or Severe Exacerbation That Required Treatment With Systemic Corticosteroids and Antibiotics|The number of exacerbation days is defined as the sum of the duration of days recorded as an exacerbation for all exacerbations recorded per patient.|64 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set (mFAS) included all patients in the Full analysis set except patients from a site with GCP non-compliance. This is a sub-group analysis with mutually exclusive population in each category for analysis.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
817335|NCT01120691|Secondary|Rate of Moderate or Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbations Requiring the Use of Both Systemic Glucocorticosteroids and Antibiotics|Rate of moderate or severe exacerbations per year = total number of moderate or severe exacerbations / total number of treatment years|64 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set (mFAS) included all patients in the Full analysis set except patients from a site, which had major issues with GCP compliance. The Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and data was available for analysis.||exacerbations per year|Participants||Number
817336|NCT01120691|Secondary|Time to First Moderate to Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbation Between QVA149, NVA237 and Open Label Tiotropium During the Treatment Period|"A Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) exacerbation was defined as a worsening of two or more of the following major symptoms for at least 2 consecutive days: dyspnea, sputum volume or sputum purulence OR a worsening of any 1 major symptom together with an increase in any 1 of the following minor symptoms for at least 2 consecutive days: sore throat, colds (nasal discharge and/or nasal congestion), fever without other cause, cough or wheezing. A COPD exacerbation was considered of moderate severity if treatment with systemic glucocorticosteroids or antibiotics or both was required and severe if hospitalization was required. An emergency room (ER) visit of longer than 24 hours was considered a hospitalization.
Rate of moderate or severe exacerbations per year = total number of moderate or severe exacerbations / total number of treatment years"|64 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set (mFAS) included all patients in the Full analysis set except patients from a site, which had major issues with GCP compliance. Only patients with a moderate or severe COPD exacerbation were included in this analysis.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817348|NCT01120808|Primary|Count of Participants With Blisters||1 week|Participants with available data were analyzed||Participants|||Count of Participants
817349|NCT01120834|Primary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|2 cycles|||Participants|||Count of Participants
817371|NCT01121146|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction|"Patient satisfaction was quantified by asking participants to respond yes or no to the question, Are you satisfied with the results of your hip operation?"|Minimum 9-year follow-up|Satisfaction rates were evaluated among 84 participants with unrevised hips who had Marathon and 70 participants with unrevised hips who had Enduron polyethylene. These participants had minimum 9-year follow-up and responded to the question about satisfaction.||percentage of participants|||Number
817337|NCT01120691|Secondary|Rate of Moderate to Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbations in QVA149 and Open-label Tiotropium Treatment Arms During the Treatment Period.|"A Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) exacerbation was defined as a worsening of two or more of the following major symptoms for at least 2 consecutive days: dyspnea, sputum volume or sputum purulence OR a worsening of any 1 major symptom together with an increase in any 1 of the following minor symptoms for at least 2 consecutive days: sore throat, colds (nasal discharge and/or nasal congestion), fever without other cause, cough or wheezing. A COPD exacerbation was considered of moderate severity if treatment with systemic glucocorticosteroids or antibiotics or both was required and severe if hospitalization was required. An emergency room (ER) visit of longer than 24 hours was considered a hospitalization.
Rate of moderate or severe exacerbations per year = total number of moderate or severe exacerbations / total number of treatment years"|76 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set (mFAS) included all patients in the Full analysis set except patients from a site, which had major issues with GCP compliance.||Exacerbations per year|Participants||Number
817338|NCT01120691|Primary|Rate of Moderate to Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbations in QVA149 and NVA237 Treatment Arms During the Treatment Period.|"A Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) exacerbation was defined as a worsening of two or more of the following major symptoms for at least 2 consecutive days: dyspnea, sputum volume or sputum purulence OR a worsening of any 1 major symptom together with an increase in any 1 of the following minor symptoms for at least 2 consecutive days: sore throat, colds (nasal discharge and/or nasal congestion), fever without other cause, cough or wheezing. A COPD exacerbation was considered of moderate severity if treatment with systemic glucocorticosteroids or antibiotics or both was required and severe if hospitalization was required. An emergency room (ER) visit of longer than 24 hours was considered a hospitalization.
Rate of moderate or severe exacerbations per year = total number of moderate or severe exacerbations / total number of treatment years"|64 weeks|Modified Full Analysis Set (mFAS) included all patients in the Full analysis set except patients from a site , which had major issues with Good Clinical Practice (GCP) compliance.||Exacerbations per year|Participants||Number
817339|NCT01120704|Primary|Self-Reported 7-Day Point-Prevalence Abstinence|"Self-Reported 7-Day Point-Prevalence Abstinence is a dichotomous outcome with values of 0 and 1 where 0=smoking on one or more of the past 7 days at the assessment endpoint (52 weeks post-quit) and 1=no smoking on any of the past 7 days at the assessment endpoint (i.e., abstinent for the past 7 days); this outcome will be analyzed in a logistic regression analysis model.
Note: This abstinence primary outcome replaces latency to relapse (now designated as a secondary outcome) because reviewers of the now-accepted manuscript (at the journal Addiction) advised us to change the primary outcome to the current week 52 Self-Reported 7-Day Point-Prevalence Abstinence."|Assessed at 52 weeks after target quit day|||participants|||Number
817340|NCT01120704|Secondary|Latency to Relapse|Latency to Relapse during the first 12 months post-quit, with relapse defined as 7 consecutive days of smoking; this outcome will be analyzed in a Cox regression survival analysis model with non-relapsers coded as right-censored|Assessed during the first 12 months post-quit after target quit day|||participants|||Number
817341|NCT01120717|Secondary|Number of Patients With Notable Change From Baseline in Fridericia's QTc Values at Any Timepoint Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable change from baseline was and increase from baseline of 30 or greater milliseconds (ms).|52 weeks|Safety population - all patients who received at least one dose of study drug whether or not they were randomized. Only patients with the required data were included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
817342|NCT01120717|Secondary|Number of Patients With Newly Occurring or Worsening Clinically Notable Vital Signs Values at Any Timepoint Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable vital sign values were: pulse rate - low, <40 bpm or <=50 bpm and decrease from baseline >=15bpm; pulse rate high, >130 bpm or >=120bpm and increase from baseline >=15 bpm. Systolic blood pressure - low, <75 mmHg or <=90 mmHg and decrease from baseline >=20 mmHg; high, >200 mmHg or >=180 mmHg and increase from baseline >=20 mmHg. Diastolic blood pressure - low, <40 mmHg or <=50 mmHg and decrease from baseline >=15 mmHg; high, >115 mmHg or >=105 mmHg and increase from baseline >=15 mmHg.|52 weeks|Safety population - all patients who received at least one dose of study drug whether or not they were randomized. Only patients with the required data were included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
817343|NCT01120717|Secondary|Number of Patients With Newly Occurring or Worsening Clinically Notable Biochemistry Values at Any Timepoint Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable biochemistry values were: sodium <125mmol/L or >160mmol/L; potassium <3.0mmol/L or >6.0mmol/L; BUN >9.99mmol/L; creatinine >176.8µmol/L; total protein (serum) <40g/L or >95g/L; albumin <25g/L; bilirubin (total) >34.2µmol/L; SGPT >3 x ULN; SGOT > 3 x ULN; gamma glutamyltransferase >3 x ULN; alkaline phosphatase (serum) >3 x ULN; glucose <2.78mmol/L or >9.99mmol/L|52 weeks|Safety population - all patients who received at least one dose of study drug whether or not they were randomized. Only patients with the required data were included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
817344|NCT01120717|Secondary|Number of Patients With Newly Occurring or Worsening Clinically Notable Hematology Values at Any Timepoint Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable hematology values were: hemoglobin - male <115g/L, female <95 g/L; hematocrit - male <0.37v/v, female <0.32v/v; white cell count - <2.8 10E9/L or >16.0 10E9/L; platelets - <75 10E9/L or >700 10E9/L|52 weeks|Safety population - all patients who received at least one dose of study drug whether or not they were randomized. Only patients with the required data were included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
817345|NCT01120717|Secondary|Pre-dose FEV1|Pre-dose FEV1 is defined as the average of the FEV1 15 minutes pre-dose and FEV1 45 minutes pre-dose. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect, average of 15 min and 45 min pre-dose FEV1 at visit 3 as the baseline measurement, and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 min post inhalation of two short acting bronchodialators as covariates. The model also included smoking status at baseline, history of ICS use and country as fixed effects with center nested within country as a random effect.|52 weeks|Full analysis set - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Only patients with the required data were included in this analysis.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817368|NCT01120990|Primary|Diastolic Blood Pressure Measured by Tested Device.|Mean Diastolic Blood pressure value of all BP measurements made by the tested device in all patients included in the analysis.|3 months|According to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol 2010, recruitment is continued until 33 subjects that meet the entry criteria complete all the measurements.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817350|NCT01120899|Secondary|Number of Fellow Eyes Demonstrating a Decrease in the Area of Late Leakage, as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography (FA), at 24 Months Compared to Baseline|"Fluorescein angiography (FA) images from both eyes in each participant were obtained via a standard digital imaging system (OIS, Sacramento, CA) at baseline and at Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24. Three retinal specialists independently graded the area of late fluorescein leakage (at approximately 10 minutes)in each eye using a region-of-interest tool in an image analysis software package (NIH ImageJ, Bethesda, MD).
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|24 Months|||Eyes|Participants||Number
817351|NCT01120899|Secondary|Number of Fellow Eyes Demonstrating a Decrease in the Area of Late Leakage, as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography (FA), at 18 Months Compared to Baseline|"Fluorescein angiography (FA) images from both eyes in each participant were obtained via a standard digital imaging system (OIS, Sacramento, CA) at baseline and at Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24. Three retinal specialists independently graded the area of late fluorescein leakage (at approximately 10 minutes)in each eye using a region-of-interest tool in an image analysis software package (NIH ImageJ, Bethesda, MD).
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|18 Months|||Eyes|Participants||Number
817352|NCT01120899|Secondary|Number of Fellow Eyes Demonstrating a Decrease in the Area of Late Leakage, as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography (FA), at 12 Months Compared to Baseline|"Fluorescein angiography (FA) images from both eyes in each participant were obtained via a standard digital imaging system (OIS, Sacramento, CA) at baseline and at Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24. Three retinal specialists independently graded the area of late fluorescein leakage (at approximately 10 minutes)in each eye using a region-of-interest tool in an image analysis software package (NIH ImageJ, Bethesda, MD).
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|12 Months|||Eyes|Participants||Number
817353|NCT01120899|Secondary|Number of Fellow Eyes Demonstrating a Decrease in the Area of Late Leakage, as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography (FA), at 6 Months Compared to Baseline|"Fluorescein angiography (FA) images from both eyes in each participant were obtained via a standard digital imaging system (OIS, Sacramento, CA) at baseline and at Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24. Three retinal specialists independently graded the area of late fluorescein leakage (at approximately 10 minutes)in each eye using a region-of-interest tool in an image analysis software package (NIH ImageJ, Bethesda, MD).
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|6 Months|||Eyes|Participants||Number
817354|NCT01120899|Secondary|Number of Study Eyes Demonstrating a Decrease in the Area of Late Leakage, as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography (FA), at 24 Months Compared to Baseline|"Fluorescein angiography (FA) images from both eyes in each participant were obtained via a standard digital imaging system (OIS, Sacramento, CA) at baseline and at Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24. Three retinal specialists independently graded the area of late fluorescein leakage (at approximately 10 minutes)in each eye using a region-of-interest tool in an image analysis software package (NIH ImageJ, Bethesda, MD).
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|24 Months|||Eyes|Participants||Number
817355|NCT01120899|Secondary|Number of Study Eyes Demonstrating a Decrease in the Area of Late Leakage, as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography (FA), at 18 Months Compared to Baseline|"Fluorescein angiography (FA) images from both eyes in each participant were obtained via a standard digital imaging system (OIS, Sacramento, CA) at baseline and at Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24. Three retinal specialists independently graded the area of late fluorescein leakage (at approximately 10 minutes)in each eye using a region-of-interest tool in an image analysis software package (NIH ImageJ, Bethesda, MD).
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|18 Months|||Eyes|Participants||Number
817356|NCT01120899|Primary|Number of Study Eyes Demonstrating an Increase or Decrease in Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) of 15 or More Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Letters at 6 Months Compared to Baseline|"Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|6 months|||Eyes|Participants||Number
817369|NCT01120990|Primary|Systolic Blood Pressure Measured With Mercury Sphygmomanometer.|Mean Systolic Blood pressure value of all BP measurements made by the two observers with mercury sphygmomanometers in all patients included in the analysis.|3 months|According to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol 2010, recruitment is continued until 33 subjects that meet the entry criteria complete all the measurements.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817357|NCT01120899|Secondary|Number of Study Eyes Demonstrating a Decrease in the Area of Late Leakage, as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography (FA), at 12 Months Compared to Baseline|"Fluorescein angiography (FA) images from both eyes in each participant were obtained via a standard digital imaging system (OIS, Sacramento, CA) at baseline and at Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24. Three retinal specialists independently graded the area of late fluorescein leakage (at approximately 10 minutes)in each eye using a region-of-interest tool in an image analysis software package (NIH ImageJ, Bethesda, MD).
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|12 Months|||Eyes|Participants||Number
817358|NCT01120899|Secondary|Number of Study Eyes Demonstrating a Decrease in the Area of Late Leakage, as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography (FA), at 6 Months Compared to Baseline|"Fluorescein angiography (FA) images from both eyes in each participant were obtained via a standard digital imaging system (OIS, Sacramento, CA) at baseline and at Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24. Three retinal specialists independently graded the area of late fluorescein leakage (at approximately 10 minutes)in each eye using a region-of-interest tool in an image analysis software package (NIH ImageJ, Bethesda, MD).
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|6 Months|||Eyes|Participants||Number
817359|NCT01120899|Secondary|Percentage Change in Retinal Thickness in the Study Eye at 24 Months Compared to Baseline|Retinal thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.|Baseline and 24 Months|||percentage change in retinal thickness|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
817360|NCT01120899|Secondary|Percentage Change in Retinal Thickness in the Study Eye at 18 Months Compared to Baseline|Retinal thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.|Baseline and 18 Months|||percentage change in retinal thickness|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
817361|NCT01120899|Secondary|Percentage Change in Retinal Thickness in the Study Eye at 12 Months Compared to Baseline|Retinal thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.|Baseline and 12 Months|||percentage change in retinal thickness|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
817362|NCT01120899|Secondary|Percentage Change in Retinal Thickness in the Study Eye at 6 Months Compared to Baseline|"Retinal thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|Baseline and 6 Months|||percentage change|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
817363|NCT01120899|Secondary|Change in BCVA in the Study Eye at 24 Months Compared to Baseline|Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.|Baseline and 24 Months|||ETDRS letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
817364|NCT01120899|Secondary|Change in BCVA in the Study Eye at 18 Months Compared to Baseline|Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.|Baseline and 18 Months|||ETDRS letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
817365|NCT01120899|Secondary|Change in BCVA in the Study Eye at 12 Months Compared to Baseline|"Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|Baseline and 12 Months|||ETDRS Letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
817366|NCT01120899|Secondary|Change in BCVA in the Study Eye at 6 Months Compared to Baseline|"Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria. The eye not chosen as the study eye is referred to as the fellow eye."|Baseline and 6 Months|||ETDRS Letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
817367|NCT01120990|Primary|Diastolic Blood Pressure Measured With Mercury Sphygmomanometer.|Mean Diastolic Blood pressure value of all BP measurements made by the two observers with mercury sphygmomanometers in all patients included in the analysis.|3 months|According to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol 2010, recruitment is continued until 33 subjects that meet the entry criteria complete all the measurements.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817372|NCT01121146|Secondary|Harris Hip Score|The Harris Hip Score measures outcome after hip replacement and is based on a scale from 0 (worst) to 100 (best).|Minimum 9-year follow-up|Harris Hip Scores were evaluated for 74 unrevised hips with Marathon and 65 unrevised hips with Enduron polyethylene that had minimum 9-year follow-up and complete data to compute a score.||score on a 100 point scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817373|NCT01121146|Secondary|Rate of Reoperation|The rate of reoperation was based on the number of reoperations in each group. Any additional surgery after a participant’s initial hip replacement was considered a reoperation.|10-year follow-up|All 116 hips randomized to Marathon polyethylene and all 114 hips randomized to Enduron polyethylene were included in the analysis population to determine the rate of reoperation.||THAs|||Number
817374|NCT01121146|Secondary|Polyethylene Wear|A single reviewer, who was blinded to the type of polyethylene liner, evaluated femoral head penetration among all unrevised hips with minimum 9-year radiographic follow-up using serial anteroposterior pelvic radiographs. Two-dimensional head penetration was determined for each follow-up radiograph relative to the immediate post-operative (nominal 6-week follow-up) reference view using Hip Suite Analysis version 8.0 with elliptical correction, a validated, computer-assisted technique. A linear wear rate was evaluated for each hip that had a minimum of three follow-up radiographs by using a least-squares linear regression to calculate the slope of the best-fit line for the wear vector magnitude versus time in situ data. The slope from this regression represented the steady-state linear wear rate. The steady-state linear wear rate data from all hips in a group was used to compute a mean polyethylene wear value.|Minimum 9-year radiographic follow-up|At least 3 head penetration measurements evaluated with Martell’s Hip Suite Analysis software were available for 76 unrevised hips with Marathon and 66 unrevised hips with Enduron polyethylene.||millimeters per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
817375|NCT01121146|Primary|Incidence of Clinically Significant Osteolysis|The incidence of clinically significant osteolysis was based on the number of unrevised THAs (total hip arthroplasties) with at least 1.5 square centimeters of pelvic and/or femoral osteolysis. Osteolysis was defined as an area of localized loss of trabecular bone or cortical erosion that was not apparent on the pre-operative or immediate postoperative radiograph. To obtain lesion sizes, the defects were outlined on the anteroposterior pelvic radiograph and the area of the lesion was measured using Martell's Hip Analysis Suite software. Lesions were considered clinically important if the total area of osteolysis around a hip replacement was at least 1.5 square centimeters.|Minimum 9-year radiographic follow-up|Minimum 9-year radiographs used to assess osteolysis were available for 79 unrevised hips with Marathon and 68 unrevised hips with Enduron polyethylene.||unrevised THAs|||Number
817376|NCT01121172|Secondary|Frequency of G212A Polymorphism of Apelin Receptor in Obese Children and Adolescents|Number of participants with Apelin Receptor Gene G212A polymorphism by genotype group|First day after enrollment|Data were collected only from the Obese participants. Data regarding the genetic polymorphism were not collected from participants forming the Lean Arm/Group.||participants|||Number
817377|NCT01121172|Primary|Serum Apelin Levels|Apelin levels were measured in serum of participants, in fasting state|First day after enrollment and after 8-hours of night fasting, at approximately 8:00 pm in the morning|||ng/ml||Full Range|Median
817378|NCT01121185|Post-Hoc|Time To Viral Rebound Post-Transplantation(Serum HCV RNA Increased ≥ 1 log10 From Viral Nadir)|The time of viral rebound was defined as the time of the first measurement of serum HCV RNA increased ≥ 1 log10 from the viral nadir (the lowest serum HCV RNA level post-transplantation). Serum HCV RNA was measured by RT-PCR.|Through Day 56|The eleven subjects who were randomized, initiated study infusions, and underwent liver transplantation were included in the analysis population.||days||Full Range|Mean
817379|NCT01121185|Secondary|Time to Onset of Recurrence of Detectable HCV RNA Post-Transplantation|Serum HCV RNA was measured by Quantitative RT-PCR|Through Day 56|The eleven subjects who were randomized, initiated study infusions, and underwent liver transplantation were included in the analysis population.||days|||Number
817380|NCT01121185|Secondary|Graft Function Assessed by Measurement of Biochemical and Synthetic Function at Multiple Time Points / Total Bilirubin|Biochemical function was assessed by measurement of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and total bilirubin and synthetic function was assessment by measurement of the pro-thrombin time (reported as the international normalized ratio, INR) at multiple time-points during the 56-day study period. The table below displays the total bilirubin at each time-point.|Through Day 56|The eleven subjects who were randomized, initiated study infusions, and underwent liver transplantation were included in the analysis population.||mg/dL||Full Range|Mean
817381|NCT01121185|Secondary|Graft Function Assessed by Measurement of Biochemical and Synthetic Function at Multiple Time Points / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT)|Biochemical function was assessed by measurement of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and total bilirubin and synthetic function was assessment by measurement of the pro-thrombin time (reported as the international normalized ratio, INR) at multiple time-points during the 56-day study period. The table below displays the ALT at each time-point.|Through Day 56|The eleven subjects who were randomized, initiated study infusions, and underwent liver transplantation were included in the analysis population.||U/L||Full Range|Mean
817382|NCT01121185|Secondary|Graft Function Assessed by Measurement of Biochemical and Synthetic Function at Multiple Time Points / International Normalized Ratio (INR)|Biochemical function was assessed by measurement of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and total bilirubin and synthetic function was assessment by measurement of the pro-thrombin time (reported as the international normalized ratio, INR) at multiple time-points during the 56-day study period. The table below displays the INR at each time-point. The INR is the ratio of a patient's prothrombin time to a control sample, raised to the power of the ISI value (International Sensitivity Index) for the batch of tissue factor being used for the assay.|Through Day 56|The eleven subjects who were randomized, initiated study infusions, and underwent liver transplantation were included in the analysis population.||unitless||Full Range|Mean
817395|NCT01121393|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Afatinib at Day 22|Outcome data are the trough plasma concentrations of afatinib at day 22 after multiple daily dosing of 40mg afatinib and after dose escalation to 50mg or dose reduction to 30mg afatinib (no patient dose reduced to 20mg during the PK assessment period).|Day 22 (course 2, visit 1)|All patients who had at least 1 afatinib dose and who had at least 1 valid afatinib plasma concentration available.||nanogram/millilitre (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827177|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received 200 mg Loading Dose||Day 1|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817383|NCT01121185|Secondary|Histologic Evidence of Hepatitis by Histologic Activity Index (HAI) Score at Baseline and Day 42|Liver biopsies obtained at baseline (day 0) and day 42 post-transplantation were assessed for histologic evidence of hepatitis by a pathologist blinded to treatment assignment using the Ishak modification of the Knodell histologic grading system to assign a histologic activity index (HAI) score. The HAI score consists of a sum of four components: 1) periportal or periseptal interface hepatitis; 2) confluent necrosis; 3) focal lytic necrosis, apoptosis and focal inflammation; 4) portal inflammation. The total HAI score can range from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 18, with higher scores indicating more severe hepatic inflammation.|Baseline Day 0 and Day 42|The 11 subjects who were randomized, initiated study infusions, and underwent transplantation were included in the analysis population. On day 0, all subjects had pre-transplant biopsy specimens available for analysis. On day 42, 4 subjects in the MBL-HCV1 group and 5 subjects in the placebo group had biopsy specimens available for analysis.||Histologic activity index (HAI) score||Full Range|Median
817384|NCT01121185|Secondary|Change in Serum HCV RNA Between Baseline and Day 3, 14, 28 and 42 Post-Transplantation|Serum HCV RNA was measured by quantitative RT-PCR. The change in HCV RNA from baseline was obtained by calculating the difference between the baseline pre-transplantation HCV RNA level and the HCV RNA level measured at each study visit.|Baseline and Day 3, 14, 28 and 42 Post-Transplantation|The eleven subjects who were randomized, initiated study infusions, and underwent liver transplantation were included in the analysis population.||log10 IU/mL||Full Range|Median
817385|NCT01121185|Secondary|The Incidence of Adverse Events and Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Determined Through Medical History, Physical Examination and Laboratory Evaluation|Adverse events were assessed by targeted medical history, physical examinations and laboratory testing. Subjects were asked at scheduled study visits through day 42 whether they experienced solicited adverse reactions (fever, chills, nausea, rash, joint pain or swelling, shortness of breath, headache, fatigue, and hives). In addition to these solicited adverse events, subjects were asked at all scheduled study visits through day 56 to report any other adverse events, regardless of whether the event was thought to be related to the study infusions. Adverse events were summarized by System Organ Class (SOC) using MedDRA (version 12.0)|Through Day 56|The eleven subjects who were randomized, initiated study infusions, and underwent liver transplantation were included in the analysis population.||events|||Number
817386|NCT01121185|Primary|Proportion of Subjects With Detectable Serum HCV RNA at Day 42 Post-Transplantation|Serum HCV RNA was measured by Quantitative RT-PCR|At Day 42 post-transplantation|The eleven subjects who were randomized, initiated study infusions, and underwent liver transplantation were included in the analysis population.||percentage of participants|||Number
817387|NCT01121211|Primary|Change From Baseline in Depression Symptom Severity|Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) (Higher score = greater depression symptom severity; Score Range 0 - ≥ 23)|Baseline, 24 weeks|All subjects who received at least one dose of study medication||HAM-D score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817388|NCT01121211|Primary|Change From Baseline in Weight|Weight in kilograms|Baseline, 24 Weeks|All subjects who received at least one dose of study medication||kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
817389|NCT01121263|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)|"For the purposes of this study MACCE is defined as a non-weighted composite score comprised of the following components:
Death
Stroke
Myocardial infarction
Repeat revascularization"|Occurence of MACCE through the end of study up to two years|||participants|||Number
817390|NCT01121263|Primary|Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)|"For the purposes of this study MACCE is defined as a non-weighted composite score comprised of the following components:
Death
Stroke
Myocardial Infarction
Repeat Revascularization"|Month 12|||participants|||Number
817391|NCT01121393|Secondary|Changes in Safety Laboratory Parameters|"Outcome data presented are the percentage of patients by worst CTCAE grade (only Grades 2 to 4 presented) on treatment for the following laboratory parameters: Potassium, Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST), Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT), Creatine and Creatine Kinase.
For Potassium; only CTCAE grades resulting from hypokalemia (low values) are presented.
Only data collected up to the analysis cut-off date (27 December 2013) were considered."|From first administration of study medication up to 28 days after the last administration of study medication up to 42.2 months|Treated set (TS) included all randomised patients who were documented to have taken at least 1 dose of study medication. Patients were allocated according to the treatment actually received. Patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment assessment of the parameter of interest (Number of patients (N) are specified in the category title).||percentage of participants|||Number
817392|NCT01121393|Secondary|Safety of Afatinib as Indicated by Intensity and Incidence of Adverse Events|"Safety of Afatinib as indicated by intensity and incidence of adverse events graded according to the US National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 3.0. Presented as the percentage of patients with an Adverse Events during the on-treatment period by highest CTCAE grade.
Only data collected up to the analysis cut-off date (27 December 2013) were considered."|From first administration of study medication up to 28 days after the last administration of study medication up to 42.2 months|The treated set (TS) included all randomised patients who were documented to have taken at least 1 dose of study medication (i.e. afatinib or gemcitabine / cisplatin). Patients were allocated according to the treatment actually received.||percentage of participants|||Number
817393|NCT01121393|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Afatinib at Day 43|Outcome data are the trough plasma concentrations of afatinib at day 43 after multiple daily dosing of 40mg afatinib and after dose escalation to 50mg or dose reduction to 30mg afatinib (no patient dose reduced to 20mg during the PK assessment period).|Day 43 (course 3, visit 1)|All patients who had at least 1 afatinib dose and who had at least 1 valid afatinib plasma concentration available.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817394|NCT01121393|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Afatinib at Day 29|Outcome data are the trough plasma concentrations of afatinib at day 29 after multiple daily dosing of 40mg afatinib and after dose escalation to 50mg or dose reduction to 30mg afatinib (no patient dose reduced to 20mg during the PK assessment period).|Day 29 (course 2, visit 2)|All patients who had at least 1 afatinib dose and who had at least 1 valid afatinib plasma concentration available.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
818143|NCT01125202|Primary|Time Specific Interdialytic Weight Gain (Baseline)|Average interdialytic weight gains (kg/day) were calculated for the 1 week period prior to baseline measurement.|Baseline|Some participants have missing interdialytic weight gains due to missed hemodialysis treatments.||kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
817396|NCT01121393|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Time of Deterioration in Pain|"HRQOL as measured by OLQ-C30 and its lung cancer module QLQ-LC13. Analysis for pain: composite of QLQ-C30, questions 9 and 19; individual items from QLQ-LC13, questions 10, 11 and 12.
Time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score increase (i.e. worsened) of at least 10 points from baseline (0 to 100 point scale). Patients without deterioration (including those with disease progression) were censored at the date of the last available HRQOL assessment; patients without post-baseline assessments were censored at the date of randomisation. Patients were considered as having deteriorated at the time of death. Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 Dec 2013) were considered.
The median is Kaplan-Meier estimates."|Baseline and throughout the study (every 3 weeks) until progression or death (whichever occurs first) up to 42 months.|The randomised set.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817397|NCT01121393|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Time of Deterioration in Dyspnoea|"HRQOL as measured by OLQ-C30 and its lung cancer module (QLQ-LC13). Analysis for dyspnoea: composite of QLQ-LC13, questions 3 to 5; individual item from QLQ-C30, question 8.
Time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score increase (i.e. worsened) of at least 10 points from baseline (0 to 100 point scale). Patients without deterioration (including those with disease progression) were censored at the date of the last available HRQOL assessment; patients without post-baseline assessments were censored at the date of randomisation. Patients were considered as having deteriorated at the time of death. Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 Dec 2013) were considered. The median is Kaplan-Meier estimates."|Baseline and throughout the study (every 3 weeks) until progression or death (whichever occurs first) up to 42 months.|The randomised set.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817398|NCT01121393|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Time of Deterioration in Coughing|"HRQOL as measured by standardised questionnaires (EuropeanOrganisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)) quality of life questionaires (OLQ-C30) and its lung cancer module (QLQ-LC13). Analysis for cough: QLQ-LC13, question 1.
Time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score increase (i.e. worsened) of at least 10 points from baseline (0 to 100 point scale). Patients without deterioration (including those with disease progression) were censored at the date of the last available HRQOL assessment; patients without post-baseline assessments were censored at the date of randomisation. Patients were considered as having deteriorated at the time of death. Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 Dec 2013) were considered.
The median is Kaplan-Meier estimates."|Baseline and throughout the study (every 3 weeks) until progression or death (whichever occurs first) up to 42 months.|The randomised set.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817399|NCT01121393|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status (PS)|"The last ECOG performance score category recorded during the study. Outcome data are the percentage of patients with an shift of ECOG performance status from baseline to the last ECOG performance status.
Only data collected up to the analysis cut-off date (27 December 2013) were considered.
ECOG PS measured on 6 point scale to assess participant's performance status. 0=Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease activities without restriction;
Restricted in physically strenuous activity, but ambulatory and able to carry out light or sedentary work;
Ambulatory (>50 percent of waking hours), capable of all selfcare, unable to carry out any work activities;
Capable of only limited self care, confined to bed or chair more then 50 percent of waking hours;
Completely disabled, cannot carry on any selfcare, totally confined to bed or chair;
Dead"|Baseline and throughout the study (every 3 weeks) until progression or death (whichever occurs first) up to 42 months.|The randomised set. Data only presented for patients with a baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of ECOG status.||percentage of participants|||Number
817400|NCT01121393|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight|The change from baseline to the lowest and the last body weight recorded or during the the study. Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 December 2013) were considered.|Baseline and throughout the study (every 3 weeks) until progression or death (whichever occurs first) up to 42 months.|The randomised set. Data only presented for a patient with a baseline and at least on post-baseline assessment of weight.||kilogram (kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
817401|NCT01121393|Secondary|Tumour Shrinkage|"Tumour shrinkage is calculated as the minimum post-baseline sum of longest diameters of target lesions (longest for non-nodal lesions, short axis for nodal lesions) (SLD), as assessed by central independent review. The mean of these minimum values are presented after adjusting for baseline sum of longest diameters and EGFR mutation category. Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 Dec 2013) were considered. A negative value means the smallest post-baseline SLD was smaller than baseline (decreased since baseline); a positive value means tumor size increased since baseline.
The means are adjusted for baseline sum of lesions and EGFR mutation category."|Tumour assessment were performed at screening, week 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48 and then every 12 weeks until progression or death whichever occurs first up to week 168|The randomised set. There were ony 220 patients in the Afatinib arm and 101 patients in the Gemcitabine / Cisplatin arm with baseline and post-baseline target lesion measurements.||millimetre (mm)||Standard Error|Mean
817402|NCT01121393|Secondary|Duration of Disease Control|"For patients with disease control, duration of disease control was defined as the time from randomisation to progression or death whichever occurs first. Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 Dec 2013) were considered.
A pre-defined set of censoring rules were used for patients who did not progress/die. The Median values are Kaplan-Meier estimates."|Tumour assessment were performed at screening, week 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48 and then every 12 weeks until progression or death whichever occurs first up to week 168|The randomised set with disease control.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817403|NCT01121393|Secondary|Duration of Objective Response|"OR is defined as a best of overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) assessed by central independent review according to RECIST version 1.1.
For patients with an objective response, duration of objective response was defined as the time from the first objective response to disease progression or death whichever occurs earlier. Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 Dec 2013) were considered.
A pre-defined set of censoring rules were used for patients who did not progress/die. The Median values are Kaplan-Meier estimates."|Tumour assessment were performed at screening, week 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48 and then every 12 weeks until progression or death whichever occurs first up to week 168|The Randomised set with an objective response.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834866|NCT01280604|Secondary|High-density Lipoprotein,(HDL)|HDL levels will be assessed in study participants 6-10 weeks after entry into study.|6-10 weeks|||milligram/deciliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817404|NCT01121393|Secondary|Time to Objective Response (OR)|"OR is defined as a best of overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) assessed by central independent review according to RECIST version 1.1.
For patients with an objective response, time to objective response was defined as the time from randomisation to the first objective response.
Outcome data are the percentage of patients with OR by each scheduled tumour assessment.
Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 December 2013) were considered."|Tumour assessment were performed at screening, week 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48 and then every 12 weeks until progression or death whichever occurs first up to week 168|The RS included all patients randomised to receive treatment, whether treated or not.||percentage of participants|||Number
817405|NCT01121393|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|"OS is defined as the time from randomisation to death. For patients who had not died by the cut-off date (27 Dec 2013), the date they were last known to be alive was derived from patient status records, the trial completion record, radiological imaging assessments, the study treatment termination record, and the randomisation date.
Median time results from unstratified Kaplan-Meier estimates."|From randomisation up to 27 Dec. 2013 cut off date for this analysis|The randomised set.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817406|NCT01121393|Secondary|Disease Control (DC)|"DC is defined as a patient with objective response (OR) or stable disease (SD) assessed by central independent review according to RECIST version 1.1 and will be presented as the percentage of patients with DC.
Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 December 2013) were considered."|Tumour assessment were performed at screening, week 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48 and then every 12 weeks until progression or death whichever occurs first up to week 168|The randomised set.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817407|NCT01121393|Secondary|Objective Response (OR)|"OR is defined as a best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) assessed by central independent review according to RECIST version 1.1 and will be presented as the percentage of patients with OR.
CR is defined as the disappearance of all target lesions and non-target lesions and no new lesions.
PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD, non-Progressive Disease or non evaluation of all non-target lesions and no new lesions.
Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 December 2013) were considered.
(Exact 95% Confidence interval by Clopper and Pearson.)"|Tumour assessment were performed at screening, week 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48 and then every 12 weeks until progression or death whichever occurs first up to week 168|The randomised set.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817408|NCT01121393|Primary|Progression-free Survival|"The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by central independent review according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1. Progression-free survival was defined as the time from randomisation to disease progression or death whichever occurs earlier. A pre-defined set of censoring rules were used for patients who did not have a PFS.
Only data collected up until the analysis cut-off date (27 December 2013) were considered. Median time results from unstratified Kaplan-Meier estimates."|Tumour assessment were performed at screening, week 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48 and then every 12 weeks until progression or death whichever occurs first up to week 168|The randomised set (RS) included all patients randomised to receive treatment, whether treated or not.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817409|NCT01121406|Secondary|Biomarkers and Pharmacogenetics Analysis (Optional)|This endpoint has not been statistically analysed in the study report|6 months||||||
817410|NCT01121406|Secondary|Vss;Apparent Volume of Distribution at Steady State Following Intravenous Administration for BI 6727 BS|Vss;apparent volume of distribution at steady state following intravenous administration for BI 6727 BS|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||Litres||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817411|NCT01121406|Secondary|CL; Total Clearance of BI 6727 BS in Plasma After Intravenous Administration|CL; total clearance of BI 6727 BS in plasma after intravenous administration|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817412|NCT01121406|Secondary|MRT; Mean Residence Time of BI 6727 BS in the Body|MRT; Mean residence time of BI 6727 BS in the body|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817413|NCT01121406|Secondary|t1/2; Terminal Half-life of CD 10899 BS in Plasma|t1/2; Terminal half-life of CD 10899 BS in plasma|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817414|NCT01121406|Secondary|t1/2; Terminal Half-life of BI 6727 BS in Plasma|t1/2; Terminal half-life of BI 6727 BS in plasma|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817415|NCT01121406|Secondary|Tmax; Time From Dosing to Maximum Measured Concentration of CD 10899 BS in Plasma|tmax; time from dosing to maximum measured concentration of CD 10899 BS (metabolite of Volasertib BI 6727) in plasma|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||hours||Full Range|Median
818238|NCT01118117|Secondary|Major Adverse Events (MAEs) Through 12 Months Post-procedure|The incidence of MAEs occurring within 12 months of the procedure. MAE is defined as target lesion revascularization (TLR), amputation of the treated limb, or death.|12 Months post-procedure|||percentage of subjects with event|||Number
817416|NCT01121406|Secondary|Tmax; Time From Dosing to Maximum Measured Concentration of BI 6727 BS in Plasma|tmax; time from dosing to maximum measured concentration of BI 6727 BS in plasma|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||hours||Full Range|Median
817417|NCT01121406|Secondary|Cmax; Maximum Measured Concentration of CD 10899 BS in Plasma|Cmax; maximum measured concentration of CD 10899 BS (metabolite of Volasertib BI 6727) in plasma|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817418|NCT01121406|Secondary|Cmax; Maximum Measured Concentration of BI 6727 BS in Plasma|Cmax; maximum measured concentration of BI 6727 BS in plasma|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817419|NCT01121406|Secondary|AUC (0-inf); Area Under the Concentration-time Curve in Plasma Over the Time Interval From 0 Extrapolated to Infinity for CD 10899 BS|AUC (0-inf); area under the concentration-time curve in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity for CD 10899 BS (metabolite of Volasertib BI 6727)|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817420|NCT01121406|Secondary|AUC (0-inf); Area Under the Concentration-time Curve in Plasma Over the Time Interval From 0 Extrapolated to Infinity for BI 6727 BS|AUC (0-inf); area under the concentration-time curve in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity for BI 6727 BS|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817421|NCT01121406|Secondary|AUC (0-24); Area Under the Concentration-time Curve in Plasma Over the Time Interval From 0 to 24 Hours for CD 10899 BS|AUC (0-24); area under the concentration-time curve in plasma over the time interval from 0 to 24 hours for CD 10899 BS (metabolite of Volasertib BI 6727)|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817422|NCT01121406|Secondary|AUC (0-24); Area Under the Concentration-time Curve in Plasma Over the Time Interval From 0 to 24 Hours for BI 6727 BS|AUC (0-24); area under the concentration-time curve in plasma over the time interval from 0 to 24 hours for BI 6727 BS|-0.083 hours (h), 2h, 4h, 6h, 24h, 168h and 336 h after first drug administration|All evaluable patients were to be included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. A patient was considered not evaluable if they had an important protocol violation relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics or had insufficient data.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817423|NCT01121406|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Changes in Laboratory and ECG Data|Clinically relevant changes in laboratory and ECG data|From first treatment administration to 21 days after the last drug administration (Up to 1403 days)|TS||percentage of participants|||Number
817424|NCT01121406|Secondary|Incidence and Intensity of Adverse Events According to the United States National Cancer Institute (US NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 3.0|Incidence and intensity of adverse events according to the United States National Cancer Institute (US NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 3.0|From first treatment administration to 21 days after the last drug administration (Up to 1403 days)|TS||participants|||Number
817425|NCT01121406|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in the Three Most Troublesome Disease Specific Symptoms/ Quality of Life (QOL)|"Three most troublesome disease specific symptoms, defined by the patient at baseline.
Patients that have defined more than 3 most troublesome symptoms have not been taken into account in the analysis.
Quality of life (QOL) and symptom control assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, QLQ-OV28, and individual symptom questionnaires.
The time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score increased (i.e. worsened) by at least 10 points from baseline (0-100 point scale). If score is missing, and patient died within 28 days after scheduled time for completion, the patient was considered deteriorated. In this case, time to deterioration is time to death."|Every 6 weeks (Up to 213 weeks)|TS||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817426|NCT01121406|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in Abdominal Bloating/ Quality of Life (QOL)|"Time to deterioration in abdominal bloating/ Quality of life (QOL) and symptom control assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, QLQ-OV28, and individual symptom questionnaires.
The time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score increased (i.e. worsened) by at least 10 points from baseline (0-100 point scale). If score is missing, and patient died within 28 days after scheduled time for completion, the patient was considered deteriorated. In this case, time to deterioration is time to death."|Every 6 weeks (Up to 213 weeks )|TS||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817427|NCT01121406|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in Pain/ Quality of Life (QOL)|"Time to deterioration in pain/ Quality of life (QOL) and symptom control assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, QLQ-OV28, and individual symptom questionnaires.
The time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score increased (i.e. worsened) by at least 10 points from baseline (0-100 point scale). If score is missing, and patient died within 28 days after scheduled time for completion, the patient was considered deteriorated. In this case, time to deterioration is time to death."|Every 6 weeks (Up to 213 weeks )|TS||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834867|NCT01280604|Secondary|Low-density Lipoprotein (LDL)|LDL levels will be assessed in study participants 6-10 weeks after entry into study.|6-10 weeks|||milligram/deciliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817428|NCT01121406|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in Fatigue/Quality of Life (QOL)|"Time to deterioration in fatigue/Quality of life (QOL) and symptom control assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, QLQ-OV28, and individual symptom questionnaires.
The time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score increased (i.e. worsened) by at least 10 points from baseline (0-100 point scale). If score is missing, and patient died within 28 days after scheduled time for completion, the patient was considered deteriorated. In this case, time to deterioration is time to death."|Every 6 weeks (Up to 213 weeks )|TS||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817429|NCT01121406|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in Global Health Status/Quality of Life (QOL)|"Time to deterioration in global health status/Quality of life (QOL) and symptom control assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, QLQ-OV28, and individual symptom questionnaires.
The time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score increased (i.e. worsened) by at least 10 points from baseline (0-100 point scale). If score is missing, and patient died within 28 days after scheduled time for completion, the patient was considered deteriorated. In this case, time to deterioration is time to death."|Every 6 weeks (Up to 213 weeks )|TS||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817430|NCT01121406|Secondary|Biological Progression-free Survival Based on Serum Cancer Antigen 125 (CA-125) According to the Gynaecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) Criteria|"Biological PFS including assessment of CA-125 levels was defined as the time from randomisation until the first occurrence of progressive disease according to CA-125, progressive disease according to radiological evidence, or death.
Also according to the below criterias,
In patients with radiological measurable disease, disease progression during study treatment could not be declared on the basis of CA-125 alone.
Patients with elevated CA-125 pre-treatment and normalization of CA-125 had to show evidence of CA-125 ≥ to two times the upper normal limit on two occasions at least one week apart or
Patients with elevated CA-125 pre-treatment, which never normalized, had to show evidence of CA-125 ≥ to two times the nadir value on two occasions at least one week apart or
Patients with CA-125 in the normal range pre-treatment had to show evidence of CA-125 ≥ to two times the upper normal limit on two occasions at least one week apart."|At screening and every 6 weeks thereafter (Up to 213 weeks )|TS||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817431|NCT01121406|Secondary|Biological Tumour Response Based on Serum Cancer Antigen 125 (CA-125) According to the Gynaecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) Criteria|"Patients were to have a pre-treatment CA-125 of at least twice the upper limit of normal to be considered for CA-125 response. Patients were not evaluable by CA-125 if they had received mouse antibodies or if they had undergone medical and/or surgical interference with their peritoneum or pleura during the previous 28 days. In eligible patients, a CA-125 response was defined as the moment the CA- 25 was reduced by 50%, with this being confirmed with a consecutive CA-125 assessment not earlier than 28 days after the previous one.
Biological response rate based on serum CA-125 levels was assessed according to the guidelines by the Gynaecologic Cancer Intergroup. Monitoring of blood levels of the tumour marker CA-125 was performed at screening and every 6 weeks thereafter."|At screening and every 6 weeks thereafter (Up to 213 weeks)|TS||participants|||Number
817432|NCT01121406|Secondary|Best Overall Response|"Best overall response (BOR) is defined as the best response recorded at any time from the date of randomisation until the end of treatment.
Missing categories signify that no tumour imaging has been performed post baseline, and therefore the response status could not be assessed."|time from the date of randomisation until study completion/discontinuation; Up to 213 weeks|TS||participants|||Number
817433|NCT01121406|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is defined as time from randomisation to death irrespective of the cause of the death.|From randomization until death or study discontinuation; Up to 213 weeks|TS||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817434|NCT01121406|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|"Progression-free survival of a patient was based on the investigator’s assessment; it was defined as the number of days from the date of randomisation until the date of either disease progression or death from any cause, whichever occurred first.
Definition of disease progression according to RECIST version 1.1; Patients with measurable tumour lesions at baseline, Target-lesions: at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, the sum of diameters must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm,taking as reference the smallest sum on study, or appearance of 1 or more new lesions.
Non-target lesions: unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions or appearance of 1 or more new lesions Patients with non-measurable tumour lesions at baseline, Non-target lesions: requires unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions or appearance of 1 or more new lesions"|From randomization until disease progression, death or study discontinuation; Up to 213 weeks|TS||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817435|NCT01121406|Primary|Disease Control Rate (DCR) at Week 24 According to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST) Version 1.1|DCR was defined as the proportion of patients who had an overall response of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD).|Week 24|TS||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817436|NCT01110421|Secondary|Number of Participants With Sustained Favorable Per-pathogen Microbiological Outcome Rate at Late Follow-Up (LFU) Visit|A total of 3 pathogens were isolated at baseline from lower respiratory tract (LRT) culture in 2 participants in the doripenem treatment group and were susceptible to the study drug received: 2 pathogens (Staphylococcus aureus Klebsiella pneumoniae) were isolated at baseline from 1 participant and a 3rd pathogen (Streptococcus pneumoniae) was isolated at baseline from the other participant (see listed in the table below; the number in parenthesis next to each pathogen represent the number of participants with the pathogen isolated at baseline in the doripenem treatment group). The favorable per-participant microbiological response was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment). NOTE: No participants in the cefepime treatment group met criteria for inclusion in the Microbiological intent-to-treat analysis.|LFU (28 to 42 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of CITT with at least one baseline pneumonia pathogen from pleural fluid, LRT, or blood culture susceptible to doripenem and cefepime. 3 and 2 participants from doripenem and cefepime, respectively had no susceptible pneumonia pathogens at baseline and were excluded from this set.||Participants|||Number
818239|NCT01118117|Secondary|Clinical Success|Clinical success defined as: relief or improvement from baseline symptoms as measured by the Rutherford score for chronic limb ischemia at 30 days as compared to baseline|30 days post-procedure|||percentage of subjects with success|||Number
817437|NCT01110421|Secondary|Number of Participants With Favorable Per-pathogen Microbiological Outcome Rate at Test Of Cure (TOC) Visit|A total of 3 pathogens were isolated at baseline from lower respiratory tract (LRT) culture in 2 participants in the doripenem treatment group and were susceptible to the study drug received: 2 pathogens (Staphylococcus aureus Klebsiella pneumoniae) were isolated at baseline from 1 participant and a 3rd pathogen (Streptococcus pneumoniae) was isolated at baseline from the other participant (see listed in the table below; the number in parenthesis next to each pathogen represent the number of participants with the pathogen isolated at baseline in the doripenem treatment group). The favorable per-participant microbiological response was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment). NOTE: No participants in the cefepime treatment group met criteria for inclusion in the Microbiological intent-to-treat analysis.|TOC (7 to 14 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of CITT with at least one baseline pneumonia pathogen from pleural fluid, LRT, or blood culture susceptible to doripenem and cefepime. 3 and 2 participants from doripenem and cefepime, respectively had no susceptible pneumonia pathogens at baseline and were excluded from this set.||Participants|||Number
817438|NCT01110421|Secondary|Number of Participants With Favorable Per-pathogen Microbiological Outcome Rate at End of IV (EIV) Visit|A total of 3 pathogens were isolated at baseline from lower respiratory tract (LRT) culture in 2 participants in the doripenem treatment group and were susceptible to the study drug received: 2 pathogens (Staphylococcus aureus Klebsiella pneumoniae) were isolated at baseline from 1 participant and a 3rd pathogen (Streptococcus pneumoniae) was isolated at baseline from the other participant (see listed in the table below; the number in parenthesis next to each pathogen represent the number of participants with the pathogen isolated at baseline in the doripenem treatment group). The favorable per-participant microbiological response was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment). NOTE: No participants in the cefepime treatment group met criteria for inclusion in the Microbiological intent-to-treat analysis.|EIV (within 24 hours after completion of the last dose of IV study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of CITT with at least one baseline pneumonia pathogen from pleural fluid, LRT, or blood culture susceptible to doripenem and cefepime. 3 and 2 participants from doripenem and cefepime, respectively had no susceptible pneumonia pathogens at baseline and were excluded from this set.||Participants|||Number
817439|NCT01110421|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Favorable Per-participant Microbiological Response Rate|Favorable per-participant microbiological response rate was evaluated at the at End of IV (EIV) visit, Test Of Cure (TOC) visit, and Late Follow-Up (LFU) visit. The favorable per-participant microbiological response was considered when all baseline pathogens were eradicated (absence) or presumed eradicated (absence of material to culture in a participant who has a positive clinical response to treatment).|EIV (within 24 hours after completion of the last dose of IV study medication therapy), TOC (7 to 14 days after the last dose of study medication therapy), and LFU (28 to 42 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Microbiological intent-to-treat - Participants of CITT with at least one baseline pneumonia pathogen from pleural fluid, LRT, or blood culture susceptible to doripenem and cefepime. 3 and 2 participants from doripenem and cefepime, respectively had no susceptible pneumonia pathogens at baseline and were excluded from this set.||Participants|||Number
817440|NCT01110421|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Clinical Cure Rate at Late Follow-Up (LFU) Visit|The participants were classified as clinical cure if all pretreatment signs and symptoms showed no evidence of resurgence after administration of the last dose of study medication and no nonstudy systemic antibacterial therapy was given for the treatment of pneumonia.|LFU (28 to 42 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Clinical Intent-to-Treat (CITT): All randomized participants who met the minimal disease definition of pneumonia regardless if a baseline pathogen was isolated from the baseline lower respiratory tract (LRT) culture, pleural fluid or blood culture.||Participants|||Number
817441|NCT01110421|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Clinical Improvement Rate at End of IV (EIV) Visit|Participants were considered as clinical improved if they had no fever, clinical improvement in signs and symptoms of pneumonia from baseline, decrease in WBC, improvement or lack of progression of radiographic findings in comparison with the screening chest X-ray, and not received any nonstudy systemic antibacterial therapy for the treatment of pneumonia after IV study drug therapy had begun.|EIV (within 24 hours after completion of the last dose of IV study medication therapy)|Clinical intent-to-treat: All randomized participants who met the minimal disease definition of pneumonia regardless if a baseline pathogen was isolated from the baseline lower respiratory tract culture, pleural fluid or blood culture.||Participants|||Number
817442|NCT01110421|Primary|The Number of Participants With Clinical Cure Rate at Test Of Cure (TOC) Visit|The participants were classified as cure if they had resolution or clinical improvement of signs and symptoms of pneumonia, favorable response at End of treatment for IV study (EIV) visit; had no fever; improvement or no progression of radiographic findings of pneumonia on chest X ray; improvement in oxygenation or discontinued mechanical ventilation in intubated participants; and not received nonstudy systemic antibacterial therapy for pneumonia.|TOC (7 to 14 days after the last dose of study medication therapy)|Clinical Intent-To-Treat (CITT): All randomized participants who met the minimal disease definition of pneumonia regardless if a baseline pathogen was isolated from the baseline lower respiratory tract culture, pleural fluid or blood culture.||Participants|||Number
817443|NCT01110499|Primary|Part 2: Change From Baseline in Average Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP)|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. Average IOP is the average of the 2 eyes for each patient at each time point. A negative number change from Baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement). Data are recorded at Hours 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12.|Baseline, Day 29|Modified Intent to Treat: all randomized and treated patients who provided IOP data for baseline and at least one postbaseline hour 0 assessment||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
817444|NCT01110499|Primary|Part 1: Change From Baseline in Intraocular Pressure (IOP)|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. Data are recorded at Hours 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12. A negative number change from Baseline indicated a reduction in IOP (improvement). Data for bimatoprost-treated eyes are combined across groups.|Baseline, Day 7|Safety Population: all treated patients||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
817445|NCT01110915|Secondary|System-related Complications|Subjects with a complication related to the implanted system, which consisted of the pacemaker, leads to the right chambers of the heart (atrium and ventricle), pacemaker software, and programmer. All adverse events in the time frame were recorded at the subject's center and assessed the AEAC. The AEAC determined whether each adverse event was a complication (requiring invasive intervention), and whether the event was related to the system.|Implant to four months post implant|||participants|||Number
817446|NCT01110915|Secondary|Occurrence of Sustained Ventricular Arrhythmias and Asystole During MRI Scans.|The endpoint was the occurrence of sustained ventricular arrhythmias and asystole during MRI scans and attributable to the MR scan. Sustained ventricular arrhythmias or asystole episodes that occurred during the MRI scan was considered attributable to the MR scan if so adjudicated by the AEAC.|During MRI scans|All subjects successfully implanted with the Advisa MRI system who underwent MRI scans were included in the analysis. All MRI scans, whether done at the 9-12 week visit in the MRI group, or done at other times in either group were included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
817447|NCT01110915|Secondary|Ventricular Sensed Amplitude Success|Subjects' ventricular sensed amplitude was measured at the 9-12 week visit (pre-MRI/waiting period) and the 4-month visit (i.e. one month post-MRI/waiting period). A success was defined as a 50% or less decrease in ventricular sensed amplitude between the two visits.|Pre-MRI /waiting period to 1-month post-MRI/waiting period|Only subjects with measured sensed amplitude values at both pre-MRI/waiting period and the 4-month visit were used in the analysis.||participants|||Number
817448|NCT01110915|Secondary|Atrial Sensed Amplitude Success|Subjects' atrial sensed amplitude was measured at the 9-12 week visit (pre-MRI/waiting period) and the 4-month visit (i.e. one month post-MRI/waiting period). A success was defined as a 50% or less decrease in atrial sensed amplitude between the two visits.|Pre-MRI /waiting period to 1-month post-MRI/waiting period|Only subjects with measured sensed amplitude values at both pre-MRI/waiting period and the 4-month visit were used in the analysis.||participants|||Number
817449|NCT01110915|Primary|Ventricular Pacing Capture Threshold Success|Subjects' ventricular pacing capture threshold was measured at the 9-12 week visit (pre-MRI/waiting period) and the 4-month visit (i.e. one month post-MRI/waiting period). A success was when a subject experienced an increase less than or equal to 0.5V (volts) between the two visits.|Pre-MRI /waiting period to 1-month post-MRI/waiting period|To be included in the analysis, subjects in the MRI group must undergo an MRI scan and those in the Control group must complete the 9-12 week visit, and all the subjects must have valid pacing capture threshold measurements at pre-MRI/waiting period and the 4-month visit.||participants|||Number
817450|NCT01110915|Primary|Atrial Pacing Capture Threshold Success|Subjects' atrial pacing capture threshold was measured at the 9-12 week visit (pre-MRI/waiting period) and the 4-month visit (i.e. one month post-MRI/waiting period). A success was when a subject experienced an increase less than or equal to 0.5V (volts) between the two visits.|Pre-MRI/waiting period to one month post-MRI/waiting period|To be included in the analysis, subjects in the MRI group must undergo an MRI scan and those in the Control group must complete the 9-12 week visit, and all the subjects must have valid pacing capture threshold measurements at pre-MRI/waiting period and the 4-month visit.||participants|||Number
817451|NCT01110915|Primary|Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Related Complications|For each subject in this objective, the endpoint was the occurrence of an MRI-related complication within 30 days post-MRI. An independent Adverse Event Advisory Committee (AEAC) determined whether each adverse event was a complication and whether it was MRI-related.|MRI scan to one-month post-MRI scan|Subjects who had an MRI scan and completed their 4-month visit (or a later follow-up), or had an MRI-related complication within one month post-MRI were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
817452|NCT01110967|Primary|Safety by Evaluating the Number of Serious Adverse Device Effects (SADEs), Adverse Device Effects (ADEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||Patients were followed up according to the local practice, up to 1 year|||events|||Number
817453|NCT01110967|Secondary|Changes in Device Placement||Up to 12 months follow up visit|||participant|||Number
817454|NCT01110967|Secondary|Device Subsidence Measured as Interbody Height Ratio (IBHR)|Interbody Height Ratio (IBHR) is calculated as the total vertical height of the two vertebral bodies directly superior and inferior to the implant divided by the anteroposterior diameter of the superior vertebral body.|Up to 12 months follow up visit|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
817455|NCT01110967|Secondary|Intervertebral Disc Space (IVD) at Implanted Level|The Intervertebral Disc Space (IVD) was measured as average disc height, calculated as [(A+B)/2]/H, where A is the posterior intervertebral disc height, B is the anterior intervertebral disc height and H is the anterior height of upper vertebral body.|Up to 12 months follow up visit|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
817456|NCT01110967|Secondary|Range of Motion (ROM) at Implanted Level|The range of motion (ROM) was calculated as the angle of the segment on the flexion radiograph minus the angle of the segment on the extension radiograph, expressed in degrees (absolute value).|Up to 12 months follow up visit|||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
817457|NCT01110967|Primary|Physical Functioning Using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)|The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) derives from the Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire, it is used to measure disability for low back pain. The index is scored from 0 to 50; 0 meaning 'no disability' and 50 meaning 'maximum disability'.|Up to 12 months follow up visit|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817458|NCT01110967|Primary|Health-related Quality of Life Using the Visual Analogue Scale for Leg Pain|The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is a tool widely used to measure pain. It is a 10 cm scale, 0cm means 'no pain' and 10cm means 'worst possible pain'. The patients mark the location corresponding to the amount of back pain they experienced on the 10cm line.|Up to 12 months follow up visit|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817459|NCT01110967|Primary|Health-related Quality of Life Using the Visual Analogue Scale for Back Pain|The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is a tool widely used to measure pain. It is a 10 cm scale, 0cm means 'no pain' and 10cm means 'worst possible pain'. The patients mark the location corresponding to the amount of back pain they experienced on the 10cm line.|Up to 12 months follow up visit|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817471|NCT01111149|Secondary|Hit Reaction Time - CPT|The hit reaction time is the average speed of correct responses for the entire test given in milliseconds. The higher the score, the slower the speed. The standard error is a measure of response speed consistency. The higher the overall standard error, the greater inconsistency in the response speed. The values below were measured at week 12.|Week 12|||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817460|NCT01111110|Primary|Y=100([FEV1 at 4 Puffs-FEV1 at 4AM)/FEV1@4AM] Difference Period 2 Minus Period 1.|(Percent improvement in FEV1 Post Dose for Period 2 over 4AM Baseline value)less (Percent improvement in FEV1 Post Dose for Period 1 over 4AM Baseline value) when 4 Puffs go into chamber|fifteen minutes after 4 puffs of albuterol|Study intended to get more subjects, but PI's review committee had to deal with candidate deadlines and a high rate of screen failures and allowed her to test seven subjects. Primary concern was the research experience, not the study questions. There was no bias in failing to meet accrual objectives thanks to the blinding.||Diff in % change from 4AM||Standard Deviation|Mean
817461|NCT01111110|Primary|Y=100([FEV1 at 2 Puffs-FEV1 at 4AM)/FEV1@4AM] Difference Period 2 Minus Period 1.|(Percent improvement in FEV1 Post Dose for Period 2 over 4AM Baseline value) less (Percent improvement in FEV1 Post Dose for Period 1 over 4AM Baseline value) when 2 Puffs go into chamber|15 minutes after 2 puffs of albuterol|Study intended to get more subjects, but PI's review committee had to deal with candidate deadlines and a high rate of screen failures and allowed her to test seven subjects. Primary concern was the research experience, not the study questions. There was no bias in failing to meet accrual objectives thanks to the blinding.||Diff in % change from 4AM||Standard Deviation|Mean
817462|NCT01111110|Primary|Y=100([FEV1 at 1 Puffs-FEV1 at 4AM)/FEV1@4AM] Difference Period 2 Minus Period 1.|(Percent improvement in FEV1 Post Dose for Period 2 over 4AM Baseline value) less (Percent improvement in FEV1 Post Dose for Period 1 over 4AM Baseline value) when 1 Puff go into chamber|fifteen minutes after 1 puff of albuterol|Study intended to get more subjects, but PI's review committee had to deal with candidate deadlines and a high rate of screen failures and allowed her to test seven subjects. Primary concern was the research experience, not the study questions. There was no bias in failing to meet accrual objectives thanks to the blinding.||Diff in % change from 4AM||Standard Error|Mean
817463|NCT01111123|Secondary|Signs of Psoriasis, Atrophy or Telangiectasis|Signs of psoriasis (erythema, induration, and scale) - physician's assessment of the severity of each of the three key characteristics of psoriatic lesions rated as: 0=clear, 1=almost clear, 2=mild, 3=moderate, 4=severe, and 5=very severe, combined into one score.|During the maintenance phase, from 2 weeks up to 26 weeks|The primary endpoint was a change in PGA during the 24 weeks of the study in the ITT.||participants|||Number
817464|NCT01111123|Primary|Physical Global Assessment|Physician global assessment (PGA) score - the physician's impression of the disease at a single time point rated as: 0=clear, 1=almost clear, 2=mild, 3=moderate, 4=severe, and 5=very severe.|During the maintenance phase, from 2 weeks up to 26 weeks|The primary endpoint was a change in PGA during the 24 weeks of the study in the intention-to-treat population (ITT).||participants|||Number
817465|NCT01111149|Secondary|Abnormal Movements - AIMS|Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS), to assess abnormal involuntary movements associated with antipsychotic drugs. There are 10 questions, based on a five-point scale ranging from 0 (none) to 4 (severe). Items 11-14 are yes/no questions that have no impact on the score. The Total Score is the sum of questions 1-7 (minimum = 0; maximum = 28). The severity index consists of one question (item 8; rated 0=none to 4=severe) based on the rater's observation of abnormal movements The AIMS Global Score is the sum of three questions (each item rated 0=none to 4=severe) regarding abnormal movements overall (minimum score 0, maximum score 12). For the total score and subscores, the higher the score, the greater the severity of abnormal movements. Scoring is based on the chapter: Guy W (2000), Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS), in: Handbook of Psychiatric Measures (Rush AJ Jr, et al., eds). APA Publishing: Washington DC: pp. 166-167.|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817466|NCT01111149|Secondary|Urge to Smoke - MNWS|The Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawal Scale (MNWS) includes two items where individuals are asked to 1) declare the percentage of time they had an urge to smoke (MNWS % Urge to Smoke); and 2) declare the percentage of time they had a strong urge to smoke (MNWS % Strong Urge). For each case, percentages range from 0% to 100% - the higher the percentage, the greater urge to smoke.|Week 12|||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
817467|NCT01111149|Secondary|Abstinence Related Symptoms - WISDM|The Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (WISDM) consists of 68 items regarding smoking. Each item is rated on a scale of 1 (not true of me at all) to 7 (extremely true of me) leading to a minimum score of 68 and a maximum score of 476. The higher the score, the greater the dependence. Four of the items are grouped into a Craving subscale (minimum 4, maximum 28), the greater the score, the greater the craving. Five of the items are grouped into a Cognition subscale (minimum 5, maximum 35), the higher the score, the greater reliance on cigarette smoking for cognitive enhancement. WISDM scoring based on the original article by Piper et al., 2004. A multiple motives approach to tobacco dependence: the Wisconsin inventory of smoking dependence motives (WISDM-68). Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 72:139-154.|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817468|NCT01111149|Secondary|Response Style Indicator (Beta) for CPT|Beta represents an individual's response tendency: Some individuals are cautious and choose not to respond very often. Conceptually, such individuals want to make sure they are correct when they give a response. Higher values of Beta reflect this response style. The emphasis is on avoiding commission errors. Other individuals respond more freely to make sure they respond to most or all targets, and they tend to be less concerned about mistakenly responding to a non-target. Lower values of Beta are produced by this response style. Values shown below were obtained at week 12.|Week 12|||Beta||Standard Deviation|Mean
817469|NCT01111149|Secondary|Detectibility (d') of Continuous Performance Test|The value d' is a measure of the difference between the signal (non-X) and noise (X) distributions. As such, d' provides a means for assessing an individual's discriminative power since, in general, the greater the difference between the signal and noise distributions, the better the ability to distinguish and detect X and non-X stimuli. The lower the score, the better the detectability. Values shown below are for week 12.|Week 12|||unitless||Standard Deviation|Mean
817470|NCT01111149|Secondary|Variability of Standard Error - CPT|"Variability of Standard Error (VSE) is a measure of response speed consistency. VSE measures within respondent variability. That is, the amount of variability the individual shows in 18 separate segments of the Continuous Performance Test in relation to his or her own overall standard error. Although VSE is a different measure than Overall Standard Error, typically the two measures produce comparable results. The higher the VSE, the greater the inconsistency in the response speed. The values shown below are the VSE for Week 12."|Week 12|||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
827178|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received Water-based and Ethanol-based Formulation||Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817472|NCT01111149|Secondary|General Psychopathology|Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), an 24-item scale measuring positive symptoms, general psychopathology, and affective symptoms commonly used for schizophrenia with each item rated on a scale of 1-7 with 1=not present and 7=severe. The minimum score is 24 and the maximum score is 168. We have used five subscales as recommended by Dingemans et al., 1995: Positive subscale (minimum score 6; maximum score 42); Negative subscale (minimum score 5; maximum score 35); Depressed subscale (minimum score 5; maximum score 35); Mania subscale (minimum score 6; maximum score 42); and Disorientation subscale (minimum score 2; maximum score 14) . For both the total score and the subscale scores, the higher the score, the greater the symptom severity. We used the BPRS version 4.0. Dingemans PMAJ, Linszen DH, Lenoir ME, Smeets RMW, 1995. Component structure of the expanded Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS-E). Psychopharmacology 122:263-267.|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817473|NCT01111149|Secondary|Positive Symptoms of Schizophrenia (SAPS)|Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS), a well-established test, used to assess the presence of psychotic symptoms of schizophrenia. There are 34 items rated on a scale of 0-5 with 0=none and 5=severe for a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 170. There are 4 subscales: Hallucinations (minimum score 0; maximum score 35); Delusions (minimum score 0; maximum score 65); Bizarre Behavior (minimum score 0; maximum score 25); Positive Formal Thought Disorder (minimum score 0; maximum score 45). Each subscale contains one additional question as a Global Rating - or overall measure for that particular subscale. The sum of these questions constitutes the Total Global Score (minimum 0, maximum 20). The values for the Global items are included in the Total Composite score. In each case, the higher the score, the greater the severity of symptoms.|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817474|NCT01111149|Secondary|Suicidality|The Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), is a survey intended to quantify the severity of suicidal ideation and behavior. The questionaire for suicidal ideation consists of 5 questions with yes (1) /no (0) answers. If answers to questions 1 and 2 are no, questions 3-5 are skipped. Minimum of 0; Maximum of 5. The questionaire for suicidal behavior consists of seven questions rated 0 for no and 1 for yes. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 7. In each case, the higher the score, the greater the severity.|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817475|NCT01111149|Secondary|Vital Signs - Pulse|Pulse will be measured. The values below were measured at week 12 of the study.|Week 12|||heart beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
817476|NCT01111149|Primary|Smoking Abstinence - Exhaled Carbon Monoxide|Exhaled carbon monoxide as a biochemical verification of smoking abstinence. Values below are for week 12.|Week 12|||parts per million||Standard Deviation|Mean
817477|NCT01111149|Primary|Smoking Abstinence - Number of Cigarettes Smoked|Number of cigarettes smoked at week 12 of the study by self-report.|Week 12|||number of cigarettes smoked||Standard Deviation|Mean
817478|NCT01111149|Secondary|Vital Signs - Weight|Weight will be measured for each participant. Values listed below are for week 12.|Week 12|||lbs||Standard Deviation|Mean
817479|NCT01111149|Secondary|Vital Signs|blood pressure will be measured.|Week 12|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817480|NCT01111149|Secondary|Abnormal Movements - BAS and SAS|"Barnes Akathisia Scale (BAS), a widely-used measurement of drug-induced akathisia. It consists of 4 questions with questions 1-3 scored on a scale of 0-3 with 0=normal and 3=severe (minimum score 0, maximum score 9; while item 4 is a global clinical assessment of akathisia rated on a scale of 0 (normal) to 5 (severe). The higher the score on each subsclae, the greater the severity of akathisia.
Simpson-Angus Scale (SAS), a 10-item instrument used to evaluate patients experiencing neuroleptic-induced parkinsonism and other extrapyramidal side effects. Items are rated for severity on a 0-4 scale, with 0 being normal and 4 being severe. Minimum = 0; Maximum = 40. The higher the score, the greater the severity."|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817481|NCT01111149|Secondary|Depression|Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), a self-report rating inventory measuring characteristic attitudes and symptoms of depression consisting of 21 items with each item rated on a four point scale (0=not present to 3=severe). The accepted ranges are as follows: 0 to 9 indicates no depression, 10 to 18 indicates mild to moderate depression, 19 to 29 indicates moderate to severe depression and 30 to 63 indicates severe depression.|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817482|NCT01111149|Secondary|Abstinence-related Symptoms - MNWS and FTND|"Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawal Scale (MNWS), a patient-reported measure of nicotine withdrawal symptoms and cravings. Eight items are listed, including craving for cigarettes, irritability, frustration, or anger, anxiety, etc scored on a five point scale from 0 (normal) to 5 (severe). Patients are asked for responses for the past 24 hours and past seven days (minimum 0, maximum 32; for each subscale). The higher the score, the greater the dependence. Additionally, one question (minimum score 1, maximum score 4 measures the individual's confidence in resisting strong urges to smoke. The higher the score on this question, the greater the individual's confidence in resisting smoking urges.
The Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence measures nicotine dependence and consists of six questions with a total minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 10. The higher the score, the greater the dependence on nicotine."|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817483|NCT01111149|Secondary|Side Effects|Side effects will be monitored by a physician and/or assistant and recorded (SEP). All patients withdrawn from the study because of emerging side effects will be followed until the side effects are resolved. Each item is scored based on a scale of 0=none; 1=mild; 2=moderate; and 3=severe. Below, the data are shown for participants experiencing symptoms on week 12 of the study.|Week 12|||participants|||Number
817484|NCT01111149|Secondary|Impulsivity and Inattention|Impulsivity and inattention will be measured using the continuous performance test. Individuals were tasked with 359 items divided six blocks (59 in block 1, 60 in blocks 2-6). Omissions result from the failure to respond to target letters. CPT% Omissions measures the percentage of responses that qualify as omissions made during the test. Higher scores indicate increased inattention. Commissions result from responses given to non-targets. CPT% Commissions measures the percentage of responses that qualify as commissions made during the test. Higher scores indicate increased inattention. Perseverations result from reaction time less than 100 ms. CPT% Perseveration % measures the percentage of responses that qualify as perseverations made during the test. The higher the score, the greater impulsivity.|Week 12|||Percentage of responses||Standard Deviation|Mean
818306|NCT01118663|Secondary|To Evaluate the Incidence of Anaphylactoid Reaction.|Data analysis was conducted on the subjects enrolled in the study prior to study termination. Because the study was terminated prematurely due to lack of enrollment, there was an insufficient sample size to conduct an efficacy analysis.|1 hour|||participants|||Number
817485|NCT01111149|Secondary|Negative Symptoms of Schizophrenia - SANS|Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) a well-established test, used to assess the presence of psychosis or negative symptoms of schizophrenia. It consists of 25 questions rated on a scale of 0 (none) to 5 (severe). With a total score range of 0 to 125 points. There are 6 subscales: Affective Flattening or Blunting - (minimum, 0; maximum 35); Inappropriate Affect (minimum, 0; maximum 5); Alogia (minimum 0; maximum 25); Avolition-Apathy (minimum 0; maximum 20); Anhedonia-Asociality (minimum 0; maximum 25); Attention (minimum 0; maximum 15). Each subscale (except for Inappropriate Affect) contains one additional question as a Global Rating - or overall measure for that particular subscale. The sum of these questions constitutes the Total Global Score (minimum 0, maximum 25). The global questions are included within the Total Composite score. In each case, the larger the score, the more severe the symptoms.|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817486|NCT01111149|Secondary|Reduction in Smoking|Successful outcome will be defined as a 50% or greater reduction in self-reported cigarettes per day and a 30% greater reduction in carbon monoxide and cotinine levels. Measured at week 12|Week 12|||participants|||Number
817487|NCT01111149|Primary|Smoking Abstinence - Serum/Urine Measurements|Measured by blood/urine tests for nicotine and its break-down product cotinine.|Week 12|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817488|NCT01111162|Primary|Immunogenicity|Immunologic response, defined as HAI titer ≥ 1:40, at 21 days after vaccine dose.|21-28 days|Among the 90 participants without evidence of previous exposure to H1N1, only 61% [95% confidence interval (CI) 51–71] developed protective titers by week 3 of the study (seroconversion rate).||percentage of seroconversion||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817489|NCT01111162|Primary|Safety|"To assess the safety of inactivated swine-origin H1N1 influenza vaccine in HIV-1 infected individuals (received as part of standard of care).
Safety was assessed via
Adverse Events of Grade 3 or higher of abnormal laboratory values, signs and symptoms or diagnoses.
Solicited local AEs, including pain, tenderness, redness, and swelling post each vaccination. Solicited systemic AEs, including feverishness, malaise, body aches (exclusive of the injection site), nausea, and headache post each vaccination."|21-28 days|||percentage of participants|||Number
817490|NCT01111240|Secondary|Percentage of Participants on Concomitant Systemic Rheumatic and Pain Relief Medication|Prior and concomitant non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs): methotrexate (MTX) and other DMARDs|Baseline, and Months 6 and 24|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
817491|NCT01111240|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With In-Patient Hospitalization|Percentage of participants with in-patient hospitalization were derived from patient recall of events in the preceding 12 months (at Baseline), in the preceding 3 months (at months 3, 6, 9, and 12), or in the preceding 6 months (at months 18 and 24).|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||percentage of particpants|||Number
817492|NCT01111240|Secondary|Mean Number of Days Missed From Work Due to Psoriatic Arthritis|Mean number of days missed from work were derived from patient recall of events in the preceding 12 months (at baseline), in the preceding 3 months (at months 3, 6, 9, and 12), or in the preceding 6 months (at months 18 and 24).|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
817493|NCT01111240|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Impairment in Daily Activities During the Last 4 Weeks of Each Visit||Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||percentage of participants|||Number
817494|NCT01111240|Secondary|Mean Funktionsfragebogen Hannover (FFbH) Questionnaire Scores Over Time|A self-administered participant questionnaire used to assess patient function on a scale of 0 (total loss of functional capacity) to 100 (maximal functional capacity) units; the FFbH score indicates the remaining percentage of participant function.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817495|NCT01111240|Secondary|Participants Assessment of Pain Over Time|Measured on a visual analog scale (VAS) of 0 to 10 cm; lower scores indicate better participant’s status.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817496|NCT01111240|Secondary|Participants Assessment of Fatigue Over Time|Measured on a visual analog scale (VAS) of 0 to 10 cm; lower scores indicate better participant’s status.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817497|NCT01111240|Secondary|Patients Global Assessment of Disease Activity Over Time|Measured on a visual analog scale (VAS) of 0 to 10 cm; lower scores indicate better participant’s status.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817498|NCT01111240|Secondary|Mean C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Levels Over Time|The C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is an acute phase reactant plasma protein, normally produced by the liver, which is commonly used as an indirect measure of the extent and activity of an inflammation. The CRP normal reference range in the blood is, as a rule, from 0 to 1.0 mg/dL.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
817499|NCT01111240|Secondary|Mean Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) Over Time|The Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) is a practicable and sensitive but not specific parameter for measuring disease progression. By means of the ESR it can be generally distinguished between an active and nonactive rheumatic disease. The normal reference range is, as a rule, 0 to 10 mm/h for men and 0 to 15 mm/h for women. The higher the ESR value out of the normal range, the higher is the disease activity.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||mm/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
817500|NCT01111240|Secondary|Number of Participants by Severity of Nail Psoriasis Levels Over Time|Nail psoriasis is a distinguishing characteristic of PsA. Nail psoriasis is characterized by changes in the nail and nail matrix, including pitting, onycholysis (painless separation of the nail from the nail bed), and reddish spots. Investigators reported the presence or absence of nail psoriasis on the basis of their clinical evaluation; no specific scale or score was used. If present, the severity of this condition was graded by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate, and severe based on their clinical impression.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||participants|||Number
817501|NCT01111240|Secondary|Number of Participants by Severity of Dactylitis Over Time|Dactylitis is a distinguishing characteristic of PsA. Dactylitis, sometimes referred to “sausage digit,” involves swelling of the entire finger. Investigators reported the presence or absence of dactylitis on the basis of their clinical evaluation; no specific scale or score was used. If present, the severity of each condition was graded by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate, and severe based on their clinical impression.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||participants|||Number
817502|NCT01111240|Secondary|Number of Participants by Severity of Enthesitis Over Time|Enthesitis is a distinguishing characteristic of PsA. Enthesitis involves inflammation at the site where tendons and other connective tissues enter the bone. Investigators reported the presence or absence of enthesitis on the basis of their clinical evaluation; no specific scale or score was used. If present, the severity of each condition was graded by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate, and severe based on their clinical impression.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||participants|||Number
817503|NCT01111240|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|Adverse Events (AEs) were reported that clinicians considered to be related to the study drug. An AE was considered to be a serious adverse event (SAE) if any of the following criteria were met: Death of participant, life-threatening event, hospitalization, prolongation of hospitalization, congenital anomaly, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, important medical event requiring medical or surgical intervention to prevent serious outcome, or spontaneous or elective abortion.|Baseline up to 24 months|Safety Set - All enrolled participants||participants|||Number
817504|NCT01111240|Primary|Mean Target Lesion Score (TLS) Over Time|The Target Lesion Score (TLS) was based on the severity of erythema, scaling, and infiltration of a prospectively-defined psoriasis target lesion of at least 2 cm in width that was considered to be representative of all other affected areas. Each of the three characteristics was evaluated by the clinician on a scale of 0 (absent) to 5 (maximal expression), and these scores were totaled to provide a TLS ranging from 0 (lowest severity) to 15 (highest severity).|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817505|NCT01111240|Primary|Mean Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected by Psoriasis Over Time|Body surface area was used to evaluate the extent of psoriatic skin involvement. At baseline, investigators classified participants as having BSA less than 3%, 3 to 10%, 11 to 20%, or greater than 20%. At all post-baseline time points, clinicians were asked to estimate BSA on a scale of 0% to 100% rather than as categories. BSA was visually determined by the investigator using the 'rule of nines' and estimating that the palm of the patient’s hand was equal to 1% BSA.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||percentage of body surface area||Standard Deviation|Mean
817506|NCT01111240|Primary|Mean Swollen Joint Count (SJC) Over Time|Swollen joint count represents the number of joints displaying swelling. Although the DAS28 includes assessments of 28 joints, additional joints are typically evaluated in examinations of participants with Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) as the joints typically affected in these participants differ from those commonly involved in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). Specifically, PsA often involves distal interphalangeal joints (DIP), whereas RA does not.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||Swollen Joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
817507|NCT01111240|Primary|Mean Tender Joint Count (TJC) Over Time|Tender joint count represents the number of joints displaying tenderness. Although the DAS28 includes assessments of 28 joints, additional joints are typically evaluated in examinations of participants with Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) as the joints typically affected in these participants differ from those commonly involved in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). Specifically, PsA often involves distal interphalangeal joints (DIP), whereas RA does not.|Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||Tender joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
817508|NCT01111240|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score (DAS)28|The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, C-reactive protein, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10. A DAS28 score greater than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24|Effectiveness analyses were performed on the full analysis set (FAS). Participants with inadequate data or who met other exclusion criteria were not included in the FAS.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817522|NCT01111318|Secondary|Terminal Half-Life (t1/2)|"Terminal half-life of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation."|Pre-dose and 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h and 96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
817509|NCT01111292|Primary|The Effect of Myo-inositol (Inositol) on P-β-catenin Staining in Areas of Low Grade Dysplasia in Subjects With Known Colitis-induced Low Grade Dysplasia.|The primary objective of this study will be to evaluate the effect of myo-inositol (inositol), administered for three months, on P-β-catenin staining in areas of low grade dysplasia or in areas of prior low grade dysplasia in subjects with known colitis-induced low grade dysplasia at baseline.|Baseline to 90 days|pβ-cat-positive cell counts in pre- and post-study biopsies with dysplasia or adenoma. Counts are broken down as the number of crypts with 3, 4, or 5 pβ-cat positive cells. High frequency (HF) fields of view are those containing at least 2 crypts with three or more pβ-cat positive cells per crypt (at 20X). I||Colonic Biopsies||Standard Deviation|Mean
817514|NCT01111318|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, Vital Signs, ECG, Clinical Laboratory Tests and Assessment of Tolerability by the Investigator|Clinically relevant abnormalities for physical examination, vital signs, ECG, clinical laboratory tests and assessment of tolerability by the investigator. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as Adverse Events (AE).|Drug administration until 4 days after drug administration or end-of-study visit, up to 19 days|Treated Set (TS) included all subjects who had been dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken the investigational treatment.||participants|||Number
817515|NCT01111318|Secondary|Urinary Glucose Excretion (UGE)|"Urinary glucose excretion, this endpoint was measured using Ae0-96.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation."|Pre-dose and time intervals 0-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h, 12-24h, 24-36h, 36-48h, 48-72h and 72-96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817516|NCT01111318|Secondary|Renal Clearance After Extravascular Administration (CL R)|"Renal clearance of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma after extravascular administration.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation."|Pre-dose and 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h and 96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
817517|NCT01111318|Secondary|Fraction of Empagliflozin Excreted Unchanged in Urine (fe0-96))|"Fraction of empagliflozin (empa) excreted unchanged in urine from time points 0 to 96 hours.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation."|Pre-dose and time intervals 0-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h, 12-24h, 24-36h, 36-48h, 48-72h and 72-96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||percentage of empagliflozin||Standard Deviation|Mean
817518|NCT01111318|Secondary|Amount of Empagliflozin That is Eliminated in Urine (Ae0-96)|"Amount of empagliflozin (empa) that is eliminated in urine over the time interval 0 to 96 hours.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation."|Pre-dose and time intervals 0-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h, 12-24h, 24-36h, 36-48h, 48-72h and 72-96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||nmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
817519|NCT01111318|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase (Vz/F)|"Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase (λz).
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation."|Pre-dose and 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h and 96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
817520|NCT01111318|Secondary|Apparent Clearance After Extravascular Administration (CL/F)|"Apparent clearance of empagliflozin (empa) in the plasma after extravascular administration.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation."|Pre-dose and 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h and 96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
817521|NCT01111318|Secondary|Mean Residence Time (MRTpo)|"Mean residence time of empagliflozin (empa) in the body.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation."|Pre-dose and 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h and 96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
818307|NCT01118663|Secondary|To Evaluate the Incidence of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events||21-42 hours|||Number of Events|||Number
817523|NCT01111318|Secondary|Terminal Rate Constant (λz)|"Terminal rate constant in plasma.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation."|Pre-dose and 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h and 96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||1/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
817524|NCT01111318|Secondary|Time From Dosing to Maximum Concentration (Tmax)|Time from dosing to maximum concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma.|Pre-dose and 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h and 96h after drug administration.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||h||Full Range|Median
817525|NCT01111318|Secondary|Area Under the Curve 0 to Time of Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation."|Pre-dose and 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h and 96h after drug administration.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||nmol*h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
817526|NCT01111318|Primary|Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation. The 'measured values' show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|Pre-dose and 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h and 96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
817527|NCT01111318|Primary|Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
The standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation. The 'measured values' show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|Pre-dose and 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h and 96h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who were documented to have taken the investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint, without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK, provided no vomiting occurred at or before two times median tmax.||nmol*h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
817528|NCT01111331|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, Vital Signs, ECG, Blood Chemistry and Assessment of Tolerability by Investigator|Clinically relevant abnormalities for physical examination, vital signs, ECG, blood chemistry and assessment of tolerability by investigator. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as Adverse Events.|Drug administration until beginning of next sequence/end of trial, 35 days|Treated set (TS) included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication.||participants|||Number
817529|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin: Area Under the PT-time Curve From 0 to Last Measurable Data Point Adjusted to Baseline (PT AUEC0-tz,Base)|Area under the PT-time curve from time of dosing to time of last measurable data point adjusted for baseline value (before any trial drug administration) of area under the PT-time curve|0 hours (h), 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacodynamic (PD) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one PD endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PD evaluation.||s*hr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817530|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin: Peak Prothrombin Time Adjusted to Baseline (PTmax,Base)|Peak prothrombin time adjusted for baseline value (before any trial drug administration) of peak prothrombin|0 hours (h), 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacodynamic (PD) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one PD endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PD evaluation.||s||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817531|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin: Area Under the PT-time Curve From 0 to Last Measurable Data Point (PT AUEC0-tz)|Area under the PT-time curve from time of dosing to time of last measurable data point|0 hours (h), 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacodynamic (PD) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one PD endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PD evaluation.||s*hr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817532|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin: Area Under the INR-time Curve From 0 to Last Measurable Data Point Adjusted to Baseline (INR AUEC0-tz,Base)|Area under the INR-time curve from time of dosing to time of last measurable data point adjusted for baseline value (before any trial drug administration) of area under the INR-time curve|0 hours (h), 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacodynamic (PD) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one PD endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PD evaluation.||ratio*h||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
818240|NCT01118117|Secondary|Procedural Success|Procedural success defined as: attainment of < 30% residual stenosis of the target lesion and no peri-procedural complications defined as: death, stroke, myocardial infarction, emergent surgical revascularization, significant distal embolization in target limb, and thrombosis of target vessel|Intra-procedure|||percentage of subjects with success|||Number
817533|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin: Peak Prothrombin Time (PTmax)|Peak prothrombin time|0 hours (h), 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacodynamic (PD) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one PD endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PD evaluation.||s||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817534|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin: Peak International Normalised Ratio Adjusted to Baseline (INRmax,Base)|Peak international normalised ratio for warfarin adjusted for baseline value (before any trial drug administration) of peak international normalised ratio|0 hours (h), 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacodynamic (PD) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one PD endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PD evaluation.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817535|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin: Area Under the INR-time Curve From 0 to Last Measurable Data Point (INR AUEC0-tz)|Area under the concentration time curve of the INR measurements over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point.|0 hours (h), 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacodynamic (PD) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one PD endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PD evaluation.||ratio*h||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817536|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin: Peak International Normalised Ratio (INRmax)|Peak international normalised ratio for warfarin, measured as the maximum INR over time.|0 hours (h), 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacodynamic (PD) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one PD endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PD evaluation.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817537|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin S-enantiomers: Apparent Volume of Distribution Following Extravascular Administration (Vz/F)|Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase λz following extravascular administration|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817538|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin S-enantiomers: Apparent Clearance After Extravascular Administration (CL/F)|Apparent clearance in plasma after extravascular administration|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817539|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin S-enantiomers: Mean Residence Time After Oral Administration (MRTpo)|Mean residence time of the analyte in the body after oral administration|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817540|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin S-enantiomers: Terminal Half-life (t1/2)|Terminal half-life of the analyte in plasma|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817541|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin S-enantiomers: Terminal Rate Constant (λz)|Terminal rate constant in plasma|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||1/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817542|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin S-enantiomers: Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|Time from dosing until maximum plasma concentration is reached|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Full Range|Median
817543|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin S-enantiomers: Area Under the Curve 0 to Last Measurable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time of dosing to time of last measurable data point.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
818241|NCT01118117|Secondary|Technical Success|"Technical Success defined by the following conditions:
Successful delivery of the stent at the lesion site
Stent(s) successfully deployed in lesion with adequate lesion coverage"|Intra-procedure|All subjects enrolled in pivotal trial||percentage of subjects with success|||Number
817544|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin R-enantiomers: Apparent Volume of Distribution Following Extravascular Administration (Vz/F)|Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase λz following extravascular administration|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817545|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin R-enantiomers: Apparent Clearance After Extravascular Administration (CL/F)|Apparent clearance in plasma after extravascular administration|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817546|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin R-enantiomers: Mean Residence Time After Oral Administration (MRTpo)|Mean residence time of the analyte in the body after oral administration|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817547|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin R-enantiomers: Terminal Half-life (t1/2)|Terminal half-life of the analyte in plasma|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817548|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin R-enantiomers: Terminal Rate Constant (λz)|Terminal rate constant in plasma|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||1/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817549|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin R-enantiomers: Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|Time from dosing until maximum plasma concentration is reached|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Full Range|Median
817550|NCT01111331|Secondary|Warfarin R-enantiomers: Area Under the Curve 0 to Last Measurable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time of dosing to time of last measurable data point.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817551|NCT01111331|Secondary|Empagliflozin: Apparent Volume of Distribution Following Extravascular Administration (Vz/F,ss)|"Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase at steady state following extravascular administration.
In addition to the below time frame, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 1, 3, and 4 for empa and a post-dose sample on day 1 for empa plus warfarin."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h post-dose on Day 5 for for empa; 0h, 20min, 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h for empa plus warfarin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817552|NCT01111331|Secondary|Empagliflozin: Apparent Clearance at Steady State (CL/F,ss)|"Apparent clearance in plasma after extravascular administration at steady state.
In addition to the below time frame, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 1, 3, and 4 for empa and a post-dose sample on day 1 for empa plus warfarin."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h post-dose on Day 5 for for empa; 0h, 20min, 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h for empa plus warfarin.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817553|NCT01111331|Secondary|Empagliflozin: Mean Residence Time at Steady State After Oral Administration (MRTpo,ss)|"Mean residence time of empagliflozin (empa) in the body at steady state after oral administration.
In addition to the below time frame, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 1, 3, and 4 for empa and a post-dose sample on day 1 for empa plus warfarin."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h post-dose on Day 5 for for empa; 0h, 20min, 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h for empa plus warfarin.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834868|NCT01280604|Primary|Triglyceride Levels|Triglyceride levels will be assessed in study participants 6-10 weeks after entry into study.|6-10 weeks|||milligram/deciliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817554|NCT01111331|Secondary|Empagliflozin: Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Tmax,ss)|"Time from last dosing to maximum plasma concentration at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ.
In addition to the below time frame, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 1, 3, and 4 for empa and a post-dose sample on day 1 for empa plus warfarin."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h post-dose on Day 5 for for empa; 0h, 20min, 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h for empa plus warfarin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Full Range|Median
817555|NCT01111331|Secondary|Empagliflozin: Terminal Half-life at Steady State (t1/2,ss)|"Terminal half-life of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma at steady state.
In addition to the below time frame, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 1, 3, and 4 for empa and a post-dose sample on day 1 for empa plus warfarin."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h post-dose on Day 5 for for empa; 0h, 20min, 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h for empa plus warfarin.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817556|NCT01111331|Secondary|Empagliflozin: Terminal Rate Constant at Steady State (λz,ss)|"Terminal rate constant of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma at steady state.
In addition to the below time frame, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 1, 3, and 4 for empa and a post-dose sample on day 1 for empa plus warfarin."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h post-dose on Day 5 for for empa; 0h, 20min, 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h for empa plus warfarin.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||1/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817557|NCT01111331|Secondary|Empagliflozin: Plasma Concentration 24 Hours After Administration of Dose (C24,N)|Plasma concentration of empagliflozin (empa) measured 24 hours after administration of the fourth dose (Cpre,5) and after the sixth dose (Cpre,7).|24 hours after dose 4 or 6 respectively (day 5 and day 7)|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817558|NCT01111331|Primary|Warfarin S-enantiomers: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817559|NCT01111331|Primary|Warfarin S-enantiomers: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time of dosing extrapolated to infinity.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817560|NCT01111331|Primary|Warfarin R-enantiomers: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817561|NCT01111331|Primary|Warfarin R-enantiomers: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time of dosing extrapolated to infinity.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h after administration of warfarin for both warfarin alone and warfarin plus empagliflozin|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817562|NCT01111331|Primary|Empagliflozin: Maximum Measured Concentration at Steady State(Cmax,ss)|"Maximum measured plasma concentration of empagliflozin (empa) for the dosing interval τ at steady state.
In addition to the below time frame, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 1, 3, and 4 for empa and a post-dose sample on day 1 for empa plus warfarin."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h post-dose on Day 5 for for empa; 0h, 20min, 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h for empa plus warfarin.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817583|NCT01111526|Primary|Phase I: Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) in Milligrams|MTD of LBH589 in addition to glucocorticoids as treatment for Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD) manifestations. MTD in Milligrams (mg), taken by mouth (PO), 3 times per week, for 4 weeks. The oral formulation replaced the IV formulation (which became unavailable) after the first 4 participants were treated. Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) is defined by the occurrence of Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) grade 3 or greater toxicity that is unexpected with transplantation, except for hematological toxicity, where DLT is defined as absolute neutrophil count (ANC) <750, and for those participants who were platelet transfusion independent is defined as platelets <10 K.|2 years, 8 months|All participants treated with Oral Formulation LBH589, during Phase I Dose Escalation.||MTD of oral LBH589 in milligrams|||Number
817563|NCT01111331|Primary|Empagliflozin: Area Under the Curve for the Dosing Interval at Steady State (AUCτ,ss)|"Area under the plasma concentration-time curve for the dosing interval τ at steady state
In addition to the specified time frame, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 1, 3, and 4 for empa and a post-dose sample on day 1 for empa plus warfarin."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h post-dose on Day 5 for for empa; 0h, 20min, 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h, 60h, 72h, 96h, 120h, 144h, 168h for empa plus warfarin.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817564|NCT01111370|Primary|the Proportion of G4 CGM System in Agreement With the Reference Standard|The proportion of G4 System values within (±) 20% of YSI reference value for glucose levels >80 mg/dL and (±) 20 mg/dL at YSI glucose levels <80 mg/dL. This is primarayly laboratory measurement outcome,and it is not measured by clinical outcome, for example, diagnosis, treatement and complication, and clinical effectiveness, etc.|Assessment done on either Day 1, 4 or 7 of the sensor wear period|Randomly enrolled||%20/20||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817565|NCT01111461|Other Pre-specified|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) Median|The antiangiogenic and direct antitumor effects of lenvatinib were assessed by analyses of two DCE-MRI/DWI MRI scans obtained on evaluable participants at Baseline and Cycle 1 Day 5. The scans were obtained using standardized acquisition across sites. DWI sequences totaling approximately 30 seconds were acquired during the DCE-MRI scans. Centralized analysis metrics for DCE-MRI included the percentage change in ADC for gadolinium chelate movement from the vasculature into the tissue extracellular space from baseline.|Cycle 1 Day 5|Imaging biomarker analysis set included those participants who received at least 1 dose of lenvatinib and had, at a minimum, a baseline and 1 postbaseline evaluable imaging assessment. n = 2 participants with evaluable data.||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
817566|NCT01111461|Other Pre-specified|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Contrast Volume Transfer Coefficient (Ktrans) Median|The antiangiogenic and direct antitumor effects of lenvatinib were assessed by analyses of two DCE-MRI/DWI MRI scans obtained on evaluable participants at Baseline and Cycle 1 Day 5. The scans were obtained using standardized acquisition across sites. DWI sequences totaling approximately 30 seconds were acquired during the DCE-MRI scans. Centralized analysis metrics for DCE-MRI included the percentage change in Ktrans for gadolinium chelate movement from the vasculature into the tissue extracellular space from baseline.|Cycle 1 Day 5|Imaging biomarker analysis set included those participants who received at least 1 dose of lenvatinib and had, at a minimum, a baseline and 1 postbaseline evaluable imaging assessment. n = 4 participants with evaluable data.||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
817567|NCT01111461|Other Pre-specified|Percentage Change From Baseline for the Imaging Biomarker Parameter of the Area Under the Plasma Concentration Curve Blood Normalized (90) (AUCBN (90)) Median for Total Volume|The antiangiogenic and direct antitumor effects of lenvatinib were assessed by analyses of 2 dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging/diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI/DWI MRI) scans obtained on evaluable participants at Baseline and Cycle 1 Day 5. The scans were obtained using standardized acquisition across sites. DWI sequences totaling approximately 30 seconds were acquired during the DCE-MRI scans. Centralized analysis metrics for DCE-MRI included percentage change in initial area under the gadolinium contrast agent time-concentration curve (first 90 seconds, blood normalized) from baseline.|Cycle 1 Day 5|Imaging biomarker analysis set included those participants who received at least 1 dose of lenvatinib and had, at minimum, a baseline and 1 postbaseline evaluable imaging assessment. n = 4 participants with evaluable data.||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
817568|NCT01111461|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Plasma Concentration of Lenvatinib|A total of 6 blood samples for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis were collected from each participant who received lenvatinib once daily.|Predose and 2 hours postdose on Cycle 1 Day 1, Cycle 1 Day 8, and Cycle 2 Day 1|PK analysis set was used and included all participants with an evaluable plasma concentration.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817569|NCT01111461|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) /Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability of Lenvatinib Tolerability of Lenvatinib|Safety was assessed by monitoring and recording all AEs and SAEs, regular monitoring of hematology, clinical chemistry, and urine values, regular measurement of vital signs, electrocardiograms (ECGs), and echocardiograms.|From the administration of first dose up to 30 days after the last dose, or up to data cut-off (21 May 2012), or up to approximately 26 months.|Safety Analysis Set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of lenvatinib and had at least 1 postbaseline safety evaluation. This was the analysis set for all safety evaluations.||Participants|||Number
817570|NCT01111461|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR)|CBR was defined as the percentage of participants with BOR of CR or PR or durable stable disease (dSD) [CR + PR + dSD] based on RECIST 1.1. The dSD rate was defined as the percentage of participants with dSD (based on RECIST 1.1 and defined as SD lasting greater than or equal to 23 weeks), as determined by the IRR and Investigator.|From date of first administration of study treatment until the date of first documentation of disease progression or date of death, if death occurred prior to disease progression, or up to approximately 26 months (as of 21 May 2012 data cut-off)|Full Analysis Set (ITT Population) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of lenvatinib.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817571|NCT01111461|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|DCR was defined as the percentage of participants with BOR of CR or PR or stable disease (SD) based on RECIST 1.1 and SD lasting greater than or equal to 7 weeks, as determined by IRR and Investigator.|From date of first administration of study treatment until the date of first documentation of disease progression or date of death, if death occurred prior to disease progression, or up to approximately 26 months (as of 21 May 2012 data cut-off)|Full Analysis Set (ITT Population) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of lenvatinib.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817584|NCT01111838|Primary|To Determine Overall Objective Response.|Patients with measurable disease will be evaluated using RECIST criteria for determination of response.|every 8 weeks|||participants|||Number
817585|NCT01111851|Secondary|Brain NK1-receptor Occupancy at 120 Hours Post Dose||120 hours post dose|"All participants with at least 1 successful postdose PET
scan were included in the analysis population."||Percent of occupancy||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
817572|NCT01111461|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was the length time in months from the date of first treatment until the date of death from any cause. If death was not observed, OS was censored at the last known alive date or data cut-off. Additional survival follow-up data was collected for all participants who had not withdrawn consent and were alive at the time of the initial survival follow-up as of 26 Nov 2012 data cut-off. Participants who were lost to follow-up at the time of the initial assessment may have been contacted again at the investigator's discretion. Updated survival (based on 26 Nov 2012 cut-off) was derived for these participants if the contact was made successfully.|From date of first administration of study treatment until the date of death, or up to approximately 32 months (as of 26 Nov 2012 data cut-off)|Full Analysis Set (ITT Population) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of lenvatinib.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817573|NCT01111461|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was measured as the time from the date of first administration of study treatment until the date of first documentation of disease progression or date of death (whichever occurred first), as determined by independent radiologic review (IRR) and Investigator based on RECIST 1.1. Disease progression per RECIST v1.1 was defined as at least a 20% relative increase and 5 mm absolute increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the smallest sum on study) recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions.|From date of first administration of study treatment until the date of first documentation of disease progression or date of death, if death occurred prior to disease progression or up to approximately 26 months (as of 21 May 2012 data cut-off)|Full Analysis Set (ITT Population) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of lenvatinib.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817574|NCT01111461|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|ORR was defined as the percentage of participants with best overall response (BOR) of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 for target lesions assessed by magnetic resonance imaging/computed tomography (MRI/CT) scans, as determined by independent radiologic review. BOR of CR was confirmed by a subsequent CR assessment at least 4 weeks later. BOR of PR was confirmed by a subsequent CR or PR assessment at least 4 weeks later. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (target or non-target) had to be reduced in short axis to <10 mm. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters. The null hypothesis ORR was ≤10% was tested using 1-sided exact test of a single proportion, at 1-sided 0.05 level. ORR was presented with corresponding 2-sided, 95% confidence interval (CI). ORR=CR+PR|From the date of first administration of study treatment until all participants completed a minimum of 6 cycles (28-day cycles) or discontinued treatment prior to the end of Cycle 6 (as of 21 May 2012 data cut-off)|Full Analysis Set (Intent-to-Treat [ITT] Analysis Set) was used and included all participants who received at least 1 dose lenvatinib.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817575|NCT01111526|Secondary|Occurrence of Possibly Related Adverse Events|Number of participants with adverse events possibly related to study treatment, per event category.|5 years, 3 months|All participants||participants|||Number
817576|NCT01111526|Secondary|Stable or Improved Chronic GVHD Severity Score|Stable or improved Chronic GVHD score: Improved Mild to None; Improved Severe to Moderate; Improved Moderate to None, Remained Stable at Mild.|1 year|All participants that received Oral Formulation LBH589 at MTD (5 mg) 3 times per week, for 4 weeks, had overlap syndrome at MTD and were evaluable at 1 year.||participants|||Number
817577|NCT01111526|Secondary|Chronic GVHD Severity at MTD|Chronic GVHD maximum severity grade at MTD, in participants without overlap syndrome at initiation of study therapy. Maximum c-GVHD severity: Mild, Moderate, Severe.|Up to 1 year|All participants that received Oral Formulation LBH589 at MTD (5 mg) 3 times per week, for 4 weeks, had overlap syndrome at MTD and were evaluable at time of analysis.||participants|||Number
817578|NCT01111526|Secondary|Chronic GVHD Onset|Chronic GVHD onset in participants without overlap syndrome at initiation of study therapy. Number of participants with overlap syndrome at MTD.|Up to 1 year|All participants that received Oral Formulation LBH589 at MTD (5 mg) 3 times per week, for 4 weeks.||participants|||Number
817579|NCT01111526|Secondary|Occurrence of Discontinuation of All Immune Suppression|Number of participants discontinuing all immune suppression without subsequent flare by 1 year post initiation of therapy.|1 year|All participants that received Oral Formulation LBH589 at MTD (5 mg) 3 times per week, for 4 weeks and were evaluable at 365 days.||participants|||Number
817580|NCT01111526|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall Survival (OS) at one year post initiation of therapy.|1 year|All participants that received Oral Formulation LBH589 at MTD (5 mg) 3 times per week, for 4 weeks.||participants|||Number
817581|NCT01111526|Secondary|Incidence of GVHD Flares Requiring Increasing Immune Suppressive Therapy|Number of participants with GVHD flares requiring increasing immune suppressive therapy within 36 days of study initiation. Cumulative incidence of GVHD flares requiring increasing immune suppressive therapy will be analyzed using the competing risk method by Gray (1988). GVHD flares (progressive disease (PD)) may result in discontinuation from Panobinostat.|Up to 36 days per participant|All participants that received Oral Formulation LBH589 at MTD (5 mg) 3 times per week, for 4 weeks.||participants|||Number
817582|NCT01111526|Primary|Phase II: Overall Rate of Response (ORR)|Rate of Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), Progressive Disease (PD) and Stable Disease (SD). Assessment of GVHD will include the skin, liver and gut. Other possible etiologies of organ disease such as C difficile enterocolitis, viral infection, drug reaction, veno-occlusive disease of the liver, etc., will be excluded by appropriate tests. CR is defined as resolution of GVHD in all evaluable organs with no subsequent additional treatment given for acute GVHD. PR is defined as improvement in ≥ one evaluable organ without deterioration in at least one other. PD is defined as deterioration in at least on evaluable organ. SD is defined as the absence of any difference sufficient to meet minimal criteria for improvement or deterioration in any evaluable organs.|1 year, 2 months|All participants treated at maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of Oral Formulation LBH589, and evaluable at planned time of analysis.||participants|||Number
817586|NCT01111851|Secondary|Brain NK1-receptor Occupancy at the Time of the Maximum Concentration (Tmax)||30 minutes after the end of the 20-minute infusion of fosaprepitant or at 4 hours after oral dosing of aprepitant|"All participants with at least 1 successful postdose PET
scan were included in the analysis population."||Percent of occupancy||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839182|NCT01324622|Secondary|Functional Improvement Using the Neck Disability Index (NDI)||up to 24 months|Due to the study’s early termination, no data were collected for this outcome|||||
817595|NCT01112670|Other Pre-specified|Relative Change in Sitagliptin Renal Clearance (CLr)|CLr of sitagliptin when administered with atorvastatin divided by CLr of sitagliptin when administered alone|0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study and who had complete urine data.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817596|NCT01112670|Secondary|Sitagliptin + Atorvastatin: Sitagliptin Renal Clearance (CLr)||0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours post-dose|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study and who had complete urine data.||ml/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
817597|NCT01112670|Primary|Sitagliptin Monotherapy: Sitagliptin Renal Clearance (CLr)||0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours post-dose|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study and who had complete urine data.||ml/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
817598|NCT01112670|Other Pre-specified|Relative Change in Sitagliptin Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|Cmax of sitagliptin when administered with atorvastatin divided by Cmax of sitagliptin when administered alone|0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours post-dose|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817599|NCT01112670|Other Pre-specified|Relative Change in Sitagliptin Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) From 0 to Infinity|AUC of sitagliptin when administered with atorvastatin divided by AUC of sitagliptin when administered alone|0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours post-dose|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817600|NCT01112670|Secondary|Sitagliptin + Atorvastatin: Sitagliptin Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours post-dose|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
817601|NCT01112670|Secondary|Sitagliptin + Atorvastatin: Sitagliptin Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) From 0 to Infinity||0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours post-dose|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study.||ng*h/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
817602|NCT01112670|Primary|Sitagliptin Monotherapy: Sitagliptin Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours post-dose|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
817603|NCT01112670|Primary|Sitagliptin Monotherapy: Sitagliptin Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) From 0 to Infinity||0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24 hours post-dose|The population analyzed included participants who completed both periods of the pharmacokinetic crossover study.||ng*hr/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
817604|NCT01112683|Secondary|Changes of Safety and Tolerability Assessments at Baseline and End of Study|Clinical history and physical examinations, electrocardiograms (ECGs), comprehensive clinical laboratory tests, and incidence of adverse event recording. The comprehensive clinical laboratory tests will include assessments of liver and kidney function, electrolytes, acid/base balance, and blood glucose and proteins. In addition, pregnancy tests will be performed on all female participants of childbearing potential.|Safety and tolerability assessments will be performed at three time points: 1) 1-7 days before beginning of treatment; 2) after 8 weeks from the beginning of the treatment; and 3) 16-17 weeks from the beginning of the treatment|||participants|||Number
817605|NCT01112683|Secondary|Changes in Benchmark Neuropsychological Measures From Baseline to End of Study|"The neuropsychological benchmark measures assessed in this study are
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III (PPVT-III; range: -27.00 to 23.00)
Test for the Reception of Grammar (TROG; range: -13.00 to 19.00)
Verbal Fluency (from the Developmental Neuropsychological Assessment (NEPSY); range: -13.00 to 10.00)
Recall of Digits (Differential Ability Scales; DAS; -50.00 to 59.00)
Spatial working memory (SWM; part of the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery, or CANTAB; range: -9.00 to 8.00)
Scales of Independent Behavior Revised (SIB-R; -12.00 to 26.00) All listed values represent differences in scores obtained at baseline subtracted from scores at 16-weeks of treatment. With the exception of the spatial working memory, for all measures, higher values represent better outcome. For the spatial working memory, lower values represent better outcome."|Benchmark neuropsychological measures will be assessed one time 24 hours before the beginning of treatment and then a second time 16 weeks from the beginning of the treatment|These measures were not predicted to change due to memantine treatment. Measures of non-verbal reasoning, receptive language and vocabulary, short-term phonological memory, verbal and non-verbal working memory and adaptive/behavioral functioning were included.||scores on a scale||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817606|NCT01112683|Primary|Changes in Neuropsychological Measures From Baseline to End of Study|"The hippocampus-dependent measures assessed in the present study are
Pattern recognition memory* - Measures visual memory for non-namable designs; scale range in dataset 4-24; higher score indicates better performance
Paired associates task* - Measures ability to learn visual associations between a picture and its location, and retention of this information over time; scale range in dataset 0-17; higher score indicates better performance
California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT) — Children's Version** - Measures episodic verbal memory (sum of the items recalled over the 4 learning trials); scale range in dataset 0-35; higher score indicates better performance
Rivermead Behavioral Memory Test-Children's version** - Measures episodic memory for visual information presented in context; scale range in dataset 1-20; higher score indicates better performance * used in power analysis calculation of sample size ** secondary measures associated with the primary hypothesis"|These neuropsychological measures will be assessed one time 24 hours before the beginning of treatment and then a second time 16 weeks from the beginning of the treatment|One participant dropped out of the study due to parent complaints of increased anxiety, and another was excluded from analyses due to side effects (increased and persistent anxiety) reported at study completion.||units on a scale||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
817607|NCT01112696|Secondary|Device Related Moderate or Device Related Severe Adverse Events|"Device related moderate adverse event: low level of inconvenience or concern to the subject and may interfere with daily activities but is usually improved by simple therapeutic remedy.
Device related severe adverse event: interrupts a subject's daily activity and typically requires intervening treatment.
Note: device related determination is made by the site that there is a reasonable possibility that the adverse event may have been caused by the device."|days one through six of sensor wear||||||
817608|NCT01112696|Primary|Glucose Sensor Accuracy When Compared to Laboratory Standard (YSI): Proportion of Glucose Sensor Readings That Met Accuracy Criteria|The primary accuracy parameter (primary effectiveness endpoint) was the comparative readings of paired sensor and YSI glucose readings, measured on days 1 through 6. Accuracy is defined as within 20% agreement between YSI and paired sensor (within 20 mg/dL if YSI <80 mg/dL). Accuracy ranges from 0 - 100, with higher number suggests better accuracy.|Days one through six of sensor use|98 subjects of 100 enrolled subjects (a total of 5857 paired sensor and YSI readings) completed participation in the inpatient frequent blood sampling procedure.||paired sensor and YSI glucose readings|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
817609|NCT01112865|Secondary|Ease of Use of Each Injection Pen|Participants were asked the following question from Section I of the IPAQ PRO tool, “Thinking about the injection pen you have been using for the past few months, how easy or difficult it is for you to use the injection pen overall?” Responses were provided using a 5 point scale which ranged from very easy (5), somewhat easy (4), neither easy nor difficult (3), somewhat difficult (2), or very difficult (1).|Month 2 and Month 4|FAS; Number of participants analyzed (N) = participants with evaluable data||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817610|NCT01112865|Secondary|Percentage of Dyads and Adult Participants Who Would Choose the New Genotropin Mark VII Injection Pen in Preference to the Genotropin® Pen|"Investigators were asked the following study treatment continuation question, Which device did the participant choose for continued treatment? Choices included the Genotropin® Pen or the new injection pen."|Month 4|FAS subset of participants located in areas where the new device was available.||percentage of dyads, adult participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817611|NCT01112865|Secondary|Percentage of Dyads and Adult Participants Reporting the New Genotropin Mark VII Injection Pen Preferable Compared to the Genotropin Pen®|"Participants were asked the following question from Section II of the IPAQ PRO tool, Thinking about both injection pens over the past few months, please choose which injection pen you prefer overall. Choices included: prefer Genotropin Pen®, prefer new injection pen, or no preference."|Month 4|FAS||percentage of dyads, adult participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817612|NCT01112865|Secondary|Percentage of Dyads and Adult Participants Reporting the New Genotropin Mark VII Injection Pen Easier to Use Compared to the Genotropin Pen®|"Participants were asked the following question from Section II of the IPAQ PRO tool, Thinking about the Genotropin pen and the new injection pen you used over the past few months, please compare both injection pens and choose which one is easier to use overall? Choices included: Genotropin Pen® easier to use, new injection pen easier to use, or no difference."|Month 4|FAS; Number of participants analyzed (N)= participants with evaluable data||percentage of dyads, adult participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817613|NCT01112865|Secondary|Percentage of Dyads and Adult Participants Reporting no Preference or Preference for the New Genotropin Mark VII Injection Pen Compared to the Genotropin Pen®|"Participants were asked the following question from Section II of the IPAQ PRO tool, Thinking about both injection pens over the past few months, please choose which injection pen you prefer overall. Choices included: prefer Genotropin Pen®, prefer new injection pen, or no preference."|Month 4|FAS||percentage of dyads, adult participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817614|NCT01112865|Primary|Percentage of Dyads (Participant and Caregiver or Parent) and Adult Participants Reporting no Difference or Easier to Use for the New Genotropin Mark VII Injection Pen Compared to the Genotropin Pen®|"Participants were asked the following question from Section II of the Injection Pen Assessment Questionnaire (IPAQ) patient-reported outcome (PRO) tool, Thinking about the Genotropin pen and the new injection pen you used over the past few months, please compare both injection pens and choose which one is easier to use overall? Choices included: Genotropin Pen® easier to use, new injection pen easier to use, or no difference."|Month 4|Full Analysis Set (FAS): randomized participants who used a study pen at least once to administer somatropin; Number of participants analyzed (N)= participants with evaluable data. Dyad defined as the participant (child being treated) and adult partner (parent or caregiver).||percentage of dyads, adult participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817615|NCT01112917|Secondary|Major Device-Related Adverse Events in Converted Subjects||6-months|There was one subject (007-006) excluded as no 6-month images were available although a 6-month assessment was conducted.||participants|||Number
817616|NCT01112917|Primary|Technical Success|Technical success is defined as filter conversion without the loss of filter head components in the vasculature or incomplete opening of filtering legs. Further, in the analysis of the data, the sponsor did not count any filters as a ‘technically’ successful conversion when the operator was unable to snare the filter hook during an attempted conversion.|6-months|||participants|||Number
817617|NCT01113008|Secondary|Cardiovascular Mortality||12 month|||participants|||Number
817618|NCT01113008|Secondary|Readmission Due to Acute Coronary Syndrome||12 month|||participants|||Number
817619|NCT01113008|Primary|Maximum Increase of Troponin at 24 Hours||24 hours|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817620|NCT01113385|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Complete or Partial Remission at 16 Weeks|Results will be considered clinically significant if the following criteria is met in response to oral galactose therapy at week 16. Complete remission is defined as (Urine Protein:Creatinine ratio [UPC] <0.2 g/g). Partial remission is defined as UPC 0.2-2 g/g.|16 weeks|||participants in remission at 16 weeks|||Number
817621|NCT01113385|Primary|Focal Segmental Glomerulosclerosis Permeability Factor (FSPF)|FSPF is reported in relation to its induction of glomerular albumin permeability (Palb) of isolated glomeruli on a range from 0 to 1, with 0 indicative of normal glomeruli and 1 indicative of injury to the permeability barrier. Results will be considered clinically significant if the following criteria is met in response to oral galactose therapy at week 16: Reduction in FSPF to <0.5 Palb or decrease in FSPF by > 0.3 Palb.|16 weeks|||Palb||Standard Deviation|Mean
817622|NCT01113398|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience Treatment-related Grade 2 or Greater CNS Hemorrhage or Grade 4 or Greater Non-hematologic Toxicities|The percentage of participants who experience unacceptable toxicity, defined as any treatment-related grade 2 or greater CNS hemorrhage or grade 4 or greater non-hematologic toxicity, will be calculated.|2 years|Intent-to-treat||percentage of participants|||Number
818242|NCT01118117|Secondary|Device Related Peri-Procedural Complications|Peri-procedural (prior to discharge) measure of success (i.e., patency and none of the following: death, stroke, MI, embolization, thrombosis, and occlusion)|Prior to Hosptial Discharge|All enrolled participants evaluated prior to hospital discharge||percentage of subjects with event|||Number
817623|NCT01113398|Secondary|Six-month Progression-free Survival (PFS6)|The percentage of participants alive and progression-free at 6 months after the start of study treatment will be determined. PFS6 will be calculated from the date study treatment started until the date of progression or death, or the date of last follow-up if participants are alive without progression. Kaplan-Meier methods will be used to estimate survival.|6 months|Intent-to-treat||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817624|NCT01113398|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival is defined as the time in months from the start of protocol treatment until the date of death, or the date of last follow-up if alive. Kaplan-Meier methods will be used to estimate overall survival.|2 years|Intent-to-treat||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817625|NCT01113398|Primary|Radiographic Response|The percentage of participants with a complete or partial response as determined by modified Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria will be determined. Complete Response (CR) is defined as complete disappearance on MR/CT of all enhancing tumor and mass effect, off all corticosteroids (or receiving only adrenal replacement doses) and accompanied by a stable or improving neurologic examination. Partial Response (PR) is defined as greater than or equal to 50% reduction in tumor size on MR/CT by bi-dimensional measurement, on a stable or decreasing dose of corticosteroids and accompanied by a stable or improving neurologic examination. Tumor assessments are done at baseline and the end of every 6-week cycle thereafter.|2 years|Intent-to-treat||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817626|NCT01113463|Secondary|Number of Participants by Response Criteria|Complete Response (CR): Complete disappearance all measurable & evaluable disease. No new lesions or evidence of non-evaluable disease. Partial Response (PR): >/= 50% decrease under baseline in sum of products of perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions. No progression of evaluable disease, nor new lesions. Stable/No Response: Does not qualify for CR, PR, or progression. The designation of Stable/No Response requires a minimum of 12 weeks duration. Progression: 25% increase in sum of products of all measurable lesions over smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease) using same techniques as baseline, OR clear worsening of any evaluable disease, OR appearance of any new lesion/site, OR failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition (unless clearly unrelated to this cancer). Unknown: Progression not been documented & one or more measurable or evaluable sites have not been assessed.|Response obtained between days 15 and 21 of every even cycle and/or when clinically indicated, up to 6 months (approximately 9 completed cycles)|Intent to treat population included all eligible subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
817627|NCT01113463|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) at 6 Months|"PFS defined as number of participants alive without documented evidence of disease progression (progression free) at 6 months. Progression-free survival calculated from the date of Day 1 Cycle 1 to the date that criteria for progression of disease is first seen. Progression is defined as 25% increase in the sum of products of all measurable lesions over smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease) using the same techniques as baseline, OR clear worsening of any evaluable disease, OR appearance of any new lesion/site, OR failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition (unless clearly unrelated to this cancer)."|6 months (following nine 21-day cycles)|Intent to treat population included all eligible subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
817628|NCT01113541|Secondary|Number of Participants With Suicidal Tendencies (Columbian-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, [C-SSRS], Mapped to C-CASA [Columbia Classification Algorithm For Suicide Assessment])|C-SSRS is a participant rated questionnaire to assess suicidal ideation, suicidal behavior, actual attempts (yes or no responses), and intensity of ideation (rated 1=low severity to 5=high severity). Yes/No responses are mapped to Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA) categories: Completed suicide, suicide attempt, preparatory acts toward imminent suicidal behavior, suicidal ideation, and self-injurious behavior, or no suicidal intent. A participant could have a yes or no response in more than one category.|Baseline, Week 1 through Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||participants|||Number
817629|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite Version (IWQOL-Lite) Scale|31-item self report inventory to assess impact of weight on quality of life. Five subscales: physical functioning, self-esteem, sexual life, public distress, and work, with categories in each subscale scored 1 (no trouble or difficulty) to 5 (persistent trouble or difficulty). The rescaled IWQoL-Lite score is determined by the sum of scores on all 31 items and rescaling this sum to a 1 to 100 scoring with 0=the poorest and 100=the best quality of life.|Baseline, Week 28, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817630|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life (EuroQol) Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-5D VAS): Current Health State Score|EQ-5D: subject rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.|Baseline, Week 28, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||scores on scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817631|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQoL Index (EQ-I)|EQ-5D: subject rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.|Baseline, Week 28, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||scores on scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817660|NCT01113580|Primary|The Percentage of Evaluable Participants Achieving a HI Titre ≥ 40 or Single Radial Haemolysis (SRH) Area ≥ 25 mm2.||Approximately 21 days after vaccination|The Evaluable Population comprised all participants who were vaccinated with the study vaccine, provided both pre- and post-vaccination antibody titre results, and were not excluded from the analyses (eg, for the use of a prohibited medication or a laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection between Visits 1 and 2).||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817632|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS)|0-100 single score scale focusing exclusively on participant's level of social and occupational functioning; not directly influenced by overall severity of participant's psychological symptoms; higher score = higher level of functioning. 1 to 10 = persistent inability to maintain minimal personal hygiene; unable to function without harming self or others or without considerable external support; 91 to 100 = superior functioning in a wide range of activities.|Baseline, Week 28, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||scores on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817633|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI)|DAI, a 10-item scale to assess how the attitude of schizophrenia participants toward their medications may affect compliance. Respondents indicate 'true' or 'false' for each item. An overall calculated score ranged from -10 to 10, where a positive score indicated a positive subjective response (compliant), a negative score indicated non-compliance. Change: score at observation minus score at baseline.|Week 28, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817634|NCT01113541|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Subscale Score|CGI-I: 7-point clinician rated scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Improvement is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), or 3 (minimally improved) on the scale. Higher score = more affected.|Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817635|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) Subscale|CGI-S: 7-point clinician rated scale to assess severity of participant's current illness state; range: 1 (normal - not ill at all) to 7 (among the most extremely ill patients). Higher score = more affected.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 12, Week 28, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817636|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS)|11-item scale that measures the severity of manic episodes from subject reported symptoms over previous 48 hours and clinical observation during interview. Four items (irritability, speech, thought content, disruptive-aggressive behaviour) are rated on a scale from 0 (symptom not present) to 8 (symptom extremely severe). The remaining 7 items (elevated mood, increased motor activity-energy, sexual interest, sleep, language-thought disorder, appearance, insight) are rated on a scale from 0 (symptom not present) to 4 (symptom extremely severe). YMRS total score range = 0 to 60.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 12, Week 28, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||scores on a scale|||Number
817637|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) - Total Score|Measures the overall severity of depressive symptoms. The MADRS has a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale of 0-6, for a total score range of 0 (low severity of depressive symptoms) to 60 (high severity of depressive symptoms).|Baseline, Week 4, Week 12, Week 28, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817638|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Physical Activity Index|Physical activity (exercise) score derived for each participant based on the frequency and intensity of physical activities: regular walking, recreational activity, cycling, and sporting activity. Six categories of total score: inactive (range: 0-2), occasional (range: 3-5), light (range: 6-8), moderate (range: 9-12), moderately vigorous (range: 13-20), and vigorous (≥21). Higher score = higher frequency and intensity of physical activity.|Baseline, Week 28, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||units on a scale|||Number
817639|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Leptin||Baseline, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||nanograms per milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817640|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein B (ApoB) Levels||Baseline, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||milligrams per deciliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817641|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Corrected QT Interval (QTc): Fridericia's Heart Rate Correction Formula (QTcF)|QT interval is the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave in the cardiac electrical cycle. QTc is the QT interval corrected for heart rate. Corrected QT interval using Fridericia's heart rate correction formula: QTcF = QT/RR^1/3, where RR=RR interval in seconds.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT; n = number of participants with analyzable data at observation.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817642|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Levels||Baseline, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Insulin levels not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||international units per milliliter||Full Range|Median
817643|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)||Baseline, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Median was reported due to small sample size and risk of skewing. Last observation = last observation while on study drug or during the lag.||percent HbA1c||Full Range|Median
817644|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI)|Body mass index = weight in kilograms (kg) / height in meters (m)^2 .|Baseline, Week 4, Week 12, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Results for BMI not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
817645|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weight||Baseline, Week 4, Week 12, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT; n = number of participants with evaluable data at observation.||kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
817646|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol and Low-density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol Levels||Baseline, Week 52 or Early Termination|PP and ITT. Median was reported due to small sample size and risk of skewing.||milligrams per deciliter||Full Range|Median
818258|NCT01118273|Secondary|Global Assessment of Study Medication as a Pain Reliever|Subject responded to question, 'How would you rating this study medication you received as a pain-reliever?' with the following choices: Poor (0), Fair(1), Good(2), Very Good(3), Excellent(4)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Participants|||Number
817647|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ten-year Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) Risk According to Framingham Scoring System|Framingham scoring system risk factors: age (risk points range: -9 to 16), cholesterol (risk points range: 0 to 13), HDL cholesterol (risk points range: -1 to 2), smoking (risk points range: 0 to 9), and systolic blood pressure (risk points range: 0 to 6); total risk points range <0 to ≥25, higher score indicates higher 10 year risk (range <1% to ≥30% 10 year risk).|Baseline, Week 4, Week 52|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817648|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Individual Risk Factors of Metabolic Syndrome (MS): Elevated Triglycerides|MS risk factor elevated triglycerides defined as ≥1.7 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) (1≥50 mg/dL).|Baseline, Week 4, Week 12, Week 52|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||millimoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817649|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Individual Risk Factors of Metabolic Syndrome (MS): Reduced High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C)|MS risk factor reduced HDL-C defined as <1.03 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) (<40 mg/dL) in men and <1.3 mmol/L (<50 mg/dL) in women.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 12, Week 52|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||millimoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817650|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Individual Risk Factors of Metabolic Syndrome (MS): Elevated Fasting Glucose|MS risk factor elevated fasting glucose defined as ≥5.6 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) (≥100 mg/dL).|Baseline, Week 4, Week 12, Week 52|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||millimoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817651|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Individual Risk Factors of Metabolic Syndrome (MS): Elevated Systolic/Diastolic Blood Pressure|MS risk factor elevated systolic/diastolic blood pressure defined as systolic blood pressure ≥130 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg) and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥85 mm Hg.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 12, Week 52|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||millimeters of mercury||Standard Deviation|Mean
817652|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Individual Risk Factors of Metabolic Syndrome (MS): Elevated Waist Circumference|MS risk factor elevated waist circumference defined as ≥102 centimeters (cm) in men and ≥88 cm in women (Asian origin: ≥90 cm [men] and ≥80 cm [women]).|Baseline, Week 4, Week 12, Week 52|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817653|NCT01113541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Individual Metabolic Syndrome (MS) Risk Factors|MS risks factors = elevated waist circumference: ≥102 cm in men and ≥88 cm in women (Asian origin: ≥90 cm [men] and ≥80 cm [women]); elevated triglycerides: ≥1.7 mmol/L (1≥50 mg/dL); reduced HDL-C: <1.03 mmol/L (<40 mg/dL) in men and <1.3 mmol/L (<50 mg/dL) in women; elevated fasting glucose: ≥5.6 mmol/L (≥100 mg/dL); and elevated systolic/diastolic blood pressure: systolic blood pressure ≥130 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥85 mm Hg.|Baseline through Week 52|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
817654|NCT01113541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Participants With Each Individual Metabolic Syndrome (MS) Risk Factor|MS risks factors: elevated waist circumference: ≥102 cm in men and ≥88 cm in women (Asian origin: ≥90 cm [men] and ≥80 cm [women]); elevated triglycerides: ≥1.7 mmol/L (1≥50 mg/dL); reduced HDL-C: <1.03 mmol/L (<40 mg/dL) in men and <1.3 mmol/L (<50 mg/dL) in women; elevated fasting glucose: ≥5.6 mmol/L (≥100 mg/dL); and elevated systolic/diastolic blood pressure: systolic blood pressure ≥130 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥85 mm Hg.|Baseline through Week 52|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
817655|NCT01113541|Secondary|Metabolic Syndrome (MS) Prevalence|Percentage of participants at each visit defined as having metabolic syndrome (MS) based on the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III. MS = 3 or more of 5 characteristics: abdominal obesity, hypertriglyceridemia, low high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, high blood pressure, and high fasting glucose.|Baseline through Week 52|PP and ITT. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
817656|NCT01113541|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Number of Risk Factors of Metabolic Syndrome (MS)|MS risks factors: elevated waist circumference: ≥102 cm in men and ≥88 cm in women (Asian origin: ≥90 cm [men] and ≥80 cm [women]); elevated triglycerides: ≥1.7 mmol/L (1≥50 mg/dL); reduced HDL-C: <1.03 mmol/L (<40 mg/dL) in men and <1.3 mmol/L (<50 mg/dL) in women; elevated fasting glucose: ≥5.6 mmol/L (≥100 mg/dL); and elevated systolic/diastolic blood pressure: systolic blood pressure ≥130 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥85 mm Hg.|Baseline, Week 52|PP and Intent-to-treat (ITT) population; ITT population = all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of study medication and who had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline MS measurement. Results not reported: data not summarized due to limited enrollment and early termination of the study.||risk factors||Standard Deviation|Mean
817657|NCT01113541|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Reduction From Baseline of at Least 1 Risk Factor for Metabolic Syndrome (MS) at Week 52 or Premature Discontinuation|MS risks factors: elevated (el) waist circumference: ≥102 centimeters (cm) in men and ≥88 cm in women (Asian origin: ≥90 cm [men] and ≥80 cm [women]); el triglycerides: ≥1.7 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) (1≥50 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL]); reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C): <1.03 mmol/L (<40 mg/dL) in men and <1.3 mmol/L (<50 mg/dL) in women; el fasting glucose: ≥5.6 mmol/L (≥100 mg/dL); and el systolic/diastolic blood pressure: systolic ≥130 millimeters of mercury (mmHg) and/or diastolic ≥85 mmHg. Responder = at least 1 less risk factor at endpoint than baseline.|Week 52 or Early Termination|Per protocol population: all subjects in the intent-to-treat population who remained in the study for at least 28 weeks. N = number of participants with analyzable data at observation.||percentage of participants|||Number
817658|NCT01113580|Secondary|Frequency and Intensity of Any Unsolicited Adverse Events|"Unsolicited adverse event (UAE) grading:
Mild: Symptoms were easily tolerated and there was no interference with daily activities. Moderate: Enough discomfort to have caused some interference with daily activities. Severe: Symptoms that prevented normal, everyday activities."|After vaccination until the end of the study; approximately 21 days|The Safety Population comprised all participants who received study vaccine and provided follow-up safety data.||participants|||Number
817661|NCT01113580|Primary|The Geometric Mean Fold Increase (GMFI) in Antibody Titre After Vaccination.|GMFI is defined as the geometric mean of the fold increases of post-vaccination antibody titre over the pre-vaccination antibody titre.|Approximately 21 days after vaccination|The Evaluable Population comprised all participants who were vaccinated with the study vaccine, provided both pre- and post-vaccination antibody titre results, and were not excluded from the analyses (eg, for the use of a prohibited medication or a laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection between Visits 1 and 2).||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817662|NCT01113580|Primary|The Percentage of Evaluable Participants Achieving Seroconversion or Significant Increase in Antibody Titre.|As per the criteria specified in the CPMP/BWP/214/96 Note for Guidance on Harmonisation of Requirements for Influenza Vaccines. For haemagglutination inhibition (HI), seroconversion is defined as achieving a post-vaccination titre of ≥ 40 for those participants with a pre-vaccination HI titre of < 10; significant increase is defined as a four-fold or greater increase in HI titre for those participants with a pre-vaccination HI titre of ≥ 10.|Approximately 21 days after vaccination|The Evaluable Population comprised all participants who were vaccinated with the study vaccine, provided both pre- and post-vaccination antibody titre results, and were not excluded from the analyses (eg, for the use of a prohibited medication or a laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection between Visits 1 and 2).||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817663|NCT01113632|Secondary|Safety of the Treatment Regimen|Listing of all non-serious Adverse Events ocurring in 5% of patients or more|18 Months|||participants|||Number
817664|NCT01113632|Secondary|Number of Partial Responses|The Number of Patients Who Experience a Partial Response From Treatment. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI or CT: Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions|18 Months|All patients who were evaluable for a response assessment||participants|||Number
817665|NCT01113632|Secondary|Number of Complete Responses|The Number of Patients Who Experience a Complete Response From Treatment. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI or CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions|18 Months|All patients who were evaluable for a response assessment||participants|||Number
817666|NCT01113632|Primary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|The Number of Patients Who Experience an Objective Benefit From Treatment. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI or CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|18 months|All patients who were evaluable for a response assessment||participants|||Number
817667|NCT01113632|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|To assess the overall response rate of patients with previously untreated CLL or SLL receiving ofatumumab.|18 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817668|NCT01113710|Secondary|Daytime Tiredness|"Daytime tiredness measured as change from baseline to end of observation period (Item 6 RLS-6 scale).
The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was utilized for all outcomes.
The RLS-6 scale is an 11-point scale (from 0 = not present/completely satisfied to 10 = very severe/completely dissatisfied) to establish an individual severity profile at various day and night times (at bedtime; during the night; during the day when the patients are resting, or during the day when the patients are involved in daily activities)."|From Baseline to end of Observation Period (3 months).|"Of the 564 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 561 are included in this analysis.
The FAS consists of all patients receiving treatment with Rotigotine at least once & for whom valid scores for item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale at baseline & at least one valid post baseline score for both item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale is documented."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817669|NCT01113710|Secondary|Severity of Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) at Daytime in Activity|"Severity of RLS at daytime in activity measured as change from baseline to end of observation period (Item 5 RLS-6 scale).
The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was utilized for all outcomes.
The RLS-6 scale is an 11-point scale (from 0 = not present/completely satisfied to 10 = very severe/completely dissatisfied) to establish an individual severity profile at various day and night times (at bedtime; during the night; during the day when the patients are resting, or during the day when the patients are involved in daily activities)."|From Baseline to end of Observation Period (3 months).|"Of the 564 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 564 are included in this analysis.
The FAS consists of all patients receiving treatment with Rotigotine at least once & for whom valid scores for item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale at baseline & at least one valid post baseline score for both item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale is documented."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817670|NCT01113710|Secondary|Severity of Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) at Daytime at Rest|"Severity of RLS at daytime at rest measured as change from baseline to end of observation period (Item 4 RLS-6 scale).
The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was utilized for all outcomes.
The RLS-6 scale is an 11-point scale (from 0 = not present/completely satisfied to 10 = very severe/completely dissatisfied) to establish an individual severity profile at various day and night times (at bedtime; during the night; during the day when the patients are resting, or during the day when the patients are involved in daily activities)."|From Baseline to end of Observation Period (3 months).|"Of the 564 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 562 are included in this analysis.
The FAS consists of all patients receiving treatment with Rotigotine at least once & for whom valid scores for item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale at baseline & at least one valid post baseline score for both item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale is documented."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817671|NCT01113710|Secondary|Satisfaction With Sleep|"Satisfaction with sleep measured as change from baseline to end of observation period (Item 1 RLS-6 scale).
The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was utilized for all outcomes.
The RLS-6 scale is an 11-point scale (from 0 = not present/completely satisfied to 10 = very severe/completely dissatisfied) to establish an individual severity profile at various day and night times (at bedtime; during the night; during the day when the patients are resting, or during the day when the patients are involved in daily activities)."|From Baseline to end of Observation Period (3 months).|"Of the 564 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 564 are included in this analysis.
The FAS consists of all patients receiving treatment with Rotigotine at least once & for whom valid scores for item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale at baseline & at least one valid post baseline score for both item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale is documented."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817672|NCT01113710|Primary|Severity of Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) During the Night|"Severity of RLS during the night measured as change from baseline to end of observation period (Item 3 RLS-6 scale).
The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was utilized for all outcomes.
The RLS-6 scale is an 11-point scale (from 0 = not present/completely satisfied to 10 = very severe/completely dissatisfied) to establish an individual severity profile at various day and night times (at bedtime; during the night; during the day when the patients are resting, or during the day when the patients are involved in daily activities)."|From Baseline to end of Observation Period (3 months).|"Of the 564 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 564 are included in this analysis.
The FAS consists of all patients receiving treatment with Rotigotine at least once & for whom valid scores for item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale at baseline & at least one valid post baseline score for both item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale is documented."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817673|NCT01113710|Primary|Severity of Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) at Bedtime|"Severity of RLS at bedtime measured as change from baseline to end of observation period (Item 2 RLS-6 scale).
The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was utilized for all outcomes.
The RLS-6 scale is an 11-point scale (from 0 = not present/completely satisfied to 10 = very severe/completely dissatisfied) to establish an individual severity profile at various day and night times (at bedtime; during the night; during the day when the patients are resting, or during the day when the patients are involved in daily activities)."|From Baseline to end of Observation Period (3 months).|"Of the 564 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 564 are included in this analysis.
The FAS consists of all patients receiving treatment with Rotigotine at least once & for whom valid scores for item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale at baseline & at least one valid post baseline score for both item 2 & item 3 of the RLS-6 scale is documented."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817674|NCT01113723|Primary|Time to Confirm the Placement of the Tracheal Tube|It is the time (in seconds) following initial insertion of laryngoscope blade to confirm with CO2 waveform|up tp 3 minutes|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817675|NCT01113723|Primary|Intubation Time (Seconds)|Times (seconds) following initial insertion of laryngoscope blade to placement of tracheal tube|3 minutes|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817676|NCT01113723|Secondary|Time to Obtain Glottis Visualization (Seconds)|Time to Obtain Glottis Visualization (Seconds): View of the glottis during the beginning of the intubation procedure. (approximately 1 minute) Glottic (the opening between the vocal cords at the upper part of the larynx) visualization comparison between the two devices in patients with an unstable cervical spine.|1 minute|Time to Obtain Glottis Visualization (Seconds) Glottic visualization during the beginning of the intubation procedure.||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
817677|NCT01113749|Post-Hoc|Percentage of Subjects With Weight Loss|Percentage of subjects with weight loss at 9 months|9 months|intention to treat||percentage of participants|||Number
817678|NCT01113749|Secondary|Percent With Treatment Decisions|Treatment decisions are expressed as percentage of subjects with discussions of new tube feeding, new orders to forego tube feeding, and new choices for assisted feeding.|3 months|||percentage of subjects|||Number
817679|NCT01113749|Primary|Decisional Conflict Scale|Decisional Conflict Scale measures conflict in decisions Total scale range 1-5 with lower scores indicating less conflict.|3 months|intention to treat||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817680|NCT01113931|Secondary|Microbiological Cure C. Trachomatis, N. Gonorrhoea Negative Population, Day 28, Percentage Participants Cured|Percentage Participants cured in N. gonorrhoea Negative Population: cured defined as both microbiological cure (negative result for urogenital C. trachomatis, determined by GP AC2 NAAT/Gen-Probe Aptima Combo 2 Nucleic Acid Amplification test) and clinical cure (males defined as resolution of baseline signs/symptoms of dysuria, urethral pruritis and urethral discharge, and resolution of exam finding of urethral discharge; females - resolution of exam finding of endocervical discharge) at Day 28|Day 28|N. gonorrhoea Population. Only subjects with an evaluable outcome are included in the analysis.||Percentage Participants Cured||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817681|NCT01113931|Secondary|Microbiological Cure C. Trachomatis and M. Genitalium, M. Genitalium Coinfected Population, Day 28, Percentage Participants Cured|Percentage Subjects Cured of both M. genitalium and C. trachomatis M. genitalium co-infected population: microbiological cure for both at Day 28, defined as negative PCR (polymerase chain reaction) for M. genitalium and negative GP AC2 NAAT (Gen-Probe Aptima Combo 2 Nucleic Acid Amplification test) for C. trachomatis at Day 28|End of Study (Day 28)|M. genitalium Coinfected Population||Percentage Participants Cured|||Number
817682|NCT01113931|Secondary|Microbiological Cure and Clinical Cure of C. Trachomatis, Day 28, Clinically Evaluable Population, Percentage Participants Cured|Microbiological cure (defined as a negative result for urogenital C. trachomatis, determined by GP AC2 NAAT/Gen-Probe Aptima Combo 2 Nucleic Acid Amplification Test and clinical cure (for males defined as resolution of baseline signs/symptoms of dysuria, urethral pruritus and urethral discharge, and resolution of exam finding of urethral discharge; for females resolution of exam finding of endocervical discharge) at Day 28|End of Study (Day 28)|Clinically Evaluable Population||Percentage Particpants Cured|||Number
817683|NCT01113931|Primary|Microbiological Cure Rate|Percentage of Subjects in mITT Population with Microbiological Cure defined as a negative result for C. trachomatis as determined by GP AC2 NAAT (Gen-Probe Aptima Combo 2 Nucleic Acid Amplification Test) at Day 28|Day 28|mITT Population - all randomized subjects who had positive NAAT for C. trachomatis at Baseline and took at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants cured||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817684|NCT01114334|Secondary|Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Instrument for Assessing Depressive Symptoms|"Depressive symptoms were measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) instrument. The PHQ-9 is a nine item survey to assess depressive symptoms over the previous 2 weeks. The patient may answer not at all (scored as a 0) , several days (scored as a 1), more than half the days (scored as a 2), or nearly every day (scored as a 3) for each item. The range in total scores is from 0 (no depressive symptoms or best outcome) to 27 (severe depressive symptoms or worst outcome). For this randomized trial mean total scores are reported."|36 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817699|NCT01114360|Secondary|Mean Daytime Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|The daytime systolic blood pressure was calculated as the average systolic blood pressure during daytime period based on 24hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Means of multiple measurements were reported|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817685|NCT01114334|Secondary|Adherence to Treatment With Antidepressant Medication|"Antidepressant Adherence will be measured with Computerized Pharmacy Records. Adherence will be operationalized as non-persistence, or time to discontinuation. Non-persistence will be considered to have occurred if the days of medication supply from the previous prescription plus a 30-day grace period exceed the number of days between the previous prescription date and the current prescription fill date. Filling no prescriptions, 'initiation failure,' will be treated as non-persistence. Minimally adequate persistence was defined as at least three 30-day fills of an antidepressant medication at a usual dose as defined in the American Psychiatric Association guideline without a 30-day gap in refills. The count of participants receiving minimally adequate persistence with antidepressant medication is reported for each study group."|36 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
817686|NCT01114334|Primary|Depression Remission|The primary outcome is depression remission ascertained with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. A score of less than 5 is considered to represent remission. The secondary clinical outcome is the continuous measure of depressive symptoms.|36 weeks|We present clinical outcome (remission rate) at 36 weeks for all patient participants entering the study. 58 of 80 subjects assigned to Guideline-Based Medical Management, and 67 of 88 subjects assigned to Motivational Interview with Guideline-Based Medical Management had available data at 36 weeks (end of trial).||participants|||Number
817687|NCT01114360|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Melatonin-related Side Effect.||After 4 weeks of treatment|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||percentage of total number of patients|||Number
817688|NCT01114360|Secondary|Nocturnal Dipping of Blood Pressure|Nocturnal dipping is the mean nighttime to mean daytime systolic and diastolic blood pressure ratios, or the percentage drop in nocturnal SBP compared to day time SBP. Night was defined as 10:00 PM through 5:59 AM. This ratio is calculated by the ambulatory blood pressure readings.|At the end of 4 weeks|||percentage ratio in night/day SBP||Standard Error|Mean
817689|NCT01114360|Secondary|Total Sleep Time|The total sleep time will be measured by polysomnography (PSG) using an Embla polysomnograph. The nocturnal total sleep time (TST) or the the total number of minutes in any stage of sleep during the major nocturnal sleep period was measured by PSG.|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||minutes||Standard Error|Mean
817690|NCT01114360|Secondary|Plasma P-Selectin|P-Selectin is a marker of endothelial function. Levels of p-selectin were measured from stored plasma using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||ng/ml||Standard Error|Mean
817691|NCT01114360|Secondary|Plasma E-Selectin|E-Selectin is a marker of endothelial function. Levels of e-selectin were measured from stored plasma using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||ng/ml||Standard Error|Mean
817692|NCT01114360|Secondary|Urinary Adrenaline Excretion Rate|The rate of urinary adrenaline excretion was measured by the Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) method from urine samples collected overnight.|At the end of 4 weeks|40 patients were enrolled in the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 patients completed the study and were their own controls.||ng/ml/min||Standard Error|Mean
817693|NCT01114360|Secondary|Urinary Noradrenaline Excretion Rate|The rate of urinary noradrenaline excretion was measured by the Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) method from urine samples collected overnight.|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||ng/ml/min||Standard Error|Mean
817694|NCT01114360|Secondary|Urinary Dopamine Excretion Rate|The rate of urinary dopamine excretion was measured by the Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) method from urine samples collected overnight.|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||ng/ml/min||Standard Error|Mean
817695|NCT01114360|Primary|Mean Nighttime Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|The nighttime diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was recorded using an ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitor. The measurements occurring from the onset of self-reported sleep to the end of self-reported sleep were recorded. Means of multiple measurements were reported|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817696|NCT01114360|Secondary|Mean Daytime Heart Rate (HR)|Daytime heart rate is the number of the pulsations of the heart per unit of time during the day. It is measured in beats per minute (bpm). Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was used to calculate the heart rate. Means of multiple measurements were reported|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||beats per minute||Standard Error|Mean
817697|NCT01114360|Secondary|Mean Daytime Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP)|Daytime mean arterial pressure (MAP) is the average blood pressure in the subject's arteries during one cardiac cycle (one complete heartbeat) during the day. It is calculated using the formula, MAP = 1/3(SBP-DBP)+DBP; where SBP is the systolic blood pressure and DBP is the diastolic blood pressure. Means of multiple measurements were reported.|At the end of 4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817698|NCT01114360|Secondary|Mean Daytime Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|The daytime diastolic blood pressure was calculated as the average diastolic blood pressure during the daytime period based on 24 hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Means of multiple measurements were reported|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
839183|NCT01324622|Secondary|Pain Scores on the Visual Analog Scale||Up to 24 months|Due to the study’s early termination, no data were collected for this outcome.|||||
817700|NCT01114360|Secondary|Mean Nighttime Heart Rate (HR)|Nighttime heart rate is number of pulsations of the heart per unit of time during nighttime sleep. It is measured in beats per minute (bpm). Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was used to calculate the heart rate. Means of multiple measurements were reported|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||beats per minute||Standard Error|Mean
817701|NCT01114360|Secondary|Mean Nighttime Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP)|Nighttime mean arterial pressure (MAP) is the average blood pressure in the subject's arteries during one cardiac cycle (one complete heartbeat) at night. It is calculated using the formula, MAP = 1/3(SBP-DBP)+DBP; where SBP is the systolic blood pressure and DBP is the diastolic blood pressure. Means of multiple measurements were reported|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817702|NCT01114360|Primary|Mean Nighttime Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|The nighttime systolic blood pressure (SBP) was recorded using an ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitor. The measurements occurring from the onset of self-reported sleep to the end of self-reported sleep were recorded. Means of multiple measurements were reported.|At the end of 4 weeks|37 subjects enrolled the study. 1 subject did not complete the two arms of the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817703|NCT01114373|Secondary|Total Sleep Time|The total sleep time will be measured by polysomnography (PSG) using an Embla polysomnograph. The nocturnal total sleep time (TST) or the the total number of minutes in any stage of sleep during the major nocturnal sleep period was measured by PSG.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||minutes||Standard Error|Mean
817704|NCT01114373|Secondary|Plasma P-Selectin|P-Selectin is a marker of endothelial function. Levels of p-selectin were measured from stored plasma using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||ng/ml||Standard Error|Mean
817705|NCT01114373|Secondary|Plasma E-Selectin|E-Selectin is a marker of endothelial function. Levels of e-selectin were measured from stored plasma using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||ng/ml||Standard Error|Mean
817706|NCT01114373|Secondary|Urinary Adrenaline Excretion Rate|The rate of urinary adrenaline excretion was measured by the Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) method from urine samples collected overnight.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||ng/ml/min||Standard Error|Mean
817707|NCT01114373|Secondary|Urinary Noradrenaline Excretion Rate|The rate of urinary noradrenaline excretion was measured by the Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) method from urine samples collected overnight.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||ng/ml/min||Standard Error|Mean
817708|NCT01114373|Secondary|Urinary Dopamine Excretion Rate|The rate of urinary dopamine excretion was measured by the Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) method from urine samples collected overnight.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||ng/ml/min||Standard Error|Mean
817709|NCT01114373|Secondary|Mean Daytime Heart Rate (HR)|Daytime heart rate is the number of pulsations of the heart per unit of time. It is measured in beats per minute (bpm). The ambulatory blood pressure monitor was used to calculate the heart rate. Means of multiple measurements are reported.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||beats per minute||Standard Error|Mean
817710|NCT01114373|Secondary|Mean Daytime Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP)|Daytime mean arterial pressure (MAP) is the average blood pressure in the subject's arteries during one cardiac cycle (one complete heartbeat) during the day. It is calculated using the formula, MAP = 1/3(SBP-DBP)+DBP; where SBP is the systolic blood pressure and DBP is the diastolic blood pressure. Means of multiple measurements are reported.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817711|NCT01114373|Secondary|Mean Daytime Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|The daytime diastolic blood pressure was calculated as the average diastolic blood pressure during the daytime period based on 24 hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Means of multiple measurements are reported.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817712|NCT01114373|Secondary|Mean Daytime Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|The daytime systolic blood pressure was calculated as the average systolic blood pressure during daytime period based on 24hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Means of multiple measurements are reported.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817713|NCT01114373|Secondary|Mean Nighttime Heart Rate (HR)|Nighttime heart rate is the number of pulsations of the heart per unit of time. It is measured in beats per minute (bpm). The ambulatory blood pressure monitor was used to calculate the heart rate. Means of multiple measurements are reported.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||beats per minute||Standard Error|Mean
817714|NCT01114373|Secondary|Mean Nighttime Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP)|Nighttime mean arterial pressure (MAP) is the average blood pressure in the subject's arteries during one cardiac cycle (one complete heartbeat) at night. It is calculated using the formula, MAP = 1/3(SBP-DBP)+DBP; where SBP is the systolic blood pressure and DBP is the diastolic blood pressure. Means of multiple measurements are reported.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817715|NCT01114373|Primary|Mean Nighttime Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|The nighttime diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was recorded using an ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitor. The measurements occurring from the onset of self-reported sleep to the end of self-reported sleep were recorded. Means of multiple measurements are reported.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817716|NCT01114373|Primary|Mean Nighttime Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|The nighttime systolic blood pressure (SBP) was recorded using an ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitor. The measurements occurring from the onset of self-reported sleep to the end of self-reported sleep were recorded. Means of multiple measurements are reported.|4 weeks|40 subjects enrolled the study. 4 subjects did not complete the study. 36 subjects completed the study in a crossover design, being their own controls.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
817717|NCT01114438|Primary|Change From Baseline in SF 36v2 Quality of Life Assessment|Quality of life was measured using Survey Form SF-36v2 licensed from Quality Metric, Inc (Lincoln, RI). Physical and Mental component scores were measured at baseline, month 12 (at the time of explant) and 6 months post explant with results self-recorded by each subject. The SF-36 v2 physical component summary (PCS) score as well as the mental component summary score (MCS) ranged between 0 and 100, with higher scores reflecting better quality of life in each case.|Baseline, 12 months (explant), 6 months post explant (18 months post baseline)|The number of participants analyzed reflects all participants who received the implant and were assessed for QoL at the respective time points.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817718|NCT01114438|Primary|Changes in Diabetic Medications at Treatment Completion Compared to Baseline|number of patients with a decrease, increase or no change in diabetic medications at time of EndoBarrier explantation (treatment completion)|12 months|Analysis was conducted on subjects with a device||Participants|||Count of Participants
817719|NCT01114438|Primary|Total Weight Change From Baseline to Week 52|Total weight change at 12 months (kg) compared to baseline|12 months|Analysis was conducted on the Full Analysis Set (FAS) defined as all subjects enrolled and implanted with the EndoBarrier, There were 29 subjects' data available for weight loss analysis at the defined 12 month endpoint.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817720|NCT01114438|Primary|HbA1c (%) Measured at Week 52||12 months|Analysis was conducted on the Full Analysis Set (FAS) defined as all subjects enrolled and implanted with the EndoBarrier, There were 29 subjects' data available for analysis of HbA1c at the defined 12 month (week 52) endpoint.||% glycated hemoglobin||Full Range|Median
817721|NCT01114503|Secondary|Assessment of Exploratory Biomarkers of Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Transcription Analysis of Peripheral Blood|The exploratory biomarkers of RNA transcription analysis of peripheral blood was planned to be assessed on Day 1(pre dose), Week 4 and Week 24. The assessment was to be done using microarray and RNA expression using quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). This endpoint was not analyzed due to the early termination of the study and since only 2 participants were recruited.|Up to Week 24|All Subjects Population. No participants were available for analysis because of early termination of study.|||||
817722|NCT01114503|Secondary|Assessment of Exploratory Biomarkers|The exploratory biomarkers were planned to be assessed on Day 1 (pre dose), Week 4, Week 12 and Week 24. It included assessment of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) markers, suppression assays for the measure of effector cell proliferation, quantification of effector memory T-cells subsets, autoreactivity assays using cytokine production of supernatants and CFSE dilution, cytokine production by in-vitro stimulated T-cells, circulating serum biomarkers and may include subsequently discovered biomarkers of the biological response associated with GO or medically related conditions and/or the action of otelixizumab. This endpoint was not analyzed due to the early termination of the study and since only 2 participants were recruited.|Up to Week 24|All Subjects Population. No participants were available for analysis because of early termination of study.|||||
817723|NCT01114503|Secondary|Assessment of Circulating Cytokines of Interleukin 6 (IL6), IL10, Interferon Gamma (IFNγ) and Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNFα) up to 2 Weeks|Assessment of circulating cytokines of IL6, IL10, IFNγ and TNFα was planned to be assessed on Day 1-8 (pre dose) and Week 12. This endpoint was not analyzed due to the early termination of the study and since only 2 participants were recruited.|Up to Week 2|All Subjects Population. No participants were available for analysis because of early termination of study.|||||
817724|NCT01114503|Secondary|Assessment of Anti-otelixizumab Antibodies|Anti-otelixizumab antibodies were planned to be assessed on Day 1 (pre dose), Day 8 (pre dose), Week 4-24 and Month 12. This endpoint was not analyzed due to the early termination of the study and since only 2 participants were recruited.|Up to Month 12|All Subjects Population. No participants were available for analysis because of early termination of study.|||||
817725|NCT01114503|Secondary|Change From Baseline Measurement of Orbital Volume as Measured by Computed Tomography (CT) Scan|The assessment of orbital volume measured by CT scan was planned to be assessed on Week 12 and Week 24. Baseline was referred to assessment at Screening. Change from Baseline was defined as post-Baseline value minus Baseline value. This endpoint was not analyzed due to the early termination of the study and since only 2 participants were recruited.|Baseline (Screening), Week 12 and Week 24|All Subjects Population. No participants were available for analysis because of early termination of study.|||||
817726|NCT01114503|Secondary|Change From Baseline for Participant-reported Health Related Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaires of Short Form 36 ( SF-36) and Graves Ophthalmopathy (GO) QoL|Assessment of health related QoL was planned to be evaluated using the validated, disease specific, GO-QoL questionnaire and the SF-36 health survey questionnaire at Day 1 (pre dose) and Week 2- 24. Mean scores range from 0 (minimum) - 100 (maximum) with higher mean scores reflected better outcomes. Baseline was referred to assessment on Day 1 (pre dose). Change from Baseline was defined as post-Baseline value minus Baseline value. This endpoint was not analyzed due to the early termination of the study and since only 2 participants were recruited.|Baseline (Day 1, pre dose) to Week 24|All Subjects Population. No participants were available for analysis because of early termination of study.|||||
817727|NCT01114503|Secondary|Change From Baseline for Individual Scores at Week 12 Incorporated in the European Group on Graves’ Orbitopathy (EUGOGO) Assessment Including, Eyelid Swelling, Clinical Activity Score (CAS) Score, Proptosis, Lid Width and Diplopia|The EUGOGO assessment of change was defined by improvement or deterioration of clinical scores. Improvement in EUGOGO was defined as improvement in two of the following measures in at least one eye, without deterioration in any of the same measures in both eyes: eyelid swelling according to color atlas evaluation, CAS by at least 2 points, proptosis by at least 2 millimeter (mm) by Hertel exophthalmometer, lid width by at least 2 mm, diplopia (disappearance or change in the degree) or improvement of >=8 degrees in motility unexplained by commensurate deterioration of motility of ipsilateral antagonists. Deterioration was defined by worsening by same quantity (as for improvement) of the same measures. Baseline was referred to assessment on Day 1 (pre dose). Change from Baseline was defined as post-Baseline value minus Baseline value. This endpoint was not analyzed due to the early termination of the study and since only 2 participants were recruited.|Baseline (Day 1, pre dose) and Week 12|All Subjects Population. No participants were available for analysis because of early termination of study.|||||
817728|NCT01114503|Primary|Assessment of CD3/T-cell Receptor (TCR) Complex Saturation and Modulation|The assessment of CD3/TCR complex saturation and modulation was planned to be assessed on Day (1-8) pre dose, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12 and Week 24. The extent of modulation was to be determined by the extent of TCR alpha beta (αβ) expression which was proportional to the combined levels of free CD3 sites and bound otelixizumab to CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Bound levels of otelixizumab was planned to be determined by using flow cytometry method using an anti Immunoglobulin (Ig) antibody. The molecules of equivalent soluble fluorochrome (MESF) of the anti-Ig antibody was to be used to quantify the levels of bound otelixizumab present on T cells. Free otelixizumab binding sites (i.e., sites not occupied by otelixizumab administered to the participants) was to be detected by staining with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) labelled otelixizumab. This endpoint was not analyzed due to the early termination of the study and since only 2 participants were recruited.|Up to Week 24|All Subjects Population. No participants were available for analysis because of early termination of study.|||||
817729|NCT01114503|Primary|Percentage of Circulating Peripheral T-cells, CD4+ and CD8+ Subset Counts|The lymphocyte subsets of T-cells, CD4+ and CD8+ cells were planned to be assessed at Day 1 (pre dose), Day 8 (pre dose), Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12 and Week 24. The percentages of relevant lymphocyte subsets was to be determined by flow cytometry. This endpoint was not analyzed due to the early termination of the study and since only 2 participants were recruited.|Up to Week 24|All Subjects Population. No participants were available for analysis because of early termination of study.|||||
817730|NCT01114503|Primary|Individual Absolute Circulating Peripheral T Lymphocytes (T-cells), CD4+ and CD8+ Subset Counts|The lymphocyte subsets of T-cells, CD4+ and CD8+ cells were planned to be assessed at Day 1 (pre dose), Day 8 (pre dose), Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12 and Week 24. The absolute counts of the relevant lymphocyte subsets was to be determined by multiplying the percentages of the cell subsets with total lymphocyte counts. The percentages of relevant lymphocyte subsets was to be determined by flow cytometry. This endpoint was not analyzed due to the early termination of the study and since only 2 participants were recruited.|Up to Week 24|All Subjects Population. No participants were available for analysis because of early termination of study.|||||
817731|NCT01114503|Primary|Number of Participants With an Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) Viral Load Abnormalities Meeting the Criteria for PCC|The PCC range for EBV viral load was > 10,000 copies of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) per million lymphocytes. The assessments were done at Week 2, Week 4, Week 8 and Week 12.|Week 2 to Week 12|All Subjects Population||Participants|||Number
817732|NCT01114503|Primary|Number of Participants With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities Meeting the Criteria for PCC|ECG parameters included pulse rate (PR) interval, QRS interval, QT interval, corrected QT interval using Bazett's formula (QTcB) and corrected QT interval using Fridericia's formula (QTcF). Criteria for ECG changes meeting potential clinical concern included: PR interval <110 and >220 milliseconds (msec); QRS interval <75 and >110 msec; QTc interval >480 to <= 500 msec, increase from baseline QTc >30 to <= 60 msec.|Screening (Day –35 to Day –1)|All Subjects Population||Participants|||Number
817733|NCT01114503|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs Abnormalities Meeting the Criteria for PCC|Vital signs assessment included pulse rate, blood pressure, temperature and respiratory rate. Criteria for vital sign values meeting potential clinical concern included: supine pulse rate <40 or >110 beats per minute (bpm), >= 15 increase from baseline and >= 30 decrease from baseline; systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 85 and > 160 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg), >= 20 mmHg increase from baseline and >= 40 mmHg decrease from baseline; diastolic blood pressure (DBP) < 45 and > 100 mm Hg, >= 10 mmHg increase from baseline and >= 20 mmHg decrease from baseline.|Up to Month 24 (Long term follow-up)|All Subjects Population||Participants|||Number
817734|NCT01114503|Primary|Number of Participants With Thyroid Function Assessment, Hormone and Glucose Assay Abnormalities Meeting the Criteria for PCC|The following laboratory parameters were analyzed: thyroid function assessment (thyroid stimulating hormone [TSH], thyroid peroxidase antibody, thyrotropin receptor antibodies (TSH-R-Abs) or TSH-binding inhibiting immunoglobulin (TBII), free thyroxine [fT4], free triiodothyronine [fT3]; hormone and glucose assays (cortisol, adrenocorticotrophic hormone [ACTH], insulin-like growth factor [IgF-1] and plasma glucose. Thyroid function tests were done at Day 1 (pre-dose) and Week 4-24. Hormone and glucose assays were done at Day 1 (pre-dose) and Week 2-24.|Up to Week 24|All Subjects Population||Participants|||Number
817735|NCT01114503|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Urinalysis Abnormalities Meeting the Criteria for PCC|The urinalysis parameters included pH, glucose, protein, blood and ketones by dipstic and microscopy (if urine dipstick was positive for blood or protein). The assessments were done at Day 1 (pre dose), Day 8, Week 2-24, Month 12 and 24.|Up to Month 24 (Long term follow-up)|All Subjects Population||Participants|||Number
817736|NCT01114503|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Hematology Abnormalities Meeting the Criteria for PCC|The PCC range for hematology parameters included white blood cell count, low- < 3 giga cells (GI)/L, high- > 20 GI/L; neutrophil count, low- < 1.5 GI/L; hemoglobin, low- > 25 g/L change from baseline, high- 180 g/L; hematocrit, low- > 0.075 L change from baseline, high- 0.54 L; platelet count, low- < 100 GI/L, high- >550 GI/L and lymphocytes, low < 0.8 GI/L. The assessments were done at Day 1 (pre dose), Day 8, Week 2-24, Month 12 and 24.|Upto Month 24 (Long term follow-up)|All Subjects Population||Participants|||Number
817737|NCT01114503|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Clinical Chemistry Abnormalities Meeting the Criteria for Potential Clinical Concern (PCC)|The PCC range for clinical chemistry parameters included albumin, <30 gram per liter (g/L); calcium, low- < 2.0 millimole (mmol)/L: high->2.75 mmol/L; creatinine, high- > 1.3x ULN mmol/L or > 159 micromole (μmol)/L or > 44 μmol/L change from Baseline; glucose, low- < 3.0 mmol/L, high- > 9.0 0 mmol/L; magnesium, low- < 0.5 mmol/L, high- > 1.23 mmol/L, phosphorus, low- < 0.8 mmol/L, high- > 1.6 mmol/L; potassium, Low- < 3.0 mmol/L, high- > 5.5 mmol/L; sodium, low- < 130 mmol/L, high- > 150 mmol/L; bicarbonate, low- < 18 mmol/L, high- > 32 mmol/L; alanine aminotransferase, high->= 2x ULN, where the normal range was (NR) 0 – 39 international units (IU)/L; aspartate aminotransferase, high- >= 2x ULN, where NR was 0 – 39 IU/L; alkaline phosphatase, high- >= 1.5x ULN, where NR was 35 – 120 IU/L; total bilirubin- >= 1.5x ULN, where NR was 0 – 18 μmol/L.The assessments were done at Day 1 (pre dose), Day 8, Week 2-24 and Month 12 and 24.|Up to Month 24 (Long term follow-up)|All Subjects Population||Participants|||Number
817738|NCT01114503|Primary|Number of Participants With at Least One Adverse Event (AE), Serious Adverse Event (SAE), or Drug-related Adverse Event|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in this definition, associated with liver injury and impaired liver function defined as alanine aminotransferase >=3 x upper limit of normal (ULN), and total bilirubin >=2 x ULN or international normalized ratio >1.5. The classification as potentially drug-related was done based on the investigator's judgment.|Up to Month 24 (Long term follow-up)|All Subjects Population included all participants who receive at least one dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
817739|NCT01114516|Secondary|Birthweight|Median birthweight|24 weeks|||grams||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817740|NCT01114516|Secondary|Neonatal Morbidity and Mortality|Days spent in the neonatal intensive care unit|1 year|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817741|NCT01114516|Secondary|Gestational Age at Delivery|Median gestational age at delivery|24 weeks|||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817742|NCT01114516|Secondary|Gestational Latency of More Than 28 Days|The frequency of achieving a gestational latency of more than 28 days|28 days postpartum|||percentage of participants|||Number
817743|NCT01114516|Primary|Gestational Latency Achieved Between Cerclage Placement and Time of Delivery|Median gestational latency achieved Between Cerclage Placement and Time of Delivery|24 weeks|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
817744|NCT01114529|Secondary|Comparison of Incidence Rates of Efficacy Endpoints Between Treatment Arms (Full Analysis Set - 24 Month Analysis)|(treated BPAR ≥ IB, graft loss or death)A comparison of the incidence rates for the individual components of the composite efficacy endpoint between treatment arms|at 24 months post-transplantation|Full Analysis Set||Number of incidence|||Number
817745|NCT01114529|Secondary|Change in Left Ventricular Mass Index (LVMi) From Randomization to Month 12 and Month 24|Evolution of left ventricular mass and hypertrophy were evaluated by left ventricular mass index (LVMi) assessed by echocardiography. LVMi is derived using a standard formula from dimensional measurements on the echocardiogram. Analysis of covariance was applied with treatment, center (as a random effect), and donor type as factors and LVMi at Randomization as covariate.|Randomization, Month 12 and Month 24|Full Analysis Set consists of only patients with triple LVMi values available at randomization, Month 12 and month 24 are included||g/m^2.7||Standard Deviation|Mean
817746|NCT01114529|Secondary|Incidence of Composite Efficacy Endpoint for Each Arm at Month 12 and Month 24|Efficacy failure rate used the composite endpoint of: (1) treated biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR)*, (2) graft loss**, or (3) death . *A treated BPAR was defined as a biopsy graded IA, IB, IIA, IIB, or III and which was treated with anti-rejection therapy. **Graft loss is defined as when the allograft was presumed lost on the day the participant started dialysis and was not able to subsequently be removed from dialysis or re-transplanted.|at 12 months and month 24 post-transplantation|Full Analysis Set||Number of incidence|||Number
817747|NCT01114529|Primary|Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR)|Assessment of renal function by comparing change from randomization to Month 12 in eGFR ‎‎(MDRD4) between treatment arms (Full analysis set). Renal function was assessed by estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula. MDRD formula: GFR [mL/min/1.73m˄2] = 186.3*(C˄-1.154)*(A˄-0.203)*G*R. DEFINITIONS: C = serum concentration of creatinine [mg/dL]; A = age [years]; G = 0.742 when gender is female, otherwise G = 1; R = 1.21 when race is black, otherwise R = 1‎|Month 12|Full Analysis set - observed eGFR values at month 12 (counted the patients with available values)||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
817748|NCT01114581|Secondary|Assess Sputum Properties (Objective Measures) and Symptoms (Subjective Measures) After Treatment With Mucinex or Placebo.||Within 10 days of developing symptoms associated with a respiratory tract infection||||||
817749|NCT01114581|Secondary|Guaifenesin AUC(0-3)||3 hours following dose administration|||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817750|NCT01114581|Primary|Percent of Inhaled Radioactive Tracer Particles Cleared From Lungs|Percentage of inhaled radioactive tracer (Ave180Clear)|3 hours following inhalation of radioactive tracer particles|Intent to treat||Percentage of inhaled radioactive tracer||Standard Deviation|Mean
817751|NCT01114672|Primary|Severity of Pruritis|"Randomized patients will fill out a survey with questions about the degree and location of their pruritis at baseline and end of study. The total score ranged from 0-21 with 21 being the most severe and zero being the absence of any of the measures of pruritis.
Last observation was carried forward to end of study. A decrease in the Severity of Pruritis score over time indicated an improvement in the severity of pruritis."|Baseline and end of study (up to 12 weeks)|Number randomized in each arm 25||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817767|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) Parent-Global Executive Composite (GEC) T Score From Baseline to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on executive function through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
The scoring for the GEC T Score is complex and is achieved using proprietary software designed to generate scores based on raw data collected. Higher scores suggest a higher level of dysfunction."|Baseline to Week 26|||T score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817768|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) Adult-Global Executive Composite (GEC) T Score From Baseline to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on executive function through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
The scoring for the GEC T Score is complex and is achieved using proprietary software designed to generate scores based on raw data collected. Higher scores suggest a higher level of dysfunction."|Baseline to Week 26|||T score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817769|NCT01114737|Primary|Number of Participants With a Score of 1 or 2 in Global Function Evaluation (CGI-I) From Baseline to Week 13.|"Effects of 6R-BH4 on global function in PKU subjects in subjects that had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4 at screening.
The CGI-I is a 7-point scale that requires the clinician to assess how much the participant's illness has improved or worsened relative to a baseline state at the beginning of the intervention and rated as: 1=very much improved; 2=much improved; 3=minimally improved; 4=no change; 5=minimally worse; 6=much worse; 7=very much worse."|13 weeks|Missing data for 1 subject in the Responders in 6R-BH4 20 mg/kg/day Arm||Number of participants with scale 1 or 2|||Number
817770|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) From Baseline to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on global function through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
CGI-S is a 7-point scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the subject’s mental illness at the time of assessment, relative to clinician’s past experience with subjects who have the same diagnosis. Considering total clinical experience, a subject is assessed on the severity of mental illness at the time of rating as: 1, normal, not at all ill; 2, borderline ill; 3, mildly ill; 4, moderately ill; 6, severely ill; or 7, among the most extremely ill."|Baseline to Week 26|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817771|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Hamilton Rating Scale For Depression (HAM-D) Score From Baseline to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on depression through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
HAM-D Score is a total score ranging from 0 to 48 with higher scores corresponding to worse severity of depression. The HAM-D is a 17-item depression rating scale. Nine of the items are scored on a 5-point scale as: 0, absence of depressive symptom being measured; 1, doubt concerning the presence of the symptom; 2, mild symptoms; 3, moderate symptoms; or 4, severe symptoms. The remaining 8 items are scored on a 3-point scale as: 0, absence; 1, doubt on the presence of the symptom; or 2, clear presence of symptoms."|Baseline to Week 26|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817772|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) Score From Baseline to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on anxiety through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
HAM-A Score is a total score ranging from 0 to 56 with higher scores corresponding to worse severity of anxiety symptoms. The HAM-A has 14 items, each measuring specific anxiety symptom clusters. Each item is given a 5-point-score as: 0, absent; 1, mild; 2, moderate; 3, severe; or 4, incapacitating."|Baseline to Week 26|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817773|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS) / Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) Total Score From Baseline to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on ADHD through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
The total ADHD-RS score and the corrected total ARS score range from 0 to 54, with higher scores corresponding to worse severity of ADHD symptoms."|Baseline to Week 26|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817774|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) Parent-Global Executive Composite (GEC) T Score From Week 13 to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on executive function through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
The scoring for the GEC T Score is complex and is achieved using proprietary software designed to generate scores based on raw data collected. Higher scores suggest a higher level of dysfunction."|Week 13 to Week 26|Phe Responders who is <18 Years of Age||T score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
819838|NCT01138475|Secondary|Serum Calcium|This secondary outcome measure is change in serum calcium from baseline to final measure at 6 weeks differences in the 3 arms were compared|6 weeks|missing data from participant in paricalcitrol||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
817775|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) Adult-Global Executive Composite (GEC) T Score From Week 13 to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on executive function through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
The scoring for the GEC T Score is complex and is achieved using proprietary software designed to generate scores based on raw data collected. Higher scores suggest a higher level of dysfunction."|Week 13 to Week 26|Phe Responders who is >=18 Years of Age||T score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817776|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) From Week 13 to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on global function through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
CGI-S is a 7-point scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the subject’s mental illness at the time of assessment, relative to clinician’s past experience with subjects who have the same diagnosis. Considering total clinical experience, a subject is assessed on the severity of mental illness at the time of rating as: 1, normal, not at all ill; 2, borderline ill; 3, mildly ill; 4, moderately ill; 6, severely ill; or 7, among the most extremely ill."|Week 13 to Week 26|Phe Responders||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817777|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) Score From Week 13 to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on depression through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
HAM-D Score is a total score ranging from 0 to 48 with higher scores corresponding to worse severity of depression. The HAM-D is a 17-item depression rating scale. Nine of the items are scored on a 5-point scale as: 0, absence of depressive symptom being measured; 1, doubt concerning the presence of the symptom; 2, mild symptoms; 3, moderate symptoms; or 4, severe symptoms. The remaining 8 items are scored on a 3-point scale as: 0, absence; 1, doubt on the presence of the symptom; or 2, clear presence of symptoms."|Week 13 to Week 26|Phe Responders||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817778|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) Score From Week 13 to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on anxiety through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
HAM-A Score is a total score ranging from 0 to 56 with higher scores corresponding to worse severity of anxiety symptoms. The HAM-A has 14 items, each measuring specific anxiety symptom clusters. Each item is given a 5-point-score as: 0, absent; 1, mild; 2, moderate; 3, severe; or 4, incapacitating."|Week 13 to Week 26|Phe Responders||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817779|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS) / Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) Total Score From Week 13 to Week 26|"Durability of the therapeutic effect of 6R-BH4 on ADHD through 26 weeks in subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
The total ADHD-RS score and the corrected total ARS score range from 0 to 54, with higher scores corresponding to worse severity of ADHD symptoms."|Week 13 to Week 26|Phe Responders with ADHD Symptoms||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817780|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) Parent-Global Executive Composite (GEC) T Score From Baseline to Week 13|"Effects of 6R-BH4 on executive function in PKU subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
The scoring for the GEC T Score is complex and is achieved using proprietary software designed to generate scores based on raw data collected. Higher scores suggest a higher level of dysfunction."|Baseline to Week 13|Phe Responders who are <18 Years of Age||T score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817781|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) Adult-Global Executive Composite (GEC) T Score From Baseline to Week 13|"Effects of 6R-BH4 on executive function in PKU subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
The scoring for the GEC T Score is complex and is achieved using proprietary software designed to generate scores based on raw data collected. Higher scores suggest a higher level of dysfunction."|Baseline to Week 13|Phe Responders who are >=18 Years of Age||T score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817782|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) From Baseline to Week 13|"Effects of 6R-BH4 on global function in PKU subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
CGI-S is a 7-point scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the subject’s mental illness at the time of assessment, relative to clinician’s past experience with subjects who have the same diagnosis. Considering total clinical experience, a subject is assessed on the severity of mental illness at the time of rating as: 1, normal, not at all ill; 2, borderline ill; 3, mildly ill; 4, moderately ill; 6, severely ill; or 7, among the most extremely ill."|Baseline to Week 13|Phe Responders||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817783|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) Score From Baseline to Week 13|"Effects of 6R-BH4 on symptoms of depression in PKU subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
HAM-D Score is a total score ranging from 0 to 48 with higher scores corresponding to worse severity of depression. The HAM-D is a 17-item depression rating scale. Nine of the items are scored on a 5-point scale as: 0, absence of depressive symptom being measured; 1, doubt concerning the presence of the symptom; 2, mild symptoms; 3, moderate symptoms; or 4, severe symptoms. The remaining 8 items are scored on a 3-point scale as: 0, absence; 1, doubt on the presence of the symptom; or 2, clear presence of symptoms."|Baseline to Week 13|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817784|NCT01114737|Secondary|Change in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) Score From Baseline to Week 13|"Effects of 6R-BH4 on symptoms of anxiety in PKU subjects who had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
HAM-A Score is a total score ranging from 0 to 56 with higher scores corresponding to worse severity of anxiety symptoms. The HAM-A has 14 items, each measuring specific anxiety symptom clusters. Each item is given a 5-point-score as: 0, absent; 1, mild; 2, moderate; 3, severe; or 4, incapacitating."|Baseline to Week 13|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817785|NCT01114737|Primary|Change in Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS) / Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) Total Score From Baseline to Week 13|"Effects of 6R-BH4 on symptoms of ADHD in PKU subjects who had symptoms of ADHD at screening in the subjects that had a blood Phe level reduction after treatment with 6R-BH4.
The total ADHD-RS score and the corrected total ARS score range from 0 to 54, with higher scores corresponding to worse severity of ADHD symptoms."|Baseline to Week 13|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817786|NCT01114828|Secondary|Ascites Volume as Measured by CT|Change from baseline (day-1) for ascites volume as measured by CT at the end of treatment (LOCF) were calculated.|Baseline, Day 7 or at the discontinued of treatment|For efficacy analysis set, 3 participants of 3.75 mg arm were excluded by violation of protocol and one participant of 7.5 mg arm was excluded by concomitant edematous disorders other than hepatic.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817787|NCT01114828|Primary|Body Weight|Changes from baseline (day-1) for body weight at the end of treatment (LOCF) were calculated.|Bseline, Day 7 or at the discontined of treatment|For efficacy analysis set, 3 participants of 3.75 mg arm were excluded by violation of protocol and one participant of 7.5 mg arm was excluded by concomitant edematous disorders other than hepatic.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817788|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 36-item Short Form Questionnaire Version 2 (SF-36v2) Physical Component Summary Score|The SF-36 questionnaire, version 2, consists of 36 general health questions with 2 components, physical and mental. For each component, a transformed summary score is calculated using 8 sub-domains: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Scores range from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate a better health state.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT analysis set, observed cases||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817789|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 36-item Short Form Questionnaire Version 2 (SF-36v2) Physical Component Summary Score|The SF-36 questionnaire, version 2, consists of 36 general health questions with 2 components, physical and mental. For each component, a transformed summary score is calculated using 8 sub-domains: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Scores range from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate a better health state.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT analysis set, observed cases||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817790|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in High-sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (Hs-CRP)|Elevation of hs-CRP is a nonspecific marker of inflammation. Values above 5 milligrams/liter (mg/L) were considered abnormally high. Decrease in level of hs-CRP indicates reduction in inflammation.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT analysis set, LOCF||milligrams/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817791|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in High-sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (Hs-CRP)|Elevation of hs-CRP is a nonspecific marker of inflammation. Values above 5 milligrams/liter (mg/L) were considered abnormally high. Decrease in level of hs-CRP indicates reduction in inflammation.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT analysis set, LOCF||milligrams/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
817792|NCT01114880|Secondary|Number of Participants Meeting the Bath Ankylosing Spondyloarthritis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) BASDAI50 Response Criteria|"A BASDAI50 responder had at least a 50% improvement from Baseline in BASDAI score. In the BASDAI, participants use a 10-centimeter visual analog scale to answer 6 questions pertaining to symptoms experienced in the preceding week (e.g., How would you describe the overall level of fatigue/tiredness you have experienced? How long does your morning stiffness last from the time you wake up?) Responses range from none to very severe or from 0 hours to 2 or more hours for morning stiffness. The score is calculated as 0.2 (Q1 + Q2 + Q3 + Q4 + Q5/2 + Q6/2)."|Week 24|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by NRI||participants|||Number
817793|NCT01114880|Secondary|Number of Participants Meeting the Bath Ankylosing Spondyloarthritis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) BASDAI50 Response Criteria|"A BASDAI50 responder had at least a 50% improvement from Baseline in BASDAI score. In the BASDAI, participants use a 10-centimeter visual analog scale to answer 6 questions pertaining to symptoms experienced in the preceding week (e.g., How would you describe the overall level of fatigue/tiredness you have experienced? How long does your morning stiffness last from the time you wake up?) Responses range from none to very severe or from 0 hours to 2 or more hours for morning stiffness. The score is calculated as 0.2 (Q1 + Q2 + Q3 + Q4 + Q5/2 + Q6/2)."|Week 12|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by NRI||participants|||Number
817794|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inflammation Score|"The Inflammation score is the mean of the 10-cm visual analog scale scores from the 2 morning stiffness-related BASDAI questions: How would you describe the overall level of morning stiffness you have had from the time you wake up?, with response ranging from none to very severe; and How long does your morning stiffness last from the time you wake up?, with response ranging from 0 hours to 2 or more hours."|Baseline and Week 24|ITT analysis set, LOCF||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817795|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inflammation Score|"The Inflammation score is the mean of the 10-cm visual analog scale scores from the 2 morning stiffness-related BASDAI questions: How would you describe the overall level of morning stiffness you have had from the time you wake up?, with response ranging from none to very severe; and How long does your morning stiffness last from the time you wake up?, with response ranging from 0 hours to 2 or more hours."|Baseline and Week 12|ITT analysis set, LOCF||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817796|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) Score|Participants assessed their ability to perform 10 selected activities (e.g., putting on socks or tights without help or aids, bending forward from the waist to pick up a pen from the floor without an aid) during the preceding week. Responses ranged from 0 (easy) to 100 (impossible). The BASFI score is the average of the 10 responses and has a possible minimum value of 0 and a possible maximum value of 100.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT analysis set, LOCF||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817797|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) Score|Participants assessed their ability to perform 10 selected activities (e.g., putting on socks or tights without help or aids, bending forward from the waist to pick up a pen from the floor without an aid) during the preceding week. Responses ranged from 0 (easy) to 100 (impossible). The BASFI score is the average of the 10 responses and has a possible minimum value of 0 and a possible maximum value of 100.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT analysis set, LOCF||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817798|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Back Pain Score|Participants assessed their total back pain within the preceding week using a total back pain 100 mm visual analog scale, with responses ranging from no pain (0) to most severe pain (100).|Baseline and Week 24|ITT analysis set, LOCF||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817799|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Back Pain Score|Participants assessed their total back pain within the preceding week using a total back pain 100 mm visual analog scale, with responses ranging from no pain (0) to most severe pain (100).|Baseline and Week 12|ITT analysis set, LOCF||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817800|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity|Participants assessed their disease activity during the preceding week using a 100 millimeter (mm) visual analog scale, with responses ranging from no activity (0) to severe activity (100).|Baseline and Week 24|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by last observation carried forward (LOCF)||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817801|NCT01114880|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity|Participants assessed their disease activity during the preceding week using a 100 millimeter (mm) visual analog scale, with responses ranging from no activity (0) to severe activity (100).|Baseline and Week 12|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by last observation carried forward (LOCF)||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
817802|NCT01114880|Secondary|Number of Participants With ASAS Partial Remission|Participants were classified as having achieved ASAS partial remission if they had a value of less than 20 on a scale from 0 (normal/none) to 100 (most severe) in each of 4 domains: Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; pain as measured by the Total Back Pain visual analog scale (VAS); function as measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI); and inflammation (mean of 2 morning stiffness-related Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] scores).|Week 24|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by NRI||participants|||Number
817803|NCT01114880|Secondary|Number of Participants With ASAS Partial Remission|Participants were classified as having achieved ASAS partial remission if they had a value of less than 20 on a scale from 0 (normal/none) to 100 (most severe) in each of 4 domains: Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; pain as measured by the Total Back Pain visual analog scale (VAS); function as measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI); and inflammation (mean of 2 morning stiffness-related Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] scores).|Week 12|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by NRI||participants|||Number
817804|NCT01114880|Secondary|Number of Participants Meeting the ASAS5/6 Response Criteria|An ASAS5/6 responder had an improvement from Baseline of 20% or more in 5 of the following 6 domains: Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; pain as measured by the Total Back Pain visual analog scale (VAS); function as measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI); inflammation (mean of 2 morning stiffness-related Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] scores); spinal mobility (lateral lumbar flexion from Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index [BASMI]); and acute phase reactant (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein).|Week 24|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by NRI||participants|||Number
817805|NCT01114880|Secondary|Number of Participants Meeting the ASAS5/6 Response Criteria|An ASAS5/6 responder had an improvement from Baseline of 20% or more in 5 of the following 6 domains: Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; pain as measured by the Total Back Pain visual analog scale (VAS); function as measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI); inflammation (mean of 2 morning stiffness-related Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] scores); spinal mobility (lateral lumbar flexion from Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index [BASMI]); and acute phase reactant (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein).|Week 12|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by NRI||participants|||Number
817806|NCT01114880|Secondary|Number of Participants Meeting the ASAS40 Response Criteria|An ASAS40 responder had improvement of 40% or more and absolute improvement of 20 units or more (on a scale of 0 [least] to 100 [worst]) from Baseline in at least 3 of the 4 domains identified above for the ASAS20. In addition, there must have been an absence of deterioration in the potential remaining domain, where deterioration was defined as a net worsening of greater than 0 units (on a scale of 0 to 100).|Week 24|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by NRI||participants|||Number
817807|NCT01114880|Secondary|Number of Participants Meeting the ASAS40 Response Criteria|An ASAS40 responder had improvement of 40% or more and absolute improvement of 20 units or more (on a scale of 0 [least] to 100 [worst]) from Baseline in at least 3 of the 4 domains identified above for the ASAS20. In addition, there must have been an absence of deterioration in the potential remaining domain, where deterioration was defined as a net worsening of greater than 0 units (on a scale of 0 to 100).|Week 12|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by NRI||participants|||Number
817808|NCT01114880|Secondary|Number of Participants Meeting the ASAS20 Response Criteria|ASAS20 responder had improvement of 20% or more and absolute improvement of at least 10 units (on a scale of 0 [least] to 100 [worst]) from Baseline in at least 3 of the following 4 domains, with absence of deterioration (change for worse of at least 20% and net worsening of at least 10 units) in the potential remaining domain: Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; Total Back Pain visual analog scale (VAS); Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI); and Inflammation (mean of 2 morning stiffness-related Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] scores).|Week 24|ITT analysis set, missing data imputed by NRI||participants|||Number
817809|NCT01114880|Primary|Number of Participants Meeting the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS) ASAS20 Response Criteria|ASAS20 responder had improvement of 20% or more and absolute improvement of at least 10 units (on a scale of 0 [least] to 100 [worst]) from Baseline in at least 3 of the following 4 domains, with absence of deterioration (change for worse of at least 20% and net worsening of at least 10 units) in the potential remaining domain: Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; Total Back Pain visual analog scale (VAS); Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI); and Inflammation (mean of 2 morning stiffness-related Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] scores).|Week 12|Analysis was performed on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) analysis set, which included all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug. A non-responder (NRI) imputation was used in which a missing response was imputed as non-response.||participants|||Number
817810|NCT01114893|Secondary|IOP Change From Baseline at 8 PM on Day 5|Outcome measure shows how each treatment reducted eye pressure at 8 PM on Day 5 compared to the eye pressure at 8 PM before the start of treatment|5 Days|||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817811|NCT01114893|Primary|Mean Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Change From Baseline at 8 AM on Day 5|Outcome measure shows how each treatment reduced eye pressure at 8 AM on Day 5 compared to the eye pressure at 8 AM before the start of treatment|5 days|||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
817812|NCT01121484|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Visual Analogue Scale for Pain (VAS-pain) at Week 8|10 centimeter (cm) line (Visual Analog Scale) marked by participant. Intensity of pain range (over past week): 0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain. Change: score at observation minus score at baseline.|Baseline, Week 8|FAS; LOCF||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
817813|NCT01121484|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms, 16 Question Self-report (QIDS-SR)|This is a 16-item self reported questionnaire that measures depressive symptoms. Improvement reported as change in depressive score. Score ranges from 0 to 42, with higher numbers indicating more severe symptom reporting. Change: score at observation minus score at baseline.|Baseline, Week 8|FAS; LOCF||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817814|NCT01121484|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) - Total Score at Week 8|Measures the overall severity of depressive symptoms. The MADRS has a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale of 0-6, for a total score range of 0 (low severity of depressive symptoms) to 60 (high severity of depressive symptoms). Change: score at observation minus score at baseline.|Baseline, Week 8|FAS||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817815|NCT01121484|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) at Week 8|CGI-S: 7-point clinician rated scale to assess severity of participant's current illness state; range: 1 (normal - not ill at all) to 7 (among the most extremely ill patients). Higher score = more affected. Change: score at observation minus score at baseline.|Baseline, Week 8|FAS; LOCF||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817816|NCT01121484|Secondary|Number of Participants With Categorical Scores on Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I)|CGI-I: 7-point scale in which the clinician rated how much the participant's condition has changed compared to baseline. Scores ranged from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Improvement defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), or 3 (minimally improved) on the scale. Higher score = more affected.|Week 8|FAS; LOCF||participants|||Number
817817|NCT01121484|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D17) at Week 8|HAM-D17, clinician-rated interview, measures presence of depressive symptoms in 17 areas (symptoms such as depressed mood, guilty feelings, suicide, sleep disturbances, anxiety levels, & weight loss). Total score ranges from 0 to 52; higher scores indicate more severe depression. Change from baseline: score at observation minus score at baseline.|Baseline, Week 8|Full Analysis Set (FAS) Population: randomized participants who had a baseline HAM-D17 score, took at least 1 dose of investigational product, and had at least 1 postbaseline HAM-D17 evaluation. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817818|NCT01121536|Primary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) Total Score|"HAM-A measures the severity of anxiety symptoms. The scale consists of 14 items, each defined by a series of symptoms, and measures both psychic anxiety (mental agitation and psychological distress) and somatic anxiety (physical complaints related to anxiety). Each item is scored on a scale of 0 (not present) to 4 (severe), with a total score range of 0-56, where <17 indicates mild severity, 18-24 mild to moderate severity and 25-30 moderate to severe. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of anxiety.
Baseline was the score before the first dose of study drug in the double-blind study."|Day 0 (baseline), Month 6 or last post-baseline observation|Safety population of participants with both a baseline and post-baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817819|NCT01121536|Primary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) Total Score|The ISI is a participant-rated, 7-item questionnaire designed to assess the severity of the participant's insomnia. Each item is ranked 0 (none) through 4 (very severe) and has a descriptor associated with each severity level. Total range is 0 (no insomnia) to 28 (very severe insomnia). Responses to each item are added to obtain a total score to determine the severity of insomnia. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of insomnia. Baseline was the assessment before the first dose of study drug in the double-blind study.|Day 0 (baseline), Month 6 (or last post-baseline observation)|Safety population of treated participants with both a baseline and post-baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817820|NCT01121536|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Global Assessment for Functioning (GAF) Scale|"The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) is a numeric scale (1 through 100) used by mental health clinicians and physicians to rate subjectively the social, occupational, and psychological functioning of adults, e.g., how well or adaptively one is meeting various problems-in-living. Ratings of 1 - 10 mean the participant is in persistent danger of severely hurting self or others (e.g., recurrent violence) or persistent inability to maintain minimal personal hygiene or serious suicidal act with clear expectation of death. Ratings of 91 - 100 indicate no symptoms, and the participant exhibits superior functioning in a wide range of activities, life's problems never seem to get out of hand, is sought out by others because of his or her many positive qualities. Positive change from baseline values indicate improvement in functioning.
Baseline was the score before the first dose of study drug in the double-blind study."|Day 0 (baseline), Month 6 or the last post-baseline assessment)|Full analysis set of participants with both a baseline and post-baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817821|NCT01121536|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 1 and Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and Endpoint in the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) for Depression|"The CGI-S is an observer-rated scale that measures illness severity on a 7-point scale, with the severity of illness scale using a range of responses from 1 (normal) through to 7 (amongst the most severely ill patients). Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression.
Baseline was the score before the first dose of study drug in the double-blind study."|Day 0 (baseline), Week 1, Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and the last post-baseline assessment)|Full analysis set||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817822|NCT01121536|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 1 and Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and Endpoint in the Total Score From the 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (QIDS-C16)|"The QIDS-C16 was derived from specified items in the IDS-C30, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Total scores range from 0-27, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 27 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression.
Baseline was the score before the first dose of study drug in the double-blind study."|Day 0 (baseline), Week 1, Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and the last post-baseline assessment)|Full analysis set||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818053|NCT01124604|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Response Based on Clinical Opioid Withdrawal Symptoms Questionnaire (COWS)|COWS is an 11-item questionnaire for clinical assessment of withdrawal symptoms. Total score is calculated by adding the scores of all the 11-items. The severity of withdrawal symptoms is categorized using values of total score as: 0-4 = no withdrawal, 5-12 = mild, 13-24 = moderate, 25-36 = moderately severe, and 37-48 = severe withdrawal.|Week 12|Safety population included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug.||Participants|||Number
817823|NCT01121536|Primary|Participants With Findings During the Open-Label Study on the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV)|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The number of participants who had findings on any of the C-SSRS-SLV (SLV=since last visit) categories at any of the time frames are indicated.
- C-SSRS=Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale"|Day 1, Week 1, Months 1, 2, 4 and 6 or last post-baseline visit|Safety population; only 19 participants were asked the last three questions as the inclusion of these questions depends on physician assessment.||participants|||Number
817824|NCT01121536|Primary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) Total Score|"The YMRS is a clinician-rated, 11-item checklist used to measure the severity of manic episodes. Information for assigning scores is gained from the participant's subjective reported symptoms over the previous 48 hours and from clinical observation during the interview. Seven items are ranked 0 through 4 and have descriptors associated with each severity level. Four items (irritability, speech, content, and disruptive-aggressive behavior) are scored 0 through 8 and have descriptors for every second increment. The total scale is 0-60. A score of ≤12 indicates remission of manic symptoms, and higher scores indicate greater severity of mania. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of mania.
Baseline was the score before the first dose of study drug in the double-blind study."|Day 0 (baseline), Month 6 or last post-baseline observation|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with both baseline (double-blind study) and treatment assessments during the open-label study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817825|NCT01121536|Primary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Body Weight|Baseline was the score before the first dose of study drug in the double-blind study.|Day 0 (baseline), Month 6 (or last post-baseline observation)|Safety population of treated participants with both baseline and post-baseline assessments.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
817826|NCT01121536|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 1 and Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and Endpoint in the Total Score From the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (IDS-C30)|"The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression.
Baseline was the score before the first dose of study drug in the double-blind study."|Day 0 (baseline), Week 1, Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and the last post-baseline assessment)|Full analysis set||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817827|NCT01121536|Primary|Physical Examination Shifts From Baseline to Endpoint|"Baseline is the day prior to double-blind treatment. Assessments are summarized as normal or abnormal. The first assessment is the baseline assessment followed by the endpoint assessment. For example 'normal/abnormal' indicates participants who were normal at baseline and abnormal at endpoint.
HEENT = Head, Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat exam"|Day 0 (baseline), Month 6 (or last post-baseline observation)|Safety population of treated participants with baseline and endpoint assessments Participants n=: General appearance 785, HEENT 784, Chest and lungs 785, Heart 785, Abdomen 785, Musculoskeletal 785, Skin 785, Lymph nodes 780, Neurological 784||participants|||Number
817828|NCT01121536|Primary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Values|"ECG was conducted at baseline which was before the first dose of study drug in the double-blind study, and at the month-6 visit of the open-label study (or early termination).
RR= inter-beat intervals"|Day 0 (baseline), Month 6 or last post-baseline observation|Safety population of treated participants with both baseline and post-baseline ECG assessments||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
817829|NCT01121536|Primary|Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Vital Signs Values|"Summary of vital signs tests in which at least one participant had a during study value that was clinically significant abnormal. Criterion for clinically significant abnormal vital signs are based on FDA Neuropharmacological Division criteria:
Pulse high: >=120 beats per minute (bpm) and increase of >=15 bpm from baseline
Pulse low: <=50 bpm and decrease of >=15 bpm from baseline
Sitting systolic blood pressure high: >=180 mm Hg and increase of >=20 mm Hg from baseline
Sitting systolic blood pressure low: <=90 mm Hg and decrease of >=20 mm Hg from baseline
Sitting diastolic blood pressure high: >=105 mm Hg and increase of >=15 mm Hg from baseline
Sitting diastolic blood pressure low: <=50 mm Hg and decrease of >=15 mm Hg from baseline"|Day 1 to Month 6|Safety population with post-baseline vital signs assessments||participants|||Number
817830|NCT01121536|Primary|Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Urinalysis Values|Summary of urinalysis tests in which at least one participant had a during study value that was clinically significant abnormal. Criterion for clinically significant abnormal urinalysis tests was >=2 unit increase from baseline.|Day 1 to Month 6|Safety population with post-baseline urinalysis assessments||participants|||Number
817831|NCT01121536|Primary|Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Hematology Values|"Summary of hematology tests in which at least one participant had a during study value that was clinically significant abnormal. The test name and criterion for clinically significant abnormal appear in each row.
ULN=upper limit of normal
WBC - white blood cell counts with a normal range of 3.8-10.7 10^9/L.
Hemoglobin with a normal range of 115-181 g/L
Hematocrit with a normal range of 0.34-0.54 L/L
Platelet counts with a normal range of 130-400 10^9/L
ANC= absolute neutrophil counts with a normal range of 1.96-7.23 10^9/L"|Day 1 to Month 6|Safety population with post-baseline hematology assessments||participants|||Number
817832|NCT01121536|Primary|Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Serum Chemistry Values|"Summary of serum chemistry tests in which at least one participant had a during study value that was clinically significant abnormal. The test name and criterion for clinically significant abnormal appear in each row.
ULN=upper limit of normal
BUN=Blood Urea Nitrogen; Uric acid has a normal range of 125-494 μmol/L. Criterion for clinically significant abnormal are different for men and women.
GGT = gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase with a normal range of 4-61 U/L
ALT = alanine aminotransferase with a normal range of 6-43 U/L
BUN = blood urea nitrogen with a normal range of 1.4-8.6 mmol/L
AST = aspartate aminotransferase with a normal range of 9-36 U/L"|Day 1 to Month 6|Safety population with post-baseline serum chemistry assessments||participants|||Number
818259|NCT01118273|Secondary|Cumulative Proportion of Participants Taking Rescue Medication by Hour|"Subjects were allowed to rescue and take a non-study pain reliever if the pain was not tolerable. This measure represents for the proportion of subjects who rescued in the study."|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Participants|||Number
817833|NCT01121536|Primary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE)|"AEs were graded by the investigator for severity on a three-point scale: mild, moderate and severe. Causality is graded as either related or not related. A serious adverse event (SAE) is an AE resulting in death, a life-threatening adverse event, hospitalization, a persistent or significant disability/incapacity, a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or an important medical event that may require medical intervention to prevent any of the previous results.
Protocol-defined adverse events requiring expedited reporting included skin rash, hypersensitivity reaction, emergent suicidal ideation or suicide attempt, and psychosis."|Day 1 up to Month 6|Safety population||participants|||Number
817834|NCT01121549|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression (TTP)|Time to disease progression was defined as the time from inclusion to first local or distant recurrence at any site.|Baseline up to Year 3|Time to disease progression was considered complementary to RFS and hence, was not analyzed.|||||
817835|NCT01121549|Secondary|Recurrence-free Survival (RFS)|Recurrence-free survival defined as the time from study inclusion to the first date of documented recurrence, with events defined as: local recurrence, distant recurrence, new primary breast cancer (includes both ipsilateral and contralateral second primaries), or death due to any cause. New primary cancer at sites other than the breast were not considered as recurrence.|Baseline up to Year 3|A subgroup of participants from FAS who had documented recurrence was evaluable for this measure.||weeks||Full Range|Median
817836|NCT01121549|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued the Exemestane Therapy||Baseline up to Year 3|Safety analysis set included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of exemestane during the observation period.||percentage of participants|||Number
817837|NCT01121549|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Received Hormonal Therapy or Chemotherapy After Discontinuation of Exemestane Therapy||Baseline up to Year 3|FAS included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of exemestane during the observation period.||participants|||Number
817838|NCT01121549|Secondary|Number of Participants With Reasons for Discontinuing Exemestane Therapy||Baseline up to Year 3|Safety analysis set included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of exemestane during the observation period.||participants|||Number
817839|NCT01121549|Secondary|Number of Missed Exemestane Doses||Week 25, 49, 73, 97, 121, 145|Full analysis set (FAS) included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of exemestane during the observation period. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants evaluable for this measure. n=number of participants evaluable at specified time points. None of the participants were evaluable at Week 145 and hence data not reported.||missed doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
817840|NCT01121549|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) by Relationship to Study Drug|An AE (all causalities) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. Relatedness to exemestane was assessed by the investigator (Yes/No). Participants with multiple occurrences of an AE within a category were counted once within the category.|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Safety analysis set included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of exemestane during the observation period.||participants|||Number
817841|NCT01121549|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. AEs were graded using National Cancer Institute (NCI)/Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE,v4.0) as Grade 1 (Mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated); Grade 2 (Moderate; minimal, local or noninvasive intervention; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living [ADL]); Grade 3 (Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization; disabling; limiting self-care ADL); Grade 4 (Life-threatening; urgent intervention indicated) and Grade 5 (Death related to AE).|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Safety analysis set included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of exemestane during the observation period.||participants|||Number
817842|NCT01121562|Secondary|Dose-corrected Trough Plasma Concentrations of Sunitinib, SU012662 and Total Drug (Sunitinib + SU012662).|"Reference dose is 37.5 mg. Dose-corrected concentration is calculated from the following formula, observed concentration multiplied by 37.5 over actual dose.
SU012662 is an active metabolite of sunitinib."|Predose of Cycle 1 Day15, Cycle 2 Day1, Cycle 3 Day1, and Cycle 4 Day 1|"The pharmacokinetics analysis set was defined as all participants who had at least one plasma concentration data at trough sampling with steady-state condition. n in the measured values means number of participants analyzed."||nanogram/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817843|NCT01121562|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall Survival (OS) is defined as the time from registration to documentation of death due to any cause.|Up to 3 years from the last subject registration to the study|"Full Analysis Set was defined as the population of all enrolled participants in whom well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor had been diagnosed and who received at least one dose of study medication.
OS was not analyzed due to short of events."||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817844|NCT01121562|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS is defined as the time from registration to first documentation of progressive disease (PD) or to death due to any cause, whichever occurs first.|Up to 799 days of treatment|"Full Analysis Set was defined as the population of all enrolled participants in whom well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor had been diagnosed and who received at least one dose of study medication.
Median PFS had not yet been reached due to short of events."||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817845|NCT01121562|Secondary|Tumor Shrinkage|Tumor shrinkage is defined as the percent change from baseline for the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions in participants.|Up to 799 days of treatment|"Full Analysis Set was defined as the population of all enrolled participants in whom well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor had been diagnosed and who received at least one dose of study medication. n  in the measured values means number of participants analyzed in the cycle."||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
817846|NCT01121562|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|ORR is defined as the percentage of participants with a best overall response of confirmed CR or confirmed PR. Based on the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST), CR is defined as the disappearance of all target lesions and PR is defined as a greater than or equal to 30% decrease in the sum of the longest dimensions of the target lesion.|Up to 799 days of treatment|Full Analysis Set was defined as the population of all enrolled participants in whom well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor had been diagnosed and who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817847|NCT01121562|Primary|Clinical Benefit Response Rate (CBR)|"CBR rate is defined as the percentage of participants with a best overall response of confirmed complete response (CR), confirmed partial response (PR) ,or stable disease (SD) ≥ 24 weeks.
Based on RECIST, CR is defined as the disappearance of all target lesions and PR is defined as a greater than or equal to 30% decrease in the sum of the longest dimensions of the target lesion. SD is defined neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum longest dimensions since the treatment started."|Up to 799 days of treatment|Full Analysis Set was defined as the population of all enrolled participants in whom well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor had been diagnosed and who received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817848|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 2 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - Tmax|PK samples for full PK evaluation of dacomitinib were drawn on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) and on C2D1. Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 PK parameter (Tmax) following dacomitinib alone and in combination with crizotinib are summarized in the below table. Tmax was observed directly from data as time of first occurrence.|Day -1 (dacomitinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||Hour||Full Range|Median
817849|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 2 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - Tlast|PK samples for full PK evaluation of dacomitinib were drawn on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) and on C2D1. Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 PK parameter (Tlast) following dacomitinib alone and in combination with crizotinib are summarized in the below table. Tlast was observed directly from data.|Day -1 (dacomitinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||Hour||Full Range|Median
817850|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 2 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - Cmax|PK samples for full PK evaluation of dacomitinib were drawn on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) and on C2D1. Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 PK parameter (Cmax) following dacomitinib alone and in combination with crizotinib are summarized in the below table. Cmax was observed directly from data.|Day -1 (dacomitinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817851|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 2 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - Cmin|PK samples for full PK evaluation of dacomitinib were drawn on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) and on C2D1. Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 PK parameter (Cmin) following dacomitinib alone and in combination with crizotinib are summarized in the below table. Cmin was observed directly from data.|Day -1 (dacomitinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817852|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 2 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - AUC24|PK samples for full PK evaluation of dacomitinib were drawn on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) and on C2D1. Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 PK parameter (AUC24) following dacomitinib alone and in combination with crizotinib are summarized in the below table. AUC24 was calculated using Linear/Log trapezoidal method.|Day -1 (dacomitinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817853|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 2 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - AUClast|PK samples for full PK evaluation of dacomitinib were drawn on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) and on C2D1. Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 PK parameter (AUClast) following dacomitinib alone and in combination with crizotinib are summarized in the below table. AUClast was calculated using Linear/Log trapezoidal method.|Day -1 (dacomitinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
818260|NCT01118273|Secondary|Time to Rescue Medication|"Subjects were allowed to rescue and take a non-study pain reliever if the pain was not tolerable. This measure represents for the time to taking rescue medication from the time the subject took study treatment."|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817854|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 1 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - Tmax|Participants were evaluated for the effect of dacomitinib on steady-state PK of crizotinib. PK of crizotinib alone was evaluated on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) after a lead in period of continuous BID dosing of crizotinib for approximately 12 days (±2 days). PK of crizotinib and dacomitinib in combination treatment was evaluated on Day 1 of Cycle 2. Blood samples for crizotinib full PK were to be collected on Day -1 and Day 1 of Cycle 2. The below table included PK data for Tmax. Tmax was observed directly from data as time of first occurrence.|Day -1 (crizotinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||Hour||Full Range|Median
817855|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 1 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - Tlast|Participants were evaluated for the effect of dacomitinib on steady-state PK of crizotinib. PK of crizotinib alone was evaluated on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) after a lead in period of continuous BID dosing of crizotinib for approximately 12 days (±2 days). PK of crizotinib and dacomitinib in combination treatment was evaluated on Day 1 of Cycle 2. Blood samples for crizotinib full PK were to be collected on Day -1 and Day 1 of Cycle 2. The below table included PK data for Tlast. Tlast was observed directly from data.|Day -1 (crizotinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||Hour||Full Range|Median
817856|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 1 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - Cmax|Participants were evaluated for the effect of dacomitinib on steady-state PK of crizotinib. PK of crizotinib alone was evaluated on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) after a lead in period of continuous BID dosing of crizotinib for approximately 12 days (±2 days). PK of crizotinib and dacomitinib in combination treatment was evaluated on Day 1 of Cycle 2. Blood samples for crizotinib full PK were to be collected on Day -1 and Day 1 of Cycle 2. The below table included PK data for Cmax. Cmax was observed directly from data.|Day -1 (crizotinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817857|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 1 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - Cmin|Participants were evaluated for the effect of dacomitinib on steady-state PK of crizotinib. PK of crizotinib alone was evaluated on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) after a lead in period of continuous BID dosing of crizotinib for approximately 12 days (±2 days). PK of crizotinib and dacomitinib in combination treatment was evaluated on Day 1 of Cycle 2. Blood samples for crizotinib full PK were to be collected on Day -1 and Day 1 of Cycle 2. The below table included PK data for Cmin. Cmin was observed directly from data.|Day -1 (crizotinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817858|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 1 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - AUC10|Participants were evaluated for the effect of dacomitinib on steady-state PK of crizotinib. PK of crizotinib alone was evaluated on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) after a lead in period of continuous BID dosing of crizotinib for approximately 12 days (±2 days). PK of crizotinib and dacomitinib in combination treatment was evaluated on Day 1 of Cycle 2. Blood samples for crizotinib full PK were to be collected on Day -1 and Day 1 of Cycle 2. The below table included PK data for AUC10. AUC10 was calculated using Linear/Log trapezoidal method.|Day -1 (crizotinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817859|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Expansion Cohort 1 With or Without Co-administration of Dacomitinib - AUClast|Participants were evaluated for the effect of dacomitinib on steady-state PK of crizotinib. PK of crizotinib alone was evaluated on Day -1 (one day before C1D1 on which the combination treatment of crizotinib and dacomitinib started) after a lead in period of continuous BID dosing of crizotinib for approximately 12 days (±2 days). PK of crizotinib and dacomitinib in combination treatment was evaluated on Day 1 of Cycle 2. Blood samples for crizotinib full PK were to be collected on Day -1 and Day 1 of Cycle 2. The below table included PK data for AUClast. AUClast was calculated using Linear/Log trapezoidal method.|Day -1 (crizotinib alone), C2D1 (crizotinib + dacomitinib)|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817879|NCT01121575|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) in Escalation Phase|PFS was defined as the time from the date of the first dose to the date of the first documentation of objective tumor progression according to RECIST 1.1 or death on study due to any cause, whichever occurred first. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date was used.|From randomization to objective tumor progression or death (up to post treatment follow-up as 28-35 days after last dose of study treatment)|The safety analysis population included all enrolled participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817860|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Escalation Phase - Tmax|At each designated time point, blood samples (3 mL) for PK analysis of dacomitinib and its metabolite, PF 05199265 were collected in appropriately labeled collection tubes containing dipotassium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (K2EDTA). The below analysis table included Tmax for dacomitinib and PF-05199265. Tmax was observed directly from data as time of first occurrence.|C1D1, C1D15|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||Hour||Full Range|Median
817861|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Escalation Phase - Tlast|At each designated time point, blood samples (3 mL) for PK analysis of dacomitinib and its metabolite, PF 05199265 were collected in appropriately labeled collection tubes containing dipotassium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (K2EDTA). The below analysis table included Tlast for dacomitinib and PF-05199265. Tlast was observed directly from data.|C1D1, C1D15|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||Hour||Full Range|Median
817862|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Escalation Phase - Cmax|At each designated time point, blood samples (3 mL) for PK analysis of dacomitinib and its metabolite, PF 05199265 were collected in appropriately labeled collection tubes containing dipotassium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (K2EDTA). The below analysis table included Cmax for dacomitinib and PF-05199265. Cmax was observed directly from data.|C1D1, C1D15|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817863|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Escalation Phase - AUC24|At each designated time point, blood samples (3 mL) for PK analysis of dacomitinib and its metabolite, PF 05199265 were collected in appropriately labeled collection tubes containing dipotassium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (K2EDTA). The below analysis table included AUC24 for dacomitinib and PF-05199265. AUC24 was calculated using Linear/Log trapezoidal method.|C1D1, C1D15|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817864|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Dacomitinib and PF-05199265 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Escalation Phase - AUClast|At each designated time point, blood samples (3 mL) for PK analysis of dacomitinib and its metabolite, PF 05199265 were collected in appropriately labeled collection tubes containing dipotassium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (K2EDTA). The below analysis table included AUClast for dacomitinib and PF-05199265. AUClast was calculated using Linear/Log trapezoidal method.|C1D1, C1D15|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817865|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Escalation Phase -Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|At each designated time point, blood samples (3 mL) for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of crizotinib and its metabolite, PF 06260182 were collected in appropriately labeled collection tubes containing dipotassium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (K2EDTA). The below analysis table included Tmax for crizotinib and PF-06260182. Tmax was observed directly from data as time of first occurrence.|C1D1, C1D15|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||Hour||Full Range|Median
817866|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Escalation Phase - Time of Last Quantifiable Concentration (Tlast)|At each designated time point, blood samples (3 mL) for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of crizotinib and its metabolite, PF 06260182 were collected in appropriately labeled collection tubes containing dipotassium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (K2EDTA). The below analysis table included Tlast for crizotinib and PF-06260182. Tlast was observed directly from data.|C1D1, C1D15|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||Hour||Full Range|Median
817867|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Escalation Phase - Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|At each designated time point, blood samples (3 mL) for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of crizotinib and its metabolite, PF 06260182 were collected in appropriately labeled collection tubes containing dipotassium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (K2EDTA). The below analysis table included Cmax for crizotinib and PF-06260182. Cmax was observed directly from data.|C1D1, C1D15|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817880|NCT01121575|Secondary|Duration of Response for the Only Participant Shown Partial Response in Expansion Phase|This outcome measure presented the duration of response for one participant in expansion cohort 1 who showed partial response.|From objective response to date of progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurs first (up to post treatment follow-up as 28-35 days after last dose of study treatment)|This Outcome Measure was only assessed for participants with response.||Weeks|||Number
818261|NCT01118273|Secondary|Overall Rating of Pain Relief|"Subjects responded to question, Overall, the relief from my starting pain was by checking one of the following choices: no relief (0), a little relief (1), some relief (2), a lot of relief (3), complete relief (4)."|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Participants|||Number
817868|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Escalation Phase - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve 10 (AUC10)|At each designated time point, blood samples (3 mL) for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of crizotinib and its metabolite, PF 06260182 were collected in appropriately labeled collection tubes containing dipotassium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (K2EDTA). AUC10 was calculated using Linear/Log trapezoidal method. The below analysis table included geometric Mean and Geometric Coefficient of Variation of AUC10 for crizotinib and PF-06260182. Arithmetic mean was presented if the n=2.|C1D1, C1D15|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817869|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Crizotinib and PF-06260182 Pharmacokinetic Parameter in Escalation Phase - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time Zero to the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|At each designated time point, blood samples (3 mL) for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of crizotinib and its metabolite, PF 06260182 were collected in appropriately labeled collection tubes containing dipotassium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (K2EDTA). The below analysis table included AUClast for crizotinib and PF-06260182. AUClast was calculated using Linear/Log trapezoidal method.|Cycle 1 (C1)/Day 1 (D1), C1D15|The PK parameter analysis population was defined as all participants in the safety analysis population who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. N= Number of participants in the treatment group in the indicated population. n= Number of participants contributing to the summary statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
817870|NCT01121575|Secondary|Number of Participants With ROS1 Gene Translocation at Baseline|Sample analyses were performed in accordance to GLP guidance and included translocation detection (RNA based) for ROS1 gene.|Baseline|The tumor analysis population included participants in safety analysis population who had a screening and on-treatment tumor biopsy for assessment of tumor biomarkers. However, number of participants analyzed in the below table included the participants evaluated for ROS1 gene translocation.||Participants|||Number
817871|NCT01121575|Secondary|Number of Participants With PIK3CA Mutation at Baseline|Sample analyses were performed in accordance to GLP guidance and included mutation detection for PIK3CA gene.|Baseline|The tumor analysis population included participants in safety analysis population who had a screening and on-treatment tumor biopsy for assessment of tumor biomarkers.||Participants|||Number
817872|NCT01121575|Secondary|Number of Participants With KRAS Mutation (GLY12CYS) at Baseline|Sample analyses were performed in accordance to GLP guidance and included mutation detection for KRAS gene.|Baseline|The tumor analysis population included participants in safety analysis population who had a screening and on-treatment tumor biopsy for assessment of tumor biomarkers.||Participants|||Number
817873|NCT01121575|Secondary|Number of Participants With EGFR Mutation at Baseline|Sample analyses were performed in accordance to Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) guidance and included mutation detection for EGFR gene.|Baseline|The tumor analysis population included participants in safety analysis population who had a screening and on-treatment tumor biopsy for assessment of tumor biomarkers.||Participants|||Number
817874|NCT01121575|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of sMet by Study Visits|This outcome measure presented the plasma concentration of sMet at different study visits. s-Met was analyzed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|At screening and Cycle 1 Day 1 (C1D1) (6 hours post dose), and C1D15, C2D1, C2D15 (all predose).|The soluble protein analysis population included participants in safety analysis who had a screening or C1D1 soluble protein assessment, and at least one on-treatment soluble protein assessment (C1D14 C2D1 or C2D14).||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817875|NCT01121575|Secondary|Number of Participants With c-Met, HER2, EGFR Amplification and ALK Rearrangement at Baseline Using FISH Method|Participants showed amplification of c-Met, HER2, and EGFR in the tumor cells and gene rearrangement of ALK are presented in this outcome measure.|Baseline|The tumor analysis population included participants in safety analysis population who had a screening and on-treatment tumor biopsy for assessment of tumor biomarkers.||Participants|||Number
817876|NCT01121575|Secondary|Expression Analysis of Tumor Biomarkers (EGFR, and c-Met) at Baseline Using Fluorescent in Situ Hybridization (FISH) Method|Expression of tumor biomarkers EGFR and cMet at Baseline (using FISH method) are presented in this outcome measure.|Baseline|The tumor analysis population included participants in safety analysis population who had a screening and on-treatment tumor biopsy for assessment of tumor biomarkers.||Ratio||Full Range|Median
817877|NCT01121575|Secondary|Expression Analysis of Tumor Biomarkers (HGF, EGFR, and c-Met ) at Baseline Using Immunohistochemistry (IHC) Method|Tumor biomarkers such as HGF, EGFR, and c-Met were analyzed in tumor cells (neoplastic compartment) of tumor specimens from both expansion cohorts 1 and 2 by IHC. The H score was derived by summing the percentages of cells staining at each intensity multiplied by the weighted intensity of staining (0, 1+, 2+, 3+, where 3+ indicates the strongest staining, 2+ indicates medium staining, 1+ indicates weak staining, and 0 indicates no staining). Minimum calculated score of 0 to maximum calculated score of 300, where 0 correspond to no expression and maximum score of 300 indicates the strongest expression. However, the biomarker expression level (higher or lower) was not a predictor of outcome.|Baseline|The tumor analysis population included participants in safety analysis population who had a screening and on-treatment tumor biopsy for assessment of tumor biomarkers.||H-Score||Full Range|Median
817878|NCT01121575|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) in Expansion Phase|PFS was defined as the time from the date of the first dose to the date of the first documentation of objective tumor progression according to RECIST 1.1 or death on study due to any cause, whichever occurred first. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date was used.|From randomization to objective tumor progression or death (up to post treatment follow-up as 28-35 days after last dose of study treatment)|The safety analysis population included all enrolled participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication. In Expansion Cohort 1, two participants had censored reasons of “no adequate baseline”, of which one participant had a censored reason “no tumor assessment data available.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
817904|NCT01121666|Secondary|Number of Days of r-hFSH Stimulation|Mean duration of stimulation was assessed.|At the day of hCG administration, up to 16 days|All participants were analyzed.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
817905|NCT01121666|Secondary|Number of Participants With Cryopreserved 2PNs, Embryos/Blastocysts||Day 1, 2, 3 and 5 of OPU/fertilisation|Intention to treat population||Patients with cryopreservation|||Number
817881|NCT01121575|Secondary|Number of Participants With ORR in Expansion Phase|ORR was defined as the percent of participants with CR or PR according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) determined by study physicians, relative to the response evaluable population. Participants were considered non-responders until proven otherwise. Thus, participants who: 1) Did not have CR or PR while on study, or 2) Did not have a post-baseline tumor evaluation, or 3) Received anti-tumor treatment other than the study medication prior to reaching a CR or PR, or 4) Died, in progress, or drop out for any reason prior to reaching a CR or PR, were counted as non-responders in the assessment of ORR. To be assigned a status of PR or CR, changes in tumor measurements in participants with responding tumors were confirmed by repeated tumor assessment that were performed 4 weeks after the criteria for response were first met.|From objective response to date of progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurs first (up to post treatment follow-up as 28-35 days after last dose of study treatment)|The response evaluable population included participants in safety analysis population who had an adequate Baseline tumor assessment.||Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817882|NCT01121575|Secondary|Number of Participants With Objective Response Rate (ORR) in Escalation Phase|ORR was defined as the percent of participants with CR or PR according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) determined by study physicians, relative to the response evaluable population. Participants were considered non-responders until proven otherwise. Thus, participants who: 1) Did not have CR or PR while on study, or 2) Did not have a post-baseline tumor evaluation, or 3) Received anti-tumor treatment other than the study medication prior to reaching a CR or PR, or 4) Died, in progress, or drop out for any reason prior to reaching a CR or PR, were counted as non-responders in the assessment of ORR. To be assigned a status of PR or CR, changes in tumor measurements in participants with responding tumors were confirmed by repeated tumor assessment that were performed 4 weeks after the criteria for response were first met.|From objective response to date of progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurs first (up to post treatment follow-up as 28-35 days after last dose of study treatment)|The response evaluable population included participants in safety analysis population who had an adequate Baseline tumor assessment.||Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817883|NCT01121575|Secondary|Number of Participants With Stable Disease and Stable Disease Duration in Expansion Phase|If a participant had not achieved an objective response with confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to RECIST (1.1) as determined by the investigators, relative to the response evaluable population, but remained stable for at least 6 weeks after first dose, then the best overall response for such a participant was considered as stable disease.|From objective response to date of progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurs first (up to post treatment follow-up as 28-35 days after last dose of study treatment)|The response evaluable population included participants in safety analysis population who had an adequate Baseline tumor assessment.||Participants|||Number
817884|NCT01121575|Secondary|Number of Participants With Stable Disease and Stable Disease Duration in Escalation Phase|If a participant had not achieved an objective response with confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) - 1.1 as determined by the investigators, relative to the response evaluable population, but remained stable for at least 6 weeks after first dose, then the best overall response for such a participant was considered as stable disease.|From objective response to date of progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurs first (up to post treatment follow-up as 28-35 days after last dose of study treatment)|The response evaluable population included participants in safety analysis population who had an adequate Baseline tumor assessment.||Participants|||Number
817885|NCT01121575|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) in Escalation Phase|DLTs were those AEs which occurred in Cycle 1 of treatment in Dose Escalation Phase which may be attributed to study drug [combined Crizotinib (PF-02341066) plus Dacomitinib (PF-00299804)] without a clear alternative explanation and despite the use of adequate/maximal medical intervention as dictated by local institutional clinical practices or the judgment of the investigator. The following events were considered DLTs (using CTCAE version 4.02);1. Grade ≥4 hematologic events. 2. Grade ≥3 non-hematological events (except Grade 3/4 asymptomatic hypophosphatemia and Grade 3/4 hyperuricemia without signs and symptoms of gout). Nausea, vomiting or diarrhea had to have persisted at Grade 3 or 4 despite maximal medical therapy. Grade 3 hypertension will be considered a DLT only if the event is unmanageable by standard approved pharmacologic agents or if the symptomatic sequelae are identified despite appropriate medical intervention.|Cycle 1 (4 weeks)|The DLT evaluable population was defined as safety analysis (SA) participants in the Dose Escalation phase who did not have a major treatment deviation during the first cycle.||Participants|||Number
817886|NCT01121575|Primary|Overview of Treatment-emergent, Treatment-related AEs in Expansion Phase|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study treatment in a participant who received study treatment. SAE was an AE resulting in death, initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, life-threatening experience, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent AEs were those with initial onset or that worsen in severity after the first dose of study medication. AEs were reported from signing of informed consent until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. SAEs were reported after this time frame if considered to be treatment related. The severity of AEs were graded by the investigator using NCI CTCAE v.4.02 and was assessed as Grade 0: no change from normal or reference range; Grade 1: mild; Grade 2: moderate; Grade 3: severe; Grade 4: life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5: death related to AE. However the below table included Grade 3, 4, and 5 AEs.|Up to Maximum of treatment duration + 28 days for each participant (could be 295 days)|The safety analysis population included all enrolled participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
817906|NCT01121666|Secondary|Embryo Quality: Mean Number of Blastomeres|"Main embryo quality parameter mean number of blastomeres"|Day 2 of OPU/fertilisation|Intention to treat population||Number of blastomeres at day 3||Standard Deviation|Mean
817907|NCT01121666|Secondary|Fertilisation Rate of Oocytes|Fertilisation rate was assessed|1 day after ovum pick-up|Intention to treat population||percentage of oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
817908|NCT01121666|Secondary|Quality of Oocytes Retrieved|Number of patients with ovum pick-up|34-36 hours after hCG administration|Intention to treat population||Participants|||Number
817909|NCT01121666|Secondary|Total Dose of r-hFSH Administered|Total dose of r-hFSH required was assessed.|Day of hCG administration (after maximum 16 days of r-hFSH treatment)|All participants were analyzed.||IU||Standard Deviation|Mean
817887|NCT01121575|Primary|Overview of Treatment-emergent, Treatment-related AEs in Escalation Phase|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study treatment in a participant who received study treatment. SAE was an AE resulting in death, initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, life-threatening experience, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent AEs were those with initial onset or that worsen in severity after the first dose of study medication. AEs were reported from signing of informed consent until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. SAEs were reported after this time frame if considered to be treatment related. The severity of AEs were graded by the investigator using NCI CTCAE v.4.02 and was assessed as Grade 0: no change from normal or reference range; Grade 1: mild; Grade 2: moderate; Grade 3: severe; Grade 4: life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5: death related to AE. However the below table included Grade 3, 4, and 5 AEs.|Up to Maximum of treatment duration + 28 days for each participant (could be 295 days)|The safety analysis population included all enrolled participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
817888|NCT01121575|Primary|Overview of Treatment-emergent All Causalities AEs in Expansion Phase|AE was any untoward medical occurrence with study drug/ device in a trial participant. SAE was an AE resulting in death, initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, life-threatening experience, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent AEs were those with initial onset or that worsen in severity after the first dose of study medication. AEs were reported from signing of informed consent until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. SAEs were reported after this time frame if considered to be treatment related. The severity of AEs were graded by the investigator using NCI CTCAE v.4.02 and was assessed as Grade 0: no change from normal or reference range; Grade 1: mild; Grade 2: moderate; Grade 3: severe; Grade 4: life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5: death related to AE. However the below table included Grade 3, 4, and 5 AEs.|Up to Maximum of treatment duration + 28 days for each participant (could be 295 days)|The safety analysis population included all enrolled participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
817889|NCT01121575|Primary|Overview of Treatment-emergent All Causalities Adverse Events (AEs) in Escalation Phase|AE was any untoward medical occurrence with study drug/ device in a trial participant. Serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in death, initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, life-threatening experience, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent AEs were those with initial onset or that worsen in severity after the first dose of study medication. AEs were reported from signing of informed consent until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. SAEs were reported after this time frame if considered to be treatment related. The severity of AEs were graded by the investigator using National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for AEs (CTCAE) v.4.02 and was assessed as Grade 0: no change from normal or reference range; Grade 1: mild; Grade 2: moderate; Grade 3: severe; Grade 4: life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5: death related to AE. However the below table included Grade 3, 4, and 5 AEs.|Up to Maximum of treatment duration + 28 days for each participant (could be 295 days)|The safety analysis population included all enrolled participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
817890|NCT01121666|Secondary|Quality of Oocytes Retrieved|The nuclear maturity was assessed (Germinal vesicle, Metaphase I, Metaphase II).|After oocyte retrieval, 34 to 36 hours after hCG administration|Intention to treat population||Percentage of cells|||Number
817891|NCT01121666|Secondary|Quality of Oocytes Retrieved|The maturity of the cumulus oophorus was assessed.|After oocyte retrieval, 34 to 36 hours after hCG administration|Intention to treat population||Percentage of cumulus oophori|||Number
817892|NCT01121666|Secondary|Ongoing Pregnancy (Second Treatment Cycle)|Ongoing pregnancy per embryo transfer. Presence of at least one viable fetus 10 weeks after embryo transfer.|10 weeks after embryo transfer|Population with a second treatment cycle||Ongoing pregnancies|||Number
817893|NCT01121666|Secondary|Clinical Pregnancy Rate (Second Treatment Cycle)|Presence of at least one intrauterine gestational sac.|Five to six weeks after oocyte retrieval|Population with a second treatment cycle||Clinical pregnancies|||Number
817894|NCT01121666|Secondary|Quality of Oocytes Retrieved|Number of embryos per blastocysts transferred|Day of embryo transfer, either 2, 3 or 5 days after oocyte retrieval|Intention to treat population||embryos per blastocysts transferred||Standard Deviation|Mean
817895|NCT01121666|Secondary|Quality of Oocytes Retrieved|Number of patients with transferred blastocysts|At day 4 and 5|Intention to treat population||Participants|||Number
817896|NCT01121666|Secondary|Embryo Quality: Absence of Multinucleation|"Main embryo quality parameter absence of multinucleation observed."|Day 3|Intention to treat population||Percentage of absent multinucleation|||Number
817897|NCT01121666|Primary|Number of Oocytes Retrieved (Intention-to-treat Population)|"As soon as ovulation criteria were reached, HCG was given to trigger ovulation and 34-36 hours later, oocytes were retrieved. If criteria for ovulation triggering could not be reached by FSH stimulation on day 16, treatment was to be stopped.
The equivalence in the number of retrieved oocytes was tested using a pre-determined clinical equivalence margin of +/- 2.9 oocytes"|34-36 hours after hCG administration and after maximum 16 days of r-hFSH treatment|Intention-to-treat population||Number of retrieved oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
817898|NCT01121666|Secondary|Live Birth Rate|Patients with liveborn children|After childbirth with questionnaire|Intention to treat population||Patients with liveborn children|||Number
817899|NCT01121666|Secondary|Ongoing Pregnancy|Ongoing pregnancy per embryo transfer. Presence of at least one viable fetus 10 weeks after embryo transfer.|Ten weeks after embryo transfer|Intention to treat population||Ongoing pregnancies|||Number
817900|NCT01121666|Secondary|Clinical Pregnancy Rate|Presence of at least one intrauterine gestational sac.|Five to six weeks after oocyte retrieval|Intention to treat population||Clinical pregnancies|||Number
817901|NCT01121666|Secondary|Implantation Rate|Defined as fetal sac per embryo transferred.|Five to six weeks after oocyte retrieval|Intention to treat population.||Percentage of implantations|||Number
817902|NCT01121666|Secondary|Number of Patients With Good Response|"Good response was defined as patients with an oocyte retrieval of four or more oocytes"|Until child birth/miscarriage, up to the end of the study|Intention to treat population.||Participants|||Number
817903|NCT01121666|Secondary|Number of Patients With Cycle Cancellation|Number of patients with cycle cancellation was assessed.|Until child birth/miscarriage, up to the end of the study|Intention to treat population||Number of patients|||Number
817912|NCT01121666|Primary|Number of Oocytes Retrieved (Per Protocol Population)|"As soon as ovulation criteria were reached, HCG was given to trigger ovulation and 34-36 hours later, oocytes were retrieved. If criteria for ovulation triggering could not be reached by FSH stimulation on day 16, treatment was to be stopped.
The equivalence in the number of retrieved oocytes was tested using a pre-determined clinical equivalence margin of +/- 2.9 oocytes"|34-36 hours after hCG administration and after maximum 16 days of r-hFSH treatment|Per protocol population||Number of retrieved oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
817913|NCT01121757|Other Pre-specified|Serum Markers Measured on the First Day of Cycle 1 and on the First Day of Cycle 3||Within 4 months of taking single agent and 6 months of taking the combination||||||
817914|NCT01121757|Secondary|Number of Participants With Grade 3 and 4 Toxicities|Evaluate the safety of lenalidomide, azacitidine and the combination of azacitidine + lenalidomide in patients with lymphoma; grading the adverse events using Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0|While taking the study drug and 30 days after the last dose|||participants|||Number
817915|NCT01121757|Primary|Overall Response|"Number of patients with a complete or partial response using Cheson criteria for lymphoma.
A complete response is defined as a complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy. A partial response is defined as a greater than or equal to 50% decrease in the sum of the products of the greatest diameters of 6 largest dominant nodes or nodal masses. No increase in size of nodes, liver or spleen and no new sites of disease. Patients who have been on study drug for at least 2 months will be considered evaluable for response as long as they have had repeat imaging to assess response or clear progression based on physical exam."|Response will be assessed after at least 6 months on combination drug.|Only subjects that completed combination drug will be included in analysis.|||||
817916|NCT01121757|Primary|Overall Response|"Number of patients with a complete or partial response using Cheson criteria for lymphoma.
A complete response is defined as a complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy. A partial response is defined as a greater than or equal to 50% decrease in the sum of the products of the greatest diameters of 6 largest dominant nodes or nodal masses. No increase in size of nodes, liver or spleen and no new sites of disease. Patients who have been on study drug for at least 2 months will be considered evaluable for response as long as they have had repeat imaging to assess response or clear progression based on physical exam."|Response will be assessed after at least 4 months on second drug.|Everyone who started the second drug regimen||participants|||Number
817917|NCT01121757|Primary|Overall Response|"Number of patients with a complete or partial response using Cheson criteria for lymphoma.
A complete response is defined as a complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy. A partial response is defined as a greater than or equal to 50% decrease in the sum of the products of the greatest diameters of 6 largest dominant nodes or nodal masses. No increase in size of nodes, liver or spleen and no new sites of disease. Patients who have been on study drug for at least 2 months will be considered evaluable for response as long as they have had repeat imaging to assess response or clear progression based on physical exam."|Response will be assessed after at least 4 months on first study drug.|Everyone who started the first drug regimen||participants|||Number
817918|NCT01121757|Primary|Response Predicted by Molecular Signatures Compared to True Response|"The predicted response (response to therapy vs. no response to therapy) using gene sequencing will be compared to the overall true response (reported in Primary Outcome 2)."|approximately one year|The number of participants who were evaluated for a response were analyzed to see if the prediction of response vs. no response through gene expression matched the true response.||participants|||Number
817919|NCT01123356|Secondary|Dose Reductions Due to Adverse Events.|Number of dose reductions due to toxicity.|30 weeks|Adverse Events were assessed at each treatment visit. All patients who were treated are included in the adverse event analysis.||dose reductions|||Number
817920|NCT01123356|Secondary|Frequency of Adverse Events|Number of adverse events occuring in greater than 20% of subjects|30 weeks|Adverse Events were assessed at each treatment visit. All patients who were treated are included in the adverse event analysis.||events|||Number
817921|NCT01123356|Secondary|Biomarkers Changes During Treatment.|Biomarkers changes during treatment. A minimum of 5 subjects will be enrolled in the biomarkers sub-study. Only those subjects enrolled at MUSC will be considered for the biomarkers sub-study. At day 1 of cycle 1, day 8 of cycle 1, day 1 of cycle 2 and day 8 of cycles 2, blood samples will be obtained for assessment of biomarkers.|30 Weeks|The biomarker sub-study was not completed due to poor accrual to this substudy and lack of feasibility.|||||
817922|NCT01123356|Secondary|Frequency of Adverse and Severe Adverse Events|Frequency of adverse and severe adverse events|30 weeks|Adverse Events were assessed at each treatment visit. All patients who were treated are included in the adverse event analysis.||participants|||Number
817923|NCT01123356|Primary|Overall Response Rate|"Obtain early assessment of the efficacy of the intracycle sequential administration of ofatumumab and lenalidomide in the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) after prior use of rituximab. Response was categorized according to the IW-CLL criteria which includes the following: Complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi)Partial remission (PR), Progressive disease (PD), Stable disease (SD).
Overall response rate was defined as those who experienced a response of CR, CRi or PR."|30 Weeks|Overall response rate is defined as response (CR, CRi or PR) at cycle 3 or cycle 6 evaluation. Only patients who completed at least 3 cycles were eligible for analysis for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
817924|NCT01123395|Primary|Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinity [AUC(0-∞)]|The area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to infinity. AUC (0-∞) was calculated as the sum of AUC (0-t) plus the ratio of the last measurable Colcrys® plasma concentration to the elimination rate constant.|serial pharmacokinetic plasma concentrations were drawn prior to dose administration (0 hour) and at 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration|Plasma concentration data for 15 of 16 participants were used in the statistical analysis. One subject dropped from the study before Period II dosing for personal reasons.||ng-hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827179|NCT01202253|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Received Water-based and Ethanol-based Formulation||Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||participants|||Number
817925|NCT01123395|Primary|Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 to Time t [AUC (0-t)]|The area under the plasma concentration versus time curve, from time 0 to the time of the last measurable Colcrys® concentration (t), as calculated by the linear trapezoidal rule|serial pharmacokinetic plasma concentrations were drawn prior to dose administration (0 hour) and at 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration|Plasma concentration data for 15 of 16 participants were used in the statistical analysis. One subject dropped from the study before Period II dosing for personal reasons.||ng-hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817926|NCT01123395|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|The maximum or peak concentration that Colcrys® reaches in the plasma|serial pharmacokinetic plasma concentrations were drawn prior to dose administration (0 hour) and at 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration|Plasma concentration data for 15 of 16 participants were used in the statistical analysis. One subject dropped from the study before Period II dosing for personal reasons.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817927|NCT01123512|Primary|Proportion of Participants With Study Success|"Patient success will be defined as:
Reduction in VCF fracture-related pain at 12 months by >15 mm from baseline as measured by a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS),
Maintenance or improvement in function at 12 months from baseline as measured by the 100 point Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and
Absence of device-related serious adverse events, defined as device-related adverse events requiring surgical reintervention or retreatment at the index level, including revision, removal, reoperation, and/or supplemental fixation"|12 Month Post-op|||participants|||Number
817928|NCT01123642|Secondary|Clinician Administered PTSD Scale||one year||||||
817929|NCT01123642|Secondary|Quality of Life Scale||one year||||||
817930|NCT01123642|Secondary|Inventory of Psychosocial Recovery (IPR)||one year||||||
817931|NCT01123642|Primary|World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS II)|Participants complete the WHODAS II at baseline, 4 months, 8 months, and 12 months. The WHODAS II measures general disability related to multiple domains (i.e., understanding and communicating, getting around, self care, getting along with people, life activities, work/school, participation in society). Total scores range from 1 (no disability) to 5 (extreme/cannot do), with higher scores indicating more impairment.|one year|A total of 345 participants were enrolled, of which 309 were deemed eligible. Analyses are conducted with the total sample N = 309, followed over time.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817932|NCT01123850|Secondary|Outcome Measure - Pain, Life Quality, Satisfaction||PreOp, Surgery, 6M, 12M|Study was terminated due to slow enrollment, there was no data analysis|||||
817933|NCT01123850|Primary|Fusion Assessment|Fusion at 12M using radiograph Fusion Mass at 12M using CT|6 M, 12 M|Study was terminated due to slow enrollment, there was no data analysis|||||
817934|NCT01123889|Primary|Pain and Disability of the Shoulder Through Validated Questionnaires|Patients will be asked to fill out questionnaires to provide insight into how their condition is progressing, consisting of components of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) total score. The maximum score is 100, made up by pain and function components' sums. Only the total score is recorded, 100 being full normal function without pain, 0 being severe pain and no function.|15 minutes prior to initial injection of corticosteroid versus platelet rich plasma|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817935|NCT01123889|Primary|Pain and Disability of the Shoulder Through Validated Questionnaires|Patients will be asked to fill out questionnaires to provide insight into how their condition is progressing, consisting of components of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) total score. The maximum score is 100, made up by pain and function components' sums. Only the total score is recorded, 100 being full normal function without pain, 0 being severe pain and no function.|12 weeks from initial injection of corticosteroid versus platelet rich plasma|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817936|NCT01123889|Primary|Pain and Disability of the Shoulder Through Validated Questionnaires|Patients will be asked to fill out questionnaires to provide insight into how their condition is progressing, consisting of components of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) total score. The maximum score is 100, made up by pain and function components' sums. Only the total score is recorded, 100 being full normal function without pain, 0 being severe pain and no function.|6 weeks from initial injection of corticosteroid versus platelet rich plasma|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817937|NCT01123928|Secondary|"Belief That Doctors and Nurses at the Hospital Have Very Good Attitudes"|Measured as a percentage of subjects who agree with the statement in a questionnaire.|Assessed during day of screening examination|Analysis was conducted for all participants who responded to this question in the survey.||percentage of respondents|||Number
817938|NCT01123928|Secondary|"Belief That Surgeons at the Hospital Are Highly Skilled"|Measured as a percentage of subjects who agree with the statement in a questionnaire.|Assessed during day of screening examination|Analysis was conducted for all participants who responded to this question in the survey.||percentage of respondents|||Number
817939|NCT01123928|Secondary|"Belief That Vision Will Improve a Lot Following Surgery"|Measured as a percentage of subjects who agree with the statement in a questionnaire.|Assessed during day of screening examination|Analysis was conducted for all participants who responded to this question in the survey.||percentage of respondents|||Number
817940|NCT01123928|Secondary|Belief That Surgery Will be Painful|Measured as a percentage of subjects who agree with the statement in a questionnaire.|Assessed during day of screening examination|Analysis was conducted for all participants who responded to this question in the survey.||percentage of respondents|||Number
817941|NCT01123928|Secondary|Knowledge That Cataract Can be Treated|Measured as a percentage of subjects who correctly answer the question in a questionnaire.|Assessed during day of screening examination|Analysis was conducted for all participants who responded to this question in the survey.||percentage of respondents|||Number
817942|NCT01123928|Secondary|Attendance at Hospital for Pre-operative Examination|Measured as a percentage of people who presented to the hospital within 6 months after screening (positive) out of total subjects.|within 6 months after screening examination|All participants who completed the study were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
817943|NCT01123928|Primary|Decision to Undergo Cataract Surgery (Surgery Acceptance)|Measured as a percentage of subjects who decide to undergo cataract surgery within 6 months after screening (positive) out of total subjects.|within 6 months after screening examination|All participants who completed the study were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
817949|NCT01123980|Secondary|Number of Hypoglycaemic Episodes - Severe and Minor|Hypoglycaemic episodes (hypos) summarised based on American Diabetes Association classification (severe, documented symptomatic, asymptomatic, probable symptomatic, and relative hypoglycaemia) and according to additional definition (minor hypoglycaemia). Severe hypos: requiring another person to actively administer resuscitative actions. Minor hypos: symptoms with plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L (56 mg/dl), or any asympomatic plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L.|Weeks 0-24|The safety analysis set contains all subjects exposed to at least one dose of investigational product(s).||episodes|||Number
817950|NCT01123980|Secondary|Number of Hypoglycaemic Episodes - All||Weeks 0-24|The safety analysis set contains all subjects exposed to at least one dose of investigational product(s).||episodes|||Number
817951|NCT01123980|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving HbA1c Below or Equal to 6.5%|The percentage of subjects achieving the treatment target for glycosylated haemoglobin A1c after 24 weeks of treatment|Week 24|Full analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) consists of all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of the trial product(s).||percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
817952|NCT01123980|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving HbA1c Below 7.0%|The percentage of subjects achieving the treatment target for glycosylated haemoglobin A1c after 24 weeks of treatment|Week 24|Full analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) consists of all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of the trial product(s).||percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
817953|NCT01123980|Secondary|9-point Plasma Glucose Profiles|Glycaemic control measured by 9-point plasma glucose (SPMG) profiles. The 9 timepoints for self-measurement during the day were: before breakfast, 2 hours after breakfast, before lunch, 2 hours after lunch, before dinner, 2 hours after dinner, before bedtime, at 2-4 a.m. and before breakfast the following day.|Week 24|Full analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) consists of all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of the trial product(s).||mmol/L||Standard Error|Mean
817954|NCT01123980|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c)||Week 0, week 24|Full analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) consists of all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product(s)||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817955|NCT01124006|Primary|Treatment Emergent Adverse Events- Relationship to Study Drug|Number of patients with Treatment Emergent Adverse Events that were designated as Possibly or Probably Related to Study Drug.|12 month period and annual telephone contact at 24 and 36 months for subject health status follow-up|Safety Population||participants|||Number
817956|NCT01124006|Primary|Treatment Emergent Adverse Events- Relationship to Study Drug|Number of patients with Treatment Emergent Adverse Events that were designated as Definitely Related to Study Drug.|Through a 12 month period and annual telephone contact at 24 and 36 months for subject health status follow-up.|Safety Population||participants|||Number
817957|NCT01124006|Secondary|Change in Mental Component Summary Quality of Life Measure Assessed by Short Form SF-36 at 12 Months From Baseline.|The 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a patient reported outcome survey that evaluates functional health and well-being. The survey is converted into two summary measures (the Physical Component- PCS and Mental Component- MCS) that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health)|12 months|"FAS Population
One subject from the rhGDF-5 1.0mg group (out of 10 subjects total) did not complete the MCS, SF-36 at Baseline."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817958|NCT01124006|Secondary|Change in Physical Component Summary of Quality of Life Measure Assessed by Short-Form 36 at 12 Months From Baseline.|The 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a patient reported outcome survey that evaluates functional health and well-being. The survey is converted into two summary measures (the Physical Component- PCS and Mental Component- MCS) that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health)|12 months|"FAS Population
One subject from the rhGDF-5 1.0mg group (out of 10 subjects total) did not complete the PCS, SF-36 at Baseline."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817959|NCT01124006|Secondary|Change in Pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 12 Months From Baseline.|The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain score asks the subject to place a vertical mark on a horizontal line ( that is approximately 10cm long) with 'No Pain' (score of 0=0cm) listed on the left and 'Very severe pain' (score of 10=10cm) labeled on the right. The subject is instructed to indicate the amount of pain they feel in their back.|12 months|FAS Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817960|NCT01124006|Secondary|Change in Function Assessed by Oswestry Disability Index Change at 12 Months From Baseline.|The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is a 10-category (Pain Intensity, Personal Care, Lifting, Walking, Sitting, Standing, Sleeping, Sex Life, Social Life, Traveling) disability measurement scale with a graded response from 0 to 5, with 0 being the best score (no impairment) to 5 being the worst score (significant impairment). ODI score for a subject is calculated by adding the scores and converting the score to a 100 point scale.|12-month|FAS Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
817961|NCT01124006|Primary|Neurological Assessment for Motor Function and Reflexes/Sensory|"Neurological Assessment for Motor Function and Reflexes/Sensory- Number of patients with Clinically Significant Abnormal results at 12 months.
For Motor Function, Clinically Significant Abnormal results are determined by the surgeon investigator and are further classified by grade: 0= No Movement, 1= Flicker/trace of contraction, 2=Active movement when gravity removed, 3= Active movement against gravity, 4= Active Movement against gravity and resistance.
For Reflexes/Sensory, Clinically Significant Abnormal results are determined by the surgeon investigator and are based on exams of the Knee, Ankle, L3-L5 Dermatone, and S1 Dermatome. Tension signs are evaluated with a straight leg raise to determine at which point, if any, sciatic pain occurs."|12 months|"Safety Population
For the Neurological Assessment at 12 months, only 8 subjects from the rhGDF-5 1.0mg group (out of 10 subjects total) completed the assessment, only 3 subjects from the rhGDF-5 2.0mg group (out of 4 subjects total) completed the assessment, and none of the placebo subjects (out of 10 total subjects) completed the assessment."||participants|||Number
817982|NCT01124149|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects in Clinical Remission at Month 12 of Maintenance Phase|"Clinical remission was defined as a score of 0 for rectal bleeding and stool frequency.
Rectal bleeding is assessed on a scale from 0-3 (0 = no rectal bleeding, 1 = streaks of blood, 2 = obvious blood, 3 = mostly blood).
Stool frequency is assessed on a scale of 0-2 (0 = 0-1 more than normal per day, 1 = 2-3 more than normal per day, 2 = 4 or more than normal per day)."|12 months|Maintenance Phase Efficacy Population included all subjects who, during the Maintenance Phase, took at least 1 dose of investigational product and had at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment.||percentage of subjects|||Number
817962|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Lacrimation|Lacrimation was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 4-point scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. Excessive lacrimation (tear production and secretion, 1-3) is a symptom of ocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817963|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Photophobia|Photophobia was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 4-point scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. Photophobia (abnormal intolerance to visual perception of light) is a symptom of intraocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817964|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Wound Integrity|Wound integrity was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 4-point scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. Lack of wound integrity (healing, 1-3) is a sign of inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817965|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Vitritis|Vitritis was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 4-point scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. Vitritis (accumulation of inflammatory cells or exudates in the vitreous humor, the fluid that fills the middle chamber of the eye) is a sign of ocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817966|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Hypopyon|Hypopyon was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 4-point scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. Hypopyon (pus in the anterior chamber of the eye) is a sign of ocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817967|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Chemosis|Chemosis was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 4-point scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. Chemosis (swelling of the conjunctiva) is a sign of intraocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817968|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Ciliary/Limbal Injection|Ciliary/limbal injection was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 4-point scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. Ciliary/limbal injection (redness of the white sclera of the eye near the limbal ring) is a sign of intraocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817969|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Conjunctival Injection|Conjunctival injection was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 4-point scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. Conjunctival injection (redness of the white sclera of the eye) is a sign of intraocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817970|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Corneal Clarity|Corneal clarity was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 4-point scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. Lack of corneal clarity (1-3) is a sign of intraocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817971|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Anterior Chamber Flare Grade|Anterior chamber flare was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 4-point scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. The presence of flare (increased protein levels) in the anterior chamber of the eye (the fluid-filled space inside the eye between the iris and the cornea's innermost surface) is a sign of intraocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817972|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment of Inflammation - Individual Component Scoring by Visit: Anterior Chamber Cell Grade|Anterior chamber cell grade was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 5-point scale: Grade 0=0 cells; Grade 1=1 to 10 cells; Grade 2=11 to 20 cells; Grade 3=21 to 50 cells; Grade 4=>50 cells. The presence of blood cells (red and white) in the anterior chamber of the eye (the fluid-filled space inside the eye between the iris and the cornea's innermost surface) is a sign of intraocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication. One patient had missing anterior cell grade assessment at all visits.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817973|NCT01124045|Secondary|Global Assessment Score of Postoperative Inflammation by Visit|A Global Assessment Score (GAS) was assigned by the Investigator based on the clinical evidence of postoperative inflammation: 0=clear, 1=improving satisfactorily; 2=not improving or worsening, withdrawal from study indicated to allow appropriate alternative therapy to be instituted. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation. For this outcome measure, percentage of patients by grade and visit is reported.|Day 1, Day 8 ± 1 day, Day 15 ± 2 days, Day 29 ± 2 days, 1 Week after Last Dose + 2 days, 3 Months + 1 week|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817974|NCT01124045|Primary|Percentage of Patients With an Anterior Cell Grade of 0 (no Cells) at Day 15 ± 2 Days|Anterior cell grade was assessed by the Investigator during slit lamp or ophthalmoscopy/light examination and graded on a 5-point scale: Grade 0=0 cells; Grade 1=1 to 10 cells; Grade 2=11 to 20 cells; Grade 3=21 to 50 cells; Grade 4=>50 cells. The presence of blood cells (red and white) in the anterior chamber of the eye (the fluid-filled space inside the eye between the iris and the cornea's innermost surface) is a sign of intraocular inflammation. A score of 0 indicates an absence of inflammation.|Day 15 ± 2 days|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication. One patient (DUREZOL) had missing anterior cell grade assessment at all visits.||Percentage of patients|||Number
817975|NCT01124097|Primary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Mean Pain|"The efficacy analysis was restricted to the primary efficacy variable in the analysis population. The intended treatment period, starting on the day of the randomization and ending at the efficacy cut-off date (October 31, 2011), was the basis for the analysis.
The primary efficacy variable was the difference between the mean values of 7 daily pain scores preceding the efficacy cut-off date (endpoint mean pain score), and before randomization (baseline mean pain score), respectively. The daily pain scores were based on the morning response to the 11-point Numeric Rating Pain Scale (NRPS) question relating to average pain intensity over the last 24 hours. The NPRS is an 11-point scale from 0-10 [“0” = no pain; “10” = the most intense pain imaginable]"|baseline to endpoint|efficacy population||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
817976|NCT01124149|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects in Partial Remission at Week 8 of Acute Phase|"Partial remission was defined as a modified UC-DAI <=3 with a combined stool frequency and rectal bleeding score of <=1 and not in complete remission.
The modified UC-DAI score is the sum of the scores of 4 parameters (stool frequency, rectal bleeding, endoscopy score, and physician global assessment), each scoring between 0 and 3, making 12 the worst score.
Endoscopy score (mucosal appearance) ranges from 0-3 (0 = normal, 1 = mild , 2 = moderate, 3 = severe).
Rectal bleeding is assessed on a scale from 0-3 (0 = no rectal bleeding, 1 = streaks of blood, 2 = obvious blood, 3 = mostly blood).
Stool frequency is assessed on a scale of 0-2 (0 = 0-1 more than normal per day, 1 = 2-3 more than normal per day, 2 = 4 or more than normal per day)."|8 weeks|Acute Phase Safety Population included all subjects who, during the Acute Phase, took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
817977|NCT01124149|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects in Complete Remission at Week 8 of Acute Phase|"Complete (clinical and endoscopic) remission was defined as a modified UC-DAI <=1 with a score of 0 for rectal bleeding and stool frequency and at least a 1-point reduction in endoscopy score from baseline.
The modified UC-DAI score is the sum of the scores of 4 parameters (stool frequency, rectal bleeding, endoscopy score, and physician global assessment), each scoring between 0 and 3, making 12 the worst score.
Endoscopy score (mucosal appearance) ranges from 0-3 (0 = normal, 1 = mild , 2 = moderate, 3 = severe).
Rectal bleeding is assessed on a scale from 0-3 (0 = no rectal bleeding, 1 = streaks of blood, 2 = obvious blood, 3 = mostly blood).
Stool frequency is assessed on a scale of 0-2 (0 = 0-1 more than normal per day, 1 = 2-3 more than normal per day, 2 = 4 or more than normal per day)."|8 Weeks|Acute Phase Safety Population included all subjects who, during the Acute Phase, took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
817978|NCT01124149|Secondary|Improvement in Stool Frequency Symptoms During the Acute Phase|"Improvement was defined as at least a 1-point reduction in the stool frequency score from baseline at each assessment point.
Stool frequency is assessed on a scale of 0-2 (0 = 0-1 more than normal per day, 1 = 2-3 more than normal per day, 2 = 4 or more than normal per day)."|3 and 8 weeks|Acute Phase Safety Population included all subjects who, during the Acute Phase, took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
817979|NCT01124149|Secondary|Improvement in Rectal Bleeding Score During the Acute Phase|"Improvement was defined as at least a 1-point reduction in the rectal bleeding score from baseline at each assessment point.
Rectal bleeding is assessed on a scale from 0-3 (0 = no rectal bleeding, 1 = streaks of blood, 2 = obvious blood, 3 = mostly blood)."|3 and 8 weeks|Acute Phase Safety Population included all subjects who, during the Acute Phase, took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
817980|NCT01124149|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Mucosal Healing at 12 Months of Maintenance Phase|"Subjects with mucosal healing were defined as subjects who had an endoscopy score <=1.
Endoscopy score (mucosal appearance) ranges from 0-3 (0 = normal, 1 = mild , 2 = moderate, 3 = severe)."|12 months|Maintenance Phase Efficacy Population included all subjects who, during the Maintenance Phase, took at least 1 dose of investigational product and had at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment.||percentage of subjects|||Number
817981|NCT01124149|Secondary|Relapse in Ulcerative Colitis at Month 12 of Maintenance Phase|Relapse was defined in the Maintenance Phase as the need for alternative treatment for UC (including surgery); subjects were classified as having a relapse if they had withdrawn from the study due to a lack of efficacy.|12 months|Maintenance Phase Efficacy Population included all subjects who, during the Maintenance Phase, took at least 1 dose of investigational product and had at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment.||percentage of subjects|||Number
817983|NCT01124149|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Complete Remission at Month 12 of Maintenance Phase|"Complete remission was defined as a modified Ulcerative Colitis Disease Activity Index (UC-DAI) <=1 with a score of 0 for rectal bleeding and stool frequency and at least a 1-point reduction in endoscopy score from baseline.
The modified UC-DAI score is the sum of the scores of 4 parameters (stool frequency, rectal bleeding, endoscopy score, and physician global assessment), each scoring between 0 and 3, making 12 the worst score.
Endoscopy score (mucosal appearance) ranges from 0-3 (0 = normal, 1 = mild , 2 = moderate, 3 = severe).
Rectal bleeding is assessed on a scale from 0-3 (0 = no rectal bleeding, 1 = streaks of blood, 2 = obvious blood, 3 = mostly blood).
Stool frequency is assessed on a scale of 0-2 (0 = 0-1 more than normal per day, 1 = 2-3 more than normal per day, 2 = 4 or more than normal per day)."|12 months|Maintenance Phase Efficacy Population included all subjects who, during the Maintenance Phase, took at least 1 dose of investigational product and had at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment.||percentage of subjects|||Number
817984|NCT01124162|Secondary|AUC0-inf of Losartan Carboxy Acid(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for the metabolite Losaran Carboxy Acid.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817985|NCT01124162|Secondary|AUC0-t of Losartan Carboxy Acid (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for the metabolite Losartan Carboxy Acid.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817986|NCT01124162|Secondary|Cmax of Losartan Carboxy Acid (Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for the metabolite Losartan Carboxy Acid.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817987|NCT01124162|Primary|AUC0-inf of Losartan (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817988|NCT01124162|Primary|AUC0-t of Losartan (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817989|NCT01124162|Primary|Cmax of Losartan (Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817990|NCT01124175|Secondary|AUC0-inf or Losartan Carboxy Acid (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for the metabolite Losartan Carboxy Acid.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817991|NCT01124175|Secondary|AUC0-t of Losartan Carboxy Acid (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for the metabolite Losartan Carboxy Acid.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817992|NCT01124175|Secondary|Cmax of Losartan Carboxy Acid (Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for the metabolite Losartan Carboxy Acid.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817993|NCT01124175|Primary|AUC0-inf of Losartan (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed. However, one subject had a baseline concentration greater than 5% of Cmax and therefore was not included in the analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817994|NCT01124175|Primary|AUC0-t of Losartan (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed. However, one subject had a baseline concentration greater than 5% of Cmax and therefore was not included in the analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817995|NCT01124175|Primary|Cmax of Losartan (Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 24 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed. However, one subject had a baseline concentration greater than 5% of Cmax and therefore was not included in the analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
817996|NCT01124188|Secondary|Changes in Short Physical Performance Battery From Ph 2 Baseline Till 14 Weeks|"Change in SPPB scores from randomization to 14 weeks for both arms.
The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) assesses physical performance. The SPPB scores range from 0-12 and assess lower extremity strength, balance, and gait speed, three meaningful predictors of morbidity and mortality in late-life. Lower scores on the SPPB indicates greater limitations. Improvement of 0.5 points indicate clinically meaningful improvement in physical performance"|Baseline and 14 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817997|NCT01124188|Secondary|Change in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) From P2 Baseline to 14 Weeks|"Change in RMDQ from randomization to 14 weeks. The Roland-Morris is a 24-item self-report questionnaire about how low-back pain affects functional activities. Each question is worth one point so scores can range from 0 (no disability) to 24 (severe disability).
Improvement of 30% is clinically meaningful"|Baseline and 14 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
817998|NCT01124188|Primary|Proportion Responding Initially by Treatment Arm During 14 Weeks Post Randomization|The PHQ-9 depression questionnaire scores range from 0 to 27. The higher the score the more severe the depression. A PHQ-9 score less than or equal to 5 represents absence of depression. The Numeric Rating scale is a self report pain scale ranging from 0 to 20. Higher numbers indicate more pain. Response in this study was defined as two consecutive PHQ-9 scores < or = to 5 AND Numeric Rating Scale for pain (NRS) > or = 30% reduction from study entry.|14 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
817999|NCT01124292|Primary|Short Questionnaire at the End of Each Session Group-A&-B:5 Consecutive TDS Trials (Intervals Ranging From Two to Ten Days) Group-C:Computer and PWC Within a Week, Over 6 Weeks.|Q1.How much thought was necessary to decide where to put your tongue to issue a specific command?1:A lot,5:A Little Q2.Was the speed of the movement of the cursor on the computer screen:1:Too slow,3:Just right,5:Too fast Q3.How difficult was pointing accurately at specific targets on the computer screen?1:Very difficult,5:Very easy Q4.Accurately guiding the powered wheelchair through the obstacle course was:1:Very difficult,5:Very easy Q4.Accurately guiding the powered wheelchair through the obstacle course was:1: Very difficult,5:Very easy (TDS:Q4-1.Unlatched,Q4-2.Latched,Q4-3.Semi-pro,SnP:Q4-4.Latched) Q5.Was the speed of the wheelchair:1:Too slow,5:Too fast Q6.Was the movement of the wheelchair:1:Very jerky,5:Very smooth Q7.Was TDS effective in dialing phone numbers:1:Completely ineffective,5:Very effective Q8.Was TDS effective in doing the weight shift:1:Completely ineffective,5:Very effective|24 months|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818000|NCT01124292|Primary|Weight Shifting Using the Tongue Drive System (TDS) for People With Spinal Cord Injuries (Completion Time)|"The TDS commands were designated to change the wheelchair mode from driving to tilting and to control the wheelchair angle. The completion time was from the initial mode change to the end of the weight shifting.
Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
818001|NCT01124292|Primary|Phone Dialing Using the Tongue Drive System (TDS) for People With Spinal Cord Injuries (Completion Time)|"Randomly selected ten-digit target phone number was visually prompted on the top of the smartphone screen, and the subject entered the same number in the following line as quickly and as accurately as possible. If the wrong number was registered, then the subjects were allowed to delete the one by issuing the deleting command.At the end of the number entering, the subject needs to move the cursor at the green colored “CALL” button, in the middle of the bottom line, and it should be selected to complete the trial. The completion time and error rate were considered to evaluate the performance.
Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
818002|NCT01124292|Primary|Driving a Wheelchair Using TDS vs SnP (Number of Navigation Errors)|"An obstacle course will be laid out in an open space and the subjects drive an electric powered wheelchair using the tongue drive system (TDS) and the sip-and-puff device (SnP) to drive through the obstacle course. The operator measured the amount of time it takes for the subjects to begin and return back to the starting point and counts the number of collisions with the obstacles.
Unlatched and latched: utilize four TDS commands for forward, backward, left, and right motions.
Unlatched: hold their tongue to keep the PWC moving. Latched: (5 linear speed levels:Backward, Stop, Forward-1, Forward-2, and Forward-3) Issuing the forward or backward commands can increase or decrease the linear speed.
Semi-proportional: Quickly touching the left and right cheeks- forward or backward commands, sliding tongue over the lip- steer the PWC to the left or right.
Group-A&-B:5 consecutive TDS trials (intervals ranging from two to ten days) Group-C:computer and PWC within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||Navigation Errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
818003|NCT01124292|Primary|Driving a Wheelchair Using TDS vs SnP (Completion Time)|"An obstacle course will be laid out in an open space and the subjects drive an electric powered wheelchair using the tongue drive system (TDS) and the sip-and-puff device (SnP) to drive through the obstacle course. The operator measured the amount of time it takes for the subjects to begin and return back to the starting point and counts the number of collisions with the obstacles.
Unlatched and latched: utilize four TDS commands for forward, backward, left, and right motions.
Unlatched: hold their tongue to keep the PWC moving. Latched: (5 linear speed levels:Backward, Stop, Forward-1, Forward-2, and Forward-3) Issuing the forward or backward commands can increase or decrease the linear speed.
Semi-proportional: Quickly touching the left and right cheeks- forward or backward commands, sliding tongue over the lip- steer the PWC to the left or right.
Group-A&-B:5 consecutive TDS trials (intervals ranging from two to ten days) Group-C:computer and PWC within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
818004|NCT01124292|Primary|On-screen Maze Using TDS, Keypad, and SnP (Sum of Deviation / 1000)|"Subjects were instructed to use four directional commands (Left, Right, Up, and Down) to move the mouse cursor using the tongue drive system (TDS), keypad, and the sip-and-puff device (SnP) as fast and accurately as possible on a maze. One out of eight maze patterns was randomly selected in each round. The performance measures were completion time (CT) from start to end and sum of deviation (SoD) from the track. SoD was calculated as the sum of all areas between the actual trajectory of the cursor when it was out of the track and the closest edge of the track divided by 1000.
Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||pixel^2/1000||Standard Deviation|Mean
818005|NCT01124292|Primary|On-screen Maze Using TDS, Keypad, and SnP (Completion Time)|"Subjects were instructed to use four directional commands (Left, Right, Up, and Down) to move the mouse cursor using the tongue drive system (TDS), keypad, and the sip-and-puff device (SnP) as fast and accurately as possible on a maze. One out of eight maze patterns was randomly selected in each round. The performance measures were completion time (CT) from start to end and sum of deviation (SoD) from the track. SoD was calculated as the sum of all areas between the actual trajectory of the cursor when it was out of the track and the closest edge of the track divided by 1000.
Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
818006|NCT01124292|Primary|Information Transfer Rate (Percentage of Correctly Completed Commands)|Computer randomly highlights one out of six or four commands and the subjects issue that particular command using the tongue drive system (TDS) and the sip-and-puff device (SnP). Subjects are given a time period (T). The time intervals for the TDS:(Group-A)2.0s,1.5s,1.0s,(Group-B &-C)1.0s,0.7s,0.5s,SnP:(Group-C)1.2s,1.0s,0.7s. The saturated results were observed from the second session during Group-A trials. Therefore, we reduced the time period from the Group-B trial. Moreover, the SnP device needs a certain time period to issue a command and we observed that the minimum possible time period was 0.7 seconds. At the end the percentage of correctly selected commands is calculated and fed into an equation along with the time given to the subjects for each selection.Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks.|24 months|||Percentage of correctly completed cmd(%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818007|NCT01124292|Primary|Information Transfer Rate (ITR)|Computer randomly highlights one out of six or four commands and the subjects issue that particular command using the tongue drive system (TDS) and the sip-and-puff device (SnP). Subjects are given a time period (T). The time intervals for the TDS:(Group-A)2.0s,1.5s,1.0s,(Group-B &-C)1.0s,0.7s,0.5s, SnP:(Group-C)1.2s,1.0s,0.7s. The saturated results were observed from the second session during Group-A trials. Therefore, we reduced the time period from the Group-B trial. Moreover, the SnP device needs a certain time period to issue a command and we observed that the minimum possible time period was 0.7 seconds. At the end the percentage of correctly selected commands is calculated and fed into an equation along with the time given to the subjects for each selection.Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks.|24 months|||bits per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
818008|NCT01124292|Primary|Fitts' Law: Multi-Directional Tapping Using TDS, Keypad, and Mouse (Error Rate)|"Subjects used the tongue drive system (TDS) to move the mouse cursor towards targets with various sizes and distances on the computer screen (Multi-directional Tapping task) and select those targets. The computer measured the time it took for the subjects to reach the targets and the accuracy of their selections from the center of the targets. The error rate is the rate of outside of targets vs. total targets.
Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||Percentage of Missed Targets (%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818009|NCT01124292|Primary|Fitts' Law: Multi-Directional Tapping Using TDS, Keypad, and Mouse (Throughput)|"Subjects used the tongue drive system (TDS) to move the mouse cursor towards targets with various sizes and distances on the computer screen (Multi-directional Tapping task) and select those targets. The computer measured the time it took for the subjects to reach the targets and the accuracy of their selections from the center of the targets. This data was then fed into an equation, which provided the throughput measure. The unit of throughput is bits per second.
The high value of throughput means better performance. Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||bits per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
818010|NCT01124292|Primary|Fitts' Law: Center-Out Tapping Using TDS, Keypad, Mouse, and SnP (Movement Time)|"Subjects used the tongue drive system (TDS) to move the mouse cursor towards targets with various sizes and distances on the computer screen (Center-out Tapping task) and select those targets. The computer measured the time it took for the subjects to reach the targets and the accuracy of their selections from the center of the targets. The movement time is the cursor movement time from the initial movement to the final movement for each target. This task is tested by the TDS, keypad, mouse and the sip-and-puff device (SnP).
Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
818011|NCT01124292|Primary|Fitts' Law: Center-Out Tapping Using TDS, Keypad, Mouse, and SnP (Error Rate)|"Subjects used the tongue drive system (TDS) to move the mouse cursor towards targets with various sizes and distances on the computer screen (Center-out Tapping task) and select those targets. The computer measured the time it took for the subjects to reach the targets and the accuracy of their selections from the center of the targets. The error rate is the rate of outside of targets vs. total targets. This task is tested by the TDS, keypad, mouse and the sip-and-puff device (SnP).
Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||Percentage of Missed Targets (%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818012|NCT01124292|Primary|Fitts' Law: Center-Out Tapping Using TDS, Keypad, Mouse, and SnP (Throughput)|"Subjects used the tongue drive system (TDS) to move the mouse cursor towards targets with various sizes and distances on the computer screen (Center-out Tapping task) and select those targets. The computer measured the time it took for the subjects to reach the targets and the accuracy of their selections from the center of the targets. This data was then fed into an equation, which provided the throughput measure. The unit of throughput is bits per second.
The high value of throughput means better performance. This task is tested by the TDS, keypad, mouse and the sip-and-puff device (SnP).
Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||bits per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
818013|NCT01124292|Primary|Fitts' Law: Vertical Tapping Using TDS, Keypad, and Mouse (Error Rate)|"Subjects used the tongue drive system (TDS) to move the mouse cursor towards targets with various sizes and distances on the computer screen (Vertical Tapping task) and select those targets. The computer measured the time it took for the subjects to reach the targets and the accuracy of their selections from the center of the targets. The error rate is the rate of outside of targets vs. total targets.
Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||Percentage of Missed Targets (%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818014|NCT01124292|Primary|Fitts' Law: Vertical Tapping Using TDS, Keypad, and Mouse (Throughput)|"Subjects used the tongue drive system (TDS) to move the mouse cursor towards targets with various sizes and distances on the computer screen (Vertical Tapping task) and select those targets. The computer measured the time it took for the subjects to reach the targets and the accuracy of their selections from the center of the targets. This data was then fed into an equation, which provided the throughput measure. The unit of throughput is bits per second.
The high value of throughput means better performance. Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||bits per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
818051|NCT01124448|Primary|Evidence of Clinically Definite Mastitis Confirmed by Microbiological Cultures and Somatic Cell Counts|Total milk bacterial count at the end of the study (after probiotic administration for 21 days), measured as log10 of the number of colony-forming units per mL of milk|one week|||log10 CFU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834913|NCT01281202|Primary|Abstinence|The number of subjects in each treatment group who are cocaine abstinent during the last 2 weeks of the Treatment Phase (Weeks 8 and 9).|Weeks 8-9|||participants|||Number
818015|NCT01124292|Primary|Fitts' Law: Horizontal Tapping Using TDS, Keypad, and Mouse (Error Rate)|"Subjects used the tongue drive system (TDS) to move the mouse cursor towards targets with various sizes and distances on the computer screen (Horizontal Tapping task) and select those targets. The computer measured the time it took for the subjects to reach the targets and the accuracy of their selections from the center of the targets. The error rate is the rate of outside of targets vs. total targets.
Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||Percentage of Missed Targets (%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818016|NCT01124292|Primary|Fitts' Law: Horizontal Tapping Using TDS, Keypad, and Mouse (Throughput)|"Subjects used the tongue drive system (TDS) to move the mouse cursor towards targets with various sizes and distances on the computer screen (Horizontal Tapping task) and select those targets. The computer measured the time it took for the subjects to reach the targets and the accuracy of their selections from the center of the targets. This data was then fed into an equation, which provided the throughput measure. The unit of throughput is bits per second.
The high value of throughput means better performance. Group-A and -B were scheduled for five consecutive TDS trials with intervals ranging from two to ten days. Testing sessions for Group-C were divided into computer access and PWC navigation within a week, over 6 weeks."|24 months|||bits per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
818017|NCT01124305|Secondary|Limb Alignment (Mechanical Axis)|"Alignment is measured on 4 month postoperative radiograph in degrees. The goal is a mechanical axis between and femur and tibia of 0 degrees. Varus alignment (bow-legged) is shown as a negative number in degrees away from 0. Valgus alignment (Knock-kneed) is expressed as a positive number in degrees away from 0."|4 months|All participants were x-rayed postoperatively to measure the mechanical axis of the leg in degrees.||degrees varus(-) or valgus(+)||Full Range|Mean
818018|NCT01124305|Secondary|Number of Instrument Trays Required||1 day|per protocol||number of trays||Standard Deviation|Mean
818019|NCT01124305|Secondary|Length of Each Surgical Step (in Seconds)|surgical exposure, tibial alignment and resection, femoral distal cut, extension gap balancing, sizing the femur, 4 finishing femoral cuts, posterior releases, patellar resection, trial components, tibial tray preparation, cleanup/ prep for cement, cementing femur, cementing tibia, cementing patella, and closure|1 day|per protocol||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
818020|NCT01124305|Primary|Length of Surgery|Time elapsed from skin incision to wound closure (in seconds)|1 day|per protocol||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
818021|NCT01124370|Secondary|NYHA Functional Class Improvement From Baseline to 6 Months|"Shift in NYHA Class from baseline to 6 months NYHA Class I - Patients with cardiac disease but without resulting limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea or anginal pain.
NYHA Class II - Patients with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea or anginal pain.
NYHA Class III - Patients with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea or anginal pain.
NYHA Class IV - Patients with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of heart failure or the anginal syndrome may be present event at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort increases."|Baseline and 6 months on therapy|Heart failure subjects with 6 month data.||participants|||Number
818022|NCT01124370|Secondary|Six-minute Hall Walk Test Change From Baseline at 6 Months|Change = Month 6 score - Baseline score|Baseline and 6 months on therapy|Subjects with baseline and 6 month data.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
818023|NCT01124370|Secondary|Heart Failure Clinical Composite|"The composite is determined according to the following definitions.
Worsened: subject died; was hospitalized due to or associated with worsening HF; demonstrated worsening in NYHA class at last observation carried forward; moderate-marked worsening of patient global assessment score at last observation carried forward; or permanently discontinued therapy from the remedē System due to or associated with worsening HF.
Improved: subject did not worsen (as defined above) and demonstrated improvement in NYHA class at last observation carried forward or moderate-marked improvement in patient global assessment score at last observation carried forward.
Unchanged: patient was neither improved nor worsened."|6 months on therapy|Evaluable subjects with heart failure at baseline.||participants|||Number
818024|NCT01124370|Secondary|Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire Change From Baseline at 6 Months|Change = Month 6 score - Baseline score This questionnaire was for the N=46 patients diagnosed with heart failure. Scores can range from 0-105, with lower scores indicating better quality of life.|Baseline and 6 months on therapy|Heart failure subjects with baseline and 6 month results.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818025|NCT01124370|Secondary|Epworth Sleepiness Scale Change From Baseline at 6 Months|Change = Month 6 score - Baseline score The ESS is an assessment to measure a subject's general level of daytime sleepiness. Scores can range from 0-24, with higher scores indicating higher level of daytime sleepiness.|Baseline and 6 months on therapy|Subjects with baseline and 6 month data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818026|NCT01124370|Secondary|Related Adverse Events|The number of subjects with a serious adverse event (SAE) considered related to the remedē system or implant procedure is provided. The number of subjects with a non-SAE related to the remedē system or implant procedure is also provided. Events are included if they occurred on or after the initial implant date through 2 years post implant. A subject may have both SAE and non-SAE events, so the participants with serious events cannot be added to the non-serious participants to get the total number of participants experiencing a related event.|Up to 2 years|Subjects with an implant attempt.||participants|||Number
818027|NCT01124370|Primary|AHI Change From Baseline at 3 Months|Change = Month 3 score - Baseline score The Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) is an index used to indicate the severity of sleep apnea. It is represented by the number of apnea and hypopnea events per hour of sleep.|Baseline and 3 months on therapy|The evaluable population includes subjects who completed a 3 Month post therapy initiation visit.||events/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
818052|NCT01124604|Other Pre-specified|Serum Concentration of Tapentadol||Week 2, 4, 8, 12|Pharmacokinetic analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 serum study drug concentration. 'N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||nanogram per milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
818028|NCT01124422|Secondary|Baseline Dyspnea Index (BDI) at Week 4 and Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) at Week 8|The BDI-TDI is a multidimensional dyspnea measurement. The BDI, administered at Week 4, consisted of 3 items (functional impairment, magnitude of task in exertional capacity, and magnitude of effort) requiring recall over the previous 4 weeks. BDI scores ranged from 0 (very severe impairment) to 4 (no impairment); the summed total score = 0 to 12. The TDI, administered at Week 8 as a follow-up of the BDI, consisted of the same 3 items requiring recall over the previous 4 weeks. TDI scores ranged from -3 (major deterioration) to +3 (major improvement); the summed total score = -9 to 9.|BDI: Week 4; TDI: Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818029|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Scores on the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire Self-Administered Standardized (CRQ-SAS) Questionnaire From Week 4 to Week 8|The CRQ-SAS, a self-administered tool used to assess health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL), consists of 20 questions (q.) in 4 domains: Dyspnea (5 q.), Fatigue (4 q.), Emotional Function (7 q.), and Mastery (4 q.). Participants rated their experience on a 7-point scale in response to each q.: 1 (maximum impairment) to 7 (no impairment); higher scores indicate better HRQOL. Individual q. were equally weighted, and domain scores (range=1-7) were calculated as the mean across the non-missing items within each domain (domain scores were calculated although an individual item score was missing).|Week 4 and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818030|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in EIC at 2 to 3.5 Minutes During the Exercise Period From Baseline (Week 3) to Week 8|The EIC was measured at 2 to 3.5 minutes during the exercise period. Change from Baseline in EIC was calculated as the value at Week 8 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mL||Standard Error|Mean
818031|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Ratio of Respiratory Rate (RR) to Tidal Volume (VT) or RR/VT at Isotime During the Course of the ESWT From Baseline to Week 8|The RR and VT of the participants at isotime were measured during the ESWT using the OMS. The ratio of RR per VT (value of RR divided by value of VT) at isotime was calculated. Change from Baseline in RR/VT at isotime was calculated as the value at Week 8 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||breaths/min/L||Standard Error|Mean
818032|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in HR Per Time Slope During the Course of the ESWT Using Pulse Oximetry From Baseline to Week 8 (Non-OMS Subgroup)|HR was measured during the course of the ESWT in the non-OMS subgroup using pulse oximetry. The HR per time slope was calculated for each participant by fitting a linear regression line to the HR recorded for each participant during the ESWT. HR per time slope results were compared between treatment groups as means of these regression lines. Change from Baseline in HR was calculated as the value at Week 8 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed. A subgroup of participants specified sites provided cardio-respiratory and exercise IC measurements with the Oxycon Mobile System (OMS). Participants not at these sites formed the non-OMS subgroup.||bpm/min||Standard Error|Mean
818033|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Tidal Volume (VT) at Isotime During the Course of the ESWT From Baseline to Week 8|VT is defined as the lung volume representing the normal volume of air displaced between normal inspiration and expiration when extra effort is not applied. The normal value is approximately 500 mL or 7 mL/kg body weight. The VT of the participants at isotime was measured during the ESWT using the OMS. Change from Baseline in VT at isotime was calculated as the value at Week 8 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||L||Standard Error|Mean
818034|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Tidal Volume (VT) Per Time Slope During the Course of the ESWT From Baseline to Week 8|VT is the lung volume representing the normal volume of air displaced between normal inspiration and expiration when extra effort is not applied (normal value is approximately 500 mL or 7 mL/kg body weight). VT was measured during the ESWT using the OMS, consisting of volume transducer O2 and CO2 sensors and allowing breath-by-breath measurement of pulmonary gas exchange parameters. The participant's VT per time slope was calculated by fitting a linear regression line (RL) to their VT during the ESWT. VT per time slope results were compared between treatment groups as means of these RLs.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||L/min||Standard Error|Mean
818035|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Respiratory Rate (RR) at Isotime During the Course of the ESWT From Baseline to Week 8|RR is defined as the number of breaths taken within a set amount of time (typically within 60 secs). The RR of the participants at isotime was measured during the ESWT using the OMS. Change from Baseline in RR at isotime was calculated as the value at Week 8 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||breaths/min||Standard Error|Mean
818036|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Respiratory Rate (RR) Per Time Slope During the Course of the ESWT From Baseline (Week 3) to Week 8|RR is defined as the number of breaths taken within a set amount of time (typically within 60 secs). The RR of the participants was measured during the ESWT using the OMS. The system consisted of volume transducer oxygen and carbon dioxide sensors and allowed breath-by-breath measurement of pulmonary gas exchange parameters. The RR per time slope was calculated for each participant by fitting a linear regression line to the RR recorded for each participant during the ESWT. RR per time slope results were compared between treatment groups as means of these regression lines.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||breaths/min/min||Standard Error|Mean
818037|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Respiratory Exchange Ratio (RER) Per Time Slope During the Course of the ESWT From Baseline to Week 8|The respiratory exchange ratio was calculated as the ratio of VCO2 and VO2. The ratio of the amount of carbon dioxide and oxygen in the hemoglobin of the participants was measured during the ESWT using the OMS. The system consisted of oxygen and carbon dioxide sensors and allowed breath-by-breath measurement of pulmonary gas exchange parameters. Change from Baseline in RER was calculated as the value at Week 8 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Ratio of VCO2 and VO2||Standard Error|Mean
818038|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Heart Rate (HR) Per Time Slope During the Course of the ESWT From Baseline (Week 3) to Week 8|HR is defined as the number of heartbeats per unit of time, typically expressed as beats per minute (bpm). It was measured during the ESWT using the OMS. The HR was collected in units of bpm and then regressed over the conduct of the exercise test measured in minutes. The HR per time slope was calculated for each participant by fitting a linear regression line to the HR recorded for each participant during the exercise test. HR per time slope results were compared between treatment groups as means of these regression lines.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||bpm/min||Standard Error|Mean
818039|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Minute Ventilation (V'E) Per Time Slope During the Course of the ESWT From Baseline (Week 3) to Week 8|The V'E was measured in the participants during the ESWT using the OMS. The system consisted of a volume transducer, oxygen sensor, and carbon dioxide sensor and allowed breath-by-breath measurement of pulmonary gas exchange parameters. The V'E was collected in liters and then regressed over the conduct of the exercise test measured in minutes. The V'E per time slope was calculated for each participant by fitting a linear regression line to the V'E recorded for each participant during the ESWT. V'E per time slope results were compared between treatment groups as means of the regression lines.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Liter (L)/min||Standard Error|Mean
818040|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Flow of Carbon Dioxide (V'CO2) Per Time Slope During the Course of the ESWT From Baseline (Week 3) to Week 8|The amount of CO2 in the hemoglobin of the participants was measured during the ESWT using the OMS. The system consisted of a carbon dioxide sensor and allowed breath-by-breath measurement of pulmonary gas exchange parameters. The V'CO2 per time slope was calculated for each participant by fitting a linear regression line to the V'CO2 recorded for each participant during the ESWT. V'CO2 per time slope results were compared between treatment groups as means of these regression lines. Change from Baseline in V'CO2 per time slope was calculated as the value at Week 8 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mL/min||Standard Error|Mean
818041|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Flow of Oxygen (V'O2) Per Time Slope During the Course of the ESWT From Baseline (Week 3) to Week 8|The V'O2 was measured during the ESWT using the Oxycon Mobile System (OMS), a portable telemetric monitoring system consisting of an oxygen sensor allowing for breath-by-breath measurement of gas exchange parameters in the lungs. The V'O2 was collected in units of mL and then regressed over the conduct of the exercise test measured in minutes. The V'O2 per time slope was calculated for each participant (par.) by fitting a linear regression line to the V'O2 recorded for each par. during the ESWT. V'O2 per time slope results were compared between treatment groups as means of these regression lin|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mL/minute (min)||Standard Error|Mean
818042|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Exercise Inspiratory Capacity (EIC) at the End of Exercise From Baseline (Week 3) to Week 8|EIC is the volume of gas that can be taken into the lungs in a full inhalation during exercise. Participants were asked to undergo the IC test every 2 minutes during exercise and at the end of the exercise, to follow changes in operational lung volumes that occured in association with exercise. Change from Baseline in EIC was calculated as the value at the end of exercise at Week 8 minus the value at the end of exercise at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mL||Standard Error|Mean
818043|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Pre-dose and Post-dose Resting Inspiratory Capacity (IC) From Baseline (Week 4) to Week 8|Resting IC is the volume of gas that can be taken into the lungs in a full inhalation at the resting position. The resting IC was measured before and after dosing. Change from Baseline in pre-dose resting IC was calculated as the pre-dose value at Week 8 minus the pre-dose value at Week 4. Change from Baseline in post-dose resting IC was calculated as the post-dose value at Week 8 minus the pre-dose value at Week 4.|Baseline (Week 4) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Milliliters (mL)||Standard Error|Mean
818044|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in EDS at Isotime From Baseline (Week 3) to Week 8|EDS at isotime (last common time point for an exercise assessment [i.e., last Borg score time point of the shortest exercise test for each participant]) was assessed using a 10-point modified Borg scale. Change from Baseline in EDS at isotime was calculated as the value at Week 8 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818045|NCT01124422|Secondary|Mean Change in Scores on the Exercise Dyspnea Scale (EDS) From Baseline (Week 3) to Week 8|EDS is used to measure the level of breathlessness due to exercise, assessed using a 10-point modified Borg scale at 2-minute intervals during the ESWT: 0=no difficulty in breathing at all, 10=maximal breathing difficulty (BD). The participant pointed to the level on the scale correlating with his BD, and the local study coordinator confirmed that level verbally to him. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 8 minus the value at Baseline. A dyspnea score/time slope was calculated by fitting a linear regression line to the dyspnea scores reported during the exercise tests.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale/minute||Standard Error|Mean
818046|NCT01124422|Primary|Mean Change in Exercise Endurance Time (EET) From Baseline (Week 3) to Week 8|EET is defined as the time taken by a participant to exert himself during an exercise. EET was calculated based on the Endurance Shuttle Walk test (ESWT). The ESWT is a standardized, externally controlled, constant-paced field test for the assessment of endurance capacity in participants with chronic lung disease. Change from Baseline in EET was calculated as the value at Week 8 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to study drug. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Seconds (sec)||Standard Error|Mean
818047|NCT01124448|Secondary|Evidence of Changes in the Immunological Profile of Milk||one year||||||
818048|NCT01124448|Secondary|Evidence of Changes in the Macronutrient and Electrolyte Profiles of Milk||One year||||||
818049|NCT01124448|Secondary|Evidence of Changes in the Metabolic Profile of Urine||One year||||||
818050|NCT01124448|Secondary|Evidence of Changes in Gene Expression of Somatic Cells Obtained From Milk Samples||one year||||||
818054|NCT01124604|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) Score at Week 12|RDQ scale is used to assess the impact of low back pain on daily activities by participants. The scale consists of 24 item questionnaire with options as “Yes”/“No” where “Yes” is counted as 1 point. The total score ranged from 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating greater disability.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. ‘N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818055|NCT01124604|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Western Ontario MacMaster Questionnaire (WOMAC) Global Score at Week 12|WOMAC is a self administered 24-item questionnaire used to evaluate participants with osteoarthritis of the knee. It consists of 3 subscales: pain (5 items), joint stiffness (2 items), and physical function (17 items). Each item is assessed on a 5-point scale from 0 to 4. The global score assesses pain, disability and joint stiffness and ranges from 0 to 96. Higher scores indicate that a symptom is bothersome and physically disabling.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. ‘N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818056|NCT01124604|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form-36 Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Scores at Week 12|SF-36v2 is 36-item form related to 8 health concepts (physical functioning, role physical, role emotional, general health, social functioning, bodily pain, vitality, mental health) and 2 summary scores (physical and mental component summary). Physical functioning, role physical and bodily pain contribute to physical component; role emotional, social functioning and mental health contribute to mental component; and social functioning, vitality, and general health contribute to both. All scores are based on a scale from 0 to 100, with higher scores defining more favorable health state.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818057|NCT01124604|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response Based on Overall Quality of Sleep Questionnaire|"Overall quality of sleep was addressed by the question: Please rate the overall quality of your sleep last night” and participants could choose one of the following options: excellent, good, fair or poor."|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Participants|||Number
818058|NCT01124604|Secondary|Number of Participants With Awakenings Based on Sleep Questionnaire|"Number of awakenings was addressed by the question: How many times did you wake up during the night?'' and lesser number signified better sleep."|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Participants|||Number
818059|NCT01124604|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Time Slept Based on Sleep Questionnaire at Week 12|"Time slept was addressed by the question: How long did you sleep last night? and the change from Baseline in time slept was reported."|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
818060|NCT01124604|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sleep Latency Based on Sleep Questionnaire at Week 12|"Sleep Latency was addressed by the question: How long after bedtime/lights out did you fall asleep last night? and the change from Baseline in sleep latency was reported. Decrease in time indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
818061|NCT01124604|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Total Score at Week 12|BPI-sf consists of 15 items (item 1 - presence of pain, item 2 - pain location, items 3 to 6 - pain severity, item 7 - status of pain treatment, item 8 - efficacy of pain treatment, and items 9a to 9g - interference of pain with daily life). Total score is defined as the mean scores from items 3, 4, 5, 6 and 9 recorded on an 11-point scale where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine. Negative change indicates an improvement in pain.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818062|NCT01124604|Secondary|Number of Participants With 50 Percent Pain Relief Based on Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Scale|BPI-sf is a self-evaluated pain assessment form consisting of 15 items (item 1 - presence of pain, item 2 - pain location, items 3 to 6 - pain severity, item 7 - status of pain treatment, item 8 - efficacy of pain treatment, and items 9a to 9g - interference of pain with daily life). Item 8 for efficacy of pain treatment assesses number of participants with at least 50 percent pain relief during the last 24 hours on a scale ranging from 0 percent (no relief) to 100 percent (complete relief).|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Participants|||Number
818063|NCT01124604|Secondary|Number of Participants With Presence of Pain Based on Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Scale|BPI-sf is a self-evaluated pain assessment form consisting of 15 items (item 1 - presence of pain, item 2 - pain location, items 3 to 6 - pain severity, item 7 - status of pain treatment, item 8 - efficacy of pain treatment, and items 9a to 9g - interference of pain with daily life). Item 1 for presence of pain assesses the question: “Do you have any pain today other than everyday kinds of pain?” on a 2-point scale of “yes” or “no”.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Participants|||Number
818064|NCT01124604|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response Based on Physician’s Global Assessment Scale|"Physician's Global Assessment Scale assesses the therapeutic efficacy (effectiveness) of the study drug for pain control on a 2-point scale of effective and not effective."|Week 8, Week 12|FAS included all participants who received study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Participants|||Number
818065|NCT01124604|Secondary|Number of Participants With Categorical Scores on Patient’s Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scale|The PGIC is a 7-point scale that requires the participants to assess how much their illness has improved or worsened relative to a Baseline state at the beginning of the intervention. The response options are 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improve, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, and 7 = very much worse.|Week 8, Week 12|FAS included all participants who received study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Participants|||Number
818066|NCT01124604|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Response Based on 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)|Percentage of participants with improvement in mean NRS score by greater than or equal to 30 percent or 50 percent in the last week from Baseline were considered as responders. Participants were asked to assess the average pain intensity on a 11-point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain imaginable) by selecting a number applicable to their pain on the scale.|Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818067|NCT01124604|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)|Participants were asked to assess the average pain intensity on a 11-point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain imaginable) by selecting a number applicable to their pain on the scale. The mean pain intensity during the past 74 hours (3 days) was evaluated at Baseline and the mean pain intensity during the past 12 hours was evaluated at subsequent study visits.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. LOCF method was used to impute missing values.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818068|NCT01124604|Primary|Change From Baseline in 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at Week 12|Participants were asked to assess the average pain intensity on a 11-point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain imaginable) by selecting a number applicable to their pain on the scale. The mean pain intensity during the past 74 hours (3 days) was evaluated at Baseline and the mean pain intensity during the past 12 hours was evaluated at subsequent study visits.|Baseline, Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-randomization efficacy data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818069|NCT01124617|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form-36 Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Scores at Week 12|The SF-36v2 is 36-item form related to 8 health concepts (physical functioning, role physical, role emotional, general health, social functioning, bodily pain, vitality, mental health) and 2 summary scores (physical and mental component summary). Physical functioning, role physical and bodily pain contribute to physical component; role emotional, social functioning and mental health contribute to mental component; and social functioning, vitality, and general health contribute to both. All scores are based on a scale from 0 to 100, with higher scores defining more favorable health state.|Baseline and Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818070|NCT01124617|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response Based on Overall Quality of Sleep Questionnaire|Participants rated the overall quality of sleep last night as excellent, good, fair and poor.|Baseline and Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Participants|||Number
818071|NCT01124617|Secondary|Number of Participants With Awakenings Based on Sleep Questionnaire|"Number of awakenings was related to How many times did the participant wake up during the night”. Lesser number signifies better sleep."|Baseline and Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure and 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Participants|||Number
818072|NCT01124617|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Time Slept Based on Sleep Questionnaire at Week 12|"Time slept was related to How long did the participant sleep last night. The mean change for the time in hours slept during the last night was reported."|Baseline and Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
818073|NCT01124617|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sleep Latency Based on Sleep Questionnaire at Week 12|"Sleep Latency was related to “How long after bedtime or lights out did the participant fall asleep last night . Decrease in time indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 12|FAS included all participants who received study drug & had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure & 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
818086|NCT01124643|Secondary|Change From Baseline in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Class|"Class I: No limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea.
Class II: Slight limitation of physical activity. Comfortable at rest, but ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, or dyspnea.
Class III: Marked limitation of physical activity. Comfortable at rest, but less than ordinary activity causes fatigue, palpitation, or dyspnea.
Class IV: Unable to carry out any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased."|Baseline to 12 months|ITT population.||participants|||Number
818074|NCT01124617|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory (Short Form) (BPI-sf) Total Score at Week 12|The BPI-sf consists of 15 Items (Item 1:presence of pain; Item 2:pain location; Items 3 to 6:pain severity; Item 7:status of pain treatment; Item 8:efficacy of pain treatment; and Items 9a to 9g: interference of pain with daily life). Total score is defined as the mean scores from Items 3, 4, 5, 6 and 9 recorded on an 11-point scale where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine. Lower score indicates an improvement in pain.|Baseline and Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818075|NCT01124617|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain Subscale Score Based on Brief Pain Inventory (Short Form) (BPI-sf) Scale|The BPI-sf consists of 15 Items (Item 1:presence of pain; Item 2:pain location; Items 3 to 6:pain severity; Item 7:status of pain treatment; Item 8:efficacy of pain treatment; and Items 9a to 9g: interference of pain with daily life). Pain Sub-scale score ranges from 0 (absent [no pain]) to 10 (extreme [pain as bad as you can image]). Higher scores indicates worsening. Total score is defined as the mean scores from Items 3, 4, 5, 6 and 9 recorded on an 11-point scale where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine. Lower score indicates an improvement in pain.|Baseline and Week 12|FAS included all participants who received study drug & had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818076|NCT01124617|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain Interference Subscale Score Based on Brief Pain Inventory (Short Form) (BPI-sf) Scale|The BPI-sf consists of 15 Items (Item 1:presence of pain; Item 2:pain location; Items 3 to 6:pain severity; Item 7:status of pain treatment; Item 8:efficacy of pain treatment; and Items 9a to 9g: interference of pain with daily life). Pain interference sub-scale score ranges from 0 (do not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes). Higher scores indicates worsening. Total score is defined as the mean scores from Items 3, 4, 5, 6 and 9 recorded on an 11-point scale where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine. Lower score indicates an improvement in pain.|Baseline and Week 12|FAS included all participants who received study drug & had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818077|NCT01124617|Secondary|Number of Participants With Categorical Scores on Physician’s Global Assessment Scale|"Physician's Global Assessment Scale assesses the therapeutic efficacy (effectiveness) of the study drug for pain control on a 2-point scale of effective and ineffective."|Week 8 and Week 12|FAS included all participants who received study drug & had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure & 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Participants|||Number
818078|NCT01124617|Secondary|Number of Participants With Categorical Scores on Patient’s Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scale|The PGIC is a 7-point scale that requires the participants to assess how much their illness has improved or worsened relative to a Baseline state at the beginning of the intervention. The response options are 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improve, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, and 7 = very much worse.|Week 8 and Week 12|FAS included all participants who received study drug & had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure & 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||Participants|||Number
818079|NCT01124617|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment Response Based on Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)|Percentage of participants with treatment response in mean NRS score by greater than equal to 30 or 50 percent (%) in the last week from baseline were considered as responders. Participants were asked to assess the average pain intensity on an 11-point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain imaginable) by selecting a number applicable to their pain on the scale.|Week 12|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data.||Percentage of participants|||Number
818080|NCT01124617|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score at Week 1 to 11|Participants were asked to assess the average pain intensity on an 11-point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain imaginable) by selecting a number on the scale applicable to their pain. Baseline pain score is defined as the average pain intensity score over the last 3 days prior to the randomization. Change from Baseline in NRS score is the mean NRS score at corresponding week minus mean NRS score at Baseline.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11|FAS included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818081|NCT01124617|Primary|Change From Baseline in Average Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score at Week 12|Participants were asked to assess the average pain intensity on an 11-point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain imaginable) by selecting a number on the scale applicable to their pain. Baseline pain score is defined as the average pain intensity score over the last 3 days prior to the randomization. Change from Baseline in NRS score is the mean NRS score at Week 12 minus mean NRS score at Baseline.|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818082|NCT01124643|Primary|Safety Evaluations||Baseline to 12 months|ITT population||participants|||Number
818083|NCT01124643|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Albumin/Creatinine (A/Cr) Ratio||Baseline to 12 months|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this endpoint.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
818084|NCT01124643|Secondary|Change From Baseline in eGFR||Baseline to 12 months|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this endpoint.||(mL/min/1.73m^2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818085|NCT01124643|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Plasma Gb3||Baseline to 12 months|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this endpoint.||(nmol/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818126|NCT01125098|Secondary|Cost/Effectiveness of the Use of PRO-CT-guided Decision Making Protocol on Duration of Antibiotic Therapy in COPD Exacerbations.||Discharge /10 days-6 months||||||
818087|NCT01124643|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHF- Q)|The MLHF-Q contains 21 questions with answers ranging from 0 (no) to 5 (very much). The final score ( 0 to 105) is the sum of the points for the 21 questions. A higher score indicates a worse quality of life.|Baseline to 12 months|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818088|NCT01124643|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Distance Walked in 6- Minute Walk Test (6MWT)||Baseline to 12 months|ITT population. Test was not done or test was not valid for all participants.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
818089|NCT01124643|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maximal Oxygen Consumption (VO2max) at Peak Exercise||Baseline to 12 months|ITT population. Test was not done or test was not valid for all participants.||(mL/min/kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818090|NCT01124643|Primary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular Mass Indexed to Height (LVMI)||Baseline to 12 months|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) participant population in this study was defined as all participants who provided informed consent and received study drug. Participants who did not have left ventricular hypertrophy were not included in this analysis.||g/m^2.7||Standard Deviation|Mean
818091|NCT01124786|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Profile of CO-1.01 Based on Sparse Sampling||30 days after first dose|Due to Primary endpoint showing lack of efficacy, development of CO-1.01 was stopped and secondary endpoints were not analyzed.|||||
818092|NCT01124786|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Status||Every 4 weeks, up to 1.5 years|Due to Primary endpoint showing lack of efficacy, development of CO-1.01 was stopped and secondary endpoints were not analyzed.|||||
818093|NCT01124786|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain Severity||Every 4 weeks, up to 1.5 years|Due to Primary endpoint showing lack of efficacy, development of CO-1.01 was stopped and secondary endpoints were not analyzed.|||||
818094|NCT01124786|Secondary|Drug Tolerability and Toxicity||Every week, up to 1.5 years|Due to Primary endpoint showing lack of efficacy, development of CO-1.01 was stopped and secondary endpoints were not analyzed.|||||
818095|NCT01124786|Secondary|Cancer Antigen (CA)19-9 Response Rates||Every 4 weeks, up to 1.5 years|Due to Primary endpoint showing lack of efficacy, development of CO-1.01 was stopped and secondary endpoints were not analyzed.|||||
818096|NCT01124786|Secondary|ORR, Duration of Response, and Progression Free Survival (PFS) in Patients With Measurable/Evaluable Disease, Using RECIST 1.1, up to 1.5 Years||Every 8 weeks|Due to Primary endpoint showing lack of efficacy, development of CO-1.01 was stopped and secondary endpoints were not analyzed.|||||
818097|NCT01124786|Secondary|Overall Survival in All Patients and Patients With hENT1 Expression||Monthly follow up after treatment discontinuation until death, up to 1.5 years|Due to Primary endpoint showing lack of efficacy, development of CO-1.01 was stopped and secondary endpoints were not analyzed.|||||
818098|NCT01124786|Primary|Overall Survival in Patients With Low High Human Equilibrative Nucleoside Transporter 1 (hENT1) Expression||Monthly follow up after treatment discontinuation until death, up to 1.5 years.|Analysis was per protocol and included hENT-1 low Intent to Treat (IIT) population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818099|NCT01124838|Secondary|Change in VFQ-25 Subscore Ocular Pain From Baseline to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"The National Eye Institute VFQ-25 is an ocular disease-specific survey that measures the influence of visual disability and visual symptoms on generic health domains such as emotional well-being and social functioning, in addition to task-oriented domains related to daily visual functioning.
The VFQ-25 consists of a base set of 25 vision-targeted questions plus an additional single-item general health rating question. The ocular pain subscore is calculated form the answers to 2 eye pain questions and ranges from 0 to 100, where higher scores or increases in score indicate less pain."|Baseline and Final/Early Termination Visit (up 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818100|NCT01124838|Secondary|Change in VFQ-25 Subscore Near Vision From Baseline to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"The National Eye Institute VFQ-25 is an ocular disease-specific survey that measures the influence of visual disability and visual symptoms on generic health domains such as emotional well-being and social functioning, in addition to task-oriented domains related to daily visual functioning.
The VFQ-25 consists of a base set of 25 vision-targeted questions plus an additional single-item general health rating question. The near vision subscore is calculated from the answers to 3 near vision-related questions and ranges from 0 to 100, where higher scores or increases in score indicate better vision-related functioning."|Baseline and Final/Early Termination Visit (up 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818101|NCT01124838|Secondary|Change in VFQ-25 Subscore Distance Vision From Baseline to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"The National Eye Institute VFQ-25 is an ocular disease-specific survey that measures the influence of visual disability and visual symptoms on generic health domains such as emotional well-being and social functioning, in addition to task-oriented domains related to daily visual functioning.
The VFQ-25 consists of a base set of 25 vision-targeted questions plus an additional single-item general health rating question. The distance vision subscore is calculated from the answers to 3 distance vision-related questions and ranges from 0 to 100, where higher scores or increases in score indicate better vision-related functioning."|Baseline and Final/Early Termination Visit (up 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818102|NCT01124838|Secondary|Change in Visual Functioning Questionnaire 25 (VFQ-25) Total Score From Baseline to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"The National Eye Institute VFQ-25 is an ocular disease-specific survey that measures the influence of visual disability and visual symptoms on generic health domains such as emotional well-being and social functioning, in addition to task-oriented domains related to daily visual functioning.
The VFQ-25 consists of a base set of 25 vision-targeted questions plus an additional single-item general health rating question. The overall composite score ranges from 0 to 100, where higher scores or increases in score indicate better vision-related functioning."|Baseline and Final/Early Termination Visit (up 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836708|NCT01299961|Secondary|12 Month Change in Gray-scale Ultrasound (GSUS)|There were seven different joints in the hands and wrists evaluated to score the GSUS.|baseline, 12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818103|NCT01124838|Secondary|Percent Change in Central Retinal Thickness in Each Eye From Baseline to the Final/Early Termination Visit.|Central retinal thickness was measured using OCT and assessed by a central reader.|Baseline and Final/Early Termination Visit (up to 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818104|NCT01124838|Secondary|Time to Optimal Coherence Tomography (OCT) Evidence of Macular Edema in At Least 1 Eye On or After Week 2|"Optical coherence tomography was performed at every visit using 1 of 3 approved machines. Images were evaluated by a central reader. Macular edema was defined as cystoid macular edema.
OCT evidence of macular edema on or after Week 2 was to be counted as an event. Dropouts due to reasons other than OCT evidence of macular edema were to be considered as censored observations at the time of dropping out."|From Baseline until the Final Visit (up to 80 weeks)|Intent to treat population with no macular edema at Baseline||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818105|NCT01124838|Secondary|Change In Logarithm of the Minimum Angle of Resolution (LogMAR) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) In Each Eye From Baseline to the Final/Early Termination Visit|Using corrective lenses based on that visit's refraction testing, participant's best corrected visual acuity was measured using an Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) logMAR chart. On the logMAR scale, 0 is equivalent to 20/20 visual acuity, the range of normal vision is considered to be from -0.2 - 0.1; higher values indicate visual impairment.|Baseline and Final/Early Termination Visit (up to 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
818106|NCT01124838|Secondary|Change in Vitreous Haze (VH) Grade in Each Eye From Baseline to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"Vitreous haze was measured using dilated indirect ophthalmoscopy (DIO) and assessed by the Investigator according to National Eye Institute (NEI) and SUN criteria:
Grade 0: No evident vitreous haze;
Grade 0.5+: Slight blurring of the optic disc margin because of the haze; normal striations and reflex of the nerve fiber layer cannot be visualized;
Grade 1+: Permits a better definition of both the optic nerve head and the retinal vessels (compared to higher grades);
Grade 2+: Permits better visualization of the retinal vessels (compared to higher grades);
Grade 3+: Permits the observer to see the optic nerve head, but the borders are quite blurry;
Grade 4+: Optic nerve head is obscured."|Baseline and Final/Early Termination Visit (up to 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818107|NCT01124838|Secondary|Change in Anterior Chamber (AC) Cell Grade in Each Eye From Baseline to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"Slit lamp examinations were conducted at each visit to assess AC cell count. The number of AC cells observed within a 1 mm × 1 mm slit beam was used to determine the grade according to the Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) criteria:
Grade 0 = < 1 cell
Grade 0.5+ = 1 - 5 cells
Grade 1+ = 6 - 15 cells
Grade 2+ = 16 - 25 cells
Grade 3+ = 26 - 50 cells
Grade 4+ = > 50 cells."|Baseline and at the Final/Early Termination Visit (up to 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818108|NCT01124838|Primary|Time to Treatment Failure on or After Week 2|"Treatment failure was defined by the occurrence of a uveitis flare (the inability to maintain disease control). To be considered treatment failure, ≥ 1 of these criteria had to be present in at least 1 eye at Week 2 or all other visits:
New active, inflammatory chorioretinal, and/or inflammatory retinal vascular lesions relative to Baseline
2-step increase relative to Baseline in anterior chamber cell grade or vitreous haze grade
Worsening of best corrected visual acuity by ≥ 15 letters relative to baseline.
Time to treatment failure was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Dropouts for reasons other than treatment failure at any time during the study were censored at the drop out date.
Per protocol, the primary analysis was performed in the Main Study population which included all randomized participants recruited outside Japan; for completeness results are also reported below for the Integrated dataset which includes participants recruited in Japan."|From Baseline until end of study (up to 80 weeks)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population which included all randomized participants; 3 participants at 2 sites were excluded from the ITT due to incomplete efficacy source data and compliance issues.||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818109|NCT01124864|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Plasma Concentration of AUY922 and Its Metabolite BJP762: Cmax|Summary of PK parameters for all patients one hour post 70 mg/m2 AUY922 infusion for concentration max. There are discrepancies between sample numbers and study population because PK samples were not collected from all study subjects and thus were not analyzed.|1 hour after infusion|PK analysis subset - All patients who received at least one dose of AUY922 in Cycle 1 and had at least one measurable post-dose AUY922 concentration.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818110|NCT01124864|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Plasma Concentration of AUY922 and Its Metabolite BJP762: AUClast|Summary of PK parameters for all patients one hour post 70 mg/m2 AUY922 infusion for area under the curve last. There are discrepancies between sample numbers and study population because PK samples were not collected from all study subjects and thus were not analyzed.|1 hour after infusion|PK analysis subset - All patients who received at least one dose of AUY922 in Cycle 1 and had at least one measurable post-dose AUY922 concentration.||h*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818111|NCT01124864|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Plasma Concentration of AUY922 and Its Metabolite BJP762: AUCinf|Summary of PK parameters for all patients one hour post 70 mg/m2 AUY922 infusion for area under the curve infinity. There are discrepancies between sample numbers and study population because PK samples were not collected from all study subjects and thus were not analyzed.|1 hour after infusion|PK analysis subset - All patients who received at least one dose of AUY922 in Cycle 1 and had at least one measurable post-dose AUY922 concentration.||h*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818127|NCT01125098|Primary|To Evaluate the Rate of Severe Exacerbations in COPD, Comparing COPD Patients Previously Treated According to the PRO-CT Protocol Versus COPD Patients Previously Treated With Standard Antibiotic Therapy.|We prospectively recruited COPD patients hospitalized for severe exacerbation of COPD and followed them after discharge. The primary end point of the study was the number of patients with at least 1 exacerbation at 6 months after the index exacerbation that was the reason for their hospital admission.|6 months|||participants|||Number
819931|NCT01139658|Secondary|Duration of Treatment||11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
818112|NCT01124864|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) Rate as Per Investigator Using Kaplan Meier Estimates - Per Investigator Radiological Review|Progression-free survival (PFS) is the time from date of randomization/start of treatment to the date of event defined as the first documented progression or death due to any cause. If a patient did not have an event, progression-free survival was censored at the date of last adequate tumor assessment. A Novartis modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors RECIST 1.1 criteria was applied to CT/MRI imaging data when assessing any responses to AUY922 treatment. All images were evaluated locally by the investigator. All complete or partial responses were confirmed by a second assessment at least 4 weeks later.|Week 12, Week 18|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of AUY922.||Percentage of participants|||Number
818113|NCT01124864|Secondary|Overall Survival Rate Using Kaplan Meier Estimates - Per Investigator Radiological Review|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the time from date of randomization/start of treatment to date of death due to any cause. If a patient is not known to have died, survival was censored at the date of last contact.|Week 12, Week 18|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of AUY922.||Percentage of participants|||Number
818114|NCT01124864|Primary|Response Assessment by Study Stratum - Per Investigator Assessment|The primary endpoint of the study was the investigator assessment of efficacy at 18 weeks in terms of response complete response (CR)/partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), or non clinical benefit (NCB) as assessed by response evaluation criteriain solid tumors (RECIST) version 1.0. ORR = patients with confirmed complete or partial response. Stable disease at 18 weeks = patients without response and with no assessment of progressive disease up to 18 weeks, but with an assessment of stable disease or better either within 2 weeks prior to the 18 week time point, or at the next non-missing assessment after the 18 week time point. No clinical benefit = all other patients.|18 weeks|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of AUY922.||Participants|||Number
818115|NCT01124916|Secondary|Urinary Distress Between Standard and Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy|At 6-months following surgery, the study will measure urinary distress using the Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI) and compare this estimate between women assigned to standard vs robotic-assisted laparoscopic abdominal sacrocolpopexy. The UDI measures urinary incontinence and distress and their effect on daily life. The score range is 0 to 300, with higher scores indicating worsening symptoms.|6 Months|The analysis excludes three individuals assigned to the LASC cohort and two individuals assigned to the RASC cohort because they were lost to follow-up six months after intervention.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818116|NCT01124916|Primary|Total Cost of Care Between Standard and Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy|At 6-weeks following surgery, the study will measure the total cost of care in dollars and compare this estimate between women assigned to standard vs robotic-assisted laparoscopic abdominal sacrocolpopexy.|6 Weeks|The analysis for the primary outcome includes all randomized subjects.||Dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
818117|NCT01124955|Secondary|Number of Anti-inflammatory Tablets Taken|Number of 50 mg sodium diclofenac pills taken per day|Days 3,7,14,21 and 28|Intention to treat (ITT)||number of pills/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818118|NCT01124955|Secondary|Likert Improvement Assessment Scale|Likert improvement assessment scale is based on the patient’s opinion (LIKERT P) and assessor’s opinion (LIKERT A), categorized in 1=MB (much better), 2=SB (slightly better), 3=NC (no change), 4=SW (slightly worse) and 5=MW (much worse). This scale was was applied to each day of assessment. The numbers in the category titles represent the different days.|Days 0, 3, 7, 14 and 21|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818119|NCT01124955|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessed on the SF-36|Questionnaire Short-form-36 is a widely used generic health status questionnaire, validated for Portuguese with eight components and each components with scores from 0 to 100: higher scores denote greater quality of life.|Days 0, 3, 7, 14, 21 and 28|Intention to treat analysis (ITT)||scores on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818120|NCT01124955|Secondary|Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RM)|"Secondary outcomes includes the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RM) for the assessment of functional capacity, with 24 items on low-back pain: higher scores denote poorer functional capacity.
0: better functional capacity 24: poorer functional capacity Range of score: the highest is 24 (poorer functional capacity) and lowest scores is 0 (better functional capacity)."|days 0, 3, 7, 14, 21 and 28|Intention to treat analysis (ITT)||scores on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818121|NCT01124955|Primary|Pain Assessed on a 10-point Numeric Pain Scale|The primary outcome is a visual analog pain scale (VAS), graded in centimeters from 0 to 10 (0=no pain; 10=worst imaginable pain), measured before (VAS 1) and after (VAS 2) the acupuncture session.|days 0, 3, 7, 14, 21 and 28|Intention to treat analysis (ITT)||cm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818122|NCT01125098|Secondary|To Verify the Duration of Hospitalization for Severe Exacerbation in COPD Patients Treated According to the PRO-CT Protocol Versus COPD Patients Treated With Standard Antibiotic Therapy.|We evaluate the duration in days in case of hospitalization for severe COPD exacerbation in COPD patients in the study population, both in the PRO-CT-guided antibiotic treatment group and in the standard antibiotic treatment group.|Discharge/10 days-6 months||11/2014||||
818123|NCT01125098|Secondary|To Verify Changes in FEV1 Value in COPD Patients Comparing Those Treated According to the PRO-CT Protocol Versus COPD Patients Treated With Standard Antibiotic Therapy.|COPD patients of the study population will undergo spirometry on visit 1, 4, 5, 7 in order to evaluate if there is change in FEV1 among COPD patients, both in the PRO-CT Group and in the standard Group.|Discharge/10 days-6 months||11/2014||||
818124|NCT01125098|Secondary|To Verify Survival in COPD Patients Comparing to Those Treated According to the PRO-CT Protocol Versus COPD Patients Treated With Standard Antibiotic Therapy.|We evaluate the number of deaths from any cause among COPD patients in the study population, in order to compare survival among patients both in PRO-CT group and in the standard group.|Discharge/10 days-6 months||11/2014||||
818125|NCT01125098|Secondary|To Evaluate if the PRO-CT-guided Decision Making to Shorten Antibiotic Therapy is Less Effective Than the Guideline Recommended Standard Antibiotic Treatment in Preventing Hospitalization.|We evaluate the number of hospital re-admissions for severe COPD exacerbation in COPD patients of the study population, both in the PRO-CT group and in the standard group, in order to assess if shortening antibiotic therapy taking into account the values of PRO-CT is less effective compared to a standard antibiotic treatment.|Discharge/10 days-6 months||11/2014||||
818128|NCT01125189|Secondary|Percentage of Resistant Variants Associated With Virologic Failure|"Virologic failure was defined as:
Virologic breakthrough: confirmed >1 log10 increase in hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA over nadir or confirmed RNA ≥lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) after confirmed HCV RNA <LLOQ, target not detected (TND) while on treatment
<1 log10 decrease in HCV RNA from baseline at Week 4 of treatment
Failure to achieve early virologic response: <2 log10 decrease in HCV RNA from baseline and HCV RNA ≥LLOQ at Week 12 of treatment
HCV RNA < LLOQ, TD or ≥ LLOQ at Week 12 and ≥ LLOQ at Week 24
HCV RNA ≥LLOQ or <LLOQ, target detected (TD) at the end of treatment (EOT) (including early discontinuation)
Relapse, defined as HCV RNA ≥LLOQ or <LLOQ, TD during follow­up, after HCV RNA < LLOQ, TND at EOT.
The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory. N=Number of participants analyzed for this outcome."|Follow-up Week 48|All treated participants. Here, N signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
818129|NCT01125189|Secondary|Percentage of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 1 Participants With 12-week Sustained Virologic Response (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as undetectable RNA (HCV RNA < lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ), target not detected (TND) at follow-up Week 12. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory. N=Number of participants analyzed for this outcome.|Follow-up Week 12|All treated participants. Here, N signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
818130|NCT01125189|Secondary|Percentage of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 1 Participants With Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR)|cEVR was defined as undetectable RNA (HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at Week 12. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory. N=Number of participants analyzed for this outcome.|Week 12|All treated participants. Here, N signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
818131|NCT01125189|Secondary|Percentage of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 1 Participants With Rapid Virologic Response (RVR)|RVR was defined as undetectable RNA (HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at Week 4. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory. N=Number of participants analyzed for this outcome.|Week 4|All treated participants. Here, N signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
818132|NCT01125189|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Discontinuations Due to Adverse Events (AEs), and Who Died|SAE was defined as a medical event that at any dose resulted in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; was life threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or required or prolonged hospitalization.|From start of study treatment (day 1) up to follow-up Week 48|All treated participants.||participants|||Number
818133|NCT01125189|Primary|Percentage of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 1 Participants With Sustained Virologic Response (SVR24)|SVR24 was defined as HCV <lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) and target not detected (TND) at follow-up Week 24. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Follow-up Week 24|All treated participants. Here, N signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
818134|NCT01125189|Primary|Percentage of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 1 Participants With Extended Rapid Virologic Response (eRVR)|eRVR was defined as HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation and target not detected at both Weeks 4 and 12 on treatment.|Weeks 4 and 12|All treated participants. Here, 'number of participants' analyzed (N) signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
818135|NCT01125202|Primary|Time Specific Change From Baseline in Dietary Sodium Intake (Baseline to 16 Weeks)|Dietary sodium intake was assessed via three 24-hour dietary recalls, including 1 dialysis weekday, 1 non-dialysis weekday, and 1 non dialysis weekend day. Recalls were entered into Nutrition Data System for Research, with sodium intake averaged across the 3 recalls.|Baseline to 16 weeks|Some participants have missing sodium data due to missed dietary recalls.||mg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818136|NCT01125202|Primary|Time Specific Change From Baseline in Dietary Sodium Intake (Baseline to 8 Weeks)|Dietary sodium intake was assessed via three 24-hour dietary recalls, including 1 dialysis weekday, 1 non-dialysis weekday, and 1 non dialysis weekend day. Recalls were entered into Nutrition Data System for Research, with sodium intake averaged across the 3 recalls. The difference between measurement time points was determined.|Baseline to 8 weeks|Some participants have missing sodium data due to missed dietary recalls.||mg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818137|NCT01125202|Primary|Time Specific Dietary Sodium Intake (16 Weeks)|Dietary sodium intake was assessed via three 24-hour dietary recalls, including 1 dialysis weekday, 1 non-dialysis weekday, and 1 non dialysis weekend day. Recalls were entered into Nutrition Data System for Research, with sodium intake averaged across the 3 recalls.|16 weeks|Some participants have missing sodium data due to missed dietary recalls.||mg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818138|NCT01125202|Primary|Time Specific Dietary Sodium Intake (8 Weeks)|Dietary sodium intake was assessed via three 24-hour dietary recalls, including 1 dialysis weekday, 1 non-dialysis weekday, and 1 non dialysis weekend day. Recalls were entered into Nutrition Data System for Research, with sodium intake averaged across the 3 recalls.|8 weeks|Some participants have missing sodium data due to missed dietary recalls.||mg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818139|NCT01125202|Primary|Time Specific Dietary Sodium Intake (Baseline)|Dietary sodium intake was assessed via three 24-hour dietary recalls, including 1 dialysis weekday, 1 non-dialysis weekday, and 1 non dialysis weekend day. Recalls were entered into Nutrition Data System for Research, with sodium intake averaged across the 3 recalls.|Baseline|Some participants have missing sodium data due to missed dietary recalls.||mg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818140|NCT01125202|Primary|Time Specific Interdialytic Weight Gain (16 Weeks)|Average interdialytic weight gains (kg/day) were calculated for the 1 week period prior to the 16 week measurement time point.|16 weeks|Some participants have missing interdialytic weight gains due to missed hemodialysis treatments.||kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818144|NCT01125514|Primary|Diuretic Efficacy Index 2 for Water Excretion|Efficacy of furosemide for water excretion (efficacy index 2) was defined by dividing urine volume by the urinary excretion of furosemide.Diuretic index 2 for water was calculated for the 0 to 4 hour fraction and for the total 0 to 24 hour urine collection.|0 to 24 hours|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable PD data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PD analysis set.||mL/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
818145|NCT01125514|Primary|Diuretic Efficacy Index 2 for Water Excretion|Efficacy of furosemide for water excretion (efficacy index 2) was defined by dividing urine volume by the urinary excretion of furosemide.Diuretic index 2 for water was calculated for the 0 to 4 hour fraction urine collection.|0 to 4 hours|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable PD data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PD analysis set.||mL/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
818146|NCT01125514|Secondary|Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP)and Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP)|Sitting blood pressure was measured three times at 1 to 2-minute intervals. The mean of the three sitting blood pressure measurements was used as the average of the sitting office blood pressure. The msSBP and msDBP data were analyzed using a mixed effect model with fixed effects from treatment and treatment*time; random effect from patients and predose as covariate.|0.5 hour pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose.|Safety analysis set include subjects that received study drug.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818147|NCT01125514|Secondary|Urine Sodium and Potassium Excretion Per Treatment at 24 Hours Postdose|Urine was collected 24 hours postdose in all treatment groups for sodium and potassium analysis. Each patient was required to void their bladder before drug administration and at the end 24 hours.|24 hours postdose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable pharmacodynamics (PD)data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PD analysis set.||mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
818148|NCT01125514|Secondary|Urine Sodium and Potassium Excretion Per Treatment at 12 Hours Postdose|Urine was collected 12 hours postdose in all treatment groups for sodium and potassium analysis. Each patient was required to void their bladder before drug administration and at the end 12 hours.|12 hours postdose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable pharmacodynamics (PD)data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PD analysis set.||mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
818149|NCT01125514|Secondary|Urine Sodium and Potassium Excretion Per Treatment at 8 Hours Postdose|Urine was collected 8 hours postdose in all treatment groups for sodium and potassium analysis. Each patient was required to void their bladder before drug administration and at the end 8 hours.|8 hours postdose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable pharmacodynamics (PD)data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PD analysis set.||mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
818150|NCT01125514|Secondary|Urine Sodium and Potassium Excretion Per Treatment at 4 Hours Postdose|Urine was collected 4 hours postdose in all treatment groups for sodium and potassium analysis. Each patient was required to void their bladder before drug administration and at the end 4 hours.|4 hours postdose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable pharmacodynamics (PD)data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PD analysis set.||mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
818151|NCT01125514|Secondary|Creatinine Clearance|Creatinine clearance= (Urine creatinine/Serum creatinine) x (Urine volume/(24*60)).|0 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 12 and 12 to 24 hours post dose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable PD data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PD analysis set.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
818152|NCT01125514|Secondary|Urine Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Furosemide: Renal Clearance (CLR)|The renal clearance of drug [volume x time-1]|0 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 12 and 12 to 24 hours post dose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable pharmacodynamic (PD) data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PD analysis set.||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
818153|NCT01125514|Secondary|Urine Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Furosemide: Amount of Drug Excreted Into the Urine From Time Zero to 24 Hours After Administration (Ae0-24)|The area under the plasma (or serum or blood) concentration-time curve from time zero to 24 h [mass × time × volume-1]|0 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 12 and 12 to 24 hours post dose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable PK data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PK analysis set||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
818154|NCT01125514|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Furosemide: Lowest Plasma Concentration Observed During a Dosing Interval at Steady State (Cmin, ss)|The minimum observed steady-state drug concentration in the plasma, blood, serum, or other body fluids at the end of the dosing interval during multiple dosing [amount x volume-1]|pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 24 hours post dose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable PK data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PK analysis set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818155|NCT01125514|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Furosemide: Average Steady State Plasma Concentration During Multiple Dosing (Cav,ss)|The average steady-state drug concentration in the plasma, blood, serum, or other body fluids during multiple dosing [amount x volume-1]. This was estimated as AUCτ/τ|pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 24 hours post dose|All subjects with evaluable pharmacokinetic parameter data with no exclusion flags and no major protocol deviations.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818156|NCT01125514|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Furosemide: Time to Reach the Maximum Concentration After Drug Administration (Tmax)|Tmax was directly determined from the raw plasma concentration-time data.|pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 24 hours post dose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable PK data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PK analysis set||Hours||Full Range|Median
818157|NCT01125514|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Furosemide: Observed Maximum Plasma Concentration Following Drug Administration at Steady State (Cmax, ss)|Cmax,ss was directly determined from the raw plasma concentration-time data.|pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 24 hours post dose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PK analysis set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818158|NCT01125514|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Furosemide: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC)|"Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were determined from the plasma concentration time profile of furosemide using a non-compartmental method:
AUCtau: Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to the end of the dosing interval
AUC (0-24): Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to 24 hours
AUClast: Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to the time of the last quantifiable concentration. AUClast was calculated as the sum of linear trapezoids using non-compartmental analysis.
AUCinf: Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity. AUCinf was calculated by adding AUClast and the value obtained from dividing the last measurable plasma concentration by λz, where λz was determined from automated linear regression of the last three time points with non-zero concentrations in the terminal phase of the log-transformed concentration-time profile"|pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 24 hours post dose|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable Pharmacokinetic (PK) data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PK analysis set.||h*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818159|NCT01125514|Primary|Diuretic Efficacy Index 1 for Sodium Excretion|Efficacy of furosemide for sodium excretion (efficacy index 1) was defined by dividing urinary sodium excretion by the urinary excretion of furosemide. Diuretic index 1 for sodium was calculated for the for the total 0 to 24 hour urine collection.|0 to 24 hours|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable pharmacodynamic (PD) data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PD analysis set.||mmol/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
818160|NCT01125514|Primary|Diuretic Efficacy Index 1 for Sodium Excretion|Efficacy of furosemide for sodium excretion (efficacy index 1) was defined by dividing urinary sodium excretion by the urinary excretion of furosemide. Diuretic index 1 for sodium was calculated for the for the total 0 to 4 hour urine collection.|0 to 4 hours|All patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable pharmacodynamic (PD) data with no major protocol deviation in at least one period were included in the PD analysis set.||mmol/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
818161|NCT01125566|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|"OS is defined as time from randomisation to death irrespective of the cause of the death.
For patients who had not died up to the cut-off date (03Sep2013), the date they were last known to be alive was derived from the patient status records, the trial completion record, radiological imaging assessments, the study treatment termination record, and the randomisation date."|From randomisation to data cut-off (03Sep2013); Up to 37 months.|Randomised set (RS): The randomised set included all patients who were randomised to receive treatment, whether treated or not||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818162|NCT01125566|Secondary|Best RECIST Assessment|"Best RECIST assessment is defined as CR, PR, stable disease (SD), PD or not evaluable by investigator (RECIST version 1.1).
CR for target lesions (TL): Disappearance of all target lesions.
CR for non-target lesions (NTL): Disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumour marker level. All lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size (<10mm short axis).
PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters (SoD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.
SD: Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as references the smallest SoD while on study.
PD: At least a 20% increase in the SoD of target lesions, taking as references the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). Also, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of a least 5mm. Appearance of one or more new lesions."|Post baseline tumour-imaging was performed at Week 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and then every 12 weeks (Data collected until cut-off date 08Jun2013; Up to 34 months)|Randomised set (RS): The randomised set included all patients who were randomised to receive treatment, whether treated or not (One centre was excluded from analysis due to serious non-compliance, thus data from 5 patients in AV arm and 1 patient in TV arm were excluded)||percentage of participants|||Number
818163|NCT01125566|Secondary|Objective Response (OR)|"OR is defined as complete response (CR) and partial response (PR). Assessed by investigator according to RECIST 1.1.
Only data collected until the cut-off date 08Jun2013 were considered. Complete Response (CR) for target lesions (TL): Disappearance of all target lesions.
Complete Response (CR) for non-target lesions (NTL): Disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumour marker level. All lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size (<10mm short axis)
Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.
Other factors which add to the overall response of an imaging timepoint as PR are as below:-
CR in TL, but non-CR/Non-PD in NTL leads to PR
CR in TL, but not evaluated NTL leads to PR
PR in TL, but non-PD NTL or not all evaluated NTL leads to PR"|Post baseline tumour-imaging was performed at Week 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and then every 12 weeks (Up to 34 months)|Randomised set (RS): The randomised set included all patients who were randomised to receive treatment, whether treated or not (One centre was excluded from analysis due to serious non-compliance, thus data from 5 patients in AV arm and 1 patient in TV arm were excluded)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818164|NCT01125566|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|"PFS is defined as time from randomisation to disease progression or death whichever occurs first. Assessed by investigator according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST 1.1).
Only data collected until the cut-off date for RECIST 1.1 based endpoints (08Jun2013) were considered.
Progression of disease was determined if at least 1 of the following criteria applied:
At least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters (SoD) of target lesions taking as reference the smallest SoD recorded since the treatment started, together with an absolute increase in the SoD of at least 5 mm
Appearance of 1 or more new lesions
Unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions"|From randomization until disease progression, death or data cut-off (08Jun2013); Up to 34 months|Randomised set (RS): The randomised set included all patients who were randomised to receive treatment, whether treated or not||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818165|NCT01125605|Primary|Tolerability After Visit 2 and Visit 3|Assessment of tolerability at visit 2 and visit 3 well tolerated = no side effcts poor tolerated = side effects|appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2), and appr. after 4 weeks (visit 3)|descriptive; for safety 326 patients were analysed; 1 patient had no efficacy values and were not analysed for efficacy; so a discrepancy between 325 patients (for efficacy) and 326 (for safety) occured||participants|||Number
818166|NCT01125605|Primary|Irritability/Eccentricity for Visit 1 (Baseline), Visit 2, Visit 3 and Last Observation|The severity of irritability/eccentricity was graded on a four-point scale from 0 (no complaints) to 3 (strong complaints).|begin (visit 1), appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2), and appr. after 4 weeks (visit 3)|descriptive; for all partcipations with values at the visits||participants|||Number
818167|NCT01125605|Secondary|Efficacy Rating for PASCONAL® NERVENTROPFEN (Last Value) Compared to Previous Therapy by Treatment Duration|"Efficacy of the therapy with PASCONAL® NERVENTROPFEN was rated by the physician on a 4-point rating scale at Visit 2 and Visit 3. The same scale was applied at Visit 1 for evaluation of the efficacy of the previous medication.
The last evaluation for PASCONAL® NERVENTROPFEN (Visit 2 or Visit 3, according to the LOCF principle) was compared with the rating for the previous therapy by means of the categories PASCONAL® better, No difference and PASCONAL® worse."|appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2) and appr. after 4 weeks (visit 3)|exploratively, all participations with values||participants|||Number
818168|NCT01125605|Primary|Nervousness/Restlessness for Visit 1 (Baseline), Visit 2, Visit 3 and Last Obsevation|The severity of nervousness/restlessness was graded on a four-point scale from 0 (no complaints) to 3 (strong complaints).|begin (visit 1), appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2), and appr. after 4 weeks (visit 3)|descriptive; for all partcipations with values at the visits||participants|||Number
818169|NCT01125605|Secondary|Efficacy Rating for PASCONAL® NERVENTROPFEN (Last Value) Compared to Previous Therapy by Concomitant Medication (Yes/no)|"Efficacy of the therapy with PASCONAL® NERVENTROPFEN was rated by the physician on a 4-point rating scale at Visit 2 and Visit 3. The same scale was applied at Visit 1 for evaluation of the efficacy of the previous medication.
The last evaluation for PASCONAL® NERVENTROPFEN (Visit 2 or Visit 3, according to the LOCF principle) was compared with the rating for the previous therapy by means of the categories “PASCONAL® better”, “No difference” and “PASCONAL® worse”."|appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2) and appr. after 4 weeks (visit 3)|exploratively, all participations with values||participants|||Number
818170|NCT01125605|Secondary|Direction of Change of Symptom Irritability/Eccentricity Between Baseline and Last Observation by Duration of Treatment|"The symptom irritability/eccentricity was analysed with respect to the direction of change between baseline (Visit 1) and the last documented visit (Visit 2 or Visit 3) by means of the categories improved, unchanged and worsened. For each symptom patients were included in the analysis only if the symptom had been present at Visit 1 (i.e. the baseline score value was > 0)."|begin (visit 1) and last observation (appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2) or appr. after 4 weeks (visit 3))|exploratively, all participations with values||participants|||Number
818171|NCT01125605|Secondary|Direction of Change of Symptom Irritability/Eccentricity Between Baseline and Last Observation by Concomitant Medication|"The symptom irritability/eccentricity was analysed with respect to the direction of change between baseline (Visit 1) and the last documented visit (Visit 2 or Visit 3) by means of the categories improved, unchanged and worsened. For each symptom patients were included in the analysis only if the symptom had been present at Visit 1 (i.e. the baseline score value was > 0)."|begin (visit 1) and last observation (could be appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2) or appr. after 4 weeks (visit 3))|exploratively, all participations with values||participants|||Number
818172|NCT01125605|Secondary|Direction of Change of Symptom Nervousness/Restlessnes Between Baseline and Last Observation by Duration of Treatment|"The symptom nervousness/restlessness was analysed with respect to the direction of change between baseline (Visit 1) and the last documented visit (Visit 2 or Visit 3) by means of the categories improved, unchanged and worsened. For each symptom patients were included in the analysis only if the symptom had been present at Visit 1 (i.e. the baseline score value was > 0)."|begin (visit 1) and last observation (could be appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2) or appr. after 4 weeks (visit 3))|exploratively, all participations with values||participants|||Number
818173|NCT01125605|Secondary|Direction of Change of Symptom Nervousness/Restlessnes Between Baseline and Last Observation by Concomitant Medication|The symptom nervousness/restlessnesswas analysed with respect to the direction of change between baseline (Visit 1) and the last documented visit (Visit 2 or Visit 3) by means of the categories “improved”, “unchanged” and “worsened”. For each symptom patients were included in the analysis only if the symptom had been present at Visit 1 (i.e. the baseline score value was > 0).|begin (visit 1) and last observation (could be appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2) or appr. after 4 weeks (visit 3))|exploratively, all participations with values||participants|||Number
818174|NCT01125605|Secondary|Changes of the Sum Score Between Baseline and Last Observation by Concomitant Medication and Treatment Duration|"The severity of 12 symptoms (nervousness/restlessness, irritability/eccentricity, sleep disorders, fitful sleep, hyperactivity, nocturnal activity, lack of concentration/forgetfulness, tiredness, discontent, listlessness, gastrointestinal problems, and headache/pressure) was graded on a four-point scale from 0 (no complaints) to 3 (strong complaints) and for the sum score of all 12 individual symptom scores (0 (no complaints) - 36 (all strong complaints).
Decrease of the sumscore between baseline and last observation by concomitant medication (with and withour medication) and treatment duration (< 4 weeks and >= 4 weeks)"|begin (visit 1) and last obvservation (could be appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2) or 4 weeks (visit 3))|exploratively, all participations with values||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818175|NCT01125605|Primary|Sumscore of 12 Individual Symptoms for Visit 1 (Baseline), Visit 2, and Visit 3|The severity of 12 symptoms (nervousness/restlessness, irritability/eccentricity, sleep disorders, fitful sleep, hyperactivity, nocturnal activity, lack of concentration/forgetfulness, tiredness, discontent, listlessness, gastrointestinal problems, and headache/pressure) was graded on a four-point scale from 0 (no complaints) to 3 (strong complaints) and for the sum score of all 12 individual symptom scores (0 (no complaints) - 36 (all strong complaints).|begin (visit 1), appr. after 2 weeks (visit 2), and appr. after 4 weeks (visit 3)|descriptive; for all partcipations with values at the visits||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818176|NCT01125722|Secondary|Change in Mean Overactive Bladder Symptom Composite Score|The Overactive Bladder Symptom Composite is a composite symptom score of toilet voids, urgency severity and urge urinary incontinence. It combines the Indevus Urgency Severity Scale for capture of urgency severity per toilet void with 24-hour frequency and urinary urge incontinence episodes. A complete reference for this validated measure can be found in teh Journal of Urology, Vol. 173, pgs 1639-1643, May 2005. The scale is specific to the instrument and lower scores represent an improvement in symptoms. The scale is a weighted average of each void a subject has. The weights are assigned as 0=no urgency, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe. The minimum score is 0, corresponding to no urgency in every void. There is no quantifiable upper limit since the scale is based on the number of voids per day, but there are reasonable upper limits. For example, if a subject had 15 voids in 1 day and all 15 were severe (=3), the Composite Score would be 45. Full details are in the reference above.|From Baseline to Week 4 of active treatment|Modified Intent-to-Treat Set (Full Analysis Set) - defined as all eligible subjects who were randomized to one of the two treatment arms and received some treatment.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818177|NCT01125722|Secondary|Change in Mean Urgency Episodes Per Day|Mean urgency episodes per day is based on a 3-day diary maintained by the subject. An urgency episode is identified by the subject as a case where they have a strong urge to urinate, i.e. difficulty controlling the bladder and thus are rushing to the bathroom. The number of urgency episodes over 3 days was recorded for each subject at baseline and again at Week 4. The 3-day average at each time point was used as the mean over 24 hours and the change from baseline to Week 4 was calculated for each subject.|From Baseline to Week 4 of active treatment|Modified Intent-to-Treat Set (Full Analysis Set) - defined as all eligible subjects who were randomized to one of the two treatment arms and received some treatment.||number of urgency episodes per 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
818178|NCT01125722|Secondary|Change in Mean Volume Per Void|Mean volume per void (or amount of urine per urination) over 24 hours is based on a 3-day diary maintained by the subject. The volume of void (in milliliters) over 3 days was recorded for each subject at baseline and again at Week 4. The 3-day average at each time point was used as the mean over 24 hours and the change from baseline to Week 4 was calculated for each subject.|From Baseline to Week 4 of active treatment|Modified Intent-to-Treat Set (Full Analysis Set) - defined as all eligible subjects who were randomized to one of the two treatment arms and received some treatment.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818179|NCT01125722|Secondary|Change in Mean Daily Voiding Frequency|Mean daily voiding frequency over 24 hours is based on a 3-day diary maintained by the subject. Voiding frequency is defined as the number of times a subject urinates. The number of voids over 3 days was recorded for each subject at baseline and again at Week 4. The 3-day average at each time point was used as the mean over 24 hours and the change from baseline to Week 4 was calculated for each subject.|From baseline to Week 4 of active treatment|Modified Intent-to-Treat Set (Full Analysis Set) - defined as all eligible subjects who were randomized to one of the two treatment arms and received some treatment.||number of voids per 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
818180|NCT01125722|Primary|Change in Mean Daily Urgency Incontinence Episodes|Mean urgency incontinence episodes (or urinary leaks) over 24 hours is based on a 3-day diary maintained by the subject. Urgency incontinence is when a subject has urinary leakage, i.e., uncontrolled release of fluid prior to making it to the bathroom. The number of leaks over 3 days was recorded for each subject at baseline and again at Week 4. The 3-day average at each time point was used as the mean over 24 hours and the change from baseline to Week 4 was calculated for each subject.|From baseline to Week 4 of active treatment|Modified Intent-to-Treat Set (Full Analysis Set) - defined as all eligible subjects who were randomized to one of the two treatment arms and received some treatment.||number of incontinence episodes/24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
818181|NCT01125748|Secondary|Time to the First Protocol-defined Severe Exacerbation|A protocol-defined severe exacerbation was a clinically significant worsening of asthma which, in the clinical judgment of the investigator, required at least 1 of the following: (1) Initiation of systemic corticosteroid treatment (tablets, suspension, or injection) or an increase in the level of systemic corticosteroid treatment from a stable maintenance dose for at least 3 days (For patients taking chronic oral corticosteroids, a protocol-defined severe exacerbation was any clinically significant worsening of asthma requiring ≥ 3 days of treatment with at least a 20 mg increase in the average daily dose of oral prednisone or a comparable dose of systemic corticosteroids) or (2) a hospitalization or emergency room visit because of asthma requiring systemic corticosteroids.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 52 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized participants.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
818182|NCT01125748|Primary|Percentage of Participants Not Experiencing a Protocol-defined Severe Exacerbation During the Study|A protocol-defined severe exacerbation was a clinically significant worsening of asthma which, in the clinical judgment of the investigator, required at least 1 of the following: (1) Initiation of systemic corticosteroid treatment (tablets, suspension, or injection) or an increase in the level of systemic corticosteroid treatment from a stable maintenance dose for at least 3 days (For patients taking chronic oral corticosteroids, a protocol-defined severe exacerbation was any clinically significant worsening of asthma requiring ≥ 3 days of treatment with at least a 20 mg increase in the average daily dose of oral prednisone or a comparable dose of systemic corticosteroids) or (2) a hospitalization or emergency room visit because of asthma requiring systemic corticosteroids.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 52 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized participants.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818183|NCT01125774|Secondary|Mean Monthly On-drug Headache Days During the Entire Study Period Among Participants With PMM Who Have an Average of 3 or More Moderate or Severe Migraine Headaches Per Month at Baseline|Participants completed a headache diary each evening at bedtime, including recording headache duration and acute headache medication use. Mean monthly on-drug headache days was calculated from diary data. “On-drug” headache day was a day, which had a valid diary entry and which followed a study drug dosing day, in which a headache (defined as headache pain ≥30 minute duration or requiring acute treatment) started, ended, or recurred. Headache pain persisting for more than 1 calendar day after initial onset into additional qualifying days (i.e., day following dosing day) was considered an occurrence of additional headache days. Mean monthly rate was adjusted to 7 days. PMM participant subgroups (based on symptoms over the 3 menstrual cycles prior to study) – In ≥2 out of 3 cycles attacks occur exclusively on Day 1 ± 2 of menstruation and at no other times of the cycle.|Up to 6 months|All randomized participants who were randomized only once, took at least 1 dose of study drug, had ≥1 post-randomization efficacy measurement, met the definition of the PMM subgroup and reported average of ≥3 moderate-severe migraine headaches/month at baseline. Participant must have ≥1 month with ≥4 dosing days.||Days per month||Standard Error|Mean
818190|NCT01125774|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Due to a Clinical AE|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the use of the study drug. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study drug, is also an AE. A clinical AE is an AE reported as a result of a clinical examination or reported by the participant.|Up to 6 months|APaT population, which included all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug. Participants were included in the treatment arm corresponding to the study treatment actually taken. Participants who took both study treatments were included in the telcagepant 140 mg treatment arm.||Participants|||Number
818184|NCT01125774|Secondary|Mean Monthly On-drug Headache Days During the Entire Study Period Among Participants With MRM Who Have an Average of 5 or More Moderate or Severe Migraine Headaches Per Month at Baseline|Participants completed a headache diary each evening at bedtime, including recording headache duration and acute headache medication use. Mean monthly on-drug headache days was calculated from diary data. “On-drug” headache day was a day, which had a valid diary entry and which followed a study drug dosing day, in which a headache (defined as headache pain ≥30 minute duration or requiring acute treatment) started, ended, or recurred. Headache pain persisting for more than 1 calendar day after initial onset into additional qualifying days (i.e., day following dosing day) was considered an occurrence of additional headache days. Mean monthly rate was adjusted to 7 days. MRM participant subgroup (based on symptoms over the 3 menstrual cycles prior to study) - In ≥2 out of 3 cycles attacks occur on Day 1 ± 2 of menstruation additionally at other times of the cycle.|Up to 6 months|All randomized participants who were randomized only once, took at least 1 dose of study drug, had ≥1 post-randomization efficacy measurement, met the definition of the MRM subgroup and reported average of ≥5 moderate-severe migraine headaches/month at baseline. Participant must have ≥1 month with ≥4 dosing days.||Days per month||Standard Error|Mean
818185|NCT01125774|Secondary|Mean Monthly On-drug Headache Days During the Entire Study Period Among Participants With MRM or PMM Who Have an Average of 5 or More Moderate or Severe Migraine Headaches Per Month at Baseline|Participants completed a headache diary each evening at bedtime, including recording headache duration and acute headache medication use. Mean monthly on-drug headache days was calculated from diary data. “On-drug” headache day was a day, which had a valid diary entry and which followed a study drug dosing day, in which a headache (defined as headache pain ≥30 minute duration or requiring acute treatment) started, ended, or recurred. Headache pain persisting for more than 1 calendar day after initial onset into additional qualifying days (i.e., day following dosing day) was considered an occurrence of additional headache days. Mean monthly rate was adjusted to 7 days. Participant subgroups (based on symptoms over the 3 menstrual cycles prior to study): PMM – In ≥2 out of 3 cycles attacks occur exclusively on Day 1 ± 2 of menstruation and at no other times of the cycle; MRM - In ≥2 out of 3 cycles attacks occur on Day 1 ± 2 of menstruation and additionally at other times of the cycle.|Up to 6 months|All randomized participants who were randomized only once, took at least 1 dose of study drug, had ≥1 post-randomization efficacy measurement, met the definition of the MRM or PMM subgroup and reported average of ≥5 moderate-severe migraine headaches/month at baseline. Participant must have ≥1 month with ≥4 dosing days.||Days per month||Standard Error|Mean
818186|NCT01125774|Secondary|Mean Monthly Headache Days During Entire Study Period Among Participants With MRM Who Have an Average of 5 or More Moderate or Severe Migraine Headaches Per Month at Baseline|Participants completed a headache diary each evening at bedtime, including recording headache duration and acute headache medication use. Mean monthly headache days was calculated from diary data. A headache day was defined as a day in which a headache (defined as headache pain ≥30 minute duration or requiring acute treatment) started, ended, or recurred. Headache pain persisting for more than 1 calendar day after initial onset was considered an occurrence of additional headache days. Mean monthly rate was adjusted to 28 days. MRM participant subgroup (based on symptoms over the 3 menstrual cycles prior to study) - In ≥2 out of 3 cycles attacks occur on Day 1 ± 2 of menstruation and additionally at other times of the cycle.|Up to 6 months|All randomized participants who were randomized only once, took at least 1 dose of study drug, had ≥1 post-randomization efficacy measurement, met the definition of the MRM subgroup and reported average of ≥5 moderate-severe migraine headaches/month at baseline. Participant must have ≥1 month with ≥4 dosing days and ≥7 diary days.||Days per month||Standard Error|Mean
818187|NCT01125774|Primary|Mean Monthly Headache Days During Entire Study Period Among Participants With Menstrually-related Migraine (MRM) or Pure Menstrual Migraine (PMM) Who Have an Average of 5 or More Moderate or Severe Migraine Headaches Per Month at Baseline|Participants completed a headache diary each evening at bedtime, including recording headache duration and acute headache medication use. Mean monthly headache days was calculated from diary data. A headache day was defined as a day in which a headache (defined as headache pain ≥30 minute duration or requiring acute treatment) started, ended, or recurred. Headache pain persisting for more than 1 calendar day after initial onset was considered an occurrence of additional headache days. Mean monthly rate was adjusted to 28 days. Participant subgroups (based on symptoms over the 3 menstrual cycles prior to study): PMM – In ≥2 out of 3 cycles attacks occur exclusively on Day 1 ± 2 of menstruation and at no other times of the cycle; MRM - In ≥2 out of 3 cycles attacks occur on Day 1 ± 2 of menstruation and additionally at other times of the cycle.|Up to 6 months|All randomized participants who were randomized only once, took at least 1 dose of study drug, had ≥1 post-randomization efficacy measurement, met the definition of the MRM or PMM subgroup and reported average of ≥5 moderate-severe migraine headaches/month at baseline. Participant must have ≥1 month with ≥4 dosing days and ≥7 diary days.||Days per month||Standard Error|Mean
818188|NCT01125774|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Due to a Laboratory AE|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the use of the study drug. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study drug, is also an AE. A laboratory AE is an AE reported as a result of a laboratory assessment or test.|Up to 6 months|APaT population, which is all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug. Also to be included participant must have at least one post-baseline lab test. Participants were included in arm corresponding to the treatment actually taken. Participants who took both treatments were included in the telcagepant 140 mg treatment arm.||Participants|||Number
818189|NCT01125774|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory AEs|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the use of the study drug. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study drug, is also an AE. A laboratory AE is an AE reported as a result of a laboratory assessment or test.|Up to 6 months|APaT population, which is all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug. Also to be included participant must have at least one post-baseline lab test. Participants were included in arm corresponding to the treatment actually taken. Participants who took both treatments were included in the telcagepant 140 mg treatment arm.||Participants|||Number
818191|NCT01125774|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the use of the study drug. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study drug, is also an AE. A clinical AE is an AE reported as a result of a clinical examination or reported by the participant.|Up to 14 days after the last dose of study drug (Up to 6.5 months)|All Participants as Treated (APaT) population, which included all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug. Participants were included in the treatment arm corresponding to the study treatment actually taken. Participants who took both study treatments were included in the telcagepant 140 mg treatment arm.||Participants|||Number
818196|NCT01112241|Primary|Absolute Change of Functional Residual Capacity (FRC) After Bronchodilators|Following albuterol plus tiotropium inhalation, FRC decrements ≥0.30 liters (L) as compared to baseline, in an individual subject, were considered as evidence of response to bronchodilators, according to O'Donnell et al. [Eur Respir J 2001; 18: 914-920]. They were calculated as follows: [FRC (L), before bronchodilators - FRC (L) after bronchodilators].|Baseline and 90 min after bronchodilators|Seventeen consecutive, clinically-stable, Caucasian outpatients, presenting with mild-to-very-severe obliterative bronchiolitis following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hematological malignancies, were studied. They were diagnosed from 460 patients (253 males, 207 females) undergoing HSCT (sourcing from bone marrow).||absolute negative change (liters)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818197|NCT01112241|Primary|Per Cent Change of Functional Residual Capacity (FRC) After Bronchodilators|Following albuterol plus tiotropium inhalation, FRC decrements ≥10 per cent as compared to baseline, in an individual subject, were considered as evidence of response to bronchodilators, according to O'Donnell et al. [Eur Respir J 2001; 18: 914-920]. They were calculated as follows: [FRC, expressed in liters (L), before bronchodilators - FRC (L) after bronchodilators/FRC (L) after bronchodilators x 100].|Baseline and 90 min after bronchodilators|Seventeen consecutive, clinically-stable, Caucasian outpatients, presenting with mild-to-very-severe obliterative bronchiolitis following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hematological malignancies, were studied. They were diagnosed from 460 patients (253 males, 207 females) undergoing HSCT (sourcing from bone marrow).||per cent negative change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818198|NCT01112241|Primary|Absolute Change of Residual Volume (RV) After Bronchodilators|Following albuterol plus tiotropium inhalation, RV decrements ≥0.30 liters (L) as compared to baseline, in an individual subject, were considered as evidence of response to bronchodilators, according to O'Donnell et al. [Eur Respir J 2001; 18: 914-920]. They were calculated as follows: [RV (L), before bronchodilators - RV (L) after bronchodilators].|Baseline and 90 min after bronchodilators|Seventeen consecutive, clinically-stable, Caucasian outpatients, presenting with mild-to-very-severe obliterative bronchiolitis following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hematological malignancies, were studied. They were diagnosed from 460 patients (253 males, 207 females) undergoing HSCT (sourcing from bone marrow).||absolute negative change (liters)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818199|NCT01112241|Primary|Per Cent Change of Residual Volume (RV) After Bronchodilators|Following albuterol plus tiotropium inhalation, RV decrements ≥10 per cent as compared to baseline, in an individual subject, were considered as evidence of response to bronchodilators, according to O'Donnell et al. [Eur Respir J 2001; 18: 914-920]. They were calculated as follows: [RV, expressed in liters (L), before bronchodilators - RV (L) after bronchodilators/RV (L) after bronchodilators x 100].|Baseline and 90 min after bronchodilators|Seventeen consecutive, clinically-stable, Caucasian outpatients, presenting with mild-to-very-severe obliterative bronchiolitis following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hematological malignancies, were studied. They were diagnosed from 460 patients (253 males, 207 females) undergoing HSCT (sourcing from bone marrow).||per cent negative change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818200|NCT01112241|Primary|Per Cent Change of Partial Forced Expiratory Flow (V'Part) After Bronchodilators|Following albuterol plus tiotropium inhalation, V'part increments ≥40 per cent as compared to baseline, in an individual subject, were considered as evidence of response to bronchodilators, according to Pellegrino et al. [Chest 1998; 114:1607-1612]. They were calculated as follows: [V'part, expressed in liters.second-1 (L.s-1), after bronchodilators - V'part (L.s-1) before bronchodilators/V'part (L.s-1) before bronchodilators x 100].|Baseline and 90 min after bronchodilators|Seventeen consecutive, clinically-stable, Caucasian outpatients, presenting with mild-to-very-severe obliterative bronchiolitis following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hematological malignancies, were studied. They were diagnosed from 460 patients (253 males, 207 females) undergoing HSCT (sourcing from bone marrow).||per cent positive change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818201|NCT01112241|Primary|Per Cent Change of Instantaneous Maximal Forced Expiratory Flow (V'Max) After Bronchodilators|Following albuterol plus tiotropium inhalation, V'max increments ≥40 per cent as compared to baseline, in an individual subject, were considered as evidence of response to bronchodilators, according to Pellegrino et al. [Chest 1998; 114:1607-1612]. They were calculated as follows: [V'max, expressed in liters.second-1 (L.s-1), after bronchodilators - V'max (L.s-1) before bronchodilators/V'max (L.s-1) before bronchodilators x 100].|Baseline and 90 min after bronchodilators|Seventeen consecutive, clinically-stable, Caucasian outpatients, presenting with mild-to-very-severe obliterative bronchiolitis following HSCT for hematological malignancies, were studied. They were diagnosed from 460 patients (253 males, 207 females) undergoing HSCT (sourcing from bone marrow).||per cent positive change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818202|NCT01112241|Primary|Absolute Change of Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) After Bronchodilators|Following albuterol plus tiotropium inhalation, FVC increments ≥0.20 liters (L) compared with baseline, in an individual subject, were considered as evidence of response to bronchodilators, according to the American Thoracic Society-European Respiratory Society standard criteria [Pellegrino et al. Eur Respir J 2005; 26: 948-968]. They were calculated as follows: [FVC (L) after bronchodilators - FVC (L) before bronchodilators].|Baseline and 90 min after bronchodilators|Seventeen consecutive, clinically-stable, Caucasian outpatients, presenting with mild-to-very-severe obliterative bronchiolitis following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hematological malignancies, were studied. They were diagnosed from 460 patients (253 males, 207 females) undergoing HSCT (sourcing from bone marrow).||absolute positive change (liters)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818203|NCT01112241|Primary|Per Cent Change of Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) After Bronchodilators|Following albuterol plus tiotropium inhalation, FVC increments ≥12 per cent as compared to baseline, in an individual subject, were considered as evidence of response to bronchodilators, according to the American Thoracic Society-European Respiratory Society standard criteria [Pellegrino et al. Eur Respir J 2005; 26: 948-968]. They were calculated as follows: [FVC, expressed in liters (L), after bronchodilators - FVC (L) before bronchodilators/FVC (L) before bronchodilators x 100].|Baseline and 90 min after bronchodilators|Seventeen consecutive, clinically-stable, Caucasian outpatients, presenting with mild-to-very-severe obliterative bronchiolitis following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hematological malignancies, were studied. They were diagnosed from 460 patients (253 males, 207 females) undergoing HSCT (sourcing from bone marrow).||per cent positive change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818204|NCT01112241|Primary|Absolute Change of Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) After Bronchodilators|Following albuterol plus tiotropium inhalation, FEV1 increments ≥0.20 liters (L) as compared to baseline, in an individual subject, were considered as evidence of response to bronchodilators, according to the American Thoracic Society-European Respiratory Society standard criteria [Pellegrino et al. Eur Respir J 2005; 26: 948-968]. They were calculated as follows: [FEV1 (L) after bronchodilators - FEV1 (L) before bronchodilators].|Baseline and 90 min after bronchodilators|Seventeen consecutive, clinically-stable, Caucasian outpatients, presenting with mild-to-very-severe obliterative bronchiolitis following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hematological malignancies, were studied. They were diagnosed from 460 patients (253 males, 207 females) undergoing HSCT (sourcing from bone marrow).||absolute positive change (liters)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818205|NCT01112241|Primary|Per Cent Change of Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) After Bronchodilators|Following albuterol plus tiotropium inhalation, FEV1 increments ≥12 per cent as compared to baseline, in an individual subject, were considered as evidence of response to bronchodilators, according to the American Thoracic Society-European Respiratory Society standard criteria [Pellegrino et al. Eur Respir J 2005; 26: 948-968]. They were calculated as follows: [FEV1, expressed in liters (L), after bronchodilators - FEV1 (L) before bronchodilators/FEV1 (L) before bronchodilators x 100].|Baseline and 90 min after bronchodilators|Seventeen consecutive, clinically-stable, Caucasian outpatients, presenting with mild-to-very-severe obliterative bronchiolitis following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hematological malignancies, were studied. They were diagnosed from 460 patients (253 males, 207 females) undergoing HSCT (sourcing from bone marrow).||per cent positive change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818206|NCT01112267|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Participants' Global Assessment on Investigational Product|"Global assessment on investigational product was done by participants on how well the investigational product controlled chronic (lasting a long time) low back pain. Assessment was done by categories 'Very bad (-2)' 'Bad (-1)' 'Not changed (0) 'Good (1)' and 'Very good (2)'. Assessment better than Good was considered as pain improvement success. Percentage of participants with pain improvement success is reported here."|Day 29|The FAS population included all the participants who had received investigational product and had at least 1 data of measurement of primary efficacy endpoint. Here ‘N’ signifies those participants who were evaluated for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818207|NCT01112267|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Investigator's Global Assessment on Investigational Product|"Global assessment on investigational product was done by investigator on how well the investigational product controlled chronic (lasting a long time) low back pain. Assessment was done by categories 'Very bad (-2)' 'Bad (-1)' 'Not changed (0) 'Good (1)' and 'Very good (2)'. Assessment better than Good was considered as pain improvement success. Percentage of participants with pain improvement success is reported here."|Day 29|The FAS population included all the participants who had received investigational product and had at least 1 data of measurement of primary efficacy endpoint. Here ‘N’ signifies those participants who were evaluated for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818208|NCT01112267|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) Korean Version Score at Day 29|The ODI Korean version was used to assess the participant's functionality. The ODI is a low back pain-specific, validated instrument that consists of questions related to limitations in performing specific activities of daily living and 1 question related to pain intensity. The ODI is a self-administered questionnaire consists of 10 sections. Each section consists of 6 statements ranked from 0 to 5 (0=good to 5=worse). Total score is the sum of score obtained in each section and ranges from 0 to 50. A higher score represents greater disability.|Baseline and Day 29|FAS population included all participants who had received investigational product and had at least 1 data of measurement of primary efficacy endpoint.||Unit on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818209|NCT01112267|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form (SF)-36 Score at Day 29|"The quality of life of participants was evaluated by SF-36 Korean version questionnaire. It is composed of 8 domains: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. Participants answered to the questionnaire of 36 questions; and physical, social, and psychological health status were assessed. It ranges 0 to 100, and higher score indicates better quality of life, But in Reported (Rptd.) Health Transition domain higher score indicates worse quality of life."|Baseline and Day 29|The FAS population included all the participants who had received investigational product and had at least 1 data of measurement of primary efficacy endpoint.||Unit on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818394|NCT01125930|Secondary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Signs: Dryness/Irritation|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic signs include redness (non-transient erythema), telangiectasia, facial edema, and dry skin.|2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818210|NCT01112267|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pain Relief|Pain relief was measured in 6 stages to assess the participant's pain relief. Extent of pain relief was measured on a scale ranging from 4 to -1, where 4=complete disappearance, 3=fair relief, 2=moderate relief, 1=slight relief, 0=no change and -1=pain worsening. Relief more than 'slight relief (1)' was considered as pain relief success.|Day 8, Day 15 and Day 29|the FAS population included all the participants who had received investigational product and had at least 1 data of measurement of primary efficacy endpoint.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818211|NCT01112267|Primary|Change From Baseline in Pain Intensity at Day 29|Change in pain intensity experienced by participants over the last 48 hours was measured on Day 29 against Baseline with VAS. VAS is a 10 cm scale. Intensity of pain range: 0 cm=no pain to 10 cm=worst possible pain.|Baseline and Day 29|The FAS population included all the participants who had received investigational product and had at least 1 data of measurement of primary efficacy endpoint.||Unit on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818212|NCT01112267|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Reduction in Pain Intensity|The percentage of participants with extent of reduction in pain intensity greater than or equal to 30 percent was reported. Pain intensity change rate was calculated by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score at baseline minus VAS score at Day 29 divided by VAS score at Baseline. VAS is a 10 centimeter (cm) scale. Intensity of pain range: 0 cm=no pain to 10 cm=worst possible pain.|Baseline up to Day 29|Full analysis set (FAS) population included all participants who had received investigational product and had at least 1 data of measurement of primary efficacy endpoint.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818213|NCT01117857|Other Pre-specified|Change in Overall Well Being Measured by the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI)|The CGI is a scale to measure the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment, relative to the clinician's past experience with patients who have the same diagnosis. Severity is ranked 1, normal, not at all ill; 2, borderline ill; 3, mildly ill; 4, moderately ill; 5, markedly ill; 6, severely ill; or 7, extremely ill. A higher score indicates greater symptom severity.|Baseline to week 9|Of the 19 participants who received study medication, 16 were considered evaluable for the purpose of analyses as they returned for at least one assessment after starting the study intervention.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818214|NCT01117857|Other Pre-specified|Change in Hot Flash Interference With Daily Activities and Quality of Life as Measured by the Hot Flash Related Daily Interference Scale (HFRDIS)|The HFRDIS is a 10-item self-report questionnaire in which subjects rate the degree to which hot flashes interfere with daily activities and quality-of-life during the prior week. Each item is rated on a scale from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes) for a total score range of 0-100 (higher score indicates greater symptom burden/interference).|Baseline to week 9|Of the 19 participants who received study medication, 16 were considered evaluable for the purpose of analyses as they returned for at least one assessment after starting the study intervention.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818215|NCT01117857|Other Pre-specified|Change in Anxiety as Measured by the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire (GAD-7)|The GAD-7 is a valid and efficient tool for screening anxiety and assessing its severity in clinical practice and research. Subjects rate the items for severity on a 4-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day) for a total range of 0-21. A higher score indicates greater anxiety symptom burden.|Baseline to week 9|Of the 19 participants who received study medication, 16 were considered evaluable for the purpose of analyses as they returned for at least one assessment after starting the study intervention.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818216|NCT01117857|Secondary|Change in Menopause Symptoms as Measured by the Greene Climacteric Scale|The Greene Climacteric Scale (GCS) is a 21-item scale used to quantify the severity of perimenopausal somatic symptoms. Each item is scored 0-3 for a total range of 0-63, with a higher score indicating greater symptom severity.|Baseline to week 9|Of the 19 participants who received study medication, 16 were considered evaluable for the purpose of analyses as they returned for at least one assessment after starting the study intervention.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818217|NCT01117857|Primary|Change in Depression Scores as Measured by the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression|The HAM-D is a 17-item well-validated and reliable measure of current depressive symptoms and their severity. Eight items are scored on a five-point scale (0-4), and nine are scored on a three-point scale (0-2) for a total score range of 0-50. A higher score indicates greater symptom severity.|Baseline to week 9|Of the 19 participants who received study medication, 16 were considered evaluable for the purpose of analyses as they returned for at least one assessment after starting the study intervention.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818218|NCT01117870|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Analgesics After Intervention|Number of PRF treatment patients with increase or decrease in medication use (either in dose, frequency, or no use), compared with the placebo group.|4 weeks|Number of participants who discontinued analgesics after intervention||Participants|||Count of Participants
818219|NCT01117870|Secondary|Change in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) From Baseline to 4 Week|ODI is an index derived from the Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire used to quantify disability for low back pain. The self-completed questionnaire contains ten topics concerning intensity of pain, lifting, ability to: care for oneself, walk, sit, sexual function, stand, social life, sleep quality, and ability to travel. Each topic category is followed by 6 statements describing different potential scenarios in the patient's life relating to the topic. The patient then checks the statement which most closely resembles their situation. Each question is scored on a scale of 0-5 with the first statement being zero and indicating the least amount of disability and the last statement is scored 5 indicating most severe disability.The scores for all questions answered are summed, then multiplied by two to obtain the index (range 0 to 100). Zero is equated with no disability and 100 is the maximum disability possible.|baseline (at recruitment) and at 4 weeks|Success defined as at least 50% improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) - measured at 4 weeks compared to placebo group.||percentage change of ODI||Standard Deviation|Mean
818236|NCT01118091|Primary|Response Rate|Response was assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. Complete response (CR) is the disappearance of all target lesions. Partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD. Progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% increase in the sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. Stable disease (SD) is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD taking as references the smallest sum LD.|3 years|||Participants|||Number
818220|NCT01117870|Secondary|Assessment of Side Effects|Percentage of patients having side effects after PRF treatment assessed at 1 week compared to placebo group. Assessment of persisting side effects, percentage of patients having side effects after PRF treatment beyond 1 week compared to the placebo group. Side effects could be nausea, headache, momentary increase in pain, fever, tingling, itching, and/or burning skin at point of treatment|1 week and up to 3 months|Assessment of persisting side effects and percentage of patients having side effects after PRF treatment beyond 1 week compared to the placebo group. Side effects could be nausea, headache, momentary increase in pain, fever, tingling, itching, and/or burning skin at point of treatment||percentage of participants|||Number
818221|NCT01117870|Secondary|Change in Mean Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores From Baseline to 4 Weeks|"Secondary outcomes were considered as exploratory. Is PRF an effective treatment for patients with CLR pain? It will be measured by a change in VAS scores from baseline measurement at recruitment.
Visual analog scale (VAS) - For pain intensity, the scale is most commonly anchored by “no pain” (score of 0) and “pain as bad as it could be” or “worst imaginable pain” (score of 10) on a 10-cm scale."|baseline (at recruitment) and at 4 Weeks|Intent to treat analysis was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818222|NCT01117870|Primary|Number of Participants Lost to Follow-up at 3 Months|Patients who were lost to follow-up at 3 months were recorded.|3 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
818223|NCT01117870|Primary|Recruitment Rate|Expected recruitment is at least 4 patients per month. At least 80% of eligible patients fulfilling the selection criteria can be recruited. The final assessment was at the end of 15 months, at which time all the subjects were enrolled. Participants withdrawing within 4 weeks after the interventional shall not be included in the study. However participants withdrawing after 4 weeks of the intervention shall be included in the final analysis, on intention to treat principle.|15 month point|Patients with suspected leg pain were initially approached by the research assistant. Further screening for eligibility was done in the presence of the physician. Suitable patients met with the research assistant (blind to intervention), who noted down the baseline parameters of the patient after obtaining an informed consent.||Participants|||Count of Participants
818224|NCT01117948|Secondary|Activities of Daily Living - ADCS-ADL; Behavioral/Psychiatric Symptoms - NPI||6 months double-blind, 6 months open label (optional)||||||
818225|NCT01117948|Primary|Cognitive Performance - ADAS-cog+|"Alzheimer's disease Assessment Scale, Cognitive Subscale (15 item) Higher scores indicate cognitive impairment. All items are assessed by independent rater (psychologists). The score goes from 0 points (no cognitive impairment) to 95 points (maximum impairment in all 15 items).
Primary Outcome Measure is the change from baseline ADAS-cog+ score to the score after 26 weeks (end of double blind)."|6 months double blind, 6 months open-label (optional)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818226|NCT01117987|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Incidence of Clinical Worsening Events|Clinical worsening events included death, overnight hospitalization for worsening of PAH, worsening of World Health Organization (WHO) functional class by at least one level (drop in WHO ), 15% decrease in the 6MWD as compared to baseline confirmed by two 6MWTs at two consecutive study visits (6MWD reduction), and drop in WHO & 6MWD reduction. Some participants have fulfilled more than one criterion. Therefore, the sum of individual components may be higher than the total number of participants with clinical worsening.|204 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS): The full analysis set included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the extension.||Percentage of participants|||Number
818227|NCT01117987|Secondary|Change From Core Study Baseline in Six-Minute Walk Distance (6MWD)|A six minute walk test (6MWT) was performed in accordance with the guidleines of the American Thoracic Society (2002).|core study baseline, extension baseline, 12 weeks, 24 weeks, 48 weeks, 72 weeks, 96 weeks, 120 weeks, 144 weeks, 156 weeks, 204 weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set (FAS), who had values at both core study baseline and the given post-baseline time point, were included in the analysis for that post-baseline time point. The FAS included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the extension.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
818228|NCT01117987|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events and Deaths|Adverse event monitoring was conducted throughout the study.|204 weeks|Safety analysis set: The safety set included all paticipants who received at least one dose of study drug during the extension.||Participants|||Number
818229|NCT01118013|Secondary|Rate of Opportunistic Infections|Percent of participants who have an opportunistic (viral, bacterial and fungal) infection in the first year following transplant.|1 year post transplant|Due to study termination, data were not collected and the outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
818230|NCT01118013|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) was defined as the transplant from registration to death of any cause. Surviving patients were censored at the date of last follow-up. The median OS with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method.|Up to 5.5 years|Due to study termination, data were not collected and the outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
818231|NCT01118013|Secondary|Complete Response Rate|Complete response (CR) rate is reported as the percentage of participants who achieved a CR.|Up to 5.5 years|Due to study termination, data were not collected and the outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
818232|NCT01118013|Primary|Comparison of EFS Distribution to That of CALGB-100002|EFS distributions between CALGB-100002 and this study will be compared using the two-sample log-rank test.|2 years|Due to study termination, data were not collected and the outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
818233|NCT01118013|Primary|Event-free Survival (EFS)|EFS was defined as the date of transplant to date of progression or develop myelodysplasia after autologous transplant. EFS was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method.|Duration of study (up to 5.5 years)|Due to study termination, data were not collected and the outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
818234|NCT01118091|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Measured from the time of randomization to time of progression (or death).|3 years|||Days|||Number
818235|NCT01118091|Secondary|Toxicity|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events see the adverse event module.|3 years|||Participants|||Number
818237|NCT01118117|Secondary|Stent Fracture at 12 Months|Occurrence of stent fracture as determined by core laboratory analysis|12 Months post-procedure|X-rays for 324 stents (234 subjects) were available for analysis by the angiographic core laboratory to evaluate stent fractures at 12 months post-procedure. One stent fracture was caused by a physician during a non-study peripheral intervention.||percentage of fracture occurrence|Participants||Number
818243|NCT01118117|Secondary|Occurrence of Target Lesion Revascularization|"The occurrence of clinically driven Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR) was measured at 12 months post-procedure.
Clinically driven defined as:
More than 50 percent stenosis with worsening symptoms, OR
More than 70 percent stenosis without symptoms"|12 Months post-procedure|Comprised of all subjects enrolled in the pivotal OSPREY trial (N=261)||percentage of subjects with TLR|||Number
818244|NCT01118117|Secondary|Primary Effectiveness Endpoint Using a Peak Systolic Velocity Ratio of ≤ 2.4 (i.e., Modified VIVA Criteria) in the mITT Cohort|The primary effectiveness endpoint was defined as absence of TLR and stent patency at 12 months as evidenced by a peak systolic velocity ratio < 2.0 from duplex ultrasound. Additional considerations were made using a more contemporary approach to evaluate stent patency using a peak systolic velocity ratio (PSVR) ≤ 2.4 (i.e., modified VIVA criteria). This outcome evaluated the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) cohort comprised of 226 subjects (excluded subjects with unknown primary effectiveness endpoint)|12 Months post-procedure|Analysis uses a more contemporary approach to evaluate primary stent patency using a peak systolic velocity ratio ≤ 2.4 (modified VIVA criteria). Because patency beyond the 12 months visit window may be considered as patency at 12 months, the out-of-window patency is imputed as treatment success in the analysis.||percentage of stent patency|||Number
818245|NCT01118117|Primary|Primary Safety Endpoint|The primary safety endpoint for this study was freedom from major adverse events (MAE) at 30 days post-procedure. MAE was defined as TLR, amputation of the treated limb, or death.|30 days post-procedure|Study success was based on the proportion of patients with freedom from MAE at 30 days post-procedure when tested against a performance goal of 88% using the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval. In both cohorts, the lower confidence interval exceeded the prespecified performance goal indicating the study met its primary safety endpoint.||percentage of subjects without a MAE||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818246|NCT01118117|Secondary|Primary Effectiveness Endpoint in Modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Cohort|Primary effectiveness endpoint was defined as absence of TLR and stent patency at 12 months as evidenced by a peak systolic velocity ratio < 2.0 from DUS obtained within the 12 months visit window. Because patency beyond the 12 months visit window may be considered as patency at 12 months, the out-of-window patency is imputed as treatment success. The modified intention to treat (mITT) cohort had 226 subjects (excluded subjects with unknown primary effectiveness endpoint).|12 Months post-procedure|The modified intention to treat (mITT) cohort had 226 subjects (excluded subjects with unknown primary effectiveness endpoint).||percentage of stent patency|||Number
818247|NCT01118117|Primary|Primary Effectiveness Endpoint|The primary effectiveness endpoint was defined as stent patency at 12 months as evidenced by absence of TLR and a peak systolic velocity ratio < 2.0 from DUS obtained within the 12 months visit window.|12 Months post-procedure|Analysis comprised of 261 subjects enrolled in pivotal trial and missing data imputed as loss of patency under the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Study success was based on the proportion of patients with stent patency when tested against a performance goal of 66% using the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval.||percentage of stent patency||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818248|NCT01118143|Secondary|Plaque Index|"The plaque index of the individual was obtained by adding the values of each tooth (an average of 4 scores) and dividing by number of teeth examined with the resulting scores as follows 0.1-1.0 = low accumulation of plaque; 1.1-2.0 = Moderate accumulation of plaque; 2.1-3.0 = high accumulation of plaque.
The Plaque index reference is Silness and Löe, 1964."|6 months after intervention|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818249|NCT01118143|Primary|Gingival Index|The gingival index of the individual was obtained by adding the values of each tooth (an average of 4 scores) and dividing by number of teeth examined with the resulting scores as follows 0.1-1.0 = mild inflammation; 1.1-2.0 = moderate inflammation; 2.1-3.0 = severe inflammation. The GI reference is Löe and Silness, 1963.|6 months after intervention|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818250|NCT01118221|Secondary|Maximum Oxygen Uptake|Change in 6 peak O2 uptake from Baseline to 3 Months|Maximum O2 uptake will be measured at 0 and 3 months.|||mL/minute||Standard Error|Mean
818251|NCT01118221|Secondary|Systemic Markers of Oxidant Stress|Plasma F2-isoprostanes measured in all subjects before and after exercise testing at baseline.|Markers of oxidant stress will be measured in all subjects before randomization after exercise testing at 0 months.|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818252|NCT01118221|Primary|6 Minute Walk Distance|Change in 6 Minute Walk Distance from Baseline to 3 Months|The 6-MWD will be measured at 0 and 3 months.|||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
818253|NCT01118273|Secondary|Wake Episode Measured by Actigraphy|Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects. Wake Episodes - # of blocks of continuous wake epochs (defined as 2 or more consecutive epochs scored as wake that ends when there is at least one epoch scored as sleep subsequent to the start of the wake epochs).|Up to 10 hours|||Wake episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818254|NCT01118273|Secondary|Activity Mean Measured by Actigraphy|Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects. Activity mean - average movement per minute.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Movement per minute||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818255|NCT01118273|Secondary|Sleep Efficiency Measured by Actigraphy|Sleep efficiency was calculated as (total sleep time/total time in-bed time) × 100; total in-bed time was fixed at 10 hours. Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Percentage of sleep time||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818256|NCT01118273|Secondary|Total Wake Time Measured by Actigraphy|Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818257|NCT01118273|Secondary|Number of Times Participants Took Rescue Medication|"Subjects were allowed to rescue and take a non-study pain reliever if the pain was not tolerable. This measure represents for the number of times rescue medication was taken by a subject."|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Participants|||Number
838351|NCT01315158|Secondary|Predictors of Sedation Related Complications as Measured by the Number of Participants Who Experience Hypoxemia (Defined as a Pulse Oximetry <90% for Any Duration)||One year|||participants|||Number
818262|NCT01118273|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score|Subjects completed the VAS scale at baseline (post-dental surgery) and after completion of the sleep period. Subjects marked a line on a 100-mm scale to indicate the severity of pain they are experiencing from 0 being no pain to 100 being worse possible pain.This measure indicates the change in pain severity rating on the VAS scale from baseline.|Baseline and up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818263|NCT01118273|Secondary|Overall Rating of Severity in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score|Subjects marked a line on a 100-mm scale to indicate the severity of pain they are experiencing from 0 being no pain to 100 being worse possible pain.|At 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818264|NCT01118273|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Categorical Pain Rating Scale Score|Subjects responded to question, 'My pain at this time is' with following choices: no pain (0), mild pain (1), moderate pain (2), or severe pain (3). Subjects completed this question at baseline (post-dental surgery) and after sleep period. The following measure is the change in pain rating from baseline.|Baseline and up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818265|NCT01118273|Secondary|Overall Rating of Severity in Categorical Pain Rating Scale Score|Subject responded to question, 'My pain at this time is' by selecting one of the following choices: no pain (0), mild pain (1), moderate pain (2), or severe pain (3).|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818266|NCT01118273|Secondary|Sleep Quality Index|Sleep Quality Index is the mean score of items, 'sleep quality', 'calm sleep', 'ease falling asleep', and 'slept throughout' on the Karolinska Sleep Diary, ranges from 1 (worst possible) to 5 (best possible).|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed).||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818267|NCT01118273|Secondary|Total Sleep Time by Subject Assessment|Subject responded to: Please estimate the number of hours and minutes you think that you slept.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818268|NCT01118273|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Sufficient Sleep|Subject rating of following question with 1 being no, definitely too little to 5 being yes, definitely enough: Did you get enough (sufficient) sleep?|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
818269|NCT01118273|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Well Rested|Subject rating of following question with 1 being not rested at all to 3 being completely rested: Well-rested?|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
818270|NCT01118273|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Ease of Awakening|Subject rating of following question with 1 being very difficult to 5 being very easy: Ease of awakening?|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
818271|NCT01118273|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Premature Awakening|Subject rating of following question with 1 being woke up much too early to 3 being no: Premature awakening?|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
818272|NCT01118273|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Easiness to Fall Asleep|Subject rating of following question with 1 being very difficult to 5 being very easy: How easy was it to fall asleep?|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
818273|NCT01118273|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Calmness of Sleep|Subject rating of following question with 1 being very restless and 5 being very calm: How calm was your sleep?|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
818274|NCT01118273|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Sleep Quality|Subject rating of following question with 1 being very poor and 5 being very good: How was your sleep?|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
818275|NCT01118273|Secondary|Global Assessment of Study Medication as a Sleep-aid|Subject rating of following question with 0 being poor to 4 being excellent: How would you rate the study medication you received as a sleep aid?|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
818276|NCT01118273|Secondary|Sleep Latency Measured by Actigraphy|Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects. Sleep latency was defined as minutes to sleep onset since dosing, where sleep onset was the first 20-minute block with 19 minutes of sleep. For subjects who had not achieved sleep onset (e.g., due to taking rescue medication before achieving sleep onset), sleep latency was considered as censored at the time of wakening.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818277|NCT01118273|Secondary|Wake After Sleep Onset (WASO) Measured by Actigraphy|Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects. WASO was defined as minutes of awake during the period of sleep onset and offset, where sleep onset is the first 20-minute block with 19 minutes of sleep.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818278|NCT01118273|Primary|Total Sleep Time Measured by Actigraphy|Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects. In calculating the total sleep time, subjects who took rescue medication were treated as “awake” from the time the rescue medication was given until the end of the sleep period. In addition, if subjects rescued before sleep onset, their total sleep time was set to zero.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818279|NCT01118312|Secondary|Childhood Asthma Control Test|Childhood Asthma Control Test (score range: 0-27); higher score indicates better asthma control|24 weeks|Analysis of Children (less than 18 years old) Childhood Asthma Control Test scores||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818280|NCT01118312|Primary|Asthma Control Test (ACT)|Asthma Control Test for adults (score range: 5-25); higher score indicates better asthma control|24 weeks|Analysis of adult (18 and above) Asthma Control Scores||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818281|NCT01118325|Secondary|AR-C124910XX (Tmax) at Week 4|Time to reach peak or maximum concentration of AZD6140 drug metabolite AR-C124910XX following AZD6140 administration|Week 4|In total 7 Japanese patients (4 patients in 45 mg and 3 patients in 90 mg) were excluded from the PK analysis set since PK samples of these patients were discarded due to a database set-up issue at the central laboratory.||hour||Full Range|Median
818282|NCT01118325|Secondary|AR-C124910XX (AUC0-tau) at Week 4|Area under the plasma concentration curve of AZD6140 drug metabolite AR-C124910XX from time zero to dosing interval|Week 4|In total 7 Japanese patients (4 patients in 45 mg and 3 patients in 90 mg) were excluded from the PK analysis set since PK samples of these patients were discarded due to a database set-up issue at the central laboratory.||ng.h/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
818283|NCT01118325|Secondary|AR-C124910XX (Cmax) at Week 4|Maximum plasma concentration of AZD6140 drug metabolite AR-C124910XX|Week 4|In total 7 Japanese patients (4 patients in 45 mg and 3 patients in 90 mg) were excluded from the PK analysis set since PK samples of these patients were discarded due to a database set-up issue at the central laboratory.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
818284|NCT01118325|Secondary|AZD6140 (Tmax) at Week 4|Time to reach peak or maximum concentration of AZD6140 following AZD6140 administration|Week 4|In total 7 Japanese patients (4 patients in 45 mg and 3 patients in 90 mg) were excluded from the PK analysis set since PK samples of these patients were discarded due to a database set-up issue at the central laboratory.||hour||Full Range|Median
818285|NCT01118325|Secondary|AZD6140 (AUC0-tau) at Week 4|Area under the plasma concentration curve of AZD6140 from time zero to dosing interval|Week 4|In total 7 Japanese patients (4 patients in 45 mg and 3 patients in 90 mg) were excluded from the PK analysis set since PK samples of these patients were discarded due to a database set-up issue at the central laboratory.||ng.h/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
818286|NCT01118325|Secondary|AZD6140 (Cmax) at Week 4|Maximum plasma AZD6140 concentration|Week 4|Only Japanese participants who had IPA data at Week 4 were considered in this analysis||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
818287|NCT01118325|Primary|IPA Final Extent at 24 Hours Post Dose on Week 4 in Japanese Patients|"Final extent IPA from pre-dose baseline was calculated using the following formula for ADP-induced platelet aggregation:
Percentage Inhibition = 100% x (PAs - PA) / (PAs) PA was the mean response at the given post dose time point and PAs was the mean response at pre dose baseline. Percentage inhibition was restricted to the closed interval [0,100]; any data falling outside this range was truncated to the appropriate limit."|Week 4|Only Japanese participants who had IPA data at Week 4 were considered in this analysis. Arm AZD6140 90 mg bd includes one non-Japanese participant resident in Japan||percentage inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
818288|NCT01118325|Primary|IPA Final Extent at 12 Hours Post Dose on Week 4 in Japanese Patients|"Final extent IPA from pre-dose baseline was calculated using the following formula for ADP-induced platelet aggregation:
Percentage Inhibition = 100% x (PAs - PA) / (PAs) PA was the mean response at the given post dose time point and PAs was the mean response at pre dose baseline. Percentage inhibition was restricted to the closed interval [0,100]; any data falling outside this range was truncated to the appropriate limit."|Week 4|Only Japanese participants who had IPA data at Week 4 were considered in this analysis. Arm AZD6140 90 mg bd includes one non-Japanese participant resident in Japan||percentage inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
818289|NCT01118325|Primary|IPA Final Extent at 8 Hours Post Dose on Week 4 in Japanese Patients|"Final extent IPA from pre-dose baseline was calculated using the following formula for ADP-induced platelet aggregation:
Percentage Inhibition = 100% x (PAs - PA) / (PAs) PA was the mean response at the given post dose time point and PAs was the mean response at pre dose baseline. Percentage inhibition was restricted to the closed interval [0,100]; any data falling outside this range was truncated to the appropriate limit."|Week 4|Only Japanese participants who had IPA data at Week 4 were considered in this analysis. Arm AZD6140 90 mg bd includes one non-Japanese participant resident in Japan||percentage inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
818290|NCT01118325|Primary|IPA Final Extent at 4 Hours Post Dose on Week 4 in Japanese Patients|"Final extent IPA from pre-dose baseline was calculated using the following formula for ADP-induced platelet aggregation:
Percentage Inhibition = 100% x (PAs - PA) / (PAs) PA was the mean response at the given post dose time point and PAs was the mean response at pre dose baseline. Percentage inhibition was restricted to the closed interval [0,100]; any data falling outside this range was truncated to the appropriate limit."|Week 4|Only Japanese participants who had IPA data at Week 4 were considered in this analysis. Arm AZD6140 90 mg bd includes one non-Japanese participant resident in Japan||percentage inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
818291|NCT01118325|Primary|Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation(IPA) Final Extent at 2 Hours Post Dose on Week 4 in Japanese Patients|"Final extent IPA from pre-dose baseline was calculated using the following formula for Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation:
Percentage Inhibition = 100% x (PAs - PA) / (PAs) Platelet Aggregation (PA) was the mean response at the given post dose time point and PAs was the mean response at pre dose baseline. Percentage inhibition was restricted to the closed interval [0,100]; any data falling outside this range was truncated to the appropriate limit."|Week 4|Only Japanese participants who had IPA data at Week 4 were considered in this analysis. Arm AZD6140 90 mg bd includes one non-Japanese participant resident in Japan||percentage inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
818292|NCT01118377|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Tumor Response|Tumor response was defined as either a complete response or a partial response prior to failure (disease progression, death from any cause, or a second malignancy). A complete response was defined as the complete disappearance on magnetic response imaging of all enhancing tumor and mass effect on a stable or decreasing dose of dexamethasone (or only receiving adrenal replacement doses) accompanied by a stable or improving neurologic examination that was maintained for at least 12 weeks. A partial response was defined as a greater than or equal to 50% reduction in tumor size by bi-dimensional measurement on a stable or decreasing dose of dexamethasone accompanied by a stable or improving neurologic examination that was maintained for at least 12 weeks.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 20 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of capecitabine.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818293|NCT01118377|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time from the initiation of therapy to the date of death from any cause or to the date the patient was last known to be alive for surviving patients.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 20 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of capecitabine.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818294|NCT01118377|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from the initiation of treatment to the earliest date of failure (disease progression, death from any cause, or a second malignancy) or to the last assessment date for patients who did not fail. Disease progression was defined as progressive neurologic abnormalities or worsening neurologic status not explained by causes unrelated to tumor progression (eg, anticonvulsant or corticosteroid toxicity, electrolyte disturbances, sepsis, hyperglycemia, weaning of steroids, radiation necrosis, etc); or a greater than 25% increase in the bi-dimensional measurement of the tumor, as compared with the previous scan; or the appearance of a new lesion; or an increase in the doses of dexamethasone required to maintain stable neurologic status or imaging.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 20 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of capecitabine.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818295|NCT01118455|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events by System Organ Class & Preferred Term (Safety Population)|"To compare the safety of Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) treatment using the VNS Therapy device to anti-epileptic drug (AED) therapy in treating patients with seizures.
The safety population consists of 66 VNS implanted patients and the AED safety population includes 69 patients who are randomized to the AED arm.
Please note one patient in the VNS safety population who was implanted but never received stimulation was excluded from the ITT population."|0-52 weeks|||participants|||Number
818296|NCT01118455|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Non-Serious Adverse Events by System Organ Class and Preferred Term (Safety Population)|"To compare the safety of Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) treatment using the VNS Therapy device to anti-epileptic drug (AED) therapy in treating patients with seizures.
The safety population consists of 66 VNS implanted patients and the AED safety population includes 69 patients who are randomized to the AED arm.
Please note one patient in the VNS safety population who was implanted but never received stimulation was excluded from the ITT population."|0-52 weeks|"Number of participants with any definite related Adverse Event by body system and preferred term, Safety Population.
NOTE: Number of participants analyzed in VNS arm includes one explant not from ITT population, but from safety population."||Participants|||Number
818297|NCT01118455|Secondary|Mean Percent Change in Seizure Frequency (ITT Population)|"The mean percent change in seizure frequency for the VNS and AED treatment groups at 52 weeks post baseline.
Both AED and VNS treatment groups were stratified according to the patients' number of previous AED treatments (early group had 2 to 5 AEDs tested to tolerance or to blood levels at upper end of target range; non-early group had more than 5 AEDs tested to tolerance or to blood levels at upper end of target range). Seizure frequency was calculated based on number of patient/caregiver reported seizures at 52-week post baseline (percentage change in seizure frequency from baseline to the 2-month period prior to the 1-year follow-up of at least 50%). All seizures were counted.
The safety population consists of 66 VNS implanted patients and the AED safety population includes 69 patients who are randomized to the AED arm.
Please note one patient in the VNS safety population who was implanted but never received stimulation was excluded from the ITT population."|52 weeks post baseline|||Percent Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818298|NCT01118455|Secondary|Hague Restriction in Childhood Epilepsy Scale (Questionnaire B) (ITT Population)|"Calculate changes in the Hague Restriction in Childhood Epilepsy scale (Carpay et al. 1997) (Questionnaire B) for patients in both treatment arms (AED and VNS) at 52 weeks after randomization compared to baseline. The higher the quality of life score the better the quality of life experienced.
An analysis of variance (ANOVA) model will be used to adjust for baseline variables (including QoL score) when comparing the two treatment groups. A two-sample t-test will be used for simple comparison QoL change from baseline.
Total range for this scale is a minimum score of 10 to a maximum score of 40. There are no applicable subscales."|52 weeks post baseline|||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818299|NCT01118455|Secondary|Wellcome Quality of Life Assessment (Questionnaire A) in Epilepsy (ITT Population)|"Calculate changes in the Wellcome Quality of Life Assessment (Parker et al. 1999) (Questionnaire A) for patients in both treatment arms (AED and VNS) at 52 weeks after randomization compared to baseline. The higher the quality of life score the better the quality of life experienced.
An analysis of variance (ANOVA) model will be used to adjust for baseline variables (including QoL score) when comparing the two treatment groups. A two-sample t-test will be used for simple comparison QoL change from baseline.
Total range for this scale is a minimum score of 81 to a maximum score of 336. There are no applicable subscales."|52 weeks post baseline|||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818300|NCT01118455|Secondary|Mean Percent Change in Hague Seizure Severity Scale Score (ITT Population)|The Hague Seizure Severity Assessment (Carpay et al. 1996) is a scale completed by the patient and/or caregiver to assess the severity and post-ictal recovery of seizures. A reduction in the HSSA score reflects less seizure severity experienced.|52 weeks post baseline|||Percent Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818301|NCT01118455|Primary|Proportion of Responders After 1 Year of Follow-up (ITT-population)|Responders are subjects who had no new AEDs added or significant dose changes in baseline AEDs within 1 year of follow-up, along with a reduction in the percentage change in seizure frequency from baseline to the 2-month period prior to the 1-year follow-up of at least 50%.|52 weeks post baseline|Subjects were stratified based on AED therapy history (Early: treated with 2 to 5 AEDs versus Non-early: treated with >5 AEDs).||percentage of responders|||Number
818302|NCT01118624|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) and Laboratory Abnormalities||Recorded at all study visits: every 2 weeks while on treatment and at safety follow-up (35 +/- 5 days post-last dose) or early termination visit (at time of withdrawal).|||participants|||Number
818303|NCT01118624|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Number of days from first dose of pralatrexate to death.|Assessed at the end of each even-numbered cycle (every 8 weeks), or per standard of care but at least every 4 weeks and no more than every 12 weeks (+/- 1 week) if treatment has ended. OS will be collected for up to 2 years from start of pralatrexate.|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818304|NCT01118624|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR)|One patient has a PR as response and duration of response was provided for that patient.|Assessed at the end of each even-numbered cycle (every 8 weeks), or per standard of care but no less than 4 weeks and nor more than every 12 weeks (+/- 1 week) if treatment has ended.|||days|||Number
818305|NCT01118624|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|Tumor response evaluation was performed using RECIST 1.0 using CT/MRI. Proportion of patients achieving a CR or PR is considered in the overall response.|Assessed at the end of each even-numbered cycle (every 8 weeks), or per standard of care but no less than 4 weeks and nor more than every 12 weeks (+/- 1 week) if treatment has ended.|||participants|||Number
818308|NCT01118663|Secondary|To Evaluate the Incidence of Clinical Need for Therapy Beyond the Current 21 Hour FDA Approved Dosing Regimen.|Because the study was terminated prematurely due to lack of enrollment, there was an insufficient sample size to conduct an efficacy analysis.|42 hours|Because the study was terminated prematurely due to lack of enrollment, there was insufficient sample size to conduct efficacy analysis.|||||
818309|NCT01118663|Secondary|To Evaluate the Percentage of Subjects Requiring Continued Therapy|Because the study was terminated prematurely due to lack of enrollment, there was an insufficient sample size to conduct an efficacy analysis.|21 hours|Because the study was terminated prematurely due to lack of enrollment, there was insufficient sample size to conduct efficacy analysis.|||||
818310|NCT01118663|Primary|The Incidence of Hepatoxicity as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects With an Alanine Transaminase (ALT) or Aspartate Transaminase (AST) Value > 1000 U/L Versus Those With an ALT and AST < 1000 U/L|Because the study was terminated prematurely due to lack of enrollment, there was an insufficient sample size to conduct an efficacy analysis.|21 hours|Because the study was terminated prematurely due to lack of enrollment, there was insufficient sample size to conduct efficacy analysis.|||||
818311|NCT01118728|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved 20% Response in Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) Working Group Criteria for Response (ASAS20)|Treatment response for ASAS20 was defined as: Improvement of ≥ 20% and ≥ 1 unit on a 0 (least) to 10 (worst) numerical rating score (NRS) in at least 3 of the 4 ASAS improvement criteria (ASASIC) domains, and no worsening of ≥ 20% and ≥ 1 unit on 0-10 NRS in the remaining domain. The 4 domains included were participant's global disease activity assessment, total back pain, physical function (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index), and Inflammation (mean of last 2 Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index questions on morning stiffness).|Baseline up to the end of treatment (60 weeks)|Analysis was performed on safety population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with ASAS20 assessment at specified time-points. Here 'n' signifies number of participants with available data for specified time-point.||Percentage of participants|||Number
818312|NCT01118728|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Any Treatment-emergent Adverse Event (TEAE), Serious Adverse Event (SAE) and Treatment Discontinuation|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product, regardless of the relationship to the investigational medicinal product (IMP). SAE was any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose resulted in death or was life-threatening or required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization or resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity or was a congenital anomaly/birth defect or was a medically important event. TEAEs were AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during the TEAE period (time from first dose of IMP up to the end of follow-up period).|Baseline up to the end of study (66 weeks)|Analysis was performed on safety population defined as all participants who received at least one dose of the study treatment after signature of the informed consent.||Percentage of participants|||Number
818315|NCT01118780|Secondary|Time to First Improvement|The time (days) to first improvement, defined as a Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-Improvement) Score ≤2. Participants who did not have a CGI-I Score ≤2 were censored at the last treatment period visit. CGI-Improvement measured the clinician's perception of the participant's improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment. Scores could have ranged from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). A CGI-Improvement Score of ≤2 was much improved or very much improved.|Baseline through 10 weeks|All randomized participants. The number of participants censored (n)=37 participants in the duloxetine treatment arm and n=58 participants in the placebo treatment arm.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818316|NCT01118780|Secondary|Time to First Functional Remission|Time (days) to first functional remission. Two definitions, using the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Global Functional Impairment Score (SDS Global Score), were used to determine functional remission: Definition 1 (SDS Global Score ≤5 at endpoint) and Definition 2 (SDS Global Score ≤6 at endpoint). Participants, who did not have an SDS Global Score ≤5 or ≤6, were censored at the last treatment period visit. The SDS was a participant-rated questionnaire used to assess the effect of the participant's symptoms on work/school (Item 1), social life/leisure activities (Item 2), and family/home management (Item 3). Each item was rated on a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 (not at all) to 10 (very severely). The SDS Global Score was the sum of the 3 items and could have ranged from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired). Higher values indicated a higher functional impairment in the participant's work/social/family life.|Baseline through 10 weeks|All randomized participants (pts). Number of pts censored (n)=50 pts in duloxetine treatment arm and n=73 pts in placebo treatment arm for time to first functional remission (SDS Global Score ≤5) and n=37 pts in duloxetine treatment arm and n=60 pts in placebo treatment arm time to first functional remission (SDS Global Score ≤6).||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818317|NCT01118780|Secondary|Time to Sustained Improvement Overall|Time (days) to the earliest visit at which the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) Total Score was a ≥30% improvement (reduction) from baseline that was sustained through the last treatment period visit. Participants who did not meet sustained improvement criteria were censored at the last treatment period visit. The Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A) was used to collect HAMA data. HAMA consisted of 14 items that assessed the severity of anxiety. Each item was scored using a 5-point scale (0=not present to 4=very severe). The HAMA Total Score could have ranged from 0 to 56 and higher scores indicated a greater degree of symptom severity.|Baseline through 10 weeks|All randomized participants. The number of participants censored (n)=43 participants in the duloxetine treatment arm and n=63 participants in the placebo treatment arm.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827180|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Other Prior Fungal Infection by Species and Colonization Index||Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants|||Number
818318|NCT01118780|Secondary|Time to First Remission|The time (days) to first remission. Two definitions, using the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) Total Score, were used to determine remission: Definition 1 (HAMA Total Score ≤7 at endpoint) and Definition 2 (HAMA Total Score ≤10 at endpoint). Participants who did not have remission were censored at the last treatment period visit. The Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A) was used to collect HAMA data. The HAMA consisted of 14 items that assessed the severity of anxiety. Each item was scored using a 5-point scale (0=not present to 4=very severe). The HAMA Total Score could have ranged from 0 to 56 and higher scores indicated a greater degree of symptom severity.|Baseline through 10 weeks|All randomized participants (pts). The number of censored pts (n)=72 pts in the duloxetine treatment arm and n=92 pts in the placebo treatment arm for time to first remission (HAMA Total Score ≤7) and n=49 pts in the duloxetine treatment arm and n=71 pts in the placebo treatment arm for the time to first remission (HAMA Total Score ≤10).||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818319|NCT01118780|Secondary|Time to First Response|The time (days) to first response, defined as a ≥50% improvement (reduction) from baseline in the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) Total Score. Participants who did not have a response were censored at the last treatment period visit. The Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A) was used to collect HAMA data. The HAMA consisted of 14 items that assessed the severity of anxiety. Each item was scored using a 5-point scale (0=not present to 4=very severe). The HAMA Total Score could have ranged from 0 to 56 and higher scores indicated a greater degree of symptom severity.|Baseline through 10 weeks|All randomized participants. The number of censored participants (n)=36 participants in the duloxetine treatment arm and n=60 participants in the placebo treatment arm.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818320|NCT01118780|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Experiencing a Treatment-Emergent Adverse Event (AE) During the Taper Period|Treatment-emergent AEs were newly occurring AEs or a worsening of AEs during the taper period. A summary of serious AEs and other AEs during the treatment period (baseline through 10 weeks) is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|2 weeks during the taper period|Randomized participants who entered the taper period.||participants|||Number
818321|NCT01118780|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Falling Down|The percentage of participants who reported 1 or more falls at or before Week 10.|Baseline through 10 weeks|Randomized participants with no falls recorded at Baseline and at least 1 post-baseline assessment for falls.||percentage of participants|||Number
818322|NCT01118780|Secondary|Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation From Study|The number of participants who discontinued from the study due to an AE (serious or other AE) during the treatment period. A summary of serious and other AEs is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 10 weeks|All randomized participants.||participants|||Number
818323|NCT01118780|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Improvement (Sustained Improvement Rate)|Two definitions, using the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) Total Score at endpoint compared with baseline, were used to determine sustained improvement: Definition 1 [sustained improvement overall required a ≥30% improvement (reduction) in the HAMA Total Score at treatment period endpoint, at an earlier visit prior to endpoint, and at all visits in between] and Definition 2 (sustained improvement from Week 2 required a ≥30% reduction at treatment period endpoint, at Week 2, and at all visits in between). Both definitions required at least 2 post-baseline visits. The Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A) was used to collect HAMA data. The HAMA consisted of 14 items that assessed the severity of anxiety. Each item was scored using a 5-point scale (0=not present to 4=very severe). The HAMA Total Score could have ranged from 0 to 56 and higher scores indicated a greater degree of symptom severity.|(Baseline through 10 weeks) and (Baseline, Week 2 through Week 10)|Randomized participants who had baseline and the required number of post-baseline HAMA Total Scores.||percentage of participants|||Number
818324|NCT01118780|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Functional Remission at Week 10 (Functional Remission Rate)|Two definitions, using the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Global Functional Impairment Score (SDS Global Score), were used to determine functional remission: Definition 1 (SDS Global Score ≤5 at endpoint) and Definition 2 (SDS Global Score ≤6 at endpoint). The SDS was a participant-rated questionnaire used to assess the effect of the participant's symptoms on work/school (Item 1), social life/leisure activities (Item 2), and family/home management (Item 3). Each item was rated on a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 (not at all) to 10 (very severely). The SDS Global Score was the sum of the 3 items and could have ranged from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired). Higher values indicated a higher functional impairment in the participant's work/social/family life.|Week 10|All randomized participants with at least 1 post-baseline SDS Global Score; Last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
818325|NCT01118780|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Response or Remission at Week 10 (Response and Remission Rates)|Response was a ≥50% improvement (reduction) in the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) Total Score at treatment period endpoint compared with baseline. Two definitions were used to determine remission: Definition 1 (HAMA Total Score ≤7 at endpoint) and Definition 2 (HAMA Total Score ≤10 at endpoint). The Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A) was used to collect HAMA data. The HAMA consisted of 14 items that assessed the severity of anxiety. Each item was scored using a 5-point scale (0=not present to 4=very severe). The HAMA Total Score could have ranged from 0 to 56 and higher scores indicated a greater degree of symptom severity.|Baseline, Week 10|Randomized participants with a baseline and 1 post-baseline HAMA Total Score; Last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
818326|NCT01118780|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 10 in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Work/School, Social Life, and Family/Home Management Individual Impairment Scores|The SDS was a participant-rated questionnaire used to assess the effect of the participant's symptoms on work/school (Item 1), social life/leisure activities (Item 2), and family/home management (Item 3). Each item was rated on a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 (not at all) to 10 (very severely). Higher values indicated a higher functional impairment in the participant's work/social/family life. Least squares (LS) mean were calculated and analyzed using mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, age category, visit, treatment-by-visit, baseline score, and baseline-by-visit.|Baseline, Week 10|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline SDS Work/School, Social Life/Leisure Activities, or Family/Home Management Individual Impairment Scores.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818327|NCT01118780|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Suicide-Related Ideation and Behavior Based on the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|"The C-SSRS captured the occurrence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors. Suicidal ideation: a yes answer to any 1 of 5 suicidal ideation questions: wish to be dead, and 4 different categories of active suicidal ideation. Suicidal behavior: a yes answer to any 1 of 5 suicidal behavior questions: preparatory acts or behavior, aborted attempt, interrupted attempt, actual attempt, and completed suicide. Treatment-emergent was the worsening or new occurrence of suicidal behavior or ideation during treatment compared with baseline (Week 0)."|Baseline through 10 weeks|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline C-SSRS Score.||participants|||Number
818328|NCT01118780|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 10 in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire - Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) Total Score|The Q-LES-Q-SF was a participant-rated questionnaire designed to assess the degree of enjoyment and satisfaction experienced during the past week. The questionnaire consisted of 16 items rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good). The total raw score was the sum of Items 1 to 14 and could have ranged from 14 to 70. Total raw scores were converted to, and expressed as, the percentage of the maximum possible score. Percent=100*(total raw score – 14)/56. Higher scores indicated higher levels of enjoyment/satisfaction. Least squares (LS) mean were calculated and analyzed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, age category, and baseline.|Baseline, Week 10|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline Q-LES-Q-SF Total Score; Last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percent of maximum possible score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818329|NCT01118780|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 10 in Brief Pain Inventory-Modified Short Form (BPI-SF) Pain Severity and Interference Subscales|The BPI-SF Pain Severity Subscale was a participant-rated questionnaire that measured the severity of pain. Severity scores could have ranged from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine) for questions assessing worst pain, least pain, and average pain in the past 24 hours, and pain right now. The BPI-SF Interference Subscale measured the interference of pain with the participant's ability to function. Interference scores could have ranged from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes) for questions assessing interference of pain in the past 24 hours for general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life. Least squares (LS) means were calculated and analyzed using mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, age category, visit, treatment-by-visit, baseline score, and baseline-by-visit.|Baseline, Week 10|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline BPI-SF Pain Severity or Interference Subscale Score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818330|NCT01118780|Secondary|Patient's Global Impressions of Improvement Scale (PGI-Improvement) at Week 10|PGI-Improvement measured the participant's perception of his or her improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment. Scores could have ranged from 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse). Least squares (LS) mean were calculated and analyzed using mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, age category, visit, treatment-by-visit.|Week 10|Randomized participants with at least 1 post-baseline PGI-Improvement Score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818331|NCT01118780|Secondary|Clinical Global Impressions of Improvement Scale (CGI-Improvement) at Week 10|CGI-Improvement measured the clinician's perception of the participant's improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment. Scores could have ranged from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Least squares (LS) mean were calculated and analyzed using mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, age category, visit, treatment-by-visit.|Week 10|Randomized participants with at least 1 post-baseline CGI-Improvement Score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818332|NCT01118780|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 10 Endpoint in Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) Subscale Scores|HADS was a 14-item questionnaire with 2 subscales (anxiety and depression). Each item was rated on a 4-point scale (0 to 3) and higher scores indicated a greater dysfunction. The HADS Anxiety Subscale Score was the sum of the odd numbered items and scores could have ranged from 0 to 21. The HADS Depression Subscale Score was the sum of the even numbered items and scores could have ranged from 0 to 21. Higher scores indicated a greater dysfunction. Least squares (LS) mean were calculated and analyzed using mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, age category, visit, treatment-by-visit, baseline score, and baseline-by-visit.|Baseline, Week 10|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline HADS Subscale Score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818333|NCT01118780|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 10 in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) (Psychic Anxiety Factor Score, Somatic Anxiety Factor Score, and Individual Item Scores: Anxious Mood Item and Tension Item)|The Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A) was used to collect HAMA data. The HAMA consisted of 14 items that assessed the severity of anxiety. Each item was scored using a 5-point scale (0=not present to 4=very severe). The HAMA Psychic Anxiety Factor Score was the sum of Items 1 to 6 and Item 14 and could have ranged from 0 to 28. The HAMA Somatic Anxiety Factor Score was the sum of Items 7 to 13 and could have ranged from 0 to 28. The HAMA Anxious Mood Item Score was the score for Item 1 and the HAMA Tension Item Score was the score for Item 2. In each case, higher scores indicated a greater degree of symptom severity. Least squares (LS) mean were calculated and analyzed using mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, age category, visit, treatment-by-visit, baseline score, and baseline-by-visit.|Baseline, Week 10|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline HAMA factor or item score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818334|NCT01118780|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 10 in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Global Functional Impairment Score|The SDS was a participant-rated questionnaire used to assess the effect of the participant's symptoms on work/school (Item 1), social life/leisure activities (Item 2), and family/home management (Item 3). Each item was rated on a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 (not at all) to 10 (very severely). The SDS Global Functional Impairment Score (SDS Global Score) was the sum of the 3 items and could have ranged from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired). Higher values indicated a higher functional impairment in the participant's work/social/family life. Least squares (LS) mean were calculated and analyzed using mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, age category, visit, treatment-by-visit, baseline score, and baseline-by-visit.|Baseline, Week 10|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline SDS Global Functional Impairment Score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818335|NCT01118780|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 10 in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) Total Score|The Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A) was used to collect HAMA data. The HAMA consisted of 14 items that assessed the severity of anxiety. Each item was scored using a 5-point scale (0=not present to 4=very severe). The HAMA Total Score could have ranged from 0 to 56 and higher scores indicated a greater degree of symptom severity. Least squares (LS) mean were calculated and analyzed using mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, age category, visit, treatment-by-visit, baseline score, and baseline-by-visit.|Baseline, Week 10|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline HAMA Total Score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818336|NCT01118845|Secondary|The Half-life Period (t1/2) of Unchanged SyB L-0501 in Korea||Prior to and 30 min after start of administration, and 0, 30, 60, 120 min after completion of administration on Day 2 of the 1st cycle|||hour||Standard Deviation|Median
818337|NCT01118845|Secondary|The Area Under the Curve (AUC) for Unchanged SyB L-0501 in Korea||Prior to and 30 min after start of administration, and 0, 30, 60, 120 min after completion of administration on Day 2 of the 1st cycle|||ng・h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818338|NCT01118845|Secondary|The Maximum Drug Concentration Time (Tmax) of Unchanged SyB L-0501 in Korea||Prior to and 30 min after start of administration, and 0, 30, 60, 120 min after completion of administration on Day 2 of the 1st cycle|||hour||Standard Deviation|Median
818339|NCT01118845|Secondary|The Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Unchanged SyB L-0501 in Korea||Prior to and 30 min after start of administration, and 0, 30, 60, 120 min after completion of administration on Day 2 of the 1st cycle|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818340|NCT01118845|Secondary|The Half-life Period (t1/2) of Unchanged SyB L-0501 in Japan||Prior to and 30 min after start of administration, and 0, 30, 60, 120 min after completion of administration on Day 2 of the 1st cycle|||hour||Standard Deviation|Median
818341|NCT01118845|Secondary|The Area Under the Curve (AUC) for Unchanged SyB L-0501 in Japan||Prior to and 30 min after start of administration, and 0, 30, 60, 120 min after completion of administration on Day 2 of the 1st cycle|||ng・h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818342|NCT01118845|Secondary|The Maximum Drug Concentration Time (Tmax) of Unchanged SyB L-0501 in Japan||Prior to and 30 min after start of administration, and 0, 30, 60, 120 min after completion of administration on Day 2 of the 1st cycle|||hour||Standard Deviation|Median
818343|NCT01118845|Secondary|The Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Unchanged SyB L-0501 in Japan||Prior to and 30 min after start of administration, and 0, 30, 60, 120 min after completion of administration on Day 2 of the 1st cycle|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818344|NCT01118845|Secondary|Concomitant Medication Usage||up to 30 weeks|||Participants|||Number
818345|NCT01118845|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Grade ≥3 Physical Examination Finding||up to 30 weeks|||Participants|||Number
818346|NCT01118845|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Abnormality (Grade ≥3) in Laboratory Test Values|"Abnormalities in laboratory test values in overall study period were analyzed. Severity of abnormalities were evaluated using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE).
grade 1 : mild grade 2 : moderate grade 3 : severe grade 4 : life threatening or disabling grade 5 : death related to adverse event"|up to 30 weeks|||Participants|||Number
818347|NCT01118845|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events||up to 30 weeks|||Events|||Number
818348|NCT01118845|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Adverse Event||up to 30 weeks|||Participants|||Number
818349|NCT01118845|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|"PFS = day of the first PFS event - day of start of study treatment + 1
The definitions of PFS event are as below.
PD according to overall response on the basis of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma
PD: Any new lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from nadir. Nodal masses; Appearance of a new lesion(s) >1.5 cm in any axis, ≥50% increase in SPD of more than one node, or ≥50% increase in longest diameter of a previously identified node >1 cm in short axis. Lesions PET positive if FDG-avid lymphoma or PET positive prior to therapy. Spleen, Liver; ≥50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previous lesions. Bone marrow; New or recurrent involvement
Disease progression during treatment period
Disease progression during follow up period
Start of treatment of new lesion
Occurrence of other multiple malignant tumors
Death"|up to 30 weeks|||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818350|NCT01118845|Secondary|The Complete Response (CR) Rate Determined on the Basis of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma|"The criteria for CR is as below
Nodal Masses:
fluorodeoxy glucose (FDG)-avid or positron emission tomography (PET) positive prior to therapy; mass of any size permitted if PET negative
Variably FDG-avid or PET negative; regression to normal size on computed tomography (CT)
Spleen, Liver:
Not palpable, nodules disappeared
Bone Marrow:
Infiltrate cleared on repeat biopsy; if indeterminate by morphology, immunohistochemistry should be negative"|up to 30 weeks|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818351|NCT01118845|Primary|The Overall Response Rate [Complete Response (CR) + Partial Response (PR)] Determined on the Basis of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma|"CR: Disappearance of all evidence of disease. PR: Regression of measurable disease and no new sites.
For the criteria for CR, See Outcome measure 2 description.
The criteria for PR is as below.
Nodal Masses:
more than 50% decrease in sum of the product of the perpendicular diameters (SPD) of up to 6 largest dominant masses; no increase in size of other nodes
FDG-avid or PET positive prior to therapy; one or more PET positive at previously involved site
Variably FDG-avid or PET negative; regression on CT
Spleen, Liver:
more than 50% decrease in SPD of nodules (for single nodule in greatest transverse diameter); no increase in size of liver or spleen
Bone Marrow:
Irrelevant if positive prior to therapy; cell type should be specified"|up to 30 weeks|||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818352|NCT01118949|Secondary|Number of Subjects Withdrawn From the Study Due to Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) During the 10-week Treatment Period|An Adverse Event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment.|From Visit 2 (Week 4) to Visit 7 (Week 13)|All 49 subjects in the Safety Set (SS) are included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
818353|NCT01118949|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) During the 10-week Treatment Period|An Adverse Event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment.|From Visit 2 (Week 4) to Visit 7 (Week 13)|All 49 subjects in the Safety Set (SS) are included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
818354|NCT01118949|Secondary|Changes in Count of 3 Hertz (Hz) Spike-wave Discharges (During Waking Hours) on 24-hour Ambulatory Electroencephalogram (EEG) From Visit 2 (Baseline Phase) to Visit 6 (Maintenance Phase)|Subjects were asked to return to the clinic on the morning of the day prior to Visit 2 and Visit 6 to begin 24-hour ambulatory EEG recordings for evaluation of spike-wave discharges. Only subjects with an evaluable EEG measurement with > 19 interpretable hours at Visit 2 and Visit 6 are included in this analysis. The 3 Hertz (Hz) spike-wave discharges are calculated per awake hours.|From Visit 2 (Week 4) to Visit 6 (Week 8)|Of the 49 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 40 subjects are included in this analysis. Data not available for 9 subjects.||1/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
818355|NCT01118949|Secondary|Changes in Count of Generalized Spike-wave Discharges on 24-hour Ambulatory Electroencephalogram (EEG) From Visit 2 (Baseline Phase) to Visit 6 (Maintenance Phase)|Subjects were asked to return to the clinic on the morning of the day prior to Visit 2 and Visit 6 to begin 24-hour ambulatory EEG recordings for evaluation of spike-wave discharges. Only subjects with an evaluable EEG measurement with > 19 interpretable hours at Visit 2 and Visit 6 are included in this analysis. The general spike-wave discharges are calculated per interpretable hours.|From Visit 2 (Week 4) to Visit 6 (Week 8)|Of the 49 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 40 subjects are included in this analysis. Data not available for 9 subjects.||1/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
818356|NCT01118949|Primary|Change in the Number of Seizure Days With Myoclonic Seizures From the Baseline Phase to the Maintenance Phase|"During the study subjects kept a diary to record daily seizure activity from Visit 1 until the end of study participation. The following information has been recorded:
Seizure type
Seizure frequency
A negative value in change of seizure days with myoclonic seizures shows a decrease in seizure days with myoclonic seizures."|From Baseline Phase (Weeks 0 to 4) to Maintenance Phase (Weeks 8 to 13)|Of the 49 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 44 are included in this analysis. Data not available for 5 subjects.||number of seizure days||Standard Deviation|Mean
818357|NCT01118949|Primary|Change in the Number of Seizure Days With Absence Seizures From the Baseline Phase to the Maintenance Phase|"During the study subjects kept a diary to record daily seizure activity from Visit 1 until the end of study participation. The following information has been recorded:
Seizure type
Seizure frequency
A negative value in change of seizure days with absence seizures shows a decrease in seizure days with absence seizures."|From Baseline Phase (Weeks 0 to 4) to Maintenance Phase (Weeks 8 to 13)|Of the 49 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 44 are included in this analysis. Data not available for 5 subjects.||number of seizure days||Standard Deviation|Mean
818358|NCT01118962|Primary|Number of Participants Withdrawn From the Study Due to Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) From Visit 1 to the End of Study (Approximately 61 Weeks)||From Visit 1 to the end of study (Approximately 61 weeks)|"Of the 39 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 39 were included in this analysis.
The SS consists of all subjects that were dosed at least once with Lacosamide (LCM)."||participants|||Number
818359|NCT01118962|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) From Visit 1 to the End of Study (Approximately 61 Weeks)||From Visit 1 to the end of study (Approximately 61 weeks)|"Of the 39 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 39 were included in this analysis.
The SS consists of all subjects that were dosed at least once with Lacosamide (LCM)."||participants|||Number
818360|NCT01118975|Primary|Clinical Benefit Rate|The Clinical Benefit Rate is the number of patients with either Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), or Stable Disease (SD) for ≥ 6 months|Radiological evaluations are performed every 12 weeks to determine disease status|||participants|||Number
818361|NCT01118975|Primary|Dose Limiting Toxicities|Safety and tolerability were assessed. Adverse events and dose limiting toxicities were recorded during an escalting dose pilot phase.|6 weeks|||Dose limiting toxicities|||Number
818362|NCT01118988|Secondary|Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS)|"assesses extent to which children have felt a number of positive and negative affects
Positive Affect subscale, 12 items, range: 12-60, higher score = more positive affect Negative Affect subscale, 15 items, range: 15-75, higher score = more negative affect"|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818363|NCT01118988|Secondary|Child Health Questionnaire - Child Report (CHQ)|"detailed questionnaire about health, daily activites, pain, behavior, family health, self-esteem
Subscales (for all subscales, higher scores = better health):
Behavior - 16 items, averaged, range 1-5 Bodily Pain and Discomfort - 2 items, averaged, range 1-6 Change in Health - 1 item, range 1-5 Family Activities - 6 items, averaged, range 1-5 Family Cohesion - 1 item, range 1-5 Global Health - 1 item, range 1-5 Global Behavior - 1 item, range 1-5 General Health - 12 items, averaged, range 1-5 Mental Health - 16 items, averaged, range 1-5 Physical Functioning - 9 items, averaged, range 1-4 Role/Social Limitations Behavioral - 3 items, range 1-4 Role/Social Limitations Emotional - 3 items, range 1-4 Role/Social Limitations Physical - 3 items, range 1-4 Self-Esteem - 14 items, range 1-5"|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818364|NCT01118988|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory 2 (BDI-2) #18|"assesses suicidal ideation and intent
Number reported is number of participants who reported any level of suicidal ideation or intent at any time and who were followed with the study's emergency protocol to ensure that such participants are not a threat to self or others, and that he/she was under the appropriate mental health care."|baseline, weekly weeks 1-8, 2 months, 4 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||participants|||Number
818365|NCT01118988|Secondary|Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS) Child Report|"assess levels of symptoms for anxiety disorders and depression
Range: 0-141; Higher scores mean higher symptom level of anxiety and depression"|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818366|NCT01118988|Secondary|Functional Disability Inventory (FDI)|"assesses functional disability for daily tasks
Range: 0-60; higher scores mean greater functional disability."|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818367|NCT01118988|Secondary|Emotion Expression Scale for Children (EESC)|"assess child emotional expression/emotion regulation
Poor Awareness subscale, 8 items, range: 8-40; higher scores = poorer emotional awareness Expressive Reluctance subscale, 8 items, range: 8-40; higher scores = more expressive reluctance"|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818368|NCT01118988|Secondary|Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) - Child Answer|"assessment of child emotion regulation
Reappraisal subscale: 6 items, range 6-30, higher scores = higher use of reappraisal Suppression subscale: 4 items, range: 4-20, higher scores = higher use of suppression"|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818369|NCT01118988|Secondary|Health Belief Scale (HBS) Short Version - Child Report|Number of treatment modalities rated 1-4 by participants on the HBS questionnaire, which asked participants to rate how much they think each of 16 listed treatment modalities would help with pain (1=Completely, 2=A lot, 3=Some, 4=A little, 5=Not at all).|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||Number of treatments||Standard Deviation|Mean
818370|NCT01118988|Secondary|Child Anxiety Sensitivity Inventory (CASI) - Child Report|"Assessment of child's anxiety sensitivity
18 items, range 18-54, higher scores = more anxiety sensitivity"|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818371|NCT01118988|Secondary|Child Symptom Inventory (CSI)|"Assement of somatic symptom complaints
24 items, range 0-96, higher score = more somatic symptoms"|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818372|NCT01118988|Secondary|Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)|"assessment of sleep quality
Range: 0-21; higher scores = lower sleep quality"|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818373|NCT01118988|Secondary|Body Map and Pain Assessment|"visual depiction of body pain and associated pain ratings over certain periods of time and conditional situations
Range: 0-19 body areas"|2 months|Not all participants who completed the intervention completed this measure, so the numbers reported herein are lower than those reported in Participant Flow.||Number of painful body areas||Standard Deviation|Mean
818374|NCT01118988|Primary|Adherence to Physician Recommended CAM Therapies|This measure tracks the attendance of CAM therapies recommended by the subjects' pain specialist physician.|post intervention (week 8)|One participant in the Mentorship group did not do the weekly CAM therapy tracking and is thus not included in the results for this measure.||Visits to CAM therapists per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
818375|NCT01125800|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response Rate (ORR) by Treatment|The tumor response to the sonidegib treatment was measured by ORR. The ORR was defined as the percentage of participants with partial response or complete response as their best overall response. Participants with stable disease, progressive disease tumor assessment were considered as non-responders. Response evaluation criteria was gadolinium chelate-enhanced brain tumor magnetic resonance imaging (Gd-MRI) for Medulloblastoma and central nervous system (CNS) tumors and response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) version 1.0 for non-CNS tumors assessed by MRI. Complete Response (CR), Progressive Disease (PD) and Incomplete Response/Stable Disease (SD) were defined as disappearance of all non-target lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions and Neither CR nor PD, respectively.|Baseline, Day 28 of Cycle 2, End of treatment (Within 14 days of last dose)|The analysis was performed in full analysis set (FAS), defined as all the participants who received at least one dose of sonidegib.||Percentage of participants|||Number
818376|NCT01125800|Secondary|Duration of Response by Treatment|Duration of overall response (complete response (CR) or partial response (PR)) was calculated for those participants whose best overall response was CR or PR. The start date was the date of the first documented tumor response (CR or PR) and the end date was the date of the event defined as the first documented progression or death due to underlying cancer or after the same treatment line. If a participant did not have a progression or death, the duration of response was censored at the date of last adequate tumor assessment in that treatment line.|Baseline, Day 28 of Cycle 2, End of treatment (Within 14 days of last dose)|"The analysis was performed in FAS population. Here Number of participants analysed” signifies treatment responders for the specified reporting group."||months||Full Range|Median
818377|NCT01125800|Secondary|Percentage of Pediatric Participants With Objective Response Rate (ORR) by Hedgehog (Hh) Signaling Pathway Status|ORR was determined in the participants with mutations on Hh gene (Hh positive) and the participants without mutations on Hh gene (Hh negative).|Baseline, Day 28 of Cycle 2, End of treatment (Within 14 days of last dose)|60 patients with known (Hedgehog) Hh pathway activation status were analyzed, 10 patients, including all 5 patients with an objective response (3 with pediatric) , were Hh-positive (+). No Hh-negative patient had an objective response.||% pediatric Hh + responders|||Number
818378|NCT01125800|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Sonidegib in Phase I|Maximum observed plasma concentration following drug administration was calculated from the raw plasma concentration time data.|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 7 hours (± 15 min) post-dose at Day 1 and Day 22 of Cycle 1|The analysis was performed in PAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||nanograms/millitres(ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818379|NCT01125800|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Sonidegib in Phase I|Tmax was defined as the time required to reach maximum observed plasma concentration. Tmax was directly determined from the raw plasma concentration time data.|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 7 hours (± 15 min) post-dose at Day 1 and Day 22 of Cycle 1|The analysis was performed in PAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||hours||Full Range|Median
818393|NCT01125930|Secondary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Symptoms: Self-Reported Presence of Flushing|Evaluation of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea symptoms includes subject reporting of flushing, burning, stinging, topical product intolerance|2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818380|NCT01125800|Secondary|Area Under the Drug Concentration Time Curve From Time Zero to 24 Hours After Dosing (AUC0-24h) of Sonidegib in Phase I|AUC(0-24h) was defined as the area under the drug concentration time curve calculated using linear trapezoidal summation from time zero to 24 hours after dosing.|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 7 hours (± 15 min) post-dose at Day 1 and Day 22 of Cycle 1|The analysis was performed in pharmacokinetic analysis set (PAS), defined as all the participants who received at least one (full or partial) dose of sonidegib and provided at least one evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) blood sample. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||nanograms*hours/millilitres (ng*hr/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818381|NCT01125800|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Treatment Related AEs and Death During the Study|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of study drug, whether or not related to study drug. A SAE was defined as an event which was fatal or life threatening, required or prolonged hospitalization, was significantly or permanently disabling or incapacitating, constituted a congenital anomaly or a birth defect, or encompassed any other clinically significant event that could jeopardize the participant or require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the aforementioned outcomes. Treatment related AEs were defined as AEs that were suspected to be related to study treatment as per investigator. On-treatment deaths were deaths which occurred up to 30 days after last date of study treatment.|Baseline (start of study treatment) up to End of treatment (Within 14 days of last dose)|The analysis was performed in safety set (SS), defined as all the participants who received at least 1 dose of sonidegib.||participants|||Number
818382|NCT01125800|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Sonidegib for Prolonged Use|MTD was defined as highest dose level for which no more than 1 participant in a dose cohort experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), based on Bayesian logistic regression model (BLRM) employing the escalation with overdose control (EWOC) principle. DLT was defined as an adverse event (AE) or abnormal laboratory value assessed as unrelated to disease, disease progression, intercurrent illness, or concomitant medications.k|Baseline, End of dose escalation part (Day 42)|The MTD for the pediatric population was not established in this study. MTD was not achieved since 1 or no DLT was observed. The recommended phase II dose was established based on the safety, pharmacokinetics, and clinical responses observed.||mg/m^2|||Number
818383|NCT01125800|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose-limiting Toxicities (DLT) in Phase I|DLT was defined as an adverse event (AE) or abnormal laboratory value assessed as unrelated to disease, disease progression, intercurrent illness, or concomitant medications. DLT included any grade 3 or 4 clinically-evident toxicity, Hematology: ≥ CTCAE grade 3 neutropenia (ANC <1.0x10^9/L); ≥ CTCAE grade 3 thrombocytopenia (platelets <50x10^9/L); ≥ CTCAE grade 3 anemia (Hgb <80 g/L); Febrile neutropenia (ANC <1x10^9/L, fever ‡ 38.5°C), Renal: ≥ CTCAE grade 3 serum creatinine (>3xULN), Hepatic: ≥ CTCAE grade 3 total bilirubin (>3xULN); ≥ 10xULN ALT elevation; grade 2 total bilirubin (>1.5ULN) together with ≥ grade 3 ALT elevation (>5xULN), Cardiac: ≥ CTCAE grade 3, Other AEs: ≥ CTCAE grade 3 vomiting or nausea despite optimal antiemetic therapy, diarrhea despite optimal antidiarrheal treatment.|Baseline, End of dose escalation part (Day 42)|The analysis was performed in full analysis set (FAS), defined as all the participants who received at least one dose of sonidegib.||participants|||Number
818384|NCT01125813|Primary|Efficacy of Treating Bleeding Episodes|"At the end of a bleeding episode, efficacy was assessed as:
Excellent: Abrupt pain relief and/or unequivocal improvement in objective signs of bleeding within approximately 8 hours after a single infusion
Good: Definite pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding within approximately 8-12 hours after an infusion requiring up to 2 infusions for complete resolution
Moderate: Probable or slight beneficial effect within approximately 12 hours after the first infusion requiring more than two infusions for complete resolution
None: No improvement within 12 hours, or worsening of symptoms, requiring more than 2 infusions for complete resolution Efficacy was rated"|After each bleeding episode, up to 6 month|||Percentage of treatments|bleeding episodes||Number
818385|NCT01125813|Primary|Efficacy Assessment After a Total of at Least 50 EDs Per Subject at the End of the Study at 6 Months|Frequency of spontaneous breakthrough bleeds/months under prophylactic treatment.|At least 50 Exposure Days and at least 6 months|All subjects who started prophylactic treatment were evaluated.||Bleeds per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
818386|NCT01125917|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) as a Measure of Safety|The purpose of the extension phase was to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of BTDS in subjects who had participated in the core study (BUP3015).|52-week extension phase|The Extension Safety Population (N = 354) consisted of all subjects who received at least 1 dose of the open-label BTDS extension study drug, and had at least 1 safety assessment during the extension phase.||participants|||Number
818387|NCT01125930|Secondary|Skin Irritation Assessed by Facial Burning Upon Product Application||2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population One subject did not complete the product assessment questionnaire at week 2 visit.||participants|||Number
818388|NCT01125930|Secondary|Skin Irritation Assessed by Facial Itching Upon Product Application||2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population One subject did not complete the product assessment questionnaire at week 2 visit.||participants|||Number
818389|NCT01125930|Secondary|Skin Irritation Assessed by Facial Stinging Upon Product Application||2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population One subject did not complete the product assessment questionnaire at week 2 visit.||participants|||Number
818390|NCT01125930|Secondary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Symptoms: Self-Reported Product Assessment|Evaluation of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea symptoms includes subject reporting of flushing, burning, stinging, topical product intolerance|2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population One subject did not complete the product assessment questionnaire at week 2 visit.||participants|||Number
818391|NCT01125930|Secondary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Symptoms: Self-Reported Facial Stinging|Evaluation of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea symptoms includes subject reporting of flushing, burning, stinging, topical product intolerance|2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818392|NCT01125930|Secondary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Symptoms: Self-Reported Facial Burning|Evaluation of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea symptoms includes subject reporting of flushing, burning, stinging, topical product intolerance|2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818396|NCT01125930|Secondary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Signs: Telangiectasia|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic signs include redness (non-transient erythema), telangiectasia, facial edema, and dry skin.|2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818397|NCT01125930|Primary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Symptoms: Self-Reported Assessment of Product|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea symptoms was assessed by asking subjects to give an overall self-assessment of product tolerance.|24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818398|NCT01125930|Primary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Symptoms: Self-Reported Facial Stinging|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea symptoms was assessed by asking subjects to rate the Facial Stinging feature of their rosacea.|24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818399|NCT01125930|Primary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Symptoms: Self-Reported Facial Burning|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea symptoms was assessed by asking subjects to rate the facial burning feature of their rosacea.|24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818400|NCT01125930|Primary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Symptoms: Self-Reported Presence of Flushing|"Flushing is defined as a temporary redness of the face, neck and chest. Subjects were asked to choose the best answer that applied to them in response to the questions Do you have flushing?."|24 weeks|LOCF, Complete Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818401|NCT01125930|Primary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Signs: Dry Skin|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea signs will be measured by taking into account the following: redness, telangiectasia, facial edema, dry skin|24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818402|NCT01125930|Primary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Signs: Facial Edema|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea signs will be measured by taking into account the following: redness, telangiectasia, facial edema, dry skin|24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818403|NCT01125930|Secondary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Signs: Non-Transient Erythema (Redness)|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic signs include redness (non-transient erythema), telangiectasia, facial edema, and dry skin.|2, 6, 12, 18 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818404|NCT01125930|Secondary|Molecular Evidence of Photodamage|These will be evaluated from skin biopsies from some subjects at baseline and final evaluation at 24 weeks. Gene expression data were normalized and presented as fold change from baseline to week 24 visit. Markers of photodamage include Collagen 1 (COL-1), Collagen 3 (COL-3), Matrix Metalloproteinase 1 (MMP1), Matrix Metalloproteinase 3 (MMP3), and Matrix Metalloproteinase 9 (MMP9).|24 weeks|ITT Population that completed baseline and week 24 biopsies||fold change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818405|NCT01125930|Secondary|Molecular Markers of Inflammation|These will be evaluated from skin biopsies from some subjects at baseline and final evaluation at 24 weeks. Gene expression data were normalized and presented as fold change from baseline to week 24 visit. Markers of inflammation include Tachykinin 1 (TAC1), CXC Motif Receptor 4 (CXCR4), CXC Motif Ligand 12 (CXCL12), and Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNFa).|24 weeks|ITT Population that completed baseline and Week 24 biopsies||fold change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818406|NCT01125930|Secondary|Signs of Other Rosacea Subtypes: Papulopustular|Signs of other rosacea subtypes includes papulopustular, inflammatory papule count|2, 6, 12, 18, 24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||inflammatory papule||Standard Deviation|Mean
818407|NCT01125930|Secondary|Signs of Other Rosacea Subtypes: Phymatous Changes of Rosacea|Signs of other rosacea subtypes using rosacea clinical scores: phymatous changes of rosacea|2, 6, 12, 18 and 24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818408|NCT01125930|Secondary|Signs of Other Rosacea Subtypes: Ocular Manifestations of Rosacea|Signs of other rosacea subtypes using rosacea clinical scores: ocular manifestations of rosacea|2, 6, 12, 18 and 24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818409|NCT01125930|Secondary|Photodamage|Photodamage was measured at baseline and Week 24 visits using the nine point Hamilton-Griffiths Photoaging Score categories. The categories were developed using photographs of subject representing grades of photodamge from none (0) to severe (8). A direct comparison is made between the subject and the photographic standards. If an exact match cannot be made, the interstandard scores (1, 3, 5, 7) are used.|24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||participants|||Number
818410|NCT01125930|Secondary|Quality of Life|The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) questionnaire was given at each visit. It involves 10 questions that relate to symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure, work and school, personal relationships and treatment. The total DLQI score is calculated by summing the score of each question resulting in a maximum of 30 and a minimum of 0. The higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired.|2, 6, 12, 18, 24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818411|NCT01125930|Primary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Signs: Telangiectasia|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea signs will be measured by taking into account the following: redness, telangiectasia, facial edema, dry skin|24 weeks|LOCF, Complete-Case ITT population||participants|||Number
818412|NCT01125930|Primary|Severity of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea Signs: Redness (Non Transient Erythema)|Severity of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea signs will be measured by taking into account the following: redness, telangiectasia, facial edema, dry skin|24 weeks|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF), Complete-Case Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population||participants|||Number
818413|NCT01126060|Primary|Postoperative Drainage Amount|method : measurement of drainage fluids from negative suction system every 8 hr until daily total amount reduces under 20mL|serial measurement from 1day to 4day after surgery|||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818414|NCT01126099|Secondary|Days in Study|The number of days participants remained in the study during the Double Blind Phase. Please note that although the length of follow-up designated in the protocol was 12 weeks, a number of participants were in this phase longer (e.g. the dose titration phase took longer than 3 weeks, assessments were delayed due to scheduling conflicts, etc.) Therefore the length of time in the Double Blind Phase can exceed 12 weeks (84 days).|12 weeks after Baseline|7 participants in the prazosin group were in the double-blind phase longer than 12 weeks (84 days). 4 participants in the placebo group were in the double-blind phase longer than 12 weeks (84 days).||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820249|NCT01142323|Secondary|Mayo Risk Score for Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis|The Mayo risk score, which is a composite of several variables (age, bilirubin, albumin, aspartate aminotransferase[AST] and h/o variceal bleeding), will be measured at entry and end of study|6 months||||||
818415|NCT01126099|Primary|Change in Neuropsychiatric Inventory Score|Neuropsychiatric Inventory score change from Baseline to last observation.The Neuropsychiatric Inventory is a scale that quantifies behavioral and psychiatric symptoms in patients with dementia. The scale ranges from 0 to 144, with 0 being no symptoms.|12 weeks|One study participant in the Placebo group dropped out prior to first follow-up, although this subject is included in the statistical analysis to provide information on the outcome at baseline.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818416|NCT01126099|Secondary|Change in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale Total Score|Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale score change from Baseline to last observation. The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale measures 18 psychiatric symptom domains. The scale ranges from 18 to 126, where 18 indicates no psychiatric symptoms.|12 Weeks after Baseline|One study participant in the Placebo group dropped out prior to first follow-up, although this subject is included in the statistical analysis to provide information on the outcome at baseline.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818417|NCT01126099|Primary|Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study - Clinical Global Impression of Change|This scale represents the raters overall impression of improvement or worsening, and is assessed at the last visit. 1 = Marked improvement, 1 = Moderate improvement, 3 = Minimal improvement, 4 = No change, 5 = Minimal worsening, 6 = Moderate worsening, 7 = Marked worsening.|12 Weeks after Baseline|Any participant who had at least one follow-up assessment was included in the analysis. One participant in the Placebo group did not return for follow-up, and therefore was not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818418|NCT01126359|Secondary|Break-through Narcotic Requirement|Patient break-through narcotic requirements in morphine equivalents are 0.2 mg of dilaudid = 1 mg of morphine, iv., used during and after VAC dressing change.|20 minutes|||Narcotic Requirements (mg)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
818419|NCT01126359|Primary|Visual Analog Scale Pain Score|Visial Analog Pain Scores (VAS) range from 0 (no pain) - 10 (worst pain ever). Visial Analog Pain Scores are determined at each pain measurement time point (during/after VAC dressing removal).|20 minutes|||Visial Analog Pain Score (VAS)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
818426|NCT01126437|Secondary|Time to Death From Major Adverse Cardiovascular Event (MACE)|The results presented below are number of patients with death from MACE.|Up to 3 years|TS including vital status follow−up, DAS||Number of deaths from MACE|||Number
818427|NCT01126437|Secondary|Time to Onset of First Major Adverse Cardiovascular Event (MACE)|Time to onset of first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). MACE was defined as: Fatal event in the system organ classes of cardiac and vascular disorders, Preferred terms: sudden death, cardiac death, sudden cardiac death, Outcome events of myocardial infarction (serious and non-serious), Outcome events of stroke (serious and non-serious) and Outcome events of TIA (serious and non-serious). The results presented below are for the number of patients with MACE.|Up to 3 years|Treated set - on treatment only||number of patients with MACE|||Number
818428|NCT01126437|Secondary|Time to First Moderate to Severe COPD Exacerbation|"COPD exacerbation defined as a complex of lower respiratory events/symptoms (increase of new onset) related to the underlying COPD, with duration of three days or more, requiring a change in treatment where a complex of lower respiratory event/symptoms was defined as having at least two of the following: shortness of breath, sputum production (volume), occurrence of purulent sputum, cough, wheezing, chest tightness and where a required change in treatment includes the following:Prescription of antibiotics and/or systemic steroids, and/or a newly prescribed maintenance respiratory medication (i.e., bronchodilators including theophyllines).
Exacerbations classified as follows:
Mild:a new prescription of maintenance bronchodilator only Moderate:antibiotics or systemic steroids without hospitalization Severe:hospitalization.
Results presented below are number of patients with moderate to severe exacerbations."|Up to 3 years|treated set - on treatment only||number of patients with event|||Number
818429|NCT01126437|Secondary|Number of Hospitalizations Associated With COPD Exacerbation|Total number of hospitalizations associated with COPD exacerbation.|Up to 3 years|treated set - on treatment only||number of hospitalizations|||Number
818430|NCT01126437|Secondary|Time to First Hospitalization Associated With COPD Exacerbation|The results presented below are for the patients with hospitalizations due to COPD exacerbations.|Up to 3 years|treated set - on-treatment only||Number of patients with event|||Number
818431|NCT01126437|Secondary|Number of COPD Exacerbations|"The number of COPD exacerbations. COPD exacerbation defined as a complex of lower respiratory events/symptoms (increase of new onset) related to the underlying COPD, with duration of three days or more, requiring a change in treatment where a complex of lower respiratory event/symptoms was defined as having at least two of the following: shortness of breath, sputum production (volume), occurrence of purulent sputum, cough, wheezing, chest tightness and where a required change in treatment includes the following:Prescription of antibiotics and/or systemic steroids, and/or a newly prescribed maintenance respiratory medication (i.e., bronchodilators including theophyllines)."|Up to 3 years|Treated Set - on treatment only||number of COPD exacerbations|||Number
818432|NCT01126437|Secondary|Trough FEV1 Over 120 Weeks (in a Substudy of 1370 Patients)|Trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) over 120 weeks (in a substudy of 1370 patients)|Up to 3 years|SSS - PFT - Sub-study set (pulmonary function testing). This analysis set included all subjects in the TS who signed informed consent to participate in the spirometry sub-study and had at least baseline and one on-treatment trough FEV1.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818433|NCT01126437|Primary|Time to First COPD Exacerbation|"Defined as a complex of lower respiratory events/symptoms (increase of new onset) related to the underlying COPD, with duration of three days or more, requiring a change in treatment where a complex of lower respiratory event/symptoms was defined as having at least two of the following: shortness of breath, sputum production (volume), occurrence of purulent sputum, cough, wheezing, chest tightness and where a required change in treatment includes the following:Prescription of antibiotics and/or systemic steroids, and/or a newly prescribed maintenance respiratory medication (i.e., bronchodilators including theophyllines).
Onset of exacerbation was defined by the onset of first recorded symptom. The end of exacerbation was decided by the investigator based on clinical judgement.
Exacerbations were classified as follows:
Mild:a new prescription of maintenance bronchodilator only Moderate:antibiotics or systemic steroids without hospitalization Severe:hospitalization."|Up to 3 years|Treated set (TS, on-treatment only)||days to event||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818434|NCT01126437|Primary|Time to All-Cause Mortality|Number of patients with all-cause mortality|Up to 3 years|Death analysis set (DAS) including vital status follow-up: This analysis set included all randomized subjects excluding only subjects who were documented as not treated.||Number of deaths|||Number
818435|NCT01126541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Pain in Participants With MCII|"The participants assessed their pain over the past 24 hours on a 0 to 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as “no pain” and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm as “unbearable pain. Participants were asked to mark the line and the distance from the left edge was measured. Higher values correspond to worst state of participant (high pain levels)."|Baseline, Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; only participants with MCII were included in the analysis. n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818436|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MCII in Pain|Participants were asked how their pain had been during the last 48 hours compared to baseline. Those participants that reported improvement assessed how important this improvement was to them; range: very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not at all important. Binary response options: 1=improved very important, or improved moderately important; 2=slightly important, not at all important, no change, or worse pain.|Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
818437|NCT01126541|Secondary|Patient Global Assessment of Pain in Participants Reporting Acceptable Symptoms Using PASS|Patient Global Assessment of Pain assessed in participants reporting acceptable symptom state using PASS (acceptance to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of pain they had during the last 48 hours) on a 0 to 100 mm horizontal VAS by the participant. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as “no pain” and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm as “unbearable pain”. Higher values correspond to worst state of participant (high pain levels).|Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; only participants with 'acceptable' symptom state assessed using PASS were included in the analysis. n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818438|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Acceptable Symptom State in Pain Assessed Using PASS|"Percentage of participants reporting acceptable symptom state: acceptance to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of pain they had during the last 48 hours; and unacceptable symptom state: not able to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of pain they had during the last 48 hours. In the case of missing data, participants who withdrew from the study because of inefficacy or toxicity were considered unacceptable."|Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
818439|NCT01126541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI in Participants With MCII|HAQ-DI was assessed in participants with MCII. HAQ-DI is a participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; and common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0=least difficulty and 3 extreme difficulty.|Baseline, Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; only participants with MCII were included in the analysis. n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818440|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MCII in Functioning|Participants were asked how their functioning had been during the last 48 hours compared to baseline. Those participants that reported improvement assessed how important this improvement was to them; range: very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not at all important. Binary response options: 1=improved very important, or improved moderately important; 2=slightly important, not at all important, no change, or worse.|Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
818441|NCT01126541|Secondary|HAQ-DI Scores in Participants Reporting Acceptable Function Using PASS|HAQ-DI was assessed in participants reporting acceptable symptom state using PASS (acceptance to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of disease activity they had during the last 48 hours). HAQ-DI is a participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; and common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0=least difficulty and 3 extreme difficulty.|Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; only participants with 'acceptable' symptom state assessed using PASS were included in the analysis. n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818442|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Acceptable Symptom State in Functioning Assessed Using PASS|"Percentage of participants reporting acceptable symptom state: acceptance to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of function they had during the last 48 hours; and unacceptable symptom state: not able to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of function they had during the last 48 hours. In the case of missing data, participants who withdrew from the study because of inefficacy or toxicity were considered unacceptable."|Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
818443|NCT01126541|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity in Participants With MCII|The Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity was assessed in participants reporting MCII on a 0 to 100 mm horizontal VAS by the participant. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as “no disease activity” (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm as “maximum disease activity” (maximum arthritis disease activity). Higher values correspond to worst state of participant (high disease activity).|Baseline, Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; only participants with MCII were included in the analysis. n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818834|NCT01122576|Secondary|Binocular Halo and Starburst|Halo and starburst (both monocular and binocular) were measured using a glarometer on integer scales of 1-5, where the smaller the number the better the outcome.|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full Analysis Set||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818444|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Minimum Clinically Important Improvement (MCII) in Disease Activity|Participants were asked how their disease activity had been during the last 48 hours compared to baseline. Those participants that reported improvement assessed how important this improvement was to them; range: very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not at all important. Binary response options: 1=improved very important, or improved moderately important; 2=slightly important, not at all important, no change, or worse-more disease activity.|Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
818445|NCT01126541|Secondary|Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity in Participants Reporting Acceptable Symptoms Using PASS|The Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity assessed in participants reporting acceptable symptom state using PASS (acceptance to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of disease activity they had during the last 48 hours) on a 0 to 100 mm horizontal VAS by the participant. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as “no disease activity” (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm as “maximum disease activity” (maximum arthritis disease activity). Higher values correspond to worst state of participant (high disease activity).|Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; only participants with 'acceptable' symptom state assessed using PASS were included in the analysis. n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818446|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Acceptable Disease Activity Symptom State Assessed Using Patient Acceptable and Unacceptable Symptom State (PASS)|"Percentage of participants reporting acceptable symptom state: acceptance to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of disease activity they had during the last 48 hours; and unacceptable symptom state: not able to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of disease activity they had during the last 48 hours. In the case of missing data, participants who withdrew from the study because of inefficacy or toxicity were considered unacceptable."|Week 24, 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
818447|NCT01126541|Secondary|Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-Sleep) Composite Sleep Problems 6 (SLP6) Index|The MOS Sleep Scale measures most constructs of sleep. The scale has a battery of questions to measure specific aspects of sleep in participants with co-morbidities. The SLP6 index is comprised of 6 items: provides a summary of sleep problems and contains questions from the sleep disturbance, sleep adequacy, respiratory impairment, and somnolence domains. The SLP6 index score ranges between 0 and 100, with higher values corresponding to more sleep problems.|Day 1 and Week 24 of initial treatment, before 1st retreatment, at 1st retreatment, and at 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population;n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818448|NCT01126541|Secondary|SF-12 Mental Health Composite Score|Mental Health Composite Scores of SF-12 were computed using the scores of 12 questions and range from 0 to 100, where a 0 score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health.|Day 1 and Week 24 of initial treatment, before 1st retreatment, at 1st retreatment, and at 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818449|NCT01126541|Secondary|Short Form 12 (SF-12) Physical Health Composite Score|Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores of SF-12 were computed using the scores of 12 questions and range from 0 to 100, where a 0 score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health.|Day 1 and Week 24 of initial treatment, before 1st retreatment, at 1st retreatment, and at 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818450|NCT01126541|Secondary|HAQ-DI Scores|HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; and common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0=least difficulty and 3 extreme difficulty.|Day 1 and Week 24 of initial treatment, before 1st retreatment, at 1st retreatment, and at 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818451|NCT01126541|Secondary|Total Mean Dose of Cortisone Between Week 24 and Week 104|All cortisone intakes were taken into account, including oral, IV (including the cortisone administration before the rituximab infusion), intramuscular and intra-articular.|Week 24 to Week 104|ITT population||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
818452|NCT01126541|Secondary|Cortisone Intake AUC (Time- and Weight-Weighted)|All cortisone intakes (in mg) were taken into account (oral, IV [including the cortisone administration before the rituximab infusion], intramuscular, and intra-articular).|Day 1 (each infusion), Week 24, Week 104|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mg*week||Standard Error|Mean
818453|NCT01126541|Secondary|Participant Assessment of Fatigue|"Participants were asked to rate their level of fatigue over the last 7 days on a 100-mm VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as “no fatigue” and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm as “extreme fatigue. Participants were asked to mark the line and the distance from the left edge was measured. Higher values correspond to worst state of participant (high levels of fatigue)."|Day 1 and Week 24 of initial treatment, before 1st retreatment, at 1st retreatment, and at 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818454|NCT01126541|Secondary|Patient's Global Assessment of Pain|"The participants assessed their pain over the past 24 hours on a 0 to 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as “no pain” and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm as “unbearable pain. Participants were asked to mark the line and the distance from the left edge was measured. Higher values correspond to worst state of participant (high pain levels)."|Day 1 and Week 24 of initial treatment, before 1st retreatment, at 1st retreatment, and at 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
820250|NCT01142323|Primary|Serum Alkaline Phosphatase|Serum alkaline phosphatase will be measured at entry and end of study|6 months|||U/L||Standard Error|Median
818455|NCT01126541|Secondary|Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity|The Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity is assessed on a 0 to 100 mm horizontal VAS by the participant. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as “no disease activity” (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm as “maximum disease activity” (maximum arthritis disease activity). Higher values correspond to worst state of participant (high disease activity).|Day 1 and Week 24 of initial treatment, before 1st retreatment, at 1st retreatment, and at 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818456|NCT01126541|Secondary|Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity|The Physician’s Global Assessment of disease activity is assessed on a 0 to 100 millimeter (mm) horizontal VAS by the physician. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as “no disease activity” (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm as “maximum disease activity” (maximum arthritis disease activity). Physicians were asked to mark the line and the distance from the left edge was measured. Higher values correspond to worst state of participant (high disease activity).|Day 1 and Week 24 of initial treatment, before 1st retreatment, at 1st retreatment, and at 12 and 24 weeks after 1st retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818457|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Anti-cyclic Citrullinated Protein (Anti-CCP) Antibodies at 24 Weeks After Treatment|Anti-CCP antibodies are auto antibodies (antibodies directed against 1 or more of an individual’s own proteins) that are frequently detected in the blood of rheumatoid arthritis participants. Anti-CCP antibodies value higher than 10 U/mL is considered positive.|Week 24 of the initial treatment, 24 weeks after first re-treatment, and 24 weeks after second retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
818458|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Rheumatoid Factor (RF) at 24 Weeks After Treatment|RF is the auto antibody directed against immunoglobulin G (IgG) and its concentration is observed in human serum or plasma. RF value higher than 20 international units per milliliter (IU/mL) is considered positive.|Week 24 of the initial treatment, 24 weeks after first re-treatment, and 24 weeks after second retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
818459|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response During Retreatment by EULAR Category|DAS28-based EULAR response criteria were used to measure individual response as no response, good, and moderate, depending on the extent of change from baseline and the level of disease activity reached. Good responders = change from baseline >1.2 with a DAS28 score of ≤3.2; moderate responders = change from baseline >1.2 with a DAS28 score of >3.2 to ≤ 5.1 or change from baseline >0.6 to ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score of ≤5.1; non-responders = change from baseline ≤0.6 or change from baseline >0.6 and ≤ 1.2 with a DAS28 score of >5.1.|Week 24, 24 weeks after 1st retreatment, 24 weeks after 2nd retreatment|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
818460|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response During Initial Treatment by European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Category|DAS28-based EULAR response criteria were used to measure individual response as no response, good, and moderate, depending on the extent of change from baseline and the level of disease activity reached. Good responders = change from baseline >1.2 with a DAS28 score of ≤3.2; moderate responders = change from baseline >1.2 with a DAS28 score of >3.2 to ≤ 5.1 or change from baseline >0.6 to ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score of ≤5.1; non-responders = change from baseline ≤0.6 or change from baseline >0.6 and ≤ 1.2 with a DAS28 score of >5.1.|Day 15, Weeks 6, 12, and 24|Overall population||percentage of participants|||Number
818461|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50%, and 70% Improvement (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)|ACR20/50/70 response defined as ≥20%, 50%, or 70% improvement, respectively, in TJC and SJC, and ≥20%, 50%, or 70% improvement, respectively, in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: Patient Global Assessment of Pain, Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (on a visual analog scale [VAS]); Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI); and CRP.|Week 24 of the initial treatment, 24 weeks after first retreatment, and 24 weeks after second retreatment|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
818462|NCT01126541|Secondary|Duration of DAS28-CRP ≤3.2 After Retreatment|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP score of ≤3.2 implied low disease activity.|Days 1 and 15, Weeks 6, 12, and 24 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 104|ITT population; only participants with a response (DAS28-CRP ≤3.2) during retreatment (at any point) were included in the analysis. n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818463|NCT01126541|Secondary|Duration of DAS28-CRP ≤3.2 After the First Course of Treatment|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP score of ≤3.2 implied low disease activity.|Days 1 and 15, Weeks 6, 12, and 24 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 104|ITT population; only participants with a response (DAS28-CRP ≤3.2) during first course of treatment (at any point) were included in the analysis.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818464|NCT01126541|Secondary|Duration of DAS28-CRP Remission After Retreatment|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP <2.6=remission.|Days 1 and 15, Weeks 6, 12, and 24 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 104|ITT population; only participants with a response (DAS28-CRP <2.6) during retreatment (at any point) were included in the analysis. n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818533|NCT01127165|Secondary|Change in Korean-Quality of Life Childhood Epilepsy (K-QOLCE)|The difference of K-QOLCE between before and after the administration. K-QOLCE is Korean version of the Quality of Life in Childhood Epilepsy Questionnaire. The calculated total score ranges 0-100, with higher scores indicating higher quality of life.|Baseline and 24 weeks|||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818465|NCT01126541|Secondary|Duration of DAS28-CRP Remission After the First Course of Treatment|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP <2.6=remission.|Days 1 and 15, Weeks 6, 12, and 24 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 104|ITT population; only participants with a response (DAS28-CRP <2.6) during initial treatment (at any point) were included in the analysis.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818466|NCT01126541|Secondary|Time to Achieve DAS28-CRP ≤3.2 After Retreatment|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP score of ≤3.2 implied low disease activity.|Days 1 and 15, Weeks 6, 12, and 24 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 104|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818467|NCT01126541|Secondary|Time to Achieve DAS28-CRP ≤3.2 After the First Course of Treatment|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP score of ≤3.2 implied low disease activity.|Days 1 and 15, Weeks 6, 12, and 24 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 104|ITT population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818468|NCT01126541|Secondary|Time to Achieve DAS28-CRP Remission After Retreatment|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP <2.6=remission.|Days 1 and 15, Weeks 6, 12, and 24 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 104|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818469|NCT01126541|Secondary|Time to Achieve DAS28-CRP Remission After the First Course|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP <2.6=remission.|Days 1 and 15, Weeks 6, 12, and 24 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 104|ITT population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818470|NCT01126541|Secondary|DAS28-CRP AUC Weighted Time|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP score of ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and <2.6=remission.|Days 1 and 15, Weeks 6, 12, and 24 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 104|ITT population||units on a scale*week||Standard Deviation|Mean
818471|NCT01126541|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Clinical Remission (DAS28-CRP <2.6) or Low Disease Activity (DAS28-CRP ≤3.2)|Percentage of participants with clinical remission and low disease activity as measured by DAS28-CRP for Arm A and Arm B at Week 24 of the Initial Treatment, at 24 weeks after first re-treatment, and at 24 weeks after second retreatment. DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP score of ≤3.2 implied low disease activity and <2.6 = remission.|Week 24 of the Initial Treatment, 24 weeks after first retreatment, and 24 weeks after second retreatment|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
818472|NCT01126541|Primary|Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joints Count and C-Reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP) Area Under the Curve (AUC) at Week 104|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and serum CRP levels (measured in milligrams per liter [mg/L]) at each visit. Joint counts included swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC). Total score range was 0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-CRP less than or equal to (≤)3.2 implied low disease activity, >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and less than (<)2.6 equals (=) remission. The AUC of all DAS28-CRP values between Day 1 and Week 104 (15 values of protocol visits) was calculated using the trapeze method (AUC between t1 and t2=(t2-t1)*((DAS28-CRP at t1 + DAS28-CRP at t2)/2). The true visit dates were used to calculate the time between 2 DAS28-CRP evaluations. All the AUC were censored at Week 104 (linear extrapolation using the 2 last DAS28-CRP values (Weeks 96 and 104) to obtain the “true” DAS28-CRP value at the “true” Week 104).|Week 104|Per Protocol (PP) population: all randomized participants in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population (defined as all randomized participants) without major protocol violations. Participants were grouped according to their initially assigned treatment arm irrespective of the treatment actually received.||score on a scale*week||Standard Error|Mean
818473|NCT01126541|Secondary|DAS28-CRP and Changes From Baseline to Week 24 in DAS28-CRP by Retreatment Course|DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range=0 to 9.4; a higher score indicated more disease activity. A DAS28-CRP score of ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and <2.6=remission.|Day 1, 24 weeks following each infusion up to 72 Weeks|ITT Population; number (n)=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818474|NCT01126541|Secondary|DAS28-CRP During the Initial Treatment|Mean DAS28-CRP at Week 24 of the Initial Treatment study. DAS28-CRP was based on joint counts, overall participant assessment, and the serum CRP level at each visit. Joint counts included SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-CRP ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and <2.6=remission.|Days 1 and 15, and Weeks 6, 12, and 24|Overall population: all participants with at least one treatment intake.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818534|NCT01127165|Secondary|Change in Behavior Assessment Korea-Child Behavior Checklist (K-CBCL)|The difference of K-CBCL between before and after the administration. K-CBCL is the Korean version of CBCL which is a standardized form that parents fill out to describe their children’s behavioral and emotional problems. The total score ranges 0- 234, with higher scores indicating worse behavioral and emotional problems.|Baseline and 24 weeks|||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818475|NCT01126580|Secondary|Measurement of LY2189265 Drug Concentration for Pharmacokinetics: Area Under the Concentration Curve (AUC)|Evaluable pharmacokinetic concentrations from the 4-week, 13-week, 26-week, and 52-week timepoints were combined and utilized in a population approach to determine the population mean estimate and standard deviation at steady-state.|4 weeks, 13 weeks, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 with evaluable LY2189265 concentration data.||nanogram hours per milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818476|NCT01126580|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Cardiovascular Events at 52 Weeks Plus 30-day Follow up|Information on cardiovascular (CV) risk factors was collected at baseline. Data on any new CV event was prospectively collected using a CV event electronic case report form. Deaths and nonfatal cardiovascular adverse events (AEs) were adjudicated by an external committee of physicians with cardiology expertise. Nonfatal cardiovascular AEs to be adjudicated included myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, hospitalization for heart failure, coronary interventions, and cerebrovascular events, including cerebrovascular accident (stroke) and transient ischemic attack. The number of participants with CV events confirmed by adjudication is summarized cumulatively at 52 weeks plus 30-day follow up. Serious and all other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality are summarized in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks plus 30-day follow up|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin.||participants|||Number
818477|NCT01126580|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Pancreatitis at 52 Weeks Plus 30-day Follow up|The number of participants with pancreatitis confirmed by adjudication is summarized cumulatively at 52 weeks plus 30-day follow up. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks plus 30-day follow up|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||participants|||Number
818478|NCT01126580|Secondary|Rate of Self-reported Hypoglycemic Events at 52 Weeks|Hypoglycemic events were classified as severe (defined as episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions), documented symptomatic (defined as any time a participant feels that he/she is experiencing symptoms and/or signs associated with hypoglycemia, and has a plasma glucose level of less than or equal to 70 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL]), or asymptomatic (defined as events not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured plasma glucose of less than or equal to 70 mg/dL). The 1-year adjusted rate of hypoglycemic events is summarized cumulatively at 52 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||events per participant per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
818479|NCT01126580|Secondary|Number of Self-reported Hypoglycemic Events at 26 and 52 Weeks|Hypoglycemic events were classified as severe (defined as episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions), documented symptomatic (defined as any time a participant feels that he/she is experiencing symptoms and/or signs associated with hypoglycemia, and has a plasma glucose level of less than or equal to 70 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL]), or asymptomatic (defined as events not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured plasma glucose of less than or equal to 70 mg/dL). A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26 weeks and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||events|||Number
818480|NCT01126580|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Anti-LY2189265 Antibodies|A participant was considered to have treatment emergent LY2189265 anti-drug antibodies (ADA) if the participant had at least one titer that was treatment-emergent relative to baseline, defined as a 4-fold or greater increase in titer from baseline measurement. The total number of treatment emergent ADA was not analyzed at 26 weeks.|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 with evaluable LY2189265 ADA data.||participants|||Number
818481|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Serum Calcitonin||Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable serum calcitonin data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing||picograms per milliliter (pcg/mL)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818482|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Pancreatic Enzymes|Amylase (total and pancreas-derived [PD]) and lipase concentrations were measured.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable pancreatic enzyme data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units per liter (U/L)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818483|NCT01126580|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Triglycerides|Percentage changes in triglycerides were assessed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) on the rank-transformed data with only treatment included in the model.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable triglyceride data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing||percentage change in triglycerides||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818484|NCT01126580|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C)|Percentage changes in LDL-C were assessed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) on the rank-transformed data with only treatment included in the model.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable LDL-C data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing||percentage change in LDL-C||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818485|NCT01126580|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C)|Percentage changes in HDL-C were assessed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) on the rank-transformed data with only treatment included in the model.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable HDL-C data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing||percentage change in HDL-C||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818486|NCT01126580|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Total Cholesterol|Percent changes in total cholesterol were assessed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) on the rank-transformed data with only treatment included in the model.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable cholesterol data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage change in total cholesterol||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818487|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Blood Pressure|Sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) and sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, prior medication group, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects, baseline interval as a covariate, and participant as a random effect.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable blood pressure data.||milliliters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818488|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Pulse Rate|Sitting pulse rate was measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, prior medication group, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects, baseline interval as a covariate, and participant as a random effect.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable pulse rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818489|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Electrocardiogram Parameters, Heart Rate|Electrocardiogram (ECG) heart rate was measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, prior medication group, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline interval as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable ECG heart rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818490|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Electrocardiogram Parameters, Fridericia Corrected QT (QTcF) Interval and PR Interval|The QT interval is a measure of the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave and was calculated from electrocardiogram (ECG) data using Fridericia's formula: QTc = QT/RR^0.33. Corrected QT (QTc) is the QT interval corrected for heart rate and RR, which is the interval between two R waves. PR is the interval between the P wave and the QRS complex. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, prior medication group, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects, baseline interval as a covariate, and participant as a random effect.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable ECG QTcF interval or PR interval data.||milliseconds (msec)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818491|NCT01126580|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events at 26 and 52 Weeks|A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was defined as an event that first occurs or worsens (increases in severity) after baseline regardless of causality or severity. The number of participants with one or more TEAE is summarized cumulatively at 26 and 52 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|26 weeks and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin.||participants|||Number
818492|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in the Diabetes Symptoms Checklist Participant-reported Outcome (DSC-r) Score|The Diabetes Symptoms Checklist-revised (DSC-r) was designed to assess the presence and perceived burden of diabetes-related symptoms. Respondents were to consider troublesomeness of 34 symptoms on a 5-point scale ranging from 5=“extremely” to 1=“not at all.” For symptoms/side-effects not experienced, the item was scored as 0. Symptoms were grouped into the following subscales: psychology-fatigue, psychology-cognitive, neurology-pain, neurology-sensory, cardiology, ophthalmology, hypoglycemia, and hyperglycemia. Subscale scores were calculated as the sum of the given subscale divided by the total number of items in the scale. Total score was computed from the sum of the 8 subscales and ranged from 0 to 40. Higher scores indicate greater symptom burden. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted by treatment, country, prior medication group, gender, and baseline score.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable DSC-r data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818493|NCT01126580|Secondary|Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) Score, Change Version|The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change (DTSQc) score is used to assess relative change in participant satisfaction from baseline. The questionnaire consists of 8 items, 6 of which (1 and 4 through 8) assess treatment satisfaction. Each item is rated on a 7-point Likert scale. The scores from the 6 treatment satisfaction items are summed to a Total Treatment Satisfaction Score, which ranges from -18 (much less satisfied) to +18 (much more satisfied). Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted by treatment, country, prior medication group, gender, and baseline score.|52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable DTSQc data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after randomization, endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818501|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Fasting Blood Glucose|Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, prior medication group, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects, baseline fasting blood glucose as a covariate, and participant as a random effect.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable fasting blood glucose data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820251|NCT01142336|Primary|Change From Baseline in CSF ptau181 at 1 Year|ptau 181 measured in CSF at baseline and after 1-year intervention|1-year change from baseline|||1-yr change (final - baseline), pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
818494|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) Score, Status Version|The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire status version (DTSQs) is used to assess participant treatment satisfaction at each study visit. The questionnaire consists of 8 items, 6 of which (1 and 4 through 8) assess treatment satisfaction. Each item is rated on a 7-point Likert scale. Scores from the 6 treatment satisfaction items are summed to a Total Treatment Satisfaction Score, which ranges from 0 (very dissatisfied) to 36 (very satisfied). Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted by treatment, country, prior medication group, gender, and baseline score.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable DTSQs data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after randomization, endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818495|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in the Impact of Weight on Self-Perception (IW-SP) Score|The Impact of Weight on Self-Perception (IW-SP) questionnaire contains 3 items that assess how often the participants' body weight affects how happy they are with their appearance and how often they feel self-conscious when out in public. Items are scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale where 5 = never and 1 = always. A single total score is calculated by summing the scores for all 3 items. Total score ranges between 3 and 15, where a higher score is indicative of better self-perception. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted by treatment, country, prior medication group, gender, and baseline score.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable IW-SP data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818496|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in the Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living (IW-ADL) Score|"The Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living (renamed the Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living [APPADL]) questionnaire contains 7 items that assess how difficult it is for participants to engage in certain activities considered to be integral to normal daily life, such as walking, standing and climbing stairs. Items are scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale where 5 = not at all difficult and 1 = unable to do. The individual scores from all 7 items are summed and a single total score is calculated and may range between 7 and 35. A higher score indicates better ability to perform activities of daily living. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted by treatment, country, prior medication group, gender, and baseline score."|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable APPADL data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818497|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Homeostasis Model Assessment of Beta-cell Function|The homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) quantifies insulin resistance and beta-cell function. HOMA2-B is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate steady-state beta cell function (%B) as a percentage of a normal reference population (normal young adults). HOMA2-S is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate insulin sensitivity (%S) as percentages of a normal reference population (normal young adults). The normal reference populations were set at 100%. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, prior medication group, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects, baseline HOMA2 as a covariate, and participant as a random effect.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable HOMA2-%B or HOMA2-%S data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||percentage of HOMA2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818498|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Body Mass Index (BMI)|Body mass index is an estimate of body fat based on body weight divided by height squared. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country, treatment, and prior medication group as fixed effects and baseline BMI as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable BMI data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||kilograms per meter squared (kg/m^2)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818499|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Body Weight|Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country, treatment, and prior medication group as fixed effects and baseline body weight as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable body weight data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||kilograms (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818500|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Daily Mean Blood Glucose Values From the 8-point Self-monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Profiles|The SMBG data were collected at the following 8 time points: pre-morning meal; 2 hours post-morning meal; pre-midday meal; 2 hours post-midday meal; pre-evening; 2 hours post-evening meal; bedtime; and 3AM or 5 hours after bedtime. Least Squares (LS) means of the mean of the 8 time points (daily mean) were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country, treatment, and prior medication group as fixed effects and baseline daily mean as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable SMBG data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818532|NCT01127139|Primary|Compliance With Tarka Treatment, All Participants and by Gender.|Participants were asked how many doses of Tarka they had missed after three months of treatment.|Month 3 Visit|All participants with evaluable case report forms were analyzed.||participants|||Number
818502|NCT01126580|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) of Less Than 7% and Less Than or Equal to 6.5% at 26 and 52 Weeks|The percentage of participants achieving HbA1c level less than 7.0% and less than or equal to 6.5% was analyzed with a logistic regression model with baseline, prior medication group, and treatment as factors included in the model.|26 weeks and 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of participants|||Number
818503|NCT01126580|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52-week Endpoint in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country, treatment, and prior medication group (previous oral antihyperglycemic medication [OAM] versus no previous OAM) as fixed effects and baseline HbA1c as a covariate.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818504|NCT01126580|Primary|Change From Baseline to 26-week Endpoint in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country, treatment, and prior medication group (previous oral antihyperglycemic medication [OAM] versus no previous OAM) as fixed effects and baseline HbA1c as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Metformin with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818505|NCT01126593|Primary|Pain Scores|Pain was measured via Visual Analong Scale in measurement (0-100mm).|O hour, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12 and 72 hours.|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818506|NCT01126619|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|"The number of participants experiencing any adverse event or a serious adverse event during the study are summarized. A serious AE is an event that results in death, is life-threatening, requires or prolongs hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity or is an important medical event that may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent any of the outcomes listed above.
Please see the Adverse Event module below for additional details."|24 Weeks|All enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
818507|NCT01126619|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment|"The following parameters were assessed using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Psoriasis (WPAI:PSO):
Percent work time missed in the last 7 days due to problems associated with psoriasis;
Percent impairment at work, based on the participant's assessment of how much psoriasis affected their productivity while they were working in the last 7 days;
Percent overall loss of work productivity, based on hours missed and impairment while working due to psoriasis;
Percent general activity impairment, based on the participant's assessment of how much psoriasis affected their ability to perform regular daily activities, such as work around the house, shopping, child care, exercising, studying, etc.
Each domain score ranges from 0 (no impairment) to 100 (complete impairment). Change from Baseline is presented as a percentage of the Baseline value: Baseline value - post-baseline value / Baseline value * 100."|Baseline and Week 24|Participants who received treatment with anti-TNF agents and completed study follow-up visits through to Week 24. The first 3 domains (work time missed, work impairment and overall loss of work productivity) were assessed on a sub-group of participants who had full time jobs (n=30).||percent change||Full Range|Mean
818508|NCT01126619|Primary|Percentage of Participants With 75% Reduction in PASI Score|The percentage of participants with a 75% reduction (improvement) in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score from Baseline. PASI score is based on an assessment of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling), and the percent area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (best outcome) to 72 (worst outcome).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24|Participants who received treatment with anti-TNF agents and completed study follow-up visits through to Week 24.||percentage of participants|||Number
818509|NCT01126619|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score|"The DLQI questionnaire asks participants to evaluate the degree that psoriasis has affected their quality of life in the last week, and includes the following parameters: symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure activities, work or school activities, personal relationships and treatment related feelings. Participants answer 10 questions on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); the range of the total score is 0 to 30. A score of 21 to 30 means an extremely large effect on the participant's life whereas 0-1 means that the disease has no effect at all.
Change from Baseline is presented as a percentage of the Baseline value: Baseline value - post-baseline value / Baseline value * 100."|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24|Participants who received treatment with anti-TNF agents and completed study follow-up visits through to Week 24.||percent change||Full Range|Mean
818510|NCT01126619|Secondary|Static Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis|"In the static physician assessment of psoriasis, psoriasis severity was rated first for all Baseline photographs and then for all Week 24 photographs according to the following scale:
Clear (no lesion); Psoriasis almost cleared; Mild psoriasis; Mild to moderate psoriasis; Moderate psoriasis; Moderate to severe psoriasis; Severe psoriasis."|Baseline and Week 24|Participants who received treatment with anti-TNF agents and completed study follow-up visits through to Week 24.||participants|||Number
818511|NCT01126619|Secondary|Dynamic Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Change in Psoriasis|In the dynamic patient global assessment of change in psoriasis, the participant compared their own sets of standardized photographs taken at Baseline and at Week 24 and rated the change of the severity of psoriasis using the dynamic photographic scale adapted to a visual analog scale ranging from -5 (very large deterioration) to +5 (very large improvement).|Baseline and Week 24|Participants who received treatment with anti-TNF agents and completed study follow-up visits through to Week 24.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818552|NCT01127581|Secondary|Incidence of Pre-delivery Oxytocin During the First Hospital Admission|Percentage of participants in receipt of Oxytocin for induction after study drug removal.|At least 30 minutes after study drug removal|Analysis population includes subjects who delivered during the first hospitalization.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818512|NCT01126619|Secondary|Dynamic Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Change in Psoriasis|In the dynamic physician global assessment of change in psoriasis, the physician compared sets of standardized photographs taken at Baseline and at Week 24 for each participant and rated the change of psoriasis severity on the dynamic PGA scale from –5 (considerable deterioration), 0 (no or minimal change) to +5 (considerable improvement).|Baseline and Week 24|Participants who received treatment with anti-TNF agents and completed study follow-up visits through to Week 24.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818513|NCT01126619|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score|The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by the erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) on a scale from none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3) or very severe (4), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 to 6. PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease. Change from Baseline is presented as a percentage of the Baseline value: Baseline value - post-baseline value / Baseline value * 100.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24|Participants who received treatment with anti-TNF agents and completed study follow-up visits through to Week 24.||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818514|NCT01126671|Secondary|Assessment of Bone Markers at Follow-up|After 11 weeks of vitamin D supplementation bone specific alkaline phosphatase, osteocalcin, and CTx will be repeated to see response to therapy.|12 weeks||||||
818515|NCT01126671|Secondary|Baseline Assessment of Bone Markers|Bone specific alkaline phosphatase, CTx, and osteocalcin will be assessed at baseline prior to subjects starting vitamin D supplementation|Baseline||||||
818516|NCT01126671|Primary|Follow-up 25OHD Levels|After 11weeks of treatment, repeat 25OHD levels will be drawn to assess subject response to vitamin D supplementation.|12 weeks|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
818517|NCT01126671|Primary|Baseline 25OHD Levels|25OHD will be drawn at baseline prior to starting vitamin D supplementation.|Baseline|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
818518|NCT01126723|Primary|Frailty Index|Frailty is defined as the combination of unintentional weight loss, exhaustion, low physical activity, slow walking speed, and muscular weakness.|post-intervention|per protocol||participants|||Number
818521|NCT01126957|Secondary|Satisfaction With Procedural Sedation|Score of 1 to 5 with 5 being completely satisfied and 1 being not satisfied at all was recorded by both the monitoring nurse and the physician performing the procedural sedation|20 minutes|103 participants completed the study. Data were collected but were not analyzed prior to the investigator leaving the institution, and neither did he make the data available for analysis.|||||
818522|NCT01126957|Primary|Respiratory Depression|"Endotracheal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) rise > 5mm/hg
Arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2) <90%
Respiratory rate (RR) < 8 br/min
Apnea > 15 sec
airway manipulation"|Baseline and throughout procedure|103 participants completed the study. Data were collected but were not analyzed prior to the investigator leaving the institution, and neither did he make the data available for analysis.|||||
818523|NCT01127087|Secondary|Total Urinary Oxalate Excretion|Oxalate is a salt of oxalic acid produced by the body's metabolism and excreted in the urine, measured in this study in two, 24-hour, urine collections.|Baseline, 4 weeks|||mg/24 hrs||Standard Deviation|Mean
818524|NCT01127087|Primary|Urinary Oxalate Creatinine Ratio|The urinary oxalate per creatinine ratio is expressed as mg/g. Paired t-test will be used when comparing reduction of urinary oxalate resulting from treatment (versus baseline) for each subject group.|Baseline, Week 4|||mg/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
818525|NCT01127139|Secondary|Adverse Events Leading to Study Discontinuation|The number of participants who discontinued from the study due to an adverse event and reported event descriptions are summarized.|Baseline to Month 6 Visit|All participants with case report forms were included in this analysis.||Participants|||Number
818526|NCT01127139|Secondary|Number and Type of Antihypertensive Drugs Added to Fixed Combination Tarka to Reach Blood Pressure Goal|The number of participants at the Month 6 visit who were taking other antihypertensive drugs in addition to their Tarka treatment to reach a blood pressure goal of less than 140/90 mmHg. The number of participants taking each type of additional drug is summarized.|Month 6 Visit|This analysis included all participants with complete data for the entire study.||Participants|||Number
818527|NCT01127139|Primary|Compliance With Tarka Treatment, All Participants and by Gender.|Participants were asked how many doses of Tarka they had missed since their previous visit.|Month 6 Visit|All participants with evaluable case report forms were analyzed.||participants|||Number
818528|NCT01127139|Secondary|Number and Type of Antihypertensive Drugs Added to Fixed Combination Tarka to Reach Blood Pressure Goal|The number of participants at the Month 3 visit who were taking other antihypertensive drugs in addition to their Tarka treatment to reach blood a pressure goal of less than 140/90 mmHg. The number of participants taking each type of additional drug is summarized.|Month 3 Visit|This analysis included all participants with complete data for the entire study.||Participants|||Number
818529|NCT01127139|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving Blood Pressure < 140/90 mmHg|The percentage of patients who had achieved blood pressure less than 140/90 mmHg after six months of treatment.|Month 6 Visit|This analysis included all participants with complete data for the entire study.||Percentage of participants|||Number
818530|NCT01127139|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving Blood Pressure < 140/90 mmHg|The percentage of patients who had achieved blood pressure less than 140/90 mmHg after three months of treatment.|Month 3 Visit|This analysis included all participants with complete data for the entire study.||Percentage of participants|||Number
818531|NCT01127139|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|The mean (average) change in participants' systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure from the baseline visit to the Month 6 visit.|Baseline to Month 6 Visit|This analysis included all participants with complete data for the entire study.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
839184|NCT01324622|Primary|Number of Participants Without Surgical Intervention|Success defined as a lack of revision, removal or addition of supplemental fixation.|up to 24 months|||participants|||Number
818535|NCT01127165|Secondary|Change in Cognitive Assessment Korean-Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (K-WISC-Ⅲ)|Cognitive assessment was performed using K-WISC-III. The total score of K-WISC-III is calculated as Full Scale IQ which ranges from 31 (worst) to 151(best). Higher scores indicate greater intelligence, lower scores indicate less intelligence. Thus a positive change indicated an improvement.|Baseline and 24 weeks|||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818536|NCT01127165|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Were Assessed As Seizure Free|The percentage of participants who showed no seizure during the maintenance phase.|24 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
818537|NCT01127256|Secondary|Quality of Life in Epilepsy (QoL-QOLIE31)|Quality of life assessment tool. Overall scores is calculated by summing subsections, and it ranges from 0 to 100. Higher score presents higher quality of life.|24 weeks|||Units On a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818538|NCT01127256|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Retention Rate|The percentage of participants who completed the trial.|24 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
818539|NCT01127256|Primary|The Percentage of Participants With Seizure Free Rate|The percentage of participants who had no seizure during the trial.|24 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
818540|NCT01127321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies to MEDI-570 at Any Visit||Predose on Day 1; Day 85, 113, and 169|Safety population included all participants who were randomized into the study and received at least 1 dose of investigational product.||participants|||Number
818541|NCT01127321|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters for MEDI-570|Following pharmacokinetic parameters were to be evaluated by using non-compartmental analysis: t1/2 = terminal phase elimination half-life which is the time measured for the serum concentration to decrease by one half; tmax = time to maximum observed serum concentration; Cmax = maximum observed serum concentration; AUC (0-t) = area under the serum concentration-time curve from time 0 to last measurable concentration; AUC (0-infinity) = area under the serum concentration-time curve from time 0 to extrapolated infinite time obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-infinity); Vz/F = apparent volume of distribution, which is the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired serum concentration of a drug; CL/F = apparent clearance which is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes.|Predose and postdose on Day 1; Day 3, 5, 8, 15, 29, 57, 85, 113, 141, and 169|Due to early termination of the study, the results were reported as individual participant’s listings but not statistically summarized.|||||
818542|NCT01127321|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Treatment-Emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs)|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. A serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between administration of study drug and Day 169 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.|Day 1 to Day 169|Safety population included all participants who were randomized into the study and received at least 1 dose of investigational product.||participants|||Number
818543|NCT01127438|Secondary|Number of Participants With Modified Sedation Success|Modified sedation success was defined as a subject who was a sedation success and did not have a MOAA/S score <2 any time after administration of sedative medication. Sedation success was defined as subjects who had 3 consecutive MOAA/S scores at or less than 4 after administration of sedative medication, completed the procedure, did not require the use of alternative sedative medication, and did not require manual/mechanical ventilation. The MOAA/S score was used to clinically rate the level of sedation using a score of 0 to 5 based on the level of responsiveness.|Day 1|Full Analysis Population.||Participants|||Number
818544|NCT01127438|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Success|Treatment success was defined as subjects who met the following 3 criteria: completed the procedure, did not require the use of alternative sedative medication, and did not require manual/mechanical ventilation.|Day 1|Full Analysis Population.||Participants|||Number
818545|NCT01127438|Primary|Number of Participants With Sedation Success|Sedation success was defined as subjects who met the following 4 criteria: had 3 consecutive Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) scores at or less than 4 after administration of sedative medication, completed the procedure, did not require the use of alternative sedative medication, and did not require manual/mechanical ventilation. The MOAA/S score was used to clinically rate the level of sedation using a score of 0 to 5 based on the subject’s level of responsiveness. A high score on the MOAA/S scale indicated a lower level of sedation.|Day 1|Full Analysis Population: All treated subjects who received study drug and had at least one postdose efficacy measurement.||Participants|||Number
818546|NCT01127581|Secondary|Rate of Adverse Events|All adverse events were rated by the Investigator as mild, moderate or severe and classified as having no relationship, possible relationship or a probable relationship to the study drug.|From study drug administration to hospital discharge (approximately 48-72 hours)|The percentage of subjects with adverse events are presented for the Intrapartum (before delivery), postpartum (maternal) and neonatal periods.||percentage of participants|||Number
818547|NCT01127581|Secondary|Incidence of Vaginal Delivery||Interval from study drug administration to vaginal delivery (average 24 hours)|The Intention-to-Treat (ITT) population was used for all secondary efficacy analyses.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818548|NCT01127581|Secondary|Incidence of Vaginal Delivery Within 24 Hours||Interval from study drug administration to vaginal delivery within 24 hours|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818549|NCT01127581|Secondary|Incidence of Any Delivery Within 12 Hours||Interval from study drug administration to delivery of neonate within 12 hours|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818550|NCT01127581|Secondary|Incidence of Any Delivery Within 24 Hours||Interval from study drug administration to delivery of neonate within 24 hours|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818551|NCT01127581|Secondary|Incidence of Vaginal Delivery Within 12 Hours||Interval from study drug administration to vaginal delivery within 12 hours|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818553|NCT01127581|Secondary|Time to Active Labor During the First Hospital Admission|Active labor was defined as progressive cervical dilatation to 4 cm with any frequency of contractions OR rhythmic, firm, adequate quality uterine contractions causing progressive cervical change occurring at a frequency of 3 or more in 10 minutes and lasting 45 seconds or more.|Interval from study drug administration to active labor (average 12 hours)|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) population||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818554|NCT01127581|Secondary|Time to Any Delivery (Vaginal or Cesarean) During the First Hospital Admission||Interval from study drug administration to neonate delivery (average 24 hours)|Subjects who did not deliver during the first hospitalization were censored at the time of labour and delivery discharge.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818555|NCT01127581|Primary|Incidence of Cesarean Delivery During the First Hospital Admission||Interval from study drug administration to cesarean delivery (average 24 hours)|Analysis was based on a between-treatment-group difference in the safety population. Subjects discharged prior to delivery, withdrew early without having a cesarean delivery or were lost-to-follow up were classified as not having the event.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818556|NCT01127581|Primary|Time to Vaginal Delivery During the First Hospital Admission||Interval from study drug administration to vaginal delivery (average 24 hours)|Subjects who underwent a cesarean delivery during the first hospitalization were censored using the longest time interval from study drug administration to cesarean delivery, independent of treatment assignment. Subjects who were discharged prior to delivery or withdrew consent prior to delivery were also censored.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818557|NCT01127607|Secondary|Adult ADHD Rating Scale Completed at the End of the Med Optimization Phase|Measures change in all DSM IV ADHD symptoms on a 0 (least severe) to 3 (most severe) scale. All information obtained during clinician interview of patient. Inattention and hyperactive/impulsive subscales each consist of 9 items with range of 0 to 27. Total Score consists of all 18 items (sum of two subscales) rated 0 to 3 with range of 0 to 54. For all, higher scores indicate more symptoms.|baseline and end of med optimization phase/week 4|Uses a within-subjects design; the same 27 participants are in both arms.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818558|NCT01127607|Secondary|Pittsburgh Side Effects Rating Scale - Percent Present for All Reported Adverse Events Occurring at a Rate of 5% or More|Self report of side effects measured during dose titration using the Pittsburgh Side Effects Rating Scale. Consists of 13 items each rated using 0(none) to 3 (severe) scales. Items endorsed as 1 (mild) or above were counted as present. Information on additional adverse events not part of the PSERS was collected by direct interview of the participants. All side effects occurring at a frequency of 5% or more are reported. Initial side effect data is reported for all participants entering pre-randomization med optimization phase who took medication (n=36) vs those formally enrolled (N=27). Also, side effect data for the med titration phase is entered per dose rather than per participant. For example, a person trying the 30, 50 and 70mg dose is entered is entered 4 times (no med as well) vs. just once. This is why baseline N is higher than for other outcomes collected at weeks 4 and 8 where data was only available for those completing the pre-randomization med optimization phase (N=27).|end of medication optimization phase/week 4|Within-subjects analysis; data entered per dose not per subject. For example, if subject 1 took 30mg, 50mg and 70mgdoses during titration, they are recorded as three separate entries. Sample size reduces as dose increases because participants stopped at lowest acceptable dose and only moved to higher dose if they did not meet optimization criteria.||Percent of participants|||Number
818559|NCT01127607|Secondary|Resting Pulse|measured at last assessment visit when at rest using an automated blood pressure machine; results reported in beats per minute. At endpoint, the medication group (N=8) was compared to the placebo group (N=9).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818560|NCT01127607|Primary|Dyadic Parent-Child Interaction Coding System (DPICS) - Behavior Percentages|Observations of parents and children as they interact with each other during a five minute homework task and during a 10 minute non-academic task. Interactions were recorded and later coded by trained observers. Observers counted number of parent and child behaviors. Percentages of behaviors as a function of total verbalizations (for praise, negative talk, demanding) or as a function of commands and questions (for impatient and responsive) were computed.Three subjects dropped prior to completing this assessment and one participant completed the other endpoint measures but not the DPICS, which is why the total N for this outcome is 23 at study endpoint. At end of period II (study endpoint), the medication group (n=10) was compared to the placebo group (N=13).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|Task situation (homework vs. non-academic) was within-subjects; all participants completed both types of interactions. Medication was between subjects.||Percentage of behaviors||Standard Deviation|Mean
818561|NCT01127607|Primary|Dyadic Parent-Child Interaction Coding System (DPICS) - Behavior Counts|Observations of parents and children as they interact with each other during a five minute homework task and during a 10 minute non-academic task. Interactions were recorded and later coded by trained observers. Observers counted number of parent and child behaviors. Average number of behaviors per group were computed. Three subjects dropped prior to completing this assessment and one participant completed the other endpoint measures but not the DPICS, which is why the total N for this outcome is 23 at study endpoint. At end of period II (study endpoint), the medication group (n=10) was compared to the placebo group (N=13).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|Task situation (homework vs. non-academic) was within-subjects; all participants completed both types of interactions. Medication was between subjects.||behaviors||Standard Deviation|Mean
818562|NCT01127607|Secondary|Weight|Weight measured on calibrated scale; participant measured without shoes or heavy clothing (jackets, sweaters, etc...). reported in kilograms.At endpoint, the medication group (N=9) was compared to the placebo group (N=11).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
818563|NCT01127607|Secondary|Impairment Rating Scale (IRS)|self rated measure of global impairment of adult participants derived from the child IRS. The IRS-A assesses impairment overall and in specific domains, including interpersonal relationships, academic performance, and self-esteem, and includes adult-specific domains of functioning, such as employment and romantic relationships. The IRS-A assesses current problems and need for treatment. Each subscale is rated from 0 (no problem) to 6 (extreme problem).At endpoint, the medication group (N=11) was compared to the placebo group (N=13). Overall Impairment is its own subscale and not a composite score of the others.|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818564|NCT01127607|Secondary|Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ)|"measures change in parenting practices.The APQ is a 42-item measure (each item ranges from 1/always to 5/never) on which parents are asked to indicate the frequency with which they implement the following parenting practices: involvement (10 items range 10-50- higher scores mean more parental involvement), positive parenting (6 items with range of 6 to 30 and higher scores indicate greater use of praise), poor monitoring/supervision (10 items with range of 10 to 50 and higher scores indicate less supervision/monitoring), inconsistent discipline(6 items with range of 6 to 30 and higher scores indicate greater problems with inconsistent discipline), and corporal punishment (3 items with range of 3-15 and greater scores indicate more use of corporal punishment). Items are rated on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (“never”) to 5 (“always”). Items summed into composite scales.
At endpoint, the medication group (N=9) was compared to the placebo group (N=13)."|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818565|NCT01127607|Secondary|Resting Blood Pressure|Measured at rest at last assessment visit using an automated blood pressure machine; results reported in mmHG. At endpoint, the medication group (N=9) was compared to the placebo group (N=10).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
818566|NCT01127607|Secondary|Pittsburgh Side Effect Rating Scale Mean Severity Rating.|rates 13 potential adverse events of Central Nervous System (CNS) stimulants on a 0-3 likert scale with 0=none 1=mild severity, 2=moderate severity, 3=severe severity. Form completed by participants. Mean severity rating then averaged across 13 categories.At endpoint, the medication group (N=10) was compared to the placebo group (N=13).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818567|NCT01127607|Secondary|Barkley Home Situations Questionnaire (HSQ)|Self completed by adult participants. Measures their child's functioning in the evening by asking them to report whether or not their child had problems in developmentally important areas. Number of problems per child are counted and counts are then averaged for each group with higher numbers representing more problems. At endpoint, the medication group (N=9) was compared to the placebo group (N=10).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||number of child problems endorsed||Standard Deviation|Mean
818568|NCT01127607|Secondary|ADHD Severity Clinical Global Impressions Severity Subscale|clinician rated measure of ADHD symptom severity in adult participants. The severity subscale is scored from 1 (normal) to 7 (extremely ill).At endpoint, the medication group (N=10) was compared to the placebo group (N=13).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818569|NCT01127607|Secondary|Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS)|The SDS consists of 3 self rated items assessing the degree to which symptoms affect work/school, social life, and family/home responsibilities. Items are rated on a 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely) scale. Items were averaged into an overall disability score with range of 0 to 10 with higher scores indicating more severe disability. At endpoint, the medication group (N=9) was compared to the placebo group (N=13).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818570|NCT01127607|Secondary|Impairment Rating Scale (IRS)|measures global functioning of child rated by the parent who was the participant in the study. The IRS is a 7 item measure that uses visual-analogue scales to evaluate the child’s problem level and need for treatment in developmentally important areas, such as peer relationships, adult-child relationships, academic performance. Each subscale including overall severity is scored from 0 (no problem) to 6 (extreme problem) with higher scores indicating more impairment. At endpoint, the medication group (N=10) was compared to the placebo group (N=13).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818571|NCT01127607|Secondary|Disruptive Behavior Disorder Rating Scale (DBD)|measures externalizing symptoms in children.measures externalizing symptoms in children completed by their primary caretaker who was a participant in the study. The DBD (Pelham et al., 1992) assessed DSM symptoms of ADHD, ODD, and CD from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much). The DBD includes symptoms of DSM-III and DSM-IV ADHD, Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) and Conduct Disorder (CD).At endpoint, the medication group (N=10) was compared to the placebo group (N=12).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818572|NCT01127607|Secondary|Social Skills Rating System (SSRS)|"Measures child's interactions with peers and adults. Items rated using Likert scales that range from 0 (never) to 2 (often).At week 8, the medication group (N=10) was compared to the placebo group (N=11). There are two subscales: Problem Behaviors (18 items rated between 0-2 for total score range of 0 to 36) and Social Skills (40 items rated 0-2 with range for total score of 0-80). The total scores for these scales are reported as standard scores, with a population mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15. For problem behavior higher scores indicate worse behavior whereas for social skills, higher scores indicate more social (or better behavior)."|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||standard scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
818573|NCT01127607|Secondary|Brown Attention Deficit Scale (BAADS)|"Measures executive functioning using 40 items each rated using a Likert Scale that ranges from 0 (never) to 3 (almost daily). Activation, Attention and effort subscales are 9 items each with range of 0-27. Affect scale is 7 items (range 0-21), memory is 6 items (range 0-18) and total score is 40 items (range 0-120). All raw scores are then reported as T scores based on normative data with higher T scores indicating worse executive functioning. At endpoint, the medication group (N=10) was compared to the placebo group (N=13)."|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||t score||Standard Deviation|Mean
818574|NCT01127607|Secondary|Parenting Locus of Control (PLC)|"self completed parenting measure of the degree to which parents feel they can influence their child’s behavior. Measure consists of 25 items each rated using a Likert scales that ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Range is 25 to 125 with higher scores indicating greater parental control over their child's behavior (desired outcome). At endpoint, the medication group (N=9) was compared to the placebo group (N=13)."|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818608|NCT01128114|Secondary|The CGI-I (Clinical Global Impression-Improvement of Illness) Change From Baseline to Week 4|The Global Improvement scale (CGI-I) is scored to rate the patient’s change from baseline CGI. A CGI-I score of 1 indicates that a patient is “very much improved” and a score of 7 indicates that a patient is “very much worse.” CGI-I scores greater than 4 indicate worsening, while scores less than 4 indicate improvement. At all following visits CGI-I will also be rated. The following calculations will be made: Proportion of patients with CGI Global Improvement rating ≤ 2 at Day 29|Baseline, week 4||||||
818575|NCT01127607|Secondary|Parenting Stress Index (PSI)--Total Stress|measures change in stress of parent child interactions and completed by the participant. The PSI is a measure of the source and degree of parenting stress (Abidin, 1995), which contains 120 items which are rated on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) scale. 101 of these items are used to compute a total stress score (reported below) as the other 19 report on specific life stressors. Range is 101 to 505, for which higher scores indicate higher levels of stress. At endpoint, the medication group (N=9) was compared to the placebo group (N=13).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818576|NCT01127607|Secondary|Adult ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD RS)|measures change in all DSM (Diagnostic and Statistics Manual) IV ADHD symptoms on a 0 (least severe) to 3 (most severe) scale. Inattention and hyperactive/impulsive subscales each consist of 9 items with range of 0 to 27. Total Score consists of all 18 items rated 0 to 3 with range of 0 to 54. For all, higher scores indicate more symptoms. All information obtained during clinician interview of patient. At endpoint, the medication group (N=11) was compared to the placebo group (N=13).|study endpoint- end of period II (between subjects trial)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818577|NCT01127607|Secondary|Pittsburgh Side Effect Rating Scale|rates 13 potential adverse events of central nervous system stimulant medications on a 0-3 likert scale with 0=none 1=mild severity, 2=moderate severity, 3=severe severity. Form completed by participants at end of med optimization phase. Mean severity rating then averaged across 13 categories. This compares mean side effect severity at unmedicated baseline state vs. on optimal dose at week 3. Analysis includes all participants completing medication optimization.|baseline and end of dose optimization phase/week 4|Within-subjects analysis; same 26 participants are in the unmedicated and optimal dose of medication arms.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818578|NCT01127607|Secondary|Dyadic Parent-Child Interaction Coding System (DPICS) - Behavior Percentages|Observations of parents and children as they interact with each other during a five minute homework task and during a 10 minute non-academic task. Interactions were recorded and later coded by trained observers. Observers counted number of parent and child behaviors with each parent-child dyad counted as one participant. Percentages of behaviors as a function of total verbalizations (for praise, negative talk, demanding) or as a function of commands and questions (for impatient and responsive) were computed. This outcome was part of period I- the within subject comparison of all participating subjects once on placebo (n=26) and once with all subjects on active medication (N=26). (the 27th participant completed this phase but partial data was lost due to mechanical failure with video equipment so their data was not included). All adult participants received both placebo and active medication in this phase that comprised all of period 1.|weeks 4 and weeks 5 (period I within subjects trial)|Used a within-subjects design; the same 26 participants completed all arms.||Percentage of behaviors||Standard Deviation|Mean
818579|NCT01127607|Secondary|Dyadic Parent-Child Interaction Coding System (DPICS)|Observations of parents and children as they interact with each other during a five minute homework task and during a 10 minute non-academic task. Interactions were recorded and later coded by trained observers. Observers counted number of parent and child behaviors with each parent-child dyad counted as one participant. Average number of behaviors per group were computed.This outcome was part of period I- the within subject comparison of all participating subjects once on placebo (n=26) and once with all subjects on active medication (N=26). (the 27th participant completed this phase but partial data was lost due to mechanical failure with video equipment so their data was not included). All adult participants received both placebo and active medication in this phase that comprised all of period 1.|weeks 4 and weeks 5 (period I within subjects trial)|Used a within-subjects design for this phase; the same 26 participants completed all four arms.||behaviors||Standard Deviation|Mean
818580|NCT01127607|Secondary|Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS)|The SDS consists of 3 self rated items assessing the degree to which symptoms affect work/school, social life, and family/home responsibilities. Items are rated on a 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely) scale. Items were averaged into an overall disability score with range of 0 to 10 with higher scores indicating more severe disability.Within subject comparison of no medication baseline vs. optimal dose medication.|baseline and week 4|Uses a within-subjects design; the same 25 participants are in both arms.||units on a 0 to 10 scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818581|NCT01127607|Secondary|Impairment Rating Scale (IRS)|"Parent ratings of their child's functioning and need for treatment in developmentally important domains. Ratings are completed using visual-analogue scales that are anchored at the low end by no problems / no need for treatment and at the high end by extreme problem / definitely needs treatment. Visual analogue ratings for each subscale were converted to 0 to 6 scales with higher values indicating greater impairment and lower values indicating less impairment for each subscale.Within subject comparison of no medication baseline vs. optimal dose medication."|baseline and week 4|Uses a within-subjects evaluation; the same 25 participants are in both arms.||units on a 0 to 6 scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818582|NCT01127607|Secondary|Disruptive Behavior Disorders Rating Scale (DBD)|Parent ratings of their child's symptoms of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and conduct disorder (CD). Measure consists of 45 items each rated on a Likert scale that ranges from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much). Items are averaged to form adhd-inattention, adhd-hyperactive/impulsive, ODD, and CD scores.Within subject comparison of no medication baseline vs. optimal dose medication. ADHD subscale consists of 20 items with range of 0 to 60. ODD subscale consists of 9 items with range of 0 to 27. CD subscale consists of 15 items with range of 0 to 45. For all subscales, higher scores indicate more severe symptoms.|baseline and week 4|Used a within-subjects design; the same 24 participants measured in both arms.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818593|NCT01127646|Secondary|Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-Parent Version: Investigator Administered and Scored (ADHD-RS-IV Parent:Inv) Total Score and Subscores at Weeks 2, 3, and 4|Assesses 18 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) ADHD diagnosis symptoms/severity in past week. Each item: 0 (none/never, rarely) to 3 (severe/very often). Total score ranges from 0 to 54. Higher total scores indicate greater illness severity. This outcome measure was not analyzed due to the insufficient sample size.|Weeks 2, 3, and 4|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818627|NCT01128192|Primary|Change in Low Dose % Endogenous Glucose Production (EGP) Inhibition|Change from Day 3 and Day 10 of low dose % EGP Inhibition (Hyperinsulinemic-Euglycemic Clamp)|Day 3 and Day 10|||percentage of EGP Inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
818583|NCT01127607|Secondary|Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ)|"measures change in parenting practices.The APQ is a 42-item measure (each item ranges from 1/always to 5/never) on which parents are asked to indicate the frequency with which they implement the following parenting practices: involvement (10 items range 10-50- higher scores mean more parental involvement), positive parenting (6 items with range of 6 to 30 and higher scores indicate greater use of praise), poor monitoring/supervision (10 items with range of 10 to 50 and higher scores indicate less supervision/monitoring), inconsistent discipline(6 items with range of 6 to 30 and higher scores indicate greater problems with inconsistent discipline), and corporal punishment (3 items with range of 3-15 and greater scores indicate more use of corporal punishment). Items are rated on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (“never”) to 5 (“always”). Items summed into composite scales.
Within subject comparison of no medication baseline vs. optimal dose medication."|baseline and week 4|Used a within-subjects evaluation; the same 24 participants evaluated in both arms.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818584|NCT01127646|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure up to 5 Weeks||Baseline, up to 5 weeks|Safety population: all participants who entered the study and took at least 1 dose of study medication.||millimeters of mercury (mm Hg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818585|NCT01127646|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate up to 5 Weeks||Baseline, up to 5 weeks|Safety population: all participants who entered the study and took at least 1 dose of study medication.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818586|NCT01127646|Secondary|Global Impression of Perceived Difficulties Investigator Version (GIPD-Inv) Total Score and Subscores At Weeks 2, 3, and 4|Assesses attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)-related difficulties (overall difficulties perceived in morning, during school, during homework, in evening, and over entire day and night). Difficulties during past week are rated by investigator on a 7-point scale (1=normal, not difficult at all; 7=extremely difficult) for each of 5 items. Total score=sum of all subscores (items) and ranges from 5 to 35. Higher scores indicate greater impairment. This outcome measure was not analyzed due to the insufficient sample size.|Weeks 2, 3, and 4|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818587|NCT01127646|Secondary|Conners' Global Index-Teacher Rating Scale Total Score During the 4-Week Treatment Period|The teacher version of Conners' Global Index consists of 10 items with each item being scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not true at all, or never/seldom) to 3 (very much true, or very often/very frequent). The total score ranges from 0 to 30. Higher scores indicate greater impairment. The Conners’ Global Index-Teacher Rating Scale total score for days with missing doses (off-days) between both groups were not analyzed due to insufficient sample size.|Baseline through 4 weeks|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818588|NCT01127646|Secondary|Daily Parent Report of Evening and Morning Behavior-Revised (DPREMB-R) Scale Total Score and Subscores During the 4-Week Treatment Period|Parent-completed 11-item questionnaire; measures difficulty level of 3 common morning behaviors (such as, get out of bed) and 8 common evening behaviors (such as, sit through dinner) from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (a lot of difficulty). Evening behavior total score range is 0 to 24. Morning behavior total score range is 0 to 9. Total score (evening+morning) range is 0 to 33. Higher scores indicate greater difficulty in evening and morning behavior. Mean DPREMB-R total score and subscores for days with missing doses (off-days) between both groups were not analyzed due to insufficient sample size.|Baseline through 4 weeks|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818589|NCT01127646|Secondary|Patient Outcomes Questions (On-Days Versus Off-Days) During the 4-Week Treatment Period|"6-item questionnaire from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) advocacy group evaluates treatment outcomes ADHD participant's perspective. Parent completed on each day of on/off period. Each item ranged from 1 (I totally agree) to 5 (I totally disagree). Items 1 and 2 pertain to sleeping and eating; high scores=better outcome. Items 3-6 pertain to behavior; high scores=worse outcome. The mean scores for analysis would have been created for each question across the days of each of the on and off phases; however, mean scores were not analyzed due to insufficient sample size."|Baseline through 4 weeks|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818590|NCT01127646|Secondary|Daily Parent Report of Evening and Morning Behavior-Revised (DPREMB-R) Scale Subscores (On-Days Versus Off-Days) During the 4-Week Treatment Period|Parent-completed 11-item questionnaire; measures difficulty level of 8 common evening behaviors (such as, sit through dinner) and 3 common morning behaviors (such as, get out of bed) from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (a lot of difficulty). Evening behavior total score range is 0 to 24. Morning behavior total score range is 0 to 9. Higher scores indicate greater difficulty in evening and morning behavior. DPREMB-R subscores between days without missing doses (on-days) and days with missing doses (off-days) not analyzed due to insufficient sample size.|Baseline through 4 weeks|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818591|NCT01127646|Secondary|Emotion Expression Scale for Children (EESC)-Parent Rated Total Score up to Week 5|"29-item parent-reported measure used to monitor effect of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication; examines 3 aspects of emotion expression: positive emotions, emotional flatness, and emotional lability. Each item rated on 5-point Likert scale (1=not at all true to 5=very much true). Positive emotional subscale items reversed scored (6-raw score). Total score=transformed positive emotion + emotional flatness+ emotional lability subscales. Total scores range: 29 to 145. Higher scores=emotional impairment. This outcome measure not analyzed due to insufficient sample size."|Up to Week 5|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818592|NCT01127646|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression-Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder-Severity Scale (CGI-ADHD-S) at Weeks 2, 3, and 4|This instrument is a single-item expert rating of the severity of the participant’s attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms in relation to the assessor’s total experience of participants with ADHD. Severity is rated on a 7-point scale (1=normal, not ill at all; 7=among the most extremely ill participants). Higher scores represent greater illness severity. This outcome measure was not analyzed due to the insufficient sample size.|Weeks 2, 3, and 4|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818628|NCT01128192|Primary|Change in Basal Endogenous Glucose Production (EGP)|Change from Day 3 and Day 10 of Basal EGP (Hyperinsulinemic-Euglycemic Clamp)|Day 3 and Day 10|||mg/kg/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
818594|NCT01127646|Secondary|Global Impression of Perceived Difficulties Scale-Patient Version (GIPD-Pat) Scale Total Score and Individual Items During the 4-Week Treatment Period|Assesses attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)-related difficulties (overall difficulties perceived in morning, during school, during homework, in evening, over entire day and night). Difficulties during past week are rated by participant on a 7-point scale (1=normal, not difficult at all; 7=extremely difficult) for each of 5 items. Total score=sum of all subscores (items); range: 5 to 35. Higher scores=greater impairment. Mean GIPD-Pat total score and individual item scores for days with missing doses (off-days) between both groups were not analyzed due to insufficient sample size.|Baseline through 4 weeks|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818595|NCT01127646|Secondary|Conners' Global Index-Teacher Rating Scale Total Score (On-Days Versus Off-Days) During the 4-Week Treatment Period|The teacher version of Conners’ Global Index consists of 10 items with each item being scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not true at all, or never/seldom) to 3 (very much true, or very often/very frequent). The total score ranges from 0 to 30. Higher scores indicate greater impairment. The Conner’s Global Index-Teacher Rating Scale total score between days without missing doses (on-days) and days with missing doses (off-days) was not analyzed due to the insufficient sample size.|Baseline through 4 weeks|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818596|NCT01127646|Secondary|Global Impression of Perceived Difficulties (GIPD) Scale-Patient Version Total Score and Individual Items (On-Days Versus Off-Days) During the 4-Week Treatment Period|Assesses attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)-related difficulties (overall difficulties perceived in morning, during school, during homework, in evening, over entire day and night). Participant rates difficulties during past week on 7-point scale (1=normal, not difficult at all; 7=extremely difficult) for each of 5 items. Total score=sum of all subscores (items); range: 5 to 35. Higher scores=greater impairment. GIPD-Pat total score and item scores between days without missing doses (on-days) and days with missing doses (off-days) were not analyzed due to insufficient sample size.|Baseline through 4 weeks|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818597|NCT01127646|Primary|Daily Parent Report of Evening and Morning Behavior-Revised (DPREMB-R) Scale Mean Total Score (On-Days Versus Off-Days) During the 4-Week Treatment Period|Parent-completed 11-item questionnaire; measures difficulty level of and 8 common evening behaviors (such as, sit through dinner) and 3 common morning behaviors (such as, get out of bed). Each item is scored on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (a lot of difficulty). Total score (evening+morning) range is 0 to 33. Higher scores indicate greater difficulty in evening and morning behavior. DPREMB-R total score between days without missing doses (on-days) and days with missing doses (off-days) was not analyzed due to the insufficient sample size.|Baseline through 4 weeks|No participants had data analyzed due to the termination of the trial and the insufficient sample size.|||||
818598|NCT01127659|Secondary|Inflammation||6 months||||||
818599|NCT01127659|Secondary|Body Composition||6 months||||||
818600|NCT01127659|Primary|Insulin Sensitivity|measured by HE clamps (baseline and 6 mths)|6 months|Glucose infusion rate in HE clamps was measured||mg/kg fat free mass/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
818601|NCT01127737|Primary|Number of Control and Intervention Participants on Skin Self-examination Performance at Follow-up 1 Month After Intervention|The number of control and intervention participants who checked their skin for cancer within the 1 month after the study visit.|1 month|Per protocol||Participants|||Number
818602|NCT01127763|Primary|Toxicity Profile-Non Hematological|Reported as percentage of patients who experienced grade 3 and higher non-hematological AEs related to the study drugs.|treatment period (up to 1 year) plus 30 days off treatment|any patient who received at least 1 dose of protocol treatment.||percentage of patients|||Number
818603|NCT01127763|Secondary|Median Progression-free Survival Time|Progression-free survival time is defined as the time from first day of treatment to the first date of disease progression or death as a result of any cause. Progression was assessed every 2 cycles of treatment (6 weeks) by CT, CT/PET, or MRI. Progression is defined using RECIST 1.0, as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|up to 1 year|Any patient with at least one dose of treatment.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818604|NCT01127763|Primary|Toxicity Profile-Hematological|Reported as percentage of patients who experienced grade 3 and higher hematological adverse events (AEs) related to the study drugs.|treatment period (up to 1 year) plus 30 days off treatment|any patient who received at least 1 dose of protocol treatment.||percentage of patients|||Number
818605|NCT01127763|Primary|Clinical Benefit Rate (Complete Response, Partial Response, and Stable Disease That Lasts More Than 6 Months)|Clinical benefit rate is defined as the number of patients with complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) that lasts at least 6 months. Response was assessed every 2 cycles of treatment (6 weeks) by computed tomography (CT), CT/positron emission tomography (PET), or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Overall response evaluation is based on Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors 1.0 (RECIST 1.0). Per RECIST 1.0 for target lesions: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD.|up to 1 year|Any patient with at least one dose of treatment.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818606|NCT01128049|Primary|Visual Quality|Average visual quality change over a 5 second blink cycle caused by movement of the tears over the surface of the eye by measuring optical irregularities.|5 seconds|The comparison was between normal, non-dry eye participants and dry eye groups.||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
818607|NCT01128114|Secondary|The Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 in CGI-S (Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness) Score|The CGI-S is scored to rate patient’s current clinical state. At enrolment patient’s condition is rated using the CGI-S. At assignment CGI-S is again completed and a score of at least 4 (moderately ill). The score at assignment Day 1 will be regarded as the baseline value. At all following visits CGI-S will be rated. Each CGI item is scored on a scale from 1 to 7. A CGI-S score of 1 indicates that a patient is “Normal, not at all ill” and a score of 7 indicates that a patient is “Among the most extremely ill patients”.|Baseline, week 4||||||
818645|NCT01128296|Secondary|Disease-free Survival by p53 Genetic Status||Up to 35 months|Participants that completed more than 80 % of the intended dose of HCQ.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818609|NCT01128114|Secondary|The Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 in - YMRS (Young Mania Rating Scale) Total Score|The YMRS is an 11-item, multiple-choice diagnostic questionnaire which psychiatrists use to measure severity of manic episodes. There are 4 items graded on a 0 to 8 scale (irritability, speech, thought content, disruptive/aggressive behavior), and 7 items graded on 0 to 4 scale. These 4 items are given twice the weight of the others to compensate for poor cooperation from severely ill patients. Typical YMRS baseline scores can vary a lot. They depend on patients’ clinical features such as mania (YMRS = 12), depression (YMRS = 3), or euthymia (YMRS = 2.|Baseline, week 4||||||
818610|NCT01128114|Primary|The Proportion of Patients With Improvement From Baseline to Week 4 in Clinical Global Impression-Clinical Benefit Score (LOCF)|CGI-CB is used to evaluate the investigator's global weighted impression of efficacy and interference of adverse event from baseline to every visit. Improvement in clinical benefit is defined as a decrease from baseline in CGI-CB. Rank 1 denotes best possible benefit from new treatment and rank 10 indicates that there is no benefit from treatment.|Baseline, week 4|As the study was terminated prematurely none of the randomized patients have been analysed.||Participants|||Number
818611|NCT01128153|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Achieving a Therapeutic Response: HbA1c Less Than 7% at Week 24, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|Number of participants achieving a glycaemic response defined as HbA1c less than 7% at Week 24|From Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set which included all participants randomised to the study who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had a non-missing baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline measure. The full analysis set follows intention-to-treat principle.||Participants|||Number
818612|NCT01128153|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 24, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) Measured as [mmol/L]|Adjusted Mean Change in FPG from baseline to Week 24 using analysis of covariance model|From Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set which included all participants randomised to the study who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had a non-missing baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline measure. The full analysis set follows intention-to-treat principle.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
818613|NCT01128153|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 24, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) Measured as [mg/dL]|Adjusted Mean Change in fasting plasma glucose from baseline to Week 24 using analysis of covariance|From Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set which included all participants randomised to the study who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had a non-missing baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline measure. The full analysis set follows intention-to-treat principle.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
818614|NCT01128153|Secondary|Change in 2-hour Postprandial Glucose (PPG) From Baseline to Week 24, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) Measured as [mmol/L]|Adjusted Mean Change in 2-hour PPG from baseline to Week 24 using analysis of covariance model|From Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set which included all participants randomised to the study who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had a non-missing baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline measure. The full analysis set follows intention-to-treat principle.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
818615|NCT01128153|Secondary|Change in 2-hour Postprandial Glucose (PPG) From Baseline to Week 24, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) Measured as [mg/dL]|Adjusted Mean Change in 2-hour PPG from baseline to Week 24 using analysis of covariance model|From Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set which included all participants randomised to the study who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had a non-missing baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline measure. The full analysis set follows intention-to-treat principle.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
818616|NCT01128153|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 24, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|Adjusted Mean Change in HbA1c from baseline to Week 24 using analysis of covariance model|From Baseline to Week 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set which included all participants randomised to the study who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had a non-missing baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline measure. The full analysis set follows intention-to-treat principle.||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
818617|NCT01128179|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Calcium-Phosphate Product Values at Week 12 (LOCF)||12 weeks|PP||mmol^2/L^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818618|NCT01128179|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Total Calcium Values at Week 12 (LOCF)||12 weeks|PP||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818619|NCT01128179|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Phosphate Values at Week 12 (LOCF)||12 weeks|PP||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818620|NCT01128179|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary Fractional Excretion of Phosphate Values at Week 12 (LOCF)||12 weeks|PP||percentage of excretion of phosphate||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818621|NCT01128179|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 1,25-Dihydroxy Vitamin D Values at Week 12 (LOCF)||12 weeks|PP||pg/ml||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818622|NCT01128179|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) Values at Week 12 (LOCF)||12 Weeks|PP||pg/ml||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818623|NCT01128179|Primary|Natural Logarithm Transformed Serum Intact Fibroblast Growth Factor (FGF-23) Levels at Week 12 Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|FGF-23 plays an important role in mineral metabolism in chronic kidney disease patients. It is secreted by bone cells in response to hyperphosphatemia. It acts to decrease renal phosphate reabsorption. Administration of a phosphate-binder (i.e. lanthanum carbonate) was expected to produce a reduction in FGF-23 levels.|12 Weeks|Per-protocol (PP) set are subjects who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had primary data assessment available from Week 2 or later and who did not have pre-defined major protocol deviations that could have affected the primary variable.||pg/ml||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818624|NCT01128192|Primary|Change in High-Dose Glucose Disposal Rate (GDR)|Change from Day 3 and Day 10 in High-Dose Glucose Disposal Rate (GDR) during Hyperinsulinemic-Euglycemic Clamp.|Day 3 and Day 10|||mg/kg/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
818625|NCT01128192|Primary|Change in Low-Dose Glucose Disposal Rate (GDR)|Change from Day 3 and Day 10 in Low-Dose Glucose Disposal Rate (GDR) during Hyperinsulinemic-Euglycemic Clamp.|Day 3 and Day 10|||mg/kg/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
818626|NCT01128192|Primary|Change in High Dose % Endogenous Glucose Production (EGP) Inhibition|Change from Day 3 and Day 10 of high dose % EGP Inhibition (Hyperinsulinemic-Euglycemic Clamp)|Day 3 and Day 10|||percentage of EGP inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
818629|NCT01128192|Primary|Change in Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Plasma Insulin Level 0-10mins, 10-180mins, 0-180mins During Hyperglycemic Clamp|Blood samples were taken at -30 min, -15 min, 0 min, 15 min, 30 min, 45 min, 60 min, 75 min, 90 min, 105 min, 120 min, 135 min, 150 min, 165 min, 180 min to assess the plasma insulin levels during Hyperglycemic Clamp (2-step hyperglycemic clamp test with arginine stimulation). The mean change in plasma insulin levels from Day 2 to Day 9 were calculated as Values on Day 9 - Values on Day 2.|0-10 mins, 10-180 mins, 0-180 mins (Day 2 and Day 9)|||h*pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
818630|NCT01128192|Primary|Change in Insulin Basal Level|Change from Day 2 and Day 9 of insulin basal levels (2-step hyperglycemic clamp test with arginine stimulation)|-30 min and -15 min on Day 2 and Day 9|||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
818631|NCT01128192|Secondary|Change in Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Plasma Insulin 0-30mins, 30-180mins, 0-180mins During Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT)|Blood samples were taken at -30 min, 0 min, 30 min, 60 min, 90 min, 120 min, 150 min, 180 min to assess the plasma insulin level. The mean change in plasma insulin level from Day 1 to Day 8 were calculated as Values on Day 8 - Values on Day 1|0-30 mins, 30-180 mins, 0-180 mins (Day 1 and Day 8)|||h*pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
818632|NCT01128192|Secondary|Change Fasting Plasma Insulin Level|An Oral Glucose Tolerance Test was performed at Day 1 (baseline) and Day 8 (post-treatment). Samples were taken at -30 min to assess the fasting plasma insulin level. The mean change in fasting plasma insulin level from Day 1 to Day 8 was assessed.|-30 minutes on Day 1 and -30 minutes on Day 8|||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
818633|NCT01128192|Secondary|Change in Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Plasma Glucose 0-30mins, 30-180mins, 0-180mins During Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT)|Blood samples were taken at -30 min, 0 min, 30 min, 60 min, 90 min, 120 min, 150 min, 180 min to assess the plasma glucose level. The mean change in plasma glucose level from Day 1 to Day 8 were calculated as Values on Day 8 - Values on Day 1.|0-30 mins, 30-180 mins, 0-180 mins (Day 1 and Day 8)|||h*mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
818634|NCT01128192|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose Level|"An Oral Glucose Tolerance Test was performed at Day 1 (baseline) and Day 8 (post-treatment). Samples were taken at
-30 min to assess the fasting plasma glucose level. The mean change in fasting plasma glucose level from Day 1 to Day 8 was assessed."|-30 minutes on Day 1 and -30 minutes on Day 8|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
818635|NCT01128244|Secondary|Plasma 3-hydroxykynurenine Concentration|For all subjects, analysis of blood samples before and after vitamin B6 supplementation will allow evaluation of discriminating biomarkers using targeted metabolite profile analysis of one-carbon metabolism and tryptophan catabolism constituents. Also, we will conduct exploratory evaluation and potential identification of new biomarkers using metabolomics analysis on subjects before and after vitamin B6 supplementation.|April, 2010 - June, 2014|Women using oral contraceptives and exhibiting low vitamin B6 status.||microl/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
818636|NCT01128244|Primary|Fasting Plasma Cystathionine Concentration|For all subjects, the concentration of plasma cystathionine in fasting blood samples taken before and after the supplementation period will provide a functional measure of vitamin B6 nutritional status.|Fasting blood samples will be taken at baseline and after 28 days of vitamin B6 supplementation.|Women using oral contraceptives and exhibiting low vitamin B6 status.||micromol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
818637|NCT01128244|Primary|Fasting Plasma Pyridoxal Phosphate Concentration|For all subjects, the concentration of plasma pyridoxal phosphate in fasting blood samples taken before and after the supplementation period will provide a direct measure of vitamin B6 nutritional status.|Fasting blood samples will be taken at baseline and after 28 days of vitamin B6 supplementation.|Women using oral contraceptives and exhibiting low vitamin B6 status.||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
818638|NCT01128244|Primary|Flux of Homocysteine Remethylation From Serine-derived Carbon|Data from analysis of serine, methionine and leucine in the timed blood samples of all subjects will provide a measurement of the metabolic rate of homocysteine remethylation from serine-derived carbon before and after vitamin B6 supplementation. These flux values may be slightly higher than flux of total homocysteine remethylation in Outcome Measure 1 because of the small contribution of methionine salvage to the flux measured in Outcome Measure 2.|Blood samples will be taken prior to infusion and at 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.5, and 9h. Infusions will be conducted at baseline and after 28 days|Women using oral contraceptives and exhibiting low vitamin B6 status.||micromol/(kg x hr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818639|NCT01128244|Primary|Total Remethylation of Homocysteine|Data from analysis of serine, methionine and leucine in the timed blood samples of all subjects will provide a measurement of the metabolic rate of total remethylation of homocysteine before and after vitamin B6 supplementation.|Blood samples will be taken prior to infusion and at 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.5, and 9h. Infusions will be conducted at baseline and after 28 days|Women using oral contraceptives exhibiting low vitamin B6 status evaluated at baseline and after vitamin B6 supplementation.||micromol/(kg x hr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818640|NCT01128270|Secondary|Detectable DCA After Day 1 in Serum (0=No 1=Yes)|All four arms receive Chloral Hydrate on Day 1 (arms 1A and 1B environmental levels) and (arms 2A and 2B therapeutic levels). The question is could Dichloroacetate be detected in serum at the end of day 1. This analysis is purely descriptive, and no comparisons were planned.|1 day|All eligible session completers||participants|||Number
818641|NCT01128270|Primary|Urinary Maleylacetone Levels After 5 Day Exposure to Therapeutic Chloral Hydrate (Arm 2B)|The levels were clinically indetectable at baseline and the question was whether or not substantive levels would be noted at after 5 days exposure to Chloral Hydrate. Detectable, but low levels were detected.|5 days|all eligible participants to arm 2B (Period 4)||micrograms per ml clorohydrate||Standard Deviation|Mean
818642|NCT01128270|Primary|Difference in Half Lives 5 Day Less One Day Exposure in Trichloroacetate|Elimination Half-life Difference on Arm 2B for 13C-Labeled trichloroacetate between day 5 (prolonged exposure) and day 1 (de novo exposure) after therapeutic level exposure to Chloral Hydrate. This outcome only applies to Period 4. Trichloroacetate is a marker, not an intervention.|5 days|This applies only to Arm 2B (Therapeutic Chloral Hydrate without DCA.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
818643|NCT01128270|Primary|Plasma DCA (Microgram/ml) After 5 Days of Therapeutic Level Chloral Hydrate on Arm 2A.|After 5 days of of therapeutic level Chloral Hydrate, the levels of Dichloroacetate in the plasma were measured.|6 Days|||micrograms/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
818644|NCT01128296|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) by p53 Mutant Status||Up to 35 months|Participants that completed more than 80 % of the intended dose of HCQ.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818646|NCT01128296|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) by CA 19-9 Response|Median number of months of overall survival for participants who experienced Ca 19-9 (surrogate biomarker) response (either an increase or decrease in Ca 19-9), or, no Ca 19-9 response. Per participant increases in Ca 19-9 ranged from >0 to 225%. Per participant decreases in Ca 19-9 ranged from >0 to 100%.|Up to 35 months|Analysis population included participants who received study treatment, who experienced either an increase or decrease in Ca 19-9, or no Ca 19-9 surrogate biomarker response||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818647|NCT01128296|Secondary|Disease-free Survival (DFS) by CA 19-9 Response|Median number of months of disease-free survival for participants who experienced Ca 19-9 (surrogate biomarker) response (either an increase or decrease in Ca 19-9), or no Ca 19-9 response. Per participant increases in Ca 19-9 ranged from >0 to 225%. Per participant decreases in Ca 19-9 ranged from >0 to 100%.|Up to 30 months|Analysis population included a total of 26 participants who received study treatment, who experienced either an increase or decrease in Ca 19-9, or no Ca 19-9 surrogate biomarker response.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818648|NCT01128296|Secondary|R0 Resection Rate|Number of participants that underwent a resection with microscopically margin-negative resection in which no gross or microscopic tumor remains in the primary tumor bed (24) / number of that completed treatment (31)|Up to 30 months|Participants that completed more than 80 % of the intended dose of HCQ.||percentage of participants|||Number
818649|NCT01128296|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) by Response to HCQ Treatment|Median number of months of overall survival in participants who did and did not experience response to HCQ treatment. Patients who had >51 % increase in their LC3-II staining were classified as having a response to HCQ.|Up to 35 months|Subset of participants that completed more than 80 % of the intended dose of HCQ.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818650|NCT01128296|Secondary|Disease-free Survival (DFS) by Response to HCQ Treatment|Median number of months of disease-free survival in participants who did and did not experience response to HCQ treatment. Patients who had >51 % increase in their LC3-II staining were classified as having a response to HCQ.|Up to 30 months|Subset of participants that completed more than 80% of the intended dose of HCQ treatment.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818651|NCT01128296|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Median number of months of overall survival for participants receiving study treatment.|Up to 35 months|Participants that completed more than 80% of the intended dose of HCQ.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818652|NCT01128296|Secondary|Disease-free Survival (DFS)|Median number of months of disease-free survival for participants receiving study treatment.|Up to 30 months|Participants that completed more than 80 % of the intended dose of HCQ.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818653|NCT01128296|Primary|Number of Participants That Experienced a Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT)|Number of Participants at each dose level of HCQ that experienced a Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT).|Up to 31 days|Observed for dose-limiting toxicities or treatment delays attributed to HCQ to determine the maximum tolerated dose.||participants|||Number
818654|NCT01128361|Primary|Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia|The Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia is a validate measure of depressive symptoms in individuals with dementia. Larger numbers indicate greater levels of depression. Scores range from 0 to 38.|Week 0, 13, and 26|Linear mixed models were used with all available data. Overall numbers analyzed may not reflect numbers at each timepoint||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818655|NCT01128361|Primary|Disability Assessment for Dementia|This is a validated measure of disability for individuals with dementia. Higher scores indicate less disability with a score of 100 indicating no disability and 0 indicating no functional ability.|Week 0, 13, and 26|Linear mixed models were used with all available data. Overall number of participants may not match numbers at each timepoint.||percentage on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818656|NCT01128361|Primary|Executive Function Composite|"A composite measure of several memory tests (Logical Memory (Immediate and Delayed), Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (sum of free recall). Each score was normalized to an independent dataset. Then the 4 standardized scores were averaged.
Numbers closer to positive indicate better executive function performance. . The scores are centered around a mean of 0 and standardized so each value represents a fraction of the standard deviation. There are no limits to the scores."|Week 0, 13, and 26|Linear mixed models were used with all available data included. Overall numbers analyzed do not necessarily match the outcome measure at each timepoint||standardized units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818657|NCT01128361|Primary|Memory Composite|"A composite measure of several memory tests (Logical Memory (Immediate and Delayed), Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (sum of free recall). Each score was normalized to an independent dataset of individuals without dementia. Then the 4 standardized scores were averaged.
Numbers closer to positive indicate better memory performance. The scores are centered around a mean of 0 and standardized so each value represents a fraction of the standard deviation. There are no limits to the scores."|week 0, 13, and 26|Linear mixed models with all available data were used. Thus the overall number of participants analyzed does not necessarily match the means reported at each timepoint.||units on a standardized scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818658|NCT01128400|Primary|Triolein Detection|We will measure triolein detection levels as a marker of subjects' ability to detect triglyceride.|Few weeks after screening|||log10 (%W/V TRIOLEIN)||Standard Error|Mean
818659|NCT01128400|Primary|Oleic Acid Detection Level|We will measure oleic acid detection levels as a marker of subjects' ability to detect free fatty acids.|Few weeks after screening|||log10 (%W/V OLEIC ACID)||Standard Error|Mean
818660|NCT01128413|Primary|Lactate Clearance|The median lactate clearance from time zero to within 6 hours of the ED stay.|The median lactate clearance within 6 hours of the ED stay.|Only 9 total patients (5 Fluid Optimization; 4 Routine Care) stayed in the Emergency Department for a full 6 hours to allow calculation of a 6 hour lactate clearance. The rest of the patients left were dispositioned out of the ED before the 6 hour mark and therefore unable to calculate a 6 hour lactate clearance.||percent lactate clearance||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818741|NCT01121900|Primary|Bioequivalence Based on AUC(0-∞)|"AUC(0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration curve vs time data pairs, with extrapolation to infinity (∞).
Measured in nanogram x hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL)."|68 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 23 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||h*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818835|NCT01122576|Secondary|Monocular Halo and Starburst|Halo and starburst (both monocular and binocular) were measured using a glarometer on integer scales of 1-5, where the smaller the number the better the outcome.|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full Analysis Set||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818661|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Primary Series Inpatient and Emergency Department Combined|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). For primary series (Dose 1, 2, 3 combined), all 30-day risk windows and all post-dose 30-day control windows were summed. Relative risk in in inpatient and emergency department health care setting for primary series was assessed by comparing the combined incidence rate of reported events in both the settings per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 1, 2, and 3 (risk window) with the combined self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days for each dose (self-control windows after risk window for each dose). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 1, 2, 3 combined (risk window for primary series), 30 days after risk window for Dose 1, 2, 3 combined (post-dose self-control window for primary series)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 3 doses of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818662|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Primary Series Emergency Department|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). For primary series (Dose 1, 2, 3 combined), all 30-day risk windows and all post-dose 30-day control windows were summed. Relative risk in emergency department health care setting for primary series was assessed by comparing the combined incidence rate of reported events in emergency department setting per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 1, 2, and 3 (risk window) with the combined self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days for each dose (self-control windows after risk window for each dose). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 1, 2, 3 combined (risk window for primary series), 30 days after risk window for Dose 1, 2, 3 combined (post-dose self-control window for primary series)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 3 doses of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818663|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Primary Series Inpatient|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). For primary series (Dose 1, 2, 3 combined), all 30-day risk windows and all post-dose 30-day control windows were summed. Relative risk in inpatient health care setting for primary series was assessed by comparing the combined incidence rate of reported events in inpatient setting per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 1, 2, and 3 (risk window) with the combined self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days for each dose (self-control windows after risk window for each dose). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 1, 2, 3 combined (risk window for primary series), 30 days after risk window for Dose 1, 2, 3 combined (post-dose self-control window for primary series)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 3 doses of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818664|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Dose 3 Inpatient and Emergency Department Combined|Relative risk for given event=incidence rate(risk window)/incidence rate(self-control window). Relative risk in inpatient and emergency department health care setting for Dose 3 was assessed by comparing the overall incidence rates of reported events in both settings per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 3 (30-day risk window) with the self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days (30-day self-control window). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 3 (risk window for Dose 3), 30 days after risk window (post-dose self-control window for Dose 3)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 3 doses of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818665|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Dose 3 Emergency Department|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). Relative risk in emergency department health care setting for Dose 3 was assessed by comparing the incidence rate of reported events in emergency department setting per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 3 (30-day risk window) with the self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days (30-day self-control window). Relative risk and its corresponding exact 2-sided 90% confidence CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 3 (risk window for Dose 3), 30 days after risk window (post-dose self-control window for Dose 3)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 3 doses of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818666|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Dose 3 Inpatient|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). Relative risk in inpatient health care setting for Dose 3 was assessed by comparing the incidence rate of reported events in inpatient setting per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 3 (30-day risk window) with the self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days (30-day self-control window). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 3 (risk window for Dose 3), 30 days after risk window (post-dose self-control window for Dose 3)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 3 doses of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818667|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Dose 2 Inpatient and Emergency Department Combined|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). Relative risk in inpatient and emergency department health care setting for Dose 2 was assessed by comparing the overall incidence rates of reported events in both settings per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 2 (30-day risk window) with the self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days (30-day self-control window). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 2 (risk window for Dose 2), 30 days after risk window (post-dose self-control window for Dose 2)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 2 doses of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818668|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Dose 2 Emergency Department|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). Relative risk in emergency department health care setting for Dose 2 was assessed by comparing the incidence rate of reported events in emergency department setting per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 2 (30-day risk window) with the self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days (30-day self-control window). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 2 (risk window for Dose 2), 30 days after risk window (post-dose self-control window for Dose 2)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 2 doses of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818669|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Dose 2 Inpatient|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). Relative risk in inpatient health care setting for Dose 2 was assessed by comparing the incidence rate of reported events in inpatient setting per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 2 (30-day risk window) with the self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days (30-day self-control window). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 2 (risk window for Dose 2), 30 days after risk window (post-dose self-control window for Dose 2)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 2 doses of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818670|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Dose 1 Inpatient and Emergency Department Combined|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). Relative risk in inpatient and emergency department health care setting for Dose 1 was assessed by comparing the overall incidence rates of reported events in both settings per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 1 (30-day risk window) with the self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days (30-day self-control window). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 1 (risk window for Dose 1), 30 days after risk window (post-dose self-control window for Dose 1)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 1 dose of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818671|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Dose 1 Emergency Department|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). Relative risk in emergency department health care setting for Dose 1 was assessed by comparing the incidence rate of reported events in emergency department setting per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 1 (30-day risk window) with the self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days (30-day self-control window). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 1 (risk window for Dose 1), 30 days after risk window (post-dose self-control window for Dose 1)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 1 dose of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818672|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Dose 1 Inpatient|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). Relative risk in inpatient health care setting for Dose 1 was assessed by comparing the incidence rate of reported events in inpatient setting per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 1 (30-day risk window) with the self-control period occurring during the subsequent 30 days (30-day self-control window). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% (CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days after Dose 1 (risk window for Dose 1), 30 days after risk window (post-dose self-control window for Dose 1)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 1 dose of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818742|NCT01121900|Primary|Bioequivalence Based on AUC(0-tlast)|"AUC(0-tlast) = Area under the plasma concentration curve (AUC) vs (versus) time data pairs, where tlast is the time of the last quantifiable concentration.
Measured in nanogram x hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL)."|68 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 23 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818743|NCT01121900|Primary|Bioequivalence Based Cmax|Cmax = Maximum plasma concentration. Measured in nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL).|68 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 23 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818673|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Pre-Dose 1 Inpatient and Emergency Department Combined|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). Relative risk in inpatient and emergency department health care setting for pre-dose 1 was assessed by comparing the overall incidence rates of reported events in both settings per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 1 (30-day risk window) with self-control period occurring during 30 days before Dose 1 (pre-vaccination 30-day self-control window). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days before Dose 1 (-34 to -5 days before Dose 1, pre-vaccination self-control window for Dose 1), 30 days after Dose 1 (risk window for Dose 1)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 1 dose of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818674|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Pre-Dose 1 Emergency Department|Relative risk for given event = incidence rate (risk window) / incidence rate (self-control window). Relative risk in emergency department health care setting for pre-dose 1 was assessed by comparing the incidence rate of reported events in emergency department setting per 1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 1 (30-day risk window) with self-control period occurring during 30 days before Dose 1 (pre-vaccination 30-day self-control window). Relative risk and exact 2-sided 90% CIs were reported. Medically attended events were documented retrospectively according to ICD-9 coding. Results were reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days before Dose 1 (-34 to -5 days before Dose 1, pre-vaccination self-control window for Dose 1), 30 days after Dose 1 (risk window for Dose 1)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 1 dose of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818675|NCT01128426|Primary|Relative Risk of Medically Attended Events Between 30-day Risk Window and 30-day Self-control Window: Pre-Dose 1 Inpatient|Relative risk for given event=incidence rate(risk window)/incidence rate(self-control window).Relative risk in inpatient health care setting for pre-dose 1 assessed by comparing incidence rate of reported events in inpatient setting/1000 person-months occurring within 30 days after Dose 1(30-day risk window) with self-control period occurring during 30 days before Dose 1(pre-vaccination 30-day self-control window).Relative risk,exact 2-sided 90 percent (%) confidence intervals (CIs) reported. Medically attended events documented retrospectively according to International Classification of Diseases, ninth Revision (ICD-9) coding.Medical attended event acute bronchiolitis due to Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) has been represented as acute bronchiolitis due to RSV and acute pyelonephritis without renal medullary necrosis(RMN) lesion has been represented as acute pyelonephritis without RMN lesion in measure categories below.Results reported for events reported in either of the windows.|30 days before Dose 1 (-34 to -5 days before Dose 1, pre-vaccination self-control window for Dose 1), 30 days after Dose 1 (risk window for Dose 1)|Analysis population included participants who started vaccination with 13vPnC within the first 6 months of life, were members of KPNC and received at least 1 dose of 13vPnC vaccine during the study observation period.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
818676|NCT01128543|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response was measured in participants who experienced either a complete response or a partial response. Per RECIST, Version 1.1, complete response is defined as the disappearance of all target lesions, and partial response is defined as a >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as a reference the baseline sum longest diameter.|From the start of treatment until a complete response or partial response was reached (up to Week 90; average of 21.3 weeks)|All participants randomized to receive at least one dose of study drug. Only those participants with a complete or partial response were evaluated.||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818677|NCT01128543|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Per RECIST, Version 1.1, Progressive Disease is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as a reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.|From the start of treatment until disease progression, death, or discontinuation from the study (average of 102.7 months)|All participants randomized to receive at least one dose of study drug. Of the 29 participants enrolled in the study, 25 were evaluable for analysis; 4 participants withdrew from the study.||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
818678|NCT01128543|Primary|Number of Participants (Par.) With Clinical Benefit (CB) at Week 12 and Week 24|Par. with CB are defined as those with complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) for >=12 or 24 weeks. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST), Version 1.1, CR is defined as the disappearance of all target lesions, PR is defined as a >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as a reference the baseline sum LD, and SD is defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease (PD), taking as a reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started.|Week 12 and Week 24|All participants randomized to receive at least one dose of study drug. Of the 29 participants enrolled in the study, 25 were evaluable for analysis; 4 participants withdrew from the study.||participants|||Number
818679|NCT01128569|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|The number of participants with treatment-emergent AEs was measured. A treatment-emergent adverse event is defined as any event not present prior to the initiation of the treatments, or any event already present that worsens in either intensity of frequency following exposure to the treatments.|From the start of study medication until Follow-up/Early Withdrawal (up to 197 days)|ITT Population||participants|||Number
818744|NCT01121913|Secondary|Apparent First Order Terminal Rate Constant [λz]|Apparent First order terminal rate constant [λz] of trazodone in plasma expressed in 1/hours.|72 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 19 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||1/hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
818745|NCT01121913|Secondary|Time to the Maximum Concentration (Tmax)||72 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 19 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||Hours||Full Range|Median
818746|NCT01121913|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Half-life (t½.z)|Apparent terminal half-life (t½.z) of trazodone in hours|72 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 19 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
818680|NCT01128569|Secondary|Minimum FEV1 Absolute Change From Baseline Between 0–2 Hour, Following the 22–23 Hour Post-treatment Allergen Challenge on Day 29 of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Participants were exposed to an allergen 22-23 hours after dosing on Day 28. Immediately prior to the exposure of allergen and starting at 2 minutes after inhalation of saline, 3 single measurements of FEV1were recorded at 1-minute intervals, and the best was taken as the post-saline value. The minimum FEV1 over 0-2 hours post-allergen challenge (PAC) (minimum early asthmatic response) was the minimum value of all of the PAC time points up to and including 2 hours PAC (i.e., minimum over 5 minutes (min), 10 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, and 45 min and 1 hour, 1.5 hours, and 2 hours). Change from Baseline was calculated using the post-saline FEV1 on Day 29 as Baseline. Minimum FEV1 absolute change from Baseline between 0–2 hour, following the 22–23 hour post-treatment allergen challenge was calculated as the minimum change value on Day 29 minus the Baseline value|Baseline and Day 29 of each treatment period (up to Study Day 197)|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed. Analysis was performed using mixed model ANCOVA with fixed effects of treatment, period, participant-level Baseline, period level Baseline, country, sex, and age.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818681|NCT01128569|Secondary|Maximum Percent Decrease From Baseline in FEV1 Between 0 2 Hour, Following the 22–23 Hour Post-treatment Allergen Challenge on Day 29 of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Participants were exposed to an allergen 22-23 hours after dosing on Day 28. Immediately prior to the exposure of allergen and starting at 2 minutes (min) after inhalation of saline, 3 single measurements of FEV1were recorded at 1-min intervals, and the best was taken as the post-saline value. The maximum change (i.e., drop in FEV1) from post-saline Baseline (BL) is defined by ordering all of the change from BL values for the 5 min, 10 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, and 45 min and the 1 hour, 1.5 hours, and 2 hours post-allergen challenge and selecting the largest change (i.e., drop in FEV1) from the BL value. If there were no negative change values, indicating a worse FEV1 value as compared to the BL value, the smallest change in FEV1, indicating an improvement from the BL value, was selected. The BL FEV1 value was the post-saline value on Day 29.|Baseline and Day 29 of each treatment period (up to Study Day 197)|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed. Analysis was performed using mixed model analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with fixed effects of treatment, period, participant-level BL, period level BL, country, sex, and age. Change from BL was calculated as the value on Day 29 minus the BL value.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818682|NCT01128569|Primary|Weighted Mean Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) Between 0–2 Hours, Following the 22–23 Hour Post-treatment Allergen Challenge on Day 29 of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Participants (par.) were exposed to an allergen (administered by inhalation) 22-23 hours after dosing on Day 28. FEV1 was measured 5 minutes (min), 10 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, and 45 min and 1 hour, 1.5 hours, and 2 hours post-allergen challenge on Day 29. Immediately prior to the exposure of allergen and starting at 2 minutes after inhalation of saline, 3 single measurements of FEV1 were recorded at 1-minute intervals, and the best was taken as the post-saline value. The FEV1 weighted mean was derived by calculating the area under the curve, and then dividing the value by the relevant time interval. Weighted mean change from Baseline is calculated as the weighted mean FEV1 value on Day 29 minus the Baseline value. The Baseline FEV1 value was the post-saline value on Day 29.|Baseline and Day 29 of each treatment period (up to Study Day 197)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: par. randomized to treatment who received >=1 dose of study drug. Only those par. available at the specified time points were analyzed. Analysis was performed using mixed model analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with fixed effects of treatment, period, par.-level Baseline, period level Baseline, country, sex, and age.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818683|NCT01128595|Primary|EAR: Absolute Change From Saline in Weighted Mean FEV1 Between 0-2 Hrs Following the 1-hr Post-treatment Allergen Challenge on Day 21 of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Participants were exposed to an allergen 1 hr after dosing on Day 21. The EAR FEV1 was measured 0 minutes (min), 5 min, 10 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, 45 min, 1 hr, 1.5 hrs, and 2 hrs post-allergen challenge on Day 21. Least squares means were obtained by adjusting for period and participant and period Baselines. Absolute change from saline in WM FEV1 was calculated as the area under the curve divided by the relevant time interval and subtracting the saline FEV1 value. After inhalation of saline, 3 single measurements of FEV1 were recorded; the maximum FEV1 value was taken as the saline value.|Day 21 of each treatment period (up to Study Day 197)|Efficacy Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818684|NCT01128595|Primary|Early Asthmatic Response (EAR): Absolute Change From Saline in Minimum FEV1 Between 0-2 Hrs Following the 1-hr Post-treatment Allergen Challenge on Day 21 of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Participants were exposed to an allergen 1 hr after dosing on Day 21. Minimum FEV1 over 0-2 hrs post-allergen challenge (Minimum EAR) is the minimum value of all of the post-allergen challenge timepoints up to and including 2 hours post-allergen challenge (i.e., minimum over 5 minutes (min), 10 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, 45 min and 1 hr, 1.5 hrs, and 2 hrs. Absolute change from saline in minimum FEV1 was calculated as the minimum FEV1 minus the saline FEV1 value. After inhalation of saline, 3 single measurements of FEV1 were recorded; the maximum FEV1 value was taken as the saline value. Least squares means were obtained by adjusting for period and participant and period Baselines.|Day 21 of each treatment period (up to Study Day 197)|Efficacy Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818747|NCT01121913|Primary|Bioequivalence Based on Cmax|Cmax = Maximum plasma concentration. Measured in nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL).|72 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 19 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818748|NCT01121913|Primary|Bioequivalence Based on AUC(0-∞)|"AUC(0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration curve vs time data pairs, with extrapolation to infinity (∞).
Measured in nanogram x hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL)."|72 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 19 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818685|NCT01128595|Primary|LAR: Absolute Change From Saline in Weighted Mean (WM) FEV1 Between 4-10 Hrs Following the 1-hr Post-treatment Allergen Challenge on Day 21 of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Participants were exposed to an allergen 1 hour after dosing on Day 21. LAR FEV1 was measured 4 hrs, 4.5 hrs, 5 hrs, 5.5 hrs, 6 hrs, 6.5 hrs, 7 hrs, 7.5 hrs, 8 hrs, 8.5 hrs, 9 hrs, 9.5 hrs, and 10 hrs post-allergen challenge on Day 21. Absolute change from saline in WM FEV1 was calculated as the area under the curve divided by the relevant time interval and subtracting the saline FEV1 value. After inhalation of saline, 3 single measurements of FEV1 were recorded; the maximum FEV1 value was taken as the saline value. Least squares means were obtained by adjusting for period and participant and period Baselines.|Day 21 of each treatment period (up to Study Day 197)|Efficacy Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818686|NCT01128595|Secondary|Provocative Concentration of Methacholine Estimated to Result in a 20% Reduction in FEV1 (PC20) on Day 22 of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Participants inhaled doubling increments of methacholine until a >=20% fall in FEV1 from the saline value was achieved. After inhalation of saline, 3 measurements of FEV1 were recorded; the maximum FEV1 value was taken as the saline value.|Day 22 of each treatment period (up to Study Day 198)|Efficacy Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||milligrams per milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
818687|NCT01128595|Secondary|Maximum Percent Change From Saline in FEV1 Between 0-2 Hrs, Following the 1-hr Post-treatment Allergen Challenge on Day 21 of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Participants were exposed to an allergen 1 hr after dosing on Day 21. FEV1 was measured 0 minutes (min), 5 min, 10 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, 45 min, 1 hr, 1.5 hrs, and 2 hrs post-allergen challenge on Day 21. Maximum percent change was calculated as the minimum FEV1 minus the saline FEV1 value divided by the saline FEV1 multiplied by 100. After inhalation of saline, 3 single measurements of FEV1 were recorded; the maximum FEV1 value was taken as the saline FEV1 value.|Day 21 of each treatment period (up to Study Day 197)|Efficacy Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||percent change||Full Range|Median
818688|NCT01128595|Primary|Late Asthmatic Response (LAR): Absolute Change From Saline in Minimum FEV1 Between 4-10 Hours (Hrs) Following the 1-hr Post-treatment Allergen Challenge on Day 21 of Each Treatment Period|Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Participants were exposed to an allergen (administered by inhalation) 1 hr after dosing on Day 21. Minimum FEV1 over 4-10 hours post-allergen challenge (minimum LAR) is the minimum value of all of the post-saline time points between 4 and 10 hrs post-allergen challenge, inclusive of the 4 hr and 10 hr timepoints (i.e., minimum over 4 hrs, 4.5 hrs, 5 hrs, 5.5 hrs, 6 hrs, 6.5 hrs, 7 hrs, 7.5 hrs, 8 hrs, 8.5 hrs, 9 hrs, 9.5 hrs, and 10 hrs). Absolute change from saline in minimum FEV1 was calculated as the minimum FEV1 minus the saline FEV1 value. After inhalation of saline, 3 single measurements of FEV1 were recorded; the maximum FEV1 value was taken as the saline value. Least squares means were obtained by adjusting for period and participant and period Baselines.|Day 21 of each treatment period (up to Study Day 197)|Efficacy Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study medication, had a post-dose FEV1 assessment, and who were not major protocol violators. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818689|NCT01128738|Secondary|Duration of Effect|Duration of effect is defined as the number of days between the date of first treatment and the date of the first recording of >50% production in gravimetric assessment compared to Baseline.|Up to Week 40|FAS1||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818690|NCT01128738|Secondary|Participant's Global Assessment of Treatment Satisfaction in the Second Treatment Phase|Participant's global assessment of treatment satisfaction is a method used to evaluate a participant's treatment satisfaction. Participants rated any improvement or worsening of their symptoms compared to Baseline by using the following 9-point scale: +4, Complete abolishment of signs and symptoms; +3, Marked improvement; +2, Moderate improvement; +1, Slight improvement; 0, Unchanged; -1, Slight worsening; -2, Moderate worsening; -3, Marked worsening; and -4, Very marked worsening.|Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to Week 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818691|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 10 (Problem Caused by Skin Treatment) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 10, participants were asked how much of a problem the treatment for their skin was, for example, by making their home messy, or by taking up time. The Score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 10 is in the Work and School domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818712|NCT01128738|Secondary|Percentage of Responders Assessed by Gravimetric Measurement at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 in the Second Treatment Phase|A pre-weighed filter paper was placed into the axilla area to collect sweat over a 5-minute period. The paper was removed and weighed to determine the amount of sweat produced. A responder was defined as a participant showing at least a 50% reduction from Baseline (Week 0 in the Second Treatment Phase) in mean weight of axillary sweating.|Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), and 16 (Study Week 32 to 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS for the Second Treatment Phase (FAS2) (LOCF dataset): all participants who were included in the FAS1, received the second treatment of IP, and had at least one efficacy assessment after the second treatment. One participant who started the Second Treatment Phase was not included in the FAS2 because they had no efficacy assessment in this phase.||percentage of participants|||Number
818692|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 9 (Caused Any Sexual Difficulties) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 9, participants were asked how much their skin caused any sexual difficulties over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 9 is in the Personal Relationships domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818693|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 8 (Problem With Partner/Friends) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 8, participants were asked how much their skin created problems with their partner or any of their close friends or relatives over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 8 is in the Personal Relationships domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818694|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 7 (Problem at Work or Studying) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 7, participants were asked if their skin prevented them from working or studying over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (yes). Item 7 is in the Work and School domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818695|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 6 (Difficult to Do Any Sport) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 6, participants were asked how much their skin made it difficult to do any sports over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 6 is in the Leisure domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818696|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 5 (Affected Social/Leisure Activities) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 5, participants were asked how much their skin affected any social or leisure activities over the last week. The Score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 5 is in the Leisure domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818697|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 4 (Influenced Clothes You Wear) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 4, participants were asked how much their skin interfered with the clothes they wore over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 4 is in the Daily Activities domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818713|NCT01128738|Secondary|Participant's Global Assessment of Treatment Satisfaction in the First Treatment Phase|The participant's global assessment of treatment satisfaction is a method used to evaluate a participant's treatment satisfaction. Participants rated any improvement or worsening of their symptoms compared to Baseline by using the following 9-point scale: +4, Complete abolishment of signs and symptoms; +3, Marked improvement; +2, Moderate improvement; +1, Slight improvement; 0, Unchanged; -1, Slight worsening; -2, Moderate worsening; -3, Marked worsening; and -4, Very marked worsening.|Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818698|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 3 (Interfere Shopping/Caring for Home) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 3, participants were asked how much their skin interfered with them going shopping or looking after their home or garden over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 3 is in the Daily Activities domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818699|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 2 (Embarrassed or Self-conscious) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 2, participants were asked how embarrassed or self conscious they were because of their skin over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 2 is in the Symptoms and Feelings domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818700|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 1 (Itchy, Sore, Painful, or Stinging) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 1, participants were asked how itchy, sore, painful or stinging their skin was over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 1 is in the Symptoms and Feelings domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818701|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Treatment Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Treatment domain consists of 1 question (Item 10). The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much); therefore, the total possible score for the Treatment domain is 0 to 3. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818702|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Personal Relationships Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Personal Relationships domain consists of 2 questions (Item 8 and Item 9). Scores range from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much) for each item; therefore, the possible total score for the Personal Relationships domain is 0 to 6. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818703|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Work and School Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Work and School domain consists of 1 question (Item 7). The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (yes); therefore, the possible total score for the Work and School domain is 0 to 3. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818704|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Leisure Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Leisure domain consists of 2 questions (Item 5 and Item 6). Scores range from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much) for each item; therefore, the possible total score for the Leisure domain is 0 to 6. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818705|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Daily Activities Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Daily Activities domain consists of 2 questions (Item 3 and Item 4). Scores range from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much) for each item; therefore, the possible total score for the Daily Activities domain is 0 to 6. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818706|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Symptoms and Feelings Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Symptoms and Feelings domain consists of 2 questions (Item 1 and Item 2). Scores range from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much) for each item; therefore, the possible total score for the Symptoms and Feelings domain is 0 to 6. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818707|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Total Score of the DLQI at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific, participant-answered questionnaire that allows for comparison of Quality of Life (QOL). DLQI total score (0-30) is a sum of the scores of 6 domains: Symptoms and Feelings, Daily Activities, Leisure, and Personal Relationships (score=0-6 for each); Work and School, and Treatment (score=0-3 for both; 0=not at all or not applicable, 3=very much or yes only in one item of Work and School). A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in the DLQI total score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818708|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the HDSS at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24 in the Second Treatment Phase|The HDSS is a 4-point scale (score range: 1-4) used to assess the impact of disease and the clinical relevance of treatment. Participants selected their underarm sweat condition from the following: 1=Never noticeable and never interferes with my daily activities, 2=Tolerable but sometimes interferes with my daily activities, 3=Barely tolerable and frequently interferes with my daily activities, and 4=Intolerable and always interferes with my daily activities. Change from Baseline in HDSS was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818709|NCT01128738|Secondary|Percentage of Responders Assessed by the HDSS in the Second Treatment Phase|The HDSS is a 4-point scale (score range: 1-4) used to assess the impact of disease and the clinical relevance of treatment. Participants selected their underarm sweat condition from the following: 1=Never noticeable and never interferes with my daily activities, 2=Tolerable but sometimes interferes with my daily activities, 3=Barely tolerable and frequently interferes with my daily activities, and 4=Intolerable and always interferes with my daily activities. A responder was defined as a participant whose change from Baseline (Week 0 in the Second Treatment Phase) was equal to or less than -2.|Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), 16 (Study Week 32 to 40), 20 (Study Week 36 to 40), and 24 (Study Week 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
818710|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Weight of Axillary Sweating at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 in the Second Treatment Phase|A pre-weighed filter paper was placed into the axilla area to collect sweat over a 5-minute period. The paper was removed and weighed to determine the amount of sweat produced. Percent change from Baseline in the Second Treatment phase was calculated as follows: (mean weight at each visit minus mean weight at Baseline in the Second Treatment Phase) * 100/mean weight at Baseline in the Second Treatment Phase.|Baseline (Week 0); and Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), and 16 (Study Week 32 to 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818711|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Weight of Axillary Sweating by Gravimetric Measurement at Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 in the Second Treatment Phase|A pre-weighed filter paper was placed into the axilla area to collect sweat over a 5-minute period. The paper was removed and weighed to determine the amount of sweat produced.|Baseline (Week 0); Weeks 4 (Study Week 20 to 28), 8 (Study Week 24 to 32), 12 (Study Week 28 to 36), and 16 (Study Week 32 to 40) in the Second Treatment Phase|FAS2 (LOCF dataset)||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
818736|NCT01128738|Primary|Percentage of Responders Assessed by Gravimetric Measurement at Week 4 in the First Treatment Phase|A pre-weighed filter paper was placed into the axilla area to collect sweat over a 5-minute period. The paper was removed and weighed to determine the amount of sweat produced. A responder was defined as a participant showing at least a 50% reduction from Baseline in mean weight of axillary sweating.|Week 4|Full Analysis Set for the First Treatment Phase (FAS1): all participants who received the first treatment of investigational product (IP) and had at least 1 post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The analysis was performed using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) dataset; missing data were imputed by carrying forward the last available data.||percentage of participants|||Number
818714|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 10 (Problem Caused by Skin Treatment) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 10, participants were asked how much of a problem the treatment for their skin was, for example, by making their home messy, or by taking up time. The Score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 10 is in the Work and School domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818715|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 9 (Caused Any Sexual Difficulties) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36 and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 9, participants were asked how much their skin caused any sexual difficulties over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 9 is in the Personal Relationships domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818716|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 8 (Problem With Partner/Friends) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 8, participants were asked how much their skin created problems with their partner or any of their close friends or relatives over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 8 is in the Personal Relationships domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818717|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 7 (Problem at Work or Studying) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 7, participants were asked if their skin prevented them from working or studying over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (yes). Item 7 is in the Work and School domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1 The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818718|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 6 (Difficult to Do Any Sport) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 6, participants were asked how much their skin made it difficult to do any sports over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 6 is in the Leisure domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818719|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 5 (Affected Social/Leisure Activities) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 5, participants were asked how much their skin affected any social or leisure activities over the last week. The Score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 5 is in the Leisure domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818720|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 4 (Influenced Clothes You Wear) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 4, participants were asked how much their skin interfered with the clothes they wore over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 4 is in the Daily Activities domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818737|NCT01121900|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Half-life (t½.z)|The elimination half-life (T½z) of trazodone in plasma (time it takes for the concentration of trazodone to fall to half), expressed in hours.|68 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 23 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
818721|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 3 (Interfere Shopping/Caring for Home) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 3, participants were asked how much their skin interfered with them going shopping or looking after their home or garden over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 3 is in the Daily Activities domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818722|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 2 (Embarrassed or Self-Conscious) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 2, participants were asked how embarrassed or self conscious they were because of their skin over the last week. The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 2 is in the Symptoms and Feelings domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818723|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Item 1 (Itchy, Sore, Painful, or Stinging) Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. In Item 1, participants were asked how itchy, sore, painful or stinging their skin was over the last week. The scores for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much). Item 1 is in the Symptoms and Feelings domain. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each item score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818724|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Treatment Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Treatment domain consists of 1 question (Item 10). The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much); therefore, the total possible score for the Treatment domain is 0 to 3. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818725|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Personal Relationships Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Personal Relationships domain consists of 2 questions (Item 8 and Item 9). Scores range from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much) for each item; therefore, the possible total score for the Personal Relationships domain is 0 to 6. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818726|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Work and School Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Work and School domain consists of 1 question (Item 7). The score for this item ranges from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (yes); therefore, the possible total score for the Work and School domain is 0 to 3. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818727|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Leisure Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Leisure domain consists of 2 questions (Item 5 and Item 6). Scores range from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much) for each item; therefore, the possible total score for the Leisure domain is 0 to 6. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818738|NCT01121900|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Elimination Rate Constant (λz)|The elimination rate constant of trazodone (Lamda z). It is the ratio of clearance to volume of distribution and is expressed in units of 1/hour. This constant is used in half-life calculations.|68 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 23 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||1/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
818728|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Daily Activities Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Daily Activities domain consists of 2 questions (Item 3 and Item 4). Scores range from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much) for each item; therefore, the possible total score for the Daily Activities domain is 0 to 6. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818729|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Symptoms and Feelings Domain Score of the DLQI at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific questionnaire that can be quickly answered by the participants and allows for comparison of QOL. The Symptoms and Feelings domain consists of 2 questions (Item 1 and Item 2). Scores range from 0 (not at all or not applicable) to 3 (very much) for each item; therefore, the possible total score for the Symptoms and Feelings domain is 0 to 6. A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in each domain score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818730|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Total Score of the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific, participant-answered questionnaire that allows for comparison of Quality of Life (QOL). DLQI total score (0-30) is a sum of the scores of 6 domains: Symptoms and Feelings, Daily Activities, Leisure, and Personal Relationships (score=0-6 for each); Work and School, and Treatment (score=0-3 for both; 0=not at all or not applicable, 3=very much or yes only in one item of Work and School). A lower score indicates better condition. Change from Baseline in the DLQI total score was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818731|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in HDSS at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 in the First Treatment Phase|The HDSS is a 4-point scale (score range: 1-4) used to assess the impact of disease and the clinical relevance of treatment. Participants selected their underarm sweat condition from the following: 1=Never noticeable and never interferes with my daily activities, 2=Tolerable but sometimes interferes with my daily activities, 3=Barely tolerable and frequently interferes with my daily activities, and 4=Intolerable and always interferes with my daily activities. Change from Baseline in HDSS was calculated as follows: score at each visit minus score at Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn, had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point, or were entered into the Second Treatment Phase.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818732|NCT01128738|Secondary|Percentage of Responders Assessed by the Hyperhidrosis Severity Scale (HDSS) in the First Treatment Phase|The HDSS is a 4-point scale (score range: 1-4) used to assess the impact of disease and the clinical relevance of treatment. Participants selected their underarm sweat condition from the following: 1=Never noticeable and never interferes with my daily activities, 2=Tolerable but sometimes interferes with my daily activities, 3=Barely tolerable and frequently interferes with my daily activities, and 4=Intolerable and always interferes with my daily activities. A responder was defined as a participant whose change from Baseline was equal to or less than -2.|Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|FAS1. The number of participants remaining in the study at the time of the visit, particularly regardless of reinjection after Week 16, was used as the denominator. The number of participants analyzed varies by week because some participants were prematurely withdrawn or had no efficacy assessment at a particular time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
818733|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Weight of Axillary Sweating at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the First Treatment Phase|A pre-weighed filter paper was placed into the axilla area to collect sweat over a 5-minute period. The paper was removed and weighed to determine the amount of sweat produced. Percent change from Baseline was calculated as follows: (mean weight at each visit minus mean weight at Baseline) * 100/mean weight at Baseline.|Week 0 (Baseline); and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|FAS1 (LOCF dataset). In the first treatment phase, the imputation of missing data by LOCF was performed up to Week 24; the missing data after Week 24 in the first treatment phase were not imputed.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
818734|NCT01128738|Secondary|Mean Weight of Axillary Sweating by Gravimetric Measurement at Baseline and Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the First Treatment Phase|A pre-weighed filter paper was placed into the axilla area to collect sweat over a 5-minute period. The paper was removed and weighed to determine the amount of sweat produced.|Week 0 (Baseline); Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|FAS1 (LOCF dataset). In the first treatment phase, the imputation of missing data by LOCF was performed up to Week 24; the missing data after Week 24 in the first treatment phase were not imputed.||milligrams (mg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818735|NCT01128738|Secondary|Percentage of Responders Assessed by Gravimetric Measurement at Weeks 1, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 in the First Treatment Phase|A pre-weighed filter paper was placed into the axilla area to collect sweat over a 5-minute period. The paper was removed and weighed to determine the amount of sweat produced. A responder was defined as a participant showing at least a 50% reduction from Baseline in mean weight of axillary sweating.|Weeks 1, 8 ,12, 16, 20, and 24|FAS1 (LOCF dataset). In the first treatment phase, the imputation of missing data by LOCF was performed up to Week 24; the missing data after Week 24 in the first treatment phase were not imputed.||percentage of participants|||Number
818739|NCT01121900|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||68 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 23 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||Hours||Full Range|Median
818749|NCT01121913|Primary|Bioequivalence Based on AUC(0-t)|"AUC(0-t) = Area under the plasma concentration curve vs (versus) time data pairs, where t is the time of the last quantifiable concentration.
Measured in nanogram x hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL)."|72 hours|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 19 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818750|NCT01121926|Secondary|Percentage Peak-Trough Fluctuation (%PTF)|"Percentage Peak-Trough Fluctuation (%PTF) of trazodone calculated as [100*(Cmax-Cmin)/Cav].
Cmax: Maximum plasma concentration Cmin: Minimum plasma concentration Cav: Average plasma concentration"|9 days|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 27 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||Percentage Peak-Trough Fluctuation||Standard Deviation|Mean
818751|NCT01121926|Secondary|Percentage Swing|"Percentage swing is a pharmacokinetic parameter calculated as follows:
((Cmax,ss - Cmin,ss)/Cmin,ss)*100.
Where:
Cmax,ss = Maximum concentration at steady state; Cmin,ss = Minimum concentration at steady state.
It was calculated over 24 hours on day 9."|9 days|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 27 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||Percentage swing||Standard Deviation|Mean
818752|NCT01121926|Secondary|Time to Peak Exposure (Tmax)|Time to peak exposure (Tmax) at steady state.|9 days|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 27 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||hours||Full Range|Median
818753|NCT01121926|Secondary|Plasma Concentration at 24 Hours Post-evening Dose (C24h)|Plasma concentration at 24 hours post-evening dose (C24h) in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)|9 days|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 27 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818754|NCT01121926|Secondary|Minimum Plasma Concentration (Cmin,ss)|Minimum plasma concentration at steady state (Cmin,ss). Measured in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)|9 days|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 27 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818755|NCT01121926|Primary|Bioequivalence Based on AUCss|"AUCss = Area under the plasma concentration curve (AUC) vs. time data pairs at steady state (ss): AUCss.
Measured in nanograms x hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL)."|9 days|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 27 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818756|NCT01121926|Primary|Bioequivalence Based on Cmax,ss|Cmax,ss = Maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) at steady state (ss): (Cmax,ss). Measured in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL).|9 days|The dataset for pharmacokinetic analysis comprised the 27 subjects who completed the study as per protocol.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818757|NCT01121939|Secondary|Disease Control Rate|The Percentage of Patients Who Experience an Objective Benefit From Treatment or Experience Stable Disease. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI or CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD), Neither Sufficient Shrinkage to Qualify For PR, Nor Sufficient Increase to Qualify for Progressive Disease; Disease Control Rate = CR + PR + SD.|18 months|Includes all patients||percentage of participants|||Number
818758|NCT01121939|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|The Length of Time, in Months, That Patients Were Alive From Their First Date of Protocol Treatment Until Death|18 months|Includes all patients (patients in both the typical carcinoid and pancreatic islet cell groups received the same treatment)||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818759|NCT01121939|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|The Length of Time, in Months, That Patients Were Alive From Their First Date of Protocol Treatment Until Worsening of Their Disease. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|18 months|Includes all patients (patients in both the typical carcinoid and pancreatic islet cell groups received the same treatment)||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818760|NCT01121939|Secondary|Define Toxicity and Safety|To define the toxicity and safety of the combination of bevacizumab, pertuzumab and Sandostatin LAR® when used in patients with advanced low grade neuroendocrine cancer - defined by grade 3/4, treatment-related toxicity|18 months|All patients on study||participants|||Number
818761|NCT01121939|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|The Percentage of Patients Who Experience an Objective Benefit From Treatment. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI or CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|18 months|Includes all patients||percentage of participants|||Number
818762|NCT01121991|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Study Drug Discontinuation.|AEs: Any new untoward medical occurrences/worsening of pre-existing medical condition, whether or not related to study drug. TEAEs: AEs that occur during treatment with the study drug. It also included incidences of mild, moderate and severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). SAE: any AE that resulted in death; was life threatening; resulted in persistent/significant disability/incapacity; resulted in/prolonged an existing in-patient hospitalization; was a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or was an overdose. Participants who discontinued from the study due to AE were also recorded.|From stimulation Day 1 (S1) to post-hCG days 35-42 (safety visit).|ITT population: all participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.||Number of participants|||Number
818763|NCT01121991|Secondary|Pregnancy Loss Per Clinical Pregnancy|Preclinical miscarriage: Spontaneous cessation of a biochemical pregnancy. Early spontaneous abortion: Any spontaneous abortion occurring after confirmation of clinical pregnancy and before completion of 12 weeks of gestation. Late spontaneous abortion: any spontaneous abortion occurring between completion of 12 weeks of gestation and prior to a viable stage. Pregnancy loss per clinical pregnancy was measured as a percentage.|Post-hCG days 35-42.|Participants with confirmed clinical pregnancies.||Percentage of pregnancy loss|||Number
818764|NCT01121991|Secondary|Number of Live Births|A live birth occurs when a fetus, whatever its gestational age, exits the maternal body and subsequently shows any sign of life, such as voluntary movement, heartbeat, or pulsation of the umbilical cord, for however brief a time and regardless of whether the umbilical cord or placenta are intact.|Post-hCG days 15-20 to pregnancy follow up.|ITT population: all participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.||Live births|||Number
818765|NCT01121991|Secondary|Number of Participants With Multiple Pregnancies|Multiple pregnancy is a pregnancy where more than one fetus develops simultaneously in the womb. There are two types of twinning—identical and fraternal. Identical twins represent the splitting of a single fertilized zygote (union of two gametes or male/female sex cells that produce a developing fetus) into two separate individuals.|Post-hCG Day 35-42.|ITT population: all participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.||participants|||Number
818766|NCT01121991|Secondary|Number of Participants With Confirmed Pregnancies: Biochemical Pregnancies and Clinical Pregnancies|Biochemical pregnancy: A positive pregnancy test defined as hCG level >10 IU/L in a sample taken at least 14 days after Day 3 embryo transfer or 12 days after Day 5/6 embryo transfer with no further ultrasound confirmation of the existence of a gestational sac in the uterus. Clinical pregnancy: Existence of at least one ultrasonography confirmed gestational sac in the uterus, with or without heartbeat.|Post-hCG days 15-20 and post-hCG days 35-42.|ITT population: all participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.||participants|||Number
818767|NCT01121991|Secondary|Mean Number of Oocytes Retrieved Per Number of Follicles Aspirated on the Day of Ovum Pick up|Mean number of oocytes retrieved per number of follicles aspirated on the day of ovum pick up was calculated. Oocyte retrieval is a technique used in in vitro fertilization in order to remove oocytes from the ovary of the female, enabling fertilization outside the body.|On day of ovum pick up (Day 1 or 2 after hCG administration)|ITT population: all participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and underwent vaginal ovum pick up.||oocytes per aspirated follicle||Standard Deviation|Mean
818768|NCT01121991|Primary|Mean Number of Mature Oocytes Per Participant Who Underwent Ovum Pick up for In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)|Mean number of oocytes undergoing ovum pick up for IVF were calculated for each participant. IVF is a process by which egg cells are fertilized by sperm outside the body, in-vitro.|On the day of ovum pick up (Day 1 or 2 after hCG administration).|Analysis population includes those participants undergoing IVF whose oocytes were assessed for maturity. Mature oocytes can be considered as Metaphase II oocytes.||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
818769|NCT01121991|Primary|Mean Number of Metaphase II Oocytes Per Participant Who Underwent Ovum Pick up for Intra-cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI)|Mean number of metaphase II oocytes was calculated for each participant undergoing ovum pick up for ICSI. ICSI is an in-vitro fertilization procedure in which a single sperm is injected directly into an egg under a microscope. Metaphase II stage of the oocyte was classified as the time at which the first polar body was observed microscopically. Metaphase II oocytes are a sub-group of the total number of oocytes.|On the day of ovum pick up (Day 1 or 2 after human chorionic gonadotropin [hCG] administration).|Analysis population includes those participants undergoing ICSI whose oocytes were assessed for maturity (Metaphase II) using a microscope.||Metaphase II Oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
818770|NCT01122030|Secondary|Apparent Elimination Half-life of Naldemedine and Metabolite Nor-S-297995|The plasma concentration of naldemedine and its metabolite Nor-S-297995 were measured by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) method. The apparent elimination half-life was calculated using the formula t1/2,z = (ln2)/λZ|Blood samples were collected predose and at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours post-dose.|PK population||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
818771|NCT01122030|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity for Naldemedine and Metabolite Nor-S-297995|The plasma concentration of naldemedine and its metabolite Nor-S-297995 were measured by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) method. Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero to infinity, calculated using the formula: AUC0-inf = AUC0-t + Ct/λZ where Ct was the last measurable concentration and λZ was the apparent terminal elimination rate constant.|Blood samples were collected predose and at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours post-dose.|PK population||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
818772|NCT01122030|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration of Naldemedine and Metabolite Nor-S-297995|The plasma concentration of naldemedine and its metabolite Nor-S-297995 were measured by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) method. Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero to the last sampling time at which concentrations were at or above the limit of quantitation, calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the logarithmic rule for decreasing concentrations (Linear Up/ Log Down).|Blood samples were collected predose and at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours post-dose.|PK population||ng*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
818773|NCT01122030|Secondary|Time to Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration of Naldemedine and Metabolite Nor-S-297995|The plasma concentration of naldemedine and its metabolite Nor-S-297995 were measured by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) method.|Blood samples were collected predose and at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours post-dose.|PK population||hours||Full Range|Median
818774|NCT01122030|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Naldemedine and Metabolite Nor-S-297995|The plasma concentration of naldemedine and its metabolite Nor-S-297995 were measured by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) method.|Blood samples were collected predose and at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours post-dose.|The pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis population included all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least one post-dose PK assessment completed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
818775|NCT01122030|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Webster Opiate Withdrawal Scale (WOWS) Score > 8 at Any Time During the Study|The Webster Opiate Withdrawal Scale (WOWS) assessment consisted of 7 questions which rate the severity of opiate withdrawal symptoms, including sweating, sleep, bone or joint aches, runny nose or tearing, gastrointestinal upset, anxiety or irritability and gooseflesh skin. Each symptom was rated on a scale from 0 (not present/no issues) to 4 or 5 (severe). The total score was calculated by summing the 7 individual scores and ranged from 0 (no withdrawal symptoms) to 29 (worst symptoms).|The WOWS assessment was performed at Screening, Day 14, Day 15 at pre-dose , and 24 and 48 hours post-dose and at the Follow-up/End of Study visit (Day 24).|Safety population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818830|NCT01122576|Secondary|Uncorrected Distance Visual Acuity|High Contrast Uncorrected Distance (UCDVA) measured at 32 inches, Intermediate (UCIVA) at 32 inches, and Near Visual Acuity (UCNVA) at 16 inches|Visit 3 (2-3 months) Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full Analysis Set||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818776|NCT01122030|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) Score > 8 at Any Time During the Study|The COWS assessment consisted of 11 questions which rated the severity of opiate withdrawal symptoms, including resting pulse rate, gastrointestinal upset, sweating, restlessness, pupil size, tremor, anxiety or irritability, bone or joint aches, gooseflesh skin, yawning, and runny nose or tearing. Each symptom was rated on a scale from 0 (not present) to 4 or 5 (most severe). The total score was calculated by summing the 11 individual scores and ranged from 0 (no withdrawal symptoms) to 48 (worst symptoms).|The COWS assessments were performed at Screening, on Day 14, Day 15 (pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 hours post-dose, and at unscheduled times as signs or symptoms indicate), on Days 16 and 17, and on Day 24/End of Study.|Safety population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
818777|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Number of Rescue Medications Used Per Day|Baseline was defined as the average number of rescue medications used per day prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15). The number of rescue medications used per day at 24 hours and 48 hours post-dose was calculated as the average number of rescue medications used per day from 0 to 24 hours and 0 to 48 hours post-dose, respectively.|Baseline, 24 hours post-dose and 48 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF imputation was used||rescue medications / day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818778|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Number of Bowel Movements With No Straining Per Day|"Straining during BMs was graded using the following scale:
0 = Absent; 1 = Mild; 2 = Moderate; 3 = Severe; 4 = Very Severe. A BM without straining was defined as a BM with a straining score = 0.
Baseline was defined as the average number of BMs without straining per day prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15). The number of BMs without straining per day at 24 hours and 48 hours post-dose was calculated as the average number of BMs with no straining per day from 0 to 24 hours and 0 to 48 hours post-dose, respectively."|Baseline, 24 hours post-dose and 48 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF imputation was used||bowel movements with no straining / day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818779|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Number of False Start Bowel Movements Per Day|"A false start was defined as any attempted, but unsuccessful bowel movement (no solid or liquid fecal material was excreted) based on the question “In the past 24 hours, how many times did you try to have a bowel movement but were unsuccessful? Baseline was defined as the average number of false start BMs per day prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15).
The number of false start BMs per day at 24 hours and 48 hours post-dose was calculated as is the average number of false start BMs per day from 0 to 24 and 0 to 48 hours post-dose, respectively."|Baseline, 24 hours post-dose and 48 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF imputation was used||false start bowel movements / day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818780|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline in BM Consistency|"Consistency of BMs was measured using the Bristol Stool Scale, as follows:
1 = separate hard lumps like nuts; 2 = sausage shaped but lumpy; 3 = like a sausage, but with cracks on its surface; 4 = like a sausage or a snake, smooth and soft; 5 = soft blobs and with clear-cut edges; 6 = floppy pieces with ragged edges/mushy stool; 7 = watery, no solid pieces, entirely liquid.
Baseline was defined as the average consistency of BMs prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15). BM consistency at 24 hours and 48 hours post-dose was calculated as the average scores from all bowel movements from 0 to 24 and 0 to 48 hours post-dose, respectively."|Baseline, 24 hours post-dose and 48 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population with available data at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818781|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Abdominal Discomfort|"Participants were asked to rate their abdominal discomfort for the past 24 hours using the following scale:
0 = Absent; 1 = Mild; 2 = Moderate; 3 = Severe; 4 = Very Severe. Baseline was defined as the average abdominal discomfort score prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15). Abdominal discomfort at 24 hours and 48 hours post-dose was calculated as the mean score from 0 to 24 and 0 to 48 hours post-dose respectively."|Baseline, 24 hours post-dose and 48 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population with available data at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818782|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Abdominal Bloating|"Participants were asked to rate their abdominal bloating for the past 24 hours using the following scale:
0 = Absent; 1 = Mild; 2 = Moderate; 3 = Severe; 4 = Very Severe. Baseline was defined as the average abdominal bloating score prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15). Abdominal bloating at 24 hours and 48 hours post-dose was calculated as the mean score from 0 to 24 and 0 to 48 hours post-dose respectively."|Baseline, 24 hours post-dose and 48 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population with available data at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818783|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 48 Hours Post-dose in Number of Complete Bowel Movements Per Day|A complete bowel movement (CBM) was defined as a bowel movement that resulted in a sensation of complete evacuation based on the question “Did you have a feeling of complete emptying after the bowel movement?” Baseline was defined as the average number of CBMs per day prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to 15). Forty-eight hours post-dose was calculated as the average number of CBMs per day from 0 to 48 hours post-dose.|Baseline and 48 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF imputation was used||complete bowel movements / day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818784|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Hours Post-dose in Number of Complete Bowel Movements Per Day|A complete bowel movement (CBM) was defined as a bowel movement that resulted in a sensation of complete evacuation based on the question “Did you have a feeling of complete emptying after the bowel movement?” Baseline was defined as the average number of CBMs per day prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15).|Baseline and 24 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF imputation was used||complete bowel movements / day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818785|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Straining During Bowel Movements|"Straining during BMs was graded using the following scale: 0 = Absent; 1 = Mild; 2 = Moderate; 3 = Severe; 4 = Very Severe.
Baseline was defined as the average straining score of all BMs prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15). The straining score at 24 and 48 hours post-dose was calculated as the average straining score from all bowel movements from 0 to 24 and 0 to 48 hours post-dose, respectively."|Baseline, 24 hours post-dose and 48 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population with available data at each time point||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818831|NCT01122576|Secondary|Manifest Refraction|Manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) was calculated as the value of the sphere plus one-half of the value of the cylinder.|Visit 4 (4-6 Months)|Full Analysis Set||Diopters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818786|NCT01122030|Secondary|Time to First Complete Spontaneous Bowel Movement|The time to first CSBM during the Study Drug Administration Period was summarized using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Each participant’s first CSBM was counted as an event and the time to first CSBM after dosing was calculated from the date and time of first dosing until the date and time of first CSBM. Participants who dropped out or were lost to follow-up before the first CSBM were censored.|From first dose on Day 15 through Day 17|Intent-to-treat population||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818787|NCT01122030|Secondary|Time to First Bowel Movement|The time to first BM during the Study Drug Administration Period was summarized using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Each participant’s first BM was counted as an event and the time to first BM after dosing was calculated from the date and time of first dosing until the date and time of first BM. Participants who dropped out or were lost to follow-up before the first BM were censored.|From first dose on Day 15 through Day 17|Intent-to-treat population||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818788|NCT01122030|Secondary|Time to First Spontaneous Bowel Movement|The time to first SBM during the Study Drug Administration Period was summarized using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Each participant’s first SBM was counted as an event and the time to first SBM after dosing was calculated from the date and time of first dosing until the date and time of first SBM. Participants who dropped out or were lost to follow-up before the first SBM were censored.|From first dose on Day 15 through Day 17|Intent-to-treat population||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818789|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 48 Hours Post-dose in Number of Complete Spontaneous Bowel Movements (CSBMs) Per Day|"Participants completed a bowel function assessment daily diary to record information about bowel movements and constipation. A complete spontaneous bowel movement was defined as a bowel movement where no laxative or enema was used and the bowel movement resulted in a sensation of complete evacuation (based on the question of “having a feeling of complete emptying after the bowel movement”).
Baseline was defined as the average number of CSBMs per day during the 2 weeks prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15). Forty-eight hours post-dose was defined as the average number of CSBMs per day from 0 to 48 hours post-dose."|Baseline and 48 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF imputation was used||complete spontaneous bowel movements/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818790|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Hours Post-dose in Number of Complete Spontaneous Bowel Movements (CSBMs) Per Day|"Participants completed a bowel function assessment daily diary to record information about bowel movements and constipation. A complete spontaneous bowel movement was defined as a bowel movement where no laxative or enema was used and the bowel movement resulted in a sensation of complete evacuation (based on the question of “having a feeling of complete emptying after the bowel movement”).
Baseline was defined as the average number of CSBMs per day during the 2 weeks prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15)."|Baseline and 24 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF imputation was used||complete spontaneous bowel movements/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818791|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 48 Hours Post-dose in Number of Bowel Movements Per Day|Participants completed a bowel function assessment daily diary to record information about bowel movements and constipation. Baseline was defined as the average number of BMs per day during the 2 weeks prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15). Forty-eight hours post-dose was defined as the average number of BMs per day from 0 to 48 hours post-dose.|Baseline and 48 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF imputation was used||bowel movements / day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818792|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Hours Post-dose in Number of Bowel Movements (BM) Per Day|Participants completed a bowel function assessment daily diary to record information about bowel movements and constipation. Baseline was defined as the average number of BMs per day during the 2 weeks prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15).|Baseline and 24 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat; LOCF imputation was used||bowel movements / day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818793|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 48 Hours Post-dose in the Number of SBMs Per Day|Participants completed a bowel function assessment daily diary to record information about bowel movements and constipation. A spontaneous bowel movement was defined as a bowel movement where no laxative or enema was used in the 24 hours preceding the bowel movement. Baseline was defined as the average number of SBMs per day during the 2 weeks prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15). Forty-eight hours post-dose was defined as the average number of SBMs per day from 0 to 48 hours post-dose.|Baseline (Day 1 to Day 15) and Day 15 to Day 17 (0 to 48 hours post-dose)|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF imputation was used||Spontaneous bowel movements / day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818794|NCT01122030|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Hours Post-dose in Number of Spontaneous Bowel Movements (SBMs) Per Day|"Participants completed a bowel function assessment daily diary to record information about bowel movements and constipation. A spontaneous bowel movement was defined as a bowel movement where no laxative or enema was used in the 24 hours preceding the bowel movement.
Baseline was defined as the average number of SBMs per day during the 2 weeks prior to receiving study drug (Day 1 to Day 15)."|Baseline (Day 1 to Day 15) and Day 15 to 16 (0 to 24 hours post-dose)|All randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment completed (intent-to-treat population). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||spontaneous bowel movements / day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818795|NCT01122030|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"Severity of adverse events (AEs) was graded according to the following definitions:
Mild: The subject experiences awareness of symptoms but these are easily tolerated or managed without specific treatment
Moderate: The subject experiences discomfort enough to cause interference with usual activity, and/or the condition requires specific treatment
Severe: The subject is incapacitated with inability to work or do usual activity, and/or the event requires significant treatment measures.
The relationship of the event to the study drug was determined by the investigator.
A serious adverse event (SAE) is defined as any AE occurring at any dose that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening AE, hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, a persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect."|From the first dose of study drug on Day 15 up to Day 24.|All participants who received any amount of study drug (safety population).||participants|||Number
818796|NCT01122108|Other Pre-specified|Weighted vs. Unweighted Composite BASA Scale Scores|Aggregate scores were calculated for both the unweighted and weighted BASA scale scores for both Colesevlam HCL (3.75G) and Cholestyramine (12g). The best possible total BASA score is 20 and the worst possible total BASA score is 4. For the weighted version of the scale, the best possible total score is 60 and the worst possible total score is 4.|1 Day|||Units on a BASA Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818797|NCT01122108|Primary|Patient Acceptability of Colesevelam HCl Powder for Oral Suspension vs. Generic Cholestyramine Via the Bile Acid Sequestrant Acceptability (BASA) Scale, Based Upon an Anticipated Equivalent Cholesterol Lowering Doses of Each Comparator Drug.|The bile acid sequestrant acceptability (BASA) scale has 4 scoring categories: taste, texture, appearance, and mixability. Participants rank each category separately. The best possible score for each category is 5, and the worst possible score for each category is 1.|1 Day|||Units on BASA Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818798|NCT01122160|Primary|Gastric pH||1 hour prior to gastric emptying on Day 7 of the given intervention|||pH||Standard Deviation|Mean
818799|NCT01122238|Primary|Percent Change in Cigarettes Smoked Per Day (CPD)|"Percent Change in Cigarettes Smoked Per Day (CPD) is computed as the percent change in self-reported cigarettes smoked per day at the assessment endpoint relative to baseline CPD; this outcome will be analyzed in a linear regression analysis model.
Note: This Percent change in Cigarettes Smoked Per Day (CPD) primary outcome replaces average number of cigarettes per day in the past week (now designated as a secondary outcome) because the percent change metric allows better comparison with prior research in this area and the results for both outcomes are highly similar."|Assessed at week 26 relative to baseline CPD.|Adult smokers not yet motivated to quit smoking. The project design measured change in the smoking patterns of these individuals.||Percent Change in cigarettes per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818800|NCT01122238|Secondary|Average Number of Cigarettes Per Day in the Past Week.||Assessed at baseline and week 26.|Adult smokers not yet motivated to quit smoking. The project design measured change in the smoking patterns of these individuals.||Change in cigarettes per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
818801|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4, 8, 16, and 24 Weeks of the Overall Relationship Domain of the Self-Esteem and Relationship (SEAR) Questionnaire|SEAR assesses psychosocial outcomes in men with erectile dysfunction. The Overall Relationship domain consists of 2 items (items 13-14), each rated on a scale of 1 (Never) to 5 (Always). The domain score was computed by summing its respective items, then transforming it into a 0 (least favorable) to 100 (most favorable) scale. The transformed score = 100 x [(actual raw score - lowest possible raw score)/possible raw score range]. Least Squares Mean changes were adjusted for baseline score, treatment group, country, visit, and visit*treatment.|Baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline SEAR Overall Relationship observation.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818802|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4, 8, 16, and 24 Weeks of the Self Esteem Domain of the Self-Esteem and Relationship (SEAR) Questionnaire|SEAR assesses psychosocial outcomes in men with erectile dysfunction. The Self-Esteem domain consists of 4 items (items 9-12), each rated on a scale of 1 (Never) to 5 (Always). Item 11 is reverse scored (1=Always and 5=Never). The domain score was computed by summing its respective items, then transforming it into a 0 (least favorable) to 100 (most favorable) scale. The transformed score = 100 x [(actual raw score - lowest possible raw score)/possible raw score range]. Least Squares Mean changes were adjusted for baseline score, treatment group, country, visit, and visit*treatment.|Baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline SEAR Self-Esteem observation.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818803|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4, 8, 16, and 24 Weeks of the Confidence Domain of the Self-Esteem and Relationship (SEAR) Questionnaire|SEAR assesses psychosocial outcomes in men with erectile dysfunction. Confidence domain measures improvement in confidence; 2 subscales (6 items: Self-Esteem [items 9-12]; Overall Relationship [items 13-14]). Each item range: 1 (Never) to 5 (Always); item 11 reverse scored. Domain score=sum of domain's respective items, then transformed into 0 (least favorable) to 100 (most favorable) scale. Transformed score=100x[(actual raw score-lowest possible raw score)/possible raw score range]. Least Squares Mean change adjusted for baseline score, treatment group, country, visit, and visit*treatment.|Baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline SEAR Confidence observation.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818804|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4, 8, 16, and 24 Weeks of the Sexual Relationship Domain of the Self-Esteem and Relationship (SEAR) Questionnaire|SEAR assesses psychosocial outcomes in men with erectile dysfunction. Sexual Relationship domain consists of 8 items (items 1-8). Items 2-8 are rated on a scale of 1 (Never) to 5 (Always), whereas item 1 is reverse scored (1=Always and 5=Never). The domain score was computed by summing its respective items, then transforming it into a 0 (least favorable) to 100 (most favorable) scale. Transformed score = 100 x [(actual raw score - lowest possible raw score)/possible raw score range]. Least Squares Mean changes adjusted for baseline score, treatment group, country, visit, and visit*treatment.|Baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline SEAR Sexual Relationship observation.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818805|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Week Endpoint of the Sexual Self-Confidence, Spontaneity, and Time Concerns Domains (23-items) of the Psychological and Interpersonal Relationships Scale (PAIRS)|The PAIRS is a 23-item scale that assesses broader psychological/interpersonal outcomes associated with erectile dysfunction and its treatment. Each question is rated on a Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The scale consists of 3 domains: Sexual Self-Confidence (items 1-6), Spontaneity domain (items 7-15), and Time Concerns (items 16-23). The average domain score for each domain was calculated by adding the nonmissing items for the respective domain, then dividing by the number of nonmissing items for the respective domain. Each average domain score ranged from 1 to 4. Higher scores represent the following: greater sexual self-confidence (better outcome); greater spontaneity (better outcome); higher time concerns (worse outcome). The Least Squares Mean changes were adjusted for treatment group, country, baseline IIEF-EF severity, baseline domain score, and baseline domain score*treatment (if p<0.10).|Baseline, 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline PAIRS observation.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818832|NCT01122576|Secondary|Manifest Refraction|Manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) was calculated as the value of the sphere plus one-half of the value of the cylinder.|Visit 3 (2-3 Months)|Full Analysis Set||Diopters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818833|NCT01122576|Secondary|Binocular Halo and Starburst|Halo and starburst (both monocular and binocular) were measured using a glarometer on integer scales of 1-5, where the smaller the number the better the outcome.|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full Analysis Set||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818806|NCT01122264|Secondary|Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) Questionnaire at 4, 8, 16, and 24 Weeks|The participant questionnaire consists of 11 questions. Each question is rated on a scale of 0 (extremely low treatment satisfaction) to 4 (extremely high treatment satisfaction). The EDITS summary score was obtained by adding each individual result for all questions, dividing by the number of questions answered (mean satisfaction score), then multiplying by 25, thus obtaining a score range from 0 (extremely low treatment satisfaction) to 100 (extremely high satisfaction). Least Squares Mean changes were adjusted for treatment group, country, visit, and visit*treatment.|4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline EDITS observation.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818807|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4, 8, 16 and 24 Weeks of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Overall Satisfaction Domain|Self-reported overall satisfaction on the IIEF over past 4 weeks and consists of 2 questions (items 13 and 14), each rated on a scale from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied). Total scores range from 2 to 10; lower numerical scores represent lower overall satisfaction. Least Squares Mean changes from baseline to endpoint for each visit were from a repeated measures analysis and included terms for baseline score, treatment group, country, baseline*treatment (if p<0.10), visit, and visit*treatment. The correlation matrix for the repeated observations was assumed to be unstructured.|Baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline IIEF Overall Satisfaction observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818808|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4, 8, 16 and 24 Weeks of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Intercourse Satisfaction Domain|Self-reported intercourse satisfaction score over past 4 weeks (1 intercourse attempt item, 2 intercourse satisfaction items). Each item range: 0 (no intercourse attempts/no satisfaction) to 5 (more attempts/high satisfaction). Total scores range: 0-15; lower scores=lower intercourse satisfaction. Least Squares Mean changes from baseline to endpoint for each visit from repeated measures analysis and included terms for baseline score, treatment group, country, baseline*treatment (if p<0.10), visit, and visit*treatment. Correlation matrix for repeated observations assumed to be unstructured.|Baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline IIEF Intercourse Satisfaction observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818809|NCT01122264|Secondary|Number of Days From the 8-Week Study Visit to the Time the Participant Discontinues From All Phosphodiesterase Type 5 (PDE5) Inhibitor Treatments|The differences in time between the 8-week time point and the discontinuation of all study treatments (that is, discontinuation from the study and not switching to another treatment) are reported by the median (95% confidence interval). Duration was measured as the number of days from Week 8 to the date of the last dose of the study drug. This outcome measure was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method.|8 weeks up to 334 days|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who completed the 8-week randomized treatment.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818810|NCT01122264|Secondary|Reasons for Discontinuation of Randomized Erectile Dysfunction Treatment|The reported reasons for a decision to discontinue from initial randomized treatment prior to Week 24 are reported. Discontinuation of randomized treatment was defined as switching between the 3 study treatments (tadalafil on demand, tadalafil once a day, or sildenafil citrate on demand) or discontinuing from all treatments. A change of dose within the same treatment was not considered as switching of treatment.|Baseline through 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants.||participants|||Number
818811|NCT01122264|Secondary|Patterns of Erectile Dysfunction Treatment Change|Results are reported as the number of participants per sequence of study medications (tadalafil on demand, tadalafil once a day, or sildenafil citrate on demand) that were taken as a result of switching treatments. The Other Treatment Sequence reports the number of participants per sequence of study medications that were taken as a result of switching treatments more than once. The number of participants who did not switch is also reported.|Baseline through 24 weeks|All randomly assigned participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
818812|NCT01122264|Secondary|Number of Treatment Switches|The number of times participants switched erectile dysfunction medication within the 3 treatments being studied (tadalafil on demand, tadalafil once a day, or sildenafil citrate on demand).|Baseline through 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who switched erectile dysfunction medication and had a baseline and post-baseline observation.||number of treatment switches||Standard Deviation|Mean
818813|NCT01122264|Secondary|Global Assessment Questions (GAQ)|The GAQ consists of 2 Yes/No/No Response (No Respo) questions. GAQ Question (Q)1: Has the treatment you have been taking during this study improved your erections? GAQ Q2: Has the treatment improved your ability to engage in sexual activity?|24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants. The last available GAQ assessment for each participant was used in the analysis.||participants|||Number
818814|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4, 8, 16 and 24 Weeks of the Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP)|Participant-assessed diary. Has 5 questions (Question[Q]1:erection achievement, Q2:successful penetration, Q3:successful intercourse, Q4:satisfied with erection, and Q5:satisfied with sexual experience) for each sexual encounter made over specified period of time. SEP Q1-Q5 scores determined as percentage of 'Yes' responses to each of 5 questions out of all sexual attempts recorded during the time period. Least Squares Mean changes from baseline to endpoint for each visit from a repeated measures analysis included terms for baseline score, treatment group, country, visit, and visit*treatment.|Baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline SEP observation.||"percentage of yes responses"||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
818815|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4, 8, 16 and 24 Weeks of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Sexual Desire Domain|Self-reported sexual desire on IIEF over past 4 weeks; comprises 2 questions (items 11 and 12). Each question rated on a scale from 1 (almost never or low/no sexual desire) to 5 (almost always or very high sexual desire). Total scores range: 2 to 10; lower numerical scores denote lower sexual desire. Least Squares Mean changes from baseline to endpoint for each visit from repeated measures analysis and included terms for baseline score, treatment group, country, baseline*treatment (if p<0.10), visit, and visit*treatment. Correlation matrix for repeated observations assumed to be unstructured.|Baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline IIEF Sexual Desire observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818816|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4, 8, 16 and 24 Weeks of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Orgasmic Function Domain|Self-reported orgasmic function on the IIEF over past 4 weeks and consists of 2 questions (items 9 and 10). Each question is rated on a scale from 0 (no sexual stimulation) to 5 (almost always/always). Total scores range from 0 to 10; lower scores represent lower orgasmic function. Least Squares Mean changes from baseline to endpoint for each visit were from a repeated measures analysis and included terms for baseline score, treatment group, country, baseline*treatment (if p<0.10), visit, and visit*treatment. The correlation matrix for the repeated observations was assumed to be unstructured.|Baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline IIEF Orgasmic Function observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818817|NCT01122264|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4, 8, 16 and 24 Weeks of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Erectile Function (EF) Domain|Self-reported EF score over past 4 weeks. Items 1-5 scores range from 0 (no sexual activity) to 5 (high EF). Item 15 score ranges from 1 (very low confidence to get/keep erection) to 5 (very high confidence). Total scores range from 1 to 30; lower scores denote greater erectile dysfunction severity. Least Squares Mean changes from baseline to endpoint for each visit from repeated measures analysis included terms for baseline score, treatment group, country, baseline*treatment (if p<0.10), visit, and visit*treatment. Correlation matrix for repeated observations assumed to be unstructured.|Baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and post-baseline IIEF-EF observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818818|NCT01122264|Primary|Time to Discontinuation of Randomized Treatment|Time to discontinuation of randomized treatment was defined as the number of days from randomization until the day the participant discontinued the randomized treatment. Discontinuation of randomized treatment was defined as switching between the 3 study treatments (tadalafil on demand, tadalafil once a day, or sildenafil citrate on demand) or discontinuing from all treatments. A change of dose within the same treatment was not considered switching of treatment. This outcome measure was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method.|Baseline up to 334 days|The analysis included all randomly assigned participants.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818819|NCT01122381|Primary|Migraine Headache Days Per 4 Week Period Comparing the Last 4 Weeks of Treatment to a 4 Week Pre-treatment Baseline.|"Compare number of migraine headache days pre and post treatment between the ESX and placebo group.
Study terminated early-no outcome data available. The single subject assigned to study drug did not actually take it according to subsequent review of ESX drug levels."|4 weeks, end of treatment and pre-treatment baseline||||||
818820|NCT01122394|Secondary|Antihypertensive/ Lipid-lowering Medication Adherence|Measured by Morisky Medication taking questionnaire (self-reported). Scores range from 0-4, with 0 being least adherent and 4 being most adherent|6 months|One participant in TI did not answer all of the questions on this assessment, so his score could not be computed and therefore he is not included in this analysis||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818821|NCT01122394|Secondary|Exercise Adherence|Measured by 7-day Physical Activity Recall|6 months|||hours per week of cardio||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818822|NCT01122394|Secondary|Total Cholesterol/High Density Lipoprotein Ratio||6 months|Only participants who provided a blood sample for which cholesterol could be analyzed were included in this analysis||ratio||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818823|NCT01122394|Secondary|Dietary Sodium|self-reported stage of change for adherence to DASH (low-sodium) diet. Pre-action refers to participants reporting that they were in pre-contemplation (no plans to adhere to DASH diet in the next 6 months), contemplation (planning to adhere within the next 6 months) or preparation (planning to adhere within the next month), while action refers to participants reporting that they are in the action stage of change (became adherent to the DASH diet within the past 6 months) and maintenance refers to participants reporting that they are in the maintenance stage of change (became adherent to the DASH diet at least 6 months ago)|6 months|||participants|||Number
818824|NCT01122394|Primary|Systolic Blood Pressure||6 months|restricted to only patients enrolled because they met criteria for high blood pressure at enrollment. Participants were not included if they were did not have elevated blood pressure at enrollment||mm Hg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
818825|NCT01122511|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Area Leakage of Choroidal Neovascularization at Month 12 as Measured by Fluorescein Angiography|Fluorescein angiography (FA) is a technique for examining the circulation of the retina (and detecting any leakage) using a dye-tracing method. Photographs are taken with a specialized low-power microscope with an attached camera designed to photograph the interior of the eye, including the retina and optic disc. FA was performed on the study eye after dilation at baseline and Week 12.|Baseline, Month 12|No participants reached the 12 month time-point. Efficacy analyses were not performed.|||||
818826|NCT01122511|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Central Retinal Thickness at Month 12 as Measured by Optical Coherence Tomography|Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT), a laser based non-invasive diagnostic system providing high-resolution imaging sections of the retina, was performed on the study eye after pupil dilation at baseline and Month 12.|Baseline, Month 12|No participants reached the 12 month time-point. Efficacy analyses were not performed.|||||
818827|NCT01122511|Secondary|The Percentage of Patients Having 15 or More Letter Improvement From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity at Month 12|BCVA is measured using an eye chart and is reported as the number of letters read correctly (ranging from 0 to 100 letters). The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or visual acuity). An increase in the number of letters read correctly means that vision has improved.|Baseline, Month 12|No participants reached the 12 month time-point. Efficacy analyses were not performed.|||||
818828|NCT01122511|Primary|Change From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) at Month 12|BCVA is measured using an eye chart and is reported as the number of letters read correctly (ranging from 0 to 100 letters). The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or visual acuity). An increase in the number of letters read correctly means that vision has improved.|Baseline, Month 12|No participants reached the 12 month time-point. Efficacy analyses were not performed.|||||
818829|NCT01122576|Secondary|Best-corrected Distance Visual Acuity|High Contrast Distance-Corrected Distance,(BCDVA), Intermediate (DCIVA), and Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA)|Visit 3 (2-3 months) Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full Analysis Set||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818836|NCT01122576|Secondary|Monocular Halo and Starburst|Halo and starburst (both monocular and binocular) were measured using a glarometer on integer scales of 1-5, where the smaller the number the better the outcome.|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full Analysis Set||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818837|NCT01122576|Secondary|Optical Scatter|Objective scatter index (OSI) was assessed using the Optical Quality Analysis System(OQAS) and summarized as a continuous variable. For this assessment, an OSI score of 1 or less represents good quality vision, 1-2 indicates some degradation but otherwise normal vision, 2-3 significant light scatter possibly requiring treatment, and scores over 4 severely compromised vision requiring intervention.|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818838|NCT01122576|Secondary|Optical Scatter|Objective scatter index (OSI) was assessed using the Optical Quality Analysis System(OQAS) and summarized as a continuous variable. For this assessment, an OSI score of 1 or less represents good quality vision, 1-2 indicates some degradation but otherwise normal vision, 2-3 significant light scatter possibly requiring treatment, and scores over 4 severely compromised vision requiring intervention.|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full Analysis Set||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818839|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Binocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 18 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818840|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Binocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 12 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818841|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Binocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 6 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818842|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Binocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 1.5, 3 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818843|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Binocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 18 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818844|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Binocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 12 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818845|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Binocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 6 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818846|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Binocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 1.5, 3 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818847|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 18 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818848|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 12 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818849|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 6 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818850|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 3 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
819016|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension Stability at 78 Weeks|Knee extension stability was evaluated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|78 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
818851|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 1.5 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818852|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 18 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818853|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 12 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818854|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 6 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818855|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 3 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818856|NCT01122576|Secondary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity With Glare 1.5 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) with glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818857|NCT01122576|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 18 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818858|NCT01122576|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 12 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818859|NCT01122576|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 1.5, 3, 6 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 4 (4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818860|NCT01122576|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 18 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818861|NCT01122576|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 12 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818862|NCT01122576|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 6 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818863|NCT01122576|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 1.5 & 3 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full set analysis||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
818864|NCT01122576|Primary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 18 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Postoperative visit 4 ( 4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818865|NCT01122576|Primary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 12 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Postoperative visit 4 ( 4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818866|NCT01122576|Primary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 6 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Postoperative visit 4 ( 4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818867|NCT01122576|Primary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 3 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Postoperative visit 4 ( 4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818868|NCT01122576|Primary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 1.5 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Postoperative visit 4 ( 4-6 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818869|NCT01122576|Primary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 18 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Postoperative visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818870|NCT01122576|Primary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 12 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Postoperative visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818871|NCT01122576|Primary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 6 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Postoperative visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818872|NCT01122576|Primary|Mesopic Monocular Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare 1.5 and 3 Cycles/Degree|Logarithm of the mesopic (low light) contrast sensitivity (ability to detect detail with subtle gradations of grayness between test target and background) without glare at five spatial frequencies (number of light and dark bars per cycle). A higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity|Postoperative visit 3 (2-3 months)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
818873|NCT01122680|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Nighttime Awakenings|Mean number of nighttime awakenings due to asthma symptoms as assessed by patients eDiary incorporated in the AM3® device. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and last week of treatment (week 4)|FAS with non-missing data for nighttime awakenings||Night awakenings per week||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818874|NCT01122680|Secondary|Control of Asthma as Assessed by Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)|ACQ is a questionnaire consisting of a seven point Likert scale ranging from 0 to 6, whereby 0 represents good control and 6 represents poor control of asthma. The scale describes the frequency and severity of asthma symptoms. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|4 weeks|FAS with non-missing ACQ data||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818875|NCT01122680|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication Per Day|Mean number of inhalations (puffs) of unscheduled rescue salbutamol therapy during whole day. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with non-missing data for rescue medication||Puffs/day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818876|NCT01122680|Secondary|Mean Evening PEF Response|Mean evening PEF assessed by patients at home. Response was defined as the change from baseline. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with non-missing evening PEF data||Litre/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818877|NCT01122680|Secondary|Mean Morning Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Response|Mean morning PEF assessed by patients at home. Response was defined as the change from baseline. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with non-missing morning PEF data||Litre/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818878|NCT01122680|Secondary|Forced Expiratory Flow (FEF) 25-75% Individual Measurements Response at Each Time Point|FEF 25-75% is the mean forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of the FVC determined at the end of the 4-week treatment period. This is often referred to as the maximum midexpiratory flow. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and 4 weeks (10 min pre-dose, 30 min, 1,2,3 hours post-dose)|FAS with non-missing FEF data||Litre||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818879|NCT01122680|Secondary|FVC Individual Measurements at Each Time-point|"Individual FVC measurements at each time-point (personal best). Response was defined as the change from baseline. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model."|Baseline and 4 weeks (10 min pre-dose, 30 min, 1,2,3 hours post-dose)|FAS with non-missing FVC data.||Litre||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818880|NCT01122680|Secondary|FVC Area Under the Curve From 0 to 3 h (AUC0-3h) Response|FVC (AUC0-3h) will be calculated as the area under the curve from 0 to 3hours using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (3 hours) to report in litres. Response was defined as the change from baseline. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with non-missing FVC data.||Litre||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818881|NCT01122680|Secondary|FVC Trough Response|The trough FVC response is defined as the pre-dose FVC measured just prior to the last administration of randomised treatment. Response was defined as the change from baseline. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with non-missing FVC data.||Litre||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818882|NCT01122680|Secondary|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Peak (0-3h) Response|The FVC peak (0-3h) response is determined at the end of the 4 week treatment period. This is the difference between the maximum FVC measured within the first 3 hours post dosing and the FVC baseline measurement. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with non-missing FVC data.||Litre||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818883|NCT01122680|Secondary|FEV1 Individual Measurements Response at Each Time-point|"Individual FEV1 measurements at each time-point (personal best). Response was defined as the change from baseline. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model."|Baseline and 4 weeks (10 min pre-dose, 30 min, 1,2,3 hours post-dose)|FAS with non-missing FEV1 data.||Litre||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818884|NCT01122680|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under the Curve From 0 to 3 h (AUC0-3h) Response|FEV1 (AUC0-3h) will be calculated as the area under the curve from 0 to 3hours using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (3 hours) to report in litres. Response was defined as the change from baseline. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with non-missing FEV1 data.||Litre||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818885|NCT01122680|Secondary|Trough FEV1 Response|The trough FEV1 is defined as the pre-dose FEV1 measured just prior to the last administration of randomised treatment. Response was defined as the change from baseline. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS with non-missing FEV1 data.||Litre||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818886|NCT01122680|Primary|Forced Expiratory Volume (FEV1) Peak (0-3h) Response|The FEV1 peak (0-3h) response is determined at the end of the 4 week treatment period. This is the difference between the maximum FEV1 measured within the first 3 hours post dosing and the FEV1 baseline measurement. Analysis adjusted for treatment, period, patient and baseline using a mixed model.|Baseline and 4 weeks|The Full analysis set (FAS) is defined as patients randomised, treated, with baseline data and at least one on-treatment efficacy measurement after 4 weeks on treatment within a period. This patient set is therefore FAS reduced to patients with non-missing FEV1 data.||Litre||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818887|NCT01122862|Secondary|Interproximal Plaque Index After 24 Hours of Treatment Administration|Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.|Day 1 post treatment administration|ITT population: All randomized participants who received study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed for this outcome measure. Missing data was not imputed.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818888|NCT01122862|Secondary|Interproximal Plaque Index After Day 4 of Treatment Administration|Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.|Day 4 post treatment administration|ITT population: All randomized participants who received study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed for this outcome measure. Missing data was not imputed.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818889|NCT01122862|Secondary|Plaque Index After 24 Hours of Treatment Administration|Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.|Day 1 post treatment administration|ITT population: All randomized participants who received study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed for this outcome measure. Missing data was not imputed.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818890|NCT01122862|Secondary|Plaque Index Score of Test Mouth Rinse Versus Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse After Day 4 of Treatment Administration|Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.|Day 4 post treatment administration|ITT population: All randomized participants who received study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed for this outcome measure. Missing data was not imputed.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818907|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Score|"The severity of illness for each participant was rated using the CGI-S scale. To assess CGI-S, the study physician answered the following question: Considering your total clinical experience with this particular population, how mentally ill is the participant at this time? Response choices included: 0 = not assessed; 1 = normal, not ill at all; 2 = borderline mentally ill; 3 = mildly ill; 4 = moderately ill; 5 = markedly ill; 6 = severely ill; and 7 = among the most extremely ill participants."|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818891|NCT01122862|Primary|Plaque Index of Test Mouth Rinse Versus Sterile Water After Day 4 of Treatment Administration|Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.|Day 4 post treatment administration|Intention to Treat (ITT) population: All randomized participants who received study treatment and had at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement. Due to drop outs, there was difference in number of participants analyzed for this outcome measure. Missing data was not imputed.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818892|NCT01122901|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|Time to event endpoints for Group A will be measured from the date of first dose. All patients who receive at least one dose of study drug will be included in the analysis. Time to event endpoints for Group B will be measured from the first post-surgical date (this will be considered start date of treatment). Progression defined as: >25% increase sum of products of perpendicular diameters (bi-dimensional measurements) of enhancing lesions (over baseline (BL) if no decrease) on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids. and/or b) Significant increase in T2/FLAIR nonenhancing lesion on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids compared to BL scan or best response following initiation of therapy c) Any new lesion. d) Clear clinical deterioration not attributable to other causes apart from the tumor e) Failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition.|2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818893|NCT01122901|Secondary|Tumor Propagation (Group B)|This outcome could not be analyzed as the n was too small. The study was terminated prematurely by Hoffman-La Roche Company due to their decision to terminate drug supply for further development of this drug. All CTEP-sponsored trials using RO4929097 were closed to accrual and all patients had to be off treatment by 7/31/12.|At the time of surgery|This outcome could not be analyzed as the n was too small. The study was terminated prematurely by Hoffman-La Roche Company due to their decision to terminate drug supply for further development of this drug.|||||
818894|NCT01122901|Secondary|Expression Levels of Notch Pathway Components and Downstream (Group B)|This outcome could not be analyzed as the n was too small. The study was terminated prematurely by Hoffman-La Roche Company due to their decision to terminate drug supply for further development of this drug. All CTEP-sponsored trials using RO4929097 were closed to accrual and all patients had to be off treatment by 7/31/12.|At the time of surgery|This outcome could not be analyzed as the n was too small. The study was terminated prematurely by Hoffman-La Roche Company due to their decision to terminate drug supply for further development of this drug.|||||
818895|NCT01122901|Secondary|Overall Survival|"time to event endpoints for Group A will be measured from date of first dose. All patients who receive at least one dose will be included in analysis.
Time to event endpoints for Group B will be measured from the first post-surgical date (this will be considered start date of treatment)."|2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818896|NCT01122901|Secondary|Number of Participants With Toxicities Associated With Study Drug (Group A and Group B)|assessed by the National Cancer Institute CTCAE version 4.0 assessed if patient received at least one dose of study drug Grade 3-5 toxicities grade 3 -severe grade 4 - life threatening grade 5 - death|Up to 30 days after completion of study treatment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
818897|NCT01122901|Secondary|Radiographic Response Rate According to the Radiographic Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Criteria (Group A) and Group (B)|"RANO:
Measurable: Bidimensionally measurable lesions w/ clearly defined margins by MRI Evaluable: Unidimensionally measurable lesions, masses w/margins not clearly defined.
Complete Response (CR): Complete disappearance of all measurable/evaluable disease. No new lesions. No evidence of non-evaluable disease. Patients on minimal/no steroids.
Partial Response (PR): >/= to 50% decrease under baseline in the sum of products of perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions. No progression of evaluable disease. Responders must be on same/decreasing doses of dexamethasone.
Stable/No Response: Does not qualify for CR, PR, or progression.
Progression: 25% increase in the sum of products of all measurable lesions over smallest sum observed (over BL if no decrease), OR clear worsening of any evaluable disease, OR appearance of any new lesion/site, OR failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition (unless clearly unrelated to this cancer)."|Up to 6 months after completion of treatment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
818898|NCT01122901|Primary|Efficiency of Neurosphere Generation After Pretreatment With RO4929097 (Group B)|This outcome could not be analyzed as the n was too small. The study was terminated prematurely by Hoffman-La Roche Company due to their decision to terminate drug supply for further development of this drug. All CTEP-sponsored trials using RO4929097 were closed to accrual and all patients had to be off treatment by 7/31/12.|At time of surgery|This outcome could not be analyzed as the n was too small. Only had 7 samples. The study was terminated prematurely by Hoffman-La Roche Company due to their decision to terminate drug supply for further development of this drug|||||
818899|NCT01122901|Primary|Overall Median Progression-free Survival (6-month PFS)|Time to event endpoints for Group A will be measured from the date of first dose. All patients who receive at least one dose of study drug will be included in the analysis. Time to event endpoints for Group B will be measured from the first post-surgical date (this will be considered start date of treatment). Progression defined as: >25% increase sum of products of perpendicular diameters (bi-dimensional measurements) of enhancing lesions (over baseline (BL) if no decrease) on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids. and/or b) Significant increase in T2/FLAIR nonenhancing lesion on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids compared to BL scan or best response following initiation of therapy c) Any new lesion. d) Clear clinical deterioration not attributable to other causes apart from the tumor e) Failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition.|At 6 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818992|NCT01132118|Primary|Insulin Sensitivity Index|"We will examine the effect of HCQ on the Matsuda Insulin Sensitivity Index (ISI) during the active treatment phase compared with placebo phase.
ISI is based on insulin and glucose levels in a fasting state during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and is calculated as follows:
ISI (Matsuda) = 10000/√ G0 X I0 X Gmean X Imean
G0 - fasting plasma glucose (mg/dL) I0 - fasting plasma insulin (mIU/L) Gmean - mean plasma glucose during OGTT (mg/dL) Imean - mean plasma insulin during OGTT (mIU/L)"|Baseline and Week 8|||(dL x L)/(mg x mIU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818900|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS) in Bipolar (de Novo Participants)|The CGAS is a 100-point rating scale measuring psychological, social, and school functioning for children aged 6 to 17. It was adapted from the Adults Global Assessment Scale. The Global Assessment Scale was a rating scale for evaluating the overall functioning of a participant during a specified time period on a continuum from psychological or psychiatric sickness to health. The CGAS is a valid and reliable tool for rating a child's general level of functioning on a health-illness continuum. The CGAS was developed by Schaffer and colleagues to provide a global measure of severity of disturbance in children and adolescents. The CGAS Score (range 1 to 100) is a single-item score for rating a child’s general level of functioning on a health-illness continuum, with higher scores representing better functioning.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818901|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorders Rating (ADHD-RS-IV) Scale Score|The ADHD-RS-IV is a reliable and easy-to-administer instrument both for diagnosing ADHD in children and adolescents and for assessing treatment response. Containing 18 items, the scale was linked directly to DSM-IV-TR diagnostic criteria for ADHD. There were 3 versions of the scale: a parent questionnaire on home behaviors (English), a parent questionnaire on home behaviors (Spanish), and a teacher questionnaire on classroom behaviors. For this trial, the parent questionnaire on home behaviors (English) was utilized. The ADHD-RS-IV Total Score (range 0 to 54) is the sum of rating scores for 18 items, with higher scores representing greater severity. A missing value for any ADHD-RS-IV assessment items could have resulted in a missing ADHD-RS-IV Total Score. Data were only available for 82 participants with bipolar disorder and these were de novo participants.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818902|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in General Behavior Inventory (GBI) Scale Total Score for Mania and Depression in Both Parent/Guardian and Subject Version of the Scale|The GBI is a self-report inventory with 73 items focusing on mood-related behaviors, including depressive, hypomanic, and biphasic symptoms. For this trial, two 20-item subscales were utilized: one was completed by the parent/guardian or legal representative, as applicable for local laws, and the other was completed by the participant. Responses were given on a 4-point Likert scale, with 0 being never or hardly ever and 3 being very often or almost constantly. The GBI Total Score for mania (range 0 to 30) is the sum of scores for items 1 to 10 and the GBI Total Score for depression (range 0 to 30) is the sum of scores for items 11 to 20 in the GBI Parent/Guardian or Subject Version panel. Scores from the Parent/Guardian and participant Versions were summarized separately. A missing value for any GBI assessment items could have resulted in a missing GBI Total Score. High scores represent greater psychopathology. Data was only available for 80 de novo participants with bipolar disorder.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818903|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression Scale - Bipolar Version Improvement Score|The CGI-BP scale refers to the global impression of the subject with respect to bipolar disorder. The scale rated the subject’s Severity of Illness (CGI-BP-Severity: mania, depression, and overall bipolar illness) and Change From Preceding Phase (CGI-BP-Improvement: mania, depression, and overall bipolar illness) based on a 7- or 8-point scale. Severity of Illness (CGI-BP-Severity) was rated at all visits. At each visit other than Day 0 (Baseline), the Change From Preceding Phase (CGI-BP-Improvement) was judged with respect to participant's condition at Baseline. The CGI-BP Severity Scores (range 1 to 7), as well as CGI-BP Improvement Scores (range 1 to 7) are single-item rating scores, with higher scores representing greater severity or less improvement. Only 94 participants had data at Baseline to explain the N=94 in the table below and these were de novo participants.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818904|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression Scale - Bipolar (CGI-BP) Version Severity Score|The CGI-BP scale refers to the global impression of the subject with respect to bipolar disorder. The scale rated the subject’s Severity of Illness (CGI-BP-Severity: mania, depression, and overall bipolar illness) and Change From Preceding Phase (CGI-BP-Improvement: mania, depression, and overall bipolar illness) based on a 7- or 8-point scale. Severity of Illness (CGI-BP-Severity) was rated at all visits. At each visit other than Day 0 (Baseline), the Change From Preceding Phase (CGI-BP-Improvement) was judged with respect to participant's condition at Baseline. The CGI-BP Severity Scores (range 1 to 7), as well as CGI-BP Improvement Scores (range 1 to 7) are single-item rating scores, with higher scores representing greater severity or less improvement. Data for 94 de novo participants were available with bipolar disorder.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818905|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) Score|The YMRS consists of 11 items assessing the core symptoms of mania and was used to assess participants with bipolar I disorder, manic and mixed episodes with or without psychotic features: elevated mood, increased motor activity - energy, sexual interest, sleep, irritability, speech (rate and amount), language - thought disorder, content, disruptive - aggressive behavior, appearance, and insight. Each item had 5 or 9 grades of severity, with lower scores indicating milder symptoms. The number of raters within each trial center was to be kept to a minimum. The YMRS Total Score (range 0 to 44) is the sum of the rating scores for 11 items for assessing the core symptoms of mania. A missing value for any YMRS assessment item(s) could have resulted in a missing YMRS Total Score. A higher YMRS Total Score represents greater severity. In this study, 94 participants had bipolar disorder, this explains the N=94 in the table below and these were de novo participants.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818906|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change in Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Score|The efficacy of trial medication were rated for each participant using the CGI-I scale. The study physician must rate the participant's total improvement whether or not it is due entirely to drug treatment. All responses were compared to the participant's condition at baseline. Response choices include: 0 = not assessed; 1 =very much improved; 2 = much improved; 3 = minimally improved; 4 = no change; 5 =minimally worse; 6 = much worse; and 7 = very much worse.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818908|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in PANSS Negative Subscale Score|The PANSS consisted of three subscales: a total of 30 symptom constructs. For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 (absence of symptoms) and a score of 7 (extremely severe symptoms). The PANSS negative subscale score was the sum of the rating scores for the 7 negative scale items from the PANSS panel. The 7 negative symptom constructs: blunted affect, emotional withdrawal, poor rapport, passive apathetic withdrawal, difficulty in abstract thinking, lack of spontaneity and flow of conversation, stereotyped thinking. The PANSS Negative Subscale ranges from 7 (absence of symptoms) to 49 (extremely severe symptoms).|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818909|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in PANSS Positive Subscale Score|The PANSS consisted of three subscales: a total of 30 symptom constructs. For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 (absence of symptoms) and a score of 7 (extremely severe symptoms). The PANSS positive subscale score was the sum of the rating scores for the 7 positive scale items from the PANSS panel. The 7 positive symptom constructs are delusions, conceptual disorganization, hallucinatory behavior, excitement, grandiosity, suspiciousness/persecution, and hostility. The PANSS Positive Subscale ranges from 7 (absence of symptoms) to 49 (extremely severe symptoms).|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818910|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Positive and Negative Symptoms Score (PANSS) Total Score|The PANSS consisted of three subscales: a total of 30 symptom constructs. For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 (absence of symptoms) and a score of 7 (extremely severe symptoms). The PANSS total score was the sum of the rating scores for 7 positive scale items, 7 negative scale items, and 16 general psychopathology scale items from the PANSS panel. The PANSS total score ranged from 30 (best possible outcome) to 210 (worst possible outcome).|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818911|NCT01122927|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Due to All Adverse Events|The percentage of participants who discontinued due to all causes other than sponsor terminating the trial was measured from the date of entering the open-label treatment phase to the date of ET for discontinued participants in the open-label treatment phase (ie, time to discontinuation = date of discontinuation [or date of completion for completed participants] − date of participant entering the open-label treatment phase + 1). If the participants completed the trial or were discontinued due to the sponsor terminating the trial, they were censored at the time of completion or trial termination, respectively.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||percentage of participants|||Number
818912|NCT01122927|Secondary|Incidence of Suicidality, Suicidal Behavior and Suicidal Ideation|Suicidality was defined as reporting at least one occurrence of any suicidal behavior or suicidal ideation. Suicidal behavior was defined as reporting any type of suicidal behaviors (actual attempt, interrupted attempt, aborted attempt, and preparatory acts or behavior). Suicidal ideation was defined as reporting any type of suicidal ideation. The below reported N value is the number of participants with specified suicidal ideation/behavior at the given time point.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||participants|||Number
818913|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline for Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) in Suicidal Ideation Intensity Total Score|Suicidality was defined as reporting at least one occurrence of any suicidal behavior or suicidal ideation. Suicidal behavior was defined as reporting any type of suicidal behaviors (actual attempt, interrupted attempt, aborted attempt, and preparatory acts or behavior). Suicidal ideation was defined as reporting any type of suicidal ideation. The suicidal ideation intensity total score is the sum of intensity scores of 5 items (frequency, duration, controllability, deterrents, and reasons for ideation). The score of each intensity item ranges from 0 (none) to 5 (worst) which leads to the range of the total score from 0 to 25. A missing score of any item resulted in a missing total score. If no suicidal ideation was reported, a score of 0 was given to the intensity scale.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818914|NCT01122927|Secondary|Baseline and Post-Baseline Tanner Staging|Tanner staging was completed together with the physical examination by the same trial-affiliated clinician in the most inconspicuous manner for the participant as possible. Tanner staging assessment consisted of 2 domains (pubic hair and breast development) for girls and 3 domains (pubic hair, penis development, and testes development) for boys. A participant who reached Stage 5 (both in pubic hair and genitalia) did not need to continue with Tanner Staging assessment and the Tanner Staging scales of this participant were imputed as 5 for all of the following scheduled time points up to and including the completion visit/ET visit. The clinician arrived at a single score summarizing the domains (not individual domain scores) when evaluating the participant. The total shift data for last visit is presented below.|Baseline to Last Visit|All those participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole during the open-label treatment phase.||participants|||Number
818915|NCT01122927|Secondary|Number of Participants With Cognitive Impairment for Each New York Assessment for Adverse Cognitive Effects of Neuropsychiatric Treatment (NY-AACENT)|The NY-AACENT is not a validated scale. It was included in this trial because of concerns that regulatory authorities (the European Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use [CHMP] and the Paediatric Sub-Committee of the European Medicinal Agency [PDCO]) had regarding drug induced cognitive impairment. No validated scale addressing these issues was available at the time of the trial. The NY-AACENT was used to detect changes in cognitive function subsequent to pharmacological or similar treatments for neurological or psychiatric problems. It was specifically designed to be used in pediatric populations (ages 12 to 17), but could have been utilized with other age groups, as appropriate.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||participants|||Number
818916|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline by Week in Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS) Score|The BARS was an EPS rating scale. The BARS was used to assess the presence and severity of akathisia. This scale consists of 4 items. Only the 4th item, the Global Clinical Assessment of Akathisia, was evaluated in this trial. This item is rated on a 6 point scale, with 0 being best (absent) and 5 being worst (severe akathisia).|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818917|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline by Week in Simpson-Angus Scale (SAS) Total Score|The SAS is a rating scale used to measure EPS. The SAS scale consists of a list of 10 symptoms of parkinsonism (gait, arm dropping, shoulder shaking, elbow rigidity, wrist rigidity, head rotation, glabella tap, tremor, salivation, and akathisia), with each item rated from 0 to 4, with 0 being normal and 4 being the worst. The SAS Total score is sum of ratings for all 10 items, with possible Total scores from 0 to 40.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818918|NCT01122927|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline by Week in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS)|The AIMS Scale was an extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) rating scale. The AIMS is a 12 item scale. The first 10 items e.g. facial and oral movements (items 1-4), extremity movements (items 5 and 6), trunk movements (item 7), investigators global assessment of dyskinesia (items 8 to 10). The first 10 items are rated from 0 to 4 (0=best, 4=worst). Items 11 and 12, related to dental status, have dichotomous responses, 0=no and 1=yes. The AIMS Total Score is the sum of the ratings for the first seven items. The possible total scores are from 0 to 28.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818919|NCT01122927|Secondary|Incidence of Vital Signs of Potential Clinical Relevance|Vital signs are taken at Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and Months 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 of Phase 2 (Visits beyond Month 12 only for de novo subjects). Assessments included orthostatic (supine and standing) blood pressure (BP), heart rate and body temperature. Incidence of TEAEs of potential clinical relevance included abnormal values in heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respiratory rate and weight that were identified based on pre-defined criteria. Abnormal vital signs in participants were reported as SAE/AEs and are reported in the SAE/other AE section of this report.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||participants|||Number
818920|NCT01122927|Secondary|Incidence of Physical Examination Findings of Potential Clinical Relevance|The physical examination evaluation was one of the parameters to measure the safety and tolerability of individual participants. Incidence of TEAEs of potential clinical relevance include abnormal changes in the following body systems: head, ears, eyes, nose, and throat; thorax; abdomen; urogenital; extremities; neurological; and skin and mucosae.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole. Any clinically relevant abnormal changes were recorded as TEAEs.||participants|||Number
818921|NCT01122927|Secondary|Incidence of Laboratory Values of Potential Clinical Relevance|The laboratory values were one of the parameters to measure the safety and tolerability of individual participants. Incidence of TEAEs of potential clinical relevance include abnormal values in serum chemistry, hematology, urinalyses and prolactin tests that were identified based on pre-defined criteria. Abnormal laboratory values in participants were reported as SAE/AEs and are reported in the SAE/other AE section of this report.|Baseline to Month 24|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||participants|||Number
818922|NCT01122927|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or participant enrolled in a clinical trial and which did not necessarily have a causal relationship with the study medication. A treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE) was any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of study medication, whether or not considered to have a causal relationship with the study medication. A serious-AE or reaction was any untoward occurrence that, at any dose, was fatal, life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, was a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or was any other medically significant event that, based on appropriate medical judgment, may have jeopardized the participant and may have required medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above.|Adverse events were recorded from the time of the informed consent was signed throughout the 24 month treatment period until the follow-up visit 30 (± 3) days after the end of trial.|All participants who had received at least one dose of oral aripiprazole.||Participants|||Number
818923|NCT01123083|Secondary|Composite Rank Sum: C-Peptide AUC, HbA1c and Exogenous Insulin Use at 6 and 12 Months|O'Brien analyses was performed on a three-part composite of HbA1c level, C-peptide AUC, and mean daily insulin use in the otelixizumab group compared with the placebo group at Months 6 and 12. The three variables was adjusted for Baseline values. Baseline adjustment was used to reduce the potential impact of imbalances in Baseline levels between treatment groups on the treatment comparisons at later time points. HbA1c and insulin use was ranked from smallest to largest, and C-peptide AUC was ranked from largest to smallest. If otelixizumab treatment was effective on the composite endpoint, then the mean of the ranks sum in the otelixizumab group was smaller than the mean of the ranks sum in the placebo group.|Month 6 and 12|ITT population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Rank||Standard Deviation|Mean
818924|NCT01123083|Secondary|Composite Rank Sum: HbA1c and Exogenous Insulin Use at 6 and 12 Months|O'Brien mean rank analyses was performed on a two-part composite of the Baseline-adjusted HbA1c level and the Baseline-adjusted mean total daily insulin use per kg body weight in the otelixizumab group compared with the placebo group at Months 6 and 12. Baseline adjustment was used to reduce the potential impact of imbalances in Baseline levels between treatment groups on the treatment comparisons at later time points. For the O'Brien mean rank analysis at a particular time point, adjusted HbA1c values (for both treatment groups together) and adjusted mean daily insulin use values was ranked from smallest to largest. For each participant, the HbA1c and insulin use ranks were added together, producing a composite rank. A treatment comparison test was then performed on the composite ranks. If otelixizumab treatment was effective on this composite endpoint, then the mean of the ranks sum in the otelixizumab group was smaller than the mean of the ranks sum in the placebo group.|Month 6 and 12|ITT population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Rank||Standard Deviation|Mean
818946|NCT01128894|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved HbA1c Response Level of <6.5% and <7.0% at Week 32|Number of participants who achieved HbA1c response levels of <6.5% and <7.0% at Week 32 were assessed. The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing.|Week 32|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Participants|||Number
818925|NCT01123083|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Change From Baseline in Severe Hypoglycemic Events and Documented Symptomatic Hypoglycemic Events at Month 12|Severe hypoglycemia was considered as an event that required assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. These episodes may be associated with sufficient neuroglycopenia to induce seizure or coma. Plasma glucose measurements may not be available during such an event, but neurological recovery attributable to the restoration of plasma glucose to normal is considered sufficient evidence that the event was induced by a low plasma glucose concentration. Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia was considered as an event during which typical symptoms of hypoglycemia are accompanied by a measured plasma glucose concentration less than or equal to 70 mg/dL and it was collected in (1) eCRF using two forms – for single event and for mutiple events, and (2) the IVRS system. The percentage of participant with incidence of severe hypoglycemia and documented symptomatic hypoglycemia have been reported.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12|ITT population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
818926|NCT01123083|Secondary|Average Number of Severe Hypoglycemic Events and Documented Symptomatic Hypoglycemic Events From Baseline to Month 12|Severe hypoglycemia was considered as an event that required assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. These episodes may be associated with sufficient neuroglycopenia to induce seizure or coma. Plasma glucose measurements may not be available during such an event, but neurological recovery attributable to the restoration of plasma glucose to normal is considered sufficient evidence that the event was induced by a low plasma glucose concentration. Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia was considered as an event during which typical symptoms of hypoglycemia are accompanied by a measured plasma glucose concentration less than or equal to 70 mg/dL and it was collected in (1) eCRF using two forms – for single event and for mutiple events, and (2) the IVRS system. The numbers of participant-reported hypoglycemic events per participant of severe hypoglycemia and documented symptomatic hypoglycemia have been reported.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12|ITT population.||Events|||Number
818927|NCT01123083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c Levels Over 7 Consecutive Days During the 2 Weeks Prior to the Assessment|HbA1c level was recorded at Baseline, Month 3, 6 and 12. Baseline was defined at Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the post Baseline value from the Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 3, 6, 12|ITT population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818928|NCT01123083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Daily Insulin Use Over 7 Consecutive Days During the 2 Weeks Prior to the Assessment|Mean daily insulin use over 7 consecutive days during the 2 weeks preceding each key visit was calculated as the mean of the values of amount of insulin used per day on each of the 7 consecutive days. Baseline was defined at Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the post Baseline value from the Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 3, 6, 12|ITT population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||International unit per kilogram (IU/kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818929|NCT01123083|Secondary|Number of Participants With Responder Status|A participant was considered a responder when, at the given time point, the participant had: glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) less than or equal to 6.5 percent and mean daily insulin use less than 0.5 international unit per kilogram per day (IU/kg/day) over 7 consecutive days during the 2 weeks preceding the visit.|Month 3, 6 and 12|ITT population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
818930|NCT01123083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Stimulated C-Peptide Mean AUC at Week 12, Month 6, 12 and 18|C-peptide is a protein that shows how much insulin the body is producing. For 3 days before the mixed meal tolerance test participants were asked to eat a balanced diet. The test was performed only when the finger-stick blood glucose level was above 70 mg/dL and no higher than 200 mg/dL. Mixed meal-stimulated C-peptide AUC was the area under the C-peptide/time curve from time 0 to 120-minutes, calculated using the trapezoidal rule. This AUC was normalized for time interval by dividing it by 120-minutes (the number of minutes over which it was determined), and was adjusted by inclusion of Baseline C-peptide AUC as a covariate in the analysis. Baseline was defined at Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the post Baseline value from the Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1) and Week 12, Month 6, 12, 18|ITT population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||nanomoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
818931|NCT01123083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 2 Hour Mixed Meal-stimulated C-peptide AUC (Normalized for 120-minute Time Interval) at Week 12 and 6 Months|C-peptide is a protein that shows how much insulin the body is producing. For 3 days before the mixed meal tolerance test participants were asked to eat a balanced diet. The test was performed only when the finger-stick blood glucose level was above 70 mg/dL and no higher than 200 mg/dL. Mixed meal-stimulated C-peptide AUC was the area under the C-peptide/time curve from time 0 to 120-minutes, calculated using the trapezoidal rule. This AUC was normalized for time interval by dividing it by 120-minutes (the number of minutes over which it was determined), and was adjusted by inclusion of Baseline C-peptide AUC as a covariate in the analysis. Baseline was defined at Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the post Baseline value from the Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1) and Week 12, Month 6|ITT population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||nanomoles per liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818932|NCT01123083|Primary|Change From Baseline in 2 Hour Mixed Meal-stimulated C-peptide Area Under Curve (AUC) (Normalized for 120-minute Time Interval) at Month 12|C-peptide is a protein that shows how much insulin the body is producing. For 3 days before the mixed meal tolerance test participants were asked to eat a balanced diet. The test was performed only when the finger-stick blood glucose level was above 70 mg per deciliter (mg/dL) and no higher than 200 mg/dL. Mixed meal-stimulated C-peptide AUC was the area under the C-peptide/time curve from time 0 to 120-minutes, calculated using the trapezoidal rule. This AUC was normalized for time interval by dividing it by 120-minutes (the number of minutes over which it was determined), and was adjusted by inclusion of Baseline C-peptide AUC as a covariate in the analysis. Baseline was defined at Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the value at Month 12 from the Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12|ITT population consisted of all participants who were randomized and received any part of at least 1 infusion of study drug. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||nanomoles per liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818933|NCT01123148|Primary|The Accuracy of BCI Typing While Tilting in a Power Wheelchair and While Sitting Still in a Power Wheelchair.|"Subjects will participate in 3 sessions. During each session each subject will copy a word in each of 3 conditions (no-movement, self-movement, continuous movement) by typing using only brainwaves. For the no-movement condition, the wheelchair seat remains in a fixed position. For the self-movement condition, the angle of the wheelchair seat changes in response to some of the selections made with the brain-computer interface. For the continuous movement condition, the angle of the wheelchair seat moves continuously. Changes in the wheelchair's position may affect spelling accuracy. The accuracy of the subject's copy spelling of the designated word will be measured for each condition in each session. The order of the conditions is balanced across the three days. The accuracy for each subject in each condition is presented as the average of the accuracies for that condition across the three days."|3 1-2 hour sessions over 2-4 weeks|||% Accuracy of selections||Standard Deviation|Mean
818934|NCT01123161|Secondary|NIHSS Scores at 90 Days|The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) is used to quantify neurological deficit. The scale ranges from 0 (best) to 42 points (worst). Between scores of 0 to 42, higher values reflect progressively greater deficit.|90 days|Intention to treat patients with an available 90-day NIHSS values therefore the total numbers available are fewer than the total ITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818935|NCT01123161|Secondary|The Barthel Index Measure of Activities of Daily Living;|The Barthel index measures independence in activities of daily living from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) in 5 point increments. Higher scores between 0 and 100 reflect progressively greater levels of independence. Scores were dichotomized at 90 so that a score of 95 or 100 was considered a successful treatment.|90 days|The intention to treat population with a 90-day Barthel index available was used, therefore the numbers are fewer than in the total population.||participants|||Number
818936|NCT01123161|Primary|90 Day Mortality|Mortality prior to the 90-day evaluation.|90 days|ITT population||participants|||Number
818937|NCT01123161|Primary|Incidence of Pneumonia|Number subjects diagnosed with pneumonia according to CDC criteria will be presented by treatment group and overall, regardless of seriousness|7 days or discharge whichever comes first|ITT population||participants|||Number
818938|NCT01123161|Primary|Incidence of Any Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage (sICH) Within 48 Hours of Stroke Onset|Incidence (number) of Symptomatic ICH (sICH) within 48 hours of stroke onset will be presented by treatment group and overall. Patients with neuroworsening (4 or more point increase in NIHSS , or a decline in the NIHSS consciousness item 1A score of more than 1 point, or a motor deterioration lasting more than 8 hours, all not due to iatrogenic cause) and hemorrhage seen on brain images in whom the investigator attributes the clinical change to the hemorrhage.|48 hours|ITT patients in whom a brain image was obtained 36 yo 48 hours after treatment||participants|||Number
818939|NCT01123161|Primary|Incidence of Any Intracranial Hemorrhage (ICH) Within 48 Hours of Stroke Onset|Incidence (number) of any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) (whether or not symptomatic) within 48 hours of stroke onset will be presented by treatment group and overall.|48 hours|Intention to treat patients with imaging obtained 36 to 48 hours after treatment||participants|||Number
818940|NCT01123161|Primary|The Primary Outcome is the Proportion of Patients Achieving a Favorable Outcome Defined as Modified Rankin Scale Score of 0 or 1, Assessed 90 Days After Treatment.|Modified Rankin describes disability: 0 is free of any disability or symptoms, 6 is death, and higher grades between 0 and 6 reflect progressively greater disability|90 days|Intention to Treat Population||participants|||Number
818941|NCT01123200|Secondary|Changes in Accuracy of BCI for Controlling Devices and Text|Changes in Accuracy Percentage (i.e., cumulative correct selections per month divided by the cumulative number of intended sections per month). Looking for trends over each 6 month period.|6 months, 12 months, 18 months|The first six month period was not completed by any participant so accuracy data for six months could not be analyzed.|||||
818942|NCT01123200|Primary|Duration of BCI Usage by Persons With ALS.|Number of months of BCI usage by each participant.|Monthly measurements for a period of up to 18 months.|||months||Full Range|Mean
818943|NCT01128829|Primary|The Effect of Sucralose on Insulin Concentration (Area Under the Curve; AUC)|we will measure plasma insulin concentrations during a 5-hour modified Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (mOGTT) administered 10 minutes after subjects consume sucralose in water or an equal volume of water without sucralose (control condition).Plasma insulin concentrations were measured at 20, 15, 10, 6, and 2 min before and at 10, 20, 30, 40, 60, 90, 120, 150,180, 240, and 300 min after ingesting 75g of glucose. All these data collected were used to create the AUC curve.|Baseline|||(pmol • min •L-1)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818944|NCT01128894|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 32|The Baseline value is the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 32 minus the value at Baseline. The analysis was performed using an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment group, region, Baseline HbA1c category, history of prior myocardial infarction (yes versus no), and age category (<65 years versus ≥65 years) as factors and Baseline weight as a continuous covariate. The LOCF method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing. Weight values obtained after hyperglycemia rescue were treated as missing and replaced with pre-rescue values.|Baseline and Week 32|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
818945|NCT01128894|Secondary|Time to Hyperglycemia Rescue at Week 32|Participants who experienced persistent hyperglycemia (high blood glucose) could have qualified for hyperglycemia rescue. The conditions for hyperglycemia rescue were as follows: fasting plasma glucose (FPG) >=280 milligram/decilitre (mg/dL) >= Week 2 and < Week 4, FPG >=250 mg/dL >= Week 4 and <Week 12, HbA1c ≥8.5% and ≤0.5% reduction from Baseline- >= Week 12 and <Week 26, or HbA1c ≥8.5% >= Week 26. Time to hyperglycemia rescue is defined as the time between the date of the first dose of study medication and the date of hyperglycemia rescue plus one day, or the time between the date of the first dose of study medication and the date of the last visit during the active treatment period plus one day for participants not requiring rescue. This time was divided by 7 to express the result in weeks. All times extending beyond Week 32 relevant to hyperglycemia rescue were censored at Week 32.|Week 32|ITT Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
818947|NCT01128894|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 26|The FPG test measures blood sugar levels after the participant has not eaten (fasted) for 12 to 14 hours. The Baseline FPG value is the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the value at Baseline. The LOCF method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing. Participants were considered in the treatment week if they had received at least one dose in that treatment week.|Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 26|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818948|NCT01128894|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 32|The FPG test measures blood sugar levels after the participant has not eaten (fasted) for 12 to 14 hours. The Baseline FPG value is the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the value at Baseline. The analysis was performed using an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment group, region, Baseline HbA1c category, history of prior myocardial infarction (yes versus no), and age category (<65 years versus ≥65 years) as factors and Baseline FPG as a continuous covariate. The LOCF method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing. Participants were considered in the treatment week if they had received at least one dose in that treatment week.|Baseline and Week 32|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818949|NCT01128894|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Weeks 4, 6, 12, 18 and 26|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin that is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over a 2- to 3-month period. The Baseline HbA1c value is defined as the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The LOCF method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing. Participants were considered in the treatment week if they had received at least one dose in that treatment week.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 6, 12, 18 and 26|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Percentage of HbA1c in the blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
818950|NCT01128894|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 32|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin that is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over a 2- to 3-month period. The Baseline HbA1c value is defined as the last non-missing value before the start of treatment. Change from Baseline in HbA1c was calculated as the value at Week 32 minus the value at Baseline. The analysis was performed using an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment group, region, history of prior myocardial infarction (yes versus no), and age category (<65 years versus ≥65 years) as factors and Baseline HbA1c as a continuous covariate. The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement was used to impute the missing measurement. If a participant had missing observation(s) immediately after Baseline, the Baseline observation was not carried forward and was left as missing.|Baseline and Week 32|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and who had at least one post-Baseline assessment of the primary endpoint, HbA1c. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Percentage of HbA1c in the blood||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818951|NCT01128946|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Enamel Fluoride Uptake Upon Exposure to NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF), SnF/NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF), NaMFP/NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF) and NaF Toothpaste (675ppmF)|Enamel fluoride uptake was determined using the microdrill enamel biopsy technique. The amount of fluoride uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride (F) divided by the area of the enamel cores. The difference between treatments was calculated with respect to fluoride uptake by enamel.|Baseline to 14 days|PP population: All randomized participants, who received at least one dose of study treatment and with at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment but did not have any major protocol violations. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there were differences in number of participants (N) per treatment group.||micrograms (μg)*F/centimeters(cm)^2]||Standard Error|Mean
818952|NCT01128946|Secondary|%SMHR of Enamel Specimens Exposed to NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF), SnF/NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF), NaMFP/NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF) and NaF Toothpaste (675ppmF)|SMH test was used to assess mineral status of partially demineralized enamel specimens using Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening/demineralization, while decrease in the indentation represents rehardening/ remineralization of enamel surface. Percent SMH recovery was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline(B), after intra-oral exposure(R) and after in-vitro demineralization(D) using formula: [(D-R)/ (D-B)]*100.|Baseline to 14 days|PP population: All randomized participants, who received at least one dose of study treatment and with at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment but did not have any major protocol violations. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there were differences in number of participants (N) per treatment group||Percentage||Standard Error|Mean
818973|NCT01129115|Primary|Change in Maximal Oxygen Consumption|Maximal Oxygen consumption (VO2 max) is the standard, quantitative measure of aerobic fitness. The physiologic range of scores is approximately 3.5 milliliters of oxygen per kilogram of body weight per minute (ml/kg/min) to approximately 90 (ml/kg/min). Higher numbers indicate greater fitness and positive change indicates increasing fitness. Lower number indicate worse fitness|26 weeks|||ml/kg/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
818953|NCT01128946|Primary|Percentage Surface Microhardness Recovery (%SMHR) of Enamel Specimens Exposed to NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF) and SnF/NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF)|SMH test was used to assess mineral status of partially demineralized enamel specimens using Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening/demineralization, while decrease in the indentation represents rehardening/ remineralization of enamel surface. Percent SMH recovery was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline(B), after intra-oral exposure(R) and after in-vitro demineralization(D) using formula: [(D-R)/(D-B)]*100.|Baseline to 14 days|Per Protocol (PP) population: All randomized participants, who received at least one dose of study treatment and with at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment but did not have any major protocol violations. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there were differences in number of participants (N) per treatment group.||Percentage of SMHR||Standard Error|Mean
818954|NCT01128959|Primary|Adverse Events||Baseline to after last iv dose on day 4|All Patients Treated Set||Number of adverse events|||Number
818955|NCT01128972|Other Pre-specified|Adjusted Mean Percent SMH Recovery of Enamel Specimens Exposed to Test Dentifrice +Sterile Water Rinse and Reference Dentifrice +Sterile Water Rinse|SMH test was used to assess mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents rehardening of enamel surface. Percent SMH recovery was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline (B), after in-situ hardening (R) and after first erosive challenge (E1) using formula: [(E1-R)/ (E1-B)]*100.|Baseline, 4 hours post treatment in each treatment period|PP population: All randomized subjects who received at least one dose of the study treatments and had no major protocol deviations were included in analysis.||Percent SMH||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818956|NCT01128972|Other Pre-specified|Adjusted Mean Percent NER of Enamel Specimens Exposed to Test Dentifrice +Sterile Water Rinse and Reference Dentifrice +Sterile Water Rinse|Enamel specimens were exposed to dietary erosive challenge and set of five indentations within each specimen was measured. Decrease in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates hardening of enamel surface. Enamel specimens were exposed to second erosion challenge to determine NER which compared the indentations values of enamel specimens at baseline (B), first erosive (E1) and second erosive challenge (E2). Percent NER was calculated by formula: [(E1-E2)/ (E1-B)]*100. Smaller the negative NER, better is treatment regimen in imparting resistance to enamel.|Baseline, 4 hours post treatment in each treatment period|PP population: All randomized subjects who received at least one dose of the study treatments and had no major protocol deviations were included in analysis.||Percent NER||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818957|NCT01128972|Other Pre-specified|Adjusted Mean Percentage SMH Recovery of Enamel Specimens Exposed to Test Dentifrice + Test MR Relative to Following Treatment Regimens: 1) Test Dentifrice +Test MR 2) Test Dentifrice + Sterile Water 3) Reference Dentifrice +Sterile Water|SMH test was used to assess mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents rehardening of enamel surface. Percent SMH recovery was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline (B), after in-situ hardening (R) and after first erosive challenge (E1) using formula: [(E1-R)/ (E1-B)]*100.|Baseline, 4 hours post treatment in each treatment period|PP population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study treatments and had no major protocol deviations were included in analysis.||Percent SMH||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818958|NCT01128972|Other Pre-specified|Adjusted Mean Percent NER of Enamel Specimens Exposed to a Treatment Regimen of Placebo Dentifrice + Test MR Relative to: 1) Test Dentifrice +Test MR 2) Test Dentifrice + Sterile Water Rinse 3) Reference Dentifrice +Sterile Water Rinse|Enamel specimens were exposed to dietary erosive challenge and set of five indentations within each specimen was measured. Decrease in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates hardening of enamel surface. Enamel specimens were exposed to second erosion challenge to determine NER which compared the indentations values of enamel specimens at baseline (B), first erosive (E1) and second erosive challenge (E2). Percent NER was calculated by formula: [(E1-E2)/ (E1-B)]*100. Smaller the negative NER, better is treatment regimen in imparting resistance to enamel.|Baseline, 4 hours post treatment in each treatment period|PP population: All randomized subjects who received at least one dose of the study treatments and had no major protocol deviations were included in analysis.||Percent NER||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818959|NCT01128972|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Percentage Surface Microhardness (SMH) Recovery of Enamel Specimens Exposed to Test Dentifrice + Test MR Relative to: 1)Test Dentifrice+Sterile Water Rinse 2)Reference Dentifrice+Sterile Water Rinse 3)Placebo Dentifrice+ Sterile Water Rinse|SMH test was used to assess mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents rehardening of enamel surface. Percent SMH recovery was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline (B), after in-situ hardening (R) and after first erosive challenge (E1) using formula: [(E1-R)/ (E1-B)]*100.|Baseline, 4 hours post treatment in each treatment period.|PP population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study treatments and had no major protocol deviations were included in analysis.||Percent SMH||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818960|NCT01128972|Primary|Adjusted Mean Percent Net Erosion Resistance (NER) of Enamel Specimens Exposed to Test Dentifrice + Test MR Relative to: 1) Test Dentifrice+ Sterile Water Rinse 2) Reference Dentifrice+ Sterile Water Rinse 3) Placebo Dentifrice+ Sterile Water Rinse|Enamel specimens were exposed to dietary erosive challenge and set of five indentations within each specimen was measured. Decrease in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates hardening of enamel surface. Enamel specimens were exposed to second erosion challenge to determine NER which compared the indentations values of enamel specimens at baseline (B), first erosive (E1) and second erosive challenge (E2). Percent NER was calculated by formula: [(E1-E2)/ (E1-B)]*100. Smaller the negative NER, better is treatment regimen in imparting resistance to enamel.|Baseline, 4 hours post treatment in each treatment period|Per protocol (PP) population: All randomized subjects who received at least one dose of the study treatments and had no major protocol deviations were included in analysis.||Percent NER||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818961|NCT01129011|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline on Satisfaction of the Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (SODA) Subscales|Mean Change in Satisfaction on SODA Assessment. Questions/statements to rate about satisfaction/dissatisfaction with their present level of abdominal discomfort. Question 1: 4-point scale range 0 (extremely unhappy) to 4 (extremely happy), statement 2 (I feel satisfied with my health with regard to abdominal discomfort) & statement 3 (I am pleased because my abdominal discomfort seems under control) on a 5 point scale (definitely true to definitely false) & question 4 rated how pleased subjects were with abdominal discomfort on a 10 point scale. Total satisfaction composite range: 2-23|baseline to 6 Months|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population||Units on SODA Subscale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818962|NCT01129011|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline on Non-Pain Symptoms of the Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (SODA) Subscales|Change from Baseline of Non-Pain Symptoms on the SODA Assessment. There are 7 categories about the non-pain symptoms: burping/beching, heartburn, bloating, passing gas, sour taste, nausea and bad breath. For each of these categories, subjects were to rate during the past seven days, on average, the severity on a 5 point scale ranging from no problem to very severe problem. The scores are combined into a single composite score. The total possible range of the non-pain symptoms subscale is: 7-35.|baseline to 6 Months|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population||Units on SODA Subscale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818963|NCT01129011|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline on Pain Intensity of the Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (SODA) Subscales|"Mean Change from Baseline on Pain Intensity of the Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (SODA) Subscales. There are 6 questions about abdominal pain during the past 7 days: q 1-5 on average: 1. rate with a number between 0 (no pain) and 100 (pain as bad as it could be), 2. rate with a number between 0 (no discomfort) and 10 (discomfort as bad as it can be), 3. on a scale of 5 (from none to excriciating), 4. on 100 mm VAS, 5. on a scale of 4 and 6. worst abdominal pain scale 0 (no discomfort) and 10 (discomfort as bad as it can be). Total composite possible range for pain intensity is: 2-47"|Baseline to 6 Months|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population||Units on SODA Subscale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
818964|NCT01129011|Secondary|Improvement From Baseline in Upper Abdominal Pain and Discomfort Scores at 6 Months, Based on the Overall Treatment Evaluation for Dyspepsia Questionnaire|"Improvement from baseline in Upper Abdominal Pain and Discomfort scores at 6 months, based on the overall Treatment Evaluation for Dyspepsia Questionnaire. Subjects were asked: since treatment started, has there been any change in your upper abdominal pain and/or discomfort? Answers would be better/about the same/worse. Participants with the response better (instead of about the same or worse), are tabulated by treatment group."|change from baseline at 6 Months|Intent to Treat Population||Participants|||Number
818965|NCT01129011|Secondary|Heartburn Symptom Resolution, ie no Heartburn Symptoms During the Last 7 Days Prior to the Visit|"Subjects were asked whether heartburn symptoms within the 7 days prior to the visit were:
none: no symptoms
mild: awareness of symptom, but easily tolerated
moderate: discomforting symptom sufficient to cause interference with normal activities (including sleep)
severe: incapacitating symptom, with inability to perform normal activities (including sleep) Heartburn was defined as a burning feeling rising from the stomach or lower part of the chest towards the neck."|6 months|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population||participants|||Number
818966|NCT01129011|Secondary|The Number of Participants Developing Duodenal Ulcers Throughout 6 Months of Treatment|The Number of Participants Developing Duodenal Ulcers at any time during the 6 Months of the treatment period|6 months|Intent to treat (ITT) population||Participants|||Number
818967|NCT01129011|Secondary|The Number of Participants Discontinuing From the Study Due to NSAID-Associated Upper GI Adverse Events or to Duodenal Ulcer|The Number of Participants Discontinuing from the Study Due to non-steroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID)-Associated Upper GI Adverse Events or to Duodenal Ulcer during the treatment period|6 Months|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population||Participants|||Number
818968|NCT01129011|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Pre-Specified NSAID-Associated Upper GI Adverse Events or Duodenal Ulcers|The Number of Participants with Pre-Specified non-steroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID)-Associated Upper Gastrointestinal (UGI) Adverse Events or Duodenal Ulcers after 6 months of treatment. Pre-specified UGI adverse events typically associated with NSAID use include dyspepsia, abdominal pain, gastritis, erosive esophagitis, duodenitis, abdominal discomfort|6 months|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population||Participants|||Number
818969|NCT01129011|Primary|Number of Participants With Gastric Ulcer Confirmed by Endoscopy|The primary efficacy endpoint was the number of subjects with gastric ulcers at any time throughout 6 months of treatment. An ulcer was defined as a mucosal break of at least 3 mm in diameter (measured by close application of open endoscopic biopsy forceps) with unequivocal crater depth. A subject is considered to have completed the study if all scheduled assessments up through the 6 month visit have been performed or if the endpoint of gastric ulcer confirmed by endoscopy has been reached.|6 months|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population||Participants|||Number
818970|NCT01129102|Secondary|Difference in the VAS of Primary Dysmenorrhea (Baseline/Pretreatment-End of Treatment)|VAS stands for Visual Analogue Scale of pain. The scale was rated as a graphic rating scale. as a 100mm baseline from 0:No pain to 100:Worst possible pain.|16weeks|This analysis was carried out based on FAS population. IKH-01 was not allocated for primary dysmenorrhea in this study. Therefore, VAS for primary dysmenorrhea is not available in IKH-01 group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818971|NCT01129102|Primary|Patient Response to Treatment for Dysmenorrhea, as Evaluated by Difference of Total Dysmenorrhea Score (Baseline/Pretreatment-End of Treatment)|"The detail of dysmenorrhea score that was used in this study is the following. These subscales summed for a total dysmenorrhea score (minimum 0 to maximum 6). Pain score None 0 : None Mild 1 : There are some troubles for work Moderate 2 : Needing to rest in bed and/or affecting work Severe 3 : Morre than 1 day in bed and not possible to work
Drug score (during a menstrual period) None 0 : None Mild 1 : taking analgesics for 1 days Moderate 2 : taking analgesics for 2 days Severe 3 : taking analgesics more than 3 days"|16weeks|Primary endpoints were analysed based on FAS population. Data unavailable for IKH-01 group because IKH-01 group only assigned for secondary dysmenorrhea.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818972|NCT01129115|Primary|Change in Physical Performance Test|The Physical Performance Test is a 9-item measure of physical function. The range of scores is 0-34. Higher numbers indicate better physical function. Positive change indicates improving function. Negative change indicates decreasing function.|26 Week|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818974|NCT01129115|Secondary|Reasoning|"Reasoning is a latent derived variable derived estimated mean. The reported latent means for this trial are created from the well-known neuropsychological tests:Letter and Word Inductive Reasoning, Matrix Reasoning.
Latent variables cannot be measured directly but are derived from a theory-driven confirmatory factor analysis in a structural equation model framework. The latent scores are centered around a mean of 0 and standardized so each value represents a fraction of the standard deviation. There are no limits to the scores. Positive number indicate improved performance. Negative numbers indicate worsening performance."|26 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818975|NCT01129115|Secondary|Set Maintenance & Shifting|"Set Maintenance and Switching is a latent derived variable derived estimated mean. The reported latent means for this trial are created from the well-known neuropsychological tests: DKEFS Card Sort, Animal and Vegetable Category Fluency.
Latent variables cannot be measured directly but are derived from a theory-driven confirmatory factor analysis in a structural equation model framework. The latent scores are centered around a mean of 0 and standardized so each value represents a fraction of the standard deviation. There are no limits to the scores. Positive number indicate improved performance. Negative numbers indicate worsening performance."|26 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818976|NCT01129115|Secondary|Simple Attention|"Simple Attention is a latent derived variable derived estimated mean. The reported latent means for this trial are created from the well-known neuropsychological tests: Digit span Forward and Backward, Letter Numbers Sequencing.
Latent variables cannot be measured directly but are derived from a theory-driven confirmatory factor analysis in a structural equation model framework. The latent scores are centered around a mean of 0 and standardized so each value represents a fraction of the standard deviation. There are no limits to the scores. Positive number indicate improved performance. Negative numbers indicate worsening performance."|26 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818977|NCT01129115|Primary|Visuospatial Processing|"Visuospatial Processing is a latent derived variable derived estimated mean.The reported latent means for this trial are created from the well-known neuropsychological tests: Block Design, Stroop Color Reading, Digit Symbol Substitution and Trailmaking Test A.
Latent variables cannot be measured directly but are derived from a theory-driven confirmatory factor analysis in a structural equation model framework. The latent scores are centered around a mean of 0 and standardized so each value represents a fraction of the standard deviation. There are no limits to the scores. Positive number indicate improved performance. Negative numbers indicate worsening performance."|26 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
818978|NCT01129115|Secondary|Verbal Memory|"Verbal Memory is a latent derived variable derived estimated mean. The reported latent means for this trial are created from the well-known neuropsychological tests: Logical Memory, Delayed Logical Memory, Selective Reminding Task - Free Recall Total, Boston Naming Test.
Latent variables cannot be measured directly but are derived from a theory-driven confirmatory factor analysis in a structural equation model framework. The latent scores are centered around a mean of 0 and standardized so each value represents a fraction of the standard deviation. There are no limits to the scores. Positive number indicate improved performance.Negative numbers indicate worsening performance."|26 weeks|Healthy older adults without measurable cognitive decline who did not meet recommended daily activity levels.||units on a standardized scale||Standard Error|Mean
818979|NCT01129128|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|Adverse events such as nausea or rash in participants receiving an Echinacea formulation or placebo will be compared|1- 30 days after starting study medication|Participants who received at least one dose of study medication||participants|||Number
818980|NCT01129128|Secondary|Peak Level IL-2|Highest level of IL-2 while taking study medication|1-10 days after starting study medication|Data analyzed on any participant who IL-2 level was obtained on 1 or more days while on study medication.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
818981|NCT01129128|Secondary|Peak Level Interferon Gamma|Highest level of Interferon gamma while taking study medication|1-10 days after starting study medication|Data analyzed on any participant who Interferon gamma level was obtained on 1 or more days while on study medication.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
818982|NCT01129128|Secondary|Peak Level IL-6|Highest level of IL-6 while taking study medication|1-10 days after starting study medication|Data analyzed on any participant who IL-6 level was obtained on 1 or more days while on study medication.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
818983|NCT01129128|Primary|Peak Level of TNF Alpha|Highest level of TNF alpha while taking study medication|1-10 days after starting study medication|Data analyzed on any participant who TNF alpha level was obtained on 1 or more days while on study medication.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
818984|NCT01129141|Primary|Tinnitus Functional Index|The TFI served as the primary outcome measure. The TFI is a 25-item self-report questionnaire that has documented validity both for scaling the severity and negative impact of tinnitus, and for measuring treatment-related changes in tinnitus (responsiveness) (Meikle et al., 2012). The total score for the TFI ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater problems with tinnitus. The TFI has excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = .97) and high test-retest reliability (r = .86) (Meikle et al., 2012). The authors of the TFI estimated that a 13-point decrease on the TFI for an individual is likely to reflect a change that feels meaningful to the person.|Baseline, 6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
818985|NCT01131884|Primary|Bone Mineral Density|Whether or not Fosamax increases bone mineral density at the hip and distal femur in spinal cord injury induced osteoporosis|1 year after enrollment|No analysis performed as there was only one patient who participated in this study|||||
818986|NCT01132118|Secondary|Triglycerides|mg/dL|Baseline and Week 8|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818987|NCT01132118|Secondary|HDL Cholesterol|mg/dL|Baseline and Week 8|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818988|NCT01132118|Secondary|LDL Cholesterol|mg/dL|Baseline and Week 8|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818989|NCT01132118|Secondary|Total Cholesterol|mg/dL|Baseline and Week 8|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
818990|NCT01132118|Secondary|HOMA-B|HOMA-B = (360 x Insulin)/(Glucose - 63)|Baseline and Week 8|||(mIU x dL)/(L x mg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
818991|NCT01132118|Secondary|HOMA-IR|"We will examine the effect of HCQ on HOMA-IR during the active treatment phase compared with placebo phase.
HOMA-IR = (Glucose x insulin)/405"|Baseline and Week 8|||(mg x mIU)/(dL*L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819015|NCT01132495|Primary|Major Adverse Cardiac Event Rate (MACE)|MACE: A composite of all cause death, documented MI, unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization.|24 Month|The primary outcome analysis was designed for Cohort A only.||percentage of subjects with SAEs|||Number
818993|NCT01132144|Secondary|Procedure Related Pain|"Pain will be assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). We will use a 10 cm length horizontal line, anchored by word descriptors at each end: No Pain = 0 cm and Very Severe Pain = 10 cm.
This outcome will be assessed in both groups, just after endometrial injury or sham procedure."|Immediately after procedure|All women enrolled.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818994|NCT01132144|Secondary|Three-dimensional Doppler Indices From Endometrium (VFI)|"Vascularization index (VI), flow index (FI) and vascularization-flow index (VFI) assessed from endometrium using three-dimensional Power Doppler ultrasonography. This outcome will be assessed when at least one follicle ≥ 17mm is observed.
Only VFI was reported as it is a combination of VI and FI (VFI = VI*FI/100), and currently there are several concerns about the validity of these indices.
Such indices have no scale."|1 month|Women that achieved at least one follicle >17mm during ovarian stimulation.||index||Standard Deviation|Mean
818995|NCT01132144|Secondary|Endometrial Volume|The total volume of endometrial tissue assessed by three-dimensional ultrasonography. This outcome will be assessed when at least one follicle ≥ 17mm is observed.|1 month|Women that achieved at least one follicle >17mm during ovarian stimulation.||cm³||Standard Deviation|Mean
818996|NCT01132144|Secondary|Endometrial Thickness|The maximum distance perpendicular to the inter-endometrial interface from the endometrium-myometrium interface of the anterior to the posterior wall of the uterus assessed in the sagittal plane. This outcome will be assessed when at least one follicle ≥ 17mm is observed.|1 month|Women that achieved at least one follicle >17mm during ovarian stimulation.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
818997|NCT01132144|Secondary|Implantation Rate|The number of gestational sacs observed divided by the number of embryos transferred.|3 months||||||
818998|NCT01132144|Secondary|Miscarriage|"Loss of a clinical pregnancy before 20 completed weeks of gestational age (18 weeks after fertilization).
Note: All allocated women will be considered when assessing miscarriage rate."|9 months|The number of clinical pregnancies was used as denominator, since miscarriage is a harm that can only happen in pregnant women.||Clinical pregnancies|||Number
818999|NCT01132144|Secondary|Ongoing Pregnancy|"At least one fetus with heart beat after 12 weeks of gestational age.
Note: All allocated women will be considered when assessing ongoing pregnancy rate."|6 months|||participants|||Number
819000|NCT01132144|Secondary|Clinical Pregnancy|"Pregnancy diagnosed by ultrasonographic visualization of one or more gestational sacs or definitive clinical signs of pregnancy. It includes ectopic pregnancy. Multiple gestational sacs are counted as one clinical pregnancy.
Note: All allocated women will be considered when assessing clinical pregnancy rate."|3 months|All women enrolled.||participants|||Number
819001|NCT01132144|Primary|Live Birth|"The complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of a product of fertilization, irrespective of the duration of the pregnancy, which, after such separation, breathes or shows any other evidence of life, such as heart beat, umbilical cord pulsation, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, irrespective of whether the umbilical cord has been cut or the placenta is attached.
Note: All allocated women will be used as denominator when assessing live birth rate."|1 year|All women enrolled.||participants|||Number
819002|NCT01132313|Secondary|Part 3 and 4: Sustained Virological Response (SVR) at 4 Weeks After End of Treatment|Part 3 and 4: Sustained virological response (SVR) at 4 weeks after end of treatment|up to 28 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819003|NCT01132313|Secondary|Part 3 and 4: Plasma HCV RNA Level <25 IU/mL at Week 4 and 12 of Treatment|Part 3 and 4: Plasma Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level <25 IU/mL at week 4 and 12 of treatment|Week 4 and 12|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
819004|NCT01132313|Secondary|Part 2: Sustained Virological Response at 4 and 24 Weeks After End of Treatment|Part 2: Sustained virological response at 4 and 24 weeks after end of treatment|4 weeks and 24 weeks after the end of treatment, up to 64 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
819005|NCT01132313|Secondary|Part 1 and 2: Plasma HCV RNA Level Not Detectable at Week 4|Part 1 and 2: Plasma Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level not detectable at Week 4|4 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
819006|NCT01132313|Secondary|Part 2: Time to Virological Response|Part 2: Time to virological response, defined as the timepoint of the first measurement of plasma HCV RNA level <25 IU/mL. The percentage of participants who achieved virological response within each time period are displayed for this outcome measure.|From drug administration until end of drug administration, up to 40 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
819007|NCT01132313|Secondary|Part 1: Time to Virological Response|Part 1: Time to virological response, defined as the timepoint of the first measurement of plasma HCV RNA level <25 IU/mL. The percentage of participants who achieved virological response within each time period are displayed for this outcome measure.|From drug administration until end of drug administration, up to 4 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
819008|NCT01132313|Primary|Part 3 and 4: Sustained Virological Response (SVR)|Part 3 and 4: Sustained virological response (SVR) defined as HCV RNA <25IU/mL and undetectable at 12 weeks after end of treatment|From drug administration until 12 weeks after end of treatment, up to 36 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819009|NCT01132313|Primary|Part 2: Sustained Virological Response (SVR)|Part 2: Sustained virological response (SVR), defined as HCV RNA <25 IU/mL and undetectable at 12 weeks after end of treatment|From drug administration until 12 weeks after end of treatment, up to 52 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
819010|NCT01132313|Primary|Part 1: Rapid Virological Response (RVR)|Part 1: Rapid virological response (RVR), defined as Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) <25IU/mL at Week 4 of treatment|4 weeks|FAS which included all randomised patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819011|NCT01132326|Primary|Patients With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events|Number of patients reporting any treatment emergent adverse events (SAE and or AEs) during the study|up to 2 years|||participants|||Number
819012|NCT01132378|Secondary|Quadriceps Strength||2 year||||||
819013|NCT01132378|Primary|Knee Society Score|The higher the score the better is the result (0-100). The knee society score reflects the outcomes and perception of the patients regarding function and pain|2 year|||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
819014|NCT01132495|Secondary|Overall MACE|Non-urgent revascularization procedures, cost and cost effectiveness, functional class, number of anti-anginal medication, rate of non-urgent revascularization, and rate of cerebrovascular event.|5 years||03/2018||||
819017|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension Stability at 52 Weeks|Knee extension stability was evaluated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|52 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819018|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension Stability at 26 Weeks|Knee extension stability was evaluated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|26 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819019|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension Stability at 12 Weeks|Knee extension stability was evaluated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|12 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819020|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension Stability at 6 Weeks|Knee extension stability was evaluated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|6 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819021|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension Stability at Baseline|Knee extension stability was evaluated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|Baseline|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819022|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Total Range of Motion at 78 Weeks|Total range of motion of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|78 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819023|NCT01132508|Primary|Surgeons Overall Satisfaction With Norian Drillable|The overall satisfaction of the ease of use of Norian Drillable was rated by the surgeon.|Surgery|||Cases|||Number
819024|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Total Range of Motion at 52 Weeks|Total range of motion of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|52 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819025|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Total Range of Motion at 26 Weeks|Total range of motion of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|26 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819026|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Total Range of Motion at 12 Weeks|Total range of motion of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|12 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819027|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Total Range of Motion at 6 Weeks|Total range of motion of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|6 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819028|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Total Range of Motion at Baseline|Total range of motion of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|Baseline|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819029|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension at 78 Weeks|The extension ability of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|78 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819030|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension at 52 Weeks|The extension ability of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|52 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819031|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension at 26 Week|The extension ability of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|26 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819032|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension at 12 Weeks|The extension ability of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|12 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819033|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension at 6 Weeks|The extension ability of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|6 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819034|NCT01132508|Secondary|Knee Function and Stability: Extension at Baseline|The extension ability of the knee was investigated by the investigator right after surgery (Baseline) and at each follow-up visit.|Baseline|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819035|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Angulation (Valgus/Varus) at 78 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter angulation (valgus/varus) (abnormal outward/inward turning of the knee) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|78 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819036|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Angulation (Valgus/Varus) at 52 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter angulation (valgus/varus) (abnormal outward/inward turning of the knee) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|52 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819037|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Angulation (Valgus/Varus) at 26 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter angulation (valgus/varus) (abnormal outward/inward turning of the knee) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|26 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819038|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Angulation (Valgus/Varus) at 12 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter angulation (valgus/varus) (abnormal outward/inward turning of the knee) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|12 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819039|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Angulation (Valgus/Varus) at 6 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter angulation (valgus/varus) (abnormal outward/inward turning of the knee) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|6 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819040|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Angulation (Valgus/Varus) at Surgery|"The anatomical grading parameter angulation (valgus/varus) (abnormal outward/inward turning of the knee) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|Surgery|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819041|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Angulation (Valgus/Varus) at Baseline|"The anatomical grading parameter angulation (valgus/varus) (abnormal outward/inward turning of the knee) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|Baseline|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819042|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Condylar Widening at 78 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter condylar widening (enlargement of the knee joint) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|78 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819043|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Condylar Widening at 52 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter condylar widening (enlargement of the knee joint) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|52 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819044|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Condylar Widening at 26 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter condylar widening (enlargement of the knee joint) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|26 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819045|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Condylar Widening at 12 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter condylar widening (enlargement of the knee joint) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|12 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819056|NCT01132508|Primary|Ease of Use Score Measured With a Surgeon Questionnaire: Product Characteristics Overall Ease of Use|Right after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, surgeons were required to answer five questions about the product characteristics of Norian Drillable.|Day 0 (Date of surgery)|||Cases|||Number
819046|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Condylar Widening at 6 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter condylar widening (enlargement of the knee joint) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|6 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819047|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Condylar Widening at Surgery|"The anatomical grading parameter condylar widening (enlargement of the knee joint) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|Surgery|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819048|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Condylar Widening at Baseline|"The anatomical grading parameter condylar widening (enlargement of the knee joint) was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoints. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|Baseline|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819049|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Depression at 78 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter depression was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoint. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|78 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819050|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters:: Depression at 52 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter depression was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoint. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|52 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819051|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Depression at 26 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter depression was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoint. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|26 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819052|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Depression at 12 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter depression was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoint. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|12 weeks|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819053|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Depression at 6 Weeks|"The anatomical grading parameter depression was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoint. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|6 week|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819054|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Depression at Surgery|"The anatomical grading parameter depression was assessed the following way: AP and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoint. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|Surgery|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819055|NCT01132508|Secondary|Radiographic Parameters: Depression at Baseline|"The anatomical grading parameter depression was assessed the following way: Anterior-Posterior (AP) and lateral radiographs were taken for the fractured and healthy tibia plateau at Baseline, right after surgery and all follow-up timepoint. Additional oblique radiographs at 45° or other fracture imaging was optional. All post-operative radiographs were compared against the healthy tibia films post-surgery and all follow-up radiographs were compared with the post-operative radiographs to evaluate the quality and changes in reduction at each timepoint. CT scans were only mandatory at Baseline."|Baseline|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
819057|NCT01132508|Primary|Ease of Use Score Measured With a Surgeon Questionnaire: Product Characteristics Flexibility With Surgical Procedure|Right after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, surgeons were required to answer five questions about the product characteristics of Norian Drillable.|Day 0 (Date of surgery)|||Cases|||Number
819058|NCT01132508|Primary|Ease of Use Score Measured With a Surgeon Questionnaire: Product Characteristics Flow Properties|Right after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, surgeons were required to answer five questions about the product characteristics of Norian Drillable.|Day 0 (Date of surgery)|||Cases|||Number
819059|NCT01132508|Primary|Ease of Use Score Measured With a Surgeon Questionnaire: Product Characteristics Handling|Right after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, surgeons were required to answer five questions about the product characteristics of Norian Drillable.|Day 0 (Date of surgery)|||Cases|||Number
819060|NCT01132508|Primary|Ease of Use Score Measured With a Surgeon Questionnaire: Product Characteristics Mixing|Right after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, surgeons were required to answer five questions about the product characteristics of Norian Drillable.|Day 0 (Date of surgery)|||Cases|||Number
819061|NCT01132508|Primary|Ease of Use Score Measured With a Surgeon Questionnaire: Screw Insertion|Right after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, surgeons were required to answer three questions about the ease of use of Norian Drillable.|Day 0 (Date of surgery)|||Cases|||Number
819062|NCT01132508|Primary|Ease of Use Score Measured With a Surgeon Questionnaire: Tap|"Right after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, surgeons were required to answer three questions about the ease of use of Norian Drillable.
A tap is an instrument used to create threads in a hole drilled in bone."|Day 0 (Date of surgery)|||Cases|||Number
819063|NCT01132508|Primary|Ease of Use Score Measured With a Surgeon Questionnaire: K-wire|"Right after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, surgeons were required to answer three questions about the ease of use of Norian Drillable.
Kirschner wires or K-wires are sterilized, sharpened, smooth stainless steel pins widely used to hold bone fragments together (pin fixation) or to provide an anchor for skeletal traction in fractures."|Day 0 (Date of surgery)|||Cases|||Number
819064|NCT01132508|Secondary|Pain and Function Assessed With the Lysholm Knee Scale|The Lysholm Knee Score assessed pain and function of the knee (by evaluating whether support for weight bearing was needed, the patients ability to climb stairs and to squat, whether the patients knee was instable and the patient experienced pain and swelling) and was completed by the patient before surgery and at Week 6, Week 12, Week 26, Week 52, Week 78 and Week 104 (for Australian sites only). The score ranged from 0 to 100 points with higher values indicating a better healing status of the knee.|6 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks, 52 weeks, 78 weeks and 104 weeks (for Australian sites only)|Five major protocol violations were excluded in the efficacy analysis.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
819065|NCT01132508|Primary|Ease of Use Score Measured With a Surgeon Questionnaire: Drill|Right after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, surgeons were required to answer three questions about the ease of use of Norian Drillable.|Day 0 (Date of surgery)|||Cases|||Number
819066|NCT01132508|Primary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability of the Device||At enrolment (between day -7 and day 0), day 0 (day of surgery), 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks, 52 weeks, 78 weeks and 104 (for Australian sites only) postoperative|||participants|||Number
819067|NCT01132508|Primary|Estimate of Blood Loss in Cubic Centimeter as a Measure of Effectiveness of the Treatment|Immediately after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, the surgeon completed a questionnaire in which he recorded the estimated amount of blood loss (the amount of fluid used in irrigation should have been subtracted from the amount of fluid present in the suction canister at the completion of surgery. Any gauze used in the procedure should have been estimated for the ml of blood loss)|Day 0 (Day of surgery)|||Cubic Centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
819068|NCT01132508|Primary|Duration of Time the Patient Was in the OR as a Measure of Effectiveness of the Treatment|Immediately after the surgery in which Norian Drillable was implanted, the surgeon completed a questionnaire in which he recorded the duration of time the patient was in the operating room (OR)|Day 0 (Day of surgery)|||Minutes||Full Range|Median
819069|NCT01132547|Secondary|Pattern of Weight in the Study Population|Change from Baseline in Weight|Baseline and 8 weeks|Completers||Kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
819070|NCT01132547|Primary|Severity of Weight Loss|Change from Baseline in Weight Z score|Baseline and 8 weeks|Completers =||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
819071|NCT01132547|Primary|Participant With Weight Loss ≥ 5% at the 8- Week Assessment When Compared to Baseline||8 weeks|LOCF||participants|||Number
819072|NCT01132651|Secondary|Change in Severity of Atopic Dermatitis (AD) as Measured by a Change in Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) Score|The IGA score is an assessment of AD severity. It is an assessment of the patient's disease state at the time of examination and does not attempt a comparison with any of the patient's previous disease states. Possible scores range from 0 to 5. A score of 0 is associated with no evidence of AD and a score of 5 is associated with severe AD.|Baseline and at 2 weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
819073|NCT01132651|Primary|Change in Sleep Quality as Measured by a Change in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) Survey Score|"The PSQI is a clinical survey used to measure sleep quality. Seven components related to sleep quality are scored: subjective sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep duration, habitual sleep efficiency, sleep disturbances, use of sleeping medications, and daytime dysfunction. Each component is scored on a scale of 0 to 3. A score of 0 is associated with better sleep quality and a score of 3 is associated with worse sleep quality. The seven component scores are summed to achieve a total PSQI score. The total PSQI score has a range of 0-21. A score of 0 is associated with better sleep quality and a score of 21 is associated with worse sleep quality.
Buysse,D.J., Reynolds,C.F., Monk,T.H., Berman,S.R., & Kupfer,D.J. (1989). The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI): A new instrument for psychiatric research and practice. Psychiatry Research, 28(2), 193-213."|Baseline and at 2 weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
819074|NCT01132664|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) - Based on Investigator Review Using Kaplan Meier - Phase l & ll||18 months|FAS consisted of all patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug (buparlisib). PFS analysis was not done for the BM cohort population. MTD/RP2D was not established due to premature termination of the study. In the phase ll portion of the study, PFS was analyzed only in patients with known PIK3 status, thus only 26/50 patients were analyzed.||Months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
819075|NCT01132664|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR) - Phase l & ll|"CBR = patients with CR, PR or SD ≥ 24 weeks according to RECIST by the investigator.
Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.0 assessed the disease status by imaging (i.e. CT/MRI): CR = Disappearance of all tumor lesions; PR= >=30% shrinkage of lesions; SD = Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR or CR nor an increase in lesions which would qualify for PD; PD = At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of all measured target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of longest diameter of all target lesions recorded at or after baseline."|18 months|"The full analysis set (FAS) consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of study drug (buparlisib).
CBR analysis was not done for the BM cohort population."||Participants|||Number
819076|NCT01132664|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR) Based on Investigator Assessment- Phase l & ll|"Disease control rate (DCR) = patients with complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) as per RECIST criteria.
Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.0 assessed the disease status by imaging (i.e. CT/MRI): CR = disappearance of all tumor lesions; PR = >=30% shrinkage of lesions; SD = Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR or CR nor an increase in lesions which would qualify for progressive disease (PD); PD = At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of all measured target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of longest diameter of all target lesions recorded at or after baseline."|18 months|"The full analysis set (FAS) consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of study drug (buparlisib).
CBR analysis was not done for the BM cohort population. DCR analysis was not done for the BM cohort population."||Participants|||Number
819077|NCT01132664|Primary|Overall Response Rate (ORR) - Phase ll|"Objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the rate of patients with best overall response (BOR) equal to complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to RECIST 1.0 from the Investigators review.
Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.0 assessed of the disease status by imaging (i.e. CT/MRI): Complete Response (CR) = Disappearance of all tumor lesions; Partial Response (PR)= >=30% shrinkage of lesions; Overall Response (OR) = patients with CR and PR."|18 months|The full analysis set (FAS) consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of study drug (buparlisib)||Participants|||Number
819078|NCT01132664|Primary|Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT) - Phase l Only|Determination of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in the dose escalation part of the study was based upon the estimation of the probability of DLT in Cycle 1 in patients of the dose-determining set.|cycle 1 - 28 days|The Dose–determining set (DDS) for the determination of the MTD consisted of all patients from the safety set in the dose escalation phase who had met the minimum safety evaluation requirements and the minimum exposure criterion or had experienced DLT during Cycle 1 and were discontinued. MTD analysis was done only on the phase lb group.||Participants|||Number
819079|NCT01132690|Secondary|Liver Volume|Liver volume measured by MRI|Baseline and Month 12|||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819080|NCT01132690|Secondary|Chemokine (C-C Motif) Ligand 18 (CCL18)|Percent change from baseline in CCL18|Every 3 months for 12 months|||Percent Change from Baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
819081|NCT01132690|Secondary|Platelet Count|Mean and standard deviation of platelet count per cubic mm|Baseline and 12 months|||platelets per cubic mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
819082|NCT01132690|Secondary|Spleen Volume|Spleen volume measured by MRI|Baseline and Month 12|||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819083|NCT01132690|Secondary|Chitotriosidase|Percent change from baseline in chitotriosidase|Every 3 months for 12 months|||Percent Change from Baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
819084|NCT01132690|Primary|Hemoglobin|median and interquartile range for change from baseline in haemoglobin|Every 3 months for 12 months|||g/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
819085|NCT01132820|Other Pre-specified|VEGFA Expression on Pre-treatment Tumor Specimens|High vs low expression.|Baseline||||||
819086|NCT01132820|Other Pre-specified|Plasma Levels of Endogenous Circulating VEGFA, Levels of Its Endogenous Inhibitor, sFlt-1 (the Truncated, Circulating Portion of VEGFR-1), Circulating TF, and Circulating Par-4||Up to 5 years||||||
819087|NCT01132820|Other Pre-specified|Levels of Receptor Targets Such as VEGFR (1, 2, 3) and PDGFR||Baseline||||||
819088|NCT01132820|Other Pre-specified|Expression of Phosphorylated ERK1 and 2, c-Jun, Stat3, PKC, and p70S6 Kinase||Baseline||||||
819089|NCT01132820|Secondary|Response Without Regard to the Time of Documented Response|Complete and partial tumor response by RECIST 1.1|Tumor responses with time restriction starts at enrollment and goes to 6 months after enrollment or until pt. off study therapy,whichever occurs first. Without time restriction starts at enrollment,lasts until off study therapy, median duration = 2.63 mth|Eligible and Treated Patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
819090|NCT01132820|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|Time until disease progression, death, or date of last contact.|Disease that can be assessed by physical exam should be evaluated every cycle. disease assessed by imaging should be evaluated every other cycle. Time frame to determine the date of progression is from the date of enrollment up to 5 years after enrollment|All eligible and evaluable patients||Months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
819091|NCT01132820|Secondary|Overall Survival|The observed length of life from entry into the study to death or the date of last contact.|From study entry to death or last contact, up to 5 years.|Eligible and Treated Patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819092|NCT01132820|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) = > 6 Months|Number of participants who survived for at least 6 months. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v.1.0) as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|For disease evaluated by physical examination, progression was assessed prior to each cycle. CT scan or MRI if used to follow lesion for measurable disease every other cycle. Evaluated from time of enrollment until progression or death, up to 5 years|Eligible and Treated Patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
819093|NCT01132820|Primary|Tumor Response|Complete and Partial Tumor Response by RECIST 1.1. Per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall response (OR) = CR + PR.|For diesease evaluated by physical examination, response was assessed prior to each cycle. CT scan or MRI if used to follow lesion for measurable disease every other cycle from enrollment until stopping study therapy. The average time on study is 3 mnths|Eligible and Treated Patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
819095|NCT01132846|Secondary|Global Visual Analog Scale Area Under the Curve|Range 0 to 7200 Higher is better/improved|Randomization to 72 hours|Based upon data completeness, sample size for this endpoint does not match the overall ROSE population.||units on a scale * hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
819096|NCT01132846|Secondary|Development of Cardio-renal Syndrome||Randomization to 72 hours|Based upon data completeness, sample size for this endpoint does not match the overall ROSE population.||participants|||Number
819097|NCT01132846|Secondary|Change in Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN)/ Serum Cystatin C Ratio|"BUN measured in mg/dL Cystatin C measured in mg/L
No units were used in calculated the ratio"|Randomization to 72 hours|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
819098|NCT01132846|Secondary|Cumulative Urinary Sodium Excretion||Randomization to 72 hours|||mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
819099|NCT01132846|Secondary|Change in Treatment Response|"Treatment failure including any of the following:
development of cardio-renal syndrome
worsening/persistent heart failure
significant hypotension requiring discontinuation of study drug
significant tachycardia requiring discontinuation of study drug death"|randomization to 72 hours|Based upon data completeness, sample size for this endpoint does not match the overall ROSE population.||participants|||Number
819100|NCT01132846|Secondary|Change in Heart Failure Status|Persistent or worsening heart failure defined as need for rescue therapy.|randomization to 72 hours|Based upon data completeness, sample size for this endpoint does not match the overall ROSE population.||participants|||Number
819101|NCT01132846|Secondary|Dyspnea Visual Analog Scale Area Under the Curve|Range 0 to 7200 Higher is better|randomization to 72 hours|Based upon data completeness, sample size for this endpoint does not match the overall ROSE population.||units on a scale * hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
819102|NCT01132846|Secondary|Change in Serum Creatinine||randomization to 72 hours|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819103|NCT01132846|Secondary|Change in Clinical Stability- RED-ROSE|Change in clinical stability as assessed by 60 day death, re-hospitalization or unscheduled outpatient visit|Baseline to 60 days|RED-ROSE was a substudy of the main ROSE trial. Only subjects consented and enrolled in RED-ROSE were included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
819104|NCT01132846|Secondary|Worst Reported Symptom Changes-RED-ROSE|"To determine whether changes in worst reported symptom (WRS) (dyspnea, body swelling or fatigue) VAS (WRS-VAS) are related to the response to decongestive therapy as assessed by change in WRS VAS.
WRS range -100 to + 100 Higher number is better (improved)"|Change from Baseline to 72 hours|RED-ROSE was a substudy of the main ROSE study. Only subjects consented and enrolled in RED-ROSE were included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819105|NCT01132846|Secondary|Change in Weight|Change in weight from randomization to 72 hours. Secondary Endpoint|randomization to 72 hours|||lbs||Standard Deviation|Mean
819106|NCT01132846|Primary|Cumulative Urinary Volume|The primary efficacy endpoint is cumulative urinary volume (UV; +/- indwelling urinary catheter) at 72 hours|Randomization to 72 hours|||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819107|NCT01132846|Primary|Decongestive Changes- RED-ROSE|"To determine whether changes in pDSS or dyspnea VAS are related to the response to decongestive therapy as evidenced by fluid volume loss
Fluid volume loss is defined as cumulative urinary output minus fluid intake during the first 72 hours post randomization."|Baseline to 72 hours|RED-ROSE is a substudy of the overall ROSE study. Only consented and enrolled RED-ROSE subjects participated.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819108|NCT01132846|Primary|Change in Dyspnea Assessment (RED-ROSE Substudy)|"To determine whether the pDSS is a more sensitive index of variability in dyspnea status than the dyspnea VAS assessed without standardization of conditions at assessment as assessed by change in Dyspnea VAS.
Dyspnea VAS range -100 to + 100 Larger number is better"|Baseline to 72 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819109|NCT01132846|Primary|Change in Cystatin C|The primary Safety endpoint is change in serum cystatin C from randomization to 72 hours.|Randomization to 72 hours|||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819110|NCT01133171|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure||From baseline to six months|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819111|NCT01133171|Primary|Change in Percentage of Participants Who Initiate Conversation With Primary Care Provider About Vascular Risk|Only the intervention patients were analyzed for this outcome.|From baseline to six-months|||percentage of patients|||Number
819112|NCT01133275|Secondary|Number of Participants With Grade 3 or 4 Adverse Events Possibly Related to Treatment|Grade 3 or 4 events Related/Possibly Related/Probably Related to study treatment. Number of participants with events specified in the study protocol: Neutropenia, Thrombocytopenia, Febrile Neutropenia, Infection, Sepsis, Venous Thromboembolic Events. Evaluations according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE) V4.0.|Up to 54 months|All participants||participants|||Number
819113|NCT01133275|Primary|Number of Participants With Erythroid Response|The rate of erythroid response to treatment with the lenalidomide/prednisone combination in non-del (5q) low and int-1 risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS) with symptomatic anemia. Hematological improvement erythroid response (HI-E) according to International Working Group (IWG) 2006 criteria.|Up to 7 months|All evaluable participants||participants|||Number
819114|NCT01133288|Secondary|Immune Response to Yulex|A secondary study outcome is the development of an immune response to Yulex using a human IgG anti-Guayule immunoassay. The development of a detectable IgG immune response will be considered a positive study.|3 months|||ug/ml|||Number
819115|NCT01133288|Primary|Sensitization to Yulex|The primary study outcome will be an assessment for sensitization to Yulex as determined by serological assay for Guayule-specific IgE antibodies. The development of a detectable IgE immune response will be considered a positive study.|Approximately 3 months|No participants were exposed to Yulex because the study was terminated.||ng/ml|||Number
819123|NCT01133379|Secondary|Mean Cold Air Stimulus VAS Score at Week 1|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Cold Air Stimulus. When being assessed, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced when cold air was directed at the exposed root of each tooth by marking a single vertical line on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|1 Week|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819116|NCT01133379|Secondary|Global Subjective VAS Score at Week 6|"At Week 6, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced by marking a single vertical line on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. Participants were instructed as follows: Please rate the intensity of the pain/discomfort you have experienced in the last two weeks when drinking cold/hot beverages and/or foods, eating sweet and sour foods, breathing cold air, brushing your teeth or performing any habits/behaviors that solicit your dentinal hypersensitivity pain/discomfort since you first started using the product. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm."|6 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819117|NCT01133379|Secondary|Global Subjective VAS Score at Week 4|"At Week 4, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced by marking a single vertical line on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. Participants were instructed as follows: Please rate the intensity of the pain/discomfort you have experienced in the last two weeks when drinking cold/hot beverages and/or foods, eating sweet and sour foods, breathing cold air, brushing your teeth or performing any habits/behaviors that solicit your dentinal hypersensitivity pain/discomfort since you first started using the product. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm."|4 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819118|NCT01133379|Secondary|Global Subjective VAS Score at Week 2|"At Week 2, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced by marking a single vertical line on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. Participants were instructed as follows: Please rate the intensity of the pain/discomfort you have experienced in the last two weeks when drinking cold/hot beverages and/or foods, eating sweet and sour foods, breathing cold air, brushing your teeth or performing any habits/behaviors that solicit your dentinal hypersensitivity pain/discomfort since you first started using the product. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm."|2 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819119|NCT01133379|Secondary|Global Subjective VAS Score at Week 1|"At Week 1, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced by marking a single vertical line on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. Participants were instructed as follows: Please rate the intensity of the pain/discomfort you have experienced in the last week when drinking cold/hot beverages and/or foods, eating sweet and sour foods, breathing cold air, brushing your teeth or performing any habits/behaviors that solicit your dentinal hypersensitivity pain/discomfort since you first started using the product. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm."|1 Week|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819120|NCT01133379|Secondary|Mean Cold Air Stimulus VAS Score at Week 6|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Cold Air Stimulus. When being assessed, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced when cold air was directed at the exposed root of each tooth by marking a single vertical line on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|6 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819121|NCT01133379|Secondary|Mean Cold Air Stimulus VAS Score at Week 4|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Cold Air Stimulus. When being assessed, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced when cold air was directed at the exposed root of each tooth by marking a single vertical line on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|4 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819122|NCT01133379|Secondary|Mean Cold Air Stimulus VAS Score at Week 2|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Cold Air Stimulus. When being assessed, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced when cold air was directed at the exposed root of each tooth by marking a single vertical line on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|2 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819135|NCT01133392|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: Maximum Serum Insulin Concentration [Cmax]|The maximum observed insulin lispro concentration following dosing.|0 to 8 hours post dose|All participants who had at least one study treatment and had evaluable PK data.||picomole/liter (pmol/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829104|NCT01216397|Secondary|Linagliptin: Time to Maximum Measured Concentration of the Analyte in Plasma (Tmax)|Median of the t_max of linagliptin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||hr||Full Range|Median
819124|NCT01133379|Secondary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity VAS Score at Week 6|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). At each visit, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced from the Yeaple probe by marking a single vertical line on a VAS scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The investigator recorded a VAS score of 0 mm for participants who did not experience discomfort at the maximum force of 80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|6 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819125|NCT01133379|Secondary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity VAS Score at Week 4|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). At each visit, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced from the Yeaple probe by marking a single vertical line on a VAS scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The investigator recorded a VAS score of 0 mm for participants who did not experience discomfort at the maximum force of 80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|4 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819126|NCT01133379|Secondary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity VAS Score at Week 2|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). At each visit, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced from the Yeaple probe by marking a single vertical line on a VAS scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The investigator recorded a VAS score of 0 mm for participants who did not experience discomfort at the maximum force of 80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|2 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819127|NCT01133379|Secondary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity VAS Score at Week 1|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). At each visit, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced from the Yeaple probe by marking a single vertical line on a VAS scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The investigator recorded a VAS score of 0 mm for participants who did not experience discomfort at the maximum force of 80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|1 Week|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819128|NCT01133379|Primary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity Score at Week 1|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Yeaple probe. The force at which discomfort was felt by the participant was recorded on a scale of 10-80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant, at each visit.|1 Week|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||grams||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819129|NCT01133379|Primary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity Score at Week 2|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Yeaple probe. The force at which discomfort was felt by the participant was recorded on a scale of 10-80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant, at each visit.|2 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||grams||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819130|NCT01133379|Primary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity Score at Week 4|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Yeaple probe. The force at which discomfort was felt by the participant was recorded on a scale of 10-80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant, at each visit.|4 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||grams||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819131|NCT01133379|Primary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity Score at Week 6|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Yeaple probe. The force at which discomfort was felt by the participant was recorded on a scale of 10-80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant, at each visit.|6 Weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set, which included all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||grams||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819132|NCT01133392|Secondary|Pharmacodynamic Parameter: Total Amount of Glucose Infused (Gtot)|The total amount of glucose infused during the euglycemic clamp procedure.|0 to 8 hours post dose|All participants who had at least one study treatment and had evaluable PD data.||grams (g)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819133|NCT01133392|Secondary|Pharmacodynamic Parameter: Time of Maximum Glucose Infusion Rate (tRmax)|Time of maximal glucose infusion rate.|0 to 8 hours post dose|All participants who had at least one study treatment and had evaluable PD data.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819134|NCT01133392|Secondary|Pharmacodynamic Parameter: Maximum Glucose Infusion Rate (Rmax)|The maximum observed glucose infusion rate during the euglycemic clamp procedure.|0 to 8 hours post dose|All participants who had at least one study treatment and had evaluable pharmacodynamic (PD) data.||milligrams per minute (mg/min)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819136|NCT01133392|Primary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: Area Under the Serum Insulin Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time Zero to the Last Time Point With a Measurable Concentration [AUC0-tlast]|Primary outcome measure is based on the pharmacokinetic area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last time point with a measurable concentration.|0 up to 8 hours post dose|All participants who had at least one study treatment and had evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||picomole*hour/liter (pmol*h/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819137|NCT01133418|Secondary|Academic Improvement Measurement System - Web-based (AIMSWEB) Reading Score (Proportion Accurate)|Number of words read correctly divided by number of words read (range = 0-1.0) Higher values represent better reading accuracy|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819138|NCT01133418|Secondary|Intra-individual Variability on Go/No-Go Task|Standard deviation of reaction times for correct responses to Go trials on a Go/No-Go Task|2 months|||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
819139|NCT01133418|Primary|Clinical Global Impression - Improvement|Blinded ratings of clinical global impression - Improvement. Scale = 1 (Very Much Improved) - 7 (Very Much Worse) Lower scores represent more improvement.|2 months|One child in the Cognitive Training Group and one child in the Non-progressive Cognitive Training group were missing CGI data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819140|NCT01133418|Primary|Total ADHD Symptom Score From Vanderbilt ADHD Parent Rating Scale|"Total ADHD Symptom Score on the Parent Vanderbilt Rating Scales; range = 0-54; this score is computed by summing the 18 ADHD symptom items which are each rated on a 0-3 Likert scale (0=Never; 1=Occasionally; 2=Often; 3=Very often); higher scores indicate higher severity of ADHD symptoms."|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819141|NCT01133522|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline to End of the Dosing Interval in PCSK9|Serum PCSK9 concentrations were determined by using a qualified enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was 15 ng/mL.|Baseline and Day 43 for QW and Q2W groups or Day 57 for Q4W group|Participants with non-missing data||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
819142|NCT01133522|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline to End of the Dosing Interval in LDL-C||Baseline and Day 43 for QW and Q2W groups or Day 57 for Q4W group|Participants with non-missing data||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
819143|NCT01133522|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) of Evolocumab|Area under the unbound evolocumab serum concentration-time curve from time of last dose to time of last quantifiable concentration following the last dose of evolocumab.|Day 29 predose (last dose for Cohorts 3-7) and Days 36 (predose for Cohorts 1 and 2), 40, 43, 50, 57, 64, 71, 78, and 85|Pharmacokinetic analysis set with available data||day*μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819144|NCT01133522|Primary|Number of Participants With Anti-Evolocumab Antibodies|Serum samples were analyzed by an electrochemiluminescence (ECL)-based immunoassay for anti-evolocumab binding antibodies. Positive samples were subsequently tested in a receptor-ligand binding bioassay for anti-evolocumab neutralizing antibodies|From the first dose of study drug until Day 85|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
819145|NCT01133522|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Evolocumab|Serum concentrations of evolocumab were measured by a validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was 800 ng/mL.|Day 1, predose and Days 4, 8, 15, 22, 29, 36, 40, 43, 50, 57, 64, 71, 78, and 85|The Pharmacokinetic analysis set consisted of all participants for whom at least 1 pharmacokinetic parameter or endpoint could be adequately estimated. Serum evolocumab concentrations were not detectable in Cohorts 1 and 2.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819146|NCT01133522|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"The relationship of each adverse event to the investigational product was assessed by the investigator.
A serious adverse event (SAE) is defined as an adverse event that
is fatal
is life threatening (places the subject at immediate risk of death)
requires in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization
results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity
is a congenital anomaly/birth defect
other significant medical hazard."|From the first dose of study drug until Day 85|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
819147|NCT01133626|Primary|The 24-hour Serum Cortisol Weighted Mean After 42 Days of Treatment|"Geometric mean serum cortisol weighted mean values were calculated at baseline and after 6 weeks (42 days) of treatment. The geometric mean ratio of week 6 / baseline is reported. The primary outcome compares the BDP HFA and Placebo treatment arms. The comparison of active control (Placebo/Prednisone) and Placebo treatment arms is an other pre-specified outcome."|Day 0 (Baseline), Day 42|Per protocol population||ratio||Standard Error|Geometric Mean
819148|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Lymphocyte Count Increased Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|Analysis Population Description: The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819149|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Febrile Neutropenia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|Analysis Population Description: The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819150|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With C. Diff Infection Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|Analysis Population Description: The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819151|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Infusion Related Reaction Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|Analysis Population Description: The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819152|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Blood Bilirubin Increased Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|Analysis Population Description: The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819629|NCT01129557|Secondary|Pre- and Post-treatment 24-urine Aldosterone in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Compares baseline and final (9 month) 24-hour urine aldosterone for subjects with and without aldosterone breakthrough|Baseline and Final (9 month)|||(ug/day)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819153|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Weight Loss Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|Analysis Population Description: The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819154|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Dyspnea Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|Analysis Population Description: The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819155|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Back Pain Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|Analysis Population Description: The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819156|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Alanine Aminotransferase Increased Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|Analysis Population Description: The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819157|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Peripheral Sensory Neuropathy Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|Analysis Population Description: The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819158|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Neck Pain Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819159|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hypocalcaemia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819160|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Fever Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819161|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Xerostomia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 3|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819162|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Aspartate Aminotransferase Increased Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819163|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Alkaline Phosphatase Increased Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819164|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hyperglycemia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819165|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Acneiform Rash Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819166|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Thrombocytopenia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819167|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hypophosphatemia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819168|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hypokalemia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819169|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Headache Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819170|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Neutropenia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819171|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hyponatremia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819172|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Diarrhea Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819698|NCT01130597|Secondary|Change in Urine Albumin to Creatinine Ratio (ACR) From Baseline to Week 4 Among Participants With ACR ≥ 30 mg/g at Baseline||Baseline and Day 28|Participants with urine ACR ≥ 30 mg/g at baseline and available data at Week 4||mg/g||Standard Error|Mean
819173|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With White Blood Cell Decreased Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819174|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Vomiting Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819175|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Pain Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 month|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819176|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Oral Mucositis Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819177|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Lymphopenia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819178|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hypoalbuminemia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819179|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Nausea Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819180|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anorexia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819181|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anemia Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819182|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Constipation Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819183|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Maculopapular Rash Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819184|NCT01133665|Secondary|Number of Participants With Fatigue Related to Cetuximab/Lenalidomide|Toxicity was scored according to NCI/CTC version 4|24 months|The number of participants for analysis was determined with >5% incidence of adverse events or any grade 3–4 adverse events related to cetuximab/lenalidomide||participants|||Number
819185|NCT01133665|Primary|Correlate the Presence of Specific Fc RIIIa Polymorphisms With Progression-free Survival in Subjects Receiving Cetuximab and Lenalidomide for SCCHN.|Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as time from date of the first treatment dose administered to the earlier of disease progression or death from any cause. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|24 months|||months||Full Range|Median
819186|NCT01133704|Secondary|Overall Survival|Subjects were followed for 3 years from the time of randomization or until death.|Time from randomization until 36 months|All randomized participants||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819187|NCT01133704|Primary|Overall Time to Disease Progression|Overall time to disease progression in subjects with asymptomatic metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer treated with sipuleucel-T (APC8015) compared to overall time to disease progression in subjects treated with placebo.|from randomization to 36 months|||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819188|NCT01133756|Secondary|Biomarker-based Proportion of Biomarker-Progression-Free Survival (B-PFS) at Week 12, Within Treatment Group|Due to the limited enrollment despite significant diligence to boost enrollment and the complex study design required to manage hematologic toxicity, the study was terminated before the initiation of Phase 2. Hence the analysis was not conducted.|Week 12|Due to the limited enrollment despite significant diligence to boost enrollment and the complex study design required to manage hematologic toxicity, the study was terminated before the initiation of Phase 2. Hence the analysis was not conducted.|||||
819189|NCT01133756|Secondary|Biomarker CA125-based Overall Response Rate (B-ORR), Within Treatment Group|Due to the limited enrollment despite significant diligence to boost enrollment and the complex study design required to manage hematologic toxicity, the study was terminated before the initiation of Phase 2. Hence the analysis was not conducted.|Day 1 of every cycle, at end of treatment visit and every 2 months during follow-up period for patients who complete study without progressive disease.|Due to the limited enrollment despite significant diligence to boost enrollment and the complex study design required to manage hematologic toxicity, the study was terminated before the initiation of Phase 2. Hence the analysis was not conducted.|||||
819251|NCT01126268|Secondary|Wound Size at Follow up|Wound size area was determined by measuring the greatest length of the wound in two perpendicular dimensions with a standard metric ruler. The two measurements were multiplied together to provide an estimate of the overall wound size. Surrounding erythema was not included in the measurement.|6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
819699|NCT01130597|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Whose Spironolactone Dose Was Increased Up to 50 mg/Day||56 Days|||percentage of participants|||Number
819190|NCT01133756|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT)|DLTs were defined as clinically significant adverse events occurring less than or equal to 21 days after commencing study treatment and considered to be possibly or probably related to study treatment by the Investigator. If 1 DLT occurred at any dose level, the cohort was to be expanded to include a maximum of six evaluable subjects. If 2 DLTs occurred at any dose level, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was to be either defined as the preceding dose, or an intermediate dose. To evaluate an intermediate dose, an additional dose cohort could be added to more accurately define the MTD.|Cycle 1 (21 days)|Safety analysis was evaluated based on Safety Population, defined as all subjects enrolled into the Phase 1b portion of this study, except for those who (i) dropped out of the study prior to receiving any study drug, or (ii) were without any safety assessments following the first dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
819191|NCT01133821|Secondary|Psychosocial Functioning|We hypothesize that subjects assigned to IPSR-QUE will experience greater improvements in psychosocial functioning over time compared to those assigned to IPSRT-PLA. The main outcomes will be the changes in Q-LES-Q, IIP, and LIFE-RIFT over 52 weeks|up to 52 weeks||||||
819192|NCT01133821|Primary|Depression Severity|"The primary endpoint is depression severity at week 20, which will be measured via the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 17-item score (HRSD-17) and the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS).
Remission is defined as 3 consecutive weeks with HRSD-17≤8 and YMRS≤8"|20 weeks|Intent to treat; patients were assessed weekly||Participants|||Count of Participants
819193|NCT01133847|Secondary|Test of Silent Reading Fluency and Comprehension (TOSREC)|The TOSREC measures sentence-level comprehension and silent reading fluency. It is a sentence verification task; children are presented with a list of sentences and must tell whether they are true or false. Items are based on common knowledge (e.g., All apples are blue). The raw score is the number of items answered correctly in 3 minutes. Standardized with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15 are reported here. Higher scores represent a better outcome.|Week 16, End of Active Treatment Phase|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined ) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error. Other reductions in numbers analyzed on this variable were due to missing data.||standardized scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819194|NCT01133847|Secondary|Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) - Phonemic Decoding Efficiency|The TOWRE Phonemic Decoding Efficiency measures the student’s fluent decoding of nonsense words that follow the spelling rules of the English language. The raw score is the number of nonwords identified correctly in 45 seconds. Standardized scores with a mean of 100 and standard deviaion of 15 are reported here. Higher scores represent a better outcome.|Week 16 (End of Active Treatment Phase) and Follow-Up|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined ) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error. Other reductions in numbers analyzed on this variable were due to missing data.||standardized scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819195|NCT01133847|Secondary|Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) - Sight Word Efficiency|The TOWRE Sight Word Efficiency subtest measures fluency of reading words in lists. The raw score is the number of words or nonwords identified correctly in 45 seconds. Standard scores with a mean of 100 and standard deviaion of 15 are reported here. Higher scores represent a better outcome.|Week 16 (End of Active Treatment Phase) and Follow-Up|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined ) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error. Other reductions in numbers analyzed on this variable were due to missing data.||standardized scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819196|NCT01133847|Secondary|Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills Oral Reading Fluency Subtest (DIBELS ORF)|DIBELS ORF measures oral reading fluency in connected text. Students are presented with a passage on their grade level to read orally, and the score is the number of words of the passage read correctly in a one-minute period. Students in this study read two passages at each test administration, and the mean score for the two passages was the dependent variable analyzed. A research synthesis of studies reporting psychometric properties for DIBELS ORF determined that reliability coefficients in these studies exceeded .80 and that the measure demonstrated moderate to high concurrent and predictive validity across studies (Goffreda & DiPerna, 2010).|Week 16 (End of Active Treatment Phase) and Follow-Up|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined ) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error. Other reductions in numbers analyzed on this variable were due to missing data.||words read correctly per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
819197|NCT01133847|Secondary|Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-III (WIAT-III) Reading Comprehension Subtest|The WIAT-III is an individually-administered test of academic achievement. This subtest involves reading sentences and longer passages and then answering a set of literal and inferential comprehension questions about the text. Scores reported here are standardized scores with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15. Higher scores represent a better outcome.|Week 16, End of Active Treatment Phase|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined ) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error.||standardized scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819198|NCT01133847|Primary|Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-III (WIAT-III) Pseudoword Decoding Subtest|The WIAT-III is an individually-administered test of academic achievement. In the Pseudoword Decoding subtest students read a list of increasingly difficult nonsense words as a test of their ability to use phonics to decode unknown words. Scores reported here are standardized scores with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15. Higher scores represent a better outcome.|Week 16 (End of Active Treatment Phase) and Follow-Up|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined ) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error. Other reductions in numbers analyzed on this variable were due to missing data.||standardized scores||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819252|NCT01126268|Secondary|Wound Size at Baseline|Wound size area was determined by measuring the greatest length of the wound in two perpendicular dimensions with a standard metric ruler. The two measurements were multiplied together to provide an estimate of the overall wound size. Surrounding erythema was not included in the measurement.|baseline|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
819199|NCT01133847|Primary|Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-III (WIAT-III) Word Reading Subtest|The WIAT-III is an individually-administered test of academic achievement. In the Word Reading subtest students read a list of increasingly difficult words. Scores reported here are standardized scores with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15.|Week 16 (End of Active Treatment Phase) and Follow-Up|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined ) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error. Other discrepancies in numbers are due to missing data.||standardized scores, M=100, SD = 15||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819200|NCT01133847|Primary|Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Checklist for DSM-IV (SNAP)- Teacher Rating of Hyperactivity-impulsivity|Rating Scale of ADHD symptomology completed by parents and teachers. Raters evaluate how well each DSM-IV ADHD symptom describes a child on a four-point Likert scale (0=Not at all, 1=Just a little, 2=Quite a bit, 3=Very much). The measure shows adequate internal consistency (.94) and test-retest reliability (Bussing et al., 2008; Gau et al., 2008).|Week 16 (End of Active Treatment Phase) and Follow-Up|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error. Other reductions in numbers analyzed on this variable were due to missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819201|NCT01133847|Primary|Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Checklist for DSM-IV (SNAP)- Teacher Rating of Inattention|Rating Scale of ADHD symptomology completed by parents and teachers. Raters evaluate how well each DSM-IV ADHD symptom describes a child on a four-point Likert scale (0=Not at all, 1=Just a little, 2=Quite a bit, 3=Very much). The measure shows adequate internal consistency (.94) and test-retest reliability (Bussing et al., 2008; Gau et al., 2008).|Week 16 (End of Active Treatment Phase) and Follow-Up|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined ) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error. Other reductions in numbers analyzed on this variable were due to missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819202|NCT01133847|Primary|Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Checklist for DSM-IV (SNAP)- Parent Rating of Hyperactivity-impulsivity|Rating Scale of ADHD symptomology completed by parents and teachers. Raters evaluate how well each DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) ADHD symptom describes a child on a four-point Likert scale (0=Not at all, 1=Just a little, 2=Quite a bit, 3=Very much). The measure shows adequate internal consistency (.94) and test-retest reliability (Bussing et al., 2008; Gau et al., 2008).|16 weeks (end of Active Treatment phase), and follow-up|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined ) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error. Other reductions in numbers analyzed on this variable were due to missing data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819203|NCT01133847|Primary|Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Checklist for DSM-IV (SNAP)- Parent Rating of Inattention|Rating Scale of ADHD symptomology completed by parents and teachers. Raters evaluate how well each DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) ADHD symptom describes a child on a four-point Likert scale (0=Not at all, 1=Just a little, 2=Quite a bit, 3=Very much). The measure shows adequate internal consistency (.94) and test-retest reliability (Bussing et al., 2008; Gau et al., 2008).|16 weeks (end of Active Treatment phase), and follow-up|Six excluded from analyses (1 from ADHD Treatment , 1 from Intensive Reading Instruction , 4 from Combined ) because upon ex post-facto review of records, they did not meet inclusion criteria and had been included in error. Other reductions in numbers analyzed on this variable were due to missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819204|NCT01133860|Secondary|in Vitro Function of Platelets Produced During Therapy in Responding Patients|in vitro platelet function will be assessed in patients achieving a platelet count of 100 x10e9/L or more at the end of the therapy|21 days or 42 days of therapy|||participants|||Number
819205|NCT01133860|Secondary|All Types of Adverse Events|All type of adverse events were registered.Results indicate the number of participants who experience a side effect of the drug.|21 days and/or 42 days of therapy, 15 and 30 days after the end of therapy|||number of participants|||Number
819206|NCT01133860|Secondary|Bleeding Tendency Assessed by WHO Bleeding Score|The percentage of patients with bleeding diathesis (grade 1, i.e. cutaneous bleeding, or grade 2, i.e. mild blood loss, according to WHO bleeding score) was calculated at baseline and at the end of therapy. The results are expressed as the mean change in the percentage of patients with bleeding diathesis (95%CI).|21 days and/or 42 days of therapy, 15 and 30 days after the end of therapy|||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819207|NCT01133860|Primary|Response to Drug Based on Platelet Count at the End of Therapy|The primary endpoints were the achievement of a platelet count over 100 x10e9/L or at least 3 times the baseline value (major response), or at least twice the baseline value but less than major response (minor response). The overall response to therapy is reported. Platelet count was measured at the end of therapy (21 or 42 days, see study design) by phase-contrast microscopy.|21 days and/or 42 days of therapy, 15 and 30 days after the end of therapy|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819208|NCT01133977|Other Pre-specified|Overall Response Rate (ORR) (for Phase 2)|ORR, defined as percentage of participants with best confirmed response (complete response [CR] or partial response [PR]). A confirmatory scan was required after no less than 4 weeks and no later than 8 weeks, starting on the date that the response was first recorded.|From the date of randomization until disease progression or death or up to approximately 2 years||||||
819209|NCT01133977|Other Pre-specified|Overall Survival (OS) (for Phase 2)|OS, defined as the time from the date of randomization until the date of death. Few events of deaths (9 events in the Lenvatinib + Dacarbazine arm and 4 events in the Dacarbazine arm) were reported to calculate the median OS or to draw conclusions regarding the OS.|From the date of randomization until death or up to approximately 2 years||||||
819210|NCT01133977|Other Pre-specified|Time to Progression (TTP) (for Phase 2)|TTP, defined as the time from the date of randomization until the date of progressive disease.|From the date of randomization until disease progression or death or up to approximately 2 years||||||
819253|NCT01126268|Secondary|Pain (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Follow up|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819211|NCT01133977|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) (for Phase 2)|PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization of a participant until (1) the date of first documented progression of such participant's disease based on Investigator assessments according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST v. 1.1) or (2) the date of such participant's death due to any cause. Progression was defined as at least a 20% increase or 5 mm increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the smallest sum on study) recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions, based on Investigator assessment according to RECIST 1.1. If missing assessments, imputed dates were used in the analysis.|From the date of randomization until the date of disease progression or death (whichever was earlier) or up to approximately 2 years|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug without major protocol eligibility violations were included in the Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Analysis Set.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819212|NCT01133977|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events/Serious Adverse Events (AEs/SAEs)|Safety assessments consisted of monitoring and recording all AEs, including all Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE v. 4.0) grades, and SAEs; regular monitoring of hematology, blood chemistry, and urine values; periodic measurement of vital signs and electrocardiograms (ECGs); and performance of physical examinations. Details of AEs and SAEs are provided in the reported adverse event section.|From signing of informed consent up to 30 days after the last dose, up to approximately 2 years|Safety Analysis Set: All participants enrolled in the Phase 1b and Phase 2 portion of this study, except for those who (i) dropped out of the study prior to receiving any study drug, or (ii) were without any safety assessment following the first dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
819213|NCT01133977|Primary|Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT) of Lenvatinib Administered in Combination With Dacarbazine (for Phase 1b)|DLTs were defined as clinically significant adverse events (AEs) occurring less than or equal to 21 days after commencing study treatment and considered by the Investigator to be possibly or probably related to study treatment.|From Day 1 through 21 days (one cycle)|Safety Analysis Set: All participants enrolled in the Phase 1b portion of this study, except for those who (i) dropped out of the study prior to receiving any study drug, or (ii) were without any safety assessment following the first dose of study drug.||Participants with DLT|||Number
819214|NCT01134016|Secondary|Safety Blood and Urine Test|"Hematology laboratory data
Biochemistry laboratory data
Urinalysis
AE; AE not including the natural progress of the underlying disease
Incidence of toxicity ≥ grade 3 according to NCI CTCAE version 4.03
Physical examination
Vital signs changes
Electrocardiogram examination results (including HR, QRS, QT, QTc, RR intervals)"|pre-screenting and every 14-day period||||||
819215|NCT01134016|Secondary|Number of Participants in the PP Population With Better Than SD at Target Lesion, Better Than Non-CR/Non-PD at Non-target Lesion and no New Lesion|"Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for overall response by CT: Judgement by total siutation of target, non-target and new lesions.
Meaning of Target lesion: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), Sum down 30% or more from target lesion baseline; Progressive Disease(PD), Sum up at least 20% from smallest value (nadir) and Absolute increase ≥ 5 mm; Stable Disease (SD), Neither enough shrinkage for PR nor enough growth for PD.
non-target lesion: CR: All non-target lesions disappeared and All lymph nodes <10 mm; Non-CR/Non-PD: Non-target lesion(s) still present and Lymph nodes ≥10 mm; PD: Unequivocal progression; New lesion :Unequivocal new cancer lesions Overall SD response should be better than SD at target lesion, better than Non-CR/Non-PD t non-target lesion and no new lesion."|pre-screening and end of treatment|Per-protocol (PP) Population: All patients who completed at least 3 cycles of treatment with proper imaging assessment (RECIST).||participants|||Number
819216|NCT01134016|Secondary|AUC0-t on Day 28|Pharmacokinetic samples will be obtained from all the patients in each dose cohort treated in all phases of the study. Patients will only be sampled during their first treatment cycle only.|30 minutes prior to and 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, and 24 hours after dose of Day 28|||log(mg*hr/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819217|NCT01134016|Secondary|AUC0-t on Day 1|Pharmacokinetic samples will be obtained from all the patients in each dose cohort treated in all phases of the study. Patients will only be sampled during their first treatment cycle only.|within 30 minutes prior to and 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, and 24 hours after dose of Day 1|||log(mg*hr/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819218|NCT01134016|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration After Dosing on Day 28|Pharmacokinetic samples will be obtained from all the patients in each dose cohort treated in all phases of the study. Patients will only be sampled during their first treatment cycle only.|30 minutes prior to and 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, and 24 hours after dose of Day 28|||log(mg/ml)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819219|NCT01134016|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration After on Day 1|Pharmacokinetic samples will be obtained from all the patients in each dose cohort treated in all phases of the study. Patients will only be sampled during their first treatment cycle only.|30 minutes prior to and 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, and 24 hours after dose of Day 1|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population: All patients who received at least 1 dose of antroquinonol with sufficient post-dose bio-samples collected for PK profile characterization.||Log(mg/ml)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819220|NCT01134016|Secondary|Half-life Time From Overall Study|Pharmacokinetic samples will be obtained from all the patients in each dose cohort treated in all phases of the study. Patients will only be sampled during their first treatment cycle only. Individual serum concentration versus (vs) time curves were plotted in 1 graph by dose level on both linear/linear and log10/linear scales. Mean serum concentration vs time curves were also presented in 1 graph for dose levels on both linear/linear and log10/linear scales.|30 minutes prior to and 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, and 24 hours after dose of Day 1&28|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
819221|NCT01134016|Secondary|Tmax After Dose|Pharmacokinetic samples will be obtained from all the patients in each dose cohort treated in all phases of the study. Patients will only be sampled during their first treatment cycle only. Individual serum concentration versus (vs) time curves were plotted in 1 graph by dose level on both linear/linear and log10/linear scales. Mean serum concentration vs time curves were also presented in 1 graph for dose levels on both linear/linear and log10/linear scales.|30 minutes prior to and 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, and 24 hours after dose of Day 1&28|||hours||Full Range|Median
819254|NCT01126268|Secondary|Pain (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Baseline|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|baseline|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819222|NCT01134016|Primary|To Determind the Maximum Tolerable Dose for Antroquinonol|"The study design consisted of 2 phases, the accelerated titration phase and the standard titration phase.
During the accelerated titration phase, patients were enrolled in a cohort of 1 new patient for each dose level and treated for 4 weeks at that level. Any DLT or instance of MT during any 4 week treatment at any dose level led to the initiation of standard titration (3+3) phase.
If none of the first 3 patients experienced any DLT, then dose escalation proceeded for the next cohort of patients. If 1 of 3 patients developed DLT, the cohort was expanded to at most 6 patients (another 3 patients added subsequently). If exactly 1 of the 6 patients experienced DLT, then escalation to the next dose level occurred. If more than 1 patient developed DLT in any dose cohort, the dose escalation was withheld and the prior dose level was considered as the MTD unless the present dose level was level 1"|DLT is to be observed during 4 week period|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: All patients who received at least 1 dose of antroquinonol.||mg|||Number
819223|NCT01134042|Other Pre-specified|Number of the Indicated Unscheduled Asthma-related Healthcare Visits During the Treatment Period|All unscheduled asthma-related visits to a physician’s office, visits to urgent care, visits to the emergency department, and hospitalizations (ICU=intensive care unit; GW=general ward) associated with severe asthma exacerbations or other asthma-related healthcare issues were recorded.|From Baseline up to Week 24/Withdrawal Visit|ITT Population||Number of visits||Standard Deviation|Mean
819224|NCT01134042|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With the Indicated Global Assessment of Change Questionnaire Responses at Weeks 4, 12, and 24|At the end of Week 4, Week 8, and Week 24/Early Withdrawal, the Global Assessment of Change Questionnaire that assesses changes in asthma symptoms (AS) and rescue medication use (RMU) was completed by the participants. The number of participants who chose the following answers to the questionnaire were determined: much better, somewhat better, a little better, the same, a little worse, somewhat worse, much worse (to assess the changes in asthma symptoms); much less often, somewhat less often, a little less often, the same, a little more often, somewhat more often, much more often (to assess the changes in the frequency of rescue medication use).|Week 4, Week 12, and Week 24/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||participants|||Number
819225|NCT01134042|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in the Asthma Control Test (ACT) Scores at Week 12 and Week 24|"The ACT is a 5-item questionnaire developed as a measure of the participant's asthma control. Questions are designed to be self-completed by the participant and include the following: In the past 4 weeks, How much of the time did your asthma keep you from getting as much done at work, school or at home?, How often have you had shortness of breath?, How often did your asthma symptoms wake you up at night or earlier than usual in the morning?, How often have you used your rescue inhaler or nebulizer medication (such as albuterol)? and How would you rate your asthma control? The ACT total score is defined as the sum of the scores from all 5 questions, provided all questions have been answered; thus, the total score ranges from 5 (poor control of asthma) to 25 (complete control of asthma). A score of 20 or higher indicates well-controlled asthma. Change from Baseline was calculated as the total score at Week 12 and Week 24/Early Withdrawal minus the total score at Baseline."|Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819226|NCT01134042|Other Pre-specified|The Number of Participants Who Withdrew Due to Lack of Efficacy During the 24-week Treatment Period|The number of participants whose primary reason for withdrawal was lack of efficacy was analyzed.|From the first dose of the study medication up to Week 24/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population||participants|||Number
819227|NCT01134042|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Daily Morning Trough (AM) and Evening (PM) Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Averaged Over the First 12 Weeks and 24 Weeks of the 24-week Treatment Period|PEF is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. PEF was measured by the participants using a hand-held electronic peak flow meter each morning and evening prior to the dose of study medication and any rescue albuterol/salbutamol inhalation aerosol use. Trough PEF is the PEF measured approximately 24 hours after the last administration of study drug. Change from Baseline (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants) was calculated as the value of the averaged daily trough AM/PM PEF over 12 weeks and 24 weeks of the 24-week Treatment Period (at Weeks 12 and 24) minus the Baseline value.|From Baseline up to Week 12 and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Liters/minute (L/min)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819228|NCT01134042|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean Serial FEV1 Over 0 to 4 Hours Post-dose at Week 24|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Serial FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry at Baseline. Weighted mean was calculated using the 4-hour serial FEV1 measurements that included the pre-dose assessment (within 5 minutes prior to dosing) and post-dose assessments after 5, 15, and 30 minutes and 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours. At each time point, the highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements was recorded. Baseline was the value obtained at Visit 3. Change from Baseline was calculated as the average Week 24 FEV1 value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Weighted mean serial FEV1 was calculated in the subset of participants for whom serial FEV1 at Week 24 was performed.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
819229|NCT01134042|Other Pre-specified|Clinic Visit 12-hour Post-dose FEV1at Week 24|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. 12-hour post-dose FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry at the Week 24 clinic visit. The highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements was recorded.|Week 24|ITT Population. 12-hour post-dose FEV1 was analyzed in the subset of participants for whom serial FEV1 at Week 24 was performed.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
819303|NCT01134393|Secondary|Frequency of Patients Requiring Up-titration to Telmisartan 80mg Plus Amlodipine 10mg Combination (T80/A10) to Achieve Blood Pressure Control Over Time||weeks 4 and 8|FAS||Number of participants|||Number
819230|NCT01134042|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Total Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) (+12) Score at Week 12 and Week 24/Early Withdrawal|"The AQLQ is a disease-specific, self-administered quality of life questionnaire used to evaluate the impact of asthma treatments on the quality of life of asthma sufferers. The AQLQ for 12 years and older (AQLQ [+12]) is a modified version of the AQLQ for use in asthma patients between the age of 12 and 70. The AQLQ contains 32 items in 4 domains: activity limitation (11 items), symptoms (12 items), emotional function (5 items), and environmental stimuli (4 items). For the 32 items on the questionnaire, the response format consists of a seven-point scale, where a value of 1 indicates “total impairment” and a value of 7 indicates “no impairment.” The AQLQ total score is defined as the average of the scores from all 32 questions; thus, the total score ranges from 1 (indicates total impairment) to 7 (indicates no impairment). Baseline was the total score obtained at Visit 3. Change from Baseline was calculated as the total score at Weeks 12 and 24 minus the total score at Baseline."|Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819231|NCT01134042|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Rescue-free and Symptom-free 24-hour Periods at the End of the 24-week Treatment Period|The number of inhalations of rescue bronchodilator, albuterol/salbutamol inhalation aerosol, used during the day and night was recorded by the participants in a daily electronic diary (eDiary). Similarly, asthma symptoms were recorded in a daily eDairy by the participants every day in the morning and evening before taking any rescue or study medication and before the peak expiratory flow measurement. A 24-hour period in which a participant’s responses to both the morning and evening assessments indicated no use of rescue medication/symptoms was considered to be rescue free/symptom free. The Baseline value was derived from the last 7 days of the daily eDiary prior to the randomization of the participant. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged value during the 24-week Treatment Period minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage of periods||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819232|NCT01134042|Primary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean Serial FEV1 Over 0-24 Hours Post-dose at Week 24|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Serial FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry at the Baseline and Week 24 clinic visits. Weighted mean was calculated using the 24-hour serial FEV1 measurements that included the pre-dose assessment (within 5 minutes prior to dosing) and the post-dose assessments after 5, 15, and 30 minutes and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 12, 16, 20, 23, and 24 hours. At each time point, the highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements was recorded. Baseline was the value obtained at Visit 3. Change from Baseline was calculated as the average Week 24 FEV1 value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Weighted mean serial FEV1 was calculated in the subset of participants for whom serial FEV1 at Week 24 was performed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819233|NCT01134042|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinic Visit Trough (Pre-bronchodilator and Pre-dose) Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at the End of the 24-week Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 is defined as the clinic visit (pre-bronchodilator and pre-dose) FEV1 measurement taken at the clinic visit while still on treatment. Pre-dose and pre-rescue albuterol/salbutamol trough FEV1 was measured electronically by spirometry in the evening at the Baseline (BL) through Week 24 clinic visits. The highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements was recorded. BL was the pre-dose value obtained at Visit 3. Change from BL was calculated as the Week 24 value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was performed using an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model with covariates of BL trough FEV1, country, sex, age, and treatment group.The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-BL on-treatment measurement at scheduled clinic visits was used to impute the missing measurements.|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of the study medication. Only those participants with non-missing covariates and a post-Baseline FEV1 measurement were analyzed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819234|NCT01134081|Primary|Differences in Angiogenic Biomarkers: PDGF-BB|Within-subject difference between the concentrations at the CelTX and Free Gingival Graft areas|5 time-points: pre-surgical, week(s) 1, 2, 3 and 4|44 subjects were enrolled. All 44 subjects participated in both arms/groups for a total of 88 surgical sites. 2 surgical sites of each patient were randomly selected to receive LCC as a donor material in 1 site and a conventional autograft using keratinized tissue from the palate as the donor material at the contralateral site.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
819235|NCT01134081|Primary|Differences in Angiogenic Biomarkers|Within-subject difference between the concentrations at the CelTX and Free Gingival Graft areas|5 time-points: pre-surgical, week(s) 1, 2, 3 and 4|44 subjects were enrolled. All 44 subjects participated in both arms/groups for a total of 88 surgical sites. 2 surgical sites of each patient were randomly selected to receive LCC as a donor material in 1 site and a conventional autograft using keratinized tissue from the palate as the donor material at the contralateral site.||ng/mL|Surgical sites|Standard Error|Mean
819236|NCT01134107|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline to 12 Weeks Endpoint for Each Treatment in Blood Pressure||Baseline, endpoint for each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both baseline and post-baseline blood pressure measurements for the respective treatment period.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819237|NCT01134107|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline to 12 Week Endpoint for Each Treatment in Weight||Baseline, endpoint for each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both baseline and post-baseline weight measurements for the respective treatment period.||kilograms (kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819238|NCT01134107|Other Pre-specified|Hypoglycemic Episode Rate Per 30 Days|"All Reported Hypoglycemic Episodes are defined as an event which is associated with
reported signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia, and/or
a documented blood glucose (BG) concentration of <= 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L)"|All days for each reservoir cycle throughout each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Participants included in hypoglycemia analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding hypoglycemia.||hypoglycemic episodes per 30 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
819239|NCT01134107|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Having a Hypoglycemic Episode|"A Documented Hypoglycemic Episode is defined as an event which is associated with a documented blood glucose (BG) concentration of <= 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L).
All Reported Hypoglycemic Episodes are defined as an event which is associated with
reported signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia, and/or
a documented blood glucose (BG) concentration of <= 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L)"|All days for each reservoir cycle throughout each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Participants included in hypoglycemia analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding hypoglycemia.||percentage of participants|||Number
819240|NCT01134107|Other Pre-specified|Pump Complications Rate Per 30 Days|Overall pump complications are defined as any combination of the following reported by the participant: tubing clogged, tubing kinked, tubing disconnect, tubing pulled out, blood in tubing, too much heat, too much cold, empty reservoir, low battery, occlusion alarm, no delivery alarm, skin abscess at site, excessive redness at site, swelling (not nodule) at site, bleeding at site, bruising at site, reservoir change (infusion set change reason only), and other. When either a reservoir change or an infusion set change was reported, participants were questioned whether the change occurred early (prior to 6 days). If he/she responded 'yes', then the reported change was recorded as a premature change.|Days 1-6 for each reservoir cycle throughout each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit. Participants included in pump complication analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding pump complications.||pump complications per 30 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
819241|NCT01134107|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With Pump Complications|Overall pump complications are defined as any combination of the following, reported by the participant: tubing clogged, tubing kinked, tubing disconnect, tubing pulled out, blood in tubing, too much heat, too much cold, empty reservoir, low battery, occlusion alarm, no delivery alarm, skin abscess at site, excessive redness at site, swelling (not nodule) at site, bleeding at site, bruising at site, reservoir change (infusion set change reason only), and other. When either a reservoir change or an infusion set change was reported, participants were questioned whether the change occurred early (prior to 6 days). If he/she responded 'yes', then the reported change was recorded as a premature change.|Days 1-6 for each reservoir cycle throughout each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit. Participants included in pump complication analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding pump complications.||percentage of participants|||Number
819242|NCT01134107|Other Pre-specified|Hyperglycemic Episode Rate Per 30 Days|Hyperglycemia was defined as an episode with (1) a measured blood glucose concentration >250 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL] (13.9 millimoles per liter [mmol/L]) and ≥3 hours after eating, or (2) a measured blood glucose concentration >300 mg/dL (16.7 mmol/L) and <3 hours after eating. Rate is presented as the number of hyperglycemic episodes adjusted for 30 days.|Days 1-6 for each reservoir cycle throughout each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Participants included in hyperglycemia analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding hyperglycemia.||hyperglycemic episodes per 30 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
819243|NCT01134107|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Having a Hyperglycemic Episode|A hyperglycemic episode was defined as an event with (1) a measured blood glucose concentration >250 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) (13.9 millimoles per liter [mmol/L]) and ≥3 hours after eating, or (2) a measured blood glucose concentration >300 mg/dL (16.7 mmol/L) and <3 hours after eating|Days 1-6 for each reservoir cycle throughout each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Participants included in hyperglycemia analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding hyperglycemia.||percentage of participants|||Number
819244|NCT01134107|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline to 12 Weeks for Daily Insulin Dose (Total, Basal, and Bolus)||Baseline, endpoint for each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit. Participants included in insulin analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding insulin dose.||Units (U) of insulin||Standard Deviation|Mean
819245|NCT01134107|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieve or Maintain a Glycated Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) Less Than or Equal to 6.5% and Less Than 7%||Endpoint for each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who completed a post-randomization visit and had an HbA1c measurement for the respective treatment period.||participants|||Number
819246|NCT01134107|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12 Weeks for Each Treatment in Glycated Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) Values||Baseline, endpoint for each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit, and had a baseline and a post-randomization HbA1c measurement for the respective treatment period. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was utilized in this analysis.||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
819247|NCT01134107|Secondary|Mean Daily Insulin Dose (Total, Basal, and Bolus)||Days 1-6 for each reservoir cycle throughout each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit. Participants included in insulin analyses are only those for whom data existed regarding insulin dose.||Units (U) of insulin||Standard Deviation|Mean
819248|NCT01134107|Secondary|Mean SMBG|Mean SMBG for combined periods; all reported SMBG values on Days 1-6, Day 2, and Day 6 for Insulin Lispro 6D and Insulin Aspart 6D.|Days 1-6 and Day 2 and Day 6 for each reservoir cycle throughout each 12-week treatment period|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit and one SMBG measurement on a Day 6, or Day 2 depending on the analysis, for the respective treatment arm: insulin lispro 6D and insulin aspart 6D.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819249|NCT01134107|Primary|Mean of Last Six 7-point Self Monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Taken on Day 6 for Insulin Lispro 6D and Insulin Aspart 6D Pump Reservoir In-use||Day 6 of each reservoir cycle for the last 6 weeks of each 12-week treatment period (Week 7 through Week 12)|All randomized participants who completed at least one post-randomization visit. Those included in the primary analysis had to have at least one reservoir in-use cycle with an SMBG measurement on Day 6 during the pre-specified collection period.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819250|NCT01126268|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Any Adverse Event (AE)|AEs included burning at application site, upper respiratory infection, furuncle, cough, and a rash at a site other than the application site. See the Adverse Events section for more detailed information.|baseline to 6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who received at least 1 dose of Retapamulin (Altabax)||participants|||Number
819255|NCT01126268|Secondary|Tissue Warmth (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Follow up|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819256|NCT01126268|Secondary|Tissue Warmth (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Baseline|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|baseline|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819257|NCT01126268|Secondary|Tissue Edema (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Follow up|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819258|NCT01126268|Secondary|Tissue Edema (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Baseline|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|baseline|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819259|NCT01126268|Secondary|Crusting (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Follow up|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819260|NCT01126268|Secondary|Crusting (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Baseline|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|baseline|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819261|NCT01126268|Secondary|Purulence (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Follow up|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819262|NCT01126268|Secondary|Purulence (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Baseline|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|baseline|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819263|NCT01126268|Secondary|Erythema (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Follow up|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819264|NCT01126268|Secondary|Erythema (Sign and Symptom of Infection) at Baseline|Signs and symptoms of infection were classified as one of the following: absent, minimal, moderate, or severe.|baseline|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819265|NCT01126268|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were a Therapeutic Success|Therapeutic response was determined from the clinical response and the microbiological response. Patients who qualified as both a “clinical success” and a “microbiological success” were deemed a “therapeutic success,” and all others were deemed “therapeutic failures.”|6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819266|NCT01126268|Secondary|Microbiologic Response at Follow up as Assessed by a Rating Scale|Microbiological response was determined by the investigator at the follow-up visit using the following microbiological outcomes: (1) microbological eradication, (2) presumed microbiological eradication, (3) presumed microbiological improvement, (4) microbiological persistence, (5) presumed microbiological persistence, (6) unable to determine, (7) new pathogen, and (8) colonization. Patients who were designated microbiological eradication, presumed microbiological eradication, presumed microbiological improvement, or colonization as defined in numbers 1, 2, 3, and 8 above were considered a “microbiological success” while all others were considered “microbiological failure.”|6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819267|NCT01126268|Secondary|Clinical Response at Follow up as Assessed by a Rating Scale|Clinical response was based on clinical evaluation by the investigator at the follow-up visit using a predefined scale with the following categories: (1) clinical success, (2) clinical improvement, (3) no change, (4) clinical failure, and (5) unable to determine. Patients who were designated as clinical success as defined in number 1 above were considered a true “clinical success” while all others were considered a “clinical failure.” Patients were classified with an outcome of “unable to determine” if they missed their follow-up visit or refused clinical examination.|6 to 8 days after treatment|All participants who had a pathogen isolated from the treatment area at baseline upon microbiological testing||participants|||Number
819268|NCT01126268|Primary|Number of Participants Whose Wound Cultures Were Positive for MRSA and Who Were Determined to be a Clinical Success at the Follow-up Visit|Clinical success is defined as no further signs or symptoms of infection present, including erythema, purulence, crusting, edema, warmth and pain.|6 to 8 days after treatment|Participants whose wound cultures were positive for MRSA||participants|||Number
819269|NCT01134276|Secondary|Total Hospital Cost During Admission After Biliary Drainage|Total hospital cost during admission after Biliary Drainage in US dollars|during hospital stay for biliary drainage procedure|||thousands in US dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
819270|NCT01134276|Secondary|Change in Total Serum Bilirubin After Drainage|Effect of reducing serum total bilirubin after drainage in terms of Daily diminution of bilirubin(mg/dL/day)|within 14 days after drainage|||mg/dL/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
819271|NCT01134276|Primary|Incidence of Infectious Complications After Biliary Drainage|at least 90 days after operation change in serum bilirubin cholangitis blood test (complete blood cell count, liver function test, CRP)|within 120 days after drainage|||participants|||Number
819272|NCT01134315|Secondary|Mean Baseline and Change From Baseline in Albumin at Final Visit (FV)|Normal ranges for these chemistry measurements varied according to the age of the participant.|Baseline, Final Visit (defined as the last post-baseline observation, up to end of study [715 days])|All Treated Population (all participants who received at least 1 dose of paricalcitol [paricalcitol group] or at least one dose of calcitriol [calcitriol group]) with measurements at baseline and given time point.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819273|NCT01134315|Secondary|Mean Baseline and Change From Baseline in Parathyroid Hormone at Final Visit (FV)|Normal ranges for these chemistry measurements varied according to the age of the participant.|Baseline, Final Visit (defined as the last post-baseline observation, up to end of study [715 days])|All Treated Population (all participants who received at least 1 dose of paricalcitol [paricalcitol group] or at least one dose of calcitriol [calcitriol group]) with measurements at baseline and given time point.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819274|NCT01134315|Secondary|Mean Baseline and Change From Baseline in 1,25-Dihydroxy Vitamin D3 at Final Visit (FV)|Normal ranges for these chemistry measurements varied according to the age of the participant.|Baseline, Final Visit (defined as the last post-baseline observation, up to end of study [715 days])|All Treated Population (all participants who received at least 1 dose of paricalcitol [paricalcitol group] or at least one dose of calcitriol [calcitriol group]) with measurements at baseline and given time point.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819275|NCT01134315|Secondary|Mean Baseline and Change From Baseline in 25-Hydroxy Vitamin D3 at Final Visit (FV)|Normal ranges for these chemistry measurements varied according to the age of the participant.|Baseline, Final Visit (defined as the last post-baseline observation, up to end of study [715 days])|All Treated Population (all participants who received at least 1 dose of paricalcitol [paricalcitol group] or at least one dose of calcitriol [calcitriol group]) with measurements at baseline and given time point.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819276|NCT01134315|Secondary|Mean Baseline (BL) and Change From Baseline in Calcium, Inorganic Phosphate (IP), Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN), Creatinine at Final Visit (FV)|Normal ranges for these chemistry measurements varied according to the age of the participant.|Baseline, Final Visit (defined as the last post-baseline observation, up to end of study [715 days])|All Treated Population (all participants who received at least 1 dose of paricalcitol [paricalcitol group] or at least one dose of calcitriol [calcitriol group]); n=number of participants with measurements at baseline and given time point.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819277|NCT01134315|Secondary|Mean Baseline (BL) and Change From Baseline in Potassium, Sodium, Chloride, Bicarbonate at Final Visit (FV)|Normal ranges for these chemistry measurements varied according to the age of the participant.|Baseline, Final Visit (defined as the last post-baseline observation, up to end of study [715 days])|All Treated Population (all participants who received at least 1 dose of paricalcitol [paricalcitol group] or at least one dose of calcitriol [calcitriol group]); n=number of participants with measurements at baseline and given time point.||mEq/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819278|NCT01134315|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs), Serious AEs (SAEs), Deaths and Discontinuations Due to AEs|AE: any untoward medical occurrence that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment; any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered causally related to the use of the product (either paricalcitol or calcitriol); can result from use of the drug as stipulated in the labeling, as well as from accidental or intentional overdose, drug abuse, or drug withdrawal; any worsening of a pre-existing condition or illness. Severity was categorized as mild, moderate, or severe. SAE: AE that results in the death; is life-threatening; results in hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; is an important medical event requiring medical or surgical intervention to prevent serious outcome; is a spontaneous or elective abortion. For more details, please see the AE section of this record.|Monitored from time of informed consent through end of study + 30 days (total of 745 days).|All participants||participants|||Number
819279|NCT01134315|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least One Incidence of Hypercalcemia|Hypercalcemia was defined as calcium >10.2 mg/dL. Percentage of participants with hypercalcemia is presented for the overall population, the subgroup of participants in the study for less than 3 months, and those in the study for greater than or equal to 3 months.|Monitored from time of informed consent through end of study + 30 days (total of 745 days).|All Treated Population (all participants who received at least 1 dose of paricalcitol [paricalcitol group] or at least one dose of calcitriol [calcitriol group]).||percentage of participants|||Number
819280|NCT01134328|Secondary|Tolerability of Study Medication at Visit 3|Subjects were asked to rate the comfort of the drop in each eye upon instillation, at 1 minute, and at 2 minutes after instillation of study medication. The assessment used a 10-point scale with 0 as very comfortable and 10 as very uncomfortable. Higher scores represent a worse outcome.|upon instillation, 1 minute and 2 minutes post instillation|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819281|NCT01134328|Secondary|Tolerability of Study Medication at Visit 2B|Subjects were asked to rate the comfort of the drop in each eye upon instillation, at 1 minute, and at 2 minutes after instillation of study medication. The assessment used a 10-point scale with 0 as very comfortable and 10 as very uncomfortable. Higher scores represent a worse outcome.|upon instillation, 1 minute and 2 minutes post instillation|Intent to Treat (ITT). Number of analyzed subjects differ due to subject discontinuation during the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819282|NCT01134328|Secondary|Ear or Palate Pruritus at 8 Hours Post-dose at Visit 4A|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ear or Palate Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a single 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Ear or Palate Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819283|NCT01134328|Secondary|Ear or Palate Pruritus at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ear or Palate Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a single 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Ear or Palate Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819284|NCT01134328|Secondary|Ear or Palate Pruritus at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ear or Palate Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a single 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Ear or Palate Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819285|NCT01134328|Secondary|Lid Swelling at 8 Hours Post-dose at Visit 4A|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours after drop instillation. Lid swelling was assessed by the patient on a 0-3 scale (0=none to 3=severe). Average of lid swelling score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819700|NCT01130597|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Discontinuing Due to Hyperkalemia (Serum Potassium > 5.5 mEq/L)||56 Days|||percentage of participants|||Number
819286|NCT01134328|Secondary|Lid Swelling Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Lid swelling was assessed by the patient on a 0-3 scale (0=none to 3=severe). Average of lid swelling score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819287|NCT01134328|Secondary|Lid Swelling at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Lid swelling was assessed by the patient on a 0-3 scale (0=none to 3=severe). Average of lid swelling score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819288|NCT01134328|Secondary|Total Redness at 8 Hours Post-Dose at Visit 4A|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours after drop instillation. Total redness was defined as the sum of the conjunctival, ciliary and episcleral redness scores, and was, thus, on a 0-12 scale, making the threshold for clinical significance a treatment difference of 3.0 units. Higher scores represent greater severity.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819289|NCT01134328|Secondary|Total Redness at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Total redness was defined as the sum of the conjunctival, ciliary and episcleral redness scores, and was, thus, on a 0-12 scale, making the threshold for clinical significance a treatment difference of 3.0 units. Higher scores represent greater severity.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819290|NCT01134328|Secondary|Total Redness at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Total redness was defined as the sum of the conjunctival, ciliary and episcleral redness scores, and was, thus, on a 0-12 scale, making the threshold for clinical significance a treatment difference of 3.0 units. Higher scores represent greater severity.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819291|NCT01134328|Secondary|Episcleral Redness at 8 Hours Post-dose at Visit 4A|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours after drop instillation. Episcleral Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of episcleral redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819292|NCT01134328|Secondary|Episcleral Redness at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Episcleral Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of Episcleral redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819293|NCT01134328|Secondary|Episcleral Redness at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Episcleral Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of episcleral redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819294|NCT01134328|Secondary|Ciliary Redness at 8 Hours Post-dose at Visit 4A|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours after drop instillation. Ciliary Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ciliary redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819295|NCT01134328|Secondary|Ciliary Redness at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Ciliary Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ciliary redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819296|NCT01134328|Secondary|Ciliary Redness at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ciliary Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ciliary redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Per protocol population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819297|NCT01134328|Primary|Conjunctival Redness at 8 Hours Post-dose at Visit 4A|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours after drop instillation. Conjunctival Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of conjunctival redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819298|NCT01134328|Primary|Conjunctival Redness at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Conjunctival Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of conjunctival redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819299|NCT01134328|Primary|Conjunctival Redness at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Conjunctival Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of conjunctival redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819300|NCT01134328|Primary|Ocular Itching at 8 Hours Post-dose at Visit 4A|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours after drop instillation. Ocular itching was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ocular itching score over both eyes was analyzed.|3, 5, 7 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819301|NCT01134328|Primary|Ocular Itching at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Ocular itching was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ocular itching score over both eyes was analyzed.|3, 5, 7 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819302|NCT01134328|Primary|Ocular Itching at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ocular itching was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ocular itching score over both eyes was analyzed.|3, 5, 7 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819701|NCT01130597|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Serum Potassium to End of Treatment||56 Days|||mEq/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819304|NCT01134393|Secondary|DBP and SBP Control and Response Rates Morning and Evening Over Time HBPM Measurements|DBP control: DBP <85 mmHg, SBP control: SBP <135 mmHg, DBP response: DBP <85 mmHg or a reduction from baseline >=10 mmHg, SBP response: SBP <135 mmHg or a reduction from baseline >= 15 mmHg|weeks 4, 8 and 12|FAS and LOCF and with at least one post baseline HBPM measurement||Number of participants|||Number
819305|NCT01134393|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Blood Pressure Categories Over Time|BP optimal: SBP <120 mmHg and DBP <80 mmHg, BP normal: SBP <130 mmHg and DBP <85 mmHg but not optimal, BP high-normal: SBP <140 mmHg and DBP <90 mmHg but not normal. Grade 1 hypertension: SBP <160 mmHg and DBP <100 mmHg but not high-normal, Grade 2 hypertension: SBP <180 mmHg and DBP <110 mmHg but not grade 1, Grade 3 hypertension: SBP >=180 mmHg or DBP >=110 mmHg.|weeks 4, 8 and 12|FAS with non-missing data||Percentage of participants|||Number
819306|NCT01134393|Secondary|DBP and SBP Control and Response Rates After 4, 8 and 12 Weeks of Treatment Using In-clinic BP Measurements|DBP control is defined as DBP <90 mmHg or <80 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment. SBP control is defined as SBP <140 mmHg or <130 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment. DBP response is defined as DBP <90 mmHg or <80 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment or a reduction from baseline >=10mmHg. SBP response is defined as SBP<140 mmHg or <130 mmHg in patients with diabetes or renal impairment or a reduction from baseline >=15mmHg.|weeks 4, 8 and 12|FAS and LOCF||Number of participants|||Number
819307|NCT01134393|Secondary|Change From Baseline Over Time in In-clinic Measured Mean Pulse Pressure||weeks 4, 8 and 12|There was no information in the Case Report Form (CRF)|||||
819308|NCT01134393|Secondary|Change From Baseline Over Time in In-clinic Measured Mean Pulse Rate|Pulse pressure was not analysed for this study instead pulse rate was analysed at weeks 4, 8 and 12.|weeks 4, 8 and 12|Treated Set (TS) with non-missing data||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
819309|NCT01134393|Secondary|Change From Baseline Over Time in In-clinic Measured Mean SBP and Mean DBP||weeks 4, 8 and 12|FAS with non-missing data||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819310|NCT01134393|Secondary|BP Control (Morning and Evening) After 12 Weeks of Treatment Using Home Blood Pressure Measurement (HBPM).|Achieving BP control with HBPM is defined as SBP<135 mmHg and DBP<85 mmHg.|Week 12|FAS and LOCF and with at least one post baseline HBPM measurement||Number of participants|||Number
819311|NCT01134393|Secondary|BP Control After 4 and 8 Weeks of Treatment Using In-clinic BP Measurements.|Achieving BP control is defined as SBP<140 mmHg and DBP<90 mmHg.|4 and 8 weeks|FAS and LOCF||Number of participants|||Number
819312|NCT01134393|Primary|Percentage of Patients Achieving Blood Pressure (BP) Control After 12 Weeks of Treatment Using In-clinic BP Measurements.|Achieving BP control is defined as SBP<140 mmHg and DBP<90 mmHg.|12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) is defined as all patients who took at least one dose of trial medication, and for whom a baseline measurement and at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement were available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) will be used.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819313|NCT01134510|Secondary|Donor Specific Antibodies [DSA] Class II|"Donor Specific Antibodies [DSAs] Class I will be checked 1, 3, and 6 months post transplant to monitor allograft function.
DSA will be measured using a relative intensity score (RIS) ranges from 0 points = No DSA; 2 points = <5000MFI (weak intensity); 5 points = 5000-10,000 MFI (moderate intensty); 10 points = >10,000MFI (strong intensity). Each DSA can have a score of 10 maximum. However, patients may have more than one DSA and points can add up to more than 10. this depends on how many DSAs [Class I and/or Class II] are present at the time of transplant and quarterly after transplant.
However, patients may have more than one DSA and points can add up to more than 10 this depends on how many DSAs [Class I and/or Class II] are present at the time of transplant and quarterly after transplant. Patients can have an infinite number of donor specific antibodies, this score can be higher than 10."|6 months|Mean Donor Specific Antibody (DSA) Class II levels at 1, 3, and 6 month post-transplant from 10 patients in the C1 Esterase Inhibitor group and 10 patients in the placebo group were calculated.||DSA relative intensity score||Standard Deviation|Mean
819314|NCT01134510|Secondary|Donor Specific Antibodies [DSA] Class I|"Donor Specific Antibodies [DSAs] Class I will be checked 1, 3, and 6 months post transplant to monitor allograft function.
DSA will be measured using a relative intensity score (RIS) ranges from 0 points = No DSA; 2 points = <5000MFI (weak intensity); 5 points = 5000-10,000 MFI (moderate intensty); 10 points = >10,000MFI (strong intensity). Each DSA can have a score of 10 maximum. However, patients may have more than one DSA and points can add up to more than 10. this depends on how many DSAs [Class I and/or Class II] are present at the time of transplant and quarterly after transplant. Patients can have an infinite number of donor specific antibodies, this score can be higher than 10."|6 months|Mean Donor Specific Antibody Class I levels at 1, 3, and 6 month post-transplant from 10 patients in the C1 Esterase Inhibitor group and 10 patients in the placebo group were calculated.||DSA relative intensity score||Standard Deviation|Mean
819315|NCT01134510|Secondary|Serum Creatinine|Serum creatinine will be checked 6 months post transplant to monitor allograft function.|6 months|Mean serum creatinine levels at 6 month post-transplant from 10 patients in the C1 Esterase Inhibitor group and 10 patients in the placebo group were calculated.||mg/dl (serum cr at 6m post transplant)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819316|NCT01134510|Primary|Post-transplant Biopsy to Identify Rejection Episodes|"Subjects will have a routine kidney biopsy 6 month after transplant to screen for episodes of acute rejection.
For purposes of this investigation, antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is defined as follows:
Deterioration of allograft function in a high-risk transplant recipient (i.e. sensitized patient with history of Donor Specific Antibodies) measured by serum Creatinine and estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate
Association with the presence of Donor Specific Antibody (usually increasing in strength) measured by luminex techniques.
Biopsy evidence of capillaritis, inflammation and C4d deposition."|6 month|9 patients in each arm completed 6 month protocol biopsy. 1 patient in the placebo arm was withdrawn before 6M biopsy. 1 patient in treatment arm refused protocol biopsy.||Episode of rejection|||Number
819317|NCT01135992|Secondary|Rate of Nocturnal Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes with a confirmed plasma glucose value of less than 3.1 mmol/L. Nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as occuring between 00:01 and 05:59 a.m.|Weeks 0-4 (IGlar), Weeks 4-16 (IDeg 3TW)|Safety Analysis Set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator||episodes per 100 patient years|||Number
819702|NCT01130597|Secondary|Mean Patiromer Dose at Week 8||Up to Week 8|||grams||Standard Deviation|Mean
819318|NCT01135992|Secondary|Rate of Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes with a confirmed plasma glucose value of less than 3.1 mmol/L.|Weeks 0-4 (IGlar), Weeks 4-16 (IDeg 3TW)|Safety Analysis Set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||episodes per 100 patient years|||Number
819319|NCT01135992|Secondary|Rate of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|Corresponds to rate of AEs per 100 patient years of exposure. Mild AEs: no or transient symptoms, no interference with subject’s daily activities. Moderate AEs: marked symptoms, moderate interference with subject’s daily activities. Severe AEs: considerable interference with subject’s daily activities, unacceptable. Serious adverse event (SAE): AE that at any dose results in any of the following: death, a life-threatening experience, in-subject hospitalization/prolongation of existing hospitalisation, persistent/significant disability/incapacity/congenital anomaly/birth defect|Weeks 0-4 (IGlar), Weeks 4-16 (IDeg 3TW)|Safety Analysis Set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||events per 100 patient years|||Number
819320|NCT01135992|Secondary|Change in Body Weight|Change from baseline in body weight after week 4 and after week 16|Week 0, Week 4, Week 16|Safety Analysis Set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator. Missing data is imputed using LOCF (last observation carried forward)||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819321|NCT01135992|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)|FPG at week 4 and 16|Week 4 and Week 16|FAS (Full Analysis Set) includes all subjects that were switched to IDeg 3TW treatment||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819322|NCT01135992|Primary|HbA1c (Glycosylated Haemoglobin)|HbA1C at week 4 and 16|Week 4 and Week 16|FAS (Full Analysis Set) includes all subjects that were switched to IDeg 3TW treatment||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
819323|NCT01136174|Secondary|Lung Function Measurement: Forced Vital Capacity Percent of Predicted (%FVC)|Change in Forced Vital Capacity percent of predicted (%FVC) from baseline to day 35. Only the results for placebo and Nintedanib 150mg arm were reported for this endpoint as nintedanib 150mg is the target dose.|baseline and day 35|Treated set||% predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
819324|NCT01136174|Secondary|Lung Function Measurement: Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|Change in forced vital capacity (FVC) from baseline to day 35. Only the results for placebo and Nintedanib 150mg arm were reported for this endpoint as nintedanib 150mg is the target dose.|baseline and day 35|Treated set||Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
819325|NCT01136174|Secondary|Lung Function Measurement: Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1)|Change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) from baseline to day 35. Only the results for placebo and Nintedanib 150mg arm were reported for this endpoint as nintedanib 150mg is the target dose.|baseline and day 35|Treated set||Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
819326|NCT01136174|Secondary|Lung Function Measurement: Diffusing Capacity for Carbon Monoxide Percent of Predicted (%DLco)|Change in Diffusing Capacity for Carbon Monoxide percent of predicted (%DLco) from baseline to day 35. Only the results for placebo and Nintedanib 150mg arm were reported for this endpoint as nintedanib 150mg is the target dose.|baseline and day 35|Treated set- Only patients with valid measurements were analysed.||% predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
819327|NCT01136174|Secondary|Lung Function Measurement: Diffusing Capacity for Carbon Monoxide (DLco)|Change in diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLco) from baseline to day 35. Only the results for placebo and Nintedanib 150mg arm were reported for this endpoint as nintedanib 150mg is the target dose.|baseline and day 35|Treated set||mL/min/mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819328|NCT01136174|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pulse Rate|Change from baseline in pulse rate at day 35. Only the results for placebo and Nintedanib 150mg arm were reported for this endpoint as nintedanib 150mg is the target dose.|baseline and day 35|Treated set||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
819329|NCT01136174|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|Change from baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) at day 35. Only the results for placebo and Nintedanib 150mg arm were reported for this endpoint as nintedanib 150mg is the target dose.|baseline and day 35|Treated set||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819330|NCT01136174|Secondary|Clinical Relevant Abnormalities in Laboratory Parameters- With Pirfenidone Background|Number of patients with Clinical Relevant Abnormalities in laboratory parameters reported as adverse events - With pirfenidone background|after the first drug intake until 28 days from the last treatment administration, up to 60 days|Treated set||participants|||Number
819331|NCT01136174|Secondary|Clinical Relevant Abnormalities in Laboratory Parameters- No Pirfenidone Background|Number of patients with Clinical Relevant Abnormalities in laboratory parameters reported as adverse events - No pirfenidone background|after the first drug intake until 28 days from the last treatment administration, up to 60 days|Treated set||participants|||Number
819332|NCT01136174|Secondary|Withdrawal Due to Adverse Event|Number of patients prematurely discontinued from trial medication due to adverse event.|after the first drug intake until 28 days from the last treatment administration, up to 60 days|Treated set||participants|||Number
819333|NCT01136174|Secondary|Cmax,ss After Multiple Doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg With BIBF 1120 (After Lunch)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state was identified from measurements obtained at multiple time points after multiple doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg with BIBF 1120 (after lunch)|Day 14 at Visit 5 (BIBF 1120 50mg and 100mg) and day 28 (visit 7) (BIBF 1120 150mg): at pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h after lunch dose|Treated set- Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819334|NCT01136174|Secondary|AUC0-8,ss After Multiple Doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg With BIBF 1120 (After Lunch)|AUC0-8,ss was calculated as the area under the concentration-time curve of the concentration-time profile of the analyte in plasma at steady state over the time interval from 0 to 8 hours after multiple doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg with BIBF 1120 (after lunch) in the time frame mentioned.|Day 14 at Visit 5 (BIBF 1120 50mg and 100mg) and day 28 (visit 7) (BIBF 1120 150mg): at pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h after lunch dose|Treated set- Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819496|NCT01137071|Secondary|1-year Disease Progression-free Survival Rate||1 year from the beginning of platinum-based rescue chemotherapy start date|In the ITT (Intention-to-treat) population, 25 patients out of the 29 considered for the PFS2 analysis presented disease progression or death and 4 were censored.||percentage of participants|||Number
819335|NCT01136174|Secondary|Cmax,ss After Multiple Doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg Without BIBF 1120 (After Lunch)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state was identified from measurements obtained at multiple time points after multiple doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg Without BIBF 1120 (after lunch)|Day -1 at Visit 1: at pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h after lunch dose|Treated set- Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819336|NCT01136174|Secondary|AUC0-8,ss After Multiple Doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg Without BIBF 1120 (After Lunch)|AUC0-8,ss was calculated as the area under the concentration-time curve of the concentration-time profile of the analyte in plasma at steady state over the time interval from 0 to 8 hours after multiple doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg without BIBF 1120 (after lunch) in the time frame mentioned.|Day -1 at Visit 1: at pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h after lunch dose|Treated set- Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819337|NCT01136174|Secondary|Cmax,ss After Multiple Doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg With BIBF 1120 (After Breakfast)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state was identified from measurements obtained at multiple time points after multiple doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg with BIBF 1120 (after breakfast)|Day 14 at Visit 5 (BIBF 1120 50mg and 100mg) and day 28 (visit 7) (BIBF 1120 150mg): At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h after morning dose and pre-dose after lunch dose|Treated set- Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819338|NCT01136174|Secondary|AUC0-4,ss After Multiple Doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg With BIBF 1120 (After Breakfast)|AUC0-4,ss was calculated as the area under the concentration-time curve of the concentration-time profile of the analyte in plasma at steady state over the time interval from 0 to 4 hours after multiple doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg with BIBF 1120 (after breakfast) in the time frame mentioned.|Day 14 at Visit 5 (BIBF 1120 50mg and 100mg) and day 28 (visit 7) (BIBF 1120 150mg): At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h after morning dose and pre-dose after lunch dose|Treated set- Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819339|NCT01136174|Secondary|Cmax,ss After Multiple Doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg Without BIBF 1120 (After Breakfast)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state was identified from measurements obtained at multiple time points after multiple doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg without BIBF 1120 (after breakfast)|Day -1 at Visit 1: At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h after morning dose and pre-dose after lunch dose|Treated set-Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819340|NCT01136174|Secondary|AUC0-4,ss After Multiple Doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg Without BIBF 1120 (After Breakfast)|AUC0-4,ss was calculated as the area under the curve of the concentration-time profile of the analyte in plasma at steady state over the time interval from 0 to 4 hours after multiple doses of Pirfenidone 600 mg without BIBF 1120 (after breakfast) in the time frame mentioned.|Day -1 at Visit 1: At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h after morning dose and pre-dose after lunch dose|Treated set- Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819341|NCT01136174|Secondary|Cmax,ss After Multiple Doses of BIBF 1120 With Pirfenidone|"Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state was identified from measurements obtained at multiple time points over a uniform dosing interval τ after multiple doses of BIBF 1120 with pirfenidone
Detailed outcome measure time frame:
In 50 mg and 100 mg dose group:
BIBF 1120:
days 14 (-1, +3) to 17 at Visit 5: At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose
In 150 mg dose group:
BIBF 1120:
days 28 (-1, +3) to 31 at Visit 5: At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose"|pre-dose, then 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose on days 14 to 17 (BIBF 1120 50 mg and 100 mg) or on days 28 to 31 (BIBF 1120 150 mg)|Treated set- Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819342|NCT01136174|Secondary|AUCτ,ss After Multiple Doses of BIBF 1120 With Pirfenidone|"AUCτ,ss was calculated as the area under the concentration-time curve of the concentration-time profile of the analyte in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ after multiple doses of BIBF 1120 with pirfenidone in the time frame mentioned.
Detailed outcome measure time frame:
In 50 mg and 100 mg dose group:
BIBF 1120:
days 14 (-1, +3) to 17 at Visit 5: At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose
In 150 mg dose group:
BIBF 1120:
days 28 (-1, +3) to 31 at Visit 5: At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose"|pre-dose, then 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose on days 14 to 17 (BIBF 1120 50 mg and 100 mg) or on days 28 to 31 (BIBF 1120 150 mg)|Treated set- Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819343|NCT01136174|Secondary|Cmax,ss After Multiple Doses of BIBF 1120 Without Pirfenidone|"Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state was identified from measurements obtained at multiple time points over a uniform dosing interval τ after multiple doses of BIBF 1120 without pirfenidone.
Detailed outcome measure time frame:
In 50 mg and 100 mg dose group:
BIBF 1120:
days 14 (-1, +3) to 17 at Visit 5: At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose
In 150 mg dose group:
BIBF 1120:
days 28 (-1, +3) to 31 at Visit 5: At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose"|pre-dose, then 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose on days 14 to 17 (BIBF 1120 50 mg and 100 mg) or on days 28 to 31 (BIBF 1120 150 mg)|Treated set- Only patients with valid final pharmacokinetic values were analysed||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819368|NCT01136408|Secondary|Anticoagulation Effects Trough INR (International Normalised Ratio)|The blood coagulation parameter INR was assessed in patients allocated to the dabigatran etexilate groups at week 0, prior to drug administration and at the trough at week 1, 4 and 12.|Week 0,1,4 and 12|Full Analysis Set||ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819369|NCT01136408|Secondary|Anticoagulation Effects Trough ECT (Ecarin Clotting Time)|The blood coagulation parameter ECT was assessed in patients allocated to the dabigatran etexilate groups at week 0, prior to drug administration and at the trough at week 1, 4 and 12.|Week 0,1,4 and 12|Full Analysis Set||seconds||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819703|NCT01130597|Secondary|Mean Patiromer Dose at Week 4||Up to Week 4|||grams||Standard Deviation|Mean
819344|NCT01136174|Secondary|AUCτ,ss After Multiple Doses of BIBF 1120 Without Pirfenidone|"AUCτ,ss was calculated as the area under the concentration-time curve of the concentration-time profile of the analyte in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ after multiple doses of BIBF 1120 without pirfenidone in the time frame mentioned.
Detailed outcome measure time frame:
In 50 mg and 100 mg dose group:
BIBF 1120:
days 14 (-1, +3) to 17 at Visit 5: At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose
In 150 mg dose group:
BIBF 1120:
days 28 (-1, +3) to 31 at Visit 5: At pre-dose and 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose"|pre-dose, then 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 3.92 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h after morning dose on days 14 to 17 (BIBF 1120 50 mg and 100 mg) or on days 28 to 31 (BIBF 1120 150 mg)|Treated set||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819345|NCT01136174|Primary|Drug-related Adverse Events|The number of patients with drug-related adverse events stratified according to pirfenidone use in each group|after the first drug intake until 28 days from the last treatment administration, up to 60 days|Treated set||participants|||Number
819346|NCT01136226|Secondary|Safety Assessments|Assess frequency and severity of spontaneously reported AE's Changes between baseline and testosterone recovery in serum testosterone and pre biopsy PSA clinical evidence of Prostate cancer changes between baseline and testosterone recovery in health questionnaire|6 months||||||
819347|NCT01136226|Primary|Serum Testosterone Recovery|To Evaluate the time to testosterone recovery, which is defined as a return to with in 90% of pretreatment level, after 6 months of neo-adjuvant treatment with Eligard 22.5mg with Radiation Therapy in patients with early prostate Cancer|6 mos|||Months||Full Range|Mean
819348|NCT01136291|Secondary|Quality of Life Through World Health Organization Quality of Life Abbreviated Questionnaire WHOQOL-Bref)|All pregnant women responded to the quality of life WHOQOL-bref questionnaire, at study inclusion and at the completion of 36 gestational weeks. The domains of these questionnaires were calculated on a scale of zero (the worse quality of life) to 100 points (the better quality of life).|at the 14 and at the 40 gestational weeks|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819349|NCT01136291|Primary|Weight Gain During the Program|Weight gain during the program was the difference between the weight measured at study entry and final consultation weight, measured by a mechanical scale, in kilos and grams|at the 14 to 40 gestational weeks|||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819350|NCT01136291|Primary|Gestational Weight Gain|Gestational weight gain is the difference between the prepregnancy weight and the last weight measure at the end of pregnancy|baseline and at 40 gestational weeks|||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819351|NCT01136356|Secondary|Mean Peak Sleep Assessed by Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)|Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) is a self-report questionnaire that assesses sleep quality, total scores range from 0 (better) to 21(worse). The data that has been reported reflects the peak scores on the PSQI during the withdrawal period from both morphine and buprenorphine.|Average mean peak sleep assessed once a week for up to 8 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
819352|NCT01136356|Secondary|Mean Daily Peak Pain Ratings Assessed by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"Visual Analog Scale (VAS) measures subjective ratings on pain. The scale on this measurement ranges from 0 being None to 100 being Extremely. The results below reflect the subjective measurements of pain taken from day 0 to day 18 of withdrawal from both morphine and buprenorphine."|Average mean daily peak pain ratings assessed from day 0 to day 18 during the 18 day withdrawal period|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
819353|NCT01136356|Primary|Mean Peak Opioid Withdrawal Assessed by the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS)|Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) is an observer-rated tool for quantifying opioid withdrawal. The scale ranges from 0 to 48: Scores 5 to 12 are mild, 13 to 24 are moderate, 25 to 36 are moderately severe, and over 36 are severe withdrawal. The scores on this repeated measure were analyzed by a two-factor ANOVA for mean peak daily COWS ratings.|Average mean peak opioid withdrawal thirty minutes before and after injection assessed up to 59 days|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
819354|NCT01136382|Secondary|Number of Withdrawals Due to Pre-defined Asthma Events|Patients were considered to have experienced a “pre-defined asthma event” if any of the following conditions were met during the study: 1. At each visit or follow-up visit, a decrease in morning pre-dose FEV1 >=20% from the Visit 3 (randomization visit) morning pre-dose FEV1 or a decrease to <65% of predicted normal value; 2. The use of >=8 actuations of albuterol/salbutamol per day on 3 or more days within any period of 7 consecutive days following randomization; 3. A decrease in morning PEF >=20% from baseline on 3 or more days within any period of 7 consecutive days after randomization; 4. Two or more nights with an awakening due to asthma, which required the use of reliever medication within any period of 7 consecutive days after randomization; 5. A clinical exacerbation requiring emergency treatment, hospitalization, or use of an asthma medication not allowed by the study protocol.|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||participants|||Number
819355|NCT01136382|Secondary|Change in Nighttime Reliever Medication Use From Baseline to Treatment Period Average|The patient, with the help of their caregiver, recorded the number of inhalations of reliever medication used, for relief of asthma symptoms, twice daily in the eDiary. Patients were asked to respond to a standard question twice daily (morning and evening). The question to be answered was, “How many albuterol/salbutamol inhalations since last diary entry?”|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||inhalations per day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819356|NCT01136382|Secondary|Change in Total Daily and Daytime Reliever Medication Use From Baseline to Treatment Period Average|The patient, with the help of their caregiver, recorded the number of inhalations of reliever medication used, for relief of asthma symptoms, twice daily in the eDiary. Patients were asked to respond to a standard question twice daily (morning and evening). The question to be answered was, “How many albuterol/salbutamol inhalations since last diary entry?”|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||inhalations per day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819370|NCT01136408|Secondary|Anticoagulation Effects Trough aPTT (Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time)|The blood coagulation parameter aPTT was assessed in patients allocated to the dabigatran etexilate groups at week 0, prior to drug administration and at the trough at week 1, 4 and 12.|Week 0,1,4 and 12|Full Analysis Set||seconds||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819357|NCT01136382|Secondary|Change in Nighttime Awakenings and Nighttime Awakenings With Reliever Medication Use From Baseline to Treatment Period Average|Patients, with the help of their caregiver, were asked to respond to a standard question each morning as they completed their eDiary. The question to be answered was, “Did your asthma cause you to wake-up last night?” If yes, patients were asked, “Did you need to use your reliever medication (albuterol/salbutamol inhaler) before you went back to sleep?” Baseline is defined as the percentage of days where patient experienced nighttime awakenings out of all available days where data was collected during the last 7 days of the run-in period.|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||percentage of days with awakenings||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819358|NCT01136382|Secondary|Change in Nighttime Asthma Symptom Score From Baseline to Treatment Period Average|Patients, with the help of their caregiver, were required to rate and document their asthma symptoms twice daily as an overall symptom score for the time period since their previous recording. The following rating scales were used: 0 = None; no symptoms of asthma; 1 = Mild symptoms; awareness of asthma symptoms and/or signs that are easily tolerated; 2 = Moderate symptoms, asthma symptoms with some discomfort, causing some interference with daily activities or sleep; 3 = Severe symptoms; incapacitating asthma symptoms and/or signs, with inability to perform daily activities or to sleep.|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819359|NCT01136382|Secondary|Change in Total Daily and Daytime Asthma Symptom Scores From Baseline to Treatment Period Average|Patients, with the help of their caregiver, were required to rate and document their asthma symptoms twice daily as an overall symptom score for the time period since their previous recording. The following rating scales were used: 0 = None; no symptoms of asthma; 1 = Mild symptoms; awareness of asthma symptoms and/or signs that are easily tolerated; 2 = Moderate symptoms, asthma symptoms with some discomfort, causing some interference with daily activities or sleep; 3 = Severe symptoms; incapacitating asthma symptoms and/or signs, with inability to perform daily activities or to sleep.|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819360|NCT01136382|Secondary|Change in Forced Mid-expiratory Flow Between 25% and 75% of the FVC (FEF25-75) From Baseline to Treatment Period Average|FEF25-75 is the average rate of airflow during the midportion of the forced vital capacity. Baseline was defined as the pre-dose assessment value measured at randomization (Visit 3), and the treatment period average was calculated as the mean of all available data recorded during the entire treatment period.|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||liters/second||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819361|NCT01136382|Secondary|Change in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) From Baseline to Treatment Period Average|FVC is the total volume of air expired after a full inspiration. Baseline was defined as the pre-dose assessment value measured at randomization (Visit 3), and the treatment period average was calculated as the mean of all available data recorded during the entire treatment period.|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819362|NCT01136382|Secondary|Change in Evening PEF From Baseline to the Treatment Period Average|The peak expiratory flow rate is the maximal rate that a person can exhale during a short maximal expiratory effort after a full inspiration. Baseline was calculated using the mean of the data recorded during the last 7 days of the run-in period, and the treatment period average was calculated as the mean of all available data recorded during the entire treatment period.|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||liters/minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819363|NCT01136382|Secondary|Change in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) From Baseline to Treatment Period Average|FEV1 is the volume exhaled during the first second of a forced expiratory maneuver started from the level of total lung capacity. Baseline was defined as the pre-dose assessment value measured at randomization (Visit 3), and the treatment period average was calculated as the mean of all available data recorded during the entire treatment period.|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819364|NCT01136382|Primary|Change in Morning Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) From Baseline to the Treatment Period Average|The peak expiratory flow rate is the maximal rate that a person can exhale during a short maximal expiratory effort after a full inspiration. Baseline was calculated using the mean of the data recorded during the last 7 days of the run-in period, and the treatment period average was calculated as the mean of all available data recorded during the entire treatment period.|Baseline to 6 weeks|The efficacy analysis set consisted of all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study medication, and contributed data for at least 1 efficacy endpoint.||liters/minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819365|NCT01136408|Primary|Changes in Laboratory Test Values|The number of patients with ALT, AST, alkaline phosphatase, or bilirubin exceeded the upper limit of normal (ULN) range|12 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||participants|||Number
819366|NCT01136408|Secondary|Steady-state Pharmacokinetics of Total Dabigatran Trough Plasma Concentration||Week 1,4 and 12|Full Analysis Set||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819367|NCT01136408|Secondary|Anticoagulation Effects Trough 11-dehydrothromboxane B2|Analysis based on concomitant use of aspirin compared to no aspirin users. 11-dehydrothromboxane B2 is measured in urine of patients.|Week 0 and 12|Per Protocol Analysis Set||pg/mg creatinine||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819704|NCT01130597|Secondary|Mean Patiromer Dose at Week 1||Up to Week 1|||grams||Standard Deviation|Mean
819705|NCT01130597|Secondary|Mean Number of Patiromer Titrations||56 Days|||patiromer titrations||Standard Deviation|Mean
819371|NCT01136408|Primary|Discontinuation of the Study Drug Due to Adverse Events|Discontinuation of the study drug due to adverse events.|Upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||participants|||Number
819372|NCT01136408|Primary|Incidence and Severity of Adverse Events|Intensity of event is categorised as mild, moderate and severe.|Upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||participants|||Number
819373|NCT01136408|Secondary|Frequency (Occurrence Rates) of Death|The percentage of patients with death|Upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819374|NCT01136408|Secondary|Frequency (Occurrence Rates) of Other Major Adverse Cardiac Events|The percentage of patients with other major adverse cardiac events|Upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819375|NCT01136408|Secondary|Frequency (Occurrence Rates) of Myocardial Infarction (Fatal or Non-fatal)|The percentage of patients with myocardial infarction (fatal or non-fatal)|Upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819376|NCT01136408|Secondary|Frequency (Occurrence Rates) of Systemic Embolism|The percentage of patients with systemic embolism|Upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819377|NCT01136408|Secondary|Frequency (Occurrence Rates) of Transient Ischemic Attack|The percentage of patients with transient ischemic attack|Upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819378|NCT01136408|Secondary|Frequency (Occurrence Rates) of Ischemic or Haemorrhagic Stroke (Fatal or Non-fatal)|The percentage of patients with ischemic or haemorrhagic stroke (fatal or non-fatal)|Upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819379|NCT01136408|Secondary|Frequency (Occurrence Rates) of a Composite Clinical Endpoint.|Percentage of patients with the composite clinical endpoint (ischemic or haemorrhagic stroke (fatal or non-fatal), transient ischemic attacks, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction (fatal or non-fatal), other major adverse cardiac events, and death)|Upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819380|NCT01136408|Primary|Frequency (Occurrence Rates) of Nuisance Bleeding Event|"The percentage of patients with nuisance bleeding event
Any bleed that did not qualify as a major bleed was defined as a minor bleed; all minor bleeding events not fulfilling one of the criteria below was defined as a nuisance bleeding event:
A skin haematoma of at least 25 sqcm
Spontaneous nose bleed lasting for more than 5 minutes
Macroscopic haematuria (either spontaneous or, if associated with an intervention, lasting more than 24 hours)
Spontaneous rectal bleeding (more than spotting on toilet paper)
Gingival bleeding lasting for more than 5 minutes
Bleeding leading to hospitalisation
Bleeding leading to blood transfusion (erythrocyte component transfusion or whole blood transfusion) of less than 4.5 units (equal to 2 units in EU/US)
Any other bleeding considered clinically relevant by the investigator"|Upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819381|NCT01136408|Primary|Frequency (Occurrence Rates) of Clinically Relevant Bleeding Event|"The percentage of patients with clinically relevant bleeding event.
Any bleed that did not qualify as a major bleed was defined as a minor bleed; minor bleed which fulfilled one of the criteria below was defined as a clinically relevant bleeding event:
A skin haematoma of at least 25 sqcm
Spontaneous nose bleed lasting for more than 5 minutes
Macroscopic haematuria (either spontaneous or, if associated with an intervention, lasting more than 24 hours)
Spontaneous rectal bleeding (more than spotting on toilet paper)
Gingival bleeding lasting for more than 5 minutes
Bleeding leading to hospitalisation
Bleeding leading to blood transfusion (erythrocyte component transfusion or whole blood transfusion) of less than 4.5 units (equal to 2 units in EU/US)
Any other bleeding considered clinically relevant by the investigator"|upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819410|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving MPG Within Range 71 to 179 mg/dL and Within the Target of 100 to 179 mg/dL by Hospital Day|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Day 1 up to day 10 of hospital study period|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819382|NCT01136408|Primary|Frequency (Occurrence Rates) of Major Bleeding Event|"The percentage of patients with major bleeding event.
Major bleeding was defined as any bleed fulfilling one of the following conditions:
Fatal or life-threatening
Retroperitoneal, intracranial, intraocular, or intraspinal bleeding (verified by objective testing)
Bleeding requiring surgical treatment
Clinically overt bleeding leading to a transfusion (erythrocyte component transfusion or whole blood transfusion) of 4.5 units (equal to 2 units in EU/US) or more
Clinically overt bleeding leading to a fall in haemoglobin of at least 2 g/dL"|upto 15 weeks|Safety set was used for safety endpoints. Full analysis set was used for efficacy endpoints. The safety set comprises all patients who were treated with trial medication at least once. The full analysis set comprises all patients who were randomised and treated with trial medication at least once. No data was imputed.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819383|NCT01136486|Primary|Assessment of Pain Severity|Pain was assessed on a scale for 1 (no pain) to 10 (severe) pain. This is observational study so participants were only seen at one time point, when they were referred to the neuropsychology service.|Referral|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819384|NCT01136655|Secondary|Urinary Excretion of Formoterol During the 12 Hours Following Inhalation of Study Drug|The amount of formoterol excreted unchanged in urine over the 12-hour period after administration [Ae(0-12h)] was calculated from the concentration of formoterol in urine multiplied by the total volume of urine collected. Volume was determined from the weight of the collected urine times an assumed urine density of 1020 g/L. The data for six patients who did not have measurable formoterol in their urine on the Foradil 12 μg treatment day was excluded from the analysis. All other urine concentrations below the lower limit of quantification were set to zero. One subject was incorrectly administered BUD 160/ formoterol (FM) 9.0 rather than BUD 160/ Foradil 12.0 at Period 4. Hence this subject is included in the Efficacy Analysis Set, but not the Safety Analysis Set for BUD 160/ Foradil 12.0.|0 to 12 hours|Efficacy analysis set including all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||pmol||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
819385|NCT01136655|Secondary|Maximal FEV1 During the 12-hour Study Period|Pulmonary function tests consisted of 3 forced expiratory maneuvers in which the patient expired forcefully from total lung capacity to residual volume, recorded using a spirometer. FEV1 was measured at 3, 9, 15, 60, 120, 180, 240, 360, 480, 600 and 720 minutes post administration of randomized study medication. The maximum FEV1 value was defined as the largest observed FEV1 value recorded during each 12-hour serial spirometry procedure. One subject was incorrectly administered BUD 160/ formoterol (FM) 9.0 rather than BUD 160/ Foradil 12.0 at Period 4. Hence this subject is included in the Efficacy Analysis Set, but not the Safety Analysis Set for BUD 160/ Foradil 12.0.|at 3, 9, 15, 60, 120, 180, 240, 360, 480, 600 and 720 minutes postdose|Efficacy analysis set including all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819386|NCT01136655|Secondary|FEV1 at 12 Hours After Study Medication Inhalation|Pulmonary function tests consisted of 3 forced expiratory maneuvers in which the patient expired forcefully from total lung capacity to residual volume, recorded using a spirometer. The FEV1 value at 12 hours after dosing was taken as the 12-hour measurement (720 minutes) from the serial spirometry. One subject was incorrectly administered BUD 160/ formoterol (FM) 9.0 rather than BUD 160/ Foradil 12.0 at Period 4. Hence this subject is included in the Efficacy Analysis Set, but not the Safety Analysis Set for BUD 160/ Foradil 12.0.|12 hours after dosing|Efficacy analysis set including all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819387|NCT01136655|Primary|Average 12 Hour Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1)|Pulmonary function tests consisted of 3 forced expiratory maneuvers in which the patient expired forcefully from total lung capacity to residual volume, recorded using a spirometer. FEV1 was obtained from the full expiratory flow-volume-time curve. FEV1 was measured at 3, 9, 15, 60, 120, 180, 240, 360, 480, 600 and 720 minutes post administration of randomized study medication. Twelve-hour serial FEV1 was calculated through an AUC determination and then divided by time, so that the final value is expressed in liters. One subject was incorrectly administered BUD 160/ formoterol (FM) 9.0 rather than BUD 160/ Foradil 12.0 at Period 4. Hence this subject is included in the Efficacy Analysis Set, but not the Safety Analysis Set for BUD 160/ Foradil 12.0.|at 3, 9, 15, 60, 120, 180, 240, 360, 480, 600 and 720 minutes postdose|Efficacy analysis set including all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819388|NCT01136746|Secondary|Number of Participants With Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE)|MACE was defined as the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or nonfatal stroke. Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819389|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Documented Nosocomial Infections|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819390|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Deterioration of Renal Function Throughout the Hospital Study Period|Deterioration of renal function was defined by an increase in serum creatinine by >0.5 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL). Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819391|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Requiring Intensive Care Unit Transfer|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819411|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving MPG Within Range 71 to 179 mg/dL and Within the Target of 100 to 179 mg/dL Throughout Hospital Study Period|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819392|NCT01136746|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events Throughout Hospital Study Period|Treatment-emergent adverse event – any untoward medical occurrence that either occurred or worsened at any time after treatment baseline and which did not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. A summary of adverse events is located in the Reported Adverse Event Module.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|All randomized participants||participants|||Number
819393|NCT01136746|Secondary|Number of Hypoglycemia and Severe Hypoglycemia Episodes Adjusted for 30 Days (Rate), by Hospital Day|Hypoglycemia was defined as any time a recorded capillary PG level is ≤70 mg/dL, even if it is not associated with signs or symptoms, or treatment consistent with current guidelines (ADA 2005; ADA 2010). Severe hypoglycemia was defined as an episode associated with a recorded capillary (or venous) PG <40 mg/dL, even if it is not associated with need for assistance or neuroglycopenic symptoms (ADA 2005) or prompt recovery after oral carbohydrate, glucagon, or IV glucose. Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Day 1 up to day 10 of hospital study period|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819394|NCT01136746|Secondary|Number (Incidence) of Hypoglycemia and Severe Hypoglycemia Episodes, by Hospital Day|Hypoglycemia was defined as any time a recorded capillary PG level is ≤70 mg/dL, even if it is not associated with signs or symptoms, or treatment consistent with current guidelines (ADA 2005; ADA 2010). Severe hypoglycemia was defined as an episode associated with a recorded capillary (or venous) PG <40 mg/dL, even if it is not associated with need for assistance or neuroglycopenic symptoms (ADA 2005) or prompt recovery after oral carbohydrate, glucagon, or IV glucose. Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Day 1 up to day 10 of hospital study period|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819395|NCT01136746|Secondary|Number of Hypoglycemia and Severe Hypoglycemia Episodes Adjusted for 30 Days (Rate), Throughout Hospital Study Period|Hypoglycemia was defined as any time a recorded capillary PG level is ≤70 mg/dL, even if it is not associated with signs or symptoms, or treatment consistent with current guidelines (ADA 2005; ADA 2010). Severe hypoglycemia was defined as an episode associated with a recorded capillary (or venous) PG <40 mg/dL, even if it is not associated with need for assistance or neuroglycopenic symptoms (ADA 2005) or prompt recovery after oral carbohydrate, glucagon, or IV glucose. Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819396|NCT01136746|Secondary|Number (Incidence) of Hypoglycemia and Severe Hypoglycemia Episodes, Throughout Hospital Study Period|Hypoglycemia was defined as any time a recorded capillary PG level is ≤70 mg/dL, even if it is not associated with signs or symptoms, or treatment consistent with current guidelines (ADA 2005; ADA 2010). Severe hypoglycemia was defined as an episode associated with a recorded capillary (or venous) PG <40 mg/dL (Umpierrez et al. 2007; Moghissi et al. 2009; Umpierrez et al. 2009), even if it is not associated with need for assistance or neuroglycopenic symptoms (ADA 2005) or prompt recovery after oral carbohydrate, glucagon, or IV glucose.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|All randomized participants who had at least one post-baseline glucose measurement.||hypoglycemic episodes|||Number
819397|NCT01136746|Secondary|Length of Hospital Stay Post-randomization Throughout the Hospital Study Period|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout the hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819398|NCT01136746|Secondary|TDD of Insulin (Units/kg) by Hospital Day|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Day 1 up to day 10 of hospital study period|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819399|NCT01136746|Secondary|TDD of Insulin (Units) by Hospital Day|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Day 1 up to day 10 of hospital study period|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819400|NCT01136746|Secondary|TDD of Insulin (Units/kg) Throughout the Hospital Study Period|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout the hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819401|NCT01136746|Secondary|Total Daily Dose (TDD) of Insulin (Units) Throughout the Hospital Study Period|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout the hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819402|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Capillary PG Measurements >240 mg/dL by Hospital Day|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Day 1 up to day 10 of hospital study period|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819403|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Capillary PG Measurements >240 mg/dL Throughout the Hospital Study Period|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout the hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819404|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Mean FPG Range of 71 to 139 mg/dL and Target of 100 to 139 mg/dL by Hospital Day|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Day 1 up to day 10 of hospital study period|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819405|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Mean FPG Range of 71 to 139 mg/dL and Target of 100 to 139 mg/dL Throughout the Hospital Study Period|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout the hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819406|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Fasting Capillary PG Measurements Within the Range of 71 to 139 mg/dL and Within the Target of 100 to 139 mg/dL by Hospital Day|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Day 1 up to day 10 of hospital study period|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819407|NCT01136746|Secondary|Percentage of Fasting Capillary PG Measurements Within the Range of 71 to 139 mg/dL and Within the Target of 100 to 139 mg/dL Throughout the Hospital Study Period|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout the hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819408|NCT01136746|Secondary|Mean FPG Throughout Hospital Study Period|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819409|NCT01136746|Secondary|Mean Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) by Hospital Day|Due to low enrollment, this outcome measure was not analyzed.|Day 1 up to day 10 of hospital study period|Due to low enrollment, zero participants were analyzed.|||||
819413|NCT01136746|Secondary|Mean Plasma Glucose (MPG) by Hospital Day|The intent was to report results up to Day 10; however, due to low enrollment, mean and standard deviations are only reported up to Day 7.|Day 1 up to day 7 of hospital study period|All randomized participants who had at least one post-baseline glucose measurement and a plasma glucose measurement at specified timepoint.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819414|NCT01136746|Primary|Percentage of Capillary Plasma Glucose Measurements Within the Range of 71 to 179 mg/dL Throughout the Hospital Study Period|Results are reported as the percentage of total number of capillary plasma glucose measurements within the range of 71 to 179 mg/dL for each treatment arm.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|All randomized participants who had at least one post-baseline glucose measurement.||percentage of capillary PG measurements|Participants||Number
819415|NCT01136746|Primary|Mean Plasma Glucose (MPG) Throughout Hospital Study Period|Overall MPG is derived as the mean of plasma glucose (PG) readings from Day/Visit 1 to Day/Visit 10.|Throughout hospital study period (1 to 10 days post-randomization)|All randomized participants who had at least one post-baseline glucose measurement.||milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819416|NCT01136772|Secondary|Changes in Psychiatric Symptoms|The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale measures the core symptoms associated with schizophrenia. The measure includes 30 items rated from 1=absent to 7=extremely severe. Full range of scores is 30-210 with higher scores representing more severe illness. Reductions in symptoms over time represent improvement.|Baseline to 6 months|Participants with PANSS scores at 6 months||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819417|NCT01136772|Primary|Efficacy Failure|Efficacy failure as indicated by psychiatric hospitalization, need for crisis intervention, clinical decision that oral antipsychotic medication cannot be discontinued in less than eight weeks, a clinical decision to discontinue the medication due to inadequate benefit, or the ongoing or repeated need for adjunctive antipsychotic medication.|24 months|All randomized participants who received an injection and attended one follow-up appointment||participants|||Number
819418|NCT01136785|Secondary|Change in 24-h Mean Level of Plasma Norepinephrine|The mean plasma norepinephrine level will be calculated for all samples collected at baseline and for all samples collected at the end of the intervention in participants randomized to the active CPAP arm. The goal of the analysis of cortisol, growth hormone and norepinephrine levels was to explore putative mechanisms underlying the effects of active CPAP therapy. Examining putative hormonal mechanisms underlying changes in glucose levels in the sham CPAP arm was not part of our aims. For each participant, the change in mean norepinephine level from baseline to end of intervention will be calculated.|after 1 week of active CPAP therapy in the laboratory|||pg/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819419|NCT01136785|Secondary|24-hr Profile of Plasma Growth Hormone|The mean plasma growth hormone level will be calculated for all samples collected at baseline and for all samples collected at the end of the intervention in participants randomized to the active CPAP arm. The goal of the analysis of cortisol, growth hormone and norepinephrine levels was to explore putative mechanisms underlying the effects of active CPAP therapy. Examining putative hormonal mechanisms underlying changes in glucose levels in the sham CPAP arm was not part of our aims. For each participant, the change in mean cortisol level from baseline to end of intervention will be calculated.|after 1 week of active CPAP therapy in the laboratory|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819420|NCT01136785|Secondary|Change in Mean Plasma Cortisol Level From 24-h Sampling|The mean plasma cortisol level will be calculated for all samples collected at baseline and for all samples collected at the end of the intervention in participants randomized to the active CPAP arm. The goal of the analysis of cortisol, growth hormone and norepinephrine levels was to explore putative mechanisms underlying the effects of active CPAP therapy. Examining putative hormonal mechanisms underlying changes in glucose levels in the sham CPAP arm was not part of our aims. For each participant, the change in mean cortisol level from baseline to end of intervention will be calculated.|after 1 week of active CPAP therapy in the laboratory|||microgram/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819421|NCT01136785|Primary|Change in Mean Serum Insulin Derived From 24 Hour Blood Sampling|Serum insulin levels will be measured on each sample collected during 24-h sampling at baseline and at the end of the 7-day intervention. Mean insulin level over 24 hours will be calculated for each participant at baseline and at the end of the intervention. For each participant, we will calculate the change in mean insulin level from baseline.|after 1 week of therapy in the laboratory|||pmol/L||Standard Error|Mean
819422|NCT01136785|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Glucose From Continuous Interstitial Glucose Monitoring Over 36-40 Hours|Continuous Glucose monitoring will provide interstitial glucose levels for 36-40 hours at baseline and after one week of active or sham CPAP therapy. The mean glucose level of all samples collected at baseline will be calculated for each participant. The mean glucose level of all samples collected at the end of the 7-day intervention will be calculated for each participant. For each participant, we will calculate the change in mean glucose level from baseline till end of the intervention.|change in mean interstitial glucose after 1 week of active or sham CPAP therapy in the laboratory|Due to sensor failures, valid profiles of interstitial glucose were available in 10 participants with the active CPAP group and 4 participants in the sham CPAP group.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
819423|NCT01136785|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of 7-day Intervention in Mean Plasma Glucose Derived From 24 Hour Blood Sampling|24 hour blood sampling will be performed at baseline and at the end of the 7-day intervention. Glucose levels will be measured on each sample. Mean glucose level for all baseline samples will be calculated for each participant. Mean glucose levels for all samples collected at the end of the intervention will be calculated. Change in mean glucose level from baseline to end of intervention will be calculated for each participant.|after 1 week of CPAP therapy in the laboratory|||mg/dl||Standard Error|Mean
819424|NCT01136876|Primary|Impact on the Trajectory of Serum and Urinary NGAL Following the Administration of Non-ionic Low Osmolar Contrast Media in Comparison to a Non-ionic, Iso-osmolar Contrast Media|Mean change from baseline values for serum NGAL at 2,4,6,24,48, and 72 hours, and urine NGAL at 2,4,6,24, and 48 hours following the administration of contrast media.|Baseline and 2, 4, 6, 24, 48,and 72 hours post-dose|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819425|NCT01136915|Primary|Impact on the Trajectory of Serum and Urinary NGAL Following the Administration of Non-ionic, Low-osmolar Contrast Media in Comparison to a Non-ionic, Iso-osmolar Contrast Media.|Mean change from baseline values for serum NGAL at 2,4,6,24,48, and 72 hours, and urine NGAL at 2,4,6,24, and 48 hours following the administration of contrast media.|Baseline and 2,4,6,24, 48, and 72 hours post-dose|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819426|NCT01136954|Secondary|Median Percent Change From Study 312 Baseline in the 28-day Seizure Frequency During the Open Label Period|Participants' parent or guardian maintained a seizure diary recording the date, number, and type of seizures the subject had. Seizure frequency of simple partial, complex partial, and partial seizures with secondary generalization were assessed from baseline of study 312 through the Open Label Visit Period. Percentage change = 100% x (seizure frequency at period - seizure frequency at Study 312 baseline)/seizure frequency at Study 312 baseline.|Baseline of study 312 (Week -8 to Week 0) to Week 59 of study 313|Safety Population||Percentage Change||Full Range|Median
819427|NCT01136954|Secondary|Median Change From Study 312 Baseline in the 28-day Seizure Frequency During the Open Label Period|Participants' parent or guardian maintained a seizure diary recording the date, number, and type of seizures the subject had. Seizure frequency of simple partial, complex partial, and partial seizures with secondary generalization were assessed from baseline of study 312 through the Open Label Visit Period.|Baseline of study 312 (Week -8 to Week 0) to Week 59 of study 313|Safety Population||Seizures||Full Range|Median
819428|NCT01136954|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Decrease From Baseline in 28-day Seizure Frequency of =50%(Responder) in the Open Label Period|A participant with a decrease from baseline in seizure frequency of =50 % was considered a responder. Participants'parent or guardian maintained a seizure diary recording the date,number, and type of seizures the subject had. The primary analysis assessed the percent of responders from baseline in the Open Label Visit Period. Seizure frequency of simple partial, complex partial, and partial seizures with secondary generalization were assessed.|Baseline through Week 59|Safety Population||Percentage of Participants|||Number
819429|NCT01136954|Primary|Treatment Emergent Non-Serious Adverse Events With Greater Than 5% Frequency|Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) is defined as an Adverse Event with a start date on or after Day 1 and within 15 days of last dose. For each event, each participant experiencing an event is only counted once even if they had multiple episodes.|Week 1 through Week 59|Safety Population (all subjects who entered the study and received at least one dose of study drug)||Participants|||Number
819430|NCT01136967|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics|Due to the sparse PK sampling in this study, the data were pooled with data from other Phase 1 studies conducted in participants with solid tumors.|Predose and 2 to 12 hours postdose at Cycle 1 Day 1, Cycle 1 Day 15, and Cycle 2 Day 1||||||
819431|NCT01136967|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)/ Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability of Lenvatinib|Safety was assessed by monitoring and recording all AEs including all Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grades and SAEs; regular monitoring of hematology, clinical chemistry, and urine values; physical examinations; and regular measurement of vital signs, electrocardiograms (ECGs), and multi-gated acquisition (MUGA) scans or echocardiogram.|For each participant, from the first patient first dose till 30 days after the last dose of study drug, up to approximately 2.9 years|Safety Analysis Set included those participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post baseline safety evaluation.||Participants|||Number
819432|NCT01136967|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR)|CBR was defined as the percentage of participants who had a BOR of CR or PR or durable SD (SD lasting greater than or equal to 23 weeks) based on IRR and Investigator's assessment. CBR = CR + PR + durable SD rate|From date of first dose of study drug until documentation of disease progression or death from any cause (whichever occurred first) or up to data cutoff (Jan 2012 and Apr 2013 for Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, respectively), up to approximately 2.9 years|Full Analysis Set (ITT Analysis Set) included all participants who received at least 1 dose study drug.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819433|NCT01136967|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|ORR was defined as the percentage of participants in each cohort who had a best overall response (BOR) of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 for target lesions and assessed by magnetic resonance imaging/computed tomography (MRI/CT) scans, as determined by independent radiologic review (IRR). A BOR of CR required confirmation by a subsequent CR assessment at least 4 weeks later. A BOR of PR required confirmation by a subsequent CR or PR assessment at least 4 weeks later. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) had to have reduction in short axis to less than 10 millimeters. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. ORR = CR + PR.|From date of first dose of study drug until all participants completed a minimum of 6 cycles (28-day cycles) or discontinued treatment prior to end of Cycle 6 by the date of data cutoff (Jan 2012 and Apr 2013 for Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, respectively)|Full Analysis Set (Intent-to-Treat [ITT] Analysis Set) included all participants who received at least 1 dose study drug.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819434|NCT01136967|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|DCR was defined as the percentage of participants who had a BOR of CR or PR or stable disease (SD). To be assigned a BOR of SD, the time from the first administration of study drug until the date of documented SD needed to be greater than or equal to seven weeks based on IRR and Investigator's assessment. DCR = CR + PR + SD|From date of first dose of study drug until documentation of disease progression or death from any cause (whichever occurred first) or up to data cutoff (Jan 2012 and Apr 2013 for Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, respectively), up to approximately 2.9 years|Full Analysis Set (ITT Analysis Set) included all participants who received at least 1 dose study drug.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819435|NCT01136967|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the length of time in months from the date of first administration of study drug until the date of death from any cause, and was based on the data cutoff date for each cohort.|From date of first dose of study drug until date of death from any cause or up to data cutoff (Jan 2012 and Apr 2013 for Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, respectively), up to approximately 2.9 years|Full Analysis Set (ITT Analysis Set) included all participants who received at least 1 dose study drug.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819512|NCT01137474|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Seated Diastolic Blood Pressure at Week 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who had nonmissing baseline and at least 1 postbaseline value during the double-blind treatment period were used for analysis.|From Baseline to Week 12|This study originally had 2 additional arms-dapagliflozin 2.5 and 5 mg-but randomization to these arms stopped when Protocol Amendment 8 (1-11-11) was implemented. Because endpoints focused only on 10-mg and placebo data, only patients in these arms who received study drug and who had nonmissing baseline and Week 12 values were included.||mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
819436|NCT01136967|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was measured as the time from the date of first administration of study treatment until the date of first documentation of disease progression or date of death from any cause (whichever occurred first), as determined by IRR and Investigator based on RECIST v1.1. Disease progression per RECIST v1.1 was defined as at least a 20% relative increase and 5 mm absolute increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the smallest sum on study) recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions.|From date of first dose of study drug until documentation of disease progression or death from any cause (whichever occurred first) or up to data cutoff (Jan 2012 and Apr 2013 for Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, respectively), up to approximately 2.9 years|Full Analysis Set (ITT Analysis Set) included all participants who received at least 1 dose study drug.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819437|NCT01137032|Secondary|and the Number of Subjects With an Increment Between Basal and 30 Minutes Day 22 of at Least 7 ug/dL.||22 days|15 subjects represents the subgroup utilized for the analysis of this endpoint.||participants|||Number
819438|NCT01137032|Secondary|Pre-injection Serum Cortisol Levels|The number of subjects with pre-injection serum cortisol levels less than or equal to 5 ug/dL Day 22.|22 Days|15 subjects represents the subgroup utilized for the analysis of this endpoint.||participants|||Number
819439|NCT01137032|Primary|Post-injection Serum Cortisol Level|The number of subjects with a post-injection serum cortisol level less than or equal to 18 ug/dL on Day 22.|22 Days|15 subjects represents the subgroup utilized for the analysis of this endpoint.||participants|||Number
819440|NCT01137071|Secondary|Two-year Overall Survival: Median Time to Death|Overall survival was calculated as the time interval between the date of beginning of rescue platinum-based chemotherapy and date of death for any cause.|2-year overall survival rate after the beginning of rescue platinum-based chemotherapy.|Within the ITT population, 7 patients died and 22 were censored. The median time to death was 25.1 months (95% CI, 16.7 to 32.4 months).||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819441|NCT01137071|Secondary|Overall Mean Pharmacokinetic (PK) Data (Minimum and Maximum Concentrations)|Cmax = Peak (postdosing) Hu3S193 plasma concentration. Cmin = Trough (predosing) Hu3S193 plasma concentration (Cmin). Plasma concentration of Hu3S193 expressed in μg/mL.|Predose and Postdose on weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9|PK samples were analyzed from 10 patients. Dose: 30 mg/m2 every two weeks||(µg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819442|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) - Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders - Hip Fracture|A SAE was defined as an AE that met one of the following conditions: Death during the protocol-defined surveillance period; Potentially fatal event (defined as a patient at immediate risk of death at the time of the event); An event requiring the patient's hospitalization or prolongation of an existing hospitalization during the protocol-defined surveillance period; An event resulting in congenital anomaly or birth defect; An event resulting in a persistent or significant disability/incapacity; Any other major medical event that did not result in death, was not life threatening, or did not require hospitalization, but that could be considered a SAE when, based on the appropriate medical judgment, it presented a risk for the patient and required medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819443|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) - Gastrointestinal Disorders|A SAE was defined as an AE that met one of the following conditions: Death during the protocol-defined surveillance period; Potentially fatal event (defined as a patient at immediate risk of death at the time of the event); An event requiring the patient’s hospitalization or prolongation of an existing hospitalization during the protocol-defined surveillance period; An event resulting in congenital anomaly or birth defect; An event resulting in a persistent or significant disability/incapacity; Any other major medical event that did not result in death, was not life threatening, or did not require hospitalization, but that could be considered a SAE when, based on the appropriate medical judgment, it presented a risk for the patient and required medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819444|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Vascular Disorders; Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders (Epistaxis)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819445|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Vascular Disorders; Gastrointestinal Disorders (Haemorrhoids)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819446|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders; Reproductive System and Breast Disorders (Vulvovaginal Pruritus)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819528|NCT01137604|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Profile and Pharmacodynamics (PD) of Lenvatinib|Due to the sparse PK sampling in this study, the data were pooled with data from other Phase 1 studies conducted in participants with solid tumors.|Blood samples collected at Cycle 1 on Days 1 and 15 and in Cycle 2 on Day 1||||||
819447|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders; Infections and Infestations (Tinea Pedis)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819448|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Psychiatric Disorders; Nervous System Disorders (Insomnia)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819449|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Nervous System Disorders; Psychiatric Disorders; Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders (Hoarseness)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819450|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders; General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions; Renal and Urinary Disorders (Flank Pain)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819451|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Investigations (Blood Cholesterol Increased)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819452|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Infections and Infestations; Renal and Urinary Disorders (Urinary Tract Infection Bacterial)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819453|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Infections and Infestations; Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders (Bronchitis)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819454|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Immune System Disorders; Blood and Lymphatic System Disorders; Injury, Poisoning and Procedural Complications (Transfusion Reaction)|The incidence of adverse events (percentage of patients with at least one adverse event and serious adverse events (overall and with reasonable relationship)) was assessed for the safety population|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819455|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions; Injury, Poisoning and Procedural Complications (Catheter Site Inflammation)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819555|NCT01137812|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from Baseline to Week 52 for each treatment group. The statistical analysis shows the treatment difference (ie, between canagliflozin and sitagliptin) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when the Week 52 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819456|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions; Injury, Poisoning and Procedural Complications (Hyperthermia)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819457|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Gastrointestinal Disorders; Vascular Disorders (Anal Haemorrhage)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819458|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Gastrointestinal Disorders; Reproductive System and Breast Disorders; Renal and Urinary Disorders (Pelvic Pain)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819459|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Gastrointestinal Disorders; Infections and Infestations; Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders (Pharyngitis)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819460|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Eye Disorders (Ocular Hyperaemia)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819461|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Endocrine Disorders; Metabolism and Nutrition Disorders (Hyperglycaemia)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819462|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Ear and Labyrinth Disorders; Nervous System Disorders (Vertigo)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819463|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Cardiac Disorders; Vascular Disorders; Nervous System Disorders (Dizziness)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819464|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders; Injury, Poisoning and Procedural Complications|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819571|NCT01138046|Secondary|Distribution Volume at Steady State (Vss) of Paclitaxel|Vss is the volume of distribution at steady state of paclitaxel. Vss was calculated from paclitaxel plasma concentration-time data on Day 1 and Day 8 with model-independent analyses|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-dose on Day 1 and Day 8 for paclitaxel|PK Population: all participants who provided blood samples for PK evaluation||milliliter per meters squared (mL/m^2)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819465|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders; Cardiac Disorders (Dyspnoea)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819466|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Reproductive System and Breast Disorders (Vulvovaginal Dryness)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819467|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Renal and Urinary Disorders; Infections and Infestations (Urinary Tract Infection)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819468|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Renal and Urinary Disorders (Dysuria)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819469|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Psychiatric Disorders (Depression)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819470|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders; Injury, Poisoning and Procedural Complications|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819471|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders; General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions; Nervous System Disorders (Spinal Pain)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819472|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Immune System Disorders; Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819473|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Immune System Disorders; General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions; Injury, Poisoning and Procedural Complications (Infusion Related Reaction)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819583|NCT01138098|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects.|After the challenge dose of Engerix™-B vaccine up to the study end|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects who received the challenge dose of Engerix-B vaccine.||Subjects|||Number
819474|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Hepatobiliary Disorders; Injury, Poisoning and Procedural Complications (Hepatotoxicity)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819475|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Ear and Labyrinth Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819476|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819477|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions; Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders (Chills)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819478|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Cardiac Disorders; General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions; Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders (Chest Pain)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819479|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Vascular Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819480|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Psychiatric Disorders (Anxiety)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819481|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Infections and Infestations; Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819482|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Blood and Lymphatic System Disorders (Anaemia)|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819483|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Infections and Infestations; Gastrointestinal Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819484|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819485|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Investigations|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819486|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Nervous System Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819487|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Immune System Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819488|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819489|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819490|NCT01137071|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) - Gastrointestinal Disorders|The Good Clinical Practice Guidelines define an Adverse Event as any untoward medical event that occurs in a patient or study patient receiving a pharmaceutical product, regardless of its causal relationship with the study treatment. Accordingly, an AE was considered as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or aggravated) temporally associated with the use of an investigational product.|From the first infusion of medication to 30 days after the last one|All patients who received at least one dose of investigational product were included in the safety dataset.||Incidence|||Number
819491|NCT01137071|Secondary|Safety - Vital Signs - Temperature|Vital signs during the study treatment (consolidation therapy). Through study completion, an average of 27 weeks.|Baseline, week 2, week 4 and week 27|All patients enrolled in this study received at least one dose of Hu3S193 (30 mg/m2) - ITT dataset. Baseline n=29, week 2 n=27, week 4 n= 28, week 27 n= 14||°C||Standard Deviation|Median
819492|NCT01137071|Secondary|Safety - Vital Signs - Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure|Both parameters were assessed throughout the study treatment. Vital signs during the study treatment (consolidation therapy). Through study completion, an average of 27 weeks.|Baseline, week 2, week 4 and week 27|All patients enrolled in this study received at least one dose of Hu3S193 (30 mg/m2) - ITT dataset. Diastolic Baseline n=29, week 2 n=27, week 4 n= 28, week 27 n= 14/ Systolic Baseline n=28, week 2 n=27, week 4 n= 28, week 27 n= 14||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Median
819493|NCT01137071|Secondary|Safety - Vital Signs - Respiratory Rate|Vital signs during the study treatment (consolidation therapy). Through study completion, an average of 27 weeks.|Baseline, week 2, week 4 and week 27|All patients enrolled in this study received at least one dose of Hu3S193 (30 mg/m2) – ITT dataset. Baseline n=29, week 2 n=27, week 4 n= 28, week 27 n= 14||ipm (Incursions per minute)||Standard Deviation|Median
819494|NCT01137071|Secondary|Safety - Vital Signs - Heart Rate|Vital signs were assessed throughout the study treatment (consolidation therapy).Through study completion, an average of 27 weeks.|Baseline, week 2 , week 4 and week 27|All patients enrolled in this study received at least one dose of Hu3S193 (30 mg/m2) – ITT dataset. Baseline n=29, week 2 n=27, week 4 n= 28, week 27 n= 14||bpm||Standard Deviation|Median
819495|NCT01137071|Secondary|Two-year Overall Survival Rate|Overall survival was calculated as the time interval between the date of beginning of rescue platinum-based chemotherapy and date of death for any cause.|2-year overall survival rate after the beginning of rescue platinum-based chemotherapy.|Within the ITT population, 7 patients died and 22 were censored. The 2-year overall survival rate was 70.7%.||percentage of participants|||Number
819706|NCT01130597|Secondary|Median Time to First Patiromer Dose Titration||56 Days|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819497|NCT01137071|Primary|1-year PFS2 Rate After the Beginning of Rescue Platinum-based Chemotherapy|"PFS2 is defined by the interval from the beginning of rescue platinum-based chemotherapy until documented disease progression or death for any cause while the patient was under study or during the prolonged follow-up period.
Disease progression is defined by appearance of any new lesion (measurable and non-measurable) by the RECIST criteria. Disease progression date is the date when a new lesion is documented."|1-Year - From platinum-based rescue chemotherapy start date until documented disease progression or death of any cause whichever occurred first.|In the ITT (intention to treat) population, 25 patients out of the 29 considered for the PFS2 analysis presented disease progression or death and 4 were censored. The median time to disease progression or death was 11.8 months (95% CI (confidence interval), 10.6 to 13.9 months).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819498|NCT01137292|Primary|Number of Participants With Investigator's Satisfaction With the Tolerability of Voriconazole Assessment at the EOT Visit|Investigator's Satisfaction Responses: very good, good, moderate, poor. Responses were based on the investigator's judgement.|up to 2 weeks (EOT visit)|FAS. Number or participants analyzed = Number of participants with Investigator’s satisfaction response for the tolerability of voriconazole at the EOT Visit.||participants|||Number
819499|NCT01137292|Primary|Number of Participants With Investigator's Satisfaction With the Efficacy of Voriconazole Assessment at the EOT Visit|Investigator's Satisfaction Responses: very good, good, moderate, poor. Responses were based on the investigator's judgement.|up to 2 weeks (EOT visit)|FAS. Number or participants analyzed = Number of participants with Investigator’s satisfaction response for the efficacy of voriconazole at the EOT Visit.||participants|||Number
819500|NCT01137292|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical and/or Mycological Efficacy by Response at the Test-of-Cure Visit|Clinical, mycological responses: clinical cure, clinical improvement, no clinical cure, mycological cure, no mycological cure, no mycological culture performed, death, and lost from follow-up. Participants could have had more than one response. Responses were based on the investigator's judgement according to the Infectious Disease Society of America, European Conference on Infections in Leukemia, and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing guidelines.|more than 2 weeks (Test-of-Cure visit)|FAS.||participants|||Number
819501|NCT01137292|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical and/or Mycological Efficacy by Response at the End of Treatment (EOT) Visit|Clinical, mycological responses: clinical cure, clinical improvement, no clinical cure, mycological cure, no mycological cure, and no mycological culture performed. Participants could have had more than one response. Responses were based on the investigator's judgement according to the Infectious Disease Society of America, European Conference on Infections in Leukemia, and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing guidelines.|up to 2 weeks (EOT visit)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) = all enrolled participants who were administered the study medication and had post baseline documentation of efficacy available.||participants|||Number
819502|NCT01137370|Primary|Median 25-OHD Level||August 2010 to March 2011||10/2011||||
819503|NCT01137370|Primary|Prevalence of Vitamin D Deficiency||At enrollment|||participants, %|||Number
819504|NCT01137396|Secondary|Change in N3 (Slow-wave) Sleep Time||change from week 1 to week 2 of inpatient treatment|||minutes||Standard Error|Mean
819505|NCT01137396|Primary|%Cocaine Free Urines||3x/week|||percent||Standard Error|Mean
819506|NCT01137435|Other Pre-specified|Number of Reported Solicited Injection-Site and Systemic Events Following A Single Intramuscular Dose of Adacel™|"Solicited injection-site: Pain, Erythema, and Swelling. Solicited systemic reactions: Fever (Temperature), Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia. Grade 3 Solicited injection-site: Pain, Prevents daily activities; Erythema and Swelling,> 10 cm. Grade 3 Solicited systemic reactions: Fever, ≥39.0°C; Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia, Prevents daily activities.
All events reported by vaccinated subjects within 7 days post-vaccination during the 6 year post marketing surveillance period."|7 days post-vaccination|Safety events were assessed in the Safety Analysis Set.||Number of Events|||Number
819507|NCT01137435|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Reporting Adverse Events After A Single Intramuscular Dose of Adacel™|All adverse event reported by vaccinated subjects within 30 days post-vaccination during the 6 year post marketing surveillance period.|30 days post-vaccination|Safety events were assessed in the Safety Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
819508|NCT01137435|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Reporting Unexpected Adverse Events After A Single Intramuscular Dose of Adacel™|Unexpected adverse events reported by vaccinated subjects within 30 days post-vaccination during the 6 year post marketing surveillance period.|30 days post-vaccination|Safety events were assessed in the Safety Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
819509|NCT01137435|Primary|Summary of Adverse Events Reported in Participants That Received a Single Intramuscular Dose of Adacel™|All adverse event reported by vaccinated subjects within 30 days post-vaccination during the 6 year post marketing surveillance period.|30 days post-vaccination|Safety events were assessed in the Safety Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
819510|NCT01137474|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Serum Uric Acid Levels at Week 12|Central laboratory serum uric acid levels will be determined at the Enrollment, Day -28, Day 1, and at Week 4, 8, 12, and 13 visits. All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who had nonmissing baseline and at least 1 postbaseline value during the double-blind treatment period were used for analysis.|From Baseline to Week 12|This study originally had 2 additional arms-dapagliflozin 2.5 and 5 mg-but randomization to these arms stopped when Protocol Amendment 8 (1-11-11) was implemented. Because endpoints focused only on 10-mg and placebo data, only patients in these arms who received study drug and who had nonmissing baseline and Week 12 values were included.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
819511|NCT01137474|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change in 24-Hour Ambulatory Diastolic Blood Pressure at Week 12 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed twice during the study, at baseline and at the end of study, for a duration of 24 hours each time. If the patient met the criteria for rescue due to hypertension, a second monitoring was performed prior to the first dose of rescue medication. Initiation of the 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring began between 6 and 11 am to ensure trough blood pressure measurements were obtained. Patients were instructed to withhold all medication on the morning of the study visit and to bring their medications to the visit with them.|From Baseline to Week 12|This study originally had 2 additional arms-dapagliflozin 2.5 and 5 mg-but randomization to these arms stopped when Protocol Amendment 8 (1-11-11) was implemented. Because endpoints focused only on 10-mg and placebo data, only patients in these arms who received study drug and who had nonmissing baseline and Week 12 values were included.||mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
819513|NCT01137474|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in 24-Hour Ambulatory Systolic Blood Pressure at Week 12 (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed twice during the study, at baseline and at the end of study, for a duration of 24-hrs each time. If the patient met the criteria for rescue due to hypertension, a second monitoring was performed prior to the first dose of rescue medication. Initiation of the 24-hr ambulatory blood pressure monitoring began between 6 and 11 am to ensure trough blood pressure measurements were obtained. Patients were instructed to withhold all medication on the morning of the study visit and to bring their medications to the visit with them.|From Baseline to Week 12|This study originally had 2 additional arms-dapagliflozin 2.5 and 5 mg-but randomization to these arms stopped when Protocol Amendment 8 (1-11-11) was implemented. Because endpoints focused only on 10-mg and placebo data, only patients in these arms who received study drug and who had nonmissing baseline and Week 12 values were included.||mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
819514|NCT01137474|Primary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 12|HbA1c was measured as percent of hemoglobin by a central laboratory. All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who had nonmissing baseline and at least 1 postbaseline value during the double-blind treatment period were used for analysis. SD=standard deviation.|From Baseline to Week 12|This study originally had 2 additional arms-dapagliflozin 2.5 and 5 mg-but randomization to these arms stopped when Protocol Amendment 8 (1-11-11) was implemented. Because endpoints focused only on 10-mg and placebo data, only patients in these arms who received study drug and who had nonmissing baseline and Week 12 values were included.||Percent||Standard Error|Mean
819515|NCT01137474|Primary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Seated Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) at Week 12|Seated BP was to be measured at every visit. Data after rescue medication was excluded. The patient first rested for at least 10 minutes in the seated position. Seated blood BP was determined from the mean of 3 replicated measurements obtained at least 1 minute apart. However, if the 3 consecutive seated BP readings were not within 8 mm Hg of each other, an additional 2 BP readings were to be obtained (total=5) and incorporated into the calculated mean for systolic BP and diastolic BP. For the initial BP recording, BP was measured in both arms. If the BP was higher in 1 arm, that arm was used for BP measurement. If there was no difference in BP measurements between arms, the dominant arm was used for all future BP measurements. All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who had nonmissing baseline and at least 1 postbaseline value during the double-blind treatment period were used for analysis. SD=standard deviation.|From Baseline to Week 12|This study originally had 2 additional arms-dapagliflozin 2.5 and 5 mg-but randomization to these arms stopped when Protocol Amendment 8 (1-11-11) was implemented. Because endpoints focused only on 10-mg and placebo data, only patients in these arms who received study drug and who had nonmissing baseline and Week 12 values were included.||mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
819516|NCT01137539|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction|Positive response to a satisfaction question|12 months|49 subjects were analyzed at the 12 month period out of the total 50 subjects enrolled in the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
819517|NCT01137539|Primary|Treatment Success Based on Patient Report on Validated Questionnaire|"Negative response to question #3 on the Urogenital Distress Inventory-6 (UDI-6) questionnaire. Question #3 states, Do you currently experience urine leakage related to physical activity, coughing or sneezing. If a subject answers No, this is considered success. If a subject answers Yes, this is considered failure of treatment."|24 months|46 subjects were analyzed at the 24 month period out of the total 50 subjects enrolled in the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
819518|NCT01137578|Primary|All Participants With an Adjudicated Deep Vein Thromboembolism (DVT) By Study-Related Radiographic Procedures That Diagnosed the DVT|Adjudication was by an Independent Central Adjudication Committee (ICAC) consisting of experienced physicians not involved in the study and blinded to each participant’s identity and clinical course. One set of 3 study-related diagnostic imaging procedures (US, MRI with contrast, and MRI without contrast) was performed. Participants were considered positive for DVT if at least one of the radiographic procedures was positive.|Either Day 40±20 days following the placement of CVC (cohort A) or within 7 days of: symptoms of DVT or incidental diagnosis of CVC-related DVT(cohort B) or Day of MRI + 48 hours (cohort C)|n=participants with an adjudicated DVT identified by a study-related adjudicated radiographic procedure.||participants|||Number
819519|NCT01137578|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adjudicated Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) Detected By a Study-Related Ultrasound (US) and/or MRI, By Cohort and Age Group|MRI with contrast (c) and without (w/o) contrast (c) enhancement were performed and a US was done within 48 hours of the MRI. Once detected, the DVT was adjudicated and confirmed by an independent central adjudication Committee (ICAC) consisting of experienced physicians not involved in the study and blinded to each participant’s identity and clinical course. Participants were considered positive for DVT if at least one of the radiographic procedures was positive. Cohort A: Day 0=day of catheter placement; Day 40 (± 20 days)=day of imaging procedures at Visit 1, or if possible within 72 hours after a CVC is removed or lost. Cohort B Visit 1: within 7 days of initiation of symptoms of a CVC-related DVT (symptoms include but were not limited to: redness, pain/tenderness, swelling, presence of subcutaneous collaterals, catheter occlusion, and the presence of catheter related infection) or within 7 days of an incidental diagnosis of CVC-related DVT by radiographic imaging.|Either Day 40±20 days following the placement of CVC (cohort A) or within 7 days of: symptoms of DVT or incidental diagnosis of CVC-related DVT(cohort B) or Day of MRI + 48 hours (cohort C)|The imaged population included all enrolled participants who had at least one study-related diagnostic imaging procedure. n=number of adjudicated images||participants|||Number
819520|NCT01137578|Secondary|Number of Deaths Which Occurred During the Study|Death as an endpoint in a participant with an adjudicated venous thromboembolism (DVT or PE) was summarized, regardless of the cause of the death. The VTE was adjudicated by a blinded central independent adjudication committee.|Enrollment up to last US or MRI plus 30 days (up to approximately 90 days)|The imaged population included all enrolled participants who had at least one study-related diagnostic imaging procedure.||participants|||Number
819572|NCT01138046|Secondary|Time to the Maximum Drug Concentration (Tmax) of Lapatinib and Paclitaxel|Tmax is defined as the time to peak concentration from initiation of lapatinib and paclitaxel dosing. Tmax was calculated from lapatinib plasma concentration-time data on Day 8 and Day 14 and paclitaxel plasma concentration-time data on Day 1 and Day 8 with model-independent analyses|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-dose on Day 8 and Day 14 for lapatininb; Day 1 and Day 8 for paclitaxel|PK Population: all participants who provided blood samples for PK evaluation||Hr||Full Range|Median
819521|NCT01137578|Primary|Number of Participants and Reasons for Non-Completion of Each of the Imaging Procedures, Ultrasound (US), MRI With Contrast and MRI Without Contrast|Bilateral US was attempted but if it could not be completed, a unilateral US was accepted for analysis. Participants who did not complete the MRI procedure with contrast could be different participants from those who did not complete the MRI procedure without contrast. Primary reasons for non-completion of imaging included: technical, investigator decision, child refused, parent refused, child missed appointment, difficulties with anesthesia/sedation, child unable to lie still, problems with contrast administration, and other reasons. Other reasons could include: late to appointment and unable to perform MRI due to time constraints; logistical reasons, parent agreed to only ultrasound at time of consent, schedule delay, equipment not available, difficulty putting patient in correct position. Due to the small numbers of participants in some cohorts, these data were more meaningful with all cohorts grouped together for the total imaged population.|Either Day 40±20 days following the placement of CVC (cohort A) or within 7 days of: symptoms of DVT or incidental diagnosis of CVC-related DVT(cohort B) or Day of MRI + 48 hours (cohort C).|Participants had at least 1 radiographic procedure performed but were unable to complete a either an Ultrasound (neither bilateral or unilateral, or could complete only a unilateral US) and/or unable to complete an MRI with contrast and/or unable to complete an MRI without contrast.||participants|||Number
819522|NCT01137578|Primary|Number of Participants Who Required Sedation/Anesthesia With the Study-Related Radiographic Procedures, by Cohort and Age|One set of diagnostic imaging procedures (US and MRI) was to be performed for all cohorts The MRI consisted of MRI venous imaging without contrast enhancement and MRI venous imaging with contrast enhancement.|Either Day 40±20 days following the placement of CVC (cohort A) or within 7 days of: symptoms of DVT or incidental diagnosis of CVC-related DVT(cohort B) or Day of MRI + 48 hours (cohort C).|The imaged population included all participants who had at least 1 study-related diagnostic imaging procedure.||participants|||Number
819523|NCT01137578|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Pulmonary Embolism (PE) Events (Symptomatic or Asymptomatic) Identified During the Study|Signs and symptoms of PE include shortness of breath, pleuritic pain, cough, orthopnea, wheezing, and may have associated signs and symptoms of DVT. In the event a PE was detected while undergoing the study MRI or other imaging procedure required for care of an underlying condition, and the participant did not manifest any signs and/or symptoms of a PE, the event was considered an asymptomatic PE. The participant was managed and further investigated according to the investigator’s standard of care. All diagnostic imaging procedures performed, such as contrast-enhanced computer tomography (CT) pulmonary angiogram, nuclear ventilation perfusion lung scan (V/Q scan), were submitted for adjudication as a suspected PE.|Enrollment up to Visit 1 plus 30 days (up to approximately 90 days)|The imaged population included all enrolled participants who had at least one study-related diagnostic imaging procedure.||participants|||Number
819524|NCT01137578|Secondary|Number of All Participants Identified With Adjudicated DVT Categorized By Presence or Absence of Symptoms at Enrollment|Adjudication was by an ICAC consisting of experienced physicians not involved in the study and blinded to each participant’s identity and clinical course. One set of Study-related diagnostic imaging procedures (US, MRI with contrast, and MRI without contrast) was performed for all cohorts. Participants were considered positive for DVT if at least one of the radiographic procedures was positive.|Either Day 40±20 days following the placement of CVC (cohort A) or within 7 days of: symptoms of DVT or incidental diagnosis of CVC-related DVT(cohort B) or Day of MRI + 48 hours (cohort C)|All participants who had an adjudicated DVT identified by at lest one study-related radiographic procedure.||Participants|||Number
819525|NCT01137578|Primary|Number of Participants Who Completed the Study-Related Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) With and Without Contrast, by Cohort and Age Group|Imaging was performed on Visit 1 which was defined for Cohort A as: Day 40 ± 20 days from Day 0, the placement of the central venous catheter (CVC), or if possible within 72 hours after a CVC was removed or lost; Visit 1 defined for Cohort B: within 7 days of initiation of symptoms of a CVC-related deep vein thromboembolism (DVT) or within 7 days of an incidental diagnosis of CVC-related DVT by radiographic imaging. Cohort C participants had an ultrasound done within 48 hours of the performance of the MRI. All 3 imaging procedures, ultrasound, MRI with contrast, MRI without contrast were to be performed on all participants, regardless of the cohort.|Either Day 40±20 days following the placement of CVC (cohort A) or within 7 days of: symptoms of DVT or incidental diagnosis of CVC-related DVT(cohort B) or Day of MRI + 48 hours (cohort C)|The imaged population included all enrolled participants who had at least 1 study-related diagnostic imaging procedure.||participants|||Number
819526|NCT01137578|Primary|Total Number of Participants Who Completed the Study-Related Ultrasound (US) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) With and Without Contrast|One set of 3 diagnostic imaging procedures (US, MRI with contrast, and MRI without contrast) was performed for all cohorts. Imaging was performed on Visit 1, which in Cohort A was Day 40 ± 20 days from Day 0, the placement of the central venous catheter (CVC), or if possible within 72 hours after a CVC was removed or lost; Visit 1 in Cohort B was within 7 days of initiation of symptoms of a CVC-related deep vein thromboembolism (DVT) or within 7 days of an incidental diagnosis of CVC-related DVT by radiographic imaging. Cohort C participants had an ultrasound done within 48 hours of the performance of the MRI, which was scheduled for a clinical reason. Note: participants completing each MRI procedure (with contrast or without contrast) could be different participants.|Either Day 40±20 days following the placement of CVC (cohort A) or within 7 days of: symptoms of DVT or incidental diagnosis of CVC-related DVT(cohort B) or Day of MRI + 48 hours (cohort C).|The imaged population included all enrolled participants who had at least 1 study-related diagnostic imaging procedure.||participants|||Number
819527|NCT01137604|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) Rate at Month 6|PFS at Month 6 was defined as the percentage of participants who remained alive and progression-free at Month 6, based on investigator's assessment. Progression was defined using Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria, as a greater than 25% increase in enhancing lesions despite stable or increasing steroid dose, an increase (significant) in non-enhancing T2-weighted-Fluid-Attenuated Inversion Recovery (T2/FLAIR) lesions that are not attributable to other non-tumor causes, and any new lesions. PFS rate at Month 6 was estimated from Kaplan-Meier (K-M) product-limit estimate of PFS.|At Month 6 from randomization (Cohort 1) or first day of treatment (Cohorts 2 and 3)|Full Analysis Set included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819707|NCT01130597|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Requiring Patiromer Downtitration||56 Days|||percentage of participants|||Number
819529|NCT01137604|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)/Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) as a Measure of Safety|Safety was assessed by monitoring and recording all AEs including all Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grades (for both increasing and decreasing severity) and SAEs; regular monitoring of hematology, clinical chemistry, and urine values; results of physical examinations, regular measurement of vital signs, and electrocardiograms (ECGs), as detailed in the Schedule of Visits and Procedures. The relationship of AEs to treatment was based on investigator judgment. Details of AEs and SAEs are provided in the reported adverse event section.|For each participant, from the first patient first dose till 30 days after the last dose or the cut-off date of 19 March 2013 (ie, 2.4 years)|Full Analysis Set - all participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
819530|NCT01137604|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR)|CBR was the percentage of the participants who had BOR of CR, PR, and SD with the minimum duration of SD lasting greater than or equal to 23 weeks. Only participants with measurable disease at baseline were included in evaluation of CBR, based on investigator's assessment.|From date of randomization (Cohort 1) or first day of treatment (Cohorts 2 and 3) until disease progression, development of unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent or up to data cutoff date of 19 March 2013 (ie, 2.4 years)|Full Analysis Set - all participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819531|NCT01137604|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|DCR was the percentage of the participants who had BOR of CR, PR, and stable disease (SD) with the minimum duration of SD lasting greater than or equal to 7 weeks. Only participants with measurable disease at baseline were included in evaluation of DCR, based on investigator's assessment.|From date of randomization (Cohort 1) or first day of treatment (Cohorts 2 and 3) until disease progression, development of unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent or up to data cutoff date of 19 March 2013 (ie, 2.4 years)|Full Analysis Set - all participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819532|NCT01137604|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was measured as the time from the randomization date (Cohort 1) or the first day of treatment (Cohort 2 and 3) to the date of death from any cause.|From date of randomization (Cohort 1) or first day of treatment (Cohorts 2 and 3) until death due to any cause or up to data cutoff date of 19 March 2013 (ie, 2.4 years)|Full Analysis Set - all participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819533|NCT01137604|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|PFS was measured as the time from randomization (Cohort 1) or the first day of treatment (Cohorts 2 and 3) until the date of first documentation of disease progression or date of death, if death occurred prior to disease progression, based on investigator's assessment.|From date of randomization (Cohort 1) or first day of treatment (Cohorts 2 and 3) until disease progression, development of unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent or up to data cutoff date of 19 March 2013 (ie, 2.4 years)|Full Analysis Set - all participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819534|NCT01137604|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|ORR was the percentage of participants with best overall response (BOR) of complete response (CR) and partial response (PR) based on RANO criteria and investigator's assessment. CR was defined as the disappearance of all enhancing disease (measurable and non-measurable) sustained for at least 4 weeks, no new lesions, and stable or improved non-enhancing (T2/FLAIR) lesions. PR was defined as greater than or equal to 50% decrease, compared to baseline, in the sum of products of perpendicular diameters of all measureable enhancing lesions sustained for at least 4 weeks. No progression of non-measurable disease, no new lesions, stable or improved non-enhancing (T2/FLAIR) lesions on same or lower dose of corticosteroids compared to baseline. For both CR and PR, in the absence of a confirming scan 4 weeks later, this scan was considered only stable disease. Only participants with measureable disease at baseline were included in evaluation of ORR.|From date of randomization (Cohort 1) or first day of treatment (Cohorts 2 and 3) until disease progression, development of unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent or up to data cutoff date of 19 March 2013 (i.e., 2.4 years)|Full Analysis Set included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819535|NCT01137682|Secondary|PK Levels of Pasireotide LAR 40 mg and Pasireotide LAR 60 mg||24 Weeks||02/2018||||
819536|NCT01137682|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Related QoL as Measured by the AcroQoL (Acromegaly Health Related QoL)||Baseline, 24 Weeks||02/2018||||
819537|NCT01137682|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Signs/Symptoms of Acromegaly (Ring Size; Headache, Fatigue, Perspiration, Paresthesias and Osteoarthralgia According to a Five-point Score Scale)||Baseline, 24 Weeks||02/2018||||
819538|NCT01137682|Secondary|Percent Change in Tumor Volume Assessed by Pituitary MRI.||Baseline, 24 Weeks||02/2018||||
819539|NCT01137682|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Tumor Volume Reduction > 25% Assessed by Pituitary MRI.||24 Weeks||02/2018||||
819540|NCT01137682|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving GH Levels < 1 µg/L.||Weeks 12 and 24||02/2018||||
819541|NCT01137682|Secondary|Percentage of of Participants Achieving GH Levels < 1 µg/L and Normal, Sex- and Age-adjusted IGF-1.||Weeks 12 and 24||02/2018||||
819542|NCT01137682|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving GH Levels < 2.5 µg/L.||Weeks 12 and 24||02/2018||||
819543|NCT01137682|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Biochemical Control Defined as Mean GH Levels < 2.5 µg/L and Normalization of Sex- and Age-adjusted IGF-1.||12 Weeks||02/2018||||
819544|NCT01137682|Secondary|Perecentage of Participants Achieving Normalization of Sex- and Age-adjusted IGF-1|The key secondary objective is to compare the effect of pasireotide LAR (40 mg and 60 mg separately) versus continuing the same treatment on the proportion of patients achieving normalization of sex- and age-adjusted IGF-1 at 24 weeks. The endpoint for the key secondary objective is the proportion of patients achieving normalization of sex- and age-adjusted IGF-1 at 24 weeks.|24 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS): comprised all patients who were randomized. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the study drug they were assigned to at randomization and actual stratum.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819611|NCT01138150|Primary|Change in the Total Serum Adiponectin (T-ADP)|Change in total serum adiponectin after treatment in responders and non responders|30 minutes after treatment, 60 minutes after treatment, 120 minutes after treatment|||ug/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819708|NCT01130597|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Requiring Patiromer Uptitration||56 Days|||percentage of participants|||Number
819545|NCT01137682|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Reduction of Mean GH Levels to < 2.5 µg/L and Normalization of Sex- and Age-adjusted IGF-1.|The primary objective of this study was to compare the proportion of patients achieving biochemical control (defined as mean GH levels <2.5 µg/L and normalization of sex- and age- adjusted IGF-1) at 24 weeks with pasireotide LAR 40 mg and pasireotide LAR 60 mg separately versus continued treatment with octreotide LAR 30 mg or lanreotide autogel (ATG) 120 mg. The primary efficacy variable is the proportion of patients with a reduction of mean GH levels to < 2.5 µg/L and normalization of sex- and age-adjusted IGF-1 at 24 weeks.|24 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS): comprised all patients who were randomized. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the study drug they were assigned to at randomization and actual stratum.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819546|NCT01137773|Secondary|Blood Glucose Concentration|average blood glucose concentration while the patients received insulin drip|24 h|||mg/dl blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
819547|NCT01137773|Primary|Karnovsky Performance Status Scale of Functional Impairment|"The Karnofsky Performance Scale Index allows patients to be classified as to their functional impairment. It can be used to compare effectiveness of different therapies and to assess the prognosis in individual patients. The lower the Karnofsky score, the worse the survival for most serious illnesses. Patients are assigned a value from 0 to 100 based on the following definitions:
Normal no complaints; no evidence of disease - 100 Able to carry on normal activity; minor signs or symptoms of disease- 90 Normal activity with effort; some signs or symptoms of disease - 80 Cares for self; unable to carry on normal activity or to do active work - 70 Requires occasional assistance, but is able to care for most of his personal needs - 60 Requires considerable assistance and frequent medical care - 50 Disabled; requires special care and assistance - 40 Severely disabled; hospital admission is indicated although death not imminent - 30 Very sick; hospital admission necessary; active s"|3 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819548|NCT01137786|Primary|Impact on the Trajectory of Serum and Urinary NGAL Following the Administration of Non-ionic Low Osmolar Contrast Media.|Mean change from baseline values for serum NGAL at 2,4,6,24,48 and 72 hours, and urine NGAL at 2,4,6,24, and 48 hours following the administration of non-ionic low osmolar contrast media.|Baseline and 2, 4, 6, 24, 48, and 72 hours post-dose|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819549|NCT01137812|Secondary|Percent Change in High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the mean percent change in HDL-C from Baseline to Week 52 for each treatment group. The statistical analysis shows the treatment difference (ie, between canagliflozin and sitagliptin) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when the Week 52 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819550|NCT01137812|Secondary|Percent Change in Triglycerides From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the mean percent change in triglycerides from Baseline to Week 52 for each treatment group. The statistical analysis shows the treatment difference (ie, between canagliflozin and sitagliptin) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when the Week 52 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819551|NCT01137812|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in SBP from Baseline to Week 52 for each treatment group. The statistical analysis shows the treatment difference (ie, between canagliflozin and sitagliptin) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when the Week 52 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819552|NCT01137812|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in body weight from Baseline to Week 52 for each treatment group. The statistical analysis shows the treatment difference (ie, between canagliflozin and sitagliptin) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when the Week 52 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819553|NCT01137812|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 52|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in FPG from Baseline to Week 52 for each treatment group. The statistical analysis shows the treatment difference (ie, between canagliflozin and sitagliptin) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 52|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when the Week 52 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819554|NCT01137812|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7% at Week 52|The table below shows the percentage of patients with HbA1c <7% at Week 52 in each treatment group. The statistical analysis shows the treatment difference (ie, between canagliflozin and sitagliptin) in the percentage.|Week 52|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when the Week 52 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percentage of patients|||Number
819573|NCT01138046|Secondary|AUC From Time Zero to Infinity (0-INF) of Paclitaxel|AUC(0-INF) is area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity. AUC (0-INF) was calculated from paclitaxel plasma concentration-time data on Day 1 and Day 8 with model-independent analyses|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-dose on Day 1 and Day 8 for paclitaxel|PK Population: all participants who provided blood samples for PK evaluation||hr*ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819556|NCT01137890|Secondary|Drug Value Questionnaire|"Street Value of Sampled Dose. After co-administration of cocaine-zonisamide, participants were asked to hypothetically estimate the value of the drug they received, if they were to purchase it on the street. The mean value (dollars) across all drug conditions is reported here.
Repeated within-subject measures ANOVA performed to observe the main effects of zonisamide dose (0, 300, and 600mg) and cocaine dose (0, 20, and 40mg), and their interaction. Only participants who received the active zonisamide medication (n=8) were included in this portion of the analysis. Additionally, all 8 subjects who received zonisamide completed both 300mg and 600mg doses.
Within-subject repeated interval during self-administration sessions. Cocaine not administered (only Zon) during Weeks 2 & 4, thus no measures taken at these times"|Weeks 1-5; mean of weeks 1, 3 and 5 reported|Because we are interested in how co-administration cocaine-zon affects this measure, only zon participants are included (n=8). Each participant receives varying doses of zon (0, 300, 600mg) at weeks 1, 2-3, 4-5, respectively. After getting used to each zon dose, they are co-administered all 3 cocaine doses (1, 20, 40mg) during Weeks 1, 3, and 5||dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
819557|NCT01137890|Primary|Cocaine Craving|Cocaine craving measured by Cocaine Selectivity Severity Assessment (CSSA). The CSSA is a reliable and valid tool to measure cocaine withdrawal severity within a 24 hr period, and has been shown to predict treatment response in a treatment setting. Participants are asked to rate 18-items on a Likert scale 0-7, with composite scores ranging 0-126 and higher numbers indicative of more severe withdrawal. Mean scores on CSSA across 39-day time period are reported.|Day 1-39|Includes all participants analyzed (n=12; 8 zonisamide, 4 placebo)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819558|NCT01137890|Primary|Behavioral Choice Measures|"In each condition of cocaine-zonisamide dose, participants were asked to choose whether they would rather have a repeated cocaine dose (same dose as most recent administration) or cash of varying monetary value. The mean number of cocaine choices across each drug condition are reported. This measure only included participants in the zonisamide (Zon) condition (n=8), with each arm representing variation in co-administration of cocaine-Zon.
Repeated within-subject measures ANOVA performed to observe the main effects of zonisamide dose (0, 300, and 600mg) and cocaine dose (1, 20, and 40mg), and their interaction. Only participants who received the active zonisamide medication (n=8) were included in this portion of the analysis.
During self-administration sessions are every 15 min over 1hr45min period. Assessment on Weeks 1 (0mg Zon), 3 (300mg Zon), 5 (600mg Zon), in which varying cocaine doses co-administered. Cocaine not administered (only Zon) during Weeks 2 & 4"|Weeks 1-5, mean of weeks 1, 3 and 5 reported|Because we are interested in how co-administered of cocaine-Zon affects this measure, only Zon participants are included (n=8). Each participant receives varying doses of Zon (0, 300, 600mg) at weeks 1, 2-3, 4-5, respectively. After getting used to each Zon dose, they are co-administered all 3 cocaine doses (1, 20, 40mg) during Weeks 1, 3, and 5||number of cocaine choices||Standard Deviation|Mean
819559|NCT01137890|Primary|Change in Visual Analog Questionnaire (VAQ) Score|VAQ measures the change in effect after dose administration. Participants rate 6 items (“Any Drug Effect”, “Rush”, “Good Effects”, “Bad Effects”, “Liking”, & “Desire for Cocaine”) by pointing an arrow along a 100-point line anchored at either end with “none” (0) & “extremely” (100). Each participant’s score is equal to the sum of all 6 ratings, & the mean of all participant’s scores is reported across each condition. The VAQ is only administered to subjects in the zonisamide (Zon) condition (n=8). Repeated within-subject measures ANOVA performed to observe the main effects of Zon dose (0, 300, & 600mg) & cocaine dose (1, 20, & 40mg), & their interaction. All 8 subjects who received Zon completed both 300mg & 600mg doses. Assessments obtained on Week 1 (0mg Zon), Week 3 (300mg Zon), & Week 5 (600mg Zon), in which all 3 cocaine were co-administered at these times. Cocaine not administered (only Zon) during Weeks 2 & 4, thus no measures taken at these times|Weeks 1-5; mean of weeks 1, 3 and 5 reported|Because we are interested in how co-administered of cocaine-Zon affects this measure, only Zon participants are included (n=8). Each participant receives varying doses of Zon (0, 300, 600mg) at weeks 1, 2-3, 4-5, respectively. After getting used to each Zon dose, they are co-administered all 3 cocaine doses (1, 20, 40mg) during Weeks 1, 3, and 5||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819560|NCT01138007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the IDS-SR Subscores for Energy, Pleasure, and Interest at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8|The IDS-SR is a 30-item scale used to evaluate the severity and changes in depressive symptoms. Each item was scored from 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (greatest symptom severity). Only five items (item 19: general interest; item 20: energy level; item 21: capacity for pleasure or enjoyment, excluding sex; item 22: interest in sex; item 30: leaden paralysis/physical energy) were evaluated for this endpoint, as a subset of the total score. The lowest possible total score and subset total score of IDS-SR are 0 and 0, and the highest possible total score and subset total score of IDS-SR are 84 and 15, respectively. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 minus the value at Baseline. The least squared means were estimated based on the ANCOVA model including Baseline IDS-SR subscore and region as covariates.|Baseline; Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8|FAS. Missing values were imputed using LOCF. Only participants who were available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819561|NCT01138007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report (IDS-SR) Total Score at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8|The IDS-SR is a 30-item scale used to evaluate the severity and changes in depressive symptoms. Each item was scored from 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (greatest symptom severity). The maximum total score is 84 (0: no symptoms; 84: greatest symptom severity), as participants were asked to answer either item 11 (decreased appetite) or item 12 (increased appetite) (not both) and either item 13 (decreased weight) or item 14 (increased weight) (not both). Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 minus the value at Baseline. The least squared means were estimated based on the ANCOVA model including Baseline IDS-SR score and region as covariates.|Baseline; Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8|FAS. Missing values were imputed using LOCF. Only participants who were available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819574|NCT01138046|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) (0-24) of Lapatinib and Paclitaxel|AUC is defined as the area under the lapatinib or paclitaxel concentration-time curve from time 0 to 24 hours (hrs). AUC (0-24) was calculated from lapatinib plasma concentration-time data on Day 8 and Day 14 and paclitaxel plasma concentration-time data on Day 1 and Day 8 with model-independent analyses|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-dose on Day 8 and Day 14 for lapatininb; Day 1 and Day 8 for paclitaxel|PK Population: all participants who provided blood samples for PK evaluation||hours * nanograms/milliliter (hr*ng/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819562|NCT01138007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-SI) Scores at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8|A CGI-SI assessment was performed in terms of severity in depression, by using scores from 0 to 7: 0, Not assessed; 1, Normal, not at all ill; 2, Borderline mentally ill; 3, Mildly ill; 4, Moderately ill; 5, Markedly ill; 6, Severely ill; 7, Among the most extremely ill participants. Change from Baseline in the CGI-SI score was calculated as the value at Week 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 minus the value at Baseline. The least squared means were estimated based on the ANCOVA model including Baseline CGI-SI score and region as covariates.|Baseline; Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8|FAS. Missing values were imputed using LOCF. Only participants who were available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819563|NCT01138007|Secondary|Number of Clinical Global Impression-Global Improvement (CGI-GI) Responders at Week 8|A CGI-GI assessment was performed at Week 8 (or withdrawal) in comparison with severity in depression observed at Baseline (Week 0; no actual assessment was performed at Baseline [the comparison was subjective]), by using scores from 0 to 7: 0, Not assessed; 1, Very much improved; 2, Much improved; 3, Minimally improved; 4, No change; 5, Minimally worse; 6, Much worse; 7, Very much worse. A CGI-GI responder is defined as a participant with a CGI-GI score of very much improved or much improved at Week 8.|Week 8|FAS. Missing values were imputed using LOCF. Only those participants who were available at Week 8 were analyzed.||participants|||Number
819564|NCT01138007|Secondary|Number of MADRS Remitters at Week 8|The MADRS scale measures the depression level of a participant. The total score was derived by adding the scores of the following 10 items: 1, Apparent sadness; 2, Reported sadness; 3, Inner tension; 4, Reduced sleep; 5, Reduced appetite; 6, Concentration difficulties; 7, Lassitude; 8, Inability to feel; 9, Pessimistic thoughts; 10, Suicidal thoughts. Each item was scored using a scale of 0 to 6 (a higher score indicates increased severity). The maximum total score is 60; 0, no depression; 60, severely depressed. A MADRS remitter is defined as a participant with a MADRS total score <=11 at Week 8.|Week 8|FAS. Missing values were imputed using LOCF.||participants|||Number
819565|NCT01138007|Secondary|Number of MADRS Responders at Week 8|The MADRS scale measures the depression level of a participant. The total score was derived by adding the scores of the following 10 items: 1, Apparent sadness; 2, Reported sadness; 3, Inner tension; 4, Reduced sleep; 5, Reduced appetite; 6, Concentration difficulties; 7, Lassitude; 8, Inability to feel; 9, Pessimistic thoughts; 10, Suicidal thoughts. Each item was scored using a scale of 0 to 6 (a higher score indicates increased severity). The maximum total score is 60; 0, no depression; 60, severely depressed. A MADRS responder is defined as a participant with a >=50% reduction from Baseline in the MADRS total score at Week 8.|Baseline and Week 8|FAS. Missing values were imputed using LOCF.||participants|||Number
819566|NCT01138007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the MADRS Individual Item Scores at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8|The MADRS scale measures the depression level of a participant using the following 10 items: 1, Apparent sadness; 2, Reported sadness; 3, Inner tension; 4, Reduced sleep; 5, Reduced appetite; 6, Concentration difficulties; 7, Lassitude; 8, Inability to feel; 9, Pessimistic thoughts; 10, Suicidal thoughts. Each item was scored using a scale of 0 to 6 (a higher score indicates increased severity). Scores for MADRS items 1, 2, 6, 7, and 8 were evaluated for this endpoint. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 minus the value at Baseline. The least squared means were estimated based on the ANCOVA model including Baseline MADRS score of each item and region as covariates.|Baseline; Week 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8|FAS. Missing values were imputed using LOCF. Only participants who were available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819567|NCT01138007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the MADRS Total Score at Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 6|The MADRS scale measures the depression level of a participant. The total score was derived by adding the scores of the following 10 items: 1, Apparent sadness; 2, Reported sadness; 3, Inner tension; 4, Reduced sleep; 5, Reduced appetite; 6, Concentration difficulties; 7, Lassitude; 8, Inability to feel; 9, Pessimistic thoughts; 10, Suicidal thoughts. Each item was scored using a scale of 0 to 6 (a higher score indicates increased severity). The maximum total score is 60; 0, no depression; 60, severely depressed. Change from Baseline in the total score was calculated as the value at Week 1, 2, 4 and 6 minus the value at Baseline. The least squared means were estimated based on the ANCOVA model including Baseline MADRS score and region as covariates.|Baseline; Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 6|FAS. Missing values were imputed using LOCF. Only participants who were available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819568|NCT01138007|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score at Week 8/Withdrawal|The MADRS scale measures the depression level of a participant. The total score was derived by adding the scores of the following 10 items: 1, Apparent sadness; 2, Reported sadness; 3, Inner tension; 4, Reduced sleep; 5, Reduced appetite; 6, Concentration difficulties; 7, Lassitude; 8, Inability to feel; 9, Pessimistic thoughts; 10, Suicidal thoughts. Each item was scored using a scale of 0 to 6 (a higher score indicates increased severity). The maximum total score is 60; 0, no depression; 60, severely depressed. Change from Baseline in the total score was calculated as the value at Week 8/Withdrawal minus the value at Baseline. The least squared means were estimated based on the Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model including Baseline MADRS score and region as covariates.|Baseline and Week 8/Withdrawal|Full Analysis Set (FAS): all participants who took at least one dose of investigational product and provided at least one efficacy observation at a Treatment Phase visit (i.e. Week 1 or later). Missing values were imputed using Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF): last observed non-missing value was used to fill missing values at a later point.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819569|NCT01138046|Secondary|Drug Clearance (CL) of Paclitaxel|CL is defined as the volume of plasma in the vascular compartment cleared of drug per unit time by the processes of metabolism and excretion. CL was calculated from paclitaxel plasma concentration-time data on Day 1 and Day 8 with model-independent analyses|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-dose on Day 1 and Day 8 for paclitaxel|PK Population: all participants who provided blood samples for PK evaluation.||mL/hour/m^2||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819570|NCT01138046|Secondary|Half-life (t1/2) of Paclitaxel|Half-life is defined as the time required for the amount of the drug in the plasma to decrease by half. T1/2 was calculated from paclitaxel plasma concentration-time data on Day 1 and Day 8 with model-independent analyses|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-dose on Day 1 and Day 8 for paclitaxel|PK Population: all participants who provided blood samples for PK evaluation||Hr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819575|NCT01138046|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Lapatinib and Paclitaxel|Cmax is defined as the maximum concentration of lapatinib and paclitaxel. Cmax was calculated from lapatinib plasma concentration-time data on Day 8 and Day 14 and paclitaxel plasma concentration-time data on Day 1 and Day 8 with model-independent analyses|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-dose on Day 8 and Day 14 for lapatininb; Day 1 and Day 8 for paclitaxel|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population: all participants who provided blood samples for PK evaluation||Nanogram per milliliter ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819576|NCT01138046|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Benefit Response (CBR)|CBR is defined using RECIST as the number of participants who received at least one dose of study medication and achieved a best OR classified as CR, PR or SD for at least 6 months (24 weeks), i.e., CR + PR + SD for >=24 weeks. CBR was based on confirmed responses by the investigator. CR is defined as the disappearance of all TLs and non-TLs. PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the LD of the target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum LD. Baseline measurements were obtained at the Screening Visit. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of TLs or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions compared to the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started. SD is defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for a PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD compared to the smallest sum LD since the treatment started. Any participant who could not be classified by the the four preceding definitions was considered Not evaluable|From the start of treatment until progressive disease/death (up to 1009 Days).|All Subjects Population. All participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
819577|NCT01138046|Secondary|Number of Partcipants With a Best Overall Response (OR) as Determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)|Best OR was defined as the best response recorded from the start of treatment until progressive disease (PD)/death as assessed by the investigator. CR is defined as the disappearance of all TLs and non-TLs. PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the LD of the target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum LD. Baseline measurements were obtained at the Screening Visit. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions compared to the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started. Stable disease (SD) is defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for a PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD compared to the smallest sum LD since the treatment started. Any participant who could not be classified by the four preceding definitions was considered Not evaluable.|From the start of treatment until progressive disease/death (up to 1009 Days).|All Subjects Population. All participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
819578|NCT01138046|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of a CR or a PR until the first documented sign of disease progression or death due to any cause (whichever occured earlier). The analysis was based on responses as evaluated by the investigator and was confirmed at a repeat assessment, with the duration of response taken from the first time the response was observed. CR is defined as the disappearance of all TLs and non-TLs. PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the LD of the target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum LD. Baseline measurements were obtained at the Screening Visit.|From the first documented evidence of a CR or a PR until the first documented sign of disease progression or death, whichever occurred earlier (up to 953 Days).|All Subjects Population. Only those participants with a CR or a PR were assessed. For participants who did not progress or die, duration of response was censored on the date of the last assessment.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819579|NCT01138046|Secondary|Time to Response|Time to response is defined as the time from the start of treatment until first documented evidence of partial response (PR) or a complete response (CR) (whichever status is recorded first). Analysis was based on responses confirmed at a repeat assessment made at least 4 weeks after the initial response, with the time to response taken as the first time the response was observed. CR is defined as the disappearance of all target lesions (TLs) and non-TLs. PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of the target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum LD. Baseline measurements were obtained at the Screening Visit.|From the start of treatment until the first documented evidence of a PR or CR, whichever status is recorded first (up to 66 Days).|All Subjects Population. Only those participants with a CR or a PR were assessed.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819580|NCT01138046|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS is defined as the interval between the start of treatment and the earliest date of radiological disease progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. PFS was based on the investigator's assessment. For participants who survived, time to death was censored at the time of the last confirmation of survival.|From the start of treatment until the earliest date of radiological disease progression or death due to any cause, whichever occured first (up to 1009 Days).|All Subjects Population. Participants who met the following criteria were censored: no Baseline assessment, no progression, treatment discontinuation for undocumented progression, treatment discontinuation for toxicity or other reason, new anti-cancer treatment started, and death or progression after more than one missed visit.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819581|NCT01138046|Primary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from the start of treatment until death due to any cause. For participants who survived, time to death was censored at the time of the last confirmation of survival.|From the start of treatment until death due to any cause or study close, whichever occurred first (assessed up to a maximum of 1290 Days)|All Subjects Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819582|NCT01138046|Primary|Number of Participants With Intolerable Toxicities in Phase I of the Study|Investigational treatment was considered tolerable if one or more of the tolerability criteria were met by none or one of the 6 participants in the first cycle of Phase I. If one or more tolerability criteria were met by two or more participants, the issue was referred to the safety committee. Tolerability criteria for toxicities related to investigational treatment included grade 4 neutropenia persisting for 7 or more days, thrombocytopenia with a platelet count of less than or equal to 25,000/millimeter (mm)^3 , clinically significant Grade 3 or 4 non-haematologic toxicities (excluding nausea) and inability to start cycle 2 within 2 weeks of scheduled dosing due to unresolved toxicity.|28 days|All Subjects Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and participated in Phase I of the study.||Participants|||Number
819709|NCT01130597|Secondary|Mean Dose of Patiromer at End of Treatment||56 Days|||grams||Standard Deviation|Mean
819584|NCT01138098|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited adverse event is any adverse event (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) follow-up period after a challenge dose of Engerix™-B vaccine|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects who received the challenge dose of Engerix-B vaccine.||Subjects|||Number
819585|NCT01138098|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed were fatigue, gastrointestinal, headache and temperature (Temperature is defined as axillary temparature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)).|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) follow-up period after a challenge dose of Engerix™-B vaccine|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects who received the challenge dose of Engerix-B vaccine.||Subjects|||Number
819586|NCT01138098|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) follow-up period after a challenge dose of Engerix™-B vaccine|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects who received the challenge dose of Engerix-B vaccine.||Subjects|||Number
819587|NCT01138098|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-HBs Antibody Concentration ≥ 100 mIU/mL|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with anti-HBs antibody concentration ≥ 10 mIU/mL. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB ELISA had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis.|Before the challenge dose of Engerix™-B vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for analysis of immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures, with no elimination criteria) who had received a challenge dose Engerix-B vaccine and for whom immunogenicity data were available at the post-Engerix-B challenge time-point.||Subjects|||Number
819588|NCT01138098|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-HBs Antibody Concentration ≥ 10 mIU/mL|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with anti-HBs antibody concentration ≥ 10 mIU/mL. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis.|Before and one month after a challenge dose of Engerix™-B vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for analysis of immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures, with no elimination criteria) who had received a challenge dose Engerix-B vaccine and for whom immunogenicity data were available at the post-Engerix-B challenge time-point.||Subjects|||Number
819589|NCT01138098|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-HBs Antibody Concentration ≥ 6.2 mIU/mL|A seropositive subject was defined as a subject with anti-HBs antibody concentration ≥ the 6.2 mIU/mLcut-off. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB ELISA had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis and the initial 3.3 mIU/mL seropositivity cut-off was revised into the new 6.2 mIU/mL cut-off.|Before and one month after a challenge dose of Engerix™-B vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for analysis of immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures, with no elimination criteria) who had received a challenge dose Engerix-B vaccine and for whom immunogenicity data were available at the post-Engerix-B challenge time-point.||Subjects|||Number
819590|NCT01138098|Secondary|Number of Subjects With an Anamnestic Response to a Challenge Dose|The anamnestic response was defined as: at least (≥) a 4-fold rise in post-challenge dose anti-HBs antibody concentrations in subjects seropositive at the pre-challenge dose time point. - Post-challenge dose anti-HBs antibody concentrations ≥ 10 mIU/mL in seronegative subjects at the pre-challenge dose time point. A seropositive/seronegative subject is a subject with anti-HBs antibody concentration ≥/lower than (<) 6.2 mIU/mL. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB ELISA had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis and the initial 3.3 mIU/mL seropositivity cut-off was revised into the new 6.2 mIU/mL cut-off.|Before and one month after a challenge dose of Engerix™-B vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for analysis of immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures, with no elimination criteria) who had received a challenge dose Engerix-B vaccine and for whom immunogenicity data were available at the post-Engerix-B challenge time-point.||Subjects|||Number
819591|NCT01138098|Primary|Number of Subjects With Anti-hepatitis B (Anti-HBs) Antibody Concentration Equal to or Above (≥) 100 Milli-International Units Per Milliliter (mIU/mL)|A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis.|One month after a challenge dose of Engerix™-B vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for analysis of immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures, with no elimination criteria) who had received a challenge dose Engerix-B vaccine and for whom immunogenicity data were available at the post-Engerix-B challenge time-point.||Subjects|||Number
819612|NCT01129206|Secondary|Correlation of FDG PET Response With Response Rate|Radiological assessment of tumor response was performed by computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET) every four cycles of therapy and responses were measured according to RECIST and PERCIST criteria.|Approximately three years|2 patients not evaluable for response applying the PERCIST criteria per PET||patients|||Number
819592|NCT01138111|Secondary|Sensitivity/Specificity/Negative Predictive Value (NPV)/Positive Predictive Value (PPV) at Baseline, 12, and 24 Months in the Detection of Significant Brain ß-amyloid Plaque Load in Patients With MCI Progressing to AD Compared to Those Who do Not Progress|"Sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV were measured based on subject BAPL scores by time point and imaging window, compared to clinical diagnosis of AD during the study period. A BAPL score of 1 was considered negative for the presence of beta-amyloid, and scores of 2 and 3 were considered positive.
For this study, sensitivity was defined as the percentage of subjects with a clinical diagnosis of AD who also had a positive PET scan (BAPL score of 2 or 3) at the respective time point.
Specificity was defined as the percentage of subjects with a clinical diagnosis of non-AD who also had a negative PET scan (BAPL score of 0 or 1) at the respective time point.
PPV was defined as the probability that a subject with a positive PET scan would have a clinical diagnosis of AD sometime during the 2 year follow up period.
NPV was defined as the probability that a subject with a negative PET scan would not have a clinical diagnosis of AD at any point during the 2 year follow up period."|2 scanning periods post injection to be evaluated at baseline|All subjects with PET data at the referenced study time point||percentage of subjects|||Number
819593|NCT01138111|Secondary|Number and Proportion of Normal and Abnormal Scans Based on Brain ß-amyloid Plaque Load (BAPL) in Subjects With MCI Converting to AD and Those Who do Not Progress|At each study time point (baseline, 12 months and 24 months) PET images were obtained at 45 min and again at 90 post injection. These images were assigned a BAPL score of 1, 2 or 3 based on the reader’s evaluation of the scan. A BAPL scores of 1 was considered normal, and scores of 2 and 3 were considered abnormal. These scores were compared to subjects clinical diagnosis for AD at the end of the study follow up period.|2 scanning periods post injection to be evaluated each at baseline, at 12 months, and at 24 months|All subjects with PET data at the referenced study time point||participants|||Number
819594|NCT01138111|Secondary|Number of Normal and Abnormal Scans in Patients With MCI Progressing to AD and Those Who do Not Progress Based on a Threshold of Neocortical SUVR=1.4|This outcome measure showed the number of abnormal scans in subjects with MCI progressing to AD and those who did not progress compared to subjects with normal scans that did not progress and those who did progress.|1 scanning period post injection to be evaluated at baseline, at 12 months and at 24 months|All subjects receiving study drug||participants|||Number
819595|NCT01138111|Primary|Quantitative Assessment of Neocortical SUVRs (Mean Standard Uptake Value Ratios) as a Measure of Florbetaben Uptake|Mean SUVRs were calculated for subjects who did and did not progress to Alzheimer's Disease (AD) during the study for each PET scan time point (baseline, 12 and 24 months)|1 scanning period post injection to be evaluated at baseline, 12 months and 24 months|All subjects receiving study drug with PET scan data at the respective timepoint||SUVR||Standard Deviation|Mean
819596|NCT01138124|Primary|Number of Renal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident renal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 33.6 grams), Tertile 2 (33.7 - 185.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (185.1 - 7500.2 grams). Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 39.0 grams), Tertile 2 (39.1 - 210.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (210.1 - 5623.8 grams).|The case index date (ID) was the date of incident renal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control ID was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases and controls were drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into the study cohort began Jan 1, 1993, or at the time of GPRD registration if after Jan 1, 1993. Follow-up ended Dec 31, 2008, or earlier if the respective cancer was diagnosed or if the participant left the GPRD for any reason including death.||participants|||Number
819597|NCT01138124|Primary|Number of Renal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident renal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.55 months), Tertile 2 (1.56 - 6.44 months), and Tertile 3 (6.45 - 78.36 months). Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.78 months), Tertile 2 (1.79 - 7.20 months), and Tertile 3 (7.21 - 64.13 months).|The case index date (ID) was the date of incident renal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control ID was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases and controls were drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into the study cohort began Jan 1, 1993, or at the time of GPRD registration if after Jan 1, 1993. Follow-up ended Dec 31, 2008, or earlier if the respective cancer was diagnosed or if the participant left the GPRD for any reason including death.||participants|||Number
819598|NCT01138124|Primary|Number of Renal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident renal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Tertiles without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions),Tertile 2 (3-8 prescriptions), and Tertile 3 (9-218 prescriptions). Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-10 prescriptions),Tertile 3 (11-191 prescriptions).|The case index date (ID) was the date of incident renal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control ID was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases and controls were drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into the study cohort began Jan 1, 1993, or at the time of GPRD registration if after Jan 1, 1993. Follow-up ended Dec 31, 2008, or earlier if the respective cancer was diagnosed or if the participant left the GPRD for any reason including death.||participants|||Number
819613|NCT01129206|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was determined from the date of start of therapy to death frm any cause.|Approximately five years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819614|NCT01129206|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions|Approximately three years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819599|NCT01138124|Primary|Number of Renal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident renal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date. With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer).|The case index date (ID) was the date of incident renal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control ID was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases and controls were drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into the study cohort began Jan 1, 1993, or at the time of GPRD registration if after Jan 1, 1993. Follow-up ended Dec 31, 2008, or earlier if the respective cancer was diagnosed or if the participant left the GPRD for any reason including death.||participants|||Number
819600|NCT01138124|Primary|Number of Pancreatic Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident pancreatic cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 33.6 grams), Tertile 2 (33.7 - 185.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (185.1 - 7500.2 grams). Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 39.0 grams), Tertile 2 (39.1 - 210.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (210.1 - 5623.8 grams).|The case index date (ID) was the date of incident pancreatic cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control ID was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases and controls were drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into the study cohort began Jan 1, 1993, or at the time of GPRD registration if after Jan 1, 1993. Follow-up ended Dec 31, 2008, or earlier if the respective cancer was diagnosed or if the participant left the GPRD for any reason including death.||participants|||Number
819601|NCT01138124|Primary|Number of Pancreatic Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident pancreatic cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.55 months), Tertile 2 (1.56 - 6.44 months), and Tertile 3 (6.45 - 78.36 months). Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.78 months), Tertile 2 (1.79 - 7.20 months), and Tertile 3 (7.21 - 64.13 months).|The case index date (ID) was the date of incident pancreatic cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control ID was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases and controls were drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into the study cohort began Jan 1, 1993, or at the time of GPRD registration if after Jan 1, 1993. Follow-up ended Dec 31, 2008, or earlier if the respective cancer was diagnosed or if the participant left the GPRD for any reason including death.||participants|||Number
819602|NCT01138124|Primary|Number of Pancreatic Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident pancreatic cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Tertiles without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions),Tertile 2 (3-8 prescriptions), and Tertile 3 (9-218 prescriptions). Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-10 prescriptions),Tertile 3 (11-191 prescriptions).|The case index date (ID) was the date of incident pancreatic cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control ID was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases and controls were drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into the study cohort began Jan 1, 1993, or at the time of GPRD registration if after Jan 1, 1993. Follow-up ended Dec 31, 2008, or earlier if the respective cancer was diagnosed or if the participant left the GPRD for any reason including death.||participants|||Number
819603|NCT01138124|Primary|Number of Pancreatic Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident pancreatic cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date. With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer).|The case index date (ID) was the date of incident pancreatic cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control ID was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases and controls were drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into the study cohort began Jan 1, 1993, or at the time of GPRD registration if after Jan 1, 1993. Follow-up ended Dec 31, 2008, or earlier if the respective cancer was diagnosed or if the participant left the GPRD for any reason including death.||participants|||Number
819604|NCT01138150|Secondary|Resistin|serum resistin levels after treatment in responders and non responders|30 minutes after treatment, 60 minutes after treatment, 120 minutes after treatment|||ug/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819605|NCT01138150|Secondary|Leptin|serum leptin levels after treatment in responders and non responders|30 minutes after treatment, 60 minutes after treatment, 120 minutes after treatment|||ug/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819606|NCT01138150|Secondary|Low Molecular Weight (LMW):Total (T)-ADP|serum LMW:T-ADP levels after treatment in responders and non responders|30 minutes after treatment, 60 minutes after treatment, 120 minutes after treatment|||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819607|NCT01138150|Secondary|High Molecular Weight (HMW): T-ADP|serum HMW:T-ADP levels after treatment in responders and non responders|30 minutes, 60 minutes, 120 minutes after treatment|||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819608|NCT01138150|Secondary|Low Molecular Weight (LMW)-ADP|serum LMW-ADP levels after treatment in responders and non responders|30 minutes after treatment, 60 minutes after treatment, 120 minutes after treatment|||ug/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819609|NCT01138150|Secondary|Middle Molecular Weight (MMW)-ADP|serum MMW-ADP levels after treatment in responders and non responders|30 minutes after treatment, 60 minutes after treatment, 120 minutes after treatment|||ug/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819610|NCT01138150|Secondary|High Molecular Weight (HMW)-Adiponectin (ADP)|serum HMW-ADP levels after treatment in responders and non responders|30 minutes after treatment, 60 minutes after treatment, 120 minutes after treatment|||ug/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819615|NCT01129206|Primary|Overall Response|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR|Approximately three years|||patients|||Number
819618|NCT01129284|Secondary|Sustained Remissions up to 1 Year After Discontinuing Therapy|Complete remission defined as stable or improved renal function, serum creatinine < or = 125% baseline, with proteinuria falling <500 mg/day at last follow-up visit (6 to 12 months post treatment). Partial remission defined as stable or improved renal function, serum creatinine < or = 125% baseline, with 50% reduction in proteinuria and final proteinuria 500-3500 mg/day at last follow-up visit (6 to 12 months post treatment).|Up to 1 year after treatment|||participants|||Number
819619|NCT01129284|Primary|Significant Reduction in Proteinuria to Remission Levels During the Treatment Period (Includes Complete and Partial Remission, as Defined in the Outcome Measure Description Below)|Complete remission is defined as stable or improved renal function, serum creatinine < or = 125% baseline, with proteinuria falling <500 mg/day at month 6. Partial remission is defined as stable or improved renal function, serum creatinine < or = 125% baseline, with 50% reduction in proteinuria and final proteinuria 500-3500 mg/day at month 6.|6 months|||participants|||Number
819620|NCT01129336|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urine NTX by Month|NTX= N-telopeptide of type 1 collagen (nmol bce/mmol [nanomoles of bone collagen equivalents per millimole of creatinine]). Baseline was defined as the last predose measurement for patients who received any study drug and as the later of the screening visit or visit 2 value for patients who did not receive study drug.|Baseline, Month 2, Month 4|All Enrolled Patients population, which included all enrolled patients regardless of whether they received study drug.||nmol bce/mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
819621|NCT01129336|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP)|Time to progression is defined as the time from the date of enrollment to the date of first documented disease progression or death due to metastatic breast cancer.|up to 18 months|All Enrolled Patients population, which included all enrolled patients regardless of whether they received study drug.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819622|NCT01129336|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Circulating Tumor Cell Levels of at Least 5 Per 7.5 mL of Peripheral Blood by Month|Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have been associated with poor patient prognosis and outcomes in patients receiving treatment for MBC. CTCs have been evaluated as a potential biomarker for predicting treatment effects and overall survival. Baseline was defined as the last predose measurement for patients who received any study drug and as the later of the screening visit or Visit 2 value for patients who did not receive the study drug. Percentage was calculated as the number of patients with CTC ≥5/7.5 mL against the number of patients with nonmissing CTC values (represented as 'n' in the categories).|Baseline, Month 1, 2, 4, 6, 9 and 18|"All Enrolled Patients population, which included all enrolled patients regardless of whether they received study drug. n in each category represents the number of patients with non-missing CTC values."||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819623|NCT01129336|Primary|Number of Participants With Progression Free Survival (PFS)|Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (target or non-target) must have exhibited a reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. Partial Response (PR): at least a 30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters. Progressive Disease (PD): at least 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum on study accompanied by an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or appearance of one or more new lesions. Stable Disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference smallest sum diameters. PFS is time from enrollment to date of first documented disease progression or death due to any cause. A participant is considered to be censored when data on time to event is missing due to a subject being lost to follow-up or non-occurrence of the outcome event before the completion of the trial.|up to 18 months|All Enrolled Patients population, which included all enrolled patients regardless of whether they received study drug.||Participants|||Number
819624|NCT01129531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Evoked Pain Score in the Area of Allodynia|Participants were asked to rate the unpleasantness (pain to touch) after 3 brush strokes in the area of allodynia on a 100 point scale where 0=no pain to 100=worst pain imaginable. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified intent to treat population included all randomized participants who received treatment and had at least 1 post-baseline pain intensity score.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819625|NCT01129531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Area of Allodynia|A tracing of the area of allodynia (pain to touch) was made and sent to an independent central reading center for measurement. The area of allodynia was measured in centimeters squared (cm^2) at Baseline and Week 12. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified intent to treat population included all randomized participants who received treatment and had at least 1 post-baseline pain intensity score.||cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
819626|NCT01129531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Area of Spontaneous Pain|A tracing of the area of spontaneous pain was made and sent to an independent central reading center for measurement. The area of spontaneous pain was measured in centimeters squared (cm^2) at Baseline and Week 12. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified intent to treat population included all randomized participants who received treatment and had at least 1 post-baseline pain intensity score.||cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
819627|NCT01129531|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Average Pain Intensity Score at Week 12|Participants rated the severity of their daily pain in the previous 7 days using a 10 point scale where 0=no pain to 10=pain as bad as you can imagine. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified intent to treat population included all randomized participants who received treatment and had at least 1 post-baseline pain intensity score.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819628|NCT01129557|Secondary|Pre- and Post-treatment Serum Aldosterone in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Compares baseline and final (9 month) serum aldosterone for subjects with and without aldosterone breakthrough|Baseline and Final (9 month)|||(ng/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819630|NCT01129557|Secondary|Pre- and Post-treatment 24-hour Urine Sodium in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Compares baseline and final (9 month) 24-hour urine sodium for subjects with and without aldosterone breakthrough|Baseline and Final (9 month)|||(mmol/day)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819631|NCT01129557|Secondary|Pre- and Post-treatment 24-hour Urine Protein in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Compares baseline and final (9 month) 24-hour urine protein for subjects with and without aldosterone breakthrough|Baseline and Final (9 month)|||(mg/day)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819632|NCT01129557|Secondary|Pre- and Post-treatment Serum Potassium in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Compares baseline and final (9 month) serum potassium for subjects with and without aldosterone breakthrough|Baseline and Final (9 month)|||(mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819633|NCT01129557|Secondary|Pre- and Post-treatment Serum Creatinine in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Compares baseline and final (9 month) serum creatinine for subjects with and without aldosterone breakthrough|Baseline and Final (9 month)|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819634|NCT01129557|Secondary|Pre- and Post-treatment Blood Pressure in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Compares baseline and final (9 month) blood pressure for subjects with and without aldosterone breakthrough|Baseline and Final (9 month)|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819635|NCT01129557|Secondary|Mean 24-hour Urine Sodium Over Time During 9-month Treatment Course in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Mean 24-hour urine sodium (mmol/day) at baseline, 3-, 6-, and 9-months. (given as reference to interpret contemporaneous plasma & urine aldosterone measurements.)|Baseline, 3-, 6-, and 9-months|||mmol/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
819636|NCT01129557|Secondary|Serum Potassium Over Time During 9-month Treatment Course in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Mean serum potassium at baseline, 3-, 6-, and 9-months. (given as reference to interpret contemporaneous plasma & urine aldosterone measurements.)|Baseline, 3-, 6-, and 9-months|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819637|NCT01129557|Secondary|Urine Aldosterone Over Time During 9-month Treatment Course in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Mean urine aldosterone at baseline, 3-, 6-, and 9-months.|Baseline, 3-, 6-, and 9-months|||ug/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
819638|NCT01129557|Secondary|Serum Aldosterone Over Time During 9-month Treatment Course in Subjects With and Without Aldosterone Breakthrough.|Mean serum aldosterone at baseline, 3-, 6-, and 9-months.|Baseline, 3-, 6-, and 9-months|||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819639|NCT01129557|Primary|Cumulative Incidence of Aldosterone Breakthrough in Subjects Who Completed the 9-month Study Protocol.|The primary outcome of this study is the 9-month cumulative incidence of aldosterone breakthrough, defined as a sustained increase in 24-hour urine aldosterone above baseline, in each treatment arm.|9 months|||participants|||Number
819640|NCT01129583|Secondary|Broberg Morrey Composite Elbow Function Score|Composite elbow function store that takes into account range of motion, stability, strength, and pain. Score ranges from 0 (worse possible function) to 100 (best possible function).|6 months post-op|||Score||Standard Error|Mean
819641|NCT01129583|Secondary|Elbow Range of Motion|Elbow flexion/extension active range of motion was assessed with the use of a standard goniometer with the center placed over the lateral epicondyle and the arms aligned with the long axis of the humerus and ulna, respectively. Full extension (arm completely straight) is defined as 0 degrees, and peak flexion is measured as the angle formed by the arm and forearm compared to a full straight arm.|3 months post-op|||Degrees||Standard Error|Mean
819642|NCT01129583|Primary|Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) Questionnaire|"The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Outcome Measure is a questionnaire designed to measure physical function and symptoms in patients with musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb.
The DASH is scored in two components: the disability/symptom questions (30 items, scored 1-5) and the optional high performance sport/music or work section (4 items, scored 1-5). The DASH disability/symptom score (0-100) is calculated by averaging all the scores, subtracting one and multiplying by 25. A score of 0 represents no disability, while 100 represents maximum possible disability."|1 year post-op|||Scores on a Scale (0-100)||Standard Error|Mean
819643|NCT01129622|Secondary|Number of Participants Developed Adverse Effects of 12.5 mg of Letrozole|The number of participants who developed short term hypoestrogenic side effects or other adverse effects of letrozole during the intake of the medication or in the following week.|Three days plus One Week following medication|All entered subjects||Number of participants|||Number
819644|NCT01129622|Primary|Number of Women With Reduced Breast Parenchymal Enhancement|Image analysis was done using the e-film workstation. A region of interest was selected in all images. The signal intensity of enhancement was recorded and the relative enhancement (percentage of increase in signal intensity) was calculated as (SIc − SI)/SI × 100, where SI and SIc are the precontrast and the postcontrast signal intensities, respectively. Relative enhancement was compared at the baseline MRI study and the after one month MRI study for all participants.|One month MRI study after letrozole compared to baseline MRI study, both with gadolinium enhancement|All participants who completed two MRIs were analysed. Percentage reduction in breast enhancement compared to baseline was determined.||Number of participants|||Number
819645|NCT01129765|Secondary|Number of Patients Experiencing a Physical Injury During Use|"After the procedure, the patient was directly examined for any of the following:
bleeding from the nostrils
disruption of the skin around the nose
increased work of breathing/respiratory distress (increased respiratory rate, increased respiratory accessory muscle use)"|Day one, immediately|This is the total number of participants, all of whose children were examined after the procedure.||paricipants|||Number
819646|NCT01129765|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Were Observed to Have an Adverse Event|"While using the device, the patients were observed by the research coordinator for any of the following adverse events to occur:
bloody nose
being sprayed in the eye with the saline
vomiting after the procedure
choking during or after the procedure
other"|Day one, immediately|||patients with an adverse event|||Number
819647|NCT01129765|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Identified the Device's User Manual as Easy to Understand|"After using the device, the caregiver answered this question on a five point Likert-like scale with increasing favorability with increasing number. The proportion answering 3 or greater is reported along with the exact 95% confidence intervals.
The question and scale are as follows: How easy was the manual to understand?
1 difficult, 2 somewhat hard, 3 fairly easy, 4 easy, 5 very easy"|Day one, immediately|||participants|||Number
819710|NCT01130597|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Serum Potassium in the Range of 4.0 – 5.1 mEq/L at the End of Treatment||56 Days|||percentage of participants|||Number
819648|NCT01129765|Primary|Number of Participants Who Properly Used the Nasal Irrigator/Aspirator Device|"'Proper use' is defined as successfully completing all of the following five steps:
Attaching wash-head to handle properly
Positioning child correctly for procedure as per the user manual's instructions
Using the device's control button correctly for both irrigation and aspiration
Placing the wash-head tip correctly at the nasal opening
Using the device for up to but not exceeding five seconds"|Day one, immediately|||participants|||Number
819649|NCT01129765|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Found the Device to be Effective|"After using the device, the caregiver answered this question on a five point Likert-like scale with increasing favorability with increasing number. The proportion answering 3 or greater is reported along with the exact 95% confidence intervals.
The question and scale are as follows: How well did the device remove nasal secretions?
1 difficult, 2 somewhat hard, 3 fairly easy, 4 easy, 5 very easy"|Day one, immediately|||participants|||Number
819650|NCT01129765|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Ease of Use With the Device|"After using the device, the caregiver answered this question on a five point Likert-like scale with increasing favorability with increasing number. An answer of 3 or greater is considered an affirmative answer. Such responses reported along with the exact 95% confidence intervals.
The question and scale are as follows: How easy was the device to use?
1 difficult, 2 somewhat hard, 3 fairly easy, 4 easy, 5 very easy"|Day one, immediately|This was the total number of participants who answered this question.||participants|||Number
819651|NCT01129778|Secondary|Reflux Disease Questionnaire Score on Day 1 After Therapy Completion|The RDQ is a 12 item survey that asks the patient to rate the frequency and severity of GERD symptoms. Each item is scored from 0 to 5 where a score of 0 is equivalent to an asymptomatic state and 5 indicates the worst severity of GERD symptoms. The total RDQ is a sum of all 12 items, and can range from 0 to 60.|Day 1 after therapy period completion|Participants who completed all protocol-specified assessments were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819652|NCT01129778|Primary|Percentage of Time Esophageal pH< 4|Reported as the the average percentage over 24 hours of total time, upright time, and supine time per day with pH <4 (symptomatic acid state) as evaluated with the Bravo pH monitoring technique.|Days 1 and 2|Participants who completed all protocol-specified assessments were included in the analysis.||percentage of hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
819653|NCT01129921|Primary|Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Mean Improvement|VAS ten point scale where 0 = no pain and 10 represents worst pain imaginable. Mean improvement of two or more points is considered clinically relevant. The mean improvement from Baseline to Year-1 is presented below for the two treatment groups.|Baseline and Year 1|All patients who reported Year-1 outcomes (Year-1 Cohort) were analyzed. The Sham Year-1 cohort represent those original Sham patients who crossed over from Sham to the mild procedure and were then followed for one year.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819654|NCT01129921|Primary|Visual Analog Scale (VAS) <=4|"VAS as measured on a 10-point scale. A score of 4 or less after treatment is considered favorable, as it indicates pain is less than the moderate to severe categories represented by scores of 5 to 10. All patients in each arm who reported a pain score of 4 or less at Week 6-12 and Year 1 are reported below."|Week 6 to 12 & Year One After Sham to mild x-over|Patients who reported Year 1 outcomes are reported at Week 6-12 and at Year 1. All findings reported below for the Sham group are after cross-over to mild.||participants|||Number
819655|NCT01129921|Primary|Visual Analog Scale (VAS) <=4|Using VAS, pain is measured on a 0 to 10 point scale where 0 represents no pain and 10 indicates severe pain. A post-treatment score of 4 points is the accepted threshold between a “mild” pain score of 1-3 points and a “moderate to severe” pain score of 5 to 10 points which represents debilitating pain that would qualify the patient for a different or additional treatment option. All patients in each arm who reported a pain score of 4 or less at six to twelve weeks post-treatment are reported below.|Week 6 to 12 prior to cross-over|All 40 participants (20 in each arm) reported VAS at six weeks to twelve weeks post-treatment. All measurements for the sham group occurred prior to cross-over to the mild procedure. Patients with scores of 4 or less in each study group are reported below. This is Intent to Treat (ITT)analysis.||participants|||Number
819656|NCT01129960|Primary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Mean Pain|Study was prematurely halted. The efficacy analysis was restricted to the primary efficacy variable in the interim analysis population. The intended treatment period, starting on the day of the randomization and ending at the efficacy cut-off date (31st October 2011), was the basis for the efficacy analysis; patients with less than 20 days of study medication were excluded from the analysis, except those with early discontinuation. Primary efficacy variable was the difference between the mean values of 7 daily pain scores preceding the efficacy cut-off date (endpoint mean pain score), and before randomization (baseline mean pain score), respectively. The daily pain scores were based on the morning response to the 11-point Numeric Rating Pain Scale (NRPS) question relating to average pain intensity over the last 24 hours. The NPRS is an 11-point scale from 0-10 [“0” = no pain; “10” = the most intense pain imaginable]|baseline up to endpoint 15 weeks (3-week titration phase and 12-week treatment maintenance phase)|FAS = Full Analysis Set (comprised all randomized subjects with mean pain score at baseline and mean score after randomization; subjects with less than 20 days of study medication of the cut-off date were excluded from the dataset, except those that prematurely withdrew; this was the primary population used in the efficacy analysis)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819657|NCT01130051|Primary|Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinity [AUC(0-∞)]|The area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to infinity. AUC (0-∞) was calculated as the sum of AUC (0-t) plus the ratio of the last measurable Colcrys® plasma concentration to the elimination rate constant.|serial pharmacokinetic plasma concentrations were drawn prior to dose administration (0 hour) and at 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration|Plasma concentration data for 13 of 16 participants were used in the statistical analysis. One subject dropped from the study before Period 2 dosing for personal reasons. Two subjects were discontinued from the study before Period 2 for protocol violations.||ng-hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819711|NCT01130597|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Serum Potassium in the Range of 4.0 – 5.1 mEq/L at Week 8||56 Days|Participants with available data at Week 8.||percentage of participants|||Number
819712|NCT01130597|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Serum Potassium in the Range of 4.0 – 5.1 mEq/L at Week 4||28 Days|Participants with available data at Week 4.||percentage of participants|||Number
819658|NCT01130051|Primary|Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 to Time t [AUC(0-t)]|The area under the plasma concentration versus time curve, from time 0 to the time of the last measurable Colcrys® concentration (t), as calculated by the linear trapezoidal rule|serial pharmacokinetic plasma concentrations were drawn prior to dose administration (0 hour) and at 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration|Plasma concentration data for 13 of 16 participants were used in the statistical analysis. One subject dropped from the study before Period 2 dosing for personal reasons. Two subjects were discontinued from the study before Period 2 for protocol violations.||ng-hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819659|NCT01130051|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|The maximum or peak concentration that Colcrys® reaches in the plasma|serial pharmacokinetic plasma concentrations were drawn prior to dose administration (0 hour) and at 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration|Plasma concentration data for 13 of 16 participants were used in the statistical analysis. One subject dropped from the study before Period 2 dosing for personal reasons. Two subjects were discontinued from the study before Period 2 for protocol violations.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819660|NCT01130103|Primary|Number of Participants Who Met Remission Criterion|remission defined as: CAPS less than or equal to 20 and Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-change score=1|Weeks 5,10|all participants who were randomized, with people who dropped out counted as non-remitters||participants|||Number
819661|NCT01130103|Secondary|Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Scale Total Score at Week 0,5,10|Measures life enjoyment and satisfaction across 16 domains 16 = very poor quality of life to 80 =very good quality of life|weeks 0,5,10|observed data at weeks 0, 5, and 10||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819662|NCT01130103|Secondary|Hamilton Depression Scale 0 = no Depression Symptoms 40 = Extreme Depression Symptoms|total score at weeks 0, 5, 10|weeks 0,5,10|observed data at each time point||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819663|NCT01130103|Secondary|Treatment Response at Weeks 5 and 10|"responder status: CGI-change score of 1 or 2
1=very much improved, 2= much improved"|weeks 5,10|all subjects randomized with dropouts carried forward as nonresponders||participants|||Number
819664|NCT01130103|Primary|Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS)|PTSD severity, minimum = 0 = no symptoms of PTSD maximum = 136 = extremely severe symptoms of PTSD|Weeks 0,5,10|all participants who were randomized||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819665|NCT01130168|Primary|Change From Baseline (0 Hours) to Week 4 in Peripheral DBP After Multiple Doses of Treatment|Peripheral SBP was measured by Brachial Sphygmomanometer (standard cuff). Peripheral DBP was measured at baseline and at 24 hours post dose on Day 28 (Week 4) and expressed as a change from baseline.|Baseline (0 hrs), 24 hours after the Day 28 dose|33 participants completed all study periods and provided more than 1 period of BP data, and were thus evaluable for the BP analyses.||mm mercury (Hg)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819666|NCT01130168|Primary|TWA Change From Baseline (0 Hours) to 12 Hours in Peripheral DBP After A Single Dose of Treatment|Peripheral DBP was measured by Brachial Sphygmomanometer (standard cuff). Single dose effects on peripheral DBP were estimated as a time-weighted average change from baseline over the 12-hour post single dose observation period.|Baseline (0 hrs), 12 hours post-dose (Day 1)|33 participants completed all study periods and provided more than 1 period of BP data, and were thus evaluable for the BP analyses.||mm mercury (Hg)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819667|NCT01130168|Primary|Change From Baseline (0 Hours) to Week 4 in Peripheral SBP After Multiple Doses of Treatment|Peripheral SBP was measured by Brachial Sphygmomanometer (standard cuff). Peripheral SBP was measured at baseline and at 24 hours post dose on Day 28 (Week 4) and expressed as a change from baseline.|Baseline (0 hrs), 24 hours after the Day 28 dose|33 participants completed all study periods and provided more than 1 period of BP data, and were thus evaluable for the BP analyses.||mm mercury (Hg)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819668|NCT01130168|Primary|TWA Change From Baseline (0 Hours) to 12 Hours in Peripheral SBP After A Single Dose of Treatment|Peripheral SBP was measured by Brachial Sphygmomanometer (standard cuff). Single dose effects on peripheral SBP were estimated as a time-weighted average change from baseline over the 12-hour post single dose observation period.|Baseline (0 hrs), 12 hours post-dose (Day 1)|33 participants completed all study periods and provided more than 1 period of BP data, and were thus evaluable for the BP analyses.||mm mercury (Hg)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819669|NCT01130168|Primary|Change From Baseline (0 Hours) to Week 4 in Central DBP After Multiple Doses of Treatment|Central DBP was measured by the SphygmoCor® device. Central DBP was measured at baseline and at 24 hours post dose on Day 28 (Week 4) and expressed as a change from baseline.|Baseline (0 hrs), 24 hours after the Day 28 dose|"33 participants completed all study periods and provided more than 1 period of BP data, and were thus evaluable for the BP analyses.
Unreliable SphygmoCor® data were collected for one participant in the ISM ER treatment group, therefore this participant was excluded from the multiple dose DBP analysis."||mm mercury (Hg)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819670|NCT01130168|Primary|TWA Change From Baseline (0 Hours) to 12 Hours in Central Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) After A Single Dose of Treatment|Central DBP was measured by the SphygmoCor® device. Single dose effects on central DBP were estimated as a time-weighted average change from baseline over the 12-hour post single dose observation period.|Baseline (0 hrs), 12 hours post-dose (Day 1)|"33 participants completed all study periods and provided more than 1 period of BP data, and were thus evaluable for the BP analyses.
Unreliable SphygmoCor® data were collected for one participant in the ISM ER treatment group, therefore this participant was excluded from the single dose DBP analysis."||mm mercury (Hg)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819671|NCT01130168|Primary|Change From Baseline (0 Hours) to Week 4 in Central SBP After Multiple Doses of Treatment|Central SBP was measured by the SphygmoCor® device. Central SBP was measured at baseline and at 24 hours post dose on Day 28 (Week 4) and expressed as a change from baseline.|Baseline (0 hrs), 24 hours after the Day 28 dose|"33 participants completed all study periods and provided more than 1 period of BP data, and were thus evaluable for the BP analyses.
Unreliable SphygmoCor® data were collected for one participant in the ISM ER treatment group, therefore this participant was excluded from the multiple dose SBP analysis."||mm mercury (Hg)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819713|NCT01130597|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Serum Potassium in the Range of 3.5 – 5.5 mEq/L at Week 8||56 Days|Participants with available data at Week 8.||percentage of participants|||Number
819672|NCT01130168|Primary|TWA Change From Baseline (0 Hours) to 12 Hours in Central Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) After A Single Dose of Treatment|Central SBP was measured by the SphygmoCor® device. Single dose effects on central SBP were estimated as a time-weighted average change from baseline over the 12-hour post single dose observation period.|Baseline (0 hrs), 12 hours post-dose (Day 1)|"33 participants completed all study periods and provided more than 1 period of BP data, and were thus evaluable for the BP analyses.
Unreliable SphygmoCor® data were collected for one participant in the ISM ER treatment group, therefore this participant was excluded from the single dose SBP analysis."||mm mercury (Hg)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819673|NCT01130168|Primary|Change From Baseline (0 Hours) to Week 4 in Heart-Rate-Corrected AIx After Multiple Doses of Treatment|"The augmentation index (AIx) is a measure of systemic arterial stiffness, and is the ratio of augmented aortic pressure (Δ P) to central pulse pressure expressed as a percent. AIx = (ΔP/PP) x 100, where P = pressure and PP = Pulse Pressure. Because heart rate (HR) affects AIx, AIx was corrected to a HR of 75 beats per minute (bpm) as follows:
HR-corrected AIx = -0.39 x (75 - HR) + AIx. This value was used for all AIx analyses."|Baseline (0 hrs), 24 hours after the Day 28 dose|"33 participants completed all study periods and provided more than 1 period of BP data, and were thus evaluable for the BP analyses.
Unreliable SphygmoCor® data were collected for two participants in the ISM ER treatment group, therefore these participants were excluded from the multiple dose AIx analysis."||percent||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819674|NCT01130168|Primary|Time-weighted Average (TWA) Change From Baseline (0 Hours) to 12 Hours in Heart-Rate-Corrected Augmentation Index (AIx) After A Single Dose of Treatment|"The augmentation index (AIx) is a measure of systemic arterial stiffness, and is the ratio of augmented aortic pressure (Δ P) to central pulse pressure expressed as a percent. AIx = (ΔP/PP) x 100, where P = pressure and PP = Pulse Pressure. Single dose effects on AIx were estimated as a time-weighted average change from baseline over the 12-hour post single dose observation period. Because heart rate (HR) affects AIx, AIx was corrected to a HR of 75 beats per minute (bpm) as follows:
HR-corrected AIx = -0.39 x (75 - HR) + AIx. This value was used for all AIx analyses."|Baseline (0 hrs), 12 hours post-dose (Day 1)|"33 participants completed all study periods and provided more than 1 period of BP data, and were thus evaluable for the BP analyses.
Unreliable SphygmoCor® data were collected for one participant in the ISM ER treatment group, therefore this participant was excluded from the single dose AIx analysis."||percent||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819675|NCT01130337|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response|An objective response was defined as either a complete response (CR) or a partial response (PR). Using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions and all non-target lesions, normalization of tumor marker level, and no new lesions. PR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions and persistence of greater than or equal to (≥) 1 non-target lesions and/or the maintenance of tumor marker level above the normal limits, or, at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, and no new lesions or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Between Days 7 and 21 of the 3rd cycle of neoadjuvant treatment, thereafter, every 9 weeks during adjuvant treatment and then after adjuvant treatment every 3 months until Month 25|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
819676|NCT01130337|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Tumor Resection (R0)|R0 resection was defined as having performed a complete resection of the tumor with adequate tumor-free margins and regional lymph node extirpation.|Between Days 7 and 21 of the 3rd cycle of neoadjuvant treatment, thereafter, every 9 weeks during adjuvant treatment and then after adjuvant treatment every 3 months until Month 25|"ITT population. Here number of participants analyzed included those who underwent surgery."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819677|NCT01130337|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pathological Complete Response (pCR)|pCR was defined as an absence of any invasive cancer cell of the primary tumor after the time of major neoadjuvant chemotherapy, with or without surgery.|Between Days 7 and 21 of the 3rd cycle of neoadjuvant treatment, thereafter, every 9 weeks during adjuvant treatment and then after adjuvant treatment every 3 months until Month 25|ITT population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819678|NCT01130337|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Disease-free Survival (DFS) at Month 18|DFS was the time elapsed from the time of surgery (for complete resection [R0] participants) until the date on which progression or death from any cause was documented (whichever occured first). Progression was defined as target lesions greater than (>) 20 percent (%) increase in the sum of the longest diameter (SLD) taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded since the treatment started (nadir) and minimum 5 millimeter (mm) increase over the nadir. When the sum becomes very small, increases within the measurement error (2-3 mm) can lead to a 20% increase. Participants who did not present progression and who had not died were censored on the last date on which it was known that there was no progression (last response assessment).|Month 18|ITT population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819684|NCT01130532|Secondary|"Change From Week 12 to Week 16 Percentage of Yes Responses to Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) Questions 3"|"Assessed the percentage of Yes responses to the SEP diary Question 3 Did your erection last long enough for you to have successful intercourse? from Week 12 (end of double-Blind treatment) to Week 16 (end of open-label treatment)."|12 weeks and 16 weeks|"All participants who were entered the open-label treatment, received at least 1 dose of study drug during open-label treatment, had Week 12 and at least 1 SEP diary Question 3 measurement during open-label treatment, excluding those with IIEF-EF domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||"percentage of yes responses"||Standard Deviation|Mean
819685|NCT01130532|Secondary|Change From 12 Weeks to 16 Weeks in Participant's International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) Domain Score|Self-reported erectile function over the past 4 weeks. IIEF- EF is the sum of Questions 1-5 and 15 of the IIEF. Questions 1-5 are scored 0 (low/no erectile function) to 5 (high erectile function) and Question 15 is scored 1 (very low confidence) to 5 (very high confidence), for a total score ranging from 1 to 30. Higher scores represent better erectile function.|12 weeks and 16 weeks|"All participants who were entered the open-label treatment, received at least 1 dose of study drug during open-label treatment, had Week 12 and at least 1 IIEF-EF measurement during open-label treatment, excluding those with IIEF-EF domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819686|NCT01130532|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Having International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) Domain Score Greater Than or Equal to 26 From 12 to 16 Weeks|Self-reported erectile function over the past 4 weeks. IIEF- EF is the sum of Questions 1-5 and 15 of the IIEF. Questions 1-5 are scored 0 (low/no erectile function) to 5 (high erectile function) and Question 15 is scored 1 (very low confidence) to 5 (very high confidence), for a total score ranging from 1 to 30. Higher scores represent better erectile function. Data presented are the percentage of participants who return to normal erectile function (IIEF-EF domain score ≥26) at end of open-label extension treatment period (Period IV).|12 weeks through 16 weeks|"All participants who were entered the open-label treatment, received at least 1 dose of study drug during open-label treatment, had Week 12 and at least 1 IIEF-EF measurement during open-label treatment, excluding those with IIEF-EF domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||percentage of participants|||Number
819687|NCT01130532|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Scale (TSS) – Partner Satisfaction With Medication Score at Week 12 Endpoint|The TSS - partner satisfaction with medication measured participant's partner satisfaction with treatment based on a 13-item questionnaire. The overall score was converted to a 0-100 scale with higher numbers on the scale indicating greater satisfaction. Satisfaction with medication was analyzed using analysis of covariance (ANOVA). The model included factors of study, treatment group, and pooled site within study.|Week 12|"All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline partner's satisfaction with medication measurement, excluding those with IIEF-EF domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819688|NCT01130532|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12-Week Endpoint in Treatment Satisfaction Scale (TSS) - Partner|The TSS measured participant's partner satisfaction with treatment based on a 13-item questionnaire. The overall score for each of five TSS domains (confidence to complete sexual activity, ease of erection, pleasure from sexual activity, erectile function satisfaction, and satisfaction with orgasm) was converted to a 0-100 scale with higher numbers on the scale indicating greater satisfaction. Least Squares (LS) mean of the change from baseline to endpoint is from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The model included centered-baseline as a covariate and factors of study, treatment group, and pooled site within study, and centered-baseline-by-treatment-group interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|"All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline partner's TSS measurement, excluding those with IIEF-EF domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819689|NCT01130532|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12-Week Endpoint in the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Question 15 (Sexual Confidence)|Self-reported erectile function over the past 4 weeks. Question 15, confidence in the ability to get an erection, is scored from 1 (very low confidence) to 5 (very high confidence). Least Squares (LS) mean of the change from baseline to endpoint is from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The model included centered-baseline as a covariate and factors of study, treatment group, and pooled site within study, and centered-baseline-by-treatment-group interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|"All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF question 15 (Sexual Confidence) assessment, excluding those with IIEF-EF domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819714|NCT01130597|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Serum Potassium in the Range of 3.5 – 5.5 mEq/L at Week 4||28 Days|Participants with available data at Week 4.||percentage of participants|||Number
819690|NCT01130532|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Scale (TSS) - Patient Satisfaction With Medication Score at Week 12 Endpoint|The TSS - patient satisfaction with medication measured participant satisfaction with treatment based on a 13-item questionnaire. The overall score was converted to a 0-100 scale with higher numbers on the scale indicating greater satisfaction. Satisfaction with medication was analyzed using analysis of covariance (ANOVA). The model included factors of study, treatment group, and pooled site within study.|Week 12|"All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline participant's satisfaction with medication measurement, excluding those with IIEF-EF domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819691|NCT01130532|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12-Week Endpoint in Treatment Satisfaction Scale (TSS) - Patient|The TSS measured participant satisfaction with treatment based on a 13-item questionnaire. The overall score for each of five TSS domains (confidence to complete sexual activity, ease of erection, pleasure from sexual activity, erectile function satisfaction, and satisfaction with orgasm) was converted to a 0-100 scale with higher numbers on the scale indicating greater satisfaction. Least Squares (LS) mean of the change from baseline to endpoint is from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The model included centered-baseline as a covariate and factors of study, treatment group, and pooled site within study, and centered-baseline-by-treatment-group interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|"All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline TSS measurement, excluding those with International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819692|NCT01130532|Secondary|"Change From Baseline to 12-Week in Percentage of Yes Responses to Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) Questions 1-5"|Assessed was the mean change from baseline in the percentage of Yes responses to the SEP diary Questions 1-5. Least Squares (LS) mean of the change from baseline to endpoint is from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The model included centered-baseline as a covariate and factors of study, treatment group, and pooled site within study, and centered-baseline-by-treatment-group interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|"All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline SEP Questions assessment, excluding those with International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||"percentage of yes responses"||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819693|NCT01130532|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12-Week Endpoint in the International Index of Erectile Function - Overall Satisfaction (IIEF-OS) Domain Score|Self-reported overall satisfaction over the past 4 weeks. IIEF-OS is the sum of Questions 13 and 14; each question scored as 1 (low/no satisfaction) through 5 (high satisfaction) with total subscore for the 2 questions of 2 to 10. Least Squares (LS) mean of the change from baseline to endpoint is from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The model included centered-baseline as a covariate and factors of study, treatment group, and pooled site within study, and centered-baseline-by-treatment-group interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|"All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF-OS measurement, excluding those with International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819694|NCT01130532|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12-Week Endpoint in the International Index of Erectile Function - Intercourse Satisfaction (IIEF-IS) Domain Score|Self-reported intercourse satisfaction over the past 4 weeks. IIEF-IS is the sum of Questions 6, 7 and 8 of the IIEF. Scores range from 0 (low/no satisfaction) to 5 (high satisfaction) for each question, with the total possible score for the 3 questions of 0 to 15. Least Squares (LS) mean of the change from baseline to endpoint is from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The model included centered-baseline as a covariate and factors of study, treatment group, and pooled site within study, and centered-baseline-by-treatment-group interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|"All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF-IS measurement, excluding those with International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819695|NCT01130532|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12-Week Endpoint in the International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) Domain Score|Self-reported erectile function over the past 4 weeks. IIEF- EF is the sum of Questions 1-5 and 15 of the IIEF. Questions 1-5 are scored 0 (low/no erectile function) to 5 (high erectile function) and Question 15 is scored 1 (very low confidence) to 5 (very high confidence), for a total score ranging from 1 to 30. Higher scores represent better erectile function. Least Squares (LS) mean of the change from baseline to endpoint is from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The model included centered-baseline as a covariate and factors of study, treatment group, and pooled site within study, and centered-baseline-by-treatment-group interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|"All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF-EF measurement, excluding those with IIEF-EF domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819696|NCT01130532|Primary|Percentage of Participants Having an International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) Domain Score Greater Than or Equal to 26 Through 12-Week Endpoint (Double-Blind Treatment Period)|Self-reported erectile function over the past 4 weeks. IIEF- EF is the sum of Questions 1-5 and 15 of the IIEF. Questions 1-5 are scored 0 (low/no erectile function) to 5 (high erectile function) and Question 15 is scored 1 (very low confidence) to 5 (very high confidence), for a total score ranging from 1 to 30. Higher scores represent better erectile function. Data presented are the percentage of participants who return to normal erectile function (IIEF-EF domain score ≥26) at end of double-blind treatment period (Period III).|Baseline through 12 weeks|"All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF-EF measurement, excluding those with IIEF-EF domain score ≥26 (normal) at baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used."||percentage of participants|||Number
819697|NCT01130597|Secondary|Change in ACR From Baseline to Week 8 Among Participants With Urine ACR ≥ 30 mg/g at Baseline||Baseline and Day 56|Participants with urine ACR ≥ 30 mg/g at baseline and available data at Week 8||mg/g||Standard Error|Mean
819716|NCT01130740|Secondary|PHQ-8|This is an 8-item self-report scale, all items are rated on a score of 0-3, for a total range of 0-24. Higher scores indicate more depressive symptoms. The Mixed Models Analysis described below utilizes a common baseline mean rather than means for the individual arms. This common baseline mean is presented here, and the raw baseline measures per group are presented in the baseline information section.|12-months|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
819717|NCT01130740|Secondary|Short Physical Performance Test Protocol|"This is a series of 5 tests covering the domains of balance (3 tests), gait speed (8 foot walk) and time to rise from a chair and return to the seated position five times. The total score ranges from 0 (worst performance) to 12 (best performance).
The Mixed Models Analysis described below utilizes a common baseline mean rather than means for the individual arms. This common baseline mean is presented here, and the raw baseline measures per group are presented in the baseline information section."|12-months|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
819718|NCT01130740|Primary|Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)|"Self-report measure of lower extremity pain (5 items), stiffness (2 items), and function (17 items) in the past two weeks. All items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from none (0) to severe / extreme (4), for a total of range of 0-96. Higher scores indicate worse symptoms and poorer function. The Mixed Models Analysis described below utilizes a common baseline mean rather than means for the individual arms. This common baseline mean is presented here, and the raw baseline measures per group are presented in the baseline information section."|12-months|All enrolled participants were analyzed, on an intent to treat basis. One enrolled participants in the Usual Care grouped changed clinical care to an enrolled OA Intervention provider after randomization, so that participant was analyzed with the OA intervention group.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
819719|NCT01130831|Secondary|Number of Tablets Per Day||12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior||Number of Tablets||Standard Deviation|Mean
819720|NCT01130831|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Total Daily Dose of Calcium at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819721|NCT01130831|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Vitamin D Dose at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||ng||Standard Deviation|Mean
819722|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With Hypercalcemic Events on Lanthanum Carbonate|Hypercalcemia defined as total serum calcium above 11.22 mg/dL|12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects|||Number
819723|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With Hypercalcemic Events on Calcium-based Phosphate Binder Therapy|Hypercalcemia is defined as total serum calcium level above 11.22 mg/dL.|Baseline|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects|||Number
819724|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With Hypocalcemic Events on Lanthanum Carbonate|Hypocalcemia is defined as serum calcium levels below 8.02 mg/dL|12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects|||Number
819725|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With Hypocalcemic Events on Calcium-based Phosphate Binder Therapy|Hypocalcemia is defined as serum calcium levels below 8.02 mg/dL|Baseline|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects|||Number
819726|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in 1,25-Hydroxy Vitamin D Levels at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy. Note that there are a high number of missing values (n=38) for this outcome which does not allow for any meaningful comparison.||percent change in vitamin D||Standard Deviation|Mean
819727|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in 25-Hydroxy Vitamin D Levels at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy. Note that there are a high number of missing values (n=36) for this outcome which does not allow for any meaningful comparison.||percent change in vitamin D||Standard Deviation|Mean
819728|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in iPTH Levels at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percent change in iPTH levels||Standard Deviation|Mean
819729|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Calcium-Phosphorous Product Levels at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percent change in calcium-phosphorous||Standard Deviation|Mean
819730|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Calcium Levels at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percent change in calcium levels||Standard Deviation|Mean
819731|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Phosphorous Levels at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percent change in phosphorous levels||Standard Deviation|Mean
819732|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects That Maintained Control of Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) Levels on Lanthanum Carbonate Therapy|iPTH levels are controlled if they meet the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) target for iPTH of 150-300 pg/mL|12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects|||Number
819733|NCT01130831|Primary|Percent of Subjects That Achieved Controlled Serum Phosphorous Levels on Lanthanum Carbonate|Phosphorous levels are controlled if they meet the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) target for serum phosphorous of 3.5-5.5 mg/dL.|12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819734|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects That Maintained Control of Serum Calcium-Phosphorous Product Levels on Lanthanum Carbonate Therapy|Calcium-phosphorous product levels are controlled if they meet the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) target for serum calcium-phosphorous product of <55 mg^2/dL^2.|12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects|||Number
819735|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects That Maintained Control of Serum Calcium Levels on Lanthanum Carbonate|Calcium levels are controlled if they meet the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) target for serum calcium of 8.4-9.5 mg/dL.|12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects|||Number
819736|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects That Maintained Control of Serum Phosphorous Levels on Lanthanum Carbonate|Phosphorous levels are controlled if they meet the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) target for serum phosphorous of 3.5-5.5 mg/dL.|12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects|||Number
819737|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects That Achieved Controlled Serum Calcium-Phosphorous Product Levels on Lanthanum Carbonate Therapy|Calcium-phosphorous product levels are controlled if they meet the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) target for serum calcium-phosphorous product of <55 mg^2/dL^2.|12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819738|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects That Achieved Controlled Serum Calcium-Phosphorous Product Levels on Calcium-based Phosphate Binder Therapy|Calcium-phosphorous product levels are controlled if they meet the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) target for serum calcium-phosphorous product of <55 mg^2/dL^2.|Baseline|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819739|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects That Achieved Controlled Serum Calcium Levels on Lanthanum Carbonate Therapy|Calcium levels are controlled if they meet the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) target for serum calcium of 8.4-9.5 mg/dL.|12 months|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819740|NCT01130831|Secondary|Percent of Subjects That Achieved Controlled Serum Calcium Levels on Calcium-based Phosphate Binder Therapy|Calcium levels are controlled if they meet the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) target for serum calcium of 8.4-9.5 mg/dL.|Baseline|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819741|NCT01130831|Primary|Percent of Subjects That Achieved Controlled Serum Phosphorous Levels on Calcium-based Phosphate Binder Therapy|Phosphorous levels are controlled if they meet the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) target for serum phosphorous of 3.5-5.5 mg/dL.|Baseline|Full Analysis Set included subjects of the Safety Analysis Set who had values for serum phosphorous, serum calcium, and intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) while on prior calcium-based phosphate binder therapy.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819742|NCT01130844|Secondary|Cumulative Amount of MMX Mesalamine Major Metabolite (Ac-5-ASA) Recovered in Urine at Steady State||Over a 24-hour period starting on day 7|PKS||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819743|NCT01130844|Secondary|Cumulative Amount of MMX Mesalamine (5-ASA) Recovered in Urine at Steady State||Over a 24-hour period starting on day 7|PKS||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
819744|NCT01130844|Primary|CL of MMX Mesalamine Major Metabolite (Ac-5-ASA) at Steady State||Over a 24-hour period starting on day 7|PKS||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
819745|NCT01130844|Primary|Tmax of MMX Mesalamine Major Metabolite (Ac-5-ASA) at Steady State||Over a 24-hour period starting on day 7|PKS||hours||Full Range|Median
819746|NCT01130844|Primary|Cmax of MMX Mesalamine Major Metabolite (Ac-5-ASA) at Steady State||Over a 24-hour period starting on day 7|PKS||ug/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819747|NCT01130844|Primary|AUC of MMX Mesalamine Major Metabolite (Ac-5-ASA) at Steady State||2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 16, and 24 hours post-dose on day 7|PKS||ug*h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819748|NCT01130844|Primary|Total Body Clearance (CL) of MMX Mesalamine (5-ASA) at Steady State|Clearance of a substance from the blood by the kidneys.|Over a 24-hour period starting on day 7|PKS||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
819749|NCT01130844|Primary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of MMX Mesalamine (5-ASA) at Steady State|Tmax is the time after administration of a drug when the maximum plasma concentration in the body is reached.|Over a 24-hour period starting on day 7|PKS||hours||Full Range|Median
819750|NCT01130844|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of MMX Mesalamine (5-ASA) at Steady State|Cmax is a term that refers to the maximum (or peak) concentration that a drug achieves in the body after the drug has been administrated.|Over a 24-hour period starting on day 7|PKS||ug/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819751|NCT01130844|Secondary|Percentage of Dose Absorbed For MMX Mesalamine (5-ASA) in Urine at Steady State|The percentage of the dose absorbed was calculated as: 100 x (Xu0-24h 5-ASA + [0.7847* Xu0-24h Ac-5-ASA])/dose, where 0.7847 is the ratio of the molecular weight of 5-ASA (153.14) to the molecular weight of Ac-5-ASA (195.15). Xu0-24h is equal to the cumulative amount recovered in urine in the time interval of 0 to 24 hours.|Over a 24-hour period starting on day 7|PKS||percentage of dose absorbed||Standard Deviation|Mean
819752|NCT01130844|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC) of MMX Mesalamine (5-ASA) at Steady State|AUC can be used as a measure of drug exposure. It is derived from drug concentration and time so it gives a measure how much and how long a drug stays in a body.|2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 16, and 24 hours post-dose on day 7|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) consisted of all subjects in the Safety Analysis Set who generated sufficient plasma samples to allow reliable determination of Cmax and AUC. The Safety Analysis Set consisted of subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product and had at least 1 post-dose safety assessment.||ug*h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819753|NCT01130883|Secondary|Termination of Treatment Due to Noncompliance|Number of participants who discontinued Klacid SR treatment early due to noncompliance with the recommended study medication regimen.|Day 8 - 16|A total of 3128 participants were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
819754|NCT01130883|Secondary|Compliance|Number of participants who took their medication according to the prescribed regimen (dose and duration) during the study.|Day 8 - 16|||Participants|||Number
819755|NCT01130883|Secondary|Study Drug Given as the First, Second or Third Antimicrobial Treatment|Number of participants who received Klacid SR as the first, second or third (further) antimicrobial agent.|Day 0|||Participants|||Number
819756|NCT01130883|Secondary|Chest X-ray in Case of Community-Acquired Pneumonia (CAP)|Number of participants in which X-ray findings were suggestive of pneumonia. In participants where the physician suspected CAP, a chest X-ray was performed and reviewed to determine whether findings were indicative of pneumonia.|Day 0|Chest X-ray was performed in 294 of the participants for whom the physician suspected pneumonia.||Participants|||Number
819757|NCT01130883|Secondary|Auscultation|Participants with abnormal auscultation findings (abnormal breath sounds) and type of findings (wheezing, crackles, both, or not reported).|Day 0, Day 8-16|Of the 3128 participants included in the analysis, auscultation findings were not reported for 38 participants at the initial visit and 116 participants at the final visit.||Participants|||Number
819758|NCT01130883|Secondary|Dyspnea and Its Type|Presence of dyspnea (difficulty breathing) and type of dyspnea (exertional, resting, both, or not reported).|Day 0, Day 8-16|||Participants|||Number
819759|NCT01130883|Secondary|Cough and Its Character|Number of participants in which cough was present, and if present, type of cough (irritating, productive, both or not reported)|Day 0, Day 8-16|||Participants|||Number
819760|NCT01130883|Secondary|Bacteriological Investigation (if Available)|The type of agent present in the infection was assessed using bacteriological investigation. Occurrence of the most common agents was reported. Participants may have had more than one pathogen present. Test results were not available prior to enrollment but were reported during the study.|Day 0|Of the 3128 participants included in the analysis, 225 participants had bacteriological investigations conducted at the Initial visit (Day 0). Some participants had more than one finding.||participants|||Number
819761|NCT01130883|Secondary|Body Temperature|Number of participants in which body temperature was increased (temperature above 37 degrees Celsius).|Day 0, Day 8-16|Of the 3128 participants included in the analysis, body temperature was not reported for 6 participants at the Initial visit, and 14 participants at the Second visit.||Participants|||Number
819762|NCT01130883|Primary|Change in Auscultation Findings, Regression of Chest X-ray Findings (Recorded by the Physician)|Auscultation findings (abnormal breath sounds) were assessed at the initial visit (Day 0) and the second visit (Day 8 -16) by the physician. “Regression of chest X-ray findings” were not recorded as it is not part of routine clinical practice to confirm X-ray regression after the participant has clinically recovered from Community-Acquired Pneumonia (CAP).|Day 0, Day 8 - 16|||participants|||Number
819763|NCT01130883|Primary|Disappearance or Significant Alleviation of Symptoms|"Overall therapeutic response, yes or no was determined by the physician based on subjective response regarding disappearance or significant alleviation of symptoms following treatment. The physician also considered objective findings such as auscultation and or chest X-ray results (if available) when determining overall therapeutic response."|Day 8 - 16|A total of 3130 participants were enrolled into the study and 3128 were included in the analysis. Two participants were excluded from the analysis as they did not meet entry criteria (2 participants were less than 18 years of age).||Participants|||Number
819764|NCT01130974|Primary|logMAR Visual Acuity (VA)|Non-inferiority of distance high contrast logMAR lens VA. A negative value indicates improved VA. Lens VA was established for All Study, Dispensed, 2-Week Follow-up Visit, and 1-Month Follow-up Visit|2 week and 1 month follow-up|All eligible, dispensed eyes||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
819765|NCT01130974|Secondary|Symptoms & Complaints|Subject symptoms/complaints were assessed on a scale from 0 to 100, with 0 denoting least favorable symptoms/complaints and 100 being the most favorable score.|Summarized over all follow-up visits through one month|All eligible dispensed eyes, summarized over all follow-up visits through 1 month.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
819766|NCT01130974|Secondary|Lens Movement|Lens movement was assessed as adequate, excessive (> 0.6 mm), insufficient (< 0.2 mm), or adherence. Suboptimal lens movement was defined as a rating other than adequate.|Summarized over all follow-up visits through one month|All Eligible, Dispensed Eyes, Over All Visits summarizes the worst case over the dispensing and all follow-up visits.||eyes|Participants||Number
819767|NCT01130974|Secondary|Lens Centration|"Lens centration was assessed as excellent(fully centered), good (slight decentration, no corneal exposure), fair (decentration, intermittent corneal exposure), or poor (incomplete corneal coverage and/or edge lift).
Suboptimal lens centration was defined as a rating other than excellent."|Summarized over all follow-up visits through 1 month|All Eligible, Dispensed Eyes, Over All Visits summarizes the worst case over the dispensing and all follow-up visits.||eyes|Participants||Number
819768|NCT01130974|Secondary|Lens Deposits|Degree of lens deposits was assessed as none, light, medium, or heavy. Suboptimal lens deposits were defined as a degree rating of medium or heavy. Measured over all visits through one month|Summarized over all follow-up visits through one month|All Eligible, Dispensed Eyes, Over All Visits summarizes the worst case over the dispensing and all follow-up visits.||eyes|Participants||Number
819769|NCT01130974|Secondary|Lens Wettability|Lens wettability was rated as Grade 4-0. Grade 4 = 100% of anterior surface wettable (optimal); Grade 3 = presence of small (< 0.1 mm), individual, discrete non-wetting areas (slight); Grade 2 = presence of single area of non-wetting between 0.1 mm and 0.5 mm in size (mild); Grade 1 = presence of several areas on non-wetting, each between 0.1 mm and 0.5 mm in size (moderate); Grade 0 = presence of one or more non-wetting areas > 0.5 mm in size (severe). Suboptimal lens wettability was defined as a rating other than Grade 4, ie slight, mild, moderate, or severe ratings. Over All Visits summarizes the worst case over the dispensing and all follow-up visits.|Summarized over all follow-up visits through 1 month|All Eligible, Dispensed Eyes, Over All Visits summarizes the worst case over the dispensing and all follow-up visits.||eyes|Participants||Number
819770|NCT01130974|Primary|logMAR Visual Acuity (VA)|Non-inferiority of distance high contrast logMAR lens VA. A negative value indicates improved VA. Lens VA was established for All Study, Dispensed, 2-Week Follow-up Visit, and 1-Month Follow-up Visit|Summarized over all visits, and dispensed visit|All eligible, dispensed eyes||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
819771|NCT01130974|Primary|Slit Lamp Findings|Graded Slit lamp findings (epithelial edema, epithelial microcysts, corneal staining, limbal injection, bulbar injection, upper lid tarsal conjunctival abnormalities, corneal neovascularization, and corneal infiltrates) > grade 2 over all follow-up visits, summarizes the worst case over all follow-up visits. Graded 0-4 with 0=none and 4=severe|Summarized over all follow-up visits through 1 month|All dispensed eyes with any slit lamp findings > grade 2||eyes|Participants||Number
819772|NCT01131052|Primary|Mean of Weekly Fasting Blood Glucose Concentration|Mean weekly blood glucose concentration at 3 months|3 months|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819773|NCT01131052|Secondary|Mean of Glycosylated Hemoglobin (hbA1c)|Mean glycosylated hemoglobin (hbA1c) at baseline. The A1C test result is reported as a percentage. The higher the percentage, the higher a person’s blood glucose levels have been. A normal A1C level is below 5.7 percent.|6 months|||percent of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
819774|NCT01131052|Secondary|Mean of Glycosylated Hemoglobin (hbA1c)|Mean glycosylated hemoglobin (hbA1c) at baseline. The A1C test result is reported as a percentage. The higher the percentage, the higher a person’s blood glucose levels have been. A normal A1C level is below 5.7 percent.|3 months|||percent of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
819775|NCT01131052|Secondary|Mean of Daily Blood Glucose Concentration|Mean of daily blood glucose concentration at baseline|Baseline|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819776|NCT01131052|Secondary|Mean of Glycosylated Hemoglobin (hbA1c)|Mean glycosylated hemoglobin (hbA1c) at baseline. The A1C test result is reported as a percentage. The higher the percentage, the higher a person’s blood glucose levels have been. A normal A1C level is below 5.7 percent.|Baseline|||percent of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
819777|NCT01131052|Secondary|Mean Blood Glucose Concentration|Mean blood glucose concentration at baseline|Baseline|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819778|NCT01131052|Primary|Percent of Participants With a Mean Blood Glucose Concentration of Less Than 40 mg/dL|Mean weekly blood glucose concentration less than 40 mg/dL at 3 months|3 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
819779|NCT01131052|Primary|Percent of Participants With a Mean Blood Glucose Concentration of Less Than 70 mg/dL|Mean weekly blood glucose concentration less than 70 mg/dL at 3 months|3 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
819780|NCT01131065|Secondary|Safety and Tolerance|Safety and tolerance to the product administration will be measured by the detection of adverse events or clinically relevant changes in vital signs.|During and after each product administration (during the 12 month treatment period)|||participants|||Number
819781|NCT01131065|Primary|HBsAb Pre-infusion Levels (Trough Levels Before Each Niuliva Administration)||Days 3 to 7, Weeks 2 to 4, Months 2 to 6, and Months 7 to 12|||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819782|NCT01131065|Primary|HBV Recurrence|HBV recurrence is measured by seroconversion or reappearance of HBsAg and HBV DNA positivity|First six and twelve months after liver transplantation|||participants|||Number
819783|NCT01131078|Secondary|Duration of Overall Complete Response|Duration of complete response was calculated as the time in months from the date of randomization to the date of first documentation of CR. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for analysis.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years|ITT Population; Only participants with a best overall response were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819784|NCT01131078|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease (SD)|Duration of SD was calculated as the number of months the participants remained in CR, PR or SD. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for analysis.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population; Only participants with a best overall response of CR, PR, or SD were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819785|NCT01131078|Secondary|Duration of Overall Response|Duration of overall response included participants who achieved a CR or PR.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population; only participants with a best overall response of CR or PR were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819786|NCT01131078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Progressive Disease Within 12 Weeks From Start of Treatment|Early progression was the proportion of participants with progressive disease within 12 weeks from the start of treatment.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and 12|ITT Population; All participants with evaluable data were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819787|NCT01131078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Stable Disease|Stable disease rate was the proportion of participants who achieved CR, PR, or SD.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population; All participants with evaluable data were included in the analysis||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819788|NCT01131078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR|CR: Complete disappearance of all target lesions; PR: At least 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of all target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum of all target lesions;|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population; All participants with evaluable data were included in the analysis||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819820|NCT01131520|Secondary|Alcohol, Smoking & Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) Score|ASSIST's Global Continuum of Illicit Drug Risk Score which ranges from 0 to 308. A higher score is associated with higher risk.|6 month post-baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819789|NCT01131078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by Best Overall Response|Best overall response is defined as the best response recorded from the date of randomization until disease progression or recurrence. Complete response (CR): at least 2 determinations of CR at least 4 weeks apart before progression; Partial response (PR): at least 2 determinations of PR at least 4 weeks apart before progression; Stable disease (SD): at least one SD assessment; Progressive Disease (PD): Disease progression or death due to underlying cancer. CR: Complete disappearance of all target lesions; PR: At least 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of all target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum of all target lesions; PD: At least 20% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of all target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum of longest diameter of all target lesions or the appearance of one or more new lesions; SD: Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for CR or PR or increase in lesions;|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population; All participants with evaluable data were included in the analysis||percentage of participants|||Number
819790|NCT01131078|Primary|Time to Progression (TTP)|TTP is defined as the time from date of randomization until objective tumor progression or death due to any cause. It includes deaths and thus can be correlated to overall survival.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population; only those participants with an event of disease progression or death were included in the analysis||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819791|NCT01131078|Secondary|Time to Progression Excluding Deaths Not Related to Underlying Cancer|The failure event was defined as tumor progression excluding only deaths not related to underlying cancer. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for analysis.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population; only participants with a time to progression event (excluding deaths not related to underlying cancer) were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819792|NCT01131078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Progression Excluding Deaths Not Related to Underlying Cancer|The failure event was defined as tumor progression excluding only deaths not related to underlying cancer.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
819793|NCT01131078|Secondary|Time to Progression Excluding Deaths|The failure event was defined as tumor progression excluding deaths due to any reason. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for analysis.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population; Only participants with a time to progression event (excluding deaths) were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819794|NCT01131078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Progression Excluding Deaths|The failure event was defined as tumor progression excluding deaths due to any reason.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
819795|NCT01131078|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure|Time to treatment failure is defined as a composite endpoint measuring time from date of randomization to discontinuation of treatment for any reason, including disease progression, death, treatment toxicity, insufficient therapeutic response, failure to return, refusing treatment, being unwilling to cooperate and withdrawing consent. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population; only participants with a treatment failure event were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819796|NCT01131078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment Failure|Treatment failure is defined as discontinuation of treatment for any reason, including disease progression, death, treatment toxicity, insufficient therapeutic response, failure to return, refusing treatment, being unwilling to cooperate and withdrawing consent.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
819797|NCT01131078|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from date of randomization until death from any cause; Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for analysis.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population; Only participants with an event (death) were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819798|NCT01131078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died|Overall survival is defined as the time from date of randomization until death from any cause|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
819799|NCT01131078|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression or Death|Disease progression was defined according to National Cancer Institute (NCI) guidelines and best clinical practices.|Randomization, Weeks 3, 6 and 9, and every 3 months up to 5 years or Death|ITT Population;||percentage of participants|||Number
819800|NCT01131130|Secondary|Lens Wettability, Test Lens vs. Air Optix Aqua|Lens wettability was assessed at each visit as Grade 4 – 0, with 4=optimal (100% of anterior surface wettable) and 0=severe (Presence of one or more non-wetting areas > 0.5 mm in size).|7 days|All eligible, dispensed eyes||eyes|Participants||Number
819801|NCT01131130|Primary|Comfort Throughout the Day - Test Lens vs. Acuvue Oasys|Subjective measurements of lens comfort were rated on a scale from 0 to 100, where 100 was the most favorable.|7 days|All eligible, dispensed eyes||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819802|NCT01131130|Primary|Comfort Throughout the Day - Test Lens vs. Air Optix Aqua Lens|Subjective measurements of lens comfort were rated on a scale from 0 to 100, where 100 was the most favorable.|7 days|All eligible dispensed eyes||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
819803|NCT01131130|Secondary|Lens Wettability, Test Lens vs. Acuvue Oasys|Lens wettability was assessed at each visit as Grade 4 – 0, with 4=optimal (100% of anterior surface wettable) and 0=severe (Presence of one or more non-wetting areas > 0.5 mm in size).|7 days|All eligible, dispensed eyes||eyes|Participants||Number
819806|NCT01131299|Secondary|Lipoprotein Insulin Resistance Index (LIRI) After 12-14 Weeks Intervention, Compared to Baseline for Alpha-cyclodextrin (a-CD) and Placebo Groups After 12-14 Weeks, Compared to Baseline|LIRI was measured at the end of each study arm (a-CD or placebo). a-CD (2g) was taken orally three times a day for 12-14 weeks. Placebo (2 tablets) was taken orally for 12-14 weeks. There was a one-week washout period between each arm.|24-28 weeks|The LIRI score is a composite of six lipoprotein parameters (VLDL, HDL and LDL, and concentrations of large VLDL, large HDL and small LDL subclasses) measured by NMR spectroscopy, which may be apparent years before the onset of overt hyperglycemia. LIRI scores range from zero, the most insulin sensitive, to 100, the most insulin resistant.||percentage||Standard Error|Mean
819807|NCT01131299|Secondary|Serum Glucose Levels After 12-14 Weeks Intervention, Compared to Baseline for Alpha-cyclodextrin (a-CD) and Placebo Groups After 12-14 Weeks, Compared to Baseline|Serum glucose levels was measured at the end of each study arm (a-CD or placebo). a-CD (2g) was taken orally three times a day for 12-14 weeks. Placebo (2 tablets) was taken orally for 12-14 weeks. There was a one-week washout period between each arm.|24-28 weeks|||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
819808|NCT01131299|Secondary|Small LDL Particle Number (by NMR Spectrometry of Lipoproteins) After 12-14 Weeks Intervention, Compared to Baseline for Alpha-cyclodextrin (a-CD) and Placebo Groups After 12-14 Weeks, Compared to Baseline|Small LDL particle numbers were measured at the end of each study arm (a-CD or placebo). a-CD (2g) was taken orally three times a day for 12-14 weeks. Placebo (2 tablets) was taken orally for 12-14 weeks. There was a one-week washout period between each arm.|24-28 weeks|||nmol/L||Standard Error|Mean
819809|NCT01131299|Primary|Total Serum Cholesterol Levels for Alpha-cyclodextrin (a-CD) and Placebo Groups After 12-14 Weeks, Compared to Baseline|Total cholesterol levels were measured at the end of each study arm (a-CD or placebo). a-CD (2g) was taken orally three times a day for 12-14 weeks. Placebo (2 tablets) was taken orally for 12-14 weeks. There was a one-week washout period between each arm.|24-28 weeks|||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
819810|NCT01131455|Primary|CT Scan for Fusion Analysis|There will be no outcome analysis for the CT scan performed on the 10 patients due to the death of the primary investigator.|8 weeks post op.||||||
819811|NCT01131494|Primary|Oropharyngeal Swallowing Score|Based on videofluoroscopy, were awarded points for the swallowing events according to their clinical relevance. The sum of these points results in the OSP (Oropharyngeal Swallowing Score), so that higher scores signify greater impairment in swallowing. OSP-score range from 0 to 243.5. This tool is being validated for that group.|five weeks|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819812|NCT01131494|Secondary|Quality of Life|Measured by the Swal-qol (Quality of life in Swallowing disorders). In this questionnaire the score range from 0 to 100 and higher scores is better quality of life.|five weeks|||scores in a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
819813|NCT01131507|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Growth Percentiles at Month 3, 6, 9 and 12|Participant’s ability to thrive was evaluated through growth percentiles for weight-for-age, length-for-age and weight-for-length recorded on Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) growth charts during each treatment visit.|Baseline, Month 3, 6, 9 and 12|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'n' specifies number of participants who were evaluable for various categories at each time point.||growth percentile||Full Range|Median
819814|NCT01131507|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|TEAE was any event not present prior to exposure to study drug or any event already present that worsened in either intensity or frequency following exposure to test drug. Serious AE (SAE) was any event that resulted in death, immediately life threatening, hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect. Number of participants with TEAEs, SAEs, TEAE’s relationship to study drug (unrelated, possible and probable) and on the basis of severity (mild [minimal/no treatment and did not interfere with daily activities], moderate [resulted in a low level of inconvenience or concern with the therapeutic measures and may have caused some interference with functioning] and severe [interrupted participant’s usual daily activity, may have required systemic drug therapy or other treatment and were usually incapacitating]) with a frequency threshold of above 5% were reported.|Up to Month 12 or early termination|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
819815|NCT01131520|Secondary|Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Risk Assessment Battery Subscale Score|HIV Drug Use Risk Assessment Battery Subscale Score ranges from 0 to 22. A higher score is considered to be associated with higher risk.|12 month post-baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819816|NCT01131520|Secondary|Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Risk Assessment Battery Subscale|HIV Drug Use Risk Assessment Battery Subscale Score ranges from 0 to 22. A higher score is considered to be associated with higher risk.|6 month post-baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819817|NCT01131520|Secondary|Hair Testing|Predicted Probabilities for testing positive on the Radioimmunoassay (RIA) Hair Testing for opiates, cocaine, amphetamine and THC, calculated from generalized estimating equations.|12 month post-baseline|The sample includes participants who provided usable hair testing data at baseline||predicted probability of positive test||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819818|NCT01131520|Secondary|Hair Testing|The predicted probabilities for testing positive on Radioimmunoassay (RIA) Hair Testing for opiates, cocaine, amphetamine and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), calculated from generalized estimating equations.|6 month post-baseline|The sample includes participants who provided usable hair testing data at baseline.||predicted probability of positive test||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819819|NCT01131520|Secondary|Alcohol, Smoking & Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) Score|ASSIST's Global Continuum of Illicit Drug Risk Score which ranges from 0 to 308. A higher score is associated with higher risk.|12 months post-baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819821|NCT01131520|Secondary|Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Drug Use Risk Assessment Battery Subscale|HIV Drug Use Risk Assessment Battery Subscale Score ranges from 0 to 22. A higher score is considered to be associated with higher risk.|3 months post-baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819822|NCT01131520|Primary|Hair Testing|The number of participants testing positive on Radioimmunoassay (RIA) Hair Testing for opiates, cocaine, amphetamine and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)|3 month post-baseline|The number of participants of the total sample who agreed to provide an analyzable hair specimen. Hair testing was not available for subjects not interviewed, those who refused testing, or who were unable to provide a sufficient quantity of hair for testing.||Participants|||Count of Participants
819823|NCT01131520|Primary|Alcohol, Smoking & Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) Score|The ASSIST's Global Continuum of Illicit Drug Risk was used. A higher score is considered more severe risk. The scores range from 0 to 308.|3 months post-baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819824|NCT01131585|Primary|Change in Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) From Baseline to Month 12|Mean change in Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letters at 12 months compared to baseline was measured using Visual acuity (VA). VA accounts for the number of letters a participant can see using Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (EDTRS)-like visual acuity testing charts, from a sitting position at a testing distance of 4 meters. BCVA means that the participant’s refraction is already taken into account when VA is determined. A higher BCVA number at 12 months in reference to baseline indicates improved BCVA.|12 months|Full Analysis Set consisted of all participants who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post-baseline assessment for BCVA. No patient completed the 12 months observational period due to study early termination; therefore, the last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used with data from 11.1 months.||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
819825|NCT01131676|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With the Composite Microvascular Outcome|"Composite microvascular outcome defined as:
Initiation of retinal photocoagulation
Vitreous haemorrhage
Diabetes-related blindness, or
New or worsening nephropathy defined as:
New onset of macroalbuminuria; or
Doubling of serum creatinine level accompanied by an eGFR (based on modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) formula) ≤45 mL/min/1.73m2; or
Initiation of continuous renal replacement therapy, or
Death due to renal disease. Percentage of patients with the event are presented."|From randomisation to individual end of observation, up to 4.6 years|TS (evaluable cases)||percentage of participants|||Number
819826|NCT01131676|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With New Onset Macroalbuminuria|New onset macroalbuminuria defined as UACR >300 mg/g. Percentage of patients with the event are presented.|From randomisation to individual end of observation, up to 4.6 years|TS (evaluable cases)||percentage of participants|||Number
819827|NCT01131676|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With New Onset Albuminuria|"New onset albuminuria defined as urine albumin / creatinine ratio (UACR) ≥30 mg/g.
Percentage of patients with the event are presented."|From randomisation to individual end of observation, up to 4.6 years|TS (evaluable cases)||percentage of participants|||Number
819828|NCT01131676|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Heart Failure Requiring Hospitalisation (Adjudicated)|Heart failure requiring hospitalisation (adjudicated). Percentage of patients with the event are presented.|From randomisation to individual end of observation, up to 4.6 years|TS||percentage of participants|||Number
819829|NCT01131676|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Silent MI|"Silent MI; defined as presence in the ECG of:
Any Q-wave in leads V2-V3 ≥0.02 seconds or QS complex in leads V2 and V3
Q-wave ≥0.03 seconds and ≥0.1 mV deep or QS complex in leads I, II, aVL, aVF, or V4-V6 in any two leads of a contiguous lead grouping (I, aVL, V6; V4-V6; II, III, and aVF)
R-wave ≥0.04 seconds in V1-V2 and R/S ≥1 with a concordant positive T-wave in the absence of a conduction defect.
It was also required that there had been no adjudicated and confirmed event of either acute MI, hospitalisation for unstable angina, coronary revascularisation procedures or stent thrombosis following randomisation up to and including the date of the specified ECG measurement.
Percentage of patients with the event are presented."|From randomisation to individual end of observation, up to 4.6 years|TS (evaluable cases)||percentage of participants|||Number
819830|NCT01131676|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With the Composite of All Events Adjudicated (4-point MACE): CV Death (Including Fatal Stroke and Fatal MI), Non-fatal MI (Excluding Silent MI), Non-fatal Stroke and Hospitalization for Unstable Angina Pectoris|"The composite of all events adjudicated (4-point MACE): cardiovascular death (including fatal stroke and fatal myocardial infarction), non-fatal myocardial infarction (excluding silent MI), non-fatal stroke and hospitalization for unstable angina pectoris.This is a key secondary endpoint of the trial.
Percentage of patients with the event are presented."|From randomisation to individual end of observation, up to 4.6 years|TS||percentage of participants|||Number
819831|NCT01131676|Primary|Time to the First Occurrence of Any of the Following Adjudicated Components of the Primary Composite Endpoint (3-point MACE): CV Death (Including Fatal Stroke and Fatal MI), Non-fatal MI (Excluding Silent MI), and Non-fatal Stroke.|"Time to the first occurrence of any of the following adjudicated components of the primary composite endpoint (3-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)): cardiovascular (CV) death (including fatal stroke and fatal myocardial infarction (MI)), non-fatal MI (excluding silent MI), and non-fatal stroke.
Percentage of patients with the event are presented."|From randomisation to individual end of observation, up to 4.6 years|TS||percentage of participants|||Number
819832|NCT01138475|Secondary|24 Hour Urine Calcium|This secondary outcome measure is change in 24-hour urine calcium from baseline to final measure at 6 weeks, differences in the 3 arms were compared|6 weeks|Missing data from paricalcitol and cholecalciferol arms||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819833|NCT01138475|Secondary|Bone Specific Alkaline Phosphatase|This secondary outcome measure is change in bone specific alkaline phosphatase from baseline to final measure at 6 weeks, differences in the 3 arms were compared|6 weeks|||u/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819834|NCT01138475|Secondary|N-Telopeptide Cross Linked Urine|This secondary outcome measure is change in N-Telopeptide cross linked urine from baseline to final measure at 6 weeks, differences in the 3 arms were compared|6 weeks|Missing data from cholecalciferol and placebo participant arms||nmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
819835|NCT01138475|Secondary|Osteocalcin|This secondary outcome measure is change in osteocalcin from baseline to final measure at 6 weeks differences in the 3 arms were compared|6 weeks|Missing data from all 3 participant arms||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819839|NCT01138475|Secondary|Alkaline Phosphatase|This secondary outcome measure is change in alkaline phosphatase from baseline to final measure at 6 weeks differences were compared between the 3 arms of the study|6 weeks|missing 1 participant data in the paricalcitol group||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
819840|NCT01138475|Primary|The Primary Outcome Measure With iPTH|Change in iPTH was compared in each arm from baseline to final measure at 6 weeks the differences were compared in the 3 arms of the study|6 weeks|missing data in paricalcitol and placebo group||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
819841|NCT01138501|Secondary|Frequency of Adverse Events (AEs)|Adverse event was defined as events occurring after administration of trial product. Severe AEs: considerable interference with subject's daily activities, unacceptable. Moderate AEs: Marked symptoms, moderate interference with the patient's daily activities. Mild AEs: No or transient symptoms, no interference with the patient's daily activities. Serious AE: AE that at any dose results in any of the following: death, a life-threatening experience, in-subject hospitalization/prolongation of existing hospitalisation, persistent/significant disability/incapacity/congenital anomaly/birth defect.|The adverse events were collected throughout the trial, corresponding to an average of 138 days per subject|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product.||events|||Number
819842|NCT01138501|Primary|The Incidence Rate of FVIII Inhibitors (Greater Than or Equal to 0.6 Bethesda Units (BU))|The incidence rate of FVIII inhibitors was calculated by including all patients with inhibitors in the nominator and including all patients with a minimum 50 exposure plus any patients with less than 50 exposures but with inhibitors in denominator.|The adverse events were collected throughout the trial, corresponding to an average of 138 days per subject.|The safety analysis set includes all 63 subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product. The analysis of the primary endpoint included all subjects with at least 50 exposure days and/or with inhibitors. A total of 59 subjects had 50 exposure days (EDs).||N with Inhibitors / N with ≥50 EDs|||Number
819843|NCT01138514|Secondary|Number of Participant With Clinical Success on the Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA)|Clinical success was defined as a score of clear (0) or almost clear (1) at Week 10.|10 weeks|per-protocol population||participants|||Number
819844|NCT01138514|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Non-inflammatory Lesions||10 weeks|Per protocol population||percentage of lesion reduction||Standard Deviation|Mean
819845|NCT01138514|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Inflammatory Lesions||10 weeks|Per protocol population||percentage of lesion reduction||Standard Deviation|Mean
819846|NCT01138657|Secondary|Change in VFQ-25 Ocular Pain Subscore From Best State Achieved Prior to Week 6 to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"The National Eye Institute VFQ-25 is an ocular disease-specific survey that measures the influence of visual disability and visual symptoms on generic health domains such as emotional well-being and social functioning, in addition to task-oriented domains related to daily visual functioning.
The VFQ-25 consists of a base set of 25 vision-targeted questions plus an additional single-item general health rating question.
The ocular pain subscore is calculated from the answers to 2 ocular pain-related questions and ranges from 0 to 100, where higher scores or increases in score indicate less pain."|Baseline to Week 6 and Final/Early Termination Visit (up 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with values at both time points; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used; participants with no values after Week 6 were excluded.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819847|NCT01138657|Secondary|Change in VFQ-25 Near Vision Subscore From Best State Achieved Prior to Week 6 to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"The National Eye Institute VFQ-25 is an ocular disease-specific survey that measures the influence of visual disability and visual symptoms on generic health domains such as emotional well-being and social functioning, in addition to task-oriented domains related to daily visual functioning.
The VFQ-25 consists of a base set of 25 vision-targeted questions plus an additional single-item general health rating question.
The distance vision subscore is calculated from the answers to 3 near vision-related questions and ranges from 0 to 100, where higher scores or increases in score indicate better vision-related functioning."|Baseline to Week 6 and Final/Early Termination Visit (up 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with values at both time points; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used; participants with no values after Week 6 were excluded.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819848|NCT01138657|Secondary|Change in VFQ-25 Distance Vision Subscore From Best State Achieved Prior to Week 6 to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"The National Eye Institute VFQ-25 is an ocular disease-specific survey that measures the influence of visual disability and visual symptoms on generic health domains such as emotional well-being and social functioning, in addition to task-oriented domains related to daily visual functioning.
The VFQ-25 consists of a base set of 25 vision-targeted questions plus an additional single-item general health rating question.
The distance vision subscore is calculated from the answers to 3 distance vision-related questions and ranges from 0 to 100, where higher scores or increases in score indicate better vision-related functioning."|Baseline to Week 6 and Final/Early Termination Visit (up 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with values at both time points; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used; participants with no values after Week 6 were excluded.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819849|NCT01138657|Secondary|Change in Visual Functioning Questionnaire 25 (VFQ-25) Composite Score From Best State Achieved Prior to Week 6 to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"The National Eye Institute VFQ-25 is an ocular disease-specific survey that measures the influence of visual disability and visual symptoms on generic health domains such as emotional well-being and social functioning, in addition to task-oriented domains related to daily visual functioning.
The VFQ-25 consists of a base set of 25 vision-targeted questions plus an additional single-item general health rating question. The overall composite score ranges from 0 to 100, where higher scores or increases in score indicate better vision-related functioning."|Baseline to Week 6 and Final/Early Termination Visit (up 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with values at both time points; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used; participants with no values after Week 6 were excluded.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819850|NCT01138657|Secondary|Percent Change in Central Retinal Thickness in Each Eye From Best State Achieved Prior to Week 6 to the Final/Early Termination Visit|Central retinal thickness was measured using optical coherence tomography and assessed by a central reader.|Baseline to Week 6 and Final/Early Termination Visit (up to 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with values at both time points; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used; participants with no values after Week 6 were excluded.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
819851|NCT01138657|Secondary|Time to Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Evidence of Macular Edema in At Least 1 Eye On or After Week 6|"Optical coherence tomography was performed at every visit using 1 of 3 approved machines. Images were evaluated by a central reader. Macular edema was defined as cystoid macular edema.
OCT evidence of macular edema on or after Week 6 was to be counted as an event. Dropouts due to reasons other than OCT evidence of macular edema were to be considered as censored observations at the time of dropping out."|From Baseline until the Final Visit (up to 80 weeks)|Intent to treat population with no macular edema at Baseline||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
819852|NCT01138657|Secondary|Change In Logarithm of the Minimum Angle of Resolution (LogMAR) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) In Each Eye From Best State Achieved Prior to Week 6 to the Final/Early Termination Visit|Using corrective lenses based on that visit's refraction testing, participant's best corrected visual acuity was measured using an Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) logMAR chart.|From Baseline to Week 6 and Final/Early Termination Visit (up to 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with values at both time points; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used; participants with no values after Week 6 were excluded.||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
819853|NCT01138657|Secondary|Change in Vitreous Haze (VH) Grade in Each Eye From Best State Achieved Prior to Week 6 to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"Vitreous haze was measured using dilated indirect ophthalmoscopy (DIO) and assessed by the Investigator according to National Eye Institute (NEI) and SUN criteria:
Grade 0: No evident vitreous haze;
Grade 0.5+: Slight blurring of the optic disc margin because of the haze; normal striations and reflex of the nerve fiber layer cannot be visualized;
Grade 1+: Permits a better definition of both the optic nerve head and the retinal vessels (compared to higher grades);
Grade 2+: Permits better visualization of the retinal vessels (compared to higher grades);
Grade 3+: Permits the observer to see the optic nerve head, but the borders are quite blurry;
Grade 4+: Optic nerve head is obscured."|From Baseline to Week 6 and Final/Early Termination Visit (up to 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with values at both time points; last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used; participants with no values after Week 6 were excluded.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819854|NCT01138657|Secondary|Change in Anterior Chamber (AC) Cell Grade in Each Eye From Best State Achieved Prior to Week 6 to the Final/Early Termination Visit|"Slit lamp examinations were conducted at each visit to assess AC cell count. The number of AC cells observed within a 1 mm × 1 mm slit beam was used to determine the grade according to the Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) criteria:
Grade 0 = < 1 cell;
Grade 0.5+ = 1-5 cells;
Grade 1+ = 6-15 cells;
Grade 2+ = 16-25 cells;
Grade 3+ = 26-50 cells;
Grade 4+ = > 50 cells."|From Baseline to Week 6 and at the Final/Early Termination Visit (up to 80 weeks)|Intent-to-treat population with values at both time points (best state achieved prior to Week 6 and at least 1 post-week 6 value); last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used; participants with no values after Week 6 were excluded.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819855|NCT01138657|Primary|Time to Treatment Failure on or After Week 6|"Time to treatment failure was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methods. Treatment failures on or after Week 6 were counted as events. Dropouts for reasons other than treatment failure at any time during the study were censored at the dropout date. To be considered a treatment failure, ≥ 1 of these criteria had to be present in at least 1 eye:
New active, inflammatory chorioretinal or retinal vascular lesions relative to Baseline
Inability to achieve ≤ 0.5+ at Week 6 or a 2-step increase relative to best state achieved at all visits after Week 6 in anterior chamber cell grade or vitreous haze grade
Worsening of best corrected visual acuity by ≥ 15 letters relative to best state achieved.
Per protocol, the primary analysis was performed in the Main Study population which included all randomized participants recruited outside Japan; for completeness results are also reported below for the Integrated dataset which includes participants recruited in Japan."|From Baseline until end of study (up to 80 weeks)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population which included all randomized participants; 6 participants at 2 sites were excluded from the ITT due to incomplete efficacy source data and compliance issues.||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
819856|NCT01138735|Secondary|Change in Inflammatory Lesion Counts From Baseline||Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|ITT Population, LOCF||lesion count change||Standard Deviation|Mean
819857|NCT01138735|Secondary|Percent Change in Total Lesion Counts From Baseline||Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|ITT Population, LOCF||percentage of change in lesion count||Standard Deviation|Mean
819858|NCT01138735|Primary|Change From Baseline in Total Lesion Counts||Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|ITT population, LOCF||lesion count change||Standard Deviation|Mean
819859|NCT01138735|Primary|Success Rate|Percentage of subjects rated Clear or Almost Clear with at least 2 grades reduction from Baseline on the Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA)|Baseline to Week 12 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|Intent to treat (ITT) population, LOCF||percentage of participant|||Number
819860|NCT01138826|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, and 168 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
819861|NCT01138826|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, and 168 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
819862|NCT01138826|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, and 168 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
819863|NCT01138826|Primary|AUC From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the time of the last measurable concentration (AUClast).|0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, and 168 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr*ng/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
819932|NCT01139658|Secondary|Duration Between Surgery and First Dose of Pradaxa||11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
819864|NCT01138826|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0-∞)]|AUC (0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞). It is obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞).|0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, and 168 hours post dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr*ng/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
819865|NCT01138969|Secondary|Peptic Ulcer Bleeding|participants with peptic ulcer bleeding within 6 months|6 months|Intention to treat||participants|||Number
819866|NCT01138969|Primary|Recurrent Peptic Ulcer|Number of participants with recurrent peptic ulcer within 6 months|6 months|Intention to treat||participants|||Number
819867|NCT01138995|Secondary|User Satisfaction|Total user satisfaction as measured on 12 item User Satisfaction survey with maximum score 24, minimum 0, where higher score indicated greater satisfaction with device,|Week 30|All randomized subjects were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819868|NCT01138995|Secondary|Berg Balance Scale (BBS) Score|Clinical measurement of balance was recorded using the Berg Balance Scale which is a highly reliable and valid test used among persons with stroke. This Scale consists of 14 items/tasks of increasing difficulty graded on a five-point ordinal scale of zero to four where zero = participant is unable to perform the task and four = participant is independent in performance of task, such that overall total score may range from zero to 56 per participant. Mean Baseline and Mean Week 30 scores were calculated and used to determine change in mean score for each study group.|Week 30|All randomized subjects are included in this analysis to determine change in mean score from Baseline to Week 30 in each study group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819869|NCT01138995|Primary|Ten Meter Walk Test (10mWT)|"Determine gait velocity during a 10 meter walk test for subjects using the L300 versus subjects using a standard usual ankle-foot orthosis (AFO). Long term device effect at comfortable gait speed in m/s. Walk test results at 30 weeks will be compared to baseline speed. The mean difference (improvement) between baseline and week 30 will be presented by study arm."|Week 30|Intent to treat analysis of 197 (98 Control and 99 Treatment) randomized subjects.||meters per second (m/s)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819870|NCT01139008|Secondary|6 Question Subject Preference Survey at Week 3|Number of participants per response to each question of the Subject Preference Survey at week 3|week 3|Safety||participants|||Number
819871|NCT01139008|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were a Success With Regard to Worst-baseline Tolerability Assessment Scores in Each Assessment (Erythema, Scaling, Dryness, Stinging/Burning) on Day 22.|Number of participants who were a success with regard to worst-baseline tolerability assessment scores for each assessment (erythema, scaling, dryness, stinging/burning) on day 22. Tolerability assessments (erythema, scaling, dryness, stinging/burning) are evaluated on a scale from 0 - 4 (0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) with 0 being best and 4 being worst. Success was defined as a tolerability score of 0 for each assessment.|Day 22|Safety||participants|||Number
819872|NCT01139008|Primary|Number of Participants Who Were a Success With Regard to Worst Post-baseline Tolerability Assessment Scores in Each Assessment (Erythema, Scaling, Dryness, Stinging/Burning) From Baseline to Week 3|Number of participants who were a success with regard to worst post-baseline tolerability assessment scores in each of the tolerability assessments at any time point between baseline and week 3. Tolerability assessments (erythema, scaling, dryness, stinging/burning) are evaluated on a scale from 0 - 4 (0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) with 0 being best and 4 being worst. Success was defined as a tolerability score of 0.|baseline to week 3|Safety||participants|||Number
819873|NCT01139021|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events After Receiving Two Catch-up Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Administered to Naive Children at 24 and 26 Months of Age.|To assess the safety and tolerability in terms of number of subjects reporting unsolicited adverse events after receiving two catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ administered to naive children at 24 and 26 months of age. The analysis was done on safety subset.|Up to 7 days after any vaccination|The analysis was done on safety subset.||Number of Subjects|||Number
819874|NCT01139021|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local and Systemic Adverse Events After Two Catch-up Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Administered to Naive Children at 24 and 26 Months of Age.|To assess the safety and tolerability by reporting solicited local and systemic adverse events of two catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ administered to naive children at 24 and 26 months of age.|Up to 7 days after any vaccination.|The analysis was done on safety subset.||Number of subjects|||Number
819875|NCT01139021|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events After Receiving a Booster (3rd) Dose of rMenB+OMV NZ Administered at One Year After Two Catch-up Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ, Previously Administered to Children.|To assess the safety and tolerability in terms of number of subjects reporting unsolicited adverse events in yerms of serious adverse events (SAEs), atleast possibly related SAEs and AEs leading to withdrawl of a booster (third) dose of rMenB+OMV NZ administered at one year after two catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ, previously administered to children at either 12 and 14 or 13 and 15 months of age in study V72P13E1.|Up to 7 days after any vaccination.|The analysis was done on safety subset.||Number of Subjects|||Number
819876|NCT01139021|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local and Systemic Adverse Events (AEs) After Receiving a Booster (Third) Dose of rMenB+OMV NZ Administered at One Year After Two Catch-up Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ, Previously Administered to Children.|To assess the safety and tolerability by reporting solicited local and systemic AEs of a booster (third) dose of rMenB+OMV NZ administered at one year after two catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ, previously administered to children at either 12 and 14 or 13 and 15 months of age in study V72P13E1.|Up to 7 days after any vaccination.|||Number of subjects|||Number
819877|NCT01139021|Secondary|GMCs to Assess Antibody Response at 1 Month and 6 Month Post Two Catch-up Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Administered to Naive Children at 24 and 26 Months of Age Against 287-953 Strain.|"To assess the immunogenicity in terms of GMCs to assess through antibody response at 1 month and 6 month post two catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ administered to naive children at 24 and 26 months of age against 287-953 strain.
Analysis was done on MITT population (Secondary)."|1 month and 6 months post two catch-up doses.|Analysis was done on MITT population (Secondary).||Concentration IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819933|NCT01139658|Secondary|Dosage of Pradaxa at Initiation||Baseline|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||participants|||Number
819878|NCT01139021|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Four Fold Increase in hSBA to Assess Antibody Response at 1 Month Post Two Catch-up Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Administered to Naive Children at 24 and 26 Months of Age.|"To assess the immunogenicity in terms of percentage of subjects with fourfold increases in hSBA titers at 1 month post two catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ in children previously administered to naive children at 24 and 26 months of age against 4 strains.
Analysis was done on MITT population (Secondary)."|1 month post two catch-up doses versus prevaccination|Analysis was done on MITT population (Secondary).||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819879|NCT01139021|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA ≥1:5 and hSBA ≥1:8 to Assess Antibody Response at 1 Month and 6 Month Post Two Catch-up Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Administered to Naive Children at 24 and 26 Months of Age.|To assess the immunogenicity in terms of percentage of subjects with hSBA ≥1:5 and hSBA ≥1:8 through antibody response at at 1 month and 6 month post two catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ administered to naive children at 24 and 26 months of age.|1 month and 6 months post two catch-up doses.|Analysis was done on MITT population (Secondary)||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819880|NCT01139021|Secondary|GMTs to Characterize Antibody Response at 1 Month and 6 Month Post Two Catch-up Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Administered to Naive Children at 24 and 26 Months of Age.|To assess the immunogenicity in terms of GMTs through antibody response at 1 month and 6 month post two catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ administered to naive children at 24 and 26 months of age.|1 month and 6 months post two catch-up doses.|Analysis was done on MITT population (Secondary).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819881|NCT01139021|Secondary|GMCs to Assess Antibody Persistence at One Year After Two Catch-up Doses and 6 Months After Booster of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination Against 287-953 Strain.|"To assess the immunogenicity in terms of GMCs determined by ELISA at 12 months after two catch up doses previously administered to children at either 12 and 14 or 13 and 15 months of age and 6 months after a booster dose of rMenB+OMV NZ administered at 26 or 27 months of age.
Both the groups received MMRV at 12 months of age."|12 months post two catch-up dose vaccination and 6 months post booster dose.|Analysis was done on MITT population (Secondary).||Concentration IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819882|NCT01139021|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least Four Fold Increase in hSBA Titers to Evaluate Antibody Response 1 Month Post Booster Dose of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination.|To assess the immunogenicity in terms of percentage of subjects with at least four fold increase in hSBA titers 1 month post booster dose of rMenB+OMV NZ administered at 26 or 27 months of age, in children previously administered two catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ at either 12 and 14 or 13 and 15 months of age.Both the groups received MMRV at 12 months of age.|1 month post booster dose versus prebooster.|Analysis was done on MITT population (Secondary).||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819883|NCT01139021|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA ≥1:5 and hSBA ≥1:8 to Assess Antibody Persistence at 12 Months After Two Catch up Doses and 6 Months After a Booster Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination.|"To assess the immunogenicity in terms of percentage of subjects with hSBA ≥1:5 and hSBA ≥1:8 at 12 months after two catch up doses previously administered to children at either 12 and 14 or 13 and 15 months of age and 6 months after a booster dose of rMenB+OMV NZ administered at 26 or 27 months of age.
Both the groups received MMRV at 12 months of age."|6month post booster dose and 12 months post two catch-up dose vaccination.|Analysis was done on MITT population (Secondary).||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819884|NCT01139021|Secondary|GMTs to Assess Antibody Persistence at 12 Months After Two Catch-up Doses and 6 Months After Booster Dose of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination.|"To assess the immunogenicity in terms of hSBA GMTs at 12 months after two catch up doses previously administered to children at either 12 and 14 or 13 and 15 months of age and 6 months after a booster dose of rMenB+OMV NZ administered at 26 or 27 months of age.
Both the groups received MMRV at 12 months of age."|12 months post two catch-up dose vaccination and 6 months post booster dose.|Analysis was done on MITT population (Secondary).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819885|NCT01139021|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentrations (GMCs) to Assess Antibody Persistence at One Year After a Booster Dose of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination.|"To assess the immunogenicity in terms of GMCs determined by Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) through antibody persistence at one year after a booster (fourth) dose of rMenB+OMV NZ in groups that received a three-dose primary series at 2, 4, 6 months of age. Group B246_12M12 received MMRV at 12 months of age (concomitantly) and group B246_12M13 received MMRV at 13 months of age (separately) against vaccine antigen 287-953.
Analysis was done on MITT population (Primary)."|12 months post booster (fourth) vaccination.|Analysis was done on MITT population (Primary).||Concentration IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819886|NCT01139021|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA ≥1:5 and hSBA ≥1:8 to Assess Antibody Persistence at on 12 Months After a Booster Dose of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination.|"To assess the immunogenicity in terms of percentage of subjects with hSBA ≥1:5 and hSBA ≥1:8 through antibody persistence at 12 months after a booster (fourth) dose of rMenB+OMV NZ in groups that received a three-dose primary series at 2, 4, 6 months of age. Group B246_12M12 received MMRV at 12 months of age (concomitantly) and group B246_12M13 received MMRV at 13 months of age (separately).
Analysis was done on MITT population (Primary)."|12 months post booster (fourth) vaccination.|Analysis was done on MITT population (Primary).||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819887|NCT01139021|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) to Assess Antibody Persistence at 12 Months After a Booster Dose of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination.|"To assess the immunogenicity in terms of human Serum Bactericidal Assay (hSBA) GMTs through antibody persistence at 12 months after a booster (fourth) dose of Novartis Meningococcal B Recombinant Vaccine (rMenB+OMV NZ) in groups that received a three-dose primary series at 2, 4,6 months of age. Group B246_12M12 received Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Varicella (MMRV) at 12 months of age (concomitantly) and group B246_12M13 received MMRV at 13 months of age (separately).
Analysis was done on Modified Intention-To-Treat (MITT) population- (Primary)."|12 months post booster (fourth) vaccination.|Analysis was done on Modified Intention-To-Treat (MITT) population (Primary).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
819888|NCT01139047|Secondary|6 Question Subject Preference Survey at Week 3|Number of participants per response to each question of the subject preference survey at week 3|3 weeks|Safety||participants|||Number
819952|NCT01139879|Secondary|Healing Rate Per Week|The mean change in area per week for all ulcers|12 weeks|Rate of change in area (healing) for all ulcers on all subjects in area (cm^2)/week||cm^2/week|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
819953|NCT01139879|Secondary|Incidence of New Ulcers|incidence of new ulcers while on the study surface|12 Weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
819889|NCT01139047|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were a Success With Regard to Worst-baseline Tolerability Assessment Scores in Each Assessment (Erythema, Scaling, Dryness, Stinging/Burning) on Day 22|Number of participants who were a success with regard to worst-baseline tolerability assessment scores for each assessment (erythema, scaling, dryness, stinging/burning) on day 22. Tolerability assessments (erythema, scaling, dryness, stinging/burning) are evaluated on a scale from 0 - 4 (0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) with 0 being best and 4 being worst. Success was defined as a tolerability score of 0 for each assessment.|day 22|||participants|||Number
819890|NCT01139047|Primary|Number of Participants Who Were a Success With Regard to Worst Post-baseline Tolerability Scores in Each Assessment (Erythema, Scaling, Dryness, Stinging/Burning) From Baseline to Week 3|Number of participants who were a success with regard to worst post-baseline tolerability scores in each of the tolerability assessments at any time point between baseline and week 3. Tolerability assessments (erythema, scaling, dryness, stinging/burning) are evaluated on a scale from 0 - 4 (0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) with 0 being best and 4 being worst. Success was defined as a tolerability score of 0.|baseline to week 3|Safety||participants|||Number
819891|NCT01139125|Primary|Safety and Efficacy|We are measuring if this medication is appropriate for use in schizophrenia patients.|4 months||||||
819892|NCT01139164|Secondary|Morbidity of Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplants|To determine the morbidity, including the pattern and severity of complications, of allogeneic stem cell transplants using reduced-intensity conditioning regimens. The average number of days spent in the hospital until day +100 will be reported as a surrogate for morbidity and complications.|100 days|This study terminated early; funding ran out before the analysis could be completed.|||||
819893|NCT01139164|Secondary|To Determine the Engraftment Rate of Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplants|To determine the engraftment rate of allogeneic stem cell transplants using reduced-intensity conditioning regimens. It will be measured as the proportion of subjects meeting criteria for engraftment before day +30 and full donor chimerism demonstrated before or at day +100. Engraftment is defined by maintenance of ANC > 500/mm3 for at least 3 consecutive days and platelet count > 20,000/mm3 for 3 consecutive days in absence of platelet transfusion. These criteria must have been met before Day +30. Chimerism is the pressence of donor cells and will be analyzed by FISH for sex-mismatched donor-recipient pairs and VNTR analysis for sex-mathced pairs. Chimerism by Day +100 will be documented for this outcome|Day +100|The outcome measure data below only accounts for the number of subjects who met the engraftment criteria prior at day +30; the chimerism data was not collected. For regimen B, only the subjects who participated in study intervention were analyzed for outcome measures.||participants|||Number
819894|NCT01139164|Primary|To Determine the Treatment-related Mortality Rate of Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplants Using Reduced-intensity Conditioning Regimens Within 1st 100-days.|Number of subject deaths prior to day 100.|8 years|For regimen B, only the subjects who participated in study intervention were analyzed for outcome measures.||participants|||Number
819895|NCT01139190|Primary|Degree of GI Injury at Day 15|"Degree of mucosal injury was assessed by endoscopy, with the following scoring system:
Score 0: No Injury Score 1: 1 to 10 petechiae Score 2: > 10 petechiae or 1 to 5 erosions Score 3: 6 to 10 erosions Score 4: > 10 erosions and/or an ulcer"|15 days|Per Protocol Population: subset of participants who had an endoscopy performed at Day 15 reviewed by both blinded endoscopists, was at least 85% compliant with taking the study drug (based on pill counts), who took the final dose drug on the day of the second endoscopy, and who had no other protocol violations that would affect assessments.||participants|||Number
819896|NCT01139294|Secondary|Gorelick Assessment|"Gorelick assessment of hydration status at baseline, and at the end of sub-q or IV hydration treatment or at discharge from the emergency dept.
volume of fluid infuse over time
time to discharge from ED to home or transfer into the hospital
discharge diagnosis from ED
duration of any supplemental hospitalization for supplemental hydration
time to first urine output observed
requirement for rescue therapy and nature of the rescue therapy
incidence of readmission to hospital/ED
global assessment of overall satisfaction with rehydration therapy by parents and caregiver"|Measurements and data are recorded only while patient is receiving care in the ED. A f/u call is made on day 3 and/or day 7 post enrollment into the study.|No outcome measure data available. Study data was lost.Data was left behind when PI left institution in 2013. Unable to find anyone with knowledge of data location.|||||
819897|NCT01139294|Primary|Cardiac Output Trends|Describe the cardiac output trends measured in liters per minute (onset and changes in slope over time) by noninvasively monitoring methods in pediatric patients being rehydrated by Hylenex augmented subcutaneous rehydration or routine IV rehydration|Measurements and data are recorded only while patient is receiving care in the Emergency Department (ED). A f/u call is made on day 3 and/or day 7 post enrollment into the study.|No outcome measure data available. Study data was lost. Data was left behind when PI left institution in 2013. Unable to find anyone with knowledge of data location.|||||
819898|NCT01139411|Secondary|Communication 2: Observed Parent-adolescent Communication Quality (DOCS)|Post-treatment value (controlling for baseline). Observed parent-adolescent communication quality was measured using the Dyadic Observed Communication Scale (DOCS) used to code communication between adolescent and caregiver during a video-taped observational coding session. The DOCS is coded on a scale of 0 -10, with higher scores reflecting higher quality of communication, as observed by an independent rater. Higher scores are thought to reflect a better treatment outcome.|Baseline to post-treatment|38 participants (19 in each group) had complete baseline and post treatment data for videotaped observations.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819899|NCT01139411|Secondary|Communication 1: Negative Maternal Weight-related Commentary (FERF-Q)|Post-treatment value (controlling for baseline). Negative maternal weight-related commentary was assessed using the Negative maternal weight-related commentary subscale of the Family Experiences Related to Food Questionnaire (FERF-Q)), an adolescent-report measure of parent behavior pertaining to weight control. The Negative maternal weight-related commentary subscale of the FERF-Q has a scale range of 1 - 5, with higher scores corresponding to greater negative maternal weight-related commentary, as perceived and reported by the adolescent. Lower scores are considered a better treatment outcome.|Baseline to post-treatment|Secondary outcomes analyzed for treatment completers only||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819954|NCT01139879|Primary|Change From Baseline in Ulcer Surface Area at Week 12|The primary outcome measure for this study is to be healing rate by area, based on the identified target study ulcer.|12 Weeks|Ulcers decreased an average of 7.96 cm^2 (+/- 8.1 cm^2) over the 12 week period||cm^2|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
819900|NCT01139411|Secondary|Parent Modeling 4: Weight and Body Concerns (FERF-Q)|Post-treatment value (controlling for baseline). Parent modeling of concern about weight/body was assessed using the Parent Modeling of Weight and Body Concerns subscale of the Family Experiences Related to Food Questionnaire (FERF-Q)), an adolescent-report measure of parent behavior pertaining to weight control. The Weight and Body Concerns subscale of the FERF-Q has a scale range of 1 - 5, with higher scores corresponding to greater parent weight and body concerns, as perceived and reported by the adolescent. Lower weight and body concern is considered a better treatment outcome.|Baseline to post-treatment|Secondary outcomes analyzed for treatment completers only||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819901|NCT01139411|Secondary|Parent Modeling 3: Physical Activity (WCSS)|Post-treatment value (controlling for baseline). Parent modeling of Physical Activity was assessed using the Physical Activity subscale of the Weight Control Strategies Scale (WCSS), a parent-report measure of his/her own healthy weight control practices. The Physical Activity subscale of the WCSS has a scale range of 0-4, with higher scores corresponding to greater physical activity. Higher scores are considered a better treatment outcome.|Baseline to post-treatment|Secondary outcomes analyzed for treatment completers only||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819902|NCT01139411|Secondary|Parent Modeling 2: Self-monitoring (WCSS)|Post-treatment value (controlling for baseline). Parent modeling of self-monitoring behavior was assessed using the Self Monitoring subscale of the Weight Control Strategies Scale (WCSS), a parent-report measure of his/her own healthy weight control practices. The Self Monitoring subscale of the WCSS has a scale range of 0 - 4, with higher scores corresponding to more self-monitoring behavior. Higher scores are thought to reflect a better treatment outcome.|Baseline to post-treatment|Secondary outcomes analyzed for treatment completers only.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819903|NCT01139411|Secondary|Parent Modeling 1: Dietary Choices (WCSS)|Post-treatment value (controlling for baseline). Parent modeling of dietary choices was assessed using the Diet Choices subscale of the Weight Control Strategies Scale (WCSS), a parent-report measure of his/her own healthy weight control practices. The Dietary choices subscale of the WCSS has a scale range of 0 - 4, with higher scores corresponding to healthier diet choices. Higher scores are considered to be a better treatment outcome.|Baseline to post-treatment|Secondary outcomes analyzed for treatment completers only.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819904|NCT01139411|Primary|Body Mass Index|Post-treatment BMI (controlling for baseline BMI)|Baseline and at completion of 16 week intervention|||kilograms/meters squared||Standard Deviation|Mean
819905|NCT01139450|Secondary|The Mean Change From Baseline in the Percentage Total Body Surface Affected (%BSA)||Baseline, 4 weeks||||||
819906|NCT01139450|Secondary|The Mean Change From Baseline in Pruritus||Baseline, 4 weeks||||||
819907|NCT01139450|Secondary|The Mean Change From Baseline in the Total Individual Clinical Signs and Symptoms Per Body Region||Baseline, 4 weeks||||||
819908|NCT01139450|Primary|Incidence of Success Based on the Investigator’s Global Evaluation at the End of Treatment||4 weeks|||participants|||Number
819909|NCT01139515|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Pre-dosing, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, and 24 hrs post dose (A,B,C) and additional 2.5,2.75,3.5,5,14,18 and 26 hrs post dose (D)|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
819910|NCT01139515|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||Pre-dosing, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, and 24 hrs post dose (A,B,C) and additional 2.5,2.75,3.5,5,14,18 and 26 hrs post dose (D)|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Hr||Full Range|Median
819911|NCT01139515|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Pre-dosing, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, and 24 hrs post dose (A,B,C) and additional 2.5,2.75,3.5,5,14,18 and 26 hrs post dose (D)|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
819912|NCT01139515|Primary|AUC From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the time of the last measurable concentration (AUClast).|Pre-dosing, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, and 24 hrs post dose (A,B,C) and additional 2.5,2.75,3.5,5,14,18 and 26 hrs post dose (D)|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
819913|NCT01139515|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0-∞)]|AUC (0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞). It is obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞).|Pre-dosing, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, and 24 hrs post dose (A,B,C) and additional 2.5,2.75,3.5,5,14,18 and 26 hrs post dose(D)|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng* hr/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
819914|NCT01139580|Secondary|Number of Participants With an ISGA Score of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) for Body Involvement at Week 8|The investigator assessed participants with psoriasis with body involvement using the ISGA, scored as: 0, clear, minor residual discoloration, no erythema, scaling, or plaque thickness; 1, almost clear, occasional fine scale, faint erythema, and barely perceptible plaque thickness; 2, mild, fine scales predominate with light-red coloration and mild plaque thickness; 3, moderate, coarse scales predominate with moderate red coloration and plaque thickness; 4 severe, thick tenacious scale predominates with deep red coloration and severe plaque thickness. Scores are a visual average of lesions.|Week 8|ITT Population. Data were analyzed using the failure and LOCF methods.||participants|||Number
819955|NCT01139996|Secondary|Mean Incidence and Duration of Delirium|As assessed by daily CAM score currently used. data were not collected|2 or more years||||||
819956|NCT01139996|Secondary|Time to Pass First SBT Following Administration of the First Dose of Clonidine or Placebo|Hours. data were not collected|2 or more years||||||
819957|NCT01139996|Secondary|Incidence and Duration in Hours of Delirium Currently Used|As assessed by the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) score Data were not collected|2 or more years||||||
819915|NCT01139580|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Target Lesion Score of 0 or 1 for Plaque Thickness at Week 8|Psoriasis is a noncontagious skin disorder, most often appearing as inflamed, thickened skin covered with silvery white scales on the scalp, trunk, and limbs. The investigator assessed participants with plaque thickness at target lesions using the PGSTL scores: 0, no elevation over normal skin; 1, possible but difficult to ascertain whether there is a slight elevation above normal skin; 2, slight but definite elevation, edges are indistinct or sloped; 3, moderate elevation with rough or sloped edges; 4, marked elevation with hard or sharp edges; 5, very marked elevation with hard sharp edges.|Baseline and Week 8|ITT Population||participants|||Number
819916|NCT01139580|Primary|Number of Participants With an ISGA Score of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) for Scalp Involvement at Week 8 Using Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|The investigator assessed participants with scalp psoriasis using the ISGA, scored as (as a visual average of lesions): 0, absence of disease; 1, very mild disease, lesions (L) with minimum erythema; 2, mild disease, L with light-red coloration, slight thickness, and fine, thin scale layer; 3, moderate disease, L with red coloration, moderate thickness, and a moderate scaled layer; 4, severe disease, L with red coloration, severe thickness, and a severe coarse, thick scale layer; 5, very severe disease, L with red coloration, very severe thickness, and a very severe, coarse, thick scale layer.|Week 8|ITT Population. Missing values were imputed using LOCF (i.e., the last available observation, including Baseline, for a participant will be used to estimate subsequent missing data points).||participants|||Number
819917|NCT01139580|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Target Lesion Score of 0 or 1 for Scaling and at Least a 2 Grade Improvement From Baseline at Week 8|Scaling of the skin is the loss of the outer layer of the epidermis in scale-like flakes. The investigator assessed participants with scaling at target lesions using the psoriasis grading scale for target lesions (PGSTL). PGSTL scores: 0, no evidence of scaling; 1, minimal, occasional fine scale over less than 5% of the lesion; 2, mild, fine scales predominate; 3, moderate, coarse scales predominate; 4 marked, thick non-tenacious scale predominates; 5 severe, very thick tenacious scale predominates.|Baseline and Week 8|ITT Population||participants|||Number
819918|NCT01139580|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Target Lesion Score of 0 or 1 for Erythema and at Least a 2 Grade Improvement From Baseline at Week 8|Erythema is redness of the skin, caused by increased blood flow in the capillaries in the lower layers of the skin. The investigator assessed participants with erythema at target lesions using the psoriasis grading scale for target lesions (PGSTL). PGSTL scores: 0, no evidence of erythema, hyperpigmentation may be present; 1, faint erythema; 2, light-red coloration; 3, moderate red coloration; 4, bright-red coloration; 5, dusky to deep red coloration.|Baseline and Week 8|ITT Population||participants|||Number
819919|NCT01139580|Primary|Number of Participants With an Investigator’s Static Global Assessment (ISGA) Score of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) for Scalp Involvement at Week 8 Using the Failure Method|The investigator assessed participants with scalp psoriasis using the ISGA, scored as (as a visual average of lesions): 0, absence of disease; 1, very mild disease, lesions (L) with minimum erythema; 2, mild disease, L with light-red coloration, slight thickness, and fine, thin scale layer; 3, moderate disease, L with red coloration, moderate thickness, and a moderate scaled layer; 4, severe disease, L with red coloration, severe thickness, and a severe coarse, thick scale layer; 5, very severe disease, L with red coloration, very severe thickness, and a very severe, coarse, thick scale layer.|Week 8|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized and dispensed study product. Missing values at Week 8 were considered to be failures. Failures were those participants who did not achieve a 2-grade improvement in IGSA score and a score of 0 or 1.||participants|||Number
819920|NCT01139658|Secondary|Reasons for Usual Follow-up||11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||participants|||Number
819921|NCT01139658|Secondary|Reasons for Unplanned Hospitalizations at Visit 3||11 weeks|Outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
819922|NCT01139658|Secondary|Duration of Unplanned Hospitalizations at Visit 3||11 weeks|Outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
819923|NCT01139658|Secondary|Frequency of Nurse Visits on the Day of Hospital Discharge||11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||times per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
819924|NCT01139658|Secondary|Reasons for Nurse Visits on the Day of Hospital Discharge||11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||participants|||Number
819925|NCT01139658|Secondary|Prescription for Nursing Care and Nurse Visits on the Day of Hospital Discharge||11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||participants|||Number
819926|NCT01139658|Secondary|Prescription for the Surveillance of the Platelet Count on the Day of Hospital Discharge||11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||participants|||Number
819927|NCT01139658|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Switched to Another Anticoagulant Therapy|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.|11 weeks|||participants|||Number
819928|NCT01139658|Secondary|Concomitant Treatments|Concomitant treatments prescribed at hospital discharge.|11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||participants|||Number
819929|NCT01139658|Secondary|Adherence to Treatment|The adherence to treatment was measured by patient declaration.|11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
819930|NCT01139658|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With a Preoperative ALT Measurement||11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||percentage of participants|||Number
819958|NCT01139996|Primary|Duration of Mechanical Ventilation Following Administration of the First Dose of Clonidine or Placebo|data were not collected|2 or more years|data were not collected|||||
819934|NCT01139658|Primary|Occurrence of Major Bleeding Events|"Occurrence of major bleeding events (MBEs) in patients treated with Pradaxa (dabigatran etexilate) after orthopaedic surgery (either THR or TKR surgery). MBEs were defined as any fatal haemorrhage, any overt bleeding greater than could be expected combined with a loss of haemoglobin ≥ 2 g/dL or requiring transfusion ≥ 2 packed red blood cells units (PRBC), any symptomatic retroperitoneal, intracranial, intraocular or intraspinal haemorrhage or any bleeding requireing treatment cessation or reoperation.
a confirmed proximal or distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or a confirmed pulmonary emboliam (PE)."|11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||participants|||Number
819935|NCT01139658|Primary|Occurrence of Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolic Events|Occurrence of symptomatic venous thromboembolic (VTE) events in patients treated with Pradaxa (dabigatran etexilate) after orthopaedic surgery (either Total Hip Replacement (THR) or Total Knee Replacement surgery (TKR)). Symptomatic VTE events were defined as a confirmed proximal or distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or a confirmed pulmonary embolism (PE).|11 weeks|Treated population included patients who took at least one dose of Pradaxa. One additional patient was excluded from the analysis as they were missing their date of first dose.||participants|||Number
819936|NCT01139762|Secondary|Change in International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Question 3 and 4 Scores From Baseline to 4, 12, and 26 Weeks|IIEF Question 3 asks how often a participant was able to penetrate his partner over the past 4 weeks. Scores range from 0 (did not attempt intercourse) to 5 (almost always or always). IIEF Question 4 asks whether/how often a participant was able to maintain an erection after penetration over the past 4 weeks. Scores range from 0 (did not attempt intercourse) to 5 (almost always or always). Least Squares (LS) Mean values were obtained from a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis. Model includes treatment, region, visit, baseline IIEF, and visit-by-treatment interaction.|Baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF Questions 3 and 4 measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819937|NCT01139762|Secondary|Change in Post Void Residual (PVR) Volume From Baseline to 26 Weeks|Postvoid Residual Volume (PVR) is determined using a portable, calibrated ultrasound device. It consists of the average of a minimum of 3 scans where the residual bladder volume was calculated by averaging the most accurate of the 3 imaging attempts.|Baseline, 26 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PVR measurement.||milliliters (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
819938|NCT01139762|Secondary|Clinician Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) at 26 Weeks|Clinician Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) measures clinician's perception of participant improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment. Number of participants is reported by the categorized score ranging from 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse).|26 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and had CGI-I measurement at 26 weeks endpoint.||participants|||Number
819939|NCT01139762|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Scale - Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (TSS-BPH) at 26 Weeks|The TSS-BPH was a validated participant-rated instrument that measured participant satisfaction with treatment based on a 13-item questionnaire. It consists of 10 items on a Likert-like scale with scores ranging from 1 (higher satisfaction) to 5 (lower satisfaction), 1 item with score ranging from 0 (higher satisfaction) to 5 (lower satisfaction), and 2 yes/no questions. The mean score for each participant ranges from 0.9 (higher satisfaction) to 5.0 (lower satisfaction). Data presented are the average of mean scores for each treatment group.|26 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and had TSS-BPH measurement at 26 weeks endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819940|NCT01139762|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) at 26 Weeks|Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) measures the participant's perception of improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment. Number of participants is reported by the categorized score ranging from 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse).|26 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and had PGI-I measurement at 26 weeks endpoint.||participants|||Number
819941|NCT01139762|Secondary|Change in International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) - Sexual Desire Domain Scores From Baseline to 4, 12, and 26 Weeks|Sexual desire domain scores is the sum of Questions 11 and 12 from the IIEF questionnaire. Scores range from 1 (low/no desire) to 5 (high desire) for each question, with the total possible score for the 2 questions ranging from 2 to 10. Higher total scores indicate higher desire. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were obtained from a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis. Model includes treatment, region, visit, baseline IIEF, and visit-by-treatment interaction.|Baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks|All randomized participants who were sexually active with female partner and had erectile dysfunction (ED), received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF-sexual desire domain score measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819942|NCT01139762|Secondary|Change in International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) - Orgasmic Function Domain Scores From Baseline to 4, 12, and 26 Weeks|Orgasmic Function domain scores is the sum of Questions 9 and 10 from the IIEF questionnaire. Scores range from 0 (low/no orgasm) to 5 (high orgasm) for each question, with the total possible score for the 2 questions ranging from 0 to 10. Higher total scores indicate higher orgasm. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were obtained from a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis. Model includes treatment, region, visit, baseline IIEF, and visit-by-treatment interaction.|Baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks|All randomized participants who were sexually active with female partner and had erectile dysfunction (ED), received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF-orgasmic function domain score measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819959|NCT01140048|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Use of Chronic Asthma Therapy at 6 Years of Age: Overall and by Prognostic Factor|"Use of Chronic Asthma Therapy for the period of 12 months prior to the age of 6 years was defined by clinical review of reported concomitant medications.
Prognostic factors for use of chronic asthma therapy at age 6 years were derived from baseline characteristic, disease characteristic and family history data, and were identified by a forward stepwise regression model."|At 6 years of age|All Enrolled Participants for whom data on concomitant asthma therapy at age 6 years and prognostic factors were available.||percentage of participants|||Number
819943|NCT01139762|Secondary|Change in International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) - Intercourse Satisfaction Domain Scores From Baseline to 4, 12, and 26 Weeks|Self-reported intercourse satisfaction over the past 4 weeks. IIEF-intercourse satisfaction is the sum of Questions 6, 7 and 8 of the IIEF. Scores range from 0 (low/no satisfaction) to 5 (high satisfaction) for each question, with the total possible score for the 3 questions of 0 to 15. Higher total scores indicate higher satisfaction. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were obtained from a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis. Model includes treatment, region, visit, baseline IIEF, and visit-by-treatment interaction.|Baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks|All randomized participants who were sexually active with female partner and had erectile dysfunction (ED), received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF-intercourse satisfaction measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819944|NCT01139762|Secondary|Change in International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) - Overall Satisfaction Domain Scores From Baseline to 4, 12, and 26 Weeks|Self-reported overall satisfaction over the past 4 weeks. IIEF-Overall Satisfaction is the sum of Questions 13 and 14 of IIEF questionnaire. Scores range from 1 (low/no satisfaction) to 5 (high satisfaction) for each question, with the total possible score for the 2 questions ranging from 2 to 10. Higher total scores indicate higher satisfaction. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were obtained from a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis. Model includes treatment, region, visit, baseline IIEF, and visit-by-treatment interaction.|Baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks|All randomized participants who were sexually active with female partner and had erectile dysfunction (ED), received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF-Overall Satisfaction measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819945|NCT01139762|Secondary|Change in International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) - Erectile Function Domain Scores From Baseline to 4, 12, and 26 Weeks|Self-reported erectile function over the past 4 weeks. IIEF- EF is the sum of Questions 1-5 and 15 of the IIEF. Questions 1-5 are scored 0 (low/no erectile function) to 5 (high erectile function) and Question 15 is scored 1 (very low confidence) to 5 (very high confidence), for a total score ranging from 1 to 30. Higher scores represent better erectile function. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were obtained from a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis. Model includes treatment, region, visit, baseline IIEF, and visit-by-treatment interaction.|Baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks|All randomized participants who were sexually active with female partner and had erectile dysfunction (ED), received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IIEF-EF measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819946|NCT01139762|Secondary|Change in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) Quality of Life Index From Baseline to 4, 12, and 26 Weeks|"IPSS Quality of Life Index assesses participant response to the following question: If you were to spend the rest of your life with your urinary condition just the way it is now, how would you feel about that? Response options are Delighted (0); Pleased (1); Mostly satisfied (2); Mixed-about equally satisfied and dissatisfied (3); Mostly dissatisfied (4); Unhappy (5); Terrible (6), with a total range of 0-6. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were obtained from a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis. Model includes treatment, region, visit, baseline total IPSS, and visit-by-treatment interaction."|Baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IPSS quality of life measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819947|NCT01139762|Secondary|Change in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) Subscores Index From Baseline to 4, 12, and 26 Weeks|IPSS storage (irritative) subscore is the sum of Questions 2, 4 and 7 of the 7-component IPSS questionnaire. Scores range from 0 (no irritative symptoms) to 5 (frequent irritative symptoms), with total subscore of the 3 questions for irritative subscore range from 0 to 15. IPSS voiding (obstructive) subscore is the sum of Questions 1, 3, 5 and 6 of the IPSS questionnaire. Scores range from 0 (no obstructive symptoms) to 5 (frequent obstructive symptoms), with total subscore of the 4 questions of the obstructive score range from 0 to 20. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were obtained from a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis. Model includes treatment, region, visit, baseline total IPSS, and visit-by-treatment interaction.|Baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IPSS subscore measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819948|NCT01139762|Secondary|Change in Total International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) From Baseline to 4 and 26 Weeks|The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) is a rating scale for severity of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The IPSS has a 7-component questionnaire. Each question is scored on a scale from 0 (none/no symptoms) to 5 (frequent symptoms), for a total score range of 0 to 35. Higher numerical scores from the IPSS questionnaire represent greater severity of symptoms. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were obtained from a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis. Model includes treatment, region, visit, baseline total IPSS, and visit-by-treatment interaction.|Baseline, 4 weeks, 26 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IPSS measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819949|NCT01139762|Primary|Change in Total International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) From Baseline to 12 Weeks|The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) is a rating scale for severity of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The IPSS has a 7-component questionnaire. Each question is scored on a scale from 0 (none/no symptoms) to 5 (frequent symptoms), for a total score range of 0 to 35. Higher numerical scores from the IPSS questionnaire represent greater severity of symptoms. Least Squares (LS) Mean values were obtained from a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis. Model includes treatment, region, visit, baseline total IPSS, and visit-by-treatment interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug, had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IPSS measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
819950|NCT01139814|Primary|Evaluation of Major Complications|Safety Evaluation of Major Complications definitely or probably related to Amigo-Controlled Mapping through Visit 3 follow-up.|Seven Days (visit 3), except for any subject with an ongoing SAE that is related to the study will be scheduled for additional evaluations at 14 day intervals.|||Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819951|NCT01139814|Primary|Navigation Performance|Effectiveness Navigation Performance -- The ability to navigate the mapping catheter under Amigo control to at least 80% of 8 pre-specified anatomical locations over all subjects.|During Procedure|||Successful locations|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
819960|NCT01140048|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Atopic Disorders at 6 Years of Age: Overall and by Prognostic Factor|"Atopic disorders include allergic rhinitis (AR) and/or atopic dermatitis (AD). Atopic disorders was defined as a positive response to the Epidemiology Questionnaire item In the past 6/12 months, has your child had a problem with sneezing or runny or blocked nose when he/she did not have a cold or the flu? for AR and/or a positive response to both of the following items for AD: Has your child had an itchy rash which was coming and going at any time in the past 6/12 months? and Has this itchy rash at any time affected any of the following places: the folds of the elbows, behind the knees, in front of the ankles, under the buttocks, or around the neck, ears, or eyes? for the period of 12 months prior to age 6 years.
Prognostic factors for atopic disorders at age 6 years were derived from baseline characteristic, disease characteristic and family history data, and were identified by a forward stepwise regression model."|At 6 years of age|All Enrolled Participants for whom data for the respective Epidemiology Questionnaire item at age 6 years and prognostic factors were available.||percentage of participants|||Number
819961|NCT01140048|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Asthma at 6 Years of Age: Overall and by Prognostic Factor|"Asthma was defined as a positive response to the Epidemiology Questionnaire item Has your child had wheezing or whistling in the chest in the past 6/12 months? for the period of 12 months prior to age 6 years.
Prognostic factors for asthma at age 6 years were derived from baseline characteristic, disease characteristic and family history data, and were identified by a forward stepwise regression model."|At 6 years of age|All Enrolled Participants for whom data for the respective Epidemiology Questionnaire item at age 6 years and prognostic factors were available.||percentage of participants|||Number
819962|NCT01140061|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Medication Due to an Adverse Event|An adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product.|Up to Day 28|The population consisted of all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
819963|NCT01140061|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event|An adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product.|Up to 14 days after last dose of study drug (up to Day 42)|The population consisted of all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study medication for whom safety data were available.||Participants|||Number
819964|NCT01140061|Primary|Mean Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of MK-0873 Following Topical Administration for 10 Days|Participant blood samples were collected on Day 11 to determine the Cmax of MK-0873 following topical administration in healthy participants and participants with psoriasis|Day 11|The population consisted of all enrolled participants who received MK-0873 and for whom blood samples were collected and evaluable to determine Cmax.||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
819965|NCT01140061|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event of Erythema in Part I of the Study|Following topical administration of MK-0873 or matching placebo patches once daily for 21 days, the number of participants with an adverse event of erythema was recorded. An adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product.|Up to Day 22 in Part 1|The population consisted of all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study medication in Part I of the study.||Participants|||Number
819966|NCT01140191|Secondary|Complete Cure of Index Lesion by Day 100|Number of participants with complete cure of index lesion by day 100. Cure rate is defined as 100% re-epithelialization of an ulcerated lesion|100 days|Analysis per protocol||Participants|||Count of Participants
819967|NCT01140191|Secondary|Cures of All Other Lesions|Number of participants with 100% re-epithelialization of all ulcerated lesions and resolution of all other types of lesions|100 days|Analysis per protocol||Participants|||Count of Participants
819968|NCT01140191|Primary|Number of Participants With No Relapse of Index Lesion Between Nominal Day 60 and 100|Number of participants with no relapses of lesion between 60 and 100 days. Relapse is defined as a 10% or greater increase in the area of ulceration of the index lesion or a shift from 100% re-epithelialization to < 100% re-epithelialization of the index lesion at Day 100 for those subjects that had 100% re-epithelialization of the index lesion at nominal Day 60 or before|60-100 days|Analysis per protocol||Participants|||Count of Participants
819969|NCT01140191|Primary|Number of Participants Demonstrating Initial Clinical Improvements|Number of participants with > 50% re-epithelialization of index lesion by Day 60 followed by complete re-epithelialization of index lesion on or before nominal Day 100;|60-100 days|Analysis per protocol||Participants|||Count of Participants
819970|NCT01140191|Primary|100% Re-epithelialization of Index Lesion by Nominal Day 60|Number of participants with 100% re-epithelialization of index lesion by nominal Day 60|Day 60|Analysis per protocol||Participants|||Count of Participants
819971|NCT01140191|Primary|Number of Adverse Events|Application site reactions including elicited question about pain, and clinician examination for erythema/redness and swelling/edema Blood chemistries and hematology Vital signs|3 months|Analysis was per protocol||Adverse Events|||Number
819998|NCT01140815|Secondary|6-week Functional Testing|A timed Functional Assessment Test, gait analysis, and balance testing for lower extremity motor function will be performed. Fewer seconds in the result indicates faster performance, which is a positive result.|6 weeks|Patients who were not revised and were able to make an appointment and complete the testing did so.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
820032|NCT01134549|Secondary|Half-life Associated With the Terminal (Log-linear) Elimination Phase (HLλz) for Etelcalcetide||Blood samples for PK assessment were drawn pre-dose, at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes, post-dose, and at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration.|Participants who received etelcalcetide||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
819972|NCT01140295|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Abnormal Electrolyte Levels|"The outcome measure was comparison of the proportions of patients who had abnormal electrolyte levels between two groups of patients, Miralax and senna.
Sodium, potassium, chloride, and carbon dioxide levels were measured in mmol/L while urea nitrogen, creatinine, glucose, calcium, magnesium, and phosphorus were measured in mg/dL. Each of these values has a reference range which varies with patients' age and sex. Minimal change of one point above or below normal reference range was dismissed as clinically insignificant. Abnormal creatinine levels were rechecked through glomerular filtration rate calculation to determine if there was any compromise in renal function since abnormal creatinine level does not mean there is renal dysfunction nor that the level is clinically significant."|The outcome measure will be assessed once one day after the completion of colonoscopy preparation|||Proportion of patients|||Number
819973|NCT01140295|Primary|Efficacy of Colon Preparation|Percentage of patients with excellent or good colonoscopy preparation. The efficacy of preparation is measured by using a validated colon cleanliness scale which has 5 different levels (Aronchik scale). Levels 1 and 2, which encompass excellent and good colonoscopy preparation, are routinely recognized as adequate preparation allowing for successful completion of colonoscopy. Levels 3-5 describe incomplete or poor preparation. These levels are associated with significant residual stool encountered at the time of colonoscopy.|The outcome measure will be assessed once one day after the completion of colonoscopy preparation|||percentage of patients|||Number
819974|NCT01140347|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Positive Anti-Ramucirumab Response [Serum Anti-Ramucirumab Antibody Assessment (Immunogenicity)]|Participants were considered positive for anti-ramucirumab antibodies [anti-drug antibodies (ADA)] if the post-treatment sample had an increase of at least 4-fold in titer from the pretreatment values. If the pretreatment value was not detected or was not present, a 1:20 post-treatment titer was required to indicate treatment emergence of ADA.|Prior to treatment and 1 hour post end of infusion for Cycles 1, 4 and 7 (14-day cycles)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-treatment ADA analysis.||participants|||Number
819975|NCT01140347|Secondary|Cmax of Ramucirumab, Cycle 7||1 hour following completion of Cycle 7 (14-day cycles) infusion|Participants who received Cycle 7 of Ram and had Cmax results.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819976|NCT01140347|Secondary|Cmax of Ramucirumab, Cycle 4||1 hour following completion of Cycle 4 (14-day cycles) infusion|Participants who received Cycle 4 of Ram and had Cmax results.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819977|NCT01140347|Secondary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Ramucirumab, Cycle 1||1 hour following the completion of Cycle 1 (14-day cycle) infusion|Participants who received Cycle 1 of Ram and had Cmax results.||micrograms/milliliter (µg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
819978|NCT01140347|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and the Number of Participants Who Died|The number of participants with serious AEs (SAEs), other non-serious AEs and participants who died. A summary of SAEs and other non-serious AEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline to study completion (up to 37 months)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
819979|NCT01140347|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life Questionnaire-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Health State Score|The EQ-5D is a self-reported, 5-dimension (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) questionnaire related to the participant's current health state. Each question was scored using a 3 level scale (no problems, some problems, or extreme problems). EQ-5D health state was defined by combining responses from each of the 5 dimensions into a weighted health-state index score according to the United Kingdom (UK) population based algorithm where 0 = death and 1 = perfect health.|Baseline, Prior to infusion on Day 1 of Cycle 4, Cycle 10, and Cycle 16 (14-day cycles), end of treatment (up to 34 months)|Randomized participants who had an EQ-5D score at baseline and the specified time points.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819980|NCT01140347|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Hepatobiliary Symptom Index-8 (FHSI-8)|The FHSI-8 is a self-administered 8-item questionnaire that measures a participant's symptoms in the domains of jaundice, stomach pain/discomfort weight loss, and fatigue. Participants rated each item on a 5-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Item scores were calculated as outlined in the FACIT manual. FHSI-8 total score was the sum of each item's score with a total score ranging from 0 (highly symptomatic) to 32 (asymptomatic).|Baseline, Prior to infusion on Day 1 of Cycle 4, Cycle 10, and Cycle 16 (14-day cycles), and end of treatment (up to 34 months)|Randomized participants who had FHSI-8 at baseline and the specified time points.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819981|NCT01140347|Secondary|Time to Radiographic Progression (TTP)|TTP was defined as the time from randomization to the first radiographically documented PD. PD was defined, using RECIST v1.1 criteria, as ≥20% increase in SOD of target lesions, taking as reference smallest sum on study (including baseline sum if it was the smallest). Sum must show an absolute increase of ≥5 mm. Appearance of ≥1 new lesions and unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions were considered progression. Participants without PD were censored at the day of the last adequate tumor assessment. Progression occurred immediately after ≥2 missed tumor assessments and were censored at the day of the last adequate tumor assessment prior to the missing assessments. Participants who began new anticancer therapy were censored at the day of their last adequate tumor assessment prior to start of new anticancer therapy.|Randomization to PD (up to 36 months)|ITT Population: All randomized participants. Participants censored: Ram=86, Pl=52.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819982|NCT01140347|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) [Objective Response Rate (ORR)]|ORR was defined, using RECIST v1.1 criteria, as the percentage of participants who achieved a best overall response of CR or PR. CR was defined as the disappearance of all lesions and any intratumor arterial enhancement in target lesions, the normalization of the tumor marker level and all lymph nodes short axis reduced to <10 mm. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease in the SOD of target lesions, including the short axes of any target lymph nodes, taking as reference the baseline SOD of target lesions, no new lesions and stable nontarget lesions. Percentage of participants was calculated as: (number of participants with CR or PR / number of participants randomized) * 100.|Baseline to the date of first evidence of confirmed CR or PR (up to 37 months)|ITT Population: All randomized participants.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
819983|NCT01140347|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as time from date of randomization until date of objectively determined progressive disease (PD) as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version (v) 1.1 or death from any cause. PD was defined as ≥20% increase in sum of diameters (SOD) of target lesions, taking as reference smallest sum on study (including baseline sum if it was smallest). Sum must show a ≥5 millimeter (mm) increase. Appearance of ≥1 new lesions and unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions were considered progression. In primary analysis, participants alive and without PD were censored at day of last adequate tumor assessment; progression or deaths without progression occurring immediately after ≥2 missed tumor assessments, were censored at day of the last adequate tumor assessment prior to missing assessments; participants who began new anticancer therapy were censored at day of the last adequate tumor assessment prior to start of new anticancer therapy.|Randomization to PD (up to 36 months)|ITT Population: All randomized participants. Participants censored: Ram=43, Pl=19.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819984|NCT01140347|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. Participants who were alive at the end of the follow-up period or were lost to follow-up were censored on the last date the participant was known to be alive.|Randomization to death from any cause (up to 37 months)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population: All randomized participants. Participants censored: Ramucirumab+BSC (Ram)=65, Placebo+BSC (Pl)=58.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
819985|NCT01140360|Primary|Disease Response|To estimate the disease control rate (SD, PR, CR) with Gleevec/Imatinib Mesylate in patients with neurofibromas (NF1). The sum of the longest diameter (LD) for all target lesions will be calculated and reported as the disease measurement. Complete Response (CR) disappearance of target lesions. Partial Response (PR) at least a 30% decrease in the disease measurement, taking as reference the disease measurement done to confirm measurable disease at study entry. Progressive Disease (PD) at least a 20% increase in the disease measurement, taking as reference the smallest disease measurement recorded since the start of treatment. Stable Disease (SD) neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD taking as reference the smallest disease measurement since the treatment started.|1 year|13 participants reached the 1 year evaluation time-point. 6 participants withdrew prior to the 1 year evaluation time-point.||Participants|||Count of Participants
819986|NCT01140477|Secondary|Visual Acuity|Best-Corrected Distance Visual Acuity (BCDVA) without Glare (logMAR)|120 - 180 day postoperative visit|The analysis population only includes those for whom the outcome was measured within the specified time frame.||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
819987|NCT01140477|Secondary|Lens Misalignment|This Outcome Measure was evaluated for Crystalens Toric IOL arm only - Toric IOLs require precise alignment to correct astigmatism; control IOLs do not.|120 - 180 day postoperative visit|The analysis population only includes those for whom the outcome was measured within the specified time frame.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
819988|NCT01140477|Primary|Percent Reduction in Absolute Cylinder|Percent reduction in absolute cylinder expressed as a percentage of the intended reduction in cylinder. Cylinder reduction is the measurement for astigmatism reduction. Astigmatism is a form of refractive error that can affect uncorrected visual acuity (at all distances). Reducing cylinder should improve UCVA, but other elements of refractive error, such as myopia or hyperopia, can also affect UCVA. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) is not affected by refractive error.|120 – 180 day postoperative visit|The analysis population only includes those for whom the outcome was measured within the specified time frame.||percentage of intended cylinder reduct||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819989|NCT01140503|Secondary|The Secondary Outcome Measure Will be Efficacy as Measured by the Mean Change in CDASI-activity at 12 Weeks|The CDASI (Cutaneous Dermatomyositis Activity and Severity Index) is a validated instrument to measure skin disease activity in dermatomyositis. A clinically meaningful change is a decrease of 4 points. All missing data are imputed using last observation carried forward. Calculation is performed as the score at 12 weeks minus the score at baseline.|Data collected at baseline at 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
819990|NCT01140503|Secondary|The Secondary Outcome Measure Will be Efficacy, as Measured by the Number of Participants Experiencing a 30% Decreased in the CDASI-a Score at 12 Weeks.|This was an intent to treat analysis--dropouts are considered treatment failures. Missing data at 12 weeks imputed by last observation carried forward.|Data collected at 12 weeks after baseline visit.|||participants|||Number
819991|NCT01140503|Primary|The Primary Endpoint Analysis Will be Safety, as Measured by the Number of Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events Occuring During 12 Weeks of Therapy and 4 Weeks of Followup.||16 weeks|||adverse events|||Number
819992|NCT01140646|Secondary|Adverse Event Grade Incidence||End of study||||||
819993|NCT01140646|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Self-assessment Items||End of study||||||
819994|NCT01140646|Primary|Percent of Baseline in Average Hot Flash Activity (Score and Frequency)|Hot flash score was defined as the number of mild hot flashes for the week plus two times the number of moderate hot flashes plus three times the number of severe hot flashes plus four times the number of very severe hot flashes. Hot flash frequency was defined as the average number of hot flashes per day for each week. Week 7 percent of baseline was calculated. The reduction in hot flash score and frequency can be calculated by subtracting the week 7 percent of baseline from 100 percent.|From baseline to week 7|Analysis population includes only the subjects who have completed the quality of life self-assessment questionnaire.||Percent of baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
819995|NCT01140815|Secondary|2-year Functional Testing|A timed Functional Assessment Test, gait analysis, and balance testing for lower extremity motor function will be performed. Fewer seconds in the result indicates faster performance, which is a positive result.|2 years|Patients who were not revised and were able to make an appointment and complete the testing did so.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
819996|NCT01140815|Secondary|1-year Functional Testing|A timed Functional Assessment Test, gait analysis, and balance testing for lower extremity motor function will be performed. Fewer seconds in the result indicates faster performance, which is a positive result.|1 year|Patients who were not revised and were able to make an appointment and complete the testing did so.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
819997|NCT01140815|Secondary|4-month Functional Testing|A timed Functional Assessment Test, gait analysis, and balance testing for lower extremity motor function will be performed. Fewer seconds in the result indicates faster performance, which is a positive result.|4 months|Patients who were not revised and were able to make an appointment and complete the testing did so.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
819999|NCT01140815|Secondary|2-year Patient Surveys|Serial patient evaluation of function will be assessed using the Oxford Knee Outcome Questionnaire. The Oxford Questionnaire consists of 12 questions, each with a value of 0 (bad) to 4(good). The results are summed for a total score of 0(bad) to 48(good).|2 years|Patients who were not revised within 2 years and were able to complete a questionnaire did so.||units on a scale 0-48||Full Range|Mean
820000|NCT01140815|Secondary|2-year X-rays|Knee Society Roentgenographic Evaluation and Scoring System will assess alignment; any evidence of loosening as indicated primarily by radiolucencies > 2mm; evidence of surface wear or particulate debris generation as indicated by early osteolysis, implant migration, or other clinical or radiographic abnormalities. Number of participants with these radiographic abnormalities by X-ray at 2 years are reported.|2 years|||participants|||Number
820001|NCT01140815|Secondary|1-year X-rays|Knee Society Roentgenographic Evaluation and Scoring System will assess alignment; any evidence of loosening as indicated primarily by radiolucencies > 2mm; evidence of surface wear or particulate debris generation as indicated by early osteolysis, implant migration, or other clinical or radiographic abnormalities. Number of participants with these radiographic abnormalities by X-ray at 1 year are reported.|1 year|||participants|||Number
820002|NCT01140815|Secondary|4-month X-rays|Knee Society Roentgenographic Evaluation and Scoring System will assess alignment; any evidence of loosening as indicated primarily by radiolucencies > 2mm; evidence of surface wear or particulate debris generation as indicated by early osteolysis, implant migration, or other clinical or radiographic abnormalities. Number of participants with these radiographic abnormalities by X-ray at 4 months are reported.|4 months|||participants|||Number
820003|NCT01140815|Secondary|6-Week X-rays|Knee Society Roentgenographic Evaluation and Scoring System will assess alignment; any evidence of loosening as indicated primarily by radiolucencies > 2mm; evidence of surface wear or particulate debris generation as indicated by early osteolysis, implant migration, or other clinical or radiographic abnormalities. Number of participants with these radiographic abnormalities by X-ray at 6 weeks are reported.|6 weeks|||participants|||Number
820004|NCT01140815|Primary|1-year Knee Society Score|Knee Society Clinical Rating System (KSS) provides for separate knee pain and patient functional assessment scores. Scale of 0-100 with higher values representing a better score.|1 year|||units on a scale 0-100||Standard Deviation|Mean
820005|NCT01140815|Primary|4-Month Knee Society Score|Knee Society Clinical Rating System (KSS) provides for separate knee pain and patient functional assessment scores. Scale of 0-100 with higher values representing a better score.|4 months|||units on a scale 0-100||Standard Deviation|Mean
820006|NCT01140815|Primary|6-Week Knee Society Score|Knee Society Clinical Rating System (KSS) provides for separate knee pain and patient functional assessment scores. Scale of 0-100 with higher values representing a better score.|6 weeks|||units on a scale 0-100||Standard Deviation|Mean
820007|NCT01140815|Primary|2-Year Knee Society Score|Knee Society Clinical Rating System (KSS) provides for separate knee pain and patient functional assessment scores. Scale of 0-100 with higher values representing a better score.|2 years|||units on a scale 0-100||Standard Deviation|Mean
820008|NCT01140867|Secondary|QoL-QOLIE31 (Quality of Life in Epilepsy)|Quality of life assessment tool. Overall scores is calculated by summing subsections, and it ranges from 0 to 100. Higher score presents higher quality of life.|Baseline and 16 weeks|Efficacy analyses were based on the FAS (Full analysis set) population, which was comprised of all patients who administrated Zonisamide at least once and reached the maintenance period to evaluate the primary endpoint. Regarding QOLIE-31, among FAS population, the patients who have both of baseline and 16 week evaluation are included.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820009|NCT01140867|Secondary|Responder Rate|The percentage of participants whose median percentage change in seizure frequency after Zonisamide treatment is reduced over 50%.|Baseline and 16 weeks|Efficacy analyses were based on the FAS (Full analysis set) population, which was comprised of all patients who administrated Zonisamide at least once and reached the maintenance period to evaluate the primary endpoint.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
820010|NCT01140867|Secondary|Seizure Free Rate|The percentage of the participants who experienced no seizure during the trial.|16 weeks|Efficacy analyses were based on the FAS (Full analysis set) population, which was comprised of all patients who administrated Zonisamide at least once and reached the maintenance period to evaluate the primary endpoint.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
820011|NCT01140867|Primary|Seizure Reduction Rate|The percentage of the seizure reduction after Zonisamide treatment comparing baseline seizure frequency.|Baseline and 16 weeks|Efficacy analyses were based on the FAS (Full analysis set) population, which was comprised of all patients who administrated Zonisamide at least once and reached the maintenance period to evaluate the primary endpoint.||Percentage of Seizure Reduction Rate||Standard Deviation|Mean
820012|NCT01140880|Primary|Course Completion|PEP course completion is a dichotomous variable (0 = Not completed; 1 = Completed) that indicates whether the participant maintained sufficient adherence to the Truvada regimen to receive all 28 doses of the medication. Note: Missing 3 Truvada doses in a row terminated the PEP-intervention and prevented Course Completion.|28-days post initiation|40 participants initiated PEP during the study, of which 30 had evaluable course completion data.||participants|||Number
820013|NCT01140880|Primary|Medication Adherence|Adherence to Truvada medication (if initiated) as assessed by self-report and pill count.|Daily throughout medication course|40 participants initiated Truvada, of which 30 had evaluable medication adherence and course completion data (the 10 others were involved in the protocol violation).||proportion|||Number
820014|NCT01140880|Secondary|Abstinence From Stimulant Drug Use (Cocaine, Amphetamine, Methamphetamine)|Abstinence will be measured using thrice weekly urine drug screens and self-report|Thrice-weekly for 8 weeks|170 participants enrolled in the study, of which 30 were involved in a protocol violation that rendered their data un-analyzable. The final analytical sample is N = 140.||Stimulant-free urinalyses||Standard Deviation|Mean
820015|NCT01140880|Primary|Time From Exposure to Truvada Initiation|Time to initiation is defined as the number of hours between exposure to viral inoculum and initiation of the Truvada medication regimen.|6-month follow-up|40 participants with evaluable data initiated Truvada during the course of the study.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
820031|NCT01134549|Secondary|Total Body Clearance (CL) for Etelcalcetide||Blood samples for PK assessment were drawn pre-dose, at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes, post-dose, and at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration.|Participants who received etelcalcetide||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
820016|NCT01140906|Secondary|Potential Discontinuation Symptoms After Abrupt Discontinuation of Treatment With Vortioxetine|The Discontinuation-Emergent Signs and Symptoms Scale (DESS) was designed to evaluate possible effects of discontinuation of antidepressant therapy. It is a clinician-rated instrument that queries for signs and symptoms on a 43-item checklist (for example, agitation, insomnia, fatigue, and dizziness) to assess whether the item (event) is discontinuation-emergent. A new or worsened event reported after discontinuation of therapy scores 1 point on the checklist, and the DESS total score is the sum of all positive scores on the checklist. A higher score indicates more symptoms.|Change from Week 8 in DESS total score analyzed at Week 10|All Patients Completed Set (APCS), OC, Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820017|NCT01140906|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ASEX Total Score After 8 Weeks of Treatment|The Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX) is a 5-item, patient self-rated scale that evaluates a patient’s recent sexual experience. Patients are asked to assess their own experience over the last week (for example, “How strong is your sex drive?”, “Are your orgasms satisfying?”) and respond on a 6-point scale for each item. The ASEX is used to identify individuals with sexual dysfunction. Possible total score ranges from 5 to 30, with the higher score indicating more patient sexual dysfunction. A negative change indicates a lower sexual dysfunction.|Baseline and Week 8|FAS, MMRM||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820018|NCT01140906|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SDS Total Score After 8 Weeks of Treatment|The Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) comprises self-rated items designed to measure impairment. The patient rates the extent to which his or her (1) work, (2) social life or leisure activities and (3) home life or family responsibilities are impaired on a 10-point visual analogue scales, on which 0 = normal functioning and 10 = severe functional impairment. The three items may be summed into a single dimensional measure of global functional impairment that ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired). The higher the score, the more severe.|Baseline and Week 8|FAS, MMRM||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820019|NCT01140906|Secondary|Proportion of Remitters at Week 8 (Remission Defined as a MADRS Total Score <=10)||Week 8|FAS, LOCF, Logistic Regression||percentage of patients|||Number
820020|NCT01140906|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MADRS Total Score After 8 Weeks of Treatment in Patients With Baseline HAM-A Total Score ≥20||Baseline and Week 8|FAS, MMRM||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820021|NCT01140906|Secondary|Change in Clinical Status Using CGI-I Score at Week 8|The Clinical Global Impression - Global Improvement (CGI-I) is a 7-point scale rated from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). The investigator rated the patient's overall improvement relative to baseline, whether or not, in the opinion of the investigator, this was entirely due to the drug treatment.|Week 8|FAS, MMRM||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820022|NCT01140906|Secondary|Proportion of Responders at Week 8 (Response Defined as a >=50% Decrease in the MADRS Total Score From Baseline)||Week 8|FAS, last observation carried forward (LOCF), Logistic Regression||percentage of patients|||Number
820023|NCT01140906|Primary|Change From Baseline in MADRS Total Score After 8 Weeks of Treatment.|The Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The rating should be based on a clinical interview with the patient, moving from broadly phrased questions about symptoms to more detailed ones, which allow a precise rating of severity, covering the last 7 days. Total score from 0 to 60. The higher the score, the more severe.|Baseline and Week 8|Full-analysis set (FAS), mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820024|NCT01141205|Secondary|Increase in Blood CD4 T-cell Counts|Analyzed: Participants (minus drop-outs and withdrawn) with measured blood CD4 T-cell counts (cells/microliter). Reported: Numbers of participants obtaining an increase in measured blood CD4 T-cell counts post vaccination of >100 CD4 Tcell per microliter|up to 6 months post vaccination|Participants minus drop-outs and withdrawn participants||participants with increased CD4 count|||Number
820025|NCT01141205|Secondary|Lowering of HIV-1 RNA Viral-load in HIV-1 Immune Responders More Than 1 Log|changes (lowering) in Plasma HIV-1 RNA viral-load (measured by Quantitative RT-PCR kit, ROCHE) of more than 1 log|up to 6 months post immunization|Participants minus drop outs and participants withdrawn by them selves or by the physicians||participants with lowering of VL|||Number
820026|NCT01141205|Secondary|Induction of New T-cell Immune Response by the Vaccine|induction of new T-cell immune response against one or more of the vaccine epitopes using Interferon gamma Enzyme Linked Immuno spot assay (IFNg-ELISPOT assay)measuring Spot forming Unis per 1 million periferal blood mononuclear cells (SFU/1 mio PBMCs) above treshold (> 50 sfu/mio PBMC).|up to 6 months after last immunisation|Analyzed: Participants minus drop-outs and withdrawn participants. Reported: numbers of participants with a new induced ELISPOT Y-cell immune response to the vaccine peptide epitopes||ELISPOT responders|||Number
820027|NCT01141205|Primary|Tolerability and Safety of the Treatment.|"We report here the numbers of participants with vaccine related adverse events degree 3 or 4.
Our goal for safety and tolerability was: Fewer than or 3 patients of the 15 vaccine treated show treatment related (reaction 3) side-effects of degree 3 or 4."|up to 6 months after end of treatment|Analyzed: number of participants started minus individuals lost to follow up or participants that withdraw. Thus we include the two individuals where the physician stopped his/her participation because of SAE not related to the vaccine or to the placebo. Reported: numbers of participants with vaccina related SAE||participants|||Number
820028|NCT01141283|Primary|The Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|Safety was assessed using reports of adverse events, clinical laboratory results, findings from physical examinations, and vital sign measurements.|6 months.|The extension safety population consisted of all subjects who were exposed to BTDS and had at least 1 safety assessment during extension phase.||participants|||Number
820029|NCT01134549|Secondary|Number of Participants With Antibodies to Etelcalcetide|Serum samples were analyzed for antibodies against etelcalcetide using a validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|Samples for antibody analysis were collected pre-dose and between days 7-12 and days 21-28.|Participants who received etelcalcetide||Participants|||Count of Participants
820030|NCT01134549|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State for Etelcalcetide||Blood samples for PK assessment were drawn pre-dose, at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes, post-dose, and at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration.|Participants who received etelcalcetide||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
820033|NCT01134549|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Rate Constant (λz) for Etelcalcetide||Blood samples for PK assessment were drawn pre-dose, at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes, post-dose, and at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration.|Participants who received etelcalcetide||1/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
820034|NCT01134549|Secondary|Percent Observed Area Under the Concentration-time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity Resulting From Extrapolation to Concentration of 0 ng/mL (AUC%Extrapobs)||Blood samples for PK assessment were drawn pre-dose, at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes, post-dose, and at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration.|Participants who received etelcalcetide||percentage of AUCINFobs||Standard Deviation|Mean
820035|NCT01134549|Secondary|Observed Area Under the Concentration-time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (AUCINFobs) for Etelcalcetide||Blood samples for PK assessment were drawn pre-dose, at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes, post-dose, and at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration.|Participants who received etelcalcetide||hr*μg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820036|NCT01134549|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve Between the Time of Dose and the Last Time Point (AUCall) for Etelcalcetide||Blood samples for PK assessment were drawn pre-dose, at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes, post-dose, and at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration.|Participants who received etelcalcetide||hr*μg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820037|NCT01134549|Secondary|Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) for Etelcalcetide|Plasma samples were analyzed for levels of etelcalcetide for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis using a validated liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (LC/MS) method.|Blood samples for PK assessment were drawn pre-dose, at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes, post-dose, and at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after drug administration.|Participants who received etelcalcetide||μg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820038|NCT01134549|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Serum 1,25 (OH)2 Vitamin D||Baseline and 12, 24, and 48 hours post-dose|Modified intent-to-treat population||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820039|NCT01134549|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Serum Calcitonin||Baseline and 10 minutes, 30 minutes, 3, 12, 24, and 48 hours post-dose|Modified intent-to-treat population||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820040|NCT01134549|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Phosphate||Baseline and 10 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 36, 42 and 48 hours post-dose|Modified intent-to-treat population with available data at each time point||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820041|NCT01134549|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Corrected Calcium||Baseline and 10 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 36, 42 and 48 hours post-dose|Modified intent-to-treat population with available data at each time point||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820042|NCT01134549|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Total Calcium||Baseline and 10 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 36, 42 and 48 hours post-dose|Modified intent-to-treat population with available data at each time point||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820043|NCT01134549|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Plasma Ionized Calcium||Baseline and 10 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 36, 42 and 48 hours post-dose|Modified intent-to-treat population||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820044|NCT01134549|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Serum Parathyroid Hormone||Baseline and 10 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 36, 42 and 48 hours post-dose|Modified intent-to-treat population||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820045|NCT01134549|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events||From the first dose of study drug through 7 days.|The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population consisted of all participants who were randomized and received study medication.||participants|||Number
820046|NCT01134614|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Objective Response|Objective response was evaluated using RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) 1.1 criteria. Per RECIST criteria, complete response (CR) = disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. All lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size (<10 mm short axis). Partial response (PR)= At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. To be assigned a status of partial response, changes in tumor measurements must be confirmed by a repeat assessment performed no less than four weeks after the criteria for response is met. Objective response = CR + PR.|Assessed every 3 months for 2 years, then every 6 months for 3 years|All randomized patients are included in this analysis.||Proportion of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820047|NCT01134614|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression-free survival is defined as the time from randomization to disease progression or death, whichever occurs first. Response and disease progression will be evaluated using the international criteria proposed by the revised Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guideline (version 1.1). Disease progression is defined as >= 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study) and the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. The appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions is also considered progression.|Assessed every 3 months for 2 years, then every 6 months for 3 years|All randomized patients are included in this analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820048|NCT01134614|Primary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause.|Assessed every 3 months for 2 years, then every 6 months for 3 years|All randomized patients are included in this analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820049|NCT01134627|Other Pre-specified|Relapse Severity Based on Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS)|EDSS assesses disability in 8 functional systems. An overall score ranging from 0 (normal) to 10 (death due to MS) was calculated. EDSS progression was defined as increase by at least 1 point if last value of EDSS was equal to 5.5 and by at least 0.5 points if last EDSS was more than 5.5.|96 weeks (+/- 1 week) or ET|"ITT population included all the participants who were randomized to study medication. Number of participants analyzed N included those participants who were evaluated for this particular measure."||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820085|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the CD4+ Cell Count After 36 Months From Baseline|The change in the Cluster of differentiation 4 (CD4+) cell count from baseline after 36 months was calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase in CD4+ cell count.|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from FAS with values for CD4+ at baseline and after 36 months.||cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
820050|NCT01134627|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Total Number of Reported Relapses (Documented and Undocumented Relapses)|Documented relapses (relapse: development of new/exacerbation of existing neurological symptoms, persisting for >48 hrs and with previous period for >30 days with stable/improving condition; relapse documented by exacerbation >=1 point increase in 2 functional systems/2 points increase in 1 functional system, or >=0.5 point increase on EDSS which assesses disability in 8 functional systems with overall score ranging from 0 [normal] to 10 [death due to MS]) and undocumented relapses only fulfilled condition for relapse.|Baseline up to 96 weeks (+/- 1 week) or ET|ITT population included all the participants who were randomized and received study medication.||participants|||Number
820051|NCT01134627|Other Pre-specified|Number of Relapse Free Participants Without Progression|Analysis based on documented relapses (relapse: development of new/exacerbation of existing neurological symptoms, persisting for >48 hrs and with previous period for >30 days with stable/improving condition; relapse documented by exacerbation >=1 point increase in 2 functional systems/2 points increase in 1 functional system, or >=0.5 point increase on EDSS which assesses disability in 8 functional systems with overall score ranging from 0 [normal] to 10 [death due to MS]) and overall relapses (documented and undocumented relapses); undocumented relapses only fulfilled condition for relapse.|Baseline up to 96 weeks (+/- 1 week) or ET|"ITT population included all the participants who were randomized and received study medication. Number of participants analyzed N included those participants who were evaluated for this particular measure."||participants|||Number
820052|NCT01134627|Other Pre-specified|Relapse Count|A relapse was defined as the development of new or the exacerbation of existing neurological symptoms or signs, in the absence of fever, persisting for more than 48 hours and with a previous period for more than 30 days with a stable or an improving condition.|Week 48 (+/- 1 week) or ET|Data was not analyzed due to insufficient number of participants available for the analysis of the measure and the study was prematurely terminated.|||||
820053|NCT01134627|Other Pre-specified|Burden of Disease|The burden of disease (BOD) is the total area of MS lesions (abnormal plaques) in the brain measured on Time Constant 1 (T1) or T2 weighted MRI.|Baseline up to 96 weeks (+/- 1 week) or ET|Sub-group of ITT population included limited number of participants at pre-selected sites selected on basis of availability of MRI scanning facilities and the willingness of the site to participate.||square millimeter (mm^2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820054|NCT01134627|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Time Constant 2 (T2) Active Scans Per Participant|Inflammatory disease activity was assessed by MRI measurement of the percentage of T2 active scans.|Baseline up to 96 weeks (+/- 1 week) or ET|Data was not analyzed due to insufficient number of participants available for the analysis of this measure and the study was prematurely terminated.|||||
820055|NCT01134627|Other Pre-specified|Number of Time Constant 2 (T2) Active Lesions|Inflammatory disease activity was assessed by MRI measurement of the number of T2 active lesions.|Week 48 up to Week 96 (+/- 1 week) or ET|Data was not analyzed due to insufficient number of participants available for the analysis of this measure and the study was prematurely terminated.|||||
820056|NCT01134627|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Onset of Disability Progression|Disability progression was defined as an increase, compared to baseline evaluation of >= 1.0 points on EDSS if EDSS was >= 1.0 at baseline or >=1.5 point on EDSS if EDSS was 0.0 at baseline. EDSS assesses disability in 8 functional systems with overall score ranging from 0 (normal) to 10 (death due to MS).|Baseline up to 96 weeks (+/- 1 week) or ET|ITT population included all the participants who were randomized and received study medication.||participants|||Number
820057|NCT01134627|Secondary|Changes in Brain Volume Measured on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)|Changes in brain volume were measured as the brain parenchymal fraction using MRI scans.|Screening , final visit (96 weeks [+/- 1 week]) or ET|Sub-group of ITT population included limited number of participants at pre-selected sites selected on basis of availability of MRI scanning facilities and the willingness of the site to participate.||cubic millimeter (mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820058|NCT01134627|Secondary|Number of New or Enlarging Lesions on Time Constant 2 (T2) Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)|Inflammatory disease activity was assessed by MRI measurement of the number of new or enlarging T2 lesions.|Final visit (96 weeks [+/- 1 week]) or ET|Sub-group of ITT population included limited number of participants at pre-selected sites selected on basis of availability of MRI scanning facilities and the willingness of the site to participate.||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
820059|NCT01134627|Secondary|Number of Participants With Documented Relapses|Documented relapse: development of new/exacerbation of existing neurological symptoms, persisting for >48 hrs and with previous period for >30 days with stable/improving condition. Exacerbation was >=1 point increase in 2 functional systems /2 points increase in 1 system, either in pyramidal, cerebral, brain-stem, sensory, bowel and bladder, visual, cerebral or other functional system or >=0.5 point increase on EDSS which assesses disability in 8 functional systems with overall score ranging from 0 (normal) to 10 (death due to MS).|Baseline up to 96 weeks (+/- 1 week) or ET|ITT population included all the participants who were randomized and received study medication.||participants|||Number
820060|NCT01134627|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced First Documented Relapse|Documented relapse: development of new/exacerbation of existing neurological symptoms, persisting for >48 hrs and with previous period for >30 days with stable/improving condition. Exacerbation = at least (>=)1 point increase in 2 functional systems/2 points increase in 1 system,either in pyramidal, cerebral, brain-stem, sensory, bowel and bladder, visual, cerebral or other functional system or >=0.5 point increase on expanded disability status scale (EDSS) which assesses disability in 8 functional systems with overall score ranging from 0 (normal) to 10 (death due to multiple sclerosis [MS]).|Baseline up to 96 weeks (+/- 1 week) or early termination (ET)|The Intention to Treat (ITT) population included all the participants who were randomized and received study medication.||participants|||Number
820061|NCT01134705|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ)|The adult RQLQ has 28 questions in 7 domains (activities, sleep, non-nose/eye symptoms, practical problems, nasal symptoms, eye symptoms, and emotional). Participants were asked to recall their experiences during the previous week and to give their responses on a 7-point scale (0 = Least severe to 6 = Extremely severe). The overall RQLQ score is the mean of all 28 responses, and ranges from 0 to 7. A negative change from Baseline score indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 6|The RQLQ population included adults (18 years and older) with an impaired quality of life at Baseline as defined by a RQLQ score at the Randomization Visit of 3.0 or greater.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820062|NCT01134705|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average AM and PM Instantaneous Total Nasal Symptom Score (iTNSS) Over the Six-week Treatment Period|"Participants recorded the severity of their nasal symptoms (sneezing, runny nose, itchy nose and nasal congestion) over the 10 minutes prior to assessment twice daily (AM & PM) using the following scale:
0=absent (no sign/symptom); 1=mild (sign/symptom present, easily tolerated); 2=moderate (awareness of symptoms, bothersome but tolerable); 3=severe (symptoms hard to tolerate, interfere with daily activities and/or sleeping).
The total nasal symptom score (sum of the 4 symptom scores) ranges from 0 to 12 (worst symptoms). A negative change from Baseline score indicates symptom improvement."|Baseline (Days -3 to 0) and Days 1-43 (6-week Treatment Period)|Intent to treat population.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820063|NCT01134705|Primary|Change From Baseline in Average AM and PM Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS) Over the Six-week Treatment Period|"Participants recorded the severity of their nasal symptoms (sneezing, runny nose, itchy nose and nasal congestion) over the past 12 hours twice daily (AM & PM) using the following scale:
0=absent (no sign/symptom); 1=mild (sign/symptom present, awareness, easily tolerated); 2=moderate (awareness of sign/symptom, bothersome but tolerable); 3=severe (sign/symptoms hard to tolerate, interfere with daily activities and/or sleeping).
The total nasal symptom score (sum of 4 symptom scores) ranges from 0 to 12 (worst symptoms). A negative change from Baseline score indicates symptom improvement."|Baseline (Days -3 to 0) and Days 1-43 (6-week Treatment Period)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: The ITT population included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of randomized study medication and had at least one post-baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820064|NCT01134731|Secondary|Mean Score of Montgomery-Asberg Depression Scale of Three Treatment Groups (Paliperidone, Lithium and Placebo) After 3 Months of Treatment|The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale will be used to measure depressive symptoms to determine the efficacy of the study drugs. It has 10 items (subscales) ranging from 0-6. Therefore the total score ranges from 0-60, with lower scores indicating better outcomes. The subscales were summed for a total score.|baseline to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820065|NCT01134731|Primary|Mean Score of Beck Scale for Suicidal Ideation of Three Treatment Groups (Paliperidone, Lithium and Placebo) After 3 Months of Treatment|The Beck Scale for Suicidal Ideation will be used to measure the efficacy of the study drugs. The primary outcome measure is the Beck Suicide Scale Self Report. The primary outcome measure is the Beck Suicide Scale Self Report. It has 21 questions (subscales) with values ranging from 0-2. Therefore the total score ranges from 0-42, with lower scores indicating better outcomes. The subscales were summed to achieve a total score.|baseline to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820066|NCT01134783|Secondary|Change in Weight From Baseline to 12 Months|Comparison of the effects of the intervention and control groups with regard to change in weight from baseline to 12 months|Baseline to 12 Months|The original study design was 4 arms (1 control & 3 intervention) that varied in the way the 4-month curriculum was delivered. Our formative work showed that students not being able to choose the course delivery method would limit interest in study participation. We changed the study design to 2 arms, which was approved by the EARLY trials DSMB.||Kg||Standard Error|Mean
820067|NCT01134783|Secondary|Change in BMI From Baseline to 12 Months|Comparison of the effects of the intervention and control groups with regard to change in BMI from baseline to 12 months|Baseline to 12 Months|The original study design was 4 arms (1 control & 3 intervention) that varied in the way the 4-month curriculum was delivered. Our formative work showed that students not being able to choose the course delivery method would limit interest in study participation. We changed the study design to 2 arms, which was approved by the EARLY trials DSMB.||kg/m2||Standard Error|Mean
820068|NCT01134783|Secondary|Change in Weight From Baseline to 4 Months|Comparison of the effects of the intervention and control groups with regard to change in weight from baseline to 4 months|Baseline to 4 Months|The original study design was 4 arms (1 control & 3 intervention) that varied in the way the 4-month curriculum was delivered. Our formative work showed that students not being able to choose the course delivery method would limit interest in study participation. We changed the study design to 2 arms, which was approved by the EARLY trials DSMB.||Kg||Standard Error|Mean
820069|NCT01134783|Secondary|Change in BMI From Baseline to 4 Months|Comparison of the effects of the intervention and control groups with regard to change in BMI from baseline to 4 months|Baseline to 4 Months|The original study design was 4 arms (1 control & 3 intervention) that varied in the way the 4-month curriculum was delivered. Our formative work showed that students not being able to choose the course delivery method would limit interest in study participation. We changed the study design to 2 arms, which was approved by the EARLY trials DSMB.||kg/m2||Standard Error|Mean
820070|NCT01134783|Secondary|Prevalence of Overweight/Obese|The prevalence of overweight/obese between intervention and control students|Baseline to 24 Months|The original study design was 4 arms (1 control & 3 intervention) that varied in the way the 4-month curriculum was delivered. Our formative work showed that students not being able to choose the course delivery method would limit interest in study participation. We changed the study design to 2 arms, which was approved by the EARLY trials DSMB.||percentage of participants|||Number
820071|NCT01134783|Primary|Change in Body Mass Index (BMI)|The primary aim of this study is to examine the effectiveness of a 24-month weight gain prevention intervention to positively affect body mass index (BMI) in 2-year college students. Our hypothesis is that students randomized to an intervention condition will experience a smaller increase in mean BMI post treatment as compared to students randomized to the control condition.|Baseline to 24 Months|The original study design was 4 arms (1 control & 3 intervention) that varied in the way the 4-month curriculum was delivered. Our formative work showed that students not being able to choose the course delivery method would limit interest in study participation. We changed the study design to 2 arms, which was approved by the EARLY trials DSMB.||kg/m2||Standard Error|Mean
820086|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Viral Load After 36 Months From Baseline|The change in the log10 viral load from baseline after 36 months was calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a negative change represents a decrease in viral load.|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from FAS with values for viral load at baseline and after 36 months.||Log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820244|NCT01142193|Primary|Percent Reduction From Baseline in Weekly (7 Day) Partial-onset Seizure Frequency During the Titration Plus Maintenance Phase Compared to Baseline.||11 weeks|Intent-to-treat (ITT): all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug||Percent Reduction||Full Range|Median
820072|NCT01134887|Primary|Patient Activation Measure|Veteran self-management of hypertension measured via the 13-item, (0-100 point range), Patient Activation Measure (PAM). Administered at baseline (1st visit) and after each additional follow-up visit during the next 12-months (+2 max). Rasch conversion changed raw scores to the PAM interval measure. Reported outcome is difference in mean PAM scores at baseline and during 12-month follow-up. If a participant had two PAM scores during the follow-up period, the average of the two was taken to calculate a combined follow-up score. Higher PAM scores represent higher levels of self-activation. Research on the PAM measure indicates that each point increase in PAM score correlates to a 2% decrease in hospitalization and a 2% increase in medication adherence. Ranges for Baseline PAM scores: Intervention = 46.1 (min) to 84.3 (max); Control = 43.2 (min) to 77 (max). Ranges for Follow-up PAM scores: Intervention = 48.4 (min) to 100 (max); Control = 45.1 (min) to 80.1 (max).|12 months|Veterans participating in CHOICE study randomized to two arms: intervention or attention control. The 13-item Patient Activation Measure was administered at baseline and up to two additional times during the following 12 months. Rasch conversion of the raw PAM scores was performed to ensure the final scores were linear and interval measures.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820073|NCT01134900|Secondary|Time to Provider Response|Time from study event to modification or discontinuation of targeted medication|Until patient discharge (~2 week average)|||Hours|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820074|NCT01134900|Primary|Adverse Drug Events or Potential Adverse Drug Events|Our primary outcome measured the rate of AKI-related ADEs and pADEs. We defined pADEs as incidents with the potential for injury related to a drug, such as use of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for at least 24 hours, and ADEs as injuries resulting from the administration of a drug, such as a toxic vancomycin trough level or a bleed after administration of enoxaparin. We measured outcomes after completion of the inpatient encounter (either by death or discharge); pADEs or ADEs occurring after patient discharge were not included in the analysis.|Until patient discharge (~2 week average)|||Patient-Medication Pairs|Participants||Number
820075|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Laboratory Data (Haemoglobin) After 36 Months From Baseline|The changes in the laboratory data (Haemoglobin) from baseline after 36 months were calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase, a negative change represents a decrease in the data. .|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from TS with evaluable data for haemoglobin at baseline and at month 36.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820076|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Laboratory Data (Creatinine) After 36 Months From Baseline|The changes in the laboratory data (Creatinine) from baseline after 36 months were calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase, a negative change represents a decrease in the data. .|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from TS with evaluable data for creatinine at baseline and at month 36.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820077|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Laboratory Data (Gamma-GT) After 36 Months From Baseline|The changes in the laboratory data (Gamma glutamyl transferase (Gamma GT)) from baseline after 36 months were calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase, a negative change represents a decrease in the data. .|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from TS with evaluable data for Gamma GT at baseline and at month 36.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820078|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Laboratory Data (AST) After 36 Months From Baseline|The changes in the laboratory data (Aspartate transminase (AST)) from baseline after 36 months were calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase, a negative change represents a decrease in the data. .|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from TS with evaluable data for the AST at baseline and at month 36.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820079|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Laboratory Data ( ALT) After 36 Months From Baseline|The changes in the laboratory data (Alanine transaminase (ALT)) from baseline after 36 months were calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase, a negative change represents a decrease in the data. .|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from TS with evaluable data for ALT at baseline and at month 36.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820080|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Laboratory Data (Blood Glucose) After 36 Months From Baseline|The changes in the laboratory data (Blood Glucose) from baseline after 36 months were calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase, a negative change represents a decrease in the data. .|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from TS with evaluable data for blood glucose at baseline and at month 36.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820081|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Laboratory Data (Triglycerides) After 36 Months From Baseline|The changes in the laboratory data (Triglycerides) from baseline after 36 months were calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase, a negative change represents a decrease in the data. .|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from TS with evaluable data for triglycerides at baseline and at month 36.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820082|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Laboratory Data (LDL Cholesterol) After 36 Months From Baseline|The changes in the laboratory data (Low density protein (LDL) Cholesterol) from baseline after 36 months were calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase, a negative change represents a decrease in the data. .|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from TS with evaluable data for LDL cholesterol at baseline and at month 36.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820083|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Laboratory Data (HDL Cholesterol) After 36 Months From Baseline|The changes in the laboratory data ( High density protein (HDL) Cholesterol) from baseline after 36 months were calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase, a negative change represents a decrease in the data. .|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from TS with evaluable data for HDL cholesterol at baseline and at month 36.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820084|NCT01134939|Secondary|Changes in the Laboratory Data (Total Cholesterol) After 36 Months From Baseline|The changes in the laboratory data (Total Cholesterol) from baseline after 36 months were calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the value after 36 months. Therefore, a positive change represents an increase, a negative change represents a decrease in the data. .|Baseline and 36 months|Patients from TS with evaluable data for total cholesterol at baseline and at month 36.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820087|NCT01134939|Primary|Number of Patients With Virologic Response (VR) After 36 Months|"VR is defined as HIV viral load of < 50 copies/mL before month 36 and without subsequent rebound or change of ARV therapy. A rebound is defined by two consecutive measurements of VL ≥ 50 copies/ml, at least two weeks apart.
A change of ARV therapy is defined as a permanent discontinuation of Viramune®. A change in the background therapy due to toxicity or intolerance is not considered failure for the analysis. Therefore, a patient remains a treatment responder in this case if all other criteria are fulfilled. A rebound is defined by two consecutive measurements of VL ≥ 50 copies/ml, at least two weeks apart, after two consecutive measurements of VL< 50 copies/ml."|36 months|Patients from Full Analysis Set (FAS): This patient set includes all patients in the treated set who have analysable data in at least one efficacy endpoint.||participants|||Number
820088|NCT01134952|Secondary|Delta Triglyceride Fasting Level|Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL|3 month|Levels at appropriate times not available on 2 patients||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820089|NCT01134952|Secondary|Delta Cholesterol Fasting Level|Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL|3 month|Levels not available for 2 patients||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820090|NCT01134952|Secondary|Delta Platelet Count|Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL|3 month|Levels not available on 2 patients at appropriate time||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820091|NCT01134952|Secondary|Delta Hemoglobin|Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL|3 month|Levels at appropriate times not available in 2 patients||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820092|NCT01134952|Secondary|Delta Alanine Aminotransferase|Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL|3 month|Levels at appropriate time not available in 2 patients||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820093|NCT01134952|Secondary|Delta Alkaline Phosphatase|Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL|3 month|Levels not available at appropriate times in 2 patients||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820094|NCT01134952|Secondary|Delta Bilirubin|Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL|3 month|Levels available at correct time in only 7 patients||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820095|NCT01134952|Secondary|Delta Tacrolimus Trough Level|Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL|3 month|2 patients did not have tacrolimus levels recorded during both time periods and are excluded||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820096|NCT01134952|Secondary|Sirolimus Trough Level||3 month|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
820097|NCT01134952|Secondary|Final Hepatitis C Viral Load|Percent change in HCV load determined 3 months after switch from SRL to MMF|3 month|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820098|NCT01134952|Primary|Delta Hepatitis C Viral Load|Percent change in HCV load determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL.|3 month|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820099|NCT01135017|Other Pre-specified|Overview of Adverse Events (AE)|AE are any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, syndrome, or illness observed by the investigator or reported by the participant during the study.|from first study drug intake up to 10 days after the last study drug intake|All randomized and treated participants. Participants were considered according to the treatment actually received.||participants|||Number
820100|NCT01135017|Secondary|Incidence Rate of Electrical Cardioversion (or Overdrive Pacing)|"Electrical cardioversion is a procedure in which an electric shock is used to restore normal heart rhythm. Overdrive pacing is a procedure in which an artificial cardiac pacemaker is used to increase the heart rate in order to suppress certain arrhythmias.
Incidence rate of electrical cardioversion (or overdrive pacing) is expressed as the number of participants that was cardioverted or paced during the study."|12 weeks|Modified intent-to-treat population as previously defined||participants|||Number
820101|NCT01135017|Secondary|Atrial Fibrillation Severity Scale (AFSS) Scores|"The University of Toronto Atrial Fibrillation Severity Scale is an instrument to assess the subject-perceived AF burden and AF symptom severity. It consists in a questionnaire plus a scoring algorithm.
AF Burden score ranges from 3 to 30 and higher scores indicate greater AF burden.
AF symptoms severity score ranges from 0 to 35 and higher scores indicate extremely severe AF symptoms."|Baseline (before randomization) and 12 weeks after randomization|Modified intent-to-treat population as previously defined||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820102|NCT01135017|Secondary|Average Ventricular Rate During AF Episodes|"Ventricular rates of AF episodes were obtained from pacemaker interrogation and EGM review.
The average ventricular rate during AF episodes in the 12-week treatment period was defined as the duration-weighted average of the ventricular rates collected at Week 4 and Week 12. It was calculated from the single available measurement when one measurement was missing."|Baseline (before randomization), 4 weeks and 12 weeks after randomization|Modified intent-to-treat population as previously defined||beats/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
820103|NCT01135017|Secondary|AF Burden During the First 4 Weeks of Treatment and After 4-week Treatment|AF burden at each pacemaker interrogation as evaluated centrally by the Pacemaker Core Lab|4 weeks and 12 weeks after randomization|Modified intent-to-treat population as previously defined||percent time in AF||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
820104|NCT01135017|Primary|Atrial Fibrillation (AF) Burden During the 12-week Treatment Period|"AF burden, defined as the percent time a subject is in AF, was evaluated centrally by a Pacemaker Core Lab based on pacemaker interrogation reports including Electrogram (EGM) data provided by the Investigator.
AF burden during the 12-week treatment period was defined as the duration-weighted average of AF burden collected at Week 4 and Week 12. It was calculated from the single available measurement when one measurement was missing."|Baseline (before randomization), 4 weeks and 12 weeks after randomization|The analysis included all randomized and treated participants with post-baseline AF burden assessment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized (Modified Intent-to-treat analysis).||percent time in AF||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
820105|NCT01135069|Primary|Improvement in Acne|Counting of acne lesions both inflammatory and non-inflammatory|12 weeks|||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820106|NCT01135134|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Total Nasal Symptom Score at 1 Week|Total nasal symptom score was a composite of 4 symptoms (sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, and nasal itching), each symptom was scored on a scale of 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe. The total score ranged from 0 to 12. The higher the score was, the more severe the symptoms were.|Baseline and 1 week|||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820107|NCT01135134|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Total Nasal Symptom Score at 2 Weeks|Total nasal symptom score was a composite of 4 symptoms (sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, and nasal itching), each symptom was scored on a scale of 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe. The total score ranged from 0 to 12. The higher the score was, the more severe the symptoms were.|Baseline and 2 weeks (or discontinuation)|||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820108|NCT01135186|Secondary|Secondary Outcome Measures Will Include Change in Symptom Severity as Measured by the Patient Assessment of Gastrointestinal Disorder-Symptom Severity Index Disorders Symptom Severity Index (PAGI-SYM)|"Symptom severity as measured by the Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Disorder- Symptom Severity Index. (PAGI-SYM)
The PAGI-SYM is compose of 20 questions.
Each question can be answered on a scale of 1-5 (below)
0 = none, 1=very mild, 2=mild, 3=moderate, 4=severe, 5=very severe
Cumulative scores were calculated by summing all 20 questions.
The minimum cumulative scores would be 0 while the maximum cumulative score would be 100
Once we calculated the cumulative score for each participant, we took the average of all the cumulative scores giving us the sample mean. This was done at baseline, week 4, and week 8.
Lower score indicates decreased symptom severity. Higher score indicates increased symptom severity."|Baseline, 4 Weeks, 8 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820109|NCT01135186|Secondary|Secondary Outcome Measures Will Include Change in Quality of Life.|"Quality of life as impacted by patients with upper gastrointestinal disorders (PAGI-QOL)
The PAGI-QOl is composed of 30 questions.
Each question asks about the degree to which a patient’s quality of life is impacted by upper gastrointestinal disorders.
Questions measure quality of life impact on a scale of 1-5 listed below.
0=none of the time, 1=a little of the time, 2=some of the time, 3=a good bit of the time, 4= most of the time, 5= all of time
The 30 items are summed together for a cumulative PAGI-QOL score. The minimum cumulative score is “0” and the maximum score is “150.”
Once we calculated the cumulative score for each participant, we took the average of all participants cumulative scores giving us the sample mean. This was done at baseline, week 4, and week 8.
Lower scores indicate an improved overall quality of life. Higher scores indicate a diminished overall quality of life."|Baseline, 4 Weeks, 8 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820110|NCT01135186|Secondary|Secondary Outcome Measures Will Include Change in Symptom Severity.|"Change in symptom severity over the past 2 weeks as measured by the patient reported Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI)
The GCSI is composed of 9 questions.
Each question asks about symptom severity on a scale of 1-5 listed below.
0=None 1= Very mild 2= Mild 3=Moderate 4=Severe 5= Very severe
The 9 scores are summed together for cumulative GCSI score. The minimum cumulative score is ‘”0” and the maximum cumulative score is “45.”
Once we calculated the cumulative score for each participant, we took the average of all participants cumulative scores giving us the sample mean. This was done at baseline, week 4, and week 8.
Higher total scores indicate higher symptom severity. Lower total scores indicate lower symptom severity."|Baseline, 4 Weeks, 8 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820111|NCT01135186|Primary|Gastric Accommodation|"Gastric Accommodation refers to the reflexive relaxation of the upper stomach after swallowing as measured by the Satiety Test at baseline, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks.
Increased gastric accommodation is considered a positive outcome."|Baseline, 4 Weeks, 8 Weeks|||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
820112|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Assessment of Macula Lutea of the Left Eye|The macula lutea of the left eye was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5. Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as maculopathy, retinal pigmentation, macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, retinal hemorrhage or aneurysm. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in macula lutea classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820113|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Assessment of Macula Lutea of the Right Eye|The macula lutea of the right eye was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5. Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as maculopathy, retinal pigmentation, macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, retinal hemorrhage or aneurysm. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in macula lutea classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820114|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Assessment of Retinal Blood Vessels of the Left Eye|The retinal blood vessels of the left eye were assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5. Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as retinal vascular disorder, retinopathy, and retinal hemorrhage. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in retinal blood vessel classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820115|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Assessment of Retinal Blood Vessels of the Right Eye|The retinal blood vessels of the right eye were assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5. Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as retinal vascular disorder, retinopathy, and retinal hemorrhage. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in retinal blood vessel classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820116|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Assessment of Optic Nerve and Papilla of the Left Eye|The optic nerve and papilla of the left eye was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5. Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as optic nerve cupping, optic nerve cup/disc ratio, or glaucomatous optic disc atrophy. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in optic nerve/papilla classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820117|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Assessment of Optic Nerve and Papilla of the Right Eye|The optic nerve and papilla of the right eye was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5. Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as optic nerve cupping, optic nerve cup/disc ratio, or glaucomatous optic disc atrophy. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in optic nerve/papilla classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820118|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Assessment of Retinal Aspect of the Left Eye|The retinal aspect of the left eye (such as color anomalies) was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5. Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as deep red ocular fundus, fundus myopicus, retinal disorders, exudates or pigmentation. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in retinal aspect classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820119|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Assessment of Retinal Aspect of the Right Eye|The retinal aspect of the right eye (such as color anomalies) was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5. Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as deep red ocular fundus, fundus myopicus, retinal disorders, exudates or pigmentation. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in retinal aspect classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820120|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Vitreous Body Assessment of Left Eye|"The vitreous body of the left eye was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5.
Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as myodesopsia, vitreous opacities, degeneration, detachment or prolapse. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in vitreous body classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows)."|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820121|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Vitreous Body Assessment of Right Eye|"The vitreous body of the right eye was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5.
Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as myodesopsia, vitreous opacities, degeneration, detachment or prolapse. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in vitreous body classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows)."|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820122|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Lens Assessment of Left Eye|"The lens of the left eye was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5.
Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as cataracts, lenticular opacities, vacuoles or pseudophakia. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in lens classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows)."|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820123|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Lens Assessment of Right Eye|"The lens of the right eye was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5.
Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as cataracts, lenticular opacities, vacuoles or pseudophakia. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in lens classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows)."|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820124|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Cornea Assessment of Left Eye|The cornea of the left eye was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5. Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as cataracts, corneal degeneration, opacity, scars or deposits. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in corneal classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820125|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Cornea Assessment of Right Eye|The cornea of the right eye was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and judged to be normal or pathological at Baseline and at Year 5. Pathological classification includes abnormal findings such as cataracts, corneal degeneration, opacity, scars or deposits. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in corneal classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820126|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Color Vision|Color vision was assessed by an Ophthalmologist and classified as normal or pathological. Pathological findings include abnormal color vision tests, color blindness and anomalous quotient. Normal indicates no pathological findings were observed. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in color vision classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820222|NCT01141569|Secondary|Tumor Control Rate (CR + PR + SD)|Tumor control rate is defined as the sum of objective response rate (CR+PR) and stable disease (SD) rate.|Up to 12 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
820127|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Accommodation|Accommodation is the adjustment of the focal length of the eye lens to keep an object in focus on the retina as its distance from the eye varies, and is measured in diopters: Diopters = 1/(focal length).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||diopters||Standard Deviation|Mean
820128|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Adaptation With Glare|"Adaptation is the ability of the eye to adjust to various levels of darkness and light. Normal and pathological status of adaptation with glare was defined as follows:
Normal status: Contrast between 1:0.05 and 1:23.5.
Pathological status: Contrast = 0 or contrast > 1:23.5.
The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in the classification of adaptation with glare between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows)."|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820129|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ophthalmologic Examination - Adaptation Without Glare|"Adaptation is the ability of the eye to adjust to various levels of darkness and light. Normal and pathological status of adaptation without glare was defined as follows:
Normal status: Contrast between 1:0.05 and 1:23.5.
Pathological status: Contrast = 0 or contrast > 1:23.5.
The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in the classification of adaptation without glare between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows)."|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820130|NCT01135368|Secondary|Ophthalmologic Examination - Visual Acuity|Visual Acuity was measured using the Snellen eye chart at a distance of 6 meters. Acuity is expressed as a ratio of the test distance (6 M) / the distance the average eye can see the letters on a certain line of the eye chart. Visual acuity of 1 is normal; an individual with acuity of 0.5 could only recognize an object at half the distance compared to an individual with normal acuity.|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, where data were available. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
820131|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Analysis - Follicle Stimulating Hormone|The change between follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) measured at year 5 in males including final visit and follicle stimulating hormone measured at baseline.|Baseline and Year 5.|Safety analysis set, including all male participants who received any study medication. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820132|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Analysis - Luteinizing Hormone|The change between luteinizing hormone measured at year 5 in males including final visit and luteinizing hormone measured at baseline.|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, including all male participants who received any study medication. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820133|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Analysis - Testosterone|The change between testosterone measured at year 5 in males including final visit and Testosterone measured at baseline.|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, including all male participants who received any study medication. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||µg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820134|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Corpus Intestinal Metaplasia|Intestinal metaplasia was assessed by biopsy and histopathological examination of the corpus and classified according to the Sydney classification as mild, moderate, severe or none. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in intestinal metaplasia classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, including all participants who received any study medication. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820135|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Antrum Intestinal Metaplasia|Intestinal metaplasia was assessed by biopsy and histopathological examination of the antrum and classified according to the Sydney classification as mild, moderate, severe or none. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in intestinal metaplasia classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, including all participants who received any study medication. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820136|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Corpus Chronic Inflammation Score|Chronic inflammation of the corpus was assessed by histopathology and graded according to the Sydney classification: 0 = None; 1 = mild; 2 = moderate; 3 = Severe.|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, including all participants who received any study medication. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820137|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average Antrum Chronic Inflammation Score|Chronic inflammation of the antrum was assessed by histopathology and graded according to the Sydney classification: 0 = None; 1 = mild; 2 = moderate; 3 = Severe|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, including all participants who received any study medication. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820138|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Corpus Atrophy|Atrophy was assessed by histopathological examination of cells biopsied from the corpus and classified according to the Sydney classification as mild, moderate, severe or none. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in atrophy classification (mild, moderate, severe or none) between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, including all participants who received any study medication. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820139|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Antrum Atrophy|Atrophy was assessed by histopathological examination of cells biopsied from the antrum and classified according to the Sydney classification as mild, moderate, severe or none. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in atrophy classification (mild, moderate, severe or none) between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows).|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, including all participants who received any study medication. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820223|NCT01141569|Secondary|Rate of Disease Stabilizations|Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study|Up to 12 months|Number of patients who had Stable disease||participants|||Number
820140|NCT01135368|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Enterochromaffin-like Cell Hyperplasia|"Enterochromaffin-like (ECL) cells were evaluated and classified by histopathological examinations as Normal, Simple (diffuse) hyperplasia, or Linear, chain producing hyperplasia.
The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in ECL-cell classification between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Year 5 (depicted in the rows) for all patients."|Baseline and Year 5|Safety analysis set, including all participants who received any study medication. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||participants|||Number
820141|NCT01135368|Primary|Change From Baseline in Endoscopic Healing of Erosive Reflux Disease as Assessed by Endoscopy|Los Angeles Classification is used to grade the extension of changes in the oesophagus induced by reflux disease (Grade 0: normal aspect of mucosa; Grade A: ≥1 mucosal breaks no longer than 5 mm; Grade B: ≥1 mucosal breaks >5 mm long; Grade C: mucosal breaks extending between tops of two or more mucosal folds but are <75% of the circumference; Grade D: mucosal breaks ≥75% of the circumference). Healed defined as anything less than Grade A criteria. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in Los Angeles classification between Baseline (table columns) and Week 8 (table rows).|Baseline and Week 8|Intent to treat population, including all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had a subsequent rating of the primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
820142|NCT01135368|Primary|Change From Baseline in Reflux Disease Symptom - Cough & Sore Throat|Cough and sore throat symptoms were assessed by the Investigator at Baseline and the Week 8 visit. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in symptom intensity (mild, moderate, severe or none) between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Week 8 (depicted in the rows) for all patients.|Baseline and Week 8|Intent to treat population, including all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had a subsequent rating of the primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
820143|NCT01135368|Primary|Change From Baseline in Reflux Disease Symptom - Nausea & Vomiting|Nausea and vomiting symptoms were assessed by the Investigator at Baseline and the Week 8 visit. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in symptom intensity (mild, moderate, severe or none) between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Week 8 (depicted in the rows) for all patients.|Baseline and Week 8|Intent to treat population, including all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had a subsequent rating of the primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
820144|NCT01135368|Primary|Change From Baseline in Reflux Disease Symptom - Pain in Upper Abdomen|Pain in the upper abdomen symptoms were assessed by the Investigator at Baseline and the Week 8 visit. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in symptom intensity (mild, moderate, severe or none) between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Week 8 (depicted in the rows) for all patients.|Baseline and Week 8|Intent to treat population, including all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had a subsequent rating of the primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
820145|NCT01135368|Primary|Change From Baseline in Reflux Disease Symptom - Difficulty Swallowing|Difficulty swallowing symptoms were assessed by the Investigator at Baseline and the Week 8 visit. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in symptom intensity (mild, moderate, severe or none) between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Week 8 (depicted in the rows) for all patients.|Baseline and Week 8|Intent to treat population, including all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had a subsequent rating of the primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
820146|NCT01135368|Primary|Change From Baseline in Reflux Disease Symptoms - Acid Regurgitation|Acid regurgitation symptoms were assessed by the Investigator at Baseline and the Week 8 visit. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in symptom intensity (mild, moderate, severe or none) between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Week 8 (depicted in the rows) for all patients.|Baseline and Week 8|Intent to treat population, including all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had a subsequent rating of the primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
820147|NCT01135368|Primary|Change From Baseline in Reflux Disease Symptom - Heartburn|Heartburn symptoms were assessed by the Investigator at Baseline and the Week 8 visit. The shift table below summarizes the individual transitions in symptom intensity (mild, moderate, severe or none) between Baseline (depicted in the columns) and Week 8 (depicted in the rows) for all patients.|Baseline and Week 8|Intent to treat population, including all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had a subsequent rating of the primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
820148|NCT01135381|Secondary|Community Tenure|The number of days a patient spends in the home versus the hospital at 30 days.|30 days|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820149|NCT01135381|Secondary|Rehospitalizations at 90 Days||90 days|||participants|||Number
820150|NCT01135381|Primary|Re-hospitalizations||During the 30days after discharge|||participants|||Number
820151|NCT01135420|Primary|Readiness to Attend Substance Use Disorder Continuing Care|Readiness to attend substance use disorder continuing care; scale range=0-4, with 0=not ready to do; 4=already doing; higher scores indicate a better outcome.|3 months post-intervention|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820152|NCT01135498|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of informed consent to the date of death (regardless of the cause of death). There was no restriction; survival was calculated until the date of death, even if another line of treatment was received, or until the date censored (last contact with the participant even if drugs different from the study treatment schedule were received). For all participants, survival information was collected until the date of death, the last contact, or the last follow-up.|From study start up to approximately 4 years|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820153|NCT01135498|Primary|Progression-Free Survival|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from the date of informed consent until the date when the participant had progression of disease or died from disease progression. Participants who received surgical treatment after treatment ended were censored at the time of surgery. Participants who left the study for reasons other than progression of the disease were censored on the date on which they received a later antitumor therapy (with the same or different drugs, radiotherapy, or surgery).|From study start up to approximately 4 years|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820154|NCT01135498|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died||From study start up to approximately 4 years|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
820155|NCT01135498|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Disease Control (CR, PR, or No Change [NC])|Percent of participants with confirmed CR, PR, or NC. Per RECIST version (v)1.0: CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease in sum of longest diameters of target lesions taking as reference baseline sum longest diameters associated to non-progressive disease response for non-target lesions. NC was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease taking as reference smallest sum of longest dimensions since treatment started associated to non-progressive disease response for non-target lesions.|From study start up to approximately 4 years|Response-Evaluable population||percentage of participants|||Number
820156|NCT01135498|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Objective Response (Complete Response [CR] or Partial Response [PR])|Percentage of participants with objective response based assessment of CR or PR according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease. All nodes, both target and non-target, must have decreased to normal (short axis less than [<]10 millimeters [mm]) and no new lesions. PR was defined as greater than or equal to (≥)30 percent (%) decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions. The short axis was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No unequivocal progression of non-target disease. No new lesions.|From study start up to approximately 4 years|Response-Evaluable population: all enrolled participants who received at least 3 cycles of treatment, had all baseline lesions evaluated at least once after receiving the third cycle (using same technique as at baseline), and were without major violations of the study protocol.||percentage of participants|||Number
820157|NCT01135498|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression or Death|Disease progression was defined according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) as a 20 percent (%) increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measureable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|Start of study to approximately 4 years|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
820158|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Total Protein|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820159|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Lipocalin 1|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820160|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Mucin 1|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||Relative unit/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820161|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline - Mucin 16 Carbohydrate Antigen 125|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of Intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||Relative unit/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820162|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Evaluated for Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Mucin 4|"Number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline."|Week 4 and 8|A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.||Participants|||Number
820163|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Mucin 5AC|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||Relative unit/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820164|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Albumin|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820165|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Epidermal Growth Factor|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820166|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Tissue Inhibitor of Metalloproteinase 1 (TIMP-1)|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820167|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Chemokine (C-C Motif) Ligand 5 (CCL5) (Alias Regulated on Activation, Normal T Cell Expressed, and Secreted: RANTES)|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820168|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Chemokine ( C-C Motif) Ligand 20 (CCL20) (Alias Macrophage Inflammatory Protein 3 Alpha: MIP3A)|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820169|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Chemokine (C-X-C Motif) Ligand 9 (CXCL9) (Alias Monokine Induced by Gamma Interferon: MIG)|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820170|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Chemokine (C-X-C Motif) Ligand 10 (CXCL10) (Alias Gamma-Interferon Inducible Protein 10: IP10)|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820171|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Interleukin-17A|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820172|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Alpha-1 Antitrypsin|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820173|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820174|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Matrix Metalloproteinase-9|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820175|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Matrix Metalloproteinase-3|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820176|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Interleukin-23|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820177|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Interleukin-1 Receptor Antagonist|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820178|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Interleukin-1 Beta|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820179|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Interleukin-12 P40/P35 Heterodimer (IL-12P70)|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820180|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Monocyte Chemotactic Protein 1|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820181|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Interleukin-8|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820182|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Interleukin-7|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820183|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Interleukin-6|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820184|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Interleukin-18|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820185|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in the Biomarker in Tear Fluid for Study Eye From Baseline -Apolipoprotein C-3|"Analysis of biomarkers which were immune and inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change= value at visit minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|"A subset of intent-to-treat population collected tear samples from both eyes at baseline, week 4 and week 8.
n=number of analyzed with sufficient quantity for testing."||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820186|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in Expression of Inflammatory Markers on Conjunctival Cells From Baseline: Percentage of Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA)-DR Positive for Study Eye|"Percentage of conjunctival epithelial cells that were positive with HLA-DR expression was calculated as HLA-DR Positive.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|A subset of intent-to-treat population collected impression cytology samples from both eyes at screening, week 4 and week 8.||Percentage of positive cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
820187|NCT01135511|Other Pre-specified|Change in Expression of Inflammatory Markers on Conjunctival Cells From Baseline: Human Leukocyte Antigen-DR Antibody Bound Per Cell for Study Eye|"The average level of HLA-DR expression per cell was reported as HLA-DR antibody bound per cell (ABC).
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change = value at observation minus value at baseline."|Baseline, Week 4 and 8|A subset of intent-to-treat population collected impression cytology samples from both eyes at screening, week 4 and week 8.||Antibodies bound per cell||Standard Deviation|Mean
820224|NCT01141569|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Rate|Progression-free survival is defined as the duration of time from start of treatment to time of progression or death, whichever occurs first.|From start of treatment to time of progression or death, whichever occurs first, assessed up to 12 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820188|NCT01135511|Secondary|Summary of Maximum Severity of Ocular Tolerability Assessments Post Baseline for Study Eye: Number of Participants in Each Severity Scale|"Ocular tolerability was assessed for the 5 symptoms (burning sensation, blurred vision, ocular discomfort, pain, tearing), based on a 4-point severity scale (none, minor, moderate, and severe).
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline."|8 weeks|Safety analysis set: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
820189|NCT01135511|Secondary|Number of Participants With Nonocular Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity|Counts of participants who had treatment-emergent nonocular AEs, defined as newly occurring or worsening after first dose. Participants with multiple occurrences of an AE within a category were counted once within the category.|8 weeks|Safety analysis set: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
820190|NCT01135511|Secondary|Number of Participants With Ocular Adverse Events (AEs)by Severity|Counts of participants who had treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), defined as newly occurring or worsening after first dose. Ocular AEs are the events which are localized in the ocular region. Participants with multiple occurrences of an AE within a category were counted once within the category.|8 weeks|Safety analysis set: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
820191|NCT01135511|Secondary|Number of Participants Evaluable for Time to Achievement of ≥3 Unit Decrease in OCI Scores|The OCI is a validated instrument developed to measure the frequency and intensity of 6 common dry eye symptoms: dryness, grittiness, stinging, eye tiredness, pain, and itching. It contains 12 questions, each measured on a 7-point rating scale (0 [Never] to 6 [Always], or 0 [Never had it] to 6 [Severe]). Negative change from baseline indicated improvement. Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.|Week 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
820192|NCT01135511|Secondary|Number of Participants Evaluable for Time to Achievement of ≥10 mm Schirmer Wetting Score Without Anesthesia for Study Eye|"The Schirmer test without anesthesia was used to estimate tear flow stimulated reflexly by insertion of a filter paper strip into the conjunctival sac.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline."|Week 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
820193|NCT01135511|Secondary|Number of Participants Evaluable for Time to Achievement of 100% Clearing of Corneal Staining for Study Eye|"Based on the National Eye Institute (NEI) dry eye clinical trials workshop, the cornea was divided into 5 different zones. Each corneal zone was graded independently using a 0 to 3 grading scale. The maximum possible staining score is 15, higher score indicated greater staining.
100% Clearing of Corneal Staining means corneal staining score = 0. Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline."|Week 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
820194|NCT01135511|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Demonstrating ≥10 Unit Decrease in Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Total Score From Baseline|"The OSDI is a validated instrument for ocular surface diseases, measuring the ocular symptoms, vision-related function, and environmental triggers.
The 12 items of the OSDI questionnaire were graded on a scale of 0 [none of the time] to 4 [all of the time]. The total OSDI score was then calculated on the basis of the following formula: OSDI=[(sum of scores for all questions answered) × 100]/[(total number of questions answered) × 4].
The OSDI is scored on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores representing greater disability.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline."|Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Percentage of participants|||Number
820195|NCT01135511|Secondary|Changes in the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Subscale Score From Baseline: Environmental Triggers|"The OSDI is a validated instrument for ocular surface diseases, measuring the ocular symptoms, vision-related function, and environmental triggers.
The 12 items of the OSDI questionnaire were graded on a scale of 0 [none of the time] to 4 [all of the time]. The subscale OSDI score was then calculated on the basis of the following formula: OSDI=[(sum of scores for questions 10 to 12 answered) × 100]/[(total number of questions 10 to 12 answered) × 4].
The OSDI is scored on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores representing greater disability.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change: score at observation minus score at baseline. Negative change from baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820196|NCT01135511|Secondary|Changes in the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Subscale Score From Baseline: Vision-Related Function|"The OSDI is a validated instrument for ocular surface diseases, measuring the ocular symptoms, vision-related function, and environmental triggers.
The 12 items of the OSDI questionnaire were graded on a scale of 0 [none of the time] to 4 [all of the time]. The subscale OSDI score was then calculated on the basis of the following formula: OSDI=[(sum of scores for questions 4 to 9 answered) × 100]/[(total number of questions 4 to 9 answered) × 4].
Thus, the OSDI is scored on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores representing greater disability.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change: score at observation minus score at baseline. Negative change from baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820225|NCT01141569|Secondary|Frequency and Severity of Adverse Events|Tabulated using counts and proportions detailing frequently occurring, serious and severe events of interest.|Up to 12 months|Number analyzed is number of participants who experienced the adverse event.||Participants|||Count of Participants
820226|NCT01141569|Secondary|Time to Progression|Time to Progression is duration of time from start of treatment to time of progression|Up to 12 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820197|NCT01135511|Secondary|Changes in the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Subscale Score From Baseline: Ocular Symptoms|"The OSDI is a validated instrument for ocular surface diseases, measuring the ocular symptoms, vision-related function, and environmental triggers.
The 12 items of the OSDI questionnaire were graded on a scale of 0 [the none of time] to 4 [all of the time]. The subscale OSDI score was then calculated on the basis of the following formula: OSDI=[(sum of scores for questions 1 to 3 answered) × 100]/[(total number of questions 1 to 3 answered) × 4].
The OSDI is scored on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores representing greater disability.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change: score at observation minus score at baseline. Negative change from baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820198|NCT01135511|Secondary|Changes in the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Total Score From Baseline|"The OSDI is a validated instrument for ocular surface diseases, measuring the ocular symptoms, vision-related function, and environmental triggers.
The 12 items of the OSDI questionnaire were graded on a scale of 0 [none of the time] to 4 [all of the time]. The total OSDI score was then calculated on the basis of the following formula: OSDI=[(sum of scores for all questions answered) × 100]/[(total number of questions answered) × 4].
The OSDI is scored on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores representing greater disability.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change: score at observation minus score at baseline. Negative change from baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820199|NCT01135511|Secondary|Number of Participants Demonstrating at Least ≥3 Unit Decrease in Ocular Comfort Index (OCI) Total Score From Baseline|"The OCI is a validated instrument developed to measure the frequency and intensity of 6 common dry eye symptoms: dryness, grittiness, stinging, eye tiredness, pain, and itching. It contains 12 questions, each measured on a 7-point rating scale (0 [Never] to 6 [Always], or 0 [Never had it] to 6 [Severe]). Total score ranged from 0 (none) to 72 (severe symptoms). A higher score indicates more severe dry eye symptoms.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change = scores at observation minus score at baseline. Negative change from baseline indicated improvement."|Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Participants|||Number
820200|NCT01135511|Secondary|Changes in the Ocular Comfort Index (OCI) Total Score From Baseline|"The OCI is a validated instrument developed to measure the frequency and intensity of 6 common dry eye symptoms: dryness, grittiness, stinging, eye tiredness, pain, and itching. It contains 12 questions, each measured on a 7-point rating scale (0 [Never] to 6 [Always], or 0 [Never had it] to 6 [Severe]). Total score ranged from 0 (none) to 72 (severe symptoms). A higher score indicates more severe dry eye symptoms.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change: score at observation minus score at baseline. Negative change from baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820201|NCT01135511|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Increase of ≥10 mm From Baseline in Schirmer Test Value Without Anesthesia for Study Eye|"The Schirmer test without anesthesia was used to estimate tear flow stimulated reflexly by insertion of a filter paper strip into the conjunctival sac. The length of wetting (distance from the notch) was recorded in millimeters (to the nearest 0.5 mm). If the wetting line was oblique, the halfway point was used.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline."|Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Participants|||Number
820202|NCT01135511|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve ≥10 mm Schirmer Test Value Without Anesthesia for Study Eye|"The Schirmer test without anesthesia was used to estimate tear flow stimulated reflexly by insertion of a filter paper strip into the conjunctival sac. The length of wetting (distance from the notch) was recorded in millimeters (to the nearest 0.5 mm). If the wetting line was oblique, the halfway point was used.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline."|Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data at Week 8.||Percentage of participants|||Number
820203|NCT01135511|Secondary|Changes in Schirmer Test Values Without Anesthesia for Study Eye From Baseline|"The Schirmer test without anesthesia was used to estimate tear flow stimulated reflexly by insertion of a filter paper strip into the conjunctival sac. The length of wetting (distance from the notch) was recorded in millimeters (to the nearest 0.5 mm). If the wetting line was oblique, the halfway point was used.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change: value at observation minus value at baseline. Positive change from baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
820204|NCT01135511|Secondary|Changes in Tear Break Up Time (TBUT) for Study Eye From Baseline|"TBUT is the interval between the last complete blink and the first appearance of a dry spot, or disruption in the tear film. Using a stopwatch, the time between last complete blink and first appearance of dry spot was recorded.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change: value at observation minus value at baseline. Positive change from baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
820247|NCT01142323|Secondary|Interleukin 6|Interleukin 6 will be measured at entry and end of study as an indirect measure of PPAR alpha pathway activation.|6 months||||||
820205|NCT01135511|Secondary|Changes in Conjunctival Staining Scores (Interpalpebral) for Study Eye From Baseline|"Based on the Oxford grading system, the bulbar conjunctiva of each eye was divided into 2 different zones (nasal and temporal). The nasal and temporal bulbar conjunctival zones were each graded independently using a 6-point scale (0 [Absent] to 5 [Severe]). Total score ranged from 0 (Absent) to 10 (severe), higher score=higher damage to eyes due to dryness. Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change = scores at observation minus score at baseline. Negative change from baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820206|NCT01135511|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Demonstrating 100 Percent Clearing of Corneal Staining for Study Eye|"Percentage of participants demonstrating corneal staining score = 0 which indicates no damage in corneal surface.
Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline."|Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data at Week 8.||Percentage of participants|||Number
820207|NCT01135511|Secondary|Changes in Corneal Staining Scores for Study Eye From Baseline|"Based on the National Eye Institute (NEI) dry eye clinical trials workshop, the cornea was divided into 5 different zones. Each corneal zone was graded independently using a 0 to 3 grading scale:0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=severe. Sum of scores of each zone led to total score. Total score range: 0 to 15, higher score indicated greater staining. Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change: score at observation minus score at baseline. Negative change from baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 1, 2 and 4|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820208|NCT01135511|Primary|Changes in Corneal Staining Scores for Study Eye From Baseline at Week 8|"Based on the National Eye Institute (NEI) dry eye clinical trials workshop, the cornea was divided into 5 different zones. Each corneal zone was graded independently using a 0 to 3 grading scale:0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=severe. Sum of scores of each zone led to total score. Total score range: 0 to 15, higher score indicated greater staining. Results from study eye are reported. The study eye was defined as the eye with the worse (higher) corneal staining score at baseline.
Change: score at observation minus score at baseline. Negative change from baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 8|Intent-to-treat population: Participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. A last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820209|NCT01135524|Primary|The Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|Safety was assessed using reports of adverse events, clinical laboratory results, findings from physical examinations, and vital sign measurements.|52 weeks|The Extension Safety Population (N = 196) consisted of all subjects who received at least 1 dose of the open-label BTDS extension study drug, and had at least 1 safety assessment during the extension phase.||participants|||Number
820210|NCT01135914|Secondary|Time Trade-Off Questionnaire - 25 (TTO) Composite Score at Month 12|(TTO) questionnaire was used to help determine the patients’ health utility. Reported health utility represents the patients’ quality of life at the current health state, and is a cardinal value that ranges from 0 (worst possible health or death) to 1 (best possible health). In this questionnaire, patients were first asked to estimate their remaining life expectancy. Second, the patients were presented with a hypothetical situation where a technology existed that could permanently return their vision to normal. This technology would always work, but would decrease their length of survival. Patients were then asked how much of their remaining life expectancy, if any, they would be willing to trade in return for use of the technology and thus for normal vision. The principle of this measure is that if patients were content with their current vision status (i.e., have a utility value of 1.0), they would not want to trade any of their remaining life years to improve their vision.|12 month|ITT defined as all patients receiving at least one dose of either study treatment for monotherapy treatment arms, or one of the two study treatments for the combination therapy arm, and having at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Patients from one study site were excluded from ITT. Patients with both baseline and 12 month data were included||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820211|NCT01135914|Secondary|EuroQoL (EQ-5D) Utility Score at Month 12|The Euro Quality of Life Questionnaire (EQ-5D) standardized instrument was utilized to measure health outcomes related to 5 dimensions, namely: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain-discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The possible range for each dimension was 1 to 3, where 1=“no problems”, 2=”some problems” and 3=”extreme problems”. Missing values were not imputed. Using the scoring algorithm derived from the Canadian value sets (Bansback et al., 2012), a utility score for a patient was calculated based on the EQ-5D responses for a given time-point at which the questionnaire was presented to the patient. This mean EQ-5D utility score ranged between 0 (worst health) to 1 (perfect health).|12 month|ITT defined as all patients receiving at least one dose of either study treatment for monotherapy treatment arms, or one of the two study treatments for the combination therapy arm, and having at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Patients from one study site were excluded from ITT. Patients with both baseline and 12 month data were included||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820227|NCT01141569|Primary|Objective Response Rate (PR + CR) Using RECIST|"Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm.
Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters"|Up to 12 months|Patients that had PR or CR (Objective response)||participants|||Number
820228|NCT01141595|Primary|Preschool Language Scales|Change in the raw score from baseline of the Preschool Language Scales over the 16 week period. The raw score was measured at baseline, 8 weeks and 16 weeks after starting treatment and the change over the 16 week period from baseline to the end of the study was calculated. There was no imputed data and the analysis was as treated. The raw score ranged from 0 to 130. Higher scores indicate better performance.|16 weeks|The number of participants with data available that completed at least the 16 week assessment.||Raw score units / 16 weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
820248|NCT01142323|Secondary|Interleukin 1|Interleukin 1 will be measured at entry and end of study as an indirect measure of peroxisome proliferator- activated receptor alpha (PPAR- alpha) pathway activation.|6 months||||||
820212|NCT01135914|Secondary|National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire - 25 (VFQ-25) Composite Score at Month 12|The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI-VFQ-25) was used to measure the influence of visual disability and visual symptoms on general health domains. The 12 subscales in the VFQ-25 are general health, general vision, ocular pain, near activities, distance activities, social function, mental health, role difficulties, dependency, driving, color vision, and peripheral vision. For each question, the patient was asked to rate their condition on a scale of 1-5 or 1-6, where a low number reflects a better outcome. A composite score for a patient is calculated by aggregating and averaging the scores from the 11 sub-scales (excluding general health sub-scale), and an algorithm is apply to give equal weight to each sub-scale. Sub-scales and composite scores are calculated by converting the response from questionnaires into a 0-100 scale, with 0 as the worst possible outcome and 100 as the best. Missing data was not imputed|12 month|ITT defined as all patients receiving at least one dose of either study treatment for monotherapy treatment arms, or one of the two study treatments for the combination therapy arm, and having at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Patients from one study site were excluded from ITT. Patients with both baseline and 12 month data were included||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820213|NCT01135914|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving Gain of Letters From Baseline in BCVA|Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letters was measured using Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (EDTRS)-like chart while participants were in a sitting position at a testing distance of 4 meters. The range of BCVA (EDTRS) is 0 to 100 letters. A gain of 5,10,15 or more BCVA letters from baseline indicates improvement.|12 months|ITT defined as all patients receiving at least one dose of either study treatment for monotherapy treatment arms, or one of the two study treatments for the combination therapy arm, and having at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Patients from one study site were excluded from ITT. Patients with 12 month data were included||Percentage of Patients|||Number
820214|NCT01135914|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving a Gain of 15-letters or More (3-lines) in BCVA From Baseline|Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letters was measured using Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (EDTRS)-like chart while participants were in a sitting position at a testing distance of 4 meters. The range of BCVA (EDTRS) is 0 to 100 letters. A higher percent of patients achieving a gain of ≥15 letters BCVA indicates a better response.|Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months|The ITT population was defined as all patients receiving at least one dose of either study treatment for monotherapy treatment arms, or one of the two study treatments for the combination therapy arm, and having at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Patients from one site were excluded from ITT||Percentage of Patients|||Number
820215|NCT01135914|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Central Retinal Thickness (CRT) at Months 3,6,9 and 12|OCT is a diagnostic imaging technique using low-coherence interferometry to produce cross-sectional tomograms of the posterior segment eye structures. OCT was performed prior to study treatment to assess CRT, presence of fluid in the macula (intra-retinal cyst or fluid) and evaluation of image to monitor disease progression/treatment effect and to determine the need to stop/re-initiate ranibizumab treatment|Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months|The ITT population was defined as all patients receiving at least one dose of either study treatment for monotherapy treatment arms, or one of the two study treatments for the combination therapy arm, and having at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Patients from one site were excluded from ITT.||um||Standard Deviation|Mean
820216|NCT01135914|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) at Months 3,6 and 9|Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letters was measured using Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (EDTRS)-like chart while participants were in a sitting position at a testing distance of 4 meters. The range of BCVA (EDTRS)is 0 to 100 letters. A positive change from baseline of BCVA indicates improvement.|Baseline, 3, 6 and 9 months|The ITT population was defined as all patients receiving at least one dose of either study treatment for monotherapy treatment arms, or one of the two study treatments for the combination therapy arm, and having at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Patients from one site were excluded from ITT.||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
820217|NCT01135914|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity- (BCVA) at Month 12|Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letters was measured using Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (EDTRS)-like chart while participants were in a sitting position at a testing distance of 4 meters. The range of BCVA (EDTRS) is 0 to 100 letters. A positive change from baseline of BCVA indicates improvement.|Baseline and 12 months|ITT defined as all patients receiving at least one dose of either study treatment for monotherapy treatment arms, or one of the two study treatments for the combination therapy arm, and having at least 1 post-baseline assessment. Patients from one study site were excluded from ITT. patients with both baseline and 12 month data were included.||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
820218|NCT01141374|Secondary|Stress Levels(3rd and 4th Evaluation)|Scale Information: Stress Symptoms List (LSS) with 60 items Low score (better outcome): 12/29 points; Medium score: 30/60 points; High score: 61/120 points; Very high score (worse outcome): >120 points.|after 60 and 75 days|75 participants were assessed||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820219|NCT01141374|Primary|Stress Levels After 4 Sessions (2nd Evaluation)|Scale information: Stress Symptoms List (LSS)with 60 items (better outcome)Low score: 12/29 points; Medium score: 30/60 points; High score: 61/120 points; Very high score (worse outcome): >120 points.|after 30 days|Of the 109 subjects, four were eliminated for having a low level of stress and 3 for not belonging to nursing staff. Of the 105, 7 didn't appear in the first session. Some lost sessions and were also excluded. One abandoned the treatment because of the side effects, one did not complete the questionnaire, seven went on vacation or sick leave (2).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820220|NCT01141491|Secondary|Overall Survival|To compare the overall survival over time, to estimate the median and 3-year progression-free survival.|Measured over time||04/2017||||
820221|NCT01141491|Primary|Progression Free Survival|"The primary objective is to compare the progression-free survival (PFS) over time.
Progression free survival is defined as the time from randomization until any evidence of tumor growth or appearance anywhere in the body or death from any cause as determined by the principal investigator at each site. The principal investigator will determine Progression-free survival by using CT scans to evaluate disease recurrence. For the purpose of this study, progression of disease is defined as the development of tumor growth or recurrence at any site of the body as determined by the principal investigator at each study site or death from disease"|3-years|||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820229|NCT01141647|Secondary|Determine Cost-effectiveness.|QALYs are the mean quality adjusted life years per patient for the Supported Employment and Standard Care groups. The QALY is a non-negative number assessing the quality and length of life and not just the crude number of years. The minimum value is 0 representing no improvement in the quality of life or length of life and larger numbers indicate healthier and longer life. Maximum QALYs are limited only by the life span of study participants, but may not exceed 1 (perfect health) in any given year.|24-month phase with face-to-face quarterly interviews|213 SE participants in the PrOMOTE study were compared to 76 individuals in the control group of the SCI-VIP study.||years||Standard Deviation|Mean
820230|NCT01141647|Secondary|Determine Total Cost Per Patient Over 24 Months|Total cost is the mean total cost per patient over 24 months in US dollars. The minimum value is 0 representing no cost in US dollars and larger numbers indicating higher costs in US dollars.|24-month phase with face-to-face quarterly interviews|213 SE participants in the PrOMOTE study were compared to 76 individuals in the control group of the SCI-VIP study.||US dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
820231|NCT01141647|Secondary|Evaluate the Effectiveness of Implementation Strategy and Level of SE Model Implementation Across Sites.|Level of implementation was assessed by interviewing clinical and vocational providers from the seven sites who were involved in or knowledgeable about the program. Values reported represent the numbers of clinical staff who cited having the VRS integrated on the clinical team, a full-time VRS, leadership support, engagement of staff, resources provided immediately, making adjustments to the implementation to fit with the local context, and having audit and feedback as supporting strong implementation|24-month phase with face-to-face quarterly interviews|Each stage comprised of two site visits. Please note that in the early stage fit of IPS model and audit and feedback were not assessed in either of the site visits, hence a value of zero is entered. Also note that in the late stage obtaining resources, fit of IPS model, and audit and feedback were only assessed at 1/2 of the site visits.||participants|||Number
820232|NCT01141647|Secondary|Determine Ongoing Effectiveness of SE Over Time.|This measure is used to evaluate the participants who were both in SCI-VIP and PrOMOTE. It assesses the number of people who obtained CE in SCI-VIP and sustained the same CE through their time in the PrOMOTE study. The cohort of SCI-VIP SE participants in PrOMOTE were analyzed separately from the 213 PrOMOTE participants.|48-month phase with face-to-face quarterly interviews|Number of participants in 24-month SE and 24-month SCI-VIP (previous study).||participants|||Number
820233|NCT01141647|Secondary|Employment Rate|Competitive Employment (CE) rate for individuals who participated in the Supported Employment arm of the PrOMOTE Study.|24 Months|||percentage of participants with CE|||Number
820234|NCT01141647|Primary|Identify Factors That Predict Employment After SCI.|To model the probability of obtaining CE, we first dichotomized CE as 'yes' or 'no'. The Competitive Employment Rate is reported in Outcome Measure 2. We then used unconditional logistic regression to model the probability of obtaining CE through a univariate modeling approach to determine statistically significant predictors of CE. Statistically significant predictors at the p<0.10 criterion level were then explored in a final multivariate model. Demographic (age, race, marital status, etc.), clinical (severity of injury, comorbidities, time since injury, etc.), barriers and facilitators, and quality of life (depression, Satisfaction with Life, etc.) were considered for modeling. A final model was obtained by including all parameters meeting the p<0.10 criterion into a final multivariate model.|24-month phase with face-to-face quarterly interviews|||Odds Ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Number
820235|NCT01142193|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects ≥50% Reduction (Responder Rate) in Weekly (7 Day) Partial-onset Seizure Frequency During the Maintenance Phase Compared to Baseline.||8 weeks (weeks 4-11)|Intent-to-treat (ITT): all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug. Note: Sample size is less than for primary outcome because some subjects discontinued study prior to the maintenance phase.||Percentage of participants|||Number
820236|NCT01142193|Secondary|Percent Reduction From Baseline in Weekly (7 Day) Partial-onset Seizure Frequency During the Maintenance Phase Compared to Baseline.||8 weeks (weeks 4-11)|Intent-to-treat (ITT): all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug. Note: Sample size is less than for primary outcome because some subjects discontinued study prior to the maintenance phase.||Percent Reduction||Full Range|Median
820237|NCT01142193|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With ≥25%, ≥75%, and 100% Reduction in Weekly (7 Day) Partial-onset Seizure Frequency During the Maintenance Phase Compared to Baseline.||8 weeks (weeks 4-11)|Intent-to-treat (ITT): all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug. Note: Sample size is less than for primary outcome because some subjects discontinued study prior to the maintenance phase.||Percentage of participants|||Number
820238|NCT01142193|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With ≥25%, ≥75%, and 100% Reduction in Weekly (7 Day) Partial-onset Seizure Frequency During the Titration Plus Maintenance Phase Compared to Baseline.||11 weeks|Intent-to-treat (ITT): all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug||Percentage of participants|||Number
820239|NCT01142193|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With ≥25%, ≥75%, and 100% Reduction in Weekly (7 Day) Partial-onset Seizure Frequency During the Titration Phases Compared to Baseline.||3 weeks (weeks 1-3)|Intent-to-treat (ITT): all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug||Percentage of participants|||Number
820240|NCT01142193|Secondary|Percent Reduction From Baseline in Weekly (7 Day) All Seizure Frequency During the Titration Plus Maintenance Phase.||11 weeks|Intent-to-treat (ITT): all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug||Percent Reduction||Full Range|Median
820241|NCT01142193|Secondary|Percent Reductions From Baseline in Weekly (7 Day) Partial-onset Seizure Frequency During the Titration Phase Compared to Baseline.||3 weeks (weeks 1-3)|Intent-to-treat (ITT): all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug||Percent Reduction||Full Range|Median
820242|NCT01142193|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With ≥50% Reduction (Responder Rate) in Weekly (7 Day) Partial-onset Seizure Frequency During the Titration Phase Compared to Baseline.||3 weeks (weeks 1-3)|||Percentage of participants|||Number
820243|NCT01142193|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With ≥50% Reduction (Responder Rate) in Weekly (7 Day) Partial-onset Seizure Frequency During the Titration Plus Maintenance Phase Compared to Baseline.||11 weeks|Intent-to-treat (ITT): all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug||Percentage of participants|||Number
820252|NCT01142336|Primary|Change From Baseline in CSF Total Tau at 1 Year|CSF total tau was measured at baseline and after 1-year of intervention|1-yr change|"In the Placebo group, 1 participant was dropped due to AE and 1 was lost to follow-up.
In the Simvastatin group, 1 participant was dropped due to AE. These 3 participants were not included in the primary analysis per analysis plan.
All these 3 subjects were not included in the primary analysis based on our per protocol analysis plan."||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
820253|NCT01142336|Primary|Change From Baseline in Aβ42 in Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) at 1 Year|CSF Aβ42 concentration were measured at baseline and after 1-year intervention.|1-year change of CSF Aβ42 from baseline|"In the Placebo group, 1 participant was dropped due to AE and 1 was lost to follow-up.
In the Simvastatin group, 1 participant was dropped due to AE. These 3 participants were not included in the primary analysis per analysis plan.
All these 3 subjects were not included in the primary analysis based on our per protocol analysis plan."||1-yr change, pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
820254|NCT01142388|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|Objective response rate is defined as number of patients with complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) divided by all eligible patients. Responses are evaluated using the revised Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guideline. CR is defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. PR is defined as disappearance of target lesions or at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), and persistence of one or more non-target lesion(s) and/or maintenance of tumor marker level above the normal limits.|assessed every 8 weeks while on treatment and every 3 months after treatment for 2 years|Eligible patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
820255|NCT01142388|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the time from randomization until death (event), or censored at last date known alive. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, with 90% confidence intervals calculated using Greenwood’s formula, and compared by the log rank test.|assessed every 3 months for 2 years after registration|Eligible patients||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
820256|NCT01142388|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) is defined as the time from randomization to progression or death without evidence of progression. For cases without documentation of progression, follow-up was censored at the date of last disease assessment without progression, unless death occurred within a short period of time (4 months) following the date last known progression-free, in which case the death was counted as an event, or in the case of death within 4 months of randomization in the absence of disease evaluation before that time. PFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, with 90% confidence intervals calculated using Greenwood’s formula, and compared by the log rank test.|assessed every 3 months for 2 years after registration|Eligible patients.||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
820257|NCT01142466|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|AE: any new untoward medical occurrence/worsening of pre-existing medical condition, whether or not related to study drug. SAE: any AE that resulted in death; was life threatening; resulted in persistent/significant disability/incapacity; resulted in/prolonged an existing in-patient hospitalization; was a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or was a medically important condition.|Baseline to Week 96|Safety population included all participants all randomized participants of the active treatment group who received at least 1 injection and all randomized participants of the ‘No Treatment’ group, provided that any post-baseline data was available.||participants|||Number
820258|NCT01142466|Secondary|Mean Changes in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Score From Baseline to Week 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, and 96|EDSS assesses disability in 8 functional systems. An overall score ranging from 0 (normal) to 10 (death due to MS) was calculated. EDSS progression was defined as increase by at least 1 point if last value of EDSS was equal to 5.5, and by at least 0.5 points if last EDSS was more than 5.5.|Baseline to Week 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, and 96|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 treatment dose (only for Rebif group) and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy endpoint assessment. The 'n' is signifying those participants who received study drug and were evaluated for this measure at the time point for each group respectively.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820259|NCT01142466|Secondary|Absolute Changes in the Number of T2 Lesions From Baseline to Week 24, 48, 72 and 96|Analysis of T2 lesions was done using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans.|Baseline to Week 24, 48, 72, and 96|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 treatment dose (only for Rebif group) and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy endpoint assessment. The 'n' is signifying those participants who received study drug and were evaluated for this measure at the time point for each group respectively.||T2 lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
820260|NCT01142466|Secondary|Absolute Changes in the Number of T1-Gadolinium (T1-Gd) Lesions From Baseline to Week 24, 48, 72 and 96|Analysis of T1-Gadolinium enhancing lesions was done using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans.|Baseline to Week 24, 48, 72, and 96|The data was not evaluated due to the small sample size available for this parameter.|||||
820261|NCT01142466|Secondary|Absolute Changes in the Number of T1 Lesions From Baseline to Week 24, 48, 72 and 96|Analysis of T1 lesions was done using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans.|Baseline to Week 24, 48, 72, and 96|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 treatment dose (only for Rebif group) and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy endpoint assessment. The 'n' is signifying those participants who received study drug and were evaluated for this measure at the time point for each group respectively.||T1 lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
820262|NCT01142466|Secondary|Number of Relapse-free Participants|A qualifying relapse was defined as a new or worsening neurological symptom, in the absence of fever, lasting for >= 48 hours, and accompanied by an objective change in the relevant (i.e. symptomatic) Kurtzke Functional Systems (KFS).|Baseline through Week 96|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 treatment dose (only for Rebif group) and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy endpoint assessment.||participants|||Number
820263|NCT01142466|Primary|Time From Baseline to First Multiple Sclerosis Relapse (in Weeks)|A qualifying relapse was defined as a new or worsening neurological symptom, in the absence of fever, lasting for >= 48 hours, and accompanied by an objective change in the relevant (i.e. symptomatic) Kurtzke Functional Systems (KFS).|Baseline through Week 96|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all participants who received at least 1 treatment dose (only for Rebif group) and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy endpoint assessment. Time to relapse was documented for participants who had at least 1 relapse during the study period.||weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
820264|NCT01142596|Primary|Median Time to Loss of Effect in Non-Responders|Median time to loss of effect from P06125 extension study baseline was estimated using Kaplan-Meier product-limit method. Result reported in Non-Responders, participants without ≥30% decrease from study P06124 baseline in PANSS Total Score at the end of study P06124. Investigator or subinvestigator was to determine whether the study drug failed to maintain effect based on occurrence of any of the following: 1) Increase in PANSS Total Score ≥30% from P06125 extension study baseline, 2) Determination that participant’s schizophrenic symptomatology had deteriorated requiring one or more of defined interventions (add new antipsychotic drug, increase in level of psychiatric outpatient care, or hospitalization/increase in level of hospitalization for psychiatric need), 3) Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score ≥6, 4) Discontinuation from study because of lack of efficacy, 5) AE/SAE of worsening of schizophrenia.|P06124 study baseline and Day 42, and P06125 study from Day 1 up to Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, had PANSS measurement at P06125 baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement, and were study P06124 Non-Responders||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820265|NCT01142596|Primary|Median Time to Loss of Effect in Responders|Median time to loss of effect from P06125 extension study baseline was estimated using Kaplan-Meier product-limit method. Result reported in Responders, participants with ≥30% decrease from study P06124 baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS, schizophrenia symptom scale) Total Score at the end of study P06124. Investigator or subinvestigator was to determine whether the study drug failed to maintain effect based on occurrence of any of the following: 1) Increase in PANSS Total Score ≥30% from P06125 extension study baseline, 2) Determination that participant’s schizophrenic symptomatology had deteriorated requiring one or more of defined interventions (add new antipsychotic drug, increase in level of psychiatric outpatient care, or hospitalization/increase in level of hospitalization for psychiatric need), 3) Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score ≥6, 4) Discontinuation from study because of lack of efficacy, 5) AE/SAE of worsening of schizophrenia.|P06124 study baseline and Day 42, and P06125 study from Day 1 up to Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, had PANSS measurement at P06125 baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement, and were study P06124 Responders||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820266|NCT01142596|Primary|Number of Participants Who Took Antiparkinsonian Drugs|This measure presents the number of participants who used antiparkinsonian drugs started on or after the start of study treatment in extension study P06125. Antiparkinsonian drugs were defined as those categorized into the N04 code (antiparkinson drugs) of the World Health Organization (WHO) Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system.|P06125 study from Day 1 up to Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
820267|NCT01142596|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Abnormalities on Electrocardiogram (ECG) at Study P06124 Baseline, Study P06125 Baseline and Week 52|The percentage of participants with abnormal ECG findings is reported for three time points: 6-week double-blind study P06124 baseline, extension study P06125 baseline and extension study Week 52.|Study P06124 baseline and P06125 study baseline and Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug||percentage of participants|||Number
820268|NCT01142596|Primary|Number of Participants With Non-serious AEs|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered study drug and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with the study drug. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to study drug. This measure presents the number of participants with at least one AEs that was non-serious (i.e., was not determined to be an SAE).|Up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Up to approximately 56 weeks)|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
820269|NCT01142596|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered study drug and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with the study drug. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to study drug. A serious AE (SAE) is any AE occurring at any dose that results in death, is life-threatening, results in hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. In addition, an important medical event that may not result in death, be life-threatening, or require hospitalization may be considered an SAE when it may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed in this definition.|Up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Up to approximately 56 weeks)|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
820270|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06125 Baseline in Prolactin at Week 52|For each participant, change in prolactin from extension study P06125 baseline to Week 52 of extension study was determined (calculated as Week 52 value minus baseline value).|Study P06125 baseline and Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06125 baseline and Week 52||μg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820271|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06124 Baseline in Prolactin at Week 52|For each participant, change in prolactin from preceding 6-week double-blind Study P06124 baseline to Week 52 of extension study P06125 was determined (calculated as Week 52 value minus baseline value).|Study P06124 baseline and study P06125 Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06124 baseline and study P06125 Week 52||μg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820272|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06125 Baseline in Insulin at Week 52|For each participant, change in insulin from extension study P06125 baseline to Week 52 of extension study was determined (calculated as Week 52 value minus baseline value).|Study P06125 baseline and Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06125 baseline and Week 52||μIU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820478|NCT01144299|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects|A seroprotected subject is a subject with a serum HI antibody titer ≥ 1:40|Day 0 and Day 21|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for analysis of immunogenicity, on subjects with available data||subjects|||Number
820273|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06124 Baseline in Insulin at Week 52|For each participant, change in insulin from preceding 6-week double-blind Study P06124 baseline to Week 52 of extension study P06125 was determined (calculated as Week 52 value minus baseline value).|Study P06124 baseline and study P06125 Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06124 baseline and study P06125 Week 52||μIU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820274|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06125 Baseline in Fasting Glucose at Week 52|For each participant, change in fasting glucose from extension study P06125 baseline to Week 52 of extension study was determined (calculated as Week 52 value minus baseline value).|Study P06125 baseline and Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06125 baseline and Week 52||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820275|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06124 Baseline in Fasting Glucose at Week 52|For each participant, change in fasting glucose from preceding 6-week double-blind Study P06124 baseline to Week 52 of extension study P06125 was determined (calculated as Week 52 value minus baseline value).|Study P06124 baseline and study P06125 Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06124 baseline and study P06125 Week 52||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820276|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06125 Baseline in HbA1c at Week 52|For each participant, change in HbA1c from extension study P06125 baseline to Week 52 of extension study was determined (calculated as Week 52 value minus baseline value).|Study P06125 baseline and Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06125 baseline and Week 52||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
820277|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06124 Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 52|For each participant, change in HbA1c from preceding 6-week double-blind Study P06124 baseline to Week 52 of extension study P06125 was determined (calculated as Week 52 value minus baseline value).|Study P06124 baseline and study P06125 Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06124 baseline and study P06125 Week 52||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
820278|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06125 Baseline in DIEPSS Item 9 Score at Endpoint|Change in DIEPSS Item 9 (Global) Score from extension study P06125 baseline to the endpoint assessment of extension study was determined (calculated as endpoint value minus baseline value). Endpoint assessment was last evaluation of participant for this measure in study, whether participant completed or did not complete study. DIEPSS is a scale, rated by the investigator or rater appointed by the investigator, used to evaluate the severity of drug induced extrapyramidal symptoms occurring during antipsychotic drug treatment. It consists of 9 items: Items 1 through 8 assess individual symptoms; Item 9 is an assessment of global severity. Each item is rated from 0 (none, normal) to 4 (severe). Negative values of change from baseline represent improvement in symptoms.|Study P06125 baseline up to Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06125 baseline and endpoint assessment||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820279|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06124 Baseline in DIEPSS Item 9 Score at Endpoint|Change in DIEPSS Item 9 (Global) Score from preceding 6-week double-blind Study P06124 baseline to endpoint assessment of extension study P06125 was determined (calculated as endpoint value minus baseline value). Endpoint assessment was last evaluation of participant for this measure in study, whether participant completed or did not complete study. DIEPSS is a scale, rated by the investigator or rater appointed by the investigator, used to evaluate the severity of drug induced extrapyramidal symptoms occurring during antipsychotic drug treatment. It consists of 9 items: Items 1 through 8 assess individual symptoms; Item 9 is an assessment of global severity. Each item is rated from 0 (none, normal) to 4 (severe). Negative values of change from baseline represent improvement in symptoms.|Study P06124 baseline and P06125 study from Day 1 up to Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06124 baseline and study P06125 endpoint assessment||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820280|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06125 Baseline in DIEPSS Total Score at Endpoint|Change in DIEPSS Total Score from extension study P06125 baseline to the endpoint assessment of extension study was determined (calculated as endpoint value minus baseline value). Endpoint assessment was last evaluation of participant for this measure in study, whether participant completed or did not complete study. DIEPSS is a scale, rated by the investigator or rater appointed by the investigator, used to evaluate the severity of drug induced extrapyramidal symptoms occurring during antipsychotic drug treatment. It consists of 9 items: Items 1 through 8 assess individual symptoms; Item 9 is an assessment of global severity. Items 1 through 8 are classified into 4 categories of parkinsonism, akathisia, dystonia and dyskinesia. Each item is rated from 0 (none, normal) to 4 (severe). The Total Score is the sum of scores on Items 1 through 8, with a range from 0 (normal) to 32 (severe). Negative values of change from baseline represent improvement in symptoms.|Study P06125 baseline up to Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06125 baseline and endpoint assessment||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820281|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06124 Baseline in Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale (DIEPSS) Total Score at Endpoint|Change in DIEPSS Total Score from preceding 6-week double-blind Study P06124 baseline to endpoint assessment of extension study P06125 was determined (calculated as endpoint value minus baseline value). Endpoint assessment was last evaluation of participant for this measure in study, whether participant completed or did not complete study. DIEPSS is a scale, rated by the investigator or rater appointed by the investigator, used to evaluate the severity of drug induced extrapyramidal symptoms occurring during antipsychotic drug treatment. It consists of 9 items: Items 1 through 8 assess individual symptoms; Item 9 is an assessment of global severity. Items 1 through 8 are classified into 4 categories of parkinsonism, akathisia, dystonia and dyskinesia. Each item is rated from 0 (none, normal) to 4 (severe). The Total Score is the sum of scores on Items 1 through 8, with a range from 0 (normal) to 32 (severe). Negative values of change from baseline represent improvement in symptoms.|Study P06124 baseline and P06125 study from Day 1 up to Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06124 baseline and study P06125 endpoint assessment||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820282|NCT01142596|Primary|Number of Participants With Extrapyramidal Symptoms|This measure reports the overall number of participants with any of a group of adverse events that were defined to represent extrapyramidal symptoms. The number of participants with each of the individual adverse events within this definition is also presented, for terms that occurred in at least one participant. For this measure, all adverse event terms within the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) Standardized MedDRA Query (SMQ) for “extrapyramidal syndrome” were treated as extrapyramidal symptoms.|Up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Up to approximately 56 weeks)|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
820283|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06125 Baseline in BMI at Week 52|For each participant, change in BMI from extension study P06125 baseline to Week 52 of extension study was determined (calculated as Week 52 value minus baseline value).|Study P06125 baseline and Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06125 baseline and Week 52||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
820284|NCT01142596|Primary|Change From Study P06124 Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI) at Week 52|For each participant, change in BMI from preceding 6-week double-blind Study P06124 baseline to Week 52 of extension study P06125 was determined (calculated as Week 52 value minus baseline value).|Study P06124 baseline and study P06125 Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06124 baseline and study P06125 Week 52||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
820285|NCT01142596|Primary|Percentage of Participants in Categories of Change in Weight From Study P06125 Baseline to Final Assessment|For each participant, change in weight from extension study P06125 baseline to the final assessment of extension study was determined (calculated as final assessment value minus baseline value). Final assessment was last evaluation of participant in study, whether participant completed or did not complete study. Participants were allocated to categories of percentage change from defined baseline to final assessment.|Study P06125 baseline up to Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06125 baseline and final assessment||percentage of participants in category|||Number
820286|NCT01142596|Primary|Percentage of Participants in Categories of Change in Weight From Study P06124 Baseline to Final Assessment|For each participant, change in weight from preceding 6-week double-blind Study P06124 baseline to the final assessment of extension study P06125 was determined (calculated as final assessment value minus baseline value). Final assessment was last evaluation of participant in study, whether participant completed or did not complete study. Participants were allocated to categories of percentage change from defined baseline to final assessment.|Study P06124 baseline and P06125 study from Day 1 up to Week 52|All participants randomized in study P06125 who received at least one dose of study drug, and had data for measure at study P06124 baseline and study P06125 final assessment||percentage of participants in category|||Number
820287|NCT01142661|Primary|Safety|General safety will be assessed by monitoring and recording the number of patients with serious adverse events for duration of treatment which continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or death.|For duration of treatment, an average of 5 months|||participants|||Number
820288|NCT01142661|Primary|Safety|General safety will be assessed by monitoring and recording the number of patients with adverse events (serious and nonserious) for duration of treatment which continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or death.|For duration of treatment, an average of 5 months|||participants|||Number
820289|NCT01142726|Secondary|Number of Participants With Results on Hematology and Clinical Laboratory Tests Meeting the Criteria for Marked Abnormality in Re-exposure Period|LLN=lower limit of normal; ULN=upper limit of normal; preRX=pretreatment. Criteria for marked abnormality on laboratory test results: Platelet count (*10^9 c/µL) <0.67*LLN or >1.5*ULN, or if preRX<LLN, use 0.5*preRX and <100,000/mm^3; potassium, serum (mEq) <0.9*LLN or >1.1*ULN, or if preRX <LLN, use <0.9*preRX or >ULN if preRX>ULN, use >1.1*preRX or <LLN; blood urea nitrogen (mg/dL) >2*preRX; creatinine (mg/dL) >1.5*preRX; ALT (U/L) >3*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >4*preRX; AST (U/L) >3*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >4*preRX; ALP (U/L) >2*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >3*preRX; G-glutamyl transferase U/L) >2*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >3*preRX; glucose, fasting (mg/dL) <0.8*LLN or >1.5*ULN, or if preRX<LLN use <0.8*preRX or >ULN if preRX >ULN, use >2.0*preRX or OR <LLN; glucose, serum (mg/dL) <65 or >220; uric acid (mg/dL)>1.5*ULN, or if preRX, use >2*preRX; albumin (g/dL) <0.9*LLN, or if preRX<LLN, use <0.75*preRX; hemoglobin (g/dL)>3 decrease from preRX; hematocrit (%) < 0.75*preRX.|Start of re-exposure period to 56 days post last dose, up to Month 30|All treated participants entering the Re-exposure Period and having measurements available were analyzed. n=evaluable. Treatment groups represent Treatment received during Treatment Period.||participants|||Number
820290|NCT01142726|Secondary|Number of Participants With Results on Hematology and Clinical Laboratory Tests Meeting the Criteria for Marked Abnormality in Withdrawal Period|LLN=lower limit of normal; ULN=upper limit of normal; preRX=pretreatment. Criteria for marked abnormality on laboratory test results: Platelet count (*10^9 c/µL) <0.67*LLN or >1.5*ULN, or if preRX<LLN, use 0.5*preRX and <100,000/mm^3; potassium, serum (mEq) <0.9*LLN or >1.1*ULN, or if preRX <LLN, use <0.9*preRX or >ULN if preRX>ULN, use >1.1*preRX or <LLN; blood urea nitrogen (mg/dL) >2*preRX; creatinine (mg/dL) >1.5*preRX; ALT (U/L) >3*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >4*preRX; AST (U/L) >3*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >4*preRX; ALP (U/L) >2*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >3*preRX; G-glutamyl transferase (GGT) (U/L) >2*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >3*preRX; glucose, fasting (mg/dL) <0.8*LLN or >1.5*ULN, or if preRX<LLN use <0.8*preRX or >ULN if preRX >ULN, use >2.0*preRX or OR <LLN; glucose, serum (mg/dL) <65 or >220; uric acid (mg/dL)>1.5*ULN, or if preRX, use >2*preRX; albumin (g/dL) <0.9*LLN, or if preRX<LLN, use <0.75*preRX; hemoglobin (g/dL)>3 decrease from preRX; hematocrit (%) < 0.75*preRX.|Last dose in TP + 57 days, up to Month 24|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the Treatment Period, entered the Withdrawal Period, and had values available. n=number evaluable||participants|||Number
820312|NCT01142908|Secondary|Body Mass Index|Calculated from vitals (height & weight) obtained during interview|12 months|39 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 31 out of the 213 in the Education Control group had missing body mass index at 12 months due to missing the 12 month interview entirely or the interview was completed over the phone, or weight was not obtained at the 12 month interview.||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
820719|NCT01147497|Primary|Provider Perceived Ease of Insertion on a 100 Point Visual Analogue Scale|The visual analogue scale for perceived ease ranges from 0 (most ease) to 100 (most difficult).|assessed immediately post IUD insertion|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
820291|NCT01142726|Secondary|Adverse Events (AEs) of Interest During the Re-exposure Period|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. AEs of special interest are events potentially associated with the drug or disease under study. Includes data up to 56 days post the last dosing day (active abatacept or active MTX, whichever is the later) in the Re-exposure Period. Treatment groups represent Treatment received during Treatment Period.|First dose in Re-exposure period up to last dose of Re-exposure Period + 56 days|Includes data up to 56 days post the last dosing day (active abatacept or active MTX, whichever is the later) in the Re-exposure Period. Treatment groups represent Treatment received during Treatment Period.||participants|||Number
820292|NCT01142726|Secondary|Adverse Events (AEs) of Interest During the Withdrawal Period|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. AEs of special interest are events potentially associated with the drug or disease under study. Includes events with an onset date on or after 57 days post last dosing day (active abatacept or active MTX whichever is the later) in the Treatment Period and up to end of Withdrawal Period. Treatment groups represent treatment received during the Treatment Period.|Last dose in TP + 57 days, up to Month 24|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period and entered the Withdrawal Period. Treatment groups represent treatment during the TP.||participants|||Number
820293|NCT01142726|Secondary|Number of Participants With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Discontinuations Due to AEs During the Full Study (All Periods)|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Includes data up to last active dose date +56 days if the participant discontinued the Treatment Period or did not enter the Withdrawal Period, up to the day of discontinuation in the Withdrawal Period for participants discontinuing the Withdrawal Period without entering the Re-exposure Period (RP), up to Day 729 visit (Month 24) for participants who complete the Withdrawal Period, and up to 56 days post last active dose in Re-exposure Period for participants entering the Re-exposure Period.|Day 1 to 56 days post last dose in the study, up to Month 30|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication were analyzed.||participants|||Number
820294|NCT01142726|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Remission by Criteria of the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Over Time in Treatment Period and Withdrawal Period|TP=treatment period; WP=withdrawal period. SDAI-defined remission= ≤3.3. The SDAI is the simple linear sum of 5 outcome parameters: tender joint count (TJC) and swollen joint count (SJC) (based on a 28-joint assessment); patient's and physician's global assessments of disease activity (assessed on 0-10 cm visual analog scale, on which higher scores=greater affection due to disease activity); and C-reactive protein level (mg/dL). SDAI total score=0-86. SDAI <=3.3 indicates disease remission, >3.4 to 11=low disease activity, >11 to 26=moderate disease activity, and >26=high disease activity. TJC is assessed and recorded at each visit, with no swelling=0, swelling=1. SJC is assessed through identification of joints that are painful under pressure or to passive motion. TJC is recorded on the joint assessment form at each visit, with no tenderness =0, tenderness = 1. Higher score indicates greater affection due to disease activity. Percent=number with remission/number evaluated (ITT)|Randomization to Month 24|ITT analysis population: Included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period. Participants were grouped according to the treatment regimen to which they were randomized.N= number evaluated.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820295|NCT01142726|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Remission by Disease Activity Score 28 Based on C-reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP) Criteria Over Time During Withdrawal Period- Treated Participants in Remission at Month 12|WP=withdrawal period. Remission defined as DAS28-CRP<2.6. The DAS 28-CRP is a measure of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and assesses the 28 joints RA commonly affects; the score includes the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28), CRP level (a measure of inflammation in the blood), and the patient's global assessment of health (ranging from very good to very bad). DAS-CRP scores range from 0 to 10, with higher values indicating greater disease activity. Individual measures are fed into a complex mathematical formula to produce the overall DAS (a score greater than 5.1 implies active disease; less than 3.2, well controlled disease; and less than 2.6, remission.). Percentage= number of participants with remission divided by number of participants who were analyzed (all treated participants who were in remission at end of treatment period and entered the Withdrawal Period)|End of Treatment Period (Month 12) to End of Withdrawal Period (Month 24)|Treated participants who were in remission at Month 12 (DAS28-CRP<2.6) and entered the Withdrawal Period were analyzed.( N=number of participants analyzed).||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820296|NCT01142726|Secondary|Number of Participants With Results on Hematology and Clinical Laboratory Tests Meeting the Criteria for Marked Abnormality During Treatment Period|Lower limit of normal (LLN); Upper limit of normal (ULN); Pretreatment (preRX). Criteria for marked abnormality: Platelet count (*10^9 c/µL) <0.67*LLN or >1.5*ULN, or if preRX<LLN, use 0.5*preRX and <100,000/mm^3; potassium, serum (mEq) <0.9*LLN or >1.1*ULN, or if preRX <LLN, use <0.9*preRX or >ULN if preRX>ULN, use >1.1*preRX or <LLN; blood urea nitrogen (mg/dL) >2*preRX; creatinine (mg/dL) >1.5*preRX; ALT (U/L) >3*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >4*preRX; AST (U/L) >3*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >4*preRX; ALP (U/L) >2*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >3*preRX; G-glutamyl transferase U/L) >2*ULN, or if preRX>ULN, use >3*preRX; glucose, fasting (mg/dL) <0.8*LLN or >1.5*ULN, or if preRX<LLN use <0.8*preRX or >ULN if preRX >ULN, use >2.0*preRX or OR <LLN; glucose, serum (mg/dL) <65 or >220; uric acid (mg/dL)>1.5*ULN, or if preRX, use >2*preRX; albumin (g/dL) <0.9*LLN, or if preRX<LLN, use <0.75*preRX; hemoglobin (g/dL)>3 decrease from preRX; hematocrit (%) < 0.75*preRX.|Day 1 up to 56 days following the last dosing day in the Treatment Period (Day 365)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period. n=number evaluable||Participants|||Number
820720|NCT01141660|Secondary|Anesthetic and Recovery Times||2 years||||||
820297|NCT01142726|Secondary|Adverse Events (AEs) of Interest During the Treatment Period|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Related=having certain, probable, possible, or unknown relationship to study drug. AEs of special interest are events potentially associated with the drug or disease under study.|Day 1 to 56 days following last dosing day (Day 365)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period||Participants|||Number
820298|NCT01142726|Secondary|Number of Participants With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Related SAEs, Discontinuations Due to SAEs, Related Adverse Events (AEs), and Discontinuations Due to AEs During the Treatment Period|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Related=having certain, probable, possible, or unknown relationship to study drug.|Day 1 to up to 56 days following the last dosing day (Day 365); all deaths during study period, including those that occurred >56 days after last dose in Treatment Period|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period||Participants|||Number
820299|NCT01142726|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline Over Time in Findings on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)|TP=treatment period; WP=withdrawal period. Change from Baseline=Postbaseline-baseline value. MRI was used to assess joint damage progression at Months 6, 12, and 18. If >20% of joints with a missing score for a parameter (erosion, osteitis, and synovitis), the MRI score of each parameter was considered missing. If ≤20% of joints had a missing score for a parameter, the MRI score for that parameter from the missing joints was carried forward from the previous MRI assessment, or carried backward from the next MRI assessment, if missing score occurred at baseline. MRI total score ranged from 0 (best outcome) to 4 (worst outcome). A gadolinium-enhanced MRI of the dominant hand-wrist was performed on all randomized patients at 5 points. The hand/wrist assessed to have more synovitis was selected initially and used for all subsequent evaluations. The MRI examination was standardized to ensure sufficient image quality for the evaluation of radiographic progression of rheumatoid arthritis.|Randomization to Month 18|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period. n=the number of patients with both baseline and postbaseline measurements.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820300|NCT01142726|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline at Months 6, 12, and 18 in Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) Scores of Short Form-36 (SF-36)|TP=treatment period; WP=withdrawal period. The SF-36 is a 36-item self-administered questionnaire developed to assess health-related quality of life (QOL) and comprises 8 domains, including 4 physical (physical health, bodily pain, physical functioning and physical role limitations) and 4 mental (mental health, vitality, social functioning, and emotional role limitation) subscales. Responses are used to derive physical and mental component summary scores, ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better QOL (0=Poorest Health; 100=Best Health). Mean change from baseline=postbaseline value-baseline value; a higher value signifies improvement.|Randomization to Months 6, 12, and 18|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period. n=number evaluable||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820301|NCT01142726|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Over Time|The Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) assesses patients' functional ability by rating their abilities over the previous week. The HAQ-DI includes at least 2 questions from each of 8 categories: dressing and grooming, hygiene, arising, reach, eating, grip, walking, and common daily activities. Patients rate difficulty performing specific tasks: 0=without difficulty, 1=with some difficulty, 2=with much difficulty, and 3=unable to do. The sum of the categories score (the highest scored item in the category) is divided by the number of categories answered, yielding a score from 0-3. When aids, devices, or help is indicated by the patient, the score for the category item is raised from a 0 or a 1 to a 2, but if the patient's highest score for a subcategory is a 3, it stays a 3.|Randomization to Month 18|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period. n=number evaluable||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820302|NCT01142726|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Response Over Time|HAQ response defined as a reduction of at least 0.3 units from baseline in score on the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), which assesses patients' functional ability by rating their abilities over the previous week. The HAQ-DI includes at least 2 questions from each of 8 categories: dressing and grooming, hygiene, arising, reach, eating, grip, walking, and common daily activities. Patients rate difficulty performing specific tasks: 0=without difficulty, 1=with some difficulty, 2=with much difficulty, and 3=unable to do. The sum of the categories score (the highest scored item in the category) is divided by the number of categories answered, yielding a score from 0-3. When aids, devices, or help is indicated by the patient, the score for the category item is raised from a 0 or a 1 to a 2, but if the patient's highest score for a subcategory is a 3, it stays a 3.|Randomization to Month 24|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period. Percentage calculated as a/b, where a=number of patients who achieved remission at Day x, and b=number of patients in the analysis.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820303|NCT01142726|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Scores on Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Over Time|TP=treatment period; WP=withdrawal period. The SDAI is the simple linear sum of 5 outcome parameters: swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC) (based on a 28-joint assessment); patient's and physician's global assessments of disease activity (assessed on 0-10 cm visual analog scale, on which higher scores=greater affection due to disease activity); and C-reactive protein level (mg/dL). SDAI total score=0-86. SJC is assessed and recorded at each visit, with no swelling=0, swelling=1 (higher score indicates greater swelling). TJC is assessed at each visit through identification of joints that are painful under pressure or to passive motion, with no tenderness=0, tenderness=1 (higher score indicates greater affection due to disease activity)..|Randomization to Month 18|Intent to Treat (ITT) population. n= number of participants with both post baseline and baseline measurements.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820304|NCT01142726|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Remission by Criteria of the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Months 12 and 18|TP=treatment period; WP=withdrawal period. SDAI-defined remission= ≤3.3. The SDAI is the simple linear sum of 5 outcome parameters: tender joint count (TJC) and swollen joint count (SJC) (based on a 28-joint assessment); patient's and physician's global assessments of disease activity (assessed on 0-10 cm visual analog scale, on which higher scores=greater affection due to disease activity); and C-reactive protein level (mg/dL). SDAI total score=0-86. SDAI <=3.3 indicates disease remission, >3.4 to 11=low disease activity, >11 to 26=moderate disease activity, and >26=high disease activity. TJC is assessed and recorded at each visit, with no swelling=0, swelling=1. SJC is assessed through identification of joints that are painful under pressure or to passive motion. TJC is recorded on the joint assessment form at each visit, with no tenderness =0, tenderness = 1. Higher score indicates greater affection due to disease activity.|Randomization to Month 18|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period. Percentage calculated as a/b, where a=number of patients who achieved remission at Months 12 and 18, and b=number of patients in the analysis.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820305|NCT01142726|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score 28 Based on C-reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP) at Months 6, 12, and 18|TP=treatment period; WP=withdrawal period. The DAS 28-CRP is a measure of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) that assesses the 28 joints RA commonly affects; the score includes the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28), CRP level (a measure of inflammation in the blood), and the patient’s global assessment of health (ranging from very good to very bad). DAS-CRP scores range from 0 to 10, with higher values indicating greater disease activity. Individual measures are fed into a complex mathematical formula to produce the overall DAS (a score greater than 5.1 implies active disease; less than 3.2, well controlled disease; and less than 2.6, remission.)|Baseline to Month 18|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period. n=number evaluable||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820306|NCT01142726|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Remission by Disease Activity Score 28 Based on C-reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP) Criteria Over Time - Intent to Treat Population|TP=treatment period; WP=withdrawal period. Remission defined as DAS28-CRP<2.6. The DAS 28-CRP is a measure of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and assesses the 28 joints RA commonly affects; the score includes the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28), CRP level (a measure of inflammation in the blood), and the patient’s global assessment of health (ranging from very good to very bad). DAS-CRP scores range from 0 to 10, with higher values indicating greater disease activity. Individual measures are fed into a complex mathematical formula to produce the overall DAS (a score greater than 5.1 implies active disease; less than 3.2, well controlled disease; and less than 2.6, remission.)|Randomization to Month 24|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period. Percentage calculated as a/b, where a=number of patients who achieved remission at Day x, and b=number of patients in the analysis (intent to treat).||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820307|NCT01142726|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received Monotherapy and Achieved Remission by Disease Activity Score 28 Based on C-reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP) Criteria at Month 12 and at Both Months 12 and 18|TP=treatment period; WP=withdrawal period. Remission defined as DAS28-CRP<2.6. The DAS 28-CRP is a measure of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) that assesses the 28 joints RA commonly affects; the score includes the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28), CRP level (a measure of inflammation in the blood), and the patient’s global assessment of health (ranging from very good to very bad). DAS-CRP scores range from 0 to 10, with higher values indicating greater disease activity. Individual measures are fed into a complex mathematical formula to produce the overall DAS (a score greater than 5.1 implies active disease; less than 3.2, well controlled disease; and less than 2.6, remission.)|Randomization to Months 12 and 18|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind monotherapy in the Treatment Period. Percentage calculated as a/b, where a=number of patients who achieved remission at Month 12 and at both Months 12 and 18, and b=number of patients in the analysis. n=number evaluable||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820308|NCT01142726|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Remission by Disease Activity Score 28 Based on C-reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP) Criteria at Month 12 and at Both Months 12 and 18|DAS28-CRP remission defined as <2.6; TP=treatment phase; WP=withdrawal phase. The DAS 28-CRP is a measure of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) that assesses the 28 joints RA commonly affects; the score includes the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28), CRP level (a measure of inflammation in the blood), and the patient’s global assessment of health (ranging from very good to very bad). These measures are then fed into a complex mathematical formula to produce the overall DAS (a score greater than 5.1 implies active disease; less than 3.2, well controlled disease; and less than 2.6, remission.)|Randomization to Months 12 and 18|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication in the Treatment Period. Percentage calculated as a/b, where a=number of patients who achieved remission at Month 12 and at both Months 12 and 18, and b=number of patients in the analysis. n=number evaluable||Percentage of participants|||Number
820309|NCT01142908|Secondary|HBA1C in Diabetic Patients|Lab values collected at interview visit by lab personnel|12 months|14 out of the 85 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group with diabetes at baseline and 15 out of the 86 participants in the Education Control group with diabetes at baseline had missing HBA1C at 6 months due to missing the 6 month interview entirely or not completing the lab assessment.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
820310|NCT01142908|Secondary|HBA1C in Diabetic Patients|Lab values collected at interview visit by lab personnel|6 months|12 out of the 85 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group with diabetes at baseline and 11 out of the 86 participants in the Education Control group with diabetes at baseline had missing HBA1C at 6 months due to missing the 6 month interview entirely or not completing the lab assessment.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
820311|NCT01142908|Secondary|HBA1C in Diabetic Patients|Lab values collected at interview visit by lab personnel|Baseline|4 out of the 85 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group with diabetes at baseline and 2 out of the 86 participants in the Education Control group with diabetes at baseline had missing data due to not having HBA1C collected at baseline.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
820392|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|Apoptosis in the Paired Samples, Performed by Caspase 3 Cleavage|Changes will be assessed by a Wilcoxon test|Up to 5 years||||||
820313|NCT01142908|Secondary|Body Mass Index|Calculated from vitals (height & weight) obtained during interview|6 months|30 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 23 out of the 213 in the Education Control group had missing body mass index at 6 months due to missing the 6 month interview entirely or the interview was completed over the phone, or weight was not obtained at the 6 month interview.||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
820314|NCT01142908|Secondary|Body Mass Index|Calculated from vitals (height & weight) obtained during interview|Baseline|5 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 1 out of the 213 participants in the Education Control group had missing data due weight and/or height not collected at baseline.||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
820315|NCT01142908|Secondary|Cholesterol LDL|Collected during interview visit by lab personnel|12 months|34 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 27 out of the 213 in the Education Control group had missing cholesterol LDL at 12 months due to missing the 12 month interview entirely or not completing the lab assessment.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820316|NCT01142908|Secondary|Cholesterol LDL|Collected during interview visit by lab personnel|6 months|29 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 22 out of the 213 in the Education Control group had missing cholesterol LDL at 6 months due to missing the 6 month interview entirely or not completing the lab assessment.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820317|NCT01142908|Secondary|Cholesterol LDL|Collected during interview visit by lab personnel|Baseline|4 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 2 out of the 213 participants in the Education Control group had missing data due to not having cholesterol LDL collected at baseline.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820318|NCT01142908|Secondary|Medication Non-adherence|First 4 items of the 5 item Morisky Self-reported measure of medication adherence was used to determine medication non-adherence.|12 months|35 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 24 out of the 213 participants in the Education Control group had missing data for medication non-adherence due to missing the 12 month assessment or non-response of adherence items collected in the 12 month interview.||participants|||Number
820319|NCT01142908|Secondary|Medication Non-adherence|First 4 items of the 5 item Morisky Self-reported measure of medication adherence was used to determine medication non-adherence.|6 months|28 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 18 out of the 213 participants in the Education Control group had missing data for medication non-adherence due to missing the 6 month assessment or non-response of adherence items collected in the 6 month interview.||participants|||Number
820320|NCT01142908|Secondary|Medication Non-adherence|First 4 items of the 5 item Morisky Self-reported measure of medication adherence was used to determine medication non-adherence.|Baseline|5 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 2 out of the 213 participants in the Education Control group had missing data for medication non-adherence due to non-response of adherence items collected in the baseline interview.||participants|||Number
820321|NCT01142908|Primary|Framingham Risk Percent (Estimate of 10 Year Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Percent)|"Components of the Framingham include gender, age fixed at baseline, systolic blood pressure (presence/absence of blood pressure medications at each time point [combination of administrative med data pull and self-report at assessment]), total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, smoking status (assessed via self-report at each study survey), and diabetes (diabetes is a combination of self-report and CPRS data review). New cases of diabetes are allowed to be updated at 6 and 12 months f/u."|12 months|43 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 33 of the 213 participants in the Education Control group had missing data at 12 months due to entirely missing the 12 month assessment or having missing data on one or more of the Framingham components.||% 10 yr Risk||Standard Deviation|Mean
820322|NCT01142908|Primary|Framingham Risk Percent (Estimate of 10 Year Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Percent)|"Components of the Framingham include gender, age fixed at baseline, systolic blood pressure (presence/absence of blood pressure medications at each time point [combination of administrative med data pull and self-report at assessment]), total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, smoking status (assessed via self-report at each study survey), and diabetes (diabetes is a combination of self-report and CPRS data review). New cases of diabetes are allowed to be updated at 6 and 12 months f/u."|6 months|29 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 24 of the 213 participants in the Education Control group had missing data at 6 months due to entirely missing the 6 month assessment or having missing data on one or more of the Framingham components.||% 10 yr Risk||Standard Deviation|Mean
820323|NCT01142908|Secondary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure|Mean BP is calculated as the average of 3 bp measurements. Collected during BP outcome measurement conducted at interviews|12 months|36 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 30 out of the 213 in the Education Control group had missing blood pressure measurement at 12 months due to missing the 12 month interview entirely or blood pressure not collected at the 12 mo. assessment due to patient arm size exceeding cuff size or interview completed over the phone.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
820324|NCT01142908|Secondary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure|Mean BP is calculated as the average of 3 bp measurements. Collected during BP outcome measurement conducted at interviews|6 months|28 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 23 out of the 213 in the Education Control group had missing blood pressure measurement at 6 months due to missing the 6 month interview entirely or blood pressure not collected at the 6 month assessment due to patient arm size exceeding cuff size or interview completed over the phone.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
820325|NCT01142908|Secondary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure|Mean BP is calculated as the average of 3 bp measurements. Collected during BP outcome measurement conducted at interviews|Baseline|One out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group did not have blood pressure collected at baseline.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
820326|NCT01142908|Secondary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure|Mean BP is calculated as the average of 3 bp measurements. Collected during BP outcome measurement conducted at interviews|12 months|36 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 30 out of the 213 in the Education Control group had missing blood pressure measurement at 12 mo. due to missing the 12 month interview entirely or blood pressure not collected at the 12 month assessment due to patient arm size exceeding cuff size or interview completed over the phone.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
820393|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|PFS (Group 3)|Evaluated using a Simon mini-max design. Curves will be generated using Kaplan-Meier methodology.|4 months||||||
820394|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|Toxicity According to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria|Toxicity will be reported by type, frequency, and severity. Please see adverse events.|Up to 5 years||||||
820327|NCT01142908|Secondary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure|Mean BP is calculated as the average of 3 bp measurements. Collected during BP outcome measurement conducted at interviews|6 months|28 out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group and 23 out of the 213 in the Education Control group had missing blood pressure measurement at 6 months due to missing the 6 month interview entirely or blood pressure not collected at the 6 month assessment due to patient arm size exceeding cuff size or interview completed over the phone.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
820328|NCT01142908|Secondary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure|Mean BP is calculated as the average of 3 bp measurements. Collected during BP outcome measurement conducted at interviews|Baseline|One out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group did not have blood pressure collected at baseline.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
820329|NCT01142908|Primary|Framingham Risk Percent (Estimate of 10 Year Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Percent)|"Components of the Framingham include gender, age fixed at baseline, systolic blood pressure (presence/absence of blood pressure medications at each time point [combination of administrative med data pull and self-report at assessment]), total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, smoking status (assessed via self-report at each study survey), and diabetes (diabetes is a combination of self-report and VA Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS) data review). New cases of diabetes are allowed to be updated at 6 and 12 months f/u."|Baseline|Two out of the 215 participants in the Pharmacist CVD group had missing data due to not having the blood pressure component of the Framingham collected at baseline.||% 10 yr Risk||Standard Deviation|Mean
820330|NCT01143038|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Developed Antibodies to Romiplostim|The number of participants who developed antibody formation (defined as negative at baseline and positive at post-baseline, transient or persistent) to romiplostim, endogenous thrombopoietin (eTPO), and thrombopoietin mimetic peptide (TMP, the peptide component of romiplostim) was summarized.|Baseline and at end of treatment (based on response to treatment, this could occur between 12 months and approximately 18 months)|Safety analysis set participants with available results||participants|||Number
820331|NCT01143038|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical trial participant. The event does not necessarily have a causal relationship with study treatment. A serious adverse event is defined as an adverse event that meets at least one of the following serious criteria: • fatal • life threatening • requires in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization • results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity • congenital anomaly/birth defect • other significant medical hazard. Whether an adverse event was treatment-related (TRAE) or not was determined by investigator.|From first dose date of romiplostim to end of study (up to 24 months).|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
820332|NCT01143038|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Splenectomy During the 12-month Treatment Period|If treatment with romiplostim was deemed ineffective or intolerable by the investigator, a splenectomy may have been performed.|12 months|Safety analysis set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820333|NCT01143038|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ITP Remission|ITP remission was defined as maintaining every platelet count ≥ 50 x 10^9/L for at least 6 months in the absence of romiplostim and any other therapies to treat ITP.|Up to 24 months|Safety analysis set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820334|NCT01143038|Primary|Number of Months With Platelet Response During the 12-Month Treatment Period|The primary endpoint was the number of months a participant achieved a platelet response during the 12-month treatment period. A platelet response for any 1 month was defined as the median of platelet counts measured in the month ≥ 50 x 10^9/L. Platelet counts within 4 weeks following a rescue medication use or following splenectomy were considered non-response. Months without any platelet count measurement were considered as months with no platelet response.|12 months|Safety Analysis Set includes all participants who received at least 1 dose of romiplostim.||months||Standard Error|Mean
820335|NCT01143051|Primary|Concentration vs. Time for Total Epinephrine From Time Zero to 6 Hours Post-dose|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at 0 (baseline), 5, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240, and 360 minutes post-dose in each treatment period and were analyzed using an established analysis method.|Pre-dose to 6 hours post-dose|Patients who : 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study-drug treatment 3) have at least 4 of the 5 post-dose PK measurements between 5 and 60 minutes post-dose available and 4) have a min of 8 of the 10 post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820336|NCT01143051|Primary|Half-life (t1/2) for Total Epinephrine|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at 0 (baseline), 5, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240, and 360 minutes post-dose in each treatment period and were analyzed using an established analysis method. Half-life (t1/2) is the amount of time it takes for epinephrine decrease to half the peak concentration in plasma during the treatment period.|Pre-dose to 6 hours post-dose|Patients who: 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study-drug treatment 3) have at least 4 of the 5 post-dose PK measurements between 5 and 60 min post-dose available; and 4) have a min of 8 of the 10 post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||min||Full Range|Mean
820337|NCT01143051|Primary|Time to Reach Peak Concentration (Tmax) for Total Epinephrine|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at 0 (baseline), 5, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240, and 360 minutes post-dose in each treatment period and were analyzed using an established analysis method. tmax is the amount of time it takes for epinephrine to reach peak concentration in plasma during the treatment period.|Pre-dose to 6 hours post-dose|Patients who : 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study-drug treatment 3) have at least four of the five post-dose PK measurements between 5 and 60 min post-dose available and 4) have a minimum of eight of the ten post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||min||Standard Deviation|Mean
820395|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|Response Rate (Complete and Partial Response)|Calculated along with a 95% confidence interval.|Up to 5 years||||||
820479|NCT01144299|Primary|Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titer|Titers given as geometric mean titer (GMT) were presented for all three vaccine influenza virus strains|Day 0 and Day 21|Analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for analysis of immunogenicity, on subjects with available data||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
820338|NCT01143051|Primary|Peak Concentration (Cmax) for Total Epinephrine From Time Zero to 6 Hours Post-dose|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at 0 (baseline), 5, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240, and 360 minutes post-dose in each treatment period and were analyzed using an established analysis method. Peak (maximum) concentration (Cmax) is the highest concentration of epinephrine measured in plasma during the treatment period.|Pre-dose to 6 hours post-dose|Patients who: 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study-drug treatment 3) have at least four of the five post-dose PK measurements between 5 and 60 min post-dose available and 4) have a minimum of eight of the ten post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820339|NCT01143051|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to 6 Hours Post-dose (AUC[0-6])|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at 0 (baseline), 5, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240, and 360 minutes post-dose in each treatment period and were analyzed using an established analysis method. Area under the curve from time zero to 6 hours post-dose (AUC[0-6]) was calculated using the trapezoidal rule.|Pre-dose to 6 hours post-dose|Patients who: 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study-drug treatment 3) have at least four of the five post-dose PK measurements between 5 and 60 min post-dose available and 4) have a minimum of eight of the ten post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||pg*min/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820340|NCT01143051|Secondary|Laboratory Analysis|Lab tests, including CBC, serum comprehensive metabolic panel, and urinalysis for all subjects, and urinary pregnancy test for women of child-bearing potential.|Screening, after each treatment and end of study, within 7 days of study visit 3||||||
820341|NCT01143051|Secondary|General Health Assessment|Physical examinations to assess general health|Screening and at or within 7 days after study visit 3||||||
820342|NCT01143051|Secondary|Hand Tremor|Hand tremor scores|at baseline, and at 10, 60, and 360 post-dose||||||
820343|NCT01143051|Secondary|Blood Values|Serum glucose and potassium levels;|at baseline, and at 15, 30, 60, 120, and 360 min post-dose||||||
820344|NCT01143051|Secondary|Telemetry and 12 Lead ECG Analysis|"Telemetry ECG recording of heart rate pre-dose, and during the initial 5 min post-dose.
A 12-lead ECG (Routine and QT / QTc intervals)at specified intervals"|within 30 min pre-dose, telemetry for 5 min post dose, 12 lead at 30, 90, and 360 min post-dose.||||||
820345|NCT01143051|Secondary|Vital Sign Analysis|Vital signs, i.e., blood pressure (SBP/DBP) and heart rate (HR);|at baseline, and at 10, 30, 60, 120, 180, and 360 min post-dose.||||||
820346|NCT01143051|Primary|Baseline Concentration (C0) of Labeled Epinephrine Total Epinephrine|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at Baseline (prior to dosing) in each treatment period following a specified washout period (3-14 days), and were analyzed using an established analysis method. Baseline concentration (C0) is the concentration of epinephrine measured in the plasma at this time point.|0 to 30 minutes prior to dosing|Patients who: 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study-drug treatment 3) have at least four of the five post-dose PK measurements between 5 and 60 min post-dose available and 4) have a minimum of eight of the ten post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820347|NCT01143077|Secondary|Tolerability and Safety|Number of participants with Treatment Emergent Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events|6 Weeks|||participants|||Number
820348|NCT01143077|Primary|Time to Relapse of Psychotic Symptoms During 6 Weeks|"Relapse is defined as any occurrence of:
Insufficient clinical response
Exacerbation of underlying disease
Discontinuation due to an adverse event"|6 Weeks|Intend to treat||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820349|NCT01143090|Secondary|Efficacy|Long-term efficacy of lurasidone in subjects with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who have completed Study D1050289|6 months||||||
820350|NCT01143090|Primary|Adverse Events|Proportions of subjects with AEs, SAEs, and discontinuations due to AEs.|6 months|Safety population - One enrolled subject did not receive any study medication and was excluded from this summary.||participants|||Number
820351|NCT01143142|Secondary|Vaccination of Daughter|With mother’s consent, daughter’s University of Michigan vaccination record will be accessed to determine whether daughter has received any doses of the HPV vaccine. If the University of Michigan vaccination record does not document a visit three months after the intervention, with mother’s consent, research staff will call mother at home to determine whether daughter has received any doses of the HPV vaccine.|Less than or equal to three months from the date of the intervention|||participants|||Number
820352|NCT01143142|Primary|Mother's Intention to Vaccinate Daughter Against HPV|Mother will rate her intention to have her daughter vaccinated against HPV using a Likert scale before and after the intervention. The scale ranges from 0-11 with higher numbers representing more positive intentions to vaccinate against HPV, and 5 being neutral intentions (i.e. neither positive nor negative). In this assessment we use this 11-point scale to assess vaccination before and after viewing the educational materials. The difference pre and post intervention in vaccination intention is calculated (min 0, max 11) and the mean of these differences are calculated for the control and intervention groups.|Date of intervention (one day)|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
820353|NCT01143207|Primary|MPA Concentration at Day 120 (C120)||day 120 after injection|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820354|NCT01143207|Primary|MPA Concentration at Day 104 (C104)||day 104 after injection|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820355|NCT01143207|Primary|MPA Concentration at Day 91 (C91)||day 91 after first injection|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820356|NCT01143207|Primary|AUC 0-91 (Area Under Curve)||first 91 days following injection|||ng day/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820357|NCT01143207|Primary|Tmax (Time to Cmax)||120 days following injection|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820358|NCT01143207|Primary|Cmax (Maximal Serum Concentration of Medroxyprogesterone Acetate (MPA))||120 days following injection|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820359|NCT01143259|Secondary|Hospital Cost|Total Cost of hospital stay inflation adjusted to 2010 dollars.|Upon discharge|The overall baseline number of participants is 274. The total number of participants that were included in the study was 248. There were 26 participants that either chose to not participate in the study after starting, or had protocol violations that excluded them from being included in the measured population.||Dollars||Full Range|Mean
820360|NCT01143259|Primary|Measure of Improvement Over the Standard|Determine if alvimopan addition to the multidisciplinary care process will result in decreased length of stay compared with the multidisciplinary care process plus placebo. Length of stay is determined by how many days a patient stays in the hospital. This is calculated by subtracting the discharge date from the admit date.|Number of days the patient stayed in the hospital [Time frame: Inpatient admit day to discharge day]|The overall baseline number of participants is 274. The total number of participants that were included in the study was 248. There were 26 participants that either chose to not participate in the study after starting, or had protocol violations that excluded them from being included in the measured population.||Days in the hospital||Full Range|Mean
820361|NCT01143272|Secondary|Total Number of Discontinuation or Change of Initially Prescribed Antibiotic||29 months|||participants|||Number
820362|NCT01143272|Secondary|Average Number of Bowel Movements in Patients With Antibiotic-associated Diarrhoea and Clostridium Difficile-associated Diarrhea||29 months|||bowel movements per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
820363|NCT01143272|Secondary|Average Duration of Antibiotic-associated Diarrhoea and Clostridium Difficile-associated Diarrhea||29 months|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820364|NCT01143272|Secondary|Incidence Density of Antibiotic-associated Diarrhea||29 months|||cases per year|||Number
820365|NCT01143272|Secondary|Total Number of Antibiotic-associated Diarrhea Episodes Without Evidence of Clostridium Difficile (Toxins)||29 months|||episodes|||Number
820366|NCT01143272|Secondary|Total Number of Clostridium Difficile-associated Diarrhea Episodes||29 months|||episodes|||Number
820367|NCT01143272|Primary|Total Number of Antibiotic-associated Diarrhea Episodes||29 months|||Episodes|||Number
820368|NCT01143324|Primary|Time to Surgery Recovery Day.|"The primary objective of the study is to access the short term recovery (from surgery to discharge) since the minimally invasive lumbar fusion techniques are expected to be associated with immediate short-term benefits. Patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures are reported to recover earlier from surgery particularly with a shorter time to first ambulation and shorter discharge as compared to the standard open procedures.
Surgery recovery day is defined as the day when patients fulfils following criteria : patient no longer needs intravenous infusion of analgesic drugs, there are no surgery related complications (AEs) impending discharge of patient, patient no longer needs nursing care. The objective of the surgery recovery day assessment is to collect the day when the patient could be discharged based on his actual clinical condition because the effective day of discharge may be prolonged by factors other than the patient's clinical recovery such as social factors."|From date of surgery until date of surgery recovery day assessed up to hospital discharge.|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820369|NCT01143324|Secondary|Number of Patients That Returned to Work 12months After the Surgery.|Document number of participants that returned to work 12 months after surgery.|12 months after the surgery|||Participants currently working|||Number
820370|NCT01143324|Secondary|ODI Difference 12 Months After the Surgery as Compared to Baseline.|Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) 12 months after the surgery as compared to baseline. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) derives from the Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire, it is used to measure disability for low back pain. The index is scored from 0 to 100; 0 meaning 'no disability' and 100 meaning 'maximum disability'.|Baseline, 12 months|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820371|NCT01143324|Secondary|Document Adverse Events Occurrence Throughout the Study.|Document the Adverse Events occurrence throughout the study. All adverse events have been included regardless visit windowing.|From Baseline until 12 months|||Number of reported adverse events|||Number
820372|NCT01143324|Secondary|Document Change in Pain Medication Consumption Over Time as Compared With Baseline. Baseline.|Document the change in pain medication consumption one year after surgery , as compared with baseline. The endpoint is the number of participants taking pain medication at baseline and number of participants taking pain medication in the week before the 12 months follow up visit.|Baseline, 12 months|||Participants|||Number
820373|NCT01143324|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Needing Intervention at Adjacent Level(s).|Proportion of the patients needing intervention at adjacent level(s).|From Baseline until 12 months|||Participants|||Number
820374|NCT01143324|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Needing a Second Intervention at the Treated Level(s) (Reoperation Rates).|Proportion of the patients needing a second intervention at the treated level(s) (reoperation rates).|From baseline until 12 months|||Participants|||Number
820375|NCT01143324|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Utilized Rehabilitation Programs|The number of patients who utilized rehabilitation programs was documented (when required).|From 6-12 months after the day of surgery|||Pts having rehab between 6-12 months|||Number
820376|NCT01143324|Secondary|Fusion Rate as Assessed by CT Scan or X-Rays, in Those Sites Where This Assessment is Standard of Care.|Fusion rate as assessed by the CT Scan or X-Rays, in those sites where this assessment is standard of care.|12 months|One hundred and thirty one-level patients (=130 LEVELS) and 24 two-level patients (=48 LEVELS) were assessed for fusion at 12 months per CIP defined criteria.||Fused levels|Participants||Number
820377|NCT01143324|Secondary|EQ-5D Questionnaire (When it is a Routine Practice) as Compared to Baseline.|EQ-5D questionnaire as compared to baseline measurement. EQ-5D Index was calculated based on answers provided in the questionnaire. Applicable to a wide range of health conditions and treatments, the EQ-5D provides a simple descriptive profile and a single index value for health status. The EQ-5D-3L consists of the EQ-5D-3L descriptive system and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ VAS). The EQ-5D descriptive system comprises 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: no problems, some problems, extreme problems. The respondent is asked to indicate his/her health state by ticking in the box against the most appropriate statement in each of the 5 dimensions. EQ VAS records the respondent’s self-rated health on a vertical 20 cm VAS where the endpoints are labelled ‘Best imaginable health state’ at the top and ‘Worst imaginable health state’ at the bottom, having numeric values of 100 and 0 respectively.|Baseline, 12 months|||Units on a scale / Index||Standard Deviation|Mean
820396|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|Overall Survival|The primary analysis will be performed among the Gnaq/Gna11 mutant patients. A stratified logrank test will be performed stratified by mutation status, M stage, and number of prior systemic therapies for metastatic disease. Due to the potential for a large number of strata and small strata sizes, the standard asymptotic stratified logrank test will be verified for robustness utilizing a permutation reference distribution.|The time from randomization to death due to any cause, assessed up to 5 years||||||
820378|NCT01143324|Secondary|Leg Pain Intensity VAS Score as Compared to Baseline|"Leg pain intensity (using VAS intensity score) as compared to baseline. Relief of Leg Pain intensity at 12 months compared to the baseline using the Back Pain Intensity Score assessed on a 10 cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS).
The endpoint is the difference between baseline and 12 months of the patient's leg-pain intensity score on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). A standardized visual analogue scale (0cm-10cm; with 0cm meaning 'no pain' and 10cm meaning 'worst possible pain') was used. Large values of the VAS score represent large degree of pain. Large (negative) change in VAS score (12 months - baseline) represents large relief of pain."|Baseline, 12 months|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820379|NCT01143324|Secondary|Back Pain Intensity Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score as Compared to Baseline.|"Relief of Back Pain intensity at 12 months compared to the baseline using the Back Pain Intensity Score assessed on a 10 cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS).
The endpoint is the difference between baseline and 12 months of the patient's back-pain intensity score on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). A standardized visual analogue scale (0cm-10cm; with 0cm meaning 'no pain' and 10cm meaning 'worst possible pain') was used. Large values of the VAS score represent large degree of pain. Large (negative) change in VAS score (12 months - baseline) represents large relief of pain."|Baseline, 12 months|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820380|NCT01143324|Primary|Time From Surgery to First Ambulation.|"The primary objective of the study is to access the short term recovery (from surgery to hospital discharge) since the minimally invasive lumbar fusion techniques are expected to be associated with immediate short-term benefits. Patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures are reported to recover earlier from surgery particularly with a shorter time to first ambulation and shorter discharge as compared to the standard open procedures.
Outcome measure timeframe for time from surgery to first ambulation is assessed up to hospital discharge as pts are all ambulated before discharge from the hospital."|From date of Surgery to date of First ambulation, assessed up to hospital discharge.|||Days from surgery to first ambulation||Standard Deviation|Mean
820381|NCT01143337|Secondary|Percent Changes From the Pretreatment Values in the Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28, and ACR Components|ACR components are tender joints count (TJC), swollen joints count (SJC), participant assessment of pain, participant global assessment of disease activity, physician global assessment of disease activity, self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ‐DI]); and C-Reactive Protein (CRP) or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR).|LOCF (Week 12 or discontinuation time)|||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
820382|NCT01143337|Secondary|Changes From the Pretreatment Values in the Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28, and ACR Components|"DAS28 (CRP) is calculated using TJC, SJC C-Reactive Protein ( CRP in mg/dL ), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (VAS in mm) using the following formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.36 x log (CRP+1) + 0.014 x Global Assessment of Arthritis + 0.96 where 28 joints are examined and a lower score indicates less disease activity.
DAS28 (ESR) is calculated using TJC, SJC erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (VAS in mm) using the following formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.70 x log (ESR) + 0.014 x Global Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined and a lower score indicates less disease activity.
A negative change score indicates improvement. Higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28 =<3.2 implied low disease activity, >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, >5.1 implied high disease activity."|LOCF (Week 12 or discontinuation time)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820383|NCT01143337|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR 70) Response|ACR 70 response is a decrease of at least 70 per cent in both tender and swollen joint count and in 3 to 5 assessments (participant's assessment of pain VAS with 0, no pain to 10, worst pain; patient's and physician's global assessment of disease activity VAS scales: overall disease activity [0, very well to 10, very poor and 0, no arthritis activity to 10, extremely active, respectively]; HAQ-DI: 20-questions on life activities [0, no difficulty to 3, inability to perform a task]; CRP).|Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, LOCF (Week 12 or discontinuation time)|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820384|NCT01143337|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR 50 Response|ACR 50 response is a decrease of at least 50 per cent in both tender and swollen joint count and in 3 to 5 assessments (participant's assessment of pain VAS with 0, no pain to 10, worst pain; patient's and physician's global assessment of disease activity VAS scales: overall disease activity [0, very well to 10, very poor and 0, no arthritis activity to 10, extremely active, respectively]; HAQ-DI: 20-questions on life activities [0, no difficulty to 3, inability to perform a task]; CRP).|Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, LOCF (Week 12 or discontinuation time)|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820385|NCT01143337|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR 20) Response|ACR 20 response is a decrease of at least 20 per cent in both tender and swollen joint count [TJC and SJC] and in 3 to 5 assessments (participant's assessment of pain visual analog scale [VAS] with 0, no pain to 10, worst pain; patient's and physician's global assessment of disease activity VAS scales: overall disease activity [0, very well to 10, very poor and 0, no arthritis activity to 10, extremely active, respectively]; Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ-DI]: 20-questions on life activities [0, no difficulty to 3, inability to perform a task]; C-reactive protein[CRP]).|Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, LOCF (Week 12 or discontinuation time)|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820386|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|FACT-M Total Score|Summarized using descriptive statistics for each assessment time and by treatment group. The scores will be compared between treatment groups using a mixed effect model for repeated measures analysis method. Treatment difference will be estimated from the model for each assessment time.|Up to 5 years||||||
820387|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Maximum Standardized Uptake Value on FLT-PET Scans|A paired student's t-test will be performed. Analysis of variance will also be performed to obtain the significance of FLT-PET uptake on each lesion between patients.|Baseline up to 60 minutes post injection||||||
820388|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|Change in PTEN|Correlated with disease status using Fishers exact test.|Baseline up to 4 months||||||
820389|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|Change in p-ERK|Decrease in p-ERK will be correlated with disease status using Fishers exact test.|Baseline up to 4 months||||||
820390|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|Change in p-AKT|Correlated with disease status using Fishers exact test.|Baseline up to 4 months||||||
820391|NCT01143402|Other Pre-specified|Change in Ki67|Correlated with disease status using Fishers exact test.|Baseline up to 4 months||||||
820398|NCT01143402|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (Evaluable Randomized Patients)|The primary analysis will be performed among the Gnaq/Gna11 mutant patients. A stratified logrank test will be performed stratified by mutation status, M stage, and number of prior systemic therapies for metastatic disease. Due to the potential for a large number of strata and small strata sizes, the standard asymptotic stratified logrank test will be verified for robustness utilizing a permutation reference distribution.|The time from randomization to death due to any cause, assessed up to 5 years|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820399|NCT01143402|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) (Evaluable Randomized Patients)|The primary analysis will be performed among the Gnaq/Gna11 mutant patients. A stratified logrank test will be performed stratified by mutation status, M stage, and number of prior systemic therapies for metastatic disease. Due to the potential for a large number of strata and small strata sizes, the standard asymptotic stratified logrank test will be verified for robustness utilizing a permutation reference distribution.|The time from randomization to the earlier date of objective disease progression per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria or death due to any cause in the absence of progression, assessed up to 5 years|Analysis of progression-free survival in all evaluable randomized patients||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820400|NCT01143610|Secondary|Gain of Clinical Attachment Level|Investigation of clinical attachment level, probing depth and reduction of recession depth|9 months post-operatively|The unit of analysis was the site, since each participant contributed with more than one site to be treated||mm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
820401|NCT01143610|Primary|Percentage of Root Coverage|Percentage of root coverage determined by: [area covered]/[total area to be covered] x 100 (in %)|Baseline, 9 months post-operatively|The unity of analysis was the site, since each participant contributed with more than one site for treatment||percentage of area covered|Participants|Full Range|Mean
820402|NCT01143636|Secondary|Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Controls - DNIC.|DNIC occurs when response from a painful stimulus (pain pressure threshold - PPT) is inhibited by another noxious stimulus (cold water). The difference between baseline and post treatment was compared between the 2 groups (real and sham) in patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1).|baseline and at 2 weeks|patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1).||lb||Standard Deviation|Mean
820403|NCT01143636|Secondary|Pain Pressure Threshold Test - PPT|Pressure pain threshold (PPT) is defined as the minimum force applied which induces pain.This test was applied before and after the treatment and the difference (post minus pre) was compared between the 2 groups (real and sham) in patients with pelvic pain (Exp 1).|baseline and at 2 weeks|Patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1).||lb||Standard Deviation|Mean
820404|NCT01143636|Secondary|Von Frey|This test is used to test subjects' sensitivity to a mechanical stimulus. It was performed before and and after the treatment and the difference (post minus pre) was compared between the 2 groups (real and sham) in patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1). A set of filaments, typically from 0.008 grams force up to 300 grams force, is applied on the patients' skin. The mechanical threshold is defined as the moment when the patient detects the stimulus.|baseline and at 2 weeks|Patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1).||grams||Standard Deviation|Mean
820405|NCT01143636|Secondary|Patient Global Assessment - PGA|"This scale measures patient's assessment of general health. It was performed at the end of the treatment and compared between the 2 groups (real and sham) in patients with pelvic pain (Exp 1). The patient has to answer the question how is your health overall on a scale going from 0 to 10 (0 being the worst, 10 being the best)."|2 weeks|Patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820406|NCT01143636|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory - BDI.|BDI is a questionnaire used for detecting depression. It was performed at the end of the treatment and compared between the 2 groups (real and sham) in patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1). It is a 21-question multiple-choice self-report inventory (scores ranging from 0 to 63 - 0 corresponds to no symptom of depression).|2 weeks|Patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820407|NCT01143636|Secondary|Mini Mental Scale - MMS|This scale measures patients cognitive impairment. It was performed at the end of the treatment and compared between the 2 groups (real and sham) in patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1). It is a 30 points scale (total scores ranging from 0 to 30), the highest score corresponds to the highest cognitive status.|2 weeks|Patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820408|NCT01143636|Secondary|Visual Analogue Scale - Anxiety.This Scale Measures Patients' Level of Anxiety on a Scale (0-no Anxiety to 10-worst Anxiety Ever). It Was Performed at the End of the Treatment and Compared Between the 2 Groups (Real and Sham) in Patients With Pelvic Pain|The scale was performed at the end of the treatment and compared between the 2 groups (real and sham) in patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1).|2 weeks|This outcome measure was performed in patients with pelvic pain (Exp 1).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820409|NCT01143636|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression - CGI|This scale measures illness severity and was performed on patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1). The scale was performed at end of the treatment and compared between the two groups (real and sham). The scale is divided in 3 sub-scales: Severity of illness (0-7), global improvement (0-7) and efficacy index (0-16), total scores ranging from 0 to 30. The highest scores corresponding to lowest clinical improvement.|2 weeks|Patients with pelvic pain (Exp 1)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820410|NCT01143636|Secondary|Quality of Life Scale (QOLS)|The questionnaire on quality of life was performed at the end of the treatment session and compared between the two groups (active and sham) in patients with pelvic pain (Exp. 1). The QOLS has 16 items (total scores ranging from 16 to 112) the highest scores corresponding the best QOL.|2 weeks|We compared active and sham groups (Exp. 1)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820411|NCT01143636|Primary|Pressure Pain Threshold|"Pressure pain threshold (PPT) is defined as the minimum force applied which induces pain.
The change in pressure pain threshold (post minus pre intervention) is use for the analysis."|baseline and at 2 weeks|The pain pressure test is performed in healthy participants (exp 2).||lb||Standard Deviation|Mean
820412|NCT01143636|Primary|Pain Assessment|We use the Visual analogue scale (VAS) to measure pain. The VAS is ranged from 0 to 10, with 0 reffering to no pain and 10 reffering the the worst possible pain. We used the difference between post treatment minus baseline to compare the two treatments (active versus sham tDCS).|baseline and at 2 weeks|The VAS is performed in patients with pelvic pain (Experiment 1).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820508|NCT01144598|Secondary|Anti-cyclic Citrullinated Peptide|Anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP) test results.|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
820413|NCT01143649|Primary|Cortical Oscillations - EEG|Recording took place in a dim-lighted room set up with acoustic and electric isolation. EEG was acquired from 64-channels HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net (Electrical Geodesic Inc., Eugene, OH) and recorded using Net Station running on a MacIntosh G4 computer. Alpha power were used as the main outcome measure. The difference values (e.g., post minus pre tACS) were used for the analysis. The alpha frequency is a brain oscillation that takes place especially when subjects are in a relaxed state, especially eyes closed. In the motor cortex, a decrease in alpha power has been seen during motor performance. Therefore, it could be speculated that a decrease in power in this study would indicate more engagement in motor cortex during the motor performance.|15 minutes|The brain oscillations measurements were only performed in the tACS study (Experiment 3).||microVolt^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
820414|NCT01143649|Primary|Cortical Excitability|"Motor evoked potential (MEP) Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS), MEP were recorded before and after tDCS (both active and sham).
The percentage of change in MEP (post versus pre intervention) between the two groups (active and sham) were used for the comparison."|1 hour|The cortical excitability measurement (MEP) was performed in healthy participants involved in the tDCS+CIMT study (Experiment 2).||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820415|NCT01143649|Primary|Jebsen Taylor Hand Function Test|Jebsen Taylor Hand Function Test: measures hand function in real-life activities, by evaluating the time required to perform 7 different tasks. We used the non-cronstrained hand for the assessments. The sum of the different tasks was used for the analysis.|2 weeks|The Jebsen Taylor Hand Function Test was only performed in the stroke study (Experiment 1).||seconds||Standard Error|Mean
820416|NCT01143688|Secondary|Asthma Symptoms|Subjective change in asthma symptoms on a visual-analogue scale with scores ranging from 0 (no positive change) to 10 (complete positive change). These subjective responses were then converted to percent change during the 2 hours by multiplying each score by 10. Each of these individual subject scores were then averaged to produce an average percent change in symptoms.|Assesed over 2 hours during each visit. There were 4 visits in each block each visit separated by 3-7 days. There were three blocks each block separated by 3-7 days.|||percent change in symptoms||Standard Error|Mean
820417|NCT01143688|Primary|Change in FEV1|The baseline FEV1 (before treatment) was subtracted from the maximum FEV1 recorded during the 2 h period following treatment. This difference value was then converted into percent improvement by dividing by baseline FEV1 and multiplying by 100. Each treatment was given 3 times to each patient, so we averaged the 3 values to yield the mean percent change in FEV1 for each condition.|FEV1 was assessed every 20 minutes for 2 hours at each visit. There were 4 visits in each block each visit separated by 3-7 days. There were three blocks each block separated by 3-7 days.|Each patient went through each treatment arm (albuterol, placebo inhaler, placebo acupuncture, and no-intervention) once in block 1, then again in block 2, and again in block 3, for a total of 12 interventions of the course of the study.||percentage change in FEV1||Standard Error|Mean
820418|NCT01143701|Primary|Teacher-rated ADHD Symptoms|Total Symptom Score on Teacher-Rated Vanderbilt ADHD Rating Scale (range=0-54). Higher scores represent more severe ADHD symptom presentation.|12 months|Analyses only included patients who had a post-intervention teacher-rated ADHD scale. Hierarchical Modeling accounted for clustering of patients nested within providers and providers nested within practices.||scores on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
820419|NCT01143701|Primary|Parent-rated ADHD Symptoms|Total Symptom Score on Parent-Rated Vanderbilt ADHD Rating Scale (range=0-54). Higher scores represent more severe ADHD symptom presentation.|12 months|Hierarchical Modeling accounted for clustering of patients nested within providers and providers nested within practices.||scores on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
820420|NCT01143714|Secondary|Number of Sharp Debridements Performed During the 4-week Treatment Phase and the 8-week Follow-up Period (12 Weeks Total)||12 weeks|Intent-to-Treat population||debridements||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820421|NCT01143714|Primary|Change in Wound Area|The primary efficacy endpoint was the percent change in wound area from baseline to completion of the 4-week treatment phase and the 8-week follow-up period|4 Weeks|Sample size originally set at 100 to provide 80% power, a=0.05. Interim analysis when enrollment reached 50 indicated results would not change with additional enrollment. Intent-to-treat used for primary inference; Missing values imputed by method of population mean and last observation carried forward (wound area).||percentage of average change in wound||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820422|NCT01143727|Secondary|Percent Change in Wound Area||28 days|Intent-to-Treat||percentage change from baseline area||Standard Deviation|Mean
820423|NCT01143727|Primary|Wound Appearance|Weekly wound appearance as assessed by BWAT-m scores. BWAT-m scores used to determine primary efficacy consist of 8 subscales, each grade an aspect of wound status on a 1-5 scale; 1=normal intact skin; 5=least desirable. Total score=8-40. Subscales: Edges, Undermining, Necrotic Tissue Type, Necrotic Tissue Amount, Exudate Type, Exudate Amount, Skin Color Surrounding Wound, and Granulation Tissue.|28 days|12 subjects initially for this exploratory study. 17 subjects enrolled to ensure 12 evaluable. Intent-to-treat used for primary inference. Missing values imputed by method of population mean (BWAT-m) and last observation carried forward (wound area).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820424|NCT01143766|Secondary|Efficacy|Assess the effect of a single 900mg dose of gabapentin pre-ERCP on pre and post procedure pain, anxiety and nausea as reported on visual analog scales.|At time of discharge post-procedure||||||
820425|NCT01143766|Secondary|Safety|Measure sedation-related adverse events|At time of discharge post-procedure||||||
820426|NCT01143766|Primary|Dosing Requirements|Assess the effect of a single 900mg dose of gabapentin pre- ERCP on intra and post procedure narcotic/sedative requirements.|At time of discharge post-procedure|TOTAL DOSE OF MEPERIDINE||TOTAL DOSE OF MEPERIDINE, mg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820427|NCT01143792|Primary|Substance Use|Percentage of substance use days in prior six months|Twelve months|The number of participants does not correspond to the participant flow model because some participants did not complete all follow-up assessment interviews. All available data were included int he analysis.||percent days of drug use||Standard Deviation|Mean
820428|NCT01143792|Primary|Substance Use|Percentage of substance use days in prior three months|Six months|The number of participants does not correspond to the participant flow model because some participants did not complete all follow-up assessment interviews. All available data were included in the analysis.||percent days of drug use||Standard Deviation|Mean
820721|NCT01141660|Primary|Number of Participants With Laryngospasm||2 years|||Participants|||Number
820429|NCT01143792|Secondary|Depressive Symptoms|Beck Depression Inventory - II (BDI-II) total score, range from 0 (no depression)to 63 (severe depression)|Twelve months|The number of participants does not correspond to the participant flow model because some participants did not complete all follow-up assessment interviews. All available data were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820430|NCT01143792|Secondary|Depressive Symptoms|Beck Depression Inventory - II (BDI - II) Range from 0 (no depression) to 63 (severe depression)|Six months|The number of participants does not correspond to the participant flow model because some participants did not complete all follow-up assessment interviews. All available data were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820431|NCT01143792|Secondary|Depressive Symptoms|Beck Depression Inventory - II (BDI-II) total score, range from 0 (no depresion)to 63 (severe depression)|Three months|The number of participants does not correspond to the participant flow model because some participants did not complete all follow-up assessment interviews. All available data were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820432|NCT01143792|Secondary|HIV Risk|Frequency of condoms use in prior six months.|Twelve months|The number of participants does not correspond to the participant flow model because some participants did not complete all follow-up assessment interviews. All available data were included in the analysis.||participants who always used condoms|||Number
820433|NCT01143792|Secondary|HIV Risk|Frequency of condoms use in prior three months.|Six months|The number of participants does not correspond to the participant flow model because some participants did not complete all follow-up assessment interviews. All available data were included in the analysis.||participants who always used condoms|||Number
820434|NCT01143792|Secondary|HIV Risk|Frequency of condoms use in prior three months.|Three months|The number of participants does not correspond to the participant flow model because some participants did not complete all follow-up assessment interviews. All available data were included in the analysis.||participants who always used condom|||Number
820435|NCT01143792|Primary|Substance Use|Percentage of substance use days in prior three months.|Three months|The number of participants does not correspond to the participant flow model because some participants did not complete all follow-up assessment interviews. All available data were included in the analysis.||percent days of drug use||Standard Deviation|Mean
820436|NCT01143818|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline to Month 6 in Body Mass Index (BMI)|The BMI was measured in kg/m^2 and was reported at baseline and at the Month 6. BMI = weight (kg)/[(height (m) x height (m)] and was measured to 1 decimal point precision.|Baseline to Month 6|The full analysis set included all participants in the safety analysis set who had BMI available at baseline and Month 6.||Percent Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820437|NCT01143818|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline to Month 6 in the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) Total Score|The MFI is a 20-item self-reported instrument designed to measure fatigue. Five scales measure different modes of fatigue: general fatigue (4 items), physical fatigue (4 items), mental fatigue (4 items), reduced motivation (4 items), and reduced activity items (4 items). The scores for each item range from 1 to 5. Each subscale includes 4 items with 5-point Likert scales and subscale scores range from 4 to 20 with a higher score indicating greater fatigue. The percent change=[(MFI value at Month 6-MFI value at baseline)/MFI baseline value] X 100.|Baseline to Month 6|The full analysis set included all participants in the safety analysis set who had an MFI score available at baseline and Month 6.||Percent Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820438|NCT01143818|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline to Month 6 in the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Total Score|The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) test is a validated 15 question assessment designed to measure changes in erectile function (6 items), orgasmic function (2 items), sexual desire (2 items), intercourse satisfaction (3 items), and overall satisfaction (2 items). The scores ranged from 0 to 5 on each item with a lower score indicating greater dysfunction. A total IIEF score of 0 (minimum) to 75 (maximum) was possible and represented the sum of all the items at baseline and Month 6. The percent change = [(IIEF value at Month 6-IIEF baseline value)/IIEF baseline value]x 100.|Baseline to Month 6|The full analysis set included all participants in the safety analysis set who had an IIEF score available at baseline and Month 6.||Percent Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820439|NCT01143818|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline to Month 6 in Aging Male Symptoms (AMS) in Mean Total Score|The Aging Male Symptoms (AMS) test is self-administered and designed to assess symptoms of aging with a rating from none (0) to extremely severe (5) for 17 items from psychological (5 items), somatic (7 items), and sexual (5 items) categories. Total scores range from 17 (minimum) to 85 (maximum). The AMS total score was reported at baseline and at Month 6 and represented the sum of all the items. The percent change from baseline was calculated as the [(AMS value at Month 6 - AMS value at baseline)/baseline value] x 100.|Baseline to Month 6|The full analysis set included all participants in the safety analysis set who had an Aging Male Symptoms (AMS) score available at baseline and Month 6.||Percent Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
820440|NCT01143883|Primary|Surgical Site Infection|We will monitor the incision from the day of surgery to post operative day 30 to determine if the incision needs antibiotics.|Day of surgery up to 30 days post operatively|The number of participants analyzed was based on the number who received treatment according to their randomized group and were treated according to study protocol||percentage of participants with SSI|||Number
820441|NCT01143896|Primary|Depression Care: Change From Baseline in Number of Depression Free Days (DFDs) at 12 Months|The change in Depression Free Days was assessed using the item mean score from the 20-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-20) collected at baseline and 12-months. The SLC-20 items are scored from 0 to 4 and averaged to provide a mean depression severity score ranging from 0 to 4. Depression-free days (DFDs) were calculated using an SCL-20 score of less than 0.5 for depression-free and 2.0 or higher for fully symptomatic, and scores in between were assigned a linear proportional value.|From Baseline to 12 months|||Depression Free Days (DFDs)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820442|NCT01143896|Primary|Depression Care: Depression Remission|Depression outcomes were assessed using the item mean score from the 20-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-20) collected at baseline and 12-months. The SLC-20 items are scored from 0 to 4 and averaged to provide a mean depression severity score ranging from 0 to 4. Remission was defined as an item mean SCL-20 score of less than 0.5.|Baseline and 12 months|||participants|||Number
820509|NCT01144598|Secondary|Rheumatoid Factor|Rheumatoid factor test results.|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
820443|NCT01143896|Primary|Depression Care: Treatment Response|Depression outcomes were assessed using the item mean score from the 20-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-20) collected at baseline and 12-months. The SLC-20 items are scored from 0 to 4 and averaged to provide a mean depression severity score ranging from 0 to 4. Depression treatment response was defined as a 50% or greater decrease in the mean SCL-20 score compared with baseline.|Baseline and 12 months|||participants|||Number
820444|NCT01143896|Secondary|Medication Adherence: Medication Possession Ratio|Medication adherence was measured using the Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) calculation: Pharmacy refill data was used to calculate a medication possession ratio (MPR), by dividing the number of days supply of a medication received by the number of day’s supply the patient needed to be able to take the medication continuously. An MPR closer to 1.0 indicates better adherence and has been associated with lower rates of hospital admission in veterans and greater symptom improvement.|12 months|||medication posession ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
820445|NCT01143896|Secondary|Quality of Hepatitis C Care: Quality Indicators: Proportion of QIs Received|Quality of CHC Indicator Measure is based on a Delphi panel-derived list of quality indicators (QI) in CHC care. The list spans the following domains of care, i.e., CHC-specific function of care (diagnosis, specialty evaluation, treatment, etc); general function of care (diagnosis, treatment, follow-up); and mode of care (encounter, medication, immunization, counseling, etc). Adherence to a given QI is scored as 1 if there is evidence in the patient EMR for the indicator being satisfied. The quality of CHC care at the patient level is calculated by dividing the number of QIs for which that individual received the indicated care by the number of QIs for which the individual is eligible for during the length of time the patient is enrolled in the HEP-TIDES 12-month study timeframe.|12 months|||proportion of QIs met||Standard Deviation|Mean
820446|NCT01143896|Primary|Number of Patients Who Initiated Hepatitis C Antiviral Treatment Within 12 Months of Enrollment|Antiviral treatment initiation was measured dichotomously by assigning a value of 1 if the patient received at least one prescription of interferon within 12 months of enrollment, and a value of 0 otherwise.|12 months|intent to treat||participants|||Number
820447|NCT01144026|Primary|Anti-Tat Antibody Titer|ELISA based chemiluminescent assay to determine the anti-Tat antibody response|5 weeks|all participants enrolled were analyzed||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
820448|NCT01144052|Secondary|Number of Infections||12 months|||events|||Number
820449|NCT01144052|Secondary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events|Recording and reporting according to regulations. Monthly assessments or if necessary.|12 months|All patients enrolled and randomized were analyzed.||participants|||Number
820450|NCT01144052|Secondary|MRI Parameters|Number of new T2-hyperintense lesions, Number of Gd-enhancing lesions on T1-weighted images. Assessments at month 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24.|12 months|All enrolled and randomized patients were analyzed.||Lesions||Full Range|Median
820451|NCT01144052|Secondary|Severity of Relapses|Change of Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS 1-10). Higher values represent a worser outcome.|12 months vs baseline|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
820452|NCT01144052|Secondary|Proportion of Relapse Free Patients||12 months|||participants|||Number
820453|NCT01144052|Secondary|Number of Relapses||12 months|||number of events|||Number
820454|NCT01144052|Secondary|Number of Participants With Relapses||12 months|All enrolled and randomized patients were analyzed.||participants|||Number
820455|NCT01144052|Primary|Number of Days Until First On-study Relapse|Patients were followed-up during 12 months and time to first on-study relapse from randomization was recorded.|12 months|All enrolled and randomized patients fulfilled the criteria for analysis.||days||Full Range|Median
820456|NCT01144182|Secondary|Emotional Subscale of Heart Failure Specific Quality of Life|Subscale of the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (HF-specific quality of life measure). Scores range from 0-25, with higher scores indicating poorer QOL.|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820457|NCT01144182|Primary|Heart Failure Specific Quality of Life|Measured by Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire. Scores range from 0-105, with higher scores indicating poorer QOL.|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the MLHFQ, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820458|NCT01144182|Secondary|Physical Subscale of Heart Failure Specific Quality of Life|Subscale of the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (HF-specific quality of life measure). Scores range from 0-40, with higher scores indicating poorer QOL.|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820459|NCT01144182|Primary|General Quality of Life From the Standardized Physical Component Score|Assesses General Quality of Life from VR-36, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher score indicating better quality of life|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the VR-36, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820460|NCT01144182|Secondary|Mental Health|Subscale of General Quality of Life from VR-36, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher score indicating better quality of life|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the VR-36, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820461|NCT01144182|Secondary|Role Emotional|Subscale of General Quality of Life from VR-36, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher score indicating better quality of life|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the VR-36, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820510|NCT01144598|Secondary|Number of Comorbidities|Number of comorbid (coexisting) medical conditions of the study participants.|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
820462|NCT01144182|Secondary|Social Functioning|Subscale of General Quality of Life from VR-36, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher score indicating better quality of life|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the VR-36, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820463|NCT01144182|Secondary|Vitality|Subscale of General Quality of Life from VR-36, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher score indicating better quality of life|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the VR-36, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820464|NCT01144182|Secondary|General Health|Subscale of General Quality of Life from VR-36, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher score indicating better quality of life|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the VR-36, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820465|NCT01144182|Secondary|Pain Index|Subscale of General Quality of Life from VR-36, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher score indicating better quality of life|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the VR-36, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820466|NCT01144182|Secondary|Role Physical|Subscale of General Quality of Life from VR-36, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher score indicating better quality of life|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the VR-36. Additionally, a second participant in CBP did not complete the role physical subscale items, leaving a total of 49 in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820467|NCT01144182|Secondary|Physical Functioning|Subscale of General Quality of Life from VR-36, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher score indicating better quality of life|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the VR-36, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820468|NCT01144182|Secondary|Standardized Mental Component Score|Assesses General Quality of Life from VR-36, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher score indicating better quality of life|3 months after discharge|51 patients in CBP and 47 patients in QIP had a follow-up visit. However, 1 participant in each arm did not complete the VR-36, such that there are only 50 participants analyzed in CBP and 46 in QIP for this outcome.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820469|NCT01144286|Secondary|Dose-response of Clinical and Mycological (Global)Therapeutic Response|Global therapeutic response at day 8± 2 days. Safety and tolerability.|Day 8 ± 2 days|Dose response tested using logistic regression-linear coefficient for treatment effect.Assuming response rate 80% for 600 mg, 75% for 300 mg, 65% for 150 mg and 50% for the placebo group, sample size of 45 subjects in each group have 90% power to detect linear dose response with 0.05 two-sided test of trend based on the logistic model.||percentage of cured participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820470|NCT01144286|Primary|Dose-response of Clinical and Mycological (Global) Therapeutic Response|"Global therapeutic response at day 26± 4 days (TOC- Test-of-Cure visit).Global therapeutic response is a composite endpoint using the clinical (signs and symptoms) and the mycological cures (microbiological culture), according to FDA guideline Vulvovaginal Candidiasis —Developing Antimicrobial Drugs for Treatment."|day 26 ± 4 days|The full analysis set (FAS) was the primary population for the analysis of all efficacy endpoints. The FAS was defined as all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of a study drug.Subjects in the FAS were analyzed according to randomized treatment group.||percentage of patients cured||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820471|NCT01144299|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that: results in death, is lifethreatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject, or may evolve into one of the outcomes listed above.|During the entire study period (From Day 0 up to Day 21)|||subjects|||Number
820472|NCT01144299|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AE)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product|During the 21-day (Day 0-20) post-vaccination period|||subjects|||Number
820473|NCT01144299|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include arthralgia, fatigue, headache, myalgia, shivering, sweating, and fever.|During the 4-day (Day 0-3) post-vaccination period|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, on subjects with available data||subjects|||Number
820474|NCT01144299|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed include ecchymosis, induration, pain, redness, and swelling.|During the 4-day (Day 0-3) post-vaccination period|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, on subjects with available data||subjects|||Number
820475|NCT01144299|Primary|Seroprotection Power|Seroprotection power is defined as the number of subject who had a pre-vaccination titer < 1:40 and a post-vaccination titer ≥ 1:40|Day 21|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for analysis of immunogenicity, on subjects with available data||subjects|||Number
820476|NCT01144299|Primary|Seroconversion Factor|Seroconversion factor, defined as the fold increase in serum HI GMT post-vaccination compared to pre-vaccination (Day 0), is presented for all three vaccine influenza virus strains|Day 21|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for analysis of immunogenicity, on subjects with available data||fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
820477|NCT01144299|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects|A seroconverted subject is a subject with a pre-vaccination serum HI titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination serum HI titer ≥ 1:40, or a pre-vaccination serum HI titer ≥ 1:10 and a fold increase (Day 21/Day 0) ≥ 4|Day 21|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for analysis of immunogenicity, on subjects with available data||subjects|||Number
820511|NCT01144598|Secondary|Stiffness Duration|Participants' duration of morning joint stiffness.|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
820480|NCT01144364|Secondary|Duration of Response Using the Competing Risk Approach - Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Progression, Relapse or Death as a Result of FL at 12, 24, and 34 Months|DOR was defined for all participants who achieved a response (CR, CRu, and PR) at Month 3 or later, after the completion of induction phase and was measured from the date of randomization until the date of progression, relapse, or death as a result of FL. Participants without relapse, progression, or death for causes other than FL were censored at their last assessment date. Analyses on this endpoint were performed with two different approaches. For the competing risk approach, deaths for causes other than FL were considered as competing events. DOR was estimated with the cumulative incidence of progression, relapse, or death as a result of FL.|Months 12, 24, and 34|ITT Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820481|NCT01144364|Secondary|Duration of Response Using a Traditional Approach - Percentage of Participants Estimated to Have a Sustained Response at 12, 24, and 34 Months|Duration of response (DOR) was defined for all participants who achieved a response (CR, CRu, and PR) at Month 3 or later, after the completion of induction phase and was measured from the date of randomization until the date of progression, relapse, or death as a result of follicular lymphoma (FL). Participants without relapse, progression, or death for causes other than FL were censored at their last assessment date. Analyses on this endpoint were performed with two different approaches. For the traditional approach, duration of response was estimated as the proportion of participants alive without progression or relapse of disease with the Kaplan-Meier method.|Months 12, 24, and 34|ITT Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820482|NCT01144364|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Molecular Response in the Induction Phase|Molecular responders were defined as the proportion of CR/CRu participants with a positive bcl-2/IgH (non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma [NHL] marker) at baseline, whose laboratory values were undetectable after treatment.|Months 5 and 8|IP population; only participants with a positive bcl-2/IgH (NHL marker) at baseline were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
820483|NCT01144364|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Response During the Induction Phase|Participants without a response assessment (due to any reasons) were considered as non-responders.|Months 1 to 8|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
820484|NCT01144364|Primary|PFS Randomization- Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Free of Progression at 12, 24, and 34 Months|PFS from randomization was measured from the date of randomization to the date of documented disease progression, relapse, or death from any cause. Responding participants and participants who were lost to follow-up were censored at their last assessment date. PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods.|12, 24, and 34 months|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820485|NCT01144364|Secondary|OS From Enrollment - Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Alive at 12, 24, and 36 Months|OS from enrollment was defined as the date of enrollment to the date of death from any cause. Participants still alive at the time of the final analysis were censored at the date of the last contact. Estimates of the OS function were made by the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method.|12, 24, and 36 months|IP population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820486|NCT01144364|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) From Randomization - Percentage of Participants With Death|OS from randomization was defined as the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. Participants still alive at the time of the final analysis were censored at the date of the last contact. Estimates of the OS function were made by the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method.|12, 24, and 34 months|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
820487|NCT01144364|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) From Randomization - Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Alive at 12, 24, and 34 Months|OS from randomization was defined as the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. Participants still alive at the time of the final analysis were censored at the date of the last contact. Estimates of the OS function were made by the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method.|12, 24, and 34 months|ITT population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820488|NCT01144364|Secondary|Disease-Free Survival (DFS) From Randomization - Percentage of Participants Disease Free at 12, 24, and 36 Months|DFS was defined for all participants who achieved a complete response (CR) or unconfirmed CR (CRu) at Month 3 or later, after the completion of induction phase and was measured from the time of randomization to the date of relapse or death as a result of lymphoma or acute toxicity of treatment. Participants without relapse were censored at their last assessment date. Estimates of DFS were made using Kaplan-Meier product-limit method.|12, 24, and 36 months|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820489|NCT01144364|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Free of Progression at 12, 24, and 36 Months|PFS from enrollment was measured from the date of enrollment to the date of disease progression, relapse, or death from any cause. Responding participants and participants who were lost to follow-up were censored at their last assessment date. Estimates of PFS function were made with the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method.|12, 24, and 36 months|IP population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820490|NCT01144364|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression or Death|PFS from randomization was measured from the date of randomization to the date of documented disease progression, relapse, or death from any cause. PFS function was estimated using Kaplan-Meier product-limit method. Responding participants and participants who were lost to follow up were censored at their last assessment date.|12, 24, and 34 months|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
820491|NCT01144403|Secondary|Number of Participant With Adverse Event (AE)|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which did not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with study treatment.|Up to 50 months (approximately)|Safety population included all the participants who had received at least one dose of study treatment.||participants|||Number
820492|NCT01144403|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS is defined as the interval between the day of enrollment and the first documentation of progressive disease or death. Progression of disease is defined as at least a 20 percent (%) increase in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions.|From the time of enrollment until death due to any cause (up to 50 months [approximately])|Efficacy population included all the participants who had received at least one dose of study treatment.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820493|NCT01144403|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival is defined as time from date of enrollment to the date of death, regardless of the cause of death.|From the time of enrollment until death due to any cause (up to 50 months [approximately])|Efficacy population included all the participants who had received at least one dose of study treatment.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820494|NCT01144403|Primary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|Overall Response Rate (ORR) was determined by tumor response according to International Workshop Group to Standardize Response Criteria for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) criteria from confirmed evaluations of both target, radiographically evaluated, and non-target lesions. A responder is defined as a subject experiencing either a complete (CR)/ unconfirmed complete (Cru), or partial response (PR) by these criteria. As per criteria; CR = disappearance of all evidence of disease; CRu = the sum of the product of the diameters (SPD) of multiple nodes decreased by at least 75%; PR = regression of measurable disease and no new sites.|Up to 50 months (approximately)|Efficacy population included all the participants who had received at least one dose of study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
820500|NCT01144442|Primary|Feasibility of HIPC in Recurrent Disease Setting|We will determine feasibility based on the proportion of patients who complete 6 prescribed cycles of second line chemotherapy after undergoing the HIPC procedure.|6 months|||participants|||Number
820501|NCT01144442|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival will be defined as time from date of surgery to date of death or censored at the date of last documented contact for patients still alive.|Up to 5 Years||||||
820502|NCT01144442|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Disease progression will be defined as time from surgery to first of either an increase in CA125 from post-treatment value (to a value greater than 100 or doubling of nadir CA125 levels) or new/increasing measurable disease by CT scan as defined by RECIST criteria, (secondary recurrence) or censored at date of last contact for patients still alive and who have no progressed or recurred (from date of surgery to disease progression).|Up to 5 Years||||||
820503|NCT01144442|Secondary|Quality of Life Measurements|The quality of life measurements (version 4 of the FACT-O questionnaire) will be summed over each subscale and overall and comparisons will be made using t-tests at distinct visits.|Baseline, 6 Weeks Post Surgery, Every 3 Weeks Up to Week 27||||||
820504|NCT01144442|Primary|Clinical Response|We will summarize clinical response as the proportion of patients with complete response. Complete response will be defined as normalization of CA125. - After 6 cycles of Second Line Adjuvant Chemotherapy.|After 6 cycles of Paclitaxel & Carboplatin (Week 21 up to 27)|||participants|||Number
820505|NCT01144598|Secondary|Evaluation of Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatments Duration|Time elapsed from onset of symptoms to diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (that is, from the first rheumatoid arthritis-related symptoms to diagnosis by a related specialist) and the time elapsed from diagnosis with rheumatoid arthritis to initiation of anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) treatment.|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||Months||Standard Deviation|Mean
820506|NCT01144598|Secondary|Number of Deformities at Inspection|The number of joint deformities of the study participants.|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
820507|NCT01144598|Secondary|Sedimentation Rate|The erythrocyte (red blood cell) sedimentation rates of study participants were assessed.|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||millimeters/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
820513|NCT01144598|Secondary|Number of Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs|The number of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) that participants were taking to treat their rheumatoid arthritis.|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
820514|NCT01144598|Secondary|Evaluation of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for Pain and Fatigue|Participants rated their pain and fatigue using a visual analog scale from 0 to 10, where 10 was the worst case.|Day 1|Participants who provided a visual analog scale rating for pain and fatigue were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820515|NCT01144598|Secondary|Evaluation of Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)|"The DAS28 index measures disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis and is derived from the number of swollen/tender joints, laboratory tests of inflammation, and participant assessment of global health (by marking a 100 mm line from very good to very bad). A higher score indicates worse control of disease. A DAS28 less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity and a DAS28 greater than 5.1 indicates high disease activity."|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
820516|NCT01144598|Secondary|Evaluation of Global Rheumatoid Arthritis Severity Scale|Global rheumatoid arthritis severity was assessed by asking the participants to consider all the ways their rheumatoid arthritis affected them and to rate how they were doing on a scale of 0 (very well) to 10 (very poor).|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820517|NCT01144598|Secondary|Work Limitation: Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire|The WPAI evaluates the ability to work and perform regular activities. The scale yields 4 types of scores (range 0 to 100): Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on-the-job effectiveness); Work Productivity Loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and Activity Impairment. Higher scores indicate impairment.|Day 1|All participants who completed the rating scales were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820518|NCT01144598|Secondary|Work Limitation: Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)|The HAQ-DI measures physical function by assessing the ability to perform daily living tasks. Each task is rated from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do). The total score ranges from 0 to 3. Higher scores indicate impairment.|Day 1|All participants who completed the rating scales were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820519|NCT01144598|Primary|Evaluation of Disease Duration: Time From Diagnosis to Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drug Treatment in Rheumatoid Arthritis|The time elapsed from diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis to initiation of treatment with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs).|Day 1|All participants with available information were included in the analysis.||Months||Standard Deviation|Mean
820520|NCT01144624|Secondary|Pharmacodynamic Effects of AZD9773 on TNF-alpha|TNF-alpha levels over approximately 6 days following the first dose|Levels taken at baseline, over the dosing period (up to Day 5/6)|Safety analysis set||pg/ml||Full Range|Median
820521|NCT01144624|Primary|Pharmacokinetics of AZD9773|Maximum concentration at steady state (Cmax ss) for serum total and specific fabs|From first dose to last dose (Day 5/6 or at premature treatment discontinuation)|Pharmacokinetic analysis set||ug/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
820522|NCT01144624|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of AZD9773|Number of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events and number of patients who died over 28 days|28 day study period|Safety analysis set||Participants|||Number
820523|NCT01144715|Secondary|Stroke Impact Scale (SIS)|Quality of Life changes are measured with the Stroke Impact Scale questionnaire. The SIS is a self-rated QOL questionnaire that addresses several domains following stroke: physical strength, memory, feelings and emotions, communication, activities of daily living (ADL), mobility, hand use, meaningful activities, and overall percentage recovery from the stroke. We report the Hand Function subscale, which ranges from 0-to-100. A higher score reflects better hand function.|End of treatment at 8 weeks post enrolment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820524|NCT01144715|Secondary|Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity Test|Upper Extremity neurological impairment will be measured using the Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity Test (FMA). The FMA is an impairment-based measure consisting of 33 movements with higher scores indicating increased ability of the patient to move out of synergistic patterns toward more isolated movements. Movement quality of the affected UE is compared to the non-affected UE on 0–2 ordinal scale with 0 indicating no movement at all, 1 indicating partial movement of the affected extremity, and 2 indicating movement equivalent to the non-affected UEs. The score ranges from 0-to-66.|End of Treatment at 8 weeks post enrolment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820525|NCT01144715|Secondary|Wolf Motor Function Test|The Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) is used to measure the degree of function using timed tasks. The WMFT is a 17-item measure used to assess activity limitations of the upper extremity. It is comprised of 2 strength items and 15 timed task performance items. The task performance items begin with the measurement of simple proximal movements and progress to more complex distal and whole limb movements. The WMFT yields two scores: 1) a functional ability score quantifying quality of performance, and 2) a timed score quantifying speed of performance in seconds. A shorter time is better outcome.|End of treatment at 8 weeks post enrolment|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820526|NCT01144715|Primary|Action Research Arm Test (ARAT)|The amount of recovery of arm-hand function is measured with the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT). The ARAT assesses activity limitations of the upper extremity. It includes 19 items divided into four subscales: grasp, grip, pinch, and gross movement. Scores range from 0-to-57 with a higher score indicating a better outcome.|End of treatment at 8 weeks post enrolment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820527|NCT01144949|Secondary|Time to Spontaneous Stone Passage (All Stones)|Time to stone passage for all ureteral stones (regardless of location) is assessed by entries in subject diaries.|4 weeks|ITT population||days||Standard Error|Mean
820528|NCT01144949|Primary|Spontaneous Stone Passage (All Stones) Without Need for Emergency Department Visits, Hospital Admissions, Surgical Intervention, or Other Interventional Procedures.|The primary efficacy variable is the occurrence of spontaneous stone passage within 4 weeks, as determined by radiography. For this outcome measure, analysis includes all ureteral stones, regardless of location in the ureter.|4 weeks|This endpoint analyzed all subjects in the ITT population, defined as randomized and received at least one dose of study drug (115 in the 8 mg silodosin arm, 117 in the placebo arm)||participants|||Number
820529|NCT01144949|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average Score on the Brief Pain Inventory (Distal Stones)|At each study visit, subjects were given a Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Questionnaire to complete. The BPI collects subject-reported pain severity scores and assesses impact of pain upon the subject’s daily life, on a 10-point scale (with 10 being the greatest severity/impact). Analysis was change from baseline to week 4.|4 weeks|Those subjects in the ITT population (defined as randomized and received at least one dose of study drug) with stones located in the distal ureter (determined by radiography) were included in this analysis. The number of ITT subjects with distal stones was 52/115 in the 8 mg silodosin treatment arm and 59/117 in the placebo treatment arm.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820530|NCT01144949|Secondary|Outpatient Narcotic Analgesic Use for Pain Relief|Narcotic analgesic use was assessed through a subject diary. Analysis was performed on the number of days with analgesic use.|4 weeks|ITT population||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820531|NCT01144949|Secondary|Time to Spontaneous Stone Passage (Distal Stones)|Time to stone passage for distally-located stones is assessed by entries in subject diaries.|4 weeks|Those subjects in the ITT population (defined as randomized and received at least one dose of study drug) with stones located in the distal ureter (determined by radiography) were included in this analysis. The number of ITT subjects with distal stones was 52/115 in the 8 mg silodosin treatment arm and 59/117 in the placebo treatment arm.||days||Standard Error|Mean
820532|NCT01144949|Primary|Spontaneous Stone Passage (Distal Stones) Without Need for Emergency Department Visits, Hospital Admissions, Surgical Intervention, or Other Interventional Procedures.|"The primary efficacy variable is the occurrence of spontaneous distal stone passage within 4 weeks, as determined by radiography.
For this outcome measure, analysis includes only those stones located in the distal ureter."|4 weeks|Those subjects in the ITT population (defined as randomized and received at least one dose of study drug) with stones located in the distal ureter (determined by radiography) were included in this analysis. The number of ITT subjects with distal stones was 52/115 in the 8 mg silodosin treatment arm and 59/117 in the placebo treatment arm.||participants|||Number
820533|NCT01145352|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Improvement On Physician's Assessment.|Percentage of participants in whom the efficacy of etanercept was assessed as either markedly effective or effective.|24 weeks|The efficacy analysis population consisted of the participants in whom DAS28 (4/ESR) was calculated (N = number of participants evaluated). The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data.||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820534|NCT01145352|Primary|Percentage of Good Responders and Moderate Responders Among Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response Based on DAS28|The Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count based (DAS28-based) EULAR response criteria were used to measure individual response as none, good, and moderate, depending on the extent of change from baseline and the level of disease activity reached. Good responders: change from baseline >1.2 with DAS28 =< 3.2; moderate responders: change from baseline >1.2 with DAS28 >3.2 or change from baseline >0.6 to =<1.2 with DAS28 =<5.1; non-responders: change from baseline =< 0.6 or change from baseline >0.6 and =<1.2 with DAS28 >5.1.|24 weeks|The efficacy analysis population consisted of the participants in whom DAS28 (4/ESR) was calculated (N = number of participants evaluated). The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820535|NCT01145352|Primary|Number of Unlisted Treatment-Related Adverse Events of Etanercept|Adverse events are all unfavorable events, including clinically problematic abnormal changes in laboratory test values, which develop in participants after the administration of Etanercept, irrespective of causal relationship to Etanercept. The causal relationship between an adverse event and Etanercept was evaluated by the sponsor. Unlisted treatment-related adverse events were confirmed with listed adverse drug reactions specified in Japanese package insert.|24 weeks|The safety analysis population consisted of the participants who received 10 mg or 25 mg lyophilized etanercept (genetical recombination) for subcutaneous injection indicated for polyarticular JIA after the marketing authorization had been granted.||events|||Number
820536|NCT01145352|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Treatment-Related Adverse Events of Etanercept|Serious treatment-related adverse events are defined as any events that lead to death, life-thretening, hospitalization or prolonged hospitalization, a permanent or remarkable disorder/dysfunction, congenital anormaly/congenital deficiency, or other medically significant events or disorder.|24 weeks|The safety analysis population consisted of the participants who received 10 mg or 25 mg lyophilized etanercept (genetical recombination) for subcutaneous injection indicated for polyarticular JIA after the marketing authorization had been granted.||participants|||Number
820537|NCT01145352|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Related Adverse Events of Etanercept|Adverse events are all unfavorable events, including clinically problematic abnormal changes in laboratory test values, which develop in participants after the administration of Etanercept, irrespective of causal relationship to Etanercept. The causal relationship between an adverse event and Etanercept was evaluated by the sponsor.|24 weeks|The safety analysis population consisted of the participants who received 10 mg or 25 mg lyophilized etanercept (genetical recombination) for subcutaneous injection indicated for polyarticular JIA after the marketing authorization had been granted.||participants|||Number
820538|NCT01145391|Secondary|Clinical Inertia|"Definition of clinical inertia: failure of a primary care physician to initiate/intensify anti-hypertensive medications AND the failure to provide behavioral counseling to lower blood pressure during a clinic visit where blood pressure is elevated above 140/90 mm Hg. The clinical inertia measure is the percentage of clinic visits with clinical inertia present divided by the total number of clinic visits.
We report a change in group mean levels of clinical inertia from baseline to 9 months post-randomization. Negative values for clinical inertia represent a decrease in the percentage of clinic visits where clinical inertia was present. Pre-randomization clinical inertia was assessed in the last 2 clinic visits prior to randomization, and post-randomization inertia was assessed in the first 2 post-randomization visits.
Hypothesis: clinical inertia will be significantly greater in the usual care compared with intervention group in the post-randomization period."|Baseline, 9 months|||% visits with inertia present||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820568|NCT01145755|Primary|MADRS Total Score Change From Baseline to Week 6|Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS): The MADRS is a 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms (Montgomery et al 1979). Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. Total score range from 0-60, where higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|6 weeks|||scores on the scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820539|NCT01145391|Primary|Blood Pressure|Hypothesis: compared with patients who receive usual care, patients who receive intervention will have an average systolic blood pressure that is at least 5 points lower 9 months after randomization.|Baseline, 9 months|Intention-to-treat analyses using restricted maximum likelihood (REML) for a repeated measures model with incomplete data (SAS Proc Mixed). As this assumes that the occurrence of missing follow-up data depends only on observed data (i.e., pre-randomization values), we also performed a sensitivity analysis using the method proposed by Little.||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
820540|NCT01145417|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response to Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8)|PHQ-8: 8-item self-administered validated subset of PHQ-9, which comprises first 8 items of measure. Participant rated “Over past 2 weeks, how often bothered by any of following problems?”: little interest in doing things(1); feeling down(2); trouble falling or staying asleep/sleeping too much(3); feeling tired(4); poor appetite/overeating(5); feeling bad about self(6); trouble concentrating(7); moving or speaking slowly or being so fidgety/moving around more than usual(8). Each item scored on scale of 0(not at all)-3(nearly every day). Total score range: 0-24, higher score=greater severity.|Baseline|SAF population included all participants who signed the informed consent, had exposure to open label study drug and had at least one safety assessment. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
820541|NCT01145417|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response to Sheehan-Suicidality Tracking Scale (S-STS) Mapped to the Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA) Categories|S-STS:8-item clinician/participant administered prospective rating scale to assess TE suicidal(Su) ideation(ID),behavior(BHV).Items 1a,2-6,7a,8 scored on 5-point Likert scale 0(not at all) to 4(extremely). Items 1,1b,7 require yes/no response. S-STS total score range 0-30. Lower score=reduced Su tendency. Responses on S-STS were mapped to Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment(C-CASA) as 1:Completed Su; 2: Su attempt; 3: Preparatory acts; 4: Su ID; 5: Self-injurious (SI) BHV, intent unknown; 6: Not enough information; 7: SI BHV, no Su intent; 8: Other, no deliberate self harm.|Baseline up to Week 25|SAF included all participants who signed the informed consent, had exposure to open label study drug and had at least one safety assessment.||participants|||Number
820542|NCT01145417|Secondary|Number of Participants With Categorical Scores on Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C)|PGI-C: participant rated instrument to measure participant's change in overall status since the start of the study, on a 7-point scale; range from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Number of participants in each category are reported.|Week 24|ITT population: all enrolled participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
820543|NCT01145417|Secondary|Visual Analogue Scale for Pain (VAS-pain)|Participants rated the severity of HIV neuropathy pain on a 0 to 100 millimeter (mm) Visual Analog Scale (VAS), where 0 mm = no pain and 100 mm = most severe pain.|Baseline, Week 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|ITT population: all enrolled participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Here ‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable at specific time points for each arm group, respectively.||millimeter (mm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820544|NCT01145417|Secondary|36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)|SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 domains of functional health and well being: physical and social (So) functioning (Fn), physical and emotional role (role-physical [R-P], role-emotional [R-E]) limitations, bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (Vit), mental health (MnH). Two summary scores include Physical Component (Ph C) and Mental Component (Mn C). The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores. Score range for domain scores and summary scores: 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning).|Baseline, Week 24|ITT population included all enrolled participants who took at least one dose of open label study drug. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Here ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at given time point for specific parameter for each arm group, respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820545|NCT01145417|Secondary|Productivity and Activity Impairment Assessed by Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Specific Health Problem (WPAI: SHP) Questionnaire|WPAI: 6-question participant rated questionnaire to determine the degree to which SHP affected work productivity while at work and affected activities outside of work. It assesses amount of absenteeism, presenteeism and daily activity impairment attributable to a HIV neuropathy pain. Question 5 and 6 assesses: How much leg/foot pain affect productivity and daily activity, respectively in past 7 days? on 11-point scale, where 0 (not affected/no impairment) to 10 (completely affected/impaired).|Baseline, Week 24|ITT population: all enrolled participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure. Here ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at given time point for specific question for each arm group, respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820546|NCT01145417|Secondary|Absenteeism and Presenteeism Assessed by Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Specific Health Problem (WPAI: SHP) Questionnaire|WPAI: 6-question participant rated questionnaire to determine the degree to which SHP affected work productivity while at work and affected activities outside of work. It assesses amount of absenteeism, presenteeism and daily activity impairment attributable to a HIV neuropathy pain. Question 2 and 3 assesses absenteeism as: Hours of work missed in past 7 days due to leg/foot pain or other reason, respectively. Question 4 assesses presenteeism as: Hours of work performed in past 7 days.|Baseline, Week 24|ITT population: all enrolled participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Here ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at given time point for specific question for each arm group, respectively.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
820569|NCT01145898|Primary|3-year Change in OPP|Measurement of change in ocular perfusion pressure|Baseline and 36 month visits|||mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
820570|NCT01145898|Primary|3-year Change in CRA RI|Measurement of change in ocular blood flow - central retinal arteries resistance index|Baseline and 36 month visits|||unitless||Standard Error|Mean
820571|NCT01145898|Primary|3-year Change in CRA EDV|Measurement of change in ocular blood flow - central retinal arteries end diastolic velocity|Baseline and 36 month visits|||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
820572|NCT01145898|Primary|3-year Change in CRA PSV|Measurement of change in ocular blood flow - central retinal arteries peak systolic velocity|Baseline and 36 month visits|||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
820547|NCT01145417|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were Employed or Unemployed Assessed by Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Specific Health Problem (WPAI: SHP) Questionnaire|WPAI: 6-question participant rated questionnaire to determine the degree to which SHP affected work productivity while at work and affected activities outside of work. It assesses amount of absenteeism, presenteeism and daily activity impairment attributable to a Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) neuropathy pain. Number of participants who responded “Yes/No” to Question 1: Are you currently employed (working for pay)? are reported.|Baseline, Week 24|Intent to Treat (ITT) population: all enrolled participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure. Here ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at given time point for each arm group, respectively.||participants|||Number
820548|NCT01145417|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent (TE) Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 30 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.|Baseline up to 30 days after last dose of study treatment|Safety population (SAF) included all participants who signed the informed consent, had exposure to open label study drug and had at least one safety assessment.||participants|||Number
820549|NCT01145482|Secondary|Memory|Memory performance was assessed using delayed recall (number of units recalled) on the Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-IV) logical memory (story recall) test. Scores represent a sum of recalled units of two different stories after a 30 minute delay. Total scores range from 0 to 50 (0-25 for each story) with higher scores reflecting better memory performance|15 minutes post insulin or placebo administration|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820550|NCT01145482|Primary|Cerebral Glutamate Concentration|Glutamate concentration was expressed as the ratio of glutamate to creatine. This was determined using magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), a magnetic resonance technique that uses the same equipment as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), but allows researchers to extract information about the concentrations of various neurochemicals of neurobiological significance.|15 minutes post insulin or placebo administration|per protocol||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
820551|NCT01145495|Secondary|Time to Best Response|Kaplan-Meier method will be used.|Up to 10 years||||||
820552|NCT01145495|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|Kaplan-Meier method will be used.|Up to 10 years||||||
820553|NCT01145495|Secondary|Toxicity of Study Treatment, Assessed by the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0|Data will be summarized using frequency tables.|Up to 10 years||||||
820554|NCT01145495|Primary|Number of Participants Who Achieved a Complete Response|Response is assessed by investigator according to International Working Group (IWG) criteria. Complete response requires disappearance of all evidence of disease.|At 12 months|At the time of analysis, 54 participants had adequate to evaluate response.||participants|||Number
820555|NCT01145508|Primary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from randomization to death or the date of last known alive.|Assessed every 3 months for 2 years, and then every 6 months for 3 years|All randomized patients are included in the analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820556|NCT01145547|Primary|Mean Area Under the Curve for Rise in Breakfast Post-prandial.|Arterialized blood glucose was monitored at 15 minute intervals and sensed glucose was recorded at five minute intervals. Mean area under the curve was calculated over the 3 hour period after breakfast for both the high and low glycemic breakfast meals.|Mean area under the curve was calculated at 0, 15min, 30 min, 45 min, 60min, 75 min, 90 min, 105 min, 120min, 135min, 150min, 165min and 180 min after breakfast|||min x (mmol/l)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820557|NCT01145560|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability|Number of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events|All study visits (over 90 days following first dose)|Safety Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
820558|NCT01145560|Secondary|28-day Mortality|Number of patients who died over 28 days|Over 28 days following first dose|Intention-to-treat analysis set||Participants|||Number
820559|NCT01145560|Secondary|7-day Mortality|Number of patients who died over 7 days|Over 7 days following first dose|Intention-to-treat analysis set||Participants|||Number
820560|NCT01145560|Primary|Ventilator-free Days (VFDs) Over 28 Days|Number of ventilator-free days (VFDs)|Over 28 days following first dose|Intention-to-treat analysis set||Days||Full Range|Median
820561|NCT01145625|Other Pre-specified|Target Area Hair Count (TAHC)|Number of hairs in the area being examined as measured by macrophotography.|Baseline to Week 52|Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group who received dispensed investigational product.||hairs per centimeter squared||Standard Deviation|Mean
820562|NCT01145625|Secondary|Target Area Hair Count (TAHC)|Number of hairs in the area being examined as measured by macrophotography|Baseline to Week 12|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population defined as all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group who received dispensed investigational product.||hairs per centimeter squared||Standard Deviation|Mean
820563|NCT01145625|Primary|Target Area Hair Count (TAHC)|Number of hairs in the area being examined as measured by macrophotography.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group who received dispensed investigational product.||hairs per centimeter squared||Standard Deviation|Mean
820564|NCT01145638|Secondary|Change in Hemoglobin From Baseline to Week 24||24 weeks|The FAS population included all the subjects who were randomised into the study, received at least one dose of the study drug, and had at least one post-baseline Hb assessment. The subjects were considered as randomised, regardless of which treatment they actually received.||g/dL||Full Range|Mean
820565|NCT01145638|Primary|Change in Hb Concentration||Baseline week 4|The FAS population included all the subjects who were randomised into the study, received at least one dose of the study drug, and had at least one post-baseline Hb assessment. The subjects were considered as randomised, regardless of which treatment they actually received.||g/dL||Full Range|Mean
820566|NCT01145755|Secondary|MADRS Remission|A patient will be classified as in remission if their MADRS total score is ≤10 at Week 6|6 weeks|||Participants|||Number
820577|NCT01145898|Primary|6-month Change in Central Retinal Artery (CRA) Vascular Resistance (RI)|Measurement of change in ocular blood flow - central retinal arteries resistance index, this is a measure of the amount of resistance to blood flow within the selected blood vessel.|Baseline and 6 month visits|||unitless||Standard Error|Mean
820578|NCT01145898|Primary|6-month Change in Central Retinal Artery (CRA) End Diastolic Velocity (EDV)|Measurement of change in ocular blood flow - central retinal arteries end diastolic velocity|Baseline and 6 month visits|||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
820579|NCT01145898|Primary|6-month Change in Central Retinal Artery (CRA) Peak Systolic Velocity (PSV)|Measurement of change in ocular blood flow - central retinal arteries peak systolic velocity|Baseline and 6 month visits|||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
820580|NCT01145898|Primary|6-month Change in Ophthalmic Artery (OA) Vascular Resistance (RI)|Measurement of change in ocular blood flow - ophthalmic artery resistance index, this is a measure of the amount of resistance to blood flow within the selected blood vessel.|Baseline and 6 month visits|||unitless||Standard Error|Mean
820581|NCT01145898|Primary|6-month Change inOphthalmic Artery (OA) End Diastolic Velocity (EDV)|Measurement of change in ocular blood flow - ophthalmic artery end diastolic velocity|Baseline and 6 month visits|||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
820582|NCT01145898|Primary|6-month Change in Ophthalmic Artery (OA) Peak Systolic Velocity (PSV)|Measurement of change in ocular blood flow - ophthalmic artery peak systolic velocity|Baseline and 6 month visits|||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
820583|NCT01146054|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Achieving Freedom From Local Progression (FFLP) in Patients Treated With Gemcitabine Followed by Fractionated Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) for up to 5 Years of Follow up.|"Freedom from local progression is defined as the time from start of SBRT treatment to local progression, with death as a competing risk. If the patient neither died nor experienced local progression, then patient was censored at last follow up.
The data was analyzed in a competing risk model and the outcome reported was the 1 year cumulative incidence rate."|12/31/2012|||Proportion of participants with FFLP||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820584|NCT01146054|Secondary|To Determine the Overall Survival in Pancreatic Cancer Patients Treated With Gemcitabine and SBRT for up to 5 Years of Follow up.|Time to death was measured from start of treatment to until death. If death was not observed, the patient was censored at last follow up.|12/31/2012|The entire cohort.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820585|NCT01146054|Secondary|To Evaluate Progression Free Survival Following Gemcitabine and SBRT for up to 5 Years of Follow up .|"Time to progression free survival is measured from start of SBRT treatment until first progression event or death, which ever comes first. If the patient did not have an event, then the patient was censored at the last follow up.
The analysis was a Kaplan-Meier curve and the outcome was the median time to progression free survival."|12/31/2012|The whole cohort.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820586|NCT01146054|Secondary|Evaluate Acute Gastrointestinal Toxicity up to 3 Months of Treatment.|Acute grade 2 or greater gastritis, fistula, enteritis, or ulcer or any other grade 3-4 gastrointestinal toxicity within 3 months of treatment.|12/31/2012|Whole cohort.||Number of toxicities.|||Number
820587|NCT01146054|Primary|To Determine the Rate of (Grade 2 or Greater) Gastrointestinal Toxicity Attributable to Gemcitabine and Fractionated SBRT at One Year.|Grade 2 or greater late gastritis, fistula, enteritis, or ulcer or late grade 3-4 gastrointestinal toxicity at one year.|12/31/2012|The whole cohort was analyzed.||Number of toxicities.|||Number
820588|NCT01146275|Primary|To Evaluate the Long Term Safety of Macrolane in Breast Enhancement|"To evaluate the long term safety of Macrolane in breast enhancement, using relevant medical history, breast examination, mammography and ultrasound as well as a comprehensive MRI investigation.
Participants with AE/SAE since participation in study 31GB0106 or any findings at the breast examination, mammography, ultrasound or comprehensive MRI investigation"|7 years +/- 6 months post treatment|Subjects that participated in study 31GB0106 was asked to partícipate in the study 31GB0904. 6 subjects signed Informed consent for this study.||participants|||Number
820589|NCT01146275|Primary|To Evaluate if the Subject Has Macrolane Deposits in the Breast Seven Years Post Treatment, Using a Comprehensive MRI Investigation|The MRI investigation was performed to evaluate if the subjects has study product (Macrolane-a Hyaluronic acid) in their breast 7 years after the treatment.|7 years +/- 6months post treatment|MRI were performed by 4 women out of 6. One woman was pregnant and therefore not included and one did not want to perform MRI.||participants with remaining product|||Number
820590|NCT01146288|Primary|Renal Vascular Resistance (mm Hg/[ml/Min])||baseline and after diuretics administration|||mm Hg/[ml/min]||Standard Deviation|Mean
820591|NCT01146288|Primary|Change in GFR (ml/Min)||baseline and after diuretics administration|||ml/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
820592|NCT01146379|Primary|Change in Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) Score Per Week|The Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) is a standardized assessment of upper extremity functional capacity. Criterion scores are awarded by a trained assessor as the person performs 19 different items requiring reaching, grasping, and manipulation of various objects. Maximum total score is 57. Minimum total score is 0. Higher scores represent better arm and hand functional capacity. In this study, scores were assesses weekly and the analysis evaluated the rate of change over time in units/week.|9 weeks|||change in units on a scale/week||Standard Error|Mean
820593|NCT01146418|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ≥1 Live Birth (Cumulative Live-Birth Rate)|The cumulative live-birth rate was defined as the number of participants with at least 1 live birth after ET in a COS cycle in Base Study P06029 or an FTET in Follow-Up Study P06031, divided by the total number of participants in each FAS treatment group.|From approximately 10 weeks after ET in Base Study P06029 or FTET in Follow-Up Study P06031 up to time of delivery (up to 2 years)|FAS population consisted of all randomized participants who received corifollitropin alfa or recFSH in Base Study P06029.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820606|NCT01146782|Secondary|Last Treatment Night Response (AHI Reduction)|Comparing AHI at the last treatment night to the control/baseline night is reported as the percent change in AHI. AHI is calculated by dividing the number of apnea/hypopnea events by the number of hours of sleep. AHI values are typically characterized as 5-15/hr = mild OSA, 15-30/hr = moderate OSA, and >30/hr = severe OSA. Negative numbers represent a decrease/improvement in AHI, whereas positive numbers represent an increase/no improvement in AHI.|At completion of 28 day home use.|All subjects in primary endpoint cohort with final evaluable treatment PSG.||AHI reduction (% change)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820594|NCT01146418|Primary|Percentage of Participants With ≥1 Vital Pregnancy (Cumulative Vital Pregnancy Rate)|The cumulative vital pregnancy rate was defined as the number of participants with at least 1 vital pregnancy in a controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) cycle in Base Study P06029 or a frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FTET) in Follow Up Study P06031, divided by the total number of participants in each Full Analysis Set (FAS) treatment group. A vital pregnancy was defined as an intrauterine pregnancy with fetal heart tones assessed at least 35 days (≥5 weeks) after embryo transfer (ET).|Assessed at least 35 days after ET in COS cycle in Base Study P06029 or an FTET cycle in Follow-Up Study P06031 (up to 2 years)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population consisted of all randomized participants who received corifollitropin alfa or recFSH in Base Study P06029.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820595|NCT01146457|Primary|Rate of Breakthrough Pain|Rate of breakthrough pain is the number of episodes of breakthrough pain divided by the number of hours of labor. Time measured from placement of the neuraxial anesthetic, until delivery of the neonate. Because duration of labor is different for all patients, the rate of breakthrough pain per hour is used as the primary outcome.|Participants were followed for the duration of delivery, an average of 7 hours|||episodes of breakthrough pain per hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
820596|NCT01146600|Secondary|Reported Adverse Events||baseline, week 1, week 2||||||
820597|NCT01146600|Secondary|PSQI|"Scores on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), a questionnaire based assessment of sleep quality. Scores were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)).
Scores on the PSQI can range from 0 to 21. Higher scores indicate poorer sleep quality."|baseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drug|Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820598|NCT01146600|Secondary|SF-36, Vitality Subscale|"The SF-36 is a health outcome scale with multiple subsections. Subjects were administered the entire SF-36; this analysis is of the vitality subscore provided by this scale. Scores were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered once at baseline, twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)).
The vitality subscore is calculated using four questions from the SF-36, and can range from 0 to 100. Higher scores reflect more vitality."|baseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drug|Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820599|NCT01146600|Secondary|FOSQ|"Scores on the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ) were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)).
Scores on the FOSQ can range from 5 to 20. Higher FOSQ scores indicate less impairment due to sleepiness."|baseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drug|Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820600|NCT01146600|Secondary|Epworth Sleepiness Scale|"Scores on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)).
ESS scores can range from 0 to 24. Higher scores indicate higher levels of sleepiness."|baseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drug|Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820601|NCT01146600|Secondary|PVT Number of Lapses|Number of lapses (no response for > 500 msec) on the PVT, averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice at baseline, four times on clarithromycin (twice during week 1 and twice during week 2), and four times on placebo (twice during week 1 and twice during week 2)). Higher numbers indicate worse vigilance.|baseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drug|Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)||Number of lapses||Standard Deviation|Mean
820602|NCT01146600|Secondary|PVT Median Reaction Time at Week 1|"median reaction time on the PVT at week 1 of each intervention. Lower values reflect faster reaction times (i.e., better vigilance)
Note that the PVT provides a median of reaction times to all stimuli (~100) presented during the 10 minute PVT test. Each subject had two PVT tests at each visit, resulting in two median values. These were averaged, and then, for the purposes of this outcome, we then obtained the MEAN across multiple subjects for each condition (baseline, clarithromycin week 1, placebo week 1)"|week 1|Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)||Msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
820603|NCT01146600|Primary|Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) Reaction Time|"Median reaction time on the PVT at the end of the second week of treatment. Lower values reflect faster reaction times (I.e., greater vigilance).
Note that the PVT provides a median of reaction times to all stimuli (~100) presented during the 10 minute PVT test. Each subject had two PVT tests at each visit, resulting in two median values. These were averaged, and then, for the purposes of this outcome, we then obtained the MEAN across multiple subjects for each condition (baseline, clarithromycin week 2, placebo week 2)"|week 2 of each intervention|Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)||Msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
820604|NCT01146613|Primary|Weekly Percentage of Heavy Drinking Days|Protocol: The primary outcome measure examines the hypothesis that varenicline will decrease the weekly proportion of heavy drinking days during Study Weeks 2 through 13 as compared to placebo.|Weeks 2-13*|||percentage of heavy drinking days||Standard Error|Mean
820605|NCT01146782|Secondary|Percent Reduction in Oxygen Desaturation Index (ODI)|Comparing first treatment night to control/baseline night reported as percent change. Negative numbers represent a reduction/improvement in ODI, whereas positive numbers represent increases/no improvement in ODI.|First treatment night|||ODI reduction (% change)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820607|NCT01146782|Secondary|Adverse Event Rate|Further categorized as serious and non-serious, device-related and non-device-related, unanticipated and anticipated, and based on level of severity. Adverse events will be evaluated during the trial at the following visits during 28-day take-home period: 7-day, 14-day, 21-day, 28-day follow-up, and any unscheduled visits.|4 weeks|The Safety Cohort consisted of all subjects who participated in at-home use of the device.||subjects|||Number
820608|NCT01146782|Primary|Clinical Success Defined as Apnea-hypopnea Index (AHI) Reduction of >50% and Treated AHI<20|Comparing first treatment night AHI to control/baseline night. AHI is calculated by dividing the number of apnea/hypopnea events by the number of hours of sleep. AHI values are typically characterized as 5-15/hr = mild OSA, 15-30/hr = moderate OSA, and >30/hr = severe OSA. For each subject, Clinical success was defined as apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) reduction of >50% and treated AHI<20. The number of subjects with clinical success was determined to calculate the primary endpoint as the ratio of the number of subjects with clinical success to the number of subjects.|first treatment night|All subjects in the primary endpoint cohort were analyzed.||subjects with clinical success|||Number
820609|NCT01146808|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Who Develop de Novo Hepatitis B Infection Post ADV Withdrawal, Which Will be Assessed at 6 Months Post Withdrawal||Six months after hepatitis B vaccination (2 years post transplant)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
820610|NCT01146808|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With a Sustained Hepatitis B Surface Antibody Titer > 500 IU/mL Prior to and After Vaccination||12-18 months post transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
820611|NCT01146808|Primary|Development of de Novo Hepatitis B Infection After Transplant With a Core Antibody Positive Liver|Determined by hepatitis B serologies and viral load.|Standard of care visits post-transplant for 2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
820612|NCT01146860|Secondary|Ultrasonography of Paranasal Sinuses|Percentage of patients with signs of acute rhinosinusitis in ultrasonography of paranasal sinuses will be evaluated. Ultrasonography scans will be visually evaluated by the investigator for signs of rhinosinusitis.|14 days|FAS: randomised patients with at least one documented application of the drug and post-baseline efficacy data||percentage of patients|||Number
820613|NCT01146860|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Classified as Responders by the Investigator on a 4-point Rating Scale|"General assessment of efficacy using a 4-point rating scale (symptoms healed, improved, unchanged, deteriorated). Patients whose symptoms are improved or healed will be classified as responders to treatment. Patients whose symptoms are unchanged or deteriorated as classified as non-responders."|14 days|FAS: randomised patients with at least one documented application of the drug and post-baseline efficacy data||percentage of patients|||Number
820614|NCT01146860|Secondary|Major Symptom Score Assessed by the Patient|"MSS: sum of the 5 main rhinosinusitis symptoms which are: rhinorrhea (anterior discharge), postnasal drip, nasal congestion, headache, facial pain/pressure.
Each symptom is individually evaluated using the following 4-point rating scale (scoring system): 0 = none/not present, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe.
Thus the MSS ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 15 score points."|14 days|FAS: randomised patients with at least one documented application of the drug and post-baseline efficacy data||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820615|NCT01146860|Secondary|SNOT 20 Symptom Scores|"Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT 20): 20 item questionnaire to assess the symptoms and emotional and social consequences of rhinosinusitis. The symptoms are assessed by the patient using a 6-point rating scale: 0 = not present / no problem, 1 = very mild problem, 2 = mild or slight problem, 3 = moderate problem, 4 = severe problem, 5 = problem as bad as it can be.
range: 0 to 100"|14 days|FAS: randomised patients with at least one documented application of the drug and post-baseline efficacy data||units on a scale (range: 0 - 100)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820616|NCT01146860|Primary|Major Symptom Score (MSS) Assessed by the Investigator|"MSS: sum of the 5 main rhinosinusitis symptoms which are: rhinorrhea (anterior discharge), postnasal drip, nasal congestion, headache, facial pain/pressure.
Each symptom is individually evaluated using the following 4-point rating scale (scoring system): 0 = none/not present, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe.
Thus the MSS ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 15 score points."|14 days|FAS: randomised patients with at least one documented application of the drug and post-baseline efficacy data||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
820617|NCT01146873|Secondary|Highest Grade ALT After Randomization|Highest grade ALT after randomization. Grading was determined based on the Division of AIDS (2004) Toxicity Tables to grade adverse reactions. Grading scale: 0 (none), 1 (mild), 2 (moderate), 3 (severe), 4 (potentially life-threatening).|through 48 weeks post randomization|||number of participants|||Number
820618|NCT01146873|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Elevated Total Cholesterol, Elevated LDL, Abnormal HDL, or Abnormal Triglycerides at 40 Weeks After Randomization|Percentage of participants with elevated total cholesterol, elevated LDL, abnormal HDL, or abnormal triglycerides at 40 weeks after randomization|40 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
820619|NCT01146873|Secondary|CD4 Cell Percentage at 48 Weeks After Randomization|CD4 Cell Percentage at 48 Weeks After Randomization|48 weeks|||percentage of cells||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
820620|NCT01146873|Primary|Viral Failure|Probability of viral failure defined as >= 2 HIV RNA measurements >1000 copies/ml using survival analysis by 48 weeks post-randomization.|48 weeks|||probability of viral failure||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
820621|NCT01146873|Primary|Viral Rebound|Probability of viral rebound defined as >=1 HIV RNA measurements >50 copies/ml using survival analysis by 48 weeks post-randomization.|48 weeks|||probability of viral rebound||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
820622|NCT01146912|Primary|Influenza Immunization: Delayed Pediatric|percentage of pediatric participants with influenza immunization by March 31 of 2012|March 31, 2012|||%participants vaccinated with influenza|||Number
820623|NCT01146912|Primary|Influenza Immunization: Pregnant Women|percentage of pregnant participants with influenza immunization by December 31, 2011|by December 31, 2011|||%participants vaccinated with influenza|||Number
820624|NCT01146912|Secondary|Attendance at Appointment|percentage of pregnant participants who attended an appointment a reminder for from Sept-December 2011|September-December 2011|||% participants attending appointment|||Number
820625|NCT01146912|Secondary|Pediatric: Vaccinated at Influenza Clinic|percentage of pediatric participants vaccinated at an influenza immunization clinic by March 31 of 2011|March 31, 2011|those unvaccinated by the start date for their cohort||% participant vaccinated at flu clinic|||Number
820626|NCT01146912|Primary|Influenza Immunization: Pediatric|percentage of pediatric participants with influenza immunization by March 31 of 2011|March 31, 2011|Individuals unvaccinated by time intervention start for their cohort||% participant vaccinated with influenza|||Number
820627|NCT01146951|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC)|"CGIC in participants with Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome (LGS) relative to placebo was presented as number of participants in each category at the final assessment (last observation carried forward [LOCF]) & at Week 12 of the Treatment Period. The investigator assessed the CGIC by comparing the participants' condition during the 4 weeks immediately before the completion (or discontinuation [d/c]) of the Treatment Period to his/her condition during the 4-week Observation Period (for participants who d/c'd the study during the Treatment Period, the CGIC was assessed by comparing the participant's condition from the start to discontinuation of the study treatment to his/her condition during the 4-week Observation Period).
The CGIC was assessed according to the following 7-grade scale based on the frequency & severity of seizures, AEs, and overall conditions of daily life.
Markedly improved, Improved, Slightly improved, Unchanged, Slightly worsened, Worsened, Markedly worsened."|Up to Week 12 of the treatment period|"Full analysis set (FAS) is defined as participants who were registered for the Treatment Period and excludes those listed below.
Participants who did not meet the inclusion criterion related the target disease, participants who did not take the study drug, participants without any evaluable efficacy data after the start of study treatment."||participants|||Number
820628|NCT01146951|Secondary|Percentage Change in the Frequency of Seizures Other Than Tonic-atonic Seizures (Per 28 Days)|"Percent change in the frequency of seizures other than tonic-atonic seizures (per 28 days) was calculated using the total seizure frequency per 28 days of the Observation Period as the baseline and the total seizure frequency per 28 days of the Treatment Period as the post-treatment value. Percentage change in total seizure frequency was calculated as follows: [100 x (post-treatment value - baseline)/ baseline].
Seizures analyzed other than tonic-atonic seizures included:
Partial seizure freq. (frequency), Absence seizure, Atyp. (atypical) absence seizure, Myoclonic seizure, Clonic seizure, Tonic seizure, Tonic-clonic seizure, Atonic seizure, & Uncla. (unclassified) epileptic seizure.
The frequency of epileptic seizures was recorded in the diary by the recorder. Seizure frequency was counted based on the classification established by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE). The diary recorder monitored the participant and recorded the seizure diary in a consistent manner."|Baseline (28 day observational period) and End of Treatment (28 day treatment period)|"Full analysis set (FAS) is defined as participants who were registered for the Treatment Period and excludes those listed below.
Participants who did not meet the inclusion criterion related the target disease, participants who did not take the study drug, participants without any evaluable efficacy data after the start of study treatment."||Percent change||Full Range|Median
820629|NCT01146951|Secondary|Percent Change in Total Seizure Frequency (Per 28 Days)|Percent change in the total seizure frequency (per 28 days) was calculated using the total seizure frequency per 28 days of the Observation Period as the baseline and the total seizure frequency per 28 days of the Treatment Period as the post-treatment value. Percentage change in total seizure frequency was calculated as follows: [100 x (post-treatment value - baseline)/ baseline].|Baseline (28 day observational period) and End of Treatment (28 day treatment period)|"Full analysis set (FAS) is defined as participants who were registered for the Treatment Period and excludes those listed below.
Participants who did not meet the inclusion criterion related the target disease, participants who did not take the study drug, participants without any evaluable efficacy data after the start of study treatment."||Percent Change||Full Range|Median
820630|NCT01146951|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving a 50% Reduction in Tonic-atonic Seizure Frequency|50% Responder Rate in Tonic-Atonic Seizure Frequency was presented as the number of participants who achieved a 50% reduction in tonic-atonic seizure frequency.|12 weeks|"Full analysis set (FAS) is defined as participants who were registered for the Treatment Period and excludes those listed below.
Participants who did not meet the inclusion criterion related the target disease, participants who did not take the study drug, participants without any evaluable efficacy data after the start of study treatment."||Participants|||Number
820631|NCT01146951|Primary|Percent Change in Tonic-Atonic Seizure Frequency From Baseline (Per 28 Days)|"The sum of the frequencies of tonic seizures and atonic seizures was defined as the “tonic-atonic seizure frequency” and the percent change in tonic-atonic seizure frequency per 28 days was assessed. The percent change in tonic-atonic seizure frequency was calculated using the tonic-atonic seizure frequency per 28 days of the Observation Period as the baseline and the tonic-atonic seizure frequency per 28 days of the Treatment Period as the post-treatment value. Percentage change in tonic - atonic seizure frequency was calculated as follows: [100 x (post-treatment value - baseline)/ baseline].
The frequency of epileptic seizures was recorded in the seizure diary by the recorder. Seizure frequency was counted based on the classification established by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE). The diary recorder monitored the participant and recorded the seizure diary in a consistent manner, and continued these practices throughout the study period."|Baseline (28 day observational period) and End of Treatment (28 day treatment period)|"Full analysis set (FAS) is defined as participants who were registered for the Treatment Period and excludes those listed below.
Participants who did not meet the inclusion criterion related the target disease, participants who did not take the study drug, participants without any evaluable efficacy data after the start of study treatment."||Percent Change||Full Range|Median
820632|NCT01147042|Primary|Basal and PMA-stimulated O2 Production Detected by Ferricytochrome c Reduction in Neutrophils||21 weeks|Data were not collected.|||||
820633|NCT01147055|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (MRCmax)|Metabolite to parent molar ratio of maximum observed plasma concentration (MRCmax).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820634|NCT01147055|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [MRAUC (0 - ∞)]|Molar ratio of metabolite to parent area under the curve from time zero to extrapolated infinite time [MRAUC (0-∞)].|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose) , 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820635|NCT01147055|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (MRAUClast)|Molar ratio of metabolite to parent area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (MRAUClast).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820636|NCT01147055|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820637|NCT01147055|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
820638|NCT01147055|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)] for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)|AUC (0 - ∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞) of crizotinib metabolite (PF-06260182). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820639|NCT01147055|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast) of crizotinib metabolite (PF-06260182).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820640|NCT01147055|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (Vz/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820641|NCT01147055|Secondary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F)|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body. Clearance obtained after oral dose CL/F is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820642|NCT01147055|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
820643|NCT01147055|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
820644|NCT01147055|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820645|NCT01147055|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820695|NCT01147406|Secondary|Maximum N6022 and Metabolite Concentrations in Plasma Within 24 Hours of End of Administration|Concentrations of N6022 and metabolite [N61149)], collected on Days 1 and 7; predose, end of infusion, and at 10 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours post-dose (the 24 hour postdose collected prior to the start of infusion on Day 2).|24 hours|Any subject that received the active IMP or placebo||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
820646|NCT01147055|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)]|AUC (0 - ∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hours (hrs) post crizotinib dose in period 1 and Day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
820647|NCT01147068|Secondary|Serologic Response Rates at Day 21 Using PanBlok With and Without Adjuvant and Placebo in Healthy Adults 18-64 Years of Age|Immunogenicity was assessed by measuring the seroconversion rates of subjects from Day 0 to Day 21 to determine and evaluate the immune response following a single dose of study vaccine. The results were compared using PanBlok with and without adjuvant and placebo in healthy adults|21 Days|All randomized subjects with Day 0 and Day 21 data analyzed by Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center using the intent to treat population and CBER antigen.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820648|NCT01147068|Secondary|Evaluation and Comparison of Immunogenicity From Geometric Mean Titers of PanBlok With and Without Adjuvant and Placebo in Healthy Adults 18-64 Years of Age.|Immunogenicity was assessed by measuring the proportion of subjects that exhibited a geometric mean titer change from Day 0 to Day 42. The geometric mean titers from the PanBlok groups (with and without adjuvant)and placebo group were then compared.|Day 0, and Day 42|All randomized subjects who received study vaccine and had Day 0 and Day 42 geometric mean titers. Analysis of results were generated by Southern Research Institute on the overall population using whole virus.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
820649|NCT01147068|Primary|Evaluation of Immunogenicity Measured by Seroconversion Rates of PanBlok With and Without Adjuvant Compared to Placebo in Healthy Adults 18-49 Years of Age.|Immunogenicity was assessed by measuring the percentage of subjects in each group exhibiting seroconversion on Day 42. The treatment groups that received adjuvanted rHA were evaluated against non-adjuvanted rHA and placebo groups for whether they demonstrated seroconversion rates and 95% confidence intervals that met regulatory criterion for licensure.|42 Days|All randomized subjects who received study vaccine and had Day 0 and Day 42 efficacy data. The analysis results are generated by Southern Research Institute on the intention to treat efficacy population using whole virus.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820658|NCT01147250|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in the Urinary Albumin/Creatinine Ratio (UACR) at Week 108|Presence of albumin in urine is a marker of nephropathy, an important microvascular complication of diabetes. UACR was defined as the ratio: mg of albumin per gram of creatinine. UACR data were log transformed before the analysis. Calculation was based on geometric mean.|Baseline to Week 108 (LOCF)|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline and at least one post-baseline UACR value. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) using the last available post-baseline UACR before Week 108 as the value at Week 108, regardless of treatment discontinuation or not.||percent change||Standard Error|Geometric Mean
820659|NCT01147250|Secondary|Time to First Occurence of CV Event: CV Death, Non-Fatal MI, Non-Fatal Stroke, Hospitalization for Unstable Angina, Hospitalization For Heart Failure or Coronary Revascularization Procedure|All CV events were positively adjudicated by CAC, used in the analysis of the composite CV endpoint comprised of CV death, non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, hospitalization for heart failure, or coronary revascularization procedure. Number of observed participants with endpoint events were reported.|From randomization up to the end of study (median follow-up of 25 months)|ITT population.||participants|||Number
820660|NCT01147250|Secondary|Time to First Occurence of CV Event: CV Death, Non-Fatal MI, Non-Fatal Stroke, Hospitalization for Unstable Angina or Hospitalization For Heart Failure|All CV events were positively adjudicated by the CAC, used in the analysis of the composite CV endpoint comprised of CV death, non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina or hospitalization for heart failure. Number of observed participants with endpoint events were reported.|From randomization up to the end of study (median follow-up of 25 months)|ITT population.||participants|||Number
820661|NCT01147250|Primary|Time to First Occurence of Primary CV Event: CV Death, Non-Fatal MI, Non-Fatal Stroke or Hospitalization for Unstable Angina|Kaplan Meier plots of the cumulative incidence rate by treatment groups were used to depict the onset of primary CV endpoint over time. Number of observed participants with endpoint events were reported. A CV event adjudication committee (CAC) reviewed and adjudicated, in a blinded fashion, all potential events.|From randomization up to the end of study (median follow-up of 25 months)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population defined as all randomized participants analyzed according to the treatment group allocated at randomization.||participants|||Number
820662|NCT01147302|Secondary|Area Under The Concentration-Time Curve (AUC) of C1 INH Functional Activity|Plasma samples were used for the determination of functional C1 INH parameters. Primary pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were calculated using baseline-corrected concentration-versus-time data following the last dose and noncompartmental techniques, as appropriate. The following PK parameters were calculated: baseline concentration (Cbaseline), maximum concentration (Cmax), average concentration at steady-state (Cav,ss), time to maximum concentration (tmax), minimum concentration (Cmin), and area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to last quantifiable concentration at time t (AUC0-t). Blood was collected on Day 13 at the indicated timepoints. If plasmapheresis was performed on a dosing day, blood samples were obtained before plasmapheresis, prior to study drug administration (post-plasmapheresis), and at time points relative to the start of infusion.|Day 13 pre-plasmapheresis (if performed) and pre-dose then 0.5, 2, 24, 48, 96, 168 and 288 (optional) hours post start of infusion|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||Units*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820663|NCT01147302|Secondary|Area Under The Concentration-Time Curve (AUC) of C1 INH Antigen|Plasma samples were used for the determination of antigenic C1 INH parameters. Primary pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were calculated using baseline-corrected concentration-versus-time data following the last dose and noncompartmental techniques, as appropriate. The following PK parameters were calculated: baseline concentration (Cbaseline), maximum concentration (Cmax), average concentration at steady-state (Cav,ss), time to maximum concentration (tmax), minimum concentration (Cmin), and area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to last quantifiable concentration at time t (AUC0-t). Blood was collected on Day 13 at the indicated timepoints. If plasmapheresis was performed on a dosing day, blood samples were obtained before plasmapheresis, prior to study drug administration (post-plasmapheresis), and at time points relative to the start of infusion.|Day 13 pre-plasmapheresis (if performed) and pre-dose then 0.5, 2, 24, 48, 96, 168 and 288 (optional) hours post start of infusion|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||g*h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820664|NCT01147302|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of C1 INH|Plasma samples were used for the determination of antigenic and functional C1 INH concentrations. Primary pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were calculated using baseline-corrected concentration-versus-time data following the last dose and noncompartmental techniques, as appropriate. The following PK parameters were calculated: baseline concentration (Cbaseline), maximum concentration (Cmax), average concentration at steady-state (Cav,ss), time to maximum concentration (tmax), minimum concentration (Cmin), area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to last quantifiable concentration at time t (AUC0-t). Blood was collected on Day 13 at the indicated timepoints. If plasmapheresis was performed on a dosing day, blood samples were obtained before plasmapheresis, prior to study drug administration (post-plasmapheresis), and at time points relative to the start of infusion.|Day 13 pre-plasmapheresis (if performed) and pre-dose then 0.5, 2, 24, 48, 96, 168 and 288 (optional) hours post start of infusion|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||hours||Full Range|Median
820665|NCT01147302|Secondary|Serum Concentrations of C1 INH Functional Activity|Plasma samples were used for the determination of functional C1 INH concentrations. Primary pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were calculated using baseline-corrected concentration-versus-time data following the last dose and noncompartmental techniques, as appropriate. The following PK parameters were calculated: baseline concentration (Cbaseline), maximum concentration (Cmax), average concentration at steady-state (Cav,ss), time to maximum concentration (tmax), minimum concentration (Cmin), area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to last quantifiable concentration at time t (AUC0-t). Blood was collected on Day 13 at the indicated timepoints. If plasmapheresis was performed on a dosing day, blood samples were obtained before plasmapheresis, prior to study drug administration (post-plasmapheresis), and at time points relative to the start of infusion.|Day 13 pre-plasmapheresis (if performed) and pre-dose then 0.5, 2, 24, 48, 96, 168 and 288 (optional) hours post start of infusion|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||Units/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820666|NCT01147302|Secondary|Serum Concentrations of C1 Inhibitor (C1 INH) Antigen|Plasma samples were used for the determination of antigenic C1 INH concentrations. Primary pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were calculated using baseline-corrected concentration-versus-time data following the last dose and noncompartmental techniques, as appropriate. The following PK parameters were calculated: baseline concentration (Cbaseline), maximum concentration (Cmax), average concentration at steady-state (Cav,ss), time to maximum concentration (tmax), minimum concentration (Cmin), area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to last quantifiable concentration at time t (AUC0-t). Blood was collected on Day 13 at the indicated timepoints. If plasmapheresis was performed on a dosing day, blood samples were obtained before plasmapheresis, prior to study drug administration (post-plasmapheresis), and at time points relative to the start of infusion.|Day 13 pre-plasmapheresis (if performed) and pre-dose then 0.5, 2, 24, 48, 96, 168 and 288 (optional) hours post start of infusion|||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
820667|NCT01147302|Secondary|Number of Participants With Allograft Failure|Allograft failure was determined by the presence of the following criteria: current renal allograft nephrectomy and/or a clinical determination that the allograft irreversibly and irrevocably ceased functioning.|From the day of enrollment to Day 90|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||participants|||Number
820668|NCT01147302|Secondary|Number of Deaths||From Day 1 to Day 90|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||participants|||Number
820669|NCT01147302|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Required Salvage Splenectomy|If necessary, rescue therapy included splenectomy.|From Day 1 to Day 90|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||participants|||Number
820696|NCT01147406|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of a Single Ascending Doses of Intravenous N6022 in Healthy Volunteers|Safety variables - number of adverse events reported during study, changes in vital signs, physical examination findings, telemetry alerts, 12-lead ECG changes, infusion site reactions, O2 saturation changes, and clinical laboratory assessment changes between subjects receiving N6022 versus placebo.|7 Days|Any subject that received active IMP or placebo||Adverse Events|||Number
820670|NCT01147302|Secondary|Number of Plasmapheresis Sessions|If necessary, rescue therapy included plasmapheresis. Participating centers used plasmapheresis for desensitization, if necessary, prior to transplant and also for the treatment of acute AMR. Plasmapheresis therapy was performed for the qualifying episode of AMR according to standards at the investigational site and at the discretion of the investigator. Sessions include those prior to first dose. If plasmapheresis therapy occurred on the same day as study drug dosing, study drug was administered after completion of the plasmapheresis session.|From Day 1 through Days 20 and 90|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||sessions||Standard Deviation|Mean
820671|NCT01147302|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine Clearance|Graft function was assessed by measuring creatinine clearance. Creatinine clearance was calculated by the Cockcroft-Gault formula. Baseline was the last value collected prior to first dose of study drug. A positive change from baseline indicates that the clearance rate has increased. Values for Day 90 were collected +/= 14 days.|From Day 1 to Days 20 and 90|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
820672|NCT01147302|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Creatinine|Graft function was assessed by measuring serum creatinine. Serum creatinine level was obtained directly from laboratory results. Baseline was the last value collected prior to first dose of study drug. A negative change from baseline indicates that serum creatinine levels have decreased. Values for Day 90 were collected +/= 14 days.|From Day 1 to Days 20 and 90|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820673|NCT01147302|Primary|Change From Baseline in Histopathology Endpoints|The protocol-specified Day 20 (post-treatment) biopsy was compared to the qualifying biopsy to assess changes in histopathology for light and immunofluorescence microscopy. The Central Pathologist provided the following categorical information from the qualifying biopsy in an AMR Scorecard: C4d Score (0-100), Margination Score (0-100) Glomerulitis Score (0-100), Vasculitis Score (0-100), Glomerulosclerosis Score (0-100), Chronic Glomerulopathy Score (0-100), Interstitial Fibrosis Score (0-100), and the Chronic Vasculitis Score (0-100), with 0 being absence of abnormal histopathology. The “qualifying” renal allograft biopsy was performed as standard of care (SOC) within 12 months after transplant and prior to screening for this study. The first dose of study drug (Day 1) was administered within 72 hours after qualifying biopsy. A negative change from baseline indicates that histopathology has improved. Endpoint includes subjects with both Qualifying and Day 20 Biopsies.|Within 72 hours prior to first dose of study drug, Day 20|The ITT-S population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820674|NCT01147302|Secondary|Number of Participants With Resolution of The Qualifying Episode of Antibody-Mediated Rejection (AMR)|The “qualifying” renal allograft biopsy was performed as standard of care within 12 months after transplant and prior to screening. The qualifying biopsy was used to establish the diagnosis of AMR and was evaluated for all of the following to obtain baseline assessments: the presence of C4d, and monocyte or neutrophil infiltration around the peritubular capillaries (PTCs) and/or glomeruli. The Central Pathologist provided the following information from the qualifying biopsy in an AMR Scorecard: C4d Score, Glomerulitis Score, Vasculitis Score, Glomerulosclerosis Score, Chronic Glomerulopathy Score, Interstitial Fibrosis Score, and the Chronic Vasculitis Score. The Banff AMR Scoring System was used to summarize these scores. Resolution determination was made based on clinical criteria (improvement of serum creatinine ± decrease of DSA titer, and/or increase in urine output) and histopathology. The first dose of study drug (Day 1) was administered within 72 hours after qualifying biopsy.|90 days after start of treatment|The Intent-to-Treat Safety (ITT-S) population, defined as participants who received at least 1 dose (or any portion of a dose) of study drug (CINRYZE or placebo).||participants|||Number
820675|NCT01147341|Other Pre-specified|Proportion of Subjects Achieving a CDAI Score Decrease Greater Than or Equal to 13.9 Points in the CimZia Treatment Group Compared to the Placebo Group at Week 24|The Clinical Disease Activity (CDAI)is a composite score. Clinical Disease Activity (CDAI) = SJC(28): Swollen 28-Joint Count (shoulders, elbows, wrists, MCPs, PIPs (including thumb IP)+ TJC(28): Tender 28-Joint Count (shoulders, elbows, wrists, MCPs, PIPs (including thumb IP)+ PGA: Patient Global disease Activity (patient’s self assessment of overall RA disease activity on a scale 1-10 where 10 is maximal activity)+ EGA: Evaluator’s Global disease Activity (evaluator’s assessment of overall RA disease activity on a scale 1-10 where 10 is maximal activity) Remission: CDAI ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: CDAI > 2.8 and ≤ 10 ;Moderate Disease Activity: CDAI > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: CDAI > 22. A CDAI reduction of 6.5 represents moderate improvement.|Baseline to Week 24|30 subjects were included in the efficacy assessment as week 24. Subjects completed 24 weeks dosing including a 12 week open-label phase.||participants|||Number
820676|NCT01147341|Other Pre-specified|Proportion of Subjects Achieving a EULAR Good or Moderate Response Criteria in the Cimzia Treatment Group Compared to the Placebo Group|"The EULAR (European League Against Rheumatism) response criteria is a classified response criteria which classifies the patients individual as non-, moderate or good responders dependent on the change and the level of the Disease Activity Score.
The Disease Activity Score(DAS28) is a continuous disease measure composite of 4 variables: 28 tender joint count, 28 swollen joint count, ESR or CRP, and participant assessment of disease activity measure on a visual analogue scale. High disease activity= > 5.1, low disease activity= < 3.2, and remission= < 2.6. Clinically significant response= decrease of >1.2 from baseline. Utilizing EULAR response criteria, DAS28 categorical responses define a good (absolute: <3.2 or >1.2 improvement from baseline), moderate (absolute: 3.2-5.1 or 0.6-1.2 change from baseline), or no response (absolute: >5.1 or <0.6 change from baseline)."|Baseline to Week 24|30 subjects were included in the efficacy assessment as week 24. Subjects completed 24 weeks dosing including a 12 week open-label phase.||participants|||Number
820697|NCT01147458|Secondary|Urinary Leukotriene E4 (LTE4) Levels|LTE4 is a terminal metabolic product of arachidonic acid by 5-LO. Its synthesis is dependent upon the activity of 5-LO and it is eliminated through urinary clearance. Hence, the level of urinary LTE4 (uLTE4) excretion may be an indicator of endogenous 5-LO activity.|Day -7 (Visit 2) up to Day 43 (Visit 9 or End of Treatment Period 2)|Since the study was terminated prematurely for a potential safety signal, and in light of the efficacy analysis, the pharmacodynamic (PD) assessment of uLTE4 was not performed and no data are reportable.|||||
820677|NCT01147341|Other Pre-specified|Proportion of Subjects Achieving an American College of Rheuamtology Low Disease Activity Score and/or Remission Score in the Cimzia Group Compared to the Placebo Group as Calculated by DAS28 (CRP)|"The Disease Activity Score-28-C-reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP)is a composite measure for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is based on 4 variables: tender and swollen joint counts (28 joints),C-Reactive Protein(CRP), and patient global assessment visual analog scale. A lower score indicated less disease activity.
Remission: CDAI ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: CDAI > 2.8 and ≤ 10 ;Moderate Disease Activity: CDAI > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: CDAI > 22"|Baseline to Week 24|30 subjects were included in the efficacy assessment as week 24. Subjects completed 24 weeks dosing including a 12 week open-label phase.||participants|||Number
820678|NCT01147341|Other Pre-specified|Proportion of Subjects Achieving an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response Criteria in the Cimzia Treatment Group Compared to the Placebo Group|"ACR50 responders are subjects with at least 50% improvement from baseline for tender joint cout (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-reactive protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale, 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale, 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale.
HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do.
Visual Analog Scale (VAS) - assessment of arthritis was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = very good and 100 mm = very bad."|Baseline to Week 24|30 subjects were included in the efficacy assessment as week 24. Subjects completed 24 weeks dosing including a 12 week open-label phase.||participants|||Number
820679|NCT01147341|Other Pre-specified|Proportion of Subjects Achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response Criteria in the Cimzia Treatment Group Compared to the Placebo Group|"ACR20 responders are subjects with at least 20% improvement from baseline for tender joint cout (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-reactive protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale, 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale, 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale.
HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do.
Visual Analog Scale (VAS) - assessment of arthritis was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = very good and 100 mm = very bad."|Baseline to Week 24|30 subjects were included in the efficacy assessment as week 24. Subjects completed 24 weeks dosing including a 12 week open-label phase.||participants|||Number
820680|NCT01147341|Other Pre-specified|Proportion of Subjects Achieving a CDAI Decrease of Greater Than or Equal to 10 Points in the Cimzia Treatment Group Compared to the Placebo Group at Week 24|The Clinical Disease Activity (CDAI)is a composite score. Clinical Disease Activity (CDAI) = SJC(28): Swollen 28-Joint Count (shoulders, elbows, wrists, MCPs, PIPs (including thumb IP)+ TJC(28): Tender 28-Joint Count (shoulders, elbows, wrists, MCPs, PIPs (including thumb IP)+ PGA: Patient Global disease Activity (patient’s self assessment of overall RA disease activity on a scale 0-10 where 10 is maximal activity)+ EGA: Evaluator’s Global disease Activity (evaluator’s assessment of overall RA disease activity on a scale 0-10 where 10 is maximal activity) Remission: CDAI ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: CDAI > 2.8 and ≤ 10 ;Moderate Disease Activity: CDAI > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: CDAI > 22. A CDAI reduction of 6.5 represents moderate improvement.|Baseline to Week 24|30 subjects were included in the efficacy assessment as week 24. Subjects completed 24 weeks dosing including a 12 week open-label phase.||participants|||Number
820681|NCT01147341|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Achieving a CDAI Score Decrease Greater Than or Equal to 13.9 Points in the CimZia Treatment Group Compared to the Placebo Group at Week 12|The Clinical Disease Activity (CDAI)is a composite score. Clinical Disease Activity (CDAI) = SJC(28): Swollen 28-Joint Count (shoulders, elbows, wrists, MCPs, PIPs (including thumb IP)+ TJC(28): Tender 28-Joint Count (shoulders, elbows, wrists, MCPs, PIPs (including thumb IP)+ PGA: Patient Global disease Activity (patient’s self assessment of overall RA disease activity on a scale 0-10 where 10 is maximal activity)+ EGA: Evaluator’s Global disease Activity (evaluator’s assessment of overall RA disease activity on a scale 0-10 where 10 is maximal activity) Remission: CDAI ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: CDAI > 2.8 and ≤ 10 ;Moderate Disease Activity: CDAI > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: CDAI > 22. A CDAI reduction of 6.5 represents moderate improvement..|Baseline to week 12|||participants|||Number
820682|NCT01147341|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Achieving a EULAR Good or Moderate Response Criteria in the Cimzia Treatment Group Compared to the Placebo Group|"The EULAR (European League Against Rheumatism) response criteria is a classified response criteria which classifies the patients individual as non-, moderate or good responders dependent on the change and the level of the Disease Activity Score.
The Disease Activity Score(DAS28) is a continuous disease measure composite of 4 variables: 28 tender joint count, 28 swollen joint count, ESR or CRP, and participant assessment of disease activity measure on a visual analogue scale. High disease activity= > 5.1, low disease activity= < 3.2, and remission= < 2.6. Clinically significant response= decrease of >1.2 from baseline. Utilizing EULAR response criteria, DAS28 categorical responses define a good (absolute: <3.2 or >1.2 improvement from baseline), moderate (absolute: 3.2-5.1 or 0.6-1.2 change from baseline), or no response (absolute: >5.1 or <0.6 change from baseline)."|Baseline to week 12|||participants|||Number
820698|NCT01147458|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of PF-04191834||Pre-dose and post-dose (1 to 3 hours) on Days 1, 8, 15, 29, 36, and 43|Due to early termination of the study, only a subset of pharmacokinetic (PK) samples, from 10 out of 190 randomized participants, were selected for analysis. These 10 participants were selected based on treatment and treatment sequence.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820891|NCT01147926|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With an Average Weekly Frequency of at Least 3 SCBM Per Week and an Increase of ≥ 1 SCBM Per Week for ≥ 75% of the 12-week Treatment Period and ≥ 75% of the Last Third of the 12-week Treatment Period||Over 12 week treatment period|mITT||percentage of subjects|||Number
820683|NCT01147341|Primary|Proportion of Subjects Achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response Criteria in the Cimzia Treatment Group Compared to the Placebo Group|"ACR20 responders are subjects with at least 20% improvement from baseline for tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-reactive protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale (VAS), 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (VAS), 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale(VAS).
HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do.
Visual Analog Scale (VAS) - assessment of arthritis was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = very good and 100 mm = very bad."|From Baseline to Week 12|35 subjects were included in the efficacy assessment at week 12. Subjects in the efficacy assessment at week 12 completed at least 4 weeks of dosing. 30 subjects who completed the 24 week study were included in the efficacy assessment at week 24.||participants|||Number
820684|NCT01147341|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Achieving an American College of Rheuamtology Low Disease Activity Score and/or Remission Score in the Cimzia Group Compared to the Placebo Group as Calculated by DAS28 (CRP)|"The Disease Activity Score-28-C-reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP)is a composite measure for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is based on 4 variables: tender and swollen joint counts (28 joints),C-Reactive Protein(CRP), and patient global assessment visual analog scale. A lower score indicated less disease activity.
Remission: CDAI ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: CDAI > 2.8 and ≤ 10 ;Moderate Disease Activity: CDAI > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: CDAI > 22"|Baseline to Week 12|35 subjects were included in the efficacy assessment at week 12. Subjects in the efficacy assessment at week 12 completed at least 4 weeks of dosing.||participants|||Number
820685|NCT01147341|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Achieving an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response Criteria in the Cimzia Treatment Group Compared to the Placebo Group at Week 12|"ACR50 responders are subjects with at least 50% improvement from baseline for tender joint cout (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-reactive protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale, 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale, 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale.
HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do.
Visual Analog Scale (VAS) - assessment of arthritis was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = very good and 100 mm = very bad."|Baseline to Week 12|35 subjects were included in the efficacy assessment at week 12. Subjects in the efficacy assessment at week 12 completed at least 4 weeks of dosing||participants|||Number
820686|NCT01147341|Primary|Proportion of Subjects Achieving a Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Decrease of Greater Than or Equal to 10 Points in the Cimzia Treatment Group Compared to the Placebo Group at Week 12|The Clinical Disease Activity (CDAI)is a composite score. Clinical Disease Activity (CDAI) = SJC(28): Swollen 28-Joint Count (shoulders, elbows, wrists, MCPs, PIPs (including thumb IP)+ TJC(28): Tender 28-Joint Count (shoulders, elbows, wrists, MCPs, PIPs (including thumb IP)+ PGA: Patient Global disease Activity (patient’s self assessment of overall RA disease activity on a scale 0-10 where 10 is maximal activity)+ EGA: Evaluator’s Global disease Activity (evaluator’s assessment of overall RA disease activity on a scale 0-10 where 10 is maximal activity) Remission: CDAI ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: CDAI > 2.8 and ≤ 10 ;Moderate Disease Activity: CDAI > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: CDAI > 22. A CDAI reduction of 6.5 represents moderate improvement.|Baseline to week 12|35 subjects were included in the efficacy assessment at week 12. Subjects in the efficacy assessment at week 12 completed at least 4 weeks of dosing||participants|||Number
820687|NCT01147380|Secondary|Anti-HCV Effect of This Treatment (If Applicable)||2 year||||||
820688|NCT01147380|Secondary|Anti-HCC Effect of This Treatment||2 year||||||
820689|NCT01147380|Secondary|NK Cell Infusion-related Toxicity|To assess NK cell infusion -related toxicity at the bedside. We will monitor the patient and check the vital sign. If any side effect are noticed, we will record and report to the data safety monitoring comittee.|1 year|Participants were devided two group( small and large dose) as described based on the dose of infused cell numbers.||participants|||Number
820690|NCT01147380|Primary|Side Effect of Cadaveric Donor Liver NK Cell Infusion|Side effect of cadaveric donor liver NK cell infusion We will measure the occurence of the side effect of the liver NK cell infusion. We will monitor the patient condition clinically. If any side effect are noticed, we will record them and report to the data safety monitoring comittee.|1 year|||participants|||Number
820691|NCT01147393|Primary|The Primary Objective of the Phase II Portion of the Study is to Determine the Anti-tumor Efficacy, as Measured by Response Rate, of Fractionated 90Y-epratutumab IgG Given in Combination With Veltuzumab Anti-CD20 IgG Therapy|||Data were not collected|||||
820692|NCT01147393|Primary|Safety|||Data was not evaluated|||||
820693|NCT01147393|Primary|Dose-limiting Toxicity|"NCI CTC version 3.0 is used to grade all adverse events and to provide management guidelines for infusional toxicity. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) is defined as follows:
Hematologic: Grade 4 toxicity >7 days, as specified by hemoglobin levels, platelet counts or absolute neutrophil count (ANC) or failure of hemoglobin levels, platelet counts or ANC to recover to Grade 1 levels within 12 weeks of completing the treatment cycle (with the use of RBC and platelet transfusions or growth factors during the 12 weeks if necessary, but at least one week without any support prior to qualifying Grade 1 levels).
Non-Hematologic: Any Grade 3 or Grade 4. Other: Any Grade 2 autoimmune reactions, or the occurrence of Grade 2 immediate-type allergic/hypersensitivity reactions (e.g., urticaria, wheezing, hypoxia and dyspnea) will be considered DLT and will also require the infusion to be permanently terminated.
Occurrence of DLT requires a patient’s treatment to be permanently discontinued"||Data were not collected|||||
820694|NCT01147393|Primary|Determine the Maximum Tolerated 90Y Dose|||Data was not collected|||||
820712|NCT01147471|Primary|Morbidity|total days on ventilator, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay|Measured daily during hospitalization (approx 1 month)|analysis is the mean and standard deviation for # days spent on each item measured||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820699|NCT01147458|Secondary|Rescue Medication Use|Rescue medication use was collected daily in a daily diary, in which participants noted the amount of rescue medication (number of pills) taken each day. Participants were provided with rescue medication paracetamol/acetaminophen throughout the study including the Washout Period and the Initial Pain Assessment Period. Paracetamol/acetaminophen was taken as needed to a maximum of 2000 mg per day, but must be discontinued 48 hours prior to the Baseline visit (Visit 3). From Visit 3 onwards, participants might take up to 2000 mg of paracetamol/acetaminophen per day up to 3 days per week.|Day -7 (Visit 2) up to 28-day follow-up (Visit 10)|Number of subjects analyzed (N) is the number of participants taking rescue mediation.||Number of pills||Standard Deviation|Mean
820700|NCT01147458|Secondary|Daily Diary Pain Score During Week 2 of Each Treatment Period|The daily diary pain was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) ranging from 0 to 10 (0 = no pain; 10 = the worst pain possible).|Over the last 4 days before baseline visits (Visits 3 for Period 1 and Visit 8 for Period 2) and over the last 6 days before Visit 5 for Period 1 and Visit 9 for Period 2|Full Analysis Set (FAS): included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study drug, regardless of whether they had efficacy data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820701|NCT01147458|Secondary|Daily Diary Pain Score During Week 1 of Each Treatment Period|The daily diary pain was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) ranging from 0 to 10 (0 = no pain; 10 = the worst pain possible).|4 days prior to baseline visits (Visits 3 for Period 1 and Vist 8 for Period 2) up to 7 days after baseline visits|Full Analysis Set (FAS): included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study drug, regardless of whether they had efficacy data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820702|NCT01147458|Secondary|Importance Weighted Total WOMAC Score|Importance weighted total WOMAC score was calculated using all subscales including Pain, Stiffness and Physical Function subscales (24 questions in total,score range: 0=none to 4= extreme,giving a possible overall score range of 0-96).Lower subscale scores represent less pain, less stiffness, or better physical performance.|Baseline (Day 1 of Visit 3 for Period 1 and Day 28 of Visit 7 for Period 2), Day 15+1 of Visit 5 for Period 1, and Day 43+1 of Visit 9 for Period 2|Full Analysis Set (FAS): included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study drug, regardless of whether they had efficacy data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820703|NCT01147458|Secondary|WOMAC Total Score|The WOMAC total score was calculated as the sum of Pain subscale score (5 questions), Stiffness subscale score (2 questions) and Physical Function subscale score (17 questions), with a total of 24 questions(score range:0=none, 4=extreme) giving a possible total score range from 0 to 96 . lower subscale scores represent less pain, less stiffness, or better physical performance.|Baseline (Day 1 of Visit 3 for Period 1 and Day 28 of Visit 7 for Period 2), Day 15+1 of Visit 5 for Period 1, and Day 43+1 of Visit 9 for Period 2|Full Analysis Set (FAS): included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study drug, regardless of whether they had efficacy data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820704|NCT01147458|Secondary|WOMAC Physical Function Domain Score|The WOMAC Physical Function subscale refers to the participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. The WOMAC Physical Function subscale, comprised of 17 questions regarding the degree of difficulty experienced in the index joint, was calculated as the mean of the scores from the 17 individual questions. The WOMAC Physical Function subscale scores for each question range from 0 to 4 giving a possible overall score range of 0-68, with higher scores indicating worse function.|Baseline (Day 1 of Visit 3 for Period 1 and Day 28 of Visit 7 for Period 2), Day 15+1 of Visit 5 for Period 1, and Day 43+1 of Visit 9 for Period 2|Full Analysis Set (FAS): included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study drug, regardless of whether they had efficacy data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820705|NCT01147458|Secondary|WOMAC Stiffness Domain Score|The WOMAC Stiffness subscale, comprised of 2 questions regarding the amount of stiffness experienced in the index joint, was calculated as the mean of the scores from the 2 individual questions. The WOMAC Stiffness subscale scores for each question range from 0 to 4 giving a possible overall score range of 0-8, with higher scores indicating more stiffness.|Baseline (Day 1 of Visit 3 for Period 1 and Day 28 of Visit 7 for Period 2), Day 15+1 of Visit 5 for Period 1, and Day 43+1 of Visit 9 for Period 2|Full Analysis Set (FAS): included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study drug, regardless of whether they had efficacy data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820706|NCT01147458|Primary|Change From Baseline in Western Ontario & McMaster (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index Pain Score at the End of Treatment Period 2|The WOMAC Pain subscale, comprised of 5 questions regarding the amount of pain experienced in the index joint, was calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions. The WOMAC Pain subscale scores for each question range from 0 to 4 giving a possible overall score range of 0-20, with higher scores indicating higher pain.|Baseline (Day 28 of Visit 7) and end of treatment Period 2 (Day 43+1 of Visit 9)|Full Analysis Set (FAS): included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study drug, regardless of whether they had efficacy data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820707|NCT01147458|Primary|Change From Baseline in Western Ontario & McMaster (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index Pain Score at the End of Treatment Period 1|The WOMAC Pain subscale, comprised of 5 questions regarding the amount of pain experienced in the index joint, was calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions. The WOMAC Pain subscale scores for each question range from 0 to 4 giving a possible overall score range of 0-20, with higher scores indicating higher pain.|Baseline (Day 1 of Visit 3) and end of treatment Period 1 (Day 15+1 of Visit 5)|Full Analysis Set (FAS): included all participants randomized who received at least one dose of study drug, regardless of whether they had efficacy data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820708|NCT01147471|Other Pre-specified|Still on Narcotics at Post-discharge Follow-up|Number of people still on narcotics at time of routine care post-discharge follow-up|approx 2 weeks post discharge|||participants|||Number
820709|NCT01147471|Secondary|Pulmonary Function|Pulmonary function tests to measure forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume one (FEV1).|Measured at 3 and 6 months post-discharge|Data not collected - insufficient participants completed follow up visits|||||
820710|NCT01147471|Secondary|Quality of Life|Rand 36 health survey.|Measured at 3 and 6 months post-discharge|Data not collected - insufficient participants completed follow up visits|||||
820711|NCT01147471|Primary|Mortality|Number of participants who died during any hospital stay.|Measured any time during hospital stay (approx 30 days)|||participants|||Number
820738|NCT01141725|Secondary|Disease-free Survival (DFS)|In a five year following, the disease free survival was obtained.|5 years|Data for this Outcome Measure was not collected per dose level and is unavailable.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820739|NCT01141725|Primary|Median Survival|In a five year following, the median survival was obtained.|5 years|||months||Full Range|Median
820740|NCT01141725|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose|A bayesian approach to estimate the MTD of bendamustine associated with a CR rate of at least 40% and with <30% grade 3–4 non-haematological toxicity was used (Wathen et al, 2008).The MTD of bendamustine in combination with idarubicin was determined after two cases of grade 3 toxicity were noted in the three patients entered at the 75 mg/m2 dose. The DLTs were congestive heart failure and mucositis in one patient each. Patients subsequent to this were treated at the 60 mg/m2 bendamustine dose.|6 months|||mg/m2|||Number
820741|NCT01141725|Primary|Incidence of Greater Than or Equal to Grade 3 Toxicity|Toxicities will be graded using the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Toxicity Criteria version 3.0.|Up to day +100 after end of therapy or until the patient received an alternative treatment for leukemia, whatever happens earlier|||Participants|||Count of Participants
820742|NCT01141725|Primary|Response|Assessed by cytogenetics/fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and flow cytometry of blood and bone marrow samples. The response criteria defined by Cheson et al. will be used in this study. These criteria are: morphologic leukemia-free state; morphologic complete remission (CR); cytogenetic CR (CRc); molecular CR (CRm); morphologic CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi); partial remission (PR); treatment failure; recurrence (progressive disease).|6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
820743|NCT01142115|Secondary|Haematuria|"Negative or positive result on a multistix urin analysis.
Negative haematuria: 10 erythrocytes/microliter or less. Positive haematuria: above 10 erythrocytes/microliter."|2 hours after catheterisation at visits 1 and 2|ITT||participants|||Number
820953|NCT01149460|Primary|AUC0-t (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration) - Valacyclovir|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-t|Blood samples collected over 12 hour period|Data from all subjects who completed the study were included in the statistical analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820744|NCT01142115|Secondary|Visible Blood|"Visual blood observed on the catheter or in the urine in connection to catheterization.
The nurse who conducted the catheterization could answer yes or no as follows:
Yes = visible blood observed. No = no visible blood observed."|10 minutes after each catheterization at visit 1 and at visit 2, which is 5-25 days after visit 1|ITT||participants|||Number
820745|NCT01142115|Secondary|Ease of Use Measured on a 5 Point Scale: Withdrawal Effort|"After each catheterization the nurse who conducted the catheterization answered how the catheter withdrawal had been.
There were 5 answer categories: very difficult - difficult - neither easy nor difficult - easy - very easy"|10 minutes after each catheterization at visit 1 and at visit 2, which is 5-25 days after visit 1|ITT||participants|||Number
820746|NCT01142115|Secondary|Ease of Use Measured on a 5 Point Scale: Insertion Effort|"After each catheterization the nurse who conducted the catheterization answered how the catheter insertion had been.
There were 5 answer categories: very difficult - difficult - neither easy nor difficult - easy - very easy"|10 minutes after each catheterization at visit 1 and at visit 2, which is 5-25 days after visit 1|ITT||participants|||Number
820747|NCT01142115|Secondary|Irritation During Voiding After Catheterization|"After each catheterization subjects were asked if they felt any irritation during voiding with answer option yes or no.
Yes - they experienced irritation. No - they did not experience irritation."|10 minutes after each catheterization at visit 1 and at visit 2, which is 5-25 days after visit 1|ITT||Participants|||Number
820748|NCT01142115|Primary|Discomfort Measured on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"Outcome measured on a 10 cm Visual Analog Scale ranging from no discomfort (0cm) to worst thinkable discomfort (10cm)."|10 minutes after each catheterisation at visit 1 and at visit 2 which is 5-25 days after visit 1|Intention to Treat (ITT) population||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
820749|NCT01142128|Primary|Reduction of Abdominal Pain in Participants Taking Viokase 16 Plus Placebo.|To elucidate the role of Viokase 16 and Nexium in the control of pancreatic pain|4 months|Analysis was not able to be done due to the small sample size.|||||
820750|NCT01142128|Primary|Reduction of Abdominal Pain in Participants Taking Viokase 16 Plus Nexium|To elucidate the role of Viokase 16 and Nexium in the control of pancreatic pain|4 months|Analysis was not able to be done due to the small sample size.|||||
820751|NCT01142128|Primary|Reduction of Abdominal Pain for Participants Taking Placebo to Nexium|To elucidate the role of Viokase 16 and Nexium in the control of pancreatic pain|4 months|Analysis was not able to be done due to the small sample size.|||||
820752|NCT01142128|Primary|Reduction of Abdominal Pain for Participants Taking Nexium Alone.|To elucidate the role of Viokase 16 and Nexium in the control of pancreatic pain|4 months|Analysis was not able to be done due to the small sample size.|||||
820753|NCT01147601|Secondary|Compare Treatment Group to Control Group Improvement Assessments|"The proportion of subjects in the treatment group as compared to the placebo control group with at least 50% improvement in the extent of the hemangioma.
The difference between the extent/size of the hemangioma as an outcome measure versus color changes.
Frequency of adverse events (e.g. hypotension, behavioral changes, etc.), collected by the investigator and reported by the parents."|at 6 months||||||
820754|NCT01147601|Primary|Proportion of Subjects in Treatment Group Compared to Placebo Group With at Least 75% Improvement in the Extent of the Hemangioma as Compared to Baseline Photos.|This will be generated by asking each of the assessors to score the improvement using a visual analog scale (VAS) assessing the decrease in size of hemangioma by comparing photographs at different times of treatment. The assessors will score this improvement into one of the following categories: 0-24%, 25-49%, 50-74%, >75%.|at 6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
820755|NCT01147627|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability in Different Groups||48 weeks||||||
820756|NCT01147627|Secondary|β-cell Function (Acute Insulin Response During IVGTT; HOMA-B, Disposition Index and Proinsulin/Insulin Ratio)||48 weeks||||||
820757|NCT01147627|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving HbA1c <7% and ≤ 6.5% and Effect of Different Interventions on Fasting and Postprandial Plasma Glucose Concentration, Blood Pressure, Lipid Profiles||48 weeks||||||
820758|NCT01147627|Primary|the Comparison Between Treatment Groups of the Changes From Baseline in HbA1c at 48 Weeks||48 weeks|||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
820759|NCT01147640|Secondary|Microbiological Response of CXA 101/Tazobactam and Metronidazole at the TOC Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population|Microbiological response is eradication (absence of the baseline pathogen from a suitable intra-abdominal specimen) or presumed eradication (absence of a suitable intra-abdominal specimen to culture at the TOC visit in a subject who is assessed as a clinical cure at TOC)|Test-of-Cure Visit (7-14 days after EOT)|Microbiologically Evaluable: treated subjects, with baseline pathogen susceptible to study drug, complied with protocol||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820760|NCT01147640|Primary|Clinical Response of CXA 101/Tazobactam and Metronidazole at Test of Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiological Modified Intent to Treat (mMITT) Analysis Population|Clinical response is complete resolution or significant improvement of all signs and symptoms of the index infection, such that no additional antibacterial therapy or surgical or drainage procedure was required for the index infection.|Test-of-Cure Visit (7-14 days after End of Therapy [EOT])|mMITT: Treated subjects, with baseline pathogen||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820954|NCT01149460|Primary|Cmax (Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma) - Valacyclovir|Bioequivalence based on Cmax|Blood samples collected over 12 hour period|Data from all subjects who completed the study were included in the statistical analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820862|NCT01147900|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject..|At Year 8.5|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of Boostrix™ vaccine, any formulation, for whom data were available.||subjects|||Number
820791|NCT01147744|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Withdrew Due to Lack of Efficacy During the 8-Week Treatment Period|The participants who met any of the following withdrawal criteria were considered to be withdrawn due to lack of efficacy: 1) Clinic FEV1 below stability limit calculated at Visit 3. 2) More than three days between two consecutive visits, PEF has fallen below stability limit calculated at Visit 3. 3) Use of 12 or more inhalations of SABA per day for more than two days between consecutive visits. 4) Asthma exacerbation defined as worsening requiring any treatment other than study medication or rescue medication. This included requiring the use of systemic or inhaled corticosteroids and /or emergency room visit or hospitalization for the treatment of asthma. The stability limit was calculated as best pre-salbutamol/albuterol FEV1 at Visit 3 x 80 percent (%).|Upto 8 Weeks|ITT Population. Only those participants with analyzable data at the indicated time point were assessed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
820792|NCT01147744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Night-time Rescue SABA Usage Over the 8-Week Treatment Period|The numbers of inhalations of rescue SABA, salbutamol/albuterol inhalation aerosol used during the day and night was recorded by the participants in an eDiary. Participants who used salbutamol/albuterol inhalation aerosol at night-time were assessed during the 8-Week treatment period. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged number of night-time salbutamol/albuterol inhalation aerosol used during the 8-Week treatment period minus the Baseline value (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants).|Baseline up to Week 8|ITT Population. Endpoint obtained from the daily diary record used all available data over the period of interest. No imputations were performed on missing data from the daily diary record.||Night-time number of inhalations||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820793|NCT01147744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Day-time Rescue Short Acting beta2-agonist (SABA) Usage Over the 8-Week Treatment Period|The number of inhalations of rescue SABA, salbutamol/albuterol inhalation aerosol used during the day and night was recorded by the participants in an eDiary. Participants who used salbutamol/albuterol inhalation aerosol at day-time were assessed during the 8-Week treatment period. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged number of day-time salbutamol/albuterol inhalation aerosol used during the 8-Week treatment period minus the Baseline value (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants).|Baseline up to Week|ITT Population. Endpoint obtained from the daily diary record used all available data over the period of interest. No imputations were performed on missing data from the daily diary record.||Day-time number of inhalations||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820794|NCT01147744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Night-time Asthma Symptom Score Over the 8-Week Treatment Period|Participants recorded their night-time asthma symptom score in an eDiary each AM upon rising and before taking any rescue or study medication and before assessing the PEF measurement during the 8-Week treatment period. Night-time asthma symptom scores, as: 0=no asthma symptoms, 1= one awakening or waking early due to asthma symptoms, 2= two or more awakenings due to asthma symptoms (including waking early), 3= asthma symptoms almost prevented the participant from sleeping, 4= severe asthma symptoms completely prevented from sleeping. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged of night-time asthma symptom score during the 8-Week treatment period minus the Baseline value (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants).|Baseline up to Week 8|ITT Population. Endpoint obtained from the daily diary record used all available data over the period of interest. No imputations were performed on missing data from the daily diary record.||Night-time symptom scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820795|NCT01147744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Day-time Asthma Symptom Score Over the 8-Week Treatment Period|Participants recorded their day-time asthma symptom score in an eDiary each PM at bedtime and before taking any rescue or study medication and before assessing the PEF measurement during the 8-Week treatment period. Day-time asthma symptom scores, as: 0=no asthma symptoms, 1=one episode of short-time asthma symptoms, 2=two or more episodes of short-time asthma symptoms, 3=asthma symptoms occurring during most part of daytime without interference with daily life activities, 4=asthma symptoms occurring during most part of daytime with interference with daily life activities, 5=severe asthma symptoms that disable working or perform normal daily activities. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged of day-time asthma symptom score during the 8-Week treatment period minus the Baseline value (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants).|Baseline up to Week 8|ITT Population. Endpoint obtained from the daily diary record used all available data over the period of interest. No imputations were performed on missing data from the daily diary record.||Day-time symptom scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820796|NCT01147744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Rescue-free Nights Averaged Over the 8-Week Treatment Period|The number of inhalations of rescue salbutamol/albuterol inhalation aerosol used during the day and night was recorded by the participants in an eDiary. The time span during which the participants did not have to take any rescue medication (medication intended to relieve symptoms immediately) was considered to be a rescue-free period. For participants, the rescue-free nights were assessed during the 8-Week treatment period. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged of rescue-free nights during the 8-Week treatment period minus the Baseline value (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants).|Baseline up to Week 8|ITT Population. Endpoint obtained from the daily diary record used all available data over the period of interest. No imputations were performed on missing data from the daily diary record.||Percentage of rescue-free nights||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820797|NCT01147744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Rescue-free Days Averaged Over the 8-Week Treatment Period|The number of inhalations of rescue salbutamol/albuterol inhalation aerosol used during the day and night was recorded by the participants in an eDiary. The time span during which the participants did not have to take any rescue medication (medication intended to relieve symptoms immediately) was considered to be a rescue-free period. For participants, the rescue-free days were assessed during the 8-Week treatment period. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged of rescue-free days during the 8-Week treatment period minus the Baseline value (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants).|Baseline up to Week 8|ITT Population. Endpoint obtained from the daily diary record used all available data over the period of interest. No imputations were performed on missing data from the daily diary record.||Percentage of rescue-free days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820798|NCT01147744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Symptom-free Nights Averaged Over the 8-Week Treatment Period|Asthma symptoms were recorded in a daily eDairy by the participants every day in the morning upon rising and before taking any rescue or study medication and before the assessment of the PEF measurement. Participant’s responses to the morning assessments indicated no symptoms were considered to be symptom free. For participants, the symptom free nights were assessed during the 8-Week treatment period. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged of symptom-free nights during the 8-Week treatment period minus the Baseline value (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants).|Baseline up to Week 8|ITT Population. Endpoint obtained from the daily diary record used all available data over the period of interest. No imputations were performed on missing data from the daily diary record.||Percentage of symptom-free nights||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820799|NCT01147744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Symptom-free Days Averaged Over the 8-Week Treatment Period|Asthma symptoms were recorded in a daily electronic diary (eDiary) by the participants every day in the evening at bedtime and before taking any rescue or study medication and before the assessment of the PEF measurement. Participant’s responses to evening assessments indicated no symptoms were considered to be symptom free. For participants, the symptom free days were assessed during the 8-Week treatment period. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged of symptom-free days during the 8-Week treatment period minus the Baseline value. Baseline was defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants.|Baseline up to Week 8|ITT Population. Endpoint obtained from the daily diary record used all available data over the period of interest. No imputations were performed on missing data from the daily diary record.||Percentage of symptom-free days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820800|NCT01147744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Daily Trough AM PEF Averaged Over the 8-Week Treatment Period|The PEF is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. Trough AM PEF is defined as the AM pre-dose and pre-rescue bronchodilator at the clinic visit. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value of the averaged PEF daily (pre-dose and pre-rescue bronchodilator) AM over the 8-Week treatment period minus the Baseline value (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants).|Baseline up to Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants with analyzable data at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters per minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820801|NCT01147744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Daily Evening (PM) Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Averaged Over the 8-Week Treatment Period|Peak expiratory flow is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value of the averaged PEF daily (pre-dose and pre-rescue bronchodilator) evening over the 8-Week treatment period minus the Baseline value (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants)|Baseline up to Week 8|ITT Population. Only those participants with analyzable data at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters per minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820810|NCT01147809|Secondary|Mean Day 15 Scheduled Pre-chemotherapy Platelet Counts Evaluated Across Cycles 1 to 6 in Phase II|Scheduled pre-chemotherapy platelet count is defined within each cycle as the platelet count assessment on which the decision to give or delay chemotherapy was made. This was averaged for each subject across cycles 1 to 6 and a natural log transformation was applied to the average. The log-transformed values were compared between eltrombopag and placebo groups using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model adjusting for cycle duration (21-day vs. 28-day), baseline loge(platelet count) and part of study (part 1 or 2 of phase II). The number of participants analyzed is the number with a Day 15 scheduled platelet count.|Day 15 (averaged across cycles 1 to 6)|ITT Population||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (G cells/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
820802|NCT01147744|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to the End of the 8-Week Treatment Period in Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1)|Pulmonary function was measured by forced expiratory volume in one second, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 is defined as the morning (AM) pre-dose and pre-rescue bronchodilator FEV1 at the clinic visit. Baseline was the pre-dose value obtained at Visit 3. Change from Baseline was calculated as the end of Week 8 value minus the Baseline value. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model used for statistical analysis. ITT Population was comprised of all participant randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of double-blind study medication.|Baseline and Week 8|ITT population. When possible, data from participants who withdrew prematurely from the study were included in the analyses. Any evaluable subject whose FEV1 measurement at Week 8 was missing was included in the analysis by imputation, using the preceding non-missing FEV1 value (last observation carried forward [LOCF]).||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820803|NCT01147809|Secondary|Time to Recovery From Platelet Nadir for Each Chemotherapy Cycle in Phase II|Platelet nadir is defined within each cycle as the lowest platelet count reported after the Day 1 chemotherapy dose. TR (>100Gi/L or >150Gi/L) from platelet nadir is defined within each cycle as the time in days from the platelet nadir to the time at which platelet count returns to >=100Gi/L or >=150Gi/L within the same cycle or up to and including Day 1 of the next cycle. For the last cycle in the study, time to recovery was calculated in the same manner but up to and including any Conclusion/Early Withdrawal visit which has been assigned to the same cycle. Blood samples were collected to estimate platelet count at: 21-day cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 1 to 6. 28-day cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22, and 24of Cycles 1 to 6. Time to recover censored if platelet count did not return to >=100/150 Gi/L. Censored results are excluded from calculation of summary statistics. Only those participants available at indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X).|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|ITT Population||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820804|NCT01147809|Secondary|Time Taken to Reach Platelet Nadir for Each Chemotherapy Cycle in Phase II|Platelet nadir is defined within each cycle as the lowest platelet count reported after the Day 1 chemotherapy dose. The time taken to reach platelet nadir is defined within each cycle. Blood samples were collected to estimate platelet nadir count at the following time points: 21-day cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 1 to 6. 28-day cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22 and 24 of Cycles 1 to 6. Only those participants available at indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X).|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|ITT Population||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820805|NCT01147809|Secondary|Maximum Duration of Thrombocytopenia Across Cycles 1 to 6 in Phase II|Duration of thrombocytopenia is defined as a period of time in days from the first report of a platelet count with NCI CTCAE Grade 1-4 until the first subsequent report of a platelet count no longer meeting those criteria, regardless of rescue medication usage. It was assessed between Day 1 of Cycle 2 and up to and including any Conclusion/Early Withdrawal visit assigned to the same cycle for participants completing up to 6 cycles, and between Day 1 of Cycle 2 and up to and including the end of Cycle 6 for participants continuing beyond 6 cycles. The chemotherapy cycle for 21-day cycle was 21 days and for 28-day cycle was 28 days. Blood samples were collected to estimate thrombocytes at the following time points: 21-day cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 2 to 6. 28-day cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22 and 24 of Cycles 2 to 6.|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|ITT Population: Participants with at least one period of thrombocytopenia where duration could be calculated.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820806|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With Thrombocytopenia of Grade 1, 2, 3 or 4 Across Cycles 1 to 6 in Phase II|As per the CTCAE version 4.0, participants with a platelet count <LLN but >=75 x 10^9/L (Gi/L) were considered to have Grade 1 thrombocytopenia; participants with a platelet count <75Gi/L, but >=50Gi/L were considered to have Grade 2 thrombocytopenia; participants with a platelet count <50Gi/L, but >=25Gi/L were considered to have Grade 3 thrombocytopenia and participants with a platelet count <25Gi/L were considered to have Grade 4 thrombocytopenia. Blood samples were collected to estimate thrombocytes at the following time points: 21-day cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 1 to 6. 28-day cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22 and 24 of Cycles 1 to 6. Participants experiencing thrombocytopenia(Platelets <150Gi/L) at least once within cycle are presented in the category title as n=X,X.|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
820807|NCT01147809|Secondary|Average Daily Area Under the Platelet-time Course Across Cycles 1 to 6 in Phase II|The average daily area under the platelet-time course was normalized by dividing the area under curve by total duration. This gives an estimated average platelet value over the time period from cycles 1 to 6. Blood samples were collected to estimate platelet count at the following time points: 21-day cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 1 to 6. 28-day cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22 and 24 of Cycles 1 to 6.|All assessments from Cycle 1 Day 1 to last assessment in Cycle 6|ITT Population:Participants with platelet count data in at least one cycle in the study.||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (G cells/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820808|NCT01147809|Secondary|Platelet Count Nadir for Each Chemotherapy Cycle in Phase II|Platelet nadir is defined as the lowest platelet count reported after the first dose of chemotherapy within each cycle. Platelet count nadir is defined for each cycle. Blood samples were collected to estimate platelet nadir count at the following time points: 21-day cycle; Day 1, Day 4, Day 8, Day 15 and Day 17 of Cycles 1 to 6. 28-day cycle; Day 1, Day 4, Day 8, Day 15, Day 22, Day 24 of Cycles 1 to 6. Only those participants available at indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X).|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|ITT Population||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (G cells/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820809|NCT01147809|Secondary|Mean Within-subject Platelet Count Prior to Scheduled Chemotherapy Across Cycles 1 to 6 in Phase II|Within-subject platelet count for each par. was calculated by summing up the visit platelet counts from each of Cycles 1 to 6 and dividing it by the number of cycles in which the par. had data. The average within a treatment group was calculated by summing up the values from each par. within the treatment 21-day cycle dividing it by the number of par. These platelet counts are different from the pre-chemotherapy platelet counts for cycles where the chemotherapy dose was delayed. Average within-subject central laboratory platelet count prior to scheduled chemotherapy across Cycles 1 to 6 are summarized. Blood samples were collected on Day 1 and 8 of Cycles 1 to 6 for 21-day cycle and on Day 1, 8 and 15 from Cycles 1 to 6 for 28-day cycle to estimate the average within subject platelet count prior to scheduled chemotherapy. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X,X in the category titles).|Day 1, Day 8, Day 15 (all averaged across cycles 1 to 6)|ITT Population||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (G cells/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820811|NCT01147809|Secondary|Mean Day 8 Scheduled Pre-chemotherapy Platelet Counts Evaluated Across Cycles 1 to 6 in Phase II|Scheduled pre-chemotherapy platelet count is defined within each cycle as the platelet count assessment on which the decision to give or delay chemotherapy was made. This was averaged for each subject across cycles 1 to 6 and a natural log transformation was applied to the average. The log-transformed values were compared between eltrombopag and placebo groups using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model adjusting for cycle duration (21-day vs. 28-day), baseline loge(platelet count) and part of study (part 1 or 2 of phase II). The number of participants analyzed is the number with a Day 8 scheduled platelet count.|Day 8 (averaged across cycles 1 to 6)|ITT Population||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (G cells/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
820812|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings at Cycle 1 Day 4 (2 to 6 Hours Post-dose) in Phase II|A single safety 12-lead ECG was performed using a standard 12-lead ECG machine at screening and 2 to 6 hours post-dose on C1D4. Change in ECG findings were categorized as 'Clinically significant change (CSC): favorable', 'No change or insignificant change' or 'Clinically significant change (CSC): unfavorable' as determined by the investigator. The Baseline value is defined as the value reported immediately prior to the administration of the first dose of investigational product. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X,X in the category titles).|C1D4|Safety Population||participants|||Number
820813|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of the Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status Scores at the Indicated Time Points in Phase II|ECOG-Zubrod scores for the Performance Status were defined as follows: 0: Fully active, 1: Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, 2: Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities, 3: Capable of only limited self-care, 4: Completely disabled, 5 and Unknown: Dead. The data is presented for the participants with the ECOG performance score at different time points during the study. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X,X in the category titles).|Screening, C1D1, C2D1, C3D1, C4D1, C5D1, C6D1, C7D1, C8D1, C9D1, C10D1, C11D1, C12D1, C13D1, C14D1, C15D1, C16D1 and C17D1|Safety Population||participants|||Number
820814|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Creatinine of >=26.5 UMOL/L in Phase II|Number of participants with at least 1 assessment of change from Baseline in creatinine, with increase >=26.5 UMOL/L are presented. The Baseline value is defined as the value reported immediately prior to the administration of the first dose of IP.|After baseline (C1D1), on-treatment (collected on days 1 and 8 for subjects on 21-day cycle and on days 1, 8 and 15 for subjects on 28-day cycle) and 30 day follow-up|Safety Population||participants|||Number
820815|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With Indicated Worst-case Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Laboratory Parameters Using CTCAE Toxicity Grading, at Anytime Post-Baseline in Phase II|"Clinical chemistry laboratory parameters with a related CTCAE (version 4.0) toxicity grading were summarized by toxicity grade at each scheduled assessment. Worst-case grade change of the laboratory parameters at anytime post-Baseline is presented as Any grade increase, Increase to Grade 3 or Grade 4. Clinical chemistry laboratory parameters included Albumin (Al), creatinine, AST, ALT, ALP, TB, Calcium hypercalcemia (CaHy)/hypocalcemia (CaHo), Glucose hyperglycemia (GluHy)/hypoglycemia (GluHo), Potassium hypernatremia (KHy)/hyponatremia (KHo) and Sodium hypernatremia (NaHy)/hyponatremia (NaHo). The Baseline value is defined as the value reported immediately prior to the administration of the first dose of chemotherapy in Cycle 1. Post-Baseline is defined as any time after the first dose of chemotherapy in Cycle 1 up to and including all follow-up visits. Only those Participant available at the indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X,X in the category titles)."|After baseline (C1D1), on-treatment (collected on days 1 and 8 for subjects on 21-day cycle and on days 1, 8 and 15 for subjects on 28-day cycle) and 30 day follow-up|Safety Population||participants|||Number
820816|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With Indicated Maximum Toxicity Grades for the Indicated Hematology Parameters, at Anytime Post-Baseline in Phase II|Hematology parameters with a related NCI CTCAE (version 4.0) toxicity grading were summarized by toxicity grade at each scheduled assessment, the maximum toxicity grade reached by a participant post-Baseline was summarized. Hematology parameters included Hemoglobin (Hb) increased, Anemia, Lymphocyte count (Lym), platelet count, White Blood Cell count (WBC) and Total Absolute Neutrophil Count (Total ANC). The Baseline value is defined as the value reported immediately prior to the administration of the first dose of chemotherapy in Cycle 1. Post-Baseline is defined as any time after the first dose of chemotherapy in Cycle 1 up to and including all follow-up visits. participants with missing Baseline value were assumed to have normal Baseline value. Only those Participant available at the indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X,X in the category titles).|After baseline (C1D1), on-treatment and 30 day follow-up|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
820817|NCT01147809|Secondary|Dose Intensity of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin(G+Cis)/Gemcitabine Plus Carboplatin (G+Cb) and Gemcitabine Across Chemotherapy Cycles 1-6 in Phase II|Dose intensity of chemotherapy is defined as the actual dose of chemotherapy given as a percentage of the scheduled C1D1/C1D8 dose, as applicable, within this study: cycle Dose Intensity (%) = Total Actual dose (mg/m^2) within cycle *100/ Total Scheduled dose (mg/m^2) in Cycle 1; wherein Actual Dose (mg/m^2) = Actual dose (mg)/Body Surface Area reported on eCRF. The average chemotherapy dose intensity at Day 1 across Cycles 1 to 6, Day 8 across Cycles 1 to 6 and Day 15 across Cycles 1 to 6 was summarized and compared between treatment groups using an ANCOVA model adjusted for cycle duration and part of the study.|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|ITT Population||Dose Intensity (%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820818|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Dose Reduction in Their Scheduled Dose of Chemotherapy in Any Cycle in Phase II|Dose reductions are required following potential drug-related toxicities. Number of participants with any dose reduction during 21-day cycle or 28-day cycle, in part 1 or part 2 of the study is summarized and presented. Only participants who actually received chemotherapy were included for the cisplatin and carboplatin components. All participants were included for the gemcitabine components.|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
820887|NCT01147926|Secondary|Percent SCBM With No Straining and Severe/Very Severe Straining|Straining was evaluated on a 5-point scale (0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe, or 4=very severe)|Over 12 week treatment period|mITT. Not all subjects in the mITT population had data for this outcome.||percentage of SBM||Standard Deviation|Mean
820819|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least One Delay in Their Scheduled Dose of Chemotherapy in Any Cycle in Phase II|Any delay in scheduled dose of gemcitabine monotherapy or the combination of gemcitabine plus carboplatin or cisplatin was evaluated for eltrombopag and placebo treated participants. Number of participants with any delay in dose during 21-day cycle or 28-day cycle, in part 1 or part 2 of the study is summarized and presented. Only those participants who actually received chemotherapy are included for the cisplatin and carboplatin components and all participants are included for the gemcitabine components (represented by n=X,X in the category titles).|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
820820|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants Requiring a Platelet Transfusion in Phase II|Platelet transfusion was used as a rescue medication for the treatment of thrombocytopenia. Number of participants requiring a platelet transfusion during Cycles 1-6 was summarized and compared between treatment groups using a logistic regression model adjusted for cycle duration. Each cycle included assessments starting at Day 1 of the cycle.|Screening, Day -5, throughout cycles 1 to 6 and up to 30 days after IP discontinuation|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
820821|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Bleeding and Significant Bleeding as Assessed Using the World Health Organization (WHO) Bleeding Scale, Across Cycles 1-6 in Phase II|The WHO Bleeding Scale is a measure of bleeding severity with the following grades: Grade 0=no bleeding; Grade 1=petechiae; Grade 2=mild blood loss; Grade 3=gross bleeding; Grade 4=debilitating blood loss. The WHO grades were further classified into the following categories: no bleeding=Grade 0; any bleeding=Grades 1 to 4; no clinically significant bleeding=Grades 0 to 1; clinically significant bleeding=Grades 2 to 4. Baseline is defined as the Day 1 assessment or the latest possible screening assessment. Across Cycles 1-6 included all assessments after first dose of chemotherapy up to the end of Cycle 6. Data exclused for participants taking drugs that affect platelet function or anticoagulants, from the time that the medication was started.|Screening, Day -5, Day 1 and 8 of Cycles 1 to 6 of 21-day cycle schedule, Day 1, 8 and 15 of cycles 1 to 6 of 28-day schedule, treatment withdrawal and 30-day follow-up|ITT Population: Participants with at least one visit within the cycle.||Participants|||Number
820822|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE): Pre-therapy, On-therapy + 30 Days and Post-therapy in Phase II|AE is any untoward medical occurrence temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product (MP), whether or not considered related to the MP. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a MP. For marketed MPs, this also includes failure to produce expected benefits, abuse, or misuse. SAE event is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose: results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.|From first dose of investigational product (IP) until 30 days after discontinuation of IP (Longer for AEs related to study participation)|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
820823|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least One Delay in Their Scheduled Dose of Chemotherapy in Any Cycle in Phase I|Any delay in a scheduled dose of gemcitabine monotherapy or the combination of gemcitabine plus carboplatin or cisplatin was evaluated for eltrombopag and placebo treated participants.|All time on chemotherapy treatment|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
820824|NCT01147809|Secondary|Dose Intensity of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin (G+Cis)/Gemcitabine Plus Carboplatin (G+Cb) and Gemcitabine Across Chemotherapy Cycles 1 to 6 in Phase I|Dose intensity of chemotherapy is defined as the actual dose of chemotherapy given as a percentage of the scheduled C1D1/C1D8 dose, as applicable, within this study: Cycle Dose Intensity (%) = Total Actual dose (mg/m^2) within Cycle *100/ Total Scheduled dose (mg/m^2) in Cycle 1; wherein Actual Dose (mg/m^2) = Actual dose (mg)/Body Surface Area reported on electronic case report form (eCRF).|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|Safety Population||Dose Intensity (%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820825|NCT01147809|Secondary|Time to Recovery From Platelet Nadir for Each Chemotherapy Cycle in Phase I, Estimated Using Central Laboratory Platelet Counts|Platelet nadir is defined within each cycle as the lowest platelet count reported after the Day 1 chemotherapy dose. Time to recovery (TR) (>100Gi/L or >150Gi/L) from platelet nadir is defined within each cycle as the time in days from the platelet nadir to the time at which platelet count returns to >=100Gi/L or >=150Gi/L within the same cycle or up to and including Day 1 of the next cycle. For the last cycle in the study, time to recovery was calculated in the same manner but up to and including any Conclusion/Early Withdrawal visit which has been assigned to the same cycle. For Group A, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 21 days and for Group B, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 28 days. Blood samples were collected to estimate platelet count at: Group A; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 1 to 6. Group B; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22, and 24 of Cycles 1 to 6. Only those participants available at indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X).|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|Safety Population||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820826|NCT01147809|Secondary|Central Laboratory Platelet Count for Time Taken to Reach Platelet Nadir for Each Chemotherapy Cycle in Phase I|Platelet nadir is defined within each cycle as the lowest platelet count reported after the Day 1 chemotherapy dose. The time taken to reach platelet nadir is defined within each cycle. For Group A, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 21 days and for Group B, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 28 days. Blood samples were collected to estimate platelet nadir count at the following time points: Group A; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 1 to 6. Group B; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22 and 24 of Cycles 1 to 6. Only those participants available at indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X).|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|Safety Population||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820827|NCT01147809|Secondary|Maximum Duration of Thrombocytopenia Across Cycles 2 to 6 in Phase I, Estimated Using Central Laboratory Platelet Counts|Duration of thrombocytopenia is defined as a period of time in days from the first report of a platelet count with NCI CTCAE Grade 1-4 until the first subsequent report of a platelet count no longer meeting those criteria, regardless of rescue medication usage. It was assessed between Day 1 of Cycle 2 and up to and including any Conclusion/Early Withdrawal visit assigned to the same cycle for participants completing up to 6 cycles, and between Day 1 of Cycle 2 and up to and including the end of Cycle 6 for participants continuing beyond 6 cycles. The chemotherapy cycle for Group A was 21 days and for Group B was 28 days. Blood samples were collected to estimate thrombocytes at the following time points: Group A; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 2 to 6. Group B; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22 and 24 of Cycles 2 to 6.|Cycle 2 to Cycle 6|Safety Population. Participants experiencing thrombocytopenia with subsequent increase in platelet count to >=150Gi/L are included.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820828|NCT01147809|Secondary|Number of Participants With Thrombocytopenia of Grade 1, 2, 3 or 4 Across All the Chemotherapy Cycles in Phase I, Using Central Laboratory Platelet Count|As per the CTCAE version 4.0, par. with a platelet count <LLN but >=75 x 10^9/L (Gi/L) were considered to have Grade 1 thrombocytopenia; par. with a platelet count <75Gi/L, but >=50Gi/L were considered to have Grade 2 thrombocytopenia; par. with a platelet count <50Gi/L, but >=25Gi/L were considered to have Grade 3 thrombocytopenia and par. with a platelet count <25Gi/L were considered to have Grade 4 thrombocytopenia. Blood samples were collected to estimate thrombocytes at the following time points: For Group A, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 21 days and for Group B, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 28 days. Blood samples were collected to estimate thrombocytes at the following time points: Group A; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 1 to 6. Group B; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22 and 24 of Cycles 1 to 6. Par. experiencing thrombocytopenia (Platelets <150Gi/L) at least once within a cycle are presented in the category title as n=X,X,X,X.|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
820829|NCT01147809|Secondary|Central Laboratory Average Daily Area Under the Curve Platelet-time Course Across Cycles 2 to 6 in Phase I|The average daily area under the platelet-time course was normalized by dividing the area under curve by total duration. This gives an estimated average platelet value over the time period from cycles 2 to 6. For 21-Day Cycle, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 21 days and for 28-Day Cycle, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 28 days. Blood samples were collected to estimate thrombocytes at the following time points: 21-Day Cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 1 to 6. 28-Day Cycle; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22 and 24 of Cycles 1 to 6.|All assessments from Cycle 2 Day 1 to last assessment in Cycle 6|Safety Population||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (G cells/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820830|NCT01147809|Secondary|Platelet Count Nadir for Each Chemotherapy Cycle in Phase I|Platelet nadir is defined as the lowest platelet count (from central laboratory data) reported after the first dose of chemotherapy within each cycle. Platelet count nadir is defined for each cycle. For Group A, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 21 days and for Group B, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 28 days. Blood samples were collected to estimate platelet nadir count at the following time points: Group A; Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycles 1 and 2, at Days 1, 4, 8, 15 and 17 of Cycle 3 to 6. Group B; Days 1, 4, 8, 15, 22 and 24 of Cycles 1 to 6. Only those participants available at indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X).|Cycle 1 to Cycle 6|Safety Population||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (G cells/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820831|NCT01147809|Secondary|Average Within-subject Central Laboratory Platelet Count Prior to Scheduled Chemotherapy Across Cycles 2 to 6 in Phase I|Within-subject platelet count for each participant was calculated by summing up the visit platelet counts from each of Cycles 1 to 6 and dividing it by the number of cycles in which the participant had data. The average within a treatment group was calculated by summing up the values from each participant within the treatment group and dividing it by the number of participants. These platelet counts are different from the pre-chemotherapy platelet counts for cycles where the chemotherapy dose was delayed. Average within-subject central laboratory platelet count prior to scheduled chemotherapy across Cycles 2 to 6 are summarized. Blood samples were collected on Days 1 and 8 of Cycles 2 to 6 for Group A and on Days 1, 8 and 15 from Cycles 2 to 6 for Group B to estimate the average within subject platelet count prior to scheduled chemotherapy. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X,X,X,X in the category titles).|Day 1 (averaged across Cycles 2 to 6), Day 8 (averaged across Cycles 2 to 6)|Safety Population||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (G cells/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820832|NCT01147809|Secondary|Average Pre-chemotherapy Platelet Count at the Indicated Time Points in Phase I|Pre-chemotherapy platelet count is defined for Cycle 1 as the platelet count (from central laboratory data) immediately preceding the first dose of chemotherapy within Cycle 1. For all subsequent cycles it is defined as the platelet count (from central laboratory data) immediately preceding, but limited to within 2 days prior to the first dose of chemotherapy at Day 1. For Group A, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 21 days and for Group B, the chemotherapy cycle consisted of 28 days. Blood samples were collected to estimate platelet count at the following time points: Group A; Days 1 and 8 of Cycles 1 to 6. Group B; Days 1, 8 and 15 of Cycles 1 to 6. Only those participants available at indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X).|C1D1, C1D8, C1D15, C2D1, C2D8, C2D15, C3D1, C3D8, C3D15, C4D1,C4D8, C4D15, C5D1,C5D8, C5D15, C6D1,C6D8 and C6D15|Safety Population||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (G cells/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820833|NCT01147809|Primary|Mean Day 1 Scheduled Pre-chemotherapy Platelet Count Evaluated Across Cycles 1 to 6 in Phase II|Scheduled pre-chemotherapy platelet count is defined within each cycle as the platelet count assessment on which the decision to give or delay chemotherapy was made. This was averaged for each participant across Cycles 1 to 6 and a natural log transformation was applied to the average. The log-transformed values were compared between eltrombopag and placebo groups using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model adjusting for cycle duration (21-day vs. 28-day), Baseline loge(platelet count) and part of study (part 1 or 2 of phase II). Only those participants available at indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X,X).|Day 1 (averaged across cycles 1 to 6)|Intent-to Treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants.||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (Gi/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
820834|NCT01147809|Primary|Number of Participants With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings at Anytime Post-Baseline in Phase I|A single safety 12-lead ECG was performed using a standard 12-lead ECG machine at screening and post-dose on C2D4. Three further ECGs were carried out at C2D8, C5D8 and C6D15. Change in ECG findings were categorized as 'Clinically significant change: favorable', 'No change or insignificant change' or 'Clinically significant change (CSC): unfavorable' as determined by the investigator. The Baseline value is defined as the value reported immediately prior to the administration of the first dose of chemotherapy in Cycle 1. Any time post-Baseline is defined by counting the participants under the worst result experienced post-Baseline. The best to worst order is 'Clinically significant change: favorable', 'No change or insignificant change', and then 'Clinically significant change (CSC): unfavorable. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X,X,X,X in the category titles).|C2D4, C2D8, C5D8, C6D15|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
820888|NCT01147926|Secondary|Percent SBM With a Consistency of Normal and Hard/Very Hard|Consistency measured using the 7-point Bristol scale where 1-2 indicate constipation (=hard/very hard), 3-4 are ideal stools (=normal), and 5-7 tending toward diarrhea.|Over 12 week treatment period|mITT. Not all subjects in the mITT population had data for this outcome.||percentage of SBM||Standard Deviation|Mean
820835|NCT01147809|Primary|Number of the Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status Scores at the Indicated Time Points in Phase I|ECOG-Zubrod scores for the performance status are defined as follows: Score 0: Fully active, 1: restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, 2: ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities, 3: capable of only limited self-care, 4: completely disabled, 5: dead. The data is presented for the participants with the ECOG performance score at the indicated time points during the study.|Screening, C1D1, C2D1, C2D8, C2D15, C3D1, C4D1, C4D22, C5D1, C5D8, C6D1, C6D15|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
820836|NCT01147809|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change From Baseline in Creatinine of >=26.5 Micromoles/Liter (UMOL/L) in Phase I|The number of participants with at least 1 change from Baseline in creatinine, with an increase >=26.5 UMOL/L are reported. Creatinine clearance is estimated using the Cockcroft-Gault formula which is a method to approximate kidney function. The Baseline value is defined as the value reported immediately prior to the administration of the first dose of chemotherapy in Cycle 1.|After Baseline (C1D1), on-treatment and 30 day follow-up|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
820837|NCT01147809|Primary|Number of Participants With Indicated Maximum Toxicity Grades for the Indicated Clinical Chemistry Laboratory Parameters, at Anytime Post-Baseline in Phase I|Clinical chemistry laboratory parameters with a related NCI CTCAE (version 4.0) toxicity grading were summarized by toxicity grade at each scheduled assessment. Clinical chemistry laboratory parameters included albumin (Alb), urea/blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, aspartate amino transferase (AST), alanine amino transferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), total bilirubin (TB), direct bilirubin (DB) and international normalized ratio/Prothrombin time (PT). The Baseline value is defined as the value reported immediately prior to the administration of the first dose of chemotherapy in Cycle 1. Post-Baseline is defined as any time after the first dose of chemotherapy in Cycle 1 up to and including all follow-up visits. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X,X,X,X in the category titles).|After Baseline (C1D1), on-treatment and 30 day follow-up|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
820838|NCT01147809|Primary|Number of Participants With Indicated Maximum Toxicity Grades for the Indicated Hematology Parameters, at Anytime Post-Baseline in Phase I|Hematology parameters with a related NCI CTCAE (version 4.0) toxicity grading were summarized by toxicity grade at each scheduled assessment, the maximum toxicity grade reached by a participant post-Baseline was summarized. Hematology parameters included hemoglobin (increased), hemoglobin (anemia), lymphocytes (increased), lymphocytes (decreased), total absolute neutrophil count (ANC), platelets (PLT) and white blood cells (WBC). The Baseline value is defined as the value reported immediately prior to the administration of the first dose of chemotherapy in Cycle 1. Post-Baseline is defined as any time after the first dose of chemotherapy in Cycle 1 up to and including all follow-up visits. Only those participant available at the indicated time points were analyzed (represented by n=X,X,X,X in the category titles).|After Baseline (C1D1), on-treatment and 30 day follow-up|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
820839|NCT01147809|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE): Pre-therapy, On-therapy + 30 Days and Post-therapy in Phase I|AEs are coded using the standard Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) and were graded by the investigator according to National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for AEs (CTCAE), version 4.0. AE is any untoward medical occurrence temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product (MP), whether or not considered related to the MP. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a MP. For marketed MPs, this also includes failure to produce expected benefits, abuse, or misuse. SAE event is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose: results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.|From Cycle 1, Day 1 (C1D1) until at least 30 days post-investigational product discontinuation (longer for AEs considered related to study participation)|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
820840|NCT01147822|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR)|DOR is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of confirmed response (CR or PR) until the first documented sign of disease progression (a >=20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of >=1 new lesion) or death, if sooner. CR=the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 mm in the short axis. PR=at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as a reference the Baseline sum LD.|From the time of response until the earliest date of disease progression/death (up to 38 months)|ITT Population (Asian). Only those participants who experienced either a confirmed CR or a PR were analyzed.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820841|NCT01147822|Secondary|Time to Response|Time to response is defined as the time from the start of treatment until the first documented evidence of confirmed CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 mm in the short axis) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as a reference the Baseline sum LD), whichever comes first. CR and PR were evaluated by an independent review per RECIST, Version 1.|From Baseline until the time of response or the earliest date of disease progression/death (up to 39 months)|ITT Population (Asian). Only those participants who experienced either a confirmed CR or a PR were analyzed.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820842|NCT01147822|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Best Response of Confirmed Complete Response (CR) or Confirmed Partial Response (PR) as Assessed by the IRC|The number of participants with evidence of CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 millimeters [mm] in the short axis) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameters [LD] of target lesions, taking as a reference the Baseline sum LD) was evaluated by an independent review per RECIST, Version 1.|From Baseline until the time of response or the earliest date of disease progression/death (up to 39 months)|ITT Population (Asian)||Participants|||Number
820843|NCT01147822|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is defined as the time from randomization until death due to any cause. Participants who had not died were censored at the date of the last adequate tumor assessment at the time of the cut-off.|From randomization until death (up to 44 months)|ITT Population (Asian)||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820889|NCT01147926|Secondary|SCBM Per Week||Over 12 week treatment period|mITT. Not all subjects in the mITT population had data for this outcome.||SCBM/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
820844|NCT01147822|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS is defined as the interval between the date of randomization and the earliest date of progressive disease (PD), as defined by the Independent Review Committee (IRC), or death due to any cause. The IRC defined PD per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), Version 1. Per RECIST, PD is defined as a >=20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter (LD) recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of >=1 new lesion. Participants who had neither progressed nor died were censored at the date of the last adequate tumor assessment at the time of the cut-off.|From randomization to the earliest date of disease progression or death (up to 39 months)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population (Asian): All randomized participants (par) from Study VEG113078 and Study VEG108844 who enrolled in Japan, China, Taiwan, and Korea.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820845|NCT01147848|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score at Day 168|"The EQ-5D is a standardized, 2-part, self-assessment instrument, designed for self-completion, used to measure health outcome. The first part consists of 5 items covering 5 dimensions (mobility, self care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). The second part is a 20 centimeter VAS that has endpoints labelled best imaginable health state and worst imaginable health state anchored at 100 and 0, respectively. Participants were asked to indicate how they rate their own health by drawing a line from an anchor box to that point on the EQ-VAS that best represents their own health on that day. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline VAS score, country, sex, age, and treatment."|Baseline and Day 168|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820846|NCT01147848|Other Pre-specified|"Percentage of Participants With No Problems in the EQ-5D Descriptive System Dimensions at Day 168/Week 24"|"The EQ-5D is a standardized, 2-part, self-assessment instrument, designed for self-completion, used to measure health outcome. The first part consists of 5 items covering 5 dimensions (mobility, self care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Each dimension is measured by a three-point Likert scale (1=no problems, 2=some problems and 3=severe problems). Respondents are asked to choose one level that reflects their own health state today for each of the five dimensions."|Day 168/Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||percentage of participants|||Number
820847|NCT01147848|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) Total Score for Participants 12 Years of Age and Older (AQLQ + 12)|"The AQLQ is a disease-specific, self-administered quality of life (QOL) questionnaire developed to evaluate the impact of asthma treatments on the QOL of asthma sufferers. The AQLQ contains 32 items in four domains: activity limitation (11 items), symptoms (12 items), emotional function (5 items), and environmental stimuli (4 items). The response format consists of a 7-point scale: a value of 1 indicates total impairment; a value of 7 indicates no impairment. The AQLQ total score is defined as the average of the scores from all 32 questions, provided at least 90% of the questions have been answered; thus, the total score ranges from 1 (indicates total impairment) to 7 (indicates no impairment). Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 168 value minus the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline total AQLQ score, country, sex, age, and treatment."|Baseline and Day 168|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820848|NCT01147848|Other Pre-specified|Number of Healthcare Contacts Related to Asthma or the Treatment of Asthma From Baseline to Day 168|All unscheduled asthma-related visits to a physician’s office, visits to urgent care, visits to the emergency department, and hospitalizations (to the general ward [GW] or the intensive care unit [ICU]) that were associated with asthma exacerbations were recorded.|Baseline to Day 168|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||visits per participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
820849|NCT01147848|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Asthma Control Test (ACT) Scores at Day 168|"The ACT is a 5-item questionnaire developed as a measure of the participant's asthma control. Questions are designed to be self-completed by the participant and include the following: In the past 4 weeks, How much of the time did your asthma keep you from getting as much done at work, school or at home?, How often have you had shortness of breath?, How often did your asthma symptoms wake you up at night or earlier than usual in the morning?, How often have you used your rescue inhaler or nebulizer medication (such as albuterol)? and How would you rate your asthma control? The ACT total score is defined as the sum of the scores from all 5 questions, provided all questions have been answered; thus, the total score ranges from 5 (poor control of asthma) to 25 (complete control of asthma). A score of 20 or higher indicates well-controlled asthma. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Day 168 value minus the Baseline value."|Baseline and Day 168|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline total ACT score, country, sex, age, and treatment.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820850|NCT01147848|Other Pre-specified|Baseline FEV1 by Completion Status|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second . Baseline is defined as the mean of the two assessments made 30 minutes pre-dose and 5 minutes pre-dose on Treatment Day 1.|Baseline|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
820851|NCT01147848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough FEV1 at Day 168|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second . Trough FEV1 is defined as the pre-dose measurement on Day 168/Week 24. Any missing data at Day 168/Week 24 was imputed using the last observation carried forward (LOCF). Baseline was the pre-dose measurement on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the pre-dose measurement on Day 168/Week 24 minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 168|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820852|NCT01147848|Secondary|Number of Participants Obtaining a >=12% and >=200 mL Increase From Baseline in FEV1|The number of participants obtaining a >=12% and >=200 mL increase from Baseline in FEV1 (the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second) was evaluated at 12-hours post-dose and at 24-hours post-dose on Day 168.|Baseline and Day 168|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||participants|||Number
820890|NCT01147926|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With an Increase of at Least 1 SCBM Per Week||Over 12 week treatment period|mITT||percentage of subjects|||Number
820853|NCT01147848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean Serial FEV1 Over 0-4 Hours at Day 168|The weighted mean serial FEV1 (the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second) over 0-4 hours post-dose at Baseline and Day 168 was derived using actual times and using the pre-dose assessment as the 0 hour measurement. Change from Baseline was calculated as the weighted mean of the 4-hour serial FEV1 measures on Day 168/Week 24 minus the Baseline value. Baseline was the pre-dose measurement on Day 1. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline FEV1, region, sex, age, and treatment.|Baseline and Day 168|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
820854|NCT01147848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean Serial FEV1 Over 0-4 Hours Post First Dose (at Randomization)|The weighted mean serial FEV1 (the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second) over 0-4 hours post-dose at Baseline was derived using actual times and using the pre-dose assessment as the 0 hour measurement. Change from Baseline was calculated as the weighted mean of the 4-hour serial FEV1 measures on Day 1 minus the Baseline value. Baseline was the pre-dose measurement on Day 1. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline FEV1, region, sex, age, and treatment.|Baseline and Randomization|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820855|NCT01147848|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Time to Onset of Bronchodilator Effect at Day 1|Time to onset of bronchodilator effect at Day 1 is defined as the actual time during the 4-hour serial FEV1 (the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second) measurements that the participant first meets or exceeds a 12% and 200 mL increase over Baseline and was derived at Day 1 only. Time to onset was calculated over 0 to 4 hours (5 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, 3 hours, and 4 hours) post-dose. Participants who never exceeded a 12% and 200 mL increase over Baseline were censored at the actual time of their last FEV1 measurement.|Baseline to Day 1|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||participants|||Number
820856|NCT01147848|Secondary|Serial FEV1 (0-24 Hours)|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second . The pre-dose FEV1 assessment and the individual serial FEV1 assessments at Day 168/Week 24 at the indicated time points (pre-dose, 5 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, 3 hours, 4 hours, 11 hours, 12 hours, 12.5 hours, 13 hours, 14 hours, 16 hours, 20 hours, 23 hours, and 24 hour s) were summarized.|Day 168|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
820857|NCT01147848|Primary|Change From Baseline in Weighted-mean 24 Hour Serial FEV1 on Day 168/Week 24|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. The weighted mean was calculated from the pre-dose FEV1 and post-dose FEV1 measurements at 5, 15, and 30 minutes (min) and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, 12, 12.5, 13, 14, 16, 20, 23, and 24 hours, respectively, on Day 168/Week 24. Change from Baseline was calculated as the weighted mean of the 24-hour serial FEV1 measures on Day 168/Week 24 minus the Baseline value. Baseline was the pre-dose measurement on Day 1. Analysis was performed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with covariates of Baseline FEV1, region, sex, age, and treatment.|Baseline and Day 168/Week 24|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least 1 dose of double-blind medication. Randomized participants were assumed to have received double-blind medication unless definitive evidence to the contrary existed. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820858|NCT01147874|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Undiagnosed Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA)|PsA: inflammatory arthritis associated with psoriasis that can have an indolent and progressive course. Primary PsA diagnosis made by rheumatologist based on physical examination, medical history and laboratory test results. Secondary PsA diagnosis made by rheumatologist based on physical examination and medical history only. For both, numerator was number of participants with “No” answer to question concerning previous diagnosis of PsA at Visit 1 (dermatology visit) and were subsequently classified as positive by rheumatologist; denominator was total number of participants evaluated for PsA.|Week 0 through Week 8|FAS population included all randomized participants with an answer to the question at Visit 1 (dermatology visit) about previous diagnosis of PsA by a rheumatologist and had an assessment of PsA during the study by a rheumatologist based on medical history, physical examination and laboratory results.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820859|NCT01147874|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Based on Physical Examination and Medical History|PsA: inflammatory arthritis associated with psoriasis that can have an indolent and progressive course. Percentage of participants with PsA was calculated by dividing the number of participants who were classified as positive by the rheumatologist and the total number of participants evaluated using medical history and physical examination as the basis for the diagnosis.|Week 0 through Week 8|FAS population included all randomized participants with an answer to the question at Visit 1 (dermatology visit) about previous diagnosis of PsA by a rheumatologist and had an assessment of PsA during the study by a rheumatologist based on medical history, physical examination and laboratory results.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820860|NCT01147874|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Based on Physical Examination, Medical History and Laboratory Results|PsA: inflammatory arthritis associated with psoriasis that can have an indolent and progressive course. Percentage of participants with PsA was calculated by dividing the number of participants who were classified as positive by the rheumatologist and the total number of participants evaluated using medical history, physical examination and laboratory results as the basis for the diagnosis.|Week 0 through Week 8|Full analysis set (FAS) population included all randomized participants with an answer to the question at Visit 1 (dermatology visit) about previous diagnosis of PsA by a rheumatologist and had an assessment of PsA during the study by a rheumatologist based on medical history, physical examination and laboratory results.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820861|NCT01147900|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|From Year 8.5 up to study end (one month post Year 10 booster vaccination)|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of Boostrix™ vaccine, any formulation, for whom data were available.||subjects|||Number
820863|NCT01147900|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE is any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any unsolicited AE = any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) follow-up period after booster vaccination|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of Boostrix™ vaccine, any formulation, for whom data were available.||subjects|||Number
820864|NCT01147900|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited General Symptoms.|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue, gastrointestinal, headache and fever [defined as axillary temperature ≥ 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = incidence of a particular symptom regardless of intensity grade and relationship to vaccination.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) follow-up period after booster vaccination|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of Boostrix™ vaccine, any formulation, for whom data were available.||subjects|||Number
820865|NCT01147900|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited Local Symptoms.|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site. Any = incidence of a particular symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) follow-up period after booster vaccination|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of Boostrix™ vaccine, any formulation, for whom data were available.||subjects|||Number
820866|NCT01147900|Primary|Number of Booster Responders to Pertussis Toxoid (PT), Filamentous Haemagglutinin (FHA) and Pertactin (PRN) Antigens.|"A booster responder to PT/PRN antigens was defined as either a vaccinated subject seronegative at analysis baseline (Year 10) with anti-PT/anti-PRN antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) 5 EL.U/mL at one month post Year 10 booster vaccination, or as a vaccinated subject seropositive at analysis baseline (Year 10) and with anti-PT/anti-PRN antibody concentration with at least a 2-fold increase at one month post Year 10 booster vaccination.
A seronegative/seropositive subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with anti-PT/anti-PRN antibody concentration ≥/< 5 EL.U/mL."|At 1 month post Year 10 booster vaccination|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol for immunogenicity at Year 10, which included all evaluable subjects who had received the booster dose of Boostrix™ vaccine, any formulation (at least 9.5 years after the dose administered in GSK263855/029 study) and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||subjects|||Number
820867|NCT01147900|Primary|Concentrations for Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seropositivity cut-off of the assay was 5 EL.U/mL.|At Year 10 pre booster vaccination (PRE) and at 1 month post Year 10 booster vaccination (POST)|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol for immunogenicity at Year 10, which included all evaluable subjects who had received the booster dose of Boostrix™ vaccine, any formulation (at least 9.5 years after the dose administered in GSK263855/029 study) and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
820868|NCT01147900|Primary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN Antibodies.|A seropositive subject for anti-PT/anti-PRN/anti-FHA antibodies was defined as a vaccinated subject who had anti-PT/anti-PRN/anti-FHA antibody concentrations greater than or equal to (≥) 5 ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL).|At Year 10 pre booster vaccination (PRE) and at 1 month post Year 10 booster vaccination (POST)|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol for immunogenicity at Year 10, which included all evaluable subjects who had received the booster dose of Boostrix™ vaccine, any formulation (at least 9.5 years after the dose administered in GSK263855/029 study) and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||subjects|||Number
820869|NCT01147900|Primary|Concentrations for Anti-D and Anti-T Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was 0.1 IU/mL for all antibodies assessed.|At Year 10 pre booster vaccination (PRE) and at 1 month post Year 10 booster vaccination (POST)|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol for immunogenicity at Year 10, which included all evaluable subjects who had received the booster dose of Boostrix™ vaccine, any formulation (at least 9.5 years after the dose administered in GSK263855/029 study) and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
820870|NCT01147900|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Diphtheria and Tetanus|A subject seroprotected against diphtheria/tetanus was defined as a vaccinated subject who had an anti-D/anti-T antibody concentration greater than or above (≥) 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|At Year 10 pre booster vaccination (PRE) and at 1 month post Year 10 booster vaccination (POST)|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol for immunogenicity at Year 10, which included all evaluable subjects who had received the booster dose of Boostrix™ vaccine, any formulation (at least 9.5 years after the dose administered in GSK263855/029 study) and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||subjects|||Number
820871|NCT01147900|Primary|Concentrations for Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seropositivity cut-off of the assay was 5 EL.U/mL.|At Year 10|The analysis was performed on the According To Protocol cohort for persistence at Year 10, which included all subjects who had received no additional dose of diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis vaccine other than the Boostrix™ booster dose received in the GSK263855/029 study, and for whom serological results were available at Year 10.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
820872|NCT01147900|Primary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN Antibodies.|A seropositive subject for anti-PT/anti-FHA/anti-PRN antibodies was defined as a vaccinated subject who had anti-PT/anti-FHA/anti-PRN antibody concentrations greater than or equal to (≥) 5 Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units per milliliter (EL.U/mL).|At Year 10|The analysis was performed on the According To Protocol cohort for persistence at Year 10, which included all subjects who had received no additional dose of diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis vaccine other than the Boostrix™ booster dose received in the GSK263855/029 study, and for whom serological results were available at Year 10.||subjects|||Number
821667|NCT01155063|Secondary|Number of Participants With Reasons for Discontinuation From Study Treatment||Month 0 up to Month 36 or early withdrawal|Data was not analyzed as the study was terminated due to insufficient number of participants enrolled in the study.|||||
820873|NCT01147900|Primary|Concentrations for Anti-PT, Anti-PRN and Anti-FHA Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seropositivity cut-off of the assay was 5 EL.U/mL for all antibodies assessed.|At Year 8.5|The analysis was performed on the According To Protocol cohort for persistence at Year 8.5 , which included all subjects who had received no additional dose of diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis vaccine other than the Boostrix™ booster dose received in the GSK263855/029 study, and for whom serological results were available at Year 8.5.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
820874|NCT01147900|Primary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) and Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA) Antibodies.|A seropositive subject for anti-PT/anti-PRN/anti-FHA antibodies was defined as a vaccinated subject who had anti-PT/anti-PRN/anti-FHA antibody concentrations greater than or equal to (≥) 5 Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units per milliliter (EL.U/mL).|At Year 8.5|The analysis was performed on the According To Protocol cohort for persistence at Year 8.5 , which included all subjects who had received no additional dose of diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis vaccine other than the Boostrix™ booster dose received in the GSK263855/029 study, and for whom serological results were available at Year 8.5.||subjects|||Number
820875|NCT01147900|Primary|Concentrations for Anti-D and Anti-T Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was 0.1 IU/mL.|At Year 10|The analysis was performed on the According To Protocol cohort for persistence at Year 10, which included all subjects who had received no additional dose of diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis vaccine other than the Boostrix™ booster dose received in the GSK263855/029 study, and for whom serological results were available at Year 10.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
820876|NCT01147900|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Diphtheria and Tetanus.|A subject seroprotected against diphtheria/tetanus was defined as a vaccinated subject who had an anti-D/anti-T antibody concentration greater than or above (≥) 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|At Year 10|The analysis was performed on the According To Protocol cohort for persistence at Year 10, which included all subjects who had received no additional dose of diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis vaccine other than the Boostrix™ booster dose received in the GSK263855/029 study, and for whom serological results were available at Year 10.||subjects|||Number
820877|NCT01147900|Primary|Concentrations for Anti-D and Anti-T Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was 0.1 IU/mL for all antibodies assessed.|At Year 8.5|The analysis was performed on the According To Protocol cohort for persistence at Year 8.5 , which included all subjects who had received no additional dose of diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis vaccine other than the Boostrix™ booster dose received in the GSK263855/029 study, and for whom serological results were available at Year 8.5.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
820878|NCT01147900|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Diphtheria and Tetanus|A subject seroprotected against diphtheria/tetanus was defined as a vaccinated subject who had an anti-diphtheria (anti-D)/anti-tetanus (anti-T) antibody concentration greater than or above (≥) 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|At Year 8.5|The analysis was performed on the According To Protocol cohort for persistence at Year 8.5, which included all subjects who had received no additional dose of diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis vaccine other than the Boostrix™ booster dose received in the GSK263855/029 study, and for whom serological results were available at Year 8.5.||subjects|||Number
820879|NCT01147926|Secondary|Percent of Subjects on the Subject Global Evaluation on Efficacy of Treatment Score Rating Treatment as Quite a Bit to Extremely Effective at Final On-Treatment Assessment|"The subject was asked to rate his global evaluation of the efficacy of treatment using the following 5-point scale:
0=not at all effective
a little bit effective
moderately effective
quite a bit effective
extremely effective."|Over 12 week treatment period|mITT. Not all subjects in the mITT population had data for this outcome.||percentage of subjects|||Number
820880|NCT01147926|Secondary|Percent of Subjects on the Subject Global Evaluation on Severity of Constipation Score Rating Constipation as Severe to Very Severe at Final On-Treatment Assessment|Subject was asked to rate the severity of his constipation using a 5-point Likert scale: 0=absent, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe, 4=very severe|Over 12 week treatment period|mITT. Not all subjects in the mITT population had data for this outcome.||percentage of subjects|||Number
820881|NCT01147926|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With an Improvement of ≥ 1 Point on the Patient Assessment of Constipation - Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) Total Score at Final On Treatment Assessment|The PAC-QOL is a validated 28-item questionnaire for the evaluation of quality of life in subjects with constipation. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale: 0=not at all/none of the time, 1=a little bit/a little bit of the time, 2=moderately/some of the time, 3=quite a bit/most of the time, 4=extremely/all of the time. Total score ranges from 0-112. Lower scores indicate improvement in symptoms. A 1-point improvement in PAC-QOL total score was considered clinically meaningful.|Over 12 week treatment period|mITT. Not all subjects in the mITT population had data for this outcome.||percentage of subjects|||Number
820882|NCT01147926|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With an Improvement of ≥ 1 Point on the Patient Assessment of Constipation – Symptom (PAC-SYM) Questionnaire Total Score at Final On Treatment Assessment|The PAC-SYM is a validated 12-item questionnaire for the evaluation of severity of symptoms of constipation in subjects with constipation. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale: 0=absent, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe, 4=very severe. Total score ranges from 0 to 48. Lower scores indicate improvement in symptoms. A 1-point improvement in PAC-SYM total score was considered clinically meaningful.|Over 12 week treatment period|mITT. Not all subjects in the mITT population had data for this outcome.||percentage of subjects|||Number
820883|NCT01147926|Secondary|Days With Rescue Medication Taken Per Week||Over 12 week treatment period|mITT. Not all subjects in the mITT population had data for this outcome.||Days/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
820884|NCT01147926|Secondary|Bisacodyl Tablets Taken Per Week||Over 12 week treatment period|mITT. Not all subjects in the mITT population had data for this outcome.||Tablets/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
820885|NCT01147926|Secondary|Time to First SCBM After Investigational Product Intake on Day 1||Day 1|mITT.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
820886|NCT01147926|Secondary|Percent SBM With Sensation of Complete Evacuation||Over 12 week treatment period|mITT. Not all subjects in the mITT population had data for this outcome.||percentage of SBM||Standard Deviation|Mean
820892|NCT01147926|Primary|The Percentage of Subjects With an Average of ≥3 Spontaneous Complete Bowel Movements (SCBM) Per Week|Spontaneous Bowel Movements defined as a bowel movement that is not preceded within a period of 24 hours by the intake of a laxative agent or by the use of an enema.|Over 12 week treatment period|Modified Intent-to-treat Population (mITT) included all subjects randomized into the study except those excluded due to a major good clinical practice (GCP) breach at one site, who took at least 1 dose of the investigational product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
820893|NCT01149057|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) at Weeks 24, 48, 72, and 96|HAQ: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; and common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty.|Baseline; Weeks 24, 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies the number participants with available data for specified category.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820894|NCT01149057|Secondary|Participant Assessment of Pain (VAS)|"The mean score of pain as assessed by participants using a 100-mm horizontal VAS, where the left endpoint (0) indicated No pain, and the right endpoint (100) indicated Unbearable pain. Higher score indicated higher pain."|Baseline; Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies the number participants with available data for specified category.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
820895|NCT01149057|Secondary|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate||Baseline; Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies the number participants with available data for specified category.||millimeter per hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
820896|NCT01149057|Secondary|C-reactive Protein Level||Baseline; Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies the number participants with available data for specified category.||milligram per deciliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
820897|NCT01149057|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin at Weeks 20, 44, 72 and 96||Baseline; Weeks 20, 44, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies the number participants with available data for specified category.||gram per deciliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
820898|NCT01149057|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, ACR50 and ACR70 Response at Weeks 24, 48, 72, and 96|ACR20 response: ≥20% improvement in TJC; ≥20% improvement in SJC; and ≥20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: Patient Assessment of Pain; Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA); Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PGA); self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ-DI]); and either CRP or ESR. ACR50 response required ≥50% improvement in the above criteria and ACR70 response required ≥70% improvement in the above criteria.|Weeks 24, 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies the number participants with available data for specified category.||percentage of partcipants|||Number
820899|NCT01149057|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SJC At Weeks 24, 48, 72, and 96|66 joints were assessed for swelling and joints are classified as swollen/not swollen giving a total possible swollen joint count score of 0 to 66. A negative change from baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline; Weeks 24, 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Here, 'n' signifies the number of participants with available data at specified timepoints.||swollen joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
820900|NCT01149057|Primary|Change From Baseline in FACIT Fatigue Score at Week 96 in PP Population|The FACIT-Fatigue score was calculated according to a 13-item questionnaire that assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participant's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worst score) to 52 (best score).|Baseline, Week 96|Per Protocol (PP) population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820901|NCT01149057|Primary|Change From Baseline in FACIT Fatigue Score at Week 72 in PP Population|The FACIT-Fatigue score was calculated according to a 13-item questionnaire that assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participant's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worst score) to 52 (best score).|Baseline, Week 72|Per Protocol (PP) population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820902|NCT01149057|Primary|Change From Baseline in FACIT Fatigue Score at Week 48 in PP Population|The FACIT-Fatigue score was calculated according to a 13-item questionnaire that assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participant's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worst score) to 52 (best score).|Baseline, Week 48|Per Protocol (PP) population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820955|NCT01149473|Primary|AUC0-inf of Hydrochlorothiazide(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Hydrochlorothiazide AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820903|NCT01149057|Primary|Change From Baseline in FACIT Fatigue Score at Week 24 in Per Protocol (PP) Population|The FACIT-Fatigue score was calculated according to a 13-item questionnaire that assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participant's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worst score) to 52 (best score).|Baseline, Week 24|Per Protocol (PP) population: all participants who completed the study. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this outcome. Here 'n' signifies the participants with available data for specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820904|NCT01149057|Primary|Change From Baseline in FACIT Fatigue Score at Week 96 in ITT Population|The FACIT-Fatigue score was calculated according to a 13-item questionnaire that assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participant's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worst score) to 52 (best score).|Baseline, Week 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data at specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820905|NCT01149057|Primary|Change From Baseline in FACIT Fatigue Score at Week 72 in ITT Population|The FACIT-Fatigue score was calculated according to a 13-item questionnaire that assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participant's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worst score) to 52 (best score).|Baseline, Week 72|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data at specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820906|NCT01149057|Primary|Change From Baseline in FACIT Fatigue Score at Week 48 in ITT Population|The FACIT-Fatigue score was calculated according to a 13-item questionnaire that assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participant's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worst score) to 52 (best score).|Baseline, Week 48|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data at specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820907|NCT01149057|Secondary|Change From Baseline in TJC At Weeks 24, 48, 72, and 96|68 joints are assessed for tenderness and joints are classified as tender/not tender giving a total possible tender joint count score of 0 to 68. A negative change from baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline; Weeks 24, 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Here, 'n' signifies the number of participants with available data at specified timepoints.||tender joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
820908|NCT01149057|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission and Low Disease Activity According to Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Weeks 24, 48, 72, and 96|CDAI was calculated by a simple numerical sum of tender and swollen joint count (based on 28-joint assessment) and the patient and physician global disease assessment (VAS 0-10 cm). CDAI total score 0-76; higher scores = greater effect due to disease activity. Remission was defined as CDAI score ≤2.8. Low disease activity was defined as CDAI score ≤10.0.|Weeks 24, 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with available data for specified category.||percentage of participants|||Number
820909|NCT01149057|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission and Low Disease Activity According to Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Weeks 24, 48, 72, and 96|SDAI was calculated by a simple numerical sum of tender and swollen joint count (based on a 28-joint assessment), patient and physician global assessment of disease activity (VAS 0-10 centimeter [cm]), and level of CRP. SDAI total score 0-86; higher scores = greater effect due to disease activity. Remission was defined as SDAI score ≤3.3. Low disease activity was defined as SDAI score ≤11.0.|Weeks 24, 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with available data for specified category.||percentage of participants|||Number
820910|NCT01149057|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28 Good or Moderate European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response at Weeks 24, 48, 72 and 96|The DAS28 score was a measure of the participant's disease activity calculated using the TJC [28 joints], SJC [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity (VAS: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity) and the ESR for a total possible score of 0 to approximately 10. In case of missing ESR value, CRP was used to calculate DAS28. Higher scores represented higher disease activity. EULAR Good response: DAS28 ≤3.2 and a change from Baseline <-1.2. EULAR Moderate response: DAS28 greater than (>) 3.2 to less than or equal to (≤) 5.1 or a change from Baseline <-0.6 to greater than or equal to (≥) -1.2.|Weeks 24, 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with available data for specified category.||percentage of participants|||Number
820911|NCT01149057|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission According to DAS28 at Weeks 24, 48, 72, and 96|Remission was defined as DAS28 score <2.6. The DAS28 score was a measure of the participant's disease activity calculated using the TJC [28 joints], SJC [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity (VAS: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity) and the ESR for a total possible score of 0 to approximately 10. In case of missing ESR value, CRP was used to calculate DAS28. Higher scores represented higher disease activity.|Weeks 24, 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with available data for specified category.||percentage of participants|||Number
820912|NCT01149057|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Remission According to Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) at Weeks 24, 48, 72, and 96|Remission was defined as DAS28 score less than (<) 2.6. The DAS28 score was a measure of the participant's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity (visual analog scale [VAS]: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity) and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 0 to approximately 10. In case of missing ESR value, C-Reactive Protein (CRP) was used to calculate DAS28. Higher scores represented higher disease activity.|Weeks 24, 48, 72 and 96|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies the number participants with available data for specified category.||participants|||Number
820913|NCT01149057|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density (BMD) in Lumbar Spine, Total Hip and Femoral Neck Regions at End of Study|BMD was measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and T-scores (a standard deviation [SD] compared with the peak BMD value of an adult aged from 20 to 30 years) were calculated. Osteopenia was defined by a T-score between -1 and -2.5 SD and osteoporosis as a T-score below -2.5 SD, according to the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. T-scores for L1-L4 lumbar spine, total spine, total hip (left), and femoral neck (left) were calculated.|Baseline, End of the study (up to Week 100)|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies the number of participants with available data for specified category.||T-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
820914|NCT01149057|Primary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue Score at Week 24 in Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population|The FACIT-Fatigue score was calculated according to a 13-item questionnaire that assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participant's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worst score) to 52 (best score).|Baseline, Week 24|ITT population. Number of participants analysed=participants with available data for this endpoint. Here, 'n' signifies participants with available data at specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820915|NCT01149148|Primary|Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)|"The Mini–Mental State Examination (MMSE) or Folstein test is a brief 30-point questionnaire test that is used to screen for cognitive impairment. It is also used to estimate the severity of cognitive impairment at a specific time and to follow the course of cognitive changes in an individual over time, thus making it an effective way to document an individual's response to treatment. MMSE = Mini Mental State Exam - measures general orientation and mental status.
Scores on a scale range from 0 - 30. Scores 23 and below are indicative of problems."|3 Months|Not all participants completed 3 month follow up neurocognitive testing.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820916|NCT01149148|Primary|Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)|"The Mini–Mental State Examination (MMSE) or Folstein test is a brief 30-point questionnaire test that is used to screen for cognitive impairment. It is also used to estimate the severity of cognitive impairment at a specific time and to follow the course of cognitive changes in an individual over time, thus making it an effective way to document an individual's response to treatment. MMSE = Mini Mental State Exam - measures general orientation and mental status.
Scores on a scale range from 0 - 30. Scores 23 and below are indicative of problems."|Baseline|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820917|NCT01149421|Secondary|Measurement of LY2189265 Drug Concentration for Pharmacokinetics - Area Under the Concentration Time Curve (AUC)|The population mean estimates and standard deviations were calculated for pharmacokinetic parameters (area under the concentration time curve [AUC] at steady state from time zero to 168 hours after study drug administration). Evaluable pharmacokinetic concentrations from the 4, 8, 12, 16, and 26 weeks timepoints were combined and utilized in a population approach to determine the population mean estimate and standard deviation at steady-state.|4, 8, 12, 16, and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 with evaluable LY2189265 concentration data.||nanograms*hour per liter (ng*h/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820918|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Body Weight|Least Squares (LS) means was calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable body weight data.||kilogram (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820919|NCT01149421|Secondary|Rate of Hypoglycemic Episodes|Hypoglycemic events (HE) were classified as severe (defined as an HE requiring assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions), documented symptomatic (defined as an HE with typical symptoms of hypoglycemia and a blood glucose level of ≤3.9 millimoles per liter [mmol/L]), asymptomatic (defined as an HE without typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured blood glucose of ≤3.9 mmol/L), nocturnal (defined as any HE occurring between bedtime and waking with a measured blood glucose of ≤3.9 mmol/L), or non-nocturnal. Hypoglycemia rate per 30 days was summarized at each visit by treatment group. The rate of hypoglycemia was analyzed using a generalized estimation equations model with a negative binomial distribution and a Logit link. Negative binomial mean was adjusted by treatment, visit, and visit by treatment interaction. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo.||events per participant per 30 days||Standard Deviation|Mean
820920|NCT01149421|Secondary|Anti-LY2189265 Antibodies|LY2189265 anti-drug antibodies (ADA) were assessed at baseline, 16 and 26 weeks, and at the safety follow-up visit 4 weeks after study drug discontinuation (30 weeks). The number of participants with initial postbaseline detection of treatment-emergent (defined as a 4-fold increase in the ADA titer from baseline) anti-drug (LY2189265) ADA at each time point were summarized.|Baseline, 16, 26, and 30 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable anti-drug (LY2189265) antibodies (ADA) data.||participants|||Number
820956|NCT01149473|Primary|AUC0-t of Hydrochlorothiazide(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Hydrochlorothiazide AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820921|NCT01149421|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Cardiovascular Events up to 26 Weeks|Deaths and nonfatal cardiovascular adverse events (AEs) were adjudicated by a committee of physicians with cardiology expertise external to the Sponsor. The nonfatal cardiovascular AEs to be adjudicated include myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, hospitalization for heart failure, coronary interventions (such as coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention), and cerebrovascular events including cerebrovascular accident (stroke) and transient ischemic attack. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo.||participants|||Number
820922|NCT01149421|Secondary|Number of Events of Adjudicated Pancreatitis up to 26 Weeks|The number of adjudicated (by an independent Clinical Endpoint Committee [CEC]) pancreatic events is summarized at 26 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo.||events|||Number
820923|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks on Electrocardiogram Parameters, Fridericia Corrected QT (QTcF) Interval and PR Interval|The QT interval is a measure of the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave and was calculated from electrocardiogram (ECG) data using Fridericia's formula: QTc = QT/RR^0.33. Corrected QT (QTc) is the QT interval corrected for heart rate and RR, which is the interval between two R waves. PR is the interval between the P wave and the QRS complex. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable Fridericia-corrected QT (QTcF) or PR interval change from baseline data.||milliseconds (msec)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820924|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 Weeks in High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (Hs-CRP)||Baseline, 16 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hs-CRP) data.||milligram per liter (mg/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820925|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks on Serum Calcitonin||Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable serum calcitonin data.||picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
820926|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks on Pancreatic Enzymes|Amylase (total and pancreas-derived) and lipase concentrations were measured.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable pancreatic enzyme data.||units per liter||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820927|NCT01149421|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events at 26 Weeks|A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was defined as an event that first occurs or worsens (increases in severity) after baseline regardless of causality or severity. The number of participants with one or more TEAE is summarized cumulatively at 26 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo.||participants|||Number
820928|NCT01149421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) of <7% or ≤6.5%|Percentages of participants who achieved glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels of <7% or ≤6.5% were analyzed with Chi-squared test/Fisher’s exact test.|Baseline and 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) data.||percentage of participants|||Number
820929|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Fasting Blood Glucose (FBG)|Fasting blood glucose (FBG) is a test to determine how much glucose (sugar) is in a blood sample after an overnight fast. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable fasting blood glucose data.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820930|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is a form of hemoglobin that is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) data.||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820931|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Mean Daytime and Nighttime Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP)|Mean daytime and nighttime mean arterial pressure (MAP) was measured by a using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant’s nondominant arm. Ambulatory blood pressure measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable mean arterial pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820957|NCT01149473|Primary|Cmax of Hydrochlorothiazide(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Hydrochlorothiazide Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820958|NCT01149473|Primary|AUC0-inf of Losartan(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821668|NCT01155063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued the Study Medication||Month 0 up to Month 36 or early withdrawal|Data was not analyzed as the study was terminated due to insufficient number of participants enrolled in the study.|||||
820932|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Mean Daytime and Nighttime Pulse Pressure|Mean daytime and nighttime pulse pressure (PP) was measured by using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant’s nondominant arm. Pulse pressure (PP) measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable pulse pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820933|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Mean Daytime, Nighttime, and Clinic Heart Rate (HR)|Daytime and nighttime heart rate (HR) was measured by using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant’s nondominant arm. Heart rate measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension. Clinic HR was measured in the clinic using the Omron HEM 907XL Blood Pressure monitor.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable heart rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820934|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Mean Daytime, Nighttime, and Clinic Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|Mean daytime and nighttime diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was measured by using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant’s nondominant arm. Ambulatory blood pressure measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline was analyzed using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusted by baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension. Clinic DBP was measured in the clinic using the Omron HEM 907XL Blood Pressure monitor.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable diastolic blood pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820935|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Mean Daytime, Nighttime, and Clinic Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|Mean daytime and nighttime systolic blood pressure (SBP) was measured by using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant’s nondominant arm. Ambulatory blood pressure measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension. Clinic SBP was measured in the clinic using the Omron HEM 907XL Blood Pressure monitor.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable systolic blood pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820936|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Mean 24-hour Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP)|Mean 24-hour mean arterial pressure (MAP) was measured by a using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant's nondominant arm. Ambulatory blood pressure measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable mean arterial pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820937|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Mean 24-hour Pulse Pressure|Mean 24-hour pulse pressure (PP) was measured by using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant's nondominant arm. Pulse pressure (PP) measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable pulse pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820938|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Mean 24-Hour Heart Rate (HR)|Mean 24-hour heart rate (HR) was measured by using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant's nondominant arm. Heart rate measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable heart rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821744|NCT01155180|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Body Weight at 6 Months|Body weight was recorded to the nearest 0.1 kg at baseline and at 6 months after randomization. Then the percentage change was calculated.|baseline and 6 months after randomization|||percentage change||Standard Error|Mean
820939|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 16 and 26 Weeks in Mean 24-hour Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|Mean 24-hour diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was measured by using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant's nondominant arm. Ambulatory blood pressure measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline was analyzed using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusted by baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 and 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable diastolic blood pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)]||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820940|NCT01149421|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks in Mean 24-hour Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|Mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure (SBP) was measured by using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant’s nondominant arm. Ambulatory blood pressure measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable systolic blood pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820941|NCT01149421|Primary|Change From Baseline to 16 Weeks in Mean 24-hour Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|Mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure (SBP) was measured by using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device attached to the participant’s nondominant arm. Ambulatory blood pressure measurements were recorded every 20 minutes during the daytime (0700 to 2200 hours) and every 30 minutes during the nighttime hours (2200 to 0700), as preprogrammed into the device. For statistical analyses, diurnal hours were defined as 0800 to 2100 and nocturnal hours were defined as 0000 to 0600. Least Squares (LS) means were calculated using mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) adjusting for baseline, pooled sites, treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, and the stratified variable of diagnosis of hypertension.|Baseline, 16 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Placebo with evaluable blood pressure data.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
820942|NCT01149434|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability of JI-101|Number of patients experiencing a grade 2 or higher Adverse Event related to JI101|2 years|||Participants|||Number
820943|NCT01149434|Primary|Tumor Response in the Ovarian Cancer Cohort|Response Rate determined by the sum of patients achieving complete or partial response to JI-101 as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors|2 years|The intent of this trial was to analyze three different cohorts of patients with different diagnosis. This analysis was conducted with 8 of the enrolled patients that had ovarian disease. The number of patients enrolled on the remaining cohorts were not included in this analysis.||Participants|||Number
820944|NCT01149434|Primary|Progression Free-Survival in the Ovarian Cancer Cohort|progression-free survival at 2 months. We define progression as using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), to detect a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|2 months|The intent of this trial was to analyze three different cohorts of patients with different diagnosis. This analysis was conducted with 8 of the enrolled patients that had ovarian disease. Patients enrolled on the remaining cohorts were excluded in this analysis. Results were calculated using Kaplan-Meier product limit methods.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
820945|NCT01149434|Secondary|Tumor Response|Response Rate determined by the sum of patients achieving complete or partial response to JI-101 as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR|2 years|||participants|||Number
820946|NCT01149434|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability of JI-101|Number of patients experiencing a grade 2 or higher Adverse Event related to JI101|2 years|||participants|||Number
820947|NCT01149434|Primary|Effect of RAD001 on Pharmacokinetics AUC(0-inf) of JI-101|Determine the mean percent change that RAD001 has on the peak concentration as determined by calculating the AUC (0-inf) of JI101 in the presence and absence of RAD001|pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours after dosing (Cycle 1 Day 8 for RAD001 + JI101 and Cycle 1 Day 15 for JI-101 alone|||percentage change||Full Range|Mean
820948|NCT01149434|Primary|Effect of JI 101 on Pharmacokinetics Area Under Curve (AUC) (0-inf) of RAD001|Determine the mean percent change that JI-101 has on the peak concentration as determined by calculating the AUC (0-inf) of RAD001 in the presence and absence of JI-101|pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours after dosing (Cycle 1 Day 1 for RAD001 alone and Cycle 1 Day 8 for RAD001 + JI-101|||percentage change||Full Range|Mean
820949|NCT01149460|Secondary|AUC0-inf (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity) - Acyclovir||Blood samples collected over 24 hour period|Data from all subjects who completed the study were included in the statistical analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820950|NCT01149460|Secondary|AUC0-t (Area Under Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration) - Acyclovir||Blood samples collected over 24 hour period|Data from all subjects who completed the study were included in the statistical analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820951|NCT01149460|Secondary|Cmax (Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma) - Acyclovir||Blood samples collected over 24 hour period|Data from all subjects who completed the study were included in the statistical analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820952|NCT01149460|Primary|AUC0-inf (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity) - Valacyclovir|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-inf|Blood samples collected over 12 hour period|Data from all subjects who completed the study were included in the statistical analysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821745|NCT01155219|Primary|Ocular Tolerance|Response defined as a combination of satisfactory or acceptable effect on IOP and a reduction of at least 20% of the total tolerance score in the worse eye.|Day 84|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
820959|NCT01149473|Primary|AUC0-t of Losartan(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820960|NCT01149473|Primary|Cmax of Losartan(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820961|NCT01149486|Secondary|AUC0-inf of Losartan Carboxy Acid(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for the metabolite Losartan Carboxy Acid.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820962|NCT01149486|Secondary|AUC0-t of Losartan Carboxy Acid(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for the metabolite Losartan Carboxy Acid.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820963|NCT01149486|Secondary|Cmax of Losartan Carboxy Acid(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for the metabolite Losartan Carboxy Acid.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820964|NCT01149486|Primary|AUC0-inf of Hydrochlorothiazide(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Hydrochlorothiazide AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820965|NCT01149486|Primary|AUC0-t of Hydrochlorothiazide(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Hydrochlorothiazide AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820966|NCT01149486|Primary|Cmax of Hydroclorothiazide(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Hydrochlorothiazide Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820967|NCT01149486|Primary|AUC0-inf of Losartan(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820968|NCT01149486|Primary|AUC0-t of Losartan(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820969|NCT01149486|Primary|Cmax of Losartan(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Losartan Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820970|NCT01149512|Secondary|% of Excess Body Weight Loss|the percent of excess body weight loss between Baseline and 1 year the percent of excess body weight loss between Baseline and 2 years the percent of excess body weight loss between Baseline and 3 years|baseline to 1 year, baseline to 2 years, baseline to 3 years|3 not included the same reason as above.||% of excessive weight loss||Standard Deviation|Mean
820971|NCT01149512|Primary|Mean Percentage Total Body Weight Loss|the percent total body weight loss between Baseline and 1 year the percent total body weight loss between Baseline and 2 years the percent total body weight loss between Baseline and 3 years|baseline to 1 year, baseline to 2 years, baseline to 3 years|Three patients’ weight data were not included in the weight loss analysis owing to early removal of band (n = 1) and complication or pregnancy affecting weight (n = 2) before 1-year follow-up. 79 patients reached 2 year follow up time point and 38 patients reached 3 year follow up time point.||% of total body weight loss||Standard Deviation|Mean
820972|NCT01149538|Secondary|Evoked Response Potential - Negative Component Latency|Evoked Response Potential - negative component latency data are included.|Baseline, 6 months, and 9 months|Children with FASD who were administered Evoked Response Potential test and provided usable data (choline and placebo arms)||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
820973|NCT01149538|Secondary|Evoked Response Potentials Microvolts|Evoked response potentials were measured for the memory task. Frontal positive slow-wave potential negative component amplitude data are included.|Baseline, 6 months, and 9 months|Children with FASD who were administered Evoked Response Potential test and provided usable date (choline and placebo arms)||Mircovolts||Standard Deviation|Mean
820974|NCT01149538|Secondary|Elicited Imitation Task Memory|The Elicited Imitation (EI) paradigm (P.J. Bauer, 1989, Dev. Psychology) was used to measure memory in the participants at baseline, 6 months, and 9 months. The measures were items recalled after a delay (delayed items) and pairs of items recalled after a delay (delayed pairs). The sample was split by age in the analysis (young vs. old) as reflected in the outcome data. Outcome data measures included here are the slopes of the regression lines reflecting change over the three timepoints, controlling for immediate memory performance on the EI task.The slopes are given, as opposed to the raw scores, because these were the values used in the growth curve analyses. Details of these analyses are included in Wozniak et al. (2015) AJCN, doi:10.3945/ajcn.114.099168. NOTE that the means presented below represent the simple slopes that estimate the change in task performance (% of items correct) per 6-month unit of time. To estimate change in task performance over 9 months, multiply by 1.5.|Baseline, 6 months, and 9 months|Young choline group (n=17); Young placebo group (n=13); Old choline group (n=14); Old placebo group (n=16).||Slope||Standard Error|Mean
820975|NCT01149538|Primary|Mullen Scales of Early Learning - Early Learning Composite|The Mullen Scales of Early Learning is a measure of global cognitive development and is a primary outcome measure. The Early Learning Composite is the total score for this measure. It is a scaled score with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 (higher scores indicate better global cognitive status; average range is 85-115; Impaired range is 70 or below; full range is typically 50 - 150, although minimum and maximum scores are dependent on age). See the Mullen Scales reference manual for more psychometric details.|Baseline and 9 months|Including those with partial completion (drop-outs and lost-to-followup).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820976|NCT01149538|Primary|Side Effects of Choline Bitartrate|Side effects of choline bitartrate will be monitored by the study physician and the P.I. with physical examinations and telephone contact.|Baseline, 6 months, & 9 months|Children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorders receiving either choline or placebo for 9 months||participants|||Number
820977|NCT01149616|Secondary|Postop Nausea|NRS scale 0-10 for nausea. Zero indicates no nausea, Ten indicates the worst nausea imagined.|24 hours|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
820978|NCT01149616|Secondary|Amount of Postop Narcotic Usage|Patients were requested to record the number of prescribed oral analgesic (oxycodone 5 mg/aceteminophen 325 mg) tablets taken for the first 24 hours following discharge|24 hours|||number of tablets||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
820979|NCT01149616|Primary|Post Operative VAS Pain Scale|Patients were instructed to select a number between zero and ten to indicate the degree of pain they experience (zero being no pain and ten being the worst pain they could imagine). Therefore, ten is worse than zero.|24 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820980|NCT01149655|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS).|The CGAS was developed by Schaffer and colleagues to provide a global measure of severity of disturbance in children and adolescents. The CGAS is a rating scale for evaluating the overall functioning of a participant during a specified time period on a continuum from psychological or psychiatric sickness to health. The CGAS is a valid and reliable tool for rating a child's general level of functioning on a health-illness continuum. CGAS score (range 1-100) was a single item score for rating a child's general level of functioning on a health-illness continuum, with higher scores represented better functioning.|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit.|The ITT data set comprised of participants randomized to period 3. LOCF method was used to impute missing data. Week 1 participants analyzed were 95 and 45.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820981|NCT01149655|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline to Endpoint in PANSS Negative Subscale.|The PANSS consisted of 3 subscales were a total of 30 symptom constructs. For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 indicated (absence of symptoms) and a score of 7 indicated (extremely severe symptoms). The 7 negative symptom constructs were blunted affect, emotional withdrawal, poor rapport, passive apathetic withdrawal, difficulty in abstract thinking, lack of spontaneity and flow of conversation and stereotyped thinking. The PANSS Total Score ranged from 30 (best possible outcome) to 210 (worst possible outcome).|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit.|The ITT data set comprised of participants randomized to period 3. LOCF method was used to impute missing data. Week 1 participants analyzed were 94 and 45.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820982|NCT01149655|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline to Endpoint in PANSS Positive Subscale.|The PANSS consisted of 3 subscales were a total of 30 symptom constructs. For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 indicated (absence of symptoms) and a score of 7 indicated (extremely severe symptoms). The 7 positive symptom constructs were delusions, conceptual disorganization, hallucinatory behavior, excitement, grandiosity, suspiciousness/persecution, and hostility. The PANSS Total Score ranged from 30 (best possible outcome) to 210 (worst possible outcome).|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit.|The ITT data set comprised of participants randomized to period 3. LOCF method was used to impute missing data. Week 1 participants analyzed were 94 and 45.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820983|NCT01149655|Other Pre-specified|Mean CGI-I Score at Endpoint.|Baseline for the double-blind maintenance phase was defined as the last visit with available data in the stabilization phase, and the CGI-I scale was completed prior to or on the first dose date in the double-blind maintenance phase. Response choices included: 0 = not assessed; 1 = very much improved,;2 = much improved; 3 = minimally improved; 4 = no change; 5 = minimally worse; 6 = much worse; and 7 = very much worse.|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit.|The ITT data set comprised of participants randomized to period 3. LOCF method was used to impute missing data. Week 1 participants analyzed were 94 and 45 and Week 2 to Week 52 participants analyzed were 97 and 48.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820984|NCT01149655|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline to Endpoint in CGI-S Score.|"The severity of illness for each participant was rated using the CGI-S scale. To assess CGI-s, the Investigator answered the following question: Considering your total clinical experience with this particular population, how mentally ill is the participant at this time? Response choices included: 0= not assessed; 1= normal, not at all ill; 2= borderline mentally ill; 3= mildly ill; 4= moderately ill; 5= markedly ill; 6= severely ill; and 7= among the most extremely ill participants."|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit.|The ITT data set comprised of participants randomized to period 3. LOCF method was used to impute missing data. Week 1 participants analyzed were 94 and 45 and Week 2 to Week 52 participants analyzed were 97 and 48.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820985|NCT01149655|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline to Endpoint in PANSS Total Score.|The PANSS consisted of 3 subscales with a total of 30 symptom constructs. For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 indicates (absence of symptoms) and a score of 7 indicates (extremely severe symptoms). The symptom constructs for each subscale were positive subscale, negative subscale and general psychopathology subscale. The PANSS Total Score ranged from 30 (best possible outcome) to 210 (worst possible outcome).|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit.|The ITT data set comprised of participants randomized to period 3. LOCF (last observation carried forward) method was used to impute missing data. Week 1 had only 95 and 45 participants analyzed.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820986|NCT01149655|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Due to All Reasons Other Than Sponsor Discontinued Study.|Percentage of participants discontinued due to all reasons other than sponsor discontinued study were noted.|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit|The ITT data set comprised of all participants who were randomized to period 3.||percentage of participants|||Number
820987|NCT01149655|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Had Achieved Remission.|Percentage of participants who had achieved remission, where remission was defined as a score of ≤ 3 on each of the following specific PANSS items, maintained for a period of 6 months: delusions, unusual thought content, hallucinatory behavior, conceptual disorganization, mannerisms/ posturing, blunted affect, social withdrawal, and lack of spontaneity.|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit.|The ITT data set comprised of participants who were randomized to the double-blind treatment. For evaluation of remission, 48 of 98 aripiprazole participants and 19 of 48 placebo participants met the 6 month threshold for remission analysis. Of those, 21 of 48 aripiprazole participants and 8 of 19 placebo participants met criteria for remission.||percentage of participants|||Number
820988|NCT01149655|Secondary|Percentage of Responders in Each Treatment Group.|Percentage of responders in each treatment group (i.e, response defined as meeting stability criteria). Participants stabilized on aripiprazole (trial drug) within the approved dose range of 10 to 30 mg/day and are tolerable based on clinical judgment.|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit|The ITT data set comprised of all participants were randomized to period 3.||percentage of participants|||Number
820989|NCT01149655|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting Exacerbation of Psychotic Symptoms/Impending Relapse Criteria.|Impending relapse was defined as meeting any of the following 5 criteria: 1) CGI-I score of ≥ 5 (minimally worse) and increase in individual PANSS items to a score > 4 with an absolute increase of ≥ 2 on that specific item or absolute increase of ≥ 4 on the combined 4 PANSS items. OR 2) CGI-I score of 6 or 7 (much or very much worse) OR 3) Hospitalization due to worsening of illness OR 4) Any suicidal behavior or answers of “yes” to Questions 4 or 5 on the suicidal ideation section of the C-SSRS OR 5) Violent or aggressive behavior resulting in clinically significant injury.|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit.|The ITT data set comprised of all participants who were randomized to period 3.||percentage of participants|||Number
820990|NCT01149655|Primary|Overall Relapse Rate (in Percent) From Randomization to Exacerbation of Psychotic Symptoms/Impending Relapse.|The primary efficacy variable was overall relapse rate from randomization, as assessed by Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) score ≥5, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores for hostility or uncooperativeness ≥5, or ≥20% increase in PANSS Total Score. Impending relapse was defined as meeting any of the following 5 criteria: 1) CGI-I score of ≥ 5 (minimally worse) and increase in individual PANSS items to a score > 4 with an absolute increase of ≥ 2 on that specific item or absolute increase of ≥ 4 on the combined 4 PANSS items (conceptual disorganization, hallucinatory behavior, suspiciousness, unusual thought content). OR 2) CGI-I score of 6 or 7 (much or very much worse) OR 3) Hospitalization due to worsening of illness OR 4) Any suicidal behavior or answers of “yes” to Questions 4 or 5 on the suicidal ideation section of the C-SSRS OR 5) Violent or aggressive behavior resulting in clinically significant injury.|Baseline to Week 52/End of Phase 3 visit.|For the primary analysis, participants that belonged to the ITT (intent to treat) data set were included in the analysis. Participants who were lost to follow-up or who were still in the study at the end of Week 52 were considered as censored on their date of last efficacy evaluation. The ITT data set comprised participants randomized to period 3.||relapse rate(percentage of participants)|||Number
820991|NCT01149733|Primary|AUC0-inf (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-inf|Blood samples drawn over 60 hour period|||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820992|NCT01149733|Primary|AUC0-t (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on AUC0-t|Blood samples drawn over 60 hour period|||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820993|NCT01149733|Primary|Cmax (Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Cmax|Blood samples drawn over 60 hour period|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
820994|NCT01149759|Secondary|Change in Epidermal Thickness|Change in lesional skin epidermal thickness at week 12 compared to baseline|12 weeks|9 participants were included in this analysis from Rockefeller University, this is a change in the skin thickness at week 12 compared to baseline||micrometer||Standard Deviation|Mean
820995|NCT01149759|Primary|SCORAD Change Score|"SCORAD (SCORing Atopic Dermatitis) is a clinical tool for assessing the severity (i.e., extent, intensity) of atopic dermatitis (AD) as objectively as possible with scores ranging from 0-100. The higher the score indicates more severe AD. For this outcome the SCORAD change score is computed as an absolute number which is comparing improvement in the SCORAD score of participants at week 12 compared to their SCORAD score at baseline."|12 weeks|9 were included in this analysis from Rockefeller University||Change Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
820996|NCT01149772|Primary|Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)|The KCCQ measures the health status of patients with congestive heart failure. The overall score is a mean score scaled from 0 - 100; where 0 represents most severe/limited functioning.|4 month (post treatment), 8 month follow/up, and 12 month follow/up|Only patients randomized for heart failure was required to complete the assessment. There were fewer patients randomized for congestive heart failure (CHF) as compared to COPD.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820997|NCT01149772|Primary|Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire_Dyspnea|The Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) measures the quality of life of patients with a chronic respiratory disease. The subscale Dyspnea looks at how much shortness of breath a patient experiences. The CRQ is a mean score and ranges from 1 - 7, where a higher score = better health.|4 month (post treatment), 8 month follow/up, 12 month follow/up|Only patients experiencing chronic lung problems (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, emphysema, bronchitis, asthma) completed this assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820998|NCT01149772|Primary|Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire_Mastery|The Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) measures the quality of life of patients with a chronic respiratory disease. The subscale Mastery looks at the patient's perceived control over the condition. The CRQ is a mean score and ranges from 1 - 7, where a higher score = better health|4 month (post treatment), 8 month follow/up, 12 month follow/up|Only patients experiencing chronic lung problems (COPD, emphysema, bronchitis, asthma) completed this assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
820999|NCT01149772|Primary|Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire_Fatigue|The Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) measures the quality of life of patients with a chronic respiratory disease. This subscale measures the amount of fatigue patients experience with the condition. The CRQ is a mean score and ranges from 1 - 7, where a higher score = better health.|4 month (post treatment), 8 month follow/up, 12 month follow/up|Only patients experiencing chronic lung problems (COPD, emphysema, bronchitis, asthma) completed this assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821000|NCT01149772|Primary|Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI)|The BAI measures an individual's level of anxiety. The measure is summed and ranges from 0 - 63 (individual item score range 0 -3 per 21 items); were higher scores = worse symptoms.|4 month (post treatment), 8 month follow/up, and 12 month follow/up|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821001|NCT01149772|Primary|Patient Health Questionnaire -9 (PHQ-9)|The PHQ-9 measures an individual's level of depression. The measure is summed and ranges from 0 - 27 (individual item score range 0 - 3 per 9 items); where higher scores = worse symptoms.|4 month (post treatment), 8 month follow/up, and 12 month follow/up|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821002|NCT01149785|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio of Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (MRCmax)|Metabolite to parent molar ratio of maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax).|0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821003|NCT01149785|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio of Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [MRAUC(0-∞)]|Molar ratio of metabolite to parent area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞) [MRAUC(0-∞)].|0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821004|NCT01149785|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio of Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration for Crizotinib Metabolite Ratio (MRAUClast)|Molar ratio of metabolite to parent area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (MRAUClast).|0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821005|NCT01149785|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821006|NCT01149785|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
821007|NCT01149785|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0-∞)] for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)|AUC (0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞). It is obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞) of crizotinib metabolite (PF-06260182).|0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821008|NCT01149785|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast) of crizotinib metabolite (PF-06260182).|0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821009|NCT01149785|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (Vz/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821010|NCT01149785|Secondary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F)|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed.|0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821011|NCT01149785|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821012|NCT01149785|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
821013|NCT01149785|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
821014|NCT01149785|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast).|0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821015|NCT01149785|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0-∞)]|AUC (0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞). It is obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞).|0 (Pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hours (hrs) post crizotinib dose in period 1 and day 0, 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192 and 312 hrs post crizotinib dose in period 2|The pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all participants enrolled and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821016|NCT01149863|Secondary|Number of Patients Who on Day 1 Collected > 10 x 10^6 CD34+ Cells/kg Following Plerixafor Dosing at 1500 Hrs||Within the first 5 days following plerixafor initiation|||Participants|||Number
821017|NCT01149863|Primary|Number of Patients Who Collected ≥ 6 x 10^6 CD34+ Cells by Day 5 (4 Apheresis Sessions) With Plerixafor Administration at 1500.||Within the first 5 days following plerixafor initiation|||Participants|||Number
821018|NCT01149876|Secondary|Change in Rhytides|"Secondary outcome measures will be change in rhytides of baseline compared to week 16.
Rhytides will be assessed clinically using a 0-6 scale where 0 is no lines and 6 is very deep lines."|baseline to week 16|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821019|NCT01149876|Primary|Change in Hyperpigmentation of the Face|"Primary outcome measure will be change in hyperpigmentation of baseline compared to week 16.
Hyperpigmentation will be measured clinically using a 0-6 scale where 0 is no hyperpigmentation and 6 is very severe hyperpigmentation."|baseline to 16 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821020|NCT01150097|Primary|Change in Renal Function|Change in renal function was assessed by the estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) using the abbreviated (4 variables) Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD-4) formula which was developed by the MDRD Study Group and has been validated in patients with chronic kidney disease. The MDRD-4 formula used for the eGFR calculation is: eGFR (mL/min/1.73m^2) = 186.3*(C^-1.154)*(A^-0.203)*G*R, where C is the serum concentration of creatinine (mg/dL), A is age (years), G=0.742 when gender is female, otherwise G=1, R=1.21 when race is black, otherwise R=1.|from months 24 to 36|The analysis population included extension participants who had both post-extension baseline and month 36 values only.||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
821021|NCT01150097|Secondary|Incidence Rate of tBPAR|The number of participants who had a tBPAR was analyzed. tBPAR was defined as a BPAR which was treated with anti-rejection therapy. The RAI is used to score liver biopsies with acute rejection and is composed of 3 categories (portal inflammation, bile duct inflammation damage, and venous endothelial inflammation) each scored on a scale of 0 (absent) to 3 (severe) by a trained pathologist. The total RAI score = the sum of the scores of the 3 categories and ranges from 0 to 9, with a higher score indicating greater rejection.|from months 24 - 36|All extension participants||Participants|||Number
821022|NCT01150097|Primary|Incidence Rate of Composite Efficacy Failure Defined as Graft Loss or Death|The number of participants who experienced graft loss or death was analyzed. The graft was presumed to be lost on the day the patient was newly listed for a liver graft, received a graft re-transplant, or died.|from months 36 - 48|Participants from the everolimus + reduced tacrolimus group and the tacrolimus elimination group||Participants|||Number
821023|NCT01150097|Primary|Incidence Rate of Composite Efficacy Failure Defined as Graft Loss or Death|The number of participants who experienced graft loss or death was analyzed. The graft was presumed to be lost on the day the patient was newly listed for a liver graft, received a graft re-transplant, or died.|from months 24 to 36|All extension participants||Participants|||Number
821024|NCT01150097|Primary|Incidence Rate of Composite Efficacy Failure Defined as Treated Biopsy Proven Acute Rejection (tBPAR ), Graft Loss or Death|The number of participants who experienced composite efficacy failure was analyzed. Composite efficacy failure was defined as treated biopsy proven acute rejection (tBPAR), graft loss, or death. A BPAR was defined as an acute rejection confirmed by biopsy with a Rejection Activity Index (RAI) score ≥ 3. tBPAR was defined as a BPAR which was treated with anti-rejection therapy. The RAI is used to score liver biopsies with acute rejection and is composed of 3 categories (portal inflammation, bile duct inflammation damage, and venous endothelial inflammation) each scored on a scale of 0 (absent) to 3 (severe) by a trained pathologist. The total RAI score = the sum of the scores of the 3 categories and ranges from 0 to 9, with a higher score indicating greater rejection. The graft was presumed to be lost on the day the patient was newly listed for a liver graft, received a graft re-transplant, or died.|from months 36 to 48|Participants from the everolimus + reduced tacrolimus group and the tacrolimus elimination group||Participants|||Number
821025|NCT01150097|Primary|Incidence Rate of Composite Efficacy Failure Defined as Treated Biopsy Proven Acute Rejection (tBPAR ), Graft Loss or Death|The number of participants who experienced composite efficacy failure was analyzed. Composite efficacy failure was defined as treated biopsy proven acute rejection (tBPAR), graft loss, or death. A BPAR was defined as an acute rejection confirmed by biopsy with a Rejection Activity Index (RAI) score ≥ 3. tBPAR was defined as a BPAR which was treated with anti-rejection therapy. The RAI is used to score liver biopsies with acute rejection and is composed of 3 categories (portal inflammation, bile duct inflammation damage, and venous endothelial inflammation) each scored on a scale of 0 (absent) to 3 (severe) by a trained pathologist. The total RAI score = the sum of the scores of the 3 categories and ranges from 0 to 9, with a higher score indicating greater rejection. The graft was presumed to be lost on the day the patient was newly listed for a liver graft, received a graft re-transplant, or died.|from months 24 to 36|All extension participants||Participants|||Number
821026|NCT01150123|Secondary|Geometric Mean Ratios of Serum GBS IgG Antibody Levels By Serotype for Subjects in Enrollment Group 2|GMR was calculated at Day 721 relative to baseline (Day 1) of serotype-specific (Ia, Ib, III) GBS IgG antibody levels across cohorts 3 and 4.|Day 1 and Day 721|Analysis was done on secondary persistence PPS.||Ratios||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821027|NCT01150123|Secondary|Geometric Mean Ratios of Serum GBS IgG Antibody Levels By Serotype for Subjects in Enrollment Group 1|GMR was calculated at Day 721 relative to baseline (Day 1) of serotype-specific (Ia, Ib, III) GBS IgG antibody levels across all cohorts 1 and 2.|Day 1 and Day 721|Analysis was done on secondary persistence PPS||Ratios||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821028|NCT01150123|Secondary|Persistence of Antibody Response in Terms of Geometric Mean Concentrations by Serotype in Subjects in Enrollment Group 2|The persistence of Serotype-specific (Ia, Ib & III) GBS IgG antibody response assessed by comparing ELISA responses in terms of GMCs at day 721 after the first injection for subjects enrolled in cohort 3 and 4.|Day 1 and Day 721|Analysis was done on secondary persistence PPS.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821029|NCT01150123|Secondary|Persistence of Antibody Response in Terms of Geometric Mean Concentrations by Serotype for Subjects in Enrollment Group 1|The persistence of Serotype–specific (Ia, Ib & III) GBS IgG antibody response was assessed by comparing ELISA responses in terms of GMCs at day 721 after the first injection for subjects enrolled in cohorts 1 and 2.|Day 1 and Day 721|Analysis was done on secondary persistence PPS - All the subjects who provided all serum sample results from Baseline (prior to vaccination) through Day 721 within protocol required windows.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821030|NCT01150123|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Unsolicited AE After Receiving GBS Trivalent Vaccine in Enrollment Group 2|Safety was assessed in terms of number of participants with unsolicited AEs after receiving GBS trivalent vaccine, reported from day 1 to day 721 across subjects in cohorts 3 and 4.|Day 1 through Day 721|Analysis was done on Unsolicited Safety Set.||participants|||Number
821031|NCT01150123|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Unsolicited AE After Receiving GBS Trivalent Vaccine in Enrollment Group 1|Safety was assessed in terms of number of participants with unsolicited AEs after receiving GBS trivalent vaccine, reported from day 1 to day 721 across subjects in cohorts 1 and 2.|Day 1 through Day 721|Analysis was done on unsolicited safety set - All subjects in the Exposed Set who provided information about postvaccination unsolicited AEs.||participants|||Number
821032|NCT01150123|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited AEs After Receiving the GBS Trivalent Vaccine in Enrollment Group 2|Safety was assessed in terms of number of participants reporting solicited local and systemic adverse events after receiving GBS vaccine from day 1 to day 7 for subjects in cohorts 3 and 4.|Day 1 to Day 7|Analysis was done on Solicited Safety Set||participants|||Number
821033|NCT01150123|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratios of Serum Group B Streptococcus IgG Antibody Levels By Serotype at Day 361|GMRs relative to baseline (Day 1) of serotype-specific (Ia, Ib, III) GBS IgG antibody levels in healthy subjects for potential use in non-pregnant women, measured at Day 361 across all cohorts.|Day 1 and day 361|Analysis was done on Co-Primary PPS.||Ratios||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821034|NCT01150123|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentrations of Serum Anti-GBS IgG Antibody Levels by Serotype at Day 361|Serotype-specific (Ia, Ib & III) GBS IgG antibody levels in healthy subjects for potential use in non-pregnant woman was assessed in terms of GMCs at Day 361 across all cohorts.|Day 1 and Day 361|Analysis was done on Co-Primary PPS||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821035|NCT01150123|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Specific Thresholds of Antibody Concentrations for Subjects in Enrollment Groups 1 & 2|The percentage of subjects achieving a specific threshold of antibody concentrations of ≥ 0.5 µg/mL at day 361 across all the cohorts for potential use in non-pregnant women.|Day 1 and Day 361|Analysis was done on Co-primary PPS - The subjects who received the vaccine correctly; provided evaluable serum samples at baseline and Day 361; and had no major protocol violations as defined prior to analysis||percentage of subjects|||Number
821036|NCT01150123|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratios of Serum Group B Streptococcus IgG Antibody Levels By Serotype|Geometric mean ratios (GMRs) relative to baseline (Day 1) of serotype-specific (Ia, Ib, III) GBS IgG antibody levels measured at Day 61 for subjects across cohorts 1 and 2.|Day 61/Day 1|Analysis was done on Primary PPS.||Ratios||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821037|NCT01150123|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Adverse Events (AEs) After Receiving the GBS Trivalent Vaccine in Enrollment Group 1|Safety was assessed in terms of number of participants reporting solicited local and systemic adverse events after receiving trivalent GBS vaccine from day 1 to day 7 for subjects across cohorts 1 and 2.|Day 1 to Day 7|Analysis was done on Solicited Safety Set - All subjects in the Exposed Set who provided data on post vaccination local or systemic AEs or other signs of reactogenicity.||participants|||Number
821038|NCT01150123|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentrations of Serum Anti-GBS IgG Antibody Levels by Serotype at Day 61|Serotype–specific (Ia, Ib & III) group B streptococcus (GBS) IgG antibody levels in healthy subjects for potential use in pregnant woman was assessed in terms of Geometric Mean Concentrations (GMCs) at Day 61 in cohorts 1 and 2.|Day 1 and Day 61|Analysis was done on Primary PPS||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821039|NCT01150123|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Specific Thresholds of Antibody Concentrations for Subjects in Enrollment Group 1|The percentage of subjects achieving a specific threshold of antibody concentrations of ≥ 0.5 µg/mL as determined by ELISA at day 61 across cohorts 1 and 2 for potential use in pregnant women.|Day 1 and Day 61|Analysis was done on primary Per Protocol Set (PPS) - The subjects who received the vaccine correctly; provided evaluable serum samples at baseline and Day 61; and had no major protocol violations as defined prior to analysis.||percentage of subjects|||Number
821040|NCT01150357|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Ambulatory Blood Pressure (MABP) in Non-­Dipper Participants at Endpoint (Phase 1)|ABPM was performed over a 24­hour period using an automatic ABPM device to record the blood pressure as per study defined criteria. Non­dippers were defined as those participants in whom there was a decrease in mean night time ABPM less than 10% as compared to average daytime ABPM.|Baseline to endpoint (Week 4 or LOCF)|"Analysis was performed in subset of FAS participants from selected centers who consented to undergo ABPM at baseline and at Week 4 or LOCF. Here, Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome measure at Week 4 or LOCF for each arm, respectively."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
821041|NCT01150357|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Ambulatory Blood Pressure (MABP) in Dipper Participants at Endpoint (Phase 1)|ABPM was performed over a 24­hour period using an automatic ABPM device to record the blood pressure as per study defined criteria. Dippers were defined as those participants in whom there was a decrease in mean night time (6pm – 6am) ABPM more than or equal to (≥ ) 10% as compared to average daytime (6am –6pm) ABPM.|Baseline to endpoint (Week 4 or LOCF)|"Analysis was performed in subset of FAS participants from selected centers who consented to undergo ABPM at baseline and at Week 4 or LOCF. Here, Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome measure at Week 4 or LOCF for each arm, respectively."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
821042|NCT01150357|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Ambulatory Systolic Blood Pressure (MASBP) During Day and Night at Week 4 (Phase 1)|ABPM was performed over a 24­hour period using an automatic ABPM device to record the blood pressure as per study defined criteria. Day time was defined as the average of the hourly means between 6 am and 10 pm while the night time mean was the average of the hourly means between 10 pm and 6 am.|Baseline to Week 4|Analysis was performed in subset of FAS participants from selected centers who consented to undergo ABPM at baseline and at Week 4. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821043|NCT01150357|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Ambulatory Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure (MASBP and MADBP) at Endpoint (Phase 1)|Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM) was performed over a 24­hour period using an automatic ABPM device to record the blood pressure as per study defined criteria. The participants who were selected for this evaluation wore the ABPM device for 24 hours, returned to the clinic upon completion of the 24­hour monitoring period for removal of device and BP assessments. The ABPM device was pre­set to collect readings every 20 minutes. Mean hourly systolic and diastolic blood pressure were calculated for each participant at post dosing 1 – 24 hours.|Baseline to endpoint (Week 4 or LOCF)|Analysis was performed in subset of FAS participants from selected centers who consented to undergo ABPM at baseline and at Week 4 or LOCF. Here 'Number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
821044|NCT01150357|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Positive Treatment Response at Endpoint (Phase 1)|Treatment responders were defined as participants with msSBP less than 95th percentile (for age, gender and height) or a 7 mmHg decrease in msSBP from the baseline.|Baseline to endpoint (Week 4 or LOCF)|"The analysis was performed on the FAS population. Here, Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome measure at Week 4 or LOCF for each arm, respectively."||Percentage of participants|||Number
821045|NCT01150357|Secondary|Change in Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) From Week 4 to Endpoint (Phase 2)|MAP was defined as the average arterial pressure during a single cardiac cycle. The MAP was measured as sum of DBP and one third of difference between SBP and DBP i.e. MAP = DBP+1/3*(SBP-DBP).|Week 4 to endpoint (Week 8 or LOCF)|The analysis was performed on the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
821046|NCT01150357|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) at Endpoint (Phase 1)|MAP was defined as the average arterial pressure during a single cardiac cycle. The MAP was measured as sum of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and one third of difference between systolic blood pressure (SBP) and DBP i.e. MAP = DBP+1/3*(SBP­DBP).|Baseline to endpoint (Week 4 or LOCF)|"The analysis was performed on the FAS population. Here, Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for MAP at Week 4 (or LOCF) for each arm, respectively."||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
821047|NCT01150357|Secondary|Change in Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP) From Week 4 to Endpoint (Phase 2)|Sitting blood pressure was measured using a calibrated standard sphygmomanometer after the participants remained in sitting position for 5 minutes at clinic during the visit. The repeat sitting measurements were made at 1­2 minute intervals and the mean of three sDBP measurements were used as the average sitting office blood pressure for that visit.|Week 4 to endpoint (Week 8 or LOCF)|"The analysis was performed on the FAS population. Here, Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for msDBP at Week 8 or LOCF for each arm, respectively."||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
821048|NCT01150357|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP) at Endpoint (Phase 1)|Sitting blood pressure was measured using a calibrated standard sphygmomanometer after the participants remained in sitting position for 5 minutes at clinic during the visit. The repeat sitting measurements were made at 1­2 minute intervals and the mean of three sDBP measurements were used as the average sitting office blood pressure for that visit.|Baseline to endpoint (Week 4 or LOCF)|"The analysis was performed on the FAS population. Here, Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for msDBP at Week 4 or LOCF for each arm, respectively."||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
821049|NCT01150357|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events From Week 4 to Week 8 (Phase 2)|AEs were defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptom, sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), syndrome or disease which either occurs during study, having been absent at baseline, or, if present at baseline, appears to worsen. SAEs were defined as any untoward medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require (or prolong) hospitalization, cause persistent or significant disability/incapacity, result in congenital anomalies or birth defects, or are other conditions which in judgement of investigators represent significant hazards.|From Week 4 to Week 8|The analysis was performed on the SAF which included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment during phase 2 (week 4 to week 8).||participants|||Number
821050|NCT01150357|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events From Baseline to Week 4 (Phase 1)|Adverse events (AEs) were defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptom, sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), syndrome or disease which either occurs during study, having been absent at baseline, or, if present at baseline, appears to worsen. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were defined as any untoward medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require (or prolong) hospitalization, cause persistent or significant disability/incapacity, result in congenital anomalies or birth defects, or are other conditions which in judgement of investigators represent significant hazards.|Baseline up to Week 4|The analysis was performed on the Safety Sets (SAF), SAF is all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment during phase 1 (baseline to week 4)||participants|||Number
821051|NCT01150357|Primary|Change in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP) From Week 4 to Endpoint (Phase 2)|Sitting blood pressure was measured using a calibrated standard sphygmomanometer after the participants remained in sitting position for 5 minutes at clinic during the visit. The repeat sitting measurements were made at 1­2 minute intervals and the mean of three sSBP measurements were used as the average sitting office blood pressure for that visit.|Week 4 to endpoint (Week 8 or LOCF)|The primary analysis was performed on the FAS population.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
821052|NCT01150357|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP) at Endpoint (Phase 1)|Sitting blood pressure was measured using a calibrated standard sphygmomanometer after the participants remained in sitting position for 5 minutes at clinic during the visit. The repeat sitting measurements were made at 1­2 minute intervals and the mean of three sSBP measurements were used as the average sitting office blood pressure for that visit.|Baseline to endpoint (Week 4 or Last observation carried forward (LOCF))|"The primary analysis was performed on the Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and had at least one post­baseline assessment for primary efficacy. Here, Number of participants analyzed signifies participants evaluable for msSBP at Week 4 or LOCF for each arm, respectively."||millimeter(s) of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Mean
821053|NCT01150409|Primary|Incidence of Hypotension Between Study Days 8 and 14 (Within 7 Days of the Initiation of Study Drug).|Study screening/enrollment stopped due to lack of eligible subjects. No outcome measures were analyzed due to the low enrollment.|Day 14||||||
821054|NCT01150461|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular Mass at 1 Year as Assessed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging.||Baseline and 1 year|||Percentage change in LV mass||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
821055|NCT01150461|Primary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Extent of Left Ventricular Fibrosis at 1 Year as Assessed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging.||Baseline and 1 year|||Percentage change in fibrotic myocardium||Standard Deviation|Mean
821056|NCT01150474|Secondary|Satisfaction With Pain Relief|"Patient satisfaction with pain relief was evaluated 24 hours after surgery using a linear analog satisfaction scale, with 0 being very dissatisfied, and 10 being very satisfied."|Approximately 24 hours following surgery|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821057|NCT01150474|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Used Antiemetic Rescue Medications||First 24 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
821058|NCT01150474|Secondary|Number of Times Antiemetic Rescue Medication Was Used||First 24 hours after surgery|||number of times antiemetics used||Standard Deviation|Mean
821059|NCT01150474|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Vomiting|This information was taken from the medical record.|Within 20 hours of surgery|||participants|||Number
821060|NCT01150474|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Nausea|This information was taken from the medical record.|Approximately 12 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
821061|NCT01150474|Secondary|Narcotic Rescue Medication|Use of all ancillary narcotic medications was taken from the medical record.|For 24 hours following surgery|||mg IV morphine equivalents||Standard Deviation|Mean
821062|NCT01150474|Secondary|Pain at Hour 20|"Pain at 20 hours was recorded using a linear analog pain scale, with 0 being no pain, and 10 being worst pain imaginable."|20 hours after surgery.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821063|NCT01150474|Secondary|Pain at Hour 12|"Pain at 12 hours was recorded using a linear analog pain scale, with 0 being no pain, and 10 being worst pain imaginable."|12 hours after surgery.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821064|NCT01150474|Primary|Pain at Hour 4|"Pain at 4 hours was recorded using a linear analog pain scale, with 0 being no pain, and 10 being worst pain imaginable."|4 hours following surgery|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821065|NCT01150500|Secondary|Clinical Endpoints|Success (device, lesion, procedure), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), target vessel failure (TVF), and stent thrombosis|5 Years||||||
821066|NCT01150500|Secondary|Percent Diameter Stenosis|The value calculated as 100 x (Reference Vessel Diameter(RVD) - Minimum luminal diameter(MLD))/ RVD using the mean values from orthogonal views (when possible) by quantitative coronary angiography(QCA).|Baseline and 9 month|67 lesions in 65 patients were analyzed.||% DS (diameter stenosis)||Standard Deviation|Mean
821067|NCT01150500|Secondary|Minimum Luminal Diameter|The average of two orthogonal views(when possible) of narrowest point within the area of assessment-in lesion, in stent or in segment. minimal luminal diameter is visually estimated during angiography by the investigator; it is measured during quantitative coronary angiography by the Angiographic Core Laboratory.|9 month|67 lesions in 65 patient were analyzed.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
821068|NCT01150500|Secondary|Binary Angiographic Restenosis|Defined as => 50% in-stent diameter stenosis at the follow-up angiogram at 9 month. If an in-stent measurement is not available, the in-lesion diameter was used.|Baseline and 9 month|67 lesions in 65 patients were analysed.||percentage of patient|||Number
821069|NCT01150500|Secondary|Late Lumen Loss|Defined as the difference between the post-procedure immediate minimal lumen diameter (MLD) and the follow-up angiography MLD at 9 month.|Baseline and 9 months|67 Lesions in 65 patients are analysed.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
821070|NCT01150500|Secondary|MACE (Major Adverse Cardiac Event)|Death, myocardial infarction (Q-wave and non-Q-wave), emergent coronary bypass, or clinically-driven repeat target lesion revascularization by percutaneous surgical methods.|Baseline and 9 month|65 patients were analyzed as ITT population||percentage of patient|||Number
821071|NCT01150500|Primary|Target Lesion Failure(TLF)|Target Lesion Failure (TLF) at 9 months post-procedure defined as a composite measure of cardiac death, heart attack attributed to the target vessel (target vessel myocardial infarction), and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR)|9 month|All 65 patients enrolled were analyzed as intent-to-treat (ITT) population and per protocol(PP) population.||percentage of TLF|||Number
821072|NCT01150760|Primary|Intensive Care Unit Length of Stay||Participants were followed up until their hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (included patients who met all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during the patient's hospitalization)||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
821073|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients Discharged to Various Locations|Location of discharge for patients who were admitted to the hospital for their bowel resection from home|Hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (included patients who met all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during the patient's hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821074|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients Who Were Readmitted Within 30 Days of Discharge||Between 0-30 days after hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (included patients who met all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during the patient's hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821075|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients Who Were Readmitted Between 16 and 30 Days After Discharge||Between 16-30 days after hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (included patients who met all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during the patient's hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821076|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients Who Were Readmitted Within 15 Days of Discharge||Within 15 days of discharge from hospitalization for bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (included patients who met all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during the patient's hospitalization)||Percent of partcipants|||Number
821077|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients With In-hospital Other Morbidity|Other morbidity was identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes for disruption of wound, decubitus ulcer, or postoperative complications not elsewhere classified.|Participants were followed up until their hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (Included patients who meet all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during their hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821078|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients With In-hospital Thromboembolic Morbidity|Thromboembolic morbidity was identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes for pulmonary embolism and infarction; arterial embolism and thrombosis or thrombosis of the lower extremities; vascular disorders of the kidney; acute vascular insufficiency of the intestine; or venous thromboembolism.|Participants were followed up until their hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (Included patients who meet all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during their hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821079|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients With In-hospital Infection Morbidity|Infection morbidity was identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes for infection due to central venous catheter; abscess of intestine; peritoneal abscess; sepsis or severe sepsis; infection due to vascular device, implant and graft; urinary tract infection; disruption of internal or external surgical wound; persistent postoperative fistula; or postoperative infection.|Participants were followed up until their hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (Included patients who meet all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during their hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821080|NCT01150760|Secondary|Postoperative Length of Hospital Stay|Calendar day of discharge - calendar day of surgery = postoperative length of stay|Measured from the day after bowel resection to the day of hospital discharge|Modified intent-to-treat (included patients who met all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, received ≥ 3 and ≤ 15 doses of alvimopan [for alvimopan cohort] during the patient's hospitalization, and received parenteral opioid on ≥ 1 postoperative day)||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
821081|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients With In-hospital Pulmonary Morbidity|Pulmonary morbidity was identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes for pneumonia; infectious pneumonia; respiratory complications, pulmonary collapse; acute respiratory failure or edema; pulmonary congestion and hypostasis; pulmonary/respiratory insufficiency after trauma and/or surgery; dyspnea; or respiratory arrest; transfusion related acute lung injury.|Participants were followed up until their hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (Included patients who meet all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during their hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821082|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients With In-hospital Cerebrovascular Morbidity|Cerebrovascular morbidity was identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes for ischemic, thrombotic, embolic or hemorrhagic cerebrovascular accidents; acute but ill-defined cerebrovascular disease; transient cerebral ischemia; syncope; or postoperative cerebrovascular accident.|Participants were followed up until their hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (Included patients who meet all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during their hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821083|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients With In-hospital Cardiovascular Morbidity|Cardiovascular morbidity was identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes for myocardial infarction; other ischemic events; congestive heart failure and shock; arrhythmias; or other cardiovascular events (cardiac complications, peripheral vascular complications).|Participants were followed up until their hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (Included patients who meet all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during their hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821084|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Reported In-hospital Postoperative Gastrointestinal (GI) Morbidity|GI morbidity will be identified using International Classification of Disease 9th Edition Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) diagnosis and procedure codes for paralytic ileus, flatulence, eructation, gas pain, insertion of a nasogastric tube, total parenteral nutrition, peripheral parenteral nutrition, digestive symptom complications, diarrhea following GI surgery, intestinal obstruction, abdominal pain, peritoneal adhesions, unspecified protein-calorie malnutrition, parenteral infusion of concentrated nutritional substances, or enteral infusion of concentrated nutritional substances.|Participants were followed up until their hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (Included patients who meet all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during their hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821085|NCT01150760|Primary|Percentage of Patients Who Died|All-cause|Participants were followed up until their hospital discharge after bowel resection|Intent-to-treat population (Included patients who meet all base population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and had at least 1 administration of alvimopan [for the alvimopan cohort] during their hospitalization)||Percent of participants|||Number
821086|NCT01150903|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With New Diagnosis of Underlying Condition at PDE5i Establishment During the End of Study Period|New diagnosis of underlying condition at PDE5i establishment was defined as any new diagnosis of interest between day 0 (index prescription) and day 91 in participants who received the index prescription between July 1, 2006 and June 30, 2008 for the two-years period combined. Diagnoses of interest were coded and categorized in to vasculogenic, urologic, neurogenic, hormonal, drug induced and psychogenic disorders.|Up to 2 years (End of study period - July 2006 to June 2008)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who received an index PDE5i prescription (sildenafil, tadalafil or vardenafil) during the study period (target population). Last observation carried forward method was used. Here, the 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
821087|NCT01150903|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Underlying Condition at PDE5i Establishment During the End of Study Period|Underlying condition at PDE5i market introduction was defined as any diagnosis of interest until day -1 in participants who received the index prescription between July 1, 2006 and June 30, 2008 for the two years period combined. Diagnoses of interest were coded and categorized in to vasculogenic, urologic, neurogenic, hormonal, drug induced and psychogenic disorders.|Up to 2 years (End of study period - July 2006 to June 2008)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who received an index PDE5i prescription (sildenafil, tadalafil or vardenafil) during the study period (target population). Last observation carried forward method was used. Here, the 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
821088|NCT01150903|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With New Diagnosis of Underlying Condition at PDE5i Market Introduction During the Early Study Period|New diagnosis of underlying condition at PDE5i market introduction was defined as any new diagnosis of interest until day -1 in participants who received the index prescription between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2001 for the three years period combined. Diagnoses of interest were coded and categorized in to vasculogenic, urologic, neurogenic, hormonal, drug induced and psychogenic disorders.|Up to 3 years (Early study period - January 1999 to December 2001)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who received an index PDE5i prescription (sildenafil, tadalafil or vardenafil) during the study period (target population). Last observation carried forward method was used. Here, the 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
821089|NCT01150903|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Underlying Condition at PDE5i Market Introduction During the Early Study Period|Underlying condition at PDE5i market introduction was defined as any diagnosis of interest until day -1 in participants who received the index prescription between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2001 for the three years period combined. Diagnoses of interest were coded and categorized in to vasculogenic, urologic, neurogenic, hormonal, drug induced and psychogenic disorders.|Up to 3 years (Early study period - January 1999 to December 2001)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who received an index PDE5i prescription (sildenafil, tadalafil or vardenafil) during the study period (target population). Last observation carried forward method was used. Here, the 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
821090|NCT01150903|Primary|Percentage of Participants With New Diagnosis of Underlying Condition Between Day 366 and Day 457 Post the Index PDE5i Prescription|New diagnosis of underlying condition was defined as any new diagnosis of interest recorded in the relevant time period. Diagnoses of interest were coded and categorized in to vasculogenic, urologic, neurogenic, hormonal, drug induced and psychogenic disorders.|Day 366 up to Day 457 post index prescription|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who received an index PDE5i prescription (sildenafil, tadalafil or vardenafil) during the study period (target population). Last observation carried forward method was used.||Percentage of participants|||Number
821091|NCT01150903|Primary|Percentage of Participants With New Diagnosis of Underlying Condition Between Day -92 and Day -1 Prior to the Index PDE5i Prescription|New diagnosis of underlying condition was defined as any new diagnosis of interest recorded in the relevant time period. Diagnoses of interest were coded and categorized in to vasculogenic, urologic, neurogenic, hormonal, drug induced and psychogenic disorders.|Day -92 up to Day -1 of index prescription|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who received an index PDE5i prescription (sildenafil, tadalafil or vardenafil) during the study period (target population). Last observation carried forward method was used.||Percentage of participants|||Number
821092|NCT01150903|Primary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With New Diagnosis of Underlying Condition Between Index PDE5i Prescription (Day 0) and Day 91|New diagnosis of underlying condition at prescription was defined as any new diagnosis of interest recorded in the relevant time period. Diagnoses of interest were coded and categorized in to vasculogenic, urologic, neurogenic, hormonal, drug induced and psychogenic disorders.|Day 0 to Day 91 post index prescription|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who received an index PDE5i prescription (sildenafil, tadalafil or vardenafil) during the study period (target population) and age-matched participants without any PDE5i prescription during the study period (control population). Last observation carried forward method was used.||Percentage of participants|||Number
821093|NCT01150903|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Underlying Condition Until Day -1 of the Index PDE5i Prescription|Underlying conditions were defined as any diagnosis of interest recorded in the relevant time period. Diagnoses of interest were coded and categorized in to vasculogenic, urologic, neurogenic, hormonal, drug induced and psychogenic disorders.|Day -92 up to Day -1 of index prescription|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who received an index PDE5i prescription (sildenafil, tadalafil or vardenafil) during the study period (target population) and age-matched participants without any PDE5i prescription during the study period (control population). Last observation carried forward method was used.||Percentage of participants|||Number
821094|NCT01150981|Secondary|Serum Adiponectin|Adiponectin concentrations in serum were measured in ng/ml, in both arms at baseline and at 8 weeks, i.e. 2 weeks after stopping drug or placebo treatment|8 weeks|||ng/ml||Standard Error|Mean
821121|NCT01151189|Secondary|CD4+ Lymphocyte Counts Before and After Administration of MVA85A/AERAS-485 Compared to Placebo in ART+ Subjects||Up to 6 months post second vaccination.|"Safety:
All randomized ART positive subjects who received a dose of study vaccine, based on actual treatment received."||cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821095|NCT01150981|Primary|Adipose Tissue Capillary Sprout Formation|Adipose tissue collected at 8 weeks was cut into ~1mm pieces which were embedded in individual wells of a 96 well plate containing growth factor depleted Matrigel. Wells were filled with media supplemented with endothelial growth factors, replaced every second day. Values for each patient are expressed as the difference in the average number of capillary branches (sprouts) formed by each of approximately 50 explants between day 14 and day 7. The number of branches forming on the periphery (defined as at least three cells in a branch structure) was counted by two investigators at day 7 and 14.|8 weeks|The number of subjects was based on the power of calculations in being able to demonstrate a difference from baseline in fat tissue microvasculature, change in HOMA2 and serum adiponectin after 6 weeks of rosiglitazone intake in all groups.||number of capillary sprouts||Standard Deviation|Mean
821096|NCT01151020|Primary|Patients With Device Failures|Device failure is defined as: Technical failure (inability to access or deploy the Zenith® TX2® Low Profile TAA Endovascular Graft or loss of patency at the time of deployment completion), or any of the following: type I or type III endoleaks requiring re-intervention, aneurysm rupture or conversion to open surgical repair, aneurysm enlargement greater than 0.5 cm.|12 months|||participants|||Number
821097|NCT01151020|Primary|Patients With Major Adverse Events (MAE)|"Major adverse event is defined as:
All-cause death; Q-wave MI; cardiac event involving arrest, resuscitation, or balloon pump; ventilation > 72 hours or re-intubation; pulmonary event requiring tracheostomy or chest tube; renal failure requiring permanent dialysis, hemofiltration, or kidney transplant in a patient with a normal pre-procedure serum creatinine level; bowel resection; stroke; paralysis; amputation involving more than toes; aneurysm or vessel leak requiring re-operation; deep vein thrombosis requiring surgical or lytic therapy; pulmonary embolism involving hemodynamic instability or surgery; coagulopathy requiring surgery; or wound complication requiring return to the operating room."|30 days|1 patient had a stroke and required ventilation >72 hours/reintubation.||participants|||Number
821098|NCT01151046|Secondary|Overall Survival|To determine whether MM-121 + exemestane is more effective than placebo + exemestane in prolonging overall survival. This was a time-to-event analysis of time from first dose to date of death.|Time from first dose to date of death, over approximately 2 years|||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821099|NCT01151046|Post-Hoc|To Explore the Utility of an EGFR Family Receptor-ligand (Heregulin, HRG) as a Predictor of Response to MM-121 and /or Exemestane in Formalin Fixed (FFPE) Tumor Samples|Fresh tumor samples were obtained from patients prior to enrollment and formalin-fixed for analysis. Samples were analyzed using RT-PCR for the expression of the biomarker, heregulin. Progression-free survival was assessed using RECIST v 1.1 to determine whether patients whose tumors express HRG have a lower PFS than those whose tumors do not express HRG, and to assess whether the addition of MM-121 to exemestane can increase PFS in HRG-high patients.|Time from first dose to date of progression, the longest time frame of 79.1 weeks|Patients with available tissue for RT-PCR analysis||months PFS||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821100|NCT01151046|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|"To determine whether MM-121 + exemestane was more effective than placebo + exemestane in prolonging progression-free survival. PFS was a time to event measure, and progression of disease is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. Progression free survival was defined as the number of months from the date of randomization to the date of death or progression. If neither death nor progression was observed during the study, PFS data was censored at the last non-progressive disease valid tumor assessment unless the patient was discontinued due to symptomatic deterioration. If this occurred, the patient was counted as having progressive disease (PD)."|Time from first dose to date of progression, the longest time frame of 79.1 weeks|||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821101|NCT01151085|Secondary|Number of Participants That Responded to Voriconazole Treatment -Severity of Infections.|Number of participants that responded to voriconazole to determine whether severity of infections(mild, moderate or severe) is significant risk factor.|16 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
821102|NCT01151085|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Past History.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events of Voriconazole to determine whether with or without Past History is significant risk factor.|16 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
821103|NCT01151085|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Severity of Infections.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events of Voriconazole to determine whether severity of infections(mild, moderate or severe) is significant risk factor.|16 weeks|||participants|||Number
821104|NCT01151085|Secondary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Gender.|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events of Voriconazole to determine whether male or female is significant risk factor.|16 weeks|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
821105|NCT01151085|Secondary|Number of Unlisted Treatment Related Adverse Events in Japanese Package Insert.|Adverse events mean all unfavorable events that occur in participants after administration of Voriconazole, irrespective of causal relationship to Voriconazole (including clinically problematic abnormal changes in laboratory test values). Number of Treatment Related Adverse Events were evaluated in company with the causal relationship to Voriconazole. Unlisted treatment related adverse events were confirmed with listed adverse drug reaction in Japanese package insert.|16 weeks|No statistical analysis provided for the number of the unlisted treatment related adverse events in Japanese Package Insert.||events|||Number
821106|NCT01151085|Primary|Number of Participants That Responded to Voriconazole Treatment.|The primary endpoint was the efficacy ratio (number of effective cases/number of evaluable cases for efficacy assessment) among the cohort comprising the subjects for efficacy analysis.|16 weeks|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
829371|NCT01226706|Secondary|Frequency of Participants With Urinary Tract Infections From Baseline to 6 Months|Frequency of particiapnts with urinary tract infections from baseline to 6 month-follow-up|Baseline to 6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
821107|NCT01151085|Primary|Number of Participants With the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events.|Adverse events mean all unfavorable events that occur in participants after administration of Voriconazole, irrespective of causal relationship to Voriconazole (including clinically problematic abnormal changes in laboratory test values). Treatment related Adverse Events were evaluated in company with the causal relationship to Voriconazole.|16 weeks|No statistical analysis provided for the frequency of treatment related adverse events.||participants|||Number
821108|NCT01151098|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) as a Measure of Safety.|Safety was assessed using reports of all new adverse events (AEs) that occurred after the first application of a patch during the extension phase were recorded.|28 weeks|The Extension Safety population (N = 189) includes all subjects who were exposed to BTDS during the Open-label Extension Phase and provided at least 1 valid safety assessment after exposure to BTDS during the Open-label Extension Phase.||participants|||Number
821109|NCT01151137|Other Pre-specified|Overview of Adverse Events [AE]|AE are any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, syndrome, or illness observed by the investigator or reported by the participant during the study.|from first study drug intake up to 10 days after the last study drug intake|Safety population: all randomized and treated participants. Participants were considered according to the treatment actually received. Consequently the participant randomized to the placebo group who received Dronedarone was included in the Dronedarone group.||participants|||Number
821110|NCT01151137|Other Pre-specified|Overview of Cardiovascular Events||From randomization up to the CSED which occurred at study termination (maximum follow-up of 1 year)|Intent-to-treat population as previously defined||participants|||Number
821111|NCT01151137|Secondary|Time to Cardiovascular Death (Cumulative Incidence Function)|"Time to cardiovascular death was defined as the time from randomization to the death.
Cumulative incidence function in each treatment group was calculated using non-parametric Kaplan-Meier estimate.
95% confidence interval was computed at each time-point using Greenwood's variance estimation."|From randomization up to the CSED which occurred at study termination (maximum follow-up of 1 year)|Intent-to-treat population as previously defined||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821112|NCT01151137|Secondary|Deaths|Deaths were classified according to the primary cause of death.|From randomization up to the CSED which occurred at study termination (maximum follow-up of 1 year)|Intent-to-treat population as previously defined||participants|||Number
821113|NCT01151137|Primary|Time to Second Co-primary Outcome (Cumulative Incidence Function)|"Time to second co-primary outcome was defined as the time from randomization to the first event among unscheduled cardiovascular hospitalization or death from any cause.
Cumulative incidence function in each treatment group was calculated using non-parametric Kaplan-Meier estimate.
95% confidence interval was computed at each time-point using Greenwood’s variance estimation."|From randomization up to the CSED which occurred at study termination (maximum follow-up of 1 year)|Intent-to-treat population as previously defined||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821114|NCT01151137|Primary|Time to First Co-primary Outcome (Cumulative Incidence Function)|"Time to first co-primary outcome was defined as the time from randomization to the first event among stroke, systemic arterial embolism, MI or cardiovascular death.
Cumulative incidence function in each treatment group was calculated using non-parametric Kaplan-Meier estimate.
95% confidence interval was computed at each time-point using Greenwood’s variance estimation."|From randomization up to the CSED which occurred at study termination (maximum follow-up of 1 year)|Intent-to-treat population as previously defined||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821115|NCT01151137|Primary|Overview of the Two Co-primary Outcomes|"First co-primary outcome was defined as the first event among stroke, systemic arterial embolism, Myocardial Infarctions [MI], or cardiovascular death.
Second co-primary outcome was defined as the first event among unscheduled cardiovascular hospitalization or death from any cause.
Both co-primary outcomes were determined based on the central review and adjudication by a blinded Adjudication Committee of all reported deaths (from any cause), MI, systemic arterial embolisms, strokes, Transient Ischemic Attacks [TIA], Heart Failure hospitalization and unplanned hospitalisations for cardiovascular cause."|From randomization up to the CSED which occurred at study termination (maximum follow-up of 1 year)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized participants considered in the treatment group to which they were randomized regardless of the treatment they actually received||participants|||Number
821116|NCT01151189|Secondary|QuantiFERON (QFN) Conversion Rate in MVA85A/AERAS-485 Recipients Compared to Control Subjects Without a Diagnosis of Tuberculosis During the Trial.||For at least 6 months post second vaccination up to 33 months total follow-up.|"Per protocol:
All randomized subjects who received a dose of study vaccine and had no major protocol deviations, were still ongoing in the study 28 days after Study Day 0, and did not have TB diagnosed within 28 days after Study Day 0 (QFT negative at baseline subgroup)."||participants who converted|||Number
821117|NCT01151189|Secondary|Immunogenicity of MVA85A/AERAS-485 Compared to Placebo as Described by Flow Cytometric Intracellular Cytokine Staining (ICS) of CD4+ and CD8+ T Cells After Stimulation With a Peptide Pool of Mycobacterial Antigens.|The antigen-specific negative control-subtracted response for any cytokine (Interferon gamma [INFγ] , Interleukin 2 [IL2], Interleukin 17 [IL17] and tumor necrosis factor [TNF]).|7 days post second vaccination.|First 70 patients enrolled who also had pre-vaccination results available were analyzed.||Percent responding TCells||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821118|NCT01151189|Secondary|Counts of Spot-forming Units After Stimulation With AG85A Peptide Pool.|Immunogenicity of MVA85A/AERAS-485 compared to placebo as described by the ex vivo interferon (IFN)-γ enzyme linked immunospot (ELISpot).|28 days post second vaccination.|First 70 patients enrolled who also had pre-vaccination results available were analyzed.||SFU - background/10^6 PBMC||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821119|NCT01151189|Secondary|HIV-1 Viral Load Before and After Administration of MVA85A/AERAS-485 Compared to Placebo in ART+ Participants.||Up tp 6 months post second vaccination|"Safety:
All randomized ART + subjects who received a dose of study vaccine, based on actual treatment received."||copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821120|NCT01151189|Secondary|HIV-1 Viral Load Before and After Administration of MVA85A/AERAS-485 Compared to Placebo in ART - Participants||Up to 6 months post second vaccination.|"Safety:
All randomized ART - subjects who received a dose of study vaccine, based on actual treatment received."||copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
829372|NCT01226706|Secondary|Frequency of Participants Needing Self-catheterization From Baseline to 6 Month Follow-up|Frequency of participants needing self-catheterization from baseline to 6 month follow-up.|Baseline to 6 months|||Participants|||Number
821122|NCT01151189|Secondary|CD4+ Lymphocyte Counts Before and After Administration of MVA85A/AERAS-485 Compared to Placebo in Anti-retroviral Therapy Negative (ART -)Subjects||Up to 6 months post second vaccination.|"Safety:
All randomized ART negative subjects who received a dose of study vaccine, based on actual treatment received."||cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821123|NCT01151189|Secondary|Number of TB Cases|Efficacy of MVA85A/AERAS-485 in the prevention of TB disease compared to control subjects who received placebo in HIV-infected, African adult subjects without active TB disease.|For at least 6 months post second vaccination up to 33 months total follow-up.|"Per protocol:
All randomized subjects who received a dose of study vaccine and had no major protocol deviations, were still ongoing in the study 28 days after Study Day 0, and did not have TB diagnosed within 28 days after Study Day 0."||participants with TB|||Number
821124|NCT01151189|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events|The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the safety of MVA85A/AERAS-485 compared to placebo in HIV-infected, African adult subjects without active TB disease.|Adverse Events (AEs) are recorded for 28 days post vaccination, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) for at least 6 months post second vaccination.|"Safety:
All randomized subjects who received a dose of study vaccine, based on actual treatment received."||percentage of participants with an AE|||Number
821125|NCT01151215|Secondary|Compare the Overall Survival in Patients Treated With AZD8931 in Combination With Anastrozole Versus Anastrozole Alone|Time from the date of randomization to the date of death (by any cause)|Following progression, patients were contacted at 12 weekly intervals until data cut-off at 31 August 2012 to determine survival status|Full Analysis Set (all participants randomized, irrespective of whether treatment was received). Participants are analysed according to the treatment group they were randomized to.||Months|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
821126|NCT01151215|Primary|Progression Free Survival as Evaluated by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1|Time from the date of randomization until the date of objective disease progression (as per RECIST 1.1) or the date of death (by any cause in the absence of progression). Disease progression is defined using RECIST 1.1 as >=20% increase in the sum of longest diameters of target lesions and an absolute increase of >=5mm, taking as reference the smallest sum of longest diameters of target lesions since study start, or unequivocal progression in non-target lesions, or appearance of any new lesions.|Tumour assessment by RECIST 1.1 every 12 weeks until data cut-off at 31 August 2012|Full Analysis Set (all participants randomized, irrespective of whether treatment was received). Participants are analysed according to the treatment group they were randomized to.||Months|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
821127|NCT01151280|Secondary|Time to Stent Occlusion|"Evidence of stent occlusion
stent occlusion was assessed during the stent indwell period (from stent placement procedure through the stent removal procedure. 3 months according to protocol). Subjects received liver function tests at the 48 hour, Week 1, Month 1, and Month 3 stent indwell follow-up visits and were also asked if they were experiencing biliary obstructive symptoms at each visit. If stent occlusion was suspected, imaging and/or endoscopic intervention was performed. One subject experienced stent occlusion at 68 days post stent placement. Time to event data was not generated as not enough events occurred to calculate medial time to event data."|mean time from stent placement to stent removal for all 10 patients was 91.3 days.|"All participants were included for analysis.
1/10 subjects experienced stent occlusion at 68 days post stent placement. Mean time to event data was not calculated as only 1 stent occlusion occurred in 10 subjects."||days|||Number
821128|NCT01151280|Secondary|Re-intervention Occurrence|Evaluation of the occurrence of re-intervention. Re-intervention is defined as any type of endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical procedure to improve biliary drainage during stent indwell or through 6 months of follow-up after stent removal.|6 months post stent removal|All participants were included for analysis.||participants|||Number
821129|NCT01151280|Secondary|Effectiveness of Stent at 6 Months|"Evaluation of effectiveness of the stent by assessing for resolution of stricture at 6 months as determined by cholangiogram.
Effectiveness is defined as the absence of biliary obstructive symptoms after receiving a WallFlex stent.
Subjects received liver function tests at the 1 Month and 6 Month post stent removal follow-up visits and were also assessed for biliary obstructive symptoms."|From stent removal through 6 months post stent removal follow-up.|Effectiveness was assessed in 9 participants that had stricture resolution at the time of stent removal. 1 participant did not have resolution at removal and therefore could not be assessed in the post stent removal follow-up period.||participants|||Number
821130|NCT01151280|Secondary|Technical Success of Stent Placement|Evaluation of technical success of the stent placement defined as the ability to deploy the stent in satisfactory position across the stricture as determined by cholangiogram.|At stent placement (Day 1)|All participants were included for analysis.||participants|||Number
821131|NCT01151280|Secondary|Stent Removability|Stent removability is measured as the ability to successfully remove the stent at initial placement in case of inadequate stent placement, during the stent indwell period in case of stent failure, or at the end of indwell without any clinically significant complications or technical difficulties. A clinically significant complication is defined as a medical event that requires an intervention.|At 3 months (per protocol removal) or early removal|All participants were included for analysis.||participants|||Number
821132|NCT01151280|Secondary|Safety|"Safety is being measured by the occurrence, severity, device- and procedure-relatedness of adverse events during stent placement, during stent indwell, at the time of stent removal, and after stent removal.
Unit of measure will be the actual number of adverse events that occurred."|From enrollment through end of study.|All participants were included for analysis.||adverse events|||Number
821133|NCT01151280|Primary|Stricture Resolution at the Time of Stent Removal.|Stricture resolution is assessed at the time of stent removal. Stricture resolution is confirmed by cholangiogram and/or balloon sweep of the biliary duct. Stent removal can be per-protocol (3 months indwell) or early.|At 3 months (per protocol removal) or at early removal.|All participants were included for analysis.||participants|||Number
821134|NCT01151345|Primary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
829373|NCT01226706|Secondary|Frequency of Urinary Tract Infections From Baseline to 6 Months|Frequency of urinary tract infections from baseline to 6 month-follow-up|Baseline to 6 months|||number of occurences|||Number
821135|NCT01151345|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
821136|NCT01151345|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821137|NCT01151345|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0-∞)]|AUC (0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞). It is obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞).|0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 hours post dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821138|NCT01151345|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration [AUC (0-t)]|AUC (0-t)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (0-t)|0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 hours post dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821139|NCT01151371|Primary|Signs of Limbal Hyperemia Narafilcon B v. Lotrafilcon B|Redness scale of 0 to 4, where 0=None, and 4=Severe.|After 4 Weeks|||units on a scale|eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
821140|NCT01151371|Secondary|Subjective Rating of Initial Comfort Narafilcon B v. Lotrafilcon B|Comfort immediately after the lens is put on the eye. Scale of 1 to 5, where 1=poor comfort, 5=excellent comfort.|After 4 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
821141|NCT01151371|Secondary|Subjective Rating of End of Day Comfort Narafilcon B v. Lotrafilcon B|Scale of 1 to 5, where 1=poor comfort and 5=excellent comfort|After 4 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
821142|NCT01151371|Secondary|Subjective Rating of Overall Ease of Lens Handling Narafilcon B v. Lotrafilcon B|Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|After 4 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821143|NCT01151371|Secondary|Signs of Inferior Corneal Staining Narafilcon B v. Lotrafilcon B|Scale of 0 to 3, where 0=none and 3=severe staining.|After 4 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821144|NCT01151371|Secondary|Subjective Rating of Initial Comfort Narafilcon B v. Nelfilcon A|Comfort immediately after the lens is put on the eye. Scale of 1 to 5, where 1=poor comfort and 5=excellent comfort.|After 1 Week|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
821145|NCT01151371|Secondary|Subjective Rating of End of Day Comfort Narafilcon B v. Nelfilcon A|Scale of 1 to 5, where 1=Poor comfort and 5=Excellent comfort|After 1 Week|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
821146|NCT01151371|Secondary|Subjective Rating of Overall Ease of Lens Handling Narafilcon B v Nelfilcon A|Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|After 1 Week|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821147|NCT01151371|Secondary|Signs of Inferior Corneal Staining Narafilcon B v. Nelfilcon A|Standard scale of 0 to 3 where 0=None, 3=Severe staining|After 1 Week|||units on a scale|eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
821148|NCT01151371|Primary|Subjective Rating of Overall Comfort Narafilcon B v. Lotrafilcon B|Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|After 4 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821149|NCT01151371|Primary|Signs of Limbal Hyperemia Narafilcon B v. Nelfilcon A|Redness scale of 0 to 4, where 0=None, 4=Severe redness|After 1 Week|||Units on a scale|eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
821150|NCT01151371|Primary|Overall Comfort Narafilcon B v. Nelfilcon A|Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|After 1 week|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821151|NCT01151410|Secondary|Change in Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) (mmHg) From Baseline to End of Study|MAP was defined as the average arterial pressure during a single cardiac cycle. The MAP was measured as sum of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and one third of difference between systolic blood pressure (SBP) and DBP i.e. MAP = DBP+1/3*(SBP-­DBP).|Baseline to end of study (Week 52 or LOCF)|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients for this trial||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821152|NCT01151410|Secondary|Change in Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP) From Baseline to End of Study|Sitting blood pressure was measured using a calibrated standard sphygmomanometer after the participants remained in sitting position for 5 minutes at clinic during the visit. The repeat sitting measurements were made at 2 to 3 minute intervals and the mean of three sDBP measurements were used as the average sitting office blood pressure for that visit.|Baseline - end of study (Week 52 or Last observation carried forward (LOCF)|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients for this trial||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821171|NCT01151436|Secondary|PERIORBITAL LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|3 MONTHS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821153|NCT01151410|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP) at to End of Study|Sitting blood pressure was measured using a calibrated standard sphygmomanometer after the participants remained in sitting position for 5 minutes at clinic during the visit. The repeat sitting measurements were made at 2 to 3 minute intervals and the mean of three sSBP measurements were used as the average sitting office blood pressure for that visit.|Baseline - end of study (Week 52 or Last observation carried forward (LOCF)|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients for this trial||millimeter(s) of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821154|NCT01151436|Secondary|LIP ENHANCEMENT ASSESSMENT|"Lip fullness grading scale score:
0: very thin lip
thin lip
moderately thick lip
thick lip
full lip"|6 MONTHS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821155|NCT01151436|Secondary|LIP ENHANCEMENT ASSESSMENT|"Lip fullness grading scale score:
0: very thin lip
thin lip
moderately thick lip
thick lip
full lip"|3 MONTHS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821156|NCT01151436|Secondary|LIP ENHANCEMENT ASSESSMENT|"Lip fullness grading scale score:
0: very thin lip
thin lip
moderately thick lip
thick lip
full lip"|3 WEEKS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821157|NCT01151436|Secondary|LIP ENHANCEMENT ASSESSMENT|"Lip fullness grading scale score:
0: very thin lip
thin lip
moderately thick lip
thick lip
full lip"|baseline|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821158|NCT01151436|Secondary|CHEEK FOLDS SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|6 MONTHS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821159|NCT01151436|Secondary|CHEEK FOLDS SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|3 MONTHS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821160|NCT01151436|Secondary|CHEEK FOLDS SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|3 WEEKS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821161|NCT01151436|Secondary|CHEEK FOLDS SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|BASELINE|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821162|NCT01151436|Secondary|UPPER LIP LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|6 MONTHS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821163|NCT01151436|Secondary|UPPER LIP LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|3 MONTHS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821164|NCT01151436|Secondary|UPPER LIP LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|3 WEEKS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821165|NCT01151436|Secondary|UPPER LIP LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|BASELINE|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821166|NCT01151436|Secondary|MARIONETTE LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|6 MONTHS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821167|NCT01151436|Secondary|MARIONETTE LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|3 MONTHS AFTER LAST INJECTION|ININTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821168|NCT01151436|Secondary|MARIONETTE LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|3 WEEKS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821169|NCT01151436|Secondary|MARIONETTE LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|BASELINE|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821170|NCT01151436|Secondary|PERIORBITAL LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|6 MONTHS AFTER LAST INJECTION|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821746|NCT01155284|Secondary|2 Hour C-peptide AUC in Response to MMTT|Blood samples for C-peptide were collected at baseline (pre-meal) and 15, 30, 60, 90, and 120 minutes post-meal.|Month 6|Of the 70 subjects randomized, 58 completed treatment and analysis.||pmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821172|NCT01151436|Secondary|PERIORBITAL LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|3 weeks after last injection|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821173|NCT01151436|Secondary|PERIORBITAL LINES SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|baseline|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821174|NCT01151436|Secondary|NASOLABIAL FOLDS SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|6 months after last injection|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
821175|NCT01151436|Secondary|NASOLABIAL FOLDS SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|3 months after last injection|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821176|NCT01151436|Secondary|NASOLABIAL FOLDS SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|3 weeks after last injection|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821177|NCT01151436|Primary|Full Face Global Aesthetic Improvement|"Global aesthetic improvement scale score from baseline:
-1: worse 0: no change
improved
much improved
very much improved"|6 months after last injection|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821178|NCT01151436|Primary|Full Face Global Aesthetic Improvement|"Global aesthetic improvement scale score from baseline:
-1: worse 0: no change
improved
much improved
very much improved"|3 months after last injection|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
821179|NCT01151436|Secondary|NASOLABIAL FOLDS SEVERITY ASSESSMENT|"Severity scored on Lemperle Rating Scale:
0: no wrinkles
just perceptible wrinkle
shallow wrinkle
moderately deep wrinkle
deep wrinkle, well-defined edges
very deep wrinkle redundant fold"|baseline|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821180|NCT01151436|Primary|Full Face Global Aesthetic Improvement|"Global aesthetic improvement scale score from baseline:
-1: worse 0: no change
improved
much improved
very much improved"|3 weeks after last injection|INTENT TO TREAT ON OBSERVED POPULATION (NO REPLACEMENT OF MISSING VALUE)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821181|NCT01151449|Secondary|Overall Survival|Computed using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Within the protocol defined follow-up period.|Inadequate data for OS estimates as only 6 patients were accrued in the study.|||||
821182|NCT01151449|Secondary|Duration of Radiologic Response|The duration of radiologic response is measured from the time measurement criteria are met for CR or PR (whichever is first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented.|From the time measurement criteria are met for CR or PR (whichever is first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented.|||months|||Number
821183|NCT01151449|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), as a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. Computed using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Time from start of study treatment to the date of first progression or death from any cause, whichever occurs first, assessed at 3 months|Inadequate data for PFS estimates as only 6 patients were accrued in the study.|||||
821184|NCT01151449|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), as a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. Computed using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Time from start of study treatment to the date of first progression or death from any cause, whichever occurs first, assessed at 6 months|Inadequate data for PFS estimates as only 6 patients were accrued in the study.|||||
821185|NCT01151449|Primary|Overall Response Rate Using RECIST|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT or MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|From start of treatment until disease progression or removal from treatment.|||participants|||Number
821186|NCT01151553|Primary|Comparison of Markers of Oxidative Stress Pre and Post Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy as Outcome|Patient has a weak heart and scheduled to have CRT placed in the next month. The study is to evaluate blood markers which may predict which patients who receive CRT will improve|One year|Early termination leading to small numbers of subjects; lost funding and staff, no data collected/processed.|||||
821187|NCT01145001|Secondary|Continuous Abstinence During Treatment|We will also examine continuous abstinence during the six week treatment period by urine analysis each week.|6 weeks|this is the intent to treat group-all starters (not treatment completers)||consecutive days of abstinence||Standard Deviation|Mean
821188|NCT01145001|Primary|Abstinence Rates at the End of Treatment|Our primary outcome will be point prevalence abstinence at the end of the treatment period defined as any self-report of cigarette use during the seven days prior to the last appointment confirmed by urine analysis.|6 weeks|||percentage of participants not smoking|||Number
821189|NCT01145053|Secondary|Nocturnal Sleep|Nocturnal Sleep is rating 1 to 5 score based on patient’s diary: 1=Sputum and cough hardly made me awake; 2=Sputum and cough only one time made me awake; 3=Sputum and cough 2 or 3 times made me awake; 4=Sputum and cough 4 to 6 times made me awake; 5=Sputum and cough made me awake all night.|Week 0 and Week 52|The 25 patients which were non approved indication patients and no efficacy information, were excluding from safety set, 316 patients were included in efficacy set. In the efficacy set, 308 patients recorded the Nocturnal Sleep.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821190|NCT01145053|Secondary|Shortness of Breath|Shortness of Breath is rating 1 to 6 score based on patient’s diary: 1=No shortness of breath and no problem in activity in daily life (ADL); 2=Despite shortness of breath, can move about like other people of the same age and no problem in ADL; 3=Can walk fast for a short time but activities like other people of the same age are not possible; 4=Can walk normally, go up the stairs slowly but quick motion is difficult; 5=Can walk slowly in the neighborhood but shortness of breath occurs; 6= Due to severe shortness of breath, rested at home all day.|Week 0 and Week 52|The 25 patients which were non approved indication patients and no efficacy information, were excluding from safety set, 316 patients were included in efficacy set. In the efficacy set, 309 patients recorded the Shortness of Breath.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821191|NCT01145053|Secondary|Amount of Sputum|Amount of Sputum is rating 1 to 4 score based on patient’s diary: 1= None; 2= Slight; 3=Slightly more; 4= Very much.|Week 0 and Week 52|The 25 patients which were non approved indication patients and no efficacy information, were excluding from safety set, 316 patients were included in efficacy set. In the efficacy set, 309 patients recorded the Amount of Sputum.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821192|NCT01145053|Secondary|Cough Frequency|Cough frequency is rating 1 to 4 score based on patient’s diary: 1=None; 2=A few times; 3=Frequently; 4=Very frequently.|Week 0 and Week 52|The 25 patients which were non approved indication patients and no efficacy information, were excluding from safety set, 316 patients were included in efficacy set. In the efficacy set, 309 patients recorded the Cough Frequency .||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821193|NCT01145053|Secondary|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1)|FEV1 is observed at Week 0 and Week 52. The change of FEV1 from Week 0 to Week 52 is calculated.|Week 0 and Week 52|The 25 patients which were non approved indication patients and no efficacy information, were excluding from safety set, 316 patients were included in efficacy set. In the efficacy set, 105 patients measured FEV1 .||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
821194|NCT01145053|Secondary|Effectiveness|Effectiveness should be comprehensively investigated based on the items of patients observation, test results of FEV1, clinical symptoms. The Effectiveness is classified into 3 category, 'Improved', 'No change' and 'Aggravated' by physician.|Week 52|The 25 patients which were non approved indication patients and no efficacy information, were excluding from safety set, 316 patients were included in efficacy set.||Patients|||Number
821195|NCT01145053|Primary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs)|The number of patient with any AEs, patients with drug-related AEs|Week 52|The all treated patients||Patients|||Number
821196|NCT01151579|Secondary|Total Number of Participants With Arrhythmias|Documented new arrhythmia occurring during study.|Five days|Number of patients for whom arrhythmias occurred within 5 days after treatment initiation.||participants|||Number
821197|NCT01151579|Secondary|Arrhythmias|Any new arrhythmia documented in the medical record that occurred between breathing treatments.|15 minutes after each treatment for average of 3 to 5 days|The percentage of arrhythmias among the number of breathing treatments.||percent|||Number
821198|NCT01151579|Primary|Heart Rate in Beats Per Minute|Average difference in Heart rate between pre and post breathing treatments|Five days|Average change in heart rate from baseline to final breathing treatment.||bpm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821199|NCT01151761|Secondary|Median Time to Overall Survival|The time to overall survival is defined as the time to death from any cause. The median was determined via Kaplan Meier methodology.|18 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821200|NCT01151761|Secondary|Liver Transplant Conversion Rate|The ability to successfully perform liver transplant among patients who initially have tumor >3 cm|12 months|||participants|||Number
821201|NCT01151761|Secondary|Freedom From Local Progression at 12 Months|the proportion of patients who experienced a local recurrence at 12 months with death as a competing risk|12 months|Neither of the two patients that participated in the study had a local recurrence prior to dying.||percentage of patients|||Number
821202|NCT01151761|Secondary|Liver Transplant Rate|The number of patients receiving liver transplant among patients who initially have tumors ≤3 cm|12 months|||participants|||Number
821203|NCT01151761|Secondary|Overall Survival at 12 Months|the estimated probability for the percentage of participants with overall survival at 12 months.|12 months|There were only two patients analyzed. Please take that under advisement when looking at the results.||probability|||Number
821204|NCT01151761|Secondary|Serum CA 19-9 Levels|Initial level of Cancer antigen 19-9|12 months|||U/ml||Full Range|Mean
821205|NCT01151761|Secondary|Pathologic Complete Response Rate|Pathologic complete response will be defined as no residual tumor cells seen on the explanted liver specimen.|12 months|||participants|||Number
821206|NCT01151761|Primary|Progression-free Survival at 12 Months|Progression free survival is defined to be the time to progression of disease or death.|12 months|||participants|||Number
821207|NCT01151852|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability of Imatinib|percentage of patients who experienced toxicity from study treatment to evaluate the safety and tolerability of imatinib re-challenge in this patient population|Up to 3years|||percentage of participants|||Number
821208|NCT01151852|Secondary|Overall Survival(OS) and Time to Progression(TTP)|To compare the overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP) in both arms of the study|Up to 3years|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821209|NCT01151852|Secondary|Response Rate|"Tumour responses were initially determined by the local investigators in accordance with RECIST 1.0.Treatment decisions were based on local onsite radiological review. All imaging data were subsequently collected, anonymised, and reviewed centrally in a double-blind manner by two external academic radiology reviewers.
Response assessment was determined in a masked central review by use of RECIST1.1."|Up to 12weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
821210|NCT01151852|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|To compare PFS assessed by investigators|up to 12 weeks|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821211|NCT01151852|Secondary|Disease Control Rate|"Inclusion of complete response, partial response or stable disease
Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR; Progressive disease (PD), >20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD), Insufficient change to qualify for PR or PD."|up to 12 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
829374|NCT01226706|Secondary|24 Hour Pad Weight (gm) at 9 Months|weight of pad (in gm) worn for 24 hours to detect urine loss|9 months|||gm||Standard Deviation|Mean
821212|NCT01151852|Primary|Progression-free Survival|To compare the progression free survival (PFS) assessed by the blinded independent central review following resumption of dosing (re-challenge) with Imatinib plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care in patients with unresectable or metastatic GIST following failure of at least prior imatinib and sunitinib therapies|up tp12 weeks|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821213|NCT01152697|Secondary|Adherence Attitude Score as Measured by the Attitude Toward Medication Questionnaire (AMQ) at 12 Months|Nineteen item inventory taken by the participant with Scale Range:0-19. Lower scores indicate improved outcomes.|12 months|Seven participants were administered and completed this measure at 12 months.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821214|NCT01152697|Secondary|Treatment Adherence Behavior Score as Measured by the Morisky Medication Rating Scale at 12 Months|Four item inventory taken by participant with Scale Range: 0-4. Lower scores indicate better outcomes.|12 months|Six participants were administered and completed this measure at 12 months.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821215|NCT01152697|Secondary|Adherence Attitude Score as Measured by the Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI) at 12 Months|Ten item inventory taken by the participant with a Scale Range: 0-10. Higher scores indicate improved outcomes.|12 months|Six participants were administered and completed this measure at 12 months.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821216|NCT01152697|Secondary|Treatment Adherence Score as Measured at 12 Months|A total treatment adherence score will calculated as a proportion of medications taken as reported from the participant, and evidenced by pill counts and documented medication injections.|12 months|Seven participants were administered and completed this measure at 12 months.||Percentage of doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
821217|NCT01152697|Secondary|Days Homeless Out of the Previous 6 Months as Measured at 12 Months|Subjects will be asked how many days they have been homeless|12 months|Six participants were administered and completed this measure at 12 months.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
821218|NCT01152697|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction as Measured by the Participant Acceptability and Satisfaction Questionnaire at 12 Months|"Satisfaction will be measured by a seven item inventory taken by the participant.
Scale ranges from 1 (Strongly Agree) to 5 (Strongly Disagree). Lower scores indicate better outcomes, while higher scores indicate worse outcomes. The highest possible score is 35."|12 months|Six participants were administered and completed this measure at 12 months.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821219|NCT01152697|Secondary|Change in Social and Occupational Functioning Scale (SOFAS) as Measured at 12 Months|Life and Work Functional status will be evaluated using the Social and Occupational Functioning Scale (SOFAS), which is derived from the GAF. The GAF is a 100-point single-item scale which measures global functioning of psychiatric patients and is widely utilized in clinical studies involving Seriously Mentally Ill patients (Jones 1995). The reliability of the GAF ranges from 0.62-0.82. Higher scores indicate improved outcomes.|Baseline-12 months|Six participants were administered and completed measurement with the SOFAS at 12 months. Only data for these participants was analyzed for change from baseline to 12 months.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821220|NCT01152697|Secondary|Global Psychopathology as Measured by the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) at 12 Months|"Global psychopathology will be measured with the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) (Guy 1976) a widely used scale which evaluates illness severity on a 1 to 7 point continuum. Severity of illness ratings on the CGI have reported reliability scores ranging from 0.41-0.66 (Guy 1976) Lower scores indicate improved outcomes. Higher scores indicate worse outcomes.
Illness scale: 1 - 7 (1 = Normal/not at all ill ; 7 = Among the most extremely ill patients) Global improvement scale: 1 - 7 (1 = Very much improved ; 7 = Very much worse)"|12 months|12 participants were administered and completed measurement with the CGI at 12 months.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821221|NCT01152697|Secondary|Frequency of Health Resource Use in the Past 3 Months as Measured at 25 Weeks|The frequency of health resource use will be measured through interview of the participant.|25 weeks|17 participants were administered and completed this measure at week 25.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
821222|NCT01152697|Secondary|Change in Schizophrenia and Schizoaffective Disorder Symptom Severity Scale as Measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) at 25 Weeks|"The PANSS (Kay, Fiszbein, & Opler 1987) was created to assess both the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia such as hallucinations and emotional withdrawal, respectively. The scale rates 30 symptoms on a scale from 1 (absent) to 7 (extreme) and has been shown to limit bias between the assessment of positive and negative symptoms, providing a broad but balanced spectrum of the illness.
There are three subscales: positive symptoms, negative symptoms, general psychopathology. Potential responses to Items on all subscales range from 1 (absent) to 7 (extreme). Lower scores indicate lower symptoms and, therefore, better outcomes. Higher scores indicate more presence of symptoms and, therefore, worse outcomes.
Subscales are combined to produce a total score, which is summed from all of the subscales. Lower total scores indicate lower symptoms and, therefore, better outcomes. Higher total scores indicate more presence of symptoms and, therefore, worse outcomes."|Baseline-25 weeks|19 participants were administered and completed measurement with the PANSS at week 25. Only data for these participants was analyzed for change from baseline to week 25.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821223|NCT01152697|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction as Measured by the Participant Acceptability and Satisfaction Questionnaire at 25 Weeks|"Satisfaction will be measured by a seven item inventory taken by the participant.
Scale ranges from 1 (Strongly Agree) to 5 (Strongly Disagree). Lower scores indicate better outcomes, while higher scores indicate worse outcomes. The highest possible score is 35."|25 weeks|17 participants were administered and completed this measure at week 25.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821224|NCT01152697|Secondary|Change in Social and Occupational Functioning Scale (SOFAS) as Measured at 25 Weeks|Life and Work Functional status will be evaluated using the Social and Occupational Functioning Scale (SOFAS), which is derived from the GAF (Global Assessment of Functioning). The GAF is a 100-point single-item scale which measures global functioning of psychiatric patients and is widely utilized in clinical studies involving Seriously Mentally Ill patients (Jones 1995). The reliability of the GAF ranges from 0.62-0.82. Higher scores indicate improved outcomes.|Baseline-25 weeks|17 participants were administered and completed measurement with the SOFAS at week 25. Only data for these participants was analyzed for change from baseline to week 25.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821747|NCT01155284|Primary|2 Hour C-peptide AUC in Response to MMTT|Blood samples for C-peptide were collected at baseline (pre-meal) and 15, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-meal.|Month 12|Of the 70 subjects randomized, 58 completed treatment and analysis.||pmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821225|NCT01152697|Secondary|Change in Global Psychopathology as Measured by the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) at 25 Weeks|"Global psychopathology will be measured with the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) (Guy 1976) a widely used scale which evaluates illness severity on a 1 to 7 point continuum. Severity of illness ratings on the CGI have reported reliability scores ranging from 0.41-0.66 (Guy 1976) Lower scores indicate improved outcomes. Higher scores indicate worse outcomes.
Illness scale: 1 - 7 (1 = Normal/not at all ill ; 7 = Among the most extremely ill patients) Global improvement scale: 1 - 7 (1 = Very much improved ; 7 = Very much worse)"|Baseline-25 weeks|17 participants were administered and completed measurement with the DAI at week 25. Only data for these participants was analyzed for change at week 25.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821226|NCT01152697|Secondary|Change in Serious Mental Illness Severity Score as Measured by the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) at 25 Weeks|"The BPRS, developed by Overall and Gorham (1962), is a widely used, relatively brief scale that measures major psychotic and non-psychotic symptoms in individuals with SMI. The 18-item BPRS is well-validated and is perhaps the most researched instrument in psychiatry. Reliability coefficients are reported to be in the range of 0.56-0.87.
Scale Range: 18-126 Lower scores represent improved outcomes."|Baseline-25 weeks|19 participants were administered and completed measurement with the BPRS at week 25. Only data for these participants was analyzed for change from baseline to week 25.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821227|NCT01152697|Secondary|Frequency of Health Resource Use Throughout Months 10, 11, and 12|The frequency of health resource use will be measured through interview of the participant.|Month 1-3, Month 10-12|Three participants were administered and completed this measurement at 12 months. Only data for these participants was analyzed for changes.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
821228|NCT01152697|Primary|Change From Baseline in Adherence Attitude Score as Measured by the Attitude Toward Medication Questionnaire (AMQ) at 25 Weeks|Nineteen item inventory taken by the participant with Scale Range:0-19. Lower scores indicate improved outcomes.|Baseline-25 weeks|19 participants were administered and completed measurement with the AMQ at week 25. Only data for these participants was analyzed for change from baseline to week 25. Lower scores indicate improved outcomes.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821229|NCT01152697|Primary|Change From Baseline in Treatment Adherence Behavior Score as Measured by the Morisky Medication Rating Scale at 25 Weeks|Four item inventory taken by participant with Scale Range: 0-4. Lower scores indicate improved outcomes.|Baseline-25 weeks|16 participants were administered and completed measurement with the Morisky Medication Rating Scale at week 25. Only data for these participants was analyzed for change from baseline to week 25.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821230|NCT01152697|Primary|Change From Baseline in Adherence Attitude Score as Measured by the Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI) at 25 Weeks|Ten item inventory taken by the participant with a Scale Range: 0-10. Higher scores indicate improved outcomes.|Baseline-25 weeks|15 participants were administered and completed measurement with the DAI at week 25. Only data for these participants was analyzed for change from baseline to week 25.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821231|NCT01152697|Primary|Change From Baseline in Treatment Adherence Score as Measured at 25 Weeks|A total treatment adherence score will calculated as a proportion of medications taken as reported from the participant, and evidenced by pill counts and documented medication injections.|Baseline-25 weeks|17 participants were administered and completed measurement of their Treatment Adherence scores at week 25. Only data for these participants was analyzed for change from baseline to week 25.||Percentage of doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
821232|NCT01152697|Primary|Change From Baseline in Days Homeless Out of the Previous 6 Months as Measured at 25 Weeks|Subjects will be asked how many days they have been homeless|Baseline-25 weeks|26 participants were asked how many days they were homeless at week 25. Only data for these participants was analyzed for change from baseline to week 25.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
821233|NCT01152788|Secondary|Safety and Toxicity Profile (Participants With Grade 3 4 5 Adverse Event)|To determine the safety and toxicity profile of rIL-21 and dacarbazine in patients with chemotherapy and immunotherapy-naive metastatic or recurrent malignant melanoma. Adverse events were measured according to the Common Terminology Criteria version 4.0 for Adverse Events. Number of patients with worst adverse event of grade 3 4 or 5 were counted for both rIL-21 and Dacarbazine arms.|Over study period, up to 22 months|||participants|||Number
821234|NCT01152788|Secondary|Overall Survival|For patients who have died, overall survival is calculated in months from the day of randomization to date of death. Otherwise, survival is censored at the last day the patient is known alive.|From randomization to death of any cause, up to 22 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821235|NCT01152788|Secondary|Response Rate|Tumour response is defined per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumour markers. Pathological lymph nodes must have short axis measures < 10 mm (Note: continue to record the measurement even if < 10 mm and considered CR). Residual lesions (other than nodes < 10 mm) thought to be non-malignant should be further investigated (by cytology or PET scans) before CR can be accepted. Confirmation of complete response is not required in this randomized study. Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of measures (longest diameter for tumour lesions and short axis measure for nodes) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters. Confirmation of partial response is not required in this randomized study. Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|From the start of study treatment until the end of treatment (before disease progression)|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821236|NCT01152788|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Progression free survival is defined as the time from randomization to the time of the first documented progression event or death by any cause. A patient who stops treatment with study drug and goes on to receive alternative therapy prior to documentation of disease progression, will be censored at the date alternative therapy began. If a patient has not progressed or received alternative therapy, progression free survival (PFS) will be censored at the date of the last disease assessment.|From randomization to progression or death, up to 22 months|treated population||years||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821273|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 120 are presented.|Week 120|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 120.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829375|NCT01226706|Secondary|24 Hour Pad Weight (gm) at 3 Months|weight of pad (in gm) worn for 24 hours to detect urine loss|3 months|||gm||Standard Deviation|Mean
821237|NCT01152814|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved SRH Area ≥25mm2 Against Each of the Three Vaccine Strains After One Vaccination of FLUAD|"Immunogenicity was measured as the percentage of participants achieving SRH area ≥25 mm2 against each of the three vaccine strains at baseline (day 1) and three weeks after FLUAD vaccination (day 22).
This criterion is met according to CHMP guideline if percentage of participants achieving SRH area ≥25 mm2 is 60% (≥65 years)."|day 22|Analysis was done using the PP dataset.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821238|NCT01152814|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratio of Participants Against Each of the Three Vaccine Strains After One Vaccination of FLUAD|"Geometric mean ratio (GMR) of participants was calculated as the ratio of post-vaccination to pre-vaccination SRH geometric mean areas (GMAs), directed against each of the three vaccine strains, three weeks after FLUAD vaccination (day 22).
The CHMP criterion was met if the geometric mean increase (GMR, day 22/day 1) in SRH antibody area is >2.0 (≥65 years)."|day 22|Analysis was done using the PP dataset.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821239|NCT01152814|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Reported Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions|Safety was assessed for all participants who reported solicited local and systemic reactions from Day 1 up to and including Day 4 after the FLUAD vaccination in accordance with available safety data on influenza vaccines.|1 to 4 days post-vaccination|Analysis was done using the safety dataset; all participants exposed and who had post-baseline safety data were included in the safety analysis.||Number of participants|||Number
821240|NCT01152814|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Seroconversion or Significant Increase in Single Radial Hemolysis (SRH) Area Against Each of Three Vaccine Strains After One Vaccination of FLUAD|"Immunogenicity was measured as the percentage of participants who achieved seroconversion or significant increase in single radial hemolysis (SRH) area, against each of the three vaccine strains, three weeks after vaccination (day 22), evaluated using SRH assay. Seroconversion: proportion of participants with negative pre-vaccination serum and a post-vaccination serum area ≥ 25 mm2. Significant increase: proportion of participants with at least a 50% increase in area from positive pre-vaccination serum. Seroconversion or significant increase: proportion of participants with either seroconversion or significant increase.
The European (Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use [CHMP]) criterion is met, if percentage of participants achieving seroconversion or significant increase in SRH area is 30% (≥65 years)."|day 22|Per protocol (PP) analysis set included all enrolled participants who had received the vaccine, provided evaluable serum samples before and after vaccination, and had no major protocol violation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821274|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 108 are presented.|Week 108|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 108.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821251|NCT01153009|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score at Week 8|The Sheehan Disability Scale assesses functional impairment in 3 domains: work/school, social life or leisure activities, and home life or family responsibilities. The participant rates the extent to which each aspect is impaired on a 10-point visual analog scale, from 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely). The 3 scores are added together to calculate the total score, which ranges from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating more impairment. LS means were from mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) ANCOVA with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline SDS total score-by-week as fixed effects.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821252|NCT01153009|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in MADRS Remission at Week 8|Remission is defined as a participant with a Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≤10. The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 to 6. The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). Decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement.|Week 8|Full analysis set, last observation carried forward was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
821253|NCT01153009|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MADRS Total Score at Week 8 in Participants With Baseline Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) Total Score ≥20|"The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 (normal) to 6 (most abnormal). The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). A decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement. LS means are from a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) ANCOVA with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline MADRS total score-by-week as fixed effects.
HAM-A is a 14 item rating scale to quantify anxiety severity rated on a 5-point scale from 0 (not present) to 4 (severe) with a total score range from 0 to 56, where lower scores indicate mild severity."|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set patients with a HAM-A Baseline score ≥20. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821254|NCT01153009|Secondary|Mean Clinical Global Impression Scale - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 8|The Clinical Global Impression-Global Improvement scale assesses the participant's improvement (or worsening) as assessed by the clinician relative to Baseline on a 7-point scale: 1, very much improved; 2, much improved; 3, minimally improved; 4, no change; 5, minimally worse; 6, much worse; or 7, very much worse. LS means were from a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) ANCOVA with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score-by-week as fixed effects.|Week 8|The Full Analysis Set. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821255|NCT01153009|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a MADRS Response at Week 8|Response is defined as a participant with a ≥50% decrease in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from Baseline. The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 to 6. The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). Decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set, last observation carried forward was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
821275|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 96 are presented.|Week 96|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 96.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821276|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 84 are presented.|Week 84|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 84.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821256|NCT01153009|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score|The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 (normal) to 6 (most abnormal). The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). A decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement. Least squares (LS) means are from a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline MADRS total score-by-week as fixed effects.|Baseline and Week 8|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, and had at least 1 valid post-baseline value for assessment of primary efficacy. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821257|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 144 are presented.|Week 144|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 144 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821258|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 132 are presented.|Week 132|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 132 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821259|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 120 are presented.|Week 120|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 120 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821260|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 108 are presented.|Week 108|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 108 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821261|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 96 are presented.|Week 96|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 96 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821262|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 84 are presented.|Week 84|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 84 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821263|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 72 are presented.|Week 72|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 72 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821264|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 60 are presented.|Week 60|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Baseline are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821265|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 48 are presented.|Week 48|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 48 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821266|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 36 are presented.|Week 36|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 36 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821267|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 24 are presented.|Week 24|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 24 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821268|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 12 are presented.|Week 12|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 12 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821269|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Week 4 are presented.|Week 4|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Week 4 are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821270|NCT01153269|Primary|CD4 Cell Count|The decision to perform laboratory tests to determine participants' CD4-positive (CD4+) T-lymphocyte counts was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean and standard deviation for those tested at Baseline are presented.|Baseline|All participants with CD4+ cell count measurements at Baseline are included.||CD4+ cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821271|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 144 are presented.|Week 144|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 144.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821272|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 132 are presented.|Week 132|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 132.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821277|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 72 are presented.|Week 72|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 72.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821278|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 60 are presented.|Week 60|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 60.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821279|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 48 are presented.|Week 48|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 48.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821280|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 36 are presented.|Week 36|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 36.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821281|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 24 are presented.|Week 24|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 24.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821282|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 12 are presented.|Week 12|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 12.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821283|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 4 are presented.|Week 4|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Week 4.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821284|NCT01153269|Primary|Viral Load|The decision to perform HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) tests to monitor participants' viral load was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Baseline are presented.|Baseline|Participants with HIV-1 RNA results at Baseline.||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821285|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 144 are presented.|Week 144|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 144.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821286|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 132 are presented.|Week 132|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 132.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821287|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 120 are presented.|Week 120|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 120.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821288|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 108 are presented.|Week 108|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 108.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821289|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 96 are presented.|Week 96|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 96.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821290|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 84 are presented.|Week 84|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 84.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821291|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 72 are presented.|Week 72|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 72.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821292|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 60 are presented.|Week 60|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 60.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821393|NCT01153672|Secondary|Overall Survival|Kaplan-Meier survival curves will be used to describe overall survival. Overall survival time will be censored on the last date the patient was known to be alive.|Time elapsed from the first day of study treatment until death, assessed up to approximately 5 years||||||
821293|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 48 are presented.|Week 48|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 48.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821294|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 36 are presented.|Week 36|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 36.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821295|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 24 are presented.|Week 24|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 24.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821296|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 12 are presented.|Week 12|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 12.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821297|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Week 4 are presented.|Week 4|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Week 4.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821298|NCT01153269|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) / Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameters|The decision to perform aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) laboratory tests to monitor participants' liver function was left to the treating physician's clinical judgment. The mean values and standard deviations for those tested at Baseline are presented.|Baseline|Participants with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase results at Baseline.||U/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821299|NCT01153321|Secondary|CC16 Concentration in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge CC16 concentration in BAL (Day 11). LPS challenge and post-LPS challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821300|NCT01153321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-related or Clinically Relevant Changes in Spirometry (Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second [FEV1], Forced Vital Capacity [FVC] Pre-bronchodilator)||up to 47 days (visit 1 to visit 6)|||Participants|||Number
821301|NCT01153321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Relevant Changes in Physical Examination||up to 47 days (visit 1 to visit 6)|||Participants|||Number
821302|NCT01153321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Relevant Changes in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Variables||up to 47 days (visit 1 to visit 6)|||Participants|||Number
821303|NCT01153321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Relevant Changes in Vital Signs||up to 47 days (visit 1 to visit 6)|||Participants|||Number
821304|NCT01153321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Relevant Treatment-related Changes in Laboratory Variables Other Than Monocytes||up to 47 days (visit 1 to visit 6)|||Participants|||Number
821305|NCT01153321|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Zero to 8 Hours (AUC(0-8)) of AZD2423 at Steady State|Steady state PK profile measured on Day 10|Day 10 pre-dose, 20 and 40 minutes post-dose, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours post-dose|All 22 patients who received AZD2423 provided at least one plasma sample and were included in the PK analysis although only 21 patients were included in the evaluation of PK at day 10, one patient had been discontinued due to an AE.||nmol*h/L||Full Range|Geometric Mean
821306|NCT01153321|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Zero to 24 Hours (AUC(0-24)) of AZD2423 at Steady State|Steady state PK profile measured on Day 10|Day 10 pre-dose, 20 and 40 minutes post-dose, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours post-dose|All 22 patients who received AZD2423 provided at least one plasma sample and were included in the PK analysis although only 21 patients were included in the evaluation of PK at day 10, one patient had been discontinued due to an AE.||nmol*h/L||Full Range|Geometric Mean
821307|NCT01153321|Secondary|Time to Cmax (Tmax) of AZD2423 at Steady State|Steady state PK profile measured on Day 10|Day 10 pre-dose, 20 and 40 minutes post-dose, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours post-dose|All 22 patients who received AZD2423 provided at least one plasma sample and were included in the PK analysis although only 21 patients were included in the evaluation of PK at day 10, one patient had been discontinued due to an AE.||hours||Full Range|Median
821308|NCT01153321|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of AZD2423 at Steady State|Steady state pharmacokinetic (PK) profile measured on Day 10|Day 10 pre-dose, 20 and 40 minutes post-dose, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours post-dose|All 22 patients who received AZD2423 provided at least one plasma sample and were included in the PK analysis although only 21 patients were included in the evaluation of PK at day 10, one patient had been discontinued due to an AE.||nmol/L||Full Range|Geometric Mean
821309|NCT01153321|Secondary|Neutrophils in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|Neutrophils in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821310|NCT01153321|Secondary|Neutrophils in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|Neutrophils in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821311|NCT01153321|Secondary|Monocytes in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|Monocytes in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821312|NCT01153321|Secondary|Monocytes in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|Monocytes in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821313|NCT01153321|Secondary|Lymphocytes in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|Lymphocytes in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821314|NCT01153321|Secondary|Lymphocytes in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|Lymphocytes in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821315|NCT01153321|Secondary|Eosinophils in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|Eosinophils in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821316|NCT01153321|Secondary|Eosinophils in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|Eosinophils in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821317|NCT01153321|Secondary|Basophils in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|Basophils in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821318|NCT01153321|Secondary|Basophils in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|Basophils in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821319|NCT01153321|Secondary|CC16 Concentration in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|CC16 concentration in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. Five patients had missing observations.||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821320|NCT01153321|Secondary|CC16 Concentration in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|CC16 concentration in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. Three patients had missing observations.||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821321|NCT01153321|Secondary|SP-D Concentration in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|SP-D concentration in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821322|NCT01153321|Secondary|SP-D Concentration in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|SP-D concentration in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821323|NCT01153321|Secondary|TNF-α Concentration in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|TNF-α concentration in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821324|NCT01153321|Secondary|TNF-α Concentration in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|TNF-α concentration in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821325|NCT01153321|Secondary|IL-8 Concentration in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|IL-8 concentration in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821326|NCT01153321|Secondary|IL-8 Concentration in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|IL-8 concentration in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821327|NCT01153321|Secondary|IL-6 Concentration in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|IL-6 concentration in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822025|NCT01152437|Secondary|Pre-dose Concentration of Afatinib in Plasma at Steady State on Day 8 (Cpre,ss,8)|Cpre,ss,8 represents the pre-dose concentration of afatinib in plasma at steady state on day 8.|day 8|Randomised set for wild-type group and treated set for mutated group.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821328|NCT01153321|Secondary|IL-6 Concentration in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|IL-6 concentration in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821329|NCT01153321|Secondary|IL-1β Concentration in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|IL-1β concentration in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821330|NCT01153321|Secondary|IL-1β Concentration in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|IL-1β concentration in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821331|NCT01153321|Secondary|CCL2 Concentration in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|CCL2 concentration in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11).|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821332|NCT01153321|Secondary|CCL2 Concentration in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|CCL2 concentration in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10)|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821333|NCT01153321|Secondary|SAA Concentration in Blood (Post-LPS Challenge)|SAA concentration in blood post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821334|NCT01153321|Secondary|SAA Concentration in Blood (Pre-LPS Challenge)|SAA concentration in blood pre-LPS challenge (Day 10).|Day 10|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821335|NCT01153321|Secondary|SP-D Concentration in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge SP-D concentration in BAL (Day 11). LPS challenge and post-LPS challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. One patient had missing observations.||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821336|NCT01153321|Secondary|RANTES Concentration in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge RANTES concentration in BAL (Day 11). LPS challenge and post-LPS challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. One patient had missing observations.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821337|NCT01153321|Secondary|IL-8 Concentration in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge IL 8 concentration in BAL. LPS challenge and post-LPS challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. One patient had missing observations.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821338|NCT01153321|Secondary|IL-6 Concentration in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge IL-6 concentration in BAL (Day 11). LPS challenge and post-LPS challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. One patient had missing observations.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821339|NCT01153321|Secondary|IL-1β Concentration in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge IL-1β concentration in BAL (Day 11). LPS challenge and post-LPS challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. One patient had missing observations.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821340|NCT01153321|Secondary|CCL2 Concentration in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge CCL2 concentration in BAL (Day 11). LPS challenge and post-LPS challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. One patient had missing observations.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821341|NCT01153321|Secondary|TNF α Concentration in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge TNF α concentration in BAL (Day 11). LPS challenge and post-LPS challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. One patient had missing observations.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821342|NCT01153321|Secondary|Macrophages in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge macrophage differential in BAL. LPS challenge and post-challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
821421|NCT01153711|Secondary|Fraction of Urine Excretion From 0 to 24 Hours at Steady State (fe0-24,ss)|fe0-24,ss represents the fraction of olodaterol eliminated in urine from time point 0 to 24 hours after administration at steady state.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|PK analysis set with evaluable data for this endpoint.||Percentage||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821343|NCT01153321|Secondary|Neutrophils in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge neutrophil differential in BAL. LPS challenge and post-challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821344|NCT01153321|Secondary|Lymphocytes in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge lymphocyte differential in BAL. LPS challenge and post-challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821345|NCT01153321|Secondary|Eosinophils in BAL (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge eosinophil differential in BAL. LPS challenge and post-challenge BAL conducted at right middle lobe.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. Five patients had missing observations.||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821346|NCT01153321|Secondary|Biopsy Epithelium Grade (Post-LPS Challenge)|Biopsies (from right middle lobe) were assessed for routine histopathology. Epithelial morphology was graded on subjective scale from 1 to 5. 1=normal; 2=PAS positive cell hypertrophy; 3=PAS positive cell hyperplasia; 4=Metaplasia with PAS positive cells throughout mucosa; 5=Metaplasia and/or squamous plates with loss of PAS positive cells|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. Thirteen patients had missing observations.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821347|NCT01153321|Secondary|Biopsy PAS Reaction Grade (Post-LPS Challenge)|Biopsies stained using PAS method. Graded on subjective scale (1=normal; 2=PAS positive cell hypertrophy; 3=PAS positive cell hyperplasia; 4=Metaplasia with PAS positive cells throughout mucosa; 5=Metaplasia and/or squamous plates with loss of PAS positive cells).|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. Thirteen patients had missing observations.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821348|NCT01153321|Secondary|CD3+ in Biopsy Sample (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge data (Day 11). Post-LPS challenge biopsies taken from right middle lobe. Cells counted in subepithelium.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. Six patients had missing observations.||cells/mm^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821349|NCT01153321|Secondary|CD45+ in Biopsy Sample (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge data (Day 11). Post-LPS challenge biopsies taken from right middle lobe. Cells counted in subepithelium.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. Six patients had missing observations.||cells/mm^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821350|NCT01153321|Secondary|Total Macrophages in Biopsy Sample (Post-LPS Challenge)|Post-LPS challenge data (Day 11). Post-LPS challenge biopsies taken from right middle lobe. Cells counted in subepithelium.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. Six patients had missing observations.||cells/mm^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821351|NCT01153321|Secondary|Total Neutrophils in Biopsy Sample (Post-LPS Challenge)|Pre-challenge = Day 11. Biopsies taken from left lingula. Cells counted in subepithelium.|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge. Six patients had missing observations.||cells/mm^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821352|NCT01153321|Primary|Absolute Monocyte Count in BAL Post-LPS Challenge|Monocyte count in BAL post-LPS challenge (Day 11)|Day 11|Thirty-nine patients were included in the efficacy analysis set. Five patients were excluded because they did not have sufficient data to be included in the primary outcome analysis. Four discontinued and one did not complete LPS challenge||x10^4 cells/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821353|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in Irritability Symptoms as Measured by the Sheehan Irritability Scale (SIS) Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A self-administered scale to be used by clinical subjects to rate suffering over the past week with regard to irritability symptoms. The total SIS score is the sum of 7 items, and ranges from 0 to 70. Each item is assessed on an 11- point scale where 0=not at all, 1-3=mildly, 4-6=moderately, 7-9=markedly, and 10=extremely. The SIS also records the number of days impaired by irritability.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821354|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in EuroQol - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A self-assessment questionnaire that provides 2 measures of health status. The EQ-5D index score is a weighted linear combination over 5 dimensions of health status. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3, and an equation is used to calculate the EQ-5D index score. The EQ-5D index score can range from possible negative values (minimum -0.415) to a maximum of 1.0. The EQ-VAS is a visual analog scale with a range of 0 to 100. For both variables, a higher score indicates a better health state.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822221|NCT01161446|Secondary|Bacterial Sexually Transmitted Infections|Includes syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydial infection|Assessed at 15 months|Includes only participants who received screening for sexually transmitted infections at the end-of-study visit.||Participants|||Count of Participants
821355|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q LES-Q-SF) Item 16|The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form) measures the patient’s satisfaction with medication and overall quality of life. The 16th item is a global rating of overall life satisfaction and contentment, rated on a 1 to 5 scale. Higher scores are indicative of greater satisfaction.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821356|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form(Q LES-Q-SF)Item 15|The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form) measures the patient’s satisfaction with medication and overall quality of life. The 15th item queries respondents’ satisfaction with the medication they are taking, rated on a 1 to 4 scale, score 0 indicates that no medication was taken. Higher scores are indicative of greater satisfaction.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821357|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in Overall Quality of Life and Satisfaction From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) by Assessing the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) % Maximum Total Score|The Q-LES-Q-SF total score is derived by summing item scores 1 to 14. Higher scores are indicative of greater enjoyment or satisfaction in each domain. The Q-LES-Q-SF % maximum total score is calculated as 100% × (Q-LES-Q-SF total score – 14) / 56, and can range from 0% to 100%.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821358|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Family Life/Home Responsibilities Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the SDS family life/home responsibilities domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821359|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Social Life Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the SDS social life domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821360|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Work/School Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the work/school domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821361|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score|Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) is 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The SDS total score is calculated as the sum of the score for the 3 inter-correlated domains (school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities) and ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired).|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821362|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 14|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821363|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 12|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821364|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 10|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 10|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821365|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 9|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 9|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821366|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A 14-item clinician-administered scale for the evaluation of anxiety symptoms. Each HAM-A item is rated on a 0 to 4 scale, the total score can range from 0 to 56. Higher HAM-A scores indicate higher levels of anxiety.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821367|NCT01153347|Secondary|Response in the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Defined as CGI-I Rating of “Very Much Improved” or “Much Improved” From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A 3-part, clinician-administered scale that rates the improvement or worsening of the patient’s illness from randomization (baseline). Each item is scored on a 1 to 7 scale. CGI-I scores >4 indicate worsening, while scores <4 indicate improvement.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
821368|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in the Clinician-rated Global Outcome of Severity as Measured by the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Score From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A 3-part, clinician-administered scale that rates the improvement or worsening of the patient’s illness from randomization (baseline). Each item is scored on a 1 to 7 scale. Higher CGI-S scores indicate greater illness severity.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821369|NCT01153347|Secondary|Change in Depressive Symptoms From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-17 Items (HAMD-17) Total Score|A 17-item, clinician-rated scale that assesses depressive symptoms. The HAMD-17 consists of 17 symptoms, each of which is rated from 0 to 2 or 0 to 4, where 0 is none/absent. The HAMD-17 total score is calculated as the sum of the 17 individual symptom scores; the total score can range from 0 to 52. Higher HAMD-17 scores indicate more severe depression.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821370|NCT01153347|Secondary|Sustained Remission, Defined as a MADRS Total Score of ≤8 at Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a MADRS total score of ≤8 at Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16)was calculated.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Week 12, Week 14, Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
821371|NCT01153347|Secondary|Sustained Response, Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score and a MADRS Total Score of ≤12 at Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score and a MADRS total score of ≤12 at Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16); Week 12, Week 14, and Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of patients analyzed|||Number
821372|NCT01153347|Secondary|Early and Sustained Response, Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score and a MADRS Total Score of ≤12 at Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score and a MADRS total score of ≤12 at Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16); Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
821422|NCT01153711|Secondary|Time From Dosing to the Maximum Concentration at Steady State (Tmax,ss)|tmax,ss represents the time from dosing to maximum concentration of olodaterol and olodaterol glucuronide in plasma at steady state.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|PK analysis set with evaluable data for this endpoint.||Hours||Full Range|Median
821373|NCT01153347|Secondary|Remission in Depressive Symptoms of MDD, Defined as MADRS Total Score of ≤8 at End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a MADRS total score of ≤8 at end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
821374|NCT01153347|Secondary|Response in Depressive Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score at End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score at end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
821375|NCT01153347|Primary|Change in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score From Randomization to End of Treatment.|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821376|NCT01153425|Secondary|Percentage of Change in Bone Volume Fraction (BVF)|Average fractional content of bone expressed in percent|Change between baseline and 12 months|||Percentage of Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
821377|NCT01153425|Primary|Percentage of Change in Trabecular Surface-to-curve Ratio|Ratio of the volume densities of surface (S) and curve (C)-type voxels, S/C|Change between baseline and 12 months|Mean change in structural and mechanical markers of bone turnover between the two groups.||Percentage of Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
821378|NCT01153503|Primary|Morphine Consumption|Morphine consumption over the first 24 hours|24 hours post surgery|||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
821379|NCT01153581|Primary|Skin Microvascular Responses|"Changes in blood flow in the small vessel in the skin are measured in response to sequential heat and drug stimulation. It is measured in volts, and then corrected for a maximum level and expressed as “% max. This is measured with a Laser Doppler probes, which measures volts."|2 months|Women with and without orthostatic intolerance||Percent of max volts||Standard Error|Mean
821380|NCT01153581|Primary|Baroreceptor Function|"This is a measure of how the body responds to changes in pressure induced by changes in position such as sitting, lying standing. The pressure changes are induced by gravity. The measurement described below to assess baroreceptor function is units of change in forearm vascular resistance for a given change in lower body negative pressure. This allows us to determine how good the body is at sending signals to the periphery to respond to postural changes.
Baroreflex sensitivity is defined as the change in interbeat interval (IBI) in milliseconds per unit change in BP. For example, when the BP rises by 10 mmHg and IBI increases by 100 ms, BRS would be 100/10 = 10 ms/mmHg."|2 months|Women with low and high orthostatic tolerance||ms/mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
821381|NCT01153581|Primary|Orthostatic Tolerance|We used a measure called cumulative stress index to determine orthostatic tolerance, which is the amount of time at a level of negative pressure each subject can maintain before feeling as if she is going to pass out. This is calculated by multiplying the pressure in mm Hg by the time in min.|2 months|||mmHg*min||Standard Deviation|Mean
821382|NCT01153620|Secondary|Comparison of the Percentage of Patients With Target Wounds <50 CFU|Comparison of the percentage of patients with target wounds <50 CFU after 60 minutes of treatment application|60 minutes||||||
821383|NCT01153620|Secondary|Reduction in CFU|Comparison of the percentage reduction in CFU after 15, 30 and 60 minutes of treatment application|15 minutes, 30 minutes and 60 minutes||||||
821384|NCT01153620|Secondary|Local Tolerability: Pruritis Burning|Local tolerability after 60 minutes of treatment application.|60 minutes||||||
821385|NCT01153620|Primary|Reduction (log10) in Colony Forming Units|Comparison of the log10 reduction in CFU after 60 minutes of treatment application.|60 minutes|ITT population: comprising all wounds having received the study treatment for any duration (n=61).||log 10 Colony Forming Units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
821386|NCT01153633|Primary|Absolute Change of Target Ulcer From Baseline to Last Visit||12 weeks|per protocol analysis||square centimeters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821387|NCT01153633|Primary|Healing of Target Ulcer atV6/EOS|Number of ulcers healed at V6/EOS|12 weeks|per protocol analysis||ulcers|||Number
821388|NCT01153633|Secondary|Condition of Wound Bed|Sum of granulation and epithelium (% of wound bed), absolute change from baseline to V6/EoS|12 Weeks|per protocol analysis||percentage of of wound bed||Standard Deviation|Mean
821389|NCT01153633|Secondary|Pain|Absolute change (mm VAS) from baseline to V6/EoS. Pain intensity assessed by patient. At each study visit the patients assessed their pain intensity using a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Thereby 0 mm represented ‘no pain’ and 100 mm ‘worst possible pain’.|12 Weeks|per protocol analysis||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
821390|NCT01153633|Secondary|Number of Different Microganisms at V6/EoS||12 Weeks|per protocol analysis||Number of microgasism species||Standard Deviation|Mean
821391|NCT01153633|Primary|Percent Change of Wound Size From Baseline to Last Visit||12 Weeks|Per protocol set||percentage change in wound size (cm2)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821392|NCT01153672|Secondary|Percentage of Patients That Experience Adverse Events as Assessed by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 3.0||Up to approximately 5 years|||percentage of participants|||Number
829410|NCT01226719|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|The Length of Time, in Months, That Patients Were Alive From Their First Date of Protocol Treatment Until Death|18 months|All patients on study||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821394|NCT01153672|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Kaplan-Meier survival curves will be used to describe progression-free survival. For progression-free survival, patients without documented disease progression or death will be treated as censored observations on the date of the last tumor assessment.|Time elapsed from the first day of study treatment, until disease progression or death, assessed up to approximately 5 years||||||
821395|NCT01153672|Primary|Duration of Response|Duration of response will be summarized for responders.|Up to approximately 5 years|||weeks||Full Range|Median
821396|NCT01153672|Primary|Rate of Clinical Benefit According to RECIST|"A 90% score (Wilson) confidence interval will be computed for the response rate and the rate of clinical benefit. The radiological (by computed tomography [CT]) response rate of vorinostat will be determined by tumor measurements assessed by modified RECIST criteria.
Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) assessed by CT, Clinical Benefit was defined as an objective response (complete response [CR], partial response [PR]) or stable disease [SD]). CR=the disappearance of all target lesions; PR=at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions; SD=neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease (PD), taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started; PD=at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of the LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions."|Up to approximately 5 years|||percentage of evaluable participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
821397|NCT01153685|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|During the entire study period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort.||Subjects|||Number
821398|NCT01153685|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.|Within the 21-day post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort.||Subjects|||Number
821399|NCT01153685|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|"Unsolicited adverse events (AE) covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptoms with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.
Any = occurrence of any adverse event regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination.
Grade 3 = an unsolicited AE that prevented normal everyday activity. Related = event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the vaccination."|Within the 21-day post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Tota Vaccinated Cohort.||Subjects|||Number
821400|NCT01153685|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and General Symptoms After Administration of Fluviral.|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site. Solicited general symptoms assessed were bronchospasm, chills, cough, fatigue, headache, joint pain at other location, muscle aches, red eyes, sore throat, swelling of the face and temperature (defined as orally temperature equal or above 38.0 degrees Celcius)|During a 4-days (Day 0-3) follow-up period after vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort on subjects with available results.||Subjects|||Number
821401|NCT01153685|Primary|Seroconversion Factor for Antibodies Against Fluviral Vaccine Strains.|Seroconversion Factor (SCF) is defined as the fold increase in serum HI antibody GMTs post-vaccination (Day 21) compared to prevaccination (Day 0).|At Day 21 after vaccination|The analyses were based on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity.||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
821402|NCT01153685|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Antibodies Against Fluviral Vaccine Strains.|A subject seroconverted for haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibodies was defined as a subject with either a prevaccination (Day 0) HI antibody titer below 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:40 or a prevaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titer.|At Day 21 after vaccination|The analyses were based on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity.||Subjects|||Number
821403|NCT01153685|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Antibodies Against Fluviral Vaccine Strains.|A Seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with a serum haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titer greater than or equal to 1:40.|At Day 21 after vaccination|The analyses were based on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity.||Subjects|||Number
821404|NCT01153685|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Antibodies Against Fluviral Vaccine Strains.|A Seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with a serum haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titer greater than or equal to 1:40.|At Day 0 before vaccination|The analyses were based on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity.||Subjects|||Number
821405|NCT01153685|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) of Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against Fluviral Vaccine Strains.|The Fluviral vaccine strains were A/California (H1N1), A/Victoria (H3N2) and B/Brisbane|At Day 21 after vaccination|The analyses were based on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821406|NCT01153685|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) of Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against Fluviral Vaccine Strains.|The Fluviral vaccine strains were A/California (H1N1), A/Victoria (H3N2) and B/Brisbane|At Day 0 before vaccination|The analyses were based on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821407|NCT01153698|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Single Components of Composite of sVTE and All-cause Mortality Events During Total Treatment Period|Total treatment period is defined from first enoxaparin administration to 24h after last Pradaxa intake or to 35h after last enoxaparin administration if no switch was performed.|From first enoxaparin administration until 24 hours after last Pradaxa intake ( planned: knee replacement: Day 10 after surgery, hip replacement:Day 28-35 after surgery)|Treated Set||Number of participants|||Number
821408|NCT01153698|Secondary|Volume of Wound Drainage (Post-operative)|Total volume of wound drainage is calculated as sum of volume drainage from end of surgery until first dose of Pradaxa plus volume drainage from first dose of Pradaxa and onwards.|From end of surgery (before first dosing) until 24 hours after last Pradaxa intake|Treated Set (All patients with non-missing information for both, the volume drainage until first dose of Pradaxa and the volume drainage from first dose of Pradaxa and onwards).||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
821409|NCT01153698|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Major Extra-surgical Site Bleedings During Total Treatment Period|Major extra-surgical site bleedings include all major bleedings not occurred at surgical site|From first enoxaparin administration until 24 hours after last Pradaxa intake if switch to Pradaxa was performed or to 35 hours after last enoxaparin administration if no switch was performed|TS||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821410|NCT01153698|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With sVTE and All-cause Mortality Events During Switch Treatment Period|"sVTE was defined as the composite of documented symptomatic proximal and distal DVT and documented symptomatic non-fatal PE.
Symptomatic DVT is defined as clinically symptomatic venous thromboembolic event and symptomatic non-fatal PE is defined as symptomatic pulmonary embolism"|From last enoxaparin administration until first Pradaxa intake|TS reduced to patients with switch period.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821411|NCT01153698|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With sVTE and All-cause Mortality Events During Pre-switch Treatment Period|sVTE was defined as the composite of documented symptomatic proximal and distal DVT and documented symptomatic non-fatal PE.|From first enoxaparin administration until last enoxaparin administration|TS reduced to patients with pre-switch period.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821412|NCT01153698|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With sVTE and All-cause Mortality Events During Total Treatment Period|sVTE was defined as the composite of documented symptomatic proximal and distal DVT and documented symptomatic non-fatal PE.|From first enoxaparin administration until 24 hours after last Pradaxa intake if switch to Pradaxa was performed or to 35 hours after last enoxaparin administration if no switch was performed|TS||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821413|NCT01153698|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With MBE During Pre-switch Treatment Period|MBEs were defined according to the modified McMaster criteria. The criteria for MBEs were: fatal; clinically overt associated with loss of haemoglobin >=20g/L in excess of what was expected; clinically overt leading to the transfusion of >=2 units packed cells or whole blood in excess of what was expected; symptomatic retroperitoneal, intracranial, intraocular or intraspinal; requiring treatment cessation; leading to re-operation.|From first enoxaparin administration until last enoxaparin administration|TS reduced to patients with pre-switch period.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821414|NCT01153698|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With MBE During Total Treatment Period|MBEs were defined according to the modified McMaster criteria. The criteria for MBEs were: fatal; clinically overt associated with loss of haemoglobin >=20g/L in excess of what was expected; clinically overt leading to the transfusion of >=2 units packed cells or whole blood in excess of what was expected; symptomatic retroperitoneal, intracranial, intraocular or intraspinal; requiring treatment cessation; leading to re-operation.|From first enoxaparin administration until 24 hours after last Pradaxa intake if switch to Pradaxa was performed or to 35 hours after last enoxaparin administration if no switch was performed|TS||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821415|NCT01153698|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolic Events (sVTE) and All-cause Mortality Events During the Switch-/ Post-switch Treatment Period|sVTE was defined as the composite of documented symptomatic proximal and distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and documented symptomatic non-fatal pulmonary embolism (PE).|From last enoxaparin administration until 24 hours after last Pradaxa intake (planned: knee replacement: Day 10 after surgery, hip replacement:Day 28-35 after surgery)|TS reduced to patients with switch-/ post-switch period.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821416|NCT01153698|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Major Bleeding Events (MBE) During the Switch-/ Post-switch Treatment Period|Major bleeding events were defined according to the modified McMaster criteria. The criteria for MBEs were: fatal; clinically overt associated with loss of haemoglobin >=20g/L in excess of what was expected; clinically overt leading to the transfusion of >=2 units packed cells or whole blood in excess of what was expected; symptomatic retroperitoneal, intracranial, intraocular or intraspinal; requiring treatment cessation; leading to re-operation.|From last enoxaparin administration until 24 hours after last Pradaxa intake( planned: knee replacement: Day 10 after surgery, hip replacement:Day 28-35 after surgery)|Treated set (TS) reduced to patients with switch-/ post-switch period. TS includes all patients who received at least one dose of enoxaparin or at least one dose of Pradaxa.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821417|NCT01153711|Secondary|Assessment of Tolerability by the Investigator|The investigator assessed tolerability based on adverse events and the laboratory evaluation at the end-of-trial examination. The investigator classified the overall tolerability according to the categories 'good', 'satisfactory', 'not satisfactory', and 'bad'.|End of period 1 and end of period 2|TS||participants|||Number
821418|NCT01153711|Secondary|Clinical Relevant Abnormalities for Vital Signs, Blood Chemistry, Haematology, Urinalysis and ECG|Clinical relevant abnormalities for Vital Signs, Blood Chemistry, Haematology, Urinalysis and ECG. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as treatment-induced Adverse Events.|First administration of trial medication until 6 days after last administration of trial medication|Treated set (TS) - Treated set includes all patients who were dispensed trial medication and were documented to have taken at least 1 dose of investigational treatment.||participants|||Number
821419|NCT01153711|Secondary|Area Under Curve From 0 to 8 Hours at Steady State (AUC0-8,ss)|AUC0-8,ss represents the area under the concentration curve of olodaterol glucuronide in plasma from 0 to time t=8 at steady state, where t is defined as the latest time-point where at least 2/3 of the subjects in both treatment periods reveal quantifiable plasma concentrations of the analyte. The geometric mean is actually the adjusted geometric mean. The geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) is the intra-individual gCV.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|PK analysis set with evaluable data for this endpoint.||Picogram*hours/milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821420|NCT01153711|Secondary|Amount of the Analyte Excreted in Urine From 0 to 24 Hours at Steady State (Ae0-24,ss)|Ae0-24,ss represents the amount of olodaterol and olodaterol glucuronide that is eliminated in urine from the time 0 to 24h after administration at steady state. The geometric mean is actually the adjusted geometric mean. The geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) is the intra-individual gCV.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|PK analysis set with evaluable data for this endpoint.||ng||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822141|NCT01160822|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration Time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity AUC(0-inf)||Day 1, pre-dose and 1, 3, 6 and 8 hours post-dose (Part A only), Day 2, 4, 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 126.|Pharmacokinetic analysis set where data were available.||µg*day/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821423|NCT01153711|Primary|Maximum Concentration at Steady State (Cmax,ss)|Cmax,ss represents the maximum concentration of olodaterol and olodaterol glucuronide in plasma at steady state. The geometric mean is actually the adjusted geometric mean. The geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) is the intra-individual gCV.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|PK analysis set with evaluable data for this endpoint.||Picogram/milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821424|NCT01153711|Primary|Area Under Curve From 0 to 1 Hour at Steady State (AUC0-1,ss)|AUC0-1,ss represents the area under the concentration curve of olodaterol in plasma from 0 to time t=1 hour at steady state, where t is defined as the latest time-point where at least 2/3 of the subjects in both treatment periods reveal quantifiable plasma concentrations of olodaterol. The geometric mean is actually the adjusted geometric mean. The geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) is the intra-individual gCV.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set includes all evaluable subjects in the treated set providing at least 1 observation for at least 1 PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||Picogram*hours/milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821425|NCT01153724|Secondary|Assessment of Tolerability by the Investigator|The investigator assessed tolerability based on adverse events and the laboratory evaluation at the end-of-trial examination. The investigator classified the overall tolerability according to the categories 'good', 'satisfactory', 'not satisfactory', and 'bad'.|End of period 1 and end of period 2|TS||participants|||Number
821426|NCT01153724|Secondary|Clinical Relevant Abnormalities for Vital Signs, Blood Chemistry, Haematology, Urinalysis and ECG|Clinical relevant abnormalities for Vital Signs, Blood Chemistry, Haematology, Urinalysis and ECG. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as Adverse Events.|First administration of trial medication until 6 days after last administration of trial medication|Treated set (TS) - Treated set includes all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of trial medication.||participants|||Number
821427|NCT01153724|Secondary|Area Under Curve From 0 to 12 Hours at Steady State (AUC0-12,ss)|AUC0-12,ss represents the area under the concentration curve of olodaterol glucuronide in plasma from 0 to time t=12 at steady state, where t is defined as the latest timepoint where at least 2/3 of the subjects in both treatment periods reveal quantifiable plasma concentrations of the analyte. The geometric mean is actually the adjusted geometric mean. The geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) is the intra-individual gCV.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|PK analysis set||Picogram*hours/milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821428|NCT01153724|Secondary|Amount of the Analyte Excreted in Urine From 0 to 24 Hours at Steady State (Ae0-24,ss)|Ae0-24,ss represents the amount of olodaterol and olodaterol glucuronide excreted in urine from 0 to time t=24 at steady state. The geometric mean is actually the adjusted geometric mean. The geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) is the intra-individual gCV.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|PK analysis set||ng||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821429|NCT01153724|Secondary|Fraction of Urine Excretion From 0 to 24 Hours at Steady State (fe0-24,ss)|fe0-24,ss represents the fraction of olodaterol eliminated in urine from time point 0 to 24 hours after administration at steady state.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|PK analysis set||percentage of olodaterol||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821430|NCT01153724|Secondary|Time From Dosing to the Maximum Concentration at Steady State (Tmax,ss)|tmax,ss represents the time from dosing to maximum concentration of olodaterol and olodaterol glucuronide in plasma at steady state.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|PK analysis set||Hours||Full Range|Median
821431|NCT01153724|Primary|Maximum Concentration at Steady State (Cmax,ss)|Cmax,ss represents the maximum concentration of olodaterol and olodaterol glucuronide (a metabolite of olodaterol) in plasma at steady state. The geometric mean is actually the adjusted geometric mean. The geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) is the intra-individual gCV.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|PK analysis set||Picogram/milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821432|NCT01153724|Primary|Area Under Curve From 0 to 6 Hours at Steady State (AUC0-6,ss)|AUC0-6,ss represents the area under the concentration curve of olodaterol in plasma from 0 to time t=6 hours at steady state, where t is defined as the latest time-point where at least 2/3 of the subjects in both treatment periods reveal quantifiable plasma concentrations of olodaterol. The geometric mean is actually the adjusted geometric mean. The geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) is the intra-individual gCV.|Day 8 of period 1 and day 14 of period 2|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set includes all evaluable subjects in the treated set providing at least 1 observation for at least 1 PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||Picogram*hours/milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821433|NCT01153763|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) Levels|LVEF was defined as the percentage of blood pumped out of the left ventricle. Change from Baseline in worst-case post Baseline was presented as no change or any increase and any decrease values. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing value prior to the first dose of study treatment. The change from Baseline was calculated as visit value minus Baseline value and was presented in the form of worst-case post Baseline value which was the maximum toxicity grade for a participant after the first dose of study drug over the treatment period.|Up to 60 months|All treated Population||Participants|||Number
821434|NCT01153763|Secondary|Number of Participants With Increase From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|Number of participants with increase from Baseline in SBP and DBP were evaluated from the first dose of study treatment till discontinuation due to any reason. Change from Baseline in worst-case post Baseline value was presented as any increase to >=80 and increase to >=100 for DBP and as any increase to >=120 and increase to >=160 for SBP. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing value prior to the first dose of study treatment. The change from Baseline was calculated as visit value minus Baseline value and was presented in the form of worst-case post Baseline value which was the maximum toxicity grade for a participant after the first dose of study drug over the treatment period. One participant out of the 92 participants (76 BRAF V600E patients + 16 BRAF V600K patients) did not have SBP and DBP collected after baseline.|Up to 60 months|All treated Population||Participants|||Number
821526|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percentage of Participants That Reach Target LDL-C Level of < 70 mg/dL (Phase I)||Week 6 (End of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I and had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821435|NCT01153763|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Temperature and Pulse Rate|Number of participants with change from Baseline in temperature and pulse rate were evaluated from the first dose of study treatment till discontinuation due to any reason. Change from Baseline in worst-case post Baseline value was presented as decrease to <=35, change to normal or no change and increase to >=38. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing value prior to the first dose of study treatment. The change from Baseline was calculated as visit value minus Baseline value and was presented in the form of worst case post-baseline value which was the maximum toxicity grade for a participant after the first dose of study drug over the treatment period.|Up to 60 months|All treated Population||Participants|||Number
821436|NCT01153763|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry and Hematology Toxicity Grades|Blood samples were collected from participants for evaluation of change from Baseline in toxicity grades in clinical chemistry and hematology parameters. The clinical chemistry parameters included alkaline phosphatase, Alanine amino transferase (ALT), Aspartate amino transferase (AST), total bilirubin, creatinine, glucose, potassium, magnesium, sodium and phosphorus. The hematology parameters included hemoglobin, total neutrophils, platelets and white blood cells (WBC). Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing value prior to the first dose of study treatment. The change from Baseline was calculated as visit value minus Baseline value and was presented in the form of worst case post-baseline value which was the maximum toxicity grade for a participant after the first dose of study drug over the treatment period. Only those participants with data available at the specified data points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Up to 60 months|All treated Population||Participants|||Number
821437|NCT01153763|Secondary|Number of Participants With AEs and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. AEs including systemic allergic and non-allergic reactions as well as local site injection-related reactions were counted throughout treatment phase and follow up phase. Systemic allergic reactions included facial paralysis, flushing, hypersensitivity and rash pruritic. Injection related reactions were considered as systemic non-allergic reactions. Local site reactions included injection site bruising, erythema, pain and reaction. The analysis was performed on All treated Population which comprised of all participants that receive at least one dose of dabrafenib.|Up to 60 months|All treated Population||Participants|||Number
821438|NCT01153763|Secondary|Overall Survival for Participants Who Had a BRAF V600K Mutation|Overall survival is defined as the time from the first dose of study medication until death due to any cause. For participants who did not die, overall survival was censored at the date of last contact. Overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier model and median and 95 percent CI was presented.|From the first dose to death due to any cause (up to 60 months)|Secondary Efficacy Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821439|NCT01153763|Secondary|Overall Survival for Participants Who Had a BRAF V600E Mutation|Overall survival is defined as the time from the first dose of study medication until death due to any cause. For participants who did not die, overall survival was censored at the date of last contact. Overall survival was estimated using kaplan-Meier model and median and 95 percent CI was presented.|Up to 60 months|Primary Efficacy Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821440|NCT01153763|Secondary|Duration of Response as Assessed by the Investigator and an Independent Reviewer for Participants Who Had a BRAF V600K Mutation|Duration of response for participants with either a CR or PR is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of a PR or CR until the first documented sign of disease progression or death due to any cause. Duration of response was estimated using Kaplan-Meier model and the median and 95 percent CI was presented. The analysis was performed on Secondary efficacy Population and only those participants who had a CR or PR were analyzed.|Up to 60 months|Secondary Efficacy Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821441|NCT01153763|Secondary|Duration of Response as Assessed by the Investigator and an Independent Reviewer for Participants Who Had a BRAF V600E Mutation|Duration of response for participants with either a CR or PR is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of a PR or CR until the first documented sign of disease progression or death due to any cause. Duration of response was estimated using Kaplan-Meier model and the median and 95 percent CI was presented. The analysis was performed on Primary efficacy Population and only those participants who had a CR or PR were analyzed.|Up to 60 months|Primary Efficacy Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821442|NCT01153763|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by the Investigator and an Independent Reviewer for Participants Who Had a BRAF V600K Mutation|PFS is defined as the interval between the first dose of study medication and the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause. The length of this interval is estimated as the date of death or progression minus date of first dose plus 1 day. Kaplan-Meier model was used to estimate the median and 95 percent CI. For participants who received subsequent anti-cancer therapy prior to the date of documented progression or death, PFS was censored at the last adequate assessment. For participants who did not have a documented date of progression or death, PFS was censored at the date of last adequate assessment.|Up to 60 months|Secondary Efficacy Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821443|NCT01153763|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by the Investigator and an Independent Reviewer for Participants Who Had a BRAF V600E Mutation|PFS is defined as the interval between the first dose of study medication and the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause. The length of this interval is estimated as the date of death or progression minus date of first dose plus 1 day. Kaplan-Meier model was used to estimate the median and 95 percent confidence interval (CI). For participants who received subsequent anti-cancer therapy prior to the date of documented progression or death, PFS was censored at the last adequate assessment. For participants who did not have a documented date of progression or death, PFS was censored at the date of last adequate assessment.|Up to 60 months|Primary Efficacy Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821471|NCT01153958|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in the form of signs, symptoms, abnormal laboratory findings, or diseases that emerges or worsens relative to baseline during a clinical study with an Investigational Medicinal Product (IMP), regardless of causal relationship and even if no IMP has been administered.|Up to 2 months post-treatment|Safety population included all randomized participants who used the investigational product at least once.||participants|||Number
821444|NCT01153763|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Best Overall Response of CR or PR as Assessed by the Investigator and an Independent Reviewer for Participants Who Had a BRAF V600K Mutation|A participant was defined as a responder if he/she achieved either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30 percent decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]). To be assigned a status of PR or CR, a confirmatory disease assessment had to have been performed at Week 12 if an initial response was seen at the Week 6 scan. Initial responses (CR/PR) that occured at Week 12 or later should have been confirmed not less than 4 weeks and not more than 6 weeks after the criteria for response were first met. The analysis was performed on Secondary efficacy analysis Population which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of GSK2118436 (All Treated Participants Population) and had a BRAF V600K mutation.|Up to 60 months|Secondary Efficacy Population||Participants|||Number
821445|NCT01153763|Primary|Number of Participants With a Best Overall Response of Confirmed Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) as Assessed by the Investigator for Participants Who Had a BRAF V600E Mutation|A participant was defined as a responder if he/she achieved either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 millimeter (mm) in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30 percent decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]). To be assigned a status of PR or CR, a confirmatory disease assessment was required at Week 12 if an initial response was seen at the Week 6 scan. Initial responses (CR/PR) that occured at Week 12 or later were required to be confirmed not less than 4 weeks and not more than 6 weeks after the criteria for response were first met. The analysis was performed on Primary efficacy Population which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of GSK2118436 (All Treated Participants Population) and had a BRAF V600E mutation.|Up to 60 months|Primary efficacy Population||Participants|||Number
821446|NCT01153815|Secondary|GAS Score as Evaluated by the Care Giver or the Participants at the Indicated Time Points|The care giver or participants used the GAS to assess response to treatment at each visit after injection. The assessor was the same throughout the study period. GAS scores were assessed by using the 9-point GAS (-4, -3, -2, -1, -0, +1, +2, +3, +4; -4=very marked worsening, -0=unchanged, +4=very marked improvement) at the indicated time point.|Weeks 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821447|NCT01153815|Secondary|Global Assessment Scale (GAS) Score as Evaluated by the Physician at the Indicated Time Points|The physician used the GAS to assess response to treatment at each visit after injection. The assessor was the same throughout the study period. GAS scores were assessed by using the 9-point GAS (-4, -3, -2, -1, -0, +1, +2, +3, +4; -4=very marked worsenig, -0=unchanged, +4=very marked improvement) at the indicated time points.|Weeks 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821448|NCT01153815|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Weeks 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12 for Principal Measure as Assessed on the Disability Assessment Scale (DAS)|The investigator assessed 4 areas of disability, hygiene, pain, dressing, and limb posture, using the 4-point DAS (0=No functional disability to 3=Severe disability). Prior to the first dose, the investigator, in consultation with the participant, selected 1functional disability item (which had to have a score of 2 or greater as measured on the DAS, indicating moderate to severe disability) from the 4 areas of disability and assessed it as a principal measure. Change from Baseline at the indicated time points was calculated as the value at Weeks 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and Weeks 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821449|NCT01153815|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Weeks 1, 4, 6, 8 and 12 for Thumb Flexor Muscle Tone as Measured on the MAS|The investigator, physotherapist, or occupational therapist extended the participant's thumb as quickly as possible to grade the flexor muscle tone. The MAS thumb score was calculated by using the 6-point MAS (0, 1, 1+ [regarded as 1.5], 2, 3, and 4; 0=no increase in muscle tone; 4=affected part[s] rigid in flexion/extension). Change from Baseline at the indicated time points was calculated as the value at Week 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and Weeks 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12|FAS Population. Only participants with thumb spasticity who received injection in the thumb muscles were evaluated. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821450|NCT01153815|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Weeks 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12 for Finger Flexor Muscle Tone as Measured on the MAS|The investigator, physiotherapist, or occupational therapist extended the participant's finger as quickly as possible to grade the flexor muscle tone. The MAS finger score was calculated by using the 6-point MAS (0, 1, 1+ [regarded as 1.5], 2, 3, and 4; 0=no increase in muscle tone; 4=affected part[s] rigid in flexion/extension). Change from Baseline at the indicated time points was calculated as the value at Week 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and Weeks 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821451|NCT01153815|Secondary|Number of Participants Classified as Wrist Treatment Responders at All Post-injection Visits|Wrist treatment responders were defined as participants with a decrease in wrist flexor muscle tone of at least one point on the MAS. The MAS wrist score was calculated by using the 6-point MAS (0, 1, 1+ [regarded as 1.5], 2, 3, and 4; 0=no increase in muscle tone; 4=affected part[s] rigid in flexion/extension).|Weeks 1, 4, 6, 8, and 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||participants|||Number
821452|NCT01153815|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Weeks 1, 4, 8, and 12 for Wrist Flexor Muscle Tone as Measured on the MAS|The investigator, physiotherapist, or occupational therapist extended the participant's wrist as quickly as possible to grade flexor muscle tone. The MAS wrist score was calculated by using the 6-point MAS (0, 1, 1+ [regarded as 1.5], 2, 3, and 4; 0=no increase in muscle tone; 4=affected part[s] rigid in flexion/extension). Change from Baseline at the indicated time points was calculated as the value at the indicated time points minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and Weeks 1, 4, 8, and 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821748|NCT01155323|Primary|Limbal Hyperemia|This outcome is assessed by the investigator during biomicroscopy examination using the following 0-4 scale: 0 = none, 1 = trace, 2 = mild, 3= moderate, 4 = severe.|after 1 week of wear|The analysis population represents subjects that completed the study per protocol.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821453|NCT01153815|Secondary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) for the Change From Baseline at Weeks 6 and 12 for MAS Wrist Score|The MAS wrist score was assessed by using the 6-point MAS (0, 1, 1+ [regarded as 1.5], 2, 3, and 4; 0=no increase in muscle tone; 4=affected part[s] rigid in flexion/extension). Mean change from Baseline for the MAS wrist score was calculated as the value at Week 6 and Week 12 minus the value at Baseline. In a graph plotting time points on the horizontal axis (HA) and changes from Baseline on the vertical axis, the area surrounded by the MAS wrist score change curve and the HA was calculated and used as a summary index (AUC) for assessment of the MAS wrist score.|Baseline (Day 0), Week 6, and Week 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821454|NCT01153815|Primary|Change From Baseline at Week 6 for Wrist Flexor Muscle Tone as Measured on the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS)|The investigator, physiotherapist, or occupational therapist extended the participant's wrist as quickly as possible to grade flexor muscle tone. The MAS wrist score was calculated by using the 6-point MAS (0, 1, 1+ [regarded as 1.5], 2, 3, and 4; 0=no increase in muscle tone; 4=affected part[s] rigid in flexion/extension). Change from Baseline at Week 6 was calculated as the value at Week 6 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and Week 6|Full Analysis Set (FAS) Population: all randomized and treated participants. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis. For each participant, missing data points were replaced by the mean of the non-missing scores from both treatment groups for that variable at the specific visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821455|NCT01153841|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life-threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|After the first vaccination up to study end (From Month 0 to Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
821456|NCT01153841|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. “Any” is defined an incidence of an unsolicited AE regardless of intensity or relationship to study vaccination.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) follow-up period after each dose|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
821457|NCT01153841|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include drowsiness, fever (defined as axillary temperature ≥ 37.5°C), irritability, and loss of appetite. Grade 3 drowsiness was defined as drowsiness which prevented normal everyday activities. Grade 3 fever was defined as fever (axillary temperature) above (>) 39.5 degree Celsius (°C). Grade 3 irritability was defined as crying that could not be comforted/preventing normal activity. Grade 3 loss of appetite was defined as the subject not eating at all. “Any” is defined as incidence of the specified symptom regardless of intensity or relationship to study vaccination.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period following each dose|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and with the symptom sheet filled in.||Subjects|||Number
821458|NCT01153841|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed include pain, redness and swelling. Grade 3 pain was defined as crying when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 swelling/redness was defined as swelling/redness larger than (>) 30 millimeters (mm). “Any” is defined as incidence of the specified symptom regardless of intensity.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period following each dose|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and with the symptom sheet filled in.||Subjects|||Number
821459|NCT01153841|Primary|Number of Subjects With Grade 3 Symptoms (Solicited and Unsolicited)|The incidence and nature of Grade 3 symptoms (solicited and unsolicited) reported during the 31-day post-vaccination period following each dose and across doses are presented.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) after each dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and with the symptom sheet filled in.||Subjects|||Number
821460|NCT01153893|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects.|During the entire study period, from the vaccination visit at Day 0 up to the end of the follow-up visit at Month 1 for the Synflorix/Infanrix primed Group and up to Month 3 for the Synflorix/Infanrix unprimed Group.|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
821461|NCT01153893|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited AEs.|Unsolicited AEs = Any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study. Also any “solicited” symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms was reported as an unsolicited adverse event.|Within 31 days (Days 0-30) after vaccination|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
821462|NCT01153893|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General AEs.|"Solicited general symptoms assessed were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever (= axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)).
Any= occurrence of any general symptom regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination Grade 3 drowsiness = drowsiness which prevented normal activity. Grade 3 irritability = crying that could not be comforted/ prevented normal activity. Grade 3 loss of appetite = not eating at all. Grade 3 fever = temperature >39.5°C.
Related = solicited symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to study vaccination."|Within 4 days (Days 0-3) after vaccination.|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
821749|NCT01155323|Primary|Subjective Rating of Quality Perceptions|This outcome is a weighted combined score calculated from individual quality perception-related questions asked on a 1-5 scale: 1 = most negative response to 5 = most positive response.|after 1 week of lens wear|The analysis population represents subjects that completed the study per protocol.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821463|NCT01153893|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local AEs.|"Solicited AEs = AEs to be recorded as endpoints in the clinical study. The presence/occurrence/intensity of these events was actively solicited from the subject or an observer during a specified post-vaccination follow-up period.
Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling.
Any = occurrence of any local symptom regardless of intensity grade.
Grade 3 pain = cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling above 30 millimetre (mm)"|Within 4 days (Days 0-3) after vaccination.|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
821464|NCT01153893|Secondary|Concentration of Antibodies Against Protein D (PD).|Anti-PD antibodies were determined using an ELISA assay. Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in ELISA units per millilitre (EL.U/mL). Concentration of specific PD antibodies was determined, using a standard reference serum. The cut-off of the assay is 100 ELISA units per millilitre (EL.U/mL).|Prior to and one month after the booster immunisation for the Synflorix/Infanrix primed Group and prior to the first dose and one month after Dose 2 in the Synflorix/Infanrix unprimed Group|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available. This included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one pneumococcal vaccine serotype or protein D for the blood sample taken one month after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821465|NCT01153893|Secondary|Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Cross-reactive Pneumococcal Serotypes.|"Cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes assessed were serotypes 6A and 19A.
Streptococcus pneumoniae opsonophagocytic activity was measured by a killing-assay using a HL 60 cell line. The results were presented as the dilution of serum (opsonic titre) able to sustain 50% killing of live pneumococci under the assay conditions. The cut-off of the assay is an opsonic titre of 8."|One month after the booster immunisation for the Synflorix/Infanrix primed Group and one month after Dose 2 in the Synflorix/Infanrix unprimed Group|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available. This included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one pneumococcal vaccine serotype or protein D for the blood sample taken one month after vaccination.||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821466|NCT01153893|Secondary|Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Pneumococcal Serotypes.|"Vaccine pneumococcal serotypes assessed were serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F.
Streptococcus pneumoniae opsonophagocytic activity was measured by a killing-assay using a HL 60 cell line. The results were presented as the dilution of serum (opsonic titre) able to sustain 50% killing of live pneumococci under the assay conditions. The cut-off of the assay is an opsonic titre of 8."|One month after the booster immunisation for the Synflorix/Infanrix primed Group and one month after Dose 2 in the Synflorix/Infanrix unprimed Group|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available. This included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one pneumococcal vaccine serotype or protein D for the blood sample taken one month after vaccination.||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821467|NCT01153893|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Cross-reactive Pneumococcal Serotypes.|"Cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes assessed were serotypes 6A and 19A. Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in microgram per millilitre (µg/mL).
The antibody concentrations against the cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 6A and 19A were determined by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The cut-off of the assay was 0.05 µg/mL."|Prior to and one month after the booster immunisation for the Synflorix/Infanrix primed Group and prior to the first dose and one month after Dose 2 in the Synflorix/Infanrix unprimed Group|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available. This included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one pneumococcal vaccine serotype or protein D for the blood sample taken one month after vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821468|NCT01153893|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Vaccine Pneumococcal Serotypes.|"Vaccine pneumococcal serotypes assessed were serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F.
Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in microgram per millilitre (µg/mL).
Pneumococcal serotype specific total imunoglobuline G (IgG) antibodies were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The cut-off of the assay was 0.05 µg/mL."|Prior to and one month after the booster immunisation for the Synflorix/Infanrix primed Group and prior to the first dose and one month after Dose 2 in the Synflorix/Infanrix unprimed Group|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available. This included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one pneumococcal vaccine serotype or protein D for the blood sample taken one month after vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821469|NCT01153893|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Grade 3 Symptoms (Solicited and Unsolicited).|"Grade 3 symptom = severe symptom that prevented normal activity.
Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling.
Solicited general symptoms assessed were drowsiness, fever, irritability and loss of appetite.
Unsolicited AEs = Any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study. Also any “solicited” symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms was reported as an unsolicited adverse event."|Within 31 days (Day 0 to Day 30) after administration of a booster dose of Synflorix vaccine in the Synflorix/Infanrix primed Group.|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
821470|NCT01153958|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Cured|Cure was defined as Nugent score less than 7, no symptoms of vaginal irritation (for example, pain, burning, odour or abnormal vaginal discharge). Nugent score was calculated by assessing for presence of large Gram-positive rods (Lactobacillus morphotypes; decrease in Lactobacillus scored as 0-4), small Gram-variable rods (Gardnerella vaginalis morphotypes; scored as 0-4), and curved Gram-variable rods (Mobiluncus species morphotypes; scored as 0-2). Total score range: 0-10. Score of 7-10 indicated bacterial vaginosis.|1 week post-treatment|FAS population included all enrolled participants who used investigational product. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
822142|NCT01160822|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration Time Curve up to the Last Measurable Concentration (AUClast)||Day 1, pre-dose and 1, 3, 6 and 8 hours post-dose (Part A only), Day 2, 4, 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 126.|Pharmacokinetic analysis set where data were available.||µg*day/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821472|NCT01153958|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Number of Participants With Each Grade of Lactobacilli at 2 Months Post-treatment|The grades of Lactobacilli in vaginal discharge were Grade 1 (Normal): Lactobacillus morphotypes predominate; Grade 2 (Intermediate): Mixed flora with some Lactobacilli present, but Gardnerella or Mobiluncus morphotypes also present; Grade 3 (Bacterial Vaginosis): Predominantly Gardnerella and/or Mobiluncus morphotypes, few or absent Lactobacilli.|Baseline and Month 2 post-treatment|FAS population included all enrolled participants who used investigational product. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the time point.||participants|||Number
821473|NCT01153958|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nugent Score at 2 Months Post-treatment|Nugent score was calculated by assessing for presence of large Gram-positive rods (Lactobacillus morphotypes; decrease in Lactobacillus scored as 0-4), small Gram-variable rods (Gardnerella vaginalis morphotypes; scored as 0-4), and curved Gram-variable rods (Mobiluncus species morphotypes; scored as 0-2). Total score range: 0-10. Score of 7-10 indicate bacterial vaginosis.|Baseline and Month 2 post-treatment|FAS population included all enrolled participants who used investigational product. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821474|NCT01153958|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse 1 Month Post-treatment|Relapse: recurrence of the symptoms of bacterial vaginosis [BV] (Nugent score greater than or equal to 7, symptoms of vaginal irritation for example, pain, burning, odour or abnormal vaginal discharge) after a period of improvement. Nugent score was calculated by assessing for presence of large Gram-positive rods (Lactobacillus morphotypes; decrease in Lactobacillus scored as 0-4), small Gram-variable rods (Gardnerella vaginalis morphotypes; scored as 0-4), and curved Gram-variable rods (Mobiluncus species morphotypes; scored as 0-2). Total score range: 0-10. Score of 7-10 indicated BV.|1 month post-treatment|FAS population included all enrolled participants who used investigational product. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
821475|NCT01153958|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse 2 Months Post-treatment|Relapse: recurrence of the symptoms of bacterial vaginosis [BV] (Nugent score greater than or equal to 7, symptoms of vaginal irritation for example, pain, burning, odour or abnormal vaginal discharge) after a period of improvement. Nugent score was calculated by assessing for presence of large Gram-positive rods (Lactobacillus morphotypes; decrease in Lactobacillus scored as 0-4), small Gram-variable rods (Gardnerella vaginalis morphotypes; scored as 0-4), and curved Gram-variable rods (Mobiluncus species morphotypes; scored as 0-2). Total score range: 0-10. Score of 7-10 indicated BV.|2 months post-treatment|Full analysis set (FAS) population included all enrolled participants who used investigational product. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
821476|NCT01153971|Secondary|DR - Time to Event|DR was defined for all participants who achieved a response (CR, CRu and PR) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase (Month 7 of the study) and was measured from the time of response until the date of progression or relapse. Participants without relapse or progression were censored at their last assessment date. Participants who died due to tumour were considered in progression. Participants who died for any other cause were censored to the death date.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population: only participants who achieved a response (CR, CRu and PR) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase of the study were included in the analysis.||months||Standard Error|Mean
821477|NCT01153971|Secondary|DR - Percentage of Participants With an Event|DR was defined for all participants who achieved a response (CR, CRu and PR) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase (Month 7 of the study) and was measured from the time of response until the date of progression or relapse. Participants without relapse or progression were censored at their last assessment date. Participants who died due to tumour were considered in progression. Participants who died for any other cause were censored to the death date.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population; only participants who achieved a response (CR, CRu and PR) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase of the study were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
821478|NCT01153971|Secondary|Duration of Response (DR) - Percentage of Participants Expected to Maintain a Response|DR data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. DR was defined for all participants who achieved a response (CR, CRu and PR) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase (Month 7 of the study) and was measured from the time of response until the date of progression or relapse. Participants without relapse or progression were censored at their last assessment date. Participants who died due to tumour were considered in progression. Participants who died for any other cause were censored to the death date.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population; only participants who achieved a response (CR, CRu and PR) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase of the study were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821479|NCT01153971|Secondary|PFS - Time to Event|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from treatment start to the date of documented disease progression. NOTE: The mean survival time and its standard error were underestimated because the largest observation was censored and the estimation was restricted to the largest event time.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population||months||Standard Error|Mean
821480|NCT01153971|Secondary|PFS - Percentage of Participants With an Event|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from the date of treatment start to the date of documented disease progression.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
821481|NCT01153971|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) - Percentage of Participants Estimated to Be Progress Free|PFS data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. PFS was defined as the time from treatment start to the date of documented disease progression. Reported data refer to values up to 40 months.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821527|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percentage of Participants That Reach Target LDL-C Level of < 100 mg/dL (Phase II)||Week 12 (End of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II and had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821482|NCT01153971|Secondary|DFS - Time to Event|DFS was defined for all participants who achieved a complete response (CR/CRu) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase (month 7 of the study) and was measured from the time of complete response to the date of relapse. Participants without relapse were censored at their last assessment date. Participants who died due to tumour burden were considered in relapse. Participants who died due to any other causes were censored on the death date. NOTE: The mean survival time and its standard error were underestimated because the largest observation was censored and the estimation was restricted to the largest event time.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40.|ITT population; only participants who achieved a complete response (CR/CRu) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase were included in the analysis.||months||Standard Error|Mean
821483|NCT01153971|Secondary|DFS - Percentage of Participants With an Event|DFS was defined for all patients who achieved a complete response (CR/CRu) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase (month 7 of the study) and was measured from the time of complete response to the date of relapse. Participants without relapse were censored at their last assessment date. Participants who died due to tumour burden were considered in relapse. Participants who died due to any other causes were censored on the death date.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40.|ITT population; only participants who achieved a complete response (CR/CRu) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
821484|NCT01153971|Secondary|Disease-Free Survival (DFS) - Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Disease-Free|DFS data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. DFS was defined for all participants who achieved a complete response (CR/CRu) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase (Month 7 of the study) and was measured from the time of CR to the date of relapse. Participants without relapse were censored at their last assessment date. Participants who died due to tumour burden were considered in relapse. Participants who died due to any other causes were censored as of the death date. The reported data refer to values up to 40 months.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population; only participants who achieved a complete response (CR/CRu) at month 1 after the completion of treatment of the induction phase were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821485|NCT01153971|Secondary|OS - Time to Event|Overall survival was defined as the time from first dosage of study drug to the date of death from any cause.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40.|ITT population||months||Standard Error|Mean
821486|NCT01153971|Secondary|OS - Percentage of Participants With an Event|OS was defined as the time from first dosage of study drug to the date of death from any cause.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40.|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
821487|NCT01153971|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) - Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Alive|OS data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. OS was defined as the time from first dosage of study drug to the date of death from any cause. Reported data refer to values up to 40 months.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821488|NCT01153971|Secondary|FFS - Time to Event|FFS was measured from the date of treatment start to the date of documented disease progression, relapse or death from any cause. Responding participants, participants who were lost to follow up, who withdrew consent or dropped out due to AEs were censored at their last assessment date. NOTE: The mean survival time and its standard error were underestimated because the largest observation was censored and the estimation was restricted to the largest event time.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population||months||Standard Error|Mean
821489|NCT01153971|Secondary|FFS - Percentage of Participants With an Event|FFS was measured from the date of treatment start to the date of documented disease progression, relapse, or death from any cause. Responding participants, participants who were lost to follow up, who withdrew consent, or who dropped out due to AEs were censored at their last assessment date.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
821490|NCT01153971|Secondary|Failure-Free Survival (FFS), Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Free of Documented Disease Progression, Relapse, or Death|FFS data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. FFS was measured from the date of treatment start to the date of documented disease progression, relapse, or death from any cause. Responding participants, participants who were lost to follow up, who withdrew consent, or dropped out due to adverse events (AE) were censored at their last assessment date. The reported data refer to values up to 40 months.|Baseline, Months 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16, 22, 28, 34 and 40|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821491|NCT01153971|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response by Response Type and Study Phase|CR: complete disappearance of all symptoms/objective signs of disease (enlarged lymph nodes, hepatomegaly, splenomegaly) for at least 3 months following definitive re-evaluation at end of therapy. For initial bone marrow involvement, clearance of bone marrow documented by biopsy, normalization of blood counts with granulocytes greater than (>)1,500 per microliter (/µL), hemoglobin >12 grams per deciliter (g/dL), platelets >100,000/µL. CRu: disappearance of all symptoms and nearly all measurable lesions, but persistence of some radiologic abnormalities with normalization of all biologic abnormalities; normalization of the performance status for at least 3 months after the definite evaluation of therapy. PR: at least 50 percent (%) reduction of measurable and evaluable lymphoma involvement for at least 4 weeks without occurrence of new manifestations, normalization of blood counts. Participants without evaluation at end of induction/maintenance phase were considered nonresponders.|Baseline, Months 4, 7, 11, 16, 22, 28, 34, and 40|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
821504|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) (Phase I)|hs-CRP measured at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4. Baseline and post-baseline measurements were log-transformed in the response vector, with fixed effects for treatment, time and the interaction of time by treatment.|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I and had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821492|NCT01153971|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Best Overall Response of CR, CRu, or PR by Study Phase|CR: complete disappearance of all symptoms/objective signs of disease (enlarged lymph nodes, hepatomegaly, splenomegaly) for at least 3 months following definitive re-evaluation at end of therapy. For initial bone marrow involvement, clearance of bone marrow documented by biopsy, normalization of blood counts with granulocytes greater than (>)1,500 per microliter (/µL), hemoglobin >12 grams per deciliter (g/dL), platelets >100,000/µL. CRu: disappearance of all symptoms and nearly all measurable lesions, but persistence of some radiologic abnormalities with normalization of all biologic abnormalities; normalization of the performance status for at least 3 months after the definite evaluation of therapy. PR: at least 50 percent (%) reduction of measurable and evaluable lymphoma involvement for at least 4 weeks without occurrence of new manifestations, normalization of blood counts. Participants without evaluation at end of induction/maintenance phase were considered nonresponders.|Baseline, Months 4, 7 (Induction Phase), 11, 16 (Maintenance Phase),22, 28, 34, and 40(Follow-Up Phase)|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821493|NCT01153971|Primary|Percentage of Participants Remaining Failure-Free After 2 Years From Treatment Start Date|Percentage of participants who at 2 years from the start of treatment remained free from documented disease progression, relapse, or death. Failure status was based on tumor evaluation performed on Month 28. Participants who did not have a tumor evaluation at Month 28 were counted as failures.|Month 28|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821494|NCT01153984|Secondary|Percentage of Similar EGFR Mutations Between Matched Plasma and Tumor Tissue Samples||Baseline up to approximately 4 years|No participants were analyzed for this outcome as no plasma samples were collected during the study.|||||
821495|NCT01153984|Secondary|Number of EGFR Positive Participants Classified Based on Type of EGFR Mutations|Participants with NSCLC have tumor associated with EGFR mutations. These mutations occur within EGFR Exons 18-21, which encodes a portion of the EGFR kinase domain.|Day 1|All enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
821496|NCT01153984|Secondary|Number of EGFR Positive Participants Classified Based on Smoking Status|Participants were asked: “Have you smoked at least 100 cigarettes in your entire life?” and “Do you now smoke cigarettes every day, some days, or not at all?” Responses were grouped into three categories: Current Smoker, Former Smoker, and Non-Smoker. Participants who reported smoking at least 100 cigarettes in their lifetime and who, at the time of survey, smoked either every day or some days were defined as 'Current smoker'. Participants who reported smoking at least 100 cigarettes in their lifetime and who, at the time of the survey, did not smoke at all were defined as 'Former smoker'. Participants who reported never having smoked 100 cigarettes were defined as 'Non-smoker'.|Day 1|All enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
821497|NCT01153984|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by Localization of PD, as Assessed by Investigator Using RECIST v1.1|PD was assessed using RECIST v1.1. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions. Percentage of participants by localization of PD were reported. Localization included: Left lung inferior lobe; Para-aortic; Left lung upper lobe; Right lung inferior lobe; and Infracranial.|Baseline up to approximately 4 years|All enrolled participants with available data for this outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
821498|NCT01153984|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Were Alive One Year After Study Treatment Initiation||Year 1|All enrolled participants with available data for this outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
821499|NCT01153984|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) And Partial Response (PR) as Assessed by the Investigator Using RECIST v1.1|CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions, and PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter compared to baseline.|Baseline up to approximately 4 years|All enrolled participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
821500|NCT01153984|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression, as Assessed by Investigator Using RECIST v1.1|Time to disease progression was defined as the time from baseline evaluation to the first date PD was recorded. Participants without progression were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions.|Baseline up to approximately 4 years|All enrolled participants.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821501|NCT01153984|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS), as Assessed by Investigator Using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1)|PFS was the time from inclusion in the study to the date of first documented PD or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. Participants without event were censored at the date of the last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented. If a participant received a second anti-cancer therapy without prior documentation of disease progression, the participant was censored at the date of last tumor assessment before starting new chemotherapy. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier method. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions.|Baseline up to approximately 4 years|All enrolled participants.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821502|NCT01154010|Primary|Inflammation Grade at Day 7|Degree and grade of ocular inflammation based on Standard Uveitis Nomenclature will be assessed at initial visit, Day 3, and Day 7 of use of the PEMF device to assess if the PEMF device decreases the duration and severity of ocular inflammation when used as an adjunctive therapy for anterior uveitis. The results posted here are from day 7. The Standard Uveitis Nomenclature scale ranges from 0 to 4, with 0 indicating a minimal level of ocular inflammation and 4 indicating the maximal level of corneal inflammation.|7 days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821503|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Hs-CRP (Phase II)|hs-CRP measured at Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6. Baseline and post-baseline measurements were log-transformed in the response vector, with fixed effects for treatment, time and the interaction of time by treatment.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II and had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821505|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Non-HDL-C/HDL-C Ratio (Phase II)|Non HDL-C/HDL-C Ratio calculated at baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II or had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821506|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Non-HDL-C/HDL-C Ratio (Phase I)|Non HDL-C/HDL-C ratio calculated at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I or had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821507|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apo B/Apo A-I Ratio (Phase II)|Apo B/Apo A-I Ratio calculated at Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II or had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821508|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apo B/Apo A-I Ratio (Phase I)|Apo B/Apo A-I ratio calculated at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I or had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821509|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in LDL-C/HDL-C Ratio (Phase II)|LDL-C/HDL-C Ratio calculated at Baseline (end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II or had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821510|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in LDL-C/HDL-C Ratio (Phase I)|LDL-C/HDL-C ratio calculated at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I or had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821511|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in TC/HDL-C Ratio (Phase II)|TC/HDL-C Ratio calculated at Baseline (end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II or had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821512|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in TC/HDL-C Ratio (Phase I)|TC/HDL-C ratio calculated at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I or had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821513|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Non-HDL-C (Phase II)|Non-HDL-C levels calculated at Baseline (end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase I) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II or had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821514|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Non-HDL-C (Phase I)|Non-HDL-C measured at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I or had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821525|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percentage of Participants That Reach Target LDL-C Level of < 70 mg/dL (Phase II)||Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II and had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821515|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apo A-I (Phase II)|Apo-A-I levels measured at Baseline (end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase I) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II or had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821516|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein A-I (Apo A-I) (Phase I)|Apo-A-I measured at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I or had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821517|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apo B (Phase II)|Apo-B levels measured at Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II or had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821518|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein B (Apo B) (Phase I)|Apo-B measured at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I or had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821519|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in HDL-C (Phase II)|HDL-C levels measured at Baseline (end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase I) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II or had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821520|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in High-density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (HDL-C) (Phase I)|HDL-C measured at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I or had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821521|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Triglycerides (TG) (Phase II)|TG levels measured at Baseline (Week 6: end of Phase I) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6. Baseline and post-baseline measurements were log-transformed in the response vector, with fixed effects for treatment, time and the interaction of time by treatment.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase I) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II and had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821522|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Triglycerides (TG) (Phase I)|TG measured at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4. Baseline and post-baseline measurements were log-transformed in the response vector, with fixed effects for treatment, time and the interaction of time by treatment.|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I and had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821523|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol (TC) (Phase II)|TC levels measured at Baseline (end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12; end of Phase II). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6.|Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase I) and Week 12 (end of Phase II)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II or had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821524|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol (TC) (Phase I)|TC measured at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I or had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
822108|NCT01160614|Primary|Single- and Multiple-dose PK Metric: Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration From Hour 0 to 12 Hours of the First Dose of ORF (Tmax 0-12)||Up to 12 hours|The full analysis population for PK (N = 30) was defined as patients who received at least 1 dose of oral study drug and had at least 1 valid quantifiable PK metric||h||Full Range|Median
821528|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percentage of Participants That Reach Target LDL-C Level of < 100 mg/dL (Phase I)||Week 6 (End of Phase I)|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during Phase I, had a baseline measurement for Phase I and had at least 1 measurement after the start of study drug provided during Phase I.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821529|NCT01154036|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Low-Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (LDL-C) (Phase II).|LDL-C levels measured at Baseline (Week 6; end of Phase 1) and after 6 weeks of study drug administration (Week 12). Baseline was defined as the average of the values at Visits 5 and 6. LDL-C was calculated using the Friedewald method when triglyceride (TG)<350 mg/dL (3.95 mmol/L) and beta quantification ultracentrifugation when TG ≥350 mg/dL (3.95 mmol/L).|Baseline (Week 6) and Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase II this population consisted of all randomized participants who completed Phase I and were not adequately controlled at the end of Phase I, received at least 1 dose of study treatment during Phase II, had a baseline measurement for Phase II or had at least 1 measurement after the start of Phase II||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821530|NCT01154036|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Low-Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (LDL-C) (Phase I)|LDL-C levels measured at Baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment (Week 6; end of Phase I). Baseline was defined as the average value of the measurements taken at Visits 3 and 4. LDL-C was calculated using the Friedewald method when triglyceride (TG)<350 mg/dL (3.95 mmol/L) and beta quantification ultracentrifugation when TG≥350 mg/dL (3.95 mmol/L).|Baseline and Week 6 (end of Phase I )|Efficacy analyses were performed using the Full Analysis Set (FAS). For Phase I this population consisted of all randomized participant who received at least one dose of study drug during Phase I and had a baseline or at least one measurement available during Phase I||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Median
821531|NCT01154127|Secondary|Exercise Endurance Time During a Sub-maximal Constant-load Cycle Ergometry Test (SMETT) on Treatment Day 1|"SMETT is an exercise procedure where the patient cycles at 80% of the maximum workload (Wmax )value achieved at the Incremental exercise test. During this test, the patient will cycle at a constant load. Exercise endurance time was from commencement of loaded pedaling to stopping exercise.
The analysis-of covariance model included the sequence, period, and treatment as fixed factors, the baseline value as covariate and the patient as a random effect."|Day 1|Pharmacodynamics (PD) set consisted of participants who completed at least one treatment period, had an evaluable PD assessment on Day 21 of this period and had no major protocol deviation impacting the primary PD assessment.||Seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821532|NCT01154127|Secondary|Leg Discomfort (Borg CR10 Scale) During Sub-maximal Constant-load Cycle Ergometry Test (SMETT) After 3 Weeks Treatment|"The modified Borg CR10 Scale consists of 12-point score that the patients pointed to so as to indicate their level of leg discomfort before and during exercise testing (where 0 indicates no breathlessness at all and 12 indicates maximum breathlessness).
A reduction in this score indicates an improvement. The analysis-of covariance model included the sequence, period, and treatment as fixed factors, the baseline value as covariate and the patient as a random effect."|Day 21|Pharmacodynamics (PD) set consisted of participants who completed at least one treatment period, had an evaluable PD assessment on Day 21 of this period and had no major protocol deviation impacting the primary PD assessment.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821533|NCT01154127|Secondary|Exertional Dyspnea (Borg CR10 Scale) During Sub-maximal Constant-load Cycle Ergometry Test (SMETT) After 3 Weeks Treatment|"The Borg CR10 Scale consists of 12-point score that the patients pointed to so as to indicate their level of dyspnea before and during exercise testing (where 0 indicates no breathlessness at all and 12 indicates maximum breathlessness).
A reduction in this score indicates an improvement. The analysis-of covariance model included the sequence, period, and treatment as fixed factors, the baseline value as covariate and the patient as a random effect."|Day 21|Pharmacodynamics (PD) set consisted of participants who completed at least one treatment period, had an evaluable PD assessment on Day 21 of this period and had no major protocol deviation impacting the primary PD assessment.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821534|NCT01154127|Secondary|Specific Airways Conductance (SGaw)|"SGaw is a measure of how hard it is to get air into the lungs, measured by (Sec(-1)*kP). Whole body plethysmography (Bodybox) was used to measure SGaw.
The analysis-of covariance model included the sequence, period, and treatment as fixed factors, the baseline value as covariate and the patient as a random effect."|Day 21|Pharmacodynamics (PD) set consisted of participants who completed at least one treatment period, had an evaluable PD assessment on Day 21 of this period and had no major protocol deviation impacting the primary PD assessment.||litres/(Second*kpa); kpa = kilopascal||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821535|NCT01154127|Secondary|Slow Vital Capacity (SVC) and Total Lung Capacity (TLC)|"Vital Capacity is the amount of air that can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after a full inhalation. Slow Vital Capacity (SVC) test is performed by having the patient slowly and completely blow out all of the air from their lungs.
Total Lung Capacity (TLC) is the best vital capacity plus residual volume. Whole body plethysmography (Bodybox) was used to measure SVC and TLC. The trough effects of Day 1 treatment are derived from values prior to morning dosing on the next treatment day (Day 2 of the corresponding period)."|Day 21|Pharmacodynamics (PD) set consisted of participants who completed at least one treatment period, had an evaluable PD assessment on Day 21 of this period and had no major protocol deviation impacting the primary PD assessment. “n” indicates number of participants with observation at each time-point.||Litres||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821536|NCT01154127|Secondary|Peak and Trough (24 h Post Dose) Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|"FEV1 is the amount of air that can be exhaled in one second. FEV1 was measured with spirometry conducted according to internationally accepted standards.
FVC is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out after full inspiration and is used in spirometry tests.
The trough effects of Day 1 treatment are derived from values prior to morning dosing on the next treatment day (Day 2 of the corresponding period).
The analysis-of covariance model included the sequence, period, and treatment as fixed factors, the baseline value as covariate and the patient as a random effect."|Day 21|Pharmacodynamics (PD) set consisted of participants who completed at least one treatment period, had an evaluable PD assessment on Day 21 of this period and had no major protocol deviation impacting the primary PD assessment.||Litres||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821537|NCT01154127|Secondary|Inspiratory Capacity (IC) at Rest (1 Hour Post Dose) and at Peak (End of Exercise) During Sub-maximal Constant-load Cycle Ergometry Test (SMETT) After 3 Weeks of Treatment|"IC at peak was observed using spirometry. However, two different methodologies (whole body plethysmography (Bodybox) and spirometry) were used to observe IC at rest.
The analysis of covariance model included the sequence, period, and treatment as fixed factors, the baseline value as covariate and the patient as a random effect."|Day 21|Pharmacodynamics (PD) set consisted of participants who completed at least one treatment period, had an evaluable PD assessment on Day 21 of this period and had no major protocol deviation impacting the primary PD assessment. “n” indicates number of participants with observation at each time-point.||Litres||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821538|NCT01154127|Secondary|Isotime Inspiratory Capacity (IC) During Sub-maximal Constant-load Cycle Ergometry Test (SMETT) After 3 Weeks of Treatment|Isotime is the last matching timepoint in the submaximal exercise tolerance test (SMETT) at which for both periods the patient has a test result. The analysis-of covariance model included the sequence, period, and treatment as fixed factors, the baseline value as covariate and the patient as a random effect.|Day 21|Pharmacodynamics (PD) set consisted of participants who completed at least one treatment period, had an evaluable PD assessment on Day 21 of this period and had no major protocol deviation impacting primary the PD assessment.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821539|NCT01154127|Primary|Exercise Endurance Time During a Sub-maximal Constant-load Cycle Ergometry Test (SMETT) After 3 Weeks (Day 21) of Treatment|SMETT is an exercise procedure where the patient cycles at 80% of the maximum workload (Wmax )value achieved at the Incremental exercise test. During this test, the patient will cycle at a constant load. Exercise endurance time was from commencement of loaded pedaling to stopping exercise. The analysis-of covariance model included the sequence, period, and treatment as fixed factors, the baseline value as covariate and the patient as a random effect.|Day 21|Pharmacodynamics (PD) set consisted of participants who completed at least one treatment period, had an evaluable PD assessment on Day 21 of this period and had no major protocol deviation impacting the primary PD assessment.||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821540|NCT01154140|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hospital Admissions-Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU)|Hospitalization details were evaluated in this study. Data regard to hospitalizations were summarized from information in the case report forms.|From 28 days prior to the start of study treatment and up to 28 days post the last dose of study treatment|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Percentage of participants|||Number
821541|NCT01154140|Secondary|Change From Baseline in General Health Status as Assessed by EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D)- Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|The EQ-5D is a validated and reliable self-report preference-based measure developed by the EuroQoL Group to assess health-related quality of life. It consists of the EQ-5D descriptive system and a visual analogue scale-the EQ VAS. The EQ-5D descriptive system measures a participants' health state on 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels, reflecting “no health problems,” “moderate health problems,” and “extreme health problems.” The EQ VAS records the respondent’s self-rated health on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state).|From Baseline up to treatment withdrawal or crossover|PRO evaluable population included all participants from the FA population who completed a baseline (last PRO assessment prior to randomization day) and at least 1 postbaseline PRO assessment prior to crossover or end of randomized study treatment. N = Total participants in PRO evaluable population set for EQ-5D analysis||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
821542|NCT01154140|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Lung Cancer Symptom Scores as Assessed by the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Lung Cancer 13 (QLQ- LC13)|The QLQ-LC13 consisted of 1 multi-item scale and 9 single items that assessed the specific symptoms (dyspnea, cough, hemoptysis, and site specific pain), side effects (sore mouth, dysphagia, neuropathy, and alopecia), and pain medication use of lung cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Scale score range: 0 to 100. Higher symptom score = greater degree of symptom severity.|Cycle 1 day 1 to end of treatment or withdrawal or crossover|PRO evaluable population included all participants from the FA population who completed a baseline (last PRO assessment prior to randomization day) and at least 1 postbaseline PRO assessment prior to crossover or end of randomized study treatment. N = Total participants in PRO evaluable population set for EORTC QLQ-LC13 analysis.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
821543|NCT01154140|Secondary|Change From Baseline Scores in QLQ-C30 Symptoms as Assessed by the EORTC-QLQ-C30|EORTC QLQ-C30: included functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), global health status, symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting) and single items (dyspnoea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation/diarrhea and financial difficulties). Most questions used 4 point scale (1 'Not at all' to 4 'Very much'; 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'very poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores averaged, transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score=better level of functioning or greater degree of symptoms.|Cycle 1 day 1 to end of treatment or withdrawal or crossover|PRO evaluable population included all participants from the FA population who completed a baseline (last PRO assessment prior to randomization day) and at least 1 postbaseline PRO assessment prior to crossover or end of randomized study treatment. N = Total participants in PRO evaluable population set for EORTC QLQ-C30 analysis.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
821544|NCT01154140|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functioning and Global Quality of Life (QOL) as Assessed by the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30)|EORTC QLQ-C30: included functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), global health status, symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting) and single items (dyspnoea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation/diarrhea and financial difficulties). Most questions used 4 point scale (1 'Not at all' to 4 'Very much'; 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'very poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores averaged, transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score=better level of functioning or greater degree of symptoms.|Cycle 1 day 1 to end of treatment or withdrawal or crossover|PRO evaluable population included all participants from the FA population who completed a baseline (last PRO assessment prior to randomization day) and at least 1 postbaseline PRO assessment prior to crossover or end of randomized study treatment. N = Total participants in PRO evaluable population set for EORTC QLQ-C30 analysis.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
821545|NCT01154140|Secondary|Time to Deterioration (TTD) in Pain in Chest, Dyspnea, or Cough|TTD in pain in chest, dyspnea, or cough from the Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-LC13) was a composite endpoint defined as the time from randomization to the earliest time the participant’s scale scores showed a 10 point or greater increase after baseline in any of the 3 symptoms. For those who had not shown deterioration, the data was censored at the last date when the participants completed an assessment (QLQ-LC13) for pain, dyspnea, or cough or at last visit date prior to crossover for participants randomized to chemotherapy who subsequently crossed over to crizotinib. A 10-point or higher change in the score was perceived by participants as clinically significant. The median TTD mentioned in below table was based on Brookmeyer and Crowley method.|From Baseline to deterioration while on study treatment|The Patient reported outcome (PRO) evaluable population included all participants from the FA population who completed a baseline (last PRO assessment prior to randomization day) and at least 1 postbaseline PRO assessment prior to crossover or end of randomized study treatment.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821546|NCT01154140|Secondary|ORR Between ALK Variant Groups Based on IRR|A mandatory tumor sample (archived or fresh) was required at screening for detecting ALK gene fusion events in order to determine the eligibility of participants to enter the study. The Vysis ALK Break Apart Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) test was used as the primary assay. Only those participants whose tissue sample was positive for the ALK gene fusion by FISH testing by the central laboratory were allowed to enter the study. Testing for ALK gene fusion variants was performed using the Response Genetics, Inc. Echinoderm Microtubule Associated Protein Like 4 (EML4) ALK reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT PCR) gene fusion test. Percentage of participant with complete or partial response was according to RECIST version 1.1 by type of ALK gene fusion variant.|Randomization to objective progression, death or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (up to 35 months)|The ALK gene fusion variant evaluable population was defined as participants from the FA population who had a result from ALK gene fusion variant testing of either no rearrangement, or 1 of 9 results reflecting 8 specific rearrangements (V1, V2, V3a, V3b, V3a/b, V4, V5a, V6, and V7).||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821547|NCT01154140|Secondary|Percentage of Participants for Each Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK) Gene Fusion Variants|A mandatory tumor sample (archived or fresh) was required at screening for detecting ALK gene fusion events in order to determine the eligibility of participants to enter the study. The Vysis ALK Break Apart Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) test was used as the primary assay. Only those participants whose tissue sample was positive for the ALK gene fusion by FISH testing by the central laboratory were allowed to enter the study. Testing for ALK gene fusion variants was performed using the Response Genetics, Inc. Echinoderm Microtubule Associated Protein Like 4 (EML4) ALK reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT PCR) gene fusion test.|Screening|The ALK gene fusion variant evaluable population was defined as participants from the FA population who had a result from ALK gene fusion variant testing of either no rearrangement, or 1 of 9 results reflecting 8 specific rearrangements (V1, V2, V3a, V3b, V3a/b, V4, V5a, V6, and V7).||Percentage of participants with variant|||Number
821548|NCT01154140|Secondary|Plasma Predose Concentration (Trough Concentration [Ctrough]) of Crizotinib and Its Metabolite|This analysis was performed in crizotinib arm only. Plasma samples for pharmacokinetic (PK) assessment were to be obtained prior to (predose) and around the time to maximum plasma concentration (Tmax) following morning dosing (at 2 to 6 hours postdose until Protocol Amendment 6 which changed the timing of PK sampling to 3 and 5 hours postdose) on Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, and 5.|Cycle 2 Day 1, Cycle 3 Day 1 and Cycle 5 Day 1|The PK concentration population (also referred to as the PK evaluable population) included any participant in the SA population who had at least 1 plasma concentration of crizotinib or its metabolite, PF 06260182, determined following crizotinib treatment as of the data cutoff date.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821549|NCT01154140|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent AEs (Treatment Related)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study treatment in a participant who received study treatment. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. AEs were to be collected from first dose until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. SAEs could be collected after this timeframe if considered to be treatment related. Grade 3 and 4 AEs in the below table indicated severe AE and life-threatening consequences respectively; Grade 5 indicated death related to AE. Chemotherapy group in the below table, only includes data before crossover to crizotinib for those participants who crossed over to receive crizotinib treatment.|From the first dose of study medication until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. However all AEs entered in the database from the treatment start were included in AE analyses.|SA population included all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study treatment, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received during the first cycle.||Percentage of participants|||Number
821550|NCT01154140|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (AEs; All Causalities)|An AE was an untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study treatment without regard to possibility of causal relationship. Serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes: death, initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, life-threatening experience, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent AEs were those with initial onset or that worsen in severity after the first dose of study medication. AEs were to be collected from first dose until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. SAEs could be collected after this timeframe if considered to be treatment related. Grade 3 and 4 AEs in below table indicated severe AE and life-threatening consequences respectively; Grade 5 indicated death due to AE. Chemotherapy group in the below table includes data before crossover to crizotinib for participants who crossed over to receive crizotinib.|From the first dose of study medication until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. However all AEs entered in the database from the treatment start were included in AE analyses|The safety analysis (SA) population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received during the first cycle.||Percentage of participants|||Number
822143|NCT01160822|Secondary|Time to Reach the Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration of Canakinumab (Tmax)||Day 1, pre-dose and 1, 3, 6 and 8 hours post-dose (Part A only), Day 2, 4, 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 126.|Pharmacokinetic analysis set where data were available.||hours||Full Range|Median
821551|NCT01154140|Secondary|Time to Extracranial Progression (EC-TTP) Based on IRR|EC-TTP was defined similarly to TTP, but only considering extracranial disease (excluding intracranial disease) and the progression was determined based on either new extracranial lesions or progression of existing extracranial lesions. The median EC-TTP presented in below table was based on Brookmeyer and Crowley method.|Randomization to objective extracranial progression or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (up to 35 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821552|NCT01154140|Secondary|Time to Intracranial Progression (IC-TTP) Based on IRR|IC-TTP was defined similarly to TTP, but only considering intracranial disease (excluding extracranial disease) and the progression was determined based on either new brain metastases or progression of existing brain metastases. The median IC-TTP presented in below table was based on Brookmeyer and Crowley method.|Randomization to objective intracranial progression or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (up to 35 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821553|NCT01154140|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP) Based on IRR|TTP was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the first documentation of objective tumor progression, as determined by IRR. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date was used. TTP (in months) was calculated as (first event date − randomization date +1)/30.44. The median TTP presented in below table was based on Brookmeyer and Crowley method,|Randomization to objective progression or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (up to 35 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821554|NCT01154140|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control at Week 12 Based on IRR|Disease Control Rate (DCR) at 12 weeks is defined as the percent of participants with CR, PR or stable disease (SD) at 12 weeks according to RECIST version 1.1 as determined by the IRR. The best response of SD can be assigned if SD criteria were met at least once after randomization at a minimum interval of 6 weeks. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease. All nodes, both target and non-target, must decrease to normal (short axis <10 mm). No new lesions and disappearance of all non-target lesions. PR was defined as >=30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions. The short axis was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No unequivocal progression of non-target disease. No new lesions.|From randomization to Week 12|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821555|NCT01154140|Secondary|Time to Tumor Response (TTR) Based on IRR|TTR was defined as the time from randomization to first documentation of objective tumor response (CR or PR) as determined by the IRR. For participants proceeding from PR to CR, the onset of PR was taken as the onset of response. TTR was calculated for the subgroup of participants with objective tumor response.|Randomization to first documentation of objective tumor response (up to 35 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization. N=Participants who had objective tumor response by IRR.||Weeks||Full Range|Median
821556|NCT01154140|Secondary|Duration of Response (DR) Based on IRR|DR was defined as the time from the first documentation of objective tumor response (CR or PR), as determined by the IRR, to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date was used. DR (in weeks) was calculated as (first date of PD or death − first date of CR or PR +1)/7. DR was only calculated for the subgroup of participants with an objective tumor response. The median duration of response presented in below table was based on Brookmeyer and Crowley method.|From objective response to date of progression, death or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (up to 35 months).|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization. N = Participants with objective tumor response by IRR.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821557|NCT01154140|Secondary|Objective Response Rate - Percentage of Participants With Objective Response as Assessed by IRR|Percentage of participants with objective response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to RECIST version 1.1. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease. All nodes, both target and non-target, must decrease to normal (short axis <10 mm). No new lesions and disappearance of all non-target lesions. PR was defined as >=30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions. The short axis was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No unequivocal progression of non-target disease. No new lesions.|Randomization to objective progression, death or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (up to 35 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821558|NCT01154140|Secondary|OS Probability at Months 12 and 18|OS was defined as the time from randomization to the date of death due to any cause. OS (in months) was calculated as (date of death − date of randomization +1)/30.44.|Months 12 and 18|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Percent probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821559|NCT01154140|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from randomization to the date of death due to any cause. OS (in months) was calculated as (date of death − date of randomization +1)/30.44.|From randomization to death or last date known alive for those not known to have died (up to 35 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822109|NCT01160614|Primary|Single- and Multiple-dose PK Metric: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration From Hour 0 to 12 Hours of the First Dose of ORF (Cmax 0-12)||Up to 12 hours|The full analysis population for PK (N = 30) was defined as patients who received at least 1 dose of oral study drug and had at least 1 valid quantifiable PK metric||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821560|NCT01154140|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Based on Independent Radiology Review (IRR) by Treatment Arm|PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the first documentation of objective tumor progression (by IRR) or death on study due to any cause, whichever occured first. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date was used. PFS (in months) was calculated as (first event date − randomization date +1)/30.44.|Randomization to objective progression, death or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (up to 35 months)|The Full Analysis (FA) population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821561|NCT01154153|Secondary|The Percent of Days of Rescue Medication Use During the Double-blind Treatment Phase|The percent of days of rescue medication used during the double-blind treatment phase was calculated. For participants who did not use any rescue medication, the percentage of days using rescue medication was set to be 0.|From randomization to 43-50 days postrandomization|The per protocol (PP) population included all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study medication and had no major protocol violations. Major protocol violations were those deemed most likely to affect the interpretation of the results and included poor compliance, use of prohibited medication, missing blood samples.||Percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
821562|NCT01154153|Secondary|Number of Participants Using Rescue Medication|The number of participants using the rescue medication (Claritin®) during the single-blind screening phase (the time from 8-24 days before randomization up to the day before randomization) and during the double-blind treatment phase (the time from randomization to end of study).|From 8 to 24 days prerandomization and randomization to end of study (43-50 days postrandomization)|The per protocol (PP) population included all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study medication and had no major protocol violations. Major protocol violations were those deemed most likely to affect the interpretation of the results and included poor compliance, use of prohibited medication, missing blood samples.||Participants|||Number
821563|NCT01154153|Secondary|Number of Participants by Relief Level as Evaluated by the Participant|Efficacy of treatment was assessed by the participant using a scale from 0-4 for relief levels, where 0 = no relief (symptoms unchanged or worsened than before), 1 = slight relief (symptoms present and only minimally improved), 2 = moderate relief (symptoms are present and may be troublesome, but are noticeably improved), 3 = marked relief (symptoms are greatly improved and although present are scarcely troublesome) and 4 = complete relief (virtually no symptom present).|At end of study (43-50 days after randomization)|The per protocol (PP) population included all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study medication and had no major protocol violations. Major protocol violations were those deemed most likely to affect the interpretation of the results and included poor compliance, use of prohibited medication, missing blood samples.||Participants|||Number
821564|NCT01154153|Secondary|Number of Participants by Relief Level as Evaluated by the Physician|Efficacy of treatment was assessed by the physician using a scale from 0-4 for relief levels, where 0 = no relief (symptoms unchanged or worsened than before), 1 = slight relief (symptoms present and only minimally improved), 2 = moderate relief (symptoms are present and may be troublesome, but are noticeably improved), 3 = marked relief (symptoms are greatly improved and although present are scarcely troublesome) and 4 = complete relief (virtually no symptom present).|At end of study (43-50 days after randomization)|The per protocol (PP) population included all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study medication and had no major protocol violations. Major protocol violations were those deemed most likely to affect the interpretation of the results and included poor compliance, use of prohibited medication, missing blood samples.||Participants|||Number
821565|NCT01154153|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS)|"Every morning, participants rated the severity of symptoms experienced over the previous 24 hours using scale from 0-3, where 0=symptoms absent, 1=mild, 2=moderate, and 3=severe symptoms (interfere with daily living or sleep) for each symptom (nasal congestion, nasal itching, sneezing, and runny nose). The rTNSS was the sum of the individual symptom scores, ranged from 0-12 (where 12 reflected the worst symptoms).
Change from baseline in the rTNSS = mean rTNSS (double-blind treatment phase) - mean rTNSS (screening phase)."|From 8-24 days prerandomization up to 6 weeks postrandomization|The per protocol (PP) population included all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study medication and had no major protocol violations. Major protocol violations were those deemed most likely to affect the interpretation of the results and included poor compliance, use of prohibited medication, missing blood samples.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821566|NCT01154153|Primary|Ratio of Serum Cortisol Area Under Curve [AUC(0-24 hr)] at the End of Treatment to Baseline|"Blood samples were collected over a 24-hour period (at 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, and 24 hours), with 0 hour being between 8:00AM to 9:00AM, immediately prior to investigational product (IP) administration. AUC (0-24hr) was calculated using the trapezoid rule, and was normalized by dividing the AUC(0-24 hr) by the actual sample collection interval between 0-hour and 24-hour blood draw times.
Ratio in Serum Cortisol AUC(0-24 hr) = (Serum Cortisol AUC[0-24 hr] at 6 weeks postrandomization)/(Serum Cortisol AUC[0-24 hr] at 1-3 days prerandomization). Log transformation was used for the analysis."|1-3 days prerandomization and 6 weeks postrandomization|The per protocol (PP) population included all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study medication and had no major protocol violations. Major protocol violations were those deemed most likely to affect the interpretation of the results and included poor compliance, use of prohibited medication, missing blood samples.||Ratio||Full Range|Geometric Mean
821567|NCT01154166|Secondary|Time to Reinstatement of L-dopa Following a Reduction in Dose Using LOCF|The mean number of days after which the dose of L-dopa was readministered after the reduction in dose was recorded.|Baseline to Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants who had their dose of L-dopa reduced were included in this analysis. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
821590|NCT01154218|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (AUC [0 - ∞])|AUC (0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞). It is obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hours (hrs) post crizotinib dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821568|NCT01154166|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Scores (PDQ39) Using LOCF|The PDQ39 is a 39 item self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire covers eight domains of health that are reported as adversely affected by patients with PD. Participants were asked to rate responses on a scale from 0 to 4 (“never” to “always”). The overall index score is the mean of the eight individual domain scores measured on a continuous scale ranging from 0 (no problem at all) to 100 (maximum level of the problem). Change from Baseline is calculated as the value at Week 24 minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points for the indicated domain were analyzed. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821569|NCT01154166|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (BL) in the Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS) Total Score Using LOCF|The PDSS uses a series of 15 questions to assess sleep disturbance associated with PD. Participants completed the assessments based on their experiences in the past week by marking a cross on each 10 centimeter (cm) scale (labelled from worst to best state). Responses were quantified by measuring the distance along each line where the cross was placed. The scores for each item ranged from 0 (symptom severe and always experienced) to 10 (symptom free). The maximum cumulative score for the PDSS was thus 150 (free of all symptoms). Change from BL=value at Week 24 minus the BL value.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821570|NCT01154166|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Depression Scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) Using LOCF|The HAMD-17 is a 17-item scale that is completed by the investigator. Each item was evaluated and scored using either a 5-point scale (e.g., absent, mild, moderate, severe, very severe) or a 3-point scale (e.g., absent, mild, marked). The total HAMD-17 score (sum of the scores of all 17 items) may range from 0 (least severe) to 52 (most severe). Change from Baseline is calculated as the value at Week 24 minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821571|NCT01154166|Secondary|Number of Responders to Study Treatment Using LOCF|"The off state is defined as the state in which PD symptoms (lack of mobility, tremor, or rigidity) are not adequately controlled by the drug. Responders are defined as participants who had at least a 20% reduction from Baseline in awake time spent off and at least a 20% reduction from Baseline in the L-dopa dose."|Baseline to Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||participants|||Number
821572|NCT01154166|Secondary|Number of Participants Requiring Reinstatement of L-dopa Following a Dose Reduction Using LOCF|In the event of unacceptable side effects relative to Baseline (e.g., dyskinesias, dystonias [neurological movement disorder]) the dosage of L-dopa was reduced. If there was reduction in the side effects and there was loss of symptom control, the dose of study medication was again increased (reinstated) at subsequent visits. If symptoms could still not be controlled, then L-dopa was reinstated; however, the dose could not exceed the baseline dose.|Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants who had their dose of L-dopa reduced were included in this analysis. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||participants|||Number
821573|NCT01154166|Secondary|Number of Responders Based on the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Global Improvement Scale Using LOCF|The CGI global improvement scale allows the investigator to rate the participant’s total improvement since the beginning of treatment (Baseline). Scores on the scale range from 1 to 7 (1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved, 4=no change, 5=minimally worse, 6=much worse, and 7=very much worse). Participants with a CGI global improvement score of <=2 (representing much improved or very much improved) were considered to be responders.|Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||participants|||Number
821574|NCT01154166|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the UPDRS Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Score at Week 24 Using LOCF|The UPDRS assesses six features of PD impairment, including Activities of Daily Living (ADL). The total ADL score ranges from 0 to 52, where 0= normal/no symptoms and 52= worst possible case. Change from Baseline is calculated as the value at Week 24 minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821575|NCT01154166|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Total Awake Time “on” Without Troublesome Dyskinesias (TD) at Week 24 Using LOCF|Dyskinesias are involuntary twisting, turning movements caused by medication during “on” time in PD. TD is defined as those movements that interfere with function and cause meaningful discomfort. Participants were asked to record the number of awake hours spent ”on” without TD in 24-hour diary cards prior to each visit on the same two days of each relevant week. The total number of awake hours spent“on”without TD per 24-hour period was the sum of the hours recorded on the two 24-hour diary cards. Change from Baseline is calculated as the value at Week 24 minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
821576|NCT01154166|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Total Awake Time Spent “on” at Week 24 Using LOCF|"The on state is defined as the state in which the PD symptoms (lack of mobility, tremor, or rigidity) are adequately controlled by the drug. Participants were asked to record the duration of their “on” periods in 24-hour diary cards prior to each visit on the same two days of each relevant week. The total number of awake hours spent “on” per 24-hour period was the sum of the hours recorded on the two 24-hour diary cards. Change from Baseline is calculated as the value at Week 24 minus the Baseline value."|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
821577|NCT01154166|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Awake Time Spent “Off” (ATSO) at Week 24 Using LOCF|"The off state is defined as the state in which PD symptoms (lack of mobility, tremor, or rigidity) are not adequately controlled by the drug. Participants were asked to record the duration of their “off” periods in 24-hour diary cards prior to each visit on the same 2 days of each relevant week. The total number of awake hours spent “off” per 24-hour period was the sum of the hours recorded on the two 24-hour diary cards. The percentage of ATSO=ATSO divided by (ATSO + awake time spent on) * 100. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 24 minus the value at Baseline."|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||Percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
821578|NCT01154166|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (BL) in the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Motor Score at Week 24 Using LOCF|The UPDRS, a clinician-based rating scale, assesses 6 features of PD impairment: (1) mentation, behavior, and mood; (2) activities of daily living; (3) motor examination; (4) complications of therapy; (5) modified Hoehn and Yahr stage; (6) Schwab and England activities of daily living scale. Assessments were conducted when participants had benefit in regard to mobility, tremor, and rigidity. The total motor score (sum of motor examination) ranges from 0 to 108: 0=normal/no symptoms; 108=worst possible case. Change from BL was calculated as the value at Week 24 minus the value at BL.|Baseline and Week 24 (Visit 13)|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed. Data were collected using the LOCF method.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821579|NCT01154166|Primary|"Mean Change From Baseline in Total Awake Time Spent Off at Week 24 Using Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)"|"The off state is defined as the state in which Parkinson’s Disease (PD) symptoms (lack of mobility, tremor, or rigidity) are not adequately controlled by the drug. Participants were asked to record the duration of their “off ” periods in 24-hour diary cards prior to each visit on two days of each relevant week. The total number of awake hours spent “off” per 24-hour period was the sum of the hours recorded on the two 24-hour diary cards. Change from Baseline is calculated as the value at Week 24 minus the Baseline value."|Baseline and Week 24 (Visit 13)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and for whom at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment was available. In the LOCF dataset, the last available on-therapy observation for a participant is used to estimate missing data points.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
821580|NCT01154218|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
821581|NCT01154218|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821582|NCT01154218|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (AUC [0 - ∞]) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)|AUC (0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞). It is obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. Here, the 'N = 35' is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure at the specified time point for crizotinib CIC fed arm group.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821583|NCT01154218|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast) of Crizotinib metabolite (PF-06260182).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821584|NCT01154218|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (Vz/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821585|NCT01154218|Secondary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F)|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821586|NCT01154218|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821587|NCT01154218|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
821588|NCT01154218|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
821589|NCT01154218|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
821891|NCT01156701|Secondary|Number of Patients With Asthma|The frequency of asthma among the four cohorts was measured.|2006-2009|The study population consisted of individuals who were at least 5 years old and had been continuously enrolled for at least 6 months in the Normative Health Informatics (NHI) insurance claims database during the influenza seasons of 2006-2009 (October-April).||patients|||Number
821591|NCT01154231|Secondary|Subjective Evaluation of Each Therapeutic Administration for Bleeding Episodes|Propotion of subjects whose physicians evaluated the effect of BeneFIX for bleeding episodes as excellent or good was calculated.|2 years for PTPs, 1 year for PUPs|Efficacy analysis set who recieved at least one administration and had at least one efficacy evaluation was used for this analysis.||percentage|evaluations by physicians|95% Confidence Interval|Number
821592|NCT01154231|Primary|Number of Administrations Required for Hemostasis for Bleeding Events|Mean number of administrations for hemostasis in replacement therapy for bleeding events.|2 years for PTPs, 1 year for PUPs|Efficacy analysis set who recieved at least one administration and had at least one efficacy evaluation was used for this analysis.||administrations|dosing for hemostasis|Full Range|Mean
821593|NCT01154231|Primary|Number of Bleeding Episodes (Annual Bleeding Event Rate) During Periodic Replacement Therapy|Annual bleeding rate (ABR) was calculated as the number of total bleeding events occured during prophylaxis period devided by the period (events/year). ABR for other replacement treatment period was also calculated to evaluate the differences between types of treatment. If the period used for ABR calculation was less or equal than 7 days, the relevant data was regarded as missing.|2 years for PTPs, 1 year for PUPs|Efficacy analysis set who recieved at least one administration and had at least one efficacy evaluation was used for this analysis.||Bleeding events/year||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
821594|NCT01154283|Secondary|EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale(VAS)|Quality of life assessed with visual analogue scale. Where the patient is asked to place a mark on a piece of paper with a vertical, scale from 100 at the top to 0 at the bottom of the scale. Where the patient is informed that 100 represents his or her best imaginable health state and 0 is his or her worst imaginable health state.|Assessed at 6 weeks (first intervention) and 12 weeks (second intervention)|One patient died and unable to report quality of life at end of 12 weeks. Two additional patients completed 12 weeks study but did not complete quality of life assessments.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821595|NCT01154283|Secondary|Transitional Dyspnea Index|Transitional Dyspnea Index scores patient reported changes in difficulty breathing during each intervention period from -3 (major deterioration) to +3 (major improvement) in three categories: functional impairment, magnitude of task, and magnitude of effort. The total TDI score ranges from -9 to +9.|Assessed at 6 weeks (first intervention) and 12 weeks (second intervention)|One patient died and unable to report dyspnea at end of 12 weeks. Two additional patients completed 12 weeks study but did not complete dyspnea assessments.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821596|NCT01154283|Secondary|"Patient Preference (Likert Scale) Definitely IPAP-only Probably IPAP-only Uncertain Probably Bi-level Definitely Bi-level"|"Patient Preference of NIPPV mode:
definitely IPAP-only probably IPAP-only uncertain probably Bi-level definitely Bi-level Number of patients who chose definitely or probably are reported."|Assessed at 6 weeks (first intervention) and 12 weeks (second intervention)|One patient died before completion of 12 weeks (second intervention) and could not have patient preference assessed.||participants|||Number
821597|NCT01154283|Primary|Hours of NIPPV Usage|Patients experienced the first intervention period during weeks 1-6 and the second intervention period during weeks 7-12. Patients were given one week to learn how to use the NIPPV equipment at the beginning of each intervention period. Therefore, only the total NIPPV hours used during the last 5 weeks of each intervention period were collected and divided by the number of weeks to obtain the average, weekly hours of NIPPV usage assessed at 6 weeks (first intervention) and 12 weeks (second intervention) for each patient.|Assessed at 6 weeks (first intervention) and 12 weeks (second intervention)|||hours||Full Range|Mean
821598|NCT01154296|Secondary|Sexual Risk Behavior -- # of Sex Acts With Substance Use|Self-reported continuous variables to determine number of (vaginal and/or anal) sex acts in which the participant reported using substances before the sex act.|6 months post randomization|||sex acts with substance use|||Number
821599|NCT01154296|Secondary|Sexual Risk Behavior -- # of Unprotected Partners|Self-reported continuous variables to determine number of partners with whom the participant had unprotected (vaginal and/or anal) sex.|6 months post randomization|||unprotected partners||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821600|NCT01154296|Secondary|Sexual Risk Behavior -- # of Partners|Self-reported continuous variables to determine number of partners with whom the participant had (vaginal and/or anal) sex.|6 months post randomization|||partners||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821601|NCT01154296|Secondary|Sexual Risk Behavior -- # of Unprotected Sex Acts|Self-reported continuous variables to determine number of unprotected (vaginal and/or anal) sex acts|6 months post randomization|||unprotected sex acts||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821602|NCT01154296|Secondary|Sexual Risk Behavior -- # of Sex Acts|Self-reported continuous variables to determine number of (vaginal and/or anal) sex acts.|6 months post randomization|||sex acts||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821603|NCT01154296|Primary|STI Incidence|Composite STI incidence (Yes/No) at 6-month follow-up in which a person is considered positive for STIs if they are positive on any tested STI.|6 months post randomization|||participants|||Number
821604|NCT01154322|Primary|Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) Using the New Pediatric Mask (Pixi) Compared to the Child's Currently-used Mask|Apnea-Hypopnea index (AHI) is an average of the number of apneas and hypopneas that occur over an hour of recorded sleep. AHI quantifies the severity of sleep disordered breathing (SDB). The higher the AHI, the more severe the SDB (mild 5-15, moderate 15-30, severe >30). In clinical practice an AHI <5 demonstrates efficacy of treatment. AHI was recorded during a monitored sleep study on the new Pixi mask and compared with the AHI from a monitored sleep study on the child's usual mask. The outcome hypothesis was that the Pixi mask AHI would be equivalent or reduced compared to the child's usual mask.|AHI after min 21 days use with Pixi mask|||AHI (events/hour)||Standard Deviation|Mean
821605|NCT01154322|Primary|Apnea-hypopnea Index (AHI) Using the New Pediatric Mask (Pixi) Compared to the Child's Currently-used Mask|Apnea-Hypopnea index (AHI) is an average of the number of apneas and hypopneas that occur over an hour of recorded sleep. AHI quantifies the severity of sleep disordered breathing (SDB). The higher the AHI, the more severe the SDB (mild 5-15, moderate 15-30, severe >30). In clinical practice an AHI <5 demonstrates efficacy of treatment. AHI was recorded during a monitored sleep study on the new Pixi mask, and compared with the AHI from a monitored sleep study on the child's usual mask. The outcome hypothesis was that the Pixi mask AHI would be equivalent or reduced compared to the child's usual mask.|Baseline AHI|Subjects who completed all visits and procedures||AHI (events/hour)||Standard Deviation|Mean
821606|NCT01154335|Secondary|Response Rate|Response rate (RR) will be estimated as the proportion of patients exhibiting complete response or partial response out of all evaluable cases. Complete Response is defined per RECIST as disappearance of all target/non-target lesions and normalization of tumor markers. Partial Response is defined per RECIST as At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD.|18 months|Only patients who received at least 8 weeks of treatment were considered evaluable for response and were included in the response rate analysis||participants|||Number
821607|NCT01154335|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the time between Day 1 Cycle 1 to the date of death from any cause. Those remaining alive will be censored at their last known assessment or follow-up.|18 months|||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821608|NCT01154335|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|Progression-free survival (PFS) is defined as the time between Day 1 Cycle 1 and date of first documented recurrence or death. Patients who do not exhibit progression while on trial will be censored at their last known assessment. Progression is defined per RECIST criteria as either 1) at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest (nadir) sum since the treatment started, or the appearance of one or more new lesions. Requires not only 20% increase, but absolute increase of a minimum of 5 mm over sum. OR 2) Appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|18 Months|||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821609|NCT01154335|Primary|To Determine the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of the Combination of OSI-906 and Everolimus for the Treatment of Patients With Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.||18 Months|||milligrams|||Number
821610|NCT01154452|Secondary|Response Rate (CR + PR) as Assessed by RECIST 1.1 (Phase Ib and II)|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions|Up to 4 months|||participants|||Number
821611|NCT01154452|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) of the Combination of RO4929097 With and Without GDC-0449 in Patients With Advanced Sarcoma. (Phase II)|Progression-free survival (PFS) of the combination of RO4929097 with and without GDC-0449 in patients with advanced sarcoma. (Phase II)|1 year||||||
821612|NCT01154452|Primary|Maximum-tolerated Dose of Gamma-secretase Inhibitor RO4929097, Defined as the Dose Level Where no More Than 1 Out of 6 Patients Experience DLT at the Highest Dose Level Below the MAD, Graded According to NCI-CTCAE Version 4.0 (Phase Ib)||Up to 28 days|||mg|||Number
821613|NCT01154634|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Change of Laboratory Variables|Number of participants with clinically relevant change of laboratory variables as judged by the responsible medical officer.|Pre-entry to follow-up|||Participants|||Number
821614|NCT01154634|Secondary|Terminal Half-life (T Half)|Terminal half-life (T half)|0 to 12 hours post dose|"Data from one subject in arm AZD2516 5 mg were excluded from efficacy analysis due to incorrect medication received.
Two samples were not analyzed for T half due to technical reasons."||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821615|NCT01154634|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|Time to maximum plasma concentration (Tmax)|0 to 12 hours post dose|Data from one subject in arm AZD2516 5 mg were excluded from efficacy analysis due to incorrect medication received.||hours||Full Range|Median
821616|NCT01154634|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|Maximum plasma concentration|0 to 12 hours post dose|Data from one subject in arm AZD2516 5 mg were excluded from efficacy analysis due to incorrect medication received.||nmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821617|NCT01154634|Secondary|Average Plasma Concentration (C Average)|Average plasma concentration|1 to 4 hours post dose|Data from one subject in arm AZD2516 5 mg were excluded from efficacy analysis due to incorrect medication received.||nmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821618|NCT01154634|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Curve(AUC)|Area under the plasma concentration vs. time curve from time zero to 12-hours post dose calculated by loglinear trapezoidal method|0 to 12 hours post dose|Data from one subject in arm AZD2516 5 mg were excluded from efficacy analysis due to incorrect medication received.||nmol*h/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821619|NCT01154634|Secondary|Transient Lower Esophagus Sphincter Relaxations (TLESRs) 0 to 3 Hours Post Meal|Number of TLESRs 0 to 3 hours post meal were calculated based upon the manometric analysis fpr the 3-hour post-meal period.|0 to 3 hours post meal|Data from two subjects were excluded from efficacy analysis due to incorrect medication received Data from five visits from two subject were excluded form analysis due to deviations caused by technical problems.||relaxations||Full Range|Geometric Mean
821620|NCT01154634|Primary|Reflux Episodes 0 to 3 Hours Post Meal|Total number of reflux episodes 0 to 3 hours post meal|0 to 3 hours post meal|Data from two subjects (one in arm AZD2516 5 mg, and one in arm Placebo) were excluded from efficacy analysis due to incorrect medication received.||Episodes||Full Range|Geometric Mean
821621|NCT01154673|Primary|Change in Proviral HIV-1 DNA in Total CD4+ T-cells From Baseline to Week 48 in Participants Randomized to the Intensified Arm Versus the Control Arm Who Received Placebo in Addition to Standard HAART.|The level of HIV Provirus in CD4 T cells obtained from peripheral blood at 48 weeks compared to baseline. A quantitative HIV PCR assay was done. The mean/median values from the standard HAART group is compared to the intensive HAART treatment regimen.|Baseline to Week 48|||HIV DNA copies/ million CD4 cells||Full Range|Median
821622|NCT01154699|Secondary|FEV1 %Predicted|Performed as part of spirometry|Every 4 weeks during the 12 week study (at the start and end of the usual care period, and at the start and end of the Bilevel PAP intervention period)|All subjects completed both arms of this crossover study.||percentage of predicted FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
821623|NCT01154699|Secondary|Short Form (SF-36) Health Survey|Well validated quality of life questionnaire that measures eight sub-sections, which are summed to yield a score from 0 (maximal disability) to 100 (no disability). The eight subsections are: vitality, physical functioning, bodily pain, general health perceptions, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, social role functioning, mental health.|Every 4 weeks during the 12 week study (at the start and end of the usual care period, and at the start and end of the Bilevel PAP intervention period)|All subjects completed both arms of the study||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822144|NCT01160822|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration of Canakinumab (Cmax)||Day 1, pre-dose and 1, 3, 6 and 8 hours post-dose (Part A only), Day 2, 4, 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 126.|Pharmacokinetic analysis set where data were available.||µg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821624|NCT01154699|Secondary|Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)|Well validated questionnaire used frequently to measure sleep quality over the prior 1 month. It consists of 19 individual items that combine to form 7 components summed to create one global score. The overall score is between 0 (better sleep) and 21 (worse sleep).|Every 4 weeks during the 12 week study (at the start and end of the usual care period, and at the start and end of the Bilevel PAP intervention period)|All subjects completed both arms of this crossover study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821625|NCT01154699|Secondary|Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)|8 item questionnaire to measure daytime sleepiness, with total score reported 0 (less sleepy) to 24 (most sleepy). Scores greater than or equal to 10 are considered excessive daytime sleepiness.|Every 4 weeks during the 12 week study (at the start and end of the usual care period, and at the start and end of the Bilevel PAP intervention period)|All subjects completed both arms of this crossover study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821626|NCT01154699|Primary|Airway Reactivity as Measured by Methacholine Challenge (PC20)|This is a physiological measurement derived from repeated breathing maneuvers which measures airway reactivity. Subjects are exposed to higher and higher concentrations of an airway irritant (in this case methacholine), and between each dose perform spirometry. The test is stopped after the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) falls 20% below the baseline. The concentration of methacholine at which this occurs is called the PC20. Methacholine challenges are routinely used in the diagnosis of asthma, and in many asthma research studies to measure changes in airway reactivity.|Every 4 weeks during the 12 week study (at the start and end of the usual care period, and at the start and end of the Bilevel PAP intervention period)|All subjects completed the crossover study design||mg/mL||Standard Error|Geometric Mean
821627|NCT01154699|Primary|Asthma Control Test|Well validated questionnaire of asthma symptoms which includes 5 written questions. Each question is answered on a scale of 1-5, which are summed to report a range of asthma control from 5 to 25 (higher score indicates better asthma control).|Every 4 weeks during the 12 week study (at the start and end of the Usual Care period, and at the start and end of the Bilevel PAP intervention period)|All 21 patients went through usual care and bilevel PAP therapy||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821628|NCT01154751|Secondary|Six-minute Walking Distance|The Six-minute Walking Distance test is an objective method for estimation of walking capacity in patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD) or claudication.|2 Years|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||Meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
821629|NCT01154751|Secondary|Target Limb Ankle Brachial Index (at Rest)|"Ankle Brachial Index (ABI) is a measure of the fall in blood pressure in the arteries supplying the legs and is used to detect evidence of blockages in the peripheral vessels. It is calculated by dividing the higher systolic blood pressure in the ankle (dorsalis pedis or posterior tibial) of the one leg by the higher of the two systolic blood pressures in the arms. A doppler probe is used to monitor the pulse while a sphygmomanometer is inflated above the artery. The cuff is deflated and the pressure at which the pulse returns is recorded.
ABI=Highest Ankle Systolic Pressure/Highest Brachial Systolic Pressure
The ABI is the ratio of the ankle to arm pressure, and an ABI between 0.9 and 1.3 is considered normal. A reduced ABI (less than 0.9) is consistent with peripheral artery occlusive disease, with values below 0.8 indicating moderate disease and below 0.5 severe disease."|2 Years|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
821630|NCT01154751|Secondary|Target Limb Ankle Brachial Index (at Rest)|"Ankle Brachial Index (ABI) is a measure of the fall in blood pressure in the arteries supplying the legs and is used to detect evidence of blockages in the peripheral vessels. It is calculated by dividing the higher systolic blood pressure in the ankle (dorsalis pedis or posterior tibial) of the one leg by the higher of the two systolic blood pressures in the arms. A doppler probe is used to monitor the pulse while a sphygmomanometer is inflated above the artery. The cuff is deflated and the pressure at which the pulse returns is recorded.
ABI=Highest Ankle Systolic Pressure/Highest Brachial Systolic Pressure
The ABI is the ratio of the ankle to arm pressure, and an ABI between 0.9 and 1.3 is considered normal. A reduced ABI (less than 0.9) is consistent with peripheral artery occlusive disease, with values below 0.8 indicating moderate disease and below 0.5 severe disease."|1 Year|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
821631|NCT01154751|Secondary|Target Limb Ankle Brachial Index (at Rest)|"Ankle Brachial Index (ABI) is a measure of the fall in blood pressure in the arteries supplying the legs and is used to detect evidence of blockages in the peripheral vessels. It is calculated by dividing the higher systolic blood pressure in the ankle (dorsalis pedis or posterior tibial) of the one leg by the higher of the two systolic blood pressures in the arms. A doppler probe is used to monitor the pulse while a sphygmomanometer is inflated above the artery. The cuff is deflated and the pressure at which the pulse returns is recorded.
ABI=Highest Ankle Systolic Pressure/Highest Brachial Systolic Pressure
The ABI is the ratio of the ankle to arm pressure, and an ABI between 0.9 and 1.3 is considered normal. A reduced ABI (less than 0.9) is consistent with peripheral artery occlusive disease, with values below 0.8 indicating moderate disease and below 0.5 severe disease."|6 months|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
821632|NCT01154751|Secondary|Target Limb Ankle Brachial Index (at Rest)|"Ankle Brachial Index (ABI) is a measure of the fall in blood pressure in the arteries supplying the legs and is used to detect evidence of blockages in the peripheral vessels. It is calculated by dividing the higher systolic blood pressure in the ankle (dorsalis pedis or posterior tibial) of the one leg by the higher of the two systolic blood pressures in the arms. A doppler probe is used to monitor the pulse while a sphygmomanometer is inflated above the artery. The cuff is deflated and the pressure at which the pulse returns is recorded.
ABI=Highest Ankle Systolic Pressure/Highest Brachial Systolic Pressure
The ABI is the ratio of the ankle to arm pressure, and an ABI between 0.9 and 1.3 is considered normal. A reduced ABI (less than 0.9) is consistent with peripheral artery occlusive disease, with values below 0.8 indicating moderate disease and below 0.5 severe disease."|30 days|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
821633|NCT01154751|Secondary|Target Limb Ankle Brachial Index (at Rest)|"Ankle Brachial Index (ABI) is a measure of the fall in blood pressure in the arteries supplying the legs and is used to detect evidence of blockages in the peripheral vessels. It is calculated by dividing the higher systolic blood pressure in the ankle (dorsalis pedis or posterior tibial) of the one leg by the higher of the two systolic blood pressures in the arms. A doppler probe is used to monitor the pulse while a sphygmomanometer is inflated above the artery. The cuff is deflated and the pressure at which the pulse returns is recorded.
ABI=Highest Ankle Systolic Pressure/Highest Brachial Systolic Pressure
The ABI is the ratio of the ankle to arm pressure, and an ABI between 0.9 and 1.3 is considered normal. A reduced ABI (less than 0.9) is consistent with peripheral artery occlusive disease, with values below 0.8 indicating moderate disease and below 0.5 severe disease."|At baseline|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
821634|NCT01154751|Secondary|Stent Fracture|"Stent fracture and Involuntary stent migration are types of device System Failure.
Device System Failure is defined as the inability of the device to provide the intended clinical utility requiring surgical intervention to correct."|1 to 3 Years|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||participants|||Number
821635|NCT01154751|Secondary|Stent Fracture|"Stent fracture and Involuntary stent migration are types of device System Failure.
Device System Failure is defined as the inability of the device to provide the intended clinical utility requiring surgical intervention to correct."|1 to 2 years|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||participants|||Number
821636|NCT01154751|Secondary|Stent Fracture|Stent fractures determined by fluoroscopy .|1 Year|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||participants|||Number
821637|NCT01154751|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization|"Target Vessel: The entire vessel in which the treated lesion is located. The boundaries for the iliac artery are the abdominal aortic bifurcation and the superior border of the inguinal ligament.
Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR): Any revascularization at the target lesion with or without evidence of target lesion diameter stenosis ≥ 50% determined by DUS or arteriography, with or without new distal ischemic sign (worsening Rutherford Becker Clinical Category that is clearly referable to the target lesion.)"|1 Year|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
821638|NCT01154751|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization|Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR): Any revascularization at the target lesion with or without evidence of target lesion diameter stenosis ≥ 50% determined by DUS or arteriography, with or without new distal ischemic sign (worsening Rutherford Becker Clinical Category that is clearly referable to the target lesion).|6 months|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
821639|NCT01154751|Secondary|Restenosis by Duplex Ultrasound|In-Stent Restenosis is re-narrowing within the margins of the stent following the reduction of a previous narrowing. It is defined as the presence of a hemodynamically significant restenosis (≥ 50%), as determined by duplex ultrasonography (DUS) or arteriography. A peak systolic velocity ratio (PSVR) of 2.4 and 2.5 will be used to calculate duplex restenosis.|1 Year|"If no PSVR measurement was available, patient was excluded from restenosis analysis. If patient had TLR prior to duplex ultrasound, PSVR was excluded from restenosis analysis.
The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available."||percentage of participants|||Number
821640|NCT01154751|Secondary|Restenosis by Duplex Ultrasound|In-Stent Restenosis is re-narrowing within the margins of the stent following the reduction of a previous narrowing. It is defined as the presence of a hemodynamically significant restenosis (≥ 50%), as determined by duplex ultrasonography (DUS) or arteriography. A peak systolic velocity ratio (PSVR) of 2.4 and 2.5 will be used to calculate duplex restenosis.|6 months|"If no PSVR measurement was available, patient was excluded from restenosis analysis. If patient had TLR prior to duplex ultrasound, PSVR was excluded from restenosis analysis.
The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available."||percentage of participants|||Number
821641|NCT01154751|Secondary|Rutherford-Becker Clinical Category|"Rutherford/Becker Categories:
0 - Asymptomatic, no hemodynamically significant occlusive disease.
- Mild claudication.
- Moderate claudication.
- Severe claudication.
- Ischemic rest pain.
- Minor tissue loss, non-healing ulcer, or focal gangrene with diffuse pedal ischemia.
- Major tissue loss, extending above transmetatarsal level, functional foot no longer salvageable."|30 days|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
821642|NCT01154751|Secondary|Number of Peri-procedural and Post-procedural Complications|Periprocedural/Postprocedural Complications defined as complications during the procedure through 30 days post implant that include hematoma, arteriovenous (AV) fistula pseudoaneurysm, subacute occlusion, non-target lesion Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA) /stenting, distal embolization, and vessel perforation.|30 days|||Number of compilcations|||Number
821643|NCT01154751|Secondary|Number of Participants Experiencing Peri-procedural and Post-procedural Complications|Periprocedural/Postprocedural Complications defined as complications during the procedure through 30 days post implant that include hematoma, arteriovenous (AV) fistula pseudoaneurysm, subacute occlusion, non-target lesion Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA) /stenting, distal embolization, and vessel perforation.|30 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
821644|NCT01154751|Primary|Six-minute Walking Distance|The Six-minute Walking Distance test is an objective method for estimation of walking capacity in patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD) or claudication.|1 Year|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||Meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
821645|NCT01154751|Primary|Six-minute Walking Distance|The Six-minute Walking Distance test is an objective method for estimation of walking capacity in patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD) or claudication.|6 months|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||Meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
821646|NCT01154751|Primary|Six-minute Walking Distance|The Six-minute Walking Distance test is an objective method for estimation of walking capacity in patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD) or claudication.|30 days|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||Meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
821647|NCT01154751|Primary|Six-minute Walking Distance|The Six-minute Walking Distance test is an objective method for estimation of walking capacity in patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD) or claudication.|At baseline|The number of patients analyzed is based on the data available.||Meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
821656|NCT01154985|Primary|Alanine Transaminase (ALT) Levels|"Mean change from baseline at month 6 analyzed by Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) in the efficacy analysis set with treatment group as a factor and baseline ALT as a covariate. Principal comparisons were the response between;
EPA-E 2700 mg and Placebo groups
EPA-E 1800 mg and Placebo groups"|6 months|Efficacy Evaluable Analysis Set - All patients in Full Analysis Set who have valid 12-month histological data without major protocol violations, including withdrawn patients with valid 12.5 month histological data after more than 6 months treatment||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
821657|NCT01154985|Primary|Alanine Transaminase (ALT) Levels|"Mean change from baseline at month 3 analyzed by Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) in the efficacy evaluable analysis set with treatment group as a factor and baseline ALT as a covariate. Principal comparisons were the response between;
EPA-E 2700 mg and Placebo groups
EPA-E 1800 mg and Placebo groups"|3 month endpoint|Efficacy Evaluable Analysis Set - All patients in Full Analysis Set who have valid 12-month histological data without major protocol violations, including withdrawn patients with valid 12.5 month histological data after more than 6 months treatment||U/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821658|NCT01154985|Primary|Histological Response Defined by Change From Baseline in Standardized Scoring of Liver Biopsies|"Patient is considered a responder if histological examination shows:
Composite NAS of <=3 AND no worsening in Fibrosis OR Improvement in NAS by >=2 across at least 2 of the NAS components AND no worsening in fibrosis
A priori threshold for statistical significance is p<0.05, 1-sided"|12 months|Efficacy Evaluable Analysis Set - All patients in Full Analysis Set who have valid 12-month histological data without major protocol violations, including withdrawn patients with valid 12.5 month histological data after more than 6 months treatment||participants|||Number
821659|NCT01155011|Primary|Minutes of Light to Moderate Physical Activity|Measured by 7 day accelerometry in adults, ≥65, using a 760 CPM cutpoint.|12 months|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
821660|NCT01155011|Primary|Daily Minutes of Physical Activity|Measured by 7 day accelerometry in adults, ≥65, with a 760 CPM cutpoint.|6 months|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
821661|NCT01155011|Primary|Daily Minutes of Physical Activity|Measured by 7 day accelerometry with a 760 cpm cutpoint.|Baseline|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
821662|NCT01155024|Secondary|Participant Socket Preference After 3 Months Usage of the Direct Manufactured Socket|Number of participants indicating socket preference after 3 months usage of the direct manufactured prosthetic socket. Comparisons made to their previous traditional definitive prosthetic socket|3 months|Total number of participants completing the period (3 months usage of direct manufactured socket) and participants classified as 'Withdrawal by participant'. Analysis does not include participants who prematurely withdrew for reasons unrelated to the direct manufactured socket intervention.||participants|||Number
821663|NCT01155024|Secondary|Participant Socket Preference After Initial Fitting|Number of participants indicating socket preference after initial fitting of both socket interventions|Within the first 4-6 hours|Total number of participants completing period for both study interventions.||participants|||Number
821664|NCT01155024|Primary|Hanspal Socket Comfort Score (SCS) After Initial Socket Fitting|The Hanspal SCS assesses participant socket comfort on a continuous scale from 0 (most uncomfortable) to 10 (most comfortable)|Within the first 4-6 hrs|Per protocol analysis including all consented participants||score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821665|NCT01155063|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Recurrent Disease|Percentage of participants with confirmed recurrent disease at the end of the study (recurrence was defined as loco-regional and/or contralateral and/or distance metastases).|Month 36 or early withdrawal|Data was not analyzed as the study was terminated due to insufficient number of participants enrolled in the study.|||||
821669|NCT01155063|Secondary|Number of Participants With Concomitant Medications|Concomitant medication (any medication other than, and in addition to, the study medication) taken for any period of time during the study and was coded by World Health Organization (WHO) medical dictionary.|Month 0 up to Month 36 or early withdrawal|Safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of the study medication during the observation period.||Participants|||Number
821670|NCT01155063|Secondary|Number of Participants With Concomitant Morbidities|Participants who had a concomitant morbidity during the study for any period of time; participants with more than one concomitant morbidity were counted for each of the concomitant morbidity classes applicable.|Month 0 up to Month 36 or early withdrawal|Safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of the study medication during the observation period.||Participants|||Number
821671|NCT01155063|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study medication in a participant who received study medication.|Month 0 up to Month 36 or early withdrawal|Safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of the study medication during the observation period.||Participants|||Number
821672|NCT01148017|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited AEs and SAEs|Number of subjects reporting unsolicited AEs, serious adverse events (SAEs) and medically attended AEs after receiving study vaccination.|Day 1 to 7 after vaccination for any unsolicited AEs, day 1 to study termination for SAEs and medically attended AEs (for the naive-40 group), day 8 to study termination for SAEs and medically attended AEs (for the other groups).|Analysis was done on the Post MenACWY at 60 months safety set ie, all subjects who received a vaccination at 60 months and were assessed for postvaccination safety, and on the Post MenACWY at 40 Months Safety Set, ie, the Naive subjects enrolled at 40 months of age who received vaccination at 40 months and were assessed for post vaccination safety.||Number of subjects|||Number
821673|NCT01148017|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local and Systemic Adverse Events (AEs) and Other Indicators of Reactogenicity|"Number of subjects reporting solicited local and systemic Adverse Events (AEs) and other indicators of reactogenicity after receiving study vaccination.
Note: solicited AEs were not recorded for naive subjects at 40 months of age, but only SAEs and medically attended AEs."|From day 1 to 7 after vaccination.|Analysis was done on the Solicited Safety Set (from 6 hours to day 7), ie, all subjects who received a vaccination at 60 months and provided postvaccination solicited safety data.||Subjects|||Number
821674|NCT01148017|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Seroresponse at 1 Month Post-vaccination|"The antibody response to one booster dose of MenACWY-CRM in children of 60 months of age who had previously received at least one dose of MenACWY-CRM in the parent study, compared to the antibody response to one dose of MenACWY-CRM in meningococcal vaccine-naïve subjects, is measured by the percentage of subjects with seroresponse at 1 month post-vaccination.
Seroresponse is defined as hSBA ≥ 1:8 for subjects with pre-vaccination hSBA titer ≤1:4, and as at least a four-fold rise in hSBA for subjects with pre-vaccination hSBA titer ≥ 1:4."|Visit 11, 1 month after vaccination.|Analysis was done on the PPS Post-MenACWY-CRM.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821675|NCT01148017|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 1:8, and ≥ 1:4 Directed Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y, at 1 Month Post-vaccination|The antibody response to one booster dose of MenACWY-CRM in children of 60 months of age who had previously received at least one dose of MenACWY-CRM in the parent study compared to the antibody response to one dose of MenACWY-CRM in meningococcal vaccine-naïve subjects, is measured by the percentage of subjects with hSBA titers ≥ 1:8 and ≥1:4 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y, at 1 month post-vaccination.|Visit 11, 1 month after vaccination.|Analysis was done on the PPS-Immunogenicity after one dose of MenACWY-CRM (PPS Post-MenACWY-CRM), ie, all subjects in the enrolled population who correctly received the vaccine, provided at least one evaluable serum sample at the relevant time points and whose assay result was available for at least one serogroup with no major protocol deviation.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821676|NCT01148017|Secondary|hSBA GMTs Directed Against N Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y in Subjects of 60 Months of Age|The persistence of the antibody response in children of 60 months of age previously vaccinated with MenACWY-CRM in study V59P14 (NCT00474526), and baseline antibody levels in age-matched naive subjects is measured by the hSBA GMTs directed against N meningitidis serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y.|Visit 10, 60 months of age.|Analysis was done on the PPS 60-Month persistence.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821677|NCT01148017|Secondary|hSBA Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) Directed Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y in Subjects of 40 Months of Age|The persistence of the antibody response in children of 40 months of age previously vaccinated with MenACWY-CRM in study V59P14 (NCT00474526), and baseline antibody levels in age-matched naive subjects, is measured by the hSBA GMTs directed against N meningitidis serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y.|Visit 9 (continuation from the parent study), 40-months of age.|Analysis was done on the PPS 40-month persistence.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821678|NCT01148017|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 1:4 Against N Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y Subjects of 60 Months of Age|The persistence of the antibody response in subjects of 60 months of age previously vaccinated with MenACWY-CRM in the parent study, and baseline antibody levels in age-matched naive subjects, is measured by the percentage of subjects with human Serum Bactericidal Assay (hSBA) titers ≥ 1:4 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y.|Visit 10, 60 months of age.|Analysis was done on the PPS 60-Month persistence.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821679|NCT01148017|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 1:4 Against N Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y in Subjects of 40 Months of Age|The persistence of the antibody response in subjects of 40 months of age previously vaccinated with MenACWY-CRM in the parent study, and baseline antibody levels in age-matched naive subjects, is measured by the percentage of subjects with human Serum Bactericidal Assay (hSBA) titers ≥ 1:4 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y.|Visit 9, 40 months of age.|Analysis was done on the PPS 40-month persistence.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821892|NCT01156701|Primary|Number of Patients With Influenza|The frequency of influenza among the four cohorts was measured.|2006-2009|The study population consisted of individuals who were at least 5 years old and had been continuously enrolled for at least 6 months in the Normative Health Informatics (NHI) insurance claims database during the influenza seasons of 2006-2009 (October-April).||patients|||Number
821680|NCT01148017|Primary|Percentages of Subjects With Human Serum Bactericidal Assay (hSBA) Titers ≥ 1:8 Directed Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y|The persistence of the antibody response in subjects of 60 months of age previously vaccinated with MenACWY-CRM in the parent study, and baseline antibody levels in age-matched naive subjects, is measured by the percentages of subjects with human Serum Bactericidal Assay (hSBA) titers ≥ 1:8 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y.|Visit 10, 60 months of age|Analysis was done on the Per Protocol Set 60-Month persistence (PPS 60-Month persistence), ie, all subjects in the enrolled population who provided an evaluable serum sample at the 60-month of age visit and had no major protocol deviation.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821681|NCT01148017|Primary|Percentages of Subjects With Human Serum Bactericidal Assay (hSBA) Titers ≥ 1:8 Directed Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y|The persistence of the antibody response in subjects of 40 months of age, previously vaccinated with MenACWY-CRM in the parent study, and baseline antibody levels in age-matched naive subjects, is measured by the percentage of subjects with human Serum Bactericidal Assay (hSBA) titers ≥ 1:8 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W-135, and Y.|Visit 9 (continuation from the parent study), 40-month visit.|Analysis was done on the Per Protocol Set 40-month persistence (PPS 40-month persistence), ie, all subjects in the enrolled population who provided an evaluable serum sample at the 40-months of age visit and had no major protocol deviation.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821682|NCT01148056|Secondary|Accuracy|To determine the accuracy of advanced MRI imaging and PET (Positron Electron Tomography) /CT in predicting nodal stage.|2 years|Study was closed early due to poor accrual. Analyses not completed.|||||
821683|NCT01148056|Secondary|Quantity of Circulating Tumor Cells|To determine the impact of radiation and surgery on quantity of circulating tumor cells in both metastatic and non-metastatic patients.|2 years|Study was closed early due to poor accrual. Analyses not completed.|||||
821684|NCT01148056|Secondary|Tissue Microarray|To determine changes in the tumor induced by radiation as assessed by tissue microarray.|2 years|Study was closed early due to poor accrual. Analyses not completed.|||||
821685|NCT01148056|Secondary|Surgical Complication Rate|To determine the surgical complication rate in patients who received preoperative radiation therapy.|2 years|Study was closed early due to poor accrual. Analyses not completed.|||||
821686|NCT01148056|Secondary|Pelvic Control Rate|To determine the pelvic control rate of patients after short course radiation therapy and surgery.|2 years|Study was closed early due to poor accrual. Analyses not completed.|||||
821687|NCT01148056|Primary|Bowel Quality of Life|To determine the rate of fecal incontinence at 1 year in patients undergoing an low anterior resection (LAR), as measured by bowel quality of life measure after preoperative conformal radiation therapy delivered in one week for rectal cancer.|2 years|Study was terminated early due to slow accrual. Analysis was not performed.|||||
821688|NCT01148420|Primary|Cessation of Bleeding Within 5 Days|Patients were called within 24 hours and 48 hours following their first study visit to ascertain their bleeding status and their use of medication, as well as any significant side effects they msy have been experiencing. Patients were asked to return to the clinic on day 3 for a repeat hemoglobin and interval history. Those women who were still having any bleeding on day 3 were contacted on day 5|3-5 days|||participants|||Number
821689|NCT01148420|Secondary|Satisfaction and Willingness to Recommend Treatment|Participants were asked whether they would recommend this treatment to a friend|End of the trial; up to day 5|||participants|||Number
821690|NCT01148420|Secondary|Patient Perception of the Acceptability of the Treatment|Results from a survey question that assessed the subjects' satisfaction with the therapy on a scale of 1-3. 1 = poor; 2 = good; 3 = excellent.|End of the trial; up to day 5|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
821691|NCT01148511|Secondary|Quality of Life|The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI-VFQ-25) was used to measure a patient’s subjective assessment of vision-related quality of life at Visits 2, 6, 9, 12, and 15. The 12 subscales in the VFQ-25 are general health, general vision, ocular pain, near activities, distance activities, social function, mental health, role difficulties, dependency, driving, color vision, and peripheral vision. The scores on the subscales were added together for a total score, which ranged from 0 to 100. A higher score indicated poorer function.|Visits 2, 6, 9, 12, and 15 (up to 12 months)|Per protocol population: All patients who were evaluated at Baseline and at 12±2 months. Patients who discontinued from the study were not included in the per protocol population.||Units on a scale||Full Range|Median
821692|NCT01148511|Secondary|Change in Central Retinal Thickness From Baseline to Month 12|Retinal thickness was measured using Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT).|Baseline to Month 12|Per protocol population: All patients who were evaluated at Baseline and at 12±2 months. Patients who discontinued from the study were not included in the per protocol population.||µm||Full Range|Median
821693|NCT01148511|Secondary|Follow-up Duration|Follow-up duration was defined as the number of days from Baseline to study discontinuation.|Baseline to Month 12|Per protocol population: All patients who were evaluated at Baseline and at 12±2 months. Patients who discontinued from the study were not included in the per protocol population.||Days||Full Range|Mean
821694|NCT01148511|Secondary|Number of Visits||Baseline to Month 12|Per protocol population: All patients who were evaluated at Baseline and at 12±2 months. Patients who discontinued from the study were not included in the per protocol population.||Visits||Full Range|Median
821695|NCT01148511|Secondary|Letter Count From Baseline to Month 12|Letter count was assessed in the study eye. Measurements were made using the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity testing charts. Results are reported in various categories of change in letter count.|Baseline to Month 12|Per protocol population: All patients who were evaluated at Baseline and at 12±2 months. Patients who discontinued from the study were not included in the per protocol population.||Percentage of patients|||Number
821696|NCT01148511|Primary|Change in Letter Count From Baseline to Month 12|Letter count was assessed in the study eye. Measurements were made using the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity testing charts. A higher letter count score indicates better vision. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Month 12|Per protocol population: All patients who were evaluated at Baseline and at 12±2 months. Patients who discontinued from the study were not included in the per protocol population.||Letters||Full Range|Median
821697|NCT01148511|Primary|Change in Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (logMAR) From Baseline to Month 12|Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was assessed in the study eye. BCVA measurements were made using the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity testing charts. Each letter on the chart has a score value of 0.02 log units. Since there are 5 letters per line, the total score for a line on the logMAR chart represents a change of 0.1 log units. The formula for calculating the logMAR BCVA score is: 0.1 + logMAR value of the best line read - 0.02 x number of letters read. A lower BCVA score indicates better vision. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Month 12|Per protocol population: All patients who were evaluated at Baseline and at 12±2 months. Patients who discontinued from the study were not included in the per protocol population.||logMAR||Full Range|Median
821698|NCT01148524|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration Against Meningococcal 287-953 Antigen, At 18 Months After Month-6 Vaccination in V72P10 Study, and in Naive Subjects.|The immune response was measured as the geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) directed against meningococcal 287-953 antigen, evaluated using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), at 18 months after month-6 vaccination of rMenB+OMV-NZ or placebo in V72P10 study, and in age-matched vaccine naive subjects enrolled in this study.|18 months after last vaccination V72P10 study.|Analysis was performed on the MITT dataset.||UI/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821699|NCT01148524|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratio at 18 Months After Month-6 Vaccination, Over Baselines at Month 0 and at One Month After the Last rMenB+OMV-NZ Vaccination in the V72P10 Study.|The immune response was measured as the geometric mean ratio (GMRs) of hSBA GMTs against meningococcal strains 44/76-SL, 5/99 and NZ98/254 as follow: GMTs at 1 month after last vaccination to baseline GMTs; GMTs at 18 months after last vaccination to baselines GMTs; and GMTs at 18 months after last vaccination to GMTs at 1 month after last vaccination.|month 0 (baseline), month 1 and 18 months after last vaccination in V72P10 study.|Analysis was performed on the MITT data set. Naive group was not reported for this endpoint since GMR data for this group were not collected (subjects were enrolled in this study and no GMT values at 1m and 18 m after last vaccination in V72P10 are available).||Geometric mean ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821700|NCT01148524|Primary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers Directed Against Meningococcal Strains, At 18 Months After Month-6 Vaccination in V72P10 Study, and in Naive Subjects.|The immune response was measured as the hSBA geometric mean titers (GMTs) directed against meningococcal strains 44/76-SL, 5/99 and NZ98/254, at 18 months after month-6 vaccination of rMenB+OMV-NZ or placebo in V72P10 study, and in age-matched vaccine naive subjects enrolled in this study.|month 0 (bl=baseline), month 1 and 18 months after last vaccination in V72P10 study.|Analysis was performed on the MITT data set.Samples were collected at 18 months post last vaccination in the parent study. For the Naive group, blood samples were obtained for meningococcal serology at day 1 and served as a comparator.||Geometric mean titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
821701|NCT01148524|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥1:4 Against Meningococcal Strains, At 18 Months After Month-6 Vaccination in V72P10 Study, and in Naive Subjects.|The immune response was measured as the percentage of subjects with hSBA titers ≥1:4 against meningococcal strains 44/76-SL, 5/99 and NZ98/254, at 18 months after month-6 vaccination of rMenB+OMV-NZ or placebo in V72P10 study, and in age-matched vaccine naive subjects enrolled in this study, evaluated by serum bactericidal assay using human complement (hSBA).|month 0 (bl=baseline), month 1 and 18 months after last vaccination in V72P10 study.|Analysis was performed on the modified intention-to-treat (MITT) data set, i.e. all subjects who provided evaluable serum samples. Samples were collected at 18 months post last vaccination in the parent study. For the Naive group, blood samples were obtained for meningococcal serology at day 1 and served as a comparator.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821702|NCT01148537|Secondary|The Average Differences From Baseline Between Moxifloxacin and Placebo by Fridericia’s Corrected Interval (QTcF) on Day 6 and Day 13|"QT and RR data were determined for each of 4 ECGs over an approximate 10-minute interval at each nominal time point. The average QT and QTc (interval corrected for heart rate) data from the replicate ECGs at each nominal time point were calculated. The average QT and QTc data over the 2 pretreatment days were used as the baseline QT and QTc values.
Observed time from start of the QRS complex to end of the T wave (QT); interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) msec; interval corrected by Fridericia’s method (QTcF) msec."|Baseline to Day 6 and Day 13|"The full analysis population for ECGs (N = 131) was defined as all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postdose digital QT/QTc evaluation.
For the comparison of moxifloxacin to placebo (N = 88), the subjects randomized to BTDS were excluded."||QTcF (msec)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
821703|NCT01148537|Secondary|The Average Differences From Baseline Between BTDS and Placebo by Fridericia’s Corrected Interval (QTcF) on Day 6 and Day 13|"QT and RR data were determined for each of 4 ECGs over an approximate 10-minute interval at each nominal time point. The average QT and QTc (interval corrected for heart rate) data from the replicate ECGs at each nominal time point were calculated. The average QT and QTc data over the 2 pretreatment days were used as the baseline QT and QTc values.
Observed time from start of the QRS complex to end of the T wave (QT); interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) msec; interval corrected by Fridericia’s method (QTcF) msec."|Baseline to Day 6 and Day 13|"The full analysis population for ECGs (N = 131) was defined as all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postdose digital QT/QTc evaluation.
For the comparison of BTDS to placebo (N = 88), the subjects randomized to moxifloxacin were excluded."||QTcF (msec)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
821704|NCT01148537|Secondary|The Average Differences From Baseline Between Moxifloxacin and Placebo of Bazett Corrected QT Interval (QTcB) on Day 6 and Day 13|"QT and RR data were determined for each of 4 ECGs over an approximate 10-minute interval at each nominal time point. The average QT and QTc data from the replicate ECGs at each nominal time point were calculated. The average QT and QTc data over the 2 pretreatment days were used as the baseline QT and QTc values.
Observed time from start of the QRS complex to end of the T wave (QT); interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) msec; interval corrected by Bazett’s method (QTcB) msec."|Baseline to Day 6 and Day 13|"The full analysis population for ECGs (N = 131) was defined as all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postdose digital QT/QTc evaluation.
For the comparison of moxifloxacin to placebo (N=88), the subjects randomized to BTDS were excluded."||QTcB (msec)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
822145|NCT01160822|Secondary|Part B: Physician's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment at Week 12|The study physician made a global assessment of response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Very Poor.|Week 12|Pharmacodynamic analysis set, where data were available.||participants|||Number
821705|NCT01148537|Secondary|The Average Differences From Baseline Between BTDS and Placebo by Bazett Corrected QT Interval (QTcB) on Day 6 and Day 13|"QT and RR data were determined for each of 4 ECGs over an approximate 10-minute interval at each nominal time point. The average QT and QTc (QT interval corrected for heart rate) data from the replicate ECGs at each nominal time point were calculated. The average QT and QTc data over the 2 pretreatment days were used as the baseline QT and QTc values.
Observed time from start of the QRS complex to end of the T wave (QT); interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) msec; interval corrected by Bazett’s method (QTcB) msec."|Baseline to Day 6 and Day 13|"The full analysis population for ECGs (N = 131) was defined as all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postdose digital QT/QTc evaluation.
For the comparison of BTDS to placebo (N = 88), the subjects randomized to moxifloxacin were excluded."||QTcB (msec)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
821706|NCT01148537|Secondary|The Average Differences Between Moxifloxacin vs Placebo From Baseline by Interval Corrected From Within-subject Data (QTci) on Day 6|"QT and RR data were determined for each of 4 ECGs over an approximate 10-minute interval at each nominal time point. The average QT and QTc data from the replicate ECGs at each nominal time point were calculated. The average QT and QTc data over the 2 pretreatment days were used as the baseline QT and QTc values.
Observed time from start of the QRS complex to end of the T wave (QT); interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) msec; interval corrected from within-subject data (QTci) msec."|Baseline to Day 6|"The full analysis population for ECGs (N = 131) was defined as all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postdose digital QT/QTc evaluation
For the comparison of moxifloxacin to placebo (N = 88), the subjects randomized to BTDS were excluded."||QTci (msec)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
821707|NCT01148537|Primary|The Comparison of Moxifloxacin to Placebo Transdermal System (TDS): the Average Difference From Baseline Using QT Interval Corrected From Within-subject Data (QTci) on Day 13|"Observed time from start of the QRS complex to end of the T wave (QT), and the time between the 2 R waves (RR) data for each of 4 electrocardiographs (ECGs) over an approximate 10-minute interval at each nominal time point. The average QT and QTc data over the 2 pretreatment days were used as the baseline QT and QTc values.
Observed time from start of the QRS complex to end of the T wave (QT); interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) msec; interval corrected from within-subject data (QTci) msec."|Baseline to Day 13|"The full analysis population for ECGs (N = 131) was defined as all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postdose digital QT/QTc evaluation.
For the comparison of moxifloxacin to placebo (N=88), the subjects randomized to BTDS were excluded."||QTci (msec)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
821708|NCT01148537|Secondary|The Average Differences Between BTDS vs Placebo From Baseline by Interval Corrected From Within-subject Data (QTci) on Day 6|"QT and RR data were determined for each of 4 ECGs over an approximate 10-minute interval at each nominal time point. The average QT and QTc data from the replicate ECGs at each nominal time point were calculated. The average QT and QTc data over the 2 pretreatment days were used as the baseline QT and QTc values.
Observed time from start of the QRS complex to end of the T wave (QT); interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) msec; interval corrected from within-subject data (QTci) msec."|Baseline to Day 6|"The full analysis population for ECGs (N = 131) was defined as all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postdose digital QT/QTc evaluation.
For the comparison of BTDS to placebo (N = 88), the subjects randomized to moxifloxacin were excluded."||QTci (msec)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
821709|NCT01148537|Primary|The Comparison of BTDS to Placebo Transdermal System (TDS): the Average Difference From Baseline Using QT Corrected From Within-subject Data (QTci) on Day 13|"Observed time from start of the QRS complex to end of the T wave (QT), and the time between the 2 R waves (RR) data for each of 4 electrocardiographs (ECGs) over an approximate 10-minute interval at each nominal time point. The average QT and QTc data over the 2 pretreatment days were used as the baseline.
Observed time from start of the QRS complex to end of the T wave (QT); interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) msec; interval corrected from within-subject data (QTci) msec."|Baseline to Day 13|"The full analysis population for ECGs (N = 131) was defined as all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postdose digital QT/QTc evaluation.
For the comparison of BTDS to placebo (N = 88), the subjects randomized to moxifloxacin were excluded."||QTci (msec)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
821710|NCT01148693|Primary|Number of Participants With Cholangitis|After Endoscopic Retrograde CholangioPancreatography (ERCP) in 3 following days we check all participants for syptoms of cholangitis (fever, chills, right upper qudrant (RUQ) pain, leukocytosis) and ruling out other diagnoses than cholangitis|72 hours|||participants|||Number
821711|NCT01148745|Secondary|Serum Ferritin|Serum ferritin values were measured at all visits|7 (visit 5), 14 (visit 8), 21 (visit 11) and 28 days (visit 14)|||g/mL||Full Range|Median
821712|NCT01148745|Secondary|Transferrin Saturation (TSAT)|Transferrin saturation (TSAT) measured as a percentage, is a medical laborastory test. It is the ratio of serum iron and total iron-binding capacity, multiplied by 100|7 (visit 5), 14 (visit 8), 21 (visit 11), and 28 (visit14) days.|||percent||Full Range|Median
821713|NCT01148745|Primary|Number of Weeks Until Transferrin Saturation (TSAT) and Ferritin Stabilize|TSAT,ferritin,and TIBC measured before start of dialysis on dosing days, and on next 13 HD treatments. Continuous variables were summarized using median. Paired continuous data (e.g., TSAT, serum ferritin) were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Analyses evaluating stabilization of post drug iron indices was determined by comparing consecutive values at consecutive dialysis sessions and when there was no longer a difference between 2 consecutive time points, levels were considered stabilized. P-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.|pre-dosing/baseline, and 7 (visit 5), 14 (visit 8), 21 (visit 11) and 28 (visit 14) days after drug administration|||weeks|||Number
821714|NCT01148771|Primary|Area Under the Curve From 48 to 72 Hours [AUC(48-72)]|AUC(48-72) is the 24 hour area under the concentration versus time curve after the 3rd dose of ertapenem, which is selected to measure approximate AUC at steady-state.|0-24 hours after 3rd ertapenem dose|||mcg*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821715|NCT01148771|Secondary|Probability of Target Attainment (PTA)|After simulating 5000 patients receiving each dosing regimen, the probability of achieving free drug concentrations above an MIC of 0.25 mcg/mL and 0.5mcg/mL for at least 40% of the dosing interval (40% fT>MIC) is calculated at each MIC dilution.|Simulated Steady-State Exposure|The probability of achieving 40% T>MIC is reported at a MIC of 0.25mcg/mL and 0.5mcg/mL respectively.||% of 5000 simulated patients|Participants||Number
821716|NCT01148771|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|The following laboratory assessments will be make before and after participation in the study to determine if objective changes occurred: blood pressure, pulse rate, temperature, complete blood count with differential, platelet count, blood urea nitrogen, serum creatinine, liver function panel [aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase], total bilirubin, and urinalysis with microscopy. Monitoring of other pathologic or unintended changes in structure (signs),or function (symptoms) of the body associated with participation in the study will occur.|3 days|||participants|||Number
821717|NCT01148771|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) at Steady-State (After 3rd Dose)|Cmax is measured at 5 minutes after the beginning of the infusion for the 5 minute IV bolus dosage regimen and at 30 minutes after the beginning of the infusion for the 30 minute infusion dosage regimen.|5 or 30 minutes post start of infusion on Day 3|Each participant received ertapenem as a 5 minute infusion and as a 30 minute infusion, only in different order due to cross-over design. Data for all participants receiving each dosage regimen are included in each arm for results.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821718|NCT01148836|Secondary|Red Blood Cell Distribution Width||before and after three months of CoQ|||percentage of sizes of red blood cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
821719|NCT01148836|Secondary|Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin||before and after three months of CoQ|||pg||Standard Deviation|Mean
821720|NCT01148836|Secondary|Hematocrit||before and after three months of CoQ|||% of red blood cell||Standard Deviation|Mean
821721|NCT01148836|Secondary|Hemoglobin||before and after three months of CoQ|||g/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
821722|NCT01148836|Secondary|Red Blood Cells||before and after three months of CoQ|||10^6 cells/µl||Standard Deviation|Mean
821723|NCT01148836|Primary|Right Atrial Pressure||before and after three months of CoQ|Due to financial constraints only PAH subjects had echocardiograms performed before and after Co-Q||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
821724|NCT01148836|Primary|Tricuspid Regurgitation Grade|Tricuspid Regurgitation Grade ranges from 1 (normal) to 4 (severe regurgitation)|before and after three months of CoQ|Due to financial constraints only PAH subjects had echocardiograms performed before and after Co-Q||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821725|NCT01148836|Primary|Right Ventricle Myocardial Performance|Tei Index=(IRT+ICT)/ET, where IRT is isovolumic|before and after three months of CoQ|Due to financial constraints only PAH subjects had echocardiograms performed before and after Co-Q||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
821726|NCT01148836|Primary|Right Ventricular Outflow|Velocity time interval|before and after three months of CoQ|Due to financial constraints only PAH subjects had echocardiograms performed before and after Co-Q||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
821727|NCT01148836|Primary|Left Ventricular End Diastolic Volume|Amount of blood in ventricle at end of diastole|before and after three months of CoQ|Due to financial constraints only PAH subjects had echocardiograms performed before and after Co-Q||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
821728|NCT01148862|Primary|The Primary Treatment Comparison is the Evaluation of the Severity (Milligrams Per Deciliter) of Induced Hypoglycemia.|Severity (Milligrams per Deciliter) of induced hypoglycemia (YSI < 70 Milligrams per Deciliter) is defined as 70 Milligrams per Deciliter minus absolute lowest blood sugar level|approximately 8 hours per induction experiment|||Milligrams per Deciliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
821729|NCT01148862|Primary|The Primary Treatment Comparison is the Evaluation of the Duration (Minutes) of Induced Hypoglycemia.|Duration (minutes) of induced hypoglycemia (YSI < 70 mg/dL)|approximately 8 hours per induction experiment|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
821730|NCT01148979|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Dysphoric Apathy/Retardation Sub-factor (MDAR) of Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) at 4 Weeks.|The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale Dysphoric Apathy Retardation subfactor (MDAR) is a 5-item subscale of the clinician-administered 10-item Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). MDAR score can range from 0-30 with a higher score representing a greater severity of depressive symptoms.|Baseline to 4 weeks of treatment|All participants who completed all 4 weeks on both treatments (i.e., Placebo and Vyvanse) were included in the analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821731|NCT01155141|Secondary|Total Cholesterol||Baseline - Month 6|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Median
821732|NCT01155141|Secondary|Glucose||Baseline - Month 6|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Median
821733|NCT01155141|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure||Baseline - Month 6|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Median
821734|NCT01155141|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure||Baseline - Month 6|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Median
821735|NCT01155141|Secondary|Weight||Baseline - Month 6|||kg||Standard Deviation|Median
821736|NCT01155141|Primary|Protein/Creatinine Ratio||Baseline - Month 6|||unitless||Standard Deviation|Median
821737|NCT01155141|Secondary|eGFR||Baseline - Month 6|||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Median
821738|NCT01155141|Primary|Serum Creatinine||Baseline - Month 6|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Median
821739|NCT01155141|Primary|24 Hour Proteinuria||Baseline - Month 6|||g/day||Standard Deviation|Median
821740|NCT01155154|Primary|Number of Participants With Presence of Wound Infection|Hand lacerations will be examined 10-14 days after initial wound closure and will be assessed for presence of infection.|2 weeks|||participants|||Number
821741|NCT01155167|Secondary|Radial Artery Patency|Prior to discharge, color doppler ultrasound was used at the site where the sheath had been inserted to determine whether the radial artery was patent (open, unobstructed).|24 hours|per protocol||participants|||Number
821742|NCT01155167|Secondary|Radial Artery Spasm During Catheterization|The blinded clinical operator recorded whether radial artery spasm occurred, as detected by resistance to advancing the catheter through the radial artery, by difficulty in torquing the catheter, or by difficulty in removing the catheter.|2 hours|All participants except 3 participants in the Topical Dilator arm for whom RAS data were not recorded||participants|||Number
821743|NCT01155167|Primary|Change in Radial Artery Diameter|The cross-sectional radial artery area was measured using a high frequency linear array transducer. All ultrasound measurements were made 2 cm proximal to the radial styloid process. Each measurement was performed 3 times and averaged. At least 30 minutes after the application of topical creams, the radial artery diameter was again measured in the same fashion.|Baseline and after 30 minutes of drug application|||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
821750|NCT01155323|Primary|Corneal Staining|Investigator assessment of the corneal staining. Staining is an indication of dryness on areas on the cornea. Here it is measured over 5 regions of the cornea: central, temporal, nasal, inferior, and superior. The staining is graded using the National Eye Institute (NEI)0-3 scale: grade 0 = normal, grade 1 = mild, grade 2 = moderate, grade 3 = severe.|after 1 week of lens wear|The analysis population represents subjects that completed the study per protocol.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821751|NCT01155323|Primary|Subjective Rating of Handling|This outcome is a weighted combined score calculated from individual lens handling-related questions asked on a 1-5 scale: 1 = most negative response to 5 = most positive response.|after 1 week of lens wear|The analysis population represents subjects that completed the study per protocol.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821752|NCT01155323|Primary|Vision Quality|This outcome is a weighted combined score calculated from individual vision-related questions asked on a 1-5 scale: 1 = most negative response to 5 = most positive response.|after 1 week of lens wear|The analysis population represents subjects that completed the study per protocol.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821753|NCT01155323|Primary|Subjective Rating of Comfort|This outcome is a weighted combined score calculated from individual comfort-related questions asked on a 1-5 scale: 1 = most negative response to 5 = most positive response.|after 1 week of lens wear|The analysis population represents subjects that completed the study per protocol.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821754|NCT01155336|Secondary|Cardiac Electrophysiology|A 20-minute supine 12-lead Holter ECG will allow the quantification of a series of standard ECG parameters as well as provide insight into frequency-domain HRV parameters, QRS duration and morphology, using signal-averaged ECG (SAECG), repolarization morphology, and variability utilizing specialized programs.|1 week||||||
821755|NCT01155336|Primary|Platelet Function|Platelet function will be measured with PFA-100 test which has been shown to correlate with an increased risk for cardiovascular events in several well conducted studies and in a meta-analysis. The PFA-100 measures the number of seconds required for a clot to form in whole blood which is passed through an aperture in a cartridge coated with epinephrine. It is meant to imitate clotting in human arteries.|12 hours|We did not complete the study and no subjects were randomized to corn oil||seconds||Full Range|Mean
821756|NCT01155726|Primary|Average Subjective Comfort|"Participants were asked, How would you rate your comfort with your study lenses? and indicated their response by marking a continuum line ranging from 0=very poor comfort to 100=excellent comfort. Subjective comfort was collected at three time points (insertion, 4 hours, 8 hours) for 3 days, and the comfort ratings were averaged together."|Insertion, 4 hours, 8 hours each: Day 1, Day 2, and Day 3|Per protocol||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821757|NCT01155830|Secondary|TNF-alpha, Maximum|This study will quantify inflammatory cytokine profiles in three neonatal disease states, namely, neonatal sepsis with cardiovascular instability, infants with a congenital diaphragmatic hernia defect, and infants suffering cardiopulmonary failure significant enough to require heart/lung bypass treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).|up to 2 weeks|||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
821758|NCT01155830|Primary|TNF-alpha, Baseline|This study will quantify inflammatory cytokine profiles in three neonatal disease states, namely, neonatal sepsis with cardiovascular instability, infants with a congenital diaphragmatic hernia defect, and infants suffering cardiopulmonary failure significant enough to require heart/lung bypass treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).|Baseline|||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
821759|NCT01155869|Secondary|Treatment Participation|Percentage of total during-treatment study visits attended. This serves as a proxy for the number of months of treatment participation|16 weeks|||percentage of visits|Participants||Number
821760|NCT01155869|Primary|Mean Weekly Self-reported Alcohol Consumption|Mean number of standard drinks per week during the 24 week study. A standard drink is any drink that contains about 14 grams of pure alcohol, e.g. 12 ounces of beer, 5 ounces of wine or 1.5 ounces of spirits.|24 weeks|||standard drink||Standard Deviation|Mean
821761|NCT01155999|Primary|The Primary Efficacy Variable Was Clinical Cure in the Worse Eye on Day 3|Clinical cure was defined as a score 0 for bulbar conjunctival injection (evaluated using a 4 point ordinal scale) and a score 0 for conjunctival purulent discharge (evaluated using a 4 point ordinal scale).|Day 3|The analysis of the primary clinical efficacy variable was primarily performed on the basis of the MFAS. The MFAS consisted of all patients of the FAS with positive Day 0 culture results in an eligible eye.||participants|||Number
821762|NCT01156012|Primary|Change From Baseline in Intraocular Pressure (IOP)|"The worse eye is defined as:
If both eyes are eligible the eye with highest Intraocular pressure (IOP) at Day 0 (D0). If both eyes have the same IOP at D0 the worse eye is the right eye.
If only one eye is eligible this eye is the worse eye.
If neither eye is eligible the worse eye is defined as the eye with the highest IOP at D0.
If both eyes have the same IOP at D0 the worse eye is the right eye."|Day 0 and Day 84|mITT set : All randomised patients, with at least one eligible eye, having received at least one dose of the Investigational Medicinal Product, and for whom any follow-up IOP recording was available for the worse eye.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
821763|NCT01156051|Secondary|Change in Baseline to Treatment Minutes of Wake Time After Sleep Onset (WASO)|Polysomnographic parameter of sleep assessing how many minutes of wakefulness occurred after sleep onset and before full morning awakening.|Baseline to last observation carried forward (after at least one week of dose stability)|29 children were enrolled; two were disqualified: one (treatment) was lost to follow-up,and one (placebo) was noncompliant with the protocol.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
821764|NCT01156051|Secondary|Change in Baseline to Treatment Latency to Persistent Sleep (LPS)|Change in an objective measure of sleep onset, using polysomnography.|Baseline to last observation carried forward (after at least one week of dose stability)|29 children were enrolled; two were disqualified: one (treatment) was lost to follow-up,and one (placebo) was noncompliant with the protocol.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
821796|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Labial Mucosa at Day 25|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 25|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821765|NCT01156051|Secondary|Change in Baseline to Treatment ADHD-Rating Scale IV Total Score|Change in baseline to treatment ADHD-Rating Scale IV (Investigator-interview ) total. This scale quantitates ADHD symptoms based on DSM-IV criteria with a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 54 (higher scores suggesting more ADHD symptoms). The total score is a sum of the 9 items on the ADHD Rating Scale IV inattention score and the 9 items on the ADHD Rating Scale IV hyperactivity-impulsivity score (scores for each 0-27).|Baseline to last observation carried forward (after at least one week of dose stability)|29 children enrolled, but two were discontinued before termination data was available: one (treatment) was lost to follow up and one (placebo) was noncompliant with the protocol.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821766|NCT01156051|Primary|Change in Polysomnographic Total Sleep Time (TST)|Change in objective measures of sleep, using polysomnography|Baseline to last observation carried forward (after at least one week of dose stability)|29 children were enrolled, one (treatment) was lost to follow up an one (placebo) was discontinued due to noncompliance with protocol.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
821767|NCT01156116|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 24-hr Diastolic Blood Pressure (mmHg) at Week 2|"The average diastolic blood pressure over a 24-hr period was calculated for each patient.
Change = Week 2 - Baseline"|Baseline and Week 2|Patients were excluded from the analysis if they were missing blood pressure data at both Baseline and Week 2.||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
821768|NCT01156116|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 24-hr Systolic Blood Pressure (mmHg) at Week 2|"The average systolic blood pressure measured over a 24-hr period was calculated for each patient.
Change = Week 2 - Baseline."|Baseline and Week 2|Patients were excluded from the analysis if they were missing blood pressure data at both Baseline and Week 2.||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
821769|NCT01156116|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Sensitivity (SI) at Week 2|"SI is estimated from modeling of the insulin and glucose values during the intravenous glucose tolerance test (ivGTT).
Change = Week 2 - Baseline."|Baseline and Week 2|One patient from each group was excluded from the analysis since they were missing SI data at both Baseline and Week 2.||[mU/L]^-1·[min]^-1||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
821770|NCT01156116|Primary|Change From Baseline in Area Under the Curve (AUC) Glucose at Week 2|"The area under the glucose time curve, between 0 and 120 minutes of the OGTT, was calculated for each patient using the trapezoidal rule .
Change = Week 2 - Baseline."|Baseline and Week 2|One patient in the Placebo group who withdrew prior to any testing was excluded from the analysis.||(mg/dL)*min||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
821771|NCT01156142|Secondary|Patient Preference for Continuing Therapy With Oral Doxepin Hydrochloride|After each dose was administered, patients were asked if they would like to continue rinses with that particular agent. The percentage of patients who expressed an interest in continuing therapy are reported below.|Up to 9 days|||percentage of patients|||Number
821772|NCT01156142|Secondary|Incidence of Using Alternative Analgesics Between 2 and 4 Hours After the Initial Mouthwash|The incidence of utilizing additional analgesics between 2 and 4 hours after the initial mouthwash will be compared between the arms by the Chi-square test .|Up to 9 days|||percentage of patients|||Number
821773|NCT01156142|Secondary|Total Drowsiness Increase|The total drowsiness increase will be calculated by the area under the curve (AUC) adjusting for baseline, with time scale replaced by a numerical scale of 1,2,3,4,5,6. The numerical scale will be used rather than the raw time scale in order to give proper weights to more immediate patient-reported mouth pain outcomes after treatment. The AUC will be calculated by proration when there are terminal missing data. If the missing data are intermittent, simple imputation will be applied to calculate the AUC. The question ('On a scale from 0 to 10, what number best describes your DROWSINESS now?') used 11-point numerical analog scales (0 (no drowsiness) to 10 (extreme drowsiness, leading to sleep) scores) to measure total drowsiness increase. The AUCs for the two treatment arms were compared by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test with 95% CIs. The statistical analysis will be the same as the primary analysis.|Up to 9 days|If a patient cancels, is missing baseline data, or only provides baseline data, he/she will be excluded from the statistical analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821774|NCT01156142|Secondary|Total Stinging or Burning From the Oral Rinse|The total stinging or burning from the oral rinse will be calculated by the area under the curve (AUC) adjusting for baseline, with time scale replaced by a numerical scale of 1,2,3,4,5,6. The numerical scale will be used rather than the raw time scale in order to give proper weights to more immediate patient-reported mouth pain outcomes after treatment. The AUC will be calculated by proration when there are terminal missing data. If the missing data are intermittent, simple imputation will be applied to calculate the AUC. The question ('On a scale from 0 to 10, what number best describes any STINGING OR BURNING FROM THE ORAL RINSE now?') used 11-point numerical analog scales (0 (no stinging or burning) to 10 (worst stinging or burning possible) scores) to total stinging or burning from the oral rinse. The AUCs for the two treatment arms were compared by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test with 95% CIs.The statistical analysis will be the same as the primary analysis.|Up to 9 days|If a patient cancels, is missing baseline data, or only provides baseline data, he/she will be excluded from the statistical analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821775|NCT01156142|Secondary|Total Taste of the Oral Rinse|The total taste of the oral rinse will be calculated by the area under the curve (AUC) adjusting for baseline, with time scale replaced by a numerical scale of 1,2,3,4,5,6 , and analyzed in the same way as the primary endpoint. The numerical scale will be used rather than the raw time scale in order to give proper weights to more immediate patient-reported mouth pain outcomes after treatment. The AUC will be calculated by proration when there are terminal missing data. If the missing data are intermittent, simple imputation will be applied to calculate the AUC. The question ('On a scale from 0 to 10, what number best describes the TASTE OF THE ORAL RINSE now?') used 11-point numerical analog scales (0 (acceptable taste) to 10(terrible taste), with higher values representing worse outcome) to evaluate the total taste of the oral rinse. The AUCs for the two treatment arms were compared by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test with 95% CIs.|Up to 9 days|If a patient cancels, is missing baseline data, or only provides baseline data, he/she will be excluded from the statistical analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821874|NCT01156532|Secondary|Mean Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score Over Time|PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). The mean PASI improvement was calculated using a linear regression model.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8, Week 16|Participants with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821776|NCT01156142|Primary|Total Pain Reduction (Mouth and Throat)|The total pain reduction will be calculated by the (average of mouth and throat) area under the curve (AUC) adjusting for baseline, with time scale replaced by a numerical scale of 1,2,3,4,5,6. The numerical scale will be used rather than the raw time scale in order to give proper weights to more immediate patient-reported mouth pain outcomes after treatment. The AUC will be calculated by proration when there are terminal missing data. If the missing data are intermittent, simple imputation will be applied to calculate the AUC. The question ('On a scale from 0 to 10, what number best describes your MOUTH PAIN due to your radiation treatment now?') used 11-point numerical analog scales (0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable or possible) scores) to measure pain. The AUCs for the two treatment arms were compared by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test with 95% CIs.|Baseline and Day 1|If a patient cancels, is missing baseline data, or only provides baseline data, he/she will be excluded from the statistical analysis. The primary analysis of the total pain reduction will only use primary data from the first phase.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821777|NCT01156311|Other Pre-specified|Number of New or Newly Enlarging T2 Lesions|The number of new T2 lesions divided by the number of months since the reference visit during the Monotherapy Period and the Add-On Therapy Period.|Week -8 to Week 24|Number of participants in the Gd cohort with analyzable data in both Monotherapy and Add-on Therapy Periods. Gd cohort: BG00012-dosed participants with at least 1 Gd-enhancing lesion in any 1 of the 3 scans (Weeks -8, -4, or 0) during the Monotherapy Period.||lesions per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
821778|NCT01156311|Other Pre-specified|Average Number of New Gd-Enhancing Lesions: Weeks -4, 0 Average Versus Weeks 20, 24 Average|The average is calculated as (total number of lesions in non-missing scans / number of non-missing MRI scans).|Week -4 through Week 24|Gd cohort: BG00012-dosed participants with at least 1 Gd-enhancing lesion in any 1 of the 3 scans (Weeks -8, -4, or 0) during the Monotherapy Period.||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
821779|NCT01156311|Other Pre-specified|Average Number of Gadolinium (Gd)-Enhancing Lesions: Week -8, -4, 0 Average Versus Week 16, 20, 24 Average|The average is calculated as (total number of lesions in non-missing scans / number of non-missing magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] scans).|Week -8 through Week 24|Gd cohort: BG00012-dosed participants with at least 1 Gd-enhancing lesion in any 1 of the 3 scans (Weeks -8, -4, or 0) during the Monotherapy Period.||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
821780|NCT01156311|Primary|Worst Post-Baseline Values for Selected Urinalysis Parameters That Require Further Evaluation for Combination Therapy|Percentage of participants with post-baseline values for selected urinalysis parameters requiring further evaluation. For urine microscopy, results were categorized for male and female participants. For males, normal/negative was considered 0 to 3 red blood cells/high-power field (rbc/hpf), and positive was categorized in the following stages: 4 to 10, 11 to 20, 21 to 149, and ≥ 150 rbc/hpf. For females, normal/negative was considered 0 to 8 rbc/hpf, and positive was categorized in the following stages: 9 to 20, 21 to 30, 31 to 149, and ≥ 150 rbc/hpf.|collected from the start of BG00012 administration through to Week 26 +/- 5 days|The Safety Population for the Combination Therapy Period was defined as any participant who took at least 1 capsule of BG00012 concurrently with the background therapy; n=participants in the safety population with at least 1 post-baseline value.||percentage of participants|||Number
821781|NCT01156311|Primary|Maximum Post-Baseline Values: Liver Enzymes for Combination Therapy|Percentage of participants with post-baseline liver enzyme values above the upper limit of normal (ULN). Liver enzymes included alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT), and bilirubin. Elevated ALT/AST (ALT/AST ≥ 3*ULN) concurrent with elevated total bilirubin was also evaluated.|collected from the start of BG00012 administration through to Week 26 +/- 5 days|Participants in the safety population with at least one post-baseline value. Safety Population for the Combination Therapy Period was defined as any participant who took at least 1 capsule of BG00012 concurrently with the background therapy.||percentage of participants|||Number
821782|NCT01156311|Primary|Potentially Clinically Significant Hematology Laboratory Abnormalities for Combination Therapy|Percentage of participants with potentially clinically significant hematology laboratory abnormalities.|collected from the start of BG00012 administration through to Week 26 +/- 5 days|Participants in the safety population with at least one post-baseline value. Safety Population for the Combination Therapy Period was defined as any participant who took at least 1 capsule of BG00012 concurrently with the background therapy.||percentage of participants|||Number
821783|NCT01156311|Primary|Summary of Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Occurring Post-BG00012 Dosing (Add-on Therapy Period)|An AE was any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not related to the study drug. A serious adverse event (SAE) was any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose: resulted in death; in the view of the Investigator, placed the participant at immediate risk of death (a life-threatening event); required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; resulted in a congenital anomaly/birth defect; was any other medically important event that, in the opinion of the Investigator, jeopardized the participant or required intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes above. TEAE was defined as having an onset date that was on or after the start of study treatment (BG00012), or that worsened after the start of study treatment.|AEs were collected from enrollment until the final study visit (Week 26 +/-5 days).|The Safety Population for the Combination Therapy Period was defined as any participant who took at least 1 capsule of BG00012 concurrently with the background therapy.||percentage of participants|||Number
821797|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Buccal Mucosa at Day 25|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 25|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821875|NCT01156532|Secondary|Adherence to Adalimumab Treatment|Adherence was measured by how many times a participant had a discontinuation (i.e., missed a study dose) during the 16 weeks of treatment.|up to 16 weeks|Participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||participants|||Number
829555|NCT01220557|Secondary|CES-D Score|Depressive symptoms were assessed using the German version of the Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), an instrument for measuring number and severity of depressive symptoms.|6 month follow up||||||
821784|NCT01156311|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Adverse Events (AEs) Occurring Before BG00012 Dosing (Monotherapy Period)|Percentage of participants with AEs, serious AEs (SAEs), and discontinuations due to AEs. An AE was any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not related to the study drug. An SAE was any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose: resulted in death; in the view of the Investigator, placed the participant at immediate risk of death (a life-threatening event); required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; resulted in a congenital anomaly/birth defect; was any other medically important event that, in the opinion of the Investigator, jeopardized the participant or required intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes above. AEs were categorized as mild, moderate, or severe. All AEs occurring from enrollment to the day before BG00012 dosing are included.|from time of enrollment until day before first administration of BG00012 (Week -8 to Week 0)|The Safety Population for the Monotherapy Period was defined as any participant who took at least 1 dose of background therapy.||percentage of participants|||Number
821785|NCT01156363|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Requiring Dose Adjustments|Dose adjustment included: Dose Increase; No Change; and Dose Decreased. Participants who did not have this data available are reported as Not Done. Results are reported for overall treatment arm.|Baseline to Month 1; Month 1 to 2; Month 2 to 3; Month 3 to 4; Month 4 to 5; Month 5 to 6; Month 6 to 7; Month 7 to 8|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome and n signifies participants who were evaluable for specified time-point.||percentage of participants|||Number
821786|NCT01156363|Secondary|Mean Time Participants Spent Having Hb Concentration Within Target Range|Target Hb concentration was between 10.0 and 12.0 g/dL.|Weeks 1 to 32|ITT Population.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
821787|NCT01156363|Secondary|Change in Hb Concentration Between Reference and Treatment Period|The baseline (reference) hemoglobin was defined as the average of the three assessments recorded during the screening and baseline visits (Week -2, -1, and 0).|Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8|ITT Population. Here, n signifies participants evaluable at specified time-point for each arm, respectively.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821788|NCT01156363|Secondary|Mean Monthly Hb Values|The baseline (reference) hemoglobin was defined as the average of the three assessments recorded during the screening and baseline visits (Week -2, -1, and 0).|Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8|ITT Population. Here, n signifies participants evaluable at specified time-point for each arm, respectively.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821789|NCT01156363|Primary|Percentage of Participants Maintaining Average Hemoglobin (Hb) Concentration Within the Target Range|Percentage of participants who maintained the Hb concentration within target range (between 10.0 and 12.0 grams per deciliter [g/dL]) throughout the treatment period were reported.|Weeks 1 to 32|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
821790|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Uvula/Oropharynx at Day 25|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 25|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821791|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Hard/Soft Palate at Day 25|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 25|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821792|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Tongue at Day 25|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 25|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821793|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Gingiva at Day 25|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 25|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821794|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Mucobuccal Fold at Day 25|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 25|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821795|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Sublingual Mucosa at Day 25|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 25|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
823171|NCT01163162|Secondary|Creatinine Clearance|The primary outcome variable will be creatinine clearance. Subject will be used as random variable and maximal likelihood estimation methods will be used. We expect no differences between periods.|1 Week|||ml/min||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
821798|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Uvula/Oropharynx at Day 24 - Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821799|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Hard/Soft Palate at Day 24 - Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821800|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Tongue at Day 24 - Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821801|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Gingiva at Day 24 - Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821802|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Mucobuccal Fold at Day 24 - Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821803|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Sublingual Mucosa at Day 24 - Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821804|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Labial Mucosa at Day 24 - Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821805|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Buccal Mucosa at Day 24 - Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821806|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Uvula/Oropharynx at Day 24 - Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821807|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Hard/Soft Palate at Day 24 - Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821808|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Tongue at Day 24 - Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821809|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Gingiva at Day 24 - Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821810|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Mucobuccal Fold at Day 24 - Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821811|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Sublingual Mucosa at Day 24 - Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821812|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Labial Mucosa at Day 24 - Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821813|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Buccal Mucosa at Day 24 - Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 24 - Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821814|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Uvula/Oropharynx at Day 5|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 5|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821815|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Hard/Soft Palate at Day 5|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 5|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821816|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Tongue at Day 5|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 5|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821817|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Gingiva at Day 5|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 5|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821818|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Mucobuccal Fold at Day 5|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 5|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821819|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Sublingual Mucosa at Day 5|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 5|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
823285|NCT01170663|Secondary|Cmax After 7th Ramucirumab (IMC-1211B) Infusion||Cycle 4, Day 1, 1 hour post end of infusion (28-day cycles)|All participants who received Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) plus Paclitaxel and had Cmax observations at specific timepoint.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
821820|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Labial Mucosa at Day 5|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 5|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821821|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Buccal Mucosa at Day 5|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 5|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821822|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Uvula/Oropharynx at Day 3|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 3|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821823|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Hard/Soft Palate at Day 3|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 3|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821824|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Tongue at Day 3|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 3|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821825|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Gingiva at Day 3|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 3|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821826|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Mucobuccal Fold at Day 3|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 3|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821827|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Sublingual Mucosa at Day 3|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 3|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821828|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Labial Mucosa at Day 3|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 3|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821829|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Buccal Mucosa at Day 3|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 3|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821830|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Uvula/Oropharynx at Day 1 – Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821889|NCT01156701|Secondary|Number of Patients With Bronchitis|The frequency of bronchitis among the four cohorts was measured.|2006-2009|The study population consisted of individuals who were at least 5 years old and had been continuously enrolled for at least 6 months in the Normative Health Informatics (NHI) insurance claims database during the influenza seasons of 2006-2009 (October-April).||patients|||Number
821831|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Hard/Soft Palate at Day 1 – Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821832|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Tongue at Day 1 – Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821833|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Gingiva at Day 1 – Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821834|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Mucobuccal Fold at Day 1 – Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821835|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Sublingual Mucosa at Day 1 – Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821836|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Labial Mucosa at Day 1 – Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821837|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Buccal Mucosa at Day 1 – Post-treatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Post-treatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821838|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Uvula/Oropharynx at Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821839|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Hard/Soft Palate at Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821840|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Tongue at Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821841|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Gingiva at Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821842|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Mucobuccal Fold at Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821843|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Sublingual Mucosa at Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821844|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Labial Mucosa at Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821845|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Buccal Mucosa at Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821846|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Uvula/Oropharynx at Screening|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Screening|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821847|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Hard/Soft Palate at Screening|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Screening|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821848|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Tongue at Screening|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Screening|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821849|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Gingiva at Screening|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Screening|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821850|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Mucobuccal Fold at Screening|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Screening|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821851|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Sublingual Mucosa at Screening|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Screening|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821852|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Labial Mucosa at Screening|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Screening|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821853|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in Irritation Score Category for Buccal Mucosa at Screening|The dental examiner rated the irritation/inflammation on the soft tissues using a scale where 0=none (normal), 1=erythema plus slight edema (mild), 2=moderate erythema and/or edema (beginning of tissue breakdown or sloughing) (moderate), 3=severe inflammation/irritation (definite blistering, ulceration, or epithelial sloughing) (severe).|Screening|Analysis was based on the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who used the investigational product. No imputations were made for missing data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821854|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Abnormal Condition by Anatomical Site at Day 25|Buccal, labial and sublingual mucosae, mucobuccal fold, gingiva, tongue, hard and soft palate, uvula, oropharynx, teeth and dental restorations were examined. The dental examiner evaluated any condition as either normal or abnormal.|Day 25|Analysis was based on subjects with measurements for this variable.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821855|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Abnormal Condition by Anatomical Site at Day 24 – Post-treatment|Buccal, labial and sublingual mucosae, mucobuccal fold, gingiva, tongue, hard and soft palate, uvula, oropharynx, teeth and dental restorations were examined. The dental examiner evaluated any condition as either normal or abnormal.|Day 24 – Post-treatment|Analysis was based on subjects with measurements for this variable.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821856|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Abnormal Condition by Anatomical Site at Day 24 – Pretreatment|Buccal, labial and sublingual mucosae, mucobuccal fold, gingiva, tongue, hard and soft palate, uvula, oropharynx, teeth and dental restorations were examined. The dental examiner evaluated any condition as either normal or abnormal.|Day 24 – Pretreatment|Analysis was based on subjects with measurements for this variable.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821857|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Abnormal Condition by Anatomical Site at Day 5|Buccal, labial and sublingual mucosae, mucobuccal fold, gingiva, tongue, hard and soft palate, uvula, oropharynx, teeth and dental restorations were examined. The dental examiner evaluated any condition as either normal or abnormal.|Day 5|Analysis was based on subjects with measurements for this variable.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821858|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Abnormal Condition by Anatomical Site at Day 3|Buccal, labial and sublingual mucosae, mucobuccal fold, gingiva, tongue, hard and soft palate, uvula, oropharynx, teeth and dental restorations were examined. The dental examiner evaluated any condition as either normal or abnormal.|Day 3|Analysis was based on subjects with measurements for this variable.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821859|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Abnormal Condition by Anatomical Site at Day 1 – Post-treatment|Buccal, labial and sublingual mucosae, mucobuccal fold, gingiva, tongue, hard and soft palate, uvula, oropharynx, teeth and dental restorations were examined. The dental examiner evaluated any condition as either normal or abnormal.|Day 1 – Post-treatment|Analysis was based on subjects with measurements for this variable.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821860|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Abnormal Condition by Anatomical Site at Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|Buccal, labial and sublingual mucosae, mucobuccal fold, gingiva, tongue, hard and soft palate, uvula, oropharynx, teeth and dental restorations were examined. The dental examiner evaluated any condition as either normal or abnormal.|Day 1 – Baseline/Pretreatment|Analysis was based on subjects with measurements for this variable.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821861|NCT01156376|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Abnormal Condition by Anatomical Site at Screening|Buccal, labial and sublingual mucosae, mucobuccal fold, gingiva, tongue, hard and soft palate, uvula, oropharynx, teeth and dental restorations were examined. The dental examiner evaluated any condition as either normal or abnormal.|Screening|Analysis was based on subjects with measurements for this variable.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
821862|NCT01156480|Secondary|Mortality||at 40 weeks corrected gestational age||||||
821863|NCT01156480|Secondary|Growth Velocity||at 40 weeks CGA||||||
821864|NCT01156480|Secondary|Length of Stay|this will be assessed at the time of discharge, around 40 weeks CGA on average. A subset of infants may be discharged later than 40 weeks corrected gestational age (CGA), however, so these infants will need to have length of stay assessed later than 40 weeks CGA.|at 40 weeks corrected gestational age||||||
821865|NCT01156480|Secondary|Time to Full Enteral Feeds|this will be assessed as the time needed to achieve full enteral feeds following the diagnosis of NEC. On average, it will be assessed at 40 weeks CGA, near the time of discharge, but there is a subset of infants who will not yet have achieved full enteral feeds at that time, so it may need to be assessed later than 40 weeks CGA|at 40 weeks corrected gestational age||||||
821866|NCT01156480|Secondary|Time on Parenteral Nutrition||at 40 weeks corrected gestational age||||||
821867|NCT01156480|Secondary|Incidence of Sepsis||at 40 weeks corrected gestational age||||||
821868|NCT01156480|Secondary|Need for Gastrointestinal Surgery||at 36 weeks corrected gestational age||||||
821869|NCT01156480|Secondary|Spontaneous Intestinal Perforation||at 36 weeks corrected gestational age||||||
821870|NCT01156480|Secondary|Gastrointestinal (GI) Failure (Defined as Not Being on Full Enteral Feeds of 120kcal/kg/Day at 36 Weeks Corrected Age)||36 weeks corrected gestational age||||||
821871|NCT01156480|Primary|CRP Level|C-reactive protein (CRP) is a non-specific measure of inflammation, usually elevated in infants diagnosed with NEC|7 days|||mg/L|||Number
821872|NCT01156480|Primary|CRP Level|C-reactive protein is a non-specific marker of inflammation, noted to be elevated in infants diagnosed with NEC.|3 days|||mg/L|||Number
821873|NCT01156532|Secondary|Mean Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score Over Time|DLQI score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot, a little, or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired. The mean DLQI improvement was calculated using a linear regression model.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8, Week 16|Participants with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821890|NCT01156701|Secondary|Number of Patients With Pneumonia|The frequency of pneumonia among the four cohorts was measured..|2006-2009|The study population consisted of individuals who were at least 5 years old and had been continuously enrolled for at least 6 months in the Normative Health Informatics (NHI) insurance claims database during the influenza seasons of 2006-2009 (October-April).||patients|||Number
821876|NCT01156532|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An adverse event was considered an SAE if it met any of the following criteria: death of the participant; life-threatening event; hospitalization; prolongation of hospitalization; congenital anomaly; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; an important medical event requiring medical or surgical intervention to prevent serious outcome; spontaneous or elective abortion. SAEs included the occurrence of tuberculosis, opportunistic infection, and malignancy.|From the time of informed consent until 70 days (5 half-lives) after the last dose of study drug (treatment was 16 weeks).|Participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||participants|||Number
821877|NCT01156532|Secondary|European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Index Score at Baseline and Week 16|EQ-5D is a self-reported health outcome which measures mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain discomfort, anxiety, and depression. An overall score is derived that measures from -0.59 (worst) to +1 (best). Improvement was defined as a mean score increase of at least 0.2.|Baseline, Week 16|Participants with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821878|NCT01156532|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reaching a Minimal Important Difference (MID) in the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot, a little, or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired. MID for the DLQI was defined as a score decrease from baseline of 2.3 to 5. The mean DLQI improvement was calculated using a linear regression model.|Baseline to Week 16|Participants with available data.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821879|NCT01156532|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reaching a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI-75) Response|PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). PASI-75 responders are the participants who achieved at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at Week 16. The mean PASI improvement was calculated using a linear regression model.|Baseline to Week 16|Participants with available data. One participant was excluded from the analysis because only baseline and not follow-up information was available. Furthermore, 3 participants did not have their PASI measurement available either at baseline or at their last follow-up visit.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
821880|NCT01156571|Secondary|Incidence of Major/Minor Non-coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG)-Related Hemorrhage by Clinical Relevant Criteria - GUSTO Severe/Life-threatening, Moderate and Mild|GUSTO = Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries trial|48 hours after randomization|||participants|||Number
821881|NCT01156571|Secondary|Individual Incidence of Stent Thrombosis (ST), Death, Myocardial Infarction (MI) and Ischemia-driven Revascularization (IDR)|CEC-adjudicated results (mITT population)|48 hours after randomization|||participants|||Number
821882|NCT01156571|Primary|The Composite Incidence of All-cause Mortality, Myocardial Infarction (MI), Ischemia-driven Revascularization (IDR) and Stent Thrombosis (ST)|Clinical Events Committee (CEC)-adjudicated results (modified intent-to-treat [mITT] population)|48 hours after randomization|||participants|||Number
821883|NCT01156597|Secondary|Cholesterol Efflux Capacity of HDL|The ability of serum HDL to remove cholesterol from cultured cells will be assessed as an in vitro method to evaluate a functional changes in HDL mediated by changes due to pioglitazone treatment. Cells were incubated with 2% serum from each study subject diluted in culture medium and incubations were performed for a total of 4 hours. Cholesterol efflux was calculated as the percent of cholesterol removed from the cells and appearing in the culture medium normalized to a reference serum pool as described in detail by de la Llera-Moya et al (de la Llera-Moya M, Drazul-Schrader D, Asztalos BF, Cuchel M, Rader DJ, Rothblat GH. The ability to promote efflux via ABCA1 determines the capacity of serum specimens with similar high-density lipoprotein cholesterol to remove cholesterol from macrophages. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2010 Apr;30(4):796-801. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.109.199158. PMID: 20075420).|24 weeks|||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
821884|NCT01156597|Secondary|HDL Apolipoprotein Levels at Study End-point|Lipoproteins will be isolated and analyzed using the gradient ultracentrifugation-high pressure liquid chromatography technique to isolate very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL), intermediate density lipoprotein (IDL), LDL, and high density lipoprotein (HDL) subfractions. Protein and lipid compositions of HDL is determined|24 weeks|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821885|NCT01156597|Primary|Increased HDL-Cholesterol and Decreased Triglycerides|"The primary endpoint will be increased high density lipoprotein cholesterol and decreased triglycerides measured as the difference after 12 or 24 weeks of treatment from baseline levels. The data are expressed as the percent change from the baseline value and calculated using he equation:
Change=[100%*(Endpoint value – Baseline Value)/Baseline Value]"|24 weeks|All subjects that completed the study were used for the final analysis||% Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
821886|NCT01156701|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Experiencing Hospitalization or Death Due to Influenza|The frequency of hospitalization and death in the study population was analyzed.|Baseline|The study population consisted of individuals who were at least 5 years old and had been continuously enrolled for at least 6 months in the Normative Health Informatics (NHI) insurance claims database during the influenza seasons of 2006-2009 (October-April).||patients|||Number
821887|NCT01156701|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients With Respiratory Outcomes||Baseline|The study population consisted of individuals who were at least 5 years old and had been continuously enrolled for at least 6 months in the Normative Health Informatics (NHI) insurance claims database during the influenza seasons of 2006-2009 (October-April).||patients|||Number
821888|NCT01156701|Secondary|Number of Patients With Any Respiratory Diagnosis|The frequency of any respiratory diagnosis among the four cohorts was measured.|2006-2009|The study population consisted of individuals who were at least 5 years old and had been continuously enrolled for at least 6 months in the Normative Health Informatics (NHI) insurance claims database during the influenza seasons of 2006-2009 (October-April).||patients|||Number
822146|NCT01160822|Secondary|Part B: Physician's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment at Week 8|The study physician made a global assessment of response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Very Poor.|Week 8|Pharmacodynamic analysis set, where data were available.||participants|||Number
821893|NCT01156792|Secondary|Number of Participants Withdrawn Due to Lack of Efficacy During the Last 3 Weeks of the 6-week Treatment Period|Participants were withdrawn if they met any of the following three criteria for ‘lack of efficacy’: 1) Clinic FEV1 below the FEV1 ‘Stability Limit’ value, 2) During any consecutive 7-day period, the participant experienced PEF fallen below the PEF ‘Stability Limit’ for more than 3 days, or if >= 12 inhalations per day of albuterol were used for more than 2 days, and 3) Ashtma exacerbation. The number of withdrawals due to lack of efficacy were summarized for each treatment and Fisher’s Exact test was used for comparison with placebo add-on. Withdrawals occurring during active washout periods are not included.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population.||Number of participants|||Number
821894|NCT01156792|Secondary|Percentage of Nights Without Awakenings Due to Asthma During the Last 3 Weeks of the 6-week Treatment Period|Night time asthma symptoms were recorded every morning upon rising, before taking any rescue or study medication and before assessing the PEF. Symptoms were recorded on a 5-point scale: 0 = no symptoms during the night, 1 = symptoms causing to wake once, 2 = symptoms causing to wake twice or more, 3 = symptoms causing to be awake most of the night, 4 = could not sleep due to severe symptoms. Participants recorded the symptoms in a daily eDiary. The number of nights with no awakenings due to asthma during the last 3 weeks of the 6-week treatment period were counted, and percentage calculated by dividing by 21 and multiplying by 100. Analysis was done using mixed effect ANCOVA model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effects of participant.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Percentage of nights||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821895|NCT01156792|Secondary|Percentage of Rescue-free Nights During the Last 3 Weeks of the 6-week Treatment Period|Albuterol was provided as a rescue medication, and participants were required to record rescue medication use in the morning and in the evening. Participants recorded the number of inhalations of rescue medication in a daily eDiary. The number of nights when rescue medication was not used (“rescue-free nights”) during the last 3 weeks of the 6-week treatment period were counted, and percentage calculated by dividing by 21 and multiplying by 100. Analysis was done using mixed effect ANCOVA model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effects of participant.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Percentage of nights||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821896|NCT01156792|Secondary|Percentage of Rescue-free Days During the Last 3 Weeks of the 6-week Treatment Period|Albuterol was provided as a rescue medication, and participants were required to record rescue medication use in the morning and in the evening. Participants recorded the number of inhalations of rescue medication in a daily eDiary. The number of days when rescue medication was not used (“rescue-free days”) during the last 3 weeks of the 6-week treatment period were counted, and percentage calculated by dividing by 21 and multiplying by 100. Analysis was done using mixed effect ANCOVA model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effects of participant.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Percentage of days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821897|NCT01156792|Secondary|Percentage of Symptom-free Nights During the Last 3 Weeks of the 6 Week Treatment Period|Night time asthma symptoms were recorded every morning upon rising, before taking any rescue or study medication and before assessing the PEF. Symptoms were recorded on a 5-point scale ranging from ‘0’ (implying no symptoms) to 4 (implying severe symptoms). Participants recorded the symptoms in a daily eDiary. The number of nights when symptoms were not experienced (“symptom-free nights”) during the last 3 weeks of the 6-week treatment period were counted, and percentage calculated by dividing by 21 and multiplying by 100. Analysis was done using mixed effect ANCOVA model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effects of participant.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Percentage of nights||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821898|NCT01156792|Secondary|Percentage of Symptom-free Days During the Last 3 Weeks of the 6-week Treatment Period|Daytime asthma symptoms were recorded every evening at bedtime, before taking any rescue or study medication and before assessing the PEF. Symptoms were recorded on a 6-point scale ranging from ‘0’ (implying no symptoms) to 5 (implying severe symptoms). Participants recorded the symptoms in a daily eDiary. The number of days when symptoms were not experienced (“symptom-free days”) during the last 3 weeks of the 6-week treatment period were counted, and percentage calculated by dividing by 21 and multiplying by 100. Analysis was done using mixed effect ANCOVA model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effects of participant.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Percentage of days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821899|NCT01156792|Secondary|Daily Rescue Short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA) Use Averaged Over the Last 3 Weeks of the 6-week Treatment Period|A SABA (albuterol) was provided to participants as a rescue medication, to use as needed for symptomatic relief of asthma symptoms. Participants were required to record their albuterol use in the morning and in the evening. Participants recorded the number of inhalations of rescue medication in a daily eDiary. The daily rescue SABA use was averaged over the last 3 weeks of the 6-week treatment period, and analyzed using mixed effect ANCOVA model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effects of participant.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Number of inhalations||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821900|NCT01156792|Secondary|Daily Asthma Symptom Score Averaged Over the Last 3 Weeks of the 6-week Treatment Period|Daytime and night time asthma symptoms were recorded every evening at bedtime and every morning upon rising, respectively, before taking any rescue or study medication and before assessing the PEF. Symptoms were recorded on scales ranging from ‘0’ (implying no symptoms) to either 5 (for daytime symptoms) or 4 (for night time symptoms) (implying severe symptoms). Participants recorded the symptoms in a daily eDiary. 24-hour period asthma symptom scores were averaged over the last 3 weeks of the 6-week treatment period, and analyzed using mixed effect ANCOVA model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effects of participant.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821901|NCT01156792|Secondary|Daily (Average of Morning and Evening) PEF Averaged Over the Last 3 Weeks of the 6 -Week Treatment Period Between GSK2190915 and Montelukast Groups|The PEF is a measure of lung function and measures how fast a person can breathe out. PEF was measured every morning and evening prior to study medication dose and any rescue albuterol (bronchodilator) use. Participants recorded PEF in a daily eDiary. Daily average of morning and evening PEF was averaged over the last 3 weeks of the 6-week treatment period, and analyzed using mixed effect ANCOVA model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effects of participant. This outcome measure explored the efficacy between GSK2190915 and montelukast due to the dosing time difference.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||L/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821902|NCT01156792|Secondary|Daily Evening PEF Averaged Over the Last 3 Weeks of the 6-week Treatment Period|The PEF is a measure of lung function and measures how fast a person can breathe out. PEF was measured every evening prior to study medication dose and any rescue albuterol (bronchodilator) use. Participants recorded PEF in a daily eDiary. Daily evening PEF was averaged over the last 3 weeks of the 6-week treatment period, and analyzed using mixed effect ANCOVA model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effects of participant.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||L/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821903|NCT01156792|Secondary|Daily Trough (Morning Pre-dose and Pre-rescue Bronchodilator) Morning Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Averaged Over the Last 3 Weeks of the 6-week Treatment Period|The PEF is a measure of lung function and measures how fast a person can breathe out. Trough PEF was measured every morning prior to study medication dose and any rescue albuterol (bronchodilator) use. Participants recorded PEF in a daily electronic diary (eDiary). Daily trough morning PEF was averaged over the last 3 weeks of the 6-week treatment period, and analyzed using mixed effect ANCOVA model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effects of participant.|Week 4 to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Liters/minute (L/min)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821904|NCT01156792|Primary|Trough (AM Pre-dose and Pre-rescue Bronchodilator) Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) at the End of the 6-week Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. FEV1 was measured electronically using spirometry, prior to study medication and any rescue albuterol (bronchodilator) use. At the end of the 6-week treatment period, FEV1 was measured approximately 24 hours after the participant’s last morning dose of study medication and approximately 12 hours after the evening dose of study medication. Trough FEV1 was analyzed using mixed effect analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model for treatment effects, incorporating fixed effects of baseline, period, age, center, smoking status, and random effect of participant. Intent-to-Treat Population is defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug.|End of Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Liters (L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821905|NCT01156844|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second Standardized (With Respect to Time) Area Under the Curve (AUC) From 0 to 12 Hours (FEV1 AUC 0-12h) After Two Weeks of Treatment|Spirometry was conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Standardized area under the curve (AUC 0-12 hours) of FEV1 measurements taken at pre-dose to 12 hours post-dose was calculated based on the trapezoidal rule and was adjusted for the area per time unit by using the scheduled time of measurements for FEV1. Analysis of covariance model was used with baseline FEV1 as a continuous covariate.|Baseline, 0 to 12 hours post dose week 2|Pharmacodynamic (PD) Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and who had evaluable PD data.||Liters||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821906|NCT01156844|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second Standardized (With Respect to Time) Area Under the Curve (AUC) From 0 to 48 Hours (FEV1 AUC 0-48h) After Two Weeks of Treatment|Spirometry was conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Standardized area under the curve (AUC 0-48 hours) of FEV1 measurements taken at pre-dose to 48 hours post-dose was calculated based on the trapezoidal rule and was adjusted for the area per time unit by using the scheduled time of measurements for FEV1. Analysis of covariance model was used with baseline FEV1 as a continuous covariate.|Baseline, 0 to 48 hours post dose week 2|Pharmacodynamic (PD) Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and who had evaluable PD data.||Liters||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821907|NCT01156844|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second Standardized (With Respect to Time) Area Under the Curve (AUC) From 0 to 24 Hours Post Dose (FEV1 AUC 0-24h) After Two Weeks of Treatment|Spirometry was conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Standardized area under the curve (AUC 0-24 hours) of FEV1 measurements taken at pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose was calculated based on the trapezoidal rule and was adjusted for the area per time unit using the scheduled time of measurements for FEV1. Analysis of covariance model was used with baseline FEV1 as a continuous covariate.|Baseline, 0-24 hours post dose week 2|Pharmacodynamic (PD) Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and who had evaluable PD data.||Liters||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821908|NCT01156844|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) After Two Weeks of Treatment|Spirometry was conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Trough FEV1 values were calculated as the mean of the 23.17 hours and 23.75 hours post morning dose FEV1 measurements. Analysis of covariance model was used with baseline FEV1 as a continuous covariate.|Baseline to week 2|Pharmacodynamic (PD) Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and who had evaluable PD data.||Liters||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
821909|NCT01156987|Primary|Lesions|Number of lesions detected|at time of read by two radiologiests, compared to biopsy within 7 days.|||lesions|||Number
821910|NCT01157065|Primary|Incidence of Events of Special Interest (ESI)|An ESI was a protocol-specified event of scientific and medical concern specific to the Sponsor's product or program where ongoing monitoring and rapid communication by the Investigator to the Sponsor was appropriate. These adverse events could have been serious or nonserious and may have required further investigation in order to characterize and understand.|Up to Day 30|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received study medication and completed at least one scheduled post-injection study visit||events|||Number
821911|NCT01157065|Primary|Mean Reduction From Baseline in Central Subfield (CSF) Retinal Thickness at Week 4|The thickness of the retina was measured using a non-invasive device that produces cross-sectional and 3D images of the eye. The reduction was calculated by subtracting Week 4 visit value from the Baseline value. A positive number indicates a reduction in thickness compared to baseline, whereas a negative number indicates an increase in thickness. An increase in thickness as compared to baseline may indicate a progression of the underlying disease.|Week 4|All patients who received study medication, completed at least one scheduled post-injection study visit, and did not receive standard therapy prior to Week 4 assessment||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
821912|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in EuroQol - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A self-assessment questionnaire that provides 2 measures of health status. The EQ-5D index score is a weighted linear combination over 5 dimensions of health status. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3, and an equation is used to calculate the EQ-5D index score. The EQ-5D index score can range from possible negative values (minimum -0.415) to a maximum of 1.0. The EQ-VAS is a visual analog scale with a range of 0 to 100. For both variables, a higher score indicates a better health state.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821913|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in Irritability Symptoms as Measured by the Sheehan Irritability Scale (SIS) Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A self-administered scale to be used by clinical subjects to rate suffering over the past week with regard to irritability symptoms. The total SIS score is the sum of 7 items, and ranges from 0 to 70. Each item is assessed on an 11-point scale where 0=not at all, 1-3=mildly, 4-6=moderately, 7-9=markedly, and 10=extremely. The SIS also records the number of days impaired by irritability.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821914|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q LES-Q-SF) Item 16|"The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form) measures the patient’s satisfaction with medication and overall quality of life.
The 16th item is a global rating of overall life satisfaction and contentment, rated on a 1 to 5 scale. Higher scores are indicative of greater satisfaction."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821915|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q LES-Q-SF) Item 15|"The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form) measures the patient’s satisfaction with medication and overall quality of life.
The 15th item queries respondents’ satisfaction with the medication they are taking, rated on a 1 to 4 scale, score 0 indicates that no medication was taken. Higher scores are indicative of greater satisfaction."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821916|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in Overall Quality of Life and Satisfaction From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) by Assessing the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) % Maximum Total Score|The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form)total score is derived by summing item scores 1 to 14. Higher scores are indicative of greater enjoyment or satisfaction in each domain. The Q-LES-Q-SF % maximum total score is calculated as 100% × (Q-LES-Q-SF total score – 14) / 56, and can range from 0% to 100%.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821917|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Family Life/Home Responsibilities Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the SDS family life/home responsibilities domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821918|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Social Life Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the SDS social life domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821936|NCT01157117|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 38 in Antigen-specific Immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4)|Casein and beta-lactoglobulin milk proteins IgG4 levels were measured in plasma. The value for each participant was subtracted from the value for that participant at baseline. Month 38 was 6 months after treatment ended at Month 32.|Month 38|All randomized participants and untreated controls who had not withdrawn from the study, came to the clinic for their Month 38 visit, and for whom valid results were reported.||mgA/L||Full Range|Median
821919|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Work/School Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the work/school domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821920|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score|Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) is 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The SDS total score is calculated as the sum of the score for the 3 inter-correlated domains (school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities) and ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired).|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821921|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 14|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821922|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 12|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821923|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 10|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 10|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821924|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 9|"A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 9|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821925|NCT01157078|Secondary|Response in the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Defined as CGI-I Rating of “Very Much Improved” or “Much Improved” From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A 3-part, clinician-administered scale that rates the improvement or worsening of the patient’s illness from randomization (baseline). Each item is scored on a 1 to 7 scale. CGI-I scores >4 indicate worsening, while scores <4 indicate improvement.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
821926|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in the Clinician-rated Global Outcome of Severity as Measured by the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Score From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A 3-part, clinician-administered scale that rates the improvement or worsening of the patient’s illness from randomization (baseline). Each item is scored on a 1 to 7 scale. Higher CGI-S scores indicate greater illness severity.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821927|NCT01157078|Secondary|Change in Depressive Symptoms From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-17 Items (HAMD-17) Total Score|A 17-item, clinician-rated scale that assesses depressive symptoms. The HAMD-17 consists of 17 symptoms, each of which is rated from 0 to 2 or 0 to 4, where 0 is none/absent. The HAMD-17 total score is calculated as the sum of the 17 individual symptom scores; the total score can range from 0 to 52. Higher HAMD-17 scores indicate more severe depression.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821953|NCT01157169|Primary|Cmax of Buprenorphine.|Bioequivalence based on Buprenorphine Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 144 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821928|NCT01157078|Secondary|Sustained Remission, Defined as a MADRS Total Score of ≤8 at Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a MADRS total score of ≤8 at Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16)was calculated.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Week 12, Week 14, Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
821929|NCT01157078|Secondary|Sustained Response, Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score and a MADRS Total Score of ≤12 at Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score and a MADRS total score of ≤12 at Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16); Week 12, Week 14, and Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of patients analyzed|||Number
821930|NCT01157078|Secondary|Early and Sustained Response, Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score and a MADRS Total Score of ≤12 at Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score and a MADRS total score of ≤12 at Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16); Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
821931|NCT01157078|Secondary|Remission in Depressive Symptoms of MDD, Defined as MADRS Total Score of ≤8 at End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a MADRS total score of ≤8 at end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
821932|NCT01157078|Secondary|Response in Depressive Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score at End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score at end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
821933|NCT01157078|Primary|Change in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score From Randomization to End of Treatment.|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821934|NCT01157117|Secondary|Change in Percent of Cells Positive for Cluster of Differentiation 63 (CD63) at Month 38 in Basophils Stimulated by Milk|Basophil cells isolated from blood using flow cytometry were stimulated with 5 different levels of milk and the percent of basophil cells that were CD63 positive was measured. The value for each participant obtained at Month 38 was subtracted from the value for that participant at baseline. The 5 different levels of milk stimulant were: 10 µg/mL, 1 µg/mL , 0.1 µg/mL , 0.01 µg/mL , and 0.001 µg/mL. Month 38 was 6 months after treatment ended at Month 32.|Month 38|All randomized participants and untreated controls who had not withdrawn from the study, came to the clinic for their Month 38 visit, and for whom valid results were reported.||percentage of CD63+ basophils||Full Range|Median
821935|NCT01157117|Secondary|Change in Percent of Cells Positive for Cluster of Differentiation 63 (CD63) at Month 32 in Basophils Stimulated by Milk|Basophil cells isolated from blood using flow cytometry were stimulated with 5 different levels of milk and the percent of basophil cells that were CD63 positive was measured. The value for each participant obtained at Month 32 was subtracted from the value for that participant at baseline. The 5 different levels of milk stimulant were: 10 µg/mL, 1 µg/mL , 0.1 µg/mL , 0.01 µg/mL , and 0.001 µg/mL. Month 32 was the last visit on treatment.|Month 32|All randomized participants and untreated controls who had not withdrawn from the study, came to the clinic for their Month 32 visit, and for whom valid results were reported.||percentage of CD63+ basophils||Full Range|Median
821954|NCT01157182|Secondary|AUC0-inf for Corrected Unconjugated Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for Corrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821937|NCT01157117|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 38 in Antigen-specific Immunoglobulin E (IgE)|The level of milk IgE in plasma as well as the IgE levels of 2 milk proteins, casein and beta-lactoglobulin, were measured. The value for each participant was subtracted from the value for that participant at baseline. Month 38 was 6 months after treatment ended at Month 32.|Month 38|All randomized participants and untreated controls who had not withdrawn from the study, came to the clinic for their Month 38 visit, and for whom valid results were reported.||kUA/L||Full Range|Median
821938|NCT01157117|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 32 in Antigen-specific Immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4)|Casein and beta-lactoglobulin milk proteins IgG4 levels were measured in plasma. The value for each participant was subtracted from the value for that participant at baseline. Month 32 was the last visit on treatment.|Month 32|All randomized participants and untreated controls who had not withdrawn from the study, came to the clinic for their Month 32 visit, and for whom valid results were reported.||mgA/L||Full Range|Median
821939|NCT01157117|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 32 in Antigen-specific Immunoglobulin E (IgE)|The level of milk IgE in plasma as well as the IgE levels of 2 milk proteins, casein and beta-lactoglobulin, were measured. The value for each participant was subtracted from the value for that participant at baseline. Month 32 was the last visit on treatment.|Month 32|All randomized participants and untreated controls who had not withdrawn from the study, came to the clinic for their Month 32 visit, and for whom valid results were reported.||kUA/L||Full Range|Median
821940|NCT01157117|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 32 in Area Under the Curve for Milk Endpoint Titration Prick Skin Test|A milk endpoint titration is a prick skin test using 5 serial 10-fold dilutions of milk which include 1:20 wt/vol, 1:200 wt/vol, 1:2,000 wt/vol, 1:20,000 wt/vol and 1:200,000 wt/vol. The score for each of these dilutions is calculated by subtracting the diameter of the saline control wheal from the diameter of the milk wheal (in millimeters). The area under the curve is calculated by adding together the scores from all 5 milk dilutions creating a composite score.|Month 32|All randomized participants who had not withdrawn from the study and came to the clinic for their Month 32 visit were assessed.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
821941|NCT01157117|Secondary|Time to Maximum Tolerated Dose|Time to reach the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of milk oral immunotherapy (OIT); MTD is the highest dose of milk powder the participant was able to consume for at least 14 consecutive days.|Baseline to completion of Escalation Phase at 22 to 40 weeks|Time to maximum tolerated dose could not be calculated because the maximum dose for the protocol was changed part way through the study after some subjects had already reached the maximum dose.|||||
821942|NCT01157117|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in the Xolair® (Omalizumab) Group vs. Placebo Group Developing Desensitization to Milk|Desensitization Assessment: Participants who successfully consumed without dose-limiting symptoms 10,000 mg of milk protein during a double-blind placebo-controlled oral food challenge were counted as successes.|Month 28|Participants who received any study treatment||percentage of participants|||Number
821943|NCT01157117|Secondary|Maximum Tolerated Dose of Milk Oral Immunotherapy (OIT)|Maximum tolerated dose of milk OIT is the highest dose of milk powder the participant was able to consume for at least 14 consecutive days.|Baseline to completion of Escalation Phase at 22 to 40 weeks|Participants who received any milk OIT dosing||mg milk powder||Standard Deviation|Mean
821944|NCT01157117|Secondary|Incidence of Severe Hypersensitivity Reactions to Milk OIT|Participants who had a change in mental status or hypotension as a milk OIT dosing symptom were counted as having a severe hypersensitivity reaction.|Through completion of milk OIT dosing (at Month 28 if failed desensitization OFC, at Month 30 if passed desensitization OFC)|Participants who received milk OIT dosing.||percentage of participants|||Number
821945|NCT01157117|Secondary|Incidence of Dosing Reactions to Milk OIT During the Maintenance Phase|Any reaction to daily milk OIT dosing recorded by the participant during the Maintenance Phase.|After completion of Escalation Phase at 22 to 40 weeks, the Maintenance Phase lasted up to Month 30|Participants who received milk OIT dosing during the Maintenance Phase.||percentage of participants|||Number
821946|NCT01157117|Secondary|Incidence of Dosing Reactions to Milk OIT During the Escalation Phase|Any reaction to daily milk OIT dosing recorded by the participant during the Escalation Phase.|Baseline to completion of Escalation Phase at 22 to 40 weeks|Participants who received any milk OIT dosing during the Escalation Phase.||percentage of participants|||Number
821947|NCT01157117|Primary|Percentage of Subjects in the Xolair® (Omalizumab) Group vs. Placebo Group Developing Clinical Tolerance to Milk|Tolerance Assessment: Participants who successfully consumed without dose-limiting symptoms 10,000 mg of milk protein during a double-blind placebo-controlled oral food challenge were then given an open feeding of milk and those who successfully consumed the open feeding were counted as successes.|Month 32 which is 8 weeks following the discontinuation of milk OIT for both groups and 4 months after discontinuation of omalizumab for the omalizumab group|The intention to treat (ITT) population was used which included all subjects randomized to double-blind treatment.||Percent of participants|||Number
821948|NCT01157169|Secondary|AUC0-inf for Norbuprenorphine.|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity) values for the metabolite Norbuprenorphine.|Blood samples collected over a 144 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821949|NCT01157169|Secondary|AUC0-t for Norbuprenorphine.|Informational comparison of AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration) values for the metabolite Norbuprenorphine.|Blood samples collected over a 144 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821950|NCT01157169|Secondary|Cmax for Norbuprenorphine.|Informational comparison of Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma) values for the metabolite Norbuprenorphine.|Blood samples collected over a 144 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821951|NCT01157169|Primary|AUC0-inf for Buprenorphine.|Bioequivalence based on Buprenorphine AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 144 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821952|NCT01157169|Primary|AUC0-t for Buprenorphine.|Bioequivalence based on Buprenorphine AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 144 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821955|NCT01157182|Secondary|AUC0-t for Corrected Unconjugated Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for Corrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821956|NCT01157182|Secondary|Cmax for Corrected Unconjugated Estrone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for Corrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821957|NCT01157182|Secondary|AUC0-inf for Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821958|NCT01157182|Secondary|AUC0-t for Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol.(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821959|NCT01157182|Secondary|Cmax for Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821960|NCT01157182|Secondary|AUC0-inf for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821961|NCT01157182|Secondary|AUC0-t for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821962|NCT01157182|Secondary|Cmax for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821963|NCT01157182|Secondary|AUC0-inf for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821964|NCT01157182|Secondary|AUC0-t for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821965|NCT01157182|Secondary|Cmax for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821966|NCT01157182|Secondary|AUC0-inf for Uncorrected Total Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for Uncorrected Total Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821967|NCT01157182|Secondary|AUC0-t for Uncorrected Total Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for Uncorrected Total Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821968|NCT01157182|Secondary|Cmax for Uncorrected Total Estrone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for Uncorrected Total Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821969|NCT01157182|Primary|AUC0-inf for Corrected Total Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Corrected Total Estrone AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821970|NCT01157182|Primary|AUC0-t for Corrected Total Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Corrected Total Estrone AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821971|NCT01157182|Primary|Cmax for Corrected Total Estrone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Corrected Total Estrone Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821972|NCT01157182|Primary|AUC0-inf for Norethindrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821973|NCT01157182|Primary|AUC0-t for Norethindrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821974|NCT01157182|Primary|Cmax for Norethindrone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822017|NCT01152385|Secondary|Change in High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP)||from baseline to 4 months|The analysis population was prior to rescue treatment (FAS)||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
821975|NCT01157234|Secondary|Plasma Arginine (ARG) Level Change From Baseline to Month-12 Between Groups|Percent change in plasma Arginine (umol/L)=[month-12 plasma Arginine level minus baseline plasma Arginine level] divided by [baseline plasma Arginine level] multiplied by 100, where all levels are in umol/L|Baseline, Month-12|Technical limitations constrained measurements of plasma Arginine, resulting in no analysis for this outcome.|||||
821976|NCT01157234|Secondary|Plasma Asymmetric Dimethylarginine (ADMA) Change From Baseline to Month 12 Between the Groups|Percent change in plasma ADMA (umol/L)=[month-12 plasma ADMA level minus baseline plasma ADMA level] divided by [baseline plasma ADMA level] multiplied by 100, where all levels are in umol/L.|Baseline, Month-12|Technical limitations constrained measurements of Asymmetric Dimethylarginine (ADMA), resulting in no analysis for this outcome.|||||
821977|NCT01157234|Post-Hoc|Percent Change in Plasma Nitric Oxide Level From Baseline to Month-12 of Treatment With Nebivolol in Transplant Recipients >/= 50 Years Old Compared With Metoprolol in Transplant Recipients Age >/= 50 Years Old.||Change in Baseline, Month-12|||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821978|NCT01157234|Post-Hoc|Percent Change in Plasma Nitric Oxide Level From Baseline to Month-twelve of Treatment With Nebivolol in Transplant Recipients >/= 50 Years Old Compared With Nebivolol in Transplant Recipients < 50 Years Old.||Change in Baseline, Month-12|Nebivolol and metoprolol groups were subdivided into <50 years old and >50 years old subgroups and differences between subgroups were analyzed.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821979|NCT01157234|Post-Hoc|Percent Change in Plasma Nitric Oxide Level From Baseline to Month-12 of Treatment With Nebivolol in Transplant Recipients < 50 Years Old Compared With Metoprolol in Transplant Recipients < 50 Years Old||Change in Baseline, Month-12|Nebivolol and metoprolol groups were subdivided into <50 years old and >50 years old subgroups and differences between subgroups were analyzed.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821980|NCT01157234|Post-Hoc|Percent Change in Plasma Nitric Oxide Level From Baseline to Month-12 of Treatment With Nebivolol in Transplant Recipients <50 Years Old Compared With Metoprolol in Transplant Recipients >/= 50 Years Old.||Baseline and Month-12|Nebivolol and metoprolol groups were subdivided into <50 years old and >50 years old subgroups and differences between subgroups were analyzed.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821981|NCT01157234|Other Pre-specified|Plasma Nitric Oxide Level (Nmol/L) at Month-12 Between the Groups.||12 Months|Full analysis set included all participants who signed inform consent and received at least one dose of study drug||nmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821982|NCT01157234|Secondary|Number of Antihypertensive Drug Classes Change From Baseline to Month-12 Between the Groups.|Percent change in quantity of Anti-Hypertensive Drug Classes (AHDC)=[Month-12 absolute number of AHDC minus baseline absolute number of AHDC] divided by [baseline absolute number of AHDC] multiplied by 100.|Change in Baseline, Month-12|Percent change||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821983|NCT01157234|Secondary|Mean Arterial Blood Pressure (Millimeter, Mercury) Change From Baseline to Month-12 Between the Groups|"Absolute change in Mean Arterial Blood Pressure, (MAP), (millimeter, Mercury= Month-12 sitting trough MAP minus baseline sitting trough MAP.
Mean Arterial Pressure= 2/3 trough diastolic blood pressure + 1/3 trough systolic blood pressure"|Change in Baseline, Month-12|Full analysis set included all participants who signed inform consent and received at least one dose of study drug.||millimeter, Mercury||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821984|NCT01157234|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure (Millimeter, Mercury) Change From Baseline to Month-12 Between the Groups|Absolute Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP), (millimeter, Mercury)= Month-12 sitting trough Diastolic Blood Pressure (millimeter, Mercury) level minus baseline sitting trough Diastolic Blood Pressure (millimeter, Mercury).|Change in Baseline, Month-12|Full analysis set included all participants who signed inform consent and received at least one dose of study drug.||millimeter, mercury||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821985|NCT01157234|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure (Millimeter, Mercury) Change From Baseline to Month-12 of Treatment Between the Groups|Absolute change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP), (millimeter, Mercury)=Month-12 sitting trough SBP level minus baseline sitting trough SBP level|Change in Baseline, Month-12|Full analysis set included all participants who signed inform consent and received at least one dose of study drug.||millimeter, Mercury||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821986|NCT01157234|Secondary|Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (ml/Minute) Change From Baseline to Month-12 Between the Groups|The changed percentage in Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR), (based on the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Equation)=[Month-12 GFR level minus baseline eGFR level] divided by [baseline eGFR level] multiplied by 100, where all levels are in ml/min.|Change in Baseline, Month-12|Full analysis set included all participants who signed inform consent and received at least one dose of study drug.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821987|NCT01157234|Primary|Plasma Nitric Oxide Level Change From Baseline to Month 12 Between the Groups.|Percent change in Nitric Oxide (NO) blood level (nmol/L)=[Month-12 NO blood level minus baseline NO blood level] divided by [baseline NO blood level] multiplied by 100, where all levels are in nmol/L.|Change in Baseline, Month-12|Full analysis set included all participants who signed informed consent and received at least one dose of study drug.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821988|NCT01157351|Primary|Percentage of Participants in Each Event Category of First Treatment Failure|First treatment failure was a composite endpoint consisting of any of the following events: arrest/incarceration, psychiatric hospitalization, discontinuation (D/C) of antipsychotic treatment due to safety or tolerability, treatment supplementation with another antipsychotic due to inadequate efficacy, discontinuation of antipsychotic treatment due to inadequate efficacy, increase in level of psychiatric services to prevent imminent psychiatric hospitalization, suicide. A Treatment Failure Event Monitoring Board (EMB), blinded to individual participant treatment assignment, determined the occurrence and date of the first treatment failure event. Percentage of participants who experienced treatment failure due to any event and for each specific category of event were assessed.|From date of randomization up to Month 15|eITT population included all ITT participants who had their study assessments for time period between randomization date and eITT end point. The eITT end point for paliperidone palmitate was the last injection date+28 days and for oral antipsychotics was the last prescription date + the number of days’ supply + 1 day.||percentage of participants|||Number
822018|NCT01152385|Secondary|Percentage Change in Triglycerides||from baseline to 4 months|The analysis population was prior to rescue treatment (FAS)||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
821989|NCT01157351|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) Score During Overall Treatment Duration|The CGI-S rating scale was a 7-point global assessment of symptom severity with scores determined by clinician as follows: 1=Not ill, 2=Very Mild, 3= Mild, 4= Moderate, 5= Marked, 6= Severe, and 7= Extremely Severe. The higher the score the worse the illness.|Baseline up to Month 15|eITT population. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821990|NCT01157351|Secondary|Time to First Psychiatric Hospitalization|A time-to parameter looking only at 1 component event of treatment failure: psychiatric hospitalization. Time to first psychiatric hospitalization was admission date of the psychiatric hospitalization recorded in the “Assessment of Treatment Failure – Psychiatric Hospitalization.”|From date of randomization up to Month 15|eITT population included all ITT participants who had their study assessments for time period between randomization date and eITT end point. The eITT end point for paliperidone palmitate was the last injection date+28 days and for oral antipsychotics was the last prescription date + the number of days’ supply + 1 day.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821991|NCT01157351|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Personal and Social Performance (PSP) Total Score During Overall Treatment Duration|The PSP score assesses the degree of difficulty a participant exhibit over a 1 month period within 4 domains of behavior: a) socially useful activities, b) personal and social relationships, c) self-care, and d) disturbing and aggressive behavior. The investigators rate participants’ degree of difficulty in each of the 4 domains using a 6-point Likert scale (from 0=absent to 5=very severe). The domain ratings were then transformed to PSP total score ranging from 1 to 100. Higher PSP total scores denote better functioning. A score between 71 and 100 represents normal to mild degree of dysfunction; a score between 31 and 70 represents varying degree of difficulty; and a score <=30 represents poor function that requires intensive supervision.|Baseline up to Month 15|eITT population. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
821992|NCT01157351|Secondary|Time to First Psychiatric Hospitalization or Arrest/Incarceration|A time to parameter looking only at 2 component events of treatment failure: arrest or incarceration, and psychiatric hospitalization. An arrest was defined as the taking of a participant into custody by legal authority, for any reason. Incarceration was defined as involuntary confinement by an officer of the law. Psychiatric hospitalization was an inpatient psychiatric hospitalization that occurred due to the participant’s clinically significant worsening of symptoms of schizophrenia.|From date of randomization up to Month 15|eITT population included all ITT participants who had their study assessments for time period between randomization date and eITT end point. The eITT end point for paliperidone palmitate was the last injection date+28 days and for oral antipsychotics was the last prescription date + the number of days’ supply + 1 day.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821993|NCT01157351|Primary|Time to First Treatment Failure|Time to first treatment failure was the time from participant randomization to the first treatment failure, which was a composite endpoint consisting of any of the following events: arrest/incarceration, psychiatric hospitalization, discontinuation of antipsychotic treatment due to safety or tolerability, treatment supplementation with another antipsychotic due to inadequate efficacy, discontinuation of antipsychotic treatment due to inadequate efficacy, increase in level of psychiatric services to prevent imminent psychiatric hospitalization, suicide. A Treatment Failure Event Monitoring Board (EMB), blinded to individual participant treatment assignment, determined the occurrence and date of the first treatment failure event.|From date of randomization up to Month 15|Explanatory Intent-to-Treat (eITT) population included all ITT participants who had their study assessments for time period between randomization date and eITT end point. The eITT end point for paliperidone palmitate was the last injection date+28 days and for oral antipsychotics was the last prescription date + the number of days’ supply + 1 day.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
821994|NCT01157377|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Daily Average Number of Micturition (Urination) Episodes|The average number of urinary episodes (urination into the toilet) was recorded by a patient bladder diary during 3 consecutive days in the week prior to Baseline and Week 12. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement (fewer urinary episodes).|Baseline, Week 12|Modified Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who received study medication and had post-baseline data available for micturition episodes.||Episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
821995|NCT01157416|Primary|Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS)|The CPSS is a 17-item standardized, self-administered questionnaires with versions for both youths and caregivers. Items are scored on 0-3 scale. Minimum possible score is 0 and maximum is 51. Only the total score is used; there are no subscales. A higher score indicates greater symptom severity (worse).|After 12 therapy sessions, up to 28 weeks.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821996|NCT01157429|Primary|Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS)|The CPSS is a 17-item standardized, self-administered questionnaires with versions for both youths and caregivers. Items are scored on 0-3 scale. Minimum possible score is 0 and maximum is 51. Only the total score is used; there are no subscales. A higher score indicates greater symptom severity (worse).|After 12 therapy sessions, up to 28 weeks.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
821997|NCT01157533|Primary|Percent of Participants Attaining Target Trough of 15-20 mg/L Following 30 mg/kg Loading Dose|Peak level (PK blood samples) drawn 4 hours after the completion of loading dose. Sequential trough levels drawn 30 minutes before each standard vancomycin dose for the next 4 doses. PK testing measures the amount of study drug in the body at different time points, with trough testing following 5 doses (1 dose every 8 to 12 hours).|Up to 5 days|Unable to complete analysis planned due to low enrollment.|||||
821998|NCT01157845|Secondary|Liver Transplantation|Patient experiences complications of liver failure within 1 year of study entry and undergoes liver transplantation|1 year|||participants|||Number
821999|NCT01157845|Primary|Mortality From Liver Failure|Patient dies of liver-related causes within 1 year of study entry|1 year|||participants|||Number
822000|NCT01151904|Secondary|Percentage of Responders With an IOP Reduction ≥20% From Baseline|IOP is a measure of the fluid pressure inside the eye. A responder is defined as a patient with a mean IOP reduction of at least 20% in the affected eye(s) from baseline. Due to lack of enrollment, analysis was not performed for this outcome measure.|Baseline, Week 12|Planned analysis population: Intent to Treat: All enrolled patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had a valid baseline measurement, and at least one valid post-Day 0 IOP measure. Due to lack of enrollment, analysis was not performed for this outcome measure.|||||
822001|NCT01151904|Secondary|Change From Baseline in IOP|IOP is a measure of the fluid pressure inside the eye. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement). Due to lack of enrollment, analysis was not performed for this outcome measure.|Baseline, Week 2, Week 6|Planned analysis population: Intent to Treat: All enrolled patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had a valid baseline measurement, and at least one valid post-Day 0 IOP measure. Due to lack of enrollment, analysis was not performed for this outcome measure.|||||
822002|NCT01151904|Primary|Change From Baseline in Intraocular Pressure (IOP)|IOP is a measure of the fluid pressure inside the eye. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement). Due to lack of enrollment, analysis was not performed for this outcome measure.|Baseline, Week 12|Planned analysis population: Intent to Treat: All enrolled patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had a valid baseline measurement, and at least one valid post-Day 0 IOP measure. Due to lack of enrollment, analysis was not performed for this outcome measure.|||||
822003|NCT01152112|Secondary|Subject Self-reported Pain Score Occurring During the Treatment Procedure|Mean difference in pain score compared between subject-rated assessment of pain occurring during a pap smear and pain occurring during the MyoSure treatment procedure, based on the Wong-Baker Faces Rating Scale (FRS)|1 hour post treatment||||||
822004|NCT01152112|Secondary|Percent of Subjects That Achieve 100% Removal of Target Pathology|Percent volume reduction of target pathology between baseline and month three post treatment assessments, as measured by saline infused sonohysterogram.|Three months post treatment||||||
822005|NCT01152112|Primary|Percent Reduction in Target Pathology Volume|Percent reduction in target pathology volume, compared between pre-treatment baseline and 3 months post MyoSure treatment|Three months post treatment|A total of 108 pathologies were removed in 74 patients. Among the 108 pathologies removed, 53 were removed in the office setting (28 myomas, 25 polyps) and 55 were removed in the ASC setting (14 myomas, 41 polyps).||percentage of fibriods/polyps|Fibroids and Polyps|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822006|NCT01152190|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4 and 8 Weeks in Color Pixel Intensity (CPI) in the Prostate Transition Zone, Peripheral Zone, and Bladder Neck|CPI quantified blood flow in a pre-specified region of interest by using color Doppler imaging. CPI was the mean color pixel intensity in the region of interest and scores could range from 0 to 160. An increase in CPI reflected an increase in blood flow. The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM) that included fixed effects for treatment, region, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, baseline as a covariate, a random effect of participant within treatment, and an unstructured covariance matrix.|Baseline, Week 4 and Week 8|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822007|NCT01152190|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4 and 8 Weeks in Arterial Resistive Index (RI) in the Prostate Peripheral Zone and Bladder Neck|Arterial RI was a measure of vascular resistance using Doppler ultrasound. RI was the ratio of (peak systolic velocity – end diastolic velocity)/peak systolic velocity, and increased as resistance to flow increased. The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM) that included fixed effects for treatment, region, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, baseline as a covariate, a random effect of participant within treatment, and an unstructured covariance matrix.|Baseline, Week 4 and Week 8|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822008|NCT01152190|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 4-Week Endpoint in Arterial Resistive Index (RI) in the Prostate Transition Zone|Arterial RI was a measure of vascular resistance using Doppler ultrasound. RI was the ratio of (peak systolic velocity – end diastolic velocity)/peak systolic velocity, and increased as resistance to flow increased. The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM) that included fixed effects for treatment, region, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, baseline as a covariate, a random effect of participant within treatment, and an unstructured covariance matrix.|Baseline, Week 4|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had non-missing data (arterial RI in the prostate transition zone) at baseline, and a post-baseline visit.||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822009|NCT01152190|Primary|Change From Baseline to 8-Week Endpoint in Arterial Resistive Index (RI) in the Prostate Transition Zone|Arterial RI was a measure of vascular resistance using Doppler ultrasound. RI was the ratio of (peak systolic velocity – end diastolic velocity)/peak systolic velocity, and increased as resistance to blood flow increased. The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM) that included fixed effects for treatment, region, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, baseline as a covariate, a random effect of participant within treatment, and an unstructured covariance matrix.|Baseline, Week 8|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, had non-missing data (arterial RI in the prostate transition zone) at baseline, and a post-baseline visit.||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822010|NCT01152294|Secondary|Value Concordance|Measure of how concordant respondents' actual decisions about treatment for their menopause symptoms are with their stated beliefs|2 weeks, on average||||||
822011|NCT01152294|Primary|Menopause Knowledge|Total knowledge score from factual questions about menopause and methods for managing menopause symptoms. Score is the percent of knowledge questions answered correctly (0 - 100%)|2 weeks, on average|Participants were randomized to not receive the decision aid (DVD and booklet)or to receive the decision aid and booklet.||Percentage (0-100%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822012|NCT01152307|Secondary|Value Concordance|Measure of how concordant respondents' actual decisions about treatment for their depression are with their stated beliefs|2 weeks, on average||||||
822013|NCT01152307|Primary|Depression Knowledge|Total knowledge score from factual questions about depression and methods for managing depression symptoms. Score is the percent of knowledge items answered correctly (0 - 100%).|2 weeks, on average|Participants were randomized to receive the DVD and booklet.||percent of correct responses||Standard Deviation|Mean
822014|NCT01152359|Secondary|Obesity-specific Health-related Quality of Life as Measured by Impact Of Weight On Quality Of Life-Lite (IWQOL-Lite) Questionnaire||48 weeks||||||
822015|NCT01152359|Secondary|Diet Adherence as Measured by Block Food-frequency Questionnaire (Absolute Percentage Deviation From the Goal Macronutrient Intake--<30% Fat for Low-fat Diet or <10% Carbohydrate for Low-carbohydrate Diet)||48 weeks||||||
822016|NCT01152359|Primary|Body Weight||48 weeks|||percentage of weight change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822026|NCT01152437|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) Time|OS time is defined as time from the date of randomisation (wild-type group) or date of start of treatment (mutated group) to the date of death. Median and confidence interval estimated using product-limit Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline till death, assessed up to 23 months|Randomised set for wild-type group and treated set for mutated group.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822027|NCT01152437|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS time is defined as time from randomisation (wild-type group) or start of treatment (mutated group) to tumor progression evaluated according to RECIST (version 1.1) or death whichever occurs earlier. Median and confidence interval estimated using product-limit Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline till progression or death, whichever came first, assessed up to 23 months|Randomised set for wild-type group and treated set for mutated group.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822028|NCT01152437|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control (DC)|Percentage of participants with objective response or stable disease (SD) as determined by RECIST (version 1.1) with confirmation criteria applied.|Baseline till progression or death, whichever came first, assessed up to 23 months|Treated Set. Primary endpoint for the population of patients with KRAS mutated tumours.||Percentage of Participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
822029|NCT01152437|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response|Percentage of participants with objective response: complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to RECIST (version 1.1) without confirmation criteria applied.|Baseline till progression or death, whichever came first, assessed up to 23 months|Randomised set. Primary endpoint for the population of patients with KRAS wildtype tumours.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
822030|NCT01152450|Secondary|Mean Number of Night Awakenings During the Last Week on Treatment (Score, Response Values)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Assessed by the patient's electronic diary (eDiary incorporated in the AM2+ device), obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment.|Baseline and during week 4|FAS||Night awakenings||Standard Error|Mean
822031|NCT01152450|Secondary|Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication During Nighttime (Last Week on Treatment, Response Values)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared.|Baseline and during week 4|FAS||Puffs||Standard Error|Mean
822032|NCT01152450|Secondary|Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication During Daytime (Last Week on Treatment, Response Values)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared.|Baseline and during week 4|FAS||Puffs||Standard Error|Mean
822033|NCT01152450|Secondary|Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication During the Whole Day (Last Week on Treatment, Response Values)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared.|Baseline and during week 4|FAS||Puffs||Standard Error|Mean
822034|NCT01152450|Secondary|PEF Variability Response (Last Week on Treatment)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. PEF variability is the absolute difference between morning and evening PEF value divided by the mean of these two values, expressed as a percent (weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared).|Baseline and during week 4|FAS||Percent||Standard Error|Mean
822035|NCT01152450|Secondary|PEF Area Under the Curve 0-24 Hours (AUC0-24h) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. AUC0-24h calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (24 hours) to report in litres/min.|10 min prior to first dose (baseline) and -10 min, 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h , 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 15 h, 16 h, 18 h, 20 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to evening dose at week 4|FAS||L/min||Standard Error|Mean
822036|NCT01152450|Secondary|FVC Area Under the Curve 0-24 Hours (AUC0-24h) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. AUC0-24h calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (24 hours) to report in litres.|10 min prior to first dose (baseline) and -10 min, 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h , 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 15 h, 16 h, 18 h, 20 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to evening dose at week 4|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822037|NCT01152450|Secondary|Individual Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Over Time (at Each Timepoint at Visits) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS||L/min||Standard Error|Mean
822038|NCT01152450|Secondary|Individual FVC Over Time (at Each Timepoint at Visits) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822039|NCT01152450|Secondary|Individual FEV1 Over Time (at Each Timepoint at Visits) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822040|NCT01152450|Secondary|Peak FVC Within 24 Hours Post-dose Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Measured following each dosing determined at the end of each 4 week treatment period.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822041|NCT01152450|Secondary|FVC Area Under the Curve 12-24 Hours (AUC12-24h) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Measured following each dosing determined at the end of each 4 week treatment period. AUC12-24h calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (12 hours) to report in litres.|10 min prior to first dose (baseline) and 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 15 h, 16 h, 18 h, 20 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to evening dose at week 4|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822077|NCT01158118|Secondary|Number of Donors Who Mobilize ≥ 2x10^6 CD34+ Cells/Kg Recipient Weight Safely Following One or Two Aphereses|-The donor will undergo a leukapheresis procedure to process 20L of blood volume. After the procedure, the collection will be analyzed to look at CD34+ cell content. If it contains at least 2x10^6 CD34+ cells/kg, then the procedure will be considered successful.|Up to 6 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822042|NCT01152450|Secondary|FVC Area Under the Curve 0-12 Hours (AUC0-12h) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Measured following each dosing determined at the end of each 4 week treatment period. AUC0-12h calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (12 hours) to report in litres.|10 min prior to first dose (baseline) and -10 min, 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h and 11 h 50 min related to evening dose at week 4|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822043|NCT01152450|Secondary|Trough Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Trough FVC is defined as FVC value (performed at 10 minutes prior to the evening trial-drug inhalation) at the end of each 4 week period of randomised treatment.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822044|NCT01152450|Secondary|Trough FEV1 Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Trough FEV1 is defined as FEV1 value (performed at 10 minutes prior to the evening trial-drug inhalation) at the end of each 4 week period of randomised treatment.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822045|NCT01152450|Secondary|Peak FEV1 Within 24 Hours Post-dose Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Measured following the evening trial-drug inhalation at the end of each 4 week period of randomised treatment.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822046|NCT01152450|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under the Curve 12-24 Hours (AUC12-24h) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Measured following the respective dosing determined at the end of each 4 week period of randomised treatment. AUC12-24h calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (12 hours) to report in litres.|10 min prior to first dose (baseline) and 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 15 h, 16 h, 18 h, 20 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to evening dose at week 4|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822047|NCT01152450|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under the Curve 0-12 Hours (AUC0-12h) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Measured following the respective dosing determined at the end of each 4 week period of randomised treatment. AUC0-12h calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (12 hours) to report in litres.|10 min prior to first dose (baseline) and -10 min, 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h and 11 h 50 min related to evening dose at week 4|FAS||L||Standard Error|Mean
822048|NCT01152450|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Evening Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF p.m.) Response During the Last Week on Treatment|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Measured by patients at home using the AM2+ device.|Baseline and during week 4 of each treatment period|FAS||L/min||Standard Error|Mean
822049|NCT01152450|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Morning Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF a.m.) Response During the Last Week on Treatment|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Measured by patients at home using the AM2+ device.|Baseline and during week 4 of each treatment period|FAS||L/min||Standard Error|Mean
822050|NCT01152450|Primary|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) Area Under the Curve 0-24 Hours (AUC0-24h) Response|Mixed Model Repeated Measure (MMRM) results. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Measurements performed in relation to evening dosing. AUC0-24h calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (24 hours) to report in litres.|10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and -10 min, 30 min, 60 min, 2 hours (h) , 3 h, 4 h , 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 15 h, 16 h, 18 h, 20 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to evening dose at week 4|Full Analysis Set (FAS) defined as all treated patients who had baseline data and at least 1 on-treatment efficacy measurement after 4 weeks on treatment within a period.||L||Standard Error|Mean
822051|NCT01152554|Secondary|Change in EuroQol - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) From Randomization (Week 0) to End of Treatment (Week 52)|A self-assessment questionnaire that provides 2 measures of health status. The EQ-5D index score is a weighted linear combination over 5 dimensions of health status. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3, and an equation is used to calculate the EQ-5D index score. The EQ-5D index score can range from possible negative values to a maximum of 1.0. The EQ-VAS is a visual analog scale with a range of 0 to 100. For both variables, a higher score indicates a better health state.|Randomization (Week 0) to end of treatment (Week 52)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a total MADRS score at randomization and a total HAMD-17 score ≥16 and a CGI-S score ≥4 at randomization.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822052|NCT01152554|Secondary|Change in Overall Quality of Life and Satisfaction From Randomization (Week 0) to End of Treatment (Week 52) by Assessing the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) % Maximum Total Score|The Q-LES-Q-SF total score is derived by summing item scores 1 to 14. Higher scores are indicative of greater enjoyment or satisfaction in each domain. The Q-LES-Q-SF % maximum total score is calculated as 100% × (Q-LES-Q-SF total score – 14) / 56, and can range from 0% to 100%.|Randomization (Week 0) to end of treatment (Week 52)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a total MADRS score at randomization and a total HAMD-17 score ≥16 and a CGI-S score ≥4 at randomization.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822053|NCT01152554|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 0) to End of Treatment (Week 52) as Measured by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score|Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) is 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The SDS total score is calculated as the sum of the score for the 3 inter-correlated domains (school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities) and ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired).|Randomization (Week 0) to end of treatment (Week 52)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a total MADRS score at randomization and a total HAMD-17 score ≥16 and a CGI-S score ≥4 at randomization.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822054|NCT01152554|Secondary|Change in the Clinician-rated Global Outcome of Severity as Measured by the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Score From Randomization (Week 0) to End of Treatment (Week 52)|A 3-part, clinician-administered scale that rates the improvement or worsening of the patient’s illness from randomization (baseline). Each item is scored on a 1 to 7 scale. Higher CGI-S scores indicate greater illness severity.|Randomization (Week 0) to end of treatment (Week 52)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a total MADRS score at randomization and a total HAMD-17 score ≥16 and a CGI-S score ≥4 at randomization.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822055|NCT01152554|Secondary|Sustained Efficacy at 9 Months, Defined as a MADRS Total Score of ≤12 at Week 12 and at All Visits up to and Including Week 52|"The percentage of patients with a MADRS total score of ≤12 at Week 12 and at all visits up to and including Week 52 was calculated. Two intermediate occurrences (not consecutive) of a MADRS >12 but ≤16 or missing were allowed from Week 16 to Week 48.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Week 12 to Week 52|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a total MADRS score at randomization and a total HAMD-17 score ≥16 and a CGI-S score ≥4 at randomization.||percentage of patients analyzed|||Number
822056|NCT01152554|Secondary|Sustained Efficacy at 3 Months, Defined as a Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score of ≤12 at Week 12 and All Visits up to and Including Week 24|"The percentage of patients with a a MADRS total score of ≤12 at Week 12 and all visits up to and including Week 24 was calculated. One intermediate occurrence of a MADRS total score >12 but ≤16 or missing was allowed from Week 16 to Week 20.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Week 12 to Week 24|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a total MADRS score at randomization and a total HAMD-17 score ≥16 and a CGI-S score ≥4 at randomization.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
822057|NCT01152554|Primary|Frequency of Patients Experiencing Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|The frequency of patients experiencing serious adverse events (SAEs) during the randomized treatment or follow-up periods was calculated.|Randomization (Week 0) to end of the follow-up period (Week 54)|Safety analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and for whom any postdose data were available.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
822058|NCT01152554|Primary|Frequency of Patients Experiencing AEs That Resulted in Discontinuation of Investigational Product (IP)|The frequency of patients experiencing AEs that resulted in discontinuation of IP during the randomized treatment or follow-up periods was calculated.|Randomization (Week 0) to end of the follow-up period (Week 54)|Safety analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and for whom any postdose data were available.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
822059|NCT01152554|Primary|Frequency of Patients Experiencing at Least One Adverse Event (AE)|The frequency of patients experiencing at least one AE during the randomized treatment or follow-up periods was calculated.|Randomization (Week 0) to end of the follow-up period (Week 54)|Safety analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and for whom any postdose data were available.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
822060|NCT01152580|Secondary|The Effect of Melatonin (3 mg) or Placebo on the Mean Change in the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) in Women After 6 Months, as Compared to Baseline.|"Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) Questionnaire is a validated questionnaire that assesses the quality and quantity of sleep and sleep disorders.This survey is designed to identify “good” and “poor” sleepers and has a score scale that ranges from 0-21 with 0 being good quality of sleep and 21 being poor quality of sleep and/or indicating as having a sleep disorder. A more positive mean change in the PSQI over time indicates a worsening of sleep. A more negative mean change in the PSQI over time indicates an improvement in sleep."|Baseline and 6 months|intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822061|NCT01152580|Secondary|The Effect of Melatonin (3 mg) or Placebo on the Mean Change in Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL) Sexual Domain Scores in Women After 6 Months, as Compared to Baseline.|"Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL) questionnaires were administered to women at baseline and after 6 months of taking placebo or melatonin nightly. The MENQOL is a validated questionnaire that measures 4 domains of menopause quality of life in women: physical, vasomotor, psychosocial and sexual with each domain having a scale of not bothered (score 0) or bothered ranging from 1(not too bothered) to 6 (really bothered). A more negative mean change for each of the MENQOL domain scores indicates an improvement of these symptoms and a more positive value a worsening of symptoms."|Baseline and 6 mos|intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822062|NCT01152580|Primary|The Effect of Melatonin (3 mg) or Placebo on the Mean Change in Bone Density in Women After 6 Months, as Compared to Baseline.|The mean change in bone mineral density (BMD), represented by T-scores, was assessed by calcaneal ultrasound in women taking melatonin (3 mg) or placebo nightly at baseline and after 6 months. A T-score is a comparison of a subject's BMD to that of a healthy 30 year old female of the same ethnicity. The more negative the T-score, the worse the BMD. Osteoporosis or brittle bone disease is defined as a T-score -2.5 or less. A more negative mean change in a T-score would indicate a worsening of BMD. A more positive mean change in a T-score would indicate an improvement of BMD.|Baseline and 6 months|intention to treat||T-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
822076|NCT01158118|Secondary|Percentage of Donors Who Reach 5x10^6 CD34+ Cells/Kg Recipient Weight in 1 or 2 Aphereses|-The donor will undergo a leukapheresis procedure to process 20L of blood volume. After the procedure, the collection will be analyzed to look at CD34+ cell content. The percentage of donors who reach at least 5x10^6 CD34+ cells/Kg recipient weight will be analyzed for this outcome measure.|6 days|-If patients achieved ≥ 2x10^6 CD34+ cells/Kg, they were not required to go on to a second day of collection||Participants|||Count of Participants
822063|NCT01152580|Secondary|The Effect of Melatonin (3 mg) or Placebo on the Mean Change in Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL) Psychosocial Domain Scores in Women After 6 Months, as Compared to Baseline.|"Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL) questionnaires were administered to women at baseline and after 6 months of taking placebo or melatonin nightly. The MENQOL is a validated questionnaire that measures 4 domains of menopause quality of life in women: physical, vasomotor, psychosocial and sexual with each domain having a scale of not bothered (score 0) or bothered ranging from 1(not too bothered) to 6 (really bothered). A more negative mean change for each of the MENQOL domain scores indicates an improvement of these symptoms and a more positive value a worsening of symptoms."|Baseline and 6 mos|intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822064|NCT01152580|Primary|The Effect of Melatonin (3 mg) or Placebo on the Mean Change in Serum Type-1 Collagen Cross-linked N-telopeptide (NTX) Levels in Women After 6 Months, as Compared to Baseline.|Type-1 collagen cross-linked N-telopeptide (NTX) levels were measured in the serum of women at baseline and after taking placebo or melatonin (3 mg) nightly for 6 months. NTX, reported as bone collagen equivalents (BCE), is released from bone due to the actions of osteoclasts or bone breakdown cells. A more positive mean change in NTX levels (6 months - baseline) could result in a worsening of bone mineral density due to an increase in bone breakdown whereas a more negative mean change in NTX levels could result in an improvement in bone mineral density due to a decrease in bone breakdown.|Baseline and 6 months|intention to treat||nM BCE||Standard Deviation|Mean
822065|NCT01152580|Secondary|The Effect of Melatonin (3 mg) or Placebo on the Mean Change in Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL) Vasomotor Domain Scores in Women After 6 Months, as Compared to Baseline.|"Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL) questionnaires were administered to women at baseline and after 6 months of taking placebo or melatonin nightly. The MENQOL is a validated questionnaire that measures 4 domains of menopause quality of life in women: physical, vasomotor, psychosocial and sexual with each domain having a scale of not bothered (score 0) or bothered ranging from 1(not too bothered) to 6 (really bothered). A more negative mean change for each of the MENQOL domain scores indicates an improvement of these symptoms and a more positive value a worsening of symptoms."|Baseline and 6 mos|intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822066|NCT01152580|Secondary|The Effect of Melatonin (3 mg) or Placebo on the Mean Change in Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL) Physical Domain Scores in Women After 6 Months, as Compared to Baseline.|"Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL) questionnaires were administered to women at baseline and after 6 months of taking placebo or melatonin nightly. The MENQOL is a validated questionnaire that measures 4 domains of menopause quality of life in women: physical, vasomotor, psychosocial and sexual with each domain having a scale of not bothered (score 0) or bothered ranging from 1(not too bothered) to 6 (really bothered). A more negative mean change for each of the MENQOL domain scores indicates an improvement of these symptoms and a more positive value a worsening of symptoms."|Baseline and 6 mos|intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822067|NCT01152580|Primary|The Effect of Melatonin (3 mg) or Placebo on the Mean Change in Serum Osteocalcin (OC) Levels in Women After 6 Months, as Compared to Baseline|Osteocalcin is a measure of osteoblast activity because it is secreted from osteoblasts. Osteocalcin levels were measured in the serum of women at baseline and after 6 months of taking placebo or melatonin (3 mg) and the data are reported as ng/mL. Osteoblasts are bone-forming cells so a more positive mean change in osteoblast activity over time (6 months - baseline) could indicate an improvement in bone mineral density. A more negative mean change in osteocalcin levels over time (6 months - baseline) could indicate a worsening of bone mineral density.|Baseline and 6 months|intention to treat||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822068|NCT01158118|Secondary|Death of Any Cause (Recipients Only)||Up to 1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822069|NCT01158118|Secondary|Relapse and Disease Progression Rate|-A patient will be considered relapsed (disease progressed) when there is a recurrence of the original malignant disease after transplantation.|Up to 1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822070|NCT01158118|Secondary|Transplant Related Mortality (Recipient Only)|Death that results from a transplant procedure related complication (e.g. infection, organ failure, hemorrhage, GVHD) rather than from relapse of the underlying disease or an unrelated cause.|100 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822071|NCT01158118|Secondary|Rate of Chronic Graft vs. Host Disease (GvHD) (Recipient Only)|Incidence and severity of chronic GVHD will be assessed based on the NIH consensus criteria and global severity scoring system. Attempts should be made to confirm the diagnosis pathologically by biopsy of target organ(s).|Day 100-1 year|6 participants are not evaluable for this outcome measure as they came off study prior to the start of chronic GvHD assessments.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822072|NCT01158118|Secondary|Rate of Acute Graft vs. Host Disease (GvHD) (Recipient Only)|-Incidence and severity of acute GVHD will be assessed based on the Seattle criteria. Attempts should be made to confirm the diagnosis pathologically by biopsy of target organ(s).|Up through Day 100|3 of the recipients received cells mobilized by 10 mcg/kg of GM-CSF and the 11 recipients received stem cells from donors mobilized with the decreased dose of 5 mcg/kg of GM-CSF.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822073|NCT01158118|Secondary|Kinetics of Immune Reconstitution as Measured by Time to Platelet Engraftment (Recipient Only)|-Time to platelet engraftment is measured by determining the first of 3 consecutive measurements of platelet count ≥ 20,000/ul without platelet transfusion support for 7 days.|Up to Day 180|1 recipient did not have platelet engraftment by Day 180 and is not evaluable for this outcome measure.||days||Full Range|Median
822074|NCT01158118|Secondary|Kinetics of Immune Reconstitution as Measured by Time to Neutrophil Engraftment (Recipient Only)|-Time to neutrophil engraftment is measured by determining the first of 3 consecutive measurements of neutrophil count ≥ 500/ul following conditioning regimen induced nadir.|Up to Day 100|||days||Full Range|Median
822075|NCT01158118|Secondary|Determine if Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Products Collected After Mobilization With IV Plerixafor Can be Used Safely for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in HLA-matched Recipients as Measured by Time to Neutrophil Engraftment (Recipient Only)|-Time to neutrophil engraftment is measured by determining the first of 3 consecutive measurements of neutrophil count ≥ 500/ul following conditioning regimen induced nadir.|Up to Day 21|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822107|NCT01160614|Primary|Single- and Multiple-dose PK Metric: Lag Time Estimated as the Time Point Immediately Prior to the First Measurable Plasma Concentration Value From Hour 0 to 12 Hours of the First Dose of ORF (Tlag 0-12)|Due to insufficient sampling, tlag 0-12 was not estimated.|Up to 12 hours||||||
822078|NCT01158118|Secondary|Proportion of Donors Who Experience Grade 3-4 Infusion Toxicity|Infusional toxicity will be evaluated by measuring the patient’s blood pressure, heart rate, respirations and temperature one hour prior to the allograft infusion and then 15 minutes, 30 minutes, one hour, 2 hours, and 4 hours, and 6 hours post infusion. Donors will have vital signs collected at each time point. EKGs will be performed immediately prior to IV AMD3100 and one hour after infusion.|30 days after completion of therapy (estimated to be 36 days)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822079|NCT01158118|Primary|Number of Donors Requiring a Second Collection to Obtain a Minimum CD34/Kg (2 x 10^6) Necessary for Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation|The primary endpoint is to reduce the number of donors treated with GM-CSF who require a second collection to obtain a minimum CD34/Kg (2 x 106) necessary for allogeneic stem cell transplantation when compared to historic controls mobilized with GM-CSF or plerixafor alone. A reduction in failed first leukapheresis from 40% to less than 10% as seen with G-CSF alone would be considered clinically meaningful.|Up to 6 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822080|NCT01158261|Primary|Specific Safety Parameters|"Incidence of graft occlusion
Incidence of adverse events potentially related to non-graft thrombotic events
Incidence of bleeding events"|Up to 4-weeks post-operatively|From participant flow, 283 subjects completed the study; One subject lost to follow-up had 4-week information in hospital records.||participants|||Number
822081|NCT01158378|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Free of Device-related Surgical Wound Infections or Meningitis During 120-day Follow-up.|Device-related surgical wound infections included all infections classified by the CEC as definitely, probably, possibly or undetermined in relation to the device.|120 days|Includes all subjects with available data that through 120 days follow-up.||percentage of subjects|||Number
822082|NCT01158378|Post-Hoc|Proportion of Treated Subjects Who Were Free of Intra-operative Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) Leakage From Dural Repair During Valsalva Maneuver, CSF Leak / Pseudomeningocele, and Unplanned Retreatment of the Original Surgical Site|"Post-Hoc analysis of primary composite endpoint of the safety and effectiveness of Adherus for a cranial application at 45 days. The endpoint was measured by the proportion of treated subjects who were free of all of the following incidences:
Intra-operative CSF leakage from dural repair after up to two Adherus / control applications during Valsalva maneuver up to 20cm H2O for up to 5 seconds.
CSF leak or pseudomeningocele diagnosed by physical examination, biochemical assay or imaging study during the 120-day follow-up period of the index procedure
Unplanned retreatment of the original surgical site adjudicated by the CEC to be device-related, including meningitis or the management of deep infection, minimally invasive procedures or return to the operating room for neurosurgical complications other than CSF leak or pseudomeningocele formation or those related to the subject’s pre-existing condition, during the 120-day follow-up period."|45 days|All subjects who received treatment with evaluable 45-day follow-up data.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822083|NCT01158378|Post-Hoc|Proportion of Treated Subjects Who Were Free of Intra-operative Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) Leakage From Dural Repair During Valsalva Maneuver, CSF Leak / Pseudomeningocele, and Unplanned Retreatment of the Original Surgical Site|"Post-Hoc analysis of primary composite endpoint of the safety and effectiveness of Adherus for a cranial application at 14 days. The endpoint was measured by the proportion of treated subjects who were free of all of the following incidences:
Intra-operative CSF leakage from dural repair after up to two Adherus / control applications during Valsalva maneuver up to 20cm H2O for up to 5 seconds.
CSF leak or pseudomeningocele diagnosed by physical examination, biochemical assay or imaging study during the 120-day follow-up period of the index procedure
Unplanned retreatment of the original surgical site adjudicated by the CEC to be device-related, including meningitis or the management of deep infection, minimally invasive procedures or return to the operating room for neurosurgical complications other than CSF leak or pseudomeningocele formation or those related to the subject’s pre-existing condition, during the 120-day follow-up period."|14 days|All subjects who received treatment with evaluable 14-day follow-up data.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822084|NCT01158378|Primary|Proportion of Treated Subjects Who Were Free of Intra-operative Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) Leakage From Dural Repair During Valsalva Maneuver, CSF Leak / Pseudomeningocele, and Unplanned Retreatment of the Original Surgical Site|"The primary endpoint was a composite evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of Adherus for a cranial application. The endpoint was measured by the proportion of treated subjects who were free of all of the following incidences:
Intra-operative CSF leakage from dural repair after up to two Adherus / control applications during Valsalva maneuver up to 20cm H2O for up to 5 seconds.
CSF leak or pseudomeningocele diagnosed by physical examination, biochemical assay or imaging study during the 120-day follow-up period of the index procedure
Unplanned retreatment of the original surgical site adjudicated by the CEC to be device-related, including meningitis or the management of deep infection, minimally invasive procedures or return to the operating room for neurosurgical complications other than CSF leak or pseudomeningocele formation or those related to the subject’s pre-existing condition, during the 120-day follow-up period."|120 days|All subjects who received treatment with evaluable 120-day follow-up data.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822085|NCT01160380|Secondary|Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) Score|Survey assessing sleep patterns. The test consists of 8 items. The response scale range is 0-24 (range 0-3 per item: 0-No chance to falling asleep; 3-high chance of falling asleep). Interpretation: 0-No chance to falling asleep; 10+ above average chance daytime sleepiness|Day 1, Day 28 and Day 56|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822086|NCT01160380|Secondary|Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Score|Survey used to assess depression and anxiety. The test consists of 14 items (7 for anxiety and 7 for depression); there are 4 possible answers for each statement. Each item on the questionnaire is scored from 0-3 and this means that a person can score between 0 and 21 for either anxiety or depression. Higher scores= more anxiety or depression.|Day 1, Day 28 and Day 56|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
822087|NCT01160380|Secondary|Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-F) Score|Survey addressing fatigue and patient happiness, coping, etc. Used to assess quality of life. The test consists of 40 items, each item with a response scale of 0-4. Higher scores denote better status Items are added to provide the total score (range 0-160).|Day 1, Day 28 and Day 56|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822088|NCT01160380|Primary|Digit Span Test Score|Test evaluates working memory and attention. The test consists of repeat numeric sequences of 2 to 9 numbers forward or backwards and evaluates the number of items from a sequence correctly named. Higher scores = better performance.|Day 1, Day 28 and Day 56|||Number of correct items||Standard Deviation|Mean
822089|NCT01160380|Primary|Symbol Digit Modalities Test Score (SDMT)|Test to evaluate neurocognitive functions (attention, visual scanning and motor speed). The test consists of a key =9 graphic symbols numbered 1 to 9 and the test =120 graphic symbols to be matched with its number. The test evaluates the number of correct matches within 90 seconds. Higher scores= better performance|Day 1, Day 28 and Day 56|||Number of correct matches||Standard Deviation|Mean
822090|NCT01160380|Primary|Trail Making Test B Score (TMT-B)|"Cognitive test that gives a measure of various aspects of cognitive performance. Used to measure cognitive fatigue. The test consists of 25 circles containing 13 sequential numbers (1-13) and 12 sequential letters (A-L) positioned.
The test evaluates the time to correctly order letters and numbers; low times = better performance."|Day 1, Day 28 and Day 56|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
822091|NCT01160380|Primary|BFI Score|Survey measuring fatigue. The scale contains 9 items; range=0-90 (0-10 per item). Mild = 1-3 Moderate = 4-7 Severe = 8-10|Day 1, Day 28 and Day 56|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822092|NCT01160445|Secondary|Toxicity of Zanolimumab and IL-2 Treatment Regimen|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events see the adverse event module.|10 months|||Participants|||Number
822093|NCT01160445|Primary|The Ability of a Combination of Aldesleukin (IL-2) and Zanolimumab (Anti-CD4 mAb) Administration to Mediate Tumor Regression in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma and Metastatic Kidney Cancer.|Tumor regression was assessed by the Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Complete response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions. Partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD. Progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) recorded since the treatment started. Stable disease (SD) is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR, nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD taking as reference the smallest sum LD.|2 years|||Participants|||Number
822094|NCT01160458|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival is the time interval from the start of treatment to the date of death.|To study completion, an average of 3 years|One participant withdrew from the study and was excluded from the analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822095|NCT01160458|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|Progression Free Survival is defined as the time interval from the start of treatment to documented evidence of disease progression. Progressive disease is at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study longest diameter (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression).|To study completion, an average of 3 years|One participant withdrew from the study and was excluded from the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822096|NCT01160458|Secondary|Duration of Overall Response|Duration of Overall Response is assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and is measured from the time measurement criteria are met for complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) (whichever is first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented (taking as reference for progressive disease the smallest measurements recorded since the treatment started). Complete response is complete disappearance of all target lesions. Partial response is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD. Progressive disease is at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression).|36 months|No participants had a complete response or partial response.|||||
822097|NCT01160458|Secondary|Safety of IMC-A12 in Patients With Mesothelioma|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|36 months|||Participants|||Number
822098|NCT01160458|Primary|Clinical Response Rate (PR+CR)|Clinical response is assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Complete response is complete disappearance of all target lesions. Partial response is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD.|36 months|||Participants|||Number
822099|NCT01160484|Secondary|Follow-up Time|time that patients were monitored for disease progression and overall survival|Follow-up visits for disease progression and overall survival every 3 months after study discontinuation. After progression, follow-up visits for survival status every 6 months or until alternate therapy needs to be started or death intervenes|||months||Full Range|Median
822100|NCT01160484|Secondary|Progression-free Survival||Time from the start of treatment to progressive disease or until death|||months||Full Range|Median
822101|NCT01160484|Secondary|Time to Progression||Time from the start of treatment to progressive disease|||months||Full Range|Median
822102|NCT01160484|Secondary|Duration of Response||First evidence of PR or better (for overall response) and MR or better (for clinical benefit response) to start of disease progression or death.|||months||Full Range|Median
822103|NCT01160484|Secondary|Time to Best Response||Up to 7.5 months (eight 28-day cycles)|||months||Full Range|Median
822104|NCT01160484|Secondary|Time to First Response||Up to 7.5 months (eight 28-day cycles)|||months||Full Range|Median
822105|NCT01160484|Primary|International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Response Criteria|The investigator will evaluate each patient for response to therapy according to criteria augmented from those developed by Bladé et al., 1998 presented below (Table 7-1). Assessment of disease response will be performed prior to drug administration on Day 1 of Cycles 2 8 and at the End of Study Treatment visit. If a patient is determined to have complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), partial response (PR), or minor response (MR), then assessment of disease response is to be performed 4 weeks later to confirm the response.|Up to 7.5 months (eight 28-day cycles)|Population analysis was carried out as per protocol. Efficacy was evaluated via a modified version of the Bladé response criteria [complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), partial response (PR), and those achieving minimal response (MR)]||participants|||Number
822106|NCT01160614|Primary|The Number of Patients With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety||Adverse events (AEs) & serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported from start of study participation through the period beyond study completion (AEs) & through 30 days following last study drug dose, or until last study visit, whichever was later (SAEs).|The safety population (N = 30) was defined as the group of patients who received study drug||participants|||Number
822110|NCT01160614|Primary|Single- and Multiple-dose PK Metric: Mean Area Under the Plasma Concentration During Each Dosing Interval-time Curve From Hour 0 to 12 Hours of the First Dose of ORF (AUC 0-12)||Up to 12 hours|The full analysis population for PK (N = 30) was defined as patients who received at least 1 dose of oral study drug and had at least 1 valid quantifiable PK metric||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822111|NCT01160614|Primary|Single-dose PK Metric: Lag Time Was Estimated as the Time Point Immediately Prior to the First Measurable Plasma Concentration Value (Tlag)|Due to insufficient sampling, tlag was not estimated.|Up to 24 hours||||||
822112|NCT01160614|Primary|Single-dose PK Metric: Apparent Plasma Terminal Phase Half/Life (t1/2z)|Due to insufficient sampling, t1/2z was not estimated.|Up to 24 hours||||||
822113|NCT01160614|Primary|Single-dose PK Metric: Apparent Terminal Phase Rate Constant (Lamda z)|Due to insufficient sampling, Lamda z was not estimated.|Up to 24 hours||||||
822114|NCT01160614|Primary|Single-dose PK Metric: Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||Up to 24 hours|The full analysis population for PK (N = 30) was defined as patients who received at least 1 dose of oral study drug and had at least 1 valid quantifiable PK metric||hour (h)||Full Range|Median
822115|NCT01160614|Primary|Single-dose PK Metric: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Up to 24 hours|The full analysis population for PK (N = 30) was defined as patients who received at least 1 dose of oral study drug and had at least 1 valid quantifiable PK metric||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822116|NCT01160614|Secondary|Multiple-dose PK Metric: Minimum Observed Plasma Concentration Just Prior to the Next Dose (Cmin)||Up to 72 hours if all 5 doses were administered|The full analysis population for PK (N = 30) was defined as patients who received at least 1 dose of oral study drug and had at least 1 valid quantifiable PK metric||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822117|NCT01160614|Primary|Single-dose PK Metric: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (AUCinf)|Due to insufficient sampling, AUCinf was not estimated.|Up to 24 hours||||||
822118|NCT01160614|Primary|Single-dose PK Metric: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Hour 0 to the Last Measurable Plasma Concentration [AUCt]||Up to 24 hours|The full analysis population for PK (N = 30) was defined as patients who received at least 1 dose of oral study drug and had at least 1 valid quantifiable PK metric||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822119|NCT01160640|Secondary|Identification of Endometrial Microorganisms Present Obtained From Women With or Without Evidence of Endometritis.|Identification of endometrial microorganisms present obtained from women with or without evidence of endometritis using a combination of culture methods, rRna sequencing and whole genomic sequencing. The aim is to identify the etiology of endometritis.|enrollment|Women who had an endometrial sample that was sufficient for histologic assessment for endometritis.||participants|||Number
822120|NCT01160640|Secondary|Resolution of Clinical Signs and Symptoms of Acute PID - Intention to Treat Analysis|Clinical response to treatment is improvement (reduction) of the McCormack Scale total score from baseline to day 3 follow-up visit. Participants without a 3-day measure were considered treatment failures.|Enrollment to 3 day follow up visit|||participants|||Number
822121|NCT01160640|Secondary|The Eradication of M. Genitalium From the Lower and Upper Genital Tract Following Antibiotic Therapy for Acute PID.|M. genitalium not detected in the cervical and endometrial cultures by nucleic acid amplification testing at the 30 day visit among women who had M. genitalium detected at either anatomical site at the enrollment visit.|Enrollment to 30 days|There were 34 women who had M. genitalium detected in the cervix or endometrium at enrollment who had test results from the 30-day visit.||participants|||Number
822122|NCT01160640|Secondary|The Prevalence of M. Genitalium in the Cervix and Endometrium From Women With Acute PID.|The number of women who had M. genitalium detected in cervical and endometrial biopsy cultures by nucleic acid amplification tests at enrollment.|enrollment|||participants|||Number
822123|NCT01160640|Primary|Clearance of Anaerobic Organisms From the Endometrium|Clearance of anaerobic microorganisms from the endometrium at the 30 day follow-up visit among women who had anaerobic microorganisms detected in their endometrial tissue sample at enrollment. Clearance is defined as no anaerobic microorganisms detected in the endometrial tissue biopsy sample collected at the 30-day visit.|Enrollment to 30 days|Women who had anaerobic microorganisms detected in their endometrial biopsy sample at enrollment based on standard bacterial culture techniques.||participants|||Number
822124|NCT01160744|Other Pre-specified|Change in Tumor Size (CTS)|CTS was defined as the log ratio of tumor size at 6 weeks to tumor size at baseline. CTS at 6 weeks=Log (Sum of Target Lesion Measurements at 6 Weeks)-Log (Sum of Target Lesion Measurements at Baseline).|Baseline, 6 weeks|All randomized participants with results at baseline and 6 weeks.||log ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
822125|NCT01160744|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With CR, PR, or Stable Disease (SD) [Disease Control Rate (DCR)]|DCR: percentage of participants with CR, PR, or SD using RECIST v 1.1 criteria. CR: disappearance of all lesions, pathological lymph node reduction in short axis to <10 mm, and normalization of tumor marker levels of non-target lesions. PR: ≥30% decrease in SOD of target lesions taking as reference baseline sum diameter. PD: ≥20% increase in SOD of target lesions and short axes of target lymph nodes, taking as reference smallest sum of longest diameters recorded since treatment started and an absolute increase in sum diameter ≥5 mm; appearance of ≥1 new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. SD: neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor increase to qualify for PD. Participants who had no post baseline tumor assessments were considered non-responders and included in the denominator when calculating response rate. Percentage of participants=(number of participants with CR+PR+SD/total number of participants)*100.|Day 1, Cycle 1 (3-week cycles) and every 6 weeks thereafter to PD (up to 24 months)|ITT Population: All randomized participants.||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
822126|NCT01160744|Secondary|Squamous Population OS|OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. If the participant was alive at the end of the follow-up period or was lost to follow-up, OS was censored on the last date the participant was known to be alive.|Randomization to the date of death from any cause [up to end of study]||06/2018||||
822140|NCT01160822|Secondary|Terminal Phase Half-life (t1/2) of Canakinumab|The time it takes for the concentration level of canakinumab to fall to 50% of the original value.|Day 1, pre-dose and 1, 3, 6 and 8 hours post-dose (Part A only), Day 2, 4, 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 126.|Pharmacokinetic analysis set where data were available.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
822127|NCT01160744|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Who Died|Data presented are the number of participants with at least 1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and treatment-emergent serious adverse event (SAE), as well as, the number of participants who died during the study. TEAEs were defined as serious and other non-serious AEs that occurred or worsened after study treatment (regardless of causality). A summary of SAEs and other non-serious adverse events, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Day 1, Cycle 1 (3-week cycles) up to 89 weeks of treatment and 1 month post-treatment follow-up|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
822128|NCT01160744|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR)|DOR was measured from the time criteria were met for the first objectively recorded CR or PR until the first date criteria for PD were met or death. Response was defined using RECIST v 1.1 criteria. CR was defined as the disappearance of all lesions, pathological lymph node reduction in short axis to <10 mm, and normalization of tumor marker level of non-target lesions. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease SOD of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum diameter. PD was defined as ≥20% increase in SOD of target lesions and short axes of target lymph nodes, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameters recorded since treatment started and an absolute increase in sum diameter of ≥5 mm; appearance of ≥1 new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Participants who did not relapse were censored at the day of their last objective tumor assessment.|Time of first response (CR or PR) until PD or death (up to 24 months)|All randomized participants with a best overall response of CR or PR. Participants censored: Pem+Carb/Cis=44, Ram+Pem+Carb/Cis=35, Gem+Carb/Cis=50, Ram+Gem+Carb/Cis=37.||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
822129|NCT01160744|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. If the participant was alive at the end of the follow-up period or was lost to follow-up, OS was censored on the last date the participant was known to be alive.|Randomization to the date of death from any cause (up to 31.3 months)|ITT Population: All randomized participants. Participants censored: Pem+Carb/Cis=22, Ram+Pem+Carb/Cis=16, Gem+Carb/Cis=32, Ram+Gem+Carb/Cis=32.||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
822130|NCT01160744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Best Overall Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) [Objective Response Rate (ORR)]|Best overall response of CR or PR was defined using RECIST v 1.1 criteria. CR was defined as the disappearance of all lesions, pathological lymph node reduction in short axis to <10 mm, and normalization of tumor marker levels of non-target lesions. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease in SOD of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum diameter. PD was defined as ≥20% increase in SOD of target lesions and short axes of target lymph nodes, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameters recorded since treatment started and an absolute increase in sum diameter of ≥5 mm; appearance of ≥1 new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Participants who had no post baseline tumor assessments were considered non-responders and included in the denominator when calculating response rate. Percentage of participants=(number of participants with CR+PR/total number of participants)*100.|Day 1, Cycle 1 (3-week cycles) and every 6 weeks thereafter to PD (up to 24 months)|ITT Population: All randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
822131|NCT01160744|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was the time from randomization to the first objective progression as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, Version 1.1 (RECIST v 1.1) or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. Progressive disease (PD) was defined as ≥20% increase in sum of diameter (SOD) of target lesions and short axes of target lymph nodes, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameters recorded since treatment started and an absolute increase in sum diameter of ≥5 millimeters (mm); appearance of ≥1 new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Participants alive and without disease progression were censored at the time of the last objective tumor assessment. Participants who did not progress and were lost to follow-up were censored at their last radiographic assessment. If no baseline or post baseline radiologic assessments were available, participants were censored at date of randomization.|Randomization to PD or death (up to 24 months)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: All randomized participants. Participants censored: Pem+Carb/Cis=14, Ram+Pem+Carb/Cis=13, Gem+Carb/Cis=14, Ram+Gem+Carb/Cis=18.||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
822132|NCT01160770|Secondary|Parent/Caregiver Global Evaluations of the Patient's Overall Change in Symptoms|"The parent/caregiver was asked to rate the patient's overall change in symptoms since the beginning of clobazam treatment by checking very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse, or very much worse."|Baseline to month 36|||percentage of participants|||Number
822133|NCT01160770|Secondary|Investigator Global Evaluations of the Patient's Overall Change in Symptoms|"The physician was asked to rate the patient's overall change in symptoms since the beginning of clobazam treatment by checking very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse, or very much worse."|Baseline to month 36|||percentage of participants|||Number
822134|NCT01160770|Secondary|Percent of Patients Considered Treatment Responders Defined as Those With a ≥25%, ≥50%, ≥75%, 100% Reduction in Drop Seizures Based on the Last 30-day Assessment|Number of drop seizures obtained from seizure diaries|Baseline to month 36|||percentage of participants|||Number
822135|NCT01160770|Secondary|Percent of Patients Considered Treatment Responders Defined as Those With a ≥25%, ≥50%, ≥75%, 100% Reduction in Drop Seizures Based on the 7-day Assessment|Number of drop seizures obtained from seizure diaries|Baseline to month 36|||percentage of participants|||Number
822136|NCT01160770|Primary|Median Percent Reduction in Average Weekly Rate of Drop Seizures Based on the Last 30-day Assessment|Number of drop seizures was obtained from seizure diaries|Baseline to month 36|||percentage of drop seizures||Full Range|Median
822137|NCT01160770|Primary|Median Percent Reduction in Average Weekly Rate of Drop Seizures Based on the 7-day Assessment|Number of drop seizures was obtained from seizure diaries|Baseline to month 36|||percentage of drop seizures||Full Range|Median
822138|NCT01160822|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution During Terminal Phase (Vz/F)||Day 1, pre-dose and 1, 3, 6 and 8 hours post-dose (Part A only), Day 2, 4, 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 126.|Pharmacokinetic analysis set, where data were available.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822139|NCT01160822|Secondary|Apparent Clearance of Canakinumab From Plasma (CL/F)||Day 1, pre-dose and 1, 3, 6 and 8 hours post-dose (Part A only), Day 2, 4, 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 126.|Pharmacokinetic analysis set, where data were available.||mL/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
822147|NCT01160822|Secondary|Part B: Physician's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment at Week 4|The study physician made a global assessment of response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Very Poor.|Week 4|Pharmacodynamic analysis set, where data were available.||participants|||Number
822148|NCT01160822|Secondary|Part B: Physician's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment at Week 2|The study physician made a global assessment of response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Very Poor.|Week 2|Pharmacodynamic analysis set, where data were available.||participants|||Number
822149|NCT01160822|Secondary|Part B: Physician's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment at Day 4|The study physician made a global assessment of response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Very Poor.|Day 4|Pharmacodynamic analysis set, where data were available.||participants|||Number
822150|NCT01160822|Secondary|Patient's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment at Week 12|Participants made a global assessment of their response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Very Poor.|Week 12|Pharmacodynamic analysis set, where data were available.||participants|||Number
822151|NCT01160822|Secondary|Patient's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment at Week 8|Participants made a global assessment of their response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Very Poor.|Week 8|Pharmacodynamic analysis set, where data were available.||participants|||Number
822152|NCT01160822|Secondary|Patient's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment at Week 4|Participants made a global assessment of their response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Very Poor.|Week 4|Pharmacodynamic analysis set, where data were available.||participants|||Number
822153|NCT01160822|Secondary|Patient's Global Assessment of Response to Treatment at Week 2|Participants made a global assessment of their response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Very Poor.|Week 2|Pharmacodynamic analysis set, where data were available.||participants|||Number
822154|NCT01160822|Secondary|Patient’s Global Assessment of Response to Treatment on Day 4|Participants made a global assessment of their response to treatment using a 5-point Likert scale: Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Very Poor.|Day 4|Pharmacodynamic analysis set, where data were available.||participants|||Number
822155|NCT01160822|Secondary|Part B: Proportion of Participants Who Used Rescue Analgesic During Study|Participants were permitted to take oral rescue medication (Acetaminophen ≤ 4 gram/day) up until 24 hours of a scheduled assessment visit during the 12-week treatment period. The estimates shown are the Kaplan-Meier estimates of the proportion of participants that took rescue medication.|Day 4, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12|Safety analysis set (all participants as assigned that received at least one dose of study drug).||proportion of participants|||Number
822156|NCT01160822|Secondary|Part B: Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain, Stiffness and Physical Function Subscales|"The WOMAC consists of 3 subscales:
The Pain subscale asks patients to rate pain in the index knee joint in the last 48 hours during walking, using stairs, in bed, sitting or lying, and standing on a scale from none (0) to extreme pain (4). The answers are summed and the total pain subscale score ranges from 0-20.
The Stiffness subscale assesses stiffness in the index knee joint during the last 48 hours doing different activities on a scale from none (0) to extreme stiffness (4). The total stiffness subscale score ranges from 0-8.
The Physical Function subscale assesses difficulty performing daily physical activities during the last 48 hours on a scale from none (0) to extreme difficulty (4). The total physical function subscale score ranges from 0-68.
Higher scores indicate more pain/stiffness/difficulty. Results are from a Bayesian ANCOVA model, with baseline WOMAC score as a covariate, time by treatment as fixed effects, region and patient as random effects."|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8 and 12|Pharmacodynamic (PD) analysis set - Patients with any available PD data and no major protocol deviations with impact on PD data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822157|NCT01160822|Secondary|Part B: Percentage of Responders in the Pain 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|A responder is defined as a participant with a 50% or greater reduction from baseline on the VAS scale for pain assessment. After walking for 20 meters, participants were asked to assess the pain in their affected knee on a 100 mm linear visual analog scale ranging from no pain (0 mm) to unbearable pain (100 mm).|Baseline, Day 4, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12|Pharmacodynamic (PD) analysis set - Patients with any available PD data and no major protocol deviations with impact on PD data. N is the number of participants with available data at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
822158|NCT01160822|Secondary|Part B: Change From Baseline in Pain Using 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"After walking for 20 meters, participants were asked to assess the pain in their affected knee on a 100 mm linear visual analog scale ranging from no pain (0 mm) to unbearable pain (100 mm).
Results are from a Bayesian ANCOVA model, fitting baseline pain VAS score as a covariate, time by treatment as fixed effects, region and patient as random effects."|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8 and 12|Pharmacodynamic (PD) analysis set - Patients with any available PD data and no major protocol deviations with impact on PD data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822159|NCT01160822|Primary|Part B: Change From Baseline to Week 4 in Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale|"The Western Ontario and McMaster osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscale asks patients to rate pain in the index knee joint in the last 48 hours doing different activities on a scale from none (0) to extreme pain (4). The answers are summed and the total pain subscale score ranges from 0 to 20, where higher scores indicate more pain. A negative change from Baseline score indicates improvement.
Results are from a Bayesian ANCOVA model, fitting baseline WOMAC pain score as a covariate, time by treatment as fixed effects, region and patient as random effects."|Baseline and Week 4|Pharmacodynamic (PD) analysis set - Patients with any available PD data and no major protocol deviations with impact on PD data, and where data were available.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822160|NCT01160822|Primary|Part B: Change From Baseline to Day 4 in Pain Using 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"After walking for 20 meters, participants were asked to assess the pain in their affected knee on a 100 mm linear visual analog scale ranging from no pain (0 mm) to unbearable pain (100 mm). A negative change from Baseline score indicates improvement.
Results are from a Bayesian analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model, fitting baseline pain VAS score as a covariate, time by treatment as fixed effects, region and subject as random effects."|Baseline and Day 4|Pharmacodynamic (PD) analysis set - Patients with any available PD data and no major protocol deviations with impact on PD data, and where data were available.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822161|NCT01160822|Primary|Part A: Number of Participants With Intolerance Events|An intolerance event is defined as an acute inflammatory reaction, characterized by a 30 mm increase in pain (on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) and associated with a new or worsened synovial fluid effusion within 3 days following the intra-articular (i.a.) injection. If baseline VAS pain score is ≥ 70 mm, an intolerance event is defined as an increase in pain by 20 mm on a 100 mm VAS associated with new or worsened synovial fluid effusion within 3 days following the i.a. injection. If baseline VAS pain score is ≥ 80 mm, an intolerance event is defined as an increase in pain by 10 mm on a 100 mm VAS associated with new or worsened synovial fluid effusion within 3 days following the i.a. injection. If baseline pain score is ≥ 90 mm, an intolerance event is defined as the patients experiencing an unspecified increase in pain on a 100 mm VAS associated with new or worsened synovial fluid effusion within 3 days following the i.a. injection.|Baseline to Day 3|Safety analysis set.||participants|||Number
822162|NCT01160848|Primary|Photoactive Porphyrins Level|Photoactive porphyrins levels on the skin surface of acne patients, part 2, measured by in vivo fluorescence spectroscopy|24 hours after cream application|||Fluorescence intensity unit||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822163|NCT01160848|Primary|Photoactive Porphyrins Level|Photoactive porphyrins levels on the skin surface of acne patients, part 2, measured by in vivo fluorescence spectroscopy|12 hours after cream application|||Fluorescence intensity unit||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822164|NCT01160848|Primary|Photoactive Porphyrins Level|Photoactive porphyrins levels on the skin surface of acne patients, part 2, measured by in vivo fluorescence spectroscopy|8 hours after cream application|||Fluorescence intensity unit||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822165|NCT01160848|Primary|Photoactive Porphyrins Level|Photoactive porphyrins levels on the skin surface of acne patients, part 2, measured by in vivo fluorescence spectroscopy|3 hours after cream application|||Fluorescence intensity unit||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822166|NCT01160848|Primary|Photoactive Porphyrins Level|Photoactive porphyrins levels on the skin surface of acne patients, part 1, measured by in vivo fluorescence spectroscopy|3 hours after cream application|||Fluorescence intensity unit||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822167|NCT01160848|Primary|Photoactive Porphyrins Level|Photoactive porphyrins levels on the skin surface of acne patients, part 1, measured by in vivo fluorescence spectroscopy|1.5 hours after cream application|||Fluorescence intensity unit||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822168|NCT01161121|Secondary|Side Effects of Medication Administration|Chest pain, chest discomfort, burning, flushing, headache, nausea, or shortness of breath|During drug infusion and until restoration of baseline hemodynamics|||participants|||Number
822169|NCT01161121|Secondary|Heart Rate Changes With Drug|Maximal heart rate documented following the administration of each agent|During drug infusion and until restoration of baseline hemodynamics|||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
822170|NCT01161121|Primary|Difference in FFR Between IV Adenosine and IV Regadenoson|FFR (as calculated by the ratio of lowest Pd/Pa at maximal hyperemia) was compared between hyperemia achieved with adenosine and with regadenoson|At maximal, steady-state hyperemia|Per protocol||ratio (Pd/Pa)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822171|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the entire study period (Day 0 to Day 182)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822172|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|Up to 21 days after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822173|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|Within the 42-day (Days 0-41) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822174|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|Within the 21-day (Days 0-20) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822175|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With pIMDs|Potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) are a subset of AEs that include autoimmune diseases and other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders of interest which may or may not have an autoimmune aetiology.|During the entire study period (Day 0 to Day 182)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822176|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Potential Immune-mediated Diseases (pIMDs)|Potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) are a subset of AEs that include autoimmune diseases and other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders of interest which may or may not have an autoimmune aetiology.|Up to Day 21|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830144|NCT01227629|Secondary|Thromboembolic Events: Number of Participants Who Died|Occurence of death by all causes|12 weeks|All randomized patients. No statistical comparisons were performed, due to the extremely small number of events.||Participants|||Number
822177|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With MAEs|MAEs were defined as events for which the subject received medical attention defined as hospitalization, an emergency room visit, or a visit to or from medical personnel (medical doctor) for any reason. Any MAE(s) = Occurrence of any MAE(s) regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Analysis of intensity and relationship to vaccination of MAEs was not performed.|During the entire study period (Day 0 to Day 182)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822178|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Medically-attended Adverse Events (MAEs)|MAEs were defined as events for which the subject received medical attention defined as hospitalization, an emergency room visit, or a visit to or from medical personnel (medical doctor) for any reason. Any MAE(s) = Occurrence of any MAE(s) regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Analysis of intensity and relationship to vaccination of MAEs was not performed.|Up to day 21|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822179|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, joint pain at other location, muscle aches, shivering, sweating and fever [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of any general symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 symptom= symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = fever > 39.0 °C, but ≤ 40.0 °C. Related= general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the vaccination. This outcome measure refers to subjects aged 6 to 10 years.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects aged 6 to 10 years who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822180|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of any general symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 drowsiness= drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 irritability= crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. Grade 3 loss of appetite= not eating at all. Grade 3 fever = fever > 39.0 °C or > 40.0 °C. Related= general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the vaccination. This outcome measure refers to subjects aged 3 to 5 years.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects aged 3 to 5 years who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822181|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of any local symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain for children less than 6 years= cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 pain for children aged 6 to < 10 years= pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 100 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects who received the study vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822182|NCT01161160|Secondary|HI Antibody Titers Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Strain|Titers were presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs), for the seropositivity cut-off value of ≥ 1:10. The Flu strain assessed was Flu A/CAL/7/09, following the CHMP and the CBER guidance.|At Day 182|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 182 days after vaccination were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822183|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With HI Antibody Titers Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Above the Cut-off Value|The cut-off value for the humoral immune response in terms of vaccine H1N1 HI antibodies were equal to or above (≥) 1:10. The Flu strain assessed was Flu A/CAL/7/09, following the CHMP and the CBER guidance.|At Day 182|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 182 days after vaccination were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822184|NCT01161160|Secondary|HI Antibody Titers Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Strain|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs), for the seropositivity cut-off value of ≥ 1:10. The Flu strain assessed was Flu A/CAL/7/09, following the CHMP and the CBER guidance.|At Day 21|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 21, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 21 days after vaccination were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822185|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Subjects With HI Antibody Titers Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Above the Cut-off Value|The cut-off value for the humoral immune response in terms of vaccine H1N1 HI antibodies were egual to or above (≥) 1:10. The Flu strain assessed was Flu A/CAL/7/09, following the CHMP and the CBER guidance.|At Day 21|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 21, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 21 days after vaccination were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822186|NCT01161160|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Rise (GMFR) for HI Antibodies Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Strain|GMFR, also called seroconversion factor (SCF), was defined as the fold increase in serum HI GMTs post-vaccination compared to pre-vaccination. The Flu strain assessed was Flu A/CAL/7/09, following the CHMP and the CBER guidance. The CHMP criterion was fulfilled if the post-vaccination point estimate for SCF was > 2.5.|At Day 182|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 182 days after vaccination were available.||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822195|NCT01161173|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time from Baseline until or death from any cause|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 4 years, 4 months)|Per-protocol population: All enrolled participants who started erlotinib therapy and did not violate the study protocol.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822187|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for HI Antibodies Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Strain|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with a serum HI titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:40, that usually is accepted as indicating protection. The Flu strain assessed was Flu A/CAL/7/09, following the CHMP and the CBER guidance. The CBER criterion was fulfilled if the lower limit of the 95% CI for seroprotection (SPR) was > 70%. The CHMP criterion was fulfilled if the post-vaccination point estimate for SPR was > 70%.|At Day 0 and Day 182|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 182 days after vaccination were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822188|NCT01161160|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for HI Antibodies Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Strain|Seroconversion rate (SCR) was defined as the proportion of subjects who had either a pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer < 10 and a post-vaccination reciprocal titer ≥ 40, or a pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer ≥ 10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post vaccination reciprocal titer against the vaccine virus. The Flu strain assessed was Flu A/CAL/7/09, following the CHMP and the CBER guidance. The CBER criterion was fulfilled if the lower limit of the 95% CI for SCR was > 40%. The CHMP criterion was fulfilled if the post-vaccination point estimate for SCR was > 40%.|At Day 182|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 182 days after vaccination were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822189|NCT01161160|Primary|Geometric Mean Fold Rise (GMFR) for HI Antibodies Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Strain|GMFR, also called seroconversion factor (SCF), was defined as the fold increase in serum HI geometric mean titers (GMTs) post-vaccination compared to pre-vaccination. The Flu strain assessed was Flu A/CAL/7/09, following the CHMP and the CBER guidance. The CHMP criterion was fulfilled if the point estimate for GMFR was > 2.5.|At Day 21|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 21, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 21 days after vaccination were available.||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822190|NCT01161160|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for HI Antibodies Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Strain|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with a serum HI titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:40, that usually is accepted as indicating protection. The Flu strain assessed was Flu A/CAL/7/09, following the CHMP and the CBER guidance. The CBER criterion was fulfilled if the lower limit of the 95% CI for seroprotection (SPR) was > 70%. The CHMP criterion was fulfilled if the post-vaccination point estimate for SPR was > 70%.|At Day 21|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 21, which included all evaluable subjeects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 21 days after vaccination were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822191|NCT01161160|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for HI Antibodies Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Strain|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with a serum HI titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:40, that usually is accepted as indicating protection. The Flu strain assessed was Flu A/CAL/7/09, following the CHMP and the CBER guidance. The CBER criterion was fulfilled if the lower limit of the 95% CI for seroprotection (SPR) was > 70%. The CHMP criterion was fulfilled if the post-vaccination point estimate for SPR was > 70%.|At Day 0|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 21, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 21 days after vaccination were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822192|NCT01161160|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 Strain|Seroconversion rate (SCR) was defined as the proportion of subjects who had either a pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer below (<) 10 and a post-vaccination reciprocal titre greater than or equal to (≥) 40, or a pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer ≥ 10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post vaccination reciprocal titer against the vaccine virus. The Flu strain assessed was A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)v-like virus (Flu A/CAL/7/09), following the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) guidance. The CBER criterion was fulfilled if the lower 95% confidence interval (CI) for SCR was (>) 40%. The CHMP criterion was fulfilled if the point estimate for SCR was > 40%.|At Day 21|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 21, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results for antibodies against A/California-like HA antigen for the blood sample taken 21 days after vaccination were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822193|NCT01161173|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Developed Rash|At each study visit, the presence of skin rash was graded using the Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC), with grade 0 = no rash, grade 1 = mild, grade 2 = moderate, grade 3 = severe, and grade 4 = life threatening or disabling rash. Reported is the percentage of participants who developed a grade ≥ 1 rash.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 4 years, 4 months)|Per-protocol population: All enrolled participants who started erlotinib therapy and did not violate the study protocol.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822194|NCT01161173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Scores|Study participants and treating physicians completed the LCSS, a measure of Quality of Life (QoL), at Baseline and throughout the study. The patient LCSS measures 6 major symptoms, the Symptom Burden Index (SBI), associated with lung malignancies (3 thoracic [cough, dyspnea, haemoptysis] and 3 general symptoms [loss of appetite, fatigue, pain]) and 3 additional scores (overall symptomatic distress, interference with daily activities, global QoL), each on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (0=no impairment, 100=maximum impairment). The physician LCSS evaluates the 6 lung malignancy associated symptoms, the SBI, on an ordinal scale (100=none, 75=mild, 50=moderate, 25=marked, 0=severe). The average of the patient and physician SBI scores (6 symptoms) and the average of the patient total score (9 symptoms) ranged from 0 to 100, with a higher patient and a lower physician score indicating more impairment. A negative patient and a positive physician change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 4 years, 4 months)|Per-protocol population: All enrolled participants who started erlotinib therapy and did not violate the study protocol. Only participants with LCSS scores were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822196|NCT01161173|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from Baseline until disease progression or death from any cause. Progressive disease was determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. Progressive disease was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter recorded since treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 4 years, 4 months)|Per-protocol population: All enrolled participants who started erlotinib therapy and did not violate the study protocol. Only participants with an evaluable response were included in the analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822197|NCT01161173|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|The time to disease progression was defined as the time from Baseline until disease progression as determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. Progressive disease was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter recorded since treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 4 years, 4 months)|Per-protocol population: All enrolled participants who started erlotinib therapy and did not violate the study protocol. Only participants with an evaluable response were included in the analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822198|NCT01161173|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), Stable Disease (SD), or Progressive Disease (PD)|The best overall response to treatment was determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. A CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions (TL) or the disappearance of all non-TLs. A PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (SLD) of TLs, taking as reference the baseline SLD. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for a PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest SLD since treatment started for TLs and the persistence of 1 or more non-TL(s). PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the SLD of TLs, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded since treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-TLs. For the best overall responses of CR and PR, a response was “confirmed” if a subsequent RECIST evaluation also showed a CR or PR.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 4 years, 4 months)|Per-protocol population: All enrolled participants who started erlotinib therapy and did not violate the study protocol. Only participants with an evaluable response were included in the analysis.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822199|NCT01161225|Secondary|Health Care Utilization Events|Participants report the following information for the prior 3-month period; their emergency department visits for asthma; hospitalization for asthma; urgent office visit for worsening asthma; routine office visit; specialist visit. A cumulative number of events were computed by adding # of visits and # of days (for hospitalization) occurred in the past 3 months .|9-months postcamp|the number of participants analyzed includes only those who stayed in the study and completed the 9-months assessment.||average number of events||Standard Deviation|Mean
822200|NCT01161225|Secondary|Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) % Predicted|Maximal amount of air one can forcefully exhale in one second. It is then converted to a percentage of normal. Range: 55-124 for the current sample.|9 months post camp|the number of participants analyzed includes only those who stayed in the study and completed spirometry at 9-months assessment.||percentage of predicted FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
822201|NCT01161225|Secondary|Asthma Knowledge Questionnaire|This 30-item instrument was developed to measure children’s knowledge on triggers and symptom identifications, and asthma management procedures (i.e., what to do and how to do it) in a true/false format. Total scores (range: 14-30) were computed by summing the number of items correctly answered. The higher scores indicate greater knowledge levels.|9 months post camp|the number of participants analyzed includes only those who stayed in the study and completed the 9-months assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822202|NCT01161225|Secondary|Attitude Toward Illness Scale|This 13-item scale was designed to assess children’s attitude toward their health condition. The scale includes questions such as “how good or bad do you feel it is that you have ___?” and, “how often do you feel that your ___ is your fault?” Respondents answer each question on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1-5). Total summed scores (range: 25-65) was constructed to reflect respondents’ overall attitudes. Higher scores indicated positive attitudes.|9 months post camp|the number of participants analyzed includes only those who stayed in the study and completed the 9-months assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822203|NCT01161225|Secondary|Illness Management Survey|This 29-item scale was developed to assess perception of barriers and to predict risk for poor self-management in adolescents with chronic illness. This scale categorizes barriers based on internal processes (e.g., cognitive skills, denial, pessimistic thinking) and contextual forces (e.g., illness-related factors, peer/family influences). Total summed scores were computed (range: 28-91). Higher scores indicate the high levels of perceived barriers to self-management.|9 months post camp|the number of participants analyzed includes only those who stayed in the study and completed the 9-months assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822204|NCT01161225|Secondary|Asthma Self-Efficacy|This 14-item scale was developed to measure the child’s confidence in attack prevention (e.g., learn asthma self-management skills, correct use of medication) and attack management (e.g., control symptoms, decide which medication to use). Total summed scores were computed (range: 21-70). Higher total scores indicate greater degree of self-efficacy.|9 months post camp|the number of participants analyzed includes only those who stayed in the study and completed the 9-months assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822205|NCT01161225|Primary|Asthma Control Questions|This measure assesses the frequencies of the limitation of daily activity, asthma symptoms (daytime and nighttime) and use of rescue medication in the past 4 weeks on a 5-point scale (0-4). Total summed scores were computed (range: 4-16). Higher total scores indicate better controlled asthma.|9 months post camp|the number of participants analyzed includes only those who stayed in the study and completed the 9-months assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822220|NCT01161446|Secondary|Number of Male Condomless Anal Intercourse Partners in Last 3 Months||From 6 to 9 and 12 to 15 months|"Included Overall Number of Participants Analyzed as number who completed follow-up. However, only participants who responded to the question regarding condomless anal intercourse partners in the last 3 months were included in this analysis for each time point."||number of partners||Standard Error|Mean
822206|NCT01161225|Primary|Pediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAQLQ)|Twenty-three items cover problems identified as being most important and troublesome in children’s everyday lives due to asthma. This scale is effective in evaluating and discriminating because of its high sensitivity to changes in asthma status within and between individuals with varying severity of asthma. Respondents are asked to recall impairments experienced during the previous week. The scale consists of three subdomains including symptoms (10 items), emotional function (8 items) and activity limitation (5 items). Each item was measured on a 7-point scale; 1 indicates maximum impairment, and 7 indicates no impairment. Higher total scores indicate better levels of functioning. Total scores were computed by summing responses from all items (range:24-161)|9 months post camp|The number of participants analyzed includes only those who stayed in the study and completed the 9-months assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822207|NCT01161329|Primary|Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB)|Total score on the scale: 0-12 Points. Higher scores indicates better functioning. SPPB evaluates balance, gait, strength and endurance by examining an individual's ability to stand with feet together in side-by-side, semi-tandem and tandem positions, time to walk 8 ft and time to rise from a chair and return to the seated position five times.|Baseline, after 3, 6 months and after 1 year|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822208|NCT01161329|Primary|The Berg Balance Scale (BBS)|Total score on the scale: 0-56 Points. Higher scores indicates better balance.|baseline, after 3, 6 months and after 1 year|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822209|NCT01161407|Secondary|"Bone Balance From Calcium Kinetics"|Calcium kinetics was determined by a calcium radiotracer. Bone balance is the difference between bone formation and bone resorption estimated by calcium kinetic modeling.|2 weeks|||mg/d calcium||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822210|NCT01161407|Secondary|Phosphorus Balance|Phosphorus balance is measured by dietary phosphorus intake (mg/d) minus phosphorus excretion (mg/d) from both urine and feces.|2 weeks|||mg/d phosphorus||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822211|NCT01161407|Primary|Calcium Balance|Calcium balance is measured by dietary calcium intake (mg/d) minus calcium excretion (mg/d) (from both urine and feces).|2 weeks|||mg/d calcium||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822212|NCT01161420|Secondary|Percentage Sleep Time at SaO2 < 90%|"The percentage of time spent with oxygen saturation below 90% has been an increasingly utilized surrogate for morbidity risk in sleep apnea populations.
The SaO2 secondary endpoint in this study was determined by the time below an SaO2 level of 90% during the 12-month PSG study compared to that at baseline (average of screening and 1-month PSG studies). The objective was to demonstrate a decrease in the percentage of sleep time with an SaO2 level below 90% at 12 months."|12 months|||Percentage of Sleep Time SaO2 <90%||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822213|NCT01161420|Secondary|Change Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) From Baseline to 12 Months|The Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) is a validated instrument that rates a subject’s daytime sleepiness. Like the FOSQ, it is a quality of life measure that is commonly used in clinical evaluation and management of OSA. Scores range from 0 to 24, with lower scores indicating greater functioning. An ESS score of less than 10 is considered to be the cutpoint for normal subjective sleepiness.|Baseline and 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822214|NCT01161420|Secondary|Change in FOSQ From Baseline to 12 Months|The Functional Outcomes Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ) is a validated instrument that assesses the effect of a subject’s daytime sleepiness on activities of ordinary living. It is a quality of life measure that is commonly used in the clinical evaluation and management of OSA. This self-administered instrument consists of 30 questions divided into 5 domains: activity level, vigilance, intimacy, general productivity and social outcome. Scores range from 5 to 20, with higher scores indicating greater functioning. Change in FOSQ was calculated by subtracting the baseline score from the 12-month score.|Baseline and 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822215|NCT01161420|Secondary|Modified Intent to Treat - AHI Responder Rate for All Implanted Subjects|"The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis for the primary endpoint included all patients who underwent an implant. A modified ITT analysis was conducted to include the subjects who did not completed the 12-month follow-up sleep study also. The ITT analysis was to calculate the AHI responder rate based on the subjects included in the analysis as described below. An Inspire therapy AHI responder was defined as a subject who experienced at least a 50% reduction in AHI from baseline and had an AHI of less than 20 at their last visit.
The following subjects were included:
All implanted subjects who had AHI data collected at both baseline and 12-months follow-up.
All implanted subjects who had baseline data but no 12-month data, and had their last data values carried forward, provide they had a least 6-month AHI data.
Any implanted subject who did not have 12-month data available due to therapy failure (e.g., study withdrawal will be included in the analsys as a treatment failure."|12 months|Implanted subjects||Number of subjects responding to therapy|||Number
822216|NCT01161420|Secondary|AHI for the Randomized Controlled Therapy (RCT) Withdrawal Study|The AHI difference between the 12-month PSG study and the 13-Month PSG study in the therapy maintenance group will be compared to the AHI difference in the therapy withdrawal group. The objective was to demonstrate that AHI increase in the therapy withdrawal group (therapy=OFF) is greater than any AHI change in the active therapy group (therapy=ON). AHI is the number of apneas or hypopneas recorded during a sleep study per hour of sleep; this is calculated by dividing the number of AHI events by the number of hours of sleep.|12 Months|The first 46 responders to the Inspire therapy at 12 months were randomized 1:1 to either the Therapy Maintenance Group (ON) or the Therapy Withdrawal Group (OFF). A subsequent sleep study of the two randomized groups was conducted and results were compared between the two groups.||events per hour||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822217|NCT01161420|Primary|Safety|The primary safety objective of this pivotal trial was to evaluate safety via a description of all reported adverse events. Per the IDE-approved protocol, no formal statistical hypothesis was tested as part of the safety assessment.|12 months|||Events Reported|||Number
822218|NCT01161420|Primary|Oxygen Desaturation Index|Demonstrate at least a 50% responder rate at the 12-month follow-up visit. An Inspire therapy ODI responder was defines as a subject who experienced at least a 25% reduction in ODI from baseline.|12 months|||percentage of subjects responding|||Number
822219|NCT01161420|Primary|Apnea Hypopnea Index|Demonstrate at least a 50% responder rate at the 12-month follow-up visit. An Inspire therapy AHI responder was defined as a subject who experienced at least a 50% reduction in AHI from baseline and had an AHI of less than 20 at the 12-month follow-up.|12 months|||percentage of subjects responding|||Number
822222|NCT01161446|Secondary|Condomless Anal Intercourse With HIV-positive or Unknown Status Partner in Last 3 Months||From 6 to 9 months and 12 to 15 months of follow-up|"Included Overall Number of Participants Analyzed as number who completed follow-up. However, only participants who responded to the question regarding non-concordant condomless anal intercourse in the last 3 months were included in this analysis for each time point."||Participants|||Count of Participants
822223|NCT01161446|Primary|HIV Testing Frequency|Number of HIV tests during follow-up reported by participants at end-of-study visit|15 months|||HIV tests||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822224|NCT01161472|Secondary|Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) on Day 6|RAVLT evaluates a wide diversity of functions: short-term auditory-verbal memory, rate of learning, learning strategies, retroactive, and proactive interference, presence of confabulation of confusion in memory processes, retention of information, and differences between learning and retrieval. Assessment of RAVLT is between 10 to 15 minutes; Performance variable: the sum of the number of words recalled successfully on the delayed recall trial. Higher score meant a better performance.|Baseline and Day 6|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Words Recalled||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822225|NCT01161472|Secondary|Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT)|RAVLT evaluates a wide diversity of functions: short-term auditory-verbal memory, rate of learning, learning strategies, retroactive, and proactive interference, presence of confabulation of confusion in memory processes, retention of information, and differences between learning and retrieval. Assessment of RAVLT is between 10 to 15 minutes; Performance variable: the sum of the number of words recalled successfully on the delayed recall trial. Higher score meant a better performance.|Baseline|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Words Recalled||Standard Deviation|Mean
822226|NCT01161472|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CogState Groton Maze Learning Task on Day 6|GMLT: a cognitive test which assessed executive function. Participant was shown a 10 x 10 grid of tiles on a computer touch screen. A 28-step pathway was hidden among 100 possible locations. The participant was instructed to move 1 step from the start location and then continue 1 tile at a time, toward the end to find the pathway. The outcome measure was total number of errors made in attempting to learn the same hidden pathway on 5 consecutive trials at a single session. Lower scores meant a better performance.|Baseline and Day 6|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Errors||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822227|NCT01161472|Secondary|CogState Groton Maze Learning Task (GMLT)|GMLT: a cognitive test which assessed executive function. Participant was shown a 10 x 10 grid of tiles on a computer touch screen. A 28-step pathway was hidden among 100 possible locations. The participant was instructed to move 1 step from the start location and then continue 1 tile at a time, toward the end to find the pathway. The outcome measure was total number of errors made in attempting to learn the same hidden pathway on 5 consecutive trials at a single session. Lower scores meant a better performance.|Baseline|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
822228|NCT01161472|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CogState CPAL on Day 6|CPAL: a cognitive test which assessed visual episodic learning. Participant was to learn and remember picture locations on the screen and was to tap the target on the central location to begin. As each picture was revealed, the participant was to remember where the picture was located and tap that location. The outcome measure was the number of errors made in correctly placing each of the 4 patterns in their location 4 times. Lower scores meant a better performance.|Baseline and Day 6|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Errors||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822229|NCT01161472|Secondary|CogState Continuous Paired Associate Learning (CPAL)|CPAL: a cognitive test which assessed visual episodic learning. Participant was to learn and remember picture locations on the screen and was to tap the target on the central location to begin. As each picture was revealed, the participant was to remember where the picture was located and tap that location. The outcome measure was the number of errors made in correctly placing each of the 4 patterns in their location 4 times. Lower scores meant a better performance.|Baseline|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
822230|NCT01161472|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CogState One Card Learning on Day 6|One card learning: a cognitive test which assessed visual learning. Participants were to remember which cards were previously shown in a task. The outcome measure was accuracy of performance; arcsine transformation of the square root (sqrt) of the proportion of correct responses. Higher scores meant a better performance.|Baseline and Day 6|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Arcsine [(sqrt) proportion correct]||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822281|NCT01162122|Secondary|Persistence of GMTs Against Homologous and Heterologous Strains|The GMTs against homologous and heterologous strains, persisting in subjects at six months (day 181) and one year (day 366) after vaccination with either aTIV or TIV.|Day 181, Day 366 post vaccination|The analysis was done on the FAS (persistence) subset population i.e all randomized population only from US sites who received a study vaccination, provided evaluable blood samples at day 1, day 22, day 181, and day 366.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822231|NCT01161472|Secondary|CogState One Card Learning|One card learning: a cognitive test which assessed visual learning. Participants were to remember which cards were previously shown in a task. The outcome measure was accuracy of performance; arcsine transformation of the square root (sqrt) of the proportion of correct responses. Higher scores meant a better performance.|Baseline|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Arcsine [(sqrt) proportion correct]||Standard Deviation|Mean
822232|NCT01161472|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CogState Identification Speed on Day 6|Identification speed: a cognitive test which assessed visual attention. A playing card was presented face up in the center of the screen. As soon as this happened, the participant had to decide whether the card was red or not. The outcome measure was speed of performance; mean of the log10 transformed reaction time for correct responses (measured in log10 MS). Lower scores meant a better performance.|Baseline and Day 6|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Log10 MS||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822233|NCT01161472|Secondary|CogState Identification Speed|Identification speed: a cognitive test which assessed visual attention. A playing card was presented face up in the center of the screen. As soon as this happened, the participant had to decide whether the card was red or not. The outcome measure was speed of performance; mean of the log10 transformed reaction time for correct responses (measured in log10 MS). Lower scores meant a better performance.|Baseline|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Log10 MS||Standard Deviation|Mean
822234|NCT01161472|Primary|Change From Baseline in Computer Based Objective Cognition Testing (CogState) Detection Speed on Day 6|Detection speed: a cognitive test which assessed psychomotor function. A playing card was presented face up in the center of the screen. As soon as this happened, the participant was to press the 'Yes' key. The outcome measure was speed of performance; mean of the log10 transformed reaction time for correct responses [measured in log10 milliseconds (MS)]. Lower scores meant a better performance.|Baseline and Day 6|The PP Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Log10 MS||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822235|NCT01161472|Primary|Computer Based Objective Cognition Testing (CogState) Detection Speed|Detection speed: a cognitive test which assessed psychomotor function. A playing card was presented face up in the center of the screen. As soon as this happened, the participant was to press the 'Yes' key. The outcome measure was speed of performance; mean of the log10 transformed reaction time for correct responses [measured in log10 milliseconds (MS)]. Lower scores meant a better performance.|Baseline|The Per Protocol (PP) Analysis Set included all randomized participants who completed the study, received treatment in all 4 study periods until the end of treatment visit in the fourth study period and who were not serious protocol violators. 'N' (Number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for the outcome measure.||Log10 MS||Standard Deviation|Mean
822236|NCT01161498|Secondary|Participants With N1-2 Disease at Baseline Requiring Neck Dissection|Participants with Baseline Nl or N2 disease (lymph node metastasis not more than 6 cm in greatest dimension) with persistent disease as determined at the post chemoradiotherapy assessment of response were to proceed to neck dissection as permitted by the institution no later than Week 22. Since this study terminated prematurely neck dissection data were not collected or analyzed.|Weeks 19 - 21||||||
822237|NCT01161498|Secondary|Disease-specific Survival|"Disease-specific survival is defined as the time from randomization to death of the patient due to the cancer under study.
Because this study was terminated with 5 participants enrolled, disease-specific survival was not analyzed."|Up to 5 years after chemoradiotherapy||||||
822238|NCT01161498|Secondary|Overall Survival|"Overall survival is defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause.
Because this study was terminated with 5 participants enrolled, overall survival was not analyzed."|Up to 5 years after chemoradiotherapy||||||
822239|NCT01161498|Secondary|Time to Any Failure|"Any failure is defined as disease progression at any site at any time following completion of chemoradiotherapy.
Because this study was terminated with 5 participants enrolled, time to any failure was not analyzed."|Up to 27 months||||||
822240|NCT01161498|Secondary|Time to Distant Failure|"Distant failure is defined as disease progression at any site other than the head and neck area at any time following completion of chemoradiotherapy.
Because this study was terminated with 5 participants enrolled, time to distant failure was not analyzed."|Up to 27 months||||||
822241|NCT01161498|Secondary|Time to Locoregional Failure|"Locoregional failure is defined as disease progression in the head and neck area at any time following completion of chemoradiotherapy.
Because this study was terminated with 5 subjects enrolled, time to locoregional failure was not analyzed."|Up to 27 months||||||
822242|NCT01161498|Secondary|Pathologic Complete Response (mCR)|"Response to therapy was assessed histopathologically from biopsies taken at surgery for those participants who had surgery prior to Week 22.
If no viable tumor cells were identified in surgical specimens (where the patient had surgery) the patient was classified as having a pathological complete response (pCR), and if viable tumor cells were identified, the patient was classified as having an incomplete pathologic response.
Because this study was terminated with 5 patients enrolled, data for this endpoint were summarized in by-patient listings only and the pathologic complete response rate was not calculated. Therefore a summary of participants with a pathologic complete response before the end of study is reported."|Up to Week 20|Randomized participants who had protocol-specified surgery||participants|||Number
822295|NCT01162122|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With HI Titers ≥40 Against Homologous Strains|The percentage of subjects demonstrating HI titers ≥40, in overall group and in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk group), against homologous strains, three weeks after vaccination with aTIV or TIV.|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the FAS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822243|NCT01161498|Secondary|Metabolic Complete Response (mCR)|"Response to therapy was assessed using [(18)F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) imaging to detect metabolically active tumors.
Metabolic complete response (mCR) is defined as complete disappearance of FDG uptake attributable to tumor compared to baseline scan.
Partial metabolic response (mPR) is defined as a > 40% decrease in specific uptake compared to the initial value in over half of the lesions.
Disease progression (mPD) is defined as a specific uptake increase in any lesion, appearance of new lesions, or presence of extended areas of disease activity.
Stable metabolic response (mSD) is defined as a decrease in uptake < 40% of the initial value of over half the lesions.
Because this study was terminated with 5 patients enrolled, data for this endpoint were summarized in by-patient listings only and the metabolic complete response rate was not calculated. Therefore a summary of metabolic response at end of study is reported."|End of study; the maximum time on study was 20 weeks.|All randomized participants||participants|||Number
822244|NCT01161498|Secondary|Clinical Objective Response (cOR)|"Tumor response was assessed by computed tomography (CT) scan according to a modified version of the revised Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria (version 1.1). Objective response is defined as achieving a clinical partial response (cPR) or complete response (cCR). cCR is defined as disappearance of all baseline lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must have a reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. cPR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of baseline lesions. Progressive disease (PD) is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of baseline lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study, and an absolute increase of at least 5 mm, or the appearance of any new lesions.
Because this study was terminated with 5 patients enrolled, data for this endpoint were summarized in by-patient listings only and the cOR rate was not calculated. Therefore a summary of response at the end of study is reported."|End of trial; the maximum time on study was 20 weeks.|All randomized participants||participants|||Number
822245|NCT01161498|Primary|2-year Event-free Survival|Event-free survival is defined as the time from randomization until the first evidence of relapse, disease progression (local, regional, metastatic, or second primary), or death from any cause. Because this study was terminated with only 5 participants enrolled, and the study was terminated in the first year, this endpoint was not analyzed.|2 years||||||
822246|NCT01161537|Secondary|Part B: Absolute Change From Baseline in in Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) Respiratory Domain Score At Week 48|The CFQ-R is a validated patient-reported outcome measuring health-related quality of life for subjects with cystic fibrosis. Respiratory domain assessed respiratory symptoms (for example, coughing, congestion, wheezing), score range: 0-100; higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and better health-related quality of life. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing measurement collected before initial administration of study drug in Part B (48 weeks).|Part B: Baseline (Day -1), Week 48|"FAS for Part B = all enrolled subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (VX-770) in Part B. Here, Number of participants analyzed signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822247|NCT01161537|Secondary|Part B: Absolute Change From Baseline in Sweat Chloride at Week 48|Sweat samples were collected using an approved Macroduct (Wescor, Logan, Utah) collection device. A volume of greater than or equal to (>=) 15 microliter was required for determination of sweat chloride. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing measurement collected before initial administration of study drug in Part B (48 weeks).|Part B: Baseline (Day -1), Week 48|"FAS for Part B = all enrolled subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (VX-770) in Part B. Here, Number of participants analyzed signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822248|NCT01161537|Secondary|Part B: Change From Baseline in Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) at Week 48|FEV1 is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out in one second, after full inspiration. Predicted FEV1 (for age, gender, and height) was calculated using the Knudson method. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing measurement collected before initial administration of study drug in Part B (48 weeks).|Part B: Baseline (Day -1), Week 48|"FAS for Part B = all enrolled subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (VX-770) in Part B. Here, Number of participants analyzed signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||percent predicted of FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
822249|NCT01161537|Secondary|Part B: Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Related AEs|"AE: any adverse change from subject’s baseline (pre-treatment) condition, including any adverse experience, abnormal recording/clinical laboratory assessment which occurs during course of study, whether it is considered related to study drug or not. SAE: medical event or condition, which falls into any of following categories, regardless of its relationship to the study drug: death, life threatening adverse experience, in-patient hospitalization/prolonged hospitalization, persistent/significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, important medical event.
Related AEs includes all AEs for which the causality was either related to study drug or possibly related to study drug."|Part B: Day 1 up to Week 48|Safety Set for Part B = all enrolled subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (VX-770 or placebo) in Part B.||participants|||Number
822250|NCT01161537|Secondary|Part A: Absolute Change From Baseline in Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) Respiratory Domain Score At Day 43|The CFQ-R is a validated patient-reported outcome measuring health-related quality of life for subjects with cystic fibrosis. Respiratory domain assessed respiratory symptoms (for example, coughing, congestion, wheezing), score range: 0-100; higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and better health-related quality of life. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing measurement collected before initial administration of study drug in VX-770 treatment phase (Day 15 to 42).|Baseline (pre-dose Day 15), Day 43|FAS for Part A = all enrolled subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (VX-770 or placebo) in Part A.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822251|NCT01161537|Secondary|Part A: Absolute Change From Baseline in Sweat Chloride at Day 43|Sweat samples were collected using an approved Macroduct (Wescor, Logan, Utah) collection device. A volume of greater than or equal to (>=) 15 microliter was required for determination of sweat chloride. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing measurement collected before initial administration of study drug in VX-770 treatment phase (Day 15 to 42).|Part A: Baseline (pre-dose Day 15), Day 43|FAS for Part A = all enrolled subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (VX-770 or placebo) in Part A.||millimole per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822252|NCT01161537|Secondary|Part A: Change From Baseline in Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) at Day 43|FEV1 is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out in one second, after full inspiration. Predicted FEV1 (for age, gender, and height) was calculated using the Knudson method. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing measurement collected before initial administration of study drug in VX-770 treatment phase (Day 15 to 42).|Part A: Baseline (pre-dose Day 15), Day 43|FAS for Part A = all enrolled subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (VX-770 or placebo) in Part A.||percent predicted of FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
822253|NCT01161537|Secondary|Part A: Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Related AEs|"AE: any adverse change from subject’s baseline (pre-treatment) condition, including any adverse experience, abnormal recording/clinical laboratory assessment which occurs during course of study, whether it is considered related to study drug or not. SAE: medical event or condition, which falls into any of following categories, regardless of its relationship to the study drug: death, life threatening adverse experience, in-patient hospitalization/prolonged hospitalization, persistent/significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, important medical event.
Related AEs includes all AEs for which the causality was either related to study drug or possibly related to study drug."|Part A: Day 1 up to Day 57|Safety Set for Part A = all enrolled subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (VX-770 or placebo) in Part A. Data was reported as per the intervention received (Placebo [Placebo Run in/Washout] or VX-770 [VX-770 Treatment]).||participants|||Number
822254|NCT01161537|Primary|Part B: Change From Baseline in Total Ventilation Defect Defined by Hyperpolarized Helium 3 Magnetic Resonance Imaging (3He-MRI) at Week 48|Subjects were asked to inhale hyperpolarized 3 He gas mixed with nitrogen to make a total volume of approximately one-third forced vital capacity (FVC) to a maximum of 1 liter and hold their breath for 20 seconds or less. Rapid MRI was performed during inhalation/exhalation and/or breath-hold. Areas of decreased ventilation were observed as ventilation defects that are visualized as decreased (and/or absent) 3He intensity in 3He MRI. The total ventilation defect was defined as the ratio of total ventilation defect volume (L) to total lung volume (L), expressed as a percentage. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing measurement collected before initial administration of study drug in Part B (48 weeks).|Part B: Baseline (Day -1), Week 48|FAS for Part B = all enrolled subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (VX-770) in Part B.||percentage of total lung volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
822255|NCT01161537|Primary|Part A: Change From Baseline in Total Ventilation Defect Defined by Hyperpolarized Helium 3 Magnetic Resonance Imaging (3He-MRI) at Day 43|Subjects inhaled hyperpolarized helium-3 (3He) gas mixed with nitrogen to make a total volume of approximately one-third forced vital capacity (FVC) to a maximum of 1 liter and hold their breath for 20 seconds or less. Rapid magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed during inhalation/exhalation and/or breath-hold. Areas of decreased ventilation were observed as ventilation defects that are visualized as decreased (and/or absent) 3He intensity in 3He-MRI. The total ventilation defect was defined as the ratio of total ventilation defect volume (L) to total lung volume (L), expressed as a percentage. Baseline was defined as the most recent non-missing measurement collected before initial administration of study drug in VX-770 treatment phase (Day 15 to 42).|Part A: Baseline (pre-dose Day 15), Day 43|FAS for Part A = all enrolled subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (VX-770 or placebo) in Part A.||percentage of total lung volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
822256|NCT01161563|Secondary|Discomfort From Injection|Questionnaire responses recorded on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), which has a range of 0-100 mm, assessed approximately 15 minutes post-injection|15 minutes|Per-protocol population, defined as all subjects who receive both study drugs and complete both post-injection questionnaires.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822257|NCT01161563|Primary|Patient Bother From Injection Site Burning and/or Stinging|Questionnaire responses recorded on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), which has a range of 0-100 mm, assessed approximately 15 minutes post-injection|15 minutes|Per-protocol population, defined as all patients who receive both study drugs and complete both post-injection questionnaires.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822258|NCT01161628|Secondary|Incidence of Non-relapse Mortality||2 years|||percentage of patients|||Number
822259|NCT01161628|Secondary|Incidence of Disease-free Survival||2 years|Of the surviving patients at 2 years (82% of initial enrolled population)||percentage of patients|||Number
822260|NCT01161628|Secondary|Duration of Systemic Corticosteroid Use||2 years|Only 2 patients out of the 22 evaluable patients enrolled received steroids during the course of treatment for cGVHD. A total of 25 patients were enrolled; 3 patients were excluded from this analysis due to treatment failure.||days||Full Range|Median
822261|NCT01161628|Primary|Rate of Partial Response of cGVHD to Treatment||2 years|||percentage of patients|||Number
822262|NCT01161628|Primary|Rate of Overall Response of cGVHD to Treatment||2 years|||percentage of patients|||Number
822263|NCT01161628|Secondary|Incidence of Overall Survival||2 years|||percentage of patients|||Number
822264|NCT01161628|Secondary|Time to Immunosuppression Withdrawal||2 years|||days||Full Range|Median
822265|NCT01161628|Secondary|Requirement for Systemic Corticosteroid Use||2 years|20 out of the 25 patients enrolled received no corticosteroids at all during the course of treatment for cGVHD||participants|||Number
822266|NCT01161628|Primary|Rate of Complete Response of cGVHD to Treatment.||2 years|||percentage of patients|||Number
822267|NCT01161771|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Schirmer's Test at Month 3|Change from baseline in Schirmer’s Test result at month 3. The Schirmer’s Test measures the rate of the secretion of tears produced by the eye over 5 minutes. The results indicate the presence of dry eye (Normal = greater than or equal to 10 millimeters (mm) of tears, Dry Eye = less than 10 mm of tears). The smaller the number, the more severe the dry eye. A positive number change from baseline indicates an increase in tears (improvement).|Baseline, Month 3|Subjects enrolled who met the inclusion criteria of having 2 limbal relaxing incisions (LRIs) during cataract extraction. Nine (9) subjects only had 1 LRI.||Millimeters of Tears||Standard Deviation|Mean
822389|NCT01155570|Primary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) at Week 24|PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis).|Week 24|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822268|NCT01161771|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Tear Break-Up Time at Month 3|Change from baseline in tear break-up time (TBUT) at month 3. TBUT is the time required for dry spots to appear on the surface of the eye after blinking. The longer it takes, the more stable the tear film. A short TBUT is a sign of poor tear film. A negative number change from baseline indicates a decrease in TBUT (worsening).|Baseline, Month 3|Subjects enrolled who met the inclusion criteria of having 2 limbal relaxing incisions (LRIs) during cataract extraction. Nine (9) subjects only had 1 LRI.||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
822269|NCT01161771|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Conjunctival Staining at Month 3|Change from baseline in conjunctival staining severity score at month 3. The conjunctiva is the clear membrane covering the white surface of the eye. Conjunctival staining following ocular administration of lissamine green dye was graded using a 6-point scale (0= no staining, 5= severe staining) over 6 areas of the white part of the eye for a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 30. The higher the score, the worse the dry eye condition. A negative number change from baseline represents a decrease in the severity of conjunctival staining (improvement)|Baseline, Month 3|Subjects enrolled who met the inclusion criteria of having 2 limbal incisions (LRIs) during cataract extraction. Nine (9) subjects only had 1 LRI.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822270|NCT01161771|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Corneal Staining at Month 3|Change from baseline in corneal staining at month 3. The cornea is the transparent front part of the eye which covers the iris and pupil. Corneal staining following administration of fluorescein dye in the eye is graded using a 6-point scale (0= no staining, 5 = severe staining) over 5 areas of the clear central part of the eye for a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 25. The higher the grade score, the worse the dry eye condition. A positive number change from baseline represents an increase in corneal staining (worsening of dry eye).|Baseline, Month 3|Subjects enrolled who met the inclusion criteria of having 2 limbal relaxing incisions (LRIs) during cataract extraction. Nine (9) subjects only had 1 LRI.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822271|NCT01161771|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Total Score at Month 3|Change from baseline in OSDI total score at month 3. The OSDI is a 12-question survey for subjects to document their dry eye disease symptoms. The OSDI consists of a 5-point scale (0=none of the time and 4 = all of the time), with higher scores representing greater disability. The scores are totaled over the 12 questions and converted to a score of 0-100 (0=no disability and 100=complete disability). A negative number change from baseline represents an improvement.|Baseline, Month 3|Subjects enrolled who met the inclusion criteria of having 2 limbal relaxing incisions (LRIs) during cataract extraction. Nine (9) subjects only had 1 LRI.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822272|NCT01161771|Primary|The Percentage of Subjects at Month 3 With Corneal Sensitivity < 50 Millimeters (mm) at Any of the Locations Measured|The percentage of subjects at month 3 with corneal sensitivity < 50 mm at any of the locations measured. Corneal sensitivity is evaluated by using a nylon filament to measure the capability of the cornea (clear front portion of the eye) to respond to touch. The longest filament length at which a minimum of the 3 out of 5 stimulus applications produce a positive response from the subject was the corneal touch threshold (sensitivity). Measurements were taken at 5 different locations in each cornea.|Month 3|Subjects enrolled who met the inclusion criteria of having 2 limbal relaxing incisions (LRIs) during cataract extraction. Nine (9) subjects only had 1 LRI.||Percentage of Subjects|||Number
822273|NCT01162096|Secondary|Engraftment, Immune Reconstitution, GVHD||6 months||||||
822274|NCT01162096|Primary|Overall Survival|Number of patients alive at 6 months post-transplant|6 months|||participants|||Number
822275|NCT01162122|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Adverse Events Following Vaccination|The number of subjects reporting solicited local and systemic adverse events and other adverse events in aTIV group compared to TIV group.|Day 1 through Day 7 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the safety set i.e all randomized subjects who received a study vaccination and provided postvaccination safety data.||participants|||Number
822276|NCT01162122|Secondary|All Cause Mortality Rate, Across Vaccine Groups|The all-cause mortality rate (excluding injury)reported in aTIV group compared to TIV group, by country.|Day 1 through Day 366 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the mFAS (effectiveness).||participants|||Number
822277|NCT01162122|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Healthcare Utilization Across Vaccine Groups|The number of subjects with emergency room visits, unscheduled physician visits, and hospitalizations due to community acquired influenza or pneumonia, cardiopulmonary disease, cardiac disease, respiratory or pulmonary disease,in aTIV group compared to TIV group.|Day 1 through Day 366 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the mFAS (effectiveness).||participants|||Number
822278|NCT01162122|Secondary|Number of High Risk Subjects With Exacerbation of Preexisting Chronic Disease, Across Vaccine Groups|The number of high risk subjects reporting exacerbation of preexisting chronic conditions (i.e.congestive heart failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, hepatic disease, renal insufficiency, and neurological/neuromuscular or metabolic disorders including diabetes mellitus) in aTIV group compared to TIV group.|Day 1 through Day 366 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the mFAS (effectiveness) population.||participants|||Number
822279|NCT01162122|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Influenza Like Illness (ILI) Across Vaccine Groups|The number of subjects reporting ILI from three weeks after vaccination to up to one year in aTIV group compared to TIV group, by country.|Day 22 through Day 366 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the modified full analysis set (mFAS; effectiveness) population i.e all subjects in the randomized population who received a study vaccination but excluding those who received a non-study vaccine during the follow-up phase.||participants|||Number
822280|NCT01162122|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Seroconversion Upto One Year After Vaccination, Against Homologous and Heterologous Strains|"The percentage of subjects demonstrating seroconversion in HI titers against homologous and heterologous strains, at six months (day 181) and one year (day 366) after vaccination with either aTIV or TIV.
Seroconversion is defined as prevaccination HI titer <10 and postvaccination HI titer ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titers from prevaccination HI titer ≥10."|Day 181, Day 366 post vaccination|The analysis was done on the FAS (persistence) subset.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822460|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in QRS Complex, PR, QT, QTcB, QTcF and RR Interval at Month 36||Baseline, Month 36|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
822282|NCT01162122|Secondary|Comparison of aTIV Versus TIV in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion Against Heterologous Strains-FAS|"The superiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV against the heterologous vaccine strains, in overall group and in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk subjects), was assessed in terms of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion, at three weeks after vaccination.
Seroconversion is defined as prevaccination HI titer <10 and postvaccination HI titer ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titers from prevaccination HI titer ≥10."|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on FAS||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822283|NCT01162122|Secondary|Comparison of HI Antibody Responses of aTIV Versus TIV, in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion Against Heterologous Strains-PPS|"The non-inferiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV against the heterologous strains, in overall group and in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk group), assessed in terms of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion at three weeks after vaccination.
Seroconversion is defined as prevaccination HI titer <10 and postvaccination HI titer ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titers from prevaccination HI titer ≥10."|Day 22 postvaccination|Analysis was done on PPS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822284|NCT01162122|Secondary|Comparison of aTIV Versus TIV in Terms of GMTs Against Heterologous Strains-FAS|The superiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV against the heterologous vaccine strains, in overall group and in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk subjects), was assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after vaccination.|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on FAS.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822285|NCT01162122|Secondary|Comparison of aTIV Versus TIV in Terms of GMTs Against Heterologous Strains-PPS|The non-inferiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV against the heterologous vaccine strains, in overall group and in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk subjects), was assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after vaccination .|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on PPS.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822286|NCT01162122|Secondary|Comparison of HI Antibody Responses of aTIV Versus TIV, in High Risk Group in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion Against Homologous Strains-FAS|"The superiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV, in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk group), assessed in terms of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion at three weeks after vaccination against the homologous vaccine strains.
Seroconversion is defined as prevaccination HI titer <10 and postvaccination HI titer ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titers from prevaccination HI titer ≥10."|Day 22 postvaccination|Analysis was done on FAS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822287|NCT01162122|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion in HI Titers, Against Heterologous Strains|"The percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion in HI titers from baseline, in overall group and in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk group), against heterologous strains, three weeks after vaccination with aTIV or TIV.
Seroconversion is defined as prevaccination HI titer <10 and postvaccination HI titer ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titers from prevaccination HI titer ≥10."|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the FAS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822288|NCT01162122|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratio (GMR) of Post- Versus Pre-vaccination HI Titers, Against Heterologous Strains|The GMR of post-vaccination versus pre-vaccination HI titers (day 22/day 1) in overall group and in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk group), against heterologous strains, three weeks after vaccination with aTIV or TIV.|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the FAS.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822289|NCT01162122|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With HI Titers ≥40 Against Heterologous Strains|The percentage of subjects demonstrating HI titers ≥40, in overall group and in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk group), against heterologous strains, three weeks after vaccination with aTIV or TIV.|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the FAS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822290|NCT01162122|Secondary|Comparison of aTIV Versus TIV in High Risk Group in Terms of GMTs Against Homologous Strains-FAS|The superiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV, in subjects with predefined co-morbidities (high risk group) assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on FAS population.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822291|NCT01162122|Secondary|Comparison of HI Antibody Responses of aTIV Versus TIV, in High Risk Group in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion Against Homologous Strains-PPS|"The non-inferiority of HI antibody responses of ATIV compared to TIV, in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk group), assessed in terms of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion at three weeks after vaccination against the homologous vaccine strains.
Seroconversion is defined as prevaccination HI titer <10 and postvaccination HI titer ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titers from prevaccination HI titer ≥10."|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on PPS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822292|NCT01162122|Secondary|Comparison of aTIV Versus TIV in High Risk Group in Terms of GMTs Against Homologous Strains-PPS|The non-inferiority of HI antibody responses of ATIV compared to TIV, in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk subjects), was assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on PPS.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822293|NCT01162122|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratio (GMR) of Post- Versus Pre-vaccination HI Titers Against Homologous Strains|The GMR of post-vaccination versus pre-vaccination HI titers (day 22/day 1) in overall group and in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk group), against homologous strains, three weeks after vaccination with aTIV or TIV.|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the FAS||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822294|NCT01162122|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion in HI Titers, Against Homologous Strains|"The percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion in HI titers from baseline, in overall group and in subjects with pre-defined co-morbidities (high risk group), against homologous strains, three weeks after vaccination with aTIV or TIV.
Seroconversion is defined as prevaccination HI titer <10 and postvaccination HI titer ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titers from prevaccination HI titer ≥10."|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the FAS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822296|NCT01162122|Primary|Comparison of aTIV Versus TIV in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion Against Homologous Strains-FAS|"The superiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV assessed in terms of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion at three weeks after vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.
Seroconversion defined as prevaccination HI titer <10 and postvaccination HI titer ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titers from prevaccination HI titer ≥10."|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on FAS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822297|NCT01162122|Primary|Comparison of aTIV Versus TIV in Terms of GMTs Against Homologous Strains-Full Analysis Set (FAS)|The superiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on FAS i.e all randomized subjects who received a study vaccination and provided evaluable serum samples both at day 1 and at day 22||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822298|NCT01162122|Primary|Comparison of aTIV Versus TIV in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion Against Homologous Strains-PPS|"The non-inferiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV assessed in terms of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion at three weeks after vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.
Seroconversion defined as prevaccination HI titer <10 and postvaccination HI titer ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titers from prevaccination HI titer ≥10."|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on PPS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822299|NCT01162122|Primary|Comparison of aTIV Versus TIV in Terms of Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) Against Homologous Strains - PPS|The non-inferiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on PPS.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822300|NCT01162122|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers in Subjects After Receiving One Dose of Lot 1 or Lot 2 or Lot 3 of aTIV|Immunologic equivalence of 3 consecutive production lots of aTIV (Lot 1, Lot 2 and Lot 3), was assessed in terms of Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) in subjects, at three weeks after vaccination, against each vaccine strain.|Day 22 post vaccination|Analysis was done on the per protocol set population (PPS) i.e all randomised subjects who received the correct vaccine, provided evaluable serum samples, and had no major protocol deviation prior to unblinding.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822301|NCT01162135|Primary|Rate of Positive PSADT Outcome|Proportion of patients at 6 months post-treatment with a PSADT >= 200% from baseline|6 months after treatment with digoxin|||participants|||Number
822302|NCT01162304|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Change|This rating on a 7-point scale measures a patients overall assessment of change since starting a given treatment. This measure provides a subjects global assessment of change, presumably including change in pain, side effects, change in functional status, convenience of therapy, subject preference and values and overall satisfaction with the intervention.|Visits 4 and 6 the end of each of the two treatment periods|Due to not reaching enrollment goal of 40 subjects, data collected on the 7 participants enrolled was not analyized because the data is not available the data are locked not able to obtain.|||||
822303|NCT01162304|Secondary|Short Form Health Survey (SF-36)|It is a 36-item questionnaire designed to measure general health related quality of life.|Visits 2, 4 and 6|Due to not reaching enrollment goal of 40 subjects, data collected on the 7 participants enrolled was not analyized because the data is not available the data are locked not able to obtain.|||||
822304|NCT01162304|Secondary|Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale|The HADS will be administered to assess anxiety and depression.|Visits 2-6|Due to not reaching enrollment goal of 40 subjects, data collected on the 7 participants enrolled was not analyized because the data is not available the data are locked not able to obtain.|||||
822305|NCT01162304|Secondary|Brief Pain Inventory|Will be administered to assess the extent to which chronic pain interferes with sleep and physical and emotional functioning.|Visits 2-6|Due to not reaching enrollment goal of 40 subjects, data collected on the 7 participants enrolled was not analyized because the data is not available the data are locked not able to obtain.|||||
822306|NCT01162304|Primary|Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS)|The primary outcome measure for this clinical trial will be pain relief documented in the subjects' daily pain diaries. Specifically, the average of the daily pain ratings recorded by subjects during the final weeks of the two treatment periods will be compared. The treatment comparison of interest is IR-oxycodone vs. ER-oxycodone, which will be tested at the p < 0.05 level using a two-tailed test.|Daily|Due to not reaching enrollment goal of 40 subjects, data collected on the 7 participants enrolled was not analyized because the data is not available the data are locked not able to obtain.|||||
822307|NCT01162317|Secondary|Wrist Actigraphy (an Objective Sleep Measure) Sleep Efficiency|Wrist actigraphy is a non-invasive method of continuously monitoring gross body activities when a watch-like actimetry sensor is worn at the non-dominant wrist. An algorithm has been developed to assess sleep/wake behavior. Specifically in this study, we used Respironics® actiwatches for data collection. Subjects were asked to wear the actiwatches for a consecutive week at baseline and then at post-intervention, and the actiwatches were taken off only during showers. Wrist actigraphy was examined in association with sleep diary the subjects were to keep for the weeks of monitoring. Threshold-based method algorithm for data interpretation was provided by Respironics® Actiware Software. Medium level threshold was set to detect Wake and Sleep; sleep interval detection algorithm was set for 3 minutes of immobile minutes for Sleep Onset and 5 minutes of immobile minutes for Sleep End. Sleep efficiency is sleep duration divided by total bed time (both in minutes), times 100%.|pre-intervention, post-intervention (1wk of recording each)|All obtained actigraphy data were analyzed. This form doesn't allow specific indication of sample sizes. Therefore, here overall numbers of participants analyzed were the same as the maximal potential.||percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
822308|NCT01162317|Primary|PSQI Change|"change of global PSQI score as compared to baseline The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) is a self-report questionnaire that assesses sleep quality over a 1-month time interval.
The PSQI global score has a possible range of 0–21 points. Any score above 5 is considered insomnia. The higher the score the worse the condition."|Baseline and post-intervention|||change of points from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
823286|NCT01170663|Secondary|Cmax After 4th Ramucirumab (IMC-1211B) Infusion||Cycle 2, Day 15 1 hour post end of infusion (28-day cycles)|All participants who received Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) plus Paclitaxel and had Cmax observations at specific timepoint.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822309|NCT01162421|Secondary|HCR: Out of Pocket Expenses Incurred for the Current Study Condition in the Past 4 Weeks at Final Visit|The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked what type of out-of-pocket expenses they had incurred for their RA in the past 4 weeks. Based on Canadian dollars.|Final Visit (up to Month 24)|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=participants with non-zero expenses for given category, and included in the mean (SD) calculation.||Canadian dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
822310|NCT01162421|Secondary|HCR: Out of Pocket Expenses Incurred for the Current Study Condition in the Past 4 Weeks at Baseline|The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked what type of out-of-pocket expenses they had incurred for their RA in the past 4 weeks. Based on Canadian dollars.|Baseline|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=participants with non-zero expenses for given category, and included in the mean (SD) calculation.||Canadian dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
822311|NCT01162421|Secondary|HCR: Health Care for RA in the Past 4 Weeks at Final Visit|The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked about their use of health care for RA in the past 4 weeks.|Final Visit (up to Month 24)|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=the number of participants included in the percentage calculation (n=2, 3 is the number of participants who stated that they had used healthcare for RA in the past 4 weeks).||percentage of participants|||Number
822312|NCT01162421|Secondary|HCR: Health Care for RA in the Past 4 Weeks at Baseline|The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked about their use of health care for RA in the past 4 weeks.|Baseline|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=the number of participants included in the percentage calculation (n=11, 10 is the number of participants who stated that they had used healthcare for RA in the past 4 weeks).||percentage of participants|||Number
822313|NCT01162421|Secondary|HCR: Medical Insurance at Final Visit|The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked whether and what type of health insurance they had. Types of Canadian insurance included: Régie de l’assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ); Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ); Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (CSST); Canadian Health Insurance Program (CHIP); and L’indemnisation des victimes d’actes criminals (IVAC).|Final Visit (up to Month 24)|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=the number of participants included in the percentage calculation (n=26, 26 is the number of participants who answered that they did have health insurance).||percentage of participants|||Number
822314|NCT01162421|Secondary|Health Care Resources Questionnaire (HCR): Medical Insurance at Baseline|The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked whether and what type of health insurance they had. Types of Canadian insurance included: Régie de l’assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ); Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ); Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (CSST); Canadian Health Insurance Program (CHIP); and L’indemnisation des victimes d’actes criminals (IVAC).|Baseline|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=the number of participants included in the percentage calculation (n=25, 28 is the number of participants who answered that they did have health insurance).||percentage of participants|||Number
822315|NCT01162421|Secondary|Likert Scale for Participant's Satisfaction With Care at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|"Participants measured their satisfaction with care by specifying their in response to the question How satisfied are you with the results of your RA treatment? on a 5-point Likert scale, from the following 5 answers: not satisfied, a little satisfied, moderately satisfied, well satisfied, very well satisfied. Scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating more satisfaction with their care."|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and had an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822316|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) Scores at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|BDI is a 21-item questionnaire, participant self-report rating inventory that measures characteristic attitudes and symptoms of depression. The range of scores is 0 to 63, with a higher value representing a worse outcome.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and had an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822317|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D VAS at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|The EQ-5D VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where 100 is the 'best imaginable health state' and 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state.'|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and had an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822390|NCT01155570|Primary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) at Week 16|PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis).|Week 16|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822318|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQOL Questionnaire (EQ-5D) Index Score at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|The EQ-5D is a participant answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that essentially attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.594 to 1 (with higher scores indicating better health state).|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822319|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|The WLQ was used to measure the impairment in work-related productivity, with reference to the previous two weeks. Each work-related question is scored from 0 to 4 and the total score ranges from 0-100, with lower scores signifying fewer limitations at work.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822320|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving MCID in FACIT-Fatigue Scale at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|The FACIT-Fatigue questionnaire is a self-administered patient questionnaire that consists of 13 questions designed to measure the degree of fatigue experienced by participants in the previous 7 days. Participants respond to the questions on a scale from 'not at all' (0) to 'very much' (4). The scale score is computed by summing the item scores, after reversing those items that are worded in the negative direction. The FACIT-Fatigue subscale score ranges from 0 to 52, where higher scores represent less fatigue. The MCID was defined as a 3.56-unit decrease in FACIT-Fatigue Scale.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822321|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue Scale at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|The FACIT-Fatigue questionnaire is a self-administered patient questionnaire that consists of 13 questions designed to measure the degree of fatigue experienced by participants in the previous 7 days. Participants respond to the questions on a scale from 'not at all' (0) to 'very much' (4). The scale score is computed by summing the item scores, after reversing those items that are worded in the negative direction. The FACIT-Fatigue subscale score ranges from 0 to 52, where higher scores represent less fatigue.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822322|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving HAQ < 0.5 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|The percentage of participants achieving HAQ < 0.5. HAQ is a participant-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. HAQ remission indicating normal physical function is defined by HAQ-DI < 0.5. A lower HAQ-DI score is better.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822323|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Minimal Clinical Important Difference (MCID) in HAQ at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|The percentage of participants achieving MCID in HAQ, defined as a 0.22 unit decrease in HAQ. HAQ is a participant-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. A lower HAQ-DI score is better.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822324|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI) at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|HAQ is a participant-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. A lower HAQ-DI score is better.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822325|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Flare-Up After Remission by Month 24|Percentage of participants with a flare-up after remission by Month 24, defined as participants who reached remission (DAS28 < 2.6) but later had two consecutive visits with DAS28 ≥ 2.6 (based on observed cases only). The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity.|Month 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and had an assessment.||percentage of participants|||Number
822326|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With EULAR Moderate Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS28 score. The DAS28 score ranges from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more disease activity. A Moderate EULAR Response is defined as either: an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of > 0.6 and < 1.2 from Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of ≤ 5.1; or an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of ≥ 1.2 from Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of > 3.2.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822327|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS28 score. The DAS28 score ranges from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more disease activity. A Good EULAR Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of ≥ 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of ≤ 3.2.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822328|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28(CRP) Low Disease Activity at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|DAS28(CRP) low disease activity was defined as DAS28(CRP) < 3.2. The DAS28(CRP) is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822329|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28(CRP) Remission at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|DAS28(CRP) remission was defined as DAS28(CRP) < 2.6. The DAS28(CRP) is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity.|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822330|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score DAS28(CRP) at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822331|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CRP at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24||Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||mg/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822332|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Pain at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|Participants were asked to indicate how severe their pain had been in the previous week on a VAS from 0 (no pain) to 100 (pain as bad as it could be). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822333|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|Participants were asked to indicate how they were doing with their RA on a VAS from 0 (very well) to 100 (very poorly). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822334|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|Physicians were asked to indicate the participant’s disease activity (independent of the participant's self assessment) on a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (very good) to 100 (very bad). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822335|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Tender Joint Count 28 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of tenderness is scored 1 and no tenderness is 0; range of score is 0-28, with higher scores indicating more tender joints.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||tender joints||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822336|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Tender Joint Count 68 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|Sixty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of tenderness is scored 1 and no tenderness is 0; range of score is 0-68, with higher scores indicating more tender joints.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||tender joints||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822337|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Count 28 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of swelling is scored 1 and no swelling is 0; range of score is 0-28, with higher scores indicating more swollen joints.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||swollen joints||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822338|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Count 66 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|Sixty-six joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of swelling is scored 1 and no swelling is 0; range of score is 0-66, with higher scores indicating more swollen joints.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||swollen joints||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822339|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|"A participant is an ACR70 responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met:
≥ 70% improvement in tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: -
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Patient assessment of pain
Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire
Acute phase reactant (erythrocyte sedimentation rate/CRP)."|Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug (nonresponder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822340|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|"A participant is an ACR50 responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met:
≥ 50% improvement in tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Patient assessment of pain
Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire
Acute phase reactant (erythrocyte sedimentation rate/CRP)."|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug (nonresponder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822341|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|"A participant is an ACR20 responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met:
≥ 20% improvement in tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: -
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Patient assessment of pain
Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire
Acute phase reactant (erythrocyte sedimentation rate/C-reactive protein [CRP])."|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug (nonresponder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822342|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Rapid Radiographic Progression at Month 12|Radiographic progression was defined as a change from Baseline in mTSS that is ≥ 5 units. The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement.|Month 12|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug ith an assessment (nonresponder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822343|NCT01162421|Secondary|Change From Baseline in mTSS at Months 6, 12 and 24|The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug; n=number of participants with an assessment at Baseline and given timepoint (observed cases).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822344|NCT01162421|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With No Radiographic Progression at Month 6 and Month 24|Radiographic progression was defined as change from Baseline in the modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) of ≤ 0.5 units). The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 24|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug (nonresponder imputation).||percentage of participants|||Number
822388|NCT01155570|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI75) Response at Week 16|PASI75 is defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) score compared with the Baseline PASI score. PASI scores range from 0 (best) to 72 (worst), with the highest score representing complete erythroderma of the severest degree. The percent decrease in score is calculated as (Week 0 PASI score minus Week 16 PASI score) divided by Week 0 PASI score.|Baseline and Week 16|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
822345|NCT01162421|Primary|Percentage of Participants With No Radiographic Progression at Month 12|Radiographic progression was defined as change from Baseline in the modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) of ≤ 0.5 units). The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement.|Baseline, Month 12|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug. Last observation carried forward (LOCF): missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation.||percentage of participants|||Number
822346|NCT01162473|Primary|Number of Subjects Who Completed Desensitization Protocol|"Subjects who withdrew prior to completing the desensitization protocol and those who experienced anaphylaxis during the desensitization protocol (i.e., were unable to complete the protocol) were considered to be treatment failures. Subjects who completed the desensitization protocol were considered to be treatment successes."|1 year|The analysis population included all subjects who began desensitization per protocol.||participants|||Number
822352|NCT01162733|Primary|Percentage of Participants First Achieving Therapeutic Levels at 12 Hours|Percentage of patients reaching a therapeutic level defined as greater than 15 mcg/mL|12 hours|||percentage of participants|||Number
822353|NCT01162733|Primary|Percentage of Participants First Achieving Therapeutic Levels at 36 Hours|The objective is to determine if therapeutic levels were reached more rapidly with the implementation of an initial vancomycin loading dose of 30 mg/kg as compared to 15mg/kg.|36 hours|||percentage of participants|||Number
822354|NCT01155466|Secondary|"Change From Baseline at Week 12 in Mean On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia"|"When a participant is on without dyskinesias, parkinsonian symptoms have dissipated and the participant is experiencing no uncontrollable extraneous movements. Study participants reported their parkinsonian symptoms at half-hour intervals as off, on without dyskinesia, on with non-troublesome dyskinesia, on with troublesome dyskinesia, or asleep on their daily diary for 3 days before randomization and for the 3 days immediately before their Week-12 visit. The mean change from baseline in on without troublesome dyskinesia time was based on a constrained longitudinal data analysis with treatment, time, and treatment-by-time interaction as fixed effects and subject as random effect."|Baseline and Week 12|The number of randomized and treated participants with at least one post baseline value.||Hours/day||Standard Error|Mean
822355|NCT01155466|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants With >30% Change (Reduction) From Baseline at Week 12 in Mean Off Time"|"The on state is defined as the period of time during which a patient's symptoms of PD improve or disappear following treatment with L-dopa or dopamine agonists. The off state is defined as the period of time characterized by the return of symptoms (i..e. tremor, slowness, and rigidity) following treatment with L-dopa or dopamine agonists. Study participants reported their symptoms at half-hour intervals as off, on, or asleep on their daily diary for 3 days before randomization and for the 3 days immediately before their Week-12 visit."|Baseline and Week 12|The number of randomized and treated participants with a Week 12 value.||Percentage of participants|||Number
822356|NCT01155466|Primary|Change From Baseline at Week 12 in Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)|The ESS is a self-administered questionnaire providing a measure of a person’s general level of daytime sleepiness, or their average sleep propensity in daily life. The scale consists of 8 situations in which the participant rates their tendency to become sleepy on a scale of 0=no chance of dozing to 3=high chance of dozing. The overall score is the sum of the scores for the 8 situations for a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 24.|Baseline and Week 12|The number of participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had baseline and Week 12 data||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822357|NCT01155466|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Suicidality|The percentage of participants with suicidality using the Columbia - Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) was reported. The C-SSR was used in this study only for the purpose of safety monitoring by measuring the incidence of different types of suicidality categories during treatment. The assessment was done by the nature of the responses, not by a numbered scale. Participants who reported at least one occurrence of suicidal behavior or suicidal ideation were counted as having experienced suicidality. Suicidal behavior included suicide attempt, aborted attempt, interrupted attempt, or preparatory behavior. Suicidal ideation included a wish to die or active suicidal thought with or without method, intent or plan.|Up to Week 12|The number of participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Percentage of participants|||Number
822358|NCT01155466|Primary|Number of Participants With Aspartate Aminotransferase >=3 Times the Upper Limit of Normal|The number of participants with aspartate aminotransferase >=3 times the upper limit of normal and a >=10% increase was reported.|Up to Week 14|The number of participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
822359|NCT01155466|Primary|Number of Participants With Alanine Aminotransferase >=3 Times the Upper Limit of Normal|The number of participants with alanine aminotransferase >=3 times the upper limit of normal and a >=10% increase was reported.|Up to Week 14|The number of participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
822360|NCT01155466|Primary|Number of Participants With Diastolic Blood Pressure >=105 mm Hg|The number of participants with Diastolic Blood Pressure >=105 mm Hg was reported.|Up to Week 14|The number of participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
822361|NCT01155466|Primary|Numberof Participants With Systolic Blood Pressure >=180 mm Hg|The number of participants with Systolic Blood Pressure >=180 mm Hg was reported.|Up to Week 14|The number of participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
822362|NCT01155466|Primary|"Change From Baseline in Mean Off Time"|"The on state is defined as the period of time during which a patient's symptoms of PD improve or disappear following treatment with L-dopa or dopamine agonists. The off state is defined as the period of time characterized by the return of symptoms (i..e. tremor, slowness, and rigidity) following treatment with L-dopa or dopamine agonists. Study participants reported their symptoms at half-hour intervals as off, on, or asleep on their daily diary for 3 days before randomization (baseline) and for the 3 days immediately before their Week-12 visit. The mean change from baseline in off time was based on a constrained longitudinal data analysis with treatment, time, and treatment-by-time interaction as fixed effects and subject as random effect."|Baseline and Week 12|The number of randomized and treated participants with at least one post baseline value.||Hours/day||Standard Error|Mean
822363|NCT01155479|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Due to an AE in Part 2|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to this medicinal product.|Week 27 to Week 52|All Participants as Treated (APaT): All participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
822364|NCT01155479|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) in Part 2|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to this medicinal product.|Week 27 to Week 52|All Participants as Treated: All participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
822365|NCT01155479|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Due to an AE in Part 1|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to this medicinal product.|Day 1 to Week 26|All Participants as Treated: All participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
822366|NCT01155479|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) in Part 1|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to this medicinal product.|Day 1 to Week 26|All Participants as Treated: All participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
824510|NCT01175018|Secondary|Difference Between the Anakinra Arm and the Placebo Arm in Change in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Values From Baseline to Follow up Exam at Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging||10-14 weeks|||% (absolute change)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822367|NCT01155479|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the UPDRS Part 2 Score (Activities of Daily Living [ADL])|The UPDRS is a clinician based rating scale used to measure motor impairments and disability. The UPDRS assesses six features of PD impairment. These are evaluated using a combination of data collected by interview and examination of the participant. The UPDRS Part 2 is the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) score and can range from 0-52 as determined by the physician with the higher score indicating the worse condition. Change from baseline was analyzed using a cLDA model with treatment, time, strata and treatment-by-time interaction as fixed effects and participant as a random effect.|Baseline and Week 26|Full Analysis Set (FAS): All randomized and treated participants with at least one post-baseline value.||Score on a Scale||Standard Error|Mean
822368|NCT01155479|Secondary|Percentage of Responders (Participants With a ≥20% Improvement in UPDRS2+3)|UPDRS is a clinician based rating scale used to measure motor impairments and disability; it assesses 6 features of PD impairment. These are evaluated using a combination of data collected by interview and examination of the participant. UPDRS Part 2 is Activities of Daily Living score and ranges from 0-52. UPDRS Part 3 is Motor Examination and ranges from 0-108. The combined scores of Parts 2 and 3 can range from 0-160 with the higher score indicating the worse condition. A Responder is defined as a participant with at least 20% improvement in UPDRS2+3 from Baseline to Week 26 (End of Part 1 Treatment); a participant with at least a 20% decrease from Baseline score in UPDRS2+3 is defined as a responder. The proportion of Responders was analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model with treatment effect, strata and Baseline UPDRS2+3 as a covariate, and treatment-by-time interaction as fixed effects and subject as random effect.|Baseline and Week 26|Full Analysis Set (FAS): All randomized and treated participants with at least one post-baseline value.||Percentage of Responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822369|NCT01155479|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Sum of Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale Parts 2 and 3 Scores (UPDRS2+3)|The UPDRS is a clinician based rating scale used to measure motor impairments and disability. The UPDRS assesses six features of PD impairment. These are evaluated using a combination of data collected by interview and examination of the participant. The UPDRS Part 2 is the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) score and can range from 0-52 as determined by the physician. The UPDRS Part 3 is the Motor Examination (Total Motor Score [TMS]) and is defined as the total score, ranging from 0-108 as determined by the physician, of the tests given in the motor examination section. The combined scores of Parts 2 and 3 can range from 0-160 with the higher score indicating the worse condition. Change from baseline was analyzed using a constrained longitudinal analysis (cLDA) model with treatment, time, strata and treatment-by-time interaction as fixed effects and participant as a random effect.|Baseline and Week 26|Full Analysis Set (FAS): All randomized and treated participants with at least one post-baseline value.||Score on a Scale||Standard Error|Mean
822370|NCT01155531|Primary|Safety of Sertraline and Telenzepine Combination|safety of the drug combination was measured in terms of number of adverse events during the study period.|7 days|||number of adverse events|||Number
822371|NCT01155531|Primary|Changes in the Meal Calories Consumed|The changes in the meal calories consumed was measured upon telenzepine treatment at the dose of 1 mg, 2 mg and 3 mg (i.e. end of every 7 days). The baseline was defined as on day 7 of sertraline treatment with no telenzepine for the specified meal. Food consumption was measured as calories consumed for breakfast, lunch, and dinner for all treatment groups on day 7 of each dose combination.|The baseline was defined as on day 7 of sertraline treatment with no telenzepine. Food consumption was measured as calories consumed for breakfast, lunch, and dinner for all treatment groups on day 7 of each dose combination.|||calorie||Standard Deviation|Mean
822372|NCT01155531|Primary|Changes in the VAS Score From Baseline.|The baseline VAS self-assessment was completed for each subject on day 7 of each dose combination. Appetite VAS was completed in the subject’s room approximately 30 min before and 1 h after each meal serving. Appetite was not assessed prior to snacks. VAS assessment was based on response to the question: “How hungry are you now?” The anchor points of the 100mm scale were “I am not hungry at all” and “Never more hungry” corresponding to 0 mm and 100 mm respectively. The subjects’ VAS scores were measured by the clinic staff and entered into the CRF. The description listed below (VAS after meal minus and VAS before meal) refers only to the mean VAS score of each group.|The baseline was defined on day 7 of sertraline treatment with no telenzepine before and meal. Appetite VAS was measured 30 min before and 1hour after to meal|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
822373|NCT01155570|Primary|Disease Activity Score 28-4, C-reactive Protein (DAS28-4 [CRP]) at Week 24|DAS28-4 (CRP) is calculated using the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and the patient's global assessment of disease activity via the visual analog scale (VAS). The calculated range of DAS28-4 is 0 to 10. A score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission, a score of 2.6 to 3.2 indicates low disease activity, a score of 3.2 to less than 5.1 indicates moderate disease activity, and a score of 5.1 or greater indicates high disease activity.|Week 24|Observed cases: participants with psoriatic arthritis in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822374|NCT01155570|Primary|Disease Activity Score 28-4, C-reactive Protein (DAS28-4 [CRP]) at Week 16|DAS28-4 (CRP) is calculated using the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and the patient's global assessment of disease activity via the visual analog scale (VAS). The calculated range of DAS28-4 is 0 to 10. A score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission, a score of 2.6 to 3.2 indicates low disease activity, a score of 3.2 to less than 5.1 indicates moderate disease activity, and a score of 5.1 or greater indicates high disease activity.|Week 16|Observed cases: participants with psoriatic arthritis in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822375|NCT01155570|Primary|Disease Activity Score 28-4, C-reactive Protein (DAS28-4 [CRP]) at Week 4|DAS28-4 (CRP) is calculated using the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and the patient's global assessment of disease activity via the visual analog scale (VAS). The calculated range of DAS28-4 is 0 to 10. A score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission, a score of 2.6 to 3.2 indicates low disease activity, a score of 3.2 to less than 5.1 indicates moderate disease activity, and a score of 5.1 or greater indicates high disease activity.|Week 4|Observed cases: participants with psoriatic arthritis in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824511|NCT01175018|Secondary|Difference Between the 2 Arm in the Interval Change in Right Ventricular Ejection Fraction (RVEF)||10-14 weeks|||% (absolute change)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822376|NCT01155570|Primary|Disease Activity Score 28-4, Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-4 [ESR]) at Week 24|DAS28-4 (ESR) is calculated using the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the patient's global assessment of disease activity via the visual analog scale (VAS). The calculated range of DAS28-4 is 0 to 10. A score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission, a score of 2.6 to 3.2 indicates low disease activity, a score of 3.2 to less than 5.1 indicates moderate disease activity, and a score of 5.1 or greater indicates high disease activity.|Week 24|Observed cases: participants with psoriatic arthritis in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822377|NCT01155570|Primary|Disease Activity Score 28-4, Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-4 [ESR]) at Week 16|DAS28-4 (ESR) is calculated using the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the patient's global assessment of disease activity via the visual analog scale (VAS). The calculated range of DAS28-4 is 0 to 10. A score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission, a score of 2.6 to 3.2 indicates low disease activity, a score of 3.2 to less than 5.1 indicates moderate disease activity, and a score of 5.1 or greater indicates high disease activity.|Week 16|Observed cases: participants with psoriatic arthritis in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822378|NCT01155570|Primary|Disease Activity Score 28-4, Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-4 [ESR]) at Week 4|DAS28-4 (ESR) is calculated using the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the patient's global assessment of disease activity via the visual analog scale (VAS). The calculated range of DAS28-4 is 0 to 10. A score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission, a score of 2.6 to 3.2 indicates low disease activity, a score of 3.2 to less than 5.1 indicates moderate disease activity, and a score of 5.1 or greater indicates high disease activity.|Week 4|Observed cases: participants with psoriatic arthritis in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822379|NCT01155570|Primary|Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Week 24|Participants assessed their pain due to psoriatic arthritis in the past week, on a single-line Visual Analog Scale (VAS) from 0 (no pain) to 100 (pain as bad as it could be).|Week 24|Observed cases: participants with psoriatic arthritis in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822380|NCT01155570|Secondary|Physician’s Overall Response Rating At Week 24|"Overall response rating, according to investigator’s subjective clinical opinion. The level of overall improvement rating was categorized as “markedly improved,” “improved,” “not changed,” or not assessable, comparing clinical conditions at Week 24 or at discontinuation with Baseline conditions."|Baseline and Week 24|Participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with assessment at Week 24.||participants|||Number
822381|NCT01155570|Primary|Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Week 16|Participants assessed their pain due to psoriatic arthritis in the past week, on a single-line Visual Analog Scale (VAS) from 0 (no pain) to 100 (pain as bad as it could be).|Week 16|Observed cases: participants with psoriatic arthritis in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822382|NCT01155570|Primary|Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Week 4|Participants assessed their pain due to psoriatic arthritis in the past week, on a single-line Visual Analog Scale (VAS) from 0 (no pain) to 100 (pain as bad as it could be).|Week 4|Observed cases: participants with psoriatic arthritis in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822383|NCT01155570|Primary|Dermatology Life Quality Index at Week 24|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot (score of 2), a little (score of 1), or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired.|Week 24|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822384|NCT01155570|Primary|Dermatology Life Quality Index at Week 16|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot (score of 2), a little (score of 1), or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired.|Week 16|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822385|NCT01155570|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 (PASI90) Response at Week 24|PASI90 is defined as at least a 90% reduction in PASI (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) score compared with the Baseline PASI score. PASI scores range from 0 (best) to 72 (worst), with the highest score representing complete erythroderma of the severest degree. The percent decrease in score is calculated as (Week 0 PASI score minus Week 24 PASI score) divided by Week 0 PASI score.|Baseline and Week 24|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
822386|NCT01155570|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 (PASI90) Response at Week 16|PASI90 is defined as at least a 90% reduction in PASI (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) score compared with the Baseline PASI score. PASI scores range from 0 (best) to 72 (worst), with the highest score representing complete erythroderma of the severest degree. The percent decrease in score is calculated as (Week 0 PASI score minus Week 16 PASI score) divided by Week 0 PASI score.|Baseline and Week 16|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
822387|NCT01155570|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI75) Response at Week 24|PASI75 is defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) score compared with the Baseline PASI score. PASI scores range from 0 (best) to 72 (worst), with the highest score representing complete erythroderma of the severest degree. The percent decrease in score is calculated as (Week 0 PASI score minus Week 24 PASI score) divided by Week 0 PASI score.|Baseline and Week 24|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
824512|NCT01175018|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events in Each Group||10-14 weeks|||adverse events|||Number
822391|NCT01155570|Primary|Physician's Global Assessment at Week 24|"The Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) is a 6-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the physician's evaluation of the participant. The degree of overall lesion severity was evaluated using the following categories:
0 / Clear (plaque elevation=none, scaling=none, erythema=hyperpigmentation, pigmented macules, diffuse faint pink or red coloration);
1 / Minimal (plaque elevation=possible but difficult to ascertain whether there is a slight elevation above normal skin, scaling=surface dryness with some white coloration, erythema=up to moderate);
2 / Mild (plaque elevation=slight, scaling=fine, erythema=up to moderate);
3 / Moderate (plaque elevation=moderate, scaling=coarser, erythema=moderate);
4 / Severe (plaque elevation=marked, scaling=coarse, erythema=severe);
5 / Very Severe (plaque elevation=very marked, scaling=very coarse, erythema=very severe)."|Week 24|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822392|NCT01155570|Primary|Physician's Global Assessment at Week 16|"The Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) is a 6-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the physician's evaluation of the participant. The degree of overall lesion severity was evaluated using the following categories:
0 / Clear (plaque elevation=none, scaling=none, erythema=hyperpigmentation, pigmented macules, diffuse faint pink or red coloration);
1 / Minimal (plaque elevation=possible but difficult to ascertain whether there is a slight elevation above normal skin, scaling=surface dryness with some white coloration, erythema=up to moderate);
2 / Mild (plaque elevation=slight, scaling=fine, erythema=up to moderate);
3 / Moderate (plaque elevation=moderate, scaling=coarser, erythema=moderate);
4 / Severe (plaque elevation=marked, scaling=coarse, erythema=severe);
5 / Very Severe (plaque elevation=very marked, scaling=very coarse, erythema=very severe)."|Week 16|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822393|NCT01155570|Primary|Physician's Global Assessment At Week 8|"The Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) is a 6-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the physician's evaluation of the participant. The degree of overall lesion severity was evaluated using the following categories:
0 / Clear (plaque elevation=none, scaling=none, erythema=hyperpigmentation, pigmented macules, diffuse faint pink or red coloration);
1 / Minimal (plaque elevation=possible but difficult to ascertain whether there is a slight elevation above normal skin, scaling=surface dryness with some white coloration, erythema=up to moderate);
2 / Mild (plaque elevation=slight, scaling=fine, erythema=up to moderate);
3 / Moderate (plaque elevation=moderate, scaling=coarser, erythema=moderate);
4 / Severe (plaque elevation=marked, scaling=coarse, erythema=severe);
5 / Very Severe (plaque elevation=very marked, scaling=very coarse, erythema=very severe)."|Week 8|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822394|NCT01155570|Primary|Physician's Global Assessment at Week 4|"The Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) is a 6-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the physician's evaluation of the participant. The degree of overall lesion severity was evaluated using the following categories:
0 / Clear (plaque elevation=none, scaling=none, erythema=hyperpigmentation, pigmented macules, diffuse faint pink or red coloration);
1 / Minimal (plaque elevation=possible but difficult to ascertain whether there is a slight elevation above normal skin, scaling=surface dryness with some white coloration, erythema=up to moderate);
2 / Mild (plaque elevation=slight, scaling=fine, erythema=up to moderate);
3 / Moderate (plaque elevation=moderate, scaling=coarser, erythema=moderate);
4 / Severe (plaque elevation=marked, scaling=coarse, erythema=severe);
5 / Very Severe (plaque elevation=very marked, scaling=very coarse, erythema=very severe)."|Week 4|Observed cases: participants in the Efficacy Analysis Population with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822395|NCT01155570|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs), Serious Adverse Drug Reactions (SADRs), Deaths, and Discontinuations Due to AEs|This study was mandated by the Japanese government as an approval condition for Humira in Japan; therefore, definitions of adverse events and seriousness criteria were applicable as specified in the Japanese local standard operating procedures, based on local Japanese regulations. ADRs were defined as adverse events for which the causal relationship with Humira was other than “not related” (ie, “probable,” “possible,” or “unclear”). The count of participants with AEs presented in this table includes serious and nonserious AEs. The count of participants with discontinuations due to AEs includes those who discontinued due to an AE plus other reasons. Please see Safety section for further details regarding adverse events.|From study registration through Week 24|Safety Analysis Population||participants|||Number
822396|NCT01162863|Secondary|Change in Motility Pattern of the Small Bowel and Colon From Baseline as Defined by the Motility Index|Change in the motility index defined as the natural log [(sum of pressure amplitudes times the number of contractions) + 1] for the small bowel and colon based on a measurement done at baseline and then again at 3 weeks into the intervention.|21-28 days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822397|NCT01162863|Secondary|Change in Small Bowel pH and Colon pH From Baseline|Change in the mean pH of the small intestine and colon based on a measurement done at baseline and then again at 3 weeks into the intervention.|21-28 days|||pH||Standard Deviation|Mean
822398|NCT01162863|Primary|Change in Gastric Emptying Time, Small Bowel Transit Time, Colon Transit Time and Whole Gut Transit Time From Baseline|Change in gastric emptying time, small bowel transit time, colon transit time and whole gut transit time measured in hours based on a measurement done at baseline and then again at 3 weeks into the intervention within each treatment arm|21-28 days|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
822399|NCT01163032|Secondary|Number of Patients With a Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (Open Label Extension Phase Only)|Adverse events were recorded in the source documents from the time of the patient’s informed consent signature until the end of the patient’s study participation. An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation patient who does not necessarily have causal relationship with treatment.|6 months|One subject who rolled into the OLE from the randomized phase (tasimelteon) experienced an unrelated TEAE during the OLE phase.||participants|||Number
822430|NCT01163097|Primary|Ratio to Baseline of Lipase.|Ratio to baseline lipase at Day 5 was calculated as Day 5 lipase divided by baseline lipase.|Day 5|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment A and B only as per study plan.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822400|NCT01163032|Other Pre-specified|Proportion of Patients With a Clinical Response (Score of ≥ 2 on N24CRS)|"Non-24 Clinical Response Scale (N24CRS) was a 4-item scale which includes LQ-nTST, UQ-dTSD, MoST and CGI-C assessments. Each assessment is scored as a 1 or 0 depending on the pre-specified threshold (see below).
LQ-nTST: >45 minutes increase in average nighttime sleep duration; UQ-dTSD: >45 minutes decrease in average daytime sleep duration; MoST: >30 minutes increase and a standard deviation <2 hours during double-masked phase (6 months); CGI-C: <2.0 from the average of D112 and Day 183 compared to baseline"|6 months|Analysis Population: all patients in the ITT population that had at least 70% of 1 circadian cycle of nighttime total sleep data reported during each phase (screening and post-randomization)||percentage of patients|||Number
822401|NCT01163032|Post-Hoc|Proportion of Responders With a Combined Sleep/Wake Response for LQ-nTST (≥ 45 Minutes) and UQ-dTSD (≤ 45 Minutes)|Responder analysis with responder defined as an increase of 45 minutes or more in (LQ-nTST) and a decrease of 45 minutes or more in (UQ-dTSD).|6 months|Analysis Population: all patients in the ITT population that had at least 70% of 1 circadian cycle of nighttime total sleep data reported during each phase (screening and post-randomization)||percentage of patients|||Number
822402|NCT01163032|Secondary|Average Midpoint of Sleep (MoST)|Midpoint of Sleep Timing (MoST) is the measurement of the average midpoint of sleep time relative to bedtime. The average MoST value will trend to 0 as an individual's sleep becomes more fragmented. Improvement is defined as an increase in the average.|6 months|Analysis Population: all patients in the ITT population that had at least 70% of 1 circadian cycle of nighttime total sleep data reported during each phase (screening and post-randomization)||minutes||Standard Error|Mean
822403|NCT01163032|Secondary|Average Upper Quartile of Days of Subjective Daytime Sleep Duration (UQ-dTSD)|UQ-dTSD measures the difference in average daytime sleep during the patient's worst 25% of days (longest total daytime sleep) between the randomized phase (6 months) and the screening phase (~ 6 weeks). Lower number indicates improvement.|6 months|Analysis Population: all patients in the ITT population that had at least 70% of 1 circadian cycle of nighttime total sleep data reported during each phase (screening and post-randomization)||minutes||Standard Error|Mean
822404|NCT01163032|Secondary|Average Lower Quartile of Nights of Nighttime Total Sleep Time (LQ-nTST)|LQ-nTST measures the difference in average nighttime sleep during the patient's worst 25% of nights (shortest total nighttime sleep) between the randomized phase (6 months)and the screening phase (~ 6 weeks). The higher number indicates improvement.|6 months|Analysis Population: all patients in the ITT population that had at least 70% of 1 circadian cycle of nighttime total sleep data reported during each phase (screening and post-randomization)||minutes||Standard Error|Mean
822405|NCT01163032|Secondary|Proportion of Responders With a Combined Sleep/Wake Response for LQ-nTST (≥ 90 Minutes) and UQ-dTSD (≤ 90 Minutes)|The sleep/wake response represents measurement of the combined improvement in the nighttime sleep duration and daytime sleep duration. Individuals that have an improvement in nighttime sleep and daytime sleep, defined as an increase of 90 minutes or more in the lower quartile of subjective nighttime total sleep time (LQ-nTST) and a decrease of 90 minutes or more in the upper quartile of daytime total sleep duration (UQ-dTSD) are considered to be a responder.|6 months|Analysis Population: all patients in the ITT population that had at least 70% of 1 circadian cycle of nighttime total sleep data reported during each phase (screening and post-randomization)||percentage of patients|||Number
822406|NCT01163032|Secondary|Average Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C)|CGI-C scores range from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). The average post-randomization score was obtained for each patient by averaging the last 2 scheduled assessments (Day D112 and Day D183). Lower number indicates improvement.|Day 112 and 183|Analysis Population: all patients in the ITT population that had at least 70% of 1 circadian cycle of nighttime total sleep data reported during each phase (screening and post-randomization)||score||Standard Error|Mean
822407|NCT01163032|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Entrained as Assessed by Urinary Cortisol|Entrainment is a measure of synchronization of the master body clock to the 24-hour day. The circadian period (τ) was calculated using urinary cortisol collected over four 48 hour periods, approximately 1 week apart for 4 separate weeks, during the screening and month 1 of the randomization phase of the trial. Entrainment was defined as having a post-baseline τ value less than 24.1 and a 95% CI that included 24.0.|1 month|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all subjects randomized into the study that have τ calculated post-randomization.||percentage of patients|||Number
822408|NCT01163032|Other Pre-specified|Proportion of Patients With a Clinical Response (Score of ≥ 3 on N24CRS)|"Non-24 Clinical Response Scale (N24CRS) was a 4-item scale which includes LQ-nTST, UQ-dTSD, MoST and CGI-C assessments. Each assessment is scored as a 1 or 0 depending on the pre-specified threshold (see below).
LQ-nTST: >45 minutes increase in average nighttime sleep duration; UQ-dTSD: >45 minutes decrease in average daytime sleep duration; MoST: >30 minutes increase and a standard deviation <2 hours during double-masked phase (6 months); CGI-C: <2.0 from the average of D112 and Day 183 compared to baseline"|6 months|Analysis Population: all patients in the ITT population that had at least 70% of 1 circadian cycle of nighttime total sleep data reported during each phase (screening and post-randomization)||percentage of patients|||Number
822409|NCT01163032|Other Pre-specified|Proportion of Patients With a Clinical Response: Entrainment of aMT6 and Score of ≥ 2 on N24CRS|"Clinical response is defined as the coincident demonstration of entrainment (aMT6) and a score ≥ 2 on the Non-24 Clinical Response Scale (N24CRS) which includes LQ-nTST, UQ-dTSD, MoST and CGI-C assessments. Each assessment is scored as a 1 or 0 depending on the pre-specified threshold (see below).
LQ-nTST: >45 minutes increase in average nighttime sleep duration; UQ-dTSD: >45 minutes decrease in average daytime sleep duration; MoST: >30 minutes increase and a standard deviation <2 hours during double-masked phase (6 months); CGI-C: <2.0 from the average of D112 and Day 183 compared to baseline
For patients randomized to tasimelteon 20 mg and who also participated in the screening phase of Study 3203 (month 7 of treatment), the screening τ from Study 3203 was used if the patient did not become entrained in Study 3201 but did become entrained during the screening phase of Study 3203."|6 months|Analysis Population: all patients in the ITT population that had at least 70% of 1 circadian cycle of nighttime total sleep data reported during each phase (screening and post-randomization)||percentage of patients|||Number
822431|NCT01163097|Primary|Ratio to Baseline of Amylase|Ratio to baseline amylase at Day 5 was calculated as Day 5 amylase divided by baseline amylase.|Day 5|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment A and B only as per study plan.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822410|NCT01163032|Primary|Proportion of Patients With a Clinical Response: Entrainment of aMT6 and Score of ≥ 3 on N24CRS|"Clinical response is defined as the coincident demonstration of entrainment (aMT6) and a score ≥ 3 on the Non-24 Clinical Response Scale (N24CRS). N24CRS measures improvement in sleep-wake measures and overall functioning (LQ-nTST, UQ-dTSD, MoST and CGI-C). Each assessment is scored as a 1 or 0 depending on the pre-specified threshold (see below).
LQ-nTST: >45 minutes increase in average nighttime sleep duration; UQ-dTSD: >45 minutes decrease in average daytime sleep duration; MoST: >30 minutes increase and a standard deviation <2 hours during double-masked phase (6 months); CGI-C: <2.0 from the average of D112 and Day 183 compared to baseline
For patients randomized to tasimelteon 20 mg and who also participated in the screening phase of Study 3203 (month 7 of treatment), the screening τ from Study 3203 was used if the patient did not become entrained in Study 3201 but did become entrained during the screening phase of Study 3203."|6 months|Analysis Population: all patients in the ITT population that had at least 70% of 1 circadian cycle of nighttime total sleep data reported during each phase (screening and post-randomization)||percentage of patients|||Number
822411|NCT01163032|Primary|Proportion of Patients Entrained as Assessed by Urinary aMT6|Entrainment is a measure of synchronization of the master body clock to the 24-hour day. The circadian period (τ) was calculated using urinary aMT6s collected over four 48 hour periods , collected approximately 1 week apart for 4 separate weeks, during the screening and month 1 of the randomization phase of the trial. Entrainment was defined as having a post-baseline τ value less than 24.1 and a 95% CI that included 24.0.|1 month|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all subjects randomized into the study that have τ calculated post-randomization.||percentage of patients|||Number
822412|NCT01163097|Secondary|Ratio to Baseline of Albumin/Creatinine|"The albumin/creatinine ratio is the urinary albumin (mg) divided by the urinary creatinine (g) result at the specified time point.
Ratio to baseline was calculated as albumin/creatinine ratio at specified day divided by baseline albumin/creatinine ratio."|Day 4|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment B and C only as per study plan.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
822413|NCT01163097|Secondary|Ratio to Baseline of Albumin/Creatinine|"The albumin/creatinine ratio is the urinary albumin (mg) divided by the urinary creatinine (g) result at the specified time point.
Ratio to baseline was calculated as albumin/creatinine ratio at specified day divided by baseline albumin/creatinine ratio."|Day 3|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment B and C only as per study plan.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
822414|NCT01163097|Secondary|Ratio to Baseline of Albumin/Creatinine|"The albumin/creatinine ratio is the urinary albumin (mg) divided by the urinary creatinine (g) result at the specified time point.
Ratio to baseline was calculated as albumin/creatinine ratio at specified day divided by baseline albumin/creatinine ratio."|Day 2|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment B and C only as per study plan.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
822415|NCT01163097|Secondary|Ratio to Baseline of Albumin/Creatinine|"The albumin/creatinine ratio is the urinary albumin (mg) divided by the urinary creatinine (g) result at the specified time point.
Ratio to baseline was calculated as albumin/creatinine ratio at specified day divided by baseline albumin/creatinine ratio."|Day 1|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment B and C only as per study plan.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
822416|NCT01163097|Secondary|Ratio to Baseline of Protein/Creatinine|"Protein/creatinine ratio is the urinary protein (mg) divided by the urinary creatinine (g) result.
Ratio to baseline protein/creatinine ratio was calculated as protein/creatinine ratio at specified day divided by baseline protein/creatinine ratio."|Day 3|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment B and C only as per study plan.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
822417|NCT01163097|Secondary|Ratio to Baseline of Protein/Creatinine|"Protein/creatinine ratio is the urinary protein (mg) divided by the urinary creatinine (g) result.
Ratio to baseline protein/creatinine ratio was calculated as protein/creatinine ratio at specified day divided by baseline protein/creatinine ratio."|Day 2|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment B and C only as per study plan.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
822418|NCT01163097|Secondary|Ratio to Baseline of Protein/Creatinine|"Protein/creatinine ratio is the urinary protein (mg) divided by the urinary creatinine (g) result.
Ratio to baseline protein/creatinine ratio was calculated as protein/creatinine ratio at specified day divided by baseline protein/creatinine ratio."|Day 1|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment B and C only as per study plan.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
822419|NCT01163097|Secondary|Subject Incidence of Proteinuria|"Protein/creatinine ratio is the urinary protein (mg) divided by the urinary creatinine (g) result at the specified time point.
Incidence of proteinuria defined as urinary protein/creatinine ratio exceeding 200 mg/g was calculated at Day 4 and overall at any time point. Incidence was calculated by treatment as number of subjects with proteinuria divided by the total number of subjects."|Day 4|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment B and C only as per study plan.||participants|||Number
822420|NCT01163097|Secondary|Subject Incidence of Treatment-emergent Adverse Event|Adverse events (AE) was considered treatment emergent if the AE started after the time of heparin titration (Treatment A), palifermin dosing on Day 1 (Treatment B), or set zero point (Treatment C).|Day 45|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C)||participants|||Number
822849|NCT01158924|Primary|Treatment Emergent Adverse Events- Relationship to Study Drug|Number of patients with Treatment Emergent Adverse Events that were designated as related or possibly related to Study Drug.|Through a 12 month period and annual telephone contact at 24 and 36 months for subject health status follow-up.|Safety Population||participants|||Number
822421|NCT01163097|Secondary|Palifermin PK Parameters: Vss|"Blood samples for palifermin PK was collected pre-dose on Days 1 and 3 of the treatment period; 2, 5, 15 and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after the Day 1 and Day 3 dose of palifermin (Treatment A and Treatment B only).
Descriptive pharmacokinetic parameters for palifermin Vss was determined by linear/log trapezoidal method. Parameters was calculated from individual subject serum concentration-time data using actual subject blood collection times. Serum concentrations reported below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was treated as zero."|Day 3|The pharmacokinetics population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) and at least one post dose PK serum sample||mL/Kg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822422|NCT01163097|Secondary|Palifermin PK Parameters: Apparent Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|"Blood samples for palifermin PK was collected pre-dose on Days 1 and 3 of the treatment period; 2, 5, 15 and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after the Day 1 and Day 3 dose of palifermin (Treatment A and Treatment B only).
Descriptive pharmacokinetic parameters for palifermin Vss was determined by linear/log trapezoidal method. Parameters was calculated from individual subject serum concentration-time data using actual subject blood collection times. Serum concentrations reported below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was treated as zero."|Day 1|The pharmacokinetics population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) and at least one post dose PK serum sample||mL/kg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822423|NCT01163097|Secondary|Palifermin PK Parameters: C0|"Blood samples for palifermin PK was collected pre-dose on Days 1 and 3 of the treatment period; 2, 5, 15 and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after the Day 1 and Day 3 dose of palifermin.
Descriptive pharmacokinetic parameters for palifermin C0 was determined by linear/log trapezoidal method. Parameters was calculated from individual subject serum concentration-time data using actual subject blood collection times. Serum concentrations reported below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was treated as zero."|Day 3|The pharmacokinetics population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) and at least one post dose PK serum sample||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822424|NCT01163097|Secondary|Palifermin PK Parameters: Estimated Concentration at Time 0 (C0)|"Blood samples for palifermin PK was collected pre-dose on Days 1 and 3 of the treatment period; 2, 5, 15 and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after the Day 1 and Day 3 dose of palifermin.
Descriptive pharmacokinetic parameters for palifermin C0 was determined by linear/log trapezoidal method. Parameters was calculated from individual subject serum concentration-time data using actual subject blood collection times. Serum concentrations reported below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was treated as zero."|Day 1|The pharmacokinetics population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) and at least one post dose PK serum sample||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822425|NCT01163097|Secondary|Palifermin PK Parameters: AUC (0-24)|"Blood samples for palifermin PK was collected pre-dose on Days 1 and 3 of the treatment period; 2, 5, 15 and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after the Day 1 and Day 3 dose of palifermin.
Descriptive pharmacokinetic parameters for palifermin AUC(0-24) was determined by linear/log trapezoidal method. Parameters was calculated from individual subject serum concentration-time data using actual subject blood collection times. Serum concentrations reported below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was deleted from calculation."|Day 3|The pharmacokinetics population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) and at least one post dose PK serum sample||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822426|NCT01163097|Secondary|Palifermin PK Parameters: Area Under the Serum Curve (AUC) (0-24)|"Blood samples for palifermin PK was collected pre-dose on Days 1 and 3 of the treatment period; 2, 5, 15 and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after the Day 1 and Day 3 dose of palifermin.
Descriptive pharmacokinetic parameters for palifermin AUC(0-24) was determined by linear/log trapezoidal method. Parameters was calculated from individual subject serum concentration-time data using actual subject blood collection times. Serum concentrations reported below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was deleted from calculation."|Day 1|The pharmacokinetics population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) and at least one post dose PK serum sample||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822427|NCT01163097|Secondary|Palifermin PK Parameters: CL|"Blood samples for palifermin PK was collected pre-dose on Days 1 and 3 of the treatment period; 2, 5, 15 and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after the Day 1 and Day 3 dose of palifermin.
Descriptive PK parameters for palifermin CL for subjects assigned to Treatment A and Treatment B was determined by linear/log trapezoidal method. Parameters was calculated from individual subject serum concentration-time data using actual subject blood collection times. Serum concentrations reported below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was treated as zero."|Day 3|The pharmacokinetics population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) and at least one post dose PK serum sample||(mL/hr/kg)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822428|NCT01163097|Secondary|Palifermin Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameters: Clearance (CL)|"Blood samples for palifermin PK was collected pre-dose on Days 1 and 3 of the treatment period; 2, 5, 15 and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after the Day 1 and Day 3 dose of palifermin.
Descriptive PK parameters for palifermin CL for subjects assigned to Treatment A and Treatment B was determined by linear/log trapezoidal method. Parameters was calculated from individual subject serum concentration-time data using actual subject blood collection times. Serum concentrations reported below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was treated as zero."|Day 1|The pharmacokinetics (PK) population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) and at least one post dose PK serum sample||(mL/hr/kg)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822429|NCT01163097|Primary|Ratio to Baseline of Protein/Creatinine|"Protein/creatinine ratio is the urinary protein (mg) divided by the urinary creatinine (g) result.
Ratio to baseline protein/creatinine ratio was calculated as protein/creatinine ratio at specified day divided by baseline protein/creatinine ratio."|Day 4|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B) or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment B and C only as per study plan.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822432|NCT01163097|Primary|Incidence of Grade 2 or Higher Specific Skin-related Adverse Events.|"Incidence of grade 2 or higher specific skin-related treatment emergent adverse events following palifermin administration was calculated for subjects in treatment groups A and B. Incidence was calculated by treatment as number of subjects with grade 2 or higher specific skin-related AEs divided by the total number of subjects.
The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v3.0) for Dermatology/Skin was used to determine the toxicity grade for a skin-related adverse event. (http://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/electronic_applications/docs/ctcaev3.pdf)"|Day 45|The safety population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B), or who had a set zero point (Treatment C). This outcome was assessed for Treatment A and B only as per study plan.||proportion of participants|||Number
822433|NCT01163097|Primary|Ratio to Baseline of Epithelial Cell Proliferation as Assessed by Ki67 Staining of Buccal Mucosal Tissue.|This outcome is a measure of the palifermin effect on the buccal mucosal cells. Ki67 is a measure of proliferation of cells in the buccal mucosa. This measure assess the number of cells per millimeter (mm) before and after palifermin treatment.|Day 4|The pharmacodynamic population consist of all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of palifermin (Treatment A or B), or who had a set zero point (Treatment C) and had both baseline and Day 4 buccal biopsy samples collected. This analysis was only performed for Treatment A relative to Treatment B as per study plan.||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822434|NCT01163253|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Answered Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU)|Ps-HCRU was a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. In the first section, it assessed direct costs associated with healthcare resource use which included participant’s interactions with healthcare providers such as general practitioners, dermatologists, cardiologists, gastroenterologists, psychiatrists, surgeons and nurses. When taking the evening dose of tofacitinib, participants were asked to answer the Ps-HCRU questionnaire only if they had an interaction with a healthcare provider or their work was impacted by psoriasis on that specified day. In this outcome measure, number of participants who answered Ps-HCRU at any specified visits were reported.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
822435|NCT01163253|Secondary|Euro Quality of Life-5-Dimensions (EQ-5D)-Visual Analogue Scale Scores (VAS)|EQ-5D VAS was a participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. It was a visual analogue scale that ranged from 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum), with higher scores indicating a better health condition.|Baseline, Month 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822436|NCT01163253|Secondary|Euro Quality of Life- 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D)-Utility Scores|EQ-5D: participant rated 5-dimension (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression) questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Each dimension was assessed on a 3-point scale (1=no problems, 2=some problems, 3=extreme problems, where higher scores=worse health condition). The responses from the 5 dimensions were used to calculate a single utility index value. Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigned a utility value for each dimension in the profile. Score was transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicated a better health state.|Baseline, Month 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822437|NCT01163253|Secondary|Number of Participants With Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) Response of “Clear” or “Almost Clear”|The PtGA evaluated the overall skin disease of participants at that point in time on a single-item. Participants provided their response on a 5-point scale ranges from: 0=clear, 1=almost clear, 2=mild, 3=moderate, 4=severe. Higher score indicated greater severity of disease. Participants who provided their response as “clear (score of 0)” or “almost clear (score of 1)” in PtGA at each specified visit were reported in this outcome measure.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||participants|||Number
822438|NCT01163253|Secondary|36-Item Short-Form (SF-36) Health Survey Version 2, Acute: Mental Component Summary Scores|The SF-36 questionnaire, version 2 was a 36-item generic health status measure. SF-36 evaluated 8 health-related aspects of an individual: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, social functioning, mental health, role emotional, vitality, and general health. The score range for each of the 8 health aspects ranged from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores indicating good health condition. Two summary scale scores were computed from the 8 health aspect scores: the Physical Component Summary and the Mental Component Summary. Score range for both summary scale ranged from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores indicating good health condition.|Baseline, Month 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822461|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in QRS Complex, PR, QT, QTcB, QTcF and RR Interval at Month 24||Baseline, Month 24|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
822880|NCT01159262|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Received Rescue Medication for Analgesia During Dexmedetomidine Infusion||During Study drug administration (6 to 24 hours)|Efficacy Evaluable Population: All subjects who received randomized Dexmedetomidine for at least 6 hours.||percentage of subjects|||Number
822439|NCT01163253|Secondary|36-Item Short-Form (SF-36) Health Survey Version 2, Acute: Physical Component Summary Scores|The SF-36 questionnaire, version 2, acute was a 36-item generic health status measure. SF-36 evaluated 8 health-related aspects of an individual: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, social functioning, mental health, role emotional, vitality, and general health. The score range for each of the 8 health aspects ranged from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores indicating good health condition. Two summary scale scores were computed from the 8 health aspect scores: physical component summary score and mental component summary score. Score range for both summary scales ranged from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores indicating good health condition.|Baseline, Month 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822440|NCT01163253|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Scores at Month 1, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48|The DLQI was a validated, self-administered, 10-item quality-of-life questionnaire that consisted of 10 items that assessed the impact of skin disease on quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). Each question was scored on a scale of 0=not at all/not relevant to 3=very much. Response from all of the 10 questions were added to derive the DLQI total scores. Total DLQI scores ranges from 0=not at all to 30=very much, with higher scores indicating greater impairment in quality of life.|Baseline, Month 1, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822441|NCT01163253|Secondary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Scores|The DLQI was a validated, self-administered, 10-item quality-of-life questionnaire that consisted of 10 items that assessed the impact of skin disease on quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). Each question was scored on a scale of 0=not at all/not relevant to 3=very much. Response from all of the 10 questions were added to derive the DLQI total scores. Total DLQI scores ranges from 0=not at all to 30=very much, with higher scores indicating greater impairment in quality of life.|Baseline, Month 1, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822442|NCT01163253|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Itch Severity Item (ISI) Scores at Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48|ISI assessed severity of itching due to psoriasis. ISI was a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate their 'severity of itching' due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms '0=no itching' and '10=worst possible itching' at the ends. Higher scores indicated greater severity of itching.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822443|NCT01163253|Secondary|Itch Severity Item (ISI) Scores|ISI assessed severity of itching due to psoriasis. ISI was a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate their 'severity of itching' due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms '0=no itching' and '10=worst possible itching' at the ends. Higher scores indicated greater severity of itching.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822444|NCT01163253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 125 Percent Increase From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Scores|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Each component of severity, that is, erythema, induration and scaling was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck [h], upper limbs [u], trunk [t] and lower limbs [l]) on a 5-point scale ranging from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity. Final PASI score = 0.1Ah (Eh + Ih + Sh) + 0.2Au (Eu + Iu + Su) + 0.3At (Et + It + St) + 0.4Al (El + Il + Sl), where head and neck: 0.1; upper limbs: 0.2; trunk: 0.3; lower limbs: 0.4. Percentage of participants with >=125% increase from baseline in PASI scores were reported.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822451|NCT01163253|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Component Scores: Induration|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Induration was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs) on a 5-point scale ranges from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822445|NCT01163253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 90 Percent Reduction From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Scores|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Each component of severity, that is, erythema, induration and scaling was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck [h], upper limbs [u], trunk [t] and lower limbs [l]) on a 5-point scale ranging from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity. Final PASI score = 0.1Ah (Eh + Ih + Sh) + 0.2Au (Eu + Iu + Su) + 0.3At (Et + It + St) + 0.4Al (El + Il + Sl), where head and neck: 0.1; upper limbs: 0.2; trunk: 0.3; lower limbs: 0.4. Percentage of participants with >=90% reduction from baseline in PASI scores were reported.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822446|NCT01163253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 50 Percent Reduction From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Scores|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Each component of severity, that is, erythema, induration and scaling was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck [h], upper limbs [u], trunk [t] and lower limbs [l]) on a 5-point scale ranging from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity. Final PASI score = 0.1Ah (Eh + Ih + Sh) + 0.2Au (Eu + Iu + Su) + 0.3At (Et + It + St) + 0.4Al (El + Il + Sl), where head and neck: 0.1; upper limbs: 0.2; trunk: 0.3; lower limbs: 0.4. Percentage of participants with >=50% reduction from baseline in PASI scores were reported.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822447|NCT01163253|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Component Scores: Scaling at Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Scaling was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs) on a 5-point scale ranges from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822448|NCT01163253|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Component Scores: Induration at Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Induration was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs) on a 5-point scale ranges from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822449|NCT01163253|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Component Scores: Erythema at Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Erythema was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs) on a 5-point scale ranges from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822450|NCT01163253|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Component Scores: Scaling|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Scaling was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs) on a 5-point scale ranges from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822459|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in QRS Complex, PR, QT, QTcB, QTcF and RR Interval at Month 48||Baseline, Month 48|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
822452|NCT01163253|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Component Scores: Erythema|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Erythema was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs) on a 5-point scale ranges from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822453|NCT01163253|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Scores at Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Each component of severity, that is, erythema, induration and scaling was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck [h], upper limbs [u], trunk [t] and lower limbs [l]) on a 5-point scale ranging from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity. Final PASI score = 0.1Ah (Eh + Ih + Sh) + 0.2Au (Eu + Iu + Su) + 0.3At (Et + It + St) + 0.4Al (El + Il + Sl), where head and neck: 0.1; upper limbs: 0.2; trunk: 0.3; lower limbs: 0.4.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822454|NCT01163253|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Scores|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Each component of severity, that is, erythema, induration and scaling was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck [h], upper limbs [u], trunk [t] and lower limbs [l]) on a 5-point scale ranging from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity. Final PASI score = 0.1Ah (Eh + Ih + Sh) + 0.2Au (Eu + Iu + Su) + 0.3At (Et + It + St) + 0.4Al (El + Il + Sl), where head and neck: 0.1; upper limbs: 0.2; trunk: 0.3; lower limbs: 0.4.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822455|NCT01163253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 75 Percent Reduction From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Scores|PASI score is the combined assessment of lesion severity (estimated by 3 components: of erythema, induration and scaling) and area affected into single score range: 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease), with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Each component of severity, that is, erythema, induration and scaling was assessed separately for four body areas (head and neck [h], upper limbs [u], trunk [t] and lower limbs [l]) on a 5-point scale ranging from 0=no involvement, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Higher score indicates greater severity. Final PASI score = 0.1Ah (Eh + Ih + Sh) + 0.2Au (Eu + Iu + Su) + 0.3At (Et + It + St) + 0.4Al (El + Il + Sl), where head and neck: 0.1; upper limbs: 0.2; trunk: 0.3; lower limbs: 0.4. Percentage of participants with >=75 percent (%) reduction from baseline in PASI scores were reported.|Baseline, Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822456|NCT01163253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Physician Global Assessment (PGA) Response of 'Clear' or 'Almost Clear'|The PGA of psoriasis was scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema (E), induration (I), and scaling (S) across all psoriatic lesions in participants. The severity rating scores (Erythema: 0= no evidence of erythema to 4= dark, deep red; Induration: 0= no evidence of plaque elevation to 4= marked plaque elevation, hard/sharp borders; Scaling: 0= no evidence of scaling to 4= thick, coarse scale predominates) were summed (E + I + S = total) and the average (total/3) was taken. The total average was rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA. The 5-point scale for PGA was: 0= clear; 1= almost clear; 2= mild; 3= moderate; 4= severe, where higher score indicated more severity of psoriasis. Percentage of participants with response of 'clear' (score of '0') and 'almost clear' (score of '1') were reported.|Month 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48|Full analysis set (FAS) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, excluding the participants who had compliance issues. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies participants evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822457|NCT01163253|Primary|Number of Participants With Malignancy Events|Malignancy events included lymphoma, and demyelinating neurologic events. Biopsies collected for malignancy events were submitted to the central laboratory for pathologist over-read.|Baseline up to 4 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to a maximum of 67 months)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
822458|NCT01163253|Primary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Cardiovascular Events|Adjudicated cardiovascular events were assessed by adjudication committee as independent reviewers based on event documentation including: hospital discharge summaries, operative reports, clinic notes, ECGs, diagnostic enzymes, results of other diagnostic tests, autopsy reports and death certificate information; as applicable.|Baseline up to 4 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to a maximum of 67 months)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
822462|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in QRS Complex, PR, QT, QTcB, QTcF and RR Interval at Month 12||Baseline, Month 12|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
822463|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in QRS Complex, PR, QT, QTcB, QTcF and RR Interval at Month 6||Baseline, Month 6|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||milliseconds (msec)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822464|NCT01163253|Primary|Number of Participants With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities|Criteria for ECG abnormality: PR interval >=300 milliseconds (msec); QT interval >=500 msec; QTcB (Bazett’s Correction) and QTcF (Fridericia’s Correction) 450 to <480 msec, 480 to <500 msec and >=500 msec.|Baseline up to 4 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to a maximum of 67 months)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
822465|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Month 48||Baseline, Month 48|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
822466|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Month 36||Baseline, Month 36|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
822467|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Month 24||Baseline, Month 24|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
822468|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Month 12||Baseline, Month 12|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
822469|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Month 6||Baseline, Month 6|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
822470|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Month 3||Baseline, Month 3|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
822471|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Month 1||Baseline, Month 1|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
822472|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) and Diastolic BP at Month 48||Baseline, Month 48|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822473|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) and Diastolic BP at Month 36||Baseline, Month 36|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822474|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) and Diastolic BP at Month 24||Baseline, Month 24|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822475|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) and Diastolic BP at Month 12||Baseline, Month 12|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822476|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) and Diastolic BP at Month 6||Baseline, Month 6|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822477|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) and Diastolic BP at Month 3||Baseline, Month 3|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822478|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) and Diastolic BP at Month 1||Baseline, Month 1|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||millimeter of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822479|NCT01163253|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Sign Abnormalities|Criteria for abnormalities in vital signs included: Systolic blood pressure (SBP): less than (<) 90 millimeter of mercury (mmHg) and maximum increase from baseline (IFB) of greater than or equal to (>=) 30 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure (DBP): <50 and greater than (>) 120 mmHg and maximum IFB of >=20 mmHg; heart rate: <40 and >120 beats per minute.|Baseline up to 4 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to a maximum of 67 months)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||participants|||Number
822480|NCT01163253|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Change From Baseline in Physical Examination|Physical examinations included: general appearance; skin, head, eyes, ears, nose and throat; heart; lungs; abdomen; lower extremities (for the presence of peripheral edema) and lymph nodes. Clinical significance of change from baseline values in physical examination was based on investigator's discretion.|Baseline up to 4 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to a maximum of 67 months)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
822481|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) and Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Month 48||Baseline, Month 48|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822482|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) and Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Month 36||Baseline, Month 36|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822483|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) and Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Month 24||Baseline, Month 24|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822484|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) and Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Month 12||Baseline, Month 12|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822485|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) and Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Month 6||Baseline, Month 6|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822486|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) and Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Month 3||Baseline, Month 3|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822487|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) and Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Month 1||Baseline, Month 1|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||international unit per liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822488|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine, Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C), High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) and Total Cholesterol (TC) Levels at Month 48||Baseline, Month 48|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822489|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine, Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C), High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) and Total Cholesterol (TC) Levels at Month 36||Baseline, Month 36|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822490|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine, Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C), High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) and Total Cholesterol (TC) Levels at Month 24||Baseline, Month 24|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822491|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine, Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C), High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) and Total Cholesterol (TC) Levels at Month 12||Baseline, Month 12|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822492|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine, Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C), High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) and Total Cholesterol (TC) Levels at Month 6||Baseline, Month 6|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822493|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine, Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C), High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) and Total Cholesterol (TC) Levels at Month 3||Baseline, Month 3|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822494|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine, Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C), High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) and Total Cholesterol (TC) Levels at Month 1||Baseline, Month 1|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||milligram per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822495|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Lymphocyte and Neutrophil Count at Month 48||Baseline, Month 48|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||1000 cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
822496|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Lymphocyte and Neutrophil Count at Month 36||Baseline, Month 36|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||1000 cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
822497|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Lymphocyte and Neutrophil Count at Month 24||Baseline, Month 24|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||1000 cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
822498|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Lymphocyte and Neutrophil Count at Month 12||Baseline, Month 12|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||1000 cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
822499|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Lymphocyte and Neutrophil Count at Month 6||Baseline, Month 6|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||1000 cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
822500|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Lymphocyte and Neutrophil Count at Month 3||Baseline, Month 3|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||1000 cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
822501|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Lymphocyte and Neutrophil Count at Month 1||Baseline, Month 1|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||1000 cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
822502|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin Level at Month 48||Baseline, Month 48|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822503|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin Level at Month 36||Baseline, Month 36|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822504|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin Level at Month 24||Baseline, Month 24|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822505|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin Level at Month 12||Baseline, Month 12|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822506|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin Level at Month 6||Baseline, Month 6|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822507|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin Level at Month 3||Baseline, Month 3|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822508|NCT01163253|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin Level at Month 1||Baseline, Month 1|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'number of participants analyzed' signifies participants evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm, respectively.||gram per deciliter (g/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822509|NCT01163253|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Abnormalities|Abnormality criteria: hematology (hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell <0.8*lower limit of normal [LLN]; reticulocyte<0.5*LLN,>1.5*ULN; platelets<0.5*LLN,>1.75* upper limit of normal [ULN]; WBC<0.6*LLN, >1.5*ULN; lymphocytes, neutrophils, basophils, eosinophils, monocytes<0.8*LLN; >1.2*ULN; coagulation (prothrombin [PT], PT ratio>1.1*ULN) liver function (bilirubin>1.5*ULN, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, gamma GT>0.3*ULN, protein, albumin<0.8*LLN; >1.2*ULN, globulin<0.5*LLN; >1.5*ULN); renal function (blood urea nitrogen, creatinine>1.3*ULN); electrolytes(sodium<0.95* LLN; >1.05* ULN, potassium, chloride, calcium, bicarbonate<0.9*LLN; >1.1*ULN), chemistry (glucose<0.6*LLN; >1.5* ULN), urinalysis (pH <4.5;>8, glucose, ketones, protein, blood, urobilinogen, nitrite, bilirubin, leukocyte esterase>=1; RBC, WBC>=20); lipids (cholesterol [C], LDL-C >1.3*ULN, HDL-C<0.8*LLN, triglycerides>1.3* ULN), hormones(T4, T3, T4, TSH<0.8* LLN; >1.2* ULN).|Baseline up to 4 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to a maximum of 67 months)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, ‘number of participants analyzed’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
822606|NCT01163916|Primary|Characteristics of Patients Prescribed Adalimumab: Residence Status|Participants were asked to indicate their residence status within the Russian Federation at the Baseline visit.|Baseline|||participants|||Number
822607|NCT01163916|Primary|Characteristics of Patients Prescribed Adalimumab: Occupation|Participants were asked to indicate their occupation at the Baseline visit.|Baseline|||participants|||Number
822510|NCT01163253|Primary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. AEs were classified according to the severity in 3 categories: a) mild: AEs did not interfere with participant’s usual function; b) moderate: AEs interfered to some extent with participant’s usual function; c) severe: AEs interfered significantly with participant’s usual function.|Baseline up to 4 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to a maximum of 67 months)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||adverse events|||Number
822511|NCT01163253|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study drug and up to 4 weeks after last dose (up to 67 months) that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. AEs included both serious and non-serious adverse events.|Baseline up to 4 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to a maximum of 67 months)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
822512|NCT01163266|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score at Week 8|The Sheehan Disability Scale assesses functional impairment in 3 domains: work/school, social life or leisure activities, and home life or family responsibilities. The participant rates the extent to which each aspect is impaired on a 10-point visual analog scale, from 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely). The 3 scores are added together to calculate the total score, which ranges from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating more impairment. LS means were from mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) ANCOVA with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline SDS total score-by-week as fixed effects.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822513|NCT01163266|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in MADRS Remission at Week 8|Remission is defined as a participant with a Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≤10. The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 to 6. The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). Decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement.|Week 8|Full analysis set, last observation carried forward was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
822514|NCT01163266|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MADRS Total Score at Week 8 in Participants With Baseline Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) Total Score ≥20|"The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 (normal) to 6 (most abnormal). The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). A decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement. LS means are from a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) ANCOVA with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline MADRS total score-by-week as fixed effects.
The HAM-A is a 14 item rating scale to quantify anxiety severity rated on a 5-point scale from 0 (not present) to 4 (severe) with a total score range from 0 to 56, where lower scores indicate mild severity."|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set patients with a HAM-A Baseline score ≥20. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822515|NCT01163266|Secondary|Mean Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 8|The Clinical Global Impression-Global Improvement scale assesses the participant's improvement (or worsening) as assessed by the clinician relative to Baseline on a 7-point scale: 1, very much improved; 2, much improved; 3, minimally improved; 4, no change; 5, minimally worse; 6, much worse; or 7, very much worse. LS means were from a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) ANCOVA with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity of Illness Scale (CGI-S) score-by-week as fixed effects.|Week 8|Full Analysis Set. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822516|NCT01163266|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a MADRS Response at Week 8|Response is defined as a participant with a ≥50% decrease in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from Baseline. The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 to 6. The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). Decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set, last observation carried forward was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
822517|NCT01163266|Primary|Change From Baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score|The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 (normal) to 6 (most abnormal). The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). A decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement. Least squares (LS) means are from a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline MADRS total score-by-week as fixed effects.|Baseline and Week 8|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, and had at least 1 valid postbaseline value for assessment of primary efficacy. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822518|NCT01163279|Secondary|DKEFS Trail Making- Condition 4: Number-letter Switching|DKEFS trail making condition 4 is a measure of executive function that requires the participant to switch back and forth between connecting numbers and letters in a sequence|Baseline, Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||Time in seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
822519|NCT01163279|Secondary|DKEFS Word Fluency|This is a measure of executive function where participants are given a letter and asked to generate as many words as they can think of within 60 seconds|Baseline, Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||Number of words generated||Standard Deviation|Mean
822520|NCT01163279|Secondary|DKEFS Tower Test- Achievement Score|This is a measure of executive function. Total achievement scores indicate the highest score participants scored on the test. The lowest score possible is 0 and the highest score possible is 30. Higher scores indicate better performance.|Baseline, Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822521|NCT01163279|Secondary|Delis Kaplan Executive Function System (DKEFS) Tower Test- Mean First-Move Time|This is a measure of executive function. The score reflects the average of the participant's first-move times, i.e. the time a participant took to make the first move|Baseline, Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||Time in seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
822522|NCT01163279|Secondary|Stanford Patient Education Research Center- Visits to Physician and Emergency Department in the Past Six Months Subscale|Stanford Patient Education Research Center has different measures of health related behaviors. Visits to physician and emergency department in the past six months subscale is one of the subscales.|Baseline, Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||number of visits||Standard Deviation|Mean
822523|NCT01163279|Secondary|Stanford Patient Education Research Center- Communication With Physicians Subscale|Stanford Patient Education Research Center has different measures of health related behaviors. communication with physicians is one of the subscales. Scores range 1-15 and higher score indicates more preparation for visits and greater ability to ask questions|Baseline, Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822524|NCT01163279|Secondary|Stanford Patient Education Research Center- Physical Activity Subscale|Stanford Patient Education Research Center has different measures of health related behaviors. Physical activity is one of the subscales. Scores indicate number of hours of physical activity per week|Baseline, Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||hours of physical activity/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
822525|NCT01163279|Secondary|Stanford Patient Education Research Center- Health Distress Subscale|Stanford Patient Education Research Center has different measures of health related behaviors. Health distress is one of the subscales. Scores range 0-20 and higher score indicates more distress.|Baseline, Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822526|NCT01163279|Secondary|Stanford Patient Education Research Center- General Health Subscale|Stanford Patient Education Research Center has different measures of health related behaviors. General Health is one of the subscales. scores range 1-5 and higher score indicate better general health|Baseline, Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822527|NCT01163279|Secondary|General Self Efficacy Scale (GSE)|GSE is a self efficacy scale with a minimum score of 10 and a maximum score of 40. Higher scores indicate higher self efficacy|Baseline, Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||Scores on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822528|NCT01163279|Primary|Total Number of Goals Improved to Criterion on the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM)|COPM is a standardized semi-structure interview in which participants identify goals related to everyday life activities. Goals considered improved to criterion are those that had 2 or more points increase on COPM ratings.|Immediately post intervention (2 months) and 3 months later|Intention to treat analysis was done therefore, the analysis population includes all participants who were randomized (n=19).||percentage of untrained goals improved|Total number of goals||Number
822529|NCT01163292|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|Adverse events (AEs) were collected from week 0 till the end of the study. Please see Adverse Event section below for more details.|Week 0 to Week 52|All participants registered||participants|||Number
822530|NCT01163292|Secondary|Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI)|Participants assessed their ability to perform the following tasks: 1) dress/groom; 2) arise; 3) eat; 4) walk; 5) reach; 6) grip; 7) maintain hygiene; and 8) maintain daily activity. Participants assessed their ability to do these tasks over the past week by marking their response on a questionnaire. Possible responses/scores included the following: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Negative mean changes from baseline in the disability index of the HAQ-DI indicated improvement.|Weeks 0, 26, and 52|All participants with post-baseline HAQ-DI data, using LOCF imputation method||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822531|NCT01163292|Secondary|Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) Change From Week 0 to Week 52|Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) is a method of assessing radiographs used in evaluation of inhibition of joint destruction of disease. Digitized X-rays of hands and feet were obtained, then scored in a blinded manner: for erosion (0 [no damage] to 5 [complete collapse or total destruction of joint]) and for joint space narrowing (0 [no damage] to 4 [complete luxation of joint]). Sum of scores was given as total mTSS (0 [normal] to 380 [maximal disease]). Large positive change in mTSS indicates disease progression; small positive/no change indicates slowing/halting of disease progression.|Week 0 to Week 52|All participants with post-baseline mTSS data, using LOCF imputation method||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822532|NCT01163292|Secondary|Matrix Metalloprotease-3 (MMP-3)|MMP-3 level in serum. Positive = >/= 121.0 ng/mL (male) and 59.7 ng/mL (female)|Weeks 0, 26, and 52|All participants with post-baseline MMP-3 data, using LOCF imputation method||units on a scale|||Number
822608|NCT01163916|Primary|Characteristics of Patients Prescribed Adalimumab: Education Level|Participants were asked to indicate their highest education level at the Baseline visit: secondary school, vocational school or college, university graduate, current university student, or other.|Baseline|||participants|||Number
824513|NCT01175018|Secondary|Incidence of Heart Failure|Difference between the anakinra arm and the placebo arm in number of patients with a new diagnosis or admission to the hospital for heart failure|10-14 weeks|||participants|||Number
822533|NCT01163292|Primary|Disease Activity Score (DAS28)|The Disease Activity Score (DAS28) is a combined index used to measure disease activity in participants with rheumatoid arthritis. Calculation of the DAS28 score used the tender joint count (28 joints), swollen joint count (28 joints), patient's global assessment of disease activity, and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). DAS 28 (ESR) scores range from 0 (no disease activity) to 9 (maximal disease activity); decrease is indicative of improvement in disease activity.|Weeks 0, 26, and 52|All participants with post-baseline DAS28 data, using last-observation-carried forward (LOCF) imputation method.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822534|NCT01163318|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (MHAQ) Score ≤ 0.5 by Visit|MHAQ was a participant-reported questionnaire that measured quality of life in terms of physical function of participants with rheumatic diseases. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past 6 months using the following response categories (score): without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score from 0 to 3, where 0 represented no disability and 3 very severe, high-dependency disability. MHAQ score ≤ 0.5 was defined as clinical remission, signifying normal physical function. Data are presented as percentage of participants.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 24, Year 1, Year 1.5, Year 2, Year 2.5, and Year 3|Efficacy analysis set, defined as safety analysis set excluding participants without evaluable DAS28-4ESR score and lack of Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (MHAQ) data prior to drug administration.||Percentage of participants|||Number
822535|NCT01163318|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score 28 - 4 Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-4ESR) < 2.6 by Visit|DAS28-4ESR, a combined index that measured activity of rheumatoid arthritis, was calculated based on: (1) the number of tender joints among 28 joints evaluated; (2) the number of swollen joints among 28 joints evaluated; (3) general health evaluated by a visual analog scale (VAS); and (4) ESR. DAS28-4ESR scores ranged from 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (maximal disease activity); decrease in DAS28-4ESR scores indicate improvement of disease. DAS28-4ESR score < 2.6 was defined as clinical remission of rheumatoid arthritis. Data are presented as percentage of participants.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, Year 1, Year 1.5, Year 2, Year 2.5, and Year 3|Efficacy analysis set, defined as safety analysis set excluding participants without evaluable DAS28-4ESR score and lack of Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (MHAQ) data prior to drug administration.||Percentage of participants|||Number
822536|NCT01163318|Secondary|Incidence of Infections and Malignant Tumors|Participants were evaluated for the presence/absence of malignant tumors and infections. Data are presented as percentage of participants.|From the initiation of adalimumab treatment, every 6 months up to 3 years.|Safety analysis set, defined as participants who did not violate protocol criteria.||Percentage of participants|||Number
822537|NCT01163318|Primary|Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs)|An ADR was any unfavourable or unintended response (adverse event) that could possibly be related to adalimumab treatment. ADRs were assessed and data are presented as percentage of participants.|From the initiation of adalimumab treatment, every 6 months up to 3 years.|Safety analysis set, defined as participants who did not violate protocol criteria.||Percentage of participants|||Number
822538|NCT01163461|Primary|Speech Production|percent change in the number of untrained words spoken correctly|Baseline to one week post treatment termination and three months post treatment termination|||% change score of untrained real words||Standard Deviation|Mean
822539|NCT01163474|Secondary|Feasibility||1 month||||||
822540|NCT01163474|Secondary|Acceptability|Acceptability was assessed using a the Demeris 17-item Likert-scale questionnaire. Scale from 1 to 5 (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree).|1 month|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822541|NCT01163474|Primary|Accuracy (FTF Decision on Patient Disposition vs. V-visit Decision on Patient Disposition)|Using CVT software and desktop webcams on the VA private network, “Virtual” CVT visits were conducted immediately prior to usual care of Face-to-Face (FTF) postoperative visits. Two independent surgeons reviewed the CVT recordings and made recommendations on patient dispositions. Accuracy was assessed by comparing the 2 reviewers’ CVT decisions to the FTF decision.|1 month|||percentage of agreement|||Number
822542|NCT01163604|Secondary|Clinical Endpoints||at one year||||||
822543|NCT01163604|Secondary|Various Adverse Effects||at one year||||||
822544|NCT01163604|Secondary|NIHSS, mRS|NIHSS and mRS are widely used stroke deficit assessment tools. Most clinical stroke-related trials require a baseline and outcome severity assessment. The baseline of mRS is rank 0, NIHSS 0; the severity of mRS is 6, NIHSS 42. AS many patients have one or more strokes before they perform stenting, this study selected NIHSS and mRS as the supplementary materials to estimate the stroke deficit of patients and to reflect the therapeutic effect and safety of stenting and argatroban therapy. These two scales are performed according to the guidance before and after stenting and argatroban therapy.|at one year||||||
822545|NCT01163604|Primary|Number of Participants With Occlusion and Restenosis at One Year|Stenosis detected by DSA(digital subtraction angiography),CTA(CT angiography)or MRA(MR angiography)was measured according to NASCET(North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial)method.Concretely, NASCET stenosis is calculated from the ratio of the linear luminal diameter of the narrowest segment of the diseased portion of the artery to the diameter of the artery beyond any poststenotic dilatation: NASCET=(1-md/C)×100%|at one year|||participants|||Number
822546|NCT01163617|Secondary|Injection Duration for the Current Autoinjector When Administered at Room Temperature (20° to 27°C) Versus the Storage Temperature (2° to 8°C)|"A health care provider administered the injection to the participant, while another recorded the time elapsed during the injection (from the time of autoinjector activation, signaled by the audible click, until the yellow indicator stopped moving in the autoinjector view window). Injections were administered immediately following removal from the refrigerator (2° to 8°C) or after at least 30 minutes, but no more than 45 minutes, following removal from the refrigerator for the product to reach room temperature (20° to 27°C)."|Phase B (Week 4)|||seconds||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
822634|NCT01164475|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to 10 Hours (AUC [0-10])||0 (pre-plerixafor dose), 0.5, 1, 4 hours post-plerixafor dose on Day 4; 9-10 hours post-plerixafor dose (pre G-CSF dose) on Day 5, 10-11 hours post-plerixafor dose (prior to first apheresis) on Day 5|FAS included all randomized patients who signed informed consent form and received at least one dose of plerixafor.||nanogram*hour per milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Standard Error|Geometric Mean
822547|NCT01163617|Secondary|Injection Duration for the Current Autoinjector Compared to the Physiolis Autoinjector|"A health care provider administered the injection to the participant, while another recorded the time elapsed during the injection (from the time of autoinjector activation, signaled by the audible click, until the yellow indicator stopped moving in the autoinjector view window). Injections were administered immediately following removal from the refrigerator (2° to 8°C) or after at least 30 minutes, but no more than 45 minutes, following removal from the refrigerator for the product to reach room temperature (20° to 27°C)."|Phase B (Week 4)|||seconds||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
822548|NCT01163617|Primary|Injection Duration for the Physiolis Autoinjector at Room Temperature (20° to 27°C) and at Storage Temperature (2° to 8°C) Compared to the Current Autoinjector Ejection Time Specification of Not More Than 10 Seconds|"A health care provider administered the injection to the participant, while another recorded the time elapsed during the injection (from the time of autoinjector activation, signaled by the audible click, until the yellow indicator stopped moving in the autoinjector view window). Injections were administered immediately following removal from the refrigerator (2° to 8°C) or after at least 30 minutes, but no more than 45 minutes, following removal from the refrigerator for the product to reach room temperature (20° to 27°C)."|Phase B (Week 4)|||seconds||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
822549|NCT01163617|Primary|Participants' Overall Satisfaction With the Drug Administration Experience Using the Physiolis Syringe/Autoinjector in Comparison to the Current Syringe/Autoinjector|Participant's overall satisfaction of the injection was collected on a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS) completed by participants immediately after self-injection. 0 = extremely unsatisfied, 10 = extremely satisfied.|Phase A (Week 0 and Week 2)|||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
822550|NCT01163656|Primary|Time to Tracheal Intubation|The amount of time it takes the anesthesiologist to insert a breathing tube using one of two methods, either by direct laryngoscopy or using the Glidescope Cobalt Video system.|Measured the time of the randomized device past the teeth/gums until its removal after intubation as the time to intubation.|||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822551|NCT01163721|Primary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Serum Glucose at Week 12|Serum glucose was measured following an overnight fast. The LOCF method was used. Participants were summarized according to the actual treatment received regardless of the allocated treatment.|Baseline to Week 12|Full Analysis Set||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822552|NCT01163721|Primary|Change From Baseline in 2-hour Postprandial Serum Glucose at Week 12 Following a Standardized Meal|2-hour postprandial serum glucose was defined as the average of serum glucose measurement at 120 minutes and 125 minutes following a standardized meal. The LOCF method was used. Participants were summarized according to the actual treatment received regardless of the allocated treatment.|Baseline to Week 12|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822553|NCT01163721|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 12|HbA1c is a blood test to measure blood sugar control over the prior 3-month period. The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used: the last observed post-baseline measurements prior to Week 12 carried forward for participants with no available Week 12 values. Participants were summarized according to the actual treatment received regardless of the allocated treatment.|Baseline to Week 12|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||percent of HbA1c in blood||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822554|NCT01163747|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events Through Week 8|An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. A Serious Adverse Event (SAE) is any AE that is fatal or is life-threatening, requires in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is medically significant or requires intervention to prevent one or other of the outcomes listed above.|8 weeks|All participants who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety evaluation.||participants|||Number
822555|NCT01163747|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Responded to Each of the 12 Anti-Pneumococcal Antibody Serotypes|"Serum levels of antibody to pneumococcal vaccine were drawn 5 weeks after vaccination with 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine to assess humoral immune response. A positive response to the pneumococcal vaccine was defined as a 2-fold increase in serum antibody titers from Baseline or an increase of > 1 mg/L from Baseline levels.
The 12 serotypes evaluated were pneumococcal serotypes 1, 3, 4, 6B, 7F, 8, 9N, 12F, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F."|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 (5 weeks post-vaccination)|Evaluable per protocol population for pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine. N indicates the number of participants with available data for each serotype. No imputation was performed.||percentage of participants|||Number
822556|NCT01163747|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Levels of Anti-tetanus Antibody 5 Weeks After Vaccination|Levels of anti-tetanus antibodies were measured by a central laboratory from serum samples taken prior to vaccination (Week 3) and 5 weeks post vaccination (Week 8).|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 (5 weeks post-vaccination)|Evaluable per protocol population for tetanus toxoid vaccine: participants who received at least one dose of study medication, had no major protocol violations, had both baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 assessments of response with evaluable titers to the tetanus toxoid vaccine.||IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822557|NCT01163747|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Levels of Anti-pneumococcal Antibody 5 Weeks After Vaccination|Levels of anti-pneumococcal antibodies were measured by a central laboratory from serum samples taken prior to vaccination (Week 3) and 5 weeks post vaccination (Week 8).|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 (5 weeks post-vaccination)|Evaluable per protocol population for pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine: participants who received at least one dose of study medication, had no major protocol violations, had both baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 assessments of response with evaluable titers to the pneumococcal vaccine.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822558|NCT01163747|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Positive Response to Tetanus Toxoid Vaccination|A positive response to the tetanus toxoid vaccination was defined as antibody levels ≥ 0.2 IU/mL for participants with Baseline tetanus antibody levels < 0.1 IU/mL, or a 4-fold increase in antibody levels compared with Baseline for participants with Baseline tetanus antibody levels ≥ 0.1 IU/mL.|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 (5 weeks post-vaccination)|Evaluable per protocol population for tetanus toxoid vaccine: participants who received at least one dose of study medication, had no major protocol violations, had both baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 assessments of response with evaluable titers to the tetanus toxoid vaccine.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822559|NCT01163747|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Responded to Combinations of 12 Anti-Pneumococcal Antibody Serotypes|"Serum levels of antibody to pneumococcal vaccine were drawn 5 weeks after vaccination with 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine to assess humoral immune response. A positive response to the pneumococcal vaccine was defined as a 2-fold increase in serum antibody titers from Baseline or an increase of > 1 mg/L from Baseline levels.
The 12 serotypes evaluated were pneumococcal serotypes 1, 3, 4, 6B, 8, 9N, 12F, 14, 19F, 23F, 7F, and 18C."|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 (5 weeks post-vaccination)|Evaluable per protocol population for pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine: participants who received at least one dose of study medication, had no major protocol violations, had both baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 assessments of response with evaluable titers to the pneumococcal vaccine.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822560|NCT01163747|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Responded to ≥ 6 of 12 Anti-pneumococcal Antibody Serotypes|"Serum levels of antibody to pneumococcal vaccine were drawn 5 weeks after vaccination with 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine to assess humoral immune response. A positive response to the pneumococcal vaccine was defined as a 2-fold increase in serum antibody titers from Baseline or an increase of > 1 mg/L from Baseline levels.
The 12 serotypes evaluated were pneumococcal serotypes 1, 3, 4, 6B, 8, 9N, 12F, 14, 19F, 23F, 7F, and 18C."|Baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 (5 weeks post-vaccination)|Evaluable per protocol population for pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine: participants who received at least one dose of study medication, had no major protocol violations, had both baseline (Week 3) and Week 8 assessments of response with evaluable titers to the pneumococcal vaccine.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822561|NCT01163760|Other Pre-specified|Comfort While Working on Computer|"Comfort throughout the day was evaluated via subjective question: Comfort while working on computer and is reported as an aggregate of Agree Strongly and Agree Somewhat."|1-week-follow-up|||percentage of participants|||Number
822562|NCT01163760|Secondary|Comfort Throughout the Whole Day|"Comfort throughout the day was evaluated via subjective question: Comfort throughout the whole day and is reported as an aggregate of Agree Strongly and Agree Somewhat."|1-week follow-up|Subjects analyzed were those enrolled, randomized, and completed the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
822563|NCT01163760|Primary|Lens Comfort|"Lens comfort was evaluated via the subjective question: How comfortable did your eyes feel at the end of the day when wearing the contact lenses you were provided? (excellent/very good=5...very good=3...Poor=0)"|1-week follow-up|Subjects analyzed were those who were enrolled, randomized, and completed the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822564|NCT01163851|Secondary|Number of Participants With Systemic Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Identified by Laboratory Parameters|Laboratory parameters alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, gamma glutamyl transferase, lactate dehydrogenase, albumin, hemoglobin, protein, amylase, creatine kinase, lipase, basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, platelets, white blood cells, bicarbonate, chloride, potassium, sodium, bilirubin, blood urea nitrogen, c-reactive protein , calcium, creatinine, direct bilirubin, glucose, magnesium, phosphate, uric acid, hematocrit, partial thromboplastin time , prothrombin time, red blood cells , urine pH, urine specific gravity were assessed to identify systemic TEAEs. TEAEs (all causalities), treatment related TEAEs and CTCAE severity grades for AEs were reported. Same participant may be reported in more than 1 CTCAE severity grade.|Baseline up to Day 64|SAS population included all participants who met the study enrollment criteria and had received any amount of study medication.||participants|||Number
822565|NCT01163851|Secondary|Number of Participants With Systemic Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Identified by Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters|ECG is used to measure the rate and regularity of heartbeats, as well as the size and position of the chambers, the presence of any damage to the heart, and the effects of drugs or devices used to regulate the heart. ECG parameters RR interval, PR interval, QRS complex, QT interval, [Bazett's Correction], QTcF interval [Fridericia's Correction] were assessed to identify systemic TEAEs. TEAEs (all causalities), treatment related TEAEs and CTCAE severity grades for AEs were reported.|Baseline up to Day 64|SAS population included all participants who met the study enrollment criteria and had received any amount of study medication.||participants|||Number
822566|NCT01163851|Secondary|Number of Participants With Systemic Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Identified by Vital Signs|Vital sign parameters body temperature, blood pressure and heart rate were assessed to identify systemic TEAEs. TEAEs (all causalities), treatment related TEAEs and CTCAE severity grades for AEs were reported. Same participant may be reported in more than 1 CTCAE severity grade.|Baseline up to Day 64|SAS population included all participants who met the study enrollment criteria and had received any amount of study medication.||participants|||Number
822567|NCT01163851|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-Drug-Antibodies (ADA)|Participants with positive antibody titer greater than 0 International Units/milliliter (IU/mL) was considered as antibody positive.|Baseline up to Day 64|SAS population included all participants who met the study enrollment criteria and had received any amount of study medication.||participants|||Number
822568|NCT01163851|Secondary|Number of Participants With Systemic Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Identified by Physical Examination|Complete physical examination was conducted to assess skin, ears, throat, cardiac, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and musculoskeletal systems for systemic TEAEs.|Baseline up to Day 64|SAS population included all participants who met the study enrollment criteria and had received any amount of study medication.||participants|||Number
822569|NCT01163851|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 64 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. TEAEs (all causalities), treatment related TEAEs and common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) severity grades for AEs were reported. Same participant may be reported in more than 1 CTCAE severity grade.|Baseline up to Day 64|SAS population included all participants who met the study enrollment criteria and had received any amount of study medication.||participants|||Number
822570|NCT01163851|Secondary|Number of Participants With Toxicity or Intolerable Dose Criteria|Toxicity criteria included any of the following : serious adverse event (SAE), increased liver transaminases (alanine aminotransferase [ALT]/aspartate aminotransferase (AST) , increased bilirubin (in absence of ALT/AST elevations), pancreatitis, creatine kinase (CK) , hyper or hypoglycemia, decreased platelet count, increased serum creatinine, diarrhea, enteritis or nausea, prolongation of QTcF interval [Fridericia's Correction] and other considered appropriate by investigator.|Baseline, Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Safety Analysis Set (SAS) population included all participants who met the study enrollment criteria and had received any amount of study medication.||participants|||Number
822571|NCT01163851|Secondary|Durability of Additional Lipid Lowering Effects of PF-04950615 (RN316) in Combination With Atorvastatin on Days 4-64|The median duration of the lipid-lowering effects (decrease in LDL-C levels by greater than or equal to 15 percent [%] compared to baseline) of PF-04950615 in combination with atorvastatin from Days 4 to 64 was reported.|Day 4 to Day 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||days||Full Range|Median
822572|NCT01163851|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Fasting Apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1) Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|ApoA1 is a major protein that is a component of HDL cholesterol and helps in clearing cholesterol from the blood by removing cholesterol from organs and tissues to be destroyed by the liver.. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
822573|NCT01163851|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Fasting High-Density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|HDL cholesterol is cholesterol in the bloodstream that is carried by high density lipoprotein. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
822574|NCT01163851|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Fasting Apolipoprotein B (ApoB) Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|ApoB is a major protein that makes up LDL cholesterol and is involved in transporting cholesterol and triglycerides to cells and tissues in the body. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
822575|NCT01163851|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Fasting Triglycerides Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|Triglycerides are a type of fat circulating in the blood and account for the majority of the fats circulating in the blood. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
822576|NCT01163851|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Fasting Non-High-density Lipoprotein-cholesterol (Non-HDL-C) Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|Non-HDL-C calculated as total cholesterol minus HDL cholesterol. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
822577|NCT01163851|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|Total cholesterol is the sum of all the cholesterol within the blood. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
822578|NCT01163851|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Fasting Low Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (LDL-C) Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|LDL cholesterol is cholesterol in the bloodstream that is carried by low density lipoprotein. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluable for particular category for each arm group respectively.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
822579|NCT01163851|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting High-Density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|HDL cholesterol is cholesterol in the bloodstream that is carried by high density lipoprotein. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822670|NCT01164722|Secondary|Tolerability and Safety of Infrared Coagulator Ablation|Number of patients who experienced a serious adverse events|All study visits through year 2|||participants|||Number
824514|NCT01175018|Secondary|Median Difference Between the 2 Arms in the Peak Oxygen Consumption (VO2) at 10-14 Weeks||10-14 weeks|||ml*kg^-1*min^-1||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822580|NCT01163851|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1) Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|ApoA1 is a major protein that is a component of HDL cholesterol and helps in clearing cholesterol from the blood by removing cholesterol from organs and tissues to be destroyed by the liver. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822581|NCT01163851|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Apolipoprotein B (ApoB) Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|ApoB is a major protein that makes up LDL cholesterol and is involved in transporting cholesterol and triglycerides to cells and tissues in the body. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822582|NCT01163851|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Triglycerides Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|Triglycerides are a type of fat circulating in the blood and account for the majority of the fats circulating in the blood. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822583|NCT01163851|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Non-High-density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (Non-HDL-C) Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|Non-HDL-C calculated as total cholesterol minus HDL cholesterol. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822584|NCT01163851|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Total Cholesterol Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|Total cholesterol is the sum of all the cholesterol within the blood. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822585|NCT01163851|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Low Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (LDL-C) Values at Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|LDL cholesterol is cholesterol in the bloodstream that is carried by low density lipoprotein. Fasting was required at least 10 hours before blood sample collection. Baseline value calculated as average of Day 2 and Day 4 measurements prior to PF-04950615 (RN316) administration.|Baseline, Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, 64|Pharmacodynamic analysis population included all enrolled participants who received any amount of study medication and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic parameter of interest. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluable for particular category for each arm group respectively.||milligram/deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822586|NCT01163851|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) of Atorvastatin|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (Vz/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 12 hrs post-dose on Day 4, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6 and 7|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure for each group respectively.||liter||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
822587|NCT01163851|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F) of Atorvastatin|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Clearance was estimated from population PK modeling. Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood.|0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 12 hrs post-dose on Day 4, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6 and 7|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
822588|NCT01163851|Primary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2) of Atorvastatin|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 12 hrs post-dose on Day 4, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6 and 7|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure for each group respectively.||hrs||Standard Deviation|Mean
822589|NCT01163851|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Atorvastatin||0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 12 hrs post-dose on Day 4, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6 and 7|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
822590|NCT01163851|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Atorvastatin||0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 12 hrs post-dose on Day 4, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6 and 7|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||hrs||Full Range|Median
822591|NCT01163851|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to End of Dosing Interval (AUCtau) of Atorvastatin||0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 12 hrs post-dose on Day 4, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6 and 7|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
822592|NCT01163851|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)] of PF-04950615 (RN316)|AUC (0 - ∞)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|0 (pre-dose on Day 4), 1, 4, 8 and 12 hrs post intravenous PF-04950615 (RN316) dose, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure for each group respectively.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
822593|NCT01163851|Primary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss) of PF-04950615 (RN316)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Steady state volume of distribution (Vss) is the apparent volume of distribution at steady-state.|0 (pre-dose on Day 4), 1, 4, 8 and 12 hrs post intravenous PF-04950615 (RN316) dose, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure for each group respectively.||liter||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
822594|NCT01163851|Primary|Systemic Clearance (CL) of PF-04950615 (RN316)|CL is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body.|0 (pre-dose on Day 4), 1, 4, 8 and 12 hrs post intravenous PF-04950615 (RN316) dose, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure for each group respectively.||liter/hour (L/hr)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
822595|NCT01163851|Primary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2) of PF-04950615 (RN316)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre-dose on Day 4), 1, 4, 8 and 12 hrs post intravenous PF-04950615 (RN316) dose, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure for each group respectively.||hrs||Standard Deviation|Mean
822596|NCT01163851|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of PF-04950615 (RN316)||0 (pre-dose on Day 4), 1, 4, 8 and 12 hrs post intravenous PF-04950615 (RN316) dose, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
822597|NCT01163851|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of PF-04950615 (RN316)||0 (pre-dose on Day 4), 1, 4, 8 and 12 hrs post intravenous PF-04950615 (RN316) dose, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||hrs||Full Range|Median
822598|NCT01163851|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) of PF-04950615 (RN316)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero to the last measured concentration (AUClast).|0 (pre-dose on Day 4), 1, 4, 8 and 12 hours (hrs) post intravenous PF-04950615 (RN316) dose, pre atorvastatin dose on Day 5, 6, 7, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 50, 57 and 64|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||nanogram*hour/milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
822599|NCT01163916|Secondary|Duration of Treatment With Adalimumab|Tolerability to adalimumab treatment was analyzed by the time on treatment until development of an adverse event leading to adalimumab discontinuation or until discontinuation from treatment for any other reason.|For the duration of the study (up to a maximum of 18.2 months).|Safety set.||weeks||Full Range|Median
822600|NCT01163916|Primary|Characteristics of Patients Prescribed Adalimumab: Other Disease Specific Treatment|Data on other medications (methotrexate, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], corticosteroids and other medications) taken for the participant's condition (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis or ankylosing spondylitis) were collected at the Baseline visit and at each follow-up visit throughout the study. Overall data are presented.|Baseline and at each follow-up visit (up to a maximum of 18.2 months).|Safety set||participants|||Number
822601|NCT01163916|Primary|Characteristics of Patients Prescribed Adalimumab: Duration of Disease|Duration of disease was defined as the time from diagnosis until study entry.|Baseline|Safety set||months||Full Range|Median
822602|NCT01163916|Primary|Characteristics of Patients Prescribed Adalimumab: Disease Severity|Disease severity was assessed by the physician as mild, moderate or severe, based on routine clinical practice.|Baseline|Safety set.||participants|||Number
822603|NCT01163916|Primary|Characteristics of Patients Prescribed Adalimumab: Marital Status|Participants were asked to indicate their marital status at the Baseline visit.|Baseline|||participants|||Number
822604|NCT01163916|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Missed or Delayed Injections|Compliance with prescribed adalimumab therapy was assessed by the percentage of participants with missed injections and/or injections delayed by more than 7 days.|For the duration of the study (up to a maximum of 18.2 months).|Safety set; the analysis only includes participants with non-missing data.||percentage of participants|||Number
822605|NCT01163916|Secondary|Patient's Acceptability of Self-injections|"At each clinic visit participants were asked to rate the convenience of adalimumab injections. Possible options were convenient, inconvenient and unable to self-inject.
The study follow-up period consisted of approximately 6 follow-up visits occurring at average intervals of 2-3 months, according to routine clinical practice.
Acceptability data are reported by follow-up visit and by treatment regimen: 40 mg every other week or 40 mg once a week, as prescribed in accordance with local marketing authorization."|Data were collected at study follow-up visits (Visits 1-6) which occurred on average at 2-3 month intervals, up to a maximum of 18.2 months.|The number of participants analyzed (251) represents the total number of participants in the safety set. The number of participants with available data at each follow-up visit were: Visit 1: 249; Visit 2: 246; Visit 3: 237; Visit 4: 205; Visit 5: 179; Visit 6: 135.||participants|||Number
822609|NCT01163955|Primary|Posture Control of Head Position, Shoulder Position and Back Position|Forward Head Position (FHP), Rounded Shoulder Position (RSP), and Thoracic spine (T/s)-Lumbar spine (L/s) positions were scored. Subscale scores of 0-3 for each FHP, RSP, and T/s L/s position were obtained. Score 0 was a perfect posture score, Score 1 was 0-1 inches out of alignment. Score 2 was 1-2 inches out of alignment. Score 3 was 2-3 inches out of alignment. Subscale scores were combined for a total score with a minimum value of 0 and a maximum value of 9. 0 being a perfect posture score, 9 being the worst postural score.|5 minute|||scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
822610|NCT01164007|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from Baseline visit to the time of death from any cause. OS was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methodology and expressed in months.|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|ITT Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822611|NCT01164007|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died|The percentage of participants who died from any cause was reported.|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
822612|NCT01164007|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure (TTF)|TTF was defined as the time from start of treatment to the time of treatment discontinuation as a result of death, adverse event, disease progression, loss to follow-up, non-compliance, or consent withdrawal was reported. Disease progression was defined as ≥20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to smallest sum on study or the appearance of new lesion(s). TTF was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methodology and expressed in months.|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|ITT Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822613|NCT01164007|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Treatment|The percentage of participants who discontinued treatment as a result of death, adverse event, disease progression, loss to follow-up, non-compliance, or consent withdrawal was reported. Disease progression was defined as ≥20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to smallest sum on study or the appearance of new lesion(s).|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
822614|NCT01164007|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP) According to RECIST|Tumor assessments were performed using RECIST. TTP was defined as the time from Baseline visit to time of death or disease progression, whichever occurred first. Disease progression was defined as ≥20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to smallest sum on study or the appearance of new lesion(s). TTP was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methodology and expressed in months.|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|ITT Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822615|NCT01164007|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression According to RECIST|Tumor assessments were performed using RECIST. Disease progression was defined as ≥20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to smallest sum on study or the appearance of new lesion(s). The percentage of participants who died or demonstrated disease progression was reported.|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
822616|NCT01164007|Secondary|DOR With CR, PR, or SD According to RECIST|Tumor assessments were performed using RECIST. DOR was defined as the time from first assessment of CR, PR, or SD to the time of death or disease progression, whichever occurred first. Disease progression was defined as ≥20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to smallest sum on study or the appearance of new lesion(s). CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions with normalization of tumor markers. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to sum of LD at Baseline. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to quality for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for disease progression, using smallest sum of LD on study as reference. DOR was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methodology and expressed in months.|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|"ITT Population. The Number of Participants Analyzed reflects the number of participants with a previous assessment of CR, PR, or SD."||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822617|NCT01164007|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression Following a Previous Assessment of CR, PR, or Stable Disease (SD) According to RECIST|Tumor assessments were performed using RECIST. Disease progression was defined as ≥20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to smallest sum on study or the appearance of new lesion(s). CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions with normalization of tumor markers. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to sum of LD at Baseline. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to quality for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for disease progression, using smallest sum of LD on study as reference. The percentage of participants who died or demonstrated disease progression among those with a previous assessment of CR, PR, or SD was reported.|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|"ITT Population. The Number of Participants Analyzed reflects the number of participants with a previous assessment of CR, PR, or SD."||percentage of participants|||Number
822618|NCT01164007|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR) With CR or PR According to RECIST|Tumor assessments were performed using RECIST. DOR was defined as the time from first assessment of CR or PR to the time of death or disease progression, whichever occurred first. Disease progression was defined as ≥20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to smallest sum on study or the appearance of new lesion(s). CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions with normalization of tumor markers. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to sum of LD at Baseline. DOR was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methodology and expressed in months.|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|"ITT Population. The Number of Participants Analyzed reflects the number of participants with a previous assessment of CR or PR."||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822671|NCT01164722|Primary|Complete Response Through 1 Year|No detection of high grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia (HGAIN) from treatment through one year. Detection of HGAIN was based on local pathology reports.|1 year post treatment|All study participants who were randomized and attended the baseline visit.||participants|||Number
824515|NCT01175018|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Each Group With Reverse Remodeling (Reduction in LVESVi >5%)||10-14 weeks|||% of participants|||Number
822619|NCT01164007|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Death or Disease Progression Following a Previous Assessment of CR or PR According to RECIST|Tumor assessments were performed using RECIST. Disease progression was defined as ≥20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to smallest sum on study or the appearance of new lesion(s). CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions with normalization of tumor markers. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease in sum of LD of target lesions in reference to sum of LD at Baseline. The percentage of participants who died or demonstrated disease progression among those with a previous assessment of CR or PR was reported.|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|"ITT Population. The Number of Participants Analyzed reflects the number of participants with a previous assessment of CR or PR."||percentage of participants|||Number
822620|NCT01164007|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)|Tumor assessments were performed using RECIST. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions with normalization of tumor markers. PR was defined as greater than or equal to (≥) 30 percent (%) decrease in sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions in reference to sum of LD at Baseline. Both were to be confirmed at a follow-up visit at least 4 weeks from the initial assessment of CR or PR. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR during the study was reported.|Baseline up to approximately 6 years (assessed at Baseline, every 12 weeks on treatment, thereafter every 3 months)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: All participants who signed the ICF, were assigned a study identifier, and received at least one dose of study medications.||percentage of participants|||Number
822621|NCT01164137|Primary|Health Services Utilization 18 Months Following Hospital Discharge|Mean health services utilization 18 months following hospital discharge. The specific health services utilization was re-admission to hospital, admission to home care, admission to long-term care and visits to emergency departments.|18 months|||Health Services Utilizations||Standard Error|Mean
822622|NCT01164137|Primary|Health Services Utilization 12 Months Following Hospital Discharge|Mean health services utilization 12 months following hospital discharge. The specific health services utilization was re-admission to hospital, admission to home care, admission to long-term care and visits to emergency departments.|12 months|||Health Services Utilizations||Standard Error|Mean
822623|NCT01164137|Primary|Health Services Utilization 9 Months Following Hospital Discharge|Mean health services utilization 9 months following hospital discharge. The specific health services utilization was re-admission to hospital, admission to home care, admission to long-term care and visits to emergency departments.|9 Months|||Health Services Utilizations||Standard Error|Mean
822624|NCT01164137|Primary|Health Services Utilization 6 Months Following Hospital Discharge|Mean health services utilization 6 months following hospital discharge. The specific health services utilization was re-admission to hospital, admission to home care, admission to long-term care and visits to emergency departments.|6 Months|||Health Services Utilizations||Standard Error|Mean
822625|NCT01164137|Primary|Health Services Utilization 3 Months Following Hospital Discharge|Mean health services utilization 3 months following hospital discharge. The specific health services utilization was re-admission to hospital, admission to home care, admission to long-term care and visits to emergency departments.|3 Months|||Health Services Utilizations||Standard Error|Mean
822626|NCT01164475|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Half-life (T1/2)|T1/2 is the time required for the plasma concentration to decrease to one half.|0 (pre-plerixafor dose), 0.5, 1, 4 hours post-plerixafor dose on Day 4; 9-10 hours post-plerixafor dose (pre G-CSF dose) on Day 5, 10-11 hours post-plerixafor dose (prior to first apheresis) on Day 5|FAS included all randomized patients who signed informed consent form and received at least one dose of plerixafor.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
822627|NCT01164475|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0 (pre-plerixafor dose), 0.5, 1, 4 hours post-plerixafor dose on Day 4; 9-10 hours post-plerixafor dose (pre G-CSF dose) on Day 5, 10-11 hours post-plerixafor dose (prior to first apheresis) on Day 5|FAS included all patients who have signed informed consent and received at least one dose of study drug.||hours||Full Range|Median
822628|NCT01164475|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0 (pre-plerixafor dose), 0.5, 1, 4 hours post-plerixafor dose on Day 4; 9-10 hours post-plerixafor dose (pre G-CSF dose) on Day 5, 10-11 hours post-plerixafor dose (prior to first apheresis) on Day 5|FAS included all randomized patients who signed informed consent form and received at least one dose of plerixafor.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822629|NCT01164475|Secondary|Mean Fold Increase in Peripheral Blood CD34+ Cell Count Following Plerixafor|Fold increase was calculated as CD34+ cell count on Day 5 divided by CD34+ cell count on Day 4.|Baseline (pre G-CSF dose on Day 4) to Day 5 (prior to first apheresis)|FAS included all randomized patients who signed informed consent form and received at least one dose of plerixafor.||fold increase||Standard Deviation|Mean
822630|NCT01164475|Secondary|Total Number of CD34+ Cells/kg Collected Over up to 4 Aphereses|The cumulative number of CD34+ cells/kg (body weight) collected over all apheresis sessions (up to a maximum of 4 sessions) was reported.|Day 5 up to Day 8|FAS included all randomized patients who signed informed consent form and received at least one dose of plerixafor.||10^6 cells/kg||Full Range|Median
822631|NCT01164475|Secondary|Median Number of Days of Apheresis to Collect at Least 5*10^6 CD34+ Cells/kg||Day 5 up to Day 8|FAS included all randomized patients who signed informed consent form and received at least one dose of plerixafor. Here, number of patients analyzed = the number of patients who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||days||Full Range|Median
822632|NCT01164475|Secondary|Median Number of Days of Apheresis to Collect at Least 2*10^6 CD34+ Cells/kg||Day 5 up to Day 8|FAS included all randomized patients who signed informed consent form and received at least one dose of plerixafor. Here, number of patients analyzed = the number of patients who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||days||Full Range|Median
822633|NCT01164475|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Who Achieved at Least 2*10^6 CD34+ Cells/kg in Less Than or Equal to 4 Days of Apheresis|The cumulative number of CD34+ cells/kg (body weight) collected over all apheresis sessions (up to a maximum of 4 sessions) was used to determine if a patient has achieved the target of >= 2*10^6 CD34+ cells/kg (minimum number of CD34+ cells required for transplantation) within 4 days of apheresis. The proportion of patients who achieved the target was reported as percentages for each treatment arm.|Day 5 up to Day 8|FAS included all randomized patients who signed informed consent form and received at least one dose of plerixafor.||percentage of participants|||Number
822635|NCT01164475|Primary|Proportion of Patients Who Achieved at Least 5*10^6 Cluster of Differentiation 34+ (CD34+) Cells Per Kilogram (Cells/kg)|The cumulative number of CD34+ cells/kg (body weight) collected over all apheresis sessions (up to a maximum of 4 sessions) was used to determine if a patient has achieved the target of >=5*10^6 CD34+ cells/kg (optimum number of CD34+ cells required for transplantation) within 4 days of apheresis. The proportion of patients who achieved the target was reported as percentages for each treatment arm.|Day 5 up to Day 8|FAS included all randomized patients who signed informed consent form and received at least one dose of plerixafor.||percentage of participants|||Number
822636|NCT01164501|Other Pre-specified|Hypoglycaemic Events|Percentage of patients who experienced a hypoglycaemic event. A hypoglycaemic event was regarded as confirmed if it was documented as an adverse event with plasma glucose values <= 70 mg/dL (<=3.9mmol/L) measured or with a documentation that the assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon or other resuscitative action had been required.|From first drug administration until 7 days after last trial medication intake, up to 458 days|Treated set which included all patients treated with at least one dose of randomised trial medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
822637|NCT01164501|Primary|HbA1c Change From Baseline in Patients With Moderate Renal Impairment|"Change from baseline in HbA1c after 24 weeks, for patients with moderate renal impairment.
Note adjusted means are provided."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) which included all randomised patients, treated with at least one dose of trial medication, who had a baseline HbA1c value. Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Mean
822638|NCT01164501|Primary|HbA1c Change From Baseline in Patients With Mild Renal Impairment|"Change from baseline in HbA1c after 24 weeks, for patients with mild renal impairment.
Note adjusted means are provided."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) which included all randomised patients, treated with at least one dose of trial medication, who had a baseline HbA1c value. Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Mean
822639|NCT01164501|Primary|HbA1c Change From Baseline in Patients With Mild or Moderate Renal Impairment|"Change from baseline in HbA1c after 24 weeks, for patients with mild or moderate renal impairment.
Note adjusted means are provided."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) which included all randomised patients, treated with at least one dose of trial medication, who had a baseline HbA1c value. Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Mean
822640|NCT01164579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28-4 (ESR) <2.6|DAS28-4(ESR) was calculated from swollen joint count and tender joint count using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4(ESR) <2.6 implied remission.|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS NRI; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
822641|NCT01164579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28-4 (ESR) â‰¤3.2|DAS28-4(ESR) was calculated from swollen joint count and tender joint count using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4(ESR) â‰¤3.2 implied low disease activity.|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS NRI; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
822642|NCT01164579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28-4 (ESR) Response (Good or Moderate Improvement)|DAS28-4(ESR) was calculated from swollen joint count and tender joint count using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28 categorical responses define a good (absolute: <3.2 or >1.2 improvement from BL), moderate (absolute: 3.2-5.1 or 0.6-1.2 change from BL), or no response (absolute: >5.1 or <0.6 change from BL).|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS NRI; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
822643|NCT01164579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28-3 (CRP) Score <2.6|DAS28-3(CRP) was calculated from the swollen joint count and tender joint count using 28-joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3(CRP) <2.6 implied remission.|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS NRI; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
822644|NCT01164579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28-3 (CRP) Score â‰¤3.2|DAS28-3(CRP) was calculated from the swollen joint count and tender joint count using 28-joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3(CRP) â‰¤3.2 implied low disease activity.|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS NRI; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
822645|NCT01164579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28-3 (CRP) Response (Good or Moderate Improvement)|DAS28-3(CRP) was calculated from the swollen joint count and tender joint count using 28-joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28 categorical responses define a good (absolute: <3.2 or >1.2 improvement from baseline [BL]), moderate (absolute: 3.2-5.1 or 0.6-1.2 change from BL), or no response (absolute: >5.1 or <0.6 change from BL).|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS NRI; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
822646|NCT01164579|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DAS28-4 (ESR)|DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated from swollen joint count and tender joint count using 28 joints count, ESR (millimeters per hour [mm/hour]) and Participant Global Assessment of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to 9.4; higher score=more disease activity.|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822827|NCT01165684|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Reaching Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Below 7.0% at Week 32|Proportion of subjects reaching HbA1c below 7.0% at Week 32|Week 32|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 383 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis at Week 32.||percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
822647|NCT01164579|Secondary|Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-4 [ESR])|DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated from swollen joint count and tender joint count using 28 joints count, ESR (millimeters per hour [mm/hour]) and Participant Global Assessment of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to 9.4; higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4 (ESR) â‰¤3.2 implied low disease activity and >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-4 (ESR) <2.6 = remission.|Baseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822648|NCT01164579|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DAS28-3 (CRP)|DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated from the swollen joint count and tender joint count using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity.|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822649|NCT01164579|Secondary|Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count and CRP (DAS28-3 [CRP])|DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated from the swollen joint count and tender joint count using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3 (CRP) less than or equal to (â‰¤)3.2 implied low disease activity and greater than (>)3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-3 (CRP) less than (<)2.6 = remission.|Baseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants assess for the specified parameter at a given visit.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822650|NCT01164579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 70% Improvement (ACR70) Response|ACR70 response: â‰¥70% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts and 70% improvement in 3 of the following 5 criteria: 1) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, 2) Participant's Assessment of Disease Activity, 3) Participant's Assessment of Pain, 4) Participant's Assessment of Functional Disability via a HAQ, and 5) CRP at each visit.|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS NRI; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
822651|NCT01164579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 50% Improvement (ACR50) Response|ACR50 response: â‰¥ 50% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts and 50% improvement in 3 of the following 5 criteria: 1) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, 2) Participant's Assessment of disease activity, 3) Paricipant's Assessment of Pain, 4) Participant's assessment of functional disability via a HAQ, and 5) CRP at each visit.|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS NRI; n=number of participants assess for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
822652|NCT01164579|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%) Improvement (ACR20) Response|ACR20 response: greater than or equal to (â‰¥)20% improvement in tender joint count; â‰¥20% improvement in swollen joint count; and â‰¥20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: Participant's Assessment of Pain; Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]); and C-Reactive Protein (CRP).|Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FAS Non-Responder Imputation (NRI) method: participants with missing values were considered to be non-responders. n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
822653|NCT01164579|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Months 6 and 12 in Erosion Score|Erosion score (a component of the modified TSS) is a measure of change in joint health. Erosion score range is from 0 (no erosion) to 280 (high erosion). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening; no change represents halting of disease progression; a decrease represents improvement.|Months 6 and 12|Evaluable Set; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822654|NCT01164579|Secondary|Erosion Scores at Months 6 and 12|Erosion score (a component of the modified TSS) is a measure of change in joint health. Erosion score range is from 0 (no erosion) to 280 (high erosion). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening; no change represents halting of disease progression; a decrease represents improvement.|Months 6 and 12|Evaluable Set; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822655|NCT01164579|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Months 6 and 12 in JSN Scores|JSN score (a component of the modified TSS) is a measure of change in joint health. JSN score range is 0 (no narrowing) to 168 (high narrowing). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening; no change represents halting of disease progression; a decrease represents improvement.|Months 6 and 12|Evaluable Set; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822656|NCT01164579|Secondary|Joint Space Narrowing (JSN) Scores at Months 6 and 12|JSN score (a component of the modified TSS) is a measure of change in joint health. JSN score range is 0 (no narrowing) to 168 (high narrowing). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening; no change represents halting of disease progression; a decrease represents improvement.|Months 6 and 12|Evaluable Set; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822657|NCT01164579|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Months 6 and 12 in mTSS|Modified TSS is a measure of change in joint health. TSS is defined as joint space narrowing score (range 0 [no narrowing] to 168 [high narrowing]) + erosion score (range is from 0 [no erosion] to 280 [high erosion]). The modified TSS range is from 0 (no damage) to 448 (bad joint status). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening; no change represents halting of disease progression; a decrease represents improvement.|Months 6 and 12|Evaluable Set; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822658|NCT01164579|Secondary|Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) at Months 6 and 12|Modified TSS is a measure of change in joint health. TSS is defined as joint space narrowing score (range 0 [no narrowing] to 168 [high narrowing]) plus (+) erosion score (range is from 0 [no erosion] to 280 [high erosion]). The modified TSS range is from 0 (no damage) to 448 (bad joint status). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening; no change represents halting of disease progression; a decrease represents improvement.|Months 6 and 12|Evaluable Set; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822659|NCT01164579|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Months 1, 3, 6, and 12 in OMERACT RAMRIS Wrist and MCP Erosions|Bone erosion assessed at 25 anatomic locations: 15 in 1 wrist and 10 in attached hand. Each site was scored in 1.0 increments from 0 (no damage) to 10 (severe damage), indicating erosion (each unit=10% bone loss) of original articular bone. OMERACT RAMRIS total erosion score for hands/wrists was sum of the individual scores for each location. Thus the maximum score per hand/wrist is 250 (range 0-250). Increasing score=greater severity.|Months 1, 3, 6, and 12|Evaluable Set||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822660|NCT01164579|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Months 1, 3, and 12 in OMERACT RAMRIS Bone Marrow Edema in Wrist and MCP|Bone edema was assessed at 25 anatomic locations: 15 in 1 wrist and 10 in attached hand. Bone edema was defined as a lesion within the trabecular bone, with ill-defined margins and signal characteristics consistent with increased water content. Each bone was scored separately; the scale was 0â€“3 based on the proportion of bone with edema, as follows 0: no edema; 1: 1â€“33% of bone edematous; 2: 34â€“66% of bone edematous; 3: 67â€“100%. OMERACT RAMRIS total bone edema score for hands/wrists was sum of the individual scores for each location. Thus the maximum score per hand/wrist was 75 (range 0-75). Increasing score=greater severity.|Months 1, 3, and 12|Evaluable Set; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822661|NCT01164579|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Months 1, 6, and 12 in OMERACT RAMRIS Wrist and MCP Synovitis|Synovitis is defined as an area in the synovial compartment that shows above normal postgadolinium enhancement of a thickness greater than the width of the normal synovium. T1-weighted images were acquired before and after the administration of intravenous contrast agent containing gadolinium. Intravenous contrast was required to demonstrate enhancing synovitis. Synovitis was scored 0 to 3 in 3 wrist regions and in each of the first through fifth MCP joints. A score of 0 is normal, with no enhancement or enhancement up to the thickness of normal synovium, while scores of 1 to 3 (mild, moderate, severe) refer to increments of one-third of the presumed maximum volume of enhancing tissue in the synovial compartment. Total synovitis score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 24. A negative value in synovitis change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Months 1, 6, and 12|Evaluable Set||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822662|NCT01164579|Primary|Change From Baseline to Month 6 in OMERACT RAMRIS Wrist and MCP Bone Marrow Edema|Bone edema was assessed at 25 anatomic locations: 15 in 1 wrist and 10 in attached hand. Bone edema was defined as a lesion within the trabecular bone, with ill-defined margins and signal characteristics consistent with increased water content. Each bone was scored separately; the scale was 0-3 based on the proportion of bone with edema, as follows 0: no edema; 1: 1-33% of bone edematous; 2: 34-66% of bone edematous; 3: 67-100%. OMERACT RAMRIS total bone edema score for hands/wrists was sum of the individual scores for each location. Thus the maximum score per hand/wrist was 75 (range 0-75). Increasing score=greater severity.|Month 6|Evaluable Set||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822663|NCT01164579|Primary|Change From Baseline to Month 3 in Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (RAMRIS) Wrist and Metacarpophalangeal (MCP) Synovitis|Synovitis is defined as an area in the synovial compartment that shows above normal postgadolinium enhancement of a thickness greater than the width of the normal synovium. T1-weighted images were acquired before and after the administration of intravenous contrast agent containing gadolinium. Intravenous contrast was required to demonstrate enhancing synovitis. Synovitis was scored 0 to 3 in 3 wrist regions and in each of the first through fifth MCP joints. A score of 0 is normal, with no enhancement or enhancement up to the thickness of normal synovium, while scores of 1 to 3 (mild, moderate, severe) refer to increments of one-third of the presumed maximum volume of enhancing tissue in the synovial compartment. Total synovitis score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 24. A negative value in synovitis change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Month 3|Evaluable Set: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug and for whom a variable is nonmissing at both baseline and the specified timepoint.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822664|NCT01164644|Primary|Assess Extent of Bruising|Primary outcome measure will be to measure the extent of bruising based on a ratio of pixels on post-operative day number ten. Every subject held a card in front of their face with a specific size marker. The square area of this marker was known and used to measure the number of pixels in this marker with Photoshop and compare it to the known area. Next the area of bruising was measured in number of pixels. Therefore for every photograph a standardized ratio of pixels was known because of the marker.|Post-operative day 10|||a ratio of pixels||Standard Error|Mean
822665|NCT01164644|Primary|Assess Extent of Bruising|Primary outcome measure will be to measure the extent of bruising based on a ratio of pixels on post-operative day number seven. Every subject held a card in front of their face with a specific size marker. The square area of this marker was known and used to measure the number of pixels in this marker with Photoshop and compare it to the known area. Next the area of bruising was measured in number of pixels. Therefore for every photograph a standardized ratio of pixels was known because of the marker.|Post-operative day 7|||a ratio of pixels||Standard Error|Mean
822666|NCT01164644|Primary|Assess Extent of Bruising|Primary outcome measure will be to measure the extent of bruising in based on a ratio of pixels on post-operative day number three. Every subject held a card in front of their face with a specific size marker. The square area of this marker was known and used to measure the number of pixels in this marker with Photoshop and compare it to the known area. Next the area of bruising was measured in number of pixels. Therefore for every photograph a standardized ratio of pixels was known because of the marker. The ratio was calculated by dividing the number of pixels of bruised area over number of pixels of standard area.|Post-operative day 3|||a ratio of pixels||Standard Error|Mean
822667|NCT01164722|Secondary|Incidence of Metachronous Lesions|Number of patients with one or more metachronous lesions|one year on study|Patents with any biopsy from randomization to one year||Participants|||Count of Participants
822668|NCT01164722|Secondary|Recurrence Rate at 1 Year||1 year on study|Patients who were treated with IRC, no data were collected on patients on the expectant management arm||Percentage of lesions that recurred|||Number
822669|NCT01164722|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With High-grade Anal Intraepithelial Neoplasia at 1 Year|Number of patients who had high grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia at one year.|1 year on study|Patients who had an evaluable biopsy within one year after randomization.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822672|NCT01164865|Primary|Likert Questionnaire Scores at 2 Weeks|The Likert Questionnaire included 8 questions on selected comfort measures. All responses were recorded on a 5-point scale, where 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Undecided, 4=Agree, and 5=Strongly Agree.|2 weeks|All participants who received regimen, satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and completed the 14-day treatment period, including completion of the Visit 2 evaluations.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
822673|NCT01164865|Primary|Change From Baseline in Ocular Comfort Rating at 2 Weeks|"Ocular comfort was rated by the participant on a continuous visual analog scale from 0-100, where 0=extremely uncomfortable, 50=neither comfortable nor uncomfortable, and 100=extremely comfortable. The participant marked a horizontal line across the scale at the point that best described how your eyes feel right now."|Baseline (Day 0), 2 weeks|All participants who received regimen, satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and completed the 14-day treatment period, including completion of the Visit 2 evaluations.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
822674|NCT01164891|Primary|Percentage of Total Dose in 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled Metabolite in Pooled Urine Samples|Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments). Urine samples were pooled over period of 96 hours (pool of 0-6 + 6-12 + 12-24 + 24-48 + 48-72 + 72-96 hour samples). Data for parent drug (RO5185426) and metabolites (2 unknown metabolites, glucosylation, mono-hydroxy) are reported.|0 up to 96 hours post dose on Day 15|PK Analysis Population.||percentage of total dose administered||Standard Deviation|Mean
822675|NCT01164891|Primary|Percentage of Total Integrated Radioactivity in Urine of 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled Metabolite|Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments). Urine samples were pooled over period of 96 hours (pool of 0-6 + 6-12 + 12-24 + 24-48 + 48-72 + 72-96 hour samples), Radioactivity was measured in terms of region of interest by high performance liquid chromatography. The radiolabelled components in each chromatogram were evaluated to determine retention times and peak area values. Data for 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled metabolites (2 unknown metabolites, glucosylation, mono-hydroxy) are reported.|0 up to 96 hours post dose on Day 15|PK Analysis Population.||percentage of total radioactivity||Standard Deviation|Mean
822676|NCT01164891|Primary|Percentage of Total Dose in 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled Metabolite in Pooled Fecal Samples|Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments). Fecal samples were pooled over 2 time intervals (0-24 + 24-48 hours, 48-72 + 72-96 hours) for measurement of 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled metabolites (glucosylation, mono-hydroxy, glucuronide) levels.|0-24 + 24-48 hours, 48-72 + 72-96 hours post dose on Day 15|PK Analysis Population.||percentage of total dose administered||Standard Deviation|Mean
822677|NCT01164891|Primary|Percentage of Total Integrated Radioactivity in Feces of 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled Metabolite|Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments). Fecal samples were pooled over two time intervals for this analysis (0-24 + 24-48 hours, 48-72 + 72-96 hours). Radioactivity was measured in terms of region of interest by high performance liquid chromatography. The radiolabelled components in each chromatogram were evaluated to determine retention times and peak area values. Data for 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled metabolites (glucosylation, mono-hydroxy, and glucuronide) are reported.|0-24 + 24-48 hours, 48-72 + 72-96 hours post dose on Day 15|PK Analysis Population.||percentage of total radioactivity||Standard Deviation|Mean
822678|NCT01164891|Primary|Plasma 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled Metabolite Levels|Collection of samples for radioactivity continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48 hour interval assessments). Plasma samples were pooled over three time intervals for this analysis based on available radioactive counts (4 + 6 hours, 12 + 24 hours, and 36 + 48 hours). The concentrations were measured in nanogram equivalent per gram which was calculated based on ratio of dosed radioactivity and the last dose of RO5185426. The concentration values represented the drug portion of the last dose. Data for 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled metabolite (mono-hydroxy) are reported.|4+6 hours, 12 +24 hours, 36+48 hours post dose on Day 15|PK Analysis Population.||nanogram equivalent per gram||Standard Deviation|Mean
822679|NCT01164891|Primary|Percentage of Total Integrated Radioactivity in Plasma of 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled Metabolite|Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments). Plasma samples were pooled over three time intervals for this analysis based on available radioactive counts (4 + 6 hours, 12 + 24 hours, and 36 + 48 hours). Radioactivity was measured in terms of region of interest by high performance liquid chromatography. The radiolabelled components in each chromatogram were evaluated to determine retention times and peak area values. Data for 14C-labeled RO5185426 and 14C-labeled metabolite (mono-hydroxy) are reported.|4+6 hours, 12 +24 hours, 36+48 hours post dose on Day 15|PK Analysis Population.||percentage of total radioactivity||Standard Deviation|Mean
822680|NCT01164891|Primary|14C-labeled RO5185426 Recovery: Percentage of Dose Excreted in Feces and Urine|Urinary and fecal samples were analyze for the percentage dose recovered as total radioactivity. The radioactivity was determined on a Packard liquid scintillation counter. Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments).|Urine:0 hour (pre dose),in quantitative fraction(0-6,6-12,12-24 hours) post dose on Day 15,during 24 hour interval thereafter;Feces:From Day 14 upto pre dose on Day 15,during 24 hour interval post dose until recovery criterion;(maximum:432 hours for both)|PK Analysis Population. One participant was excluded in the analysis because of contamination of urine sample with feces.||percentage of dose recovered||Standard Deviation|Mean
822828|NCT01165684|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Reaching Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Below 7.0% at Week 21|Proportion of subjects reaching HbA1c below 7.0% at Week 21|Week 21|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 383 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis at Week 21.||percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
822681|NCT01164891|Primary|AUC Ratio of Blood:Plasma 14C-labeled RO5185426|Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments).|0 hour (prior to evening dose) on Day 14; 0 hour (pre dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 168, 216, 312 hours post dose on Day 15, and then every 96 hour until recovery criteria met (maximum: 432 hours)|PK Analysis Population. Number of participants analysed = participants with measurable data for this outcome.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
822682|NCT01164891|Primary|Half-life of 14C-labeled RO5185426 in Both Blood and Plasma|Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments).|0 hour (prior to evening dose) on Day 14; 0 hour (pre dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 168, 216, 312 hours post dose on Day 15, and then every 96 hour until recovery criteria met (maximum: 432 hours)|PK Analysis Population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with measurable data for this outcome.||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
822683|NCT01164891|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve From Time Zero to the Last Quantifiable Sample (AUClast) of 14C-RO5185426 in Both Blood and Plasma|Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments). 14C-labeled RO5185426 given was equivalent to ≤1mSv.|0 hour (prior to evening dose) on Day 14; 0 hour (pre dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 168, 216, 312 hours post dose on Day 15, and then every 96 hour until recovery criteria met (maximum: 432 hours)|PK Analysis Population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with measurable data for this outcome.||(micrograms equivalent/milliliter)*hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
822684|NCT01164891|Primary|Time to Reach Cmax in Both Blood and Plasma|Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments).|0 hour (prior to evening dose) on Day 14; 0 hour (pre dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 168, 216, 312 hours post dose on Day 15, and then every 96 hour until recovery criteria met (maximum: 432 hours)|PK Analysis Population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with measurable data for this outcome.||hours||Full Range|Median
822685|NCT01164891|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration of 14C-labeled RO5185426 (Cmax) in Both Blood and Plasma|Collection of samples continued until the recovery criterion was met (radioactivity recovered from urine and feces ≤ 1 % of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments). 14C-labeled RO5185426 given was equivalent to ≤1 millisieverts (mSv).|0 hour (prior to evening dose) on Day 14; 0 hour (pre dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 168, 216, 312 hours post dose on Day 15, and then every 96 hour until recovery criteria met (maximum: 432 hours)|PK Analysis Population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with measurable data for this outcome.||micrograms equivalent per milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
822686|NCT01164891|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of first treatment to the date of death, regardless of the cause of death.|From Baseline then Day 1 of Cycle 3 thereafter, Day 1 of every other cycle (every 2 months) until death (maximum 841 days)|The data was not collected, as planned, due to small number of participants enrolled in the study.|||||
822687|NCT01164891|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Response by Confirmed Best Overall Response|Best overall response (according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors 1.1 criteria) was defined as best response recorded from start of treatment until disease progression which included complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) that had been confirmed by second tumor assessment no less than (<) 4 weeks after criteria for response were first met. Confirmed CR: disappearance of all target and non-target lesions; no new lesions, and any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 millimeters (mm). Confirmed PR: at least 30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. Disease progression: at least 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions.|From Baseline then Day 1 of Cycle 3 thereafter, Day 1 of every other cycle (every 2 months) until disease progression, withdrawal from study or death (maximum 841 days)|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
822688|NCT01164891|Primary|Plasma RO5185426 Trough Concentrations on Days 15,16, and 17||Pre-dose on Days 15, 16 and 17|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Population: participants from whom the level of radioactivity recovered from excreta (urine and feces) was ≤ 1% of the radioactivity in the administered dose between any two successive 48-hour interval assessments.||micrograms per milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
822689|NCT01165021|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from date of first dose to the first observation of disease progression or death due to any cause. For participants not known to have died or did not have objective progressive disease (PD) as of the data inclusion cut-off date, PFS was censored at the date of the last objective progression-free disease assessment. PD was defined using RECIST v1.1 criteria as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (including the baseline sum if that is the smallest). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. The appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression.|Enrollment until the first date of objectively determined PD or death up to 64 months|All participants who received 1 or more doses of preoperative chemotherapy. Participants censored=3.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822690|NCT01165021|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as duration from the date of study enrollment to the date of death from any cause. Participants not known to have died as of the data inclusion cut-off date were censored at the date of last contact. The last contact for participants in post-discontinuation was the last date participant was known to be alive.|Enrollment until the date of death from any cause up to 64 months|All participants who received 1 or more doses of preoperative chemotherapy. Participants censored=8||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822881|NCT01159262|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Who Received Rescue Medication Midazolam for Sedation During Dexmedetomidine Infusion||During study drug administration (6 to 24 hours)|Efficacy Evaluable Population: All subjects who received randomized Dexmedetomidine for at least 6 hours.||percentage of subjects|||Number
822691|NCT01165021|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Exhibit a Downward Shift in Tumor Extent From Stage IIIAN2 to Stages IIIA, II, I, or Stage 0|Tumor downstaging compared to baseline (Stage IIIAN2) were those participants who exhibited a downward shift in tumor extent from Stage IIIAN2 to Stages IIIA, II, I, or 0 were reported. Downstaging was based on radiological examination. Stage IIIAN2 was locally advanced and/or involved lymph nodes, metastasis in ipsilateral mediastinal and or subcarinal lymph nodes, tumors were ≤2 centimeters (cm) up to 5 cm in greatest dimension; Stage IIIA was locally advanced and/or involved lymph nodes, tumor extension was restricted to the affected lung; Stage II was locally advanced and/or involved lymph nodes; Stage I was small localized cancers, usually curable; Stage 0 the cancer did not spread beyond the inner lining of the lung. Missing responses were also reported. Percentage of participants calculated as: (number of participants with a downward shift in extent of their tumor) divided by (total number of evaluable participants) multiplied by 100.|From study enrollment until disease progression or recurrence up to completion of 3 cycles (21-day cycles) of chemotherapy|Participants who received at least 1 dose of preoperative chemotherapy and had baseline and Cycle 3 scans for tumor assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822692|NCT01165021|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With No Viable Tumor Cells in Resected Lung Tissue [Pathological Complete Remission (pCR)]|pCR after the participant has undergone surgery was calculated as: (total number of participants with pCR) divided by (the total number of participants in pathological response population) multiplied by 100.|At the time of surgery (within 3 to 6 weeks of Day 1 of Cycle 3 [21-day cycles] of chemotherapy)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of preoperative chemotherapy and had surgical tumor tissue samples available.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822693|NCT01165021|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) [Overall Response Rate (ORR)]|Response was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) criteria. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and all target and non-target lymph nodes were non-pathological or normal in size [<10 millimeter (mm) short axis]. PR was defined as having at least a 30% decrease in sum of longest diameter of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. ORR calculated as: (sum of the number of participants with PRs and CRs) divided by (number of evaluable participants) multiplied by 100.|From study enrollment until disease progression or recurrence up to completion of 3 cycles (21-day cycles) of chemotherapy|Participants who received at least 1 dose of preoperative chemotherapy and had baseline and Cycle 3 scans for tumor assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822694|NCT01165047|Primary|Number of Participants With Side Effects and/or Adverse Events|A phone contact will be made to the subject 5 days after the trial to assess general health status and collect information on any reported side effects or adverse events.|5 days|||participants|||Number
822695|NCT01165112|Secondary|Ability to Proceed to Peripheral Blood Stem Cell (PBSC) Collection Following Treatment (Impact of This Regimen on Stem Cell Reserve)||Up to 5 weeks after the last course|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822696|NCT01165112|Secondary|Preliminary Assessment of the Efficacy of This Regimen|Response will be defined by standard NCI criteria (Cheson et al) for lymphoid malignancies.|Up to 5 weeks after the last course|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822697|NCT01165112|Primary|Safety and Toxicity of This Regimen|Count of participants experiencing a dose limiting toxicity. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version (v)4.0 will be used to classify and grade toxicities.|Up to 5 weeks after the last course|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822698|NCT01165112|Primary|Maximally Tolerated Dose of Bendamustine Hydrochloride That Can be Combined With Rituximab, Carboplatin, and Etoposide Chemotherapy in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Lymphoid Malignancies|Defined as dose at which approximately =< 25% of patients experience a DLT. Following completed observation of final patient, two-parameter logistic model fit to data, generating dose-response curve based on observed toxicity rate at dose levels visited. Based on this fitted model, MTD is estimated to be dose that is associated with toxicity rate of 25%. If estimate of slope parameter for fitted curve is not positive and finite, geometric mean of dose level used for last cohort and dose level that would have been assigned to next cohort is taken as MTD.|Up to 5 weeks after the last course|||mg/m2 x 2|||Number
822699|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With the Indicated Reason for Incorrect Inhaler Use and Who Required Additional Instruction the Indicated Number of Times at Baseline, Week 2, and Week 4|Participants were given a demonstration of correct inhaler use (using placebo inhalers), and the participants' competence to correctly use the demonstration inhaler was then assessed based on 3 steps: open the device, inhale the dose, and close the device. If the participants did not perform the maneuvers correctly, the step of the inhaler use that was performed incorrectly by the participants was recorded. The entire procedure was demonstrated once again. and the number of times that the participants required additional instruction (RAI) was recorded.|Baseline, Week 2, and Week 4|ITT Population. Only those participants who used the inhaler incorrectly at the specified time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
822700|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Used the Inhaler Correctly or Incorrectly at Baseline, Week 2, and Week 4|Participants were given a demonstration of correct inhaler use (using placebo inhalers), and the participants' competence to correctly use the demonstration inhaler was then assessed.|Baseline (BL), Week 2 (W2), and Week 4 (W4)|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
822701|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Number of the Indicated Unscheduled Asthma-related Healthcare Visits During the Treatment Period|All unscheduled asthma-related visits to a physician’s office, visits to urgent care, visits to the emergency department, and hospitalizations (ICU=intensive care unit; GW=general ward) associated with severe asthma exacerbations or other asthma-related healthcare were recorded.|From Baseline up to Week 12/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population||Number of visits||Standard Deviation|Mean
822717|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Occurrence and relationship to vaccination of all SAEs in all subjects. Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|Within the 30-day (Days 0-29) post-vaccination period, up to Month 14 and up to study end (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|This analysis was based on the the total vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one dose of study vaccine or placebo administered.||Subjects|||Number
822702|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With the Indicated Global Assessment of Change Responses at Week 4, Week 8, and Week 12/Early Withdrawal|At the end of Week 4, Week 8, and Week 12/Early Withdrawal, the Global Assessment of Change Questionnaire that assesses changes in asthma symptoms (AS) and rescue medication use (RMU) was completed by the participants. The number of participants who chose the following answers to the questionnaire were determined: much better, somewhat better, a little better, the same, a little worse, somewhat worse, much worse (to assess the changes in asthma symptom); much less often , somewhat less often , a little less often , the same , a little more often , somewhat more often , much more often (to assess the changes in the frequency of rescue medication use).|Week 4, Week 8, and Week 12/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
822703|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in the Asthma Control Test (ACT) Score at Week 12|"The ACT is a 5-item questionnaire developed as a measure of the participant's asthma control. Questions are designed to be self-completed by the participant and include the following: In the past 4 weeks, How much of the time did your asthma keep you from getting as much done at work, school or at home?, How often have you had shortness of breath?, How often did your asthma symptoms wake you up at night or earlier than usual in the morning?, How often have you used your rescue inhaler or nebulizer medication (such as albuterol)? and How would you rate your asthma control? The ACT total score is defined as the sum of the scores from all 5 questions, provided all questions have been answered; thus, the total score ranges from 5 (poor control of asthma) to 25 (complete control of asthma). A score of 20 or higher indicates well-controlled asthma. Change from Baseline was calculated as the total score at Week 12/Early Withdrawal minus the total score at Baseline."|Baseline and Week 12/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed. The analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment group.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822704|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Daily Evening (PM) PEF Averaged Over the 12-week Treatment Period|PEF is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. PEF was measured by the participants using a hand-held electronic peak flow meter each evening prior to the dose of study medication and any rescue albuterol/salbutamol inhalation aerosol use. Change from Baseline (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants) was calculated as the value of the averaged daily PM PEF over the 12-week treatment period (at Week 12) minus the Baseline value. The analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment group.|From Baseline up to Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters per minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822705|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Daily Morning (AM) Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Averaged Over the 12-week Treatment Period|Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. PEF was measured by the participants using a hand-held electronic peak flow meter each morning prior to the dose of study medication and any rescue albuterol/salbutamol inhalation aerosol use. Change from Baseline (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants) was calculated as the value of the averaged daily AM PEF over the 12-week treatment period (at Week 12) minus the Baseline value. The analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment group.|From Baseline up to Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters per minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822706|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Bronchodilator Effect|Bronchodilator effect is defined as an increase of FEV1 (defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second) from Baseline of both 12% and 200 milliliters (mL) during 24 hours, which was evaluated using the serial FEV1 measurements at Baseline (Visit 3).|Baseline|ITT Population. Only the subset of participants performing serial measurements were analyzed.||participants|||Number
822707|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Weighted Mean Serial FEV1 Over 0-4 Hours Post-dose at Baseline and Week 12|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Serial FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry at the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits. Weighted mean serial FEV1 over 0-4 hours was calculated using the serial FEV1 measurements that included the pre-dose assessment (within 30 minutes prior to dosing at Baseline and within 5 minutes prior to dosing at Week 12) and post-dose assessments after 5, 15, and 30 minutes and 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours. At each time point, the highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements were recorded. Baseline was the value obtained at Visit 3.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT Population. Weighted mean serial FEV1 was calculated in the subset of participants for whom serial FEV1 at Week 12 was performed. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
822708|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Weighted Mean Serial FEV1 Over 0-24 Hours Post-dose at Baseline|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Serial FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry at Baseline. Weighted mean was calculated using the 24-hour serial FEV1 measurements that included the pre-dose assessment (within 30 minutes prior to dosing) and post-dose assessments after 5, 15, and 30 minutes and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 12, 16, 20, 23, and 24 hours. At each time point, the highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements were recorded. Baseline was the value obtained at Visit 3.|Baseline|ITT Population. Weighted mean serial FEV1 was calculated in the subset of participants for whom serial FEV1 was performed.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
822709|NCT01165138|Other Pre-specified|Clinic Visit 12-hour Post-dose FEV1 at Week 12|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. 12-hour post-dose FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry at the Week 12 clinic visit. The highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements was recorded. The analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline FEV1, region, sex, age, and treatment group.|Week 12|ITT Population. 12-hour post-dose FEV1 was analyzed in the subset of participants for whom serial FEV1 at Week 12 was performed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822773|NCT01165242|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life-threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|From Month 0 through Month 6|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822710|NCT01165138|Secondary|Serial FEV1 Over 0-1 Hour Post-dose at Randomization|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Serial FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry at Randomization. Serial FEV1 measurements after 5, 15, and 30 minutes and 1 hour post-dose were assessed. At each time point, the highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements was recorded. The analysis was performed using a repeated measures model adjusted for baseline, region, sex, age, treatment group, and planned time points.|Randomization|ITT Population. Serial FEV1 was calculated for the subset of participants for whom serial FEV1 was performed. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822711|NCT01165138|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Withdrew Due to Lack of Efficacy During the 12-week Treatment Period|The number of participants whose primary reason for withdrawal was lack of efficacy was analyzed.|From the first dose of the study medication up to Week 12/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population||participants|||Number
822712|NCT01165138|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Total Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) (+12) Score at Week 12/Early Withdrawal|"The AQLQ is a disease-specific, self-administered quality of life questionnaire used to evaluate the impact of asthma treatments on the quality of life of asthma sufferers. The AQLQ for 12 years and older (AQLQ [+12]) is a modified version of the AQLQ for use in asthma patients between the age of 12 and 70. The AQLQ contains 32 items in 4 domains: activity limitation (11 items), symptoms (12 items), emotional function (5 items), and environmental stimuli (4 items). For the 32 items on the questionnaire, the response format consists of a seven-point scale, where a value of 1 indicates “total impairment” and a value of 7 indicates “no impairment.” The AQLQ total score is defined as the average of the scores from all 32 questions; thus, the total score ranges from 1 (indicates total impairment) to 7 (indicates no impairment). Baseline was the total score obtained at Visit 3. Change from Baseline was calculated as the total score at Week 12 minus the total score at Baseline."|Baseline and Week 12/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed. The analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment group.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822713|NCT01165138|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Symptom-free 24-hour (hr) Periods During the 12-week Treatment Period|Asthma symptoms were recorded in a daily eDairy by the participants every day in the morning and evening before taking any rescue or study medication and before the peak expiratory flow measurement. A 24-hour (hr) period in which a participant’s responses to both the morning and evening assessments indicated no symptoms was considered to be symptom free. The Baseline value was derived from the last 7 days of the daily eDiary prior to the randomization of the participant. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged value during the 12-week Treatment Period minus the Baseline value. The analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment group.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage of symptom-free 24-hr periods||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822714|NCT01165138|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Rescue-free 24-hour (hr) Periods During the 12-week Treatment Period|The number of inhalations of rescue albuterol/salbutamol inhalation aerosol used during the day and night was recorded by the participants in a daily electronic diary (eDiary). A 24-hour (hr) period in which a participant’s responses to both the morning and evening assessments indicated no use of rescue medication was considered to be rescue free. The Baseline value was derived from the last 7 days of the daily eDiary prior to the randomization of the participant. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged value during the 12-week Treatment Period minus the Baseline value. The analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment group.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage of rescue-free 24-hr periods||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822715|NCT01165138|Primary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean Serial FEV1 Over 0-24 Hours Post-dose at Week 12|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Serial FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry at the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits. Weighted mean was calculated using the 24-hour serial FEV1 measurements that included the pre-dose assessment (within 30 minutes prior to dosing at Baseline and within 5 minutes prior to dosing at Week 12) and post-dose assessments after 5, 15, and 30 minutes and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 12, 16, 20, 23, and 24 hours. At each time point, the highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements was recorded. Baseline was the value obtained at Visit 3. Change from Baseline was calculated as the average Week 12 FEV1 value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline FEV1, region, sex, age, and treatment group.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT Population. Weighted mean serial FEV1 was calculated for the subset of participants for whom serial FEV1 was performed at Week 12.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822716|NCT01165138|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinic Visit Trough (Pre-bronchodilator and Pre-dose) Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at Week 12|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 is defined as the clinic visit (pre-bronchodilator and pre-dose) FEV1measurement taken at the clinic visit while still on-treatment. Pre-dose and pre-rescue albuterol/salbutamol trough FEV1 was measured electronically by spirometry in the evening at the Baseline through Week 12 clinic visits. The highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements was recorded. Baseline was the pre-dose value obtained at Visit 3. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 12 value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was performed using an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model with covariates of Baseline trough FEV1, region, sex, age, and treatment group. The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement at scheduled clinic visits was used to impute the missing m|Baseline and Week 12|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment, who received at least one dose of the study medication. Only those participants with non-missing covariates and post-Baseline FEV1 data were analyzed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824621|NCT01183013|Secondary|Occurrence of Relative Efficacy Response (HbA1c Lowering by at Least 0.5% After 30 Weeks of Treatment)|Glycosylated hemoglobin is reported as a percentage of the total hemoglobin.|Baseline and 30 weeks|FAS with non-completers (without a value at Week 30) considered as failure||participants|||Number
822718|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|Occurrence, intensity and relationship to vaccination of unsolicited AEs, according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) classification in all subjects An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 AE = an AE which prevented normal, everyday activities. Related = AE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within 30 days (Days 0 - 29) after each vaccination|This analysis was based on the the total vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one dose of study vaccine or placebo administered.||Subjects|||Number
822719|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With AEs With Any and Related Medically Attended Visit (MAEs)|Occurrence and relationship to vaccination of medically attended visits (defined as hospitalizations, emergency room visits or visits to or from medical personnel), other than routine health care visits in all subjects.|From Month 0 to Month 8 post-vaccination|This analysis was based on the the total vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one dose of study vaccine or placebo administered.||Subjects|||Number
822720|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Potential Immune Mediated Diseases (pIMDs)|Occurrence and relationship to vaccination of any potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) in all subjects|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|This analysis was based on the the total vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one dose of study vaccine or placebo administered.||Subjects|||Number
822721|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Symptoms (Solicited and Unsolicited)||Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the total vaccinated cohort – Diary Card, which was a subset of subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, who completed diary cards with any solicited symptoms during the 7 days (Day 0 to Day 6) post vaccination period.||Subjects|||Number
822722|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, fever [defined as oral, axillary, rectal or tympanic temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)], headache, myalgia, shivering and sweating. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = fever > 39.0 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the TVc – Diary Card, which was a subset of subjects from the TVc, who completed diary cards with any solicited symptoms during the 7 days (Day 0 to Day 6) post vaccination period.||Subjects|||Number
822723|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 100 millimeters (mm) of injection site. Relationship analysis was not performed.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the total vaccinated cohort – Diary Card, which was a subset of subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, who completed diary cards with any solicited symptoms during the 7 days (Day 0 to Day 6) post vaccination period.||Subjects|||Number
822724|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Days of Pain Medication Associated With HZ|The analysis was performed in subjects with a confirmed HZ episode|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
822725|NCT01165177|Secondary|Distribution of Pain Medication Associated With HZ|The distribution of pain medication included 1 to 3 or more separate medications. This Outcome Measure was only assessed participants with confirmed HZ.|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822726|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With HZ Related Complications, by Complication Type|Complication types included HZ vasculitis, Disseminated Disease, Ophtalmic Disease, Neurologic Disease, Visceral Disease and Stroke. This Outcome Measure was only assessed participants with confirmed HZ.|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822727|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Confirmed HZ Episode Related Mortality and Hospitalizations|The analysis focused on confirmed HZ episode related hospitalizations and deaths.|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822728|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Days With Severe ‘Worst’ HZ-associated Pain.|Severe 'worst' pain was defined as HZ-associated pain rated as 3 or above on the 'worst pain' ZBPI questionnaire. This Outcome Measure was only assessed participants with confirmed HZ. This analysis involved any subject reporting ZBPI clinically significant pain (i.e. pain with a score of 3 or more on a 0-10 point scale) at any time during the study.|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
822774|NCT01165242|Secondary|Number of Subjects With New Onset of Chronic Illness(es) (NOCI)|NOCI included hypersensitivity, insulin resistance, asthma and bronchial hyperreactivity.|From Month 0 through Month 6|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822729|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Confirmed HZ Episode Taking Pain Medication Associated With HZ|The analysis focused on subjects taking pain medication due to HZ|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822730|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Confirmed HZ Episode Having a Reduction of Duration of Pain Medication Associated With HZ|The analysis focused on patients who experienced a reduction in duration of pain medication administered for HZ in subjects with confirmed HZ.|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822731|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Confirmed HZ Episode Related Hospitalizations|The analysis focused on confirmed HZ episode related hospitalizations.|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822732|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With HZ Related Complications|The analysis focused on the incidence of HZ complications in subjects with confirmed HZ|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822733|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Confirmed HZ Episode Related Mortality|The analysis focused on the number of subjects who died due to HZ|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822734|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Reduction of Duration of Severe ‘Worst’ HZ-associated Pain|Severe 'worst' pain was defined as HZ-associated pain rated as 3 or above on the 'worst pain' Zoster Brief Pain Inventory (ZBPI) questionnaire. The outcome assessed the duration of severe ‘worst’ HZ-associated pain following the onset of a confirmed HZ rash over the entire pain reporting period as measured by the ZBPI in subjects with confirmed HZ. This analysis involved any subject reporting clinically significant pain (i.e. pain with a score of 3 or more on a 0-10 point scale) at any time during the study.|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822735|NCT01165177|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Episodes of Post-Herpetic Neuralgia (PHN)|The incidence of PHN was calculated using the modified total vaccinated chort.|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822736|NCT01165177|Primary|Number of Subjects With Confirmed Herpes Zoster (HZ) Cases|Confirmed HZ cases during the study were assessed in the Modified Total Vaccinated Cohort (mTVc)|During the entire study period (3 to 5 year period following Day 0)|The analysis was based on the modified total vaccinated cohort, which included subjects from the total vaccinated cohort, except those who were not administered with the second vaccination or who developed a confirmed case of Herpes Zoster prior to 1 month after the second vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
822737|NCT01165203|Secondary|HIV VL|HIV VL was tabulated by HIV status, for subjects with a number of available results greater than or equal to (≥) 40 copies/mL.|At Screening Visit (up to 21 days prior to Month 0), Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included only vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented, who had available results of ≥ 40 copies/mL.||HIV-RNA copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822738|NCT01165203|Secondary|CD4 Count|CD4 count was tabulated by HIV status.|At Screening Visit (up to 21 days prior to Month 0), Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||CD4 T-cells/million T-cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
822739|NCT01165203|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Herpes Zoster (HZ) Cases and Complications||From Month 0 until Month 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822740|NCT01165203|Secondary|­Anti-VZV and Anti-gE Antibody Concentrations, by HIV Status|Antibody concentrations were as determined by ELISA and tabulated by HIV status. Anti-VZV and anti-gE antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) and expressed in mIU/mL.|At Months 0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 18|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohorts for immunogenicity and for persistence, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available at the considered time points (up to Month 7 for the ATP cohort for immunogenicity and at Month 18 for the ATP cohort for persistence).||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822741|NCT01165203|Secondary|­Anti-VZV and Anti-gE Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were as determined by ELISA and tabulated for the main study groups. Anti-VZV and anti-gE antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) and expressed in mIU/mL.|At Months 0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 18|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohorts for immunogenicity and for persistence, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available at the considered time points (up to Month 7 for the ATP cohort for immunogenicity and at Month 18 for the ATP cohort for persistence).||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822742|NCT01165203|Secondary|­Frequencies of Varicella-Zoster Virus (VZV)- and gE-specific CD4 T-cells, by HIV Status|The analysis focused on CD4 T-cells expressing at least 2 cytokines (among IFN-g, IL-2, TNF-a and/or CD40L as determined by ICS at Months 0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 18 and tabulated by HIV status.|At Months 0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 18|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohorts for immunogenicity and for persistence, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available at the considered time points (up to Month 7 for the ATP cohort for immunogenicity and at Month 18 for the ATP cohort for persistence).||CD4 T-cells/million T-cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
822743|NCT01165203|Secondary|­Frequencies of Varicella-Zoster Virus (VZV)- and gE-specific CD4 T-cells|The analysis focused on CD4 T cells expressing at least 2 cytokines (among IFN-g, IL-2, TNF-a and/or CD40L as determined by ICS at Months 0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 18 and tabulated for the main study groups.|At Month 0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 18|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohorts for immunogenicity and for persistence, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available at the considered time points (up to Month 7 for the ATP cohort for immunogenicity and at Month 18 for the ATP cohort for persistence).||CD4 T-cells/million T-cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
822744|NCT01165203|Primary|­Anti-gE Antibody (Ab) Concentrations|­Anti-gE antibody (Ab) concentrations were determined by Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) at Month 7 in ART and non-ART cohorts presenting high CD4 counts at enrolment. Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) and expressed in milli-international units per milliliter (mIU/mL).|At Month 7|||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822745|NCT01165203|Primary|Frequency of gE-specific CD4 T-cells|The analysis focused on CD4 T-cells expressing at least 2 cytokines (among interferon-gamma (IFN-g) , interleukin-2 (IL-2), tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) and/or CD40 ligand (CD40L)) as determined by in vitro intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) at Month 7 in ART and non-ART cohorts presenting high CD4 counts at enrollment.|At Month 7|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available at Month 7.||CD4 T-cells/million T-cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
822746|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Pre-defined Changes in HIV Viral Load (VL) and CD4 T-cell Count, by HIV Status|In this analysis, results were tabulated by HIV status.|From Month 1 to Month 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822747|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any AIDS-defining Condition, by HIV Status|In this analysis, results were tabulated by HIV status|From Month 0 to Month 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822748|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Significant Change in Antiretroviral Therapy (ART), Including Initiation of ART in ART-naïve Subjects, by HIV Status|In this analysis, results were tabulated by HIV status|From Month 0 to Month 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822749|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Pre-defined Changes in HIV Viral Load (VL) and CD4 T-cell Count|In this analysis, results were tabulated for the main study groups.|From Month 1 to Month 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822750|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any AIDS-defining Condition|In this analysis, results were tabulated for the main study groups.|From Month 0 until Month 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822751|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Significant Change in Antiretroviral Therapy (ART), Including Initiation of ART in ART-naïve Subjects|In this analysis, results were tabulated for the main study groups. Significant changes to ART appeared due to failure to control HIV viral load and due to failure to maintain high CD4 cells count.|From Month 0 until Month 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822752|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Hematological and Biochemical Parameters Below, Within or Above Normal Laboratory Ranges|The assessed parameters were Alanine Aminotransferase, Albumin, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Basophils, Bilirubin Total, Bilirubin Conjugated / Direct, Creatinine, Eosinophils, Glucose, Bicarbonate, Haemoglobin, Potassium, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Sodium, Neutrophils, Platelets and White Blood Cells. Tabulation was made by relation to the normal laboratory ranges: below, within or above, and also staus unknown.|At Month 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822753|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Hematological and Biochemical Parameters Below, Within or Above Normal Laboratory Ranges|The assessed parameters were Alanine Aminotransferase, Albumin, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Basophils, Bilirubin Total, Bilirubin Conjugated / Direct, Creatinine, Eosinophils, Glucose, Bicarbonate, Haemoglobin, Potassium, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Sodium, Neutrophils, Platelets and White Blood Cells. Tabulation was made by relation to the normal laboratory ranges: below, within or above, and also status unknown.|At Month 6|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822754|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Hematological and Biochemical Parameters Below, Within or Above Normal Laboratory Ranges|The assessed parameters were Alanine Aminotransferase, Albumin, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Basophils, Bilirubin Total, Bilirubin Conjugated / Direct, Creatinine, Eosinophils, Glucose, Bicarbonate, Haemoglobin, Potassium, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Sodium, Neutrophils, Platelets and White Blood Cells. Tabulation was made by relation to the normal laboratory ranges: below, within or above, and also staus unknown.|At Month 3|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822755|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Hematological and Biochemical Parameters Below, Within or Above Normal Laboratory Ranges|The assessed parameters were Alanine Aminotransferase, Albumin, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Basophils, Bilirubin Total, Bilirubin Conjugated / Direct, Creatinine, Eosinophils, Glucose, Bicarbonate, Haemoglobin, Potassium, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Sodium, Neutrophils, Platelets and White Blood Cells. Tabulation was made by relation to the normal laboratory ranges: below, within or above, and also status unknown.|At Month 2|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822756|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Hematological and Biochemical Parameters Below, Within or Above Normal Laboratory Ranges|The assessed parameters were Alanine Aminotransferase, Albumin, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Basophils, Bilirubin Total, Bilirubin Conjugated / Direct, Creatinine, Eosinophils, Glucose, Bicarbonate, Haemoglobin, Potassium, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Sodium, Neutrophils, Platelets and White Blood Cells. Tabulation was made by relation to the normal laboratory ranges: below, within or above, and also status unknown.|At Month 1|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822757|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Hematological and Biochemical Parameters Below, Within or Above Normal Laboratory Ranges|The assessed parameters were Alanine Aminotransferase, Albumin, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Basophils, Bilirubin Total, Bilirubin Conjugated / Direct, Creatinine, Eosinophils, Glucose, Bicarbonate, Haemoglobin, Potassium, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Sodium, Neutrophils, Platelets and White Blood Cells. Tabulation was made by relation to the normal laboratory ranges: below, within or above, and also status unknown.|At Screening Visit (up to 21 days prior to Month 0)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822758|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited AEs|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 AE = an AE which prevented normal, everyday activities. Related = AE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within 30 days (Days 0-29) after each vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822759|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue, gastrointestinal (symptoms included nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and/or abdominal pain), headache, myalgia, shivering and temperature [defined as oral/axillary temperature above (>) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = incidence of a particular symptom regardless of their intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = fever > 39.0 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period following each dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822760|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = incidence of a particular symptom regardless of their intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 100 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period following each dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented, who had their symptom sheets filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822761|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Adverse Events (AEs) of Specific Interest|AEs of specific interest include new onset of autoimmune diseases (NOADs) and other immune mediated inflammatory disorders from administration of the first dose of vaccine/placebo.|From Month 0 until Month 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822762|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Fatal SAEs|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|From screening (up to 21 days prior to Month 0) until Month 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822763|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With SAEs Related to Study Participation or to a Concurrent GSK Medication/Vaccine|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|From screening (up to 21 days prior to Month 0) until Month 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822764|NCT01165203|Primary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|From Month 0 to Month 18|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822810|NCT01165450|Secondary|Time to Complete Re-epithelialization of the Study Eye|Resolution of epithelial defect is defined as the largest diameter of the epithelial defect being less than 0.5 mm, as it is difficult to distinguish a smaller defect from the small amount of fluorescing staining seen in a healed defect. Time of complete re-epithelialization will be defined as the midpoint between the last observed date with an epithelial defect and the date of the first visit with no epithelial defect, up to Day 28 ± 2.|28 ± 2 days|The study was terminated prematurely, data were never analyzed; PI has left the institution and data are no longer available.|||||
822765|NCT01165216|Secondary|Serum Half-life (T-HALF) of Ipilimumab|T-HALF was calculated as the ratio of ln(2) to elimination rate constant (K), where K was estimated as negative slope obtained by regression of the terminal log-linear portion of the serum concentration vs time profile following the ipilimumab dose on Day 1 of Cycle 3. Individual patient pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter values were derived by noncompartmental methods, using a validated PK analysis program. Actual times were used for the analyses. T-HALF measurements were performed during the 3rd cycle; at predose and at 1.5, 4 , 24 (Day 2), 48 (Day 3), 168 hrs (Day 8),and 336 (Day 15) hours postdose; during the 4th and subsequent cycle, predose ipilimumab; and off-treatment until progression of disease, toxicities requiring discontinuation, withdrawal of consent, or study closure.|During Cycle 3: predose and 1.5, 4, 24, 48, 168, and 336 hours postdose ipilimumab|Participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
822766|NCT01165216|Secondary|Time of Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Tmax)|Tmax was recorded directly from experimental observations. Actual times were used for the analyses. Tmax measurements were performed during the 3rd cycle; at predose and at 1.5, 4 , 24 (Day 2), 48 (Day 3), 168 hrs (Day 8),and 336 (Day 15) hours postdose; during the 4th and subsequent cycle, predose ipilimumab; and off-treatment until progression of disease, toxicities requiring discontinuation, withdrawal of consent, or study closure.|During Cycle 3: predose and 1.5, 4, 24, 48, 168, and 336 hours postdose ipilimumab|Participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Hours||Full Range|Median
822767|NCT01165216|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration Curve From Time 0 to Day 21 (in 1 Interval Dosing) (AUC[0-21d]) for Ipilimumab|The AUC(0-21d) was calculated using a mixture of log- and linear-trapezoidal summations. Using no weighting factor, the terminal log-liner phase of the concentration-time curve was determined by least-square linear regression of at least 3 data points. Individual patient pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter values were derived by noncompartmental methods using a validated PK analysis program. Actual times were used for the analyses. AUC(0-21d) measurements were performed during the 3rd cycle, at predose and at 1.5, 4 , 24 (Day 2), 48 (Day 3), 168 hrs (Day 8),and 336 (Day 15) hours postdose; during the 4th and subsequent cycle, predose ipilimumab; and off-treatment until progression of disease, toxicities requiring discontinuation, withdrawal of consent; or study closure.|During Cycle 3: predose and 1.5, 4, 24, 48, 168, and 336 hours postdose ipilimumab|Participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||ug*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822768|NCT01165216|Secondary|Trough Observed Serum Concentration (Cmin) of Ipilimumab|Cmin was recorded directly from experimental observations. Actual times were used for the analyses. Cmin measurements were performed during the 3rd cycle, at predose and at 1.5, 4 , 24 (Day 2), 48 (Day 3), 168 (Day 8), and 336 (Day 15) hours postdose; during the 4th and subsequent cycle, predose ipilimumab; and off-treatment until progression of disease, toxicities requiring discontinuation, withdrawal of consent; or study closure.|During Cycle 3: predose and 1.5, 4, 24, 48, 168, and 336 hours postdose ipilimumab|Participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||ug/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822769|NCT01165216|Secondary|Maximum Serum Concentration (Cmax) of Ipilimumab|Cmax was recorded directly from experimental observations. Actual times were used for the analyses. Cmax measurements were performed during the 3rd cycle; at predose and at 1.5, 4 , 24 (Day 2), 48 (Day 3), 168 hrs (Day 8),and 336 (Day 15) hours postdose; during the 4th and subsequent cycle, predose ipilimumab; and off-treatment until progression of disease, toxicities requiring discontinuation, withdrawal of consent, or study closure.|During Cycle 3: predose and 1.5, 4, 24, 48, 168, and 336 hours postdose ipilimumab|Participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||ug/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822770|NCT01165216|Secondary|Number of Participants With Best Overall Response (BOR) of Partial Response (PR) or Stable Disease|Tumor response was determined for all participants with measurable lesions by radiologic responses as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1. The BOR was the best response recorded from start of treatment until disease progression/recurrence. RECIST for target lesions: PR=at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest dimension (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD; stable disease=neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started. At minimum, tumor measurements were to be obtained at screening, every 6 weeks (±1 week) during the induction phase and every 12 weeks (±1 week) during the maintenance phase.|Day 1 of Cycle 3, Day 1 of Cycle 5, and Day 22 of Cycle 6|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
822771|NCT01165216|Secondary|Number of Participants With Death As Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Drug-related SAEs, Drug-related Adverse Events (AEs), AEs Leading to Discontinuation, Drug-related AEs Leading to Discontinuation|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Treatment-related=having certain, probable, possible, or unknown relationship to study drug. AE incidence was assessed from Day 1 until Week 24 and every 12 weeks thereafter during the maintenance period, until discontinuation of study drug, due to progression of disease, toxicities requiring discontinuation, withdrawal of consent, or study closure, and at least every 4 weeks(±1 week) until all study drug-related toxicities had recovered to resolved, stabilized or returned to baseline or were deemed irreversible during the follow-up period).|Continuously from Day 1 to Week 24 and every12 weeks thereafter during maintenance until discontinuation of drug|Participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug||Participants|||Number
822772|NCT01165216|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing a Dose-limiting Toxicity (DLT)|A DLT was defined as study drug-related adverse event occurring during the first 2 cycles after ipilimumab administration in the induction phase and was any of the following: Grade 4 absolute neutrophil count (ANC) decreased (<500 cells/ mm^3) for 7 or more consecutive days; febrile Neutropenia (body temperature ≥38.5° C with ANC <1000 /mm^3) lasting >3 days; Grade 4 platelet count decreased (<25,000 cells/mm^3) or Grade 3 platelet count decreased requiring a platelet transfusion; Grade 3 or greater nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, despite the use of adequate/maximal medical intervention; Grade 3 or greater aspartate transaminase/alanine transaminase level and rash that has not resolved to Grade 2 or lower within 2 weeks after onset; or any Grade 3 or greater nonhematologic toxicity (except Grade 3 fatigue, Grade 3 asthenia, Grade 3 transient arthralgia/myalgia, or Grade 3 transient abnormal electrolyte levels).|Day 1 of Cycles 1 and 2 From Day 1 of Cycle 3 to Day 21 of Cycle 4|Participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Participants|||Number
822775|NCT01165242|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|Within 31 days (Day 0-30) post-vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822776|NCT01165242|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue, gastrointestinal, headache and temperature [defined as oral temperature equal to or above (≥) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = fever > 39.5 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, who had their symptom sheets filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822777|NCT01165242|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 50 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, who had their symptom sheets filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822778|NCT01165242|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Vaccine Response for hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBA-MenW-135 and hSBA-MenY Antibodies|Vaccine response was defined as: -for initially seronegative subjects [with hSBA titer below (<) 1:4]: post-vaccination antibody titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:8 one month after vaccination; -for initially seropositive subjects (with hSBA titer ≥ 1:4): post-vaccination antibody titer ≥ 4-fold the pre-vaccination antibody titer one month after vaccination.|One month after vaccinattion (Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who had received the study vaccine dose and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component for the blood sample taken one month after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822779|NCT01165242|Secondary|hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBA-MenW-135 and hSBA-MenY Antibody Titers|Antibody titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|Prior to (PRE) and one month after vaccination (Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who had received the study vaccine dose and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
822780|NCT01165242|Secondary|Number of Subjects With hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBA-MenW-135 and hSBA-MenY Antibody Titers ≥ the Cut-off Value|The cut-off value for the hSBA-Men titers was greater than or equal to (≥) 1:8.|Prior to (PRE) and one month after vaccination (Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who had received the study vaccine dose and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822781|NCT01165242|Secondary|Number of Subjects With hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBA-MenW-135 and hSBA-MenY Antibody Titers ≥ the Cut-off Value|The cut-off value for the hSBA-Men titers was greater than or equal to (≥) 1:4.|Prior to (PRE) and one month after vaccination (Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who had received the study vaccine dose and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822782|NCT01165242|Primary|Number of Subjects With Vaccine Response to Serum Bactericidal Assay Using Human Complement Against Neisseria Meningitidis Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y (hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBA-MenW-135 and hSBA-MenY) Antibodies|"Vaccine response was defined as:
for initially seronegative subjects [with hSBA titer below (<) 1:4]: post-vaccination antibody titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:8 one month after vaccination;
for initially seropositive subjects (with hSBA titer ≥ 1:4): post-vaccination antibody titer ≥ 4-fold the pre-vaccination antibody titer one month after vaccination."|One month after vaccination (Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who had received the study vaccine dose and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component for the blood sample taken one month after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
822783|NCT01165281|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Discontinued Due to Lack of Efficacy|The duration from the date of first study drug intake to treatment discontinuation due to lack of efficacy.|4 weeks|Time to discontinuation due to lack of efficacy was not analyzed since there was only 1 patient in the per-protocol set (in the tapentadol group) who discontinued treatment due to lack of efficacy.||Number of participants|||Number
822784|NCT01165281|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Entering the Maintenance Period|Patients were eligible to formally enter the maintenance period if they had a pain intensity score of <=3 and did not take rescue medication more than twice daily while they were taking a stable regimen of study drug (6 identical consecutive doses) over a 3-day period.|4 weeks|Per-protocol population included all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study drug, had post-baseline efficacy data and didn’t have major protocol deviations (including use of prohibited concomitant medications, non-compliance, failure to meet selection criteria, violation of regulatory requirements, or treatment deviation).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
822785|NCT01165281|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Various Levels of Pain Improvement (Responders)|The proportion of patients with at least a 30 percentage improvement based on the percent change from baseline in Numerical Rating Scale score during the last 3 days of the double-blind treatment period.|Baseline, Last 3 Days of Study Drug Administration (4 weeks)|Per-protocol population included all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study drug, had post-baseline efficacy data and didn’t have major protocol deviations (including use of prohibited concomitant medications, non-compliance, failure to meet selection criteria, violation of regulatory requirements, or treatment deviation).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
822786|NCT01165281|Secondary|Total Daily Dose of Rescue Medication Use for the Double-blind Treatment Period|During the study, if a patient experienced breakthrough pain (pain that occurs for short periods of time between doses of study drug), treatment with rescue medication (morphine immediate release [IR] 5 mg) was to be given. The average total daily dose of Morphine IR taken (mg) was assessed.|4 weeks|This is a subset of the per-protocol population that included patients who received at least 1 dose of rescue medication. The per-protocol population included all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study drug, had post-baseline efficacy data and didn’t have major protocol deviations.||Milligrams||Standard Deviation|Mean
822787|NCT01165281|Secondary|Frequency of Rescue Medication Use for the Double-blind Treatment Period|During the study, if a patient experienced breakthrough pain (pain that occurs for short periods of time between doses of study drug), treatment with rescue medication (morphine immediate release [IR] 5 mg) was to be given. The average number of doses of Morphine IR taken per day was assessed.|4 weeks|This is a subset of the per-protocol population that included patients who received at least 1 dose of rescue medication. The per-protocol population included all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study drug, had post-baseline efficacy data and didn’t have major protocol deviations.||Number of doses per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
822788|NCT01165281|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Score Categories|The PGIC was rated by the patient and was based on the single question “Since the start of this treatment, my cancer-related pain overall is,” where 1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved, 4=not changed, 5=minimally worse, 6=much worse, 7=very much worse.|Baseline, Endpoint of the 4-week Treatment Period|Per-protocol population included all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study drug, had post-baseline efficacy data and didn’t have major protocol deviations (including use of prohibited concomitant medications, non-compliance, failure to meet selection criteria, violation of regulatory requirements, or treatment deviation).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
822789|NCT01165281|Primary|Change From Baseline to the Last 3 Days of Study Drug Administration (Last Observation Carried Forward) in the Score for Average Pain Intensity on an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale|The patients recorded their average pain intensity over the past 24 hours once daily in the evening and at the same time as much as possible (eg, 10:00 PM) throughout the study in response to the following question: “What has your average pain level been for the past 24 hours, where 0=no pain and 10=pain as bad as you can imagine.” The score at 3 days before the completion of study drug administration was defined as the average pain intensity score averaged over the last 3 days before completion of study drug administration.|Baseline, Last 3 Days of Study Drug Administration (4 weeks)|Per-protocol population included all patients who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study drug, had post-baseline efficacy data and didn’t have major protocol deviations (including use of prohibited concomitant medications, non-compliance, failure to meet selection criteria, violation of regulatory requirements, or treatment deviation).||Scores on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822790|NCT01165307|Secondary|Subject Satisfaction at 12 Months|Subject satisfaction was ascertained by asking study participants to choose from one of four categories relating to their general satisfaction with treatment: totally satisfied, generally satisfied, acceptable improvement in symptoms, or unacceptable treatment.|Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
822791|NCT01165307|Secondary|Pain at 12 Months as Measured by the Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|The pain VAS is a continuous scale comprised of a horizontal (HVAS) line, 100 mm in length. Possible scores range from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst possible pain). The patient marks on the line the point that they feel represents their perception of their current state. The VAS score is determined by measuring in millimeters from the left hand end of the line to the point that the patient marks.|Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||mm||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822792|NCT01165307|Secondary|Bleeding Pattern at 12 Months|"The menstruation pattern of the subjects was evaluated. A bleeding episode was defined as any set of one or more bleeding days bounded at each end by two or more bleeding-free days. The bleeding pattern was analyzed using a 90 day reference period and divided into groups, (based on World Health Organization (WHO) classification of clinically important bleeding patterns). The groups are Amenorrhea (no bleeding during the reference period); Infrequent bleeding (fewer than 3 bleeding episodes); Irregular bleeding (between 3 and 5 episodes with less than 3 bleeding-free intervals of length 14 days or more); Prolonged bleeding (1 or more bleeding episodes lasting 14 days or more); Eumenorrhea normal pattern (none of the above patterns)."|Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
822793|NCT01165307|Secondary|Indirect Medical Costs|Indirect cost A refers to cost of sanitary products and lack of activity, indirect cost B refers to cost of sanitary products and reduced work days, and indirect cost C refers to cost of sanitary products, lack of activity, and reduced work days.|Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
822794|NCT01165307|Secondary|Direct Medical Costs|Direct Medical Costs consisted of two categories: primarily hospital billed services, and primarily physician billed services. Primary hospital billed services were as defined by Medicare billing practice.|Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
822795|NCT01165307|Secondary|Change in Ferritin From Baseline||Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||ug/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822796|NCT01165307|Secondary|Ferritin at 12 Months||Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||ug/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822797|NCT01165307|Secondary|Change in Hemoglobin||baseline, 12 months|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||g/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822798|NCT01165307|Secondary|Hemoglobin at 12 Months||Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||g/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824920|NCT01178671|Secondary|Response Status|Responders defined by Clinician Administered Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Scale total score decreased by at least 30% compared with baseline and Clinical Global Impression improvement score of =1 or 2 at endpoint|up to 24 weeks|intent to treat||percentage of subjects|||Number
822799|NCT01165307|Secondary|Quality of Life as Measured by the Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale (MMAS )|The MMAS questionnaire captures the subjective consequences of menorrhagia on six domains: practical difficulties; social life; psychological wellbeing; physical health; work routine; and family life. Each of the six domains has four statements that represent four levels of response. Respondents indicate the statement that best matches their feelings for each domain. The statement scores derive from a weighting of the domains and a weighting of the statements in level of severity by women in the original study. Scores range from 0 (worst possible state in all domains) to 100 (best possible state in all domains).|Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822800|NCT01165307|Secondary|Quality of Life Score Using the Short Form-12 (SF-12) Health Survey|Quality of life (QoL) was measured by the SF-12 questionnaire. The SF-12 is a multipurpose short form survey with 12 questions, all selected from the SF-36 Health Survey. Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores are computed (combined, scored, and weighted) using the scores of the 12 questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health. Improvement was defined as a change of ≥ 6 points.|Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822801|NCT01165307|Primary|Menstrual Blood Loss (MBL) as Measured by Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart (PBLAC).|The PBLAC is a simple, pictorial tool used in women with menorrhagia to assess menstrual blood loss. The total score is calculated by adding up the sum of all scores for the tampons or sanitary napkin used in the menstrual cycle. For tampons: 1 for lightly stained, 5 for moderately soiled and 10 for completely saturated tampons. For sanitary napkins: 1 for lightly stained, 5 for moderately soiled, and 20 for completely saturated pads. Clots were given a score of 1 for small and 5 for large clots. Abnormal PBLAC bleeding score greater than or equal to 100, which correlates with menorrhagia, defined as greater than 80 mL of menstrual blood loss. Normal bleeding is defined as a score of 75 or less. A score of 0 indicates amenorrhea, or absence of menstruation.|Measured at 12 months following initial treatment|Only subjects who completed the 12 month visit were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822802|NCT01165320|Primary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Drug-Related Adverse Experiences|An adverse experience (AE) is defined as any unfavorable or unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study drug. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study drug is also an AE. A drug-related AE is one judged to be definitely, probably, or possibly related to the study drug.|Invasive candidiasis: up to 70 days; aspergillosis: up to 98 days|The full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received >=1 dose of study drug. No participants with esophageal candidiasis were identified for inclusion in the study and assessment for safety outcomes.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
822803|NCT01165320|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Overall Favorable Response to Therapy|Invasive candidiasis: favorable overall response required resolved clinical findings and negative culture test for Candida species on follow-up. If Candida species were not observed in the baseline blood culture, favorable overall response required resolved clinical findings and resolved or improved radiographic findings. Aspergillosis: favorable overall response required resolved, improved, or unchanged clinical findings and resolved or improved radiographic findings, or resolved or improved clinical findings and resolved, improved, or stable radiographic findings.|Invasive candidiasis: up to 56 days; aspergillosis: up to 84 days|"The full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received >=1 dose of study drug. No participants with esophageal candidiasis were identified for inclusion in the study and assessment for response to therapy. Participants whose overall response assessment was unable to judge were counted as having an unfavorable response."||Percentage of Participants|||Number
822804|NCT01165424|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Total Nasal Symptom Score|Total nasal symptom score was a composite of 4 symptoms (sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, and nasal itching). Each symptom was scored on a scale of 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, and 3 = severe for a total score ranging from 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more severe symptoms.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 (or discontinuation)|All treated participants||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
822805|NCT01165424|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events and Adverse Drug Reactions||Baseline to Week 24|All treated participants||participants|||Number
822806|NCT01165450|Secondary|Percent Reduction of Corneal Epithelial Defect at Day 28 ± 2 in the Study Eye|To compare, in each of the two patient populations, the percent reduction in epithelial defect size at Day 28 ± 2 compared to baseline, as measured by slit lamp examination with fluorescein staining. Epithelial defect size determined by pseudo-area, defined by the longest diameter of the lesion multiplied by the longest perpendicular to this longest diameter.|28 ± 2 days|The study was terminated prematurely, data were never analyzed; PI has left the institution and data are no longer available.|||||
822807|NCT01165450|Secondary|Persistence of Complete Corneal Re-epithelialization in the Study Eye|To determine whether or not complete corneal re-epithelialization was persistent, as determined by whether the healed epithelium remains intact after complete re-epithelialization is confirmed in the study eye. The measurement will be made at Day 28 ± 2.|28 ± 2 days|The study was terminated prematurely, data were never analyzed; PI has left the institution and data are no longer available.|||||
822808|NCT01165450|Secondary|Change in the Rate of Re-epithelialization of the Study Eye|"To determine the change in the rate of re-epithelialization of the study eye from the screening run-in period to the treatment period, if applicable.
Time Frame: Screening period is defined as Day -7 to Day 0 ± 1. Treatment period is defined as Day 0 ± 1 through time of complete re-epithelialization. Time of complete re-epithelialization is defined as the midpoint between the last observed date with an epithelial defect and the date of the first visit with no epithelial defect, up to Day 28 ± 2."|35 ± 2 days|The study was terminated prematurely, data were never analyzed; PI has left the institution and data are no longer available.|||||
822809|NCT01165450|Secondary|Complete Healing of the Corneal Epithelial Defect at Day 14 ± 1 in the Study Eye|To determine binary indicator of whether or not healing has occurred at 14 ± 1 days, defined as the largest diameter of the epithelial defect being smaller than 0.5 mm as determined by slit lamp examination with fluorescein staining.|14 ± 1 days|The study was terminated prematurely, data were never analyzed; PI has left the institution and data are no longer available.|||||
822811|NCT01165450|Primary|Incidence of Adverse Events Following Application of the Investigational Product in All Subjects|Primary safety measure: To determine incidence of adverse events by recording their occurrence at each study visit through Day 28 ± 2. Analysis of safety data will be performed prior to each dose-escalation. If greater than 2 serious adverse events are found that are causally related to the investigational product, the study will be halted.|28 ± 2 days|The study was terminated prematurely, data were never analyzed; PI has left the institution and data are no longer available.|||||
822812|NCT01165450|Primary|Percent Healing of the Corneal Epithelial Defect at Day 14 ± 1 in the Study Eye|Primary efficacy measure: To determine whether topical treatment of persistent epithelial defects with Nexagon preparations yields greater healing at Day 14 ± 1, compared to vehicle alone, in individuals having had diabetic vitrectomy. Healing will be determined by comparing pseudo-area (as measured by Investigator, or designated ophthalmologist) at baseline (taken just prior to the first treatment) and Day 14 ± 1. Pseudo-area is defined by the longest diameter of the lesion multiplied by the longest perpendicular to this longest diameter.|14 ± 1 days|The study was terminated prematurely, data were never analyzed; PI has left the institution and data are no longer available.|||||
822813|NCT01165541|Primary|Number of Very Heavy Drinking Days Per Week|The number of “very heavy” drinking days (8 or more drinks per drinking day for men or 6 or more drinks per drinking day for women) per week|14 Weeks|The Analysis Population only consists of participants that completed both phases of the study.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
822814|NCT01165554|Secondary|Blinded Visual Interpretation of Each Subject’s Flutemetamol F 18 Injection Brain PET Images as Normal, With Anatomic CT Brain Images for Reference.|Blinded visual interpretation of each subject’s Flutemetamol F 18 Injection brain PET images as normal, with anatomic CT brain images for reference.|Post flutemetamol administration.|||Percent of Specificity-Normal Reads||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822815|NCT01165554|Secondary|Blinded Visual Interpretation of Each Subject’s Flutemetamol F 18 Injection Brain PET Images as Abnormal, With Anatomic CT Brain Images for Reference.|Blinded visual interpretation of each subject’s Flutemetamol F 18 Injection brain PET images as abnormal, with anatomic CT brain images for reference.|Post flutemetamol administration.|||Percent of Sensitivity-Abnormal Reads||95% Confidence Interval|Number
822816|NCT01165554|Secondary|Blinded Visual Interpretation of Each Subject’s Flutemetamol F 18 Injection Brain PET Images as Normal, Without Anatomic Brain Images.|"A calculation used to assess Specificity was (Number of Blinded Reads determined normal by Reader N) divided by the (Total number of normal participants).
Blinded visual interpretation of each subject’s Flutemetamol F 18 Injection brain PET images as normal, without anatomic brain images."|Post Flutemetamol administrations|The assessment was done post-mortum based on the estimates of the presence of amyloid plaque in the brain.||Percentage of Specificity by Reader|||Number
822817|NCT01165554|Primary|The Sensitivity of Blinded Visual Interpretations of [18F]Flutemetamol Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Images Without Anatomic Brain Images for Detecting Brain Fibrillar Amyloid β.|"A calculation used to assess Sensitivity was (Number of Blinded Reads determined abnormal by Reader N) divided by the (Total number of abnormal participants).
Blinded visual interpretations of [18F]flutemetamol Positron Emission Tomography (PET) images without anatomic brain images for detecting brain fibrillar amyloid β."|Post flutemetamol administration.|The assessments were post-mortum based on the estimates of the presence of amyloid plaque in the brain.||Percentage of Sensitivity by Reader|||Number
822818|NCT01165684|Secondary|Hypoglycaemic Episodes (Rate of All Treatment Emergent Hypoglycaemia Episodes)|A hypoglycaemic episode was defined as treatment emergent if the onset of the episode was on or after the first day of exposure to randomised treatment and no later than 1 day after the last day of randomised treatment.|Week 0 to Week 32|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator. 397 subjects contributed with data.||Episodes /year of patient exposure|||Number
822819|NCT01165684|Secondary|Body Mass Index (BMI) at Week 32|Estimated mean BMI after 32 Weeks of treatment|Week 32|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 378 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis at Week 32.||kg/m^2||Standard Error|Mean
822820|NCT01165684|Secondary|Body Weight at Week 32|Estimated mean body weight after 32 Weeks of treatment|Week 32|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 378 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis at Week 32.||kg||Standard Error|Mean
822821|NCT01165684|Secondary|Mean Plasma Glucose Increment Over 3 Meals (Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner) at Week 32|Estimated mean plasma glucose increment over 3 meals (breakfast, lunch and dinner) at Week 32|Week 32|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 352 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis at Week 32.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822822|NCT01165684|Secondary|Mean Plasma Glucose Increment Over 3 Meals (Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner) at Week 21|Mean plasma glucose increment over 3 meals (breakfast, lunch and dinner) at Week 21|Week 21|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 343 subjects contributed to the data at Week 21.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822823|NCT01165684|Secondary|Mean Plasma Glucose Increment Over 3 Meals (Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner) at Week 10|Mean plasma glucose increment over 3 meals (breakfast, lunch and dinner) at Week 10|Week 10|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 326 subjects contributed to the data at Week 10.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822824|NCT01165684|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 32|Estimated Mean FPG at Week 32|Week 32|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 383 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis at Week 32.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Mean
822825|NCT01165684|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 21|Mean FPG at Week 21|Week 21|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 383 subjects contributed to the data at Week 21.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822826|NCT01165684|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 10|Mean FPG at Week 10|Week 10|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 368 subjects contributed to data at Week 10.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
822829|NCT01165684|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Reaching Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Below 7.0% at Week 10|Proportion of subjects reaching HbA1c below 7.0% at Week 10|Week 10|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 376 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis at Week 10.||percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
822830|NCT01165684|Secondary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) From Baseline to Week 21|Estimated mean change from baseline in HbA1c after 21 Weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 21|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 383 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis at Week 21.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Error|Mean
822831|NCT01165684|Secondary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) From Baseline to Week 10|Estimated mean change from baseline in HbA1c after 10 Weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 10|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 376 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis at Week 10.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Error|Mean
822832|NCT01165684|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) From Baseline to Week 32|Estimated mean change from baseline in HbA1c after 32 Weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 32|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). 383 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis at Week 32.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Error|Mean
822833|NCT01158534|Secondary|Number of Patients With Statistically Significant Change in Cellular Immune Parameters From Baseline to 2 Months|To evaluate the effect of celecoxib and interferon alpha therapy on cellular immune parameters. Absolute change following two cycles of therapy.|at two months from start of treatment|Patients that received treatment||participants|||Number
822834|NCT01158534|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival measured in months and summarized using the Kaplan-Meier method. Time to objective progression will be measured from the start of treatment until the criteria for progression are met, taking as reference the smallest measurements recorded since the treatment started, including baseline.|to progression|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822835|NCT01158534|Secondary|Duration of Response|The duration of overall response is measured from the time measurement criteria are met for CR or PR (whichever is first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented (taking as reference for progressive disease the smallest measurements recorded since the treatment started, including baseline). The duration of overall CR is measured from the time measurement criteria are first met for CR until the first date that recurrent disease is objectively documented.|end of study|Patients who achieved at least a partial response||months||Full Range|Median
822836|NCT01158534|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival measured in months and summarized using the Kaplan-Meier method.|death|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822837|NCT01158534|Primary|Objective Response Rate Assessed by RECIST Criteria.|The best overall response is the best response recorded from the start of the treatment until disease progression/recurrence (taking as reference for progressive disease the smallest measurements recorded since the treatment started, including baseline). The patient's best response assignment will depend on the achievement of both measurement and confirmation criteria. Objective response will be assessed by RECIST criteria.|at week 4 of cycle 2 and every other cycle thereafter|||participants|||Number
822838|NCT01158703|Secondary|Number of Thrombotic Events|Number of thrombotic events with combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel vs. aspirin alone|52 weeks|above is the total number of participants||thrombotic Events over 52Wks|||Number
822839|NCT01158703|Secondary|Number of Myocardial Infarction Events|Number of myocardial infarction events with combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel vs. aspirin alone|52 weeks|above is the total number of participants||MI Events over 52Wks|||Number
822840|NCT01158703|Secondary|Number of Angina Events|Number of angina events with combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel vs. aspirin alone|52 weeks|above is the total number of participants||Angina Events over 52Wks|||Number
822841|NCT01158703|Secondary|Number of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events With Combination Therapy|Number of major adverse cardiovascular events(angina, any thrombotic events, and myocardial infarction) with combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel vs. aspirin alone|52 weeks|above is the total number of all events reported||MACE Events over 52Wks|Participants||Number
822842|NCT01158703|Secondary|Incidence of Bleeding Between the Two Treatment Arms||52 weeks|||BLEEDING EVENTS|||Number
822843|NCT01158703|Primary|Incidence of More Than 50% Stenosis in Graft With Combination Therapy With Aspirin and Clopidogrel vs. Aspirin Alone|Incidence of more than 50% stenosis in graft with combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel vs. aspirin and placebo|52 weeks|Incidence of more than 50% stenosis in graft with combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel vs. aspirin and placebo||occluded grafts|Participants||Number
822844|NCT01158716|Secondary|ECG Evidence of Ischemia During Coronary Balloon Occlusion|ST-segment deviation as monitored during coronary balloon occlusion|During coronary balloon occlusion||||||
822845|NCT01158716|Secondary|Chest Pain During Coronary Balloon Occlusion|Chest pain severity was assessed with a 10 point scale (0: no pain, 10: most severe discomfort ever experienced)|During coronary balloon occlusion||||||
822846|NCT01158716|Primary|Delta Cardiac Troponin I (ΔcTnI)|ΔcTnI is defined as cardiac troponin I (cTnI) at 24 hours post-PCI minus cTnI before coronary angiography|24 hours post PCI|||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822847|NCT01158924|Secondary|Change in Physical Component Summary of Quality of Life Measure Assessed by Short-Form 36 at 12 Months From Baseline.|The 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a patient reported outcome survey that evaluates functional health and well-being. The survey is converted into two summary measures (the Physical Component - PCS and Mental Component- MCS) that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health).|12 Months|FAS Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822848|NCT01158924|Secondary|Change in Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 12 Months From Baseline.|The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score asks the subject to place a vertical mark on a horizontal line (that is approximately 10 cm long) with 'No Pain' (score of 0 = 0 cm) listed on the left and 'Very severe pain' (score of 10=10cm) labeled on the right. The subject is instructed to indicate the amount of pain they feel in their back.|12 months|FAS Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822850|NCT01158924|Secondary|Change in Function Assessed by Oswestry Disability Index Change at 12 Months From Baseline|The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is a 10-category (Pain Intensity, Personal Care, Lifting, Walking, Sitting, Standing, Sleeping, Sex Life, Social Life, Traveling) disability measurement scale with a graded response from 0 to 5, with 0 being the best score (no impairment) to 5 being the worst score (significant impairment). ODI score for a subject is calculated by adding the scores and converting the score to a 100 point scale.|12 months|FAS Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822851|NCT01158924|Primary|Neurological Assessment for Motor Function and Reflexes/Sensory|"Neurological Assessment for Motor Function and Reflexes/Sensory- Number of patients with Clinically Significant Abnormal results at 12 months.
For Motor Function, Clinically Significant Abnormal results are determined by the surgeon investigator and are further classified by grade: 0= No Movement, 1= Flicker/trace of contraction, 2=Active movement when gravity removed, 3= Active movement against gravity, 4= Active Movement against gravity and resistance.
For Reflexes/Sensory, Clinically Significant Abnormal results are determined by the surgeon investigator and are based on exams of the Knee, Ankle, L3-L5 Dermatone, and S1 Dermatome. Tension signs are evaluated with a straight leg raise to determine at which point, if any, sciatic pain occurs."|12 months|"Safety Population
The Neurological Assessment at 12 months was only conducted on 13 subjects from the 1.0mg group (out of 14 total subjects) and 25 subjects from the 2.0 mg group (out of 26 total)."||participants|||Number
822852|NCT01159054|Secondary|Number of Completed Subjects With Significant Increase in ALT (Alanine Aminotransferase).|The number of subjects with significant rise in ALT but not to the extent requiring removal from the study (rise to more than 3 times the upper limit of the normal range)|6 months (checked monthly)|||Participants|||Number
822853|NCT01159054|Secondary|Hemodialysis Access Stenosis/Thrombosis|Comparison of the average hemodialysis access stenosis/thrombosis requiring intervention in the 3 month before and the last 3 months of the study.|6 months|Data for this outcome measure was not collected from the medical record due to early termination of the study.|||||
822854|NCT01159054|Secondary|Rate of Cardiovascular Events|Comparison of the average major cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction and/or stroke) in the 3 month before and the last 3 months of the study.|6 months|Data for this outcome measure was not collected from the medical record due to early termination of the study.|||||
822855|NCT01159054|Secondary|Hemoglobin Level|Pre and Post Levels|6 months|Only 2 subjects completed the study. Further analysis was not done because power was not met.||g/dL||Full Range|Mean
822856|NCT01159054|Secondary|ESA (Erythorpoietic Stimulating Agent) Dose Requirement|Comparison of the average ESA dose used in the 3 month before and the last 3 months of the study.|6 months|Data for this outcome measure was not collected.|||||
822857|NCT01159054|Secondary|Albumin Level|Pre and Post levels.|6 months|Only 2 subjects completed the study. Further analysis was not done because power was not met.||g/dL||Full Range|Mean
822858|NCT01159054|Primary|Changes in IL-6 Level|Change in IL-6 level before and after treatment in each subject|6 months|Only 2 subjects completed the study. Further analysis not done because power was not met.||pg/mL||Full Range|Mean
822859|NCT01159054|Primary|Changes in Hs-CRP Level|Change in hs-CRP level before and after treatment in each subject|6 months|Only 2 subjects completed the study. Power for further analysis was not met.||mg/L||Full Range|Mean
822860|NCT01159054|Primary|Changes in FDG-PET/CT Dual Scan Score||6 months|Analysis of images for this outcome measure was not done given than only 2 subjects had completed the study at the time of the study early termination and closure (per funding source)|||||
822861|NCT01159171|Secondary|Overall Survival|OS was defined as the time in months from Day 1 until the date of death due to any cause. Data for participants who were alive at the end of the study were censored at the date of the last available follow-up visit. Mean OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, monthly to end of study (up to 24 months)|ITT Population||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
822862|NCT01159171|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) - Percentage of Participants With an Event by 24 Months|OS was defined as the time in months from Day 1 until the date of death due to any cause. Data for participants who were alive at the end of the study were censored at the date of the last available follow-up visit.|Baseline, monthly to end of study (up to 24 months)|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
822863|NCT01159171|Secondary|Time to Progression|TTP was defined as the time in months from Day 1 until the date of first documented progressive disease, or death due to any cause. Data for participants who were alive without disease progression at the end of study, or who were non-responder participants (without tumor assessment after baseline) were censored at Day 1. Mean TTP was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, monthly to end of study (up to 24 months)|ITT Population||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
822864|NCT01159171|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP) - Percentage of Participants With an Event by 24 Months|TTP was defined as the time time in months from Day 1 until the date of first documented progressive disease, or death due to any cause. Data for participants who were alive without disease progression at the end of study, or who were non-responder participants (without tumor assessment after baseline) were censored at Day 1.|Baseline, monthly to end of study (up to 24 months)|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
822865|NCT01159171|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure|TTF was defined as the time in months from Day 1 until discontinuation of treatment for any reasons. These reasons included: death due to any cause, treatment toxicity (adverse event), insufficient therapeutic response (progression of disease), failure to return (lost to follow-up), refusing treatment (participant non-compliance), being unwilling to cooperate and withdrawing consent (participant withdrew consent). Mean TTF was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, monthly to end of study (up to 24 months)|ITT Population||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
822866|NCT01159171|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure (TTF) - Percentage of Participants With an Event by 24 Months|TTF was defined as the time in months from Day 1 until discontinuation of treatment for any reasons. These reasons included: death due to any cause, treatment toxicity (adverse event), insufficient therapeutic response (progression of disease), failure to return (lost to follow-up), refusing treatment (participant non-compliance), being unwilling to cooperate and withdrawing consent (participant withdrew consent).|Baseline, every month to end of treatment (up to 24 months)|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
822929|NCT01165775|Secondary|Neonatal Hypoglycemia||birth to discharge|Neonates from birth to discharge. The maternal patients received betamethasone to minimize the complications of prematurity. Maternal blood glucose levels were monitored using the Dexcom Seven Plus Continuous Glucose Monitoring System.||participants|||Number
822867|NCT01159171|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease|Duration of stable response (CR, PR, or SD) was calculated only for participants of the ITT population whose best overall response was CR, PR, or SD based on RECIST criteria. Duration of overall response was defined as the time from the date of the first assessment of CR, PR, or SD status until the date of progression or death. Data for participants who were alive without any objectively documented disease progression at the end of the study were censored as of the date of last contact. Mean time to event was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 3 months to progression of disease or end of study (up to 24 months)|ITT Population: only participants with a best overall response of CR, PR, or SD were included in the analysis.||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
822868|NCT01159171|Primary|Percentage of Participants by Best Overall Response|Best response recorded from the start of treatment until disease progression. Based on assessment of CR, PR, stable disease (SD), or progressive disease (PD), according to RECIST. CR: disappearance of all target lesions, non-target lesions, and normalization of tumor marker level. PR: ≥30% decrease under baseline of the sum of the LD diameters of all target lesions. CR and PR persist on repeat imaging study at least 4 weeks after initial documentation. SD: neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD. Reference is the smallest sum LD. PD: at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter recorded or the appearance of one or more new lesions.|Baseline, every 3 months to progression of disease or end of study (up to 24 months)|ITT Population. 5 participants were not assessed as they did not reach the 3 month time-point.||percentage of participants|||Number
822869|NCT01159171|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease - Percentage of Participants With an Event by 24 Months|Duration of stable response (CR, PR, or stable disease [SD]) was calculated only for participants of the ITT population whose best overall response was CR, PR, or SD based on RECIST criteria. Duration of overall response was defined as the time from the date of the first assessment of CR, PR, or SD status until the date of progression or death. Data for participants who were alive without any objectively documented disease progression at the end of the study were censored as of the date of last contact.|Baseline, every 3 months to progression of disease or end of study (up to 24 months)|ITT Population; only participants with a best overall response of CR, PR, or SD were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
822870|NCT01159171|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of overall response (CR or PR) was calculated for participants of the ITT population whose best overall response was CR or PR based on RECIST criteria. Duration of overall response was defined as the time from the date of the first assessment of CR or PR status until the date of progression or death. Data for participants who were alive without any objectively documented disease progression at the end of the study were censored as of the date of last contact. Mean time to event was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every 3 months to progression of disease or end of study (up to 24 months)|ITT Population; only participants with a best overall response of CR or PR were included in the analysis.||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
822871|NCT01159171|Secondary|Duration of Response - Percentage of Participants With an Event by 24 Months|Duration of overall response (CR or PR) was calculated only for participants of the ITT population whose best overall response was CR or PR based on RECIST criteria. Duration of overall response was defined as the time from the date of the first assessment of CR or PR status until the date of progression or death. Data for participants who were alive without any objectively documented disease progression at the end of the study were censored as of the date of last contact.|Baseline, every 3 months to progression of disease or end of study (up to 24 months)|ITT population; only participants with a best overall response of CR or PR were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
822872|NCT01159171|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR)|Percentage of participants with OR was defined as the percentage of participants who achieved complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions, non-target lesions, and normalization of tumor marker level. PR was defined as greater than or equal to (≥)30 percent (%) decrease under baseline of the sum of the longest diameter (LD) diameters of all target lesions. No unequivocal progression of non-target disease. No new lesions. Complete and partial responses must have been confirmed no less than 4 weeks after the criteria for response were first met.|Baseline, every 3 months to progression of disease or end of study (up to 24 months)|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who signed the informed consent, were assigned a study patient number, and who were administered at least 1 dose of 1 study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
822873|NCT01159262|Secondary|Time to Successful Extubation in DEX-exposed Subjects||From start of DEX administration to extubation of each subject up to 7 days post-infusion|Efficacy Evaluable Population: All subjects who received randomized Dexmedetomidine for at least 6 hours.||hour||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822874|NCT01159262|Secondary|Weight-adjusted Total Amount (Per kg) of Rescue Medication Morphine Given for Analgesia During Dexmedetomidine Infusion (Among Who Used)||During study drug administration (6 to 24 hours)|All subjects who received morphine during Dexmedetomidine infusion||milligram/Kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822875|NCT01159262|Secondary|Weight-adjusted Total Amount (Per kg) of Rescue Medication Fentanyl Given for Analgesia During Dexmedetomidine Infusion (Among Who Used)||During study drug administration (6 to 24 hours)|All subjects who received fentanyl during Dexmedetomidine infusion||microgram/Kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822876|NCT01159262|Secondary|Weight-adjusted Total Amount (Per kg) of Rescue Medication Midazolam Given for Sedation During Dexmedetomidine Infusion (Among Who Used)||During study drug administration (6 to 24 hours)|All subjects who received midazolam during Dexmedetomidine infusion||milligrams/Kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822877|NCT01159262|Secondary|Total Amount of Rescue Medication Morphine Given for Sedation During Dexmedetomidine Infusion (Among Who Used)||During study drug administration (6 to 24 hours)|All subjects who received morphine during Dexmedetomidine infusion||milligram||Standard Deviation|Mean
822878|NCT01159262|Secondary|Total Amount of Rescue Medication Fentanyl Given for Sedation During Dexmedetomidine Infusion (Among Who Used)||During study drug administration (6 to 24 hours)|All subjects who received fentanyl during Dexmedetomidine infusion||Microgram||Standard Deviation|Mean
822879|NCT01159262|Secondary|Total Amount of Rescue Medication Midazolam Given for Sedation During Dexmedetomidine Infusion (Among Who Used)||During Study drug administration (6 to 24 hours)|All subjects who received midazolam during Dexmedetomidine infusion||Milligram||Standard Deviation|Mean
822882|NCT01159431|Secondary|Mood|Mean change in score on the Beck Depression Inventory. The Beck Inventory is a patient reported mood scale. The minimum score is 0, and the maximum score is 63. Scores of less than 10 are considered in the normal range. Scores above 10 are consistent with depression. Higher scores indicate higher degrees of depression, with scores of > 25 consistent with severe depression.|18-weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822883|NCT01159431|Primary|Change in Seizure Frequency|Percent change in seizure frequency from baseline|18 weeks|||percentage change in seizures per month||Standard Deviation|Median
822884|NCT01159431|Secondary|Response Ratio: Mean Percent Change in Seizures|Response Ratio: Mean Percent Change in seizures over the treatment period, where [T-B] / [T+B] x 100%, where T = seizure frequency during the treatment period, and B = seizure frequency during the baseline period.|18 weeks|||percentage change of RRATIO||Standard Deviation|Mean
822885|NCT01159431|Primary|Time to the 4th Seizure|Number of Days to the 4th seizure|treatment period (18-weeks)|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
822886|NCT01159431|Primary|50% Responder Rate|"Change in responder rate, at end of study (18 weeks)
Absolute percent of subjects with 50% reduction in seizures, 18 weeks compared with 6 weeks Note, the number is not a mean or median, but a fixed percentage."|Treatment period, 18 weeks (end of double blind period) compared with first 6 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
822887|NCT01159535|Primary|Mean Number of Alcohol and Drug Use Days Out of Past 30|Self reported use of alcohol and or illicit substances over the previous 30 days|30 days previous, assessed at 12-month follow-up|||number of days out of past 30||Standard Deviation|Mean
822888|NCT01159574|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression (Progression Free Survival)||From start of treatment, to date of disease progression|18 patients were removed from study for reasons other then disease progression; 2 patients are still receiving treatment.||days||Full Range|Mean
822889|NCT01159574|Secondary|Time to Maximum Response, Expressed as Number of Cycles of Treatment to Maximum Response||From baseline to cycle of maximum response, which occurred on average after 2 cycles; 1 cycle = 28 days|||cycles||Full Range|Mean
822890|NCT01159574|Primary|Overall Response Rate|Best response rate was recorded for all patients, using the IMWG criteria.|from baseline to cycle with maximum response, which was achieved on average after 2 cycles|||Participants|||Count of Participants
822891|NCT01159600|Other Pre-specified|Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Adverse Events|Number of patients with confirmed hypoglycaemic events, as reported as adverse events.|From first intake of randomised trial medication until 7 days after last trial medication intake, up to 231 days|"Treated set, which included all patients treated with at least one dose of randomised trial medication. Treatment assignment as first medication taken.
Open label set which included all patients entered into the open-label arm."||percentage of participants|||Number
822892|NCT01159600|Primary|HbA1c Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in HbA1c after 24 weeks.
For open-label groups the descriptive mean is provided, for randomised groups adjusted means are provided. The means are adjusted separately for metformin alone and metformin plus sulphonylurea background medication."|Baseline and 24 weeks|"Full analysis set. Treatment assignment as randomised.
Open-label analysis: Open-label set which included all patients entered in the empa 25mg open-label treatment arm.
Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values."||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Mean
822893|NCT01159600|Secondary|Mean Daily Plasma Glucose (MDG) Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in mean daily glucose (MDG) using the 8-point blood glucose profile, after 24 weeks of treatment.
For open-label groups the descriptive mean is provided, for randomised groups adjusted means are provided. The means are adjusted separately for metformin alone and metformin plus sulphonylurea background medication."|Baseline and 24 weeks|"Full analysis set. Treatment assignment as randomised.
Open-label analysis: Open-label set which included all patients entered in the empa 25mg open-label treatment arm.
Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values."||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
822894|NCT01159600|Secondary|Body Weight Change From Baseline|"Body weight change from baseline after 24 weeks.
For open-label groups the descriptive mean is provided, for randomised groups adjusted means are provided. The means are adjusted separately for metformin alone and metformin plus sulphonylurea background medication."|Baseline and 24 weeks|"Full analysis set. Treatment assignment as randomised.
Open-label analysis: Open-label set which included all patients entered in the empa 25mg open-label treatment arm.
Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values."||kg||Standard Error|Mean
822895|NCT01159665|Other Pre-specified|Time Necessary to Remove the Vitreous From the Eye|PPV was performed in all subjects. The time necessary to remove the vitreous from the eye, measured from first start of vitrectomy cutter till end of core vitrectomy phase, was calculated.|From first start of vitrectomy cutter till the end of core vitrectomy phase|Safety Set||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
822896|NCT01159665|Primary|Ocriplasmin Activity Levels in Vitreous Samples Obtained at the Beginning of Vitrectomy.|Vitreous samples were obtained at the beginning of vitrectomy in subjects at various times relative to ocriplasmin injection (post-injection), for the determination of ocriplasmin activity (Group 1 [5-30 minutes]; Group 2 [31-60 minutes]; Group 3 [2-4 hours]; Group 4 [24 hours ±2 hours]; Group 5 [7 days ±1 day]. Subjects in Group 6 (control) did not receive the ocriplasmin injection.|5-30 minutes, 31-60 minutes, 2-4 hours, 1 day, or 7 days after ocriplasmin injection|Safety Set. Values for the PPV 7 days (+1 day) after injection and for PPV without injection treatment groups were all < Lower Limit of Quantification (LLOQ)||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
822897|NCT01159691|Primary|Assessment of Patient Satisfaction Referring to Gastrointestinal (GI) Complaints Following Treatment Switch to Neupro® at Visit 3|"Patient satisfaction referring to GI complaints is classified into 5 categories:
Missing
Very satisfied
Satisfied
Moderately satisfied
Not satisfied."|At Visit 3 (after approximately 6 weeks)|All of the 65 subjects in the Full Analysis Set are included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
822898|NCT01159691|Primary|Assessment of Patient Satisfaction Referring to Gastrointestinal (GI) Complaints Following Treatment Switch to Neupro® at Visit 2|"Patient satisfaction referring to GI complaints is classified into 5 categories:
Missing
Very satisfied
Satisfied
Moderately satisfied
Not satisfied."|At Visit 2 (after approximately 2-4 weeks)|All of the 65 subjects in the Full Analysis Set are included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
822899|NCT01159691|Primary|Change From Baseline to Visit 3 in the Sum Score of Gastrointestinal (GI) Complaints|"Sum score of GI complaints was calculated from frequency and intensity of the complaints. The intensity of GI complaints during the last week ranges from 0 (no complaints) to 3 (severe) and the frequency of these complaints during the last week ranges from 0 (never) to 4 (every day).
For each of the seven GI complaints assessed at a visit (swallowing disorders, heartburn, feeling of fullness, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and diarrhea), intensity and frequency were multiplied to achieve individual item scores of GI complaints (range: 0 – 12).
Finally, the sum score of GI complaints per visit was calculated by accumulating 6 of the 7 item scores (excluding swallowing disorders, which was recorded at Baseline only) for patients with valid values in each score (range: 0 – 72). Negative values indicate an improvement from Baseline to Visit 3 with larger negative values showing a better improvement."|From Baseline to Visit 3 (approximately 6 weeks)|Of the 65 subjects in the Full Analysis Set, 58 are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822900|NCT01159691|Primary|Change From Baseline to Visit 3 in the Assessment of Intensity of Gastrointestinal (GI) Complaints for Any Reason as Per Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)|Patients were asked to classify the intensity of their GI complaints on a scale ranging from 0 (no complaints) to 100 (extremely severe complaints). Negative values indicate an improvement from Baseline to Visit 3 with larger negative values showing a better improvement.|From Baseline to Visit 3 (approximately 6 weeks)|Of the 65 subjects in the Full Analysis Set, 58 are included in this analysis.||millimeter (mm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822901|NCT01159743|Secondary|Change Over Time in Body Fat Distribution|"Change over time in total body fat and fat in the limbs and trunk was assessed by dual X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) in participants for whom a DEXA measurement performed at least 6 months before participation in this study was available.
A negative change score indicates fat loss over time and a positive change score indicates fat gain over time."|DEXA performed at the study visit and more than 6 months prior to the study visit (the period of time between the DEXA recorded at the study visit and the previous DEXA ranged from 6 to 36 months).|Participants for whom a dual X-ray absorptiometry measurement performed at least 6 months before participation in this study was available.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822902|NCT01159743|Secondary|Lipodystrophy Severity Grading Scale (LSGS) Scores|"Perception of body fat was assessed by the Lipodystrophy Severity Grading Scale (LSGS), a standardized measurement of subjective lipoatrophy (fat loss) and lipoaccumulation (fat gain) perceived by the participant and by the physician. The degree of lipoatrophy and diffuse fat accumulation at each region was rated by both the participant and the physician as: Score 0=absent; Score 1=mild or noticeable on close inspection; Score 2=moderate or readily noticeable by patient/physician; Score 3=severe or readily noticeable to a casual observer.
Score A reflects the lipoatrophy or fat loss perception at the face, arms, buttocks and legs and ranges from 0-12.
Score B reflects the perception of fat gain at the abdomen, neck, and breasts and ranges from 0-9.
The overall score is the sum of the scores A+B, and ranges from 0-21.
Higher numbers indicate more fat loss (Score A) or gain (Score B). An average overall patient/physician score >7 indicates a clinical diagnosis of lipodystrophy."|Study visit|"All participants for whom data were available. The number of participants included in the analysis of each score for each group of participants is shown as N (EFV and then LPV/r)."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822903|NCT01159743|Secondary|Distribution of Body Fat Mass|Body fat mass was assessed by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan.|Study visit|"All participants for whom data were available. The number of participants included in the analysis of each category for each group of participants is shown as N (EFV and then LPV/r)."||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822904|NCT01159743|Primary|Total Limb Fat Mass|Total limb fat mass was assessed by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan. DEXA uses a whole body scanner and two different low-dose x-rays to read bone mass and soft tissue mass.|Study visit|All participants for whom data were available.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
822905|NCT01159769|Primary|Overall Patient Satisfaction|"Overall satisfaction was assessed by the patient on a questionnaire. The patient was instructed to select a single response to the statement, Overall, how satisfied were you with olopatadine 0.2%? A 5-point scale was used: very satisfied, satisfied, undecided, dissatisfied, very dissatisfied. Results are reported as the percentage of patients who responded, very satisfied or satisfied."|Day 7|All subjects who used the study medication at least once (intent to treat).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
822906|NCT01159769|Primary|Overall Patient Satisfaction|"Overall satisfaction was assessed by the patient on a questionnaire. The patient was instructed to select a single response to the statement, Overall, how satisfied are you with your current eye allergy medication? A 5-point scale was used: very satisfied, satisfied, undecided, dissatisfied, very dissatisfied. Results are reported as the percentage of patients who responded, very satisfied or satisfied."|Day 0|All subjects who used the study medication at least once (intent to treat).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
822907|NCT01159912|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Total Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) (+12) Score at Week 12 and Week 24|"The AQLQ is a disease-specific, self-administered quality of life questionnaire used to evaluate the impact of asthma treatments on the quality of life of asthma sufferers. The AQLQ for 12 years and older (AQLQ [+12]) is a modified version of the AQLQ for use in asthma patients between the ages of 12 and 70. The AQLQ contains 32 items in 4 domains: activity limitation (11 items), symptoms (12 items), emotional function (5 items), and environmental stimuli (4 items). For the 32 items on the questionnaire, the response format consists of a seven-point scale, where a value of 1 indicates “total impairment” and a value of 7 indicates “no impairment.” The AQLQ total score is defined as the average of the scores from all 32 questions; thus, the total score ranges from 1 (indicates total impairment) to 7 (indicates no impairment). Baseline was the total score obtained at Visit 3. Change from Baseline was calculated as the total score at Weeks 12 and 24 minus the total score at Baseline."|Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822930|NCT01165775|Primary|Percentage Time Spent Above Glucose Thresholds (>110;>144;>180) 24-48 Hours Post Betamethasone Treatment|During a 24 hour monitoring period (24-48 hours post betamethasone treatment), which percentage of the time was spent above glucose thresholds (>110;>144;>180)|24-48 hours post betamethasone treatment|Seventeen women were enrolled at the time of betamethasone administration and data were available for 15 patients.||percentage time||Standard Deviation|Mean
822908|NCT01159912|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Symptom-free 24-hour (hr) Periods at the End of the 24-week Treatment Period|The number of inhalations of rescue bronchodilator, albuterol/salbutamol inhalation aerosol, used during the day and night was recorded by the participants in a daily electronic diary (eDiary). Similarly, asthma symptoms were recorded in a daily eDairy by the participants every day in the morning and evening before taking any rescue or study medication and before the peak expiratory flow measurement. A 24-hour period in which a participant’s responses to both the morning and evening assessments indicated no symptoms was considered to be symptom free. The Baseline value was derived from the last 7 days of the daily eDiary prior to the randomization of the participant. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged value during the 24-week Treatment Period minus the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage of symptom-free 24-hr periods||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822909|NCT01159912|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Daily Morning (AM) PEF Averaged Over the First 12 Weeks and 24 Weeks of the 24-week Treatment Period|PEF is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. PEF was measured by the participants using a hand-held electronic peak flow meter each morning and evening prior to the dose of study medication and any rescue albuterol/salbutamol inhalation aerosol use. Change from Baseline (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants) was calculated as the value of the averaged daily AM PEF over 12 weeks and 24 weeks of the 24-week Treatment Period (at Weeks 12 and 24) minus the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment.|From Baseline up to Week 12 and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters/minute (L/min)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822910|NCT01159912|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Daily Trough Evening (PM) Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Averaged Over the First 12 Weeks and 24 Weeks of the 24-week Treatment Period|PEF is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. PEF was measured by the participants using a hand-held electronic peak flow meter each morning and evening prior to the dose of study medication and any rescue albuterol/salbutamol inhalation aerosol use. Trough evening PEF is the PM PEF measured approximately 24 hours after the last evening administration of study drug. Change from Baseline (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants) was calculated as the value of the averaged daily trough PM PEF over 12 weeks and 24 weeks of the 24-week Treatment Period (at Weeks 12 and 24) minus the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment.|From Baseline up to Week 12 and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters/minute (L/min)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822911|NCT01159912|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Rescue-free 24-hour (hr) Periods at the End of the 24-week Treatment Period|The number of inhalations of rescue bronchodilator, albuterol/salbutamol inhalation aerosol, used during the day and night was recorded by the participants in a daily electronic diary (eDiary). Similarly, asthma symptoms were recorded in a daily eDairy by the participants every day in the morning and evening before taking any rescue or study medication and before the peak expiratory flow measurement. A 24-hour period in which a participant’s responses to both the morning and evening assessments indicated no use of rescue medication was considered to be rescue free. The Baseline value was derived from the last 7 days of the daily eDiary prior to the randomization of the participant. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged value during the 24-week Treatment Period minus the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage of rescue-free 24-hr periods||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822912|NCT01159912|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinic Visit Trough Evening (Pre-bronchodilator and Pre-dose) Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at the End of the 24 Week Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 is defined as the clinic visit (pre-bronchodilator and pre-dose) FEV1 measurement taken at the clinic visit at the end of the dosing interval. Pre-dose and pre-rescue albuterol/salbutamol trough FEV1 was measured electronically by spirometry in the evening at the Baseline through Week 24 clinic visits. The highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements was recorded. Baseline was the pre-dose value obtained at Visit 2. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 24 value minus the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment. The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data, in which the last non-missing post-Baseline on-treatment measurement at scheduled clinic visits was used to impute the missing measurements.|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study medication. Only those participants with non-missing covariates and a post-Baseline FEV1 measurement were analyzed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
822913|NCT01159938|Secondary|Change in Postprandial Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV)|The PWV measured arterial stiffness in the aortic and brachial arteries of healthy participants and T2DM participants. Changes in PWV from baseline [30-minute (min) pre-breakfast] are reported.|30 mins (pre-breakfast), 60, 120, 180 and 240 mins (post-breakfast)|Enrolled healthy and randomized type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) participants who had a baseline and post-baseline PWV measurement at specified time point and no major protocol deviation.||meters per second (m/sec)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822914|NCT01159938|Secondary|Change in Blood Glucose (BG)|Changes in BG from the baseline [30-minute (min) pre-breakfast] are reported.|30 mins (pre-breakfast), 50, 110 ,170, and 230 mins (post-breakfast)|Enrolled healthy and randomized type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) participants who had a baseline and a post-baseline blood glucose measurement at specified time point and no major protocol deviation.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822932|NCT01165983|Secondary|Absolute Change in Inflammatory Cytokines and Growth Factors, TNFα, pg/mL||12 Weeks post-randomization|||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822933|NCT01165983|Secondary|Absolute Change in Inflammatory Cytokines and Growth Factors, sCD-40L ng/mL||12 Weeks post-randomization|||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822915|NCT01159938|Secondary|Change in QT Interval on Electrocardiogram (ECG)|QT interval is a measure of time from the beginning of the QRS complex to the end of the T wave on an ECG during which contraction of the ventricles occurs. Changes in QT interval from baseline [30-minute (min) pre-breakfast] are reported.|30 mins (pre-breakfast), 60, 120, 180 and 240 mins (post-breakfast)|Enrolled healthy and randomized type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) participants who had a baseline and a post-baseline QT interval measurement at specified time point and no major protocol deviation.||milliseconds (msec)||Standard Deviation|Mean
822916|NCT01159938|Secondary|Change in Peripheral Artery Tonometry (PAT)|The PAT device is a pneumatic plethysmograph that applies uniform pressure to the surface of each finger tip and measures digital pulse amplitude. The PAT was reported as a percentage of pulse amplitude and expressed as the ratio of post deflation to baseline pulse amplitude in hyperemic finger divided by the same ratio in the contralateral finger that served as a control. The change in PAT from baseline [30-minute (min) pre-breakfast] is reported.|30 mins (pre-breakfast), 120 and 240 mins (post-breakfast)|Enrolled healthy and randomized T2DM participants who had a baseline and a post-baseline PAT measurement at specified time point and no major protocol deviation.||percentage of pulse amplitude||Standard Deviation|Mean
822917|NCT01159938|Secondary|Change in Pulse Wave Amplitude (PWA)|The PWA measured systemic arterial stiffness (augmentation index). PWA was reported as a percentage of systolic peak and calculated as the difference between second and first systolic peak in an ascending aortic pulse pressure waveform divided by the first systolic peak then multiplied by 100. The change in PWA from baseline [30-minute (min) pre-breakfast] is reported.|30 mins (pre-breakfast), 60, 120, 180 and 240 mins (post-breakfast)|Enrolled healthy and randomized type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) participants with a baseline and a post-baseline PWA measurement at specified time point and no major protocol deviation.||percentage of systolic peak||Standard Deviation|Mean
822918|NCT01159938|Primary|Postprandial Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV) in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) Participants at 240 Minutes (Mins) Post-Breakfast|The PWV measured arterial stiffness in the aortic and brachial arteries of T2DM participants. The Least Square (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effect analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model that was adjusted for age, body mass index (BMI), visit, group, condition, group by condition, and random participant.|240 mins (post-breakfast)|Randomized T2DM participants who received study drug and had a post-baseline PWV measurement at the specified time point and no major protocol deviation.||meters per second (m/sec)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
822919|NCT01159938|Primary|Postprandial Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV) in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) Participants at 180 Minutes (Mins) Post-Breakfast|The PWV measured arterial stiffness in the aortic and brachial arteries of T2DM participants. The Least Square (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effect analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model that was adjusted for age, body mass index (BMI), visit, group, condition, group by condition, and random participant.|180 mins (post-breakfast)|Randomized T2DM participants who received study drug and had a post-baseline PWV measurement at the specified time point and no major protocol deviation.||meters per second (m/sec)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
822920|NCT01159938|Primary|Postprandial Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV) in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) Participants at 120 Minutes (Mins) Post-Breakfast|The PWV measured arterial stiffness in the aortic and brachial arteries of T2DM participants. The Least Square (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effect analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model that was adjusted for age, body mass index (BMI), visit, group, condition, group by condition, and random participant.|120 mins (post-breakfast)|Randomized T2DM participants who received study drug and had a post-baseline PWV measurement at the specified time point and no major protocol deviation.||meters per second (m/sec)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
822921|NCT01159938|Primary|Postprandial Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV) in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) Participants at 60 Minutes (Mins) Post-Breakfast|The PWV measured arterial stiffness in the aortic and brachial arteries of T2DM participants. The Least Square (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effect analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model that was adjusted for age, body mass index (BMI), visit, group, condition, group by condition, and random participant.|60 mins (post-breakfast)|Randomized T2DM participants who received study drug and had a post-baseline PWV measurement at the specified time point and no major protocol deviation.||meters per second (m/sec)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
822922|NCT01159938|Primary|Postprandial Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV) in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) Participants at 30 Minutes (Mins) Pre-Breakfast|The PWV measured arterial stiffness in the aortic and brachial arteries of T2DM participants. The Least Square (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effect analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model that was adjusted for age, body mass index (BMI), visit, group, condition, group by condition, and random participant.|30 mins (pre-breakfast)|Randomized T2DM participants who were scheduled to receive study drug and had a baseline PWV measurement at the specified time point and no major protocol deviation.||meters per second (m/s)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
822923|NCT01160237|Secondary|Humoral Immune Response in Terms of HI Antibodies Against Each Vaccine Strain, at Different Timepoints in Subjects Aged 18-60 and Above 60 Years||At Days 0, 7 and 182|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
822924|NCT01160237|Secondary|Potential Immune Mediated Diseases||During the whole study period (Day 0 - Day 182)|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
822925|NCT01160237|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events||During the whole study period (Day 0 - Day 182)|The analysis was performed on the total vaccinated cohort. No subjects were enrolled in the Control Group by the time the study was prematurely terminated.||subjects|||Number
822926|NCT01160237|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events||During 31 days (Day 0 - Day 30) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the total vaccinated cohort. No subjects were enrolled in the Control Group by the time the study was prematurely terminated.||subjects|||Number
822927|NCT01160237|Secondary|Solicited Local and General Symptoms||During 7 days (Day 0 - Day 6) after vaccination|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
822928|NCT01160237|Primary|Humoral Immune Response in Terms of Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies for Each Vaccine Strain, in Subjects Aged 18-60 and Above 60 Years||21 days after vaccination|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
822934|NCT01165983|Secondary|Absolute Change in Inflammatory Cytokines and Growth Factors, MDC ng/mL||12 Weeks post-randomization|||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822946|NCT01165983|Primary|Skin Blood Flow Before and After Iontophoresis With Acetylcholine and Sodium Nitroprusside|Laser doppler imaging is used to measure microcirculatory changes pre- and post-iontophoresis of acetylcholine (Ach) and sodium nitroprusside (NaNP).|12 Weeks post-randomization|||percent change over baseline||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822947|NCT01165983|Primary|Skin Blood Flow Before and After Iontophoresis With Acetylcholine and Sodium Nitroprusside|Laser doppler imaging is used to measure microcirculatory changes pre- and post-iontophoresis of acetylcholine and sodium nitroprusside.|Baseline|||percentage change over baseline||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822948|NCT01165983|Primary|Nitroglycerine Induced Vasodilation|Using ultrasound, images are taken pre- and post-vasodilation of the brachial artery induced with a 0.4mg tablet of NTG.|12 Weeks post-randomization|||percent change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822949|NCT01165983|Primary|Nitroglycerin Induced Dilation|Using ultrasound, images are taken pre- and post-vasodilation of the brachial artery induced with a 0.4mg tablet of NTG.|Baseline|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
822950|NCT01165983|Primary|Flow Mediated Vasodilation|Using ultrasound, percent change in brachial artery diameter is measured in response to an increase in shear stress from a tightened blood pressure cuff, which causes endothelium-dependent dilatation.|12 Weeks post-randomization|Number of subjects that completed the study||percent change over baseline||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
822951|NCT01165983|Primary|Flow Mediated Vasodilation|Using ultrasound, percent change in brachial artery diameter is measured in response to an increase in shear stress from a tightened blood pressure cuff, which causes endothelium-dependent dilatation.|Baseline|||percentage change over baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
822952|NCT01165996|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Particular Genetic Abnormalities Detected by Whole Exome Sequencing Correlation With Clinical Response|Proportion of patients with particular genetic abnormalities detected by whole exome sequencing correlation with clinical response|Baseline||03/2013||||
822953|NCT01165996|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Bone Marrow Evidence of Terminal Differentiation Response to Therapy.|Bone marrow evidence of terminal differentiation will be correlated with response criteria|Day 0,42,84||03/2013||||
822954|NCT01165996|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Bone Marrow Evidence of Cytotoxicity.|Cytotoxicity will be correlated with clinical response criteria|Day 0, 42, 84||03/2013||||
822955|NCT01165996|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Pharmacodynamic Evidence of Drug Effect.|Evidence of pharmacodynamic effect will be correlated with clinical response criteria.|Day 0, 42, 84||03/2013||||
822956|NCT01165996|Secondary|Cytogenetic Response as Per IWG Criteria|Described as the number of patients with a major cytogenetic response (refers to disappearance of a cytogenetic abnormality) or a minor cytogenetic response (50% or more reduction of abnormal metaphases).|at 12 months|Patients that had cytogenetic abnormalities at baseline.||participants|||Number
822957|NCT01165996|Secondary|Number of Patients That Experience > Grade 2 Non-hematologic Toxicity by National Cancer Institute (NCI)/Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) v4 Criteria|Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) will be presented in tables that include causality, seriousness, severity/grade, and whether the AE resulted in death or discontinuation of treatment, Laboratory data will be summarized in tables that show changes from pre-treatment values and frequencies of abnormal values. Descriptive statistics will also be provided.|up to 12 months of treatment|All patients that received treatment.||participants|||Number
822958|NCT01165996|Primary|Number of Patients With Response as Defined by IWG (International Working Group) Criteria for Myelodysplasia|The criteria for complete remission (CR) and partial remission (PR) involve specific improvements in marrow and peripheral blood measurements obtained on 2 or more successive assessments. The response parameters in peripheral blood must be maintained for at least 8 weeks. Responses designated as CR include less than 5% marrow blasts without evidence of dysplasia and normalization of peripheral blood counts, including a hemoglobin level of 110 g/L (11 g/dL) or more, a neutrophil count of 1.5 × 109/L or more, and a platelet count of 100 × 109/L or more. For PR, patients must demonstrate all CR criteria if abnormal before treatment except that marrow blasts should decrease by 50% or more compared with pretreatment levels, or patients may demonstrate a less-advanced MDS disease classification category than prior to treatment.|Formal assessment at week 12 for study primary end-point (hematologic improvement).|All patients enrolled and that received any treatment.||participants|||Number
822959|NCT01166139|Secondary|Efficacy of Nilotinib in Patients With Systemic Sclerosis, as Defined by an Improvement in the Modified Rodnan Skin Score|"Improvement in Modified Rodnan skin score reported as a mean (units equals number of points).
The Modified Rodnan Skin Score (MRSS) measures dermal skin thickness through the examination of 17 body areas: fingers, hands, forearms, arms, feet, legs, and thighs (in pairs), and face, chest, and abdomen. In each of these areas, the skin score is evaluated by manual palpation. The skin score is 0 for uninvolved skin, 1 for mild thickening, 2 for moderate thickening, and 3 for severe thickening (hidebound skin). The total skin score is the sum of the skin scores of the individual areas. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 51. A higher score indicates greater severity of disease."|12 months treatment|||units on a scale|||Number
822960|NCT01166139|Secondary|Improvement of Modified Rodnan Skin Score Reported as a Mean (Units Equals Number of Points)|Efficacy of Nilotinib in patients with systemic sclerosis, as defined by an improvement in the Modified Rodnan Skin Score (MRSS) The Modified Rodnan Skin Score (MRSS) measures dermal skin thickness through the examination of 17 body areas: fingers, hands, forearms, arms, feet, legs, and thighs (in pairs), and face, chest, and abdomen. The skin score is evaluated by manual palpation in each of these areas. The skin score is 0 for uninvolved skin, 1 for mild thickening, 2 for moderate thickening, and 3 for severe thickening (hidebound skin). The total skin score is the sum of the skin scores of the individual areas where the minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 51. A higher score indicates greater severity of disease.|6 Months of treatment|||units on a scale|||Number
822961|NCT01166139|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability||6 Months and 12 months treatment|||Adverse Events|||Number
822962|NCT01166178|Secondary|Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events Comparison of Treatment Groups|Adverse Events and Serious Adverse events are reported in the safety section.|24 months|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done. The sample size was not powered for comparison between groups; however, all AEs are reported in the safety section.|||||
822963|NCT01166178|Secondary|Course of Disease in Multiple Sclerosis Patients|The course of disease in Multiple Sclerosis (MS) patients was measured comparing results from the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) from screening and month 12. EDSS is a scale, ranging from 0 (normal) to 10 (death due to MS) for assessing neurologic impairment in MS. It is based on a weighting scheme of eight functional systems. The functional systems are Visual, Brain Stem, Pyramidal, Cerebellar, Sensory, Bowel&Bladder, Cerebral and Other functions. EDSS was assessed by the treating neurologist.|Screening (day -21 to -1) and month 12|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done.|||||
822964|NCT01166178|Secondary|Change in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at 24 Months|"Change in bone mineral density (BMD) of the femoral neck was measured using Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) at screening and at month 24.
A DXA scanner is a device that uses x-ray beams to measure the amount of minerals in the bone."|Screening (day -21 to -1) and month 24|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done.|||||
822965|NCT01166178|Secondary|Change in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip Region at 24 Months|"Change in bone mineral density (BMD) of the total hip region was measured using Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) at screening and at month 24.
A DXA scanner is a device that uses x-ray beams to measure the amount of minerals in the bone."|Screening (day -21 to -1) and month 24|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done.|||||
822966|NCT01166178|Primary|Change in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip Region at 12 Months|"Change in bone mineral density (BMD) of the total hip region was measured using Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) at screening and at month 12.
A DXA scanner is a device that uses x-ray beams to measure the amount of minerals in the bone."|Screening (day -21 to -1) and month 12|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done.|||||
822967|NCT01166178|Secondary|Change in Bone Mineral Density of the Lumbar Spine at 24 Months|"Change in bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine was measured using Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) at screening and at month 24.
A DXA scanner is a device that uses x-ray beams to measure the amount of minerals in the bone."|Screening (day -21 to -1) and month 24|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done.|||||
822968|NCT01166178|Secondary|Change in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at 12 Months|"Change in bone mineral density (BMD) of the femoral neck was measured using Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) at screening and at month 12.
A DXA scanner is a device that uses x-ray beams to measure the amount of minerals in the bone."|Screening (day -21 to -1) and month 12|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done.|||||
822969|NCT01166178|Secondary|Change in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip at 6 Months|Change in bone mineral density (BMD) of the total hip was measured using Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) at screening and at month 6. A DXA scanner is a device that uses x-ray beams to measure the amount of minerals in the bone.|Screening (day -21 to -1) and month 6|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done.|||||
822970|NCT01166178|Secondary|Change in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at 6 Months|"Change in bone mineral density (BMD) of the femoral neck was measured using Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) at screening and at month 6.
A DXA scanner is a device that uses x-ray beams to measure the amount of minerals in the bone."|Screening (day -21 to -1) and month 6|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done.|||||
822971|NCT01166178|Secondary|Change in Bone Mineral Density of the Lumbar Spine at 6 Months|"Change in bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine was measured using Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) at screening and at month 6.
A DXA scanner is a device that uses x-ray beams to measure the amount of minerals in the bone."|Screening (day -21 to -1) and month 6|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done.|||||
822972|NCT01166178|Primary|Change in Bone Mineral Density of the Lumbar Spine at 12 Months|"Change in bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine was measured using Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) at screening and at month 12.
A DXA scanner is a device that uses x-ray beams to measure the amount of minerals in the bone."|Screening (day -21 to -1) and month 12|A total of 168 randomized participants were needed to have a power of 93% % to detect a significant difference in lumbar spine BMD. This study randomized 29 participants of the planned 168; hence, the planned analysis was not done.|||||
822973|NCT01166230|Secondary|Rate of Progression|"Only patients with Ta/T1 were included in the follow-up study. Progression is defined as presence of T2-T4 tumors, with or without carcinoma in situ (CIS), at worst recurrence."|4.5 years|||percentage of patients|||Number
822974|NCT01166230|Primary|Recurrence Free Survival||up to 4.5 years|Intention-to-treat (ITT)||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822975|NCT01166230|Other Pre-specified|Median Time to Recurrence||up to 4.5 years|ITT||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
822976|NCT01166230|Other Pre-specified|Longer-term Recurrence-free Rates After Hexvix (Cysview) and Non-Hexvix (Cysview) Cystoscopy/TURB|To extend the follow-up period of the pivotal trial (B305/04) to up in all available patients, to assess a longer-term estimate of recurrence-free rates after Hexvix and non-Hexvix cystoscopy/TURB, and to assess numbers and types of recurrences, amount and type of treatment given, and numbers of deaths.|up to 5.5 years retrospectively|ITT||percentage of paticipants|||Number
824921|NCT01178671|Secondary|Depression Severity|as measured by the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, which rates severity of depression on a scale from 0 (least depression) to 50 (greatest depression).|up to 24 weeks|intent to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822977|NCT01166282|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|"An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. A serious AE (SAE) is an event that results in death, is life-threatening, requires or prolongs hospitalization, results in a congenital anomaly, persistent or significant disability/incapacity or is an important medical event that, based on medical judgment, may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent any of the outcomes listed above. Treatment-emergent events (TEAEs or TESAE) are defined as any event that began or worsened in severity after the first dose of study drug. The investigator assessed the relationship of each event to the use of study drug as either probably related to study drug, possibly related to study drug, probably not related, or not related to study drug.
For more details on adverse events please see the AE section below."|Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were collected from first dose of study drug until 70 days after the last dose of study drug (up to 212 weeks)|Safety population: All randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug||participants|||Number
822978|NCT01166282|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Pediatric American College of Rheumatology Pediatric 70% Response (ACR Pedi70)|The ACR Pedi70 response is defined as ≥70% improvement in at least 3 of 6 JRA core set criteria with no more than 1 of the 6 criteria with >30% worsening. The 6 variables for the JRA core set criteria are Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of participant's disease activity, Parent's Global Assessment of participant's overall well-being, number of active joints (joints with swelling not due to deformity or joints LOM plus pain and/or tenderness), number of joints with LOM, Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ), and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs CRP). Baseline is the last value prior to the first dose of study drug. Non-responder imputation NRI was used.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
822979|NCT01166282|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Pediatric American College of Rheumatology Pediatric 50% Response (ACR Pedi50)|The ACR Pedi50 response is defined as ≥50% improvement in at least 3 of 6 JRA core set criteria with no more than 1 of the 6 criteria with >30% worsening. The 6 variables for the JRA core set criteria are Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of participant's disease activity, Parent's Global Assessment of participant's overall well-being, number of active joints (joints with swelling not due to deformity or joints LOM plus pain and/or tenderness), number of joints with LOM, Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ), and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs CRP). Baseline is the last value prior to the first dose of study drug. NRI was used.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
822980|NCT01166282|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Pediatric American College of Rheumatology Pediatric 30% Response (ACR Pedi30)|The ACR Pedi30 response is defined as ≥30% improvement in at least 3 of 6 juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (JRA) core set criteria with no more than 1 of the 6 criteria with >30% worsening. The 6 variables for the JRA core set criteria are Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of participant's disease activity, Parent's Global Assessment of participant's overall well-being, number of active joints (joints with swelling not due to deformity or joints LOM plus pain and/or tenderness), number of joints with LOM, Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ), and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs CRP). Baseline is the last value prior to the first dose of study drug. Non-responder imputation (NRI) was used for missing data.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
822981|NCT01166282|Secondary|Swollen Joint Count (SJC68): Change From Baseline to Week 12|Sixty-eight joints were assessed by physical examination. Joint swelling was classified as present or absent. Scores range from 0 to 68, with higher scores representing higher disease activity. Baseline is defined as the last nonmissing value prior to the first dose of study drug. LOCF was used.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822982|NCT01166282|Secondary|Tender Joint Count (TJC72): Change From Baseline to Week 12|Seventy-two joints were assessed by pressure on physical examination. Joint tenderness was classified as either present or absent. Scores range from 0 to 72, with higher scores representing higher disease activity. Baseline is defined as the last nonmissing value prior to the first dose of study drug. LOCF was used.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822983|NCT01166282|Secondary|Number of Sites of Enthesitis: Change From Baseline to Week 12|The presence of enthesitis was assessed by pressure at 35 anatomical locations. Enthesitis was classifed as either present or absent. Scores range from 0 to 35, with higher scores representing higher disease activity. Baseline is defined as the last nonmissing value prior to the first dose of study drug. LOCF was used.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population||sites of enthesitis||Standard Deviation|Mean
822984|NCT01166282|Primary|Percent Change in Number of Active Joints With Arthritis From Baseline to Week 12|A joint assessment was recorded at all study visits to assess the number of active joints. A total of 72 joints were assessed for swelling not due to deformity or joints with loss of motion (LOM) plus pain and/or tenderness. Total possible scores ranges from 0 (no active joints) to 72 (all active joints). Baseline is defined as the last nonmissing value prior to the first dose of study drug. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used for missing data.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
822985|NCT01166646|Secondary|"Number of Subjects Whose Signs of Psoriasis Was Designated Success"|Signs of psoriasis including scaling, erythema, and plaque elevation will be recorded at baseline, Day 8, and Day 15 on a 0 (clear) to 4 (severe/very severe) point scale. Each of the signs of psoriasis will be dichotomized to a) “success” and “failure” with success defined as a grade of 1 or 0 at the End of Treatment (EOT; i.e., the visit at which psoriasis has cleared [Day 8 or Day 15] or end of the assigned treatment period).|Day 15|"Analysis shown is based on the number of subjects whose Signs of Psoriasis was designated Success (ITT population) at Day 15."||participants|||Number
822986|NCT01166646|Secondary|Changes in Disease Severity (Success)|Overall disease severity (ODS) will be recorded at baseline, Day 8, and Day 15 on a 0 (clear) to 4 (severe/very severe) point scale. ODS evaluations will be dichotomized to “success” and “failure” with success defined as a grade of 1 or 0 at the end of treatment (EOT).|Day 15|Analysis shown is based on the ITT population at Day 15.||participants|||Number
822987|NCT01166646|Primary|Pharmacokinetic Properties (AUC)|Comparison of PK results (area under the curve [AUC] from time 0 to infinity) between the two Treatment Groups will be conducted following the last application of the medication on Day 8.|Day 8|Pharmacokinetics properties were evaluated in a subgroup of 12 adult subjects per arm.||pg*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822988|NCT01166646|Primary|Pharmacokinetic Properties (Tmax)|Comparison of PK results (time to peak concentration [Tmax]) between the two Treatment Groups will be conducted following the last application of the medication on Day 8.|Day 8|Pharmacokinetic properties were evaluated in a subgroup of 12 adult subjects per arm.||Hours||Full Range|Geometric Mean
822989|NCT01166646|Primary|Pharmacokinetic Properties (Cmax)|Comparison of PK results (peak concentration in plasma [Cmax]) between the two Treatment Groups will be conducted following the last application of the medication on Day 8.|Day 8|Pharmacokinetic properties were evaluated in a subgroup of 12 adult subjects per arm.||pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
822990|NCT01166646|Primary|Adrenal Suppression Potential|Hypothalamic Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA)-Axis responses to Cosyntropin Stimulation Testing (CST) were dichotomized to normal and abnormal. An abnormal HPA Axis response (HPA Suppression) was defined as a 30-minute post-stimulation serum cortisol level of ≤18 μg/dL at the end of treatment.|After 1-2 weeks dose|Analysis shown is based on the ITT population, defined as all enrolled participants who were randomized and applied at least one dose of the test article.||participants|||Number
822991|NCT01166659|Secondary|Mean Number of Topical IOP-Lowering Medications Used in Comparison With Baseline|The number of unique glaucoma medications was recorded. The mean number of topical IOP-lowering medications was computed by dividing the total number of medications used (the numerator) by the total number of subjects who reported on medication use at the visit.|Baseline, Month 12 postoperative|Eyes implanted with the CyPass 2FX device with data available.||medications|eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
822992|NCT01166659|Secondary|Proportion of Eyes With Achievement of Target IOP With and Without Use of Ocular Hypotensive Medication|Target IOP was defined as ≥ 6 mmHg and ≤ 21 mmHg. Proportion of eyes is reported as a percentage.|Month 12 postoperative|Eyes implanted with the CyPass 2FX device with data available.||percentage of eyes|eyes||Number
822993|NCT01166659|Primary|Proportion of Eyes With Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Reduction of ≥ 20% at 12 Months Postoperatively Who Were on Fewer or the Same Number of Ocular Hypotensive Medications as Compared With Baseline|IOP (fluid pressure inside the eye) was assessed using Goldmann applanation tonometry and reported in millimeters mercury (mmHg). A reduction in IOP from baseline indicates an improvement. Proportion of eyes is reported as a percentage.|Baseline; Month 12 postoperative|Eyes implanted with the CyPass 2FX device with data available.||percentage of eyes|eyes||Number
822994|NCT01166724|Secondary|Change in iGFR|We will also compare the change in iGFR (as well as estimated GFR) from time of conversion to 12 and 24 months of follow up by paired t-test between groups.|12 months|Early termination; Sponsor discontinued the study for corporate reasons. No data analyzed. Data were not collected and the outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
822995|NCT01166724|Primary|Biopsy-derived Measures of Fibrosis|The primary analyses will compare biopsy-derived measures of fibrosis in the Tac-maintenance and SRL groups using the t-test.|12 months|Early termination; Sponsor discontinued the study for corporate reasons. No data analyzed. Data were not collected and the outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
822996|NCT01166750|Secondary|Quality of Life||weekly for 12 weeks||||||
822997|NCT01166750|Secondary|Mood and Stress||weekly for 12 weeks||||||
822998|NCT01166750|Primary|Pain|Pain intensity on a 0 to 10 visual analog scale with 0 being no pain and 10 being worst possible pain.|weekly for 12 weeks|They were the ones still remaining at the end of the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
822999|NCT01166763|Secondary|OH Vitamin D Levels in Serum|Assessment of 25(OH)D levels as a measure of circulating vitamin D.|baseline and 6 months|All subjects completing trial||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
823000|NCT01166763|Secondary|Change in Proliferation (as Assessed by Ki-67) Examined in Breast Epithelial Cells.|Change in percent of cells expressing staining for Ki-67 antibody in breast epithelial cell specimens acquird by Random Periareolar Fine Needle Aspiration.|baseline and 6 months|All subjects completing trial.||percentage of cells staining positive||Full Range|Median
823001|NCT01166763|Primary|Change in Mammographic Breast Density Over Course of Study|Change in the percent of the breast area that is considered to be at higher density on mammogram.|baseline and 6 months|All subjects completing trial||Change in percent dense breast area||Standard Deviation|Mean
823002|NCT01166958|Secondary|Average Bone Mineral Density of the One-third Radius at Baseline, 3 Months and 6 Months|One-third radius BMD was measured at the baseline, three month and six month visits. The outcome data is an overall average and range from all time points.|BMD measured at the baseline, 3 month, and 6 month visits.|||g/cm2||Full Range|Mean
823003|NCT01166958|Secondary|Average Bone Mineral Density of the Proximal Femur (Hip) at Baseline, 3 Months and 6 Months|Hip BMD was measured at the baseline, three month and six month visits. The outcome data is an overall average and range from all time points.|BMD measured at the baseline, 3 month, and 6 month visits.|||g/cm2||Full Range|Mean
823004|NCT01166958|Primary|Serum Markers of Skeletal Turnover (Serum P1NP)|Serum P1NP was measured at all study visits following the screening visit. The outcome data is an overall average and range from all time points.|These were measured at the baseline and 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5 and 6 month visits.|||mcg/L||Full Range|Mean
823005|NCT01166958|Secondary|Average Bone Mineral Density of the Spine at Baseline, 3 Months and 6 Months|Spine BMD was measured at the baseline, three month and six month visits. The outcome data is an overall average and range from all time points.|BMD measured at the baseline, 3 month, and 6 month visits.|||g/cm2||Full Range|Mean
823006|NCT01166958|Primary|Serum Markers of Skeletal Turnover (Serum CTX)|Serum CTX was measured at all study visits following the screening visit. The outcome data is an overall average and range from all time points.|These were measured at the baseline and 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5 and 6 month visits.|||ng/mL||Full Range|Mean
823007|NCT01166971|Primary|Defocus Curve|A defocus curve is created by multiple measurements of one's visual acuity at different spherical powers (recorded as Diopters (D)). Visual Acuity (VA) is measured in logMAR. LogMAR is the “logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution”.|3 months after surgery|In the ReSTOR +3 population, 1 subject did not complete the assessment at -5.00 D; therefore, only 32 subjects were used for this measure.||LogMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
823008|NCT01166997|Primary|Major Bleeding and Intracranial Bleeding at 30 Days.|Bleeding will be classified as major if it is associated with a fall in the hemoglobin level of at least 2.0 g/dl, transfusion of ≥ 2 units of red blood cells, or involvement of a critical site (e.g., intracranial, intraspinal). To aid in evaluating the relationship of bleeding events to rt-PA administration, they will also be categorized by whether they occurred within 3 days after the initiation of thrombolytic therapy.|30 days|||participants|||Number
823010|NCT01167023|Secondary|P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) as Measured by Accumetrics VerifyNow® P2Y12 (VN P2Y12) at 30 Days|PRU represents the rate and extent of adenosine (ADP)-stimulated platelet aggregation. The VN P2Y12 assay is a point-of-care device that measures platelet aggregation with single-use, disposable cartridges. A low PRU reflects stronger inhibition of P2Y12, whereas a high PRU reflects weaker inhibition of P2Y12. The Least Squares Mean values were calculated from a mixed-effects model repeated measures analysis with baseline measurement, stratification variable sickle cell genotype, treatment, time, and time*treatment interaction as fixed effects, and participant as a random effect in the model.|30 days|Safety population: All randomized participants who took at least 1 dose of study medication. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment they actually received. The analysis was performed in the safety population who had both baseline and 30-day PRU measurements and a non-missing genotype.||P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823011|NCT01167023|Secondary|Intensity of Pain Related to Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) During the Treatment Duration|Participants recorded intensity of pain due to SCD each day in daily pain diaries using a pain scale. A scale of 0 to 9 was used, with 0=no pain and 9=unbearable pain. A response range of 1 to 9 indicated participant experienced pain due to SCD, whereas a response of 0 indicated participant did not experience pain due to SCD. Pain intensity was the average of a participant's pain ratings. Average pain intensity=(Sum of all nonmissing pain intensity responses/number of daily pain diaries completed). Number of daily pain diaries completed is number of nonmissing pain intensity responses.|Baseline through 30 days|Intent to treat (ITT) population consisted of all randomized participants. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to. The analysis was performed in the ITT population who had recorded the pain intensity in at least 1 daily pain diary.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823012|NCT01167023|Secondary|Platelet Reactivity Index (PRI) Measured by Vasodilator-Associated Stimulated Phosphoprotein (VASP) at 30 Days|PRI was calculated by VASP phosphorylation assay using flow cytometry. The PRI indicates the level of P2Y12 inhibition. A low PRI reflects strong inhibition of P2Y12, whereas a high PRI reflects weak/absent inhibition of P2Y12. The Least Squares (LS) Mean values were calculated from a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis with baseline measurement, stratification variable sickle cell genotype, treatment, time, and time*treatment interaction as fixed effects, and participant as a random effect in the model.|30 days|All randomized participants who took at least 1 dose of study medication. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment they actually received. The analysis was performed in the safety population who had both baseline and 30-day PRI measurements and a non-missing genotype.||percentage of PRI||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823013|NCT01167023|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pain Events Related to Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) Requiring Medical Attention During the Treatment Duration|Pain requiring medical attention was defined 2 ways: (1) if the participant attended an unplanned doctor’s appointment or clinic visit, visited the emergency room, or was admitted to hospital due to sickle cell pain, or (2) if the participant experienced a vaso-occlusive crisis (VOC), acute chest syndrome, or hepatic sequestration at least once during the treatment period.|Baseline through 30 days|Intent to treat (ITT) population consisted of all randomized participants. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to. The analysis was performed in the ITT population who completed at least 1 page of the daily pain diary or with pain endpoint case report form (CRF) data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
823014|NCT01167023|Secondary|Percentage of Days With Pain Related to Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) During the Treatment Duration|Participants recorded the intensity of pain due to SCD each day in the daily pain diaries. A scale of 0 to 9 was used, with 0 indicating no pain, and 9 indicating unbearable pain. A response range of 1 to 9 indicated the participant experienced pain due to SCD, whereas a response of 0 indicated participant did not experience pain due to SCD. The percentage of days with pain (pain rate) was calculated as follows: Pain rate = 100*(Total number of days with pain/number of daily pain diaries completed). Number of daily pain diaries completed was number of nonmissing pain intensity responses.|Baseline through 30 days|Intent to treat (ITT) population consisted of all randomized participants. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to. The analysis was performed in the ITT population who recorded pain intensity in at least 1 daily pain diary.||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823015|NCT01167023|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hemorrhagic Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) During the Treatment Duration|TEAEs were defined as AEs that occurred or worsened after receiving the study drug.|Baseline through 30 days|Safety population: All randomized participants who took at least 1 dose of study medication. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment they actually received.||percentage of participants|||Number
823016|NCT01167023|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Hemorrhagic Events Requiring Medical Intervention During the Treatment Duration|A hemorrhagic event requiring medical intervention. Medical intervention was defined as any medical attention resulting in therapy or further investigation during the 30-day treatment duration.|Baseline through 30 days|Safety population: All randomized participants who took at least 1 dose of study medication. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment they actually received.||percentage of participants|||Number
823017|NCT01167140|Secondary|Participants With an Improvement in Global Appearance|• Subjects’ global assessment of change in appearance of target area at 7 days post-treatment, and at 30-day intervals for 120 days after treatment to baseline|Up to 4 months|5 subjects were excluded from effectiveness analysis because they received a lower dose.||participants|||Number
823018|NCT01167140|Secondary|Participants With One Point Improvement in Line Severity|• Investigators’ rating of line severity improvement in the target area in animation at 7 days post-treatment, and at 30-day intervals for 120 days after treatment from baseline|Baseline and up to 4 months|Of the 41 subjects treated, 5 were treated at a lower dose and excluded from the effectiveness measure.||participants|||Number
823019|NCT01167140|Primary|Number of Participants With Effectiveness and Safety Success|"Effectiveness success: an improvement in line severity in the target area in animation at 30 days post-treatment as rated by the investigator using the 5-point wrinkle scale
Safety success: the absence of a device-related serious adverse event (DSAE)"|Up to 4 months|All subjects treated were analyzed to the safety endpoint.||participants|||Number
823266|NCT01170546|Primary|Static Knee Stability|The KT-2000 knee ligament arthrometer (MED Metric Co., San Diego, USA) is designed to assess the anterior drawer laxity of the knee joint. The discrepancy of anterior displacement between the sound side and the lesion side is applied in evaluating the static stability of the knee.|one year||12/2010||||
823020|NCT01167153|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Orthostatic Pulse at 12 Weeks|Orthostatic pulse was measured by sphygmomanometer when subject stood for 1 minute at clinic during each visit.|Baseline, 12 weeks|ITT (intention to treatment) population: all randomised subjects who had baseline assessment and at least one assessment record of orthostatic pulse rate after baseline.||beats/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
823021|NCT01167153|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sitting Pulse at 12 Weeks|Sitting pulse was measured by sphygmomanometer after subject sat for 5 minutes at clinic during each visit.|Baseline, 12 weeks|ITT (intention to treatment) population: all randomised subjects who had baseline assessment and at least one assessment record of sitting pulse rate after baseline.||beats/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
823022|NCT01167153|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Orthostatic SBP and DBP at 12 Weeks|The arm with higher sitting blood pressure was selected for all examinations throughout the study. Orthostatic blood pressure was measured when subject stood for 1 minute. Orthostatic blood pressures were measured at screening and each visit.|Baseline, 12 weeks|ITT (intention to treatment) population: all randomised subjects who had baseline assessment and at least one assessment record of orthostatic SBP and DBP after baseline.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823023|NCT01167153|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Whom Blood Pressure Target Was Achieved at the Study End Point at 12 Weeks|Blood Pressure (BP) target was defined as mean sitting BP<140/90 mm Hg in non-diabetic patients and<130/80 mm Hg in diabetic patients at 12 weeks.|12 weeks|ITT (intention to treatment) population: all randomised subjects who had baseline assessment and at least one assessment record of blood pressure control after baseline||Percentage of participants|||Number
823024|NCT01167153|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Effective Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) Control Rate and Effective Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) Control Rate at the Study End Point (12 Weeks)|"Effective SBP control rate was defined as proportion of subjects in whom MSSBP < 140 mmHg or MSSBP reduction ≥ 20 mmHg from baseline.
Effective DBP control rate was defined as proportion of subjects in whom MSDBP < 90 mmHg or MSDBP reduction ≥10 mmHg from baseline."|Baseline, 12 weeks|ITT (intention to treatment) population: all randomised subjects who had baseline assessment and at least one assessment record of effective BP control after baseline.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823025|NCT01167153|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP) at the Study End Point (12 Weeks)|The sitting blood pressure was trough value (23-26 hours after drug administration) measured by sphygmomanometer. Blood pressure was measured on both arms and the arm with higher msDBP was used at visit 1 and following visits. Measurement of blood pressure was carried out 3 times at each visit on the selected arm. The results and mean value of three sitting blood pressures were recorded for analysis.|Baseline, 12 weeks|ITT (intention to treatment) population: all randomised subjects who had baseline assessment and at least one assessment record of MSDBP after baseline.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823026|NCT01167153|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP) at the Study End Point (12 Weeks)|The sitting blood pressure was trough value (23-26 hours after drug administration) measured by sphygmomanometer. Blood pressure was measured on both arms and the arm with higher mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (MSDBP) was used at visit 1 and following visits. Measurement of blood pressure was carried out 3 times at each visit on the selected arm. The results and mean value of three sitting blood pressures were recorded for analysis.|Baseline, 12 weeks|ITT (intention to treatment) population: all randomised subjects who had baseline assessment and at least one assessment record of MSSBP after baseline.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823027|NCT01167192|Secondary|Determine the Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy in Disseminated Cancer Cells in the Bone Marrow and the Correlation to Tumor Response||Up to 15 months from time of registration|The physician who was to perform the correlative laboratory work for the study left the university prior to performing the correlative work for this study.|||||
823028|NCT01167192|Secondary|Successful Development of Animal Models of Triple Negative Breast Cancer as Measured by the Genetic Similarity Between the Primary Tumor and the Tumor in Animals||At the time of IVAD placement and at the time of surgery|Participants did not have sufficient tissue for this outcome measure to be analyzed.|||||
823029|NCT01167192|Secondary|Successful Development of Animal Models in Triple Negative Breast Cancers as Measured by the Ability of the Tumors to Metastasize to Other Organs||At the time of IVAD placement and at the time of surgery|Participants did not have sufficient tissue for this outcome measure to be analyzed.|||||
823030|NCT01167192|Secondary|Successful Development of Animal Models for Triple Negative Breast Cancers as Measured by the Ability to Passage the Tumors in Mice||At the time of IVAD placement and at the time of surgery|Participants did not have sufficient tissue for this outcome measure to be analyzed.|||||
823031|NCT01167192|Secondary|Successful Development of Animal Models of Triple Negative Breast Cancers as Measured by the Ability to Grow the Tumors in Mice.||At the time of IVAD placement and at the time of surgery|Participants did not have sufficient tissue for this outcome measure to be analyzed.|||||
823032|NCT01167192|Secondary|Medical Toxicities as Measured by Number of Grade 3 or Higher Adverse Events||30 days post surgery (approximately 16-20 weeks after start of registration)|||adverse event|||Number
823033|NCT01167192|Secondary|Overall Survival Rate||Median follow-up was 59.9 months|1 patient was removed from study due to treatment related toxicity prior to surgery and 1 patient expired prior to surgery. These 2 patients are not included in this outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823034|NCT01167192|Secondary|Determine the Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy in Disseminated Cancer Cells in the Bone Marrow||Up to 15 months from registration|The physician who was to perform the correlative laboratory work for the study left the university prior to performing the correlative work for this study.|||||
823035|NCT01167192|Secondary|Number of Participants With Surgical Complications||30 days post surgery (approximately 16-20 weeks from registration)|1 patient was removed from study due to treatment related toxicity prior to surgery and 1 patient expired prior to surgery. These two patients are not included in this outcome measure.||participant|||Number
823092|NCT01167881|Primary|The Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) After 104 Weeks of Treatment.||Baseline and 104 weeks|FAS (LOCF) – Full Analysis Set (FAS) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF); Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Mean
823036|NCT01167192|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|Progression = at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of the target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions, appearance of one or more new lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Up to 5 years from registration|There are 8 participants not included in this outcome measure and the reasons are as follows: (1) removed from study due to treatment related toxicity prior to surgery, (1) expired prior to surgery, and (6) did not have progressive disease.||months||Full Range|Median
823037|NCT01167192|Primary|Relationship Between Tumor Response and Deficiencies in DNA Repair Mechanisms||Prior to surgery (approximately 12-16 weeks from registration)|The physician who was to perform the correlative laboratory work for the study left the university prior to performing the correlative work for this study.|||||
823038|NCT01167192|Primary|Response Rate as Measured by Number of Participants Who Achieved Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|"Complete response (CR) = disappearance of all target lesions, disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level.
Partial response (PR) = at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of the target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD"|Prior to surgery (approximately 12-16 weeks from registration)|1 patient was removed from study due to treatment related toxicity prior to efficacy evaluation and 1 patient expired prior to efficacy evaluation. These two patients are not included in this outcome measure.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823039|NCT01167257|Secondary|Net Change of the Global Response Assessment (GRA)|Efficacy:(measured the net change of variables from baseline and 1 month) The Global response assessment (GRA) have seven point scale is centered at zero (no change): markedly worse; moderately worse; slightly worse; no change; slightly improved; moderately improved; and markedly improved.|Baseline to 4 weeks after initial treatment|||participants|||Number
823040|NCT01167257|Secondary|Net Change of the Urgency Severity Score (USS) Within 3 Days|Efficacy:(measured the net change of variables from baseline and 1 month) Urgency severity score (USS) within 3 days. The USS have 1-point scale ranging from 0 to 4. The USS grades urgency per toilet void as none, mild, moderate or severe.|Baseline to 4 weeks after initial treatment|||participants|||Number
823041|NCT01167257|Secondary|Net Change of the Postvoid Residual Volume (PVR)|Efficacy:(measured the net change of variables from baseline and 1 month) Postvoid residual volume (PVR) Change = Week 4 minus Baseline value|Baseline and 1 month after initial treatment|||mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823042|NCT01167257|Secondary|Net Change of the Maximum Flow Rate (Qmax)|Efficacy:(measured the net change of variables from baseline and 1 month) Maximum flow rate (Qmax) Change = Week 4 minus Baseline value|Baseline to 4 weeks after initial treatment|Control arm: subject number S025 was removed from analysis for not meeting the requirement for analysis, thus control arm 27 subjects||mL/s||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823043|NCT01167257|Secondary|Net Change of the Functional Bladder Capacity (FBC)|Efficacy:(measured the net change of variables from baseline and 1 month) Functional bladder capacity (FBC) Change = Week 4 minus Baseline value|Baseline to 4 weeks after initial treatment|Control arm: subject number S025 was removed from analysis for not meeting the requirement for analysis, thus control arm 27 subjects||mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823044|NCT01167257|Secondary|Net Change of the Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS)|"Efficacy:(measured the net change of variables from baseline to 1 month) Overactive bladder symptom score (OABSS) The OABSS is a 4-item questionnaire developed to evaluate OAB symptoms. The maximal scores are 2, 3, 5 and 5 for daytime frequency, nighttime frequency, urgency and urgency in continence, respectively.
The OABSS range = 0 to 15 ((asymptomatic to very symptomatic). Change = Week 4 minus Baseline value"|Baseline to 4 weeks after initial treatment|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823045|NCT01167257|Secondary|Mean Change of the Urgency Urinary Incontinence (UUI) Per 3 Days|"Efficacy:
Mean change of the urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) per 3 days from baseline to 4 weeks after the treatment day based on the 3-day voiding diary.
Change = Week 4 minus Baseline value"|Baseline to 4 weeks after initial treatment|Control arm: subject number S025 was removed from analysis for not meeting the requirement for analysis, thus control arm 27 subjects||Frequency per 3 days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823046|NCT01167257|Secondary|Mean Change of the Urgency Episodes Per 3 Days|"Efficacy:
Mean change of the Urgency episodes per 3 days from baseline to 4 weeks after the treatment day based on the 3-day voiding diary.
Change = Week 4 minus Baseline value"|Baseline to 4 weeks after initial treatment|Control arm: subject number S025 was removed from analysis for not meeting the requirement for analysis, thus control arm 27 subjects||Frequency per 3 days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823047|NCT01167257|Primary|Mean Change of the Total Frequency Per 3 Days|"Efficacy:
Mean change of the total frequency per 3 days from baseline to 4 weeks after the treatment day based on the 3-day voiding diary.
Change = Week 4 minus Baseline value"|Baseline to 4 weeks after initial treatment|Control arm: subject number S025 was removed from analysis for not meeting the requirement for analysis, thus control arm 27 subjects||Frequency per 3 days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823048|NCT01167426|Secondary|Patient Injection Experience Preference|"The Injection Experience Preference Questionnaire utilizes a 5-level preference scale where participants were asked to compare their injection experience during the first 2 weeks (glatiramer acetate 20 mg/1 mL) with the past 2 weeks (glatiramer acetate 20 mg/0.5 mL). Response options were: 1. strongly prefer first experience (first 2 weeks); 2. somewhat prefer first experience (first 2 weeks); 3. no preference; 4. somewhat prefer second experience (past 2 weeks); 5. strongly prefer second experience (past 2 weeks). Responses 1 and 2 were combined into a single category (prefers first experience) and responses 4 and 5 were combined into a single category (prefers second experience)."|Week 4|Analysis Population with available data.||participants|||Number
823068|NCT01167608|Primary|"2nd Most Commonly Reported Future Barrier to Mental Health Services: Doctors Are Not Sensitive Enough to PD-related Issues"|"The purpose of this study was to assess the 3 most commonly reported past and future barriers to mental health services. This outcome represents the 2nd most commonly reported future barrier to mental health services reported by those who responded to the survey described in the Methods section. Outcome is reported as the percentage of all respondents surveyed who endorsed this particular future barrier. This barrier can best be described as limited knowledge of PD amongst treatment providers.
NOTE: This is an anonymous, cross-sectional survey study. Not all participants responded to every item, so sample size varies between outcome measures."|Lifetime|||percentage of total respondents|||Number
823049|NCT01167426|Primary|Change From Week 2 to Week 6 in Composite Score of Patient Satisfaction With Injection Experience|"The Satisfaction with Injection Experience questionnaire consists of 5 questions where participants are asked to rate their injection experience over the past 2 weeks on ease of use, bother, acceptability, confidence to inject and satisfaction. The response options range from strongly disagree (score = 1) to strongly agree (score = 5). The composite score of Satisfaction with Injection Experience is defined as the mean of the five Likert questions. The composite score ranges from 1.0 to 5.0, with a score of 5.0 representing the most satisfaction with injection experience and a score of 1.0 representing the least satisfaction with injection experience."|Week 2 (prior to first injection with 20 mg/0.5 mL formulation), Week 6 (after 4 weeks of treatment with 20 mg/0.5 mL formulation).|The Analysis Population consisted of of all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had satisfaction data at time points 2 and 6 weeks, 2 and 4 weeks, or 2, 4 and 6 weeks.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823051|NCT01167504|Secondary|Defined Behaviour of Salivary Film Formation|"A secondary output is a well defined description of the film formation behaviour of normalsaliva in terms of thickness (nm), viscoelastic modulus (mN/m) and temporal behaviour. This will be used to develop model or artificial salivas saliva that forms films in the same way as real saliva ex vivo, that can be used to screen the effects of different compounds and ingredients, without having to collect fresh saliva from human volunteers. The measure is the rate of increase in film thickness (depth, nm) as a function of time, measured by adsorbing whole mouth saliva onto a solid silica surface and measuring the film thickness using Dual Polarisation Interferometry and Quartz Crystal Microbalance."|Within 4 hours of saliva collection.|Literature data and power calculations were used to calculate the number of individuals required to show a statistical significant effect of the presence of ingredients on the thickness of the salivary film.||nm/cm2/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
823052|NCT01167504|Primary|Impact of Ingredients on Thickness (Depth, nm) of Salivary Films Adsorbed Onto Solid Surfaces|The principal output is to determine how ingredients in food and oral hygiene products affect the way that saliva forms films on surfaces similar to those found inside the mouth. We will determine the main physical properties of the film such as thickness (nm), adsorbed mass (ng/cm^2), density (ng/cm^3) measured by adsorbing whole mouth saliva onto solid silica surfaces and measuring the above properties of the film using Dual Polarisation Interferometry and a Quartz Crystal Microbalance. The effect of ingredients from food and oral hygiene products on the above measured parameters will be determined.|Within 4 hours of saliva collection.|Based on published results of saliva pellicle thickness, power calculations showed that 12 individuals would provide sufficient statistical significance to determine the effect of added ingredients on salivary film thickness.||nm||Standard Deviation|Mean
823053|NCT01167582|Primary|Red Blood Cell Transfusion|Differences in mean number of units of red blood cell transfusions between the two study arms.|In-hospital up to 30 days post randomization|||blood units||Standard Deviation|Mean
823054|NCT01167582|Secondary|Composite Mortality and Morbidity|Composite rates of all cause mortality, or myocardial infarction (recurrent if had ST segment or Non ST segment MI or new myocardial infarction), or unscheduled coronary revascularization and pneumonia.|30 days and 6 months||||||
823055|NCT01167582|Secondary|Pneumonia or Blood Stream Infection and Each Separately||30 days and 6 months||||||
823056|NCT01167582|Secondary|Deep Vein Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism||30 days and 6 months||||||
823057|NCT01167582|Secondary|Stent Thrombosis||30 days and 6 months||||||
823058|NCT01167582|Secondary|Congestive Heart Failure||30 days and 6 months||||||
823059|NCT01167582|Secondary|Stroke||30 days and 6 months||||||
823060|NCT01167582|Secondary|Unscheduled Hospital Admission|Unscheduled hospital admission at 30 days and 6 months for any reason, for cardiac reason (e.g., acute coronary syndrome, MI, congestive heart failure, or arrhythmia), or infection.|30 days and 6 months||||||
823061|NCT01167582|Secondary|Mortality From Cardiac Causes||30 days and 6 months||||||
823062|NCT01167582|Secondary|Individual Components of Composite Outcome|All cause mortality Myocardial infarction (recurrent if had ST segment or Non ST segment MI or new myocardial infarction) Unscheduled coronary revascularization.|30 days and 6 months||||||
823063|NCT01167582|Secondary|Mortality or Myocardial Ischemia|Composite 6 month rates of all cause 6 month mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction up to 6 months after randomization, unscheduled coronary revascularization within 6 months.|6 months|||participants|||Number
823064|NCT01167582|Secondary|Mortality or Myocardial Ischemia|Composite 30 day rates of all cause 30 day mortality, or myocardial infarction (recurrent if had ST segment or Non ST segment MI or new myocardial infarction) up to 30 days after randomization, or unscheduled coronary revascularization within 30 days.|30 days|||participants|||Number
823065|NCT01167582|Primary|Hemoglobin Concentration|Differences in the mean hemoglobin concentrations between the two study arms.|In-hospital up to 30 days post randomization|||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823066|NCT01167582|Primary|Trial Feasibility|"the number of eligible study subjects and enrollment rates, overall and by center;
the adherence rates for the transfusion protocol, overall and by center;
the frequencies of proposed outcomes"|6 months||||||
823067|NCT01167608|Primary|"3rd Most Commonly Reported Future Barrier to Mental Health Services: Services Are Not Available in my Community"|"The purpose of this study was to assess the 3 most commonly reported past and future barriers to mental health services. This outcome represents the 3rd most common future barrier to mental health service reported by respondents to the survey described in the Methods section. Outcome is reported as the percentage of all respondents surveyed who endorsed this particular future barrier. This barrier can best be described as limited access.
NOTE: This is an anonymous, cross-sectional survey study. Not all participants responded to every item, so sample size varies between outcome measures."|Lifetime|||percentage of total respondents|||Number
823090|NCT01167881|Secondary|The Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline After 104 Weeks of Treatment.||baseline and 104 weeks|FAS (LOCF-H) – Full Analysis Set (FAS) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF); Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy or change of antihypertensive therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
823091|NCT01167881|Secondary|The Occurrence of Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Events During 104 Weeks of Treatment.||baseline and 104 weeks|Treated set, all patients treated with at least one dose of randomised study drug.||participants|||Number
823069|NCT01167608|Primary|"Most Commonly Reported Future Barrier to Mental Health Services: Out of Pocket Cost Was Too High"|"The purpose of this study was to assess the 3 most commonly reported past and future barriers to mental health services. This outcome represents the most common future barrier to mental health service reported by respondents to the survey described in the Methods section. Outcome is reported as the percentage of all respondents surveyed who endorsed this particular future barrier. This barrier can best be described as limited access.
NOTE: This is an anonymous, cross-sectional survey study. Not all participants responded to every item, so sample size varies between outcome measures."|Lifetime|||percentage of total respondents|||Number
823070|NCT01167608|Primary|"3rd Most Commonly Reported Past Barrier to Mental Health Services: Out of Pocket Cost Was Too High"|"The purpose of this study was to assess the 3 most commonly reported past and future barriers to mental health services. This outcome represents the 3rd most common past barrier to mental health services reported by survey respondents. The outcome reported is the percentage of all respondents surveyed who endorsed this particular past barrier. This barrier can best be described as limited access.
NOTE: This is an anonymous, cross-sectional survey study. Not all participants responded to every item, so sample size varies between outcome measures."|Lifetime|||percentage of total respondents|||Number
823071|NCT01167608|Primary|"2nd Most Commonly Reported Past Barrier to Mental Health Services: Doctors Are Not Sensitive Enough to PD-related Issues"|"The purpose of this study was to assess the 3 most commonly reported past and future barriers to mental health services. This outcome represents the 2nd most common past barrier to mental health services reported by survey respondents. The outcome reported is the percentage of all respondents surveyed who endorsed this particular past barrier. This barrier can best be described as limited knowledge of PD amongst treatment providers.
NOTE: This is an anonymous, cross-sectional survey study. Not all participants responded to every item, so sample size varies between outcome measures."|Lifetime|||percentage of total respondents|||Number
823072|NCT01167608|Primary|"Most Commonly Reported Past Barrier to Mental Health Services: Anyone in my Situation Would be Struggling"|"The purpose of this study was to assess the 3 most commonly reported past and future barriers to mental health services. This outcome represents the most common past barrier to mental health services reported by survey respondents. The outcome reported is the percentage of all respondents surveyed who endorsed this particular past barrier. This barrier can best be described as low mental health literacy.
NOTE: This is an anonymous, cross-sectional survey study. Not all participants responded to every item, so sample size varies between outcome measures."|Lifetime|||percentage of total respondents|||Number
823073|NCT01167634|Primary|Change in Weight|Change in weight between baseline and 24 weeks|24 Weeks|||pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
823074|NCT01167829|Secondary|Free Testosterone Mean Concentration|Free T normal range 4.7-18 ng/dL|baseline & day 9|per protocol||ng/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823075|NCT01167829|Secondary|Free T Maximum Concentration|Free T normal range 4.7-18 ng/dL|baseline & day 9|per protocol||ng/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823076|NCT01167829|Secondary|Mean Estradiol Concentration||baseline & day 9|per protocol||ng/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823077|NCT01167829|Secondary|Maximum Estradiol Concentration||baseline & day 9|per protocol||ng/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823078|NCT01167829|Secondary|Mean SHGB Concentration||baseline & day 9|per protocol||ng/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823079|NCT01167829|Secondary|Maximum Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin (SHGB)Concentration||baseline & day 9|||ng/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823080|NCT01167829|Secondary|Mean Dihydrotestosterone (DHT) Concentration||baseline & day 9|per protocol||ng/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823081|NCT01167829|Secondary|Maximum Dihydrotestosterone (DHT) Concentration||baseline & day 9|per protocol||ng/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823082|NCT01167829|Primary|Mean Testosterone Concentration|initial 24-hour pharmacokinetics (PK) of oral testosterone dosed 3 times daily and post 24-hour PK after 9 days of treatment|baseline & day 9|per protocol||ng/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823083|NCT01167829|Primary|Maximum Testosterone Concentration|initial pharmacokinetics [PK] (day 1) of oral testosterone dosed 3 times daily and the PK after 9 days of treatment|baseline & day 9|per protocol||ng/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823084|NCT01167881|Secondary|The Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) From Baseline After 52 Weeks of Treatment.||baseline and 52 weeks|FAS (LOCF-H) – Full Analysis Set (FAS) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF); Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy or change of antihypertensive therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
823085|NCT01167881|Secondary|The Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline After 52 Weeks of Treatment.||baseline and 52 weeks|FAS (LOCF-H) – Full Analysis Set (FAS) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF); Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy or change of antihypertensive therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
823086|NCT01167881|Secondary|The Occurrence of Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Events During 52 Weeks of Treatment.||baseline and 52 weeks|Treated set, all patients treated with at least one dose of randomised study drug.||participants|||Number
823087|NCT01167881|Secondary|The Change in Body Weight From Baseline After 52 Weeks of Treatment.||baseline and 52 weeks|FAS (LOCF) – Full Analysis Set (FAS) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF); Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||kilograms||Standard Error|Mean
823088|NCT01167881|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in HbA1c After 52 Weeks of Treatment.||baseline and 52 weeks|FAS (LOCF) – Full Analysis Set (FAS) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF); Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Mean
823089|NCT01167881|Secondary|The Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) From Baseline After 104 Weeks of Treatment.||baseline and 104 weeks|FAS (LOCF-H) – Full Analysis Set (FAS) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF); Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy or change of antihypertensive therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
823093|NCT01167881|Secondary|The Change in Body Weight From Baseline After 104 Weeks of Treatment.||baseline and 104 weeks|FAS (LOCF) – Full Analysis Set (FAS) with Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF); Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||kilograms||Standard Error|Mean
823094|NCT01168024|Secondary|Change in Kidney Function Between the Randomized Groups.||Up to 96 hours post-procedure|Change in eGFR was available for 2 treatment and 1 control subject. 1 out of range eGFR value for a subject (0.1) was not used as this value is not clinically feasible.||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823095|NCT01168024|Primary|Evaluating Local Events.|"Events evaluated include:
Coronary sinus perforation, dissection, or occlusion that requires treatment or results in MI or death
Pericardial effusions (including pericardial tamponade) requiring treatment"|Through 30 days post-procedure.|||events|||Number
823096|NCT01168024|Primary|Evaluating Bleeding/Transfusion Events.|"Bleeding/transfusion events evaluated:
Blood loss requiring transfusion of ≥ 2 units
Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Major Bleeding
TIMI Minor Bleeding"|Through 30 days post-procedure|||events|||Number
823097|NCT01168024|Primary|Incidence of Contrast Induced Nephropathy (CIN) in Subjects.|CIN is defined as a post-procedure relative serum creatinine increase ≥ 25% or an absolute serum creatinine increase of ≥ 0.5 mg/dL).|Through 72 hours post-procedure|||participants|||Number
823098|NCT01168232|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the duration of time from study entry to time of death or the date of last contact.|From study entry to death or last contact, up to 5 years of follow-up.|Eligible and Treated Patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823099|NCT01168232|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival is the period of time from study entry to time of disease progression, death or date of last contact, whichever occurs first. Progression is assessed by RECIST 1.1|From study entry to disease progression, death or date of last contact, whichever occurs first, up to 5 years of follow-up.|Eligible and Treated Patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823100|NCT01168232|Primary|Adverse Events (Grade 3 or Higher) During Treatment Period.|Number of participants with a maximum grade of 3 or higher during treatment period. Adverse events are graded and categorized using CTCAE v4.0|During treatment and up to 30 days after stopping the study treatment|Eligible and Treated Participants||participants|||Number
823101|NCT01168232|Primary|Objective Tumor Response|Proportion of participants with objective tumor response. Objective tumor response is defined as complete or partial tumor response as assessed by RECIST 1.1.|Every other cycle for first 6 months; then every 3 months thereafter until completion of study treatment; and at any other time if clinically indicated based on symptoms or physical signs suggestive of progressive disease.1 cycle is 21 days|Eligible and Treated Patients. Measure of dispersion is 95% One-sided confidence Interval||percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823102|NCT01168349|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Vitamins Prescription||Week 4 to 6, Week 12 to 16, Week 24 to 48|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure and “n” included participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
823103|NCT01168349|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Adequate Iron Status|Criteria for adequate iron status included serum ferritin greater than (>) 100 micrograms/liter (µg/L) and transferrin saturation (TSAT)> 20%.|Baseline, Week 4 to 6, Week 12 to 16, Week 24 to 48|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure and “n” included participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
823104|NCT01168349|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hb Concentration Within the Range of 10 to 12 g/dL||Baseline up to Week 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823105|NCT01168349|Secondary|Relative Percent Change in Hb Concentration From Baseline Over the Study Period||Baseline, Week 4 to 6, Week 12 to 16, Week 24 to 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure and “n” included participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
823106|NCT01168349|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Permanent Discontinuation From NeoRecormon® Treatment||Baseline up to Week 4 to 6, Week 12 to 16, Week 24 to 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure and “n” included participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
823107|NCT01168349|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Temporary Discontinuation From NeoRecormon® Treatment|Percentage of participants with at least 1 temporary discontinuation was reported.|Baseline up to Week 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823108|NCT01168349|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Modifications of NeoRecormon® Regimen|All modifications were based on the change in frequency, route of administration or dose depending on the need for treatment adjustments according to Hb concentration. Percentage of participants with at least 1 modification in NeoRecormon® regimen was reported.|Baseline up to Week 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823109|NCT01168349|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With NeoRecormon® SC Injections at a Weekly Dose of 30000 IU||Baseline up to Week 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823110|NCT01168349|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Subcutaneous (SC) Route of Administration||Baseline, Week 4 to 6, Week 12 to 16, Week 24 to 48|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure and “n” included participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
823167|NCT01163149|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 24 for Plasma Inorganic Pyrophosphate (PPi)|Blood samples were collected to evaluate the effect of asfotase alfa on reduction in plasma inorganic pyrophosphate (PPi)|Baseline, Week 24|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat, all randomized patients)||uM||Standard Deviation|Mean
823111|NCT01168349|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-specified Dose and Frequency of Injections|Pre-specified doses and frequency included; 20000 IU/week - Once a week (qw), 30000 IU/week -qw, 30000 IU/week - Twice a week (tw), 30000 IU/week - Once every 2 weeks (q2w), 40000 IU/week - qw, 60000 IU/week - qw, and other. Missing data were not reported.|Baseline, Week 4 to 6, Week 12 to 16, Week 24 to 48|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure and “n” included participants who were evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
823112|NCT01168349|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Starting Dose Between 360 and 540 IU/kg/Weeks||Baseline|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823113|NCT01168349|Secondary|Mean Starting Dose of NeoRecormon® Injection|Dose of NeoRecormon® injection was measured in international units/kilograms/weeks (IU/kg/weeks).|Baseline|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||IU/kg/weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
823114|NCT01168349|Primary|Self-Reported Questionnaire: Change From Baseline on the Impact of Health on Regular Activities at Week 24 to 28|Self-administered questionnaire, WPAI questionnaire was used to assess work and activity impairment due to anemia in cancer participants in the last 7 days. The self-administered questionnaire consisted of 6 questions. It assessed amount of absenteeism, presenteeism and daily activity impairment attributable to anemia in cancer participants. Question 6 asked participants to indicate how much their anemia affected their ability to do their regular daily activities such as housework, childcare, exercising, shopping, studying and so on, in the past 7 days on a scale from 0 (no effect) to 10 (completely prevented from doing daily activities).|Baseline, Week 24 to 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823115|NCT01168349|Primary|Self-Reported Questionnaire: Change From Baseline on the Impact of Health on Regular Activities at Week 12 to 16|Self-administered questionnaire, WPAI questionnaire was used to assess work and activity impairment due to anemia in cancer participants in the last 7 days. The self-administered questionnaire consisted of 6 questions. It assessed amount of absenteeism, presenteeism and daily activity impairment attributable to anemia in cancer participants. Question 6 asked participants to indicate how much their anemia affected their ability to do their regular daily activities such as housework, childcare, exercising, shopping, studying and so on, in the past 7 days on a scale from 0 (no effect) to 10 (completely prevented from doing daily activities).|Baseline, Week 12 to 16|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823116|NCT01168349|Primary|Self-Reported Questionnaire: Change From Baseline on the Impact of Health on Regular Activities at Week 4 to 6|Self-administered questionnaire, WPAI questionnaire was used to assess work and activity impairment due to anemia in cancer participants in the last 7 days. The self-administered questionnaire consisted of 6 questions. It assessed amount of absenteeism, presenteeism and daily activity impairment attributable to anemia in cancer participants. Question 6 asked participants to indicate how much their anemia affected their ability to do their regular daily activities such as housework, childcare, exercising, shopping, studying and so on, in the past 7 days on a scale from 0 (no effect) to 10 (completely prevented from doing daily activities).|Baseline, Week 4 to 6|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823117|NCT01168349|Primary|Self-Reported Questionnaire: Percentage of Participants With Current Employment at Week 24 to 28|Self-administered questionnaire, WPAI questionnaire was used to assess work and activity impairment due to anemia in cancer participants in the last 7 days. The self-administered questionnaire consisted of 6 questions. It assessed amount of absenteeism, presenteeism and daily activity impairment attributable to anemia in cancer participants. Question 1 asked participants to indicate if they were currently employed or working for pay (Yes or No). Data reported for the outcome included those who were employed.|Week 24 to 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823118|NCT01168349|Primary|Self-Reported Questionnaire: Percentage of Participants With Current Employment at Week 12 to 16|Self-administered questionnaire, WPAI questionnaire was used to assess work and activity impairment due to anemia in cancer participants in the last 7 days. The self-administered questionnaire consisted of 6 questions. It assessed amount of absenteeism, presenteeism and daily activity impairment attributable to anemia in cancer participants. Question 1 asked participants to indicate if they were currently employed or working for pay (Yes or No). Data reported for the outcome included those who were employed.|Week 12 to 16|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823119|NCT01168349|Primary|Self-Reported Questionnaire: Percentage of Participants With Current Employment at Week 4 to 6|Self-administered questionnaire, WPAI questionnaire was used to assess work and activity impairment due to anemia in cancer participants in the last 7 days. The self-administered questionnaire consisted of 6 questions. It assessed amount of absenteeism, presenteeism and daily activity impairment attributable to anemia in cancer participants. Question 1 asked participants to indicate if they were currently employed or working for pay (Yes or No). Data reported for the outcome included those who were employed.|Week 4 to 6|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823120|NCT01168349|Primary|Self-Reported Questionnaire: Percentage of Participants With Current Employment at Baseline|Self-administered questionnaire, work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI) questionnaire was used to assess work and activity impairment due to anemia in cancer participants in the last 7 days. The self-administered questionnaire consisted of 6 questions. It assessed amount of absenteeism, presenteeism and daily activity impairment attributable to anemia in cancer participants. Question 1 asked participants to indicate if they were currently employed or working for pay (Yes or No). Data reported for the outcome included those who were employed.|Baseline|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823121|NCT01168349|Primary|Mean Number of Days of Sick Leave|Sick leaves was described in active participants at inclusion (professional activity: active, in sick leave or unemployed participants).|Week 4 Up to Week 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who had at least 1 sick leave without any missing data.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823122|NCT01168349|Primary|Percentage of Participants With At Least 1 Sick Leave|Sick leaves was described in active participants at inclusion (professional activity: active, in sick leave or unemployed participants).|Week 4 Up to Week 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823123|NCT01168349|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Professional Activity: Baseline|Percentage of participants with professional activity was assessed based on the number of participants with early response or not at Day 21 to 42. Professional activity was categorized as active; disability; no occupation; retired; sick leave; student, training; and unemployment.|Baseline|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823124|NCT01168349|Primary|KPS: Week 24 to 28|KPS was used to quantify participant’s general well-being and activities of daily life and participants were classified based on their functional impairment. An 11-level score, KPS score ranged between 0 (death) to 100 (no evidence of disease). Higher score means higher ability to perform daily tasks. KPS was based on the number of participants with early response.|Week 24 to 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823125|NCT01168349|Primary|KPS: Week 12 to 16|KPS was used to quantify participant’s general well-being and activities of daily life and participants were classified based on their functional impairment. An 11-level score, KPS score ranged between 0 (death) to 100 (no evidence of disease). Higher score means higher ability to perform daily tasks. KPS was based on the number of participants with early response.|Week 12 to 16|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823126|NCT01168349|Primary|KPS: Week 4 to 6|KPS was used to quantify participant’s general well-being and activities of daily life and participants were classified based on their functional impairment. An 11-level score, KPS score ranged between 0 (death) to 100 (no evidence of disease). Higher score means higher ability to perform daily tasks. KPS was based on the number of participants with early response.|Week 4 to 6|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823127|NCT01168349|Primary|Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS): Baseline|KPS was used to quantify participant’s general well-being and activities of daily life and participants were classified based on their functional impairment. An 11-level score, KPS score ranged between 0 (death) to 100 (no evidence of disease). Higher score means higher ability to perform daily tasks. KPS was based on the number of participants with early response.|Baseline|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823128|NCT01168349|Primary|Time to First RBC Transfusions|Time to first RBC transfusion was assessed based on the number of participants with early response or not at Day 21 to 42. Early treatment response was defined as an increase of Hb concentration of at least 1 g/dL, 3 to 6 weeks after treatment initiation. Kaplan-Meier estimate was used.|Baseline up to Week 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823129|NCT01168349|Primary|Mean Number of RBC Units|Mean number of units was based on the number of participants with at least 1 RBC transfusion.|Baseline up to Week 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure without any missing data.||RBC units||Standard Deviation|Mean
823130|NCT01168349|Primary|Mean Number of RBC Transfusions|Mean number of transfusion was based on the number of participants with at least 1 RBC transfusion.|Baseline up to Week 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure without any missing data.||RBC transfusions||Standard Deviation|Mean
823131|NCT01168349|Primary|Percentage of Participants With At Least 1 Red Blood Cell (RBC) Transfusion|Participants with at least 1 RBC transfusion was assessed based on the number of participants with early response or not at Day 21 to 42. Early treatment response was defined as an increase of Hb concentration of at least 1 g/dL, 3 to 6 weeks after treatment initiation.|Baseline up to Week 28|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
823132|NCT01168349|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Early Treatment Response: Day 21 to 42|Early treatment response was defined as an increase of Hb concentration of at least 1 g/dL, 3 to 6 weeks after treatment initiation.|Day 21 to 42|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823133|NCT01168349|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Early Treatment Response: Day 28 to 42|Early treatment response was defined as an increase of Hemoglobin (Hb) concentration of at least 1 gram/deciliter (g/dL), 4 to 6 weeks after treatment initiation.|Day 28 to 42|Efficacy population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included those participants who were evaluable for the outcome measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823134|NCT01168427|Secondary|R-wave Amplitude Measurement|Average R-wave amplitude at implant and 30-days post procedure|Implant procedure and 30 days post-implant procedure||09/2012||||
823135|NCT01168427|Secondary|Physician Satisfaction With Reveal In-office Implants|Observational survey of physicians satisfaction post implant At implant|At implant||09/2012||||
823136|NCT01168427|Secondary|Techniques and Procedures Utilized During Reveal In-office Implants|Observational data collection as to the technics and procedures utilized during all implants including (but not limited to): device orientation, suturing, wound closure, instrument and material use, and time.|At implant||09/2012||||
823137|NCT01168427|Secondary|Surgical Staff Utilized for Reveal In-office Implants|Observational analysis of surgical staff present at the Reveal Implants|At implant||09/2012||||
823138|NCT01168427|Secondary|Number of Participants Having Procedure-related Adverse Events|Report number of participants having procedure-related adverse events that meet the primary endpoint (requiring surgical intervention), and number of participants having other procedure-related adverse events (not requiring surgical intervention).|From Implant to 90 days post-implant procedure|||participants|||Number
823139|NCT01168427|Primary|Procedure-related Complications Rate Requiring Resolution by Surgical Intervention|This objective estimates the proportion of patients having procedure-related complication requiring resolution by surgical intervention at 90 days post-implant procedure using Kaplan-Meier method.|From Implant to 90 days post-implant procedure|Reveal device indicated patients, enrolled in the study and implanted per protocol||participants|||Number
823140|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Visual Analog Scale - Subset: Tense|The Visual Analog Scale is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics or attitudes that cannot be directly measured. The severity of attitude at the time of testing is marked with a cross along a 10 cm line (labeled neutral to afraid, confused, sad, angry, energetic, tired, happy or tense). Responses are quantified by measuring the distance along each line to the intersection with the cross in centimetres, to the nearest 0.1 cm. The scores for each item range from 0 (symptoms-free) to 10 (symptom severe).|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823141|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Visual Analog Scale - Subset: Happy|The Visual Analog Scale is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics or attitudes that cannot be directly measured. The severity of attitude at the time of testing is marked with a cross along a 10 cm line (labeled neutral to afraid, confused, sad, angry, energetic, tired, happy or tense). Responses are quantified by measuring the distance along each line to the intersection with the cross in centimetres, to the nearest 0.1 cm. The scores for each item range from 0 (symptoms-free) to 10 (symptom severe).|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823142|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Visual Analog Scale - Subset: Tired|The Visual Analog Scale is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics or attitudes that cannot be directly measured. The severity of attitude at the time of testing is marked with a cross along a 10 cm line (labeled neutral to afraid, confused, sad, angry, energetic, tired, happy or tense). Responses are quantified by measuring the distance along each line to the intersection with the cross in centimetres, to the nearest 0.1 cm. The scores for each item range from 0 (symptoms-free) to 10 (symptom severe).|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823143|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Visual Analog Scale - Subset: Energetic|The Visual Analog Scale is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics or attitudes that cannot be directly measured. The severity of attitude at the time of testing is marked with a cross along a 10 cm line (labeled neutral to afraid, confused, sad, angry, energetic, tired, happy or tense). Responses are quantified by measuring the distance along each line to the intersection with the cross in centimetres, to the nearest 0.1 cm. The scores for each item range from 0 (symptoms-free) to 10 (symptom severe).|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823144|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Visual Analog Scale - Subset: Angry|The Visual Analog Scale is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics or attitudes that cannot be directly measured. The severity of attitude at the time of testing is marked with a cross along a 10 cm line (labeled neutral to afraid, confused, sad, angry, energetic, tired, happy or tense). Responses are quantified by measuring the distance along each line to the intersection with the cross in centimetres, to the nearest 0.1 cm. The scores for each item range from 0 (symptoms-free) to 10 (symptom severe).|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823145|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Visual Analog Scale - Subset: Sad|The Visual Analog Scale is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics or attitudes that cannot be directly measured. The severity of attitude at the time of testing is marked with a cross along a 10 cm line (labeled neutral to afraid, confused, sad, angry, energetic, tired, happy or tense). Responses are quantified by measuring the distance along each line to the intersection with the cross in centimetres, to the nearest 0.1 cm. The scores for each item range from 0 (symptoms-free) to 10 (symptom severe).|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823146|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Visual Analog Scale - Subset: Confused|The Visual Analog Scale is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics or attitudes that cannot be directly measured. The severity of attitude at the time of testing is marked with a cross along a 10 cm line (labeled neutral to afraid, confused, sad, angry, energetic, tired, happy or tense). Responses are quantified by measuring the distance along each line to the intersection with the cross in centimetres, to the nearest 0.1 cm. The scores for each item range from 0 (symptoms-free) to 10 (symptom severe).|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
824922|NCT01178671|Secondary|PTSD Self-rated Severity|as measured by the PTSD Checklist which rates severity of PTSD from 17 (least severe) to 85 (most severe).|up to 24 weeks|completers||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823147|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale - Motor (UPDRS Part III)|Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale - Motor (UPDRS Part III)is a 14-question inventory measuring the motor functions of patients with Parkinson's Disease. Each subject is rated on a scale of 0 to 4 with the total score from 0 to 56. Higher total scores indicate more impairment of motor function.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823148|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Becks Depression Inventory (BDI-II)|The Becks Depression Inventory (BDI-II) is a 21-question inventory measuring the severity of depression. Each subject is instructed to choose an answer on a scale value of 0 to 3 with the total score from 0 to 63. Higher total scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms.|Change from baseline to week 12|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823149|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)|The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) is 40-item psychological inventory based on a 4-point Likert scale. Higher scores are positively correlated with higher levels of anxiety. The range for this test is 0 to 160.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823150|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Visual Analog Scale - Subset: Afraid|The Visual Analog Scale is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics or attitudes that cannot be directly measured. The severity of attitude at the time of testing is marked with a cross along a 10 cm line (labeled neutral to afraid, confused, sad, angry, energetic, tired, happy or tense). Responses are quantified by measuring the distance along each line to the intersection with the cross in centimetres, to the nearest 0.1 cm. The scores for each item range from 0 (symptoms-free) to 10 (symptom severe).|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823151|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Marin Apathy Inventory (Apathy Evaluation Scale)|The Marin Apathy Inventory (Apathy Evaluation Scale) is a 14-item inventory measuring apathy of the subject over the past 2 to 4 weeks. Subjects are instructed to choose an answer from 0 to 3: 0=not at all, 1 = slightly, 2 = some, 3 = a lot, to questions related to apathy. The range would be 0 to 42, the higher the score the worse the apathy.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823152|NCT01168596|Other Pre-specified|Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS)|The Parkinson's disease sleep scale (PDSS) is a 15-item visual analogue scale that assesses the profile of nocturnal disturbances in Parkinson's disease patients. The severity of symptoms of sleep over the past week is marked with a cross along a 10 cm line (labeled worst to best state). Responses are quantified by measuring the distance along each line to the intersection with the cross in centimetres, to the nearest 0.1 cm. The scores for each item range from 0 (symptom severe and always experienced) to 10 (symptom-free). The maximum score for PDSS is 150.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823153|NCT01168596|Secondary|Hand-grip Strength|The patients use the hand on the side most affected by Parkinson’s disease to grip the dynamometer with as much strength as they can for 3 consecutive tries. The highest score will be their maximal voluntary contraction (MVC). The subject then rests for 60 seconds. The subject is asked to try to maintain 70% of their MVC and the duration the subject is able to maintain above 50% of their MVC is recorded. Immediately after the maintenance test, the subject performs three more MVCs and each one is recorded. These results are the duration the subject is able to maintain above 50% of their MVC.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823154|NCT01168596|Secondary|Finger Tapping|The patient is asked to use the index finger on the side most affected by Parkinson’s disease to tap for sixty seconds with the number of taps at 30 seconds and 60 seconds recorded.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||finger taps per sixty seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823155|NCT01168596|Secondary|Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT)|The Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT) is a neuropsychological test used to assess capacity and rate of information processing and sustained and divided attention. Where subjects are given a number (every 3 seconds for the first series and 2 seconds for the second series) and are asked to add the number they just heard with the number they heard before. This is a challenging task that involves working memory, attention, and arithmetic capabilities.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823168|NCT01163149|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 24 for Plasma Pyridoxal-5' Phosphate (PLP)|Blood samples were collected to evaluate the effect of asfotase alfa on reduction in plasma pyridoxal-5' phosphate (PLP)|Baseline, Week 24|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat, all randomized patients)||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823169|NCT01163162|Primary|24-hour Urine Creatinine Excretion Rate|We expect the 24 hour urine creatinine excretion rate to show no differences between groups.|1 Week|||mg/24hour/day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823170|NCT01163162|Secondary|Serum Creatinine|We expect serum creatinine to confirm the results of creatinine clearance.|1 Week|||mg/dl/day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823156|NCT01168596|Secondary|PD Quality of Life Scale (PDQ39)|PD Quality of Life Scale (PDQ39) is a 39-item questionnaire, which measures eight dimensions of health (mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognitions, communication and bodily discomfort) over the past 30 days. Dimension scores are coded on a scale of 0 (never) to 5 (always). The higher the score, the worse the quality of life affected by PD. The range for this test is 0 to 195. All eight dimensions are added for a total score.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823157|NCT01168596|Secondary|Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFIS)|The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFIS) is a 20-item self-report instrument designed to measure fatigue. It covers the following dimensions: general fatigue, physical fatigue, mental fatigue, reduced motivation and reduced activity. Subjects are instructed to choose a number from 1 to 5 that indicates their degree of agreement with each statement where 1 indicates that it is true and 5 that it is not true. There are positive and negative statements in the questionnaire. The range is 1 to 100, the higher the number the higher the fatigue.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823158|NCT01168596|Secondary|Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS)|The Fatigue Severity Score consists of a nine-item questionnaire to identify common features of fatigue. Patients are instructed to choose a number from 1 to 7 that indicates their degree of agreement with each statement, where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree. Scores can range from a minimum of 9 to a maximum of 63. The higher the score, the more fatigue the subject.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823159|NCT01168596|Primary|Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS)|The MFIS rates how much of a problem fatigue has caused the subjects during the past month, including the day of testing. It consists of 21 questions of fatigue on quality of life. Each subject is asked to circle the appropriate response for each item: 0=never, 1=rarely, 2=sometimes, 3=often, 4=always, 5=almost always. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum is 105. The higher the score, the more fatigue the subject.|Change from baseline to week 12|The number of patients used to calculate the results for this measure are different from the number of patients listed in the Participant Flow Module because of missing data. Any missing values were omitted from the summaries. Summary measures are for complete data only.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823160|NCT01163149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HPP-related Osteomalacia as Measured by Trans-iliac Crest Bone Biopsy: Mineralization Lag Time|A trans-iliac crest bone biopsy was performed to quantify changes from Baseline in histomorphometric parameters relevant for evaluation of osteomalacia severity, including Mineralization Lag Time (days). The difference in time under observation between asfotase alfa groups (Week 48) and control group (Week 24) resulted from study design, ie, control subjects transitioned to active treatment after the Week 24 visit.|Baseline, Week 24 (Control group), and Week 48 (Asfotase alfa groups).|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat, all randomized patients)||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823161|NCT01163149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HPP-related Osteomalacia as Measured by Trans-iliac Crest Bone Biopsy: Osteoid Thickness|A trans-iliac crest bone biopsy was performed to quantify changes from Baseline in histomorphometric parameters relevant for evaluation of osteomalacia severity, including Osteoid Thickness (um). The difference in time under observation between asfotase alfa groups (Week 48) and control group (Week 24) resulted from study design, ie, control subjects transitioned to active treatment after the Week 24 visit.|Baseline, Week 24 (Control group), and Week 48 (Asfotase alfa groups).|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat, all randomized patients)||um||Standard Deviation|Mean
823162|NCT01163149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HPP-related Osteomalacia as Measured by Trans-iliac Crest Bone Biopsy: Osteoid Volume/Bone Volume|A trans-iliac crest bone biopsy was performed to quantify changes from Baseline in histomorphometric parameters relevant for evaluation of osteomalacia severity, including Osteoid Volume/Bone Volume (%). The difference in time under observation between asfotase alfa groups (Week 48) and control group (Week 24) resulted from study design, ie, control subjects transitioned to active treatment after the Week 24 visit.|Baseline, Week 24 (Control group), and Week 48 (Asfotase alfa groups).|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat, all randomized patients)||percentage of volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
823163|NCT01163149|Secondary|Change in Walking Ability as Measured by the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT)|The patient was instructed to walk the length of a pre-measured hallway for 6 minutes. The primary measurement was distance walked (in meters).|Baseline, Week 24 (primary treatment period) and up to 288 weeks of asfotase alfa exposure|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat, all randomized patients). Among the 6 control subjects, only 4 had both a Baseline and Week 24 value.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
823164|NCT01163149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density (BMD) as Measured by Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA)|A DXA scan was performed to evaluate bone bone mineral density (BMD) of the spine, hip, and whole body during the primary (first 24 weeks) and extension treatment periods (up to 288 weeks).|Baseline, every 24 weeks through Week 96, then every 48 weeks until Week 288.|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat, all randomized patients)||g/cm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823165|NCT01163149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Content (BMC) as Measured by Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA)|A DXA scan was performed to evaluate bone mineral content (BMC) of the spine, hip, and whole body during the primary (first 24 weeks) and extension treatment periods (up to 288 weeks).|Baseline, every 24 weeks through Week 96, then every 48 weeks until Week 288.|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat, all randomized patients)||g||Standard Deviation|Mean
823166|NCT01163149|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of Asfotase Alfa|The safety and tolerability of daily subcutaneous (SC) injections of asfotase alfa was assessed by routine monitoring of patients for treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and injection-associated reactions (IARs).|Up to 288 weeks exposure to asfotase alfa|Safety Set. Control group and asfotase alfa Cohorts during the primary treatment period (first 24 weeks of study); all patients with asfotase alfa exposure during open-label extension treatment period.||Number of Treatment-Emergent Events|||Number
823172|NCT01163214|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Experienced Neurological Changes Postoperatively|Participants were questioned at the 6 weeks follow-up visit regarding any neurological changes that were not present preoperatively.|6 weeks postoperative|The number of participants analyzed in the nerve block arm varied because data were not available for all participants in all neurological categories. The sample size for the periarticular injection arm was 79 because neurological data were not collected on 2 participants.||participants|||Number
823173|NCT01163214|Secondary|Length of Stay in Hospital|Length of stay data were calculated from the medical record.|Approximately 2 days after surgery|The number of participants analyzed were different than the baseline values for the arms because data were not available for some participants.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823174|NCT01163214|Secondary|Straight-leg Raise|Post-operative quadriceps function was measured by the number of participants who could perform a straight-leg raise.|Day 1 morning (AM), Day 1 afternoon (PM), Day 2 morning, Day 2 afternoon|The number of participants analyzed varied at each category time point because either data points were missing for participants, or as the condition of the participants improved, they were discharged from the hospital. Number of participants per arm for each time point is shown in each category label.||participants|||Number
823175|NCT01163214|Secondary|Narcotic Use|Use of additional narcotic medications (as needed), measured in morphine equivalents.|Intraoperative, Day of surgery, Post-Operative Day 1, Post-Operative Day 2|Intention to treat analysis||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823176|NCT01163214|Primary|Post-Operative Pain|Pain was measured using a linear analog scale for pain, with a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 points (worst possible pain).|Afternoon on post-operative Day 1, approximately 14:00|Intention to treat analysis||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823177|NCT01163214|Secondary|Pain Scores in the Per-protocol Subset (Participants Who Received the Allocated Treatment)|Pain was measured using a linear analog scale for pain, with a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 points (worst possible pain).|Afternoon on post-operative Day 1, approximately 14:00|In the nerve block arm 5 subjects were excluded (3 subjects were not treated as planned, and 1 subject received a sciatic catheter instead of a single injection, and 1 subject previously had a nerve block procedure.) In the periarticular injection arm 4 patients were excluded (3 subjects were not treated as planned, and 1 subject was too heavy.)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823178|NCT01168674|Secondary|Predictors of Bipolarity to Define the Study Population|The specific bipolarity predictors in patients with MDD were assessed.|13 weeks|The most common predictor was antidepressant tolerance, as reported below in 37 subjects.||percentage of subjects|||Number
823179|NCT01168674|Primary|MADRS Improvement Over 6 Weeks|"Montgomery Asberg Depression scale improvement was assessed in two 6 week crossover periods.
Minimum score on MADRS is 0, the maximum is 60. Higher scores represent a worse outcome, i.e., greater severity of depressive symptoms.
Scores of about 20 and above are generally seen as consistent with being in a full major depressive episode.
No subscales were used or combined."|13 weeks (Two 6 week periods plus a one week washout)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823180|NCT01168687|Primary|Standard Alcoholic Drinks Per Treatment Period|The primary outcome of this study is to determine the effect of levetiracetam on alcohol consumption as measured by change in # of drinks during each treatment period.|This will be assessed during a 42-day period.|All study participants were used for data analysis. If there were no significant differences between the two doses of levetiracetam, data would be collapsed for analysis.||number of drinks per treatment period||Standard Error|Mean
823181|NCT01168726|Secondary|Protective Behavioral Strategies Scale.|Use of protective behavioral strategies related to alcohol use. Higher scores indicate more use of the strategies. A total score was calculated by summing the three subscale scores on the measure (range = 3-18).|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823182|NCT01168726|Secondary|Drinking Norms Rating Form|Perceived drinking among other students, represented by standardized scores on the Drinking Norms Rating Form. Higher values indicate that the individual perceives higher levels of drinking among other students. Because the scores are standardized their is no hypothetical minimum or maximum, and the scale is standardized with a mean of 0 and standard deviation of 1. So, a mean value of 1.52 means that participants in that condition had an average score that was 1.52 standard deviation above the overall mean of the sample.|6 months|||units on a scale (standardized)||Standard Deviation|Mean
823183|NCT01168726|Primary|Rutgers Alcohol Problems Index (RAPI)|Total scores on an alcohol problems scale. Possible score range = 0-92. Higher scores are indicative of more alcohol-related problems.|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823184|NCT01168726|Primary|Drinks Per Week||6 Months|||drinks per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
823185|NCT01168856|Primary|Number of Participants Who Had Received Mericitabine (MCB)-Based Regimen and Enrolled in NV22688|Population sequencing was used for determination of loss of resistance status. Results are reported as per donor protocol.|Month 18|Resistance monitoring population.||participants|||Number
823186|NCT01168856|Primary|Number of Participants With STV Resistance Status-Clonal Sequencing|"Clonal sequencing was used for determination of loss of resistance status. Resistance status was reported as either with loss of STV resistance or without loss of STV resistance.
Category 1-Number of participants with loss of resistance in NV22688. One participant with loss of resistance in NV22688 was included in this analysis.
Category 2-Number of participants with no loss of resistance in NV22688. A total of 4 participants with no loss of resistance in NV22688 were included in this analysis.
Category 3-Number of participants with loss of resistance in donor study. One participant with loss of resistance, analyzed by clonal sequencing in NV22688.
Category 4-Number of participants with loss of resistance in donor study. Two participants with no loss of resistance, analyzed by clonal sequencing in NV22688."|Month 3-18|Resistance monitoring population. Here, n1=total number of participants with loss of STV resistance in NV22688 (by population sequencing). n2= total number of participants who had no STV resistance at the end of donor study they experienced a viral relapse in NV22688.||participants|||Number
823199|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 6|Any abnormalities in diastolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 6|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 6.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824923|NCT01178671|Secondary|Alternative Measure of PTSD Severity|as measured by the Short Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Rating Interview, which rates severity of PTSD from 0 (least severe) to 32 (most severe)|up to 24 weeks|completers||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823187|NCT01168856|Primary|Number of Participants With Setrobuvir (STV) Resistance Status-Population Sequencing|"Population sequencing was used for determination of loss of resistance status. Resistance status was reported as either with loss of STV resistance or without loss of STV resistance.
Category 1-Number of participants with loss of resistance in NV22688. A total of 5 participants with resistance at the end of donor study by population sequencing were included in this analysis.
Category 2-Number of participants with no loss resistance in NV22688. A total of 3 participants with resistance at the end of donor study by population sequencing were included in this analysis.
Category 3-Number of participants with loss of resistance in donor study. A total of 3 participants with no STV resistance at the end of donor study by population sequencing enrolled in NV22688 were included in this analysis."|Month 3-18|Resistance monitoring population.||participants|||Number
823188|NCT01168856|Primary|Number of Participants With BOC or TVR Resistance Status-Clonal Sequencing|"Clonal sequencing was used for determination of loss of resistance status. Resistance status was reported as either with loss of BOC or TVR resistance or without loss of BOC or TVR resistance.
Category 1-Number of participants with loss of resistance in NV22688. A total of 3 participants with loss of resistance in NV22688 were included in this analysis.
Category 2-Number of participants with no loss of resistance in NV22688. A total of 3 participants with no loss of resistance in NV22688 were included in this analysis.
Category 3-Number of participants with loss of resistance in donor study. A total of 2 participants who had no resistance at the end of donor study were analyzed by clonal sequencing in NV22688."|Month 3-18|Resistance monitoring population.||participants|||Number
823189|NCT01168856|Primary|Number of Participants With Boceprevir (BOC) or Telaprevir (TVR) Resistance Status-Population Sequencing|"Population sequencing was used for determination of loss of resistance status. Resistance status was reported as either with loss of BOC or TVR resistance or without loss of BOC or TVR resistance.
Category 1-Number of participants with loss of resistance in NV22688. A total of 6 participants with resistance at the end of donor study by population sequencing were included in this analysis.
Category 2-Number of participants with no loss resistance in NV22688. One participant with resistance at the end of donor study by population sequencing was included in this analysis.
Category 3-Number of participants with loss of resistance in donor study. A total of 2 participants with no BOC or TVR resistance at the end of donor study by population sequencing enrolled in NV22688 were included in this analysis."|Month 3-18|Resistance monitoring population.||participants|||Number
823190|NCT01168856|Primary|Number of Participants With DNV Resistance Status-Clonal Sequencing|"Clonal sequencing was used for determination of loss of resistance status. Resistance status was reported as either with loss of DNV resistance or without loss of DNV resistance.
Category 1-Number of participants with loss of resistance in NV22688. A total of 64 participants with loss of resistance in NV22688 were included in this analysis.
Category 2-Number of participants with no loss of resistance in NV22688. A total of 35 participants with no loss of resistance in NV22688 were included in this analysis.
Category 3-Number of participants with loss of resistance in donor study. A total of 26 participants who had no DNV resistance at the end of donor study were analyzed by clonal sequencing in NV22688. Three participants from donor studies WV21913, NP28266 and NP27946, respectively were not analyzed by clonal sequencing in NV22688 as loss of resistance mutations was demonstrated by clonal sequencing in donor study."|Month 3-18|Resistance monitoring population.||participants|||Number
823191|NCT01168856|Primary|Number of Participants With Danoprevir (DNV) Resistance Status-Population Sequencing|"Population sequencing was used for determination of loss of resistance status. Resistance status was reported as either with loss of DNV resistance or without loss of DNV resistance.
Results are reported as per donor protocol. Category 1: Number of participants with loss of resistance in NV22688. A total of 99 participants with resistance at the end of donor study by population sequencing were included in this analysis.
Category 2: Number of participants with no loss of resistance in NV22688. A total of 33 participants with resistance at the end of donor study by population sequencing were included in this analysis.
Category 3: Number of participants with loss of resistance in donor study. A total of 30 participants with no DNV resistance at the end of donor study by population sequencing enrolled in NV22688 were included in this analysis."|Month 3-18|Resistance monitoring population.||participants|||Number
823192|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Pulse Rate in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 36|Any abnormalities in pulse rate were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 36|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 36.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
823193|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Pulse Rate in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 24|Any abnormalities in pulse rate were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 24|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 24.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
823194|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Pulse Rate in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 12|Any abnormalities in pulse rate were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 12|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 12.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
823195|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Pulse Rate in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 6|Any abnormalities in pulse rate were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 6|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 6.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
823196|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 36|Any abnormalities in diastolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 36|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 36.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823197|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 24|Any abnormalities in diastolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 24|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 24.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823198|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 12|Any abnormalities in diastolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 12|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 12.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824924|NCT01178671|Primary|Time to Discontinuation of Study Treatment||up to 24 weeks|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823200|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 36|Any abnormalities in systolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 36|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 36.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823201|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 24|Any abnormalities in systolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 24|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 24.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823202|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 12|Any abnormalities in systolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 12|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 12.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823203|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 6|Any abnormalities in systolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 6|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessments at Month 6.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823204|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean HCV RNA Levels in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 36|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 36|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with detectable HCV RNA at Month 36.|||||
823205|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean HCV RNA Levels in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 24|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 24|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with detectable HCV RNA at Month 24.|||||
823206|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean HCV RNA Levels in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 12|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 12|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with detectable HCV RNA at Month 12.|||||
823207|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean HCV RNA Levels in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 6|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 6|SVR durability monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with detectable HCV RNA at Month 6.||IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823208|NCT01168856|Primary|Percentage of Participants With the Detectable HCV RNA Results in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 36|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 36|SVR durability monitoring population included all participants who were enrolled in SVR durability arm. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with HCV RNA assessment at Month 36.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823209|NCT01168856|Primary|Percentage of Participants With the Detectable HCV RNA Results in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 24|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 24|SVR durability monitoring population included all participants who were enrolled in SVR durability arm. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with HCV RNA assessment at Month 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823210|NCT01168856|Primary|Percentage of Participants With the Detectable HCV RNA Results in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 12|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 12|SVR durability monitoring population included all participants who were enrolled in SVR durability arm. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with HCV RNA assessment at Month 12.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823211|NCT01168856|Primary|Percentage of Participants With the Detectable HCV RNA Results in SVR Durability Monitoring Arm at Month 6|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 6|SVR durability monitoring population included all participants who were enrolled in SVR durability arm. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with HCV RNA assessment at Month 6.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823212|NCT01168856|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Received Anti-HCV Medications in Resistance Monitoring Arm|Percentage of participants who received any anti-HCV medication during the monitoring period was reported.|Up to 18 months|Resistance monitoring population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823213|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Pulse Rate in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 18|Any abnormalities in pulse rate were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 18|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 18.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
823214|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Pulse Rate in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 12|Any abnormalities in pulse rate were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 12|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 12.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
823215|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Pulse Rate in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 9|Any abnormalities in pulse rate were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 9|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 9.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
823216|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Pulse Rate in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 6|Any abnormalities in pulse rate were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 6|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 6.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
823217|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Pulse Rate in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 3|Any abnormalities in pulse rate were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 3|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 3.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
823218|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 18|Any abnormalities in diastolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 18|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 18.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823219|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 12|Any abnormalities in diastolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 12|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 12.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823220|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 9|Any abnormalities in diastolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 9|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 9.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823221|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 6|Any abnormalities in diastolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 6|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 6.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823222|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 3|Any abnormalities in diastolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 3|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 3.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823223|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 18|Any abnormalities in systolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 18|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 18.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823224|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 12|Any abnormalities in systolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 12|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 12.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823225|NCT01168856|Primary|Systolic Blood Pressure in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 9|Any abnormalities in systolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 9|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 9.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823226|NCT01168856|Primary|Systolic Blood Pressure in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 6|Any abnormalities in systolic blood pressure were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 6|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 6.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823227|NCT01168856|Primary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 3|Any abnormalities in systolic blood pressure (units: millimeters of Mercury [Hg] [mmHg]) were reported at the discretion of principal investigator.|Month 3|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with vital signs assessment at Month 3.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823228|NCT01168856|Primary|HCV RNA Levels in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 18|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 18|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with detectable HCV RNA at Month 18.||IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823229|NCT01168856|Primary|HCV RNA Levels in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 12|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 12|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with detectable HCV RNA at Month 12.||IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823230|NCT01168856|Primary|HCV RNA Levels in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 9|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 9|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with detectable HCV RNA at Month 9.||IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823231|NCT01168856|Primary|HCV RNA Levels in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 6|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 6|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with detectable HCV RNA at Month 6.||IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823232|NCT01168856|Primary|HCV RNA Levels in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 3|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 3|Resistance monitoring population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with detectable HCV RNA at Month 3.||IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823233|NCT01168856|Primary|Percentage of Participants With the Detectable HCV RNA Results in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 18|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 18|Resistance monitoring population included all participants who were enrolled in resistance monitoring arm. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with HCV RNA assessment at Month 18.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823234|NCT01168856|Primary|Percentage of Participants With the Detectable HCV RNA Results in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 12|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 12|Resistance monitoring population included all participants who were enrolled in resistance monitoring arm. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with HCV RNA assessment at Month 12.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823235|NCT01168856|Primary|Percentage of Participants With the Detectable HCV RNA Results in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 9|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 9|Resistance monitoring population included all participants who were enrolled in resistance monitoring arm. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with HCV RNA assessment at Month 9.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823236|NCT01168856|Primary|Percentage of Participants With the Detectable HCV RNA Results in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 6|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 IU/mL).|Month 6|Resistance monitoring population included all participants who were enrolled in resistance monitoring arm. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with HCV RNA assessment at Month 6.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823267|NCT01170598|Primary|Program Adherence.|Adherence to supervised exercise program assessed as a percentage of exercise sessions completed(number of days of supervised exercise performed/the number of days that patients were approached to participate).|Baseline, Post-induction (weeks 4-6)|||percentage of exercise days completed|||Number
823237|NCT01168856|Primary|Percentage of Participants With the Detectable HCV Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Results in Resistance Monitoring Arm at Month 3|Serum HCV RNA concentration was determined using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HCV Test (Detection limit = 15 International Units per milliliter [IU/mL]).|Month 3|Resistance monitoring population included all participants who were enrolled in resistance monitoring arm. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with HCV RNA assessment at Month 3.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823238|NCT01168934|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (MRCmax)|Metabolite to parent molar ratio of maximum observed plasma concentration (MRCmax).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A and 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823239|NCT01168934|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (MRAUC [0-∞])|Molar ratio of metabolite to parent area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞) (MRAUC [0-∞]).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. Here, the ‘N = 13’ is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure at the specified time point for this arm group.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823240|NCT01168934|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio of Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration for Crizotinib Metabolite Ratio (MRAUClast)|Molar ratio of metabolite to parent area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (MRAUClast).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A and 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823241|NCT01168934|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
823242|NCT01168934|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A and 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823243|NCT01168934|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (AUC [0 - ∞]) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)|AUC (0 - ∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞) of crizotinib metabolite (PF-06260182).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. Here, the ‘N = 13’ is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure at the specified time point for this arm group.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823244|NCT01168934|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast) of crizotinib metabolite (PF-06260182).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A and 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823245|NCT01168934|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Steady state volume of distribution (Vss) is the apparent volume of distribution at steady-state.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823246|NCT01168934|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (Vz/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823247|NCT01168934|Secondary|Systemic Clearance (CL)|CL is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823262|NCT01170533|Primary|Platelet Function as Assessed by the P2Y12 Reactivity Index|P2Y12 reactivity index which will be assessed by flow cytometry determination of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP).|1 week|A sample size of 18 patients was required to be able to detect a 10% absolute difference in PRI between both regimens with 80% power and 2-sided significance level of 0.05, assuming a 15% standard deviation for the difference between regimens.||Percentage of platelet reactivity index||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823248|NCT01168934|Secondary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F)|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823249|NCT01168934|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A and 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
823250|NCT01168934|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
823251|NCT01168934|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A and 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823252|NCT01168934|Secondary|Dose Normalized Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast[dn])|AUClast[dn] = Dose normalized area under the plasma concentration time-curve (AUC[dn]) from zero to the last measured concentration.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A and 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL/mg||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823253|NCT01168934|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A and 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823254|NCT01168934|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (AUC [0 - ∞])|AUC (0 - ∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A and 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823255|NCT01168934|Primary|Dose Normalized Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (AUC [0 - ∞][dn])|AUC [0 - ∞][dn] = Dose normalized area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC[dn]) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - ∞) divided by dose.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hours (hrs) post IV crizotinib dose in Treatment A and 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hrs post oral crizotinib dose in Treatment B|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL/mg||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823256|NCT01170364|Primary|24 Hour Measured Caloric Intake|The primary outcome measure is 24-hour food intake assessed by 24 hour weighed intake after one week of sibutramine administration compared to one week of placebo administration.|1 week|This is a cross over design study. All participants received sibutramine and placebo. The sibutramine arm listed here includes all participants who received sibutramine (regardless of whether they received it first or second). The placebo arm included all those who received placebo (regardless of whether they received it first or second).||kcal||Standard Deviation|Mean
823257|NCT01170390|Secondary|EE Steady State After Randomization|Steady state levels of ethinyl estradiol (EE) post- randomization|Post-randomiziation 4 months|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823258|NCT01170390|Secondary|EE Steady State Baseline|Steady state levels of ethinyl estradiol (EE) at baseline (2 months)|Baseline (2 months)|One subject discontinued prior to the completion of the baseline cycle in the Aviane/Aviane arm||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823259|NCT01170390|Secondary|LNG AUC|Baseline measurements of levonorgestrel AUC (on Aviane). Area under the curve at baseline for levonorgestrel. AUC was calculated from time zero to 168 hours and extrapolated to infinity from serial repeat sampling (0,0.5,1.1.5,2,3,4,6,8,12 hours and then single samples daily for 4 days between Cycles 1 and 2.|baseline (2 months)|||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823260|NCT01170390|Secondary|LNG AUC|Area under the curve post-randomization for levonorgestrel. AUC was calculated and extrapolated using post randomization in single daily samples drawn during Cycle 4 days 20-26. Serial repeat sampling to obtain a detailed PK curve was not performed to obtain this AUC. Subjects could provide samples during these days at times convenient to them and PK software accounted for the time between when the drug was dosed versus when the sample was drawn.|post-randomization (4 months)|||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823261|NCT01170390|Primary|LNG Steady State at Baseline and Then Post-randomization|The main goal is to test whether key pharmacokinetic parameters of levonordestrel (LNG) differ between obese women taking traditionally dosed OCs versus the interventional arms (i.e. using each obese subject as their own control).|baseline (2 months) and post-randomization (4 months)|One subject discontinued prior to the completion of the baseline studies in the Aviane/Aviane arm||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823269|NCT01170598|Primary|Recruitment Rate|Ratio of patients who consented to participate out of all eligible patients expressed as a percentage (eligible patients who consented to participation/eligible patients who declined participation).|Baseline|For this outcome measure we analyzed 52 participants (rather than 35). Fifty-two participants met the study eligibility criteria. Thirty-five out of 52 consented to participate which is how we derived our recruitment rate of 67% (35/52).||percentage of patients|||Number
823270|NCT01170598|Secondary|Development of Sepsis|Development of sepsis (percentage of participants who developed sepsis during induction chemotherapy course).|Post-induction (weeks 4-6)|||percentage of participants|||Number
823271|NCT01170598|Secondary|Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Admission|Intensive care unit (ICU) admission (percentage of participants admitted to ICU during induction chemotherapy course).|Post-induction (weeks 4-6)|||percentage of participants|||Number
823272|NCT01170598|Secondary|Length of Stay|Length of stay (date of admission to hospital to date of discharge).|Post-induction (weeks 4-6)|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823273|NCT01170598|Secondary|Fatigue|Fatigue will be assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy fatigue subscale (FACT-Fatigue). The FACT-Fatigue consists of 13 questions and has excellent psychometric characteristics. Fatigue scores derived from this questionnaire range from 0-52 with a higher score reflecting lower fatigue.|Baseline, Post-induction (weeks 4-6)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823274|NCT01170598|Secondary|Global Quality of Life|Global quality of life (QOL) will be measured by the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core 30-item questionnaire (QLQ-C30). The EORTC QLQ-C30 is a widely used, self-reported, psychometrically sound cancer QOL instrument. QOL scores derived from this questionnaire range from 0-100 with a higher score reflecting a higher QOL.|Baseline, Post-induction (weeks 4-6)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823275|NCT01170598|Primary|Grip Strength|Measure of upper-body strength using a Jamar hand dynamometer. Participants were asked to hold and squeeze (the dynamometer) with maximal force. Three trials were completed with each hand, alternating between the right and left to minimize fatigue. The highest recorded value of the dominant hand was used in the analysis.|Baseline, Post-induction (weeks 4-6)|||kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
823276|NCT01170598|Primary|Timed 10-chair Stands|Measure of lower-body strength completed by standing from a seated position 10 times as quickly as possible.|Baseline, Post-induction (weeks 4-6)|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
823277|NCT01170598|Primary|6-minute Walk Test|Measure of functional endurance assessed by the walking distance covered in a 6-minute period. Participants walk a pre-established course for a total of 6 minutes. The distance covered in that time is recorded as the 6-minute walk test score.|Baseline, Post-induction (4-6 weeks)|||feet||Standard Deviation|Mean
823278|NCT01170598|Primary|Peak Aerobic Capacity (VO2peak)|The modified Bruce protocol is a walking-based treadmill test used to assess peak aerobic capacity. As the test progresses the intensity of each 3-minute work load increases. The test concludes when the participant reaches his maximal heart rate or volitional fatigue. The value attained on this test is measured in metabolic equivalents (METS). METS are a measure of exercise intensity and reflect the physical demands of an activity. In this context, a higher value achieved on the treadmill test (in METS) indicates work at a higher intensity and therefore a higher aerobic capacity.|Baseline, Post-induction (weeks 4-6)|||metabolic equivalent (METS)||Standard Deviation|Mean
823279|NCT01170663|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Serious and Other Non-serious Adverse Events (AE) and Who Died|Participants who died or who had clinically significant events defined as serious AEs (SAEs) and other non-serious AEs (regardless of causality). A summary of SAEs and other non-serious AEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline up to 103 weeks and within 30 days of last dose of study drug|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and based on the treatment each participant received.||participants|||Number
823280|NCT01170663|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Therapy in European Quality of Life Questionnaire-5 Dimension (EuroQol EQ-5D) Index Score|The EQ-5D is a generic, multidimensional, health status instrument. The profile allowed participants to rate their health state in 5 health domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and mood using a 3-level scale [1 (no problem), 2 (some problems), and 3 (major problems)]. These combinations of responses were converted into a weighted health-state Index Score according to the United Kingdom (UK) population-based algorithm. The possible values for the Index Score ranged from -0.59 (severe problems in all 5 dimensions) to 1.0 (no problem in any dimension). A negative change indicated a worsening of the participant's health status.|Baseline, end of therapy (up to 103 weeks)|All participants according to the treatment group to which they were randomized with baseline and end of treatment EQ-5D observations.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823281|NCT01170663|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Therapy in European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life: Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) in Global Health Status|EORTC QLQ-C30 v3.0 is a 30-item, self-administered questionnaire with multidimensional scales assessing 15 domains (5 functional domains [physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social], 9 symptom scales [fatigue, pain, nausea and vomiting, dyspnea, loss of appetite, insomnia, constipation and diarrhea, and financial difficulties] and global health status scale). 28 questions assessed on a 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much) scale and the remaining 2 questions used a 1 (poor) to 7 (excellent) scale. A linear transformation was applied to standardize the raw scores to range between 0 and 100 per developer guidelines. For the functional domains and global health status scale, higher scores represent a better level of functioning. For symptoms scales, higher scores represented a greater degree of symptoms.|Baseline, end of therapy (up to 103 weeks)|All participants according to the treatment group to which they were randomized with baseline and end of treatment Global Health Status observations.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823282|NCT01170663|Secondary|Cmin Prior to 7th Ramucirumab (IMC-1211B) Infusion||Cycle 4, Day 1 (28-day cycles)|All participants who received Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) plus Paclitaxel and had Cmin observations at specific timepoint.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823283|NCT01170663|Secondary|Cmin Prior to 4th Ramucirumab (IMC-1211B) Infusion||Cycle 2, Day 15 (28-day cycle)|All participants who received Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) plus Paclitaxel and had Cmin observations at specific timepoint.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823284|NCT01170663|Secondary|Minimum Concentration (Cmin) Prior to First Ramucirumab (IMC-1211B) Infusion|This outcome measure was included in error as the time point was before ramucirumab (IMC-1211B) was administered. Cmin was not analyzed.|Cycle 1, Day 1 predose (28-day cycles)|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
823287|NCT01170663|Secondary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) After First Ramucirumab (IMC-1211B) Infusion||Cycle 1, Day 1, 1 hour post end of infusion (28-day cycles)|All participants who received Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) plus Paclitaxel and had Cmax observations at specific timepoint.||micrograms/milliliter (µg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823288|NCT01170663|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Anti-Ramucirumab Antibodies (Serum Anti-Ramucirumab Antibody Assessment )(Immunogenicity)|Participants who developed treatment-emergent antibody responses to Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) after baseline.|Prior to and after ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) infusion: Day 1 Cycles 1, 2 and 3 (28-day cycles) Doses 1, 4, 7 and 30-37 days after last dose of study therapy up to 103 weeks|All participants according to the treatment group to which they were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug with anti-ramucirumab antibodies.||percentage of participants|||Number
823289|NCT01170663|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CR or PR [Objective Response Rate (ORR)]|ORR was the percentage of participants who had CR or PR defined using RECIST v1.1 criteria. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm and normalization of tumor marker level of non-target lesions. PR was defined as having a ≥30% decrease in sum of LD of target lesions. Percentage of participants calculated as: (number of participants with CR + PR)/(total number of participants)*100.|Randomization up to 22.2 months|All participants according to the treatment group to which they were randomized.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823290|NCT01170663|Secondary|Best Overall Response (BOR) of Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), Stable Disease (SD) or PD|BOR was defined as the best response across all time points from randomization until radiologically confirmed PD using RECIST, v1.1 criteria. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm and normalization of tumor marker level of non-target lesions. PR was defined as having a ≥30% decrease in sum of LD of target lesions. PD was defined as having a ≥20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions and ≥5 mm increase above nadir. SD was defined as small changes that did not meet above criteria.|Randomization up to 22.2 months|All participants according to the treatment group to which they were randomized.||percentage of participants|||Number
823291|NCT01170663|Secondary|Time to Progressive Disease (TTP)|TTP was defined as the time from randomization until date of radiographic progression using RECIST v1.1 criteria. PD was defined as having a ≥20% increase in sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions and at minimum 5 millimeters (mm) increase above nadir. Participants who did not progress or were lost to follow-up were censored at the date of last tumor assessment. Participants who had no baseline tumor assessment or no post baseline assessment and no death reported with 2 scan intervals post randomization were censored at date of randomization. Participants with no progression and not died within 2 scan intervals after last assessment were censored at date of last tumor assessment. Participants with no post baseline assessment or tumor progression but death reported within 2 scan intervals after randomization were censored at date of death.|Baseline up to 22.2 months|All participants according to the treatment group to which they were randomized. Participants censored: Ramucirumab (IMC-1211B) plus Paclitaxel =107, Placebo plus Paclitaxel =94.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823292|NCT01170663|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was measured from date of randomization to first radiographically documented progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause. PD defined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 (RECIST v1.1) as ≥20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this included the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). The sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Participants who had no baseline or post baseline radiological tumor assessment were censored at date of randomization. Participants who had no tumor progression or death within 2 scan intervals following the last assessment were censored at the date of last radiographic tumor assessment. Participants who began new anticancer treatment and had no tumor progression were censored at date of assessment prior to initiation of new therapy. Participants lost to follow-up or withdrew consent were censored at the date of their last assessment.|Randomization up to 22.2 months|All participants according to the treatment group to which they were randomized. Participants censored: Ramucirumab (IMC-1211B) plus Paclitaxel =51, Placebo plus Paclitaxel =39.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823293|NCT01170663|Primary|Overall Survival Time (OS)|OS time was measured from date of randomization to date of death from any cause. Participants who were not known to have died on or before the date of data cut-off, OS data was censored on the last date (on or before the cut-off date) the participant was known to be alive.|Randomization up to 27.5 months|All participants according to the treatment group to which they were randomized. Participants censored: Ramucirumab (IMC-1211B) plus Paclitaxel =74, Placebo plus Paclitaxel =75.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823294|NCT01170754|Other Pre-specified|Boston Prep Scale (Per Protocol Analysis)|"Analysis includes a sub-group of subjects who drank >75% of the preparation and adhered to a clear liquid diet (Per Protocol).
The BPS is scored 0-9 with 9 being an excellent preparation throughout the colon. From the right colon, transverse colon , and left colon a score of 0-3 is given as follows and the total BPS is the arithmetic sum from each colon segment:"|photographs were taken throughout colonoscopy and reviewed within 1 month after procedure|Includes subjects who followed instructions (Per Protocol analysis)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823295|NCT01170754|Secondary|Phosphorus Level in mg/dl|Phosphorus level: Risks from the preparation include failure to cleanse the colon adequately and the risk of electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypokalemia. We will compare adverse events from the comparator preps by assessing electrolytes on the day of the procedure.|Day of procedure|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
823296|NCT01170754|Secondary|Magnesium Level in mg/dl|Magnesium level: Risks from the preparation include failure to cleanse the colon adequately and the risk of electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypokalemia. We will compare adverse events from the comparator preps by assessing electrolytes on the day of the procedure.|Day of procedure|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
823297|NCT01170754|Secondary|Calcium Level in mg/dl|Calcium level: Risks from the preparation include failure to cleanse the colon adequately and the risk of electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypokalemia. We will compare adverse events from the comparator preps by assessing electrolytes on the day of the procedure.|Day of procedure|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
823298|NCT01170754|Secondary|Glucose Level in mg/dl|Glucose level: Risks from the preparation include failure to cleanse the colon adequately and the risk of electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypokalemia. We will compare adverse events from the comparator preps by assessing electrolytes on the day of the procedure.|Day of procedure|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
823299|NCT01170754|Secondary|Creatinine Level in mg/dl|Creatinine level: Risks from the preparation include failure to cleanse the colon adequately and the risk of electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypokalemia. We will compare adverse events from the comparator preps by assessing electrolytes on the day of the procedure.|Day of procedure|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
823300|NCT01170754|Secondary|BUN Level in mg/dl|BUN level: Risks from the preparation include failure to cleanse the colon adequately and the risk of electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypokalemia. We will compare adverse events from the comparator preps by assessing electrolytes on the day of the procedure.|Day of procedure|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
823301|NCT01170754|Secondary|Bicarbonate Level in mmol/L|Bicarbonate level: Risks from the preparation include failure to cleanse the colon adequately and the risk of electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypokalemia. We will compare adverse events from the comparator preps by assessing electrolytes on the day of the procedure.|Day of procedure|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
823302|NCT01170754|Secondary|Chloride Level in mmol/L|Chloride level: Risks from the preparation include failure to cleanse the colon adequately and the risk of electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypokalemia. We will compare adverse events from the comparator preps by assessing electrolytes on the day of the procedure.|Day of procedure|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
823303|NCT01170754|Secondary|Potassium Level in mmol/L|Potassium level: Risks from the preparation include failure to cleanse the colon adequately and the risk of electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypokalemia. We will compare adverse events from the comparator preps by assessing electrolytes on the day of the procedure.|Day of procedure|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
823304|NCT01170754|Secondary|Sodium Level in mmol/L|Sodium level: Risks from the preparation include failure to cleanse the colon adequately and the risk of electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypokalemia. We will compare adverse events from the comparator preps by assessing electrolytes on the day of the procedure.|Day of procedure|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
823305|NCT01170754|Primary|Boston Prep Scale|"The study is a non-inferiority study: The objective is to conclude that the prep quality scores of those receiving Miralax is at most 10% less than for Golytely. Thus the difference in prep scores between Miralax minus Golytely should be greater than - 10%. If this is the case, Miralax would be considered as non-inferior to Golytely.
The outcome measure will use the Boston Prep Scale. The BPS is scored 0-9 with 9 being an excellent preparation throughout the colon. From the right colon, transverse colon , and left colon a score of 0-3 is given as follows and the total BPS is the arithmetic sum from each colon segment:
0 = Unprepared colon segment with mucosa not seen due to solid stool.
= Portion of mucosa of the colon segment seen, but other areas of the colon segment not well seen.
= Minor amount of residual staining, small fragments of stool and/or opaque liquid
= clear colon without staining"|photographs were taken throughout the colonoscopy and reviewed within 1 month after procedure.|Includes all subjects who were enrolled and underwent procedure (Intention-to-treat analysis)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823306|NCT01170884|Primary|Mean Diurnal Intraocular Pressure (IOP) at Week 12|Mean Diurnal (average of 8 AM, 10 AM, and 4 PM time points) IOP at Week 12 in the study eye. IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye.|Week 12|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) included all subjects who were randomized to study medication.||Millimeters of mercury (mm Hg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
823307|NCT01170949|Primary|Urticaria Activity Score (% Change From Baseline)|The weekly UAS was calculated by adding the daily scores over one week. During the whole course of the study patients recorded the amount of wheals and the intensity of itching as well as the occurrence of swelling in ranges between 0 and 3. These daily scores were used to calculate urticaria activity scores (UAS) as follows: Daily UAS are calculated by adding the score points obtained for the symptom categories “number of wheals” and “intensity of pruritus”. “Number of wheals” is scored as 0 = no wheals, 1 = some wheals (<20), 2 = moderate number of wheals (20-50), 3 = more than 50 wheals. “Intensity of pruritus” is scored as 0 = no itching; 1 = mild itching, not irritating; 2 = moderate itching, normal daily activity and sleep is possible; and 3 = severe itching, normal daily activity and sleep is impaired. The maximum score is 42.|Day 28|ITT = 73||percentage of UAS baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
823308|NCT01170962|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Who Died During Follow-up Period|AE was defined as any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that does not necessarily have a causal relationship. SAE was defined as a medical event that at any dose resulted in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or; was life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or required or prolonged hospitalization.|From day 8 post last dose of treatment up-to Week 72|Safety population included all treated participants.||participants|||Number
823309|NCT01170962|Secondary|Number of Participants With Genotypic-1B Substitution at Baseline, On-treatment and During Follow-up Associated With Virologic Failures|Non-structural protein 5A of HCV resistance associated polymorphisms in GT-1b samples, included L28M/V, R30H/Q, L31M, Q54H/N/Y, P58A/Q/S, Q62E/K/N/R/S, A92T/V and Y93F/H.|Baseline to follow-up Week 48|All treated participants who received at least 1 dose of study therapy.||participants|||Number
823310|NCT01170962|Secondary|Number of Participants With Genotypic-1A Substitution at Baseline, On-treatment and During Follow-up Associated With Virologic Failures|Non-structural protein 5A of HCV resistance associated polymorphism in GT-1a samples included M28L/T/V, Q30H, L31M, H54Y, H58C/D/N/P/Q, E62D and Y93C.|Baseline to follow-up Week 48|All treated participants who received at least 1 dose of study therapy.||participants|||Number
823311|NCT01170962|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response at Week 12 (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as undetectable RNA ie., Hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA <lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ), target not detected (TND) at follow-up Week 12. TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Follow-up Week 12|All treated participants who received at least 1 dose of study therapy.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
824925|NCT01178671|Primary|PTSD Severity|PTSD severity will be measured by the Clinician-Administered Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Scale, from 0 (least severe) to 136 (most severe).|up to 24 weeks|intention to treat sample||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823312|NCT01170962|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR)|cEVR was defined as undetectable RNA ie., Hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected (TND) at Week 12. TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche Cobas® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Week 12|All treated participants who received at least 1 dose of study therapy.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
823313|NCT01170962|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Rapid Virologic Response (RVR)|RVR was defined as undetectable RNA ie., Hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected (TND) at Week 4. TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche Cobas® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Week 4|All treated participants who received at least 1 dose of study therapy.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
823314|NCT01170962|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Discontinuations Due to Adverse Events (AEs) and Who Died On-treatment|AE was defined as any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that does not necessarily have a causal relationship. SAE was defined as a medical event that at any dose resulted in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity; or was life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or required or prolonged hospitalization.|From first dose to last dose plus 7 days, up to 49 weeks|Safety population included all treated participants.||participants|||Number
823315|NCT01170962|Primary|Percentage of Participants With 24-week Sustained Virologic Response (SVR24)|SVR24 was defined as undetectable RNA (Hepatitis C Virus [HCV] RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at follow-up Week 24. TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Follow-up Week 24|All treated participants who received at least 1 dose of study therapy.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
823316|NCT01170962|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Extended Rapid Virologic Response (eRVR)|eRVR was defined as undetectable Hepatitis C virus RNA at both Weeks 4 and 12. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Week 4, Week 12|All treated participants who received at least 1 dose of study therapy.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
823317|NCT01171118|Primary|AHI - Apnea Hypopnea Index|This is a standard metric used to describe severity of disordered breathing during sleep.Normal healthy subjects would have an AHI value of zero during sleep. Mild disordered breathing would correspond to a value of 5 to 10 events per hours; moderate 10-25; severe would be over 25|2- 2 1/2 hours during study visit|This is a standard size for this type of sleep study and was performed per protocol.||events per hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
823318|NCT01171183|Secondary|Retention|number of weeks each participant is on study protocol|12 weeks|Those eligible participants who entered the residential facility and received at least one dose of study medication. One person in the carvedilol group is excluded from all analyses due to not meeting inclusion criteria.||Weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
823319|NCT01171183|Primary|Urine Toxicology Screens|Treatment Effectiveness Score, defined by the # of cocaine negative urines during the outpatient phase of the study divided by the total number of urine samples (30) and then multiplied by 100.|based on thrice weekly urine results during the 10-week outpatient phase|Those who completed the residential facility and attended at least one outpatient clinic visit to complete assessments.||percentage of cocaine negative urines||Standard Deviation|Mean
823320|NCT01171521|Secondary|Pain|Visual Analog Pain Scale (VAS) with DermaClose use, and on study wound at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. The scale goes from 0 to 10 with 0 being no pain and 10 being the most severe pain imaginable. It is a visual analog scale so is continuous data.|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823321|NCT01171521|Primary|Quality of Life|"The SF-12 contains 12 items from the SF-36 Health Survey - . The SF-12 contains one or two items that measure each of the eight concepts included in the SF-36.
The Quality of Life SF-12 is a scale from 0 - 100, in which 0 = poor functioning and 100 = excellent functioning."|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823322|NCT01171534|Secondary|Cost-to-Benefit Ratio of DermaClose Versus Vessel Loop Fasciotomy Closure|Costs associated with both types of closure (DermaClose and Vessel Loop) including hospital days, number of procedures, procedural and hospital costs including device(s), negative pressure wound therapy costs, and operating room time and associated costs.|One year||||||
823323|NCT01171534|Secondary|Quality of Life|Quality of Life measured by the SF-12 version 1 at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|One Year||||||
823324|NCT01171534|Secondary|Pain|Visual Analog Pain Scale (VAS) during initial hospitalization and at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|One Year|too low of an enrollment volume to analyze|||||
823325|NCT01171534|Primary|Performance of DermaClose System in Treatment of Fasciotomy Wounds|Days to wound closure; number and types of procedures required for wound closure; infection requiring reoperation; wound dehiscence requiring reoperation|One year|Too low of an enrollment volume to analyze|||||
823326|NCT01171612|Secondary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events Related With Antiplatelet Therapy Management|"Perioperative withdrawal antiplatelet therapy is defined with > or = 5 days without therapy
We create 3 categories:
Not withdrawal
Complete withdrawal (5 or > days without antiplatelet drugs , mono or dual therapy)
Incomplete withdrawal: patients under dual antiplatelet therapy, who maintain aspirin and stopped clopidogrel =/ > 5 days"|90 days after surgery|MACCEs||participants|||Number
823327|NCT01171612|Secondary|Major Haemorrhagic Events|Transfusion > = 2 red blood cells Units, haemoglobin descent >= 20 gr/dL, intracerebral haemorrhage|up to 90 days after surgery|||participants|||Number
823328|NCT01171612|Primary|Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Events (MACCEs)|Cardiac Mortality, Myocardial Infarction, Angina Pectoris, new arrythmia, Congestive Heart Failure, Stroke, Cardiac Arrest|up to 90 days after surgery|||participants|||Number
823329|NCT01171677|Primary|Roesenberg Self Esteem|The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale is a 10-item, 4-point Likert scale used to assess global self-esteem. The scale ranges from 0-30 with higher scores indicating higher the self-esteem.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823466|NCT01172600|Secondary|Biomarkers|BIOMARKERS: IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10, 1L-17A, IFN-γ, and TNF-α|before 3rd block, typically at 2 months from baseline|21 Entonox patients and 26 Oxygen patients did come for the 3rd block. Among the patients who came for the 3rd block, blood sample was not collected in 5 Entonox patients and 1 Oxygen patient.||pg/ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823330|NCT01171677|Primary|Quality of Life (QoL)|The Quality of Life (QoL) assessment is adapted from Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q). The 23-item QoL consists of five subscales: physical health/activities, feelings, leisure time activities, social relations, and general activities. The scale ranges from 23-115; the higher score indicates higher quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing intervention||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823331|NCT01171677|Primary|Self-Efficacy for Abstinence|The Self-Efficacy for Abstinence assessment is adapted from DiClemente (1994)’s Alcohol Abstinence Self-Efficacy. The modified 10-item, 5-point Likert scale (Not at all to Extremely) assesses confidence in abstaining from alcohol. The scale is comprised of four subscales: negative affect, social/positive, physical and other concerns, and withdrawal and urges. Overall abstinence self-efficacy score is calculated by summing each item. The scale ranges from 10-50, the higher the score the higher the self-efficacy for abstinence.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823332|NCT01171677|Primary|Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR)|Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) measures reading ability. The test involves 50 incorrectly spelled words. The score is computed based on the number of correctly pronounced words. The scale ranges from 0-50, the higher the score the higher the reading ability.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823333|NCT01171677|Primary|Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT)|Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) measures verbal fluency. The assessment consists of three trials; the total score is a sum of all three trials. The scale ranges from 0-90, the higher the score the higher the verbal fluency.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823334|NCT01171677|Primary|Digit Span|Digit span measures attention efficiency. The Digit-span task is used to measure verbal working memory. Two subscales, Digits Forward and Digits Backward, were combined for a total scale range from 0-30, the higher the score the better the working memory.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823335|NCT01171677|Primary|Trailmaking Test B|Trailmaking Test A and B measures cognitive shifting, visual search speed, scanning, speed of processing, mental flexibility, as well as executive functioning. The test generally requires ability to sequence (Parts A and B), ability to shift cognitive set (Part B), and processing speed (Parts A and B). Part A and Part B are scored separately and expressed in terms of the number of seconds it takes the participant to complete each section, the higher the score the longer it took the subject to complete the test. Trailmaking Part B examines executive functioning and ability to shift cognitive set. The lower the score the faster the ability to shift cognitive set.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
823336|NCT01171677|Primary|Trailmaking Test A|Trailmaking Test A and B measures cognitive shifting, visual search speed, scanning, speed of processing, mental flexibility, as well as executive functioning. The test generally requires ability to sequence (Parts A and B), ability to shift cognitive set (Part B), and processing speed (Parts A and B). Part A and Part B are scored separately and expressed in terms of the number of seconds it takes the participant to complete each section, the higher the score the longer it took the subject to complete the test. Trailmaking Part A assesses cognitive processing speed. The lower the score the faster the processing speed.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing trial||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
823337|NCT01171677|Primary|Stroop Color/Word|Stroop Color Word Test assesses cognitive flexibility, resistance to interference from outside stimuli, creativity, psychopathology and cognitive complexity. The Stroop consists of three subscales: Word, Color, and Color-Word. The Stroop Color-Word test is the third subscale administered. The raw score is determined by the number of correct responses within a 90-second period. The scale ranges from 0-100, the higher score the greater the cognitive flexibility and resistance to interference.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823338|NCT01171677|Primary|Stroop Color|Stroop Color Word Test assesses cognitive flexibility, resistance to interference from outside stimuli, creativity, psychopathology and cognitive complexity. The Stroop consists of three subscales: Word, Color, and Color-Word. The Stroop Color test is the second subscale administered. The raw score is determined by the number of correct responses within a 90-second period. The scale ranges from 0-100, the higher score the greater the cognitive flexibility.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823339|NCT01171677|Primary|Stroop Word|Stroop Color Word Test assesses cognitive flexibility, resistance to interference from outside stimuli, creativity, psychopathology and cognitive complexity. The Stroop consists of three subscales: Word, Color, and Color-Word. The Stroop Word test is the first subscale administered. The raw score is determined by the number of correct responses within a 90-second period. The scale ranges from 0-100, the higher score the greater the cognitive flexibility.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823340|NCT01171677|Primary|Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recognition|Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) assesses Verbal learning and memory, immediate recall, delayed recall, and delayed recognition. The HVLT is comprised of three subscales: HVLT Total Recall, HVLT Delayed Recall, and HVLT Delayed Recognition. HVLT Delayed Recognition is administered immediately after the HVLT Delayed Recall subscale and involves 12 forced choice responses. The HVLT Delayed Recognition scale ranges from 0-24, the higher score associated with greater recognition ability.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823341|NCT01171677|Primary|Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recall|Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) assesses Verbal learning and memory, immediate recall, delayed recall, and delayed recognition. The HVLT is comprised of three subscales: HVLT Total Recall, HVLT Delayed Recall, and HVLT Delayed Recognition. HVLT Delayed Recall is administered 20-25 minutes after the HVLT Total Recall. The HVLT Delayed Recall scale ranges from 0-12, the higher score associated with greater retention.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823467|NCT01172600|Secondary|Biomarkers|BIOMARKERS: IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10, 1L-17A, IFN-γ, and TNF-α|before 2nd block, typically at 1 month from baseline|10 Entonox patients and 11 Oxygen patients did not come for 2nd block. Among patients came for the 2nd block, blood sample was not collected in 9 Entonox patients and 6 Oxygen patients.||pg/ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823342|NCT01171677|Primary|Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Total Recall|The Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) assesses Verbal learning and memory, immediate recall, delayed recall, and delayed recognition. The HVLT is comprised of three subscales: HVLT Total Recall, HVLT Delayed Recall, and HVLT Delayed Recognition. HVLT Total Recall is the sum of 3 trials in which twelve words are read to and repeated back by subject. The HVLT Total Recall scale ranges from 0-36, the higher score associated with greater verbal learning.|Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)|participants completing each arm||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823343|NCT01171690|Secondary|Safety Analysis|Arms were compared for total number of adverse events, including severe and serious adverse events.|Approximately 90 days after surgery|||events|||Number
823344|NCT01171690|Primary|Hospital Length of Stay|"Hospital length of stay from initiation of therapy with calcium and calcitriol to ready to discharge from a calcium perspective (calcium level > 7.5 mg/dL and increasing x 2 over 12 hours in an asymptomatic patient with stable therapy and no need for intravenous (IV) calcium in last 24 hours)."|Approximately 7 days after surgery|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823345|NCT01171794|Primary|Acute Mountain Sickness Severity|Lake Louise Criteria scores range from 0-15 with higher scores representing more severe symptoms|2 days|Participants meeting all inclusion criteria were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823346|NCT01171794|Primary|Acute Mountain Sickness|Lake Louise Criteria scores range from 0-15 with higher scores representing more severe symptoms; scores of 3 or greater with presence of a headache considered a positive diagnosis of acute mountain sickness|2 days|Participants meeting all inclusion criteria were analyzed||Participants|||Count of Participants
823347|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Endpoint of All Death, Any Myocardial Infarction (MI) and Any Revascularization (TLR/TVR/Non TVR)|"Death defined by the Academic Research Consortium is as follows: All death is considered to be cardiac death unless an unequivocal noncardiac cause can be established.
MI- due to target vessel: All infarcts that cannot be clearly attributed to a vessel other than the target vessel will be considered related to the target vessel.
Any revascularization: TLR or TVR or non-TVR"|393 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823348|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Endpoint of All Death, Any Myocardial Infarction (MI) and Any Revascularization (TLR/TVR/Non TVR)|"Death defined by the Academic Research Consortium is as follows: All death is considered to be cardiac death unless an unequivocal noncardiac cause can be established.
MI- due to target vessel: All infarcts that cannot be clearly attributed to a vessel other than the target vessel will be considered related to the target vessel.
Any revascularization: TLR or TVR or non-TVR"|254 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823349|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Endpoint of All Death, Any Myocardial Infarction (MI) and Any Revascularization (TLR/TVR/Non-TVR)|"Death defined by the Academic Research Consortium is as follows: All death is considered to be cardiac death unless an unequivocal noncardiac cause can be established.
MI- due to target vessel: All infarcts that cannot be clearly attributed to a vessel other than the target vessel will be considered related to the target vessel.
Any revascularization: TLR or TVR or non-TVR"|37 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823350|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Endpoint of All Death, MI and Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR)|"Death defined by the Academic Research Consortium is as follows: All death is considered to be cardiac death unless an unequivocal noncardiac cause can be established. Specifically, any unexpected death even in patients with coexisting potentially fatal noncardiac disease (eg, cancer, infection) should be classified as cardiac.
Myocardial infarction: Myocardial Infarction Classification and Criteria for Diagnosis as defined by the Academic Research Consortium.
Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR): Target vessel revascularization is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel is defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion, which includes upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself."|393 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823351|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Endpoint of All Death, MI and Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR)|"Death defined by the Academic Research Consortium is as follows: All death is considered to be cardiac death unless an unequivocal noncardiac cause can be established. Specifically, any unexpected death even in patients with coexisting potentially fatal noncardiac disease (eg, cancer, infection) should be classified as cardiac.
Myocardial infarction: Myocardial Infarction Classification and Criteria for Diagnosis as defined by the Academic Research Consortium.
Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR): Target vessel revascularization is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel is defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion, which includes upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself."|254 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823352|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Endpoint of All Death, MI and Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR)|"Death defined by the Academic Research Consortium is as follows: All death is considered to be cardiac death unless an unequivocal noncardiac cause can be established. Specifically, any unexpected death even in patients with coexisting potentially fatal noncardiac disease (eg, cancer, infection) should be classified as cardiac.
Myocardial infarction: Myocardial Infarction Classification and Criteria for Diagnosis as defined by the Academic Research Consortium.
Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR): Target vessel revascularization is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel is defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion, which includes upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself."|37 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823468|NCT01172600|Secondary|Biomarkers|BIOMARKERS: IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10, 1L-17A, IFN-γ, and TNF-α|baseline - before 1st block|Blood sample was not collected for 5 Entonox patients and 1 Oxygen patients.||pg/ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823353|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Endpoint of Cardiac Death, Myocardial Infarction (MI) Attributed to the Target Vessel and Clinical-indicated Target Lesion Revascularization (CI-TLR)|"Cardiac death: Any death due to proximate cardiac cause (eg, myocardial infarction, low-output failure, fatal arrhythmia), unwitnessed death and death of unknown cause, and all procedure related deaths, including those related to concomitant treatment, will be classified as cardiac death.
MI- due to target vessel: All infarcts that cannot be clearly attributed to a vessel other than the target vessel will be considered related to the target vessel.
Clinical-indicated Target Lesion Revascularization (CI-TLR): TLR with evidence of diameter stenosis ≥ 50% determined by QCA; or in the case of any one of the following: new recurrent history of angina pectoris, ischemic signs, abnormal results in diagnostic tests, or TLR >=70% in the absence of the above signs."|393 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823354|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Endpoint of Cardiac Death, Myocardial Infarction (MI) Attributed to the Target Vessel and Clinical-indicated Target Lesion Revascularization (CI-TLR)|"Cardiac death: Any death due to proximate cardiac cause (eg, myocardial infarction, low-output failure, fatal arrhythmia), unwitnessed death and death of unknown cause, and all procedure related deaths, including those related to concomitant treatment, will be classified as cardiac death.
MI- due to target vessel: All infarcts that cannot be clearly attributed to a vessel other than the target vessel will be considered related to the target vessel.
Clinical-indicated Target Lesion Revascularization (CI-TLR): TLR with evidence of diameter stenosis ≥ 50% determined by QCA; or in the case of any one of the following: new recurrent history of angina pectoris, ischemic signs, abnormal results in diagnostic tests, or TLR >=70% in the absence of the above signs."|254 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823355|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Endpoint of Cardiac Death, Myocardial Infarction (MI) Attributed to the Target Vessel and Clinical-indicated Target Lesion Revascularization (CI-TLR)|"Cardiac death: Any death due to proximate cardiac cause (eg, myocardial infarction, low-output failure, fatal arrhythmia), unwitnessed death and death of unknown cause, and all procedure related deaths, including those related to concomitant treatment, will be classified as cardiac death.
MI- due to target vessel: All infarcts that cannot be clearly attributed to a vessel other than the target vessel will be considered related to the target vessel.
Clinical-indicated Target Lesion Revascularization (CI-TLR): TLR with evidence of diameter stenosis ≥ 50% determined by QCA; or in the case of any one of the following: new recurrent history of angina pectoris, ischemic signs, abnormal results in diagnostic tests, or TLR >=70% in the absence of the above signs."|37 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823356|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Revascularizations (Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR)/ Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR)/Any Revascularization) Both Clinically-indicated and Not Clinically-indicated.|"TLR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention of the target lesion or bypass surgery of the target vessel performed for restenosis or other complication of the target lesion. The target lesion was defined as the treated segment from 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent.
TVR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel was defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion, including upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself.
A revascularization is considered clinically indicated if angiography at follow-up shows a %DS ≥ 50% and if one of the following occurs: history of recurrent angina pectoris due to the target vessel; signs of ischemia at rest or during exercise test due to target vessel; abnormal results of any invasive diagnostic test; TLR or TVR with a % DS ≥ 70% even in the absence of the above mentioned ischemic signs."|393 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823357|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Revascularizations (Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR)/ Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR)/Any Revascularization) Both Clinically-indicated and Not Clinically-indicated.|"TLR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention of the target lesion or bypass surgery of the target vessel performed for restenosis or other complication of the target lesion. The target lesion was defined as the treated segment from 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent.
TVR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel was defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion, including upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself.
A revascularization is considered clinically indicated if angiography at follow-up shows a %DS ≥ 50% and if one of the following occurs: history of recurrent angina pectoris due to the target vessel; signs of ischemia at rest or during exercise test due to target vessel; abnormal results of any invasive diagnostic test; TLR or TVR with a % DS ≥ 70% even in the absence of the above mentioned ischemic signs."|254 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823358|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Revascularizations (Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR)/ Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR)/Any Revascularization) Both Clinically-indicated and Not Clinically-indicated.|"TLR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention of the target lesion or bypass surgery of the target vessel performed for restenosis or other complication of the target lesion. The target lesion was defined as the treated segment from 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal to the stent.
TVR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel. The target vessel was defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion, including upstream and downstream branches and the target lesion itself.
A revascularization is considered clinically indicated if angiography at follow-up shows a %DS ≥ 50% and if one of the following occurs: history of recurrent angina pectoris due to the target vessel; signs of ischemia at rest or during exercise test due to target vessel; abnormal results of any invasive diagnostic test; TLR or TVR with a % DS ≥ 70% even in the absence of the above mentioned ischemic signs."|37 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823359|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Stent Thrombosis (Confirmed/Definite, Probable, Possible)|"The Clinical Event Committee will adjudicate the events according to the definitions developed by the Academic Research Consortium (ARC), as published in Circulation (Cutlip, D.E., et al., Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials: A Case for Standardized Definitions. Circulation, 2007. 115: p. 2344-2351.)
Stent thrombosis was defined according to the ARC guidelines as follows: definite: acute coronary syndrome and angiographic or pathological confirmation of stent thrombosis; probable: unexplained death ≤30 days or any MI that is related to acute ischemia in the territory of the implanted stent without angiographic confirmation of stent thrombosis; and possible: unexplained death >30 days after stent placement."|365 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823360|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Stent Thrombosis (Confirmed/Definite, Probable, Possible)|"The Clinical Event Committee will adjudicate the events according to the definitions developed by the Academic Research Consortium (ARC), as published in Circulation (Cutlip, D.E., et al., Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials: A Case for Standardized Definitions. Circulation, 2007. 115: p. 2344-2351.)
Stent thrombosis was defined according to the ARC guidelines as follows: definite: acute coronary syndrome and angiographic or pathological confirmation of stent thrombosis; probable: unexplained death ≤30 days or any MI that is related to acute ischemia in the territory of the implanted stent without angiographic confirmation of stent thrombosis; and possible: unexplained death >30 days after stent placement."|254 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823361|NCT01171820|Secondary|Adjudicated Stent Thrombosis (Confirmed/Definite, Probable, Possible)|"The Clinical Event Committee will adjudicate the events according to the definitions developed by the Academic Research Consortium (ARC), as published in Circulation (Cutlip, D.E., et al., Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials: A Case for Standardized Definitions. Circulation, 2007. 115: p. 2344-2351.)
Stent thrombosis was defined according to the ARC guidelines as follows: definite: acute coronary syndrome and angiographic or pathological confirmation of stent thrombosis; probable: unexplained death ≤30 days or any MI that is related to acute ischemia in the territory of the implanted stent without angiographic confirmation of stent thrombosis; and possible: unexplained death >30 days after stent placement."|0 to 37 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. The number of patients analyzed excludes subjects who were lost-to-follow-up.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823362|NCT01171820|Secondary|In-segment Percent Diameter Stenosis (% DS)|"This number represents the average of percent diameter stenosis found on examination of all the lesions analyzed.
This value calculated as 100 * (1 - MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA."|270 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. Patients were required to have angiographic follow-up to provide this endpoint information. Some patients not completing the study, did not have this follow up. The number of analyzed represents number of patients randomized.||Percent diameter stenosis|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
823363|NCT01171820|Secondary|In-stent Percent Diameter Stenosis (% DS)|"This number represents the average of percent diameter stenosis found on examination of all the lesions analyzed.
This value calculated as 100 * (1 - minimum lumen diameter/reference vessel diameter) (MLD/RVD) using the mean values from two orthogonal views (when possible) by QCA."|270 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. Patients were required to have angiographic follow-up to provide this endpoint information. Some patients not completing the study, did not have this follow up. The number of analyzed represents number of patients randomized.||Percent diameter stenosis|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
823364|NCT01171820|Secondary|In-segment Angiographic Binary Restenosis Rate|Percent of patients with a follow-up percent diameter stenosis of ≥ 50% per QCA.|270 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. Patients were required to have angiographic follow-up to provide this endpoint information. Some patients not completing the study, did not have this follow up. The number of analyzed represents number of patients randomized.||Percentage of participants|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
823365|NCT01171820|Secondary|In-stent Angiographic Binary Restenosis Rate|Percent of patients with a follow-up percent diameter stenosis of ≥ 50% per QCA.|270 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. Patients were required to have angiographic follow-up to provide this endpoint information. Some patients not completing the study, did not have this follow up. The number of analyzed represents number of patients randomized.||Percentage of participants|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
823366|NCT01171820|Secondary|Distal Late Loss|Distal Minimum Lumen Diameter (MLD) post-procedure minus distal MLD at follow-up|270 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. Patients were required to have angiographic follow-up to provide this endpoint information. Some patients not completing the study, did not have this follow up. The number of analyzed represents number of patients randomized.||millimeters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
823367|NCT01171820|Secondary|Proximal Late Loss|Proximal Minimum Lumen Diameter (MLD) post-procedure minus proximal MLD at follow-up|270 day|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. Patients were required to have angiographic follow-up to provide this endpoint information. Some patients not completing the study, did not have this follow up. The number of analyzed represents number of patients randomized.||millimeters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
823368|NCT01171820|Secondary|In-segment Late Loss|In-segment minimal lumen diameter (MLD) post-procedure minus (-) in segment MLD at follow-up|270 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. Patients were required to have angiographic follow-up to provide this endpoint information. Some patients not completing the study, did not have this follow up. The number of analyzed represents number of patients randomized.||millimeters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
823388|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, or result in disability/incapacity. Any = occurrence of an SAE regardless of the intensity grade or relationship to vaccination.|Throughout the entire study period (from Day 0 to Study End at Month 21)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one dose of the Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
823469|NCT01172600|Secondary|Usage of Opioid||3 months follow-up after last block (maximum of 3 blocks with a typical 1 month interval between blocks)|5 patients in each group were lost follow up.||participants|||Number
823369|NCT01171820|Secondary|Clinical Procedure Success (Per-patient)|Successful delivery and deployment of the study stent or stents at the intended target lesion and successful withdrawal of the stent delivery system with attainment of final residual stenosis of less than 50% of the target lesion by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) (by visual estimation if QCA unavailable) and/or using any adjunctive device without the occurrence of cardiac death, MI attributed to the target vessel and/or CI-TLR during the hospital stay with a maximum of first seven days post index procedure. In multiple lesion setting each lesion must meet clinical procedure success.|immediately post-procedure|The sample size for clinical procedure success is based on the number of evaluable patients, for whom data is available to define clinical procedure success.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823370|NCT01171820|Secondary|Clinical Device Success (Per-lesion)|Successful delivery and deployment of the study stent (in overlapping stent setting a successful delivery and deployment of the first and second study stent) at the intended target lesion and successful withdrawal of the stent delivery system with attainment of final residual stenosis of less than 50% of the target lesion by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) (by visual estimation if QCA unavailable), without use of a device outside the assigned treatment strategy.|immediately post-procedure|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population.||Percentage of lesions|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
823371|NCT01171820|Primary|In-stent Late Loss (LL)|In-stent minimal lumen diameter (MLD) post-procedure minus (-) in-stent MLD at follow-up|270 days|Analysis based on intention to treat (ITT) population. Patients were required to have angiographic follow-up to provide this endpoint information. Some patients not completing the study, did not have this follow up.||millimeters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
823372|NCT01171924|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Safety and tolerability will be assessed in the two treatment arms and the incidence of adverse events will be compared.|12-15 months|||participants|||Number
823373|NCT01171963|Secondary|Concentrations of Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA) and Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) Antibodies|Antibody assessment was performed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off (≥ 5 EL.U/mL) for all antibodies assessed (anti-PT, anti-FHA and anti-PRN). This outcome measure concerns solely subjects in Sub-cohort 2, who received the EPI vaccination concomitantly with study vaccination with the Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo.|At Day 0 and at Month 4|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 2, which included subjects with OPV and Infanrix™ vaccines co-administered with the study vaccine, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823374|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA) and Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) Antibodies.|Antibody assessment was performed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). A subject seropositive for anti-PT/anti-FHA/anti-PRN antibodies was defined as a subject with an anti-PT/anti-FHA/anti-PRN antibody concentrations greater than or equal to (≥) 5 ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). This outcome measure concerns solely subjects in Sub-cohort 2, who received the EPI vaccination concomitantly with study vaccination with the Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo.|At Day 0 and at Month 4|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 2, which included subjects with OPV and Infanrix™ vaccines co-administered with the study vaccine, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||Subjects|||Number
823375|NCT01171963|Secondary|Titers for Anti-poliovirus Type 1 (Anti-polio 1), Anti-polio 2 and Anti-polio 3 Antibodies|Titers were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay was the seroprotection cut-off (≥ 8 estimated doses 50% [ED50] for anti-poliovirus type 1 [anti-polio 1]/anti-polio 2/anti-polio 3 antibodies. This outcome measure concerns solely subjects in Sub-cohort 2, who received the EPI vaccination concomitantly with study vaccination with the Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo.|At Day 0 and at Month 4|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 2, which included subjects with OPV and Infanrix™ vaccines co-administered with the study vaccine, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823376|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected Against Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3.|A subject seroprotected against poliovirus types 1, 2 and 3 was defined as a subject with anti-poliovirus type 1 (anti-polio 1)/anti-polio 2/anti-polio 3 antibody titer greater than or equal to (≥) 8 estimated doses 50% (ED50). This outcome measure concerns solely subjects in Sub-cohort 2, who received the EPI vaccination concomitantly with study vaccination with the Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo (cf. population definition below).|At Day 0 and at Month 4|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 2, which included subjects with OPV and Infanrix™ vaccines co-administered with the study vaccine, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||Subjects|||Number
823377|NCT01171963|Secondary|Anti-Diphtheria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus (Anti-T) Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in international unit per milliliter (IU/mL). The cut-off of the assay was the seroprotection cut-off assay (≥ 0.1 IU/mL). This outcome measure concerns solely subjects in Sub-cohort 2, who received the EPI vaccination concomitantly with study vaccination with the Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo.|At Day 0 and at Month 4|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 2, which included subjects with OPV and Infanrix™ vaccines co-administered with the study vaccine, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823416|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3|A seropositive subject was defined as a subject with anti-polio type 1, 2 or 3 ≥ 1:8.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823378|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected Against Diphtheria and Tetanus|A subject seroprotected against diphtheria/tetanus was defined as a subject with an anti-diphtheria (anti-D)/anti-tetanus (anti-T) antibody concentrations greater than or equal to (≥) 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL). This outcome measure concerns solely subjects in Sub-cohort 2, who received the EPI vaccination concomitantly with study vaccination with the Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo|At Day 0 and at Month 4|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 2, which included subjects with OPV and Infanrix™ vaccines co-administered with the study vaccine, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||Subjects|||Number
823379|NCT01171963|Secondary|Anti-rotavirus (Anti-RV) Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibody Concentrations.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in units per milliliter (U/mL). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off (≥ 20 U/mL).|At Day 0, Month 2 and at 12 months of age|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included eligible subjects in the ATP cohorts for immunogenicity sub-cohorts 1 and 2 seronegative for serum anti-rotavirus immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies at Day 0 and with availability immunogenicity data at pre and post sampling time-points.||U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823380|NCT01171963|Secondary|Anti-rotavirus (Anti-RV) Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibody Concentrations.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in units per milliliter (U/mL). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off (≥ 20 U/mL).|At Day 0, Month 2 and at 12 months of age.|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 2, which included subjects with OPV and Infanrix™ vaccines co-administered with the study vaccine, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823381|NCT01171963|Secondary|Anti-rotavirus (Anti-RV) Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in units per milliliter (U/mL). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off (≥ 20 U/mL).|At Day 0, Month 2 and at 12 months of age|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 1, which included subjects vaccinated with at least 1 dose of HRV vaccine/Placebo, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823382|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for Anti-rotavirus (Anti-RV) Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibodies.|A subject seropositive for anti-rotavirus (anti-RV) immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies was defined as a subject anti-RV IgA antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) the seropositivity cut-off of 20 units per milliliter (U/mL).|At Day 0, Month 2 and at 12 months of age|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included eligible subjects in the ATP cohorts for immunogenicity sub-cohorts 1 and 2 seronegative for serum anti-rotavirus immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies at Day 0 and with availability immunogenicity data at pre and post sampling time-points.||Subjects|||Number
823383|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for Anti-rotavirus (Anti-RV) Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibodies.|A subject seropositive for anti-rotavirus (anti-RV) immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies was defined as a subject anti-RV IgA antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) the seropositivity cut-off of 20 units per milliliter (U/mL).|At Day 0, Month 2 and at 12 months of age|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 2, which included subjects with OPV and Infanrix™ vaccines co-administered with the study vaccine, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||Subjects|||Number
823384|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for Anti-rotavirus (Anti-RV) Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibodies.|A subject seropositive for anti-rotavirus (anti-RV) immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies was defined as a subject anti-RV IgA antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) the seropositivity cut-off of 20 units per milliliter (U/mL).|At Day 0, Month 2 and at 12 months of age|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 1, which included subjects vaccinated with at least 1 dose of HRV vaccine/Placebo, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||Subjects|||Number
823385|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Anti-rotavirus (Anti-RV) Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibodies.|A seroconverted subject was defined as a subject seronegative at baseline (Day 0) with the appearance of anti-RV IgA antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) 20 units per milliliter (U/mL) at the time point assessed. A seronegative subject was defined as a subject with anti-RV IgA antibody concentration lower than (<) 20 U/mL.|At Month 2 and at 12 months of age|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included eligible subjects in the ATP cohorts for immunogenicity sub-cohorts 1 and 2 seronegative for serum anti-rotavirus immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies at Day 0 and with availability immunogenicity data at pre and post sampling time-points.||Subjects|||Number
823386|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Anti-rotavirus (Anti-RV) Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibodies.|A seroconverted subject was defined as a subject seronegative at baseline (Day 0) with the appearance of anti-RV IgA antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) 20 units per milliliter (U/mL) at the time point assessed. A seronegative subject was defined as a subject with anti-RV IgA antibody concentration lower than (<) 20 U/mL.|At Month 2 and at 12 months of age|Analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 2, which included subjects with OPV and Infanrix™ vaccines co-administered with the study vaccine, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||Subjects|||Number
823387|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Anti-rotavirus (Anti-RV) Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibodies|A seroconverted subject was defined as a subject seronegative at baseline (Day 0) with the appearance of anti-RV IgA antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) 20 units per milliliter (U/mL) at the time point assessed. A seronegative subject was defined as a subject with anti-RV IgA antibody concentration lower than (<) 20 U/mL.|At Month 2 and at 12 months of age|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity Sub-cohort 1, which included subjects vaccinated with at least 1 dose of HRV vaccine/Placebo, complying with protocol, with EPI childhood vaccinations completed according to Chinese recommendations and available immunogenicity data at post sampling time-point.||Subjects|||Number
823389|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE is any adverse event (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any = occurrence of an unsolicited AE regardless of the intensity grade or relationship to vaccination.|Within the 31-day (Days 0–30) follow-up periods following any dose of the Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one dose of the Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
823390|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited Local Symptoms Following Dose 2 of the Rotarix™ Vaccine/Placebo|Solicited local symptoms assessed following administration of the co-administered EPI vaccines were pain, swelling, and redness. Any = any occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom regardless of the intensity grade. This outcome measure was only assessed in subjects from Sub-cohort 2, who received the EPI vaccination concomitantly with study vaccination with the Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo.|Within the 8-day (Days 0–7) follow-up periods following Dose 2 of the Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one dose of the Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo administration documented only on subjects in sub-cohort 2, for whom results were available.||Subjects|||Number
823391|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited General Symptoms Following Administration of the Co-administered EPI Vaccines|Solicited general symptoms assessed following administration of the co-administered EPI vaccines were drowsiness, gastrointestinal symptoms, fussiness/irritability, loss of appetite, and fever, defined as axillary temperature (T) above or equal to [>=] 37.5 degrees Celsius [°C] (if GSK scale) or >= 37.1°C (if Chinese scale ). Any = any occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom regardless of the intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. This outcome measure was only assessed in subjects from Sub-cohort 2, who received the EPI vaccination concomitantly with study vaccination with the Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo.|Within the 8-day (Days 0–7) follow-up periods following Doses 1 and 2 of the OPV vaccine and Dose 1 of the Infanrix™ vaccine|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one dose of the Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo administration documented only on subjects in sub-cohort 2, for whom results were available.||Subjects|||Number
823392|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited General Symptoms Following Vaccination With the Rotarix™ Vaccine/Placebo|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fever,defined as axillary temperature (T) above or equal to [>=] 37.5 degrees Celsius [°C] (if GSK scale) or >= 37.1°C (if Chinese scale), fussiness/irritability, loss of appetite, cough/runny nose, diarrhea and vomiting. Any = any occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom regardless of the intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. This outcome measure was only assessed in subjects from Sub-cohort 1, who received the EPI vaccination independently of study vaccination with the Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo.|Within the 8-day (Days 0–7) follow-up periods after any dose of Rotarix™ vaccine/placebo|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one dose of the Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo administration documented, solely on subjects not part of Sub-cohort 2.||Subjects|||Number
823393|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Severe Gastroenteritis (GE) Due to Any Cause|Severe GE was defined as an episode of GE with score equal to or higher than (>=) 11 on a 20-point Vesikari scoring system. This outcome measure concerns results for GE episodes due to any cause.|From Month 1 ½ to Month 21|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for efficacy, which included subjects vaccinated with Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo who had entered the efficacy surveillance period (Months 1 ½-21) with no rotavirus other than vaccine strain in the gastroenteritis stool samples collected between Day 0 and Month 1 ½.||Subjects|||Number
823394|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Episodes of Rotavirus Gastroenteritis (RVGE) Caused by the Circulating Wild Type (WT) Strains Requiring Hospitalization|A gastroenteritis episode was classified positive for rotavirus (RV) and caused by the circulating WT RV strains if RV other than the vaccine strain was identified in a stool sample collected during the episode.|From Month 1 ½ to Month 21|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for efficacy, which included subjects vaccinated with Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo who had entered the efficacy surveillance period (Months 1 ½-21) with no rotavirus other than vaccine strain in the gastroenteritis stool samples collected between Day 0 and Month 1 ½.||Subjects|||Number
823395|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Severe Episode(s) of Rotavirus Gastroenteritis (RVGE) of Any Type.|A gastroenteritis episode was classified positive for rotavirus (RV) if RV was identified in a stool sample collected during the episode. Severe RVGE was defined as an episode of RVGE with score equal to or higher than (>=) 11 on a 20-point Vesikari scoring system. RV types assessed were G1 Wild Type (G1WT), G2, G3, G9, GX (G type unknown, but not vaccine strain), P4, P8 Wild Type (P8WT), P9, PX (P type unknown, but not vaccine strain) and Pooled Non-G1WT.|From Month 1 ½ to Month 21|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for efficacy, which included subjects vaccinated with Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo who had entered the efficacy surveillance period (Months 1 ½-21) with no rotavirus other than vaccine strain in the gastroenteritis stool samples collected between Day 0 and Month 1 ½.||Subjects|||Number
823396|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Episode(s) of Rotavirus Gastroenteritis (RVGE) of Any Type.|A gastroenteritis episode was classified positive for rotavirus (RV) if RV was identified in a stool sample collected during the episode. RV types assessed were G1 Wild Type (G1WT), G2, G3, G9, GX (G type unknown, but not vaccine strain), P4, P8 Wild Type (P8WT), P9, PX (P type unknown, but not vaccine strain) and Pooled Non-G1WT.|From Month 1 ½ to Month 21|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for efficacy, which included subjects vaccinated with Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo who had entered the efficacy surveillance period (Months 1 ½-21) with no rotavirus other than vaccine strain in the gastroenteritis stool samples collected between Day 0 and Month 1 ½.||Subjects|||Number
823417|NCT01171989|Secondary|Anti-HBs Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in mIU/mL.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823397|NCT01171963|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Episode(s) of Rotavirus Gastroenteritis (RVGE) Caused by the Circulating Wild-type Strains|A gastroenteritis episode was classified positive for rotavirus (RV) and caused by the circulating wild-type (WT) RV strains if RV other than the vaccine strain was identified in a stool sample collected during the episode.|From Month 1 ½ to Month 21|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for efficacy, which included subjects vaccinated with Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo who had entered the efficacy surveillance period (Months 1 ½-21) with no rotavirus other than vaccine strain in the gastroenteritis stool samples collected between Day 0 and Month 1 ½.||Subjects|||Number
823398|NCT01171963|Primary|Number of Subjects With Severe Episode(s) of Rotavirus Gastroenteritis (RVGE) Caused by the Circulating Wild Type (WT) Strains|A gastroenteritis episode was classified positive for rotavirus (RV) and caused by the circulating wild-type (WT) RV strains if RV other than the vaccine strain was identified in a stool sample collected during the episode. Severe RVGE was defined as an episode of RV GE with score equal to or higher than (>=) 11 on a 20-point Vesikari scoring system.|From Month 1 ½ to Month 21|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for efficacy, which included subjects vaccinated with Rotarix™ vaccine or placebo who had entered the efficacy surveillance period (Months 1 ½-21) with no rotavirus other than vaccine strain in the gastroenteritis stool samples collected between Day 0 and Month 1 ½.||Subjects|||Number
823399|NCT01171976|Secondary|EuroQoL (EQ-5D) Thermometer Score: Change From Baseline at Month 12 and Month 24|The Euro Quality of Life Questionnaire (EQ-5D) is an indirect utility questionnaire. It is a standardized instrument was utilized to measure health outcomes related to 5 dimensions, namely: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The possible range for each dimension was 1 to 3, where 1= “no problems”, 2=“some problems” and 3=“extreme problems” . A composite health index was then defined by combining the levels for each dimension. Overall, 243 health states are possible. For each health state, the EuroQol group has assigned a utility value typically between 0 and 1 with lower scores representing a higher level of dysfunction|Baseline, Month 12 and Month 24|Analyzed set included all randomized patients who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. If missing values occurred without a subsequent observed value, the last observed value was carried forward to subsequent scheduled visits by means of a last observation carried forward.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823400|NCT01171976|Secondary|Visual Functioning Questionnaire (VFQ-25) Change From Baseline in Total Score at Month 12 and Month 24|The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI-VFQ-25) was used to measure the influence of visual disability and symptoms on general health. The 12 subscales in the VFQ-25 are general health, general vision, ocular pain, near activities, distance activities, social function, mental health, role difficulties, dependency, driving, color vision, and peripheral vision. For each, the patient was asked to rate their condition on a scale of 1-5 or 1-6, where a low number reflects a better outcome. Each response was recoded per the scoring rules outlined in the National Eye Institute (NEI) VFQ-25 Scoring Algorithm. Under this scoring algorithm , the recoded values range between 0 and 100 and a high score means a better functioning|Baseline, Month 12 and Month 24|Analyzed set included all randomized patients who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. If missing values occurred without a subsequent observed value, the last observed value was carried forward to subsequent scheduled visits by means of a last observation carried forward.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823401|NCT01171976|Secondary|Central Subfield Thickness of the Study Eye: Percent Change From Baseline at Month 24|High Resolution OCT was performed at every study visit by Spectral Domain OCT (if not available Time Domain OCT was acceptable) and the images were transferred to a digital video disc. These assessments were performed by trained and adequately qualified experts at the sites and prior to any study drug administration. CSFT is the average retinal thickness of the circular area with 1 mm diameter around the foveal center.|Baseline and 24 month|Analyzed set included all randomized patients who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. If missing values occurred without a subsequent observed value, the last observed value was carried forward to subsequent scheduled visits by means of a last observation carried forward.||Percent Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
823402|NCT01171976|Secondary|Central Subfield Thickness of the Study Eye: Percent Change From Baseline at Month 12|High Resolution OCT was performed at every study visit by Spectral Domain OCT (if not available Time Domain OCT was acceptable) and the images were transferred to a digital video disc. These assessments were performed by trained and adequately qualified experts at the sites and prior to any study drug administration. CSFT is the average retinal thickness of the circular area with 1 mm diameter around the foveal center.|Baseline, Month 12|Analyzed set included all randomized patients who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. If missing values occurred without a subsequent observed value, the last observed value was carried forward to subsequent scheduled visits by means of a last observation carried forward.||Percent Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
823403|NCT01171976|Secondary|Visual Acuity of the Study Eye: Categorized Change From Baseline at Month 24|Visual acuity was assessed at every study visit for the study eye using best correction determined from protocol refraction. The BCVA measurements were taken in a sitting position using ETDRS–like VA testing charts at a starting distance of 4 meters.|Baseline, 24 month|Analyzed set included all randomized patients who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. If missing values occurred without a subsequent observed value, the last observed value was carried forward to subsequent scheduled visits by means of a last observation carried forward.||Percentage of pateints|||Number
823404|NCT01171976|Secondary|Visual Acuity of the Study Eye: Categorized Change From Baseline at Month 12|Visual acuity was assessed at every study visit for the study eye using best correction determined from protocol refraction. The BCVA measurements were taken in a sitting position using ETDRS–like VA testing charts at a starting distance of 4 meters.|Baseline, Month 12|Analyzed set included all randomized patients who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. If missing values occurred without a subsequent observed value, the last observed value was carried forward to subsequent scheduled visits by means of a last observation carried forward.||Percentage of patients|||Number
823470|NCT01172600|Secondary|Usage of Opioid||3rd block, typically at 2 months from baseline|21 Entonox patients and 26 Oxygen patients did not receive 2nd block.||participants|||Number
823405|NCT01171976|Secondary|Visual Acuity of the Study Eye: Change From Baseline at Month 24|Visual acuity was assessed at every study visit for the study eye using best correction determined from protocol refraction. The BCVA measurements were taken in a sitting position using ETDRS–like VA testing charts at a starting distance of 4 meters.|Baseline and Month 24|Analyzed set included all randomized patients who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. If missing values occurred without a subsequent observed value, the last observed value was carried forward to subsequent scheduled visits by means of a last observation carried forward.||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
823406|NCT01171976|Secondary|Visual Acuity of the Study Eye: Change From Baseline at Month 12|Visual acuity was assessed at every study visit for the study eye using best correction determined from protocol refraction. The BCVA measurements were taken in a sitting position using ETDRS–like VA testing charts at a starting distance of 4 meters.|Baseline and Month 12|Analyzed set included all randomized patients who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. If missing values occurred without a subsequent observed value, the last observed value was carried forward to subsequent scheduled visits by means of a last observation carried forward.||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
823407|NCT01171976|Secondary|Visual Acuity of the Study Eye: Average Change From Baseline to Month 1 Through Month 24|Visual acuity was assessed at every study visit for the study eye using best correction determined from protocol refraction. The BCVA measurements were taken in a sitting position using ETDRS–like VA testing charts at a starting distance of 4 meters.|Baseline to Month 24|Analyzed set included all randomized patients who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. If missing values occurred without a subsequent observed value, the last observed value was carried forward to subsequent scheduled visits by means of a last observation carried forward.||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
823408|NCT01171976|Primary|Visual Acuity of the Study Eye: Average Change From Baseline to Month 1 Through Month 12|Visual acuity was assessed at every study visit for the study eye using best correction determined from protocol refraction. The BCVA measurements were taken in a sitting position using ETDRS–like VA testing charts at a starting distance of 4 meters.|Baseline to Month 12|Analyzed set included all randomized patients who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. If missing values occurred without a subsequent observed value, the last observed value was carried forward to subsequent scheduled visits by means of a last observation carried forward.||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
823409|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs were defined as medical occurrences that resulted in death, were life threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or resulted in disability/incapacity.|After the booster dose of the study vaccine up to the study end (from Month 0 to Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the Booster Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with the booster vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823410|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE was any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) post-booster period|The analysis was performed on the Booster Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with the booster vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823411|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed included drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever (defined as axillary temperature ≥ 37.5º C). Any= all reports of the specified symptom irrespective of intensity grade and relationship to vaccination.|During the 8-day (Days 0-7) post-booster period|The analysis was performed on the Booster Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with the booster vaccine administration documented and who had the symptoms sheet filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823412|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed included pain, redness and swelling. Any= all reports of the speecified symptom irrespective of intensity grade.|During the 8-day (Days 0-7) post-booster period|The analysis was performed on the Booster Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with the booster vaccine administration documented and who had the symptoms sheet filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823413|NCT01171989|Secondary|Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) for the seropositivity cut-off value ≥ 5 EL.U/mL.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823414|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA) and Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN)|A seropositive subject was defined as a subject with anti-PT, anti-FHA and anti-PRN antibody concentrations ≥ 5 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units per milliliter (EL.U/mL).|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823415|NCT01171989|Secondary|Anti-poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3 Antibody Titres|Titers were expressed as geometric mean titters (GMTs) for the seropositivity cut-off value of ≥ 1:8.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823471|NCT01172600|Secondary|Usage of Opioids||2nd block, typically at 1 month from baseline|10 Entonox patients and 11 Oxygen patients did not receive 2nd block.||participants|||Number
823418|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-hepatitis B (Anti-HBs) Antibody Concentrations ≥ Cut-off Values|The cut-off values assessed were 3.3 milli-international units per milliliter (mIU/mL), 10 mIU/mL and 100 mIU/mL.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823419|NCT01171989|Secondary|Anti-D and Anti-T Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) for the seropositivity cut-off value of ≥ 0.1 IU/mL.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823420|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-diphteria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus (Anti-T)|A seropositive subject was defined as a subject with anti-D and anti-T antibody concentrations ≥ 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823421|NCT01171989|Secondary|Anti-PSC Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) for the seropositivity cut-off value of ≥ 0.3 μg/mL.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823422|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Polysaccharide N. Meningitidis Serogroup C (PSC) Antibody Concentrations ≥ Cut-off Values|The cut-off values assessed were ≥ 0.3 μg/mL and ≥ 2 μg/mL.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823423|NCT01171989|Secondary|Anti-rSBA-MenC Antibody Titres|Antibody titers were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs) for the seroprotection cut-off value of ≥ 1:8.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823424|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-rSBA-MenC|A seropositive subject for anti-rSBA-MenC was defined as a subject with antibody titers greater than or equal to (≥) 1:128.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823425|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against rSBA-MenC|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with anti-rSBA-MenC antibody titers ≥ 1:8.|At Month 0, before the booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823426|NCT01171989|Secondary|Anti-PRP Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) for the cut-off value of ≥ 0.15 μg/mL.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823427|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-PRP Antibody Concentrations ≥ the Cut-off|The cut-off value of the assay was an anti-PRP antibody concentration ≥ 1 μg/mL.|At Month 0 and Month 1, before and one month after booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823428|NCT01171989|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-PRP|A seropositive subject was defined as a subject with anti-PRP antibody concentrations ≥ 0.15 μg/mL.|At Month 0, before the booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823429|NCT01171989|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Neisseria Meningitidis Serogroup C Using Baby Rabbit Completent (rSBA-MenC)|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with anti-rSBA-MenC titers greater than or equal to (≥) 1:8.|At Month 1, post-booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823597|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in fMRI Brain Activation Patterns During Pressure Stimulation From Baseline to Week 9 of Treatment||Week 9||||||
823598|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in fMRI Brain Activation Patterns During Pressure Stimulation From Baseline to Week 6 of Treatment||Week 6||||||
823430|NCT01171989|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Polyribosyl-Ribitol-Phosphate (PRP)|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with anti-PRP antibody concentrations greater than or equal to (≥) 0.15 micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL).|At Month 1, post-booster dose|The analysis was performed on the Booster According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823431|NCT01172145|Secondary|Zarit Burden Inventory|Measure of Caregiver Burden. Caregiver rates each item assessing burden on a 0 to 4 point scale with higher numbers reflecting more frequent occurence of the behavior or feeling being assessed.|after 8 weeks of treatment|||raw score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823432|NCT01172145|Secondary|The Direct Assessment of Functional Status Scale|A direct, examiner observed assessment of basic and instrumental activities of daily living. Participants are awarded points for correct performance of activities. Raw score is used for statistical comparison.|after 8 weeks of treatment|||raw score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823433|NCT01172145|Secondary|Lawton Brody Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire|Caregiver reported performance of personal and instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs. There are 6 personal ADLs (i.e. dressing, grooming, eating, etc) and 8 instrumental ADLs (i.e. managing finances, transportation, food preparation) which are assessed. Each item is awarded 2 points for fully independent, 1 point for minimal or moderate support required, and 0 points for full support. Maximum score for independence with all personal and instrumental ADL's is 28.|after 8 weeks of treatment|||raw score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823434|NCT01172145|Secondary|Zarit Burden Inventory|Measure of Caregiver Burden. Caregiver rates each item assessing burden on a 0 to 4 point scale with higher numbers reflecting more frequent occurence of the behavior or feeling being assessed.|at baseline|||raw score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823435|NCT01172145|Secondary|The Direct Assessment of Functional Status Scale|A direct, examiner observed assessment of basic and instrumental activities of daily living. Participants are awarded points for correct performance of activities. Raw score is used for statistical comparison.|at baseline|||raw score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823436|NCT01172145|Secondary|Lawton Brody Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire|Caregiver reported performance of personal and instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs. There are 6 personal ADLs (i.e. dressing, grooming, eating, etc) and 8 instrumental ADLs (i.e. managing finances, transportation, food preparation) which are assessed. Each item is awarded 2 points for fully independent, 1 point for minimal or moderate support required, and 0 points for full support. Maximum score for independence with all personal and instrumental ADL's is 28.|at baseline|||raw score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823437|NCT01172145|Primary|Apathy|The Frontal Systems Behavior Scale.Raw scores are converted to T-Scores using published norms. T-Scores have a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. T-scores less than or equal to 64 are within the average range. T-scores equal to or greater than 65 are indicative of a clinically significant problem. Higher scores indicate greater problem severity.|after 8 weeks of treatment|||T-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823438|NCT01172145|Primary|Apathy|The Frontal Systems Behavior Scale. Raw scores are converted to T-Scores using published norms. T-Scores have a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. T-scores less than or equal to 64 are within average range. T-scores equal to or greater than 65 are indicative of a clinically significant problem. Higher scores indicate greater problem severity.|at baseline|||T-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823439|NCT01172184|Secondary|Number of Participants With Heart Failure Requiring Rehospitalization During Follow-up Period|After discharge from index hospitalization of surgical intervention, heart failure with rehospitalization will be assessed. Heart failure with re-hospitalization was documented by at least one of the following: worse exercise tolerance and respiratory distress with NYHA class III or IV symptoms, presence of pulmonary rales, or chest radiography showing pulmonary congestion, which needed an augmented decongestive regimen during an in-hospital stay. The correlation between left atrial distensibility and heart failure was analyzed. ROC curve was used to estimate the best cut-off point.|1-2 years|||participants|||Number
823440|NCT01172184|Secondary|Number of Participants With Post-operation Atrial Fibrillation|After operation, patients received continuous EKG monitor during the ICU stay. After transfer to ordinary ward, patients received 2 times of EKG record per day and another EKG would be done if patients felt palpitation and irregular heart beats were found by nursing staffs. The event of atrial fibrillation (Af) was defined as irregular irregular heart beats which was lack of p wave and last for more than 30 seconds. The relationship between left atrial distensibility and post-operative Af was analysed. ROC curve was used to assess the best cutoff value of left atrial distensibility.|baseline and 1 year|||participants|||Number
823441|NCT01172184|Primary|Left Ventricular Filling Pressure More Than 15 mmHg Measured by Left Ventricular Catheterization|Since left ventricular filling pressure more than 15 mmHg indicated poor ventricular compliance and more cardiovascular event in many prior reports, the current study used it as the threshold. Otherwise, the correlation between left ventricular filling pressure and left atrial distensibility was assessed. ROC curve was used to estimate the best cut-off point of left atrial distensibility for predicting left ventricular filling pressure more than 15 mmHg.|1 year|Severe mitral regurgitation affects the accuracy of left ventricular filling pressure estimated by tissue Doppler imaging. Therefore, we conducted this study using left atrial parameters to assess left ventricular filling pressure in patients with severe mitral regurgitation.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823442|NCT01172288|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Effects|Number of participants with adverse events according to the Pediatric Adverse Events Rating Scale|12 weeks|||participants|||Number
823443|NCT01172288|Secondary|Overall Improvement|Clinical Global Impression - Improvement Scale (CGI-I). The CGI is a 7-point scare that requires the clinician to assess how much the patient's illness has improved or worsened relative to a baseline state at the beginning of the intervention. 1 = Very much improved; 2 = Much improved; 3 = Minimally improved; 4 = No change; 5 = Minimally worse; 6 = Much worse; 7 = Very much worse.|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823444|NCT01172288|Secondary|Improvement in OCD Severity|Childrens' Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS). 10-item scale. Each item is rated from 0-4. A sum total is calculated by adding items 1-10. 0-7: Subclinical. 8-15: Mild. 16-23: Moderate. 24-31: Severe. 32-40: Extreme.|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823445|NCT01172288|Secondary|Improvement of Premonitory Urges|"Premonitory Urge for Tics Scale (PUTS). Items are rated on a scale of 1-4 from least to most. A total score is calculated by summing the scores of all items. Nine is the minimum possible score. A score of 12.5-24.5 indicates medium intensity of premonitory urges for tics. A score of 25-30.5 indicates high intensity which may be associated with marked impairment. Scores 31 and above indicate extremely high intensity with probable severe impairment. A score of 36 is the maximum score possible."|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823446|NCT01172288|Primary|Improvement in Tic Severity|"Yale Global Tic Severity Scale is a standard psychiatric measure that rates tics from 0 (no tics) to 100 (most severe tics).
It separately rates motor tics and vocal tics in 5 subscales (number, frequency, intensity, complexity and interference) where the maximum severity score for motor tics is 25 and for vocal tics is 25. Giving us the Total Tic Severity Score maximum of 50.
The additional Impairment Scale rates the degree of disability caused by the tics ranging from 0 (none) to 50 (severe). When these two scores are added we get the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale Score."|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823447|NCT01172353|Secondary|Dialysis During Hospitalization||During hospitalization|||participants|||Number
823448|NCT01172353|Primary|Contrast-induced Nephropathy|rise in serum creatinine >0,5mg/dl|48 hours|||percentage of contrast nephropaty|||Number
823449|NCT01172418|Secondary|Patient Survival||at 3 years post-transplant||||||
823450|NCT01172418|Secondary|Patient Survival||at 1 year post-transplant||||||
823451|NCT01172418|Secondary|Graft Survival||at 3 years post-transplant||||||
823452|NCT01172418|Secondary|Graft Survival||at 1 year post-transplant||||||
823453|NCT01172418|Primary|Incidence of Acute Rejection at One Year Post-transplant||at one year post-transplant|||percentage of patients having BPAR|||Number
823454|NCT01172522|Primary|Number of Participants Who Showed Improvement in Under Eye Swelling and Dark Circles Relative to Baseline Per Intervention|Efficacy was measured per intervention by assessing number of participants with improvement in under eye dark circles and swelling. Criteria used to assess under eye improvement and swelling was by a 5 point scale comparing each week's photographic appearance to the appearance at baseline: 1) fexofenadine right and placebo left, and 2) fexofenadine left and placebo right. The split face comparison was noted in efficacy measured changes in under eye swelling and dark circles relative to baseline. Participants were graded by 2 blinded dermatologists who reviewed photographs of all participants at entry and weekly until end of study plus one week, day 37. Total number of participants: 30. Placebo right and fexofenadine left 15 participants. Placebo left and fexofenadine right 15 participants.|Baseline, weekly, and end of study +7 days|Thirty participants in total; 15 had fexofenadine left and placebo right; 15 had fexofenadine right and placebo left.||participants|||Number
823455|NCT01172535|Primary|Proportion of Participants Tolerating LPV/r|Participants were considered to have tolerated medication if they did not stop treatment before the 24 week PK visit for any reason other than completing treatment or death not related to treatment.|Measured at study completion (week 24)|All participants||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823456|NCT01172535|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing Adverse Events of Grade 3 or 4|Adverse events were graded by the Division of AIDS Table for Grading the Severity of Adult and Pediatric Adverse Events, Version 1.0, dated December, 2004, Clarification August 2009, which is available on the RSC web site (http://rsc.tech-res.com/safetyandpharmacovigilance/). Grade 1 = mild, Grade 2 = moderate, Grade 3 = severe, Grade 4 = potentially life-threatening, Grade 5 = death|Measured at study visits through end of study (weeks 2, 4, 12, 24)|All participants||participants|||Number
823457|NCT01172535|Secondary|Treatment Efficacy (CD4%)|Having CD4%≥25 at the week 24 visit.|Measured at entry and study completion (week 24)|Participants with data from both study entry and the week 24 study visit||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823458|NCT01172535|Secondary|Treatment Efficacy (HIV Viral Load)|Having HIV viral load <400 copies/mL at the week 24 visit|Measured at entry and study completion (week 24)|Participants with data from both study entry and the week 24 study visit||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823459|NCT01172535|Secondary|Adherence|Adherence, defined as proportion of doses taken (note: proportion could be greater than 1.0 for reasons such as tablets having to be taken twice due to first one being spit out or imprecise measurement of liquid doses)|Measured at week 4, week 12, and study completion (week 24)|Participants bringing medication to be measured at the study visit||Proportion of expected doses taken||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823460|NCT01172535|Primary|Proportion of Participants With an AUC of Less Than 10% of Adults|Proportion of participants with an AUC less that 10% of adults (AUC0-24 <104 mcg*hr/mL)|Measured at 4 weeks of treatment prior to the observed dose and at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose|Participants with complete pharmacokinetics data at week 4||proportion of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
823461|NCT01172535|Primary|Clearance of Lopinavir/Ritonavir (CL/F)|Clearance of lopinavir/ritonavir, as determined by analysis of 12-hour pharmacokinetic sampling|Measured at 4 weeks of treatment prior to the observed dose and at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose|Participants having complete pharmacokinetics data at week 4||L/h/kg||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823462|NCT01172535|Primary|Minimum Concentration of Lopinavir/Ritonavir (Cmin)|Minimum concentration of lopinavir/ritonavir, as determined by analysis of 12-hour pharmacokinetic sampling|Measured at 4 weeks of treatment prior to the observed dose and at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose|Participants having complete pharmacokinetics data at week 4||mcg/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823463|NCT01172535|Primary|Maximum Concentration of Lopinavir/Ritonavir (Cmax)|Maximum concentration of lopinavir/ritonavir, as determined by analysis of 12-hour pharmacokinetic sampling|Measured at 4 weeks of treatment prior to the observed dose and at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose|Participants having complete pharmacokinetics data at week 4||mcg/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823464|NCT01172535|Primary|Lopinovir/Ritonavir Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC0-24)|Area under the curve over 24 hours (AUC0-24), as determined by a non-compartmental analysis of 12-hour pharmacokinetic sampling for lopinavir/ritonavir|Measured at 4 weeks of treatment prior to the observed dose and at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose|Participants having complete pharmacokinetics data at week 4||mcg*hr/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
823465|NCT01172600|Secondary|Biomarkers|BIOMARKERS: IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10, 1L-17A, IFN-γ, and TNF-α|3 months follow-up after last block (maximum of 3 blocks with a typical 1 month interval between blocks)|No blood sample was planned to be collected.|||||
823472|NCT01172600|Secondary|Change in Oswestry Score (% of Disability) From Baseline to 3 Months Follow-up|Oswestry score ranges from 0% to 100%, which measures % of disability. The outcome is change in the Oswestry score from baseline (before 1st block) to 3 months follow-up.|At baseline (before 1st block) and 3 months follow-up after last block (maximum of 3 blocks with a typical 1 month interval between blocks)|5 patients in each group were lost follow-up.||absolute percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
823473|NCT01172600|Secondary|Change in Oswestry Score (% of Disability) From Baseline to 3rd Block|Oswestry score ranges from 0% to 100%, which measures % of disability. The outcome is change in the Oswestry score from baseline (before 1st block) to before 3rd block.|At baseline (before 1st block) and before the 3rd block, typically at 2 months from baseline|21 Entonox patients and 26 Oxygen patients did not receive 3rd block.||absolute percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
823474|NCT01172600|Secondary|Change in Oswestry Score (% of Disability) From Baseline to 2nd Block|Oswestry score ranges from 0% to 100%, which measures % of disability. The outcome is change in the Oswestry score from baseline (before 1st block) to before 2nd block.|At baseline (before 1st block) and before the 2nd block, typically at 1 month from baseline|10 Entonox patients and 11 Oxygen patients did not receive 2nd block.||absolute percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
823475|NCT01172600|Primary|Change in VAS Pain Score From Baseline to Before 3rd Block|"10-cm-long Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score, ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). It was measured before 1st 2nd and 3rd block and at 3 month follow-up.
The primary outcome was the change in VAS pain score from baseline (before 1st block) to before the 3rd block"|At baseline (before 1st block) and before the 3rd block, typically at 2 months from baseline|21 patients in the Entonox group and 26 patients in the Oxygen group did not receive the 2nd block treatment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823476|NCT01172600|Primary|Change in VAS Pain Score From Baseline to Before 2nd Block|"10-cm-long Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score, ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). It was measured before 1st 2nd and 3rd block and at 3 month follow-up.
The primary outcome was the change in VAS pain score from baseline (before 1st block) to before the 2nd block."|At baseline (before 1st block) and before the 2nd block, typically at 1 month from baseline|10 patients in the Entonox group and 11 patients in the Oxygen group did not receive the 2nd block treatment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823477|NCT01172600|Primary|Change in VAS Pain Score From Baseline to 3 Month Follow-up|"10-cm-long Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score, ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). It was measured before 1st 2nd and 3rd block and at 3 month follow-up.
The primary outcome was the change in VAS pain score from baseline (before 1st block) to the 3 month follow-up."|At baseline (before 1st block) and 3 months follow-up after last block (maximum of 3 blocks with a typical 1 month interval between blocks)|For 10 patients with missing VAS at 3 month follow up: 5 patients who had 2nd or 3rd epidural block, we assigned the last VAS observation (i.e., from VAS before 2nd or 3rd block to 3 month follow-up); and for 5 patients who only had 1st epidural, we assigned the worst VAS (10) for Entonox patients and the best VAS (0) for Oxygen patients.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823478|NCT01172808|Secondary|Time to First Asthma Exacerbation From the Two Twin Trials 205.419 (NCT01172821) and the Present 205.418 (NCT01172808)|Time to first asthma exacerbation (including severe, non-severe; symptomatic, asymptomatic; i.e. any exacerbation) during the 24-week treatment period on combined data from the two twin trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and 205.419 (NCT01172821)|24 weeks|FAS of combined data from the two twin trials 205.419 (NCT01172821) and 205.418 (NCT01172808)||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823479|NCT01172808|Secondary|Time to First Severe Asthma Exacerbation From the Two Twin Trials 205.419 (NCT01172821) and the Present 205.418 (NCT01172808)|Time to first severe asthma exacerbation during the 24-week treatment period on combined data from the two twin trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and 205.419 (NCT01172821).|24 weeks|FAS of combined data from the two twin trials 205.419 (NCT01172821) and 205.418 (NCT01172808)||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823480|NCT01172808|Primary|The Responder Rate as Assessed by the ACQ From the Two Twin Trials 205.419 (NCT01172821) and the Present 205.418 (NCT01172808)|"The responder rate as assessed by the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) determined at the end of the 24-week treatment period (on combined data from the two twin trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and 205.419 (NCT01172821)). A patient was considered to be a responder if he or she was reported with an improvement (decrease) in the ACQ total score of at least 0.5 points.
The ACQ total score was calculated as the mean of the responses to 7 questions and was analysed as an absolute value. The score ranges from 0 (no impairment) to 6 (maximum impairment)."|24 weeks|FAS of combined data from the two twin trials 205.419 (NCT01172821) and 205.418 (NCT01172808)||Percentage of participants|||Number
823481|NCT01172808|Secondary|Asthma Symptom-free Days Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week. An asthma symptom-free day was defined as a day with no reported symptoms and no use of rescue medication.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Days||Standard Error|Mean
823482|NCT01172808|Secondary|Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication During the Entire 24-h Day Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Daily use of salbutamol (albuterol) rescue medication as needed during the entire study period. Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Number of Puffs||Standard Error|Mean
823483|NCT01172808|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Evening FEV1 (FEV1 p.m.) Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823484|NCT01172808|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Morning FEV1 (FEV1 a.m.) Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823599|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in fMRI Brain Activation Patterns During Pressure Stimulation From Baseline to End of Treatment||Week 0 to Week 15||||||
823485|NCT01172808|Secondary|PEF Variability|PEF daily variability was assesed by patients at home using the AM3 device. PEF variability is the absolute difference between morning and evening PEF value divided by their mean, based on the weekly mean response at week 24. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Percentage of mean PEF||Standard Error|Mean
823486|NCT01172808|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Evening PEF (PEF p.m.) Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Litre/min||Standard Error|Mean
823487|NCT01172808|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Morning PEF (PEF a.m.) Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Litre/min||Standard Error|Mean
823488|NCT01172808|Secondary|The Responder Rate as Assessed by the ACQ|The responder rate as assessed by the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) determined at the end of the 24-week treatment period. A patient was considered to be a responder if he or she was reported with an improvement (decrease) in ACQ total score of at least 0.5 points. The ACQ total score was calculated as the mean of the responses to 7 questions and was analysed as an absolute value. The score ranges from 0 (no impairment) to 6 (maximum impairment).|24 weeks|FAS||Percentage of Participants|||Number
823489|NCT01172808|Secondary|Total Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) Score at the End of the 24-week Treatment Period|Control of asthma as assessed by the ACQ determined at the end of 24-week treatment. The ACQ contains 7 questions, each question has a 7 point scale from 0 (no symptoms) till 6 (highest intensity). Total score was defined as the sum of all items divided by the number of items. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
823490|NCT01172808|Secondary|Total Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQs)) Score|Total score from the Standardised Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ(s)) determined at the end of 24-week treatment. The AQLQ(s) contains 32 questions, each question has a 7 point scale from 1 (highest intensity) till 7 (no symptoms). Total score was defined as the sum of all items divided by the number of items. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
823491|NCT01172808|Secondary|Trough PEF Response|Trough peak expiratory flow (PEF) response determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2). Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre/min||Standard Error|Mean
823492|NCT01172808|Secondary|FVC Area Under Curve 0-3 Hours (AUC0-3h) Response|Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2) determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week. FVC AUC 0-3h was calculated from 0-3 hours post-dose using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time (3h) to report in litres.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823493|NCT01172808|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under Curve 0-3 Hours (AUC0-3h) Response|Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2) determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week. FEV1 AUC 0-3h was calculated from 0-3 hours post-dose using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time (3h) to report in litres.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823494|NCT01172808|Secondary|Trough FVC Response|Trough FVC response determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2). Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823495|NCT01172808|Secondary|Peak FVC Within 3 Hours Post-dose Response|Peak forced vital capacity (FVC) response within 3 hours post-dose determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2). Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823496|NCT01172808|Primary|Trough FEV1 Response|Trough FEV1 response determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2). Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823497|NCT01172808|Primary|Peak FEV1 Within 3 Hours Post-dose Response|Peak forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) response within 3 hours post-dose determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2). Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) - all treated patients who had baseline data and at least 1 on-treatment efficacy measurement excluding patients from one centre due to non-compliance with good clinical practice.||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823498|NCT01172821|Secondary|Time to First Asthma Exacerbation From the Two Twin Trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and the Present 205.419 (NCT01172821)|Time to first asthma exacerbation (including severe, non-severe; symptomatic, asymptomatic; i.e. any exacerbation) during the 24-week treatment period on combined data from the two twin trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and 205.419 (NCT01172821)|24 weeks|FAS of combined data from the two twin trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and 205.419 (NCT01172821)||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823499|NCT01172821|Secondary|Time to First Severe Asthma Exacerbation From the Two Twin Trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and the Present 205.419 (NCT01172821)|Time to first severe asthma exacerbation during the 24-week treatment period on combined data from the two twin trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and 205.419 (NCT01172821)|24 weeks|FAS of combined data from the two twin trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and 205.419 (NCT01172821)||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825989|NCT01195090|Secondary|Changes in Fasting Plasma Glucose|fasting serum sugar change from baseline to 24 weeks|24 weeks|An intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis with last observation carried forward was used to assess efficacy.||mg/dl||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823500|NCT01172821|Primary|The Responder Rate as Assessed by the ACQ From the Two Twin Trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and the Present 205.419 (NCT01172821)|The responder rate as assessed by the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) determined at the end of the 24-week treatment period (on combined data from the two twin trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and 205.419 (NCT01172821)). A patient was considered to be a responder if he or she was reported with an improvement (decrease) in the ACQ total score of at least 0.5 points.|24 weeks|FAS of combined data from the two twin trials 205.418 (NCT01172808) and 205.419 (NCT01172821).||Percentage of participants|||Number
823501|NCT01172821|Secondary|Asthma Symptom-free Days Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week. An asthma symptom-free day was defined as a day with no reported symptoms and no use of rescue medication.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Days||Standard Error|Mean
823502|NCT01172821|Secondary|Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication During the Entire 24-h Day Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Daily use of salbutamol (albuterol) rescue medication as needed during the entire study period. Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Number of Puffs||Standard Error|Mean
823503|NCT01172821|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Evening FEV1 (FEV1 p.m.) Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823504|NCT01172821|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Morning FEV1 (FEV1 a.m.) Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823505|NCT01172821|Secondary|PEF Variability|PEF daily variability was assesed by patients at home using the AM3 device. PEF variability is the absolute difference between morning and evening PEF value divided by their mean, based on the weekly mean response at week 24. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Percentage of Mean PEF||Standard Error|Mean
823506|NCT01172821|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Evening PEF (PEF p.m.) Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Litre/min||Standard Error|Mean
823507|NCT01172821|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Morning PEF (PEF a.m.) Based on the Weekly Mean Response at Week 24|Weekly means obtained during the last 7 days before week 24 measured by patients at home using the AM3 device. Response was defined as change from baseline. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week|Baseline and last 7 days before week 24 visit|FAS||Litre/min||Standard Error|Mean
823508|NCT01172821|Secondary|The Responder Rate as Assessed by the ACQ|The responder rate as assessed by the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) determined at the end of the 24-week treatment period. A patient was considered to be a responder if he or she was reported with an improvement (decrease) in ACQ total score of at least 0.5 points.The score ranges from 0 (no impairment) to 6 (maximum impairment).|24 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
823509|NCT01172821|Secondary|Total Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) Score|Control of asthma as assessed by the ACQ determined at the end of 24-week treatment. The ACQ contains 7 questions, each question has a 7 point scale from 0 (no symptoms) till 6 (highest intensity). Total score was defined as the sum of all items divided by the number of items and ranges from from 0 (no symptoms) till 6 (highest intensity). Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
823510|NCT01172821|Secondary|Total Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQs)) Score|"Total score from the Standardised Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ(s)) determined at the end of 24-week treatment.
The AQLQ(s) contains 32 questions, each question has a 7 point scale from 1 (highest intensity) till 7 (no symptoms). Total score was defined as the sum of all items divided by the number of items and ranges from from 1 (highest intensity) till 7 (no symptoms). Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week."|24 weeks|FAS||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
823511|NCT01172821|Secondary|Trough PEF Response|Trough peak expiratory flow (PEF) response determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2). Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre/min||Standard Error|Mean
823512|NCT01172821|Secondary|FVC Area Under Curve 0-3 Hours (AUC0-3h) Response|Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2) determined at the end of the 24- week treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week. FVC AUC 0-3h was calculated from 0-3 hours post-dose using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time (3h) to report in litres.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823513|NCT01172821|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under Curve 0-3 Hours (AUC0-3h) Response|Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2) determined at the end of the 24- week treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week. FEV1 AUC 0-3h was calculated from 0-3 hours post-dose using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time (3h) to report in litres.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823514|NCT01172821|Secondary|Trough FVC Response|Trough FVC response determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2). Means are adjusted for treatment, country, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823515|NCT01172821|Secondary|Peak FVC Within 3 Hours Post-dose Response|Peak forced vital capacity (FVC) response within 3 hours post-dose determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2). Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823516|NCT01172821|Primary|Trough FEV1 Response|Trough FEV1 response determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2). Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|FAS||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823517|NCT01172821|Primary|Peak FEV1 Within 3 Hours Post-dose Response|Peak forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) response within 3 hours post-dose determined at the end of the 24-week treatment. Response was defined as change from baseline (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication at visit 2). Means are adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment by week, and baseline by week.|24 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) - all treated patients who had baseline data and at least 1 on-treatment efficacy measurement.||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
823518|NCT01172847|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant or Treatment Related Changes in Electrocardiogram (ECG)|ECG was recorded when participants were rested in a supine position for at least 5 minutes.|Screening; pre-dose on Day 1 and Day 5 of each treatment period; Follow-up visit|Safety Population included all participants who received at least one dose of the study medication, whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not.||participants|||Number
823519|NCT01172847|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Abnormality in Laboratory Parameters|"Laboratory analysis included hematology (hemoglobin, hematocrit, erythrocytes, platelets counts, leukocytes counts, neutrophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, basophils, and monocytes);, biochemistry (aspartate aminotransferase , alanine aminotransferase, gamma glutamyl trans peptidase, total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, lactate dehydrogenase, albumin, creatinine, urea, creatine phosphokinase, total protein, sodium, chloride, calcium, phosphate, potassium, glucose (fasting), amylase, lipase, total cholesterol, and calculated creatinine clearance); and urinalysis.
Marked laboratory test values (high and low) falling outside the marked reference range and which also represents a clinically relevant change from baseline of at least a designated amount were recoded. In this study, marked abnormality ranges for phosphate as 0.75 – 1.60 millimole (mmol)/L and proteinuria (0 to 4+, and 1)."|Screening; Day -1 and Day 5 (pre-dose) of each treatment period; Follow-up visit|Safety Population included all participants who received at least one dose of the study medication, whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not.||participants|||Number
823520|NCT01172847|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Vital Signs|Vital signs included heart rate (HR), blood pressure (systolic blood pressure [SBP] and diastolic blood pressure [DBP]), and body temperature. Blood pressure and pulse rate were recorded when participants were rested in a supine position for at least 5 minutes and after standing for 2 minutes. Vital signs values that fall outside the investigator’s normal ranges were recorded.|Screening (Days -28 to -2); pre-dose and 2h post-dose on D1 and D5 of each treatment period; at Follow-up visit (10 -14 days after last dose) for blood pressure and HR; Screening; Day -1 of each treatment period; Follow-up visit for temperature|Safety Population included all participants who received at least one dose of the study medication, whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not.||participants|||Number
823521|NCT01172847|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events (AEs) and Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered to be related to the medicinal product. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect.|Up to 11 weeks|Safety Population included all participants who received at least one dose of the study medication, whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not.||participants|||Number
823522|NCT01172847|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Rimantadine|Cmax of rimantadine was calculated following the administration of rimantadine alone or in combination with oseltamivir and was directly observed from the data.|Pre-dose; 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours post-dose on Day 5|PK analysis population included all participants who were adhered to the protocol.||ng/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823523|NCT01172847|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Oseltamivir and Oseltamivir Carboxylate|Oseltamivir carboxylate is active metabolite of oseltamivir. Cmax of oseltamivir and oseltamivir carboxylate were calculated following the administration of oseltamivir alone or in combination with rimantadine and was directly observed from the data.|Pre-dose; 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours post-dose on Day 5|PK analysis population included all participants who were adhered to the protocol.||ng/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823524|NCT01172847|Primary|Steady State Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to 12 Hours After Dosing (AUC0-12) of Rimantadine|AUC0-12 of rimantadine was calculated following the administration of rimantadine alone or in combination with oseltamivir, using the linear trapezoidal rule.|Pre-dose; 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours post-dose on Day 5|Pharmacokinetic analysis population included all participants who were adhered to the protocol.||h*ng/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823525|NCT01172847|Primary|Steady State Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to 12 Hours After Dosing (AUC0-12) of Oseltamivir and Oseltamivir Carboxylate|Oseltamivir carboxylate is active metabolite of oseltamivir. AUC0-12 of oseltamivir and oseltamivir carboxylate were calculated following the administration of oseltamivir alone or in combination with rimantadine, using the linear trapezoidal rule.|Pre-dose; 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours post-dose on Day 5|Pharmacokinetics (PK) analysis population included all participants who were adhered to the protocol.||hours (h)*nanogram (ng)/milliliter (mL)||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823526|NCT01166126|Secondary|Number of Participants With Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Toxicities assessed using NCI Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Effects (CTCAE) v4.0.|1 year|||participants|||Number
823600|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in Pain Tolerance From Baseline to End of Treatment|The primary outcome parameter is the change in pressure pain tolerance (maximum tolerated pressure) from baseline to end of treatment. Measured in kg/cm^2. Lower values represent a worse outcome.|Week 0 -Week 15|||kg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823527|NCT01166126|Secondary|Number of Participants With Progression Free Survival (PFS) at 6 Months.|"Patients will be evaluated by physical examination and imaging assessments (brain MRI and CT scans of the chest, abdomen and pelvis). Disease progression will be defined by RECIST criteria on physical exam or diagnostic imaging assessments that are attributed to metastatic melanoma.
Progressive Disease (PD): At least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression)."|6 months from day 1 of treatment|||participants|||Number
823528|NCT01166126|Primary|Number of Participants With Overall Survival (OS) at One Year|The one-year overall survival of the combination of temsirolimus and AZD6244 Hydrogen Sulfate.|1 year post last treatment|||participants|||Number
823529|NCT01166126|Primary|Number of Participants With Complete Response (CR) and Partial Response (PR)|"Anti-tumor response (CR+PR) was defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST).
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm.
Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters."|1 year|All participants||participants|||Number
823530|NCT01172873|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)|Beck’s Depression Inventory (BDI): This is a 21-item self report that measures depression symptoms and will be used for both adults and adolescents at baseline, session 5, session 10 and the follow-up visit. BDI-II scores range from 0-63, with higher scores representing greater severity of depression symptoms.|baseline, visit 5, visit 10, follow-up visit|Data from 14 adolescents were analyzed. One participant was excluded from analyses because he did not receive DCS at every treatment visit. Another was excluded because she was unable to provide reliable data on outcome measures. Another was excluded because she was unable to provide reliable data on outcome measures.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823531|NCT01172873|Secondary|Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children (MASC)|Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children (MASC): This is a 39-item self-report that measures anxiety symptoms. It provides a total score, as well as 10 subscales, although only total scores will be analyzed. MASC scores range from 0-117, with higher scores representing greater severity of anxiety symptoms. The MASC and will be administered at baseline, session 5, session 10 and the follow-up visit for adolescents.|baseline, visit 5, visit 10, follow-up visit|Data from 14 adolescents were analyzed. One participant was excluded from analyses because he did not receive DCS at every treatment visit. Another was excluded because she was unable to provide reliable data on outcome measures.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823532|NCT01172873|Primary|Child Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS) for Adolescents|The CYBOCS is a semi-structured measure of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) severity with excellent inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability. It is validated in those starting at age 7 and used in studies up to age 20.The CYBOCS differs from the adult Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS) only in its use of simpler language. CYBOCS scores range from 0-40, with higher scores representing greater severity of symptoms. The CYBOCS will be administered by independent evaluators (IEs) at baseline, session 5, session 10 and the follow-up visit. It will be the primary outcome measure. The CYBOCS checklist will be used to determine symptom dimensions.|baseline, visit 5, visit 10, follow-up visit|Data from 14 adolescents were analyzed. One participant was excluded from analyses because he did not receive DCS at every treatment visit. Another was excluded because she was unable to provide reliable data on outcome measures.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823533|NCT01172938|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events||Up to 5 years||10/2017||||
823534|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Dactylitis Score of Zero at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 52 weeks.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823535|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a MASES Score of Zero at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 24 weeks. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants with a baseline value > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823536|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 70 Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823537|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823538|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Good or Moderate EULAR Response at Week 52|"A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score.
A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.
A Moderate Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or,
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants|||Number
823539|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 52 weeks.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823540|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 52 weeks. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823541|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the FACIT-Fatigue Scale Score at Week 52|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823542|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the DAS28 at Week 52|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the DIP joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823543|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the CDAI Score at Week 52|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8 Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10 Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22 High Disease Activity: > 22."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823544|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 52|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a baseline value > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823601|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in Pain Tolerance From Baseline to Week 9 of Treatment||Week 9||||||
823545|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 52|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a baseline value > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823546|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Patient Assessment of Pain at Week 52|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
823547|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified PsARC Response at Week 52|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from Baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from Baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823548|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the SF-36 Physical Functioning Domain at Week 52|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823549|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 52|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823550|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 20 Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population consists of all participants who were randomized or re-randomized to apremilast at any time during the study. Only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823551|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Dactylitis Score of Zero at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 24 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823602|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in Pain Tolerance From Baseline to Week 6 of Treatment||Week 6||||||
823603|NCT01173055|Secondary|Pain Tolerance at Baseline|The primary outcome parameter is the pressure pain tolerance (maximum tolerated pressure) at pre-treatment baseline.|Week 0|||kg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823604|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Control (DNIC) Effect From Baseline to End of Treatment.|0-100 numerical rating scale. 0 on the numerical scale represents a better outcome. 100 represents a worse outcome.|Week 0 - Week 15|On participant did not complete this outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823552|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a MASES Score of Zero at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 24 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823553|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Dactylitis Score of Zero at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 16 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823554|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a MASES Score of Zero at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 16 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823555|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 70 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823556|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823557|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 70 Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823558|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 50 Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823605|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Control (DNIC) Effect From Baseline to Week 9 of Treatment.||Week 9||||||
823606|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Control (DNIC) Effect From Baseline to Week 6 of Treatment.||Week 6||||||
823559|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Good or Moderate EULAR Response at Week 24|"EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score.
A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.
A Moderate Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or,
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823560|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 24 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823561|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 24 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823562|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Good or Moderate European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response at Week 16|"A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score.
A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.
A Moderate Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or,
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823563|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 16 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823564|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 16 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823565|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 24|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823607|NCT01173055|Secondary|Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Control (DNIC) Effect at Baseline.|0-100 numerical rating scale. 0 on the numerical scale represents a better outcome. 100 represents a worse outcome.|Week 0|One participant did not complete this outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823690|NCT01175382|Primary|Change in Frequency of Urination After 6-week Intervention (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed by subjects prior to randomization and following the first phase of treatment was used to calculate changes in frequency of urination.|From Baseline to 6 Weeks|||voids per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
823566|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) at Week 24|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the DIP joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823567|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 24|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10; Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: > 22."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823568|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 24|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set. Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included. LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823569|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 24|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823570|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient’s Assessment of Pain at Week 24|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823571|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) Response at Week 24|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823572|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SF-36 Physical Function at Week 24|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823573|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 16|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823574|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) at Week 16|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823575|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 16|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0 to 76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8 Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10 Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22 High Disease Activity: > 22."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823576|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 16|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set. Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823577|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 16|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823578|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient’s Assessment of Pain at Week 16|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823579|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) Response at Week 16|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from Baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from Baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823580|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 16|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823581|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire- Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 24|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823582|NCT01172938|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 20 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at Week 24. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823583|NCT01172938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire- Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 16|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823584|NCT01172938|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set consisting of all participants randomized as specified in the protocol. Participants who withdrew early or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
823585|NCT01173029|Post-Hoc|Polygenic Risk Score|"Among all analyzed, four renin-angiotensin-aldosterone polymorphisms had statistical significance relating to composite endpoint.
They were: Angiotensinogen, renin, angiotensin II type 1 receptor and aldosterone synthase. Each polymorphism was arbitrarily weighted according to respective presentation in both alleles as follows: zero (low risk homozygosis), one (heterozygosis) and two (high risk homozygosis). In a following step, they were summed up for each subject, thus, creating a polygenic risk score.
The weights of the polymorphisms were, thus, defined:
Angiotensinogen: MM - zero, MT - one, TT - two
Renin: AA - zero, GA - one, GG - two
Angiotensin II type 1 receptor: CC - zero, AC - one, AA - two
Aldosterone synthase: CC - zero, TC - one, TT - two
The polygenic risk score value ranges from zero (all low risk polymorphisms in homozygosis) to eight (all high risk polymorphisms in homozygosis)."|up to 10 years|Subjects in both resistant systemic arterial hypertension and pseudo-resistant systemic arterial hypertension groups had their respective genetic background scored according to present rule.||composite enpoint events|||Number
823586|NCT01173029|Secondary|Composite of Acute Myocardial Infarctions and/or Strokes Either Fatal or Nonfatal|"Evidence of clinically definite stroke (focal neurological deficits persisting for more than 24 hours) confirmed or not by non-investigational computerized tomography.
Evidence of clinically definite acute myocardial infarction (prolonged > 20min chest pain, not relieved by sublingual nitrate, ST-T segment deviation on 12-lead surface ECG, elevation of plasma troponin >0.2 ng/dL 6h following chest pain episode).
Death was considered to be related to the event if occurring up to 30 days after the acute event.
Assessment twice an year by active and direct contact to patients or relatives and review of medical records."|up to 10 years|"Number of participants was based on input demand at outpatient clinics. Those who provided provided consent for genetic testing were included.
A post-hoc sampling procedure (power calculation) validated sample size."||participants|||Number
823587|NCT01173029|Primary|Strokes, Either Fatal or Nonfatal|"Evidence of clinically definite stroke (focal neurological deficits persisting for more than 24 hours) confirmed or not by non-investigational computerized tomography.
Death was considered to be related to the event if occurring up to 30 days after the acute event.
Assessment twice an year by active and direct contact to patients or relatives and review of medical records."|up to 10 years|"Number of participants was based on input demand at outpatient clinics. Those who provided provided consent for genetic testing were included.
A post-hoc sampling procedure (power calculation) validated sample size."||participants|||Number
823588|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in fMRI Activation Patterns During N-back Procedure From Baseline to Week 15 of Treatment.||Week 15||||||
823589|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in fMRI Activation Patterns During N-back Procedure From Baseline to Week 9 of Treatment.||Week 9||||||
823590|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in fMRI Activation Patterns During N-back Procedure From Baseline to Week 6 of Treatment.||Week 6||||||
823591|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in fMRI Activation Patterns During N-back Procedure From Baseline to End of Treatment.||Week 0||||||
823592|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in Descending Pain Modulation From Baseline to Week 15 of Treatment (as Assessed by Changes in fMRI Brainstem Activation Patterns)||Week 15||||||
823593|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in Descending Pain Modulation From Baseline to Week 9 of Treatment (as Assessed by Changes in fMRI Brainstem Activation Patterns)||Week 9||||||
823594|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in Descending Pain Modulation From Baseline to Week 6 of Treatment (as Assessed by Changes in fMRI Brainstem Activation Patterns)||Week 6||||||
823595|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in Descending Pain Modulation From Baseline to End of Treatment (as Assessed by Changes in fMRI Brainstem Activation Patterns)||Week 0 - Week 15||||||
823596|NCT01173055|Secondary|Change in fMRI Brain Activation Patterns During Pressure Stimulation From Baseline to Week 15 of Treatment||Week 15||||||
823608|NCT01173055|Primary|Change in Pain Threshold From Baseline to End of Treatment.|The primary outcome parameter is the change in medium pressure pain threshold (pressure that evokes a perceived pain intensity of 40-50 out of 100 on a numerical rating scale) from baseline to end of treatment. Measured in kg/cm^2. Lower values represent a worse outcome.|Week 0 - Week 15|||kg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823609|NCT01173055|Primary|Change in Pain Threshold From Baseline to Week 9 of Treatment|The primary outcome parameter is the change in medium pressure pain threshold from baseline to end of treatment.|Week 9||||||
823610|NCT01173055|Primary|Change in Pain Threshold From Baseline to Week 6 of Treatment.|The primary outcome parameter is the change in medium pressure pain threshold from baseline to week 6 of treatment.|Week 6||||||
823611|NCT01173055|Primary|Pain Threshold at Baseline|The primary outcome parameter is the medium pressure pain threshold at pre-treatment baseline (pressure that evokes a perceived pain intensity of 40-50 out of 100 on a numerical rating scale). Measured in kg/cm^2.|Week 0|||kg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823612|NCT01173120|Secondary|Number of Participants With Positive Anti-abatacept Responses Over Time by Electrochemiluminescence Immunoassay in the ACP Device Substudy|An electrochemiluminescence immunoassay screened sera for drug-specific antibodies; immunocompetition was used to identify specific anti-Abatacept reactivity. CTLA4 and Possibly immunoglobulin (Ig) category=reactivity against extracellular domain of human CTLA4, constant regions of human IgG1, or both (CTLA4Ig; Abatacept molecule). Ig and/or Junction (JNCT)category=reactivity against constant regions and/or hinge region of human IgG1. Drug-induced seropositivity defined as a post-baseline titer higher than Baseline, or any post-baseline positivity if Baseline value was missing. TRT=treatment|ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 85 days post last ACP dose|Immunogenicity Population, defined as all participants who received at least 1 dose of abatacept administered with the ACP who had at least one post Substudy Day 1 immunogenicity result available.||participants|||Number
823613|NCT01173120|Secondary|Number of Participants With Positive Anti-abatacept or Anti-Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte Antigen 4-T Cell (CTLA4-T) Responses Over Time by Enzyme Linked Immunosorbant Assay (ELISA) in the ACP Device Substudy|Serum samples from all treated adult participants with active rheumatoid arthritis were screened for the presence of drug-specific antibodies using ELISA. Immunogenicity was defined as the presence of a positive anti-abatacept or anti-CTLA4 antibody.|ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 28 days post last ACP dose|Immunogenicity Population, defined as all participants who received at least 1 dose of abatacept administered with the ACP who had at least one post Substudy Day 1 immunogenicity result available.||participants|||Number
823614|NCT01173120|Primary|Mean Temperature Over Time in the ACP Device Substudy||ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 7 days post last ACP dose.|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of SC abatacept administered via the ACP.||degrees Celsius||Standard Deviation|Mean
823615|NCT01173120|Primary|Mean Heart Rate Over Time in the ACP Device Substudy||ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 7 days post last ACP dose.|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of SC abatacept administered via the ACP.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
823616|NCT01173120|Primary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) Over Time in the ACP Device Substudy||ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 7 days post last ACP dose.|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of SC abatacept administered via the ACP.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823617|NCT01173120|Primary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) Over Time in the ACP Device Substudy||ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 7 days post last ACP dose.|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of SC abatacept administered via the ACP.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823618|NCT01173120|Primary|Number of Participants With Other Chemistry and Urinalysis Laboratories Meeting MA Criteria in the ACP Device Substudy|MA criteria: serum glucose (Glu): <65 mg/dL/>220 mg/dL;fasting serum Glu: <0.8* LLN/>1.5*ULN,or if BL<LLN then use 0.8*BL or >ULN,or if BL>ULN then use >2.0*BL or <LLN;total protein: <0.9*LLN/>1.1*ULN,or if BL<LLN then use <0.9*BL or >UNL,or if BL>UNL then use >1.1*BL or <LLN; albumin: <0.9*LLN,or if BL<LLN then use <0.75 BL;uric acid: >1.5*ULN,or if BL>ULN then use >2*BL. Urinalysis (Urine protein,urine Glu,urine blood,leukocyte esterase,Red Blood Cells [RBCs], White Blood Cells [WBCs]):Use ≥2 when BL value missing or when pre-dose=0 or 0.5; use ≥3 when pre-dose=1, use ≥4 when pre-dose=2 or 3|ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 7 days post last ACP dose.|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of SC abatacept administered via the ACP.||participants|||Number
823691|NCT01175395|Secondary|To Determine the Number of Retreatments With Lucentis in Eyes Initially Treated With 20089 TA and Lucentis|Because of the combination - 20089/Lucentis - treatment, patients may not require monthly Lucentis injections as is the current standard of care practice for AMD.|30 to 360 days|||retreatments||Full Range|Median
823619|NCT01173120|Primary|Number of Participants With Electrolyte Laboratories Meeting MA Criteria in the ACP Device Substudy|Marked abnormality criteria: Sodium (Na): <0.95*LLN/ >1.05*ULN, or if BL<LLN then use <0.95* BL or >ULN, or if BL>ULN then use>1.05* BL or <LLN; potassium (K): <0.9* LLN/>1.1*ULN, or if BL<LLN then use <0.9* BL or >ULN, or if BL>ULN then use>1.1* BL or <LLN; (Cl): <0.9* LLN/>1.1* ULN, or if BL<LLN then use <0.9* BL or >ULN, or if BL>ULN then use>1.1* BL or <LLN; calcium (Ca): <0.8* LLN/>1.2* ULN, or if BL<LLN then use <0.75* BL or >ULN, or if BL>ULN then use>1.25* BL or <LLN; phosphorous (P): <0.75* LLN/ >1.25* ULN, or if BL<LLN then use 0.67* BL or >ULN, or if BL>ULN then use>1.33* BL or <LLN|ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 7 days post last ACP dose.|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of SC abatacept administered via the ACP.||participants|||Number
823620|NCT01173120|Primary|Number of Participants With Liver Function Laboratories Meeting MA Criteria in the ACP Device Substudy|Marked abnormality criteria: Alkaline phosphatase (ALP): >2* ULN, or if BL>ULN then use >3* BL; aspartate aminotransferase (AST): >3* ULN, or if BL>ULN then use >4* BL; alanine aminotransferase (ALT): >3* ULN, or if BL>ULN then use >4* BL; G-Glutamyl transferase (GGT): >2* ULN, or if BL>ULN then use >3* BL; Bilirubin: >2* ULN, or if BL>ULN then use >4* BL; blood urea nitrogen (BUN): >2* BL; creatinine: >1.5* BL|ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 7 days post last ACP dose.|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of SC abatacept administered via the ACP.||participants|||Number
823621|NCT01173120|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Results in Hematology Meeting the Criteria for Marked Abnormality in the ACP Device Substudy|BL=baseline; LLN lower limit of normal; ULN=upper limit of normal. Marked abnormality criteria: Hemoglobin: >3 g/dL decrease from BL; Hematocrit: <0.75*BL; Erythrocytes: <0.75*BL; Platelets: <0.67*LLN/>1.5*ULN, or if BL <LLN, use 0.5*BL/<100,000 mm^3; Leukocytes: <0.75*LLN/ >1.25*ULN, or if BL<LLN, use <0.8*BL/>ULN, or if BL>ULN, use >1.2*BL/<LLN; neutrophils+bands: <1.0*10^3 c/uL; eosinophils: >0.750*10^3 c/uL; basophils: >400 mm^3; monocytes: >2000 mm^3; lymphocytes: <0.750*10^3 c/uL/ >7.50*10^3 c/uL.|ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 7 days post last ACP dose.|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of SC abatacept administered via the ACP.||participants|||Number
823622|NCT01173120|Primary|Number of Participants With AEs of Special Interest in the ACP Device Substudy|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a preexisting medical condition which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. AEs of special interest are those AEs that may be associated with the use of immunomodulatory drugs including all infections, local injection reactions (prespecified), and systemic injection reactions (within 24 hours of dosing).|ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to 1st dose of non-ACP SC abatacept (administered once participants switched back to main study). For participants discontinuing both studies: Day 1 of ACP dosing to 56 days post last ACP dose|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous abatacept administered via the ACP.||participants|||Number
823623|NCT01173120|Secondary|Minimum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmin) of Abatacept Over Time in the ACP Device Substudy|Trough levels of abatacept were evaluated based upon serum samples. Day 1 pharmacokinetics were based on exposure to the pre-filled syringes and did not reflect abatacept exposure via the ACP device.|Days 1, 29, 57, 85, 169, and 253 of ACP substudy|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of SC abatacept administered via the ACP. Trough concentrations in participants who discontinued from the substudy were not summarized descriptively, but were included in the concentration listings.||ug/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
823624|NCT01173120|Primary|Number of Participants With Death, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Treatment-related SAEs, SAEs Leading to Discontinuation, Adverse Events (AEs), Treatment-related AEs, and AEs Leading to Discontinuation|An AE is any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. An SAE is any unfavorable medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency or abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Treatment-related=possibly, probably, or certainly related to and of unknown relationship to study treatment.|ACP substudy Day 1 to last substudy assessment occurring prior to the 1st dose of non-ACP subcutaneous (SC) abatacept, assessed up to 12 months|As-Treated Population, defined as all participants enrolled in ACP substudy who received at least 1 dose of SC abatacept administered via the ACP.||participants|||Number
823625|NCT01175148|Primary|Cummalative Incidence of Grade 2 to 4 Acute Graft vs Host Diesease (GVHD) at Day 100 Post Transplant in HSCT Recipients|Cummalative incidence of grade 2 to 4 acute Graft vs Host Diesease (GVHD) at day 100 post transplant will be will be histologically confirmed and graded in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Recipients|100 days post transplant|Only the Recipients were analyzed for the outcome measurements.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823650|NCT01175226|Primary|Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey-21 (WURSS-21) Questionnaire|Daily Change in WURSS-21 Severity Score Averaged over Days 2 to 4. The Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey-21 (WURSS-21) Questionnaire is an evaluative illness-specific outcomes instrument designed to assess the severity of cold symptoms and the impact of the common cold (range 0-140), with higher scores indicating more symptoms and functional impairment.|Days 2-4|Intent-to-Treat Infected (ITT-I) Population - all randomized subjects who had a PCR positive result for rhinovirus from nasal swab on Days 1, 3, 5 and 7 with at least 1 post-baseline measurement of efficacy.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823651|NCT01175317|Secondary|Average Intraoperative CO2 Gap|"The CO2 gap (difference arterial pCO2 and pCO2 of the stomach lumen) reflects global intestinal perfusion status and is measured every 15 minutes intraoperatively and every 60 minutes during the first 8 hours postoperatively.
Intraoperative measurements were averaged per individual patient, producing the average intraoperative CO2 gap."|Average intraoperative CO2 gap|||kPa||Standard Deviation|Mean
823652|NCT01175317|Primary|Peak Value of I-FABP|"Intestinal-Fatty Acid Binding Protein (a marker of intestinal damage) is measured in plasma.
The primary outcome measure is the difference in peak values of I-FABP between the control group and the intervention group."|1 hour postoperatively|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823653|NCT01175343|Secondary|Impact of RO49097 on Ascitic Fluid Circulating Tumor Cells|Impact of RO49097 on ascitic fluid circulating tumor cells.|Up to 2 years|Data were not collected.|||||
823654|NCT01175343|Secondary|Expression of Notch Biomarkers in Advanced Platinum Resistant Ovarian, Fallopian, and Primary Peritoneal Cancers.|An exploratory analysis for potential predictive biomarkers was performed on archival, paraffin-embedded tumor tissue for components of the Notch Pathway: Jagged-1 and NICD. The percentage of positive cells were scored into four categories: 0 (0%), 1 (1-33%), 2 (34-66%), and 3 (67-100%). The product of the intensity and percentage scores was used as the final score and classified as negative (0-4) or positive (5-9).|Up to 2 years|25 patients were assessed for Jagged-1 expression. 17 patients that were evaluable for response were assessed for NICD expression.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823655|NCT01175343|Secondary|Frequency and Severity of Adverse Events|Tabulated using counts and proportions detailing frequently occurring, serious and severe events of interest.|Up to 2 years|Adverse events analyzed include all serious adverse events (SAEs), and other (non-serious) treatment-related adverse events.There are 21 SAEs and 72 other (non-serious) adverse events.||Adverse Events|Adverse Events||Count of Units
823656|NCT01175343|Secondary|Overall Survival|Summary statistics, such as mean, median, counts and proportion, used to summarize the patients. Survival estimates computed using Kaplan-Meier method. Potential association between variables measured using Pearson correlation coefficients, chi-square tests, one- or two-sample t-tests or logistic regression analyses as appropriate. Non-parametric tests such as Spearman correlation coefficients, Fisher’s exact tests and Wilcoxon rank sum tests may be substituted if necessary. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals will be constructed and selected results illustrated using figures and plots.|Up to 2 years|40 patients are evaluable for response.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823657|NCT01175343|Secondary|CA125 Response Rate (GCIG Criteria)|"The CA-125 response rate is defined as the proportion of patients with a Gynecological Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) CA-125 response.
CA-125 response is defined as the moment CA-125 is reduced by 50% from the last pre-treatment level prior to start of therapy. The response must be confirmed and maintained with a consecutive CA-125 for at least 28 days."|Time from start of treatment to time of disease progression or death from any cause, whichever came first, assessed up to 2 years|There are 40 patients evaluable for response.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823658|NCT01175343|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|"Response was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1).
Evaluation of Target Lesions:
Complete response (CR) - disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm.
Partial response (PR) - at least 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.
Evaluation of Non-Target Lesions:
Complete response (CR) - disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. All lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size (<10 mm short axis)."|Time from start of treatment to time of disease progression or death from any cause, whichever came first, assessed up to 2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
823659|NCT01175343|Primary|Four Cycle Progression-free Survival Rate|"Defined as the proportion of the study population that has not had tumor progression (symptomatic, RECIST progression, CA-125 progression) or died at the completion of the cycle four mark.
RECIST criteria for progressive disease (PD) in target lesions: >= 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5mm. The appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression. In non-target lesions: Appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.
CA-125 PD is based on the progressive serial elevation of serum CA-125 according to:
A) elevated CA-125 pretreatment & normalization of CA-125 or C) CA-125 in normal range pretreatment: CA-125 >= 2x ULN on 2 occasions.
B) elevated CA-125 pretreatment that never normalizes: CA-125 >= 2x nadir value on 2 occasions"|84 days (4 courses)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
823660|NCT01175356|Secondary|Incidence of Unacceptable Toxicity and Sinusoidal Obstruction Syndrome (SOS), Assessed by Common Terminology Criteria (CTV)v.4.0 for Toxicity Assessment and Grading for I-MIBG|Number of patients who had an unacceptable toxicity or experienced SOS. Unacceptable toxicity was defined as CTC Grade 4-5 Pulmonary/Respiratory.|Up to 6 weeks after course 5 of induction|Includes patients who received 131I-MIBG therapy.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823661|NCT01175356|Primary|Percentage of MIBG Avid Patients Treated With MIBG Labeled With Iodine-131 and Bu/Mel Chemotherapy|Number of MIBG avid patients who receive 131I-MIBG and Bu/Mel divided by the number of patients evaluable for the feasibility of MIBG and Bu/Mel consolidation endpoint x 100%.|Up to day -6 of conditioning|Includes patients who met criteria to receive 131I-MIBG but went off protocol therapy before receiving a dose assignment, but excludes patients that could not receive 131I-MIBG therapy due to lack of an open treatment slot. The definition of receiving Bu/Mel conditioning is receiving the first dose of planned Busulfan on Day -6 of conditioning.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825990|NCT01195090|Primary|Mean Change in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (A1C)|A1C change from baseline to 24 weeks|24 weeks|An intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was used to assess efficacy.||percentage of Hb||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823662|NCT01175356|Primary|Percentage of MIBG Avid Patients Treated With Meta-iodobenxylguanide (MIBG) Labeled With Iodine-131|Number of MIBG avid patients who receive 131I-MIBG divided by the number of patients evaluable for the feasibility of MIBG endpoint x 100%.|Up to 6 weeks after course 5 of induction|Includes patients who met criteria to receive 131I-MIBG but went off protocol therapy before receiving a dose assignment, but excludes patients that could not continue onto 131I-MIBG therapy due to lack of an open treatment slot. The definition of receiving MIBG labeled with iodine-131 is receiving 131I-MIBG.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823663|NCT01175369|Secondary|Additional Asthma Morbidity Outcomes|We will look at additional asthma morbidity outcomes including symptom nights, days needing rescue medications, functional severity, days absent from school, and quality of life.|1-9 months (Monthly Follow-up assessments)||||||
823664|NCT01175369|Secondary|Cost Effectiveness of the Intervention|Cost-effectiveness will examine the net program costs to the number of symptom-free days gained. Benefits will be described as the net difference in medical and productivity costs between children in the treatment and control groups.|approximately 9 months (length of school year)||||||
823665|NCT01175369|Secondary|Cotinine Level|To test the effectiveness of the environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) reduction portion of the study, we will compare baseline cotinine values to 2 month (for smoke exposed participants) and final follow-up assessments (for all participants).|2 month and approximately 9 month (end of school year) follow-up assessments||||||
823666|NCT01175369|Primary|Number of Symptom Free Days|The primary outcome variable is the average number of symptom free days over 2 weeks assessed during peak asthma season (data collected during November, December, January and February during the school year).|Average Symptom Free Days, over 2 weeks, during peak asthma season (November-February)|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823667|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS) From Baseline to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Change from Baseline to 12 weeks on the International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS) to measure urinary symptoms related to BPH. The I-PSS is based on the answers to seven questions concerning urinary symptoms and one question concerning quality of life. Each question concerning urinary symptoms allows the patient to choose one out of six answers indicating increasing severity of the particular symptom. The answers are assigned points from 0 to 5. The total score can therefore range from 0 to 35 (asymptomatic to very symptomatic).|From Baseline to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823668|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) From Baseline to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Change from baseline to 12 weeks on the OAB-q to measure symptom bother and condition-specific health-related quality of life. This questionnaire asks about how much you have been bothered by selected bladder symptoms during the past 4 weeks. Scale ranges from 8 to 48 with higher scores indicating a greater degree of bother.|From Baseline to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823669|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Urinary Incontinence Episodes From Baseline to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed by subjects prior to randomization and following each phase of treatment will be used to calculate changes in frequency of urination|From Baseline to 12 weeks|||voids per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
823670|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Urgency Score From Baseline to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed by subjects prior to randomization and following each phase of treatment will be used to calculate changes in frequency of urgency associated with each void and incontinent episode using the Indevus Urgency Severity Scale (IUSS). IUSS asks patients about the degree of urgency, as meant to describe the urge to urinate. Patients are asked to rate the degree of urgency and its impact on the completion of activity or tasks during the time that the urgency sensation is present and before reaching the toilet for a toilet void. Four distinct, subjective degrees of urgency severity were identified, including 1) no sensation of urgency, 2) awareness of urgency but easily tolerated, 3) urgency that is somewhat uncomfortable and 4) extreme urgency discomfort.|From Baseline to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823671|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Nocturia Measured From Baseline to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed by subjects prior to randomization and following each phase of treatment will be used to calculate changes in the frequency nocturia|From Baseline to 12 weeks|||voids per night||Standard Deviation|Mean
823672|NCT01175382|Secondary|How Bothersome Were Side Effects? 12 Week Report|Ordinal Rating regarding how bothersome side effects were|12 weeks post randomization|Sample sizes reported for analysis differs from the sample size in the Participant Flow Module for Outcomes in patient satisfaction, perception of improvement and bothersome side effects due to patients, either not completing the form or non-response to the questions, although they still enrolled in the study (applies for both 6 &12 week analysis).||Participants|||Count of Participants
823673|NCT01175382|Secondary|Satisfaction With Progress at 12 Weeks|Patient global ratings of satisfaction using the validated Patient Satisfaction Question.|12 weeks post randomization|Sample sizes reported for analysis differs from the sample size in the Participant Flow Module for Outcomes in patient satisfaction, perception of improvement and bothersome side effects due to patients, either not completing the form or non-response to the questions, although they still enrolled in the study (applies for both 6 &12 week analysis).||Participants|||Count of Participants
823674|NCT01175382|Secondary|Patient Perception of Improvement at 12 Weeks|Patient global ratings of improvement using the validated Estimated Percent Improvement and Global Perception of Improvement.|12 weeks post randomization|Sample sizes reported for analysis differs from the sample size in the Participant Flow Module for Outcomes in patient satisfaction, perception of improvement and bothersome side effects due to patients, either not completing the form or non-response to the questions, although they still enrolled in the study (applies for both 6 &12 week analysis).||Participants|||Count of Participants
823675|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) From 6 to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Change from 6 weeks to 12 weeks on the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) to measure urinary symptoms related to BPH.The I-PSS is based on the answers to seven questions concerning urinary symptoms and one question concerning quality of life. Each question concerning urinary symptoms allows the patient to choose one out of six answers indicating increasing severity of the particular symptom. The answers are assigned points from 0 to 5. The total score can therefore range from 0 to 35 (asymptomatic to very symptomatic).|Change from 6 weeks to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823676|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) From 6 to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Change from 6 weeks to 12 weeks on the OAB-q to measure symptom bother and condition-specific health-related quality of life. This questionnaire asks about how much you have been bothered by selected bladder symptoms during the past 4 weeks. Scale ranges from 8 to 48 with higher scores indicating a greater degree of bother.|Change from 6 week to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823677|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Nocturia From 6 Weeks to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed by subjects prior to randomization and following each phase of treatment will be used to calculate changes in frequency of nocturia|Change from 6 weeks to 12 weeks|||Voids per night||Standard Deviation|Mean
823678|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Urinary Incontinence From 6 Weeks to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed by subjects prior to randomization and following each phase of treatment will be used to calculate changes in frequency of incontinence episodes.|Change from 6 weeks to 12 weeks|||Episodes per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
823679|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Urgency Score From 6 Weeks to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed by subjects prior to randomization and following each phase of treatment will be used to calculate changes in urgency associated with each void and incontinent episode using the Indevus Urgency Severity Scale (IUSS). IUSS asks patients about the degree of urgency, as meant to describe the urge to urinate. Patients are asked to rate the degree of urgency and its impact on the completion of activity or tasks during the time that the urgency sensation is present and before reaching the toilet for a toilet void. Four distinct, subjective degrees of urgency severity were identified, including 1) no sensation of urgency, 2) awareness of urgency but easily tolerated, 3) urgency that is somewhat uncomfortable and 4) extreme urgency discomfort.|Change from 6 weeks to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823680|NCT01175382|Secondary|How Bothersome Were Side Effects? 6 Week Report|Ordinal Rating regarding how bothersome side effects were|From Baseline to 6 weeks|Sample sizes reported for analysis differs from the sample size in the Participant Flow Module for Outcomes in patient satisfaction, perception of improvement and bothersome side effects due to patients, either not completing the form or non-response to the questions, although they still enrolled in the study (applies for both 6 &12 week analysis).||Participants|||Count of Participants
823681|NCT01175382|Secondary|Patient Perceptions of Improvement|Patient global ratings of improvement using the validated Estimated Percent Improvement and Global Perception of Improvement|From Baseline to 6 Weeks|Sample sizes reported for analysis differs from the sample size in the Participant Flow Module for Outcomes in patient satisfaction, perception of improvement and bothersome side effects due to patients, either not completing the form or non-response to the questions, although they still enrolled in the study (applies for both 6 &12 week analysis).||Participants|||Count of Participants
823682|NCT01175382|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction|Patient global ratings of satisfaction using the validated Patient Satisfaction Question|From Baseline to 6 Weeks|Sample sizes reported for analysis differs from the sample size in the Participant Flow Module for Outcomes in patient satisfaction, perception of improvement and bothersome side effects due to patients, either not completing the form or non-response to the questions, although they still enrolled in the study (applies for both 6 &12 week analysis).||Participants|||Count of Participants
823683|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS) From Baseline to 6 Weeks. (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Change from baseline to 6 weeks on the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) to measure urinary symptoms related to benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH). The I-PSS is based on the answers to seven questions concerning urinary symptoms and one question concerning quality of life. Each question concerning urinary symptoms allows the patient to choose one out of six answers indicating increasing severity of the particular symptom. The answers are assigned points from 0 to 5. The total score can therefore range from 0 to 35 (asymptomatic to very symptomatic).|From Baseline to 6 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823684|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) From Baseline to 6 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Change from baseline on the OAB-q to measure symptom bother and condition-specific health-related quality of life. This questionnaire asks about how much you have been bothered by selected bladder symptoms during the past 4 weeks. Scale ranges from 8 to 48 with higher scores indicating a greater degree of bother.|From Baseline to 6 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823685|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Nocturia From Baseline to 6 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed prior to randomization and following each phase of treatment will be used to calculate changes in frequency of nocturia.|From Baseline to 6 Weeks|||voids per night||Standard Deviation|Mean
823686|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Urinary Incontinence From Baseline to 6 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed prior to randomization and following each phase of treatment will be used to calculate changes in frequency of incontinence episodes.|From Baseline to 6 Weeks|||episodes per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
823687|NCT01175382|Secondary|Change in Urgency From Baseline to 6 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed prior to randomization and following each phase of treatment will be used to calculate changes in urgency associated with each void and incontinent episode using the Indevus Urgency Severity Scale (IUSS). IUSS asks patients about the degree of urgency, as meant to describe the urge to urinate. Patients are asked to rate the degree of urgency and its impact on the completion of activity or tasks during the time that the urgency sensation is present and before reaching the toilet for a toilet void. Four distinct, subjective degrees of urgency severity were identified, including 1) no sensation of urgency, 2) awareness of urgency but easily tolerated, 3) urgency that is somewhat uncomfortable and 4) extreme urgency discomfort.|From Baseline to 6 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823688|NCT01175382|Primary|Change in Frequency of Urination From Baseline to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed by subjects prior to randomization and following the second phase of treatment were used to calculate changes in frequency of urination|Baseline to 12 weeks|||Voids per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
823689|NCT01175382|Primary|Change in Frequency of Urination From 6 Weeks to 12 Weeks (Last Observation Carried Forward)|Bladder diaries completed by subjects prior to randomization and following each phase of treatment were used to calculate changes in frequency of urination.|Change from 6 weeks to 12 weeks|||Voids per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
823692|NCT01175395|Primary|To Assess the Safety & Tolerability of 20089 TA (6.9 mg or 13.8 mg) When Used Adjunctively With Lucentis 0.5 mg in Subjects With Sub-foveal Neovascular AMD|"The primary objective is to assess the ocular safety of 20089 TA (6.9 mg or 13.8 mg)treatment in combination with Lucentis.
The ocular safety endpoints to be assessed include the number of participants with ocular Adverse Events such as: evidence of endophthalmitis, uveitis, ocular hemorrhage, retinal tear or detachment to be assessed during ophthalmic examinations. Elevated IOP as measured by an applanation tonometer at every visit."|360 Days|||Number-participants with adverse events|||Number
823693|NCT01175434|Secondary|Feasibility and Acceptability|We will conduct interviews with parents and school nurses to evaluate whether this new program is feasible and acceptable among this population.|one year||||||
823694|NCT01175434|Secondary|Cost Effectiveness|We will evaluate the cost effectiveness to implement and sustain the web-based system in schools. We will review the cost of the intervention using three main categories of costs; programmatic costs (costs of initiating and running the program), productivity costs, and medical costs estimated at the individual child level.|one year||||||
823695|NCT01175434|Primary|Average Number of Symptom-free Days Over 14 Days; (Symptom-free Days Are Averaged Over 4 Bi-monthly Follow-ups)|The primary outcome is asthma morbidity between groups. We will measure asthma morbidity by looking at the average number of symptom-free days, over 2 weeks, at each bi-monthly follow-up time point over the school year. Number of days without asthma symptoms will be reported by the child's caregiver.|Average number of days, over 2 weeks, throughout the school year|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823696|NCT01175473|Secondary|Percentages of Patients by Ranges of Oxyntomodulin Levels|Percentage of patients with oxyntomodulin level less than or equal to (<=) limit of detection (LOD), above limit of quantification (LOQ) and between LOD and LOQ were reported. The LOD and LOQ values for oxyntomodulin were 70 and 200 picogram per milliliter (pg/mL) respectively.|0.5 (8:00 clock time; prior to standardized breakfast), 2.5, 4.5 hours on Day -1 (baseline), 0.5 (prior to standardized breakfast), 2.5, 4.5 hours post study drug administration on Day 28|PD population. Here, 'n' signifies patients with oxyntomodulin assessment at the specified time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
823697|NCT01175473|Secondary|Change From Time-matched Baseline in Obestatin Concentration at Day 28|Change was calculated by subtracting time-matched baseline value from Day 28 value. Baseline value was the Day -1 time-matched obestatin assessment.|0.5 (8:00 clock time; prior to standardized breakfast), 2.5, 4.5 hours on Day -1 (baseline), 0.5 (prior to standardized breakfast), 2.5, 4.5 hours post study drug administration on Day 28|PD population.||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
823698|NCT01175473|Secondary|Change From Time-matched Baseline in Peptide YY3-36 (PYY3-36) Concentration at Day 28|Change was calculated by subtracting time-matched baseline value from Day 28 value. Baseline value was the Day -1 time-matched PYY-36 assessment.|0.5 (8:00 clock time; prior to standardized breakfast), 2.5, 4.5 hours on Day -1 (baseline), 0.5 (prior to standardized breakfast), 2.5, 4.5 hours post study drug administration on Day 28|PD population.||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
823699|NCT01175473|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Day 29|Change = HbA1c value at Day 29 (24 hours post-dose on Day 28) minus HbA1c value at baseline (pre-dose [Hour 0] on Day 1).|Pre-dose (Hour 0) on Day 1 and 29 (that is, 24 hours post-dose on Day 28)|PD population. Here, number of patients analyzed = patients with post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||percentage of hemoglobin||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823700|NCT01175473|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon AUC(0:30-4:30h) at Day 28|The area under the glucagon concentration time curve (AUC0:30-4:30h) was calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule from time of breakfast start (30 minutes after study drug administration [time: 0.5 hours] on Day 28) to 4 hours after breakfast start (time: 4.5 hours) and corrected by subtracting pre-breakfast glucagon concentration (time: 0.5 hours). Glucagon AUC0:30-4:30h on Day -1 was the baseline. Change in glucagon AUC0:30-4:30h = glucagon AUC0:30-4:30h on Day 28 minus glucagon AUC0:30-4:30h on Day -1.|0.5 (8:00 clock time; prior to standardized breakfast), 1, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours on Day -1 (baseline), 0.5 (prior to standardized breakfast), 1, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours post study drug administration on Day 28|PD population.||h*pg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823701|NCT01175473|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-Peptide AUC(0:30-4:30h) at Day 28|The area under the C-peptide concentration time curve (AUC0:30-4:30h) was calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule from time of breakfast start (30 minutes after study drug administration [time: 0.5 hours] on Day 28) to 4 hours after breakfast start (time: 4.5 hours) and corrected by subtracting pre-breakfast C-peptide concentration (time: 0.5 hours). C-peptide AUC0:30-4:30h on Day -1 was the baseline. Change in C-peptide AUC0:30-4:30h = C-peptide AUC0:30-4:30h on Day 28 minus C-peptide AUC0:30-4:30h on Day -1.|0.5 (8:00 clock time; prior to standardized breakfast), 1, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours on Day -1 (baseline), 0.5 (prior to standardized breakfast), 1, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours post study drug administration on Day 28|PD population.||h*ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823702|NCT01175473|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin AUC(0:30-4:30h) at Day 28|The area under the insulin concentration time curve (AUC0:30-4:30h) was calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule from time of breakfast start (30 minutes after study drug administration [time: 0.5 hours] on Day 28) to 4 hours after breakfast start (time: 4.5 hours) and corrected by subtracting pre-breakfast insulin concentration (time: 0.5 hours). Insulin AUC0:30-4:30h on Day -1 was the baseline. Change in insulin AUC0:30-4:30h = insulin AUC0:30-4:30h on Day 28 minus insulin AUC0:30-4:30h on Day -1.|0.5 (8:00 clock time; prior to standardized breakfast), 1, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours on Day -1 (baseline), 0.5 (prior to standardized breakfast), 1, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours post study drug administration on Day 28|PD population.||hour*micro international unit/milliliter||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823703|NCT01175473|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pro-insulin AUC(0:30-4:30h) at Day 28|The area under the pro-insulin concentration time curve (AUC0:30-4:30h) was calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule from time of breakfast start (30 minutes after study drug administration [time: 0.5 hours] on Day 28) to 4 hours after breakfast start (time: 4.5 hours) and corrected by subtracting pre-breakfast pro-insulin concentration (time: 0.5 hours). Pro-insulin AUC0:30-4:30h on Day -1 was the baseline. Change in pro-insulin AUC0:30-4:30h = pro-insulin AUC0:30-4:30h on Day 28 minus pro-insulin AUC0:30-4:30h on Day -1.|0.5 (8:00 clock time; prior to standardized breakfast), 1, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours on Day -1 (baseline), 0.5 (prior to standardized breakfast), 1, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours post study drug administration on Day 28|PD population.||hour*micro international unit/milliliter||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823704|NCT01175473|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Postprandial Plasma Glucose (PPG) Excursion at Day 28|PPG excursion was determined on Day -1 (Baseline) and 28 as the maximum change in PPG from time of breakfast start (time: 0.5 hours) until 4 hours later subtracted from pre-meal plasma concentration.|0.5 (8:00 clock time; prior to standardized breakfast), 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours on Day -1 (baseline), 0.5 (prior to standardized breakfast), 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours post study drug administration on Day 28|PD population.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823705|NCT01175473|Primary|Change From Baseline in Area Under the Plasma Glucose Concentration Curve From Time 0.5 Hours to 4.5 Hours (GLU-AUC0:30-4:30h) at Day 28|The area under the plasma glucose concentration time curve (GLU-AUC0:30-4:30h) was calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule from time of breakfast start (30 minutes after study drug administration [time: 0.5 hours] on Day 28) to 4 hours after breakfast start (time: 4.5 hours) and corrected by subtracting pre-breakfast plasma glucose concentration (time: 0.5 hours). GLU-AUC0:30-4:30h on Day -1 was the baseline. Change in GLU-AUC0:30-4:30h = GLU-AUC0:30-4:30h on Day 28 minus GLU-AUC0:30-4:30h on Day -1.|0.5 (8:00 clock time; prior to standardized breakfast), 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours on Day -1 (baseline), 0.5 (prior to standardized breakfast), 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 hours post study drug administration on Day 28|Pharmacodynamic (PD) population (modified intent-to-treat [mITT] population) included all randomized patients, who received at least 1 dose of lixisenatide or liraglutide, and had both a baseline assessment and at least 1 post-baseline assessment of any pharmacodynamic variable, irrespective of compliance with the study protocol and procedures.||h*mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823706|NCT01175590|Secondary|Individual Clinical Outcomes - Bulbar Injection|Bulbar conjunctival injection measured as normal, mild, moderate or severe|At day 11 (Vist 3)|Baseline-Designated Study Eye (Modified Intent-to- Treat Population)||eyes|Participants||Number
823707|NCT01175590|Secondary|Individual Clinical Outcomes - Bulbar Injection|Bulbar conjunctival injection measured as normal, mild, moderate or severe|At day 8 (Vist 2)|Baseline-Designated Study Eye (Modified Intent-to- Treat Population)||eyes|Participants||Number
823708|NCT01175590|Secondary|Individual Clinical Outcomes - Bulbar Injection|Bulbar conjunctival injection measured as normal, mild, moderate or severe|At day 1 (Vist 1)|Baseline-Designated Study Eye (Modified Intent-to- Treat Population)||eyes|Participants||Number
823709|NCT01175590|Secondary|Individual Clinical Outcomes - Ocular Discharge|ocular conjunctival discharge measured as absent, mild, moderate or severe|At day 11 (Vist 3)|Baseline-Designated Study Eye (Modified Intent-to- Treat Population)||eyes|Participants||Number
823710|NCT01175590|Secondary|Individual Clinical Outcomes - Ocular Discharge|ocular conjunctival discharge measured as absent, mild, moderate or severe|At day 8 (Vist 2)|Baseline-Designated Study Eye (Modified Intent-to- Treat Population)||eyes|Participants||Number
823711|NCT01175590|Secondary|Individual Clinical Outcomes - Ocular Discharge|ocular conjunctival discharge measured as absent, mild, moderate or severe|At day 1 (Vist 1)|Baseline-Designated Study Eye (Modified Intent-to- Treat Population)||eyes|Participants||Number
823712|NCT01175590|Secondary|Microbial Outcome With Clinical Resolution|At each follow-up visit for the accepted ocular bacterial species that were present at or above threshold at baseline|Day 11 (Visit 3)|Modified Intent-to-Treat Population||eyes|Participants||Number
823713|NCT01175590|Secondary|Microbial Outcome With Clinical Resolution|At each follow-up visit for the accepted ocular bacterial species that were present at or above threshold at baseline|Day 8 (Visit 2)|Modified Intent-to-Treat Population||eyes|||Number
823714|NCT01175590|Primary|Non-Ocular Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events|Non-Ocular Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events on the Study Eye|7 days|Safety Population||Events|||Number
823715|NCT01175590|Secondary|Microbial Eradication|The absence of all accepted ocular bacterial species that were present at or above threshold at baseline, after seven days of treatment.|Days 11 (Visit 3)|Study Eye, Modified Intent-to-Treat Population||eyes|Participants||Number
823716|NCT01175590|Secondary|Microbial Eradication|The absence of all accepted ocular bacterial species that were present at or above threshold at baseline, after seven days of treatment.|Days 8 (Visit 2)|Study Eye, Modified Intent-to-Treat Population||eyes|Participants||Number
823717|NCT01175590|Secondary|Clinical Resolution|The absence of both conjunctival discharge and bulbar conjunctival injection, after seven days of treatment.|Day 11 (Visit 3)|Study eye for the mITT population||eyes|||Number
823718|NCT01175590|Secondary|Clinical Resolution|The absence of both conjunctival discharge and bulbar conjunctival injection, after seven days of treatment. Participants with non-missing data|Day 8 (Visit 2)|Study eye for the mITT population||eyes|Participants||Number
823719|NCT01175590|Primary|Ocular Treatment Emergent Adverse Events|Ocular Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events on the Study Eye|At each visit - 7 days|Safety Population||Events|Participants||Number
823720|NCT01175668|Secondary|Total Dose of NMS Used||For the duration of treatment, upto 3 months|||mg/kg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823721|NCT01175668|Primary|Length of Treatment With Neonatal Morphine Sulfate||subjects were followed for the duration of treatment, up to 3 months|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
823722|NCT01175707|Secondary|Health Economic Outcomes in United States (US) Dollars for Home Infusion Therapy Per Participant|Total Heartland costs per participant were derived by summing the costs of drug, pharmacy services/supplies and nursing.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||US Dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
823723|NCT01175707|Secondary|Number of Laboratory Assessment Types During Home Infusion Therapy|There may be more than one type of laboratory assessment per participant. A participant is counted only once for each category. Laboratory assessments include serum creatinine, creatine phosphokinase (CPK), and vancomycin trough|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Assessments|||Number
823724|NCT01175707|Secondary|Mean Number of Laboratory Assessments Per Participant During Home Infusion Therapy|Laboratory assessments include serum creatinine, creatine phosphokinase (CPK), and vancomycin trough.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Assessments||Standard Deviation|Mean
823725|NCT01175707|Secondary|Participants Who Had More Than 1 Laboratory Assessment During Home Infusion Therapy|Laboratory assessments include serum creatinine, creatine phosphokinase (CPK), and Vancomycin trough.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Participants|||Number
823726|NCT01175707|Secondary|Number of Intervention Types During Home Infusion Therapy|There may be more than one type of intervention per participant. A participant is counted only once for each category even if they had several instances of a given intervention.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants||participants|||Number
823727|NCT01175707|Secondary|Mean Number of Interventions Per Participant During Home Infusion Therapy|Type of interventions include IV line replacement, IV line removal, IV line placement (post study therapy), incision and drainage (wound), incision and drainage (line), debridement, declotting procedure, and blood draw.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Interventions||Standard Deviation|Mean
823728|NCT01175707|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least 1 Intervention Related to Complicated Skin or Skin Structure Infection (cSSSI) During Home Infusion Therapy|Type of interventions include Intravenous (IV) line replacement, IV line removal, IV line placement (post study therapy), Incision and drainage (wound), Incision and drainage (line), Debridement, Declotting procedure, and Blood draw.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Participants|||Number
823729|NCT01175707|Primary|Percentage of Treatment Goals Met at End of Therapy|"Treatment goals included: 1. Elimination of infection/achieved desired response. 2. Laboratory values were within normal limits or improved indicating progress toward therapy goal. 3. Pain was controlled. 4. Participant did not have catheter site complications (eg,infection, loss of patency). 5. Participant had no knowledge deficits related to administration, equipment use, side effects and waste disposal. 6. Participant had no side effects, adverse drug reactions and/or drug or food interactions. 7. Signs and symptoms of infection did improve or resolve. 8. Participant was compliant with IV therapy 9. Successfully completed therapy without interruptions, unexpected hospitalizations. 10. Participant continued on an oral antibiotic. 11. Participant continued on an IV antibiotic.
Each participant’s percentage was derived from number of treatment goals achieved out of a maximum of 11 goals. Reported percentage below is the average of all participants’ percentage of goals met by arm."|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Percentage of Goals Met||Standard Deviation|Mean
823730|NCT01175707|Primary|Reasons for Pharmacist Consultations During Home Infusion Therapy|The reason for a participant’s pharmacist consultation is presented. There may be more than one reason for pharmacist consultations per participant.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Reason Cited|||Number
823731|NCT01175707|Primary|Reasons for Nurse Visits During Home Infusion Therapy|The reason for a participant’s nurse visit is presented. There may be more than one reason for nurse visits per participant.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Reason Cited|||Number
823732|NCT01175707|Primary|Number of Participants With at Least One Pharmacist Consultation During Home Infusion Therapy||Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Participants|||Number
823733|NCT01175707|Primary|Number of Participants With at Least 1 Unscheduled Nursing Visit During Home Infusion Therapy||Day 1 up to Day 14|Number of Participants Analyzed based on number of participants with at least one nurse visit/pharmacist consultation within each treatment group results in 39 participants analyzed for the Daptomycin ARM group for this Outcome Measure.||Participants|||Number
823734|NCT01175707|Primary|Number of Nurse Visits or Consultations Per Participant for Home Infusion Therapy|Each participant is counted once per category.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Visits or Consultations per Participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
823735|NCT01175707|Primary|Total Antibiotic Therapy Duration (in Days) Per Participant for Home Infusion Therapy|The mean duration in home-infusion antibiotic therapy per participant is presented.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823736|NCT01175707|Primary|Time Spent (Minutes) for Home Infusion Therapy|Each participant is counted once per category. Avg=average; Admin=administer.|Day 1 up to Day 14|All study participants.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
823737|NCT01175798|Secondary|Change in Immune Parameters|Secondary outcomes to be measured include change in peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) profile by flow cytometry at 6 and 12 months, change in ELISPOT-based panel of reactive T cell (PRT) readout at 6 and 12 months, change in PMBC cytokine production in response to toll-like-receptor stimulation at 6 and 12 months, and response to influenza vaccination.|1 year||||||
823738|NCT01175798|Primary|Change in 25OH-Vitamin D Level|Vitamin D deficient study subjects will be randomized to either treatment with 50,000 IU oral 25OH-Vit D weekly or no treatment (standard of care). The primary outcome of change in 25OH-Vit D level will be measured at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months.|1 year|||ng/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823739|NCT01175811|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Severe Hypoglycemic Episode|Severe hypoglycemic episode is defined as any event requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. The percentage of participants experiencing a severe hypoglycemic episode is defined as the 100 multiplied by the number of participants experiencing a severe hypoglycemic episode divided by the number of participants exposed to study drug.|baseline through 24 weeks|Participants in the safety analyses population: participants who had been randomized and received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823740|NCT01175811|Secondary|The Rate of Hypoglycemic Episodes|The rate of hypoglycemic episodes is defined as the mean number of hypoglycemic episodes per 30 days per participant. Hypoglycemic episodes are defined as an event which is associated with reported signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia, and/or a documented blood glucose (BG) concentration of <= 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L).|baseline through 24 weeks|Participants in the safety analyses population: participants who had been randomized and received at least one dose of study drug.||hypoglycemic episode/30 days/participant||Standard Error|Mean
823741|NCT01175811|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hypoglycemic Episodes (Incidence)|Incidence of hypoglycemic episodes is defined as 100 multiplied by the number of participants experiencing a hypoglycemic episode divided by the number of participants exposed to study drug. Hypoglycemic episodes are defined as an event which is associated with reported signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia, and/or a documented blood glucose (BG) concentration of <= 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L).|baseline through 24 weeks|Participants in the safety analyses population: participants who had been randomized and received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
823742|NCT01175811|Secondary|Daily Dose of Insulin Per Kilogram of Body Weight: Total, Basal and Prandial||24 weeks|Participants in the intent-to-treat population: participants who had been randomized and received at least one dose of study drug. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||International Units per kilogram (IU/kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
823780|NCT01175850|Primary|Primary Safety Composite|Primary safety composite is defined as freedom from death through 30 days or target limb major amputation or clinically-driven target vessel revascularization (CD-TVR) within 12 months post index procedure.|12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
823743|NCT01175811|Secondary|Change in Body Mass Index (BMI) From Baseline to 12 and 24 Weeks|Body mass index is an estimate of body fat based on body weight divided by height squared. Least Squares (LS) means are calculated using mixed model repeating measures (MMRM) using change from baseline in BMI at all post baseline measurement as dependent variables, treatment, country, visit and treatment by visit interaction as fixed effects, baseline BMI value as a covariate and participants as a random effect.|Baseline, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks|Participants in the intent-to-treat population: participants who had been randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline BMI data.||kilogram per square meter (kg/m^2)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823744|NCT01175811|Secondary|Daily Dose of Insulin: Total, Basal, and Prandial||24 weeks|Participants in the intent-to-treat population: participants who had been randomized and received at least one dose of study drug. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) principle was used.||International Units (IU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
823745|NCT01175811|Secondary|The 7-point Self-monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Profiles at Baseline, 12 Weeks and 24 Weeks.|7-point Self-monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Profiles are measures of blood glucose taken 7 times a day at the morning pre-meal, morning 2-hours post-meal, midday pre-meal, midday 2-hours post-meal, evening pre-meal, evening 2-hours post-meal, and 0300 hour [3 am]. Each participant took measures on 3 non-consecutive days and the average was calculated for each of the 7 time points. The mean of the 7-point averages was calculated for all the participants at baseline, Weeks 12 and 24.|Baseline, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks|Participants in the intent-to-treat population: participants who had been randomized and received at least one dose of study drug||milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
823746|NCT01175811|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) Less Than or Equal to 6.5% and Less Than or Equal to 7% at 12 Weeks and 24 Weeks|The Percentage of participants achieving a haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) less than or equal (<=) to 6.5% or 7% is defined as 100 multiplied by the number of participants with a HbA1c of the cut-off value (6% or 7%) divided by the number of participants exposed to study drug. Participants with missing HbA1c values at endpoint were treated as not achieving the HbA1c goal.|12 weeks, 24 weeks|Participants in the intent-to-treat population: participants who had been randomized and received at least one dose of study.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823747|NCT01175811|Secondary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to 12 Week Endpoint|Least Squares (LS) means are calculated using mixed model repeating measures (MMRM) with the change from baseline in HbA1c at all post baseline measurement as dependent variables, treatment, country, visit and treatment by visit interaction as fixed effects, baseline HbA1c value as a covariate and participant as a random effect.|Baseline, 12 weeks|Participants in the intent-to-treat population: participants who had been randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and who had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline evaluable HbA1c data.||percent HbA1c||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823748|NCT01175811|Primary|Change in Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) From Baseline to 24 Week Endpoint|Least Squares (LS) means are calculated using mixed model repeating measures (MMRM) with the change from baseline in HbA1c at all post baseline measurement as dependent variables, treatment, country, visit and treatment by visit interaction as fixed effects, baseline HbA1c value as a covariate and participant as a random effect.|Baseline, 24 weeks|Participants in the intent-to-treat population: participants who had been randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline evaluable HbA1c data.||percent HbA1c||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823749|NCT01175824|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to 24 Weeks Endpoint (Intention-to-Treat Population)|The change from baseline to 24 weeks in the percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in plasma. The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM) that included baseline HbA1c concentration as a covariate, treatment, country, week of visit, and treatment-by-week interaction as fixed effects, and participant and error as random effects.|Baseline, 24 weeks|Intention-to-treat population (ITT): randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had HbA1c data at 24 weeks. Participants were analyzed per their assigned treatment arm regardless of the treatment they actually received.||percentage of HbA1c||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823750|NCT01175824|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Severe Hypoglycemic Episodes|The number of participants who had a severe hypoglycemic episode anytime during the study. Severe hypoglycemia was defined as any event in which the participant required the assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions.|Baseline through 24 weeks|Safety population: randomized participants who took at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
823751|NCT01175824|Secondary|The Rate of Hypoglycemic Episodes|The hypoglycemia rate per 30 days was calculated as the number of episodes reported for the interval between visits and during the study divided by the number of days in the given interval and multiplied by 30.|Baseline through 24 weeks|Safety population: randomized participants who took at least 1 dose of study drug.||hypoglycemic episodes per 30 day period||Standard Deviation|Mean
823752|NCT01175824|Secondary|Perceptions About Medications-Diabetes 21 (PAM-D21) Questionnaire Score at 24 Weeks|PAM-D21 is a validated questionnaire consisting of 21 items to assess a participant's perceptions about their diabetes treatment regimens and perceived emotional and physical side-effects. The PAM-D21 consists of 4 subscales: Convenience/Flexibility (items 1 to 3); Perceived Effectiveness (items 4 to 6); Emotional Effects (items 7 to 11); and Physical Effects (items 12 to 21). Item scores range from 1 (none of the time) to 4 (all of the time). Subscale scores were linearly transformed to a 0-100, with higher score corresponds to better perceptions about diabetes medications. The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model that included baseline score as a covariate and treatment, glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) stratum, and country as fixed effects.|24 weeks|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had PAM-D21 scores at 24 weeks.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823781|NCT01175850|Primary|Primary Patency|Primary patency is defined as freedom from clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) or restenosis as determined by duplex ultrasound (DUS) Peak Systolic Velocity Ratio (PSVR) ≤ 2.4.|12 Month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823782|NCT01175902|Secondary|OPP, Period 2|"OPP was calculated according to the following formula:
OPP=(1/3 systolic BP + 2/3 diastolic BP) x 2/3 -IOP, diastolic OPP (DOPP)=diastolic BP-IOP
OPP after treaemt from week 8 to week 12"|12 weeks|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823753|NCT01175824|Secondary|Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (ITSQ) Score at 24 Weeks|ITSQ: validated instrument containing 22 items which are measured on a 7-point scale: 1 (no bother at all) to 7 (a tremendous bother) used to assess insulin treatment satisfaction. Items are divided into 5 domains: Inconvenience of Regimen (5 items: domain score range 5 to 35), Lifestyle Flexibility (3 items: domain score range 3 to 21), Glycemic Control (3 items: domain score range 3 to 21), Hypoglycemic Control (5 items: domain score range 5 to 35), Insulin Delivery Device (6 items: domain score range 6 to 42) lower scores reflect better outcome. ITSQ Total Overall Score ranged from 22 to 154. Raw domain scores transformed on 0-100 scale, where transformed domain score = 100×[(7-raw domain score)/6]. Higher scores indicate better treatment satisfaction. Least squares (LS) mean estimated from analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model that included baseline score as covariate and treatment, glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) stratum, and country as fixed effects.|24 weeks|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had ITSQ scores at 24 weeks. Last observation carried forward (LOCF).||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823754|NCT01175824|Secondary|The Number of Participants With a Hypoglycemic Episodes (Incidence)|A hypoglycemic episode was defined as an event associated with 1) reported signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia, and/or 2) a documented blood glucose (BG) concentration of <= 70 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL, 3.9 millimoles per liter (mmol/L)].|Baseline through 24 weeks|Safety population: randomized participants who took at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
823755|NCT01175824|Secondary|Change in Weight From Baseline to 12 Weeks and 24 Weeks|The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM) that included baseline weight as a covariate, treatment, country, baseline glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) stratification level, week of visit, and the treatment-by-week interaction as fixed effects, and participant and error as random effects.|Baseline, 12 weeks, 24 weeks|Safety population: randomized participants who took at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable body weight data at the specified time points.||kilograms (kg)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823756|NCT01175824|Secondary|Daily Insulin Dose: Total, Basal, and Prandial at 12 Weeks and 24 Weeks||12 weeks, 24 weeks|Intention-to-treat population (ITT): randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had dosing data at the specified time points. Participants were analyzed per their assigned treatment arm regardless of the treatment they actually received.||international units (IU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
823757|NCT01175824|Secondary|Glycemic Variability From the 7-point Self-Monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Profiles at 12 Weeks and 24 Weeks|The 7-point SMBG profile was calculated as the average blood glucose concentration across the 7 pre-specified time points in a day that was then averaged over 3 non-consecutive days in the 2 weeks prior to the 12 week visit and 24 week visit. Glycemic variability was calculated as the standard deviation of the 7-point SMBG profiles. Standard deviation was first calculated for each day and then averaged over 3 non-consecutive days for each visit. The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from mixed-effects model with repeated measures that included the baseline value of the variable as a covariate, treatment, country, baseline glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)stratification level, week of visit, and treatment-by-week interaction as fixed effects, and participant and error as random effects.|12 weeks, 24 weeks|Intention-to-treat population (ITT): randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had SMBG glycemic variability data at the specified time points. Participants were analyzed per their assigned treatment arm regardless of the treatment they actually received.||millimoles/liter (mmol/L)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823758|NCT01175824|Secondary|7-point Self-Monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Profiles at 12 Weeks and 24 Weeks|7-point Self-monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Profiles are measures of blood glucose taken 7 times a day at the morning pre-meal, morning 2-hours post-meal, midday pre-meal, midday 2-hours post-meal, evening pre-meal, evening 2-hours post-meal, and 0300 hour [3 am]. Each participant took measures on 3 non-consecutive days and the average was calculated for each of the 7 time points. The mean of the 7-point averages was calculated for all the participants at baseline, Weeks 12 and 24. The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from mixed-effects model with repeated measures that included the baseline value of the variable as a covariate, treatment, country, baseline glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)stratification level, week of visit, and treatment-by-week interaction as fixed effects, and participant and error as random effects.|12 weeks, 24 weeks|Intention-to-treat population (ITT): randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had SMBG data at the specified time points. Participants were analyzed per their assigned treatment arm regardless of the treatment they actually received.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823759|NCT01175824|Secondary|Change in the Fasting Plasma Glucose Concentration From Baseline to 12 Weeks and 24 Weeks|The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM) that included baseline fasting plasma glucose value as a covariate, treatment, country, baseline HbA1c stratification level, week of visit, and treatment-by-week interaction as fixed effects, and participant and error as random effects.|Baseline, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks|Intention-to-treat population (ITT): randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had fasting plasma glucose concentration data at the specified time points. Participants were analyzed per their assigned treatment arm regardless of the treatment they actually received.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823760|NCT01175824|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieve a Target HbA1c Concentration of Less Than 7% or Less Than or Equal to 6.5% at 24 Weeks||24 weeks|Intention-to-treat population (ITT): randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had HbA1c data at 24 weeks. Participants were analyzed per their assigned treatment arm regardless of the treatment they actually received.||participants|||Number
823761|NCT01175824|Secondary|Change in the HbA1c Concentration From Baseline to 12 Weeks Endpoint|The change from baseline to 12 weeks in the percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in plasma. The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM) that included baseline HbA1c concentration as a covariate, treatment, country, week of visit, and treatment-by-week interaction as fixed effects, and participant and error as random effects.|Baseline, 12 weeks|Intention-to-treat population (ITT): randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had HbA1c data at the 12 weeks. Participants were analyzed per their assigned treatment arm regardless of the treatment they actually received.||percentage of HbA1c||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823762|NCT01175824|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to 24 Weeks Endpoint (Per Protocol Population)|The change from baseline to 24 weeks in the percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in plasma. The least squares (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM) that included baseline HbA1c concentration as a covariate, treatment, country, week of visit, and treatment-by-week interaction as fixed effects, and participant and error as random effects.|Baseline, 24 weeks|Per protocol population: randomized participants with the exception of participants who did not complete Week 24 visit, received study drug different from their randomized study treatment, violated any of the inclusion, exclusion, or discontinuation criteria, or were significantly noncompliant.||percentage of HbA1c||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823763|NCT01175850|Secondary|Days of Hospitalization Due to the Index Lesion|Days of hospitalization from procedure through 12 month.|12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823764|NCT01175850|Secondary|Clinical Success|Clinical success is defined as procedural success without procedural complications (death, stroke, major target limb amputation, thrombosis of the target lesion, or target vessel revascularization (TVR)) prior to discharge.|Day 1|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331)||Percentage of participants|||Number
823765|NCT01175850|Secondary|Procedural Success|Procedural success is defined as obtainment of ≤30% residual stenosis by visual estimate (with or without stenting)|Day 1|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331)||Percentage of participants|||Number
823766|NCT01175850|Secondary|Device Success|Device success is defined as successful delivery, balloon inflation and deflation and retrieval of the intact study device without burst below rated burst pressure (RBP).|Day 1|Total number of devices used in the ITT population (n=331).||Percentage of devices|Devices||Number
823767|NCT01175850|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Walking Capacity Assessment by Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ) at 12 Months|"Walking capacity assessment by WIQ at 1 year compared to baseline. WIQ is a quality of life questionnaire that was specifically designed to assess the degree of impairment experienced by patients with claudication.
Clinical outcomes were assessed by patients responses to question 1A. Question 1A is specific for calf or buttocks claudication and is used to create a summary score for analysis. Question 1A is expressed on a scale of 0% (unable to perform because of severe claudication) to 100% (no impairment)."|12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823768|NCT01175850|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Assessment by EuroQol Group 5-Dimension Self Report Questionnaire (EQ5D) at Month 12|"Quality of life assessment by EQ5D at 1 year compared to baseline. EQ5D is a standardised measure of health status and economic appraisal. The EQ5D consists of the EQ5D descriptive system which comprises the following variables for the 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: (1) no problems, (2) some problems, (3) extreme problems. A complex algorithm that took individual dimensions and generated an overall score was used.
EQ5D health state is used in the algorithm to calculate an overall score where - 0.109 = 'worst possible outcome' and 1.000 = 'best possible outcome'."|Baseline to 12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823769|NCT01175850|Secondary|Duplex-defined Binary Restenosis (Peak Systolic Velocity Ratio >3.4).||12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Percentage of particpants|||Number
823770|NCT01175850|Secondary|Duplex-defined Binary Restenosis (Peak Systolic Velocity Ratio (PSVR) >2.4).|Duplex ultrasound measurement that measures the peak systolic velocity of blood (cm/sec) within a lesion divided by the peak velocity of blood (cm/sec) proximal to the lesion.|12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823771|NCT01175850|Secondary|Secondary Sustained Clinical Improvement|Freedom from target limb amputation and increase in Rutherford class.|12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||percentage of participants|||Number
823772|NCT01175850|Secondary|Primary Sustained Clinical Improvement|Freedom from target limb amputation, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and increase in Rutherford class. Rutherford classification is a clinical staging system that is used to describe peripheral arterial disease.|12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||percentage of particpants|||Number
823773|NCT01175850|Secondary|Thrombosis at the Target Lesion||12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823774|NCT01175850|Secondary|Major Target Limb Amputation||12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||percentage of amputations|||Number
823775|NCT01175850|Secondary|Time to First Clinically Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (CD-TLR)|Clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) is defined as any re-intervention within the target lesion due to symptoms or drop of ankle brachial index (ABI) of ≥20% or >0.15 when compared to post-procedure baseline.|12 month|Includes all subjects who experienced a CD-TLR.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823776|NCT01175850|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR)||12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823777|NCT01175850|Secondary|Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR)||12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823778|NCT01175850|Secondary|All-cause Death||12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||percentage of participants|||Number
823779|NCT01175850|Secondary|Major Adverse Events (MAE) Composite|Major Adverse Events (MAE) composite defined as all-cause death, clinically-driven target vessel revascularization (CD-TVR), major target limb amputation, thrombosis at the target lesion site|12 month|Intention-to-Treat (ITT) (n=331) that excludes subjects who did not have evaluable data at the reporting timeframe.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823783|NCT01175902|Secondary|Ocular Perfusion Pressure (OPP), Period 1|"OPP was calculated according to the following formula:
OPP=(1/3 systolic BP + 2/3 diastolic BP) x 2/3 -IOP, diastolic OPP (DOPP)=diastolic BP-IOP"|4 weeks|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823788|NCT01176032|Secondary|Effectivness of Aliskiren in Controlling Blood Pressure Compare to Losartan in Terms of Rate of Use of Added Antihypertensive Rescue Drugs|The rate of use of first and second antihypertensive rescue drugs added was also assessed at all visits after week 2. The rescue drug at week 10 and 18 for those patients not achieving the required BP was amlodipine, Patients who did not achieve the required BP at week 26 were treated with hydrochlorothiazide|Baseline, Week 10,18,26|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment||Patients|||Number
823789|NCT01176032|Secondary|Effectivness of Aliskiren in Controlling Blood Pressure Compare to Losartan in Terms of Patients With SBP < 140 mmHg and DBP < 90 mmHg Compared to Baseline|The control rate was defined as the proportion of patients with SBP < 140 mmHg and DBP < 90 mmHg compared to baseline|Week10,18,26,36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment||Patients|||Number
823790|NCT01176032|Secondary|Effectivness of Aliskiren in Controlling Blood Pressure Compare to Losartan in Terms of Patients With Satisfactory Response Rate|Response rate was defined as the proportion of patients with a satisfactory systolic BP response (SBP < 140 mmHg or reduction of ≥ 10 mmHg compared to baseline) and a satisfactory diastolic BP response (DBP < 90 mmHg or reduction of ≥ 5 mmHg compared to baseline)|Baseline, Week10,18,26,36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment||Patients|||Number
823791|NCT01176032|Secondary|Effectivness of Aliskiren in Controlling Blood Pressure Compare to Losartan in Terms of Reduction in Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|The mean systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) readings for the aliskiren and losartan treatment groups, the difference in these values between the two groups and the comparison of post-baseline vs. baseline values|Baseline, Week 10,18,26,36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823792|NCT01176032|Secondary|Effectivness of Aliskiren in Controlling Blood Pressure Compare to Losartan in Terms of Reduction in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|The mean systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) readings for the aliskiren and losartan treatment groups, the difference in these values between the two groups and the comparison of post-baseline vs. baseline values|Baseline, Week 10,18,26,36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823793|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline of LVMI in Combination of Aliskiren With Amlodipine|Echocardiogram was performed at week 1 and at week 36. Reduction in LVMI is defined as the difference between the LVMI at the final visit and the baseline LVMI|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment||g/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823794|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular (LV) Function, Left Atrial Volume (Biplane Simpson's Method) in Combination of Aliskiren With Amlodipine|Reductions in the following measurements were analysed between the baseline visit and the final visit: left atrial volume (biplane Simpson's method)|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||cm3/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823795|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular (LV) Function, LA (Left Atrium) Diameter in Combination of Aliskiren With Amlodipine|Reductions in the following measurements were analysed between the baseline visit and the final visit: LA diameter|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||mm/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823796|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular (LV) Function, LV Ejection Fraction (Teicholz), and LV Ejection Fraction (Simpson) in Combination of Aliskiren With Amlodipine|Reductions in the following measurements were analysed between the baseline visit and the final visit: LV ejection fraction (Teicholz), and LV ejection fraction (Simpson)|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
823797|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular (LV) Function, LV End-diastolic Volume by Simpson's Rule, and LV End-systolic Volume by Simpson's Rule in Combination of Aliskiren With Amlodipine|Reductions in the following measurements were analysed between the baseline visit and the final visit: LV end-diastolic volume by Simpson's rule, and LV end-systolic volume by Simpson's rule|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
823798|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Biomarker Such as Aldosterone (Aldo) in Heart Disease in Combination of Aliskiren With Amlodipine|The plasma level of biomarker parameter plasma aldosterone used to measure improvement in left ventricular (LV) function or reduction in left ventricular mass index (LVMI).|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||ng/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
823820|NCT01176240|Secondary|306B Efficacy: Change in OHSA Item 1 From Baseline to Week 8 (Visit 7)|OHSA item 1 scale range: 0 (none) -10 (worst), likert scale. Change: score at Week 8 minus score at baseline. A negative score indicates an improvement in symptoms during the double-blind randomized phase relative to value at baseline.|Baseline, Week 8|The analysis was defined as those patients who completed 8 week of dosing and completed the visit 7 (8 week) efficacy evaluation. Patients who did not have week 8 efficacy data were excluded from the analysis. Of note, 2 patients completed the 8 week double blind study, but did not complete the efficacy evaluations at the final visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823799|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Combination of Aliskiren With Amlodipine in Biomarkers of Heart Disease.|The plasma level of biomarkers parameters used to measure improvement in left ventricular (LV) function or reduction in left ventricular mass index (LVMI). The following biomarkers were analyzed: cardiotrophin-1 (CT-1), matrix metalloproteinase-1 (MMP-1); tissue inhibitor of MMPs (TIMP-1); annexin A5 (AnxA5); N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP)|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
823800|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Reduction of Left Ventricular Mass Index (LVMI)|Echocardiogram was performed at week 1 and at week 36. Reduction in LVMI is defined as the difference between the LVMI at the final visit and the baseline LVMI|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment||g/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823801|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular (LV) Function, Left Atrial Volume (Biplane Simpson's Method)|Reductions in the following measurements were analysed between the baseline visit and the final visit: left atrial volume (biplane Simpson's method)|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||cm3/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823802|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular (LV) Function, LA (Left Atrium) Diameter|Reductions in the following measurements were analysed between the baseline visit and the final visit: LA diameter|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||mm/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823803|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular (LV) Function, LV Ejection Fraction (Teicholz), and LV Ejection Fraction (Simpson)|Reductions in the following measurements were analysed between the baseline visit and the final visit: LV ejection fraction (Teicholz), and LV ejection fraction (Simpson)|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
823804|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular (LV) Function, LV End-diastolic Volume by Simpson's Rule, and LV End-systolic Volume by Simpson's Rule|Reductions in the following measurements were analysed between the baseline visit and the final visit: LV end-diastolic volume by Simpson's rule, and LV end-systolic volume by Simpson's rule|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
823805|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Biomarker Such as Aldosterone (Aldo) in Heart Disease|The plasma level of biomarker parameter (aldosterone (Aldo)) used to measure improvement in left ventricular (LV) function or reduction in left ventricular mass index (LVMI)|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||ng/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
823806|NCT01176032|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Biomarkers in Heart Disease|The plasma level of biomarkers parameters used to measure improvement in left ventricular (LV) function or reduction in left ventricular mass index (LVMI). The following biomarkers were analyzed: cardiotrophin-1 (CT-1), matrix metalloproteinase-1 (MMP-1); tissue inhibitor of MMPs (TIMP-1); annexin A5 (AnxA5); N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP)|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment. Patients with both baseline and week 36 assessment were included in this analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
823807|NCT01176032|Primary|Change From Baseline in C-terminal Propeptide of Procollagen Type I (PICP)|PICP is a measure of blood concentration of procollagen I carboxy-terminal propeptide (PICP), a peptide released from the myocardium when procollagen is converted to type I collagen. This biomarker exhibits good specificity and sensitivity for identifying myocardial fibrosis in hypertension.|Baseline, Week 36|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients included in the safety population who had a baseline assessment of the primary variable and at least one post-baseline assessment.||ug/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
823808|NCT01176058|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Died||Baseline to Day 52|Safety population: All participants who have received at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
823809|NCT01176058|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Response at Follow-Up|Microbiological Success implies Eradication: culture negative for all Candida species present at baseline (documented), or culture data N/A (presumed). Microbiological Failure implies (1) Persistence: baseline Candida species present in repeat cultures (documented), or culture data N/A (presumed); (2) Recurrence: baseline Candida species isolated following eradication (documented), or culture data N/A (presumed); or (3) Indeterminate: culture data N/A (loss to follow-up or death that was not due to candidiasis or candidemia).|Post treatment follow-up visit (Up to Day 52)|MITT population. N=number of participants with evaluable data; participants with missing or indeterminate data are set to Failure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823810|NCT01176058|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Response at EOT|Microbiological Success implies Eradication: culture negative for all Candida species present at baseline (documented), or culture data N/A (presumed). Microbiological Failure implies (1) Persistence: baseline Candida species present in repeat cultures (documented), or culture data N/A (presumed); (2) Recurrence: baseline Candida species isolated following eradication (documented), or culture data N/A (presumed); or (3) Indeterminate: culture data N/A (loss to follow-up or death that was not due to candidiasis or candidemia).|End of Treatment (Up to Day 42)|MITT population. N=number of participants with evaluable data; participants with missing or indeterminate data are set to Failure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823811|NCT01176058|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Response at EOIT|Microbiological Success implies Eradication: culture negative for all Candida species present at baseline (documented), or culture data N/A (presumed). Microbiological Failure implies (1) Persistence: baseline Candida species present in repeat cultures (documented), or culture data N/A (presumed); (2) Recurrence: baseline Candida species isolated following eradication (documented), or culture data N/A (presumed); or (3) Indeterminate: culture data N/A (loss to follow-up or death that was not due to candidiasis or candidemia).|End of Intravenous Treatment (Up to Day 42)|MITT population. N=number of participants with evaluable data; participants with missing or indeterminate data are set Failure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823812|NCT01176058|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Follow-Up|Clinical response included success and failure. Success included Cure (resolution of signs and symptoms of the Candida infection) and Improvement (significant, but incomplete resolution of signs and symptoms of Candida infection). Failure defined as No significant improvement in signs and symptoms or death due to Candida infection or circumstances prevented an evaluation from being made.|Post treatment follow-up visit (Up to Day 52)|MITT population. N=number of participants with evaluable data; participants with missing data set to Failure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823813|NCT01176058|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at EOT|Clinical response included success and failure. Success included Cure (resolution of signs and symptoms of the Candida infection) and Improvement (significant, but incomplete resolution of signs and symptoms of Candida infection). Failure defined as No significant improvement in signs and symptoms or death due to Candida infection or circumstances prevented an evaluation from being made.|End of Treatment (Up to Day 42)|MITT population. N=number of participants with evaluable data; participants with missing data set to Failure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823814|NCT01176058|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at EOIT|Clinical response included success and failure. Success included Cure (resolution of signs and symptoms of the Candida infection) and Improvement (significant, but incomplete resolution of signs and symptoms of Candida infection). Failure defined as No significant improvement in signs and symptoms or death due to Candida infection or circumstances prevented an evaluation from being made.|End of Intravenous Treatment (Up to Day 42)|MITT population. N=number of participants with evaluable data; participants with missing data set to Failure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823815|NCT01176058|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Global Response at End of Treatment (EOT)|"Global response included clinical and microbiological success or failure. Success - clinical success (defined as the resolution or significant improvement in signs and symptoms of invasive candidiasis) and microbiological success (defined as the eradication of Candida species present at baseline, as determined on follow-up culture, or the presumed eradication, if culture data were N/A for a participant with a successful clinical response).
Failure – Any case that did not meet the criteria for success."|End of Treatment (Up to Day 42)|MITT population. N=number of participants with evaluable data; participants with missing or indeterminate data set to Failure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823816|NCT01176058|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Global Response at End of Intravenous Treatment (EOIT)|"Global response included clinical and microbiological success or failure. Success - clinical success (defined as the resolution or significant improvement in signs and symptoms of invasive candidiasis) and microbiological success (defined as the eradication of Candida species present at baseline, as determined on follow-up culture, or the presumed eradication, if culture data were not available [N/A] for a participant with a successful clinical response).
Failure – Any case that did not meet the criteria for success."|End of Intravenous Treatment (Up to Day 42)|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) population: participants had confirmed diagnosis of candidemia or other forms of invasive candidiasis, received at least 1 dose of study medication treatment, had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy evaluation. N=number of participants with evaluable data; participants with missing or indeterminate data set to Failure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823817|NCT01176240|Post-Hoc|Study 306A: Change in Dizziness/Lightheadedness/Feeling Faint/Feeling Like You Might Black Out (OHSA Item 1) From Baseline to Week 1|OHSA item 1 scale range: 0 (none) -10 (worst), likert scale. Change: score at Week 1 minus score at baseline. A negative score indicates improvement in symptoms during the double-blind randomized phase relative to value at baseline.|Baseline, Week 1|Last observation carried forward was used to impute missing values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823818|NCT01176240|Secondary|306B Efficacy: Change in Orthostatic Hypotension Questionnaire Score (OHQ)|"The relative mean change in Orthostatic Hypotension Questionnaire (OHQ) composite score from baseline to end of study. The OHQ is the average of two sub-scales, the Orthostatic Hypotension Symptom Assessment Scale (OHSA) and the Orthostatic Hypotension Daily Activities Scale (OHDAS). Each asks the patient to rate their symptoms or disease impact over the past week. The OHSA sub-scale is the average of six items: 1) Dizziness, lightheadedness, feeling faint or feeling like you might black out; 2) Problems with vision; 3) Weakness; 4) Fatigue; 5) Trouble concentrating; and 6) Head/neck discomfort. The OHDAS sub-scale is the average of four items: 1) Standing for a short time; 2) Standing for a long time; 3) Walking for a short time; and 4) Walking for a long time. Each item is scored on a Likert scale from 0 to 10, with 10 being the most severe.
For the change from baseline, negative numbers represent improvement from baseline in OHQ score."|Baseline, Week 8|The primary analysis was defined as those patients who completed 8 week of dosing and completed the visit 7 (8 week) efficacy evaluation. Patients who did not have week 8 efficacy data were excluded from the analysis. Of note, 2 patients completed the 8 week double blind study, but did not complete the efficacy evaluations at the final visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823819|NCT01176240|Secondary|306B Efficacy: Rate of Patient Reported Falls|The average number of patient reported falls per week.|up to 10 weeks|The primary analysis was defined as those patients who completed 1 week of dosing at the identified optimal dose of study medication and completed the visit 4 (1 week) efficacy evaluation. Patients who did not have week 1 efficacy data were excluded from the analysis.||falls per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
823898|NCT01177293|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 and 168 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
823821|NCT01176240|Secondary|306B Efficacy: Change in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) Measurements Post Standing From Baseline to Week 1|Measure: Lowest standing systolic blood pressure reading of immediately post standing and 3 minutes post standing. Change: standing systolic blood pressure at Week 1 (Visit 4) minus standing systolic blood pressure at baseline. A positive score indicates an improvement in standing systolic blood pressure during the double-blind randomized phase relative to value at baseline.|Baseline, Week 1|One droxidopa patient did not complete the standing blood pressure measurements of the orthostatic standing test at visit 4 (one week of stable dosing)||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823822|NCT01176240|Secondary|306B Efficacy: Change in OHSA Item 1 From Baseline to Week 4 (Visit 6)|OHSA item 1 scale range: 0 (none) -10 (worst), likert scale. Change: score at Week 4 minus score at baseline. A negative score indicates an improvement in symptoms during the double-blind randomized phase relative to value at baseline.|Baseline, Week4|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823823|NCT01176240|Secondary|306B Efficacy: Change in OHSA Item 1 From Baseline to Week 2 (Visit 5)|OHSA item 1 scale range: 0 (none) -10 (worst), likert scale. Change: score at Week 2 minus score at baseline. A negative score indicates an improvement in symptoms during the double-blind randomized phase relative to value at baseline.|Baseline, Week2|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823824|NCT01176240|Post-Hoc|306A Efficacy: Patient Reported Falls|The total number of patient reported falls during the 8 week treatment period|Baseline, Week 8|||total falls per group|||Number
823825|NCT01176240|Primary|306B Efficacy: Change in Dizziness/Lightheadedness/Feeling Faint/Feeling Like You Might Black Out (OHSA Item 1)|OHSA item 1 scale range: 0 (none) -10 (worst), likert scale. Change: score at Week 1 minus score at baseline. A negative score indicates an improvement in symptoms during the double-blind randomized phase relative to value at baseline.|Baseline, Week1|The primary analysis was defined as those patients who completed 1 week of dosing at the identified optimal dose of study medication and completed the visit 4 (1 week) efficacy evaluation. Patients who did not have week 1 efficacy data were excluded from the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823826|NCT01176240|Primary|306A Efficacy: Change in Orthostatic Hypotension Questionnaire Score (OHQ)|"The primary efficacy endpoint for 306A is the relative mean change in Orthostatic Hypotension Questionnaire (OHQ) composite score from baseline to end of study. The OHQ is the average of two sub-scales, the Orthostatic Hypotension Symptom Assessment Scale (OHSA) and the Orthostatic Hypotension Daily Activities Scale (OHDAS). Each asks the patient to rate their symptoms or disease impact over the past week. The OHSA sub-scale is the average of six items: 1) Dizziness, lightheadedness, feeling faint or feeling like you might black out; 2) Problems with vision; 3) Weakness; 4) Fatigue; 5) Trouble concentrating; and 6) Head/neck discomfort. The OHDAS sub-scale is the average of four items: 1) Standing for a short time; 2) Standing for a long time; 3) Walking for a short time; and 4) Walking for a long time. Each item is scored on a Likert scale from 0 to 10, with 10 being the most severe.
For the change from baseline, negative numbers represent improvement from baseline in OHQ score."|Baseline, Week 8|LOCF was used to impute values for patients who did not have an end of study visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823827|NCT01176292|Primary|Clinical Flexion|Maximum, passive flexion and extension of the operated knee joint in the supine position will be measured and recorded using a long goniometer.|1 year|||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
823828|NCT01176292|Primary|Clinical Flexion|Maximum, passive flexion and extension of the operated knee joint in the supine position will be measured and recorded using a long goniometer.|4-6 months|||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
823829|NCT01176292|Secondary|Oxford Knee Score|A patient reported questionnaire for assessing the outcome of knee surgery. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 48. A higher score represents a better outcome.|1 year|||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823830|NCT01176292|Secondary|Knee Society Score|A standard clinical evaluation system for reporting results for patients undergoing total knee replacement. The minimum score is 0 and the highest score is 100. A higher score represents a better outcome.|1 year|||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823831|NCT01176292|Secondary|Radiographic Flexion|Lateral radiographs of the knee will be taken with the patient supine with maximal passive knee flexion. Flexion will then be measured directly from these radiographs.|1 year|||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
823832|NCT01176292|Secondary|Radiographic Flexion|Lateral radiographs of the knee will be taken with the patient supine with maximal passive knee flexion. Flexion will then be measured directly from these radiographs.|preoperative, 4-6 weeks|||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
823833|NCT01176292|Primary|Clinical Flexion|Maximum, passive flexion and extension of the operated knee joint in the supine position will be measured and recorded using a long goniometer.|Preoperative, 4-6 weeks|||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
823834|NCT01176448|Secondary|Visual Analog Scale for Assessing Scar Improvement.|"Visual Analog Scale for assessing scar improvement. 0 : Worsening or no improvement
: 1-25% improvement
: 26-50% improvement
: 51-75% improvement
: 76-100% improvement"|3 months|"With 12 pairs of scars gave a 95% probability to detect a treatment difference at a two sided 0.05 significance level if a significant difference between treatments is 1.5 units (based on a 0
–4 scale as mentioned above). This is based on the assumption that the within-patient standard deviation of the response variable is 0.5 units."||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
823835|NCT01176448|Primary|Safey Data Score Based on Ordinal Ratings of Erythema, Edema, Bleeding, Eschar After Resurfacing|Erythema, edema, bleeding, and eschar after resurfacing were used as indicators of safety. Each was judged based on a 4 point ordinal scale 0=absent, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe.|Day 0, Week1, Month 1|Each scar was divided in half and the halves randomized to either Fractionated Laser treatment or Dermabrasion.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
823836|NCT01176513|Secondary|To Compare the Ability of PET/CT Imaging With GE-148 (18F) Injection to Predict Prostate Malignancy and Distinguish it From Other Pathologies (Inflammation, Hyperplasia, Atrophy, Hemorrhage) With That of T2W MRI, DCE MRI, MR DWI, and MRSI Performed at 3T.|Use of descriptive statistics to compare the ability of the PET/CT imaging and MRI to predict malignancy, based on histopathology as the standard of truth, on a subject basis and per lesion basis.|After GE-148 (18F) Injection administration|Efficacy analyses were not performed because GE Healthcare terminated the study early for administrative reasons.|||||
824768|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|The Composite of ST, All Death, and All MI Rate in Single Lesion Treated Subgroup|The composite of ST, all death, and all MI rate in Patients with single lesion treated during the index procedure|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
823837|NCT01176513|Primary|To Assess the Magnitude of Uptake and Retention of GE-148 (18F) Injection in Malignant Prostate Tumors, Non-malignant Prostate Pathology, and Regions of Normal Prostate Tissue in Subjects With Prostate Cancer, Using PET/CT Imaging.|Quantitative measurements of the level of uptake of GE-148 (18F) Injection into each tissue type (malignant prostate tumors, non-malignant prostate pathology, and regions of normal prostate) calculated as Standardized Uptake Values (SUVs), using histopathology as the standard of truth.|After GE-148 (18F) Injection administration.|Efficacy analyses were not performed because GE Healthcare terminated the study early for administrative reasons.|||||
823838|NCT01176565|Other Pre-specified|Any Serious Adverse Event Within the 90-day Study Period|The complete count of all subjects who experienced any serious adverse events throughout their participation in the trial was included in this tabulation. Adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were assessed by the site investigators for all patients. Potential relatedness to the study treatment was a required reporting element for all adverse events but was not considered in this count. Terminology from the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) and severity criteria from the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v. 4.03) were used as a basis for reporting adverse events. Serious adverse events are defined as being fatal, life-threatening, resulting in hospitalization or prolonged hospitalization, resulting in disability or congenital anomaly, or requiring intervention to prevent permanent impairment or damage and were required to be reported promptly. An Independent Oversight Committee (IOC) reviewed and adjudicated adverse event data.|From randomization through the 90 day visit (90 ± 14 days per protocol window; up to ± 30 days data is used) or until known death, withdrawal, or loss to follow-up.|Patients may have experienced more than one adverse event. This measure is designed to show the total count of any patients who experienced any type of serious adverse event, whether it was felt to be related to the study treatment or not, throughout the duration of their participation in the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823839|NCT01176565|Other Pre-specified|Treatment-related Serious Adverse Event Within 72 Hours of Randomization|Adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were assessed by the site investigators for all patients, including for their potential relatedness to the study treatment. An Independent Oversight Committee (IOC) reviewed and adjudicated all adverse event data. The 72-hours-from-randomization time window was considered the most likely time frame during which treatment-related adverse events or serious adverse events would be observed. Terminology from the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) and severity criteria from the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v. 4.03) were used as a basis for reporting adverse events. Serious adverse events are defined as being fatal, life-threatening, resulting in hospitalization or prolonged hospitalization, resulting in disability or congenital anomaly, or requiring intervention to prevent permanent impairment or damage and were required to be reported promptly.|From randomization through 72 hours (3 days)|Relatedness is defined by the terms unrelated, unlikely, possibly, probably, or definitely related to the study treatment. Results are entered as the count of participants experiencing any serious adverse event within 72 hours of randomization that was determined by the site investigator to possibly or more have relationship to the study treatment.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823840|NCT01176565|Other Pre-specified|Hypotension Within 72 Hours|Hypotension (abnormally low blood pressure) was the most likely adverse event that could be associated with the study treatment, and is the primary basis (risk) on which neurological deterioration or other untoward effects of the study treatment could occur. It is therefore examined as a numerically-measured occurrence in addition to monitoring patients closely for neurological deterioration or other symptoms. Hypotension, when named as an adverse event, was defined as the syndrome of low blood pressure with SBP < 85 mmHg. Instances of hypotension were to be avoided through close monitoring, and administration of fluid bolus for SBP < 110 mmHg. If hypotension did occur, it was to be reversed as quickly as possible through discontinuation of intravenous nicardipine and intravenous fluid administration, which can be accomplished readily in a variety of settings where patients with intracerebral hemorrhage are routinely housed during early hospitalization.|From randomization through 72 hours from randomization|Blood pressure including the potential for hypotension was monitored according to intensive care unit standards for ICH patients during early hospitalization. Blood pressure was monitored more closely during the 24-hour study period and at times when nicardipine (or other/secondary IV antihypertensive medications) were being titrated.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823841|NCT01176565|Other Pre-specified|Neurological Deterioration Within 24 Hours, Defined by a Decrease of 2 or More Points on the GCS Score or an Increase of 4 or More Points on the NIHSS Score From Baseline, Not Related to Sedation or Hypnotic-agent Use and Sustained for at Least 8 Hours.|Neurologic deterioration was measured using two scales. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score measures of level of consciousness in eye, motor, and verbal components. At least one point is given in each category. The scale ranges from 3 to 15, with 3 indicating deep unconsciousness and 15 indicating consciousness is not impaired. The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) quantifies neurologic deficits in 11 categories. Level of consciousness, horizontal eye movement, visual fields, facial palsy, movement in each limb, sensation, language & speech, and extinction or inattention on one side of the body are tested. Scores range from 0 to 42, with 0 indicating normal function and higher scores indicating greater deficit severity. Neurological status was checked per ICU standards through 24 hours, recommended as hourly GCS and full assessment every 2 hours. NIHSS assessment at baseline and 24 +/- 3 hours was pre-specified. Assessments were added for suspected neurological change.|From randomization through the 24-hour treatment period|All subjects were assessed for neurological status regularly. Grid-estimated verbal scoring based on eye and motor scores was used for intubated patients so that GCS scores could be compared over time and was consistent across patients.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823863|NCT01176968|Secondary|Electrocardiogram Q Wave to the End of the S Wave Corresponding to Ventricle Depolarization (QRS) Duration at 6 Months Post-randomization.|Electrocardiogram Q wave to the end of the S wave corresponding to ventricle depolarization (QRS) duration at 6 months post-randomization. The continuous endpoints were assessed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model, fitted with corresponding baseline and treatment. These were analyzed at 6 months based on last observation carried forward (LOCF) and also using all available data up to end of study.|6 months|The FAS using the ITT principle, regardless of compliance with the study drug and the protocol was used.||Milliseconds (msec)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830648|NCT01231841|Secondary|Reduction of VB Repertoire Associated With r-ATG/CsA Combination|We will perform molecular analysis of the TCR repertoire to identify “marker” immunodominant clone specimens using VB typing.|Every 4 weeks||||||
823842|NCT01176565|Secondary|Hematoma Expansion (Number of Patients With Hematoma Expansion of 33% or Greater Between the Baseline and 24 +/- 6 Hours Head CTs, as Measured by the Central Reader for Patients With Readable Scans for Both Time Points Submitted by Data Lock.)|Hematoma expansion as determined by serial CT scans: Hematoma expansion was defined as an increase in the volume of intraparenchymal hemorrhage of 33% or greater as measured by a central imaging analyst who was was unaware of the treatment assignments, clinical findings, and time points of image acquisition. The area of the hematoma was delineated by image analysis software with the use of density thresholds on each slice, followed by manual correction. To ensure accuracy and consistency of the readings, images were coded randomly and independently of subject numbers and manual correction was also done without awareness of treatment assignments, clinical findings, or time points of image acquisition. This data point is defined as being present (hematoma expansion of 33% or more was calculated between the baseline scan hematoma volume and the 24 +/- 6 hours hematoma volume measures at data analysis), meaning that hematoma expansion as defined must have occurred or it was not counted.|From the baseline head CT to the 24 +/- 6 hours from randomization head CT|Participants with readable head CTs at baseline and 24 +/- 6 hours from randomization (submitted before data lock) were analyzed. Hematoma expansion was only recorded as present if ≥ 33% volume increase was calculated. Scans done outside of time window + margin, submitted after data lock, or not readable in standard DICOM format could not be used.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823843|NCT01176565|Secondary|Quality of Life at 90 Days Using EuroQol (EQ) Measures: EQ-5D (EuroQol Five Dimension), Consisting of Standardized EQ-5D-3L (EuroQol Five Dimension, Three-Level) Questionnaire and EQ VAS (EuroQol Visual Analog Scale) Scores|Standardized scales developed by the EuroQol Research Foundation were used as a secondary outcome measure in addition to the mRS scale score. The EQ-5D is a simple, standardized non-disease-specific instrument for describing and valuating health-related quality of life. The EQ-5D-3L questionnaire consists of 5 questions in 5 different domains and allows for responses from 1 (the best outcome) to 3 (the worst outcome) in each of five categories (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Total scores range from 5 to 15, with lower scores indicating better quality of life and a higher score indicating a worse quality of life. A second component of EuroQol outcome measurements is a printed 20 cm visual analogue scale (EQ VAS) that appears somewhat like a thermometer, on which a score from 0 (worst imaginable health state or death) to 100 (best imaginable health state) is marked by the patient (or, when necessary, their proxy) with the scale in view.|90 days (± 14 days per protocol window; up to ± 30 days data is used) from randomization|All available valid data were analyzed. Outcomes collected outside of 90 ± 30 days weren't considered valid. EQ-5D data were missing for 28 patients in the intensive group & for 27 in the standard group. EQ VAS data were missing for 144 patients in the intensive group and for 146 in the standard group.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
823844|NCT01176565|Primary|Death or Disability According to Modified Rankin Scale Score at 90 Days (3 Months) From Randomization|The primary outcome was death or disability, defined by modified Rankin scale (mRS) of 4-6 at 90 days following treatment. The modified Rankin Scale score ranges from 0, indicating no symptoms, to 6, indicating death. A score of 4 indicates moderately severe disability including the inability to walk or attend to one's own bodily needs. A score of 5 indicates severe disability; bedridden, incontinent, and requiring constant nursing care. To score a 3 or lower on the mRS, a person must at least be able to walk without the assistance of another person. We chose the mRS because of its high inter-observer reliability, superiority to other indices, and consistency with previous trials in patients with ICH. Reliability was further increased by use of a structured interview template and by requiring mRS assessors to pass a certification test. Persons conducting the 90-day mRS assessment were to be unaware of the treatment arm or clinical course of the patients they assessed.|90 days (± 14 days per protocol window; up to ± 30 days data is used) from randomization|All subjects were analyzed for known death at any time following randomization. Patients surviving through 90 days (± 14 days per protocol window; data used up to ± 30 days) were assessed for disability using the mRS. Patients not completing the 90-day visit within 30 days of due date aren't included in the death & disability participant counts.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823845|NCT01176773|Secondary|Adverse Events||12 months|Intent-to-treat||percentage of subjects|||Number
823846|NCT01176773|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Attain Their Lip Treatment Goal|"Prior to treatment and in consultation with the Investigator, the subject establishes a realistic lip fullness treatment goal. At follow-up, attainment is assessed as yes or no. The outcome measure is the percentage of subjects responding yes as to whether their pre-established lip fullness treatment goal had been attained."|1-12 months|All subjects who provided a lip fullness goal achievement assessment||percentage of subjects|||Number
823847|NCT01176773|Secondary|Subject Assessment of Appearance and Feel of the Lips Using the Look and Feel Scale|The scale consists of subcategories pertaining to how the subjects perceived aspects of their lips (e.g., softness, smoothness, etc). The outcome measure is the percentage of subjects who scored 0-3 on an 11-point scale, where a lower score on the scale indicates a positive result.|3 months|All subjects with a Look and Feel assessment||percentage of subjects|||Number
823848|NCT01176773|Secondary|Investigator Assessment of Oral Commissures Using the Oral Commissures Severity Scale|Score on 4-point Oral Commissures Severity Scale, where 0 is none and 3 is severe. A decreased score indicates improvement.|12 months|All subjects who were treated in their oral commissures||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823849|NCT01176773|Secondary|Investigator Assessment of Perioral Line Severity Using the Perioral Line Severity Scale|Score on 4-point Perioral Line Severity Scale, where 0 is none and 3 is severe. A decreased score indicates improvement.|12 months|All subjects who were treated for perioral lines||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823850|NCT01176773|Primary|Investigator Assessment of the Subject's Overall Lip Fullness on the 4-point Lip Fullness Scale|The responder rate at 3 months, where a responder was defined as an improvement (increase) on the Lip Fullness Scale of ≥ 1 grade compared with the baseline assessment|3 months|Intent-to-treat||percentage of responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823899|NCT01177293|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the time of the last measurable concentration (AUClast).|0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 and 168 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr*ng/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
823851|NCT01176877|Secondary|To Assess the Impact of an Educational Lecture on Long-term Knowledge Retention About Keloid Scars by Comparing Mean Scores Between Knowledge Assessment Questionnaires Administered Before an Educational Lecture and 3 Months After an Educational Lecture|All subjects completed a written questionnaire to assess knowledge about keloid scars before an educational lecture about keloids, immediately after the educational lecture about keloids, and 3 months after the educational lecture about keloids. This written questionnaire to assess knowledge about keloid scars contained 19 questions related to risk factors for developing keloid scars, keloid scar prevention, and keloid scar treatment. A correct response to a question was awarded 1 point and all correct responses were summed to achieve a total score. Possible total score ranged from 0 to 19. A score of 0 is associated with worse knowledge about keloid scars and a score of 19 is associated with better knowledge about keloid scars.|before and 3 months after a 5 minute educational lecture|Patients enrolled who were available for phone contact 3 months following intervention.||score on a scale||Full Range|Mean
823852|NCT01176877|Primary|To Assess the Impact of an Educational Lecture on Knowledge About Keloid Scars by Comparing Mean Scores Between Knowledge Assessment Questionnaires Administered Before an Educational Lecture and Immediately After an Educational Lecture|All subjects completed a written questionnaire to assess knowledge about keloid scars before an educational lecture about keloids, immediately after the educational lecture about keloids, and 3 months after the educational lecture about keloids. This written questionnaire to assess knowledge about keloid scars contained 19 questions related to risk factors for developing keloid scars, keloid scar prevention, and keloid scar treatment. A correct response to a question was awarded 1 point and all correct responses were summed to achieve a total score. Possible total score ranged from 0 to 19. A score of 0 is associated with worse knowledge about keloid scars and a score of 19 is associated with better knowledge about keloid scars.|immediately before and after a 5 minute educational lecture|||score on a scale||Full Range|Mean
823853|NCT01176955|Primary|Adherence to Study Medication|Adherence will be objectively measured with the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS) cap and the percentage of prescribed doses taken will be reported.|12 weeks|||Percent of prescribed doses taken||Full Range|Median
823854|NCT01176955|Secondary|The Measured Adherence by the MEMS Cap in Relation to the Change (Dynamic Assessment) in the Acne Global Assessment.|All study subjects' objective adherence will be compared to clinical improvement as measured by the Acne Global Assessment.|12 weeks||||||
823855|NCT01176955|Secondary|The Measured Adherence by the MEMS Cap in Relation to the Patient Reported Adherence Via the Internet Survey.|Study subjects' self-reported adherence (in the intervention group, via the weekly internet survey) will be compared to objectively measured adherence via MEMS caps.|12 weeks||||||
823856|NCT01176955|Secondary|The Change (Dynamic Assessment) From Baseline to End of Treatment in Lesion Counts.|Both inflammatory (papules, pustules and nodules) and non-inflammatory (open and closed comedones) acne lesions will be counted by a study investigator. Percentage change from baseline to the final study visit will be calculated.|Baseline to 12 weeks|||percent change in lesion count||Standard Deviation|Mean
823857|NCT01176955|Secondary|The Change (Dynamic Assessment) in the Acne Global Assessment From Baseline to End of Study.|Acne Global Assessment is measured by a study investigator and is an overall assessment of the subject's acne severity, on a 0 (clear) to 5 (very severe) scale.|Baseline to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823858|NCT01176968|Secondary|Change in Serum Level of Biomarker (Interleukin-6) at 6 Months Post-randomization.|Change in serum level of Interleukin-6 at 6 months post-randomization. The continuous endpoint was assessed using ANCOVA model, fitted with corresponding baseline and treatment. It was analyzed at 6 months based on LOCF and also using all available data up to end of study.|6 months|The Biomarker Analysis Set is a subset of FAS subjects who have the biomarker data (ICTP, PINP, PIIINP, Interleukin-6, aldosterone, cortisol, and Galactin 3) available.||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823859|NCT01176968|Secondary|Change in Serum Level of Biomarker (ICTP) at 6 Months Post-randomization.|Change in serum level of ICTP at 6 months post-randomization. The continuous endpoint was assessed using ANCOVA model, fitted with corresponding baseline and treatment. It was analyzed at 6 months based on LOCF and also using all available data up to end of study.|6 months|The Biomarker Analysis Set is a subset of FAS subjects who have the biomarker data (ICTP, PINP, PIIINP, Interleukin-6, aldosterone, cortisol, and Galactin 3) available.||μg/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823860|NCT01176968|Secondary|Change in Serum Levels of Biomarkers (PIIINP, Galectin 3, and PINP) at 6 Months Post-randomization.|Change in serum levels of PIIINP, Galectin 3, and PINP at 6 months post-randomization. The continuous endpoints were assessed using ANCOVA model, fitted with corresponding baseline and treatment. These were analyzed at 6 months based on LOCF and also using all available data up to end of study.|6 months|The Biomarker Analysis Set is a subset of FAS subjects who have the biomarker data (ICTP, PINP, PIIINP, Interleukin-6, aldosterone, cortisol, and Galactin 3) available.||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823861|NCT01176968|Secondary|Change in Serum Levels of Biomarkers (Aldosterone and Cortisol) at 6 Months Post-randomization.|Change in serum levels of aldosterone and cortisol at 6 months post-randomization. The continuous endpoints were assessed using ANCOVA model, fitted with corresponding baseline and treatment. These were analyzed at 6 months based on LOCF and also using all available data up to end of study.|6 months|The Biomarker Analysis Set is a subset of FAS subjects who have the biomarker data (carboxyterminal telopeptide of type I collagen [ICTP], procollagen type I N-terminal peptide [PINP], procollagen type III N-terminal peptide [PIIINP], Interleukin-6, aldosterone, cortisol, and Galactin 3) available.||nmol/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823862|NCT01176968|Secondary|Left Atrial Diameter (LAD) (Recorded on Each Occasion an Echocardiogram is Conducted).|LAD recorded each time an echocardiogram is conducted. The continuous endpoints were assessed using ANCOVA model, fitted with corresponding baseline and treatment. These were analyzed at 6 months based on LOCF and also using all available data up to end of study.|0-24 months|The FAS using the ITT principle, regardless of compliance with the study drug and the protocol was used.||Centimeters (cm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
823873|NCT01177007|Secondary|Safety as Graded by CTCAE Version 3.0|Clinical and biochemical toxicity that were assessed as at least possibly related to treatment were recorded from the day of treatment until protocol exit or death. Toxicities were graded by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v3.0.|12 months|50 participants were assessed for adverse events, with a total of 207 adverse events reported. Two patients had grade 5 toxicities (grade 5 cholecystitis and death), which were attributed to disease progression and were not device-related.||adverse events|Adverse Events||Number
823864|NCT01176968|Secondary|Second or Subsequent Non-fatal Myocardial Infarction (MI).|The occurrence of second or subsequent nonfatal MI. Time-to-event analyses were measured from the date of randomization. A subject who did not experience the endpoint(s) of interest was censored on the last day the subject was confirmed by the investigator to be endpoint-free. The time-to-event distributions were summarized by treatment group using Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative incidence.|0-24 months|The FAS using the ITT principle, regardless of compliance with the study drug and the protocol was used. The efficacy analysis data sets for clinical events included all available study endpoints. Furthermore, only events confirmed by the EAC were used.||Events|||Number
823865|NCT01176968|Secondary|Decision to Provide an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) or Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT).|The decision to provide an ICD or CRT. Time-to-event analyses were measured from the date of randomization. A subject who did not experience the endpoint(s) of interest was censored on the last day the subject was confirmed by the investigator to be endpoint-free. The time-to-event distributions were summarized by treatment group using Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative incidence.|0-24 months|The FAS using the ITT principle, regardless of compliance with the study drug and the protocol was used.||Events|||Number
823866|NCT01176968|Secondary|Brain (B-type) Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) >200 pg/mL or NT-proBNP >450, >900 or >1800 pg/mL for Ages <50 Years, 50-75 Years and >75 Years, Respectively (Recorded 1 Month or Later Post-randomization).|The occurrence of first occurrence of BNP >200 pg/mL or NT-proBNP >450, >900 or >1800 pg/mL for ages <50 years, 50 to 75 years and >75 years, respectively (recorded 28 days or later post-randomization). Time-to-event analyses were measured from the date of randomization. A subject who did not experience the endpoint(s) of interest was censored on the last day the subject was confirmed by the investigator to be endpoint-free. The time-to-event distributions were summarized by treatment group using Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative incidence.|0-24 months|The FAS using the ITT principle, regardless of compliance with the study drug and the protocol was used.||Events|||Number
823867|NCT01176968|Secondary|First Recorded Ejection Fraction (EF) of ≤40% (Recorded 1 Month or Later Post-randomization).|The occurrence of first recorded EF ≤40% (recorded 28 days or later post-randomization). Time-to-event analyses were measured from the date of randomization. A subject who did not experience the endpoint(s) of interest was censored on the last day the subject was confirmed by the investigator to be endpoint-free. The time-to-event distributions were summarized by treatment group using Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative incidence.|0-24 months|The FAS using the ITT principle, regardless of compliance with the study drug and the protocol was used. The efficacy analysis data sets for clinical events included all available study endpoints.||Events|||Number
823868|NCT01176968|Secondary|First and Each Subsequent Episode (After an Event Free Interval of ≥ 48 Hours) of Sustained Ventricular Tachycardia or Ventricular Fibrillation.|The occurrence of first and each subsequent episode (after an event-free interval of ≥ 48 hours) of sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation. Time-to-event analyses were measured from the date of randomization. A subject who did not experience the endpoint(s) of interest was censored on the last day the subject was confirmed by the investigator to be endpoint-free. The time-to-event distributions were summarized by treatment group using Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative incidence.|0-24 months|The FAS using the ITT principle, regardless of compliance with the study drug and the protocol was used. The efficacy analysis data sets for clinical events included all available study endpoints. Furthermore, only events confirmed by the EAC were used.||Events|||Number
823869|NCT01176968|Secondary|Diagnosis of Heart Failure|The occurrence of first diagnosis of heart failure from the date of randomization. Time-to-event analyses were measured from the date of randomization, and a subject who did not experience the endpoint(s) of interest was censored on the last day the subject was confirmed by the investigator to be endpoint-free. The time-to-event distributions were summarized by treatment group using Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative incidence.|0-24 months|The FAS using the ITT principle, regardless of compliance with the study drug and the protocol was used. The efficacy analysis data sets for clinical events included all available study endpoints. Furthermore, only events confirmed by the EAC were used.||Events|||Number
823870|NCT01176968|Secondary|Cardiovascular Mortality|The occurrence of cardiovascular mortality from randomization. Time-to-event analyses were measured from the date of randomization. A subject who did not experience the endpoint(s) of interest was censored on the last day the subject was confirmed by the investigator to be endpoint-free. The time-to-event distributions were summarized by treatment group using Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative incidence.|0-24 months|The FAS using the ITT principle, regardless of compliance with the study drug and the protocol was used. The efficacy analysis data sets for clinical events included all available study endpoints. Furthermore, only events confirmed by the EAC were used.||Events|||Number
823871|NCT01176968|Primary|First Event of Cardiovascular Mortality, Re-hospitalization or Extended Initial Hospital Stay Due to Diagnosis of Heart Failure, Sustained Ventricular Tachycardia or Fibrillation, Ejection Fraction ≤40% or BNP Above Age Adjusted Cut Off|Cardiovascular mortality is defined as any mortality adjudicated as death due to sudden cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), worsening heart failure, cardiac arrhythmia, other cause (such as pulmonary embolism, peripheral arterial disease [PAD], etc.). Hospitalization due to congestive heart failure (CHF) and requires extended hospital stay or frequent visits to emergency room, observation unit or in-patient care, due to CHF as the primary or secondary diagnosis supported by a discharge report or clinical summary for hospitalization as determined by the endpoint adjudication committee (EAC). A composite of time to first event of cardiovascular mortality (CV), re-hospitalization or extended initial hospital stay due to diagnosis of heart failure, sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation, ejection fraction ≤40% after 1 month or BNP >200 pg/mL or NT-proBNP >450 pg/mL (age <50 years); >900 pg/mL (age 50 to 75 years) or >1800 pg/mL (age >75 years) after 1 month.|0-24 months|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) using the intent-to-treat (ITT) principle, regardless of compliance with the study drug and the protocol was used. The efficacy analysis data sets for clinical events included all available study endpoints.||Events|||Number
823872|NCT01177007|Secondary|Mean Radiation Dose Delivered to Total Liver|Therasphere dose calculation was performed using positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging post-procedure to estimate the actual delivered dose of Theraspheres to the liver.|24 hours|Mean radiation doses were calculated for the total cohort of participants and also stratified according to disease type - colorectal cancer, neuroendocrine, and non-CRC/non-NE.||Gray||Standard Deviation|Mean
823874|NCT01177007|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) Rate at 2 Years|"Measured from the date corresponding to initiation of therapy until the date of death due to any cause. At the time of registration, the outcome measure was entered in clinicaltrials.gov as open-ended. At the time of results reporting, this outcome was presented as Up to 2 years. Overall survival was analyzed via Kaplan-Meier methodology with log-rank test using all 50 patients on study and stratified based on disease type. 2-year OS rates were also stratified based on tumor burden."|Up to 2 years|2-year OS rate for all patients (n=50) were analyzed and also stratified based on tumor burden: Patients with tumor burden of 25% or less (n=34) and patients with tumor burden greater than 25% (n=16).||percentage of participants|||Number
823875|NCT01177007|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|"Measured from the date corresponding to initiation of therapy until the date of death due to any cause. At the time of registration, the outcome measure was entered in clinicaltrials.gov as open-ended. Overall survival was analyzed via Kaplan-Meier methodology with log-rank test using all 50 patients on study and stratified based on disease type."|Median follow-up time was 11.41 months (CI: 1.5-33.7)|Median OS for all patients (n=50) were analyzed and also stratified based on disease type: CRC (n=12); NE (n=26); and non-CRC/non-NE (n=12).||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823876|NCT01177007|Secondary|Tumor Response by the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) Criteria|"Efficacy as assessed by radiographic tumor response using EASL criteria at baseline up to 12 months post treatment.
Complete Response (CR): Achieving 100% tumor necrosis of targeted lesions Partial Response (PR): Demonstrating greater than 50% tumor necrosis in targeted lesions Progressive Disease (PD): Reappearance of or increased tumor enhancement greater than 25% in targeted lesions Stable Disease (SD): Not meeting requirements for CR or PR and not demonstrating evidence of progression in targeted lesions."|12 months|RECIST for all applicable patients (n=43) were analyzed and also stratified based on disease type: CRC (n=9); NE (n=22); and non-CRC/non-NE (n=12). 7 out of the 50 patients were not analyzed due to lack of follow-up imaging.||Participants|||Count of Participants
823877|NCT01177007|Secondary|Tumor Response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.0|"Efficacy as assessed by radiographic tumor response using RECIST criteria at baseline, at 4 weeks post treatment, and subsequent 3 month intervals.
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all lesions targeted by Y90 Partial Response (PR): At least 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of lesions targeted by Y90 Progressive Disease (PD): At least 20% increase in sum of LD of lesions targeted by Y90 Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage for PR nor sufficient increase for PD."|12 months|RECIST for all applicable patients (n=43) were analyzed and also stratified based on disease type: CRC (n=9); NE (n=22); and non-CRC/non-NE (n=12).||Participants|||Count of Participants
823878|NCT01177007|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP) of the Treated Lesion(s) According to EASL Criteria|This outcome was not assessed. Instead, the primary outcome of progression-free survival based on RECIST and EASL criteria was assessed and reported.|Evaluated 4 weeks following each TheraSpheres procedure, and at 2-3 month intervals thereafter.|Analysis for TTP was not performed. In lieu of TTP, the PFS based on RECIST and EASL criteria was analyzed.|||||
823879|NCT01177007|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) of the Treated Lesion(s) According to RECIST and EASL Criteria|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from the date of Y-90 radioembolization to date of disease progression or latest follow-up. PFS was analyzed via Kaplan-Meier methodology with log-rank test using all 50 patients on study and stratified based on disease type. RECIST and EASL criteria were used to assess progression with kappa value for intermethod agreement of treatment responses of 0.9.|2 years|Median PFS for all subjects and stratified based on disease type.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823880|NCT01177007|Primary|Time to Progression (TTP) of the Treated Lesion(s) According to RECIST Criteria|This outcome was not assessed. Instead, the primary outcome of progression-free survival based on RECIST and EASL criteria was assessed and reported.|Evaluated 4 weeks following each TheraSpheres procedure, and at 2-3 month intervals thereafter.|These data were not collected. See outcome measure #2.|||||
823881|NCT01177098|Primary|Average Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP) at Each Hour Evaluated at Week 12|Intraocular pressure (IOP) is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. Average eye IOP is the average IOP of both eyes and was evaluated at Week 12 at Hour 0, Hour 2 and Hour 8.|Week 12|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823882|NCT01177098|Primary|Average Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP) at Each Hour Evaluated at Week 6|Intraocular pressure (IOP) is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. Average eye IOP is the average IOP of both eyes and was evaluated at Week 6 at Hour 0, Hour 2 and Hour 8.|Week 6|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823883|NCT01177098|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average Eye IOP at Each Hour Evaluated at Week 12|Intraocular pressure (IOP) is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. Average eye IOP was evaluated at Baseline and Week 12 at Hour 0, Hour 2 and Hour 8. Average eye IOP is defined as the average of the IOP in both eyes. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement).|Baseline, Week 12|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823884|NCT01177098|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Worse Eye IOP at Each Hour Evaluated at Week 12|Intraocular pressure (IOP) is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. IOP was evaluated at Baseline and Week 12 at Hour 0, Hour 2 and Hour 8 in the worse eye, defined as the eye with the worse (higher) IOP at baseline. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement).|Baseline, Week 12|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823885|NCT01177098|Primary|Average Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP) at Each Hour Evaluated at Week 2|Intraocular pressure (IOP) is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. Average eye IOP is the average IOP of both eyes and was evaluated at Week 2 at Hour 0, Hour 2 and Hour 8.|Week 2|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823886|NCT01177098|Primary|Change From Baseline in Worse Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP) at Each Hour Evaluated at Week 12|Intraocular pressure (IOP) is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. IOP was evaluated at Baseline and Week 12 at Hour 0, Hour 2 and Hour 8 in the worse eye, defined as the eye with the worse (higher) IOP at baseline. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement).|Baseline, Week 12|Per-protocol population included randomized participants who did not have a protocol violation that significantly affected the conduct or the results of the trial.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823887|NCT01177228|Primary|Area Under the Drug Effect Time Curve [AUEC(0-last)] as Measured by Inhibition of the MAdCAM-1-Fc Marker|AUEC (0-last) is the area under the drug effect-time curve until the last available time point. Mean percent inhibition over time [AUEC(0-last)] was determined for the MAdCAM-1-Fc marker. MAdCAM-1-Fc is a fusion of human MAdCAM-1 with parts of a mouse monoclonal antibody.|Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 15, 29, 43, 57, 71, 85, 86, 87, 89, 92, 99, 113, 127, 141, 155, 169, 183, 197, 211, 225, 239, and 253|"PD Analysis Set; participants with available data (indicated by n)"||percent inhibition*days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823888|NCT01177228|Primary|Area Under the Drug Effect Time Curve [AUEC(0-last)] as Measured by Inhibition of the ACT-1 Marker|AUEC (0-last) is the area under the drug effect-time curve until the last available time point. Mean percent inhibition over time [AUEC(0-last)] was determined for the Act-1 marker. Act-1 is a mouse antibody similar to vedolizumab that also binds α4β7 integrin.|Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 15, 29, 43, 57, 71, 85, 86, 87, 89, 92, 99, 113, 127, 141, 155, 169, 183, 197, 211, 225, 239, and 253|"PD Analysis Set; participants with available data (indicated by n)"||percent inhibition*days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823889|NCT01177228|Primary|Maximum Drug Effect (Emax) as Measured by Inhibition of the MAdCAM-1-Fc Marker|"The target of vedolizumab is α4β7 integrin, a receptor found on inflammatory immune cells that guides these inflammatory cells to the gut and binds to the mucosal addressin cell adhesion molecule-1 (MAdCAM-1) on gut endothelial cells. The extent of the α4β7 receptor saturation by vedolizumab was assessed using the MAdCAM-1-Fc binding interference assay. MAdCAM-1-Fc is a fusion of human MAdCAM-1 with parts of a mouse monoclonal antibody. The assay measures the percent inhibition of the MAdCAM-1-Fc binding to α4β7 integrin due to the presence of vedolizumab binding.
Emax was calculated on Day 1, Day 85, and based on all available data."|Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 15, 29, 43, 57, 71, 85, 86, 87, 89, 92, 99, 113, 127, 141, 155, 169, 183, 197, 211, 225, 239, and 253|"PD Analysis Set; participants with available data (indicated by n)"||percent inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
823890|NCT01177228|Primary|Maximum Drug Effect (Emax) of Vedolizumab as Measured by Percent Inhibition of the Act-1 Marker|"The target of vedolizumab is α4β7 integrin, a receptor found on inflammatory immune cells that guides these inflammatory cells to the gut and binds to the Mucosal Addressin Cell Adhesion Molecule-1 (MAdCAM-1) on gut endothelial cells. The extent of the α4β7 receptor saturation by vedolizumab was assessed using the Act-1 binding interference assay. Act-1 is a mouse antibody similar to vedolizumab that also binds α4β7 integrin. The assay measures the percent inhibition of the Act-1 due to the presence of vedolizumab binding.
Emax was calculated on Day 1, Day 85 and based on all available data."|Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 15, 29, 43, 57, 71, 85, 86, 87, 89, 92, 99, 113, 127, 141, 155, 169, 183, 197, 211, 225, 239, and 253|"Pharmacodynamic (PD) Analysis Set, defined as all participants for whom there were sufficient data to estimate PD. Analyses only include participants with available data (indicated by n)."||percent inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
823891|NCT01177228|Primary|Terminal Phase Elimination Half-life (t½) of Vedolizumab|Terminal phase elimination half-life (t½) is the time required for half of the drug to be eliminated from the plasma.|Pre-dose through Day 253|PK Analysis Set; participants with available data||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823892|NCT01177228|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve (AUC) for Vedolizumab|"AUC was calculated for 3 time intervals during the study:
AUC (Day 0-14): from administration on Day 0 to last quantifiable concentration on Day 14, selected to capture the AUC following the first dose of vedolizumab until administration of the second dose
AUC(Day 85-99): from administration on Day 85 to last quantifiable concentration on Day 99, selected to assess the amount of drug accumulation with the planned loading regimen by comparing it to AUC(Day 0-14)
AUC(Day 85-141): from the first quantifiable concentration on Day 85 to the last quantifiable concentration on Day 141, selected to assess the drug exposure over an 8-week period"|Days 0-14, Days 85-99, Days 85-141|PK Analysis Set; participants with available data at each time point (indicated by “n”).||day*μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823893|NCT01177228|Primary|Cmin: Minimum Observed Plasma Concentration of Vedolizumab|Minimum observed plasma concentration (Cmin) is the lowest plasma concentration of a drug after administration, obtained directly from the plasma concentration-time curve.|Day 85, prior to and 2, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours after dosing.|PK Analysis Set; participants with available data.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823894|NCT01177228|Primary|Cmax: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration of Vedolizumab on Days 1 and 85|Maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) is the peak plasma concentration of a drug after administration, obtained directly from the plasma concentration-time curve.|Days 1 and 85, prior to and 2, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours after dosing.|"Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set, defined as all vedolizumab participants for whom there were sufficient data to estimate PK. Analyses only include participants with available data at each time point (indicated by n)."||µg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823895|NCT01177228|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a patient administered a pharmaceutical product, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment. The investigator systematically collected information adequate to determine both the outcome and severity of the AE, and whether or not it was drug-related or met the criteria for classification as a serious adverse event (SAE). An SAE was defined as an AE that resulted in (or posed risk for) death, inpatient hospitalization (or prolonging hospitalization), or congenital, persistent or significant disability/incapacity.
The intensity for each AE was defined according to the following criteria:
Mild: Awareness of sign or symptom, but easily tolerated Moderate: Discomfort enough to cause interference with normal daily activities Severe: Inability to perform normal daily activities."|From the first date of study drug administration through Day 253|Safety Analysis Set, defined as all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. One participant was randomized but not dosed and is not included in this population.||participants|||Number
823896|NCT01177293|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 and 168 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
823897|NCT01177293|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 and 168 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
823900|NCT01177293|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0-∞)]|AUC (0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞). It is obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞).|0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 and 168 hours post dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr*ng/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
823901|NCT01177384|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an Adverse Event||Up to 24 Weeks|All participants as treated population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Data were excluded after the initiation of rescue therapy.||Participants|||Number
823902|NCT01177384|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event||Up to Week 24 + 14 Day Post-Study Follow-up|All participants as treated population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Data were excluded after the initiation of rescue therapy.||Participants|||Number
823903|NCT01177384|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 24|Change from baseline at Week 24 is defined as Week 24 FPG minus Week 0 FPG. Efficacy analyses treated data as missing after the initiation of rescue therapy.|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set, all randomized participants except those who: failed to take at least 1 dose of study treatment, lacked all post-randomization data for the FPG subsequent to at least 1 dose of study treatment, or lacked baseline data for the FPG. Last observation carried forward (missing data approach).||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823904|NCT01177384|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (A1C) at Week 24|A1C is measured as a percent. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 24 A1C percent minus the Week 0 A1C percent. Efficacy analyses treated data as missing after the initiation of rescue therapy.|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set, all randomized participants except those who: failed to take at least 1 dose of study treatment, lacked all post-randomization data for the A1C subsequent to at least 1 dose of study treatment, or lacked baseline data for the A1C. Last observation carried forward (missing data approach).||Percent||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
823905|NCT01177410|Primary|The Number of Months That Subjects Are Monthly Responders in Both IBS-related Abdominal Pain AND Stool Consistency During the Entire Three Months.|A weekly responder in abdominal pain is defined as a ≥30% improvement from baseline in the weekly average abdominal pain score on a 10-point scale (0=no pain - 10= worst possible pain). A weekly responder in stool consistency is defined as ≥50% reduction in the number of days in a week with stool consistency of Type 6 or 7 compared with baseline using the Bristol Stool Scale. Monthly responders are subjects who are weekly responders in both abdominal pain and stool consistency for at least two out of four weeks.|3 months|Intent to Treat Population included all randomized subjects who ingested at least one dose of study drug. Analysis of study data was based on observed cases, missing data remained missing.||participants|||Number
823906|NCT01177410|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Who Are Monthly Responders in Both Abdominal Pain and Stool Consistency for at Least 2 Months During the 3-month Treatment Period|A weekly responder in abdominal pain is defined as a ≥30% improvement from baseline in the weekly average abdominal pain score on a 10-point scale (0=no pain - 10= worst possible pain). A weekly responder in stool consistency is defined as ≥50% reduction in the number of days in a week with stool consistency of Type 6 or 7 compared with baseline using the Bristol Stool Scale. Monthly responders are subjects who are weekly responders in both abdominal pain and stool consistency for at least two out of four weeks.|3 months|Intent to Treat Population included all randomized subjects who ingested at least one dose of study drug. Analysis of study data was based on observed cases, missing data remained missing.||participants|||Number
823907|NCT01168973|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Had Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) or Died|Data presented are the number of participants who experienced at least 1 TEAE, Grade 3, 4, or 5 TEAE, treatment-emergent serious adverse event (SAE), TEAE leading to discontinuation of study treatment (ramucirumab/placebo or docetaxel), and TEAE leading to death. Clinically significant events were defined as treatment-emergent SAEs and other non-serious adverse events (AEs) regardless of causality. A summary of SAEs and other non-serious AEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|First infusion up to 30 days following last infusion (up to Cycle 38, 21 days/cycle)|Safety population: Randomized participants who received any quantity of study drug, grouped by the treatment they actually received.||participants|||Number
823908|NCT01168973|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-Ramucirumab Antibodies|The number of participants who had treatment-emergent or follow-up emergent anti-drug antibodies (ADA) is reported. Participants with treatment-emergent ADA were defined as participants who had any sample from baseline through Cycle 5 pre-infusion that was a 4-fold increase (2 dilution increase) in immunogenicity titer over the baseline titer, or participants who tested negative at baseline and positive post-baseline (at titer of ≥1:20). Participants with follow-up emergent ADA were defined as participants who had any sample during 30 days post last infusion that was a 4-fold increase (2 dilution increase) in immunogenicity titer over the baseline titer.|Baseline, prior to infusion for week 4 and 8 (cycles 3 and 5), and 30 days following last infusion (up to Cycle 38, 21 days/cycle)|Randomized participants who received any quantity of study treatment, grouped by the treatment they actually received, who had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline ADA assessment.||participants|||Number
823909|NCT01168973|Secondary|Maximum and Minimum Serum Concentrations (Cmax and Cmin) of Ramucirumab||Prior to infusion and 1 hour following infusion for 4 and 8 (cycles 3 and 5 at 21 days/cycle)|Participants assigned to the ramucirumab and docetaxel arm at randomization, who had evaluable ramucirumab pharmacokinetic (PK) data to calculate Cmax and Cmin.||micrograms per milliliter (mcg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
823917|NCT01168986|Primary|Immediate Change in Pain Sensitivity Using a Numeric Pain Rating Scale|Participants rated the pain associated with a standardized (51 degrees Celsius) thermal stimulus applied to the plantar surface of their dominant foot using a 0 to 100 numeric pain rating scale with 0 indicating no pain at all and 100 indicating the most intense pain sensation imaginable.|Immediate within session change pre to post intervention|The numbers of participants analyzed is not consistent with number of participants enrolled in the study due to missing data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830649|NCT01231841|Secondary|Comparison of the Level of IS as Assessed by Immuknow Assay in Responders and Non-responders||Every 2 weeks for 3 months beginning on day 1 of therapy and then monthly (for a total of 6 months)||||||
823910|NCT01168973|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 30-Day Follow-Up Visit on European Quality of Life Questionnaire-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) Health State Scores|The EQ-5D is a quality-of-life instrument that consists of 2 parts. The first part (Health State Index score) allowed participants to rate their health state in 5 health domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression using a scale from 1 to 3 (no problem, some problems, and extreme problems, respectively). These combinations of attributes were converted into a weighted Health State Index score according to a United Kingdom population-based algorithm; the possible values for the Health State Index score ranged from -0.59 (severe problems in all 5 dimensions) to 1.0 (no problem in any dimension). The second part of the EQ-5D was a VAS that allowed participants to rate their present health condition. Possible EQ-5D VAS scores ranged from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state).|Baseline, 30 days following last infusion (up to Cycle 38, 21 days/cycle)|Randomized participants grouped according to their assigned treatment at randomization, who had an EQ-5D assessment at a baseline and 30 days post treatment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823911|NCT01168973|Secondary|Maximum Improvement on Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)|The LCSS consisted of 9 items: 6 items focused on lung cancer symptoms [loss of appetite, fatigue, cough, dyspnea (shortness of breath), hemoptysis (blood in sputum), and pain] and 3 items were global items (symptom distress, interference with activity level, and global quality of life). Participant responses to each item were measured using visual analogue scales (VAS) with 100-mm lines. A higher score for any item represented a higher level of symptoms/problems. The Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) was the mean of the 6 symptom items of the LCSS, and the Total LCSS was the mean of all 9 LCSS items. ASBI and Total LCSS were not computed for a participant if he/she had 1 or more missing values for the 6 and 9 items, respectively. Maximum improvement in LCSS scores, ASBI, and Total LCSS score was the largest decrease from baseline for each variable, which was the smallest (most negative or smallest positive) non-missing value among all change from baseline values for each variable.|Baseline, Day 21 of each cycle, and 30 days following last infusion (up to Cycle 38, 21 days/cycle)|Randomized participants grouped according to their assigned treatment at randomization, who had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline LCSS score.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
823912|NCT01168973|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Disease Control (Disease Control Rate)|Participants achieved disease control if they had a best overall response of PR, CR or stable disease (SD). According to RECIST v1.1, PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions (including the short axes of any target lymph node), taking as reference the baseline sum diameter; CR was the disappearance of all non-nodal target lesions, with the short axes of any target lymph node reduced to <10 mm, the disappearance of all nontarget lesions, and the normalization of tumor marker levels (if tumor markers were initially above the ULN). SD was neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify as PR nor sufficient increase to qualify as PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameter since treatment started. The percentage of participants who achieved disease control=(number of participants with CR, PR, or SD)/(number of participants assessed)*100.|Baseline to measured PD (up to 29 months)|ITT population: All randomized participants grouped according to their assigned treatment at randomization.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823913|NCT01168973|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Objective Response (Objective Response Rate)|Participants achieved an objective response if they had a best overall response of partial response (PR) or complete response (CR). According to RECIST v1.1, PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions (including the short axes of any target lymph node), taking as reference the baseline sum diameter; CR was the disappearance of all non-nodal target lesions, with the short axes of any target lymph node reduced to <10 mm, the disappearance of all nontarget lesions, and the normalization of tumor marker levels [if tumor markers were initially above the upper limit of normal (ULN)]. The percentage of participants who achieved an objective response=(number of participants with CR or PR)/(number of participants assessed)*100.|Baseline to measured PD (up to 29 months)|ITT population: All randomized participants grouped according to their assigned treatment at randomization.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823914|NCT01168973|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Time|PFS time was the time from randomization until the date of objectively determined progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1), PD was at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study. In addition to the 20% relative increase, the sum must have also demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 millimeters (mm). The appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing nontarget lesions was also considered progression. Participants without objectively determined PD who were alive at the end of the follow-up period (or lost to follow‑up) were censored on the date of the participant's last complete radiographic tumor assessment; if no baseline or post-baseline radiologic assessment was available, the participant was censored at the date of randomization.|Randomization to measured PD or date of death from any cause (up to 29 months)|ITT population: All randomized participants grouped according to their assigned treatment at randomization. Participants censored: ramucirumab and docetaxel arm = 70 participants; placebo and docetaxel arm = 42 participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823915|NCT01168973|Primary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was the time from randomization until the date of death from any cause. Participants who were alive at the end of the follow-up period (or lost to follow‑up) were censored on the last date the participant was known to be alive.|Randomization to date of death from any cause (up to 34 months)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: All randomized participants grouped according to their assigned treatment at randomization. Participants censored: ramucirumab and docetaxel arm = 200 participants; placebo and docetaxel arm = 169 participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823916|NCT01168986|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Neck Extension Range of Motion at 2 Weeks|change in neck extension range of motion over a 2 week period|2 weeks|The numbers of participants analyzed is not consistent with number of participants enrolled in the study due to missing data||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
823938|NCT01169311|Secondary|Quality of Life, Mental Component|quality of life, SF36 measure as change from baseline the scoring ranges from 0 to 100 with 0 = complete mental activity limitation; while 100 = capable of mental activity without limitation|Baseline, 30 days post op|Only subjects who completed the SF-36 questionnaire were included in the analysis. The number of participants reflects 24/27 subjects completed the questionnaire.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823918|NCT01168986|Primary|2 Week Change in Disability on the Neck Disability Index|A functional questionnaire (the neck disability index) to assess self report of disability related to neck pain. The neck disability index is a 10 item questionnaire assessing neck pain related disability. Items are scored from 0 to 5 with the total score doubled resulting in a final score from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating higher levels of perceived disability.|2 weeks|The numbers of participants analyzed is not consistent with number of participants enrolled in the study due to missing data||2 week change in units a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823919|NCT01168986|Primary|2 Week Change in Pain Score on a Numeric Rating Scale|a 101 point numeric rating scale of neck pain with 0 indicating no pain at all and 100 indicating the worst pain imaginable|2 weeks|The numbers of participants analyzed is not consistent with number of participants enrolled in the study due to missing data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823920|NCT01168999|Secondary|Change From Baseline at 2 Weeks in Low Back Left Sidebending Range of Motion|Low back left sidebending range of motion was measured in degrees using a gravity inclinometer|Change from Baseline at 2 weeks|||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
823921|NCT01168999|Secondary|Change From Baseline at 2 Weeks in Low Back Right Sidebending Range of Motion|Low back right sidebending range of motion was measured in degrees using a gravity inclinometer|Change from Baseline at 2 weeks|||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
823922|NCT01168999|Secondary|Change From Baseline at 2 Weeks in Low Back Extension Range of Motion|Low back extension range of motion was measured in degrees using a gravity inclinometer|Change from Baseline at 2 weeks|||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
823923|NCT01168999|Secondary|Change From Baseline at 2 Weeks in Low Back Flexion Range of Motion|Low back flexion range of motion was measured in degrees using a gravity inclinometer|Change from Baseline at 2 weeks|||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
823924|NCT01168999|Primary|Change in Pain Sensitivity From Baseline to Immediately Following the Assigned Intervention as Measured by a Visual Analog Scale|"Participants received a standard thermal stimulus to the bottom of their foot prior to and immediately following their assigned intervention. Participants rated their pain in response to this thermal stimulus using a 101 mm visual analog scale with 0 mm indicating no pain at all and 100 mm indicating the worst pain imaginable."|baseline and immediately following their assigned intervention during the initial session|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823925|NCT01168999|Primary|Change From Baseline at 2 Weeks in Disability as Measured by the Oswestry Disability Index|The Oswestry Disability Index is a 10 item questionnaire measuring low back pain related disability. Individual item scores range from 0 to 5. Scores on all items are summed and multiplied by 2 to provide a percentage ranging between 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating greater low back pain related disability.|Change from Baseline at 2 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823926|NCT01168999|Primary|Change From Baseline at 2 Weeks in Clinical Pain as Measured by a Numeric Rating Scale|A 101 point numeric rating scale with 0= no pain at all to 100= worst pain imaginable of low back pain|Change from Baseline at 2 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823927|NCT01168999|Primary|Expectation for Treatment Effectiveness|how helpful participants expect the assigned intervention will be in decreasing their low back pain|baseline|||percent expecting less pain|||Number
823928|NCT01168999|Primary|Believability of Placebo|Assess whether or not participants receiving the placebo are blinded to the fact they are receiving the placebo as indicated by the percentage of participants in each arm of the study believing they received SMT|baseline|||percentage of participants|||Number
823929|NCT01169038|Primary|Change in Absolute FVC From Baseline to Post Completion of 8 Weeks of Antibiotic Therapy.|The primary endpoint was improvement in absolute FVC from baseline to completion of therapy. Spirometry testing was performed using a standardized calibrated laptop spirometer, Flowscreen II USA Spirometer (VIASYS Healthcare Inc., Yorba Linda, CA). The volume accuracy of the spirometer was checked daily using a three liter calibration syringe. Each subject was given at least three attempts and the greatest measurement for absolute FVC and Forced Expiratory Volume (FEV1) at baseline, four week, and eight week assessments was recorded.|8 weeks|In the ITT analysis, we included the values from the last measured value for those who did not complete the trial. We analyzed the measured value at 8 weeks among those subjects who completed 8 weeks of therapy in the per protocol analysis.||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
823930|NCT01169064|Secondary|Patient Dressing Cost|Total cost of dressings per group based on 1 dressing per patient|Postoperative|||dollars|||Number
823931|NCT01169064|Secondary|Infection Rate Adjusted for Maternal BMI||6 weeks postpartum|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
823932|NCT01169064|Primary|Silver Treatment Efficacy|As measured by number of patients with postop infections at 6 wks|6 weeks postpartum|||participants|||Number
823933|NCT01169103|Primary|Change in Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule-1 (sICAM) Over 6 Months|Soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM) was used as a surrogate marker of cardiovascular risk|Baseline and 6 months|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823934|NCT01169103|Primary|Change in High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) Over 6 Months|As a marker of cardiovascular risk, hs-CRP will be assessed at baseline and 6 months to assess the rate at which hs-CRP levels change with rhGH therapy.|Baseline and 6 months|||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
823935|NCT01169103|Primary|Changes in Lipid Panel|Lipid profile will be obtained using established methods. Total Cholesterol, Triglycerides, LDL and HDL measurements will be obtained at baseline, and then at the six-month visits to determine the rate at which lipid measures change with rhGH therapy|Baseline and 6 months|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823936|NCT01169103|Secondary|Change in Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) Score|Homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) was used as a validated measure of insulin resistance. A 2-hour Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT) using 1.75 gram/kilogram of oral glucose (maximum 75 gram) will be performed at baseline and six months after administration of rhGH/placebo/ no therapy. Fasting insulin and glucose will be used to determine HOMA-IR: [fasting glucose (mmol/l) x fasting insulin (µU/ml)]/22.5]|Baseline and 6 months|||HOMA-IR score||Standard Deviation|Mean
823937|NCT01169103|Primary|Change in Visceral and Subcutaneous Abdominal Adipose Tissue Over 6 Months|Visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue (SAT) were assessed using single slice MR imaging (MRI)|Baseline and 6 months|Due to scheduling difficulties one no treatment subject did not perform the MRI portion of the study at either the baseline or the 6 month visit.||mm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823939|NCT01169311|Secondary|Quality of Life, Physical Component|Physical component score SF36 scale measured as change from baseline the scoring ranges from 0 to 100 with 0 = unable to do anything while 100 = capable of physical activity without limitation|baseline, 30 days post op|Only subjects who completed the SF-36 questionnaire were included in the analysis. The number of participants reflects 24/27 subjects completed the questionnaire.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823940|NCT01169311|Secondary|Post Operative Pain|Post operative pain measured by 11 point visual analog scale, measured as change from baseline The scale range is 0-10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst possible pain|baseline, 30 days post op|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823941|NCT01169311|Secondary|Incidence of Stapler Malfunction or Misfires||about 20 minutes for procedure|||participants|||Number
823942|NCT01169311|Secondary|Time to Return to Normal Activity||30 days post op|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
823943|NCT01169311|Secondary|Length of Stay|length of time between time of admission and time of discharge|Day 0, time of discharge minus time of admission|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
823944|NCT01169311|Secondary|Intra-Operative Bleeding Requiring Intervention|Incidence of intervention for intra-operative staple-line bleeding|Day 0 - time of surgery|||participants|||Number
823945|NCT01169311|Secondary|OR Time|Duration of procedure|Day 0 - Time of stop minus time of start|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
823946|NCT01169311|Primary|Uneventful Creation of a Functional Staple Line at First Firing of Device|Successful creation of staple line at first firing of device during hemorrhoidopexy|about 20 minutes for procedure|||participants|||Number
823947|NCT01169467|Secondary|Mean Arterial Blood Pressure (MAP) Variability in Patients With Secondary Brain Injury|Improved physiologic Response. A lower variability of mean Arterial Blood pressure during treatment would be considered an improved physiologic response. A higher variability of mean Arterial Blood pressure during treatment would be considered a worse physiologic response. Variability was assessed and listed as the standard deviation of all measurements within 24 hours.|Baseline to 24 hours|Everyone who started the trial was included except for seventeen subjects had incomplete data and could not be included in this analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
823948|NCT01169467|Secondary|Cerebral Perfusion Pressure Changes in Patients With Secondary Brain Injury|Improved physiologic Response. A higher cerebral perfusion pressure during treatment would be considered an improved physiologic response. A lower cerebral perfusion pressure during treatment would be considered a worse physiologic response.|Baseline to 24 hours|Everyone who completed the trial was included except for fourteen subjects had incomplete data and could not be included in this analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
823949|NCT01169467|Secondary|Amount of Sedative/Analgesic Used During Treatment in Patients With Secondary Brain Injury|Improved physiologic Response. A lower use of sedatives or analgesic during treatment would be considered an improved physiologic response. An increase in the use of sedatives or analgesic during treatment would be considered a worse physiologic response.|24 hours|Everyone who started the trial was included except for one subject had incomplete data and could not be included in this analysis.||mg/ml||Standard Error|Mean
823950|NCT01169467|Primary|Change in Pressure Reactivity Index (PRx)|"Using computational methods, the PRx was determined by calculating the correlation coefficient between 20 consecutive, time-averaged data points (60-second periods) of ICP and Arterial Blood Pressure (ABP).
A positive PRx correlation suggests impaired cerebrovascular pressure reactivity, that is, passive transmission of changes in ABP to ICP. A negative PRx correlation indicates good pressure reactivity. Any change in ABP produces inverse changes in ICP."|Baseline to 24 hours|Everyone who completed the trial was included except for nineteen subjects had incomplete data and could not be included in this analysis.||Pressure Reactivity Index||Standard Error|Mean
823951|NCT01169467|Primary|Variability of Intracranial Pressure (ICP)|Variability of intracranial pressure was assessed and listed as the standard deviation of all measurements within 24 hours. Variability was assessed and listed as the standard deviation of all measurements within 24 hours|Baseline to 24 hours|Everyone who completed the trial was included except for fourteen subjects had incomplete data and could not be included in this analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
823952|NCT01169493|Secondary|Left Ventricular End-diastolic Size||6 months|Data not collected.||cubic cm||Standard Error|Mean
823953|NCT01169493|Secondary|Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)||6 months|Data not collected.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
823954|NCT01169493|Secondary|NYHA Function Class|The New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Classification places patients in one of four categories based on how much they are limited during physical activity. Class I means there is no limitation of physical activity and Class IV means a person is unable to carry on any physical activity without discomfort/symptoms of heart failure at rest.|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823955|NCT01169493|Secondary|6-minute Walk Distance|6-minute walk distance was the distance that a participant could walk in 6 minutes.|6 months|All participants who completed the six month period for VVI-40, RV DDD-40, Bi-V DDD-40 regardless of which arm they are randomized to. Participants may be counted as completing more than one period.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
823956|NCT01169493|Secondary|Minnesota Quality of Life Questionnaire|This is a standardized method for assessing quality of life in patients with heart failure. It asks 21 questions and measures the impact HF has on a subject's life. Each question is rated 0-5. The total score for the 21 items can range from 0 to 105. Higher scores indicate more burden of disease on quality of life.|6 months|All participants who completed the six month period for VVI-40, RV DDD-40, Bi-V DDD-40 regardless of which arm they are randomized to. Participants may be counted as completing more than one period.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
823957|NCT01169493|Secondary|Arrhythmic Events|To determine if pacing mode impacts the frequency of ventricular arrhythmias, the incidence of ventricular tachyarrhythmia episodes on device interrogation will be compared between treatment group assignments. An episode will be considered ventricular arrhythmia if it lasts longer than 30 seconds or requires anti-tachycardia pacing or high voltage device therapy for termination.|6 months|All participants who completed the six month period for VVI-40, RV DDD-40, Bi-V DDD-40 regardless of which arm they are randomized to. Participants may be counted as completing more than one period.||participants|||Number
823958|NCT01169493|Secondary|Secondary Echocardiographic Endpoints|Comparisons of the derived velocity-time integral calculated on the aortic continuous wave Doppler-spectrogram, RV end-diastolic size, RV EF, mitral and tricuspid regurgitation severity, and estimated RV systolic pressure.|6 months|Data not collected.|||||
823959|NCT01169493|Primary|The Primary Endpoint of the Trial Will be a Comparison of the Proportion of Patients in Each of the Three Treatment Groups Who Demonstrate Positive LV Remodeling, Defined as a Decrease in LV End Systolic Diameter of >5mm.||6 months|All participants who completed the six month period for VVI-40, RV DDD-40, Bi-V DDD-40 regardless of which arm they are randomized to. Participants may be counted as completing more than one period.||percentage of participants|||Number
823960|NCT01169519|Secondary|Hemodynamic Safety and Efficacy|Assessment of pulmonary vascular resistance|10 minutes after completion of sildenafil infusion|||Wood units * m^2||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
823961|NCT01169519|Primary|Maximum Sildenafil Plasma Concentration|Assessment of peak sildenafil plasma concentration.|5 minutes after completion of sildenafil infusion|3 patients were enrolled in this group but in 1 participant, an inadequate plasma sample volume prevented accurate determination of sildenafil concentration.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823962|NCT01169558|Secondary|Efficacy: Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) was measured as the time from start of first bevacizumab administration to investigator-assessed progression or death, whichever occurred first. Progression was defined using RECIST v1.0, as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. Reported is the median time of PFS.|Up to approximately 3 years|158 participants from the ITT population were included in the analysis. Four participants were excluded from the ITT population due to protocol deviation.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823963|NCT01169558|Secondary|Efficacy: Time to Disease Progression|Time to disease progression was measured as the time from start of first bevacizumab administration to investigator-assessed progression. Progression was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. For participants without disease progression at the end of the study, date and time to progression were censored at the last investigator assessment. Reported is the median time to disease progression.|Up to approximately 3 years|158 participants from the ITT population were included in the analysis. Four participants were excluded from the ITT population due to protocol deviation.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823964|NCT01169558|Secondary|Efficacy: Overall Survival|Overall survival was measured as the time from start of first bevacizumab administration to death. For participants who were alive at the end of the study, data on survival were censored at the time of the last contact. Reported is the median duration of overall survival.|Up to approximately 3 years|158 participants from the ITT population were included in the analysis. Four participants were excluded from the ITT population due to protocol deviation.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823965|NCT01169558|Primary|Safety: Number of Participants With Serious and Specific Adverse Events|A serious adverse event was defined as any experience that suggested a significant hazard, contraindication, side effect, or precaution, and fulfilled any of the following criteria: fatal (resulted in death), life-threatening, required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, was a congenital anomaly/birth defect, was medically significant or required intervention to prevent any of the other outcomes listed here. Specific adverse events (Spec AEs) included the following: hypertension, bleeding/hemorrhage, proteinuria, wound healing complications, thrombosis/thrombus/embolism (t/t/e), thrombosis/thrombus/embolism - vascular access, gastrointestinal perforation, and infusion (injection) site reaction.|Up to approximately 3 years|The intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants receiving at least one dose of the study drug. This population was primarily used for the reporting of safety information.||participants|||Number
823966|NCT01169610|Secondary|Tolerability|Tolerability will be defined by the number of adverse events experienced by patients.|Two years||||||
823967|NCT01169610|Secondary|Prolonged Smoking Abstinence|"Self-reported all tobacco abstinence since two weeks after target quit date (TQD) which will be during their 28-day stay in the IAP on day 8 of varenicline therapy. Negative response to the question, “Have you used any type of tobacco, even a puff, for 7 consecutive days or at least once each week on two consecutive weeks since xx/xx/xxxx?” Note: xx/xx/xxxx corresponds to the date two weeks after the target quit date (TQD).
Biochemically-confirmed abstinence at the visit for which prolonged abstinence is being obtained."|Two years||||||
823968|NCT01169610|Secondary|7-day Point Prevalence Smoking Abstinence|Negative response to the question, “Have you used any type of tobacco, even a puff, in the past 7 days.” This will be a self-reported outcome biochemically-confirmed with exhaled-air carbon monoxide (CO) < 8 parts per million (ppm) during the medication phase.|Two years||||||
823969|NCT01169610|Primary|Heavy Drinking Days|Number of drinking days > 5 drinks/day for men and > 4 drink/day for women. This will be a self-reported outcome.|Two years||||||
823970|NCT01169610|Primary|Continuous Alcohol Abstinence|No consumption of alcohol (not even a single drink) during the specified interval of time. This will be a self-reported outcome.|Two years||||||
823971|NCT01169649|Primary|Overall Response.|Response and progression will be evaluated in this study using the new international criteria proposed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD Progressive Disease (PD): At least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started.|every 12 weeks|||participants|||Number
823972|NCT01169675|Secondary|Tumour Shrinkage|Tumour shrinkage is defined as the maximum percentage decrease from baseline in the sum of the longest diameters of target lesions.|Every 6 weeks before week 48 and every 12 weeks after week 48 until progression|Treated Set: all patients that received treatment of Afatinib or Pemetrexed and who were evaluated for the longest diameter of the target lesions.||participants|||Number
823973|NCT01169675|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from the first treatment to the occurence of tumour progression or death, whichever came first. It was assessed according to RECIST version 1.1 criteria.|Every 6 weeks before week 48 and every 12 weeks after week 48 until progression|Treated Set includes all patients that received treatment of Afatinib or Pemetrexed||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
823974|NCT01169675|Secondary|Disease Control|Disease Control is defined as complete response, partial response, or stable disease according to the response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) version 1.1.|Every 6 weeks before week 48 and every 12 weeks after week 48 until progression|Treated Set includes all patients that received treatment of Afatinib or Pemetrexed||participants|||Number
823975|NCT01169675|Secondary|Objective Response (OR)|"Objective Response is defined as complete response or partial response according to the response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) version 1.1.
Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level; Partial Response (PR): at least 30% decrease of the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions; Progressive Disease (PD): at least a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions together with an absolute increase in the sum of LD of at least 5 millimeters; Stable Disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR, nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD."|Every 6 weeks before week 48 and every 12 weeks after week 48 until progression|Treated Set includes all patients that received treatment of Afatinib or Pemetrexed||participants|||Number
823976|NCT01169675|Secondary|Investigator Defined Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT) During All Courses of Treatment, Treated Set|Occurence of DLT during all courses of treatment with Afatinib at two different dose schedules in combination with the standard established dose of pemetrexed (500 mg/m2).|DLT were assessed during all cycles of treatment|Treated Set includes all patients that received treatment of Afatinib or Pemetrexed||participants|||Number
823977|NCT01169675|Primary|Investigator Defined Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT) During First Course of Treatment, Treated Set|Occurence of DLT during the first course of treatment to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of Afatinib at two different dose schedules in combination with the standard established dose of pemetrexed (500 mg/m2).|DLT were assessed during the first cycle (days 1-21)|Treated Set includes all patients that received treatment of Afatinib or Pemetrexed that who were evaluable for MTD determination||participants|||Number
823978|NCT01169701|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Biopsy-proven Acute Rejection (BPAR), Graft Loss, Death and Lost to Follow up|The incidence of BPAR, graft loss, death and lost to follow-up events was calculated using relative frequency.|Month 24|Intent to Treat (ITT): The ITT included participants who received at least one dose of study medication and at least one post baseline LVMI value.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823979|NCT01169701|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cardiovascular Biomarkers, C-reactive Protein (CRP)|Blood samples were collected to analyze CRP. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, month 6, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at both baseline and the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
823980|NCT01169701|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Cardiovascular Biomarker, Type 1 Procollagen Amino-terminal-propeptide (PINP)|Blood samples were collected to analyze PCR. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, month 6, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at both baseline and the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||ug/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
823981|NCT01169701|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Cardiovascular Biomarker, N-terminal Pro-brain Natriuretic Peptide Fraction (NT-proBNP)|Blood samples were collected to analyze NT-proBNP. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, month 6, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at both baseline and the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823982|NCT01169701|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Cardiovascular Biomarker, Myeloperoxidase (MPO)|Blood samples were collected to analyze MPO. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, month 6, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at both baseline and the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||U/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
823983|NCT01169701|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Cardiovascular Biomarker, Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|Blood samples were collected to analyze HbA1c. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, month 6, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at both baseline and the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||Percentage of HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
823984|NCT01169701|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cardiovascular Biomarkers: Troponin I and Collagen Type 1 C-telopeptide (ICTP)|Blood samples were collected to analyze Troponin I and collagen type 1 C-telopeptide (ICTP). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, month 6, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at both baseline and the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
823985|NCT01169701|Secondary|Renal Function as Measured by Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR)|Estimated GFR was caluclated using the modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) formula.|Month 6, month 12, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
823986|NCT01169701|Secondary|Renal Function as Measured by Creatinine Clearance|Creatinine clearance was calculated using the Cockroft-Gault formula.|Month 6, month 12, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||mg/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
824036|NCT01170221|Primary|Early Clinical Response Rate|Responder: No increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature ≤37.6°C|48-72 hours|The ITT analysis set includes data from all randomized participants.||Responders|||Number
823987|NCT01169701|Secondary|Renal Function Measured by Serum Creatinine|Serum samples were collected to analyze serum creatinine.|Month 6, month 12, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
823988|NCT01169701|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Major Cardiovascular Events (MACE)|The percentage of participants who experienced MACE were reported. MACE included acute myocardial infarction, insertion or replacement of implantable defibrillator, peripheral vascular disorders, congestive heart failure, coronary artery bypass, other events, percutaneous coronary intervention and stroke.|Month 24|The Intent to Treat (ITT) analysis set: The ITT included participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post baseline LVMI value.||Percentage of participants|||Number
823989|NCT01169701|Secondary|Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV)|Utilizing the SphygmoCor Device, ECG leads placed at the carotid and femoral arteries provided the measure of the pulse wave at that particular arterial location. The distance between the two vascular beds divided by the pulse wave time shift provided a measure of the pulse wave velocity.|Month 6, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||m/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
823990|NCT01169701|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean 24 Hour Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure|Blood pressure was measured using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Month 6, month 12, month 24|Participants from the safety analysis set were considered for this analysis. The safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of study medication. For each time point, only participants, who had values at both baseline and the given time point, were analyzed for that time point.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
823991|NCT01169701|Primary|Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular Mass Index (LVMI)|Left ventricular hypertrophy grade was assessed by echocardiogram where the left ventricular mass index was calculated. The presence of LVM was defined as > 49.2 g/m^2.7 in men and >46.7 g/m^2.7 in women. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Month 24|Participants from the Intent to Treat (ITT) analysis set, who had both baseline and month 24 values, were analyzed. The ITT included participants who received at least one dose of study medication and at least one post baseline LVMI value.||g/m^2.7||Standard Deviation|Mean
823992|NCT01169753|Primary|"Number of Participants With Fatigue Worst BFI Score"|"Efficacy defined by fatigue worst score from the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) after each 2-week treatment period, using a 0 - 10 scale with 10 being WORST level of fatigue."|After each 2 week treatment|No analysis completed, study stopped due to slow accrual with only one participant.|||||
823993|NCT01169779|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients With Symptomatic Hypoglycemia and Severe Symptomatic Hypoglycemia|Symptomatic hypoglycemia was an event with clinical symptoms that were considered to result from a hypoglycemic episode with an accompanying plasma glucose less than 60 mg/dL (3.3 mmol/L) or associated with prompt recovery after oral carbohydrate, intravenous glucose, or glucagon administration, if no plasma glucose measurement was available. Severe symptomatic hypoglycemia was symptomatic hypoglycemia event in which the patient required the assistance of another person and was associated with either a plasma glucose level below 36 mg/dL (2.0 mmol/L) or prompt recovery after oral carbohydrate, intravenous glucose, or glucagon administration, if no plasma glucose measurement was available.|First dose of study drug up to 3 days after the last dose administration|Safety population included all randomized patients who were exposed to at least 1 dose of study drug, regardless of the amount of treatment administered.||participants|||Number
823994|NCT01169779|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Requiring Rescue Therapy During Main 24-Week Period|Routine fasting self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) and central laboratory FPG (and HbA1c after week 12) values were used to determine the requirement of rescue medication. If fasting SMPG value exceeded the specified limit for 3 consecutive days, the central laboratory FPG (and HbA1c after week 12) were performed. Threshold values - from baseline to Week 8: fasting SMPG/FPG >250 milligram/deciliter (mg/dL) (13.9 mmol/L), from Week 8 to Week 12: fasting SMPG/FPG >220 mg/dL (12.2 mmol/L), and from Week 12 to Week 24: fasting SMPG/FPG >200 mg/dL (11.1 mmol/L) or HbA1c >8.5%. For a patient to be included in mITT population, both baseline and at least 1 post baseline on-treatment assessment for at least 1 efficacy variable, were required.|Baseline up to Week 24|mITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
823995|NCT01169779|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Patients With at Least 5% Weight Loss From Baseline at Week 24|The on-treatment period for this efficacy variable is the time from the first dose of study drug up to 3 days after the last dose of study drug or up to the introduction of rescue therapy, whichever is the earliest. For a patient to be included in mITT population, both baseline and at least 1 post baseline on-treatment assessment for at least 1 efficacy variable, were required.|Baseline, Week 24|mITT population. Here, number of patients analyzed = patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline body weight assessment during on-treatment period.||percentage of participants|||Number
823996|NCT01169779|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucose Excursion at Week 24|Glucose excursion = 2-hour PPG minus plasma glucose 30 minutes prior to the standardized meal test, before study drug administration. Change was calculated by subtracting Baseline value from Week 24 value. The on-treatment period for this efficacy variable is the time from the first dose of study drug up to the last dosing day of study drug or up to the introduction of rescue therapy, whichever is the earliest.|Baseline, Week 24|Subgroup for standardized meal test. Missing data was imputed using LOCF. Here, number of patients analyzed = patients with Baseline and at least 1 post-baseline glucose excursion assessment during on-treatment period.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
823997|NCT01169779|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Level Less Than or Equal to 6.5% at Week 24|The on-treatment period for this efficacy variable is the time from the first dose of study drug up to 3 days after the last dose of study drug or up to the introduction of rescue therapy, whichever is the earliest. For a patient to be included in mITT population, both baseline and at least 1 post baseline on-treatment assessment for at least 1 efficacy variable, were required.|Week 24|mITT population. Here, number of patients analyzed = patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment during on-treatment period.||percentage of participants|||Number
823998|NCT01169779|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Level Less Than 7% at Week 24|The on-treatment period for this efficacy variable is the time from the first dose of study drug up to 3 days after the last dose of study drug or up to the introduction of rescue therapy, whichever is the earliest. For a patient to be included in mITT population, both baseline and at least 1 post baseline on-treatment assessment for at least 1 efficacy variable, were required.|Week 24|mITT population. Here, number of patients analyzed = patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment during on-treatment period.||percentage of participants|||Number
823999|NCT01169779|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 24|Change was calculated by subtracting Baseline value from Week 24 value. The on-treatment period for this efficacy variable is the time from the first dose of study drug up to 3 days after the last dose of study drug or up to the introduction of rescue therapy, whichever is the earliest. For a patient to be included in mITT population, both baseline and at least 1 post baseline on-treatment assessment for at least 1 efficacy variable, were required.|Baseline, Week 24|mITT population. Missing data was imputed using LOCF. Here, number of patients analyzed = patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline body weight assessment during on-treatment period.||kilogram||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824000|NCT01169779|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 2-Hour Postprandial Plasma Glucose (PPG) at Week 24|The 2-hour PPG test measured blood glucose 2 hours after eating a standardized meal. Change was calculated by subtracting Baseline value from Week 24 value. The on-treatment period for this efficacy variable is the time from the first dose of study drug up to the last dosing day of study drug or up to the introduction of rescue therapy, whichever is the earliest.|Baseline, Week 24|Subgroup for standardized meal test. Missing data was imputed using LOCF. Here, number of patients analyzed = patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline 2-hour PPG assessment during on-treatment period.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824001|NCT01169779|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 24|Change was calculated by subtracting Baseline value from Week 24 value. The on-treatment period for this efficacy variable is the time from the first dose of study drug up to 1 day after the last dose of study drug or up to the introduction of rescue therapy, whichever is the earliest. For a patient to be included in mITT population, both baseline and at least 1 post baseline on-treatment assessment for at least 1 efficacy variable, were required.|Baseline, Week 24|mITT population. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). Here, number of patients analyzed = patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline FPG assessment during on-treatment period.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824002|NCT01169779|Primary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 24|Absolute change = HbA1c value at Week 24 minus HbA1c value at baseline. The on-treatment period for this efficacy variable is the time from the first dose of study drug up to 3 days after the last dose of study drug or up to the introduction of rescue therapy, whichever is the earliest. For a patient to be included in mITT population, both baseline and at least 1 post baseline on-treatment assessment for at least 1 efficacy variable, were required.|Baseline, Week 24|mITT population:all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose;had baseline,at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, irrespective of compliance with study protocol/procedures. Last observation carried forward used. Number of patients analyzed=patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment during on-treatment period.||percentage of hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824003|NCT01169987|Secondary|WPAI Questionnaire: Mean Percentage of Activity Impairment Due to Psoriasis for All Participants and Broken Down by Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|Activity impairment due to psoriasis (the extent to which psoriasis affected the ability to perform usual daily activities) is presented as the mean percentage of activity impairment, calculated as 100*scale value of WPAI question 6 (between 0 and 10) / 10. WPAI is a questionnaire used to evaluate lost productivity; scores are presented as percentages (multiplying the scores by 100), with 0% representing no impact on productivity and 100% representing complete impact on productivity. For the purpose of the analysis of the evolution of parameters over time, follow-up visits were classified into time-windows (TWs), based upon the number of days between onset of adalimumab treatment and the date of each subsequent visit: TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730).|Baseline, TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730); last observation (up to 24 months)|ITT set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any follow-up data were available; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||percentage of activity impairment||Standard Deviation|Mean
824004|NCT01169987|Secondary|WPAI Questionnaire: Mean Percentage of Total Work Productivity Impairment (TWPI) Due to Psoriasis for All Participants and Broken Down by Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|The mean percentage of TWPI due to psoriasis (based on the WPAI questionnaire) is presented, calculated as: Absenteeism (%) + extent to which psoriasis decreased productivity (%)* [number of hours worked / (number of hours of work missed due to psoriasis + number of hours worked)]. WPAI is a questionnaire used to evaluate lost productivity; scores are presented as percentages (multiplying the scores by 100), with 0% representing no impact on productivity and 100% representing complete impact on productivity. For the purpose of the analysis of the evolution of parameters over time, follow-up visits were classified into time-windows (TWs), based upon the number of days between onset of adalimumab treatment and the date of each subsequent visit: TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730).|Baseline, TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730); last observation (up to 24 months)|ITT set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any data follow-up were available; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||percentage of TWPI||Standard Deviation|Mean
824037|NCT01170247|Primary|Onset of Sedation|Minutes it takes until the patient is cooperative enough for the procedure|Every 60 seconds through study completion|||Participants|||Count of Participants
824516|NCT01175018|Secondary|Difference Between the Anakinra Arm and the Placebo Arm in Change in Left Ventricular End-diastolic Volume Indices From Baseline to Follow up Exam at Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging||10-14 weeks|Applies only to subset of patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at baseline and 10-14 weeks.||mL/m2||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824005|NCT01169987|Secondary|WPAI Questionnaire: Mean Percentage of Impairment While Working Due to Psoriasis (Presenteeism) for All Participants and Broken Down by Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|Presenteeism (the extent to which psoriasis decreased productivity) is presented as the mean percentage of impairment while working due to psoriasis, and calculated as: 100*scale value of question 5 on the WPAI (between 0 and 10) / 10. WPAI is a questionnaire used to evaluate lost productivity; scores are presented as percentages (multiplying the scores by 100), with 0% representing no impact on productivity and 100% representing complete impact on productivity. For the purpose of the analysis of the evolution of parameters over time, follow-up visits were classified into time-windows (TWs), based upon the number of days between onset of adalimumab treatment and the date of each subsequent visit: TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730).|Baseline, TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730); last observation (up to 24 months)|ITT set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any follow-up data were available.||percentage of impairment while working||Standard Deviation|Mean
824006|NCT01169987|Secondary|Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire: Mean Percentage of Work Time Missed (Absenteeism) for All Participants and Broken Down by Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|Absenteeism, presented as the mean percentage of work time missed due to psoriasis (as reported on the WPAI), and calculated as: 100*number of hours of work missed due to psoriasis / (number of hours of work missed due to psoriasis + number of hours worked). WPAI is a questionnaire used to evaluate lost productivity; scores are presented as percentages (multiplying the scores by 100), with 0% representing no impact on productivity and 100% representing complete impact on productivity. For the purpose of the analysis of the evolution of parameters over time, follow-up visits were classified into time-windows (TWs), based upon the number of days between onset of adalimumab treatment and the date of each subsequent visit: TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730).|Baseline, TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730); last observation (up to 24 months)|ITT set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any follow-up data were available; n=number of participants with assessment at given time point.||percentage of work time missed||Standard Deviation|Mean
824007|NCT01169987|Secondary|DLQI: Percentage of Participants in DLQI Categories for All Participants and Broken Down by Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|DLQI is a participant-reported outcome consisting of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot (score of 2), a little (score of 1), or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired. The following scoring categories present the effect on participant's life: 0-1 no effect at all; 2-5 small effect; 6-10 moderate effect; 11-20 very large effect; 21-30 extremely large effect. Follow-up visits were classified into time windows (TWs), based upon the number of days between onset of adalimumab treatment and the date of each subsequent visit: TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730).|Baseline, TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730); last observation (up to 24 months)|ITT set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any follow-up data were available; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
824008|NCT01169987|Secondary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI): Mean Score for All Participants and Broken Down by Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|DLQI score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each question are: very much (3), a lot (2), a little (1), or not at all (0). The total DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired. For the purpose of the analysis of the evolution of parameters over time, follow-up visits were classified into time-windows, based upon the number of days between onset of adalimumab treatment and the date of each subsequent visit: TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730).|Baseline, TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730); last observation (up to 24 months)|ITT set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any follow-up data were available; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824009|NCT01169987|Secondary|Physician's Global Assessment (PGA): Percentage of Participants in Regrouped PGA Categories for All Participants and Broken Down by Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|"The PGA was an evaluation of a participant's psoriasis on a 6-point scale: clear (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), severe (4), or very severe (5), which were then regrouped into the 2 categories Clear/Minimal or Mild/Moderate/Severe/Very Severe (M/Md/S/VS), and presented as the percentage of participants in each. For the purpose of the analysis of the evolution of parameters over time, follow-up visits were classified into time-windows (TWs), based upon the number of days between onset of adalimumab treatment and the date of each subsequent visit: TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730)."|Baseline, TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730); last observation (obs.; up to 24 months)|ITT set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any follow-up data were available; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
824117|NCT01179490|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters (t1/2)|Plasma pharmacokinetics (t1/2) of unchanged bendamustine|On Day 1 only|||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824010|NCT01169987|Secondary|Mean Percent Affected Body Surface Area (BSA) For All Participants and Broken Down by Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|Clinical psoriasis evaluations by the investigator of percentage of affected BSA. For the purpose of the analysis of the evolution of parameters over time, follow-up visits were classified into time-windows (TWs), based upon the number of days between onset of adalimumab treatment and the date of each subsequent visit: TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730).|Baseline, TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730); last observation (up to 24 months)|ITT set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any follow-up data were available; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||percentage of affected BSA||Standard Deviation|Mean
824011|NCT01169987|Secondary|PASI: Percentage Improvement Change Categories From Baseline for All Participants and Broken Down by Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|Percentage of participants who achieved ≥ 50%, 75%, 90% or 100% reduction (improvement) from Baseline in PASI score (PASI50, PASI75, PASI90, PASI100). Four anatomic sites (head, upper extremities, trunk, and lower extremities) were assessed for erythema, induration (plaque thickness), and desquamation (scaling) as seen on the day of the examination. The severity of each sign was assessed using a 5-point scale: 0=no symptoms, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. PASI percentage improvement=100*(PASI score at Baseline - score at follow-up visit) / PASI score at Baseline. For the purpose of analysis of the evolution of parameters over time, follow-up visits were classified into time-windows (TWs), based on the number of days between onset of adalimumab treatment and the date of each subsequent visit: TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730).|Baseline, TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730); last observation (up to 24 months)|ITT set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any follow-up data were available; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
824012|NCT01169987|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI): Mean Percentage Improvement From Baseline for All Participants and Broken Down by Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|Four anatomic sites (head, upper extremities, trunk, and lower extremities) were assessed with PASI for erythema, induration (plaque thickness), and desquamation (scaling) as seen on the day of the examination. The severity of each sign was assessed using a 5-point scale: 0=no symptoms, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. PASI percentage improvement=100*(PASI score at Baseline – score at follow-up visit) / PASI score at Baseline. For the purpose of the analysis of the evolution of parameters over time, follow-up visits were classified into time-windows (TWs), based upon the number of days between onset of adalimumab treatment and the date of each subsequent visit: TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730).|Baseline, TW 3 months=period between Day 1 and 137 (target, Day 91); TW 12 months=period between Day 275 and 456 (target, Day 365); TW 24 months=period starting on Day 640 (target Day 730); last observation (up to 24 months)|ITT set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any follow-up data were available; n=number of participants with an assessment at Baseline and given time point.||percentage improvement||Standard Deviation|Mean
824013|NCT01169987|Primary|Adalimumab Treatment Retention Status|Percentage of participants with an adalimumab treatment status of continuous, early intermittent, late intermittent, permanently discontinued, or other. Continuous=initiated on adalimumab, had no treatment interruption period, still on treatment at study termination, and completed the study. Early intermittent=initiated on adalimumab 40 mg, treated every other week (EOW) for < 112 days (16 weeks) after initiation of treatment, with afterwards ≥ 1 treatment interruption period of ≥ 70 consecutive days, on treatment at study termination, and completed the study. Late intermittent=initiated on adalimumab 40 mg, treated EOW for ≥ 112 days (16 weeks) after initiation of treatment, with afterwards ≥ 1 treatment interruption period of at least 70 consecutive days, on treatment at study termination, and completed the study. Permanently discontinued=received ≥ 1 dose of adalimumab and stopped adalimumab treatment permanently. Other=participants not belonging to any of the previous groups.|Month 24/ Early Termination visit|Intention to Treat (ITT) set: all participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of adalimumab, and for whom any follow-up data were available.||percentage of participants|||Number
824014|NCT01170039|Secondary|Change in Scores on the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) Questionnaire|The difference in the scores on the self-reported Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) questionnaire. The quality of life is measured by the by the overall scores on the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) questionnaire, a validated 28-item questionnaire measuring quality of life as it pertains to constipation. The 28 items are grouped into four subscales, 1) worries and concerns, 2) physical discomfort, 3) psychosocial discomfort, and 4) satisfaction. A 5-point Likert response scale, ranging from 0 (Not at all/None of the time) to 4 (Extremely/ All of the time), is used. The subscale scores vary from 0 to 4 and the total (global) score ranges from 0 to 4. A lower score indicates better quality of life (QOL).|Screening, 8 weeks|7 subjects in the Lubiprostone arm and 7 subjects in the placebo arm did not complete the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) questionnaire and therefore no data was analyzed for these subjects.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824015|NCT01170039|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Daily Abdominal Discomfort|The number of subjects experiencing abdominal discomfort was recorded weekly.|1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, 4 weeks, 5 weeks, 6 weeks, 7 weeks, 8 weeks|The number of participants in both arms was analyzed by Intention-to-Treat (ITT).||participants|||Number
824016|NCT01170039|Secondary|Efficacy, Measured by the Duration of Colonic Transit Time as Measured by the SmartPill pH Capsule|The duration of colonic transit time in hours was measured by the SmartPill pH Capsule. Colonic transit time is the time interval from the cecal entry of the capsule to anal expulsion and was measured in hours.|Baseline, 4 weeks|Intention to treat population.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
824118|NCT01179490|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters (AUC)|Plasma pharmacokinetics (AUC) of unchanged bendamustine|On Day 1 only|||ng・h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824017|NCT01170039|Primary|Efficacy, Measured by the Average Number of Spontaneous Bowel Movements (SBMs) Per Week|The average number of spontaneous bowel movements calculated per week from baseline to 8 weeks was recorded. The number of spontaneous bowel movements was recorded by the subjects in a daily stool diary and the weekly average was calculated. Spontaneous bowel movements are bowel movements within a 24 hour period independent of rescue medication use within the previous week.|1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, 4 weeks, 5 weeks, 6 weeks, 7 weeks, 8 weeks|Two subjects in the Lubiprostone arm did not complete the daily stool diary at baseline. No data was analyzed for these two subjects.||spontaneous bowel movements||Standard Deviation|Mean
824018|NCT01170091|Secondary|Clinical Global Impressions-Global Improvement (CGI-I)|"CGI-I comprises of 7 categories including very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse and very much worse."|before and after the treatment with Mirapex (at least 4 weeks after the end of titration)|Patients whose CGI-I were assessed at the baseline and at 4 weeks after the end of titration. Efficacy Data Set (Intent to Treat)||patients|||Number
824019|NCT01170091|Secondary|Patient-Global Impressions (PGI-I)|"PGI comprises of 7 categories including very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse and very much worse."|before and after the treatment with Mirapex (at least 4 weeks after the end of titration)|Patients whose PGI were assessed at the baseline and at 4 weeks after the end of titration. Efficacy Data Set (Intent to Treat)||patients|||Number
824020|NCT01170091|Secondary|International Restless Legs Syndrome Rating Scale (IRLS) Change After 4 Weeks of Mirapex Treatment|"a change in 10-item scale rated by the patient on 5 levels with a minimum (none) sum score of 0 to maximum (very severe) sum score of 40"|before and after the treatment with Mirapex (at least 4 weeks after the end of titration)|Patients whose IRLS scores were assessed at the baseline and at 4 weeks after the end of titration. Efficacy data set (Intent to Treat)||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824021|NCT01170091|Primary|Number of Reported Adverse Events|If there is a dose titration, another 4 weeks should be followed up|Up to 4 weeks|Patients with RLS who took at least one dose of Mirapex - Safety Analysis Set||cases|||Number
824022|NCT01170117|Primary|Psychological Change|Comparison of psychological change as measured by the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS), in patients receiving olanzapine compared with those receiving placebo. The Y-BOCS is divided into two sections: obsessive and compulsive. The scores for each section range from 1 to 20. The overall scores are obtained from adding scores for the two sections, to obtain a range between 2-40. A lower score reflects improvement/ fewer obsessive compulsive symptoms. A score of 25 or more is considered moderately severe, a score of 30 or more is considered severe, and a score of more than 35 is considered very severe.|Weekly during 16-week intervention and twice during 8-week follow-up|||YBOCs score units per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
824023|NCT01170117|Primary|Rate of Weight Change|Comparison of rate of weight change between patients receiving olanzapine and those receiving placebo|Weekly during 16-week trial and twice during 8 weeks follow-up|Patients assigned to receive placebo or olanzapine for 16 weeks.||Change in BMI (kg/m2) per month||Standard Error|Mean
824024|NCT01170208|Secondary|Incidence of Severe or Serious Hypoglycemia.||January 2011||||||
824025|NCT01170208|Secondary|Reduction in Fructosamine.||January 2011||||||
824026|NCT01170208|Secondary|Reduction in HbA1c.||January 2011||||||
824027|NCT01170208|Secondary|Clinical Evaluation of ―Over-ride‖ to Determine if the Reason for ―Over-ride‖ Will Affect a Change in the Algorithm.||January 2011||||||
824028|NCT01170208|Primary|Weekly Mean Blood Glucose||Twelve week period from week 4 to week 16|Per Protocol||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824029|NCT01170221|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Pain, by Study Visit|0=no pain, 10=worst pain Only 1 visit per participant for Day 4-6, only 1 visit for Day 7-9, and only 1 visit for Day 10-13.|Multiple|The Intent to Treat analysis set includes data from all randomized participants.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824030|NCT01170221|Secondary|Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Response at the Day 7 Visit|Clinical improvement was defined as improvement in overall clinical status.|Day 7|The Intent to Treat analysis set includes data from all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
824031|NCT01170221|Secondary|Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Response at the 48-72 Hour Visit|Clinical improvement was defined as improvement in overall clinical status.|48-72 Hour Visit|The Intent to Treat analysis set includes data from all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
824032|NCT01170221|Secondary|To Compare the Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Success at the Post Treatment Evaluation Visit in the Clinically Evaluable-Post Treatment Evaluation Analysis Set|Clinical success defined as resolution/near resolution of most disease-specific signs and symptoms, absence/near resolution of systemic signs of infection, no new signs, symptoms, or complications attributable to the ABSSSIs so no further antibiotic therapy was required for the treatment of the primary lesion.|Post-Treatment Evaluation (7-14 days after the End of Therapy)|All randomized patients who received the minimal study therapy, completed EOT and PTE assessments, no concomitant systemic antibiotic therapy through PTE, and had no confounding events or factors.||participants|||Number
824033|NCT01170221|Secondary|Investigator’s Assessment of Clinical Success at the Post Treatment Evaluation Visit|Clinical success defined as resolution/near resolution of most disease-specific signs and symptoms, absence/near resolution of systemic signs of infection, if present at baseline, no new signs, symptoms, or complications attributable to the ABSSSIs so no further antibiotic therapy was required for the treatment of the primary lesion.|Post-Treatment Evaluation (7-14 days after the End of Therapy)|The Intent to Treat analysis set included data from all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
824034|NCT01170221|Secondary|Clinical Response at 48-72 Hours That is Sustained at the End of Therapy Visit in the Clinically Evaluable-End of Therapy Analysis Sets|Responder: No increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature ≤37.6°C|EOT Day 11|All randomized patients receiving minimal study therapy, completed 48-72 Hour and EOT assessments, no concomitant systemic antibiotic therapy through EOT, and had no confounding events or factors||participants|||Number
824035|NCT01170221|Secondary|Clinical Response at 48-72 Hours That is Sustained at the End of Therapy Visit.|Responder: No increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature ≤37.6°C.|Day 11|The ITT analysis set includes data from all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
824119|NCT01179490|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters (Tmax)|Plasma pharmacokinetics (tmax) of unchanged bendamustine|On Day 1 only|||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824038|NCT01170273|Primary|Change in Short Physical Performance Battery Test Score|The short physical performance battery (SPPB) examines 3 areas of lower extremity function: static balance test, gait speed test and getting in and out of a chair test. The total SPPB score is the sum of the scores of the 3 components and can range from 0 to 12, with 0 reflecting severe limitations and 12 minimal or no limitations. The ranges for each subscale are: balance (0-4), gait speed (0-4), sit-to-stand (0-4). In all the subscales, 0 reflects worse outcome and 4 best outcome.|baseline and 9 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824039|NCT01177553|Secondary|Fetal/Neonatal/Infant Survival of the AGA Fetus 6 Months After Birth, Comparing the SLPCV (Selective Laser Photocoagulation of Communicating Vessels) and Expectant Management Groups.||6 months||||||
824040|NCT01177553|Primary|Survival|Effects of surgery or expectant management on postnatal neurological morbidity of the AGA baby. The primary comparison will be between SLPCV (selective laser photocoagulation of communicating vessels) and expectant management.|6 months|||percentage of AGA babies who survived|||Number
824041|NCT01177670|Secondary|Safety Endpoints|The Adiana System will be evaluated for safety on the basis of the occurrence of adverse events which are related to the study device, unanticipated or serious.|At one and two years|Intent to treat||participants|||Number
824042|NCT01177670|Primary|Pregnancy Rate - for Women Informed They May Rely on the Adiana System for Contraception.|The primary efficacy endpoints are the one and two year pregnancy rates among women who have hysterosalpingogram (HSG)-proven bilateral occlusion and are informed that they may rely on the Adiana System for contraception.|At one and two years|Efficacy results were not tabulated due to the early termination of the study. Only 169 of the planned 1,000 subjects (16.9%) were enrolled therefore the study is defined as incomplete, as fewer than one-third of the intended patients were enrolled.|||||
824043|NCT01177709|Secondary|Insulin Level|fasting serum insulin uIU/ml.|baseline, 4 weks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks|||uIU/ml||Standard Error|Mean
824044|NCT01177709|Secondary|Glucose Levels|Fasting glucose|baseline, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks|||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
824045|NCT01177709|Primary|Weight (wt) in Pounds (Lbs)..|Patients weight in pounds|baseline, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks|||weight(wt) in pounds(lbs)||Standard Error|Mean
824046|NCT01177722|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting at Least One Solicited Injection Site Reaction at the Prevenar Injection Site After Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV-Hep B-PRP~T or Infanrix Hexa™ Vaccine|Solicited Injection Site Reactions: Pain, Erythema, and Swelling. Solicited Systemic Reactions: Pyrexia (Temperature), Vomiting, Crying, Somnolence, Anorexia, and Irritability. Grade 3 was defined as: Pain, cries when injected limb is moved or movement of the limb is reduced; Erythema and Swelling, ≥ 5 cm; Pyrexia (Temperature), ≥ 39.6ºC; Vomiting, ≥ 6 episodes/24 hours or requiring parenteral hydration; Crying, > 3 hours; Somnolence, sleeping most of time or difficult to wake up; Anorexia, refuses ≥ 3 feed/meals or refuses most feeds/meals; and Irritability, inconsolable.|Day 0 up to 7 post each vaccination|Solicited injection site and systemic reactions were assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine (Safety Analysis Set).||Participants|||Number
824047|NCT01177722|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting at Least One Solicited Injection Site (Study Vaccine) or Systemic Reactions After Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV-Hep B-PRP~T or Infanrix Hexa Vaccine|Solicited Injection Site Reactions: Pain, Erythema, and Swelling. Solicited Systemic Reactions: Pyrexia (Temperature), Vomiting, Crying, Somnolence, Anorexia,and Irritability. Grade 3 was defined as: Pain, cries when injected limb is moved or movement of the limb is reduced; Erythema and Swelling, ≥ 5 cm; Pyrexia, (Temperature) ≥ 39.6°C; Vomiting, ≥ 6 episodes/24 hours or requiring parenteral hydration; Crying, > 3 hours; Somnolence, sleeping most of time or difficult to wake up; Anorexia, refuses ≥ 3 feed/meals or refuses most feeds/meals; and Irritability, inconsolable.|Day 0 up to 7 after each dose|Solicited injection site and systemic reactions were assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine (Safety Analysis Set).||Participants|||Number
824048|NCT01177722|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) of Antibodies After Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV-Hep B-PRP~T or Infanrix Hexa Vaccine|Antibodies were measured by toxin neutralization test for Diphtheria (D); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for Tetanus (T), Pertussis toxoid (PT), and Filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA); neutralization assay for Poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3; chemiluminescence detection for Hepatitis B (Hep B), and Farr type radioimmunoassay for Haemophilus influenza type b (PRP).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and 30 days post-dose 3|GMTs were assessed in all subjects who did not have any protocol violation that might interfere with primary criteria evaluation (Per Protocol Population).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824049|NCT01177722|Primary|Number of Participants With Seroprotection or Vaccine Response After Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV-Hep B-PRP~T or Infanrix Hexa Vaccine|Seroprotection was defined as titers ≥ 0.01 IU/mL for Diphtheria (D) and Tetanus (T); ≥ 10 IU/mL for Hep B; ≥ 0.15 µg/mL for PRP, and ≥ 8 (1/dil) for Poliovirus. Vaccine response for PT and FHA were defined as a titer ≥ lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) in initially seronegative participants, or at least persistence (post-vaccination titer ≥ pre-vaccination titer) in initially seropositive subjects (titer ≥ LLOQ).|30 Days post-dose 3|Seroprotection and vaccine response were assessed in all subjects who did not have any protocol violation that might interfere with primary criteria evaluation (Per Protocol Population).||Participants|||Number
824050|NCT01177722|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) of Anti-Hepatitis B Before and After 3 Dose Primary Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV-Hep B-PRP~T Batch A, B, or C, or Infanrix Hexa™|Antibodies against Hepatitis B (Hep B) were measured by chemiluminescence detection.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) Dose 1 and 30 days post-vaccination|GMTs were assessed in all subjects who did not have any protocol violation that might interfere with primary criteria evaluation (Per-Protocol Population).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824120|NCT01179490|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters (Cmax)|Plasma pharmacokinetics (Cmax) of unchanged bendamustine|On Day 1 only|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824055|NCT01177800|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|The AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant participating in a clinical study that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the pharmaceutical/biological agent under study. A serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); significant disability; congenital (occurred before birth, due to parent’s genetic input) anomaly.|Baseline up to end of study (Week 26)|Safety Population included all participants randomly assigned to infliximab or placebo group.||participants|||Number
824056|NCT01177800|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Week 26|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific QOL instrument designed to assess impact of disease on a participants QOL. It is a 10-item questionnaire that, in addition to evaluating overall, QOL can be used to assess 6 different aspects: symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure, work or school performance, personal relationships and treatment. Questions scored on a 4-point Likert scale: 0 (not relevant), 1 (a little), 2 (a lot), and 3 (very much). Scores of individual items (0-3) were added to yield a total score (0-30); higher score = greater impairment of participants QOL.|Baseline and Week 26|ITT population included all participants randomly assigned to Infliximab or placebo group. 'n' included those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specific time points.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824057|NCT01177800|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Static Physician Global Assessment (PGA) Score Less Than Equal to 1 at Week 10|The Static physician global assessment (PGA) determines psoriasis lesions overall at given time point. Overall lesions graded for I (0= no evidence of plaque elevation to 5= severe plaque elevation), E (0 = no evidence of E, hyperpigmentation may be present to 5=dusky to deep red coloration), S (0 = no evidence of S to 5 = severe; very thick tenacious scale predominates). Sum of 3 scales divided by 3 gives final PGA score. Range for final score is 0 = cleared, except for residual discoloration, 1 = minimal, 2 = mild, 3=moderate, 4= marked and 5= severe; Scores should be rounded to the nearest whole number. If total ≤1.49, score = 1; if total≥ 1.50, score = 2. Percentage of participants with static PGA score <= 1 at week 10 were reported.|Week 10|ITT population included all participants randomly assigned to Infliximab or placebo group.||percentage of participants|||Number
824058|NCT01177800|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Week 10|The DLQI is a dermatology-specific quality of life (QOL) instrument designed to assess impact of disease on a participants QOL. It is a 10-item questionnaire that, in addition to evaluating overall, QOL can be used to assess 6 different aspects: symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure, work or school performance, personal relationships and treatment. Questions scored on a 4-point Likert scale: 0 (not relevant), 1 (a little), 2 (a lot), and 3 (very much). Scores of individual items (0-3) were added to yield a total score (0-30); higher score = greater impairment of participants QOL.|Baseline and Week 10|ITT population included all participants randomly assigned to Infliximab or placebo group. Here 'n' included those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specific time points.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824059|NCT01177800|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Greater Than Equal to 75 Percent Response in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)|The PASI score is based on the assessment of the erythema (e), induration (I), scaling (S), and the body is divided into 4 regions head, trunk, upper extremities, lower extremities. The assessment was done on 4-point scale (where, 0 = none, 1 = slight, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, and 4 = very severe). The total possible score ranges from 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease). Participants with no less than 75 percent relative Baseline improvement in the PASI scores are considered to be PASI 75 responders.|Week 10|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants randomly assigned to Infliximab or placebo group.||percentage of participants|||Number
824060|NCT01177813|Other Pre-specified|Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Adverse Events|"Confirmed hypoglycaemic events refer to all hypoglycaemic events, that had a glucose value <= 70 ml/dL or where assistance was required.
Symptomatic hypoglycaemic events were to be reported as adverse events. Patients can be counted in more than one category."|From first drug intake until 7 days after last medication intake, up to 219 days|Treated set (actual) including all patients treated with at least 1 dose of randomised trial medication with some treatment switchers (1 from Empa25 to placebo; 1 patient got Empa 10 at least with one mis-allocated kit) and open-label set||percentage of participants|||Number
824061|NCT01177813|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure (SBP and DBP)|"The term “baseline” refers to the last observation before the start of randomised trial treatment (or of open-label treatment for the open-label arm).
In this endpoint, the measured values show unadjusted values, whereas the statistical analyses show adjusted values. Statistics for open-label group are descriptive.
For blood pressure, data following changes in antihypertensive therapy is censored, in the same way that data following initiation of rescue medication is censored."|Baseline and week 24|FAS and open-label set, last observation carried forward without values following a change in antihypertensive therapy (LOCF- H) was used as the imputation rule||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
824062|NCT01177813|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Body Weight|"The term “baseline” refers to the last observation before the start of randomised trial treatment (or of open-label treatment for the open-label arm).
In this endpoint, the measured values show unadjusted values, whereas the statistical analyses show adjusted values. Statistics for open-label group are descriptive."|Baseline and day 169|FAS (LOCF) and open-label set (LOCF)||kg||Standard Error|Mean
824063|NCT01177813|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) After 24 Weeks|"The term “baseline” refers to the last observation before the start of randomised trial treatment (or of open-label treatment for the open-label arm).
In this endpoint, the measured values show unadjusted values, whereas the statistical analyses show adjusted values. Statistics for open-label group are descriptive."|Baseline and day 169|FAS and open-label set, last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule for both sets||percent of HbA1c||Standard Error|Mean
824064|NCT01179048|Secondary|Time From Randomisation to Each Individual Component of the Composite Microvascular Outcome and to the Retinopathy and Nephropathy Composite Outcomes Separately.|Time from randomisation to each individual component of the composite microvascular outcome and to the retinopathy and nephropathy composite outcomes separately. The percentage of subjects experiencing each individual component of the composite microvascular outcome are presented.|from randomisation (visit 3; month 0) to last contact (visit 16; up to month 60+30 days)|All randomised subjects||Percentage of subjects|||Number
824065|NCT01179048|Secondary|Time From Randomisation to First Occurrence of a Composite Microvascular Outcome|"Time from randomisation to first occurrence of a composite microvascular outcome, defined as any one of the following:
new onset of persistent macroalbuminuria
persistent doubling of serum creatinine
need for continuous renal replacement therapy
death due to renal disease
need for retinal photocoagulation or treatment with intravitreal agents
vitreous haemorrhage
diabetes-related blindness
The percentage of subjects experiencing a first occurrence of a composite microvascular outcome is presented."|from randomisation (visit 3; month 0) to last contact (visit 16; up to month 60+30 days)|All randomised subjects.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
824066|NCT01179048|Secondary|Time From Randomisation to Each Individual Component of the Expanded Composite Cardiovascular Outcome|Time from randomisation to each individual component of the expanded composite cardiovascular outcome. The percentage of subjects experiencing each of the individual component of the expanded composite cardiovascular outcome (defined as either cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, coronary revascularisation, hospitalisation for unstable angina or heart failure) is presented.|from randomisation (visit 3; month 0) to last contact (visit 16; up to month 60+30 days)|All the randomised subjects.||percentage of subjects|||Number
824067|NCT01179048|Secondary|Time From Randomisation to All Cause Death|Time from randomisation to all cause death. The percentage of subjects with a death by any cause (all-cause death) is presented.|from randomisation (visit 3; month 0) to last contact (visit 16; up to month 60+30 days)|All randomised subjects||percentage of subjects|||Number
824068|NCT01179048|Secondary|Time From Rand. to First Occurrence of an Expanded Composite Cardiovascular Outcome Defined as Either Cardiovascular Death, Non-fatal Myocardial Infarction, Non-fatal Stroke, Revascularisation, Hospitalisation for Unstable Angina or for Heart Failure.|Time from randomisation to first occurrence of an expanded composite cardiovascular outcome defined as either cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, coronary revascularisation, hospitalisation for unstable angina or for heart failure. The percentage of subjects experiencing first occurrence of an expanded composite cardiovascular outcome defined as either cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, coronary revascularisation, hospitalisation for unstable angina or for heart failure is presented.|from randomisation (visit 3; month 0) to last contact (visit 16; up to month 60+30 days)|All randomised subjects.||percentage of subjects|||Number
824069|NCT01179048|Primary|Time From Randomisation to First Occurrence of Cardiovascular Death, Non-fatal Myocardial Infarction, or Non-fatal Stroke (a Composite Cardiovascular Outcome)|Time from randomisation to first occurrence of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke (a composite cardiovascular outcome). The percentage of subjects experiencing a first event of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke (a composite cardiovascular outcome) is presented.|from randomisation (visit 3; month 0) to last contact (visit 16; up to month 60+30 days)|All randomised subjects.||percentage of subjects|||Number
824070|NCT01179113|Secondary|Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting|Number of participants that experienced Postoperative nausea and vomiting using at PACU|1 day|||participants|||Number
824071|NCT01179113|Secondary|Opioid Consumption in PACU Obtained From the Recorded Data|Postoperative use of opioid (Hydromorphone) consumption inside hospital at PACU (recorded by study staff and data obtained from patient charts).|1 day|||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824072|NCT01179113|Primary|Post-operative Pain Using Verbal Rating Scale (VRS)|"Verbal Rating Scale goes from 0 to 10, where:
0 indicates= No pain and 10 indicates= The worst possible pain
The information was be recorded by study staff and data obtained from patient and patient charts from post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay"|1 day|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824121|NCT01179490|Secondary|Number of Abnormalities (Grade ≥3) in Laboratory Test Values|Abnormalities in laboratory test values in overall study period were analyzed. Severity of abnormalities were evaluated using CTCAE.|Up to 2 years|||Events|||Number
824087|NCT01179217|Secondary|The Effect of Oral L-glutamine on Vital Signs|To assess the effect of oral L-glutamine on Vital signs (respiration). Change from Baseline will be reported at Weeks 4, 24, and 48.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 24 and Week 48|Safety Population which includes all patients that took at least one dose of study medication.||breaths/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
824088|NCT01179217|Secondary|Effect of Oral L-glutamine on Vital Signs|To assess the effect of oral L-glutamine on Vital signs (temperature). Change from Baseline will be reported at Weeks 4, 24, and 48.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 24 and Week 48|Safety Population which includes all patients that took at least one dose of study medication.||degree C||Standard Deviation|Mean
824089|NCT01179217|Secondary|The Effect of Oral L-glutamine on Vital Signs|To assess the effect of oral L-glutamine on Vital signs (pulse rate). Change from Baseline will be reported at Weeks 4, 24, and 48.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 24 and Week 48|Safety Population which includes all patients that took at least one dose of study medication.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
824090|NCT01179217|Secondary|The Effect of Oral L-glutamine on Hematological Parameters|To assess the effect of oral L-glutamine on hematological parameters (reticulocyte count), Change from Baseline will be reported at Weeks 4, 24 and 48.|Baseline, Week 4, 24 and 48|Safety population - The safety population included all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||1000 cells/uL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824091|NCT01179217|Secondary|The Effect of Oral L-glutamine on Hematological Parameters|To assess the effect of oral L-glutamine on hematological parameters (hematocrit), Change from Baseline will be reported at Weeks 4, 24 and 48.|Baseline, Week 4, 24 and 48|Safety population - The safety population included all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||% of red blood cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
824092|NCT01179217|Secondary|The Effect of Oral L-glutamine on Vital Signs|To assess the effect of oral L-glutamine on Vital signs (systolic and diastolic blood pressure). Change from Baseline will be reported at Weeks 4, 24, and 48.|Baseline, Week 4, 24, and 48|Safety Population which includes all patients that took at least one dose of study medication.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824093|NCT01179217|Secondary|The Effect of Oral -L-glutamine on Hematological Parameters|To assess the effect of oral L-glutamine on hematological parameters (hemoglobin), Change from Baseline will be reported at Weeks 4, 24 and 48.|Baseline, Week 4, 24 and 48|Safety population - The safety population included all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824094|NCT01179217|Secondary|The Number of Emergency Room/Medical Facility Visits for Sickle Cell Pain|The number of emergency room visits or medical facility visits that occur from Week 0 to Week 48, will be used to evaluate the efficacy of oral L-glutamine as a treatment for sickle cell anemia and beta-0 thalassemia.|48 weeks|Intent-to-Treat Population - Included all patients who were randomized and dispensed study medication.||Number of ER visits||Full Range|Median
824095|NCT01179217|Secondary|The Number of Hospitalizations for Sickle Cell Pain|The number of hospitalizations that occur from Week 0 to Week 48, will be used to evaluate the efficacy of oral L-glutamine as a treatment for sickle cell anemia and beta-0 thalassemia.|48 weeks|Intent-to-Treat Population - Included all patients who were randomized and dispensed study medication.||Number of hospitalizations||Full Range|Median
824096|NCT01179217|Primary|The Number of Occurrences of Sickle Cell Crises|The number of occurrences of protocol-defined sickle cell crises that occur from Week 0 to Week 48 will be used to evaluate the efficacy of oral L-glutamine as a treatment for sickle cell anemia and beta-0 thalassemia.|48 weeks|Intent-to-Treat Population - Included all patients who were randomized and dispensed study medication.||Number of crises||Full Range|Median
824097|NCT01179334|Secondary|Area Under Effect Curve (AUEC) of Standing HR Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|The area under effect curve (AUEC) at each visit of standing HR describes an average within-subject increase in HR from baseline over a time-period of 4 hours post-dose (Note that the area only takes values above the individual baseline for the respective visit into account. The area that would result from a decrease from baseline is not taken into account for the calculation of the area). Baseline was the last HR recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||Beats/min*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824122|NCT01179490|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Abnormality (Grade ≥3) in Laboratory Test Values|"Abnormalities in laboratory test values in overall study period were analyzed. Severity of abnormalities were evaluated using CTCAE.
grade 1 : mild
grade 2 : moderate
grade 3 : severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening
grade 4 : life threatening or disabling
grade 5 : death related to AE"|Up to 2 years|||Participants|||Number
824098|NCT01179334|Secondary|Area Under Effect Curve (AUEC) of Supine HR Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|The area under effect curve (AUEC) at each visit of supine HR describes an average within-subject change in HR from baseline over a time-period of 4 hours post-dose (Note that the area only takes values above the individual baseline for the respective visit into account. The area that would result from a decrease from baseline is not taken into account for the calculation of the area). Baseline was the last HR recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||Beats/min*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824099|NCT01179334|Secondary|Area Under Effect Curve (AUEC) of Standing DBP Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|The area under effect curve (AUEC) at each visit of standing DBP describes an average within-subject change in DBP from baseline over a time-period of 4 hours post-dose (Note that the area only takes values below the individual baseline for the respective visit into account. The area that would result from an increase from baseline is not taken into account for the calculation of the area). Baseline was the last DBP recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||mmHg*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824100|NCT01179334|Secondary|Area Under Effect Curve (AUEC) of Supine DBP Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|The area under effect curve (AUEC) at each visit of supine DBP describes an average within-subject change in DBP from baseline over a time-period of 4 hours post-dose (Note that the area only takes values below the individual baseline for the respective visit into account. The area that would result from an increase from baseline is not taken into account for the calculation of the area). Baseline was the last DBP recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||mmHg*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824101|NCT01179334|Secondary|Area Under Effect Curve (AUEC) of Standing SBP Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|The area under effect curve (AUEC) at each visit of standing SBP describes an average within-subject change in SBP from baseline over a time-period of 4 hours post-dose (Note that the area only takes values below the individual baseline for the respective visit into account. The area that would result from an increase from baseline is not taken into account for the calculation of the area). Baseline was the last SBP recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||mmHg*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824102|NCT01179334|Secondary|Area Under Effect Curve (AUEC) of Supine SBP Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|The area under the effect curve (AUEC) at each visit of supine SBP describes an average within-subject change in SBP from baseline over a time-period of 4 hours post-dose (Note that the area only takes values below the individual baseline for the respective visit into account. The area that would result from an increase from baseline is not taken into account for the calculation of the area). Baseline was the last SBP recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||mmHg*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824103|NCT01179334|Secondary|Maximum Change From Baseline in Standing Heart Rate (HR) Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|Heart rate (HR) was measured as standard vital sign parameter. Range allowed in this study: <= 105 beats per minute (bpm) in the first 2 hours after intake of background treatment with sildenafil. The maximum change from baseline at each visit was defined as the within-subject maximum increase from baseline (or zero if baseline was higher than all subsequent HR measurements in that profile) within 4 hours post-dose. Baseline was the last HR recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||Beats/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
824104|NCT01179334|Secondary|Maximum Change From Baseline in Supine Heart Rate (HR) Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|Heart rate (HR) was measured as standard vital sign parameter. Range allowed in this study: <= 105 beats per minute (bpm) in the first 2 hours after intake of background treatment with sildenafil. The maximum change from baseline at each visit was defined as the within-subject maximum increase from baseline (or zero if baseline was higher than all subsequent HR measurements in that profile) within 4 hours post-dose. Baseline was the last HR recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||Beats/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
824105|NCT01179334|Secondary|Maximum Change From Baseline in Standing Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|Diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was measured as standard vital sign parameter. Range allowed in this study: <= 110 mmHg. The maximum change from baseline at each visit was defined as the within-subject maximum decrease from baseline (or zero if baseline was lower than all subsequent DBP measurements in that profile) within 4 hours post-dose. Baseline was the last DBP recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824106|NCT01179334|Secondary|Maximum Change From Baseline in Supine Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|Diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was measured as standard vital sign parameter. Range allowed in this study: <= 110 mmHg. The maximum change from baseline at each visit was defined as the within-subject maximum decrease from baseline (or zero if baseline was lower than all subsequent DBP measurements in that profile) within 4 hours post-dose. Baseline was the last DBP recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824107|NCT01179334|Secondary|Maximum Change From Baseline in Standing Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|Systolic blood pressure (SBP) was measured as standard vital sign parameter. Range allowed in this study: <= 180 mmHg. In addition, SBP must be >=95 mmHg in the first 2 hours after intake of background treatment with sildenafil. The maximum change from baseline at each visit was defined as the within-subject maximum decrease from baseline (or zero if baseline was lower than all subsequent SBP measurements in that profile) within 4 hours post-dose. Baseline was the last SBP recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|PD analysis set||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824123|NCT01179490|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events, Related Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events, and Related Serious Adverse Events|Adverse events were evaluated using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.02, Japan Clinical Oncology Group/Japan Society of Clinical Oncology (JCOG/JSCO) version, and were encoded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA).|Up to 2 years|||Events|||Number
824108|NCT01179334|Primary|Maximum Change From Baseline in Supine Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) Within 4 Hours Post-dose at Visit 6 (Week 12)|Systolic blood pressure (SBP) was measured as standard vital sign parameter. Range allowed in this study: <= 180 mmHg. In addition, SBP must be >=95 mmHg in the first 2 hours after intake of background treatment with sildenafil. The maximum change from baseline at each visit was defined as the within-subject maximum decrease from baseline (or zero if baseline was lower than all subsequent SBP measurements in that profile) within 4 hours post-dose. Baseline was the last SBP recorded at and within 30 minutes before intake of study drug.|Pre-dose (baseline) and within 4 hours post-dose at visit 6 (week 12)|pharmacodynamic(s) (PD) analysis set||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824109|NCT01179347|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Revised Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire (CFQ-R) Score|Different format of CFQ-R are used depending of the patients' age. Adolescent and adult format of CFQ-R is used for patients of 14 years and older, for younger children a parent version and a children format is used. In case parent and children questionnaires were filled out, the children questionnaire is taken into account. Scores were calculated for each domain of the CFQ-R which are presented separately. A score of 100 corresponds to the highest quality of life possible, whereas a score of 0 corresponds to the lowest quality of life possible. Increasing score indicates better health.|Baseline and 12 weeks|FAS reduced to patients having CFQ-R information at baseline and at week 12.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824110|NCT01179347|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 1 Pulmonary Exacerbation During Double-blind Treatment|Selected questions from the Respiratory and Systemic Symptoms Questionnaire (RSSQ), the investigator assessment of physical findings and pulmonary function, and the use of intravenous antibiotics as a concomitant therapy were used to determine if a cystic fibrosis-related pulmonary exacerbation had occurred.|12 weeks|FAS reduced to patients having RSSQ information on day 29, 57 or 85.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
824111|NCT01179347|Secondary|Pre-bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Flow Between 25 Percent and 75 Percent of the FVC (FEF25−75) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline in percent of predicted at the end of 12-week double-blind treatment period and is therefore expressed in percent of predicted. FEF25−75 is also known as maximum mid-expiratory flow and was measured before bronchodilator (salbutamol) use. Means are adjusted for treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, age group (<= 11, >=12), baseline and baseline-by-visit interaction.|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) with imputation reduced to patients with observed wash-out compliance. The FAS was defined as all patients in the treated set who had at least 1 baseline pulmonary function test (PFT) measurement and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PFT measurement. No patients <5 years of age were included in the FAS.||Percent of predicted||Standard Error|Mean
824112|NCT01179347|Secondary|Trough FVC Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline in percent of predicted at the end of 12-week double-blind treatment period and is therefore expressed in percent of predicted. Trough FCV was defined as the pre-dose FVC measured just prior to the administration of randomised treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, age group (<= 11, >=12), baseline and baseline-by-visit interaction.|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) with imputation reduced to patients with observed wash-out compliance. The FAS was defined as all patients in the treated set who had at least 1 baseline pulmonary function test (PFT) measurement and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PFT measurement. No patients <5 years of age were included in the FAS.||Percent of predicted||Standard Error|Mean
824113|NCT01179347|Secondary|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Area Under the Curve 0-4 Hours (AUC0-4h) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline in percent of predicted at the end of 12-week double-blind treatment period and is therefore expressed in percent of predicted. Means are adjusted for treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, age group (<= 11, >=12), baseline and baseline-by-visit interaction. FVC AUC0-4h was normalised for time and was calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (4 h).|30 minutes (min) before first dosing of study drug (defined as baseline), at 1 hour (h), 2 h , 3 h, and 4 h post dosing at day 1 and at 30 min before dosing, at 1 hour, 2 h , 3 h, and 4 h post dosing after 12 weeks.|Full Analysis Set (FAS) with imputation reduced to patients with observed wash-out compliance. The FAS was defined as all patients in the treated set who had at least 1 baseline pulmonary function test (PFT) measurement and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PFT measurement. No patients <5 years of age were included in the FAS.||Percent of predicted||Standard Error|Mean
824114|NCT01179347|Primary|Trough FEV1 Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline in percent of predicted at the end of 12-week double-blind treatment period and is therefore expressed in percent of predicted. Trough FEV1 was defined as the pre-dose FEV1 measured just prior to the administration of randomised treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, age group (<= 11, >=12), baseline and baseline-by-visit interaction.|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) with imputation reduced to patients with observed wash-out compliance. The FAS was defined as all patients in the treated set who had at least 1 baseline pulmonary function test (PFT) measurement and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PFT measurement. No patients <5 years of age were included in the FAS.||Percent of predicted||Standard Error|Mean
824115|NCT01179347|Primary|Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Area Under the Curve 0-4 Hours (AUC0-4h) Response|Mixed Model Repeated Measurement (MMRM) results. Response was defined as change from baseline in percent of predicted at the end of 12-week double-blind treatment period and is therefore expressed in percent of predicted. Means are adjusted for treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, age group (<= 11, >=12), baseline and baseline-by-visit interaction. FEV1 AUC0-4h was normalised for time and was calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (4 h).|30 minutes (min) before first dosing of study drug (defined as baseline), at 1 hour (h), 2 h , 3 h, and 4 h post dosing at day 1 and at 30 min before dosing, at 1 hour, 2 h , 3 h, and 4 h post dosing after 12 weeks.|Full Analysis Set (FAS) with imputation reduced to patients with observed wash-out compliance. The FAS was defined as all patients in the treated set who had at least 1 baseline pulmonary function test (PFT) measurement and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PFT measurement. No patients <5 years of age were included in the FAS.||Percent of predicted||Standard Error|Mean
824116|NCT01179399|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) and Recommended Phase 2 Dose (RP2D) of TAK-960|Adverse events, serious adverse events, assessments of clinical laboratory values, vital sign measurements and electrocardiograms (ECGs)|up to 12 months|Maximum tolerable dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of TAK-960 were not determined due to sponsor decision to discontinue the study for business reasons.|||||
824124|NCT01179490|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Adverse Event, Related Adverse Event, Serious Adverse Event, and Related Serious Adverse Event|Adverse events were evaluated using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.02, Japan Clinical Oncology Group/Japan Society of Clinical Oncology (JCOG/JSCO) version, and were encoded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA).|Up to 2 years|||Participants|||Number
824125|NCT01179490|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is the period from the date of patient registration to the date of death.|Up to 2 years|||Days||Full Range|Median
824126|NCT01179490|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR)|DOR is the period from the date of achieving CR or PR to either the date of recurrence, exacerbation, progression or death.|Up to 2 years|||Days||Full Range|Median
824127|NCT01179490|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure (TTF)|TTF is the period from patient registration to either the date of recurrence, exacerbation, progression, death or discontinuation of treatment.|Up to 2 years|||Days||Full Range|Median
824128|NCT01179490|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|"PFS is the period from patient registration to either the date of recurrence, exacerbation, progression or death.
Recurrence, exacerbation, progression were assessed from serum M-protein, urine M-protein, serum free light chain (FLC), the percentage of marrow plasma cells, disappearance of clonal plasma cells, plasma cell tumor in soft tissue, and bone lesion."|Up to 2 years|||Days||Full Range|Median
824129|NCT01179490|Secondary|Response Rate (Based on the Modified SWOG Criteria)|"The proportion of subjects evaluated as response (CR + PR) was calculated.
PR (SWOG) requires the followings:
Decline in myeloma protein of ≥25%–<74% in serum myeloma protein
Reduction in 24h urinary myeloma protein of ≥25%–<89%
No increase in skeletal destruction
Serum calcium within normal range"|Up to 36 weeks|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824130|NCT01179490|Secondary|Response Rate (Based on the Bladé Criteria)|"The proportion of subjects evaluated as response (CR + PR) was calculated.
PR (Bladé) requires 1. or all of the others:
Some, but not all, of the criteria for CR are fulfilled
≥50% reduction in the level of the serum monoclonal paraprotein, maintained for a minimum of 6 weeks.
Reduction in 24 h urinary light chain excretion either by ≥90% or to <200 mg, maintained for a minimum of 6 weeks.
For patients with non-secretory myeloma only, ≥50% reduction in plasma cells in a bone marrow aspirate and on trephine biopsy, if biopsy is performed, maintained for a minimum of 6 weeks.
≥50% reduction in the size of soft tissue plasmacytomas (by radiography or clinical examination).
No increase in size or number of lytic bone lesions (development of a compression fracture does not exclude response)."|Up to 36 weeks|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824131|NCT01179490|Secondary|CR Rate Based on the (Bladé) Criteria|"The proportion of subjects evaluated as CR was calculated.
CR (Bladé) requires all of the followings:
Absence of the original monoclonal paraprotein in serum and urine by immunofixation, maintained for a minimum of 6 weeks. The presence of oligoclonal bands consistent with oligoclonal immune reconstitution does not exclude CR.
<5% plasma cells in a bone marrow aspirate and also on trephine bone biopsy, if biopsy is performed. If absence of monoclonal protein is sustained for 6 weeks it is not necessary to repeat the bone marrow, except in patients with non-secretory myeloma where the marrow examination must be repeated after an interval of at least 6 weeks to confirm CR.
No increase in size or number of lytic bone lesions (development of a compression fracture does not exclude response)
Disappearance of soft tissue plasmacytomas"|Up to 36 weeks|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824132|NCT01179490|Secondary|Response Rate (Based on the IMWG Criteria)|"The proportion of subjects evaluated as response [sCR + CR + very good partial response (VGPR) + Partial Response (PR)] was calculated.
VGPR (IMWG): Serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or 90% or greater reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein level <100mg per 24 h
PR (IMWG): ≥50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction in 24 h urinary M-protein by ≥90% or to <200mg per 24 h"|Up to 36 weeks|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824133|NCT01179490|Secondary|CR Rate [Based on the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Criteria]|"The proportion of subjects evaluated as CR [strict CR (sCR) + CR] was calculated.
sCR (IMWG): CR as defined below plus Normal FLC ratio and absence of clonal cells in bone marrow by immunohistochemistry or immunofluorescence
CR (IMWG): Negative immunofixation on the serum and urine and disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and <5% plasma cells in bone marrow"|Up to 36 weeks|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824134|NCT01179490|Primary|Complete Response (CR) Rate [Based on the Modified Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) Criteria]|"The proportion of subjects evaluated as CR was calculated.
CR (modified SWOG) requires all of the followings:
Decline in serum myeloma protein by ≥75% to ≤25 g/L
Reduction in 24 h urinary protein by ≥90% to ≤200 mg/24 h
No increase in skeletal destruction
Serum calcium within normal range
No blood transfusion required in the previous 3 months"|Up to 36 weeks|||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824135|NCT01179516|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score|The Sheehan Disability Scale assesses functional impairment in 3 domains: work/school, social life or leisure activities, and home life or family responsibilities. The participant rates the extent to which each aspect is impaired on a 10-point visual analog scale, from 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely). The 3 scores are added together to calculate the total score, which ranges from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating more impairment. LS means were from mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) ANCOVA with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline SDS total score-by-week as fixed effects.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824136|NCT01179516|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in MADRS Remission at Week 8|Remission is defined as a participant with a Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≤10. The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 to 6. The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). Decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement.|Week 8|Full analysis set, last observation carried forward was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
824219|NCT01180790|Secondary|Segment 1 and Segment 2: End of Treatment Response|The percentage of the Virology Population subjects that were reported as undetectable HCV RNA at the completion of treatment.|Week 48 (Segment 1); Week 24 (Segment 2)|Segment 2 analyzed the Per Protocol Population, which includes all randomized subjects who completed 12 weeks of ACH-014625 dosing and an additional 12 weeks of Peg/Ribavirin dosing.||percentage of participants|||Number
824137|NCT01179516|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MADRS Total Score at Week 8 in Participants With Baseline Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) Total Score ≥ 20|"The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 (normal) to 6 (most abnormal). The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). A decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement. LS means are from a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) ANCOVA with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline MADRS total score-by-week as fixed effects.
HAM-A is a 14 item rating scale to quantify anxiety severity rated on a 5-point scale from 0 (not present) to 4 (severe) with a total score range from 0 to 56, where lower scores indicate mild severity."|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set patients with a HAM-A Baseline score ≥ 20. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824138|NCT01179516|Secondary|Mean Clinical Global Impression Scale - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 8|The Clinical Global Impression - global improvement assesses the participant's improvement (or worsening) as assessed by the clinician relative to Baseline on a 7-point scale: 1, very much improved; 2, much improved; 3, minimally improved; 4, no change; 5, minimally worse; 6, much worse; or 7, very much worse. LS means were from a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) ANCOVA with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score-by-week as fixed effects.|Week 8|The Full Analysis Set. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824139|NCT01179516|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a MADRS Response at Week 8|Response is defined as a participant with a ≥50% decrease in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from Baseline. The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 to 6. The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). Decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set, last observation carried forward was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
824140|NCT01179516|Primary|Change From Baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score|The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 (normal) to 6 (most abnormal). The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). A decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement. Least squares (LS) means are from a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with treatment, center, week, treatment-by-week interaction, Baseline MADRS total score-by-week as fixed effects.|Baseline and Week 8|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug, and had at least 1 valid post-baseline value for assessment of primary efficacy. A mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) based on observed cases was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824141|NCT01179568|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS)|The WSAS is a modification of a scale introduced by Hafner and Marks (1976), consisting of 0-8 point ratings of the extent to which symptoms interfere with five areas of daily functioning: work, home management, private leisure, social leisure, and family relationships. It is a well-validated, widely used self-report measure. Additional time points include weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 40. A total score calculated as a sum of all items (possible range 0-40) was used in the analyses with higher scores indicating more impairment. For the pre-specified analyses we compared change in the WSAS total score from baseline (calculated as baseline score minus week 20 score) for CIT with CGT vs PLA with CGT (aim 2), and for CIT with CGT vs CIT (aim 3) based on the intention-to-treat principle including all randomized participants.|Baseline and week 20|Prespecified secondary analyses of self-report ratings of grief-related functional impairment (WSAS) compared changes in scores using a weighted linear regression with inverse probability weighting to adjust for missing assessments.||score change from baseline to wk20||Standard Deviation|Mean
824142|NCT01179568|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS)|The WSAS is a modification of a scale introduced by Hafner and Marks (1976), consisting of 0-8 point ratings of the extent to which symptoms interfere with five areas of daily functioning: work, home management, private leisure, social leisure, and family relationships. It is a well-validated, widely used self-report measure. Additional time points include weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 40. A total score calculated as a sum of all items (possible range 0-40) was used in the analyses with higher scores indicating more impairment. For the pre-specified analyses we compared change in the WSAS total score from baseline (calculated as baseline score minus week 12 score) for CIT vs PLA at week 12 (aim 1), based on the intention-to-treat principle including all randomized participants.|Baseline and week 12|Prespecified secondary analyses of self-report ratings of grief-related functional impairment (WSAS) compared changes in scores using a weighted linear regression with inverse probability weighting to adjust for missing assessments.||score change from baseline to wk12||Standard Deviation|Mean
824143|NCT01179568|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inventory of Complicated Grief (ICG)|The 19-item self-report instrument assesses symptoms of complicated grief. Responses on individual items are added up to a total score, which can range from 0 to 76 with higher scores indicating more intense symptoms. This scale has been utilized previously in treatment studies of CG. Additional times points include weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 40. For the pre-specified analyses we compared change in the ICG total score from baseline (calculated as baseline score minus week 20 score) for CIT with CGT vs PLA with CGT (aim 2), and for CIT with CGT vs CIT (aim 3) based on the intention-to-treat principle including all randomized participants.|Baseline and week 20|Prespecified secondary analyses of self-report ratings of CG symptoms (ICG) compared changes in scores using a weighted linear regression with inverse probability weighting to adjust for missing assessments.||score change from baseline to wk20||Standard Deviation|Mean
824153|NCT01179672|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline at 12-Week Endpoint in the BPI-Severity Scale|BPI-Severity Scale was a self-reported scale that measured the severity of pain based on the average pain over the past 24-hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine). A negative change indicated an improvement in the participant's condition. LS mean was calculated using MMRM and adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, as well as baseline score and baseline score-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|ITT principle was applied: All participants with a baseline and 12-week, 24-hour BPI-Severity score based on the randomized group were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824144|NCT01179568|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inventory of Complicated Grief (ICG)|The 19-item self-report instrument assesses symptoms of complicated grief. Responses on individual items are added up to a total score, which can range from 0 to 76 with higher scores indicating more intense symptoms. This scale has been utilized previously in treatment studies of CG. Additional times points include weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 40. For the pre-specified analyses we compared change in the ICG total score from baseline (calculated as baseline score minus week 12 score) for CIT vs PLA at week 12 (aim 1), based on the intention-to-treat principle including all randomized participants.|Baseline and week 12|Prespecified secondary analyses of self-report ratings of CG symptoms (ICG) compared changes in scores using a weighted linear regression with inverse probability weighting to adjust for missing assessments.||score change from baseline to wk12||Standard Deviation|Mean
824145|NCT01179568|Primary|Responder Status Based on Complicated Grief Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Scale|Brief rating scale frequently used in clinical trials. For this study, version modified for complicated grief was be used. Response is defined as a score of 1(very much improved) or 2 (much improved) on the scale. The rating was done by an Independent Evaluator.|Weeks 12 and 20|Response rates were compared under the intention-to-treat principle, including all randomized participants in a logistic regression with inverse probability weighting .||percentage of responders|||Number
824146|NCT01179672|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline at 12 Week Endpoint in the SDS Total Score|SDS was self-reported and used to assess the effect of the participant's symptoms on their work (Item 1), social life (Item 2), and family life (Item 3). Each item was measured on a 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely) point scale with higher values indicating greater disruption. SDS total score was the sum of the 3 items and ranged from 0 to 30, with higher values indicating greater disruption in the participant's work/social/family life. Scores ≥5 were associated with significant functional impairment. A negative change indicated an improvement in the participant's condition. LS mean was adjusted using MMRM and adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, baseline score and baseline score-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|All participants with non-missing SDS Total Score at baseline and 12 weeks.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824147|NCT01179672|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline at 12-week Endpoint in the BPI Interference Score|BPI-Interference Score was a self-reported scale that measured the interference of pain based on the average of the 7 questions assessing the interference of pain for general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life. The average interference scores ranged from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes). A negative change indicates an improvement in the participant's condition. LS means was calculated using MMRM and adjusted treatment, pooled investigator, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, baseline score and baseline score-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|All participants with non-missing BPI-Interference score at baseline and 12 weeks.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824148|NCT01179672|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced Equal to or Greater Than 30%, 50% or 75% Reduction From Baseline at 12-week Endpoint in BPI-Severity Average Pain Score|BPI-Severity scale was a self-reported scale that measured the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24 hours. The severity scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as severe as you can imagine). A negative change indicated an improvement in the participant's condition. Percentage of participants was calculated as: (number of participants with 30% [or 50% or 75%] reduction in BPI-Severity average pain) divided by (number of participants) multiplied by 100.|Baseline, 12 weeks|All participants with a baseline and postbaseline BPI-Severity average pain scores.||percentage of participants|||Number
824149|NCT01179672|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience Equal to or Greater Than 30%, 50% or 75% Reduction From Baseline at 12-Week Endpoint in Weekly Mean of Average Daily Pain|24-hour self-assessment of average daily pain was recorded in the participants diary based on an 11 point Likert scale with scores ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Percentage of participants was calculated as: (number of participants with 30% [or 50% or 75%] reduction in average daily pain) divided by (number of participants) multiplied by 100.|Baseline, 12 weeks|All participants with a baseline and postbaseline 24-hour average pain score.||percentage of participants|||Number
824150|NCT01179672|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline at 12-Week Endpoint in the Sensory Subscale of the SF-MPQ|SF-MPQ was a self-reported instrument that consisted of 11 sensory descriptors describing pain. The descriptors were rated on an intensity scale from 0 (none), 1 (mild), 2 (moderate) or 3 (severe). Three (3) pain scores were derived from the sum of the intensity rank values of the words chosen for sensory descriptors. The SF-MPQ sensory subscale was the sum of the 11 scores (ranged from 0 to 33, with 33 being the worst pain). A negative change indicates an improvement. LS mean was calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator and baseline.|Baseline, 12 weeks|ITT principle was applied: All participants with a baseline and 12 weeks SF-MPQ score based on the randomized group were analyzed; last observation carried forward (LOCF).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824151|NCT01179672|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) Scale at 12-Week Endpoint|PGI-I was self-reported and measured a participant's perception of improvement at the time of assessment compared with the start of treatment. Scores ranged from 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse). LS mean was calculated using MMRM and adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, as well as baseline score and baseline score-by-visit interaction.|12 weeks|All participants with a baseline and 12-week PGI-I score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824152|NCT01179672|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline at 12-Week Endpoint in the CGI-S Scale|CGI-S was administered by the investigator in the presence of the participant and measured the severity of illness at the time of assessment compared with start of treatment; CGI-S scores ranged from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill participants). A negative change indicated an improvement in the participant's condition. LS mean was calculated using MMRM and adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, as well as baseline score and baseline score-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|ITT principle was applied: All participants with a baseline and 12-week CGI-S score based on the randomized group were analyzed. Data from 9 sites was not included in analysis due to wrong questionnaire used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827181|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Prior Colonization With Candida by Colonization Index||Baseline|Data for prior colonization by colonization index was not analyzed as the study was retrospective and colonization index was not recorded for the participants.|||||
824154|NCT01179672|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline at 12-Week Endpoint in Weekly Mean of Night Pain and Worst Pain|24-hour average night pain and worst pain severity scores were recorded daily on an 11-point Likert scale, an ordinal scale, with scores ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). A negative change indicated an improvement in the participant's condition. LS mean was calculated using MMRM and adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, as well as the baseline score and baseline score-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|ITT principle was applied: All participants with a baseline and 12-week 24-hour night pain score and worst pain score based on the randomized group were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824155|NCT01179672|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline at 12-Week Endpoint in the Weekly Mean of Pain Severity Score|24-hour average pain severity scores were recorded daily by the participant on an 11-point Likert scale, an ordinal scale, with scores ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). The weekly mean was calculated. A negative change indicated an improvement in participant's condition. Least squares (LS) mean was calculated using mixed model repeating measures (MMRM) and adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction, as well as baseline score and baseline score-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, 12 weeks|Intent-to-treat (ITT) principle was applied: All participants with a baseline and 12-week 24-hour average pain score based on the randomized group were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824156|NCT01179737|Secondary|Total Number of Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events|Adverse events were summarized by the number of patients having any adverse event overall and presented in the safety section. Study was prematurely terminated.|168 days||||||
824157|NCT01179737|Primary|Change in Pulmonary Vascular Resistance (PVR)|Change in pulmonary vascular resistance is measured via right heart catheter assessment according to local hospital procedures. It assesses several prognostic hemodynamic variables in pulmonary hypertension, including Pulmonary Vascular Resistance (PVR). Study was prematurely terminated and not powered for efficacy.|168 days||||||
824158|NCT01179737|Secondary|Change in Six-Minute Walk Distance (6MWD) From Baseline|During standardized walk course participants are connected to a portable pulse oximeter via a finger probe and instructed to walk at a comfortable speed for as far as they could manage in 6 minutes. Study was prematurely terminated and efficacy data were not analyzed or summarized|Baseline, 168 days||||||
824159|NCT01179919|Secondary|Steady-State Cmax and Cmin of Oseltamivir Carboxylate|Cmax is the maximum concentration and Cmin in the minimum concentration of oseltamivir carboxylate measured in nanogram of oseltamivir carboxylate per milliliter of plasma (ng/mL)|6 days|Subjects who received all 9 doses of oseltamivir||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824160|NCT01179919|Primary|Steady-State AUC of Oseltamivir Carboxylate|AUC is the area under the concentration-time curve. This is measured as concentration in nanograms of oseltamivir carboxylate per milliliter of plasma multiplied by time in hours (hour*ng/mL)|6 days|Subjects who received all 9 doses of oseltamivir||hour*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824161|NCT01179984|Secondary|Primary Target Lesion Patency|Percentage of participants with Primary Target Lesion Patency (TLP) at 12 months post-index procedure|12 months post-index procedure|Primary Target Lesion Patency (TLP) at 12 months post-index procedure.||percentage of participants|||Number
824162|NCT01179984|Primary|(Safety) Freedom From Occurrence of Death, Amputation and TVR/TLR at 30-days Post-index Procedure.|"Safety:
Freedom from occurrence of death, amputation and TVR/TLR at 30-days post-index procedure."|30 day follow-up|Freedom from occurrence of death, amputation and TVR/TLR at 30-days post-index procedure.||percentage of freedom from events|||Number
824163|NCT01179984|Primary|Acute Effectiveness: Percentage of Stents With Successful Delivery|"Effectiveness:
Acute effectiveness defined as the successful delivery of the stent with the post-deployment stent length being within 10% of the pre-deployment length."|At implantation (Day 0)|||percentage of stents|Stents|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
824193|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 10|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 10|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824172|NCT01180127|Secondary|VO2max|measured at randomization, i.e., before exposure to the intervention, and then again after completion of the 12-week intervention|Up to 12 weeks after exercise/dietary intervention exposure|One subject in the exercise, dietary intervention and one subject in the exercise, food additive lacking flavanol group had unusable data for this outcome and thus are not included in these analyses.||mL/(kg·min)||Standard Deviation|Mean
824173|NCT01180127|Secondary|Modified Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test|Participants are read a list of words over three learning trials and the subject is asked to free recall as many words as possible after each trial. These 3 trials are followed by 1 learning trial of a distracter list and then a short delayed free recall trial of the initial list. After approximately 60-minutes, subjects are asked to freely recall words from the initial list, then to recall words form the distracter list, and then complete a forced-choice recognition trial. A source memory trial is administered in which subjects are read each presented word and then asked to identify whether they were initially presented during the 3 learning trials or during the distracter trial. Measured as a retention score (ratio) for which the number of words recalled after the short delay is divided by the number of words recalled on the third learning trial.|Up to 12 weeks after exercise/dietary intervention exposure|There were 4 subjects (1 in exercise, dietary intervention; 2 in no exercise, dietary intervention, and 1 in exercise, food additive lacking flavanol) who did not have useable data and are thus not included in analyses.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
824174|NCT01180127|Primary|ModBent (Modified Benton Visual Retention Test)|This is an object recognition task. Participants view a complex stimulus, then are asked to select which one of two objects was identical to the studied stimulus. After a series of these matching trials, during the subsequent recognition trials participants are shown serially individual complex objects and asked to indicate whether the object was identical to any of the target stimuli viewed during the matching trials. Their reaction time for correct responses, measured in milliseconds, is the unit of measurement.|Up to 12 weeks after exercise/dietary intervention exposure|One subject in the exercise, dietary intervention and one subject in the no exercise, dietary intervention group had outlying (larger than 3 standard deviation from mean) ModBent values that were deleted and hence those groups have 7 and 10 subjects analyzed rather than 8 and 11 respectively.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
824175|NCT01180127|Primary|CBV-fMRI (Cerebral Blood Volume-functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging)|In steady state conditions, CBV is an indirect measure of basal metabolism in the brain. CBV-fMRI is a technique that generates maps of basal metabolism across different brain regions|Up to 12 weeks after exercise/dietary intervention exposure|One subject in the exercise, food additive lacking flavanol arm, and one subject in the wait list control food additive without flavanol arm had non useable data for this outcome which is why there are only 8 subjects analyzed in those two arms rather than 9.||percent CBV in a brain region||Standard Deviation|Mean
824176|NCT01180244|Secondary|Change in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire Sleep Satisfaction Visual Analog Scale|The Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire includes a sleep visual analog scale (VAS) with ranges of 0-10 centimeters. Higher values represent greater difficulty with sleep. The change in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire sleep visual analog scale is determined by subtracting baseline VAS values from end of treatment VAS values. Thus, a negative value represents sleep improvement (i.e. a better outcome), while a positive value represents sleep worsening (i.e. a worse outcome).|Total timeframe 13 weeks: baseline followed by 11 weeks of treatment with outcome assessed within 14 days following end of treatment|Participants who correctly completed the outcome questionnaire||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824177|NCT01180244|Secondary|Change in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire Pain Visual Analog Scale|The Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire includes a pain visual analog scale (VAS) with ranges of 0-10 centimeters. Higher values represent greater pain. The change in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire pain visual analog scale is determined by subtracting baseline VAS values from end of treatment VAS values. Thus, a negative value represents pain improvement (i.e. a better outcome), while a positive value represents pain worsening (i.e. a worse outcome).|Total timeframe 13 weeks: baseline followed by 11 weeks of treatment with outcome assessed within 14 days following end of treatment|Participants who correctly completed the outcome questionniare||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824178|NCT01180244|Secondary|Change in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire Overall Score|The Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire yields a score ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores representing a greater impact or level of symptoms. The change in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire is determined by subtracting scores at baseline from scores at end of treatment. Thus negative numbers represent symptom improvement (i.e. a better outcome) and positive numbers represent symptom worsening (i.e. a worse outcome).|Total timeframe 13 weeks: baseline followed by 11 weeks of treatment with outcome assessed within 14 days following end of treatment|Participants who correctly completed the outcome questionniare||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824179|NCT01180244|Secondary|Change in Number of Positive Tender Points|"The number of positive tender points ranges from 0-18, and are defined per criteria set forth by the American College of Rheumatology and based on dolorimetry measurements made on 18 prescribed tender point locations. A tender point is considered positive if less than 4 kilograms per centimeter squared pressure is required to elicit a painful response. The change in number of positive tender points is determined by subtracting the number of positive tender points at baseline from the number of positive tender points at end of treatment. Thus, a negative number represents pain improvement (i.e. better outcome), whereas a positive number represents a worsening of pain (i.e. worse outcome)."|Total timeframe 13 weeks: baseline followed by 11 weeks of treatment with outcome assessed within 14 days following end of treatment|||Number of positive tender points||Standard Deviation|Mean
824180|NCT01180244|Primary|Change in Tender Point Pain Threshold|"Tender point pain threshold is derived by summing the dolorimetry-based pain pressure thresholds measured on a subject for each of the 18 tender points sites specified by the American College of Rheumatology for fibromyalgia classification. The range of dolorimeter values for each tender point site is 0-4 (units are kilograms per square centimeter, i.e. kg/cm^2). Higher numbers represent greater pressure required to elicit pain, and are thus indicators of less pain sensitivity at the tender point. Since 18 tender points are measured on a patient and their individual dolorimeter values summed, the range of tender point pain threshold values is 0-72. A higher score represents less overall pain sensitivity. The change in tender point pain threshold is determined by subtracting values at baseline from values at end of treatment. Thus a positive difference represents pain improvement (i.e.. a better outcome). A negative difference represents pain worsening (i.e. a worse outcome)."|Total timeframe 13 weeks: baseline followed by 11 weeks of treatment with outcome assessed within 14 days following end of treatment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824181|NCT01180296|Secondary|Serum Progesterone Levels||At approximately 28 weeks' gestation||||||
824182|NCT01180296|Primary|Rate of Recurrent Preterm Birth|Spontaneous preterm birth prior to 37 weeks' gestation. Indicated preterm deliveries (for maternal or fetal reasons) were excluded.|Prior to 37 weeks' gestation|||participants|||Number
824183|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in EuroQol - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A self-assessment questionnaire that provides 2 measures of health status. The EQ-5D index score is a weighted linear combination over 5 dimensions of health status. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3, and an equation is used to calculate the EQ-5D index score. The EQ-5D index score can range from possible negative values (minimum -0.415) to a maximum of 1.0. The EQ-VAS is a visual analog scale with a range of 0 to 100. For both variables, a higher score indicates a better health state.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824184|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q LES-Q-SF) Item 16|The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form) measures the patient’s satisfaction with medication and overall quality of life. The 16th item is a global rating of overall life satisfaction and contentment, rated on a 1 to 5 scale. Higher scores are indicative of greater satisfaction.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824185|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q LES-Q-SF) Item 15|The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form) measures the patient’s satisfaction with medication and overall quality of life. The 15th item queries respondents’ satisfaction with the medication they are taking, rated on a 1 to 4 scale, score 0 indicates that no medication was taken. Higher scores are indicative of greater satisfaction.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824186|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in Overall Quality of Life and Satisfaction From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) by Assessing the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) % Maximum Total Score|The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form)total score is derived by summing item scores 1 to 14. Higher scores are indicative of greater enjoyment or satisfaction in each domain. The Q-LES-Q-SF % maximum total score is calculated as 100% × (Q-LES-Q-SF total score – 14) / 56, and can range from 0% to 100%.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824187|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Family Life/Home Responsibilities Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the SDS family life/home responsibilities domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824188|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Social Life Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the SDS social life domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824189|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Work/School Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the work/school domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824190|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score|Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) is 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The SDS total score is calculated as the sum of the score for the 3 inter-correlated domains (school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities) and ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired).|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824191|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 14|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824192|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 12|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824194|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 9|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 9|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824195|NCT01180400|Secondary|Response in the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Defined as CGI-I Rating of “Very Much Improved” or “Much Improved” From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A 3-part, clinician-administered scale that rates the improvement or worsening of the patient’s illness from randomization (baseline). Each item is scored on a 1 to 7 scale. CGI-I scores >4 indicate worsening, while scores <4 indicate improvement.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
824196|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in the Clinician-rated Global Outcome of Severity as Measured by the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Score From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A 3-part, clinician-administered scale that rates the improvement or worsening of the patient’s illness from randomization (baseline). Each item is scored on a 1 to 7 scale. Higher CGI-S scores indicate greater illness severity.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824197|NCT01180400|Secondary|Change in Depressive Symptoms From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-17 Items (HAMD-17) Total Score|A 17-item, clinician-rated scale that assesses depressive symptoms. The HAMD-17 consists of 17 symptoms, each of which is rated from 0 to 2 or 0 to 4, where 0 is none/absent. The HAMD-17 total score is calculated as the sum of the 17 individual symptom scores; the total score can range from 0 to 52. Higher HAMD-17 scores indicate more severe depression.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824198|NCT01180400|Secondary|Sustained Remission, Defined as a MADRS Total Score of ≤8 at Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a MADRS total score of ≤8 at Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16)was calculated.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Week 12, Week 14, Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
824199|NCT01180400|Secondary|Sustained Response, Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score and a MADRS Total Score of ≤12 at Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score and a MADRS total score of ≤12 at Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16); Week 12, Week 14, and Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of patients analyzed|||Number
824200|NCT01180400|Secondary|Early and Sustained Response, Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score and a MADRS Total Score of ≤12 at Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score and a MADRS total score of ≤12 at Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16); Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
824201|NCT01180400|Secondary|Remission in Depressive Symptoms of MDD, Defined as MADRS Total Score of ≤8 at End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a MADRS total score of ≤8 at end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
824218|NCT01180790|Secondary|Segment 1 and Segment 2: Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks ( Three Months Post Dosing) (SVR12)|The percentage of the Virology Population subjects that achieved sustained virologic response, defined as HCV RNA < LOQ, at 12 weeks (three months) post dosing.|3 months post dosing|Segment 2 analyzed the Per Protocol Population (PPP=all randomized subjects completing 12 wks of ACH-014625 + an extra 12 wks of Peg/RBV) who returned for SVR12.||percentage of participants|||Number
824202|NCT01180400|Secondary|Response in Depressive Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score at End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score at end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
824203|NCT01180400|Primary|Change in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score From Randomization to End of Treatment.|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824204|NCT01180647|Secondary|Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events|AEs and SAEs per standard definitions will be measured by self-report.|Eight weeks post-release|One XR-NTX participant who was randomized was excluded from final data analysis because he was never released from jail to community.||participants|||Number
824205|NCT01180647|Secondary|Accidental Drug Overdose|Accidental drug overdose is defined as patient self-report of any event consistent with over-sedation or respiratory suppression following ingestion of alcohol, prescription, or illicit drugs.|Four weeks post-release|One XR-NTX participant who was randomized was excluded from final data analysis because he was never released from jail to community.||participants|||Number
824206|NCT01180647|Secondary|Injection Drug Use Post-release|This secondary outcome tracks any injection drug use and frequency of injection drug use in the four weeks following release from jail.|Four weeks post-release|||percentage of participants by arm|||Number
824207|NCT01180647|Secondary|Any Opioid Use Post-release|Counts of any opioid use, defined as self-reported ≥ 1 day of heroin or other opioid use as measured by the Timeline Follow-Back assessment during the first 4 weeks post-release.|Four weeks post-release|One XR-NTX participant who was randomized was excluded from final data analysis because he was never released from jail to community.||percentage of participants|||Number
824208|NCT01180647|Secondary|Participation in Community Drug Treatment Post-release|This secondary outcome tracks community drug treatment initiation four weeks post-release from jail. Measured by self-report community drug treatment initiation at week 4 study visit.|Four weeks post-release|One XR-NTX participant who was randomized was excluded from final data analysis because he was never released from jail to community.||percentage of participants|||Number
824209|NCT01180647|Primary|Post-Release Opioid Relapse|Post-release opioid relapse at week 4, measured by self-report (Time Line Follow Back) and urine toxicologies, and defined as ≥10 of 28 days of self-reported opioid misuse following jail release or two or three positive of the three urine samples during weeks 2, 3 and 4. A single positive or missing urine result counted as 7 opioid misuse days.|Four weeks post-release|One XR-NTX participant randomized was excluded from final data analysis due to the fact he was never released from jail to community, so primary outcome (post-release opioid relapse) could not be measured.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824210|NCT01180660|Secondary|24 Hour Total Opioid Consumption|24 hour total opioid consumption using IV morphine equivalents|24 hours post surgery|||miligrams||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824211|NCT01180660|Primary|Quality of Recovery 40 on the Day After Surgery|"Quality of Recovery 40 on the Day After Surgery. The survey is a quality of recovery tool and a score of 40 is low and 200 is high.
The minimum score is 40 which is minimum recovery score and them maximum score is 200 which is considered better recovery."|24 hours|||units on scale 40 (low) - 200 (high)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824212|NCT01180777|Secondary|Corneal Staining|Corneal staining type was graded in a 5-point scale over the 5 corneal regions by Investigator using a slit lamp; 0=none, 1=trace, 2=mild, 3=moderate, and 4=severe. Maximum grade of corneal staining type over the 5 corneal regions was categorized either absence or presence of corneal staining for the analysis.|After 6-9 days of lens wear|All subjects who successfully completed the study.||eyes|eye||Number
824213|NCT01180777|Secondary|Binocular Snellen Visual Acuity (VA)|Binocular Snellen VA was assessed at dispensing by Investigator using a Snellen vision chart. Subjects were analyzed based on their performance on a Snellen Vision chart exam in the study lenses in an effort to measure how well the lenses perform for vision correction.|10-15 minutes post lens fit|All subjects who successfully completed the study.||participants|||Number
824214|NCT01180777|Primary|Lens Fit Acceptance|Lens fit acceptance (whether acceptable or unacceptable) was assessed by the Investigator at dispensing.|10-15 minutes post lens fit|All subjects who successfully completed the study.||eyes|Eyes||Number
824215|NCT01180790|Secondary|Segment 1 and Segment 2: HCV RNA Change From Baseline|Change from baseline in log10 HCV RNA level by visit.|Week 12|Efficacy analysis was performed on the virology population , which was a subset of the ITT population and included all subjects who had a baseline HCV RNA result and at least 1 post baseline HCV RNA result||log10 HCV RNA level||Standard Deviation|Mean
824216|NCT01180790|Secondary|Segment 1 and Segment 2: HCV RNA Change From Baseline|The mean change from baseline in log10 HCV RNA level by visit for the virology population|Week 4|Efficacy analysis was performed on the virology population, which was a subset of the ITT population and included all subjects who had a baseline HCV RNA result and at least 1 post baseline HCV RNA result||log10 HCV RNA Level||Standard Deviation|Mean
824217|NCT01180790|Secondary|Segment 1 and Segment 2: Sustained Virologic Response ( Six Months Post Dosing) (SVR24)|The percentage of the Virology Population subjects that achieved sustained virologic response, defined as HCV RNA < LOQ, six months post dosing.|6 months post dosing|Segment 2 analyzed the Per Protocol Population (PPP=all randomized subjects completing 12 wks of ACH-014625 + an extra 12 wks of Peg/RBV) who returned for SVR24.||percentage of participants|||Number
824220|NCT01180790|Secondary|Segment 2: RVR4 (Rapid Viral Response at 4 Weeks)|For Segment 2, the percentage of subjects in the virology population that achieved RVR4, defined as HCV RNA< or equal to LOQ at the Week 4 visit.|4 weeks|Per protocol virology population (a subset of the virology population) and included all randomized subjects who completed 4 weeks of ACH-0141625 dosing.||percentage of participants|||Number
824221|NCT01180790|Secondary|Segment 1: Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR)|For Segment 1, the percentage of subjects in the virology population that achieved cEVR (complete early virologic response), defined as undetectable HCV RNA at Week 12.|12 weeks|Analysis for Segment 1 was performed on the virology population (which is the same as the ITT population) and included all subjects who had a baseline HCV RNA result and at least 1 post baseline HCV RNA result.||percentage of participants|||Number
824222|NCT01180790|Primary|Segment 2: Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR)|The primary efficacy endpoint for Segment 2 of the study was the percentage of subjects achieving cEVR (complete early virologic response), defined as undetectable HCV RNA at Week 12.|Week 12|Per protocol virology population (a subset of the virology population) and included all randomized subjects who completed 12 weeks of ACH-0141625 dosing.||percentage of participants|||Number
824223|NCT01180790|Primary|Segment 2: Safety|Segment 2: Percentage of Subjects with the following: adverse events, abnormal laboratory safety tests and dose reductions, interruptions and discontinuations. Criteria for abnormal laboratory safety tests: treatment-emergent worsening DAIDs graded laboratory tests.|12 weeks|The safety population, which was defined as all subjects randomized and treated with at least one dose of ACH-0141625. Subjects were analyzed according to the randomized treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
824224|NCT01180790|Primary|Segment 1 : Rapid Viral Response at Week 4 (RVR4)|The primary efficacy endpoint for Segment 1 of the study was the percentage of subjects in each treatment group achieving RVR at Week 4 (HCV RNA< or equal to LOQ at the Week 4 visit).|4 weeks|Efficacy analysis was performed on the virology population (a subset of the ITT population) and included all subjects who had a baseline HCV RNA result and at least 1 post baseline HCV RNA result.||percentage of participants|||Number
824225|NCT01180790|Primary|Segment 1: Safety|Segment 1: Percentage of subjects with the following: adverse events, abnormal laboratory safety tests, dose reductions, interruptions, and discontinuations. Criteria for abnormal laboratory safety tests: treatment-emergent worsening DAIDs graded laboratory tests.|4 weeks|The safety population, which was defined as all subjects randomized and treated with at least one dose of ACH-0141625 or Placebo. Subjects were analyzed according to the randomized treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
824226|NCT01180894|Secondary|The Number of Participants Who Died||28 Days|||participants|||Number
824227|NCT01180894|Secondary|Infection|"The number of participants with at least one infection.
Specific infections analyzed included VAP (Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia), bacteremia, and urinary tract infection (UTI)."|28 Days|||participants|||Number
824228|NCT01180894|Secondary|Iron-deficient Erythropoeisis (IDE)|An elevated eZPP is diagnostic of Iron-deficient erythropoiesis (IDE) and reflects the bone marrow iron supply regardless of total body iron.|14 Days|||micro mol: mol heme||Full Range|Mean
824229|NCT01180894|Primary|RBC Transfusion|The number of participants who underwent RBC transfusion.|42 Days|||participants|||Number
824230|NCT01180985|Secondary|Subjective Assessment of Lens Comfort Using the Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM Questionnaire.|Contact Lens User Experience CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|10 minutes after lens insertion at time of initial lens fitting|Analysis is on those subjects who were enrolled, randomized to a study arm, and completed the study.||CLUE score||Standard Deviation|Mean
824231|NCT01180985|Secondary|Bulbar Redness|Scale of 0 to 4, where 0=None, 2=Trace, 3=Mild, 4=Moderate, 5=Severe.|after 7 days of lens wear|Analysis is on those subjects who were enrolled, randomized to a study arm, and completed the study.||eyes|eyes||Number
824232|NCT01180985|Primary|Subjective Assessment of Quality of Vision Using the Contact Lens User Experience(CLUE)TM Questionnaire.|Contact Lens User Experience CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|after 7 +/- 1 days of lens wear|Analysis is on those subjects who were enrolled, randomized to a study arm, and completed the study.||CLUE score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824233|NCT01180985|Secondary|Limbal Redness|Scale of 0 to 4, where 0=None, 2=Trace, 3=Mild, 4=Moderate, 5=Severe.|after 7 days of lens wear|Analysis is on those subjects who were enrolled, randomized to a study arm, and completed the study.||eyes|eyes||Number
824234|NCT01180985|Primary|Subjective Assessment of Lens Comfort Using the Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM Questionnaire.|The contract Lens Experience (CLUE)TM questionnaire is a validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|after 7 +/-1 days of lens wear|Analysis is on those subjects who were enrolled, randomized to a study arm, and completed the study.||CLUE score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824235|NCT01180985|Primary|Visual Acuity Binocular|Snellen binocular visual acuity measurement|after 7 +/- 1 days of lens wear|Analysis is on those subjects who were enrolled, randomized to a study arm, and completed the study.||participants|||Number
824236|NCT01180985|Primary|Visual Acuity Monocular|Snellen monocular visual acuity measurement was measured in both eyes that wore lenses for one week and came in for the evaluation with an inserted lens.|after 7 +/- 1 days of lens wear|Analysis is on those subjects who were enrolled, randomized to a study arm, and completed the study.||eyes|eyes||Number
824320|NCT01181271|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Non-relapse Mortality|Non-relapse mortality is defined as participants who die from causes other than their underlying disease relapse, such as infection or graft versus host disease|2-years after allogeneic transplant|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
824237|NCT01180998|Primary|Distance Visual Acuity (VA)|Visual Acuity is measured monocularly (each eye separately) in Snellen, the converted to logMAR units. The logMAR scale has a range of -0.30 to 1.00. A value of 0 or less would not require distance vision correction and a value of 0 or greater may require distance vision correction.|after 4 weeks of toric contact lens wear|All subjects that were dispensed a study lens except those that discontinued for non-clinical reasons.||logMAR|eyes|Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824238|NCT01180998|Primary|Distance Visual Acuity|Measured monocularly (each eye separately) in Snellen converted to logMAR units. The logMAR scale has a range of -0.30 to 1.00. A value of 0 or less would not require distance vision correction and a value of 0 or greater may require distance vision correction.|after 1 week of toric contact lens wear|All subjects that were dispensed a study lens except those that discontinued for non-clinical reasons.||logMAR|eyes|Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824239|NCT01180998|Primary|Overall Success in Fitting With a Toric Contact Lens|Percent of subjects with success with toric lens fitting defined as meeting all of the following pre-determined criteria: 1) acceptable fit, 2) orientation stability less than or equal to 20 degree rotation, 3) binocular visual acuity (VA) within one line of spectacle VA, 4) Good, very good, or excellent overall quality of Vision, and 5) good, very, good, or excellent overall lens comfort. There was not an inferential statistical analysis conducted on this outcome. Comparison was made through the use of 95% CI's for the proportions. Therefore no statistical analysis section is included for this primary outcome.|4 weeks|All subjects that were dispensed a study lens except those that discontinued for non-clinical reasons.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824240|NCT01181011|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Relevant Findings in Electrocardiogram (ECG), Vital Signs, Physical Finding or Laboratory Finding Abnormalities||4 weeks|Treated set||Participants|||Number
824241|NCT01181011|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least One Treatment Emergent Adverse Event||4 weeks|Treated set||Participants|||Number
824242|NCT01181011|Secondary|V_z/F of Amlodipine||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for V_z/F of Amlodipine||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
824243|NCT01181011|Secondary|CL/F of Amlodipine||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for CL/F of Amlodipine||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824244|NCT01181011|Secondary|t_½ of Amlodipine||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for t_½ of Amlodipine||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824245|NCT01181011|Secondary|MRT_po of Amlodipine||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for MRT_po of Amlodipine||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824246|NCT01181011|Secondary|λz of Amlodipine||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for λz of Amlodipine||1/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824247|NCT01181011|Secondary|Tmax of Amlodipine||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for tmax of Amlodipine||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824248|NCT01181011|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase λz Following an Extravascular Administration (V_z/F) of Telmisartan||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for V_z/F of Telmisartan||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
824249|NCT01181011|Secondary|Apparent Clearance of Telmisartan in Plasma Following Extravascular Administration (CL/F)||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for CL/F of Telmisartan||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824250|NCT01181011|Secondary|Elimination Half-life (t_½) of Telmisartan||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for t_½ of Telmisartan||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824251|NCT01181011|Secondary|Mean Residence Time of Telmisartan in the Body After Oral Administration (MRT_po)||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for MRT_po of Telmisartan||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824252|NCT01181011|Secondary|Terminal Rate Constant in Plasma (λz) of Telmisartan|reflect the speed of drug elimination in vivo|3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for λz of Telmisartan||1/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824253|NCT01181011|Secondary|Time to Attain Cmax (Tmax) of Telmisartan||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for tmax of Telmisartan||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824254|NCT01181011|Primary|Cmax of Amlodipine||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days of wash-outs|All patients with values for Cmax of Amlodipine||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824255|NCT01181011|Primary|AUC_0-∞ of Amlodipine||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for AUC_0-∞ of Amlodipine||ng·h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824256|NCT01181011|Primary|AUC_0-tz of Amlodipine||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for AUC_0-tz of Amlodipine||ng·h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824257|NCT01181011|Primary|The Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Telmisartan||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for Cmax of Telmisartan||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824258|NCT01181011|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From the Time of Dosing to Infinity (AUC_0-∞) of Telmisartan||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for AUC_0-∞ of Telmisartan||ng·h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824259|NCT01181011|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of Telmisartan in Plasma Over the Time Interval From 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC_0-tz)||3 periods of single-dose treatment (8 days of sampling) separated by 21 days wash-outs|All patients with values for AUC_0-tz of Telmisartan||ng·h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824321|NCT01181271|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Extensive Chronic Graft-versus-host-disease|Extensive chronic graft versus-host-disease (GVHD) was defined as GVHD that required systemic immunosuppression.|1-year after allogeneic transplant|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
824260|NCT01181050|Secondary|Change in DAS28-CRP After 24 Weeks of Treatment.|DAS28-CRP=0.56×sqrt(tender joints [count:1-28])+0.28×sqrt(swollen joints [count:1-28])+0.36×Ln(CRP level+1)+0.014×(patient’s disease assessment on 0-100 mm scale [100=most severe])+0.96. Range: 0.96 to no upper limit. Higher score=more severe disease. Mean change in DAS-CRP score after 24 Weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 24|Change in DAS28-CRP was calculated by using last observation carried forward method.||scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
824261|NCT01181050|Secondary|Change in DAS28-CRP After 6 Weeks of Treatment.|DAS28-CRP=0.56×sqrt(tender joints [count:1-28])+0.28×sqrt(swollen joints [count:1-28])+0.36×Ln(CRP level+1)+0.014×(patient’s disease assessment on 0-100 mm scale [100=most severe])+0.96. Range: 0.96 to no upper limit. Higher score=more severe disease. Mean change in DAS-CRP score after 6 Weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 6|Change in DAS28-CRP was calculated by using last observation carried forward method.||scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
824262|NCT01181050|Primary|Change in DAS28-CRP After 12 Weeks of Treatment|DAS28-CRP=0.56×sqrt(tender joints [count:1-28])+0.28×sqrt(swollen joints [count:1-28])+0.36×Ln(CRP level+1)+0.014×(patient’s disease assessment on 0-100 mm scale [100=most severe])+0.96. Range: 0.96 to no upper limit. Higher score=more severe disease. Mean change in DAS-CRP score after 12 Weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 12|Change in DAS28-CRP was calculated by using last observation carried forward method.||scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
824263|NCT01181102|Secondary|Incidence of Major Bleeding or Clinically Relevant Non-major Bleeding.||2 weeks|The Safety Analysis Set was defined as all subjects who were enrolled in the study, but excluded those who had significant GCP violations, who did not receive any doses of the study drug, or who had no safety data after the start of study treatment||percentage of subjects with bleeds||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824264|NCT01181102|Primary|Incidence of Subjects With Venous Thromboembolism Events.|"The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of subjects who experienced at least one of the thromboembolic events listed below during the period from the start of study treatment to the venography at the end of study treatment.
Lower extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) confirmed by unilateral venography at the end of study treatment
Definite diagnosis of symptomatic Pulmonary Embolism (PE)
Symptomatic DVT confirmed before the venography at the end of study treatment The objectives were to verify the non-inferiority of edoxaban to enoxaparin with regard to prevention of venous Thromboembolism (VTE)"|2 weeks|Efficacy Analysis population. 22 (7.4%) - DU-176b 41 (13.9%) - enoxaparin||percent of participants with VTE events||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824265|NCT01181128|Secondary|Number of Transfusions Required Per Surgery|Number of blood component transfusions during a single surgery.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks|Participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and underwent major surgery.||surgeries|Major Surgeries||Number
824266|NCT01181128|Secondary|Estimated Total Blood Loss During Major Surgery||up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks|Participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc, underwent major surgery, and had blood loss during surgery information available.||mL|Major Surgeries|Full Range|Median
824267|NCT01181128|Secondary|Dose Per Injection and Total Dose Required to Maintain Hemostasis During Major Surgery|Mean dose per injection is the average dose for all injections (including loading dose) needed to maintain hemostasis during surgery. Total dose is the sum across all injections (including loading dose) needed to maintain hemostasis during surgery.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks|Participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and underwent major surgery.||IU/kg|Major Surgeries|Full Range|Median
824268|NCT01181128|Secondary|Number of Injections Required to Maintain Hemostasis During Major Surgery|The number of injections to maintain hemostasis during surgery includes all injections for surgery purposes, including from the loading dose to the end date/time of surgery.|up to 52 weeks|Participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and underwent major surgery.||injections|Major Surgeries|Full Range|Median
824269|NCT01181128|Secondary|Investigators’/Surgeons’ Assessment of Participants’ Response to rFVIIIFc for Major Surgery|Based on the first assessment of hemostasis by the surgeon/investigator 24 hours or later post-surgery. Scaled responses: Excellent = 1, Good = 2, Fair = 3, Poor/none = 4.|up to 52 weeks|Participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and underwent major surgery.||responses|Major Surgeries||Number
824270|NCT01181128|Secondary|Hemophilia-Specific Quality of Life Index for Children (Haemo-QoL) Questionnaire: Change From Baseline to Week 14 and Week 28 in Haemo-QoL III Total Score|The Haemo-QoL III, a quality of life assessment instrument for adolescents with hemophilia, was administered to participants from 13 to 16 years old. This instrument assesses domains specific to living with hemophilia and consists of 12 domains: physical health, feeling, view of yourself, family, friends, others, sports and school, treatment, perceived support, dealing with hemophilia, future, and relationships. Total HAEMO-QoL score is the sum of all raw scores for all subscales for participants for whom at least the minimum number of required questions have been answered. Total scores are presented as the Transformed Scale Score (TSS) from 0-100%, with lower scores indicating a better quality of life. A negative change indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 14, Week 28|Full Analysis Set: participants 13 to 16 years of age who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and had an assessment. n=participants who had specified assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
824271|NCT01181128|Secondary|Hemophilia-Specific Quality of Life Index for Adults (Haem-A-QoL) Questionnaire: Change From Baseline to Week 28|The Haem-A-QoL consists of items pertaining to 10 domains specific to living with hemophilia and was administered to adult participants (17 years and older). The 10 domains are: physical health, feeling, view of yourself, sports/leisure, school/work, dealing with hemophilia, and treatment (time frame for all 7 domains, during the last month) and future, family planning, and outlook for the future (time frame for all 3 domains, recently). Lower scores represent better QoL; therefore, a negative change from baseline represents improvement during the course of the study. Scores on a scale range between 0 and 100. Participants in Arm 1 were stratified by their prestudy regimen (either prophylaxis or on-demand).|Baseline, Week 28|Full Analysis Set: participants over 17 years of age who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and had an assessment. n=participants who had specified assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
824322|NCT01181271|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Grades II to IV Acute Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD)|Grade I GVHD is characterized as mild disease, grade II GVHD as moderate, grade III as severe, and grade IV life-threatening.|within 200 days after allogeneic transplant|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
824272|NCT01181128|Secondary|Hemophilia-Specific Quality of Life Index for Adults (Haem-A-QoL) Questionnaire: Change From Baseline to Week 14|The Haem-A-QoL consists of items pertaining to 10 domains specific to living with hemophilia and was administered to adult participants (17 years and older). The 10 domains are: physical health, feeling, view of yourself, sports/leisure, school/work, dealing with hemophilia, and treatment (time frame for all 7 domains, during the last month) and future, family planning, and outlook for the future (time frame for all 3 domains, recently). Lower scores represent better QoL; therefore, a negative change from baseline represents improvement during the course of the study. Scores on a scale range between 0 and 100. Participants in Arm 1 were stratified by their prestudy regimen (either prophylaxis or on-demand).|Baseline, Week 14|Full Analysis Set: participants over 17 years of age who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and had an assessment. n=participants who had specified assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
824273|NCT01181128|Secondary|Incremental Recovery (Two-stage Chromogenic Assay)|The rise in FVIII activity in IU/dL per unit dose administered in IU/kg. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable two-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||IU/dL per IU/kg||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824274|NCT01181128|Secondary|Mean Residence Time (MRT; Two-stage Chromogenic Assay)|The average time that a drug molecule is present in the systemic circulation. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable two-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824275|NCT01181128|Secondary|Clearance (CL; Two-stage Chromogenic Assay)|Rate at which the body removes the drug, measured as the volume of the plasma cleared of drug per unit time per unit weight. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable two-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||mL/h/kg||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824276|NCT01181128|Secondary|Elimination Half Life (t1/2; Two-stage Chromogenic Assay)|Time required for the activity of the drug to reach half of its original value. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable two-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824277|NCT01181128|Secondary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) Per Dose (Two-stage Chromogenic Assay)|Dose normalized area under the drug concentration-time curve. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable two-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||IU*h/dL per IU/kg||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824323|NCT01181271|Secondary|Number of Days After Allogeneic Transplant Until Absolute Neutrophil Count Was Equal to or Greater Than 500/uL||within 28 days after allogeneic transplant|This was only measured in the 17 participants who experienced a hematological nadir after allo transplant.||days||Full Range|Median
824324|NCT01181271|Primary|Peripheral Blood All-cell Donor Chimerism|Successful donor stem cell engraftment is defined as when ≥ 80% of hematopoietic elements are donor-derived as determined by chimerism assays from peripheral blood at day 100 after non-myeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation.|100 days post allogeneic transplant|Participants who underwent the full tandem AUTO-ALLO stem cell transplant||percentage of donor-derived elements||Full Range|Median
824278|NCT01181128|Secondary|Time at Maximum Activity (Tmax; Two-stage Chromogenic Assay)|Time at which the maximum activity (Cmax) is observed. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable two-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824279|NCT01181128|Secondary|Time at Maximum Activity (Tmax; One-stage Clotting Assay)|Time at which maximum activity (Cmax) is observed. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable one-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824280|NCT01181128|Secondary|Time to 1% and 3% FVIII Activity (Two-stage Chromogenic Assay)|Estimated time after dose (in days) when FVIII activity has declined to approximately 1 or 3 IU/dL (1% or 3%) above baseline, respectively. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable two-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824281|NCT01181128|Secondary|Time to 1% and 3% FVIII Activity (One-stage Clotting Assay)|Estimated time after dose (in days) when FVIII activity has declined to approximately 1 or 3 IU/dL (1% or 3%) above baseline, respectively. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable one-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824282|NCT01181128|Secondary|Volume at Steady State (Vss; Two-stage Chromogenic Assay)|Volume of distribution at steady state. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable two-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||mL/kg||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824283|NCT01181128|Secondary|Volume at Steady State (Vss; One-stage Clotting Assay)|Volume of distribution at steady state. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable one-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||mL/kg||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824326|NCT01181323|Secondary|Number of Maternal Participants With Season-specific LAIV Influenza A and B Strains Detected in Breast Milk Following Vaccination.|Breast milk was collected from all maternal participants prior at Days 2 and 8 post vaccination for PCR and cell culture to assess for the presence of the viruses in the LAIV vaccine. The data coordinating center selected 25% of participants in the TIV group for testing to serve as an internal control for the assay.|Day 2 and 8 post vaccination|All participants with samples selected for testing by the data coordinating center, 100% of LAIV recipients and 25% of TIV recipients, are included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
824284|NCT01181128|Secondary|Total Dose Per Injection Required for Resolution of a Bleeding Episode by Location of Bleed|For each bleeding episode at one location, the total dose is the sum of the doses (IU/kg) administered across all injections given to treat that bleeding episode. Please see Outcome Measure 20 for a definition of the efficacy period. A bleeding episode started from the first sign of a bleed, and ended 72 hours after the last treatment for the bleeding, within which any symptoms of bleeding at the same location, or injections less than or equal to 72 hours apart, were considered part of the same bleeding episode. Bleeding episodes that presented in multiple locations are included as a single event in the overall summary for dose administered to resolve that bleeding episode but are included in the individual summaries for each location.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks (efficacy period as defined in description)|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and had complete information on the dose administered to treat a bleeding episode; n=total number of bleeding episodes at this location.||IU/kg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824285|NCT01181128|Secondary|Number of Injections Required for Resolution of a Bleeding Episode by Location of Bleed|Please see Outcome Measure 20 for a definition of the efficacy period. A bleeding episode started from the first sign of a bleed, and ended 72 hours after the last treatment for the bleeding, within which any symptoms of bleeding at the same location, or injections less than or equal to 72 hours apart, were considered the same bleeding episode. All injections given from the initial sign of a bleed until the last date/time within the bleed window were counted. The resolution of a bleed was defined as no sign of bleeding following injection for the bleed. Bleeding episodes that presented in multiple locations are included as a single event in the overall summary for the number of injections to resolve that bleeding episode but are included in summaries for each location.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks (efficacy period as defined in description)|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and had evaluable efficacy assessments; n=total number of bleeds at given location.||injections||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824286|NCT01181128|Secondary|Number of Injections Required for Resolution of a Bleeding Episode|A bleeding episode started from the first sign of a bleed, and ended 72 hours after the last treatment for the bleeding, within which any symptoms of bleeding at the same location, or injections less than or equal to 72 hours apart, were considered the same bleeding episode. All injections given from the initial sign of a bleed until the last date/time within the bleed window are counted. The resolution of a bleed is defined as no sign of bleeding following injection for the bleed. The efficacy period in Arms 1 and 2 began with the first prophylactic dose of rFVIIIFc and ended with the last dose (regardless of reason for dosing). The efficacy period in Arm 3 began at the time of last PK rFVIIIFc sampling timepoint and ended at the date of the last study visit. Periods of PK evaluations and surgery/rehabilitation are not included in the efficacy period.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks (efficacy period as defined in description)|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and had at least 1 bleeding episode.||injections|Bleeding Episodes|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824287|NCT01181128|Secondary|Number of Days From Last Treatment Injection to a New Bleeding Episode|Number of days from the last injection to treat a bleeding episode to a new bleeding episode, analyzed for per evaluable bleeding episode and per participant. For “per participant” values, number of days from last injection to treat a bleed to a new bleeding episode is averaged across all evaluable bleeding episodes for each participant first, and then descriptive statistics were calculated across participants. A follow-up injection administered >72 hours after the most recent injection given to treat a bleed was considered a new bleed at the same location and was classified as type=Unknown (not evaluable). The efficacy period in Arms 1 and 2 began with the first prophylactic dose of rFVIIIFc and ended with the last dose (regardless of reason for dosing). The efficacy period in Arm 3 began at the time of last PK rFVIIIFc sampling timepoint and ended at the date of the last study visit. Periods of PK evaluations and surgery/rehabilitation were not included in the efficacy period.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks (efficacy period as defined in description)|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and had at least 1 evaluable bleeding episode. The first bleed for each participant could not be included in this analysis since there was no previous bleed from which to measure time.||days|Evaluable Bleeding Episodes|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824288|NCT01181128|Secondary|Annualized Joint Bleeding Rate (Spontaneous and Traumatic)|Annualized bleeding episodes = (Number of bleeding episodes of the specified type / number of days in efficacy period) x 365.25. The efficacy period in Arms 1 and 2 began with the first prophylactic dose of rFVIIIFc and ended with the last dose (regardless of reason for dosing). The efficacy period in Arm 3 began at the time of last PK rFVIIIFc sampling timepoint and ended at the date of the last study visit. Periods of PK evaluations and surgery/rehabilitation were not included in the efficacy period. A bleeding episode started from the first sign of a bleed, and ended 72 hours after the last treatment for the bleeding, within which any symptoms of bleeding at the same location, or injections less than or equal to 72 hours apart, were considered the same bleeding episode.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks (efficacy period as defined in description)|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc with evaluable data.||bleeding episodes per participant per yr||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824289|NCT01181128|Secondary|Annualized Bleeding Rate by Location of Bleed (Joint, Muscle, Internal, Skin/Mucosa)|Annualized bleeding episodes = (Number of bleeding episodes at the specified location / number of days in efficacy period) x 365.25. The efficacy period in Arms 1 and 2 began with the first prophylactic dose of rFVIIIFc and ended with the last dose (regardless of reason for dosing). The efficacy period in Arm 3 began at the time of last PK rFVIIIFc sampling timepoint and ended at the date of the last study visit. Periods of PK evaluations and surgery/rehabilitation were not included in the efficacy period. A bleeding episode started from the first sign of a bleed, and ended 72 hours after the last treatment for the bleeding, within which any symptoms of bleeding at the same location, or injections less than or equal to 72 hours apart, were considered the same bleeding episode. Any bleeding at a different location was a separate bleeding episode regardless of time from the last injection.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks (efficacy period as defined in description)|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc with evaluable data.||episodes per participant per year||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824374|NCT01173523|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival estimated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) methods is defined as the time from study entry to death due to any cause or date last known alive.|Long-term follow-up for survival occurred every 4 weeks. As of this analysis, follow-up among survivors was a median (range) of 11.5 months (0.9-47.9).|The analysis dataset is comprised of treated patients.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824290|NCT01181128|Secondary|Investigator’s Assessment of Participants’ Bleeding Response to rFVIIIFc Injection|The investigator was given the opportunity to record an assessment of a participant’s response to treatment, if the participant was treated in the hospital for a major bleed, using the following 4-point scale: excellent=abrupt pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding within approximately 8 hours after the initial injection; good=definite pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding within approximately 8 hours after an injection, but possibly requiring more than one injection after 24 to 48 hours for complete resolution; moderate=probable or slight beneficial effect within 8 hours after the initial injection and requiring more than one injection; no response=no improvement, or condition worsened, within approximately 8 hours after the initial injection.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks|This supplemental assessment was not summarized because of insufficient data.|||||
824291|NCT01181128|Secondary|Participant Assessment of Response to Injections to Treat a Bleeding Episode|Participant's assessment of the response to the first rFVIIIFc injection for each bleeding episode. Percentages were based on the number of bleeding episodes for which a response was provided for the first injection, using the following 4-point scale: excellent=abrupt pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding within approximately 8 hours after the initial injection; good=definite pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding within approximately 8 hours after an injection, but possibly requiring more than one injection after 24 to 48 hours for complete resolution; moderate=probable or slight beneficial effect within 8 hours after the initial injection and requiring more than one injection; no response=no improvement, or condition worsened, within approximately 8 hours after the initial injection.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and had at least 1 evaluable bleeding episode; based on the number of injections with an evaluation.||percentage of responses|Bleeding Episodes||Number
824292|NCT01181128|Secondary|Annualized rFVIIIFc Consumption Per Participant|Consumption is calculated for the efficacy period. The efficacy period in Arms 1 and 2 began with the first prophylactic dose of rFVIIIFc and ended with the last dose (regardless of reason for dosing). The efficacy period in Arm 3 began at the time of last PK rFVIIIFc sampling timepoint and ended at the date of the last study visit. Periods of PK evaluations and surgery/rehabilitation are not included in the efficacy period. Overall units (IU/kg) of annualized rFVIIIFc consumption = [Total rFVIIIFc IU/kg received during the efficacy period / number of days in efficacy period] x 365.25.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks (efficacy period as defined in description)|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc. 'Overall' n=participants in the Full Analysis Set with evaluable data in the efficacy period; 'Last 3 Months on Study' n=participants in the Full Analysis Set with evaluable data and >=6 months on study.||IU/kg rFVIIIFc per participant per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
824293|NCT01181128|Secondary|Comparison of Annualized Bleeding Rates: Arm 2 Versus Arm 3|Estimated using the negative binomial model with treatment arm as covariate, based on whole study duration for all participants. Annualized bleeding episodes = (number of bleeding episodes / number of days in the respective period)*365.25.The efficacy period in Arm 2 began with the first prophylactic dose of rFVIIIFc and ended with the last dose (regardless of reason for dosing). The efficacy period in Arm 3 began at the time of last PK rFVIIIFc sampling timepoint and ended at the date of the last study visit. Periods of PK evaluations and surgery/rehabilitation are not included in the efficacy period. A bleeding episode started from the first sign of a bleed, and ended 72 hours after the last treatment for the bleeding, within which any symptoms of bleeding at the same location, or injections less than or equal to 72 hours apart, were considered the same bleeding episode.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks (efficacy period as defined in description)|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc with an efficacy assessment.||episodes per participant per year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824294|NCT01181128|Primary|Incremental Recovery (One-stage Clotting Assay)|The rise in FVIII activity in IU/dL per unit dose administered in IU/kg. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable one-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||IU/dL per IU/kg||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824295|NCT01181128|Primary|Mean Residence Time (MRT; One-stage Clotting Assay)|The average time that a drug molecule is present in the systemic circulation. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable one-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824325|NCT01181323|Secondary|ELISA IgA and IgG GMT to Each of the Influenza Strains in the Vaccine Received in Sera of Maternal Subjects|Blood was collected from maternal subjects on Day 0 prior to vaccination, and at Day 28 post vaccination for assessment of IgA and IgG antibodies with a standard ELISA assay. The ELISA assay was conducted with the antigens in the 2011-2012 seasonal influenza vaccine, A/Perth/16/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008, those in the 2012-2013 seasonal influenza vaccine, A/Victoria/361/2011 and B/Wisconsin/1/2010, and the antigen in both seasons' vaccines, A/California/7/2009 (H1N1). The lower limit of detection is 5.82 units/mL for IgA and 2.56 units/mL for IgG. Titers below the limit of detection were reported as one-half the limit of detection.|Day 0 and Day 28 post vaccination|All enrolled maternal participants with results reported are included in this analysis population.||units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824388|NCT01173848|Primary|Subjects Achieving Normal Vitamin D Levels||within 24 weeks|||participants|||Number
824296|NCT01181128|Primary|Clearance (CL; One-stage Clotting Assay)|Rate at which the body removes the drug, measured as the volume of the plasma cleared of drug per unit time per unit weight. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable one-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||mL/h/kg||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824297|NCT01181128|Primary|Elimination Half Life (t1/2; One-stage Clotting Assay)|Time required for the activity of the drug to reach half of its original value. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable one-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824298|NCT01181128|Primary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) Per Dose (One-stage Clotting Assay)|Dose normalized area under the drug concentration-time curve. Sampling for Advate PK profiling was conducted, following at least 96 hours of washout, at these timepoints: preinjection and at either 30 (±3) minutes or 10 (±3) minutes, 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 48 (±2) hours (Day 2), and 72 (±2) hours (Day 3) from the start of the injection. Sampling for rFVIIIFc PK profiling was conducted at Day 0 (directly following at least 96 hours washout from Advate PK profiling or within 4 weeks of the Advate dose or other rFVIII product) and repeated 12 to 24 weeks later at the following timepoints: preinjection and at 30 (±3) minutes (or 10 (±3) minutes), 1 hour (±15 minutes), 6 (±1) hours, 24 (±2) hours (Day 1), 72 (±2) hours (Day 3), 96 (±2) hours (Day 4), and 120 (±2) hours (Day 5) from the start of the injection.|See Measure Description for complete time frame.|Participants who had evaluable one-stage PK profiles for both Advate and baseline rFVIIIFc.||IU*h/dL per IU/kg||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824299|NCT01181128|Primary|Comparison of Annualized Bleeding Rates: Arm 1 Versus Arm 3|Estimated using the negative binomial model with treatment arm as covariate, based on whole study duration for all participants. Annualized bleeding episodes = (number of bleeding episodes / number of days in the respective period)*365.25.The efficacy period in Arm 1 began with the first prophylactic dose of rFVIIIFc and ended with the last dose (regardless of reason for dosing). The efficacy period in Arm 3 began at the time of last PK rFVIIIFc sampling timepoint and ended at the date of the last study visit. Periods of PK evaluations and surgery/rehabilitation are not included in the efficacy period. A bleeding episode started from the first sign of a bleed, and ended 72 hours after the last treatment for the bleeding, within which any symptoms of bleeding at the same location, or injections less than or equal to 72 hours apart, were considered part of the same bleeding episode.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks (efficacy period as defined in description)|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc with an efficacy assessment.||episodes per participant per year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824300|NCT01181128|Primary|Annualized Bleeding Rate|Annualized bleeding episodes = (number of bleeding episodes during the efficacy period / number of days during the efficacy period)*365.25. The efficacy period in Arms 1 and 2 began with the first prophylactic dose of rFVIIIFc and ended with the last dose (regardless of reason for dosing). The efficacy period in Arm 3 began at the time of last PK rFVIIIFc sampling timepoint and ended at the date of the last study visit. Periods of PK evaluations and surgery/rehabilitation are not included in the efficacy period. A bleeding episode started from the first sign of a bleed, and ended 72 hours after the last treatment for the bleeding, within which any symptoms of bleeding at the same location, or injections less than or equal to 72 hours apart, were considered the same bleeding episode.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks (efficacy period as defined in description)|Full Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc with an efficacy assessment.||episodes per participant per year||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824301|NCT01181128|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Relevant Abnormalities in Vital Signs or Relevant Changes From Baseline in Vital Signs|Number of participants with clinically relevant abnormalities or relevant changes from baseline in temperature, pulse (beats per minute [bpm]), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) are presented. Baseline (BL) is defined as the last non-missing evaluable assessment taken prior and closest to the first rFVIIIFc dose. ↑ signifies increase and ↓ signifies decrease.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks|Safety Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of Advate or at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc and had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment for temperature or at least one post-baseline assessment for pulse, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure.||participants|||Number
824302|NCT01181128|Primary|Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Abnormal Laboratory Values From Baseline|Clinical laboratory evaluations included hematology and blood chemistry. Table does not include laboratory tests evaluated during the surgical/rehabilitation period. ULN=upper limit of normal.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks|Safety Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of Advate or at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc n=the number of participants with at least one post-baseline value.||participants|||Number
824348|NCT01181349|Secondary|Number of Participants With and Without Postoperative Residual Neuromuscular Blockade Who Received Neuromuscular Blockade Reversal Agents|Neuromuscular blockade reversal agents administered to participants undergoing surgical procedures were recorded. The number of participants who received such an agent is presented, for participants with and without residual neuromuscular blockade.|From end of surgery through PACU arrival, an expected average of 10 minutes|FAS population includes all treated participants||participants|||Number
824303|NCT01181128|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Treatment-emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs)|AE=any untoward medical occurrence that did not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment, and could be any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of study product, whether related or not. TEAE=AE present prior to receiving the first injection of Advate or rFVIIIFc that subsequently worsened in severity or not present prior to receiving the first injection but subsequently appeared before the last visit on study. Serious AE (SAE)=AE resulting in death, immediate risk of death, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or any other medically important event. AEs emergent between the first Advate injection and first on-study rFVIIIFc injection (Sequential PK Subgroup) or during the surgical/rehabilitation period (Surgery Subgroup) are presented separately.|up to 52 weeks + 30 days ± 1 week|Safety Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of Advate or at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc. For Arm 1, AEs emergent between 1st on-study Advate dose and 1st rFVIIIFc dose are reported as treatment-emergent to Advate (1st column); AEs emergent after 1st rFVIIIFc injection are reported as treatment-emergent to rFVIIIFc (2nd column).||participants|||Number
824304|NCT01181128|Primary|Incidence Rate of FVIII Inhibitor Development|An inhibitor test result ≥0.6 Bethesda units (BU)/mL, identified and confirmed by re-testing of a second sample obtained within 2 to 4 weeks, was considered positive. Both tests were to be performed using the Nijmegen-modified Bethesda Assay by the central laboratory. The incidence rates along with the 95% confidence interval (CI) were summarized for all titers for subjects with 50 or more exposure days (EDs) to rFVIIIFc and a valid inhibitor test after the 50th exposure. In addition, the incidence rates for all subjects regardless of their exposure days to rFVIIIFc were also summarized. The 95% CI was calculated using Clopper-Pearson exact method.|up to 52 weeks ± 2 weeks|Safety Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of Advate or at least 1 dose of rFVIIIFc; n=number of participants with given number of exposure days who had a valid inhibitor test.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824305|NCT01181141|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With Venous Thromboembolism Events.||2 weeks||||||
824306|NCT01181141|Primary|The Incidence of Major or Clinically Relevant Non-major Bleeding|Bleeding events during the period from the start of treatment with the study drug (study treatment) to the day of the follow-up examination were assessed as the primary endpoints.|2 weeks|Safety Analysis Set defined as all subjects who were secondarily enrolled in study, but excluded those with significant GCP violations, did not receive any study drug, or had no safety data after start of study treatment. However, subjects who had significant GCP violations, but received at least one dose of study drug, safety data were assessed.||percentage of subjects with bleeds||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824307|NCT01181167|Secondary|Incidence of Major Bleeding or Clinically Relevant Non-major Bleeding||2 weeks|Safety analyses were performed for the Safety Analysis Set, which was defined as all subjects who were secondarily enrolled in the study, but excluded those who had significant GCP violations, who had not received any doses of the study drug, or who had no safety data after the start of study treatment.||percentage of subjects with bleeds||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824308|NCT01181167|Primary|Incidence of Subjects With Venous Thromboembolism Events|"The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of subjects who experienced at least one of the thromboembolic events listed below during the period from the start of study treatment to the venography at the end of study treatment.
Lower extremity DVT confirmed by bilateral venography at the end of study treatment
Definite diagnosis of symptomatic PE
Symptomatic DVT confirmed before the venography at the end of study treatment The objectives were to verify the non-inferiority of edoxaban to enoxaparin with regard to prevention of VTE"|2 weeks|The FAS was defined as all subjects enrolled in the study, but excluded those who had significant GCP violations, who had not received any doses of the study drug, or those who did not develop symptomatic DVT or PE, but in whom venography was not appropriately performed.||percentage of subjects with vte events||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824309|NCT01181258|Secondary|Patients With Expansion of NK Cells|Number of patients who experience in vivo expansion of allogeneic donor natural killer (NK) cells.|Day 14|||Participants|||Count of Participants
824310|NCT01181258|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|Cumulative incidence will be used to determine time to disease progression.|Day 1 through Month 12|10 participants had disease progression||days||Full Range|Median
824311|NCT01181258|Secondary|Serious Adverse Events|Number of participants experiencing serious adverse events that occur during study. Adverse event collection for the purposes of this study will focus on targeted adverse events and unexpected adverse events at specific time points in relation to the NK cell infusion and post infusion IL2 injections.|Day 1 through Month 12|||Participants|||Count of Participants
824312|NCT01181258|Primary|Objective Response Rate|The number of patients with an objective response rate (Partial Response +Complete Response) at 2 months post haploidentical NK cell infusion in patient with refractory/relapsed NHL or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).|Month 2 Post Infusion|One participant died of sepsis a week after therapy and was not evaluable.||Participants|||Count of Participants
824313|NCT01181271|Secondary|Estimated Two Year Overall Survival Rate for Participants Undergoing Only Autologous Transplant||two years|Participants who ONLY underwent Autologous transplant, did not proceed to Allogeneic transplant||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
824314|NCT01181271|Secondary|Estimated Two Year Progression Free Survival Rate for Participants Undergoing Only Autologous Transplant||Two Years|Participants who ONLY underwent Autologous transplant (did not proceed to Allogeneic)||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
824315|NCT01181271|Secondary|Estimated Two Year Overall Survival Rate for All Participants||2 years|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
824316|NCT01181271|Secondary|Estimated Two Year Progression Free Survival Rate for All Participants||2 years|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
824317|NCT01181271|Secondary|Estimated Two Year Overall Survival Rate for Participants Undergoing Both Autologous and Allogeneic Transplants||Two-years after Allogeneic Transplant|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
824318|NCT01181271|Secondary|Estimated Two Year Progression Free Survival Rate for Participants Undergoing Both Autologous and Allogeneic Transplants||2 years after allogeneic transplant|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
824319|NCT01181271|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Disease Relapse||2-years after allogeneic transplant|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
824327|NCT01181323|Secondary|Number of Maternal Participants Positive for the Season-specific LAIV Influenza A Strain in Respiratory Secretions at Day 8 Who Were Positive for H1N1 and/or H3N2 Strains.|Nasal swab samples were collected from all maternal participants at Day 8 post vaccination for PCR and cell culture to assess for the presence of the viruses in the LAIV vaccine in respiratory secretions. Those who were positive for the Influenza A strain were further tested to identify the H1N1 and H3N2 strain.|Day 8 post vaccination|The analysis population is limited to participants who were positive by PCR and/or cell culture for the vaccine strain of Influenza A.||participants|||Number
824328|NCT01181323|Secondary|Number of Maternal and Infant Participants Positive for the Season-specific LAIV Influenza A Strain in Respiratory Secretions at Day 2 Who Were Positive for H1N1 and/or H3N2 Strains.|Nasal swab samples were collected from all maternal and infant participants at Day 2 post vaccination for PCR and cell culture to assess for the presence of the viruses in the LAIV vaccine in respiratory secretions. Those who were positive for the Influenza A strain were further tested to identify the H1N1 and H3N2 strain.|Day 2 post vaccination|The analysis population is limited to participants who were positive by PCR and/or cell culture for the vaccine strain of Influenza A.||participants|||Number
824329|NCT01181323|Secondary|Number of Maternal Participants Positive for the Season-specific LAIV Influenza A Strain in Respiratory Secretions at Day 0 Who Were Positive for H1N1 and/or H3N2 Strains.|Nasal swab samples were collected from all maternal participants prior to vaccination for PCR and cell culture to assess for the presence of the viruses in the LAIV vaccine in respiratory secretions. Those who were positive for the Influenza A strain were further tested to identify the H1N1 and H3N2 strain.|Day 0 prior to vaccination|The analysis population is limited to participants who were positive by PCR and/or cell culture for the vaccine strain of Influenza A.||participants|||Number
824330|NCT01181323|Secondary|Number of Infant Participants With Season-specific LAIV Influenza A and B Strains Detected in Respiratory Secretions at Day 8 Post Vaccination.|Nasal swab samples were collected from all infant participants at Day 8 post vaccination for PCR and cell culture to assess for the presence of the viruses in the LAIV vaccine in respiratory secretions. The data coordinating center selected 25% of participants in the TIV group for testing to serve as an internal control for the assay.|Day 8 post vaccination|All participants with samples selected for testing by the data coordinating center, 100% of LAIV recipients and 25% of TIV recipients, are included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
824331|NCT01181323|Secondary|Number of Infant Participants With Season-specific LAIV Influenza A and B Strains Detected in Respiratory Secretions at Day 2 Post Vaccination.|Nasal swab samples were collected from all infant participants at Day 2 post vaccination for PCR and cell culture to assess for the presence of the viruses in the LAIV vaccine in respiratory secretions. The data coordinating center selected 25% of participants in the TIV group for testing to serve as an internal control for the assay.|Day 2 post vaccination|All participants with samples selected for testing by the data coordinating center, 100% of LAIV recipients and 25% of TIV recipients, are included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
824332|NCT01181323|Secondary|Number of Infant Participants With Season-specific LAIV Influenza A and B Strains Detected in Respiratory Secretions Prior to Vaccination.|Nasal swab samples were collected from all infant participants prior to vaccination for PCR and cell culture to assess for the presence of the viruses in the LAIV vaccine in respiratory secretions. The data coordinating center selected 25% of participants in the TIV group for testing to serve as an internal control for the assay.|Day 0 prior to vaccination|All participants with samples selected for testing by the data coordinating center, 100% of LAIV recipients and 25% of TIV recipients, are included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
824333|NCT01181323|Secondary|Number of Maternal Participants With Season-specific LAIV Influenza A and B Strains Detected in Respiratory Secretions at Day 8 Post Vaccination.|Nasal swab samples were collected from all maternal participants at Day 8 post vaccination for PCR and cell culture to assess for the presence of the viruses in the LAIV vaccine in respiratory secretions. The data coordinating center selected 25% of participants in the TIV group for testing to serve as an internal control for the assay.|Day 8 post vaccination|All participants with samples selected for testing by the data coordinating center, 100% of LAIV recipients and 25% of TIV recipients, are included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
824334|NCT01181323|Primary|Number of Maternal Participants Reporting Solicited Quantitative Local Symptoms After Vaccination|Participants maintained a memory aid to record daily the occurrence of local reactions of redness and swelling for 8 days after vaccination (Day 0-7). If the reaction was present, the maximum diameter was measured in millimeters (mm). Participants are counted if they reported experiencing the reaction with any measurement greater than 0 mm on any of the 8 days.|Day 0-7 post vaccination|All enrolled maternal participants are included in this analysis population.||participants|||Number
824335|NCT01181323|Primary|Number of Maternal Participants Reporting Solicited Subjective Local Symptoms After Vaccination|Participants maintained a memory aid to record daily the occurrence of local symptoms of nasal congestion, runny nose, cough, sore throat, nasal bleeding, pain at injection site, tenderness at injection site, and swelling at injection site for 8 days after vaccination (Day 0-7) based on their interference with daily activities. Participants are counted if they reported experiencing the symptom at any severity on any of the 8 days.|Day 0-7 post vaccination|All enrolled maternal participants are included in this analysis population.||participants|||Number
824336|NCT01181323|Primary|Number of Maternal Participants Reporting Solicited Subjective Systemic Symptoms After Vaccination|Participants maintained a memory aid to record daily the occurrence of systemic symptoms of feverishness, malaise, myalgia, headache, nausea, weakness, and chills for 8 days after vaccination (Day 0-7) based on their interference with daily activities. Participants are counted if they reported experiencing the symptom at any severity on any of the 8 days.|Day 0-7 post vaccination|All enrolled maternal participants are included in this analysis population.||participants|||Number
824337|NCT01181323|Primary|Number of Maternal Participants Reporting Fever After Vaccination|Participants were provided with a thermometer and a memory aid on which to record daily oral temperatures for 8 days after vaccination (Day 0-7). The protocol defined fever as oral temperature of 37.8 degrees Celsius or higher. Participants are counted as experiencing fever if they reported oral temperatures of 37.8 degrees Celsius or higher on any of the 8 days.|Day 0-7 post vaccination|All enrolled maternal participants are included in this analysis population.||participants|||Number
824338|NCT01181323|Secondary|Number of Maternal Participants With Season-specific LAIV Influenza A and B Strains Detected in Respiratory Secretions at Day 2 Post Vaccination.|Nasal swab samples were collected from all maternal participants at Day 2 post vaccination for PCR and cell culture to assess for the presence of the viruses in the LAIV vaccine in respiratory secretions. The data coordinating center selected 25% of participants in the TIV group for testing to serve as an internal control for the assay.|Day 2 post vaccination|All participants with samples selected for testing by the data coordinating center, 100% of LAIV recipients and 25% of TIV recipients, are included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
824339|NCT01181323|Secondary|Number of Maternal Participants With Season-specific LAIV Influenza A and B Strains Detected in Respiratory Secretions Prior to Vaccination.|Nasal swab samples were collected from all maternal participants prior to vaccination for PCR and cell culture to assess for the presence of the viruses in the LAIV vaccine in respiratory secretions. The data coordinating center selected 25% of participants in the TIV group for testing to serve as an internal control for the assay.|Day 0 prior to vaccination|All participants with samples selected for testing by the data coordinating center, 100% of LAIV recipients and 25% of TIV recipients, are included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
824340|NCT01181323|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMT) in Maternal Sera of Hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) Antibodies to Each of the Influenza Strains in the Vaccine Received|Blood was collected for HAI assay at Day 0 prior to vaccination and again at 28 days following vaccination. The HAI assay was conducted with the antigens in the 2011-2012 seasonal influenza vaccine, A/Perth/16/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008, those in the 2012-2013 seasonal influenza vaccine, A/Victoria/361/2011 and B/Wisconsin/1/2010, and the antigen in both seasons's vaccine, A/California/7/2009 (H1N1). The lower limit of detection for the assay was a titer of 10, sera samples below detection were given a value of 5 for analysis.|Day 0 and 28 post vaccination|All enrolled maternal participants with results reported are included in this analysis population.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824341|NCT01181323|Primary|Number of Infant Participants With Medically Attended Respiratory or Gastrointestinal AEs 28-42 Days After Maternal Vaccination|Maternal participants were contacted by telephone at Day 42 to report all medically attended respiratory or gastrointestinal adverse events occurring in the infant participants between 28 and 42 days after maternal vaccination.|Within 28-42 days after maternal vaccination|All infant participants for whom the maternal participants were contacted are included in the analysis population description. One maternal participant was not contacted.||participants|||Number
824342|NCT01181323|Primary|Breast Milk ELISA IgA and IgG Geometric Mean Titers (GMT) to Each of the Vaccine Influenza Strains|Breast milk was collected at Day 0 prior to vaccination and again at 28 days following vaccination for testing in IgA and IgG ELISA Assays. The ELISA assay was conducted with the antigens in the 2011-2012 seasonal influenza vaccine, A/Perth/16/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008, those in the 2012-2013 seasonal influenza vaccine, A/Victoria/361/2011 and B/Wisconsin/1/2010, and the antigen in both seasons's vaccine, A/California/7/2009 (H1N1). The lower limit of detection is 5.82 units/mL for IgA and 2.56 units/mL for IgG. Titers below the limit of detection were reported as one-half the limit of detection.|Day 0 and 28 post vaccination|All enrolled maternal participants are included in this analysis population.||units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824343|NCT01181323|Primary|Number of Participating Reporting Non-serious Unsolicited Adverse Events Related to Vaccination Within 28 Days of Maternal Vaccination|Adverse events (AE) for this protocol used the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) guideline E6 definition of AE, any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product regardless of its causal relationship to the study treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of investigational product. Related was defined as a reasonable possibility that the study product caused the AE. Reasonable possibility means that there is evidence to suggest a causal relationship between the study product and the adverse event. Non-serious AEs were those that did not meet the definition of serious (see Outcome Measure 1). Maternal participants were queried at each visit through 28 days after vaccination for the occurrence of any AE for her or the infant separately from the pre-defined solicited symptoms.|Day 0 to Day 28 post vaccination|All enrolled participants are included in the analysis population for this outcome measure||participants|||Number
824344|NCT01181323|Primary|Number of Infant Participants Reporting Solicited Systemic Adverse Events Within 11 Days of Maternal Vaccination|Maternal participants maintained a memory aid to record daily the occurrence in their infants of systemic adverse events of fever (defined as rectal temperature 37.8 degrees Celsius or greater), drowsiness, irritability/fussiness, loss of appetite, nasal congestion, difficulty breathing, runny nose, and cough for 11 days (Day 0-10) after maternal vaccination based on protocol-defined grading (none, mild, moderate or severe) for each symptom. Rectal temperature was measured once daily. Participants are counted if they were reported as experiencing the symptom at any severity on any of the 11 days.|Day 0 to Day 10 post vaccination|||participants|||Number
824345|NCT01181323|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting New Onset Chronic Medical Conditions|New onset chronic medical condition was defined as any new ICD-10 diagnosis for a participant that was expected to continue for at least 6 months and require continued health care intervention. ICD-10 = International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th revision. Maternal participants were asked at each visit through 180 days after enrollment if they or their infants had any new diagnosis.|Day 0 to Day 180 post vaccination|All enrolled participants are included in the analysis population for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
824346|NCT01181323|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events included any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death; was life threatening; was a persistent/significant disability/incapacity; required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation thereof; was a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or may have jeopardized the participant, or required intervention to prevent one of the outcomes, regardless of relationship to study product or study participation.|Day 0 to Day 180 post vaccination|All enrolled participants are included in the analysis population for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
824347|NCT01181349|Secondary|Number of Participants With and Without Postoperative Residual Neuromuscular Blockade With Postoperative Events||From end of surgery through hospital discharge, an expected average of 6 days|FAS population includes all treated participants||participants|||Number
824349|NCT01181349|Secondary|Number of Participants With and Without Postoperative Residual Neuromuscular Blockade Who Received Propofol or Sevoflurane|Anesthetic agents administered to participants undergoing surgical procedures were recorded. The number of participants who received propofol or sevoflurane is presented, for participants with and without residual neuromuscular blockade.|From start of surgery through PACU arrival|FAS population includes all treated participants; for this outcome measure only participants who received propofol or sevoflurane are included||participants|||Number
824350|NCT01181349|Secondary|Number of Participants With and Without Postoperative Residual Neuromuscular Blockade Who Received Identified Neuromuscular Blocking Agents|Neuromuscular blocking agents administered to participants undergoing surgical procedures were recorded. The number of participants who received atracurium, cisatracurium, rocuronium or vecuronium is presented, for participants with and without residual neuromuscular blockade.|From start of surgery through PACU arrival|FAS population includes all treated participants; for this outcome measure only participants who received atracurium, cisatracurium, rocuronium or vecuronium are included||participants|||Number
824351|NCT01181349|Primary|Number of Participants With Train-of-four (TOF) Ratio <0.9 at PACU Arrival|The incidence of incomplete postoperative neuromuscular recovery from general anesthesia was assessed in study participants upon arrival in the PACU, after their respective surgical procedures were completed. Neuromuscular functioning was assessed by applying repetitive TOF electrical stimulations to the ulnar nerve every 15 seconds and assessing twitch response at the adductor pollicis muscle. The TOF ratio is the ratio of the magnitude of the fourth twitch to that of the first twitch, and a ratio <0.9 indicates residual neuromuscular blockade (incomplete neuromuscular recovery).|Upon arrival in the PACU|Full analysis set (FAS) population includes all treated participants||participants|||Number
824352|NCT01173211|Secondary|Number of Participants With HAI Antibody Titer Greater Than or Equal to 40 Against Each Antigen Included in the 2010-2011 Inactivated TIV in Cord Blood Collected at Time of Delivery.|Cord blood was collected at delivery for HAI assay at time of delivery. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen. Participants are counted if the titer at the timepoint is 40 or greater.|At time of delivery|Subjects from whom cord blood samples were collected at delivery from which valid results were reported are included.||participants|||Number
824353|NCT01173211|Secondary|HAI GMT Against Each Antigen in the 2010-2011 Seasonal Influenza Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in Cord Blood Collected at Time of Delivery|Cord blood was collected at delivery for HAI assay at time of delivery. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen.|At time of delivery|Subjects from whom cord blood samples were collected at delivery from which valid results were reported are included.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
824354|NCT01173211|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Maternal Serum HAI Antibody Titer Greater Than or Equal to 40 Against Each Antigen Included in the 2010-2011 Inactivated TIV at Time of Delivery.|Maternal blood was collected for HAI assay at time of delivery. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen. Participants are counted if the titer at the timepoint is 40 or greater.|At time of delivery|Subjects who contributed blood samples at delivery from which valid results were reported are included.||participants|||Number
824355|NCT01173211|Secondary|Number of Participants With 4-fold or Greater Maternal Serum HAI Antibody Titer Increases Against Each Antigen in the 2010-2011 Seasonal Influenza Trivalent Influenza Vaccine at Time of Delivery|Blood was collected from all participants prior to vaccination as well as at time of delivery. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen. A participant met the threshold of a 4-fold rise in titer if the Day 0 titer was less than 10 (the assay's lowest level of detection) and the titer was 40 or greater at delivery, or the Day 0 titer was greater than or equal to 10 and the titer was an increase by 4-fold or more at delivery.|Day 0 prior to vaccination and at time of delivery|Subjects who contributed blood samples at delivery from which valid results were reported are included.||participants|||Number
824356|NCT01173211|Primary|Number of Participants With HAI Antibody Titer of 40 or Greater Against Each Antigen in the 2010-2011 Seasonal Influenza Trivalent Influenza Vaccine|Blood was collected from all participants prior to vaccination as well as 28 days after vaccination. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen. Participants are counted if the titer at the timepoint is 40 or greater.|Day 0 prior to and Day 28 after vaccination|Subjects who received vaccination and contributed blood samples from which valid results were reported are included. One subject who did not meet eligibility criteria was not included.||participants|||Number
824357|NCT01173211|Primary|Number of Participants With 4-fold or Greater Serum HAI Antibody Titer Increases Against Each Antigen in the 2010-2011 Seasonal Influenza Trivalent Influenza Vaccine|Blood was collected from all participants prior to vaccination as well as 28 days after vaccination. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen. A participant met the threshold of a 4-fold rise in titer if the Day 0 titer was less than 10 (the assay's lowest level of detection) and the Day 28 post vaccination titer was 40 or greater, or the Day 0 titer was greater than or equal to 10 and the Day 28 post vaccination titer was an increase by 4-fold or more.|Day 0 prior to and Day 28 after vaccination|||participants|||Number
824358|NCT01173211|Primary|Hemagglutination Inhibition Assay (HAI) Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) Against Each Antigen in the 2010-2011 Seasonal Influenza Trivalent Influenza Vaccine|Blood was collected for HAI assay at Day 0 prior to vaccination and again at 28 days following vaccination. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen.|Day 0 prior to and Day 28 following vaccination|Subjects who received vaccination and contributed blood samples from which valid results were reported are included. One subject who did not meet eligibility criteria was not included.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824359|NCT01173211|Secondary|Maternal HAI GMT Against Each Antigen in the 2010-2011 Seasonal Influenza Trivalent Influenza Vaccine at Time of Delivery|Maternal blood was collected for HAI assay at time of delivery. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen.|At time of delivery|Subjects who contributed blood samples at delivery from which valid results were reported are included.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824360|NCT01173211|Secondary|Number of Participants With HAI Antibody Titer of 40 or Greater Against Each Antigen in the 2010-2011 Seasonal Influenza Trivalent Influenza Vaccine at 6 Months After Vaccination|Blood was collected from all participants at 180 days after vaccination. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen. Participants are counted if the titer at the timepoint is 40 or greater.|Day 180 (approximately 6 months after vaccination)|Subjects who received vaccination and contributed blood samples from which valid results were reported are included.||participants|||Number
824361|NCT01173211|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Fever After Vaccination|Participants were provided with a thermometer and a memory aid on which to record daily oral temperatures for 8 days after vaccination (Day 0-7). The protocol defined fever as oral temperature of 37.8 degrees Celsius or higher. Participants are counted as experiencing fever if they reported oral temperatures of 37.8 degrees Celsius or higher on any of the 8 days.|8 days after vaccination (Days 0-7).|All participants receiving the vaccination are included in the safety cohort.||participants|||Number
824362|NCT01173211|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Subjective Systemic Reactions After Vaccination|Participants maintained a memory aid to record daily the occurrence of systemic symptoms of feverishness, malaise, myalgia, headache, and nausea for 8 days after vaccination (Day 0-7) based on their interference with daily activities. Participants are counted if they reported experiencing the symptom at any severity on any of the 8 days.|8 days after vaccination (Days 0-7).|All participants receiving the vaccination are included in the safety cohort.||participants|||Number
824363|NCT01173211|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Quantitative Local Reactions After Vaccination|Participants maintained a memory aid to record daily the occurrence of local reactions of redness and swelling for 8 days after vaccination (Day 0-7). If the reaction was present, the maximum diameter was measured in millimeters (mm). Participants are counted if they reported experiencing the reaction with any measurement greater than 0 mm on any of the 8 days.|8 days after vaccination (Days 0-7).|All participants receiving the vaccination are included in the safety cohort.||participants|||Number
824364|NCT01173211|Secondary|Number of Participants With 4-fold or Greater Serum HAI Antibody Titer Increases Against Each Antigen in the 2010-2011 Seasonal Influenza Trivalent Influenza Vaccine at 6 Months After Vaccination|Blood was collected from all participants at 180 days after vaccination. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen. A participant met the threshold of a 4-fold rise in titer if the Day 0 titer was less than 10 (the assay's lowest level of detection) and the Day 180 post vaccination titer was 40 or greater, or the Day 0 titer was greater than or equal to 10 and the Day 180 post vaccination titer was an increase by 4-fold or more.|Day 180 (approximately 6 months after vaccination)|Subjects who received vaccination and contributed blood samples from which valid results were reported are included.||participants|||Number
824365|NCT01173211|Secondary|Hemagglutination Inhibition Assay (HAI) Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) Against Each Antigen in the 2010-2011 Seasonal Influenza Trivalent Influenza Vaccine at 6 Months After Vaccination|Blood was collected for HAI assay at approximately Day 180 following vaccination. The HAI assay was conducted with the three antigens in the 2010-2011 seasonal inactivated TIV: Influenza B antigen, H1N1 antigen, and H3N2 antigen.|Day 180 (approximately 6 months after vaccination)|Subjects who received vaccination and contributed blood samples from which valid results were reported are included.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824366|NCT01173211|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Subjective Local Reactions After Vaccination|Participants maintained a memory aid to record daily the occurrence of local reactions of pain, tenderness and swelling for 8 days after vaccination (Day 0-7) based on their interference with daily activities. Participants are counted if they reported experiencing the symptom at any severity on any of the 8 days.|8 days after vaccination (Days 0-7).|All participants receiving the vaccination are included in the safety cohort.||participants|||Number
824367|NCT01173211|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Vaccine-associated Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events included any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death of the mother, fetus or infant; was life threatening to mother, fetus or infant; was a persistent/significant disability/incapacity; required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation thereof; was a congenital anomaly/birth defect in fetus or infant; or may have jeopardized the mother, fetus or infant, or required intervention to prevent one of the outcomes, or was described as Guillain-Barré Syndrome. Association was determined by a clinician licensed to diagnose and listed on the site's FDA Form 1572.|Day 0 through Day 180 after vaccination|All participants receiving vaccination are included in the safety cohort||participants|||Number
824368|NCT01173211|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Neonatal Complications|Participants were contacted after delivery, and medical records reviewed, to collect neonatal complications. The data collection process followed a prospectively-defined list of complications reported for this outcome measure, some of which may have also been reported as serious adverse events if otherwise meeting those requirements.|At time of delivery|Pregnant participants receiving vaccination are included in this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
824369|NCT01173211|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Maternal Complications of Pregnancy, Labor and Delivery|Participants were contacted after delivery, and medical records reviewed, to collect complications experienced during pregnancy, labor and delivery. The data collection process followed a prospectively-defined list of complications reported for this outcome measure, some of which may have also been reported as serious adverse events if otherwise meeting those requirements.|During the pregnancy and at the time of delivery|Pregnant participants receiving vaccination are included in this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
824370|NCT01173211|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Vaccine-associated Unsolicited Non-serious Adverse Events|Unsolicited non-serious adverse events were collected from participants at follow up contacts, either by phone or in clinic, through 28 days after vaccination. Association to vaccination was determined by a clinician licensed to make a medical diagnosis and listed on the site's Federal Drug Administration's Form 1572.|Day 0 through Day 28 post vaccination|All participants receiving vaccination are included in the safety cohort||participants|||Number
824371|NCT01173471|Secondary|Change in Mean Intra-ocular Pressure Compared With Baseline After 4 Weeks Treatment||Baseline to 4 weeks|Efficacy analysis set||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824372|NCT01173471|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Change in Intra-ocular Pressure After 4 Weeks of Treatment||Baseline to 4 weeks|Efficacy analysis set||Participants|||Number
824375|NCT01173523|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) based on the Kaplan-Meier method is defined as the time from study entry to the earliest documentation of disease progression (PD) based on RECIST 1.1 criteria or death. Participants alive without evidence of PD were censored at the date of last adequate disease assessment. Per RECIST 1.1 for target lesions PD is at least a 20% increase in sum LD, taking as reference the smallest sum on study with at least 5 mm absolute increase. For non-target lesions, progression is appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression on existing non-target lesions.|Disease was evaluated radiographically at baseline and every 8 weeks on treatment. Treatment duration was a median of 2 cycles (parallel to 2 months given the 4 week cycle length) and range of 1-2 cycles in this study cohort.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824376|NCT01173523|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the percentage of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on RECIST 1.1 criteria on treatment. Per RECIST 1.1 for target lesions: CR is complete disappearance of all target lesions and PR is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference baseline sum LD. PR or better overall response assumes at a minimum incomplete response/stable disease (SD) for the evaluation of non-target lesions and absence of new lesions.|Disease was evaluated radiographically at baseline and every 8 weeks on treatment. Treatment duration was a median of 2 cycles (parallel to 2 months given the 4 week cycle length) and range of 1-2 cycles in this study cohort.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824377|NCT01173523|Primary|8-Week Progression-Free Rate|The 8-week progression free rate is defined as the percentage of participants achieving complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) based on RECIST 1.1 criteria by the time of the first disease assessment (8 weeks). Per RECIST 1.1 for target lesions: CR is complete disappearance of all target lesions; PR is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference baseline sum LD; and SD is neither sufficient decrease to qualify as PR nor sufficient increase to qualify as progressive disease (PD). PD is at least a 20% increase in sum LD, taking as reference the smallest sum on study with at least 5 mm absolute increase. Response needed confirmation within 4 weeks. For non-target lesions, progression-free means no new lesions or unequivocal progression on existing non-target lesions or not evaluated.|Disease was evaluated radiographically at baseline and every 8 weeks on treatment; Treatment continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Relevant for this endpoint was the first 8 week disease re-assessment.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824378|NCT01173653|Primary|Smoking Status at Follow up|Patients enrolled in this study were contacted via phone to assess smoking status. Smoking status was a self-report from each subject. Primary outcome measure is the smoking status of the enrollee at the time of follow-up contact. We calculated the percentage of participants who had stopped smoking at the 6 week follow-up period in each arm|6 weeks|Of subjects enrolled, 56 of the 109 subjects in the control arm and 49 of 90 subjects in the intervention arm were able to be contacted via phone and were willing to provide follow-up data for analysis of smoking status at the 6 week follow-up.||percentage of participants|||Number
824379|NCT01173679|Secondary|Toxicities|Dasatinib may enhance the myelosuppression expected from fludarabine. This toxicity will be monitored with frequent CBC's. If after Day 21 of a cycle there is a grade 4 cytopenia, a dose reduction will occur in the next cycle of treatment, and that cycle cannot start until the ANC > 1,000 and the platelets > 25,000. There is also a risk for pleural effusions with dasatinib, but the risk will be low, since there is a break from dasatinib dosing on days 15-28 of each cycle. Nevertheless, if a grade 2 pleural effusion occurs, there will be a dose reduction in the next cycle of treatment.|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
824380|NCT01173679|Secondary|Progression-Free and Overall Survival|To describe the progression-free and overall surivial|2 years|||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824381|NCT01173679|Primary|Response Rate|To describe the response rate of complete response (CR) and partial response (PR) to treatment with this drug combination (SD=stable disease, PD=progressive disease)|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
824382|NCT01173718|Secondary|Time to Potential Central Venous Catheter Removal|The time to potential central venous catheter removal is defined as the time from the initial study procedure to the third consecutive cannulation through the GORE® ACUSEAL Vascular Graft in which hemodialysis is carried out. The third consecutive cannulation is a surrogate endpoint for time to CVC removal. Typically, CVC removal is ordered after the third consecutive cannulation.|Initial study procedure to the third consecutive cannulation, assessed from day 3 thru day 123|All subjects with unknown time to potential central venous catheter removal at the 6 month window were omitted from calculations||days||Full Range|Median
824383|NCT01173718|Secondary|Time to First Cannulation|The time to first cannulation is defined as the time from access placement to the first cannulation of the GORE® ACUSEAL Vascular Graft.|Time of access placement to first cannulation, assessed up to one week|All subjects with unknown time to first cannulation at the 6 month window were omitted from calculations||percentage of grafts|||Number
824384|NCT01173718|Secondary|Time to Event Analysis (Cumulative Patency)|The cumulative patency at 6 months and time-to-loss of cumulative patency will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier survival curve for time-to-event analysis to obtain estimates accounting for censoring.|6 Months|All subjects with unknown time to event analysis (cumulative patency) status at the 6 month window were omitted from calculations||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824385|NCT01173718|Secondary|Primary Unassisted Patency at 6 Months|The primary unassisted patency is defined as the percentage of subjects free from the first occurence of either access thrombosis or an access procedure performed to maintain access patency.|6 Months|All subjects with unknown primary unassisted patency status at the 6 month window were omitted from calculations||percentage of participants|||Number
824386|NCT01173718|Primary|Freedom From Bleeding at 6 Months|Percentage of subjects free from both major and minor bleeding events, assessed at 6-months|6 Months|All subjects with unknown bleeding status at the 6 month window were omitted from calculations||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824387|NCT01173718|Primary|Cumulative Patency at 6 Months|Percentage of subjects free from loss of access for hemodialysis at the study access site, assessed at 6 month.|6 Months|All subjects with unknown cumulative patency status at the 6 month window were omitted from calculations||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824389|NCT01173874|Secondary|Efficacy as Measured by Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS)|"Total PANSS score with 30 items. Each item is rated 1-7 so the minimum Total PANSS score =30 and the maximum is 210. Anchors for each item are as follows, the higher values represent an increase in severity of symptoms:
Absent
Minimal
Mild
Moderate
Moderately severe
Severe
Extremely severe"|4-6 month period|Completed subjects||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824390|NCT01173874|Secondary|Cognition as Measured by Cognitive Assessment Interview (CAI)|"Cognitive Assessment Interview was used to obtain information about cognitive functioning from both subject and an informant. Composite CAI scores were reported. Scale ranges from 1-7 with the following anchors:
Normal, no cognitive impairment
Borderline impairment
Mildly impaired
Moderately impaired
Markedly impaired
Severely impaired
Among the most extremely impaired"|4-6 month period|completed subjects with available completed CAI data. Numbers above are correct as not all completed subjects (Analysis Population Description) had completed CAI assessment available for analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824391|NCT01173874|Primary|Cognitive Function as Measured by the University of California, San Diego, Performance-Based Skills Assessment-Brief (UPSA-B) Scale|The UPSA-B assesses functional capacity to perform tasks similar to those in daily life. Raw scores are converted into scaled scores ranging from 0–100, with higher scores indicating better functional capacity.|4-6 month period|Completed subjects||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824392|NCT01173874|Primary|Cognitive Function Measured by MCCB Composite Score|"The MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) will be used to assess cognitive function. The MCCB composite score is comprised of sub-scale measures of: a) working memory; b) attention and vigilance; c) verbal learning; d) visual learning; e) speed of processing; f) reason and problem solving; and g) social cognition. The MCCB takes 90 minutes or less to complete.
MCCB assessed 4 times: prestabilization (screening), randomization (after 6-8 weeks of lurasidone stabilization, prior to initial cognitive remediation), midpoint (after 20 cognitive remediation session), and study completion (final visit after 30 cognitive remediation sessions).
MCCB composite scores are reported as t-scores where a t-score = 50 is the population average. Every 10 points is one standard deviation. There is no range as scores are as far from population average."|4-6 month period|Completers||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824393|NCT01174004|Secondary|Motor Symptoms Change From Baseline (Negative = Improvement)|"Motor symptoms were measured using the change from baseline to Day 43 in the combined score of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II (Activities of Daily Living) and Part III (Motor Examination). The possible total score is 0 to 160 and a negative change in score indicates improvement.
Analysis Method: Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA). The UPDRS Parts II+III score was analyzed by constructing 2-sided 95% confidence intervals (CIs) on the difference between the pimavanserin dose group and placebo mean change from baseline. Non-inferiority was concluded if the upper limit of the CI was less than or equal to 5."|Study Days 1 and 43|This is the “Intent to Treat” population, defined as patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had both the baseline SAPS assessment and at least one post-baseline SAPS assessment collected no later than 3 days after the last dose date.||Score on the UPDRS-II+III||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824394|NCT01174004|Primary|Antipsychotic Efficacy|"Antipsychotic Efficacy was defined as a decrease in the severity and/or frequency of hallucinations and/or delusions. This is measured as the change from baseline (Day 1) to Day 43 in the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms 9-item sum score for Parkinson’s Disease (SAPS-PD). The possible total score is 0 to 45 and a negative change in score indicates improvement.
Analysis Method: Mixed Model Repeated Measures (MMRM)"|Each study visit (i.e. Days 1, 15, 29 and 43)|"This is the Intent to Treat population, defined as patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had both the baseline SAPS assessment and at least one post-baseline SAPS assessment collected no later than 3 days after the last dose date."||Score on the SAPS-PD scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824395|NCT01174030|Secondary|PSA-5 Success|"Each concentration/regimen was compared to its respective placebo control as part of the primary analysis.
PSA-5 success defined as 2-grade improvement on PSA-5.
Patient Self Assessment - 5 (PSA-5) - Grade/description 0 / No redness
/ Very mild redness
/ Mild redness
/ Moderate redness
/ Severe redness"|day 29|ITT population, LOCF when the data are missing at all four timepoints (i.e. Hours 3,6,9,12) LOCF method will be applied from the previous visit.||participants|||Number
824396|NCT01174030|Secondary|CEA Success|"CEA success defined as 2-grade improvement on CEA.
Each concentration/regimen was compared to its respective placebo control as part of the primary analysis.
Clinician Erythema Assessment (CEA) - Grade/Description 0 / Clear Skin with no signs of erythema
/ Amost clear; slight redness
/ Mild erythema; definite redness
/ Moderate erythema; marked redness
/ Severe erythema; fiery redness"|Day 29|ITT population, LOCF when the data are missing at all four timepoints (i.e. Hours 3,6,9,12) LOCF method will be applied from the previous visit.||participants|||Number
824397|NCT01174030|Primary|Composite Success|"Composite success defined as 2-grade improvement on Clinician Erythema Assessment (CEA)and Patient Self Assessment-5 (PSA-5).
Each concentration/regimen was compared to its respective placebo control as part of the primary analysis."|Day 29|Intent-to Treat (ITT) population, LOCF when the data are missing at all four timepoints (i.e. Hours 3, 6, 9, 12) LOCF method will be applied from previous visit.||participants|||Number
824398|NCT01174043|Other Pre-specified|Mechanistic Attributes of Erlotinib Hydrochloride in AML, Including Intracellular Quantitative Protein and Gene Expression Modifications and the in Vivo Effect of This Agent on the Differentiation of AML Blasts||Baseline; days 3, 4, 8, and 29 of course 1; and day 29 of courses 3, 6, 9, and 12||||||
824399|NCT01174043|Secondary|Treatment Related Adverse Events Grade 3 or Higher|Adverse events will be graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 3.0. Grading scale will be from 1 (mild) to 5 (causing death). This will determine the number of unique patients who had a treatment related (possible, probable or definite) adverse event that was graded 3 or greater.|up to 15 months|||participants|||Number
824400|NCT01174043|Secondary|Duration of Response (up to One Year Follow up) in Patients Who Achieve a Complete Remission|The duration of response is from the time of response until failure or until the end of follow-up for the patients who received complete remission. Complete remission includes presence of less than 5% blasts in an aspirate sample with marrow spicules and with a count of at least 200 nucleated cells.|1 year after treatment discontinuation|All patients enrolled and received treatment||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
824401|NCT01174043|Primary|Overall Response Rate (Defined as Partial Remission or Better) to 3 Months of Treatment With Erlotinib|The percent of patients were shown as having a partial remission or better based on definitions of response in AML. Partial remission includes a decrease of at least 50% in the percentage of blasts to 5% to 25% in the bone marrow aspirate. Complete remission includes presence of less than 5% blasts in an aspirate sample with marrow spicules and with a count of at least 200 nucleated cells. The percent and 95% exact confidence intervals will be calculated.|3 months of treatment with erlotinib|All patients enrolled and received treatment||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824402|NCT01174160|Primary|Proportion of Patients With Treatment-induced Conversion of Atrial Fibrillation to Sinus Rhythm|The proportion of patients with treatment-induced conversion of atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm for a minimum duration of 1 minute|Within 90 minutes after first exposure|||participants|||Number
824403|NCT01174173|Secondary|Right Ventricular Hemodynamics|Mean pulmonary artery pressure was assessed invasively by right heart catheterization at the conclusion of the study to estimate right ventricular hemodynamics.|3 months|Analysis was performed on all participants who completed right heart catheterization at the conclusion of the study||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824404|NCT01174173|Secondary|Absolute RV Longitudinal Strain|Change in absolute right ventricular (RV) longitudinal strain as assessed by exercise stress echocardiography with speckle-tracking echocardiography at baseline and conclusion of the study. An increase in exercise-induced change in RV longitudinal strain between baseline to conclusion of the study is indicative of improved RV function. If absolute RV longitudinal strain increases with exercise, that is a sign that the RV is working well. If absolute RV longitudinal strain decreases with exercise, that is a sign that the RV is not working well. Therefore, between baseline and conclusion of the study, if exercise-induced change in RV strain increases that means that the RV is working better at the conclusion of the study.|3 months|Analysis was performed on all participants who completed exercise stress echocardiography at baseline and conclusion of the study (month 3)||percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
824405|NCT01174173|Secondary|RV Perfusion on Cardiac MRI|The majority of patients did not undergo cardiac MRI because it was difficult for the patients to tolerate the imaging study. Therefore, we were not able to assess change in RV perfusion.|3 months||||||
824406|NCT01174173|Primary|Improve Quality of Life|The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire is a 23-item, self-administered instrument that quantifies physical function, symptoms (frequency, severity and recent change), social function, self-efficacy and knowledge, and quality of life. The scores are averaged and transformed to a range of 0-100, in which higher scores reflect better health status and was performed at the conclusion of the study.|3 Months|Analysis was performed on the 8 participants who completed the KCCQ questionnaire at baseline and at the conclusion of the study (month 3)||KCCQ Summary Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
824407|NCT01174173|Primary|6-Minute Walk Test|Improve Exercise Capacity measured by 6-Minute Walk Test|3 Months|Analysis was performed in all participants who completed the study and had a 6-minute walk test at baseline and at the conclusion of the study.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
824408|NCT01174173|Primary|Improve Angina Symptoms|Assessed as average improvement in WHO Functional Class. The WHO Functional Class score ranges from 1 to 4, with higher scores indicating more impairment|3 months|Analysis was performed on all participants who completed as average change in WHO Functional class score from baseline to 3 months (Baseline, 3 months)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824409|NCT01174186|Secondary|Assessment Group in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) Core Set for Clinical Practice|clinical measurements of inflammation in spondyloarthritis patients as described by the Assessment Group in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS)|one year||||||
824410|NCT01174186|Secondary|Spondyloarthritis Consortium of Canada Score|Inflammation on MRI assessed by the Spondyloarthritis Consortium of Canada score and a Danish scoring method|one year||||||
824411|NCT01174186|Primary|Change in Intestinal Inflammation Measured by Faecal Calprotectin|"Feacal calprotectin is a protein and a marker of the degree of inflammation in the intestine, but not the site of inflammation.
We measured the level calprotectin continuously in each of the patients. Difference was inferred by repeated measurement ANOVA"|Baseline to 52 weeks|"15 patients in each group was included. 3 in the calprotectin negative group patients did not fulfill the entire study period (1 lost to follow-up, 2 withdrew consent).
Data analysed as last observation carried forward."||mg/g||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824412|NCT01174186|Primary|Change Lewis Score Index|"Lewis' score describes the amount of inflammation seen optically by capsular endoscopy.
Gralnek et al. devised and validated the Lewis score index, based on three endoscopic parameters: villous edema, ulcer and stenosis/stricture. Using these parameters, the authors established a score range of 8–4,800 points where: LS < 135 reflects normal mucosal appearances, LS 135–790 mild mucosal inflammatory change and an LS value ≥790 moderate to severe mucosal inflammatory changes.
The patients had endoscopy performed at baseline and again after 20 weeks. The number of patients improving was compared to number of patients deteriorating"|20 weeks|Because endoscopy has a small risk for perforation. The study was designed so only patients with active inflammation at baseline had follow-up endoscopy performed. Because all patients with normal calprotectin levels had normal endoscopy, follow-up was only performed on this group of patients.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824413|NCT01174264|Primary|Tmax Following Steady State Exposure for 14 Days|Time of maximum drug concentration.|24 hours|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
824414|NCT01174264|Primary|AUC Following Steady State Exposure for 14 Days|Area under the curve from 0 to 24 hours.|24 hours|3 and 2 patients with missing data, respectively||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824415|NCT01174264|Primary|Cmax Following Steady State Exposure for 14 Days|Maximum drug concentration over 24 hours.|24 hours|||ng/ml||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824416|NCT01174264|Primary|Ctrough Following Steady State Exposure for 14 Days|Minimum blood concentration over 24-hour observation period. Blood sample collected at 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours.|24 hours|||ng/ml||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824417|NCT01174264|Primary|Tlag Following Single Dose of Drug|Time between drug administration and when it is first observed in the systemic circulation.|168 hours|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
824418|NCT01174264|Primary|Tmax`Following Single Dose of Drug|Time of maximum drug concentration|168 hours|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
824419|NCT01174264|Secondary|Objective Responses in Patients With Solid Tumors|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT or MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 30 days|2 patients in Arm I and 4 patients in Arm III were non-evaluable for response.||participants|||Number
824420|NCT01174264|Primary|AUC Following Single Dose of Drug|Area under the curve from 0-168 hours.|168 hours|||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824421|NCT01174264|Primary|Cmax Following Single Dose of Drug|Highest observed concentration over the 168 hour period. Blood samples were collected at j0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 24, 48, 120, and 168 hours.|168 hours|||ng/ml||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824422|NCT01174342|Primary|Intraocular Pressure|Intraocular pressure during different stages of child delivery.|During child delivery|We included in the analysis all women completing vaginal delivery that had measurements of their intraocular pressure during most stages of labor.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824423|NCT01174446|Secondary|Health Resource Use - Days Lost From Work or School||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||Days||Full Range|Median
824424|NCT01174446|Secondary|Health Resource Use - Unscheduled Doctor's Office Visits||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||Visits||Full Range|Median
824425|NCT01174446|Secondary|Health Resource Use - Emergency Room Visits||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||Visits||Full Range|Median
824426|NCT01174446|Secondary|Health Resource Use - Total Days of Hospital Stay||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||Days||Full Range|Median
824427|NCT01174446|Secondary|Health Resource Use - Number of Hospitalizations||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||Hospitalizations||Full Range|Median
824428|NCT01174446|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) Disease-specific: Haemo-QoL - Participants On-Demand (Ages 12-16)|The Haemo-QoL is a quality of life (QoL) assessment instrument for children and adolescents with haemophilia. As a hemophilia-specific instrument, this measure assesses very specific aspects of dealing with hemophilia. For the Haemo-QoL, higher scores indicate a worse quality of life. Scores on a scale range between 0 and 100.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824429|NCT01174446|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) Disease-specific: Haem-A-QoL|The Haem-A-QOL instrument has been developed and used in hemophilia A patients. As a hemophilia-specific instrument, this measure assesses very specific aspects of dealing with hemophilia. The areas covered by this instrument are: physical health, sports/leisure, school/work, dealing with hemophilia, and outlook for the future. For the Haem-A-QOL, higher scores indicate a worse quality of life. Scores on a scale range between 0 and 100.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824430|NCT01174446|Secondary|Pediatric Quality of Life Questionnaire (PedsQL) Total Score (Ages 12-16)|The Peds-QL is a generic Health-Related Quality of Life (HR QoL) instrument designed specifically for a pediatric population. It captures the following domains: general health/activities, feelings/emotional, social functioning, school functioning. For this study, the Peds-QL for 12 to 16-year-old subjects was used. Higher scores indicate better quality of life (QOL) for all domains of the Peds-QL. This modular instrument uses a 5-point scale: from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, 4=0. 4 dimensions (physical, emotional, social, & school functioning) are scored.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824431|NCT01174446|Secondary|Pediatric Quality of Life Questionnaire (PedsQL) Psychosocial Health Summary Score (Ages 12-16)|The Peds-QL is a generic Health-Related Quality of Life (HR QoL) instrument designed specifically for a pediatric population. It captures the following domains: general health/activities, feelings/emotional, social functioning, school functioning. For this study, the Peds-QL for 12 to 16-year-old subjects was used. Higher scores indicate better quality of life (QOL) for all domains of the Peds-QL. This modular instrument uses a 5-point scale: from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, 4=0. 4 dimensions (physical, emotional, social, & school functioning) are scored.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824432|NCT01174446|Secondary|Pediatric Quality of Life Questionnaire (PedsQL) Physical Health Summary Score (Ages 12-16)|The Peds-QL is a generic Health-Related Quality of Life (HR QoL) instrument designed specifically for a pediatric population. It captures the following domains: general health/activities, feelings/emotional, social functioning, school functioning. For this study, the Peds-QL for 12 to 16-year-old subjects was used. Higher scores indicate better quality of life (QOL) for all domains of the Peds-QL. This modular instrument uses a 5-point scale: from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, 4=0. 4 dimensions (physical, emotional, social, & school functioning) are scored.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824433|NCT01174446|Secondary|SF-36: HRQoL General Health|Quality of life survey response as measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both subscores and summary scores. The raw data from the SF-36 items were transformed to norm based scores for each of the 8 HRQoL/SF-36 health domain scores.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824449|NCT01174446|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Laboratory Parameters: Vital Signs|Clinically significant changes in vital signs assessments for pulse rate, systolic/diastolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, body temperature|Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
824434|NCT01174446|Secondary|SF-36: HRQoL Social Functioning|Quality of life survey response as measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both subscores and summary scores. The raw data from the SF-36 items were transformed to norm based scores for each of the 8 HRQoL/SF-36 health domain scores.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824435|NCT01174446|Secondary|SF-36: HRQoL Vitality|Quality of life survey response as measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both subscores and summary scores. The raw data from the SF-36 items were transformed to norm based scores for each of the 8 HRQoL/SF-36 health domain scores.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824436|NCT01174446|Secondary|SF-36: HRQoL Mental Health|Quality of life survey response as measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both subscores and summary scores. The raw data from the SF-36 items were transformed to norm based scores for each of the 8 HRQoL/SF-36 health domain scores.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824437|NCT01174446|Secondary|SF-36: HRQoL Bodily Pain|Quality of life survey response as measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both subscores and summary scores. The raw data from the SF-36 items were transformed to norm based scores for each of the 8 HRQoL/SF-36 health domain scores.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824438|NCT01174446|Secondary|SF-36: HRQoL Role-Emotional|Quality of life survey response as measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both subscores and summary scores. The raw data from the SF-36 items were transformed to norm based scores for each of the 8 HRQoL/SF-36 health domain scores.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824439|NCT01174446|Secondary|SF-36: HRQoL Role-Physical (RP)|Quality of life survey response as measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both subscores and summary scores. The raw data from the SF-36 items were transformed to norm based scores for each of the 8 HRQoL/SF-36 health domain scores.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824440|NCT01174446|Secondary|SF-36: HRQoL Physical Functioning' (PF)|Quality of life survey response as measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both subscores and summary scores. The raw data from the SF-36 items were transformed to norm based scores for each of the 8 HRQoL/SF-36 health domain scores.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824441|NCT01174446|Secondary|SF-36: HRQoL 'Mental Health' (MH)|Quality of life survey response as measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both subscores and summary scores. The raw data from the SF-36 items were transformed to norm based scores for each of the 8 HRQoL/SF-36 health domain scores.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824442|NCT01174446|Secondary|Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36): HRQoL 'Physical Component Score' (PCS)|The PCS is a summary scale of the dimensions physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, and general health. The component score is normalized to a standard population. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both subscores and summary scores.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824443|NCT01174446|Secondary|General Pain Assessment Through a Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|Participant rated assessment of health-related quality of life. The VAS Pain Scale rates current health state on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst imaginable pain). For the pain scale, a higher score indicates worse pain.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824444|NCT01174446|Secondary|EuroQoL (Quality of Life)-5 Dimensions Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-5D VAS) Scores|Participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better quality of life.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824445|NCT01174446|Secondary|EuroQoL (Quality of Life)-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Total Index Scores|EQ-5D is a participant answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions - mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The EQ-5D total score ranges from 0 (worst health state) to 1 (perfect health state) and 1 reflects the best outcome.|Baseline at either Study Part 1, or Study Part 2, and End of Study (study weeks 29-31)|Full Analysis Set||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824446|NCT01174446|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) After BAX326 Treatment||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, and Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|||participants|||Number
824447|NCT01174446|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs) After BAX326 Treatment||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, and Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||adverse events|||Number
824448|NCT01174446|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Laboratory Parameters: Thrombogenic Markers|Clinically significant changes in thrombogenic markers assessments for thrombin-antithrombin (TAT), prothrombin fragment 1.2, and D-dimer as evaluated by an independent Data Monitoring Committee (DMC)|Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
824450|NCT01174446|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Laboratory Parameters: Hematology|Clinically significant changes in hematology assessments for Basophils, Basophils/Leukocytes, Eosinophils, Eosinophils/Leukocytes, Erythrocyte Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin Concentration, Erythrocyte Mean Corpuscular Volume, Erythrocytes, Hematocrit, Hemoglobin, Leukocytes, Lymphocytes, Lymphocytes/Leukocytes, Monocytes, Monocytes/Leukocytes, Neutrophils, Neutrophils/Leukocytes, Platelets,|Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
824451|NCT01174446|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Laboratory Parameters: Clinical Chemistry|"Clinically significant changes in chemistry assessments for Alanine Aminotransferase, Albumin, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Bicarbonate, Bilirubin, Blood Urea Nitrogen, Chloride, Glucose, Potassium, Protein (Serum), Sodium.
Clinically Significant (CS) defined as:
1. The abnormal value constitutes an adverse event (AE) and,
2. The abnormal value is a symptom of or related to a disease that is already recorded as an AE in Case Report Form (CRF)."|Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
824452|NCT01174446|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Thrombotic Events||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
824453|NCT01174446|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Severe Allergic Reactions (e.g. Anaphylaxis)||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
824454|NCT01174446|Secondary|Occurrence of Treatment Related Total Binding Antibodies|Occurrence of treatment related total binding antibodies to Factor IX (FIX), antibodies to Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) proteins, and recombinant furin (rFurin) is defined by more than 2-dilution increase as compared to levels at screening visit and confirmed specificity (e.g. negative to 1:80)|Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
824455|NCT01174446|Secondary|Occurrence of Total Binding Antibodies of Indeterminate Specificity (Within Assay Variability)|Occurrence of total binding antibodies of indeterminate specificity (within assay variability) to FIX, antibodies to CHO proteins and rFurin is defined by a dilution of 2 or less increase as compared to levels at screening visit (e.g. negative to 1:20 or 1:40).|Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
824456|NCT01174446|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Developed Inhibitory Antibodies to Factor IX (FIX)||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week, Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
824457|NCT01174446|Secondary|Consumption of BAX326 Per Participant: Median Weight-adjusted Consumption Per Month||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week (Prophylaxis and On-Demand period), Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||IU/kg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824458|NCT01174446|Secondary|Consumption of BAX326 Per Participant: Median Number of Infusions Per Month||Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks, Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week (Prophylaxis and On-Demand period), Study Part 3 = 1 week (Total = 29-31 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||Infusions||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824459|NCT01174446|Secondary|Consumption of BAX326 Per Event Per Participant|Weight-adjusted consumption of BAX326 by event per participant, i.e., for prophylactic treatment and for treatment of bleeds until resolution of bleed.|Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week (Note: Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||IU/kg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824460|NCT01174446|Secondary|Total Weight-adjusted Dose Per Bleeding Episode (BEs) of All BEs Treated With BAX326 by Bleeding Site and Cause||Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week (Note: Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks)|Full Analysis Set||IU/kg|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824461|NCT01174446|Secondary|Hemostatic Efficacy at Resolution of All Bleeding Episodes (BEs) Treated With BAX326 by Bleeding Site and Cause|"Rating Scale for Treatment of BEs (4-point ordinal scale):
Excellent: Full relief of pain and cessation of objective signs of bleeding (eg, swelling, tenderness, and decreased range of motion in the case of musculoskeletal hemorrhage) after a single infusion. No additional infusion required for the control of bleeding. Administration of further infusions to maintain hemostasis did not affect this scoring.
Good: Definite pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding after a single infusion. Possibly requires more than 1 infusion for complete resolution.
Fair: Probable and/or slight relief of pain and slight improvement in signs of bleeding after single infusion. Required more than 1 infusion for complete resolution.
None: No improvement or condition worsens."|At bleed resolution throughout the study period of 22 months (Study Parts 1, 2, and 3)|Full Analysis Set||Bleeding episodes|Participants||Number
824462|NCT01174446|Secondary|Bleeding Episodes Treated With 1, 2 or ≥3 Infusions of BAX326 by Bleeding Site and Cause|The number of bleeding episodes treated with 1, 2, or ≥3 infusions of BAX326 to achieve adequate hemostasis. Only infusions required until resolution of bleed were considered.|Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week (Study Part 2 began at week 3-5)|Full Analysis Set||Bleeding episodes|Participants||Number
824463|NCT01174446|Secondary|Study Part 2: Annualized Bleed Rate (ABR) During Treatment With BAX326|ABR during prophylaxis (twice-weekly) in Part 2 was calculated as (Number of bleeding episodes/observed treatment period in days) * 365.25. The treatment period on prophylaxis was defined as time between the first and the last prophylactic infusions and ABR on prophylaxis was calculated for participants who received a minimum of 3 months of prophylactic treatment with BAX326.|Study Part 2 = 26 weeks ± 1 week (Note: Study Part 1 = 2-4 weeks)|Full Analysis Set - Prophylactic cohort||Bleeds per year||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824464|NCT01174446|Secondary|Study Parts 1 and 3: Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|"Vss computed as CL·MRT.
The objective of Study Part 3 was to re-evaluate the Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters for BAX 326 after a period of 6 months of treatment, in participants who accumulated at least 30 EDs to BAX 326, and to compare them with those determined in the same participants participating in Study Part 1."|0-30 minutes before infusion up to 72 hours post-infusion|"Pharmacokinetic Per Protocol Analysis Set (PKPPAS)
-Participants who participated in Study Parts 1-3 and completed Study Part 1 without any major protocol deviations"||dL/kg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824488|NCT01174576|Primary|Energy ad Libitum Meal|The energy of first meal 3 hr after ingestion|3 hr post ingestion|||kcal||Standard Deviation|Mean
824465|NCT01174446|Secondary|Study Parts 1 and 3: Half Life (T 1/2)|"Elimination phase half-life will be determined as ln2/ λz.
The objective of Study Part 3 was to re-evaluate the Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters for BAX 326 after a period of 6 months of treatment, in participants who accumulated at least 30 EDs to BAX 326, and to compare them with those determined in the same participants participating in Study Part 1."|0-30 minutes before infusion up to 72 hours post-infusion|"Pharmacokinetic Per Protocol Analysis Set (PKPPAS)
-Participants who participated in Study Parts 1-3 and completed Study Part 1 without any major protocol deviations"||Hour||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824466|NCT01174446|Secondary|Change in Incremental Recovery (IR) at 30 Minutes Over Time|The median changes in IR at 30 Minutes, calculated as the change in IR value from exposure day 1 (ED1).|0-30 minutes before infusion and 30 minutes post-infusion|"Pharmacokinetic Per Protocol Analysis Set (PKPPAS)
-Participants who participated in Study Parts 1-3 and completed Study Part 1 without any major protocol deviations"||(IU/dL) / (IU/kg)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824467|NCT01174446|Secondary|Incremental Recovery (IR) at 30 Minutes Over Time|"IR at 30 Minutes was measured at the following time points during the study:
Part 1 or Part 2, Exposure Day (ED) 1. (If participant was present for Study Part 1, then ED 1 from Part 1 was used. If Participant entered study in Study Part 2, then ED 1 from Part 2 was used.)
Part 2: Week 5
Part 2: Week 13
Part 2 or Part 3: Week 26 (Week 26 of study participation)
Study Completion or Termination Visit"|0-30 minutes before infusion and 30 minutes post-infusion|"Pharmacokinetic Per Protocol Analysis Set (PKPPAS)
-Participants who participated in Study Parts 1-3 and completed Study Part 1 without any major protocol deviations"||(IU/dL) / (IU/kg)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824468|NCT01174446|Secondary|Study Parts 1 and 3: Incremental Recovery at Cmax (IR at Cmax)|"Defined as (Cmax - Cpre-infusion)/Dose, where maximum concentration (Cmax) will be determined as the highest concentration achieved within one hour after infusion.
The objective of Study Part 3 was to re-evaluate the Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters for BAX 326 after a period of 6 months of treatment, in participants who accumulated at least 30 EDs to BAX 326, and to compare them with those determined in the same participants participating in Study Part 1."|0-30 minutes before infusion up to 1 hour post-infusion|"Pharmacokinetic Per Protocol Analysis Set (PKPPAS)
-Participants who participated in Study Parts 1-3 and completed Study Part 1 without any major protocol deviations"||(IU/dL) / (IU/kg)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824469|NCT01174446|Secondary|Study Parts 1 and 3: Clearance (CL)|"Computed as Dose/ AUC0-∞.
The objective of Study Part 3 was to re-evaluate the Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters for BAX 326 after a period of 6 months of treatment, in participants who accumulated at least 30 EDs to BAX 326, and to compare them with those determined in the same participants participating in Study Part 1."|0-30 minutes before infusion up to 72 hours post-infusion|"Pharmacokinetic Per Protocol Analysis Set (PKPPAS)
-Participants who participated in Study Parts 1-3 and completed Study Part 1 without any major protocol deviations"||dL/(kg·hr)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824470|NCT01174446|Secondary|Study Parts 1 and 3: Mean Residence Time (MRT)|"Computed as Area under the moment curve 0-∞ (AUMC0-∞) / AUC0-∞- TI/2, where AUMC0-∞ will be determined in a similar manner as AUC0-∞ and TI represents infusion duration [hr]
The objective of Study Part 3 was to re-evaluate the Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters for BAX 326 after a period of 6 months of treatment, in participants who accumulated at least 30 EDs to BAX 326, and to compare them with those determined in the same participants participating in Study Part 1."|0-30 minutes before infusion up to 72 hours post-infusion|"Pharmacokinetic Per Protocol Analysis Set (PKPPAS)
-Participants who participated in Study Parts 1-3 and completed Study Part 1 without any major protocol deviations"||Hour||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824471|NCT01174446|Secondary|Study Parts 1 and 3: Area Under the Plasma Concentration/Time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity Per Dose (AUC0-∞/ Dose)|"Defined as (AUC0-t + Ct)/ λz/ dose, where t is the time of last quantifiable concentration, Ct is the last quantifiable concentration. λz will be estimated from the slope of natural log-linear fitting to latter quantifiable concentrations, with largest adjusted R^2.
The objective of Study Part 3 was to re-evaluate the Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters for BAX 326 after a period of 6 months of treatment, in participants who accumulated at least 30 EDs to BAX 326, and to compare them with those determined in the same participants participating in Study Part 1."|0-30 minutes before infusion up to 72 hours post-infusion|"Pharmacokinetic Per Protocol Analysis Set (PKPPAS)
-Participants who participated in Study Parts 1-3 and completed Study Part 1 without any major protocol deviations"||(IU·hr)/ dL/ (IU/kg)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824472|NCT01174446|Primary|Study Part 1- Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to 72 Hours Per Dose|Computed using the linear trapezoidal method. The concentration at 72 hours was interpolated from the two nearest sampling time points or extrapolated using the last quantifiable concentration and the terminal rate constant λz. λz was estimated from the slope of natural log-linear fitting to latter quantifiable concentrations, with largest adjusted R^2.|72 hours|"Pharmacokinetic Per Protocol Analysis Set (PKPPAS)
-Participants who participated in Study Parts 1-3 and completed Study Part 1 without any major protocol deviations"||(IU·hr/dL) / (IU/kg)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824473|NCT01174459|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Score of the International Restless Legs Syndrome Rating Scale (IRLS)|International Restless Legs Syndrome rating scale (IRLS): The IRLS rating scale is a selfrating scale used to evaluate the severity of RLS and the patients are requested to answer 10 questions on a scale of 0 to 4. Respective scores (0-4 points) for the 10 questions were added up to calculate the total score on the IRLS. Therefore the total score is 0-40. The lower values represent a better outcome.|after 12 months or at the end of observation|Efficacy set: The patient set included all patients in the safety set with approved indication RLS and had IRLS total score measurement at baseline and at least one post-baseline time point.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
824474|NCT01174459|Primary|Incidence of Drug-related Adverse Events|Number of patients with drug-related adverse events|12 Months|Safety set: all patients who were documented to have taken at least one dose of pramipexole except for patients who had no observation documented after entry, made invalid registration or were not under the appropriate site contact.||participants|||Number
824475|NCT01174550|Secondary|Cumulative Radiation Exposure Within 90 Days|Cumulative radiation exposure from all cardiovascular diagnostic tests and procedures performed within 90 days after randomization.|90 days|||milliSievert (mSv)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824508|NCT01175018|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Each Group With Reverse Remodeling (Reduction in LVESVi >10%)||10-14 weeks|||% of participants|||Number
824476|NCT01174550|Secondary|Quality of Life (QOL) as Measured by Complete Resolution of Symptoms That Led to the Initial Testing|Percentage of participants with improvement in Quality of Life as measured by complete resolution of the symptoms that led to initial testing|6 month, 12 month 24 month|The number of participants were limited due to budget constraints.||% of participants|||Number
824477|NCT01174550|Secondary|Quality of Life (QOL) as Measured by Seattle Anginal Quality of Life Subscale|Participant score Quality of Life measured by Seattle Angina Scale Anginal Frequency Subscale utilizing the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ). SAQ: 19-item, 5-6-point Likert, questionnaire measuring 5 dimensions of coronary artery disease: Anginal Stability: whether symptoms are changing. Anginal Frequency: how often patient having symptoms Physical Limitation: how much condition hampers ability to do what he wants.Treatment Satisfaction: how well patient understands care. Disease Perception: impact of condition on interpersonal relationships. Each dimension assigns response an value, beginning with 1 for response at the lowest level of functioning & summing across items within each of the 5 scales. Scale scores transformed to 0-100 range by subtracting the lowest scale. Higher score suggest symptoms more stable & less frequent, condition has less impact on activities, increased satisfaction with treatment, & perception of disease has less impact on interpersonal relationships.|Baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months|The number of participants were limited due to budget constraints.||participant score||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824478|NCT01174550|Secondary|Quality of Life (QOL) as Measured by Seattle Angina Scale Anginal Frequency Subscale|Participant score Quality of Life measured by Seattle Angina Scale Anginal Frequency Subscale utilizing the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ). SAQ: 19-item, 5-6-point Likert, questionnaire measuring 5 dimensions of coronary artery disease: Anginal Stability: whether symptoms are changing. Anginal Frequency: how often patient having symptoms Physical Limitation: how much condition hampers ability to do what he wants.Treatment Satisfaction: how well patient understands care. Disease Perception: impact of condition on interpersonal relationships. Each dimension assigns response an value, beginning with 1 for response at the lowest level of functioning & summing across items within each of the 5 scales. Scale scores transformed to 0-100 range by subtracting the lowest scale. Higher score suggest symptoms more stable & less frequent, condition has less impact on activities, increased satisfaction with treatment, & perception of disease has less impact on interpersonal relationships.|Baseline, 6 month, 12 month, 24 month|The number of participants were limited due to budget constraints.||participant score||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824479|NCT01174550|Secondary|Quality of Life (QOL) as Measured by Duke Activity Status Index|Participant score in Quality of Life as measured by Duke Activity Status Index (DASI). DASI measures a person's functional capacity based on a 12-item questionnaire that correlates with peak O2 uptake during exercise testing. The DASI is a self-administered questionnaire that measures a patient's functional capacity. It can be used to get a rough estimate of a patient's peak oxygen uptake. The maximum score for the DASI is 58.2 (better functional ability/capacity) and the minimum score is 0 (worse functional ability/capacity).|Baseline, 6 months, 12 months 24 months|The number of participants were limited due to budget constraints.||participant score||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824480|NCT01174550|Secondary|Medical Cost|Assess and compare total medical cost for the two diagnostic testing arms by intention to treat at both 90 days and 3 years cumulative.|90 days and 3 years cumulative|Patients enrolled in PROMISE and cared for in the fee-for-service sector of the US health care system were included in the economic study. Because the costing methods being used were not applicable to other health systems, patients enrolled in the Military/VA system , an Health maintenance Organization (HMO) , or in Canada were excluded.||Per participant cost in US dollars||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
824481|NCT01174550|Secondary|Percentage of Invasive Cardiac Catheterization Events Without Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease Within 90 Days Following Participant Randomization|Percentage of Invasive Cardiac Catheterization Events Without Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease (CAD)Within 90 Days Following Participant Randomization|Up to 90 days following participant randomization|||Percentage of events||Standard Error|Mean
824482|NCT01174550|Secondary|Time to Death, Myocardial Infarction (MI), Unstable Angina (UA), Complications, No Coronary Artery Disease (CAD)|Time to primary endpoint as defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), major complications from cardiovascular (CV) procedures or testing, unstable angina hospitalization, and no coronary artery disease (CAD). The Kaplan-Meier events rates (cumulative percentage of participants with an event) were estimated for the anatomic and functional diagnostic test groups.|90 days, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months, 42 months|||Percentage of participants with an event|||Number
824483|NCT01174550|Secondary|Time to Major Complications From Cardiovascular (CV) Procedures|Time to this secondary endpoint as defined as a composite of major complications from cardiovascular procedures and testing (stroke, bleeding, anaphylaxis, renal failure). The Kaplan-Meier events rates (cumulative percentage of participants with an event) were estimated for the anatomic and functional diagnostic test groups.|90 days, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months, 42 months|||Percentage of participants with an event|||Number
824484|NCT01174550|Secondary|Time to Death or Myocardial Infarction (MI)|Time to this secondary endpoint as defined as a composite of death and myocardial infarction (MI). The Kaplan-Meier events rates (cumulative percentage of participants with an event) were estimated for the anatomic and functional diagnostic test groups.|90 days, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months, 42 months|||Percentage of participants with an event|||Number
824485|NCT01174550|Secondary|Time to Death, Myocardial Infarction (MI), Unstable Angina Hospitalization|Time to this secondary endpoint as defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and unstable angina hospitalization. The Kaplan-Meier events rates (cumulative percentage of participants with an event) were estimated for the anatomic and functional diagnostic test groups.|90 days, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months, 42 months|||Percentage of participants with an event|||Number
824486|NCT01174550|Primary|Time to Primary Endpoint|Time to primary endpoint as defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), major complications from cardiovascular (CV) procedures or testing, and unstable angina hospitalization. The Kaplan-Meier events rates (cumulative percentage of participants with an event) were estimated for the anatomic and functional diagnostic test groups.|90 days, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months, 42 months|||Percentage of participants with an event|||Number
824487|NCT01174576|Primary|Total Energy Intake|the energy consumed at breakfast, ad libitum meal and rest of the experimental day|1 d|||kcal||Standard Deviation|Mean
824489|NCT01174576|Primary|Cortisol Total Area Under the Curve|Total area under the curve was defined as the sum of the areas under and over the baseline using the trapezoidal rule. The time points for the calculations were 15 min before beverage consumption, immediately after beverage consumption, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 min postconsumption.|15 min before ingestion to 3 hr post ingestion|||ug*h/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824490|NCT01174576|Primary|Insulin Total Area Under the Curve|Total area under the curve was defined as the sum of the areas under and over the baseline using the trapezoidal rule. The time points for the calculations were 15 min before beverage consumption, immediately after beverage consumption, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 min postconsumption.|15 min before ingestion to 3 hr post ingestion|||uU*h/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
824491|NCT01174576|Secondary|Serum Antioxidant Capacity Total Area Under the Curve|"Serum samples, collected 15 min before ingestion, immediately after ingestion, 15 min, 30 min, 60 min, 90 min, 120 min and 150 min after ingestion were analyzed for the ex vivo serum resistance to oxidative stress, that was induced by copper sulfate (CuSO4). The analysis of all collected samples was performed by the measurement of conjugated diene formation, which was monitored for every sample of all time points every 2 min for a 3.5 h period at 234 nm in a microplate spectrophotometer.
Total area under the curve was defined as the sum of the areas under and over the baseline using the trapezoidal rule. The time points for the calculations were 15 min before beverage consumption, immediately after beverage consumption, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 min postconsumption."|15 min before ingestion to 21/2 hr post ingestion|||lag time (min) *h||Standard Deviation|Mean
824492|NCT01174576|Primary|Glucose Total Area Under the Curve|Total area under the curve was defined as the sum of the areas under and over the baseline using the trapezoidal rule. The time points for the calculations were 15 min before beverage consumption, immediately after beverage consumption, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 min postconsumption.|15 min before ingestion to 3 hr post ingestion|||mg*h/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
824493|NCT01174576|Primary|Interleukin-18 Total Area Under the Curve|Total area under the curve was defined as the sum of the areas under and over the baseline using the trapezoidal rule. The time points for the calculations were 15 min before beverage consumption, immediately after beverage consumption, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 min postconsumption.|15 min before ingestion to 3 hr post ingestion|||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824494|NCT01174576|Primary|Inteleukin-6 Total Area Under the Curve|Total area under the curve was defined as the sum of the areas under and over the baseline using the trapezoidal rule. The time points for the calculations were 15 min before beverage consumption, immediately after beverage consumption, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 min postconsumption.|15 min before ingestion to 3 hr post ingestion|||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824495|NCT01174576|Primary|Adiponectin Total Area Under the Curve|Total area under the curve was defined as the sum of the areas under and over the baseline using the trapezoidal rule. The time points for the calculations were 15 min before beverage consumption, immediately after beverage consumption, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 min postconsumption.|15 min before ingestion to 3 h post ingestion|||ug*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824496|NCT01174576|Primary|Glucagon-like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Total Area Under the Curve|Total area under the curve was defined as the sum of the areas under and over the baseline using the trapezoidal rule. The time points for the calculations were 15 min before beverage consumption, immediately after beverage consumption, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 min postconsumption.|15 min before ingestion to 3 hr post ingestion|||ug*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824497|NCT01174576|Primary|Peptide Tyrosine Tyrosine (PYY) Total Area Under the Curve|Total area under the curve was defined as the sum of the areas under and over the baseline using the trapezoidal rule. The time points for the calculations were 15 min before beverage consumption, immediately after beverage consumption, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 min postconsumption.|15 min before ingestion to 3 hr post ingestion|||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824498|NCT01174576|Primary|Ghrelin Total Area Under the Curve|Total area under the curve was defined as the sum of the areas under and over the baseline using the trapezoidal rule. The time points for the calculations were 15 min before beverage consumption, immediately after beverage consumption, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 min postconsumption.|15 min before ingestion to 3 hr post ingestion|||ug*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824499|NCT01174784|Primary|CTO Crossing Success Using the Wildcat|Successful femoropopliteal CTO crossing using the Wildcat identified by confirmation of guidewire placement in the distal true lumen confirmed by angiography.|Index through 30-Day Follow-Up|Patients treated with Wildcat post guidewire failure.||participants|||Number
824500|NCT01174784|Primary|Major Adverse Events|The primary safety endpoint of the CONNECT Study was defined as absence of in-hospital or 30-days Major Adverse Events (MAEs), no evidence of clinically significant perforations, clinically significant embolizations or Grade C or greater dissections after Wildcat CTO crossing confirmed by angiography.|Index through 30-Day Follow-Up|Patients treated with Wildcat post guidewire failure.||participants|||Number
824501|NCT01175005|Primary|Procalcitonin Level at ED Presentation|Level of procalcitonin will be obtained. At the end of the study we will determine who was septic or bacteremic and compare the procalcitonin levels between those who were septic/bacteremic and those who were not.We will attempt to identify whether a level of procalcitonin exists above which rates of bacteremia or bacterial sepsis in patients with fever and a central line exist. Blood cultures will be followed for up to 5 days until reported as final.There are no further study interventions.|Initial blood draw in ED and if admitted a second level will be obtained at 24 hours.|||ng/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
824502|NCT01175018|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events Requiring Withdrawal in Each Group||10-14 weeks|||adverse events|||Number
824503|NCT01175018|Secondary|Number of Deaths in Each Group||10-14 weeks|||deaths|||Number
824504|NCT01175018|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Each Group With Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Change >10%||10-14 weeks|||% of participants|||Number
824505|NCT01175018|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Each Group With Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Change >5%||10-14 weeks|||% of participants|||Number
824506|NCT01175018|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Each Group With Adverse Remodeling (LVESVi Increase >10%)||10-14 weeks|||% of participants|||Number
824507|NCT01175018|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Each Group With Adverse Remodeling (LVESVi Increase >5%) Based Upon Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging||10-14 weeks|Applies only to subset of patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at baseline and 10-14 weeks.||% of participants|||Number
824517|NCT01175018|Primary|Difference Between the Anakinra Arm and the Placebo Arm in Change in Left Ventricular End-systolic Volume Indices|Change in n left ventricular end-systolic volume indices from baseline to follow up exam at cardiac magnetic resonance imaging comparing anakinra- and placebo-treated patients.|10-14 weeks minus baseline|Applies only to subset of patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at baseline and 10-14 weeks.||mL/m2||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824518|NCT01175031|Secondary|Device-Detected Clear Airway Apnea Agreement|Device Detected Clear Airways were broken down and then reviewed with the manually scored apneas. Of the clear airway apneas they were broken down into a few different categories: Manually Scored Obstructive Apneas, Manually Scored Central Apneas, Manually scored, hypopneas and manually scored RERAs.|During a single night of polysomnography lasting an average of 8 hours|335 Device Detected Clear Airway Apneas were detected.||events|Participants||Number
824519|NCT01175031|Secondary|Device-Detected Obstructed Airway Apnea Agreement|Device-Detected Apneas were broken down and then reviewed with the manually scored apneas. Of the Obstructed Airway apneas they were broken down into a few different categories: Manually Scored Obstructive Apneas, Manually Scored Central Apneas, Manually Scored Hypopneas and Manually Scored RERAs.|During a single night of polysomnography lasting an average of 8 hours|762 Device Detected Apneas were detected.||events|Participants||Number
824520|NCT01175031|Secondary|Device Detected Apneas as Detected by Philips Respironics (PR) System One|All device-detected apneas were tabulated. Then they were broken down into obstructed airway apneas and clear airway apneas. The results are recorded below as apneas with obstructed airway and apneas with clear airway.|During a single night of polysomnography lasting an average of 8 hours|1097 Device Detected Apneas were detected.||events|Participants||Number
824521|NCT01175031|Primary|Number of Breathing Events Identified by the Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) Device Compared to a Simultaneous Polysomnography|The following breathing events: RERAs, central apneas, periodic breathing, obstructive apneas, and hypopneas in patients previously diagnosed with CompSAS or OSA detected by simultaneous Polysomnography and REMstar Auto with A-Flex were compared.|During a single night of polysomnography lasting an average of 8 hours|||events/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
824522|NCT01181492|Secondary|PCA Fentanyl Consumption|PCA fentanyl consumption and adverse effects are recorded during the first 24 h after surgery.|24 h after surgery|||μg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824523|NCT01181492|Secondary|The Visual Analog Scale 24 Hours Postoperative|The visual analog scale (VAS) is used for pain evaluation at rest which from 0 to 10 (higher values represent morepain) during patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) treatment 24 h after operation|24 hours after operation|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824524|NCT01181492|Primary|CYP3A4*1G Polymorphism|According to CYP3A4*1G polymorphism,patients are devided into three groups: *1/*1,*1/*1G,*1G/*1G|48 hours after operation|the number of participants for analysis was determined according to gene type of CYP3A4*1G polymorphism which was carried by participant.||participants|||Number
824525|NCT01181531|Secondary|Treatment Comparison of Plasma PTH < 300 pg/mL During Efficacy Assessment Phase (EAP)|Number of participants achieving Plasma PTH < 300 pg/mL During Efficacy Assessment Phase (EAP)|week 40-52|||Participants|||Number
824526|NCT01181531|Secondary|Treatment Comparison of >=30% Reduction From Baseline in Mean PTH During the Efficacy Assessment Phase (EAP)|Number of participants achieving a >=30% Reduction From Baseline in Mean PTH During Efficacy Assessment Phase (EAP)|Baseline to week 40-52|||Participants|||Number
824527|NCT01181531|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean PTH During Efficacy Assessment Phase (EAP)|Mean PTH during EAP is defined as the mean of values at study weeks 40, 44, 48 and 52|Baseline to week 40-52|All subjects randomized by treatment arm.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824528|NCT01181609|Secondary|OS - Time to Event|OS was defined as the time from start of study treatment to death from any cause. Median OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every cycle to progression or death. (Maximum of 52.5 months follow-up)|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824529|NCT01181609|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) - Percentage of Participants With an Event|Overall survival was defined as the time from start of study treatment to death from any cause.|Baseline, every cycle to progression or death (Maximum of 52.5 months follow-up)|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
824530|NCT01181609|Secondary|Duration of Overall Disease Control|ODC duration was defined as the time in months, from when measurement criteria were first met for CR, PR, or SD (whichever status was recorded first) until the first date when progressive disease or the death from any cause was documented. Data were censored for participants who were lost to follow-up, discontinued prematurely without progression/death, or who reached the end of study without progression. Median ODC was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every cycle until progression or death. (Maximum of 52.5 months follow-up)|ITT population; only participants with an ODC response (CR, PR, or SD) were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824531|NCT01181609|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response was defined as the time in months from the day of CR or PR was first noted to the day of progression of disease, death or last follow-up. Median duraiton of response is estimated sing the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every cycle until progression or death (Maximum of 52.5 months follow-up)|ITT population; only participants with a response (CR or PR) were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824532|NCT01181609|Secondary|PFS - Time to Event|PFS was defined as the time from start of study treatment to investigator assessed disease progression, or death due to any cause, whichever comes first. Progression was based on tumor assessments made by the investigators according to RECIST. Median PFS was estimed using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline, every cycle to progression or death (Maximum of 52.5 months follow-up)|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824533|NCT01181609|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) - Percentage of Participants With an Event|PFS was defined as the time from start of study treatment to investigator assessed disease progression, or death due to any cause, whichever comes first. Progression was based on tumor assessments made by the investigators according to RECIST.|Baseline, every cycle to progression or death (Maximum of 52.5 months follow-up)|ITT||percentage of participants|||Number
824561|NCT01182428|Secondary|Persisting Dissection|All subjects with persisting dissection of the target lesion up to the 270 day follow-up visit|at 270 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of evaluated lesions|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
824534|NCT01181609|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Best Overall Response of CR or PR|Percentage of participants achieving CR or PR as defined by RECIST criteria. CR defined as disappearance of all target lesions, non-target lesions, and normalization of tumor marker level. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease under baseline of the sum of the LD of all target lesions. CR and PR were confirmed no less than 4 weeks after the criteria for response were met.|Baseline, every cycle to progression or death (Maximum of 52.5 months follow-up)|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824535|NCT01181609|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Overall Disease Control (ODC)|ODC was defined as the percentage of participants with measurable disease at baseline who on assessment achieved complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). CR defined as disappearance of all target lesions, non-target lesions, and normalization of tumor marker level. PR was defined as greater than or equal to (≥) 30 percent (%) decrease under baseline of the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of all target lesions. SD defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since start of treatment. CR and PR were confirmed no less than 4 weeks after the criteria for response were met.|Baseline, after every other cycle to disease progression or death (Maximum of 52.5 months follow-up)|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824536|NCT01182194|Primary|AUC0-inf of Ethinyl Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|Analysis included 29 of 31 finished subjects. Subject 13 was excluded from the analysis population due to pre-dose levels greater than 5% for Cmax in Period 1 and Period 2. Subject 31 was excluded from the analysis population due to pre-dose levels greater than 5% for Cmax in Period 1.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824537|NCT01182194|Primary|AUC0-t of Ethinyl Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|Analysis included 29 of 31 finished subjects. Subject 13 was excluded from the analysis population due to pre-dose levels greater than 5% for Cmax in Period 1 and Period 2. Subject 31 was excluded from the analysis population due to pre-dose levels greater than 5% for Cmax in Period 1.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824538|NCT01182194|Primary|Cmax of Ethinyl Estradiol(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|Analysis included 29 of 31 finished subjects. Subject 13 was excluded from the analysis population due to pre-dose levels greater than 5% for Cmax in Period 1 and Period 2. Subject 31 was excluded from the analysis population due to pre-dose levels greater than 5% for Cmax in Period 1.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824539|NCT01182194|Primary|AUC0-inf of Drospirenone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Drospirenone AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 120 hour period.|Analysis included 30 of 31 finished subjects. Subject 31 was excluded from the analysis population due to pre-dose levels greater than 5% for Cmax in Period 1.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824540|NCT01182194|Primary|AUC0-t of Drospirenone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Drospirenone AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 120 hour period.|Analysis included 30 of 31 finished subjects. Subject 31 was excluded from the analysis population due to pre-dose levels greater than 5% for Cmax in Period 1.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824541|NCT01182194|Primary|Cmax of Drospirenone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Drospirenone Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 120 hour period.|Analysis included 30 of 31 finished subjects. Subject 31 was excluded from the analysis population due to pre-dose levels greater than 5% for Cmax in Period 1.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824542|NCT01182207|Primary|AUC0-inf of Ethinyl Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824543|NCT01182207|Primary|AUC0-t of Ethinyl Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824544|NCT01182207|Primary|Cmax of Ethinyl Estradiol(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824545|NCT01182207|Primary|AUC0-inf of Drospirenone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Drospirenone AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 120 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824546|NCT01182207|Primary|AUC0-t of Drospirenone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Drospirenone AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 120 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824547|NCT01182207|Primary|Cmax of Drospirenone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Drospirenone Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 120 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824548|NCT01182285|Secondary|NIS (Na/I-symporter) Expression|NIS (Na/I-symporter) Expression is assessed by quantitative reverse transcription (RT) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and immunohistochemistry (IHC). NIS mRNA expression was measured by quantitative RT PCR from biopsy samples.|Entry to study and after 10 weeks of treatment|There is no standard of error to report. The acronym GAPDH expanded is glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase. Only 1 participant was analyzed because biopsies were not performed in 12 subjects.||percent expression||Standard Error|Median
824562|NCT01182428|Secondary|Thrombus|All subjects with thrombus of the target lesion up to the 270 day follow-up visit|at 270 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of evaluated lesions|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
824549|NCT01182285|Secondary|Best Overall Response|Best overall response was assessed by radioiodine uptake. Complete response (CR) is increased Rai (radioiodine) uptake on post- valproic acid therapy at week 10, AND a decrease in Tg (thyroglobulin ) level to less than 2 ng/ml (or a decrease in Tg-Ab (thyroglobulin antibodies) level to less than 2.0 IU/ml) at 10 weeks AND disappearance of all lesions at 16 weeks. Partial response (PR) is increased Rai uptake on post-valproic scan at week 10, OR a decreased Tg level (or a decrease in Tg Ab (Tg antibody) level by more than 20%) at 10 weeks AND 30% decrease in target lesion at 16 weeks. Stable disease (SD) is no change in RAI uptake AND Tg levels (or TG-Ab level) AND no significant change of lesions at 16 weeks. Progressive disease (PD) is tumor mass increases OR Tg levels (or Tg-Ab levels) increases over 10 weeks OR at least 20% increase in target lesion at 16 weeks.|Week 16|Best overall response was not assessed for the phase 1 portion.||participants|||Number
824550|NCT01182285|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|41 months and 11 days|Adverse events are not reported per Arm. All adverse events were reported to include phases 1 and 2 since it is analyzed throughout the whole study.||participants|||Number
824551|NCT01182285|Primary|RAI (Radioactive Iodine) Uptake and Tg (Thyroglobulin) Level Compared Pre and Post- Valproic Treatment|Complete response (CR) is increased Rai uptake on post- valproic acid therapy at week 10, AND a decrease in Tg level to less than 2 ng/ml (or a decrease in Tg-Ab level to less than 2.0 IU/ml) at 10 weeks AND disappearance of all lesions at 16 weeks. Partial response (PR) is increased Rai uptake on post-valproic scan at week 10, OR a decreased Tg level (or a decrease in Tg Ab (Tg antibody) level by more than 20%) at 10 weeks AND 30% decrease in target lesion at 16 weeks. Stable disease (SD) is no change in RAI uptake AND Tg levels (or TG-Ab level) AND no significant change of lesions at 16 weeks. Progressive disease (PD) is tumor mass increases OR Tg levels (or Tg-Ab levels) increases over 10 weeks OR at least 20% increase in target lesion at 16 weeks.|Entry to study and after 10 weeks of treatment for Phase 1, and 10 weeks of treatment to 16 weeks of treatment for phase 2.|13 participants were enrolled in phase 1 and 8/13 (5 from University of California San Francisco (UCSF) moved on from phase 1 to the phase 2 schedule 2 portion. However, Tg data from UCSF is unavailable for 5 of the participant, thus only 3 were analyzed in the phase 2 portion.||participants|||Number
824552|NCT01182298|Primary|Median Log Change in HCV RNA Levels on Day 7|The primary end point of this study is the the log change in HCV RNA levels on Day 7|first 7 days|||log IU/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824553|NCT01182337|Secondary|Change in Mental Component Summary Quality of Life Measure Assessed by Short Form SF-36 at 12 Months From Baseline.|The 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a patient reported outcome survey that evaluates functional health and well-being. The survey is converted into two summary measures (the Physical Component - PCS and Mental Component- MCS) that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health).|12 Months|"FAS Population
Only 21 subjects from the rhGDF-5 group (out of 22 subjects total) completed the MCS, SF-36."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824554|NCT01182337|Secondary|Change in Physical Component Summary of Quality of Life Measure Assessed by Short Form 36 at 12 Months From Baseline|The 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a patient reported outcome survey that evaluates functional health and well-being. The survey is converted into two summary measures (the Physical Component - PCS and Mental Component- MCS) that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health).|12 months|"FAS Population
Only 21 subjects from the rhGDF-5 group (out of 22 total subjects) completed the baseline PCS, SF-36."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824555|NCT01182337|Secondary|Change in Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 12 Months From Baseline.|The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score asks the subject to place a vertical mark on a horizontal line (that is approximately 10 cm long) with 'No Pain' (score of 0 = 0 cm) listed on the left and 'Very severe pain' (score of 10=10cm) labeled on the right. The subject is instructed to indicate the amount of pain they feel in their back.|12 months|FAS Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824556|NCT01182337|Primary|Treatment Emergent Adverse Events- Relationship to Study Drug|Number of patients with Treatment Emergent Adverse Events that were designated as Possibly or Probably Related to Study Drug.|12 month period and annual telephone contact at 24 and 36 months for subject health status follow-up|Safety Population||participants|||Number
824557|NCT01182337|Primary|Treatment Emergent Adverse Events- Relationship to Study Drug|Number of patients with Treatment Emergent Adverse Events that were designated as Definitely Related to Study Drug.|Through a 12 month period and annual telephone contact at 24 and 36 months for subject health status follow-up|Safety Population||participants|||Number
824558|NCT01182337|Secondary|Change in Function Assessed by Oswestry Disability Index Change at 12 Months From Baseline.|The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is a 10-category (Pain Intensity, Personal Care, Lifting, Walking, Sitting, Standing, Sleeping, Sex Life, Social Life, Traveling) disability measurement scale with a graded response from 0 to 5, with 0 being the best score (no impairment) to 5 being the worst score (significant impairment). ODI score for a subject is calculated by adding the scores and converting the score to a 100 point scale.|12 month|FAS Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824559|NCT01182337|Primary|Neurological Assessment for Motor Function and Reflexes/Sensory|"Neurological Assessment for Motor Function and Reflexes/Sensory- Number of patients with Clinically Significant Abnormal results at 12 months.
For Motor Function, Clinically Significant Abnormal results are determined by the surgeon investigator and are further classified by grade: 0= No Movement, 1= Flicker/trace of contraction, 2=Active movement when gravity removed, 3= Active movement against gravity, 4= Active Movement against gravity and resistance.
For Reflexes/Sensory, Clinically Significant Abnormal results are determined by the surgeon investigator and are based on exams of the Knee, Ankle, L3-L5 Dermatone, and S1 Dermatome. Tension signs are evaluated with a straight leg raise to determine at which point, if any, sciatic pain occurs."|12 months|"Safety Population
For the Neurological Assessment at 12 months, only 21 subjects from the rhGDF-5 group completed the assessment (out of 22 total subjects) and 5 subjects from the Control group completed the assessment (out of 9 subjects total)."||participants|||Number
824560|NCT01182376|Primary|LA Fibrosis|The change in left atrial fibrosis percentage, as measured on a scale, using MRI imaging, from baseline to the end of treatment.|baseline, 1 year|The number of participants analyzed for both groups is less than the number enrolled due to patient attrition or poor MRI scans.||percentage of fibrosis||Standard Deviation|Mean
824563|NCT01182428|Secondary|Aneurysm|All subjects with aneurysm of the target lesion up to the 270 day follow-up visit|at 270 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||% of target lesions with aneurysm|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
824564|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Revascularization (TLR/TVR/All Revascularizations)|Composite of Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR), Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR), all revascularizations|at 1 year|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824565|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Revascularization (TLR/TVR/All Revascularizations)|Composite of Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR), Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR), all revascularizations|at 240 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824566|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Revascularization (TLR/TVR/All Revascularizations)|Composite of Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR), Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR), all revascularizations|at 30 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824567|NCT01182428|Secondary|In-segment Percent Diameter Stenosis||at 270 days|The angiographic analysis population is less than the total population for the following reasons: Refusals, Death, Test Not Analyzable, Scheduling Problems, Medical Decisions, No study stent implanted, Patient Misunderstandings, Patient withdrawn by physician, Consent Withdrawal.||% diameter stenosis|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
824568|NCT01182428|Secondary|In-stent Percent Diameter Stenosis||at 270 days|The angiographic analysis population is less than the total population for the following reasons: Refusals, Death, Test Not Analyzable, Scheduling Problems, Medical Decisions, No study stent implanted, Patient Misunderstandings, Patient withdrawn by physician, Consent Withdrawal.||% diameter stenosis|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
824569|NCT01182428|Secondary|In-segment Angiographic Binary Restenosis Rates|Only a certain number of patients were required to have angiographic follow-up. Percent of subjects with a follow-up in-stent percent diameter stenosis of ≥ 50% per quantitative coronary angiography (QCA).|at 270 days|The angiographic analysis population is less than the total population for the following reasons: Refusals, Death, Test Not Analyzable, Scheduling Problems, Medical Decisions, No study stent implanted, Patient Misunderstandings, Patient withdrawn by physician, Consent Withdrawal.||Percentage of target lesions|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
824570|NCT01182428|Secondary|In-stent Angiographic Binary Restenosis Rates|Only a certain number of patients were required to have angiographic follow-up. Percent of subjects with a follow-up in-stent percent diameter stenosis of ≥ 50% per quantitative coronary angiography (QCA).|at 270 days|The angiographic analysis population is less than the total population for the following reasons: Refusals, Death, Test Not Analyzable, Scheduling Problems, Medical Decisions, No study stent implanted, Patient Misunderstandings, Patient withdrawn by physician, Consent Withdrawal.||Percentage of Target Lesions|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
824571|NCT01182428|Secondary|In-segment Late Loss (LL)|LL = Minimal Lumen Diameter (MLD) post-procedure minus MLD at follow-up|at 270 days|The angiographic analysis population may be less than the total population for the following reasons: Refusals, Death, Test Not Analyzable, Scheduling Problems, Medical Decisions, No study stent implanted, Patient Misunderstandings, Patient withdrawn by physician, Consent Withdrawal.||millimeters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
824572|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Cardiac Death, Non-Cardiovascular Death, Vascular Death, Q-wave MI and Non Q-wave MI (Peri-Procedural, Unrelated to PCI).||at 1 year|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824573|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Cardiac Death, Non-Cardiovascular Death, Vascular Death, Q-wave MI and Non Q-wave MI (Peri-Procedural, Unrelated to PCI).||at 240 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824574|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Cardiac Death, Non-Cardiovascular Death, Vascular Death, Q-wave MI and Non Q-wave MI (Peri-Procedural, Unrelated to PCI).||at 30 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824575|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Rate of All Death, All MI and All Revascularization (TLR/TVR/Non TVR).||at 1 year|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824576|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Rate of All Death, All MI and All Revascularization (TLR/TVR/Non TVR).||at 240 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824577|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Rate of All Death, All MI and All Revascularization (TLR/TVR/Non TVR).||at 30 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824578|NCT01182428|Primary|In-stent Late Loss (LL) (Main Secondary Endpoint)|In-stent Minimal Lumen Diameter (MLD)post-procedure – in-stent MLD at follow-up.|at 270 days|The angiographic analysis population may be than the total population for the following reasons: Refusals, Death, Test Not Analyzable, Scheduling Problems, Medical Decisions, No study stent implanted, Patient Misunderstandings, Patient withdrawn by physician, Consent Withdrawal.||millimeters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
824579|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Rate of All Death, All MI and Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR).||at 240 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824580|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Rate of All Death, All MI and Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR).||at 30 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824581|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Rate of Cardiac Death, MI Attributed to the Target Vessel and CI-TLR.||at 1 year|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824582|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Rate of Cardiac Death, MI Attributed to the Target Vessel and CI-TLR.||at 240 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824583|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Composite Rate of Cardiac Death, MI Attributed to the Target Vessel and Clinically Indicated Target Lesion Revascularization (CI-TLR).||at 30 days|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824584|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Stent Thrombosis (Definite, Probable, Possible)||30 days to 1 year (Late)|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824585|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Stent Thrombosis (Definite, Probable)||30 days to 1 year (Late)|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. Population change based on follow up timeframe.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824586|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Stent Thrombosis (Definite, Probable)||1 to 30 days (Sub-Acute)|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824587|NCT01182428|Secondary|Adjudicated Stent Thrombosis (Definite, Probable)||< 1 day (Acute)|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824588|NCT01182428|Secondary|Clinical Procedure Success|Successful delivery and deployment of the study stent or stents at the intended target lesion and successful withdrawal of the stent delivery system without adverse cardiac events.|Intra-operative|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824589|NCT01182428|Secondary|Clinical Device Success|Successful delivery and deployment of the study stent at the intended target lesion and successful withdrawal of the stent delivery system.|Intra-operative|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population.||Percentage of evaluated lesions|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
824590|NCT01182428|Primary|Adjudicated Composite Rate of All Death, All MI and Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR).|This measure adds together all subjects who were determined by an expert panel to have died, had MI or had TVR as a result of their procedure.|at 1 year|Based on Intent to Treat (ITT) population. The analysis population at follow-up visits may have changed due to early termination from the study by the patient or physician.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824591|NCT01182480|Secondary|Glycemic Control|Measured by patients' self-reported fasting blood glucose levels during the intervention period and compared to previous laboratory data in the medical record.|3 months||||||
824592|NCT01182480|Secondary|Perceived Self-efficacy|As measured by comparison of patient responses to validated assessment instrument administered at baseline and post-intervention|3 months||||||
824593|NCT01182480|Secondary|Appointment Attendance|As measured by no-show rates for appointments at all clinics during the study period, compared between intervention and control groups|3 months||||||
824594|NCT01182480|Primary|Patient Engagement|Patient engagement was assessed by patient text message response rates and average response times. Response rates were calculated as a percentage from the number of patient-initiated text messages sent in response to a system-generated request for information (the numerator) divided by the total number of system-generated requests for information (the denominator). Average response times were calculated from system-recorded time stamps for outbound requests sent and inbound patient-initiated responses received.|3 months|Group of study participants who received the text message intervention over a 3-month period.||text message response rate (percent)|||Number
824595|NCT01182493|Secondary|Change in Body Weight or BMI, Lipids and Blood Pressure||6 months||||||
824596|NCT01182493|Secondary|Quality of Life and Treatment Satisfaction||6 months||||||
824597|NCT01182493|Secondary|Change in Postprandial Glycemia|Change in mean postprandial hyperglycemia 0 to 2 hours post meal, defined as ≥180 mg/dl and measured by SMBG|6 months||||||
824598|NCT01182493|Secondary|Safety|Severe hypoglycemia incidence; Diabetic Ketoacidosis incidence and Diabetes related hospitalizations|6 months treatment and 6 months follow-up||||||
824599|NCT01182493|Secondary|Change in Glycemic Variability|Glycemic parameters calculated from blinded CGM data: Measure of the Average glucose/day; AUC in hypo- (≤70mg/dL) and in hyperglycemia (≥180 mg/dL; Time spent in hypo- (≤70mg/dL) and hyperglycemia (≥180 mg/dL); Mean Amplitude of Glycemic Excursions (MAGE) is the most common measure of the volatility of blood glucose levels; Standard deviation|6 months||||||
824600|NCT01182493|Primary|Between Group Difference in HbA1c When Comparing CSII to MDI|To evaluate change in glycemic control (HbA1c) after 6 months of insulin pump therapy in patients with type 2 DM, as compared to patients on MDI therapy over the same time period|6 months|||% HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
824601|NCT01182610|Secondary|Survival||2-year survival from first dose of panitumumab|This study was closed due to a notification letter (November 1, 2011) and preliminary results from another trial that included panitumumab as part of combination chemotherapy for gastroesophageal cancer. The study was closed by mutual consent from the Principal Investigator, Sponsor, and Funder.|||||
824602|NCT01182610|Secondary|Thirty-day Surgical Mortality|All subjects who have undergone surgical resection will be followed for a 30-day postoperative safety evaluation. Death from any cause within 30 days of the date of surgery will be considered a surgical mortality death.|From date of surgery to 30 days after date of surgery|This study was closed due to a notification letter (November 1, 2011) and preliminary results from another trial that included panitumumab as part of combination chemotherapy for gastroesophageal cancer. The study was closed by mutual consent from the Principal Investigator, Sponsor, and Funder.|||||
824603|NCT01182610|Secondary|Resection Rate of Surgery|"The patient will be scored as having an R0 resection, if no invasive cancer is detected involving the margins of the resection by routine microscopic hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)examination, and the operative report indicates complete resection with no residual disease.
The patient will be scored as having an R1 resection, if invasive cancer is detected involving the margins of resection by routine microscopic hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) examination, and the operative report indicates complete resection with no residual disease.
The patient will be scored as having an R2 resection, if the operative report indicates incomplete resection or gross residual disease."|At time of surgery (between days 50 to 64)|This study was closed due to a notification letter (November 1, 2011) and preliminary results from another trial that included panitumumab as part of combination chemotherapy for gastroesophageal cancer. The study was closed by mutual consent from the Principal Investigator, Sponsor, and Funder.|||||
824604|NCT01182610|Secondary|Pathologic Response Rate|The patient will be scored as having had a pathologic complete response (pCR) if the routine histologic examination of the resected specimen shows no residual invasive cancer by standard hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) examination.|At time of surgery (between days 50 to 64)|This study was closed due to a notification letter (November 1, 2011) and preliminary results from another trial that included panitumumab as part of combination chemotherapy for gastroesophageal cancer. The study was closed by mutual consent from the Principal Investigator, Sponsor, and Funder.|||||
824605|NCT01182610|Primary|Response Rate|The primary endpoint is overall response rate (ORR) as determined per RECIST guidelines version 1.1 from baseline and restaging scans conducted between Days 36 to 43. Response is defined as the occurrence of either Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) as best response. CR is defined as the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. A PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of the target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|From the start of study treatment until restaging evaluation performed between days 36 to 43|This study was closed due to a notification letter (November 1, 2011) and preliminary results from another trial that included panitumumab as part of combination chemotherapy for gastroesophageal cancer. The study was closed by mutual consent from the Principal Investigator, Sponsor, and Funder.|||||
824606|NCT01182675|Secondary|Percent Engraftment of Donor T-cells in Blood by STR Testing|We will measure whether we are able to detect donor T-cells in the patient's blood after HSCT.|1 Year||||||
824607|NCT01182675|Secondary|Percent Engraftment of Donor Stem Cells in Bone Marrow by STR Testing|We will measure whether we are able to detect donor stem cells in the patient's bone marrow after HSCT.|1 Year||||||
824608|NCT01182675|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Become Independent From Regular IVIG Infusion|Based on B-cell function assays from the patient's blood, we will be able to determine if patients are able to successfully discontinue IVIG infusions.|2 Years||||||
824609|NCT01182675|Secondary|Incidence of Chronic GVHD||2 Years||||||
824610|NCT01182675|Secondary|Incidence of Acute GVHD||100 Days||||||
824611|NCT01182675|Primary|Engraftment of Donor B-cells in Blood by STR Testing|Number of participants in whom donor B cells were detected in the patient's blood after HSCT.|1 Year|||participants|||Number
824612|NCT01182727|Primary|Side Effects of Salsalate|This Measure is reporting the number of participants with side effects as reported on the Side Effect Checklist used to monitor common medication side effects.|6 weeks|All subjects who completed the study were analyzed.||participants|||Number
824613|NCT01182805|Primary|Early Diastolic Mitral Annular Velocity (E-prime) Using Tissue Doppler|E-prime is a conventional commonly-used parameter of diastolic function. Higher values of E-prime typically reflect better diastolic function.|Assessed from echo obtained at time of enrollment|Only 25 subjects had adequate images for assessment of DCSR-IVR and interpretable tissue Doppler and gold standard assessment of diastolic function, and the analysis was limited to these subjects.||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
824614|NCT01182805|Primary|Diastolic Circumferential Strain Rate During Isovolumic Relaxation|Diastolic circumferential strain rate during isovolumic relaxation is a novel measure of diastolic function that measures the rate of relaxation of the left ventricle during the interval of isovolumic relaxation (the period of active relaxation). We would expect that a higher value reflects better relaxation, and better diastolic function.|Assessed from echo obtained at time of enrollment|Only 26 subjects had adequate images for assessment of DCSR-IVR and had gold standard assessment of diastolic function, and the analysis was limited to these subjects.||1/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
824615|NCT01183013|Secondary|Incidence of Rescue Therapy During the First 30 Weeks of Treatment|Rescue therapy was defined to include any new antidiabetic medication taken for hyperglycemia and introduced on or after the start date of study treatment and before the end date of study treatment.|30 weeks|FAS||participants|||Number
824616|NCT01183013|Secondary|Time to First Use of Rescue Therapy|Proportion of patients at 30 weeks with rescue therapy using Kaplan-Meier analysis.|30 weeks|FAS||Proportion of participants|||Number
824617|NCT01183013|Secondary|Two-hour Postprandial Glucose (2hPPG) Change From Baseline at Week 30 by Meal Tolerance Test (MTT)|The change from baseline is the 2hPPG after 30 weeks minus the baseline 2hPPG.|Baseline and 30 weeks|MTT set: This patient set includes those patients in the FAS who had a valid MTT at baseline and at least one valid on-treatment MTT. An MTT is considered valid if both an FPG and a 2-hour PPG value are available.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
824618|NCT01183013|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Change From Baseline by Visit Over Time|The change from baseline is the FPG over time minus the baseline FPG. Model includes fixed effects for treatment, continuous baseline FPG, continuous baseline HbA1c, prior anti-diabetic medication, country, visit and treatment by visit interaction|Baseline, week 6, week 12, week 18, week 24, week 30|FAS (observed cases)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
824619|NCT01183013|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Change From Baseline After 30 Weeks of Treatment|The change from baseline is the FPG after 30 weeks minus the baseline FPG.|Baseline and 30 weeks|Patients from Full Analysis Set (FAS) with a value for FPG at baseline and on-treatment. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) used to handle missing values at Week 30.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
824620|NCT01183013|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline by Visit Over Time|"HbA1c is measured as a percentage. The change from baseline is the HbA1c over time minus the baseline HbA1c. The model includes fixed effects for treatment, continuous baseline HbA1c, prior andi-diabetic medication, country, visit and treatment.
by visit interaction."|Baseline, week 6, week 12, week 18, week 24, week 30|FAS (observed cases)||percent||Standard Error|Mean
824622|NCT01183013|Secondary|Occurrence of Cumulative Treat to Target Efficacy Response, of HbA1c Under Treatment of < 6.5% After 30 Weeks of Treatment|Glycosylated hemoglobin is reported as a percentage of the total hemoglobin.|Baseline and 30 weeks|FAS patients who also had baseline HbA1c >=6.5%. Non-completers (patients without a value at Week 30) were considered as failures (NCF)||participants|||Number
824623|NCT01183013|Secondary|Occurrence of Cumulative Treat to Target Efficacy Response, of HbA1c Under Treatment of < 7.0% After 30 Weeks of Treatment|Glycosylated hemoglobin is reported as a percentage of the total hemoglobin.|Baseline and 30 weeks|FAS patients who also had baseline HbA1c>=7%.Non-completers (patients without a value at Week 30) were considered as failures (NCF).||participants|||Number
824624|NCT01183013|Primary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c After 30 Weeks of Treatment.|HbA1c is measured as a percentage. The change from baseline is the Week 30 HbA1c minus the baseline HbA1c.|Baseline and 30 weeks|Patients from Full Analysis Set (FAS) with last observation carried forward (LOCF) used to handle missing values at Week 30. FAS is the patient set which includes all patients who were documented to have taken at least one dose of treatment and who had a baseline HbA1c value at at least one on-treatment HbA1c.||percent||Standard Error|Mean
824625|NCT01183065|Primary|To Determine the Overall Response Rate (CR+PR)|by RECIST version 1.1 criteria|2 years|||participants|||Number
824626|NCT01183104|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at 52 W||Baseline and 52 W|Analysis set of evaluation for efficacy; Per Protocol Set. Some participants had loss of the measurement.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824627|NCT01183104|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin/Proinsulin Ratio at 52 W||Baseline and 52 W|Analysis set of evaluation for efficacy; Per Protocol Set. Some participants had loss of the measurement.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
824628|NCT01183104|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HOMA-β at 52 W|β cell function is measured by the Homeostatic Model Assessment(HOMA-β). HOMA β = [20 x fasting insulin (μU/mL)] / [fasting plasma glucose (mmol/L) - 3.5]|Baseline and 52 W|Analysis set of evaluation for efficacy; Per Protocol Set. Some participants had loss of the measurement.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
824629|NCT01183104|Secondary|The Number of Participants Achieving HbA1c < 6.9 %||52 W|Analysis set of evaluation for efficacy; Per Protocol Set Some participants were not completed to 52 W.||Participants|||Count of Participants
824630|NCT01183104|Primary|Number of Participants With Hypoglycaemia||From baseline to 52 W|Analysis set of evaluation for safety.||Participants|||Count of Participants
824631|NCT01183104|Primary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c at 52 W||Baseline and 52 W|Analysis set of evaluation for efficacy; Per Protocol Set.||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824632|NCT01183169|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Viral Relapse|Viral relapse was defined as reappearance of detectable HCV RNA after previously being undetectable (< LOQ) during treatment.|within 24 weeks after treatment|FAS For Efficacy||percentage of participants|||Number
824633|NCT01183169|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Viral Breakthrough|"On-treatment viral breakthrough was defined as either:
Confirmed increase of HCV RNA ≥1 log10 above nadir (nadir = lowest HCV RNA value during treatment), or
HCV RNA becoming ≥ 100 IU/mL after previously being undetectable (< LOQ) during treatment"|within 48 weeks|FAS For Efficacy||percentage of participants|||Number
824634|NCT01183169|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Abnormal Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) at Baseline Who Had Normalized ALT at Treatment End and Study End||Up to 48 weeks|Participants in the FAS For Efficacy with abnormal ALT at baseline and available data at the respective time point||percentage of participants|||Number
824635|NCT01183169|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With End of Treatment Response (ETR)-LOQ and ETR-LOD|ETR-LOQ and ETR-LOD were defined as serum HCV RNA < LOQ and serum HCV RNA < LOD at treatment end (completed or prematurely discontinued), respectively.|within 48 weeks|FAS For Efficacy||percentage of participants|||Number
824636|NCT01183169|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Partial Early Virologic Response After 12 Weeks of Treatment (pEVR)-LOQ and pEVR-LOD|pEVR-LOQ and pEVR-LOD were defined as a ≥ 2 log10 decrease in HCV RNA and still detectable (≥ LOQ and ≥ LOD, respectively) after 12 weeks of treatment. Post-switch groups were assessed 12 weeks after the switch.|after 12 weeks of treatment|FAS For Efficacy||percentage of participants|||Number
824637|NCT01183169|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Rapid Viral Response (RVR)-LOQ and RVR-LOD|RVR-LOQ and RVR-LOD were defined as serum HCV RNA < LOQ and serum HCV RNA < LOD after 4 weeks of treatment, respectively. Post-switch groups were assessed 4 weeks after the switch.|after 4 weeks of treatment|FAS For Efficacy||percentage of participants|||Number
824638|NCT01183169|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Sustained Viral Response 24 Weeks After Treatment (SVR24)-LOQ and SVR24-LOD|SVR24-LOQ and SVR24-LOD were defined as serum HCV RNA < LOQ and serum HCV RNA < LOD 24 weeks after treatment, respectively.|24 weeks after treatment|FAS For Efficacy||percentage of participants|||Number
824639|NCT01183169|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Sustained Viral Response 12 Weeks After Treatment (SVR12)-LOQ and SVR12-LOD|SVR12-LOQ and SVR12-LOD were defined as serum HCV RNA < LOQ and serum HCV RNA < LOD 12 weeks after treatment, respectively.|12 weeks after treatment|FAS For Efficacy||percentage of participants|||Number
824640|NCT01183169|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Early Viral Response Below the Limit of Detection (cEVR-LOD)|cEVR-LOD was defined as serum HCV RNA below the limit of detection (< LOD; i.e., 10 IU/mL) after 12 weeks of treatment. Post-switch groups were assessed 12 weeks after the switch.|after 12 weeks of treatment|FAS For Efficacy||percentage of participants|||Number
824641|NCT01183169|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Early Viral Response Below the Limit of Quantification (cEVR-LOQ)|cEVR-LOQ was defined as serum HCV RNA below the limit of quantification (< LOQ; i.e., 25 IU/mL) after 12 weeks of treatment. Post-switch groups were assessed 12 weeks after the switch.|after 12 weeks of treatment|Full Analysis Set (FAS) For Efficacy, defined as all randomized participants who were randomized after the 2nd protocol amendment||percentage of participants|||Number
824642|NCT01183234|Primary|Time of Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for MPH Using Two Different Formulations (Equasym XL and Metadate CD)|Tmax is the time after administration of a drug when the maximum plasma concentration in the body is reached.|predose and 0.5, 1.0, 1.25, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20 and 24 hours post-dose|PK set||hours||Full Range|Median
824769|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|The Composite of ST, All Death, and All MI Rate in Patients Without Diabetic Disease|The composite of ST, all death, and all MI rate in Non Diabetes|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824643|NCT01183234|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for MPH Using Two Different Formulations (Equasym XL and Metadate CD)|Cmax is a term that refers to the maximum (or peak) concentration that a drug achieves in the body after the drug has been administrated.|predose and 0.5, 1.0, 1.25, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20 and 24 hours post-dose|PK set||ng/ml||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824644|NCT01183234|Primary|Area Under the Steady-state Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC 0-t) for Methylphenidate Hydrochloride (MPH) Using Two Different Formulations (Equasym XL and Metadate CD)|AUC 0-t is the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to the time of last quantifiable concentration. AUC can be used as a measure of drug exposure. It is derived from drug concentration and time so it gives a measure how much and how long a drug stays in a body.|predose and 0.5, 1.0, 1.25, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20 and 24 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetic analysis set (PK) defined as all subjects in the safety analysis set who had evaluable plasma concentration-time profiles for MPH through 24 hours post-dosing in both treatment periods. Subjects who vomited or experienced significant diarrhea between dosing and 10 hours post-dose were excluded.||ng*h/ml||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824645|NCT01183312|Secondary|EEG Power||following drug administration||||||
824646|NCT01183312|Secondary|Change in Stanford Sleepiness Scale|The Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS) is a subjective rating of sleepiness, with score ranging from 1 to 7, where higher values reflect more severe sleepiness. The measure used was change in SSS from baseline to drug administration (calculated as baseline value - average value with study drug, where higher numbers denote improvement from baseline).|10, 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 minutes after drug administration (averaged for all time points for each subject)|Intention to treat (all randomized subjects were included)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824647|NCT01183312|Secondary|PVT Additional Measure #5, Change in Visual Analog Scale Rating of Sleepiness at the Completion of PVT|At the end of the 10 minute PVT testing period, subjects were asked to rate their current level of sleepiness along a line, which was transformed into a numeric value from 1-10, such that high levels indicated more severe subjective sleepiness. The measure used was the change in this rating from baseline to drug administration (calculated as baseline value - average value with study drug, where higher numbers denote improvement from baseline).|10, 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 minutes after drug administration (averaged for all time points for each subject)|Intention to treat (all randomized subjects were included)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824648|NCT01183312|Secondary|PVT Additional Measure #4, Change in False Response Frequency|The false response frequency is defined as the number of button presses when no stimulus is presented. The measure used was the change in false response frequency from baseline to drug administration (calculated as baseline value - average value with study drug, where higher numbers denote improvement from baseline).|10, 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 minutes after drug administration (averaged for all time points for each subject)|Intention to treat (all randomized subjects were included)||number of false starts||Standard Deviation|Mean
824649|NCT01183312|Secondary|PVT Additional Measure #3, Change in Optimum Response Times|The optimum response times is defined as the reciprocal of the reaction time averaged across the fastest 10% of responses. The measure used was the change in optimum response time from baseline to following drug administration (calculated as baseline value - average value with study drug, where lower numbers denote improvement from baseline).|10, 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 minutes after drug administration (averaged for all time points for each subject)|Intention to treat (all randomized subjects were included)||1/msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
824650|NCT01183312|Secondary|PVT Additional Measure #2, Change in Duration of Lapse Domain|The PVT duration of lapse domain is defined as the reciprocal of the reaction time averaged across the slowest 10% of responses. The measure used was the change in duration of lapse domain from baseline to drug administration (calculated as baseline value - average value with study drug, where lower numbers denote improvement from baseline).|10, 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 minutes after drug administration (averaged for all time points for each subject)|Intention to treat (all randomized subjects were included)||1/msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
824651|NCT01183312|Secondary|PVT Additional Measure #1, Change in Lapse Frequency|A PVT lapse is defined as a reaction time exceeding 500 msec following the presentation of a single stimulus, which are then summed for the entire 10 minute PVT testing period. The measure used was the change in the frequency of lapses from baseline to drug administration (calculated as baseline value - average value with study drug, where higher numbers denote improvement from baseline).|10, 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 minutes after drug administration (averaged for all time points for each subject)|Intention to treat (all randomized subjects were included)||number of lapses during PVT testing||Standard Deviation|Mean
824652|NCT01183312|Primary|Change in Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) Median Reaction Time|The PVT measures the reaction time to button press following the presentation of a visual stimulus, reported here as the median reaction time for multiple presentations during the 10 minute task. The measure used was the change in median reaction time from baseline to drug administration, where the median reaction time at each of the time points (below) was averaged to provide a single on-treatment value for median reaction time. The measure was then calculated as baseline value - treatment value, such that higher numbers denote improvement from baseline.|10, 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 minutes after drug administration (averaged for all time points for each subject)|Intention to treat (all randomized subjects were included)||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
824653|NCT01183390|Primary|AUC0-t of Anastrozole(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Anastrozole AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824654|NCT01183390|Primary|Cmax of Anastrozole(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Anastrozole Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824655|NCT01183468|Primary|C-peptide 2-hour AUC in Response to a Mixed-meal Tolerance Test at Week 52|No results for the primary outcome measure are available since the study was terminated prior to reaching the outcome measure time frame of 52 weeks.|Week 52|Enrolled Sample|||||
824694|NCT01184053|Primary|Objective Response (CR+PR) Rate of Subjects Given Trisenox|To estimate the objective response (CR+PR) rate (as defined by the Gynecologic Oncology Group [GOG] RECIST Criteria)of Trisenox® in women with recurrent or metastatic endometrial cancer when administered at 0.25 mg/kg/day for 5 consecutive days (D1-5) every 4 weeks.|28 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
824656|NCT01183481|Secondary|Control Rate of Delayed Phase Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching in Patients Undergoing Multiple Fraction Radiotherapy|"Percentage of participants experiencing no nausea, vomiting, and retching was assessed.
Assessments of nausea, vomiting, and antiemetic use will be taken daily within 2-10 following the radiation therapy based on patient self-report nausea/vomiting diaries."|Days 2-10 following radiotherapy|Patients undergoing multiple fraction treatment||percentage of participants|||Number
824657|NCT01183481|Secondary|Control Rate of Acute Phase Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching in Patients Undergoing Multiple Fraction Radiotherapy|"Percentage of participants in the multiple fraction arm experiencing no nausea, vomiting, and retching was assessed.
Data will be measured by research staff at baseline and patient self-report nausea diaries will be taken on each day within this time frame."|During radiotherapy (5 days) and the 24 hours following radiotherapy|Patients undergoing multiple fraction treatment||percentage of participants|||Number
824658|NCT01183481|Secondary|Control Rate of Delayed Phase Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching in Patients Undergoing Single Fraction Radiotherapy|"Percentage of participants in the single fraction arm experiencing no nausea, vomiting, and retching was assessed.
Assessments of nausea, vomiting, and antiemetic use will be taken daily within 2-10 following the radiation therapy based on patient self-report nausea/vomiting diaries."|Days 2-10 following radiotherapy|Patients undergoing single fraction treatment||percentage of participants|||Number
824659|NCT01183481|Secondary|Control Rate of Acute Phase Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching in Patients Undergoing Single Fraction Radiotherapy|"Percentage of participants experiencing no nausea, vomiting, and retching during the acute phase was assessed.
Assessments of nausea, vomiting, and antiemetic use will be taken daily following the radiation therapy based on patient self-report nausea/vomiting diaries."|Day of radiotherapy and 24 hours following|Patients undergoing single fraction treatment||percentage of participants|||Number
824660|NCT01183481|Secondary|The Complete RINV Prophylaxis Rate (Acute and Delayed Phases), the Partial Emesis Control Rate, the Safety of the Combined Regime, QOL Issues, the Time to the First Emetic Event and Use of Rescue Medication .|Data will be measured by research staff at baseline and patient self-report nausea diaries will be taken on each day within this time frame.|From day of radiotherapy to 10 days following radiotherapy||||||
824661|NCT01183481|Primary|The Proportion of Patients Experiencing no Vomiting and no Nausea, Without Use of Any Rescue Antiemetic Medication(s), From Days 2-10 Following the Radiation Therapy (Delayed RINV).|Assessments of nausea, vomiting, and antiemetic use will be taken daily within 2-10 following the radiation therapy based on patient self-report nausea/vomiting diaries.|Days 2-10 following radiotherapy|||participants|||Number
824662|NCT01183533|Secondary|Mortality||90 days|Note: although 2 patients were not available for complete day 90 assessments, family/patient communication provided necessary mortality information.||participants|||Number
824663|NCT01183533|Secondary|90-day Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) Score 0 or 1|Number of patients with mRS of 0 or 1 at 90 days. The mRS is a clinician-reported measure of global disability that has been widely applied for evaluating recovery from stroke. It has a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 6. Zero represents a patient that has no disability or residual stroke symptoms. A score of 1 is defined as: no significant disability: despite symptoms, able to carry out all usual duties and activities. The maximum score, 6, indicates death. A score of 2 is defined as slight disability: unable to perform all previous activities but able to look after own affairs without assistance; a score of 3 is defined as moderate disability: requiring some help but able to walk without assistance; a score of 4 is moderately severe disability: unable to walk without assistance and unable to attend to own bodily needs without assistance; a score of 5 is severe disability: bedridden, incontinent and requiring constant nursing care and attention.|90 days|^ Note: 2 patients were not available for 90-day follow-up assessments.||participants|||Number
824664|NCT01183533|Primary|Frequency of Symptomatic Hemorrhagic Transformation Safety of iv Rt-PA in Wake up Stroke Patients|The primary outcome of this study is the frequency of symptomatic hemorrhagic transformation evident within 24 hours of treatment with IV t-PA. Symptomatic was defined as significant clinical deterioration with at least a 4 point or more increase in the NIH Stroke scale.|24 hours|||cases.|||Number
824665|NCT01183546|Secondary|Shoulder Peak Resultant Moment|Shoulder Peak Resultant Moment during wheelchair transfers was calculated using an inverse dynamics model approach. Inputs into the model included forces recorded at the hands during transfers, three-dimensional motion trajectories of markers placed on the upper limbs and trunk, and subject's anthropometric data.|Baseline Testing and at Followup Testing (4 weeks)|||Newton-meter/kilogram||Standard Deviation|Mean
824666|NCT01183546|Primary|Transfer Performance (TAI Scores Part 1)|"Part 1 of the TAI is comprised of 15 items which are scored yes (1 point) when the subject performs the specified skill correctly and no (0 points) when the subject performs the skill incorrectly or (N/A) which means the item does not apply. The part 1 summary score is the summation of each item's score multiplied by 10, and then divided by the number of applicable items, ranging from 0 to 10."|Baseline Testing and at Followup Testing (4 weeks)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824667|NCT01183650|Primary|Pharmacokinetics: Time to Concentration Maximum (Tmax) of Tadalafil and Metabolite IC710||1 day and 10 days|All enrolled participants||hours||Full Range|Median
824668|NCT01183650|Primary|Pharmacokinetics: Concentration Maximum (Cmax) of Tadalafil and Metabolite IC710||1 day and 10 days|All enrolled participants||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824669|NCT01183650|Primary|Pharmacokinetics: Area Under the Concentration Curve (AUC) for Tadalafil and Metabolite IC710|AUC for Day 1 is reported as AUC(tau [t], day 1), which is AUC from time zero to 24 hours (t) postdose on Day 1. AUC for Day 10 is reported as AUC(t,steady state [ss]), which is AUC during one 24-hour dosing interval at steady-state.|1 day and 10 days|All enrolled participants||nanograms*hour/milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824679|NCT01183858|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) at the End of Study|OS defined as the time from randomization to the date of death due to any cause.|Randomization to End of Study: 14 October 2010 – 7 February 2014 (Up to 39.8 months)|Intent-to-treat Population included all randomized participants. 2 participants were excluded from analysis: 1 participant randomized in error and 1 participant with missing source data.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824695|NCT01184079|Secondary|Safety Profile|Total proportion of side effects reported after any dose, compared by arm.|1 week after vaccination|Intention-to-treat||percentage of doses with side effects|||Number
824670|NCT01183728|Secondary|Indication of Efficacy|"Clinical exploration, questionaires (VAS, WOMAC, Lequesne Index, SF-36 life quality) at all the periods. To evaluate effectiveness through development of criteria for quantitative MRI (Cartigram) denoting regeneration of articular cartilage at 6, 12 and 24 months after the implantation of MSV.
Magnetic Resonance imaging measurements of T2 relaxation (Cartigram) performed at 0, 6 and 12 months to quantify articular cartilage degeneration. The values (in milliseconds) are T1/2 for decay of the T2 MRI signals. Normal values are below 50 ms; values above 50 ms correspond to inflamed cartilage.
Mean (SD) are expressed as the percent of values (of a total of 88 measurements) that are between 50 and 90 ms. A value =5 is considered normal (can be attained by chance). Values above 5 are considered pathological. The worst possible is 100."|0, 6, 12, 24 months|||percentage of values||Standard Deviation|Mean
824671|NCT01183728|Primary|Feasibility and Safety of the Implementation of MSV in the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee.|"Clinical review, questionaires (VAS - Visual Analogue Scale (a psychometric response scale which can be used for subjective measurements of knee pain), WOMAC - Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (questionnaire to quantify the pain, stiffness and physical function in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip), Lequesne Index (is a composite measure of pain and disability, with specific self-report questionnaires for knee (osteoarthritis)), SF36 life quality - Short Form 36 (is a questionnaire for the detection of changes in quality of life)).
In all cases, the scale was from 0 to 100%. Measurements were performed before cell transplantation (0) and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months afterwards depending on the questionnaire. For VAS, WOMAC and Lequesne, lower values represent a better outcome. For SF-36, higher values represent a better outcome.
VAS-DA, VAS for pain associated to daily activities. VAS-SP, VAS for pain associated to sports activities."|0, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824672|NCT01183780|Secondary|Observed Maximum Concentration (Cmax) and Observed Minimum Concentration (Cmin) of Ramucirumab||Preinfusion and 1 hour postinfusion in Cycles 3, 5, 9, 13, and 17|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable data for Cmin and Cmax.||micrograms/milliliter (ug/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824673|NCT01183780|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Anti-Ramucirumab Antibodies|Blood samples were tested to determine if a participant reacted to ramucirumab by producing anti-ramucirumab antibodies. Samples were identified as treatment emergent anti-drug antibody (TE ADA) if the post-treatment sample had an increase of at least 4 fold in titer from pre-treatment values. If the pre-treatment value was not detected or was not present, a 1:20 post-treatment titer was required to indicate treatment emergence. The percentage of participants with TE ADA was calculated as: (the number of participants with TE ADA / total number of participants with at least 1 post-treatment immunogenicity sample analyzed)*100.|Cycles 1, 3, 5, and 30-Day FU|All participants who received study treatment and who had immunogenicity samples analyzed at the specified time points.||percentage of participants|||Number
824674|NCT01183780|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQol- 5D (EQ-5D)|The EQ-5D is a generic, multidimensional, health status instrument. The profile allows participants to rate their health state in 5 health domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and mood using a 3-level scale (no problem, some problems, and major problems). These combinations of attributes were converted into a weighted health-state Index Score according to the United Kingdom (UK) population-based algorithm. The possible values for the Index Score ranged from -0.59 (severe problems in all 5 dimensions) to 1.0 (no problem in any dimension). A negative change indicated a worsening of the participant's health status.|Baseline and 30-Day Follow-Up (FU) up to 171 Weeks|All randomized participants who had EQ-5D assessed at baseline and 30-day FU.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824675|NCT01183780|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] QLQ-C30 Global Health Status|The EORTC QLQ-C30 (v. 3.0) is a self-administered, cancer-specific questionnaire with multidimensional scales assessing 15 domains (5 functional domains, 9 symptoms, and global health status). A linear transformation was applied to standardize the raw scores to range between 0 and 100 per developer guidelines. For the functional domains and global health status scale, higher scores represent a better level of functioning. For symptom scales, higher scores represent a greater degree of symptoms. Maximum improvement is the best post-baseline change.|Baseline Up to 171 Weeks|All randomized participants who had EORTC QLQ-C30 assessed at baseline and post-baseline .||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824676|NCT01183780|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Objective Response (Objective Response Rate)|The objective response rate is equal to the proportion of participants achieving a best overall response of partial response or complete response (PR + CR). Response was defined using RECIST, v. 1.1 criteria. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm and normalization of tumor marker level of non-target lesions; PR was defined as having at least a 30% decrease in sum of longest diameter of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum diameter.|Randomization until Disease Progression Up to 38.01 Months|All randomized participants.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824677|NCT01183780|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) Time|PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization until the date of objectively determined progressive disease (PD) [according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version (v). 1.1] or death due to any cause, whichever was first. PD is at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 millimeters (mm). Participants who died without a reported prior progression were considered to have progressed on the day of their death. Participants who did not progress or were lost to follow-up were censored at the day of their last radiographic tumor assessment.|Randomization to Measured PD or Date of Death from Any Cause Up to 38.01 Months|All randomized participants. Participants censored: Ramucirumab + FOLFIRI = 60; Placebo + FOLFIRI = 42.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824678|NCT01183780|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time in months from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. For participants not known to have died as of the cut-off date, OS was censored at the last known date alive.|Randomization to Date of Death from Any Cause Up to 39.36 Months|All randomized participants. Participants censored: Ramucirumab + FOLFIRI group = 164; Placebo + FOLFIRI= 139.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824680|NCT01183858|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) at the End of Study|PFS is defined as the time from randomization to the date of first occurrence of disease progression or death. For target lesions, Progressive Disease (PD) was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter recorded since treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions. For non-target lesions, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Randomization to End of Study: 14 October 2010 – 7 February 2014 (Up to 39.8 months)|Intent-to-treat Population included all randomized participants. 2 participants were excluded from analysis: 1 participant randomized in error and 1 participant with missing source data.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824681|NCT01183858|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) at the End of the Study|"An adverse event was considered any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Preexisting conditions that worsened during the study were reported as adverse events.
A serious adverse event is any experience that suggests a significant hazard, contraindication, side effect or precaution that: results in death, is life-threatening, required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is medically significant.
Adverse Events in the following categories are presented: Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events, AEs leading to withdrawal from treatment and AEs leading to death."|Randomization to End of Study: 14 October 2010 – 7 February 2014 (Up to 39.8 months)|Safety population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
824682|NCT01183858|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP)|Tumor response was assessed by the investigator using computer tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 criteria. Time to progression (TTP) in weeks was defined as the time from randomization to the date of disease progression. Participants without event were censored at the date of the last tumor assessment when the patient was known to be progression free.|Randomization to Clinical Cutoff: 28 October 2013 (Up to 36.5 months)|Intent-to-treat Population included all randomized participants. 2 participants were excluded from analysis: 1 participant randomized in error and 1 participant with missing source data.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824683|NCT01183858|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|Tumor response was assessed by the investigator using computer tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. Disease control rates were measured according to RECIST version 1.1 criteria. A participant was defined as having controlled disease if they sustained a Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) for at least 4 weeks during randomized treatment (confirmed response), or Stable Disease (SD) for at least 6 weeks. Patients with no tumor assessment after the start of study treatment were considered as having uncontrolled disease. The percentage of participants with Disease Control is presented.|Randomization to Clinical Cutoff: 28 October 2013 (Up to 36.5 months)|Intent-to-treat Population included all randomized participants. 2 participants were excluded from analysis: 1 participant randomized in error and 1 participant with missing source data.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824684|NCT01183858|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|Tumor response was assessed by the investigator using computer tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. A participant was defined as a responder if they sustained a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) for at least 4 weeks during randomized treatment (confirmed response). Patients with no tumor assessment after the start of study treatment were to be considered as non-responders. The percentage of participants in each best response category is presented.|Randomization to Clinical Cutoff: 28 October 2013 (Up to 36.5 months)|Intent-to-treat Population included all randomized participants. 2 participants were excluded from analysis: 1 participant randomized in error and 1 participant with missing source data.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824685|NCT01183858|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS defined as the time from randomization to the date of death due to any cause.|Randomization to Clinical Cutoff: 28 October 2013 (Up to 36.5 months)|Intent-to-treat Population included all randomized participants. 2 participants were excluded from analysis: 1 participant randomized in error and 1 participant with missing source data.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824686|NCT01183858|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS is defined as the time from randomization to the date of first occurrence of disease progression or death. For target lesions, Progressive Disease (PD) was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter recorded since treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions. For non-target lesions, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Randomization to Clinical Cutoff: 28 October 2013 (Up to 36.5 Months)|Intent-to-treat Population included all randomized participants. 2 participants were excluded from analysis: 1 participant randomized in error and 1 participant with missing source data.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824687|NCT01183975|Primary|Mean Excess Weight Change|Mean excess weight change in valid subjects. Excess weight is calculated as body weight minus ideal body weight, where ideal body weight is determined by the method of Lorentz (Ein neuer Konstitionsinde. Klin Wochenschr 1929; 8:348-51).|3 years follow up|||percent change in excess weight||Standard Deviation|Mean
824688|NCT01183975|Primary|Mean BMI Change|Mean change in BMI for valid subjects|3 years follow-up|517 valid patients analyzed||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
824689|NCT01184014|Secondary|the Mean Blood Glucose of All Blood Glucose Readings|as stated above|starting 3 hours after the initial index BG>180 measure, across the entire hospital stay or up through 5 days if hospital LOS is > 5 days||||||
824690|NCT01184014|Primary|Mean Blood Glucose.|as stated above|discharge or until after their 5th day in the hospital|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824691|NCT01184053|Secondary|Associations Between Markers of Angiogenesis (e.g. VEGF) With Response|We will request a blood sample to measure vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) as well as other angiogenic factors and correlate levels to response to arsenic trioxide. Such effects have been observed in cultured cell lines and animal models, as well as clinical studies.|4 years|No patients achieved a CR or PR response, no angiogenesis was performed.|||||
824692|NCT01184053|Secondary|Overall Survival||5 years|All patients who received treatment||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824697|NCT01184079|Primary|Immunogenicity After Dose 3|Geometric mean titer (GMT) and 95% confidence intervals around titer 1 month after dose 3 in per protocol population, comparing the two groups.|1 month after dose 3 (e.g., month 7 if third dose at 6months or month 13 if third dose at 12 months)|Intention-to-treat||mM units/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
824698|NCT01184118|Secondary|Number of Participants With Improved, Unchanged, and Worsened Anterior Tongue Strength (KPa) From Baseline With 16-week of High Dose Inhaled FP Treatment.|The Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI) will be used. This instrument has a standard-sized air-filled polymer balloon, called tongue sensor or bulb, which can be inserted between the tongue blade and the roof of the mouth. Anterior tongue strength (KPa) reported. Subjects were divided into 3 subgroups: improved (lower anterior tongue strength KPa), unchanged, or worsened (higher anterior tongue strength KPa).|16 weeks|||participants|||Number
824699|NCT01184118|Secondary|Number of Participants With Improved, Unchanged, and Worsened Sleep Disorders Questionnaire (SA-SDQ) From Baseline With 16-week of High Dose Inhaled FP Treatment.|Secondary goals include evaluating effects of this medication on severity of obstructive sleep disordered breathing (SDB) (validated by Sleep Disorders Questionnaire (SA-SDQ)). Subjects were divided into 3 subgroups: improved (less negative SA-SDQ score), unchanged, or worsened (more negative SA-SDQ score).|16 weeks|||participants|||Number
824700|NCT01184118|Primary|Number of Participants With Improved, Unchanged, and Worsened Critical Closing Pressure (Pcrit) From Baseline With 16-week of High Dose Inhaled FP Treatment.|Upper airway (UAW) collapsibility, as measured by critical closing pressure (Pcrit), defined as the maximum nasal pressure at which the UAW occludes. Subjects were divided into 3 subgroups: improved (more negative Pcrit), unchanged, or worsened (less negative Pcrit).|16 weeks|||participants|||Number
824701|NCT01184417|Secondary|Number of Study Patients With Mortality as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|mortality in study patients|1 year|||participants|||Number
824702|NCT01184417|Secondary|Number of Study Patients With Seizure as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|Did the study patient have a witnessed seizure during their hospitaliztion (yes/no).|1 year|||participants|||Number
824703|NCT01184417|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Requiring a Bedside Sitter as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|"Did the study patient require a Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) or other hospital staff to serve as a bedside sitter to observe the patient and provide additional safety supervision during any portion of their hospitalization."|1 year|||percentage of participants|||Number
824704|NCT01184417|Secondary|Number of Patients Requiring Endotracheal Intubation as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|"The outome answeres the question Did the study patient require endotracheal intubation, or not. This outcome investigates if the phenobarbital intervention is associted with increased incidence of respiratory depression and subsequent increased need for intubation."|1 year|||participants|||Number
824705|NCT01184417|Secondary|Length of Stay|hospital LOS, per patient, in hours from admission to discharge|1 year|||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824706|NCT01184417|Primary|Total Lorazepam Required Per Patient Per Admission|How much total lorazepam did each study patient receive from inital presentation in the Emergency Department through their discharge from the hospital, in milligrams.|1 year|||milligrams||Standard Deviation|Mean
824707|NCT01184417|Primary|Percentage of Patients Requiring ICU Admission|admission to intensive care unit|1 year|||percentage of participants|||Number
824708|NCT01184417|Primary|Number of Patients Requiring Continuous Lorazepam Infusion|"All study patients are placed on the standardized institutional alcohol withdrawal protocol and receive boluses of lorazepam (1, 2 or 4 mg IV) based on their acute alcohol withdrawal score (AAWS), adminstered serially up to every 15 minutes. Patients who are refractory to the maximum dose of lorazepam allowed by the protocol (up to 4mg lorazepam IV q 15 mins)are placed on a continuous IV lorazepam infusion (or lorazepam drip). Thus, continuous lorazepam infusion is a yes or no variable (i.e. continuous infusion, or not)."|1 year|||participants|||Number
824709|NCT01177943|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration [AUC (0-tlast)]|The AUC (0-tlast) is the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (predose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (tlast) and is based on the atomoxetine plasma concentration. The Least Squares (LS) Mean Value was based on treatment, period, group, and subject.|Predose, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, and 24 hours post dose|All participants who had an AUC value were included in the AUC analysis.||nanogram hour per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824710|NCT01177943|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|The Cmax values are based on the atomoxetine plasma concentration. The Least Squares (LS) Mean Value was based on treatment, period, group, and subject.|Predose, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, and 24 hours post dose|All participants who had a Cmax value were included in the Cmax analysis.||nanogram per millileter (ng/mL)||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824711|NCT01177956|Secondary|Duration of Response Until Cut-off Date 15 November 2012|Time from first assessment of CR or PR to disease progression or death (within 60 days of last tumor assessment). Participants without event are censored on the date of last tumor assessment. Tumor assessments based on modified WHO criteria.|Evaluations were performed every 6 weeks until progression, reported between day of first participant randomized, 25 December 2009, until cut-off date 15 November 2012|Subgroup of participants from the study population having best confirmed response (CR or PR).||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824712|NCT01177956|Secondary|Duration of Response Until Cut-off Date 25 January 2011|Time from first assessment of CR or PR to disease progression or death (within 60 days of last tumor assessment). Participants without event are censored on the date of last tumor assessment. Tumor assessments based on modified WHO criteria.|Evaluations were performed every 6 weeks until progression, reported between day of first participant randomized, 25 December 2009, until cut-off date 25 January 2011|Subgroup of participants from the study population having best confirmed response (CR or PR).||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824713|NCT01177956|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP) Until Cut-off Date 15 November 2012|Time from first administration of trial treatment to disease progression (radiological or clinical, if radiological progression is not available). Participants without event are censored on the date of last tumor assessment.|Evaluations were performed every 6 weeks until progression, reported between day of first participant randomized, 25 December 2009, until cut-off date 15 November 2012|ITT population included all participants who received at least one dose of the IMP cetuximab or chemotherapy.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824714|NCT01177956|Primary|Best Overall Response (BOR) Until Cut-off Date 15 November 2012|BOR: Percentage of participants experiencing a CR (complete disappearance of measurable and evaluable disease without new lesions) or PR (greater than or equal to 50 percent decrease of sum of product diameters of measurable disease, evaluable disease not worsening or progressing, no new lesions confirmed by a subsequent assessment no less than 28 days after criteria for response were first met) (based on modified WHO criteria), divided by the number of participants belonging to ITT or safety population.|Evaluations were performed every 6 weeks until progression, reported between day of first participant randomized, 25 December 2009, until cut-off date 15 November 2012|ITT population included all participants who received at least one dose of the investigational medicinal product (IMP) cetuximab or chemotherapy.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824715|NCT01177956|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP) Until Cut-off Date 25 January 2011|Time from first administration of trial treatment to disease progression (radiological or clinical, if radiological progression is not available). Participants without event are censored on the date of last tumor assessment.|Evaluations were performed every 6 weeks until progression, reported between day of first participant randomized, 25 December 2009, until cut-off date 25 January 2011|ITT population included all participants who received at least one dose of the IMP cetuximab or chemotherapy.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824716|NCT01177956|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) Time Until Cut-off Date 15 November 2012|Duration from first administration of trial treatment until progression (radiological or clinical, if radiological progression is not available) or death due to any cause. Only deaths within 60 days of last tumor assessment are considered. Participants without event are censored on the date of last tumor assessment.|Evaluations were performed every 6 weeks until progression, reported between day of first participant randomized, 25 December 2009, until cut-off date 15 November 2012|ITT population included all participants who received at least one dose of the IMP cetuximab or chemotherapy.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824717|NCT01177956|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) Time Until Cut-off Date 25 January 2011|Duration from first administration of trial treatment until progression (radiological or clinical, if radiological progression is not available) or death due to any cause. Only deaths within 60 days of last tumor assessment are considered. Participants without event are censored on the date of last tumor assessment.|Evaluations were performed every 6 weeks until progression, reported between day of first participant randomized, 25 December 2009, until cut-off date 25 January 2011|ITT population included all participants who received at least one dose of the IMP cetuximab or chemotherapy.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824718|NCT01177956|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) Time Until Cut-off Date 15 November 2012|The OS time was defined as the time from first administration of trial treatment to death. Participants without event are censored at the last date known to be alive or at the clinical cut-off date, whatever is earlier.|Time from randomization to death or last day known to be alive, reported between day of first participant randomized, 25 December 2009, until cut-off date 15 November 2012|ITT population included all participants who received at least one dose of the IMP cetuximab or chemotherapy.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824719|NCT01177956|Primary|Best Overall Response (BOR) Until Cut-off Date 25 January 2011|BOR: Percentage of participants experiencing a Complete Response (CR) (complete disappearance of measurable and evaluable disease without new lesions) or Partial Response (PR) (greater than or equal to 50 percent decrease of sum of product diameters of measurable disease, evaluable disease not worsening or progressing, no new lesions confirmed by a subsequent assessment no less than 28 days after criteria for response were first met) (based on modified World Health Organization [WHO] criteria), divided by the number of participants belonging to intention to treat (ITT) or safety population.|Evaluations were performed every 6 weeks until progression, reported between day of first participant randomized, 25 December 2009, until cut-off date 25 January 2011|ITT population included all participants who received at least one dose of the IMP cetuximab or chemotherapy.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824720|NCT01177969|Secondary|Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule: Child and Parent Versions|The Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule: Child and Parent Versions are clinician-rated scales assessing anxiety symptoms and the associated severity and impairment in children over the past month. The clinician interviewer interviews the child and parent separately about the nature and severity of the child's anxiety. If a child meets criteria for an anxiety disorder, a single item is rated by the interviewer, which represents anxiety severity. The scale score for this single item ranges from 0 to 8 with higher scores indicating more severe anxiety symptoms.|Post-treatment, which was an average of 16 weeks after Baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824721|NCT01177969|Primary|Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale.|The Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale is a clinician-rated scale assessing anxiety symptoms and the associated severity and impairment in children over the past week. The scale includes 5 items which are summed to form a total score, which represents anxiety severity. The scale score ranges from 0 to 25 with higher scores indicating more severe anxiety symptoms.|Post-treatment, which is an average of 16 weeks after Baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824722|NCT01178073|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Borg Dyspnea Index at Week 24|Borg Dyspnea Index (BDI) indicates the degree of breathlessness after completion of the 6 minute walk test. The BDI was calculated by using the Borg category (C) ratio (R) CR10 scale which starts at 0 (nothing at all) and has no upper limit (extremely strong). Change from BL was calculated as the Week 24 values minus the BL value. The BDI scale was assessed by each participant. The BL BDI score is the average of the two BDI values obtained following the two 6MWD tests used in determining the BL 6MWD. A negative change from BL in the BDI score represented an improvement for the participant. The analysis was performed based on the last observation carried forward data, except in the case of an adjudicated clinical failure event of death or hospitalization preceding the missing data observation. In this case, the missing observation was assigned the worst-rank score relative to those actually observed and was assigned rank reflecting the relative order of the actual event times.|Baseline (BL) and Week 24|mITT Population. Only participants with Baseline data were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824770|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|The Composite of ST, All Death, and All MI Rate in Patients With Diabetic Disease.|The composite of ST, all death, and all MI rate in All Diabetes patients.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824723|NCT01178073|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the World Health Organization Functional Class at Week 24|The WHO Functional Class (FC) indicates the severity of PAH and is an adaptation of the New York Heart Association classification. It was assessed by the investigator. There are four grades for WHO FC based on severity of symptoms (Class I = none, Class IV = most severe). Baseline WHO FC is the latest assessment prior to dosing (i.e., at Randomization or Screening). Change from Baseline at Week 24 was calculated as the Week 24 value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was performed based on the last observation carried forward data, except in the case of an adjudicated clinical failure event of death or hospitalization preceding the missing data observation. In this case, the missing observations was assigned the worst-rank score relative to those actually observed and was assigned rank reflecting the relative order of the actual event times.|Baseline and Week 24|mITT Population. Only participants with Baseline data were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824724|NCT01178073|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the 6 Minute Walk Distance Test at Week 24|The 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) test measures the distance that a participant can walk in a period of 6 minutes. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 24 value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was performed based on last observation carried forward data, except in the case of an adjudicated clinical failure event of death or hospitalization preceding the missing data observation. In this case, the missing observation was assigned the worst-rank score relative to those actually observed and was assigned a rank reflecting the relative order of the actual event times. Baseline 6MWD comprised of an average of the last two consecutive measurements prior to randomization that varied by no greater than 10%. If only one measurement was available, that measurement was used. If no two consecutive measures vary by no greater than 10% then Baseline was based on the last two consecutive measures for a participant.|Baseline and Week 24|mITT Population. Only participants with Baseline data were analyzed.||Meters||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824725|NCT01178073|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Satisfactory Clinical Response at Week 24|A satisfactory clinical response at Week 24 is defined as a participant who meets all of the following criteria: 10% improvement in 6MWD compared with Baseline; improvement to or maintenance of World Health Organization (WHO) class I or II symptoms; no events of clinical worsening prior to or at the Week 24 visit. Clinical worsening events included: death, hospitalization for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), and disease progression. Participants without an event of clinical worsening prior to or at the Week 24 visit who did not have a 6MWD value or a WHO functional class value at Week 24 were excluded from the analysis.|Baseline and Week 24|"mITT Population. Only those participants who had a Yes/No response were analyzed."||Percentage of participants|||Number
824726|NCT01178073|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in the N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide at Week 24|N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) is a surrogate marker of heart failure. The data were log-transformed. The geometric mean was calculated (based on the log-transformed data). The geometric mean ratio was calculated as the ratio between the Week 24 value and the Baseline value (based on the log-transformed data) and presented as percent change = 100 * (geometric mean ratio – 1). The Baseline value is the last value prior to administration of study drug; this may be prior to or on the day of study drug initiation. No imputation was performed for missing data. The secondary endpoints were analyzed according to a pre-specified hierarchical testing procedure.|Baseline and Week 24|mITT Population. Only participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percent change||Standard Error|Mean
824727|NCT01178073|Primary|Number of Participants With First Adjudicated Clinical Failure (CF) Event, Death, Hospitalisation for Worsening PAH, Disease Progression, Unsatisfactory Long-term Clinical Response, All Through FAV|Time to the first adjudicated CF event (death, hospitalization for worsening pulmonary arterial hypertension [PAH], disease progression, or unsatisfactory long-term clinical response) after initiating either first-line combination therapy with AMB and TAD or first-line monotherapy with either drug (AMB or TAD) in par. with PAH was assessed. If data was not available for some par. following a loss to follow-up, their event times were treated as censored at their last assessment time for the statistical analyses. FAV occurred approximately 4 weeks after the predicted 105th adjudicated first CF event was reached. Par. who had an FAV, and who had no adjudicated events or whose first adjudicated event occurred after their FAV, were censored at their individual FAV. Modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Population: all randomized par. who met the PAH diagnosis and inclusion/exclusion criteria defined in protocol amendment 2 and who also received at least one dose of investigational product (IP).|From Baseline up to the Final Assessment Visit (FAV) (average of 609 days)|mITT Population||Participants|||Number
824728|NCT01178099|Secondary|P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU)-Derived VerifyNow (VN) Percent Inhibition at Day 12|"PRU-derived VN percent inhibition is calculated as a percent decrease of PRU from baseline using the following formula:
([PRU at baseline – PRU at time of post baseline] / PRU at baseline) x 100%"|Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||percent inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
824729|NCT01178099|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percent Aggregation to 20 µM Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) at Day 12|Percent aggregation was assessed by Plateletworks® ADP assay, a whole blood-based test of platelet aggregation for the assessment of platelet inhibition. The assay determines the change in single platelet count due to activation and aggregation by ADP and inhibition thereof by antiplatelet agents.|Baseline, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||percent aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
824730|NCT01178099|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Area Under the Aggregation Curve at Day 12|AUC to 20 micromolar (μM) adenosine diphosphate (ADP), 6.5μM ADP, Collagen, and thrombin receptor activator for peptide 6 (TRAP-6) were calculated by whole blood multi-electrode aggregometry (MEA) assay. Platelet aggregation was continuously recorded for 5 minutes and quantified as area under the aggregation curve, measured in aggregation units*minutes (AU*min).|Baseline, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||aggregation units*minutes (AU*min)||Standard Deviation|Mean
824771|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TVF Rate in Dual Vessel Treated Subgroup|ID-TVF rate in Patients with dual vessel treated during the index procedure.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824731|NCT01178099|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Platelet Reactivity Index (PRI) of Prasugrel at Day 12|PRI was calculated by vasodilator-associated phosphoprotein (VASP) phosphorylation assay using flow cytometry (FC) and a VASP assay using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The PRI indicates the level of P2Y12 inhibition. A low PRI reflects strong inhibition of P2Y12, whereas a high PRI reflects weak/absent inhibition of P2Y12.|Baseline, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||percentage PRI||Standard Deviation|Mean
824732|NCT01178099|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) Device Reported P2Y12 Percent Inhibition at Day 12|PRU device reported VerifyNow percent inhibition is reported by Accumetrics VerifyNow™ P2Y12 (VN-P2Y12) assay, a point-of-care device that measures platelet aggregation with single-use, disposable cartridges.|Baseline, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||percent inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
824733|NCT01178099|Secondary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Prasugrel's Inactive Metabolites, R-95913, R-106583, and R-119251|Cmax was observed from the data and used to calculate geometric Least Squares (LS) Means. The log-transformed Cmax was analyzed with a mixed effect model with dose, population, dose*population interaction as fixed effects, and participant as a random effect.|Day 1, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824734|NCT01178099|Secondary|Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation (IPA) to 20 Micromolar (µM) Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) at Day 12|"IPA is calculated as a percent decrease of maximum platelet aggregation (MPA) from baseline using the following formula:
([MPA at baseline – MPA postbaseline] / MPA at baseline) x 100%"|Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||percent inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
824735|NCT01178099|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Residual Platelet Aggregation (RPA) to 20 Micromolar (µM) Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) at Day 12|RPA is the percentage aggregation as measured by light transmission aggregometry (LTA) at 6 minutes after the addition of 20 μM ADP. LTA is an assay that measures platelet aggregation by determining the amount of light transmitted through a cuvette containing the platelet-rich plasma stimulated with a platelet activator, such as ADP, relative to platelet-poor plasma (100% light transmittance).|Baseline, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||percent aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
824736|NCT01178099|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Maximum Platelet Aggregation (MPA) to 20 Micromolar (µM) Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) at Day 12|MPA to 20 μM ADP was assessed by light transmission aggregometry (LTA), an assay that measures platelet aggregation by determining the amount of light transmitted through a cuvette containing the platelet-rich plasma stimulated with a platelet activator, such as ADP, relative to platelet-poor plasma (100% light transmittance). The LTA results were collected as MPA, for which low values indicate strong platelet inhibition.|Baseline, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||percent aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
824737|NCT01178099|Secondary|Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation (IPA) to 5 Micromolar (µM) Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) at Day 12|"IPA is calculated as a percent decrease of maximum platelet aggregation (MPA) from baseline using the following formula:
([MPA at baseline – MPA postbaseline] / MPA at baseline) x 100%"|Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||percent inhibition||Standard Deviation|Mean
824738|NCT01178099|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Residual Platelet Aggregation (RPA) to 5 Micromolar (µM) Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) at Day 12|RPA is the percentage aggregation as measured by LTA at 6 minutes after the addition of 5 μM ADP. LTA is an assay that measures platelet aggregation by determining the amount of light transmitted through a cuvette containing the platelet-rich plasma stimulated with a platelet activator, such as ADP, relative to platelet-poor plasma (100% light transmittance).|Baseline, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||percent aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
824739|NCT01178099|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve (AUC) From Time of Dosing Through the Sampling Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration [AUC(0-tlast)] of Prasugrel’s Inactive Metabolites, R-95913, R-106583, and R-119251|AUC was calculated through the sampling time of the last quantifiable plasma concentration [AUC(0-tlast)]. Geometric Least Squares (LS) Means were obtained. The log-transformed AUC was analyzed with a mixed effect model with dose, population, dose*population interaction as fixed effects, and participant as a random effect.|Day 1, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||nanogram*hour per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824740|NCT01178099|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Maximum Platelet Aggregation (MPA) to 5 Micromolar (µM) Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) at Day 12|MPA to 5 μM ADP was assessed by light transmission aggregometry (LTA), an assay that measures platelet aggregation by determining the amount of light transmitted through a cuvette containing the platelet-rich plasma stimulated with a platelet activator, such as ADP, relative to platelet-poor plasma (100% light transmittance). The LTA results were collected as MPA, for which low values indicate strong platelet inhibition.|Baseline, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||percent aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
824772|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TVF Rate in Single Vessel Treated Subgroup|ID-TVF rate in Patients with single vessels treated during the index procedure.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824741|NCT01178099|Primary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Prasugrel's Active Metabolite, R-138727|Cmax was observed from the data and used to calculate Geometric Least Squares (LS) Means. The log-transformed Cmax was analyzed with a mixed effect model with dose, population, dose*population interaction as fixed effects, and participant as a random effect.|Day 1, Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824742|NCT01178099|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve (AUC) From Time of Dosing Through the Sampling Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration [AUC(0-tlast)] for Prasugrel’s Active Metabolite, R-138727|The AUC of Prasugrel's active metabolite, R-138727, was calculated through the sampling time of the last quantifiable plasma concentration [AUC(0-tlast)]. Geometric Least Squares (LS) Means were obtained. The log-transformed AUC was analyzed with a mixed effect model with dose, population, dose*population interaction as fixed effects, and participant as a random effect.|Time of dosing up to 8 hours post-dose on Day 1 and Day 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug and have evaluable data, excluding participants with an adverse event (AE) of vomiting that occurred at or before 4-hours postdose.||nanogram*hour per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824743|NCT01178125|Secondary|Percentage of On-Drug Pregnancies in Compliant-Use, by Body Mass Index (BMI) Decile Groups Using the 7-Day Rule|Crude pregnancy rate is defined as the percentage of on-drug pregnancies per number of participants in each body mass index (BMI) decile (BMI range, in kg/m^2). The 7-day rule is a standardized process for calculating pregnancy rates. Seven-day rule: a pregnancy was considered “on drug” if the date of conception was on or after the date of first dose of investigational product (IP), but no more than 7 days after the last tablet was taken; last tablet included combination hormonal or EE tablets. Compliant use: did not skip 2 or more consecutive pills, had an overall compliance with IP administration of at least 80%, and did not use a prohibited medication.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. 'Compliant-use' set included PITT participants who completed at least 1 28-day cycle and in which no other BCMs were used, and who were deemed to be compliant, per protocol. n=number of participants in BMI decile group.||percentage of pregnancies|||Number
824744|NCT01178125|Secondary|Percentage of On-Drug Pregnancies in Typical-Use, by Body Mass Index (BMI) Decile Groups Using the 7-Day Rule|Crude pregnancy rate is defined as the percentage of on-drug pregnancies per number of participants in each body mass index (BMI) decile (BMI range, in kg/m^2). The 7-day rule is a standardized process for calculating pregnancy rates. Seven-day rule: a pregnancy was considered “on drug” if the date of conception was on or after the date of first dose of investigational product (IP), but no more than 7 days after the last tablet was taken; last tablet included combination hormonal or EE tablets.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. The 'Typical-use' set included PITT participants who completed at least one 28-day cycle and in which no other birth control method (BCM), including condoms, were used. n=number of participants in BMI decile group.||percentage of pregnancies|||Number
824745|NCT01178125|Secondary|Percentage of On-Drug Pregnancies in All Users, by Body Mass Index (BMI) Decile Groups Using the 7-Day Rule|Crude pregnancy rate is defined as the percentage of on-drug pregnancies per number of participants in each body mass index (BMI) decile (BMI range, in kg/m^2). The 7-day rule is a standardized process for calculating pregnancy rates. Seven-day rule: a pregnancy was considered “on drug” if the date of conception was on or after the date of first dose of investigational product (IP), but no more than 7 days after the last tablet was taken; last tablet included combination hormonal or EE tablets.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. The 'All Users' set included PITT participants who completed at least one 28-day cycle. n=number of participants in BMI decile group.||percentage of pregnancies|||Number
824746|NCT01178125|Secondary|Percentage of On-Drug Pregnancies in Compliant-Use, by Body Weight Decile Groups Using the 7-Day Rule|Crude pregnancy rate is defined as the percentage of on-drug pregnancies per number of participants in each body weight decile (weight range, in kilograms). The 7-day rule is a standardized process for calculating pregnancy rates. Seven-day rule: a pregnancy was considered “on drug” if the date of conception was on or after the date of first dose of investigational product (IP), but no more than 7 days after the last tablet was taken; last tablet included combination hormonal or EE tablets. Compliant use: did not skip 2 or more consecutive pills, had an overall compliance with IP administration of at least 80%, and did not use a prohibited medication.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. 'Compliant-use' set included PITT participants who completed at least 1 28-day cycle in which no other BCMs were used, and who were deemed to be compliant, per protocol. n=number of participants in body weight decile group.||percentage of pregnancies|||Number
824747|NCT01178125|Secondary|Percentage of On-Drug Pregnancies in Typical-Use, by Body Weight Decile Groups Using the 7-Day Rule|Crude pregnancy rate is defined as the percentage of on-drug pregnancies per number of participants in each body weight decile (weight range, in kilograms). The 7-day rule is a standardized process for calculating pregnancy rates. Seven-day rule: a pregnancy was considered “on drug” if the date of conception was on or after the date of first dose of investigational product (IP), but no more than 7 days after the last tablet was taken; last tablet included combination hormonal or EE tablets.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. The 'Typical-use' set included PITT participants who completed at least one 28-day cycle and in which no other birth control method (BCM), including condoms, were used. n=number of participants in body weight decile group.||percentage of pregnancies|||Number
824773|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TVF Rate in Dual Lesion Treated Subgroup|ID-TVF rate in Patients with dual lesion treated during the index procedure|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824774|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TVF Rate in Single Lesion Treated Subgroup|ID-TVF rate in Patients with single lesion treated during the index procedure|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824748|NCT01178125|Secondary|Percentage of On-Drug Pregnancies in All Users, by Body Weight Decile Groups Using the 7-Day Rule|Crude pregnancy rate is defined as the percentage of on-drug pregnancies per number of participants in each body weight decile (weight range, in kilograms). The 7-day rule is a standardized process for calculating pregnancy rates. Seven-day rule: a pregnancy was considered “on drug” if the date of conception was on or after the date of first dose of investigational product (IP), but no more than 7 days after the last tablet was taken; last tablet included combination hormonal or EE tablets.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. The 'All Users' set included PITT participants who completed at least one 28-day cycle. n=number of participants in the body weight decile group.||percentage of pregnancies|||Number
824749|NCT01178125|Secondary|Compliant-Use Life-Table Estimates of Pregnancy Rates Based on 28-Day Cycles and Broken Out by Subpopulations Defined by Participant Weight|A life table approach was used to estimate the cumulative pregnancy rate on a cycle-by-cycle basis for each of the thirteen 28-day treatment cycles. Compliant use: did not skip 2 or more consecutive pills, had an overall compliance with IP administration of at least 80%, and did not use a prohibited medication.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. The 'Compliant-use' set included PITT participants who completed at least one 28-day cycle and in which no other BCMs, including condoms, were used, and who were deemed to be compliant, per protocol.||pregnancies / cumulative exposure||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824750|NCT01178125|Primary|Compliant-Use Pregnancy Rates Based on Pearl Index (PI) Analyses for 28-Day Cycles and Broken Out by Subpopulations Defined by Participant Weight, Using the 7-Day Rule|Contraceptive failure is measured by the pregnancy rate calculated using the Pearl Index (PI) and the 7-day rule (a standardized process for calculating pregnancy rates). PI used all pregnancies, as determined by a positive urine and/or serum pregnancy test, except those for which the date of conception was before starting DR-102 or > 7 days after stopping the combination DSG/EE or EE treatment of DR-102.The PI is defined as number of contraceptive failures per 100 women-years of exposure: (100)*(total number of pregnancies)*(13)/(total number of 28-day cycles). Seven-day rule: a pregnancy was considered “on drug” if the date of conception was on or after the date of first dose of investigational product (IP), but no more than 7 days after the last tablet was taken; last tablet included combination hormonal or EE tablets. Compliant use: did not skip 2 or more consecutive pills, had an overall compliance with IP administration of at least 80%, and did not use a prohibited medication.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. 'Compliant-use' set included PITT participants who completed at least one 28-day cycle and in which no other birth control method (BCM), including condoms, were used, and who were deemed to be compliant, per protocol.||pregnancies / 100 woman years exposure|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
824751|NCT01178125|Primary|Typical-Use Pregnancy Rates Based on Pearl Index (PI) Analyses for 28-Day Cycles and Broken Out by Subpopulations Defined by Participant Weight, Using the 7-Day Rule|Contraceptive failure is measured by the pregnancy rate calculated using the Pearl Index (PI) and the 7-day rule (a standardized process for calculating pregnancy rates). PI used all pregnancies, as determined by a positive urine and/or serum pregnancy test, except those for which the date of conception was before starting DR-102 or > 7 days after stopping the combination DSG/EE or EE treatment of DR-102.The PI is defined as number of contraceptive failures per 100 women-years of exposure: (100)*(total number of pregnancies)*(13)/(total number of 28-day cycles). Seven-day rule: a pregnancy was considered “on drug” if the date of conception was on or after the date of first dose of investigational product (IP), but no more than 7 days after the last tablet was taken; last tablet included combination hormonal or EE tablets.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. The 'Typical-use' set included PITT participants who completed at least one 28-day cycle and in which no other birth control method (BCM), including condoms, were used.||pregnancies / 100 woman years exposure|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
824752|NCT01178125|Secondary|All Users Life-Table Estimates of Pregnancy Rates Based on 28-Day Cycles and Broken Out by Subpopulations Defined by Participant Weight|A life table approach was used to estimate the cumulative pregnancy rate on a cycle-by-cycle basis for each of the thirteen 28-day treatment cycles.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. The 'All Users' set included PITT participants who completed at least one 28-day cycle.||pregnancies / cumulative exposure||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824753|NCT01178125|Other Pre-specified|Endometrial Biopsy Classification Results for Endometrial Tissue/Glands at Baseline and Endpoint|A subset of study participants agreed to have baseline and endpoint (Week 51/Early Withdrawal) endometrial biopsies. Results were provided for assessment of endometrial tissue/glands. Atrophic: scant or moderate amount of tissue, consists of tiny strips and wisps of surface endometrium or small tubular glands with scant or absent luminal secretions. Inactive: tubular glands lined by epithelial cells with mild pseudostratified and elongated nuclei. Proliferative: tubular or elongated glands lined by cells with elongated, dense, pseudostratified nuclei. Secretory: glands are tortuous or coiled with subnuclear vacuolation, secretion, and intraluminal tufts. Hyperplasia: proliferative type of glands showing glandular crowding with irregular shapes and sizes of enlargement, budding, and branching. Menstrual: glandular and stromal breakdown with fibrin thrombi in small vessels, condensed and collapsed stroma, and necrotic debris.|Baseline (at Enrollment), Endpoint (Week 51/Early Withdrawal)|Subset of participants with sufficient tissue at both Baseline and Endpoint biopsies.||participants|||Number
824775|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TVF Rate in Patients Without Diabetic Disease|ID-TVF rate in Non Diabetes|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824776|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TVF Rate in Patients With Diabetic Disease|ID-TVF rate in All Diabetes patients.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824777|NCT01178268|Secondary|Acute Gain||post procedure on 0 day|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||Millimeter|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
824778|NCT01178268|Secondary|Percent Diameter Stenosis (%DS)||post procedure on 0 day|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||Percent Diameter stenosis|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
824754|NCT01178125|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Deaths, and Discontinuations Due to AEs|AEs summarized are those that began or worsened after treatment with investigational product (IP). An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a subject or clinical investigation subject participating in a clinical study and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment or clinical study. Severity of AEs was assessed as mild, moderate or severe. A severe AE was defined as incapacitating, with inability to perform usual activity. An AE was defined as treatment-related when there is reasonable possibility that the AE was caused by or attributed to the IP and/or a causal relationship cannot be ruled out. An SAE was defined as one that meets any one of the following criteria: fatal or life-threatening; requires or prolongs in-patient hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly/birth defect; important medical event.|Serious adverse Event (SAE) reporting period began upon signed informed consent and ended at the Final Study or the Early Withdrawal Visit. AEs were reported at each study visit (Weeks 0 through Week 53). Treatment duration with IP was up to one year.|Safety population (received at least 1 dose of DR-102)||participants|||Number
824755|NCT01178125|Primary|All Users Pregnancy Rates Based on Pearl Index (PI) Analyses for 28-Day Cycles and Broken Out by Subpopulations Defined by Participant Weight, Using the 7-Day Rule|Contraceptive failure is measured by the pregnancy rate calculated using the Pearl Index (PI) and the 7-day rule (a standardized process for calculating pregnancy rates). PI used all pregnancies, as determined by a positive urine and/or serum pregnancy test, except those for which the date of conception was before starting DR-102 or > 7 days after stopping the combination desogestrel/ethinyl estradiol (DSG/EE) or ethinyl estradiol (EE) treatment of DR-102.The PI is defined as number of contraceptive failures per 100 women-years of exposure: (100)*(total number of pregnancies)*(13)/(total number of 28-day cycles). Seven-day rule: a pregnancy was considered “on drug” if the date of conception was on or after the date of first dose of investigational product (IP), but no more than 7 days after the last tablet was taken; last tablet included combination hormonal or EE tablets.|thirteen 28-day cycles|Pregnancy Intent-to-Treat Population (PITT) of participants who were 18 to 35 years of age, inclusive, at the Screening Visit. The 'All Users' set included PITT participants who completed at least one 28-day cycle.||pregnancies / 100 woman years exposure|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
824756|NCT01178138|Primary|Blood Pressure Effects of Prazosin on Methamphetamine|"Blood pressure effects of prazosin on methamphetamine;
In each session, each subject received prazosin (1 or 2 mg) or prazosin placebo. The blood pressure was measured. Then, one hour later, methamphetamine placebo or methamphetamine (20mg) was given and the blood pressure was measured again."|0 hr time point after prazosin and 1 hr time point after methamphetamine|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824757|NCT01178138|Primary|Heart Effects of Prazosin on Methamphetamine|"Heart effects of prazosin on methamphetamine;
In each session, each subject received prazosin (1 or 2 mg) or prazosin placebo. The heart rate was measured. Then, one hour later, methamphetamine placebo or methamphetamine (20mg) was given and the heart rate was measured again."|0 hr time point after prazosin and 1 hr time point after methamphetamine|||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
824758|NCT01178138|Primary|Self-report Effects of High.|"Visual analog scales measuring effects prazosin on methamphetamine; change in methamphetamine high. Visual analog scales allow the subject to give a rating of methamphetamine effects. For instance, how high the dose makes you . The study tested how much prazosin changed the effects of methamphetamine as measured by these visual analog scales.
Visual analog scale is a 100 mm scale, ranging from 0 (no effect) to 100 (maximum effect).
In each session, each subject received prazosin (1 or 2 mg) or prazosin placebo. The visual analog scale was measured. Then, one hour later, methamphetamine placebo or methamphetamine (20mg) was given and the visual analog scale was measured again."|0 hr time point after prazosin and 1 hr time point after methamphetamine|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824759|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TLR Rate in Dual Vessel Treated Subgroup|Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization rate in Patients with dual vessel treated during the index procedure.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824760|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TLR Rate in Single Vessel Treated Subgroup|Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization rate in Patients with single vessels treated during the index procedure.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824761|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TLR Rate in Dual Lesion Treated Subgroup|Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization rate in Patients with dual lesion treated during the index procedure|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824762|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TLR Rate in Single Lesion Treated Subgroup|Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization rate in Patients with single lesion treated during the index procedure|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824763|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TLR Rate in Patients Without Diabetic Disease|Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization rate in Non Diabetes|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824764|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|ID-TLR Rate in Patients With Diabetic Disease.|Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization rate in All Diabetes patients.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824765|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|The Composite of ST, All Death, and All MI Rate in Dual Vessel Treated Subgroup|The composite of ST, all death, and all MI rate in Patients with dual vessel treated during the index procedure.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824766|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|The Composite of ST, All Death, and All MI Rate in Single Vessel Treated Subgroup|The composite of ST, all death, and all MI rate in Patients with single vessels treated during the index procedure.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824767|NCT01178268|Other Pre-specified|The Composite of ST, All Death, and All MI Rate in Dual Lesion Treated Subgroup|The composite of ST, all death, and all MI rate in Patients with dual lesion treated during the index procedure|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824787|NCT01178268|Secondary|XIENCE V EECSS Excellent Overall Performance and Deliverability Using the XIENCE V EECSS Performance Evaluation Questionnaire|A related secondary performance goal for XIENCE V EECSS is the physician-determined evaluation of acute performance, deliverability, and resource utilization. XIENCE V EECSS acute performance and deliverability were determined using the XIENCE V EECSS Performance Evaluation Questionnaire. Possible responses included strongly agree,moderately agree, agree, moderately disagree, and strongly disagree. Study physicians who enrolled patients into the study were reported for this outcome measure.|During the procedure|||percentage of participants|||Number
824788|NCT01178268|Secondary|Fluoroscopy Time|This is the procedure related endpoint.|On day 0, during the procedure.|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Median
824789|NCT01178268|Secondary|Amount of Contrast Used|Defined as total amount used from insertion of the first guiding catheter until removal of the last guiding catheter.|On day 0, during the procedure.|||Milliliter||Standard Deviation|Median
824790|NCT01178268|Secondary|Procedure Time|This is the procedure related endpoint. Procedure time is defined as time between insertion of the first guiding catheter until removal of the last guiding catheter.|On day 0, during the procedure.|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Median
824791|NCT01178268|Secondary|Acute Procedure Success|Per-protocol procedure success is defined as the achievement of a final in-stent DS of < 50% (by online QCA or visual estimation), using the assigned device and with any adjunctive devices, and occurring without cardiac death, MI (including Q-wave or non–Q-wave), or repeat revascularization of the target lesion during the hospital stay.|< or = 1 day|||percentage of participants|||Number
824792|NCT01178268|Secondary|Acute Device Success|Per-protocol device success is defined as the achievement of a final in-stent residual diameter stenosis (DS) of < 50% by Quantitative Coronary Angiography (QCA), using only the assigned device, and occurring without a device malfunction.|< or = 1 day|||percentage of participants|Participants||Number
824793|NCT01178268|Secondary|Patient Compliance With Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT)||24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824794|NCT01178268|Secondary|Patient Compliance With Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT)||12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824795|NCT01178268|Secondary|Patient Compliance With Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT)||9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824796|NCT01178268|Secondary|Patient Compliance With Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT)||6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824797|NCT01178268|Secondary|Patient Compliance With Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT)||30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824798|NCT01178268|Secondary|Definite / Probable Stent Thrombosis|Stent Thrombosis was adjudicated using Academic Research Consortium (ARC) criteria. Definite Stent Thrombosis defined as angiographic confirmation with at least one of the following: acute onset of ischemic symptoms at rest, new ischemic changes suggestive of acute ischemia, typical rise and fall of cardiac biomarkers; pathological confirmation of ST through either autopsy or tissue examination following thrombectomy. Probable Stent Thrombosis defined as any unexplained death within the first 30 days or, irrespective of the time after the index procedure, any MI related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the stent without angiographic confirmation.|Overall (0 - 772 days)|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824799|NCT01178268|Secondary|Definite / Probable Stent Thrombosis|Stent Thrombosis was adjudicated using Academic Research Consortium (ARC) criteria. Definite Stent Thrombosis defined as angiographic confirmation with at least one of the following: acute onset of ischemic symptoms at rest, new ischemic changes suggestive of acute ischemia, typical rise and fall of cardiac biomarkers; pathological confirmation of ST through either autopsy or tissue examination following thrombectomy. Probable Stent Thrombosis defined as any unexplained death within the first 30 days or, irrespective of the time after the index procedure, any MI related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the stent without angiographic confirmation.|Very late (366 – 772 days)|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824800|NCT01178268|Secondary|Definite / Probable Stent Thrombosis|Stent Thrombosis was adjudicated using Academic Research Consortium (ARC) criteria. Definite Stent Thrombosis defined as angiographic confirmation with at least one of the following: acute onset of ischemic symptoms at rest, new ischemic changes suggestive of acute ischemia, typical rise and fall of cardiac biomarkers; pathological confirmation of ST through either autopsy or tissue examination following thrombectomy. Probable Stent Thrombosis defined as any unexplained death within the first 30 days or, irrespective of the time after the index procedure, any MI related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the stent without angiographic confirmation.|Late (31 – 365 days)|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824801|NCT01178268|Secondary|Definite / Probable Stent Thrombosis|Stent Thrombosis was adjudicated using Academic Research Consortium (ARC) criteria. Definite Stent Thrombosis defined as angiographic confirmation with at least one of the following: acute onset of ischemic symptoms at rest, new ischemic changes suggestive of acute ischemia, typical rise and fall of cardiac biomarkers; pathological confirmation of ST through either autopsy or tissue examination following thrombectomy. Probable Stent Thrombosis defined as any unexplained death within the first 30 days or, irrespective of the time after the index procedure, any MI related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the stent without angiographic confirmation.|Early (0 – 30 days)|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824802|NCT01178268|Secondary|Definite / Probable Stent Thrombosis|Stent Thrombosis was adjudicated using Academic Research Consortium (ARC) criteria. Definite Stent Thrombosis defined as angiographic confirmation with at least one of the following: acute onset of ischemic symptoms at rest, new ischemic changes suggestive of acute ischemia, typical rise and fall of cardiac biomarkers; pathological confirmation of ST through either autopsy or tissue examination following thrombectomy. Probable Stent Thrombosis defined as any unexplained death within the first 30 days or, irrespective of the time after the index procedure, any MI related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the stent without angiographic confirmation.|Subacute (1 – 30 days)|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824803|NCT01178268|Secondary|Definite / Probable Stent Thrombosis|Stent Thrombosis was adjudicated using Academic Research Consortium (ARC) criteria. Definite Stent Thrombosis defined as angiographic confirmation with at least one of the following: acute onset of ischemic symptoms at rest, new ischemic changes suggestive of acute ischemia, typical rise and fall of cardiac biomarkers; pathological confirmation of ST through either autopsy or tissue examination following thrombectomy. Probable Stent Thrombosis defined as any unexplained death within the first 30 days or, irrespective of the time after the index procedure, any MI related to documented acute ischemia in the territory of the stent without angiographic confirmation.|Acute (<1 day)|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824804|NCT01178268|Secondary|Major Bleeding Complications|Secondary safety endpoint.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824805|NCT01178268|Secondary|Major Bleeding Complications|Secondary safety endpoint.|12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824806|NCT01178268|Secondary|Major Bleeding Complications|Secondary safety endpoint.|9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824807|NCT01178268|Secondary|Major Bleeding Complications|Secondary safety endpoint.|6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824808|NCT01178268|Secondary|Major Bleeding Complications|Secondary safety endpoint.|30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824809|NCT01178268|Secondary|Target Vessel Protocol MI (TV-MI)|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824810|NCT01178268|Secondary|Target Vessel Protocol MI (TV-MI)|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint.|12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824811|NCT01178268|Secondary|Target Vessel Protocol MI (TV-MI)|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint.|9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824812|NCT01178268|Secondary|Target Vessel Protocol MI (TV-MI)|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint.|6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824813|NCT01178268|Secondary|Target Vessel Protocol MI (TV-MI)|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint.|30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824814|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Protocol MI (Including Q-wave or Non–Q-wave)|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824815|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Protocol MI (Including Q-wave or Non–Q-wave)|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint.|12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824816|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Protocol MI (Including Q-wave or Non–Q-wave)|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint.|9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824817|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Protocol MI (Including Q-wave or Non–Q-wave)|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint.|6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824818|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Protocol MI (Including Q-wave or Non–Q-wave)|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint.|30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824819|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Death|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint. All Death includes cardiac, vascular, non-cardiovascular.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824820|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Death|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint. All Death includes cardiac, vascular, non-cardiovascular.|12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824821|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Death|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint. All Death includes cardiac, vascular, non-cardiovascular.|9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824822|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Death|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint. All Death includes cardiac, vascular, non-cardiovascular.|6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824823|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Death|This is one of the secondary safety endpoint. All Death includes cardiac, vascular, non-cardiovascular.|30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824824|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Revascularization (TLR, TVR, and Non-TVR)|One of the Secondary Safety Endpoint was all revascularization rates (target lesion, target vessel, non-target lesion, and non-target vessel) (PCI and CABG).|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824825|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Revascularization (TLR, TVR, and Non-TVR)||12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824826|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Revascularization (TLR, TVR, and Non-TVR)||9 Months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824827|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Revascularization (TLR, TVR, and Non-TVR)||6 Months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824828|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Revascularization (TLR, TVR, and Non-TVR)||30 Days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824829|NCT01178268|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiac Event (Cardiac Death, All MI and TLR)||24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824830|NCT01178268|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiac Event (Cardiac Death, All MI and TLR)||12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824839|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Death(Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular), All MI, All Revascularization (TLR, TVR, and Non-TVR) (PCI and CABG)|This is one of the Secondary Composite Endpoint. All death(cardiac, vascular and non-cardiovascular), all MI, all revascularization [(target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-target lesion revascularization(TVR) [Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and Coronary artery bypass graft(CABG)].|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824840|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Death(Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular), All MI, All Revascularization (TLR, TVR, and Non-TVR) (PCI and CABG)|This is one of the Secondary Composite Endpoint. All death(cardiac, vascular and non-cardiovascular), all MI, all revascularization [(target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-target lesion revascularization(TVR) [Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and Coronary artery bypass graft(CABG)].|12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824841|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Death(Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular), All MI, All Revascularization (TLR, TVR, and Non-TVR) (PCI and CABG)|This is one of the Secondary Composite Endpoint. All death(cardiac, vascular and non-cardiovascular), all MI, all revascularization [(target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-target lesion revascularization(TVR) [Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and Coronary artery bypass graft(CABG)].|9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824842|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Death(Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular), All MI, All Revascularization (TLR, TVR, and Non-TVR) (PCI and CABG)|This is one of the Secondary Composite Endpoint. All death(cardiac, vascular and non-cardiovascular), all MI, all revascularization [(target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-target lesion revascularization(TVR) [Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and Coronary artery bypass graft(CABG)].|6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824843|NCT01178268|Secondary|All Death(Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular), All MI, All Revascularization (TLR, TVR, and Non-TVR) (PCI and CABG)|This is one of the Secondary Composite Endpoint. All death(cardiac, vascular and non-cardiovascular), all MI, all revascularization [(target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-target lesion revascularization(TVR) [Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and Coronary artery bypass graft(CABG)].|30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824844|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of Cardiac Death and MI (Including Q-wave and Non–Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel (TV)||24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824845|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of Cardiac Death and MI (Including Q-wave and Non–Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel (TV)||12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824846|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of Cardiac Death and MI (Including Q-wave and Non–Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel (TV)||9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824847|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of Cardiac Death and MI (Including Q-wave and Non–Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel (TV)||6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824848|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of Cardiac Death and MI (Including Q-wave and Non–Q-wave) Attributed to the Target Vessel (TV)||30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824849|NCT01178268|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Lesion Failure (ID-TLF)|This is one of the Secondary Composite Endpoints.|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824850|NCT01178268|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Lesion Failure (ID-TLF)|This is one of the Secondary Composite Endpoints.|12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824851|NCT01178268|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Lesion Failure (ID-TLF)|This is one of the Secondary Composite Endpoints.|9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824852|NCT01178268|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Lesion Failure (ID-TLF)|Incidence of composite of cardiac death, MI attributed to the TV and ID-TLR|6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824853|NCT01178268|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Lesion Failure (ID-TLF)|Incidence of composite of cardiac death, MI attributed to the TV and ID-TLR|30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824854|NCT01178268|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Lesion Revascularization (ID-TLR) (Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft [CABG])|The is the major Secondary Efficacy Endpoint.|12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824855|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of Stent Thrombosis (ST)(Definite and Probable), All Death (Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular), and All MI (Including Q-wave and Non–Q-wave)||24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824856|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of Stent Thrombosis (ST)(Definite and Probable), All Death (Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular), and All MI (Including Q-wave and Non–Q-wave)||9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824857|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of Stent Thrombosis (ST)(Definite and Probable), All Death (Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular), and All MI (Including Q-wave and Non–Q-wave).||6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824858|NCT01178268|Secondary|Incidence of Composite of Stent Thrombosis (ST)(Definite and Probable), All Death (Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular), and All MI (Including Q-wave and Non–Q-wave).||30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824859|NCT01178268|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Vessel Failure (ID-TVF)|Incidence of composite of cardiac death, all MI (including Q-wave and non– Q-wave), and ID target vessel revascularization (ID-TVR) (TLR and non-TLR in the TV [PCI and CABG])|24 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824860|NCT01178268|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Vessel Failure (ID-TVF)|Incidence of composite of cardiac death, all MI (including Q-wave and non– Q-wave), and ID target vessel revascularization (ID-TVR) (TLR and non-TLR in the TV [PCI and CABG])|9 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824861|NCT01178268|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Vessel Failure (ID-TVF)|Incidence of composite of cardiac death, all MI (including Q-wave and non– Q-wave), and ID target vessel revascularization (ID-TVR) (TLR and non-TLR in the TV [PCI and CABG]).|6 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824862|NCT01178268|Secondary|Ischemia-driven Target Vessel Failure (ID-TVF)|Incidence of composite of cardiac death, all MI (including Q-wave and non– Q-wave), and ID target vessel revascularization (ID-TVR) (TLR and non-TLR in the TV [PCI and CABG])|30 days|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants|||Number
824863|NCT01178268|Primary|Incidence of Composite of ST (Definite and Probable), All Death (Cardiac, Vascular and Non-cardiovascular), and All MI (Including Q-wave and Non–Q-wave)|The primary composite safety endpoint was the incidence of the composite of ST (definite and probable), all death (cardiac, vascular and non-cardiovascular), and all MI (including Q-wave and non–Q-wave).|12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824864|NCT01178268|Primary|Ischemia-driven Target Vessel Failure (ID-TVF)|This is the primary efficacy endpoint. Ischemia-driven target vessel failure is defined as the composite of cardiac death, all myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (ID-TVR).|12 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824865|NCT01178268|Primary|In-stent Late Loss (LL)|"This is the primary angiographic endpoint.
In-stent LL: The difference between the minimum lumen diameter (MLD) immediately after stent deployment and the MLD at follow-up (within stent)"|>=13 months|The number of participants with angiographic follow up available was analysed.||Millimeter|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
824866|NCT01178281|Secondary|Overall Survival|The time from randomization to the death or to the latest date when participants are known to be alive.|Up to 2.5 years||08/2018||||
824867|NCT01178281|Secondary|Frequency of Adverse Events|An Adverse Event (AE) is any noxious, unintended or untoward medical occurrence that may appear or worsen in a participant during the course of a study.|Up to 2.5 years||08/2018||||
824868|NCT01178281|Secondary|FACT-Anemia Quality of Life Questionaire|The FACT-An questionnaire is a cancer-specific questionnaire measuring the four general domains of quality-of-life and an additional anemia questionnaire.|Up to treatment discontinuation||08/2018||||
824869|NCT01178281|Secondary|Euro QOL 5 Dimension Questionaire|The EQ-5D is a standardized instrument that measures health outcomes for a wide range of health conditions.|Up to treatment discontinuation||08/2018||||
824870|NCT01178281|Secondary|Healthcare Resource Utilization|"Characterization of medical resource utilization among participants treated with pomalidomide as compared to subjects receiving placebo treatment.
Information on the length of each hospitalization and other major outpatient resource use will be collected at designated study visits, including major diagnostic procedures and other interventions such as those required for transfusions or for treatment-related adverse events. Additionally, information on major categories of concomitant medications (eg., use of G-CSF, intravenous antibiotics, anti-virals, iron chelation) will be obtained."|Every 28 days||08/2018||||
824871|NCT01178281|Secondary|Time to Becoming RBC-transfusion-independent|Number of days from randomization to achieving RBC transfusion independence as assessed every 28 days.|Up to 2.5 years||08/2018||||
824872|NCT01178281|Secondary|Duration of RBC-transfusion Independence|Number of days from randomization to achieving RBC transfusion independence as assessed every 28 days.|Up to 2.5 years||08/2018||||
824873|NCT01178281|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Red Blood Cell (RBC) Transfusion Independence|"Defined as the absence of intravenous RBC transfusions for any consecutive rolling 84 day interval (i.e. days 1 to 84, days 2 to 85 etc) before Day 169 visit. A responder is: a. One who received at least two RBC transfusions on/after the first dose of study drug, and at least one ≥ 84 days between two consecutive RBC-transfusions; b. One who received at least one RBC transfusion after the first dose of study drug and no RBC transfusion at the first study drug day, and the time interval between the first dose of study drug and the RBC transfusion date is ≥ 84 days; c. One who received at least one RBC transfusion on/after the first dose of study drug and the time interval between the last RBC transfusion and the last transfusion assessment date is ≥ 84 days; d. One who did not receive any RBC transfusions on and after the first dose of study drug, and the time interval between the first dose of study drug and the date of the last transfusion assessment is ≥ 84 days"|168 days|Intent to Treat Population (ITT) includes all participants that were randomized to either of the two study drugs, regardless of whether or not any study drug was actually taken.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826070|NCT01195701|Secondary|Total Testosterone|Free & total testosterone, and the calculated free androgen index will be compared; additionally, these levels will be correlated with the questionnaire data and clitoral measurements|Between day 1-14 (follicular phase) of menstrual cycle|||ng/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
824892|NCT01178333|Secondary|Time to Platelet Recovery, Among Subjects With a Low Platelet Count When the Positive PF4 Antibody Test Was Drawn||From the time that the nadir platelet count was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||days||Standard Error|Mean
824893|NCT01178333|Secondary|Use of Treatment (Non-heparin Anticoagulant) Used at the Time of Discharge||From the time that the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||participants|||Number
824894|NCT01178333|Primary|Time to Occurrence of a Composite Triple Endpoint Consisting of Death, Limb Amputation/Gangrene, and New Thrombosis|The median survival time is reported by each group for the time to occurrence of a composite triple endpoint consisting of death, limb amputation/gangrene, and new thrombosis.|From the time that the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge or day 45, whichever occurred first.|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824895|NCT01178333|Primary|Time to Occurrence of a Composite Triple Endpoint Consisting of Death, Limb Amputation/Gangrene, and New Thrombosis|The mean time to an event is estimated by the area under the survival function. If the largest time is an event time, then the survival function goes to zero at that time, and the mean survival estimate is finite. Otherwise, the mean time cannot be estimated and may lead to a bias.|From the time that the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge or day 45, whichever occurred first.|||days||Standard Error|Mean
824896|NCT01178333|Secondary|Use of Treatment (Non-heparin Anticoagulant) Used in Hospital|Types of treatment (direct thrombin inhibitor, fondaparinux, warfarin, no treatment) provided to subjects in hospital|From the time that the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||participants|||Number
824897|NCT01178333|Secondary|Relationship of the Heparin PF-4 Antibody Titer to the Primary Endpoint|Heparin PF-4 OD test results were the dichotomous outcome (<1.0 vs. >=1.0). Primary endpoint was the composite endpoint of death, limb amputation/gangrene, or new thrombosis.|From the time the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||participants|||Number
824898|NCT01178333|Secondary|Relationship of the Heparin PF-4 Antibody Titer to the Degree of Thrombocytopenia|Heparin PF-4 optical density (OD) test results were the dichotomous outcome (<1.0 vs. >=1.0). Nadir Platelet Count (x10^9 / L) was used for the degree of thrombocytopenia. The Heparin PF-4 optical density test looks for antibodies to complexes of heparin combined with platelet factor 4. Higher optical density indicates higher antibody concentration. We could say that generally OD values above 0.4 are considered a positive result, and that the higher the OD, the greater the concentration of antibodies in the patient's blood.|From the time the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||X10^9 / L||Standard Deviation|Mean
824899|NCT01178333|Secondary|Relationship of the Heparin PF-4 (Platelet Factor 4) Antibody Titer to the Clinical Diagnosis|Heparin PF-4 (platelet factor 4) optical density (OD) test results were the dichotomous outcome (<1.0 vs. >=1.0). Clinical diagnosis was three groups (HIT-T, Isolated HIT and No HIT). The Heparin PF-4 optical density test looks for antibodies to complexes of heparin combined with platelet factor 4. Higher optical density indicates higher antibody concentration. We could say that generally OD values above 0.4 are considered a positive result, and that the higher the OD, the greater the concentration of antibodies in the patient's blood.|From the time the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|There was one missing data for optical density test results in Isolated HIT group. Therefore, 283 subjects were used for Isolated HIT group.||participants|||Number
824900|NCT01178333|Secondary|Type of Heparin Exposure - Low Molecular Weight Heparin (LMWH)|Two types of heparins are commonly used as anticoagulants - unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). LMWHs are derived from UFH by depolymerization. Each LMWH product has a specific molecular weight distribution that determines its anticoagulant activity and duration of action.|Hospital admission to date the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn, or 28 days prior to the date it was drawn, whichever is later, through the date it was drawn|||participants|||Number
824901|NCT01178333|Secondary|Type of Heparin Exposure - Unfractionated Heparin (UFH)|Two types of heparins are commonly used as anticoagulants - unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). UFH has been used for the prevention and treatment of thrombosis for several decades.|Hospital admission to date the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn, or 28 days prior to the date it was drawn, whichever is later, through the date it was drawn|||participants|||Number
824902|NCT01178333|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With HIT With Thrombosis (HIT-T) and Isolated HIT|"Proportion of subjects who, at the time the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn, were in each of the following categories:
Group 1: Those with thrombosis and or without thrombocytopenia (HIT-T): 16% of 442 subjects.
Group 2: Those with thrombocytopenia but not thrombosis (Isolated HIT): 64% of 442 subjects.
Group 3: Those with neither thrombocytopenia nor thrombosis (Neither HIT-T nor Isolated HIT): 20% of 442 subjects."|From the date 5 days before the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn to the date it was drawn|||participants|||Number
824903|NCT01178333|Secondary|Time to Occurrence of Major Bleeding|The median survival time is reported by each group for the time to occurrence of major bleeding.|From the time that the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825294|NCT01181726|Primary|AUC0-inf of Corrected Total Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Corrected Total Estrone AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824904|NCT01178333|Secondary|Time to Occurrence of Major Bleeding|The mean time to an event is estimated by the area under the survival function. If the largest time is an event time, then the survival function goes to zero at that time, and the mean survival estimate is finite. Otherwise, the mean time cannot be estimated and may lead to a bias.|From the time that the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||days||Standard Error|Mean
824905|NCT01178333|Secondary|Time to Occurrence of Radiographically Confirmed Thromboembolism|"The mean time to an event is estimated by the area under the survival function. If the largest time is an event time, then the survival function goes to zero at that time, and the mean survival estimate is finite. Otherwise, the mean time cannot be estimated and may lead to a bias. However, the median survival times could not be defined for all three groups, so the mean time was reported in Outcome Measure Data Table."|From the time the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||days||Standard Error|Mean
824906|NCT01178333|Secondary|Time to Occurrence of Limb Amputation or Limb Gangrene|"Due to the small number of events, the median or mean survival time could not be defined. Therefore, the number of subjects with limb amputation or limb gangrene was reported in Outcome Measure Data Table."|From the time the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||participants|||Number
824907|NCT01178333|Secondary|Time to Death|The median survival time is reported by each group for the time to death.|From the time the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824908|NCT01178333|Secondary|Time to Death|The mean time to an event is estimated by the area under the survival function. If the largest time is an event time, then the survival function goes to zero at that time, and the mean survival estimate is finite. Otherwise, the mean time cannot be estimated and may lead to a bias.|From the time the positive heparin PF-4 antibody test was drawn until hospital discharge, death, or day 45, whichever occurred first|||days||Standard Error|Mean
824909|NCT01178385|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression - Severity Scale (This Scale Measures the Severity of the Child's Anxiety Symptoms).|This scale measures severity of the child's overall anxiety presentation. The minimum rating is 0, the maximum is 6. Higher scores correspond to greater anxiety; lower scores correspond to less severe anxiety. There are no subscales for this measure.|After an average of 16 weeks (Post-treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824910|NCT01178385|Secondary|Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule Highest Anxiety Clincian Severity Rating (Measures the Severity of the Child's Anxiety Symptoms)|This is a measure of severity of the child's primary anxiety disorder. The maximum rating is 8, the minimum rating is 0. Higher scores correspond to more severe anxiety.|After an average of 16 weeks (Post-treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824911|NCT01178385|Primary|Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (Measures the Severity of Anxiety Symptoms)|This scale assesses the severity of anxiety symptoms. The scale ranges from 0 (minimum score) to 25 (maximum score). Higher scores reflect more severe anxiety symptoms; lower scores reflect lower anxiety severity. There are no subscales to this measure.|After an average of 16 weeks (Post-treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824912|NCT01178528|Secondary|New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class|"The 1994 NYHA Classification system is a measure of functional status. It was designed for clinical assessment of patients by physicians as NYHA class I, II, III, or IV, on the basis of patient’s limitations in physical activities caused by cardiac symptoms.
Class I describes patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) but without resulting limitation of physical activity. There is no objective evidence of CVD.
Class II describes patients with CVD resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. There is objective evidence of minimal CVD.
Class III describes patients with CVD resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. There is objective evidence of moderately severe CVD.
Class IV describes patients with CVD resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. There is objective evidence of severe CVD.
Here we report data on number of patients showing an improvement by at least one NYHA class according to treatment allocation."|3 months|||participants|||Number
824913|NCT01178528|Primary|Maximal Oxygen Consumption|Functional capacity was assessed by means of a cardiopulmonary exercise test with a bicycle ergometer with gas exchange monitoring (Vmax 29 C, SensorMedics). Peak oxygen consumption was defined as the maximal oxygen consumption (MVO2) observed during exercise.|3 months|||mL/Kg/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
824914|NCT01178528|Secondary|Quality of Life|Quality of life (QoL) was evaluated using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) which is a global measurement of QoL, allowing a subjective assessment of the impact of the disease and treatment. Patients are asked to indicate their current state in a line from 0 (worst state) to 10 (best state), with higher values therefore representing a better outcome.|3 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824915|NCT01178528|Primary|Exercise Tolerance Assessed by 6 Minute Walking Test|"Distance measured at 6 minute walking test. The 6 minute walking test was performed according to standardised procedure at baseline, before inclusion (at least 1 week after baseline evaluation), and at the end of the study. Patients who had not done at least two tests in the past underwent two practice 6 minute walking tests at least 3 days apart. Results are expressed in terms of distance walked (metres). The test was supervised by a physical therapist.
Patients were asked to walk at their own maximal pace a 100 m long hospital corridor. At the beginning of the last (6th) minute of the test a standard phrase of encouragement was told. Patients were allowed to stop if signs or symptoms of significant distress occurred (dyspnea, angina), through they were instructed to resume walking as soon as possible."|3 months|||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
824916|NCT01178671|Secondary|Sexual Functioning|as measured by Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale, which rates impairment in sexual functioning from 5 (least impaired) to 30 (most impaired).|up to 24 weeks|intent to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824917|NCT01178671|Secondary|Sleep Quality|as measured by Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, which rates severity of impairment in sleep quality from 0 (least impaired) to 21 (most impaired).|up to 24 weeks|intent to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824918|NCT01178671|Secondary|Adverse Effects|as assessed by Side Effect Checklist|up to 24 weeks|intent to treat||percentage of subject dropped due to AEs|||Number
824919|NCT01178671|Secondary|Remission Status|Remitter as defined by Clinician Administered Posttraumatic Stress Disorders Scale total score <20 at endpoint|up to 24 weeks|intent to treat||percentage of subjects|||Number
824926|NCT01178762|Primary|Total Number of Participants With Negative Chlamydia Direct Fluorescent Antibody (DFA) Test Results After Oral Azithromycin Treatments|We performed direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) tests for Chlamydia by swabbing across the lower and upper tarsal conjunctiva four times after topical application of 0.5% proparacaine. All of the DFA tests were examined by the same experienced microbiologist who was masked to the identities and clinical conditions of the patients. Each DFA slide was read under a fluorescent microscope and was observed for discrete fluorescent chlamydial elementary bodies (EBs).The DFA test was considered positive if above 10 EBs were counted per high-power field.|4 weeks, 8 weeks and 12 weeks after the first dose of the medication|Only participants with confirmed DFA tests are counted in the results below. Participants with confirmed negative DFA tests subsequently stopped treatment and were not retested. Participants lost to follow-up are counted as not having a confirmed DFA negative test||participants|||Number
824927|NCT01178827|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Delayed Recall Score as Measured by the BVMT-R up to Day 10|Change from Baseline in delayed recall score as measured by the BVMT-R up to Day 10. The BVMT-R is an instrument used to measure visual learning and memory (recognition and recall). It consists of 3 learning trials: free recall, delayed recall, and yes/no delayed recognition trial. The total recall score is the sum of 3 free recall learning trials, and reflects the patient’s ability to learn. The total score ranges from 0 (no memory) to 12 (best memory). A positive change from baseline indicates improved memory.|Baseline, 10 Days|Per Protocol: All subjects who completed the study.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824928|NCT01178827|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Recall Score as Measured by the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) up to Day 10|Change from Baseline in total recall score as measured by the BVMT-R up to Day 10. The BVMT-R is an instrument used to measure visual learning and memory (recognition and recall). It consists of 3 learning trials: free recall, delayed recall, and yes/no delayed recognition trial. The total recall score is the sum of 3 free recall learning trials, and reflects the patient’s ability to learn. The total score ranges from 0 (no memory) to 36 (best memory). A positive change from baseline indicates improved memory.|Baseline, 10 Days|Per Protocol: All subjects who completed the study.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824929|NCT01178827|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Delayed Recall Score as Measured by the HVLT-R up to Day 10|Change from Baseline in Delayed Recall Score as Measured by the HVLT-R up to Day 10. The HVLT-R is an instrument used to measure verbal learning and memory (recognition and recall). It consists of 3 learning trials: free recall, delayed recall, and yes/no delayed recognition. The total recall score was the sum of 3 ‘free recall’ learning trials, and reflects the patient’s ability to learn. The total score ranges from 0 (no memory) to 12 (best memory). A positive change from baseline indicates improved memory.|Baseline, 10 Days|Per Protocol: All subjects who completed the study.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824930|NCT01178827|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Recall Score as Measured by the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R) up to Day 10|Change from Baseline in Total Recall Score as Measured by the HVLT-R up to Day 10. The HVLT-R is an instrument used to measure verbal learning and memory (recognition and recall). It consists of 3 learning trials: free recall, delayed recall, and yes/no delayed recognition. The total recall score was the sum of 3 ‘free recall’ learning trials, and reflects the patient’s ability to learn. The total score ranges from 0 (no memory) to 36 (best memory). A positive change from baseline indicates improved memory and a negative change from baseline indicates worsened memory.|Baseline, 10 Days|Per Protocol: All subjects who completed the study.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824931|NCT01178827|Secondary|Plasma Levels of Oxybutynin and N-Desethyl-Oxybutynin at Day 2 Post-dose|Plasma levels of Oxybutynin and N-Desethyl-Oxybutynin (metabolite of Oxybutynin) at Day 2 post-dose. Plasma is the liquid component of the blood in which the blood cells are suspended. Plasma samples were collected from each patient and analyzed for the drug the patient received.|Day 2 Post-Dose|All patients who received of Oxybutynin IR||Nanograms (ng) per milliliter (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
824932|NCT01178827|Secondary|Plasma Levels of Sanctura XR® at Day 10 Post-dose|Plasma levels of Sanctura XR® at Day 10 post-dose. Plasma is the liquid component of the blood in which the blood cells are suspended. Plasma samples were collected from each patient and analyzed for the drug the patient received.|Day 10 Post-Dose|All patients who received of Sanctura XR®||Nanograms (ng) per milliliter (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
824933|NCT01178827|Primary|Cerebral Spinal Fluid Levels of Oxybutynin and N-Desethyl-Oxybutynin at Day 2 Post-dose|Cerebral spinal fluid levels of Oxybutynin and N-Desethyl-Oxybutynin (metabolite of Oxybutynin) at Day 2 Post-dose. Cerebral spinal fluid is the fluid that surrounds the spinal cord and the inside of the brain. Samples were drawn from patients who received Oxybutynin IR.|Day 2 Post-Dose|All patients who received Oxybutynin IR||Nanograms (ng) per milliliter (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
824934|NCT01178827|Primary|Cerebral Spinal Fluid Levels of Sanctura XR® at Day 10 Post-dose|Cerebral spinal fluid levels of Sanctura XR® at Day 10 Post-dose. Cerebral spinal fluid is the fluid that surrounds the spinal cord and the inside of the brain. Samples were drawn from patients who received Sanctura XR®.|Day 10 Post-Dose|All patients who received Sanctura XR®||Nanograms (ng) per milliliter (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
824935|NCT01178853|Primary|Percent Mean Change From Baseline of International Normalized Ratio (INR)|INR is the ratio of a patient's prothrombin time to a standard, raised to the power of the ISI value for the tissue factor reagent used (INR = (PT-Test/PT-Normal)^ISI)|22 Days|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
824936|NCT01184755|Primary|Change in Systolic and Diastolic BP Measured by Ambulatory BP Monitoring (Waking Averages)|The primary outcome for this study is the change in systolic and diastolic BP measured by Ambulatory BP monitoring at 8-weeks. The measure is the waking mean BP.|8 weeks|These were patients who completed both the baseline and 8-week Ambulatory BP measures.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824937|NCT01184846|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Normal/Abnormal Not Clinically Significant (ANCS) Value at Baseline Changing to Abnormal Clinically Significant (ACS) Value at Completion Visit in Routine Laboratory Parameters.|Number of subjects with changes from normal/ANCS values at baseline to ACS values at Completion Visit in routine laboratory parameters including hematology and serum chemistry analytes. Investigators flagged each laboratory value as normal, ANCS or ACS at each assessment timepoint.|At Day 1 (baseline) and at Completion Visit (Week 25 or early discontinuation)|The SDS comprised all subjects treated with the study drug.||participants|||Number
831482|NCT01246076|Secondary|Time to Discontinuation of Treatment||Up to 56 weeks (14 cycles)|16 out of 24 participants were evaluable for this outcome measure as these 16 participants completed at least the first cycle of treatment.||cycles||Full Range|Median
824938|NCT01184846|Secondary|Mean Change in Body Temperature During Infusion|Body temperature was measured before the start of IgPro10 infusion, at 30 minutes and 1 hour after the start of infusion, then every hour until the end of infusion and at 1 hour after the end of infusion. Mean changes from the pre-infusion value to each of the post-infusion values were calculated for each infusion, and the mean value and SD of these individual mean changes is reported.|At Days 1 to 5 and at Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19 and 22.|The SDS comprised all subjects treated with the study drug.||°C||Standard Deviation|Mean
824939|NCT01184846|Secondary|Mean Change in Pulse Rate During Infusion|Pulse rate was measured before the start of IgPro10 infusion, at 30 minutes and 1 hour after the start of infusion, then every hour until the end of infusion and at 1 hour after the end of infusion. Mean changes from the pre-infusion value to each of the post-infusion values were calculated for each infusion, and the mean value and SD of these individual mean changes is reported.|At Days 1 to 5 and at Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19 and 22.|The SDS comprised all subjects treated with the study drug||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
824940|NCT01184846|Secondary|Mean Change in Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure During Infusion|Systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) were measured before the start of IgPro10 infusion, at 30 minutes and 1 hour after the start of infusion, then every hour until the end of infusion and at 1 hour after the end of infusion. Mean changes from the pre-infusion value to each of the post-infusion values were calculated for each infusion, and the mean value and standard deviation (SD) of these individual mean changes is reported.|At Days 1 to 5 and at Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19 and 22.|The SDS comprised all subjects treated with the study drug.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824941|NCT01184846|Secondary|Relatedness of AEs Per Subject|The causal relationship of an AE to the study drug was to be assessed and assigned by the investigator.|For the duration of the study, up to 34 weeks|The SDS comprised all subjects treated with the study drug.||percentage of subjects|||Number
824942|NCT01184846|Secondary|Relatedness of AEs Per Infusion|The causal relationship of an AE to the study drug was to be assessed and assigned by the investigator.|For the duration of the study, up to 34 weeks|The SDS comprised all subjects treated with the study drug.||AE rate per infusion|Participants||Number
824943|NCT01184846|Secondary|Severity of AEs Per Subject|"The severity of each AE was to be graded by the investigator as follows:
Mild: Symptoms were easily tolerated and there was no interference with daily activities.
Moderate: Discomfort enough to cause some interference with daily activities.
Severe: Incapacitating with inability to work or do usual activity."|34 weeks|The SDS comprised all subjects treated with the study drug.||percentage of subjects|||Number
824944|NCT01184846|Secondary|Severity of AEs Per Infusion|"The severity of each AE was to be graded by the investigator as follows:
Mild: Symptoms were easily tolerated and there was no interference with daily activities.
Moderate: Discomfort enough to cause some interference with daily activities.
Severe: Incapacitating with inability to work or do usual activity."|For the duration of the study, up to 34 weeks|The SDS comprised all subjects treated with the study drug.||AE rate per infusion|Participants||Number
824945|NCT01184846|Secondary|Frequency of Adverse Events (AEs)|Overall rate of AEs per infusion.|For the duration of the study, up to 34 weeks|The safety data set (SDS) comprised all subjects treated with the study drug.||AE rate per infusion|Participants||Number
824946|NCT01184846|Secondary|Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Level||At baseline and at Weeks 7, 13 and 19 (levels determined immediately before and after IVIG infusion), and at completion visit (Week 25)|The FAS includes all subjects who received at least one dose of IgPro10, regardless of whether or not the subject recorded an efficacy variable measurement.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824947|NCT01184846|Secondary|Change in Medical Research Council Sum Scale (MRC)|"The change in MRC sum score was determined at the completion visit compared to baseline and to the last measurement under the previous IVIG treatment using a non-parametric analysis to calculate the Hodges-Lehmann point estimate and the corresponding Tukey confidence interval on an exploratory basis.
The 80-point MRC sum score is the sum of scores for eight bilateral (left and right side) muscle groups, each rated between 0 (no visible contraction) to 5 (normal movement). A higher MRC sum score indicates greater muscle contraction/limb movement. Positive values for change in MRC sum score indicate improvement, with a more positive value indicating greater muscle contraction/ limb movement compared with the value at baseline."|Up to 34 weeks|The FAS includes all subjects who received at least one dose of IgPro10, regardless of whether or not the subject recorded an efficacy variable measurement. Analysed subgroups include all subjects and IVIG-pretreated and IVIG-untreated subjects from baseline to completion, and IVIG-pretreated subjects from last IVIG treatment to completion.||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
824948|NCT01184846|Secondary|Change in Maximum Grip Strength|Change in maximum grip strength of the dominant hand. A non-parametric analysis was used to calculate the Hodges-Lehmann point estimate and the corresponding Tukey confidence interval on an exploratory basis. Positive values for change in maximum grip strength indicate improvement.|Up to 34 weeks|The FAS includes all subjects who received at least one dose of IgPro10, regardless of whether or not the subject recorded an efficacy variable measurement. Analysed subgroups include all subjects and IVIG-pretreated and IVIG-untreated subjects from baseline to completion, and IVIG-pretreated subjects from last IVIG treatment to completion.||kPa||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
824949|NCT01184846|Secondary|Change in Adjusted INCAT Score|"The change in INCAT score was determined at the completion visit compared to baseline and to the last measurement under the previous IVIG treatment using a non-parametric analysis to calculate the Hodges-Lehmann point estimate and the corresponding Tukey confidence interval on an exploratory basis.
The INCAT disability score ranges from 0 to 10 and is the sum of arm and leg disability each rated between 0 and 5 (where arm = 0 indicates ‘no upper limb problems’ and arm = 5 indicates ‘inability to use either arm for any purposeful movement’, and leg = 0 indicates ‘walking not affected’, and leg = 5 indicates ‘restricted to wheelchair, unable to stand and walk a few steps with help’). Thus, a higher INCAT disability score indicates greater disability. Negative values for change in INCAT score indicate improvement, with a more negative value indicating greater improvement compared with the value at baseline."|Up to 34 weeks|The FAS includes all subjects who received at least one dose of IgPro10, regardless of whether or not the subject recorded an efficacy variable measurement. Analysed subgroups include all subjects and IVIG-pretreated and IVIG-untreated subjects from baseline to completion, and IVIG-pretreated subjects from last IVIG treatment to completion.||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831483|NCT01246076|Secondary|Duration of Response||Until 6 months after end of treatment|8 participants had a response -- all had MCR.||days||Full Range|Median
824950|NCT01184846|Primary|Responder Rate|"Percentage of responders based on the adjusted Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment Scale (INCAT) score.
Responders were defined as those subjects who: 1) demonstrated a “clinically meaningful improvement” between baseline and Week 25, or 2) who were discontinued from the study for any reason after the start of IgPro10 treatment but with “clinically meaningful improvement” at the last study visit.
Clinically meaningful improvement” was a decrease of at least 1 adjusted INCAT score point excluding an improvement of one point in the total score if this improvement was only due to a decrease in the upper limb score of 1 to 0."|25 weeks|The full analysis set (FAS) includes all subjects who received at least one dose of IgPro10, regardless of whether or not the subject recorded an efficacy variable measurement. The valid cases set (VCS) consists of all FAS subjects without any major protocol deviation (ie, the subjects who participated in the study as intended).||percentage of responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824951|NCT01184859|Secondary|Participant Counts of Minimum Observed Serum Sodium Levels During the Second Treatment Period (Days 4-32)|Serum sodium levels were monitored throughout the trial as part of the clinical chemistry panel. If the value was ≤125 mEq/L, the participant was to be withdrawn from the trial and treatment stopped immediately. This outcome reports participants' lowest recorded serum sodium levels during the second treatment period.|Days 4- 32|Safety population which included all randomised and exposed participants. Participants were analysed according to the actual treatment received.||participants|||Number
824952|NCT01184859|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sleep Related Quality of Life Based on the Global Score of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) at Approximately Day 32|The Global Score of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) is comprised of Questions 2-9 with a total scale of 0 (no difficulty sleeping) to 21 (severe difficulty). The change in Global Score is Global Score at the end of period 2 (day 32) - Global Score at the start of Period 2 (day 4). A negative change indicates an improvement in quality of life.|Approximately Day 4 (start of period 2) and Day 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824953|NCT01184859|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nocturia-Related Quality of Life Based on Evaluation Provided by Nocturia Quality of Life Questionnaire (N-QoL) at Approximately Day 32|N-QoL assesses the impact of nocturia on quality of life (QoL) and treatment outcomes. N-QoL is a self-administered questionnaire with 13 items using scales of 0 = no negative impact to QoL to the upper number = signficant negative impact to QoL. The sleep/energy domain consists of 7 questions with a scale of 0 to 28. The bother/concern domain consists of 5 questions for a scale of 0 to 20. The 13th question is an overall assessment scored from 0 to 10. The Total Score includes all 13 questions with a scale of 0 (no negative impact to QoL) to 58 (significant negative impact to QoL).|Approximately Day 4 (start of period 2) and Day 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824954|NCT01184859|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nocturnal Polyuria Index at Approximately Day 32|Nocturnal polyuria index is defined as a proportion of nocturnal urine volume to the 24-hour urine volume. Urine volume and time of day of those voids was recorded over three consecutive days per week in diaries kept by study participants. The average nocturnal polyuria index of the 3 days recorded in the last week of the study (between study days 25-32) was compared to the average baseline readings.|3 days between study days -6 to 0 (Baseline), and days 25 to 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||nocturnal urine volume / 24-hour urine||Standard Deviation|Mean
824955|NCT01184859|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 24-Hour Urine Production Per Body Weight at Approximately Day 32|Twenty-four hour urine volume was recorded over three consecutive days per week in diaries kept by study participants. Urine volume per body weight was calculated. The average 24-hour urine volume per kg of body weight of the 3 days recorded in the last week of the study (between study days 25-32) was compared to the average baseline readings.|3 days between study days -6 to 0 (Baseline), and days 25 to 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||ml/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824956|NCT01184859|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 24-Hour Urine Volume at Approximately Day 32|Twenty-four hour urine volume was recorded over three consecutive days per week in diaries kept by study participants. The average 24-hour urine volume of the 3 days recorded in the last week of the study (between study days 25-32) was compared to the average baseline readings.|3 days between study days -6 to 0 (Baseline), and days 25 to 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
824957|NCT01184859|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nocturnal Urine Volume at Approximately Day 32|Nocturnal urine volume was recorded over three consecutive days per week in diaries kept by study participants. The average nocturnal urine volume of the 3 days recorded in the last week of the study (between study days 25-32) was compared to the average baseline readings.|3 days between study days -6 to 0 (Baseline), and days 25 to 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
824969|NCT01184872|Secondary|Duration of Treatment (Intravenous)|Duration of treatment is the interval from first to last intravenous (i.v.) administration. It was preferable that a patient complete the whole antibiotic treatment with the randomized i.v. study drug only. Duration of treatment in patients with bacteremia could be extended up to 28 days.|Up to 28 days|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned at randomization.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
824958|NCT01184859|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Number of 24-hour Urine Voids at Approximately Day 32|Number of voids in 24 hours was recorded over three consecutive days per week in diaries kept by study participants. The average number of 24-hour voids of the 3 days recorded in the last week of the study (between study days 25-32) was compared to the average baseline readings.|3 days between study days -6 to 0 (Baseline), and days 25 to 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
824959|NCT01184859|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Number of Daytime Voids at Approximately Day 32|Number of daytime voids was recorded over three consecutive days per week in diaries kept by study participants. The average number of daytime voids of the 3 days recorded in the last week of the study (between study days 25-32) was compared to the average baseline readings.|3 days between study days -6 to 0 (Baseline), and days 25 to 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
824960|NCT01184859|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Sleep Time at Approximately Day 32|"Total sleep time is defined as the time spent asleep from initial sleep to final awakening.
Records of nocturia and sleep over three consecutive days per week were kept in voiding-sleep diaries by study participants. The average of the total time asleep of the 3 days recorded in the last week of the study (between study days 25-32) was compared to average baseline readings."|3 days between study days -6 to 0 (Baseline), and days 25 to 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
824961|NCT01184859|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Duration of First Period of Undisturbed Sleep After 28 Days of Treatment - Period 2|"Duration of first period of undisturbed sleep is defined as the length of time from initial sleep to first awakening.
Records of nocturia and sleep over three consecutive days per week were kept in voiding-sleep diaries by study participants. The average length of first period of undisturbed sleep of the 3 days recorded in the last week of the study (between study days 25-32) was compared to average baseline readings."|3 days between study days -6 to 0 (Baseline), and days 25 to 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
824962|NCT01184859|Secondary|Time When Urine Production <0.12 ml/kg/Min|Urine volume was registered and samples for osmolality check were collected every 30 minutes as long as there was an antidiuretic action defined as a urine production <0.12 mL/kg/min. The hydration due to water-loading should have lasted until end of action, defined as when the urine production returned to >0.12 mL/kg/min, but no longer than 12 hours.|Day 1|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
824963|NCT01184859|Secondary|Area Under the Urine Production Curve (AUCurine Prod)|Area under the urine production curve, from dose administration to end of action (AUCurine prod)|Day 1|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance.||h*mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824964|NCT01184859|Secondary|Area Under the Urine Osmolality Curve (AUCosm)|Area under the urine osmolality curve, from dose administration to end of action (AUCosm).|Day 1|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance.||h*mOsm/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
824965|NCT01184859|Primary|Change From Baseline in Number of Nocturnal Voids After 28 Days of Treatment - Period 2|Records of nocturia and sleep over three consecutive days per week were kept in voiding-sleep diaries by study participants. The average number of nocturnal voids of the 3 days recorded in the last week of the study (between study days 25-32) was compared to average baseline readings.|3 days between study days -6 to 0 (Baseline), and days 25 to 32|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance. Missing values post baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) where at least one post baseline measurement was available at a visit before the missing observation.||nocturnal voids||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
824966|NCT01184859|Primary|Duration of Action Defined as the Time With Urine Osmolality Above 200 mOsm/kg - Period 1|Participants were water-loaded to suppress the endogenous release of vasopressin, thus all antidiuretic activity was generated by desmopressin only. Water-loading was initiated 2 hours before dosing on Day 1. Urine volume was registered and samples for osmolality check were collected every 30 minutes as long as there was an antidiuretic action defined as a urine production <0.12 mL/kg/min. The hydration should have lasted until end of action, defined as when the urine production returned to >0.12 mL/kg/min, but no longer than 12 hours.|Day 1|Per protocol population, consisting of treated participants without major protocol violations and with >=80% treatment compliance.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
824967|NCT01184872|Secondary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events and Death||Continuously from baseline up to 28 days after end of antibiotic treatment.|The safety set included all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and who had at least one post-baseline safety assessment.||participants|||Number
824968|NCT01184872|Secondary|Duration of Treatment (Intravenous and Oral)|Duration of treatment is the interval from first to last intravenous (i.v.) or to last oral administration if patients switched to an oral antibiotic therapy. It was preferable that a patient complete the whole antibiotic treatment with the randomized i.v. study drug only. Duration of treatment in patients with bacteremia could be extended up to 28 days.|Up to 28 days|The Full Analysis set (FAS) comprised all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned at randomization.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
825295|NCT01181726|Primary|AUC0-t of Corrected Total Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Corrected Total Estrone AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
824970|NCT01184872|Secondary|Number of Participants With Microbiological Response at Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit|Microbiological Success: All infecting Gram-positive pathogens isolated at baseline were eradicated or presumed to be eradicated at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) evaluation and a super infecting pathogen was not isolated either prior to or at the TOC evaluation. Microbiological Failure: Persistence or relapse / re-infection of one or more infecting Gram-positive pathogens or isolation of a super infecting pathogen prior to or at the TOC evaluation.|Baseline and 7 to 14 days after end of therapy|Population analyzed consisted of patients from the clinically evaluable population who had independent microbiological assessments.||participants|||Number
824971|NCT01184872|Primary|Number of Patients With Clinical Success at the Test-Of-Cure (TOC) Visit|Success: Clinically significant signs and symptoms associated with the skin infection present at the pre-treatment infection site resolved (cure), or improved without need of further antibacterial therapy. Failure: Persistence or progression of signs and symptoms or development of new clinical signs and symptoms at the infection site, or concomitant antibacterial therapy with activity against isolated organisms, or treatment duration longer than pre-specified, or switch back to intravenous therapy due to relapse, or requirement of a major surgical procedure as adjunct or follow-up therapy.|Baseline and 7 to 14 days after end of therapy|The clinically evaluable population was used for the efficacy analysis. It included all patients who met the criteria for complicated skin and soft tissue, had no substantive protocol deviation, had a sponsor clinical response assessment of “success” or “failure” at the assessment visit, and had a specified baseline primary site of infection.||participants|||Number
824972|NCT01184885|Secondary|Complete Response|"To describe response rates to hyper-CVAD and sirolimus in adults with ALL and other aggressive lymphoid malignancies.
Bone marrow (<5% blasts) with adequate bone marrow cellularity, no evidence of circulating blasts or extramedullary disease and normalization of peripheral blood counts except for platelets (neutrophil count =1,000/µL)."|Every 21 days or as count recovery allows (at least 14 days apart) up to 24 weeks|||participants|||Number
824973|NCT01184885|Secondary|Induction Mortality|Induction mortality. Hyper-CVAD/ Rapamycin will be considered acceptable if induction mortality does not exceed 31% in patients older than 60, or 15% in those younger than 60|18 months||||||
824974|NCT01184885|Primary|Number of Participants With Count Recovery That Allows for Starting a Phase II Study to Evaluate Response Rates and Survival|"This will be assessed by evaluating the tolerability of this regimen compared to historical controls who received Hyper-CVAD or Hyper-CVAD/ Rituximab regimens. The treatment will be designated feasible for an individual subject if in 80% of chemotherapy cycles the subject has count recovery that allows for starting the subsequent cycle by Day 28. Count recovery is defined as ANC (absolute neutrophil count) of > 0.5 x 10^9/L and platelet count > 50 x 10^9/L.
Hyper-CVAD/Rapamycin will be deemed acceptable if it is feasible to administer in 80% or more of subjects."|18 months|||participants|||Number
824975|NCT01184898|Secondary|Partial Response|"Partial response is defined as:
Requires that all of the criteria for complete remission be satisfied except that the bone marrow may contain ≥ 5% blasts but < 25% blasts.
A marrow with <5% blasts that contain Auer rods will also be considered a PR"|Within one week of peripheral count recovery but no later than day 42|||participants|||Number
824976|NCT01184898|Secondary|Complete Response in the Absence of Platelet Recovery|"Complete response in the absence of platelet recovery is defined as:
- Bone marrow (<5% blasts) with adequate bone marrow cellularity, no evidence of circulating blasts or extramedullary disease and normalization of peripheral blood counts except for platelets (neutrophil count =1,000/µL)"|Within one week of peripheral count recovery but no later than day 42|||participants|||Number
824977|NCT01184898|Secondary|Complete Response|"Complete response is defined as:
Peripheral Blood Counts -Neutrophil count >1 x 109/L.
Platelet count ≥ 100 x 109/L.
Reduced hemoglobin concentration or hematocrit has no bearing on remission status.
Leukemic blasts must not be present in the peripheral blood.
Cellularity of bone marrow biopsy must be > 20% with maturation of all cell lines with < 5% blasts and no Auer rods.
Extramedullary leukemia, such as CNS or soft tissue involvement, must not be present"|Within one week of peripheral count recovery but no later than day 42|||participants|||Number
824978|NCT01184898|Primary|Association Between the Magnitude of mTOR Target Inhibition Post-treatment in Leukemic Blasts and Clinical Response in Patients With High Risk AML Treated With Sirolimus MEC|"Percent change compared between response groups (responder vs nonresponder).
This outcome measure only includes patients who survived to outcome assessment."|From pre- to post-treatment|||percentage change in leukemic blasts||Full Range|Mean
824979|NCT01184989|Primary|Dabigatran Concentration in Plasma, Measured With HPLC-MS/MS|Dabigatran Concentration in Plasma, measured with HPLC-MS/MS - Most relevant timepoints are reported here, ie timepoints of day 6|At day 6 before drug intake (di), at 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h and 24h after di|Correct calculation set: all patients of the Per Protocol set (PPS) (patients with at least one pair of observations for both PD and PK parameters without important protocol violations) and additionally all patients of the TS whom the only reason for not being in the PPS was the non-influential forbidden concomitant medication or vomiting||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824980|NCT01184989|Primary|Dabigatran Concentration in Plasma, Estimated From Central Hemoclot®|"The Hemoclot® test kit measures the dTT (diluted Thrombin time). In the present trial, as a first step, the dTT in calibration samples that had known Dabigatran concentrations was measured centrally with the Hemoclot® test kit, and a linear calibration curve was fitted to the data from the calibration samples. Thereafter, for each patient at each time-point, the dTT was measured with the Hemoclot® kit and the Dabigatran concentration was read off from the calibration curve.
These estimated concentrations are compared with concentrations measured in parallel with HPLC-MS/MS.
As the trial objective is the method comparison and not the detection of the absolute concentrations of either of the methods, the result is reported as a relative bioavailability [%], see Statistical Analysis 1 below. Only concentrations >= LLOQ (Lower Limit of concentration) are included in the quantitative comparison."|Screening, day of surgery 1 hour (h) and 2h after drug intake (di) for late finalization of surgery, 4h and 8h after di for early finalization of surgery, 15 minutes (min) before di at days 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, at day 6 also 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h and 24 after di|Correct calculation set: all patients of the Per Protocol set (PPS) (patients with at least one pair of observations for both PD and PK parameters without important protocol violations) and additionally all patients of the TS whom the only reason for not being in the PPS was the non-influential forbidden concomitant medication or vomiting||measurements estimated as above LLOQ|Participants||Number
824981|NCT01184989|Primary|Dabigatran Concentration in Plasma, Estimated From Local Hemoclot®|"The Hemoclot® test kit measures the dTT (diluted Thrombin time). In the present trial, as a first step, the dTT in calibration samples that had known Dabigatran concentrations was measured locally with the Hemoclot® test kit, and a linear calibration curve was fitted to the data from the calibration samples. Thereafter, for each patient at each time-point, the dTT was measured with the Hemoclot® kit and the Dabigatran concentration was read off from the calibration curve.
These estimated concentrations are compared with concentrations measured in parallel with HPLC-MS/MS.
As the trial objective is the method comparison and not the detection of the absolute concentrations of either of the methods, the result is reported as a relative bioavailability [%], see Statistical Analysis 1 below. Only concentrations >= LLOQ (Lower Limit of concentration) are included in the quantitative comparison."|Screening, day of surgery 1 hour (h) and 2h after drug intake (di) for late finalization of surgery, 4h and 8h after di for early finalization of surgery, 15 minutes (min) before di at days 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, at day 6 also 1h, 2h, 4h, 8h and 24 after di|Correct calculation set: all patients of the Per Protocol set (PPS) (patients with at least one pair of observations for both PD and PK parameters without important protocol violations) and additionally all patients of the TS whom the only reason for not being in the PPS was the non-influential forbidden concomitant medication or vomiting||measurements estimated as above LLOQ|Participants||Number
824982|NCT01185834|Secondary|Overall Lens Fit|As assessed by the investigator at study visit using a biomicroscope, which magnifies the appearance of the contact lens on the participant's eye. Lens fit was graded by eye on a 5-point scale, with 2=unacceptably loose, 1=acceptably loose, 0=optimal, -1=acceptably tight, and -2=unacceptably tight|3 months of wear, replacing lenses monthly|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as: major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
824983|NCT01185834|Primary|Overall Comfort|As interpreted by the participant and recorded on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 3 months of wear time. Overall comfort was evaluated binocularly and rated on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|3 months of wear, replacing lenses monthly|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as: major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
824984|NCT01185964|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Anti-Olaratumab Antibody Assessment|Participants with Treatment Emergent (TE) anti-olaratumab antibodies were participants with a 4-fold increase (2 dilutions) increase over a positive baseline antibody titer or for a negative baseline titer, a participant with an increase from the baseline to a level of 1:20.|Baseline, Up to 30 Months|All participants who had baseline and post baseline anti-olaratumab antibodies.||percentage of participants|||Number
824985|NCT01185964|Secondary|PK: Half-Life (T1/2) Cycle 1 Day 8, Cycle 3 Day 8 of Olaratumab||Cycle 1 Day 8:Preinfusion,1hr,72hr,168hr Post Infusion; Cycle 3 Day 8: Preinfusion,1hr,24hr,72hr,168hr Post Infusion|All participants who had evaluable PK data in Phase 1b and Phase 2. Per protocol, optional Olaratumab monotherapy data was exploratory and not collected for this outcome measure.||Days||Full Range|Geometric Mean
824986|NCT01185964|Secondary|PK: Area Under Concentration Curve Versus Time (AUCτ) Cycle 1 Day 8, Cycle 3 Day 8 of Olaratumab|AUCτ = area under the concentration versus time curve during one dosing interval with a measurable concentration.|Cycle 1 Day 8:Preinfusion,1hr,72hr,168hr Post Infusion; Cycle 3 Day 8: Preinfusion,1hr,24hr,72hr,168hr Post Infusion|All participants who had evaluable PK data in Phase1b and Phase 2. Per protocol, optional Olaratumab monotherapy data was exploratory and not collected for this outcome measure.||microgram•hour/milliliter (μg•h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824987|NCT01185964|Secondary|PK: Minimum Concentration (Cmin) Cycle 1 Day 8, Cycle 3 Day 8 of Olaratumab||Cycle 1 Day 8: Preinfusion, 1hr,72hr,168hr Post Infusion; Cycle 3 Day 8: Preinfusion,1hr, 24hr,72hr,168hr Post Infusion|All participants who had evaluable PK data in Phase 1b and Phase 2. Per protocol, optional Olaratumab monotherapy data was exploratory and not collected for this outcome measure.||μg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824988|NCT01185964|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Maximum Concentration (Cmax) Cycle 1 Day 1, Cycle 3 Day 1 of Olaratumab||Cycle 1 Day 1: Preinfusion, End of Infusion,1hr,48hr,72hr,168 hr Post infusion; Cycle 3 Day 1:Preinfusion, End of Infusion,1hr,24hr,48hr,72hr,168hr Post Infusion|All participants who had evaluable PK data in Phase 1b and Phase 2. Per protocol, optional Olaratumab monotherapy data was exploratory and not collected for this outcome measure.||nanogram/milliliter (μg/mL )||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
824989|NCT01185964|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Are Progression-Free (PFS) at 3 Months|(PFS) rate is defined as the percentage of participants that are alive and progression-free 3 months after randomization. PFS is measured from randomization until the first radiographic progressive disease as defined by RECIST (version 1.1) or death from any cause. Participants who died without PD were considered to have progressed on the day of death. Censoring applied: If no radiologic assessment at baseline or post baseline, participant was censored at the date of randomization or the day of their last tumor assessment if no PD and were lost to follow up; If death or PD occurred after 2 or more consecutive missing radiographic visits, censoring occurred at the date of the last radiographic visit. If participant started new treatment before PD, participant was censored at the date of last tumor assessment prior to new therapy. If treatment was discontinued for reasons other than PD and no further assessment, censoring occurred at last tumor assessment.|Randomization Until First Radiographic PD or Death from Any Cause (Up to 3 Months)|All randomized participants in Phase 2. Per protocol, phase 1b and optional Olaratumab monotherapy data was exploratory and not collected for this outcome measure. Censored Participants = Phase 2 Olaratumab + Doxorubicin = 11 and Doxorubicin = 19.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825003|NCT01186406|Secondary|Median Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival was defined as the time in months from the date study treatment started until the date of progression or the date of death if death occurred before progression, or until the date of last follow-up if alive without progression. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate progression-free survival.|21 months|Intent-to-treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825004|NCT01186406|Secondary|Median Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time in months from the start of SRS to the date of death or last contact if alive. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival.|21 months|Intent-to-treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824990|NCT01185964|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (Objective Response Rate)|Objective Response Rate (ORR) is confirmed best overall tumor response of CR or PR. According to RECIST v1.1, PR defined as a >30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameters (LD) of the target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of the LD; CR was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions. Percentage of participants was calculated as: total number of participants with a best tumor response of PR or CR among participants counted in the denominator/total number of participants treated with any amount of study drug, who has a complete radiographic assessment at baseline, and who has at least 1 complete radiographic assessment at postbaseline x 100%.|Randomization Until Progressive Disease (Up to 30 Months)|All randomized participants in Phase 2 and optional Olaratumab monotherapy.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
824991|NCT01185964|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. Reasons for censoring OS were that participant was known to be alive, participant was lost to follow up during the study or participant withdrew consent to follow up.|Randomization to the Date of Death From Any Cause (Up To 47 Months)|All randomized participants in Phase 2. Per protocol, phase 1b and optional Olaratumab monotherapy data was exploratory and not collected for this outcome measure. Censored participants = Phase 2 Olaratumab + Doxorubicin = 27 and Doxorubicin = 15.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824992|NCT01185964|Secondary|Number of Participants With AEs and SAEs for Phase 2 Portion|A summary of SAEs and all other non-serious AEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Event module.|Baseline, Up to 30 Months|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Phase 2 and optional Olaratumab monotherapy.||participants|||Number
824993|NCT01185964|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment Related Adverse Events (TEAE), Adverse Events (AE) or Serious Adverse Events (SAE) for Safety for the Phase 1b Portion of the Study|All Phase 1b participants who experienced at least 1 TEAE in the Phase 1b portion of the study. Adverse Event with missing relationship to study is counted as related. A summary of SAEs and all other non-serious AEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Event module.|Baseline Up to 30 Months|All participants in Phase 1b.||participants|||Number
824994|NCT01185964|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS is measured from randomization until the first radiographic documentation of progression of disease (PD) as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.1) or death from any cause. Participants who died without PD was considered to have progressed on the day of death. The following censoring rules applied: If no radiologic assessment at baseline or post baseline, participant was censored at the date of randomization. Participants were censored at the day of their last tumor assessment if no PD and were lost to follow up; If death or PD occurred after 2 or more consecutive missing radiographic visits, censoring occurred at the date of the last adequate radiographic visit. If participant started new treatment before PD, the participant was censored at the date of last tumor assessment prior to new therapy. If treatment was discontinued for reasons other than PD and no further assessment, censoring occurred at last tumor assessment.|Randomization Until the First Radiographic Documentation of Objective Progression (Up to 29 Months)|All randomized participants in Phase 2. Per protocol, phase 1b and optional Olaratumab monotherapy data was exploratory and not collected for this outcome measure. Censored Participants = Phase 2 Olaratumab + Doxorubicin = 11 and Doxorubicin = 19.||Month||95% Confidence Interval|Median
824995|NCT01186250|Secondary|Change From Baseline in High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (HsCRP) at One Year|measure of low levels of C-reactive protein to identify low but persistent levels of inflammation|Baseline and 1 year|participant drop put||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
824996|NCT01186250|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ADMA (Asymmetric Dimethylarginine) at One Year.|Competitive ELISA assay in Stanford laboratory.|Baseline and 1 year|One participant in one arm did not have Baseline or one year data.||umol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
824997|NCT01186250|Secondary|Change in Maximal Intimal Thickness(MIT) by Intravascular Unltrasound(IVUS)|The change in maximal intimal thickness (MIT) from baseline to one year was recorded for several matched sites in the same coronary artery, the cross sections, predominantly in the left anterior descending coronary artery, from baseline to one-year follow-up, were studied. The IVUS cross sections were matched by using identifiable landmarks in the images, such as bifurcations or arterial calcification, or external landmarks, such as coronary veins or pericardium. In addition, the one-year IVUS studies were obtained with an angiographic roadmap of where the initial IVUS study was performed along the length of the vessel. The IVUS system auto pullback was performed at .5 mm/s from the mid-distal portion of the study vessel, where an easily identifiable landmark was visible (i.e., branchpoint). The following items were measured for each patient: maximal intimal thickness (MIT), intimal area (IA), and vessel area.|Baseline and 1 year|number participants analyzed contained drops out due to clinical reasons||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
824998|NCT01186250|Secondary|Change From Baseline in TG/HDL Ratio at One Year|Triglyceride ratio to High Density Lipoprotien|Baseline and 1 year|One drop out||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
824999|NCT01186250|Secondary|Change in Levels of Fasting Glucose at Baseline and 1 Year|Oral Glucose Tolerance Test : blood was drawn for fasting plasma glucose and insulin levels, followed by ingestion of a solution containing 75grams of glucose. Repeat blood samples were collected for glucose and insulin levels at 30, 90, and 120 minutes after glucose ingestion. All glucose measurements were performed by the Clinical Translational Research Unit (CTRU) Stanford University.|Baseline and 1 year|One participant in each group did not complete the OGTT.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825000|NCT01186250|Secondary|Change in Intimal Volume|Intimal volume is defined as external elastic membrane volume minus lumen (luminal) volume measured at the heart Catheterization and intravascular Ultrasound( IVUS)|baseline and 1 year|The number of participants enrolled were not all included in the intimal volume analysis because the Angiographic diagnostic evaluation needed for intimal volume measurement was clinically inappropriate for 3 in the pioglitazone arm and 5 in the Placebo arm at 12 months post transplant.||mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
825001|NCT01186250|Primary|Insulin Levels Area Under Curve(AUC)|Change from baseline in Insulin Levels During Oral Glucose Tolerance test at 1 year.|Baseline and 1 year|||h*pmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
825002|NCT01186406|Secondary|Unacceptable Toxicity Related to the Treatment Regimen|The number of patients experiencing unacceptable toxicity defined as the occurrence of ≥ grade 2 CNS hemorrhage or treatment-related grade 4 or 5 non-hematologic toxicity.|27 months|||participants|||Number
825005|NCT01186406|Primary|21-month Overall Survival|The percentage of participants alive at 21 months after the start of study treatment. Overall survival was calculated from the date study treatment started until the date of death or the date of last follow-up if alive. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival.|21 months|Intent-to-treat||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825006|NCT01186419|Secondary|Area Under The Steady-state Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of SPD602|AUC can be used as a measure of drug exposure. It is derived from drug concentration and time so it gives a measure of how much and how long a drug stays in a body.|92 weeks|PK Analysis Set, defined as all subjects in the Safety Set for whom the primary PK data were considered sufficient and interpretable. The Safety Set was defined as all subjects who received any amount of investigational product.||ng*hr/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
825007|NCT01186419|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of SPD602|Cmax is a term that refers to the maximum (or peak) concentration that a drug achieves in the body after the drug has been administered.|92 weeks|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set, defined as all subjects in the Safety Set for whom the primary PK data were considered sufficient and interpretable. The Safety Set was defined as all subjects who received any amount of investigational product.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
825008|NCT01186419|Primary|Change From Baseline in Liver Iron Concentration (LIC) at 96 Weeks|LIC was determined by R2 Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI).|Baseline and 96 weeks|Full Analysis Set, defined as all subjects in the Safety Set who had at least 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment. The Safety Set was defined as all subjects who received any amount of investigational product.||mg/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
825009|NCT01186458|Secondary|Biologic Interaction|To explore the biologic interaction between fludarabine and Velcade and determine if Velcade can potentiate the DNA-damaging effect of fludarabine.|6 months|Data for this secondary objective was not collected or analyzed due to the termination of the study.|||||
825010|NCT01186458|Secondary|Toxicity|To evaluate the toxicity profile of this regimen. Adverse event counts by grade are presented.|6 months|||number of adverse events|||Number
825011|NCT01186458|Secondary|Survival|To evaluate the progression-free survival and event-free survival in patients who receive therapy with fludarabine, Velcade, and rituximab.|6 months|Data for this secondary objective was not collected or analyzed due to the termination of the study.|||||
825012|NCT01186458|Primary|Overall Response Rate|To determine the overall response rate and frequency of complete and partial responses in patients with relapsed or refractory follicular non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) who receive therapy with fludarabine, Velcade, and rituximab administered every 28 days.|6 months|Data for this primary objective was not collected or analyzed due to the termination of the study.|||||
825013|NCT01186562|Secondary|Acute C-peptide Response (ACR) to Glucose|Derived from intravenous glucose tolerance test (0 to 10 minute measures after IV dextrose bolus)|18 months|This test required two IVs. In patients for whom 2 IVs could not be placed successfully, this test could not be performed. N's reflect number of patients completing this test.||min*ng/dL||Standard Error|Mean
825014|NCT01186562|Secondary|Acute C-peptide Response (ACR) to Glucose|Derived from intravenous gluocose tolerance testing (0 to 10 minute measures after dextrose bolus)|12 months|This test required two IVs. In patients for whom 2 IVs could not be placed successfully, this test could not be performed. N's reflect number of patients completing this test.||min*ng/dL||Standard Error|Mean
825015|NCT01186562|Secondary|AUC C-peptide|AUC C-peptide (ng/dL*min) from mixed meal tolerance test (measured times 0 to 2 hours after Boost HP)|18 months|Patients with vomiting, NPO (Nothing by Mouth) restrictions (due to chronic GI illness) were not able to complete MMTT. (Mixed meal Tolerance Test) The N for each group reflects the number of patients who successfully completed this assessment.||min*ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825016|NCT01186562|Secondary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) C-peptide (ng/dL*Min)|AUC C-peptide obtained from a mixed meal test (measured time 0 to 2 hours after Boost HP)|12 months|Patients with vomiting, NPO restrictions (due to chronic GI illness) were not able to complete MMTT. The N for each group reflects the number of patients who successfully completed this assessment.||ng*min/dL||Standard Error|Mean
825017|NCT01186562|Secondary|Insulin Independence|percentage of patients insulin independent|18 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
825018|NCT01186562|Primary|Insulin Independence|percentage of patients insulin independent|12 months|N's reflect patients that returned for study follow up.||percentage of participants|||Number
825296|NCT01181726|Primary|Cmax of Corrected Total Estrone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Corrected Total Estrone Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825024|NCT01186705|Primary|Overall Objective Response Rate (ORR)|in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with known PIK3CA mutations and wild type KRAS, to single agent MK-2206. Response and progression will be evaluated in this study using the new international criteria proposed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.1)|1 year|||participants|||Number
825025|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pustular, Erythrodermic, or Guttate Psoriasis During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)||Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|Safety-C||percentage of participants|||Number
825026|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pustular, Erythrodermic, or Guttate Psoriasis During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)||Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|Safety-B||percentage of participants|||Number
825027|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pustular, Erythrodermic, or Guttate Psoriasis During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)||Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|Safety-A||percentage of participants|||Number
825028|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-C in EQ-5D Domain Scores During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C."|Week 56 (Period C)|FAS-C||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825029|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-A in EQ-5D Domain Scores During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment Period (Period A)|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Baseline-A defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A."|Week 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n=number of participants with an observation||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825030|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean EQ-5D Domain Scores During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed)."|Baseline and Week 56 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825031|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean EQ-5D Domain Scores During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment Period (Period A)|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed)."|Baseline and Week 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n=number of participants with an observation.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825032|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-C in EQ-5D Utility Score and VAS Scores During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state. Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C."|Week 56 (Period C)|FAS-C||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825033|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-A in EQ-5D Utility Score and VAS Scores During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment Period (Period A)|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state. Baseline-A defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A."|Week 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n=number of participants with an observation||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825070|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean DLQI Score During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825034|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean EQ-5D Utility Score and VAS Scores During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state."|Baseline and Week 56 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825035|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Health State Profile Utility Score and VAS Scores During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment Period (Period A)|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state."|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n=number of participants with an observation.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825036|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Maintaining PtGA Response of Clear or Almost Clear During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B) Among Participants Who Had a Response of Clear or Almost Clear at Beginning of Period B|The PtGA asks the participant to evaluate the overall cutaneous disease at that point in time on a single item, 5 point scale. The scale is scored as follows: 0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe. Response defined as score of 0 or 1.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825037|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PtGA Response of Clear or Almost Clear During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C) Among Participants Who Had a PtGA of Mild, Moderate or Severe During CP-690,550 Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The PtGA asks the participant to evaluate the overall cutaneous disease at that point in time on a single item, 5 point scale. The scale is scored as follows: 0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe. Response defined as score of 0 or 1.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825038|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PtGA Response of Clear or Almost Clear During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The PtGA asks the participant to evaluate the overall cutaneous disease at that point in time on a single item, 5 point scale. The scale is scored as follows: 0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe. Response defined as score of 0 or 1.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825039|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each PtGA of Psoriasis Category During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The PtGA asks the participant to evaluate the overall cutaneous disease at that point in time on a single item, 5 point scale. The scale is scored as follows: 0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C||percentage of participants|||Number
825040|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each PtGA of Psoriasis Category During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The PtGA asks the participant to evaluate the overall cutaneous disease at that point in time on a single item, 5 point scale. The scale is scored as follows: 0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||percentage of participants|||Number
825041|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Psoriasis Category During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The PtGA asks the participant to evaluate the overall cutaneous disease at that point in time on a single item, 5 point scale. The scale is scored as follows: 0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||percentage of participants|||Number
825042|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-C in SF-36 Domain Scores During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life. Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.|Week 56 (Period C)|FAS-C||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825043|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-A in SF-36 Domain Scores During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life. Baseline-A defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Week 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n=number of participants with an observation||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825044|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean SF-36 Domain Scores During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Baseline and Week 56 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825045|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean SF-36 Domain Scores During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Baseline and Week 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n=number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825046|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-C in SF-36 PCS and MCS Scores During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). A PCS score and MCS score are based on a normalized sum of the 8 scale scores; PCS/MCS summary concept score = (raw score*10) plus 50. Linear transformations were performed to transform scores to a mean of 50 and SDs of 10, in the general population. In norm-based scoring, each scale is scored to have same average (50)/SD (10). With this method anytime a scale score is below 50, health status is below average, and each point is one-tenth of a SD. Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Week 56 (Period C)|FAS-C||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825047|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-A in SF-36 PCS and MCS Scores During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). A PCS score and MCS score are based on a normalized sum of the 8 scale scores; PCS/MCS summary concept score = (raw score*10) plus 50. Linear transformations were performed to transform scores to a mean of 50 and SDs of 10, in the general population. In norm-based scoring, each scale is scored to have same average (50)/SD (10). With this method anytime a scale score is below 50, health status is below average, and each point is one-tenth of a SD. Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Week 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825048|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean SF-36 PCS and MCS Scores During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). A PCS score and MCS score are based on a normalized sum of the 8 scale scores; PCS/MCS summary concept score = (raw score*10) plus 50. Linear transformations were performed to transform scores to a mean of 50 and SDs of 10, in the general population. In norm-based scoring, each scale is scored to have same average (50)/SD (10). With this method anytime a scale score is below 50, health status is below average, and each point is one-tenth of a SD. Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Baseline and Week 56 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825049|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) Scores During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). A PCS score and MCS score are based on a normalized sum of the 8 scale scores; PCS/MCS summary concept score = (raw score*10) plus 50. Linear transformations were performed to transform scores to a mean of 50 and standard deviations (SDs) of 10, in the general population. In norm-based scoring, each scale is scored to have same average (50)/SD (10). With this method anytime a scale score is below 50, health status is below average, and each point is one-tenth of a SD. Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Baseline and Week 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n=number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825050|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to DLQI ≥5-Point Reduction From Baseline-A Response During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with Baseline-C DLQI ≥5, where Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825051|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DLQI ≥5-Point Reduction From Baseline-A Response During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with Baseline-C DLQI ≥5, where Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825052|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to DLQI ≥5-Point Reduction From Baseline-A Response During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with Baseline-A DLQI ≥5, where Baseline-A was defined as the last observation before the first dosing date in Period A.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825053|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DLQI ≥5-Point Reduction From Baseline-A Response During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with Baseline-A DLQI ≥5, where Baseline-A was defined as the last observation before the first dosing date in Period A.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825054|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by DLQI Severity Category During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). Severity is measured using the following categories of scores: 0-1=no effect on patients' lives; 2-5=small effect; 6-10=moderate effect; 11-20=very large effect; 21-30=extremely large effect.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||percentage of participants|||Number
825055|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DLQI ≤1 Response During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with a Baseline-C DLQI >1, where Baseline-C is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825056|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DLQI ≤1 Response During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B participants with Baseline-B DLQI >1 where Baseline-B defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.||percentage of participants|||Number
825057|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DLQI ≤1 Response During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with a Baseline-A DLQI ≤1, where Baseline-A is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825058|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DLQI ≥5 Point Reduction From Baseline-C Response During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline. Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with Baseline-C DLQI ≥5||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825059|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DLQI ≥5 Point Reduction From Baseline-B Response During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B participants with Baseline-B DLQI ≥5.||percentage of participants|||Number
825060|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DLQI ≥5 Point Reduction From Baseline-A Response During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with a Baseline-A DLQI ≥5, where Baseline-A is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A. n=participants with an observation.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825069|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-A in DLQI Score During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline. Baseline-A defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825061|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-C in DLQI Subscale Scores During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The DLQI can be analyzed under 6 subscales by combining questions and is categorized as follows: symptoms and feelings (maximum score=6); daily activities (maximum score=6); leisure (maximum score=6); work and school (maximum score=3); personal relationships (maximum score=6); and treatment (maximum score=3). The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline. Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825062|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-B in DLQI Subscale Scores During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The DLQI can be analyzed under 6 subscales by combining questions and is categorized as follows: symptoms and feelings (maximum score=6); daily activities (maximum score=6); leisure (maximum score=6); work and school (maximum score=3); personal relationships (maximum score=6); and treatment (maximum score=3). The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline. Baseline-B defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825063|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-A in DLQI Subscale Scores During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The DLQI can be analyzed under 6 subscales by combining questions and is categorized as follows: symptoms and feelings (maximum score=6); daily activities (maximum score=6); leisure (maximum score=6); work and school (maximum score=3); personal relationships (maximum score=6); and treatment (maximum score=3). The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline. Baseline-A defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825064|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean DLQI Subscale Scores During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The DLQI can be analyzed under 6 subscales by combining questions and is categorized as follows: symptoms and feelings (maximum score=6); daily activities (maximum score=6); leisure (maximum score=6); work and school (maximum score=3); personal relationships (maximum score=6); and treatment (maximum score=3).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825065|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean DLQI Subscale Scores During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The DLQI can be analyzed under 6 subscales by combining questions and is categorized as follows: symptoms and feelings (maximum score=6); daily activities (maximum score=6); leisure (maximum score=6); work and school (maximum score=3); personal relationships (maximum score=6); and treatment (maximum score=3).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825066|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean DLQI Subscale Scores During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The DLQI can be analyzed under 6 subscales by combining questions and is categorized as follows: symptoms and feelings (maximum score=6); daily activities (maximum score=6); leisure (maximum score=6); work and school (maximum score=3); personal relationships (maximum score=6); and treatment (maximum score=3).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825067|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-C in DLQI Score During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline. Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals number of participants with an observation||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825068|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-B in DLQI Score During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline. Baseline-B defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825071|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean DLQI Score During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825072|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825073|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to ISI Reduction (2-point Decrease in ISI Score) During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with Baseline-C ISI >1, where Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825074|NCT01186744|Secondary|ISI Reduction (2-point Decrease in ISI Score) During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C) - Percentage of Participant With a Response|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with Baseline-C ISI ≥2, where Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825075|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to ISI Reduction (2-point Decrease in ISI Score) During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with Baseline-A ISI ≥2, where Baseline-A was defined as the last observation before the first dosing date in Period A.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825076|NCT01186744|Secondary|ISI Reduction (2-point Decrease in ISI Score) During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A) - Percentage of Participants With a Response|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with Baseline-A ISI ≥2, where Baseline-A was defined as the last observation before the first dosing date in Period A.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825077|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to ISI Score of ≤1 During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with Baseline-C ISI >1, where Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825078|NCT01186744|Secondary|ISI Score of ≤1 During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C) - Percentage of Participants With a Response|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with a Baseline-C ISI >1, where Baseline-C is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825079|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to ISI Score of ≤1 During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with Baseline-A ISI >1, where Baseline-A was defined as the last observation before the first dosing date in Period A.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825080|NCT01186744|Secondary|ISI Score of ≤1 During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A) - Percentage of Participants With a Response|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with Baseline-A ISI >1, where Baseline-A was defined as the last observation before the first dosing date in Period A.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825081|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ISI ≥2-Point Reduction During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with a Baseline-C ISI ≥2, where Baseline-C is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825082|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ISI ≥2-Point Reduction During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with a Baseline-A ISI ≥2, where Baseline-A is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825083|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an ISI Score of ≤1 During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with a Baseline-C ISI >1, where Baseline-C is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825084|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ISI Score of ≤1 During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with a Baseline-A ISI >1, where Baseline-A is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825085|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ISI Score of 0 During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C participants with a Baseline-C ISI greater than (>) 0, where Baseline-C is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825086|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ISI Score of 0 During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A participants with a Baseline-A ISI greater than (>) 0, where Baseline-A is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825087|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-C in ISI Score During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends. Baseline-C defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825088|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-B in ISI Score During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends. Baseline-B defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825089|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-A in ISI Score During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends. Baseline-A defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825090|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean ISI Score During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825091|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean ISI Score During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825092|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Itch Severity Item (ISI) Score During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825132|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to PGA Response of Clear or Almost Clear During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C) Among Participants Who Had a PGA of Mild, Moderate, or Severe at the Beginning of Period C||Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825093|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI Score ≥125% of the Baseline-A PASI Score During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|PASI quantifies severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite score by investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head/neck, upper limbs, trunk, lower limbs), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for proportion of body region to the whole body. PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0-72.0; higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline-A defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825094|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI Score ≥125% of the Baseline-A PASI Score During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|PASI quantifies severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite score by investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head/neck, upper limbs, trunk, lower limbs), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for proportion of body region to the whole body. PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0-72.0; higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline-A defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||percentage of participants|||Number
825095|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI Score ≥125% of the Baseline-A PASI Score During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|PASI quantifies the severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite score by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk, and lower limbs), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0-72.0; higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825096|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving 100% Reduction in PASI Relative to Baseline-A (PASI100) During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|PASI quantifies severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite score by investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head/neck, upper limbs, trunk, lower limbs), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for proportion of body region to the whole body. PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0-72.0; higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline-A defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825097|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving at Least a 90% Reduction in PASI Relative to Baseline-A (PASI90) During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|PASI quantifies severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite score by investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head/neck, upper limbs, trunk, lower limbs), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for proportion of body region to the whole body. PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0-72.0; higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline-A defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825098|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving at Least a 50% Reduction in PASI Relative to Baseline-A (PASI50) During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|PASI quantifies severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite score by investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head/neck, upper limbs, trunk, lower limbs), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for proportion of body region to the whole body. PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0-72.0; higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline-A defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825099|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving at Least a 100% Reduction in PASI Relative to Baseline-A (PASI100) During Period A|PASI quantifies the severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and the percent of BSA) affected. PASI is a composite score by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk, and lower limbs), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for proportion of the body region to the whole body. PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825100|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving at Least a 90% Reduction in PASI Relative to Baseline-A (PASI90) During Period A|PASI quantifies the severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and the percent of BSA) affected. PASI is a composite score by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk, and lower limbs), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for proportion of the body region to the whole body. PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825101|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving at Least a 50% Reduction in PASI Relative to Baseline-A (PASI50) During Period A|PASI quantifies the severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and the percent of BSA) affected. PASI is a composite score by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk, and lower limbs), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for proportion of the body region to the whole body. PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; NRI||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825102|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in PASI Component Scores During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825103|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in PASI Component Scores During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825104|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in PASI Component Scores During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n equals number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825105|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean PASI Component Scores During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825106|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean PASI Component Scores During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825107|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean PASI Component Scores During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n equals number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825108|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-C in PASI Score During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline-C defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals number of participants with an observation||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825133|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to PASI75 Response During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C) For Those Who Had a >50% Reduction of Visit A4/Week 24 PASI Response During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|PASI75 response defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827202|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Oral Antifungal Started to Complete Therapy||Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825109|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-B in PASI Score During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline-B defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825110|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline-A in PASI Score During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline-A defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825111|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean PASI Score During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825112|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean PASI Score During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis. Baseline defined as last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825113|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean PASI Score During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825114|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Percent of Psoriatic BSA by Body Region During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|Baseline defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||percent psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825115|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Percent of Psoriatic BSA by Body Region During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Baseline defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||percent psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825116|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Percent of Psoriatic BSA by Body Region During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|Baseline defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n equals number of participants with an observation||percent change in psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825117|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Percent of Psoriatic BSA by Body Region During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The %surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||percent psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825118|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Percent of Psoriatic BSA by Body Region During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The %surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||percent psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825119|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Percent of Psoriatic BSA by Body Region During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The %surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n equals number of participants with an observation||percent psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825120|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Total Percent of Psoriatic BSA During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|Baseline was defined as the last observation until first dosing date in Period C.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals number of participants with an observation||percent change in psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825121|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Total Percent of Psoriatic BSA During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Baseline defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period B.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||percent change in psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825122|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Total Percent of Psoriatic BSA During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|Baseline defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n equals number of participants with an observation||percent change in psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825123|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Total Percent of Psoriatic BSA During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The %surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C; n equals the number of participants with an observation||percent psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825124|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Total Percent of Psoriatic BSA During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The %surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; n equals the number of participants with observations||percent psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825125|NCT01186744|Secondary|Mean Total Percent of Psoriatic Body Surface Area (BSA) During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The %surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A; n equals the number of participants with an observation.||percent psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
825126|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PGA Response of Clear or Almost Clear During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) on a 5-point scale where 0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe. 95% confidence interval is constructed using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution of one-sample proportion.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825127|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PGA Response of Clear or Almost Clear During Double-Blind Withdrawal Treatment (Period B)|PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) on a 5-point scale where 0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe. 95% confidence interval is constructed using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution of two-sample proportion.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B||percentage of participants|||Number
825128|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PGA Response of Clear or Almost Clear During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) on a 5-point scale where 0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe. 95% confidence interval is constructed using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution of one-sample proportion.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825129|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI75 Response During the CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C)|PASI75 response defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to baseline. PASI responses in each period are relative to Baseline-A, where Baseline-A is defined as the last observation until first dosing date in Period A. 95% confidence interval is constructed using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution of one-sample proportion.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825130|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI75 Response During Double-Blind Withdrawal Treatment (Period B)|PASI75 response defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to baseline. PASI responses in each period are relative to Baseline-A, where Baseline-A is defined as the last observation until first dosing date in Period A. 95% confidence interval is constructed using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution of one-sample proportion.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B||percentage of participants|||Number
825131|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI75 Response During the Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|PASI75 response defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to baseline. Baseline defined as the last observation up to the first dosing date in Period A. 95% confidence interval is constructed using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution of one-sample proportion.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825134|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Regaining PASI75 and PGA Response (PGA of Clear or Almost Clear) During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C) Who Had Lost Both PASI75 Response and PGA Response at the Beginning of Period C|PASI75 response defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to baseline. PASI responses at each period are relative to Baseline-A, where Baseline-A is defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A. 95% confidence interval constructed using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution of one-sample proportion.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825135|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to Regain PASI75 and PGA Response (Clear or Almost Clear) During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C) Among Participants Who Lost Both PASI75 Response and PGA Response (Clear or Almost Clear) at the Beginning of Period C|PASI75 response defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825136|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Regaining PASI75 and PGA Response (Clear or Almost Clear) During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C) Among Participants Who Lost Both PASI75 Response and PGA Response (Clear or Almost Clear) at the Beginning of Period C|PASI75 response defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825137|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to Loss of >50% of the Visit A4/Week 24 PASI Response and Loss of PGA Response (Clear or Almost Clear) During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)||Week 24 (Period A) and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825138|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Maintaining Adequate PASI Response and Maintaining PGA Response (Clear or Almost Clear) During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Adequate PASI response defined as less than or equal to 50% reduction of the Visit A4/Week 24 PASI Response.|Week 24 (Period A) and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825139|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PASI Score ≥125% of Baseline-A or New Type of Psoriasis (Pustular, Erythrodermic) During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI responses at each period are relative to Baseline-A where Baseline-A was defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A. 95% confidence interval is constructed using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution of two-sample proportion.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B; Overall number (n) indicates the total number of participants with PASI Score ≥125% of baseline at least once during Weeks 4 to 16 of Period B.||percentage of participants|||Number
825140|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PASI Score ≥125% of Baseline-A or New Type of Psoriasis (Pustular, Erythrodermic) During the Period Between Week 24 and Week 32 (Period B)|The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI responses at each period are relative to Baseline-A where Baseline-A was defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A. Weeks 4 and 8 are relative to the Period B baseline and are the same as Weeks 28 and 32, which are relative to Period A baseline. 95% confidence interval is constructed using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution of two-sample proportion.|Weeks 4 and 8 (Period B)|FAS-B; Overall number (n) indicates the total number of participants with PASI Score ≥125% of baseline at least once during Weeks 4 to 8 of Period B.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825141|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to Loss of Adequate Response During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Adequate response defined as >50% reduction of the Visit A4/Week 24 (last visit in Period A) PASI response.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825142|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participant Maintaining an Adequate Response During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|Adequate response defined as >50% reduction of the Visit A4/Week 24 (last visit in Period A) PASI response.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825143|NCT01186744|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Both a PASI50-75 Response and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) ≤5 Response During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|PASI50-75 response defined as a reduction of at least 50% but less than 75%. The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess participant health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825144|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to PGA Response of Clear or Almost Clear During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|FAS-A||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825145|NCT01186744|Secondary|Median Time to PASI75 Response During Initial CP-690,550 Treatment (Period A)|The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. PASI75 response defined as 75% reduction in PASI relative to baseline.|Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 (Period A)|The Period A-Full Analysis Set (FAS-A) included all participants who were randomized at baseline and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 5mg BID or 10 mg BID) during Period A.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825157|NCT01187004|Secondary|Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Length of Stay|If extracardiac complications, especially acute lung injury, prolonged Intensive Care Unit (ICU) length of stay due to longer mechanical ventilation.|at 28 days|The analysis of the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) length of stay was done on all the patients included in the study. We want to evaluate if the development of acute lung injury prolongs the intensive care unit length of stay.ICU length of stay was calculated up to 28 days,and patients who died before were considered as having the maximum value||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825146|NCT01186744|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a PGA Response of Clear or Almost Clear During CP-690,550 Re-treatment (Period C) Among Participants Who Had a PGA of Mild, Moderate, or Severe During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|The Period C-Full Analysis Set (FAS-C) included all FAS-B participants who were advanced to the re-treatment period (Period C) during the 16 weeks of Period B and had received at least one dose of investigational drug (CP-690,550 5 mg BID or 10 mg BID) during Period C.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825147|NCT01186744|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a PASI75 Response During CP-690,550 Re-Treatment (Period C) Among Those Who Had a Greater Than (>)50% Reduction of Visit A4/Week 24 PASI Response During Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. PASI75 response is defined as at least 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline/Day 1. Baseline defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period C. PASI responses at each period were relative to Baseline-A, where Baseline-A was defined as the last observation up to first dosing date in Period A.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 16 (Period C)|FAS-C||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825148|NCT01186744|Primary|Percentage of Participants Maintaining a Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) Response During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal (Period B)|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 (Period B)|FAS-B||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825149|NCT01186744|Primary|Percentage of Participants Maintaining a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI75) Response During the Double-Blind Treatment Withdrawal Period (Period B)|The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both lesion severity and the percent of body surface area (BSA) affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI75 response defined as at least a 75 percent (%) reduction in PASI relative to baseline.|Weeks 4, 8 12, and 16 (Period B)|The Period B-Full Analysis Set (FAS-B) included all participants who were re-randomized at the end of Period A and received at least 1dose of investigational drug (CP-690,550 5 mg BID or 10 mg BID) or placebo at the beginning of Period B.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825150|NCT01186796|Secondary|Mean GH Half-Life in Response to Secretagogue|Subjects were administered 4 different secretagogues: (i) L-arginine/Saline, (ii) L-arginine/Ghrelin, (iii) L-arginine/GHRH, and (iv) L-arginine / GHRH + Ghrelin. The result was calculated on each 6-hr pool of data by utilizing a previously published deconvolution method and analyzed via two-way ANOVA.|Withdrawal of blood samples (2.5 mL each) every 10 min for 6 hr. Sampling will begin at 0800 h and conclude at 1400 h.|||min||Standard Error|Mean
825151|NCT01186796|Secondary|Mean Duration of GH Bursts (Mode) in Response to Secretagogue|Subjects were administered 4 different secretagogues: (i) L-arginine/Saline, (ii) L-arginine/Ghrelin, (iii) L-arginine/GHRH, and (iv) L-arginine / GHRH + Ghrelin. The result was calculated on each 6-hr pool of data by utilizing a previously published deconvolution method and analyzed via two-way ANOVA.|Withdrawal of blood samples (2.5 mL each) every 10 min for 6 hr. Sampling will begin at 0800 h and conclude at 1400 h.|||min||Standard Error|Mean
825152|NCT01186796|Secondary|Mean Mass of GH Released Per Burst in Response to Secretagogue|Subjects were administered 4 different secretagogues: (i) L-arginine/Saline, (ii) L-arginine/Ghrelin, (iii) L-arginine/GHRH, and (iv) L-arginine / GHRH + Ghrelin. The result was calculated on each 6-hr pool of data by utilizing a previously published deconvolution method and analyzed via two-way ANOVA.|Withdrawal of blood samples (2.5 mL each) every 10 min for 6 hr. Sampling will begin at 0800 h and conclude at 1400 h.|||ug/L||Standard Error|Mean
825153|NCT01186796|Secondary|Mean GH Concentration (Pulsatile) in Response to Secretagogue|Subjects were administered 4 different secretagogues: (i) L-arginine/Saline, (ii) L-arginine/Ghrelin, (iii) L-arginine/GHRH, and (iv) L-arginine / GHRH + Ghrelin. The result was calculated by averaging values over the 6 hour collection timeframe.|Withdrawal of blood samples (2.5 mL each) every 10 min for 6 hr. Sampling will begin at 0800 h and conclude at 1400 h.|||ug/L/6h||Standard Error|Mean
825154|NCT01186796|Primary|Mean Baseline GH Concentration|Averaged over 90-min baseline on the saline day.|Withdrawal of blood samples (2.5 mL each) every 10 min for 6 hr. Sampling will begin at 0800 h and conclude at 1400 h.|||ug/L||Standard Error|Mean
825155|NCT01186848|Primary|Live-rater by Two Blinded Dermatologists|"The primary outcome was a blinded rating of the treatment area (Fractional Laser vs. Fractional Laser plus Intense Focused Ultrasound) with the best cosmetic appearance. Two dermatologists blindly evaluated the treated and control areas of each side from live subjects on the final follow up visit (week 10). This was reported as percentages of participants for whom 1550-nm Erbium-doped Fractionated Laser or Micro-focused Ultrasound and 1550nm-fractionated Laser resulted in the best cosmetic appearance."|week 10|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825156|NCT01186939|Primary|Number of Participants in Different Categories of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events for the Extension Period|Participant counts for a variety of subsets of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs)during the extension study period (43-68 months). Subsets include participants counts for serious TEAEs, serious TEAEs that the investigator evaluated as releated to treatment, TEAEs leading to discontinuation of therapy, or a dose reduction, or a dose interruption.|43- 68 months|Safety population includes all 40 participants in the extension study.||participants|||Number
825158|NCT01187004|Primary|Acute Lung Injury After Cardiac Surgery|to evaluate the incidence of acute lung injury (ALI) in patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary by pass and to identify the main predictors.Diagnosis of Acute Lung Injury (ALI) was made according to the American-European Consensus conference criteria, including acute onset, PaO2 /FiO2 <300 regardless of Positive End Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) level, bilateral and diffuse opacities on chest radiograph, absence of left ventricular failure, or history of lung disease.|at seven days after intervention|Patients consecutively admitted to the cardiac Intensive Care Unit (cICU) after cardiac surgery on cardiopulmonary by pass (CPB), during a time frame of two years.The analysis was per protocol, to identify the predictors of acute lung injury after cardiac surgery.||participants|||Number
825159|NCT01187017|Secondary|Secondary Endpoints Will Evaluated for the Study to Include: (a) Hematologic Response at 3 and 12 Months and Yearly Thereafter; (b) Relapse (c) Clonal Evolution to Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria (PNH), Myelodysplasia or Acute Leukemia; (e) Survival.||12 months||||||
825160|NCT01187017|Primary|Response Rate at 6 Months|The primary objective is to assess the Flu/Cy hematological response in SAA.The primary endpoint will be response at six months.|6 months|||participants|||Number
825161|NCT01187043|Primary|Induction Amenorrhea|Induction of amenorrhea as determined by suppression of ovulation and/or menses, measured by using ovulation timing kits and daily diary for bleeding. Five doses will be compared in an escalating-dose, to independent groups, to a run-in placebo treatment period.|10 weeks|Per protocol: subjects who exhibited trough levels of proellex on at least 7 of the 10 weekly visits during the dosing period||participants|||Number
825162|NCT01187355|Secondary|Likert Statement: When I Use This Solution, I Forget I am Wearing my Lenses.|As interpreted and reported by the subject on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of the last three days of wearing experience. A 5-point Likert scale was used, where 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree; 3=neither disagree nor agree; 4=agree; 5=strongly agree.|Day 30|All enrolled and dispensed subjects with an on-regimen follow-up visit.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825163|NCT01187355|Secondary|Likert Statement: When I Use This Solution, My Lenses Are Comfortable From Morning Until Evening.|As interpreted and reported by the subject on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of the last three days of wearing experience. A 5-point Likert scale was used, where 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree; 3=neither disagree nor agree; 4=agree; 5=strongly agree.|Day 30|All enrolled and dispensed subjects with an on-regimen follow-up visit.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825164|NCT01187355|Primary|Likert Statement: When I Use This Solution, I Can Comfortably Wear my Lenses.|As interpreted and reported by the subject on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of the last three days of wearing experience. A 5-point Likert scale was used, where 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree; 3=neither disagree nor agree; 4=agree; 5=strongly agree.|Day 30|All enrolled and dispensed subjects with an on-regimen follow-up visit.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825165|NCT01187433|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection-Site and Systemic Reactions Following Any and Each Vaccination With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Injection-site reactions: Pain, Erythema, and Swelling. Systemic reactions: Fever, Headache, Malaise, Myalgia, and Asthenia. Grade 3 Injection-site reactions (9 to 11 years): Pain, Incapacitating, unable to perform usual activities; Erythema and Swelling, ≥5 cm. Grade 3 Injection site reactions (≥12 years): Pain, Significant; prevents daily activity; Erythema and Swelling, >10 cm. Grade 3 Systemic reactions: Fever, ≥39˚C; Headache, Malaise, Myalgia, and Asthenia, Significant; prevents daily activity.|Day 0 up to Day 14 post each vaccination|Solicited injection-site and systemic reactions were assessed in the Safety Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825166|NCT01187433|Primary|Geometric Mean Titer Ratios (GMTRs) of Flavivirus naïve Subjects Against Each Serotype With the Parental of Dengue Virus Strains Before and After Vaccinations With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Geometric mean titers were assessed using the Dengue Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT). Flavivirus naïve subjects at baseline are defined as those subjects with <10 (1/dil) for all serotypes with parental dengue virus strains and for yellow fever titer.|Before and 28 days after each injection|Geometric mean titer ratios were assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Titer ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825167|NCT01187433|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) of Flavivirus Immune Subjects Against Each Serotype With the Parental of Dengue Virus Strains Before and After Vaccinations With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Geometric mean titers were assessed using the Dengue Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT). Flavivirus immune subjects at baseline are defined as those subjects with ≥10 (1/dil) for at least 1 serotype with the parental dengue virus strain or for the yellow fever titer.|Before and 28 days after each injection|Geometric mean titers were assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Titers (1/dilutions)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825168|NCT01187433|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) Against Each Serotype With the Parental of Dengue Virus Strains Before and After Vaccinations With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Geometric mean titers were assessed using the Dengue Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT).|Before and 28 days after each injection|Geometric mean titers were assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Titers (1/dilutions)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825169|NCT01187433|Primary|Geometric Mean Titer Ratios (GMTRs) Against Each Serotype With the Parental of Dengue Virus Strains Before and After Vaccinations With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Geometric mean titer ratios were assessed using the Dengue Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT).|Before and 28 days after each injection|Geometric mean titer ratios were assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Titer ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825170|NCT01187433|Primary|Percentage of Flavivirus Naïve Subjects With Seropositivity Against At Least 1, 2, 3, or 4 Parental Dengue Virus Serotypes Before and After Vaccinations With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Seropositivity was defined as participants achieving neutralizing antibody titers ≥10 (1/dil) against each serotype and was assessed using the Dengue Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT). Flavivirus naïve subjects at baseline are defined as those subjects with <10 (1/dil) for all serotypes with parental dengue virus strains and for yellow fever titer.|Before and 28 days after each injection|Seropositivity was assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825240|NCT01187550|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Insulin at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|ITT population set included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘N’ (Number of participants analyzed) signified those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||picomole/L (pmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825171|NCT01187433|Primary|Percentage of Flavivirus Immune Subjects With Seropositivity Against At Least 1, 2, 3, or 4 Parental Dengue Virus Serotypes Before and After Vaccinations With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Seropositivity was defined as participants achieving neutralizing antibody titers ≥10 (1/dil) against each serotype and was assessed using the Dengue Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT). Flavivirus immune subjects at baseline are defined as those subjects with ≥10 (1/dil) for at least 1 serotype with the parental dengue virus strain or for the yellow fever titer.|Before and 28 days after each injection|Seropositivity was assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825172|NCT01187433|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Seropositivity Against At Least 1, 2, 3, or 4 Parental Dengue Virus Serotypes Before and After Vaccinations With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Seropositivity was defined as participants achieving neutralizing antibody titers ≥10 (1/dil) against each serotype and was assessed using the Dengue Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT).|Before and 28 days after each injection|Seropositivity was assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825173|NCT01187433|Primary|Percentage of Flavivirus Naïve Subjects With Seropositivity Against Each Serotype With the Parental Dengue Virus Strains Before and After Vaccinations With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Seropositivity was defined as participants achieving neutralizing antibody titers ≥10 (1/dil) against each serotype and was assessed using the Dengue Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT). Flavivirus naïve subjects at baseline are defined as those subjects with <10 (1/dil) for all serotypes with parental dengue virus strains and for yellow fever titer.|Before and 28 Days after each injection|Seropositivity was assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825174|NCT01187433|Primary|Percentage of Flavivirus Immune Participants With Seropositivity Against Each Serotype With the Parental Dengue Virus Strains Before and After Vaccinations With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Seropositivity was defined as participants achieving neutralizing antibody titers ≥10 (1/dil) against each serotype and was assessed using the Dengue Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT). Flavivirus immune subjects at baseline are defined as those subjects with ≥10 (1/dil) for at least 1 serotype with the parental dengue virus strain or for the yellow fever titer.|Before and 28 days after each injection|Seropositivity was assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825175|NCT01187433|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Seropositivity Against Each Serotype With the Parental Dengue Virus Strains Before and After Vaccinations With Either CYD Dengue Vaccine or a Placebo|Seropositivity was defined as participants achieving neutralizing antibody titers ≥10 (1/dil) against each serotype and was assessed using the Dengue Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT).|Before and 28 days after each injection|Seropositivity was assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825176|NCT01187498|Secondary|Patient Desire for Alternate Treatment|"Patient response to Do you wish to receive another form of treatment? (yes)"|post-treatment (week 8)|Completers minus one missing value||participants|||Number
825177|NCT01187498|Secondary|Patient Global Rating of Bothersomeness of Side Effects|"Patient global rating of how bothersome their side effects were (no side effects to extremely bothersome)"|post-treatment (week 8)|Completers minus one missing value||participants|||Number
825178|NCT01187498|Secondary|Patient Report of Symptom Distress|"Patient report of how disturbed they were by symptoms (not at all to extremely)"|post-treatment (week 8)|Completers minos one missing value||participants|||Number
825179|NCT01187498|Secondary|Patient Global Rating of Activity Restriction|"Patient global rating of activity restriction (not at all to all the time)"|post-treatment (week 8)|Com0leters minus one missing value||participants|||Number
825180|NCT01187498|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction|"Patient global rating of satisfaction with progress in treatment (completely satisfied to very dissatisfied)"|post-treatment (week 8)|Completers minus one missing value||participants|||Number
825181|NCT01187498|Secondary|Patient Global Perception of Improvement (GPI)|"Patient global perception of improvement (much better to much worse)"|post-treatment (week 8)|Completers minus one missing value||participants|||Number
825182|NCT01187498|Secondary|Change on American Urological Association (AUA) Symptom Index|Change in score on American Urological Association (AUA) Symptom Index (baseline to week 8). The index measures lower urinary tract symptoms. Scores range from 0 to 35, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms.|baseline to post-treatment (week 8)|Completers||Scores on the scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825183|NCT01187498|Secondary|Percent Change in Frequency of Urge Incontinence|Percent change in frequency of urge incontinence episodes based on 7-day bladder diary. Percent change was calculated as ([frequency at baseline] - [frequency at 8 weeks]) / (frequency at baseline).|baseline to post-treatment (week 8)|Included participants who experienced incontinence at baseline only||Percent change in episodes per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
825184|NCT01187498|Secondary|Change in Urgency Severity|"Indevus Urgency Severity Scale incorporated into the 7-day bladder diary. Scores for urgency severity ranged from 0 to 3:
0: None—no urgency
Mild—awareness of urgency, but is easily tolerated.
Moderate—enough urgency discomfort that it interferes with or shortens usual activity
Severe—extreme urgency discomfort that abruptly stops all activities or tasks."|baseline to post-treatment (week 8)|Participants who completed treatment and returned bladder diary with useable urgency scores||Score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825185|NCT01187498|Secondary|Change in Nocturia Frequency|Change in frequency of nocturia episodes based on 7-day bladder diary|baseline to post-treatment (week 8)|||nocturia episodes per night||Standard Deviation|Mean
825186|NCT01187498|Primary|24-hour Voiding Frequency|Mean voiding frequency per 24 hours derived from 7-day bladder dairy|post-treatment (week 8)|Treatment completers||voids per 24-hour day||Standard Deviation|Mean
825187|NCT01187511|Secondary|Spontaneous Alcohol Craving Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value).|Day 7 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline craving measure taken 4 days after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825297|NCT01181726|Primary|AUC0-inf of Norethindrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone AUC0-inf.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825188|NCT01187511|Secondary|Spontaneous Alcohol Craving Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value).|Day 4 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline craving measure taken 4 days after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825189|NCT01187511|Secondary|Spontaneous Alcohol Craving Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value).|Day 32 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline craving measure taken 4 days after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825190|NCT01187511|Secondary|Spontaneous Alcohol Craving Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value).|Day 28 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline craving measure taken 4 days after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825191|NCT01187511|Secondary|Spontaneous Alcohol Craving Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value).|Day 25 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline craving measure taken 4 days after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825192|NCT01187511|Secondary|Spontaneous Alcohol Craving Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value).|Day 21 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline craving measure taken 4 days after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825193|NCT01187511|Secondary|Spontaneous Alcohol Craving Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value).|Day 18 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline craving measure taken 4 days after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825194|NCT01187511|Secondary|Spontaneous Alcohol Craving Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value).|Day 14 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline craving measure taken 4 days after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825195|NCT01187511|Secondary|Spontaneous Alcohol Craving Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value).|Day 11 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline craving measure taken 4 days after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825196|NCT01187511|Secondary|Spontaneous Alcohol Craving Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value).|Day 1 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline craving measure taken 4 days after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825197|NCT01187511|Secondary|Depression Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 7 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline depression symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825198|NCT01187511|Secondary|Depression Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 4 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline depression symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825199|NCT01187511|Secondary|Depression Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 32 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline depression symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825200|NCT01187511|Secondary|Depression Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 28 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline depression symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825201|NCT01187511|Secondary|Depression Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 25 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline depression symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825202|NCT01187511|Secondary|Depression Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 21 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline depression symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825203|NCT01187511|Secondary|Depression Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 18 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline depression symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825204|NCT01187511|Secondary|Depression Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 14 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline depression symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825205|NCT01187511|Secondary|Depression Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 11 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline depression symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825206|NCT01187511|Secondary|Depression Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 1 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline depression symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825207|NCT01187511|Secondary|Anxiety Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 7 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline anxiety symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825241|NCT01187550|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Glucose at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|ITT population set included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘N’ (Number of participants analyzed) signified those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||millimole/liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825208|NCT01187511|Secondary|Anxiety Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 4 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline anxiety symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825209|NCT01187511|Secondary|Anxiety Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 32 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline anxiety symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825210|NCT01187511|Secondary|Anxiety Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 28 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline anxiety symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825211|NCT01187511|Secondary|Anxiety Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 25 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline anxiety symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825212|NCT01187511|Secondary|Anxiety Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 21 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline anxiety symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825213|NCT01187511|Secondary|Anxiety Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 18 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline anxiety symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825214|NCT01187511|Secondary|Anxiety Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 14 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline anxiety symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825215|NCT01187511|Secondary|Anxiety Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 11 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline anxiety symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825216|NCT01187511|Secondary|Anxiety Symptom Ratings Measured Bi-weekly During the Treatment Period|Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity).|Day 1 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who had a baseline anxiety symptom rating taken 1 day after inpatient admission (but prior to enrollment in this protocol), and who completed all 32 days of the treatment period||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825242|NCT01187550|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 (IGFBP-3) Levels at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|ITT population set included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||microgram/mL (mcg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
827280|NCT01203852|Secondary|Adverse Metabolic Effects|Change in glucose after treatment with study medication|after 6-8 weeks treatment|All patients with change in glucose data||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825217|NCT01187511|Secondary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Trier/Cue-reactivity Procedure|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|70 minutes after the beginning of the Trier/cue-reactivity procedure, which occurred on Day 21 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed the full Trier/cue-reactivity procedure||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825218|NCT01187511|Secondary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Trier/Cue-reactivity Procedure|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|40 minutes after the beginning of the Trier/cue-reactivity procedure, which occurred on Day 21 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed the full Trier/cue-reactivity procedure||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825219|NCT01187511|Secondary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Trier/Cue-reactivity Procedure|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|20 minutes after the beginning of the Trier/cue-reactivity procedure, which occurred on Day 21 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed the full Trier/cue-reactivity procedure||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825220|NCT01187511|Secondary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Trier/Cue-reactivity Procedure|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|15 minutes prior to the beginning of the Trier/cue-reactivity procedure, which occurred on Day 21 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed the full Trier/cue-reactivity procedure||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825221|NCT01187511|Secondary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Trier/Cue-reactivity Procedure|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|100 minutes after the beginning of the Trier/cue-reactivity procedure, which occurred on Day 21 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed the full Trier/cue-reactivity procedure||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825222|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|90 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825223|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|75 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825224|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|60 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825225|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|5 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825226|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|45 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825227|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|30 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825292|NCT01181726|Secondary|AUC0-t of Uncorrected Total Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for Uncorrected Total Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825228|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|15 minutes prior to the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825229|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|15 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825230|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|90 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825231|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|75 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825232|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|60 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825233|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|5 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825234|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|45 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825235|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|30 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825236|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|15 minutes prior to the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825237|NCT01187511|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|15 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 25, 26, or 27 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825238|NCT01187550|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Lipid Profile at Week 4|Total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol and triglycerides levels were evaluated.|Baseline and Week 4|ITT population set included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘N’ (Number of participants analyzed) signified those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
825239|NCT01187550|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) Test at Week 4|HOMA-IR is used to assess insulin resistance and calculated by an empirical mathematical formula based on fasting plasma glucose and fasting plasma insulin levels. HOMA-IR = fasting plasma insulin (picomole/liter [pmol/L]) * fasting plasma glucose (millimole/liter [mmol/L]) divided by 22.5.|Baseline and Week 4|ITT population set included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘N’ (Number of participants analyzed) signified those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||pmol/L*mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
825243|NCT01187550|Primary|Change From Baseline in Serum Insulin Like Growth Factor-1 Standard Deviation Score (IGF-1 SDS) Levels at Week 4|Insulin Like Growth Factor-1 Standard Deviation Score (IGF-1 SDS) was calculated as logarithm (log) 10 actual value of IGF-1 - log 10 (mean reference value of IGF-1) divided by log10 reference standard deviation of IGF-1.|Baseline and Week 4|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population set included all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||nanogram/millilter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825244|NCT01187771|Secondary|Mean 24-hour Diastolic Blood Pressure||9 months|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
825245|NCT01187771|Secondary|Direct Health Care Costs||9 months|Data not collected.|||||
825246|NCT01187771|Secondary|Depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9)|The PHQ-9 is scored from 0-27 with higher scores indicating more severe depression.|9 months|||PHQ-9 scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825247|NCT01187771|Secondary|Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index|The Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index results in scores ranging from 1-7, with higher scores indicating a higher quality of life.|9 months|||Units on Quality of Life Index||Standard Deviation|Mean
825248|NCT01187771|Secondary|Insulin Resistance (HOMA Index)||9 months|Data were not collected.|||||
825249|NCT01187771|Secondary|Mean 24-hour Systolic Blood Pressure||9 months|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
825250|NCT01187771|Primary|Epworth Sleepiness Score|The Epworth Sleepiness Scale results in scores ranging from 0-24, where scores of 0-10 indicate normal levels of sleepiness while 11-24 indicate excessive daytime sleepiness.|9 months|||Units on Epworth Sleepiness scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825251|NCT01187771|Primary|Effective Apnea Hypopnea Index|The Effective Apnea Hypopnea Index (AHI) is the actual frequency of apneas and hypopneas per hour that the patient is exposed to. It is calculated as the AHI while on CPAP times the proportion of sleep time that CPAP was used plus the AHI off CPAP times the proportion of sleep time that CPAP is not used.|9 months|||Events per hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
825252|NCT01187901|Secondary|Change in Number of Duodenal Polyps From Baseline to 6 Months in Attenuated FAP Participants|A comparison between the Sulindac-erlotinib and Placebo arm Attenuated FAP subgroups of the change in number of polyps in a 10-centimeter segment of the duodenum (6-month polyp count minus baseline polyp count)|Baseline and 6 months|Attenuated FAP participants are defined with the presence of a mutation in a portion of the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene known to correlate with attenuated FAP and presentation of a milder phenotype in terms of polyp density in the participant and the family. All participants with attenuated FAP had a confirmed mutation in the APC gene.||polyps||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825253|NCT01187901|Secondary|Change in Number of Duodenal Polyps From Baseline to 6 Months in Classic FAP Participants|A comparison between the Sulindac-erlotinib and Placebo arm Classic FAP subgroups of the change in number of polyps in a 10-centimeter segment of the duodenum (6-month polyp count minus baseline polyp count)|Baseline and 6 months|Classic FAP participants are defined as those presenting with more than 100 colonic adenomas and either (1) multiple family members with a classic FAP phenotype or (2) an adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) mutation in a region of the gene known to correlate with Classic FAP, or (3) both||polyps||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825254|NCT01187901|Secondary|Change in Number of Duodenal Polyps From Baseline to 6 Months|A comparison between the Sulindac-erlotinib and Placebo arms of the change in number of polyps in a 10-centimeter segment of the duodenum (6-month polyp count minus baseline polyp count).|Baseline and 6 months|||polyps||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825255|NCT01187901|Secondary|Change in Duodenal Polyp Burden From Baseline to 6 Months in Attenuated FAP Participants|A comparison between the Sulindac-erlotinib and Placebo arm Attenuated FAP subgroups of the change in polyp burden from a 10-centimeter segment of the duodenum, measured as the sum of the diameters of the polyps, in millimeters (mm), from the duodenal segment (6-month polyp burden minus baseline polyp burden).|Baseline and 6 months|Attenuated FAP participants are defined with the presence of a mutation in a portion of the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene known to correlate with attenuated FAP and presentation of a milder phenotype in terms of polyp density in the participant and the family. All participants with attenuated FAP had a confirmed mutation in the APC gene.||mm||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825256|NCT01187901|Secondary|Change in Duodenal Polyp Burden From Baseline to 6 Months in Classic Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP) Participants|A comparison between the Sulindac-erlotinib and Placebo arm Classic FAP subgroups of the change in polyp burden from a 10-centimeter segment of the duodenum, measured as the sum of the diameters of the polyps, in millimeters (mm), from the duodenal segment (6-month polyp burden minus baseline polyp burden).|Baseline and 6 months|Classic FAP participants are defined as those presenting with more than 100 colonic adenomas and either (1) multiple family members with a classic FAP phenotype or (2) an adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) mutation in a region of the gene known to correlate with Classic FAP, or (3) both.||mm||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825257|NCT01187901|Primary|Change in Duodenal Polyp Burden From Baseline to 6 Months|A comparison between the Sulindac-erlotinib and Placebo arms of the change in polyp burden from a 10-centimeter segment of the duodenum, measured as the sum of the diameters of the polyps, in millimeters (mm), from the duodenal segment (6-month polyp burden minus baseline polyp burden).|Baseline and 6 months|||mm||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825258|NCT01187914|Primary|Left Atrial (LA) Remodeling Pre-ablation|Utah staging for fibrosis (I - <=5%, II - 5.01%-20.0%, III - 20.01%-35% and IV - >=35.01%)|Once pre-ablation|||participants|||Number
825259|NCT01187953|Secondary|For the 24-month Analysis, the Endpoint Includes Additional Treatment Failures That Occurred During the 12-month Treatment Extension Period, up to Day 734 After the Randomization Date.|Treatment failure is a composite endpoint; a patient is considered a treatment failure if the patient experienced any of the following events during this period (day 1 to day 734): death, graft failure, BPAR (Banff grade ≥1A) or lost to follow-up.|734 days|All 543 randomized patients were included in the analysis population.||participants|||Number
825260|NCT01187953|Primary|The Primary Efficacy Endpoint for the Study is the Proportion of Treatment Failures Within 12 Months After Randomization to Study Drug.|Treatment failure is a composite endpoint; a patient is considered a treatment failure if the patient experienced any of the following events during this period: death, graft failure, BPAR (Banff grade ≥1A) or lost to follow-up.|360 days|All 543 randomized patients were included in the analysis population.||participants|||Number
828856|NCT01221441|Secondary|The Incidence and Severity of Adverse Events in Treated Patients|The incidence and severity of adverse events assessed through 104 weeks (2 years) after dose administration|2 Years|All patients receiving treatment with either active or placebo||participants|||Number
825261|NCT01188109|Secondary|Immunohistochemistry to Determine Status of Excision Repair Cross Complementation Gene-1 (ERCC1) Expression|To determine the level of ERCC1 expression, formalin-fixed, resected tumors were stained with anti-ERCC1 monoclonal antibody (clone 8F1; Neomarkers, Fremont, CA, USA) using the Dako Autostainer (Ft. Collins, CO). The percentage and intensity of fine granular nuclear staining were graded by a single pathologist. Percentage of staining was categorized into the following groups: 0 ≤ 1%; 1 = 1–10%; 2 = 11–50%; 3 = 51–100%. Staining intensity was scored as follows: 0 = none; 1 = weak; 2 = moderate; 3 = strong. Subsequently, an overall score to dichotomize the expression level to low or high was calculated: [(1+intensity score)/3]*percentage score. An overall score ≤ 2 was considered low ERCC1 expression, and > 2 was high ERCC1 expression.|At the time of resection|Twenty patients had tissue available for ERCC1 analysis.||patients|||Number
825262|NCT01188109|Primary|Recurrence-free Survival as Measured by CT Scan|Clinical data were prospectively collected. Staging was performed using 7th American Committee on Cancer criteria. Patients were followed by radiologic evaluation (CT or MRI) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) every 3 months for the first 3 years after resection to assess for recurrence. Subsequently, patients underwent imaging every 6 months.|Every 3 months and then every 6 months for 2 more years after resection|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825263|NCT01188226|Secondary|Denture Teeth Calculus|Clinical evaluation of calculus for anterior teeth and posterior teeth on left and right sides on four-point scale (0= none; 1 = present on ≤ 1/3 of gingival margins; 2 = present on > 1/3 of gingival margins and parts of fissures and/or individual spots around cervical portion of tooth; 3 = covering more than ½ of gingival margins and the complete fissures and/or continuous heavy band of calculus around cervical portion of the tooth)|24 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 24-month follow-up. Anterior, right-posterior, and left-posterior denture teeth areas of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.||participants|||Number
825264|NCT01188226|Secondary|Denture Teeth Calculus|Clinical evaluation of calculus for anterior teeth and posterior teeth on left and right sides on four-point scale (0= none; 1 = present on ≤ 1/3 of gingival margins; 2 = present on > 1/3 of gingival margins and parts of fissures and/or individual spots around cervical portion of tooth; 3 = covering more than ½ of gingival margins and the complete fissures and/or continuous heavy band of calculus around cervical portion of the tooth)|18 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 18-month follow-up. Anterior, right-posterior, and left-posterior denture teeth areas of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.||participants|||Number
825265|NCT01188226|Secondary|Denture Teeth Calculus|Clinical evaluation of calculus for anterior teeth and posterior teeth on left and right sides on four-point scale (0= none; 1 = present on ≤ 1/3 of gingival margins; 2 = present on > 1/3 of gingival margins and parts of fissures and/or individual spots around cervical portion of tooth; 3 = covering more than ½ of gingival margins and the complete fissures and/or continuous heavy band of calculus around cervical portion of the tooth)|12 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 12-month follow-up. Anterior, right-posterior, and left-posterior denture teeth areas of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.||participants|||Number
825266|NCT01188226|Secondary|Amount of Denture Teeth Plaque|Clinical evaluation of plaque for anterior teeth and left posterior teeth and right posterior teeth on four-point scale (0= none; 1 = soft debris covering ≤1/3 of tooth surface; 2 = soft debris covering > 1/3 and ≤ ½ of tooth surface; 3 = soft debris covering more than ½ of tooth surface)|24 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 24-month follow-up. Anterior, right-posterior, and left-posterior denture teeth areas of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.||participants|||Number
825267|NCT01188226|Secondary|Amount of Denture Teeth Plaque|Clinical evaluation of plaque for anterior teeth and left posterior teeth and right posterior teeth on four-point scale (0= none; 1 = soft debris covering ≤1/3 of tooth surface; 2 = soft debris covering > 1/3 and ≤ ½ of tooth surface; 3 = soft debris covering more than ½ of tooth surface)|18 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 18-month follow-up. Anterior, right-posterior, and left-posterior denture teeth areas of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.||participants|||Number
825268|NCT01188226|Secondary|Amount of Denture Teeth Plaque|Clinical evaluation of plaque for anterior teeth and left posterior teeth and right posterior teeth on four-point scale (0= none; 1 = soft debris covering ≤1/3 of tooth surface; 2 = soft debris covering > 1/3 and ≤ ½ of tooth surface; 3 = soft debris covering more than ½ of tooth surface)|12 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 12-month follow-up. Anterior, right-posterior, and left-posterior denture teeth areas of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.||participants|||Number
825269|NCT01188226|Secondary|Denture Teeth Esthetics|Clinical evaluation of color deviation of anterior teeth to shade guide (3 levels: high, little, none)|24 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 24-month follow-up.||participants|||Number
825270|NCT01188226|Secondary|Denture Teeth Esthetics|Clinical evaluation of color deviation of anterior teeth to shade guide (3 levels: high, little, none)|18 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 18-month follow-up.||participants|||Number
825271|NCT01188226|Secondary|Denture Teeth Esthetics|Clinical evaluation of color deviation of anterior teeth to shade guide (3 levels, high, little none)|12 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 12-month follow-up.||participants|||Number
825272|NCT01188226|Secondary|Denture Teeth Calculus|Clinical evaluation of calculus for anterior teeth and posterior teeth on left and right sides on four-point scale (0= none; 1 = present on ≤ 1/3 of gingival margins; 2 = present on > 1/3 of gingival margins and parts of fissures and/or individual spots around cervical portion of tooth; 3 = covering more than ½ of gingival margins and the complete fissures and/or continuous heavy band of calculus around cervical portion of the tooth)|6 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 6-month follow-up. Anterior, right-posterior, and left-posterior denture teeth areas of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.||participants|||Number
825293|NCT01181726|Secondary|Cmax of Uncorrected Total Estrone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for Uncorrected Total Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825273|NCT01188226|Secondary|Amount of Denture Teeth Plaque|Clinical evaluation of plaque for anterior teeth and left posterior teeth and right posterior teeth on four-point scale (0= none; 1 = soft debris covering ≤1/3 of tooth surface; 2 = soft debris covering > 1/3 and ≤ ½ of tooth surface; 3 = soft debris covering more than ½ of tooth surface)|6 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 6-month follow-up. Anterior, right-posterior, and left-posterior denture teeth areas of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.||participants|||Number
825274|NCT01188226|Secondary|Denture Teeth Esthetics|Clinical evaluation of color deviation of anterior teeth to shade guide (3 levels: high, little, none)|6 months after denture completion|||participants|||Number
825275|NCT01188226|Primary|Location of Posterior Denture Tooth Wear|Clinical evaluation of posterior wear location (right, left, equal)|24 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 24-month follow-up. Upper and lower dentures of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.One participant had the lower denture refabricated after 12 months and was not included in 24-month lower-denture assessment||participants|||Number
825276|NCT01188226|Primary|Location of Posterior Denture Tooth Wear|Clinical evaluation of posterior wear location (right, left, equal)|18 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 18-month follow-up. Upper and lower dentures of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.One participant had the lower denture refabricated after 12 months and was not included in 18-month lower-denture assessment||participants|||Number
825277|NCT01188226|Primary|Location of Posterior Denture Tooth Wear|Clinical evaluation of posterior wear location (right, left, equal)|12 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 12-month follow-up. Upper and lower dentures assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.||participants|||Number
825278|NCT01188226|Primary|Location of Posterior Denture Tooth Wear|Clinical evaluation of posterior wear location (right, left, equal).|6 months after denture completion|For study participants who completed the 6-month follow-up. Upper and lower dentures of each participant assessed and reported separately as Arms for this outcome.||participants|||Number
825279|NCT01181726|Secondary|AUC0-inf of Corrected Unconjugated Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for Corrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825280|NCT01181726|Secondary|AUC0-t of Corrected Unconjugated Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for Corrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825281|NCT01181726|Secondary|Cmax of Corrected Unconjugated Estrone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for Corrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825282|NCT01181726|Secondary|AUC0-inf of Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825283|NCT01181726|Secondary|AUC0-t of Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825284|NCT01181726|Secondary|Cmax of Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for Corrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825285|NCT01181726|Secondary|AUC0-inf of Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825286|NCT01181726|Secondary|AUC0-t of Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825287|NCT01181726|Secondary|Cmax of Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825288|NCT01181726|Secondary|AUC0-inf of Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825289|NCT01181726|Secondary|AUC0-t of Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825290|NCT01181726|Secondary|Cmax of Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Informational comparison of Cmax values for Uncorrected Unconjugated Estradiol.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825291|NCT01181726|Secondary|AUC0-inf of Uncorrected Total Estrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity)|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for Uncorrected Total Estrone.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825298|NCT01181726|Primary|AUC0-t of Norethindrone(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825299|NCT01181726|Primary|Cmax of Norethindrone (Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825300|NCT01181778|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Post-counseling Contacts With Physician Offices, by Hormonal Contraceptive Method|Participant contacts with physician offices were collected, and the number of callbacks by method of contraception recorded. Participants who called back more than once were counted overall and for each method of contraception.|Up to four months after the counseling visit|The analysis population consisted of all participants who completed questionnaires before and after physician counseling and had no medical reason to prevent them from using a combined hormonal contraception method.||percentage of participants|||Number
825301|NCT01181778|Primary|Number of Participants Choosing Each Hormonal Contraceptive Method Before and After Counseling|Before receiving counseling, participants recorded on a questionnaire the method of contraception they thought they would choose. This was to be compared with the method of contraception the same participants thought they would choose after they received physician counseling, which was also recorded on their questionnaire.|Day of inclusion (Day 0) prior to physician counseling and after physician counseling|The analysis population consisted of all participants who completed questionnaires before and after physician counseling and had no medical reason to prevent them from using a combined hormonal contraception method.||Participants|||Number
825302|NCT01181804|Primary|t1/2 Boceprevir in Fasted State|T1/2 is the time required for a given drug concentration to decrease by 50%.|Predose through 72 hours post-dose|Analysis is per protocol; all available data are included in the model. No imputation is used for missing data.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
825303|NCT01181804|Primary|Half Life (t1/2) of Boceprevir in Fed State|T1/2 is the time required for a given drug concentration to decrease by 50%.|Predose through 72 hours post-dose|Analysis is per protocol; all available data are included in the model. No imputation is used for missing data.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
825304|NCT01181804|Primary|AUCinf in Fasted State|AUC is the measure of total plasma exposure of a drug over a given time period. AUC is derived from the area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve.|Predose through 72 hours post-dose|Analysis is per protocol; all available data are included in the model. No imputation is used for missing data.||ng*hr/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825305|NCT01181804|Primary|AUC From Hour 0 to Infinity (AUCinf) in Fed State|AUC is the measure of total plasma exposure of a drug over a given time period. AUC is derived from the area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve.|Predose through 72 hours post-dose|Analysis is per protocol; all available data are included in the model. No imputation is used for missing data.||ng*hr/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825306|NCT01181804|Primary|Cmax of Boceprevir Tablets Versus Capsules in Fasted State|Cmax is the highest plasma drug concentration observed on the plasma concentration-time curve.|Predose through 72 hours post-dose|Analysis is per protocol; all available data are included in the model. No imputation is used for missing data.||ng/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825307|NCT01181804|Primary|AUCtf for Boceprevir Tablets Versus Capsules in Fasted State|AUC is the measure of total plasma exposure of a drug over a given time period. AUC is derived from the area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve.|Predose through 72 hours post-dose|Analysis is per protocol; all available data are included in the model. No imputation is used for missing data.||ng*hr/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825308|NCT01181804|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Boceprevir Tablets Versus Capsules in Fed State|Cmax is the highest plasma drug concentration observed on the plasma concentration-time curve.|Predose through 72 hours post-dose|Analysis is per protocol; all available data are included in the model. No imputation is used for missing data.||ng*hr/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825309|NCT01181804|Primary|Area Under the Concentration Curve (AUC) From Hour 0 to the Final Quantifiable Sample (AUCtf) for Boceprevir Tablets Versus Capsules in Fed State|AUC is the measure of total plasma exposure of a drug over a given time period. AUC is derived from the area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve.|Predose through 72 hours post-dose|Analysis is per protocol; all available data are included in the model. No imputation is used for missing data.||ng*hr/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825310|NCT01181895|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Global Assessment of Change Questionnaire Responses at the End of Week 4 and Week 12|At the end of Week 4 and Week 12, the Global Assessment of Change Questionnaire, which assesses changes in asthma symptoms and rescue medication use, was completed by participants using the following scale: asthma symptom (AS) change: much better, somewhat better, a little better, the same, a little worse, somewhat worse, much worse; rescue medication use (RMU): much less often , somewhat less often , a little less often , the same , a little more often , somewhat more often , much more often.|Week 4 and Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Participants|||Number
825311|NCT01181895|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Time to an Increase of >=12% and >=200 Milliliters (mL) Above Baseline in FEV1 on Day 1 and Day 84 (0-2 Hours)|The number of participants with a >=12% and >=200 mL increase from Baseline in FEV1 (the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second) was evaluated on Day 1 and Week 12 for the time to a >=12% increase from Baseline (at the 5 minutes (min), 15 min, 30 min, 1hour (hr), and 2 hr nominal time points. Participants who did not achieve a >=12% and >=200 mL increase from Baseline in FEV1 over this time period were considered censored.|Day 1 and Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Participants|||Number
825323|NCT01181986|Secondary|Plasma Glucose|Plasma glucose was measured before and 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours following study drug administration. Results are expressed as least-square means of ANCOVA models adjusted for sampling time and intervention sequence.|0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours post-study drug on day 11|||mg/dl||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825324|NCT01181986|Secondary|Plasma Triglycerides|Triglycerides concentrations were measured before and 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours following study drug. Results are expressed as least-square means of ANCOVA models adjusted for sampling time and intervention sequence.|0, 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours post-study drug on day 11|||mg/dl||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825312|NCT01181895|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daily AM (Morning) PEF Averaged Over the 12-week Treatment Period|PEF is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. Trough PEF is the PEF measured approximately 24 hours after the last administration of study drug. The Baseline value is the average value of the last 7 days of daily AM PEF prior to randomization. Change from Baseline in trough AM PEF was calculated as the averaged value of all daily AM PEF for Weeks 1 to Week 12 minus the value at Baseline. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment.|Baseline and Weeks 1-12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Liters per minute (L/min)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825313|NCT01181895|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daily Trough (Pre-dose and Pre-rescue Bronchodilator) PM (Evening) Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Averaged Over the 12-week Treatment Period|PEF is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. Trough PEF is the PEF measured approximately 24 hours after the last administration of study drug. The Baseline value is the average value of the last 7 days of daily PM PEF prior to randomization. Change from Baseline in trough PM PEF was calculated as the averaged value of all daily PM PEF for Week 1 to Week 12 minus the value at Baseline. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment.|Baseline and Weeks 1-12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Liters per minute (L/min)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825314|NCT01181895|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Individual Serial FEV1 Assessments at the End of the 12-week Treatment Period, Including the 12-hour and 24-hour Time Points|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the volume of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. The individual serial FEV1 is calculated from the pre-dose FEV1 and post-dose FEV1 measurements at 5, 15, 30, and 60 minutes (min) and 2, 3, 5, 11, 12, 12.5, 13, 14, 16, 20, 23, and 24 hours, relatively, on Treatment Day 84 (Week 12). The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose FEV1 measurement. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value of the individual serial FEV1 taken at Week 12 minus the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline FEV1, region, sex, age, and treatment. Analysis was performed separately for each planned time point.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825315|NCT01181895|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Symptom-free 24-hour (hr) Periods During the 12-week Treatment Period|Participants who were symptom free for 24-hour periods during the12-week treatment period were assessed. The Baseline value was derived from the last 7 days of the daily diary prior to the randomization of the participant (including the day of randomization). Change from Baseline is calculated as the value at Weeks 1-12 minus the value at Baseline. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment.|Baseline and Weeks 1-12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Percentage of symptom-free 24-hr periods||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825316|NCT01181895|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Rescue-free 24-hour (hr) Periods During the 12-week Treatment Period|The time span during which the participants did not have to take any rescue bronchodilator (medication intended to relieve symptoms immediately) was considered to be a rescue-free period. The Baseline value was derived from the last 7 days of the daily diary prior to the randomization of the participant (including the day of randomization). Change from Baseline is calculated as the value at Weeks 1-12 minus the value at Baseline. Analysis was performed using ANCOVA with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age, and treatment.|Baseline and Weeks 1-12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Percentage of rescue-free 24-hr periods||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825317|NCT01181895|Primary|Change From Baseline in Weighted-mean 24-hour Serial Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at Week 12|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the volume of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. The weighted mean is calculated from the pre-dose FEV1 and post-dose FEV1 measurements at 5, 15, and 30 minutes (min) and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, 12, 12.5, 13, 14, 16, 20, 23, and 24 hours, respectively, at Week 12. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose FEV1 measurement. Change from Baseline is calculated as the weighted mean 0-24 hour FEV1 (Liters) at Week 12 minus the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with covariates of Baseline FEV1, region, sex, age, and treatment.|Baseline and Week 12|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study medication. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825318|NCT01181921|Primary|Change From Baseline in Sleep/Wake Patterns as Measured by Actigraph at 12 Weeks|Actigraph is a small portable device that is worn on the wrist of the non-dominant arm to measure body movement during long time periods. It creates a pattern based on activity that is useful in assessing sleep-wake cycles across many consecutive days and nights. It is useful for assessing sleep phase disorders.|Baseline and 12 weeks|Only one participant was recruited and did not complete the study; therefore no assessments have been conducted throughout the study.|||||
825319|NCT01181947|Primary|Technical Success at Time of Initial Implant|Technical success is defined as successful delivery and deployment of the stent graft (assessed intraoperatively). This is achieved by deployment of the Valiant Thoracic Stent Graft in the planned location with no unintentional coverage of the left subclavian artery, left common carotid artery and/or brachiocephalic artery and with the removal of the delivery system|intraoperatively|"The primary and secondary endpoints will be reported descriptively.
By-gender and by-race data summaries for the primary endpoints, if appropriate, will be generated. Data from all study sites will be grouped together for analyses."||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825320|NCT01181947|Secondary|ACM and ARM|All-cause (ACM), Aneurysm related (ARM) and dissection related mortality|at 30 days, 12 months, 24 months and 36 months||||||
825321|NCT01181947|Secondary|SAE|Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|through 12 months|"The primary and secondary endpoints will be reported descriptively.
By-gender and by-race data summaries for the primary endpoints, if appropriate, will be generated. Data from all study sites will be grouped together for analyses."||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825322|NCT01181947|Primary|Treatment Success|"technical success and freedom from
TAA diameter increase of stented segment (>5mm compared to 1 mo),
Types I/III endoleak,
Aneurysm rupture,
Conversion to open surgery,
Stent graft occlusion,
Stent graft migration resulting in SAE or secondary intervention."|at 30 days, 12 months, 24 months and 36 months||||||
825325|NCT01181986|Primary|Reactive Hyperemia Index (RHI)|Greater RHI reflects greater endothelial function. It is calculated as average post-ischemia pulse magnitude divided by average pre-ischemia pulse magnitude. Results are expressed as least-square means of ANCOVA models.|0, 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours on Day 11 (Sub-study 1); 0 and 120 minutes on test Days 1, 2 & 3 (Sub-study 2)|||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825326|NCT01182103|Secondary|BDNF Levels of MDD Patients Before and After Treatment and Healthy Controls|"Serum BDNF levels were measured. MDD patients received antidepressant treatment, a standard biological management. Nothing novel (such as experimental drugs or management) is introduced in the treatment, so the research design is observational (of standard treatment).
The choice of antidepressant drugs depended on the need of patients in natural treatment procedure. They included selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), eg. fluoxetine or paroxetine."|2 years|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
825327|NCT01182103|Primary|Histone Modification of MDD Patients Before and After Treatment and With Healthy Controls|"Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) was used to measure histone modification. The unit of our given machine is relative quantification, and a higher value indicated increased histone modification. The detailed method could be found in:
Huebert DJ, Kamal M, O’Donovan A, Bernstein BE: Genome-wide analysis of histone modifications by ChIP-on-chip. Methods 2006; 40: 365–369."|2 years|||relative quantification||Standard Deviation|Mean
825328|NCT01182103|Primary|Brain-derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF) DNA Methylation of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) Patients and Healthy Controls|averaged percentage of methylation at each CpG site listed|2 years|Only 39 out of the 48 MDD patients provided enough blood sample for this analysis.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
825329|NCT01182181|Primary|AUC0-t of Anastrozole(Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Measurable Concentration)|Bioequivalence based on Anastrozole AUC0-t.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825330|NCT01182181|Primary|Cmax of Anastrozole(Maximum Observed Concentration of Drug Substance in Plasma)|Bioequivalence based on Anastrozole Cmax.|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825331|NCT01188343|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection Site and Systemic Reactions Following Administration of MMR Vaccine|Solicited injection site: Pain, Erythema, and Swelling; Solicited systemic reactions: Fever (Temperature), Vomiting, Crying Abnormal, Drowsiness, Appetite Lost, and Irritability. Grade 3 injection site: Pain - Cries when injected limb is moved or movement of limb is reduced; Erythema and Swelling - ≥5 cm. Grade 3 systemic reactions: Fever - >39.5°C; Vomiting - ≥6 episodes per 24 hours or requiring parenteral hydration; Crying Abnormal - >3 hours; Drowsiness - Sleeping most of the time or difficult to wake; Appetite Lost - Refused ≥3 feeds/meals or refused most feeds/meals; Irritability - Inconsolable.|Day 0 up to Day 14 post-vaccination|Solicited injection site and systemic events were assessed in all randomized and vaccinated participants, the Safety Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
825332|NCT01188343|Other Pre-specified|Serological Status of Flavivirus at Before (Baseline) Concomitant Administration of JE-CV and MMR or Single Administration of JE-CV and MMR Vaccine|Neutralizing antibodies levels against dengue were only evaluated on subjects ELISA positive for Immunoglobulin G (IgG) or Immunoglobulin M (IgM). Flavivirus positive was defined as antibodies against JE-CV virus ≥10 (l/dil) or antibodies against at least one dengue virus serotype ≥10 (l/dil); Flavivirus negative was defined as antibodies against JE CV virus < 10 (l/dil) and antibodies against the 4 dengue virus serotypes < 10 (l/dil).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination)|Serological status of Flavivirus infection was assessed in the Full Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
825333|NCT01188343|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection Site and Systemic Reactions Following Administration of JE-CV Vaccine|Solicited injection site: Pain, Erythema, and Swelling; Solicited systemic reactions: Fever (Temperature), Vomiting, Crying Abnormal, Drowsiness, Appetite Lost, and Irritability. Grade 3 injection site: Pain - Cries when injected limb is moved or movement of limb is reduced; Erythema and Swelling - ≥5 cm. Grade 3 systemic reactions: Fever - >39.5°C; Vomiting - ≥6 episodes per 24 hours or requiring parenteral hydration; Crying Abnormal - >3 hours; Drowsiness - Sleeping most of the time or difficult to wake; Appetite Lost - Refused ≥3 feeds/meals or refused most feeds/meals; Irritability - Inconsolable.|Day 0 up to Day14 post-vaccination|Solicited injection site and systemic events were assessed in all randomized and vaccinated participants, the Safety Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
825334|NCT01188343|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titers of Antibodies to Vaccine Antigens Before and After Concomitant Administration of JE-CV and MMR or Single Administration of JE-CV and MMR Vaccine|JE-CV antigens were measured using a 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50); MMR antigens were measured using enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|Pre-vaccination and Day 42 post-vaccination|Geometric mean titers were assessed in the Per Protocol Analysis Set population with evaluable data.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825335|NCT01188343|Secondary|Number of Participants With Seroprotection to JE-CV and MMR Antigens Before, at Month 6 After Last Vaccination and Month 12 After First Following Concomitant Administration of JE-CV and MMR or Single Administration of JE-CV and MMR Vaccine|JE-CV antigens were measured using a 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50); MMR antigens were measured using enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Seroprotection was defined as: for JE-CV - participants with a pre-vaccination titer <1/10 (1/dil) and post-vaccination titer ≥1/10, (1/dil) or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1/10 and 4-fold increase from pre- to post; for Measles - post-vaccination titer ≥120 mIU/ml, when pre-vaccination titer is <120 mIU/ml; for Mumps - post-vaccination titer ≥1/10 units/ml when pre-vaccination titer is <10 units/ml; and for Rubella, post-vaccination titer ≥1/10 IU/ml when pre-vaccination titer is <10 IU/m|Pre-vaccination and up to Month 12 post-vaccination|Seroprotection to JE-CV and to MMR vaccine antigen was assessed in all participants who were randomized, vaccinated and who performed all protocol defined activities the Full Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
825350|NCT01188551|Primary|FLACC Behavioral Pain Assessment Scale Scores|"FLACC Behavioral Pain Assessment Scale: each of the five categories (F) Face, (L) Legs, (A) Activity, (C) Cry, (C) Consolability is scored from 0-2, which results in a total score between 0 and 10.
0 = Relaxed and comfortable 1–3 = Mild discomfort 4–6 = Moderate pain 7–10 = Severe discomfort or pain or both"|30 mins. post-op|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825351|NCT01188564|Secondary|Time to Minimal Symptoms|"The key secondary efficacy endpoint was the time to minimal symptoms at all locations. The time to achieving minimal symptoms was defined as an answer of Yes to TEQ question 3."|24 hours|||minutes||Full Range|Median
825336|NCT01188343|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Seroconversion to JE-CV and MMR Antigens Before and 42 Days Following Concomitant Administration of JE-CV and MMR or Single Administration of JE-CV and MMR Vaccine|JE-CV antigens were measured using a 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50); MMR antigens were measured using enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Seroconversion was defined as: for JE-CV - participants with a pre-vaccination titer <1/10 and post-vaccination titer ≥1/10, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1/10 and 4-fold increase from pre- to post; for Measles - post-vaccination titer ≥120 mIU/ml, when pre-vaccination titer is <120 mIU/ml; for Mumps - post-vaccination titer ≥1/10 U/ml when pre-vaccination titer is <10 U/ml; and for Rubella, post-vaccination titer ≥1/10 U/ml when pre-vaccination titer is <10 U/m|Pre-vaccination and Day 42 post-vaccination|Seroconversion to JE-CV and to MMR vaccine antigen was assessed in all participants who were randomized, vaccinated, who performed all protocol defined activities and has evaluable data (Per-protocol Analysis Set).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
825337|NCT01188343|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Seroconversion to Vaccine Antigens Following Concomitant Administration of Japanese Encephalitis Chimeric Virus Vaccine (JECV) and MMR or Single Administration of JE-CV and MMR Vaccine at 42 Days Following First Vaccination|JE-CV antigens were measured using a 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50); MMR antigens were measured using enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Seroconversion was defined as: for JE-CV - participants with a pre-vaccination titer <1/10 and post-vaccination titer ≥1/10, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1/10 and 4-fold increase from pre- to post; for Measles - post-vaccination titer ≥120 mIU/ml, when pre-vaccination titer is <120 mIU/ml; for Mumps - post-vaccination titer ≥1/10 U/ml when pre-vaccination titer is <10 U/ml; and for Rubella, post-vaccination titer ≥1/10 U/ml when pre-vaccination titer is <10 U/ml.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 42 post-vaccination|Seroconversion was assessed in the Per Protocol Analysis Set with evaluable data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
825338|NCT01188421|Primary|Mean Ratings on Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) Measure of Withdrawal During Double-blind Taper (7-days) and Post-taper (7-days) Period.|Outcomes represent mean peak withdrawal as rated on the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) total score. Withdrawal was collected 7 times daily and daily peak values were identified for each participant and averaged together as a function of group. Primary outcomes were mean peak results from the 7-day taper period and first 7 days post-taper. The COWS is an 11-item observer-rated measure of opioid withdrawal severity. Items are rated on individual Likert scales and the total score range is 0-47. Higher values indicate more severe withdrawal.|14 days total|Repeated measures ANOVA||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
825339|NCT01188447|Secondary|Average Contact Time|Total time spent with patient (Defined as difference between Transfer of Care and Arrival at Patient Side)|immediately following evaluation|In order to be included in this analysis, and to have Contact Time calculated, both the paramedic arrival time and transfer of care time were required. Any case missing this information could not be included in the calculation.||minutes||Full Range|Mean
825340|NCT01188447|Secondary|Scene Time|Time spent at scene (difference between Paramedic scene departure and arrival at patient side)|immediately following evaluation|In order to be included in this analysis, a valid time for paramedic arrival and paramedic scene departure were required. Any patient refusing transport or missing time information was not included in the analysis.||Minutes||Full Range|Mean
825341|NCT01188447|Secondary|Performance of the Canadian C-Spine Rule|"Measurements of the performance of the rule will include:
rule accuracy
paramedic accuracy of interpretation
paramedic agreement and level of comfort with the decision suggested by the Canadian C-Spine Rule"|Rule accuracy will be within 30 days of enrollment. Paramedic accuracy of interpretation and agreement will be assessed immediately following enrollment.|||percentage of injuries identified||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825342|NCT01188447|Secondary|Clearance Rate|Proportion of eligible low-risk patients transported without immobilization|Measures of clinical impact will be assessed immediately following the patient's Emergency Department visit|||Participants|||Count of Participants
825343|NCT01188447|Primary|Adverse Events|"Measures of safety will include:
number of missed cervical spine injuries
number of serious adverse outcomes"|within 30 days of enrollment|||Adverse event|||Number
825344|NCT01188499|Secondary|Evaluation of Pharmacokinetics and Translational Biomarkers|Measurement of TL32711 pharmacokinetics: Maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), area under the curve (AUC), half-life (t1/2) and assessment of translational biomarkers in plasma, PBMC's and tumor biopsies. Gene expression profiling of tumor tissue.|Cycle 1 and Cycle 2||||||
825345|NCT01188499|Secondary|Evaluation of Anti-tumor Efficacy|Tumor burden according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and time to progression|Every 2 cycles|Intent-to-treat (ITT)||participants|||Number
825346|NCT01188499|Primary|Number of Subjects With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|Number of subjects with adverse events as a measure of safety and tolerability including changes in vital signs, electrocardiograms (ECGs), safety and laboratory parameters|1 Cycle (3-4 weeks)|||participants|||Number
825347|NCT01188538|Secondary|Percent Change (%) in Inflammatory Lesion Counts|Inflammatory lesions were counted and recorded by the Evaluator (Investigator or designee) at Baseline and at Week 12. Based on these counts at Baseline and Week 12, Percent change (%) from Baseline in inflammatory lesion counts at Week 12 was calculated.|Week 12|ITT (LOCF)||Percent change (%)||Full Range|Median
825348|NCT01188538|Primary|Change From Baseline (Log10 Cfu/cm²) in Count of Follicular P. Acnes|"Quantitative bacterial examinations were performed on the subjects’ face during the study. These samplings were performed using a method to quantify the follicular microbiological flora of the skin (at Baseline and Week 12 visits).This method consists of a technique allowing the extraction of the outermost layer of epidermis from hair follicle on the cheek and to culture the samplings in order to have the number of P. acnes.
Outcome measure = Change from baseline (Log10 cfu/cm²) in count of Follicular P. acnes at end of the study."|Week 12|Intent To Treat (ITT)/Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||Log10 cfu/cm²||Standard Deviation|Mean
825349|NCT01188551|Secondary|Recovery From General Anesthesia|Post-anesthesia recovery score: Aldrete The Aldrete scoring system takes into account the patient's ability to move, respiration, circulation, consciousness, and oxygen saturation. A maximum of two points are awarded in each category and a score of 9 or 10 is required for discharge.|30 mins. post-op|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825384|NCT01190436|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Decrease in Heart Rate by at Least 10 Bpm at Week 12||Week 12|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
825352|NCT01188564|Primary|Time to Beginning of Relief of Symptoms|"Time to beginning of relief is the time lapsed from the beginning of the infusion of study medication to the beginning of a beneficial effect based on patient's responses to the Treatmetn Effect Questionnaire (TEQ) for the primary attack location. The beginning of relief is defined as the first timepoint at which
The patient reports any of the following answers for TEQ question 1: A little better, Better or Much better; and;
The patient reports the following answer for TEQ question 2: Yes; and,
There is persistence in improvement at the next assessment time, i.e.either the same or a better response to Question 1 and Yes to Question 2."|Patients observed for 24 hours|||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825353|NCT01188577|Primary|Concentration vs. Time for Total Epinephrine From Time Zero to 6 Hours Post-dose|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at 0 (baseline), 2, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, 15, 20, 25, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 240, and 360 minutes post-dose in each treatment period and were analyzed using an established analysis method.|Pre-dose to 6 hours post-dose|Patients who: 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study drug treatment 3) have at least three of the four post-dose PK measurements btw 2 and 10 min post-dose available and 4) have a minimum of twelve of the fifteen post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825354|NCT01188577|Primary|Half-life (t1/2) of Total Epinephrine|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at 0 (baseline), 2, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, 15, 20, 25, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 240, and 360 minutes post-dose in each treatment period and were analyzed using an established analysis method. Half-life (t1/2) is the amount of time it takes for epinephrine to decrease to half the peak concentration in plasma during the treatment period.|Pre-dose to 6 hours post-dose|Patients who: 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study drug treatment 3) have at least three of the four post-dose PK measurements btw 2 and 10 min post-dose available and 4) have a minimum of twelve of the fifteen post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||min||Full Range|Mean
825355|NCT01188577|Primary|Time to Reach Peak Concentration (Tmax) for Total Epinephrine|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at 0 (baseline), 2, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, 15, 20, 25, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 240, and 360 minutes post-dose in each treatment period and were analyzed using an established analysis method. Tmax is the amount of time it takes for epinephrine to reach peak concentration in plasma during the treatment period.|Pre-dose to 6 hours post-dose|Patients who: 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study drug treatment 3) have at least three of the four post-dose PK measurements btw 2 and 10 min post-dose available and 4) have a minimum of twelve of the fifteen post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||min||Standard Deviation|Mean
825356|NCT01188577|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to 6 Hours Post-dose (AUC[0-6]) for Total Epinephrine|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at 0 (baseline), 2, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, 15, 20, 25, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 240, and 360 minutes post-dose in each treatment period and were analyzed using an established analysis method. Area under the curve from time zero to 6 hours post-dose (AUC[0-6]) was calculated using the trapezoidal rule.|Pre-dose to 6 hours post-dose|Patients who: 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study drug treatment 3) have at least three of the four post-dose PK measurements btw 2 and 10 min post-dose available and 4) have a minimum of twelve of the fifteen post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||pg*min/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825357|NCT01188577|Primary|Peak Concentration (Cmax) of Total Epinephrine From Time Zero to 6 Hours Post-dose|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at 0 (baseline), 2, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, 15, 20, 25, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 240, and 360 minutes post-dose in each treatment period and were analyzed using an established analysis method. Peak (maximum) concentration (Cmax) is the highest concentration of epinephrine measured in plasma during the treatment period.|Pre-dose to 6 hours post-dose|Patients who: 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study drug treatment 3) have at least three of the four post-dose PK measurements btw 2 and 10 min post-dose available and 4) have a minimum of twelve of the fifteen post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825358|NCT01188577|Primary|Baseline Concentration (C0) of Total Epinephrine|Patient PK blood samples were taken from a vein in a hand or arm via indwelling heparin-anticoagulated IV catheters, or by venipunctures at Baseline (prior to dosing) in each treatment period following a specified washout period (3-14 days), and were analyzed using an established analysis method. Baseline concentration (C0) is the concentration of epinephrine measured in the plasma at this time point.|0 to 30 minutes prior to dosing|Patients who: 1) have taken the valid pre-dose baseline PK sample 2) have correctly taken the randomized study drug treatment 3) have at least three of the four post-dose PK measurement btwn 2 and 10 min post-dose available and 4) have a minimum of twelve of the fifteen post-dose PK measurements for the entire 6 hour post-dose PK sampling period.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825359|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PQ-LES-Q Overall Score (i.e., Item 15) at Day 56|PQ-LES-Q is a questionnaire to assess quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction in children and adolescents. The participant is asked to rate 15 items reflecting quality of life with respect to the previous week on a scale of 1=very poor to 5=very good. Items 1-14 assess specific areas (e.g., your health, your mood or feelings); Item 15 is a global assessment of overall quality of life. The Item 15 result is defined to be the PQ-LES-Q overall score, and ranged from 1 to 5 with a higher score indicating better quality of life. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in quality of life is represented by positive values. This analysis used an LOCF approach; if no Day 56 value was available for a participant, the last available assessment prior to the Day 56 assessment was used.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment value of the PQ-LES-Q overall score score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825360|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pediatric Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (PQ-LES-Q) Total Score at Day 56|PQ-LES-Q is a questionnaire to assess quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction in children and adolescents. The participant is asked to rate 15 items reflecting quality of life with respect to the previous week on a scale of 1=very poor to 5=very good. Items 1-14 assess specific areas (e.g., your health, your mood or feelings); Item 15 is a global assessment of overall quality of life. The PQ-LES-Q total score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the first 14 items, and ranged from 14 to 70 with a higher score indicating better quality of life. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in quality of life is represented by positive values. This analysis used a last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) approach; if no Day 56 value was available for a participant, the last available assessment prior to the Day 56 assessment was used.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment value of the PQ-LES-Q total score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825361|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Children’s Global Assessment Scale (CGAS) Score at Day 56|CGAS is a 100-point scale measuring psychological, social, and school functioning in children aged 6-17. Minimum scores ranged from 1-10, representing the need for constant supervision (worse result) to maximum scores of 91-100, representing superior functioning (better result). The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in functioning is represented by positive values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the CGAS score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825362|NCT01190254|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Cumulative Percentage of Participants With CGI-I Response at End of Study|CGI-I response was defined as the occurrence of a CGI-I score of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved). CGI-I is a 7-point scale for assessing the global improvement of the participant’s illness relative to baseline, with ratings from 1=very much improved to 7=very much worse. The Kaplan-Meier estimate reports the cumulative percentage of participants with CGI-I response from first drug intake up to approximately Day 58.|Baseline up to approximately Day 58|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS).||cumulative % of participants w/ Response|||Number
825363|NCT01190254|Secondary|CGI-I Responders|A CGI-I responder was defined as a participant who had a CGI-I score of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) at the last available assessment of the study for that participant (i.e., endpoint). CGI-I is a 7-point scale for assessing the global improvement of the participant’s illness relative to baseline, with ratings from 1=very much improved to 7=very much worse.|Baseline up to Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS).||participants|||Number
825364|NCT01190254|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Day 56|CGI-I is a 7-point scale for assessing the global improvement of the participant’s illness relative to baseline, with ratings from 1=very much improved to 7=very much worse.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included an on-treatment Day 56 value of the CGI-I score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825365|NCT01190254|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Total PANSS 30% Response at End of Study|A total PANSS 30% response was defined as a reduction from baseline of at least 30% in the PANSS Total score. The PANSS is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument for assessing the symptoms of schizophrenia. For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The Total score is the sum of the ratings for the individual items, and ranged from 30 to 210 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The Kaplan-Meier estimate reports the cumulative percentage of participants with total PANSS 30% response from first drug intake up to approximately Day 59.|Baseline up to approximately Day 59|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS).||cumulative % of participants w/ Response|||Number
825366|NCT01190254|Secondary|Total PANSS 30% Responders|A Total PANSS 30% responder was defined as a participant who had a reduction from baseline of at least 30% in the PANSS Total score at the last available assessment of the study for that participant (i.e., endpoint). The PANSS is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument for assessing the symptoms of schizophrenia. For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The Total score is the sum of the ratings for the individual items, and ranged from 30 to 210 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms.|Baseline up to Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS).||participants|||Number
825367|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Anxiety/Depression Factor Score at Day 56|This measure reports results for the 4 items of the Marder anxiety/depression factor of the PANSS, which is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument used to assess the symptoms of schizophrenia. Marder factors are a modified grouping of the 30 PANSS items. For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS Marder anxiety/depression factor score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 4 applicable Marder factor items, and ranged from 4 to 28 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the PANSS Marder anxiety/depression factor score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825406|NCT01190566|Secondary|Rate Constant of the Escape of the Contrast Agent From the Extracellular Extravascular Space Into the Plasma Compartment (Kep)||Baseline, post-1st chemotherapy|||min-1||Standard Deviation|Mean
825368|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Hostility/Excitement Factor Score at Day 56|This measure reports results for the 4 items of the Marder hostility/excitement factor of the PANSS, which is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument used to assess the symptoms of schizophrenia. Marder factors are a modified grouping of the 30 PANSS items. For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS Marder hostility/excitement factor score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 4 applicable Marder factor items, and ranged from 4 to 28 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the PANSS Marder hostility/excitement factor score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825369|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Disorganized Thoughts Factor Score at Day 56|This measure reports results for the 7 items of the Marder disorganized thoughts factor of the PANSS, which is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument used to assess the symptoms of schizophrenia. Marder factors are a modified grouping of the 30 PANSS items. For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS Marder disorganized thoughts factor score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 7 applicable Marder factor items, and ranged from 7 to 49 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the PANSS Marder disorganized thoughts factor score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825370|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Negative Symptoms Factor Score at Day 56|This measure reports results for the 7 items of the Marder negative symptoms factor of the PANSS, which is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument used to assess the symptoms of schizophrenia. Marder factors are a modified grouping of the 30 PANSS items. Negative symptoms represent a diminution or loss of normal functions (e.g., emotional withdrawal). For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS Marder negative symptoms factor score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 7 applicable Marder factor items, and ranged from 7 to 49 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the PANSS Marder negative symptoms factor score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825371|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Positive Symptoms Factor Score at Day 56|This measure reports results for the 8 items of the Marder positive symptoms factor of the PANSS, which is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument used to assess the symptoms of schizophrenia. Marder factors are a modified grouping of the 30 PANSS items (Marder et al. J Clin Psychiatry 1997;58(12):538-46). Positive symptoms refer to an excess or distortion of normal mental status (e.g., delusions). For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS Marder positive symptoms factor score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 8 applicable Marder factor items, and ranged from 8 to 56 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the PANSS Marder positive symptoms factor score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825372|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS General Psychopathology Subscale Score at Day 56|This measure reports results for the 16 items of the general psychopathology subscale of the PANSS, which is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument used to assess the symptoms of schizophrenia. For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS general psychopathology subscale score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 16 subscale items, and ranged from 16 to 112 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the PANSS general psychopathology subscale score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825373|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Positive and Negative Subscale Scores Combined at Day 56|This measure reports results for the combined positive subscale (7 items) and negative subscale (7 items) of the PANSS, which is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument used to assess the symptoms of schizophrenia. Positive symptoms refer to an excess or distortion of normal mental status (e.g., delusions). Negative symptoms represent a diminution or loss of normal functions (e.g., emotional withdrawal). For each of the total 14 items in the combined positive and negative subscales, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS positive and negative subscale scores combined for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 14 combined subscale items, and ranged from 14 to 98 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the PANSS positive/negative subscale scores combined must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825374|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Negative Subscale Score at Day 56|This measure reports results for the 7 items of the negative subscale of the PANSS, which is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument used to assess the symptoms of schizophrenia. Negative symptoms represent a diminution or loss of normal functions (e.g., emotional withdrawal). For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS negative subscale score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 7 subscale items, and ranged from 7 to 49 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the PANSS negative subscale score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825375|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Positive Subscale Score at Day 56|This measure reports results for the 7 items of the positive subscale of the PANSS, which is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument used to assess the symptoms of schizophrenia. Positive symptoms refer to an excess or distortion of normal mental status (e.g., delusions). For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS positive subscale score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 7 subscale items, and ranged from 7 to 49 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the PANSS positive subscale score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825376|NCT01190254|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Score at Day 56|Change from baseline in CGI-S score at Day 56 is the Key Secondary Outcome Measure. CGI-S is a 7-point scale for assessing the global severity of the participant’s illness, with ratings from 1=normal, not ill to 7=very severely ill. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 56 value of the CGI-S score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825377|NCT01190254|Primary|Change From Baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Total Score at Day 56|The PANSS is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument for assessing the symptoms of schizophrenia. It consists of 3 subscales: positive subscale (7 items), negative subscale (7 items), and general psychopathology subscale (16 items). Positive symptoms refer to an excess or distortion of normal mental status (e.g., delusions). Negative symptoms represent a diminution or loss of normal functions (e.g., emotional withdrawal). For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS total score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 30 PANSS items, and ranged from 30 to 210 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 56; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 56|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment PANSS Total Score (this group is termed the efficacy Full Analysis Set [FAS]); also, to be included an on-treatment Day 56 value of PANSS Total Score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825378|NCT01190267|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug During Extension Study Due to an AE|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE could therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product.|Up to 26 weeks|All participants who received at least one dose of extension study medication||participants|||Number
825379|NCT01190267|Primary|Number of Participants With a Treatment-Emergent Adverse Event (AE) During Extension Study|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE could therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product. An AE was defined as a “treatment-emergent” AE if it was not present at the extension study baseline, or if it was present at the extension study baseline but worsened in severity compared to baseline during the extension study treatment period.|Up to 30 weeks|All participants who received at least one dose of extension study medication||participants|||Number
825380|NCT01190306|Primary|Change in Corneal Curvature.||6 Months|The CXL-001 study was completed but data analysis was not done. Prior to data analysis, the sponsor, Topcon, decided to terminate the study for administrative reasons only, and not as a result of any safety issues or concerns relating to the study.|||||
825381|NCT01190306|Primary|Changes in Corneal Curvature||6MO||||||
825382|NCT01190436|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An adverse event (AE) was defined as any new untoward medical occurrences/worsening of pre-existing medical condition without regard to possibility of causal relationship.|Baseline up to Week 12|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
825383|NCT01190436|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol, Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol, High Density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol and Triglyceride Level at Week 12|The change in total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglyceride level at Week 12 was calculated as total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglyceride level at Week 12 minus total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglyceride level at baseline, respectively.|Baseline, Week 12|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825385|NCT01190436|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Sugar (FBS) Level at Week 12|The change in FBS level at Week 12 was calculated as FBS level at Week 12 minus FBS level at baseline.|Baseline, Week 12|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825386|NCT01190436|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Increased Fasting Blood Sugar (FBS) at Week 12|Percentage of participants with increased FBS (greater than 16 milligram per deciliter [mg/dL] from baseline) at Week 12 was reported.|Week 12|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
825387|NCT01190436|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Week 12|The change in heart rate at Week 12 was calculated as the heart rate at Week 12 minus heart rate at baseline.|Baseline, Week 12|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825388|NCT01190436|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Response to Study Drug|Response to study drug was defined as lowering of systolic BP by at least 10 mmHg from baseline.|Week 12|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
825389|NCT01190436|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Controlled BP|Controlled BP was defined as BP less than 130/80 mmHg.|Week 12|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
825390|NCT01190436|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure (BP) at Week 12|The change in diastolic and systolic BP at Week 12 was calculated as diastolic and systolic BP at Week 12 minus diastolic and systolic BP at baseline, respectively.|Baseline, Week 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
825391|NCT01190436|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Week 12|HbA1c represents the percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin. The change in HbA1c at Week 12 was calculated as HbA1c at Week 12 minus HbA1c at baseline.|Baseline, Week 12|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percent HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
825392|NCT01190436|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Increased Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 12|HbA1c represents the percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin. Percentage of participants with increased HbA1c (greater than 0.5% from baseline) at Week 12 was reported.|Week 12|ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
825393|NCT01190514|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time 0 Extrapolated to Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)||Day 1 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4: pre-dose, 0 hour, and 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, and 48 hours post-dose|PK population; N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825394|NCT01190514|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUCinf)|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|Day 1 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4: pre-dose, 0 hour, and 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, and 48 hours post-dose|PK population; N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825395|NCT01190514|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Half-life (t 1/2)|Terminal elimination (plasma decay) half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Day 1 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4: pre-dose, 0 hour, and 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, and 48 hours post-dose|PK population; N=number of participants contributing to the median.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
825396|NCT01190514|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|Cmax measured as nanograms divided by milliliters (ng/mL).|Day 1 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4: pre-dose, 0 hour, and 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, and 48 hours post-dose|PK population; N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825397|NCT01190514|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||Day 1 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4: pre-dose, 0 hour, and 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, and 48 hours post-dose|PK population; N=number of participants contributing to the median.||hours||Full Range|Median
825398|NCT01190514|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time 0 to 48 Hours (AUC48)|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to 48 hours post dose; measured as nanograms multiplied by hours divided by milliliters (ng*hr/mL).|Day 1 of Periods 1, 2, 3, and 4: pre-dose, 0 hour, and 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, and 48 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetic parameter analysis (PK) population: all participants randomized and treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825399|NCT01190527|Secondary|The Number of Participants That Experience Lung Toxicity and Esophagitis|The number of participants that experience RT (radiation therapy) induced lung toxicity, and grade 2 or greater (symptomatic) esophagitis, will be recorded.|2 years|||participants|||Number
825400|NCT01190527|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Alive at 2 Years|Overall survival of all patients will be estimated|2 years|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825401|NCT01190527|Secondary|Number of Patients That Were Able to Receive Dose Escalation|The number of patients for which dose escalation was possible will be reported.|2 Years|||participants|||Number
825402|NCT01190527|Primary|2 Year Rate of Overall Local-Regional Tumor Control Using FGD-PET-CT During Radiation Therapy(RT)|Use FGD-PET-CT based adaptive radiation to deliver a higher total dose to the active tumor to determine if it will improve the local-regional tumor control and progression-free survival in patients, without increasing the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of the lung.|2 years|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825403|NCT01190566|Secondary|Standardized Uptake Value on 18F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose Positron Emission Tomography||Baseline, post-1st chemotherapy|||unitless||Standard Deviation|Mean
825404|NCT01190566|Secondary|Total Choline Amount of the Tumor Measured on Single Voxel 1H-magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy|Single voxel 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy quantifies the amount of total choline-containing compounds of a tumor, which indicates cellular proliferation and malignant transformation.|Baseline, post-1st chemotherapy|Of the 48 participants, 13 participants did not undergo magnetic resonance spectroscopy examinations due to workflow problem. We included the available data from 35 participants.||unitless||Standard Deviation|Mean
825405|NCT01190566|Secondary|Extracellular Extravascular Space Per Unit Volume of Tissue (Ve)||Baseline, post-1st chemotherapy|||unitless||Standard Deviation|Mean
825408|NCT01190566|Secondary|Proportions of Voxels Within a Tumor With Increased or Decreased Signal Intensity (Parametric Response Map Signal Intensity; PRMSI)|Parametric response map analysis using a software calculates the interval change of signal intensity based on a voxel-to-voxel comparison between measurements at baseline and after the first cycle of chemotherapy. PRMSI+ indicates proportions of voxels within a tumor with increased signal intensity. PRMSI- indicates proportions of voxels within a tumor with decreased signal intensity. PRMSI0 indicates proportions of voxels within a tumor with unchanged signal intensity.|Baseline, post-1st chemotherapy|||% of voxels||Standard Deviation|Mean
825409|NCT01190566|Secondary|Tumor Volume|Tumor volume measured on 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging|Baseline, post-1st chemotherapy|||cm3||Standard Deviation|Mean
825410|NCT01190566|Secondary|Tumor Size|Maximal tumor diameter measured on magnetic resonance imaging|baseline, completion of 1st cycle of chemotherapy|||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
825411|NCT01190566|Primary|Patholocial Response to Chemotherapy|Pathological complete response (pCR) or non-pCR|Post-operation|||participants|||Number
825412|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 26 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|26 weeks after enrollment|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825413|NCT01190813|Secondary|Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 26 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|26 weeks after enrollment|All participants continued in the study regardless of whether they continued with study medication after the 18-week visit; 49 participants in the levodopa group and 24 participants in the placebo group continued study medication at the 18-week visit.||participants|||Number
825414|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 26 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|26 weeks after enrollment|All participants continued in the study regardless of whether they continued with study medication after the 18-week visit; 49 participants in the levodopa group and 24 participants in the placebo group continued study medication at the 18-week visit.||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825415|NCT01190813|Secondary|Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 26 Weeks|Similar to the analysis for the amblyopic eye, the fellow eye visual acuity will be evaluated to determine if study treatment had an adverse effect on the occluded eye. The analysis will be a treatment group comparison of the mean fellow eye visual acuity at 26 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity.|26 weeks after enrollment|All participants continued in the study regardless of whether they continued with study medication after the 18-week visit; 49 participants in the levodopa group and 24 participants in the placebo group continued study medication at the 18-week visit.||participants|||Number
825416|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Systemic Adverse Events||Enrollment through 26 weeks|||events||Standard Deviation|Mean
825417|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 26 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 26 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|26 weeks after enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825418|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 18 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the primary outcome (18 week) visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|18 weeks after enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825419|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 16 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 16 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|16 weeks after enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825420|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 10 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 10 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|10 weeks after enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825421|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 4 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 4 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|4 weeks after enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825422|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at Enrollment|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at enrollment. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|At enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825423|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 26 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 26 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|26 weeks after enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825424|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 18 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the primary outcome (18 week) visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|18 weeks after enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825425|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 16 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 16 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|16 weeks after enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825426|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 10 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 10 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|10 weeks after enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825427|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 4 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 4 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|4 weeks after enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825428|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at Enrollment|A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at enrollment. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never).|At enrollment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825429|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 18 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|18 weeks after enrollment|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825430|NCT01190813|Primary|Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline|"The primary outcome is the amblyopic eye visual acuity letter score measured at the 18-week primary outcome visit following a rapid taper of study medicine beginning at week 16. The primary analytic approach will be a treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity adjusted for baseline acuity.
Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line."|18 weeks after enrollment|The ITT principle was followed. For subjects with no visit in the +/- 1 wk window for the 18-wk visit, data from a visit 14-27 wks after randomization were used, if available. Multiple imputation by the Monte Carlo Markov Chain method was used for missing 18-wk VA outcomes based on tx group, baseline VA, & VA scores from completed follow-up visits.||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825431|NCT01190813|Secondary|Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 18 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|18 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825432|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|18 weeks after enrollment|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825433|NCT01190813|Secondary|Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks|Similar to the analysis for the amblyopic eye, the fellow eye visual acuity will be evaluated to determine if study treatment had an adverse effect on the occluded eye. The analysis will be a treatment group comparison of the mean fellow eye visual acuity at 18 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity.|18 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825434|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 26 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity at 26 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity. Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|26 weeks after enrollment|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825435|NCT01190813|Secondary|Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 26 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|26 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825436|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 16 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity at 16 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity. Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|16 weeks after enrollment|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825437|NCT01190813|Secondary|Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 16 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|16 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825438|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 10 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity at 10 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity. Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|10 weeks after enrollment|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825439|NCT01190813|Secondary|Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 10 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|10 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825440|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 4 Weeks|A treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity at 4 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity.|4 weeks after enrollment|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825441|NCT01190813|Secondary|Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 4 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|4 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825442|NCT01190813|Secondary|Amblyopia Resolution at 26 Weeks|Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects with 20/25 or better visual acuity.|26 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825443|NCT01190813|Secondary|Amblyopia Resolution at 18 Weeks|Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects with 20/25 or better visual acuity.|18 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825444|NCT01190813|Secondary|Amblyopia Resolution at 16 Weeks|Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects with 20/25 or better visual acuity.|16 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825445|NCT01190813|Secondary|Amblyopia Resolution at 10 Weeks|Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects with 20/25 or better visual acuity.|10 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825446|NCT01190813|Secondary|Amblyopia Resolutionat 4 Weeks|Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects with 20/25 or better visual acuity.|4 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825447|NCT01190813|Secondary|Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 26 Weeks|Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects who have improved from baseline by 10 or more letters.|26 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825448|NCT01190813|Secondary|Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 16 Weeks|Treatment group comparisons of the proportion of subjects who have improved from baseline by 10 or more letters.|16 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825449|NCT01190813|Secondary|Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 10 Weeks|Treatment group comparisons of the proportion of subjects who have improved from baseline by 10 or more letters.|10 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825450|NCT01190813|Secondary|Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 4 Weeks|Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects who have improved from baseline by 10 or more letters.|4 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825451|NCT01190813|Secondary|Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks|Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line.|18 weeks after enrollment|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825452|NCT01190813|Secondary|Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks||18 weeks after enrollment|||participants|||Number
825453|NCT01190813|Secondary|Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 18 Weeks|Treatment group comparisons of the proportion of subjects who have improved from baseline by 10 or more letters.|18 weeks after enrollment|The analysis followed the intent-to-treat principle. For missing primary outcome visits (±1 wk), data from a visit 14-27 wks after randomization were used, if available.Multiple imputation(Monte Carlo Markov Chain method) was used for missing 18-wk VA outcomes based on treatment group, baseline VA, and VA scores from completed follow-up visits||participants|||Number
825454|NCT01190813|Primary|Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline|"The primary outcome is the amblyopic eye visual acuity letter score measured at the 18-week primary outcome visit following a rapid taper of study medicine beginning at week 16. The primary analytic approach will be a treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity adjusted for baseline acuity.
Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line."|18 weeks after enrollment|The ITT principle was followed. For subjects with no visit in the +/- 1 wk window for the 18-wk visit, data from a visit 14-27 wks after randomization were used, if available. Multiple imputation by the Monte Carlo Markov Chain method was used for missing 18-wk VA outcomes based on tx group, baseline VA, & VA scores from completed follow-up visits.||participants|||Number
825455|NCT01190839|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Recurrence (CR) of Crohn's Disease (CD) Prior to or at Week 104|CR criteria:1) A >=70-point increase from baseline in CDAI score [in general, CDAI score ranges from 0 to approximately 600; higher score indicates higher disease activities];2)A CDAI score >=200;3)Evidence of endoscopic recurrence [ileal Rutgeerts score of >=i2 at anastomotic site or its equivalent elsewhere in GI tract] and 4)A negative stool test for C. difficile toxin (if, in the opinion of the investigator, the participant's symptoms are predominantly diarrheal); or at least 1 of followings:1) developing a new draining external fistula;2)re-opening and draining of a previously existing external fistula;3)developing a new internal fistula;4)developing a new perianal abscess or 5)developing a new intra-abdominal abscess more than 3 months after date of index surgery. In addition, participants who had a treatment failure [initiated a prohibited CD medication, had prohibited use of CD medication, or had surgery for CD]before or at Week 104 were considered to have clinical recurrence.|Baseline up to Week 104|Analysis population included all the participants who were randomly assigned to receive 1 of the study treatments.||percentage of participants|||Number
825456|NCT01190839|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Endoscopic Recurrence of CD Prior to or at Week 76|Endoscopic recurrence is defined as an ileal Rutgeert's score of >= i2 either at the anastomotic site or elsewhere in the gastrointestinal tract. In addition, participants who had a treatment failure (initiated a prohibited CD medication, had a prohibited use of a CD medication, or had a surgery for CD) prior to Week 76, and who developed a new draining external fistula or re-opening and draining of a previously existing external fistula or developed a new internal fistula, new perianal abscess or new intra-abdominal abscess more than 3 months after the date of the index surgery were considered to have had endoscopic recurrence prior to or at Week 76.|Baseline up to Week 76|Analysis population included all the participants who were randomly assigned one of the treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
831484|NCT01246076|Secondary|Overall Survival Rate|-Overall survival rate is the percentage of participants who were alive 6 months after end of treatment.|6 months after end of treatment (up to 82 weeks from start of treatment)|||percentage of participants|||Number
825457|NCT01190839|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Recurrence (CR) of Crohn's Disease (CD) Prior to or at Week 76|CR criteria:1) A >=70-point increase from baseline in CDAI score [in general, CDAI score ranges from 0 to approximately 600; higher score indicates higher disease activities];2)A CDAI score >=200;3)Evidence of endoscopic recurrence [ileal Rutgeerts score of >=i2 at anastomotic site or its equivalent elsewhere in GI tract] and 4)A negative stool test for C. difficile toxin (if, in the opinion of the investigator, the participant's symptoms are predominantly diarrheal); or at least 1 of followings:1) developing a new draining external fistula;2)re-opening and draining of a previously existing external fistula;3)developing a new internal fistula;4)developing a new perianal abscess or 5)developing a new intra-abdominal abscess more than 3 months after date of index surgery. In addition, participants who had a treatment failure [initiated a prohibited CD medication, had prohibited use of CD medication, or had surgery for CD] before or at Week 76 were considered to have clinical recurrence.|Baseline up to Week 76|Analysis population included all the participants who were randomly assigned to receive 1 of the study treatments.||percentage of participants|||Number
825458|NCT01190865|Secondary|Time in Days to 50% Correct Identification (ID50) of the Implanted Male DNA 17 Loci in Female Volunteers, With Regard to Three DNA Profile Types, Including Partial DNA Profile, > 50% DNA Profile, and Full (or Complete) DNA Profile.|"The biopsy area was examined for the presence of the Y chromosome, based on the presence of a full set of Y-STR loci as well as partial sets, assayed by a commercial kit (AmpFISTRTM).
Probit analysis was utilized to determine the time in days to 50% correct identification (ID50) of the implanted male DNA 17 loci in female volunteers, with regard to three DNA profile types, including partial DNA profile, > 50% DNA profile, and full (or complete) DNA profile. The analysis was performed using SAS® PROC PROBIT"|Cohorts of 3 subjects were biopsied at weekly intervals for 8 weeks|The analysis population consisted of the 8 cohorts of 3 subjects biopsied at weekly intervals over the 8-week duration of the study. It should be note that the cohort for Week 8 (Day 57) was composed of 4 subjects||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825459|NCT01190865|Primary|Identification of the Full Set of Y-chromosome Short Tandem Repeats in Each Bioopsy.|The primary efficacy variable was detection of the full set of 17 Y STR loci. If all loci amplified such that a clear identification of a donor was possible, the test result was categorized as positive. If fewer loci amplified such that identification of the donor was not possible in a forensic setting, the result was categorized as negative. Descriptive statistics are presented for this variable.|Cohorts of 3 subjects were biopsied at weekly intervals for 8 weeks|3 subjects were withdrawn; 2 for non-compliance and one at the subject's request. One subject, who was available to replace a subject assigned to a weekly cohort if the subject was unavailable, was assayed on Day 57 with the subjects assigned to the Week 8 cohort.||Participants|||Count of Participants
825460|NCT01190878|Primary|Ocular Inflammation|"Anterior Chamber Cell Grade 0 at Day 15 measured on a 0 to 4 scale: 0 is 0 cells; 1 is 1-10 cells; 2 is 11-20 cells; 3 is 21-50 cells; 4 is > 50 cells."|15 days|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population using Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.||participants|||Number
825461|NCT01190891|Secondary|Global Rating of Change|The GROC questionnaire is an instrument that measures overall changes in the quality of life of the subject. The use of a GROC is a common, feasible, and useful method for assessing outcome, and has been shown to be a valid measurement of change in patient status in other pain populations. A change in score of three rating points has been established as a clinically significant in the patients perception of quality of life. The GROC has 15 possible choices, with 0 being equal to no change and -1 to -7 indicating a negative change and +1 to +7 indicating a positive change.|1 year|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
825462|NCT01190891|Primary|Shoulder Pain and Disability Index|The SPADI is a 100-point, 13 item self-administered questionnaire divided into two subscales (pain and disability), with higher scores indicating greater pain and disability. It is responsive to change and accurately discriminates between patients who are improving or worsening. It has high test-retest reliability and internal consistency. The minimal detectable change (MDC) is 18 and the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) is between 8-13 points. The validity and responsiveness to change of SPADI have been described in physical therapy, as well as primary and secondary care settings.|1 year|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
825463|NCT01191008|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Treatment-Related Adverse Events Unexpected From Japanese Package Insert|A treatment-related adverse event was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to latanoprost/timolol maleate in a participant who received latanoprost/timolol maleate. Expectedness of the adverse event was determined according to Japanese package insert. Relatedness to latanoprost/timolol maleate was assessed by the investigator.|Max 104 weeks|The safety analysis set comprised of participants who had met the inclusion criteria and had received latanoprost/timolol maleate at least once.||Participants|||Number
825464|NCT01191008|Primary|Clinical Effectiveness Rate|Clinical effectiveness rate, which was defined as the percentage of participants who achieved clinical effectiveness over the total number of effectiveness analysis population, was presented along with the corresponding exact 2sided 95% confidence interval. Overall effectiveness of latanoprost/timolol was determined by the investigator based on clinical symptoms and examinations. Clinical effectiveness was assessed according to the following categories: (1) effective, (2) not effective, or (3) not assessable at the end of observation period (Max 104 weeks).|Max 104 weeks|The effectiveness analysis set comprised of participants that were excluded off-label uses or blank evaluation from safety analysis set.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825465|NCT01191008|Primary|Number of Participants WithTreatment-Related Adverse Events|A treatment-related adverse event was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to latanoprost/timolol maleate in a participant who received latanoprost/timolol maleate. Relatedness to latanoprost/timolol maleate was assessed by the investigator.|Max 104 weeks|The safety analysis set comprised of participants who had met the inclusion criteria and had received latanoprost/timolol maleate at least once.||Participants|||Number
825466|NCT01191086|Primary|Evaluate the Safety of USL255 Through the Collection of Adverse Events and Clinical Laboratory Evaluations||Open label treatment of up to 62 weeks|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population was used for all analyses. The ITT population included all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug in this extension study.||participants|||Number
825467|NCT01191190|Secondary|Detectable Minimal Residual Disease (MRD)|The patient who achieved a CR did not have detectable MRD in the bone marrow by four-color flow cytometry (<0.1% of cells).|2 years|||participants|||Number
825471|NCT01191190|Secondary|IwCLL-WG Defined Progressive Disease (PD)|"Responses were assessed two months after completion of therapy
Progressive Disease is defined as:
Greater than or equal to 50% increase in the products of at least two lymph nodes on two consecutive determinations two weeks apart (at least one lymph node must be ≥ 2 cm; or the appearance of a new palpable lymph node; OR
Greater than or equal to 50% increase in the size of the liver and/or spleen as determined by measurement below the respective costal margins; or appearance of palpable hepatomegaly or splenomegaly, which was not previously present; OR
Greater than or equal to 50% increase in the absolute number of circulating lymphocytes to at least 5,000μl; OR
Transformation to a more aggressive histology (i.e., Richter’s syndrome or prolymphocytic leukemia with ≥ 56% prolymphocytes);"|2 months|||participants|||Number
825472|NCT01191190|Secondary|IwCLL-WG Defined Stable Disease (SD)|"Responses were assessed two months after completion of therapy.
Subjects who do not fulfill the criteria for complete or partial response as defined above but do not exhibit progressive disease will be considered as having stable disease."|2 months|||participants|||Number
825473|NCT01191190|Secondary|IwCLL-WG Defined Partial Response (PR)|Responses were assessed two months after completion of therapy|2 months|||participants|||Number
825474|NCT01191190|Secondary|IwCLL-WG Defined Nodular Partial Response (PR)|"Responses were assessed two months after completion of therapy.
Partial Response is defined as:
Greater than or equal to 50% decrease in blood absolute lymphocyte count from pre-treatment value; AND
Greater than or equal to 50% reduction in lymphadenopathy from pre-treatment value; AND
Greater than or equal to 50% reduction in splenomegaly/hepatomegaly from pre-treatment value.
In addition, patients need to have at least ONE of the following:
Neutrophils ≥ 1,500/μl or ≥ 50% improvement from pre-treatment value; AND / OR
Platelets > 100,000/μl or 50% improvement from pre-treatment value; AND / OR
Hemoglobin > 11.0 gm/dl (non-transfused) or 50% improvement from pre-treatment value."|2 months|||participants|||Number
825475|NCT01191190|Secondary|IwCLL-WG Defined Overall Response Rate (ORR)|Responses were assessed two months after completion of therapy. Overall Response Rate (ORR) = CR + PR|2 months|||participants|||Number
825476|NCT01191190|Primary|IwCLL-WG Defined Complete Response (CR)|"Responses were assessed two months after completion of therapy.
Criteria for complete remission is assessed with: a bone marrow biopsy and repeat CT scan (abdominal, chest and pelvis if initial was abnormal) to confirm iwCLL-WG defined CR.
iwCLL-WG Complete Response is defined as:
Peripheral blood lymphocytes (evaluated by blood and differential count) below 4 x 109/L (4000/L).
Absence of lymphadenopathy (>1.5 cm)of physical exam; AND
No hepatomegaly and splenomegaly on physical exam; AND
Absence of constitutional symptoms; AND
Normal complete blood count as exhibited by neutrophils ≥ 1,500/μl, platelets > 100,000/μl, hemoglobin > 11.0g/dL (non-transfused), and lymphocyte count < 5,000/μl; AND
Bone marrow aspirate and biopsy must be normocellular for age with <30% of nucleated cells being lymphocytes. Lymphoid nodules must be absent"|2 months|||participants|||Number
825477|NCT01191242|Primary|(R)-EDDP Trough Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825478|NCT01191242|Primary|(R)-EDDP Peak Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825479|NCT01191242|Primary|(S)-EDDP Trough Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825480|NCT01191242|Primary|(S)-EDDP Peak Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825481|NCT01191242|Primary|Total EDDP Trough Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825482|NCT01191242|Primary|Total 2-ethylidene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3-diphenylpyrrolidene (EDDP) Peak Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825483|NCT01191242|Primary|(R)-Methadone Trough Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825484|NCT01191242|Primary|(R)-Methadone Peak Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825485|NCT01191242|Primary|(S)- Methadone Trough Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825486|NCT01191242|Primary|(S)- Methadone Peak Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825487|NCT01191242|Primary|Total Methadone Trough Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825488|NCT01191242|Primary|Total Methadone Peak Plasma Concentration||Day 1, Day 7, Day 21|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825489|NCT01191255|Secondary|ESA Analysis|Full analysis population, cumulative Erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) administration from baseline to the end of the Safety Assessment Period (Week 52)|52 weeks|||Units/Day||Full Range|Median
825490|NCT01191255|Secondary|IV Iron Analysis|Full Analysis Population, cumulative IV Iron administration from Baseline to the end of the Safety Assessment Period (Week 52)|52 weeks|||mg/day||Full Range|Median
825491|NCT01191255|Secondary|Change in Mean Serum Transferrin Saturation (TSAT) From Baseline to the End of the Safety Assessment Period (Week 52)||52 weeks|Full Analysis Population (LOCF)||% Saturation||Standard Deviation|Mean
825492|NCT01191255|Secondary|Change in Mean Serum Ferritin From Baseline to Week 52||52 weeks|Full Analysis Population (LOCF)||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825493|NCT01191255|Primary|Change in Mean Serum Phosphorus From Baseline (Week 52) to the End of the Efficacy Assessment Period (EAP; Week 56)|Patients who completed the 52-week Safety Assessment Period (SAP) on KRX-0502 (ferric citrate) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either KRX-0502 (ferric citrate) or Placebo for 4 weeks.|4 weeks|Full Analysis Population (LOCF)||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825494|NCT01191268|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events up to 26 Weeks, 52 Weeks, and 4 Weeks After Last Dose|A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was defined as an event that first occurs or worsens (increases in severity) after baseline regardless of causality or severity. The number of participants with one or more TEAE is summarized cumulatively at 26 weeks, 52 weeks, and 4 weeks after last dose. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26 weeks, 52 weeks, and 4 weeks after last dose|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine.||participants|||Number
825538|NCT01191736|Secondary|The Proportion of Subjects Who Assessed the Responsiveness of the Victim (Manikin) as Judged by Expert Raters|The proportion of the subjects who assessed the responsiveness of the victim (manikin) as judged by expert raters|60 minutes after intervention and two months after intervention|||Proportion of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
825495|NCT01191268|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent LY2189265 Antibodies up to 26 Weeks, 52 Weeks, and 4 Weeks After Last Dose|A participant was considered to have treatment emergent LY2189265 anti-drug antibodies (ADA) if the participant had at least one titer that was treatment-emergent relative to baseline, defined as a 4-fold or greater increase in titer from baseline measurement.|Baseline through 4 weeks after last dose|Participants who received at least one dose of LY2189265 with evaluable LY2189265 ADA data.||participants|||Number
825496|NCT01191268|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adjudicated Cardiovascular Events up to 52 Weeks|Deaths and nonfatal cardiovascular adverse events (AEs) were adjudicated by a committee of physicians with cardiology expertise external to the Sponsor. The nonfatal cardiovascular AEs to be adjudicated include myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, hospitalization for heart failure, coronary interventions (such as coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention), and cerebrovascular events including cerebrovascular accident (stroke) and transient ischemic attack. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine.||participants|||Number
825497|NCT01191268|Secondary|Rate of Self-reported Hypoglycemic Events up to 52 Weeks|Hypoglycemic events (HE) were classified as severe (episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions and had a plasma glucose [PG] of ≤ 70 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL]), documented symptomatic (any time a participant felt that he/she was experiencing symptoms and/or signs associated with hypoglycemia and had a PG of ≤ 70 mg/dL), or asymptomatic (events not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured PG of ≤ 70 mg/dL). The 1-year adjusted rate of hypoglycemic events is summarized cumulatively at 52 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||events per participant per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
825498|NCT01191268|Secondary|Number of Participants With Self-reported Hypoglycemic Events up to 26 Weeks, 52 Weeks, and 4 Weeks After Last Dose|Hypoglycemic events (HE) were classified as severe (episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions and had a plasma glucose [PG] of ≤ 70 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL]), documented symptomatic (any time a participant felt that he/she was experiencing symptoms and/or signs associated with hypoglycemia and had a PG of ≤ 70 mg/dL), or asymptomatic (events not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycemia but with a measured PG of ≤ 70 mg/dL). The number of participants with self-reported hypoglycemic events is summarized cumulatively. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 26 weeks and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||participants|||Number
825499|NCT01191268|Secondary|Number of Events of Adjudicated Pancreatitis up to 26 Weeks, 52 Weeks, and 4 Weeks After Last Dose|The number of adjudicated (by an independent Clinical Endpoint Committee [CEC]) pancreatic events is summarized at 52 weeks. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine.||events|||Number
825500|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Electrocardiogram Parameters, Heart Rate|Electrocardiogram (ECG) heart rate was measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, metformin use, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline value as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable ECG heart rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825501|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Electrocardiogram Parameters, Fridericia Corrected QT (QTcF) Interval and PR Interval|The QT interval is a measure of the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave and was calculated from electrocardiogram (ECG) data using Fridericia's formula: QTc = QT/RR^0.33. Corrected QT (QTc) is the QT interval corrected for heart rate and RR, which is the interval between two R waves. PR is the interval between the P wave and the QRS complex. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, metformin use, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline value as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable ECG QTcF or PR Interval data.||milliseconds (msec)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825502|NCT01191268|Secondary|Pulse Rate at Baseline, 52 Weeks, and 4 Weeks After Last Dose|Seated pulse rate was measured.|Baseline and 52 weeks and 4 weeks after last dose|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable seated pulse rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825503|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Pulse Rate|Seated pulse rate was measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, metformin use, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable seated pulse rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825504|NCT01191268|Secondary|Blood Pressure at Baseline, 52 Weeks, and 4 Weeks After Last Dose|Seated systolic blood pressure (SBP) and seated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were measured.|Baseline and 52 weeks and 4 weeks after last dose|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable blood pressure data.||milliliters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825539|NCT01191736|Primary|Median Compression Depth (mm)|Assessment of resuscitation skills using a Laerdal Resusci Annie recording manikin and Laerdal PC Skill Reporting software|60 minutes after intervention or two months after intervention|Per protocol||millimeters||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826071|NCT01195701|Secondary|Free Testosterone|Free testosterone and the calculated free androgen index will be compared; additionally, these levels will be correlated with the questionnaire data and clitoral measurements|Between day 1-14 (follicular phase) of menstrual cycle|||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825505|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Blood Pressure|Seated systolic blood pressure (SBP) and seated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were measured. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, metformin use, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline blood pressure as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable blood pressure data.||milliliters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825506|NCT01191268|Secondary|Serum Calcitonin at Baseline, 52 Weeks, and 4 Weeks After Last Dose||Baseline and 52 weeks and 4 weeks after last dose|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable serum calcitonin data.||picomole per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
825507|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Serum Calcitonin||Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable serum calcitonin data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing||picogram per milliliter (pcg/mL)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825508|NCT01191268|Secondary|Pancreatic Enzymes at Baseline, 52 Weeks, and 4 Weeks After Last Dose|Amylase (total and pancreas-derived [PD]) and lipase concentrations were measured at baseline and at 4 weeks after last dose (ALD).|Baseline and 52 weeks and 4 weeks after last dose|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable pancreatic enzyme data.||units per liter (U/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825509|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Pancreatic Enzymes|Amylase (total and pancreas-derived [PD]) and lipase concentrations were measured.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable pancreatic enzyme data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units per liter (U/L)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825510|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in the Low Blood Sugar Survey (LBSS)|The Low Blood Sugar Survey (LBSS) contains 33 items comprised of 2 subscales (behavior and worry), each of which is rated on a 5-point numeric rating scale from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). It captures behavioral changes associated with the concerns and experiences of hypoglycemia and the degree to which participants are worried about certain aspects associated with hypoglycemia during the previous 4 weeks. The behavior (or avoidance) subscale has 15 items, and the worry (or affect) subscale has 18 items. Subscale scores are calculated by summing participant responses to items (behavior range 0-60; worry range 0-72). A total score is calculated as the sum of both subscales (range 0-132). Higher scores indicate greater negative impact on subscales and total score. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country, treatment and metformin use as fixed effects and baseline score as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable LBSS data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825511|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in the Impact of Weight on Self-Perception (IW-SP)|The Impact of Weight on Self-Perception (IW-SP) questionnaire contains 3 items that assess how often the participants' body weight affects how happy they are with their appearance and how often they feel self-conscious when out in public. Items are scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale where 5 = never and 1 = always. A single total score is calculated by summing the scores for all 3 items. Total score ranges between 3 and 15, where a higher score is indicative of better self-perception. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country, treatment, and metformin use as fixed effects and baseline score as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable IW-SP data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825512|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in the Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living (IW-ADL)|"The Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living questionnaire (renamed the Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire [APPADL]) contains 7 items that assess how difficult it is for participants to engage in certain activities considered to be integral to normal daily life, such as walking, standing and climbing stairs. Items are scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale where 5 = not at all difficult and 1 = unable to do. The individual scores from all 7 items are summed and a single total score is calculated and may range between 7 and 35. A higher score indicates better ability to perform activities of daily living. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country, treatment, and metformin use as fixed effects and baseline score as a covariate."|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable APPADL data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825522|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 52-week Endpoint in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted by treatment, country, baseline metformin, and baseline HbA1c.|Baseline, 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825556|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in UPDRS II Score Separately at Week 18|UPDRS Part II (activities of daily living) ranges from 0 to 52. Reduction over time represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825513|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in the EQ-5D|The EQ-5D questionnaire is a generic, multidimensional, health-related, quality-of-life instrument. It consists of 2 parts: the first part assesses 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) that have 3 possible levels of response (no problem, some problem, or extreme problem). These dimensions are converted into a weighted health-state Index Score. The EQ-5D United Kingdom (UK) score ranges from -0.59 to 1.0, where a score of 1.0 indicates perfect health and negative values are valued as worse than dead. The second part consists of a visual analog scale (VAS) on which the participants rated their perceived health state on that day from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health). Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted by treatment, country, metformin use, and baseline.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable EQ-5D data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825514|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks, 52 Weeks, and 4 Weeks After Last Dose in Body Mass Index (BMI)|Body mass index is an estimate of body fat based on body weight divided by height squared. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, metformin use, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline BMI as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable BMI data.||kilograms per meter squared (kg/m^2)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825515|NCT01191268|Secondary|Body Weight at Baseline, 52 Weeks, and 4 Weeks After Last Dose||Baseline and 52 weeks and 4 weeks after last dose|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable body weight data.||kilograms (kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825516|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Body Weight|Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with country, treatment, and metformin use as fixed effects and baseline body weight as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable body weight data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||kilograms (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825517|NCT01191268|Secondary|Total Daily Insulin Dose Overall and by Components (Insulin Lispro and Insulin Glargine)|Total daily insulin (TDI) dose was reported at baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks. Daily Insulin Lispro and Insulin Glargine doses were reported at 26 and 52 weeks.|Baseline and 26 weeks and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine.||units||Standard Deviation|Mean
825518|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Fasting Serum Glucose|Fasting serum glucose was measured by the central laboratory. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, country, visit, metformin use, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline fasting blood glucose as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable fasting blood glucose data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825519|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in Blood Glucose Values From the 8-point Self-monitored Plasma Glucose (SMPG) Profiles|The self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) data were collected at the following 8 time points: pre-morning meal; 2 hours post-morning meal; pre-midday meal; 2 hours post-midday meal; pre-evening meal; 2 hours post-evening meal; bedtime; and 3AM or 5 hours after bedtime. The mean of the 8 time points (Daily Mean) was also calculated. Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment, metformin, country, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable SMPG data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)]||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825520|NCT01191268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 and 52 Weeks in the Percentage of Participants Achieving Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Less Than 7% Without Nocturnal or Severe Hypoglycemia|The percentage of participants achieving HbA1c less than 7.0% without nocturnal (defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurred between bedtime and waking) or severe (episodes requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer resuscitative actions) hypoglycemia was analyzed with a repeated logistic regression model (generalized estimating equation model) with baseline HbA1c, baseline metformin, country, and treatment as factors included in the model.|Baseline, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of participants|||Number
825521|NCT01191268|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Attaining Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Less Than 7% and Less Than or Equal to 6.5% at Weeks 26 and 52|The percentage of participants achieving HbA1c level less than 7.0% and less than or equal to 6.5% was analyzed with a repeated logistic regression model (generalized estimating equation model) with baseline HbA1c, baseline metformin, country, and treatment as factors included in the model.|26 weeks and 52 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of participants|||Number
825537|NCT01191723|Primary|Change From Baseline in QTcI for MAP0004 3.0mg and Placebo at 30 Minutes|The corrected QT interval, individualized (QTcI) is a measurement of the electrical impulses through the largest part of the heart muscle individualized for subject pre-dose values. A negative change is a shortening of the QTc interval, a positive change is a lengthening of the QTc interval.|baseline and 30 minutes|Patients with data available at required time point were included in the analysis population.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
825523|NCT01191268|Primary|Change From Baseline to 26-week Endpoint in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|Least Squares (LS) means of change from baseline were calculated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted by treatment, country, baseline metformin, and baseline HbA1c.|Baseline, 26 weeks|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of LY2189265 or Insulin Glargine with evaluable HbA1c data. Only pre-rescue measurements were used. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values. If there were no data after the date of randomization, the endpoint was considered missing.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825524|NCT01191320|Primary|Change in HbA1C|The change in HbA1c from Baseline to 3 Months for each treatment arm|3 months|ITT population||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
825525|NCT01191398|Secondary|Monitoring of Adverse Events During Study Administration|Subjects will be monitored for episodes of apnea, laryngospasm, vomiting, oxygen desaturation(<92%), and changes in heart rate and blood pressure. The time frame will include the time the study medication is administered until at least 30 minutes post Ketamine administration.|1 hour|||adverse events|||Number
825526|NCT01191398|Primary|Difference in Salivary Flow Rate (ml/Min) Between Study Groups|Oral Secretions will be collected by oral suctioning starting at the time Ketamine is administed until 30 minutes post Ketamine administration. Suctionings will be done by trained personnel every 5 minutes starting with the Ketamine administration. Flow rate will be calculated by dividing the total volume of saliva suctioned by the total time suctioned (30 minutes)|30 minutes|||ml/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
825527|NCT01191411|Primary|Colorectal Cancer Screening Participation, Defined as Completion of a Guaiac or Immunochemical Stool Occult Blood Test, Colonoscopy, Sigmoidoscopy, or Barium Enem.|To compare participation rates for screening between those receiving (a) mailed invitation to screening (immunochemical stool blood test (MailFIT) or colonoscopy(MailColo)) and (b) traditional visit-based screening (VisitBased), rates for these groups will be contrasted via a Chi-squared test. A p value<0.025 will be considered statistically significant.|1 year|Overall, out of 1593 patients assigned to FIT outreach, 648 were screened; out of 479 assigned to colonoscopy outreach, 118 were screened; and out of 3898 assigned to usual care, 471 were screened.||percentage of participants|||Number
825528|NCT01191476|Secondary|Time to Orientation|Time to orientation was measured from the time sevoflurane or propofol administration was stopped until orientation (able to state their name and date of birth).|Every minute after anesthesia was stopped until orientation occurred|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
825529|NCT01191476|Secondary|Time to Extubation|Time to extubation was measured from the time sevoflurane or propofol administration was stopped until tracheal extubation occurred. Criteria to determine extubation included a train of four stimulus > 0.9 (a method to measure the magnitude and type of neuromuscular block, a ratio of the fourth response to the first one), a tidal volume > 5 mL/kg, minute ventilation > 3 L, a respiratory rate of > 10 breaths/minute, an end tidal carbon dioxide < 45 mmHg, and eye opening has occurred.|Every minute after anesthesia was stopped until extubation occurred|Measurement||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
825530|NCT01191476|Secondary|Time to Eye Opening|Measured from the time sevoflurane or propofol administration was stopped until the subject's eyes were opened. The investigator tapped the subject on the forehead or shoulder after anesthesia was stopped and asked them to open their eyes. This process was repeated approximately every minute until eye opening occurred.|Every minute after anesthesia was stopped until the subjects' eyes opened|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
825531|NCT01191476|Secondary|Time to Loss of Consciousness|Loss of consciousness was measured from the time the anesthetic was administered until loss of consciousness (no response to command) occurred. Inhalational induction was induced with sevoflurane via vital capacity induction at 8%. Intravenous induction was induced with propofol at 4 µg/mL via target controlled infusion (TCI). In subjects who received both anesthetic agents, a bolus dose of propofol 1.5 mg/kg was used for induction.|Up to 10 minutes|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
825532|NCT01191476|Primary|Cost of Volatile Induction and Maintenance Anesthesia (VIMA) With Sevoflurane, Total Intravenous Anesthesia (TIVA) With Propofol, or Intravenous Induction With Propofol and Inhalational Maintenance With Sevoflurane|"[Cost of VIMA = unit price of sevoflurane X used volume of sevoflurane];
[Cost of TIVA = unit price of propofol X total volume of propofol in the syringe];
[Cost of Propofol Induction and Sevoflurane Maintenance = unit price of propofol X total volume of propofol in the syringe + unit price of sevoflurane X volume of sevoflurane in the syringe].
The total volume of propofol in the syringe was calculated, even if all the anesthetic was not used, because it could not be reused."|Anesthetic Duration between 1 to 3 Hours|The full analysis set was used for the determination of cost of anesthesia.||Yuan||Standard Deviation|Mean
825533|NCT01191723|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate for MAP0004 3.0mg, Placebo, and Moxifloxacin at 30 Minutes and 2 Hours|The heart rate is a measure of how fast or slow the heart beats (measured in beats per minute). A negative change indicates a decrease in heart rate and a positive change indicates an increase in heart rate.|baseline, 30 minutes, and 2 hours|Patients with data available at required time point were included in the analysis population.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825534|NCT01191723|Secondary|Change From Baseline in QTcF for MAP0004 3.0mg, Placebo, and Moxifloxacin at 2 Hours|The Fridericia corrected QT interval(QTcF) is a measurement of the electrical impulses through the largest part of the heart muscle. A negative change is a shortening of the QTc interval, a positive change is a lengthening of the QTc interval.|baseline and 2 hours|Patients with data available at required time point were included in the analysis population.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
825535|NCT01191723|Secondary|Change From Baseline in QTcF for MAP0004 3.0mg and Placebo at 30 Minutes|The Fridericia corrected QT interval(QTcF) is a measurement of the electrical impulses through the largest part of the heart muscle. A negative change is a shortening of the QTc interval, a positive change is a lengthening of the QTc interval.|baseline and 30 minutes|Patients with data available at required time point were included in the analysis population.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
825536|NCT01191723|Primary|Change From Baseline in QTcI for MAP0004 3.0mg, Placebo, and Moxifloxacin at 2 Hours|The corrected QT interval, individualized (QTcI) is a measurement of the electrical impulses through the largest part of the heart muscle individualized for subject pre-dose values. A negative change is a shortening of the QTc interval, a positive change is a lengthening of the QTc interval.|baseline and 2 hours|Patients with data available at required time point were included in the analysis population.||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
825540|NCT01191749|Primary|Overall Response - Number of Participants Who Achieved Complete Remission (CR)+Partial Remission (PR) - as Per International Working Group (IWG) Response Criteria|Overall response (OR) defined as complete/partial remission for at least 4 weeks or hematologic improvement for at least 8 weeks. Response Criteria are according to the Modified IWG Response Criteria in Myelodysplasia. IWG 2006 response criteria - CR: bone marrow evaluation shows less than or equal to (<=) 5% blasts; normal maturation of all cells lines (mCR), peripheral blood evaluation shows hemoglobin >= 11 gram per deciliter (g/dL), neutrophils >= 1000/mL, platelets >= 100,000/mL, 0% blasts; PR: Same as CR, except blasts decrease by >=50%, still greater than 5% in bone marrow. Hematologic improvement are measured in participants with pretreatment abnormal values: hemoglobin level less than 110 g/L (11 g/dL) or red blood count (RBC)-transfusion dependence, platelet count <100 x 10^9/L or platelet-transfusion dependence, absolute neutrophil count (ANC) less than 1.0 x 10^9/L.|Up to 6 months following treatment; response assessed every 2 months|One subject’s response was indeterminate due to the absence of end of therapy assessments.||participants|||Number
825541|NCT01191762|Primary|Fractional Change in [PTH] in CKD After a 4-week Course of Sevelamer Carbonate|This outcome measure documented the effect of intestinal phosphate-binding on [PTH]. Fractional change was calculated as ([PTH]post - [PTH]pre)/[PTH]pre, where 'pre' and 'post' referred respectively to baseline [PTH] (before treatment) and [PTH] after four weeks of treatment. Reductions were cited as negative numbers, and increments were cited as positive numbers.|4 weeks|||percentage of baseline [PTH]||Standard Error|Mean
825542|NCT01191788|Secondary|Mental Health Functioning as Measured by SF-12 MCS.|The SF-12 is a 12 question, self-administered measure of general health functioning. The SF-12 outputs a mental health summary score (MCS), which ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better mental health functioning. MCS scores are standardized such that mean = 50 and SD = 10 in the general U.S. population.|3 Months Post Treatment|||SF-12 score||Standard Deviation|Mean
825543|NCT01191788|Primary|Depressive Symptoms as Measured by the Beck Depression Inventory II|The Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) is a 21 question, self-administered measure of depressive symptoms. Scores range from 0 - 63, with higher scores indicating more severe depressive symptoms.|3 Months Post Treatment|||BDI-II score||Standard Deviation|Mean
825544|NCT01191801|Other Pre-specified|Leukemia-Free Survival (LFS)|Durability of remission (CR) assessed by LFS|Up to 5 years or the duration of the study|Subset of Intent to Treat patients that have a Measured CR||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825545|NCT01191801|Other Pre-specified|Event Free Survival (EFS)||Up to 5 years or duration of study|Intent to Treat Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825546|NCT01191801|Other Pre-specified|Overall Remission (OR) Rate Based on the IWG Response Criteria|"Group A patient OR compared to Group B patient OR
Overall Remission includes Complete Remission (CR), Complete Remission with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp), Complete Remission with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi), and Partial Remission (PR). Complete remission means bone marrow blast count of less than 5% with adequate recovery of peripheral blood counts as typically defined by the IWG. Both CRi and CRp refer complete remission but with incomplete blood count and platelet recovery, respectively. PR, or partial remission, refers to remission in which bone marrow contains blast counts between 5 and 25 percent."|Up to 5 years or the duration of the study|Intent to Treat Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825547|NCT01191801|Secondary|All Cause Mortality|Vosaroxin + cytarabine mortality versus placebo + cytarabine mortality|60 Days|Safety Population (705)||percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825548|NCT01191801|Secondary|All Cause Mortality|Vosaroxin + cytarabine mortality versus placebo + cytarabine mortality|30 Days|Safety Population (705)||percentage of Participants in the Group||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825549|NCT01191801|Secondary|Complete Remission (CR) Rate Based on Modified International Working Group (IWG) Criteria.|Group A (Vosaroxin + cytarabine) patient CR as compared to Group B (placebo + cytarabine) patient CR. Complete remission (CR) is typically defined using IWG criteria as bone marrow blast count of less than 5% with adequate recovery of peripheral blood counts.|Up to 5 years or duration of study|The percentage of patients who achieved CR was adjudicated by the CPARR (Central Pathology and Response Review) panel using modified IWG response criteria. The outcome measure reflects the Intent to Treat Population.||percentage of particpants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825550|NCT01191801|Primary|Overall Survival|Vosaroxin + cytarabine patient survival versus placebo + cytarabine patient survival|Up to 5 years or duration of study|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population which consists of all patients enrolled (randomly assigned to treatment group).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825551|NCT01191827|Primary|Neuronal Response During Sensory Gating|Neuronal response (blood oxygenation level dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging signal, relative to the global mean) during sensory gating. Sensory gating is defined as the process of filtering out unnecessary environmental stimuli.|Immediate|||% BOLD signal||Standard Deviation|Mean
825552|NCT01191944|Secondary|Levodopa (L-Dopa) Dose Change During the Study|Although the number of patients who began the study with concomitant L-dopa supplementation and required a change in dosage was not analysed for this study, the change from baseline in L-dopa dose is presented.|18 weeks|FAS. Only patients with concomitant L-Dopa treatment at baseline.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
825553|NCT01191944|Secondary|Levodopa (L-Dopa) Introduction During the Study|Number of patients without concomitant L-Dopa treatment at baseline which required L-Dopa supplementation during the study.|18 weeks|FAS. Only patients without concomitant L-Dopa treatment at baseline.||Participants|||Number
825554|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in UPDRS III Score Separately at Week 18|UPDRS Part III (motor examination) ranges from 0 to 108. Reduction over time represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825555|NCT01191944|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) Total Score at 18 Weeks|ESS is a patient-report scale with 8 items rating how likely one is to fall asleep during passive and inconsequential situations such as watching television, more active situations such as sitting and talking to someone, or consequential situations such as sitting in a car, while stopped for a few minutes in traffic. The likelihood of dozing off is rated from 0 points (no chance) to 3 points (high chance). The overall rating scale is scored from 0 (no daytime sleep) to 24 (worst daytime sleep).|Baseline and week 18|Observed cases (OC). Only patients with ESS assessment at baseline and at 18 weeks were analyzed.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825557|NCT01191944|Secondary|Responder in UPDRS Parts II+III Score at Week 18|Responders were defined as patients with at least a 20 percent improvement of UPDRS II+III score relative to baseline. UPDRS II+III ranges 0-160 scores from best to worst and was calculated as the sum of Part II (activities of daily living, ranges from 0 to 52) and Part III (motor examination, ranges from 0 to 108).|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF)||Participants|||Number
825558|NCT01191944|Secondary|Patient Global Impressions of Improvement (PGI-I) Responder at Week 18|The PGI-I scale is a patient-rated instrument which was used to measure the improvement of a patients PD symptoms throughout the study. Ranging from 1 point=very much better to 7 points=very much worse. Responders were defined as patients having score 1 or 2 (at least much better) when comparing the past week to the assessment at baseline.|18 weeks|FAS (LOCF)||Participants|||Number
825559|NCT01191944|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Responder at Week 18|CGI-I was used to assess the overall status of Parkinsons disease (PD) after interviewing the patient about the various aspects of the PD and after evaluating adverse events and concomitant treatments. Ranging from 1 point=very much improved to 7 points=very much worse. Responders were defined as patients having score 1 or 2 (at least much improved) when comparing the past week to the assessment at baseline.|18 weeks|FAS (LOCF). Only patients with on-treatment CGI-I evaluation were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
825560|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Duration of On-time With Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 18|Duration of on-time with troublesome Dyskinesia based on patient diary data, percentage ranging from 0 (best case) to 100 (worst case). On-time describes a period during which a patient was relatively free of Parkinsons symptoms (e.g. mobile or capable of moving with relative ease and independence). Dyskinesia qualified as troublesome if it interfered with function or caused meaningful discomfort. Decrease in the duration represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced PD. Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825561|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Duration of On-time Without or With Non-troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 18|Duration of on-time without Dyskinesia or with non-troublesome Dyskinesia based on patient diary data, percentage ranging from 0 (worst case) to 100 (best case). On-time describes a period during which a patient was relatively free of Parkinsons symptoms (e.g. mobile or capable of moving with relative ease and independence). Dyskinesia qualified as non-troublesome if it did not interfere with function or did not cause meaningful discomfort. Increase in the duration represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced PD. Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825562|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Duration of On-time With Non-troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 18|Duration on-time with non-troublesome Dyskinesia based on patient diary data, percentage ranging from 0 (worst case) to 100 (best case). On-time describes a period during which a patient was relatively free of Parkinsons symptoms (e.g. mobile or capable of moving with relative ease and independence). Dyskinesia qualified as non-troublesome if it did not interfere with function or did not cause meaningful discomfort. Increase in the duration represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced PD. Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825563|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Duration of On-time Without Dyskinesia at Week 18|Duration of on-time without Dyskinesia based on patient diary data. On-time describes a period during which a patient was relatively free of Parkinsons symptoms (e.g. mobile or capable of moving with relative ease and independence). Increase in the duration represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced PD. Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825564|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage On-time With Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 18|Percentage on-time with troublesome Dyskinesia based on patient diary data, percentage ranging from 0 (best case) to 100 (worst case). On-time describes a period during which a patient was relatively free of Parkinsons symptoms (e.g. mobile or capable of moving with relative ease and independence). Dyskinesia qualified as troublesome if it interfered with function or caused meaningful discomfort. Decrease in the percentage represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced PD. Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||Percentage of on-time||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825565|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage On-time Without or With Non-troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 18|Percentage on-time without or with non-troublesome Dyskinesia based on patient diary data, percentage ranging from 0 (best case) to 100 (worst case). On-time describes a period during which a patient was relatively free of Parkinsons symptoms (e.g. mobile or capable of moving with relative ease and independence). Dyskinesia qualified as non-troublesome if it did not interfere with function or did not cause meaningful discomfort. Increase in the percentage represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced PD. Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||Percentage of on-time||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825566|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage On-time With Non-troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 18|Percentage on-time with non-troublesome Dyskinesia based on patient diary data, percentage ranging from 0 (worst case) to 100 (best case). On-time describes a period during which a patient was relatively free of Parkinsons symptoms (e.g. mobile or capable of moving with relative ease and independence). Dyskinesia qualified as non-troublesome if it did not interfere with function or did not cause meaningful discomfort. Increase in the percentage represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced PD. Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||Percentage of on-time||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825567|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage On-time Without Dyskinesia at Week 18|Percentage on-time without Dyskinesia based on patient diary data, percentage ranging from 0 (worst case) to 100 (best case). On-time describes a period during which a patient was relatively free of Parkinsons symptoms (e.g. mobile or capable of moving with relative ease and independence). Increase in the percentage represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced PD. Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||Percentage of on-time||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825568|NCT01191944|Secondary|Responder in Percentage Off-time During Waking Hours at Week 18|Percentage off-time based on patient diary data, percentage ranging from 0 (best case) to 100 (worst case). Off-time describes a period when the patient experiences increased parkinsonian symptoms (e.g. immobility or inability to move with ease). Reduction over time represents an improvement. Responders were defined as patients with at least a 20 percent improvement relative to baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced PD. Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||Participants|||Number
825569|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Duration of Off-time During Waking Hours at Week 18|Duration of off-time during waking hours based on patient diary data. Off-time describes a period when the patient experiences increased parkinsonian symptoms (e.g. immobility or inability to move with ease). Reduction over time represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced PD. Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825570|NCT01191944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage Off-time During Waking Hours at Week 18|Percentage off-time during waking hours based on patient diary data, percentage ranging from 0 (best case) to 100 (worst case). Off-time describes a period when the patient experiences increased parkinsonian symptoms (e.g. immobility or inability to move with ease). Reduction over time represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|FAS (LOCF) reduced to patients with advanced Parkinsons Disease (PD). Advanced PD patients were those reporting at least 2 hours of off-time daily during each of the two days before baseline, as recorded in the patient diary.||Percentage off-time||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825571|NCT01191944|Primary|Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinsons Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Parts II+III Score at Week 18|UPDRS total score ranges from 0 (best) to 160 (worst) and was calculated as the sum of Part II (activities of daily living, ranges from 0 to 52) and Part III (motor examination, ranges from 0 to 108). Reduction over time represents an improvement. Means are adjusted for treatment, centre and baseline.|Baseline and week 18|Full analysis set (FAS) with last observation carried forward (LOCF). FAS is defined as all randomised patients which received at least one dose of study drug and provided any post baseline efficacy assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825572|NCT01192022|Secondary|Time to Intraoperative Hemostasis at Target Bleeding Site|The target bleeding area was observed at 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, and 10 minutes after the patch was applied to see if the bleeding stopped, and time in minutes until bleeding stopped was recorded.|10 minutes|Full Analysis set included all randomized participants analyzed according to the treatment assigned.||minutes||Full Range|Median
825573|NCT01192022|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Intraoperative Hemostasis at Target Bleeding Site Within 5 Minutes|3, 4 and 5 minutes after the patch was applied to the target bleeding area, the area was observed to see if the bleeding stopped.|within 5 minutes|Full Analysis set included all randomized participants analyzed according to the treatment assigned.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825574|NCT01192022|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Intraoperative Hemostasis at Target Bleeding Site Within 3 Minutes|3 Minutes after the patch was applied to the target bleeding area, the area was observed to see if the bleeding stopped.|within 3 minutes|Full Analysis set included all randomized participants analyzed according to the treatment assigned.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825575|NCT01192126|Primary|Slit Lamp Examination > Grade 2|Slit lamp findings for each eye will be assessed at each study visit, including epithelial edema, epithelial microcysts, corneal staining, limbal injection, bulbar injection, upper lid tarsal conjunctival abnormalities, corneal neovascularization, and corneal infiltrates, will be graded for severity on a scale from 0 (No Finding) to 4 (Severe Finding). Slit lamp > 2.|All study visits from screening through 2 week follow-up|All Dispensed Eyes||Eyes|Participants||Number
825576|NCT01192126|Primary|Visual Acuity|Distance High contrast logMAR visual acuity (VA), difference between the test and control lens at dispensing visit and 1 week follow-up, crossover visit and 1 week follow-up.|Dispensing Visit and 1 week follow-up|All Eligible Dispensed Eyes||LogMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
825577|NCT01192139|Secondary|Safety: Clinically Significant Laboratory, Vital Sign, Physical Examination, and Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities|Abnormalities considered by the investigator to be clinically significant and/or reported as an AE.|From Day 1 of Period 1 through Day 3 of Period 3 (study discharge)|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
825578|NCT01192139|Secondary|Safety: Adverse Events (AEs), Discontinuations Due to AEs, Deaths, and Serious AEs (SAEs)|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a pre-existing medical condition in a subject administered an investigational product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires or prolongs inpatient hospitalization (including elective surgery), results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an important medical event.|AEs: from initiation of study drug administration on Day 1/Period 1 through study discharge Day 3/Period 3. SAEs: from date of written consent until 30 days after discontinuation of dosing or participation in study if last scheduled visit occurred later.|Safety Population = all participants who received any study drug.||Participants|||Number
825579|NCT01192139|Secondary|Metformin Fraction of AUC(0-inf) Contributed by AUC(0-t)(AUC[0-t]/AUC[0-inf])||Period 1 (before dosing, 0.167,0.25,0.5,0.75,1,1.5,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,12,18,24,36 and 48 hours after dosing)|Treated participants (the smaller sample size for AUC(0-inf) was due to the inability to estimate Kel for some of the subjects).||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
825581|NCT01192139|Secondary|Metformin T1/2|terminal half life; calculated as ln(2)/Kel|Period 1 (before dosing, 0.167,0.25,0.5,0.75,1,1.5,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,12,18,24,36 and 48 hours after dosing)|Treated participants (the smaller sample size for T1/2 was due to the inability to estimate Kel for some of the subjects).||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
825582|NCT01192139|Primary|Metformin Cmax||Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825583|NCT01192139|Secondary|Metformin AUC(0-t)|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (Ct), calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule.|Period 1 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167,0.25,0.5,0.75,1,1.5,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,12,18,24,36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825584|NCT01192139|Primary|Metformin AUC(0-inf)|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity; calculated as AUC0-t [calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule] + Ct/Kel, where Ct was the last measurable concentration and Kel was the terminal rate constant|Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|Treated participants (the smaller sample size for AUC[0-inf] was due to the inability to estimate potassium chloride for some participants)||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825585|NCT01192139|Secondary|Active Metabolite BMS-510849 AUC(0-t)/AUC(0-inf)||Period 1 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167,0.25,0.5,0.75,1,1.5,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,12,18,24,36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
825586|NCT01192139|Secondary|Active Metabolite BMS-510849 Tmax||Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
825587|NCT01192139|Secondary|Active Metabolite BMS-510849 T1/2|terminal half life; calculated as ln(2)/Kel|Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
825588|NCT01192139|Secondary|Active Metabolite BMS-510849 Cmax||Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825589|NCT01192139|Secondary|Active Metabolite BMS-510849 AUC(0-t)|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (Ct), calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule.|Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825590|NCT01192139|Secondary|Active Metabolite BMS-510849 AUC(0-inf)|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity; calculated as AUC0-t [calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule] + Ct/Kel, where Ct was the last measurable concentration and Kel was the terminal rate constant|Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825591|NCT01192139|Secondary|Saxagliptin Fraction of AUC(0-inf) Contributed by AUC(0-t) (AUC[0-t]/AUC[0-inf])||Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
825592|NCT01192139|Secondary|Time to Achieve the Observed Maximum Saxagliptin Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
825593|NCT01192139|Primary|Saxagliptin Observed Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825594|NCT01192139|Secondary|Saxagliptin Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-t])|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (Ct), calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule.|Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825595|NCT01192139|Secondary|Saxagliptin Terminal Half-life (T1/2)|terminal half life; calculated as ln(2)/Kel|Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
825596|NCT01192139|Primary|Saxagliptin Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC[0-inf])|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity; calculated as AUC0-t [calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule] + Ct/Kel, where Ct was the last measurable concentration and Kel was the terminal rate constant|Periods 1, 2, and 3 (samples taken before dosing, and at 0.167, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours after dosing)|All treated participants||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825597|NCT01192152|Secondary|Safety: Clinically Significant Laboratory, Vital Sign, Physical Examination, and/or 12-Lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities|Abnormalities considered clinically significant and/or reported as an AE by the investigator.|From Day 1 of Period 1 to Day 3 of Period 2 for participants in Treatment Sequence BA and Day 5 of Period 3 for participants in Treatment Sequence ABC|All subjects who received at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
825615|NCT01192152|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin Cmax||Periods 1 & 2:predose, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48 hours postdose. Period 3: predose on Days 2 & 3; predose, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24 hours postdose on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825616|NCT01192152|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin AUC(0-tau)||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825598|NCT01192152|Secondary|Safety: Adverse Events (AEs), Discontinuations Due to AEs, Deaths, and Serious AEs (SAEs)|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a pre-existing medical condition in a subject administered an investigational product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires or prolongs inpatient hospitalization (including elective surgery), results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an important medical event.|AEs: from initiation of study drug administration on morning of Day 1/Period 1 through study discharge. SAEs: from date of written consent until 30 days after discontinuation of dosing or participation in study if last scheduled visit occurred later.|All subjects who received at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
825599|NCT01192152|Secondary|Metformin Tmax||Periods 1 & 2:predose, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48 hours postdose. Period 3: predose on Days 2 & 3; predose, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24 hours postdose on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
825600|NCT01192152|Secondary|Metformin AUC(0-inf) Contributed by AUC(0-t)(AUC[0-t]/AUC[0-inf])||Periods 1 and 2: predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours postdosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study. 2 participants in Treatment A & 1 in Treatment B were excluded as a result of the inability to estimate with acceptable accuracy a terminal slope for terminal phase concentration data. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, & this measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
825601|NCT01192152|Secondary|Metformin T1/2||Periods 1 and 2: predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours postdosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of study. One participant in Treatment A was excluded as a result of the inability to estimate with acceptable accuracy a terminal slope for the terminal phase concentration data. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825602|NCT01192152|Secondary|Metformin Fluctuation %||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||percentage of fluctuation||Standard Deviation|Mean
825603|NCT01192152|Secondary|Metformin Cavg||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825604|NCT01192152|Secondary|Metformin Cmin||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825605|NCT01192152|Primary|Metformin Cmax||Periods 1 & 2:predose, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48 hours postdose. Period 3: predose on Days 2 & 3; predose, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24 hours postdose on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825606|NCT01192152|Secondary|Metformin AUC(0-tau)||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825607|NCT01192152|Secondary|Metformin AUC(0-t)||Periods 1 and 2: predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours postdosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825608|NCT01192152|Primary|Metformin AUC(0-inf)||Periods 1 and 2: predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours postdosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study. 2 participants in Treatment A & 1 in Treatment B were excluded due to the inability to estimate with acceptable accuracy a terminal slope for terminal phase concentration data. Treatment C administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825609|NCT01192152|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin Tmax||Periods 1 & 2:predose, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48 hours postdose. Period 3: predose on Days 2 & 3; predose, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24 hours postdose on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
825610|NCT01192152|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin AUC(0-t)/AUC(0-inf)||Periods 1 and 2: predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours postdosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of study. One participant in Treatment A was excluded as a result of the inability to estimate with acceptable accuracy a terminal slope for the terminal phase concentration data. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
825611|NCT01192152|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin T1/2||Periods 1 and 2: predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours post-dosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of study. One participant in Treatment A was excluded as a result of the inability to estimate with acceptable accuracy a terminal slope for the terminal phase concentration data. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825612|NCT01192152|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin Fluctuation %||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||percentage of fluctuation||Standard Deviation|Mean
825613|NCT01192152|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin Cavg||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825614|NCT01192152|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin Cmin||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825617|NCT01192152|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin AUC(0-t)||Periods 1 and 2: predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours postdosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825618|NCT01192152|Secondary|5-hydroxy Saxagliptin AUC(0-inf)||Periods 1 and 2: predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours postdosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of study. One participant in Treatment A was excluded as a result of the inability to estimate with acceptable accuracy a terminal slope for the terminal phase concentration data. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825619|NCT01192152|Secondary|Saxagliptin Time to Achieve the Observed Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||Periods 1 & 2:predose, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48 hours postdose. Period 3: predose on Days 2 & 3; predose, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24 hours postdose on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
825620|NCT01192152|Secondary|Saxagliptin Fraction of AUC(0-inf) Contributed by AUC(0-t) (AUC[0-t]/AUC[0-inf])||Periods 1 and 2: predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours postdosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of study. One participant in Treatment A was excluded as a result of the inability to estimate with acceptable accuracy a terminal slope for the terminal phase concentration data. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
825621|NCT01192152|Secondary|Saxagliptin Terminal Half-life (T1/2)||Periods 1 and 2: predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours postdosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of study. One participant in Treatment A was excluded as a result of the inability to estimate with acceptable accuracy a terminal slope for the terminal phase concentration data. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825622|NCT01192152|Secondary|Saxagliptin Degree of Fluctuation Over the Dosing Interval (Fluctuation %)||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||percentage of fluctuation||Standard Deviation|Mean
825623|NCT01192152|Secondary|Saxagliptin Average Plasma Concentration Over the Dosing Period (Cavg)||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825624|NCT01192152|Secondary|Saxagliptin Trough (Predose) Plasma Concentration (Cmin)||Period 3: predosing on Days 2 and 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours postdosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825625|NCT01192152|Primary|Saxagliptin Observed Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Periods 1 & 2: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 mins & 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 hrs post-dosing. Period 3: predosing on Days 2 & 3; predosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24 hrs postdosing on Day 4|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825626|NCT01192152|Secondary|Saxagliptin Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 to the End of the Dosing Interval (AUC[0-tau])|Dosing interval = 24 hours.|Period 3: pre-dosing on Days 2 and 3; pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 24 hours post-dosing on Day 4.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825627|NCT01192152|Secondary|Saxagliptin Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-t])||Periods 1 and 2: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours post-dosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to end of study. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825628|NCT01192152|Primary|Saxagliptin Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC[0-inf])||Periods 1 and 2: pre-dosing, 15, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours post-dosing.|All treated participants not discontinuing prior to the end of study. One participant in Treatment A was excluded as a result of the inability to estimate with acceptable accuracy a terminal slope for the terminal phase concentration data. Treatment C was administered only during Period 3, and this outcome measure was analyzed for Periods 1 and 2.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825629|NCT01192178|Secondary|Mean Percentage of Rescue-free Days|A rescue-free day was defined as a day during the Peak Viral Period on which no puffs of rescue medication were recorded. Percentage of rescue-free days was defined as the number of days during the Peak Viral Period on which no puffs of rescue medication were recorded, divided by the number of days in that same period on which non-missing values were recorded, multiplied by 100.|Peak Viral Period (from 30 August 2010 through the end of treatment [up to Week 16])|ITT Population. Only those participants who recorded data during the Peak Viral Period and had a treatment stop date with a defined Peak Viral Period were analyzed.||Percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
825630|NCT01192178|Secondary|Mean Percentage of Symptom-free Days|A symptom-free day was defined as a day during the Peak Viral Period on which the asthma symptom score was zero. The daily asthma symptom score (measured during the day and the previous night) was reported on a 6-point scale (ranging from 0=no symptoms to 5=severe symptoms). Percentage of symptom-free days was defined as the number of days during the Peak Viral Period on which the asthma symptom score=0, divided by the number of days in that same period on which non-missing values were recorded, multiplied by 100.|Peak Viral Period (from 30 August 2010 through the end of treatment [up to Week 16])|ITT Population. Only those participants who recorded data during the Peak Viral Period and had a treatment stop date with a defined Peak Viral Period were analyzed.||Percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
826072|NCT01195701|Primary|Clitoral Measurements Using Pelvic MRI|All cases and controls will undergo a pelvic MRI without contrast to assess the clitoral complex.|Between day 1-14 (follicular phase) of menstrual cycle|||millimeters (mm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825631|NCT01192178|Secondary|Mean Percentage of Episode-free (EF) Days|An EF day was defined as a day without any of the following: rescue albuterol use, use of oral/parenteral corticosteroids for asthma, use of asthma medication other than study treatment, asthma symptom score >0, nighttime awakenings due to asthma, unscheduled health care visits (defined as home visits, office visits, or urgent care visits), ER visits, hospitalizations for asthma, school absenteeism due to asthma, or morning peak expiratory flow (measure of maximum airflow) <80% of baseline. Percentage of EF days=No. of EF days divided by No. of days of treatment exposure, multiplied by 100.|Peak Viral Period (from 30 August 2010 through the end of treatment [up to Week 16])|ITT Population. Only those participants who recorded data during the Peak Viral Period, had a treatment stop date with a defined Peak Viral Period, and had available data on all days on which data were recorded were analyzed.||Percentage of days||Standard Error|Mean
825632|NCT01192178|Secondary|Mean Percentage of Asthma-control Days|An asthma-control day was defined as a day without any of the following: rescue albuterol use, use of oral/parenteral corticosteroids for asthma, use of asthma medication other than double-blind study treatment, asthma symptom score >0, nighttime awakenings due to asthma, unscheduled health care visits (defined as home visits, office visits, or urgent care visits), ER visits, hospitalizations for asthma, or school absenteeism due to asthma. The percentage of asthma-control days = the number (No.) of asthma-control days divided by the No. of days of treatment exposure, multiplied by 100.|Peak Viral Period (from 30 August 2010 through the end of treatment [up to Week 16])|ITT Population. Only those participants who recorded data during the Peak Viral Period, had a treatment stop date with a defined Peak Viral Period, and had available data on all days on which data were recorded were analyzed.||Percentage of days||Standard Error|Mean
825633|NCT01192178|Secondary|Number of Asthma Exacerbations Associated With the Presence of Moderate or Severe URTS or a Confirmed RV Infection During the Peak Viral Period|Each participant (with assistance from the parent/legal guardian as needed) was instructed to keep an electronic diary (eDiary) with record of daily URTS symptoms that included: runny nose, sneezing, nasal congestion, and sore throat. Based on the best-described aggregate URTS during the previous 24 hours, participants rated symptoms as: 0 = Not present; 1 = Mild, clearly present; 2 = Moderately severe, uncomfortable; and 3 = Severe, interfering with sleep or activity. Mucus samples were collected and analyzed for RVwhen the eDiary alerted for moderate/severe URTS.|Peak Viral Period (from 30 August 2010 through the end of treatment [up to Week 16])|ITT Population. Only those participants who reported >=1 exacerbation were analyzed. Only those participants with moderate or severe URTS or a confirmed RV infection were analyzed.||Number of asthma exacerbations|||Number
825634|NCT01192178|Secondary|Mean Duration of Worsening Asthma Symptoms Associated With the Presence of Moderate or Severe URTS or a Confirmed RV Infection|A worsening asthma day is one on which any of the following occurred: rescue albuterol use above baseline, use of oral/parenteral corticosteroids for asthma, use of asthma medication other than study medication, asthma symptom scores >=3, nighttime awakenings, unscheduled health care visits, or missed school due to asthma. The duration of worsening asthma is the number of consecutive worsening asthma days after the date of a URTS score of 2 (moderate) or 3 (severe) or collection of a mucus sample containing RV (whichever occurred first). Each span of consecutive days is a participant interval.|Peak Viral Period (from 30 August 2010 through the end of treatment [up to Week 16])|ITT Population. Only those participants with relevant data defining a worsening asthma day during the peak viral period and with moderate or severe URTS or a confirmed RV infection were analyzed.||Days per participant interval||Standard Error|Mean
825635|NCT01192178|Secondary|Mean Asthma Symptom Scores, as an Indicator of Severity, Associated With the Presence of Moderate or Severe Upper Respiratory Tract Symptoms (URTS) or a Confirmed Rhinovirus (RV) Infection at Baseline and During the Peak Viral Period|Participants recorded their asthma symptom score over the previous 24 hours (during the day and the previous night) using the following 6-point scale: 0=No symptoms; 1=Symptoms for 1 short period; 2=Symptoms for >=2 short periods; 3=Symptoms for most of the day/previous night that did not affect normal daily activities; 4=Symptoms for most of the day/previous night that affected normal daily activities; 5=Symptoms so severe that participant could not perform normal daily activities. The Baseline mean asthma symptom score was calculated as the average score over 7 days prior to Week 1, Visit 2.|Baseline (Week 1) and Peak Viral Period ([period during which the greatest number of viral infections is expected] from 30 August 2010 through the end of the treatment period [up to Week 16])|ITT Population. Only those participants with moderate or severe URTS or a confirmed RV infection were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825636|NCT01192178|Primary|Total Number of Asthma Exacerbations Reported During the Treatment Period|An asthma exacerbation was defined as deterioration of asthma that required the use of outpatient oral/parenteral corticosteroids (tablets, suspensions, or injection) or an urgent care, hospitalization, or emergency room (ER) visit due to asthma that required oral/parenteral corticosteroids. Two exacerbations (out of a total of 51) were excluded: (1) one exacerbation occurred within 7 days of the resolution of an earlier one, and, per protocol, was combined with the previous exacerbation; and (2) one exacerbation occurred post treatment.|From Baseline (Week 1) until the end of treatment (up to Week 16)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment. Only those participants who reported >=1 exacerbation were analyzed.||Number of asthma exacerbations|||Number
825637|NCT01192191|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings|A 12-lead ECG was recorded in a supine position after the participant was kept at rest in this position for at least 5 minutes at assessment time points (Week 12, Week 24, and Week52). Data are presented for clinically significant (CS) as well as not clinically significant (NCS) abnormal findings. Any abnormal ECG, including those that worsen from baseline, and clinically significant as assessed by the investigator were recorded as CS.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Participants|||Number
825638|NCT01192191|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (HR) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 52; Week 24/WD; and Week 52/WD|Heart rate was measured in a sitting position after a participant was kept at rest for at least 5 minutes at assessment time points (Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 52; Week 24/WD; and Week 52/WD). Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 24, Week 32, Week 40, Week 52, Week 24/WD, Week 52/WD|ITT Population. Only those participants with post-Baseline data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Beats/Minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
825639|NCT01192191|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Pressure at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 52; Week 24/WD; and Week 52/WD|Blood pressure measurement included systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 52; Week 24/WD; and Week 52/WD. Blood pressure was measured in a sitting position after a participant was kept at rest for at least 5 minutes. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 24, Week 32, Week 40, Week 52, Week 24/WD, and Week 52/WD|ITT Population. Only those participants with post-Baseline data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825640|NCT01192191|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 24-hour Urinary Cortisol Excretion at Weeks 24 and 52/Withdrawal (WD)|24-hour urinary cortisol excretion was calculated by multiplying the total volume of urine by the concentration of urinary cortisol. Cortisol is a hormone released from the adrenal gland that helps in fat, protein, and carbohydrate metabolism. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 24, and Week 52/Withdrawal (WD)|The Urine Cortisol Population: all participants in the ITT Population for whom a urine sample was obtained and whose urine sample was not considered to have confounding factors that could affect the interpretation of the results. Only those participants with post-Baseline data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Nanomoles (nmol)/24 hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
825641|NCT01192191|Secondary|Number of Participants for the Indicated Urinalysis Parameters Tested by Dipstick at Baseline (BL) and Week 52/Withdrawal (WD)|Urinalysis parameters included: Urine Occult Blood (UOB), Urine Glucose (UG), Urine Ketones (UK), Urine Protein (UP), and Urine Leukocyte Esterase test for detecting White Blood Cell (UWBC). The dipstick was a strip used to detect the presence or absence of these parameters in the urine sample. The dipstick test gives results in a semi-quantitative manner, and results can be read as negative (Neg), Trace, 1+, 2+, and 3+, indicating proportional concentrations in the urine sample. Data are reported as the number of participants who had neg, trace, 1+, 2+, and 3+ levels at Baseline (Week -2) and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 52/Withdrawal (WD)|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Participants|||Number
825642|NCT01192191|Secondary|Number of Participants for the Indicated Clinical Chemistry and Urinalysis Parameters Who Experienced a Low, Normal, and High Levels at Baseline (BL) and Week 52/Withdrawal (WD)|Clinical chemistry and urinalysis parameters included: Albumin, Alkaline Phosphatase (AP), Alanine Amino Transferase (ALT), Aspartate Amino Transferase (AST), Bilirubin (Direct [BD], Indirect [BI], and Total [BT]), Creatine Kinase (CK), Chloride, Carbon Dioxide content/Bicarbonate (CO2/BC), Creatinine, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase (GGT), Glucose, Potassium, Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH), Sodium, Urine pH, Urine Specific Gravity (USG),Total Protein (TP), Urea/Blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and Uric Acid (UA). Data are reported as the number of participants who had low, normal, and high levels at BL (Week-2) and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), and Week 52/Withdrawal (WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Participants|||Number
825643|NCT01192191|Secondary|Number of Participants for the Indicated Hematological Parameters Who Experienced Low, Normal, and High Levels at Baseline (BL) and Week 52/Withdrawal (WD)|Hematological parameters included: Basophils (Baso), Eosinophils (Eosin), Lymphocytes (Lymph), Monocytes (Mono), Total Neutrophils (TN), Hemoglobin (Hemo), Hematocrit (Hmcrt), Platelet Count (PT), Red Blood Cell Count (RBC Count), White Blood Cell Count (WBC Count). Data are reported as the number of participants who had low, normal, and high levels at BL (Week-2) and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), and Week 52/Withdrawal (WD)|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Participants|||Number
825644|NCT01192191|Secondary|Number of Participants With Pneumonia During the Treatment Period|Pneumonia is an inflammatory condition of the lung, affecting primarily the microscopic air sacs known as alveoli. All diagnoses of pneumonia (radiographically confirmed or unconfirmed) were reported as an AE or SAE. An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the ot|From the start of investigational product to the last dose of treatment (up to Week 52/Withdrawal [WD])|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
825645|NCT01192191|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Drug-related AE and Any Drug-related SAE Throughout the Treatment Period|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the definition above, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury. Relatedness was assessed by the investigator.|From the start of investigational product to the last dose of treatment (up to Week 52/Withdrawal [WD])|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
825646|NCT01192191|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Non-serious Adverse Event (AE) and Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE) Throughout the Treatment Period|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the definition above, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury. Refer to the general AE/SAE module for a list of AEs (occurring at a frequency threshold >=5%) and SAEs.|From the start of investigational product to the last dose of treatment (up to Week 52/Withdrawal [WD])|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who had been randomized to and received at least one dose of randomized medication in the treatment period||Participants|||Number
825647|NCT01192204|Secondary|Treatment Changes in Loss of Heterozygosity Events|Laboratory experiments will be conducted to assess the effects of gel treatment on pre and post loss of heterozygosity (LOH) events at loci associated with tumor suppressor genes.|Before and after the 3 month treatment duration|||LOH events||Standard Error|Mean
825648|NCT01192204|Secondary|Changes in Lesional Sizes|The remaining oral dysplasia lesion will be inspected at each follow up appointment (every 10-14 days). Biopsies will be immediately conducted on patients with any indication of malignant transformation including indurated, rolled borders, nonhealing ulcers, etc. Accordingly, these patients will withdraw from the trial. Participants will also be monitored for any changes consistent with contact mucositis e.g. soreness and erythema at application site. Clinical photographs were taken for the patients records. Pre treatment and post treatment photographs, with a ruler in place, were used for accurate pre and post treatment size measurement. NOTE: if treatment is beneficial, lesional size will decrease which will be reflected as a negative number.|pretreatment and posttreatment (3 months treatment duration)|||mm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
825649|NCT01192204|Primary|Light Microscopic Histologically Scored Diagnoses Pretreatment to Post Treatment|A hemisection of lesional tissue will be conducted before the 3 month treatment to establish a diagnosis and provide a pretreatment baseline for the experimental parameters. Anl excisional biopsy of the treatment site including any remaining residual lesional tissue (excision of oral dysplastic lesions is consistent with current standards of care) will be obtained after 3 months of treatment to provide a posttreatment diagnosis. The 0 to 8 histologic scale was:0=normal with or without hyperkeratosis BEST OUTCOME, 1=atypia, 2=mild dysplasia, 3=mild-moderate dysplasia, 4=moderate dysplasia,5=moderate-severe dysplasia,6=severe dysplasia, 7=carcinoma in situ, 8=invasive oral squamous cell carcinoma (WORST OUTCOME).|Before and after the 3 month treatment.|The population evaluated were as previously described i.e. 22 participants in the BRB gel cohort and 18 participants in the placebo gel cohort.||unit on histologic grade scale||Standard Error|Mean
825650|NCT01192282|Primary|Commonest HPV Genotypes Isolated by HIV Status|10 commonest types of HPV isolated according to HIV status|18 months|||Participants|||Number
825651|NCT01192282|Primary|Number of HPV Genotypes Isolated by HIV Status|Number of HPV Genotypes isolated according to HIV Status|Up to 18 months|119 out of 126 uncontaminated samples were HPV DNA Positive. Out of these 119 HPV DNA Positive Samples, 12 were B-Globin Positive but no specific HPV Genotype could be identifiable.||participants|||Number
825652|NCT01192282|Primary|HPV DNA and Pap Smear Results|Relationship between HPV DNA Positivity and Pap Smear Results|18 Months|Only 118 out of 119 patients with HPV DNA Positive had a Pap Smear done. One patient was a Virgin and hence no Pap Smear was done.||Participants|||Number
825653|NCT01192282|Primary|HPV DNA and HIV Status|HPV DNA Positivity and HIV Status|18 Months|Only 126 out of 156 samples collected from each patients were analysed as 30 of the samples were contaminated, of which 22 were from HIV Positive patients and 8 were from HIV Negative patients.||participants|||Number
825662|NCT01192347|Secondary|Maximum Daily Dose of Anagrelide Hydrochloride||6 months|Safety Set comprised all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of Anagrelide Hydrochloride and had at least 1 post-baseline safety assessment documented.||mg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
825663|NCT01192347|Secondary|Summary of Adverse Drug Reactions: When the Dosing Was Inconsistent With the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC)|"Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when XAGRID treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
Initiation of XAGRID dosing consistent with the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC):
Consistent if:
The starting dose was <=1 mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was no more than 0.5mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was made at least 7 days after first initiation or at least 7 days after any previous modification (up or down), AND
The maximum dose did not exceed 10 mg/day at any stage.
Inconsistent: in all other cases"|6 months|Safety Set comprised all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of Anagrelide Hydrochloride and had at least 1 post-baseline safety assessment documented.||percentage of subjects|||Number
825664|NCT01192347|Secondary|Summary of Adverse Drug Reactions: When the Dosing Was Consistent With the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC)|"Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when XAGRID treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
Initiation of XAGRID dosing consistent with the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC):
Consistent if:
The starting dose was <=1 mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was no more than 0.5mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was made at least 7 days after first initiation or at least 7 days after any previous modification (up or down), AND
The maximum dose did not exceed 10 mg/day at any stage.
Inconsistent: in all other cases"|6 months|Safety Set comprised all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of Anagrelide Hydrochloride and had at least 1 post-baseline safety assessment documented.||percentage of subjects|||Number
825665|NCT01192347|Secondary|Summary of Adverse Drug Reactions: No Withdrawal of Previous Cytoreductive Therapy|"Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when Anagrelide Hydrochloride treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
•Withdrawal of previous cytoreductive therapy:
Before: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was prior to the date of Anagrelide Hydrochloride initiation
After: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was between the first administration and the last administration of Anagrelide Hydrochloride during the follow-up
Not Withdrawn: in all other cases"|6 months|Safety Set comprised all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of Anagrelide Hydrochloride and had at least 1 post-baseline safety assessment documented.||percentage of subjects|||Number
825666|NCT01192347|Secondary|Summary of Adverse Drug Reactions: Withdrawal of Previous Cytoreductive Therapy After Anagrelide Hydrochloride Initiation|"Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when Anagrelide Hydrochloride treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
•Withdrawal of previous cytoreductive therapy:
Before: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was prior to the date of Anagrelide Hydrochloride initiation
After: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was between the first administration and the last administration of Anagrelide Hydrochloride during the follow-up
Not Withdrawn: in all other cases"|6 months|Safety Set comprised all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of Anagrelide Hydrochloride and had at least 1 post-baseline safety assessment documented.||percentage of subjects|||Number
825684|NCT01192516|Secondary|Physical Function- Six Minute Walk|Six minute walk is the distance (in feet) that people walk at a usual pace over 6 minutes|Baseline|Numbers may vary due to missing data||feet||Standard Deviation|Mean
825685|NCT01192516|Primary|Pain- WOMAC|This is a 5 item pain scale in which items on a scale of 0 - 4 are summed. A higher score means more pain.|6 months post baseline|Numbers may vary due to missing data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825667|NCT01192347|Secondary|Summary of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADR): Withdrawal of Previous Cytoreductive Therapy Before Anagrelide Hydrochloride Initiation|"Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when Anagrelide Hydrochloride treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
•Withdrawal of previous cytoreductive therapy:
Before: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was prior to the date of Anagrelide Hydrochloride initiation
After: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was between the first administration and the last administration of Anagrelide Hydrochloride during the follow-up
Not Withdrawn: in all other cases"|6 months|Safety Set comprised all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of Anagrelide Hydrochloride and had at least 1 post-baseline safety assessment documented.||percentage of subjects|||Number
825668|NCT01192347|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Platelet Target Response: When the Dosing Was Inconsistent With the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC)|"Full response is a platelet count of <400x10^9/L. Partial response is a platelet count between 400-600x10^9/L or a platelet count reduction of 200x10^9.
Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when XAGRID treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
Initiation of XAGRID dosing consistent with the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC):
Consistent if:
The starting dose was <=1 mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was no more than 0.5mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was made at least 7 days after first initiation or at least 7 days after any previous modification (up or down), AND
The maximum dose did not exceed 10 mg/day at any stage.
Inconsistent: in all other cases"|6 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all enrolled patients for whom Anagrelide Hydrochloride therapy was initiated. Subjects who had not taken any previous cytoreductive therapy other than Anagrelide Hydrochloride were excluded from the FAS.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825669|NCT01192347|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Platelet Target Response: When the Dosing Was Consistent With the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC)|"Full response is a platelet count of <400x10^9/L. Partial response is a platelet count between 400-600x10^9/L or a platelet count reduction of 200x10^9.
Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when XAGRID treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
Initiation of XAGRID dosing consistent with the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC):
Consistent if:
The starting dose was <=1 mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was no more than 0.5mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was made at least 7 days after first initiation or at least 7 days after any previous modification (up or down), AND
The maximum dose did not exceed 10 mg/day at any stage.
Inconsistent: in all other cases"|6 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all enrolled patients for whom Anagrelide Hydrochloride therapy was initiated. Subjects who had not taken any previous cytoreductive therapy other than Anagrelide Hydrochloride were excluded from the FAS.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825670|NCT01192347|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Platelet Target Response: No Withdrawal of Previous Cytoreductive Therapy|"Full response is a platelet count of <400x10^9/L. Partial response is a platelet count between 400-600x10^9/L or a platelet count reduction of 200x10^9.
Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when Anagrelide Hydrochloride treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
•Withdrawal of previous cytoreductive therapy:
Before: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was prior to the date of Anagrelide Hydrochloride initiation
After: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was between the first administration and the last administration of Anagrelide Hydrochloride during the follow-up
Not Withdrawn: in all other cases"|6 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all enrolled patients for whom Anagrelide Hydrochloride therapy was initiated. Subjects who had not taken any previous cytoreductive therapy other than Anagrelide Hydrochloride were excluded from the FAS.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825671|NCT01192347|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Platelet Target Response: Withdrawal of Previous Cytoreductive Therapy After Anagrelide Hydrochloride Initiation|"Full response is a platelet count of <400x10^9/L. Partial response is a platelet count between 400-600x10^9/L or a platelet count reduction of 200x10^9.
Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when Anagrelide Hydrochloride treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
•Withdrawal of previous cytoreductive therapy:
Before: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was prior to the date of Anagrelide Hydrochloride initiation
After: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was between the first administration and the last administration of Anagrelide Hydrochloride during the follow-up
Not Withdrawn: in all other cases"|6 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all enrolled patients for whom Anagrelide Hydrochloride therapy was initiated. Subjects who had not taken any previous cytoreductive therapy other than Anagrelide Hydrochloride were excluded from the FAS.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825672|NCT01192347|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Platelet Target Response: Withdrawal of Previous Cytoreductive Therapy Before Anagrelide Hydrochloride Initiation|"Full response is a platelet count of <400x10^9/L. Partial response is a platelet count between 400-600x10^9/L or a platelet count reduction of 200x10^9.
Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when Anagrelide Hydrochloride treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
•Withdrawal of previous cytoreductive therapy:
Before: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was prior to the date of Anagrelide Hydrochloride initiation
After: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was between the first administration and the last administration of Anagrelide Hydrochloride during the follow-up
Not Withdrawn: in all other cases"|6 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all enrolled patients for whom Anagrelide Hydrochloride therapy was initiated. Subjects who had not taken any previous cytoreductive therapy other than Anagrelide Hydrochloride were excluded from the FAS.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825686|NCT01192516|Primary|Pain- WOMAC|This is a 5-item pain scale in which scores from 0 - 4 are summed. A higher score indicates more pain.|10 weeks post-baseline|Sample numbers may differ due to missing data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825687|NCT01192516|Primary|Pain- Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)|This is a summary of reported pain in specific activities. It is 5 questions with answers ranging from 0 - 4. Total possible score is 20 in which a higher score is worse pain.|Baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825673|NCT01192347|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Continuation of Anagrelide Hydrochloride at 6 Months: When the Dosing Was Inconsistent With the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC)|"Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when XAGRID treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
Initiation of XAGRID dosing consistent with the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC):
Consistent if:
The starting dose was <=1 mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was no more than 0.5mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was made at least 7 days after first initiation or at least 7 days after any previous modification (up or down), AND
The maximum dose did not exceed 10 mg/day at any stage.
Inconsistent: in all other cases"|6 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all enrolled patients for whom Anagrelide Hydrochloride therapy was initiated. Subjects who had not taken any previous cytoreductive therapy other than Anagrelide Hydrochloride were excluded from the FAS.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825674|NCT01192347|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Continuation of Anagrelide Hydrochloride at 6 Months: When the Dosing Was Consistent With the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC)|"Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when XAGRID treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
Initiation of XAGRID dosing consistent with the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC):
Consistent if:
The starting dose was <=1 mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was no more than 0.5mg/day, AND
Any increase in dose was made at least 7 days after first initiation or at least 7 days after any previous modification (up or down), AND
The maximum dose did not exceed 10 mg/day at any stage.
Inconsistent: in all other cases"|6 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all enrolled patients for whom Anagrelide Hydrochloride therapy was initiated. Subjects who had not taken any previous cytoreductive therapy other than Anagrelide Hydrochloride were excluded from the FAS.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825675|NCT01192347|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Continuation of Anagrelide Hydrochloride at 6 Months: No Withdrawal of Previous Cytoreductive Therapy|"Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when Anagrelide Hydrochloride treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
•Withdrawal of previous cytoreductive therapy:
Before: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was prior to the date of Anagrelide Hydrochloride initiation
After: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was between the first administration and the last administration of Anagrelide Hydrochloride during the follow-up
Not Withdrawn: in all other cases"|6 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all enrolled patients for whom Anagrelide Hydrochloride therapy was initiated. Subjects who had not taken any previous cytoreductive therapy other than Anagrelide Hydrochloride were excluded from the FAS.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825676|NCT01192347|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anagrelide Hydrochloride Titration Modifcations- First Modification Only||6 months|Safety Set comprised all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of Anagrelide Hydrochloride and had at least 1 post-baseline safety assessment documented.||participants|||Number
825677|NCT01192347|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Anagrelide Hydrochloride Starting Doses||6 months|Safety Set comprised all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of Anagrelide Hydrochloride and had at least 1 post-baseline safety assessment documented.||percentage of subjects|||Number
825678|NCT01192347|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Continuation of Anagrelide Hydrochloride at 6 Months: Withdrawal of Previous Cytoreductive Therapy After Anagrelide Hydrochloride Initiation|"Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when Anagrelide Hydrochloride treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
•Withdrawal of previous cytoreductive therapy:
Before: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was prior to the date of Anagrelide Hydrochloride initiation
After: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was between the first administration and the last administration of Anagrelide Hydrochloride during the follow-up
Not Withdrawn: in all other cases"|6 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all enrolled patients for whom Anagrelide Hydrochloride therapy was initiated. Subjects who had not taken any previous cytoreductive therapy other than Anagrelide Hydrochloride were excluded from the FAS.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825679|NCT01192347|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Continuation of Anagrelide Hydrochloride at 6 Months: Withdrawal of Previous Cytoreductive Therapy Before Anagrelide Hydrochloride Initiation|"Patients who had taken a previous cytoreductive therapy were divided into subgroups based on the treatment regimens used when Anagrelide Hydrochloride treatment was initiated, using the following variables:
•Withdrawal of previous cytoreductive therapy:
Before: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was prior to the date of Anagrelide Hydrochloride initiation
After: if a stop date of previous cytoreductive therapy was between the first administration and the last administration of Anagrelide Hydrochloride during the follow-up
Not Withdrawn: in all other cases"|6 months|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all enrolled patients for whom Anagrelide Hydrochloride therapy was initiated. Subjects who had not taken any previous cytoreductive therapy other than Anagrelide Hydrochloride were excluded from the FAS.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825680|NCT01192412|Secondary|Serious Maternal Complications Measured up to 6 Weeks Postpartum|"Serious maternal complications measured up to 6 weeks postpartum. Death or one or more life-threatening maternal complications:
Adverse neurological complications (stroke, eclampsia, and/or blindness), and/or
End-organ failure (uncontrolled hypertension, inotropic support, pulmonary oedema, respiratory failure, myocardial ischaemia/infarction, renal failure, coagulopathy, and/or transfusion)"|6 weeks|||participants|||Number
825681|NCT01192412|Primary|Pregnancy Loss or NICU Admission for Greater Than 48 Hours|Pregnancy loss or NICU admission for greater than 48 hours, as recorded in the maternal and infant medical records immediately following the birth (or pregnancy loss), and then again after the mothers' and infants' discharge home. Supplemental information, about potential post-discharge maternal or neonatal morbidities in the 6 weeks following birth for the mother, or 28 days of life for the baby, will be obtained by contacting women at 6 weeks postpartum and/or from medical records.|6 weeks|||participants|||Number
825682|NCT01192516|Secondary|Physical Function- Six Minute Walk|This is the distance people walk in feet over 6 minutes|6 months post baseline|Numbers may differ due to missing data||feet||Standard Deviation|Mean
825683|NCT01192516|Secondary|Physical Function- Six Minute Walk|This is the distance in feet that people walk over 6 minutes.|10 weeks post-baseline|Numbers may differ due to missing data||feet||Standard Deviation|Mean
825688|NCT01192516|Primary|Fatigue-BFI|This is a summary measure of fatigue severity and interference items in which the average of 9 items is taken. Each item is rated on a scale of 0 - 10. A higher score indicates worse fatigue.|6 months post-baseline|Sample numbers may vary due to missing data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825689|NCT01192516|Primary|Fatigue-BFI|This is a summary measure of fatigue severity and interference items in which the average of 9 items is taken. Each item is rated on a scale of 0 - 10. A higher score is worse fatigue.|10 weeks post-baseline|Sample numbers may differ due to missing data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825690|NCT01192516|Primary|Fatigue- Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI)|This is a summary measure of fatigue severity and fatigue interference items in which the average of 9 items is taken. Each item is rated on a scale of 0 - 10. A higher score is worse fatigue.|Baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825691|NCT01192542|Primary|Binocular Visual Acuity|Snellen binocular visual acuity assessed by the Investigator and was converted to the LogMAR scale. A value <0 implies clinically positive results, a value >0 implies clinically negative results|Post lens insertion (baseline)|Analysis was conducted on subjects who enrolled, were randomized, and successfully complete the study per protocol.||LogMAR||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825692|NCT01192542|Secondary|Bulbar Redness of Grade 3 or Above|Bulbar redness was assessed using a 5-point slit lamp classification scale (5-Worst, 0-None). Only those eyes with bulbar redness grade >= 3 were reported for purposes of this analysis. Grades 3 -5 are considered to be part of the adverse events reporting.|After 6-8 days of lens wear|Analysis was conducted on subjects who successfully completed the study.||Subject Eyes|Participants||Number
825693|NCT01192542|Secondary|Limbal Redness of Grade 3 or Above|Limbal redness was assessed using a 5-point slit lamp classification scale (5-Worst, 0-None). Only those eyes with limbal redness grade >= 3 were reported for purposes of this analysis. Grades 3 -5 are considered to be part of the adverse events reporting.|After 6-8 days of lens wear|Analysis was conducted on subjects who successfully completed the study.||Subject Eyes|Participants||Number
825694|NCT01192542|Primary|Monocular Visual Acuity Assessment|Snellen monocular visual acutity (VA) assessed by the Investigator and was converted to the LogMAR scale.|Post lens insertion (baseline)|Analysis was conducted on subjects who were enrolled, randomized, and successfully completed the study.||logMAR|Participants|Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825695|NCT01192698|Primary|HCV RNA Result|Will measure mean HCV RNA levels 4 weeks after liver transplant|4 weeks after liver transplant|||IU/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
825696|NCT01185028|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Adverse events determined and evaluated by patient reporting and the DAIDS toxicity table.|2 years|||adverse events|||Number
825697|NCT01185028|Secondary|Tolerability|Proportion of individuals that discontinued study drug|2 years||||||
825698|NCT01185028|Secondary|Sustained Viral Response Rate|Proportion of participants that are HCV negative 6 months after treatment completion|72 weeks|||participants|||Number
825699|NCT01185080|Secondary|Change From Baseline of C-X-C Motif Chemokine 10 (CXCL10) in Nasal Lavage|"Change from baseline to 24 hours after last dose (day1 visit 15) of C-X-C motif chemokine 10 (CXCL10) in nasal lavage, expressed as a ratio. The ratio is calculated as day1 of visit 15 / baseline.
Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable biomarker data at visit 2 and visit 15."|Baseline to 1st day of visit 15|||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
825700|NCT01185080|Secondary|Change From Baseline of C-X-C Motif Chemokine 10 (CXCL10) in Plasma|"Change from baseline to 24 hours after last dose (day1 visit 15) of C-X-C motif chemokine 10 (CXCL10) in plasma, expressed as a ratio. The ratio is calculated as day1 of visit 15 / baseline.
Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable biomarker data at visit 2 and visit15."|Baseline to 1st day of visit 15|||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825701|NCT01185080|Secondary|Absolute Mean Value of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF)|"Absolute mean value of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) for pre-dose symptoms on visit 11, during treatment period. Treatment period is one month, which starts at visit 2 and ends at visit 14. The patient will breathe out as much as he can. Then a mask (Portable Inspiratory Flow Meter) will be placed over the nose and mouth and the patient will inspire forcefully through the nose while the lips remain tightly closed. The highest PNIF (L/minute) out of 3 measurements will be recorded.
Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data at visit 11."|Pre-dose on visit 11 (end of 3rd week of treatment)|||L/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
825702|NCT01185080|Secondary|Absolute Mean Value of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF)|"Absolute mean value of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) for pre-dose symptoms on visit 2, during treatment period. Treatment period is one month, which starts at visit 2 and ends at visit 14. The patient will breathe out as much as he can. Then a mask (Portable Inspiratory Flow Meter) will be placed over the nose and mouth and the patient will inspire forcefully through the nose while the lips remain tightly closed. The highest PNIF (L/minute) out of 3 measurements will be recorded.
Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data at visit 2."|Pre-dose on visit 2 (baseline)|||L/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
825703|NCT01185080|Secondary|Absolute Mean Value of Instantaneous Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS)|"Absolute mean value of Instantaneous Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) for pre-dose symptoms on visit11, during treatment period. Treatment period is one month, which starts at visit 2 and ends at visit 14. Each individual symptom is scored 0 to 3, which 0 = Absence of symptoms, 1 = Mild symptoms, 2 = Moderate symptoms and 3 = Severe symptoms. The scores of each individual symptom (runny nose, blocked nose and the maximum score of nasal itching or sneezing) will be added together to give a TNSS of 0 to 9. TNSS Score 0 indicates better outcome and TNSS score 9 indicates worse outcome.
Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data at visit 11."|Pre-dose on visit 11 (end of 3rd week of treatment)|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825704|NCT01185080|Secondary|Absolute Mean Value of Instantaneous Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS)|"Absolute mean value of Instantaneous Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) for pre-dose symptoms on visit 2, during treatment period. Treatment period is one month, which starts at visit 2 and ends at visit 14. Each individual symptom is scored 0 to 3, which 0 = Absence of symptoms, 1 = Mild symptoms, 2 = Moderate symptoms and 3 = Severe symptoms. The scores of each individual symptom (runny nose, blocked nose and the maximum score of nasal itching or sneezing) will be added together to give a TNSS of 0 to 9. TNSS Score 0 indicates better outcome and TNSS score 9 indicate worse outcome.
Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data at visit 2."|Pre-dose on visit 2 (baseline)|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825705|NCT01185080|Primary|of Evening Measurements of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) (12 Hrs)|"Mean of evening measurements of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (absolute values) of symptoms over the last 12 hours during allergen challenge, collected in patient diary. The Mean is calculated over the evening of the 1st day to the morning of 8th day of the Allergen challenge period. The patient will breathe out as much as he can. Then a mask (Portable Inspiratory Flow Meter) will be placed over the nose and mouth and the patient will inspire forcefully through the nose while the lips remain tightly closed. The highest PNIF (L/minute) out of 3 measurements will be recorded.
Allergen challenge period starts 24 hrs post last dose. Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data from the challenge period (Visit 15)."|During evening of the 1st day to the morning of the 8th day of Allergen challenge period.|||L/min||Full Range|Least Squares Mean
825706|NCT01185080|Primary|Mean of Morning Measurements of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) (12 Hrs)|"Mean of morning measurements of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (absolute values) of symptoms over the last 12 hours during allergen challenge, collected in patient diary. The Mean is calculated over the evening of the 1st day to the morning of 8th day of the Allergen challenge period. The patient will breathe out as much as he can. Then a mask (Portable Inspiratory Flow Meter) will be placed over the nose and mouth and the patient will inspire forcefully through the nose while the lips remain tightly closed. The highest PNIF (L/minute) out of 3 measurements will be recorded.
Allergen challenge period starts 24 hrs post last dose. Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data from the challenge period (Visit 15)."|During evening of the 1st day to the morning of the 8th day of Allergen challenge period.|||L/min||Full Range|Least Squares Mean
825707|NCT01185080|Primary|Mean of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) (10 Min)|"Mean of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (absolute values) recorded immediately after TNSS scoring (recall period 10 min), during Allergen challenge period. The Mean is calculated over 4th day to 7th day of the Allergen challenge period. The patient will breathe out as much as he can. Then a mask (Portable Inspiratory Flow Meter) will be placed over the nose and mouth and the patient will inspire forcefully through the nose while the lips remain tightly closed. The highest PNIF (L/minute) out of 3 measurements will be recorded.
Allergen challenge period starts 24 hrs post last dose. Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data from the challenge period (Visit 15)."|During 4th day to 7th day of Allergen challenge period.|||L/min||Full Range|Least Squares Mean
825708|NCT01185080|Primary|Mean of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) (10 Min)|"Mean of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (absolute values) recorded immediately after TNSS scoring (recall period 10 min), during Allergen challenge period. The Mean is calculated over the Allergen challenge period, which is a seven day period. The patient will breathe out as much as he can. Then a mask (Portable Inspiratory Flow Meter) will be placed over the nose and mouth and the patient will inspire forcefully through the nose while the lips remain tightly closed. The highest PNIF (L/minute) out of 3 measurements will be recorded.
Allergen challenge period starts 24 hrs post last dose. Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data from the challenge period (Visit 15)."|During 1st day to 7th day of Allergen challenge period.|||L/min||Full Range|Least Squares Mean
825709|NCT01185080|Primary|Mean of Evening Measurements of Reflective (12 Hrs) Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS)|"Mean of evening measurements of Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (absolute values) of symptoms over the last 12 hours during allergen challenge, collected in patient diary. The Mean is calculated over the evening of the 1st day to the morning of 8th day of the Allergen challenge period. Each individual symptom is scored 0 to 3, which 0 = Absence of symptoms, 1 = Mild symptoms, 2 = Moderate symptoms and 3 = Severe symptoms. The scores of each individual symptom (runny nose, blocked nose and the maximum score of nasal itching or sneezing) will be added together to give a TNSS of 0 to 9. TNSS Score 0 indicates better outcome and TNSS score 9 indicates worse outcome.
Allergen challenge period starts 24 hrs post last dose. Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data from the challenge period (Visit 15)."|During the evening of the 1st day to the morning of the 8th day of Allergen challenge period.|||Scores on a scale||Full Range|Least Squares Mean
825710|NCT01185080|Primary|Mean of Morning Measurements of Reflective (12 Hrs) Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS)|"Mean of morning measurements of Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (absolute values) of symptoms over the last 12 hours during allergen challenge, collected in patient diary. The Mean is calculated over the evening of the 1st day to the morning of 8th day of the Allergen challenge period. Each individual symptom is scored 0 to 3, which 0 = Absence of symptoms, 1 = Mild symptoms, 2 = Moderate symptoms and 3 = Severe symptoms. The scores of each individual symptom (runny nose, blocked nose and the maximum score of nasal itching or sneezing) will be added together to give a TNSS of 0 to 9. TNSS Score 0 indicates better outcome and TNSS score 9 indicates worse outcome.
Allergen challenge period starts 24 hrs post last dose. Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data from the challenge period (Visit 15)."|During evening of the 1st day to the morning of the 8th day of Allergen challenge period.|||Scores on a scale||Full Range|Least Squares Mean
825711|NCT01185080|Primary|Mean of Reflective (10 Min) Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS)|"Mean of Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (absolute values) for symptoms over the last 10 minutes after allergen challenge, collected during clinic visits. The Mean is calculated over 4th day to 7th day of the Allergen challenge period. Each individual symptom is scored 0 to 3, which 0 = Absence of symptoms, 1 = Mild symptoms, 2 = Moderate symptoms and 3 = Severe symptoms. The scores of each individual symptom (runny nose, blocked nose and the maximum score of nasal itching or sneezing) will be added together to give a TNSS of 0 to 9. TNSS Score 0 indicates better outcome and TNSS score 9 indicates worse outcome. Allergen challenge period starts 24 hrs post last dose.
Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data from the challenge period (Visit 15)."|During 4th day to 7th day of Allergen challenge period.|||Scores on a scale||Full Range|Least Squares Mean
825795|NCT01185561|Secondary|State–Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI Form Y-1) Trait Anxiety Sub-test Score|Scores on the The State–Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI Form Y-1) Trait Anxiety Sub-test are compared between those assigned to intervention versus those assigned to usual medical care six months after randomization. The STAI trait anxiety subtest is a 20-item scale measuring state anxiety. Scores may range from 20 to 80 with higher scores indicating greater state anxiety.|6 Months|This analysis is restricted to participants who completed the final study visit six months after randomization.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825712|NCT01185080|Primary|Mean of Reflective (10 Min) Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS)|"Mean of Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (absolute values) for symptoms over the last 10 minutes after allergen challenge, collected during clinic visits. The Mean is calculated over the Allergen challenge period, which is a seven day period. Each individual symptom is scored 0 to 3, which 0 = Absence of symptoms, 1 = Mild symptoms, 2 = Moderate symptoms and 3 = Severe symptoms. The scores of each individual symptom (runny nose, blocked nose and the maximum score of nasal itching or sneezing) will be added together to give a TNSS of 0 to 9. TNSS Score 0 indicates better outcome and TNSS score 9 indicates worse outcome.
Allergen challenge period starts 24 hrs post last dose (visit 15). Number of Participants Analyzed is based on all patients with evaluable efficacy and/or biomarker data from the challenge period (Visit 15)."|During 1st day to 7th day of Allergen challenge period.|||Scores on a scale||Full Range|Least Squares Mean
825713|NCT01185249|Primary|The Measurement of the Difference Between Early Morning and Evening Weights for CHF Patients||Mean differences in the morning (5am) weights compared for three consecutive days. Day 1, Day 2, Day 3. Mean difference in the morning (5am) and evening (8pm) weights for three consecutive days. Day 1, Day 2, Day 3.|Patients with three consecutive days of morning and evening weights.||kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
825714|NCT01185288|Other Pre-specified|Serum Adalimumab Trough Concentrations at Week 24|Serum trough concentrations of adalimumab assessed at week 24 (24 weeks after the 1st dose).|Week 24|All participants with available pharmacokinetics at week 24: For Adalimumab + Low Dose Methotrexate, n = 134; for Adalimumab + High Dose Methotrexate, n = 140.||µg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825715|NCT01185288|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Medical Outcomes Study Version II (MOS) Sleep Problem Index 9 at Week 24|The least squares mean percentage change in MOS Sleep Problem Index 9 from baseline to week 24. The MOS Sleep Problem Index 9 consists of 9 questions to assess sleep, including how long it takes the participant to fall asleep (1=0 to 15 minutes, to 5=more than 60 minutes); and aspects of related to quality of sleep, including how often the participant felt that the sleep was not quiet, felt rested upon waking, awakened short of breath or with a headache, felt drowsy during the day, had trouble falling sleep, how often were awaken, had trouble staying awake during the day, and got needed amount of sleep (1=all the time; 5=none of the time). Least squares means and 95% CI were from 2-way ANCOVA model with effects for baseline MOS Sleep Problem Index value, treatment group, and prior methotrexate dose group.|Baseline, 24 weeks|All participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication (intent to treat). Missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the value at early termination visit (LOCF).||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
825716|NCT01185288|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) ≤ -0.22 at Week 24|The HAQ-DI is a patient-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0), with some difficulty (1), with much difficulty (2), and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 (no disability) to 3 (very severe, high dependency disability). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) defined for the HAQ-DI is a change from baseline of ≤ -0.22. Normal physical function is defined by HAQ-DI score of < 0.5. Negative change from baseline in the overall score indicates improvement.|Baseline, 24 weeks|All participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication (intent to treat). Missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the value at early termination visit (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
825717|NCT01185288|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Criteria Response at Week 24|Response, as defined by ACR70 criteria at week 24. A participant is a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from baseline are met: ≥ 70% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 70% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: physician global assessment of disease activity, participant global assessment of disease activity, participant assessment of pain, disability index of the health assessment questionnaire, and acute phase reactant value (C-reactive protein).|Baseline, 24 weeks|All participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication (intent to treat). Missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the value at early termination visit (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
825718|NCT01185288|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Criteria Response at Week 24|Response, as defined by ACR50 criteria at week 24. A participant is a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from baseline are met: ≥ 50% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 50% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: physician global assessment of disease activity, participant global assessment of disease activity, participant assessment of pain, disability index of the health assessment questionnaire, and acute phase reactant value (C-reactive protein).|Baseline, 24 weeks|All participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication (intent to treat). Missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the value at early termination visit (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
825719|NCT01185288|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Power Doppler Ultrasound (PD U/S) Score for Synovial Vascularity Improvement by 30% at Week 24|PD U/S assessed the severity of synovial inflammation in both hands (bilateral wrists, metacarpophalangeal joints 2, 3, 5, and metatarsophalangeal joint 5). Bilateral images based on dorsal midline imaging of the wrist, dorsal and volar imaging of metacarpophalangeal joints, and dorsal imaging alone of metatarsophalangeal joints are scored using a 4-grade scale: grade 0 or normal = normal joint (no Doppler signal); grade 1 or mild = mild synovitis (≤ 3 isolated signals); grade 2 or moderate = moderate synovitis (> 3 isolated signals or a confluent signal in < 50% of synovial area); grade 3 or marked = marked synovitis (signals in ≥ 50% of the synovial area). Each image is rated 0 to 3, for a total possible score ranging from 0 to 48 (16*0, 16*3) for 2 hands. Higher grade/score=more severe disease. Change = week 24 score - baseline score.|Baseline, 24 weeks|All participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication (intent to treat). Missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the value at early termination visit (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
826212|NCT01188655|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Without Enthesitis||Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
825720|NCT01185288|Primary|Disease Activity Score for 28 Joints Based on C-reactive Protein (DAS28[CRP]) at Week 24|The DAS28(CRP) score includes 28 tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, C-reactive protein, and participant's global assessment of disease activity. Scores on the DAS28(CRP) range from 0 to 10. A DAS28(CRP) score ≥ 5.1 indicates high disease activity, and a DAS28(CRP) score < 2.6 indicates clinical remission. Least squares means and 95% CI were from 2-way ANCOVA model with effects for baseline DAS28(CRP) value, treatment group, and prior methotrexate dose group.|Week 24|All participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication (intent to treat). Missing responses were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
825721|NCT01185301|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Remission at Week 26|CDAI is a measure of disease activity derived as follows: CDAI = SJC28 + TJC28 + GH (cm) + PhGA (cm) where TJC28 and SJC28 represent total tender joint count and total swollen joint count, respectively, based on 28 joints (including the left and right side of the body), GH = Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, and PhGA = Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (both measured on a visual analogue scale with a range of 0 [none] to 10 [severe]). CDAI total score = 0 to 76. CDAI ≤ 2.8 indicates disease remission, > 2.8 to 10 = low disease activity, > 10 to 22 = moderate disease activity, and > 22 = high disease activity.|Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825722|NCT01185301|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Remission at Week 26|SDAI is a measure of disease activity derived as follows: SDAI = SJC28 + TJC28 + GH (cm) + PhGA (cm) + CRP (mg/dL), where TJC28 and SJC28 represent total tender joint count and total swollen joint count, respectively, based on 28 joints (including the left and right side of the body), GH = Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, and PhGA = Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (both measured on a visual analogue scale with a range of 0 [none] to 10 [severe]), and CRP is C-reactive protein measured in mg/dL. SDAI total score = 0 to 86. SDAI ≤ 3.3 indicates disease remission, > 3.4 to 11 = low disease activity, > 11 to 26 = moderate disease activity, and > 26 = high disease activity.|Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825723|NCT01185301|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With No Radiographic Progression at Week 26|“No radiographic progression” was defined as a change from Baseline in modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) at Week 26 of ≤ 0.5. mTSS is a measure of change in joint health from digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale of 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale of 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement.|Baseline, Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825724|NCT01185301|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) at Week 26|The modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) is a measure of change in joint health from digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale of 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale of 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement.|Baseline, Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population with available data at time point (observed cases).||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825725|NCT01185301|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) ≤ –0.22 at Week 26|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) defined for the HAQ-DI is a change from Baseline of ≥ 0.22. HAQ remission indicating normal physical function is defined by HAQ-DI score of < 0.5. Negative change from Baseline in the overall score indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825726|NCT01185301|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 26|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) is a patient-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where 0 represents no disability and 3 very severe, high-dependency disability. HAQ remission indicating normal physical function is defined by HAQ-DI score of < 0.5. Negative change from Baseline in the overall score indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population with non-missing baseline and at least 1 non-missing post-baseline value (baseline is defined as the last non-missing value prior to the first dose of study drug); last observation carried forward.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825727|NCT01185301|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 100 Criteria Response at Week 26|"Response, as defined by ACR 100 criteria at Week 26. A participant is a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met: ≥ 100% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 100% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 100% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Patient assessment of pain
Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire
Acute phase reactant value (C-reactive protein)."|Baseline, Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825728|NCT01185301|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 90 Criteria Response at Week 26|"Response, as defined by ACR 90 criteria at Week 26. A participant is a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met: ≥ 90% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 90% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 90% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Patient assessment of pain
Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire
Acute phase reactant value (C-reactive protein)."|Baseline, Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825729|NCT01185301|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 Criteria Response at Week 26|"Response, as defined by ACR 70 criteria at Week 26. A participant is a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met: ≥ 70% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 70% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Patient assessment of pain
Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire
Acute phase reactant value (C-reactive protein)."|Baseline, Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825730|NCT01185301|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Criteria Response at Week 26|"Response, as defined by ACR 50 criteria at Week 26. A participant is a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met: ≥ 50% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 50% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Patient assessment of pain
Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire
Acute phase reactant value (C-reactive protein)."|Baseline, Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825731|NCT01185301|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Criteria Response at Week 26|"Response, as defined by ACR 20 criteria at Week 26. A participant is a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met: ≥ 20% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 20% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Patient assessment of pain
Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire
Acute phase reactant value (C-reactive protein)."|Baseline, Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825732|NCT01185301|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28(CRP) Remission at Week 26|Disease remission was defined as a disease activity score, based on CRP, for 28 joints that was < 2.6 (DAS28[CRP] < 2.6). The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, C-reactive protein, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10.|Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825733|NCT01185301|Primary|Percentage of Participants With 28-Joint Disease Activity Score of C-reactive Protein (DAS28[CRP]) Low Disease Activity at Week 26|Percentage of participants achieving low disease activity as defined by a clinical response (DAS28[CRP] < 3.2). The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, C-reactive protein, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10. A DAS28 score >5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score <3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score <2.6 indicates clinical remission.|Week 26|Intent-to-Treat population; participants with a missing response were imputed as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
825734|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline Through Week 12 in the ENSEMBLE Minimum Data Set 1.0||Baseline, 12 weeks|Zero participants were analyzed. Assessment of ENSEMBLE Minimum Data Set 1.0 was not collected at Week 12 and therefore results are not reported for outcome measure.|||||
825735|NCT01185353|Secondary|Population PK: Area Under the Concentration Curve Versus Time at a Dosing Interval at Steady State (AUCtau,ss) of LY3009104||Baseline through 24 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of LY3009104 with evaluable LY3009104 PK data.||nanomoles*hour/Liter (nmol*h/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
825736|NCT01185353|Secondary|Population Pharmacokinetics (PK): Maximum Concentration at Steady State of Dosing (Cmax,ss) of LY3009104||Baseline through 24 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of LY3009104 with evaluable LY3009104 PK data.||nanomoles/Liter (nmol/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
825737|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue Scale (FACIT-F) Score|The FACIT-F Scale is a brief 13-item, symptom-specific questionnaire that specifically assesses the participant self-reported severity of fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and functioning. The FACIT-F uses a numeric rating scale of 0 (“Not at all”) to 4 (“Very much”) for each item to assess fatigue and its impact in the past 7 days. Total scores range from 0 to 52, with higher scores indicating less fatigue.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received study drug in Part A and had FACIT-F evaluated at Week 12. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825738|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Brief Pain Inventory Modified Short Form (BPI-sf Modified) Worst-Pain-in-the Past-24-hours Item Score|The BPI-sf modified is a self-administered questionnaire developed for the rapid assessment of pain. The BPI-sf modified provides information on the intensity of pain (the sensory dimension) as well as the degree to which pain interferes with function (the reactive dimension). The questionnaire asks questions about pain relief, pain quality, and the participant's perception of the cause of pain. The BPI-sf modified uses a numeric rating scale from 0 (“No pain”) to 10 (“Pain as bad as you can imagine”). Since pain can be quite variable over a day, the BPI-sf modified asked participants to rate their pain at the time of responding to the questionnaire (right now), and also at its worst, least and average over the last 24 hours.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received study drug and had BPI-sf worst-pain-in-the past-24-hours item evaluated at Week 12. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825739|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) Health Survey Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) Scores|The SF-36 is a health-related survey that assesses participant's quality of life and consists of 36 questions covering 8 health domains (physical functioning, bodily pain, role limitations due to physical problems and also emotional problems, general health, mental health, social functioning and vitality) and 2 component scores (PCS and MCS). The PCS score consisted of physical functioning, bodily pain, role-physical, and general health scales. The MCS score consisted of social functioning, vitality, mental health, and role-emotional scales. Both PCS and MCS range from 0-100 with higher scores indicating better health or functioning.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received study drug in Part A and had SF-36 evaluated at analysis time point. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825740|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline Through Week 12 in Duration (Minutes) of Morning Stiffness|The Investigator asked participants about the duration of their morning stiffness (in minutes) in and around the joints and recorded the duration. The Investigator asked the participants about duration of morning stiffness on the day prior to the study visit to capture actual symptoms. If morning stiffness duration was longer than 12 hours (720 minutes), it was truncated to 720 minutes for statistical presentations and analyses.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12|All randomized participants who received study drug in Part A and had morning stiffness evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values for Week 12 analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
825741|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting Low Disease Activity and Remission Based on the 28 Diarthrodial Joint Count (DAS28) Baseline Through Weeks 76 and 128|Disease Activity Score (DAS) modified to include 28 joint count (DAS28) consisted of composite score of following variables: tender joint count (TJC28), swollen joint count (SJC28), CRP (mg/L), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity using VAS (patient's global VAS). Scores ranged from 1.0-9.4, where lower scores indicated less disease activity. DAS28 scores ≤3.2 are considered as low disease activity, and scores <2.6 are considered as remission. Participants who discontinue before analysis time points are treated as non-responders.|Baseline through Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D and had DAS28-CRP evaluated at analysis time points.||percentage of participants|||Number
825742|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting Low Disease Activity and Remission Based on the 28 Diarthrodial Joint Count (DAS28) Baseline Through Weeks 12 and 24|Disease Activity Score (DAS) modified to include 28-joint count (DAS28) consisted of composite score of following variables: tender joint count (TJC28), swollen joint count (SJC28), CRP [milligrams per liter (mg/L)], and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity using VAS (patient's global VAS). Scores ranged from 1.0-9.4, where lower scores indicated less disease activity. DAS28 scores ≤3.2 are considered as low disease activity, and scores <2.6 are considered as remission. Participants who discontinue before analysis time points are treated as non-responders.|Baseline through Weeks 12 and 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B and had DAS28-CRP evaluated at analysis time points.||percentage of participants|||Number
825743|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Responders According to EULAR28 Baseline Through Weeks 76 and 128|EULAR28 categorizes clinical response based upon improvement since baseline in Disease Activity Score modified to include the 28-joint count (DAS28) and post-baseline DAS28. DAS28 consists of a composite score of the following variables: tender joint count (TJC28), swollen joint count (SJC28), CRP, and Patient's Global Assessment of their Disease Activity (patient's global VAS). DAS28 scores range from 1.0-9.4. EULAR28 categories include: No Response (improvement in DAS28 of ≤0.6 units or post-baseline DAS28 score >5.1 with improvement by ≤1.2 units), Moderate Response (post-baseline DAS28 ≤5.1 with improvement by >0.6 units but ≤1.2 units or post-baseline DAS28 score >3.2 with improvement by >1.2 units), and Good Response (post-baseline DAS28 score ≤3.2 with improvement by >1.2 units).|Baseline, Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D and had EULAR28 evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||percentage of participants|||Number
825744|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Responders According to European League Against Rheumatism Responder Index Based on 28-joint Count (EULAR28) Baseline Through Weeks 12 and 24|EULAR28 categorizes clinical response based upon improvement since baseline in DAS modified to include the 28-joint count (DAS28) and post-baseline DAS28. DAS28 consists of a composite score of the following variables: TJC28, SJC28, CRP, and Patient's Global Assessment of their Disease Activity (patient's global VAS). DAS28 scores range from 1.0-9.4. EULAR28 categories include: No Response (improvement in DAS28 of ≤0.6 units or post-baseline DAS28 score >5.1 with improvement by ≤1.2 units), Moderate Response (post-baseline DAS28 ≤5.1 with improvement by >0.6 units but ≤1.2 units or post-baseline DAS28 score >3.2 with improvement by >1.2 units), and Good Response (post-baseline DAS28 score ≤3.2 with improvement by >1.2 units).|Baseline through Weeks 12 and 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B and had EULAR28 evaluated at analysis time points.||percentage of participants|||Number
825745|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 76 and 128 in DAS28-CRP|Disease Activity Score (DAS) modified to include 28 joint count (DAS28) consisted of composite score of following variables: tender joint count (TJC28), swollen joint count (SJC28), CRP (mg/L), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity using visual analog scale (VAS) (patient's global VAS). DAS28-CRP=0.56*square root (sqrt)(TJC28)+0.28*sqrt(SJC28)+0.36*natural log(CRP+1)+0.014*patient's global VAS+0.96. Scores ranged from 1.0-9.4, where lower scores indicated less disease activity and remission is DAS28-CRP <2.6. A decrease in DAS28-CRP indicated an improvement in participant's condition.|Baseline, Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D and had DAS28-CRP evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825773|NCT01185522|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events|An Any Adverse Events (AEs) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered to be related to the medicinal product. An Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect.|Up to 4 months|Safety population consisted of all participants included in the study, who respected the inclusion and non-inclusion criteria and who at least one tocilizumab infusion.||Number of Participants|||Number
825746|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 12 and 24 in Disease Activity Score (DAS) Based on the 28 Diarthrodial Joint Count and CRP Level (DAS28-CRP)|Disease Activity Score (DAS) modified to include 28 joint count (DAS28) consisted of composite score of following variables: tender joint count-28 (TJC28), swollen joint count-28 (SJC28), CRP (mg/L), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity using VAS (patient's global VAS). DAS28-CRP=0.56*square root (sqrt)(TJC28)+0.28*sqrt(SJC28)+0.36*natural log(CRP+1)+0.014*patient's global VAS+0.96. Scores ranged from 1.0-9.4, where lower scores indicated less disease activity, and remission was DAS28-CRP <2.6. A decrease in DAS28-CRP indicated an improvement in participant's condition.|Baseline, Weeks 12 and 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B and had DAS28-CRP evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825747|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 76 and 128 in Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Patient's Assessment of Pain|Physician's and Patient's assessments of DA assessed using a VAS that ranged from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 indicated no arthritis activity and 100 indicated extremely active arthritis. Patient's assessment of pain due to arthritis assessed using a VAS that ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 mm (worst possible pain).|Baseline, Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D and had physician's and participant’s assessments of disease activity and pain evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825748|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 12 and 24 in Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Patient's Assessment of Pain|Physician's and Patient's Assessments of Disease Activity (DA) assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) that ranged from 0 to 100 millimeters (mm), where 0 indicated no arthritis activity and 100 indicated extremely active arthritis. Patient's assessment of pain due to arthritis was also assessed using a VAS that ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 mm (worst possible pain).|Baseline, Weeks 12 and 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B and had physician's and participant’s assessments of disease activity and participant’s pain evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825749|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 76 and 128 in ESR|ESR is a laboratory analyte that is an indicator of inflammation. Decreases represent reductions in inflammation.|Baseline, Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D and had ESR evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
825750|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 12 and 24 in Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)|ESR is a laboratory analyte that is an indicator of inflammation. Decreases represent reductions in inflammation.|Baseline, Weeks 12 and 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B and had ESR evaluated at analysis time points.||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
825751|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 76 and 128 in hsCRP|hsCRP is a laboratory analyte that is an indicator of inflammation. Decreases in hsCRP represent reductions in inflammation.|Baseline, Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D and had hsCRP evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
825752|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 12 and 24 in High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hsCRP)|hsCRP is a laboratory analyte that is an indicator of inflammation. Decreases in hsCRP represent reductions in inflammation.|Baseline, Weeks 12 and 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B and had hsCRP evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
825753|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 76 and 128 in HAQ-DI Score|The HAQ-DI questionnaire assesses the participant's self-perception on the degree of difficulty [0 (without any difficulty), 1 (with some difficulty), 2 (with much difficulty), and 3 (unable to do)] when dressing and grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and performing other daily activities. Scores for each functional area were averaged to calculate HAQ-DI scores, which ranged from 0 (no disability) to 3 (worst disability). A decrease in HAQ-DI score indicated an improvement in the participant's condition.|Baseline, Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D and had HAQ-DI evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825754|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 12 and 24 in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score|The HAQ-DI questionnaire assesses the participant's self-perception on the degree of difficulty [0 (without any difficulty), 1 (with some difficulty), 2 (with much difficulty), and 3 (unable to do)] when dressing and grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and performing other daily activities. Scores for each functional area were averaged to calculate HAQ-DI scores, which ranged from 0 (no disability) to 3 (worst disability). A decrease in HAQ-DI score indicated an improvement in the participant's condition.|Baseline, Weeks 12 and 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B and had HAQ-DI evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825755|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 76 and 128 in TJC and SJC|TJC is the number of tender and painful joints determined for each participant by examination of 68 joints. Joints were assessed by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. Participants were asked for pain sensations on these manipulations and watched for spontaneous pain reactions. Any positive response on pressure, movement, or both was translated into a single tender-versus-nontender dichotomy. SJC is the number of swollen joints determined for each participant by examination of 66 joints. Joints were classified as either swollen or not swollen. Swelling was defined as palpable fluctuating synovitis of the joint.|Baseline, Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D and had TJC and SJC evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825810|NCT01185704|Secondary|Number of Blastocysts|Blastocyst is an embryo, five or six days after fertilization, with an inner cell mass, outer layer of trophectoderm and a fluid-filled blastocoele cavity.|Day 5-6 post oocytes retrieval day (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 15 days}])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||blastocysts||Standard Deviation|Mean
825756|NCT01185353|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Weeks 12 and 24 in Tender and Swollen Joint Counts (TJC and SJC)|TJC is the number of tender and painful joints determined for each participant by examination of 68 joints. Joints were assessed by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. Participants were asked for pain sensations on these manipulations and watched for spontaneous pain reactions. Any positive response on pressure, movement, or both was translated into a single tender-versus-nontender dichotomy. SJC is the number of swollen joints determined for each participant by examination of 66 joints. Joints were classified as either swollen or not swollen. Swelling was defined as palpable fluctuating synovitis of the joint.|Baseline, Weeks 12 and 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B and had TJC and SJC evaluated at analysis time points. LOCF was used to impute missing post-baseline values||number of joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
825757|NCT01185353|Secondary|ACR Percent Improvement (ACR-N)|ACR-N is a continuous measure of clinical, laboratory, and functional outcomes in RA that characterizes percentage (%) of improvement in disease activity from baseline based on ACR core set. This index was calculated as minimum of a) % of improvement in TJC, b) % of improvement in SJC, and c) third highest percentage of improvement of remaining 5 ACR core criteria: If ≥3 components of the 5 ACR core criteria were missing, then c) was set to missing; if any of 3 components a), b), or c) were missing, then ACR-N was set to missing. Percentage of improvement was truncated to a range of -100 to 100 to minimize impact of outliers (greater scores indicate greater % improvement) and negative scores indicate a decline. Data presented are model-based Bayesian posterior mean response rates with 95% credible interval.|Baseline through Week 12|All randomized participants who received study drug in Part A. Participants who had missing components of the ACR-N at Week 12 had these components imputed by LOCF.||percentage of improvement||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825758|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR50 Response Baseline Through Week 12 - Model Based Dose Response|ACR50 Responder Index is a composite of clinical, laboratory, and functional measures in RA. An ACR50 Responder is a participant who had ≥50% improvement from baseline in both 68 tender and 66 swollen joint counts and ≥50% improvement in at least 3 of 5 criteria: Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, HAQ-DI (assessment of participant’s physical function), pain due to RA, and hsCRP. Participants who discontinue before analysis time point are treated as non-responders. Percentage of participants achieving ACR50 response = (number of ACR50 responders) / (number of participants analyzed) * 100. Data presented are model-based Bayesian posterior mean response rates with 95% credible interval.|Baseline through Week 12|All randomized participants who received study drug in Part A. Participants who had missing components of the ACR50 index at analysis time point had these components imputed by LOCF.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825759|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR70 Response Baseline Through Weeks 76 and 128|ACR70 Responder Index is a composite of clinical, laboratory, and functional measures in RA. An ACR70 Responder is a participant who had ≥70% improvement from baseline in both 68 tender and 66 swollen joint counts and ≥70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 criteria: Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, HAQ-DI (assessment of participant’s physical function), pain due to RA, and hsCRP. Participants who discontinue before analysis time points are treated as non-responders. Percentage of participants achieving ACR70 response = (number of ACR70 responders) / (number of participants analyzed) * 100.|Baseline through Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D. Participants who had missing components of the ACR70 index at analysis time points had these components imputed by LOCF.||percentage of participants|||Number
825760|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR70 Responder Index Response Baseline Through Week 24|ACR70 Responder Index is a composite of clinical, laboratory, and functional measures in RA. An ACR70 Responder is a participant who had ≥70% improvement from baseline in both 68 tender and 66 swollen joint counts and ≥70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 criteria: Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, HAQ-DI (assessment of participant’s physical function), pain due to RA, and hsCRP. Participants who discontinue before analysis time points are treated as non-responders. Percentage of participants achieving ACR70 response = (number of ACR70 responders) / (number of participants analyzed) * 100.|Baseline through Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B. Participants who had missing components of the ACR70 index at analysis time points had these components imputed by LOCF.||percentage of participants|||Number
825761|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR50 Response Baseline Through Weeks 76 and 128|ACR50 Responder Index is a composite of clinical, laboratory, and functional measures in RA. An ACR50 Responder is a participant who had ≥50% improvement from baseline in both 68 tender and 66 swollen joint counts and ≥50% improvement in at least 3 of 5 criteria: Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, HAQ-DI (assessment of participant’s physical function), pain due to RA, and hsCRP. Participants who discontinue before analysis time points are treated as non-responders. Percentage of participants achieving ACR50 response = (number of ACR50 responders) / (number of participants analyzed) * 100.|Baseline through Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D. Participants who had missing components of the ACR50 index at analysis time points had these components imputed by LOCF.||percentage of participants|||Number
825762|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR 50 Responder Index Response Baseline Through Week 24|ACR50 Responder Index is a composite of clinical, laboratory, and functional measures in RA. An ACR50 Responder is a participant who had ≥50% improvement from baseline in both 68 tender and 66 swollen joint counts and ≥50% improvement in at least 3 of 5 criteria: Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, HAQ-DI (assessment of participant’s physical function), pain due to RA, and hsCRP. Participants who discontinue before analysis time points are treated as non-responders. Percentage of participants achieving ACR50 response = (number of ACR50 responders) / (number of participants analyzed) * 100.|Baseline through Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B. Participants who had missing components of the ACR50 index at analysis time points had these components imputed by LOCF.||percentage of participants|||Number
825811|NCT01185704|Secondary|Number of Embryos|Embryo is defined as the product of the zygote, two or three days after fertilization of the oocytes.|Day 2-3 post oocytes retrieval day (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 15 days}])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||embryos||Standard Deviation|Mean
825763|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR20 Response Baseline Through Weeks 76 and 128|ACR20 Responder Index is a composite of clinical, laboratory, and functional measures in RA. An ACR20 Responder is a participant who had ≥20% improvement from baseline in both 68 tender and 66 swollen joint counts and ≥20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 criteria: Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, HAQ-DI (assessment of participant’s physical function), pain due to RA, and hsCRP. Participants who discontinue before analysis time points are treated as non-responders. Percentage of participants achieving ACR20 response = (number of ACR20 responders) / (number of participants analyzed) * 100.|Baseline through Weeks 76 and 128|All participants who received study drug in Parts C and D. Participants who had missing components of the ACR20 index at analysis time points had these components imputed by LOCF.||percentage of participants|||Number
825764|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR20 Responder Index Response Baseline Through Week 24|ACR20 Responder Index is a composite of clinical, laboratory, and functional measures in RA. An ACR20 Responder is a participant who had ≥20% improvement from baseline in both 68 tender and 66 swollen joint counts and ≥20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 criteria: Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, HAQ-DI (assessment of participant’s physical function), pain due to RA, and hsCRP. Participants who discontinue before analysis time points are treated as non-responders. Percentage of participants achieving ACR20 response = (number of ACR20 responders) / (number of participants treated) * 100.|Baseline through Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24|All randomized participants who received study drug in Parts A and B. Participants who had missing components of the ACR20 index at analysis time points had these components imputed by LOCF.||percentage of participants|||Number
825765|NCT01185353|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR20 Responder Index Response Baseline Through Week 12 - Model Based Dose Response|ACR20 Responder Index is a composite of clinical, laboratory, and functional measures in RA. An ACR20 Responder is a participant who had ≥20% improvement from baseline in both 68 tender and 66 swollen joint counts and ≥20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 criteria: Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, HAQ-DI (assessment of participant’s physical function), pain due to RA, and hsCRP. Participants who discontinue before analysis time point are treated as non-responders. Percentage of participants achieving ACR20 response = (number of ACR20 responders) / (number of participants analyzed) * 100. Data presented are model-based Bayesian posterior mean response rates with 95% credible interval.|Baseline through Week 12|All randomized participants who received study drug in Part A. Participants who had missing components of the ACR20 index at Week 12 had these components imputed by LOCF.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825766|NCT01185353|Primary|Percentage of Participants in the 4 mg and 8 mg Dose Groups Who Achieved an American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Responder Index Response Baseline Through Week 12|ACR20 Responder Index is a composite of clinical, laboratory, and functional measures in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). An ACR20 Responder is a participant who had ≥20% improvement from baseline in both 68 tender and 66 swollen joint counts and ≥20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 criteria: Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) (assessment of participant’s physical function), pain due to RA, and hsCRP. Participants who discontinue before analysis time point are treated as non-responders. Percentage of participants achieving ACR20 response = (number of ACR20 responders) / (number of participants analyzed) * 100.|Baseline through Week 12|All randomized participants who received placebo, 4 mg or 8 mg LY3009104 in Part A. Participants who had missing components of the ACR20 index at Week 12 had these components imputed by last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
825767|NCT01185509|Secondary|Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs)|CTCs levels were determined based on established methods.|Assessed when patient comes off-study||09/2017||||
825768|NCT01185509|Secondary|Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs)|CTCs levels were determined based on established methods.|Assessed at 6 weeks||09/2017||||
825769|NCT01185509|Secondary|Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs)|CTCs levels were determined based on established methods.|Assessed at baseline||09/2017||||
825770|NCT01185509|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS based on the Kaplan-Meier method is defined as the duration of time from study entry to documented disease progression (PD) requiring removal from the study or death. Per RECIST 1.1 for target lesions: PD is at least a 20% increase in sum LD, taking as reference the smallest sum on study with at least 5 mm absolute increase. For non-target lesions, progression-free means no new lesions or unequivocal progression on existing non-target lesions or not evaluated.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline, on trt every 6 weeks (wks) for the first 18 wks and then every 12 wks and within 2 wks off-study; Median follow-up was 2.7 months.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825771|NCT01185509|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR)|CBR was defined as achieving complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) for 24 weeks or longer based on RECIST 1.1 criteria on treatment. Per RECIST 1.1 for target lesions: CR is complete disappearance of all target lesions and PR is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference baseline sum LD. PD is at least a 20% increase in sum LD of target lesions (smallest sum LD reference), new lesions, and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Stable disease (SD) is defined as any condition not meeting the above criteria. SD needed to be a minimum 24 weeks in duration|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline, on trt every 6 weeks (wks) for the first 18 wks and then every 12 wks; Median (range) trt duration was 12 weeks (3-67).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825772|NCT01185509|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|ORR was defined as the percentage of patients achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on RECIST 1.1 criteria on treatment. Per RECIST 1.1 for target lesions: CR is complete disappearance of all target lesions and PR is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference baseline sum LD. PR or better overall response assumes at a minimum incomplete response/stable disease (SD) for the evaluation of non-target lesions and absence of new lesions.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline, on trt every 6 weeks (wks) for the first 18 wks and then every 12 wks; Median (range) trt duration was 12 weeks (3-67).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825774|NCT01185522|Secondary|Number of Participants for Rheumatoid Arthritis Management With Tocilizumab Treatment up to Month 4|Participants with tocilizumab treatment were managed according to number of tocilizumab treatment received according to Summary of Product Characteristics recommendations, as 8 mg/kg, dose duration of 1-hour, correct infusion progress; and received DMARD, methotrexate, and corticosteroids concomitantly with tocilizumab during Months 1 to 4.|From Baseline (D0) to M 1, M 2, M 3, and M 4|Patient analysis population consisted of all participants included in the study, who respected inclusion criteria, received at least one tocilizumab infusion, had an evaluable FACIT-Fatigue score at inclusion, and at least one evaluable FACIT fatigue score during treatment. n = number of participants available at the particular time point.||Number of Participants|||Number
825775|NCT01185522|Secondary|Correlations Between Fatigue and Other Participant Reported Outcomes at Day 0 and Month 4|Fatigue was assessed by FACIT-Fatigue scale (ranging from 0 [worse score] to 52 [better score]) and VAS fatigue (ranging from 0 [symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms] to 100 [worsening of symptoms and arthritis disease activity]). Other participant reported outcomes (PROs) were VAS for pain and quality of sleep (ranging from 0 [symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms] to 100 [worsening in arthritis disease activity]), SF36 vitality score (ranging from 0 [worst] to 100 [best]) and HAD score (calculated using the 14 items and each item was scored 0, 1, 2 or 3 where a score of 3 corresponds to the most anxious/depressed. 7-item depression and 7-item anxiety subscales were summed; each resulting in a total score of 0-21). Correlation between fatigue as assessed by FACIT-Fatigue score or VAS fatigue was evaluated for all participants using a linear regression and were reported for D0 and M4.|Day 0 and Month 4|Patient analysis population consisted of all participants included in the study, who respected inclusion criteria, received at least one tocilizumab infusion, had an evaluable FACIT-Fatigue score at inclusion, and at least one evaluable FACIT fatigue score during treatment. n = number of participants available at the particular time point.||Coefficient of correlation|||Number
825776|NCT01185522|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With FACIT-Fatigue Score, SF36 Vitality Score, and VAS Fatigue at Day 0 and Month 4|FACIT-Fatigue score (ranging from 0 [worse score] to 52 [better score]), VAS (ranging from 0 [symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms] to 100 [worsening in arthritis disease activity]) and SF36 vitality score (ranging from 0 [worst] to 100 [best]) were calculated at Baseline and Month 4.|Baseline (D0) and Month 4|Patient analysis population consisted of all participants included in the study, who respected inclusion criteria, received at least one tocilizumab infusion, had an evaluable FACIT-Fatigue score at inclusion, and at least one evaluable FACIT fatigue score during treatment. n = number of participants available at the particular time point.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825777|NCT01185522|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving PASS Score at Baseline (Day 0) and Month 4|A PASS score at Day 0 and Month 4 calculated on participants with acceptable symptom state. PASS is defined as the highest level of symptom beyond which participants consider themselves well. PASS is a 1-question assessment of how rheumatoid arthritis has affected participant in last 48 hours.|Baseline (D0) and Month 4|Patient analysis population consisted of all participants included in the study, who respected inclusion criteria, received at least one tocilizumab infusion, had an evaluable FACIT-Fatigue score at inclusion, and at least one evaluable FACIT fatigue score during treatment. n = number of participants available at the particular time point.||Number of participants|||Number
825778|NCT01185522|Secondary|Relative Median Change From Baseline in C - Reacting Protein at Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, and Month 4|The correlation between fatigue and CRP value was evaluated for all participants at each evaluation time (on raw data at inclusion; on relative changes at M1 to M4) using a linear regression. CRP values were described as continuous variables for all participants at each evaluation time (Baseline to M4).|From Baseline (D0) to M 1, M 2, M 3, and M 4|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants with Changes in CRP level up to Month 4 were analyzed for this outcome measure. n = number of participants available at specified time points.||Percent change||Full Range|Median
825779|NCT01185522|Secondary|Relative Median Change From Baseline in ESR to Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, and Month 4|The correlation between fatigue and ESR value was evaluated for all participants at each evaluation time (on raw data at inclusion; on relative changes at M1 to M4) using a linear regression. ESR values were described as continuous variables for all participants at each evaluation time (Baseline to M4).|From Baseline (D0) to M 1, M 2, M 3, and M 4|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants with Changes in ESR values up to Month 4 were analyzed for this outcome measure. n = number of participants available at specified time points.||Percent change||Full Range|Median
825780|NCT01185522|Secondary|Relative Median Change From Baseline in Disease Activity (Tender Joint Count and Swollen Joint Count) to Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, and Month 4|"Relative change (RC) from Baseline (BL) in disease activity included TJC and SJC was evaluated as continuous variables for all participants at each evaluation time points.
For tender joint count, a total of 68 joints were assessed. The presence of a tender joint was scored as 1 and absence as 0. Total score is calculated by adding the scores, which is ranging from 0 (best possible score or no tender joint) to 68 (worse possible score or all tender joints). Lower scores indicate no tender joint and higher scores indicate worsening tender joints. For swollen joint count, a total of 66 joints were assessed. The presence of a tender joint was scored as 1 and absence as 0. Total score is calculated by adding the scores, which is ranging from 0 (best possible score or no swollen joint) to 66 (worse possible score or all swollen joints). Lower scores indicate no swollen joint and higher scores indicate worsening swollen joints."|From Baseline (D0) to M 1, M 2, M 3, and M 4|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants with changes in TJC and SJC up to Month 4 were analyzed for this outcome measure. n = number of participants available for particular parameters at specified time points.||Percent change||Full Range|Median
825781|NCT01185522|Secondary|Relative Median Change From Baseline in DAS 28 and VAS Patient’s Global Assessment to Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, and Month 4|Relative change from Baseline (BL) in DAS 28 was evaluated for all participants at each evaluation time (on raw data at inclusion; at Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, and Month 4 using a linear regression. DAS-28 and VAS patient’s global assessment (PGA) were described as continuous variables for all participants at each evaluation time points (Baseline to M4). DAS 28 ranging from 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (worsening in disease activity) and VAS PGA ranging from 0 (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) to 100 (worsening of symptoms and arthritis disease activity),|From Baseline (D0) to M 1, M 2, M 3, and M 4|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants with changes in DAS 28 up to Month 4 were analyzed for this outcome measure. n = number of participants available for particular parameters at specified time points.||Percent change||Full Range|Median
825782|NCT01185522|Secondary|Median Time to Onset of an Improvement of the FACIT-Fatigue Score|The time of onset of a clinically significant improvement of fatigue was defined as the time between the date of the first tocilizumab infusion and the date of the first increase of at least 4 points of the FACIT-Fatigue score (date of questionnaire completion) during 4 months of tocilizumab treatment. FACIT-Fatigue score assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. It is calculated with 13-item questionnaire on 5-point scale, 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The larger the participant’s response to the questions (exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participants fatigue. For all questions (except for 2 negatively stated), the code is reversed and a new score is calculated as 4 minus the participant’s response. The sum of all responses results a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score).|Up to Month 4|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants with increase of at least 4 points of the FACIT-Fatigue score were analyzed for this outcome measure.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825783|NCT01185522|Secondary|Correlation Between Relative Changes From Baseline of FACIT-Fatigue Score and VAS Fatigue to 4 Months of Tocilizumab Treatment|Correlation between FACIT-Fatigue score and VAS fatigue was evaluated for all participants at inclusion and after 4 months of tocilizumab treatment (relative change from baseline) using a linear regression. FACIT-Fatigue score assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. It is calculated with 13-item questionnaire on 5-point scale, 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The larger the participant’s response to the questions (exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participants fatigue. For all questions (except for 2 negatively stated), the code is reversed and a new score is calculated as 4 minus the participant’s response. The sum of all responses results a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score). VAS fatigue score ranging from 0 (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) to 100 (worsening in symptoms and arthritis disease activity)|From Baseline (D0) to Month (M) 4|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants with Changes in FACIT-Fatigue Score and VAS Fatigue at Month 4 were analyzed for this outcome measure.||Correlation Coefficient|||Number
825784|NCT01185522|Primary|Mean Clinically Significant Improvement in Tender Joints and Swollen Joints as Predictive Factors After 4 Months of Tocilizumab Treatment|"Predictive factors were characteristics of participants that indicated greater or lesser likelihood of responding to a specific treatment regimen.
For tender joint count (TJC), a total of 68 joints were assessed. The presence of a tender joint was scored as 1 and absence as 0. Total score is calculated by adding the scores, which is ranging from 0 (best possible score or no tender joint) to 68 (worse possible score or all tender joints). Lower scores indicate no tender joint and higher scores indicate worsening tender joints.
For swollen joint count (SJC), a total of 66 joints were assessed. The presence of a tender joint was scored as 1 and absence as 0. Total score is calculated by adding the scores, which is ranging from 0 (best possible score or no swollen joint) to 66 (worse possible score or all swollen joints). Lower scores indicate no swollen joint and higher scores indicate worsening swollen joints."|At Month 4|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants who completed a FACIT-Fatigue score at Month 4 and had clinically significant improvement in fatigue with respect to predictive factors were analyzed for this outcome measure.||Number of joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
825785|NCT01185522|Primary|Median Clinically Significant Improvement in C-Reactive Protein as a Predictive Factors After 4 Months of Tocilizumab Treatment|Predictive factors were characteristics of participants that indicated greater or lesser likelihood of responding to a specific treatment regimen. C-reactive protein (CRP) is one of the biomarkers for the diagnosis and assessment of disease activity in RA.|At Month 4|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants who completed a FACIT-Fatigue score at Month 4 and had clinically significant improvement in fatigue with respect to predictive factors were analyzed for this outcome measure.||milligram per liter||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825786|NCT01185522|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Improvement in Fatigue at Month 4 With Respect to Predictive Factors|Predictive factors of fatigue were taken into account included gender, age, time since initial diagnosis, Erosive RA, disease activity score (DAS, ranging from 0 [no disease activity] to 10 [worsening in disease activity]), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), anemia, treatment with corticosteroids, doses of corticosteroids, health assessment questionnaire (HAQ, ranging from 0 [without any difficulty] to 60 [worsening or unable to do physical activities]), FACIT-Fatigue score (ranging from 0 [worse score] to 52 [better score]), visual analogue score (VAS) for fatigue, pain, quality of sleep, and global assessment (ranging from 0 [symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms] to 100 [worsening of symptoms and arthritis disease activity]), Short Form 36 (SF36) vitality score (ranging from 0 [worst] to 100 [best]), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS; represented as score </= 7 [no case], 7 to 10 [doubtful case], and > 10 [certain case of HAD]).|At Month 4|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants whom baseline characteristics were available at inclusion and who completed a FACIT-Fatigue score at Month 4 and had clinically significant improvement in fatigue with respect to predictive factors were analyzed for this outcome measure.||Number of participants|||Number
825787|NCT01185522|Secondary|Baseline Disease Characteristic: Mean FACIT-Fatigue Score and VAS Fatigue Score|FACIT-fatigue score and VAS fatigue score were fatigue assessment parameters. FACIT-Fatigue score assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. It is calculated with 13-item questionnaire on 5-point scale, 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The larger the participant’s response to the questions (exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participants fatigue. For all questions (except for 2 negatively stated), the code is reversed and a new score is calculated as 4 minus the participant’s response. The sum of all responses results a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score). VAS fatigue score ranges from 0 (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) to 100 (worsening in symptoms and arthritis disease activity). Clinically relevant improvement is defined as >/= 4-point change from Baseline.|Baseline (D0)|Patient analysis population consisted of all participants included in the study, who respected inclusion criteria, received at least one tocilizumab infusion, had an evaluable FACIT-Fatigue score at inclusion, and at least one evaluable FACIT fatigue score during treatment. n = number of participants available for particular time fatigue scores.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825911|NCT01194479|Primary|Epinephrine (pg/mL)|Epinephrine levels will be measured throughout the study to assess whether there are changes during hypoglycemia with inhaled formoterol. These levels will be checked every 20 minutes during the 120 minute study session. Results are presented at the Basal, Euglycemia (30 minutes) and Hypoglycemia (105-120 minutes) stages|up to 120 minutes|Results are pooled at the arm level and split by placebo and control regardless of randomization order.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
825788|NCT01185522|Secondary|Baseline Disease Characteristic: Number of Participants With High Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate, CRP Level, Anemia, and Unacceptable Patient Acceptable Symptom State Fatigue|High Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) was defined as (1) for participants aged up to 50 years: > 15 mm/h for men and > 20 mm/h for women, and (2) for participants aged over 50 years: > 20 mm/h for men and > 25 mm/h for women. Anemia was defined as plasma hemoglobin level <12 gram per deciliter (g/dL) for women and <13 g/dL for men. The CRP test is evaluated for an acute phase reactant of inflammation. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement. Patient-Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) that is defined as the highest level of symptom beyond which participants consider themselves well. PASS is a 1-question assessment of how rheumatoid arthritis has affected participant in last 48 hours.|Baseline (D0)|Patient analysis population consisted of all participants included in the study, who respected inclusion criteria, received at least one tocilizumab infusion, had an evaluable FACIT-Fatigue score at inclusion, and at least one evaluable FACIT fatigue score during treatment. n = number of participants available for particular parameters.||Number of participants|||Number
825789|NCT01185522|Secondary|Baseline Disease Characteristic: DAS28, Patient’s Global Assessment, VAS Pain and HAQ Score as Rheumatoid Arthritis Assessment Parameters|DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen (range 0-28) and tender (range 0-28) joint counts, acute phase response (ESR in mm/h), and patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale, where 0 is no disease activity and 100 is maximum disease activity). The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate worsening disease activity. VAS pain score calculated as 0 to 10 cm; where 0 = no pain, and 10 = worst possible pain. HAQ indicates how the disease affected participant’s activities of daily life. It consisted of 20 questions in 8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale, 0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do. Sum of scores was divided by number of domains with a score for a total possible score of 0 (best/no difficulties to perform activities) to 3 (worst/ unable to perform activities at all).|Baseline (D0)|Patient analysis population consisted of all participants included in the study, who respected inclusion criteria, received at least one tocilizumab infusion, had an evaluable FACIT-Fatigue score at inclusion, and at least one evaluable FACIT fatigue score during treatment. n = number of participants available for particular parameters.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825790|NCT01185522|Secondary|Baseline Disease Characteristics: Tender Joint Count and Swollen Joint Count|"For tender joint count, a total of 68 joints were assessed. The presence of a tender joint was scored as 1 and absence as 0. Total score is calculated by adding the scores, which is ranging from 0 (best possible score or no tender joint) to 68 (worse possible score or all tender joints). Lower scores indicate no tender joint and higher scores indicate worsening tender joints.
For swollen joint count, a total of 66 joints were assessed. The presence of a tender joint was scored as 1 and absence as 0. Total score is calculated by adding the scores, which is ranging from 0 (best possible score or no swollen joint) to 66 (worse possible score or all swollen joints). Lower scores indicate no swollen joint and higher scores indicate worsening swollen joints. Tender joint count and swollen joint count were assessed at baseline and were used as baseline disease characteristics for assessment of rheumatoid arthritis."|Baseline (D0)|Patient analysis population was considered. n = number of participants available for particular parameters.||Number of joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
825791|NCT01185522|Secondary|Baseline Disease Characteristics: Number of Participants With Positive Rheumatoid Factor and/or Anti-cyclic Citrullinated Protein Antibodies|Blood was collected for Rheumatoid Factor (RF) at Baseline and was analyzed. RF level was reported in international units/milliliter (IU/mL). All participants were assessed for anti-cyclic citrullinated protein (anti-CCP) antibodies at baseline. Number of participants with a positive RF and/or anti-CCP antibodies were reported as baseline disease characteristics.|Baseline (D0)|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants with positive RF and/or anti-CCP antibodies at baseline were analyzed for this outcome measure.||Number of Participants|||Number
825792|NCT01185522|Secondary|Baseline Disease Characteristics: Mean Disease Duration|Mean disease (rheumatoid arthritis) duration at inclusion was recorded for all participants as baseline disease characteristics.|Baseline (Day [D] 0)|Patient analysis population was considered. Participants for whom data of disease duration was available at baseline were analyzed for this outcome measure.||years||Standard Deviation|Mean
825793|NCT01185522|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Significant Improvement in Fatigue After 4 Months of Tocilizumab Treatment|"Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue score assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. It is calculated with 13-item questionnaire on 5-point scale: 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The larger the participant’s response to the questions (exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participants fatigue. For all questions (except for 2 negatively stated), the code is reversed and a new score is calculated as 4 minus the participant’s response. The sum of all responses resulted a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score). A higher score reflects an improvement in the participant’s health status. Clinically relevant improvement is defined as a >= 4-point change from Baseline.
This was performed using the last observation carried forward (LOCF) method and for participants who completed a FACIT-Fatigue score at Month 4 (completers)."|At Month 4|Patient analysis population consisted of all participants included in the study, who respected inclusion criteria, received at least one tocilizumab infusion, had an evaluable FACIT-Fatigue score at inclusion, and at least one evaluable FACIT fatigue score during treatment.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825794|NCT01185561|Secondary|State–Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI) Anger Expression Sub-test Score|Scores on the The State–Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI) Anger Expression Sub-test will be compared between those assigned to intervention versus those assigned to usual medical care six months after randomization. The STAXI anger expression subtest is a 24-item scale measuring how anger is generally being experienced and expressed. Scores may range from 0 to 72 with higher scores indicating greater anger.|6 Months|This analysis is restricted to participants who completed the final study visit six months after randomization.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825912|NCT01194479|Secondary|Blood Glucose Levels (Average)|Blood glucose levels will be checked every 5 minutes during the 120 minute study session in order to maintain blood glucose levels in the normal and hypoglycemic range. Presented is the average of the collected values.|Up to 120 minutes|Subjects are pooled across randomized conditions in their respective study arms and reported overall.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825796|NCT01185561|Secondary|State–Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI Form Y-1) State Anxiety Sub-test Score|Scores on the The State–Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI Form Y-1) State Anxiety Sub-test are compared between those assigned to intervention versus those assigned to usual medical care six months after randomization. The STAI state anxiety subtest is a 20-item scale measuring state anxiety. Scores may range from 20 to 80 with higher scores indicating greater state anxiety.|6 Months|This analysis is restricted to participants who completed the final study visit six months after randomization.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825797|NCT01185561|Primary|Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) Score|The CES-D score was compared between those assigned to intervention versus those assigned to usual medical care six months after randomization. The CES-D is a self-report questionnaire assessing frequency and severity of depression symptoms. Scores may range from 0 to 60, where higher scores indicate worse mood.|6 Months|This analysis is restricted to participants who completed the final study visit six months after randomization.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825798|NCT01185600|Secondary|Each Participant's Number of Non-serious Adverse Events|All clinical non-serious adverse events reported in the clinical chart were recorded in the study's data files. This type of events, defined as Non-Serious Adverse Events or just Adverse Events (AEs) were categorized into 5 groups: (1) Cardiovascular / respiratory; (2) renal; (3) neurologic (CNS); (4) infections; and (5) other. For each participant, the outcome measure was defined as the number of AE's he or she experienced during his/her hospital stay.|Within 30 days after CABG surgery|||Adverse events||Standard Deviation|Mean
825799|NCT01185600|Primary|Difference in Levels of Circulating CD235a+ Red Cell Microparticles 1 Hour Post-surgery|Difference in levels of circulating CD235a+ red cell microparticles between at 1 hour post-surgery and at pre-surgery, i.e. levels at 1 hour post-surgery - level at pre-surgery|Interval between pre-surgery and 1 hour post-surgery|||counts / uL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825800|NCT01185600|Primary|Difference in Levels of Circulating CD62E+ Endothelial Microparticles 1 Hour Post-surgery|Difference in levels of circulating CD62E+ endothelial microparticles between 1 hour post-surgery and at pre-surgery, i.e. level at 1 hour post-surgery - level at pre-surgery|Interval between pre-surgery and 1 hour post-surgery|"There were 2 participants' blood samples were not performed due to clotting or missing samples in the Group of Transfusion with unwashed RBC. Therefore, the total number is 57 instead of 59 in that group."||counts / uL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825801|NCT01185600|Primary|Difference in Levels of Circulating Annexin V+ Microparticles 1 Hour Post- Surgery|Difference in levels of circulating Annexin V+ microparticles between at pre-surgery and 1 hour post-surgery, i.e. level of Annexin V+ microparticles at 1 hour post-surgery - level of Annexin V+ microparticles at pre-surgery|Interval between pre-surgery and 1 hour post-surgery|"There were 2 participants' blood samples were not performed due to clotting or missing samples in the Group of Transfusion with unwashed RBC. Therefore, the total number is 57 instead of 59 in that group."||counts / uL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825802|NCT01185600|Primary|Difference in Levels of Circulating CD41+ Platelet-derived Microparticles 1 Hour Post-surgery|Difference in levels of circulating CD41+ platelet microparticles between at pre-surgery and at 1hour post-surgery, i.e. level at 1hour post-surgery - level at pre-surgery|interval between presurgery and 1 hour post-surgery|"There were 2 participants' blood samples were not performed due to clotting or missing samples in the Group of Transfusion with unwashed RBC. Therefore, the total number is 57 instead of 59 in that group."||counts / uL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825803|NCT01185600|Primary|Occurrence of at Least One Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|Comparison of the two groups with respect to occurrence or not of at least one SAE including sepsis, respiratory failure, multi-organ failure, anaphylactic shock, transfusion-related acute lung injury, MI, stroke, cardiac arrest.|within 30 days after CABG surgery|||participants|||Number
825804|NCT01185600|Primary|One-year Mortality|Number participants who expired within one year after CABG surgery|Within one year after CABG surgery|During the 12 months after hospital discharge, one participant in the group of transfusion with washed RBC and 3 participants in the group of transfusion with unwashed RBC were lost to follow up.||participants|||Number
825805|NCT01185600|Primary|In Hospital Mortality|The number of participants who expired during hospital stay after CABG surgery|Within 30 days after CABG surgery|||participants|||Number
825806|NCT01185704|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in the form of signs, symptoms, abnormal laboratory findings, or diseases that emerges or worsens relative to baseline during a clinical study with an Investigational Medicinal Product (IMP), regardless of causal relationship and even if no IMP has been administered. A Serious Adverse Event (SAE) was an AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death; life threatening; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; congenital anomaly/birth defect. To avoid the participant/event combination double-count AEs and SAEs are reported separately.|Day 1 up to end of study (15 days post last administration of study drug)|||participants|||Number
825807|NCT01185704|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Pregnancy|Clinical pregnancy was defined as pregnancy diagnosed by ultrasonographic visualization of one or more gestational sacs or definitive clinical signs of pregnancy. It excludes ectopic pregnancy.|10 weeks post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 15 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
825808|NCT01185704|Secondary|Implantation Rate|Implantation rate per reporting group was measured as the number of gestational sacs observed, divided by the number of embryos transferred multiplied by 100.|5 weeks post oocytes retrieval day (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 15 days}])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percent sacs per embryo|||Number
825809|NCT01185704|Secondary|Number of Transferred Embryos|Embryo transfer is the procedure in which one or more embryos are placed in the uterus.|Day 2-3 post Oocytes retrieval day (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 15 days}])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||transferred embryos||Standard Deviation|Mean
826255|NCT01188811|Primary|Brain Atrophy by MRI||% change brain volume from baseline to year 2|22 subjects in the lipoic acid group and 24 in the placebo group completed the MRI outcome. Two outliers in the lipoic acid group were not included in analysis.||whole brain percent volume change||Standard Deviation|Mean
825812|NCT01185704|Secondary|Percentage of Fertilized Oocytes Retrieved|Oocytes were fertilized using Intra-cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) technique which is an IVF procedure in which a single sperm is injected directly into an egg under a microscope.|Oocytes retrieval day (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 15 days}])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percent fertilized oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
825813|NCT01185704|Secondary|Total Dose of Recombinant Human Follicle Stimulating Hormone (r-hFSH)||Day 1 up to r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 15 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||international unit (IU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825814|NCT01185704|Secondary|Number and Quality of Oocytes Retrieved|Oocyte retrieval is a technique used in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) in order to remove oocytes from the ovary of the female participant, enabling fertilization outside the body. Oocytes were classified into 4 different categories based on their quality: mature, fractured, immature and inseminated oocytes.|Oocytes retrieval day (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 15 days}])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication.||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
825815|NCT01185704|Secondary|Number of Follicles Greater Than or Equal (>=) to 17 mm (For Day 1 Protocol) or 19 mm (For Day 7 Protocol) on r-hCG Day||r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 15 days])|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||follicles||Standard Deviation|Mean
825816|NCT01185704|Secondary|Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Levels||Day 0|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||nanogram/milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825817|NCT01185704|Secondary|Serum Progesterone (P4) Levels||Day 1|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||nanomolar/liter (nmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825818|NCT01185704|Secondary|Serum Estradiol (E2) Levels||Day 1|ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825819|NCT01185704|Secondary|Serum Luteinizing Hormone (LH) and Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) Levels||Day 1|"ITT population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Here n signifies those participants who were evaluated for specified category."||International unit/liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825820|NCT01185704|Primary|Estradiol (E2) Levels on r-hCG Day||r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 15 days])|"Intent to treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of the study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure."||picogram/milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825821|NCT01185782|Secondary|Number of Participants With OHSS|OHSS is a syndrome which can manifest with enlarged ovaries, advanced ascites with increased vascular permeability, pleural fluid accumulation, hemoconcentration, and increased blood clotting.|Start of treatment period to post-treatment assessment period (Day 35-42)|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP. This was actually identical to the FAS population.||participants|||Number
825822|NCT01185782|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and AEs Leading to Study Drug Discontinuation|AEs: Any untoward medical occurrence in the form of signs, clinically significant abnormalities in laboratory findings, diseases, symptoms, or worsening of complications. TEAEs: AEs that occur during treatment with the IMP. SAE: any AE that resulted in death; was life threatening; resulted in persistent/significant disability/incapacity; resulted in/prolonged an existing in-patient hospitalization; was a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or was a medically important condition. Participants who discontinued from the study due to AE were also recorded.|Pretrial observation period to post-treatment assessment period (Days 35-42)|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP. This was actually identical to the FAS population.||participants|||Number
825823|NCT01185782|Secondary|Ovulation Rate, Where Ovulation is Defined as a Serum P4 Level Greater Than or Equal to 10 ng/mL or Clinical Pregnancy|For this secondary endpoint, participants were considered to have ovulated if serum P4 level was more than or equal to 10 ng/mL on Day 6±1 or 9±1 during the post-treatment assessment period, or if the participant became clinically pregnant.|On Day 6±1 or 9±1 during post-treatment assessment period|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP and had no major violation of GCP such as non-compliance with the agreement, serious protocol violations, etc.||percent ovulation|||Number
825824|NCT01185782|Secondary|Clinical Pregnancy Rate|Clinical pregnancy was defined as existence of at least one ultrasonography confirmed gestational sac in the uterus, with or without heartbeat.|Day 35-42 of post-treatment assessment period|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP and had no major violation of GCP such as non-compliance with the agreement, serious protocol violations, etc.||percent clinical pregnancy|||Number
825825|NCT01185782|Secondary|Biochemical Pregnancy Rate|Biochemical pregnancy was defined as a positive pregnancy test (urinary beta-hCG test) on Day 28-31 of the post-treatment assessment period|Day 28-31 of post-treatment assessment period|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP and had no major violation of GCP such as non-compliance with the agreement, serious protocol violations, etc.||percent biochemical pregnancy|||Number
825826|NCT01185782|Secondary|Single Follicle Maturation Rate|Single follicle maturation was defined as the presence of the dominant follicle with a mean diameter of 18 mm or greater without concurrent presence of other follicles of 14 mm or larger in diameter.|Start of treatment period until Day 1 of post-treatment assessment period|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP and had no major violation of GCP such as non-compliance with the agreement, serious protocol violations, etc.||percent single follicle maturation|||Number
825827|NCT01185782|Secondary|Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (hCG) Cancellation Rate|hCG cancellation criterion was defined as the presence of 4 or more ovarian follicles with a mean diameter greater than or equal to 16 mm. If the hCG cancellation criterion was met, the administration of hCG was withheld. Otherwise, a single intramuscular dose of hCG 5000 IU (Japanese Pharmacopoeia- JP) was administered within 24 hours of the last ultrasound examination.|Day 1 of post-treatment assessment period|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP and had no major violation of GCP such as non-compliance with the agreement, serious protocol violations, etc.||percent hCG cancellation|||Number
825828|NCT01185782|Secondary|Total Dose of the Investigational Medicinal Product (IMP) Administered to Participants With Dominant Follicle Achieving 18 mm in Mean Diameter|Total dose of IMP administered was defined as the cumulative dose administered from the start of treatment with IMP until the mean diameter of the dominant follicle reached 18 mm.|Start of treatment period until Day 1 of post-treatment assessment period|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP and had no major violation of GCP such as non-compliance with the agreement, serious protocol violations, etc. Only participants in whom the dominant follicle reached 18 mm in mean diameter were considered for the analysis of this parameter.||IU||Standard Deviation|Mean
825829|NCT01185782|Secondary|Time for Dominant Follicle to Achieve 18 mm in Mean Diameter|Dosing time length was calculated as number of days from the first administration of the IMP until the mean diameter of the dominant follicle was confirmed to have reached 18 mm.|Start of treatment period until Day 1 of post-treatment assessment period|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP and had no major violation of GCP such as non-compliance with the agreement, serious protocol violations, etc. Only participants in whom the dominant follicle reached 18 mm in mean diameter were considered for the analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
825830|NCT01185782|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Dominant Follicle Achieving 18 mm in Mean Diameter||Start of treatment period until Day 1 of post-treatment assessment period|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP and had no major violation of GCP such as non-compliance with the agreement, serious protocol violations, etc.||participants|||Number
825831|NCT01185782|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Ovulation|Participants were considered to have ovulated if serum progesterone (P4) level was greater than or equal to 5 nanogram (ng)/mL on Day 6±1 or 9±1 during the post-treatment assessment period, or if the participant became clinically pregnant.|On Day 6±1 or 9±1 days during post-treatment assessment period (Day 35-42 of post-treatment period for clinical pregnancy)]|Full analysis set (FAS) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of IMP and had no major violation of Good Clinical Practice (GCP) such as non-compliance with the agreement, serious protocol violations, etc.||percentage of participants|||Number
825832|NCT01192776|Other Pre-specified|Severe Neonatal Brain Abnormalities|"The data for this analysis have not yet been collected.
MRIs taken between 7-14 days will be examined."|7-14 days of life||07/2020||||
825833|NCT01192776|Secondary|Multiorgan Dysfunction|The data needed for this analysis are not collected directly, and needs to be coded based on the available information. This is a complex undertaking and will take additional time to create. Once created, we will promptly report the results and anticipate reporting by March 2018.|Until death, discharge, or transfer||03/2018||||
825834|NCT01192776|Secondary|Multiple Disabilities|Multiple disabilities is defined as two or more of the following 5 components: disabling CP, GMFCS level 3-5, Bayley cognitive score < 70, blindness, or deafness.|Follow up at 18-22 months corrected age|Infants who survived and were followed at 18-22 months||Participants|||Count of Participants
825835|NCT01192776|Secondary|Hearing Impairment|Hearing impairment is defined as hearing impairment despite amplification|Follow up at 18-22 months corrected age|Infants who survived and were followed at 18-22 months||Participants|||Count of Participants
825836|NCT01192776|Secondary|Visual Impairment|Visual impairment is defined as bilateral blindness with some/no useful vision|Follow up at 18-22 months corrected age|Infants who survived and were followed at 18-22 months||Participants|||Count of Participants
825837|NCT01192776|Secondary|Level of Disability Among Survivors, by Level of HIE|Among survivors, number of normal infants and infants with mild, moderate and severe disability Severe disability was defined by any of the following: a Bayley III cognitive score <70, a GMFCS level of 3-5, blindness or profound hearing loss (inability to understand commands despite amplification). Moderate disability was defined as a Bayley cognitive score of 70-84 and either a GMFCS level of 2, seizure disorder, or a hearing deficit requiring amplification to understand commands. Mild impairment was defined by a cognitive score 70-84, or a cognitive score ≥ 85 and any of the following: presence of a GMFCS level 1 or 2, seizure disorder or hearing loss not requiring amplification. Normal was defined by a cognitive score ≥ 85 in the absence of any neurosensory deficits or seizures after NICU discharge.|Follow up at 18-22 months corrected age|Includes all infants followed at 18-22 months, except for 6 infants who could not be distinguished between normal and mild. Does not include 17 infants lost to follow up or 56 deaths.||Participants|||Count of Participants
825838|NCT01192776|Secondary|Cerebral Palsy||Follow up at 18-22 months corrected age|Infants who survived and were followed at 18-22 months||Participants|||Count of Participants
825839|NCT01192776|Secondary|Bayley Cognitive Score|Bayley Scale of Infant Development Composite Cognitive Score. The total composite score is reported, ranging from the lowest score of 55 to the highest score of 145. Lower values specify worse outcome.|Follow up at 18-22 months corrected age|Infants who survived and were followed at 18-22 months||scores on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825840|NCT01192776|Secondary|Clinical Neonatal Seizures|Documented seizures during hospital course|Through death, discharge, or transfer|||Participants|||Count of Participants
825841|NCT01192776|Secondary|Withdrawal of Care|Number of infants for whom aggressive care is withdrawn|Birth through hospital discharge, average 22 days.|||Participants|||Count of Participants
825852|NCT01193049|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in RNA Expression for Genes Encoding IL-5 and IL-13 From Sputum at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, SP were collected, then the RNA expression profiles of IL-5 and IL-13 genes were determined from SP collected after 7 hours and previously at baseline, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|All randomized participants||Fold Change||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825842|NCT01192776|Secondary|Level of Disability Among Survivors|"Among survivors number of normal infants and infants with mild, moderate, and severe disability
Severe disability was defined by any of the following: a Bayley III cognitive score <70, a GMFCS level of 3-5, blindness or profound hearing loss (inability to understand commands despite amplification). Moderate disability was defined as a Bayley cognitive score of 70-84 and either a GMFCS level of 2, seizure disorder, or a hearing deficit requiring amplification to understand commands. Mild impairment was defined by a cognitive score 70-84, or a cognitive score ≥ 85 and any of the following: presence of a GMFCS level 1 or 2, seizure disorder or hearing loss not requiring amplification. Normal was defined by a cognitive score ≥ 85 in the absence of any neurosensory deficits or seizures after NICU discharge."|Follow up at 18-22 months corrected age|Includes all infants followed at 18-22 months except for 6 infants who could not be distinguished between normal and mild. Does not include 17 infants lost to follow up or 56 deaths||Participants|||Count of Participants
825843|NCT01192776|Secondary|Death|Death includes any mortality prior to follow up at 18-22 months.|Birth to 22 months corrected age|Includes all deaths and all infants followed at 18-22 months. Does not include 17 infants lost to follow up.||Participants|||Count of Participants
825844|NCT01192776|Primary|Death or Moderate to Severe Disability|Death includes any mortality prior to follow up at 18-22 months. Severe disability was defined by any of the following: a Bayley III cognitive score <70, a GMFCS level of 3-5, blindness or profound hearing loss (inability to understand commands despite amplification). Moderate disability was defined as a Bayley cognitive score of 70-84 and either a GMFCS level of 2, seizure disorder, or a hearing deficit requiring amplification to understand commands.|Birth to 22 months corrected age|Includes all deaths and all infants followed at 18-22 months. Does not include 17 infants lost to follow up.||Participants|||Count of Participants
825845|NCT01193049|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Nasal and Bronchial Eicosanoids and Leukotrienes at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge.|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, NE and SP were collected, then prostaglandin and leukotriene concentrations were determined from NE and SP collected after 7 hours and previously at BL, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was planned to be determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|As this same approach in a parallel study was unfruitful, these data were not pursued, and results are not presented.|||||
825846|NCT01193049|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Cytokines From Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid (BALf)|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 23 hours had elapsed, BALf were collected, then the concentrations of IL-5, IL-13, and TARC were determined from BALf collected after 23 hours and previously at BL, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was planned to be determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 23 hours post-allergen challenge|As concentrations of cytokines were below the lower limit of quantitation this analysis was not performed, and results are not presented.|||||
825847|NCT01193049|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Interleukin-23 (IL-23) From Nasal Exudates and Sputum at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, NE and SP were collected, then the concentrations of IL-23 were determined from NE and SP collected after 7 hours and previously at BL, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was plan to be determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|As IL-23 levels were too low to detect, this analysis was not performed and results are not presented.|||||
825848|NCT01193049|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Thymic Stromal Lymphopoietin (TSLP) From Nasal Exudates and Sputum at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, NE and SP were collected, then the concentrations of TSLP were determined from NE and SP collected after 7 hours and previously at BL, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was planned to be determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|As TSLP levels were too low to detect, this analysis was not performed and results are not presented.|||||
825849|NCT01193049|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Macrophage Inflammatory Protein-1β (MIP-1β) From Nasal Exudates and Sputum at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, NE and SP were collected, then the concentrations of MIP-1β were determined from NE and SP collected after 7 hours and previously at BL, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|All randomized participants||Fold Change||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825850|NCT01193049|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Interleukin-1β (IL-1β) From Nasal Exudates and Sputum at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, NE and SP were collected, then the concentrations of IL-1β were determined from NE and SP collected after 7 hours and previously at BL, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|All randomized participants||Fold Change||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825851|NCT01193049|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Interleukin-17 (IL-17) From Nasal Exudates and Sputum at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, NE and SP were collected, then the concentrations of IL-17 were determined from NE and SP collected after 7 hours and previously at BL, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|All randomized participants||Fold Change||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826270|NCT01189136|Other Pre-specified|Pain From Treatment|Patient-reported discomfort attributable to the study intervention (0-10 Likert scale, with higher numbers representing greater pain)|30 minutes|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825853|NCT01193049|Secondary|Change in Vibration Response Imaging (VRI) After Metacholine Exposure|One hour before treatment with prednisone/placebo, participants inhaled for 2 minutes a nebulised solution of metacholine (0.13 ml/min); then one hour after prednisone/placebo treatment were challenged with allergens. From 1 to 7 hours after allergen challenge, ventilatory heterogeneity was assessed by Vibration Response Imaging (VRI) by monitoring the following: inspiration/expiration (I/E) amplitude ratio, I/E duration ratio, synchrony duration, and quantitative lung data.|From 1 to 7 hours post-allergen challenge|As all VRI results showed no allergen or treatment-related signals these results are not presented.|||||
825854|NCT01193049|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Eotaxin-3 From Nasal Exudates and Sputum at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, NE and SP were collected, then the concentrations of Eotaxin-3 were determined from NE and SP collected after 7 hours and previously at BL, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|All randomized participants||Fold Change||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825855|NCT01193049|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Thymus and Activation Regulated Chemokine (TARC) From Nasal Exudates and Sputum at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, NE and SP were collected, then the concentrations of TARC were determined from NE and SP collected after 7 hours and previously at BL, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|All randomized participants||Fold Change||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825856|NCT01193049|Primary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Interleukin-13 (IL-13) From Nasal Exudates and Sputum at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, NE and SP were collected, then the concentrations of IL-13 were determined from NE and SP collected after 7 hours and previously at BL, to derive the FC from BL for each participant. The GM was determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|All randomized participants||Fold Change||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825857|NCT01193049|Primary|Geometric Mean Fold Change From Baseline in Interleukin-5 (IL-5) Concentration From Nasal Exudates and Sputum at 7 Hours Post-allergen Challenge|Participants were treated with either prednisone or placebo, followed 1 hour later by nasal allergen challenge and then inhaled allergen challenge. After 7 hours had elapsed, nasal exudates (NE) and sputum (SP) were collected, then the concentrations of IL-5 were determined from NE and SP collected after 7 hours and previously at baseline (BL), to derive the fold change (FC) from BL for each participant. The geometric mean (GM) was determined by averaging FC from BL for all analyzed participants.|Baseline and 7 hours post-allergen challenge|All randomized participants||Fold Change||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
825858|NCT01194219|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Psoriasis Flare or Rebound During the Placebo Controlled Phase|Psoriasis flare was defined as a sudden intensification of psoriasis requiring medical intervention, or a diagnosis of new generalized erythrodermic, inflammatory, or pustular psoriasis. Rebound is defined as a severe and sudden worsening of disease that occurs after treatment has been discontinued. Note categories below. [1] Psoriasis adverse events (ie, preferred term as Guttate psoriasis, Psoriasis, Pustular psoriasis) started on or after the first dose date and on or before the last dose date within the phase. [2] Psoriasis adverse events (ie, preferred term as Guttate psoriasis, Psoriasis, Pustular psoriasis, Rebound psoriasis) started after the last dose date for participants who discontinued within the phase. [3] PASI >= 125% of baseline score at any visit after the last dose date for participants who discontinued within the phase and were not included in [1] and/or [2].|Weeks 0 to Week 16|Included all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of Investigational Product.||participants|||Number
825859|NCT01194219|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE) in the Placebo Controlled Phase|An AE was any noxious, unintended, or untoward medical occurrence, that may appear or worsen in a participant during the course of study. It may be a new intercurrent illness, a worsening concomitant illness, an injury, or any concomitant impairment of the participant's health, including laboratory test values regardless of etiology. Any worsening (ie, any clinically significant adverse change in the frequency or intensity of a preexisting condition) was considered an AE. A serious AE (SAE) is any untoward adverse event that is fatal, life-threatening, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, requires or prolongs existing in-patient hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly or birth defect, or a condition that may jeopardize the patient or may require intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above. An AE is a treatment emergent AE if the AE start date is on or after the date of the first dose of study drug and no later than 28 days after the last dose.|Week 0 to Week 16|Safety population consisted of all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of Investigational Product (IP)||participants|||Number
825860|NCT01194219|Secondary|Time to Loss of PASI-75 Response (Loss of Effect) at Week 32 During the Re-Randomized Treatment Withdrawal Phase|Time to loss was the time between the re-randomization date and the date of the first assessment where loss of PASI-75 was observed (event); or the time between the re-randomization date and the date of the last PASI assessment in the Weeks 32-52 interval prior to addition of protocol-prohibited medication/therapy, or resumption of APR 30 BID, or discontinuation, or Week 52 if no loss (censored).|Week 32 to Week 52|Analysis population consisted of participants who were re-randomized to placebo or apremilast 30mg BID at Week 32.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825875|NCT01194245|Secondary|Mean Daily Insulin Dose|Prandial insulin doses were recorded during 10-point glucose monitoring for a total of 3 days during each treatment period (3 days during Week 10 of Treatment Period 1 and 3 days during Week 22 of Treatment Period 2). The mean daily insulin dose over the 3 days during each treatment period is presented. Data is presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-PH20 + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (Insulin Lispro from both cohorts).|Week 10 and Week 22|Participants who completed both Treatment Period 1 and Treatment Period 2 and had evaluable insulin dose data.||units (U)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831864|NCT01243411|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Penile Length|A negative value represents a reduction in measurement from baseline.|Baseline and Week 36|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
825861|NCT01194219|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Both a 75% Improvement (Response) in the PASI and sPGA Score of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) With at Least 2 Points Reduction From Baseline at Week 16 From Baseline|"PASI-75 response was the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at Week 16. The improvement in PASI score was used as a measure of efficacy. See Outcome Measure #1 for further description.
sPGA is a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (clear), 1 (almost clear), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate), to 4 (severe), incorporating an assessment of the severity of the three primary signs of the disease: erythema, scaling and plaque elevation. See OCM #2 for further description."|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
825862|NCT01194219|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Mental Component Summary (MSC) Score of the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-item (SF-36) Health Survey Version 2.0 at Week 16|"The SF-36 was a 36-item general health status instrument and consists of 8 scales: physical function (PF), role limitations–physical (RP), vitality (VT), general health perceptions (GH), bodily pain (BP), social function (SF), role limitations–emotional (RE), and mental health (MH). Scale scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. Two overall summary scores were obtained − a Physical Component Summary score (PCS) and a Mental Component Summary score (MCS).
Scores from the 8 scales, PCS and MCS were transformed to the norm-based scores using weights from U.S. general population, with 50 as the average and 10 as the standard deviation, higher scores indicating better health. For norm based scores, change from baseline were calculated for the 8 scales and the two summary scales, where change = visit value − baseline value."|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used. Participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825863|NCT01194219|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Total Score at Week 16|DLQI is a simple, compact, and practical questionnaire for use in a dermatology clinical setting to assess limitations related to the impact of skin disease. The instrument contains ten items dealing with the participant’s skin. With the exception of Item Number 7, the participant responds on a four-point scale, ranging from “Very Much” (score 3) to “Not at All” or “Not relevant” (score 0). Item Number 7 is a multi-part item, the first part of which ascertains whether the participant’s skin prevented them from working or studying (Yes or No, scores 3 or 0 respectively), and if “No,” then the participant is asked how much of a problem the skin has been at work or study over the past week, with response alternatives being “A lot,” “A little,” or “Not at all” (scores 2, 1, or 0 respectively). The DLQI total score is derived by summing all item scores, which has a possible range of 0 to 30, with 30 corresponding to the worst quality of life, and 0 corresponding to the best.|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used. Participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value are included||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825864|NCT01194219|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pruritus Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score at Week 16|The Pruritus Visual Analog Scores (VAS) were used to measure the amount of itching and discomfort a participant experiences. Participant's Assessment of Pruritus (Itch) asked: On average, how much itch have you had because of your condition in the past week? All VAS values range from 0 to 100. Higher scores correspond to more severe symptom or disease. Change from baseline was calculated for the VAS scale, where change = visit value − baseline value.|Baseline and Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used. Participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825865|NCT01194219|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a 50% Improvement (Response) in the PASI Score (PASI-50) at Week 16 From Baseline|A participant was classified as having at least a 50% improvement in PASI score from baseline, which was equivalent to a percent change from baseline ranging from −100% to −50%. PASI score is based on an assessment of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling), and the percent area affected as observed on the day of examination.|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
825866|NCT01194219|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) Score at Week 16|"Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) scores range from 0 to 72, with higher scores reflecting greater disease severity. Erythema, thickness, and scaling are scored on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (very severe) on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs. Degree of involvement on each of the 4 anatomic regions is scored on a scale of 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement). The total qualitative score (sum of erythema, thickness, and scaling scores) is multiplied by the degree of involvement for each anatomic region and then multiplied by a constant. These values for each anatomic region are summed to yield the PASI score. The PASI score was set to missing if any severity score or degree of involvement is missing.
PASI score percent change from baseline was calculated as 100* (visit score – baseline score)/baseline score (%)."|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used. Participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value are included .||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825888|NCT01194414|Secondary|Maximum Serum Concentration (Cmax) of Tocilizumab||Week 0, Week 20: at 6 hours (hr), 24 hr, 48 hr, 96 hr, 120 hr and 168 hr after dose|Pharmacokinetic-Evaluable Population included all participants who provided at least one evaluable PK sample were included in the PK analysis. Here, number of participants analyzed who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ indicates number of participants who were evaluated at specified time point.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825867|NCT01194219|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Percent of Affected Body Surface Area (BSA) at Week 16|"BSA was a measurement of involved skin. The overall BSA affected by psoriasis was estimated based on the palm area of the participant’s hand (entire palmar surface or “handprint” including the fingers), which equates to approximately 1% of total body surface area.
BSA percent change from baseline (Visit 2 Week 0) was determined at each visit of the study, which is calculated as 100*(visit BSA – baseline BSA) / baseline BSA (%)."|Baseline and Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value were included. Last observation carried forward imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825868|NCT01194219|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Static Physician Global Assessment (sPGA) Score of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) With at Least 2 Points Reduction From Baseline|The sPGA was a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (clear), 1 (almost clear), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate), to 4 (severe), incorporating an assessment of the severity of the three primary signs of the disease: erythema, scaling and plaque elevation. When making the assessment of overall severity, the Investigator factored in areas that have already been cleared (ie, have scores of 0) and did not just evaluate remaining lesions for severity, ie, the severity of each sign was averaged across all areas of involvement, including cleared lesions. In the event of different severities across disease signs, the sign that is the predominant feature of the disease should be used to help determine the sPGA score.|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
825869|NCT01194219|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a 75% Improvement (Response) in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI-75) at Week 16 From Baseline|PASI-75 response is the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at Week 16. The improvement in PASI score was used as a measure of efficacy. The PASI was a measure of psoriatic disease severity taking into account qualitative lesion characteristics (erythema, thickness, and scaling) and degree of skin surface area involvement on defined anatomical regions. PASI scores range from 0 to 72, with higher scores reflecting greater disease severity. Erythema, thickness, and scaling are scored on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (very severe) on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs. Degree of involvement on each of the 4 anatomic regions is scored on a scale of 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement). The PASI score was set to missing if any severity score or degree of involvement is missing.|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
825870|NCT01194245|Secondary|Mean Daily Postprandial Glucose (PPG) Excursions|Participants performed 10-point glucose monitoring for a total of 3 days during each treatment period (3 days during Week 10 of Treatment Period 1 and 3 days during Week 22 of Treatment Period 2). Mean daily postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) excursions (referring to the change in blood glucose levels from before to after a meal) during 10-point glucose monitoring for breakfast, lunch, and dinner are presented. Data were collected 1 and 2 hours (hr) after each meal for 3 days and the means of each excursion are presented.|Week 10 and Week 22|Participants who completed both Treatment Period 1 and Treatment Period 2 and had evaluable postprandial glucose (PPG) excursion data.||milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825871|NCT01194245|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at the End of Each Treatment Period|Body weight was measured at baseline (Week 0) and at the end of each treatment period (Week 12 and Week 24). Data is presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-PH20 + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (Insulin Lispro from both cohorts).|Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24|Participants who completed both Treatment Period 1 and Treatment Period 2 and had evaluable body weight data.||pounds (lbs)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825872|NCT01194245|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) at the End of Each Treatment Period|Glycosylated hemoglobin A1C (HBA1c) levels were measured at baseline (Week 0) and at the end of each treatment period (Week 12 and Week 24). Data are presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-PH20 + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (Insulin Lispro from both cohorts). Least Squares (LS) means were calculated from mixed effects linear models with treatment (Lispro, Aspart), recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 (rHuPH20; yes, no), and treatment sequence as fixed effects and participant within treatment sequence as a random effect.|Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24|Participants who completed both Treatment Period 1 and Treatment Period 2 and had evaluable hemoglobin A1C data.||percentage of hemoglobin A1C||Standard Deviation|Mean
825873|NCT01194245|Secondary|Rates of Hypoglycemia at the End of Each Treatment Period|Overall rates of hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤70 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL] and <56 mg/dL) were calculated based on 4 weeks of observation for each treatment period. Data is presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-PH20 + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (Insulin Lispro from both cohorts). A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Week 12 and Week 24|Participants who completed both Treatment Period 1 and Treatment Period 2.||events per participant per month|||Number
825874|NCT01194245|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting Glucose Targets|Participants were instructed to monitor their blood glucose levels a minimum of 4 times per day on all non-10-point glucose monitoring days. The number of participants meeting 90-minute postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) targets of <140 and <180 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) for at least 2/3 of values during non-10-point glucose monitoring days was recorded. The percentage was calculated by dividing the number of participants with values meeting the specified target at least 2/3 of the time by the total number of participants analyzed, multiplied by 100. Data is presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-PH20 + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (Insulin Lispro from both cohorts).|Baseline through Week 24, excluding 10-point glucose monitoring days|Participants who completed both Treatment Period 1 and Treatment Period 2 and had evaluable postprandial glucose data.||percentage of participants|||Number
829233|NCT01225354|Secondary|Subject First Impression|Each subject will complete the 10-point (1-Not at all to 10-Very Much) evaluating their own first impression at Baseline, Visit 2 (if applicable), Visit 3, and Visit 4.|baseline, Visit 2, Visit3, and Visit 4||12/2013||||
825876|NCT01194258|Secondary|Mean Daily PPG Excursions|Participants performed 10-point glucose monitoring for a total of 3 days during each treatment period (3 days during Week 10 of Treatment Period 1 and 3 days during Week 22 of Treatment Period 2). Mean daily PPG excursions during 10-point glucose monitoring for breakfast, lunch, and dinner from Treatment Period 1 or Treatment Period 2 are presented. PPG refers to the change in glucose concentration before to after a meal. Data were collected 1 and 2 hours (hr) after each meal. Data are presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-PH20 + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (insulin lispro from both cohorts).|Week 10 and Week 22|All participants who completed both Period 1 and Period 2 with evaluable PPG excursion data.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825877|NCT01194258|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at the End of Each Treatment Period|Change from baseline in body weight at the end of each treatment period (Week 12 and Week 24) is presented. Data are presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-PH20 + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (Insulin lispro from both cohorts).|Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24|All participants who completed both Period 1 and Period 2 with evaluable body weight data.||pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
825878|NCT01194258|Secondary|Rates of Hypoglycemia at the End of Each Treatment Period|The rate of hypoglycemia, defined as blood glucose levels ≤70 mg/dL and <56 mg/dL, was calculated based on 4 weeks of observation prior to the end of treatment period (that is, Week 12 and Week 24). Data are presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-PH20 + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (Insulin lispro from both groups). A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Week 12 and Week 24|All participants who completed both Treatment Period 1 and Treatment Period 2.||Events per participant per month|||Number
825879|NCT01194258|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting Glucose Targets at Least 2/3 of the Time|Participants were instructed to monitor their blood glucose levels a minimum of 4 times per day on all non-10-point glucose monitoring days. The number of participants meeting 90-minute postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) targets of <140 and <180 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) for at least 2/3 of values was recorded during non-10-point glucose monitoring was recorded. The number of participants was recorded, and the percentage of participants meeting glucose targets was calculated by the number of participants with values meeting the specified target at least 2/3 of the time by the total number of participants analyzed, multiplied by 100. Data is presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-PH20 + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (Insulin Lispro from both cohorts).|Baseline through Week 24, excluding 10-point glucose monitoring days|Participants in Treatment Period 1 or Treatment Period 2 who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable postprandial blood glucose data.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825880|NCT01194258|Secondary|Mean Daily Insulin Dose as Recorded During 10-Point Glucose Monitoring|Mean daily insulin dose as recorded during 10-point glucose monitoring is reported. Blood glucose values were obtained during a total of 3 days during each treatment period (3 days during Week 10 of Treatment Period 1 and 3 days during Week 22 of Treatment Period 2) at the following timepoints: immediately prior to breakfast (fasting), 1 hour (hr) after breakfast, 2 hr after breakfast, immediately prior to lunch, 1 hr after lunch, 2 hr after lunch, immediately prior to dinner, 1 hr after dinner, 2 hr after dinner, and at 03:00. A minimum of 7 determinations were required for each day during the 3 days of 10-point glucose profiles. Prandial insulin doses were also recorded during the 10-point glucose monitoring and the mean daily insulin dose over the 3 days was calculated. Data are presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-PH20 + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (Insulin Lispro from both cohorts).|Week 10 and Week 22|All participants who completed both Treatment Period 1 and Treatment Period 2 with evaluable insulin dosing data.||units of Insulin||Standard Deviation|Mean
825881|NCT01194258|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) at the End of Each Treatment Period|Change in glycosylated hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) from baseline (Week 0) to end of treatment period (Week 12 and Week 24) is presented. Data are presented by combined treatment group (Lispro-recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 (PH20) + Aspart-PH20 = Analog-PH20) and combined comparator drug (Insulin lispro from both groups). Least squares (LS) means were calculated from linear contrasts of mixed effects linear models with treatment (Lispro, Aspart), PH20 (yes, no), and treatment sequence as fixed effects and participant within treatment sequence as a random effect.|Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24|All participants who completed both Treatment Period 1 and Treatment Period 2 with evaluable HbA1C data.||percentage of HbA1C||Standard Deviation|Mean
825882|NCT01194297|Secondary|Medically-attended Wheezing|Wheezing that triggers a visit for medical care|42 days|Total N||participants|||Number
825883|NCT01194297|Primary|Humoral Immunogenicity|Hemagglutinin specific antibody, as measured by hemagglutination inhibition|28-42 days||||||
825884|NCT01194414|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Developed Antibodies To Tocilizumab at Week 97||Week 97|The safety population includes all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, whether re-randomized or not, and who had at least one post-dose safety assessment. Here, 'n' indicates number of subjects in the safety population tested by screening assay at any time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
825885|NCT01194414|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Soluble Interleukin-6 Receptor (sIL-6R) Concentration at Week 97||Baseline, Week 97|The ITT-PK population includes all participants who were eligible for the ITT population and provided at least 1 evaluable PK sample in the double blind or open label periods. Here, number of participants analyzed who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ indicates number of participants who were evaluated at specified time point.||nanogram/milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825886|NCT01194414|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Interleukin-6 (IL-6) Concentration at Week 25||Baseline, Week 25|The ITT-PK population includes all participants who were eligible for the ITT population and provided at least 1 evaluable PK sample in the double blind or open label periods. Here, number of participants analyzed who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ indicates number of participants who were evaluated at specified time point.||picogram/milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825887|NCT01194414|Secondary|Time to Maximum Serum Concentration (Tmax) of Tocilizumab||Week 0, Week 20: at 6 hours (hr), 24 hr, 48 hr, 96 hr, 120 hr and 168 hr after dose|Pharmacokinetic-Evaluable Population included all participants who provided at least one evaluable PK sample were included in the PK analysis. Here, number of participants analyzed who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ indicates number of participants who were evaluated at specified time point.||hour (hr)||Full Range|Median
825889|NCT01194414|Secondary|Minimum Serum Concentration (Cmin) of Tocilizumab||Week 0, Week 20: at 6 hours (hr), 24 hr, 48 hr, 96 hr, 120 hr and 168 hr after dose|Pharmacokinetic-Evaluable Population included all participants who provided at least one evaluable PK sample were included in the PK analysis. Here, number of participants analyzed who were evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ indicates number of participants who were evaluated at specified time point.||micrgram/milliliter (mcg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825890|NCT01194414|Secondary|Area Under the Serum Concentration Curve of Tocilizumab at Steady State for SC and IV Treatment||Week 20: at 6 hours (hr), 24 hr, 48 hr, 96 hr, 120 hr and 168 hr after dose.|Pharmacokinetic-Evaluable Population included all participants who provided at least one evaluable PK sample were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis (PK) analysis. Here, number of participants analyzed who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||μg*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
825891|NCT01194414|Secondary|Area Under the Serum Concentration Curve of Tocilizumab After First SC Injection or IV Infusion||Week 0: at 6 hours (hr), 24 hr, 48 hr, 96 hr, 120 hr and 168 hr after first dose|Pharmacokinetic-Evaluable Population included all participants who provided at least one evaluable PK sample were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis (PK) analysis. Here, number of participants analyzed who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||microgram*hour/milliliter (mcg*hr/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
825892|NCT01194414|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Withdrew Because of Lack of Therapeutic Response at Week 97|The percentage of participants who withdrew from the study because they were not responding to treatment with the study drug.|Week 97|ITT Population included all participants who completed double blind period and were re-randomized at Week 24 and received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
825893|NCT01194414|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Decrease of ≥0.3 in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) From Baseline to Week 97|The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index (HAQ-DI) is a patient completed questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and common daily activities. Each domain has at least two component questions. There are four possible responses for each component ranging from 0(without any difficulty) to 4 (unable to do).HAQ-DI=sum of worst scores in each domain divided by the number of domains answered. A decrease indicates improvement. No imputation of missing scores was made other than for missing baseline scores, for which last score prior to baseline will be carried forward. For participants who prematurely withdrew, data collected at withdrawal visit was used and data thereafter is missing.|Baseline, Week 97|ITT Population included all participants who completed double blind period and were re-randomized at Week 24 and received at least one dose of study drug. Here, number of participants analyzed is the participants for whom parameter was collected.||percentage of participants|||Number
825894|NCT01194414|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) Remission at Week 97|The DAS28 (ESR) score is a measure of the subject's disease activity. It is calculated using the tender joint count (28 joints), swollen joint count (28 joints), patient's global assessment of disease activity VAS where left side of the line 0=no disease activity to right side of the line 100=extreme disease activity and ESR. DAS28-(ESR) total scores range from 0 - 10. Remission is defined as achieving a DAS28-ESR score of less than 2.6. LOCF used for tender and swollen joint counts, no imputation used for ESR and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS.|Week 97|ITT Population included all participants who completed double blind period and were re-randomized at Week 24 and received at least one dose of study drug. If ESR=0 then ESR=1 is substituted into the DAS28 calculation to enable a non-missing DAS28 score. Here, number of participants analyzed is the participants for whom parameter was collected.||percentage of participants|||Number
825895|NCT01194414|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology Criteria (ACR20, ACR50, ACR70) at Week 97|ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70: ≥20%, ≥50% and ≥70% reduction from baseline for both TJC68 and SJC66, as well as for 3 of 5 additional ACR variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain in last 24 hours using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (0=no pain and 100=unbearable pain); Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity in last 24 hours using a VAS (0=no disease activity and100=maximum disease activity); Health Assessment Questionnaire: 20 questions in 8 areas (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities) answered on a scale of 0=without difficulty to 3=unable to do; and acute-phase reactant (either CRP or ESR). CRP was used for calculation of ACR. If missing, ESR was used. LOCF was used for missing joint counts, no imputation for other ACR components.|Week 97|Re-Randomized Intent-to-Treat Population (ITT Population) included all participants who completed double blind period and were re-randomized at Week 24, received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, number of participants analyzed is the participants for whom parameter was collected.||percentage of participants|||Number
825896|NCT01194414|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Withdrew Because of Lack of Therapeutic Response at Week 24|The percentage of participants who withdrew from the study because they were not responding to treatment with the study drug.|24 Weeks|Per Protocol Population included all randomized participants who received study drug and had no major protocol violations.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825897|NCT01194414|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Decrease of ≥ 0.3 in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) From Baseline to Week 24|The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index (HAQ-DI) is a participant completed questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and common daily activities. Each domain has at least two component questions. There are four possible responses for each component ranging from 0(without any difficulty) to 4 (unable to do).HAQ-DI=sum of worst scores in each domain divided by the number of domains answered. A decrease indicates improvement.|Baseline, 24 Weeks|Participants from the Per Protocol Population (all randomized participants who received study drug and had no major protocol violations) with data available for analysis. No imputation of missing scores will be made other than for missing baseline scores, for which last score prior to defined protocol baseline time window will be carried forward.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825910|NCT01194479|Primary|Norepinephrine (pg/mL)|Norepinephrine levels will be measured throughout the study to assess whether there are changes during hypoglycemia with inhaled formoterol. These levels will be checked every 20 minutes during the 120 minute study session. Results are presented at the Basal, Euglycemia (30 minutes) and Hypoglycemia (105-120 minutes) stages|up to 120 minutes|Results are pooled at the arm level and split by placebo and control regardless of randomization order.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
825898|NCT01194414|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) Remission at Week 24|The DAS28 (ESR) score is a measure of the subject's disease activity. It is calculated using the tender joint count (28 joints), swollen joint count (28 joints), patient's global assessment of disease activity VAS where left side of the line 0=no disease activity to right side of the line 100=extreme disease activity and ESR. DAS28-(ESR) total scores range from 0 - 10. Remission is defined as achieving a DAS28-ESR score of less than 2.6.|Week 24|Participants from the Per Protocol Population (randomized participants who received study drug and had no major protocol violations) with data available for analysis. Missing SJC and TJC will be imputed using the last post-baseline value for the patient (LOCF). No imputation for missing ESR or patient’s global assessment of disease activity.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825899|NCT01194414|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an American College of Rheumatology Criteria (ACR70) Response at Week 24|ACR70 response is defined as a ≥ 70% improvement (reduction) compared with baseline for both total joint count-68 joints (TJC68) and swollen joint count-66 joints (SJC66), as well as for three of the five additional ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) where left end of the line 0=no pain to right end of the line 100=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS where left end of the line 0=no disease activity to right end of the line 100=maximum disease activity; Health Assessment Questionnaire: 20 questions in 8 areas (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities) answered on a scale of 0=without difficulty to 3=unable to do; and acute-phase reactant (either C-reactive protein or Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate).|Baseline, 24 weeks|Per Protocol Population included all randomized participants who received study drug and had no major protocol violations. Last Observation Carried Forward was used for missing joint counts, no imputation for other ACR components. CRP will be used primarily for calculation of the ACR response. If missing, the ESR will be used for that participant.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825900|NCT01194414|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an American College of Rheumatology Criteria (ACR50) Response at Week 24|ACR50 response is defined as a ≥ 50% improvement (reduction) compared with baseline for both total joint count-68 joints (TJC68) and swollen joint count-66 joints (SJC66), as well as for three of the five additional ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) where left end of the line 0=no pain to right end of the line 100=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS where left end of the line 0=no disease activity to right end of the line 100=maximum disease activity; Health Assessment Questionnaire: 20 questions in 8 areas (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities) answered on a scale of 0=without difficulty to 3=unable to do; and acute-phase reactant (either C-reactive protein or Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate).|Baseline, 24 weeks|Per Protocol Population included all randomized participants who received study drug and had no major protocol violations. Last Observation Carried Forward was used for missing joint counts, no imputation for other ACR components. CRP will be used primarily for calculation of the ACR response. If missing, the ESR will be used for that participant.||Percentage of participants|||Number
825901|NCT01194414|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events and Clinically Significant Laboratory Assessments||Baseline to up to 3 months after last dose of study drug (approximately up to 2 years)|The safety population includes all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, whether re-randomized or not, and who had at least one post-dose safety assessment. Data are included from double blind and open label (OL) periods in the SC and IV arms but only from the OL period in IV-SC and SC-IV switch arms.||percentage of participants|||Number
825902|NCT01194414|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an American College of Rheumatology Criteria (ACR20) Response at Week 24|ACR20 response is defined as a ≥ 20% improvement (reduction) compared with baseline for both total joint count-68 joints (TJC68) and swollen joint count-66 joints (SJC66), as well as for three of the five additional ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) where left end of the line 0=no pain to right end of the line 100=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS where left end of the line 0=no disease activity to right end of the line 100=maximum disease activity; Health Assessment Questionnaire: 20 questions in 8 areas (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities) answered on a scale of 0=without difficulty to 3=unable to do; and acute-phase reactant (either C-reactive protein [CRP] or Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate [ESR]).|Baseline, 24 weeks|Per Protocol Population included all randomized participants who received study drug and had no major protocol violations. Last Observation Carried Forward was used for missing joint counts, no imputation for other ACR components. CRP will be used primarily for calculation of the ACR response. If missing, the ESR will be used for that participant.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825903|NCT01194427|Primary|Changes in Markers of Proliferation Prior to and After Study Drug Administration|To determine the percentage change in proliferation index Ki-67 in both ER-positive and ER-negative tumors between baseline and post-treatment biopsy following 14 days of vorinostat 400 mg PO once daily and tamoxifen 20mg PO once daily in women with primary breast cancer awaiting definitive surgery.|Baseline and 14 days|Two (2) participants were enrolled; however, due to difficulty in recruitment, we were not able to complete the study. There were not study-specific analyses completed or results to report.|||||
825904|NCT01194440|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Discontinue or Change Aromatase Inhibitory (AI) Therapy||12 months||||||
825905|NCT01194440|Secondary|Visual Analog Scale||12 months||||||
825906|NCT01194440|Secondary|Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index||12 months||||||
825907|NCT01194440|Primary|Frequency of Women With Aromatase Inhibitor Associated Musculoskeletal Symptoms (AIMSS)|The primary hypothesis of the study is that given zoledronic acid with letrozole would result in a significant decline in the percentage of women experiencing AIMSS as compared to patients receiving letrozole alone. The number of women experiencing AIMSS in this study is compared to the results from a prior published study of women receiving letrozole alone.|12 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
825908|NCT01194453|Secondary|Response Rate||6 weeks|||percentage|||Number
825909|NCT01194453|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)||36months|||day||95% Confidence Interval|Median
825913|NCT01194479|Primary|Glucagon (pg/mL)|Glucagon levels will be measured throughout the study to assess whether there are changes during hypoglycemia with inhaled formoterol. These levels will be checked every 20 minutes during the 120 minute study session. Results are presented at the Basal, Euglycemia (30 minutes) and Hypoglycemia (105-120 minutes) stages.|up to 120 minutes|Results are pooled at the arm level and split by placebo and control regardless of randomization order.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
825914|NCT01194531|Primary|Implantation Rate|Implantation rate is defined as the ratio between the number of gestational sacs with a fetal heartbeat and the total number of embryos transferred.|Data is collected at approximately 4-6 weeks gestation, 20 weeks gestation and 40 weeks gestation.|Patients who reached embryo transfer were included in this analysis.||percentage of implantation per group|||Number
825915|NCT01194674|Secondary|Change in Retino-vascular Leakage, as Seen on Fluorescein Angiography (FA), at 4 Weeks vs. Baseline|"Retino-vascular leakage was calculated after manually outlining the inner and outer borders of the subretinal fluid packet in the optical coherence tomography (OCT) images using the Edit Segmentation function of the Cirrus HD-OCT software. For cases in which a pigment epithelial detachment was present, the volume of the pigment epithelial detachment was included in the calculation of leakage volume."|Baseline and 4 weeks||||||
825916|NCT01194674|Primary|Number of Non-ocular Adverse Events|The number of adverse events that were not eye-related was calculated.|24 weeks|||Adverse Events|||Number
825917|NCT01194674|Primary|Number of Ocular Adverse Events|The number of eye-related adverse events was calculated.|24 weeks|||Adverse Events|||Number
825918|NCT01194674|Primary|Number of Severe Adverse Events||24 weeks|||Adverse Events|||Number
825919|NCT01194674|Secondary|Change in ETDRS Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) at 12 Weeks vs. Baseline|Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.|Baseline and 12 Weeks||||||
825920|NCT01194674|Secondary|Change in ETDRS Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) at 4 Weeks vs. Baseline|Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.|Baseline and 4 weeks||||||
825921|NCT01194674|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Macular or Complete Posterior Vitreous Detachment (PVT) at 4 Weeks||Baseline and 4 weeks||||||
825922|NCT01194674|Secondary|Change in Central Macular Thickness, as Measured by Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT), at 4 Weeks vs. Baseline|Retinal thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.|Baseline and 4 weeks||||||
825923|NCT01194674|Primary|Number of Adverse Events||24 weeks|||Adverse Events|||Number
825924|NCT01194830|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 2-hour Post-prandial Glucose (PPG) After 24 Weeks||baseline, 24 weeks|Meal Tolerance Test, observed cases data set (MTT-OC) includes all randomized patients who participated in the MTT sub-study. Patients required to have both baseline and on-treatment results.||mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825925|NCT01194830|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) After 24 Weeks||baseline, 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received study medication and had both a baseline FPG value and an on-treatment FPG value.||mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825926|NCT01194830|Secondary|Occurrence of Relative Efficacy Response (Reduction in HbA1c >= 0.5%) After 24 Weeks|Glycosylated hemoglobin is reported as a percentage of the total hemoglobin|24 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received study medication.||Participants|||Number
825927|NCT01194830|Secondary|Occurrence of Absolute Efficacy Response (HbA1c < 6.5%) After 24 Weeks|Glycosylated hemoglobin is reported as a percentage of the total hemoglobin|24 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received study medication.||Participants|||Number
825928|NCT01194830|Secondary|Occurrence of Absolute Efficacy Response (HbA1c < 7%) After 24 Weeks|Glycosylated hemoglobin is reported as a percentage of the total hemoglobin|24 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received study medication.||Participants|||Number
825929|NCT01194830|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c (Glycosylated Hemoglobin) After 18 Weeks|Glycosylated hemoglobin is reported as a percentage of the total hemoglobin|baseline, 18 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received study medication and had both a baseline HbA1c value and an on-treatment HbA1c value. Four subjects in each arm excluded for site non-compliance.||Percentage||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825930|NCT01194830|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c (Glycosylated Hemoglobin) After 12 Weeks|Glycosylated hemoglobin is reported as a percentage of the total hemoglobin|baseline, 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received study medication and had both a baseline HbA1c value and an on-treatment HbA1c value. Four subjects in each arm excluded for site non-compliance.||Percentage||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825931|NCT01194830|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c (Glycosylated Hemoglobin) After 6 Weeks|Glycosylated hemoglobin is reported as a percentage of the total hemoglobin|baseline, 6 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received study medication and had both a baseline HbA1c value and an on-treatment HbA1c value. Four subjects in each arm excluded for site non-compliance.||Percentage||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825932|NCT01194830|Primary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c (Glycosylated Hemoglobin) After 24 Weeks|Glycosylated hemoglobin is reported as a percentage of the total hemoglobin|baseline, 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received study medication and had both a baseline HbA1c value and an on-treatment HbA1c value. Four subjects in each arm excluded for site non-compliance.||Percentage||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825933|NCT01194856|Secondary|Correlate the Changes in DEXA-measured Fat Limb With Fat mtDNA, mtRNA and Fat Apoptosis|A secondary objective of this trial will be to correlate the changes in DEXA-measured limb fat with those of fat mtDNA, mtRNA levels and fat apoptosis|96 weeks|Data not collected for analysis due to low enrollment and participant discontinuation.|||||
825934|NCT01194856|Secondary|Compare Changes in Levels of Hs-CRP Between the Two Arms|To examine the effect of switching from EFV to ATV/r on highly sensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) in HIV-1 infected patients, a secondary objective of this trial will be to compare changes over 96 weeks in hs (highly sensitive) - CRP levels between the EFV arm and the ATV/r arm.|96 weeks|Data not collected for analysis due to low enrollment and participant discontinuation.|||||
825935|NCT01194856|Secondary|Comparing Glucose Metabolism (Fasting Insulin, QUIKI and HOMA-IR) Between the Two Arms|To examine the effect of switching from EFV to ATV/r on glucose metabolism in HIV-1 infected patients, a secondary objective of this trial will be to compare changes over 96 weeks in fasting insulin, QUIKI and HOMA-IR between the EFV arm and the ATV/r arm|96 weeks|Data not collected for analysis due to low enrollment and participant discontinuation.|||||
825936|NCT01194856|Secondary|Comparing Fasting Lipid Levels Between the Two Arms|To examine the effect of switching from EFV to ATV/r on lipids in HIV-1 infected patients, a secondary objective of this trial will be to compare changes over 96 weeks in fasting lipid levels between the EFV arm and ATV/r arm.|96 weeks|Data not collected for analysis due to low enrollment and participant discontinuation.|||||
825937|NCT01194856|Secondary|Compare Changes in Fat mtDNA, mtRNA and Fat Apoptosis Between the Two Arms|To examine the effect of switching from EFV to ATV/r on fat mtDNA, mtRNA, and fat apoptosis in HIV-1 infected patients, a secondary objective of this trial will be to compare changes over 96 weeks in fat mtDNA, mt RNA levels and fat apoptosis between the EFV arm and ARV/r arm.|96 weeks|Data not collected for analysis due to low enrollment and participant discontinuation.|||||
825938|NCT01194856|Secondary|Compare Changes in CD4, HIV-1 RNA Levels and Adverse Events in Two Arms|To examine the effect of switching from EFV to ATV/r on safety in HIV-1 infected patients, a secondary objective of this trial will be to compare changes over 96 weeks in CD4 cell count, HIV-1 RNA levels, and adverse events between the EFV arm and the ATV/r arm|96 weeks|Data not collected for analysis due to low enrollment and participant discontinuation.|||||
825939|NCT01194856|Secondary|Compare Changes for DEXA-measured Limb Fat Between EFV and ATV/r Arms|To examine the effect of switching from EFV- to ATV/r on limb fat in HIV-1 infected patients with established lipoatrophy, a secondary objective of this trial will be to compare changes over 96 weeks in DEXA-measured limb fat between the EFV arm and ARV/r.|96 weeks|Data not collected for analysis due to low enrollment and participant discontinuation.|||||
825940|NCT01194856|Primary|Change in DEXA-measured Limb Fat Between the EFV and ATV/r Arms|To examine the effect of switching from EFV- to ATV/r on limb fat in HIV-1 infected patients with established lipoatrophy, the primary objective of this trial will be to compare changes over 48 weeks in DEXA-measured limb fat between the EFV arm and ATV/r.|48 weeks|Data not collected for analysis due to low enrollment and participant discontinuation.|||||
825941|NCT01194869|Secondary|Clinical Response Rate (Complete Pathologic Response Rate After Surgery)|Pathologic complete response (pCR): Absence of invasive breast cancer in the breast (mastectomy or lumpectomy) specimen during follow-up. Presence of in situ cancer alone will be considered a pCR but may be recorded separately.|Up to 2 years after definitive surgery|||participants|||Number
825942|NCT01194869|Secondary|Clinical Response Rate During Follow-up (Disease Recurrence)|Response will be assessed according to World Health Organization criteria with progressive disease (PD) defined as a 25% or greater increase in a single lesion, OR reappearance of any lesion which has disappeared, OR clear worsening of any evaluable disease OR appearance of any new lesion/site.|Up to 2 years after definitive surgery|||participants|||Number
825943|NCT01194869|Primary|Pathologic Complete Response (pCR) at the Time of Surgery After Preoperative Treatment|Pathologic complete response (pCR): Absence of invasive breast cancer in the breast (mastectomy or lumpectomy) specimen at the time of definitive surgery. Presence of in situ cancer alone will be considered a pCR but may be recorded separately.|At the time of surgery, after 24 weeks of preoperative treatment|||participants|||Number
825944|NCT01194908|Secondary|To Determine the Safety of Tamoxifen in Combination With Decitabine and LBH589||Patients will undergo an evaluation for extent of disease 8 weeks from starting study drugs and every 8 weeks (2 cycles) while on study.|No data were analyzed due to trial termination.|||||
825945|NCT01194908|Primary|To Determine the Maximum Tolerated Dose of Decitabine and LBH589 Given in Combination in Patients With Metastatic or Locally Advanced Metastatic Breast Cancers||Estrogen receptor status checked 5 days after treatment. Staging is done every 8 weeks.|No data were analyzed due to trial termination.|||||
825946|NCT01194973|Secondary|Platelet Count Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks||Through 52 Weeks|Change from baseline platelet counts were analyzed for the ITT population using a repeated measures ANOVA model. The estimated LS means of change from baseline at each post-baseline visit alongside with 95% CIs and P-values were calculated, as were the parameter estimates for the covariates and their associated P-values.||10^9 cells/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
825947|NCT01194973|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement|Proportion of Patients with Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement was determined and defined as an increase in eGFR by ≥ 15 mL/min/1.73m^2 from baseline sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart|Through End of Study, Median Exposure 52 Weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement through end of study were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized for each parameter.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825948|NCT01194973|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Platelet Count Normalization|Proportion of Patients with Platelet Count Normalization through end of study of treatment was determined and defined as the platelet count observed to be ≥ 150 x 109/L on at least two consecutive measurements which span a period of at least four weeks|Through End of Study, Median Exposure 52 Weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Platelet Count Normalization through end of study were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825960|NCT01195025|Secondary|Variation of Coagulation Factors and Plasma Proteins During and After Infusion of Crystalloid and Colloid Solutions.|The investigators will measure a few markers of coagulation (fibrinogen, thrombocytes, D-Dimer, PK-INR, aPTT, and coagulation factor VII) as well as Cystatin C, serum albumine and hemoglobin and how the concentration of these vary with the different dilutions of blood during and after infusion of a colloid and/or a crystalloid solution.|420 minutes||05/2015||||
825949|NCT01194973|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Complete Hematologic Response|Proportion of Patients with Complete Hematologic response through end of study of treatment was determined and defined by normalization of platelet count and LDH sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through End of Study, Median Exposure 52 Weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Complete Hematologic Response through end of study were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825950|NCT01194973|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Modified Complete TMA Response|Proportion of Patients with Modified Complete TMA response through end of study was determined and defined by normalization of hematological parameters (platelet count and LDH) and improvement in renal function (defined as ≥ 25% reduction from the baseline value in serum creatinine, which were sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through End of Study, Median Exposure 52 Weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Modified Complete TMA Response through end of study were performed for the ITT population. Exact binomial two-sided 95% CI using the Clopper-Pearson method for the responder rate was presented.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825951|NCT01194973|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Complete TMA Response|Proportion of Patients with Complete TMA response through end of study was determined and defined by normalization of hematological parameters (platelet count and LDH) and preservation of renal function (defined as < 25% increase in serum creatinine from baseline) which were sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through End of Study, Median Exposure 52 Weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Complete TMA Response through end of study were performed for the ITT population. Exact binomial two-sided 95% CI using the Clopper-Pearson method for the responder rate was presented.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825952|NCT01194973|Secondary|Platelet Count Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks||Through 26 weeks|Change from baseline platelet counts were analyzed for the ITT population using a repeated measures Analysis of variance (ANOVA) model. The estimated LS means of change from baseline at each post-baseline visit alongside with 95% CIs and P-values were calculated, as were the parameter estimates for the covariates and their associated P-values.||10^9 cells/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
825953|NCT01194973|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement|Proportion of Patients with Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement was determined and defined as an increase in eGFR by ≥ 15 mL/min/1.73m^2 from baseline, sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through 26 weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement through 26 weeks were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825954|NCT01194973|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Platelet Count Normalization|Proportion of Patients with Platelet Count Normalization through 26 weeks of treatment was determined and defined as the platelet count observed to be ≥ 150 x 109/L on at least two consecutive measurements which span a period of at least four weeks|Through 26 weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Platelet Count Normalization through 26 weeks were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825955|NCT01194973|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Complete Hematologic Response|Proportion of Patients with Complete Hematologic response through end of study was determined and defined by normalization of platelet count and LDH sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through 26 weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Complete Hematologic Response through 26 weeks were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825956|NCT01194973|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Modified Complete TMA Response|Proportion of Patients with Modified Complete TMA response through 26 weeks of treatment was determined and defined by normalization of hematological parameters (platelet count and LDH) and improvement in renal function (defined as ≥ 25% reduction from the baseline value in serum creatinine, which were sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through 26 weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Modified Complete TMA Response through 26 weeks were performed for the ITT population. Exact binomial two-sided 95% CI using the Clopper-Pearson method for the responder rate was presented.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825957|NCT01194973|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Complete TMA Response|Proportion of Patients with Complete TMA response was determined and defined by normalization of hematological parameters (platelet count and LDH) and preservation of renal function (defined as < 25% increase in serum creatinine from baseline) which were sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through 26 weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Complete TMA Response through 26 weeks were performed for the ITT population. Exact binomial two-sided 95% CI using the Clopper-Pearson method for the responder rate was presented.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
825958|NCT01194999|Primary|Change in OAB Symptoms Post Pubovaginal Sling Operation|Measured through the administration of five overactive bladder questionnaires. Difference from baseline to follow-up evaluated using the Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test.|Baseline to final follow-up.|All patients enrolled in the study were analyzed, except for those currently being treated with antimuscarinic therapy.||participants|||Number
825959|NCT01195025|Primary|Elimination Half Life for Different Fluids Alone or When Combined|Volume kinetic analyses of the dilution of hemoglobin for different infusion fluids alone or in combination.|420 minutes|All the 10 participating subjects. Analysis studying the summary of each of the included infusion occasions. Only acetated Ringers, only colloid and finally a combination of colloid and acetated Ringers. Each experiment generated one elimination half-life (In experiment C one for acetated Ringer's and one for starch (HES 6%)).||Minutes|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825988|NCT01195090|Secondary|Changes in High Sensitive C-reactive Protein|fasting high sensitive serum C-reactive protein change from baseline to 24 weeks|24 weeks|An intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was used to assess efficacy||mg/dl||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825961|NCT01195025|Secondary|Accuracy of Noninvasive Haemoglobin Measurement by Pulse Oximetry, for Different Fluids (Start to End of Infusion)|"Difference between true hemoglobin B-Hb and measured hemoglobin with pulseoximeter (SpHb)at the end of an infusion in relation to the initial measured values SpHb and B-Hb at the start of the infusion.
Relative difference (%) = (SpHb - Hb)/((Hb+SpHb)/2) x 100"|30 min|Only the pure experiments were included in this analysis. The combined experiment is not included since infusions were performed in sequence, which made the comparison of the bias for the two different fluids irrelevant.||percentage of relative difference|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825962|NCT01195025|Secondary|Accuracy of Non-invasive Hemoglobin Monitoring for Different Fluids|"Pulse-oximeter based measurements compared with invasive hemoglobin measurements. All paired in the study.
Accuracy depending on which infusion is selected (Ringer's, Hydroxyethyl starch or a combination of both)."|420 min|The study was analysed per protocol and missing values were not replaced. All pairs of all collected data in one series of experiments. The number of analysed data points for each subject was in experiment A: 26, in experiment B: 32 and in experiment C: 42.||percentage of relative difference|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825963|NCT01195025|Primary|Volume Effects for Hydroxyethyl Starch, Ringer's Solution or a Combination of Both.|"volume kinetics: mathematical calculation from hemoglobin variations during and after an infusion.
Degree of plasma dilution depending on which solution(s) and how much solution is/are given."|420 minutes|"All the 10 participating subjects. Analysis studying the summary of each of the included infusion occasions. Only acetated Ringers, only colloid and finally a combination of colloid and acetated Ringers.
Each experiment generated one distribution volume. (In experiment C one for acetated Ringer's and one for Starch (HES 6%))."||Litre||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
825964|NCT01195090|Secondary|Baseline High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C)|Baseline HDL-C|Baseline|Baseline HDL-C||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
825965|NCT01195090|Secondary|Baseline Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C)|Baseline LDL-C|Baseline|Baseline LDL-C||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
825966|NCT01195090|Secondary|Baseline Triglyceride (TG)|Baseline TG|Baseline|Baseline TG||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
825967|NCT01195090|Secondary|Baseline Total Cholesterol|Baseline Total cholesterol|Baseline|Baseline Total cholesterol||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
825968|NCT01195090|Secondary|Baseline Body Weight|Baseline body weight|Baseline|Baseline body weight||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
825969|NCT01195090|Secondary|Baseline Alanine-aminotransferase (ALT)|Baseline alanine-aminotransferase|Baseline|Baseline alanine-aminotransferase||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
825970|NCT01195090|Secondary|Baseline Homoeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR)|Baseline HOMA-IR|Baseline HOMA-IR|Baseline HOMA-IR||HOMA-IR score||Standard Deviation|Mean
825971|NCT01195090|Secondary|Baseline High Sensitive C-reactive Protein|Baseline high sensitive C-reactive Protein|baseline|Baseline high sensitive C-reactive Protein||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
825972|NCT01195090|Secondary|Baseline Fasting Plasma Glucose|Baseline fasting plasma glucose|baseline|Baseline fasting plasma glucose||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
825973|NCT01195090|Secondary|Percentages of Patients With Severe Hypoglycemia|Proportion of severe hypoglycemia after treatment|24 weeks|Proportion of severe ypoglycemia after treatment||percentage|||Number
825974|NCT01195090|Primary|The Percentages of Patient Achieving an A1C <7%|The percentages of patient achieving an A1C <7% at endpoint|24 weeks|The percentages of patient achieving an A1C <7% at endpoint||percentage|||Number
825975|NCT01195090|Primary|Baseline A1C|baseline A1C|Baseline|baseline Laboratory measurements||percentage of Hb||Standard Deviation|Mean
825976|NCT01195090|Secondary|Percentages of Patients With Nasopharyngitis|Proportion of Nasopharyngitis after treatment|24 weeks|All patients who had taken at least one dose of study medication were included in the safety analysis||percentage|||Number
825977|NCT01195090|Secondary|Percentages of Patients With Gastrointestinal Adverse Events|Proportion of Gastrointestinal adverse events after treatment|24 weeks|All patients who had taken at least one dose of study medication were included in the safety analysis||percentge|||Number
825978|NCT01195090|Secondary|Percentages of Patients With Edema|proportion of edema after treatment|24 weeks|All patients who had taken at least one dose of study medication were included in the safety analysis||percentage|||Number
825979|NCT01195090|Secondary|Percentages of Patients With Mild to Moderate Hypoglycemia|Incidence of mild to moderate hypoglycemia after treatment|24 weeks|All patients who had taken at least one dose of study medication were included in the safety analysis||percentage|||Number
825980|NCT01195090|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Alanine-aminotransferase (ALT)|ALT change from baseline to 24 weeks|24 weeks|An intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was used to assess efficacy||IU/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825981|NCT01195090|Secondary|Change in Fasting High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol(HDL-C)|HDL-C change from baseline to 24 weeks|24 weeks|An intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was used to assess efficacy.||mg/dl||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825982|NCT01195090|Secondary|Change in Fasting Triglycerides(TG)|TG change from baseline to 24 weeks|24 weeks|An intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was used to assess efficacy.||mg/dl||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825983|NCT01195090|Secondary|Change in Fasting Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C)|LDL-C change from baseline to 24 weeks|24 weeks|An intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was used to assess efficacy||mg/dl||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825984|NCT01195090|Secondary|Change in Fasting Total-cholesterol|Total-cholesterol change from baseline to 24 weeks|24 weeks|An intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was used to assess efficacy.||mg/dl||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825985|NCT01195090|Secondary|Percentages of Patients With Total Adverse Events (AE)|percentages of total adverse events|24 weeks|All patients who had taken at least one dose of study medication were included in the safety analysis||percentage|||Number
825986|NCT01195090|Secondary|Body Weight Change|body weight change from baseline to 24 weeks|24 weeks|An intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was used to assess efficacy||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825987|NCT01195090|Secondary|Changes in Homoeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR)|HOMA-IR change from baseline to 24 weeks|24 weeks|An intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was used to assess efficacy||HOMA-IR score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
825991|NCT01195103|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Sedation Within 4 Minutes|"Percentage of patients achieving a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale score less than or equal to 4, and the block procedure initiated, within 4 minutes of the administration of the first bolus of study drug. The Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale ranges from 0 (does not respond to deep stimulus) to 6 (agitated). The score of 4 equals lethargic response to name spoken in normal tone."|approximately 4 minutes after administration of first bolus of study drug|||percentage of participants|||Number
825992|NCT01195116|Primary|Change in Pain Score (1-10, 10 is Most Pain) From Baseline, to Average Post op Pain Score in PACU|It is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics or attitudes towards pain that cannot be directly measured.|Assessed every 15 minutes while in Post Anesthesia Care Unit until discharged home, which was approximately 10 times on the average|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825993|NCT01195272|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Acceptable and Not Acceptable Benefit-Risk Assessments|Benefit:Risk was defined at the participant level. It was considered acceptable if the DAS28 improvement represented at least a moderate European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response. The risks were based on the known adverse event (AE) profile of tocilizumab rather than on the actual AEs experienced by each participant|Weeks 12, 24, and 36|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
825994|NCT01195272|Secondary|Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count (DAS28)|The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis. The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, acute phase response (erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR] or C-reactive protein [CRP]), and general health status. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS, which includes a 44 swollen joint count. The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity.|Screening, Baseline, and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48, and 52|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
825995|NCT01195272|Primary|Percentage of Neutrophils Positive for Dihydrorhodamine-123 (DHR) Oxidation|Phagocytosis can be measured by incubating neutrophils with PI-labeled heat killed S. aureus following incubation for 30 minutes. Neutrophils are co-incubated with DHR, which becomes oxidized by the products of the respiratory burst generated during phagocytosis. Fluorescence can then be measured by flow cytometry.|Visit 2, 3, 5, and 8 (Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of positive neutrophils||Standard Deviation|Mean
825996|NCT01195272|Primary|Percentage of Neutrophils Positive for Propidium Iodide (PI)-Labeled Staphylococcus Aureus (S. Aureus) Uptake|S. aureus were heat killed then labeled with PI and opsonized with AB serum (SAPI). S. aureus was then incubated with the neutrophils for 30 minutes at 37 degrees Celsius. The neutrophils were washed, then the percentage of cells positive for the labeled S. aureus (that is, phagocytosed) was calculated via flow cytometry. A higher percentage represented more active phagocytosis.|Visit 2, 3, 5, and 8 (Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of positive neutrophils||Standard Deviation|Mean
825997|NCT01195272|Primary|Mean Chemiluminescence (AUC) of Neutrophil Reactive Species Production Using Phorbol 12-Myristate 13-Acetate (PMA) Stimulation|Using luminol as a substrate for reactive oxidants, a chemical reaction is produced resulting in photon emission (chemiluminescence). PMA is a receptor-independent stimulator of the respiratory burst and the PMA response measures the total capacity of neutrophils to generate reactive oxidants. Measurements of reactive oxygen species are calculated as total chemiluminescence or the AUC.|Visit 2, 3, 5, and 8 (Baseline and predose at Weeks 4, 12 and 24)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||chemiluminescence units * hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
825998|NCT01195272|Primary|Mean Chemiluminescence (Area Under the Concentration-time Curve [AUC]) of Neutrophil Reactive Species Production Using Formyl-Methionyl-Leucyl-Phenylalanine (fMLP) Stimulation|Using luminol as a substrate for reactive oxidants, a chemical reaction is produced resulting in photon emission (chemiluminescence). fMLP stimulation is mediated through the fMLP receptor on the cell surface. The fMLP response is only observed in primed neutrophils and response is a measure of in vivo priming. Measurements of reactive oxygen species are calculated as total chemiluminescence or the AUC.|Visit 2, 3, 5, and 8 (Baseline and predose at Weeks 4, 12 and 24)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||chemiluminescence units*hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
825999|NCT01195272|Primary|Mean Fluorescence Intensity of Membrane Bound Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (mTNFα) on Neutrophil Surface|Neutrophils were incubated with labeled antibody against mTNF. Flow cytometry was used to determine the mean fluorescence intensity. Greater fluorescence correlates to a greater density of membrane bound TNF.|Visits 2, 3, and 5 (Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||fluorescence intensity unit||Standard Deviation|Mean
826000|NCT01195272|Primary|Mean Fluorescence Intensity of Interleukin-6 Receptor (Il-6R) on Neutrophil Surface|Neutrophils were incubated with labeled antibody against IL-6R. Flow cytometry was used to determine the mean fluorescence intensity. Greater fluorescence correlates with greater density of membrane bound IL-6 receptor.|Visits 2, 3, and 5 (Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||fluorescence intensity unit||Standard Deviation|Mean
826001|NCT01195272|Primary|Mean Fluorescence Intensity of CD63 on Neutrophil Surface|Neutrophils were incubated with labeled antibody against CD63b. Flow cytometry was used to determine the mean fluorescence intensity. Greater fluorescence correlates with greater azurophilic degranulation, an indicator of greater microbe killing.|Visits 2, 3, and 5 (Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||fluorescence intensity unit||Standard Deviation|Mean
826002|NCT01195272|Primary|Mean Fluorescence Intensity of CD62L (L Selectin) on Neutrophil Surface|Neutrophils were incubated with labeled antibody against CD62L (L selectin). Flow cytometry was used to determine the mean fluorescence intensity. Greater fluorescence correlates with greater adhesion of neutrophils to vessel walls.|Visits 2, 3 and 5 (Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||fluorescence intensity unit||Standard Deviation|Mean
826003|NCT01195272|Primary|Mean Fluorescence Intensity of CD18 on Neutrophil Surface|Neutrophils were incubated with labeled antibodies against CD18. Flow cytometry was used to determine the mean fluorescence intensity. Greater fluorescence correlates with greater adhesion, migration, and ingestion of complement-opsonized particles.|Visits 2, 3, and 5 (Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed at each visit||fluorescence intensity unit||Standard Deviation|Mean
826004|NCT01195272|Primary|Mean Fluorescence Intensity of CD11b on Neutrophil Surface|Neutrophils were incubated with labeled antibodies against CD11b. Flow cytometry was used to determine the mean fluorescence intensity. Greater fluorescence correlates with greater adhesion, migration, and ingestion of complement-opsonized particles.|Visits 2, 3, and 5 (Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||fluorescence intensity unit||Standard Deviation|Mean
826005|NCT01195272|Primary|Mean Percentage of Cells Staining Positive for Annexin V Binding With Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony Stimulating Factor (GM-CSF)|Aging neutrophils translocate phosphatidylserine from the inner leaflet of the plasma membrane to the outer leaflet during the early stages of apoptosis. This translocation can be measured due to the affinity of FITC-labeled annexin V to bind exposed phosphatidylserine. Cells that stain positive to Annexin V binding are apoptotic. At 4 hrs and 20 hrs stimulated and control samples were analyzed for levels of apoptosis. GM-CSF is an agent that delays apoptosis. Percentage of cells that stained positive for Annexin V binding in the presence or absence of GM-CSF (GM-CSF delayed or constitutive) were determined by flow cytometry.|Visits 2, 3, 5, and 8 (Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of cells staining positive||Standard Deviation|Mean
826006|NCT01195272|Primary|Mean Percentage of Cells Staining Positive for Annexin V Binding in Apoptosis|Aging neutrophils translocate phosphatidylserine from the inner leaflet of the plasma membrane to the outer leaflet during the early stages of apoptosis. This translocation can be measured due to the affinity of fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-labeled annexin V to bind exposed phosphatidylserine. Cells that stain positive to Annexin V binding are apoptotic. At 4 hours (hrs) and 20 hrs stimulated and control samples were analyzed for levels of apoptosis.|Visits 2, 3, 5, and 8 (Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population: all participants in the Safety Population who provided follow-up data for neutrophils or at least 1 efficacy variable. n (number) equals (=) number of participants analyzed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of cells staining positive||Standard Deviation|Mean
826007|NCT01195363|Primary|Number of Patients Whose Mood Improved According to MADRS and YMRS Scale Scores.|The primary outcome measure was assessed by 50% reduction in: 1. depression scores on the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), which ranges from 0 indicating no symptoms to 60 indicating most symptoms 2. mania scores on the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), which ranges from 0 indicating no symptoms to 60 indicating most symptoms.|Baseline visit to week 24|Per Protocol||participants|||Number
826008|NCT01195415|Secondary|Percentage of Treated Patients Experiencing Grade 3+ Toxicity Per National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) Version 3.0||Up to 4 weeks|||percentage of patients|||Number
826009|NCT01195415|Secondary|Median Progression Free Survival|Median progression free survival was calculated for all treated patients. Assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. The 95% confidence interval for this estimate will be computed using the Greenwood’s formula.|Up to 24 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826010|NCT01195415|Secondary|The Number of Participants With an Objective Best Response (CR + PR)|The number of participants with either a complete response (CR) or a partial response (PR) will be calculated. A CR is defined as the disappearance of all target lesions. A PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions.|Up to 4 weeks|All treated patients were evaluable.||participants|||Number
826011|NCT01195415|Primary|Median Percent at Baseline and 3 Weeks in CD44+/ CD24+/ ESA+ Cells From Needle Biopsy Calculated Using FACS|The median percentage of CD44+CD24+ESA+ cells from needle biopsy were calculated at baseline and at 3 weeks using FACS. The difference between the two time points was calculated.|3 weeks|Of the 25 patients enrolled, only 22 were evaluable for the primary endpoint.||percentage of CD44+/ CD24+/ ESA+ cells||Full Range|Median
826012|NCT01195467|Secondary|Change From Baseline of CNS Toxicity as Measured by Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HADS) Score (Baseline vs Week 12)|To assess the change from baseline of CNS toxicity as measured by Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HADS) score (baseline vs week 12)|baseline to week 12||||||
826013|NCT01195467|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Adherence From Baseline After 12 Weeks of Raltegravir as Measured by the Adherence Questionnaire: Medication Adherence Self-Report Inventory (M-MASRI)|To assess the change from baseline in adherence from baseline after 12 weeks of raltegravir as measured by the adherence questionnaire: Medication Adherence Self-Report Inventory (M-MASRI)|baseline to week 12||||||
826014|NCT01195467|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Grade 2-4 Non-CNS Adverse Events After 12 Weeks of Raltegravir Compared With Baseline|To assess the proportion of patients with grade 2-4 non-CNS adverse events after 12 weeks of raltegravir compared with baseline|baseline to week 12||||||
826015|NCT01195467|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Grade 2-4 Laboratory Parameters (Excluding Lipids) After 12 Weeks of Raltegravir Compared With Baseline|To assess the proportion of patients with grade 2-4 laboratory parameters (excluding lipids) after 12 weeks of raltegravir compared with baseline|baseline to week 12||||||
826016|NCT01195467|Secondary|Change in Fasting Lipids (Total Cholesterol and Subfractions and Triglycerides) After 4 and 12 Weeks of Raltegravir|To assess the change in fasting lipids (total cholesterol and subfractions and triglycerides) after 4 and 12 weeks of raltegravir|week 4 to week 12||||||
826017|NCT01195467|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Viral Load < 50 Copies/mL and <400 Copies/ml at Weeks 4 and 12 After Switching to Raltegravir|To assess the proportion of patients with viral load < 50 copies/mL and <400 copies/ml at weeks 4 and 12 after switching to raltegravir|week 4 to week 12||||||
826018|NCT01195467|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in CD4+ Count After 12 Weeks of Raltegravir|Change from baseline to week 12 in CD4+ count after 12 weeks of raltegravir having switched from efavirenz-containing therapy|baseline to week 12||||||
826073|NCT01195779|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|From Day 0 to 179|||Subjects|||Number
826019|NCT01195467|Secondary|The Rate of Neuropsychiatric and Central Nervous System (CNS) Toxicity of Raltegravir Therapy After 12 Weeks on Treatment|"The rate of neuropsychiatric and central nervous system (CNS) toxicity as measured after 12 weeks of raltegravir therapy as measured by :
Sleep questionnaire
CNS toxicity (as determined by questionnaire based on efavirenz SPC and graded based on the ACTG adverse event scale)"|baseline to week 12|||percentage of improvement in sleep score|||Number
826020|NCT01195467|Primary|The Rate of Neuropsychiatric and Central Nervous System (CNS) Toxicity of Raltegravir Therapy After 4 Weeks on Treatment|To assess the rate of neuropsychiatric and central nervous system (CNS) toxicity as measured from baseline to 4 weeks of raltegravir therapy as measured by sleep questionnaire & CNS toxicity (as determined by questionnaire based on efavirenz SPC and graded based on the ACTG adverse event scale)|4 weeks|||percentage improvement in CNS score|||Number
826021|NCT01195584|Secondary|Days of Hospitalization|Total time of hospitalization.|at hospital discharge|analysis per protocol||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
826022|NCT01195584|Secondary|Drainage|Drainage during hospitalization. The drainage was placed during the surgery and has been removed prior to hospital discharge. The amount of drainage in milliliters has been measured.|at hospital discharge|analysis per protocol||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
826023|NCT01195584|Secondary|Number of Spine Segments|Number of affected spine segments. One spine segment is defined as 2 vertebral bodies and the intervertebral disc (between the 2 vertebral bodies). For this study the number fo affected spine segments is identical to the number of operated intervertebral discs.|peri operative|analysis per protocol||spine segments||Standard Deviation|Mean
826024|NCT01195584|Secondary|Blood Loss|Loss of blood during surgical procedure in milliliters.|after surgery|analysis per protocol||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
826025|NCT01195584|Secondary|Operation Duration|Duration of the operation in minutes.|after surgery|analysis per protocol||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
826026|NCT01195584|Primary|Postoperative Complications in the BMI Groups During Post Operative Hospitalization.|Postoperative complications related to the operation within the body mass index groups. A complication is any harmful event occuring during the surgery until hospital discharge.|at hospital discharge|Analysis per protocol||Events during hospitalization|||Number
826027|NCT01195597|Secondary|Sustained 80% Reduction in the Number of Cig/Day at Week- 24 From Baseline (Heavy Reducers)|Participants were monitored for up to 24 weeks. This is the number of partecipants who sustained 80% reduction at week 24|number of cigarettes/day as assessed at week 24|Intention to treat (ITT)||number of participants|||Number
826028|NCT01195597|Primary|Sustained 50% Reduction in the Number of Cig/Day at Week-24 From Baseline (Reducers)|Participants were monitored for up to 24 weeks. This is the number of smokers who sustained 50% reduction in the number of cig/day at week-24 from baseline (reducers).|number of cigarettes/day as assessed at week 24|Intention to treat (ITT)||number of participants|||Number
826029|NCT01195623|Secondary|Recurrence Rate|number of recurrences in treatment arms but also nature of recurrences|7 years|The number of legs with recurrence of varicose veins in the saphenofemoral junction (SFJ)or saphenopopliteal junction (SPJ)||legs|Participants||Number
826030|NCT01195623|Primary|Rate of Re-do Surgery|number of reoperations (legs) in the two treatment arms|7 years mean|The number of legs has been analyzed, randomized 166 legs in the duplex group and 177 in the no-duplex group||legs|||Number
826031|NCT01195636|Secondary|Change in Daily Sleep Interference Scale (DSIS) From Baseline to Week 3 of XPF-002 Treatment Compared to Week 3 of Placebo Treatment (With LOCF)|"Subjects recorded their sleep interference scores each morning for the previous night's sleep (using an 11-point Likert numerical rating scale (NRS); 0-10, where 0 = no interference with sleep and 10 = pain completely interfered with sleep). A daily sleep interference score was calculated.
This measurement is the 'Change in DSIS score from baseline between the 3rd week of XPF-002 treatment and the 3rd week of placebo treatment for each subject'. Any missing scores were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).
The reduction in DSIS on each treatment compared to baseline is reported as a negative number. A larger negative number, indicates a greater reduction in sleep interference due to pain. (A positive number would indicate sleep interference due to pain was increased compared to baseline.)"|3 Weeks|"The Efficacy Evaluable Population was used for this analysis. This population includes randomised subjects who recorded both baseline and post-baseline data in both treatment periods. The maximum number of subjects who could contribute to this population is 57.
Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute any missing data."||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
826032|NCT01195636|Secondary|Change in Overall Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) From Baseline to Week 3 (With LOCF)|"Subjects completed the NPSI questionaire at various timepoints during the study. An overall NPSI score (the sum of 10 quantitative responses, each scored 0-10, max score = 100) was calculated each time the NPSI questionaire was completed.
This measurement is the 'Change in Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) score from baseline between the 3rd week of XPF-002 treatment and the 3rd week of placebo treatment for each subject. If the NPSI score for Week 3 was missing, the last value from within the same treatment period was used (ie last observation carried forward (LOCF)).
The reduction in NPSI on each treatment compared to baseline is reported as a negative number. A larger negative number, indicates a greater reduction in neuropathic pain symptoms. (A positive number would indicate neuropathic pain symptoms were increased compared to baseline.)"|3 Weeks|"The Efficacy Evaluable Population was used for this analysis. This population includes randomised subjects who recorded both baseline and post-baseline data in both treatment periods. The maximum number of subjects who could contribute to this population is 57.
Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute any missing data."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826033|NCT01195636|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Using Rescue Analgesic Medications During XPF-002 Treatment Compared to Placebo Treatment||3 Weeks|||participants|||Number
826034|NCT01195636|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Achieving 30% Improvement in Mean Daily Pain Score From Baseline to Week 3 on XPF-002 Treatment Compared to Placebo Treatment||3 Weeks|"The Efficacy Evaluable Population was used for this analysis. This population includes randomised subjects who recorded both baseline and post-baseline data in both treatment periods.
Missing data were not imputed. Only subjects who recorded sufficient pain scores in each treatment period were included in this analysis."||participants|||Number
826168|NCT01196104|Secondary|Week 20 (Follow-up) Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second|Week 20 (Follow-up, 4 weeks after discontinuation of study treatment) Change from Baseline in FEV1|Baseline to Week 20|Safety Population, with data available at Week 20||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826035|NCT01195636|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Achieving 50% Improvement in Mean Daily Pain Score From Baseline to Week 3 on XPF-002 Treatment Compared to Placebo Treatment||3 weeks|"The Efficacy Evaluable Population was used for this analysis. This population includes randomised subjects who recorded both baseline and post-baseline data in both treatment periods.
Missing data were not imputed. Only subjects who recorded sufficient pain scores in each treatment period were included in this analysis."||participants|||Number
826036|NCT01195636|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Achieving at Least a 1 Point Improvement in Mean Daily Pain Score (Measured Using the 11-point Likert NRS) From Baseline to Week 3 on XPF-002 Compared to Placebo|Subjects recorded their pain scores 4 times each day (using an 11-point Likert numerical rating scale (NRS); 0-10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable). An average (mean) daily pain score was calculated.|3 Weeks|"The Efficacy Evaluable Population was used for this analysis. This population includes randomised subjects who recorded both baseline and post-baseline data in both treatment periods.
Missing data were not imputed. Only subjects who recorded sufficient pain scores in each treatment period were included in this analysis."||participants|||Number
826037|NCT01195636|Secondary|Change in Mean Daily Pain Score From Baseline to Week 3|"Subjects recorded their pain scores 4 times each day (using an 11-point Likert numerical rating scale (NRS); 0-10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable). An average (mean) daily pain score was calculated.
This measurement is the 'Change in mean daily pain score from baseline between the 3rd week of XPF-002 treatment and the 3rd week of placebo treatment for each subject'. Missing data were not imputed.
The reduction in pain on each treatment compared to baseline is reported as a negative number. A larger negative number, indicates a greater reduction in pain. (A positive number would indicate pain was increased compared to baseline.)"|3 Weeks|"The Efficacy Evaluable Population was used for this analysis. This population includes randomised subjects who recorded both baseline and post-baseline data in both treatment periods.
Missing data were not imputed. Only subjects who recorded sufficient pain scores in each treatment period were included in this analysis."||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
826038|NCT01195636|Secondary|Change in Mean Daily Pain Score From Baseline to Week 2|"Subjects recorded their pain scores 4 times each day (using an 11-point Likert numerical rating scale (NRS); 0-10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable). An average (mean) daily pain score was calculated.
This measurement is the 'Change in mean daily pain score from baseline between the 2nd week of XPF-002 treatment and the 2nd week of placebo treatment for each subject'. Missing data were not imputed.
The reduction in pain on each treatment compared to baseline is reported as a negative number. A larger negative number, indicates a greater reduction in pain. (A positive number would indicate pain was increased compared to baseline.)"|2 week|"The Efficacy Evaluable Population was used for this analysis. This population includes randomised subjects who recorded both baseline and post-baseline data in both treatment periods.
Missing data were not imputed. Only subjects who recorded sufficient pain scores in each treatment period were included in this analysis."||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
826039|NCT01195636|Secondary|Change in Mean Daily Pain Score From Baseline to Week 1|"Subjects recorded their pain scores 4 times each day (using an 11-point Likert numerical rating scale (NRS); 0-10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable). An average (mean) daily pain score was calculated.
This measurement is the 'Change in mean daily pain score from baseline between the 1st week of XPF-002 treatment and the 1st week of placebo treatment for each subject'. Missing data were not imputed.
The reduction in pain on each treatment compared to baseline is reported as a negative number. A larger negative number, indicates a greater reduction in pain. (A positive number would indicate pain was increased compared to baseline.)"|1 week|"The Efficacy Evaluable Population was used for this analysis. This population includes randomised subjects who recorded both baseline and post-baseline data in both treatment periods.
Missing data were not imputed. Only subjects who recorded sufficient pain scores in each treatment period were included in this analysis."||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
826040|NCT01195636|Primary|Change in Mean Daily Pain Score From Baseline to Week 3 (With LOCF)|"Subjects recorded their pain scores 4 times each day (using an 11-point Likert numerical rating scale (NRS); 0-10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable). An average (mean) daily pain score was calculated.
This measurement is the 'Change in mean daily pain score from baseline between the 3rd week of XPF-002 treatment and the 3rd week of placebo treatment for each subject'. Any missing mean daily pain scores were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).
The reduction in pain on each treatment compared to baseline is reported as a negative number. A larger negative number, indicates a greater reduction in pain. (A positive number would indicate pain was increased compared to baseline.)"|3 weeks|"The Efficacy Evaluable Population was used for this analysis. This population includes randomised subjects who recorded both baseline and post-baseline data in both treatment periods. The maximum number of subjects who could contribute to this population is 57.
Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used to impute any missing data."||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
826041|NCT01195662|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With Orthostatic Hypotension at Baseline and Week 12, Including Data After Rescue|Orthostatic hypotension was defined as a decrease from supine to standing of > 20 mmHg in systolic BP or >10 mmHg in diastolic BP. Proportion was calculated from number of participants with orthostatic hypotension (n) divided by the number of treated participants (N). n/N presented as a percent (%). Baseline was Day 1 of the double blind Period. Measurements for orthostatic hypotension were taken on Day 1 and at Week 12 visit and does not reflect AEs reported by the investigator.|Baseline (Day 1), Week 12|N= All randomized participants who received double-blind medication and had non-missing Week (t) values. Week 12 includes participants with orthostatic hypotension during Week 12 visit window. Data after rescue included.||Percent of Participants|||Number
826042|NCT01195662|Secondary|Number of Participants With Normal or Abnormal Electrocardiogram Summary Tracing at Week 12 (LOCF), Including Data After Rescue|12-Lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) were performed at Enrollment, Day 1 of Double Blind Period and Week 12/End of treatment visit (last observation carried forward) on participants who were supine. ECGs were assessed by the investigator as normal or abnormal. Baseline (BL) was Day 1 prior to dosing or last observation prior to dosing.|Baseline, Week 12|N= All randomized participants who received double-blind medication. Data after rescue included.||participants|||Number
826169|NCT01196104|Secondary|Week 20 (Follow-up) Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second|Week 20 (Follow-up) FEV1, 4 weeks after discontinuation of study treatment|Week 20 (Follow-up)|Safety Population, with data available at Week 20||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826043|NCT01195662|Secondary|Number of Participants With Elevated Liver Laboratory Tests in Participants Treated With Double Blind 10 mg Dapagliflozin or Placebo , Including Data After Rescue|Laboratories were obtained at Day 1, Weeks 4, 8 and 12 in the Double Blind Period. Baseline: last assessment prior to start of first dose of double-blind treatment. Includes laboratory values measured after the first date of double-blind treatment and up to and including the last day of double blind treatment plus 30 days. Upper limit of normal (ULN);, alanine aminotransferase (ALT); aspartate aminotransferase (AST); alkaline phosphatase (ALP). Marked abnormality (High): AST and ALT (>3*ULN); ALP (>1.5*ULN); bilirubin (>1.5*ULN). Participants with abnormally elevated liver laboratory tests were followed 30 days after the last dose of study drug.|Baseline (Day 1) to last dose double blind medication (Week 12) Plus 30 days|N=All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. n=number of participants treated with double blind study medication with at least one non-missing post-baseline value. Data after rescue included.||participants|||Number
826044|NCT01195662|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Chemistry Laboratory Abnormalities in 12 Week Double Blind Treatment Period, Including Data After Rescue|Samples obtained: Day 1, Weeks 4, 8,12 in Double Blind Period. Baseline: last assessment prior to start of first dose of double-blind treatment. Pretreatment (PreRX); grams per deciliter (g/dL); upper limit of normal (ULN); milliequivalent per liter (mEq/L); greater than (>) less than (<); Units per liter (U/L), Marked abnormality Low (High): hemoglobin <6 (>18 females or >20 males) g/dL; creatinine (>=1.5*preRX, >=2.5 mg/dL); glucose < 54 or (> 350) mg/dL; albumin <= 2 or (> 6) g/dL; creatine kinase >5*ULN; albumin/creatinine ratio (>1800 mg/G); calcium <7.5 (>1 and >0.5 from PreRX) mg/dL; bicarbonate <=13 meq/dL; potassium <=2.5 (>6) meq/L; magnesium <1 (>4) mEq/L; sodium < 130 mEq/L (>150 mEq/L; phosphorus (>=5.6 mg/dL age 17-65, >=5.1 is >=66 years); Albumin/creatinine ratio (>1800 mg/g). Note: Hepatic tests are presented separately in next outcome measure.|Baseline (Day 1) to last dose double blind medication (Week 12) plus 4 days|N=All randomized participants who received at least one dose of double-blind medication. n=all treated participants who had non-missing Baseline and on-study measurement. Data after rescue included.||participants|||Number
826045|NCT01195662|Secondary|Number of Participants With Deaths,Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Adverse Events (AEs), Hypoglycemia Events, Discontinuation Due to AEs, SAEs and Hypoglycemia, During the 12 Week Double Blind Period, Including Data After Rescue|Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA), version 15.1 AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Related=having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug as per the investigator. Events captured from baseline to last double blind dose plus 4 days for AEs, plus 30 days for SAEs during the Double Blind 12 Week Period. Only hypoglycemia reported as an SAE is included in AE/SAE categories . All reported hypoglycemia events within 4 days of last day of treatment are included as hypoglycemic events.|Baseline to last dose of 12 weeks of double blind medication plus 30 days if SAE or plus 4 days if AE/hypoglycemic event|Randomized participants who received double-blind study medication in the double-blind period.||participants|||Number
826046|NCT01195662|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Serum Uric Acid at Week 12 in Double-Blind Treatment Period - Randomized Participants|Adjusted mean change in serum uric acid from baseline at Week 12 was calculated. Serum uric acid was measured in milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) by a central laboratory. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. Serum uric acid measurements were obtained at qualification and lead-in (Day -28) periods, and at Day 1, Weeks 4, 8, and 12, in the double-blind period but only the change from baseline at Week 12 was considered a secondary endpoint and is presented.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received double-blind medication and had non-missing Baseline and on-study measurement. Data after rescue was included.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
826047|NCT01195662|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in 24-hr Ambulatory Diastolic Blood Pressure at Week 12 (LOCF)|Ambulatory 24 hour (hr) BP monitoring (ABPM) was performed at baseline, which was during the lead-in period (between Day -7 and Day -1 prior to randomization) and 1 week prior to the Week 12 visit/end of treatment visit. If no Week 12 measurement was available, the last available earlier post-baseline measurement was used (LOCF). Initiation of the 24-hr ABPM began between 6am and 11am to ensure trough BP measurements were obtained. The ABPM units were calibrated, and used per the manufacturer’s and central ABPM vendor instructions. BP was measured in mmHg. Participants had to have a mean 24-hour ABPM ≥ 130/80 mmHg prior to randomization. All medication was withheld on the morning of the study visit and brought to the visit site by the participant. Once the ABPM cuff was in place, all morning medication was taken while at the site.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received double-blind medication and had non-missing Baseline and on-study measurement (Week 12 LOCF). Data after rescue excluded from analyses.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
826048|NCT01195662|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Seated Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) for 12 Week Double-Blind Treatment Period - Randomized Participants|Diastolic BP was measured in millimeters of mercury (mmHg) on Day -1, Day 1, Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 of the Double Blind Period. Diastolic BP values were obtained after the participant was seated for quietly for 10 minutes; a mean of 3 replicate measurements was taken at least 1 minute apart. However, if the 3 consecutive seated BP readings were not within 8 mm Hg of each other, an additional 2 BP readings were obtained (total = 5) and incorporated into the calculated mean. BP was measured in both arms. If the pressure was higher in one arm than the other, then this arm was used; if no difference, the participant’s dominant arm was used for all future BP measurements. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. Participants refrained from ingestion of caffeine, alcohol, or nicotine at least 10 hours prior to their visit and having their BP measured.|Baseline to Week 12|All randomized participants who received double-blind medication and had non-missing Baseline and on-study measurement. Data after rescue excluded from analyses||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
826067|NCT01195701|Secondary|FSFI Desire|The desire domain of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) consists of two questions and measures the frequency (almost never to almost always) and level (very low to very high) of sexual desire. Item scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating better sexual function, and the domain score is weighted by a factor of 0.6, such that the domain score can range from 1.2 to 6.0.|baseline visit|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826049|NCT01195662|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in 24-hour Ambulatory Systolic Blood Pressure at Week 12 Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|Ambulatory 24 hour (hr) blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed at baseline, which was during the lead-in period (between Day -7 and Day -1 prior to randomization) and 1 week prior to the Week 12 visit/end of treatment visit. If no Week 12 measurement was available, the last available earlier post-baseline measurement was used (LOCF) for analysis. Initiation of the 24-hr ABPM began between 6am and 11am to ensure trough BP measurements were obtained.The ABPM units were calibrated, and used per the manufacturer’s and central ABPM vendor instructions. BP was measured in mmHg. Participants had to have a mean 24-hour ABPM ≥ 130/80 mmHg prior to randomization. All medication was withheld on the morning of the study visit and brought to the visit site by the participant. Once the ABPM cuff was in place, all morning medication was taken while at the site.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received double-blind medication and had non-missing Baseline and Week 12 (LOCF) values. Data after rescue excluded from analyses.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
826050|NCT01195662|Primary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) for 12 Week Double-Blind Treatment Period - Randomized Participants|Adjusted mean change in glycosylated hemoglobin ( HbA1c) from baseline at Week 12 was calculated. HbA1c was measured as percent of hemoglobin by a central laboratory. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. HbA1c values were obtained at enrollment and lead-in (Day -28) periods, and at Day 1, Weeks 4, 8, and 12, in the double-blind period.|Baseline to Week 12|All randomized participants who received double-blind medication and had non-missing Baseline and on-study measurement. Data after rescue included.||Percent of Hemoglobin||Standard Error|Mean
826051|NCT01195662|Primary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Seated Systolic Blood Pressure for 12 Week Double-Blind Treatment Period - Randomized Participants|Systolic blood pressure (SBP) was measured in millimeters of mercury (mmHg) on Day -1, Day 1, Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 of the Double Blind Period. Blood pressure (BP) values were obtained after the participant was seated for quietly for 10 minutes; a mean of 3 replicate measurements was taken at least 1 minute apart. However, if the 3 consecutive seated BP readings were not within 8 mm Hg of each other, an additional 2 BP readings were obtained (total = 5) and incorporated into the calculated mean. BP was measured in both arms. If the BP was higher in one arm than the other, then this arm was used; if no difference, the participant’s dominant arm was used for all future BP measurements. Baseline was defined as the last assessment prior to the start date and time of the first dose of the double-blind study medication. Participants refrained from ingestion of caffeine, alcohol, or nicotine at least 10 hours prior to their visit and having their BP measured.|Baseline to Week 12|All randomized participants who received double-blind medication and had non-missing Baseline and on-study measurement. Data after rescue excluded from analyses||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
826052|NCT01195675|Other Pre-specified|Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, Vital Signs, ECG, Blood Chemistry and Assessment of Tolerability by the Investigator|Clinically relevant abnormalities for physical examination, vital signs, ECG, blood chemistry, haematology, urinanalysis and assessment of tolerability by the investigator. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as adverse events (AEs). Time frame for AE reporting includes the period of first drug administration until end of study. A more detailed definition of the used time frame and MedDRA Version can be found in the AE section.|Drug administration until beginning of next sequence/end of trial, up to 48 days|Treated set (TS): All subjects who were dispensed trial medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment.||participants|||Number
826053|NCT01195675|Other Pre-specified|Placebo Corrected Change From Mean Baseline at Any Time Point Between 30 Minutes and 24 Hours After Dosings.|"The placebo corrected change from mean baseline is defined per time point as the difference of the change from baseline for empa or moxifloxacin minus the average change from baseline obtained for the two administrations of placebo. The clinically relevant information (and endpoint resulting from ICH E14) is shown by the maximum mean value of all measurements.
Results are presented for the greatest change, for empa 25mg the greatest change was seen at the 24 hour time point, for empa 200 mg and moxifloxacin the greatest change was seen at the 2.5 hour time point."|60 minutes (min), 50min and 40 min before the first dose and 30min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h and 24h after the first dose|Full analysis set (FAS): all treated subjects who had at least one baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment for at least one ECG endpoint.||ms||Standard Deviation|Mean
826054|NCT01195675|Other Pre-specified|Time-matched Change From Placebo in QTcN Between 30 Minutes and 24 Hours After Dosing.|"The time-matched change from placebo is defined per time point as the difference of the ECG measurement following administration of empa or moxifloxacin minus the average of the measurements obtained following the two administrations of placebo. The clinically relevant information (and endpoint resulting from ICH E14) is shown by the maximum mean value of all measurements.
Results are presented for the greatest change, for empa 25mg the greatest change was seen at the 24 hour time point, for empa 200 mg and moxifloxacin the greatest change was seen at the 2.5 hour time point."|60 minutes (min), 50min and 40 min before the first dose and 30min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h and 24h after the first dose|Full analysis set (FAS): all treated subjects who had at least one baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment for at least one ECG endpoint.||ms||Standard Deviation|Mean
826055|NCT01195675|Primary|Empa 200mg: Mean QTcN Change From Baseline Between 1 and 4 Hours After Dosing|"Mean QTcN (heart rate-corrected QT interval, using a study population-based approach) from the ECGs obtained between 1h to 4h following drug administration minus the mean QTcN from the baseline ECGs obtained pre-dose at each visit, for empa 200mg.
Note, the treatment means presented are actually adjusted means."|60 minutes (min), 50min and 40 min before the first dose and 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h and 4h after the first dose|Full analysis set (FAS): all treated subjects who had at least one baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment for at least one ECG endpoint.||ms|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
826068|NCT01195701|Secondary|Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) Total Score|The FSFI is a validated index of sexual function, consisting of a total score and six subscales or domains: desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, and pain. The FSFI total is the sum of the six domain scores, each of which is weighted as noted. The FSFI total score can range from 2 to 36, with higher scores indicating better sexual function. A total score of 26.55 has been identified as the ideal cut point for differentiating between normal sexual function and sexual dysfunction.|baseline visit|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826056|NCT01195675|Secondary|Empa 200mg: Change From Mean Baseline in QTcN at Each Time Point Between 30 Minutes and 24 Hours After Dosings|"Change from mean baseline in QTcN at each time point between 30 minutes and 24 hours after dosings for empa 200mg. The clinically relevant information (and endpoint resulting from ICH E14) is shown by the maximum upper confidence limit value over time.
For this outcome results are presented for the 2.5 hour timepoint as this was when the maximum value was seen.
Note, the presented means are actually adjusted means."|60 minutes (min), 50min and 40 min before the first dose and 0.5 hour (h), 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h and 24h after the first dose|Full analysis set (FAS): all treated subjects who had at least one baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment for at least one ECG endpoint.||ms|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
826057|NCT01195675|Secondary|Empa 25mg: Change From Mean Baseline in QTcN at Each Time Point Between 30 Minutes and 24 Hours After Dosings|"Change from mean baseline in QTcN at each time point between 30 minutes and 24 hours after dosings for empa 25mg. The clinically relevant information (and endpoint resulting from ICH E14) is shown by the maximum upper confidence limit value over time.
For this outcome results are presented for the 24 hour timepoint as this was when the maximum value was seen.
Note, the presented means are actually adjusted means."|60 minutes (min), 50min and 40 min before the first dose and 0.5 hour (h), 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h and 24h after the first dose|Full analysis set (FAS): all treated subjects who had at least one baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment for at least one ECG endpoint.||ms|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
826058|NCT01195675|Secondary|Mean QTcN Change From Baseline Between 2 and 4 Hours After Dosing|"Mean changes from baseline in QTcN from all ECGs taken between 2 hours and 4 hours after dosings
Note, the means presented are actually adjusted means."|60 minutes (min), 50min and 40 min before the first dose and 2 hour (h), 2.5h, 3h and 4h after the first dose|Full analysis set (FAS): all treated subjects who had at least one baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment for at least one ECG endpoint.||ms|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
826059|NCT01195675|Secondary|Empa 200 mg: Mean QTcN Change From Baseline Between 30 Minutes and 24 Hours After Dosing|"Mean changes from baseline in QTcN from all ECGs taken between 30 minutes and 24 hours after dosings, for empa 200 mg.
Note, presented means are actually adjusted means."|60 minutes (min), 50min and 40 min before the first dose and 30min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h and 24h after the first dose|Full analysis set (FAS): all treated subjects who had at least one baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment for at least one ECG endpoint.||ms|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
826060|NCT01195675|Secondary|Empa 25 mg: Mean QTcN Change From Baseline Between 30 Minutes and 24 Hours After Dosing|"Mean changes from baseline in QTcN from all ECGs taken between 30 minutes and 24 hours after dosings, for empa 25 mg.
Note, presented means are actually adjusted means."|60 minutes (min), 50min and 40 min before the first dose and 30min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h and 24h after the first dose|Full analysis set (FAS): all treated subjects who had at least one baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment for at least one ECG endpoint.||ms|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
826061|NCT01195675|Primary|Empa 25mg: Mean QTcN Change From Baseline Between 1 and 4 Hours After Dosing|"Mean QTcN (heart rate-corrected QT interval, using a study population-based approach) from the ECGs obtained between 1h to 4h following drug administration minus the mean QTcN from the baseline electrocardiogram (ECGs) obtained pre-dose at each visit, for empa 25mg.
Note, the treatment means presented are actually adjusted means."|60 minutes (min), 50min and 40 min before the first dose and 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h and 4h after the first dose|Full analysis set (FAS): all treated subjects who had at least one baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment for at least one ECG endpoint.||ms|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
826062|NCT01195701|Secondary|FSFI Pain|The pain domain of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) consists of three questions and measures the frequency of discomfort or pain during and following vaginal penetration (almost never to almost always), and the level of discomfort or pain (very low to very high). Item scores range from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating better sexual function, and the pain score is weighted by a factor of 0.4, such that the domain score can range from 0 to 6.0.|baseline visit|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826063|NCT01195701|Secondary|FSFI Satisfaction|The satisfaction domain of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) consists of three questions and measures satisfaction (very dissatisfied to very satisfied) with emotional closeness with partner, sexual relationship with partner, and overall sexual relationship with partner. Item scores range from 0 (or 1) to 5, with higher scores indicating better sexual function, and the satisfaction score is weighted by a factor of 0.4, such that the domain score can range from 0.8 to 6.0.|baseline visit|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826064|NCT01195701|Secondary|FSFI Orgasm|The orgasm domain of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) consists of three questions and measures the frequency of orgasm (almost never to almost always), difficulty in achieving orgasm (extremely difficult to not difficult), and satisfaction with the ability to reach orgasm (very dissatisfied to very satisfied). Item scores range from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating better sexual function, and the orgasm score is weighted by a factor of 0.4, such that the domain score can range from 0 to 6.0.|baseline visit|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826065|NCT01195701|Secondary|FSFI Lubrication|The lubrication domain of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) consists of four questions and measures the frequency of lubrication (almost never to almost always), the difficulty in becoming lubricated (extremely difficult to not difficult), frequency of maintaining lubrication (almost never to almost always), and difficulty in maintaining lubrication (extremely difficult to not difficult). Item scores range from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating better sexual function, and the lubrication score is weighted by a factor of 0.3, such that the domain score can range from 0 to 6.0.|baseline visit|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826066|NCT01195701|Secondary|FSFI Arousal|The arousal domain of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) consists of four questions and measures the frequency (almost never to almost always) and level (very low to very high) of sexual arousal; and confidence in becoming aroused (very low to very high confidence) and frequency of satisfaction with arousal (almost never to almost always). Item scores range from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating better sexual function, and the arousal score is weighted by a factor of 0.3, such that the domain score can range from 0 to 6.0.|baseline visit|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826069|NCT01195701|Secondary|Free Androgen Index|Free androgen index is calculated as the ratio of total testosterone to sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG)|Between day 1-14 (follicular phase) of menstrual cycle|||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826074|NCT01195779|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Potential Immune-mediated Diseases|Potential Immune-Mediated Diseases (pIMDs) are a subset of AEs that include both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology.|From Day 0 to 179|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
826075|NCT01195779|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Adverse Events With Medically Attended Visits|A mediaclly attended visit is defined as hospitalisation, an emergency room visit or a visit to or from medical personnel (medical doctor) for any reason.|From Day 0 to 179|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
826076|NCT01195779|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.|within 28 days (Day 0 to Day 27) after any vaccination|||Subjects|||Number
826077|NCT01195779|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local and General Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms included pain, redness and swelling at the injection site. Solicited general symptoms included drowsiness, fever, irritability and loss of appetite.|during a 7 day follow-up period (Day 0 to 6) after any vaccination|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
826078|NCT01195779|Secondary|Serum Neutralising Antibody Titers|Titers were planned to be expressed as Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs). Analysis was planned to be done for antibodies against all 4 vaccine strains.|on Days 0, 28/56 and 180|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
826079|NCT01195779|Secondary|Serum HI Antibody Titers|Titers were planned to be expressed as Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs). Analysis was planned to be done for antibodies against all 4 vaccine strains.|on Days 0, 28/56 and 180|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
826080|NCT01195779|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Fever of at Least Grade 2 or Higher|Grade 2 fever was defined as axillary temperature above 38 degrees Celcius.|Within 7 days (Day 0 to 6) follow-up period after any dose of study vaccine|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
826081|NCT01195779|Primary|Geometric Mean Number of All-CD4 Cytokine Positive Cells|Geometric mean of the number of CD4 cytokine positive T cells per million T cells.|at Day 28/ Day 56|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
826082|NCT01195779|Primary|Serum Neutralizing Antibody Titers||at Day 28/ Day 56|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
826083|NCT01195779|Primary|Serum Haemagglutination-inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers|Titers were planned to be expressed as Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs). Analysis was planned to be done for antibodies against all 4 vaccine strains.|at Day 28/ Day 56|This outcome measure was not assessed for any of the study groups since the study was terminated prematurely.|||||
826084|NCT01195831|Secondary|Evaluation of the Quality of Life||Baseline to weeks 2 and 4||||||
826085|NCT01195831|Secondary|Patients With Success (Patient's Itching Score=None) at Week 4||4 weeks||||||
826086|NCT01195831|Secondary|For Each Clinical Sign (Redness, Thickness, Scaliness), the Percentage of Patients With Success (Clinical Score=0) at Week 4||4 weeks||||||
826087|NCT01195831|Secondary|Patients With Success (Total Sign Score ≤1) at Week 4|"Investigators assessed scalp psoriasis lesions in terms of three clinical signs: redness, thickness and scaliness. For each clinical sign a single score, reflecting the average severity of all lesions on the scalp, was derived according to a 5-point scale ranging from 0 to 4 (0= best;4= worst). The sum of the three individual scores (redness, thickness and scaliness) constituted a Total Sign Score of the scalp ranging from 0 to 12 (0= best;12= worst). Patients with a Total sign score of 0 or 1 at week 4 achieved Success."|4 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
826088|NCT01195831|Secondary|"Patients With Controlled Disease in Term of Clear or Very Mild According to Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Week 4."|Patients made a global assessment of the disease severity by use of a 5-point scale (Clear, Very Mild, Mild, Moderate, Severe). Patients classifying their disease as Clear or Very Mild at week 4 were rated as having Controlled disease. This assessment was made prior to the investigator's assessments.|4 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
826089|NCT01195831|Secondary|Patients With “Controlled Disease” in Terms of “Clear” or “Very Mild” According to Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Week 2.|Patients made a global assessment of the disease severity by use of a 5-point scale (Clear, Very Mild, Mild, Moderate, Severe). Patients classifying their disease as Clear or Very Mild at week 2 were rated as having Controlled disease. This assessment was made prior to the investigator's assessments.|2 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
826090|NCT01195831|Secondary|Patients With “Controlled Disease” in Terms of “Clear” or “Minimal” According to Investigator’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Week 2|Investigators made a global assessment of the disease severity by use of a 6-point scale (Clear, Minimal, Mild, Moderate, Severe and Very Severe). Patients with disease severity classified as Clear or Minimal disease at week 2 were rated as having Controlled disease.|2 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
826091|NCT01195831|Primary|Patients With ”Controlled Disease” in Terms of “Clear” or “Minimal” According to Investigator’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity at Week 4.|Investigators made a global assessment of the disease severity by use of a 6-point scale (Clear, Minimal, Mild, Moderate, Severe and Very Severe). Patients with disease severity classified as Clear or Minimal disease after the treatment period (week 4) were rated as having Controlled disease.|4 weeks|||percentage of parcipitants|||Number
826092|NCT01195844|Primary|The Number of Deaths in Hospitalized Participants Enrolled in the Study|The number of deaths among children up to 5 years of age hospitalized for diarrhea in the 4 Brazilian hospital research centers. Diarrhea was defined as the passage of 3 or more soft/liquid feces in a 24-hour period.|1 year|Participants were not followed-up in the study; thus the number of deaths was not known.|||||
826170|NCT01196104|Secondary|Week 16 Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second|Week 16 Change from Baseline in FEV1|Baseline to Week 16|Safety Population, with data available at Week 16||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826093|NCT01195844|Primary|The Duration of Hospitalization for Participants Enrolled in the Study|The mean duration (days) of hospital stay for children up to 5 years of age hospitalized for diarrhea in the 4 Brazilian hospital research centers. Diarrhea was defined as the passage of 3 or more soft/liquid feces in a 24-hour period.|From hospital admission to discharge|The population analyzed was all enrolled participants whether or not a fecal sample was obtained.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
826094|NCT01195844|Primary|The Numbers of Participants Hospitalized for Diarrhea and Rotavirus-caused Diarrhea Per Month|Children up to 5 years of age hospitalized for diarrhea were tested for fecal rotavirus as determined by enzyme immunoassay. Diarrhea was defined as the passage of 3 or more soft/liquid feces in a 24-hour period.|1 year|The population analyzed was all enrolled participants whether or not a fecal sample was obtained||Participants|||Number
826095|NCT01195844|Primary|The Number of Hospitalizations for Diarrhea That Are Caused by Rotavirus by Age Group|Children up to 5 years of age hospitalized for diarrhea were tested for fecal rotavirus as determined by enzyme immunoassay. Diarrhea was defined as the passage of 3 or more soft/liquid feces in a 24-hour period. The number of hospitalizations for diarrhea from rotavirus infection was reported for each age group.|1 year|The population analyzed was the 27 of 190 participants who had a fecal sample positive for rotavirus.||participants|||Number
826096|NCT01195844|Primary|The Percentage of Hospitalizations for Diarrhea That Are Caused by Rotavirus|Children up to 5 years of age hospitalized for diarrhea were tested for fecal rotavirus as determined by enzyme immunoassay. Diarrhea was defined as the passage of 3 or more soft/liquid feces in a 24-hour period. The number of hospitalizations for diarrhea from rotavirus infection was divided by the total number of hospitalizations for diarrhea in the 4 hospital research centers.|1 year|Children hospitalized for diarrhea and providing a fecal sample in the 4 Brazilian hospital research centers||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826097|NCT01195844|Primary|The Geographic Distribution of Hospitalizations for Diarrhea That Are Caused by Rotavirus|Children up to 5 years of age hospitalized for diarrhea were tested for fecal rotavirus as determined by enzyme immunoassay. Diarrhea was defined as the passage of 3 or more soft/liquid feces in a 24-hour period. For each geographic location, the number of hospitalizations for diarrhea that was caused by rotavirus was reported.|1 year|The population analyzed was children up to 5 years of age hospitalized for diarrhea. A total of 190 of the 230 participants had fecal samples analyzed; 27 of these had stool samples positive for rotavirus.||Participants|||Number
826098|NCT01195844|Primary|The Percentage of Hospitalizations for Diarrhea in Children up to 5 Years of Age|The percentage of total hospitalizations for children up to 5 years of age in the 4 Brazilian hospital research centers that were for diarrhea. Diarrhea was defined as the passage of 3 or more soft/liquid feces in a 24-hour period.|1 year|"The population to be analyzed was all hospitalizations for any reason for children up to 5 years of age in the 4 hospital research centers
The number of total hospitalizations for children up to 5 years of age was not known; thus this outcome measure was not evaluated"|||||
826099|NCT01195844|Primary|The Number of Hospitalizations for Diarrhea in Children up to 5 Years of Age|The total number of hospitalizations for diarrhea in children up to 5 years of age in the 4 Brazilian hospital research centers was reported. Diarrhea was defined as the passage of 3 or more soft/liquid feces in a 24-hour period.|1 year|The population analyzed was all enrolled participants whether or not a fecal sample was obtained||participants|||Number
826100|NCT01195922|Primary|Percent (%) Change in Clinical and Laboratory Evaluations for Safety||Percent (%) change from Pre to Post treatement (~21 days)|Same sample loss during processing for phosphor and magnesium||percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
826101|NCT01195922|Primary|Percent (%) Changes in Tumor Size, Blood Flow, and Standardized Uptake Value||21 days post treatment with rapamycin|It was not possible to obtain appropriate CT scans or SUV measurement from all participants||percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
826102|NCT01195922|Primary|Percent (%) Change in Levels of pS6, pAKt473, and Ki-67||21 days post treatment with rapamycin|paraffin embedded formalin fixed tissues including head and neck cancer lesion were not available for 2 participants||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
826103|NCT01195948|Secondary|Changes in High-speed Indocyanine Green Angiography (HS-ICG)||Week 24||||||
826104|NCT01195948|Secondary|Reduction in Exposure to Corticosteroid as Measured by the Area Under the Dose-time Curve.||Week 24||||||
826105|NCT01195948|Secondary|Number of Participants Presenting No Change in Autofluorescence Patterns as Observed on Fundus Autofluorescence (FAF) at Week 24 Compared to Baseline||Week 24|Thirty (30) participants completed Week 24. One placebo participant was lost to follow-up at Week 10.||participants|||Number
826106|NCT01195948|Secondary|Number of Participants Presenting No Change in Retinal Vessel Leakage Observed by Fluorescein Angiography (FA) at Week 24 Compared to Baseline||Week 24|Thirty (30) participants completed Week 24. One placebo participant was lost to follow-up at Week 10.||participants|||Number
826107|NCT01195948|Secondary|Mean Change in Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in Left Eye (OS) at Week 24 Compared to Baseline|Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.|Baseline and Week 24|Thirty (30) participants completed Week 24. One placebo participant was lost to follow-up at Week 10.||ETDRS letters||Full Range|Mean
826108|NCT01195948|Secondary|Mean Change in Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in Right Eye (OD) at Week 24 Compared to Baseline|Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.|Baseline and Week 24|Thirty (30) participants completed Week 24. One placebo participant was lost to follow-up at Week 10.||ETDRS letters||Full Range|Mean
826109|NCT01195948|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Determined to be a Treatment Failure, Defined as Recurrent (or Flare) of Uveitis or a Drop in Visual Acuity of ≥ 15 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Letters|Recurrent (or flare) of uveitis is defined as at least a 2-step increase in anterior chamber cells and/or vitreous haze using the Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) grading system|Week 52|Twenty-five (25) participants completed Week 52. Three completed prior to Week 52 as a result of early study closure (1/group), two placebo participants and one 4 mg participant were lost to follow-up at Weeks 10, 44 and 28, respectively.||participants|||Number
826110|NCT01195948|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Determined to be a Treatment Failure, Defined as Recurrent (or Flare) of Uveitis or a Drop in Visual Acuity of ≥ 15 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Letters|Recurrent (or flare) of uveitis is defined as at least a 2-step increase in anterior chamber cells and/or vitreous haze using the Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) grading system|Week 24|Thirty (30) participants completed Week 24. One placebo participant was lost to follow-up at Week 10.||participants|||Number
826111|NCT01195948|Primary|The Primary Outcome is the Time to Recurrence of Uveitis in Participants of Each Treatment Group, During or After Tapering of Oral Prednisone to a Dose of 7.5 mg/Day, or Equipotent Dose of Alternative Corticosteroid Medication.|"Recurrence (or flare) is defined as an anterior chamber cells and/or vitreous haze grading of ≥ 2+ using the Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) grading system.
The time to this event is defined as the time from randomization to recurrence, loss to follow-up or end of study, whichever comes first. Participants that do not present with disease recurrence will be censored at the time of the last disease evaluation."|Time from randomization to recurrence, loss to follow-up, or end of study, up to 52 weeks|||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826112|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs: medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|Up to Month 6|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort which included all subjects with study vaccine administered.||subjects|||Number
826113|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs: medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|Up to Day 28|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort which included all subjects with study vaccine administered.||subjects|||Number
826114|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Medically-Attended Events (MAEs), Adverse Events of Specific Interest (AESIs)/ Potential Immune Mediated Diseases (pIMDs) and Adverse Events (AEs) of Special Interest|"MAEs: subject received medical attention defined as hospitalisation, an emergency room visit or a visit to or from medical personnel (medical doctor) for any reason.
AESIs/pIMD: includes both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology. Adverse events of special interest include both convulsion and anaphylaxis."|During the entire study period (up to Month 6)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort which included all subjects with study vaccine administered.||subjects|||Number
826115|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|"Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.
Any was defined as any symptom regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 was a symptom preventing normal everyday activity. Related was any symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination."|During a 28 day follow-up period (Day 0-27) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort which included all subjects with study vaccine administered.||subjects|||Number
826116|NCT01196026|Secondary|Duration of Any Solicited General Symptom Experienced by Subjects Above 6 Years Old|Duration was expressed as median number of days the symptom persisted. Solicited general symptoms assessed include fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, myalgia, shivering and fever.|During a 7-day follow-up period (Day 0-6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, on subjects aged above 6 years that had completed their symptom sheet for the respective vaccine dose only.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826117|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Above 6 Years Reported Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include arthralgia, fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, myalgia, shivering, sweating and fever. Any was defined as any symptom regardless of intensity; any fever was axillary temperature greater than or equal to 37.5 degrees celsius. Grade 3 was a symptom preventing normal everyday activity; grade 3 fever was axillary temperature above 39 degrees celsius. Related was any symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|During a 7-day follow-up period (Day 0-6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, on subjects aged above 6 years that had completed their symptom sheet for the respective vaccine dose only.||subjects|||Number
826118|NCT01196026|Secondary|Duration of Any Solicited General Symptom Experienced by Subjects Less Than 6 Years Old|Duration was expressed as median number of days the symptom persisted. Solicited general symptoms assessed include diarrhoea, drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever.|During a 7-day follow-up period (Day 0-6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, on subjects aged less than 6 years that had completed their symptom sheet for the respective vaccine dose only.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826119|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Less Than 6 Years Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include diarrhoea, drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever. Any was defined as any symptom regardless of intensity; any fever was axillary temperature greater than or equal to 37.5 degrees celsius. Grade 3 was a symptom preventing normal everyday activity; grade 3 loss of appetite was not eating at all; grade 3 fever was axillary temperature above 39 degrees celsius. Related was any symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|During the 7 days (Days 0–6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, on subjects aged less than 6 years that had completed their symptom sheet for the respective vaccine dose only.||subjects|||Number
826120|NCT01196026|Secondary|Duration of Any Solicited Local Symptom|Duration was expressed as median number of days the symptom persisted. Solicited local symptoms assessed include: pain, redness and swelling.|During the 7 days (Days 0 – 6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, on subjects that had completed their symptom sheet and reported the respective symptom only.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826171|NCT01196104|Secondary|Week 16 Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second|Week 16 FEV1|Week 16|Safety Population, with data available at Week 16||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826172|NCT01196104|Secondary|Baseline Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1)|Baseline FEV1|Baseline|Safety Population||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826121|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed include: pain, redness and swelling. Any is any symptom regardless of intensity. Grade 3 was defined as a symptom that prevented normal activity.above 50 millimeter.|During the 7 days (Day 0 – 6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, on subjects that had completed their symptom sheet for the respective vaccine dose only.||subjects|||Number
826122|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroconverted for Serum Neutralising Antibodies Against H1N1 in Subjects Receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine|"Seroconverted subject was a subject with a minimum 4-fold increase in titer at post-vaccination for neutralizing antibody response.
Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains for subjects in groups receiving Fluarix vaccine and H1N1 strain for subjects in groups receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine."|Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at Month 6 were available.||subjects|||Number
826123|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroconverted for Serum Neutralising Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains in Subjects Receiving Fluarix|Seroconverted subject was a subject with a minimum 4-fold increase in titer at post-vaccination for neutralizing antibody response.|Day 28|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available. Analysis was done only on those groups receiving the Fluarix vaccine.||subjects|||Number
826124|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for Serum Neutralising Antibodies Against H1N1 in Subjects Receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine|Seropositivity was defined as antibody titers greater than or equal to 1:28. Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains for subjects in groups receiving Fluarix vaccine and H1N1 strain for subjects in groups receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine.|Day 0 and Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at Month 6 were available.||subjects|||Number
826125|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for Serum Neutralising Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains|Seropositivity was defined as antibody titers greater than or equal to 1:28.|Day 0 (for all groups) and Day 28 (for groups receiving Fluarix only)|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available. Analysis was done only on those groups receiving the Fluarix vaccine.||subjects|||Number
826126|NCT01196026|Secondary|Serum Neutralising Antibody Titers Against H1N1 in Subjects Receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine|Antibody titers were expressed as GMTs.] Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains for subjects in groups receiving Fluarix vaccine and H1N1 strain for subjects in groups receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine.|Day 0 and Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at Month 6 were available.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826127|NCT01196026|Secondary|Serum Neutralising Antibody Titers Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains|Antibody titers were expressed as Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs).|Day 0 (for all groups) and Day 28 (for groups receiving Fluarix only)|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available. Analysis was done only on those groups receiving the Fluarix vaccine.||titer||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826128|NCT01196026|Secondary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) in HI Antibody Titers Against H1N1 in Subjects Receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine|"MGI is defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination (Month 6) reciprocal HI titer to the pre-vaccination (Day 0) reciprocal HI titer.
Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains for subjects in groups receiving Fluarix vaccine and H1N1 strain for subjects in groups receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine."|Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at Month 6 were available.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826129|NCT01196026|Secondary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) in HI Antibody Titers Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains in All Subjects Receiving Fluarix Vaccine|MGI is defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination (Day 28) reciprocal HI titer to the pre-vaccination (Day 0) reciprocal HI titer. Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains.|Day 28|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available. Analysis was done only on those groups receiving the Fluarix vaccine.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826130|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected for HI Antibodies Against H1N1 in Subjects Receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with a serum HI titer greater than or equal to 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection. Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains for subjects in groups receiving Fluarix vaccine and H1N1 strain for subjects in groups receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine.|Day 0 and Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at Month 6 were available.||subjects|||Number
826131|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected for HI Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with a serum HI titer greater than or equal to 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection. Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains.|Day 0 (for all groups) and Day 28 (for groups receiving Fluarix only)|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available.||subjects|||Number
826132|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroconverted for HI Antibodies Against H1N1 in Subjects Receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine|"A seroconverted subject was defined as a subject that had either a pre-vaccination (Day 0) titer below 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titer.
Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains for subjects in groups receiving Fluarix vaccine and H1N1 strain for subjects in groups receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine."|Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at Month 6 were available.||subjects|||Number
826133|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroconverted for HI Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains in All Subjects Receiving Fluarix Vaccine|"A seroconverted subject was defined as a subject that had either a pre-vaccination (Day 0) titer below 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titer.
Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains."|Day 28|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available. Analysis was done only on those groups receiving the Fluarix vaccine.||subjects|||Number
826134|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for HI Antibodies Against H1N1 in Subjects Receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine|Seropositivity was defined as antibody titers greater than or equal to 1:10. Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains for subjects in groups receiving Fluarix vaccine and H1N1 strain for subjects in groups receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine.|Day 0 and Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at Month 6 were available.||subjects|||Number
826135|NCT01196026|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for HI Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains|Seropositivity was defined as antibody titers greater than or equal to 1:10. Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains.|Day 0 (for all groups) and Day 28 (for groups receiving Fluarix only)|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available.||subjects|||Number
826136|NCT01196026|Secondary|HI Antibody Titers Against H1N1 in Subjects Receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine|Antibody titers were expressed as GMTs. Vaccine strains included in the analysis were H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains for subjects in groups receiving Fluarix vaccine and H1N1 strain for subjects in groups receiving Havrix Junior Vaccine.|Day 0 and Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at Month 6 were available.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826137|NCT01196026|Secondary|HI Antibody Titers Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains|Antibody titers were expressed as GMTs. Vaccine strains included in the analysis were Flu A/CAL/7/09 H1N1 , FluB/Bri/60/08 Victoria, and Flu A/Vic/210/09 H3N2, further in this summary denoted as H1N1, Victoria and H3N2 strains, respectively.|Day 0 (for all groups) and Day 28 (for groups receiving Fluarix only)|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
826138|NCT01196026|Primary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) in HI Antibody Titers Against H1N1 in All Subjects Receiving Fluarix Vaccine|MGI is defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination (Day 28) reciprocal HI titer to the pre-vaccination (Day 0) reciprocal HI titer.|Day 28|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available. The data presented here are only for the Fluarix All Ages Group. Similar data for other groups will be presented as Secondary Outcome Measure.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826139|NCT01196026|Primary|Number of Subjects Seroconverted for HI Antibodies Against H1N1 in All Subjects Receiving Fluarix Vaccine|A seroconverted subject was defined as a subject that had either a prevaccination (Day 0) titer below 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titer.|Day 28|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available. The data presented here are only for the Fluarix All Ages Group. Similar data for other groups will be presented as Secondary Outcome Measure.||subjects|||Number
826140|NCT01196026|Primary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected for HI Antibodies Against H1N1 in All Subjects Receiving Fluarix Vaccine|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with a serum HI titer greater than or equal to 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection.|Day 0-28|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available. The data presented here are only for the Fluarix All Ages Group. Similar data for other groups will be presented as Secondary Outcome Measure.||subjects|||Number
826141|NCT01196026|Primary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for HI Antibodies Against H1N1 in All Subjects Receiving Fluarix Vaccine|Seropositivity was defined as antibody titers greater than or equal to 1:10.|Day 0-28|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available. The data presented here are only for the Fluarix All Ages Group. Similar data for other groups will be presented as Secondary Outcome Measure.||subjects|||Number
826142|NCT01196026|Primary|Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers Against H1N1 in All Subjects Receiving Fluarix Vaccine|Antibody titers were expressed as Geometric mean titers (GMTs).|Day 0 and 28|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data at day 28 were available. The data presented here are only for the Fluarix All Ages Group. Similar data for other groups will be presented as Secondary Outcome Measure.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826143|NCT01196052|Secondary|Disease-free Survival at Month 12|Disease-free survival was defined as the time from date of first protocol treatment for adjuvant patients or date of surgery for neoadjuvant patients to disease recurrence, occurrence of invasive contralateral breast cancer, other second primary cancer (excluding non-breast second primary), or death, whichever occurred first.|From the start of trastuzumab emtansine for adjuvant patients and from the date of surgery for neoadjuvant patients to 12 months later|"Safety-evaluable population: All participants who received at least 1 dose of trastuzumab emtansine.
Due to too few events, the analysis of disease-free survival was not performed."|||||
826173|NCT01196104|Secondary|Number of Cough Episodes Occuring Within 10 Minutes of Drug Inhalation||Baseline to Week 16|Safety Population||Cough episodes|||Number
826174|NCT01196104|Secondary|Number of Single Coughing Episodes|Total number of times patients coughed only once|Baseline to Week 16|Safety Population||Cough episodes|||Number
826144|NCT01196052|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Pathological Complete Response|Pathological complete response was defined as the absence of invasive neoplastic cells at microscopic examination of the primary tumor and lymph nodes after surgery following primary systemic therapy. Pathological complete response was evaluated in participants treated with neoadjuvant therapy doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide-5-fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by 1 or more doses of trastuzumab emtansine and who underwent surgery.|Day of surgery|Efficacy analysis population: All participants who enrolled in the neoadjuvant setting and received surgery, after completing 4 cycles of trastuzumab emtansine treatment.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826145|NCT01196052|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Completed ≥ 95% of the Planned Radiotherapy Treatment With Concurrent Trastuzumab Emtansine Administration Without Significant (> 5 Days) Delay||From the start to the end of radiotherapy treatment (up to 51 weeks)|Safety-evaluable population: All participants who received at least 1 dose of trastuzumab emtansine. Only participants who received concurrent radiotherapy and who had radiotherapy dose information reported were included in the analysis.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826146|NCT01196052|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Completed the Planned Duration of Trastuzumab Emtansine Treatment|Participants were to receive up to a total of 17 cycles of trastuzumab emtansine. If trastuzumab was given concurrently with either the optional docetaxel or optional radiation, then the number of 3-week cycles of trastuzumab therapy was subtracted from the planned 17 cycles of trastuzumab emtansine therapy.|From the start to the end of trastuzumab emtansine treatment (up to 51 weeks)|Safety-evaluable population: All participants who received at least 1 dose of trastuzumab emtansine.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826147|NCT01196052|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least 1 Adverse Event During Concurrent Hormonal Therapy With Trastuzumab Emtansine Treatment||From the start to the end of concurrent hormonal therapy (up to 51 weeks)|Safety-evaluable population: All participants who received at least 1 dose of trastuzumab emtansine. Only participants who received concurrent hormonal therapy were included in the analysis.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826148|NCT01196052|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least 1 Adverse Event During Concurrent Radiotherapy With Trastuzumab Emtansine Treatment||From the start to the end of concurrent radiotherapy (up to 51 weeks)|Safety-evaluable population: All participants who received at least 1 dose of trastuzumab emtansine. Only participants who received concurrent radiotherapy were included in the analysis.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826149|NCT01196052|Primary|Adverse Events, LVEF Function, and Deaths|The following percentages of participants are reported: At least 1 adverse event while receiving T-DM1; at least 1 serious adverse event while receiving T-DM1; an adverse event leading to discontinuation, dose delay, or dose reduction of trastuzumab emtansine treatment; symptomatic cardiac dysfunction; and asymptomatic decline in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). An asymptomatic LVEF decline was defined as a LVEF < 50% and a maximum decrease ≥ 10% from Baseline. The percentage of participants who died is reported.|From the start to the end of trastuzumab emtansine treatment (up to 51 weeks)|Safety-evaluable population: All participants who received at least 1 dose of trastuzumab emtansine.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826150|NCT01196052|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Cardiac Event Within 12 Weeks After the Start of Trastuzumab Emtansine Treatment|A cardiac event was defined as death from a cardiac cause or severe congestive failure (New York Heart Association [NYHA] Class III or IV) with a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of ≥ 10% from Baseline to an LVEF of < 50%.|Baseline to 12 weeks after the start of trastuzumab emtansine treatment|Cardiac-safety evaluable population: All participants who received at least 1 dose of T-DM1 and met either of the following 2 criteria: (1) Had an echocardiogram/multiple-gated acquisition assessment by 12 weeks after the first dose of T-DM1 or (2) discontinued study treatment because of cardiac toxicity prior to completion of 4 cycles of T-DM1.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826151|NCT01196078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Changes in FACT-L (Lung Symptoms) by Category of Change|The LCS consists of 7 items of the FACT-L (3 items relating to breathing/dyspnea, and 1 item each relating to cough, weight loss, appetite, and cognition). The LCS total score is the sum of the scores from the 7 items, each rated on a five-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). For clear thinking and good appetite, the higher score represented 'Improved'; for other subscales and questionnaires, the higher score represented 'Worsened'. For each FACT-L question, the response status was defined as down, up, or no change if the score at endpoint was smaller (score down), larger than (score up), or the same as (no change) that at baseline.|Baseline and End of study|Safety Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
826152|NCT01196078|Secondary|Changes in Quality of Life as Assessed by FACT-L (Lung Symptoms) Questionnaire|The LCS consists of 7 items of the FACT-L (3 items relating to breathing/dyspnea, and 1 item each relating to cough, weight loss, appetite, and cognition) rated on a five-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The LCS total score is the sum of the scores from the 7 items. For clear thinking and good appetite, the higher score represented 'Improved'; for other subscales and questionnaires, the higher score represented 'Worsened'. Missing data were replaced by the valid post-baseline assessment before. The change of FACT-L subscore was the change from baseline to endpoint. The LCS of FACT-L is an independently validated tool that measures the disease-related symptoms of lung cancer on an overall scale of 0 (most symptomatic) to 28 (asymptomatic).|Baseline and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and End of study|Safety Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826153|NCT01196078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Changes in Quality of Life as Measured by FACT Questionnaire Scores by Category of Change|The FACT and the FACT-L contain 4 general and 1 lung cancer symptom-specific subscale, including PWB, SWB, EWB, FWB, and the 8-item LCS that assess symptoms commonly reported by participants with lung cancer. For subscales of FWB and SWB, questionnaires of EWB, and additional concerns questions, the higher score represented 'Improved'. For other subscales and questionnaires, the higher score represented Worsened'. For PWB, FWB, SWB, and EWB scores and disease-specific subscale score, higher scores indicated a better outcome; a response of down, up, or no change was defined as a score change of ≤ -2 (score down), ≥ +2 (score up), or between these values.|Baseline and End of study|Safety Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
826154|NCT01196078|Secondary|Changes in Quality of Life as Measured by the FACT Questionnaire|The FACT Questionnaire contains 4 general and 1 lung cancer symptom-specific subscale, including PWB, SWB, EWB, FWB, and the 8-item LCS that assess symptoms commonly reported by participants with lung cancer. Each subscale was assessed by a five-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) to determine the quality of life. PWB, SWB and FWB scores ranged from 0-28 and EWB scores ranged from 0-24. LCS scores ranged from 0-36. For subscales of FWB and SWB, questionnaires of EWB, and additional concerns questions, the higher score represented 'Improved'. For other subscales and questionnaires, the higher score represented 'Worsened'. Missing data were replaced by the valid post-baseline assessment before. For PWB, FWB, SWB, and EWB scores and disease-specific subscale score, response of down, up or no change were defined as score changes of less than or equal to (≤)2, greater than or equal to (≥)+2, or between these values.|Baseline and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and End of study|Safety Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826155|NCT01196078|Secondary|Quality of Life as Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Questionnaire|The FACT Questionnaire contains 4 general and 1 lung cancer symptom-specific subscale, including Physical Well-Being (PWB), Social/family Well-Being (SWB), Emotional Well-Being (EWB), Functional Well-Being (FWB), and the 8-item Lung Cancer Subscale (LCS) that assess symptoms commonly reported by participants with lung cancer. Each subscale was assessed by a five-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) to determine the quality of life. PWB, SWB and FWB scores ranged from 0-28 and EWB scores ranged from 0-24. LCS scores ranged from 0-36. For subscales of FWB and SWB, questionnaires of EWB, and additional concerns questions, the higher score represented 'Improved'. For other subscales and questionnaires, the higher score represented 'Worsened'. Missing data were replaced by the valid post-baseline assessment before. The FACT-L score ranges from 0 to 136, with higher scores indicating better quality of life.|Baseline and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and End of study|Safety Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826156|NCT01196078|Secondary|Overall Survival: Time to Event|Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death. Participants who were alive at the time of the analysis were censored at the date of the last follow-up assessment. Participants without follow-up assessment were censored at the day of last dose and participants with no post baseline information were censored at the time of randomization. Overall median time to event was assessed for the population that experienced an event.|Day 1 of Cycles 1 through 6 to date of death or date of last follow-up assessment|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826157|NCT01196078|Secondary|Overall Survival: Percentage of Participants With an Progressive Disease or Death|Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death. Participants who were alive at the time of the analysis were censored at the date of the last follow-up assessment. Participants without follow-up assessment were censored at the day of last dose and participants with no postbaseline information were censored at the time of randomization. Progressive disease was defined per RECIST as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.|Day 1 of Cycles 1 through 6 to date of death or date of last follow-up assessment|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
826158|NCT01196078|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|Time to disease progression was defined as the interval between the day of randomization and the first documentation of progressive disease or death.|Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, and 5 or first documentation of progressive disease or death|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826159|NCT01196078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression|Progressive disease was defined using RECIST as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.|Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, and 5 or first documentation of progressive disease or death|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
826160|NCT01196078|Secondary|Duration of Response Among Participants Who Achieved Either a CR or PR|Duration of response was defined similarly for complete and partial responders. Complete response lasted from the date the complete response was first recorded to the date on which progressive disease was first noted or date of death. Partial response lasted from the date of partial response to the date of the first observation of progressive disease or date of death.|Screening, Day 1 of Cycles 3 and 5, every 4th cycle during post-study treatment, and every 3 cycles during follow-up|ITT population; only participants with a response (CR or PR) were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826161|NCT01196078|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Disease Control|Disease control was defined as achieving a best overall response of CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) according to RECIST criteria. Participants with tumor assessment unevaluable were viewed as uncontrolled.|Screening, Day 1 of Cycles 3 and 5 and at End of treatment up to 1 year|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
826162|NCT01196078|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Best Overall Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions. PR was defined as at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD. Participants experiencing either a CR or PR according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) were classified as responders. Participants with tumour assessment unevaluable were viewed as non-responders.|Screening, Day 1 of Cycles 3 and 5 and at End of treatment up to 1 year|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
826163|NCT01196104|Secondary|Week 20 (Follow-up) Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity|Week 20 (Follow-up, 4 weeks after discontinuation of study treatment) Change from Baseline in FVC|Baseline to Week 20|Safety Population, with data available at Week 20||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826164|NCT01196104|Secondary|Week 20 (Follow-up) Forced Vital Capacity|Week 20 (Follow-up, 4 weeks after discontinuation of study treatment) FVC|Week 20|Safety Population, with data available at Week 20||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826165|NCT01196104|Secondary|Week 16 Change From Baseline Forced Vital Capacity|Week 16 Change from Baseline FVC|Baseline to Week 16|Safety Population, with data available at Week 16||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826166|NCT01196104|Secondary|Week 16 Forced Vital Capacity|Week 16 FVC|Week 16|Safety Population, with data available at Week 16||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826167|NCT01196104|Secondary|Baseline Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|Baseline FVC|Baseline|Safety Population||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826177|NCT01196104|Secondary|Mild or Moderate Hypoglycemic Event Rate|"Mild or moderate hypoglycemic event rate, ie, total number of events divided by subject-months of observation
Nonsevere hypoglycemia is defined as a subject:
SMBG levels < 70 mg/dL AND/OR
Symptoms that are relieved by the self-administration of carbohydrates"|Baseline to Week 16|Safety Population||Events / subject-month|||Number
826178|NCT01196104|Secondary|Severe Hypoglycemic Event Rate|"Severe hypoglycemic event rate, ie, total number of events divided by subject-months of observation
Severe hypoglycemia is defined as a subject who requires the assistance of another individual (not merely requested) and either:
SMBG levels ≤ 36 mg/dL OR
There is a prompt response to the administration of carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative measures"|Baseline to Week 16|Safety Population||Events / subject-month|||Number
826179|NCT01196104|Secondary|Total Number of Cough Episodes|Total number of times patients coughed once, intermittently or continuously (inclusive)|Baseline to Week 16|Safety Population||Cough episodes|||Number
826180|NCT01196104|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction as Assessed by Subject Treatment and Health Outcomes Questionnaires|Not analyzed due to early termination of the trial.|Change from baseline to 16 weeks||||||
826181|NCT01196104|Secondary|Changes in Body Weight at 16 Weeks|Not analyzed due to early termination of the trial.|Change from baseline to 16 weeks||||||
826182|NCT01196104|Secondary|Glycemic Excursions and Variability as Assessed Through Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM)|Not analyzed due to early termination of the trial.|Change from baseline to 16 weeks||||||
826183|NCT01196104|Secondary|Seven-point Glucose at Randomization and Throughout the Study|Not analyzed due to early termination of the trial.|Change from baseline to 16 weeks||||||
826184|NCT01196104|Secondary|Glycomark and Fructosamine Levels Measured Throughout the Study|Not analyzed due to early termination of the trial.|Change from baseline to 16 weeks||||||
826185|NCT01196104|Secondary|Comparison of Post-prandial Glucose (PPG) Levels at Randomization and Throughout the Study|Not analyzed due to early termination of the trial.|Change from baseline to 16 weeks||||||
826186|NCT01196104|Secondary|Comparison of Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Levels at Randomization and Throughout the Study|Not analyzed due to early termination of the trial.|Change from baseline to 16 weeks||||||
826187|NCT01196104|Secondary|To Evaluate the Effect of Each Treatment on HbA1c|Not analyzed due to early termination of the trial.|Change from baseline to 16 weeks||||||
826188|NCT01196104|Primary|Change in HbA1c (%) From Baseline to Week 16|Change from Baseline in glycated hemoglobin at Week 16|Baseline to Week 16|Safety Population, participants with data available at Baseline and Week 16||Percentage of total hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
826189|NCT01196377|Primary|%FEV1|% predicted forced expiratory volume in 1-second as a measure of airway obstruction|2 hours|||%-predicted||Full Range|Mean
826190|NCT01196429|Secondary|Objective Tumor Response|Complete and Partial Tumor Response by RECIST 1.1. RECIST1.1 is a multi-page paper, and response is defined in the protocol across multiple pages, so it is not practical to define response here.|Every other cycle for first 6 months; then every 3 months for two years; then every six months for the next three years; and at any other time if clinically indicated based on symptoms or physical signs suggestive of progressive disease or rising serum tu|Eligible and Treated Patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
826191|NCT01196429|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the duration of time from study entry to time of death or the date of last contact.|Every cycle during treatment, then every 3 months for the first 2 years, then every six months for the next three years and then annually for the next 5 years.|Eligible and Treated Patients||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
826192|NCT01196429|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the period from study entry until disease progression, death, or the last date of contact. Progression was based on RECIST 1.1|Tumor scans were done every other cycle for the first 6 months; then every 3 months x 2; then every 6 mths thereafter; and at any other time if clinically indicated based on symptoms or physical signs suggestive of progressive disease or rising tumor mark|Eligible and Treated Patients||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
826193|NCT01196429|Primary|Frequency and Severity of Toxicity|Grade 3 or higher adverse events were graded by CTC AE v4|Each cycle while on treatment|Eligible and Treated Patients||participants|||Number
826194|NCT01196429|Primary|Compare Progression-free Survival in Newly Diagnosed Stage III or IV Clear Cell Ovarian Cancer Patients in Patients in the U.S. and Worldwide (Outside of Japan) Versus Patients in Japan.|"Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined s the period from study entry until disease progression, death, or the last date of contact. Progression was based on Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1. Outcome measure data not reported because protocol stated If the combination is declared active (i.e. HO is rejected) in one or both of the populations, the two populations will be compared with respect to PFS using a logrank test stratified by optimal/suboptimal disease status. The combination was not declared active in either population."|Tumor scans were done every other cycle for the first 6 months;then every 3 mnths x2;then every 6 mnths thereafter; and at any other time if clinically indicated based on symptoms or physical signs suggesting progressive dx or rising serum tumor marker le|"The protocol stated if the combination is declared active (i.e., HO is rejected) in one or both of the populations, the two populations will be compared with respect to PFS using a logrank test stratified by optimal/suboptimal disease status. The combination was not declared active in either population."|||||
826213|NCT01188655|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ASQoL at Week 12 and Week 24|ASQoL is a questionnaire that assesses disease-specific quality of life (QoL). It consists of 18 statements that are relevant to the physical and mental conditions for a participant with AS: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each statement is answered by the participant as a 'Yes' (scored as 1) or 'No' (scored as 0). All item scores are summed to give a total score. Total score can range from 0 (good QoL) to 18 (poor QoL).|Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826271|NCT01189136|Other Pre-specified|Questionnaire Data - Impression of Allocation|"Participants were asked to guess to which treatment arm they had been allocated (PTNS Sham or I Don't Know). Outcome was measured as the number of patients in each arm accurately determining their allocation."|30 minutes|Number||number of participants|||Number
826195|NCT01196429|Primary|Proportion of Patients Who Are Alive and Progression-free for at Least 12 Months After Study Entry in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Stage III or IV Clear Cell Ovarian Cancer in the Following Populations: Patients in the U.S./Worldwide and Japan|Progression of target lesions (TL) was a >=20% increase in the sum of the diameters of TL, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (including the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must demonstrate an absolute increase >=5 mm. Progression of non-target lesions (NTL) as defined as appearance of >=1 new lesions or unequivocal progression of existing NTL. Unequivocal progression should not normally trump target lesion status; it must be representative of overall disease status change, not a single lesion increase. Clear progression of only NTL is exceptional, but the opinion of the treating physician should prevail in such circumstances, and the progression status should be later confirmed by a review panel (or Principal Investigator). Progression of TL, unequivocal progression of NTL, or new lesions constitutes progression. This description is abbreviated; see the RECIST 1.1 manuscript for further details.|Tumor scans were done every other cycle for the first 6 months; then every 3 months x2; then every 6 months thereafter; and at any other time if clinically indicated or signs suggestive of progressive disease or rising levels; for up to 5 years.|Eligible and Treated Patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
826196|NCT01196442|Secondary|Effect of Electric Stimulation Pain Therapy on Other Non-pain Symptoms at Month 3|Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN)-20. The CIPN-20 has 3 subscales: a sensory, motor, and autonomic subscale. There are 17 questions that are rated 0-not at all to 3-very much. Scales are summed. Final score ranges from 0-51, 0 as the best possible outcome and 51 as the worst.|Month 3|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826197|NCT01196442|Secondary|Effect of Electric Stimulation Pain Therapy n Other Non-pain Symptoms at Month 2|Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN)-20. The CIPN-20 has 3 subscales: a sensory, motor, and autonomic subscale. There are 17 questions that are rated 0-not at all to 3-very much. Scales are summed. Final score ranges from 0-51, 0 as the best possible outcome and 51 as the worst.|month 2|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826198|NCT01196442|Secondary|Effect of Electric Stimulation Pain Therapy on Other Non-pain Symptoms at Month 1|Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN)-20. The CIPN-20 has 3 subscales: a sensory, motor, and autonomic subscale. There are 17 questions that are rated 0-not at all to 3-very much. Scales are summed. Final score ranges from 0-51, 0 as the best possible outcome and 51 as the worst.|month 1|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826199|NCT01196442|Secondary|Effect of Electric Stimulation Pain Therapy on Other Non-pain Symptoms at Day 10|Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN)-20. The CIPN-20 has 3 subscales: a sensory, motor, and autonomic subscale. There are 17 questions that are rated 0-not at all to 3-very much. Scales are summed. Final score ranges from 0-51, 0 as the best possible outcome and 51 as the worst.|Day 10|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826200|NCT01196442|Secondary|Use of Medications Including Morphine Oral Dose Equivalents, Anti-depressants, and Neuroleptics|Record daily pain medication usage and convert all opioids to MOEDs (American Pain Society 2003). Compare the average daily use prior to day 1 to the average daily use day 30. Range is 0-none to 240-most|From day 1 to day 30|||doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
826201|NCT01196442|Secondary|Effect of Electrical Stimulation Pain Therapy on Other Non-pain Symptoms at Day 1|Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN)-20. The CIPN-20 has 3 subscales: a sensory, motor, and autonomic subscale. There are 17 questions that are rated 0-not at all to 3-very much. Scales are summed. Final score ranges from 0-51, 0 as the best possible outcome and 51 as the worst.|Day 1|Participants at Day 1||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826202|NCT01196442|Primary|Change in Pain Score From Day 1 to Day 10|"Change in Brief Pain Inventory (Now)Scale
1 (none) to 5 (complete interference)"|From day 1 to day 10|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826203|NCT01188603|Primary|Flibanserin: Tmax,ss|Median of the tmax,ss of Flibanserin|8 days|All patients with values for the time from dosing to the maximum measured concentration of flibanserin in plasma after single dose at steady state (tmax,ss)||h||Full Range|Median
826204|NCT01188603|Primary|Flibanserin: Cmax,ss|Geometric mean of the Cmax,ss of Flibanserin|8 days|All patients with values for the maximum concentration of Flibanserin in plasma after single dose at steady state (Cmax,ss)||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826205|NCT01188603|Primary|Flibanserin: Cmax (Peak Concentration)|Geometric mean of the Cmax of Flibanserin|8 days|All patients with values for the maximum concentration of Flibanserin in plasma after single dose (Cmax)||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826206|NCT01188603|Primary|Flibanserin: AUC τ,ss|Geometric mean of the AUC τ,ss of Flibanserin|8 days|All patients with values for the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over a dosing interval τ at steady state (AUC τ,ss)||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826207|NCT01188603|Primary|Flibanserin: Area Under the Curve; AUC_0-∞|Geometric mean of the AUC_0-∞ of Flibanserin|8 days|||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826208|NCT01188655|Secondary|Spine Agility Function by Ott Test|The Ott index determines the agility of the thoracic spine.|Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
826209|NCT01188655|Secondary|Spine Agility Function by Schober Test|Schober test determines agility of lumbar spine. It measures participant’s ability to flex the lower back. Examiner makes a mark at fifth lumbar vertebra (L5); places 1 finger 5 cm below and another 10 cm above the mark. Participant is asked to touch the toes. Examiner measures the increase in distance between 2 fingers.|Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
826210|NCT01188655|Secondary|Mean Occiput-to-wall Distance at Week 12 and Week 24||Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
826211|NCT01188655|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Without Peripheral Arthritis||Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
826214|NCT01188655|Secondary|Mean Duration of Morning Stiffness|Duration of morning stiffness is defined as the time elapsed when participant woke up in the morning and was able to resume normal activities without stiffness in minutes (If none was present = 0; If morning stiffness was continuing, average of duration of stiffness over the past 3 days was reported; If stiffness persisted the entire day, 1440 minutes (24h x 60 minutes) was recorded).|Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
826215|NCT01188655|Secondary|Physician's Global Assessment Visual Analog Scale at Weeks 12 and 24|Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, with 0 mm= no disease activity.|Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
826216|NCT01188655|Secondary|Participant's Global Assessment Visual Analog Scale at Weeks 12 and 24|Measured using a 100mm VAS ranging from 0=very good to 100=very bad.|Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826217|NCT01188655|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the BASFI at Weeks 12 and 24|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826218|NCT01188655|Secondary|Change From Baseline in BASDAI at Week 12 and 24|BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of 0-10 (0=none and 10=very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10.|Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826219|NCT01188655|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving BASDAI 40 Response at Week 24|BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of 0-10 (0=none and 10=very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10. Participants who achieved a decrease of 40 percent or more from baseline to the following visits are called as responders.|Week 24|Safety population: all participants who recieved at least one dose of study medication during the study period, n equals number of participants analyzed at the given time point||Percentage of participants|||Number
826220|NCT01188668|Secondary|Plasma Dehydro-aripiprazole (Metabolite) Concentration Versus Time Summary: Aripiprazole 5mg, DVS SR 100 mg, Aripiprazole 5 mg|Summary statistics were to be calculated by setting concentration values below the lower limit of quantification (LLQ = 0.100 ng/mL) to zero. Summary statistics were not to be presented if number of observations above lower limit of quantification (NALQ) = 0.|Period 1 / Day 1 and Period 2 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing|PK concentration analysis population: all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 concentration in at least 1 treatment period. Period 2 / Day 1 = Day 1 of Aripiprazole dosing (Period 2 / Day 7) within the DVS SR, Aripiprazole coadministration dosing period.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
826221|NCT01188668|Secondary|Plasma Aripiprazole Concentration Versus Time Summary: Aripiprazole 5mg, DVS SR 100 mg + Aripiprazole 5 mg|Summary statistics were to be calculated by setting concentration values below the lower limit of quantification (LLQ = 0.100 ng/mL) to zero. Summary statistics were not to be presented if number of observations above lower limit of quantification (NALQ) = 0.|Period 1 / Day 1 and Period 2 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing|PK concentration analysis population: all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 concentration in at least 1 treatment period. Period 2 / Day 1 = Day 1 of Aripiprazole dosing (Period 2 / Day 7) within the DVS SR, Aripiprazole coadministration dosing period.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
826222|NCT01188668|Secondary|Dehydro-aripiprazole (Metabolite) Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR||Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|PK parameter analysis population. Data was insufficient for analysis; not analyzable.||liters||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826223|NCT01188668|Secondary|Dehydro-aripiprazole (Metabolite) Apparent Clearance (CL/F) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood calculated as (Dose/AUCinf).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|PK parameter analysis population. Data was insufficient for analysis; not analyzable.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826224|NCT01188668|Secondary|Dehydro-aripiprazole (Metabolite) Terminal Half-life (t 1/2) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Terminal half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|PK parameter analysis population. N=Number of participants contributing to the mean.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
826237|NCT01188772|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Developed Resistance to Sofosbuvir|Resistance monitoring was completed in all subjects who received sofosbuvir and who had non-response, viral rebound, virologic breakthrough, or HCV RNA plateaus between Day 0 and Week 24.|Baseline to Week 12|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set who received a regimen containing sofosbuvir were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
826225|NCT01188668|Secondary|Dehydro-aripiprazole (Metabolite) Time for Cmax (Tmax) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Time for maximum observed plasma concentration.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||hours||Full Range|Median
826226|NCT01188668|Secondary|Dehydro-aripiprazole (Metabolite) Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR||Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826227|NCT01188668|Secondary|Dehydro-aripiprazole (Metabolite) Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUCinf) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Dehydro-aripiprazole is a metabolite of Aripiprazole. Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|PK parameter analysis population. N=Number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826228|NCT01188668|Secondary|Aripiprazole Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Calculated as Dose / (AUCinf * kel); where kel=terminal phase rate constant.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|PK parameter analysis population. N=Number of participants contributing to the mean.||liters||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826229|NCT01188668|Secondary|Aripiprazole Apparent Clearance (CL/F) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood calculated as (Dose/AUCinf); measured as milliliters per minute (mL/min).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|PK parameter analysis population. N=Number of participants contributing to the mean.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826230|NCT01188668|Secondary|Aripiprazole Terminal Half-life (t 1/2) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Terminal half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|PK parameter analysis population. N=Number of participants contributing to the mean.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
826231|NCT01188668|Secondary|Aripiprazole Time for Cmax (Tmax) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Time for maximum observed plasma concentration.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|PK parameter analysis population. N=Number of participants contributing to the median.||hours||Full Range|Median
826232|NCT01188668|Secondary|Aripiprazole Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Cmax measured as nanograms per milliliters (ng/mL).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|PK parameter analysis population. N=Number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826233|NCT01188668|Primary|Aripiprazole Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUCinf) Following Aripiprazole Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞); measured as nanograms multiplied by hours divided by milliliters (ng*hr/mL).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, and 312 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours after dosing; also 0 hour Period 2 / Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and Day 20|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population: all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. N=Number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826234|NCT01188681|Secondary|Response Per NCI Criteria|Overall response rate per National Cancer Institute (NCI) Working group criteria.|1 and 2 months after end of treatment, then every 3 months until disease progression, death, initiation of new therapy, study withdrawal, or 2 years|Safety data for all patients who received any study drug and efficacy data for randomized patients who received some study treatment and have some post baseline data are presented here.||percentage of patients|||Number
826235|NCT01188681|Primary|Response Per International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (IWCLL) Criteria|Patients had full clinical response assessment monthly during treatment, at the end of treatment (EOT) visit, 30 and 60 days after the EOT visit, and subsequently every 3 months until the earliest of progression of CLL, death, initiation of new therapy, withdrawal from the study, or completion of 18 months of follow-up evaluations. Clinical response assessment included physical examination with measurement of spleen, liver, and lymph nodes, disease-related symptoms, and laboratory measurements, specifically complete blood count (CBC) with differential.|1 and 2 months after end of treatment, then every 3 months until disease progression, death, initiation of new therapy, study withdrawal, or 2 years|Treated patients||percentage of patients|||Number
826236|NCT01188694|Primary|PTSD Symptom Severity-Interview (PSS-I)|PTSD Symptom Scale - Interview Version, higher scores represent higher PTSD severity (range 0 - 51)|Pre-treatment, post-treatment (4 weeks from pre-), 1-month follow-up (from post-), and 3-month follow-ups (from post-)|Intent to Treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826238|NCT01188772|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics of GS-331007 (AUCtau at Day 29)|The pharmacokinetics of sofosbuvir metabolite GS-331007 were analyzed as the the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve over the dosing interval (AUCtau) at Day 29. Blood samples were collected at 1, 2, and 4 hours postdose for all participants, and at 8 and 12 hours postdose for participants enrolled at selected sites.|1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours postdose|Participants who had measurements of pharmacokinetic parameters at Day 29 were analyzed.||ng•h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826239|NCT01188772|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics of GS-331007 (AUCtau at Day 15)|The pharmacokinetics of sofosbuvir metabolite GS-331007 were analyzed as the the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve over the dosing interval (AUCtau) at Day 15. Blood samples were collected at 1, 2, and 4 hours postdose for all participants, and at 8 and 12 hours postdose for participants enrolled at selected sites.|1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours postdose|Participants who had measurements of pharmacokinetic parameters at Day 15 were analyzed.||ng•h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826240|NCT01188772|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics of GS-331007 (AUCtau at Day 8)|The pharmacokinetics of sofosbuvir metabolite GS-331007 were analyzed as the the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve over the dosing interval (AUCtau) at Day 8. Blood samples were collected at 1, 2, and 4 hours postdose for all participants, and at 8 and 12 hours postdose for participants enrolled at selected sites.|1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours postdose|Participants who had measurements of pharmacokinetic parameters at Day 8 were analyzed.||ng•h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826241|NCT01188772|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics of GS-331007 (Cmax at Day 29)|The pharmacokinetics of sofosbuvir metabolite GS-331007 were analyzed as the Cmax at Day 29. Blood samples were collected at 1, 2, and 4 hours postdose for all participants, and at 8 and 12 hours postdose for participants enrolled at selected sites.|1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours postdose|Participants who had measurements of pharmacokinetic parameters at Day 29 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826242|NCT01188772|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics of GS-331007 (Cmax at Day 15)|The pharmacokinetics of sofosbuvir metabolite GS-331007 were analyzed as the Cmax at Day 15. Blood samples were collected at 1, 2, and 4 hours postdose for all participants, and at 8 and 12 hours postdose for participants enrolled at selected sites.|1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours postdose|Participants who had measurements of pharmacokinetic parameters at Day 15 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826243|NCT01188772|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics of GS-331007 (Cmax at Day 8)|The pharmacokinetics of sofosbuvir metabolite GS-331007 were analyzed as the maximum observed concentration of drug in plasma (Cmax) at Day 8. Blood samples were collected at 1, 2, and 4 hours postdose for all participants, and at 8 and 12 hours postdose for participants enrolled at selected sites.|1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours postdose|Participants who had measurements of pharmacokinetic parameters at Day 8 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826244|NCT01188772|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response at Post-treatment Week 12 (SVR12) and 24 (SVR24)|SVR12 and SVR24 were defined as HCV RNA below the limit of detection (< 15 IU/mL) at post-treatment Weeks 12 and 24, respectively.|Post-treatment Weeks 12 and 24|Safety Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
826245|NCT01188772|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virologic Response at the End of Treatment|End-of-treatment virologic response was defined as HCV RNA below the limit of detection (< 15 IU/mL) at the last on-treatment visit.|Week 48 (genotype 1) or Week 12 (genotype 2/3)|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed. One participant in the Sofosbuvir 400 mg (Genotype 2/3) Group was lost to follow up before the end of treatment and is not included in this analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
826246|NCT01188772|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Extended Rapid Virologic Response|Extended rapid virologic response was defined as HCV RNA below the limit of detection (< 15 IU/mL) at Week 4 (Day 29) which was maintained through Week 12.|Week 4 to Week 12|Safety Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
826247|NCT01188772|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Early Virologic Response at Week 12|Complete early virologic response was defined as HCV RNA below the limit of detection (< 15 IU/mL) at Week 12|Week 12|Safety Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
826248|NCT01188772|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Rapid Virologic Response at Week 4|Rapid virologic response was defined as HCV RNA below the limit of detection (< 15 IU/mL) at Week 4 (Day 29)|Week 4|Safety Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
826249|NCT01188772|Secondary|Change in HCV RNA From Baseline to Week 12||Baseline to Week 12|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826250|NCT01188772|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced Adverse Events During the Sofosbuvir Treatment Period|Adverse events (AEs) occurring during the sofosbuvir treatment period and for 30 days following the last dose of sofosbuvir were summarized across the participant population. A participant was counted once if they had a qualifying event.|Baseline to Week 12 plus 30 days|Safety Analysis Set: participants were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug||percentage of participants|||Number
826251|NCT01188798|Secondary|Assess Overall Survival, Relapse, Engraftment, and Regimen-related Morbidity and Estimating Cumulative Incidence of Pulmonary Adverse Events and Mucositis.|To characterize the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships of pentostatin in this patient population and to assess the relationship between pre-transplant minimal residual disease (MRD) and transplant outcomes.|42 days post- transplant|Insufficient data was available to answer objectives.|||||
826252|NCT01188798|Primary|Determining Whether the Hepatic Adverse Event-free (NCI Grades II-IV) Survival at Day 42 After an HLA-matched Transplant for Hematologic Malignancy Can be Improved by Using a GVHD Prophylaxis Regimen That Includes Pentostatin Rather Than MTX.|The hypothesis was that individuals receiving the drug pentostatin as GVHD prophylaxis would experience less severe hepatic toxicity than those receiving methotrexate as GVHD prophylaxis. The study is estimated to have sufficient statistical power to ascertain at least a 20% improvement in day 42 grade 2 or above hepatic toxicity-free survival in pentostatin recipients|42 days post-transplant|Insufficient data was available to answer objectives|||||
826253|NCT01188811|Secondary|Safety Measure: Adverse Events||adverse events recorded from baseline to year 2|Intention-to-treat analysis was performed on 27 participants in the lipoic acid group and 24 in the placebo group.||occurences|||Number
826254|NCT01188811|Secondary|Disability Measures: Mobility||Change in Timed 25 Foot Walk from baseline to year 2|Outliers were removed and intention-to-treat analysis was performed on data from 21 participants in the lipoic acid group and 17 in the placebo group.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
826256|NCT01188928|Secondary|Mean Percentage Change in PASI From Baseline to Week 8|At all treatment phase visits the (sub)investigator made an assessment of the extent and severity of clinical signs of the subject’s psoriasis using a modified PASI score (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) To make up the score, the three features of a psoriatic plaque redness, scaling and thickness are each assigned a number from 0 to 4 with 4 being worst. The extent of involvement of each region of the body is scored from 0 to 6. Adding up the scores give a range of 0 to 72.|Baseline and 8 weeks|||percentage of change in PASI||Standard Deviation|Mean
826257|NCT01188928|Secondary|Mean Percentage Change in PASI From Baseline to Week 4|At all treatment phase visits the (sub)investigator made an assessment of the extent and severity of clinical signs of the subject’s psoriasis using a modified PASI score (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) To make up the score, the three features of a psoriatic plaque redness, scaling and thickness are each assigned a number from 0 to 4 with 4 being worst. The extent of involvement of each region of the body is scored from 0 to 6. Adding up the scores give a range of 0 to 72.|Baseline and 4 weeks|||percentage of change in PASI||Standard Deviation|Mean
826258|NCT01188928|Primary|Controlled Disease According to the Investigator’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity (IGA) at Weeks 8|The IGA was chosen as the primary efficacy assessment. The primary endpoint is subjects with ‘Controlled disease’ according to the IGA. ‘Controlled disease’ is defined as clear or almost clear for subjects with moderate disease at baseline and clear for subjects with mild disease at baseline.|week 8|||participants|||Number
826259|NCT01188928|Primary|Controlled Disease According to the Investigator’s Global Assessment of Disease Severity (IGA) at Weeks 4|The IGA was chosen as the primary efficacy assessment. The primary endpoint is subjects with ‘Controlled disease’ according to the IGA. ‘Controlled disease’ is defined as clear or almost clear for subjects with moderate disease at baseline and clear for subjects with mild disease at baseline.|4 weeks|||participants|||Number
826260|NCT01188967|Secondary|Number of Participants With 7-day, Point-prevalence Tobacco Abstinence 2-weeks After Discontinuation of Double Blind Study Medications|"The hypothesis is that those assigned to GSK598809 will demonstrate a higher rate of biochemically-verified, 7-day, point-prevalence tobacco abstinence than those assigned to identical placebo two weeks after discontinuation of double blind study medications.
7-day, Point-prevalence tobacco abstinence was defined as not smoking for the 7 consecutive days before this visit after discontinuation of double blind study medications"|Week 10 of the study|7 participants completed this visit.||Participants|||Count of Participants
826261|NCT01188967|Secondary|7-day, Point-prevalence Tobacco Abstinence at the End of 6 Weeks Exposure to GSK598809/Placebo|The hypothesis is that those assigned to GSK598809 will demonstrate a higher rate of biochemically-verified, 7-day, point-prevalence tobacco abstinence than those assigned to identical placebo at the end of 6 weeks exposure to GSK598809/placebo.|Week 8 of the study|7 participants completed week 6 weeks exposure to GSK598809/placebo.||Participants|||Count of Participants
826262|NCT01188967|Secondary|7-day, Point-prevalence Tobacco Abstinence at the End of the First Week of Exposure to GSK598809/Placebo|The hypothesis is that those assigned to GSK598809 will demonstrate a higher rate of biochemically-verified, 7-day, point-prevalence tobacco abstinence than those assigned to identical placebo at the end of the first week of exposure to GSK598809/placebo.|Week 3 of the study|13 participants completed week 1 visit||Participants|||Count of Participants
826263|NCT01188967|Primary|4-week, Continuous Tobacco Abstinence at the End of the 6-week, Double Blind, Treatment Phase|The hypothesis is that those assigned to GSK598809 will demonstrate a higher rate of biochemically-verified, 4-week, continuous tobacco abstinence than those assigned to identical placebo at the end of the 6-week, double blind, treatment phase. Four-week continuous abstinence will be defined as Timeline Followback Calendar confirmation at study visit of smoking no cigarettes in the past 7 days, and expired air CO<10ppm for 4 consecutive weeks (the last 4 weeks of the randomized phase)|Week 8 of the study|9 participants completed this visit||Participants|||Count of Participants
826264|NCT01189032|Primary|Mean Change in Fluorescein Staining Score From Baseline|"Fluorescein staining was scored according to the protocol by Shimmura et al. The cornea was divided into 3 equal zones: upper, middle, and lower. Each zone had a staining score ranging between 0 and 3 points, with minimum and maximum total staining scores ranging between 0 and 9 points. 0 is better.
The degree of staining with Fluorescein dyes was scored as follows: 0 = no staining, 1= staining of less than half of the area, 2= staining of more than half of the area, 3= staining in the whole area."|Baseline and 4-week (discontinued(LOCF))|"Efficacy analysis was performed per protocol set (PPS). Excluded cases were 7 subjects (3 subjects in 3% group, 3 subjects in 1% group, and 1 subject in Placebo group).
The reason of exclusion: used the prohibited concomitant drug, dosing period shortage, number of doses non-compliance, or had no available efficacy data."||points||Standard Deviation|Mean
826265|NCT01189071|Secondary|Decreased Use of Narcotic and Anticholinergic Medication Use Postoperatively.|"Decreased use of narcotic and anticholinergic medication use postoperatively, compared to the standard of care patient"|end of study with 30 patients recruited|Three participants were recruited to the study, but no data were collected or analyzed as the author of the study left the institution and the study was terminated.|||||
826266|NCT01189071|Primary|Decreased Post Operative Ureteral Stent Pain, Evidenced by Decreased Pain Scores, Less ER Visits/Hospital Admits, or Patient Phone Calls for Stent Pain/Difficulty|"Decreased post operative ureteral stent pain, evidenced by decreased pain scores, less ER visits/hospital admits, or patient phone calls for stent pain/difficulty, as compared to the standard of care patient with no preop Darifenacin"|24 months|Three participants were recruited to the study, but no data were collected or analyzed as the author of the study left the institution and the study was terminated.|||||
826267|NCT01189110|Primary|Percentage of Self-reported Abstinence at 6 Weeks.|Percentage of study participants free from smoking at 6 weeks based on self-report (yes/no).|6 weeks|A middle-aged, US military veteran population not free of smoking (at least 10 cigarettes per day) and not currently in reciept of any other form of smoking cessation intervention.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826268|NCT01189123|Secondary|Antibody Responses|Hemagglutination inhibition antibody titers measured for standard vs high dose|2 years|||GMT||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826269|NCT01189123|Primary|Cellular Immune Response|comparison of CMI in high vs standard dose|3 years|A subset of samples were chosen for testing since not enough money was available to test samples from all subjects. The samples were divided by randomization group (blinded to study staff -- they were called group A or group B). From each group, samples were randomly pulled.||percentage of Stimulated cells||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826272|NCT01189136|Secondary|Amount of Improvement in Voiding Efficiency|Improvement of voiding efficiency, as measured by dividing the volume voided by the total volume (voided volume + retained volume) per participant. Each participant is evaluated separately, and the mean percentage of improvement was calculated for each arm.|30 minutes|||percentage of voided vol/total volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
826273|NCT01189136|Primary|Persistent Retention|Number of participants with persistent unsuccessful trial of void after the intervention|30 minutes|||participants|||Number
826274|NCT01189201|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, Vital Signs, ECG, Blood Chemistry and Assessment of Tolerability by the Investigator|Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, Vital Signs, ECG, Blood Chemistry and Assessment of Tolerability by the Investigator. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as Adverse Events. Time frame for adverse event was until the end-of-study examination.|Drug administration until next treatment period/end-of-study examination, up to 36 days|Treated set (TS) included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment.||participants|||Number
826275|NCT01189201|Primary|Linagliptin Formulation Comparison: Area Under the Curve 0 to 72 Hours (AUC0-72)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of linagliptin in plasma over the time interval from 0 to 72 hours.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826276|NCT01189201|Primary|Linagliptin Formulation Comparison: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of linagliptin in plasma.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826277|NCT01189201|Secondary|Linagliptin Formulation Comparison: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of linagliptin in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826278|NCT01189201|Primary|Empagliflozin Formulation Comparison: Area Under the Curve 0 to the Last Quantifiable Drug Plasma Concentration (AUC0-tz)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the last quantifiable drug plasma concentration.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826279|NCT01189201|Primary|Empagliflozin Formulation Comparison: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826280|NCT01189201|Secondary|Empagliflozin Formulation Comparison: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826281|NCT01189201|Primary|Linagliptin Fed vs Fasted: Area Under the Curve 0 to 72 Hours (AUC0-72)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of linagliptin in plasma over the time interval from 0 to 72 hours.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826721|NCT01200069|Secondary|Incidence of Headache & Severity Headache After ECT Treatment #3|Subject self reported numerical rating of incidence and severity of post ECT headache after treatment #3, 0=no pain, 2-4=moderate pain, 5-7=distressing severe pain, 8-9 very serious pain, 10=unbearable pain.|1 hour after treatment, 6 hours, 24 hours and 48 hours|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
826282|NCT01189201|Primary|Linagliptin Fed vs Fasted: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of linagliptin in plasma.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826283|NCT01189201|Secondary|Linagliptin Fed vs Fasted: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of linagliptin in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826284|NCT01189201|Primary|Empagliflozin Fed vs Fasted: Area Under the Curve 0 to the Last Quantifiable Drug Plasma Concentration (AUC0-tz)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the last quantifiable drug plasma concentration.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826285|NCT01189201|Primary|Empagliflozin Fed vs Fasted: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma, comparing fed with fasted.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826286|NCT01189201|Secondary|Empagliflozin Fed vs Fasted: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826287|NCT01189201|Secondary|Linagliptin: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of linagliptin in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826288|NCT01189201|Secondary|Empagliflozin: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826289|NCT01189201|Secondary|Linagliptin: Time From Last Dosing to Maximum Measured Concentration (Tmax)|Time from last dosing to the maximum measured concentration of linagliptin in plasma|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||hours||Full Range|Median
826290|NCT01189201|Secondary|Empagliflozin: Time From Last Dosing to Maximum Measured Concentration (Tmax)|Time from last dosing to the maximum measured concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma.|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||hours||Full Range|Median
826722|NCT01200069|Secondary|Incidence and Severity of Headache After ECT Treatment 2|Subject self reported numerical rating of incidence and severity of post ECT headache 0=no pain, 2-4=moderate pain, 5-7= distressing severe pain, 8-9= very severe pain, 10=unbearable pain.|1 hour, 6 hour, 24 hour and 48 hours|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
826291|NCT01189201|Primary|Linagliptin: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of linagliptin in plasma.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826292|NCT01189201|Primary|Empagliflozin: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826293|NCT01189201|Primary|Linagliptin: Area Under the Curve 0 to 72 Hours (AUC0-72)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of linagliptin in plasma over the time interval from 0 to 72 hours.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826294|NCT01189201|Primary|Empagliflozin: Area Under the Curve 0 to the Last Quantifiable Drug Plasma Concentration (AUC0-tz)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the last quantifiable drug plasma concentration.
In this endpoint, the “measured values“ show inter-individual variabilities, whereas the statistical analyses show intra-individual variabilities."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826295|NCT01189227|Secondary|Frequencies of Adverse Events as Assessed by the NCI CTCAE v4.0||From study entry through 3 months after the last treatment dose.||||||
826296|NCT01189227|Secondary|Frequencies of Selected Postoperative Surgical Complications and Other Adverse Events Within 30 Days of Surgery||Assessed within 30 days from the time of surgery||||||
826297|NCT01189227|Secondary|The Difference in R0 and Combined R0 + R1 Resection Rates Between the Two Arms.||Assessed at the time of surgery||||||
826298|NCT01189227|Secondary|Overall Survival||From study entry until the time of death or for a maximum of 5 years.||||||
826299|NCT01189227|Secondary|RFS of Patients Event-free||From study entry until the date of recurrence or for a maximum of 6 months.||||||
826300|NCT01189227|Primary|Recurrence-free Survival (RFS)|Time to recurrence or death|From study entry until the date of recurrence or death or for a maximum of 5 years.||||||
826301|NCT01189240|Secondary|Measurement of AUC24 to Determine the Effect of Bevacizumab on the Plasma Pharmacokinetics of RO4929097 Day 15|all pts at all dose levels (5,10 and 20mg) will have pks collected. 10 samples will be collected at various time points over a 24 hour time point. Samples will be collected on the 15th day of treatment during cycle 1.|24hr|Day 15. Only 4 pts samples were evaluable for AUC 24 at the10mg dose.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826302|NCT01189240|Secondary|Measurement of AUC24 to Determine the Effect of Bevacizumab on the Plasma Pharmacokinetics of RO4929097 Day 1|all pts at all dose levels (5,10 and 20mg) will have pks collected. 10 samples will be collected at various time points over a 24 hour time point. Samples will be collected on the first day of treatment during cycle 1.|24hrs|Day 1||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826303|NCT01189240|Secondary|Measurement of Cmax to Determine the Effect of Bevacizumab on the Plasma Pharmacokinetics of RO4929097 Day 15|all pts at all dose levels (5,10 and 20mg) will have pks collected. 10 samples will be collected at various time points over a 24 hour time point. Samples will be collected on the 15th day of treatment during cycle 1.|24hr|Day 15 only. Level 2 10mg only had 5pts with evaluable PKs at day 15||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826304|NCT01189240|Secondary|Measurement of Cmax to Determine the Effect of Bevacizumab on the Plasma Pharmacokinetics of RO4929097 Day 1|"all pts at all dose levels (5,10 and 20mg) will have pks collected. 10 samples will be collected at various time points over a 24 hour time point. Samples will be collected on the first day of treatment during cycle 1.
For initial cycle (Cycle 1) bevacizumab was not given until 2 or 3 days after all PKs samples of initial dose of RO49290977 was collected"|24 hrs|Day One only||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826305|NCT01189240|Secondary|Toxicity Description (Dose Limiting Toxicity-DLT) of Gamma-secretase Inhibitor RO4929097 in Combination With Bevacizumab|Pts were treated at escalating dose levels of RO4929097 (Dose levels: 5, 10 or 20 mg) for an observed evaluation at the end of a 4week period. 3 pts treated at each cohort. Pts must receive one dose of treatment to be evaluated for toxicity. Toxcity description associated with combination of RO4929097 and Bevacizumab|28 days - 1 cycle|DLT Defintion, must be related to RO and/or Bev: ANC </= 500/μL or second time ANC <1,000/μL; PLTs </= 25,000/μL or second time platelets <50,000/μL; Febrile neutropenia;Thrombocytopenic bleeding (platelets <50,000/μL and with clinically significant bleeding); Delay of treatment > 14 days ;grade 3 or 4 non-hematological toxicity (some exceptions)||participants|||Number
826344|NCT01189500|Secondary|N-desmethyl-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Time for Cmax (Tmax) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Time for maximum observed plasma concentration.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the median.||hours||Full Range|Median
826306|NCT01189240|Primary|Maximum-tolerated Dose and the Recommended Phase II Dose of Gamma-secretase Inhibitor RO4929097 in Combination With Bevacizumab Determined by Dose-limiting Toxicity Rate (Phase I)|Pts were treated at escalating dose levels of RO4929097 (Dose levels: 5, 10 or 20 mg) for an observed evaluation at the end of a 4week period. 3 pts treated at each cohort if less than or equal to 33% dose will be escalated. Pts must receive one dose of treatment to be evaluated for toxicity. A standard 3+3 dose escalation method will be used|28 days|RO4929097 Days 1-3 weekly (doses 5,10, 20 mg) + Bev 10mg/kg IV q2 wks - cycle 28 days. 3+3 dose escalation method will be used. Target DLT is > or equal to 33%||mg|||Number
826307|NCT01189279|Secondary|Number of Patients With an at Least 1-Grade Severity Increase in Local Scalp Tolerability by Dermatologist Assessment|Local scalp tolerability by dermatologist assessment is based on a 4-point scale (0=None, 1=Mild, 2=Moderate, and 3=Severe) for 5 symptoms (dryness/scaling, edema, erythema, folliculitis, and pigmentation). An at least 1-grade increase at any timepoint from baseline indicates a worsening of symptoms.|Baseline, 20 Days|Safety Population: all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication||Patients|||Number
826308|NCT01189279|Secondary|Number of Patients With an at Least 1-Grade Severity Increase in Local Scalp Tolerability by Patient Assessment|Local scalp tolerability by patient assessment is based on a 4-point scale (0=None, 1=Mild, 2=Moderate, and 3=Severe) for 3 symptoms (burning, itching, and stinging). An at least 1-grade increase from baseline at any timepoint indicates a worsening of symptoms.|Baseline, 20 Days|Safety Population: all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication||Patients|||Number
826309|NCT01189279|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings|An ECG is a tracing of the heart's electrical activity over time in waves with points identified at P, Q, R, S, and T [measured in milliseconds (ms)], as well as the heart rate [measured in beats per minute (bpm)]. Clinically significant abnormal results include maximum post-treatment QTcB>500 ms, maximum post-treatment QTcF>500 ms, maximum post-treatment QT interval >500 ms, PR interval 25% increase from baseline and >200 ms, QRS interval 25% increase from baseline and >100 ms, heart rate 25% increase from baseline and >100 bpm, and heart rate 25% decrease from baseline and <50 bpm.|17 Days|Safety Population: all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication||Percentage of Patients|||Number
826310|NCT01189279|Primary|Maximum Plasma Level (Cmax) Following Multiple Doses of Bimatoprost|Cmax is the maximum plasma level following multiple doses of bimatoprost. Plasma is the fluid portion of the blood in which the cells are suspended.|17 Days|Per Protocol: all subjects with no major protocol deviations||Picograms/Milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
826311|NCT01189279|Primary|Maximum Plasma Level (Cmax) Following a Single Dose of Bimatoprost|Cmax is the maximum plasma level following a single dose of bimatoprost. Plasma is the fluid portion of the blood in which the cells are suspended.|Day 1|Per Protocol: all subjects with no major protocol deviations||Picograms/Milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
826312|NCT01189292|Secondary|Necessary Anesthesiological Medication|Compare the amount of necessary anesthesiologic medication during the operation between the treatment (dexamethasone) and the control (saline) group|measured from beginning of anaesthesia to end of anaesthesia|||milligram||Standard Deviation|Mean
826313|NCT01189292|Secondary|Length of Hospital Stay|Compare the lengths of hospital stay between the treatment (dexamethasone) and the control (saline) group|Difference between day of admission and day of discharge|intention to treat||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
826314|NCT01189292|Secondary|Postoperative Pain After Physical Stress|"Compare grade of pain between the treatment (dexamethasone) and the control (saline) group
Pain was measured using a verbal rating scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 in steps of 1
before obtaining the pain rating, patients were asked to turn their heads (physical stress)"|4 and 8 hours after surgery|intention to treat analysis||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826315|NCT01189292|Secondary|Degree of Post Operative Nausea and Vomiting|"mild nausea:......single administration of an antiemetic drug
severe nausea: repeated administration of antiemetic drugs
vomiting:...........at least one vomiting event"|8 hours after surgery|intention to treat||participants|||Number
826316|NCT01189292|Secondary|Degree of Post Operative Nausea and Vomiting|"mild nausea:......single administration of an antiemetic drug
severe nausea: repeated administration of antiemetic drugs
vomiting:...........at least one vomiting event"|4 hours after surgery|intention to treat||participants|||Number
826317|NCT01189292|Secondary|Incidence of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting|"Compare the postoperative recovery, as determined by postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after preoperative application of single-dose dexamethasone versus saline in patients undergoing partial or total thyroidectomy (primary end-point)
any PONV event within 48 hours after surgery
PONV was measured at 4, 8, 16, 24, 32 and 48 hours after surgery"|within 48 hours after surgery (PP)|per protocol analysis||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826318|NCT01189292|Primary|Incidence of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting|"Compare the postoperative recovery, as determined by postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after preoperative application of single-dose dexamethasone versus saline in patients undergoing partial or total thyroidectomy (primary end-point)
any PONV event within 48 hours after surgery
PONV was measured at 4, 8, 16, 24, 32 and 48 hours after surgery"|within 48 hours after surgery|intention to treat analysis||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826319|NCT01189370|Secondary|Overall Number of Participants That Had Disease Progression on Study|Disease Progression as defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria.|26 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
826320|NCT01189370|Primary|Number of Participants Who Could Tolerate Each Dose Level|Tolerability will be defined as successful completion of the dose level without experiencing Grade 3 or 4 toxicity.|12 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
826321|NCT01189435|Primary|To Examine the Objective Response Rate (ORR) of Single-agent Erlotinib|in recurrent EGFR-mutant lung cancer, given to patients who previously received adjuvant erlotinib or gefitinib|2 years||||||
826342|NCT01189500|Secondary|N-desmethyl-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Apparent Clearance (CL/F) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood calculated as (Dose/AUCinf); measured as milliliters per minute (mL/min).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. Data was insufficient for analysis; not analyzable.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826322|NCT01189461|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Score at Week 48 (End of Treatment)|VA indicated sharpness or clarity of vision. BCVA assessed by early treatment diabetic retinopathy study chart using 4 meter (m), 1m distance, or if participant was able to count fingers, perceive hand motion or light. At 4m (>= 20 letters), VA score=number of letters correct plus 30 (credited for 30 letters at 1m); otherwise , VA score=number of letters read correctly at 1m plus number read at 4m (if any). If no letters were read correctly at 4m or 1m, VA score= 0, which were excluded from summary statistics calculation. BVCA score ranged: 0 (poor eyesight) to 78 (best eyesight).|Baseline, Week 48 (End of treatment)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who had BVCA score greater than 0 at baseline and 'n' signifies those who were evaluable at each specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826323|NCT01189461|Primary|Mean Total Number of Injections|Mean number of injections per participant was calculated as (number of injection administered per participant – 1)/duration of treatment. Mean number of injections administered for total participants was summarized.|Baseline up to Week 48 (End of treatment)|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||injections||Standard Deviation|Mean
826324|NCT01189461|Secondary|Incidence of Ocular and Non-Ocular Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Total number of participants who had ocular and non-ocular SAEs was reported.|Baseline up to 30 days after last dose|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
826325|NCT01189461|Primary|Incidence of Ocular and Non-Ocular Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. Total number of participants who had ocular and non-ocular AEs was reported.|Baseline up to 30 days after last dose|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Same participant may be represented in more than 1 category.||participants|||Number
826326|NCT01189487|Secondary|Eradication Rate (Bacteriological Response, Investigator Assessment)|"Eradication Rate was calculated from the following formula, the number of participants assessed as eradication , presumed eradication or microbial substitution over total participants excluding ones assessed as indeterminate multiplied by 100. Microbial substitution means the appearance of new pathogens other than the original pathogens in a specimen from the same location with signs and symptoms of infection after the original pathogens were eradicated by treatment."|Day 4, End of treatment, Test of cure (7 days after End of treatment), Long term follow up (7 days after Test of cure)|"Bacteriologic per protocol set consisted of all participants in the clinical per protocol set in whom bacterial pathogens were identified at baseline. No imputation was used for missing data. n in the Measure Values was the total participants EXCLUDING ones assessed as indeterminate."||percentageof participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826327|NCT01189487|Secondary|Eradication Rate (Bacteriological Response, Data Review Committee Assessment)|"Eradication Rate was calculated from the following formula, the number of participants assessed as eradication, presumed eradication or microbial substitution over total participants excluding ones assessed as indeterminate multiplied by 100. Microbial substitution means the appearance of new pathogens other than the original pathogens in a specimen from the same location with signs and symptoms of infection after the original pathogens were eradicated by treatment."|Day 4, End of treatment, Test of cure (7 days after End of treatment), Long term follow up (7 days after Test of cure)|"Bacteriologic per protocol set consisted of all participants in the clinical per protocol set in whom bacterial pathogens were identified at baseline. No imputation was used for missing data. n in the Measure Values was the total participants EXCLUDING ones assessed as indeterminate."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826328|NCT01189487|Secondary|The Tendency Toward Clinical Improvement (Investigator Assessment)|The number of participants who showed tendency toward clinical improvement based on the assessment of temperature, white blood cell count, C-reactive protein, clinical symptoms on Day 4 and was determined to continue the treatment.|Day 4|Clinical per protocol set consisted of all participants who received at least one dose, have no significant violation of protocol, and underwent prescribed evaluations during the observation period. No imputation was used for missing data.||percentage of participants|||Number
826329|NCT01189487|Secondary|Response Rate (Clinical Response, Investigator Assessment)|"Response rate was calculated from the following formula, the number of participants assessed as effective over total participants EXCLUDING ones assessed as indeterminate multiplied by 100."|End of treatment, Test of cure (7 days after End of treatment), Long term follow up (7 days after Test of cure)|"Clinical per protocol set consisted of all participants who received at least one dose, have no significant violation of protocol, and underwent prescribed evaluations during the observation period. No imputation was used for missing data. n in the Measure Values means total participants excluding ones assessed as indeterminate."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826330|NCT01189487|Primary|Response Rate (Clinical Response, Data Review Committee Assessment)|"Response rate was calculated from the following formula, the number of participants assessed as effective over total participants excluding ones assessed as indeterminate multiplied by 100."|End of treatment, Test of cure (7 days after End of treatment), Long term follow up (7 days after Test of cure)|"Clinical per protocol set consisted of all participants who received at least one dose, have no significant violation of protocol, and underwent prescribed evaluations during the observation period. No imputation was used for missing data. n in the Measure Values means total participants EXCLUDING ones assessed as indeterminate."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826343|NCT01189500|Secondary|N-desmethyl-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Terminal Half-life (t 1/2) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Terminal half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||hours||Standard Error|Mean
826331|NCT01189500|Secondary|Plasma 4-hydroxy-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Concentration Versus Time Summary: Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Summary statistics were to be calculated by setting concentration values below the lower limit of quantification (LLQ = 0.100 ng/mL) to zero. Summary statistics were not to be presented if number of observations above lower limit of quantification (NALQ) = 0.|Period 1 / Day 1 and Period 2 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing|PK concentration analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the median. Period 2 / Day 1 = Day 1 of Tamoxifen dosing (Period 2 / Day 7) within the DVS SR, Tamoxifen coadministration dosing period.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
826332|NCT01189500|Secondary|Plasma N-desmethyl-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Concentration Versus Time Summary: Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Summary statistics were to be calculated by setting concentration values below the lower limit of quantification (LLQ = 0.250 ng/mL) to zero. Summary statistics were not to be presented if number of observations above lower limit of quantification (NALQ) = 0.|Period 1 / Day 1 and Period 2 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing|PK concentration analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the median. Period 2 / Day 1 = Day 1 of Tamoxifen dosing (Period 2 / Day 7) within the DVS SR, Tamoxifen coadministration dosing period.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
826333|NCT01189500|Secondary|Plasma Endoxifen (Metabolite) Concentration Versus Time Summary: Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Summary statistics were to be calculated by setting concentration values below the lower limit of quantification (LLQ = 0.100 ng/mL) to zero. Summary statistics were not to be presented if number of observations above lower limit of quantification (NALQ) = 0.|Period 1 / Day 1 and Period 2 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing|PK concentration analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the median. Period 2 / Day 1 = Day 1 of Tamoxifen dosing (Period 2 / Day 7) within the DVS SR, Tamoxifen coadministration dosing period.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
826334|NCT01189500|Secondary|Plasma Tamoxifen Concentration Versus Time Summary: Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Summary statistics were to be calculated by setting concentration values below the lower limit of quantification (LLQ = 0.250 ng/mL) to zero. Summary statistics were not to be presented if number of observations above lower limit of quantification (NALQ) = 0.|Period 1 / Day 1 and Period 2 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing|PK concentration analysis population: all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 concentration in at least 1 treatment period. N=number of participants contributing to the median. Period 2 / Day 1 = Day 1 of Tamoxifen dosing (Period 2 / Day 7) within the DVS SR, Tamoxifen coadministration dosing period.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
826335|NCT01189500|Secondary|4-hydroxy-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR||Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. Data was insufficient for analysis; not analyzable.||liters||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826336|NCT01189500|Secondary|4-hydroxy-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Apparent Clearance (CL/F) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood calculated as (Dose/AUCinf); measured as milliliters per minute (mL/min).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. Data was insufficient for analysis; not analyzable.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826337|NCT01189500|Secondary|4-hydroxy-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Terminal Half-life (t 1/2) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Terminal half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||hours||Standard Error|Mean
826338|NCT01189500|Secondary|4-hydroxy-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Time for Cmax (Tmax) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Time for maximum observed plasma concentration.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the median.||hours||Full Range|Median
826339|NCT01189500|Secondary|4-hydroxy-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR||Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826340|NCT01189500|Secondary|4-hydroxy-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUCinf) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|4-hydroxy-tamoxifen is a metabolite of Tamoxifen. Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826341|NCT01189500|Secondary|N-desmethyl-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR||Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. Data was insufficient for analysis; not analyzable.||liters||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826345|NCT01189500|Secondary|N-desmethyl-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR||Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826346|NCT01189500|Secondary|N-desmethyl-tamoxifen (Metabolite) Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUCinf) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|N-desmethyl-tamoxifen is a metabolite of Tamoxifen. Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826347|NCT01189500|Secondary|Endoxifen (Metabolite) Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR||Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. Data was insufficient for analysis; not analyzable.||liters||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826348|NCT01189500|Secondary|Endoxifen (Metabolite) Apparent Clearance (CL/F) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood calculated as (Dose/AUCinf); measured as milliliters per minute (mL/min).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. Data was insufficient for analysis; not analyzable.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826349|NCT01189500|Secondary|Endoxifen (Metabolite) Terminal Half-life (t 1/2) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Terminal half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
826350|NCT01189500|Secondary|Endoxifen (Metabolite) Time for Cmax (Tmax) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Time for maximum observed plasma concentration.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the median.||hours||Full Range|Median
826351|NCT01189500|Secondary|Endoxifen (Metabolite) Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR||Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826352|NCT01189500|Secondary|Tamoxifen Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Calculated as Dose / (AUCinf * kel); where kel=terminal phase rate constant.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||liters||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826353|NCT01189500|Secondary|Tamoxifen Apparent Clearance (CL/F) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood calculated as (Dose/AUCinf); measured as milliliters per minute (mL/min).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826354|NCT01189500|Secondary|Tamoxifen Terminal Half-life (t 1/2) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Terminal half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
826355|NCT01189500|Secondary|Tamoxifen Time for Cmax (Tmax) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Time for maximum observed plasma concentration.|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the median.||hours||Full Range|Median
826356|NCT01189500|Secondary|Tamoxifen Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Cmax measured as nanograms per milliliters (ng/mL).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826429|NCT01190124|Secondary|HIV-RNA Levels|For patients in whom T20 was replaced by raltegravir it will be determined the number of patients that maintain undetectable viral load (confirmed HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL) at week 48.|Week 48|||participants|||Number
826357|NCT01189500|Primary|Endoxifen (Metabolite) Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUCinf) Following Endoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Endoxifen is a metabolite of Tamoxifen. Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|PK parameter analysis population. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826358|NCT01189500|Primary|Tamoxifen Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUCinf) Following Tamoxifen Alone and When Coadministered With DVS SR|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞); measured as nanograms multiplied by hours divided by milliliters (ng*hr/mL).|Period 1 / Day 1: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,16, 24, 48, 72, 120, 168, 216, 264, 312, 384, 456, and 528 hours after dosing; Period 2 / Day 1 and Day 7: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 hours; 0 hour on Day 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population: all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. N=number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826359|NCT01189604|Secondary|Modified Observers Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) at End of Initiation Period|The MOAA/S is a 6-point ordinal scale measuring a patient's level of sedation. Scores range from 0 (No response to painful stimulus [trapezius squeeze]) to 5 (Responds readily to name spoken in normal tone [awake]). MOAA/S scores were classified as 0-1, 2-4 and 5.|Last measurement in maintenance period (3 minutes for arms 1-5; 1 minute for arm 6, 5 minute for arm 7)|||Participants|||Number
826360|NCT01189604|Secondary|Blood Concentrations of Propofol|Blood concentration of ICI35,868 (propofol)|At the end of the initiation period and every 2 minutes during the maintenance period|||µg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826361|NCT01189604|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction With Sedation Instrument (PSSI) Questionnaire|The PSSI is a 100-point visual analog scale measuring a patient's satisfaction with sedation. Scores range from 0 (Very dissatisfied) to 100 (Very satisfied).|24 - 48 hours after completion of the procedure|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826362|NCT01189604|Primary|Modified Observers Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) Score 4 Minutes From Beginning of Maintenance Period|The MOAA/S is a 6-point ordinal scale measuring a patient's level of sedation. Scores range from 0 (No response to painful stimulus [trapezius squeeze]) to 5 (Responds readily to name spoken in normal tone [awake]). MOAA/S scores were classified as 0-1, 2-4 and 5.|4 minutes from the beginning of the maintenance period|||Participants|||Number
826363|NCT01189604|Primary|Modified Observers Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) Score 2 Minutes From Beginning of Maintenance Period|The MOAA/S is a 6-point ordinal scale measuring a patient's level of sedation. Scores range from 0 (No response to painful stimulus [trapezius squeeze]) to 5 (Responds readily to name spoken in normal tone [awake]). MOAA/S scores were classified as 0-1, 2-4 and 5.|2 minutes from the beginning of the maintenance period|||Participants|||Number
826364|NCT01189617|Primary|"Number of Subjects With Irritation Score of 0 at Baseline and One Week"|Severity of irritation on a scale from 0 (No Irritation) to 6 (Presence of Lesions). Since a score of 0 is required at baseline for inclusion in the trial, this score represents a change from baseline and the trial is considered baseline-controlled.|Baseline and One Week|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
826365|NCT01189747|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 3-point Improvement From Baseline for Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire (FLO-11) Item 8 at Day 30|The percentage of FLO-11 Item #8 responders, defined as participants with a ≥ 3-point improvement in FLO-11 score from baseline for FLO-11 Question #8: “My facial lines make me look tired” The FLO-11 questionnaire is comprised of 11 items that assess the subject's perceptions about specific aspects of their facial lines for the previous 7 days. Each question is scored on an 11-point scale (0=not at all, 5=somewhat, 10=very much).|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population consisted of all randomized participants. Only subjects with Baseline scores ≥ 3 were included.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826366|NCT01189747|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 2-point Improvement From Baseline for Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire (FLO-11) Item 5 at Day 30|The percentage of FLO-11 Item #5 responders, defined as participants with a ≥ 2-point improvement in FLO-11 score from Baseline for FLO-11 Question #5: “My facial lines make me look less attractive than I want to look.” The FLO-11 questionnaire is comprised of 11 items that assess the subject's perceptions about specific aspects of their facial lines for the previous 7 days. Each question is scored on an 11-point scale (0=not at all, 5=somewhat, 10=very much).|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population consisted of all randomized participants. Only subjects with Baseline scores ≥ 2 were included.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826367|NCT01189747|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 2-point Improvement From Baseline for Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire (FLO-11) Item 2 at Day 30|The percentage of FLO-11 Item #2 responders, defined as participants with a ≥ 2-point improvement in FLO-11 score from Baseline for FLO-11 Question #2: “When I look in the mirror, my facial lines make me look older than I want to look.” The FLO-11 questionnaire is comprised of 11 items that assess the subject's perceptions about specific aspects of their facial lines for the previous 7 days. Each question is scored on an 11-point scale (0=not at all, 5=somewhat, 10=very much).|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population consisted of all randomized participants. Only subjects with Baseline scores ≥ 2 were included.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826368|NCT01189747|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Judged Themselves in a Younger Self-Perception of Age Category Than at Baseline|Participants were considered to judge themselves younger if the category change was from “look my current age” at Baseline to “look younger” at Day 30 or from “look older” at Baseline to “look my current age/younger” at Day 30.|Baseline, Day 30|"Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants. Only those participants who rated themselves as look my current age or look older at Baseline are included in the analyses."||Percentage of participants|||Number
826430|NCT01190124|Secondary|HIV-RNA Levels|For patients in whom T20 was replaced by raltegravir it will be determined the number of patients that maintain undetectable viral load (confirmed HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL) at week 24.|Week 24|||participants|||Number
826369|NCT01189747|Secondary|Subject Global Assessment of Change in Crow’s Feet Lines (SGA-CFL) Score|Patients rated the change in their Crow’s Feet Lines using the SGA-CFL 7-point scale: 1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved, 4=no change, 5=minimally worse, 6=much worse or 7=very much worse at Day 30. Lower scores indicate improvement.|Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826370|NCT01189747|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 1-Grade Improvement From Baseline by Investigator Facial Wrinkle Scale Assessment of the Severity of Crow’s Feet Lines at Rest|The Investigator assessed the severity of the patient's Crow's Feet Lines at rest using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale: 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe. The percentage of participants with a ≥ 1-grade improvement from Baseline at Day 30 is reported.|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat participants included all randomized participants. Only participants who were rated at least mild at Baseline are included in the analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826371|NCT01189747|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 1-Grade Improvement From Baseline by Investigator Facial Wrinkle Scale Assessment of the Severity of Crow’s Feet Lines at Maximum Smile|The Investigator assessed the severity of the patient's Crow's Feet Lines at maximum smile using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale: 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe. The percentage of participants with a ≥ 1-grade improvement from Baseline at Day 30 is reported.|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826372|NCT01189747|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Grade of None or Mild at Maximum Smile Based on the Investigator’s Facial Wrinkle Scale Assessment of the Severity of Crow’s Feet Lines|The Investigator assessed the severity of the patient's Crow's Feet lines at maximum smile using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale: 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe. The percentage of participants with a score of none or mild at Day 30 is reported.|Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826373|NCT01189747|Primary|Percentage of Responders Based on Composite Facial Wrinkle Scale Assessment of Crow's Feet Line Severity at Maximum Smile|The composite facial wrinkle scale assessment is based on both the Investigator and Subject Facial Wrinkle scales at Day 30. The Investigator assessed the severity of the patient's Crow's Feet Lines at maximum smile using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale: 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe and the patient assessed the severity of their Crow's Feet Lines at maximum smile using the same 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale. A responder is defined as a participant with a ≥ 2-grade improvement from Baseline.|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants. Participants with missing values are considered non-responders.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826374|NCT01189760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 3-point Improvement From Baseline for Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire (FLO-11) Item 8 at Day 30|The percentage of FLO-11 Item #8 responders, defined as participants with a ≥ 3-point improvement in FLO-11 score from Baseline for FLO-11 Question #8: “My facial lines make me look tired.” The FLO-11 questionnaire is comprised of 11 items that assess the subject's perceptions about specific aspects of their facial lines for the previous 7 days. Each question is scored on an 11-point scale (0=not at all, 5=somewhat, 10=very much).|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants. Only participants with a Baseline score ≥ 3 are included.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826375|NCT01189760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 2-point Improvement From Baseline for Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire (FLO-11) Item 5 at Day 30|The percentage of FLO-11 Item #5 responders, defined as participants with a ≥ 2-point improvement in FLO-11 score from Baseline for FLO-11 Question #5: “My facial lines make me look less attractive than I want to look.” The FLO-11 questionnaire is comprised of 11 items that assess the subject's perceptions about specific aspects of their facial lines for the previous 7 days. Each question is scored on an 11-point scale (0=not at all, 5=somewhat, 10=very much).|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants. Only participants with a Baseline score ≥ 2 are included.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826376|NCT01189760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 2-point Improvement From Baseline for Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire (FLO-11) Item 2 at Day 30|The percentage of FLO-11 Item #2 responders, defined as participants with a ≥ 2-point improvement in FLO-11 score from Baseline for FLO-11 Question #2: “When I look in the mirror, my facial lines make me look older than I want to look.” The FLO-11 questionnaire is comprised of 11 items that assess the subject's perceptions about specific aspects of their facial lines for the previous 7 days. Each question is scored on an 11-point scale (0=not at all, 5=somewhat, 10=very much).|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants. Only participants with a Baseline score ≥ 2 are included.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826377|NCT01189760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Judged Themselves in a Younger Self-Perception of Age Category Than at Baseline|Participants were considered to judge themselves as looking younger if the category change was from “look my current age” at Baseline to “look younger” at Day 30 or from “look older” at Baseline to “look my current age/younger” at Day 30.|Baseline, Day 30|"Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants. Only those participants who rated themselves as look my current age or look older at Baseline are included in the analyses."||Percentage of participants|||Number
826378|NCT01189760|Secondary|Subject Global Assessment of Change in Crow’s Feet Lines (SGA-CFL) Score|Patients rated the change in their Crow’s Feet Lines using the SGA-CFL 7-point scale: 1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved, 4=no change, 5=minimally worse, 6=much worse or 7=very much worse at Day 30. Lower scores indicate improvement.|Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826379|NCT01189760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 1-Grade Improvement From Baseline by Investigator Facial Wrinkle Scale Assessment of the Severity of Crow’s Feet Lines at Rest|The Investigator assessed the severity of the patient's Crow's Feet Lines at rest using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale: 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe. The percentage of participants with a ≥ 1-grade improvement from Baseline at Day 30 is reported.|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants. Only those participants who were rated at least mild at Baseline are included in the analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826431|NCT01190124|Secondary|HIV-RNA Levels|For patients in whom T20 was replaced by raltegravir it will be determined the number of patients that presented undetectable viral load (confirmed HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL) at baseline.|Baseline|||participants|||Number
826380|NCT01189760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 1-Grade Improvement From Baseline by Investigator Facial Wrinkle Scale Assessment of the Severity of Crow’s Feet Lines at Maximum Smile|The Investigator assessed the severity of the patient's Crow's Feet Lines at maximum smile using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale: 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe. The percentage of participants with a ≥ 1-grade improvement from Baseline at Day 30 is reported.|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826381|NCT01189760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Grade of None or Mild at Maximum Smile Based on the Investigator Facial Wrinkle Scale Assessment of the Severity of Crow’s Feet Lines|The Investigator assessed the severity of the patient's Crow's Feet lines at maximum smile using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale: 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe. The percentage of participants with a score of none or mild at Day 30 is reported.|Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826382|NCT01189760|Primary|Percentage of Responders Based on Composite Facial Wrinkle Scale Assessment of Crow's Feet Line Severity at Maximum Smile|The composite facial wrinkle scale assessment is based on both the Investigator and Subject Facial Wrinkle scales at Day 30. The Investigator assessed the severity of the patient's Crow's Feet Lines at maximum smile using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale: 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe and the patient assessed the severity of their Crow's Feet Lines at maximum smile using the same 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale. A responder is defined as a participant with a ≥ 2-grade improvement from Baseline.|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants. Participants with missing values are considered non-responders.||Percentage of participants|||Number
826383|NCT01189812|Secondary|Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (BSS)|"The BSS is a 21-item slef-report instrument used to detect ans measure the severity of suicidal ideation in adults. It measures a broad spectrum of attitudes and behaviors for assessing patient suicide risk, as well as reveals specific suicidal characteristics which require greater scrutiny.
Comparison between citalopram and lithium and citalopram and placebo groups in the BSS will be made from baseline to week 4"|4 weeks||||||
826384|NCT01189812|Secondary|Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS)|"The BHS measures the extent of negative attitudes about the future. It has particular utility as an indirect indicator of suicidal risk in depressed examinees or individuals who have made suicide attempts.
Comparison between citalopram and lithium and citalopram and placebo groups in the BHS will be made from baseline to week 4"|4 weeks||||||
826385|NCT01189812|Primary|Sheehan-Suicidality Tracking Scale (S-STS)|"The S-STS is an 14 item clinician administered prospective rating scale that scores both treatment-emergent suicidal ideations and suicidal behaviors with scores ranging from 0-40 points. Patients scoring a 0 are experiencing no suicidal thoughts, ideations, or attempts, while a score of 40 indicates a fatal, completed suicide.
Comparison was made between the citalopram with lithium and the citalopram with placebo treatment groups. Outcome measures are expressed as change scores from the baseline visit to week 4."|4 weeks; from Baseline to Week 4|The ITT population consisted of 80 patients randomized to lithium (n=40)or placebo (n=40).||Scores on a Scale (S-STSS)|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
826386|NCT01189890|Secondary|LS Mean Change From Baseline in Participant Body Weight at Week 30|Participants were only permitted to wear a drape gown and undergarments (no street clothes, no shoes or socks) for this evaluation. Body weight was measured after voiding (to the nearest 0.1 kg) and measurements were collected until 2 consecutive measurements did not differ by more than 0.2 kg from each other. Body weight measurements were evaluated using a standardized, calibrated digital scale and was reported in kilograms (kg) at baseline and Week 30.|Baseline and Week 30|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and had body weight measurements at baseline and at Week 30.||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
826387|NCT01189890|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HbA1c <6.5% at Week 30|Participant whole blood samples were collected at Week 30 to determine the number of participants achieving HbA1c <6.5% at Week 30. Hemoglobin A1c is a measure of the percentage of glycated hemoglobin in the blood and provides an indication of participant blood glucose control in the 2 to 3 months prior to the evaluation.|Week 30|The population included all randomized participants who had HbA1c at baseline and Week 30, did not take prohibited concomitant medications, had compliance >85%, and did not receive any incorrect study medication.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
826388|NCT01189890|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HbA1c <7.0% at Week 30|Participant whole blood samples were collected at Week 30 to determine the number of participants achieving HbA1c <7.0% at Week 30. HbA1c is a measure of the percentage of glycated hemoglobin in the blood and provides an indication of participant blood glucose control in the 2 to 3 months prior to the evaluation.|Week 30|The population included all randomized participants who had HbA1c at baseline and Week 30, did not take prohibited concomitant medications, had compliance >85%, and did not receive any incorrect study medication.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
826389|NCT01189890|Secondary|LS Mean Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 30|Plasma samples were collected from participants after an overnight fast at baseline and Week 30 to determine the mean change from baseline in participant FPG.|Baseline and Week 30|The population included all randomized participants who had a FPG value at baseline and Week 30, did not take prohibited concomitant medications, had compliance >85%, and did not receive any incorrect study medication.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
826390|NCT01189890|Primary|Number of Participants Discontinuing Study Treatment Due to An AE|"An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the
study treatment, whether or not considered related to the use of the treatment administered."|Up to Week 30|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
826391|NCT01189890|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing An Adverse Event (AE)|"An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the
study treatment, whether or not considered related to the use of the treatment administered."|Up to Week 30|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
826432|NCT01190124|Primary|CD4 Cells Count|CD4 cells count at baseline.|Baseline|||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
826433|NCT01190124|Primary|HIV-RNA Levels|Patients achieving undetectable viral load (confirmed HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL) at week 48.|week 48|||participants|||Number
826392|NCT01189890|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event of Symptomatic Hypoglycemia Up to Week 30|Symptomatic hypoglycemia was defined as an episode with clinical symptoms attributed to hypoglycemia, without regard to glucose level. Participants were instructed to complete the Hypoglycemia Assessment Log (HAL) for any symptomatic episodes he or she believed represent hypoglycemia. If a fingerstick glucose was obtained before or shortly (i.e., within a few minutes) after treating, the value was recorded in the HAL. In addition, participants were instructed to record in the HAL any fingerstick glucose values ≤70 mg/dL (≤3.9 mmol/L) regardless of the presence of clinical symptoms.|Up to Week 30|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||Participants|||Number
826393|NCT01189890|Primary|Least Squares (LS) Mean Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) at Week 30|Participant whole blood samples were collected at baseline and Week 30 to determine the LS mean HbA1c change from baseline. HbA1c is a measure of the percentage of glycated hemoglobin in the blood and provides an indication of participant blood glucose control in the 2 to 3 months prior to the evaluation.|Baseline and Week 30|The population included all randomized participants who had a baseline HbA1c, had a HbA1c at Week 30, did not take prohibited concomitant medications, had compliance >85%, and did not receive any incorrect study medication.||Percentage of HbA1c||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
826394|NCT01190007|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein B at Each Visit|"Value at each visits minus value at baseline divided by value at baseline multiplied by 100"|Week 4, 12, 24, and 52|The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. LOCF means Last Observation Carried Forward.||Percentage of Apolipoprotein B||Standard Deviation|Mean
826395|NCT01190007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ratio of Total Cholesterol (TC) to High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) at Each Visit|Value at each visits minus value at baseline|Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 52|The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. LOCF means Last Observation Carried Forward.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
826396|NCT01190007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ratio of Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) to High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) at Each Visit|Value at each visits minus value at baseline|Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 52|The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. LOCF means Last Observation Carried Forward.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
826397|NCT01190007|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Triglyceride (TG) at Each Visit|"Value at each visits minus value at baseline divided by value at baseline multiplied by 100"|Week 4, 12, 24, and 52|The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. LOCF means Last Observation Carried Forward.||Percentage of TG||Standard Deviation|Mean
826398|NCT01190007|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) at Each Visit|"Value at each visits minus value at baseline divided by value at baseline multiplied by 100"|Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 52|The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. LOCF means Last Observation Carried Forward.||Percentage of HDL-C||Standard Deviation|Mean
826399|NCT01190007|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol (TC) at Each Visit|"Value at each visits minus value at baseline divided by value at baseline multiplied by 100"|Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 52|The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. LOCF means Last Observation Carried Forward.||Percentage of TC||Standard Deviation|Mean
826400|NCT01190007|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) at Each Visit|"Value at each visits minus value at baseline divided by value at baseline multiplied by 100"|Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 52|The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. LOCF means Last Observation Carried Forward.||Percentage of LDL-C||Standard Deviation|Mean
826401|NCT01190007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) at Each Visit in Participant Population With Angina Pectoris and Hypercholesterolemia|Value at each visits minus value at baseline|Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52|"The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.
Participants with both angina pectoris and hypercholesterolemia were included the participants with all of angina pectoris, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia."||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
826402|NCT01190007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) at Each Visit in Participant Population With Both Hypertension and Hypercholesterolemia|Value at each visits minus value at baseline|Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52|The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. LOCF means Last Observation Carried Forward.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
826403|NCT01190007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) at Each Visit in Population With Both Angina Pectoris and Hypercholesterolemia|Value at each visits minus value at baseline|Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52|The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. Participants both angina pectoris and hypercholesterolemia were included the participants with all of angina pectoris, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
826404|NCT01190007|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) at Each Visit in Participant Population With Both Hypertension and Hypercholesterolemia|Value at each visits minus value at baseline|Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52|The efficacy analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug and contributed data to baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment. LOCF means Last Observation Carried Forward.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
826434|NCT01190124|Primary|HIV-RNA Levels|Patients achieving undetectable viral load (confirmed HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL) at week 24.|week 24|||participants|||Number
826405|NCT01190007|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Counts of participants who had treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), defined as newly occurring or worsening after first dose. Relatedness to [study drug] was assessed by the investigator (Yes/No). Participants with multiple occurrences of an AE within a category were counted once within the category.|52 weeks|The safety analysis set included all participants who took at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
826406|NCT01190085|Primary|Salivation|Whether ghrelin intravenous (i.v.), as compared to saline i.v., dose-dependently results in increased cue-reactivity (CR) responses to alcohol cues in terms of psychophysiological responses, namely salivation changes.|approximately 30 minutes after drug administration|||gram||Standard Deviation|Mean
826407|NCT01190085|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability.|Whether ghrelin intravenous (i.v.), as compared to saline i.v., does not significantly increase Adverse Events (AEs).|participants will be followed after the cue-reactivity experiment, an expected average of 7 days|||participants|||Number
826408|NCT01190085|Primary|Alcohol Visual Analogue Scale (A-VAS)|"Whether ghrelin intravenous (i.v.), as compared to saline i.v., dose-dependently results in increased cue-reactivity (CR) responses to alcohol cues in terms of urge to drink [as measured by the Alcohol Visual Analogue Scale (A-VAS)].
The A-VAS was rated on 11-point anchored Likert-type scales, where 0 is the minimum score (no craving) and 11 is the maximum score (highest craving intensity). The change in the A-VAS score (deltaA-VAS) was used to indicate decrease (-d) or increase (+d) in craving intensity."|approximately 30 minutes after drug administration|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826409|NCT01190098|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life in Epilepsy (QOLIE-31) From Baseline to Visit 4|Range 0 -10 where higher scores reflect better quality of life.|Baseline to visit 4 (approximately 1 - 2 months)|5 subjects did not complete enough questions on the tool for the total score to be calculated at both time points.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
826410|NCT01190098|Secondary|Change in Daily Seizure Frequency From Baseline to Visit 4|Number of seizures per day.|Baseline to visit 4 (approximately 1 - 2 months)|2 subjects did not complete seizure diary at both time points.||number of seizures per day||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826411|NCT01190098|Secondary|Change in Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) From Baseline to Visit 4.|Range 0-27, where higher scores indicate more impairment (depressive symptoms)|Baseline to visit 4 (approximately 1 - 2 months)|5 subjects did not complete enough questions on the tool for the total score to be calculated at both time points.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
826412|NCT01190098|Secondary|Change in Adverse Event Profile (AEP) From Baseline to Visit 4.|Range 19-76, where higher scores indicate more severe impairment (in terms of 19 common antiepileptic drug side effects.|Baseline to visit 4 (approximately 1 - 2 months)|3 subjects did not complete enough questions on the tool for the total score to be calculated at both time points.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
826413|NCT01190098|Secondary|Change in Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ) From Baseline to Visit 4.|Range 0-20 where lower scores indicate more impairment (sleep related QOL).|Baseline to visit 4 (approximately 1 - 2 months)|5 subjects did not complete enough questions on the tool for the total score to be calculated at both time points.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
826414|NCT01190098|Secondary|Change in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Inventory (PSQI) From Baseline to Visit 4|Range 0-21, where higher scores more impairment (in terms of sleep quality).|Baseline to Visit 4 (approximately 1 - 2 months)|7 subjects did not complete enough questions on the tool for the total score to be calculated at both time points.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
826415|NCT01190098|Secondary|Change in the Fatigue Severity Scale From Baseline to Visit 4.|Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS): Range 7- 63 where higher scores indicate more severe fatigue.|Baseline to Visit 4 (approximately 1 - 2 months)|6 subjects did not complete enough questions on the tool for the total score to be calculated at both time points.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
826416|NCT01190098|Primary|Change in Epworth Sleepiness Scale Score From Baseline to Visit 4|Scale 0 - 24 Higher scores indicate more severe symptoms|Baseline and Visit 4 (approximately 1 - 2 months)|||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
826417|NCT01190124|Secondary|Adverse Drug Reactions|Number of participants that suffered clinical and laboratory-associated adverse events, including events that lead to discontinuations or death. Investigator will collect all drug-related adverse events, i.e. judged by the investigator to be definitely, probably, or possibly related to the study drug.|Week 48|||participants|||Number
826418|NCT01190124|Primary|CD4 Cells Count|CD4 cells count at week 48.|week 48|||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
826419|NCT01190124|Primary|CD4 Cells Count|CD4 cells count at week 24.|week 24|||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
826420|NCT01190124|Secondary|HIV-RNA Levels|For the HIV-2 infected patients it will be determined the number of patients that achieve or maintain undetectable viral load (confirmed HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL) at week 48.|Week 48|||participants|||Number
826421|NCT01190124|Secondary|HIV-RNA Levels|For the HIV-2 infected patients it will be determined the number of patients that achieve or maintain undetectable viral load (confirmed HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL) at week 24.|Week 24|||participants|||Number
826422|NCT01190124|Secondary|HIV-RNA Levels|For the HIV-2 infected patients it will be determined the number of patients with undetectable viral load (confirmed HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL) at baseline.|Baseline|||participants|||Number
826423|NCT01190124|Secondary|CD4 Cells Count|For the HIV-2 infected patients CD4 cells count will be assessed at week 48.|Week 48|||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
826424|NCT01190124|Secondary|CD4 Cells Count|For the HIV-2 infected patients CD4 cells count will be assessed at week 24.|Week 24|||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
826425|NCT01190124|Secondary|CD4 Cells Count|For the HIV-2 infected patients CD4 cells count will be assessed at baseline.|Baseline|||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
826426|NCT01190124|Secondary|CD4 Cells Count|For patients in whom T20 was replaced by raltegravir it will be assessed the median changes of CD4 cells count at week 48.|Week 48|||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
826427|NCT01190124|Secondary|CD4 Cells Count|For patients in whom T20 was replaced by raltegravir it will be assessed the median changes of CD4 cells count at week 24.|Week 24|||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
826428|NCT01190124|Secondary|CD4 Cells Count|For patients in whom T20 was replaced by raltegravir CD4 cells count will be assessed.|Baseline|||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
826435|NCT01190124|Primary|HIV-RNA Levels|Patients with undetectable viral load (confirmed HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL) at baseline.|Baseline|||participants|||Number
826436|NCT01190150|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Treatment-emergent AEs are summarized by total participants with TEAEs, participants with serious TEAEs, participants with TEAEs deemed by the investigator to be related to treatment, and participants who experienced TEAEs that caused permanent discontinuation from the study.|Day 1 up to week 4|The Safety Population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of tranexamic acid.||participants|||Number
826437|NCT01190150|Primary|Elimination Half-life (t ½)|Apparent first-order terminal elimination half life|Day 1 or Day 8 (before dosing and at the following times thereafter: 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 24 hours post-dose)|Plasma PK population includes all participants with at least one quantifiable PK concentration.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
826438|NCT01190150|Primary|The Ratio of AUC0-t to AUCinf|Comparison of AUC0-t to AUCinf by creating a ratio.|Day 1 or Day 8 (before dosing and at the following times thereafter: 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 24 hours post-dose)|Plasma PK population including all participants with three or more non-zero plasma concentrations. One participant withdrew on Day 7 and did not meet the requisite samples required for this PK parameter.||ratio of AUC0-t / AUCinf||Standard Deviation|Mean
826439|NCT01190150|Primary|Dose Normalized Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to Infinity (AUCinf)|Dose-normalized AUCinf is calculated as the sum of AUC0-t plus the ratio of the last measurable plasma concentration to the elimination rate constant, normalized to the 1.3 g dose.|Day 1 or Day 8 (before dosing and at the following times thereafter: 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 24 hours post-dose)|Plasma PK population including all participants with three or more non-zero plasma concentrations. One participant withdrew on Day 7 and did not meet the requisite samples required for this PK parameter.||μg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826440|NCT01190150|Primary|Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to Infinity (AUCinf)|The area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to infinity. AUCinf is calculated as the sum of AUC0-t plus the ratio of the last measurable plasma concentration to the elimination rate constant.|Day 1 or Day 8 (before dosing and at the following times thereafter: 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 24 hours post-dose)|Plasma PK population including all participants with three or more non-zero plasma concentrations. One participant withdrew on Day 7 and did not meet the requisite samples required for this PK parameter.||μg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826441|NCT01190150|Primary|Dose Normalized Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to the Last Time Point (AUC0-t)|The area under the plasma concentration versus time curve, from time 0 to the last measurable concentration normalized to the 1.3 g dose.|Day 1 or Day 8 (before dosing and at the following times thereafter: 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 24 hours post-dose)|Plasma PK population includes all participants with at least one quantifiable PK concentration.||μg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826442|NCT01190150|Primary|Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to the Last Time Point (AUC0-t)|The area under the plasma concentration versus time curve, from time 0 to the last measurable concentration, as calculated by the linear trapezoidal method.|Day 1 or Day 8 (before dosing and at the following times thereafter: 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 24 hours post-dose)|Plasma PK population includes all participants with at least one quantifiable PK concentration.||μg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826443|NCT01190150|Primary|Time to Maximum Concentration Level (Tmax)|Time of the maximum measured plasma concentration. If the maximum value occurs at more than one time point, Tmax is defined as the first time point with this value.|Day 1 or Day 8 (before dosing and at the following times thereafter: 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 24 hours post-dose)|Plasma PK population includes all participants with at least one quantifiable PK concentration.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
826444|NCT01190150|Primary|Dose-normalized Maximum Concentrations Level (Cmax)|Cmax is the maximum measured plasma concentration over the time-span specified and normalized to the 1.3 g dose.|Day 1 or Day 8 (before dosing and at the following times thereafter: 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 24 hours post-dose)|Plasma PK population includes all participants with at least one quantifiable PK concentration.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826445|NCT01190150|Primary|Maximum Concentrations Level (Cmax)|Cmax is the maximum measured plasma concentration over the time-span specified.|Day 1 or Day 8 (before dosing and at the following times thereafter: 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 24 hours post-dose)|Plasma PK population includes all participants with at least one quantifiable PK concentration.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826446|NCT01190215|Primary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against Fluarix Vaccine Containing H1N1 Strain.|"Fluarix vaccine strain was Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1).
MGI is defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titre to the pre-vaccination (Day 0) reciprocal HI titre.
Day 28 data were presented for the Fluarix Group only."|At Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826447|NCT01190215|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against Fluarix Vaccine Containing H1N1 Strain.|"Fluarix vaccine strain was Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1).
A seroprotected subject was a subject with a serum HI titre ≥ 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection.
Day 28 data were presented for the Fluarix Group only."|At Day 0 and Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Subjects|||Number
826462|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Neutralising Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"A seroconverted subject for neutralising antibodies was a subject with a minimum 4-fold increase in titre at post-vaccination.
Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Perth/16/09 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
At Month 6, only data for the Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1) strain were presented for the Havrix Group."|At Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for antibody persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available at Month 6.||Subjects|||Number
826448|NCT01190215|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against Fluarix Vaccine Containing H1N1 Strain.|"Fluarix vaccine strain was Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1).
A seroconverted subject was a subject who had either a pre-vaccination (Day 0) titre less than (< ) 1:10 and a post-vaccination titre greater than or equal to ( ≥) 1:40 or a pre-vaccination titre ≥ 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titre.
Day 28 data were presented for the Fluarix Group only."|At Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Subjects|||Number
826449|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects.|During the entire study period (Up to Month 6)|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
826450|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects.|Within the 28-day (Days 0-27) post-vaccination period|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
826451|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Adverse Events of Special Interest.|Adverse events of special interest for safety monitoring includes both convulsion and anaphylaxis.|During the entire study period (Up to Month 6)|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
826452|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Adverse Events of Specific Interest (AESIs)/Potential Immune Mediated Diseases (pIMDs).|Potential Immune-Mediated Diseases (pIMDs) or Adverse events of specific interest (AESI), are a subset of AEs that include both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology.|During the entire study period (Up to Month 6)|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
826453|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Medically-attended Events (MAEs).|For each solicited and unsolicited symptom the subject experienced, the subject was asked if they received medical attention defined as hospitalization, an emergency room visit or a visit to or from medical personnel for any reason.|During the entire study period (Up to Month 6)|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
826454|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Medically-attended Events (MAEs).|For each solicited and unsolicited symptom the subject experienced, the subject was asked if they received medical attention defined as hospitalization, an emergency room visit or a visit to or from medical personnel for any reason.|Within the 28-day (Days 0-27) post-vaccination period|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
826455|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|"An unsolicited adverse event is any adverse event (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.
Grade 3 = event that prevented normal, everyday activities. Related = event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination."|Within 28 days (Day 0 – Day 27) after vaccination|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
826456|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Days With Grade 3 Solicited General Symptoms.|"Solicited general symptoms assessed were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache and myalgia.
Grade 3 symptom = general symptom that prevented normal activity.
Inter-quartile range assessed was the 25th percentile and the 75th percentile."|Within 7 days (Day 0 – Day 6) after vaccination|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826457|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Days With Any Solicited General Symptoms.|"Solicited general symptoms assessed were arthralgia, fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, myalgia, shivering, sweating, temperature (temperature = axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius).
Inter-quartile range assessed was the 25th percentile and the 75th percentile."|Within 7 days (Day 0 – Day 6) after vaccination|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826458|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Days With Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms.|"Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain and swelling.
Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling above 50 millimetres.
Inter-quartile range assessed was the 25th percentile and the 75th percentile."|Within 7 days (Day 0 – Day 6) after vaccination|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826459|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Days With Any Solicited Local Symptoms.|"Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling.
Inter-quartile range assessed was the 25th percentile and the 75th percentile."|Within 7 days (Day 0 – Day 6) after vaccination|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826460|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited General Symptoms.|"Solicited general symptoms assessed were arthralgia, fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, myalgia, shivering, sweating, temperature (temperature = axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius).
Any = occurrence of any solicited general symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 symptom = general symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 temperature = axillary temperature above 39.0 degrees Celsius."|Within 7 days (Day 0 – Day 6) after vaccination|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
826461|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms.|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of any solicited local symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling above 50 millimetres.|Within 7 days (Day 0 – Day 6) after vaccination|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all vaccinated subjects.||Subjects|||Number
826463|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Neutralising Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"A seroconverted subject for neutralising antibodies was a subject with a minimum 4-fold increase in titre at post-vaccination.
Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Perth/16/09 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
Day 28 data were presented for the Fluarix Group only."|At Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Subjects|||Number
826464|NCT01190215|Secondary|Geometric Mean Antibody Titres for Neutralising Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Perth/16/09 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
Titres were expressed as geometric mean antibody titres (GMTs)."|At Day 0 and at Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for antibody persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available at Month 6.||titre||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826465|NCT01190215|Secondary|Geometric Mean Antibody Titres for Neutralising Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Perth/16/09(H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
Day 28 data were presented for the Fluarix Group only.
Titres were expressed as geometric mean antibody titres (GMTs)."|At Day 0 and at Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||titre||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826466|NCT01190215|Secondary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
MGI is defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titre to the pre-vaccination (Day 0) reciprocal HI titre.
Only data for the Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1) strain were presented for the Havrix Group."|At Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for antibody persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available at Month 6.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826467|NCT01190215|Secondary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
MGI is defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titre to the pre-vaccination (Day 0) reciprocal HI titre.
Day 28 data were presented for the Fluarix Group only."|At Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826468|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
A seroprotected subject was a subject with a serum HI titre ≥ 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection.
Only data for the Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1) strain were presented for the Havrix Group."|At Day 0 and Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for antibody persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available at Month 6.||Subjects|||Number
826469|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
A seroprotected subject was a subject with a serum HI titre ≥ 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection.
Day 28 data were presented for the Fluarix Group only."|At Day 0 and Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Subjects|||Number
826470|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
A seroconverted subject was a subject who had either a pre-vaccination (Day 0) titre < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titre ≥ 1:40 or a pre-vaccination titre ≥ 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titre.
Only data for the Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1) strain were presented for the Havrix Group."|At Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for antibody persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available at Month 6.||Subjects|||Number
826471|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
A seroconverted subject was a subject who had either a pre-vaccination (Day 0) titre less than (< ) 1:10 and a post-vaccination titre greater than or equal to ( ≥) 1:40 or a pre-vaccination titre ≥ 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titre.
Day 28 data were presented for the Fluarix Group only."|At Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Subjects|||Number
826512|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Days With Solicited Local Symptoms.|The number of days with any grade of local symptoms after Dose 1 and Dose 2 vaccination respectively was tabulated. Assessed solicited local symptoms for duration were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on vaccinated subjects with available results and with the symptom sheet completed.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826472|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
Seropositivity was assessed for subjects with an antibody titre assay cut-off equal to or above 1:10.
Only data for the Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1) strain were presented for the Havrix Group."|At Day 0 and at Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for antibody persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available at Month 6.||Subjects|||Number
826473|NCT01190215|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
Seropositivity was assessed for subjects with an antibody titre assay cut-off value equal to or above 1:10.
Day 28 data were presented for the Fluarix Group only."|At Day 0 and Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Subjects|||Number
826474|NCT01190215|Primary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against Fluarix Vaccine Containing H1N1 Strain.|"Fluarix vaccine strain was Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1).
Seropositivity was assessed for subjects with an antibody titre assay cut-off value equal to or above 1:10.
Day 28 data was presented only for the Fluarix Group."|At Day 0 and Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Subjects|||Number
826475|NCT01190215|Secondary|Geometric Mean Antibody Titres for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
Only data for the Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1) strain were presented for the Havrix Group.
Titres were expressed as geometric mean antibody titres (GMTs)."|At Day 0 and at Month 6|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for antibody persistence at Month 6 which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available at Month 6.||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826476|NCT01190215|Primary|Geometric Mean Antibody Titres for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against Fluarix Vaccine Containing H1N1 Strain.|"Fluarix vaccine strain was Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1).
Day 28 data were presented only for the Fluarix Group.
Titres were expressed as geometric mean antibody titre."|At Day 0 and Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826477|NCT01190215|Secondary|Geometric Mean Antibody Titres for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against All Fluarix Vaccine Strains.|"Fluarix vaccine strains were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008.
Day 28 data were presented for the Fluarix Group only.
Titres were expressed as geometric mean antibody titres (GMTs)."|At Day 0 and Day 28|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity at Day 28 included subjects who received at least 1 vaccine dose, for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. It included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against H1N1 antigen for the blood sample taken 28 days after the vaccine dose.||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826478|NCT01196741|Secondary|Median PFS||From first saracatinib/placebo dose to first documented progression and/or death, assessed up to 36 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826479|NCT01196741|Secondary|Median Time To Progression Based on RECIST v1.1 and GCIG CA125 Criteria|"Where a patient's disease is not measurable by RECIST v1.1, response may be based on GCIG CA125 criteria plus symptoms.
Time To Progression will be calculated by the trial statistician during the final analysis."|Using RECIST v1.1 at baseline; at Week 7 or 8 of each chemotherapy cycle; and 3 monthly during follow up. CA125 response will be assessed at baseline, weeks 1, 3 and 6 of each chemotherapy cycle, and at every follow up visit.||||||
826480|NCT01196741|Secondary|Quality of Life: Trial Outcome Index (TOI) Based on FACT-O|"The TOI value for each patient is derived at each timepoint by calculating the sum of 3 subscales: Physical Well-Being (PWB), Functional Well-Being (FWB), Additional Concerns. Each subscale score is derived from questions with 4 answers (0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=somewhat, 3=quite a bit, 4=very much). In each subscale reversals are performed and the individual question scores added together. This value is then multiplied by the number of questions within the subscale, and divided by the number of questions answered to derive a subscale score. The higher each subscale score, the better the QoL.
PWB 7 questions, lower values=better QoL.
FWB 7 questions, higher values=better QoL.
Additional concerns 11 questions (higher values in 6 questions=better QoL; higher values in 5 questions=worse QoL)
The TOI is reported for each arm based on the average TOI score of each patient calculated across the outcome measure time frame. The higher the TOI, the better the QoL."|Patients will fill in FACT-O questionnaires at the following timepoints: baseline; Weeks 1, 3 and 6 of every chemotherapy cycle; at every follow up visit|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
826481|NCT01196741|Secondary|Median Duration of Response|"Where a patient's disease is not measurable by RECIST v1.1, response may be based on GCIG CA125 criteria plus symptoms.
Duration of Response will be calculated by the trial statistician during the final analysis."|Using RECIST v1.1 at baseline; at Week 7 or 8 of each chemotherapy cycle; and 3 monthly during follow up. CA125 response will be assessed at baseline, weeks 1, 3 and 6 of each chemotherapy cycle, and at every follow up visit.||||||
826482|NCT01196741|Secondary|Objective Response Rate Based on Investigator Assessment Based on RECIST v1.1 +/- GCIG CA125 Criteria|Where a patient's disease is not measurable by RECIST v1.1, response may be based on GCIG CA125 criteria plus symptoms.|Using RECIST v1.1 at baseline; at Week 7 or 8 of each chemotherapy cycle; and 3 monthly during follow up. CA125 response will be assessed at baseline, weeks 1, 3 and 6 of each chemotherapy cycle, and at every follow up visit.|||percentage of participants|||Number
826483|NCT01196741|Secondary|Overall Survival||First saracatinib/placebo dose until death, assessed up to 36 months|||months||Full Range|Median
826484|NCT01196741|Primary|6 Month Progression-free Survival Rate (PFS) (Based on Combined Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST) v1.1 +/- Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) CA125 Criteria)|"Where a patient's disease is not measurable by RECIST v1.1, response may be based on GCIG CA125 criteria plus symptoms.
The 6 month progression-free survival rate will be calculated by the trial statistician during the final analysis."|Using RECIST v1.1 at baseline; at Week 7 or 8 of each chemotherapy cycle; and 3 monthly during follow up. CA125 response will be assessed at baseline, weeks 1, 3 and 6 of each chemotherapy cycle, and at every follow up visit.|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
826485|NCT01196923|Primary|Acute Isolation of Pulmonary Veins.|99% of pulmonary veins were isolated (72/73)|Acute PVI measured on the day of treatment|All treated participants with reported data.||percent isolated pulmonary veins|||Number
826486|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Days With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs) After Vaccination|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any: any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 = unsolicited AE that prevented normal everyday activity. Analyses of duration for unsolicited AEs were not performed.|Within the 21-day (Days 0-20) follow-up period post vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.|||||
826487|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Days With Solicited General Symptoms After Vaccination|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms (Gastr.), headache, muscle ache, shivering, temperature (defined as oral temperature equal to or above 38.0 degrees Celsius) and joint pain at location other than the injection site (Joint Pain). Joint pain data were collected for subjects in Canada and Mexico only. Analyses of duration for solicited general symptoms were not performed.|Within the 7-day follow-up period after vaccination (Days 0-6)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, on subjects for whom results were available.|||||
826488|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Days With Solicited Local Symptoms After Vaccination.|Solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site. Analyses of duration for solicited local symptoms were not performed.|Within the 7-day follow-up period after vaccination (Days 0-6)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, on subjects for whom results were available.|||||
826489|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any = any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 = unsolicited AE that prevented normal everyday activity Related: unsolicited AE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within the 21-day (Days 0-20) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Subject|||Number
826490|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms (Gastr. Symptoms), headache, muscle ache, shivering, temperature – oral temperature equal to or above (≥) 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C) - and joint pain at location other than the injection site (Joint Pain). Grade 3 temperature = temperature ≥ 39.0 °C. Grade 3 symptom = symptom that prevented normal everyday activity. Related symptom = symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to study vaccination. Joint pain data were collected for subjects in Canada and Mexico only.|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, on subjects for whom results were available.||Subject|||Number
826491|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site. Grade 3 pain = significant pain at rest/pain that prevented normal everyday activity. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 100 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, on subjects for whom results were available.||Subject|||Number
826492|NCT01196975|Secondary|Seroconversion Factor for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|The seroconversion factor (SCF) was defined as the fold increase in serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) geometric mean titers (GMTs) post vaccination compared to Day 0 (i.e. the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the Day 21 reciprocal HI titer to the Day 0 reciprocal HI titer). The 4 assessed influenza strains were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N1), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 (FLO) flu strains.|At Day 21 (D21) post vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826493|NCT01196975|Secondary|Seroconversion Factor for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata|The seroconversion factor (SCF) was defined as the fold increase in serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) geometric mean titers (GMTs) post vaccination compared to Day 0 (i.e. the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the Day 21 reciprocal HI titer to the Day 0 reciprocal HI titer). The 4 assessed influenza strains were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N1), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 (FLO) flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 2 age categories, 18-60Y and ≥ 61Y.|At Day 21 (D21) post vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826513|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|During the entire study period (Day 0 - Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on vaccinated subjects with available results.||subjects|||Number
826494|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza by Age Strata|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had either a pre-vaccination titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and at least a four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The 4 assessed influenza strains were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N1), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 (FLO) flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 2 age categories, 18-60Y and ≥ 61Y.|At Day 21 (D21) after vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||Subject|||Number
826495|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had either a pre-vaccination titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and at least a four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The 4 assessed influenza strains were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N1), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 (FLO) flu strains.|At Day 21 (D21) after vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||Subject|||Number
826496|NCT01196975|Secondary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was 1:10. Antibodies assessed were antibodies against the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 flu strains.|At Day 0 (D0), and at Day 21 (D21) and Day 180 (D180) post vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for persistence, which included all vaccinated subjects who had not received a vaccine forbidden in the protocol, and with available assay results at Day 180 for assessed antibodies.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826497|NCT01196975|Secondary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was 1:10. Antibodies assessed were antibodies against the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 2 age categories, 18-60Y and ≥ 61Y.|At Day 0 (D0) and at Day 21 (D21) post vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826498|NCT01196975|Primary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was 1:10. Antibodies assessed were antibodies against the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 (FLO) flu strains. Results for Day 21 for the subjects in the GSK2282512A Group are the results specific to this primary outcome measure.|At Day 0 (D0) and at Day 21 (D21) post vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826499|NCT01196975|Secondary|Seroconversion Factor for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata|The seroconversion factor (SCF) was defined as the fold increase in serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) geometric mean titers (GMTs) post vaccination compared to Day 0 (i.e. the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the Day 21 reciprocal HI titer to the Day 0 reciprocal HI titer). The 4 assessed influenza strains were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N1), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 (FLO) flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 2 age categories, 18-64Y and ≥ 65Y.|At Day 21 (D21) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826500|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza by Age Strata|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had either a pre-vaccination titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and at least a four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The 4 assessed influenza strains were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N1), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 (FLO) flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 2 age categories, 18-64Y and ≥ 65Y.|At Day 21 (D21) after vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||Subject|||Number
826501|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with serum Hemagglutination Inhibition titer ≥ 1:40. The 4 assessed influenza strains were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N1), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 (FLO) flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 2 age categories, 18-64Y and ≥ 65Y.|At Day 0 (D0) and at Day 21 (D21) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||Subject|||Number
827502|NCT01207570|Primary|Ankle Passive Range of Motion|Ankle passive range of motion at day 4 before the crossover treatment|day 4 before treatment|All subjects received the intended treatment protocol and were included in the analysis. ITT was used to analyze the data.||degree||Standard Deviation|Mean
826502|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with serum Hemagglutination Inhibition titer ≥ 1:40. The 4 assessed influenza strains were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N1), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 (FLO) flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 2 age categories, 18-60Y and ≥ 61Y.|At Day 0 (D0) and at Day 21 (D21) after vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subject|||Number
826503|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with serum Hemagglutination Inhibition titer ≥ 1:40. The 4 assessed influenza strains were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N1), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 (FLO) flu strains|At Day 0 (D0) and at Day 21 (D21) after vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||Subject|||Number
826504|NCT01196975|Secondary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was 1:10. Antibodies assessed were antibodies against the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 2 age categories, 18-64Y and ≥ 65Y.|At Day 0 (D0), and at Day 21 (D21) and Day 180 (D180) post vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for persistence, which included all vaccinated subjects who had not received a vaccine forbidden in the protocol, and with available assay results at Day 180 for assessed antibodies.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826505|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|From the beginning of the study until study end (from Day 0 to Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Subject|||Number
826506|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Potential Immune-mediated Diseases (pIMDs)|Potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) are a subset of adverse events that include both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology. Related pIMD = pIMD assessed by the investigator to be causally related to vaccination.|From the beginning of the study until study end (from Day 0 to Day 180) .|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on subjects with available results.||Subject|||Number
826507|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Related Medically-attended Adverse Events (MAEs)|Medically-attended adverse events (MAEs) were non-serious and serious events leading to an otherwise unscheduled visit to or from medical personnel for any reason, including emergency room visits. If a medically-attended adverse event was leading to hospitalization (or met any other serious adverse event [SAE] criterion), it was reported as SAE. Related MAE = MAE assessed by the investigator to be causally related to vaccination. Relationship to vaccination was not computed for MAEs.|From the beginning of the study until study end (from Day 0 to Day 180) .|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on subjects with available results.|||||
826508|NCT01196975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Medically-attended Adverse Events (MAEs)|Medically-attended adverse events (MAEs) were non-serious and serious events leading to an otherwise unscheduled visit to or from medical personnel for any reason, including emergency room visits. If a medically-attended adverse event was leading to hospitalization (or met any other serious adverse event [SAE] criterion), it was reported as SAE.|From the beginning of the study until study end (from Day 0 to Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on subjects with available results.||Subject|||Number
826509|NCT01196975|Secondary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was 1:10. Antibodies assessed were antibodies against the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 2 age categories, 18-60Y and ≥ 61Y.|At Day 0 (D0), and at Day 21 (D21) and Day 180 (D180) post vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence, which included all vaccinated subjects who had not received a vaccine forbidden in the protocol with available assay results for assessed antibodies in Day 180 blood samples.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826510|NCT01196975|Secondary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was 1:10. Antibodies assessed were antibodies against the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (BRI) and FLU B/Florida/4/06 flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 2 age categories, 18-64Y and ≥ 65Y.|At Day 0 (D0) and at Day 21 (D21) post vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826511|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Days With Solicited General Symptoms|The number of days with any grade of local symptoms after Dose 1 and Dose 2 vaccination respectively was tabulated. Assessed solicited general symptoms for duration were drowsiness, fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms (Gastro.), headache, irritability, loss of appetite, muscle aches, shivering and temperature [axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)].|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on vaccinated subjects with available results and with the symptom sheet completed.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826514|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Potential Immune-Mediated Diseases (pIMDs).|pIMDs were defined as a subset of AEs that included both clearly autoimmune diseases (AID) and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology.|During the entire study period (Day 0 - Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on vaccinated subjects with available results||subjects|||Number
826515|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Medically Attended Adverse Events (MAEs).|MAEs were defined as AEs that resulted in medical attention (defined as hospitalization, an emergency room visit or a visit to or from medical personnel for any reason). Any = any MAE regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 MAE = MAE which prevented normal, everyday activities. Related = MAE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination. Assessment of intensity for MAEs was not performed.|During the entire study period (Day 0 - Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on vaccinated subjects with available results.||subjects|||Number
826516|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any = any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 = unsolicited AE that prevented normal activity Related = unsolicited AE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|During the 28-day (Days 0-27) follow-up period after any vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on vaccinated subjects with available results.||subjects|||Number
826517|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms in Subjects Aged 6 Years or Older.|Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and temperature [axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of any solicited general symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 drowsiness = drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 irritability = crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. Grade 3 loss of appetite = not eating at all. Related = general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination. Grade 3 temperature = temperature >39.0°C.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after any vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on vaccinated subjects with available results and with the symptom sheet completed.||subjects|||Number
826518|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms in Subjects Younger Than 6 Years Old.|Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and temperature [axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of any solicited general symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 drowsiness = drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 irritability = crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. Grade 3 loss of appetite = not eating at all. Related = general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination. Grade 3 temperature = temperature >39.0°C.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after any vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on vaccinated subjects with available results and with the symptom sheet completed.||subjects|||Number
826519|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms.|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site. Any = incidence of a particular symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = Cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful (Child <6 years) or pain that prevented normal activity (Child >6 years). Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 50 millimeters (mm) of the injection site.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after any vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, on vaccinated subjects with available results and with the symptom completed.||subjects|||Number
826520|NCT01196988|Secondary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|MGI is defined as the geometric mean of the within subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titer to the Day 0 reciprocal HI titer. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata). Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 6 -17 months and 18-35 months.|At Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826521|NCT01196988|Secondary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|MGI is defined as the geometric mean of the within subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titer to the Day 0 reciprocal HI titer. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata). Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 3-8 years and 9-17 years.|At Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826522|NCT01196988|Secondary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease.|MGI is defined as the geometric mean of the within subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titer to the Day 0 reciprocal HI titer. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata).|At Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826523|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|A seroprotected subject was defined as as a vaccinated subject who had a serum HI titer ≥ 1:120. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata). Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 6 -17 months and 18-35 months.|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826524|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had a serum HI titer ≥ 1:120. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata). Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 3-8 years and 9-17 years.|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826525|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had a serum HI titer ≥ 1:120. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata).|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826526|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had a serum HI titer ≥ 1:80. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata). Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 6-17 months and 18-35 months.|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826527|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had a serum HI titer ≥ 1:80. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata). Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 3-8 years and 9-17 years.|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826528|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had a serum HI titer ≥ 1:80. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata).|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826529|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had a serum HI titer ≥ 1:40. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata). Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 6-17 months and 18-35 months.|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826530|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had a serum HI titer ≥ 1:40. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata). Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 3-8 years and 9-17 years.|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826558|NCT01197911|Secondary|Apparent Total Body Clearance (CL/F) of Aleglitazar|CL/F was calculated as dose/AUCinf, where AUCinf represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol.||L/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826531|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had a serum HI titer ≥ 1:40. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata).|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826532|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had either a pre-vaccination titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and at least a four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata). Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 6-17 months and 18-35 months.|At Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826533|NCT01196988|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had either a pre-vaccination titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and at least a four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata). Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 3-8 years and 9-17 years.|At Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826534|NCT01196988|Secondary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|"Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was 1:10. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata).
Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 6-17 months and 18-35 months."|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826535|NCT01196988|Secondary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease by Age Strata.|"Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was 1:10. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata).
Subjects were assessed according to 2 age strata: 3-8 years and 9-17 years."|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826536|NCT01196988|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease.|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had either a pre-vaccination titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and at least a four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata).|At Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826537|NCT01196988|Primary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease.|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was 1:10. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the FLU A/California/7/09 (H1N1), FLU A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FLU B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and FLU B/Brisbane/3/07 (Yamagata).|At Day 0 [PRE] and at Day 28 (for primed subjects) and Day 56 (for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning Immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826538|NCT01197898|Primary|Change From Baseline in Extent of Presence/Absence of Epithelial Tongue.|The results were found to be inconclusive due to the small number of biopsy specimens of sufficient quality for analysis. Four of the 10 subjects enrolled were not evaluable due to poor biopsy quality.|28 Days|Goal was to complete 10 subjects in an allocation ratio of 1:1 for Santyl vs. placebo. Since this was an exploratory study, the sample size was arbitrary.||participants|||Number
826539|NCT01197911|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Abnormalities in Clinical Laboratory Parameters|Laboratory parameters included hematology, coagulation, biochemistry, and urinalysis. A marked abnormality was defined as a test result which was outside of the marked abnormality range. Data was reported as the number of participants who had low level values (values less than the normal range) and high level values (values more than the normal range).|Up to 6 weeks|The safety analysis consisted of all participants who had received the single dose of the study drug (aleglitazar), whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not.||participants|||Number
826540|NCT01197911|Secondary|Number of Participants With Low and High Vital Signs Values|Vital signs were assessed after participants had rested in a supine position for no less than 5 minutes. Vital signs included systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, pulse rate, and oral body temperature. The normal ranges of vital signs were: systolic blood pressure as 90-140 millimeter of Hg (mm Hg), diastolic blood pressure as 50-90 mm Hg, pulse rate as 45-100 beats per minute, and oral body temperature as 36.3-37.5 degree Celsius. Data was reported as the number of participants who had low level values (values less than the normal range) and high level values (values more than the normal range).|Days -28 to -2, Day -1, Days 1 to 5, and Day 10 for blood pressure and pulse rate; and Days -28 to -2, Day -1, and Day 10 for oral body temperature|The safety analysis consisted of all participants who had received the single dose of the study drug (aleglitazar), whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not.||participants|||Number
826541|NCT01197911|Secondary|Number of Participants With Low and High Electrocardiograms (ECGs) Parameter Values|The ECG evaluations were performed after participants were at rest and in supine position for at least 5 minutes before recording and remain resting and supine during the recordings. ECGs parameters included heart rate (HR), RR interval, PR interval, QRS duration, QT interval, QTcB, and QTcF intervals. The normal ranges of ECG parameter values were: HR as 40-100 beats per minute, RR as 600-1500 milliseconds (msec), PR as 120-200 msec, QRS as 80-120 msec, QT as 200-500 msec, QTcB as 350-450 msec, and QTcF as 350-450 msec. Data was reported as the number of participants who had low level values (values less than the normal range) and high level values (values more than the normal range).|Screening (Days -28 to -2), baseline (Day -1), Days 1 to 5, and follow-up visit (Day 10)|The safety analysis consisted of all participants who had received the single dose of the study drug (aleglitazar), whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not.||participants|||Number
826542|NCT01197911|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Death, and Study Discontinuation|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered to be related to the medicinal product. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect.|Up to 6 weeks|The safety analysis consisted of all participants who had received the single dose of the study drug (aleglitazar), whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not.||participants|||Number
826543|NCT01197911|Secondary|Apparent Unbound Total Body Clearance (CL/Fu) of Aleglitazar|CL/F is an apparent total clearance of the drug from plasma after oral administration. It was calculated as dose/AUCinf. AUCinf represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose for plasma; 0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-24, and 24-48 hours post-dose for urine|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific study drug/metabolite were analyzed.||L/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826544|NCT01197911|Secondary|Apparent Unbound Volume of Distribution (Vz/Fu) of Aleglitazar|VzF/u is an apparent volume of Unbound distribution during terminal phase after non-intravenous administration. It was calculated as CL/F/kel, where CL/F was calculated as dose/AUCinf, where AUCinf represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity and kel as constant elimination rate of aleglitazar.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose for plasma; 0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-24, and 24-48 hours post-dose for urine|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed. Only participants with data available for specific study drug/metabolite were analyzed.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826545|NCT01197911|Secondary|Area Under the Unbound Plasma Concentration-time Curve of Aleglitazar From Time 0 to 48 Hours Post-dose (AUCu,0-48)|AUClast represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero to the 48 hours post-dose. It was calculated by non-compartmental analysis using the linear trapezoidal rule, using relative actual time values.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed. Only participants with data available for specific study drug/metabolite were analyzed.||h*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826546|NCT01197911|Secondary|Area Under the Unbound Plasma Concentration-time Curve of Aleglitazar From 0 to the Last Quantifiable Time-point Post-dose (AUCu,Last)|Plasma samples were collected for this PK parameter. AUClast represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero 0 to the last quantifiable time-point post-dose. It was calculated by non-compartmental analysis using the linear trapezoidal rule, using relative actual time values. AUClast was extrapolated to AUCinf by adding the ratio of Clast/kel to the AUClast, where Clast was the last observed concentration and kel was elimination rate constant.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed. Only participants with data available for specific study drug/metabolite were analyzed.||h*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826547|NCT01197911|Secondary|Maximum Unbound Plasma Concentration (Cmax,u) of Aleglitazar|Cmax was obtained directly from the concentration-time data.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed. Only participants with data available for specific study drug/metabolite were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826597|NCT01198600|Primary|Phase 3: Ocular Comfort, Lens Age 14 Days, End of Day|Ocular comfort was rated bilaterally by the participant after wearing the same pair of lenses for 14 days. Ocular comfort was recorded on a continuum and converted to a 100-point scale where 1=EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE (“I CANNOT tolerate the comfort of my eyes! I am in pain!”)and 100=VERY COMFORTABLE & FRESH (“Wow! My eyes feel incredible! I love this feeling.”)|Day 15|All enrolled and dispensed participants, Phase 3.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826548|NCT01197911|Secondary|Area Under the Unbound Plasma Concentration-time Curve of Aleglitazar From Time 0 to Infinity (AUCu,Inf)|AUCinf represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity. It was calculated by non-compartmental analysis using the linear trapezoidal rule, using relative actual time values. It was assessed using an analysis of variance model on the log-transformed values of AUCinf of aleglitazar with hepatic impairment group as factor.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed. Only participants with data available for specific study drug/metabolite were analyzed.||h*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826549|NCT01197911|Secondary|Mean of Fraction of Unbound Aleglitazar (fu)|fu was calculated using the mean of the 2-hour (reflecting Cmax) and 24-hour (reflecting Ctrough) values for each participant or, if the result of only one time-point was available, fu was the result of the available time-point. Ctrough) is a measured concentration at the end of a dosing interval at steady state.|2 and 24 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed. Only participants with data available for specific study drug/metabolite were analyzed.||Percentage||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826550|NCT01197911|Secondary|Fraction of Drug Excreted in Urine From Time 0 to 48 Hours Post-dose (fe0-48) of Aleglitazar|fe0-48 was calculated as Ae0-48/dose. The cumulative amount excreted in urine Ae0-48 over the entire collection interval of 48 hours was calculated by adding the Ae of the intervals 0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-24, and 24-48 hours. Ae was calculated by multiplying the urine volume within the collection interval by the associated drug concentration.|0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-24, and 24-48 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed. Only participants with data available for specific study drug/metabolite were analyzed.||mcg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826551|NCT01197911|Secondary|Amount Excreted in Urine From Time 0 to 48 Hours Post-dose (Ae0-48) of Aleglitazar, M1, and M6|The cumulative amount excreted in urine Ae0-48 over the entire collection interval of 48 hours was calculated by adding the Ae of the intervals 0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-24, and 24-48 hours, where Ae was calculated by multiplying the urine volume within the collection interval by the associated drug concentration.|0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-24, and 24-48 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed.||mcg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826552|NCT01197911|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) of Aleglitazar|Vz/F is the apparent volume of distribution during terminal phase after non-intravenous administration. It was calculated as CL/F/kel, where CL/F was calculated as dose/AUCinf, where AUCinf represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity and kel as constant elimination rate of aleglitazar.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose for plasma; 0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-24, and 24-48 hours post-dose for urine|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826553|NCT01197911|Secondary|Elimination Rate Constant (Kel) of Aleglitazar|The kel is fraction of a substance that is removed per unit time measured at any particular instant. It was calculated using at least 3 concentration-time points and ideally covered more than 2 half-lives.|0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-24, and 24-48 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol.||1/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826554|NCT01197911|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Half-life (t½) of Aleglitazar, M1, and M6|M1 and M6 are pharmacologically inactive metabolites of aleglitazar. T1/2 is the time required for a given drug concentration in the plasma to decrease by 50%.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826555|NCT01197911|Secondary|Time of Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Aleglitazar, M1, and M6|M1 and M6 are pharmacologically inactive metabolites of aleglitazar. Tmax was measured as time to reach the maximum concentration in the plasma after post-dose.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol.||h||Full Range|Mean
826556|NCT01197911|Secondary|Apparent Non-renal Clearance (CLNR/F) of Aleglitazar|Plasma and urine samples were collected for this PK parameter. CLNR/F was estimated as CL/F, based on the approximated formula of CLNR/F = (CL-CLR)/F with CLR of aleglitazar being equal to zero. CL/F was calculated as dose/AUCinf, where AUCinf represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity. CLR was calculated as Ae0-48/AUC0-48, where Ae0-48 as amount excreted in urine from time zero to 48 hours post-dose and AUC0-48 represents area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero to the 48 hours post-dose.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose for plasma; 0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-24, and 24-48 hours post-dose for urine|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed.||L/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826557|NCT01197911|Secondary|Renal Clearance (CLR) of Aleglitazar, M1, and M6|CLR was calculated as Ae0-48/AUC0-48, where Ae0-48 as amount excreted in urine from time 0 to 48 hours post-dose and AUC0-48 represents area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero to the 48 hours post-dose.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72, and 96 hours post-dose for plasma; 0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-24, and 24-48 hours post-dose for urine|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed.||L/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826559|NCT01197911|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to the Last Quantifiable Time-point Post-dose (AUClast) of Aleglitazar, M1, and M6|AUClast was calculated by non-compartmental analysis using the linear trapezoidal rule, using relative actual time values.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed.||h*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826560|NCT01197911|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to 48 Hours Post-dose (AUC0-48) of Aleglitazar, M1, and M6|M1 and M6 are pharmacologically inactive metabolites of aleglitazar. AUC0-48 was calculated by non-compartmental analysis using the linear trapezoidal rule, using relative actual time values.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed.||h*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826561|NCT01197911|Secondary|Cmax of M1 and M6|M1 and M6 are pharmacologically inactive metabolites of aleglitazar. Cmax was obtained directly from the concentration-time data.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826562|NCT01197911|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Aleglitazar|Cmax was obtained directly from the concentration-time data.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The pharmacokinetics (PK) analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826563|NCT01197911|Secondary|AUCinf of M1 (RO4408754) and M6 (RO4583746)|M1 and M6 are pharmacologically inactive metabolites of aleglitazar. AUCinf represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity. AUCinf was calculated by non-compartmental analysis using the linear trapezoidal rule, using relative actual time values.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The PK analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol. Only participants with data available for specific metabolite were analyzed.||h*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826564|NCT01197911|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUCinf) of Aleglitazar|AUCinf was calculated by non-compartmental analysis using the linear trapezoidal rule, using relative actual time values.|Pre-dose, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours post-dose|The pharmacokinetics (PK) analysis population consisted of all participants who received the study drug and adhered to the protocol.||hours (h)*nanogram (ng)/milliliter (mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826565|NCT01198145|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Each Arm That Experience Clinically Significant Deficits in Overall Quality of Life and Fatigue|For each arm, the percentage of patients experience clinically significant deficits in overall QOL and fatigue as indicated by a score of 5 or lower on the 0-10 scale. The analysis was done using the questionnaire that was completed during the first week of radiotherapy (RT) and 6 weeks after RT.|Up to 6 weeks post radiotherapy|All completed QOL questionnaires were included in the analysis. Questionnaires used were completed during the first week during RT and 6 weeks after RT. From Arm I, 41 patients completed questionnaires, 39 during and 26 after RT. For Arm II, 42 patients completed the questions, 40 during and 29 after RT.||percentage of participants|||Number
826566|NCT01198145|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Each Arm That Require Any Type of Antidiarrheal Medications.|The number of patients reporting the use of anti-diarrheal medications divided by the number of patients evaluated for this endpoint.|Up to 24 months post radiotherapy|Two patients in Arm I and one patient from Arm II were not included in the endpoint analyses due to cancellations and protocol violations.||percentage of participants|||Number
826567|NCT01198145|Secondary|"Percent of Patients in Each Arm That Recorded Yes to Each of Questions 2-10 on the Bowel Function Questionnaire"|"Questions that were used in this analysis:
2. Have you had a problem causing you to get up at night to have a bowel movement? 3. Have you had a problem causing you to lose control of your bowel movements? 4. Have you had a problem causing you to have a bowel movement within 30 minutes of a prior bowel movement? 5. Have you had to wear protective clothing or a pad in case you lost control of a bowel movement? 6. Have you had a problem causing you to be unable to tell the difference between stool and gas? 7. Have you had a problem causing you to have stools that are liquid? 1=yes 2=no q08 8. Have you found that once you feel the urge to have a bowel movement, you must do so within 15 minutes to avoid an accident? 9. Have you had cramping with a bowel movement? 10. Have you had blood in your bowel movement?"|Up to 6 weeks post radiation therapy|All patients that completed the questionnaire were included in the analysis. Questionnaires used were completed during the last week during RT and 6 weeks after RT.||percentage of participants|||Number
826568|NCT01198145|Secondary|Percentage of Patients in Each Arm That Experience Tenesmus, Abdominal Pain, Constipation, Diarrhea and Rectal Bleeding During and After RT|The number of patients that reported any grade 1 or higher adverse event was divided by the total number of patients evaluated. The analysis was done separately for each of the 5 outcomes and separately during RT and after RT.|During radiation therapy and up to 6 weeks post radiation therapy|Two patients in Arm I and one patient from Arm II were not included in the endpoint analyses due to cancellations and protocol violations. 42 patients from each arm started RT and were used in that portion of the analysis. 25 patients from Arm I and 29 patients from Arm II were evaluated after RT. Two patients from Arm 1 provided incomplete data.||percentage of participants|||Number
826580|NCT01198366|Secondary|Interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) Enzyme-linked Immunospot (ELISpot) Response: Spot Forming Units/10^6 PBMC According to ELISpot Assay|To evaluate the immunogenicity of AERAS-402 compared to controls. ELISpot assay of specific T cell responses after stimulation with a peptide pool of mycobacterial peptides. Values presented have been corrected for background readings.|28 days post last vaccination|"Groups 1 and 4: Subjects who received both vaccinations as randomized (assays were not done for Groups 2 and 3).
Group 5: Subjects who received all three study vaccinations as randomized."||SFU/10^6 PBMC||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826569|NCT01198145|Secondary|Average Graded Severity for Tenesmus, Abdominal Pain, Constipation, Diarrhea and Hemorrhage During and After RT as Graded by CTCAE v4.0|Tenesmus, Abdominal pain, constipation, diarrhea and hemorrhaging were assessed during RT and up to 6 weeks after RT. Severity of these events were graded using the terminology and grading categories defined in the NCI's Common Toxicity Criteria (CTCAE), Version 4.0. Grade 0 = None; 1=Mild; Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3=Severe, Grade 4=Life-threatening. For each patient, an average score for each outcome variable during and after RT calculated as follows: The sum of all severity scores for that variable divided by the number of severity scores for that variable recorded for the patient during the course of RT and for 6 weeks following RT.|During radiation therapy and up to 6 weeks post radiation therapy|Two patients in Arm I and one patient from Arm II were not included in the endpoint analyses due to cancellations and protocol violations. 42 patients from each arm started RT and were used in that portion of the analysis. 25 patients from Arm I and 29 patients from Arm II were evaluated after RT. Two patients from Arm 1 provided incomplete data.||Average Grade of Event||Standard Deviation|Mean
826570|NCT01198145|Secondary|Area Under the Curve That Combines the Individual Severity of Diarrhea Toxicity as Measured by the CTCAE v4.0 During and After RT|For each patient, an Area Under the Curve (AUC) summary statistic will be calculated taking into account the individual severity of diarrhea toxicity over time. Severity of diarrhea was graded using the terminology and grading categories defined in the NCI's Common Toxicity Criteria (CTCAE), Version 4.0. Grade 0 = None; 1=Mild; Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3=Severe, Grade 4=Life-threatening. The curve was constructed using weekly assessments during and after RT. A separate analysis was done during the course of RT and every week for 6 weeks following RT.|During radiation therapy and up to 6 weeks post radiation therapy|Two patients in Arm I and one patient from Arm II were not included in the endpoint analyses due to cancellations and protocol violations. 42 patients from each arm started RT and were used in that portion of the analysis. 25 patients from Arm I and 29 patients from Arm II were evaluated after RT. Two patients from Arm 1 provided incomplete data.||grade*week||Standard Deviation|Mean
826571|NCT01198145|Secondary|Maximum Severity of Each Outcome Variable (Rectal Bleeding, Abdominal Cramping, Tenesmus, Constipation, and Diarrhea) Measured During and After RT|"The maximal severity of each of 5 different adverse even types (Tenesmus, Abdominal Pain, Constipation, Diarrhea, and Rectal Bleeding) were collected as a secondary endpoint. Severity of the events was graded using the terminology and grading categories defined in the NCI's Common Toxicity Criteria (CTCAE), Version 4.0. Grade 0 = None; 1=Mild; Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3=Severe, Grade 4=Life-threatening. Adverse events were assessed during the course of RT and for 6 weeks following RT. The table below represents the worst grade for each patient for each type.
Two-sided chi-square tests will be used to compare each percentage variable between treatment arms for each event type."|During radiation therapy and up to 6 weeks post radiation therapy|Two patients in Arm I and one patient from Arm II were not included in the endpoint analyses due to cancellations and protocol violations. 42 patients from each arm started RT and were used for the analysis. 25 patients from Arm I and 29 patients from Arm II were evaluated after RT. Two patients from Arm 1 provided incomplete data.||Participants|||Count of Participants
826572|NCT01198145|Primary|Maximum Severity of Diarrhea Toxicity as Measured by the CTCAE v4.0 During and After Radiotherapy (RT)|"The primary endpoint for this study is the maximal severity of diarrhea toxicity. Severity of diarrhea was graded using the terminology and grading categories defined in the NCI's Common Toxicity Criteria (CTCAE), Version 4.0. Grade 0 = None; 1=Mild; Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3=Severe, Grade 4=Life-threatening as measured by the CTCAE version 4.0. Assessments were recorded during the course of RT and for 6 weeks following RT. The table below represents the worst graded diarrhea for each patient.
A two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test will be used to test the equality of the distributions of maximum diarrhea severity grades between the two treatment arms."|During radiation therapy and up to 6 weeks post radiation therapy|Two patients in Arm I and one patient from Arm II were not included in the baseline analysis nor the endpoint analyses due to cancellations and protocol violations.||Participants|||Count of Participants
826573|NCT01198275|Primary|Probability of Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm at One-year Follow up.(Number of Patients Who Maintained Sinus Rhythm)|Sinus Rhythm maintenance means no Atrial Fibrillation recurrence at one-year follow up. Patients with successful electrical cardioversion (DCCV)underwent weekly clinical and electrocardiographic controls for the first three weeks following cardioversion. Subsequently, follow up visits with performance of clinical evaluation, ECG, and a 24-hour Holter monitoring were performed at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after DCCV.|one year|||partecipants|||Number
826574|NCT01198275|Secondary|The Mean Time to a First Recurrence of AF and the Rate of AF Recurrence|The mean time to a first recurrence of AF; and the rate of AF recurrence at 1, 3 and 6 months.|1, 3 and 6 months||07/2011||||
826575|NCT01198327|Secondary|Mean Change in Retinal Thickness|Mean change in retinal thickness as measured by OCT (Optical Coherence Tomography).|24 mos from study baseline|||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
826576|NCT01198327|Secondary|Mean Changes in Visual Acuity|Mean changes in visual acuity. Visual acuity is measured using standard ETDRS (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study) charts which measure visual acuity in terms of letters( ETDRS Letters) read at a distance of 4 meters away from the chart. The ETDRS letters Score can be from 0 to 100, with 0 representing poor vision and 100 representing best vision.|24 mos from study baseline|||ETDRS letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
826577|NCT01198327|Primary|Incidence of Serious Adverse Events.|Record the serious adverse events, both ocular and non-ocular to gather long-term safety data.|24 mos|||number of serious adverse events|||Number
826578|NCT01198366|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Converting From a Negative QuantiFERON Test (QFT) to Positive QFT After Vaccination|To evaluate the proportion of on-study QuantiFERON conversions from negative to positive in infants that received AERAS-402 compared to controls. A QFT value of on >= 0.35IU/mL was considered positive for this study.|up to 24 months post vaccination|Subjects who received at least one vaccination and had results at baseline and end of study.||% converting from QFT neg to pos|||Number
826579|NCT01198366|Secondary|Antigen-specific Antibody Response - Mean Optical Density (Mean OD)|To evaluate the immunogenicity of AERAS-402 compared to controls by ELISA Assay for Antigen-specific Antibody Response. Median responses of individual Mean OD (absorbance at 450nm) by study group is presented. Higher OD values suggests the presence of antibody to each of the Mtb antigens (Ag85A, Ag85B and TB10.4).|28 day post last vaccination|"Groups 1 and 4: Subjects who received both vaccinations as randomized (assays were not done for Ag85A and TB10.4).
Assays were not done for groups 2 and 3 for any antigen. Group 5: Subjects who received all three study vaccinations as randomized."||Optical Density||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826581|NCT01198366|Secondary|Percentage of Cells Expressing Various Cytokines Will be Measured by Intracellular Cytokine Staining (ICS) in All Subjects|To evaluate the immunogenicity of AERAS-402 compared to controls, flow cytometric ICS of CD4 and CD8 T cells producing any of three cytokines (IFN-γ, TNF-α, and/or IL-2) alone or in combination after stimulation with a peptide pool of mycobacterial peptides. Dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) subtracted responses are presented.|28 days post last vaccination|Groups 1–4: Subjects who received both vaccinations as randomized. Group 5: Subjects who received all three study vaccinations as randomized.||percentage of Tcell response||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826582|NCT01198366|Primary|Adverse Events Collected Per Subject|Adverse Events (AEs) are recorded for 28 days post vaccination Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) are recorded for the entire study period to assess the safety profile|Up to 24 months post vaccination|Subjects who received at least one vaccination.||percentage of subjects with an AE|||Number
826583|NCT01198509|Secondary|Mean Units Change in DAS28 From Baseline to 6 Months|"DAS28 (disease activity score with 28 joint count). Possible score range: 0 to 10. This is a composite index calculated from 4 measures: two from a physician (28 tender joint count, 28 swollen joint count), one from the patient (patient global estimate of disease activity), and one laboratory biomarker (erythrocyte sedimentation rate or ESR). A score of 0 represents best possible health status (no apparent disease activity) and 10 represents worst possible.
The outcome is reported as mean change in DAS28 score from baseline to 6 months. The mean changes reported are negative values for downward change in score (i.e., improvement in health status)."|6 months|Please note that only the first 3 groups (RA doxycycline, RA vancomycin, and RA randomized to no treatment) were analyzed for change from baseline to six months (outcomes). Groups 4, 5 and 6 (RA cross-sectional, Psoriatic Arthritis, and Healthy Volunteers) were analyzed for baseline measures only in a cross-sectional comparison.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
826584|NCT01198509|Primary|Alteration of Microbiota, Alteration of T Cell Function/Activation|"Oral and intestinal microbiota, and T cell function and activation, will be assessed at baseline, and at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 months after baseline, to determine whether changes are associated with vancomycin treatment versus doxycycline treatment versus no treatment.
Results are reported as number of participants who experienced changes in oral/intestinal microbiota, T cell function/activation.
Methods/criteria to assess change in microbiota: change in relative abundance of microorganisms at genus and species level (as assessed high-throughput 16S rDNA sequencing).
Methods/criteria to assess change in T cell function/activation: change in percentage of inhibition of regulatory T cells as measured by interferon gamma levels in in-vitro assays."|6 months|Primary outcome only evaluated in first three groups of RA patients: 4 randomized to treatment with doxycycline; 10 randomized to treatment with vancomycin; 19 randomized to no treatment.||participants|||Number
826585|NCT01198548|Secondary|PFS of Patients Receiving Study Treatment|"The estimated distributions of PFS will be obtained using the product-limit based Kaplan-Meier method.
3 Year Survival Rate"|Defined as the time from the start of the study treatment until the date of progression or death from any cause, whichever comes first, assessed up to 3 years|Due to the study’s early termination and inadequate number of patients, no patients were analyzed.|||||
826586|NCT01198548|Secondary|OS of Patients Receiving Study Treatment|The estimated distribution of OS will be obtained using the product-limit based Kaplan-Meier method.|Up to 3 years|Due to the study’s early termination and inadequate number of patients, no patients were analyzed.|||||
826587|NCT01198548|Secondary|Toxicity Rates as Assessed by NCI CTCAE Version 4||Up to 30 days post-treatment|Due to the study’s early termination and inadequate number of patients, no patients were analyzed.|||||
826588|NCT01198548|Secondary|RR of Patients Receiving Study Treatment||Up to 3 years|Trial terminated early. Too few patients to analyze.|||||
826589|NCT01198548|Primary|Rate of Sufficient Cholecalciferol||By week 16|Due to the study’s early termination and inadequate number of patients, no patients were analyzed.|||||
826590|NCT01198548|Primary|Median PFS|The estimated distributions of PFS will be obtained using the product-limit based Kaplan-Meier method. The corresponding 95% confidence intervals for the estimated probability will be computed using the method proposed in Clopper and Pearson.|Up to 12 months|Due to the study’s early termination and inadequate number of patients, no patients were analyzed.|||||
826591|NCT01198574|Primary|Status of Cellular Iron Deficiency|Cellular Iron deficiency status is also measured by serum transferrin receptor|at week 0, week 6 and week12|Per Protocol analysis||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826592|NCT01198574|Primary|Status of Tissue Iron Store|Tissue iron store was measured by serum ferritin|at week 0, week 6 and week12|Per Protocol analysis||µg/L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826593|NCT01198574|Primary|Haemoglobin Level|Haemoglobin level (g/L) measured by cyanmethaemoglobin method|at week 0, week 6 and week12|Per Protocol||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826594|NCT01198600|Primary|Phase 3: Ocular Comfort, Lens Age 27 Days, End of Day|Ocular comfort was rated bilaterally by the participant after wearing the same pair of lenses for 27 days. Ocular comfort was recorded on a continuum and converted to a 100-point scale where 1=EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE (“I CANNOT tolerate the comfort of my eyes! I am in pain!”)and 100=VERY COMFORTABLE & FRESH (“Wow! My eyes feel incredible! I love this feeling.”)|Day 43|All enrolled and dispensed participants, Phase 3.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826595|NCT01198600|Primary|Phase 3: Ocular Comfort, Lens Age 27 Days, Hour 10|Ocular comfort was rated bilaterally by the participant after wearing the same pair of lenses for 27 days. Ocular comfort was recorded on a continuum and converted to a 100-point scale where 1=EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE (“I CANNOT tolerate the comfort of my eyes! I am in pain!”)and 100=VERY COMFORTABLE & FRESH (“Wow! My eyes feel incredible! I love this feeling.”)|Day 43|All enrolled and dispensed participants, Phase 3.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826596|NCT01198600|Primary|Phase 3: Ocular Comfort, Lens Age 27 Days, Hour 1|Ocular comfort was rated bilaterally by the participant after wearing the same pair of lenses for 27 days. Ocular comfort was recorded on a continuum and converted to a 100-point scale where 1=EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE (“I CANNOT tolerate the comfort of my eyes! I am in pain!”)and 100=VERY COMFORTABLE & FRESH (“Wow! My eyes feel incredible! I love this feeling.”)|Day 43|All enrolled and dispensed participants, Phase 3.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826770|NCT01193114|Secondary|BDI Depression Score|Beck Depression Inventory - II (BDI - II) Range from 0 (no depression) to 63 (severe depression)|9 months post-baseline measure|The analysis was conducted with all of the collected data. Discrepancies in number of participants between the Participant Flow Module and the analysis are due to missing data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826598|NCT01198600|Primary|Phase 3: Ocular Comfort, Lens Age 14 Days, Hour 10|Ocular comfort was rated bilaterally by the participant after wearing the same pair of lenses for 14 days. Ocular comfort was recorded on a continuum and converted to a 100-point scale where 1=EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE (“I CANNOT tolerate the comfort of my eyes! I am in pain!”)and 100=VERY COMFORTABLE & FRESH (“Wow! My eyes feel incredible! I love this feeling.”)|Day 15|All enrolled and dispensed participants, Phase 3.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826599|NCT01198600|Primary|Phase 3: Ocular Comfort, Lens Age 14 Days, Hour 1|Ocular comfort was rated bilaterally by the participant after wearing the same pair of lenses for 14 days. Ocular comfort was recorded on a continuum and converted to a 100-point scale where 1=EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE (“I CANNOT tolerate the comfort of my eyes! I am in pain!”)and 100=VERY COMFORTABLE & FRESH (“Wow! My eyes feel incredible! I love this feeling.”)|Day 15|All enrolled and dispensed participants, Phase 3.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826600|NCT01198600|Primary|Phase 3: Ocular Comfort, Lens Age 1 Day, End of Day|Ocular comfort was rated bilaterally by the participant after wearing the same pair of lenses for 1 day. Ocular comfort was recorded on a continuum and converted to a 100-point scale where 1=EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE (“I CANNOT tolerate the comfort of my eyes! I am in pain!”)and 100=VERY COMFORTABLE & FRESH (“Wow! My eyes feel incredible! I love this feeling.”)|Day 1|All enrolled and dispensed participants, Phase 3.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826601|NCT01198600|Primary|Phase 3: Ocular Comfort, Lens Age 1 Day, Hour 10|Ocular comfort was rated bilaterally by the participant after wearing the same pair of lenses for 1 day. Ocular comfort was recorded on a continuum and converted to a 100-point scale where 1=EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE (“I CANNOT tolerate the comfort of my eyes! I am in pain!”)and 100=VERY COMFORTABLE & FRESH (“Wow! My eyes feel incredible! I love this feeling.”)|Day 1|All enrolled and dispensed participants, Phase 3.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826602|NCT01198600|Primary|Phase 3: Ocular Comfort, Lens Age 1 Day, Hour 1|Ocular comfort was rated bilaterally by the participant after wearing the same pair of lenses for 1 day. Ocular comfort was recorded on a continuum and converted to a 100-point scale where 1=EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE (“I CANNOT tolerate the comfort of my eyes! I am in pain!”)and 100=VERY COMFORTABLE & FRESH (“Wow! My eyes feel incredible! I love this feeling.”)|Day 1|All enrolled and dispensed participants, Phase 3.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826603|NCT01198691|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction|"Patients will be given a survey at their 6 week post-op visit to assess their satisfaction with the appearance of their scar. The survey asked whether patients strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with the statement, I am satisfied with the overall appearance of my incision. Those who responsed agree or strongly agree were said to be satisfied with the appearance and the outcome is reported as number of participants who were satisfied."|Patient satisfaction will be assessed 6 weeks later at their post-op visit|||participants|||Number
826604|NCT01198691|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction|"Patients will be given a survey prior to being discharged to assess their satisfaction with the appearance of their scar. The survey asked whether patients strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with the statement, I am satisfied with the overall appearance of my incision. Those who responsed agree or strongly agree were said to be satisfied with the appearance and the outcome is reported as number of participants who were satisfied."|This will be assessed 3 day after the patient's C-section before they are discharged from the hospital|||participants|||Number
826605|NCT01198691|Primary|Post Operative Pain (3 Days Post-op)|Post operative pain at the time of discharge will be measured using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The scale has a minimum score of 0 representing no pain and a maximum score of 10 representing the worst possible pain.|1 Year|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826606|NCT01198691|Primary|Post Operative Pain|Post operative pain at post operative day #1 will be measured using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The scale has a minimum score of 0 representing no pain and a maximum score of 10 representing the worst possible pain.|1 Year|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
826607|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject. Any SAE(s) = Occurrence of any SAE(s) regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Related SAE(s)= Occurrence of any SAE(s) assessed by the investigator as causally related to vaccination.|During the entire study period (from Day 0 to Day 180)|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
826608|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Medically-attended Adverse Events (MAEs) After Vaccination|Medically-attended adverse events (MAEs) were non-serious and serious events leading to an otherwise unscheduled visit to or from medical personnel for any reason, including emergency room visits. If a medically-attended adverse event was leading to hospitalization (or met any other criterion for serious adverse event (SAE)), it was reported as SAE. Any MAE(s) = Occurrence of any MAE(s) regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.Relationship to vaccination was not assessed for MAEs.|During the entire study period (from Day 0 to Day 180)|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
826609|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Potential Immune-mediated Diseases (pIMDs) After Vaccination|"Potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) are a subset of adverse events that include both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology.
Any pIMD(s) = Occurrence of any pIMD(s) regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Related pIMD(s) = pIMD assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination."|During the entire study period (from Day 0 to Day 180)|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
826675|NCT01199744|Secondary|Number of Participants With Either a Serious or Non-serious Adverse Drug Reaction Who Were Also Taking Concomitant Medications|Concomitant medications are defined as drugs used during the administration of Relenza.|5 months (November 2009 to March 2010)|All participants who visited the sentinel 26 centers from the date of the contract to 31st March 2010 and were prescribed Relenza for the purpose of either treatment or prophylaxis of influenza||participants|||Number
826610|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any unsolicited AE(s) = Occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 unsolicited AE = Occurrence of any unsolicited AE that prevented normal activities. Related unsolicited AE(s) = Occurrence of an unsolicited AE assessed by the investigator to be causally related to vaccination.|During the 28-day follow-up period (Day 0-27) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
826611|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Days With Fever in All Subjects Regardless of Their Age After Vaccination|Duration for fever was assessed via tabulation of the number of days with local symptoms of fever (axillary temperature ≥ 38°C) after vaccination with Dose 1 and Dose 2, respectively.|During the 7-day follow-up period (Days 0-6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented, solely on subjects with symptom sheet completed for the reported specific symptom.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826612|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Days With Solicited General Symptoms After Vaccination in Subjects 5 Years of Age and Above|Duration was assessed via tabulation of the number of days with local symptoms of any grade after vaccination with Dose 1 and Dose 2, respectively. Solicited general symptoms assessed for duration in subjects 5 years of age and above were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, joint pain at other location, muscle aches and shivering.|During the 7-day follow-up period (Days 0-6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented, solely on subjects with symptom sheet completed for the reported specific symptom.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826613|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Days With Solicited General Symptoms After Vaccination in Subjects Below 5 Years of Age|Duration was assessed via tabulation of the number of days with local symptoms of any grade after vaccination with Dose 1 and Dose 2, respectively. Solicited general symptoms assessed for duration in subjects below 5 years of age were drowsiness, irritability and loss of appetite.|During the 7-day follow-up period (Days 0-6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented, solely on subjects with symptom sheet completed for the reported specific symptom.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826614|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Subjects 5 Years of Age and Above With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, joint pain at other location, muscle aches, shivering and temperature. Any = Incidence of a particular symptom regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Any temperature = axillary temperature ≥ 38.0 °C. Grade 3 temperature = axillary temperature ≥ 39.0°C. Grade 3 symptom = Symptom that prevented normal activity. Related = A general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to vaccination.|During the 7-day follow-up period (Days 0-6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented, solely on subjects with symptom sheet completed for the reported specific symptom.||subjects|||Number
826615|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Subjects Below 5 Years of Age With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Symptoms assessed were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and temperature. Any = Incidence of a particular symptom regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Any temperature = Axillary temperature ≥ 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C). Grade 3 temperature = Axillary temperature ≥ 39.0°C. Grade 3 irritability = Crying that could not be comforted/ preventing normal activity. Grade 3 drowsiness = Drowsiness preventing normal activity. Grade 3 loss of appetite = Not eating at all. Related = A general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to vaccination.|During the 7-day follow-up period (Days 0-6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented, solely on subjects with symptom sheet completed for the reported specific symptom.||subjects|||Number
826616|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Days With Solicited Local Symptoms After Vaccination|Duration was assessed via tabulation of the number of days with local symptoms of any grade after vaccination with Dose 1 and Dose 2 respectively. Solicited local symptoms assessed for duration were pain, redness and swelling.|During the 7-day follow-up period (Days 0-6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented and symptom sheet completed only on subjects that reported the specific symptom.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
826617|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms After Vaccination|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any was defined as any solicited local symptom reported irrespective of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain for subjects < 5 years of age = Cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful; Grade 3 pain for subjects ≥ 5 years of age = Significant pain at rest, pain that preventeded normal everyday activities. Grade 3 redness and swelling were defined as redness/swelling above 100 millimeters (mm).|During the 7-day follow-up period (Days 0-6) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented, solely on subjects with symptom sheet completed for the reported specific symptom.||subjects|||Number
826618|NCT01198756|Secondary|Seroconversion Factor for Hemagglutination Inhibition Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease - By Age Strata|The seroconversion factor (SCF) was defined as the fold increase in serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) geometric mean titers (GMTs) post vaccination compared to Day 0 (i.e. the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titer to the pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer). The 4 assessed influenza strains were the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Florida/4/2006 (Yamagata) flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 3 age categories, 3-8 years, 9-17 years and 6-35 months.|At 28 days after administration of the last vaccine dose (Day 28 for Primed Subjects and at Day 56 for Unprimed Subjects) (POST)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, inclusive of all evaluable and eligible subjects with immunogenicity results available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination, solely on subjects with both pre- and post-vaccination immunogenicity results available.||fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826619|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease - By Age Strata|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with serum Hemagglutination Inhibition titer ≥ 1:40. The 4 assessed influenza strains were the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Florida/4/2006 flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 3 age categories, 3-8 years, 9-17 years and 6-35 months.|At Day 0 and at 28 days after administration of the last vaccine dose (Day 28 for Primed Subjects and at Day 56 for Unprimed Subjects) (POST)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable and eligible subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826620|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroconverted Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease - By Age Strata|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had either a pre-vaccination titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and at least a four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The vaccine strains assessed were A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Florida/4/2006 (Yamagata) flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 3 age categories, 3-8 years, 9-17 years and 6-35 months.|At 28 days after administration of the last vaccine dose (Day 28 for Primed Subjects and at Day 56 for Unprimed Subjects) (POST)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, inclusive of all evaluable and eligible subjects with immunogenicity results available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination, solely on subjects with both pre- and post-vaccination immunogenicity results available.||subjects|||Number
826621|NCT01198756|Secondary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease - By Age Strata|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was the seropositivity cut-off of 1:10. Antibodies assessed were antibodies against the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Florida/4/2006 (Yamagata) flu strains. Subjects were assessed according to 3 age categories, 3-8 years, 9-17 years and 6-35 months.|At Day 0 and at 28 days after administration of the last vaccine dose (Day 28 for Primed Subjects and at Day 56 for Unprimed Subjects) (POST)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable and eligible subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826622|NCT01198756|Secondary|Seroconversion Factor for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|The seroconversion factor (SCF) was defined as the fold increase in serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) geometric mean titers (GMTs) post vaccination (at Day 28 for Primed Subjects and at Day 56 for Unprimed Subjects (POST)) compared to Day 0 (i.e. the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titer to the pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer). The 4 assessed influenza strains were the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Florida/4/2006 (Yamagata) flu strains|At 28 days after administration of the last vaccine dose (Day 28 for Primed Subjects and at Day 56 for Unprimed Subjects) (POST)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, inclusive of all evaluable and eligible subjects with immunogenicity results available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination, solely on subjects with both pre- and post-vaccination immunogenicity results available.||fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826623|NCT01198756|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with serum Hemagglutination Inhibition titer ≥ 1:40. The 4 assessed influenza strains were the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Florida/4/2006 flu strains.|At Day 0 and at 28 days after administration of the last vaccine dose (Day 28 for Primed Subjects and at Day 56 for Unprimed Subjects) (POST)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable and eligible subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||subjects|||Number
826624|NCT01198756|Secondary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was the seropositivity cut-off of 1:10. Antibodies assessed were antibodies against the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Florida/4/2006 (Yamagata) flu strains.|At Day 0 and at 28 days after administration of the last vaccine dose (Day 28 for Primed Subjects and at Day 56 for Unprimed Subjects) (POST)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable and eligible subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826625|NCT01198756|Primary|Number of Subjects Seroconverted Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had either a pre-vaccination titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and at least a four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The vaccine strains assessed were the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Florida/4/2006 (Yamagata) flu strains.|At 28 days after administration of the last vaccine dose (Day 28 for Primed Subjects and at Day 56 for Unprimed Subjects) (POST)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, inclusive of all evaluable and eligible subjects with immunogenicity results available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination, solely on subjects with both pre- and post-vaccination immunogenicity results available.||subjects|||Number
826676|NCT01199744|Secondary|Number of Participants With Either a Serious or Non-serious Adverse Drug Reaction Who Were Vaccinated for Influenza||5 months (November 2009 to March 2010)|All participants who visited the sentinel 26 centers from the date of the contract to 31st March 2010 and were prescribed Relenza for the purpose of either treatment or prophylaxis of influenza||participants|||Number
826626|NCT01198756|Primary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was the seropositivity cut-off of 1:10. Antibodies assessed were antibodies against the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Florida/4/2006 (Yamagata) flu strains.|At 28 days after administration of the last vaccine dose (Day 28 for Primed Subjects and at Day 56 for Unprimed Subjects) (POST)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable and eligible subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcomes variables were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after vaccination.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826627|NCT01198769|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects.|During the entire study period (from Dose 1 at Day 0 up to Month 4)|The Total vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
826628|NCT01198769|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited adverse event is any adverse event (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) follow-up period after vaccination|The Total vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
826629|NCT01198769|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Rotavirus (RV) Present in the Gastroenteritis (GE) Stool Sample.|"RV was not identified in the one GE stool sample collected in the study. Two subjects reported GE episode between vaccination Dose 1 and before vaccination Dose 2. For one of them, GE stool sample was not collected and for the other subject no RV was identified in the GE stool sample.
GE symptoms were defined as diarrhoea with or without vomiting. A GE stool sample was collected as soon as possible after the illness began by the parent/guardian of the subject. Presence of RV antigen was detected by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)."|From Day 0 (first vaccine dose) to study Month 4 (2 months post-Dose 2)|The Total vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
826630|NCT01198769|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited General Symptoms.|Solicited general symptoms assessed were cough, diarrhoea, irritability, loss of appetite, temperature (any temperature was defined as a tympanic on rectal setting temperature ≥ 38.0 degrees Celsius) and vomiting.|During the 8-day (Days 0-7) post-vaccination period|The Total vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
826631|NCT01198769|Secondary|Serum Anti-rotavirus IgA Antibody Concentrations.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean antibody concentration in units per millilitre (U/mL), calculated on all subjects.|2 months post-Dose 2 (at study Month 4)|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included subjects who received Hepatitis B immunoglobulin after birth, who were seronegative for serum anti-RV IgA antibody at Day 0, who complied with vaccination schedule for the Rotarix vaccine, who had no RV other than the vaccine strain in gastroenteritis stool sample up to Month 4.||U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826632|NCT01198769|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Serum Anti-rotavirus Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibody.|Seroconversion is defined as the appearance of IgA antibody concentration equal to or above (≥) 20 Units per millilitre (U/mL) in the serum of subjects who were seronegative before vaccination. A seronegative subject is a subject with anti-rotavirus IgA antibody concentration below (<) 20 U/mL.|2 months post-Dose 2 (at study Month 4)|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included subjects who received Hepatitis B immunoglobulin after birth, who were seronegative for serum anti-RV IgA antibody at Day 0, who complied with vaccination schedule for the Rotarix vaccine, who had no RV other than the vaccine strain in gastroenteritis stool sample up to Month 4.||Subjects|||Number
826633|NCT01198795|Primary|Patients With Any Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|The number of patients who experienced one or more TEAE during the 24-week open-label treatment period or the 2-week down-taper period,|From Baseline (Week 0) to Week 26|||participants|||Number
826634|NCT01198873|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Left Ventricular Function|"left ventricular (LV) function was assessed at baseline and after 12 months treatment using 2-D echocardiography and interpreted blindly via a central Echocardiography Core Lab.
Participants who discontinued after completing at least 3 months of treatment were assessed after last study drug intake and data were included in the analysis."|baseline (before randomization) and post-baseline (after 3-12 months of treatment)|||centimeters/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
826635|NCT01198873|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)|"Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) was assessed at baseline and after 12 months treatment using 2-D echocardiography and interpreted blindly via a central Echocardiography Core Lab.
Participants who discontinued after completing at least 3 months of treatment were assessed after last drug intake and data were included in the analysis."|baseline (before randomization) and post-baseline (after 3-12 months of treatment)|Modified intent-to-treat population as previously defined||percentage of blood pumped out||Standard Deviation|Mean
826636|NCT01198873|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Left Atrial Dimension|"Maximal left atrial diameter in the anteroposterior dimension was assessed at baseline and after 12 months treatment using 2-D echocardiography and interpreted blindly via a central Echocardiography Core Lab.
Participants who discontinued after completing at least 3 months of treatment were assessed after last drug intake and data were included in the analysis."|baseline (before randomization) and post-baseline (after 3-12 months of treatment)|Modified intent-to-treat population as previously defined||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
826637|NCT01198873|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Left Atrial Function|"left atrial (LA) function was assessed at baseline and after 12 months treatment using 2-D echocardiography and interpreted blindly via a central Echocardiography Core Lab.
Participants who discontinued after completing at least 3 months of treatment were assessed after last study drug intake and data were included in the analysis."|baseline (before randomization) and post-baseline (after 3-12 months of treatment)|Modified intent-to-treat population as previously defined||mililiters||Standard Deviation|Mean
826638|NCT01198873|Primary|Change From Baseline in Left Atrial Volume Index (LAVi)|"Left Atrial Volume index (LAVi) was assessed at baseline and after 12 months treatment using 2-D echocardiography and interpreted blindly via a central Echocardiography Core Lab.
Participants who discontinued after completing at least 3 months of treatment were assessed after last study drug intake and data were included in the analysis."|baseline (before randomization) and post-baseline (after 3-12 months of treatment)|"The analysis included all randomized and treated participants with at least one post-baseline echocardiographic assessment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized (Modified Intent-to-treat analysis).
The quality of the post-baseline echocardiography was inadequate for determining LAVi in one participant."||mililiters/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
826639|NCT01198977|Other Pre-specified|Physical Activity (Behavioral Target)|First item of the Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire (GLTEQ). GLTEQ asks participants to indicated the number of days per week they engaged in strenuous (e.g., running), moderate (e.g., easy bicycling), and mild (e.g., easy walking) exercise activities for periods of 15 min or more. Total weekly frequency is then calculated using an algorithm that multiplies the frequency of activities by 9 (strenuous), 5 (moderate), or 3 (mild) metabolic equivalents and sums each to produce a total level of physical activity in MET/min per week.|baseline, 3 months, 6 months|Veterans with MS from Veterans Affairs (VA) Puget Sound Health Care System and civilians with MS from the greater Puget Sound area. Note: Telephone Counseling Group: 1=lost to follow-up, so analyzed 30 participants instead of 31.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
826640|NCT01198977|Secondary|Depression|"Depression Module of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). 9-item self-report instrument designed to identify depressive symptoms consistent with criteria for major depressive episode in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, 4th Edition. Each item is rated over the last 2 weeks: 0 (not at all), 1 (several days), 2 (more than half the days), or 3 (nearly every day).
Total Score for 9 items = 27."|baseline, 3 months, 6 months|Veterans with MS from Veterans Affairs (VA) Puget Sound Health Care System and civilians with MS from the greater Puget Sound area. Note: Telephone Counseling Group: 1=lost to follow-up, so analyzed 30 participants instead of 31.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
826641|NCT01198977|Primary|Fatigue|Modified Fatigue Inventory Scale (MFIS) at baseline, 3-month, 6-month MFIS consisted of 21 items, ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). The total score was 0 to 84.|baseline, 3 months, 6 months|Veterans with MS from Veterans Affairs (VA) Puget Sound Health Care System and civilians with MS from the greater Puget Sound area. Note: Telephone Counseling Group: 1=lost to follow-up, so analyzed 30 participants instead of 31.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
826642|NCT01199016|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Nasopharyngeal/Oropharyngeal (NP/OP) Samples With Positive Results for Streptococcus Pneumoniae Serotypes Other Than 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, or 19A in Healthy Participants|Total percentage of MEF samples that were tested positive for Streptococcus pneumoniae serotypes other than those included in Prevnar 13 (1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, or 19A) have been reported. NP/OP samples were collected from participants at all healthy visits as well as AOM visits.|Baseline up to Month 36|NP/OP healthy population included all participants with an NP/OP swab collection at a healthy visit. In this analysis, 'Number of NP/OP samples analyzed' indicates those samples that tested positive for Streptococcus pneumoniae.||percentage of NP/OP samples|NP/OP Samples||Number
826643|NCT01199016|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Middle Ear Fluid (MEF) Samples With Positive Results for Streptococcus Pneumoniae Serotypes Other Than 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, or 19A in Participants With Acute Otitis Media (AOM)|MEF samples were obtained from participants who presented with an episode of AOM as defined by clinical criteria. Total percentage of MEF samples that were tested positive for Streptococcus pneumoniae serotypes other than those included in Prevnar 13 (1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, or 19A) have been reported.|Baseline up to Month 36|MEF AOM population included all participants with at least 1 MEF sample from an episode of AOM. In this analysis, 'Number of MEF samples analyzed' indicates those samples that tested positive for Streptococcus pneumoniae.||percentage of MEF samples|MEF Samples||Number
826644|NCT01199016|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Nasopharyngeal/Oropharyngeal (NP/OP) Samples With Positive Results for Streptococcus Pneumoniae Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, or 19A in Healthy Participants|Total percentage of NP/OP samples that were tested positive for any of the 6 additional serotypes included in Prevnar 13 (1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, or 19A) have been reported. NP/OP samples were collected from participants at all healthy visits as well as AOM visits.|Baseline up to Month 36|NP/OP healthy population included all participants with an NP/OP swab collection at a healthy visit. In this analysis, 'Number of NP/OP samples analyzed' indicates those samples that tested positive for Streptococcus pneumoniae serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, or 19A.||percentage of NP/OP samples|NP/OP Samples||Number
826645|NCT01199016|Primary|Percentage of Middle Ear Fluid (MEF) Samples With Positive Results for Streptococcus Pneumoniae Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, or 19A in Participants With Acute Otitis Media (AOM)|MEF samples were obtained from participants who presented with an episode of AOM as defined by clinical criteria. Total percentage of MEF samples that were tested positive for any of the 6 additional serotypes included in Prevnar 13 (1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, or 19A) have been reported.|Baseline up to Month 36|MEF AOM population included all participants with at least 1 MEF sample from an episode of AOM. In this analysis, 'Number of MEF samples analyzed' indicates those samples that tested positive for Streptococcus pneumoniae serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, or 19A.||percentage of MEF samples|MEF Samples||Number
826646|NCT01199042|Secondary|Average Therapy Pressure Values|"To compare BiPAP autoSV Advanced therapy pressure values (Encore Pro Software) from the first 7 days of BiPAP autoSV Advanced at home treatment to the last 7 days of at home treatment to determine if pressure requirements change over time.
This analysis compares the average pressure support of the first week compared to the average pressure support to the final week."|3 months|26 participants completed the 3-month home follow-up.||cm/H2O||Standard Deviation|Mean
826647|NCT01199042|Secondary|Breathing Event Indexes|"To determine if there are changes in breathing event indexes (Encore Pro Software) from the first 7 days of BiPAP autoSV Advanced at home treatment to the last 7 days of at home treatment to assess therapy efficacy.
Values were determined by taking the average of the first 7 days of treatment and comparing them to the average of the last 7 days of treatment."|from the first 7 days of BiPAP autoSV Advanced at home treatment to the last 7 days of at home treatment|26 participants completed the 3-month home follow-up.||Apnea-Hypopnea events per hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
829786|NCT01230307|Secondary|Exercise Capacity Measured by 6 Minute Walk Test||6 months|Because enrollment was less than 30% of original goal (6 vs 4 patients) and therefore would not have scientific validity and no conclusions could be determined, this outcome was not analyzed.|||||
826648|NCT01199042|Secondary|Epworth Sleepiness Scale|"To determine if there are changes in subjective sleepiness on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) between Baseline (Visit 1) and 3 months (Visit 6). The ESS is an 8 question survey that determines sleepiness, each question is rated as a 0-3 will the total score ranging from 0-24.
Interpretation:
Score 0-7: Unlikely that there is abnormal sleep Score 8-9: Average amount of daytime sleepiness Score 10-15: Possible excessive sleepiness depending on the situation. Patient may want to consider seeking medical attention.
Score 16-24: Excessive sleepiness and patient should consider seeking medical attention
A decrease in the score indicates improvements in a patients overall sleepiness. An increase in the score indicates increased sleepiness."|3 months|26 participants completed the 3-month home follow-up.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826649|NCT01199042|Primary|Apnea/Hypopnea Index (AHI)|To compare the AHI between the diagnostic CPAP titration and BiPAP autoSV Advanced PSG nights.|During a single night of polysomnography lasting up to 8 hours.|||Apnea-Hypopnea events per hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
826650|NCT01199237|Secondary|Time From Anesthetic Discontinuation to First Ability to Swallow|At 2 minutes after first response to command (T1), the patient was asked to swallow 20 mL of water from a paper cup, and an observer blinded to anesthetic assignment assessed the ability to swallow based on transit of water to the posterior pharynx (absence of pooling or drooling) and absence of cough or gag (indicating misdirection of the water bolus into the laryngeal inlet). This test was repeated at 6, 14, 22, 30 and 60 minutes after the time of first response to command.|up to 60 minutes after T1|||Seconds||Full Range|Mean
826651|NCT01199237|Secondary|Nausea and Vomiting|Patients were asked to rate their experience of nausea and vomiting on a 0-10 verbal analog scale, with 0 being absence and 10 being the worst imaginable|60 minutes after T1|Only patients able to respond at time of assessment||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
826652|NCT01199237|Secondary|Nausea and Vomiting|Patients were asked to rate their experience of nausea and vomiting on a 0-10 verbal analog scale, with 0 being absence and 10 being the worst imaginable|30 minutes after T1|Only participants able to respond at time of assessment||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
826653|NCT01199237|Secondary|Time From Potent Inhaled Anesthetic Discontinuation to First Response to Command (T1)|"At the conclusion of surgery, after the patient's potent inhaled anesthetic was discontinued, the commands open your eyes and squeeze my hand were given at 30-second intervals. The time at which patient first appropriately response to both commands was noted as T1."|Up to 1 hour post-operative|||seconds||Full Range|Mean
826654|NCT01199237|Primary|Recovery of Ability to Swallow After Neostigmine/Glycopyrrolate Antagonism of Rocuronium Paralysis.|The patient is judged by the primary anesthetist to be awake at time T1. At 2 minutes after T1, the patient was asked to swallow 20mL of water from a paper cup, and a blinded observer judged the ability to swallow based on transit of water to the posterior pharynx (absence of pooling or drooling) and absence of cough or gag.|At 2 minutes after response to command (T1).|Only participants judged by the clinician as able to take the test (n=57)||participants|||Number
826655|NCT01199471|Secondary|Time to Extubation of Patients|The time to extubation of patients was measured from cessation of anesthesia administration to tracheal extubation of the patient.|Every minute after cessation of anesthesia until the patient was extubated|All available data were included in the analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
826656|NCT01199471|Secondary|Time to Eye Opening of Patients|Time to eye opening of patients was measured by the time from cessation of anesthesia administration to opening of the patients' eyes. After cessation of anesthesia, the investigators lightly tapped on the patients forehead or shoulder and asked the patients to open their eyes. This process was repeated about every minute until the patients opened their eyes.|Every minute after cessation of anesthesia until the patient opened his/her eyes|All available data were included in the analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
826657|NCT01199471|Secondary|Time to Intubation of Patients|The time to intubation of the patients was measured from the commencement of administration of anesthesia to intubation of each patient.|Up to 10 minutes|All available data were included in the analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
826658|NCT01199471|Secondary|Time to Loss of Consciousness of Patients Administered Anesthesia|The time to loss of consciousness was measured from commencement of administration of anesthesia to the patient's loss of consciousness (no response to command).|Up to 10 minutes|All available data were included in the analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
826659|NCT01199471|Primary|Patient Satisfaction With the Anesthesia Recorded at the End of the Operation Using a Numeric Analog Scale (NAS)|Patient satisfaction with the anesthesia recorded at the end of the operation within 24 hours using a numeric analog scale (NAS) from 0 (not satisfied at all) to 10 (completely satisfied) are summarized.|Within 24 hours|All available data were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826660|NCT01199471|Primary|Anesthesiologist Satisfaction With the Anesthesia Recorded at the End of the Operation Using a Numeric Analog Scale (NAS)|Anesthesiologist satisfaction with the anesthesia administered to each patient during surgery was recorded at the end of the operation using a Numeric Analog Scale (NAS) from 0 (not satisfied at all) to 10 (completely satisfied) are summarized.|Within 24 hours|400 participating anesthesiologists evaluated their satisfaction with anesthesia (sevoflurane) administered to patients during surgery. All available data for 3,993 patients are included and summarized.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826661|NCT01199601|Secondary|Completion of 9 Month Measles-mumps-rubella Vaccination on Time.|Assess whether patients randomized to the intervention were more likely to have children receiving the measles-mumps-rubella vaccination at 9 months of age after receiving concentrated postpartum counseling compared to women receiving standard of care.|12 months|||participants|||Number
826662|NCT01199601|Secondary|Correct Breastfeeding Practices to 1 Year|Assess whether patients randomized to the intervention exhibit correct breastfeeding practices (a composite variable in which exclusive breastfeeding occurs to 6 months and continued complementary breastfeeding continues to 12 months) after receiving concentrated postpartum counseling compared to women receiving standard of care.|12 months|||participants|||Number
826663|NCT01199601|Primary|Utilization of Postpartum Contraception|Determine whether the re-training and assignment of healthcare providers dedicated to intrapartum rapid testing and intensive post-partum counseling will positively impact postpartum contraceptive use as compared to any counseling provided by existing health providers for these services among women delivering in public health maternity hospitals in Kabul, Afghanistan.|12 months|Participants included in analysis were those completing the 6 and 12 month follow-up visits.||participants|||Number
826664|NCT01199705|Secondary|Rate of Mild, Moderate, or Severe Local Reactions|"In addition to the standard MedDRA System Organ Class (SOC) AE assignments, the category of 'local reactions' was defined to provide the possibility for a combined analysis of local reactions and included AEs of: infusion site discomfort, infusion site erythema, infusion site haemorrhage, infusion site induration, infusion site inflammation, infusion site pain, infusion site pruritus, infusion site swelling, injection site erythema, injection site extravasation, injection site induration, injection site irritation, injection site pain, injection site pruritus, injection site swelling, and puncture site reaction.
Mild AE: Symptoms are easily tolerated and there is no interference with daily activities; Moderate AE: Discomfort enough to cause some interference with daily activities; Severe AE: Incapacitating with inability to work or do usual activity."|For the duration of the study, up to 36 weeks|The SDS comprised all subjects treated with the study drug.||AEs per infusion|Participants||Number
826665|NCT01199705|Secondary|Rate of All Adverse Events by Relatedness and Seriousness|The rate of adverse events (AEs) was the number of treatment-emergent AEs over the number of infusions administered. At least possibly related AEs included possibly related AEs, probably related AEs, and related AEs.|For the duration of the study, up to 36 weeks|The safety data set (SDS) comprised all subjects treated with the study drug.||AEs per infusion|Participants||Number
826666|NCT01199705|Secondary|Duration of Use of Antibiotics for Infection Prophylaxis and Treatment|Median number of days of use of antibiotics for infection prophylaxis and/or treatment, presented by study period: IVIG treatment (up to 12 weeks), SCIG IgPro20 treatment (wash-in/wash-out; 12 weeks), and SCIG IgPro20 treatment (efficacy; 12 weeks).|Up to 36 weeks|||Days||Full Range|Median
826667|NCT01199705|Secondary|Number of Days of Hospitalization Due to Infections by Study Period|Median number of days of hospitalization due to infections, presented by study period: IVIG treatment (up to 12 weeks), SCIG IgPro20 treatment (wash-in/wash-out; 12 weeks), and SCIG IgPro20 treatment (efficacy; 12 weeks).|Up to 36 weeks|||Days||Full Range|Median
826668|NCT01199705|Other Pre-specified|Annualized Rate of Serious Bacterial Infections (SBIs), FAS Population|"The annualized rate was based on the total number of SBIs and the total number of subject study days for all subjects in the specified study periods (listed below) and analysis population and adjusted to 365 days.
Study periods:
IVIG treatment (up to 12 weeks)
SCIG IgPro20 treatment (wash-in/wash-out; 12 weeks)
SCIG IgPro20 treatment (efficacy; 12 weeks)"|Up to 36 weeks|The FAS comprised all subjects treated with IgPro20 during the efficacy period who had the disease under study.||SBIs per subject year|Participants||Number
826669|NCT01199705|Secondary|Number of Days Out of Work/School/Kindergarten/Day Care or Unable to Perform Normal Daily Activities Due to Infections by Study Period|Median number of days out of work/school/kindergarten/day care or unable to perform normal daily activities due to infections, presented by study period: IVIG treatment (up to 12 weeks), SCIG IgPro20 treatment (wash-in/wash-out; 12 weeks), and SCIG IgPro20 treatment (efficacy; 12 weeks).|Up to 36 weeks|||Days||Full Range|Median
826670|NCT01199705|Other Pre-specified|Annualized Rate of Serious Bacterial Infections (SBIs), PPS Population|"The annualized rate was based on the total number of SBIs and the total number of subject study days for all subjects in the specified study periods (listed below) and analysis population and adjusted to 365 days.
Study periods:
IVIG treatment (up to 12 weeks)
SCIG IgPro20 treatment (wash-in/wash-out; 12 weeks)
SCIG IgPro20 treatment (efficacy; 12 weeks)"|Up to 36 weeks|The PPS comprised all subjects with the disease under study who fulfilled the protocol-specified criteria for a) immunoglobulin treatment prior to and during the study, b) availability of evaluable serum IgG levels, and c) dose stability.||SBIs per subject year|Participants||Number
826671|NCT01199705|Secondary|Rate of Infection Episodes (Serious and Non-serious) by Study Period, FAS Population|"The annualized rate of infection episodes (serious and non-serious) was based on the total number of infection episodes and the total number of subject study days for all subjects in the specified study periods (listed below) and analysis population and adjusted to 365 days.
Study periods:
IVIG treatment (up to 12 weeks)
SCIG IgPro20 treatment (wash-in/wash-out period) (12 weeks)
SCIG IgPro20 treatment (efficacy) (12 weeks)"|Up to 36 weeks|The FAS comprised all subjects treated with IgPro20 during the efficacy period who had the disease under study.||Infections per subject year|Participants||Number
826672|NCT01199705|Secondary|Rate of Infection Episodes (Serious and Non-serious) by Study Period, PPS Population|"The annualized rate of infection episodes (serious and non-serious) was based on the total number of infection episodes and the total number of subject study days for all subjects in the specified study periods (listed below) and analysis population and adjusted to 365 days.
Study periods:
IVIG treatment (up to 12 weeks)
SCIG IgPro20 treatment (wash-in/wash-out period) (12 weeks)
SCIG IgPro20 treatment (efficacy) (12 weeks)"|Up to 36 weeks|The PPS comprised all subjects with the disease under study who fulfilled the protocol-specified criteria for a) immunoglobulin treatment prior to and during the study, b) availability of evaluable serum IgG levels, and c) dose stability.||Infections per subject year|Participants||Number
826673|NCT01199705|Secondary|Number of Infection Episodes (Serious and Non-serious) by Study Period|"Number of infection episodes (serious and non-serious) presented by study period:
IVIG treatment: Study subjects were treated with their IVIG therapy with 3- or 4-weekly schedules for 3 dosing cycles (9 to 12 weeks; before being switched to SCIG treatment with IgPro20).
SCIG treatment (wash-in/wash-out; weeks 1 to 12): IgPro20 was administered subcutaneously with the first subcutaneous (SC) IgPro20 infusion starting 1 week after the last IVIG dose. Subjects were treated with weekly SC IgPro20 infusions for a 12-week wash-in/wash-out period. The IgPro20 dose was to be equal to the weekly equivalent dose of the previous IVIG therapy.
SCIG treatment (efficacy; weeks 13 to 24): After the SCIG wash-in/wash-out treatment, subjects were treated with weekly SC IgPro20 infusions for a 12-week efficacy period. The IgPro20 dose was to be equal to the weekly equivalent dose of the previous IVIG therapy."|Up to 36 weeks|||Number of infection episodes|||Number
826674|NCT01199705|Primary|IgG Trough Level|Geometric means of trough levels measured before 3 intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) infusions was compared with those of trough levels measured at steady-state for 3 subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIG) infusions (weeks 16, 20 and 24). The ratio of these geometric means was the primary outcome measure.|During IVIG period (IV 1, IV 2, IV 3) and during SCIG period at weeks 16, 20, and 24|The PPS comprised all subjects with the disease under study who fulfilled the protocol-specified criteria for a) immunoglobulin treatment prior to and during the study, b) availability of evaluable serum IgG levels, and c) dose stability. The FAS comprised all subjects treated with IgPro20 during the efficacy period who had the disease under study.||Ratio of Geometric Means||90% Confidence Interval|Number
826677|NCT01199744|Secondary|Number of Participants With Either a Serious or Non-serious Adverse Drug Reaction Who Were Also in the Indicated High-risk Categories|Participants with only hypertension were excluded from the cardiocirculatory disease category. Participants in high-risk categories are at risk for the aggravation of both infection and symptoms.|5 months (November 2009 to March 2010)|All participants who visited the sentinel 26 centers from the date of the contract to 31st March 2010 and were prescribed Relenza for the purpose of either treatment or prophylaxis of influenza||participants|||Number
826678|NCT01199744|Secondary|Number of Participants With Either a Serious or Non-serious Adverse Drug Reaction Categorized by Either Having Risk Factors for Influenza or Having no Risk Factors|Risk factors are defined as pregnancy; infancy; being elderly; and having chronic respiratory disease, cardiocirculatory disease, and/or diabetes.|5 months (November 2009 to March 2010)|All participants who visited the sentinel 26 centers from the date of the contract to 31st March 2010 and were prescribed Relenza for the purpose of either treatment or prophylaxis of influenza||participants|||Number
826679|NCT01199744|Secondary|Number of Participants With Either a Serious or Non-serious Adverse Drug Reaction Categorized by Either Having Complications or Having no Complications|A complication is defined as asthma.|5 months (November 2009 to March 2010)|All participants who visited the sentinel 26 centers from the date of the contract to 31st March 2010 and were prescribed Relenza for the purpose of either treatment or prophylaxis of influenza||participants|||Number
826680|NCT01199744|Secondary|Number of Participants With Either a Serious or Non-serious Adverse Drug Reaction Categorized by Reason for the Use of Relenza|The dose given for treatment of influenza is 10 mg twice daily for 5days. Prophylaxis is defined as a measure taken for the prevention of a disease or condition. The prophylactic dose of Relenza is 10 mg once daily for 10 days.|5 months (November 2009 to March 2010)|All participants who visited the sentinel 26 centers from the date of the contract to 31st March 2010 and were prescribed Relenza for the purpose of either treatment or prophylaxis of influenza||participants|||Number
826681|NCT01199744|Secondary|Number of Participants in the Indicated Age Categories With Either a Serious or Non-serious Adverse Drug Reaction||5 months (November 2009 to March 2010)|All participants who visited the sentinel 26 centers from the date of the contract to 31st March 2010 and were prescribed Relenza for the purpose of either treatment or prophylaxis of influenza||participants|||Number
826682|NCT01199744|Secondary|Number of Male and Female Participants With Either a Serious or Non-serious Adverse Drug Reaction||5 months (November 2009 to March 2010)|All participants who visited the sentinel 26 centers from the date of the contract to 31st March 2010 and were prescribed Relenza for the purpose of either treatment or prophylaxis of influenza||participants|||Number
826683|NCT01199744|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Serious Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR)|"A serious ADR is defined as a serious adverse drug event (ADE) that a physician has determined to be related to the use of Relenza. Serious ADE: death caused by an ADR; an event that is life threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, results in severe symptoms requiring treatment so that symptoms do not lead to previously mentioned outcomes, and a congenital anomaly/birth defect. For a complete list of all serious ADRs recorded during the study, see Serious Adverse Events section."|5 months (November 2009 to March 2010)|All participants who visited the sentinel 26 centers from the date of the contract to 31st March 2010 and were prescribed Relenza for the purpose of either treatment or prophylaxis of influenza||participants|||Number
826684|NCT01199744|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Drug Reaction|"An adverse drug reaction is defined as a drug adverse event that a physician has determined to be related to the use of Relenza. A drug adverse event is defined as any unfavorable or unintended sign (including laboratory test abnormalities), symptom, or disease that occurs when a drug is administered, regardless of the relationship to the drug. For a complete list of all adverse drug reactions recorded during the study, see the section entitled Other (Non-serious) Adverse Events."|5 months (November 2009 to March 2010)|All participants who visited the sentinel 26 centers from the date of the contract to 31st March 2010 and were prescribed Relenza for the purpose of either treatment or prophylaxis of influenza||participants|||Number
826685|NCT01199822|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Related AEs|Data presented are the number of participants who experienced a treatment related AE of any grade.|First dose to study completion up to 5.6 months|All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
826686|NCT01199822|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serum Anti-Olaratumab Antibody Assessment (Immunogenicity)|Participants with Treatment Emergent (TE) anti-olaratumab antibodies were participants with a 4-fold increase (2 dilutions) increase over a positive baseline antibody titer or for a negative baseline titer, a participant with an increase from the baseline to a level of 1:20.|First dose to study completion up to 5.6 months|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable baseline and evaluable post-baseline antibody data.||participants|||Number
826687|NCT01199822|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)||Cycle 2: Pre-dose and up to 336 hours post-dose|Zero participants were analyzed because of insufficient amount of samples collected.|||||
826688|NCT01199822|Secondary|Clearance of Olaratumab at Steady State (CLss)|CLss is the volume of plasma (or blood) from which the drug is completely removed, or cleared, in a given time at steady-state.|Cycle 2: Pre-dose and up to 336 hours post-dose|All participants who received study drug and had PK data available to calculate CLss. Zero participants were analyzed for groups of 10 mg/kg IMC-3G3 and 15 mg/kg IMC-3G3 because of insufficient amount of samples collected. Due to limited data, CLss is not representative of the study population.||milliliters/hour/kilogram (mL/h/kg)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826689|NCT01199822|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Half-Life (t1/2) of Olaratumab|t1/2 is the time it takes for the drug concentration in serum to decrease to half the value observed at the beginning of the time period.|Cycle 2: Pre-dose and up to 336 hours post-dose|All participants who received study drug and had PK data available to calculate t1/2. Due to limited data and the relatively short duration of sample collection, t1/2 is not representative of the study population.||days||Full Range|Geometric Mean
826720|NCT01199965|Primary|Cmax of Dihydroergotamine After MAP0004 and IV DHE Administration in Smokers Versus Non-smokers|The maximum concentration (Cmax) is the highest concentration of a drug measured in the plasma. Plasma is the clear portion of the blood. The Cmax of Dihydroergotamine is reported in picograms per milliliter (pg/ml).|48 hours|Patients with available data at specified time points are included in the analysis population.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826690|NCT01199822|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration of Olaratumab Versus Time Curve During One Dosing Interval (AUCτ) Following Multiple Doses||Cycle 2: Pre-dose and up to 336 hours post-dose|All participants who received study drug and had PK data available to calculate AUCτ. Zero participants were analyzed for groups of 10 mg/kg IMC-3G3 and 15 mg/kg IMC-3G3 because of insufficient amount of samples collected. Due to the limited data, AUCτ is not representative of the study population.||micrograms*hours/milliliter (µg*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826691|NCT01199822|Primary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Olaratumab Following Multiple Doses||Cycle 2: Pre-dose and up to 336 hours post-dose|All participants who received study drug and had pharmacokinetic (PK) data available to calculate Cmax. Due to the limited data, Cmax is not representative of the study population.||micrograms/milliliter (µg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826692|NCT01199822|Primary|Number of Participants With a Dose- Limiting Toxicity (DLT) in Cycle 1|A DLT is defined as 1 of the following events, if considered by the investigator to be definitely, probably, or possibly related to olaratumab: NCI-CTCAE v4.02 Grade 4 neutropenia lasting >7 days; NCI-CTCAE v4.02 Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia with signs of bleeding or requiring platelet transfusions; NCI-CTCAE v4.02 Grade ≥3 neutropenia associated with fever; NCI-CTCAE v4.02 Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic toxicity, excluding electrolyte abnormality; NCI-CTCAE v4.02 Grade ≥3 skin toxicity despite best preemptive and supportive care; and/or NCI-CTCAE v4.02 Grade ≥3 diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting despite best preemptive and supportive care.|First dose through Cycle 1 (6 weeks/cycle)|All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
826693|NCT01199822|Primary|Number of Participants With SAEs|A summary of SAEs and other non-serious AEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|First dose to study completion up to 5.6 months|All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
826694|NCT01199822|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|Data presented are the number of participants who experienced AEs of any grade and AEs of Grade ≥3 as determined by National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) Version (v) 4.02. A summary of serious adverse events (SAEs) and other non-serious AEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|First dose to study completion up to 5.6 months|All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
826695|NCT01199861|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|"Relationship to study drug was determined by the investigator (suspected/not suspected).
A serious AE is defined as an event which fulfills one of the following criteria:
is fatal or life-threatening;
results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity;
constitutes a congenital anomaly/birth defect;
requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization;
is medically significant, i.e., jeopardizes the patient or may require intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above."|From first dose of study drug until 45 days after the last dose of study drug (130 days).|Safety set - all patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
826696|NCT01199861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Antibody-titer 6 Weeks After Vaccination|Change from Baseline was expressed by the ratio of post-vaccination to pre-vaccination antibody titer for each of the three strains included in the seasonal influenza vaccine. Inhibition of an immune response to each strain included in the seasonal influenza vaccine was assessed by the relative difference of the geometric mean antibody titer ratio on fingolimod as compared to placebo six weeks after a single dose of seasonal influenza vaccine.|Pre-vaccination (Week 6) and 6 weeks after vaccination (Study Week 12).|Full analysis set for whom data were available.||ratio|||Number
826697|NCT01199861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Antibody-titer 3 Weeks After Vaccination|Change from Baseline was expressed by the ratio of post-vaccination to pre-vaccination antibody titer for each of the three strains included in the seasonal influenza vaccine. Inhibition of an immune response to each strain included in the seasonal influenza vaccine was assessed by the relative difference of the geometric mean antibody titer ratio on fingolimod as compared to placebo three weeks after a single dose of seasonal influenza vaccine.|Pre-vaccination (Week 6) and 3 weeks after vaccination (Study Week 9).|Full analysis set for whom data were available.||ratio|||Number
826698|NCT01199861|Secondary|Immune Response 6 Weeks After Tetanus Toxoid Booster|"Percentage of participants with an immune response to a single dose of tetanus toxoid six weeks after vaccination. A patient was considered a responder to tetanus toxoid booster vaccination if one of the following criteria was met:
Seroconversion: The pre-vaccination antibody titer measurement was <0.1 IU/ml and the post-vaccination measurement was ≥0.4 IU/ml.
Significant increase: The pre-vaccination antibody titer measurement was ≥0.1 IU/ml and the increase in antibody titer from this to the post-vaccination measurement was ≥4- fold."|Week 6 (pre-vaccination) and 6 weeks after vaccination (Study Week 12)|Full analysis set for whom data were available.||percentage of participants|||Number
826699|NCT01199861|Secondary|Immune Response 3 Weeks After Tetanus Toxoid Booster|"Percentage of participants with an immune response to a single dose of tetanus toxoid three weeks after vaccination. A patient was considered a responder to tetanus toxoid booster vaccination if one of the following criteria was met:
Seroconversion: The pre-vaccination antibody titer measurement was <0.1 IU/ml and the post-vaccination measurement was ≥0.4 IU/ml.
Significant increase: The pre-vaccination antibody titer measurement was ≥0.1 IU/ml and the increase in antibody titer from this to the post-vaccination measurement was ≥4- fold."|Week 6 (pre-vaccination) and 3 weeks after vaccination (Study Week 9)|Full analysis set for whom data were available.||percentage of participants|||Number
826700|NCT01199861|Secondary|Immune Response 6 Weeks After Seasonal Influenza Vaccination|"Percentage of participants who responded to treatment with the seasonal influenza vaccine 6 weeks after vaccination. Response was defined as patients fulfilling one of the following criteria for at least one of the three strains contained in the seasonal influenza vaccine:
Seroconversion: The pre-vaccination antibody titer measurement was <1:10 and the post-vaccination measurement is ≥1:40.
Significant increase in antibody titer: The pre-vaccination antibody titer measurement was ≥1:10 and the increase in antibody titer from this to the post-vaccination measurement is ≥ 4-fold."|Week 6 (pre-vaccination) and 6 weeks after vaccination (Study week 12).|Full analysis set for whom data were available.||percentage of participants|||Number
827503|NCT01207570|Primary|Ankle Passive Range of Motion|The ankle passive range of motion will be measured by a Myrin goniometer.|day 1 before treatment|All subjects received the intended treatment protocol and were included in the analysis. ITT was used to analyze the data.||degree||Standard Deviation|Mean
826701|NCT01199861|Primary|Immune Response 3 Weeks After Seasonal Influenza Vaccination|"Percentage of participants who responded to treatment with the seasonal influenza vaccine 3 weeks after vaccination. Response was defined as patients fulfilling one of the following criteria for at least one of the three strains contained in the seasonal influenza vaccine:
Seroconversion: The pre-vaccination antibody titer measurement was <1:10 and the post-vaccination measurement is ≥1:40.
Significant increase in antibody titer: The pre-vaccination antibody titer measurement was ≥1:10 and the increase in antibody titer from this to the post-vaccination measurement is ≥ 4-fold."|Week 6 (pre-vaccination) and 3 weeks after vaccination (Study week 9)|The full analysis set which includes all patients who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug, and for whom data were available.||percentage of participants|||Number
826702|NCT01199926|Primary|Inflammation|The primary endpoint is the change in C reactive protein after the three month intervention|three months|||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
826703|NCT01199926|Primary|Glucose Tolerance|The primary endpoint is the change in the area under the glucose curve following an oral glucose tolerance test prior to and after the three month intervention.|three months|Power statistical calculation was completed based on 80% power and error on lean mass measurement.||mmol/L/120 min||Standard Deviation|Mean
826704|NCT01199926|Primary|Muscle Function|The primary endpoint is the change in lean mass (kilograms) after the three month resistance exercise intervention.|three months|Power statistical calculation was completed based on 80% power and error on lean mass measurement.||kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
826705|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4+) and Cluster of Differentiation 8 (CD8+) Cell Counts at Week 48||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48|Intent-To-Treat participants enrolled in the study who took at least one dose of any of the study medications||cells/uL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826706|NCT01199939|Secondary|Number of Participants With Virologic Failure|Virologic Failure is defined as participant who is a rebounder or a non-responder. Rebounder participant is defined as a participant who is still in the study at Week 12 and first achieves 2 consecutive virologic responses (<50 copies/mL) followed by 2 consecutive non-responses or a discontinued participant (any reason) for which the last observed time point shows a non-response. Non responder participant is defined as a participant who is still in the study at Week 12 and never achieves 2 consecutive responses.|Baseline (Day 1) to Week 48|Intent-To-Treat participants enrolled in the study who took at least one dose of any of the study medications||Participants|||Number
826707|NCT01199939|Secondary|Time to Reach First Confirmed Virologic Response|CVR is defined as confirmed plasma Viral Load of less than 50 human immunodeficiency virus – type 1 (HIV-1) ribonucleic acid (RNA) copies/mL.|Baseline (Day 1) to Week 48|Intent-To-Treat participants enrolled in the study who took at least one dose of any of the study medications||Days||Standard Error|Mean
826708|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Log10 Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus – Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Load at Week 48||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48|Intent-to-treat participants who received at least one dose of any of the study medication with evaluable data at Week 48||log10 Copies/mL||Full Range|Median
826709|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Log10 Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus – Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Load at Week 42||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 42|Intent-to-treat participants who received at least one dose of any of the study medication with evaluable data at Week 42||log10 Copies/mL||Full Range|Median
826710|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Log10 Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus – Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Load at Week 36||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 36|Intent-to-treat participants who received at least one dose of any of the study medication with evaluable data at Week 36||log10 Copies/mL||Full Range|Median
826711|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Log10 Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus – Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Load at Week 30||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 30|Intent-to-treat participants who received at least one dose of any of the study medication with evaluable data at Week 30||log10 Copies/mL||Full Range|Median
826712|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Log10 Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus – Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Load at Week 24||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 24|Intent-to-treat participants who received at least one dose of any of the study medication with evaluable data at Week 24||log10 Copies/mL||Full Range|Median
826713|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Log10 Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus – Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Load at Week 20||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 20|Intent-to-treat participants who received at least one dose of any of the study medication with evaluable data at Week 20||log10 Copies/mL||Full Range|Median
826714|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Log10 Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus – Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Load at Week 16||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 16|Intent-to-treat participants who received at least one dose of any of the study medication with evaluable data at Week 16||log10 Copies/mL||Full Range|Median
826715|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Log10 Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus – Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Load at Week 12||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 12|Intent-to-treat participants who received at least one dose of any of the study medication with evaluable data at Week 12||log10 Copies/mL||Full Range|Median
826716|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Log10 Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus – Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Load at Week 8||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 8|Intent-to-treat participants who received at least one dose of any of the study medication with evaluable data at Week 8||log10 Copies/mL||Full Range|Median
826717|NCT01199939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Log10 Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus – Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Load at Week 4||Baseline (Day 1) and Week 4|Intent-to-treat participants who received at least one dose of any of the study medication with evaluable data at Week 4||log10 Copies/mL||Full Range|Median
826718|NCT01199939|Primary|Number of Participants With Confirmed Virologic Response (CVR) at Week 48|CVR is defined as confirmed plasma Viral Load of less than 50 human immunodeficiency virus – type 1 (HIV-1) ribonucleic acid (RNA) copies/mL.|Week 48|Intent-To-Treat Non-Virologic failure (VF) censored: Participants who took at least one dose of any of the study medications and did not withdraw for reasons other than VF or experienced VF prior to discontinuation. Participants with evaluable data at Week 48||Participants|||Number
826719|NCT01199965|Primary|AUC(0-48) of Dihydroergotamine After MAP0004 and IV DHE Administration in Smokers and Non-smokers|The AUC(0-48) is the area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration. Dihydroergotamine AUC(0-48) is reported in picograms times hour per milliliter (pg*h/ml).|48 hours|Patients with available data at specified time points are included in the analysis population.||pg*h/ml||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
826723|NCT01200069|Secondary|Subject Self Reported Numerical Rating of Incidence and Severity of Post Electroconvulsive Therapy Headache After Treatment Day 1|Subject self reported numerical rating of incidence and severity of Post ECT pain score for headache at 1, 6, 24 and 48 hours post procedure. Pain Rating 0= no pain, 2-4=moderate pain, 5-7=distressing severe pain, 8-9=intense very severe pain, 10=unbearable pain|1 hour, 6 hours, 24 hours & 48 hours following procedure|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
826724|NCT01200069|Primary|Myalgia Reported After Treatment #3|Subject self reported severity of myalgia based on a self reported assessment utilizing numeric rating scale 0=no myalgia, 1-3=mild myalgia (annoying, little interference with ADL);4-6=moderate (interferes significantly with ADL); 7-10 severe myalgia(unable to perform every day activities)|1 hour, 6 hour, 24 hour, 48 hour after 3rd ECT treatment|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
826725|NCT01200069|Primary|Myalgia Reported on Treatment Day 2|Subject self reported numerical rating of incidence and severity of post ECT Myalgia after treatment day 2 0=no pain, 1-3=mild pain (annoying, little interference with ADL), 4-6= moderate,( interferes significantly with ADL) 7-10 severe pain (unable to perform everyday activities)|1 hour, 6 hours, 24 hours & 48 hours following procedure|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
826726|NCT01200069|Primary|Subject Self Reported Numerical Rating of Incidence and Severity of Post-Electroconvulsive Therapy Myalgias After Treatment 1|subject self reporting rating scale for severity of myalgias utilizing numeric rating scale 0= no pain, 1-3= mild pain, annoyance with little interference with Activities of Daily Living (ADL), 4-6= moderate (interferes significantly with ADL, 7-10 = severe pain unable to perform ADL|Treatment day 1 at 1hour, 6 hour, 24 hours, 48 hours|subjects report at one hour following treatment||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
826727|NCT01200160|Secondary|Overall Safety and Tolerability of Niaspan|Evaluate overall safety of Niaspan through evaluation of adverse events|every 4 weeks for 24 weeks||||||
826728|NCT01200160|Secondary|Frequency of Flushing Events|evaluate occurrence of such events over time|every 4 weeks for 24 weeks||||||
826729|NCT01200160|Secondary|Evaluate Changes Induced by Niaspan at the Completion of the Study Against Base Line Values|Evaluation of changes in non-HDL-C (non-high-density lipoproteins-cholesterol) lipids, LDL- C (low-density lipoproteins-cholesterol), total cholesterol and triglycerides (including in subjects with high triglycerides ≥ 200 mg/dL), and the impact on the Framingham score|every 4 to 8 weeks for 24 weeks||||||
826730|NCT01200160|Primary|Effectiveness of Niaspan|"Increasing serum HDL-C (high-density lipoprotein - cholesterol) levels.
Calculated change in different variables (Difference percent for HDL, LDL, Non-HDL and Triglycerides) was obtained using the expression:
percent.change=((final.visit.variable-baseline.variable.))/(baseline.variable))*100 Then percent change is calculated at 24 weeks regarding baseline for different variables."|24 weeks regarding baseline visit (visit1)|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826731|NCT01200342|Primary|Number of Participants With Response|Tumor response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors for participants with measurable disease defined by presence of at least 1 measurable lesion at baseline: Complete Response (CR): disappearance all target lesions determined by 2 consecutive observations not less than 4 weeks apart. Partial Response (PR): >30% decrease in sum of LD of target lesions (LD) of target lesions taking as reference baseline sum LD determined by two consecutive observations not less than four weeks apart. Progression (PD): >20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions references smallest sum LD recorded since treatment started or appearance of one or more new lesions. Stable Disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD taking references smallest sum LD since treatment started. Measurable: lesions accurately measured in at least 1 dimension (longest diameter to be recorded) as 20 mm with conventional techniques or as 10 mm with spiral CT s|Following two 3-week cycles|The efficacy-evaluable population defined as all subjects who completed at least two cycles of therapy and had at least one post-screening assessment of target and non-target lesions.||Participants|||Number
826732|NCT01200342|Primary|Overall Response Rate (Percentage Subjects With Confirmed Complete or Partial Response)|Tumor response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors for participants with measurable disease defined by presence of at least 1 measurable lesion at baseline: Complete Response (CR): disappearance all target lesions determined by 2 consecutive observations not less than 4 weeks apart. Partial Response (PR): >30% decrease in sum of LD of target lesions (LD) of target lesions taking as reference baseline sum LD determined by two consecutive observations not less than four weeks apart. Progression (PD): >20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions references smallest sum LD recorded since treatment started or appearance of one or more new lesions. Stable Disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD taking references smallest sum LD since treatment started. Measurable: lesions accurately measured in at least 1 dimension (longest diameter to be recorded) as 20 mm with conventional techniques or as 10 mm with spiral CT s|Following two 3-week cycles|The efficacy-evaluable population defined as all subjects who completed at least two cycles of therapy and had at least one post-screening assessment of target and non-target lesions. Due to inadequate enrollment of study participants, no statistical analyses were able to be performed.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
826738|NCT01200368|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Toddler Dose (12 to 15 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees C, decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]) were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after the toddler dose|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N'(number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826739|NCT01200368|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Infant Series Dose 3 (5 to 10 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees C, decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]) were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 3 of infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N'(number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826740|NCT01200368|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Infant Series Dose 2 (4 to 8 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees C, decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]) were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 2 of infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N'(number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826741|NCT01200368|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Infant Series Dose 1 (3 to 6 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]) were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 1 of infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N'(number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826742|NCT01200368|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Toddler Dose (12 to 15 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Redness and swelling were scaled as Any (redness or swelling present); Mild (0.5 centimeters [cm] to 2.0 cm); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after the toddler dose|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826743|NCT01200368|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Infant Series Dose 3 (5 to 10 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Redness and swelling were scaled as Any (redness or swelling present); Mild (0.5 centimeters [cm] to 2.0 cm); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 3 of the infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826744|NCT01200368|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Infant Series Dose 2 (4 to 8 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Redness and swelling were scaled as Any (redness or swelling present); Mild (0.5 centimeters [cm] to 2.0 cm); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 2 of the infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826745|NCT01200368|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Infant Series Dose 1 (3 to 6 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Redness and swelling were scaled as Any (redness or swelling present); Mild (0.5 centimeters [cm] to 2.0 cm); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 1 of the infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826746|NCT01200368|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Antigen-specific Acellular Pertussis Antibody 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|GMC was measured in EU/mL and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated for PT and FHA antibodies.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity population. N (number of participants analyzed) = number of participants with determinate DTaP antibody level to serotype.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826747|NCT01200368|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Antigen-specific Diphtheria and Tetanus Antibody 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|GMC was measured in IU/mL and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated for diphtheria and tetanus antibodies.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity population. N (number of participants analyzed) = number of participants with determinate DTaP antibody level to serotype.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826748|NCT01200368|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Antigen-specific Acellular Pertussis Antibodies 1 Month After the Infant Series|GMC was measured in EU/mL and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated for PT and FHA antibodies.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all expected doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, and had no major protocol violations.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826749|NCT01200368|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Antigen-specific Diphtheria and Tetanus Antibodies 1 Month After the Infant Series|GMC was measured in IU/mL and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated for diphtheria and tetanus antibodies.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, and had no major protocol violations.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826750|NCT01200368|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Predefined Antibody Levels for Diphtheria Toxoid, Tetanus Toxoid, and Pertussis Antigens 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|Predefined antibody level was 0.1 IU/mL for diphtheria, 0.01 IU/mL for tetanus, 5 EU/mL for PT, and 5 EU/mL for FHA.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity population. N (number of participants analyzed) = number of participants with determinate DTaP antibody level to serotype.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826751|NCT01200368|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) of Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|Antibody GMC as measured by mcg/mL for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) are presented. GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% confidence intervals (CI) were evaluated. Geometric means (GMs) were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. To demonstrate non-inferiority, for 6 additional serotypes in 7vPnC + DTaP group, the lowest GMC observed among the 7 common serotypes in the group was taken as reference.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity set:eligible participants who received vaccine to which they were randomized at all 4 doses,had blood drawn within specified time,had >=1 valid assay result after toddler dose for analysis,had no major protocol violation.N(number of participants analyzed)=participants with determinate IgG antibody level to serotype.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826752|NCT01200368|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Level >=0.35 mcg/mL 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody threshold >=0.35 mcg/mL along with the corresponding 95% CI for the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) are presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants. To demonstrate non-inferiority, for 6 additional serotypes in 7vPnC + DTaP group, the lowest response observed among the 7 common serotypes in the group was taken as reference.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity set:eligible participants who received vaccine to which they were randomized at all 4 doses,had blood drawn within specified time,had >=1 valid assay result after toddler dose for analysis,had no major protocol violation.N(number of participants analyzed)=participants with determinate IgG antibody level to serotype.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826753|NCT01200368|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) of Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody for 6 Additional Serotypes 1 Month After the Infant Series|Antibody GMC for 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) are presented. GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs were evaluated. GMs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. To demonstrate non-inferiority, for 6 additional serotypes in 7vPnC + DTaP group, the lowest GMC observed among the 7 common serotypes in the group was taken as reference.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result after Dose 3 for the proposed analysis, and had no major protocol violations.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826754|NCT01200368|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Predefined Antibody Levels for Diphtheria Toxoid, Tetanus Toxoid, and Pertussis Antigens 1 Month After the Infant Series|Predefined antibody levels were 0.1 International Units/mL (IU/mL) for diphtheria, 0.01 IU/mL for tetanus, 5 Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) units/mL (EU/mL) for pertussis toxoid (PT), and 5 EU/mL for filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA).|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result after Dose 3 for the proposed analysis, and had no major protocol violations.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826755|NCT01200368|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) of Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody for 7 Common Serotypes 1 Month After the Infant Series|Antibody geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) are presented. GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% confidence intervals (CI) were evaluated. Geometric means (GMs) were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result after Dose 3 for the proposed analysis, and had no major protocol violations.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
835003|NCT01282203|Secondary|Cardiac Troponin (if Available)|Troponin T values measured within 24 hours of anesthesia were to be collected when available.|Within 24 hours after anesthesia|No data were available for the cardiac troponin outcome measure.|||||
826756|NCT01200368|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Level Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.35 Microgram Per Milliliter (mcg/mL) 1 Month After the Infant Series|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody threshold >=0.35 mcg/mL along with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F and 19A) are presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants. To demonstrate non-inferiority, for 6 additional serotypes in 7vPnC + DTaP group, the lowest response observed among the 7 common serotypes in the group was taken as reference.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result after Dose 3 for the proposed analysis, and had no major protocol violations.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826757|NCT01193101|Secondary|Change From Week 8 to Week 9 in msDBP and msSBP After Single-blind Placebo Withdrawal at Week 8|From week 8 to week 9, participants entered a single-blind placebo withdrawal period to assess the effect of LCZ696 on blood pressure following its discontinuation. Participants, who were randomized to the LCZ696 treatment groups, were discontinued from CLCZ696 at the end of week 8 and all 4 treatment groups received single-blind placebo for 1 week post week 8. A positive change from week 8 to week 9 indicates worsening.|8 weeks, 9 weeks|Only participants from the full analysis, who had values at both week 8 and week 9, were included in the analysis. The FAS included all randomized participants.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
826758|NCT01193101|Secondary|Trough to Post-dosing Hour Ratio for Change From Baseline in 24-hour Mean Ambulatory SBP|Trough to post-dosing hour ratio at each post-dosing hour = [trough LSM of LCZ696 - trough LSM of placebo]/[post-dosing hour LSM of LCZ696 - post-dosing hour LSM of placebo]|baseline, 8 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) The FAS included all randomized participants.||ratio|||Number
826759|NCT01193101|Secondary|Trough to Post-dosing Hour Ratio for Change From Baseline in 24-hour Mean Ambulatory DBP|Trough to post-dosing hour ratio at each post-dosing hour = [trough LSM of LCZ696 - trough LSM of placebo]/[post-dosing hour LSM of LCZ696 - post-dosing hour LSM of placebo]|baseline, 8 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS): The FAS included all randomized participants.||ratio|||Number
826760|NCT01193101|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved Successful BP Control|BP control is defined as BP < 140/90 mmHg.|8 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (FAS), who had week 8 values, were analyzed. The FAS included all randomized participants.||Participants|||Number
826761|NCT01193101|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved a Successful Response in msSBP|Successful response in msSBP is defined as msSBP <140 mmHg or a reduction ≥ 20 mmHg from baseline.|8 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (FAS), who had week 8 values, were analyzed. The FAS included all randomized participants.||Participants|||Number
826762|NCT01193101|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved a Successful Response in msDBP|Successful response in msDBP is defined as msDBP <90 mmHg or a reduction ≥ 10 mmHg from baseline.|8 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (FAS), who had week 8 values, were analyzed. The FAS included all randomized participants.||Participants|||Number
826763|NCT01193101|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Ambulatory Pulse Pressure|Mean ambulatory pulse pressure is the difference in maSBP and maDBP (maSBP - maDBP). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (FAS), who had both baseline and week 8 values, were analyzed. The FAS included all randomized participants.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826764|NCT01193101|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Pulse Pressure|Mean sitting pulse pressure is the difference in msSBP and msDBP (msSBP - msDBP). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (FAS), who had both baseline and week 8 values, were analyzed. The FAS included all randomized participants.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826765|NCT01193101|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nighttime Mean Ambulatory DBP and SBP|Hourly mean ambulatory DBP and SBP post-dosing was calculated for each post-dosing hour over 24 hours by taking the average of the readings taken in the corresponding post-dosing hour at randomization and at week 8. Nighttime mean SBP and DBP were the averages of the hourly means between 10 pm and 6 am. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (FAS), who had both baseline and week 8 values, were analyzed. The FAS included all randomized participants.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826766|NCT01193101|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daytime Mean Ambulatory DBP and SBP|Hourly mean ambulatory DBP and SBP post-dosing was calculated for each post-dosing hour over 24 hours by taking the average of the readings taken in the corresponding post-dosing hour at randomization and at week 8. Daytime mean SBP and DBP were the averages of the hourly means between 6 am and 10 pm. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (FAS), who had both baseline and week 8 values, were analyzed. The FAS included all randomized participants.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826767|NCT01193101|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 24 Hour Mean Ambulatory DBP and SBP|Hourly mean ambulatory DBP and SBP post-dosing was calculated for each post-dosing hour over 24 hours by taking the average of the readings taken in the corresponding post-dosing hour at randomization and at week 8. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (FAS), who had both baseline and week 8 values, were analyzed. The FAS included all randomized participants.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826768|NCT01193101|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP)|Sitting BP measurements were performed at screening through the end of the study at every study visit. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (FAS), who had both baseline and week 8 values, were analyzed. The FAS included all randomized participants.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826769|NCT01193101|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP)|Sitting BP measurements were performed at screening through the end of the study at every study visit. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (FAS), who had both baseline and week 8 values, were analyzed. The FAS included all randomized participants.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826771|NCT01193114|Secondary|BDI Depression Score|Beck Depression Inventory - II (BDI - II) Range from 0 (no depression) to 63 (severe depression)|6 months post-baseline measure|The analysis was conducted with all of the collected data. Discrepancies in number of participants between the Participant Flow Module and the analysis are due to missing data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826772|NCT01193114|Secondary|BDI Depression Score|Beck Depression Inventory - II (BDI - II) Range from 0 (no depression) to 63 (severe depression)|3 months post-baseline measure|The analysis was conducted with all of the collected data. Discrepancies in number of participants between the Participant Flow Module and the analysis are due to missing data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826773|NCT01193114|Primary|Percent Days of Substance Use in the Prior 3 Months.||9 months post-baseline measure|The analysis was conducted with all of the collected data. Discrepancies in number of participants between the Participant Flow Module and the analysis are due to missing data.||percent days of substance use||Standard Deviation|Mean
826774|NCT01193114|Primary|Percent Days of Substance Use in the Prior 3 Months.||6 months post-baseline measure|The analysis was conducted with all of the collected data. Discrepancies in number of participants between the Participant Flow Module and the analysis are due to missing data.||percent days of substance use||Standard Deviation|Mean
826775|NCT01193114|Primary|Percent Days of Substance Use in the Prior 3 Months.||3 months post-baseline measure|The analysis was conducted with all of the collected data. Discrepancies in number of participants between the Participant Flow Module and the analysis are due to missing data.||percent days of substance use||Standard Deviation|Mean
826776|NCT01193127|Secondary|Use of Pain Medications After Day 1|Ocular pain medications were identified by reviewing concomitant medications. Subject incidence of ocular pain medication use at day 1 and post day 1 were presented. Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|up to 30 days|All randomized subjects||participants|||Number
826777|NCT01193127|Secondary|Use of Pain Medications at Day 1|Ocular pain medications were identified by reviewing concomitant medications. Subject incidence of ocular pain medication use at day 1 and post day 1 were presented. Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|One day|All randomized subjects||participants|||Number
826778|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Use of Ophthalmic Anti-inflammatory Medications|Ophthalmic anti-inflammatory medications were identified by reviewing concomitant medications. Subject incidence of ophthalmic anti-inflammatory medication use by post-surgery day was presented. Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|up to 30 days|All randomized subjects||participants|||Number
826779|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Pain VAS Score After Day 0|VAS pain scores (where 0 = no pain and 100 = worst possible pain) after the day of surgery were summarized.|43 days|Subjects with data at time point.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
826780|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 30|The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|30 days|Subjects with data at time point.||cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
826781|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 14|The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|14 days|Subjects with data at time point.||cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
826782|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 7|The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|Seven days|Subjects with data at time point.||cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
826783|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 2|The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|Two days|Subjects with data at time point.||cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
826784|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 1|The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|One day|Subjects with data at time point.||cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
826785|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Two Hours Post-Surgery|The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|Two hours|Subjects with data at time point.||cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
826786|NCT01193127|Secondary|Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 30|"Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|30 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826929|NCT01193348|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) and Pharmacodynamics (PD); Minimum and Maximum Blood Concentration (Body Weight Cohort ≥40kg) N=5||Induction Phase was between 1 and 4 weeks in length depending on patient weight cohort. Maintenance Phase was started either 2 weeks or 3 weeks after induction phase depending on patient weight cohort|PK parameters Cmin and Cmax were estimated using a population PK model developed from the observed PK concentration data.||micrograms/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826787|NCT01193127|Secondary|Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 14|"Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|14 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826788|NCT01193127|Secondary|Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 7|"Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|Seven days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826789|NCT01193127|Secondary|Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 2|"Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|Two days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826790|NCT01193127|Secondary|Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 1|"Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|One day|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826791|NCT01193127|Secondary|Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Two Hours Post-surgery|"Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|Two hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826792|NCT01193127|Secondary|Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Baseline|"Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|Baseline|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826811|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Haziness Six Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Six hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826812|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Haziness Two Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826793|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 30|"Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|30 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826794|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 14|"Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|14 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826795|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 7|"Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|Seven days|Subjects with scores at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826796|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 2|"Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|Two days|Subjects with scores at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826797|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 1|"Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|One day|Subjects with scores at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826798|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, 2 Hours Post Surgery|"TPostoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|Two hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826813|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Foreign Body Sensation 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Up to 30 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826799|NCT01193127|Secondary|Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Baseline|"Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject’s anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.
Grading was as follows:
Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.
Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous"|Baseline|Subjects with scores at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826800|NCT01193127|Secondary|Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 30|Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|30 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||Log score||Standard Deviation|Mean
826801|NCT01193127|Secondary|Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 14|Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|14 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||Log score||Standard Deviation|Mean
826802|NCT01193127|Secondary|Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 7|Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|Seven days|Subjects with scores at time point.||Log score||Standard Deviation|Mean
826803|NCT01193127|Secondary|Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 2|Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|Two days|Subjects with scores at time point.||Log score||Standard Deviation|Mean
826804|NCT01193127|Secondary|Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 1|Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|One day|Subjects with scores at time point.||Log score||Standard Deviation|Mean
826805|NCT01193127|Secondary|Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Baseline|Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.|Baseline|Subjects with scores at time point.||Log score||Standard Deviation|Mean
826806|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Haziness 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Up to 30 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826807|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Haziness 14 Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|14 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826808|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Haziness Seven Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Seven days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826809|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Haziness Two Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826810|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Haziness One Day Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|One day|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826814|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Foreign Body Sensation 14 Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|14 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826815|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Foreign Body Sensation Seven Days Post-Surgery 7 Days|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Seven days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826816|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Foreign Body Sensation Two Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826817|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Foreign Body Sensation One Day Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|One day|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826818|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Foreign Body Sensation Six Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Six hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826819|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Foreign Body Sensation Two Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826820|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Itching 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Up to 30 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826821|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Itching 14 Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|14 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826822|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Itching Seven Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Seven days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826823|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Itching Two Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826824|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Itching One Day Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|One day|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826825|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Itching 6 Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Six hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826826|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Itching Two Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826864|NCT01193218|Secondary|Change From Baseline in FPG|Change from baseline in FPG after 12 weeks of treatment|baseline and 12 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826827|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Eye Discharge 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Up to 30 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826828|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Eye Discharge 14 Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|14 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826829|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Eye Discharge Seven Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Seven days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826830|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Eye Discharge Two Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826831|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Eye Discharge One Day Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|One day|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826832|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Eye Discharge Six Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Six hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826833|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Eye Discharge 2 Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826834|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Photophobia 30 Days Post-Surgery /Early Termination|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Up to 30 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826835|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Photophobia 14 Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|14 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826836|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Photophobia Seven Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Seven days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826837|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Photophobia Two Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826838|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Photophobia One Day Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|One day|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826839|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Photophobia Six Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Six hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
835431|NCT01287416|Secondary|Suicidal Ideation in Past 2 Days at Baseline|Number of people who endorsed having thought about suicide in the past 2 days as measured at baseline (not at all vs a little to a lot)|July 19-20, 2010|||participants|||Number
826840|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Photophobia Two Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826841|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Tearing, 30 Days Post-Surgery/ Early Termination|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|up to 30 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826842|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Tearing, 14 Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|14 days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826843|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Tearing, Seven Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Seven days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826844|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Tearing, Two Days Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two days|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826845|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Tearing, One Day Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|One day|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826846|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Tearing, Six Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Six hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826847|NCT01193127|Secondary|Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System – Tearing, Two Hours Post-Surgery|The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System – NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.|Two hours|Subjects with scores at time point.||participants|||Number
826848|NCT01193127|Primary|Ocular Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score (mm) Within 12 Hours Postoperatively|For the primary analysis of this endpoint, only the results on the day of operation at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10-12 hours were utilized. The VAS scores (where 0 = no pain and 100 = worst possible pain) were summarized by treatment group and time point. Repeated measures analyses of variance were used to test for differences in postoperative ocular pain. The repeated measures model included VAS pain score as the response variable and treatment (OMS302, phenylephrine hydrochloride (PE), and vehicle), time point (as a categorical variable) and the stratification factor LOCS II grade as predictor variables. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach with an AR(1) working correlation structure was used.|through 12 hours post-surgery|Subjects with postoperative VAS scores.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826849|NCT01193127|Primary|Pupil Diameter (mm) During Surgery|Pupil diameter from surgical baseline (immediately prior to surgical incision) to the end of the surgical procedure (wound closure) was summarized using descriptive statistics by treatment group and time point. Repeated measures analyses of variance were used to test for differences in the maintenance of mydriasis. The repeated measures model included change from baseline pupil diameter as the response variable and treatment (OMS302, ketorolac tromethamine, and vehicle), time point (as a categorical variable) and the stratification factor lens opacities classification system II (LOCS II) grade as predictor variables. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach with an AR(1) working-correlation structure was used.|During surgery (immediately prior to surgical incision to wound closure)|Subjects with interpretable video recordings obtained during surgery.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
826850|NCT01193153|Secondary|Double-blind: Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression - Severity Schizoaffective Scale (CGI-S-SCA) Overall Score at Endpoint|"The CGI-S-SCA is a syndrome-specific 7-point scale (from 1 indicating not ill to 7 indicating very severely ill) that includes an overall severity score as well as scores for the positive, negative, manic, and depressive domains of the illness. The CGI-S-SCA was used to assess the level of overall impairment, as well as that related to each domain, at the time of the visit and for the week prior to the visit."|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 64/LOCF) in double-blind period|DB ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of double-blind study medication. LOCF method was used to impute missing values. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point for each arm, respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826865|NCT01193218|Secondary|Occurrence of Treat to Target Efficacy Response|Occurrence of treat to target efficacy response, that is an HbA1c of <7.0% after 12 weeks of treatment|baseline and 12 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826851|NCT01193153|Secondary|Open-label: Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression - Severity Schizoaffective Scale (CGI-S-SCA) Overall Score at Endpoint|"The CGI-S-SCA is a syndrome-specific 7-point scale (from 1 indicating not ill to 7 indicating very severely ill) that includes an overall severity score as well as scores for the positive, negative, manic, and depressive domains of the illness. The CGI-S-SCA was used to assess the level of overall impairment, as well as that related to each domain, at the time of the visit and for the week prior to the visit."|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 13/LOCF) in OL Lead-in period, Endpoint (Week 25/LOCF) in open-label stabilization period|OL ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of open-label study medication. LOCF method was used to impute missing values. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826852|NCT01193153|Secondary|Double-blind: Change From Baseline in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) Total Score at Endpoint|The YMRS was designed to measure the severity of manic symptoms, to gauge the effect of treatment on mania severity, and to detect a return of manic symptoms (for example relapse or recurrence). YMRS is a checklist of 11 items that are ranked on a scale of 0 to 4 or 0 to 8. Seven of the items (elevated mood, increased motor activity, sexual interest, sleep, language-thought disorder, appearance, and insight) are ranked 0 to 4 and have descriptors associated with each severity level (that is, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4). Four of the items (irritability, speech, content, and disruptive-aggressive behavior) are scored 0 to 8 and have descriptors for every other increment (that is, 0, 2, 4, 6, 8). The item score is based on participant's report of his or her condition and clinician's behavioral observations during the interview, with emphasis on the latter. Higher scores indicate worsening. Responses are summed to yield YMRS total score ranging from 0 to 60.|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 64/LOCF) in double-blind period|DB ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of double-blind study medication. LOCF method was used to impute missing values. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point for each arm, respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826853|NCT01193153|Secondary|Open-label: Change From Baseline in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) Total Score at Endpoint|The YMRS was designed to measure the severity of manic symptoms, to gauge the effect of treatment on mania severity, and to detect a return of manic symptoms (for example relapse or recurrence). YMRS is a checklist of 11 items that are ranked on a scale of 0 to 4 or 0 to 8. Seven of the items (elevated mood, increased motor activity, sexual interest, sleep, language-thought disorder, appearance, and insight) are ranked 0 to 4 and have descriptors associated with each severity level (that is, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4). Four of the items (irritability, speech, content, and disruptive-aggressive behavior) are scored 0 to 8 and have descriptors for every other increment (that is, 0, 2, 4, 6, 8). The item score is based on participant's report of his or her condition and clinician's behavioral observations during the interview, with emphasis on the latter. Higher scores indicate worsening. Responses are summed to yield YMRS total score ranging from 0 to 60.|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 13/LOCF) in OL Lead-in period, Endpoint (Week 25/LOCF) in open-label stabilization period|OL ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of open-label study medication. LOCF method was used to impute missing values. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826854|NCT01193153|Secondary|Double-blind: Change From Baseline in Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-21) Total Score at Endpoint|The HAM-D-21 is a 21-item, clinician-rated scale to evaluate depressed mood as well as the vegetative and cognitive symptoms of depression. The items are rated on a 5-point (0 to 4) scale. The 5-point scale items use a rating of 0 (absent), 1 (doubtful to mild), 2 (mild to moderate), 3 (moderate to severe), and 4 (very severe). A rating of 4 is usually reserved for extreme symptoms. The responses for all 21 items are summed to yield the HAM-D-21 total score that ranges from 0-63.|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 64/LOCF) in double-blind period|DB ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of double-blind study medication. LOCF method was used to impute missing values. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point for each arm, respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826855|NCT01193153|Secondary|Open-label: Change From Baseline in Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-21) Total Score at Endpoint|The HAM-D-21 is a 21-item, clinician-rated scale to evaluate depressed mood as well as the vegetative and cognitive symptoms of depression. The items are rated on a 5-point (0 to 4) scale. The 5-point scale items use a rating of 0 (absent), 1 (doubtful to mild), 2 (mild to moderate), 3 (moderate to severe), and 4 (very severe). A rating of 4 is usually reserved for extreme symptoms. The responses for all 21 items are summed to yield the HAM-D-21 total score that ranges from 0-63.|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 13/LOCF) in OL Lead-in period, Endpoint (Week 25/LOCF) in open-label stabilization period|OL ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of open-label study medication. LOCF method was used to impute missing values. n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826856|NCT01193153|Secondary|Double-blind: Change From Baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Total Score at Endpoint|The PANSS is a 30-item scale designed to assess various symptoms of schizophrenia including delusions, grandiosity, blunted affect, poor attention, and poor impulse control. The 30 symptoms are rated on a 7-point scale that ranges from 1 (absent) to 7 (extreme psychopathology). The PANSS total score consists of the sum of all 30 PANSS items and ranges from 30 to 210. Higher scores indicate worsening.|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 64/LOCF) in double-blind period|DB ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of double-blind study medication. LOCF method was used to impute missing values. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point for each arm, respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826866|NCT01193218|Primary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c After 12 Weeks of Treatment.|The primary endpoint in this study is the change from baseline in HbA1c after 12 weeks of treatment.|baseline and 12 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS)||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826930|NCT01193348|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) and Pharmacodynamics (PD); Minimum and Maximum Blood Concentration (Body Weight Cohort 30 - <40kg) N=1||Induction Phase was between 1 and 4 weeks in length depending on patient weight cohort. Maintenance Phase was started either 2 weeks or 3 weeks after induction phase depending on patient weight cohort|PK parameters Cmin and Cmax were estimated using a population PK model developed from the observed PK concentration data. N=0 in the maintenance phase because the patient changed to ≥40kg body weight category||micrograms/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826857|NCT01193153|Secondary|Open-label: Change From Baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Total Score at Endpoint|The PANSS is a 30-item scale designed to assess various symptoms of schizophrenia including delusions, grandiosity, blunted affect, poor attention, and poor impulse control. The 30 symptoms are rated on a 7-point scale that ranges from 1 (absent) to 7 (extreme psychopathology). The PANSS total score consists of the sum of all 30 PANSS items and ranges from 30 to 210. Higher scores indicate worsening.|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 13/LOCF) in OL Lead-in period, Endpoint (Week 25/LOCF) in open-label stabilization period|OL ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of open-label study medication. LOCF method was used to impute missing values. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826858|NCT01193153|Secondary|Double-blind: Number of Participants With Personal and Social Performance (PSP) Categorical Scores|The PSP scale was designed to assess the degree of dysfunction a participant exhibits during a month prior to any visit within 4 domains of behavior: a) socially useful activities, b) personal and social relationships, c) self-care, and d) disturbing and aggressive behavior, each rated on 6-point scale (1=absent to 6=very severe). Total transformed score from 1 to 100 is generated from raw score based on clinical interpretation of scores generated in 4 areas of functioning. Number of participants in each specific category; good functioning (PSP total score >70), variable functioning (PSP total score between 31 and 70), and poor functioning (PSP total score <=30) were assessed.|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 64/LOCF) in DB period|DB ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of double-blind study medication. LOCF method was used to impute missing values.'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point for each arm, respectively.||participants|||Number
826859|NCT01193153|Secondary|Double-blind: Change From Baseline in Personal and Social Performance (PSP) Total Score at Endpoint|The PSP scale was designed to assess the degree of dysfunction a participant exhibits during a month prior to any visit within 4 domains of behavior: a) socially useful activities, b) personal and social relationships, c) self-care, and d) disturbing and aggressive behavior, each rated on 6-point scale (1=absent to 6=very severe). Total transformed score from 1 to 100 is generated from raw score based on clinical interpretation of scores generated in 4 areas of functioning. A score lying between 71 and 100 indicated a good functioning; one between 31 and 70 indicated varying degrees of difficulty, and a score of <=30 indicated functioning so poor that participant required intensive supervision.|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 64/LOCF) in double-blind period|DB ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of double-blind study medication. LOCF method was used to impute missing values. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point for each arm, respectively.||Units on a Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826860|NCT01193153|Secondary|Open-label: Change From Baseline in Personal and Social Performance (PSP) Total Score at Endpoint|The PSP scale was designed to assess the degree of dysfunction a participant exhibits during a month prior to any visit within 4 domains of behavior: a) socially useful activities, b) personal and social relationships, c) self-care, and d) disturbing and aggressive behavior, each rated on 6-point scale (1=absent to 6=very severe). Total transformed score from 1 to 100 is generated from raw score based on clinical interpretation of scores generated in 4 areas of functioning. A score lying between 71 and 100 indicated a good functioning; one between 31 and 70 indicated varying degrees of difficulty, and a score of <=30 indicated functioning so poor that participant required intensive supervision.|Baseline and Endpoint (Week 13/LOCF) in Open-label (OL) Lead-in period, Endpoint (Week 25/LOCF) in open-label stabilization period|OL ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of open-label study medication. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826861|NCT01193153|Secondary|Double-blind: Change From Baseline in Personal and Social Performance (PSP) Total Score at Week 64 (Total Mixed Model Repeated Measures [MMRM] Analysis of Covariance [ANCOVA])|The PSP scale was designed to assess the degree of dysfunction a participant exhibits during a month prior to any visit within 4 domains of behavior: a) socially useful activities, b) personal and social relationships, c) self-care, and d) disturbing and aggressive behavior, each rated on 6-point scale (1=absent to 6=very severe). Total transformed score from 1 to 100 is generated from raw score based on clinical interpretation of scores generated in 4 areas of functioning. A score lying between 71 and 100 indicated a good functioning; one between 31 and 70 indicated varying degrees of difficulty, and a score of <=30 indicated functioning so poor that participant required intensive supervision.|Baseline and Week 64 of double blind relapse prevention period|DB ITT analysis set which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one injection of double-blind study medication. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point for each arm, respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
826862|NCT01193153|Primary|Double-blind: Percentage of Participants Who Experienced Relapse|Relapse was defined as first occurrence of any 1 of following:psychiatric hospitalization due to worsening symptoms; any intervention employed to avert imminent hospitalization due to worsening symptoms or need for additional antipsychotic,antidepressants/mood stabilizing medication; deliberate self-injury,suicidal/homicidal ideation that is clinically significant as determined by investigator,or violent behavior resulting in clinically significant injury to another person or property damage; worsening of any 1 or more of 8 selected positive and negative syndrome scale(PANSS) items to a score of greater than or equal to (>= 6) after randomization(if the score for the corresponding item was less than or equal to [<=] 4 at randomization); worsening of certain other measures in specific ways at 2 consecutive visits. Relapse by subgroup of participants on monotherapy,adjunctive therapy to antidepressants/mood stabilizers,participants with psychotic symptoms/mood symptoms was examined.|Day 1 up to Month 15 of double blind relapse prevention period|Double-blind(DB) Intent-to-Treat(ITT) analysis set included all randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 injection of DB study medication.‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable for each specified category,for each arm.||percentage of participants|||Number
826863|NCT01193218|Other Pre-specified|Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Adverse Events|Number of patients with confirmed hypoglycaemic adverse events|between first drug intake of study medication up to a period of 7 days (inclusive) after the last drug intake of study medication, up to 392 days|Treated patients||participants|||Number
826867|NCT01193244|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in Global Health Status|Global health status deterioration is defined as a drop greater than 16 points from the baseline assessment, confirmed at least 3 weeks later, on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core Module 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) index after the score has been linearly transformed to a 0 to 100 scale. EORTC QLQ-C30 consists of 30 questions, where question 1 to 28 can be answered with 1: Not at all, 2: A little, 3: Quite a bit, 4: Very much and question 29 to 30 with 1: Very poor to 7: Excellent. For subscales a high score from 0-100 indicates: high global quality of life, high level of functioning (physical, role, emotional, cognitive, social) or a high level of symptoms (fatigue, nausea, pain, dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhoea, financial difficulties).|Baseline until EOT (approximately up to 4.7 years)|The ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826868|NCT01193244|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response|Percentage of participants with objective response based assessment of confirmed complete response (CR) or confirmed partial response (PR) according to RECIST 1.1. A CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions determined by computerized tomography (CT) or MRI. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have had reduction in short axis to <10 millimetre (mm). A PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of longest diameters of non-lymph node lesions and of the short diameter or short axis of lymph nodes.|Baseline until disease progression or death, whichever occurred first (approximately up to 4.7 years)|The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) evaluable population included all participants who had measurable disease by RECIST 1.1 at the baseline assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826869|NCT01193244|Secondary|Time to Subsequent Antineoplastic Therapy|Time to subsequent antineoplastic therapy is defined as the time from randomization to the start of any alternate antineoplastic therapy for prostate cancer. Deaths due to disease progression prior to antineoplastic therapy for prostate cancer are considered as events. Otherwise, time to next therapy is censored at the date of death or the last date the participant was known to be alive or the data cutoff date, whichever is earlier.|Baseline until start of subsequent antineoplastic therapy (up to 4.7 years)|The ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826870|NCT01193244|Secondary|Time to Docetaxel Chemotherapy|Time to docetaxel based chemotherapy is defined as the time from randomization to the start of docetaxel based chemotherapy for prostate cancer, regardless of whether the participant received concurrent orteronel or not. Deaths due to disease progression prior to Docetaxel based chemotherapy were considered as events.|Baseline until start of docetaxel chemotherapy (up to 4.7 years)|ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826871|NCT01193244|Secondary|Time to PSA Progression|Time to PSA progression was defined as time from randomization to a PSA increase of 25 percent and PSA rise of at least 2 nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL) above the lowest value observed post baseline or, if no PSA decline occurred post baseline, compared to baseline PSA.|Baseline until the final on treatment assessment or until end of short term follow-up following discontinuation of treatment, whichever occurred later (approximately up to 4.7 years)|ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826872|NCT01193244|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving PSA90 Response at Any Time During the Study|The PSA90 is defined as a decline of PSA by 90 percent from baseline.|Cycle: 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34 and 37|ITT population where baseline and post-baseline assessments were available. The ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826873|NCT01193244|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving 90 Percent Reduction From Baseline in Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA90 Response) at Week 12|The PSA90 is defined as a decline of PSA by 90 percent from baseline.|Week 12|ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||percentage of participants|||Number
826874|NCT01193244|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving PSA50 Response at Any Time During the Study|The PSA50 is defined as a decline of PSA by 50 percent from baseline.|Cycle: 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34 and 37|ITT population where baseline and post-baseline assessments were available. The ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826875|NCT01193244|Secondary|Time to SRE|Time to SRE is defined as the time from randomization to SRE, or death due to any cause, whichever comes first. SRE is defined as a fracture or spinal cord compression or the need for radiation or surgery at the site of a prostate cancer metastatic lesion that is substantiated by radiographic or pathologic evidence.|Baseline up to EOT (Cycle 61 Day 58)|The ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826876|NCT01193244|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Skeletal Related Events (SRE)|Skeletal related (SRE) event is defined as a fracture or spinal cord compression or the need for radiation or surgery at the site of a prostate cancer metastatic lesion that is substantiated by radiographic or pathologic evidence.|Baseline up to EOT (approximately up to 4.7 years)|The ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826877|NCT01193244|Secondary|Number of Participants With TEAEs Categorized Into Investigations Related to Chemistry, Hematology or Coagulation||Baseline up to 30 days or EOT whichever is later (approximately up to Cycle 61 Day 58)|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
826878|NCT01193244|Secondary|Worst Change From Baseline Over Time in Cardiac Ejection Fraction|Worst change was defined as the worst overall change that occurred in cardiac ejection fraction at any measured time point.|Baseline up to 30 days or EOT whichever is later (approximately up to Cycle 61 Day 58)|Safety population where baseline and post-baseline assessments were available. Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||percent ejection fraction||Standard Deviation|Mean
826879|NCT01193244|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings||Baseline up to EOT (Cycle 61 Day 58)|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
827536|NCT01207687|Secondary|Incidence of Serious or Life Threatening Toxicities|The number of patients with serious or life threatening toxicities (CTCAE grade 3 or above)|Up to 6 months post-treatment|Participants evaluated for serious or life threatening toxicities||Participants|||Count of Participants
826880|NCT01193244|Secondary|Number of Participants With Worst Change From Baseline in Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status|ECOG assessed participant's performance status on 5 point scale: 0=Fully active/able to carry on all pre-disease activities without restriction; 1=restricted in physically strenuous activity, ambulatory/able to carry out light or sedentary work; 2=ambulatory (>50 percent of waking hours [hrs]), capable of all self care, unable to carry out any work activities; 3=capable of only limited self care, confined to bed/chair >50 percent of waking hrs; 4=completely disabled, cannot carry on any self care, totally confined to bed/chair; 5=dead. Worst change was defined as the worst overall change that occurred in ECOG status at any measured time point during the treatment period.|Baseline until EOT (approximately up to 4.7 years)|Safety population where baseline and post-baseline assessments were available. Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
826881|NCT01193244|Secondary|Number of Participants With TEAEs Related to Weight||Baseline up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Cycle 61 Day 58)|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
826882|NCT01193244|Secondary|Number of Participants With TEAEs Related to Vital Signs||Baseline up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Cycle 61 Day 58)|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
826883|NCT01193244|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events Greater Than or Equal to (>=) Grade 3|Grade 3 (Severe) events=unacceptable or intolerable events, significantly interrupting usual daily activity, require systemic drug therapy/other treatment. Grade 4 (Life-threatening) events caused participant to be in imminent danger of death. Grade 5 (Death) events=death related to an AE.|Baseline up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Cycle 61 Day 58)|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
826884|NCT01193244|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting One or More Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||Baseline up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Cycle 61 Day 58)|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
826885|NCT01193244|Secondary|Time to Pain Progression|Time to pain progression was defined as the time from participant randomization to the first assessment date of pain progression. Pain progression was defined as the occurrence of 1 of the following and confirmed by an additional assessment, at least 3 weeks but not more than 5 weeks later: The brief pain inventory-short form (BPI-SF) worst pain score was >=4 with a >=2 point increase over baseline in BPI-SF worst pain score with stable or increased analgesic use; The BPI-SF worst pain score was >=4 but not less than baseline with new or increased (relative to baseline) Step II or Step III analgesic use; The BPI-SF worst pain score was <=3 but not less than baseline with new or increased (relative to baseline) Step III analgesic use. BPI-SF was an 11-item questionnaire, designed to assess severity and impact of pain on daily functions. Total score ranged from 0 to 100 with lower scores being indicative of less pain or pain interference.|Baseline until End of treatment (EOT) (approximately up to 4.7 years)|ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826886|NCT01193244|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Favorable Circulating Tumor Cell Count (CTC) Levels at Week 12|A favorable CTC count was defined as less than <5 counts per 7.5 milliliter (mL) in whole blood. An unfavorable CTC count was defined as greater than or equal to (>=) 5 counts/7.5 mL in whole blood.|Week 12|ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826887|NCT01193244|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving 50 Percent Reduction From Baseline in Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA50) Response at Week 12|The PSA50 is defined as a decline of at least 50 percent (%) from baseline.|Week 12|ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826888|NCT01193244|Primary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was calculated from the date of participant randomization to the date of participant death due to any cause. Participants without documentation of death at time of the analysis were censored as of the date the participant was last known to be alive, or the data cutoff date, whichever was earlier.|Baseline until death (up to 4.7 years)|ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826889|NCT01193244|Primary|Radiographic Progression-free Survival (rPFS)|rPFS was defined as the time from randomization to the first objective evidence of radiographic disease progression assessed by independent central radiology review or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Radiographic disease progression was evaluated by computerized tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and radionuclide bone scans at regularly scheduled visits. Radiographic disease progression in bone required a confirmatory scan. Radiographic disease progression in soft tissue did not require a confirmatory scan for purposes of analysis. Radiographic disease progression was evaluated by independent central radiology review using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 for soft tissue disease and Prostate Cancer Working Group (PCWG2) guidelines for bone disease. Participants who did not reach the endpoint were censored at their last assessment.|Baseline until radiographic disease progression or death, whichever occurred first (approximately up to 4.7 years)|ITT population included all participants who were randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
826890|NCT01193283|Primary|Blood Counts and Adverse Event Profile After 6 Months of Treatment.|The safety endpoint will be toxicity profile after 6 months of treatment. The efficacy endpoint is complete response rate at 6 months, with complete response defined as blood counts no longer meeting the standard criteria for severe pancytopenia in severe aplastic anemia.|6 months|||participants|||Number
826891|NCT01193335|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With OPA Titer >= Lower Limit of Quantitation (LLOQ) 2 Years After Toddler Dose|Percentage of participants achieving OPA titer >=LLOQ for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) determined in blood samples of all participants was presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on observed proportion of participants. LLOQ for each serotype: 1=18; 3=12; 4=21; 5=29; 6A=37; 6B=43; 7F=210; 9V=345; 14=35; 18C=31; 19A=18; 19F=48; 23F=13.|2 Years After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure during specified follow-up period and 'n' signifies participants with a determinate OPA titer to the given serotype during specified follow-up period for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826892|NCT01193335|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With OPA Titer >= Lower Limit of Quantitation (LLOQ) 1 Year After Toddler Dose|Percentage of participants achieving OPA titer >=LLOQ for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) determined in blood samples of all participants was presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on observed proportion of participants. LLOQ for each serotype: 1=18; 3=12; 4=21; 5=29; 6A=37; 6B=43; 7F=210; 9V=345; 14=35; 18C=31; 19A=18; 19F=48; 23F=13.|1 Year After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure during specified follow-up period and 'n' signifies participants with a determinate OPA titer to the given serotype during specified follow-up period for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826893|NCT01193335|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With OPA Titer >= Lower Limit of Quantitation (LLOQ) 1 Month After Toddler Dose|Percentage of participants achieving OPA titer >=LLOQ for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) determined in blood samples of all participants was presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on observed proportion of participants. LLOQ for each serotype: 1=18; 3=12; 4=21; 5=29; 6A=37; 6B=43; 7F=210; 9V=345; 14=35; 18C=31; 19A=18; 19F=48; 23F=13.|1 Month After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here 'n' signifies participants with a determinate OPA titer to the given serotype during specified follow-up period for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826894|NCT01193335|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With OPA Titer >= Lower Limit of Quantitation (LLOQ) Before Toddler Dose|Percentage of participants achieving OPA titer >=LLOQ for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) determined in blood samples of all participants was presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on observed proportion of participants. LLOQ for each serotype: 1=18; 3=12; 4=21; 5=29; 6A=37; 6B=43; 7F=210; 9V=345; 14=35; 18C=31; 19A=18; 19F=48; 23F=13.|Before Toddler Dose (pre-vaccination)|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘n’ signifies participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype for each arm respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826895|NCT01193335|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With OPA Titer >= Lower Limit of Quantitation (LLOQ) 1 Month After Infant Series|Percentage of participants achieving OPA titer >=LLOQ for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) determined in blood samples of all participants was presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on observed proportion of participants. LLOQ for each serotype: 1=18; 3=12; 4=21; 5=29; 6A=37; 6B=43; 7F=210; 9V=345; 14=35; 18C=31; 19A=18; 19F=48; 23F=13.|1 Month After Infant Series|Evaluable Infant Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘n’ signifies participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype for each arm respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826896|NCT01193335|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal Opsonophagocytic Activity (OPA) Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) 2 Years After Toddler Dose|Antibody-mediated serum OPA against the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) was measured using a pneumococcal OPA assay. Results were expressed as OPA titers. OPA titers were logarithmically transformed for analysis; geometric means calculated and expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|2 Years After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure during specified follow-up period and 'n' signifies participants with a determinate OPA titer to the given serotype during specified follow-up period for each arm, respectively.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826897|NCT01193335|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal Opsonophagocytic Activity (OPA) Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) 1 Year After Toddler Dose|Antibody-mediated serum OPA against the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) was measured centrally using a pneumococcal OPA assay. Results were expressed as OPA titers. OPA titers were logarithmically transformed for analysis; geometric means calculated and expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|1 Year After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure during specified follow-up period and 'n' signifies participants with a determinate OPA titer to the given serotype during specified follow-up period for each arm, respectively.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826898|NCT01193335|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal Opsonophagocytic Activity (OPA) Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) 1 Month After Toddler Dose|Antibody-mediated serum OPA against the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) was measured centrally using a pneumococcal OPA assay. Results were expressed as OPA titers. OPA titers were logarithmically transformed for analysis; geometric means calculated and expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|1 Month After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘n’ signifies participants with a determinate OPA titer to the given serotype for each arm respectively.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826899|NCT01193335|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal Opsonophagocytic Activity (OPA) Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) Before Toddler Dose|Antibody-mediated serum OPA against the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) was measured centrally using a pneumococcal OPA assay. Results were expressed as OPA titers. OPA titers were logarithmically transformed for analysis; geometric means calculated and expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|Before the toddler dose (pre-vaccination)|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here 'n’ signifies participants with a determinate OPA titer to the given serotype for each arm respectively.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826931|NCT01193348|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) and Pharmacodynamics (PD); Minimum and Maximum Blood Concentration (Body Weight Cohort 20 - <30kg)||Induction Phase was between 1 and 4 weeks in length depending on patient weight cohort. Maintenance Phase was started either 2 weeks or 3 weeks after induction phase depending on patient weight cohort|PK parameters Cmin and Cmax were estimated using a population PK model developed from the observed PK concentration data||micrograms/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826900|NCT01193335|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal Opsonophagocytic Activity (OPA) Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) 1 Month After Infant Series|Antibody-mediated serum OPA against the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) was measured centrally using a pneumococcal OPA assay. Results were expressed as OPA titers. OPA titers were logarithmically transformed for analysis; geometric means calculated and expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|1 Month After Infant Series|Evaluable Infant Immunogenicity Population. Here n’ signifies participants with a determinate OPA titer to the given serotype for each arm respectively.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826901|NCT01193335|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Persistence 2 Years After Toddler Dose: Group 1A, 1B, 1C|The persistence of the antibody response induced by 13vPnC was described by geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A). GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs were evaluated. GMCs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. CIs were calculated as back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|2 Years After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure during specified follow-up period and 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype during specified follow-up period for each arm, respectively.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826902|NCT01193335|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Toddler Dose: Group 1A, 1B, 1C|The persistence of the antibody response induced by 13vPnC was described by geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A). GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs were evaluated. GMCs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. CIs were calculated as back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|1 Year After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure during specified follow-up period and 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype during specified follow-up period for each arm, respectively.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826903|NCT01193335|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody 1 Month After Toddler Dose: Group 1A, 1B, 1C|Geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) were presented. GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMCs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. CIs were calculated as back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations. Here 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.|1 Month After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826904|NCT01193335|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Before Toddler Dose: Group 1A, 1B, 1C|Geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) were presented. GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMCs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. CIs were calculated as back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations. Here 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.|Before Toddler Dose (pre-vaccination)|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826905|NCT01193335|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody 1 Month After Infant Series: Group 1A, 1B, 1C|Geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) were presented. GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMCs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. CIs were calculated as back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations. Here 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.|1 Month After Infant Series|Evaluable Infant Immunogenicity Population.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826906|NCT01193335|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Persistence 2 Years After Toddler Dose|The persistence of the antibody response induced by 13vPnC was described by geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A). GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs were evaluated. GMCs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. CIs were calculated as back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|2 Years After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure during specified follow-up period and 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype during specified follow-up period for each arm, respectively.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826932|NCT01193348|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) and Pharmacodynamics (PD); Minimum and Maximum Blood Concentration (Body Weight Cohort 10 - <20kg) N=7||Induction Phase was between 1 and 4 weeks in length depending on patient weight cohort.Maintenance Phase was started 1 week after induction phase and dosing of eculizumab administration was every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks depending on patient weight cohort|PK parameters Cmin and Cmax were estimated using a population PK model developed from the observed PK concentration data||micrograms/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826907|NCT01193335|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Toddler Dose|The persistence of the antibody response induced by 13vPnC was described by geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A). GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs were evaluated. GMCs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. CIs were calculated as back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|1 Year After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure during specified follow-up period and 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype during specified follow-up period for each arm, respectively.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826908|NCT01193335|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody 1 Month After Toddler Dose|Geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) were presented. GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMCs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. CIs were calculated as back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations. Here 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.|1 Month After Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826909|NCT01193335|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Before Toddler Dose|Geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) were presented. GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMCs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. CIs were calculated as back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Before Toddler Dose (pre-vaccination)|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826910|NCT01193335|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serotype-specific Pneumococcal IgG Antibody Level >=0.35 mcg/mL 1 Month After Toddler Dose: Group 1A, 1B, 1C|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody threshold >=0.35 mcg/mL along with the corresponding 95% CI for the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) were presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘n’ signifies participants with a determinate IgG antibody concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826911|NCT01193335|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serotype-specific Pneumococcal IgG Antibody Level ≥0.35 mcg/mL 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody threshold >=0.35 mcg/mL along with the corresponding 95% CI for the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) were presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants. Here ‘n’ signifies participants with a determinate IgG antibody concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population included eligible participants who received all the assigned vaccinations (Infant Dose 1, 2, 3 and toddler dose), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826912|NCT01193335|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Level >=0.35 mcg/mL 1 Month After Infant Series: Group 1A, 1B, 1C|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody threshold >=0.35 mcg/mL along with the corresponding 95 % CI for the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) were presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants. Here 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.|1 Month After Infant Series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population included eligible participants who received all the assigned vaccinations (Infant Dose 1, 2 and 3), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826913|NCT01193335|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Rise (GMFR) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody From Toddler Pre-Dose to 1 Month After Toddler Dose|GMFR for the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) from before 13vPnC toddler dose to 1 month after 13vPnC toddler dose were computed using the logarithmically transformed assay results. CIs for GMFR were back transformations of confidence levels based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the fold rises. GMFRs were calculated using all participants with available data from both before 13vPnC toddler dose and after 13vPnC toddler dose blood draws.|Before 13vPnC Toddler Dose (pre-vaccination), 1 month after 13vPnC Toddler Dose|Evaluable Toddler Immunogenicity Population. Here ‘n’ signifies participants with a determinate IgG antibody concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.||fold rise||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826933|NCT01193348|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) and Pharmacodynamics (PD); Minimum and Maximum Blood Concentration (Body Weight Cohort 5 - <10kg) N=3||Induction Phase was between 1 and 4 weeks in length depending on patient weight cohort.Maintenance Phase was started 1 week after induction phase and dosing of eculizumab administration was every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks depending on patient weight cohort|PK parameters Cmin and Cmax were estimated using a population PK model developed from the observed PK concentration data||micrograms/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826914|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs): 2-Year Follow-up After Toddler Dose|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received vaccine without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE: an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial/prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|1-year follow-up after toddler dose to 2-year follow-up after toddler dose|Safety population for 2-year follow-up after toddler dose included all participants who received 13vPnC toddler dose and had safety data available during specified follow-up period.||percentage of participants|||Number
826915|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs): 1-Year Follow-up After Toddler Dose|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received vaccine without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE: an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial/prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|1 month after toddler dose up to 1-year follow-up|Safety population for 1-year follow-up after toddler dose included all participants who received 13vPnC toddler dose and had safety data available during specified follow-up period.||percentage of participants|||Number
826916|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs): Toddler Dose|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received vaccine without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE: an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial/prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|Toddler dose up to 1 Month after toddler dose|Safety population for toddler dose included all participants who received 13vPnC toddler dose.||percentage of participants|||Number
826917|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs): After Infant Series|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received vaccine without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE: an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial/prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|1 Month after Dose 3 of the infant series up to toddler dose|Safety population for infant series included all participants who received at least 1 dose of 13vPnC during infant series.||percentage of participants|||Number
826918|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs): Infant Series|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received vaccine without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE: an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial/prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|Dose 1 up to 1 month after Dose 3 (infant series)|Safety population for infant series included all participants who received at least 1 dose of 13vPnC during infant series.||percentage of participants|||Number
826919|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events Within 7 Days After Toddler Dose|Systemic events (fever >=38 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, increased sleep, and irritability or decreased sleep) and use of antipyretic medication were reported using an electronic diary. Decreased appetite was scaled as Any; Mild (loss of appetite but no decreased oral intake); Moderate (decreased oral intake); Severe (refusal to feed). Increased sleep was scaled as Any; Mild (increased or prolonged sleeping bouts); Moderate (slightly subdued interfering with daily activity); Severe (disabling not interested in usual daily activity). Irritability or decreased sleep was scaled as Any; Mild (easily consolable); Moderate (requiring increased attention); Severe (inconsolable; crying that cannot be comforted). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after the toddler dose|Safety population for Toddler Dose: all participants who received 13vPnC Toddler Dose. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any event and 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified event for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826920|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events Within 7 Days After Dose 3 Infant Series|Systemic events (fever >=38 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, increased sleep, and irritability or decreased sleep) and use of antipyretic medication were reported using an electronic diary. Decreased appetite was scaled as Any; Mild (loss of appetite but no decreased oral intake); Moderate (decreased oral intake); Severe (refusal to feed). Increased sleep was scaled as Any; Mild (increased or prolonged sleeping bouts); Moderate (slightly subdued interfering with daily activity); Severe (disabling not interested in usual daily activity). Irritability or decreased sleep was scaled as Any; Mild (easily consolable); Moderate (requiring increased attention); Severe (inconsolable; crying that cannot be comforted). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 3 of the infant series|Safety population for Dose 3 infant series: all participants who received 13vPnC Dose 3. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any event and 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified event for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826928|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Level Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.35 Microgram Per Milliliter (mcg/mL) 1 Month After Infant Series|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody threshold >=0.35 mcg/mL along with the corresponding 95 percent (%) confidence interval (CI) for the 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) were presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants. Here 'n' signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population included eligible participants who received all the assigned vaccinations (Infant Dose 1, 2 and 3), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826921|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events Within 7 Days After Dose 2 Infant Series|Systemic events (fever >=38 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, increased sleep, and irritability or decreased sleep) and use of antipyretic medication were reported using an electronic diary. Decreased appetite was scaled as Any; Mild (loss of appetite but no decreased oral intake); Moderate (decreased oral intake); Severe (refusal to feed). Increased sleep was scaled as Any; Mild (increased or prolonged sleeping bouts); Moderate (slightly subdued interfering with daily activity); Severe (disabling not interested in usual daily activity). Irritability or decreased sleep was scaled as Any; Mild (easily consolable); Moderate (requiring increased attention); Severe (inconsolable; crying that cannot be comforted). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 2 of the infant series|Safety population for Dose 2 infant series: all participants who received 13vPnC Dose 2. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any event and 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified event for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826922|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events Within 7 Days After Dose 1 Infant Series|Systemic events (fever >=38 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, increased sleep, and irritability or decreased sleep) and use of antipyretic medication were reported using an electronic diary. Decreased appetite was scaled as Any; Mild (loss of appetite but no decreased oral intake); Moderate (decreased oral intake); Severe (refusal to feed). Increased sleep was scaled as Any; Mild (increased or prolonged sleeping bouts); Moderate (slightly subdued interfering with daily activity); Severe (disabling not interested in usual daily activity). Irritability or decreased sleep was scaled as Any; Mild (easily consolable); Moderate (requiring increased attention); Severe (inconsolable; crying that cannot be comforted). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 1 of the infant series|Safety population for Dose 1 infant series: all participants who received 13vPnC Dose 1. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any event and 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified event for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826923|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions Within 7 Days After Toddler Dose|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Mild (hurts if gently touched with no crying); Moderate (hurts if gently touched with crying); Severe (causes limitation of limb movement). Redness and swelling were scaled as Any (redness or swelling present); Mild (0.5 centimeters [cm] to 2.0 cm); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (>7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after the toddler dose|Safety population for Toddler Dose: all participants who received 13vPnC Toddler Dose. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction.'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826924|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions Within 7 Days After Dose 3 Infant Series|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Mild (hurts if gently touched with no crying); Moderate (hurts if gently touched with crying); Severe (causes limitation of limb movement). Redness and swelling were scaled as Any (redness or swelling present); Mild (0.5 centimeters [cm] to 2.0 cm); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (>7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 3 of the infant series|Safety population for Dose 3 infant series: all participants who received 13vPnC Dose 3.Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction.'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826925|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions Within 7 Days After Dose 2 Infant Series|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Mild (hurts if gently touched with no crying); Moderate (hurts if gently touched with crying); Severe (causes limitation of limb movement). Redness and swelling were scaled as Any (redness or swelling present); Mild (0.5 centimeters [cm] to 2.0 cm); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (>7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 2 of the infant series|Safety population for Dose 2 infant series: all participants who received 13vPnC Dose 2.Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction.'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826926|NCT01193335|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions Within 7 Days After Dose 1 Infant Series|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Mild (hurts if gently touched with no crying); Moderate (hurts if gently touched with crying); Severe (causes limitation of limb movement). Redness and swelling were scaled as Any (redness or swelling present); Mild (0.5 centimeters [cm] to 2.0 cm); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (>7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 1 of the infant series|Safety population for Dose 1 infant series: all participants who received13vPnC Dose 1. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction.'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
826927|NCT01193335|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody 1 Month After the Infant Series|Antibody geometric mean concentration (GMC) for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) and 6 additional pneumococcal serotypes specific to 13vPnC (Serotypes 1, 3, 5, 6A, 7F, and 19A) were presented. GMC (13vPnC) and corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs were evaluated. GMCs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw. CIs for GMC were back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population. Here ‘n’ signifies participants with a determinate IgG concentration to the given serotype for each arm, respectively.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826934|NCT01193348|Secondary|Platelet Count Change From Baseline to 52 Weeks||Through 52 Weeks|Change from baseline platelet counts were analyzed for the ITT population using a repeated measures ANOVA model. The estimated LS means of change from baseline at each post-baseline visit alongside with 95% CIs and P-values were calculated, as were the parameter estimates for the covariates and their associated P-values.||10^9 cells/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
826935|NCT01193348|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement|Proportion of Patients with Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement was determined and defined as an increase in eGFR by ≥ 15 mL/min/1.73m2 from baseline, sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through End of Study, Median Exposure 55 Weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with eGFR Improvement through end of study were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826936|NCT01193348|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Platelet Count Normalization|Proportion of Patients with Platelet Count Normalization through end of study was determined and defined as the platelet count observed to be ≥ 150 x 109/L on at least two consecutive measurements which span a period of at least four weeks|Through End of Study, Median Exposure 55 Weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Platelet Count Normalization through end of study were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826937|NCT01193348|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Complete Hematologic Response|Proportion of Patients with Complete Hematologic response through end of study was determined and defined by normalization of platelet count and LDH sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through End of Study, Median Exposure 55 Weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Complete Hematologic Response through end of study were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826938|NCT01193348|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Complete TMA Response|Proportion of Patients with Complete TMA response was determined and defined by normalization of hematological parameters (platelet count and LDH) and ≥ 25% improvement in serum creatinine from baseline which was sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart).|Through End of Study, Median Exposure 55 Weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Complete TMA Response through end of study were performed for the ITT population. Exact binomial two-sided 95% CI using the Clopper-Pearson method for the responder rate was presented.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826939|NCT01193348|Secondary|Platelet Count Change From Baseline to 26 Weeks||Through 26 weeks|Change from baseline platelet counts were analyzed for the ITT population using a repeated measures ANOVA model. The estimated LS means of change from baseline at each post-baseline visit alongside with 95% CIs and P-values were calculated, as were the parameter estimates for the covariates and their associated P-values.||10^9 cells/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
826940|NCT01193348|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement|Proportion of Patients with Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement was determined and defined as an increase in eGFR by ≥ 15 mL/min/1.73m2 from baseline, sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through 26 weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Improvement through 26 weeks were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826941|NCT01193348|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Platelet Count Normalization|Proportion of Patients with Platelet Count Normalization through 26 weeks of treatment was determined and defined as the platelet count observed to be ≥ 150 x 109/L on at least two consecutive measurements which span a period of at least four weeks.|Through 26 weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Platelet Count Normalization through 26 weeks were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826942|NCT01193348|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Complete Hematologic Response|Proportion of Patients with Complete Hematologic response through 26 weeks of treatment was determined and defined by normalization of platelet count and LDH sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart.|Through 26 weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Complete Hematologic Response through 26 weeks were performed for the ITT population. The number of patients with response and responder rate, along with an exact two-sided 95% CI were summarized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826943|NCT01193348|Primary|Proportion of Patients With Complete TMA Response|Proportion of Patients with Complete TMA response was determined and defined by normalization of hematological parameters (platelet count and LDH) and ≥ 25% improvement in serum creatinine from baseline which was sustained for at least two consecutive measurements obtained at least four weeks apart).|Through 26 weeks|The tabulations of the proportions of patients with Complete TMA Response through 26 weeks were performed for the ITT population. Exact binomial two-sided 95% CI using the Clopper-Pearson method for the responder rate was presented.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826944|NCT01193556|Secondary|Operative Time, Estimated Blood Loss (EBL), Diet Volume and Activity Level||1-2 weeks post-operatively|An integrity audit found that the data for this study could not be analyzed owing to unverifiable source documentation.|||||
826945|NCT01193556|Primary|Post-operative Pain|The primary outcome measure will be pain in each treatment group, as measured by visual analog scale twice daily in the 10 day period directly following surgery.|10 days immediately following surgery|An integrity audit found that the data for this study could not be analyzed owing to unverifiable source documentation.|||||
826967|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in CSF Amyloid-beta x-42 Concentration at Week 32 for AAB-003 8 mg/kg and Placebo Groups||Baseline and Week 32|The CSF analysis set consisted of participants in the AAB-003 8 mg/kg cohort who had provided sufficient CSF samples at Baseline and Week 32 to allow for assaying of both samples, and who had no occurrence of VE.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826946|NCT01193582|Secondary|GMFR of Anti-Pneumococcal Antibody Levels to the 7 Pneumococcal Serotypes Contained in Prevenar Above Vaccination Baseline Values at 12 Months After the Last Dose.|GMFRs for the 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) from pre-vaccination to 12- month follow-up were computed using the logarithmically transformed assay results. CIs for GMFR are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t-distribution for the mean logarithm of the titers.|Pre-vaccination to 12 months after the last dose|Evaluable immunogenicity population consisted subjects who had received all , assigned vaccination(s), had blood drawn within required time frame for 12 month follow-up blood draw visit, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result, had received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||Fold rise||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826947|NCT01193582|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against the 7 Pneumococcal Serotypes Contained in Prevenar at 12 Months After the Last Dose.|Serotype-specific Pneumococcal IgG antibody GMC 12 months after the last dose for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) are presented. GMC and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|12 months after the last dose|Evaluable immunogenicity population consisted subjects who had received all , assigned vaccination(s), had blood drawn within required time frame for 12 month follow-up blood draw visit, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result, had received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826948|NCT01193582|Secondary|GMFR of Anti-Pneumococcal Antibody Levels to the 7 Pneumococcal Serotypes Contained in Prevenar Above Vaccination Baseline Values in Group 3.|GMFRs for the 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) from pre-vaccination to post-vaccination were computed using the logarithmically transformed assay results. CIs for GMFR are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t-distribution for the mean logarithm of the titers.|Pre-vaccination to 1 month after first dose of Prevenar in Group 3|Evaluable immunogenicity population consisted of eligible participants in the age range who had received all the assigned vaccination(s), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, had received no prohibited vaccines, and had no other major protocol violations.||Fold rise||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826949|NCT01193582|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations to the 7 Pneumococcal Serotypes Contained in Prevenar at 1 Month After the First Dose in Group 3|Serotype-specific Pneumococcal IgG antibody GMC one month after the first dose in Group 3 for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) are presented. GMC and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|1 month after first dose of Prevenar in Group 3|Evaluable immunogenicity population consisted of eligible participants in the age range who had received all the assigned vaccination(s), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, had received no prohibited vaccines, and had no other major protocol violations.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826950|NCT01193582|Secondary|GMFR of Anti-Pneumococcal Antibody Levels to the 7 Pneumococcal Serotypes Contained in Prevenar Above Vaccination Baseline Values in Group 2.|GMFRs for the 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) from pre-vaccination to post-vaccination were computed using the logarithmically transformed assay results. CIs for GMFR are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t-distribution for the mean logarithm of the titers.|Pre-vaccination to 1 month after second dose of Prevenar in Group 2|Evaluable immunogenicity population consisted of eligible participants in the age range who had received all the assigned vaccination(s), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, had received no prohibited vaccines, and had no other major protocol violations.||Fold rise||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826951|NCT01193582|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations to the 7 Pneumococcal Serotypes Contained in Prevenar at 1 Month After the Second Dose in Group 2|Serotype-specific Pneumococcal IgG antibody GMC 1 month after the second dose in Group 2 for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) are presented. GMC and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|1 month after second dose of Prevenar in Group 2|Evaluable immunogenicity population consisted of eligible participants in the age range who had received all the assigned vaccination(s), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, had received no prohibited vaccines, and had no other major protocol violations.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826952|NCT01193582|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Rise (GMFR) of Anti-Pneumococcal Antibody Levels to the 7 Pneumococcal Serotypes Contained in Prevenar Above Vaccination Baseline Values in Group 1.|GMFRs for the 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) from pre-vaccination to post-vaccination were computed using the logarithmically transformed assay results. CIs for GMFR are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t-distribution for the mean logarithm of the titers.|Pre-vaccination to 1 month after third dose of Prevenar in Group 1|Evaluable immunogenicity population consisted of eligible participants in the age range who had received all the assigned vaccination(s), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, had received no prohibited vaccines, and had no other major protocol violations.||Fold rise||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826953|NCT01193582|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations to the 7 Pneumococcal Serotypes Contained in Prevenar at 1 Month After the Third Dose in Group 1|Serotype-specific Pneumococcal IgG antibody GMC one month after the third dose in Group 1 for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) are presented. GMC and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|1 month after third dose of Prevenar in Group 1|Evaluable immunogenicity population consisted of eligible participants in the age range who had received all the assigned vaccination(s), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, had received no prohibited vaccines, and had no other major protocol violations.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827182|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Prior Colonization With Candida by Species|Lower limit of confidence interval was reported as 0 if the same was calculated as less than 0 by standard calculations (outside the valid range of 0 to 100).|Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
826954|NCT01193582|Primary|Antibody Concentrations to the 7 Pneumococcal Serotypes Contained in Prevenar at Baseline in Each Group|Serotype-specific Pneumococcal IgG antibody GMC at baseline for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) are presented. GMC and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|Baseline|Evaluable immunogenicity population consisted of eligible participants in the age range who had received all the assigned vaccination(s), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, had received no prohibited vaccines, and had no other major protocol violations.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826955|NCT01193582|Primary|Antibody Concentrations to the 7 Pneumococcal Serotypes Contained in Prevenar|Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody geometric mean concentration (GMC) after 1 month of last dose for 7 common pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) are presented. GMC and corresponding 2-sided 95% confidence intervals (CI) were evaluated. Geometric means (GMs) were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|1 month after last dose in each group|Evaluable immunogenicity population consisted of eligible participants in the age range who had received all the assigned vaccination(s), had blood drawn within required time frames, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, had received no prohibited vaccines, and had no other major protocol violations.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
826956|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2) for Amyloid-Beta x-40||Baseline; Day 2 (24 hours post start of infusion); Weeks 1, 6, and 13 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion]), Week 26 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion], 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion), and Weeks 32 and 39.|All randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication, had a Baseline PD parameter assessment, at least one post-dose PD parameter assessment, and who had available data for t1/2. No participants had available data for t1/2 in AAB-003 8 mg/kg and Placebo Groups.||Day||Standard Deviation|Mean
826957|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to End of Dosing Interval (AUCtau) for Amyloid-Beta x-40||Weeks 1, 3, 6, 10, 13 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion]), Week 26 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion], 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion), and Weeks 32 and 39.|All randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication, had a Baseline PD parameter assessment, and at least one post-dose PD parameter assessment. n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding timeframe.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826958|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (AUCinf) for Amyloid-Beta x-40||Baseline; Day 2 (24 hours post start of infusion); Weeks 1, 6, and 13 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion]), Week 26 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion], 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion), and Weeks 32 and 39.|All randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication, had a Baseline PD parameter assessment, at least one post-dose PD parameter assessment, and who had available data for AUCinf. No participants had available data for AUCinf in AAB-003 8 mg/kg and Placebo Groups.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826959|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) for Amyloid-Beta x-40||Baseline; Day 2 (24 hours post start of infusion); Weeks 1, 6, and 13 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion]), Week 26 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion], 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion), and Weeks 32 and 39.|All randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication, had a Baseline PD parameter assessment, at least one post-dose PD parameter assessment, and who had available data for AUClast.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826960|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for Amyloid-Beta x-40||Weeks 1, 3, 6, 10, 13 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion]), Week 26 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion], 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion), and Weeks 32 and 39.|All randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication, had a Baseline PD parameter assessment and at least one post-dose PD parameter assessment. n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding timeframe.||Hours||Full Range|Median
826961|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Amyloid-Beta x-40||Weeks 1, 3, 6, 10, 13 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion]), Week 26 (pre-dose, 1 hour [end of infusion], 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion), and Weeks 32 and 39.|All randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one postdose pharmacodynamic (PD) parameter assessment. n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding timeframe.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826962|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|CSF P-tau Concentration at Baseline and Week 32 for AAB-003 2 mg/kg and 4 mg/kg Groups||Baseline and Week 32|The CSF analysis set consisted of participants in the AAB-003 8 mg/kg cohort who had provided sufficient CSF samples at Baseline and Week 32 to allow for assaying of both samples, and who had no occurrence of VE.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826963|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in CSF P-tau Concentration at Week 32 for AAB-003 8 mg/kg and Placebo Groups||Baseline and Week 32|The CSF analysis set consisted of participants in the AAB-003 8 mg/kg cohort who had provided sufficient CSF samples at Baseline and Week 32 to allow for assaying of both samples, and who had no occurrence of VE.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826964|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|CSF Tau Concentration at Baseline and Week 32 for AAB-003 2 mg/kg and 4 mg/kg Groups||Baseline and Week 32|The CSF analysis set consisted of participants in the AAB-003 8 mg/kg cohort who had provided sufficient CSF samples at Baseline and Week 32 to allow for assaying of both samples, and who had no occurrence of VE.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826965|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in CSF Tau Concentration at Week 32 for AAB-003 8 mg/kg and Placebo Groups||Baseline and Week 32|The CSF analysis set consisted of participants in the AAB-003 8 mg/kg cohort who had provided sufficient CSF samples at Baseline and Week 32 to allow for assaying of both samples, and who had no occurrence of VE.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826966|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|CSF Amyloid-beta x-42 Concentration at Baseline and Week 32 for AAB-003 2 mg/kg and 4 mg/kg Groups||Baseline and Week 32|The CSF analysis set consisted of participants in the AAB-003 8 mg/kg cohort who had provided sufficient CSF samples at Baseline and Week 32 to allow for assaying of both samples, and who had no occurrence of VE.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
826968|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|CSF Amyloid-beta x-40 Concentration at Baseline and Week 32 for AAB-003 2 mg/kg and 4 mg/kg Groups||Baseline and Week 32|The CSF analysis set consisted of participants in the AAB-003 8 mg/kg cohort who had provided sufficient CSF samples at Baseline and Week 32 to allow for assaying of both samples, and who had no occurrence of VE.||picogram/milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
826969|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in CSF Amyloid-beta x-40 Concentration at Week 32 for AAB-003 8 mg/kg and Placebo Groups||Baseline and Week 32|The CSF analysis set consisted of participants in the AAB-003 8 mg/kg cohort who had provided sufficient CSF samples at Baseline and Week 32 to allow for assaying of both samples, and who had no occurrence of VE.||picogram/milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
826970|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) Concentration of AAB-003 at Week 32|Participants enrolled in the 2, 4 and 8 mg/kg cohorts participated in an optional CSF collection. Participants enrolled in the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) cohort were mandatorily collected for CSF.|Week 32 or Early Withdrawal|All randomized and treated participants in the 2, 4 and 8 mg/kg cohorts who consented to the collection of CSF samples.||nanogram/millliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
826971|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline on the Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) Score at Weeks 13, 26, and 39|The MMSE is a brief 30-point questionnaire test that is used to assess cognition. It is commonly used to screen for dementia. In the time span of about 10 min, it samples various functions, including arithmetic, memory and orientation. Scores range from 0 to 30 (higher scores indicate less impairment) and participants with scores of 16 to 26 were eligible.|Baseline, Weeks 13, 26 and 39|All participants who were randomized to a treatment and received at least one infusion of study medication. n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826972|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline on the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) and Global CDR Rating at Weeks 26 and 39|The CDR scale is a clinician-rated dementia staging instrument that tracks the progression of cognitive impairment in the following 6 categories – memory, orientation, judgment and problem solving, involvement in community affairs, home and hobbies, and personal care based on the CDR interview. The CDR is based on discussions between the clinician with the participant and caregiver using a structured format. A global CDR score is established by clinical scoring rules with values of 0 (no dementia), 0.5 (questionable dementia), 1 (mild dementia), 2 (moderate dementia), and 3 (severe dementia). A more quantitative version of the CDR scale is obtained by summing up the ratings in each of the 6 categories to provide the (CDR-SB). The CDR-SB scale ranges from 0 to 18 where higher score indicates severe dementia.|Baseline, Weeks 26 and 39|All participants who were randomized to a treatment and received at least one infusion of study medication. n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826973|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Behavioral Symtoms as Measured by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) at Weeks 13, 26 and 39|The NPI is an instrument used to assess changes of behavior that have appeared in a defined period of time in participants with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias. Twelve (12) behavioral areas are assessed in the NPI – delusions, apathy, hallucinations, disinhibition, agitation, irritability, depression, aberrant motor behavior, anxiety, nighttime behaviors, euphoria, appetite, and eating changes. The NPI score is based on frequency and severity of specific behaviors within these categories as reported by the caregiver. A separate caregiver distress score may also be included. The NPI ranges from 0 to 144 (higher scores indicate greater psychopathology).|Baseline, Weeks 13, 26 and 39|All participants who were randomized to a treatment and received at least one infusion of study medication. n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826974|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Disability Assessment in Dementia (DAD) Score at Weeks 13, 26 and 39|The DAD is a functional assessment based on an interview with the caregiver that takes approximately 20 min to administer and it is comprised of 40 items, 17 related to self-care and 23 items involving instrumental activities of daily living. The DAD is scored from 0 to 100 (higher scores indicate better functioning).|Baseline, Weeks 13, 26 and 39|All participants who were randomized to a treatment and received at least one infusion of study medication. n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826975|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-cog) Score at Weeks 13, 26 and 39|The ADAS-cog 70 Point is a structured scale (approximately 40 min to complete) that evaluates memory, orientation, attention, reasoning, language and constructional praxis. This study used the 11-item cognitive subscale of the ADAS-Cog with scores ranging from 0 to 70 points; higher scores indicated greater cognitive impairment.|Baseline, Weeks 13, 26 and 39|All participants who were randomized to a treatment and received at least one infusion of study medication. n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding timeframe.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
826976|NCT01193608|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Positive Anti-product Antibody Response to AAB-003 in Serum|Human serum anti-drug antibodies (ADA) samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-AAB-003 antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method|Day 1 (predose), Week 13 (predose), Week 26 (predose) and Week 39 or Early Withdrawal|All participants who received an infusion of study medication. n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding timeframe.||Participants|||Number
826977|NCT01193608|Primary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline and Absolute Values in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Meeting Categorical Summarization Criteria|Criteria for ECG values of potential clinical concern are: interval between the start of the ECG P wave and the start of the QRS complex corresponding to the time between onset of atrial depolarization and onset of ventricular depolarization (PR): >= 300 milliseconds (msec), and >=25% increase when baseline >=200 msec/ >=50% increase when baseline less than or equal to (<=) 200 msec; time from ECG Q wave to the end of S wave corresponding to ventricular depolarization (QRS): >=200 msec, and >=25% increase when baseline >100 msec/ >=50% increase when baseline <=100 msec; QTc using Fridericia's formula (QTcF) interval: 450 to <480 msec, >=480 msec; QTcF change from baseline: 30 to <60 msec, and >=60 msec.|Baseline, Weeks 1,13,16,26,39 or Early Withdrawal|Safety Analysis Set included all participants who received an infusion of study medication (including partial infusions).||Participants|||Number
827183|NCT01202253|Secondary|Infecting Organisms by Species||Baseline up to Day 14 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||participants|||Number
826978|NCT01193608|Primary|Number of Participants With Vasogenic Edema of All Severity After Each Infusion Visit|VE of the brain, identified via MRI, was identified as an adverse event of special circumstance.|Day 1, Week 13, and Week 26|Safety Analysis Set included all participants who received an infusion of study medication, including partial infusions. n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding timeframe.||Participants|||Number
826979|NCT01193608|Primary|Number of Participants With New Occurrence of Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Finding|Brain MRIs were collected during the course of study to assess for any potential drug-related changes that might have constituted a safety concern for study participants. Findings suggestive of either vasogenic edema (VE) or intracranial hemorrhage represented adverse events of special circumstance and were to be reported immediately.|Baseline up to Week 32.|Safety Analysis Set included all participants who received an infusion of study medication (including partial infusions).||Participants|||Number
826980|NCT01193608|Primary|Number of Participants With Categorical Scores on the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|The C-SSRS assessed whether the participant experienced the following: completed suicide (1), suicide attempt (2) (response of “Yes” on “actual attempt”), preparatory acts toward imminent suicidal behavior (3)(“Yes” on “preparatory acts or behavior”), suicidal ideation (4) (“Yes” on “wish to be dead”, “non-specific active suicidal thoughts”, “active suicidal ideation with methods without intent to act or some intent to act, without specific plan or with specific plan and intent), any suicidal behavior or ideation, self-injurious behavior (7)(“Yes” on “Has participant engaged in non-suicidal self-injurious behavior”).|Baseline up to Week 39 or Early Withdrawal|Safety Analysis Set included all participants who received at least one infusion of study medication (including partial infusions).||Participants|||Number
826981|NCT01193608|Primary|Serum Decay Half-Life (t1/2) for AAB-003 at Week 26||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
826982|NCT01193608|Primary|Serum Decay Half-Life (t1/2) for AAB-003 at Day 1||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4 and 6 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
826983|NCT01193608|Primary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss) for AAB-003 in Serum at Week 26||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||mL/kg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826984|NCT01193608|Primary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss) for AAB-003 in Serum at Day 1||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4 and 6 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||mL/kg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826985|NCT01193608|Primary|Systemic Clearance (CL) for AAB-003 in Serum at Week 26||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||mL/hr/kg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826986|NCT01193608|Primary|Systemic Clearance (CL) for AAB-003 in Serum at Day 1||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4 and 6 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||milliliter/hour/kilogram (mL/hr/kg)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826987|NCT01193608|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to End of Dosing Interval (AUCtau) for AAB-003 in Serum at Week 26||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||mcg*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826988|NCT01193608|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to End of Dosing Interval (AUCtau) for AAB-003 in Serum at Day 1||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4 and 6 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||mcg*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826989|NCT01193608|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (AUCinf) for AAB-003 in Serum at Day 1||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4 and 6 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||mcg*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826990|NCT01193608|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) for AAB-003 in Serum at Day 1||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4 and 6 hours post start of infusion.|PK Analysis Set consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment||mcg*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826991|NCT01193608|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Tmax) for AAB-003 at Week 26||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||Hours (hr)||Full Range|Median
826992|NCT01193608|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Tmax) for AAB-003 at Day 1||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4 and 6 hours post start of infusion.|PK Analysis Set consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment.||Hours (hr)||Full Range|Median
827184|NCT01202253|Secondary|Number of Participants With Infection Sites as Per Ultrasound Scan and Computerized Tomography (CT) Scan||Baseline|Data was not analyzed as the study was retrospective and data for infection site as per ultrasound and CT scan was not available.|||||
826993|NCT01193608|Primary|Average Concentration (Cavg) for AAB-003 in Serum at Week 26||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826994|NCT01193608|Primary|Average Concentration (Cavg) for AAB-003 in Serum at Day 1||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4 and 6 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826995|NCT01193608|Primary|Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmax) for AAB-003 at at Week 26||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post start of infusion.|Evaluable participants in the PK analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment).||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826996|NCT01193608|Primary|Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmax) for AAB-003 at Day 1||Pre-dose, 1 hour (end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 4 and 6 hours post start of infusion.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one infusion of study medication and have at least one post-dose PK parameter assessment.||microgram per milliliter (mcg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
826997|NCT01193608|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Neurological Examination Findings|The neurological examination was done to the extent needed to assess the participant for any potential changes in neurological status, as determined by the investigator. The minimum items assessed were level of consciousness, speech, cranial nerves, motor, sensory, coordination, gait, and tendon reflexes.|Screening, Day 1 (Baseline) and Weeks 1,6,13,19,26,32, and 39, and at Early Withdrawal|Safety analysis set consisted of all participants who received at least one infusion of study medication (including partial infusions). n = number of evaluable participants at the corresponding time point.||Participants|||Number
826998|NCT01193608|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Physical Examination Findings||Baseline up to 39 Weeks and at Early Withdrawal|Safety analysis set consisted of all participants who received at least one infusion of study medication (including partial infusions). A full physical examination consisted of abdomen, genitourinary, cardiovascular systems, lungs, lymph nodes, mouth, musculoskeletal, general, skin, extremities, head, ears, eyes, nose, throat and thyroid.||Participants|||Number
826999|NCT01193608|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs of Potential Clinical Concern|Criteria for potential clinical concern in vital signs included: supine/sitting pulse rate of less than (<) 40 or more than (>) 120 beats per minute (bpm), and standing pulse rate of <40 or >140 bpm; systolic blood pressure (SBP) of more than or equal to (>=)30 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg) change from baseline in same posture and <90 mm Hg; diastolic blood pressure (DBP) >=20 mm Hg change from baseline in same posture and <50 mm Hg. Only supine vital signs were planned for this study. Unplanned sitting vital signs were collected only in the 8/mg and placebo groups and also reported.|Baseline up to 39 Weeks and at Early Withdrawal|Safety analysis set consisted of all participants who received at least one infusion of study medication (including partial infusions).||Participants|||Number
827000|NCT01193608|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Abnormalities||Baseline up to 39 Weeks and at Early Withdrawal|Safety analysis set consisted of all participants who received at least one infusion of study medication (including partial infusions). Laboratory test parameters included hematology, coagulation, liver function, renal function, electrolytes, clinical chemistry, and urinalysis (dipstick and microscopy).||Participants|||Number
827001|NCT01193608|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)||Baseline up to 39 Weeks and at Early Withdrawal|Safety analysis set consisted of all participants who received at least one infusion of study medication (including partial infusions). A TEAE was defined as an untoward medical occurrence reported by the participant or investigator following administration of at least one dose of AAB-003.||Participants|||Number
827002|NCT01193660|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety,Which Are Related to Umbilical Cord Blood, Erythropoietin, or Immunosuppressant|The number of patients with serious adverse events within each group; Serious adverse events were defined as any event that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolonged the hospital stay, or was otherwise serious in the judgment of the investigator.|6 months|||participants|||Number
827003|NCT01193660|Secondary|Changes in Hand Function|QUEST (Quality of Upper Extremity Skills Test) as a standardized measurement tool for assessing hand function consisting of sub-scales; dissociated movement, grasps, weight bearing, and protective extension. These are standardized to range from zero (or below zero in grasp section) to 100 and higher values mean better hand function. We reported QUEST differences between each assessment times.|Baseline - 1 month - 3 months - 6 months|Intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827004|NCT01193660|Secondary|Changes in Muscle Strength|Summation of MMT (manual muscle strength test score): summated scores of the manual muscle strength test (zero=0, trace=1, poor=2, fair=3, good=4, normal=5) for flexors, extensors, abductors, and adductors of bilateral shoulder and hip joints; flexors and extensors of bilateral elbow, wrist, and knee; dorsiflexors and plantar flexors of the ankles (range: 0 ~ 160) Higher score means better muscle strength. Categories of outcome table are summation of MMT scores measured at each assessment time point.|Baseline - 1 month - 3 months - 6 months|Intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827005|NCT01193660|Secondary|Changes in Functional Independence in Daily Activities|WeeFIM (Functional Independence Measure for Children) measures functional independence in daily activities. WeeFIM contains 18 items and each item is ranked from complete dependence (scored as 1) to complete independence (scored as 7). The range is from 18 to 126 and higher scores mean more independent performance in daily activities. Categories of outcome table are total WeeFIM scores measured at each assessment time point.|Baseline - 1 month - 3 months - 6 months|Intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827034|NCT01193920|Secondary|Number of Non-pregnant Subjects Reporting Solicited and Unsolicited Adverse Events|Number of non-pregnant subjects reporting solicited and unsolicited adverse events following 2 injections (1 month apart) of the trivalent GBS vaccine at a dose of 20/20/20 μg with aluminum at one month after second vaccination are reported.|Day 61|Safety set, solicited and unsolicited reactogenicity, non-pregnant subjects||participants|||Number
827006|NCT01193660|Primary|Changes in Standardized Gross Motor Function|GMFM (Gross Motor Function Measure) as a standardized measurement tool for assessing Gross Motor Function consisting of sub-scales; lying & rolling, sitting, crawling & kneeling, standing, walking, running & jumping (range: 0~100 , Higher value means better gross motor function). We reported changes of GMFM between each assessment time points. Categories of outcome table are baseline and values of just subtracting the latter raw scores from the former ones.|Baseline - 1 month - 3 months - 6 months|Intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827007|NCT01193660|Secondary|Changes in Functional Performance in Daily Activities|Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI) for assessing functional performance in daily activities in children (All values are adjusted and higher value means better functional performance, 0 - worst, 100 - best). We reported here 2 scales and 3 domains of each scale: a Functional Skill Scale (FSS) and a Caregiver Assistance Scale (CAS) which are divided respectively into 3 domains: self care, mobility, and social function. Categories of outcome table are each domain scores measured at each assessment time point.|Baseline -1 month - 3 months - 6 months|Intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827008|NCT01193660|Secondary|Comparison of Changes in Brain Glucose Metabolism Using by Brain 18F-FDG PET: Increased and Decreased Areas of Brain Glucose Metabolism|"18F-FDG PET imaging was performed twice prior to and then 2 weeks post-treatment. Ninety slices of each emission image were obtained, and all scans were reviewed by a nuclear physician. Spatial pre-processing and statistical analyses were performed using SPM8 implanted in Matlab to compare differences in regional brain glucose metabolism between groups and differences between pre- and post-therapy imaging data. We reported increased areas and decreased areas of glucose metabolism in three groups. We defined that 1 refers to INCREASED areas, -1, DECREASED areas and 0, just NO CHANGE."|Baseline - 2 weeks|Intention to treat||units on a scale|||Number
827009|NCT01193660|Secondary|Changes in Brain MRI|Changes on brain Diffusion Tensor Image (DTI); DTI provides quantitative information about the microscopic integrity of white matter. White matter normally possesses a high degree of diffusion anisotropy than gray matter. We can measure fractional anisotropy (FA) value in DTI imaging and it ranges from 0 to 1. Higher FA value of a certain region of interest means the area has more integrity of white matter.|Baseline - 6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827010|NCT01193660|Secondary|Changes in Motor Neurodevelopmental Outcome|Korean version of Bayley Scale of Infant Development-II (K-BSID-II) Motor Scales (higher value means better motor function: 0 - worst, 111 - best). We reported changes of BSID-II Motor Scale raw score between each assessment time points. Categories of outcome data are values of subtracting the latter scores from the former ones.|Baseline - 1 month - 3 months - 6 months|Intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827011|NCT01193660|Secondary|Changes in Cognitive Neurodevelopmental Outcome|Korean version of Bayley Scale of Infant Development-II (K-BSID-II) Mental Scales (higher value means better mental function: 0 - worst, 178 - best). We reported changes of BSID-II Mental Scale raw score between each assessment time points. Categories of outcome data are values of subtracting the latter scores from the former ones.|Baseline -1 month - 3 months - 6 months|Intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827012|NCT01193660|Primary|Changes in Motor Performance|GMPM (Gross Motor Performance Measure) as a standardized measurement tool for assessing quality of movement regarding 3 properties of 5 ones; alignment, coordination, dissociated movement, stability, and weight shift (range: 0~100, Higher value means better motor quality). We reported changes of GMPM score between each assessment time points. Categories of outcome table are baseline and values of just subtracting the latter raw scores from the former ones.|Baseline -1 month - 3 months - 6 months|Intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827013|NCT01193686|Secondary|General Anger Level|5-item scale developed for this study. Assesses level of perceived experienced anger in the past month. Possible scores range from 5-35 with higher scores indicating greater levels of anger.|Post- Participation|This measure was only administered to Recipients of Peer Visits.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
827014|NCT01193686|Secondary|Patient Activation Measure|Measures participante self-efficacy, knowledge of and engagement in health care. Possible scores range from 13-52 with higher scores indicating greater efficacy/knowledge/engagement.|Post- Participation|This measure was only administered to Recipients of Peer Visitation.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
827015|NCT01193686|Secondary|Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist- Military Version (PCL-M)|Measures PTSD symptoms. Possible scores range from 19-95, with higher scores indicating greater symptom severity.|Upon study completion.|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
827016|NCT01193686|Secondary|Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (Depression Screen)|9-item depression screen with possible response options ranging from 9-36, with higher numbers indicating greater depression symptom severity.|Upon completion of visits.|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
827017|NCT01193686|Primary|Post Traumatic Growth Inventory|Administered only to Peer Visitors, possible range 0-105, with higher scores indicating greater post-traumatic growth. Post-traumatic growth includes emotional changes such as noticing a stronger sense of self, deepened relationships, increased sense of gratitude or appreciation for life, increased spirituality.|Upon completion of study requirements (i.e., visits)|This measure was only administered to Veteran Peer Visitors.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
827018|NCT01193868|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Time from initiation of study drug until death, progression of tumor, or for worsening of tumor that did not meet RECIST 1.1 criteria but that did require discontinuation of therapy, assessed up to 5 years|Baseline up to 5 years|Study terminated early. Analysis not performed due to small numbers.|||||
827019|NCT01193868|Secondary|Correlation of Tumor Shrinkage/Response With Biomarker Expression|Correlate percent change in tumor size at 6 weeks (or at time off study, if therapy is stopped earlier due to tumor progression) with tumor Immunohistochemistry (IHC) scores for Notch pathway and stem cell markers; Tumor % shrinkage with RO4929097 will correlate with pre-therapy tumor expression of Notch pathway members, with expression of stem cell markers, and with changes in these over the first cycle of therapy.|6 weeks|Study terminated early. Analysis not performed due to small numbers.|||||
827035|NCT01193920|Secondary|Antibody GMC in Non-pregnant Subjects at One Year After the First Vaccination|Antibody GMC per serotype in non-pregnant subjects after receiving two doses of the study vaccine administered one month apart, at one year after first vaccination.|Day 361, one year after the first vaccination|FAS persistence, non-pregnant subjects||concentration (μg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827020|NCT01193868|Secondary|Proportion of Tumors Expressing the Expression of Tumor Notch Markers and Stem Cell Markers of Interest in Participants With vs Without Tumor Progression|Tumor Immunohistochemistry (IHC) scores for Notch pathway and stem cell markers used in comparison to tumor progression; and progression evaluated in using international criteria proposed by revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Changes in the largest diameter (unidimensional measurement) of the tumor lesions and the shortest diameter in the case of malignant lymph nodes are used in the RECIST criteria. Wilcoxon rank sum tests will be used. Compared using Fisher Exact Tests.|Up to 3 months|Study terminated early with low accrual leading to insufficient data for analysis.|||||
827021|NCT01193868|Secondary|Proportion of Tumors Expressing the Expression of Tumor Notch Markers and Stem Cell Markers of Interest in Participants With vs Without Response by RECIST Criteria|Wilcoxon rank sum tests will be used.|Up to day 3|Study terminated early. Analysis not performed due to small numbers.|||||
827022|NCT01193868|Secondary|Proportion of Tumors Expressing the Expression of Tumor Notch Markers and Stem Cell Markers of Interest in Participants With vs Without Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Activating Mutations|Wilcoxon rank sum tests will be used. Compared using Fisher Exact Tests. For participants having biopsies both before and after the agent, paired comparisons of post-therapy to pre-therapy results for the Notch IHC scores will be used. Researchers will assess changes from pre-therapy to post-therapy using a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test (Sum Test). Spearman coefficients will be used to correlate tumor expression of Notch pathway markers with expression of stem cell markers.|Up to day 3|Study terminated early with low accrual leading to insufficient data for analysis.|||||
827023|NCT01193868|Secondary|Proportion of Tumors Expressing the Expression of Tumor Notch Markers and Stem Cell Markers of Interest in Participants With Versus Without a Particular Host Genotype Polymorphism|Wilcoxon rank sum tests will be used. For participants having biopsies both before and after the agent, paired comparisons of post-therapy to pre-therapy results for the Notch IHC scores will be used. Researchers will assess changes from pre-therapy to post-therapy using a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test (Wilcoxon rank sum tests).|Up to day 3|Study terminated early with low accrual leading to insufficient data for analysis.|||||
827024|NCT01193868|Secondary|Proportion of Tumors Expressing the Expression of Tumor Notch Markers and Stem Cell Markers of Interest in This Population vs Tumor Bank Population|For participants having biopsies both before and after the agent, paired comparisons of post-therapy to pre-therapy results for the Notch IHC scores will be used. Researchers will assess changes from pre-therapy to post-therapy using a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test (Wilcoxon rank sum tests). Spearman coefficients will be used to correlate tumor expression of Notch pathway markers with expression of stem cell markers.|Up to day 3|Study terminated early with low accrual leading to insufficient data for analysis.|||||
827025|NCT01193868|Primary|Percentage of Tumor Shrinkage as a Continuous Variable|Response is reported as a continuous variable, as % change in tumor size from baseline. Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients will be used. Reported with 95% two-sided confidence intervals.|6 weeks|Study terminated early with low accrual leading to insufficient data for analysis.|||||
827026|NCT01193868|Primary|Response Rate by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)|Percentage of participants with response per RECIST version 1.1: Complete Response (CR):Disappearance all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes with reduction in short axis to <10 mm. Partial Response (PR): At least 30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, reference baseline sum diameters. Progressive Disease (PD): At least 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, reference smallest sum on study (includes baseline sum if that is smallest on study). In addition to relative increase of 20%, sum must demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: appearance of 1 or more new lesions also considered progressions). Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, reference smallest sum diameters while on study. Best response recorded from treatment start until disease progression/recurrence (reference for progressive disease the smallest measurements recorded since treatment started).|Response evaluation every 6 weeks (in addition to baseline scan, confirmatory scans approximately 6-7 (not less than 4) weeks following initial documentation of objective response). Expected follow up to 5 years, actual study period 9/2010 to 4/2014.|Only those participants who have measurable disease present at baseline and received at least one dose of study medication considered evaluable for response with their response classified according to the RECIST definitions stated. Participants who exhibit objective disease progression prior to the end of cycle 1 also considered evaluable.||percentage of participants|||Number
827027|NCT01193907|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least 4-fold Increase in Anti-Vi ELISA Titer||At 28 days after vaccination|||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827028|NCT01193907|Primary|Anti-Vi ELISA (Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay) Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC)||At 28 days after vaccination|||GMC||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827029|NCT01193907|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Adverse Events||During the 28-day period after vaccination|||participants|||Number
827030|NCT01193907|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Post Immunization Reactions|Solicited reactions collected during the 7-day period after vaccination are pain, erythema, induration, chills, malaise, myalgia, headache, arthralgia and fatigue|During the 7-day period after vaccination|||participants|||Number
827031|NCT01193920|Secondary|Number of Infants Reporting Serious Adverse Events|Number of infants born from women who received either one of three different doses of the study vaccine or placebo who reported serious adverse events|one year after birth|||Number of subjects|||Number
827032|NCT01193920|Secondary|Antibody GMC Per Serotype at Different Time Points in Infants|Antibody GMC per serotype on the day of birth, at 6 weeks and 3 months of age in infants born from women who received either one of three different doses of the study vaccine or placebo.|Day 4, day 43 and day 91 after birth|Per Protocol Set, infants, i.e. all subjects who provided evaluable serum samples at birth, study day 43, study day 91 and within the required time frames||concentration (μg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827033|NCT01193920|Secondary|Number of Maternal Subjects Reporting Solicited and Unsolicited Adverse Events|Number of maternal subjects reporting solicited and unsolicited adverse events following the administration of either one of three different doses of the study vaccine or placebo.|From day 1 to one year after delivery|Safety set, solicited and unsolicited reactogenicity, maternal subjects||participants|||Number
835432|NCT01287416|Secondary|Lifetime Suicide Attempt at Baseline|Number of people who endorsed having made a suicide attempt in their lifetime as measured at baseline|July 19-20, 2010|||participants|||Number
827036|NCT01193920|Secondary|The Percentage of Non-pregnant Subjects With Antibody Concentrations Above a Defined Threshold at One Year After the First Vaccination.|The percentage of non-pregnant subjects with antibody concentrations above a defined threshold per serotype after the administration of two vaccine doses one month apart. Antibody concentrations which exceed pre-defined serotype specific ELISA values are 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8 mcg/mL.|Day 361, one year after the first vaccination|FAS persistence, non-pregnant subjects, i.e. all enrolled subjects who provided at least one evaluable serum sample result at day 1 (prior to vaccination) and day 361.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827037|NCT01193920|Secondary|Antibody GMC Per Serotype in Maternal Subjects at One Month After Vaccination|Antibody GMC per serotype in maternal subjects at one month after the administration of one of three different doses of the study vaccine or placebo.|day 31|FAS, secondary, maternal subjects, day 31||concentration (μg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827038|NCT01193920|Primary|Antibody GMC in Maternal Subjects at Day of Delivery|Antibody GMC per serotype in maternal subjects at day of delivery following one administration of one of three different doses of the study vaccine or placebo are reported.|Day of delivery|FAS primary, maternal subjects||Concentration (μg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827039|NCT01193920|Primary|The Percentages of Maternal Subjects With Antibody Concentrations Above a Defined Threshold at Day of Delivery.|The percentages of maternal subjects with antibody concentrations above a defined threshold per serotype following the administration of one of three different doses of the study vaccine or placebo.Antibody concentrations which exceed pre-defined serotype specific ELISA values are 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8 μg/mL.|Day of delivery|FAS primary, maternal subjects, i.e. all enrolled subjects who provided at least one evaluable serum sample result at day 1 (prior to vaccination) and at delivery||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827040|NCT01193920|Secondary|The Percentages of Maternal Subjects With Antibody Concentrations Above a Defined Threshold Per Serotype at One Month After Vaccination.|The percentages of maternal subjects with antibody concentrations above a defined threshold per serotype at one month after the administration of one of three different doses of the study vaccine or placebo. Antibody concentrations which exceed pre-defined serotype specific ELISA values are 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8 μg/mL.|Day 31, one month after vaccination|FAS, secondary, maternal subjects, day 31, i.e. all enrolled subjects who provided at least one evaluable serum sample result at day 1 (prior to vaccination) and at day 31||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827041|NCT01193920|Primary|Antibody Geometric Mean Concentrations (GMC) in Non-pregnant Women at One Month After the Second Vaccination.|Antibody GMC per serotype in non-pregnant women after receiving two doses of the study vaccine administered one month apart .|Day 61, one month after the second vaccination|FAS - primary, non-pregnant subjects||concentrations (μg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827042|NCT01193920|Primary|The Percentages of Non-pregnant Subjects With Antibody Concentrations Above a Defined Threshold at One Month After the Second Vaccination.|The percentages of non-pregnant subjects with antibody concentrations above a defined threshold per serotype after the administration of two vaccine doses administered one month apart. Defined thresholds for antibody concentrations, which exceed pre-defined serotype specific ELISA values are 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8 μg/mL.|Day 61, one month after the second vaccination|Full Analysis Set (FAS) – primary, non-pregnant subjects, i.e. all enrolled subjects who provided at least one evaluable serum sample result at Day 1 (prior to vaccination) and Day 61||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827043|NCT01194089|Secondary|Numeric Pain Score|Upon arrival in the PACU and at least every 30 minutes thereafter while in the PACU, the subject was asked to report pain using a numerical pain score for current pain at rest from 0 (representing no pain) to 10 (representing the worst imaginable pain).|on admission, 30 minutes, 60 minutes, at discharge|Not all participants completed the pain scale at every time point. The participants analyzed per arm (nicotine, normal) at each time point were: on admission (40, 45); 30 minutes (40, 47); 60 minutes (34, 40); at discharge (39, 44),||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827044|NCT01194089|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Needed to Use Antiemetic Medication in the PACU|Rescue antiemetic therapy was 0.625 mg droperidol. Recalcitrant postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting (PONV) was treated per discretion of the supervising anesthesiologist.|24 hours postoperatively.|||participants|||Number
827045|NCT01194089|Primary|Postoperative Opioid Use During the Postanesthesia Care Unit (PACU) Stay, and the First 24 Hours Postoperatively|Opioid use was calculated in intravenous morphine equivalents (iv MEQ) according to the Mayo Clinic Pharmacy opioid conversion calculator based on the recommendations from the American Pain Society. Specifically, the following conversion was used: 10 mg in MEQ=100mcg iv fentanyl=1.5 mg iv hydromorphone=20mg oral oxycodone=30mg oral hydrocodone.|During PACU stay (approximately 94 minutes after operation), 24 hours after operation|||mg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827046|NCT01194154|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability or incapacity; and congenital anomaly. Percentage of participants with AEs included participants affected with both SAEs and non-SAEs.|24 months|The Safety Analysis Set (SAF) included all participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Analysis for SAF was performed according to the study medication actually received (as treated population). Number of participants analyzed=participants evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
827047|NCT01194154|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Cystatin C Concentration at Month 24|Cystatin C is a protein which is mainly used as a biomarker of kidney function. If kidney function and GFR decline, the blood levels of cystatin C rise.|Baseline, Month 24|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study medication and provided any successive eGFR measurement. Here, n=number of participants evaluable for each category.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
827075|NCT01200602|Primary|Proportion of Patients Who Maintain Weight or Experience Weight Gain|A patient will be defined as “success” if he/she maintains or gains weight at the end if Initial Treatment compared with baseline of study entry.|4 weeks|Since only one patient was accrued, patient confidentiality prevents the reporting of this patient.|||||
827048|NCT01194154|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urinary Albumin Creatinine Ratio (UACR) at Month 24|UACR is defined as the ratio: milligram of albumin per gram of creatinine. The presence of albumin in the urine (macroalbuminuria) is a marker of kidney disease. Albumin and creatinine concentrations were obtained from spot urine samples.|Baseline, Month 24|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study medication and provided any successive eGFR measurement. Number of Participants Analyzed (N) = number of participants evaluable and available with valid data for this outcome measure. Here, n=number of participants evaluable for each category.||mg/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
827049|NCT01194154|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Creatinine Concentration at Month 24|Serum creatinine is an indicator of kidney function. Creatinine is a substance formed from the metabolism of creatine, commonly found in blood, urine, and muscle tissue. It is removed from the blood by the kidneys and excreted in urine. Normal adult blood levels of creatinine=45 to 90 micromoles per liter (mcmol/L) for females, 60 to 110 mcmol/L for males, however normal values are age-dependent.|Baseline, Month 24|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study medication and provided any successive eGFR measurement. Here, n=number of participants evaluable for each category.||mcmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
827050|NCT01194154|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Calculated Creatinine Clearance (Cockcroft-Gault Equation) at Month 24|Creatinine clearance was calculated according to the Cockcroft and Gault Formula. It measures rate creatinine (substance formed from metabolism of creatine) is cleared from blood by kidneys. Normal adult creatinine clearance is greater than or equal to (>=) 90 mL/min. Change from baseline=CC at Week X minus CC at baseline where higher scores represented improved renal function.|Baseline, Month 24|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study medication and provided any successive eGFR measurement. Here, n=number of participants evaluable for each category.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
827051|NCT01194154|Secondary|Yearly Reduction Rate of Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Calculated by Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI)|The eGFR value calculated using the CKD-EPI equation. The formula used is based on age, sex, ethnicity, and serum creatinine and eGFR values are calculated as follows: GFR in mL/min per 1.73 m^2 = 141 x min (SerumCr/k; 1)^a x max(SerumCr/k; 1)^(-1.209) x 0.993^age x F x B, where k=0.7 for female (else=0.9); a=-0.329 for female (else=-0.411), F=1.018 for female (else=1), B=1.159 for black (else=1), min/max=minimum/maximum of listed values. The Yearly Reduction Rate (mL/min/1.73m^2 / Year) is defined as –365.25 x Beta, where Beta is the slope parameter derived for each participant separately by simple linear regression of the change from baseline in participant's eGFR measurements (from Baseline to Visit 24) on the actual day of measurement.|24 months|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study medication and provided any successive eGFR measurement.||mL/min/1.73m^2/year||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827052|NCT01194154|Primary|Yearly Reduction Rate of Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) Calculated by Modification of Diet in Renal Disease With 4 Variables (MDRD-4)|The yearly reduction in eGFR was calculated using the MDRD-4 formula. This formula is based on age, sex, and serum creatinine and eGFR values are calculated as follows: GFR in milliliter per minute (mL/min) per 1.73 meter square (m^2) = 175 x Serum Cr^-1.154 x age^-0.203 x 0.742 (if female). The yearly reduction rate (mL/min/1.73m^2 / Year) is defined as –365.25 multiplied by Beta, where Beta is the slope parameter derived for each participants separately by simple linear regression of the change from baseline in participant's eGFR measurements (from Baseline to Visit 24) on the actual day of measurement.|24 months|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study medication and provided any successive eGFR measurement.||mL/min/1.73m^2/year||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827053|NCT01200433|Secondary|Number of Apneic Episodes.|The number of antihypertensive interventions during Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) surgery.|during DBS surgery|||number of episodes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827054|NCT01200433|Secondary|Number of Hypertensive Episodes|The number of hypertensive episodes during Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) surgery.|During DBS surgery|||number of episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
827055|NCT01200433|Secondary|Cerebral Perfusion Pressure||at the first peak during DBS surgery|||mmHg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827056|NCT01200433|Secondary|Pulsatility Index|Pulsatility index is a measure of the variability of blood velocity in a vessel, and was calculated as the difference between the peak systolic and minimum diastolic velocities divided by the mean velocity during the cardiac cycle.|at the first peak during DBS surgery|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827057|NCT01200433|Secondary|Alertness/Sedation|Modified observer's assessment of alertness /sedation (OAA/S) scale which ranges from 0 to 5 (0 = does not respond to noxious stimuli and 5 = responds to name spoken in normal tone)|at the first peak during DBS surgery|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827058|NCT01200433|Secondary|Cerebral Blood Flow|The investigator will test the hypothesis that dexmedetomidine is non-inferior to propofol for cerebral blood flow as measured by transcranial Doppler and brain oxygenation as measured by near-infrared spectroscopy.|after procedure, in post anesthesia care unit (PACU)|The cerebral flow at PACU was not planned as a primary outcome. The primary outcome was cerebral flow at the first peak of study drug. The data was collect for information purpose only. No test was done for cerebral blood flow at PACU.||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
827059|NCT01200433|Primary|Brain Oxygen|Brain oxygenation values were estimated by near-infrared spectroscopy and brain oxygenation was averaged across the first and second study drug infusion periods.|during first (10-20 minutes) and second (throughout the procedure) study drug infusion periods|||% oxygenation||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827060|NCT01200433|Primary|Cerebral Blood Flow|Cerebral blood flow was the average of right and left carotid velocities recorded by transcranial Doppler.|For patients randomized to dexmedetomidine: at the first peak of study drug (i.e., at peak dose of study drug during first infusion period); for patients randomized to propofol: when infusion of propofol stopped.|||cm/sec||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827076|NCT01201486|Primary|Sensitivity of Color Doppler Examination to Detect Major Heart Defects During the Second Trimester of Pregnancy|The number of *fetuses with* heart defects detected by color Doppler in the second trimester was compared to the number of *fetuses with* major heart defects detected at birth.|2nd trimester|||fetuses|||Number
827077|NCT01201629|Secondary|Discharge Disposition|Patient discharged home or to sub-acute facility|after 4 weeks of intervention|||Participants|||Count of Participants
827061|NCT01200498|Primary|Participants With an Objective Response|Objective response defined as Complete, Partial response, and Clinical Improvement based on International Working Group (IWG) Criteria: Complete remission (CR): Absence transfusion & growth factor support AND Complete resolution disease-related symptoms/signs; Peripheral blood count remission; Normal leukocyte differential; Bone marrow histological remission. Partial remission (PR): All CR except bone marrow histological remission. Clinical improvement (CI): No CR/PR, disease progression with one: ≥2 g/dL increase hemoglobin level or transfusion independent; Either ≥50% reduction in palpable splenomegaly of spleen ≥10 cm baseline or spleen palpable at >5 cm baseline becomes not palpable; ≥100% increase in platelet count & absolute platelet count ≥50,000 x 10^9/L; or ≥100% increase in absolute neutrophil count (ANC) & ANC ≥0.5 x 10^9/L. Progressive disease: Progressive splenomegaly or Leukemic transformation confirmed by bone marrow blast of ≥20%; or Increase peripheral blood blast|Baseline to 3 Cycles (84 days)|||Participants|||Number
827062|NCT01200511|Secondary|Patient Reported Outcomes at Month 6|The Visual Task Difficulty Assessment (VISTAS) questionnaire was completed by the subject to assess difficulty in completing everyday tasks that depend on good vision. Distance specific tasks were rated (without / with corrective aids) using a 1 to 5 point scale, where 1 = no difficulty; 2 = minor difficulty; 3 = moderate difficulty; 4 = major difficulty; 5 = cannot accomplish. Individual scores for each task were averaged to obtain the overall score for each vision type/function. Near vision was defined as less than 50 cm; intermediate vision as 50 cm to 1 m; extended intermediate vision as 90 cm to 4 m; and distant vision as more than 4 m.|Month 6 from second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all subjects receiving IOL implantation in both eyes with data at visit. A subject may have responded with and without.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827063|NCT01200511|Primary|Proportion of Subjects That Achieved Spherical Equivalent Within ± 0.5D, ± 0.75D, and ± 1.0D at Month 6|Manifest refraction was performed under well-lit conditions using an ETDRS chart. The subject was manually refracted to his/her best correction by an outcomes assessor using a phoropter or trial lenses. Manifest refraction was performed for each eye. Proportion of subjects that achieved spherical equivalent within ± 0.5D/ ± 0.75D/ ± 1.0D at Month 6 is reported as percentage of subjects.|Month 6 from second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all subjects receiving IOL implantation in both eyes with data at visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
827064|NCT01200511|Primary|Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Across a Range of Distances at Month 6|VA was tested binocularly with correction in place if needed across a range of distances under well-lit conditions using Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts. VA was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.1 logMAR increment corresponding to 5 letters, or 1 line, on an ETDRS chart. A lower numeric value represents better visual acuity.|Month 6 from second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all subjects receiving IOL implantation in both eyes with data at visit.||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
827065|NCT01200511|Primary|Uncorrected Visual Acuity Across a Range of Distances at Month 6|Visual acuity (VA) was tested binocularly (both eyes together) unaided across a range of distances under well-lit conditions using Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts. VA was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.1 logMAR increment corresponding to 5 letters, or 1 line, on an ETDRS chart. A lower numeric value represents better visual acuity.|Month 6 from second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all subjects receiving IOL implantation in both eyes with data at visit.||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
827066|NCT01200524|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Day 29 in Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory Scal (NPSI) Total Score.|LOCF- Last Observation Carried Forward. At baseline and at end of treatment the participants filled in their Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory Scal (NPSI) pain symptom descriptors, recall period 24 hours. Each descriptor was rated on a NUmerical Rating Scale 0-10; 0=No (symptom), 10=Worst (symptom) imaginable. The NPSI Total Score was calculated as the sum of 10 of the NPSI descriptors. Higher total score is considered worse outcome.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 29 (Visit 7)|mITT analysis set including only those that had adequate NPSI data at baseline and Day 29||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827067|NCT01200524|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least 50% Decrease From Baseline in Numerical RatingScale (NRS) Average Pain Score at Day 28.|"Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF). Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Average Pain score reduction=(change from baseline at Day 28/baseline)*100.
Responder= NRS Average Pain score reduction ≥50% (yes/no)"|Baseline (mean of Day -5 to Day -1) to Day 28|mITT analysis set||Participants|||Number
827068|NCT01200524|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least 30% Decrease From Baseline in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Average Pain Score at Day 28.|LOCF- Last Observation Carried Forward. Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Average Pain score reduction= (change from baseline at Day 28/baseline)*100. Responder=NRS Average Pain score reduction ≥30% (yes/no)|Baseline (mean of Day -5 to Day -1) to Day 28|mITT analysis set||Participants|||Number
827069|NCT01200524|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Days 24-28 in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Worst Pain Score|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF). Twice daily, the participants rated their Worst Pain intensity during the past 12 hours on an Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) 0-10; 0=No pain, 10=Worst pain imaginable.|Baseline (mean of Day -5 to Day -1) to the mean of Day 24 to Day 28|mITT analysis set including only those that had adequate NRS data at baseline and Days 24-28||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827070|NCT01200524|Primary|Change From Baseline to Days 24-28 in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Average Pain Score.|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF). Twice daily, the participants rated their Average Pain intensity during the past 12 hours on an Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scale 0-10. 0= No pain, 10= Worst pain imaginable.|Baseline (mean of Day -5 to Day -1) to the mean of Day 24 to Day 28|mITT analysis set including only those that had adequate NRS data at baseline and Days 24-28||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827071|NCT01200602|Secondary|Toxicity Profile|Number of patients with grade 3+ non-hematologic adverse events using Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Effects (CTCAE) v.4.0|4 weeks|Since only one patient was accrued, patient confidentiality prevents the reporting of this patient.|||||
827072|NCT01200602|Secondary|Weight Maintenance Over Time||4 weeks|Since only one patient was accrued, patient confidentiality prevents the reporting of this patient.|||||
827073|NCT01200602|Secondary|Caloric Intake||4 weeks|Since only one patient was accrued, patient confidentiality prevents the reporting of this patient.|||||
827074|NCT01200602|Secondary|BMI Trends||4 weeks|Since only one patient was accrued, patient confidentiality prevents the reporting of this patient.|||||
827078|NCT01201629|Secondary|Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) Change Scores|The Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) is a standardized ordinal scale that measures upper extremity (arm and hand) function. This test assesses the ability to lift various sized objects to a height of 14.75 inches, move cylindrical shaped objects a distance of 14.75 inches, use pinch grasp to lift varying sized objects (such as a ball bearing, and a marble) between the thumb and the 3rd finger, and perform 3 gross upper extremity movements. Each upper extremity is evaluated individually. Score 0=no arm-hand movement and 57=normal|baseline to after 4-weeks of therapy|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827079|NCT01201629|Primary|Total Functional Independence Measure (TFIM) Change Scores|"The Functional Independence Measure (FIM™) will measure the degree of disability. The FIM scale is a reliable and valid functional assessment measure widely used in rehabilitation settings. The FIM has 18 items and each item is scored on an ordinal scale ranging from 1 to 7. A FIM™ item score of seven is categorized as complete independence, while a score of one is total assist (patient performs less than 25% of task). The total FIM score (TFIM) quantifies level of independence and ranges from 18 (lowest) to 126 (highest) level of independence."|from baseline to 4-weeks of therapy|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827080|NCT01201759|Secondary|Change in Fasting Values for Vascular Inflammation IL-6 at Visits 2-3 or 4-5|"The pro-atherogenic inflammatory mediators are assessed by the change in fasting values of Interleukin-6 in plasma concentration Pre and Post intervention at -30 min ( fasting).
For fasting values treatments (placebo and salsalate) and visits (pre and post) were defined as within subject’s factors."|Study visit at min -30 (fasting)|All enrolled participants who completed the study.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827081|NCT01201759|Secondary|Change in Area Under the Curve (AUC) for Lipemia (Free Fatty Acids ) at Visits 2-3 or 4-5 Depending on Order of Treatment Assignment.|"The postprandial lipemia is assessed by the change in the AUC for plasma Free fatty acids (FFA)sampled before and after intervention at time points of 0min immediately post feeding to 480 min.
For peak FFA area under the curve (AUC), treatments (placebo and salsalate) and visits (pre and post treatment) were defined as within-subject’s factors."|Each visit sampled at 0 (immediately post-feeding), and 30,60,90,120,240,360,480 min post-feeding..|All enrolled participants who completed the study.||mg*min/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827082|NCT01201759|Secondary|Change in Area Under the Curve (AUC) for Glycemia (Glucose) at Visits 2-3 or 4-5 Depending on Order of Treatment Assignment.|"The postprandial glycemia is assessed by the change in the AUC for plasma glucose sampled before and after intervention at time points of 0 (immediately post-feeding) to 480 min.
For peak Glucose, and Glucose area under the curve (AUC), treatments (placebo and salsalate) and visits (pre and post treatment) were defined as within-subject’s factors."|Blood samples for each visit were sampled at 0 (immediately post-feeding), and 30,60,90,120,240,360,480 min post-feeding..|All participants who completed treatment.||mg*min/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827083|NCT01201759|Primary|Change in Area Under the Curve (AUC) for Lipemia (Triglycerides) at Visits 2-3 or 4-5 Depending on Order of Treatment Assignment.|"The postprandial lipemia is assessed by the change in the AUC for plasma triglycerides sampled before and after intervention at time points 0 (immediately post-feeding)to 480 min.
For peak TG, and TG area under the curve (AUC), treatments (placebo and salsalate) and visits (pre and post treatment) were defined as within-subject’s factors."|Each visit samples at 0 (immediately post-feeding), and 30,60,90,120,240,360,480 min post-feeding..|All enrolled participants who completed the study.||mg*min/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827084|NCT01201772|Primary|PRI Levels at 4 Hours||4 hours after treatment|A total of 65 patients were randomized. One patient assigned to the 10mg prasugrel group was withdrawn after randomization due to anemia identified after baseline blood sampling. Finally, 64 patients [10 mg (n=22), 30 mg (n=21) and 60 mg (n=21)] completed all time periods of the study.||percentage of platelet reactivity||Standard Error|Mean
827085|NCT01201785|Primary|Collagen Induced Aggregation|Collagen induced aggregation using light transmittance aggregometry|after 1 -week of treatment|A 20% SD for the difference between collagen-induced platelet aggregation in patients on aspirin 81 mg od versus 81 mg bid was assumed, and based on a power of 80% and a significance level of 0.05. Based on these values, we determined that a sample population of 20 patients would be needed.||percentage of platelet aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
827086|NCT01201798|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day 0) in Slit-Lamp Total Sign Score at All Visits|The following signs were each graded on a 0 – 3 scale (0 = absent; 1 = mild; 2 = moderate; 3 = severe): posterior synechia, hypopyon, limbal injection, and keratic precipitates. Peripheral synechia was graded by the combined number of clock hours affected (0 = absent; 1 = < 3 hrs; 2 = 3-6 hours; 3 = > 6 hours). The total sign score was calculated as the sum of the 5 individual sign scores, the anterior chamber cell grade and the anterior chamber flare grade. The minimum/best total sign score was 0, and the maximum/worst total sign score was 23.|Baseline (Day 0), Day 3, Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28, Day 35, Day 42|Per Protocol: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of the allocated study medication and had no major protocol deviations, including violation of entry criteria, poor compliance, and use of prohibited medications. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was performed for missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827087|NCT01201798|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day 0) in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Total Symptom Score at All Time Points|The following symptoms were each graded by the subject according to a 0-100 visual analog scale (VAS) using a mark on a 100 mm line (0 = absent, 100 = maximal): eye pain, photophobia, blurred vision, and lacrimation. The total symptom score was calculated as the sum of the 4 individual symptom scores.|Baseline (Day 0), Day 3, Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28, Day 35, Day 42|Per Protocol: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of the allocated study medication and had no major protocol deviations, including violation of entry criteria, poor compliance, and use of prohibited medications. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was performed for missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827088|NCT01201798|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Who Discontinued Due to Lack of Efficacy|Lack of efficacy was defined as those subjects who discontinued study participation either due to treatment failure or an adverse event with a preferred term of iridocyclitis, iritis, uveitis, or vitritis. Proportion is reported as percentage of subjects.|Time to Event|Per Protocol: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of the allocated study medication and had no major protocol deviations, including violation of entry criteria, poor compliance, and use of prohibited medications.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
835433|NCT01287416|Secondary|Lifetime Suicidal Ideation at Baseline|Number of people who endorsed having thought about suicide in their lifetime as measured at baseline|July 19-20, 2010|||participants|||Number
827089|NCT01201798|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With Anterior Chamber Cell Grade ≤1|As assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination. Anterior chamber cell grade was graded on a 5-point scale, with 0 = no cells; 1 = 1 to 10 cells; 2 = 11 to 20 cells; 3 = 21 to 50 cells; and 4 = more than 50 cells. Proportion is reported as percentage of subjects.|Day 3, Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28, Day 35, Day 42|Per Protocol: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of the allocated study medication and had no major protocol deviations, including violation of entry criteria, poor compliance, and use of prohibited medications. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was performed for missing data.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
827090|NCT01201798|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With Anterior Chamber Cell Count ≤5 and Flare Grade of 0|Inflammatory cells in the anterior chamber were assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination and recorded based on actual cell count. Anterior chamber flare (protein escaping from dialated vessels) was assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination and graded on a 5-point scale, with 0 = none; 1 = mild (trace to clearly noticeable, visible); 2 = moderate; 3 = marked; and 4 = severe. Proportion is reported as percentage of subjects.|Day 3, Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28, Day 35, Day 42|Per Protocol: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of the allocated study medication and had no major protocol deviations, including violation of entry criteria, poor compliance, and use of prohibited medications. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was performed for missing data.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
827091|NCT01201798|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With Anterior Chamber Cell Count of 0|Inflammatory cells in the anterior chamber were assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination and recorded based on actual cell count. Proportion is reported as a percentage of subjects.|Day 3, Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28, Day 35, Day 42|Per Protocol: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of the allocated study medication and had no major protocol deviations, including violation of entry criteria, poor compliance, and use of prohibited medications. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was performed for missing data.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
827092|NCT01201798|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With Anterior Chamber Cell Grade of 0|Inflammatory cells in the anterior chamber were assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination and graded on a 5-point scale, with 0 = ≤ 1 cell count; 1 = 2 to 10 cell count; 2 = 11 to 20 cell count; 3 = 21 to 50 cell count; and 4 = > 50 cell count. Proportion is reported as percentage of subjects.|Day 3, Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28, Day 35, Day 42|Per Protocol: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of the allocated study medication and had no major protocol deviations, including violation of entry criteria, poor compliance, and use of prohibited medications. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was performed for missing data.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
827093|NCT01201798|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day 0) in Anterior Chamber Flare Grade at All Time Points|Anterior chamber flare (protein escaping from dialated vessels) was assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination and graded on a 5-point scale, with 0 = none; 1 = mild (trace to clearly noticeable, visible); 2 = moderate; 3 = marked; and 4 = severe.|Baseline (Day 0), Day 3, Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28, Day 35, Day 42|Per Protocol: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of the allocated study medication and had no major protocol deviations, including violation of entry criteria, poor compliance, and use of prohibited medications. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was performed for missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827094|NCT01201798|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day 0) in Anterior Chamber Cell Grade at All Time Points Other Than Day 14|Inflammatory cells in the anterior chamber were assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination and graded on a 5-point scale, with 0 = ≤ 1 cell count; 1 = 2 to 10 cell count; 2 = 11 to 20 cell count; 3 = 21 to 50 cell count; and 4 = > 50 cell count.|Baseline (Day 0), Day 3, Day 7, Day 21, Day 28, Day 35, Day 42|Per Protocol: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of the allocated study medication and had no major protocol deviations, including violation of entry criteria, poor compliance, and use of prohibited medications. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was performed for missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827095|NCT01201798|Primary|Change From Baseline (Day 0) in Anterior Chamber Cell Grade at Day 14|Inflammatory cells in the anterior chamber were assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination and graded on a 5-point scale, with 0 = ≤ 1 cell count; 1 = 2 to 10 cell count; 2 = 11 to 20 cell count; 3 = 21 to 50 cell count; and 4 = > 50 cell count.|Baseline (Day 0), Day 14|Per Protocol: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of the allocated study medication and had no major protocol deviations, including violation of entry criteria, poor compliance, and use of prohibited medications. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was performed for missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827096|NCT01201811|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vd/F) of Azacitidine|Apparent volume of distribution, was calculated according to the equation: Vd/F = (CL/F)/λz|Timeframe: Day 7 pre-dose and at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose|The PK population includes all participants with evaluable azacitidine plasma PK profile.||Liters||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827097|NCT01201811|Secondary|Apparent Total Plasma Clearance (CL/F) of Azacitidine|Apparent total plasma clearance (CL/F) of Azacitidine was calculated as Dose/AUC∞|Timeframe: Days 5 and 6 at predose and Day 7 (pre-dose) at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose|The PK population includes all participants with evaluable azacitidine plasma PK profile.||L/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827098|NCT01201811|Secondary|Terminal Phase of Half-life (T1/2) of Azacitidine|The apparent terminal half-life was calculated according to the following equation t½ = 0.693/λz.|Timeframe: Day 7 pre-dose at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose|The PK population includes all participants with evaluable azacitidine plasma PK profile.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827099|NCT01201811|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Azacitidine|Time to maximum observed plasma concentration obtained directly from the observed concentration versus time data.|Timeframe: Day 7 pre-dose and at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose|The PK population includes all participants with evaluable azacitidine plasma PK profile.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827100|NCT01201811|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Azacitidine|The observed maximum plasma concentration obtained directly from the observed concentration versus time data.|Timeframe: Day 7 pre-dose and at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose|The PK population includes all participants with evaluable azacitidine plasma PK profile.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827101|NCT01201811|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to the Last Measurable Concentration (AUCt) of Azacitidine|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to the last quantifiable time point, calculated by the linear trapezoidal rule when concentrations are increasing and the logarithmic trapezoidal method when concentrations are decreasing.|Timeframe: Day 7 pre-dose and at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose|The PK population includes all participants with evaluable azacitidine plasma PK profile.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827102|NCT01201811|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC∞) of Azacitidine|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC∞) following multiple doses of Azacitidine on Day 7; if possible, the area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity, calculated by the linear trapezoidal rule and extrapolated to infinity was calculated according to the following equation: AUC∞ = AUCt + (Ct/ λz ), where Ct is the last quantifiable concentration. No AUC extrapolation was performed with unreliable λz. If % AUC extrapolated is ≥ 25%, AUC∞ was not reported.|Timeframe: Day 7 pre-dose and at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose|The PK population includes all participants with evaluable azacitidine plasma PK profile.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827103|NCT01201811|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE)|"An AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes was defined as a serious adverse event (SAE):
Death;
Life-threatening event;
Any inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization;
Persistent or significant disability or incapacity;
Congenital anomaly or birth defect;
Any other important medical event.
The severity of an AE was evaluated by the investigator according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE) (Version 4.0) where Grade 1 = Mild, Grade 2 = Moderate, Grade 3 = Severe, Grade 4 = Life-threatening and Grade 5 = Death. Treatment Emergent AEs (TEAE) were defined as AEs with an onset date on or after the first dose of study drug and within 28 days after the date of the last dose. In addition, any AE that occurred beyond this timeframe and that was assessed by the investigator as possibly related to study drug was considered a TEAE."|From the first dose of study drug through 28 days after completion of/discontinuation from the study (maximum time on study drug 244 days)|Safety Population included enrolled participants who received at least one dose of investigational product and had at least one postdose assessment||participants|||Number
827104|NCT01201811|Secondary|Number of Infections (Post-baseline Average) Requiring Intravenous Antibiotics, Anti-fungals, or Antivirals Per 28 Days|The on-treatment adverse event of infection requiring IV antibiotics, antifungals, or antivirals per 28 days/cycle. The overall post-baseline average is the average of number of infections requiring IV antibiotics or IV antiviral per 28 days/cycle. For each participant the overall post-baseline average was calculated as the average of # of infections requiring IV antibiotics or IV antiviral per 28 days per cycle.|Up to week 24; The on-treatment period was considered the period from the date of the first dose to the last treatment study visit.|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as all enrolled participants.||Infections per cycle||Standard Deviation|Mean
827105|NCT01201811|Secondary|Number of Platelet Transfusions by Cycle|The number of transfusions received 56 days prior to treatment and during study was standardized per 28 days and summarized by cycle for platelets. The formula for standardizing per 28 days was: [(# of transfusions in the measurement period / length of the measurement period (days)) x 28], where the measurement period was either baseline or the relevant cycle length. For each participant the overall post-baseline average was calculated as the average of # of platelet transfusions per cycle.|Up to week 24; The on-treatment period was considered the period from the date of the first dose to the last treatment study visit.|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as all enrolled participants.||Transfusions||Standard Deviation|Mean
827106|NCT01201811|Other Pre-specified|Participants' Platelet Transfusion Status for Participants Who Were Transfusion Independent at Baseline|"A participant was considered platelet transfusion independent at baseline if the participant had no platelet transfusions during the 56 days prior to first dose. During the study, a participant was considered platelet transfusion independent during the on-treatment period if the participant had no platelet transfusions during any 56 consecutive days or more (eg, Days 1 through 56, Days 2 through 57, etc.). Otherwise, they were considered platelet transfusion dependent.
The total N=44, but 1 participant can only be dependent or independent at baseline for each type of transfusion (ie, total = 44: platelet dependent at BL=18, platelet independent at BL=26)"|Baseline to Cycle 6; The on-treatment period was considered the period from the date of the first dose to the last treatment study visit.|The intent-to-treat (ITT) participants who were transfusion independent||percentage of particpants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827107|NCT01201811|Other Pre-specified|Participants' Platelet Transfusion Status for Participants Who Were Transfusion Dependent at Baseline|"A participant was considered platelet transfusion dependent at baseline if the participant had one or more platelet transfusions during the 56 days prior to first dose. During the study, a participant was considered platelet transfusion independent during the on-treatment period if the participant had no platelet transfusions during any 56 consecutive days or more (eg, Days 1 through 56, Days 2 through 57, etc.). Otherwise, they were considered platelet transfusion dependent.
The total N=44, but 1 participant can only be dependent or independent at baseline for each type of transfusion (ie, total = 44: platelet dependent at BL=18, platelet independent at BL=26)"|Baseline to Cycle 6; The on-treatment period was considered the period from the date of the first dose to the last treatment study visit.|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population who were transfusion dependent||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827108|NCT01201811|Secondary|Number of Red Blood Cell (RBC) Transfusions by Cycle|The number of transfusions received 56 days prior to treatment and during study were standardized per 28 days and summarized by cycle for RBCs. The formula for standardizing per 28 days was: [(# of transfusions in the measurement period / length of the measurement period (days)) x 28], where the measurement period was either baseline or the relevant cycle length. For each participant the overall post-baseline average was calculated as the average of # of RBC transfusions per cycle.|Up to week 24;The on-treatment period was considered the period from the date of the first dose to the last treatment study visit.|ITT Population- The intent-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as all enrolled participants.||Transfusions||Standard Deviation|Mean
827185|NCT01202253|Secondary|Number of Participants With Infection Sites as Per Microbiological Analysis|Infection sites included blood, chest, urinary tract, intra-abdominal, bile duct, liver, kidney, mouth and esophagus.|Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||participants|||Number
827109|NCT01201811|Other Pre-specified|Participants' Red Blood Cell (RBC) Transfusion Status for Participants Who Were Transfusion Independent at Baseline|"A participant was considered RBC transfusion-independent at baseline if the participant had no RBC transfusions during the 56 days prior to first dose. During the study, a participant was considered transfusion independent during the on-treatment period if the participant had no RBC transfusions during any 56 consecutive days or more (eg, Days 1 through 56, Days 2 through 57, etc.). Otherwise, they were considered transfusion dependent.
The total N=44, but 1 participant can only be dependent or independent at baseline for each type of transfusion (ie, total = 44: RBC dependent at BL=32, RBC independent at BL=12)"|Baseline to Cycle 6; The on-treatment period was considered the period from the date of the first dose to the last treatment study visit.|The Intent to Treat (ITT) participants who were transfusion independent||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827110|NCT01201811|Other Pre-specified|Participants' Red Blood Cell (RBC) Transfusion Status for Participants Who Were Transfusion Dependent at Baseline|"A participant was considered transfusion dependent at baseline if the participant had one or more Red Blood Cell transfusions during the 56 days prior to first dose. During the study, a participant was considered transfusion independent during the on-treatment period if the participant had no transfusions during any 56 consecutive days or more (e.g., Day 1 through 56, Day 2 through 57, etc). Otherwise, they were considered transfusion dependent.
The total N=44, but 1 participant can only be dependent or independent at baseline for each type of transfusion (ie, total = 44: RBC dependent at BL=32, RBC independent at BL=12)"|Baseline to Cycle 6; The on-treatment period was considered the period from the date of the first dose to the last treatment study visit|The intent-to-treat (ITT) participants who were transfusion dependent||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827111|NCT01201811|Primary|Percentage of Participants Showing Hematologic Improvement Using International Working Group (IWG Criteria for Hematologic Improvement Cheson 2000) Criteria for Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS) and Assessed by Sponsor|"Hematologic improvements (HI) have 4 categories:
Erythroid response (HI-E): Major >20g/L increase or transfusion independent. Minor- 10-20g/L increase or ≥50% decrease in transfusion requirements.
Platelet response (HI-P): Major absolute increase of ≥30x10^9/L or platelet transfusion independence. Minor-≥50% increase.
Neutrophil response (HI-N): Major 100% increase or an absolute increase of >0.5x10^9/L. Minor-≥100% increase and absolute increase of <0.5x10^9/L
Progression or relapse after HI
Overall hematological improvement (HI) was defined as any type (major or minor) of improvement of HI-E, HI-P, or HI-N. Criteria: Pretreatment=hemoglobin <100g/L or RBC transfusion-dependent, platelet count <100x10^9/L or platelet transfusion dependent, absolute neutrophil count <1.5x10^9/L. Sponsor’s determination was derived using clinically relevant data.
Denominator for progression/relapse after HI included participants who had achieved HI."|Response assessed at end of cycle 6; through week 24; End of study|The intention-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as all enrolled participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827112|NCT01201811|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Hematologic Response Using International Working Group (IWG) Criteria for Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS) and Assessed by Investigator|"Hematologic Response according to the 2000 International Working Group (IWG) response criteria for MDS was based on the Investigators determination and defined as:
Complete Response (CR): repeat bone marrow (BM) shows <5% myeloblasts, and peripheral blood values lasting ≥ 2 months of hemoglobin (hgb) (>110 g/L), neutrophils (≥1.5x10^9/L), platelets (≥100x10^9/L), blasts (0%) and no dysplasia
Partial Response (PR): same as CR for peripheral blood: BM shows blasts decrease by ≥ 50% or a less advanced FAB classification from pretreatment
Stable disease (SD): failure to achieve a PR, no evidence of progression for at least 2 months.
Failure: death during treatment or disease progression
Relapse After CR or PR: return to pretreatment BM blast percent or decrement of ≥ 50% from remission/response levels in granulocytes or platelets; or reduction in hgb by ≥20 g/L or transfusion dependence
Disease Progression: change in blast levels
Disease Transformation to AML"|Response assessed at end of cycle 6; through week 24; End of study|The intention-to-treat (ITT) population was defined as all enrolled participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827113|NCT01201915|Secondary|Time to Complete Clinical Clearance|Time to complete clinical clearance was defined as the time from the first treatment with vismodegib until complete clinical clearance as determined by the investigator.|Baseline to the end of the study (up to 12 weeks for Cohort 1; up to 36 weeks for Cohort 2, up to 20 weeks for Cohort 3)|Efficacy evaluable population: All participants who were treated with at least 1 dose of study drug. Only participants who achieved complete clinical clearance were included in the analysis.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827114|NCT01201915|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Histologic Clearance|Complete histologic clearance was defined as the absence of histological evidence of basal cell carcinoma at the target tumor site. Histological examination was performed by an independent pathologist on specimens collected within 2 weeks of the end of treatment period, ie, at 12 weeks after Baseline in Cohort 1, at 36 weeks after Baseline in Cohort 2, and at 20 weeks after Baseline in Cohort 3.|Baseline to Week 12 (Cohort 1), Baseline to Week 36 (Cohort 2), Baseline to Week 20 (Cohort 3)|Efficacy evaluable population: All participants who were treated with at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827115|NCT01201967|Secondary|Change in Physical Health-related Quality of Life From Baseline to 24 Weeks|Physical health-related quality of life is measured with the Short Form-12 Physical Component Score (SF-12 PCS). The SF-12 PCS a 6-item scale that assesses physical health-related quality of life. Each question provides the option of 2-6 answers. Some questions are Yes/No (2 options), while others ask how often something occurs (6 options, etc.). Scores are calculated using a formula and can range from 0 to 100. A score of 50 indicates average physical health-related quality of life. Higher scores represent higher than average physical health-related quality of life, and lower scores represent lower physical health-related quality of life.|Baseline, 24 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827116|NCT01201967|Secondary|Change in Physical Function From Baseline to 24 Weeks|Physical function is measured with the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI). The DASI is a 12-item scale that measures physical function. Each question asks about whether the subject can complete a physical activity and are given the following options: Scores range from 0 to 58.2. Lower scores indicate lower levels of physical function.|Baseline, 24 weeks|92 participants in the Collaborative Care group were compared to 91 participants in the Usual Care group.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827117|NCT01201967|Secondary|Change in Health Status From Baseline to 24 Weeks|Health status measured by the Euro Quality of Life-5 Domain (EQ5D). The EQ5D is a 5-item scale that assesses quality of life. Each question asks about difficulties with certain areas of health (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) and offer three possible answers: No problems, Moderate problems, Extreme problems. Scores can range from 0.000-1.000, with lower scores indicating less quality of life, and higher scores indicating higher quality of life.|Baseline, 24 weeks|92 participants in the Collaborative Care group were compared to 91 participants in the Usual Care group.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827118|NCT01201967|Secondary|Number of Rehospitalizations From Baseline to 24 Weeks|The number of rehospitalizations from baseline to 24 weeks was measured by contacting subjects' medical providers at 24 weeks and by asking subjects about rehospitalizations during each follow-up phone call.|24 weeks|||readmissions|||Number
827119|NCT01201967|Secondary|Change in Adherence to Health Behaviors From Baseline to 24 Weeks|Adherence to health behaviors is measured with the Medical Outcome Study Specific Adherence Scale (MOS-SAS). The MOS-SAS is a 3-item scale used to assess medication adherence, physical activity adherence, and diet adherence. Each question asks how often the subject adheres to the behavior, providing the following options: 1 = None of the time, 2 = A little of the time, 3 = Some of the time, 4 = A good bit of the time, 5 = Most of the time, 6 = All of the time. Scores are totaled and range from (3 to 18). A low score indicates poorer adherence to healthy behaviors.|Baseline, 24 weeks|92 participants in the Collaborative Care group were compared to 91 participants in the Usual Care group.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827120|NCT01201967|Secondary|Rate of Adequate Treatment of Depression and/or Anxiety Symptoms 5 Days After Enrollment|"Adequate treatment was defined as:
(1) Prescription of a standard dose of an established first-line treatment for depression, generalized anxiety disorder, or panic disorder, and/or (2) referral to evidence-based psychotherapy (either to an outside mental health provider or a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy workbook in the Collaborative Care arm of the study).
Patients already engaged in #1 and/or #2 at the time of enrollment had a different process. Subjects must have been engaged in at least 4 weeks of treatment prior to enrollment while still meeting criteria for the disorder. For this population, adequate treatment was defined as:
(1) Prescription dose increase/augmentation/switch, and/or (2) referral to psychotherapy (either to an outside mental health provider or a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy workbook in the Collaborate Care arm).
Timeframe of 5 days after enrollment was determined by calculating the median length of hospitalization for all subjects."|5 days after enrollment|92 participants in the Collaborative Care group were compared to 91 participants in the Usual Care group.||participants|||Number
827121|NCT01201967|Secondary|Change in Anxiety Symptoms From Baseline to 24 Weeks|Anxiety symptoms measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Anxiety Subscale (HADS-A). The HADS-A is a 7-item scale used to measure anxiety severity. Each question asks about a specific symptom of anxiety and offers four answers: 0 = Never / Not at all, 1 = A little / Time to time, 2 = Quite often / Usually, 3 = Most of the time / Very often. Scores are totaled and range from 0-21. A higher score means more anxiety.|Baseline, 24 weeks|92 participants in the Collaborative Care group were compared to 91 participants in the Usual Care group.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827122|NCT01201967|Secondary|Change in Depression Symptoms From Baseline to 24 Weeks|Depression symptoms measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). The PHQ-9 is a 9-item scale that measures depression severity. Each question asks how often the subject experiences symptoms of depression and offers four answers: 0 = Not at all, 1 = Several days, 2 = More than half the days, 3 = Nearly every day. Scores are totaled and range from 0-27. To be considered depressed, subjects had to (a) have a total score of 10 or more, (b) answer five questions with a score of 2 or 3, and (c) one of the five questions had to be question 1 or question 2 (or both). Anyone who did not meet these criteria were not considered depressed.|Baseline, 24 weeks|92 participants in the Collaborative Care group were compared to 91 participants in the Usual Care group.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827123|NCT01201967|Primary|Change in Mental Health-related Quality of Life From Baseline to 24 Weeks|Mental health-related quality of life is measured by the Short Form-12 Mental Component Score (SF-12 MCS). The SF-12 MCS is a 6-item scale that assesses mental health-related quality of life. Each question provides the option of 2-6 answers. Some questions are Yes/No (2 options), while others ask how often something occurs (6 options, etc.). Scores are calculated using a formula and can range from 0 to 100. A score of 50 indicates average mental health-related quality of life. Higher scores represent higher than average mental health-related quality of life, and lower scores represent lower mental health-related quality of life.|Baseline, 24 weeks|92 participants in the Collaborative Care group were compared to 91 participants in the Usual Care group.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827124|NCT01202071|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to Time t (AUC[0-t])|"Pharmacokinetic parameter: Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 (administration of the drug) to time t (the last quantifiable concentration time point). AUC measured in nanogram hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL) was calculated on Day 1 and Day 5 of administration during each Period (I-IV).
Data was displayed based on the participant's CYP2C19 genotype: CYP2C19-EM are extensive metabolizers who have normal metabolizing capacity. CYP2C19-PM are poor metabolizers with a metabolizing capacity deficiency or remarkably decreased metabolizing capacity."|Day 1 and Day 5 of administration during Period I-IV (0, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 hours post-dose)|||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827125|NCT01202071|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: Maximal Drug Concentration (Cmax)|"Pharmacokinetic parameter: maximal drug concentration (Cmax) measured in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) was calculated on Day 1 and Day 5 of administration during each Period (I-IV).
Data was displayed based on the participant's CYP2C19 genotype: CYP2C19-EM are extensive metabolizers who have normal metabolizing capacity. CYP2C19-PM are poor metabolizers with a metabolizing capacity deficiency or remarkably decreased metabolizing capacity."|Day 1 and Day 5 of administration during Period I-IV|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827126|NCT01202071|Primary|Percentage Duration With An Intragastric pH >= 4 During The Entire 24 Hours Of Day 5 Administration|The 24-hour intragastric pH monitoring was performed on Day 5 of administration in each study period (Period I-IV). Data was displayed based on the participant's CYP2C19 genotype: CYP2C19-EM are extensive metabolizers who have normal metabolizing capacity. CYP2C19-PM are poor metabolizers with a metabolizing capacity deficiency or remarkably decreased metabolizing capacity.|Day 5 of administration during Period I-IV|||Percentage of Time in a 24 Hour Period||Standard Deviation|Mean
827127|NCT01202110|Primary|Determine in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) the Safe Dosing of Early Propranolol.|The primary outcome is to determine the safety of early propranolol treatment after TBI by recording the number of episodes of bradycardia (heart rate < 60 beats per minute), hypotension (defined as systolic blood pressure < 90) or decreased cerebral perfusion pressure (defined as CPP less than 60mmHg) refractive to treatment.|24 months|Terminated prior to enrolling|||||
827128|NCT01202162|Secondary|Quality of Recovery 40|Survey completion at 24 hours post surgery of the Quality of Recovery 40 questionnaire.This questionnaire asks 40 questions in 5 categories of recovery. The scores are combined from each group and are used as a composite score. The scores range from a low of 40 to a high of 200. A score of 40 would indicate a poor quality of recovery where as a score of 200 would be a good quality of recovery at 24 hours postoperative.|1 day|In the Desflurane group 35 completed the survey 24 hours postoperative where as 33 in the Sevoflurane completed the survey during the postoperative period.||score (between 40 low-200 high)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827129|NCT01202162|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Coughed||Perioperative|||participants|||Number
827130|NCT01202162|Primary|Time to Awakening||Time inhalational agent is turned off to time of patient awakening|||Elapsed time in minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827131|NCT01202188|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With COPD Exacerbations Requiring Hospitalization or Treatment With Systemic Corticosteroids and/or Antibiotics But no Hospitalization||26 Weeks|Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827132|NCT01202188|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With at Least One Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbation Over the 26 Week Treatment Period||26 Weeks|Full Analysis Set includes all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827133|NCT01202188|Secondary|Rate of Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbation|Rate of moderate or severe exacerbations per year = total number of moderate or severe exacerbations / total number of treatment years|26 Weeks|||Exacerbations per year|||Number
827134|NCT01202188|Secondary|24 Hour Holter Monitoring in a Subset of Patients|"24-hourly mean heart rate was performed using a Holter Monitor at Weeks 12 and 26 in a subgroup of patients. Mixed model: heart rate = treatment + baseline heart rate + baseline smoking status + baseline ICS use + region + center (region) + error. Center was included as a random effect nested within region.
The 24-hourly mean heart rate is the mean heart rate over the 24 hour period, derived using hourly mean heart rate beats per minute."|Week 12, Week 26|Safety Set Holter Group-a subset of the Safety participants that included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and participated in the 24 hour Holter monitoring with evaluable data available for analysis. No participants in the Titotropium arm participated in the Holter Monitoring.||beats per minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827135|NCT01202188|Secondary|Standardized FEV1 (With Respect to Length of Time) Area Under the Curve (AUC) From 5 Minutes to 23 Hours 45 Minutes at Week 26|FEV1 was measured with spirometry conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Measurements were made at 5, 15, and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 23 hours 15 minutes and 23 hours 45 minutes post-dose. The standardized AUC FEV1 was calculated as the sum of trapezoids divided by the length of time. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline FEV1 and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|From 5 minutes to 23 hours 45 minutes post-dose Week 26|Participants from the 24 hour serial spirometry subset of the full analysis set (all randomized participants who received study drug) with data available for analysis. Data within 6 hours of rescue medication use or 7 days of systemic corticosteroid use is excluded from the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827136|NCT01202188|Secondary|Standardized FEV1 (With Respect to Length of Time) Area Under the Curve (AUC) From 5 Minutes to 12 Hours at Day 1 and Week 26|FEV1 was measured with spirometry conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Measurements were made at 5, 15, and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 hours post-dose. The standardized AUC FEV1 was calculated as the sum of trapezoids divided by the length of time. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline FEV1 and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|From 5 minutes to 12 hours post-dose Day 1 and Week 26|Participants from the 24 hour serial spirometry subset of the full analysis set (all randomized participants who received study drug) with data available for analysis. Data within 6 hours of rescue medication use or 7 days of systemic corticosteroid use is excluded from the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827137|NCT01202188|Secondary|Standardized FEV1 (With Respect to Length of Time) Area Under the Curve (AUC) From 5 Minutes to 4 Hours at Day 1 and Week 26|FEV1 was measured with spirometry conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Measurements were made at 5, 15, and 30 minutes; and 1, 2, and 4 hours post-dose. The standardized AUC FEV1 was calculated as the sum of trapezoids divided by the length of time. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline FEV1 and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|From 5 minutes to 4 hours post-dose Day 1 and Week 26|Participants from full analysis set, all randomized participants who received study drug, with data available for analysis. Data within 6 hours of rescue medication use or 7 days of systemic corticosteroid use is excluded from analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827159|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Deterioration in Neurological Examination Findings|Worsening of the condition relative to baseline was reported as deteriorated. Assessment categories are as follows: normal or abnormal for Cranial Nerve Function, Mental State, and Coordination; normal, mild, moderate, or severe ataxia for Gait; none/absent, normal, or hyper-reflexic for Deep Tendon Reflexes; absent or present for Abnormal Reflexes; normal, mild, moderate, or severe weakness for Muscle Strength; slight, more marked, or considerable increase, or affected parts rigid in flexion or extension for Muscle Tone; absent or present for Sensory Function.|53 weeks|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827138|NCT01202188|Secondary|"Percentage of Days With no Rescue Medication Use Over 26 Weeks"|A day with no rescue medication use is defined from the diary data as any day where the patient recorded no rescue medicine use during the previous 12 hours. The percentage of days is calculated by the number of days with no rescue medicine use/total number of days with evaluable data X 100. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline number of puffs and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|26 Weeks|Participants from the full analysis set (all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug) with evaluable data (at least 40 days of diary data) available for analysis.||Percentage of days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827139|NCT01202188|Secondary|Change From Baseline (BL) in the Daytime and Night Time Rescue Medication Use (Number of Puffs) Over 26 Weeks|The number of puffs of rescue medication taken in the previous 12 hours was record in patient diary in the morning and in the evening for 26 weeks. The total number of puffs in the morning and evening were calculated and divided by the number of days with data to determine the mean daily number of daytime and nighttime puffs. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline number of puffs and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline (BL) ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|Baseline, Week 26|Participants from the full analysis, consisting of all randomized participant who received study drug, with data available for analysis.||Puffs||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827140|NCT01202188|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Mean Daily Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication at Week 12 and Week 26|The number of puffs of rescue medication taken in the previous 12 hours was record in patient diary in the morning and in the evening for 26 weeks. The total number of puffs per day was calculated and divided by the number of days with data to determine the mean daily number of puffs of rescue medication for each patient. Rescue medication data recorded during the 14 day run-in was used to calculate the baseline. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline number of puffs and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 26|Participants from the full analysis, consisting of all randomized participant who received study drug, with data available for analysis at Week 12 and Week 26.||Puffs per day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827141|NCT01202188|Secondary|"Percentage of Days Able to Perform Usual Daily Activities Over 26 Weeks"|"Patients answered the question Did your respiratory symptoms stop you performing your usual activities today?-Not at all in their daily diary. The percentage of days is calculated by the number of days patient is able to perform daily activities/total number of days with evaluable data X 100. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline Percent of Days and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect."|26 Weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, all randomized participants who received study drug, with evaluable diary data (at least 40 days) for analysis.||Percentage of days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827142|NCT01202188|Secondary|"Percentage of Days With No Daytime Symptoms Over 26 Weeks"|A day with no day time symptoms is defined from the diary data as any day where the patient recorded no coughing, no wheezing, no sputum production and no breathlessness during the previous 12 hours (approximately 8AM to 8PM). The percentage of days is calculated by the number of days with no daytime symptoms/total number of days with evaluable data X 100. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline Percent of days and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|26 Weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, all randomized participants who received study drug, with evaluable diary data (at least 40 days) for analysis.||Percentage of days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827143|NCT01202188|Secondary|"Percentage of Nights With No Night Time Awakenings Over 26 Weeks"|A day with no night time awakenings is defined from the diary data as any day where the patient did not wake up due to COPD symptoms. The percentage of nights is calculated by the number of days with no nighttime awakenings/total number of days with evaluable data X 100. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline Percent days and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|26 Weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, all randomized participants who received study drug, with evaluable diary data (at least 40 days) for analysis.||Percentage of nights||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827144|NCT01202188|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With a Clinically Important Improvement From Baseline of at Least 4 Units in the SGRQ Total Score After 26 Weeks of Treatment|SGRQ is a health related quality of life questionnaire consisting of 51 items in three areas: symptoms (respiratory symptoms and severity), activity (activities that cause or are limited by breathlessness) and impacts (social functioning and psychological disturbances due to airway disease). The total score is 0 to 100 with a higher score indicating poorer health status.|Baseline, Week 26|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, that included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward but not more than 14 weeks and data within 4 weeks of day 1 were not carried forward.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827201|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Documented Eradication of Infecting Species|Documented microbial eradication was defined as 2 negative follow-up blood cultures for bloodstream infections.|Baseline|Data was not analyzed as the study was retrospective and data for eradication of candida infection was not documented in the participants’ medical notes.|||||
827145|NCT01202188|Secondary|St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total Score After 12 and 26 Weeks of Treatment|SGRQ is a health related quality of life questionnaire consisting of 51 items in three areas: symptoms (respiratory symptoms and severity), activity (activities that cause or are limited by breathlessness) and impacts (social functioning and psychological disturbances due to airway disease). The total score is 0 to 100 with a higher score indicating poorer health status. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with Baseline SGRQ and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|Week 12, Week 26|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward but not more than 14 weeks and data within 4 weeks of day 1 were not carried forward.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827146|NCT01202188|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With a Clinically Important Improvement of at Least 1 Point in TDI Focal Score After 26 Weeks of Treatment|A trained assessor interviewed the patient and graded the degree of impairment due to dyspnea (difficulty breathing) at Week 12 and Week 26. TDI focal score is based on three domains: functional impairment, magnitude of task and magnitude of effort. The BDI (baseline) was measured at Day 1. The TDI captures changes from baseline. Each domain is scored from -3 (major deterioration) to 3 (major improvement) to give an overall TDI focal score of -9 to 9.|Baseline, Week 26|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827147|NCT01202188|Secondary|Baseline Transitional Dyspnea Index (BDI/TDI) Focal Score at Week 12 and Week 26|"A trained assessor interviewed the patient and graded the degree of impairment due to dyspnea (difficulty breathing). BDI/TDI focal score is based on three domains: functional impairment, magnitude of task and magnitude of effort and captures changes from baseline. BDI was measured at day 1 prior to the first dose with domain scores ranging from 0=very severe to 4=no impairment and a total score ranging from 0 to 12(best). TDI captures changes from baseline. Each domain is scored from -3=major deterioration to 3=major improvement to give an overall TDI focal score of -9 to 9. Higher numbers indicate a better score.
A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with Baseline Dyspnea Index Score and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators as covariates and included baseline smoking status, baseline inhaled corticosteroids and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect."|Baseline, Week 12, Week 26|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward but not more than 14 weeks and data within 4 weeks of day 1 were not carried forward.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827148|NCT01202188|Secondary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume In One Second (FEV1) After 26 Weeks of Treatment With QVA149 Compared to Tiotropium|Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards. Trough FEV1 was defined as the mean of the 23 hour 15 minute and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose values. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline FEV1 and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|23 hours 15 minutes and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose Week 26|Participants from the Per-protocol Set, randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug without major protocol deviations. Data was imputed with last observation carried forward. Data within 6 hours of rescue medication use or 7 days of systemic corticosteroid use is excluded from the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827149|NCT01202188|Secondary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume In One Second (FEV1) After 26 Weeks of Treatment With QVA149, QAB149 and NVA237 Compared to Placebo|Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards. Trough FEV1 was defined as the mean of the 23 hour 15 minute and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose values. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline FEV1 and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|23 hours 15 minutes and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose Week 26|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Data was imputed with last observation carried forward. Data within 6 hours of rescue medication use or 7 days of systemic corticosteroid use is excluded from the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827150|NCT01202188|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Mean Daily Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication Over 26 Weeks|The number of puffs of rescue medication taken in the previous 12 hours was record in patient diary in the morning and in the evening for 26 weeks. The total number of puffs per day was calculated and divided by the number of days with data to determine the mean daily number of puffs of rescue medication for each patient. Rescue medication data recorded during the 14 day run-in was used to calculate the baseline. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline number of puffs and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|Baseline, Week 26|Participants from the full analysis, consisting of all randomized participant who received study drug, with data available for analysis.||Puffs per day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827160|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Visual Field Deteriorated|Number of participants who had normal visual field at baseline and showed abnormal result after the study treatment, assessed by confrontational visual field test (neurological examination).|53 weeks|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
836709|NCT01299961|Secondary|12 Month Change in Power Doppler Ultrasound (PDUS) Scores|There were seven different joints in the hands and wrists evaluated to score the PDUS.|baseline, 12 months|As stated previously||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827151|NCT01202188|Secondary|St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total Score at Week 26|SGRQ is a health related quality of life questionnaire consisting of 51 items in three areas: symptoms (respiratory symptoms and severity), activity (activities that cause or are limited by breathlessness) and impacts (social functioning and psychological disturbances due to airway disease). The total score is 0 to 100 with a higher score indicating poorer health status. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with Baseline SGRQ and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|26 weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set,included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward but not more than 14 weeks and data within 4 weeks of day 1 were not carried forward.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827152|NCT01202188|Secondary|Transitional Dyspnea Index (TDI) Focal Score at Week 26|A trained assessor interviewed the patient and graded the degree of impairment due to dyspnea (difficulty breathing). TDI focal score is based on three domains: functional impairment, magnitude of task and magnitude of effort. Each domain is scored from -3 (major deterioration) to 3 (major improvement) to give an overall TDI focal score of -9 to 9. Higher numbers indicate a better score. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with Baseline Dyspnea Index Score and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|Week 26|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827153|NCT01202188|Primary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume In One Second (FEV1) After 26 Weeks of Treatment|Spirometry was performed according to internationally accepted standards. Trough FEV1 was defined as the mean of the 23 hour 15 minute and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose values. A mixed model was used with treatment as a fixed effect with baseline FEV1 and FEV1 prior to inhalation and FEV1 60 minutes post inhalation of two short acting bronchodilators (components of reversibility at Day -14) as covariates. The model also included baseline smoking status (current/ex-smoker), baseline ICS use (Yes/No) and region as fixed effects with center nested within region as a random effect.|23 hours 15 minutes and 23 hour 45 minute post-dose Week 26|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Data was imputed with last observation carried forward. Data within 6 hours of rescue medication use or 7 days of systemic corticosteroid use is excluded from the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827154|NCT01202227|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Modified Brief Pain Inventory (10 Item) (mBPI-10)Total Scores at Last Evaluation Score|"The mBPI-10 is a self administered questionnaire that assesses pain interference with functional activities over the past week. These items are measured on an 11 point scale, ranging from “does not interfere” (0) to “completely interferes” (10). A composite score, the Pain Interference Index, will be calculated by averaging the 10 items that comprise the scale.
Change = observation mean at Week 52 minus baseline mean."|Baseline, Week 52|"The full analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study and for whom post-treatment data were available.
The number of participants who had mBPI at Week 52/ Early Termination was 101 participants (n=101)."||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827155|NCT01202227|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) at Each Time Point: Affective Scores|"The main component of the SF-MPQ consists of 15 descriptors (11 sensory; 4 affective) which are rated on an intensity scale as 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate or 3 = severe.
Range: 0 to 12 for affective score. Change = observation mean minus baseline mean. Negative change indicated improvement."|Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52|The full analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study and for whom post-treatment data were available. For study endpoint of efficacy (Week 52), missing values was imputed with the last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827156|NCT01202227|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) at Each Time Point: Sensory Scores|"The main component of the SF-MPQ consists of 15 descriptors (11 sensory; 4 affective) which are rated on an intensity scale as 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate or 3 = severe.
Range: 0 to 33 for sensory score. Change = observation mean minus baseline mean. Negative change indicated improvement."|Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52|The full analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study and for whom post-treatment data were available. For study endpoint of efficacy (Week 52), missing values was imputed with the last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827157|NCT01202227|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) at Each Time Point: Total Scores|"The main component of the SF-MPQ consists of 15 descriptors (11 sensory; 4 affective) which are rated on an intensity scale as 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate or 3 = severe.
Range: 0 to 45 for total score. Change = observation mean minus baseline mean. Negative change indicated improvement."|Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52|The full analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study and for whom post-treatment data were available. For study endpoint of efficacy (Week 52), missing values was imputed with the last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827158|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Suicidal Ideation According to Sheehan Suicidality Tracking Scale (Sheehan-STS)|The Sheehan-STS is an 8-item prospective rating scale that tracks treatment-emergent suicidal ideation and behaviors. Participants who reported a score of ≥1 (5-point scale ranging from 0: not at all to 4: extremely) for Item 2, 3, 4 or 5 of the Sheehan-STS prognostic scale is considered to have suicidal ideation as the scores are mapped to Category 4 (suicide ideation) of the Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment.|Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827161|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Skin Redness Related to Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)|DVT was defined if a segment of the deep vein of the lower limb was not compressible or a previous compressive vein became non compressive or there was no flow in the underlying vessel. Symptoms of DVT included pain in the lower limb, localized tenderness, swelling, pitting edema, collateral superficial veins (non-varicose), and skin redness. The symptom was assessed as mild, moderate or severe.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 20, 36, 52, and 53|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827162|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Collateral Superficial Veins (Non-varicose) Related to Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)|DVT was defined if a segment of the deep vein of the lower limb was not compressible or a previous compressive vein became non compressive or there was no flow in the underlying vessel. Symptoms of DVT included pain in the lower limb, localized tenderness, swelling, pitting edema, collateral superficial veins (non-varicose), and skin redness. The symptom was assessed as mild, moderate or severe.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 20, 36, 52, and 53|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827163|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Pitting Edema Related to Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)|DVT was defined if a segment of the deep vein of the lower limb was not compressible or a previous compressive vein became non compressive or there was no flow in the underlying vessel. Symptoms of DVT included pain in the lower limb, localized tenderness, swelling, pitting edema, collateral superficial veins (non-varicose), and skin redness. The symptom was assessed as mild, moderate or severe.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 20, 36, 52, and 53|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827164|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Swelling Related to Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)|DVT was defined if a segment of the deep vein of the lower limb was not compressible or a previous compressive vein became non compressive or there was no flow in the underlying vessel. Symptoms of DVT included pain in the lower limb, localized tenderness, swelling, pitting edema, collateral superficial veins (non-varicose), and skin redness. The symptom was assessed as mild, moderate or severe.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 20, 36, 52, and 53|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827165|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Localized Tenderness Related to Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)|DVT was defined if a segment of the deep vein of the lower limb was not compressible or a previous compressive vein became non compressive or there was no flow in the underlying vessel. Symptoms of DVT included pain in the lower limb, localized tenderness, swelling, pitting edema, collateral superficial veins (non-varicose), and skin redness. The symptom was assessed as mild, moderate or severe.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 20, 36, 52, and 53|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827166|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Localized Pain Related to Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)|DVT was defined if a segment of the deep vein of the lower limb was not compressible or a previous compressive vein became non compressive or there was no flow in the underlying vessel. Symptoms of DVT included pain in the lower limb, localized tenderness, swelling, pitting edema, collateral superficial veins (non-varicose), and skin redness. The symptom was assessed as mild, moderate or severe.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 20, 36, 52, and 53|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827167|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Generalized or Abdominal Edema|Number of participants who had generalized or abdominal edema.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 20, 36, 52, and 53|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827168|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Facial/Periorbital Edema|Number of participants who had facial or periorbital edema.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 20, 36, 52, and 53|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827169|NCT01202227|Primary|Number of Participants With Peripheral Edema|Number of participants who had peripheral edema in lower extremities. Edema was categorized as follows: trace, pitting 1 (lower leg), 2 (lower leg to knee), and 3 (above knee and /or presacral edema).|Baseline, Weeks 4, 20, 36, 52, and 53|The safety analysis set consists of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication in this long-term study.||Participants|||Number
827170|NCT01202253|Secondary|Number of Participants With Different Types of Drug-related Serious Adverse Events||Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||participants|||Number
827171|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Drug-related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants|||Number
827172|NCT01202253|Secondary|Number of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study treatment was considered an adverse event (AE) without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An AE resulting in any of the following outcomes, or deemed to be significant for any other reason, was considered to be a SAE: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; a life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||events|||Number
827173|NCT01202253|Secondary|Duration of Anidulafungin Therapy||Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
827174|NCT01202253|Secondary|Number of Participants With Other Dosing Patterns|The other dosing patterns for anidulafungin included any dosing pattern different from 200 mg loading dose on Day 1 followed by 100 mg doses subsequently starting from Day 2.|Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||participants|||Number
827175|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received 200 mg Dose on Day 1 and 100 mg for All Subsequent Doses||Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827186|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Systolic Blood Pressure More Than 2 Standard Deviations Below the Mean for Age Recorded Within 24 Hour Period Prior to Initiation of Drug Therapy|Lower limit of confidence interval was reported as 0 if the same was calculated as less than 0 by standard calculations (outside the valid range of 0 to 100).|Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827187|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Documented Body Temperature Above 38.0 Degree Celsius or Below 36.0 Degree Celsius Within 24 Hour Period Prior to Initiation of Drug Therapy|Lower limit of confidence interval was reported as 0 if the same was calculated as less than 0 and upper limit of confidence interval was reported as 100 if the same was calculated as greater than 100, by standard calculations (outside the valid range of 0 to 100).|Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827188|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Probable or Proven Fungal Infection at the Initiation of Drug Therapy||Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827189|NCT01202253|Secondary|Dose Changes for Immunosuppressant Drugs||Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Data was not analyzed as the study was retrospective and data for dose change for immunosuppressant drugs was not available.|||||
827190|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Prescribed With Systemic Antifungal Within 30 Days Before Study Start|Lower limit of confidence interval was reported as 0 if the same was calculated as less than 0 by standard calculations (outside the valid range of 0 to 100).|Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827191|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Concomitant Bacterial or Viral Infection|Upper limit of confidence interval was reported as 100 if the same was calculated as greater than 100 by standard calculations (outside the valid range of 0 to 100).|Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827192|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Absolute Neutrophil Count Less Than 500 Per Cubic Millimeter (/mm^3) and Greater Than or Equal to 500 /mm^3|Lower limit of confidence interval was reported as 0 if the same was calculated as less than 0 and upper limit of confidence interval was reported as 100 if the same was calculated as greater than 100, by standard calculations (outside the valid range of 0 to 100).|Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827193|NCT01202253|Secondary|Duration of Stay at Liver Intensive Therapy Unit (LITU)||Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
827194|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Admitted to Liver Intensive Therapy Unit (LITU)||Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827195|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Creatinine Clearance at Least Twice the Baseline Value During Period of Drug Therapy||Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Data was not analyzed as the study was retrospective and data for creatinine clearance was not available for the participants.|||||
827196|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Liver Function Test Results at Least Twice the Baseline Value During Period of Drug Therapy|Percentage of participants with liver function test results at least twice the baseline value during period of drug therapy was calculated for the liver function variables, bilirubin, aspartate transaminase, alkaline phosphatase and gamma glutamyl transferase.|Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827197|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Abnormal Results for Liver Function at End of Drug Therapy|Percentage of participants with abnormal liver function results were based on 4 liver function variables- bilirubin, aspartate transaminase, alkaline phosphatase and gamma glutamyl transferase. Normal reference ranges of these variables are: plasma bilirubin: 3-17 micromoles/L or 2.5-10 mg/L for adults; aspartate transaminase: 6-34 IU/L for females and 8-40 IU/L for males; alkaline phosphatase: 5-38 IU/L for females and 10-50 IU/L for males; gamma glutamyl transferase: 7-32 IU/L for females and 11-50 IU/L for males.|Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827198|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Abnormal Results for Liver Function at Initiation of Drug Therapy|Percentage of participants with abnormal liver function results were based on 4 liver function variables- bilirubin, aspartate transaminase, alkaline phosphatase and gamma glutamyl transferase. Normal reference ranges of these variables are: plasma bilirubin: 3-17 micromoles/L or 2.5-10 mg/L for adults; aspartate transaminase: 6-34 International Units/Liter (IU/L) for females and 8-40 IU/L for males; alkaline phosphatase: 5-38 IU/L for females and 10-50 IU/L for males; gamma glutamyl transferase: 7-32 IU/L for females and 11-50 IU/L for males. Upper limit of confidence interval was reported as 100 if the same was calculated as greater than 100 by standard calculations (outside the valid range of 0 to 100).|Baseline|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827199|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Resolution of Signs of Infection According to Computerized Tomography (CT) Scan Results|A CT scan was performed and the resultant scan was reviewed for the presence of the infection as per investigator’s discretion.|Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827200|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Resolution of Signs of Infection According to Ultrasound Scan Results|An ultrasound scan was performed and the resultant scan was reviewed for the presence of the infection as per investigator’s discretion.|Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836868|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 18 Hours|The scale measure pain after 18 hours (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|18 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827203|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Requiring Change or Additional Antifungal Therapy|Lower limit of confidence interval was reported as 0 if the same was calculated as less than 0 by standard calculations (outside the valid range of 0 to 100).|Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827204|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Lack of Clinical Response|Favorable clinical response was defined as clinical resolution of signs and symptoms of infection and no need to change or add to antifungal therapy, or transition to oral antifungal to complete therapy.|Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827205|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Favorable Clinical Response|Favorable clinical response was defined as clinical resolution of signs and symptoms of infection and no need to change or add to antifungal therapy, or transition to oral antifungal to complete therapy.|Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827206|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Death Unrelated to Fungal Infection||Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827207|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Death Attributable to Fungal Infection||Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants|||Number
827208|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died Due to All Causes|Death due to all causes included death attributable to fungal infection, death unrelated to fungal infection and death due to multiple causes.|Baseline up to Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827209|NCT01202253|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Unfavorable Outcome|Unfavorable outcome was defined as the need to change to another antifungal agent because of lack of clinical response or death due to the antifungal infection or microbiologic persistence of the fungus or superinfection with a new Candida, Aspergillus or other fungal strain occurring at least 3 days and up to 14 days of anidulafungin therapy, or a lack of follow up data about clinical and microbiologic responses at the end of anidulafungin therapy.|Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827210|NCT01202253|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Favorable Outcome|Favorable outcome was defined as favorable clinical response and documented or presumed microbial eradication (two negative follow-up blood cultures for bloodstream infections or a successful clinical response without follow-up cultures for other infections). Favorable clinical response was defined as clinical resolution of signs and symptoms of infection and no need to change or add to antifungal therapy, or transition to oral antifungal to complete therapy.|Day 28 post-treatment|Full analysis set included all participants who met the defined eligibility criteria. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827211|NCT01202279|Primary|Change From Baseline in Total Symptom Score of the Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey - 21 (WURSS-21).|WURSS-21 is made up of 21 questions with a scoring from 0 = no symptom to 7 = severe symptom. With a minimum score of 0 to a maximum score of 147.|Baseline and 7 Days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827212|NCT01202279|Primary|Antibiotic Sparing|Number of patients who received an antibiotic|Day 7|Per Protocol Population using Fishers Exact Test.||Participants|||Number
827213|NCT01202565|Secondary|Associations Between General Improvement in Psoriasis With Improvement in Quality of Life|Associations between general improvement in quality of life, measured by percentage change of DLQI, and general improvement in psoriasis at the same time, measured by percentage improvement of the PASI, were evaluated by means of Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. Generally, correlation coefficients below 0.2 are considered as no or only weak association, between 0.2 and 0.5 as moderate association, between 0.5 and 0.8 as strong association and above 0.8 as very strong associations.|Baseline and Month 12|Full Analysis Set; participants with both PASI and DLQI data available. LOCF was used.||correlation coefficient|||Number
827214|NCT01202565|Secondary|Associations Between Improvement in Quality of Life With Improvement in Scalp Psoriasis|Associations between general improvement in quality of life, measured by percentage change of DLQI, and the improvement of scalp psoriasis at the same time, measured by percentage improvement of the PSSI, were evaluated by means of Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. Generally, correlation coefficients below 0.2 are considered as no or only weak association, between 0.2 and 0.5 as moderate association, between 0.5 and 0.8 as strong association and above 0.8 as very strong associations.|Baseline and Month 12|Scalp Psoriasis Set; participants with both PSSI and DLQI data available. LOCF was used.||correlation coefficient|||Number
827215|NCT01202565|Secondary|Associations Between Improvement in Quality of Life With Improvement in Nail Psoriasis|Associations between general improvement in quality of life, measured by percentage change of DLQI, and the improvement of nail psoriasis at the same time, measured by percentage improvement of the NAPSI, were evaluated by means of Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. Generally, correlation coefficients below 0.2 are considered as no or only weak association, between 0.2 and 0.5 as moderate association, between 0.5 and 0.8 as strong association and above 0.8 as very strong associations.|Baseline and Month 12|Nail Psoriasis Set; participants with both NAPSI and DLQI data available. LOCF was used.||correlation coefficient|||Number
827281|NCT01203852|Primary|Change in Blood Pressure From Baseline to Treatment|Response to blood pressure medication will be assessed by measuring blood pressure before and after treatment|after 6-8 weeks of treatment|All patients with antihypertensive response data. 282 patients completed all 3 study periods. 369 patients completed only period 1. 328 patients completed only period 3.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
836869|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 12 Hours|The scale measure pain after 12 hours (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|12 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827216|NCT01202565|Secondary|Associations Between General Improvement in Psoriasis With Improvement in Scalp Psoriasis|Associations between general improvement in psoriasis, measured by percentage change of PASI, and the improvement of scalp psoriasis at the same time, measured by percentage improvement of the PSSI, were evaluated by means of Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. Generally, correlation coefficients below 0.2 are considered as no or only weak association, between 0.2 and 0.5 as moderate association, between 0.5 and 0.8 as strong association and above 0.8 as very strong associations.|Baseline and Month 12|Scalp Psoriasis Set; participants with both PSSI and PASI data available. LOCF was used.||correlation coefficient|||Number
827217|NCT01202565|Secondary|Associations Between General Improvement in Psoriasis With Improvement in Nail Psoriasis|Associations between general improvement in psoriasis, measured by percentage change of PASI, and the improvement of nail psoriasis at the same time, measured by percentage improvement of the NAPSI, were evaluated by means of Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. Generally, correlation coefficients below 0.2 are considered as no or only weak association, between 0.2 and 0.5 as moderate association, between 0.5 and 0.8 as strong association and above 0.8 as very strong associations.|Baseline and Month 12|Nail Psoriasis Set; participants with both NAPSI and PASI data available. LOCF was used.||correlation coefficient|||Number
827218|NCT01202565|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DLQI Score|The DLQI questionnaire asks participants to evaluate the degree that psoriasis has affected their quality of life in the last week, and includes the following parameters: symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure activities, work or school activities, personal relationships and treatment related feelings. Participants answer 10 questions on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); the range of the total score is 0 to 30. A score of 21 to 30 means an extremely large effect on the participant's life whereas 0-1 means that the disease has no effect at all. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Full Analysis Set with Baseline DLQI score; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827219|NCT01202565|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score|The DLQI questionnaire asks participants to evaluate the degree that psoriasis has affected their quality of life in the last week, and includes the following parameters: symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure activities, work or school activities, personal relationships and treatment related feelings. Participants answer 10 questions on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); the range of the total score is 0 to 30. A score of 21 to 30 means an extremely large effect on the participant's life whereas 0-1 means that the disease has no effect at all. Change from Baseline is presented as a percentage of the Baseline value: Month 12 value - Baseline value / Baseline value * 100. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Month 12|Full analysis Set. Only participants with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value are included. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
827220|NCT01202565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a PASI 50 Response|"The percentage of participants with a ≥ 50% reduction (improvement) in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score from Baseline.
PASI is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by the erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) on a scale from none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3) or very severe (4), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 to 6. PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Full Analysis Set with Baseline PASI score; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||percentage of participants|||Number
827221|NCT01202565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a PASI 75 Response|"The percentage of participants with a ≥ 75% reduction (improvement) in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score from Baseline.
PASI is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by the erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) on a scale from none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3) or very severe (4), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 to 6. PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Full Analysis Set with Baseline PASI score; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||percentage of participants|||Number
827222|NCT01202565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a PASI 90 Response|"The percentage of participants with a ≥ 90% reduction (improvement) in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score from Baseline.
PASI is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by the erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) on a scale from none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3) or very severe (4), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 to 6. PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Full Analysis Set with Baseline PASI score; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||percentage of participants|||Number
827223|NCT01202565|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PASI Score|The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by the erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) on a scale from none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3) or very severe (4), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 to 6. PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Full Analysis Set with Baseline PASI score; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827224|NCT01202565|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score|The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by the erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) on a scale from none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3) or very severe (4), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 to 6. PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease. Change from Baseline is presented as a percentage of the Baseline value: Month 12 value - Baseline value / Baseline value * 100. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Month 12|Full analysis Set. Only participants with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value are included. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
827225|NCT01202565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Complete Clearing of Scalp|Complete clearing on scalp is defined as a PSSI score of zero. The PSSI consists of two parts: an assessment of scalp area involved and an assessment of the 3 clinical symptoms erythema, induration and desquamation. Involved scalp area is measured on a scale from 0 (0% of scalp involved) to 6 (90-100% of scalp involved), clinical symptoms are each rated from 0 (absent) to 4 (severest possible). The composite score ranges from 0 (best) to 72 (worst) and is derived from the sum of symptom scores multiplied by the score of involved scalp area.|Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Scalp Psoriasis Set; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||percentage of participants|||Number
827226|NCT01202565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Good Clinical Response on Scalp|"Good clinical response on scalp is defined as a ≥ 50% improvement from Baseline in PSSI score.
The PSSI consists of two parts: an assessment of scalp area involved and an assessment of the 3 clinical symptoms erythema, induration and desquamation. Involved scalp area is measured on a scale from 0 (0% of scalp involved) to 6 (90-100% of scalp involved), clinical symptoms are each rated from 0 (absent) to 4 (severest possible). The composite score ranges from 0 (best) to 72 (worst) and is derived from the sum of symptom scores multiplied by the score of involved scalp area."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Scalp Psoriasis Set; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||percentage of participants|||Number
827227|NCT01202565|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Scalp Severity Index (PSSI)|The PSSI consists of two parts: an assessment of scalp area involved and an assessment of the 3 clinical symptoms erythema, induration and desquamation. Involved scalp area is measured on a scale from 0 (0% of scalp involved) to 6 (90-100% of scalp involved), clinical symptoms are each rated from 0 (absent) to 4 (severest possible). The composite score ranges from 0 (best) to 72 (worst) and is derived from the sum of symptom scores multiplied by the score of involved scalp area. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Scalp Psoriasis Set; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827228|NCT01202565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Complete Clearing of Nails|"Complete clearing of nails is defined as a total NAPSI score of zero.
The NAPSI grades nails for both nail matrix psoriasis and nail bed psoriasis. The sum of these two scores is the total score for that nail. Nail matrix psoriasis consists of any of the following: pitting, leukonychia, red spots in the lunula, or nail plate crumbling. Nail bed psoriasis is the presence or absence of onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, oil drop (salmon patch) discoloration or nail bed hyperkeratosis. Scoring for each is based on the following scale:
0 = none;
1 = present in 1/4 nail quadrants;
2 = present in 2/4 nail quadrants;
3 = present in 3/4 nail quadrants;
4 = present in 4/4 nail quadrants.
The 2 most affected nails on either hands or feet were evaluated and summed for a score ranging from 0 (no nail psoriasis) to 16 (psoriasis in 4/4 nail quadrants)."|Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Nail Psoriasis Set; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||percentage of participants|||Number
827229|NCT01202565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Good Clinical Response on Nail Psoriasis|"Good clinical response on nails is defined as ≥ 50% improvement from Baseline in total NAPSI score.
The NAPSI grades nails for both nail matrix psoriasis and nail bed psoriasis. The sum of these two scores is the total score for that nail. Nail matrix psoriasis consists of any of the following: pitting, leukonychia, red spots in the lunula, or nail plate crumbling. Nail bed psoriasis is the presence or absence of onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, oil drop (salmon patch) discoloration or nail bed hyperkeratosis. Scoring for each is based on the following scale:
0 = none;
1 = present in 1/4 nail quadrants;
2 = present in 2/4 nail quadrants;
3 = present in 3/4 nail quadrants;
4 = present in 4/4 nail quadrants.
The 2 most affected nails on either hands or feet were evaluated and summed for a score ranging from 0 (no nail psoriasis) to 16 (psoriasis in 4/4 nail quadrants)."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Nail Psoriasis Set; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||percentage of participants|||Number
827230|NCT01202565|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI)|"NAPSI grades nails for both nail matrix psoriasis and nail bed psoriasis. The sum of these two scores is the total score for that nail. Nail matrix psoriasis consists of any of the following: pitting, leukonychia, red spots in the lunula, or nail plate crumbling. Nail bed psoriasis is the presence or absence of onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, oil drop (salmon patch) discoloration or nail bed hyperkeratosis. Scoring for each is based on the following scale:
0 = none;
1 = present in 1/4 nail quadrants;
2 = present in 2/4 nail quadrants;
3 = present in 3/4 nail quadrants;
4 = present in 4/4 nail quadrants.
The 2 most affected nails on either hands or feet were evaluated and summed for a score ranging from 0 (no nail psoriasis) to 16 (psoriasis in 4/4 nail quadrants).
A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Nail Psoriasis Set; the analysis was based on all available data. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was also used for the Month 12 time point. The number of participants included in the analysis at each time point is indicated by N."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827231|NCT01202565|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Scalp Severity Index (PSSI) to Month 12|"The PSSI consists of two parts: an assessment of scalp area involved and an assessment of the 3 clinical symptoms erythema, induration and desquamation. Involved scalp area is measured on a scale from 0 (0% of scalp involved) to 6 (90-100% of scalp involved), clinical symptoms are each rated from 0 (absent) to 4 (severest possible). The composite score ranges from 0 (best) to 72 (worst) and is derived from the sum of symptom scores multiplied by the score of involved scalp area.
Change from Baseline is presented as a percentage of the Baseline value: Month 12 value - Baseline value / Baseline value * 100. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and Month 12|Scalp Psoriasis Set (SPS), which includes participants with a Baseline PSSI ≥ 10. Only participants with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value are included. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
827232|NCT01202565|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) to Month 12|"NAPSI grades nails for both nail matrix psoriasis and nail bed psoriasis. The sum of these two scores is the total score for that nail. Nail matrix psoriasis consists of any of the following: pitting, leukonychia, red spots in the lunula, or nail plate crumbling. Nail bed psoriasis is the presence or absence of onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, oil drop (salmon patch) discoloration or nail bed hyperkeratosis. Scoring for each is based on the following scale:
0 = none;
1 = present in 1/4 nail quadrants;
2 = present in 2/4 nail quadrants;
3 = present in 3/4 nail quadrants;
4 = present in 4/4 nail quadrants.
The 2 most affected nails on either hands or feet were evaluated and summed for a score ranging from 0 (no nail psoriasis) to 16 (psoriasis in 4/4 nail quadrants).
Change from Baseline is presented as a percentage of the Baseline value, calculated as: Month 12 value - Baseline value / Baseline value * 100. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and Month 12|Nail Psoriasis set, which includes participants with a Baseline NAPSI score ≥ 10. Only participants with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline value are included. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
827233|NCT01202578|Secondary|Tube Retention|Presence of the tympanostomy tube across the tympanic membrane at the follow-up visit.|7 days|Tube retention was assessed for all TT successfully placed by the TTDS||percentage of tubes retained|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
827234|NCT01202578|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With Procedure Success|Procedure Success was defined as the successful placement of any tympanostomy tube in all enrolled ears in a given subject. Non-Acclarent tubes successfully placed manually following non-success of the TTDS were counted toward Procedure Success. Procedure Success was determined on a per subject basis: the rate was calculated by the number of subjects achieving Procedure Success out of the total number of enrolled subjects.|0 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827235|NCT01202578|Primary|Device Success|Device Success is defined as the successful delivery of the tympanostomy tube across the tympanic membrane using the tympanostomy tube delivery system (TTDS).Device Success is evaluated on a per device basis.|0 days|Device Success is evaluated on a per device basis.||percentage of devices|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
827236|NCT01202578|Primary|Safety of Tympanostomy Tube (TT) Delivery System|Occurrence of pre-defined Safety Events of acoustic trauma, deployment of the TT into the middle ear, damage to middle ear structures, unintended tympanic membrane perforation requiring treatment, abrasion to the external acoustic meatus requiring significant treatment, and major bleeding requiring significant treatment.|7 days|Subjects in whom TTDS was attempted.||percentage of ears|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
827237|NCT01202591|Primary|Safety and Tolerability in Terms of Number of Patients With Adverse Events (Serious and Non-serious)||3 years, 10 months (Adverse events recorded from patient screening to discontinuation plus 28 days safety follow-up).|All patients who receive at least one dose of study treatment (AZD4547 or exemestane)||Participants|||Number
827238|NCT01202643|Secondary|Implantation Rate|Number of gestational sacs per number of embryos transferred in each treatment group|28 days after embryo transfer|Presuming an implantation rate of 10% and anticipating a 10% increase to 20% with treatment, about 200 embryos transferred in each study arm would be needed for 80% power and alpha of 0.05.||Gestational sacs|Participants||Number
827239|NCT01202643|Primary|Endometrial Thickness|Thickness of the endometrium on the day of embryo transfer|Day of embryo transfer|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
827240|NCT01202656|Secondary|Live Birth Rates|Live birth rates among normal infertile couples undergoing IVF|Within nine months of embryo transfer|||Live Birth|||Number
827241|NCT01202656|Primary|Embryo Implantation and Clinical Pregnancy Rates|"Implantation rate: The number of gestational sacs noted in the endometrial cavity 26 to 30 days after embryo transfer divided by the number of embryos transferred
Clinical pregnancy:
Gestational sac with evidence of a viable pregnancy at least 28 days after embryo transfer"|26 to 30 days after embryo transfer|Presuming an implantation rate of 10% and anticipating a 10% increase to 20% with treatment, about 200 embryos transferred in each study arm would be needed for 80% power and alpha of 0.05.||Gestational sacs|Participants||Number
827242|NCT01202747|Primary|Association Between Screening Methods (Meibomian Gland Expression) and Treatment Effectiveness Outcomes (Total Meibomian Gland Score)|"Analysis of association between Baseline Meibomian Gland Expression Score and Total Meibomian Gland Score at 4 Weeks. Success was defined by demonstration of a statistically significant (p<0.05) association between the screening method and outcome.
Meibomian gland expression sum scores range from 0 to 60 with a higher score reflecting less meibomian gland dysfunction. Total meibomian gland scores range from 0 to 45 with a higher score reflecting less meibomian gland dysfunction."|Baseline and 4 Weeks|Results presented are for the Intent to Treat population.||Correlation coefficient|||Number
827243|NCT01202877|Primary|Overall Response (OR) Within 6 Months|Overall response defined as percentage of participants with response as follows: (OR = CR [complete response (CR) rate] + CRi [complete remission with incomplete count recovery] + PR [partial remission] + HI [hematologic improvement]) within 6 months of treatment initiation|6 Months|||percentage of participants|||Number
827292|NCT01203930|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the interval from the start of study treatment to death from any cause.|Up to 28 Months|Overall survival analysis was not performed because the follow-up period was insufficient to capture enough events.|||||
827966|NCT01205503|Secondary|Troponin Levels in Patients Receiving Doxorubicin Containing Chemotherapy|Continuous Measure of troponin at the 4 time points outlined in the protocol for each group.|prior to and 3 hours post doxorubicin and between cycles 1 and 2|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827244|NCT01202877|Primary|Participant Best Response Assessed Using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) Version 1.1|Criteria for response per international working group for Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS) & acute myeloid leukemia (AML) where responders obtained a complete remission (CR), a CR with incomplete bone marrow recovery (CRi), a morphologic leukemia-free status (MLFS), or a partial remission (PR). CR: <5% bone marrow blasts, neutrophil count>1.0 X10⁹/L, & platelet count>100 X10⁹/L. CRi: all CR criteria except residual neutropenia (<1.0 X10⁹/L) or thrombocytopenia (<100 X10⁹/L). MLFS: <5% blasts in bone marrow regardless of neutrophil & platelet count in peripheral blood. PR: all CR criteria, except reduction> 50% in bone marrow blasts, but still >5%. Clinical responses evaluated using RECIST version 1.1 criteria after every two cycles, with confirmation of clinical response at 4 weeks after achieving response.|6 months|||participants|||Number
827245|NCT01202903|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Number of Puffs of Asthma Rescue Medication Following 24-week Treatment|Analysis of rescue medication use followed a similar method to that employed for total asthma symptom score. The mean number of puffs across the 28 days prior to the Week 24 assessment visit was used to calculate a change from baseline. LS Mean of change from baseline in mean number of puffs of asthma rescue medication is calculated with the ANCOVA model using treatment, stratification group, dosing schedule, gender, smoking status, center grouping, and baseline mean number of puffs of asthma rescue medication as covariates.|24 weeks|The FAS consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 randomized patients did not receive study drug and were excluded along with 1 other patient who did not receive study drug for more than 60 days||Number of puffs||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827246|NCT01202903|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Investigator and Patient Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness (GETE) at Weeks 16 and 24|The global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE) is an assessment of asthma symptom control and overall response to asthma treatment. The evaluation was performed by both investigator and patient, each using the same 5 point scale. The GETE scale ranges were as follows: excellent, good, moderate, poor and worsening. A good or excellent response on the 5 point scale indicated that a patient had responded to treatment. 1=excellent 2=good 3=moderate 4=poor 5= worsening. Responder is defined as the patient who achieved an excellent or good response. Non-responder isdefined as the patient who achieved a moderate or poor or worsening response.|16 and 24 weeks|The FAS consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 randomized patients did not receive study drug and were excluded along with 1 other patient who did not receive study drug for more than 60 days||Percent|||Number
827247|NCT01202903|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Symptom Scores Following 24-week Treatment|Total asthma symptom score was derived for each day as the total of the morning (scale 0-1), daytime (scale 0-4) and nocturnal (scale 0-4) scores with a max score of 9. The mean score across the 28 days prior to the week 24 assessment visit was used to calculate a change from baseline. Analysis of total asthma symptom score was performed using ANCOVA model and Van-Elteren test. LS Mean of change from baseline in mean asthma symptom score is calculated with the ANCOVA model using treatment, stratification group, dosing schedule, gender, smoking status, center grouping, and baseline mean asthma symptom scores as covariates. Decrease of score on change from baseline means improvement of asthma symptom control.|24 weeks|The FAS consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 randomized patients did not receive study drug and were excluded along with 1 other patient who did not receive study drug for more than 60 days||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827248|NCT01202903|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With at Least a 0.5 or 0.75 Point Improvement in the ACQ Score at Week 24|The Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) is a questionnaire consisting of 7 questions assessing symptoms, airway caliber and rescue β2-agonist use. One value representing overall asthma control on that occasion was calculated. Decrease in scores of 0.5 or higher between ACQ assessments are considered clinically meaningful. The ACQ was completed by the patient at the Investigator’s site at Visit 2 (Week 1, pre-dose), Visit 6 (after completion of 16 weeks of treatment) and at the End of Study/Early Termination visit. Only patients with no more than 1 item missing are included, and the missing item was imputed by interpolation|24 weeks|The FAS consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 randomized patients did not receive study drug and were excluded along with 1 other patient who did not receive study drug for more than 60 days||Percent|||Number
827249|NCT01202903|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ACQ Score Following 24-week Treatment|The Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) is a questionnaire consisting of 7 questions assessing symptoms, airway caliber and rescue β2-agonist use. One value representing overall asthma control on that occasion was calculated. Decrease in scores of 0.5 or higher between ACQ assessments are considered clinically meaningful. The ACQ was completed by the patient at the Investigator’s site at Visit 2 (Week 1, pre-dose), Visit 6 (after completion of 16 weeks of treatment) and at the End of Study/Early Termination visit. LS Mean of change from baseline in ACQ score is calculated with the ANCOVA model using treatment, stratification group, dosing schedule, center grouping, smoking status, and baseline ACQ score as covariates. Score 0= totally controlled, 6= extremely poorly controlled|24 weeks|The FAS consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 randomized patients did not receive study drug and were excluded along with 1 other patient who did not receive study drug for more than 60 days||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827250|NCT01202903|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving at Least a 0.5, 1.0 or 1.5 Point Improvement From Baseline in AQLQ Overall Score Following 24-week Treatment|The standardized version of the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQs)), was used to assess the patients’ asthma-related quality of life. There are 32 questions in the AQLQ and they are in 4 domains (symptoms, activity limitation, emotional function and environmental exposure). Each question was answered on a 7 point scale (1-totally limited/problems all the time, 7-not at all limited/no problems). The overall AQLQ score is the mean of all 32 responses, and the individual domain scores are the means of the items in those domains (a minimum domain / overall score of 1 = Severely impaired whereas a maximum domain / overall score of 7 = not impaired at all). A positive change from baseline score indicates improvement.|24 weeks|The FAS consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 randomized patients did not receive study drug and were excluded along with 1 other patient who did not receive study drug for more than 60 days||Percent|||Number
828025|NCT01213706|Primary|Airway Blood Flow Response to Albuterol|Airway Blood Flow will be measured before and 15 minutes after the 180 mcg of albuterol inhalation.|Qaw post minus Qaw pre albuterol after WBPA or Sham WBPA|controls n =15, smokers N=15 , asthma N=15||μl/min/ml||Standard Error|Mean
827251|NCT01202903|Secondary|Change From Baseline in AQLQ Score Following 24-week Treatment|The standardized version of the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQs)), was used to assess the patients’ asthma-related quality of life. There are 32 questions in the AQLQ and they are in 4 domains (symptoms, activity limitation, emotional function and environmental exposure). Each question was answered on a 7 point scale (1-totally limited/problems all the time, 7-not at all limited/no problems). The overall AQLQ score is the mean of all 32 responses, and the individual domain scores are the means of the items in those domains (a minimum domain / overall score of 1 = Severely impaired whereas a maximum domain / overall score of 7 = not impaired at all). A positive change from baseline score indicates improvement.|24 weeks|The FAS consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 randomized patients did not receive study drug and were excluded along with 1 other patient who did not receive study drug for more than 60 days||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827252|NCT01202903|Secondary|Change From Baseline in % Predicted FEV1 Following 24-week Treatment|Spirometry was used at defined time points throughout the study to assess the clinical status of patients and to capture the following variables: forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), FEV1 percent predicted, forced vital capacity (FVC) and the FEV1/FVC ratio. During the Screening assessment, spirometry was performed pre- and post-bronchodilator administration to assess reversibility. During the treatment period (including prerandomization assessments on Day 1), spirometry was performed after withholding bronchodilators. The results of spirometry were required to meet the ATS/ERS criteria for acceptability and repeatability. Acceptability criteria were applied before repeatability was determined. LS Mean of change from baseline in % predicted FEV1 is calculated with the ANCOVA model using treatment, stratification group, dosing schedule, gender, center grouping, smoking status, and baseline % predicted FEV1 as covariates.|Baseline, 24 weeks|The FAS consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 randomized patients did not receive study drug and were excluded along with 1 other patient who did not receive study drug for more than 60 days||L/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827253|NCT01202903|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Evening PEF (L/Min) Following 24-week Treatment|A Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) meter was distributed to patients at Visit 1, to be used to measure PEF twice-daily as directed. During the Screening and Treatment Periods, PEF was measured in the morning and evening every day. the morning PEF was performed within 15 minutes after waking, and the evening PEF approximately 12 hours later. Patients were encouraged to perform morning and evening PEF measurements before the use of any LABA or rescue medication. The highest of 3 values was recorded as the daily personal best. The personal best was used to calculate the mean morning PEF and mean evening PEF value collected between assessment Visits. LS Mean of change from baseline in mean morning PEF is calculated with the ANCOVA model using treatment, stratification group, dosing schedule, gender, center grouping, smoking status, and baseline mean morning PEF as covariates.|Baseline, 24 weeks|The FAS consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 randomized patients did not receive study drug and were excluded along with 1 other patient who did not receive study drug for more than 60 days||L/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827254|NCT01202903|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Morning Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Following the 24-week Treatment Period|A Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) meter was distributed to patients at Visit 1, to be used to measure PEF twice-daily as directed. During the Screening and Treatment Periods, PEF was measured in the morning and evening every day. the morning PEF was performed within 15 minutes after waking, and the evening PEF approximately 12 hours later. Patients were encouraged to perform morning and evening PEF measurements before the use of any LABA or rescue medication. The highest of 3 values was recorded as the daily personal best. The personal best was used to calculate the mean morning PEF and mean evening PEF value collected between assessment Visits LS Mean of change from baseline in mean morning PEF is calculated with the ANCOVA model using treatment, stratification group, dosing schedule, gender, center grouping, smoking status, and baseline mean morning PEF as covariates.|Baseline, 24 weeks|The FAS consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. 7 randomized patients did not receive study drug and were excluded along with 1 other patient who did not receive study drug for more than 60 days||L/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827255|NCT01202955|Secondary|Correct Reaction Time During Attention Task Performance After Overnight Abstinence.|We wanted to examine the effects of Tolcapone on the Continuous Performance Task (attention task) after overnight abstinence as compared to placebo.|30 days|Only participants who completed both study phases were analyzed.||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
827256|NCT01202955|Secondary|N-back (Working Memory) Correct Reaction Time After Overnight Abstinence.|To obtain preliminary data on the effects of Tolcapone on abstinence-induced neurocognitive deficits in abstinent smokers with differing COMT genotypes. We examined reaction time differences on the n-back task between tolcapone and placebo treatment.|30 days|Only participants who completed both sessions were analysed||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
827257|NCT01202955|Primary|Number of Eligible Participants Enrolled Who Completed the Study.|Number of enrolled participants who complete the final study visit|30 days|Number of Participants who completed the study.||Participants|||Number
827258|NCT01203046|Primary|Other Complications|Patients with complications different to surgical site infection.|10 days|Patients who presented any complication different of surgical site infection after surgery||participants|||Number
827259|NCT01203046|Primary|Surgical Site Infection|The patients were evaluated up to 10 days with close observation of surgical site. We concluded as surgical site infection when inflammatory signs, purulent discharge, intestinal liquid and aponeurosis disruption was observed.|10 days|All patients with inflammatory signs, purulent discharge, intestinal liquid and aponeurosis disruption observed at surgical site were included.||participants|||Number
827260|NCT01203072|Secondary|Incidence of Major Bleeding or Clinically Relevant Non-major Bleeding|Incidence of Major Bleeding or Clinically Relevant Non-major Bleeding. Related to the study drug|2 weeks|Safety Analysis Set is defined as subjects secondarily enrolled in study, but excluded those with significant GCP violations, did not receive any doses of study drug, or had no safety data after start of study treatment. Subjects with significant GCP violations, but received at least one dose of study drug, safety data were assessed individually||percentage of subjects with bleeds||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828177|NCT01214980|Secondary|Numeric Itching Score|Average donor site itching score for treatment group, numeric scale 0 (no itch) to 10 (worst possible itch), at 5 weeks post skin graft procedure|5 weeks|Randomized subjects with a minimum of 4 out of 5 study treatments and itching score reported||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827261|NCT01203072|Primary|Proportion of Subjects With Venous Thromboembolism Events.|"The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of subjects who experienced at least one of the thromboembolic events listed below during the period from the start of study treatment to the venography at the end of study treatment.
Lower extremity DVT confirmed by bilateral venography at the end of study treatment
Definite diagnosis of symptomatic PE
Symptomatic DVT confirmed before the venography at the end of study treatment The objectives were to verify the non-inferiority of edoxaban to enoxaparin with regard to prevention of VTE"|2 weeks|The FAS was defined as all subjects enrolled in the study, but excluded those who had significant GCP violations, who had not received any doses of the study drug, or those who did not develop symptomatic DVT or PE, but in whom venography was not appropriately performed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827262|NCT01203098|Secondary|Incidence of Major Bleeding or Clinically Relevant Non-major Bleedings.||2 weeks|The Safety Analysis Set was defined as all subjects who were enrolled in the study, but excluded those who had significant GCP violations, who did not receive any doses of the study drug, or who had no safety data after the start of study treatment||percentage of subjects with bleeds||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827263|NCT01203098|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Venous Thromboembolism Events|"The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of subjects who experienced at least one of the thromboembolic events listed below during the period from the start of study treatment to the venography at the end of study treatment.
Lower extremity DVT confirmed by bilateral venography at the end of study treatment
Definite diagnosis of symptomatic PE
Symptomatic DVT confirmed before the venography at the end of study treatment The objectives were to verify the non-inferiority of edoxaban to enoxaparin with regard to prevention of VTE"|2 weeks|The FAS was defined as all subjects enrolled in the study, but excluded those who had significant GCP violations, who had not received any doses of the study drug, or those who did not develop symptomatic DVT or PE, but in whom venography was not appropriately performed.||percent of participants with VTE event||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827264|NCT01203319|Secondary|the Safety of Recombinant Hepatitis B Vaccines in Nonresponders|assessment of the local and systemic adverse reaction within the first 30 days after third vaccination|within the first 30 days after third vaccination||||||
827265|NCT01203319|Secondary|the Safety of Recombinant Hepatitis B Vaccines in Nonresponders|assessment of the local and systemic adverse reaction within the first 30 days after second vaccination|within the first 30 days after second vaccination||||||
827266|NCT01203319|Secondary|the Safety of Recombinant Hepatitis B Vaccines in Nonresponders|assessment of the local and systemic adverse reaction within the first 30 days after first vaccination|within the first 30 days after first vaccination||||||
827267|NCT01203319|Secondary|Immunogenicity of Recombinant Hepatitis B Vaccines in Nonresponders|Quantitative detection of anti-HBs using ratio-immunity method on serum obtained one month after first vaccination|one month after the first vaccination|||participants|||Number
827268|NCT01203319|Primary|Immunogenicity of Recombinant Hepatitis B Vaccines in Nonresponders|Quantitative detection of anti-HBs using ratio-immunity method on serum obtained one month after third vaccination|one month after the third vaccination|||participants|||Number
827269|NCT01203319|Primary|Immunogenicity of Recombinant Hepatitis B Vaccines in Nonresponders|Quantitative detection of anti-HBs using ratio-immunity method on serum obtained one month after second vaccination|one month after the second vaccination|Accroding to Protocol set||participants|||Number
827270|NCT01203644|Secondary|Adverse Events|Safety assessments included monitoring of treatment-emergent adverse events|Through 30 days postdose||||||
827271|NCT01203644|Primary|Time to First Use of Supplemental Pain Medication|The primary efficacy endpoint was the time to first use of supplemental pain medication (opioid or non-opioid) postoperatively for surgical wound pain|Through 96 hours postdose|||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827272|NCT01203787|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Dose Reductions||11/22/2010-3/10/2014|||participants|||Number
827273|NCT01203787|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Dose Interruptions||Baseline-End of Treatment (11/22/2010-3/10/2014)|||participants|||Number
827274|NCT01203787|Primary|Cumulative Dose of Sorafenib|Table below shows mean cumulative dose of sorafenib for each of the dosing regimens.|11/22/2010-1/27/14|||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
827275|NCT01203787|Secondary|Frequency and Severity of Adverse Events According to National Cancer Institute- CTCAE|The total number of CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria) grade 5 adverse events was collected for each dosing regimen beginning at baseline through 6 months of treatment.|11/22/2010-3/10/2014|||Grade 5 Adverse Events|||Number
827276|NCT01203787|Secondary|Safety of Dosing Regimens as Assessed by the Frequency and Severity of Adverse Events According to National Cancer Institute- CTCAE|The total number of CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria) grade 4 adverse events was collected for each dosing regimen beginning at baseline until Week 24/Early Termination Visit.|11/22/2010-3/10/2014|||Grade 4 adverse events|||Number
827277|NCT01203787|Secondary|Safety and Efficacy of Sorafenib Dosing Regimens|Safety of Sorafenib was assessed by the frequency and severity of adverse events according to NCI-CTCAE grading|Baseline-End of Treatment (11/22/2010-3/10/2014)|The total number of CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria) grade 3 adverse events was collected for each dosing regimen||Grade 3 adverse events|||Number
827278|NCT01203787|Primary|Total (Cumulative) Dose Delivery of Sorafenib|This outcome measure table shows the median cumulative dose delivered to the subjects randomized to the standard dosing regimen (N=63) and ramp-up regimen (N=57) at 4 months of treatment.|4 months-1/12/2010-1/27/14|||mg||Full Range|Median
827279|NCT01203826|Primary|Skeletal Radiograph Evaluation Using a Qualitative Radiographic Global Impression of Change (RGI-C) Scale Compared to Baseline (Pre-treatment) in Study ENB-006-09.|"Evaluation of radiographic change in rickets severity (as assessed by skeletal radiographs of the hands/wrists and knees) from the Baseline of Study ENB-006-09 relative to the End of Study (EOS) visit in Study ENB-008-10 using an ordinal RGI-C scale score. The RGI-C is a 7-point rating scale that ranges from -3 (indicative of severe worsening of HPP associated rickets) to +3 (indicative of complete or near complete healing of HPP associated rickets).
The time points will be pre-treatment (Baseline from Study ENB-006-09) to the last radiographic assessment in Study ENB-008-10, which represents at least 72 months of treatment."|At least 72 months of treatment with asfotase alfa|Each visit in Study ENB-008-10 was calculated relative to the start of exposure to asfotase alfa in Study ENB-006-09 (24 weeks are added to each visit in Study ENB-008-10). Results shown are for the last assessment in Study ENB-008-10 and represent at least 72 months of treatment with asfotase alfa.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
827282|NCT01203878|Secondary|Cosmetic Appearance|"Change (improvement) in investigator scores of cosmetic appearance of the treatment area (entire face) by objective and subjective assessments:
INVESTIGATOR COSMETIC ASSESSMENT 0 - Facial skin is smooth to the touch, without significant lines or unevenness in pigmentation
1 - Facial skin shows 1 area (cheeks, forehead, or the perioral area) of significant 3 - Facial skin shows 3 areas with significant roughness, dyspigmentation, or fine lines 2 - Facial skin shows 2 areas of significant roughness, dyspigmentation, or fine lines 4 - All are severe in severity"|Week 18 (4 weeks after randomization visit)|Randomized patients with both a baseline and a week 18 investigator cosmetic appearance score. One imiquimod/observation patient did not have an end of study investigator cosmetic appearance score.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827283|NCT01203878|Secondary|Complete Clearance|The proportion of randomized patients with complete clearance of actinic keratoses in the treatment area (entire face).|Week 18 (4 weeks after randomization visit)|Randomized patients with a week 18 actinic keratosis count.||participants|||Number
827284|NCT01203878|Primary|Actinic Keratosis Count|The percent change in actinic keratosis count as compared to the baseline lesion count|Week 18 (4 weeks after randomization visit)|Randomized patients with both a baseline and a week 18 actinic keratosis count. One patient in imiquimod/observation group did not have a baseline count and therefore was not included in the analysis.||percent reduction in baseline count||Standard Deviation|Mean
827285|NCT01203917|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from first dose of gefitinib study treatment until death by any cause. Patients who had not died at the time of analysis were censored at the last date the patient was known to be alive.|Survival follow up from first dose of gefitinib till death of the patient or till end of study in absence of death.|Full analysis set, EGFR M+ patients who had taken at least 1 dose of gefitinib||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827286|NCT01203917|Other Pre-specified|Progression - Free Survival (PFS) (Independent Central Review)|PFS was defined as the time from the first dose of gefitinib study treatment until objective disease progression as defined by RECIST 1.1 (≥20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions from minimum, clinically significant progression in non-target lesions or the presence of a new lesion) or death (by any cause in the absence of progression). Progression is based on measurements of scans by central review.|Scans taken at baseline and then follow up assessments taken every 6 weeks until progression, or last evaluable assessment in the absence of progression, assessed up to 23 months|Full analysis set, EGFR M+ patients who had taken at least 1 dose of gefitinib||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827287|NCT01203917|Secondary|Progression - Free Survival (PFS) (Investigator)|PFS was defined as the time from the first dose of gefitinib study treatment until objective disease progression as defined by RECIST 1.1 (≥20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions from minimum, clinically significant progression in non-target lesions or the presence of a new lesion) or death (by any cause in the absence of progression). Progression is based on measurements made at site by investigator.|Scans taken at baseline and then follow up assessments taken every 6 weeks until progression, or last evaluable assessment in the absence of progression, assessed up to 23 months|Full analysis set, EGFR M+ patients who had taken at least 1 dose of gefitinib||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827288|NCT01203917|Other Pre-specified|Objective Response Rate (ORR) (Independent Central Review))|% of patients in the Full analysis set who have a complete response [CR] or partial response [PR] confirmed by repeat imaging at least 4 weeks later with no evidence of progression between confirmation visits (as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1)). CR: disappearance of all target lesions (TLs) & non-target lesions (NTLs). PR: >= 30% decrease in the sum of diameters compared to baseline (with no evidence of progression) and the NTLs are at least stable with no evidence of new lesions. Outcome is based on measurements of scans by central review.|Scans taken at baseline and then follow up assessments taken every 6 weeks until progression, or last evaluable assessment in the absence of progression, assessed up to 23 months|Full analysis set, EGFR M+ patients who had taken at least 1 dose of gefitinib||Percentage of Participants|||Number
827289|NCT01203917|Other Pre-specified|Disease Control Rate (DCR) (Independent Central Review)|DCR is calculated as the % of the FAS patient population with a best visit response of CR, PR (a visit response of CR or PR which is confirmed at least 4 weeks later) or stable disease (SD). SD is defined as no evidence of CR, PR or progression and must have occurred at a minimum of 6 weeks after first dose of study treatment. (progression is defined as ≥20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions from minimum; clinically significant progression in non-target lesions; the presence of a new lesion or death). Outcome is based on measurements of scans by central review.|Scans taken at baseline and then follow up assessments taken every 6 weeks until progression, or last evaluable assessment in the absence of progression, assessed up to 23 months|Full analysis set, EGFR M+ patients who had taken at least 1 dose of gefitinib||Percentage of Participants|||Number
827290|NCT01203917|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR) (Investigator)|DCR is calculated as the % of the FAS patient population with a best visit response of CR, PR (a visit response of CR or PR which is confirmed at least 4 weeks later) or stable disease (SD). SD is defined as no evidence of CR, PR or progression and must have occurred at a minimum of 6 weeks after first dose of study treatment. (progression is defined as ≥20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions from minimum; clinically significant progression in non-target lesions; the presence of a new lesion or death). Outcome is based on measurements made at site by investigator.|Scans taken at baseline and then follow up assessments taken every 6 weeks until progression, or last evaluable assessment in the absence of progression, assessed up to 23 months|Full analysis set, EGFR M+ patients who had taken at least 1 dose of gefitinib||Percentage of Participants|||Number
827291|NCT01203917|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) (Investigator)|% of patients in the Full analysis set who have a complete response [CR] or partial response [PR] confirmed by repeat imaging at least 4 weeks later with no evidence of progression between confirmation visits (as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1)). CR: disappearance of all target lesions (TLs) & non-target lesions (NTLs). PR: >= 30% decrease in the sum of diameters compared to baseline (with no evidence of progression) and the NTLs are at least stable with no evidence of new lesions. Outcome is based on measurements made at site by investigator.|Scans taken at baseline and then follow up assessments taken every 6 weeks until progression, or last evaluable assessment in the absence of progression, assessed up to 23 months|Full analysis set, EGFR M+ patients who had taken at least 1 dose of gefitinib||Percentage of Participants|||Number
827293|NCT01203930|Secondary|Changes in Potential Pharmacodynamic Markers of Drug Activity in Plasma and Whole Blood|"Changes in potential pharmacodynamic markers of drug activity will include assessments of chemokine and cytokine concentrations, effects on the activity of PI3K and related pathways, and effect on cell migration and other functional outcomes. This endpoint will be assessed at the following time points:
Idelalisib+Rituximab (Cohort 1): Predose and 1.5 hour postdose on Day 1 and predose on Days 15, 29, 57, 113, and 169
Idelalisib (Cohort 2): Predose on Days 1, 29, 57, 141"|Up to 169 days|The collection of plasma samples for pharmacodynamic (PD) analysis in this study was planned prior to the availability of results from an identical PD analysis in another idelalisib study with a larger sample size (n = 176 unique subjects with 2085 longitudinal plasma samples). Therefore, PD analysis was not performed in this study (n = 41).|||||
827294|NCT01203930|Secondary|Idelalisib Plasma Concentrations (Cohort 2)||Predose and 1.5 hours postdose at Weeks 0 and 4 and predose at Weeks 8 and 20|PK Analysis Set: participants in the ITT Analysis Set from Cohort 2 who had the necessary baseline and on-study measurements to provide interpretable results for the specific parameters of interest.||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827295|NCT01203930|Secondary|Idelalisib Plasma Concentrations (Cohort 1)||Predose and 1.5 hours postdose at Weeks 0, 4, and 24|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set: participants in the ITT Analysis Set from Cohort 1 who had the necessary baseline and on-study measurements to provide interpretable results for the specific parameters of interest.||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827296|NCT01203930|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|"Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the interval from the first dose date of drug to the earlier of the first documentation of definitive disease progression or death from any cause.
Progression was defined using the Standardized IWCLL criteria as specifically modified for this study to consider the mechanism of action of idelalisib and similar drugs. The occurrence of any of the following events indicated progression:
Evidence of any new disease
Evidence of worsening of index lesions, spleen or liver, or non-index disease
Decrease in platelet count or hemoglobin that is attributable to CLL and is confirmed by bone marrow biopsy"|Up to 28 Months|ITT Analysis Set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827297|NCT01203930|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response (DOR) was defined as the interval from the first documentation of CR or PR to the earlier of the first documentation of disease progression or death from any cause.|Up to 28 Months|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set who achieved complete or partial response.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827298|NCT01203930|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in the Sum of the Product of the Greatest Perpendicular Diameters (SPD) of All Measurable Lesions||Baseline; Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, and 120|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||percent change||Full Range|Median
827299|NCT01203930|Secondary|Lymphadenopathy Response Rate|Lymphadenopathy response rate was defined as the percentage of participants with a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions while receiving study therapy.|Baseline and up to 28 Months|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with baseline measurable lymph nodes were analyzed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827300|NCT01203930|Secondary|Overall Safety of Idelalisib|The overall safety of idelalisib was assessed as the percentage of participants experiencing treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs; Serious AEs, Grade ≥ 3 AEs, AEs related to idelalisib, and AEs leading to discontinuation of idelalisib).|Up to 28 Months|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
827301|NCT01203930|Primary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|"ORR was assessed based on standardized International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (IWCLL) criteria as specifically modified for this study to reflect current recommendations which consider the mechanism of action of idelalisib and similar drugs, and was defined as the proportion of participants achieving a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) as assessed by the investigator. Based on the CLL response definition in the protocol (modified Hallek 2008), the parameters of lymphadenopathy, liver and/or spleen size, constitutional symptoms, polymorphonuclear leukocytes, circulating clonal B-lymphocytes, platelet count, hemoglobin, and marrow were assessed.
CR: meeting all defined criteria
PR: meeting at least 2 of the criteria of circulating lymphocytes, lymphadenopathy, liver, spleen, or bone marrow (or only lymphadenopathy if liver and spleen normal at baseline) and at least 1 of the criteria for polymorphonuclear leukocytes, platelet count, or hemoglobin."|Up to 28 Months|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Analysis Set: participants who received at least 1 dose of idelalisib.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827302|NCT01197326|Secondary|Respiration Rate Impact on RRT Calls|Proportion of calls secondary to abnormal respiratory vital signs. Respiration Rate is considered to be one of the main early indicators of deterioration.|6 months|||percentage of calls|||Number
827303|NCT01197326|Primary|Survival|Survival at the end of the RRT call (time when the RRT team left the patient, average duration of calls around 25 min)|6 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
827304|NCT01197417|Secondary|Hospital Length of Stay||Start of first study drug infusion to actual hospital discharge|||Hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827305|NCT01197417|Secondary|Development of Acute Chest Syndrome (ACS)||Patients will be monitored daily, on average, during their length of stay until discharge, up to 10 days post enrollment|||Paricipants|||Number
827306|NCT01197417|Secondary|Rehospitalization||Rehospitalization will be measured at 7 days post discharge and at the follow-up visit (on average, 30 days post discharge)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug who had known rehospitalization status within 7 days||Participant|||Number
827307|NCT01197417|Secondary|Warm Sensation Associated With Study Drug Infusion|Patient spontaneously reported feelings of warmth during any study drug infusion.|Patient-reported warm sensation upon infusion will be monitored every 8 hours, concurrent with each infusion, and for 20-30 minutes after infusion completion, until discharge, up to 2 days post enrollment|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participant|||Number
827308|NCT01197417|Secondary|Hypotension Associated With Infusion|For each study drug infusion, systolic blood pressure (SBP) was measured just prior to the start of the infusion and again every 10 minutes until 30 minutes until the end of the infusion. Hypotension was defined as a greater than 20% reduction in SBP relative to corresponding baseline measurement for any study drug infusion.|Blood pressure will be monitored every 8 hours, concurrent with each infusion, and for 20-30 minutes after infusion completion, until discharge, up to 2 days post enrollment|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Participant|||Number
827309|NCT01197417|Secondary|Number of Morphine Equivalents Per Kilogram of Body Weight Used During Hospitalization||Total morphine equivalents used during the hospitalization will be recorded on the day of discharge, up to 10 days post enrollment|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug and who did not withdraw from data collection prior to either hospital discharge or 12 hours after last intravenous opioid.||mg Morphine/kg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827310|NCT01197417|Primary|Hospital Length of Stay (Hours)||From the time of the start of first study med infusion until hospital discharge or 12 hours after the last IV opioid, whichever occurs first, up to 10 days post enrollment|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug and who did not withdraw from data collection prior to outcome||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827311|NCT01197495|Secondary|Duration Effect of Treatment on Lip Fullness|Duration of treatment effect on lip fullness is assessed by the blinded Evaluating Investigator as ≥1-point Improvement from baseline in overall lip fullness of the eligible lip at each visit.|Month 1, Month 3, Month 6, Month 7.5, Month 9, Month 10.5, Month 12|Modified Intent-to-Treat: all treated subjects with data at the designated time point||% of Pts Retaining ≥1-point Improvement||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827312|NCT01197495|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Their Personal Treatment Goal of Overall Lip Fullness|Subjects assessed their personal treatment goal of overall lip fullness as 'achieved' or 'not achieved.'|Baseline, Month 3|Treated subjects in the Treatment group||Percentage of Subjects|||Number
827313|NCT01197495|Secondary|Percentage of Oral Commissures With ≥1-Point Improvement on the Oral Commissures Severity (OCS) Scale|Subject's right and left oral commissures are assessed compared to baseline using the validated OCS Scale. Scores range from 0=none (best) to 3=severe (worst).|Baseline, Month 3|Subjects treated for OCS at the designated time points||Percentage of Oral Commissures|Participants||Number
827314|NCT01197495|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With ≥1-Point Improvement on the Perioral Line (POL) Severity Scale|Subject's upper lip perioral lines are assessed compared to baseline using the 4-point validated POL Severity Scale. Scores range from 0=None (best) to 3=Severe (worst).|Baseline, Month 3|Subjects treated for POL at the designated time points||Percentage of Subjects|||Number
827315|NCT01197495|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With ≥1-Point Improvement on the Investigator Assessed 5-point Lip Fullness Scale 2 (LFS2)|Overall lip fullness is assessed by the blinded Evaluating Investigator compared to baseline using the 5-point LFS2. Scores range from 1=minimal improvement to 5=very marked improvement.|Baseline, Month 3|Modified Intent-to-Treat: all treated subjects with data at the designated time point||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827316|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in EuroQol - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A self-assessment questionnaire that provides 2 measures of health status. The EQ-5D index score is a weighted linear combination over 5 dimensions of health status. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3, and an equation is used to calculate the EQ-5D index score. The EQ-5D index score can range from possible negative values to a maximum of 1.0. The EQ-VAS is a visual analog scale with a range of 0 to 100. For both variables, a higher score indicates a better health state.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827317|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q LES-Q-SF) Item 16|The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form) measures the patient’s satisfaction with medication and overall quality of life. The 16th item is a global rating of overall life satisfaction and contentment. Higher scores are indicative of greater enjoyment or satisfaction in each domain.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827318|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q LES-Q-SF) Item 15|The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form) measures the patient’s satisfaction with medication and overall quality of life. The 15th item queries respondents’ satisfaction with the medication they are taking. Higher scores are indicative of greater enjoyment or satisfaction in each domain.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827319|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in Overall Quality of Life and Satisfaction From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) by Assessing the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) % Maximum Total Score|The Q-LES-Q-SF (Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form) total score is derived by summing item scores 1 to 14. Higher scores are indicative of greater enjoyment or satisfaction in each domain. The Q-LES-Q-SF % maximum total score is calculated as 100% × (Q-LES-Q-SF total score – 14) / 56, and can range from 0% to 100%.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827320|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Family Life/Home Responsibilities Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the SDS family life/home responsibilities domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828223|NCT01215279|Secondary|Serum Amyloid-A (SAA) Concentration in Plasma at Baseline|Baseline = Day 1 = Visit 2|Day 1|||ng/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
827321|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Social Life Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the SDS social life domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827322|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by SDS Work/School Domain Score|A 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The 3 inter-correlated domains are school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities. The numerical rating for the work/school domain score is 0- 10, where 10 is considered to be 'highly impaired'.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827323|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score|Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) is 5-item, self-administered scale that measures the extent a patient is impaired by their disease. Higher scores indicate more severe impairment. The SDS total score is calculated as the sum of the score for the 3 inter-correlated domains (school/work, social life, and family life/home responsibilities) and ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired).|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827324|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 14|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 14|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827325|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 12|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827326|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 10|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 10|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827327|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in MADRS Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to Week 9|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to Week 9|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827328|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) Total Score From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A 14-item clinician-administered scale for the evaluation of anxiety symptoms. Each HAM-A item is rated on a 0 to 4 scale. Higher HAM-A scores indicate higher levels of anxiety.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827329|NCT01197508|Secondary|Response in the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Defined as CGI-I Rating of “Very Much Improved” or “Much Improved” From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A 3-part, clinician-administered scale that rates the improvement or worsening of the patient’s illness from randomization (baseline). Each item is scored on a 1 to 7 scale. CGI-I scores >4 indicate worsening, while scores <4 indicate improvement.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
827330|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in the Clinician-rated Global Outcome of Severity as Measured by the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Score From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16)|A 3-part, clinician-administered scale that rates the improvement or worsening of the patient’s illness from randomization (baseline). Each item is scored on a 1 to 7 scale. Higher CGI-S scores indicate greater illness severity.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828224|NCT01215279|Secondary|CCL2 Concentration in Plasma at End of Treatment|End of treatment = 4 weeks = Visit 6|week 4|||pg/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
827331|NCT01197508|Secondary|Change in Depressive Symptoms From Randomization (Week 8) to End of Treatment (Week 16) as Measured by Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-17 Items (HAMD-17) Total Score|A 17-item, clinician-rated scale that assesses depressive symptoms. The HAMD-17 consists of 17 symptoms, each of which is rated from 0 to 2 or 0 to 4, where 0 is none/absent. The HAMD-17 total score is calculated as the sum of the 17 individual symptom scores; the total score can range from 0 to 52. Higher HAMD-17 scores indicate more severe depression.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827332|NCT01197508|Secondary|Sustained Remission, Defined as a MADRS Total Score of ≤8 at Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a MADRS total score of ≤8 at Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16)was calculated.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Week 12, Week 14, Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
827333|NCT01197508|Secondary|Sustained Response, Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score and a MADRS Total Score of ≤12 at Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score and a MADRS total score of ≤12 at Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16); Week 12, Week 14, and Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of patients analyzed|||Number
827334|NCT01197508|Secondary|Early and Sustained Response, Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score and a MADRS Total Score of ≤12 at Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score and a MADRS total score of ≤12 at Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16); Week 10, Week 12, Week 14, and Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
827335|NCT01197508|Secondary|Remission in Depressive Symptoms of MDD, Defined as MADRS Total Score of ≤8 at End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a MADRS total score of ≤8 at end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Week 16|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
827336|NCT01197508|Secondary|Response in Depressive Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), Defined as a ≥50% Reduction From Randomization (Week 8) in MADRS Total Score at End of Treatment (Week 16)|"The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction from randomization (Week 8) in MADRS total score at end of treatment (Week 16) was calculated.
MADRS is 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms."|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
827337|NCT01197508|Primary|Change in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score From Randomization to End of Treatment.|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each MADRS item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214 or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827338|NCT01197521|Secondary|SF-36 - Comparison of the Change in MCS From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|SF-36: 36 item Short Form Health Survey, a measure of health-related QoL. Scores for 8 sub-domains (Physical Functioning, Role-physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Function, Role-emotional & Mental Health) are derived & normalised to a scale of 0-100. Mental Component Scores (MCS) are derived by multiplying each of these 8 scores by a constant, summing them & standardising against a population with mean of 50, standard deviation of 10. Higher scores represent a better QoL. Mean changes from baseline score are presented at each visit as increases from baseline (defined as post-baseline minus baseline); larger changes indicate a better clinical condition. ANCOVA=analysis of covariance, BID=twice daily, DMARD=disease modifying antirheumatic drug, PO=orally, QD=once daily, QoL=quality of life.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827339|NCT01197521|Secondary|SF-36 - Comparison of the Change in PCS From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|SF-36: 36 item Short Form Health Survey, a measure of health-related QoL. Scores for 8 sub-domains (Physical Functioning, Role-physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Function, Role-emotional & Mental Health) are derived & normalised to a scale of 0-100. Physical Component Scores (PCS) are derived by multiplying each of these 8 scores by a constant, summing them & standardising against a population with mean of 50, standard deviation of 10. Higher scores represent a better QoL. Mean changes from baseline score are presented at each visit as increases from baseline (defined as post-baseline minus baseline); larger changes indicate a better clinical condition. ANCOVA=analysis of covariance, BID=twice daily, DMARD=disease modifying antirheumatic drug, PO=orally, QD=once daily, QoL=quality of life.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827340|NCT01197521|Secondary|HAQ-DI Response - Comparison of the Change (>=0.22) From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|HAQ-DI: Health Assessment Questionnaire – Disability Index, a measure of physical function. The HAQ-DI score is calculated by summing scores from 8 sub-categories (ie, scores for patient ability in dressing and grooming, rising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and common daily activities) and dividing by the number of categories completed. The HAQ-DI score takes values between 0 and 3, with higher score indicating greater disability. HAQ-DI response: a reduction from baseline in HAQ-DI greater than or equal to the minimally important difference (0.22). BID=twice daily, DMARD=disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR=odds ratio, PO=orally, QD=once a day.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827341|NCT01197521|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving DAS28-CRP EULAR Response at Week 24|Change in DAS28 was derived for each post baseline scheduled assessment and categorised using the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. BID=twice daily, CRP=C-reactive protein, DAS28=Disease Activity Score based on a 28-joint count, DMARD=disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR=odds ratio, PO=orally, QD=once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827342|NCT01197521|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving DAS28-CRP <2.6 at Week 24|DAS28-CRP: Disease Activity Score based on a count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (CRP) and the patient's own assessment. Scores can take any positive value with a lower value indicating a better clinical condition. A DAS28-CRP score of <2.6 is indicative of remission of RA symptoms. BID=twice daily, CRP=C-reactive protein, DMARD=Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR=odds ratio, PO=orally, QD=once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827343|NCT01197521|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving DAS28-CRP <2.6 at Week 12|DAS28-CRP: Disease Activity Score based on a count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (CRP) and the patient's own assessment. Scores can take any positive value with a lower value indicating a better clinical condition. A DAS28-CRP score of <2.6 is indicative of remission of RA symptoms. BID=twice daily, CRP=C-reactive protein, DMARD=Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR=odds ratio, PO=orally, QD=once a day.|12 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827344|NCT01197521|Secondary|ACRn - Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|ACRn: American College of Rheumatology index of RA improvement, based on smallest percentage improvement in the count of swollen joints (out of 28 joints), count of tender joints (out of 28 joints), or in blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) or the physician or patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. Scores are reported as a percentage improvement on a scale of -100 to +100, with larger values representing a better clinical outcome. BID=twice daily, CI=confidence interval, CRP=C-reactive protein, DMARD=Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO=orally, QD=once a day, RA=rheumatoid arthritis. Mean refers to change at Week 24.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage improvement from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
827345|NCT01197521|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR70 up to Week 24|ACR70: American College of Rheumatology 70% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. BID=twice daily, CRP=C-reactive protein, DMARD=Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO=orally, QD=once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827346|NCT01197521|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR50 up to Week 24|ACR50: American College of Rheumatology 50% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. BID=twice daily, CRP=C-reactive protein, DMARD=Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO=orally, QD=once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827450|NCT01206582|Primary|Venous Plasma Heme-oxygenase 1 (HO1) Protein Concentration|HO1 protein concentration levels in plasma were assessed with a HO1 (human) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit.|baseline, day 3, day 7, day 56|Total number of subjects analyzed varied per time period due to discontinuations, subject and data availability. Subjects analyzed are presented per category as (n=hemin, albumin arms).||ng/mL||Standard Error|Mean
827347|NCT01197521|Secondary|ACR20 - Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR20, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 1|ACR20: American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. BID=twice daily, CRP=C-reactive protein, DMARD=Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO=orally.|1 week|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827348|NCT01197521|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 24 in mTSS, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo.|mTSS: modified total Sharp score, a measure of structural progression based upon X-rays. Hand and foot joints are scored for erosions and joint space narrowing and the results summed to give a value between 0 and 448. A higher value represents more serious progression of the disease. After disregarding ineligible records, patients with 2 or more non-missing values have had missing data imputed via linear extrapolation/interpolation methods. Patients with only 1 result have been excluded from the analysis. ANCOVA=analysis of covariance, BID=twice daily, DMARD=disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IP=investigational product, PO=orally, QD=once a day.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of IP. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment. Measurements at 2 timepoints are required in order for a patient to be included in the analysis; therefore patients with only 1 result have been excluded from the analysis population.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827349|NCT01197521|Primary|Proportion of Patients With ACR20 at Week 24, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo.|ACR20: American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. BID=twice daily, CRP=C-reactive protein, DMARD=disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO=orally, QD=once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827350|NCT01197534|Secondary|SF-36 - Comparison of the Change in MCS From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|SF-36: 36-item Short Form Health Survey, a measure of health related quality of life. Scores for 8 sub-domains (Physical Functioning, Role-Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Function, Role-Emotional and Mental Health) are derived and normalised to a scale of 0-100. Physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS) are derived by multiplying each of these 8 scores by a constant, summing them and standardising against a population with mean of 50+/- 10. Higher scores represent a better quality of life. Mean changes from baseline score are presented as increases from baseline (defined as post-baseline minus baseline); larger changes indicate a better clinical condition. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827351|NCT01197534|Secondary|SF-36 - Comparison of the Change in PCS From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|SF-36: 36-item Short Form Health Survey, a measure of health related quality of life. Scores for 8 sub-domains (Physical Functioning, Role-Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Function, Role-Emotional and Mental Health) are derived and normalised to a scale of 0-100. Physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS) are derived by multiplying each of these 8 scores by a constant, summing them and standardising against a population with mean of 50+/- 10. Higher scores represent a better quality of life. Mean changes from baseline score are presented as increases from baseline (defined as post-baseline minus baseline); larger changes indicate a better clinical condition. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827352|NCT01197534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 24 in mTSS, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|mTSS: modified total sharp score, a measure of structural progression based upon X-rays. Hand and foot joints are scored for erosions and joint space narrowing and the results summed to give a value between 0 and 448. A higher value represents more serious progression of the disease. After disregarding ineligible records, patients with 2 or more non-missing values have had missing data imputed via linear extrapolation/interpolation methods. Patients with only 1 result were excluded from the analysis. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, IP = investigational product, QD = once a day.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes patients who received at least 1 dose of IP. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. Measurements at 2 timepoints are required for a patient to be included in the analysis; therefore patients with only 1 result have been excluded from the analysis population.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827353|NCT01197534|Secondary|HAQ-DI Response - Comparison of the Change(>=0.22) From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|HAQ-DI: Health Assessment Questionnaire – Disability Index, a measure of physical function. The HAQ-DI score is then calculated by summing the category scores from 8 sub-categories (ie, scores for patient ability in dressing and grooming, rising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and common daily activities) and dividing by the number of categories completed. The HAQ-DI score takes values between 0 and 3, with a higher score indicating greater disability. The HAQ-DI response is a reduction from baseline in HAQ-DI score greater than or equal to the minimally important difference (0.22). BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR = odds ratio, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827451|NCT01206595|Secondary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events|All adverse events were to be recorded from the time of dosing through Day 8. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were to be recorded through Day 30.|Through 30 days postdose||||||
827354|NCT01197534|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving DAS28 EULAR Response at Week 24|Change in DAS28 was derived for each post baseline scheduled assessment and categorised using the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. BID = twice daily, DAS28 = Disease Activity Score based on a 28-joint count, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR=odds ratio, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827355|NCT01197534|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving DAS28-CRP <2.6 at Week 24, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|DAS28-CRP: Disease Activity Score based on a count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (CRP) and the patient's own assessment. Scores can take any positive value with a lower value indicating a better clinical condition. A DAS28-CRP score of <2.6 is indicative of remission of RA symptoms. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR=odds ratio, PO = orally, QD=once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827356|NCT01197534|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving DAS28-CRP <2.6 at Week 12, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|DAS28-CRP: Disease Activity Score based on a count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (CRP) and the patient's own assessment. Scores can take any positive value with a lower value indicating a better clinical condition. A DAS28-CRP score of <2.6 is indicative of remission of RA symptoms. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR = odds ratio, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|12 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827357|NCT01197534|Secondary|ACRn - Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|ACRn: American College of Rheumatology index of RA improvement, based on smallest percentage improvement in the count of swollen joints (out of 28 joints), count of tender joints (out of 28 joints), or in blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) or the physician or patient’s own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. Scores are reported as a percentage improvement on a scale of -100 to +100, with larger values representing a better clinical outcome. BID = twice daily, CI = confidence interval, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO = orally, QD = once a day. Mean refers to change at Week 24.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage improvement from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
827358|NCT01197534|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR70, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|ACR70: American College of Rheumatology 70% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient’s own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827359|NCT01197534|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR50, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|ACR50: American College of Rheumatology 50% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient’s own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827360|NCT01197534|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR20, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 1|ACR20: American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient’s own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|1 week|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827361|NCT01197534|Primary|Proportion of Patients With ACR20 at Week 24, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|ACR20: American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient’s own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827362|NCT01197547|Secondary|Serious Adverse Device Effect (SADE)|A secondary endpoint of the Genesys HTA Post Approval Study is to assess Serious Adverse Device Effects. Per the approved protocol, an SADE is an adverse device effect resulting in any of the consequences characteristic of a serious adverse event, or that might have led to any of these consequences if suitable action had not been taken or intervention had not been made, or if circumstances had been less opportune.|Day 1|992 - Intent-To-Treat (ITT) population||number of participants|participants||Number
827363|NCT01197547|Secondary|Technical Malfunctions|A secondary endpoint of the Genesys HTA Post Approval Study is to assess technical complaints (i.e. disposable and hardware issues). Technical complaints are issues related to system components encountered during the procedure such as error messages, problems with the connection, power, early incomplete procedure terminations, or display/user interface, or damage to the unit.|Day 1|992 patients = ITT population||percent of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827364|NCT01197547|Primary|Burn Rate||Day 1|||participants|||Number
827365|NCT01197560|Secondary|Stage 2: Health Related Quality of Life for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Patients|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL Questionnaire for Patients with Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-item oncology-specific questionnaire developed to assess the quality of life of cancer patients. The descriptive system EQ-5D is a generic questionnaire consisting of 3 levels within each of the 5 domains. It’s is a standardized instrument for use as a measure of health outcome and provides a simple descriptive profile and a single index value for health status||According to the Stage 1 results as assessed by the independent response adjudication committee (IRAC), neither subtype met the pre specified requirement to be further studied in Stage 2. Study terminated after Stage 1 completed and before Stage 2 started.|||||
827366|NCT01197560|Secondary|Stage 2: Time to Progression for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Participants|Time to progression is defined as the time from the start of study drug therapy to the first documentation of disease progression||According to the Stage 1 results as assessed by the independent response adjudication committee (IRAC), neither subtype met the pre specified requirement to be further studied in Stage 2. Study terminated after Stage 1 completed and before Stage 2 started.|||||
827367|NCT01197560|Secondary|Stage 2: Overall Response Rate for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Patients With a Duration of Response Lasting ≥ 16 Weeks|"Response was defined as participants with a complete response (CR), unconfirmed complete response (CRu) or partial response (PR), based on IWG Response Criteria for NHL (Cheson1999) as evaluated by the Independent Response Assessment Committee (IRAC).
Complete Response (CR) is a complete disappearance of all disease with the exception of nodes. No new lesions. Previously enlarged organs must have regressed and not be palpable. Bone marrow(BM) must be negative if positive at baseline. Normalization of markers.
CR Unconfirmed (CRU) does not qualify for CR above, due to a residual nodal mass or an indeterminate BM.
Partial Response (PR) is a 50% decrease in the sum of the products of diameters (SPD) for up to 6 identified dominant lesions, including spleenic and hepatic nodules from baseline. No new lesions and no increase in the size of liver, spleen or other nodes"||According to the Stage 1 results as assessed by the independent response adjudication committee (IRAC), neither subtype met the pre specified requirement to be further studied in Stage 2. Study terminated after Stage 1 completed and before Stage 2 started.|||||
827368|NCT01197560|Secondary|Stage 2: Duration of Complete Response for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Participants|Duration of Complete Response was to be calculated for complete responders as the time of from documented initial complete response (either CR or CRu) until documented disease progression determined by CT or MRI scan, or death, whichever occurs earlier.||According to the Stage 1 results as assessed by the independent response adjudication committee (IRAC), neither subtype met the pre specified requirement to be further studied in Stage 2. Study terminated after Stage 1 completed and before Stage 2 started.|||||
827369|NCT01197560|Secondary|Stage 2: Overall Survival (OS) for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Participants|Overall Survival (OS) is defined as the time from randomization until death due to any cause.||According to the Stage 1 results as assessed by the independent response adjudication committee (IRAC), neither subtype met the pre specified requirement to be further studied in Stage 2. Study terminated after Stage 1 completed and before Stage 2 started.|||||
827370|NCT01197560|Secondary|Stage 2: Duration of Overall Response for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Participants|Length of time of overall response (Complete Response + Complete Response unconfirmed + Partial Response) was to be calculated for responders as the time from documented initial response (either CR, CRu, or PR) until documented disease progression determined by CT or MRI scan, or death, whichever occurs earlier.|Approximately 3.5 years|According to the Stage 1 results as assessed by the independent response adjudication committee (IRAC), neither subtype met the pre specified requirement to be further studied in Stage 2. Study terminated after Stage 1 completed and before Stage 2 started.|||||
827371|NCT01197560|Secondary|Stage 2: Overall Response Rate for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Participants|"Response was defined as participants with a complete response (CR), unconfirmed complete response (CRu) or partial response (PR), based on IWG 1999 Response Criteria for NHL (Cheson1999) as evaluated by the Independent Response Assessment Committee (IRAC).
Complete Response (CR) is a complete disappearance of all disease with the exception of nodes. No new lesions. Previously enlarged organs must have regressed and not be palpable. Bone marrow(BM) must be negative if positive at baseline. Normalization of markers.
CR Unconfirmed (CRU) does not qualify for CR above, due to a residual nodal mass or an indeterminate BM.
Partial Response (PR) is a 50% decrease in the sum of the products of diameters (SPD) for up to 6 identified dominant lesions, including spleenic and hepatic nodules from baseline. No new lesions and no increase in the size of liver, spleen or other nodes"||According to the Stage 1 results as assessed by the independent response adjudication committee (IRAC), neither subtype met the pre specified requirement to be further studied in Stage 2. Study terminated after Stage 1 completed and before Stage 2 started.|||||
827372|NCT01197560|Secondary|Stage 2: Complete Response Rate for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Participants|"Complete Response Rate (CR + CRu rate) was to be calculated as the proportion of participants achieving a CR or CRu using 1999 IWG Response Criteria, (Cheson, 1999).
CR: Complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease, disappearance of any disease-related symptoms, and normalization of biochemical abnormalities.
Cru: Criteria for CR above but with 1 or more of the following:
A residual lymph node mass > 1.5 cm in greatest transverse diameter that has regressed by more than 75% in the sum of the products of diameters (SPD) Indeterminate bone marrow (increased number or size of aggregates without cytologic or architectural atypia)."||According to the Stage 1 results as assessed by the independent response adjudication committee (IRAC), neither subtype met the pre specified requirement to be further studied in Stage 2. Study terminated after Stage 1 completed and before Stage 2 started.|||||
827373|NCT01197560|Primary|Stage 2: Progression-free Survival for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Participants|Number of participants who survive without progressing based on the International Working Group Response Criteria [IWG].||According to the Stage 1 results as assessed by the independent response adjudication committee (IRAC), neither subtype met the pre-specified requirement to be further studied in Stage 2. Study terminated after Stage 1 completed and before Stage 2 started.|||||
827452|NCT01206595|Primary|Time to First Use of Supplemental Pain Medication Postoperatively for Surgical Pain|The primary efficacy endpoint was the time to first use of supplemental pain medication (opioid or non-opioid) postoperatively for surgical pain.|Through 96 hours postdose|||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827374|NCT01197560|Primary|Stage 1: Percentage of Participants With an Overall Response Rate (ORR) According to the International Working Group (IWG) Response Criteria for Non Hodgkin's Lymphoma (NHL), Cheson 1999.|"Response was defined as participants with a complete response (CR), unconfirmed complete response (CRu) or partial response (PR), based on IWG 1999 Response Criteria for NHL as evaluated by the Independent Response Adjudication Committee (IRAC).
Complete Response (CR) is a complete disappearance of all disease with the exception of nodes. No new lesions. Previously enlarged organs must have regressed and not be palpable. Bone marrow(BM) must be negative if positive at baseline. Normalization of markers.
CR Unconfirmed (CRU) does not qualify for CR above, due to a residual nodal mass or an indeterminate BM.
Partial Response (PR) is a 50% decrease in the sum of the products of diameters (SPD) for up to 6 identified dominant lesions, including spleenic and hepatic nodules from baseline. No new lesions and no increase in the size of liver, spleen or other nodes"|From Sept 2010 to the data cut-off of 4 July 2013; when all participants had reached the scheduled 16-week assessment or had progressed/died before the scheduled 16-week assessment). Median follow-up time was 6.7 and 4.7 months in each arm respectively|The Modified Intent to Treat (mITT ) population was defined as all participants randomized who had a DLBCL diagnosis and either Germinal Center B-cell subtype (GCB) or non-GCB subtype confirmed by Central Pathology, and who received at least one dose of study drug (lenalidomide or Investigator’s choice).||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827375|NCT01197755|Secondary|SF-36 - Comparison of the Change in MCS From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|SF-36: 36 item short form health survey, as a measure of health-related quality of life. The SF-36 scores for 8 sub-domains (Physical Functioning, Role-Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Function, Role-Emotional and Mental Health) are derived and normalised to a scale of 0 to 100. The physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS) are derived by multiplying each of these 8 scores by a constant, summing them and standardising against a population with a mean of 50, standard deviation of 10. A higher score represents a better quality of life. Mean changes from baseline score are presented as increases from baseline (defined as post-baseline minus baseline); larger changes indicate a better clinical condition. Mean refers to change in score at Week 24. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, PO = orally, QD = once daily.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827376|NCT01197755|Secondary|SF-36 - Comparison of the Change in PCS From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|SF-36: 36 item short form health survey, as a measure of health-related quality of life. Scores for 8 sub-domains (Physical Functioning, Role-Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Function, Role-Emotional and Mental Health) are derived and normalised to a scale of 0 to 100. The physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS) are derived by multiplying each of these 8 scores by a constant, summing them and standardising against a population with a mean of 50, standard deviation of 10. A higher score represents a better quality of life. Mean changes from baseline score are presented as increases from baseline (defined as post-baseline minus baseline); larger changes indicate a better clinical condition. Mean refers to change in scores at Week 24. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, PO = orally, QD = once daily|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827377|NCT01197755|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 24 in mTSS Score, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|mTSS: modified total sharp score, a measure of structural progression based upon X-rays. Hand and foot joints are scored for eroisions and joint space narrowing and the results summed to give a value between 0 and 488. A higher value represents more serious progression of the disease. After disregarding ineligible records, patients with 2 or more non-missing values had missing data imputed via linear extrapolation/interpolation methods. Patients with only 1 result were excluded from the analysis. ANCOVA = Analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, IP = investigational product, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes patients who received at least 1 dose of IP. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. Measurements at 2 timepoints are required for a patient to be included in the analysis; therefore patients with only 1 result have been excluded from the analysis population.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827378|NCT01197755|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With a HAQ-DI Response at Week 24 - Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|HAQ-DI: Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index, a measure of physical function. The HAQ-DI score is calculated by summing the category scores from 8 sub-categories (ie, scores for patient ability in dressing and grooming, rising, eating, walking, hygeine, reach, grip and common daily activities) and dividing by the number of categories completed. The HAQ-DI score takes values between 0 and 3, with a higher score indicating greater disability. A HAQ-DI response is a reduction from baseline in HAQ-DI greater than or equal to the minimally important difference (0.22). BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR = odds ratio, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827379|NCT01197755|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving DAS28-CRP EULAR Response at Week 24, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|Change from baseline in DAS28-CRP at Week 24 was categorised using the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DAS28 = Disease Activity Score based on a 28-joint count, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR = odds ratio, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827419|NCT01206140|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival was estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan and Meier. Progression wasl evaluated in this study using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions, or death.|Until disease progression or death, up to 4.5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827380|NCT01197755|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving DAS28-CRP <=3.2 at Week 12, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|DAS28-CRP: Disease Activity Score based on a count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (CRP) and the patients' own assessment. Scores can take any positive value with a lower value indicating a better clinical condition. A DAS28-CRP score of <=3.2 indicates low disease activity. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR = odds ratio, PO = orally, QD = once daily.|12 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827381|NCT01197755|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving DAS28-CRP <2.6 at Week 24, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|DAS28-CRP: Disease Activity Score based on a count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (CRP) and the patients' own assessment. Scores can take any positive value with a lower value indicating a better clinical condition. A DAS28-CRP score of <2.6 is indicative of remission of RA symptoms. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR = odds ratio, PO = orally, QD = once daily.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827382|NCT01197755|Secondary|ACRn - Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 24|ACRn: American College of Rheumatology index of RA improvement, based on smallest percentage improvement in the count of swollen joints (out of 28 joints), count of tender joints (out of 28 joints), or in blood test measures of inflammation (such as C-Reactive Protein) or the physician or patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. Scores are reported as a percentage improvement on a scale of -100 to +100, with larger values representing a better clinical outcome. Mean refers to change at Week 24. BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO = orally, QD = once a day.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage improvement from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
827383|NCT01197755|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR70 at Week 24, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|ACR70: American College of Rheumatology 70% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as C-Reactive Protein) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO = orally, QD = once daily.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827384|NCT01197755|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR50 at Week 24, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|ACR50: American College of Rheumatology 50% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as C-Reactive Protein) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO = orally, QD = once daily.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827385|NCT01197755|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR20 at Week 1, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|ACR20: American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as C-Reactive Protein) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO = orally, QD = once daily.|1 week|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827386|NCT01197755|Primary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR20 at Week 24, Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo|ACR20: American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as C-Reactive Protein) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, PO = orally, QD = once daily.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.||Percentage of responders|||Number
827387|NCT01197794|Secondary|Total Reliever Medication Use|Reliever medication use (number of inhalations), measured in the morning and evening. Total reliever medication use is calculated by taking the sum of the number of daytime and evening inhalations of reliever medication. Change from baseline: treatment period average minus baseline.|Twelve week treatment period|The full analysis set consist of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and contributed sufficient data for at least the primary or secondary efficacy endpoint||Number of inhalations||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827388|NCT01197794|Secondary|Asthma Symptom Score|Asthma symptoms, measured in the morning and evening, based on a scale from 0-3 with higher scores indicating more severe asthma symptoms. Total asthma symptom score (0-6) is calculated by taking the sum of the morning and evening scores. Change from baseline: treatment period average minus baseline.|Twelve week treatment period|The full analysis set consist of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and contributed sufficient data for at least the primary or secondary efficacy endpoint||Score on scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827389|NCT01197794|Secondary|Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ(S))|The AQLQ(S) consists of 32 questions, each assessed on a scale from 1-7, with higher values indicating better health-related quality of life. Overall scores are calculated from the means of the individual scores. The minimal important difference is a change in score of 0.5. Change from baseline: treatment period average minus baseline.|Twelve week treatment period|The full analysis set consist of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and contributed sufficient data for at least the primary or secondary efficacy endpoint||Score on scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827390|NCT01197794|Secondary|Number of Participants With Well-controlled Asthma (ACQ5<=0.75)|The ACQ5 consists of 5 questions, each assessed on a scale from 0-6, where 0 represents good asthma control and 6 represents poor asthma control. The overall score is the mean of the responses. Well-controlled asthma is defined as ACQ5<=0.75 at the end of the 12-week treatment period.|Twelve week treatment period|The full analysis set consist of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and contributed sufficient data for at least the primary or secondary efficacy endpoint||Participants|||Number
827391|NCT01197794|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least One Treatment Failure|Treatment failure is defined as a clinical need for additional inhaled corticosteroid use as judged by the investigator based on evaluations at the clinic.|Twelve week treatment period|The full analysis set consist of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and contributed sufficient data for at least the primary or secondary efficacy endpoint||Participants|||Number
827392|NCT01197794|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least One Severe Asthma Exacerbation|Severe asthma exacerbation defined as deterioration in asthma leading to either hospitalization/emergency room treatment or oral glucocorticosteroid treatment for at least 3 days|Twelve week treatment period|The full analysis set consist of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and contributed sufficient data for at least the primary or secondary efficacy endpoint||Participants|||Number
827393|NCT01197794|Secondary|Adverse Events|Number of participants who had at least one adverse event during the randomized treatment period|Twelve week treatment period|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and from whom any data after randomization was available||Participants|||Number
827394|NCT01197794|Secondary|Asthma Control Questionnaire 5-item (ACQ5)|The ACQ5 consists of 5 questions, each assessed on a scale from 0-6, where 0 represents good asthma control and 6 represents poor asthma control. The overall score is the mean of the responses. The minimal important difference is defined as a change in score of 0.5. Change from baseline: treatment period average minus baseline.|Twelve week treatment period|The full analysis set consist of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and contributed sufficient data for at least the primary or secondary efficacy endpoint||Scores on scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827395|NCT01197794|Secondary|Morning and Evening PEF|Change from baseline: treatment period average minus baseline. Treatment period average defined as the mean of all available morning (evening) PEF during randomized treatment that occurred on or prior to treatment failure. Treatment failure defined as worsening asthma symptoms resulting in increased dose of inhaled corticosteroid.|Twelve week treatment period|The full analysis set consist of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and contributed sufficient data for at least the primary or secondary efficacy endpoint||Liters/minute||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827396|NCT01197794|Primary|Pre-bronchodilator FEV1 at the Clinic|Change from baseline: treatment period average minus baseline. Treatment period average defined as the mean of all available data during randomized treatment that occurred on or prior to treatment failure. Treatment failure defined as worsening asthma symptoms resulting in increased dose of inhaled corticosteroid.|Twelve week treatment period|The full analysis set consist of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and contributed sufficient data for at least the primary or secondary efficacy endpoint||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827397|NCT01197833|Primary|Absolute Change From Baseline in PA-V3 Score|The Patient Self-assessment of Visible Varicose Veins (PA-V3) instrument is a 5-point scale used by patients to evaluate the appearance of their visible varicose veins. On this paper questionnaire, the instructions included a diagram of the medial view of a leg with the area between the ankle and the groin circled. The patient was instructed to choose 1 of 5 response options that best described the appearance of the visible varicose veins of the leg that was treated in the study. The patient was instructed not to consider the appearance of the leg outside the circled area or of any spider veins. Possible responses ranged from “Not at all noticeable” (a score of 0) to “Extremely noticeable” (a score of 4)|PA-V3 measured at baseline and then at 8 weeks|||score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827398|NCT01197833|Primary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Independent Photography Review (IPR-V3 Score)|The Independent Photography Review – Visible Varicose Veins (IPR-V3) instrument is a 5-point scale used to assess the appearance of a patient’s visible varicose veins. At screening, the site clinician was instructed to review the appearance of the patient’s varicose veins in the medial section of each leg (a ‘live’ assessment), then select an IPR-V3 score (i.e., none=0, mild, moderate, severe or very severe=4) that best represented the appearance of the patient’s varicose veins. This assessment took into account the attributes caliber, dilatation, tortuosity, and extent and number of varicosities, and was used to determine patient eligibility. The site clinician used a set of reference photographs (2 example photographs for each score on the scale) to assist with assigning a score to the appearance of the patient’s visible varicose veins.|IPR-V3 measured at baseline and then at 8 weeks|||score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827399|NCT01203956|Secondary|Key Measures That Will be Used to Evaluate the Intervention(s)|The Epworth Sleepiness Scale will be used to evaluate sleepiness The Sleep Wake Activity Inventory will be used to evaluate sleepiness Daily diaries will be used to evaluate daily use of the device|2 weeks||||||
827400|NCT01203956|Primary|Apnea-hypopnea Index (AHI)|Number of apnea/hypopnea events per hour, measured by SmartLink component of device.|4 weeks|||events / hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
827401|NCT01204203|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall Survival is defined as the number of days from the day the subject started treatment to the day the subject experienced death or lost to follow-up.|Baseline up to 28 months|Participants with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma.||months||Full Range|Median
827402|NCT01204203|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|Progression Free Survival is defined as the number of days from the day the subject started treatment to the day the subject experienced evidence of disease progression, as determined by radiological or clinical progression.|Baseline up to 28 months|Participants with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma.||Months||Full Range|Median
827449|NCT01206582|Primary|Venous Monocyte HO1 Activity|HO1 activity in white blood cells was measured by an assay that measures bilirubin production as a marker of HO1 activity.|baseline, Day 3, Day 7, Day 56|Total number of subjects analyzed varied per time period due to discontinuations, subject and data availability. Subjects analyzed are presented per category as (n=hemin, albumin arms).||pmol bilirubin/mg/h||Standard Error|Mean
827403|NCT01204203|Primary|Tumor Response Rate Following Zoledronic Acid (Zometa)|The modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST 2004) will be used for target lesions and assessed by CT scans. Complete Response (CR) is the disappearance of target lesions; Partial Response (PR) is greater than or equal to 30% reduction in the total tumor measurement; Stable Disease (SD) is the absence of response or progression; and Progressive Disease (PD) is a 20% increase in the total tumor measurement over nadir value or the appearance of new lesions.|Baseline up to 28 months or until progressive disease or death|Participants with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma.||percentage of responders|||Number
827406|NCT01205828|Secondary|Biomarker Analysis|To evaluate biological correlation with response to ABT-888 and temozolomide, including evaluation of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) of 13q, decreased expression of or mutations in BRCA-1 or -2, and a select assortment of DNA repair genes.|6 months|Since the treatment showed no significant efficacy against HCC, therefore study of biomarker that predict responsiveness of the treatment was not carried out.|||||
827407|NCT01205828|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had Grade 3 or 4 Adverse Events|Record of all toxicities graded according to the NCI CTCAE version 3.0|6 months|grade 3 or 4 adverse events||participants|||Number
827408|NCT01205828|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|The number of months between a patient's enrollment and his/her disease progression|2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827409|NCT01205828|Secondary|Overall Survival|the number of months between a patient's enrollment and his/her date of death|2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827410|NCT01205828|Primary|Clinical Benefit Rate|complete response at any time + partial response at any time + stable disease after 8 weeks of treatment based on RECIST Criteria|8 weeks|||participants|||Number
827411|NCT01206101|Secondary|Glucose Level Variability And Hypoglycaemia Duration Derived From The Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (CGMS)|Change from baseline in glucose level variability and hypoglycaemia at baseline, weekly during liraglutide dose escalation, at 12 weeks pre-transplant, at 24 weeks post-transplant, 52 weeks post-transplant and 56 weeks (4 weeks after withdrawal of liraglutide or liraglutide placebo)|At 12 weeks pre-transplant, at 24 weeks post-transplant, 52 weeks post-transplant and 56 weeks (4 weeks after withdrawal of liraglutide or liraglutide placebo)|Full analysis set (FAS) – all randomised subjects who underwent one or more transplantations after randomisation. Due to the premature termination of the trial prior to islet cell transplantation in any randomised subject, no formal statistical analyses were performed.|||||
827412|NCT01206101|Secondary|Change in Islet Cell Yield During Culture|Change in islet cell yield from pre-culture to post-culture|From 0 hours pre-culture to 24 hours to 72 hours|Full analysis set (FAS) – all randomised subjects who underwent one or more transplantations after randomisation. Due to the premature termination of the trial prior to islet cell transplantation in any randomised subject, no formal statistical analyses were performed.|||||
827413|NCT01206101|Secondary|Proportion of Insulin-Independent Subjects|Proportion of insulin-independent subjects among all randomised subjects who had one or more transplantations after randomisation|At 52 weeks after initial transplantation|Full analysis set (FAS) – all randomised subjects who underwent one or more transplantations after randomisation. Due to the premature termination of the trial prior to islet cell transplantation in any randomised subject, no formal statistical analyses were performed.|||||
827414|NCT01206101|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With HbA1c Below Or Equal to 6.5% At Week 52 That Are Free From Severe Hypoglycaemic Events|Proportion of subjects with HbA1c below or equal to 6.5% at week 52 that were free from severe hypoglycaemic events|From week 0 to week 52 after initial transplantation|Full analysis set (FAS) – all randomised subjects who underwent one or more transplantations after randomisation. Due to the premature termination of the trial prior to islet cell transplantation in any randomised subject, no formal statistical analyses were performed.|||||
827415|NCT01206101|Secondary|Number of Hypoglycaemic Episodes|A hypoglycaemic episode was defined as treatment emergent if the onset of the episode was on or after the first day of exposure to randomised treatment and until the last day on randomised treatment. Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes were categorised either as minor (PG<3.1 mmol/L [56 mg/dL]) or severe (subject unable to treat himself/herself).|During week 0 to week 52|Full analysis set (FAS) – all randomised subjects who underwent one or more transplantations after randomisation. Due to the premature termination of the trial prior to islet cell transplantation in any randomised subject, no formal statistical analyses were performed.|||||
827416|NCT01206101|Primary|Proportion Of Insulin-independent Subjects After Receiving Only One (Single-Donor) Islet Cell Transplant|Proportion Of Insulin-independent Subjects After Receiving Only One (Single-Donor) Islet Cell Transplant.|At week 52 after initial transplantation|Full analysis set (FAS) – all randomised subjects who underwent one or more transplantations after randomisation. Due to the premature termination of the trial prior to islet cell transplantation in any randomised subject, no formal statistical analyses were performed.|||||
827417|NCT01206140|Secondary|4 -Month Progression-free Survival Rate.|Progression-free survival rate was calculated using the survival distribution function, and 95% confidence limits were calculated using the log-log transformation. Progression was defined using the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions, or death.|Four months|||percent of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827418|NCT01206140|Secondary|Number of Participants With Objective Response|Response evaluated using the Choi criteria. CR - disappearance of all lesions and no new lesions; PR - a decrease in size (the sum of longest diameters of target lesions as defined in RECIST) of 10% or more or a decrease in tumor density (HU) of 15% or more on CT and no new lesions and no obvious progression of nonmeasurable disease; SD - does not meet the criteria for CR, PR, or PD and no symptomatic deterioration attributed to tumor progression; PD - an increase in tumor size of 10% or more and does not meet criteria of PR by tumor density (HU) on CT or new lesions or new intratumoral nodules or increase in the size of the existing intratumoral nodules. Objective response = CR+PR.|Evaluated for response after every two cycles, up to 4.5 years.|||participants|||Number
827453|NCT01206608|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Adverse events were monitored through Day 8 and serious adverse events through Day 30.|Through 30 days postdose||||||
827420|NCT01206322|Primary|Perfusion Outcome: Right Insular Cortex Perfusion (ml/100g/Min/mmHg)|"To determine the acute effects of a single 40-IU dose of intranasal insulin vs. placebo on cognition and regional perfusion and vasoreactivity to CO2 challenge measured by 3-D continuous arterial spin labeling (CASL) MRI at 3 Tesla in the control and diabetic groups.
Cognitive outcome: Brief Visuospatial Spatial Memory test -Total Recall (unit T Score).
Perfusion outcome: Regional vasoreactivity (ml/100g/min/mmHg)."|Acute changes within 2 hours|||ml/100g/min/mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
827421|NCT01206322|Primary|Cognitive Outcome: Brief Visuospatial Spatial Memory Test -Total Recall (Unit T Score)|"To determine the acute effects of a single 40-IU dose of intranasal insulin vs. placebo on cognition and regional perfusion and vasoreactivity to CO2 challenge measured by 3-D continuous arterial spin labeling (CASL) MRI at 3 Tesla in the control and diabetic groups.
Cognitive outcome: Brief Visuospatial Spatial Memory test -Total Recall (unit T Score).
Perfusion outcome: Regional vasoreactivity (ml/100g/min/mmHg).
Each participant received a single dose of intranasal insulin (INI) or placebo on day 2 and a single dose dose of insulin or placebo on day 3 in a random order.
Acute effects on baseline perfusion, regional vasoreactivity and cognition were determined within 2 hours after administration of insulin or placebo."|Acute changes within 2 hours|||T-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
827422|NCT01206387|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (%BSA) Affected at Day 28|"Mean Change from Baseline in percent body surface area (%BSA) affected by Psoriasis
The Body Surface Area (BSA) is a numerical score used to measure the physician’s assessment of the percentage of the participant’s total BSA involved with psoriasis.
BSA = SQRT ((height (cm) X weight (kg))/3600) BSA is in m2, W is weight in kg, and H is height in cm. Total body Surface Area (BSA) in meters squared
For the %Body Surface Area Affected the Rule of Nine was be used.
Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area i.e., difference of base percent values [Percent Body Surface Area at 28 days - Percent Body Surface Area at Baseline]."|Baseline and day 28|Base on intention to treat. All participant with Mean Change from Baseline in %BSA affected at Day 28||percentage of body surface area affected||Standard Deviation|Mean
827423|NCT01206387|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Total Lesion Severity Scale (TLSS) (ITT)|"Mean Change from Baseline in Lesion Severity Scale-TLSS (ITT)
TLSS of psoriasis is a combined score based on physician assessment of disease severity for the Target Lesion assessed at baseline and at Day 28. The TLSS combined score included summary of individually scored induration (as 0=Clear or 1=Almost Clear, or 2=Mild, or 3=Moderate, or 4=Severe, or 5=Very Severe), erythema (as 0=Clear or 1=Almost Clear, or 2=Mild, or 3=Moderate, or 4=Severe, or 5=Very Severe), and scaling (as 0=Clear or 1=Almost Clear, or 2=Mild, or 3=Moderate, or 4=Severe, or 5=Very Severe). To be eligible for inclusion in the study, the combined score of all three signs for the Target Lesion must total at least 7 and the patient must have at least a score of 3=Moderate for plaque elevation
The first evaluation was for the change from baseline in TLSS, using a two-sided, α = 0.05 level of significance."|Baseline and day 28|Base on intention to treat. All participant with mean change from baseline in TLSS at Day 28||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827424|NCT01206387|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Physician Global Assessment (PGA) Score at Day 28 Using ITT.|"In the Physician Global Assessment of psoriasis is a score based on physician assessment of overall disease severity for all lesions assessed at baseline and at Day 28. The PGA score range: from 0 (Clear=No Psoriatic lesions, i.e. no plaque formation; no erythema, no induration, no scaling) to 5 (Very Severe=Coarse scaling with pronounced cracking and fissures. Erythema is dark red with induration. Plaques are markedly elevated with sharp and hard edges).
The first evaluation was for the change from baseline in PGA, using a two-sided, α = 0.05 level of significance. If superiority of the test product over its vehicle was demonstrated (p<0.05), then PGA change from baseline values was examined."|Baseline and day 28|All participants enrolled in this study were included in this intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Results are presented as observed||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827425|NCT01206387|Primary|Treatment Success|A patient is considered a Treatment Success for the Target Lesions if the target lesion has a score of 0 or 1 on the Target Lesion Severity Score (TLSS)for each of each of the three signs and symptoms (erythema, scaling and plaque elevation).|28 days|||participants|||Number
827426|NCT01206387|Primary|Clinical Success|A patient is considered a Clinical Success if the Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) is 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|28 days|Primary Efficacy Analysis at Day 28 Clinical Success (ITT)||participants|||Number
827427|NCT01206439|Secondary|Exercise Tolerance|Changes in exercise tolerance and time from baseline to 180 days.|Baseline to day 180.||||||
827428|NCT01206439|Primary|Change in Systolic and Diastolic Myocardial Function|Cannot report as only 1 patient was evaluated and data will not be able to remain anonymous.|Baseline to day 180|Insufficient data to analyze.|||||
827429|NCT01206452|Secondary|Inflammatory Cytokine Response to Ablation Procedure|Measure inflammatory marker levels, including IL-1, IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α, 24 hours post-ablation to assess interval response to steroid administration.|24 Hours after Ablation Procedure|||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
827430|NCT01206452|Secondary|Inflammatory Cytokine Response to Ablation Procedure|Measure inflammatory marker levels, including IL-1, IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α, immediately post-ablation in keeping with prior studies on the anti-inflammatory effects of steroids following cardiac surgery.|Immediately Post-Ablation Procedure|||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
827431|NCT01206452|Secondary|Number of Participants With Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence From 3 Months up to 6 Months|Number of AF recurrences between the two study groups as assessed by 1-month event monitor placed at 3 and 6 months post-ablation. Any episode of AF lasting greater than 30 seconds was counted as a recurrence.|From 3 months up to 6 months post-procedure|||Participants with AF recurrence|||Number
827432|NCT01206452|Secondary|Number of Participants With Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence From 0 Months up to 3 Months|Number of AF recurrences between the two study groups as assessed by inpatient telemetry in the immediate post-procedure period until discharge and 1-month event monitor placed at 3 months post-ablation. Any episode of AF lasting greater than 30 seconds was counted as a recurrence.|From 0 months up to 3 months post procedure|||Participants with AF recurrence|||Number
827433|NCT01206452|Primary|Number of Participants With Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence From 6 Months up to 12 Months|Number of AF recurrences between the two study groups as assessed by 1-month event monitor placed at 6 and 12 months post-ablation. Any episode of AF lasting greater than 30 seconds was counted as a recurrence.|From 6 months up to 12 months post-procedure|||Participants with AF recurrence|||Number
827434|NCT01206478|Secondary|Change in Non-communicating Children's Pain Checklist - Revised (NCCPC-R) Scores|Non-communicating Children’s Pain Checklist - Revised (NCCPC-R) used to measure outcome. The NCCPC-R is a 30 item measure intended to assess pain in children who are unable to speak because of cognitive or physical impairments. There are 7 sub-scales including vocal, social, facial, activity, body/limbs, physiological, and eating/sleeping. Each question has a potential score of 0 to 3. Scores are totaled for each sub-scale. Sub-scale scores are then added together for the Total Score. Total Scores can range from 0 to 90. The higher the score, the higher level of pain indicated by the child. This measure was completed by parents at week 0, week 10, and week 24.|baseline, 24 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827435|NCT01206478|Primary|% Calories Taken Orally|Percent Kilocalories (kcal) Obtained Orally. This measure was obtained using the 24 hour food recall, a standardized five-pass method developed by the US Department of Agriculture for use in national dietary surveillance. This measure has been widely used in several large trials and data suggest it is the most valid and reliable method of dietary assessment for children (20). The data were collected at week 0, week 10, and week 24 using standardized probes by highly trained research staff, and parents were presented with paper food models and measuring devices prior to interviews to reference during the recall. Recalls were analyzed with the Nutritional Data System for Research, version 2005; University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.|baseline, 24 weeks|||change in percent kcal obtained orally||Standard Deviation|Mean
827436|NCT01206517|Primary|Terminal Phase (Elimination) Half-life (t1/2) of Asenapine|Elimination t1/2 is the time it takes for the concentration of the drug in the body to decrease by half during the elimination phase.|Predose (0 hours) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 hours after the final asenapine dose (administered on Day 7 for Cohorts 1 and 2; on Day 8 for Cohorts 3b, 3c and 3d; and on Day 12 for Cohort 3a)|All participants administered asenapine with evaluable pharmacokinetic data. Two participants in Cohort 3a and one participant in Cohort 3c did not complete the study and are excluded from pharmacokinetic analysis.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
827437|NCT01206517|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 12 Hours Post Dose (AUC0-12) of Asenapine|AUC0-12 is the area under the plasma drug-concentration time curve calculated for the 12 hour interval after dosing.|Predose (0 hours) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12 hours after the final asenapine dose (administered on Day 7 for Cohorts 1 and 2; on Day 8 for Cohorts 3b, 3c and 3d; and on Day 12 for Cohort 3a)|All participants administered asenapine with evaluable pharmacokinetic data. Two participants in Cohort 3a and one participant in Cohort 3c did not complete the study and are excluded from pharmacokinetic analysis.||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827438|NCT01206517|Primary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Asenapine|tmax is the time from dosing to maximum plasma drug concentration levels.|Predose (0 hours) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 hours after the final asenapine dose (administered on Day 7 for Cohorts 1 and 2; on Day 8 for Cohorts 3b, 3c and 3d; and on Day 12 for Cohort 3a)|All participants administered asenapine with evaluable pharmacokinetic data. Two participants in Cohort 3a and one participant in Cohort 3c did not complete the study and are excluded from pharmacokinetic analysis.||hr||Full Range|Median
827439|NCT01206517|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Asenapine|Cmax is the peak plasma concentration following a dose of the study drug.|Predose (0 hours) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 hours after the final asenapine dose (administered on Day 7 for Cohorts 1 and 2; on Day 8 for Cohorts 3b, 3c and 3d; and on Day 12 for Cohort 3a)|All participants administered asenapine with evaluable pharmacokinetic data. Two participants in Cohort 3a and one participant in Cohort 3c did not complete the study and are excluded from pharmacokinetic analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827440|NCT01206582|Secondary|Leukocyte and Platelet Counts|Measured by complete blood count|baseline, Day 4, Day 7, Day 56|||number x 10^9 cells/L||Standard Error|Mean
827441|NCT01206582|Secondary|Erythrocyte Count|Measured by complete blood count|baseline, Day 4, Day 7, Day 56|||number x 10^12 erythrocytes/L||Standard Error|Mean
827442|NCT01206582|Secondary|Hemoglobin|Measured by complete blood count|baseline, Day 4, Day 7, Day 56|||g/dL||Standard Error|Mean
827443|NCT01206582|Secondary|Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (APTT)||baseline, Day 4, Day 7, Day 56|||Seconds||Standard Error|Mean
827444|NCT01206582|Secondary|Prothrombin Time||baseline, Day 4, Day 7, Day 56|||International Normalized Ratio (INR)||Standard Error|Mean
827445|NCT01206582|Secondary|Serum Creatinine||baseline, Day 4, Day 7, Day 56|||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
827446|NCT01206582|Secondary|Autonomic Functions|Subjects completed a standardized autonomic symptom questionnaire, the Composite Autonomic Severity Score (CASS) which consists of 2 subscores: cardiovagal (CASS-vag; 0-3) and adrenergic (CASS-adr;0-3), where 0, 1, 2, 3 represent non, mild, moderate, and severe dysfunction, respectively.|baseline, Day 56|Total number of subjects analyzed varied per time period due to discontinuations, subject and data availability. Subjects analyzed are presented per category as (n=hemin, albumin arms).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827447|NCT01206582|Secondary|Gastrointestinal Symptoms|Subjects recorded their GI symptoms every day in the validated Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) - Daily Diary. For each subject, the daily GCSI data were averaged per week. Components coded 0 (no symptoms) to 5 (very severe). GCSI total score is the average of 9 components from the nausea/vomiting, fullness/early satiety, and bloating subscores. These individual subscores are averages of 3,4, and 2 components, respectively. Subscores for upper and lower abdominal pain, heartburn/regurgitation and FDA nausea, vomiting, fullness, and pain (NVFP) composite are averages of 2, 2, 7, and 4 components, respectively.|baseline, 8 weeks|Total number of subjects analyzed varied per time period due to discontinuations, subject and data availability. Subjects analyzed are presented per category as (n=hemin, albumin arms).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827448|NCT01206582|Primary|Gastric Emptying Half-time|The time for half of the ingested solids or liquids to leave the stomach. Gastric emptying was assessed with ^13C Spirulina Breath Test. After an overnight fast, subjects consumed the test meal containing ^13C Spirulina. Breath samples were collected in duplicate glass tube using a straw to blow into the bottom of the tube to displace contained air. The ^13CO_2 content of the breath was determined by AB Diagnostics. The provide of ^13CO_2 excretion is used to estimate the half-time of gastric emptying.|baseline, day 3, day 7, day 56|Total number of subjects analyzed varied per time period due to discontinuations, subject and data availability. Subjects analyzed are presented per category as (n=hemin, albumin arms).||minutes||Standard Error|Mean
827454|NCT01206608|Primary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) of the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at Rest (NRS-R) and With Activity (NRS-A) Pain Intensity Scores|Assessments of postoperative pain were conducted through 96 hours and included pain intensity at rest (NRS-R) and with activity (NRS-A). The prescribed activity was to consist of raising the arm, in full extension at the elbow and wrist, to a position parallel with the axis of the torso. Pain intensity was scored on an 11-point scale, where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst possible pain.|Through 96 hours postdose|||Units on a scale*hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
827455|NCT01206660|Secondary|Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score at Day 28.|Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis: score based on dermatologist's assessment of disease averaged over all lesions of face, genitals, or intertriginous area (i.e., breast fold, gluteal crease, axilla). Overall lesions were graded for induration, erythema, and scaling; range: 0 (no evidence) to 5 (severe). The sum of the 3 scores was divided by 3 to obtain a final PGA score. Higher scores indicate greater severity of disease.|Day 28|ITT Population. Participants who returned for at least one post baseline visit and/or provided an assessment for pruritus were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827456|NCT01206660|Primary|Treatment Success|A patient is considered a Treatment Success for the Target Lesions if the target lesion has a score of 0 or 1 on the Target Lesion Severity Score (TLSS) for each the three signs and symptoms (erythema, scaling and plaque elevation).|Day 28|||participants|||Number
827457|NCT01206660|Primary|Clinical Success ITT|A patient is considered a Clinical Success if the Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) is 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|28 days|Analysis was conducted using Intent-to-Treat (ITT)||participants|||Number
827458|NCT01206738|Primary|Email vs Postal Recruitment: Number of GPs Completing the First Questionnaire|GPs were randomly allocated to receive their invitation to take part by email or by post. Outcome measure was proportion of GPs responding by completing the first questionnaire|27/1/20111 - 15/5/2011|880 physicians received email and 880 received postal invitations. 138 and 132 responded respectively.||participants|||Number
827459|NCT01206738|Primary|Number of Simulated Scenarios Where an Antibiotic Was Not Prescribed|Eight simulated clinical scenarios where presented to the GP and he/she was asked whether an antibiotic should be prescribed. The outcome measures was the number of scenarios where an antibiotic was not prescribed.|Immediately after completion of questionnaire|||scenarios||Standard Deviation|Mean
827460|NCT01206777|Secondary|Demonstrate Nursing Satisfaction for Administration of Rapid Infusion Over Standard Titration Practice|Surveys were given to nurses in the outpatient infusion center to measure their satisfaction with the administration of the rapid infusion rate compared to standard titration practice.|6 months, as a before and after infusion survey|Post infusion surveys were collected and de-identified by assignment of an individual nurse identification number||percentage of nurses satisfied|||Number
827461|NCT01206777|Secondary|Time Savings of a 60 Minute Infusion Versus Predicted Infusion Time Using Standard Second Dose Titration Schedule||Determined from difference in expected time by package insert administration and actual time on day of treatment|||minutes for rapid R infusion||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827462|NCT01206777|Primary|Incidence of Grade III and IV Hypersensitivity Reactions||Every 15 minutes from start of infusion until completion, for up to 1 hour|||percentage of patients|||Number
827463|NCT01207102|Secondary|"To Assess the Safety and Tolerability of a Combination Regimen of Weekly Abraxane® and Carboplatin to Treat Women With Triple Negative Stage IV Metastatic Breast Cancer"|The proportion of patients experiencing any neurotoxicity will be tabulated by grade. The proportion of patients experiencing ≥ grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities (excluding neurotoxicity) and the proportion of patients experiencing ≥ grade 3 hematologic toxicities will be calculated with their exact 80% confidence intervals.|2 years|Due to insufficient accrual, data analysis was not performed.|||||
827464|NCT01207102|Primary|PFS|The primary objective of the trial is to statistically test whether Abraxane® and carboplatin can improve progression-free survival (PFS) as compared to historical controls.|PFS is defined as the interval from study registration to disease progression or death due to any cause, whichever comes first|Due to insufficient accrual, data analysis was not performed.|||||
827465|NCT01207219|Secondary|Severity of Symptoms|PANSS total score is computed by summing the scores of positive, negative and general symptom subscores. The range of PANSS total score is from 30 to 210, range of PANSS positive and negative subscores is from 7 to 49, range of PANSS general symptoms subscore is from 16 to 112, with higher values representing worse outcome. CDS total score is computed by summing the scores of nine items of the scale. The range of CDS total score is from 0 to 27, with higher values representing worse outcome.|Baseline and 12 weeks|One subject in the waitlist control group has not completed all measures both at the baseline and 12 weeks. Measure of clinical severity has been missing in the data set. So that there are 37 subjects' data of clinical severity has been included for analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827466|NCT01207219|Primary|Attention and Concentration|measured by Letter Cancellation test Q score. The basic version of the task consists of six 52-character rows in which the target character is randomly interspersed approximately 18 times in each row. Subjects were asked to cancel the letter “C” and “E” as quickly as possible. The time to completion, number of error and omission items were recorded. A “quality of search” index (Q), developed by Geldmacher et al., was applied for the analysis. Q is the ratio of correct number to total number of targets multiplied by the ratio of correct number per second. Higher Q scores represent more efficient performance and better attention and concentration. Q scores could range from 0 (worst possible outcome) to 1 (best possible outcome).|baseline and 12 weeks|||Correct number per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
827467|NCT01207219|Primary|Working Memory|measured by Digit Span backwards test. In this test, the subject was asked to recall a series of numbers in reverse order. The correctly recalled series were scored as 1, and the test contains 14 sequences of numbers. The range of working memory score is from 0 to 14, with higher values representing better outcome.|baseline and 12 weeks|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827468|NCT01207219|Primary|Verbal Retention|The total number of correctly recalled words after short-term (10 minutes) and long-term (30 minutes) delay in the random condition of Hong Kong List Learning test.|baseline and 12 weeks|||correctly recorded words||Standard Deviation|Mean
827469|NCT01207219|Primary|Verbal Acquisition|Total number of corrected encoded words in the first three trials in the random condition of Hong Kong List Learning test.|baseline and 12 weeks|||correctly encoded words||Standard Deviation|Mean
827470|NCT01207388|Secondary|Resource Utilization||5 years||01/2020||||
827471|NCT01207388|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQoL 5-Dimension (EQ-5D) Scales|The EQ-5D is a self-administered questionnaire which captures 3 basic types of information: a descriptive profile (health state index) and the overall health rating using a visual analog scale. The health state index measures mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression on scales from no problems (score = 1), some problems (score = 2), to extreme problems (score = 3). For each dimension the mean change from baseline was calculated at the end of each treatment cycle and at the end of study. The maximum observed change from baseline during cycles 1 to 4 and the change from baseline at the end of study are reported for each dimension.|Subjects are assessed at Screening Visit (Baseline), at day 29 of each treatment cycle, at Day 30 Safety Follow-Up Visit and during mandated Efficacy Follow-Up Visits occurring at month 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 after treatment start.|Full analysis set||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827472|NCT01207388|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EORTC-QLQ-C30 Scales|"The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Insomnia, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact).
For each of these scales, scores range from 0 to 100. For the GHS and 5 functional scales a high score indicates better global health status/functioning and a positive change from baseline indicates improvement. For the 9 symptom scales, a high score indicates a higher level of symptoms, and a negative change from Baseline indicates an improvement in symptoms.
The maximum changes from baseline to cycles 1 through 4 and to the end of the core study are reported."|Subjects are assessed at Screening Visit (Baseline), at day 29 of each treatment cycle, at Day 30 Safety Follow-Up Visit and during mandated Efficacy Follow-Up Visits occurring at month 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 after treatment start.|Full analysis set||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827473|NCT01207388|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated for severity according to the the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4, as follows:
Grade 1 – Mild AE; Grade 2 – Moderate AE; Grade 3 - Severe AE; Grade 4 - Life-threatening or disabling AE; Grade 5 - Death.
The investigator used medical judgment to determine if there was a causal relationship (ie, related, unrelated) between an adverse event and blinatumomab.
An AE was considered “serious” if it resulted in death, was life-threatening, required or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption to conduct normal life functions, was a congenital anomaly or birth defect or was a medically important condition."|From the first dose of blinatumomab until 30 days after last dose. Adverse events are reported up to the data cut-off date of 05 August 2015; the median treatment duration was 55 days.|All participants who received any infusion of blinatumomab.||participants|||Number
827474|NCT01207388|Secondary|Change in MRD Level From Baseline to End of Cycle 1 in Non-MRD Responders|MRD level was measured by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) performed on bone marrow and assessed by the central laboratory. An MRD level of 10^-n corresponds to residual leukemia cells at a frequency of 1 per 10ⁿ bone marrow cells.|Baseline and end of cycle 1 (6 weeks)|Full analysis set participants who were in hematological complete remission at treatment start, with no MRD Response in the first treatment cycle, excluding Philadelphia-positive participants.||participants|||Number
827475|NCT01207388|Secondary|Duration of Complete MRD Response|"The duration of MRD response was analyzed as the time from onset of MRD negativity until MRD or hematological relapse or date of last confirmation of negative MRD status. Participants who received chemotherapy or HSCT after treatment with blinatumomab, before hematological or extramedullary relapse were censored at the start of chemotherapy or HSCT, respectively.
MRD relapse is defined as the reappearance of individual rearrangements of Ig- or TCR-genes ≥ lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) for at least 1 individual marker measured by an assay with a sensitivity of minimum 10^-4. Hematological relapse is defined as the unequivocal detection of > 5% leukemia cells in bone marrow as measured by cytological or microscopic assessment, presence of circulating leukemia blasts, or extramedullary leukemia."|Until the data cut-off date of 05 August 2015; median time on study was 18.3 months.|Full analysis set participants who were in hematological complete remission at treatment start, excluding Philadelphia-positive participants, who had an MRD complete response at cycle 1||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827476|NCT01207388|Secondary|Time to Hematological Relapse|Time to hematological relapse was measured from the start of treatment with blinatumomab until hematological or extramedullary relapse. Participants who died or received HSCT or post-blinatumomab chemotherapy after treatment with blinatumomab were censored at their last hematological assessment prior to death or HSCT or post-blinatumomab chemotherapy (whichever occurred first).|Until the data cut-off date of 05 August 2015; median time on study was 18.3 months.|Full analysis set participants who were in hematological complete remission at treatment start, excluding Philadelphia-positive participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827477|NCT01207388|Secondary|100-Day Mortality After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant|The mortality rate within 100 days after allogeneic HSCT was defined as the Kaplan-Meier estimate of the percentage of participants dying within 100 days after the day of the first allogeneic HSCT.|100 days after HSCT, as of the data cut-off date of 05 August 2015|Full analysis set participants who underwent HSCT prior to relapse (hematological or extramedullary) excluding Philadelphia-positive participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827478|NCT01207388|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was measured from the first treatment with blinatumomab until death due to any cause. Participants who did not die were censored at their last contact date.|Until the data cut-off date of 05 August 2015; median time on study was 18.3 months.|Full analysis set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827487|NCT01207414|Primary|Integrated Clinical Global Impression of Change (I-CGI-C) at Week 12|The I-CGI-C at Week 12 was the overall impression of medically qualified raters using three separate Clinical Global Impression of Change scales: efficacy (E-CGI-C); safety and tolerability (ST-CGI-S); and overall severity (I-CGI-S) combined for a total score. The I-CGI-C scale ranged from 1 to 7 with lower scores indicating improvement (1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved), higher scores indicating worsening (5=minimally worse, 6= much worse, 7=very much worse), and a score of 4 indicating no change.|Week 12|Participants from the Full Analysis Set (three cohorts combined: risperidone, olanzapine or aripiprazole) with data available for analyses.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827479|NCT01207388|Secondary|Hematological Relapse-free Survival (RFS)|"Hematological RFS was measured from first dose of blinatumomab until the first assessment of documented relapse (either hematological or extramedullary), secondary leukemia, or death due to any cause. Participants without a documented relapse, or death due to any cause were censored at the time of their last hematological assessment. Participants who received chemotherapy for relapsed or persistent MRD or for any other reason after treatment with blinatumomab, or HSCT after treatment with blinatumomab, before hematological or extramedullary relapse, or death occurred were censored at the start of chemotherapy or HSCT, respectively.
Hematological relapse was defined as unequivocal detection of > 5% leukemia cells in bone marrow as measured by cytological, microscopic assessment, presence of circulating leukemia blasts, or extramedullary leukemia (whichever occurred first).
The 18-month Kaplan-Meier estimate of hematological RFS is reported."|18 months|Full analysis set participants who were in hematological complete remission at treatment start, excluding Philadelphia-positive participants.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827480|NCT01207388|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) Response Within the First Treatment Cycle|"At the end of the first treatment cycle (Day 29) a bone marrow aspiration/biopsy was performed and evaluated by the central MRD laboratory.
Complete MRD response is defined as no polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification of individual rearrangements of immunoglobulin (Ig)- or T-cell receptor (TCR)-genes detected after completion of the first cycle."|During the first cycle (6 weeks)|Primary endpoint full analysis set (Prim EP FAS) included all participants with an Ig TCR PCR MRD assay with the minimum required sensitivity of 1 x 10^-4 at central lab established at Baseline.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827481|NCT01207401|Primary|Median Visual Analogue Score Measuring Pain|"We asked participants to report their pain score on visual analogue scale (0mm=no pain and 100mm=worse pain possible) at the following time points:
Speculum placement
Tenaculum placement
Paracervical block administration(if subject is in this arm)
IUD insertion
Five minutes post procedure"|1) Speculum placement 2) Tenaculum placement 3) Paracervical block administration(if subject is in this arm) 4) IUD insertion 5) Five minutes post procedure|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
827482|NCT01207414|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Integrated Clinical Global Impression of Severity (I-CGI-S) at Week 12|I-CGI-S incorporated the overall, combined impression of illness severity based upon the E-CGI-S and ST-CGI-S. Medically qualified raters evaluated the patient's illness in the previous 7 days at Baseline and Week 12 on a scale of 1 to 7 (1=normal not at all ill, 2=borderline mental illness or impairment, 3=mildly ill or impaired, 4=moderately ill or impaired, 5=marked ill or impaired, 6= severely ill or impaired or 7=among the most extremely ill patients. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827483|NCT01207414|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Safety and Tolerability Clinical Global Impression of Severity (ST-CGI-S) at Week 12|Medically qualified raters used the ST-CGI-S at Baseline and Week 12 to evaluate safety and tolerability in the previous 7 days on a scale of 1 to 7 (1=Normal-no symptoms, 2=borderline severity, 3=mild impairment, 4=moderate, 5=marked, 6=severe, 7=among the most severe.) A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Participants from the Full Analysis Set with data available for analyses.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827484|NCT01207414|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Efficacy Clinical Global Impression of Severity (E-CGI-S) at Week 12|Medically qualified raters use the E-CGI-S scale at Baseline and Week 12 to assess the effectiveness of treatment by examining changes in positive symptoms [hallucinations (false perceptions), delusions (false beliefs), paranoia (unfounded distrust), conceptual disorganization (loosening of associations), or hostility], negative symptoms [apathy (lack of interest), avolition (lack of motivation), alogia (poverty of speech), and anhedonia (absence of pleasure)] and cognitive symptoms [concentration difficulties, difficulties with executive function (integrative reasoning), and illogical thinking] in the previous 7 days on a scale of 1 to 7 (1=normal, 2=borderline mentally ill, 3=mildly ill, 4=moderately ill, 5=markedly ill, 6=severely ill or 7=among the most extremely ill). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Participants from the Full Analysis Set with data available for analyses.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827485|NCT01207414|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events or Death|"Adverse event are defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptoms, sign (including an abnormal lab finding), syndrome or disease which either occurs during the study, having been absent at baseline, or if present at baseline appear to worsen.
Serious adverse events are any untoward medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require (or prolong) hospitalization , cause persistent or significant disability/incapacity, result in congenital anomalies or birth defects, or are other conditions which in judgments of the investigators represent significant hazards.
Additional information about adverse events can be found in the Adverse Event section."|12 Weeks|Participants from the Safety Analysis Set- all randomized participants who received study drug (three cohorts combined: risperidone, olanzapine or aripiprazole) with data available for analyses.||Participants|||Number
827486|NCT01207414|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) at Week 12|The TSQM consisted of 14 questions about the patient's satisfaction with the drug in 4 domains: Effectiveness [3 questions scored as 1(extremely dissatisfied) to 7(extremely satisfied)], Side Effects [question 4 scored as 0(no) or 1(yes);question 5 scored as 1(extremely bothersome) to 5(not at all bothersome);questions 6 - 8 scored as 1(a great deal) to 5(not at all)], Convenience [questions 9 and 10 scored as 1(extremely difficult) to 7 (extremely easy);question 11 scored as 1(extremely inconvenient) to 5 (extremely convenient)] and Global Satisfaction [question 12 scored as 1(not at all confident) to 7(extremely confident);question 13 scored as 1(not at all certain) to 5(extremely certain);question 14 scored as 1(extremely dissatisfied) to 5(extremely satisfied)]. The scores of each of the domains were added together and an algorithm used to create a score of 0 to 100. Higher scores for each domain indicate a better outcome. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Participants from the Full Analysis Set with data available for analyses.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827501|NCT01207570|Primary|Ankle Passive Range of Motion|Ankle dorsiflexion passive range of motion|Day 1 after treatment|All subjects received the intended treatment protocol and were included in the analysis. ITT was used to analyze the data.||degree||Standard Deviation|Mean
828225|NCT01215279|Secondary|CCL2 (Chemokine Ligand for CCR2b Receptor) Concentration in Plasma at Baseline|Baseline = Day 1 = Visit 2|Day 1|||pg/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
827488|NCT01207427|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Weekly Average of Spontaneous Bowel Movements (SBMs) During Treatment|An SBM was defined as a bowel movement (BM) with no laxative use in the previous 24 hours. Each weekly SBM average was calculated as follows: (7 × number of SBMs) / (number of days with nonmissing data). The overall SBM rate for the 4-week double-blind treatment period was calculated as follows: (the average of the first week + the average of the second week + the average of the third week + the average of the fourth week) / 4.|Baseline, Weeks 1 through 4 of treatment|All participants who were randomized to study treatment and had at least 1 evaluable SBM post-dose measurement during the Double-blind Period. Last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values.||Number of SBMs/week||Standard Error|Mean
827489|NCT01207453|Secondary|Knee Pain Threshold|A measure of the change in knee pain threshold from baseline to 6 weeks. Knee pain threshold was determined by applying pressure to a subject's knee until the subject felt pain. The difference between the average knee pain threshold (an average for the right and left knees) at baseline was compared to that at 6 months. Pain threshold was measured in kg/cm^2. The difference in threshold could range from 0-11 kg/cm^2. A higher difference between thresholds indicates improved pain sensitivity.|Baseline to 6 weeks|||kg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
827490|NCT01207453|Secondary|Wrist Pain Threshold|A measure of the change in wrist pain threshold from baseline to 6 weeks. Wrist pain threshold was determined by applying pressure to a subject's wrist until the subject felt pain. The difference between the average wrist pain threshold (an average for the right and left wrists) at baseline was compared to that at 6 months. Pain threshold was measured in kg/cm^2. The difference in threshold could range from 0-11 kg/cm^2. A higher difference between thresholds indicates improved pain sensitivity.|Baseline to 6 weeks|||kg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
827491|NCT01207453|Secondary|Trapezius Pain Threshold|A measure of the change in trapezius pain threshold from baseline to 6 weeks. Trapezius pain threshold was determined by applying pressure to a subject's trapezius muscle until the subject felt pain. The difference between the average trapezius pain threshold (an average for the right and left trapezii) at baseline was compared to that at 6 months. Pain threshold was measured in kg/cm^2. The difference in threshold could range from 0-11 kg/cm^2. A higher difference between thresholds indicates improved pain sensitivity.|Baseline to 6 weeks|||kg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
827492|NCT01207453|Secondary|Thumbnail Pain Threshold|A measure of the change in thumbnail pain threshold from baseline to 6 weeks. Thumbnail pain threshold was determined by applying pressure to a subjectt's thumbnail until the subject felt pain. The difference between the average thumbnail pain threshold (an average for the right and left thumbs) at baseline was compared to that at 6 months. Pain threshold was measured in kg/cm^2. The difference in threshold could range from 0-11 kg/cm^2. A higher difference between thresholds indicates improved pain sensitivity.|Baseline to 6 weeks|||kg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
827493|NCT01207453|Secondary|Symptom Intensity Scale (SIS)|A measure of the change in SIS score from baseline to 6 weeks. The SIS score ranges from 0-9.75, with high scores being worse indicating more widespread pain and fatigue.|Baseline to 6 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827494|NCT01207453|Secondary|Change in Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM)|CPM is defined as the difference between pain threshold A (measured after a conditioning stimulus activates pathways that inhibit pain) and pain threshold B (measured before the conditioning stimulus is applied). The conditioning stimulus was immersion of the hand in a cold water bath. Pressure pain threshold was assessed at the trapezius muscle initially. Subjects were then instructed to immerse their hand in a water bath for 30 seconds. At 20 seconds, pressure pain threshold at the trapezius was assessed again. We defined the magnitude of subjects’ CPM as the difference in pressure pain threshold between baseline and 20 seconds after cold water immersion. This difference was compared to that measured at 6 weeks. The scale for the difference in CPM ranged from 0-11 kg/cm^2, with 0 indicating no change in CPM between 6 weeks and baseline and 11 indicating the maximum possible change. A greater change in CPM between baseline and 6 weeks is indicative of improvements in CPM.|Baseline to 6 weeks|||kg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
827495|NCT01207453|Primary|Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Change|"A measure of change in scores on the BPI short form, a 24-hr average pain item, from baseline to 6 weeks, The BPI short form scores ranges from 0-10, with 10 being the worst pain."|Baseline to 6 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827496|NCT01207466|Primary|Quality of Vision (Crisp and Clear)|Quality of vision (crisp and clear), as interpreted and reported by the participant by eye on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of one week’s wear time. Quality of vision was assessed on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|1 week of wear|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as: major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
827497|NCT01207492|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate|To determine the clinical benefit rate [% CR + % PR + % stable disease by RECIST 1.1] at 6 months. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR) is a disappearance of all target lesions. Partial Response (PR) is a >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions. Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.|6 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827498|NCT01207492|Secondary|Overall Tumor Response Rate (OR)|To determine overall tumor response rate [% complete response (CR) + % partial response (PR) by RECIST 1.1]. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR) is a disappearance of all target lesions. Partial Response (PR) is a >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions. Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|2 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827499|NCT01207492|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Progression Free Survival|To estimate progression free survival at 6 months in participants with recurrent PVNS treated with nilotinib. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|6 months|||percentage of participants with PFS||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827500|NCT01207570|Primary|Ankle Passive Range of Motion|Ankle passive range of motion on day 4 after the crossover treatment|Day 4 after treatment|||degree||Standard Deviation|Mean
827504|NCT01207583|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-Specified Systemic Events Post-dose 4|Systemic events (any fever >=38 degrees C, decreased appetite, diarrhea, restless sleep, unusual crying, unusual fussiness, unusual irritability, and vomiting) were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 4|Safety set (post-dose 4) population included all participants who received Dose 4 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 4.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827505|NCT01207583|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-Specified Systemic Events Post-dose 3|Systemic events (any fever >=38 degrees C, decreased appetite, diarrhea, restless sleep, unusual crying, unusual fussiness, unusual irritability, and vomiting) were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 3|Safety set (post-dose 3) population included all participants who received Dose 3 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 3.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827506|NCT01207583|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-Specified Systemic Events Post-dose 2|Systemic events (any fever >=38 degrees C, decreased appetite, diarrhea, restless sleep, unusual crying, unusual fussiness, unusual irritability, and vomiting) were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 2|Safety set (post-dose 2) population included all participants who received Dose 2 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 2.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827507|NCT01207583|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-Specified Systemic Events Post-dose 1|Systemic events (any fever >=38 degrees C, decreased appetite, diarrhea, restless sleep, unusual crying, unusual fussiness, unusual irritability, and vomiting) were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 1|Safety set (post-dose 1) population included all participants who received Dose 1 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 1.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827508|NCT01207583|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-Specified Local Reactions Post-dose 4|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Induration and redness were scaled as Any (induration or redness present); Mild (<2.5 cm); Moderate (>=2.5 cm to <5.0 cm); Severe (>=5.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Solicited local reactions included redness, swelling and tenderness while unsolicited local reactions included injection site hematoma, injection site hemorrhage, injection site induration and injection site warmth.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 4|Safety set (post-dose 4) population included all participants who received Dose 4 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 4.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827509|NCT01207583|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-Specified Local Reactions Post-dose 3|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Induration and redness were scaled as Any (induration or redness present); Mild (<2.5 cm); Moderate (>=2.5 cm to <5.0 cm); Severe (>=5.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Solicited local reactions included redness, swelling and tenderness while unsolicited local reactions included injection site hematoma, injection site hemorrhage, injection site induration and injection site warmth.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 3|Safety set (post-dose 3) population included all participants who received Dose 3 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 3.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827510|NCT01207583|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-Specified Local Reactions Post-dose 2|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Induration and redness were scaled as Any (induration or redness present); Mild (<2.5 cm); Moderate (>=2.5 cm to <5.0 cm); Severe (>=5.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Solicited local reactions included redness, swelling and tenderness while unsolicited local reactions included injection site hematoma, injection site hemorrhage, injection site induration and injection site warmth.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 2|Safety set (post-dose 2) population included all participants who received Dose 2 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 2.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827511|NCT01207583|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-Specified Local Reactions Post-dose 1|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Induration and redness were scaled as Any (induration or redness present); Mild (<2.5 centimeters [cm]); Moderate (>=2.5 cm to <5.0 cm); Severe (>=5.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Solicited local reactions included redness, swelling and tenderness while unsolicited local reactions included injection site hematoma, injection site hemorrhage, injection site induration and injection site warmth.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 1|Safety set (post-dose 1) population included all participants who received Dose 1 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 1.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827512|NCT01207583|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Febrile Reactions Post-dose 4|Febrile reactions were defined as reactions which causes a rise in body temperature following vaccination in children. Fever was defined as a temperature of >=38 degrees C. Percentage of participants with febrile reaction of >=38 degrees C was observed.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 4|Safety set (post-dose 4) population included all participants who received Dose 4 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 4.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827513|NCT01207583|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Febrile Reactions Post-dose 3|Febrile reactions were defined as reactions which causes a rise in body temperature following vaccination in children. Fever was defined as a temperature of >=38 degrees C. Percentage of participants with febrile reaction of >=38 degrees C to <=39 degrees C was observed.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 3|Safety set (post-dose 3) population included all participants who received Dose 3 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827514|NCT01207583|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Febrile Reactions Post-dose 2|Febrile reactions were defined as reactions which causes a rise in body temperature following vaccination in children. Fever was defined as a temperature of >=38 degrees C. Percentage of participants with febrile reaction of >=38 degrees C to <=39 degrees C was observed.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 2|Safety set (post-dose 2) population included all participants who received Dose 2 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 2.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836870|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 6 Hours|The scale measure pain after 6 hours (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|6 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827515|NCT01207583|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Febrile Reactions Post-dose 1|Febrile reactions were defined as reactions which causes a rise in body temperature following vaccination in children. Fever was defined as a temperature of greater than or equal to (>=) 38 degrees Celsius (C). Percentage of participants with febrile reaction of >=38 degrees C to less than or equal to (<=) 39 degrees C, >39 degrees C to <=40 degrees C and >40 degrees C were observed.|Day 1 to Day 3 post-dose 1|Safety set (post-dose 1) population included all participants who received Dose 1 and who had safety follow-up data following Dose 1.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827516|NCT01207596|Secondary|Global Assessment of Treatment Satisfaction|Patients were asked to rate their global assessment of treatment satisfaction, ranging from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied”. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study|Baseline visit to Week 12 or last visit|LOCF||percentage of patients|||Number
827517|NCT01207596|Secondary|Pain Quality Assessment Scale (PQAS)|The PQAS is a 20-item scale that quantifies the quality and intensity of neuropathic and non-neuropathic pain; scores range from 1 to 200, with higher scores indicating more severe pain|Baseline visit to 12 weeks visit|LOCF||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827518|NCT01207596|Secondary|Sleep Quality Assessment (SQA)|Sleep Quality Assessment (SQA) scale, asking patients to assess the degree that pain has interfered with their sleep in the last 24 hours (where 0 = does not interfere and 10 = completely interferes)|Baseline visit to Week 12 or last visit|LOCF||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827519|NCT01207596|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Average Pain Over the Last 24 Hrs on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Scale Question #6: the Number That Tells How Much Pain You Have Right Now|"Change from baseline to end of study on question #4 (current pain) of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI): Please rate your pain by marking the box beside the number that tells how much pain you have right now, where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine."|Baseline visit to Week 12 or last visit|LOCF||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827520|NCT01207596|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Average Pain Over the Last 24 Hrs on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Scale Question #4: the Number That Best Describes Your Pain at Its Least in the Last 24 Hours|"Change from baseline to end of study on question #4 (least pain) of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI): Please rate your pain by marking the box beside the number that best describes your pain at its least in the last 24 hours, where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine."|Baseline visit to Week 12 or last visit|LOCF||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827521|NCT01207596|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Average Pain Over the Last 24 Hrs on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Scale Question #3: the Number That Best Describes Your Pain at Its Worst in the Last 24 Hours|"Change from baseline to end of study on question #3 (worst pain) of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI): Please rate your pain by marking the box beside the number that best describes your pain at its worst in the last 24 hours, where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine."|Baseline visit to Week 12 or last visit|LOCF||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827522|NCT01207596|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Average Pain Over the Last 24 Hrs on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Scale|The primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline to end of study on question #5 (“average pain”) of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI): “Please rate your pain by marking the box beside the number that best describes your pain on the average,” where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine.|Baseline visit to Week 12 or last visit|LOCF||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
827523|NCT01207648|Secondary|Time to First Medically Confirmed Clinical Relapse Post-Rebif® Initiation|Medically confirmed clinical relapses were defined as the emergence of new neurological symptoms that occurred more than 30 days after a previous attack and persisted for more than or equal to 24 hours in the absence of known inter-current illness.|Start of observation period (first medical record available on site) up to last medical record available on site or the end of the observation period (31 December 2009), whichever occurred first.|Multiple sclerosis (MS) analysis set is a subset of the “Retrospective Cohort” set included all participants with a final diagnosis of MS. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827524|NCT01207648|Secondary|Annualized Medically Confirmed Clinical Relapses Rate Prior to Rebif® Initiation and During Rebif® Treatment|Medically confirmed clinical relapses were defined as the emergence of new neurological symptoms that occurred more than 30 days after a previous attack and persisted for more than or equal to 24 hours in the absence of known inter-current illness. Annualized relapse rate was defined as number of attacks per year.|Start of observation period (first medical record available on site) up to last medical record available on site or the end of the observation period (31 December 2009), whichever occurred first.|Multiple sclerosis (MS) analysis set is a subset of the “Retrospective Cohort” set included all participants with a final diagnosis of MS. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Attacks per year|||Number
827525|NCT01207648|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Parameters|Laboratory parameters assessed for abnormality were: total white blood cell count (Neutrophils, Lymphocytes, Leukocytes, Monocytes, Eosinophils and Basophils), differential hematogram (Hematocrit, Erythrocytes, Hemoglobin, and Platelet), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and thyroid tests (including Triiodothyronine, Thyroxine, Thyroperoxidase Antibody and Thyroid-Stimulating Hormone). Due to the retrospective nature of the study, laboratory data should be interpreted with caution as data were not collected according to a specific time schedule and the time on study per participant was not standardized.|Start of observation period (first medical record available on site) up to last medical record available on site or the end of the observation period (31 December 2009), whichever occurred first.|Total analysis set included all the participants who were exposed to Rebif® for treatment of demyelinating event and were evaluated in this retrospective study. 'n' signifies number of participants who were evaluable for the specified categories.||Participants|||Number
827615|NCT01200797|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|Estimated probable duration of life from on‐study date to date of death from any cause, using the Kaplan‐Meier method with censoring (see analysis population description for additional details).|On‐study date to date of death from any cause (assessed up to 12 months)|All patients are included in the analysis on intention‐to treat basis. Analysis is by Kaplan‐Meier method, where death is an event, with censoring for non‐expired patients at greater of off‐study date or last known alive date.||daya||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827526|NCT01207648|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Medical Events, and Non-serious Medical Events (Reported by the Investigator as Related to Rebif®)|Medical events in the retrospective study are equivalent to adverse events in a prospective clinical study. A medical event was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in the form of signs, symptoms, abnormal laboratory findings, or diseases that emerges or worsens relative to baseline during a clinical study with an investigational medicinal product (IMP), regardless of causal relationship and even if no IMP has been administered. Serious medical event: A medical event that resulted in death; was life threatening; resulted in persistent/significant disability/incapacity; resulted in/prolonged an existing in-patient hospitalization; was a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or was a medically important condition. Participants may be represented in more than one category as participant who had experienced serious medical event may also had experienced non-serious medical event reported by the Investigator as related to Rebif®, so in that case it will be counted in both the categories.|Start of observation period (first medical record available on site) up to last medical record available on site or the end of the observation period (31 December 2009), whichever occurred first.|Total analysis set included all the participants who were exposed to Rebif® for treatment of demyelinating event and were evaluated in this retrospective study.||Participants|||Number
827527|NCT01207648|Primary|Number of Participants With Pre-specified Medical Events|These pre-specified medical events categories were evaluated: injections site reactions, flu-like symptoms, hepatic disorders, blood cell disorders, allergic reactions, epilepsy and convulsive disorders, thyroid dysfunction, autoimmune diseases, bone/epiphyseal and cartilage disorders, serious infections, malignancies. Each category defined by group of events which best fit the medical concept either using a standard medical dictionary for regulatory activities (MedDRA) Query (SMQ) e.g., Malignancies was defined by the SMQ Malignancies (narrow scope) containing more than 1800 different preferred terms (PTs) (including procedures and lab tests) or using a customized query, e.g., Serious infections was defined by all PTs assessed as serious in System Organ Class (SOC) Infections and Infestation. Participants may be represented in more than once in a category (Participants could have reported several medicals events pertaining to a specific category) as well as in more than one category.|Start of observation period (first medical record available on site) up to last medical record available on site or the end of the observation period (31 December 2009), whichever occurred first.|Total analysis set included all the participants who were exposed to Rebif® for treatment of demyelinating event and were evaluated in this retrospective study.||Participants|||Number
827528|NCT01207687|Secondary|Quality of the Life, Assessed Using SF-36, SSQ, andTRQ|Standard scoring manuals will be used to summarize the each item or domains. A overall score at each time point will be compared with the baseline score two-tailed pared t-test will be used to assess the change form the baseline and MANOVA could be used to assess the association between the quality of life and the change of the hearing score. Each item or domain will be summarized using descriptive statistics. Comparisons of on-treatment and post-treatment values with the pre-treatment baseline value will be performed using paired t-tests.|18 months||09/2018||||
827529|NCT01207687|Secondary|Quality of the Life, Assessed Using SF-36, SSQ, andTRQ|Standard scoring manuals will be used to summarize the each item or domains. A overall score at each time point will be compared with the baseline score two-tailed pared t-test will be used to assess the change form the baseline and MANOVA could be used to assess the association between the quality of life and the change of the hearing score. Each item or domain will be summarized using descriptive statistics. Comparisons of on-treatment and post-treatment values with the pre-treatment baseline value will be performed using paired t-tests.|12 months||01/2018||||
827530|NCT01207687|Secondary|Quality of the Life, Assessed Using SF-36, SSQ, andTRQ|Standard scoring manuals will be used to summarize the each item or domains. A overall score at each time point will be compared with the baseline score two-tailed pared t-test will be used to assess the change form the baseline and MANOVA could be used to assess the association between the quality of life and the change of the hearing score. Each item or domain will be summarized using descriptive statistics. Comparisons of on-treatment and post-treatment values with the pre-treatment baseline value will be performed using paired t-tests.|6 months||01/2018||||
827531|NCT01207687|Secondary|Quality of the Life, Assessed Using Health Survey Short Form-36 (SF-36), Speech and Spatial Qualities Questionnaire (SSQ), and Tinnitus Reaction Questionnaire (TRQ)|Standard scoring manuals will be used to summarize the each item or domains. A overall score at each time point will be compared with the baseline score two-tailed pared t-test will be used to assess the change form the baseline and MANOVA could be used to assess the association between the quality of life and the change of the hearing score. Each item or domain will be summarized using descriptive statistics. Comparisons of on-treatment and post-treatment values with the pre-treatment baseline value will be performed using paired t-tests.|Baseline||01/2018||||
827532|NCT01207687|Secondary|Change in Vascular Permeability (Ktrans), Relative Cerebral Blood Volume/Flow, Mean Transit Time, and Mean Vessel Diameter From Perfusion-weighted MRI|The correlations between imaging parameters and hearing response will then be estimated based on the estimated changes. Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) will be used to estimate association of imaging parameters in hearing responses after treatment. The greatest on-treatment change from the pretreatment baseline value during the course of the study will be computed for each subject. Statistical comparisons between MRI parameters measured on different study time point will be performed with a two-tailed paired exact Wilcoxon test.|Baseline to week 72||01/2018||||
827533|NCT01207687|Secondary|Changes in Function of the Auditory System|The primary DPOAE measurement will be treated non-parametrically (present or absent across time) DPOAE’s will be considered present at the frequency of F2 when the distortion product is 6dB above the noise floor. Variables will be analyzed for differences using t-tests if the effects and sample sizes warrant, but this may not be advisable given the small numbers to be accrued.|Baseline to 6 months post-treatment||01/2018||||
827534|NCT01207687|Secondary|Median Percent Change in Target Vestibular Schwannoma Volume Using Volumetric MRI|The median percent change in the volume of the target vestibular schwannoma using volumetric MRI|Baseline to 12 months|||percentage of change in tumor volume||Full Range|Median
827535|NCT01207687|Secondary|Radiographic Response|The proportion of participants with radiographic response as measured by a >/= 20% reduction in tumor volume from baseline on MRI imaging will be estimated using a binomial distribution.|Baseline to 6 months post-treatment|||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827537|NCT01207687|Primary|Proportion of Patients With Hearing Response|A hearing response was defined as increased word recognition score above the 95% critical threshold that is maintained across two sequential evaluation time points. The word recognition score (WRS) is the percentage of phonetically-balanced, monosyllabic words that a patient can accurately repeat presented at either most comfortable level or most intelligible level.The proportion of patients with hearing response in the target ear was estimated using a binomial distribution along with 95% confidence intervals.|Baseline to 12 months|All people who underwent treatment were analyzed. Two patients stopped treatment early. One due to toxicity at week 25 and one due to need for medical care not permitted while on treatment at week 49.||Proportion with hearing response||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827538|NCT01207765|Secondary|Degree of CD20 Expression on Plasma Cells and/or Targeting of Post-germinal Center B Cells Correlation With Toxicity, Response and Biodistribution|CD20 immunohistochemical staining of plasma cells on baseline bone marrow biopsy specimen, graded on qualitative scale (0 to +++)|2 weeks prior - 2 weeks post transplant|Immunohistochemical analysis showed inconsistent / insufficient CD20 staining on surface of plasma cells; comparisons could not be made|||||
827539|NCT01207765|Secondary|Time to Engraftment in Patients Who Proceed to Myeloablative Chemotherapy After Receiving 90Y Zevalin® (Ibritumomab Tiuxetan).|Number of days from stem cell infusion (day +0) to day of neutrophil engraftment (first of three consecutive days with absolute neutrophil count > 500)|Transplant through day 42|Analyzed on intent-to-treat basis||Days||Full Range|Median
827540|NCT01207765|Primary|Safety and Efficacy|Efficacy: objective response rate (CR + PR) at 12 and 104 days following radioimmunotherapy. Safety: the rate of occurrence of defined toxic events including non-engraftment and unacceptable biodistribution of 90Y Zevalin occurring by day +42 following transplant. Response determined according to Blade' Criteria (Bladé J, Br J Haematol.1998 Sep;102(5):1115-23) for multiple myeloma; Response based on reduction of monoclonal protein (M-protein) from initial presentation.|Through day +104 following immunotherapy|6 subjects had objectively measurable disease and were evaluable for response, 8 subjects received study intervention and are evaluable for safety||participants|||Number
827541|NCT01207934|Secondary|Post-treatment Plasma Leptin Levels|plasma leptin levels after fourteen days ingestion of either leptin or placebo.|fourteen days|||Micrograms/Liter||Standard Error|Mean
827542|NCT01207934|Primary|Post-treatment Glucose Disposal. I.e. Glucose Disposal After Treatment With Leptin or Placebo.|This is a measure of the body's ability to metabolize sugar after treatment with either leptin or a placebo. We compare the effect of leptin therapy on insulin-mediated stimulation of glucose disposal with that of placebo. In general, a high glucose disposal rate is a marker of healthy metabolic function. Glucose disposal is measured by tracking the amount of tagged glucose in the bloodstream over time. It is adjusted to subject body weight.|fourteen days|||mmol/kg body weight/minute||Standard Error|Mean
827543|NCT01207934|Secondary|Baseline Plasma Leptin Concentrations|Leptin is an endogenous hormone. Here we measure the pre-treatment concentration of naturally-occurring leptin in the blood.|baseline|||Micrograms/Liter||Standard Error|Mean
827544|NCT01207934|Primary|Baseline Glucose Disposal - a Measure of the Body's Ability to Process Sugars.|pre-treatment glucose disposal. In general, a high glucose disposal rate is a marker of healthy metabolic function. Glucose disposal is measured by tracking the amount of tagged glucose in the bloodstream over time. It is adjusted to subject body weight.|baseline|||mmol/kg body weight/minute||Standard Error|Mean
827545|NCT01208181|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an AE|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease associated with the use of a medical treatment or procedure, regardless of whether it is considered related to the medical treatment or procedure.|Up to Week 12|ASaT population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one study drug. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received for the analysis of safety data using the ASaT population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827546|NCT01208181|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event (AE)|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease associated with the use of a medical treatment or procedure, regardless of whether it is considered related to the medical treatment or procedure.|Up to 112 days|All Subjects as Treated (ASaT) population, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one study drug. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received for the analysis of safety data using the ASaT population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827547|NCT01208181|Secondary|Average Change From Week 6 in Patient Global Assessment of Pain Over Weeks 10 and 12 in Part 2 Among Pain Inadequate Responders From Part 1|"A participant overall assessment of pain on a visual analog scale (VAS) was assessed with a question concerning the amount of pain due to arthritis during the past 48 hours. Pain was assessed on an 100 mm VAS scale with a left-hand marker no pain (0 mm) or right-hand marker extreme pain (100 mm). In those participants who were considered inadequate responders to etoricoxib 60 mg in Part 1 (defined as a participant with <50% improvement from baseline in PGAP [VAS] at Week 6), the incremental benefit of increasing the etoricoxib dose from 60 mg (in Part 1) to 90 mg (in Part 2) compared to remaining on 60 mg in Part 2 was evaluated via average change from Week 6 over Weeks 10 and 12 in Patient Global Assessment of Pain score. Therefore, data for only these 2 arms are displayed."|Week 6 and Week 10 to Week 12|This population (a subpopulation of the mITT population) was composed of pain inadequate responder (PIRs) in Part 1. PIRs were defined as participants with <50% improvement from baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Pain (VAS) at Week 6 and received at least one dose of study medication in Part 2.||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827556|NCT01208207|Primary|Time-Weighted Average Change From Baseline in the Spinal Pain Intensity in Study Part 1: Etoricoxib 90 mg vs. Naproxen|Spinal Pain Intensity is measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0-100 mm with a lower value representing a better response. The time-weighted average change is calculated by taking the time between adjacent observations divided by the time from the randomization visit to the last observation in the period of interest, and using it as the weight for computation of the average.|Baseline and up to Week 6|Per-Protocol Population - excluded participants due to important protocol deviations that may have had a substantial effect on the result of the primary efficacy endpoint.||mm VAS||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827557|NCT01208220|Primary|Quicker Filling of the Wound With Good Tissue (vs. Treatment With NPWT Alone)||2 weeks into study|||Percentage of red granulation tissue|||Number
827548|NCT01208181|Secondary|Time-Weighted Average Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Pain in Part 1 (Etoricoxib 90 mg vs. Etoricoxib 60 mg)|"A participant overall assessment of pain on a visual analog scale (VAS) was assessed with a question concerning the amount of pain due to arthritis during the past 48 hours. Pain was assessed on an 100 mm VAS scale with a left-hand marker no pain (0 mm) or right-hand marker extreme pain (100 mm). The key secondary objectives compared the relative efficacy between etoricoxib 90 mg and 60 mg in Part 1 of this study so data for only these 2 arms are displayed."|Baseline and Week 6|The mITT population in Part 1 consisted of all randomized participants receiving at least 1 dose of study medication, had baseline data for the analysis endpoint, and least one post-randomization measurement for the analysis endpoint that was collected within 3 days after the last dose of study medication.||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827549|NCT01208181|Secondary|Time-Weighted Average Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP in Part 1 (Etoricoxib 90 mg vs. Etoricoxib 60 mg)|Disease Activity Score Using C-Reactive Protein [DAS28-CRP] (0 - 10 Range). The DAS28-CRP index is a composite score of weighted components including tender joint counts of 28, swollen joint counts of 28, patient global assessment of disease activity, and C-reactive protein (CRP). For each observation (Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 10, 12), components were combined into a single DAS28-CRP score using the following algorithm: 0.56*square root (sqrt) (tender joint count [28])+0.28*sqrt(swollen joint count [28] )+0.36* ln(crp+1) + 0.014* Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity + 0.96. The key secondary objectives compared the relative efficacy between etoricoxib 90 mg and 60 mg in Part 1 of this study so data for only these 2 arms are displayed.|Baseline and Week 6|The mITT population in Part 1 consisted of all randomized participants receiving at least 1 dose of study medication, had baseline data for the analysis endpoint, and least one post-randomization measurement for the analysis endpoint that was collected within 3 days after the last dose of study medication.||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827550|NCT01208181|Primary|Time-Weighted Average Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Pain in Part 1 (Etoricoxib vs. Placebo)|"A participant overall assessment of pain on a visual analog scale (VAS) was assessed with a question concerning the amount of pain due to arthritis during the past 48 hours. Pain was assessed on an 100 mm VAS scale with a left-hand marker no pain (0 mm) or right-hand marker extreme pain (100 mm). The primary objectives of the study compared the efficacy of etoricoxib (90 mg, 60 mg) to placebo in Part 1 of this study so data for only these 3 arms are displayed."|Baseline and Week 6|The mITT population in Part 1 consisted of all randomized participants receiving at least 1 dose of study medication, had baseline data for the analysis endpoint, and least one post-randomization measurement for the analysis endpoint that was collected within 3 days after the last dose of study medication.||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827551|NCT01208181|Primary|Time-Weighted Average Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP in Part 1 (Etoricoxib vs. Placebo)|Disease Activity Score Using C-Reactive Protein [DAS28-CRP] (0 - 10 Range). The DAS28-CRP index is a composite score of weighted components including tender joint counts of 28, swollen joint counts of 28, patient global assessment of disease activity, and C-reactive protein (CRP). For each observation (Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 10, 12), components were combined into a single DAS28-CRP score using the following algorithm: 0.56*square root (sqrt) (tender joint count [28])+0.28*sqrt(swollen joint count [28] )+0.36* ln(crp+1) + 0.014* Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity + 0.96. The primary objectives of the study compared the efficacy of etoricoxib (90 mg, 60 mg) to placebo in Part 1 of this study so data for only these 3 arms are displayed.|Baseline and Week 6|The modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population in Part 1 consisted of all randomized participants receiving at least 1 dose of study medication, had baseline data for the analysis endpoint, and least one post-randomization measurement for the analysis endpoint that was collected within 3 days after the last dose of study medication.||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827552|NCT01208207|Primary|Number of Participants Discontinuing Study Treatment Due to an Adverse Event||Up to 26 weeks|All Patients as Treated Population (APaT) - Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received. One participant randomized to 60 mg in Part II received 90 mg in Part II, and; therefore, was included in the Etoricoxib 60mg / 90mg (Part II) arm.||Participants|||Number
827553|NCT01208207|Secondary|Average Change From Week 6 in the Spinal Pain Intensity Over Weeks 10 and 12 in Study Part 2: Etoricoxib 60/90 mg vs. Etoricoxib 60mg (Non-responders From Part I)|Spinal Pain Intensity is measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0-100 mm with a lower value representing a better response. Average change from Week 6 in Spinal Pain Intensity (VAS) over Weeks 10 and 12 is calculated as the average Spinal pain Intensity (VAS) value over Weeks 10 and 12 minus the Spinal Pain Intensity (VAS) at Week 6.|Week 6 to Week 10 and Week 12|Modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Population - the mITT population in Part I consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment, had at least 1 measurement of interest post-randomization that was collected within 3 days of the last dose of study medication taken in Part I, and had baseline data.||mm VAS||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827554|NCT01208207|Secondary|Time-Weighted Average Change From Baseline in the Spinal Pain Intensity in Study Part 1: Etoricoxib 90 mg vs. Etoricoxib 60 mg|Spinal Pain Intensity is measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0-100 mm with a lower value representing a better response. The time-weighted average change is calculated by taking the time between adjacent observations divided by the time from the randomization visit to the last observation in the period of interest, and using it as the weight for computation of the average.|Baseline and up to Week 6|Modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Population - the mITT population in Part I consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment, had at least 1 measurement of interest post-randomization that was collected within 3 days of the last dose of study medication taken in Part I, and had baseline data.||mm VAS||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827555|NCT01208207|Primary|Time-Weighted Average Change From Baseline in the Spinal Pain Intensity in Study Part 1: Etoricoxib 60 mg vs. Naproxen|Spinal Pain Intensity is measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0-100 mm with a lower value representing a better response. The time-weighted average change is calculated by taking the time between adjacent observations divided by the time from the randomization visit to the last observation in the period of interest, and using it as the weight for computation of the average.|Baseline and up to Week 6|Per-Protocol Population - excluded participants due to important protocol deviations that may have had a substantial effect on the result of the primary efficacy endpoint.||mm VAS||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827559|NCT01208233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Box and Blocks (B&B) Test at Day 90 for Non-paretic Hand (Part 2)|The B&B test is a measure of manual dexterity. The B&B apparatus consists of a box divided into 2 sections and 1-inch hardwood blocks. The blocks began in the compartment of the test box to the dominant side of the participant. The participant was required to transfer the blocks one at a time to the other side of the box as quickly as possible in 1 minute using the non-paretic hand. The box was then turned so all the blocks were in the same side as the paretic hand. The participant was then required to do the test with his/her paretic hand. The participant was told that if more than 1 block was picked up at a time it was to only count as 1 block. The participant was also told that their fingertips needed to cross the partition for the block to be counted. The performance measure for this task was the number of blocks moved within 1 minute.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Number of participants indicated those participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo.||blocks moved per minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827560|NCT01208233|Other Pre-specified|Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (AEs) Resulting in Discontinuation of Study Drug (Part 2)|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pre-treatment state.|Day 1 (Baseline) up to follow-up (28 days after Day 90)|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo).||Number of participants|||Number
827561|NCT01208233|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With SBP <100 mm Hg or SBP Decline >=30 mm Hg From Immediate Pre-dose Measurement, With or Without Neuro-worsening (Defined as an NIHSS Increase of 4 Points or Greater) Within 2 Hours Post-dose (Part 2)||Day 1 (Baseline) up to Day 14|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo).||Number of participants|||Number
827562|NCT01208233|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Neuro-worsening (Part 2)|NIHSS change of 4 points or greater.|Day 1 (Baseline) up to Day 90|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo).||Number of participants|||Number
827563|NCT01208233|Other Pre-specified|Mortality Directly Related to Stroke (Part 2)|Deaths caused by stroke were reported.|The time began from the participant provided informed consent through 28 calendar days post last administration of investigational product.|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo).||Number of participants|||Number
827564|NCT01208233|Other Pre-specified|All-cause Mortality (Part 2)|Deaths regardless causality were reported.|The time began from the participant provided informed consent through 28 calendar days post last administration of investigational product.|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo).||Number of participants|||Number
827565|NCT01208233|Secondary|Plasma Concentrations of PF-03049423 (Part 1 and 2)||Days 1, 2, 7, 14, 30, 60 and 90|PK concentration population included all participants who were treated with PF-03049423 who had at least 1 measurable concentration. n=participants with concentration above lower limit of quantification at the corresponding sampling time.||nanogram/milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
827566|NCT01208233|Secondary|Gait Velocity Test at Day 90 (Part 2)|The 10-meter walk test requires a 20 meter straight path, with 5 meters for acceleration, 10 meters for steady state walking, and 5 meters for deceleration. Markers were placed at the 5 and 15 meter positions along the path. The participant began to walk “at a comfortable pace” at 1 end of the path, and continued walking until he/she reached the other end. The rater used a stopwatch to determine how much time it took for the participant to traverse the 10 meter center of the path, starting the stopwatch as soon as the participant’s limb crossed the first marker and stopping the stopwatch as soon as the participant’s limb crossed the second marker.|Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Participants analyzed indicated number of participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo for this outcome measure.||meters/second (m/s)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827567|NCT01208233|Secondary|Domains of Interest: Change From Baseline in Recognition Memory Test at Day 90 (Part 2)|This test assesses the ability to recognize pictures of objects. The participant was presented a series of pictures, a subset of which were the objects presented in the RBANS Naming Sub Test. After each picture was presented, the participant indicated either manually (ie, affirmative head nod) or verbally whether the picture was seen previously. The participant was given 5 seconds per picture to respond. The performance measure for this task was the total number of pictures correctly identified.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Participants analyzed indicated number of participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo for this outcome measure.||pictures correctly identified||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827568|NCT01208233|Secondary|Domains of Interest: Change From Baseline in Line Cancellation Test at Day 90 [(L-R)/(L+R)] (Part 2)|The participant was presented with a page that had lines placed across the page. The participant was required to cross out all the lines on the page using their non-paretic hand after the tester had demonstrated what was required by crossing out the center line. The performance measure for this task was the total number of omissions made expressed as a percentage of the total number of items in the test. The test contains 4 variables: (L+R)/28 × 100%, (L/14) × 100%, (R/14) × 100%, and (L-R)/(L+R), where L = number of lines crossed on the left side of the paper; R = number of lines crossed on the right side of the paper.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Number of participants analyzed indicated participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo for this outcome measure.||change in ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827642|NCT01201317|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Days 24-28 in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Worst Pain Score.|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF). Twice daily, the participants rated their Worst pain intensity during the past 12 hours on an Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) 0-10, 0=No pain, 10=Worst pain imaginable.|Baseline (mean of Day -5 to Day -1) to the mean of Day 24 to Day 28|Intention-to-treat set (ITT)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827569|NCT01208233|Secondary|Domains of Interest: Change From Baseline in Line Cancellation Test [(L+R)/28 × 100%, (L/14) × 100%, (R/14) × 100%)] at Day 90 (Part 2)|The participant was presented with a page that had lines placed across the page. The participant was required to cross out all the lines on the page using their non-paretic hand after the tester had demonstrated what was required by crossing out the center line. The performance measure for this task was the total number of omissions made expressed as a percentage of the total number of items in the test. The test contains 4 variables: (L+R)/28 × 100%, (L/14) × 100%, (R/14) × 100%, and (L-R)/(L+R), where L = number of lines crossed on the left side of the paper; R = number of lines crossed on the right side of the paper.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). n=number of participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo for this outcome measure.||change in percentage of lines crossed||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827570|NCT01208233|Secondary|Domains of Interest: Change From Baseline in RBANS Naming Sub Test at Day 90 (Part 2)|This test requires the participant to name 10 objects drawn in ink. The tester asked the participant to identify the picture. The participant had 20 seconds to respond to each picture presented. The performance measure was the number of objects named correctly.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Participants analyzed indicated number of participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo for this outcome measure.||objects named correctly||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827571|NCT01208233|Secondary|Domains of Interest: Change From Baseline in Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) Coding Sub Test at Day 90 (Part 2)|The test uses a reference key, the participant had 90 seconds to pair specific numbers with given geometric figures. Responses could be written or oral. The performance measure for this task was the total number of correct responses.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Participants analyzed indicated number of participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo for this outcome measure.||correct responses||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827572|NCT01208233|Secondary|BI at Day 90 (Part 2)|The BI is an index of independence to score the ability of a participant with a neuromuscular or musculoskeletal disorder to care for him or herself. The index rates a participant’s ability on the following 10 activities: feeding, moving from wheelchair to bed, personal toilet, getting on and off toilet, bathing self, walking on level surface, ascending and descending stairs, dressing, controlling bowels and controlling bladder. The maximum total score is 100 in a participant without functional impairment; the minimum score is 0 in a participant with major functional impairment.|Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Participants analyzed indicated number of participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo for this outcome measure.||unit on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827573|NCT01208233|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Barthel Index (BI) >= 95 and BI =100 at Day 90 (Part 2)|The BI is an index of independence to score the ability of a participant with a neuromuscular or musculoskeletal disorder to care for him or herself. The index rates a participant’s ability on the following 10 activities: feeding, moving from wheelchair to bed, personal toilet, getting on and off toilet, bathing self, walking on level surface, ascending and descending stairs, dressing, controlling bowels and controlling bladder. The maximum total score is 100 in a participant without functional impairment; the minimum score is 0 in a participant with major functional impairment.|Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg).||percentage of participants|||Number
827574|NCT01208233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in NIHSS at Day 90 (Part 2)|The NIHSS is a graded 11-item neurological examination rating speech and language, cognition, visual field deficits, motor and sensory impairments and ataxia used for the clinical assessment of acute stroke therapy. The maximum total score is 42 in a participant with a severe neurological deficit; the minimum score is 0 in a participant without gross neurological deficits.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Participants analyzed indicated number of participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo for this outcome measure.||unit on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827575|NCT01208233|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) (0-1) at Day 90 (Part 2)|The NIHSS is a graded 11-item neurological examination rating speech and language, cognition, visual field deficits, motor and sensory impairments and ataxia used for the clinical assessment of acute stroke therapy. The maximum total score is 42 in a participant with a severe neurological deficit; the minimum score is 0 in a participant without gross neurological deficits.|Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg).||percentage of participants|||Number
827576|NCT01208233|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With mRS (0-1) at Day 90 (Part 2)|The mRS is a 6-point scale of functional recovery. The scale grades participants as having no symptoms (0), minor symptoms (1), minor handicap (2), moderate handicap (3), moderately severe handicap (4), severe handicap (5), or death (6).|Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg).||percentage of participants|||Number
827643|NCT01201317|Primary|Change From Baseline to Days 24-28 in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Average Pain Score.|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF). Twice daily, the participants rated their Average Pain intensity during the past 12 hours on an Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) 0-10; 0=No pain, 10=Worst pain imaginable.|Baseline (mean of Day -5 to Day -1) to the mean of Day 24 to Day 28|Intention-to-treat set (ITT)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836871|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 240 Minutes|The scale measure pain after 240 minutes (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|240 minutes|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827577|NCT01208233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hand Grip Strength Test at Day 90 for Paretic to Non-paretic Hand Ratio (Part 2)|The Hand Grip Strength Test measures the maximum isometric strength of the hand and forearm muscles. The participant was required to squeeze the dynamometer with maximum isometric effort while sitting with shoulder adducted and neutrally roated, elbow flexed at 90 degrees and the forearm in neutral position and wrist between 0 to 30 degrees dorsiflexion and a 0 to 15 degrees ulnar deviation. The participant performed this task 3 times with each hand, starting with the non-paretic hand. The performance measure for this task was the average score measured in pounds of pressure exerted.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Number of participants analyzed indicated those participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo.||percentage change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827578|NCT01208233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hand Grip Strength Test at Day 90 for Paretic and Non-paretic Hands (Part 2)|The Hand Grip Strength Test measures the maximum isometric strength of the hand and forearm muscles. The participant was required to squeeze the dynamometer with maximum isometric effort while sitting with shoulder adducted and neutrally roated, elbow flexed at 90 degrees and the forearm in neutral position and wrist between 0 to 30 degrees dorsiflexion and a 0 to 15 degrees ulnar deviation. The participant performed this task 3 times with each hand, starting with the non-paretic hand. The performance measure for this task was the average score measured in pounds of pressure exerted.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). n=number of participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo.||pounds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827579|NCT01208233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Box and Blocks (B&B) Test at Day 90 for Paretic to Non-paretic Hand Ratio (Part 2)|The B&B test is a measure of manual dexterity. The B&B apparatus consists of a box divided into 2 sections and 1-inch hardwood blocks. The blocks began in the compartment of the test box to the dominant side of the participant. The participant was required to transfer the blocks one at a time to the other side of the box as quickly as possible in 1 minute using the non-paretic hand. The box was then turned so all the blocks were in the same side as the paretic hand. The participant was then required to do the test with his/her paretic hand. The participant was told that if more than 1 block was picked up at a time it was to only count as 1 block. The participant was also told that their fingertips needed to cross the partition for the block to be counted. The performance measure for this task was the number of blocks moved within 1 minute.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Number of participants indicated those participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo.||percentage change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827580|NCT01208233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Box and Blocks (B&B) Test at Day 90 for Paretic Hand (Part 2)|The B&B test is a measure of manual dexterity. The B&B apparatus consists of a box divided into 2 sections and 1-inch hardwood blocks. The blocks began in the compartment of the test box to the dominant side of the participant. The participant was required to transfer the blocks one at a time to the other side of the box as quickly as possible in 1 minute using the non-paretic hand. The box was then turned so all the blocks were in the same side as the paretic hand. The participant was then required to do the test with his/her paretic hand. The participant was told that if more than 1 block was picked up at a time it was to only count as 1 block. The participant was also told that their fingertips needed to cross the partition for the block to be counted. The performance measure for this task was the number of blocks moved within 1 minute.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 90|The I-FAS consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 MTD or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). Number of participants indicated those participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo.||blocks moved per minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
827581|NCT01208233|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) Less Than or Equal to (<=2) at Day 90 (Part 2)|The mRS is a 6-point scale of functional recovery. The scale grades participants as having no symptoms (0), minor symptoms (1), minor handicap (2), moderate handicap (3), moderately severe handicap (4), severe handicap (5), or death (6).|Day 90|The Inferential Full Analysis Set (I-FAS) consisted of participants within the FAS who were randomized to PF-03049423 maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or highest dose (6 mg) group or the placebo group that was in the same cohort as the MTD or highest dose (6 mg). n=number of participants included for comparison between active drug and placebo.||percentage of participants|||Number
827582|NCT01208233|Primary|Number of Participants With Suicidal Behavior and/or Ideation as Assessed by Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) (Part 1* and 2)|"Data were mapped to Columbia-Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA) event codes. C-SSRS assessed if participant experienced: completed suicide (Code 1), suicide attempt (Code 2) (Response of “Yes” on “actual attempt”), preparatory acts toward imminent suicidal behavior (Code 3) (“Yes” on “aborted attempt”, interrupted attempt”, preparatory acts or behavior”), suicidal ideation (Code 4) (“Yes” on “wish to be dead”, non-specific active suicidal thoughts”, active suicidal ideation with methods without intent to act/some intent to act without specific plan or with specific plan and intent), self-injurious behavior, no suicidal intent (Code 7) (“Yes” on “Has participant engaged in non-suicidal self-injurious behavior”). Number of participants with Yes response for any of above mentioned categories was assessed. *This was a primary endpoint for Part 1 (timeframe Days 1 to 14), as data for it were not reported separately, Part 1 and 2 data were reported together."|Day 7 (Baseline) up to follow up (28 days after Day 90)|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo). n=number of participants who had C-SSRS assessed at that visit.||participants|||Number
827644|NCT01201343|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fatigue Score at Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 12 and 24|Fatigue scale was derived from the United Kingdom Neurological Disability Scale (UKNDS), and evaluates fatigue according to the participant's subjective impression and the functional disability that it causes. 'Yes' or 'No' answers result in a score that ranges from 0 to 5, where a score 5 shows worse state. (Sharrack B et al., 1999)|Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 12, and 24|ITT population. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at that time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827583|NCT01208233|Primary|Number of Participants With Significant Change in Neurological Examination Findings (Part 1* and 2)|The complete neurological examination included an assessment of the motor, sensory, cranial nerves, reflexes, mental status and associated motor functions. The limited neurological exam could examine the same categories of neurologic assessments as the full examination, but would differ by the depth in the examination. The examination was required to be done to the extent needed to assess the participant for any potential changes in neurological status, as determined by the Investigator, but had to always include an assessment of motor, vision and hearing. *This endpoint was a primary endpoint for Part 1 (timeframe Days 1 to 14), as data for this timeframe were not reported separately, Part 1 and 2 data were reported together.|Day 1 (Baseline) up to Day 90|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo). Participants analyzed indicated those who had neurological examinations done at both baseline and last visit.||participants|||Number
827584|NCT01208233|Primary|Number of Participants With Significant Change in Physical Examination Findings (Part 1* and 2)|The complete physical examination included examination of the skin, eyes, ears, throat, neck, cardiac, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and musculoskeletal systems. The limited physical examination included examination of the cardiac, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and musculoskeletal systems. *This endpoint was a primary endpoint for Part 1 (timeframe Days 1 to 14), as data for this timeframe were not reported separately, Part 1 and 2 data were reported together.|Day 1 (Baseline) up to Day 90|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo). Participants analyzed indicated those who had physical examinations done at both baseline and last visit.||participants|||Number
827585|NCT01208233|Primary|Number of Participants With Electrocardiograms (ECGs) Data Met Criteria of Potential Clinical Concern (Part 1* and 2)|ECG criteria of potential clinical concern were 1), PR interval: >=300 milliseconds (msec); >=25% increase when baseline >200 msec; or increase >=50% when baseline <=200 msec; 2), QRS interval: >=140 msec; >=50% increase from baseline; 3), QT interval: >=500 msec, QTc interval using Fridericia’s formula (QTcF interval): absolute value >=450 - <480 msec, >=480-<500 msec, >=500 msec; absolute change 30 - <60, >=60 msec. *This endpoint was a primary endpoint for Part 1 (timeframe Days 1 to 14), as data for this timeframe were not reported separately, Part 1 and 2 data were reported together.|Day 1 (Baseline) to Day 90|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo). n=number of evaluable participants.||participants|||Number
827586|NCT01208233|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs Data Met Criteria of Potential Clinical Concern (Part 1* and 2)|Vital signs included blood pressure (BP; supine, sitting and standing) and pulse rate. Vital signs criteria of potential clinical concern were 1), BP: systolic BP (SBP) greater than or equal to (>=) 30 or 50 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg) change from grand baseline in same posture, systolic less than (<) 90 mm Hg; diastolic BP (DBP) >=20 mm Hg change from grand baseline in same posture, diastolic <50 mm Hg; 2), pulse rate (supine, sitting and standing): <40 or greater than (>) 120 beats per minute (bpm); Standing: <40 or >140 bpm. *This endpoint was a primary endpoint for Part 1 (timeframe Days 1 to 14), as data for this timeframe were not reported separately, Part 1 and 2 data were reported together.|Day 1 (Baseline) up to follow-up (28 days after Day 90)|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo). n=number of evaluable participants.||participants|||Number
827587|NCT01208233|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Abnormal Laboratory Test Results (Part 1* and 2)|The total number of participants with laboratory test abnormalities (without regard to baseline abnormality) was assessed. *This endpoint was a primary endpoint for Part 1 (timeframe Days 1 to 14), as data for this timeframe were not reported separately, Part 1 and 2 data were reported together.|Day 1 (Baseline) up to Day 90|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who took any study medication (active or placebo). Participants analyzed indicated number of participants evaluated.||participants|||Number
827588|NCT01200758|Secondary|Percentage of Responses Who Showed Rituximab SC Formulation Convenient as Compared to Rituximab IV Formulation as Assessed by Physician/Nurse Opinion|"All investigator physicians and nurses involved in this study were asked to complete question i.e. Which formulation of rituximab (SC or IV) do you think is more convenient? based on their experience with the rituximab SC and IV formulations across all participants and presented as rituximab SC is much more convenient; rituximab SC is a little more convenient; both formulations are equally convenient; rituximab IV is a little more convenient; and rituximab IV is much more convenient."|After Cycle 8 of induction treatment (24 weeks) and during the maintenance part of the study after 12 months (i.e., Cycle 15), and after the end of the maintenance treatment, (i.e., Cycle 20) (1 Cycle=4 weeks for Cycle 8 and 8 weeks for Cycles 15 and 20)|"ITT Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for the outcome measure. Here n = number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure at specified timepoint."||percentage of responses|||Number
827589|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Percentage of Responses Showing Time Saved of Staff as Per Physician/Nurse Opinions With Each Administration of Rituximab SC as Compared to Rituximab IV at the End of Cy 8, 15 and 20|All investigator physicians and nurses involved in this study were asked to provide the staff time that could be saved with each administration of rituximab SC as compared with rituximab IV to participants in routine practice afetr Cy 8, 15, 20 and categorized as less than (<) 1 hr, at least 1 hr but <2 hrs, at least 2 hrs but <3 hrs, at least 3 hrs but <4 hrs, >/=4 hrs. Staff were asked not to consider the time needed for the first IV administration. Analysis was done in all participants to show a comparison on the time saved by staffs when administered via SC and IV.|After Cycle 8 of induction treatment (24 weeks) and during the maintenance part of the study after 12 months (i.e., Cycle 15), and after the end of the maintenance treatment, (i.e., Cycle 20) (1 Cycle=4 weeks for Cycle 8 and 8 weeks for Cycles 15 and 20)|"ITT Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for the outcome measure. Here n = number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure at specified timepoint."||percentage of responses|||Number
827652|NCT01208337|Secondary|Incidence of Patients in Whom Steroids Are Not Used|As part of analysis for assessing effectiveness and safety of Alemtuzumab Induction at the time of transplant, it is important to assess the incidence in which patients enrolled were able to wean off of steroids post-transplant compared to historical controls.|5 year|Induction of Alemtuzumab at time of transplant may increase the likelihood of weaning off steroids sooner after transplant than patients who did not receive Alemtuzumab as induction immunosuppression medication.||participants|||Number
827590|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Percentage of Participants Positive for Human Anti-Human Antibodies (HAHAs) to Rituximab|Levels of HAHA in serum were detected at Day 1 of each cycle up to Cycle 8 and at follow-up visit. Stage I and II: Baseline: pre-dose (72 hours prior) D1 of Cy1, Cy 3-20, D0 of Cy2 (1 Cy=3 weeks for Cy1-8 & 8 weeks for Cy9-20), post-baseline: every 12 weeks after last rituximab administration until 96 weeks (a median of 27 months; up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|Stage I and II: Baseline, post-baseline (See detailed timeframe in Outcome Measure description)|"Safety Analysis Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for the outcome measure. Here n = number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure at specified timepoint."||percentage of participants|||Number
827591|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Percentage of Participants Positive for Human Anti-Chimeric Antibodies (HACAs) to Rituximab|Levels of HACA in serum were detected at Day 1 of each cycle up to Cycle 8 and at follow-up visit. Stage I and II: Baseline: pre-dose (72 hours prior) D1 of Cy1, Cy 3-20, D0 of Cy2 (1 Cy=3 weeks for Cy1-8 & 8 weeks for Cy9-20), post-baseline: every 12 weeks after last rituximab administration until 96 weeks (a median of 27 months; up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|Stage I and II: Baseline, post-baseline (See detailed timeframe in Outcome Measure description)|"Safety Analysis Population: included 6 participants who were randomized under Rituximab SC arm but withdrew after Cy1 and then analyzed under Rituximab IV arm. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for the outcome measure. Here n = number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure at specified timepoint."||percentage of participants|||Number
827592|NCT01200758|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With B-Cell Depletion by Cycle for Maintenance Phase|Depletion is defined as a CD19 value <80 cells/mm^3.|Stage I and II (maintenance): D1 of Cy 9 to 20 (1 Cy=8 weeks) (up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|"ITT Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for the outcome measure. Here n = number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure at specified timepoint."||percentage of participants|||Number
827593|NCT01200758|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With B-Cell Depletion by Cycle for Induction Phase|Depletion is defined as a cluster of differentiation (CD) 19 value <80 cells per cubic millimeter (cells/mm^3).|Stage I and II (induction): for rituximab IV - D1 of Cy 1 to 8 (1 Cy=3 weeks); for rituximab SC - D1 of Cy 1 and Cy 3 to 8, D0 of Cy 2|"ITT Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for the outcome measure. Here n = number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure at specified timepoint."||percentage of participants|||Number
827594|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Rituximab Levels 12 Weeks, 24 Weeks, and 36 Weeks After the Last Rituximab Administration||12 weeks, 24 weeks, and 36 weeks after the last rituximab administration (up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|"Safety Analysis Population included all participants who received at least one dose of rituximab, either IV or SC. Participants were analyzed as treated. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for the outcome measure. Here n = number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure at specified timepoint."||mcg/mL||Full Range|Median
827595|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Ctrough of Rituximab at Each Maintenance Treatment Cycle|Stage I and II (maintenance): D29 of Cy8 (induction; 1 Cy=4 weeks), predose (within 2 hr) on D1 of Cy9 to 19 (maintenance Cy1 to 12 [1 Cy=8 weeks]; up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|Stage I and II (maintenance): Predose (within 2hr) up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years]) (See detailed timeframe in Outcome Measure description)|"ITT Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for the outcome measure. Here n = number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure at specified timepoint."||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827596|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Ctrough of Rituximab at Each Induction Treatment Cycle|Stage I and II (Induction): Rituximab IV: Predose (within 2 hr) on D1 of Cy1-8 (1 Cy=3 weeks & 4 weeks for Cy8); Rituximab SC: Predose (within 2 hr) on D1 of Cy1 & Cy3-8 (1 Cy=3 weeks and 4 weeks for Cy8), predose (within 2 hr) on D0 of Cy2 (up to data cutoff of 31 Oct 2013 [up to 32 months])|Stage I and II (Pooled): Predose (within 2hr) up to data cutoff of 31 Oct 2013 [up to 32 months]) (See detailed timeframe in Outcome Measure description)|"ITT Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for the outcome measure. Here n = number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure at specified timepoint."||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827597|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I: Maximum Serum Concentrations (Cmax) of IV and SC Rituximab|Predose (within 2 hr) and 24 hrs postdose on Cy7 (D1,3,7,15), predose (0 hr) on Cy8 D1 (1 Cy=3 weeks); additionally within 15 minutes after end of infusion (infusion duration=30 minutes) on Cy7 D1 for rituximab IV (up to data cutoff of 11 Apr 2012 [up to 26 months])|Stage I (Induction): Predose (within 2hr) up to data cutoff of 11 Apr 2012 [up to 26 months]) (See detailed timeframe in Outcome Measure description)|Stage 1 PK Evaluable Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827598|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage 1: Observed Area Under the Serum Concentration-Time Curve (AUC) of Rituximab|AUC is a measure of the serum concentration of the drug over time. It is used to characterize drug absorption. Predose (within 2 hr) and 24 hrs postdose on Cy 7 (D1,3,7,15), predose (0 hr) on Cy 8 D1 (1 Cy=3 weeks); additionally within 15 minutes after end of infusion (infusion duration=30 minutes) on Cy 7 D1 for rituximab IV (up to data cutoff of 11 Apr 2012 [up to 26 months])|Stage I (Induction): Predose (within 2 hour [hr]) up to data cutoff of 11 Apr 2012 [up to 26 months]) (See detailed timeframe in Outcome Measure description)|Stage I PK evaluable population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||mcg*day/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827599|NCT01200758|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause. Participants without event were censored at the time of last follow-up information for survival, ie, at the last time known to be alive.|Baseline up to death (up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|ITT population.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827600|NCT01200758|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died||Baseline up to death (up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
827653|NCT01208337|Secondary|Incidence of Patients in Whom Tacrolimus Whole Blood Concentration Less Than 10 ng/ml Are Being Used at 1-year Follow-up.|Tacrolimus whole blood concentrations less than 10 ng/ml|1 year|It is believed that patients whom received Alemtuzumab at the time of transplant and continue post-transplant with functioning grafts will have Tacrolimus whole blood concentrations less than 10ng/ml.||participants|||Number
827601|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Event-Free Survival Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for NHL|Event-free survival was defined as the time from randomization to disease progression/relapse, death or initiation of new NHL therapy. If the specified event (progression/relapse, death or new anti-lymphoma treatment) did not occur, event-free survival was censored at the last tumor assessment date either during treatment or follow up. Event-free survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves. Baseline, D1 of all cycles (Cy 1-20) (1 Cy=3 weeks for Cy1-8 & 8 weeks for Cy9-20), at early withdrawal, at follow-up, every 12 weeks for 96 weeks or until documented disease progression/relapse or death (up to a median of 27 months; up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|Baseline up to disease progression or death up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 (up to 6 years) (See detailed timeframe in Outcome Measure description)|ITT population.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827602|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage 1 and II (Pooled): Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression/Relapse, New Anti-Lymphoma Treatment or Death Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for NHL|Disease progression: ≥50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previously identified abnormal node or appearance of any new lesion during or at the end of therapy or ≥50% increase in the greatest diameter of any previously identified node >1 cm in its short axis or in the SPD of more than one node. Baseline, D1 of all cycles (Cy 1-20) (1 Cy=3 weeks for Cy1-8 & 8 weeks for Cy9-20), at early withdrawal, at follow-up, every 12 weeks for 96 weeks or until documented disease progression/relapse or death (up to a median of 27 months; up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|Baseline up to disease progression or death up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 (up to 6 years) (See detailed timeframe in Outcome Measure description)|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
827603|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage 1 and II (Pooled): Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for NHL|PFS was defined as the time from randomization to disease progression/relapse or death due to any cause. If the specified event (disease progression/relapse, death) did not occur, PFS was censored at the last tumor assessment date showing no disease progression, either during treatment or follow-up. Disease progression: ≥50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previously identified abnormal node or appearance of any new lesion during or at the end of therapy or ≥50% increase in the greatest diameter of any previously identified node >1 cm in its short axis or in the SPD of more than one node. PFS analysis was performed using Kaplan – Meier curves. Baseline, D1 of all cycles (Cy 1-20) (1 Cy=3 weeks for Cy1-8 & 8 weeks for Cy9-20), at early withdrawal, at follow-up, every 12 weeks for 96 weeks or until documented disease progression/relapse or death (up to median of 27 months; up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|Baseline up to disease progression or death up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 (up to 6 years) (See detailed timeframe in Outcome Measure description)|ITT Population.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827604|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage 1 and II (Pooled): Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression/Relapse or Death|Disease progression: ≥50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previously identified abnormal node or appearance of any new lesion during or at the end of therapy or ≥50% increase in the greatest diameter of any previously identified node >1 cm in its short axis or in the SPD of more than one node. Baseline, D1 of all cycles (Cy 1-20) (1 Cy=3 weeks for Cy1-8 & 8 weeks for Cy9-20), at early withdrawal, at follow-up, every 12 weeks for 96 weeks or until documented disease progression/relapse or death (up to median of 27 months; up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years])|Baseline up to disease progression or death up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 (up to 6 years) (See detailed timeframe in Outcome Measure description)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
827605|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Percentage of Participants With Overall Response at the End of Maintenance Treatment Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for NHL|Overall Response comprised of CR, CRu, or PR . A participant was defined as a responder if they sustained a CR, CRu or PR at the end of induction treatment. Response assessment was based on clinical examination and CT scans. Assessment of tumor response was performed according to the International Working Group response criteria for NHL. CR: complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy; CRu: CR along with regression in lymph node mass by >75% in SPD. The 95% CI for the response rates was estimated for one sample binomial using Pearson-Clopper.|Stage I and II: Baseline up to 57 days after last maintenance dose (last maintenance dose: maintenance Cy12/Study Cy20 [30 months]) (up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years]) (1 Cy=8 weeks)|ITT population; only participants who entered the maintenance phase and received at least 1 cycle of rituximab maintenance treatment from Cycle 9 to Cycle 20 were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827606|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Percentage of Participants With Complete Response at the End of Maintenance Treatment Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for NHL|Complete Response comprised of CR and CRu. A participant was defined as a responder if they sustained a CR or CRu at the end of induction treatment. Response assessment was based on clinical examination and CT scans. Assessment of tumor response was performed according to the International Working Group response criteria for NHL. CR: complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy; CRu: CR along with regression in lymph node mass by >75% in SPD. The 95% CI for the response rates was estimated for one sample binomial using Pearson-Clopper.|Stage I and II: Baseline up to 57 days after last maintenance dose (last maintenance dose: maintenance Cy12/Study Cy20 [30 months]) (up to data cutoff of 11 Jan 2016 [up to 6 years]) (1 Cy=8 weeks)|ITT population; only participants who entered the maintenance phase and received at least 1 cycle of rituximab maintenance treatment from Cycle 9 to Cycle 20 were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827614|NCT01200797|Primary|Time to Progression (TTP)|Estimated probable duration from on‐study date to date of disease progression, using the Kaplan‐Meier method with censoring (see analysis population description for additional details). Disease progression is defined under RECIST v1.1 as >=20% increase in sum of longest diameters of target lesions, unequivocal progression of non‐target lesions, or appearance of new lesions.|On‐study date to date of progression (assessed up to 12 months)|All patients are included in the analysis on intention-to-treat basis. Analysis is by Kaplan‐Meier method, where progression is an event, with censoring for non-progressed patients at greater of off‐study date, last known alive date, or date of death not attributable to disease progression.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827607|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Percentage of Participants With Complete Response at the End of Induction Treatment Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for NHL|Complete Response comprised of CR and CRu. A participant was defined as a responder if they sustained a CR or CRu at the end of induction treatment. Response assessment was based on clinical examination and CT scans. Assessment of tumor response was performed according to the International Working Group response criteria for NHL. CR: complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy; CRu: CR along with regression in lymph node mass by >75% in SPD. The 95% CI for the response rates was estimated for one sample binomial using Pearson-Clopper.|Stage I and II: Baseline up to end of induction treatment Cy8 (24 weeks) (1 Cy=3 weeks)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827608|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage II: Percentage of Participants With Complete Response at the End of Induction Treatment Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for NHL|Complete Response comprised of CR and CRu. A participant was defined as a responder if they sustained a CR or CRu at the end of induction treatment. Response assessment was based on clinical examination and CT scans. Assessment of tumor response was performed according to the International Working Group response criteria for NHL. CR: complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy; CRu: CR along with regression in lymph node mass by >75% in SPD. The 95% CI for the response rates was estimated for one sample binomial using Pearson-Clopper.|Stage II: Baseline up to end of induction treatment Cy8 (24 weeks) (1 Cy=3 weeks)|Stage II ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827609|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I: Percentage of Participants With Complete Response at the End of Induction Treatment Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for NHL|Complete Response was comprised CR and CRu. A participant was defined as a responder if they sustained a CR or CRu at the end of induction treatment. Response assessment was based on clinical examination and CT scans. Assessment of tumor response was performed according to the International Working Group response criteria for NHL. CR: complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy; CRu: CR along with regression in lymph node mass by >75% in SPD. The 95% CI for the response rates was estimated for one sample binomial using Pearson-Clopper.|Stage I: Baseline up to end of induction treatment Cy8 (24 weeks) (1 Cy=3 weeks)|Stage I ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827610|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I and II (Pooled): Percentage of Participants With Overall Response at the End of Induction Treatment Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for NHL|Overall Response comprised of CR, CRu, or PR. A participant was defined as a responder if they sustained a CR, CRu or PR at the end of induction treatment. Response assessment was based on clinical examination and CT scans. Assessment of tumour response was performed according to the International Working Group response criteria for NHL. CR: complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy; CRu: CR along with regression in lymph node mass by >75% in SPD; PR: ≥50% decrease in SPD of 6 largest dominant nodes or nodal masses. The 95% CI for the response rates was estimated for one sample binomial using Pearson-Clopper.|Stage I and II: Baseline up to end of induction treatment Cy8 (24 weeks) (1 Cy=3 weeks)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827611|NCT01200758|Secondary|Stage I: Percentage of Participants With Overall Response at the End of Induction Treatment Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for NHL|Overall Response comprised CR, CRu, or PR. A participant was defined as a responder if they sustained a CR, CRu or PR at the end of induction treatment. Response assessment was based on clinical examination and CT scans. Assessment of tumor response was performed according to the International Working Group response criteria for NHL. CR: complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy; CRu: CR along with regression in lymph node mass by >75% in the SPD; PR: ≥50% decrease in SPD of 6 largest dominant nodes or nodal masses. The 95% CI was estimated for one sample binomial using Pearson-Clopper.|Stage I: Baseline up to end of induction treatment Cy8 (24 weeks) (1 Cy=3 weeks)|Stage I ITT Population included all participants who were randomized in Stage I irrespective whether they received study drug or not.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827612|NCT01200758|Primary|Stage II: Percentage of Participants With Overall Response at the End of Induction Treatment Assessed Using International Working Group Response Criteria for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL)|Overall Response comprised complete response (CR), CR unconfirmed (CRu), or PR. A participant was defined as a responder if they sustained a CR, CRu or PR at the end of induction treatment. Response assessment was based on clinical examination and computed tomography (CT) scans. Assessment of tumor response was performed according to the International Working Group response criteria for NHL. CR: complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disappearance of all disease-related symptoms if present before therapy; CRu: CR along with regression in lymph node mass by more than (>) 75% in the sum of the products of greatest diameters (SPD); PR: Greater than or equal to (≥) 50% decrease in SPD of 6 largest dominant nodes or nodal masses. The 95% CI was estimated for one sample binomial using Pearson-Clopper.|Stage II: Baseline up to end of induction treatment Cy8 (24 weeks) (1 Cy=3 weeks)|Stage II ITT Population included all participants who were randomized in Stage II irrespective whether they received study drug or not.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827613|NCT01200758|Primary|Stage I: Trough Serum Concentrations (Ctrough) of IV and SC Rituximab||Stage I: Cycle (Cy) 7 Day (D) 21 (within 2 hours predose on Cy8) of induction treatment (1 Cy=3 weeks)|Stage I pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluable population comprised all participants with data for Ctrough available at Cycle 7 and/or observed area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) available at Cycle 7. Participants were analyzed as per treatment received. Number of participants analyzed = participants analyzed for this outcome measure.||micrograms per milliliter (mcg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827692|NCT01209286|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was measured for all participants from the date of first infusion of blinatumomab until the date of death due to any cause. Participants who did not die were censored on the last documented visit date. Overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods.|Up to the data cut-off date of 15 October 2012; maximum follow up time was 667 days.|Full analysis set||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827616|NCT01200797|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Estimated probable duration of life without disease progression, from on‐study date to earlier of progression date or date of death from any cause, using the Kaplan‐Meier method with censoring (see analysis population description for additional details). Disease progression is defined under RECIST v1.1 as >=20% increase in sum of longest diameters of target lesions, unequivocal progression of non‐target lesions, or appearance of new lesions.|On‐study date to lesser of date of progression or date of (assessed up to 12 months)|All patients are included in the analysis on intention‐to-treat basis. Analysis is by Kaplan‐Meier method, where either death or progression is an event, with censoring for non‐progressed, non‐expired patients at greater of off‐study date or last known alive date.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827617|NCT01200797|Primary|Number of Patients With Each Worst-grade Toxicity|Count of patients according to the worst‐grade toxicity experienced by each, where worst‐grade toxicity is per NCI common toxicity criteria: grade 1, mild; grade 2, moderate; grade 3, severe; grade 4, life‐threatening; grade 5, death.|On‐study date to 30 days following final dose of study|Total number of patients reported with any toxicity. Not all participants may have an adverse event, thus not every patient on-treatment may be accounted for in worst-grade toxicities.||participants|||Number
827618|NCT01200797|Primary|Overall Response (OR)|Number of patients in each response category, per RECIST v1.1, summarized as follows for target lesion criteria (see RECIST v1.1 for additional details): complete response (CR),disappearance of target lesions; partial response (PR), >=30% decrease in sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions; progressive disease (PD), >=20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions or appearance of new lesions; stable disease (SD), insufficient change in target lesions or new lesions to qualify as either PD or PR. Patients are categorized according to the best response achieved prior to occurrence of progressive disease, where best response hierarchy is CR>PR>SD>PD. Confirmation of CR or PR is required to deem either one the best overall response.|On‐treatment date to date of disease progression (assessed up to 12 months)|All patients with best overall response data; patients are excluded if best overall response data is missing or if the patient is nonevaluable for best overall response||participants|||Number
827619|NCT01200810|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability Assessed Using NCI CTCAE Version 4.0|Number of participants randomized to RO4929097 arm who experienced serious adverse events .|Up to 12 months|||participants|||Number
827620|NCT01200810|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With PSA Progression During the Observation Phase||Up to 12 months|Analysis could not be conducted as study was terminated early due to lack of study drug. No subjects entered the observation phase.|||||
827621|NCT01200810|Secondary|Time to PSA Progression During the Observation Phase||Up to 12 months|Analysis could not be conducted as study was terminated early due to lack of study drug. No subjects entered the observation phase.|||||
827622|NCT01200810|Secondary|Time to PSA Progression During the Combination Phase||Up to 12 months||||||
827623|NCT01200810|Secondary|Time to PSA Nadir During the Combination Phase||Up to 12 months|Analysis could not be conducted as study was terminated early due to lack of study drug.|||||
827624|NCT01200810|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With PSA Progression During the Combination Phase||Up to 12 months|Analysis could not be conducted as study was terminated early due to lack of study drug. Only three patients started combination phase and were then removed from study due to lack of study drug.|||||
827625|NCT01200810|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Who Achieve Complete Response (by PSA) During the Combination Phase||Up to 12 months|Analysis could not be conducted as study was terminated early due to lack of study drug. Only three patients started combination phase and were then removed from study due to lack of study drug.|||||
827626|NCT01200810|Primary|Time to PSA Progression|Time to PSA progression will be compared in the two groups using a log-rank test for a maximum of 54 weeks.|Up to 12 months|Analysis could not be conducted as the protocol was terminated early due to lack of study drug. Only three patients progressed during randomization phase.|||||
827627|NCT01200875|Primary|Blood Growth Factor Concentrations||5 days following PRP injection|||IGF-1 fold-change from baseline @ 24h||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
827628|NCT01200992|Secondary|Comparison of Safety of EN3348 With Mitomycin C [Adverse Events (Other Than Serious Adverse Events) With Frequency Threshold of 5% or Greater].|Safety endpoint displayed includes adverse events (other than serious adverse events) with a frequency threshold of 5% or greater, for each treatment arm. No statistical comparisons have been performed between the 2 treatment arms.|Through study early termination, approximately 23 months from first subject enrolled.|Relevant safety data are presented in the Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events Modules. Any clinically significant findings pertaining to other secondary outcomes such as vital signs, physical exams and laboratory test results would appear in these Modules as well. No statistical comparisons have been performed between the 2 treatment arms.||participants|||Number
827629|NCT01200992|Primary|Comparison of Event-free Survival of Intravesical EN3348 With Mitomycin C.|Primary efficacy endpoint will be event-free survival - the interval from randomization to an event. An event is defined as tumor recurrence, tumor progression to muscle invasive bladder cancer or death, whichever occurs first. Tumor recurrence or progression must be documented by bladder biopsy.|1 year|The study was discontinued early. The number of subjects randomized at time of closure represented 18.7% of the planned enrollment of 450 subjects. Thus, the planned analysis as stated in the protocol was not performed. Only 2 subjects (5.1%) in the EN3348 arm and 4 subjects (8.9%) in the mitomycin C arm completed all planned doses.|||||
827630|NCT01201265|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|Change from baseline in DBP was analyzed by overall response (CR+PR, SD+PD).|Baseline, Cycle 6, 12 of treatment|Safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Here, n signifies the number of participants evaluable at specified time points.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
827631|NCT01201265|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|Change from baseline in SBP was analyzed by overall response (CR+PR, SD+PD).|Baseline, Cycle 6, 12 of treatment|Safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Here, n signifies the number of participants evaluable at specified time points.||millimetre of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
827741|NCT01209702|Secondary|Part 2: Elimination Half-life of Tocilizumab|Elimination half-life of tocilizumab at steady state after 12 weeks of treatment.|Week 12, pre-dose and at the end of infusion, on the 2nd and 7th day of Week 12, 14 days post-dose (Week 14) and 28 days post-dose (pre-dose of Week 16 infusion).|Due to premature study termination pharmacokinetic parameters were not analyzed.|||||
827632|NCT01201265|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Cycle 6 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-30)|The EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) questionnaire incorporates 9 multi scale items: 5 functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional and social); 3 symptom scales (fatigue, pain and nausea & vomiting); and a global health and quality-of-life scale. It contains 30 questions. The score for each item and the overall score ranges from 0 to 100. A high overall scale and subscale scores represent improved health status. However, in case of symptoms, higher scores suggest increased perception of these symptoms.|Baseline, cycle 6|Efficacy analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and with at least one efficacy assessment. Here, n signifies the number of participants evaluable at specified time points.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827633|NCT01201265|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event (AE)|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product.|Up to 28 days after termination of study treatment (approximately 1569 days)|Safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||participants|||Number
827634|NCT01201265|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival was measured from the date of the first study drug dose to the date of death from any cause. The median overall survival time with 95%CI was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.|From the date of registration until the disease progression or death (up to 1541 days)|Efficacy analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and with at least one efficacy assessment.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827635|NCT01201265|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP)|Duration of time to progression (TTP) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The time to progression was calculated in days from the date of registration until the earliest date of documented disease progression.|From the date of registration until the disease progression (up to 1541 days).|Efficacy analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and with at least one efficacy assessment.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827636|NCT01201265|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Clinical Benefit Response (CBR)|Clinical benefit response was defined as a complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD). CBR was assessed using Recist v.1.1. CR: disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. SD: neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. PD: at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm.|From the date of registration until the disease progression or death (up to 1541 days)|Efficacy analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and with at least one efficacy assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827637|NCT01201265|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Overall Response|The overall response rate (ORR) was defined as complete response (CR) + partial response (PR). ORR was summarized using number and percentage along with two-sided 95% Pearson-Clopper CI. The overall response rate was assessed utilizing the RECIST v. 1.1. CR: disappearance of all target and non-target lesions (TLs) and normalization of tumor markers. Pathological lymph nodes must have short axis measures less than (<) 10 millimeter (mm). PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of measures (longest diameter for tumor lesions and short axis measure for nodes) of TLs, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters.|From the date of registration until the disease progression or death (up to 1541 days)|Efficacy analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and with at least one efficacy assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827638|NCT01201265|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression free survival (PFS) was calculated in days from the date of registration until the earliest date of documented disease progression or death. The median PFS time with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated using Kaplan Meier method. The progression-free survival was assessed utilizing computer tomography (CT)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/bone scans and X-ray and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v. 1.1. Progression of disease is defined as at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions.|From the date of registration until the disease progression or death (up to 1541 days).|Efficacy analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and with at least one efficacy assessment||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827639|NCT01201317|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Day 29 in Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory Scale (NPSI) Total Score.|Last Observation carried Forward (LOCF). Scale consists of 10 Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory Scale (NPSI) pain symptom descriptors wiht a recall period of 24 hours. Each descriptor is rated on a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) 0-10; 0=No (symptom), 10=Worst (symptom) imaginable. The NPSI Total Score was calculated as the sum of 10 of the NPSI descriptors. Range for total score 0 -100. Higher total score implicates worse symptoms.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 29 (Visit 7)|Modified Intention- to- treat set (ITT) including only patients with adequate baseline and Day 29 data||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827640|NCT01201317|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least 50% Decrease From Baseline in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Average Pain Score at Day 28.|"Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF). Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Average Pain score reduction=(change from baseline at Day 28/baseline)*100.
Responder= NRS Average Pain score reduction ≥50% (yes/no)"|Baseline (mean of Day -5 to Day -1) to Day 28|Intention-to-treat set (ITT)||Participants|||Number
827641|NCT01201317|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least 30% Decrease From Baseline in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Average Pain Score at Day 28.|"Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF). Numerical Rating Scale(NRS) Average Pain score reduction=(change from baseline at Day 28/baseline)*100.
Responder= NRS Average Pain score reduction ≥30% (yes/no)"|Baseline (mean of Day -5 to Day -1) to Day 28|Intention-to-treat set (ITT)||Participants|||Number
836872|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 210 Minutes|The scale measure pain after 210 minutes (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|210 minutes|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827645|NCT01201343|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Center for State-trait Anger Expression Inventory 2 (STAXI-state) Score at Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|STAXI-state scale measures the intensity of anger as an emotional state (state anger) and the disposition to experience angry feelings as a personality trait (trait anger). In this study only 1 of the original 6 scales was used, the state anger scale, which measures the intensity of anger at a given moment as emotional state. This scale consists of 15 items graded in 4 degrees from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much), where 4 corresponds to the worst state. The total score range from 1 (not at all) to 60 (very much), where 60 corresponds to the worst state. (Spielberger CD, 1996)|Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|ITT population: all participants with at least 1 interferon-beta intake and 1 evaluation of primary criterion, that is, at least 1 evaluation before treatment initiation and after Day 0 for emotional dyscontrol sub-score. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at that time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827646|NCT01201343|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) Score at Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|CES-D is an auto-questionnaire including 20 items to screen for depressive feelings and behaviour. The 20 items of this scale are graded from 0 (never) to 3 (always), where 3 corresponds to the most severe state with the exception of items 4, 8, 12 and 16 (scoring was reversed before the calculation of the total score). Total score ranged from 0 (never) to 60 (always), where 60 corresponds to most severe state. (Radloff LS, 1977)|Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|ITT population: all participants with at least 1 interferon-beta intake and 1 evaluation of primary criterion, that is, at least 1 evaluation before treatment initiation and after Day 0 for emotional dyscontrol sub-score. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at that time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827647|NCT01201343|Secondary|Change From Baseline in State-trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI State) Score at Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|STAI state scale is an auto-evaluation scale for anxiety. This scale includes 20 items that allow quantifying feeling of apprehension, tension, nervousness and worry that the participant feels at the time of the completion of the questionnaire. The 20 items are graded from 1 (no) to 4 (yes), where 'yes' corresponds to the best state for items 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 11, 15, 16, 19, 20 (scoring was reversed before calculation of total score); and to the worst state for items 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18. The total score ranged from 1 (best state) to 80 (worst state). (Spielberger CD et al., 1983)|Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|ITT population: all participants with at least 1 interferon-beta intake and 1 evaluation of primary criterion, that is, at least 1 evaluation before treatment initiation and after Day 0 for emotional dyscontrol sub-score. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at that time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827648|NCT01201343|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Emotional Abrasion Sub-score of the EHD Scale at Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|EHD scale is a tool to assess the depressive mood dimensions 'lack of emotional control' (emotional dyscontrol) and 'blunted effect' which comprises of 11 items graded in 4 degrees from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much), where 4 corresponds to the worst state. The emotional abrasion sub-score is the sum of items 3, 6, 7, and 8. The total possible score range from 1 (not at all) to 16 (very much), where 16 corresponds to worst state. (Radat F et al., 2007)|Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24|ITT population: all participants with at least 1 interferon-beta intake and 1 evaluation of primary criterion, that is, at least 1 evaluation before treatment initiation and after Day 0 for emotional dyscontrol sub-score. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at that time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827649|NCT01201343|Primary|Change From Baseline in Emotional Dyscontrol Sub-score of the EHD Scale at Month 24|EHD scale is a tool to assess the depressive mood dimensions 'lack of emotional control' (emotional dyscontrol) and 'blunted effect' which comprises of 11 items graded in 4 degrees from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much), where 4 corresponds to the worst state. The emotional dyscontrol sub-score is the sum of items 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 10, and 11. The total possible score range from 1 (not at all) to 28 (very much), where 28 corresponds to worst state. (Radat F et al., 2007)|Baseline and Month 24|ITT population: all participants with at least 1 interferon-beta intake and 1 evaluation of primary criterion, that is, at least 1 evaluation before treatment initiation and after Day 0 for emotional dyscontrol sub-score. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at that time-point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827650|NCT01201343|Primary|Change From Baseline in Emotional Dyscontrol Sub-score of the EHD Scale at Month 18|EHD scale is a tool to assess the depressive mood dimensions 'lack of emotional control' (emotional dyscontrol) and 'blunted effect' which comprises of 11 items graded in 4 degrees from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much), where 4 corresponds to the worst state. The emotional dyscontrol sub-score is the sum of items 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 10, and 11. The total possible score range from 1 (not at all) to 28 (very much), where 28 corresponds to worst state. (Radat F et al., 2007)|Baseline and Month 18|ITT population: all participants with at least 1 interferon-beta intake and 1 evaluation of primary criterion, that is, at least 1 evaluation before treatment initiation and after Day 0 for emotional dyscontrol sub-score. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at that time-point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827651|NCT01201343|Primary|Change From Baseline in Emotional Dyscontrol Sub-score of the Depressive Mood Scale (Echelle d'Humeur Depressive [EHD]) Scale at Month 12|EHD scale is a tool to assess the depressive mood dimensions 'lack of emotional control' (emotional dyscontrol) and 'blunted effect' which comprises of 11 items graded in 4 degrees from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much), where 4 corresponds to the worst state. The emotional dyscontrol sub-score is the sum of items 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 10, and 11. The total possible score range from 1 (not at all) to 28 (very much), where 28 corresponds to worst state. (Radat F et al., 2007)|Baseline and Month 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: all participants with at least 1 interferon-beta intake and 1 evaluation of primary criterion, that is, at least 1 evaluation before treatment initiation and after Day 0 for emotional dyscontrol sub-score. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at that time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827742|NCT01209702|Secondary|Part 2: Peak Plasma Concentration of Tocilizumab|The peak plasma concentration (Cmax) of tocilizumab at steady state after 12 weeks of treatment.|Week 12, pre-dose and at the end of infusion, on the 2nd and 7th day of Week 12, 14 days post-dose (Week 14) and 28 days post-dose (pre-dose of Week 16 infusion).|Due to premature study termination pharmacokinetic parameters were not analyzed.|||||
827654|NCT01208337|Secondary|Incidence of Patients in Whom Steroids Are Not Used|As part of analysis for assessing effectiveness and safety of Alemtuzumab Induction at the time of transplant, it is important to assess the incidence in which patients enrolled were able to wean off of steroids post-transplant compared to historical controls.|1 year|Induction of Alemtuzumab at time of transplant may increase the likelihood of weaning off steroids sooner after transplant than patients who did not receive Alemtuzumab as induction immunosuppression medication.||participants|||Number
827655|NCT01208337|Secondary|Incidence of Biopsy-proven Acute Cellular Rejection|Biopsy-proven incidence of acute cellular rejection|1 Year|Alemtuzumab induction at the time of transplant may reduce the rate of early acute cellular rejection compared with historical controls, but may increase rate of alternate post-transplant complications, such as Post Transplant Lymphoproliferative Disorder (PTLD).||participants|||Number
827656|NCT01208337|Primary|Incidence of Post Transplant Lymphoproliferative Disorder (PTLD)|Asses safety of Alemtuzumab in combination with Tacrolimus and steroids in twenty-three pediatric intestine allograft recipients by calculating the rate in which PTLD occurred amongst the study population.|5 Year|Alemtuzumab induction at the time of transplant may reduce the rate of early acute cellular rejection compared with historical controls, but may increase rate of alternate post-transplant complications, such as Post Transplant Lymphoproliferative Disorder (PTLD).||participants|||Number
827657|NCT01208402|Secondary|Percentage of Postoperative Hours 4 to 12 With Systolic Blood Pressure <95 mmHg|Duration of postoperative hours 4 to 12 patient was not in the target window of SBP > 95 mmHg, expressed as percent of the total 9 hours. SBP was measured during hours four and five at 30 minute intervals and once every hour for the next 7 hours, through 12 hours postoperatively.|Postoperative hours 4-12|Specific vital sign measurements were available for calculation of outcomes during the final 9 hours postoperatively in 18 cases in the Long-Acting BB group and in 16 cases in the Esmolol group.||percentage of 8 hour interval||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827658|NCT01208402|Primary|Percentage of Postoperative Hours 4 to 12 With Heart Rate (HR) <60 or >80 Bpm.|Duration of postoperative hours 4 to 12 spent outside Target HR range defined as 60 to 80 bpm, expressed as percent of the total 9 hours. Vital signs are measured during hours four and five at 30 minute intervals and once every hour for the next 7 hours, through 12 hours postoperatively.|Postoperative hours 4-12|Specific vital sign measurements were available for calculation of outcomes during the final 9 hours postoperatively in 18 cases in the Long-Acting beta blocker group and in 16 cases in the Esmolol group.||percentage of 8 hour interval||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827659|NCT01208402|Secondary|Percentage of Postoperative First Three Hours With Systolic Blood Pressure <95 mmHg|Duration of postoperative first three hours patient was not in the target window of SBP > 95 mmHg, expressed as percent of the total 3 hours. SBP is measured from end of surgery to 3 hours postoperatively at 5 minute intervals for first hour and every 15 minutes thereafter.|end of surgery to 3 hours|Ten cases (7 in the oral long acting beta blocker group and 3 in the Esmolol infusion group) were missing some of the postoperative vital sign measurements, resulting in gaps too long for valid calculation of the postoperative outcomes only.||percentage of 3 hour interval||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827660|NCT01208402|Primary|Percentage of Postoperative First Three Hours With Heart Rate (HR) <60 or >80 Bpm|Duration of postoperative first three hours spent outside Target HR range defined as 60 to 80 bpm, expressed as percent of the total 3 hours. Vital signs are measured from end of surgery to 3 hours postoperatively at 5 minute intervals for the first hour and every 15 minutes thereafter.|End of surgery to 3 hours|Ten cases (7 in the oral long acting beta blocker group and 3 in the Esmolol infusion group) were missing some of the postoperative vital sign measurements, resulting in gaps too long for valid calculation of the postoperative outcomes only.||percentage of 3 hour interval||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827661|NCT01208402|Secondary|Percentage of Intraoperative Case Time With Systolic Blood Pressure <95 mmHg|Duration of intraoperative case time patient was not in the target window of SBP > 95 mmHg, expressed as percent of total case minutes. SBP is measured from start of surgery to end of surgery at 5 minute intervals or less.|Start of surgery to end of surgery, an average duration of 245 minutes|Three enrolled cases (1 in the oral long acting beta blocker group and 2 in the Esmolol infusion group) were excluded from calculations a priori because they received diltiazem, a calcium channel blocker which lowers heart rate, before the operation.||percentage of surgery minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827662|NCT01208402|Primary|Percentage of Intraoperative Case Time With Heart Rate (HR) <60 or >80 Bpm|Duration of intraoperative excursion (ie, time spent) outside Target HR range defined as 60 to 80 bpm during surgery, expressed as percent of case minutes. Vital signs are measured from start of surgery to end of surgery at 5 minute intervals or less.|Start of surgery to end of surgery, an average duration of 245 minutes|Three enrolled cases (1 in the oral long acting beta blocker group and 2 in the Esmolol infusion group) were excluded from calculations a priori because they received diltiazem, a calcium channel blocker which lowers heart rate, before the operation.||percentage of case minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827663|NCT01208415|Primary|Patients That Are Free From Patency-related Intervention|Patency-related intervention is defined as: Secondary intervention to treat a > 60% stenosis of the internal iliac artery (as identified through CT, angiography, or duplex ultrasound and confirmed by core laboratory) associated with clinical symptoms. Of note, this not only includes patients with internal iliac artery stenosis following successful placement of the Zenith® Branch Endovascular Graft-Iliac Bifurcation and ConnectSX™, but also any cases of technical failure resulting in occlusion of the internal iliac artery during the initial implant procedure that require secondary intervention for associated clinical symptoms.|6 Months|Of the 37 patients available for analysis at 6 months, data was available for 34 patients.||participants|||Number
827693|NCT01209286|Secondary|Relapse-free Survival|Relapse-free survival was measured only for participants who achieved a CR or CRh* during the core study and was measured from the time the participant first achieved remission until first documented relapse or death due to any cause. Participants without a documented relapse (hematological or extramedullary) or who did not die were censored at the time of their last bone marrow assessment or their last survival follow-up visit confirming remission. Relapse-free survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods.|Up to the data cut-off date of 15 October 2012; maximum follow up time was 459 days.|Participants who reached complete remission or complete remission with partial hematological recovery during the core study.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827785|NCT01210170|Primary|Albuterol-induced Change in FEV1|FEV1 will be measured before and after inhalation of 180 mcg albuterol.|15 minutes after albuterol inhalation|||liters||Standard Error|Mean
827664|NCT01208870|Secondary|Changes in Variety Measures|Variety of high energy density foods (RED) and low energy density foods (GREEN) were calculated from the Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) for pilot 1 and 24 hour recalls (24-HR) for pilot 2. High energy dense food or Red foods are low in nutrient density. Most Red foods come from the Fats, Oils and Sweets groups and are to be used sparingly. Modified foods from the Fats, Oils, and Sweets group are still considered to be Red foods, even if their energy level is low. These foods contribute little nutrients to the diet and compete for consumption of healthier foods. Green foods are high in nutrient density and low in energy density. Most Green foods come from the fruit and vegetable groups. Serving sizes were based off the serving sizes used in United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) common serving sizes. Coding was based on the serving sizes of the specified food items and used to calculate the changes from baseline to six months.|Baseline to 6 months|Parents and children were measured, three families did not complete the dietary measures.||food items||Standard Deviation|Mean
827665|NCT01208870|Secondary|Change in Child Delay Discounting|Kirby, small, medium and large reinforcers. The Kirby monetary choice questionnaire will be used to measure impulsivity in parents and children. Participants are presented with a set of 27 choices between smaller immediate rewards and larger delayed rewards. An estimate of the participant’s discounting rate parameter can be made from the pattern of choices and participants who discount the value of the delayed rewards more steeply are said to be more impulsive as measured in higher K-values (0.25 vs 0.00016).|Baseline to 6 months|Children that completed this measure at pre and post time points. Eleven children did not complete the post measure.||k value||Standard Deviation|Mean
827666|NCT01208870|Secondary|Change in Parent Delay Discounting|Kirby, small, medium and large reinforcers. The Kirby monetary choice questionnaire will be used to measure implusivity in parents and children. Participants are presented with a set of 27 choices between smaller immediate rewards and larger delayed rewards. An estimate of the participant’s discounting rate parameter can be made from the pattern of choices and participants who discount the value of the delayed rewards more steeply are said to be more impulsive as measured in K-values. (0.25 impulsive to 0.00016 not impulsive)|Baseline to 6 months|Parents that completed this measure pre and post. Ten parents did not complete this post measure.||k value||Standard Deviation|Mean
827667|NCT01208870|Primary|Change Parent Body Composition|Parent Body Mass Index (kg/m^2) difference from baseline to 6 months|Baseline to 6 months|Parents||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
827668|NCT01208870|Secondary|Change in Dietary Intake of Calories|Energy intake was calculated for parents and children as the different from baseline to six months of calories consumed. The first pilot used the calories generated from the Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) report however the second pilot used calories from 24 hour recalls based on the Center of Disease Control data base or food labels.|Baseline to 6 months|Parents and children, three families did not complete the dietary measures.||calories||Standard Deviation|Mean
827669|NCT01208870|Primary|Change of Child Body Composition|Child percent overweight difference from baseline to 6 month. The formula used to derive weight loss percentage was weight lost at 6 months divided by starting weight, multiplied by 100.|Baseline to 6 months|Children that completed the reported measures. Two children did not complete the body composition measures from the experimental groups and four children from the control group did not complete this measure.||percentage of weight||Standard Error|Mean
827670|NCT01208961|Primary|C(Max): Maximum Plasma Concentration|Analyses of the outcome measures presented are for baseline-adjusted data for total (esterified and unesterfied) EPA and DHA since the presence of endogenous levels of these fatty acids would likely contribute to intra-subject variability and affect the analyses and interpretation.|Blood samples were obtained pre-dose at -1.0, -0.5, and 0 hours and after dose administration at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours.|||nmol/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
827671|NCT01208961|Primary|AUC(Inf): Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to Infinity|Analyses of the outcome measures presented are for baseline-adjusted data for total (esterified and unesterfied) EPA and DHA since the presence of endogenous levels of these fatty acids would likely contribute to intra-subject variability and affect the analyses and interpretation.|Blood samples were obtained pre-dose at -1.0, -0.5, and 0 hours and after dose administration at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours.|||nmol.h/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
827672|NCT01208961|Primary|AUC(0-t): Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 24 Hours (the Final Time With a Concentration ≥ LOQ)|Analyses of the outcome measures presented are for baseline-adjusted data for total (esterified and unesterfied) EPA and DHA since the presence of endogenous levels of these fatty acids would likely contribute to intra-subject variability and affect the analyses and interpretation.|Blood samples were obtained pre-dose at -1.0, -0.5, and 0 hours and after dose administration at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours.|||nmol.h/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
827673|NCT01209143|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratio of the Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Ethinyl Estradiol and Norethindrone|On Days 1 and 8, blood samples were taken prior to the administration of the contraceptive norethindrone 1 mg/ethinyl estradiol 35 µg (Ortho-Novum 1/35®) and 30 minutes, and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 hours, between 8 and 12 hours, and 24 hours post-dose. Plasma concentrations of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone were determined using a validated liquid chromatography mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC MS/MS) assay. Individual and mean plasma ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone concentration versus time data were tabulated and plotted by analyte. The pharmacokinetic parameters of each analyte were calculated using standard non-compartmental methods (WinNonlin version 5.2.1, Pharsight Corp., Mountain View, CA). The geometric mean ratios of Cmax of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone were defined as the ratios of Cmax of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone on Day 8 divided by Cmax of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone on Day 1, respectively.|Pre-dose and 30 minutes, and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 hours, between 8 and 12 hours, and 24 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population: All participants with pharmacokinetic data on Day 1 and Day 8.||ng/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Number
827715|NCT01209624|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT) Parameters: Mean RNFL Thickness|Mean retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness in millimeters (mm) right and left eye assessed by HRT imaging. Valid range: 0.100 to 0.400 mm. Only the RNFL for the eye treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Last Visit|PP; n = number of participants with a non-missing response at both visits (baseline and observation). Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for RNFL thickness.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
827674|NCT01209143|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratio of the Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to Infinity (AUC[0-inf]) of Ethinyl Estradiol and Norethindrone|On Days 1 and 8, blood samples were taken prior to the administration of the contraceptive norethindrone 1 mg/ethinyl estradiol 35 µg (Ortho-Novum 1/35®) and 30 minutes, and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 hours, between 8 and 12 hours, and 24 hours post-dose. Plasma concentrations of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone were determined using a validated liquid chromatography mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC MS/MS) assay. Individual and mean plasma ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone concentration versus time data were tabulated and plotted by analyte. The pharmacokinetic parameters of each analyte were calculated using standard non-compartmental methods (WinNonlin version 5.2.1, Pharsight Corp., Mountain View, CA). The geometric mean ratios of AUC(0-inf) of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone were defined as the ratios of AUC(0-inf) of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone on Day 8 divided by AUC(0-inf) of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone on Day 1, respectively.|Pre-dose and 30 minutes, and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 hours, between 8 and 12 hours, and 24 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population: All participants with pharmacokinetic data on Day 1 and Day 8.||ng/mL*hr||90% Confidence Interval|Number
827675|NCT01209143|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratio of the Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Rosiglitazone|On Days 1 and 8, blood samples were taken prior to the administration of rosiglitazone and 30 minutes, and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 hours, between 8 and 12 hours, and 24 hours post-dose. Plasma concentrations of rosiglitazone were determined using a validated liquid chromatography mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC MS/MS) assay. Individual and mean plasma rosiglitazone concentration versus time data were tabulated and plotted by analyte. The pharmacokinetic parameters of each analyte were calculated using standard non-compartmental methods (WinNonlin version 5.2.1, Pharsight Corp., Mountain View, CA). The geometric mean ratio of Cmax of rosiglitazone was defined as the Cmax of rosiglitazone on Day 8/ Cmax of rosiglitazone on Day 1.|Pre-dose and 30 minutes, and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 hours, between 8 and 12 hours, and 24 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population: All participants with pharmacokinetic data on Day 1 and Day 8.||ng/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Number
827676|NCT01209143|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratio of the Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to Infinity (AUC[0-inf]) of Rosiglitazone|On Days 1 and 8, blood samples were taken prior to the administration of rosiglitazone and 30 minutes, and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 hours, between 8 and 12 hours, and 24 hours post-dose. Plasma concentrations of rosiglitazone were determined using a validated liquid chromatography mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC MS/MS) assay. Individual and mean plasma rosiglitazone concentration versus time data were tabulated and plotted by analyte. The pharmacokinetic parameters of each analyte were calculated using standard non-compartmental methods (WinNonlin version 5.2.1, Pharsight Corp., Mountain View, CA). The geometric mean ratio of AUC(0-inf) of rosiglitazone was defined as the AUC(0-inf) of rosiglitazone on Day 8/AUC(0-inf) of rosiglitazone on Day 1.|Pre-dose and 30 minutes, and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 hours, between 8 and 12 hours, and 24 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetic population: All participants with pharmacokinetic data on Day 1 and Day 8.||ng/mL*hr||90% Confidence Interval|Number
827677|NCT01209195|Secondary|Immunogenicity|Samples were collected to determine the presence of an immunologic reaction to MM-121 (i.e. human anti-human antibodies).|Samples were collected for all patients pre-dose on all cycles for duration of treatment, the longest of which was 163 weeks, and a collection was made post-infusion in any case of infusion reaction||||||Number
827678|NCT01209195|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters (AUClast)|"Pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluation was performed on plasma samples obtained weekly for the first cycle of the study and then on day 1 of each additional cycle to assess pre-treatment trough concentrations of MM-121. Non-compartmental analysis (NCA) was performed to calculate standard PK parameters, including the maximum observed concentration (Cmax). Serum levels of MM-121 were measured at a central lab using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Data is presented per dose level of MM-121 (20/12 mg/kg weekly, 40/20 mg/kg weekly, 40 mg/kg Q2W, or 40/20 mg/kg QW x 7 plus a rest week).
Immunogenicity data is not available."|Collections taken at for all patients at Cycle 1, Week 1 (pre-treatment/pre-infusion, at the end of the infusion, and 2.5, 4, 6 and 24 hours after starting the infusion of MM-121) and pre-treatment at Cycle 1, Week 3 and Cycle 2, Week 1|"All patients. Data presented per dose level of MM-121 and not per cohort. The same dose was used in multiple cohorts, and those data were combined.
NOTE: two patients are not included in the analysis due to incorrectly collected or processed samples."||hr* ug/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827679|NCT01209195|Secondary|To Determine the Pharmacokinetics (PK) of MM-121 When Administered in Combination With Paclitaxel|Pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluation was performed on plasma samples obtained weekly for the first cycle of the study and then on day 1 of each additional cycle to assess pre-treatment trough concentrations of MM-121. Non-compartmental analysis (NCA) was performed to calculate standard PK parameters, including the maximum observed concentration (Cmax). Serum levels of MM-121 were measured at a central lab using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Data is presented per dose level of MM-121 (20/12 mg/kg weekly, 40/20 mg/kg weekly, 40 mg/kg Q2W, or 40/20 mg/kg QW x 7 plus a rest week).|Collections taken at for all patients at Cycle 1, Week 1 (pre-treatment/pre-infusion, at the end of the infusion, and 2.5, 4, 6 and 24 hours after starting the infusion of MM-121) and pre-treatment at Cycle 1, Week 3 and Cycle 2, Week 1|"All patients. Data presented per dose level of MM-121 and not per cohort. The same dose was used in multiple cohorts, and those data were combined.
NOTE: two patients are not included in the analysis due to incorrectly collected or processed samples."||ug/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827680|NCT01209195|Secondary|To Characterize the Efficacy of the Combination of MM-121 and Paclitaxel Using Objective Response Rate|To determine the number of patients reporting an objective response using RECIST v 1.1 where a Partial Response (PR) is defined as >20% decrease in tumor burden from baseline and a Complete Response (CR) is defined as complete disappearance from tumor burden from baseline. Objective Response is presented as the total # patients with PR or CR.|patients were assessed for response during their time on study, the longest of which was 163 weeks|||participants with objective response|||Number
827716|NCT01209624|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heidelberg Retina Tomograph Parameters: Cup Shape Measure|Cup shape measure right and left eye assessed by HRT imaging . Valid range: -0.400 to -0.010. Only the cup shape measure for the eye treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Last Visit|PP; n = number of participants with a non-missing response at both visits (baseline and observation). Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for cup shape measure.||Cup shape measure||Standard Deviation|Mean
827681|NCT01209195|Primary|To Determine the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of MM-121 in Combination With Paclitaxel: Paclitaxel Dose Level|"Using a 3+3 dose escalation model, the maximum tolerated dose of each combination was determined by assessing dose-limiting toxicities in each cohort.
Part 1 Cohort 1: MM-121: 20 mg/kg loading dose followed by 12 mg/kg QW IV )20/12) + Paclitaxel: 80mg/m2 IV QW Part 1 Cohort 2: MM-121: 40 mg/kg loading dose followed by 20 mg/kg QW IV (40/20) + Paclitaxel: 80mg/m2 QW IV Part 2 Cohort 1: MM-121: 40/20 mg/kg IV + Paclitaxel: 80mg/m2 QW IV Part 2 Cohort 2: MM-121 20 /12 mg/kg IV QW + Paclitaxel: 80 mg/m2 QW IV Part 2 Cohort 3: MM-121 40mg/kg IV QOW + Paclitaxel: 80 mg/m2 QW IV Part 2 Cohort 4: MM-121 - 40 mg/kg loading dose followed by 20 mg/kg weekly IV for 3 weeks, followed by one week of rest + Paclitaxel: 80mg/m2 weekly IV for 3 weeks, followed by one week of rest"|From date of first dose to 30 days after termination, the longest 163 weeks|note: MTD of MM-121 when administered in combination with paclitaxel provided in separate endpoint entry||mg/m2|||Number
827682|NCT01209195|Primary|To Determine the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of MM-121 in Combination With Paclitaxel: MM-121 Dose Level|"Using a 3+3 dose escalation model, the maximum tolerated dose of each combination was determined by assessing dose-limiting toxicities in each cohort.
Part 1 Cohort 1: MM-121: 20 mg/kg loading dose followed by 12 mg/kg QW IV )20/12) + Paclitaxel: 80mg/m2 IV QW Part 1 Cohort 2: MM-121: 40 mg/kg loading dose followed by 20 mg/kg QW IV (40/20) + Paclitaxel: 80mg/m2 QW IV Part 2 Cohort 1: MM-121: 40/20 mg/kg IV + Paclitaxel: 80mg/m2 QW IV Part 2 Cohort 2: MM-121 20 /12 mg/kg IV QW + Paclitaxel: 80 mg/m2 QW IV Part 2 Cohort 3: MM-121 40mg/kg IV QOW + Paclitaxel: 80 mg/m2 QW IV Part 2 Cohort 4: MM-121 - 40 mg/kg loading dose followed by 20 mg/kg weekly IV for 3 weeks, followed by one week of rest + Paclitaxel: 80mg/m2 weekly IV for 3 weeks, followed by one week of rest"|From date of first dose to 30 days after termination, the longest 163 weeks|NOTE: MTD of paclitaxel when administered with MM-121 provided in separate endpoint entry||mg/kg|||Number
827683|NCT01209195|Primary|Dose Escalation: To Evaluate the Safety and Tolerability of Escalating Doses of the MM-121 Plus Paclitaxel Combination Via Reporting of Dose-limiting Toxicity (DLT)|To establish the safety of escalating doses of MM-121 in combination with paclitaxel in order to determine the recommended phase 2 dose. Dose-escalation conducted using standard 3+3 model to determine maximum tolerated dose. Reports of Dose-Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) were assessed to determine the MTD.|From date of first dose to 30 days after termination, the longest 163 weeks|||participants reporting DLTs|||Number
827684|NCT01209260|Secondary|Plastic Dilator Shavings|In ex vivo pre-procedural testing, the assigned transseptal needle was advanced through the plastic dilator and sheath, and the presence of grossly visible plastic shavings after introduction of the needle through the dilator and long sheath was recorded.|immediately prior to procedure|The assigned needle for each participant was analyzed prior to the procedure||Needles|Participants||Number
827685|NCT01209260|Secondary|Performance of the Assigned Needle Type|Failure to achieve transseptal access with the assigned needle type resulted in crossover because of an inability to puncture the interatrial septem despite forward pressure and tenting, leading to concern that further effort might lead to perforation of the free (lateral) LA wall.|at time of procedure|||participants|||Number
827686|NCT01209260|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety||During or immediately after procedure, up to 1 day after procedure. On average, up to 1 day after the procedure.|||participants|||Number
827687|NCT01209260|Primary|Transseptal Access Procedure Time|Total amount of procedure time, from the beginning of the transseptal procedure until left atrium (LA) access is obtained in each patient. Participants for whom puncture failed crossed over to the other Intervention. Analysis performed on an intention-to-treat basis.|Day of procedure|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827688|NCT01209286|Secondary|Serum Cytokine Peak Levels|The activation of immune effector cells was monitored by the measurement of peripheral blood cytokine levels including interleukin (IL)-2, IL-6, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α and interferon gamma (IFN-γ) using multiplex cytometric bead assays. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) is 125 pg/mL and the limit of detection (LOD) is 20 pg/mL.|Samples were collected prior to treatment start (baseline), and at 2, 6, 24, and 48 hours after drug infusion start, and at these same time points when dose is escalated in each treatment cycle.|Participants who received blinatumomab and who had evaluable pharmacodynamic data.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827689|NCT01209286|Secondary|Clearance of Blinatumomab|Clearance was calculated as R0/Css; where R0 is the infusion rate (μg/m^2/hr) and Css is the steady state concentration.|Samples were collected at predose and at 48 hours following start of infusion, when dose is escalated and on Days 8, 15, 22, and 29 of the first 2 cycles.|Participants who received blinatumomab and who had available pharmacokinetic data.||L/m^2/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
827690|NCT01209286|Secondary|Steady State Blinatumomab Concentration|"The steady state concentration of blinatumomab was summarized as the observed concentrations collected at least 10 hours after the intravenous infusion was started for cycle 1 and cycle 2, respectively. Actual doses administered were used in the analysis.
Concentrations below the limit of detection (3 pg/mL) were set to zero before data analysis and concentrations below the lower limit of quantitation (50 pg/mL) were excluded from analysis."|Samples were collected at predose and at 48 hours following start of infusion, when dose is escalated and on Days 8, 15, 22, and 29 of the first 2 cycles.|Participants who received blinatumomab and who had available pharmacokinetic data.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827691|NCT01209286|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events|"Adverse events were evaluated for severity according to the grading scale provided in the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 3.0 and according to the following:
Grade I (mild); Grade 2 (moderate); Grade 3 (severe - significantly limits the patient's ability to perform routine activities despite symptomatic therapy; Grade 4 (life-threatening); Grade 5 (death).
The investigator used medical judgment to determine if there was a causal relationship (ie, certain, probable, possible, unlikely, not related) between an adverse event and blinatumomab.
A serious adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence or effect, that at any dose:
resulted in death, was life-threatening, required or prolonged hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, is a congenital anomaly or birth defect or is a medically important condition."|From the start of the first infusion to 30 days after the end of the last infusion in the core study or from the start of the first retreatment cycle infusion to 30 days after the end of the last retreatment cycle; median treatment duration was 55.7 days.|Safety analysis set, defined as all participants who received any infusion of blinatumomab.||participants|||Number
827694|NCT01209286|Secondary|Time to Hematological Relapse|"Time to hematological relapse was measured for participants who achieved a CR or CRh* during the core study and was measured from the time the participant first achieved remission until first documented relapse or death due to disease progression. Participants without a documented relapse (hematological or extramedullary) and who did not die were censored at the time of their last bone marrow assessment or their last survival follow-up visit confirming remission. Participants who died without having reported hematological relapse or without showing any clinical sign of disease progression were censored on their day of death.
Hematological Relapse was defined as:
Proportion of blasts in bone marrow > 5%
Extramedullary relapse.
Time to hematological relapse was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier methods."|Up to the data cut-off date of 15 October 2012; maximum follow up time was 459 days.|Participants who reached complete remission or complete remission with partial hematological recovery during the core study.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827695|NCT01209286|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received an Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant (HSCT) After Treatment With Blinatumomab|The percentage of participants who underwent immediate allogeneic HSCT (defined as those in remission who undergo HSCT without receiving any other treatments) after having discontinued or completed the core study.|Up to the data cut-off date of 15 October 2012; maximum follow up time was 459 days|Full analysis set||percentage of participants|||Number
827696|NCT01209286|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) Response During the Core Study|A minimal residual disease (MRD) response is defined as MRD < 10^-4 blasts/nucleated cells based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) evaluation of individual rearrangements of immunoglobulin or T cell receptor genes.|During the core study treatment period (up to 30 weeks).|Full analysis set (FAS)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827697|NCT01209286|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Response of Partial Remission Within 2 Cycles of Treatment|"At the end of each infusion period, a bone marrow aspiration/biopsy was performed to evaluate the efficacy of blinatumomab. All hematological assessments of bone marrow were reviewed in a central reference laboratory. Partial remission was defined by the following criteria:
• Bone marrow blasts ≤ 25%"|Within the first 2 cycles of treatment, 12 weeks|Full analysis set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827698|NCT01209286|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Response of Complete Remission With Only Partial Hematological Recovery Within 2 Cycles of Treatment|"At the end of each infusion period, a bone marrow aspiration/biopsy was performed to evaluate the efficacy of blinatumomab. All hematological assessments of bone marrow were reviewed in a central reference laboratory. Complete remission with only partial hematological recovery (CRh*) was defined by the following criteria:
Less than or equal to 5% blasts in the bone marrow
No evidence of circulating blasts or extramedullar disease
Partial recovery of peripheral blood counts:
Platelets > 50,000/μL
Hemoglobin ≥ 7 g/dL
ANC > 500/μL."|Within the first 2 cycles of treatment, 12 weeks|Full analysis set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827699|NCT01209286|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Response of Complete Remission Within 2 Cycles of Treatment|"At the end of each infusion period, a bone marrow aspiration/biopsy was performed to evaluate the efficacy of blinatumomab. All hematological assessments of bone marrow were reviewed in a central reference laboratory. Complete Response/Remission (CR) was defined by the following criteria:
Less than or equal to 5% blasts in the bone marrow
No evidence of circulating blasts or extramedullar disease
Full recovery of peripheral blood counts:
Platelets > 100,000/μL
Hemoglobin ≥ 11 g/dL
Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) > 1,500/μL"|Within the first 2 cycles of treatment, 12 weeks|Full analysis set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827700|NCT01209286|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Response of Complete Remission or Complete Remission With Only Partial Hematological Recovery Within 2 Cycles of Treatment|"At the end of each infusion period, a bone marrow aspiration/biopsy was performed to evaluate the efficacy of blinatumomab. All hematological assessments of bone marrow were reviewed in a central reference laboratory. Hematological remissions were defined by the following criteria:
Complete Response/Remission (CR):
Less than or equal to 5% blasts in the bone marrow
No evidence of circulating blasts or extramedullar disease
Full recovery of peripheral blood counts:
Platelets > 100,000/μL
Hemoglobin ≥ 11 g/dL
Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) > 1,500/μL
Complete Remission with only Partial Hematological Recovery (CRh*):
Less than or equal to 5% blasts in the bone marrow
No evidence of circulating blasts or extramedullar disease
Partial recovery of peripheral blood counts:
Platelets > 50,000/μL
Hemoglobin ≥ 7 g/dL
ANC > 500/μL."|Within the first 2 cycles of treatment, 12 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS), defined as participants who received any infusion of the assigned study medication, who completed at least the first treatment cycle and for whom at least one response assessment was available after the start of treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827701|NCT01209520|Primary|Degree of Demethylation in Patient Tumor Tissue and/or Serum Induced by 5-azacitidine on Specific Tumor Specific Genes (TSGs)|To measure the grade of demethylation induced by 5-azaciditine on specific TSGs by analyzing plasma DNA, and global demethylation by analyzing WBC DNA, and determine the duration of this effect.|Up to 2 years|Study data were not analyzed due to insufficient number of evaluable patients.|||||
827702|NCT01209520|Primary|Percentage of Patients Showing a Presence of Methylated Tumor Suppressor Genes in Their Tumor Tissue and/or Serum Achieving Partial or Complete Response to Protocol Therapy.|To determine the feasibility and efficacy of incorporating a demethylating agent (5-azacitidine; Vidaza®, Celgene, Summit, NJ, USA) as part of adjuvant therapy in patients diagnosed with NSCLC who harbor methylated tumor supressor genes (TSGs) in their tumor tissue and/or serum. Response to be evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v. 1.0.|Up to 2 years|Study data were not analyzed due to insufficient number of evaluable patients.|||||
827703|NCT01209624|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Progression of Visual Field|Progression defined as visual field deterioration rated progressive by physician on at least 1 post-baseline visit, and increase in Aulhorn stage (by at least 1 stage) and/or decrease in mean defect by at least 2.5 dB (Last Visit minus Baseline).|Month 24 (or last visit)|PP; to be included in the percentage, participants must have had Visual Field Deterioration rated as progressive by the physician on at least 1 post-baseline visit, and at least one measure of increase in Aulhorn Stage by at least 1 stage, and decrease in Mean Defect by at least 2 dB (last visit minus baseline).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836873|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 180 Minutes|The scale measure pain after 180 minutes (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|180 minutes|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827704|NCT01209624|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Progression of Optic Disc Excavation|Progression (Last Visit minus Baseline) defined as increase in horizontal cup to disc ratio and/or vertical cup to disc ratio by at least 0.2, and/or decrease in at least 1 of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT) parameters (deterioration of rim area 0.2 mm2; deterioration of rim volume 0.1 mm3 deterioration or mean retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness 0.1 mm).|Month 24 (or last visit)|PP; to be included in the percentage, participants must have provided a response for at least one of following events: increase in horizontal or vertical cup to disc ratio, or decrease in rim area, rim volume, or mean RNFL thickness. Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for the relevant outcome measure.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
827705|NCT01209624|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Progression of Glaucoma Damage|Overall progression defined as at least 1 of the 6 individual progression of glaucoma damage measures met: increase in horizontal cup to disc ratio and/or vertical cup to disc ratio by at least 0.2; at least 1 post Baseline (BL) optic-disc hemorrhage; decreased rim area (0.2 mm2), rim volume (0.1 mm3), mean retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL)(0.1 mm), progressive visual field deterioration, increase in Aulhorn stage (by at least 1 stage), and/or decrease in mean defect by at least 2.5 decibels [dB])|Month 24 (or last visit)|PP; to be included in the percentage, participants must have provided a response for at least one of the six individual progression of glaucoma damage measures. Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for the relevant outcome measure.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
827706|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Individual Progression of Glaucoma Damage: Mean Defect|Decrease in mean defect by at least 2.5 decibels (dB) (Last Visit minus Baseline).|Month 24 (or last visit)|PP; results based on participants with a value for mean defect at both Baseline and at least one post-baseline visit. Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for the relevant outcome measure.||Participants|||Number
827707|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Individual Progression of Glaucoma Damage: Aulhorn Stage|Increase in Aulhorn Stage by at least one stage (last visit minus baseline). Three different visual field defect categories defined using Aulhorn stage values 1-5: Aulhorn stage 1 = mild damage, Aulhorn stages 2, 3 = moderate damage, Aulhorn stages 4, 5 =severe damage.|Month 24 (or last visit)|PP; results based on participants with a value for Aulhorn Stage at both Baseline and at least one post-baseline visit. Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for the relevant outcome measure.||Participants|||Number
827708|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Individual Progression of Glaucoma Damage: Visual Field Defect-Deterioration|Visual Field Deterioration rated as progressive by physician on at least one post-baseline visit; range: 1= improved 2= stable 3= progressive. If both eyes were treated with Xalatan® the value for the right eye was used; otherwise, only the assessment for the eye treated with study medication was used.|Month 24 (or last visit)|PP; results based on participants with at least one post-baseline assessment of change in visual field defect. Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for the relevant outcome measure.||Participants|||Number
827709|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Individual Progression of Glaucoma Damage: Rim Area, Rim Volume, or Mean Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer (RNFL) Thickness|Decrease in at least one Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT) parameter by: Rim Area 0.2 millimeter (mm)2, Rim Volume 0.1 mm3, or mean retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) Thickness 0.1 mm, (Last Visit minus Baseline).|Month 24 (or last visit)|PP; results based on participants with a value of the variable in question at both Baseline and at least one post-baseline visit. Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for the relevant outcome measure.||Participants|||Number
827710|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Individual Progression of Glaucoma Damage: Optic Disc Hemorrhage|Participants with at least one post-baseline optic disc hemorrhage.|Month 24 (or last visit)|PP; results based on participants with at least one post-baseline assessment of optic disc hemorrhage. Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for the relevant outcome measure.||Particpants|||Number
827711|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Individual Progression of Glaucoma Damage: Horizontal Cup to Disc Ratio and/or Vertical Cup to Disc Ratio|Increase in Horizontal Cup to Disc Ratio and/or Vertical Cup to Disc Ratio by at least 0.2 (Last Visit minus Baseline).|Month 24 (or last visit)|PP; results based on participants with both a Baseline and at least one post-baseline visit. Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for the relevant outcome measure.||Participants|||Number
827712|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Investigator Assessments of Efficacy at Month 24|Number of participants with Investigator assessments of the efficacy of Xalatan® treatment rated as: 1=very good, 2=good, 3=moderate, 4=insufficient. If study medication was stopped before 24 months, assessment was performed at the time of early termination.|Month 24|PP; N = number of participants with a non-missing response at Month 24 visit.||Participants|||Number
827713|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline to Month 24 in Visual Field Defect|Change in mean defect right and left eye; valid range: -30 - + 30 decibels (dB). Visual field defect categories: preperimetric glaucoma: ≥ -2 dB; mild damage: < -2 dB and ≥ -3.3 dB; moderate damage: < -3.3 dB and ≥ -4.6 dB; and severe damage: < -4.6 dB. If both eyes were treated with Xalatan® , the value for the right eye was used; otherwise, only the mean defect value for the eye treated with study medication was used.|Baseline, Month 24|PP; N = number of participants who provided a Mean Defect value at both Baseline and Month 24 visits.||Participants|||Number
827714|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline to Month 24 in Aulhorn Stages|Values of change in Aulhorn Stage measured by Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer. Aulhorn stages: no scotoma, Stage I (relative scotomas only), Stage II (absolute scotomas without connection to blind spot), Stage III (absolute scotomas with connection to blind spot), Stage IV (absolute scotomas more than 1 quadrant affected), and Stage V (temporal residual visual field only). If both eyes were treated with Xalantan® the value of right eye was analyzed; otherwise, only the assessment for the eye treated with study medication was used.|Baseline, Month 24|PP; N = number of participants who provided Aulhorn stage values of 1 to 5 at both baseline and month 24 visits.||Participants|||Number
827739|NCT01209702|Secondary|Part 2: Volume of Distribution of Tocilizumab|Volume of distribution of tocilizumab at steady state after 12 weeks of treatment.|Week 12, pre-dose and at the end of infusion, on the 2nd and 7th day of Week 12, 14 days post-dose (Week 14) and 28 days post-dose (pre-dose of Week 16 infusion).|Due to premature study termination pharmacokinetic parameters were not analyzed.|||||
827717|NCT01209624|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT) Parameters: Rim Volume|Rim volume (mm3) right and left eye assessed by HRT imaging. Valid range: 0.080 to 0.700 mm3. Only the rim volume for the eye treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Last Visit|PP; n = number of participants with a non-missing response at both visits (baseline and observation). Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for rim volume.||mm3||Standard Deviation|Mean
827718|NCT01209624|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT) Parameters: Rim Area|Rim area (millimeter [mm]2) right and left eye assessed by HRT imaging. Valid range: 0.500 to 1.900 mm2. Only the rim area for the eye treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Last Visit|PP; n = number of participants with a non-missing response at both visits (baseline and observation). Last Visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value for rim area.||mm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
827719|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Optic Disc Hemorrhage by Visit: Month 24|Presence of optic disc hemorrhages assessed by slip lamp examination. Only data for eye were treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed.|Month 24|PP; N = number of participants who indicated whether or not they had an optic disc hemorrhage at the given visit.||Participants|||Number
827720|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Optic Disc Hemorrhage by Visit: Month 18|Presence of optic disc hemorrhages assessed by slip lamp examination. Only data for eye were treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed.|Month 18|PP; N = number of participants who indicated whether or not they had an optic disc hemorrhage at the given visit.||Participants|||Number
827721|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Optic Disc Hemorrhage by Visit: Month 12|Presence of optic disc hemorrhages assessed by slip lamp examination. Only data for eye were treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed.|Month 12|PP; N = number of participants who indicated whether or not they had an optic disc hemorrhage at the given visit.||Participants|||Number
827722|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With Optic Disc Hemorrhage by Visit: Month 6|Presence of optic disc hemorrhages assessed by slip lamp examination. Only data for eye were treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed.|Month 6|PP; N = number of participants who indicated whether or not they had an optic disc hemorrhage at the given visit.||Participants|||Number
827723|NCT01209624|Primary|Change From Baseline by Visit in Optic Disc Excavation: Vertical Cup to Disc Ratio|Mean vertical cup to disc (cup/disc or C/D) ratio measured by slit lamp examination to assess progression of glaucoma; calculated as the ratio of the diameter of the depression (cup) to that of the optical nerve head (disc). Valid range: 0.1-1.0; a high cup/disc ratio may imply glaucoma. Only data for the eye treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Last Visit|PP. N = number of participants with vertical cup to disc ratio at baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit; change analyzed for participants with a non-missing response at baseline and observation. Last Visit: change in vertical cup to disc ratio in participants with a non-missing response at both baseline and at least one post-baseline visit.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
827724|NCT01209624|Primary|Change From Baseline by Visit in Optic Disc Excavation: Horizontal Cup to Disc Ratio|Mean horizontal cup to disc (cup/disc or C/D) ratio measured by slit lamp examination to assess progression of glaucoma; calculated as the ratio of the diameter of the depression (cup) to that of the optical nerve head (disc). Valid range: 0.1-1.0. Only data for the eye treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Last Visit|PP; N = number of participants with horizontal cup to disc ratio data at baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit; change analyzed for participants with a non-missing response at baseline and observation. Last Visit: change in participants with a non-missing response at both baseline and at least one post-baseline visit.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
827725|NCT01209624|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Target at Last Visit|Percentage of participants who achieved their IOP target set at baseline. Response: Yes = achieved IOP target at last vist; No = did not achieve IOP target at last visit.|Month 24, (or last visit)|PP; n = number of subjects in the Per Protocol Analysis Set with a non-missing response at Last Visit. Last visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value of IOP.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
827726|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants Per Visit With Intraocular Pressure (IOP) 24-Hour Pressure Peaks: Month 24|Response: Yes = had IOP 24-hour pressure peak; No = did not have IOP 24-hour pressure peak.|Month 24|PP; N = number of participants with analyzable data at observation. The total number of participants by visit with an IOP peak response of ‘Yes’ differs from those with numerical values of IOP peaks since 1 of the 2 fields was populated for certain participants.||Participants|||Number
827727|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants Per Visit With Intraocular Pressure (IOP) 24-Hour Pressure Peaks: Month 12|Response: Yes = had IOP 24-hour pressure peak; No = did not have IOP 24-hour pressure peak.|Month 12|PP; N = number of participants with analyzable data at observation. The total number of participants by visit with an IOP peak response of ‘Yes’ differs from those with numerical values of IOP peaks since 1 of the 2 fields was populated for certain participants.||Participants|||Number
827728|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With a 24-Hour Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Profile: Month 24|Response: Yes = had an IOP 24-hour profile; No = did not have an IOP 24-hour profile.|Month 24|PP; N = number of participants with analyzable data at observation.||Participants|||Number
827729|NCT01209624|Primary|Number of Participants With a 24-Hour Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Profile: Month 12|Response: Yes = had an IOP 24-hour profile; No = did not have an IOP 24-hour profile.|Month 12|PP; N = number of participants with analyzable data at observation.||Participants|||Number
827740|NCT01209702|Secondary|Part 2: Clearance of Tocilizumab|Clearance of tocilizumab at steady state after 12 weeks of treatment.|Week 12, pre-dose and at the end of infusion, on the 2nd and 7th day of Week 12, 14 days post-dose (Week 14) and 28 days post-dose (pre-dose of Week 16 infusion).|Due to premature study termination pharmacokinetic parameters were not analyzed.|||||
836874|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 150 Minutes|The scale measure pain after 150 minutes (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|150 minutes|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827730|NCT01209624|Primary|Change From Baseline in Raw Intraocular Pressure (IOP) by Visit|Mean IOP values measured by applanation tonometry or noncontact method; valid range: 8-40 millimeters of mercury (mmHg). Only the IOP reading for the eye treated with Xalatan® was used; if both eyes were treated, the value of the right eye was analyzed. Last visit = last post-baseline visit at which participant provides a value of IOP.|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Last Visit|Per protocol (PP) analysis set: all participants in the Full Analysis Set (at least 1 dose of Xalatan® and 1 post-baseline IOP measurement) who were treated for ≥18 months; had at least BL and 1 post-BL non-missing efficacy assessments for IOP at least 18 months apart; without ametropy at BL; and without additional glaucoma medication during study.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
827731|NCT01209689|Primary|Percentage of ASsessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis 20 (ASAS20) Responders at Week 12|ASAS20 was defined as an improvement of ≥ 20% and an absolute improvement of ≥ 10 units on a 0-100 visual analog scale (VAS) from Baseline to Week 12 in 3 of 4 domains: 1-Patient global assessment (with extremes labelled none and severe), 2-Pain assessment (average total and nocturnal pain scores with extremes labelled no pain and most severe pain), 3-Function (represented by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis (BAS) Functional Index [BASFI] average of 10 questions regarding ability to perform specific tasks with extremes labelled easy and impossible), and 4-Inflammation (average of the last 2 questions on the 6-question BAS Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] concerning morning stiffness intensity with extremes labelled none and very severe and duration between 0 and 2 or more hours); and the absence of deterioration (of at least 20% and absolute change of at least 10 units on a 0-100 mm scale) in the remaining domain.|Baseline to Week 12|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of treatment. The analysis only included assessments while patients were receiving double-blind treatment and that occurred prior to withdrawal or the date when all patients were unblinded (15 Jul 2011). Patients who withdrew or escaped were considered non-responders.||Percentage of patients|||Number
827732|NCT01209702|Secondary|Part 1: The Number of Participants With Adverse Events|A serious adverse event (AE) is any event that is fatal, life-threatening, requires in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is medically significant or requires intervention to prevent one or other of the outcomes listed above. The intensity of each AE was graded according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.02. A severe AE was any event of Grade 4 (life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated) or 5 (death related to AE).|Up to 40 weeks|The safety analysis population included all patients who received at least one tocilizumab/placebo infusion and had at least one postdose safety assessment. Patients were assigned to treatment groups as treated for analysis.||participants|||Number
827733|NCT01209702|Secondary|Part 2: Percentage of Participants With a Reduction of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Proven Spinal Inflammation|Magentic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton was to be performed at Baseline and Week 24. MRI scans will be evaluated using the ankylosing spondylitis spinal MRI activity (ASspiMRI-a) score, grading activity (0-6) per vertebral unit in 23 units.|Baseline and Week 24|Due to premature study termination this outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
827734|NCT01209702|Secondary|Part 2: Radiographic Change According to the Modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (mSASSS)|"Radiographs were to be assessed using the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (mSASSS). The mSASSS is a four-point scoring system for lateral radiographs of the lumbar and cervical spine and has been shown to reliably track disease progression over time, where:
0 = No abnormality;
1 = Erosion, sclerosis, or squaring;
2 = Syndesmophyte;
3 = Total bony bridging at each site."|Baseline and Week 104|This outcome measure was not analyzed due to premature study termination.|||||
827735|NCT01209702|Primary|Part 2: Percentage of Participants Achieving a 20% Improvement in Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS20) at Week 12|"ASAS is composed of four domains. To achieve an ASAS20 response required improvement of ≥20% and ≥ 1 unit (10 mm) in at least 3 domains and no worsening of ≥ 20 % and ≥ 1 unit (10 mm) in the remaining domain.
The patient's global assessment of current disease status, measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), from symptom-free / no AS symptoms (0) to maximum AS disease severity (100).
The patient's overall assessment of the severity of spinal pain based on responses to 2 questions assessed on a 100 mm VAS, from no pain (0) to most severe pain (100). The spinal pain score is the mean of these 2 questions.
The function component was measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI). The patient provides self-assessment of 10 questions on a 100 mm VAS. The BASFI score is the mean of these values.
The inflammation component of the ASAS was determined by the mean of questions 5 and 6 of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)."|Baseline and Week 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The analysis only includes assessments while the patient was receiving double blind medication, and occurred prior to both withdrawal and the 15 July 2011 (date at which all patients were unblinded). Patients who withdrew or escaped are considered as non-responders until week 24.||percentage of participants|||Number
827736|NCT01209702|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-tocilizumab Antibodies|A positive anti-tocilizumab antibody result was defined as a negative assay result at Baseline and a positive post-baseline screening assay with positive confirmation or neutralizing assay at the same visit.|From Baseline until end of study (a maximum treatment duration of 40 weeks).|All patients treated with tocilizumab and screened for anti-tocilizumab antibodies at any timepoint.||participants|||Number
827737|NCT01209702|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Level of Soluble Interleukin-6 Receptor|"Soluble Interleukin-6 receptor levels were measured from blood samples taken pre-dose at Baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment.
The analysis was not performed for participants in Part 2 due to premature study termination."|Baseline and Week 12|Pharmacokinetic Population: All patients who received at least one tocilizumab infusion and had at least one pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic sample. Only those patients with available data at each time point are included in the analysis (indicated by N). Patients who did not receive their week 8 dose were excluded.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827738|NCT01209702|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Level of Interleukin-6|"Interleukin-6 levels were measured from blood samples taken pre-dose at Baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment.
The analysis was not performed for participants in Part 2 due to premature study termination."|Baseline and Week 12|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population: All patients who received at least one tocilizumab infusion and had at least one PK and pharmacodynamic sample. Only patients with available data at each time point are included (indicated by N). Patients who did not receive their Week 8 dose were excluded.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827743|NCT01209702|Secondary|Part 2: Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve of Tocilizumab|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) of tocilizumab at steady state after 12 weeks of treatment.|Week 12, pre-dose and at the end of infusion, on the 2nd and 7th day of Week 12, 14 days post-dose (Week 14) and 28 days post-dose (pre-dose of Week 16 infusion).|Due to premature study termination pharmacokinetic parameters were not analyzed.|||||
827744|NCT01209702|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-Reactive Protein|Levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) were measured from blood samples taken at Baseline and at Week 12.|Baseline and Week 12|Intent-to-treat population where data were available. The analysis was not performed for participants in Part 2 due to premature study termination.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827745|NCT01209702|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI)|"The Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index linear function is a combined index of 5 clinical measurements (performed by the Joint Assessor) which reflect axial mobility in the AS patient. The measurements to assess mobility are:
Tragus-to-wall;
Modified Schober (lumbar flexion);
Cervical rotation;
Lateral spinal flexion;
Intermalleolar distance.
The BASMI linear result is the average of the 5 assessments and ranges from 0 to 10. The higher the BASMI score the more severe the patient’s limitation of movement due to their AS."|Baseline and Week 12|Intent-to-treat population where data were available. The analysis was not performed for participants in Part 2 due to premature study termination.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827746|NCT01209702|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI)|The Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) is an assessment of function in AS patients. The participant provides their assessment of their ability to perform 10 activities on a 100 mm horizontal visual analog scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (easy) to 100 (impossible). The BASFI score is the mean of these values and is tabulated on a 0 (best) to 10 (worst) cm scale.|Baseline and Week 12|Intent-to-treat population for whom data were available. The analysis was not performed for participants in Part 2.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
827747|NCT01209702|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)|"The BASDAI is a patient-administered assessment of 6 parameters specific to AS. The following parameters were assessed on a 100-mm horizontal visual analogue: fatigue, spinal pain, peripheral arthritis, enthesitis, intensity of morning stiffness, and duration of morning stiffness. For questions 1 to 5, the left-hand extreme of the line (0) represents none (symptom-free) and the right-hand extreme (100) represents very severe (maximum severity). For question 6, a time axis was used, with the left-hand extreme of the line representing 0 hours and the right-hand extreme representing 2 or more hours. The BASDAI score was calculated as follows:
BASDAI = [Q1 + Q2 + Q3 + Q4 + (Q5 + Q6)/2]/5. The total score is tabulated on a scale from 0 (best) to 10 cm (worst)."|Baseline and Week 12|Intent-to-treat population where data were available.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
827748|NCT01209702|Secondary|Part 2: Percentage of Participants Achieving a 40% Improvement in Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS40) at Week 24|"ASAS is composed of four domains. To achieve an ASAS40 response required improvement of ≥40% and ≥ 2 units (20 mm) in at least 3 domains and no worsening at all in the remaining domain.
The patient's global assessment of current disease status, measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), from symptom-free / no AS symptoms (0) to maximum AS disease severity (100).
The patient's overall assessment of the severity of spinal pain based on responses to 2 questions assessed on a 100 mm VAS, from no pain (0) to most severe pain (100). The spinal pain score is the mean of these 2 questions.
The function component was measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI). The patient provides self-assessment of 10 questions on a 100 mm VAS. The BASFI score is the mean of these values.
The inflammation component of the ASAS was determined by the mean of questions 5 and 6 of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)."|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT), Part 2 study population. This analysis was not performed due to premature study termination.|||||
827749|NCT01209702|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a 40% Improvement in Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS40) at Week 12|"ASAS is composed of four domains. To achieve an ASAS40 response required improvement of ≥40% and ≥ 2 units (20 mm) in at least 3 domains and no worsening at all in the remaining domain.
The patient's global assessment of current disease status, measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), from symptom-free / no AS symptoms (0) to maximum AS disease severity (100).
The patient's overall assessment of the severity of spinal pain based on responses to 2 questions assessed on a 100 mm VAS, from no pain (0) to most severe pain (100). The spinal pain score is the mean of these 2 questions.
The function component was measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI). The patient provides self-assessment of 10 questions on a 100 mm VAS. The BASFI score is the mean of these values.
The inflammation component of the ASAS was determined by the mean of questions 5 and 6 of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)."|Baseline and Week 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. If the response at the Week 12 visit could not be determined due to early withdrawal or missing data then the patient is considered a non-responder. The analysis was not performed for participants in Part 2 due to premature study termination.||percentage of participants|||Number
827750|NCT01209702|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Value <2 in Each of the 4 ASAS Parameters at Week 12|"Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) is composed of four domains.
The patient's global assessment of current disease status, measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), from symptom-free / no AS symptoms (0) to maximum AS disease severity (100).
The patient's overall assessment of the severity of spinal pain based on responses to 2 questions assessed on a 100 mm VAS, from no pain (0) to most severe pain (100). The spinal pain score is the mean of these 2 questions.
The function component was measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), the mean of 10 self-assessment questions on a 100 mm VAS.
The inflammation component of the ASAS was determined by the mean of questions 5 and 6 of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI).
Each of the above 4 domains are measured on a scale from 0-100 mm, but reported on a 0-10 cm scale. A score of less than 2 units (20 mm) in each domain is defined as partial remission."|Week 12|Intent-to-treat. If the response at the Week 12 visit could not be determined due to early withdrawal or missing data then the patient is considered a non-responder. The analysis was not performed for participants in Part 2 due to premature study termination.||percentage of participants|||Number
827938|NCT01205269|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure, Average Effect Over 0 - 4 Hours Post-dose|Average systolic blood pressure value|0, 30 min, 2 h, 4 h|Of the 28 randomised patients, 27 completed the study and one discontinued during the last washout period. All 28 randomised patients were included in the analyses of all variables||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
827751|NCT01209702|Secondary|Part 2: Percentage of Participants Achieving a 20% Improvement in Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS20) at Week 24|"ASAS is composed of four domains. To achieve an ASAS20 response required improvement of ≥20% and ≥ 1 unit (10 mm) in at least 3 domains and no worsening of ≥ 20 % and ≥ 1 unit (10 mm) in the remaining domain.
The patient's global assessment of current disease status, measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), from symptom-free / no AS symptoms (0) to maximum AS disease severity (100).
The patient's overall assessment of the severity of spinal pain based on responses to 2 questions assessed on a 100 mm VAS, from no pain (0) to most severe pain (100). The spinal pain score is the mean of these 2 questions.
The function component was measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI). The patient provides self-assessment of 10 questions on a 100 mm VAS. The BASFI score is the mean of these values.
The inflammation component of the ASAS was determined by the mean of questions 5 and 6 of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)."|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The analysis only includes assessments while the patient was receiving double blind medication, and occurred prior to both withdrawal and the 15 July 2011 (date at which all patients were unblinded). Patients who withdrew or escaped are considered as non-responders until week 24.||percentage of participants|||Number
827752|NCT01209702|Primary|Part 1: Percentage of Participants Achieving a 20% Improvement in Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS20) at Week 12|"ASAS is composed of four domains. To achieve an ASAS20 response required improvement of ≥20% and ≥ 1 unit (10 mm) in at least 3 domains and no worsening of ≥ 20 % and ≥ 1 unit (10 mm) in the remaining domain.
The patient's global assessment of current disease status, measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), from symptom-free / no AS symptoms (0) to maximum AS disease severity (100).
The patient’s overall assessment of the severity of spinal pain based on responses to 2 questions assessed on a 100 mm VAS, from no pain (0) to most severe pain (100). The spinal pain score is the mean of these 2 questions.
The function component was measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI). The patient provides self-assessment of 10 questions on a 100 mm VAS. The BASFI score is the mean of these values.
The inflammation component of the ASAS was determined by the mean of questions 5 and 6 of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)."|Baseline and Week 12|"Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients who were randomized into the study and received at least one tocilizumab/placebo infusion.
If the response at the 12-week visit could not be determined due to early withdrawal or missing data then the patient was considered a non-responder."||percentage of participants|||Number
827753|NCT01209767|Primary|Blinded Rating of the Treatment Area (Cryolipolysis vs. Subcision) With the Best Cosmetic Appearance.|"Two dermatologists blindly evaluated and compared the treated and control areas of each side at the final follow up visit (week 12). They rated the area with the best cosmetic appearance and reported the percentages of participants for whom Cryolipolysis or Subcision resulted in the best cosmetic appearance. It was possible for raters to determine that neither treatment outperformed the other, thereby rating the control arm better."|12 weeks|||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
827754|NCT01209780|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events After Vaccination With Investigational TIV and Control Vaccine|The number of 3-17 year old children reporting any unsolicited adverse event and any serious adverse event (SAE) after receiving either one or two doses of investigational TIV and control vaccine are reported.|Day 1 to 180 (non-naive )/Day 1 to 209 (naive)|Analysis was done on the safety set population.||Subjects|||Number
827755|NCT01209780|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Adverse Events After Vaccination With Investigational TIV and Control Vaccine|The number of 3-17 year old children with solicited local and systemic adverse events and other adverse events, after receiving either one or two doses of investigational TIV as compared to control vaccine are reported.|Day 1 to 7 after vaccination|Analysis was done on the safety set population i.e all subjects who received at least one study vaccine and provided post vaccination safety data.||Subjects|||Number
827756|NCT01209780|Secondary|Percentages of Vaccine-naive Children Achieving Seroconversion in Antibody Titers, After Receiving Two Doses of Investigational TIV or Control Vaccine|"The percentages of 3 to 8 years-old vaccine naive children achieving seroconversion or significant increase in HI antibody titers after receiving two doses of investigational TIV or control vaccine, are reported. The time frame of evaluation was 28 days after first (Day 29) and 21 days after the second dose (Day 50).
This criterion, according to the US (CBER) guideline, is met if the lower limit of 95% CI of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion or significant increase at day 29 and day 50 is ≥40, for each vaccine strain."|Day 29 and Day 50|Analysis was done on the per protocol population.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827757|NCT01209780|Secondary|Percentages of Vaccine-naive Children Achieving HI Titers ≥40 After Receiving Two Doses of Investigational TIV or Control Vaccine.|"The percentage of 3 to 8 years-old vaccine-naive subjects achieving HI titers ≥40, after receiving two doses of investigational TIV or control vaccine. The time frame of evaluation was 28 days after first (Day 29) and 21 days after second vaccine dose (Day 50).
This criterion according to the US (CBER) guideline is met if the lower bound of the two sided 95%CI for percentage of subjects achieving HI titers ≥40 is ≥70%, for each vaccine strain."|Day 1, Day 29, and Day 50|Analysis was done on the per protocol population.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827758|NCT01209780|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Seroconversion in Antibody Titers Following Vaccination With Investigational TIV or Control Vaccine|"The percentages of 3 to 8 years-old subjects achieving seroconversion in HI antibody titers after receiving either one or two doses of investigational TIV or control vaccine, at 21 days after last vaccination, are reported.
This criterion, according to the US (CBER) guideline, is met if the lower limit of 95% CI of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion or significant increase at day 22 and day 50 (21 days after last vaccination) is ≥40."|Day 22 for non-naive/Day 50 for naive|Analysis was performed on the per protocol population.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827759|NCT01209780|Primary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of Investigational TIV to Control Vaccine in Terms of Post Vaccination Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs)|The non-inferiority of the antibody responses of investigational TIV compared to control vaccine assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs, at 21 days after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains in 3 to 8 year old children.|Day 22 for non-naive/Day 50 for naive subjects|Analysis was performed on the per protocol population.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827760|NCT01209780|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects Achieving HI Titers ≥40 Following Vaccination With Investigational TIV or Control Vaccine.|"The percentages of 3 to 8 year old subjects achieving HI titers ≥40 after receiving either one or two doses of investigational TIV or control vaccine, 21 days after last vaccination, are reported.
This criterion according to the US (CBER)guideline is met if the lower bound of the two sided 95%CI for percentage of subjects achieving HI titers ≥40, is ≥70%."|Day 22 for non-naive/Day 50 for naive subjects|Analysis was performed on per protocol population.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827761|NCT01209780|Primary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of Investigational TIV to Control Vaccine in Terms of the Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion|"The non-inferiority of the antibody responses of investigational TIV compared to control TIV assessed in terms of the percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion, against the three homologous vaccine strains,in children 3 to 8 years of age, at 21 days after last vaccination.
Seroconversion was defined as a pre-vaccination haemagglutinin inhibition (HI) titer <1:10 and post-vaccination HI titer ≥1:40 or as a pre-vaccination HI titer ≥1:10 and at minimum four-fold rise in post-vaccination antibody titer"|Day 22 for non-naive/Day 50 for naive subjects|Analysis was done on per protocol population i.e-all subjects who correctly received study vaccinations,provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points, and had no major protocol violation as defined prior to unblinding.||Percentages||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827762|NCT01209949|Secondary|Number of Participants With Tolerability Assessments Resulting in an Adverse Event|Number of participants with tolerability assessments resulting in an adverse event. Tolerability assessments include erythema (0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe); Scaling (0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe); Dryness (0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe); Stinging/Burning (0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) with a score of None being best and a score of Severe being worst.|12 weeks|Safety||participants|||Number
827763|NCT01209949|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Lesion Counts (Inflammatory, Non-inflammatory, and Total) at Week 12.|Mean percent change from baseline in lesions counts (inflammatory, non-inflammatory, and total) at week 12.|Week 12|Modified ITT (subjects with a baseline and week 12 visit)||percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
827764|NCT01209949|Primary|Number of Participants Who Were a Success (Subject's Global Assessment of 'Clear' or 'Almost Clear') at Week 12|Number of participants who were a Success (Subject's Global Assessment of 'Clear or 'Almost Clear') at week 12. Subject's Global Assessment is measured on a scale (Clear, Almost Clear, Mild, Moderate, Severe, Very Severe) with Clear being best and Very Severe being worst.|12 weeks|Modified ITT (subjects with a baseline and week 12 visit)||participants|||Number
827765|NCT01210001|Other Pre-specified|Hypoglycaemic Events|Number of patients with hypoglycaemic events, as reported as adverse events.|From first drug administration until 7 days after last intake of study drug, up to 256 days|Treated set which included all patients treated with at least one dose of randomised study medication||percentage of participants|||Number
827766|NCT01210001|Primary|HbA1c Change From Baseline for Pio and Met Background Medication Patients|"Change From Baseline in HbA1c after 24 weeks for patients with pioglitazone (pio) and metformin (met) background medication only.
Note that adjusted means are provided."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) which included all randomised and treated patients who had a baseline HbA1c value for patients on pioglitazone and metformin background medication. Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Mean
827767|NCT01210001|Secondary|Body Weight Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in body weight after 24 weeks.
Note that adjusted means are provided."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) which included all randomised and treated patients who had a baseline HbA1c value. Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||kg||Standard Error|Mean
827768|NCT01210001|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) after 24 weeks of treatment.
Note that adjusted means are provided."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) which included all randomised and treated patients who had a baseline HbA1c value. Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
827769|NCT01210001|Primary|HbA1c Change From Baseline|"Change From Baseline in HbA1c after 24 weeks.
Note that adjusted means are provided."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) which included all randomised and treated patients who had a baseline HbA1c value. Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for imputation of missing values.||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Mean
827770|NCT01210079|Primary|Change in Pain Threshold Time From Baseline to Week 5|Change in pain threshold time from baseline (pre-gabapentin) to week 5 (post gabapentin)measured during cold pressor task administered at peak methadone blood levels. Pain threshold time is the amount of time that passes before pain is detected after administration of the cold pressor.|baseline, 5 weeks|||seconds||Standard Error|Mean
827771|NCT01210118|Secondary|Days of Prematurity of Birth|Days of prematurity of birth were recorded|After child birth|Only the participants who met the inclusion criteria and completed the research protocol were included in the research analysis.||number of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
827772|NCT01210118|Primary|The Effectiveness of the Interventions According the Levels of Urine Cotinine Before and After Intervention.|The basic primary outcomes of the study present the levels of urine cotinine before and after intervention separately for each group according to the cut of point that is used for the separation of active from passive smoking ,when urine cotinine ≤80ng/ml: there is biochemically validated smoking cessation.|At the baseline and at the 32nd week of gestation|||percentage of participants who quit|||Number
827773|NCT01210118|Secondary|Birth Weight|Infants' birth weight was recorded.|After child birth|Only the participants who met the inclusion criteria and completed the research protocol were included in the research analysis.||birth weight in grams||Standard Deviation|Mean
827774|NCT01210118|Primary|Participants' Smoking Status|participants' smoking status was validated by urine cotinine and urine nicotine|around the 32nd week of gestation.|Only the participants who met the inclusion criteria and completed the research protocol were included in the research analysis||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
827775|NCT01210144|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Specific Histological Pattern of the Endometrium in Participants With Good or Poor Response to Gonal-f®|Participants with each histological pattern of endometrium were analyzed. Histological patterns included: Proliferative phase (described as the endometrial on the first two weeks after the menstruation [or before ovulation]), Early secretory phase (first step of the secretory phase, located at the Day 16-18 of the cycle), Intermediate secretory phase (secretory phase located at the Day 20-22 of the cycle and describes endometrial closer to the implantation phase). Participants with poor response: 5 mature oocytes or less; participants with good response: more than 8 mature oocytes.|Day of Oocyte Retrieval (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG administration) after COS by Gonal-f®|Data for histological pattern of the endometrium in participants with good or poor response to Gonal-f were not summarized because the number of participants in each group with respect to ovarian response were too low.|||||
827776|NCT01210144|Secondary|Gene Expression in Participants With Good or Poor Response to Gonal-f®|A list of genes based on gene expression profiling carried out on RNA extracted from endometrial tissue. The expression of mRNA in endometrial tissue was measured by using microarrays such as the Affymetrix® GeneChip HG-U133 plus 2.0 array or equivalent. Participants with poor response: 5 mature oocytes or less; participants with good response: more than 8 mature oocytes.|Day of Oocyte Retrieval (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG administration) after COS by Gonal-f®|Data were not analyzed because gene expression of the endometrium could not be performed due to poor quality of biopsy samples and poor recruitment in the study.|||||
827777|NCT01210144|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Specific Histological Pattern of the Endometrium in Participants Without Blastocyst Transfer|Participants with each histological pattern of endometrium were analyzed. Histological patterns included: Proliferative phase (described as the endometrial on the first two weeks after the menstruation [or before ovulation]), Early secretory phase (first step of the secretory phase, located at the Day 16-18 of the cycle), Intermediate secretory phase (secretory phase located at the Day 20-22 of the cycle and describes endometrial closer to the implantation phase).|Day 5 or 6 (window of implantation) after Oocyte Retrieval|"ITT population: participants who received at least one dose of study medication. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure. Data were not analyzed for Gonal-f® + Ovitrelle® (Multi-dose Antagonist Protocol) group because there were no participants without blastocyst transfer in this group."||participants|||Number
827778|NCT01210144|Secondary|Gene Expression in Participants Without Blastocyst Transfer|A list of genes based on gene expression profiling carried out on RNA extracted from endometrial tissue. The expression of mRNA in endometrial tissue was measured by using microarrays such as the Affymetrix® GeneChip HG-U133 plus 2.0 array or equivalent.|Day 5 or 6 (window of implantation) after Oocyte Retrieval|Data were not analyzed because gene expression of the endometrium could not be performed due to poor quality of biopsy samples and poor recruitment in the study.|||||
827779|NCT01210144|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Specific Histological Pattern of the Endometrium Following 1 Cycle With Gonal-f® and Having Undergone Agonist or Antagonist Protocol|Participants with each histological pattern of endometrium were analyzed. Histological patterns included: Proliferative phase (described as the endometrial on the first two weeks after the menstruation [or before ovulation]), Early secretory phase (first step of the secretory phase, located at the Day 16-18 of the cycle), Intermediate secretory phase (secretory phase located at the Day 20-22 of the cycle and describes endometrial closer to the implantation phase).|Day of Oocyte Retrieval (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG administration) after COS by Gonal-f®|"ITT population included those participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Here N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure."||participants|||Number
827780|NCT01210144|Secondary|Gene Expression of the Endometrium Following 1 Cycle With Gonal-f® in Participants Having Undergone Agonist or Antagonist Protocol|A list of genes based on gene expression profiling carried out on RNA extracted from endometrial tissue. The expression of mRNA in endometrial tissue was measured by using microarrays such as the Affymetrix® GeneChip HG-U133 plus 2.0 array or equivalent.|Day of Oocyte Retrieval (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG administration) after COS by Gonal-f®|Data were not analyzed because gene expression of the endometrium could not be performed due to poor quality of biopsy samples and poor recruitment in the study.|||||
827781|NCT01210144|Secondary|Gene Expression of the Endometrium in Participants With or Without Blastocyst Transfer|A list of genes based on gene expression profiling carried out on RNA extracted from endometrial tissue. The expression of mRNA in endometrial tissue was measured by using microarrays such as the Affymetrix® GeneChip HG-U133 plus 2.0 array or equivalent.|Day of Oocyte Retrieval (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG administration) after COS by Gonal-f®|Data were not analyzed because gene expression of the endometrium could not be performed due to poor quality of biopsy samples and poor recruitment in the study.|||||
827782|NCT01210144|Primary|Number of Participants With a Specific Histological Pattern of the Endometrium Following 1 Cycle With Gonal-f®|Participants with each histological pattern of endometrium were analyzed. Histological patterns included: Proliferative phase (described as the endometrial on the first two weeks after the menstruation [or before ovulation]), Early secretory phase (first step of the secretory phase, located at the Day 16-18 of the cycle) and Intermediate secretory phase (secretory phase located at the Day 20-22 of the cycle and describes endometrial closer to the implantation phase).|Day of Oocyte Retrieval (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG administration) after COS by Gonal-f®|"Intention-to-Treat (ITT) population: participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure. Results for both agonist and antagonist protocol are presented as total since assessment of histological pattern for whole study population was the primary objective."||participants|||Number
827783|NCT01210144|Primary|Gene Expression of the Endometrium Following 1 Cycle With Gonal-f®|A list of genes based on gene expression profiling carried out on ribonucleic acid (RNA) extracted from endometrial tissue. The expression of messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) in endometrial tissue was measured by using microarrays such as the Affymetrix® GeneChip HG-U133 plus 2.0 array or equivalent.|Day of Oocyte Retrieval (36 +/- 2 hours post r-hCG administration) after COS by Gonal-f®|Data were not analyzed for both agonist and antagonist protocol as total, which was the primary objective, since gene expression of the endometrium could not be performed due to poor quality of biopsy samples and poor recruitment in the study.|||||
827784|NCT01210170|Secondary|Albuterol Induced Percent Change in Qaw|Qaw will be measured before and 15 min after albuterol inhalation|change in Qaw 15 minutes after albuterol inhalation|||percent change in Qaw||Standard Error|Mean
827786|NCT01210443|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Concentration of N-amino Terminal Fragment of the Prohormone Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-pro BNP)|Change from baseline in Blood Concentration of NT-pro BNP is calculated as the value at each time point (every 12 weeks until Week 48 and every 24 weeks after Week 48) minus value at baseline.|Up to 22 days (last participant discontinuation)|"The efficacy analysis set was defined as all subjects who receive at least one dose of study drug during this extension study and have efficacy observations at baseline of the preceding study (B1321052) in any efficacy assessments.
Descriptive statistics for any efficacy endpoints were not calculated due to a small number of participants."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827787|NCT01210443|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Change From Baseline in WHO Functional Class|The change from baseline in WHO functional class was classified into “Improved”, “No change” and “Worsened”. The change from baseline in WHO functional class is summarised with percentage of participants at each time point (every 12 weeks until Week 48 and every 24 weeks after Week 48).|Up to 22 days (last participant discontinuation)|"The efficacy analysis set was defined as all subjects who receive at least one dose of study drug during this extension study and have efficacy observations at baseline of the preceding study (B1321052) in any efficacy assessments.
Descriptive statistics for any efficacy endpoints were not calculated due to a small number of participants."||Parcentage of participants|||Number
827788|NCT01210443|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 6-Minute Walk Distance|Change from baseline in 6-minute walk distance is calculated as the value at each time point (every 12 weeks until Week 48 and every 24 weeks after Week 48) minus value at baseline.|Up to 22 days (last participant discontinuation)|"The efficacy analysis set was defined as all subjects who receive at least one dose of study drug during this extension study and have efficacy observations at baseline of the preceding study (B1321052) in any efficacy assessments.
Descriptive statistics for any efficacy endpoints were not calculated due to a small number of participants."||Meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
827789|NCT01210443|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Worsening|Clinical worsening is defined as 1) Hospitalization for worsening pulmonary arterial hypertension, 2) On-study death, 3) Heart-lung or lung transplantation, 4) Atrial septostomy, 5) Addition of the chronic medications for the treatment of worsening pulmonary arterial hypertension, and 6) Initiation of oxygen.|Up to 22 days (last participant discontinuation)|"The efficacy analysis set was defined as all subjects who receive at least one dose of study drug during this extension study and have efficacy observations at baseline of the preceding study (B1321052) in any efficacy assessments.
Descriptive statistics for any efficacy endpoints were not calculated due to a small number of participants."||Percentage of participants|||Number
827790|NCT01210443|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Number of participants with any adverse events, severe adverse events, serious adverse events|Up to 22 days (last participant discontinuation)|The safety analysis set is defined as all subjects who receive at least one dose of study drug during this extension study.||Participants|||Number
827791|NCT01210495|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-related AEs in Randomized Portion|Treatment-related AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant with causal relationship to the study drug. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. The grade of an AE was determined according to CTCAE Version 3.0.|Up to 28 days after last dose of study drug, for up to 3 years|The safety analysis population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received.||Participants|||Number
827792|NCT01210495|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (AEs) in Randomized Portion|An AE was an untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study treatment without regard to possibility of causal relationship. Serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes: death, initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, life-threatening experience, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent AEs were those with initial onset or that worsen in severity after the first dose of study medication. The grade of an AE was determined according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 3.0.|Up to 28 days after last dose of study drug, for up to 3 years|The safety analysis population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received.||Participants|||Number
827793|NCT01210495|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-related AEs in Non-randomized Portion|Treatment-related AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant with causal relationship to the study drug. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. The grade of an AE was determined according to CTCAE Version 3.0.|Up to 28 days after last dose of study drug, for up to 3 years|The safety analysis population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received.||Participants|||Number
827794|NCT01210495|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent AEs in Non-randomized Portion|An AE was an untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study treatment without regard to possibility of causal relationship. Serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes: death, initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, life-threatening experience, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent AEs were those with initial onset or that worsen in severity after the first dose of study medication. The grade of an AE was determined according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 3.0.|Up to 28 days after last dose of study drug, for up to 3 years|The safety analysis population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received.||Participants|||Number
827795|NCT01210495|Secondary|Number of Participants With Dose-limiting Toxicities (DLTs) in Non-randomized Portion|Number of Child-Pugh Class B (score 7) participants with DLT was evaluated during Cycle 1 of treatment in the non-randomized portion of the study.|Cycle 1 (4 weeks)|Participants with Child-Pugh Class B, score 7 are only included in this analysis.||Participants|||Number
827796|NCT01210495|Secondary|EQ-VAS in Randomized Portion: Overall Between-treatment Comparison Based on the Repeated Measures Mixed Effects Model|EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in rates the participant's overall health status using values from 0 (worst imaginable) to 100 (best imaginable). The below table included the model estimated average based on all the observed values/time points. The mixed effect model was used.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-dose and before any other clinical assessments, every 4 weeks thereafter while on study, at end of study treatment/withdrawal, and follow-up and at Day 28 after last dose date|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827797|NCT01210495|Secondary|EuroQoL (EQ-5D)- Health State Profile Utility Score in Randomized Portion: Overall Between-treatment Comparison Based on the Repeated Measures Mixed Effects Model|EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state. Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state. The below table included the model estimated average based on all the observed values/time points. The mixed effect model was used.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-dose and before any other clinical assessments, every 4 weeks thereafter while on study, at end of study treatment/withdrawal, and follow-up and at Day 28 after last dose date|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827798|NCT01210495|Secondary|Time to Deterioration (TTD) Based on the Composite Endpoint in Randomized Portion: Overall Between-treatment Comparison Based on the Repeated Measures Mixed Effects Model|A time to deterioration (TTD) analysis was performed for FHSI-8. Time to deterioration was defined as the time between date of randomization and date of the event.|From randomization to death or tumor progression or FHSI-8 mean score decrease >=3 points, whichever comes first|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827799|NCT01210495|Secondary|Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Hepatobiliary Cancer Trial Outcome Index (FACT Hep-TOI) Questionnaire in Randomized Portion: Overall Between-treatment Comparison Based on the Repeated Measures Mixed Effects Model|The trial outcome index is defined to be the sum (PWB+FWB+HepCS), making it 32 items altogether. Each ranges from '0' – not at all to '4' - very much regarding how much each item was present in the last 7 days. FACT Hep –TOI total score ranges from 0 to 128, where the highest score represents a maximum achievable quality of life. The below table included the model estimated average based on all the observed values/time points. The mixed effect model was used.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-dose and before any other clinical assessments, every 4 weeks thereafter while on study, at end of study treatment/withdrawal, and follow-up and at Day 28 after last dose date|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827800|NCT01210495|Secondary|Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Hepatobiliary Cancer Subscale (FACT Hep-CS18) Questionnaire in Randomized Portion: Overall Between-treatment Comparison Based on the Repeated Measures Mixed Effects Model|This subscale consists of 18 items rated on a scale from ‘0’ - not at all to ‘4’ - very much regarding how much each item was present in the last 7 days. FACT-Hep-CS18 total score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher score reflects better quality of life or fewer symptoms. The 18 items of this scale are associated with hepatocellular carcinoma. The below table included the model estimated average based on all the observed values/time points. The mixed effect model was used.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-dose and before any other clinical assessments, every 4 weeks thereafter while on study, at end of study treatment/withdrawal, and follow-up and at Day 28 after last dose date|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827801|NCT01210495|Secondary|FACT-G Subscales in Randomized Portion: Overall Between-treatment Comparison Based on the Repeated Measures Mixed Effects Model|FACT-G is core questionnaire of Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) measurement system to evaluate quality of life (QoL) in cancer population. FACT-G consisted of 27 questions grouped in 4 domains of general Health-Related QoL (HRQoL): Physical Well-being (PWB), Social/Family Well-Being (SWB) , Emotional Well-Being (EWB) and Functional Well-Being (FWB). Each of the individual subscale, except EWB has 7 items and each integer scored 0 to 4 making a maximum possible score of 28 (range 0 to 28). EWB has 6 items and each integer scored 0 to 4 making a maximum possible score of 24 (range 0 to 24). For all the 4 scales, higher values correspond to better health. The below table included the model estimated average based on all the observed values/time points. The mixed effect model was used.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-dose and before any other clinical assessments, every 4 weeks thereafter while on study, at end of study treatment/withdrawal, and follow-up and at Day 28 after last dose date|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827810|NCT01210495|Secondary|Axitinib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Parameter - Time to First Occurrence of Cmax (Tmax), Non-randomized Portion|Axitinib samples were to be collected from all participants on Cycle 1 Day 15 at the following time points: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours after axitinib dosing.|Cycle 1 Day 15|The PK concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 measured concentration on at least 1 day of PK assessment. The PK parameter analysis set included all participants treated who had at least 1 estimated PK parameter of primary interest.||Hour||Full Range|Median
827870|NCT01204658|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Inhibiting Pneumococcal Pneumolysin Toxoid Haemolysis Activity – Primary Phase of the Study|Analysis of the concentrations of antibodies inhibiting pneumococcal pneumolysin toxoid haemolysis activity (anti-Ply) was not performed as no assay was validated to perform this analysis. This outcome concerns results for the Primary Phase of the study.|At Month 3, e. g. one month post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)||12/2050||||
827802|NCT01210495|Secondary|FHSI-8 in Randomized Portion: Overall Between-treatment Comparison Based on the Repeated Measures Mixed Effects Model|The FACT-Hep includes the FACT-G and a hepatobiliary module. The Hepatobiliary disease specific items include: swelling or cramps, losing weight, GI related questions, lack of energy, side effects, pain, fatigue, usual activities, jaundice, fevers, itching, taste of food and chills. Eight of the items (pain, back pain, stomach pain/discomfort, lack of energy, fatigue, nausea, weight loss, and jaundice) make up the FHSI-8, and are considered to be symptoms specific to hepatobiliary cancer. FHSI-8 total score ranges from 0 to 32 where “0” is a severely symptomatic participant and the highest score indicates an asymptomatic participant. The below table included the model estimated average based on all the observed values/time points. The mixed effect model was used.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-dose and before any other clinical assessments, every 4 weeks thereafter while on study, at end of study treatment/withdrawal, and follow-up and at Day 28 after last dose date|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827803|NCT01210495|Secondary|Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) in Randomized Portion: Overall Between-treatment Comparison Based on the Repeated Measures Mixed Effects Model|FACT-G is core questionnaire of Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) measurement system to evaluate quality of life (QoL) in cancer population. FACT-G consisted of 27 questions grouped in 4 domains of general Health-Related QoL (HRQoL): Physical Well-being (PWB), Social/Family Well-Being (SWB), Emotional Well-Being (EWB) and Functional Well-Being (FWB);each ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). FACT-G ranged between 0 and 108. Since questions could be reversed coded, as appropriate, before calculating FACT-G, 0 and 108 could be considered worst and best health states. The below table included the model estimated average based on all the observed values/time points. The mixed effect model was used.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-dose and before any other clinical assessments, every 4 weeks thereafter while on study, at end of study treatment/withdrawal, and follow-up and at Day 28 after last dose date|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827804|NCT01210495|Secondary|Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Hepatobiliary Questionnaire (FACT-Hep) in Randomized Portion: Overall Between-treatment Comparison Based on the Repeated Measures Mixed Effects Model|FACT-Hep consists of 27-item FACT-G, and 18-item Hepatobiliary Subscale. FACT-Hep questionnaire uses 5-point Likert rating scale, range '0'-not at all to '4'. FACT-Hep total score ranges from 0 to 180, where highest score represents maximum achievable quality of life. Domains of FACT-G include Physical Well-Being (PWB), Social/Family Well-Being (SWB), Emotional Well-Being (EWB) and Functional Well-Being (FWB). Hepatobiliary disease specific items include: swelling or cramps, losing weight, gastrointestinal-related questions, lack of energy, side effects, pain, fatigue, usual activities, jaundice, fevers, itching, taste of food and chills. Eight of the items (pain, back pain, stomach pain/discomfort, lack of energy, fatigue, nausea, weight loss and jaundice) make up FACT-Hepatobiliary Symptom Index (FHSI-8), and are considered to be symptoms specific to hepatobiliary cancer. Table below included mixed effect model estimated average based on all observed values/time points.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-dose and before any other clinical assessments, every 4 weeks thereafter while on study, at end of study treatment/withdrawal, and follow-up and at Day 28 after last dose date|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827805|NCT01210495|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Specific miRNA Transcript Present in Circulation in Randomized Portion|A 5 mL whole blood sample was collected from all randomized participants to evaluate the miRNA transcripts.|Baseline|The miRNA analysis set included all participants in the safety analysis set who had a baseline miRNA assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827806|NCT01210495|Secondary|Concentration of Soluble Proteins at Baseline in Randomized Portion|Plasma soluble proteins IL-6, E-Selectin, IL-8, HGF, MMP-2, SCF, Ang-2, VEGF-A, VEGF-C, sVEGFR2, sVEGFR3, SDF1, NGAL, MIF, c-MET, RANTES, and MCP-3 were only measured in randomized participants.|Baseline|The soluble protein analysis set included all participants in the safety analysis set who had a Baseline soluble protein assessment.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827807|NCT01210495|Secondary|Axitinib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Parameter - Apparent Oral Volume of Distribution of the Drug During the Elimination Phase (Vz/F), Non-randomized Portion|Axitinib samples were to be collected from all participants on Cycle 1 Day 15 at the following time points: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours after axitinib dosing. The PK parameter, Vz/F has been presented in this outcome measure. In the below table, 4 participants in Child-Pugh A and 1 participant in Child-Pugh B were not reported due to nonestimable half-life.|Cycle 1 Day 15|The PK concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 measured concentration on at least 1 day of PK assessment. The PK parameter analysis set included all participants treated who had at least 1 estimated PK parameter of primary interest.||Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827808|NCT01210495|Secondary|Axitinib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Parameter - Terminal Plasma Elimination Half-life (t1/2), Non-randomized Portion|Axitinib samples were to be collected from all participants on Cycle 1 Day 15 at the following time points: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours after axitinib dosing. In the below table, 4 participants in Child-Pugh A and 1 participant in Child-Pugh B were not reported due to nonestimable half-life.|Cycle 1 Day 15|The PK concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 measured concentration on at least 1 day of PK assessment. The PK parameter analysis set included all participants treated who had at least 1 estimated PK parameter of primary interest.||Hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
827809|NCT01210495|Secondary|Axitinib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Parameter - Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F), Non-randomized Portion|Axitinib samples were to be collected from all participants on Cycle 1 Day 15 at the following time points: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours after axitinib dosing. In the below table, 4 participants in Child-Pugh A and 1 participant in Child-Pugh B were not reported due to nonestimable half-life.|Cycle 1 Day 15|The PK concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 measured concentration on at least 1 day of PK assessment. The PK parameter analysis set included all participants treated who had at least 1 estimated PK parameter of primary interest.||L/hr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827811|NCT01210495|Secondary|Axitinib Steady-state PK Parameter - Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to 24 hr (AUC0-24), Non-randomized Portion|Axitinib samples were to be collected from all participants on Cycle 1 Day 15 at the following time points: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours after axitinib dosing. In the below table, 4 participants in Child-Pugh A and 1 participant in Child-Pugh B were not reported due to nonestimable half-life.|Cycle 1 Day 15|The PK concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 measured concentration on at least 1 day of PK assessment. The PK parameter analysis set included all participants treated who had at least 1 estimated PK parameter of primary interest.||ng*hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827812|NCT01210495|Secondary|Axitinib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax), Non-randomized Portion|Axitinib samples were to be collected from all participants on Cycle 1 Day 15 at the following time points: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours after axitinib dosing.|Cycle 1 Day 15|The PK concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 measured concentration on at least 1 day of PK assessment. The PK parameter analysis set included all participants treated who had at least 1 estimated PK parameter of primary interest.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827813|NCT01210495|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Clinical Benefit Response (CBR) - Stratified Analysis, Randomized Portion|CBR was defined as the proportion of participants with confirmed CR or confirmed PR or a best response of stable disease ≥8 weeks according to RECIST criteria, relative to all randomized participants who had baseline measurable disease. Confirmed responses were defined as those that persisted on repeat imaging study ≥4 weeks after the initial documentation of response. Participants who did not have on study radiographic tumor re evaluation or who died, progressed, or dropped out for any reason prior to reaching a CR, PR, or stable disease were counted as non-responders in the assessment of CBR. A participant who initially met the criteria for a PR and then subsequently became a confirmed CR was to be assigned a best response of CR.|From Baseline up to end of treatment|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827814|NCT01210495|Secondary|Duration of Response (DR) by Unstratified Analysis, Randomized Portion|DR was defined as the time from the first documentation of objective tumor response (CR or PR) that was subsequently confirmed to the first documentation of PD or to death due to any cause, whichever occurs first. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date was to be used. DR (in months) was to be calculated as (the end date for DR − first CR or PR that was subsequently confirmed +1)/30.4.|From objective response to date of progression or death|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received. DR was calculated for the subgroup of FAS participants with objective response.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827815|NCT01210495|Secondary|Time to Tumor Progression (TTP) - Stratified Analysis, Randomized Portion|TTP was defined as the time from randomization to first documentation of objective tumor progression. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date was used. TTP (in months) was calculated as (first event date − first randomization date +1)/30.4.|Every 8 weeks until disease progression/death or start of new treatment or until at least two years after the last participant has been randomized, whatever occurs first|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827816|NCT01210495|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) - Percentage of Participants With Objective Response by Stratified Analysis, Randomized Portion.|ORR was defined as the percent of participants with confirmed complete response (CR) or confirmed partial response (PR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must decrease to normal (short axis <10 mm). PR was defined as a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest dimensions of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum longest dimensions.|Every 8 weeks until at least two years after the last participant has been randomized|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827817|NCT01210495|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) - Stratified Analysis, Randomized Portion|"PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. PFS (in months) was calculated as (first event date − first randomization date +1)/30.4. Tumor progression was determined from oncologic assessment data (where data meet the criteria for progressive disease [PD]), or from AE data (where the outcome was Death). As per RECIST 1.1, progression was defined as ≥20% increase in the sum of the longest dimensions of the target lesions or the appearance of one or more new target lesions and unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, or the appearance of 1 new non-target lesions. Participants discontinuing study treatment without documented evidence of disease progression were to be followed up at least every 8 weeks after discontinuing study treatment until disease progression, or initiation of another anticancer treatment, whichever was earlier."|Every 8 weeks until disease progression/death or start of new treatment or until at least two years after the last participant has been randomized, whatever occurs first|FAS included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827818|NCT01210495|Primary|Overall Survival (OS) - Stratified Analysis, Randomized Portion|OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause. OS (in months) was calculated as (date of death − first randomization date +1)/30.4. For participants still alive at the time of the analysis, the OS time was censored on the last date they were known to be alive. All participants were followed up for survival at least every 3 months after discontinuing study treatment until at least two years after randomization of the last participant.|From randomization until at least two years after the last participant has been randomized|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants, and participants were classified according to the randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827819|NCT01210651|Secondary|Total Change Scores on Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) Among Study Completers|The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) is a 10-item, self-administered, validated psychometric instrument to measure self-esteem, defined as having an overall feeling of self-worth and self-acceptance. Each item is scored from 0 to 3, and individual item scores are summed to yield a total possible RSES ranging from 0-30. RSES scores from 0-14 suggest low self-esteem, from 15-25 normal self-esteem, and from 26-30 high self-esteem. RSES scores of study completers were examined, and the total change score on RSES was calculated for each intervention group as the mean RSES score at 0 wks subtracted from the mean RSES score at 8 wks.|0 wks, 8 wks|Population of study completers was comprised of participants in both intervention groups who provided study measures at intervention start at 0 wks and at intervention finish at 8 wks.||points on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827820|NCT01210651|Secondary|Total Change Scores on General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES) Among Study Completers|The General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES) is a 10-item, self-administered, validated psychometric instrument to measure self-efficacy, defined as the belief that one’s actions are responsible for successful outcomes in coping with difficult life demands. Each item is scored from 1 to 4, with a total GSES score derived by summing the individual item scores. Possible GSES scores range from 10 (no belief in one's self-efficacy) to 40 (strongest belief in one’s self-efficacy). GSES scores of study completers were examined, and the total change score on GSES was calculated for each intervention group as the mean GSES score at 0 wks subtracted from the mean GSES score at 8 wks.|0 wks, 8 wks|Population of study completers was comprised of participants in both intervention groups who provided study measures at intervention start at 0 wks and at intervention finish at 8 wks.||points on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827821|NCT01210651|Primary|Number of Study Completers With Remitted Depression, Per Completers Analysis of BDI Scores at 8 Weeks|The Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI) is a 21-item validated instrument for the self-report of depressive symptoms, with individual item scores summed to yield a total possible BDI score that ranges from 0-63. BDI scores from 0-13 suggest absent to minimal depressive symptoms, from 14-19 mild symptoms, from 20-28 moderate symptoms, and from 29-63 severe symptoms. Analysis examined BDI scores of study completers and identified in each intervention group the number of participants with an 8-wk BDI score ≤ 9, defined as remitted depression.|8 Weeks|Population of study completers with remitted depression was comprised of participants in both intervention groups who provided study measures at 0 wks and 8 wks, and achieved an 8-wk BDI score ≤ 9.||participants|||Number
827822|NCT01210651|Primary|Total Change Scores on Beck Depression Inventory-II Among Study Completers|The Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI) is a 21-item validated instrument for the self-report of depressive symptoms, with individual item scores summed to yield a total possible BDI score that ranges from 0-63. BDI scores from 0-13 suggest absent to minimal depressive symptoms, from 14-19 mild symptoms, from 20-28 moderate symptoms, and from 29-63 severe symptoms. BDI scores of study completers were examined, and the total change score on BDI was calculated for each intervention group as the mean BDI score at 0 wks subtracted from the mean BDI score at 8 wks.|0 wks and 8 wks|Population of study completers was comprised of participants in both intervention groups who provided study measures at intervention start at 0 wks and at intervention end at 8 wks.||points on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827823|NCT01210651|Primary|Intent-to-Treat Analysis of Adjusted Mean Beck Depression Inventory-II Scores Over Intervention Period|The Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI) is a 21-item validated instrument for the self-report of depressive symptoms, with individual item scores summed to yield a total possible BDI score that ranges from 0-63. BDI scores from 0-13 suggest absent to minimal depressive symptoms, from 14-19 mild symptoms, from 20-28 moderate symptoms, and from 29-63 severe symptoms. Regression analysis software examined the BDI scores measured in study participants every 2 wks from intervention start at 0 wks until intervention end at 8 wks, using maximum likelihood estimations to derive an adjusted mean BDI score for each intervention group at each measurement point.|0 wks, 2 wks, 4 wks, 6 wks, 8 wks|Intent-to-Treat population was comprised of all randomized participants in both intervention groups, regardless of adherence to protocol or premature dropout. BDI scores of any participants missing at 0 wks were imputed by carrying forward their BDI scores from screening.||points on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
827824|NCT01210690|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Withdraw Due to Lack or Loss of Efficacy During the Treatment Period|Number of patients who withdraw due to lack or loss of efficacy during the Treatment Period (maximum 12 months).|From Baseline through the last Treatment Visit (maximum 12 months)|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The FAS consisted of all patients in the Enrolled Set who had at least 1 post-Baseline efficacy assessment.||participants|||Number
827825|NCT01210690|Secondary|Global Evaluation Scale of Epilepsy Severity (GES)|"Global evaluation scale of epilepsy severity (GES): physician's assessment of the change from Baseline of the epilepsy severity at the last Treatment Visit (maximum 12 months). The GES is a 7-point scale that assesses change in the severity of the patient's illness. The GES is a 7-point scale with the following options:
7=Marked improvement
6=Moderate improvement
5=Slight improvement
4=No Change
3=Slight worsening
2=Moderate worsening
1=Marked worsening
As a variant of this variable, a 3-class variable was derived as follows
“Marked improvement,” “Moderate improvement,” and “Slight improvement” were defined as “Improved.”
“No change” was defined as “Stable.”
“Slight worsening,” “Moderate worsening,” and “Marked worsening” were defined as “Worsened.”"|From Baseline to the last Treatment Visit (maximum time frame is 12 months)|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The FAS consisted of all patients in the Enrolled Set who had at least 1 post-Baseline efficacy assessment. Presented is the number of subjects with a non-missing measurement at Visit 7.||participants|||Number
827836|NCT01210716|Secondary|Safety Measured by Adverse Events During the TPE Procedure||Adverse events were collected during each TPE procedure.|Adverse events were summarized for enrolled subjects per protocol. 7 out of 37 enrolled subjects experienced adverse events during the study with a total of 12 adverse events reported.||participants|||Number
827837|NCT01210716|Primary|Percent Efficiency of Plasma Removal During the Therapeutic Plasma Exchange Procedure|"The calculation is based on the volume of plasma that was processed through the machine compared to the volume of patient plasma that was actually removed during the procedure.
Plasma Efficiency = (plasma removed/plasma processed)*100"|After completion of the TPE procedure.|A total of 37 patients who consented and enrolled started the 1st procedure. Of these 37 patients, 33 patients completed the 1st procedure and started a 2nd procedure. Three patients did not complete the second procedure resulting in 30 patients with completed paired Test and Control procedures.||percentage of plasma removal efficiency||Full Range|Mean
827826|NCT01210690|Secondary|Global Evaluation Scale of the Psychomotor Development (GES)|"Global evaluation scale of the psychomotor development (GES): physician's assessment of the change from Baseline in the psychomotor development at the last Treatment Visit (maximum timeframe is 12 months). The GES is a 7-point scale with the following options:
7=Marked improvement
6=Moderate improvement
5=Slight improvement
4=No Change
3=Slight worsening
2=Moderate worsening
1=Marked worsening
As a variant of this variable, a 3-class variable was derived as follows
“Marked improvement,” “Moderate improvement,” and “Slight improvement” were defined as “Improved.”
“No change” was defined as “Stable.”
“Slight worsening,” “Moderate worsening,” and “Marked worsening” were defined as “Worsened.”"|From Baseline to the last Treatment Visit (maximum 12 months)|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The FAS consisted of all patients in the Enrolled Set who had at least 1 post-Baseline efficacy assessment. Presented is the number of subjects with a non-missing measurement at Visit 7.||participants|||Number
827827|NCT01210690|Secondary|Number of Patients With Abnormalities Noted During Neurological Examination From Baseline to the Last Treatment Visit|The Number of Patients With Abnormalities Noted During Neurological Examination cannot be given because abnormality frequencies were only determined for single parameters of the neurological examination and therefore a subject might have been counted several times.|From Baseline to the last Treatment Visit (maximum 12 months)||||||
827828|NCT01210690|Secondary|Number of Patients With Abnormalities Noted During Physical Examination From Baseline to the Last Treatment Visit|"Number of patients with abnormalities noted during physical examination over the Treatment Period (maximum 12 months). Any abnormal findings during the physical examination during the study were reported as Adverse Events (AEs).
The Number of Patients With Abnormalities Noted During Physical Examination From Baseline to the Last Treatment Visit cannot be given because abnormalities at Screening are listed only and worsening after Screening were handled as AEs and tabulated along with the other AEs."|From Baseline to the last Treatment Visit (maximum 12 months)||||||
827829|NCT01210690|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Standardized Head Circumference Scores at the Safety Follow-up Visit|For each visit, head circumference was measured and age standardization was performed based on WHO growth charts to obtain z-scores. For this outcome measure, the difference of head circumference z-scores from Safety Follow-up Visit to Baseline was determined and averaged across the study population.|From Baseline to the Safety Follow-up Visit (maximum Treatment Period is 12 months plus 2-week safety follow-up)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consisted of all patients in the Enrolled Set who received at least 1 (partial) dose of study medication.||z-scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
827830|NCT01210690|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Standardized Body Length Scores at the Safety Follow-up Visit|For each visit, body length was measured and age standardization was performed based on WHO growth charts to obtain z-scores. For this outcome measure, the difference of body length z-scores from Safety Follow-up Visit to Baseline was determined and averaged across the study population.|From Baseline to the Safety Follow-up Visit (maximum Treatment Period is 12 months plus 2-week safety follow-up)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consisted of all patients in the Enrolled Set who received at least 1 (partial) dose of study medication.||z-scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
827831|NCT01210690|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Standardized Body Weight Scores at the Safety Follow-up Visit|For each visit, body weight was measured and standardization for gender and age was performed based on WHO growth charts to obtain z-scores. For this outcome measure, the mean of the differences of individual body weight z-scores from Safety Follow-up Visit to Baseline was determined.|From Baseline to the safety follow-up visit (maximum treatment period is 12 months plus 2-week safety follow-up)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consisted of all patients in the Enrolled Set who received at least 1 (partial) dose of study medication.||z-scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
827832|NCT01210690|Secondary|Presence of Deviation From the Normal Milestones of Psychomotor Development From Baseline to the Last Treatment Visit|Number of patients with presence of deviation from the normal milestones of psychomotor development during the Treatment Period (maximum 12 months). The treating physician evaluated at each visit, as part of standard clinical practice, the psychomotor development of the patient. The evaluation of the patient’s psychomotor development was categorized by the motor development, the social development and the language development.|From Baseline to the last Treatment Visit (maximum 12 months)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consisted of all patients in the Enrolled Set who received at least 1 (partial) dose of study medication. Presented is the number of subjects with non-missing data on psychomotor development at the corresponding visit.||participants|||Number
827833|NCT01210690|Secondary|Incidence of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Leading to Temporary or Permanent Discontinuation of Keppra® (Levetiracetam) From Baseline Through the Last Visit|Number of patients with any Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) leading to temporary or permanent discontinuation of Keppra® (Levetiracetam) during the Treatment Period (maximum 12 months).|From Baseline through the last Treatment Visit (maximum 12 months)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consisted of all patients in the Enrolled Set who received at least 1 (partial) dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
827834|NCT01210690|Secondary|Incidence of Overall Serious Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) From Baseline Through the Safety Follow-up|Number of patients with any serious Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) during the study (maximum Treatment Period is 12 months plus 2-week safety follow-up).|From Baseline through the Safety Follow-up Visit (maximum Treatment Period is 12 months plus 2-weeks safety follow-up)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consisted of all patients in the Enrolled Set who received at least 1 (partial) dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
827835|NCT01210690|Primary|Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) From Baseline Through Safety Follow-up Visit|Number of patients with any Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) as reported by the patient's parent and/or caregiver or observed by the treating physician during the study (maximum Treatment Period is 12 months plus 2-week safety follow-up).|From Baseline through the Safety Follow-up Visit (maximum Treatment Period is 12 months plus 2-week safety follow-up)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consisted of all patients in the Enrolled Set who received at least 1 (partial) dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
829105|NCT01216397|Secondary|Linagliptin: Percentage of AUCtz-∞ Obtained by Extrapolation|Geometric Mean of percentage of AUCtz-∞ of linagliptin, where percentage is the unit of measurement.|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||percentage||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827838|NCT01210807|Primary|Mean LogMAR Binocular Photopic Distance Corrected Near Visual Acuity at 33 cm|Snellen equivalent for the mean logMAR binocular photopic distance corrected near visual acuity at 33 cm is 20/24 for the Multifocal Group. Snellen equivalent for the mean logMAR binocular photopic distance corrected near visual acuity at 33 cm is 20/81 for the Monofocal Group.|4-6 Months|Within the 4-6 month time frame, one assessment was performed per participant. Though 70 subjects started the study (36 ZMB00; 34 ZCB00), data for logMAR binocular photopic distance corrected near visual acuity at 33 were available for only 33 ZMB00 and 31 ZCB00 subjects at the the 4-6 month visit.||logMAR visual acuity||Standard Deviation|Mean
827839|NCT01210807|Secondary|Number of Subjects With 20/40 or Better Best Corrected Binocular Distance Visual Acuity||4-6 months|Within the 4-6 month time frame, one assessment was performed per participant. Though 70 subjects started the study (36 ZMB00; 34 ZCB00), best corrected binocular diatance visual acuity data were available for only 32 ZMB00 and 31 ZCB00 subjects at the the 4-6 month visit.||participants|||Number
827840|NCT01210820|Primary|Change in Keratometric Cylinder|Change in mean keratometric cylinder (as measured by keratometry) compared to baseline.|6 Months|||Diopters of astigmatism change||Standard Deviation|Mean
827841|NCT01210820|Primary|Change in Refractive Astigmatism|Change in mean cylinder (assessed by manifest refraction) compared to baseline.|6 months|||Diopter of cylinder change||Standard Deviation|Mean
827842|NCT01211106|Primary|Drinking Outcome|Percent days of heavy drinking during the sixteen weeks. The percentage of days in which heavy drinking occurred ranges from 0 - 100% with lower days associated with better outcomes.|16 weeks|The number of subjects available for this measure are greater than the PTSD outcome as drinking outcomes can be obtained at anytime and thus some participants provided data at the post study evaluation.||percent days ofheavy drinking||Standard Deviation|Mean
827843|NCT01211106|Primary|PTSD Symptoms|PTSD checklist (PCL), the PCL version used with the civilian PCL. The PCL is a standardized self-report rating scale for PTSD comprising 17 items that correspond to the key symptoms of PTSD. Respondents indicate how much they have been bothered by a symptom over the past month using a 5-point (1–5) scale, circling their responses. Responses range from 1 Not at All – 5 Extremely thus the total score ranges from 17 - 85. Lower scores are associated with less severity/symptoms.|16 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827844|NCT01204294|Secondary|Glycosylated Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)|The change from baseline in HbA1c after 52 weeks of treatment. When the HbA1c after 52 weeks treatment was missing, the value from the measurements at the closest preceding visit replaced the missing value.|Baseline and 52 weeks|The full analysis set (FAS) comprised all treated patients who had baseline HbA1c measurement and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
827845|NCT01204294|Primary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs)|The number of patient with any AEs, patients with severe AE, patients with AEs leading to discontinuation of trial drug, and patients with Hypoglycaemic events|The first drug administration through 7 days after the last drug administration, up to 382 days|The treated set (TS) comprised all patients who received at least one dose of randomised study medication in the 52-week treatment period||Patients|||Number
827846|NCT01204398|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Study in In-clinic Pulse Rate||8 weeks|TS with non-missing data||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
827847|NCT01204398|Secondary|Treatment Emergent Adverse Events|Electrocardiogram, laboratory parameters and physical examinations were performed and any abnormal findings were recorded within the adverse events|8 weeks|Treated Set (TS) defined as all patients who entered the run-in phase and were treated with T80/A5.||Participants|||Number
827848|NCT01204398|Secondary|ABPM Hourly Mean DBP and SBP at Baseline and the End of the Study, Starting 1 Hour After Dosing|DBP and SBP hourly means over the 24-hour dosing interval as measured by ABPM at baseline and after 8 weeks of treatment|0 and 8 weeks|FAS||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
827849|NCT01204398|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Study in DBP and SBP|Manually measured in-clinic DBP and SBP|8 weeks|FAS||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
827850|NCT01204398|Secondary|Trough to Peak (T/P) Ratio for DBP and SBP After 8 Weeks of Treatment|Calculated on the basis of changes in hourly means from baseline. Trough is defined as the mean of the last three hours of the 24-hour dosing interval. Peak is the greatest reduction in hourly means in hours 2 to 8 after dosing. All measurements are using ABPM.|8 weeks|FAS||Ratio||Full Range|Median
827851|NCT01204398|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ABPM Hourly Mean DBP and SBP, Starting 1 Hour After Dosing|Changes from baseline in DBP and SBP hourly means over the 24-hour dosing interval as measured by ABPM after 8 weeks of treatment with T80/A5|8 weeks|FAS||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
827852|NCT01204398|Primary|DBP and SBP Change From Baseline in Mean 24-hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM) Mean|ABPM measurements were taken every 20 minutes throughout the day and night by the validated SpaceLabs Model 90217 monitor.|8 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) defined as all patients with at least one dose of T80/A5, and for whom baseline and post-baseline ABPM are available.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
827853|NCT01204658|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An SAE was defined as any medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, resulted in disability/incapacity in a subject. AE(s) considered as SAE(s) also included invasive or malignant cancers, intensive treatment in an emergency room or at home for allergic bronchospasm, blood dyscrasias or convulsions that did not result in hospitalization, as per the medical or scientific judgement of the physician. Any = Occurrence of an SAE, regardless of relationship to vaccination.|During the entire study period (Months 0-11)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort for the Primary Phase, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one of the 3 vaccine doses against pneumococcal diseases.||Subjects|||Number
827861|NCT01204658|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Polyribosyl Ribitol Phosphate (Anti-PRP) – Booster Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations will be expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in microgram per milliliter (µg/mL). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.15 µg/mL or 1 µg/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Booster Phase of the study.|At Months 10 and 11, e.g. prior to and at one month post booster vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827854|NCT01204658|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs) – Booster Phase of the Study|An unsolicited AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. For the marketed products administered in the study, this also included failure to produce expected benefits (i.e. lack of efficacy), abuse or misuse of the product. Any = Occurrence of an unsolicited AE, regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) period post booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort of Booster Phase, which included all subjects who received the booster dose of vaccine against pneumococcal diseases.||Subjects|||Number
827855|NCT01204658|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs) – Primary Phase of the Study|An unsolicited AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. For the marketed products administered in the study, this also included failure to produce expected benefits (i.e. lack of efficacy), abuse or misuse of the product. Any = Occurrence of an unsolicited AE, regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) period post primary vaccination, across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort for the Primary Phase, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one of the 3 vaccine doses against pneumococcal diseases.||Subjects|||Number
827856|NCT01204658|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 Solicited General Symptoms and Solicited General Symptoms With Relationship to Vaccination – Booster Phase of the Study|Assessed solicited general symptoms were Drowsiness, Irritability, Loss of appetite (Loss Appet.) and Fever (rectal temperature higher than [≥] 38 degrees Celsius [°C]). Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom, regardless of intensity and relationship to vaccination. Related = Occurrence of the specified symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to vaccination. Grade 3 Drowsiness = Drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Irritability = Crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Loss of appetite = Subject did not eat at all. Grade 3 Fever = Axillary temperature higher than (>) 40.0°C.|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) period post vaccination after booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort for the Booster Phase, which included all subjects who received the booster dose of vaccine against pneumococcal diseases, with analysis done solely on subjects with post-vaccination solicited symptoms results available.||Subjects|||Number
827857|NCT01204658|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms – Booster Phase of the Study|Assessed local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling at injection site. Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom, regardless of intensity. Grade 3 Pain = Crying when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 Redness/Swelling = Redness/swelling at injection site larger than (>) 30 millimeters (mm).|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) period after booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort for the Booster Phase, which included all subjects who received the booster dose of vaccine against pneumococcal diseases, with analysis done solely on subjects with post-vaccination solicited symptoms results available.||Subjects|||Number
827858|NCT01204658|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms – Primary Phase of the Study|Assessed local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling at injection site. Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom, regardless of intensity. Grade 3 Pain = Crying when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 Redness/Swelling = Redness/swelling at injection site larger than (>) 30 millimeters (mm).|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) periods post vaccination, after each dose (D) of the 3-dose primary vaccination course|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort for the Primary Phase, which included all subjects who received at least one of the 3 vaccine doses against pneumococcal diseases, with analysis done solely on subjects with post-vaccination solicited symptoms results available.||Subjects|||Number
827859|NCT01204658|Secondary|Titers of Antibodies Against Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3 (Anti-1, Anti-2 and Anti-3) – Booster Phase of the Study|Antibody titers will be measured by virus microneutralization test, expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay for anti-1, anti-2 and anti-3 antibody was a titer higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns results for the Booster Phase of the study.|At Months 10 and 11, e.g. prior to and at one month post booster vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827860|NCT01204658|Secondary|Titers of Antibodies Against Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3 (Anti-1, Anti-2 and Anti-3) – Primary Phase of the Study|Antibody titers will be measured by virus microneutralization test, expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay for anti-1, anti-2 and anti-3 antibody was a titer higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns results for the Primary Phase of the study.|At Month 3, e. g. one month post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827869|NCT01204658|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Inhibiting Pneumococcal Pneumolysin Toxoid Haemolysis Activity – Booster Phase of the Study|Analysis of the concentrations of antibodies inhibiting pneumococcal pneumolysin toxoid haemolysis activity (anti-Ply) was not performed as no assay was validated to perform this analysis. This outcome concerns results for the Booster Phase of the study.|At Months 10 and 11, e.g. prior to and at one month post booster vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)||12/2050||||
829106|NCT01216397|Secondary|Linagliptin: AUC0-infinity|Geometric mean of AUC0-infinity of Linagliptin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||nmol*hr/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
827862|NCT01204658|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Polyribosyl Ribitol Phosphate (Anti-PRP) – Primary Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations will be expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in microgram per milliliter (µg/mL). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.15 µg/mL or 1 µg/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Primary Phase of the study.|At Month 3, e. g. one month post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827863|NCT01204658|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Hepatitis B (Anti-HBs) – Booster Phase of the Study|"Antibody concentrations will be expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in milli-International Units per milliliter (mIU/mL). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 10 mIU/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Booster Phase of the study.
* A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA) assay had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). The table shows updated results following partial or complete reanalysis. The retest has been performed in using Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved ChemiLuminescence ImmunoAssay (CLIA) commercial assay Centaur™."|At Months 10 and 11, e.g. prior to and at one month post booster vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827864|NCT01204658|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Hepatitis B (Anti-HBs) – Primary Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations will be expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in milli-International Units per milliliter (mIU/mL). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 10 mIU/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Primary Phase of the study. Note that the percentage of subjects with concentration ≥10 mIU/mL was over-estimated due to the use of in-house assay overestimating concentrations between 10-100 mIU/mL. Accordingly GMCs were also overestimated.|At Month 3, e. g. one month post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827865|NCT01204658|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA), Pertactin (Anti-PRN) – Booster Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations will be measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in Elisa Units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The seropositivity cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 5 EL.U/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Booster Phase of the study.|At Months 10 and 11, e.g. prior to and at one month post booster vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827866|NCT01204658|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA), Pertactin (Anti-PRN) – Primary Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations will be measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in Elisa Units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The seropositivity cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 5 EL.U/mL. This outcome concerns results for the primary Phase of the study.|At Month 3, e. g. one month post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827867|NCT01204658|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Diphtheria (Anti-D) and Tetanus (Anti-T) – Booster Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations will be expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in International Units per milliliter (IU/mL). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.1 IU/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Booster Phase of the study.|At Months 10 and 11, e.g. prior to and at one month post booster vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827868|NCT01204658|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Diphtheria (Anti-D) and Tetanus (Anti-T) – Primary Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations will be expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in International Units per milliliter (IU/mL). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.1 IU/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Primary Phase of the study.|At Month 3, e. g. one month post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
828226|NCT01215279|Secondary|SGRQ Total Score at End of Treatment|Decrease in score represents improved Quality of Life; increase represents deteriorated Quality of Life. An increase or decrease of 4 or more percent units is judged as the Minimal Clinically Important Difference.|week 4|||Percent of maximum possible score||Standard Deviation|Mean
827871|NCT01204658|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Pneumococcal Serotypes – Booster Phase of the Study|Titers for opsonophagocytic activity assessed for this outcome measure were those for opsonophagocytic activity against the vaccine/cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F and 23F (OPA-1, -3, -4, -5, -6A, -6B, -7F, -9V, -14, -18C, -19A, -19F and -23F). The Seropositivity cut-off of the assay was a titer for opsonophagocytic activity higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns results for the Booster Phase of the study. Results for humoral immune response to the opsonophagocytic activity testing for OPA-19A will be updated when validated results become available.|At Months 10 and 11, e.g. prior to and at one month post booster vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827872|NCT01204658|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Pneumococcal Serotypes – Primary Phase of the Study|Titers for opsonophagocytic activity assessed for this outcome measure were those for opsonophagocytic activity against the vaccine/cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F and 23F (OPA-1, -3, -4, -5, -6A, -6B, -7F, -9V, -14, -18C, -19A, -19F and -23F). The Seropositivity cut-off of the assay was a titer for opsonophagocytic activity higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns results for the Primary Phase of the study. Results for humoral immune response to the opsonophagocytic activity testing for OPA-19A will be updated when validated results become available.|At Month 3, e. g. one month post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827873|NCT01204658|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Pneumococcal Serotypes – Booster Phase of the Study|Antibodies assessed for this outcome measure were those against the vaccine/cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F and 23F (ANTI-1, -3, -4, -5, -6A, -6B, -7F, -9V, -14, -18C, -19A, -19F and -23F). Antibody concentrations were measured by 22F enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The seropositivity cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.05 µg/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Booster Phase of the study.|At Months 10 and 11, e.g. prior to and at one month post booster vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827874|NCT01204658|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Pneumococcal Serotypes – Primary Phase of the Study|Antibodies assessed for this outcome measure were those against the vaccine/cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F and 23F (ANTI-1, -3, -4, -5, -6A, -6B, -7F, -9V, -14, -18C, -19A, -19F and -23F). Antibody concentrations were measured by 22F enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The seropositivity cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration ≥ 0.05 µg/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Primary Phase of the study.|At Month 3, e. g. one month post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827875|NCT01204658|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Protein D (Anti-PD) – Booster Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA Units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The seropositivity cut-off of the assay was a concentration of anti-PD antibodies ≥ 100 EL.U/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Booster Phase of the study.|At Months 10 and 11, e.g. prior to and at one month post booster vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827876|NCT01204658|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Protein D (Anti-PD) – Primary Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA Units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The seropositivity cut-off of the assay was a concentration of anti-PD antibodies ≥ 100 EL.U/mL. This outcome concerns results for the Primary Phase of the study.|At Month 3, e. g. one month post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827884|NCT01204671|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Adverse Events With Medically-attended Events (MAEs)|Medically-attended events (MAEs) refer to non-serious and serious events leading to an otherwise unscheduled visit to or from medical personnel for any reason, including emergency room visits. If a MAE was leading to hospitalisation (or met any other serious adverse event criterion), it was reported as serious adverse event. Related MAE = MAE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination. Subjects receiving the GSK2321138A vaccine were pooled for this outcome measure.|From the beginning of the study (Day 0) to study end (Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Subject|||Number
827877|NCT01204658|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Pneumococcal Pneumolysin Toxoid (dPly) and Pneumococcal Histidine Triad Protein D (PhtD) Proteins – Booster Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations against dPly and PhtD (anti-dPly and anti-PhtD, respectively) were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA Units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). Cut-offs for seropositivity were concentrations higher than or equal to (≥)12 EL.U/mL for anti-dPly antibodies and ≥ 17 EL.U/mL for anti-PhtD antibodies. This outcome concerns results for the Booster Phase of the study.|At Months 10 and 11, e.g. prior to and at one month post booster vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827878|NCT01204658|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Pneumococcal Pneumolysin Toxoid (dPly) and Pneumococcal Histidine Triad Protein D (PhtD) Proteins – Primary Phase of the Study|Antibody concentrations against dPly and PhtD (anti-dPly and anti-PhtD, respectively) were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA Units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). Cut-offs for seropositivity were concentrations higher than or equal to (≥)12 EL.U/mL for anti-dPly antibodies and ≥ 17 EL.U/mL for anti-PhtD antibodies. This outcome concerns results for the Primary Phase of the study.|At Month 3, e. g. one month post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity adapted for each epoch which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study antigen component after primary vaccination (primary phase) or before or after booster vaccination (booster phase).||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827879|NCT01204658|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Reporting Fever > 40° C With Causal Relationship to Vaccination After Each Primary Vaccination Dose and Across Doses in the 10PP-HD/Infanrix Hexa Group and in the Synflorix/Infanrix Hexa Group|Grade 3 fever was defined as fever by rectal measurement >40.0°C. Related was defined as causal relationship to vaccination. This endpoint was assessed after each primary vaccination dose and across doses and in subjects in the 10PP-HD/Infanrix hexa (or 10PP-HD) and Synflorix/Infanrix hexa (or 10PN) groups only.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period following each primary vaccination dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort for the Primary Phase, which included all subjects who received at least one of the 3 vaccine doses against pneumococcal diseases, with analysis done solely on subjects with post-vaccination solicited symptoms results available.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827880|NCT01204658|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Reporting Fever > 40.0°C With Causal Relationship to Vaccination After Each Primary Vaccination Dose and Across Doses in 10PP-LD/Infanrix Hexa Group and in Synflorix/Infanrix Hexa Group|Grade 3 fever was defined as fever by rectal measurement > 40.0°C. Related was defined as causal relationship to vaccination. This endpoint was assessed after each primary vaccination dose and across doses and in subjects in the 10PP-LD/Infanrix hexa (or 10PP-LD) and Synflorix/Infanrix hexa (or 10PN) groups only.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period following each primary vaccination dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort for the Primary Phase, which included all subjects who received at least one of the 3 vaccine doses against pneumococcal diseases, with analysis done solely on subjects with post-vaccination solicited symptoms results available.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827881|NCT01204658|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited General Symptoms and With Solicited General Symptoms Related to Vaccination – Primary Phase of the Study|Assessed solicited general symptoms were Drowsiness, Irritability, Loss of appetite (Loss Appet.) and Fever (rectal temperature higher than or equal to [>=] 38 degrees Celsius [°C]). Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom, regardless of intensity and relationship to vaccination. Related = Occurrence of the specified symptom assessed by the investigators as causally related to vaccination. Grade 3 (G3) Drowsiness = Drowsiness that prevented normal activity. G3 Irritability = Crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. G3 Loss of appetite = Subject did not eat at all. G3 Fever = Rectal temperature higher than (>) 40.0°C. Primary results correspond to results for occurrences of G3 fever symptoms assessed by the investigators as related to vaccination (Related G3 fever).|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) periods post vaccination, after each dose (D) of the 3-dose primary vaccination course|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort for the Primary Phase, which included all subjects who received at least one of the 3 vaccine doses against pneumococcal diseases, with analysis done solely on subjects with post-vaccination solicited symptoms results available.||Subjects|||Number
827882|NCT01204671|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject. Any SAE = any SAE regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Related SAE = SAE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|From the beginning of the study (Day 0) to study end (Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Subject|||Number
827883|NCT01204671|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Potential Immune-mediated Diseases (pIMDs)|Potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) are a subset of adverse events that include both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology. Related pIMD = pIMD assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination. Subjects receiving the GSK2321138A vaccine were pooled for this outcome measure.|From the beginning of the study (Day 0) to study end (Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Subject|||Number
827939|NCT01205269|Secondary|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC), Peak Effect Over 0 - 24 Hours Post-dose|Maximum FVC value|0, 5 min, 15 min, 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h, 12 h, 14 h, 18 h, 22 h, 24 h|Of the 28 randomised patients, 27 completed the study and one discontinued during the last washout period. All 28 randomised patients were included in the analyses of all variables||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
836875|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 120 Minutes|The scale measure pain after 120 minutes (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|120 minutes|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827885|NCT01204671|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|Unsolicited AEs cover any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any unsolicited AE = any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 unsolicited AE = unsolicited AE that prevented normal everyday activity Related unsolicited AE = unsolicited AE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within the 21-day (Days 0-20) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Subject|||Number
827886|NCT01204671|Secondary|Number of Days With Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms post vaccination were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms (Gastr.), headache, joint pain at other location (Joint Pain), muscle aches, shivering, and temperature [defined as axillary temperature above or equal to (> =) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)].|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, solely on subjects with available results.||Day||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827887|NCT01204671|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms post vaccination were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms (Gastr.), headache, joint pain at other location (Joint Pain), muscle aches, shivering, and temperature [axillary temperature above or equal to (>=) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of a symptom regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 = symptom which prevented normal every day activities. Grade 3 temperature = axillary temperature > 39°C. Related = symptom assessed as causally related to study vaccination.|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, solely on subjects with available results.||Subject|||Number
827888|NCT01204671|Secondary|Number of Days With Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms post vaccination were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site.|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, solely on subjects with available results.||Day||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
827889|NCT01204671|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms.|Assessed solicited local symptoms post vaccination were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site. Any = occurrence of a symptom regardless of intensity. Grade 3 pain = significant pain at rest/ that prevented normal every day activities. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 100 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|Within the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, solely on subjects with available results.||Subject|||Number
827890|NCT01204671|Secondary|Increase in Hemagglutination Inhibition Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|Increase in hemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibodies is presented in terms of mean geometric increase (MGI), defined as the geometric mean of the within subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titer to the Day 0 reciprocal HI titer , expressed using “fold increase” as unit . Antibodies assessed were HI antibodies against the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria), and B/Brisbane/3/2007 (Yamagata) flu strains. Subjects receiving the GSK2321138A vaccine were pooled for this outcome measure.|At Day 21 (D21)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for Immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available, and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827891|NCT01204671|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|A seroprotected subject was a vaccinated subject who had hemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titer above or equal (>=) 1:40. Antibodies assessed were HI antibodies against the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria), and B/Brisbane/3/2007 (Yamagata) flu strains. Subjects receiving the GSK2321138A vaccine were pooled for this outcome measure.|At Day 0 (D0), and at Day 21 (D21)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for Immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available, and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subject|||Number
827892|NCT01204671|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|A seropositive subject was a vaccinated subject with hemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titer above or equal (>=) the reference cut-off value of 1:10. Antibodies assessed were HI antibodies against the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria), and B/Brisbane/3/2007 (Yamagata) flu strains. Subjects receiving the GSK2321138A vaccine were pooled for this outcome measure.|At Day 0 (D0), and at Day 21 (D21)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for Immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available, and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subject|||Number
827893|NCT01204671|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|A seroconverted subject was a vaccinated subject who had either a pre-vaccination hemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer above or equal (>=) 1:40, or a pre-vaccination HI antibody titer >= 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination HI antibody titer. Antibodies assessed were HI antibodies against the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria), and B/Brisbane/3/2007 (Yamagata) flu strains. Subjects receiving the GSK2321138A vaccine were pooled for this outcome measure.|At Day 21 (D21)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for Immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available, and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subject|||Number
827940|NCT01205269|Secondary|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1), Average Effect Over 0 - 24 Hours Post-dose|Average FEV1 value|0, 5 min, 15 min, 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h, 12 h, 14 h, 18 h, 22 h, 24 h|Of the 28 randomised patients, 27 completed the study and one discontinued during the last washout period. All 28 randomised patients were included in the analyses of all variables||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
827894|NCT01204671|Primary|Titers for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was 1:10. HI antibodies assessed were antibodies against the A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria), and B/Brisbane/3/2007 (Yamagata) flu strains. Subjects receiving the GSK2321138A vaccine were pooled for this outcome measure.|At Day 0 (D0), and at Day 21 (D21)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for Immunogenicity, which included all vaccinated and eligible subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available, and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827895|NCT01204697|Secondary|Duration of Response (DoR)|Duration of response (DoR) was defined as the interval (in days) from first documentation of a response (CR/PR depending on which occurred first) to the date of the first documentation of disease progression or death from any cause. Participants presenting a response were considered as censored at the date of the last assessment with a documentation of non-progression. DoR (days) = (Date of PD/death ‐ Date of CR/PR) + 1. Assessments were performed according to RECIST Version 1.1. DoR was assessed using the Kaplan‐Meier method. Detailed definitions of CR and PR are provided in Outcome Measure 4.|From randomization until progressive disease or death, assessed up to 18 months|FAS population. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies those participants who had a best overall response of CR or PR.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827896|NCT01204697|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control|Disease control was defined as PR, CR, or SD. Participants who did not achieve a CR or PR or SD were counted as non‐responders in the analysis of disease control. According to RECIST Version 1.1, SD was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, and PD. Detailed definitions of CR and PR are provided in Outcome Measure 4.|From randomization until progressive disease or death, assessed up to 18 months|FAS population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827897|NCT01204697|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|Best overall response (complete response [CR]/partial response [PR]) was defined as the best response recorded from the start of the treatment until disease progression (PD). Best response in this trial was defined as the best response observed at any post-treatment visits. According to RECIST Version 1.1, CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease. All nodes, both target and non-target, must decrease to normal (short axis less than [<] 10 mm). No new lesions. PR was defined as greater than or equal to [>=] 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions. The short axis was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No unequivocal progression of non-target disease. No new lesions.|From randomization until progressive disease or death, assessed up to 18 months|FAS population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827898|NCT01204697|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival (OS) was defined as the interval (in days) between the date of randomization and death from any cause. Participants alive at the time of the analysis were censored at the date they were last known to be alive. OS was assessed using the Kaplan‐Meier method.|From randomization until death, assessed up to 18 months|FAS population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827899|NCT01204697|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression-free Survival (PFS) was defined as the interval (in days) between the date of randomization and the first documentation of progressive disease or death from any cause. Participants alive and progression-free were considered as censored at the date of the last tumor assessment when the participant was known to be progression‐free. Participants without post‐baseline tumor assessment, but known to be alive, were censored at the time of randomization. PFS (days) = (Date of Event ‐ Date of Randomization) + 1. PFS was assessed using the Kaplan‐Meier method. Detailed definition of PD is provided in Outcome Measure 1.|From randomization until progressive disease or death, assessed up to 18 months|FAS population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
827900|NCT01204697|Primary|Percentage of Participants Free From Disease Progression or Death at 6 Months|According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Version 1.1, progressive Disease (PD) is defined as: for Target Lesions - At least a 20 percent (%) increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 millimeter (mm). (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression). For Non-Target Lesions - Unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression).|Month 6|FAS population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
827901|NCT01204736|Primary|Elbow Extension Strength|Elbow extension strength was measured as the maximum elbow extension moment that subject's could generate. We used an elbow moment transducer to measure elbow moments under isometric (no change in arm posture) conditions. Subjects performed three trials at maximum effort, holding maximum elbow extension for 5 to 7 seconds. The maximum moment was computed as the maximum average moment sustained over a 0.5 second window.|At least one year post surgery|||Newton-Meters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
827902|NCT01204775|Primary|Mean Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 16||16 week short term treatment period|||percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
827903|NCT01204788|Primary|Number of Participants With Infection|Primary outcome is infection (yes/no) where participant without infection found by day 42 patient are counted as 'No' to infection.|Blood draw 2-3 times a week while hospitalized, weekly thereafter. Participant to remain on study 42 days after transfusion.|Outcomes inevaluable due to low recruitment.|||||
827917|NCT01205126|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain Relief, in the Past 24 Hour Recorded Assessed by BPI Short Form Questionnaire at Day 29|The BPI is questionnaire for evaluating the degree of pain severity and the impact of pain in performing daily routines. BPI comprises of total 9 items in total, and the 8th item consisting of 7 sub-items is a question asking the degree of disturbance due to pain. The score ranges from 0% to 100%, wherein 0% indicates no relief and 100% indicates complete relief.|Baseline and Day 29|The PPS included all randomly assigned participants who had completed all efficacy evaluations, have good compliance to the protocol without major protocol violations specified and who prematurely discontinued the study due to lack of efficacy were also included. Redefined LOCF was applied.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827904|NCT01204853|Secondary|Number of Participants With Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameters at Steady State|The following PK parameters at the steady state were evaluated: maximum observed concentration during the dosing interval (Cmax), time for maximum observed concentration during the dosing interval (Tmax), area under the plasma concentration-time curve over dosing interval tau for multiple dose (AUCtau), terminal elimination half-life (t1/2), apparent clearance (CL/F) and apparent volume of distribution during the terminal elimination phase (Vz/F) at Week 12/Termination (as data permit), and concentration predose during multiple dosing (Ctrough) at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12/Termination.|pre-dose at Week 2, 4, 8, and pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 hours post-dose at Week 12 or study termination|"The PK concentration set was defined as all participants who have at least 1 concentration.
The PK parameter analysis set was defined as all participants who have at least 1 of PK parameters of interest.
Descriptive statistics for PK parameters were not calculated due to a small number of participants."||Participants|||Number
827905|NCT01204853|Secondary|Clinical Worsening|Clinical worsening is defined as 1) Hospitalization for worsening pulmonary arterial hypertension, 2) On-study death, 3) Heart-lung or lung transplantation, 4) Atrial septostomy, 5) Addition of the chronic medications for the treatment of worsening pulmonary arterial hypertension, and 6) Initiation of oxygen.|12 weeks|"Efficacy analysis set is defined as all participants who receive at least one dose of the study drug and had efficacy observations at baseline in any efficacy assessments.
Descriptive statistics for clinical worsening were not calculated due to a small number of participants."||Participants|||Number
827906|NCT01204853|Secondary|Change From Baseline in N-amino Terminal Fragment of the Prohormone Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-pro BNP)|Change from baseline in NT-pro BNP is calculated as the value at Week 12 minus value at baseline.|12 weeks|"Efficacy analysis set is defined as all participants who receive at least one dose of the study drug and had efficacy observations at baseline in any efficacy assessments.
Descriptive statistics for change from baseline in NT-pro BNP were not calculated due to a small number of participants."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
827907|NCT01204853|Secondary|Number of Participants With Haemodynamics Parameters|"The following haemodynamic measurements were assessed: right arterial pressure, pulmonary arterial systolic pressure, pulmonary arterial diastolic pressure, mean pulmonary arterial pressure, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, left ventricular-end diastolic pressure, cardiac output, systemic arterial blood pressure (systolic, diastolic and mean), and heart rate.
Change from baseline in haemodynamics parameters is calculated as the value at Week 12 minus value at baseline."|12 weeks|"Efficacy analysis set is defined as all participants who receive at least one dose of the study drug and had efficacy observations at baseline in any efficacy assessments.
Descriptive statistics for change from baseline in haemodynamics parameters were not calculated due to a small number of participants."||Participants|||Number
827908|NCT01204853|Secondary|Change From Baseline in WHO Functional Class|The change from baseline in WHO functional class was classified into “Improved”, “No change” and “Worsened”. The change from baseline in WHO functional class at Week 12 was to be summarized with frequency count and percentage in each category based on imputed data for missing values at Week 12.|12 weeks|"Efficacy analysis set is defined as all participants who receive at least one dose of the study drug and had efficacy observations at baseline in any efficacy assessments.
Descriptive statistics for change from baseline in WHO functional class were not calculated due to a small number of participants."||Percentage of participants|||Number
827909|NCT01204853|Primary|Change From Baseline in 6-minute Walk Distance|Change from baseline in 6-minute walk distance is calculated as the value at Week 12 minus value at baseline.|12 weeks|"Efficacy analysis set is defined as all participants who receive at least one dose of the study drug and had efficacy observations at baseline in any efficacy assessments.
Descriptive statistics for change from baseline in 6-minute walk distance were not calculated due to a small number of participants."||Meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
827910|NCT01204853|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Number of participants with any adverse events, severe adverse events, serious adverse events|12 weeks|"Safety analysis set is defined as all participants who receive at least one dose of the study drug.
Descriptive statistics for adverse events were not calculated due to a small number of subjects."||Participant|||Number
827911|NCT01205035|Secondary|Angiographic Leakage From Baseline to Month 6 and 12|"Angiography was taken via fluorescein angiography. Any increases of angiographic leakage was counted between baseline and month 6. Also any decreases of angiographic leakage was counted between baseline and 6 month. The same was done between baseline and 12 month.
Any increase of angiographic leakage was counted as a +1. Likewise, any decrease of angiographic leakage was counted as a -1. The sum was calculated based on the number of participants in each arm and the total shown in the outcome. For example: if across the three injected participants for their 6 month visit, two of them showed an increase of angiographic leakage and one showed a decrease, then the outcome would be, (+1) + (+1) + (-1)= +1. Likewise, if the same three participant's 12 month visit showed two with a decrease in leakage and one with no changes in leakage, the outcome would be, (-1) + (-1) + (0)= -2"|Baseline to 6 and baseline to 12 months|||Sum of increases (+1) and decreases (-1)|||Number
827912|NCT01205035|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events Associated to the Administration of Ranibizumab 2.0mg||Baseline to 6 month, baseline to 9 month and baseline to 12 months|||Number of Adverse Events|||Number
827913|NCT01205035|Secondary|Change in Standard Central Subfield Thickness (CST) as Measured by OCT From Baseline to 6, 9, and 12 Months|A large decrease in CST thickness may be indicative of a worse clinical outcome. These measurements are done to ensure safety of the participants.|Baseline to 6, 9, and 12 months|||Micrometer||Full Range|Mean
827914|NCT01205035|Secondary|Change in Visual Acuity From Baseline to Month 6 and From Baseline to 9 Months||Baseline to 6 months and baseline to 9 months|||LogMAR Unit||Full Range|Mean
827915|NCT01205035|Primary|Visual Acuity Change From Baseline to Month 12 of the Study||Baseline to 12 months|||LogMAR Unit||Full Range|Mean
827916|NCT01205126|Secondary|Breakthrough Pain Medication (Rescue Medication) Doses Taken|Any breakthrough pain medication taken during the overall study was reported. Morphine hydrochloride was used as a rescue medication in case of breakthrough pain.|Baseline up to Day 29|The PPS included all randomly assigned participants who had completed all efficacy evaluations, have good compliance to the protocol without major protocol violations specified and who prematurely discontinued the study due to lack of efficacy. Redefined LOCF was applied. Here 'N' =number of participants who were evaluated for this outcome measure.||Doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
827918|NCT01205126|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain Right Now Assessed by BPI Short Form Questionnaire Score at Day 29|The BPI is questionnaire for evaluating the degree of pain severity and the impact of pain in performing daily routines. Change in Pain Right now in BPI was reported. The score ranges from 0=no pain to 10=pain as bad as participants could imagine.|Baseline and Day 29|The PPS included all randomly assigned participants who had completed all efficacy evaluations, have good compliance to the protocol without major protocol violations specified and who prematurely discontinued the study due to lack of efficacy were also included. Redefined LOCF was applied.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827919|NCT01205126|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average Pain, in the Past 24 Hours Assessed by BPI Short Form Questionnaire Score at Day 29|The BPI is questionnaire for evaluating the degree of pain severity and the impact of pain in performing daily routines. Change in average pain in the past 24 hours, in BPI score was reported. The score ranges from 0 to 10 wherein, 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as participants could imagine.|Baseline and Day 29|The PPS included all randomly assigned participants who had completed all efficacy evaluations, have good compliance to the protocol without major protocol violations specified and who prematurely discontinued the study due to lack of efficacy were also included. Redefined LOCF was applied.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827920|NCT01205126|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain at Its Least, in the Past 24 Hours Assessed by BPI Short Form Questionnaire Score at Day 29|The BPI is questionnaire for evaluating the degree of pain severity and the impact of pain in performing daily routines. Change in pain at its least, in the past 24 hours in BPI score was reported. The total score ranges from 0 to 10, wherein 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as participants could imagine.|Baseline and Day 29|The PPS included all randomly assigned participants who had completed all efficacy evaluations, have good compliance to the protocol without major protocol violations specified and who prematurely discontinued the study due to lack of efficacy were also included. Redefined LOCF was applied.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827921|NCT01205126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Worst Pain in the Past 24 Hours Assessed by Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Short Form Questionnaire Score at Day 29|The BPI is questionnaire for evaluating the degree of pain severity and the impact of pain in performing daily routines. Change in worst pain in the past 24 hours in BPI score was reported. The total score ranges from 0 to 10, wherein 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as participants could imagine.|Baseline and Day 29|Per protocol set (PPS) included all randomly assigned participants who had completed all efficacy evaluations, and participants who prematurely discontinued the study due to lack of efficacy were also included. Redefined last observation carried forward (LOCF) was applied. Redefined LOCF is LOCF prior to over dose rescue medication.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827922|NCT01205230|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Event of Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT)|The following were considered DLTs only while participants were receiving pazopanib co-administered with either ketoconazole or esomeprazole: Grade 4 hematologic toxicities, excluding lymphopenia; and Grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities, excluding alopecia and nausea/vomiting/diarrhea for which adequate supportive therapy had not been instituted. Toxicities observed once co-administration of pazopanib with ketoconazole or esomeprazole was complete (after Day 5 of Period 2) could also be considered DLTs if judged to be relevant by the investigator and the GlaxoSmithKline Medical Monitor.|From Baseline (Day 1) to a maximum of 4 weeks after the last dose of study drug was administered (on Study Day 12)|All Treated Population. Per protocol, a DLT could not occur during single-agent pazopanib administration in Period 1; thus, data were only collected and analyzed for those participants receiving pazopanib co-administered with either ketoconazole or esomeprazole in Period 2.||participants|||Number
827923|NCT01205230|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Grade 3 or 4 Adverse Events (AEs)|AEs were graded according to the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE), Version 4.0. Grades range from 0 (no toxicity) to 4 (life-threatening or disabling). A Grade 3 AE is severe; defined as considerable interference with the participant’s daily activities, medical intervention/therapy required, and hospitalization possible. A Grade 4 AE is life-threatening; defined as extreme limitation in activity, significant medical intervention/therapy required, and hospitalization probable.|From Baseline (Day 1) to a maximum of 4 weeks after the last dose of study drug was administered (on Study Day 12)|All Treated Population: all participants who were enrolled into the study and received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
827924|NCT01205230|Secondary|Plasma Ketoconazole Concentration at the Indicated Time Points|Blood samples for the determination of plasma ketoconazole concentrations were collected before (pre-dose [within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration]) and after the final pazopanib and ketoconazole dose (fifth dose) during Period 2 at the indicated time points, relative to pazopanib administration (at 1 and 2 hours after pazopanib administration). Blood samples were obtained via peripheral intravenous cannula or central line. Concentrations of ketoconazole were determined in plasma samples using the currently approved analytical methodology.|Day 5 of Period 2 (combination therapy). Blood samples were collected within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration and 1 and 2 hours after pazopanib administration.|PK Population||mcg/mL||Full Range|Mean
827925|NCT01205230|Secondary|Tmax for the Indicated Metabolites of Pazopanib When Administered Alone or in Combination With Ketoconazole and Ezomeprazole|Blood samples for PK analysis of pazopanib were obtained at pre-dose (within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration) and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter tmax was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin. Nominal data collection time points (TPs) were defined in the protocol; however, the actual data collection TP often differed slightly from the nominal TP for various reasons. This leads to medians and ranges that don't coincide with planned nominal data collection TPs.|Day 7 of Period 1 (monotherapy) and Day 5 (Study Day 12) of Period 2 (combination therapy). Blood samples were obtained within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration.|PK Population||hr||Full Range|Median
827937|NCT01205269|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure, Average Effect Over 0 - 4 Hours Post-dose|Average diastolic blood pressure value|0, 30 min, 2 h, 4 h|Of the 28 randomised patients, 27 completed the study and one discontinued during the last washout period. All 28 randomised patients were included in the analyses of all variables||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
836876|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 90 Minutes|The scale measure pain after 90 minutes (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|90 minutes|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827926|NCT01205230|Secondary|Plasma Cmax for the Indicated Metabolites of Pazopanib When Administered Alone or in Combination With Ketoconazole and Ezomeprazole|Blood samples for PK analysis of the metabolites of pazopanib were obtained at pre-dose (within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration) and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter Cmax was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin. The concentration-time curve is the result of time points of blood sampling and its measured concentration of pazopanib in the plasma.|Day 7 of Period 1 (monotherapy) and Day 5 (Study Day 12) of Period 2 (combination therapy). Blood samples were obtained within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration.|PK Population||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827927|NCT01205230|Secondary|Plasma AUC(0-24) for the Indicated Metabolites of Pazopanib When Administered Alone or in Combination With Ketoconazole and Ezomeprazole|Blood samples for PK analysis of the metabolites of pazopanib were obtained at pre-dose (within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration) and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter AUC(0-24) was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin. Plasma AUC(0-24) is a measure of the amount of drug a participant has been exposed to in 24 hours.|Day 7 of Period 1 (monotherapy) and Day 5 (Study Day 12) of Period 2 (combination therapy). Blood samples were obtained within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration.|PK Population. One participant from the Pazopanib + Ketoconazole treatment arm was not analyzed for GSK1071306 due to mishandling of PK samples during shipping. Only those participants providing samples were analyzed.||hr*mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827928|NCT01205230|Secondary|Plasma Concentration at 24 Hours After Administration (C24) of Pazopanib Alone and of Pazopanib in Combination With Ketoconazole and Esomeprazole|Pazopanib plasma concentration-time data were analyzed by non-compartmental methods with WinNonlin. Calculations were based on the actual sampling times. From the plasma concentration-time data, the PK parameter C24 was determined.|Day 7 of Period 1 (monotherapy) and Day 5 (Study Day 12) of Period 2 (combination therapy). Blood samples were obtained 24 hours after administration of pazopanib.|PK Population||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827929|NCT01205230|Primary|Time of Occurrence of Cmax (Tmax) of Pazopanib Alone and of Pazopanib in Combination With Ketoconazole and Esomeprazole|Blood samples for PK analysis of pazopanib were obtained at pre-dose (within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration) and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter tmax was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin. Nominal data collection time points (TPs) were defined in the protocol; however, the actual data collection TP often differed slightly from the nominal TP for various reasons. This leads to medians and ranges that don't coincide with planned nominal data collection TPs.|Day 7 of Period 1 (monotherapy) and Day 5 (Study Day 12) of Period 2 (combination therapy). Blood samples were obtained within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration.|PK Population||hours (hr)||Full Range|Median
827930|NCT01205230|Primary|Plasma Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) of Pazopanib Alone and of Pazopanib in Combination With Ketoconazole and Esomeprazole|Blood samples for PK analysis of pazopanib were obtained at pre-dose (within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration) and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter Cmax was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin. The concentration-time curve is the result of time points of blood sampling and its measured concentration of pazopanib in the plasma.|Day 7 of Period 1 (monotherapy) and Day 5 (Study Day 12) of Period 2 (combination therapy). Blood samples were obtained within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration.|PK Population||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827931|NCT01205230|Primary|Plasma Pazopanib Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Zero (Pre-dose) to 24 Hours (AUC[0-24]) of Pazopanib Alone and of Pazopanib in Combination With Ketoconazole and Esomeprazole|Blood samples for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of pazopanib were obtained at pre-dose (within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration) and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration. From the plasma concentration-time curve, the PK parameter AUC(0-24) was determined by standard non-compartmental analysis using WinNonlin. Plasma AUC(0-24) is a measure of the amount of drug a participant has been exposed to in 24 hours.|Day 7 of Period 1 (monotherapy) and Day 5 (Study Day 12) of Period 2 (combination therapy). Blood samples were obtained within 60 minutes prior to pazopanib administration and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after pazopanib administration.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population: all participants who underwent plasma PK sampling and had evaluable PK assay results from at least one analyte||Hour*micrograms/milliliters (hr*mcg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827932|NCT01205269|Secondary|Plasma AZD8683 AUC0-24|Area under the AZD8683 plasma concentration curve from 0 to 24 hours|0, 5 min, 15 min, 30 min, 45 min, 1 h, 90 min, 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h|Plasma concentrations were below the LLOQ for all post-dose samples for some patients and treatments. PK parameters for these 3 treatments have been set to missing and are not included in the descriptive statistics.||nmol*h/L||Full Range|Geometric Mean
827933|NCT01205269|Secondary|Plasma AZD8683 Cmax|Maximum plasma concentration of AZD8683|0, 5 min, 15 min, 30 min, 45 min, 1 h, 90 min, 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h|Plasma concentrations were below the LLOQ for all post-dose samples for some patients and treatments. PK parameters for these 3 treatments have been set to missing and are not included in the descriptive statistics.||nmol/L||Full Range|Geometric Mean
827934|NCT01205269|Secondary|QTcF, Average Effect Over 0 - 4 Hours Post-dose|Average QTcF value. QTcF = QT interval corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's formula|0, 30 min, 2 h, 4 h|Of the 28 randomised patients, 27 completed the study and one discontinued during the last washout period. All 28 randomised patients were included in the analyses of all variables||ms||Standard Deviation|Mean
827935|NCT01205269|Secondary|Heart Rate, Average Effect Over 0 - 4 Hours Post-dose|Average heart rate value|0, 30 min, 2 h, 4 h|Of the 28 randomised patients, 27 completed the study and one discontinued during the last washout period. All 28 randomised patients were included in the analyses of all variables||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
827936|NCT01205269|Secondary|Pulse, Average Effect Over 0 - 4 Hours Post-dose|Average pulse value|0, 30 min, 2 h, 4 h|Of the 28 randomised patients, 27 completed the study and one discontinued during the last washout period. All 28 randomised patients were included in the analyses of all variables||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
827941|NCT01205269|Primary|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1), Average Effect Over 22 - 26 Hours Post-dose|Trough FEV1 value|22 h, 24 h, 26 h|Of the 28 randomised patients, 27 completed the study and one discontinued during the last washout period. All 28 randomised patients were included in the analyses of all variables||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
827942|NCT01205269|Primary|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1), Peak Effect Within 0 - 24 Hours Post-dose|Maximum FEV1 value|0, 5 min, 15 min, 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h, 12 h, 14 h, 18 h, 22 h, 24 h|Of the 28 randomised patients, 27 completed the study and one discontinued during the last washout period. All 28 randomised patients were included in the analyses of all variables||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
827943|NCT01205399|Secondary|Procedural Time for AlloMax Surgical Graft Placement.|Procedure time will be defined as beginning when the Investigator made the initial incision and ending when the skin closure was completed (skin to skin).|0 Days|All enrolled subjects that could be verified through historical medical record review.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
827944|NCT01205399|Secondary|Complications in Subjects With Hernias Repaired With an AlloMax Surgical Graft.|Complications will be assessed by evaluation of the procedural and device related adverse events (AEs) documented in the subject’s medical files from the time surgery was initiated until the day the subject had a postoperative visit.|9+ Months|All enrolled subjects that could be verified through historical medical record review.||complication events|||Number
827945|NCT01205399|Primary|Number of Subjects With Hernia Recurrence Post Repair With an AlloMax Surgical Graft|A recurrent hernia is a hernia, confirmed by the Investigator at any point after surgery, in the same location as the hernia repaired in the index procedure.|9 + Months|All enrolled subjects that could be verified through historical medical record review.||participants|||Number
827946|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Pulse Rate at the Exit Visit|The pulse rate of participants was recorded. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier) minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Screening) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
827947|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (BP) and Diastolic BP at the Exit Visit|Systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic BP of participants were measured in the sitting position. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier) minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
827948|NCT01205451|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormalities of Urinalysis at the Screening and Exit Visits|Urine samples of participants were collected for urinalysis, including measuring protein, blood, leukocyte, glucose, and urobilinogen. All values out of the normal range were evaluated by the investigator. Classification of clinically significant and not clinically significant was based on the investigator’s clinical judgment; no specific criteria were used.|Screening visit (-Week 1) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Screening and exit visits were analyzed.||participants|||Number
827949|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Serum Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN), Fasting Blood Glucose (FBG), Sodium, Potassium, Chloride, Total Cholesterol, and Triglyceride Values at the Exit Visit|Blood samples of participants were collected for biochemical tests of BUN, FBG, electrolytes, cholesterol, and triglycerides. The BUN test is primarily used to evaluate kidney function. Electrolytes include sodium, potassium, and chloride. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||Millimoles per Liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
827950|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Serum Creatinine, Uric Acid, and Total Bilirubin Values at the Exit Visit|Blood samples of participants were collected for a biochemical test of creatine, uric acid, and total bilirubin. Creatine and uric acid are evaluated for kidney function. The liver function test includes total bilirubin. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier) minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||Micromoles per Liter (μmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
827951|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Serum Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT), Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST), Gamma-glutamyl Transferase (y-GT), and Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP) Values at the Exit Visit|Blood samples of participants were collected and evaluated for liver function, including measuring ALT, AST, y-GT, and ALP. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier) minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||International Units per Liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
827952|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Total Protein and Albumin Values at the Exit Visit|Blood samples of participants were collected for a biochemical test of total protein and albumin, at Baseline and at the exit visit. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier) minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||grams/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
827953|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hematocrit Value at the Exit Visit|The hematocrit, also called packed cell volume or erythrocyte volume fraction, is the volume percentage of red blood cells in the blood. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier) minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
827965|NCT01205503|Secondary|B-type Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) Blood Levels in Patients Receiving Doxorubicin Containing Chemotherapy|Continuous Measure of BNP at the 4 time points outlined in protocol for each of the groups. This is a 32-amino acid polypeptide secreted by heart ventricles in response to excessive stretching of cardiomyocytes.|prior to and 3 hours post doxorubicin and between cycles 1 and 2|||pg/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827954|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin Content at the Exit Visit|Blood samples of participants were collected and evaluated for hemoglobin at Baseline and at the exit visit. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier) minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||Grams per Liter (grams/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
827955|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Neutrophils, the Percentage of Lymphocytes, the Percentage of Monocytes, the Percentage of Eosinophils, and the Percentage of Basophils at the Exit Visit|Blood samples of participants were collected and evaluated for the percentage of neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, and basophils comprising the total WBC count in the blood at Baseline and at the exit visit. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier) minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||Percentage of the total WBC||Standard Deviation|Mean
827956|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in White Blood Cell (WBC) and Platelet Count at the Exit Visit|Blood samples of participants were collected and evaluated for WBC count and platelet count at Baseline and at the exit visit. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier) minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||10^9 cells per Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
827957|NCT01205451|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Red Blood Cell (RBC) Count at the Exit Visit|Blood samples of participants were collected and evaluated for RBC count at Baseline and at the exit visit. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the exit visit (Week 12 or earlier) minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0) and exit visit (Week 12 or earlier)|Safety Set Population: all enrolled and treated participants. Only those participants for whom data were available for both the Baseline and exit visits were analyzed.||10^12 cells per Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
827958|NCT01205451|Secondary|GAS Score as Evaluated by the Care Giver or the Participant at Week 6 and Week 12|The care giver or participant used the GAS to assess response to treatment at each visit after injection. The assessor was the same throughout the study period. GAS scores were assessed by using the 9-point GAS (-4, -3, -2, -1, -0, +1, +2, +3, +4; -4=very marked worsening, 0=unchanged, +4=very marked improvement) at Week 6 and Week 12.|Week 6 and Week 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827959|NCT01205451|Secondary|Global Assessment Scale (GAS) Score as Evaluated by the Physician at Week 6 and Week 12|The physician used the GAS to assess response to treatment at each visit after injection. The assessor was the same throughout the study period. GAS scores were assessed by using the 9-point GAS (-4, -3, -2, -1, -0, +1, +2, +3, +4; -4=very marked worsening, -0=unchanged, +4=very marked improvement) at Week 6 and Week 12.|Week 6 and Week 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827960|NCT01205451|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Week 6 and Week 12 for the Principal Measure as Assessed on the Disability Assessment Scale (DAS)|The investigator assessed 4 areas of disability, hygiene, pain, dressing, and limb posture, using the 4-point DAS (0=No functional disability to 3=Severe disability). Prior to the first dose, the investigator, in consultation with the participant, selected 1functional disability item (which had to have a score of 2 or greater as measured on the DAS, indicating moderate to severe disability) from the 4 areas of disability and assessed it as a principal measure. Change from Baseline at Week 6 or Week 12 was calculated as the value at Week 6 or Week 12 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0), Week 6, and Week 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827961|NCT01205451|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Week 6 and Week 12 for Thumb Flexor Muscle Tone as Measured on the MAS|The investigator or assessor extended the participant's thumb as quickly as possible to grade the flexor muscle tone. The MAS thumb score was calculated by using the 6-point MAS (0, 1, 1+ [regarded as 1.5], 2, 3, and 4; 0=no increase in muscle tone; 4=affected part[s] rigid in flexion/extension). Change from Baseline at Week 6 or Week 12 was calculated as the value at Week 6 or Week 12 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0), Week 6, and Week 12|FAS Population. Only those participants who had thumb spasticity were analyzed. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827962|NCT01205451|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Week 6 and Week 12 for Finger Flexor Muscle Tone as Measured on the MAS|The investigator or assessor extended the participant's finger as quickly as possible to grade the flexor muscle tone. The MAS finger score was calculated by using the 6-point MAS (0, 1, 1+ [regarded as 1.5], 2, 3, and 4; 0=no increase in muscle tone; 4=affected part[s] rigid in flexion/extension). Change from Baseline at Week 6 or Week 12 was calculated as the value at Week 6 or Week 12 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0), Week 6, and Week 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827963|NCT01205451|Secondary|Number of Participants Classified as Wrist Treatment Responders at Week 6 and Week 12|Wrist treatment responders are defined as participants with a decrease in wrist flexor muscle tone of at least one point on the MAS from Baseline. The MAS wrist score was calculated by using the 6-point MAS (0, 1, 1+ [regarded as 1.5], 2, 3, and 4; 0=no increase in muscle tone; 4=affected part[s] rigid in flexion/extension).|Baseline (Day 0), Week 6, and Week 12|FAS Population. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis.||participants|||Number
827964|NCT01205451|Primary|Change From Baseline at Week 6 and Week 12 for Wrist Flexor Muscle Tone as Measured on the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS)|The investigator or assessor extended the participant's wrist as quickly as possible to grade flexor muscle tone. The MAS wrist score was calculated by using the 6-point MAS (0, 1, 1+ [regarded as 1.5], 2, 3, and 4; 0=no increase in muscle tone; 4=affected part[s] rigid in flexion/extension). Change from Baseline at Week 6 or Week 12 was calculated as the value at Week 6 or Week 12 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Day 0), Week 6, and Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) Population: all randomized and treated participants with at least one post-treatment MAS wrist score. The missing data imputation method was used for analysis. For each participant, missing data points were replaced by the mean of the non-missing scores from both treatment groups for that variable at the specific visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
827967|NCT01205503|Secondary|Plasma HNE Percent Changes From Baseline in Patients Receiving Doxorubicin Containing Chemotherapy|Continuous Measure of the percent change from baseline of Plasma HNE at the 4 time points outlined in the protocol for each group. All measurements after naive baseline were adjusted as percent change from each individual's baseline measure.|prior to and 3 hours post doxorubicin and between cycles 1 and 2|||Percent Change from Baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827968|NCT01205503|Secondary|Protein Carbonyl Percent Changes From Baseline in Patients Receiving Doxorubicin Containing Chemotherapy|Continuous Measure of percent changes from baseline of Protein Carbonyl at the 4 time points outlined in the protocol for each group. All measurements after naive baseline were adjusted as percent change from each individual's baseline measure.|prior to and 3 hours post doxorubicin and between cycles 1 and 2|||Percent Change from Baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827969|NCT01205503|Primary|TNF-alpha Levels in Patients Receiving Doxorubicin Containing Chemotherapy|Continuous Measure of TNF-alpha at the 4 time points outlined in the protocol for each group.|prior to and 3 hours post doxorubicin and between cycles 1 and 2|||log(pg/ml)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
827970|NCT01205581|Secondary|Comparison of Geometric Mean Ratios (GMR) by HAI|"GMTs compared to each other as a ratio of the pre- and post-vaccine titers and as the ratio post-last dose to 9 months later.
GMRs were compared pre- to post-vaccination and post- vaccination to 9 months later."|Pre-vaccination, post-vaccination and 9 months after vaccination|Two patients in the HIV-HD group were excluded because data was only available at baseline. These 2 patients were lost for follow-up before evaluation for post-vaccine immune response.||Ratio|||Number
827971|NCT01205581|Secondary|Comparison of Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) by HAI|Serum antibody levels expressed as the reciprocal of the dilution needed to inhibit hemagglutination in vitro.|Pre-vaccination, post-vaccination and 9 months after vaccination|Two patients in the HIV-HD group were excluded because data was only available at baseline. These 2 patients were lost for follow-up before evaluation for post-vaccine immune response.||Titers||Full Range|Geometric Mean
827972|NCT01205581|Secondary|Number of Systemic Reactogenicity Events After Second Dose|Number of moderate or greater systemic reactogenicity event associated with the administration of Fluzone or FluzoneHD. Systemic reactions were defined as muscle ache, fatigue, or fever.|First 14 days after vaccination|||Events|||Number
827973|NCT01205581|Secondary|Number of Systemic Reactogenicity Events After First Dose|Number of moderate or greater systemic reactogenicity event associated with the administration of Fluzone or FluzoneHD. Systemic reactions were defined as muscle ache, fatigue, or fever.|First 14 days after vaccination|||Events|||Number
827974|NCT01205581|Secondary|Number of Local Reactogenicity Events After Second Dose|Number of moderate or greater local reactogenicity events associated with the administration of Fluzone or FluzoneHD. Local reactions were defined as pain, redness, or induration.|First 14 days after vaccination|||Events|||Number
827975|NCT01205581|Secondary|Number of Local Reactogenicity Events After First Dose|Number of moderate or greater local reactogenicity events associated with the administration of Fluzone or FluzoneHD. Local reactions were defined as pain, redness, or induration.|First 14 days after vaccination|||Events|||Number
827976|NCT01205581|Secondary|Rate of Vaccine Response by Seroprotection Compared by Absolute Lymphocyte Count (ALC)|The relationship between baseline lymphocyte numbers/function and robustness of the immune response will be described through descriptive analysis of relationships between pre-defined variables.|ALC at baseline and vaccine response at least 21 days after last dose of vaccine|30 participants did not have ALC data collected at baseline evaluation because they had complete blood count (CBC) ordered without differential count.||percentage of participants|||Number
827977|NCT01205581|Primary|Number of Participants Achieving Seroprotection After Second Dose of Vaccine|The immune response of Fluzone HD to Fluzone was determined using the hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) assay to each of the 3 antigens contained in the vaccine: H1, H3 and B. Seroprotection was defined as a post-vaccine HAI titer ≥40.|21 to 42 days after second dose|Two patients in the HIV-HD group were excluded because data was only available at baseline. These 2 patients were lost for follow-up before evaluation for post-vaccine immune response.||number of participants|||Number
827978|NCT01205581|Primary|Rate of Seroprotection After 1 Dose of Vaccine|The immune response of Fluzone HD to Fluzone was determined using the hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) assay to each of the 3 antigens contained in the vaccine: H1, H3 and B. Seroprotection was defined as a post-vaccine HAI titer ≥40.|at least 21 days after first dose, which is given at the time of baseline evaluation visit, and prior to second dose|Two patients in the HIV-HD group were excluded because data was only available at baseline. These 2 patients were lost for follow-up before evaluation for post-vaccine immune response.||Percentage of participants|||Number
827979|NCT01205581|Secondary|Rate of Vaccine Response by Seroconversion Compared by Absolute Lymphocyte Count (ALC)|The relationship between baseline lymphocyte numbers/function and robustness of the immune response will be described through descriptive analysis of relationships between pre-defined variables.|ALC at baseline and vaccine response at least 21 days after last dose of vaccine|30 participants did not have ALC data collected at baseline evaluation because they had complete blood count (CBC) ordered without differential count.||percentagae of participants|||Number
827980|NCT01205581|Secondary|Rate of Sero-conversion for 1 Dose vs. 2 Doses of Fluzone SD|"The rate of seroconversion to the 3 antigens contained in the vaccine was determined by hemagglutination-inhibition test and was compared by disease.
The immune response of 1 dose vs. 2 doses of Fluzone SD was determined using the hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) assay to each of the 3 antigens contained in the vaccine: H1, H3 and B. Seroconversion was defined as a post-vaccine HAI titer ≥40 if baseline was <10, or a 4-fold rise in HAI titer if the baseline ≥10."|at least 21 days after each dose of vaccine|||percentrage of participants|||Number
827981|NCT01205581|Secondary|Rate of Sero-conversion for 1 Dose vs. 2 Doses of Fluzone HD|"The rate of seroconversion to the 3 antigens contained in the vaccine was determined by hemagglutination-inhibition test and was compared by disease.
The immune response of 1 dose vs. 2 doses of Fluzone HD was determined using the hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) assay to each of the 3 antigens contained in the vaccine: H1, H3 and B. Seroconversion was defined as a post-vaccine HAI titer ≥40 if baseline was <10, or a 4-fold rise in HAI titer if the baseline ≥10."|at least 21 days after each dose of vaccine|Two patients in the HIV-HD group were excluded because data was only available at baseline. These 2 patients were lost for follow-up before evaluation for post-vaccine immune response.||percentage of participants|||Number
827982|NCT01205581|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Grade 3 and Grade 4 Adverse Events Possibly, Probably, or Definitely Attributable to Fluzone or Fluzone HD|Number of participants reporting grade 3 and grade 4 adverse events possibly, probably, or definitely attributable to Fluzone or Fluzone HD.|From initial vaccine administration through up to 8 months|Adverse events of Fluzone HD and Fluzone are provided as combined data from cancer and HIV patients, since there is no reason to believe one group is more susceptible to adverse events than the other.||participants|||Number
827983|NCT01205581|Primary|Rate of Seroconversion After 1 Dose of Vaccine|The immune response of Fluzone HD to Fluzone was determined using the hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) assay to each of the 3 antigens contained in the vaccine: H1, H3 and B. Seroconversion was defined as a post-vaccine HAI titer ≥40 if baseline was <10, or a 4-fold rise in HAI titer if the baseline ≥10.|at least 21 days after first dose, which is given at the time of baseline evaluation visit, and prior to second dose|Two patients in the HIV-HD group were excluded because data was only available at baseline. These 2 patients were lost for follow-up before evaluation for post-vaccine immune response.||percentage of participants|||Number
827984|NCT01205646|Secondary|Changes in Bone Turnover Markers||Four weeks after initiating zoledronte therapy||||||
827985|NCT01205646|Secondary|Evaluate Changes in Bone Scans||Four weeks after initiating zoledronate therapy||||||
827986|NCT01205646|Secondary|Evaluate the Change in PSA After Zoledronate Therapy||Four weeks after initiating Zoledronate therapy||||||
827987|NCT01205646|Primary|PET Response Rate in Metastatic Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Zoledronate Therapy.|PET response rate was pre-defined in Section 5.0 of the protocol based on the magnitude of change in the mean standardized uptake value (SUVmean), which is measured at each PET scan. Specifically, a decline in SUVmean of at least 15% pre/post Zometa was taken as evidence of a “PET response”. Per the protocol, Scan 2 was used as the pre-Zometa measure of SUVmean, and Scan 3 (1-2 weeks later) was used as the post-Zometa measure of SUVmean.|Within 3 weeks|||Proportion of participants with response||90% Confidence Interval|Number
827988|NCT01205685|Secondary|Correlative Studies|Biomarkers associated with response to OSI-906 + Erlotinib + Letrozole + Goserelin|< or = to 2 weeks before initiation of Phase II study treatment period|No correlative studies were performed because the study did not move to the Phase II portion|||||
827989|NCT01205685|Secondary|Number of Participants With Tumor Response Per RECIST|Per RECIST criteria v. 1.1: measurable lesions: complete response (CR) disappearance of target lesions, partial response (PR) > 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, progressive disease (PD) > 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions or appearance of new lesions, stable disease (SD) neither sufficient decrease nor increase of the sum of smallest sum of the LD of target lesions|Every 12 weeks to tumor progression|Patients who were available for measurement of tumor response.||participants|||Number
827990|NCT01205685|Secondary|Safety Profile Based on Number of Patients With Each Worst-grade Toxicity|According to National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events with 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, 4 = life threatening/disabling, and 5 = death.|Every 4 weeks up to 24 weeks|Patients who received treatment and experienced an adverse event.||participants|||Number
827991|NCT01205685|Primary|Anti-tumor Activity of OSI-906|Time to progression measured in months from study entry to date of disease progression|From study entry to 6 months|Patients who received treatment and who were available for determination of disease progression. One patient withdrew after beginning of treatment and was not available for determination of the duration of disease progression.||months||Full Range|Median
827992|NCT01211145|Secondary|Use of Rescue Medication During the First 24 Hours After Treatment||24 hours post-treatment.|Full analysis set (observed cases)||Participants|||Number
827993|NCT01211145|Secondary|Sustained Headache Response at 2 Hours|Sustained headache response at 2 hours is a binary response variable derived from the headache intensities recorded in the patient diary. Sustained headache response is defined as a reduction in migraine headache pain intensity from severe or moderate to mild or none a 1 hr. which is then maintained (without a return to moderate or severe pain) at 2 hrs. with no use of rescue medication prior to the 2 hr. assessment.|Up to 2 hours post-treatment|Full analysis set (observed case)||Participants|||Number
827994|NCT01211145|Secondary|Headache Response at 24 Hours Post-treatment|Headache response is a binary response variable derived from the headache intensities recorded in the patient diary. Headache response is defined as a reduction in headache pain intensity from severe or moderate to mild or none with no use of rescue medication prior to the assessment.|24 hours post-treatment|Full analysis set (observed case)||Participants|||Number
827995|NCT01211145|Secondary|Headache Response at 2 Hours Post-treatment|Headache response is a binary response variable derived from the headache intensities recorded in the patient diary. Headache response is defined as a reduction in headache pain intensity from severe or moderate to mild or none with no use of rescue medication prior to the assessment.|2 hours post-treatment|Full analysis set (last observation carried forward)||Participants|||Number
827996|NCT01211145|Secondary|Pain-free Status at 24 Hours Post-treatment||24 hours post-treatment|Full analysis set (observed case)||Participants|||Number
827997|NCT01211145|Primary|Pain-free Status at 2 Hours Post-treatment||2 hours post-treatment.|Full analysis set (last observation carried forward)||Participants|||Number
827998|NCT01211184|Secondary|Muscle Catabolism|Assessed by the ratio of 3-methylhistidine/creatinine in excreted urine (unit: mmol/mmol).This is an amino acid unique to muscle that does not undergo intermediary metabolism, meaning that its urinary excretion is an index of the degree of muscle catabolism.|From the morning after surgery (07.30) up to the morning two days after sthe surgery (07.30)|Per protocol||mmol/mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
827999|NCT01211184|Primary|Change in Insulin Sensitivity (Percent)|Insulin sensitivity (micro-mol per kg per minute glucose uptake) was calculated based on an intravenous glucose tolerance test (Theor Biol Med Model 2011, 8: 12) on the day before surgery. The percent change was taken as (day after - day before) / day before|Day before surgery (approximately 3 PM) and in the morning after surgery (approx. 7.30 AM).|Per protocol analysis. The study was powered to detect a difference in glucose clearance.||percent change of insulin sensitivity||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828089|NCT01214252|Primary|Confirmed Hernia Recurrence|Confirmed hernia or hernia recurrence: Proportion of patients treated with Permacol Surgical Implant who experienced hernia or hernia recurrence at the repair site. Hernia or recurrence is defined by hernia diagnosis during clinical assessment by surgeon or medical chart review|12 months|||participants|||Number
828000|NCT01211197|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, Vital Signs, ECG, Blood Chemistry and Assessment of Tolerability by the Investigator.|Clinically relevant abnormalities for physical examination, vital signs, ECG, blood chemistry and assessment of tolerability by the investigator. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as adverse events.|Drug administration up to 7 days after last drug administration, up to 8 days|Treated set (TS) includes all subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication and was used for safety analysis.||participants|||Number
828001|NCT01211197|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase (Vz/F)|"Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase (λz).
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||Litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
828002|NCT01211197|Secondary|Apparent Clearance After Extravascular Administration (CL/F)|"Apparent clearance of the analyte in the plasma after extravascular administration.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
828003|NCT01211197|Secondary|Mean Residence Time in the Body After Oral Administration (MRTpo)|"Mean residence time of the analyte in the body after oral administration.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
828004|NCT01211197|Secondary|Terminal Half-life in Plasma (T1/2)|"Terminal half-life of the analyte in plasma.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
828005|NCT01211197|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Rate Constant in Plasma (λz)|"Terminal elimination rate constant in plasma.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||1/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
828006|NCT01211197|Secondary|Time to Maximum Measured Concentration (Tmax)|"Time from dosing to the maximum concentration of the analyte in plasma.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||hours||Full Range|Median
828007|NCT01211197|Primary|Metformin: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of metformin in plasma.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828008|NCT01211197|Primary|Metformin: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of metformin in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828009|NCT01211197|Secondary|Metformin: Area Under the Curve 0 to the Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of metformin in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828010|NCT01211197|Secondary|Empa: Area Under the Curve 0 to the Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||nmol*h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828090|NCT01214330|Secondary|Patient Attitudes|Results from SoloPap Patient Questionairre regarding patient attitudes.|6 months||||||
828011|NCT01211197|Primary|Empa: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828012|NCT01211197|Primary|Empa: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
Note the standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation (CV)."|1 hour (h) before drug administration and 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1 h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational medication, provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of pharmacokinetics.||nmol*h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828013|NCT01211340|Secondary|Anxiety|This measure determines the level of anxiety experienced by a hospice caregiver. Total scores range from 0-21 with higher scores representing more anxiety. Only the last available measure will be used to reflect the measure closest to time of death.|Every 14 days until the death of the patient for an average of 45 days-Only measure used in analysis is the last completed measure|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828014|NCT01211340|Secondary|Caregiver Quality of Life-Revised Subscale Emotional|This is one domain of a four domain instrument. It involves one question with a range of 0-10.Only the last available measure will be used to reflect the measure closest to time of death.|Every 14 days until the death of the patient for an average of 45 days-Only measure used in analysis is the last completed measure|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828015|NCT01211340|Primary|Caregiver Perceptions of Pain Medicine Questionaire|This 16 question instrument measures the perceptions hospice caregivers have toward the administration of pain medications. Scores on items vary from 1-5 with the lower scores indicating more problematic perceptions of pain management. A Total score is computed between 16-80 Only the last available measure will be used to reflect the measure closest to time of death.|Every 14 days until the death of the patient for an average of 45 days-Only measure used in analysis is the last completed measure|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828016|NCT01213576|Secondary|Number of Participants With Microfilarial Clearance at 24 Months of Follow up|Microfilaria will be detected using the nucleopore filtration technique and analysed according to the respective treatment arms at the 24 month time point. Microfilarial clearance will be defined by non-detection of microfilaria in the night blood sample|24 months|Intention to treat, with last result carried forward in the case of missing visit||participants|||Number
828017|NCT01213576|Primary|Number of Participants Achieving Microfilarial Clearance|Microfilaria clearance will be assessed in regard to dosage as well as frequency of treatment. Microfilarial clearance is defined by non-detection of microfilaria in the night blood sample.|12 months|Number of participants with non detectable microfilaria at follow up||participants|||Number
828018|NCT01213589|Secondary|Clinical Success|"Clinical success was defined as: (i) successful introduction and deployment of the Valiant Thoracic Stent Graft at the intended location; (ii) successful coverage of the proximal entry tear; (iii) no immediate conversion to open surgery;(iv) absence of surgical open repair or endovascular re-intervention; (v) absence of death related to aortic disease or treatment; (vi) absence of graft thrombosis, obstructions, twists or kinks; (vii) absence of graft migration;(viii) absence of graft integrity failure; (ix) at the level of the ostium of the LSA, the more proximal entry tear of the dissection, the largest section of the thoracic aorta, and at the first image/slice available with upper part of the liver:
Absence of true lumen decrease in diameter (≥ 5 mm is significant) Absence of increase in total aortic diameter (≥ 5 mm is significant)"|through 36 months|||participants|||Number
828019|NCT01213589|Secondary|Freedom From Disease-, Procedure-, or Device-related Severe Complications|"Complications were assigned a severity score (according SVS scores) so that degrees of morbidity can be assessed and compared. A severe complication necessitates major surgical or medical intervention, may be associated with prolonged convalescence, is usually accompanied by prolonged or permanent disability, and may result in death.
Kaplan-Meier estimate of freedom from disease-, procedure-, or device-related severe complications"|through 36 months|||Percentage Event Free|||Number
828020|NCT01213589|Secondary|Freedom From Disease-, Procedure- or Device-related Major Complications|"Complications were assigned a severity score (according SVS scores) so that degrees of morbidity can be assessed and compared. A moderate complication indicates the need for significant intervention, prolongation of hospitalization more than 24 hours, and at most, minor permanent disability that does not preclude normal daily activity. A severe complication necessitates major surgical or medical intervention, may be associated with prolonged convalescence, is usually accompanied by prolonged or permanent disability, and may result in death. Both moderate and severe complications are considered as major complications.
Kaplan-Meier estimate of freedom from disease-, procedure-, or device-related major complications by clinical group."|through 36 months|||Percentage Event Free|||Number
828021|NCT01213589|Secondary|Freedom of Re-intervention|Kaplan-Meier estimate of freedom from secondary procedures by clinical group.|30 days or at discharge, 3/6/12/24/36 months|||Percentage Event Free|||Number
828022|NCT01213589|Secondary|Efficacy/Performance|- Technical Success Technical success, defined as a composite of (i) successful introduction and deployment of at least one Valiant Thoracic Stent Graft at the intended location, (ii) successful coverage of the proximal entry tear, (iii) no immediate conversion to open surgery during the same intervention, (iv) absence of death within 24 hours post-procedure, and (v) the absence of significant graft twist, kink or obstruction by intra-operative measurements|30 days or at discharge, 3/6/12/24/36 months|||participants|||Number
828023|NCT01213589|Secondary|Safety|"All causes mortality
Disease-, procedure- or device-related mortality"|30 days or at discharge, 3/6/12/24/36 months|||participants|||Number
828024|NCT01213589|Primary|Disease-, Procedure- or Device-related Mortality at 12 Months Post-procedure|Disease, device or procedure-related mortality at 12 months post-procedure, defined as any death related to the device, to the disease or to the surgical procedure occurring in the period of 365 days following the day of the implant procedure.|12 months post-procedure|||participants|||Number
828026|NCT01213823|Primary|Number of Any Severe Hepatic Injury Cases and Matched Controls|Severe hepatic injury (acute/subacute necrosis of liver, hepatic coma, hepatorenal syndrome, or hepatitis unspecified) classified as: 1) acute liver failure (associated with encephalopathy and/or coagulopathy in absence of underlying liver disease); 2) Hy's Law Criteria (serum alanine transaminase [ALT] levels greater than [>]3 times the upper limit of normal [ULN] and direct bilirubin >2 times ULN and absence of alkaline phosphatase elevation); 3) ALT levels greater than or equal to (≥) 10 times ULN; 4) ALT levels >3 times ULN and less than (<) 10 times ULN; or 5) classified by clinician. Disease Related Group (DRG) severity of illness coding was reported for severe hepatic injury cases and matched controls.|01 June 2006 to 30 June 2008 (up to 25 Months)|Acute-care participants, with at least 1 dose of echinocandin antifungal therapy and a primary or secondary International Classification of Diseases 9 (ICD-9).||Participants|||Number
828027|NCT01213836|Secondary|Mean Ratio of Morning Plasma Concentration of Quetiapine and Nor-quetiapine for Quetiapine IR and Quetiapine XR, at Steady-state Conditions in the End of Each Treatment Period 1 and 2.|The ratio was derived as individual plasma concentration of quetiapine divided by the plasma concentration of nor-quetiapine. The mean ratio was derived for each treatment, XR and IR, respectively.|End of Period 1, end of Period 2|21 patients for the FAS were analysed. This outcome measure was introduced as a protocol amendment after study start and plasma concentration was not measured in all patients. FAS is all patients who, in both study periods, received at least one dose of investigational product and for whom post-dose efficacy data are available in both periods.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
828028|NCT01213836|Secondary|Number of Dropouts.|The number of patients who dropped out was counted.|Period 1 and Period 2|The Safety analysis set was used, that is all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and for whom any post-dose safety data are available were included in the safety set.||participants|||Number
828029|NCT01213836|Secondary|Mean Overall Sedation as Measured by the Stanford Sleepiness Scale When Administered According to Label|"Stanford Sleepiness Scale: The sleepiness was assessed by the patient on a 7 item rating scale ranging from 1 (Feeling active and vital) to 7 (Almost in reverie).
There are 3 assessments made in each period (post 1, 2 and 3 for each period). That is three measurements per patient per treatment. The mean is an overall mean of all the recordings in all patients, one mean value per treatment group."|Period 1 at 3 visits,(post 1),(post 2),(post 3), in a 5-day (maximum 8 day) period. Period 2 at 3 visits,(post 1),(post 2),(post 3), in a 5-day (maximum 8 day) period.|The full analysis set (FAS) used for analysis of efficacy included all patients who, in both study periods, received at least one dose of investigational product and for whom post-dose efficacy data are available in both periods.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828030|NCT01213836|Secondary|Mean Overall Sedation as Measured by the Modified Bond-Lader Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) When Administered According to Label|"The modified Bond-Lader VAS: The degree of sedation was marked by the patient on a 100 mm VAS ranging between Alert (=0 mm) and Drowsy (=100 mm). The marked length in millimetres.
There are 3 assessments made in each period (post 1, 2 and 3 for each period). That is three measurements per patient per treatment. The mean is an overall mean of all the recordings in all patients, one mean value per treatment group."|Period 1 at 3 visits,(post 1),(post 2),(post 3), in a 5-day (maximum 8 day) period. Period 2 at 3 visits,(post 1),(post 2),(post 3), in a 5-day (maximum 8 day) period.|The full analysis set (FAS) used for analysis of efficacy included all patients who, in both study periods, received at least one dose of investigational product and for whom post-dose efficacy data are available in both periods.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828031|NCT01213836|Secondary|Mean Daytime Cognitive Performance Using CogState: - Working Memory - Verbal Learning) -Reasoning and Problem Solving|International Shopping List Task (ISLT): measures reasoning and problem solving. Min=minus infinity, max=plus infinity, higher score=better performance. Groton Maze Learning Test (GMLT): measures reasoning and problem solving. Min=minus infinity, max=plus infinity, lower score=better performance. Lower=better performance. One Back memory task (ONB: measures working memory, min=minus infinity, max=plus infinity, lower score=better performance.|Period 1 at 3 visits,(post 1),(post 2),(post 3), in a 5-day (maximum 8 day) period. Period 2 at 3 visits,(post 1),(post 2),(post 3), in a 5-day (maximum 8 day) period.|Per Protocol (PPS), subset of the FAS consisting of patients who fulfilled all of inclusion but none of exclusion criteria, complied with study medication dosing, did not violate any of the restrictions and completed the study without protocol violation.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828032|NCT01213836|Secondary|Mean Treatment Satisfaction for Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire of Medication (TSQM)|"TSQM is a 14-item questionnaire with 4 sub-scales: effectiveness of the medication; treatment side effects; convenience of the medication; global satisfaction with the medication. Scale range 0-100 for each sub-scale, higher=greater satisfaction/milder side effects/greater convenience/greater overall satisfaction.
There are 2 measurement, (after the start of taking study drug) one at end of period 1 and one at end of period 2. That is one measurement per patient per treatment. The mean of all the patients is presented, one mean value per treatment group."|Before taking study drug, end of Period 1 and end of Period 2|Full Analysis Set (FAS)used for efficacy analysis included all patients who in both study periods, received at least 1 dose of investigational product and for whom post-dose efficacy data was available.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828033|NCT01213836|Primary|Mean for Attentional Standardised Composite Score Based on Performance Scores From the CogState Test Battery Domains Detection (Speed of Processing)and Identification (Attention/Vigilance)|Attentional standardised composite score: Standardised speed of performance score. Higher Score=better performance. Score range minus infinity to plus infinity. Measured at baseline (before study drug administration) and in Period 1 at 3 visits,(post 1),(post 2),(post 3), in a 5-day (maximum 8 day) period. (Last test day not earlier than after 10 days of randomised)and in Period 2 at 3 visits,(post 1),(post 2),(post 3), in a 5-day (maximum 8 day) period. Last test day not earlier than after 10 days of crossover treatment.|Period 1 at 3 visits,(post 1),(post 2),(post 3), in a 5-day (maximum 8 day) period. Period 2 at 3 visits,(post 1),(post 2),(post 3), in a 5-day (maximum 8 day) period.|The per protocol set (PPS) is a subset of the FAS consisting of patients who fulfilled all inclusion criteria but none of the exclusion criteria, complied with study medication dosing scheme, did not violate any of the study restrictions and completed the study without protocol violation.||standardised units||Standard Deviation|Mean
828289|NCT01215695|Secondary|Laryngeal View Grade of 1 or 2|The laryngeal view as Grade 1 (full view of the glottis) or Grade 2 (glottis partly exposed, anterior commissure not seen) according to the method described by Cormack and Lehane (1984).|30 minutes|||Participants|||Count of Participants
828034|NCT01213966|Primary|Derived Parasite Reduction Rate at 24 Hours (PPR24)|"PRR24 is the log10 change in parasitemia over 24 hours estimated from a regression model fit separately for each patient. The relationship between parasite counts and time was analyzed by fitting a variable lag phase, then a linear decline to the natural log of parasite count versus time relationship. The slope of this log linear relationship is the primary end-point.
The time points chosen for the regression are those that yield the highest degree of significance when assessing the regression when the number of time points are greater than or equal to 3. No extrapolation was performed."|24 hours after study drug administration|||Log10 parasites/24h||Full Range|Median
828035|NCT01214083|Secondary|Liver Function Tests (ALT)||week 0 and week 13|||units/liter||Standard Error|Mean
828036|NCT01214083|Secondary|Drinks Per Drinking Days||week 1 and week 13|||drinks/drinking day||Standard Error|Mean
828037|NCT01214083|Secondary|Percentage of Drinking Days|"Percentage of drinking days was measured by the Time Line Follow Back (TLFB) Method. The percentage has a total range of 0%-100%. Higher percentages represent a worse outcome (i.e., more drinking days)."|week 1 and week 13|||percentage of drinking days||Standard Error|Mean
828038|NCT01214083|Secondary|Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q)|The Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire is designed to assess a quality of life. The scale has a total score range of 16-80. Higher values represent a better outcome (i.e., better quality of life).|week 1 and week 13|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
828039|NCT01214083|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression (CGI)|The Clinical Global Impression is designed to assess overall severity of illness. The scale has a total score range of 1-7. Higher values represent a worse outcome (i.e., severe illness).|week 1 and week 13|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
828040|NCT01214083|Secondary|Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale (OCDS)|The Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale is designed to assess obsessive and compulsive aspects of alcoholism. The scale has a total score range of 0-56. Higher values represent a worse outcome (i.e., more alcohol problems).|week 1 and week 13|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
828041|NCT01214083|Secondary|Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS)|The Penn Alcohol Craving Scale is designed to assess alcohol craving severity. The scale has a total score range of 0-30. Higher values represent a worse outcome (i.e., higher craving).|week 1 and week 13|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
828042|NCT01214083|Secondary|Liver Function Tests (AST)||week 0 and week 13|||units/liter||Standard Error|Mean
828043|NCT01214083|Primary|Percentage of Heavy Drinking Days|"Percentage of heavy drinking days was measured by the Time Line Follow Back (TLFB) Method. ('Heavy drinking' was defined as 5 or more standard drinks per day for men and 4 or more standard drinks for women.) The percentage has a total range of 0%-100%. Higher percentages represent a worse outcome (i.e., more heavy drinking)."|week 1 and week 13|||percentage of heavy drinking days||Standard Error|Mean
828044|NCT01214109|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase at Steady State Following Oral Administration (Vz/F,ss) for PK Population (Excluding Subjects Due to Emesis)|Vz/F,ss = Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase λz at steady state following oral administration|27 days|PK Population excluding subjects with reported emesis - Subjects with values for Vz/F,ss excluding subjects with reported emesis||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828045|NCT01214109|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase at Steady State Following Oral Administration (Vz/F,ss) for PK Population (All Subjects)|Vz/F,ss = Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase λz at steady state following oral administration|27 days|PK Population - Subjects with values for Vz/F,ss||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828046|NCT01214109|Secondary|The Apparent Clearance of the Analyte in Plasma at Steady State Following Oral Administration (CL/F,ss) for PK Population (Excluding Subjects Due to Emesis)|CL/F,ss = Apparent clearance of the analyte in the plasma at steady state following oral administration|27 days|PK Population excluding subjects with reported emesis - Subjects with values for CL/F,ss excluding subjects with reported emesis||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828047|NCT01214109|Secondary|The Apparent Clearance of the Analyte in Plasma at Steady State Following Oral Administration (CL/F,ss) for PK Population (All Subjects)|CL/F,ss = Apparent clearance of the analyte in the plasma at steady state following oral administration|27 days|PK Population - Subjects with values for CL/F,ss||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828048|NCT01214109|Secondary|Minimum Steady State Concentration (Cmin,ss) for PK Population (Excluding Subjects Due to Emesis)|Cmin,ss = Minimum observed concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state|27 days|PK Population excluding subjects with reported emesis - Subjects with values for Cmin,ss excluding subjects with reported emesis||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828049|NCT01214109|Secondary|Minimum Steady State Concentration (Cmin,ss) for PK Population (All Subjects)|Cmin,ss = Minimum observed concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state|27 days|PK Population - Subjects with values for Cmin,ss||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828050|NCT01214109|Secondary|Terminal Half-life of the Analyte in Plasma at Steady State (t1/2,ss) for PK Population (Excluding Subjects Due to Emesis)|t1/2,ss - Apparent plasma terminal elimination half-life at steady state|27 days|PK Population excluding subjects with reported emesis - Subjects with values for t1/2,ss excluding subjects with reported emesis||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828051|NCT01214109|Secondary|Terminal Half-life of the Analyte in Plasma at Steady State (t1/2,ss) for PK Population (All Subjects)|t1/2,ss - Apparent plasma terminal elimination half-life at steady state|27 days|PK Population - Subjects with values for t1/2,ss||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828052|NCT01214109|Secondary|Average Concentration in Plasma Under Steady-state Conditions (Cavg) for PK Population (Excluding Subjects Due to Emesis)|Cavg = Average concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state|27 days|PK Population excluding subjects with reported emesis - Subjects with values for Cavg excluding subjects with reported emesis||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828053|NCT01214109|Secondary|Average Concentration in Plasma Under Steady-state Conditions (Cavg) for PK Population (All Subjects)|Cavg = Average concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state|27 days|PK Population - Subjects with values for Cavg||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830148|NCT01227629|Secondary|Thromboembolic Events: Number of Participants With Transient Ischemic Attack|Occurence of a transient ischemic attack|12 weeks|All randomized patients. No statistical comparisons were performed, due to the extremely small number of events.||Participants|||Number
828054|NCT01214109|Secondary|Predose Steady State Concentration of the Analyte Immediately Before Administration of the Next Drug Administration (Cpre,ss) for PK Population (Excluding Subjects Due to Emesis)|Cpre,ss = pre-dose concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state immediately before administration of the next dose|27 days|PK population excluding subjects with reported emesis - Subjects with values for Cpre,ss excluding subjects with reported emesis||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828055|NCT01214109|Secondary|Predose Steady State Concentration of the Analyte Immediately Before Administration of the Next Drug Administration (Cpre,ss) for PK Population (All Subjects)|Cpre,ss = pre-dose concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state immediately before administration of the next dose|27 days|PK population - Subjects with values for Cpre,ss||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828056|NCT01214109|Secondary|Peak-to-trough Fluctuation (PTF) for PK Population (Excluding Subjects Due to Emesis)|PTF = Peak-to-trough fluctuation is measured as a percent|27 days|PK population excluding subjects with reported emesis - Subjects with values for PTF excluding subjects with reported emesis||percent||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828057|NCT01214109|Secondary|Peak-to-trough Fluctuation (PTF) for PK Population (All Subjects)|PTF = Peak-to-trough fluctuation is measured as a percent|27 days|PK population - Subjects with values for PTF||percent||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828058|NCT01214109|Secondary|Time From Dosing to the Maximum Measured Concentration of the Analyte in Plasma (Tmax) for PK Population (Excluding Subjects Due to Emesis)|tmax = time of maximum observed plasma concentration|27 days|PK population excluding subjects with reported emesis - Subjects with values for t_max excluding subjects with reported emesis||hours||Full Range|Median
828059|NCT01214109|Secondary|Time From Dosing to the Maximum Measured Concentration of the Analyte in Plasma (Tmax) for PK Population (All Subjects)|tmax = time of maximum observed plasma concentration|27 days|PK population - Subjects with values for tmax||hours||Full Range|Median
828060|NCT01214109|Primary|Maximum Steady State Concentration (Cmax,ss) for PK Population (Excluding Subjects Due to Emesis)|Cmax,ss = maximum observed concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state|27 days|PK population excluding subjects with reported emesis - Subjects with values for Cmax,ss excluding subjects with reported emesis||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828061|NCT01214109|Primary|Maximum Steady State Concentration (Cmax,ss) for PK Population (All Subjects)|Cmax = maximum observed concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state|27 days|PK population - Subjects with values for Cmax,ss||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828062|NCT01214109|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of Pramipexole in Plasma at Steady State Over 24 Hours (AUC0-24,ss); in Case of ER up to the Time Point of Next Dosing (AUCtau,ss) for PK Population (Excluding Subjects Due to Emesis)|AUC0-24,ss = area under the plasma concentration-time curve between 0 and 24 hours at steady state. AUCtau,ss = area under the plasma concentration-time curve over a dosing interval at steady state|27 days|PK population excluding subjects with reported emesis - Subjects with values for AUC0-24,ss for IR and values for AUCtau,ss for ER, excluding subjects with reported emesis||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828063|NCT01214109|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of Pramipexole in Plasma at Steady State Over 24 Hours (AUC0-24,ss); in Case of ER up to the Time Point of Next Dosing (AUCtau,ss) for Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population (All Subjects)|AUC0-24,ss = area under the plasma concentration-time curve between 0 and 24 hours at steady state. AUCtau,ss = area under the plasma concentration-time curve over a dosing interval at steady state|27 days|PK population - Subjects with values for AUC0-24,ss for IR and values for AUCtau,ss for ER||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828064|NCT01214161|Secondary|Provider's Assessment of Patient's Maximum Pain on a Visual Analogue Scale|This secondary analysis looked at provider perception of patient maximum pain during IUD insertion This was not done per intervention because we were looking at the accuracy of the provider's assesment of the patient's pain, which is not dependent on intervention. The provider was blinded to the intervention so that would not have influenced results.|during IUD insertion|||units on a 100 mm visual analogue scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828065|NCT01214161|Secondary|Adverse Events||During IUD insertion|||participants|||Number
828066|NCT01214161|Primary|Pain During IUD Insertion at Various Time Points (See Description for Time Points)|Patient marked pain on a 100 mm visual analogue scale during the part of the IUD insertion procedure where the tenaculum was placed, the uterus was measured/sounded, the IUD was inserted into the uterus, and the speculum was removed.|During IUD insertion (see above description for which time points)|||units on a 100 mm visual analogue scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828067|NCT01214174|Primary|Proportion of Patients With Anterior Chamber Cell Clearing at Day 8 Post-Treatment|This study will measure as its primary endpoint the anterior chamber cell count at Day 8 post-treatment in the study eye. The proportion of patients with anterior chamber cell count = 0 at Day 8 in the study eye for each dosage group will be compared. Only one eye was treated per participant.|8 days post-treatment|||percentage of patients with ACC clearing||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828068|NCT01214187|Secondary|St George's Respiratory Questionnaire|St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) is a validated self-reported instrument. In this instrument, scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores reflective of worse quality of life.|Baseline to Week 12|||Total Score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828069|NCT01214187|Secondary|Six Minute Walk Distance|The six minute walk distance is commonly used both in research studies and in clinical practice as a measure of functional capabilities, and changes in six minute walk distance and oxygen use during testing over time often reflect clinically relevant disease progression. We will measure the distance travelled during six minutes (meters) in accordance with published guidelines|Baseline to Week 12|||meters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828070|NCT01214187|Secondary|Diffusing Capacity for Carbon Monoxide (DLCO) % Predicted Values|Interstitial changes associated with IPF can worsen diffusing capabilities across the alveolar-capillary membrane. As a result, diffusing capacity of carbon monoxide is an important outcome to assess architectural distortion and resultant decrements in diffusing capabilities|Baseline to Week 12|||% predicted||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828071|NCT01214187|Secondary|Total Lung Capacity % Predicted Values (TLC)|Total lung capacity % predicted values (TLC) is a major clinical determinant of restrictive lung disease in practice, with TLC measurement below the 5th percentile of the predicted value indicative of a restrictive ventilatory defect|Baseline to Week 12|||% Predicted||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828072|NCT01214187|Primary|Serum MMP7 Level|The primary study endpoint was the change in MMP7 serum concentration (ng/ml) from baseline to 12 weeks. Serum MMP7 concentrations in peripheral blood are easily measureable and reflect changes in the alveolar microenvironment. Thus, we have chosen to study mean serum MMP7 concentrations after three months of CO treatment as a surrogate biomarker of the effect of inhaled CO administration on disease progression.|Baseline to Week 12|One subject randomized to placebo withdrew consent prior to the MMP7 blood draw at visit 2. This is missing data and the reason why we have n=28 for placebo group.||ng/ml||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828073|NCT01214239|Secondary|Number With HbA1c at Least Lowering 0.5%|Number with HbA1c at least 0.5% lowering from baseline at week 24|baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Non-completers were considered as failure imputation (NCF).||Patients|||Number
828074|NCT01214239|Secondary|Number of Patients With HbA1c < 6.5% at Week 24 With Baseline HbA1c >= 6.5%.|Number of patients with HbA1c < 6.5% at week 24 with baseline HbA1c >= 6.5%.|baseline and at week 24|This population includes the FAS with baseline HbA1c >= 6.5%. Non-completers were considered as failure imputation (NCF).||Patients|||Number
828075|NCT01214239|Secondary|Number of Patients With HbA1c < 6.5%|Number of patients with HbA1c < 6.5% at week 24|baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Non-completers were considered as failure imputation (NCF).||Patients|||Number
828076|NCT01214239|Secondary|Number of Patients With HbA1c < 7.0% at Week 24 With Baseline HbA1c >= 7.0%.|Number of patients with HbA1c < 7.0% at week 24 with baseline HbA1c >= 7.0%.|baseline and at week 24|This population includes the FAS with baseline HbA1c >= 7.0%. Non-completers were considered as failure imputation (NCF).||Patients|||Number
828077|NCT01214239|Secondary|Number of Patients With HbA1c < 7.0%|Number of patients with HbA1c < 7.0% at week 24|baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Non-completers were considered as failure imputation (NCF).||Patients|||Number
828078|NCT01214239|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline at Week 24|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline FPG and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828079|NCT01214239|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline at Week 18|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline FPG and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 18|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828080|NCT01214239|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline at Week 12|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline FPG and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828081|NCT01214239|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline at Week 6|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 6|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828082|NCT01214239|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline at Week 24 in the Subset of Chinese Patients|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available (in the subset of Chinese patients). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||% of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828083|NCT01214239|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline at Week 18|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 18|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||% of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828084|NCT01214239|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline at Week 12|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||% of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828085|NCT01214239|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline at Week 6|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 6|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||% of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828086|NCT01214239|Primary|HbA1c Change From Baseline at Week 24|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||% of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828087|NCT01214252|Secondary|Hernia or Hernia Recurrence by Year From Year 2 to Last Year Observed|Confirmed and Unconfirmed hernia or hernia recurrence by year from Year 2 to last year observed|Year 2 to Year 8|||participants|||Number
828088|NCT01214252|Secondary|Total Unconfirmed Hernia or Hernia Recurrence|"Total unconfirmed hernia or hernia recurrence at the repair site by year (Number and percentage)
Unconfirmed hernia or recurrence reported by the subject is defined by confirmation of hernia symptoms based on results of the Symptoms Questionniare but not confirmed by clinical assessment by a surgeon or medical chart review"|12 Months|||participants|||Number
828091|NCT01214330|Primary|Concordance (Similarity Between Samples) of Pap Smears|Is the SoloPap collection device as good at detecting cervical dysplasia as a clinician-collected Pap Smear?|1 year|102 females recruited from an outpatient clinic in a military treatment facility, age >18, without severe hand arthritis||percentage of participants|||Number
828093|NCT01214395|Primary|Primary Endpoint Will be the Number of Tea Tree Oil Patients That Did Not Have a Catheter-related Infection Within 6 Months After Entry Into the Trial.|"Catheter-related infections will be defined according to standard guidelines
Cases with definite and probable infections will be classified as infections."|6 months|||participants|||Number
828094|NCT01214434|Secondary|Percent Reduction From Baseline for Oiliness at End of Treatment.|Oiliness scored on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe).|From Baseline to end of treatment (Day 7 or 14)|All subjects will data after baseline were included in the analysis. For the Bland emollient group, 2 subjects were excluded from the analysis. For the Promiseb group, 3 subjects were excluded and one of the subjects that did not complete the study was included with Day 7 data carried forward to impute missing Day 14 data.||percent reduction from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
828095|NCT01214434|Secondary|Percent Reduction From Baseline for Erythema at End of Treatment.|Erythema scored on scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe).|From Baseline to end of treatment (Day 7 or 14)|All subjects will data after baseline were included in the analysis. For the Bland emollient group, 2 subjects were excluded from the analysis. For the Promiseb group, 3 subjects were excluded and one of the subjects that did not complete the study was included with Day 7 data carried forward to impute missing Day 14 data.||percent reduction from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
828096|NCT01214434|Secondary|Percent Reduction From Baseline for Crusting at End of Treatment.|Crusting scored on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe).|From Baseline to end of treatment (Day 7 or 14)|All subjects will data after baseline were included in the analysis. For the Bland emollient group, 2 subjects were excluded from the analysis. For the Promiseb group, 3 subjects were excluded and one of the subjects that did not complete the study was included with Day 7 data carried forward to impute missing Day 14 data.||percent reduction from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
828097|NCT01214434|Secondary|Precent Reduction From Baseline for Scaling at End of Treatment.|Scaling score on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe).|From Baseline to end of treatment (Day 7 or 14)|All subjects will data after baseline were included in the analysis. For the Bland emollient group, 2 subjects were excluded from the analysis. For the Promiseb group, 3 subjects were excluded and one of the subjects that did not complete the study was included with Day 7 data carried forward to impute missing Day 14 data.||percent reduction from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
828098|NCT01214434|Primary|Number of Participants With Excellent Overall Safety Score at End of Treatment.|The investigator will assess tolerance at Day 7 and Day 14 using an overall safety score of 0 to 3 defined as; Grade 0-No signs of irritation (excellent); Grade 1-Slight signs of irritation which resolved (Good); Grade 2-Clear signs of irritation (Fair); Grade 3-Patient discontinued due to irritation(Poor).|End of treatment|All subjects will data after baseline were included in the analysis. For the Bland emollient group, 2 subjects were excluded from the analysis. For the Promiseb group, 3 subjects were excluded and one of the subjects that did not complete the study was included with Day 7 data carried forward to impute missing Day 14 data.||participants|||Number
828099|NCT01214434|Primary|Subjects With Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) Success (IGA of 0 or 1) at End of Treatment (Day 7 or 14).|IGA scored on scale of 0 (clear) to 4 (severe).|end of treatment (Day 7 or 14)|All subjects will data after baseline were included in the analysis. For the Bland emollient group, 2 subjects were excluded from the analysis. For the Promiseb group, 3 subjects were excluded and one of the subjects that did not complete the study was included with Day 7 data carried forward to impute missing Day 14 data.||percentage of participants|||Number
828100|NCT01214616|Primary|Drug-related Adverse Events|Number of patients with drug-related adverse events|during the treatment period or up to 28 days after the completion of drug administration, up to 730 days|Treated set||participants|||Number
828101|NCT01214616|Secondary|Objective Tumour Response|"According to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 criteria and assessed by CT or MRI: Complete Response (CR), disappearance of all target and non-target lesions; Partial Response (PR), at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR."|Pre-treatment, every 8 weeks after start of study treatment, end of treatment|Treated set||participants|||Number
828102|NCT01214616|Secondary|Cmax for Vinorelbine|maximum measured blood concentration|predose, 10minutes, 0.5, 1, 4, 7 hours, 23hours55minutes after 2nd or 3rd or 4th dose (as “with afatinib”) and 1st dose (as “without afatinib”)|Treated set||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828103|NCT01214616|Secondary|AUC0-∞ for Vinorelbine|area under the blood concentration-time curve of the analyte over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity|predose, 10minutes, 0.5, 1, 4, 7 hours, 23hours55minutes after 2nd or 3rd or 4th dose (as “with afatinib”) and 1st dose (as “without afatinib”)|Treated set||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828104|NCT01214616|Secondary|Cmax,ss for Afatinib|maximum measured plasma concentration at steady state|pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7hours, and 23hours55minutes after 7th or 14th or 21th dose (as “with Vinorelbine”) and 20th dose (as “without Vinorelbine”)|Treated set||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828105|NCT01214616|Secondary|AUCτ,ss for Afatinib|area under the plasma concentration-time curve following dose at steady state over the dosing interval τ|pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7hours, and 23hours55minutes after 7th or 14th or 21th dose (as “with Vinorelbine”) and 20th dose (as “without Vinorelbine”)|Treated set||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828106|NCT01214616|Primary|Number of Patients With Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) During 1st Course|DLTs and Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of afatinib in combination with vinorelbine iv. (MTD = not determined)|during 1st course|Treated set: all patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational medication (afatinib or vinorelbine)||participants|||Number
828107|NCT01214720|Secondary|Bevacizumab Concentration in the Presence of Gemcitabine and Erlotinib|Blood samples were collected from a subgroup of participants, in selected centers for the determination of bevacizumab serum concentration before the first bevacizumab/placebo exposure (Week 1) and at Weeks 3, 5, 7, and 9. Each time blood samples were collected just (preferably within 1 hour) before the start of the study treatment.|Weeks 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9|ITT Population. Number (n) = number of participants assessed at a specific visit.||micrograms/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
828108|NCT01214720|Primary|Duration of Overall Survival - Time to Event|Duration of OS was defined as the time between date of randomization and date of death due to any cause. Participants without an event were censored at the date last known to be alive. Participants who were randomized but not exposed to study drug and had no further follow up were censored at the date of randomization. Median duration of survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Randomization, Weeks 1-8 of Cycle 1, Weeks 1-3 of consecutive cycles, 28 days and 3 months after lst treatment, and every 3 months for up to 18 months from last participant randomized|ITT Population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828109|NCT01214720|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), or Stable Disease (SD) at First Postbaseline Tumor Assessment|Percentage of participants with CR, PR, or SD according to modified RECIST evaluation at the first postbaseline tumor assessment. CR equaled (=) complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with normalization of tumor marker level. PR is greater than or equal to (≥) a 30% decrease of the sum of the LD of all target lesions as referenced to the baseline sum LD of all target lesions. Persistence of one or more non-target lesions(s) and/or maintenance of tumor marker level above normal limits. SD=neither sufficient shrinkage of target lesions to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD with persistence of one or more non-target lesions(s) and/or maintenance of tumor marker level above normal limits.|Baseline and Week 8|ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828110|NCT01214720|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) - Time to Event|PFS was defined as the time between the date of randomization and the date of documented PD (per RECIST), or date of death due to any cause. Data for participants without an event were censored at the date of last follow up for progression, or date of last available tumor assessment if no further follow up assessment for progression was performed. Participants who were randomized but not exposed to study drug and had no further follow up were censored at the date of randomization. Median PFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Screening, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, and every 12 weeks thereafter or until confirmed evidence of disease progression|ITT Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828111|NCT01214720|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) - Percentage of Participants With an Event|PFS was defined as the time between the date of randomization and the date of documented progressive disease (PD) defined according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) evaluation, or date of death due to any cause. PD was defined as at least a 20 percent (%) increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum (LD) recorded since the treatment started. Participants without an event were censored at the date of last follow up for progression, or date of last available tumor assessment if no further follow up assessment for progression was performed. Participants who were randomized but not exposed to study drug and had no further follow up were censored at the date of randomization.|Screening, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, and every 12 weeks thereafter or until confirmed evidence of disease progression|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
828112|NCT01214720|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Response (CBR)||Randomization, Weeks 1-8 of Cycle 1, Weeks 1-3 of consecutive cycles, 28 days and 3 months after lst treatment, and every 3 months for up to 18 months from last participant randomized|The analysis of the CBR was dependent on the calculation of analgesic therapy (AT); this calculation relies on established conversion factors for different morphine derivatives (MD). Many MD utilized by participants do not have well-established conversion factors, yielding uninterpretable results. Therefore, CBR was not analyzed in this study.|||||
828113|NCT01214720|Primary|Duration of Overall Survival - Percentage of Participants With an Event|Duration of overall survival (OS) was defined as the time between date of randomization and date of death due to any cause. Participants without an event were censored at the date last known to be alive. Participants who were randomized but not exposed to study drug and had no further follow up were censored at the date of randomization.|Randomization, Weeks 1-8 of Cycle 1, Weeks 1-3 of consecutive cycles, 28 days and 3 months after lst treatment, and every 3 months for up to 18 months from last participant randomized|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
828114|NCT01214759|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability as Assessed by the Number of Participants Who Completed the 28-day Course of the Antiretroviral Drugs Being Explored in This Study||28 days|All who were enrolled||participants|||Number
828115|NCT01214759|Secondary|Number of Participants Exhibiting Clinical or Laboratory Abnormalities Resulting From the 28-day Exposure to the Antiretroviral Drugs Being Explored in This Study|Participants who experienced side effects categorized as grade 3 or higher by the Division of AIDS table for grading the severity of adult and pediatric adverse events were tested for clinical or laboratory abnormalities.|28 days|Only participants who experienced side effects categorized as grade 3 or higher by the Division of AIDS table were tested for clinical or laboratory abnormalities, and since no participants experienced side effects greater than grade 1, no participants were tested for clinical or laboratory abnormalities.|||||
828116|NCT01214759|Primary|Efficacy as Assessed by the Number of Participants Who Were HIV Positive at 6 Months|This measure assesses whether the combination of Truvada and Raltegravir prevents the acquisition of HIV at six months among HIV-negative people who have been exposed to HIV.|6 months|All who completed all study visits||participants|||Number
828117|NCT01214811|Primary|Wound Area at Visit 2|At each visit the wound length and width is measured and calculated in cm2.|After one week|||cm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
828118|NCT01214811|Primary|Wound Are at Baseline||Baseline||||||
828119|NCT01214824|Secondary|Proportion of Time in Hypoglycaemia (<3.9mmol/L)-Unmasked|Proportion of time (hours per day) in hypoglycaemia (<3.9mmol/L) for the unmasked phase|2 weeks following baseline & 3 months|Analysis per protocol 31 participants analysed in the unmasked phase 1 28 participants analysed in the unmasked phase 2||Hours per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828120|NCT01214824|Secondary|Proportion of Time in Hypoglycaemia (<3.9 mmol/L)- Masked|Proportion of time (hours per day) in hypoglycaemia (<3.9 mmol/L) for the masked phase. There were two masked phases in the study, one 5 day wear at baseline and one 5 day wear at 6 months. During masked wear subject were not able to see continuous glucose data from the device.|Baseline & 6 months|Analysis per protocol||Hours per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828121|NCT01214824|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Had Reduction in HbA1c of > or = 0.5%|Number of subjects with a HbA1c reduction greater than or equal to 0.5% and 95% confidence interval from visit 1 (baseline) to visit 7 (6 months).|Baseline and 6 months|Intention to treat analysis||participants|||Number
828176|NCT01214980|Secondary|Donor Site Recidivism Rate|Number of donor sites that healed and then reopened during the study.|6 weeks|Randomized subjects that had a minimum of 4 out of 5 study treatments and fully epithelialized during the study.||participants that healed and reopened|||Number
830149|NCT01227629|Secondary|Number of Participants With Thromboembolic Events: Ischemic Stroke|Occurence of an ischemic stroke (fatal or non-fatal)|12 weeks|All randomized patients. No statistical comparisons were performed, due to the extremely small number of events.||Participants|||Number
828171|NCT01214915|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Responded in Platelet Count Whose Baseline Platelet Count Was <600x10^9/L|A response was defined as platelet counts to <600x10^9/L across consecutive visits for at least 4 weeks following at least 3 months of treatment.|12 months|Full Analysis Set defined as subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline platelet measurement assessment.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828172|NCT01214915|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Responded in Platelet Count Whose Baseline Platelet Count Was ≥600x10^9/L|A response was defined as platelet counts to <600x10^9/L across consecutive visits for at least 4 weeks following at least 3 months of treatment.|12 months|Full Analysis Set defined as subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline platelet measurement assessment.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828173|NCT01214915|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Normalization in Platelet Count|Normalization was defined as platelet counts ≤400x10^9/L across consecutive visits for at least 4 weeks following at least 3 months of treatment.|12 months|Full Analysis Set defined as subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline platelet measurement assessment.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828174|NCT01214915|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least 50% Reduction in Platelet Count|Subjects who achieved at least 50% reduction in platelet count from their baseline level across consecutive visits for at least 4 weeks and following 3 months of treatment.|12 months|Full Analysis Set defined as subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline platelet measurement assessment.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828175|NCT01214915|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Who Responded in Platelet Count|A response was defined as platelet counts to <600x10^9/L across consecutive visits for at least 4 weeks following at least 3 months of treatment.|12 months|Full Analysis Set defined as subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline platelet measurement assessment.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828178|NCT01214980|Secondary|Numeric Pain Score|Average donor site pain score for each treatment group, numeric scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), at five weeks post skin graft procedure|5 weeks|randomized subjects that had a minimum of 4 out of 5 study treatments and with a numeric pain score reported||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
828179|NCT01214980|Secondary|Time to Full Epithelialization|Time to full epithelialization in days from the date of initial donor site harvest procedure per the blinded adjudication of the donor site image.|Days to full epithelialization|randomized subjects that had a minimum of 4 out of 5 study treatments||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
828180|NCT01214980|Primary|Rate of Wound Healing|The primary endpoint is an average of the group for each participant's donor site wound closure time, defined as days to absence of drainage from the date of the initial donor site harvest procedure.|Days to absence of drainage from the initial donor site harvest procedure|randomized participants that had a minimum of 4 out of 5 treatments||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
828181|NCT01215032|Secondary|Percent Maintaining Glycemic Control|To describe glycemic control as assessed by hemoglobin A1C. Glycemic control was defined as maintaining fasting plasma glucose levels less than or equal to 130 mg/dL. Plasma glucose levels were measured at baseline (prior to metformin dosing), pre-month 2, pre-month 4, pre-month 7, pre-month 10 and pre-month 13, and/or at off-study visit.|2 years|Participants were stratified based on baseline hemoglobin A1c. HbA1c < 6.0 is considered normal; HbA1c >/= 6.0 is considered abnormal.||Participants|||Count of Participants
828182|NCT01215032|Secondary|Relationship Between Baseline Metabolomic Profile and PSA Response|To determine the plasma metabolomic profiles associated with response to metformin using the Metabolon platform. The Metabolon platform is a proprietary technique of metabolic profiling using mass spectrometry coupled with liquid and/or gas chromatography and robust bioinformatics. The aim is to test the hypothesis that insulin level is a biomarker that predicts activity of metformin therapy for the treatment of castrate-resistant prostate cancer.|2 years|Data was not collected for this outcome measure because blood (plasma) samples were never run on the Metabolon platform, as the study was terminated early.|||||
828183|NCT01215032|Secondary|Number of Participants With PSA Response|PSA response is defined as a 50% decline from baseline confirmed by a second PSA value 4 weeks later.|12 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
828184|NCT01215032|Primary|PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen) Response|Percent change in PSA from baseline to 12 weeks.|Approximately 12 weeks|||percentage of baseline PSA||Full Range|Median
828185|NCT01215097|Secondary|Number With HbA1c at Least Lowering 0.5%|Number with HbA1c at least 0.5% lowering from baseline at week 24|baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Non-completers were considered as failure imputation (NCF).||Participants|||Number
828186|NCT01215097|Secondary|Number of Patients With HbA1c < 6.5% at Week 24 With Baseline HbA1c >= 6.5%.|Number of patients with HbA1c < 6.5% at week 24 with baseline HbA1c >= 6.5%.|baseline and at week 24|This population includes the FAS with baseline HbA1c >= 6.5%. Non-completers were considered as failure imputation (NCF).||Participants|||Number
828187|NCT01215097|Secondary|Number of Patients With HbA1c < 6.5%|Number of patients with HbA1c < 6.5% at week 24|baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Non-completers were considered as failure imputation (NCF).||Participants|||Number
828188|NCT01215097|Secondary|Number of Patients With HbA1c < 7.0% at Week 24 With Baseline HbA1c >= 7.0%.|Number of patients with HbA1c < 7.0% at week 24 with baseline HbA1c >= 7.0%.|baseline and at week 24|This population includes the FAS with baseline HbA1c >= 7.0%. Non-completers were considered as failure imputation (NCF).||Participants|||Number
828189|NCT01215097|Secondary|Number of Patients With HbA1c < 7.0%|Number of patients with HbA1c < 7.0% at week 24|baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Non-completers were considered as failure imputation (NCF).||Participants|||Number
828190|NCT01215097|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline at Week 18|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline FPG and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 18|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828191|NCT01215097|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline at Week 12|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline FPG and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828192|NCT01215097|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline at Week 6|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline FPG and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 6|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828193|NCT01215097|Secondary|FPG Change From Baseline at Week 24|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828194|NCT01215097|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline at Week 24(Chinese Only)|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at 24 weeks|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available (Chinese only). Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828195|NCT01215097|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline at Week 18|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 18|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828196|NCT01215097|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline at Week 12|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828197|NCT01215097|Secondary|HbA1c Change From Baseline at Week 6|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 6|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828198|NCT01215097|Primary|HbA1c Change From Baseline at Week 24|Means are treatment adjusted for baseline HbA1c and previous anti-diabetic medication.|Baseline and at week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all treated and randomised patients with a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c measurement available. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as the imputation rule.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828199|NCT01215110|Secondary|Summary of Statistical Analysis of TMC207 Area Under the Concentration-time Curve Over the Dose Interval of 0 to 24 h (AUC(0-24)) on Day 1 and Day 14||Day 1 (0, 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hour post-dose) or Day 14 (0, 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hour post-dose)|On Day 14, N=13 for TMC207 300 group and N=14 for TMC207 400 group due to early withdrawal of three participants||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828200|NCT01215110|Secondary|Summary of Statistical Analysis of TMC207 Time of Maximum Plasma Concentration (T(Max)) on Days 1 and 14||Day 1 (0, 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hour post-dose) or Day 14 (0, 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, and 30 hour post-dose)|On Day 14, N=13 for TMC207 300 group and N=14 for TMC207 400 group due to early withdrawal of three participants||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
828201|NCT01215110|Secondary|Summary of Statistical Analysis of TMC207 Maximum Plasma Concentration Following Dosing (C(Max)) on Days 1 and 14||Day 1 (0, 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hour post-dose) or Day 14 (0, 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, and 30 hour post-dose)|On Day 14, N=13 for TMC207 300 group and N=14 for TMC207 400 group due to early withdrawal of three participants||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828202|NCT01215110|Secondary|Rate of Change in Time to Sputum Culture Positivity (TTP)(Hours) in Liquid Culture Media (Days 7-14)|The TTP was measured in the Mycobacterial Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) (Bactec MGIT960) automated liquid culture system from overnight sputum. TTP rates of change were calculated from the two slopes of the bi-linear (piece-wise) regression, for each treatment group.|Days 7-14 of fourteen consecutive days of treatment|Because of insufficient data for bilinear regression, nine participants were omitted from TTP calculations.||hours/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828203|NCT01215110|Secondary|Rate of Change in Time to Sputum Culture Positivity (TTP)(Hours) in Liquid Culture Media (Days 2-14)|The TTP was measured in the Mycobacterial Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) (Bactec MGIT960) automated liquid culture system from overnight sputum. TTP rates of change were calculated from the two slopes of the bi-linear (piece-wise) regression, for each treatment group.|Days 2-14 of fourteen consecutive days of treatment|Because of insufficient data for bilinear regression, nine participants were omitted from TTP calculations.||hours/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828204|NCT01215110|Secondary|Rate of Change in Time to Sputum Culture Positivity (TTP)(Hours) in Liquid Culture Media (Days 0-2)|The TTP was measured in the Mycobacterial Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) (Bactec MGIT960) automated liquid culture system from overnight sputum. TTP rates of change were calculated from the two slopes of the bi-linear (piece-wise) regression, for each treatment group.|Two consecutive days of treatment|Because of insufficient data for bilinear regression, nine participants were omitted from TTP calculations.||hours/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828205|NCT01215110|Secondary|Rate of Change in Time to Sputum Culture Positivity (TTP)(Hours) in Liquid Culture Media (Days 0-14)|The TTP was measured in the Mycobacterial Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) (Bactec MGIT960) automated liquid culture system from overnight sputum. TTP rates of change were calculated from the two slopes of the bi-linear (piece-wise) regression, for each treatment group.|Fourteen consecutive days of treatment|Because of insufficient data for bilinear regression, nine participants were omitted from TTP calculations.||hours/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828206|NCT01215110|Secondary|Early Bactericidal Activity (EBA) Measured as the Mean Rate of Change of log10 Colony Forming Units (CFU) of M. Tuberculosis Per ml Sputum on Solid Medium Over Time (Days 0-2).|The rates of change were calculated from the two slopes of the bi-linear (piece-wise) regression, for each treatment group. The nodes (point of inflection, i.e. where slope changes) used in these bi-linear regressions, as determined by visual inspection, were Day 3.5. node. Throughout the analyses, the established node at Day 2.5 was used in the Rifafour e-275 arm. Since this range (Days0-2) is before the node day, the rate of change for this outcome is equal to the slope at Day 0. Note that to facilitate interpretation the sign of these slopes were reversed for log10CFU/ml.|Two consecutive days of treatment|Because of insufficient data for bilinear regression, four patients were omitted from EBA(CFU) calculations.||log10CFU/ml/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828207|NCT01215110|Secondary|Early Bactericidal Activity (EBA) Measured as the Mean Rate of Change of log10 Colony Forming Units (CFU) of M. Tuberculosis Per ml Sputum on Solid Medium Over Time (Days 2-14).|The rates of change were calculated from the two slopes of the bi-linear (piece-wise) regression, for each treatment group. The nodes (point of inflection, i.e. where slope changes) used in these bi-linear regressions, as determined by visual inspection, were Day 3.5. node. Throughout the analyses, the established node at Day 2.5 was used in the Rifafour e-275 arm. Note that to facilitate interpretation the sign of these slopes were reversed for log10CFU/ml.|Days 2-14 of fourteen consecutive days of treatment|Because of insufficient data for bilinear regression, four patients were omitted from EBA(CFU) calculations.||log10CFU/ml/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828208|NCT01215110|Secondary|Early Bactericidal Activity (EBA) Measured as the Mean Rate of Change of log10 Colony Forming Units (CFU) of M. Tuberculosis Per ml Sputum on Solid Medium Over Time (Days 7-14).|The rates of change were calculated from the two slopes of the bi-linear (piece-wise) regression, for each treatment group. The nodes (point of inflection, i.e. where slope changes) used in these bi-linear regressions, as determined by visual inspection, were Day 3.5. node. Throughout the analyses, the established node at Day 2.5 was used in the Rifafour e-275 arm. Since Day 7 is later than the node day, the rate of change for this outcome is equal to the slope at Day 14. Note that to facilitate interpretation the sign of these slopes were reversed for log10CFU/ml.|Days 7-14 of fourteen consecutive days of treatment|Because of insufficient data for bilinear regression, four patients were omitted from EBA(CFU) calculations.||log10CFU/ml/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828209|NCT01215110|Primary|Early Bactericidal Activity (EBA) Measured as the Mean Rate of Change of log10 Colony Forming Units (CFU) of M. Tuberculosis Per ml Sputum on Solid Medium Over Time (Days 0-14).|The rates of change were calculated from the two slopes of the bi-linear (piece-wise) regression, for each treatment group. The nodes (point of inflection, i.e. where slope changes) used in these bi-linear regressions, as determined by visual inspection, were Day 3.5. node. Throughout the analyses, the established node at Day 2.5 was used in the Rifafour e-275 arm. Note that to facilitate interpretation the sign of these slopes were reversed for log10CFU/ml.|Fourteen consecutive days of treatment|Because of insufficient data for bilinear regression, four patients were omitted from EBA(CFU) calculations.||log10CFU/ml/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828210|NCT01215123|Secondary|Treatment Duration: Number of Bevacizumab Cycles|Bevacizumab treatment duration in routine clinical practice was measured by the number of bevacizumab treatment cycles.|Up to a maximum of 36.4 months|All enrolled participants||cycles||Full Range|Median
828211|NCT01215123|Primary|Time to Disease Progression (TDP)|Time to disease progression was defined as the time interval between first-line treatment onset and investigator-assessed disease progression. Disease progression was assessed according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria and defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|Up to a maximum of 36.4 months|All enrolled participants||months||Full Range|Median
828212|NCT01215227|Primary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Total Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) Score at Week 40|The ESS is a self-administered questionnaire providing a measure of a person’s general level of daytime sleepiness, or their average sleep propensity in daily life. The scale consists of 8 situations in which the participant rates their tendency to become sleepy on a scale of 0=no chance of dozing to 3=high chance of dozing. The overall score is the sum of the scores for the 8 situations for a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 24 with a higher score indicating greater sleepiness.|Baseline and Week 40|Participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) population (all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug) that had a baseline value and data at Week 40 for Total ESS Score||Percentage change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
828213|NCT01215227|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Suicidality|The number of participants with suicidality using the Columbia - Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) was reported. The C-SSR was used in this study only for the purpose of safety monitoring by measuring the incidence of different types of suicidality categories during treatment. The assessment was done by the nature of the responses, not by a numbered scale. Participants who reported at least one occurrence of suicidal behavior or suicidal ideation were counted as having experienced suicidality. Suicidal behavior included suicide attempt, aborted attempt, interrupted attempt, or preparatory behavior. Suicidal ideation included a wish to die or active suicidal thought with or without method, intent or plan.|Up to 42 weeks|APaT population, which consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828214|NCT01215227|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) ≥3 Times Upper Limit of Normal and ≥10% Increase From Baseline|The number of participants with AST ≥3 times the upper limit of normal and a ≥10% increase was reported. Laboratory safety blood work was collected from participants at Week 4, Week 6, and Week 8 visits.|Up to 42 weeks|APaT population, which consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828215|NCT01215227|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) ≥3 Times Upper Limit of Normal and ≥10% Increase From Baseline|The number of participants with ALT ≥3 times the upper limit of normal and a ≥10% increase was reported. Laboratory safety blood work was collected from participants at Week 4, Week 6, and Week 8 visits.|Up to 42 weeks|APaT population, which consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828216|NCT01215227|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Diastolic Blood Pressure ≥105 mmHg|The percentage of participants with Diastolic Blood Pressure ≥105 mmHg was reported. On Day 1 and Early Termination, blood pressure was measured as follows: Participant lay supine for 5 minutes, then had blood pressure taken; then stood for 3 minutes and had blood pressure taken; then rested for 10 minutes, at which time the process was repeated twice (ie, three rounds total). For all other blood pressure measurements, the procedure needed only to be done once (ie, one round).|Up to 42 weeks|APaT population, which consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828217|NCT01215227|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Systolic Blood Pressure ≥180 mmHg|The percentage of participants with Systolic Blood Pressure ≥180 mm Hg was reported. On Day 1 and Early Termination, blood pressure was measured as follows: Participant lay supine for 5 minutes, then had blood pressure taken; then stood for 3 minutes and had blood pressure taken; then rested for 10 minutes, at which time the process was repeated twice (ie, three rounds total). For all other blood pressure measurements, the procedure needed only to be done once (ie, one round).|Up to 42 weeks|All Participants as Treated (APaT) population, which consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828218|NCT01215279|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss/F) Population Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of AZD2423 at Steady State|PK-model: 1-compartment population model with first order absorption. (Vss/F) was estimated at steady state|2 blood samples (pre- and post dose) per visit collected at weeks 1, 2 and 4|||L||Full Range|Geometric Mean
828219|NCT01215279|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Concentration (Tmax) Population Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of AZD2423 at Steady State|PK-model: 1-compartment population model with first order absorption. tmax was estimated at steady state|2 blood samples (pre- and post dose) per visit collected at weeks 1, 2 and 4|||Hours||Full Range|Median
828220|NCT01215279|Secondary|Cmax, Population Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of AZD2423 at Steady State|PK-model: 1-compartment population model with first order absorption. Cmaxwas estimated at steady state|2 blood samples (pre- and post dose) per visit collected at weeks 1, 2 and 4|||nmol/L||Full Range|Geometric Mean
828221|NCT01215279|Secondary|Areaa Under the Curve From 0 to 24 Hours (AUC 0-24), Population Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of AZD2423 at Steady State|PK-model: 1-compartment population model with first order absorption. AUC was estimated at steady state|2 blood samples (pre- and post dose) per visit collected at weeks 1, 2 and 4|||nmol*h/L||Full Range|Geometric Mean
828222|NCT01215279|Secondary|SAA Concentration in Plasma at End of Treatment|End of treatment = 4 weeks = Visit 6|week 4|||ng/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
828227|NCT01215279|Secondary|St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD (SGRQ) Total Score at Baseline|The SGRQ-C includes 40 questions in 3 domains: Symptoms (distress due to respiratory symptoms, 7 questions), Activity (disturbance of physical activity, 13 questions), Impacts (overall impact on daily life and well-being, 20 questions). Scores are expressed as a percentage. Baseline is Day 1.|Day 1|||Percent of maximum possible score||Standard Deviation|Mean
828228|NCT01215279|Secondary|Rescue Medication Use During the Last 7 Days of Treatment|Number of inhalations of short acting β2 agonist (SABA) or short acting muscarinic antagonist (SAMA) per day.|Average of the last 7 days of treatment (week 4)|||Inhalations||Full Range|Mean
828229|NCT01215279|Secondary|BCSS (Evening) Total Score During Last 7 Days of Treatment|The BCSS scale includes one question for each of the symptoms of breathlessness, cough, and sputum. The total BCSS score ranges from 0 to 12; higher scores indicate greater symptom severity. The minimally important difference has been defined as a change in total score of greater than 0.3 units.|Average of the last 7 days of treatment (week 4)|||Units on scale, 0-12||Standard Deviation|Mean
828230|NCT01215279|Secondary|Breathlessness, Cough and Sputum Scale (BCSS) (Evening) Total Score at Baseline|The BCSS scale includes one question for each of the symptoms of breathlessness, cough, and sputum. The total BCSS score ranges from 0 to 12; higher scores indicate greater symptom severity. The minimally important difference has been defined as a change in total score of greater than 0.3 units. Baseline is mean of 10 days prior to treatment.|Average of 10 days of pre-treatment measurements (day -10 to -1)|||Units on scale, 0-12||Standard Deviation|Mean
828231|NCT01215279|Secondary|EXACT Total Score During Last 7 Days of Treatment|The EXACT Tool is a Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) measure; 14 items evaluated on 5- or 6-point scales; total score ranges from 0 to 100 (higher values indicate more severe exacerbation).|Average of the last 7 days of treatment (week 4)|||Units on scale, 0-100||Standard Deviation|Mean
828232|NCT01215279|Secondary|Exacerbations of Chronic Pulmonary Disease Tool (EXACT) Total Score at Baseline|The EXACT Tool is a Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) measure; 14 items evaluated on 5- or 6-point scales; total score ranges from 0 to 100 (higher values indicate more severe exacerbation). Baseline is the mean value over the 7 days prior to randomisation.|Average of 7 days of pre-treatment measurements (day -7 to -1)|||Units on scale, 0-100||Standard Deviation|Mean
828233|NCT01215279|Secondary|Evening PEF During Last 7 Days of Treatment|Measurement conducted by patient in evening.|Average of the last 7 days of treatment (week 4)|||L/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
828234|NCT01215279|Secondary|Evening PEF at Baseline|Measurement conducted by patient in evening.|Average of 10 days of pre-treatment measurements (day -10 to -1)|||L/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
828235|NCT01215279|Secondary|Morning PEF During Last 7 Days of Treatment|Measurements conducted by patient in morning upon rising, before intake of morning dose of investigational product but after clearing out mucus. Patients was to refrain from taking rescue medication prior to measurement if possible.|Average of the last 7 days of treatment (week 4)|||L/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
828236|NCT01215279|Secondary|Morning Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) at Baseline|Measurements conducted by patient in morning upon rising, before intake of morning dose of investigational product but after clearing out mucus. Patients was to refrain from taking rescue medication prior to measurement if possible.|Average of 10 days of pre-treatment measurements (day -10 to -1)|||L/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
828237|NCT01215279|Secondary|Evening FEV1 During Last 7 Days of Treatment|Measurement conducted by patient in evening.|Average of the last 7 days of treatment (week 4)|||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828238|NCT01215279|Secondary|Evening FEV1 at Baseline|Measurement conducted by patient in evening.|Average of 10 days of pre-treatment measurements (day -10 to -1)|||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828239|NCT01215279|Secondary|Morning FEV1 During Last 7 Days of Treatment|Measurements conducted by patient in morning upon rising, before intake of morning dose of investigational product but after clearing out mucus. Patients was to refrain from taking rescue medication prior to measurement if possible.|Average of the last 7 days of treatment (week 4)|||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828240|NCT01215279|Secondary|Morning FEV1 at Baseline|Measurements conducted by patient in morning upon rising, before intake of morning dose of investigational product but after clearing out mucus. Patients was to refrain from taking rescue medication prior to measurement if possible.|Average of 10 days of pre-treatment measurements (day -10 to -1)|||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828241|NCT01215279|Primary|Monocytes at Follow-up|Monocyte count in peripheral blood at follow-up (Week 5; 1 week after end of treatment)|week 5 (follow-up)|||10^9/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828242|NCT01215279|Primary|Monocytes at End of Treatment|Monocyte count in peripheral blood at end of treatment (4 weeks)|week 4|||10^9/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828243|NCT01215279|Primary|Monocytes at Baseline|Monocyte count in peripheral blood at baseline (Pre-dose, Day 1)|Day 1|||10^9/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828244|NCT01215279|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Physical Examination|Number of participants with clinically significant changes in physical examination assessed at all the listed time points|Day 1, 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, 4 weeks and 5 weeks (follow-up)|||Participants|||Number
828245|NCT01215279|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in ECG Variables|Number of participants with clinically significant changes in ECG variables assessed at all the listed time points|Day 1, 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, 4 weeks and 5 weeks (follow-up)|||Participants|||Number
828246|NCT01215279|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Vital Signs|Number of participants with clinically significant changes in vital signs assessed at all the listed time points|Day 1, 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, 4 weeks and 5 weeks (follow-up)|||Participants|||Number
828247|NCT01215279|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Laboratory Variables Other Than Monocytes|Number of all participants with clinically significant changes in laboratory variables, except monocyte, assessed at all the listed time points|Day 1, 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, 4 weeks and 5 weeks (follow-up)|||Participants|||Number
828248|NCT01215292|Primary|Intratesticular Androstenedione (ADD) Level||10 days|||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828249|NCT01215292|Primary|Intratesticular Dihydrotestosterone (DHT) Level||10 days|||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828250|NCT01215292|Primary|Intratesticular Testosterone (IT-T) Level||10 days|||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836877|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 60 Minutes|The scale measure pain after 60 minutes (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|60 minutes|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828251|NCT01215344|Secondary|Progression Free Survival by MRD Status at Day 100.|Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions|up to 7 years|Patients with MRD status information at the EOI and day 100 (post-AHCT).||years||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828252|NCT01215344|Primary|The Percent of Patients With Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) Status Changing to Negative at Day 100 (Post-AHCT), Among Patients With MRD Positive at the End of Induction (EOI).|Patients were treated with induction therapy (VRD) followed by autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (AHCT). MRD status of a patient with at least partial response was evaluated at the end of induction (EOI) and day 100 (post-AHCT). MRD of a patient is measured by seven-color flow cytometry.|6-months post ASCT|Newly diagnosed, symptomatic multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Patients were treated with induction therapy VRD followed by AHCT. MRD staus was evaluated for patients with at least partial response at the end of induction (EOI) therapy. Ten of these patients had MRD negative at EOI.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828253|NCT01215357|Secondary|Effects on the Clinical Global Impression|Clinician's Global Impression is used assess severity and changes in clinical symptoms during and at the end of the study|6 weeks||||||
828254|NCT01215357|Secondary|Statistically Significant Changes in the Gambling Symptom Assessment Scale|It is expected that there will be decreases in this scale|6 weeks||||||
828255|NCT01215357|Secondary|Type, Frequency and Severity of Side Effects|All side effects of the drug will be monitored and recorded|6 weeks||||||
828256|NCT01215357|Primary|Statistically Significant (p<0.05) Decrease From Baseline in Yale Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale Modified for Pathological Gambling|This scale assesses the severity of gambling urges and gambling behaviors. The study anticipates that there will be a reduction in either or both of these assessments. The range is from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 40, where zero means no gambling urges occurred.|Baseline and 6 weeks|Patients completing all visits||YBOCS score||Standard Deviation|Mean
828257|NCT01215422|Secondary|"Number of Intubation Attempts to Reach Best Obtainable Time to Intubation"|"For each anesthesiologist, the median time-to-intubation for patients #1-5, #6-10, #11-15, and #16-20 was determined. The anesthesiologist was considered to have reached Best Obtainable Time (BOT) to Intubation once the median time on any group of 5 consecutive patients was less than 3 seconds faster than the median time in the previous group of 5 consecutive patients, provided that there were no failed intubations or subsequent failed intubations using the same device."|less than 5 minutes per intubation|||participants|||Number
828258|NCT01215422|Secondary|Mean Years Since Completion of Anesthesiology Residency|To investigate whether there was a correlation between the years since completion of anesthesiology residency to the mid-point of study (2008)and median time-to-intubation for all first attempt intubations for the study. Years since completion of anesthesiology residency reported in the data table, correlation reported in the statistical analysis below|Baseline (assessed as of 2008)|||years||Full Range|Mean
828259|NCT01215422|Secondary|Time to Intubation, Stratified by Weight of Patients|To compare the time-to-intubation for these laryngoscopes in children of different weights.|4 years|Time to Intubation, Stratified by Weight of Patients||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
828260|NCT01215422|Secondary|Time to Intubation, Analyzed by Order of Laryngoscopes Used|To determine if the learning curve was altered by the order in which the two new laryngoscopes were learned by the anesthesiologist,mean and median times on intubations #16-20 were compared for the two videolaryngoscopes.|4 years|Only anesthesiologists who completed minimum 18 intubations with each scope were included. We report the mean of their mean times and the mean of their median times on intubations #16-20 when they should have attained a reasonable skill level.||seconds|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
828261|NCT01215422|Secondary|Cormack & Lehane Score|This Outcome was designed to determine if the view of the airway as determined by the Cormack & Lehane grading system is improved by use of the GlideScope (GS) video laryngoscope and/or the Karl Storz Direct Coupled Interface (DCI) (KS) video laryngoscope as this would be a surrogate marker for utility in a difficult airway. Score is reported as a whole number from I to IV with I being an easy intubation and IV being one where the larynx cannot be visualized at all.|reported during intubation (up to 5 minutes)|Patients were excluded if the Cormack-Lehane score was not recorded.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828262|NCT01215422|Primary|Success in Learning to Use a Videolaryngoscope(VLS)|"Anesthesiologists were to perform 20 intubations with each videolaryngoscopes. #1-10 were for practice. Rapid Success was no failed intubation attempts on #11-20 and a median time-to-intubation no more than 50% longer than their baseline median time-to-intubation on #11-15 . Delayed Success was achieving these same parameters on #16-20 if they were not achieved on #11-15. Operators who did not achieve either goal were labeled as having No Success."|Up to 5 minutes per intubation|Only anesthesiologists who completed minimum 18 intubations with either laryngoscope were analyzed for the primary outcome.||percent of anesthesiologists|Participants||Number
828263|NCT01215435|Secondary|Number of Treatment Emergent Hypoglycaemic Episodes|A hypoglycaemic episode will be defined as treatment emergent if the onset of the episode is on or after the first day of trial product, and no later than the last day on trial product.|Week 0 to Week 36|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||episodes|||Number
828264|NCT01215435|Secondary|Change in FPG (Fasting Plasma Glucose) From Baseline to Week 36|Estimated mean change from baseline in FPG after 36 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 36|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828265|NCT01215435|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) From Baseline to Week 11|Estimated mean change from baseline in HbA1c after 11 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 11|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using baseline observation carried forward (BOCF)||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Error|Mean
828266|NCT01215513|Primary|Number of Participants With Markedly Abnormal Values in ECG Variables|This outcome measure included incidence of markedly abnormal changes in ECG variables (PR, QRS, and QT interval, QTcF, and ventricular rate). The figures present the number of participants with normal baseline and at least one post-baseline markedly abnormal value.|From baseline (day 0) to end of treatment (up to day 364)|Descriptive statistics provided a view of the 1-year safety of degarelix (CS42 and CS42A safety analysis set).||Participants|||Number
828267|NCT01215513|Secondary|Serum Levels of Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Over Time|PSA levels were measured over time. The figures present the median level at day 0 (n=155 participants), day 196 (n=148), day 280 (n=115), and day 364 (n=109).|Day 0, day 196, day 280, and day 364|CS42 and CS42A full analysis set (data of all participants who received at least one dose of degarelix and had at least one efficacy assessment after dosing). The figures present the median of the absolute values at day 0 (n=155 participants), day 196 (n=148), day 280 (n=115), and day 364 (n=109).||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
828268|NCT01215513|Primary|Number of Participants With Markedly Abnormal Values in Vital Signs and Body Weight|This outcome measure included incidence of markedly abnormal changes in blood pressure (systolic and diastolic), pulse, and body weight. The figures present the number of participants with normal baseline and at least one post-baseline markedly abnormal value.|From baseline (day 0) to end of treatment (up to day 364)|Descriptive statistics provided a view of the 1-year safety of degarelix (CS42 and CS42A safety analysis set).||Participants|||Number
828269|NCT01215513|Primary|Number of Participants With Markedly Abnormal Values in Safety Laboratory Variables|"The figures present the number of participants who had markedly abnormal levels of safety laboratory variables. Only the laboratory variables that had at least one participant with abnormal value are presented, more variables were included in the study.
ULN=upper limit of normal"|From baseline (day 0) to end of treatment (up to day 364)|Descriptive statistics provided a view of the 1-year safety of degarelix (CS42 and CS42A safety analysis set).||Participants|||Number
828270|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Viral Relapse|Viral relapse was defined as having reappearance of detectable HCV RNA after previously being undetectable (< LOD) during treatment.|within 24 weeks after the end of treatment|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
828271|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Viral Breakthrough|"Viral breakthrough was defined as either:
Confirmed increase of HCV RNA ≥1 log10 above nadir (nadir = lowest HCV RNA value during treatment), or
HCV RNA becoming ≥ 100 IU/mL after previously being undetectable (< LOD) during treatment"|within 24 weeks of treatment|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
828272|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With RVR Who Achieved SVR24LOQ and SVR24LOD (Genotype 3)||24 weeks after the end of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with genotype 3 HCV infection||percentage of participants|||Number
828273|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With RVR Who Achieved SVR24LOQ and SVR24LOD (Genotype 2)||24 weeks after the end of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with genotype 2 HCV infection||percentage of participants|||Number
828274|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With RVR Who Achieved SVR at 24 Weeks After the End of Treatment (SVR24LOQ and SVR24LOD)||24 weeks after the end of treatment|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
828275|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With RVR Who Achieved SVR12LOQ and SVR12LOD (Genotype 3)||12 weeks after the end of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with genotype 3 HCV infection||percentage of participants|||Number
828276|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With RVR Who Achieved SVR12LOQ and SVR12LOD (Genotype 2)||12 weeks after the end of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with genotype 2 HCV infection||percentage of participants|||Number
828277|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With RVR Who Achieved Sustained Viral Response (SVR) 12 Weeks After the End of Treatment (SVR12LOQ and SVR12LOD)|SVR12LOQ and SVR12LOD were defined as Sustained Viral Response (SVR) [serum HCV RNA < LOQ and < LOD] 12 weeks after treatment, respectively.|12 weeks after the end of treatment|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
828278|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ETR24LOQ and ETR24LOD (Genotype 3)||at end of treatment, within 24 weeks|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with genotype 3 HCV infection||percentage of participants|||Number
828279|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ETR24LOQ and ETR24LOD (Genotype 2)||at end of treatment, within 24 weeks|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with genotype 2 HCV infection||percentage of participants|||Number
828280|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With End of Treatment Response (ETR) Within 24 Weeks (ETR24LOQ and ETR24LOD)|ETR24LOQ and ETR24LOD were defined as ETR [serum HCV RNA < LOQ and < LOD] after 24 weeks of treatment or when prematurely discontinued.|at end of treatment, within 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
828281|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With cEVR12LOQ and cEVR12LOD (Genotype 3)||after 12 weeks of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with genotype 3 HCV infection||percentage of participants|||Number
828282|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With cEVR12LOQ and cEVR12LOD (Genotype 2)||after 12 weeks of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with genotype 2 HCV infection||percentage of participants|||Number
828283|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Early Viral Response (cEVR) After 12 Weeks of Treatment (cEVR12LOQ and cEVR12LOD)|cEVR12LOQ and cEVR12LOD were defined as cEVR [serum HCV RNA < LOQ and < LOD] after 12 weeks of treatment, respectively.|after 12 weeks of treatment|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
828284|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With RVR4LOQ and RVR4LOD (Genotype 3)||after 4 weeks of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with genotype 3 HCV infection||percentage of participants|||Number
828285|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With RVR4LOQ and RVR4LOD (Genotype 2)||after 4 weeks of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with genotype 2 HCV infection||percentage of participants|||Number
828286|NCT01215643|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With RVR After 4 Weeks of Treatment < the Limit of Detection (RVR4LOD)|RVR4LOD was defined as Rapid Viral Response (RVR) [serum HCV RNA < the limit of detection (LOD), i.e., < 10 IU/mL], after 4 weeks of treatment.|after 4 weeks of treatment|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
828287|NCT01215643|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Rapid Viral Response (RVR) After 4 Weeks of Treatment < the Limit of Quantification (RVR4LOQ)|RVR4LOQ was defined as RVR [serum hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) < the limit of quantification (LOQ), i.e., < 25 IU/mL], after 4 weeks of treatment.|after 4 weeks of treatment|Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as all participants to whom study treatment was correctly assigned.||percentage of participants|||Number
828288|NCT01215695|Secondary|Ease of Intubation|After completion of the procedure the intubator will be asked to score the ease of intubation. To do this, he/she will give a score from 0-100 with 0 being the easiest and 100 being the hardest.|2-4 hours after intubation|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828290|NCT01215695|Secondary|Neck Movement|One observer will video-record the entire intubation procedure. At a later time, an otherwise unrelated observer will watch the video-records and grade the neck movement during intubation. Neck movement will be classified as Grade 0: no neck movement, Grade 1: minimal neck movement, or Grade 2: moderate neck movement. Results are reported as total with mild, moderate, or severe neck movement.|30 minutes|Only those participants with available data were analyzed for the assessment. All subjects reported had mild, moderate or severe neck movement.||Participants|||Count of Participants
828291|NCT01215695|Secondary|The Number of Intubation Attempts|counted as each approach of the ETT to the glottic entrance.|30 minutes|||Number of intubation attempts||Standard Deviation|Mean
828292|NCT01215695|Primary|Intubation Time|divided into time to successfully place the glidescope (visualization of the epiglottis), time to successfully insert the videostylet (passing through the cords) and time to verified placement of the ETT (as outlined above). Interim bag and mask time, if needed, will not be included in the intubation time. More than 5 attempts or 120 s are regarded as failure of intubation. If failure to secure the airway occurs with the GVL and videostylet, then conventional difficult intubation protocols approved by the University of Louisville Hospital will be implemented.|120 seconds|||time in seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828293|NCT01215721|Primary|Time to Continence|Days to zero pad continence were assessed by patient self-reported Pad free continence declaration card.|12 months|||Days to Continence||Standard Deviation|Median
828294|NCT01215734|Secondary|Patients Receiving HD or SD TIV With a 4-fold Rise in Hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) Titers Relative to Baseline for Each of 3 Influenza Viruses|Adult hematopoetic stem cell transplant recipients at least 6 months post-transplant receiving either HD or SD TIV who had blood drawn at pre-vaccination and at 28-42 days post-vaccination and who experienced a 4-fold rise in each of three post-vaccination influenza antibody titers, relative to their baseline titers. Trivalent vaccine is for the H1N1/H3N2/B influenzas. A 4-fold rise in type-specific antibody titer is considered adequate antibody response to the specific influenza virus|Before TIV and 28-42 days after TIV|Patients who received either the high-dose or the standard dose TIV and who had blood drawn for HAI titers before TIV and at 28-42 days after TIV. Data not available for 5 HD and 1 SD patients.||participants|||Number
828295|NCT01215734|Primary|Patients Experiencing at Least 1 Solicited Local and/or Systemic Adverse Event After High Dose (HD) Trivalent Influenza Vaccine (TIV) or Standard Dose (SD) Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in Adult Hematopoetic Stem Cell Transplant (SCT) Recipients|Patients were questioned about the following adverse events related to TIV: Local: pain, tenderness, swelling/induration, or erythema at injection site. Systemic: fatigue/malaise, headache, nausea, vomiting, body ache not at injection site, fever >= 100.4 degrees Fahrenheit, or change in activity level.|Day of TIV to 7 days after TIV|Patients who received either the high-dose TIV or the standard dose TIV||participants|||Number
828296|NCT01215786|Secondary|Mean Concentration of AGN-207281 in Plasma at Day 14|Mean concentration of AGN-207281 in plasma at day 14. Plasma is the liquid component of the blood in which the blood cells are suspended. On day 14, the plasma sample collected 15 minutes post-morning dose from each patient receiving AGN-207281 was analyzed to determine the average drug concentration levels of AGN-207281.|Day 14|The analysis population included all patients that started the study and were treated with AGN-207281.||Picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
828297|NCT01215786|Secondary|Mean Concentration of AGN-207281 in Plasma at Day 7|Mean concentration of AGN-207281 in plasma at day 7. Plasma is the liquid component of the blood in which the blood cells are suspended. On day 7, the plasma sample collected 15 minutes post-morning dose from each patient receiving AGN-207281 was analyzed to determine the average drug concentration levels of AGN-207281.|Day 7|The analysis population included all patients that started the study and were treated with AGN-207281.||Picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
828298|NCT01215786|Primary|Change From Baseline in Worse Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP) at Day 14|Change from baseline in worse eye IOP at day 14. Worse eye IOP refers to the eye with the worse (highest) baseline IOP (a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye). A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement).|Baseline, Day 14|Safety population, which consisted of all patients who started the study and received treatment.||Millimeters of mercury (mm Hg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
828299|NCT01215851|Secondary|Rate of Change in Time to Sputum Culture Positivity (TTP)(Hours) in Liquid Culture Media (Days 0-14)|The TTP was measured in the Mycobacterial Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) (Bactec MGIT960) automated liquid culture system from overnight sputum. TTP rates of change were calculated for each individual patient from the slopes β1 and β2 of the bi-linear regression fitted to the data for each individual patient (TTP versus Day).|14 Days|In the case of patient dropout, their patient data were included in the analyses as long as enough points were recorded to allow curve fitting. The number of patients analyzed for this measure was 81.||time (h) to positive per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828300|NCT01215851|Secondary|Early Bactericidal Activity (EBA) Measured as the Mean Rate of Change of log10 Colony Forming Units (CFU) of M. Tuberculosis Per ml Sputum on Solid Medium Over Time (Days 7-14).|Log10 CFU rates of change were calculated for each individual patient from the slopes β1 and β2 of the bi-linear regression fitted to the data for each individual patient (log10CFU versus Day). Mean log10 CFU changes from baseline were compared. A higher slope value indicates a greater change in log10 CFU from baseline. Note that to facilitate interpretation the sign of these slopes are reversed for logCFU. A positive slope value therefore indicates a reduction in log10 CFU from baseline.|Day 7-14|In the case of patient dropout, their patient data were included in the analyses as long as enough points were recorded to allow curve fitting. The number of patients analyzed for this outcome was 80.||log10CFU/ml/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828301|NCT01215851|Secondary|Early Bactericidal Activity (EBA) Measured as the Mean Rate of Change of log10 Colony Forming Units (CFU) of M. Tuberculosis Per ml Sputum on Solid Medium Over Time (Days 2-14).|Log10 CFU rates of change were calculated for each individual patient from the slopes β1 and β2 of the bi-linear regression fitted to the data for each individual patient (log10CFU versus Day). Mean log10 CFU changes from baseline were compared. A higher slope value indicates a greater change in log10 CFU from baseline. Note that to facilitate interpretation the sign of these slopes are reversed for logCFU. A positive slope value therefore indicates a reduction in log10 CFU from baseline.|Day 2-14|In the case of patient dropout, their patient data were included in the analyses as long as enough points were recorded to allow curve fitting. The number of patients analyzed for this measure was 80.||log10CFU/ml/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828302|NCT01215851|Secondary|Early Bactericidal Activity (EBA) Measured as the Mean Rate of Change of log10 Colony Forming Units (CFU) of M. Tuberculosis Per ml Sputum on Solid Medium Over Time (Days 0-2).|Log10 CFU rates of change were calculated for each individual patient from the slopes β1 and β2 of the bi-linear regression fitted to the data for each individual patient (log10CFU versus Day). Mean log10 CFU changes from baseline were compared. A higher slope value indicates a greater change in log10 CFU from baseline. Note that to facilitate interpretation the sign of these slopes are reversed for logCFU. A positive slope value therefore indicates a reduction in log10 CFU from baseline.|Day 0-2|In the case of patient dropout, their patient data were included in the analyses as long as enough points were recorded to allow curve fitting. The number patients analyzed for this measure was 84.||log10CFU/ml/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828303|NCT01215851|Primary|Early Bactericidal Activity (EBA) Measured as the Mean Rate of Change of log10 Colony Forming Units (CFU) of M. Tuberculosis Per ml Sputum on Solid Medium Over Time (Days 0-14).|Log10 CFU rates of change were calculated for each individual patient from the slopes β1 and β2 of the bi-linear regression fitted to the data for each individual patient (log10CFU versus Day). Mean log10 CFU changes from baseline were compared. A higher slope value indicates a greater change in log10 CFU from baseline. Note that to facilitate interpretation the sign of these slopes are reversed for logCFU. A positive slope value therefore indicates a reduction in log10 CFU from baseline.|14 consecutive days of treatment|In the case of patient dropout, their patient data were included in the analyses as long as enough points were recorded to allow curve fitting. The number of patients analyzed for this outcome was 80.||log10CFU/ml/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828304|NCT01215929|Primary|Measure of Methamphetamine Withdrawal|Total score on the Methamphetamine Withdrawal Assessment scale (MAWA) based on DSMIV criteria for amphetamine withdrawal. This questionnaire is comprised of 13 items which describe symptoms associated with the cessation of chronic amphetamine use for which participants indicate severity on a 4-point scale. The minimum score indicating no methamphetamine withdrawal symptoms is 0 and the maximum score is 4 indicating that a patient has the most severe withdrawal symptom related to that question. The subscales are the 13 questions and the total score is the sum of all the scores for the 13 items on the scale. The range minium and better outcome is a lower score. The range is from 0-52. The worse outcome is reflected in a higher score.|at the end of week 4|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828305|NCT01215955|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Severe Hypoglycemic Episodes|Severe hypoglycemia is defined as an event requiring assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. These episodes may be associated with sufficient neuroglycopenia to induce seizure or coma. Plasma glucose measurements may not be available during such an event, but neurological recovery attributable to the restoration of plasma glucose to normal is considered sufficient evidence that the event was induced by low plasma glucose.|Randomization up to 24 weeks|All randomized participants except those from the excluded site.||percentage of participants|||Number
828306|NCT01215955|Secondary|The Rate of Hypoglycemic Episodes|The hypoglycemia rate per 30 days was calculated as the number of hypoglycemic episodes reported divided by the number of days at risk times 30.|Randomization through 24 weeks overall|All randomized participants except those from the excluded site.||hypoglycemic episodes per 30 day period||Standard Deviation|Mean
828307|NCT01215955|Secondary|The Number of Participants ≥65 Years of Age With Hypoglycemic Episodes (Incidence)|A hypoglycemic episode in participants ≥ 65 years of age was defined as any time a participant felt they were experiencing a sign or symptom that was associated with hypoglycemia, or had a blood glucose level of ≤70 milligram per deciliter [mg/dL, ≤3.9 millimoles per liter (mmol/L)] even if it was not associated with signs, symptoms or treatment (consistent with current American Diabetes Association 2005 guidelines).|Randomization through 24 weeks overall|All randomized participants ≥65 years old except those from the excluded site.||participants|||Number
828308|NCT01215955|Secondary|The Number of Participants With a Hypoglycemic Episode (Incidence)|A hypoglycemic episode was defined as any time a participant felt they were experiencing a sign or symptom that was associated with hypoglycemia, or had a blood glucose level of ≤70 milligram per deciliter [mg/dL, ≤3.9 millimoles per liter (mmol/L)] even if it was not associated with signs, symptoms or treatment (consistent with current American Diabetes Association 2005 guidelines).|Randomization through 24 weeks overall|All randomized participants except from the excluded site.||participants|||Number
828309|NCT01215955|Secondary|Daily Dose of Insulin Per Kilogram of Body Weight: Total, Basal and Prandial (Bolus)|Total insulin was the sum of basal insulin (glargine) that was required to manage normal daily blood fluctuations and prandial insulin that was taken at meal time. Total, basal and prandial amounts were then divided by the participant's body weight in kilograms (kg). Least Squares (LS) mean calculated using mixed model repeating measure (MMRM) analysis that included baseline, treatment, country, sulfonylurea/meglitinide use, baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) strata (≤8% and >8%), visit and treatment-by-visit interaction.|24 weeks|Full Analysis Set: all participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized, received ≥1 dose of study insulin and with values in the specified category, except participants from the excluded site.||international units/kilogram (IU/kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828310|NCT01215955|Secondary|Daily Dose of Insulin: Total, Basal and Prandial (Bolus)|Total insulin was the sum of basal insulin (glargine) that was required to manage normal daily blood fluctuations and prandial insulin that was taken at meal time. Least Squares (LS) mean calculated using mixed model repeating measure (MMRM) analysis that included baseline, treatment, country, sulfonylurea/meglitinide use, baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) strata (≤8% and >8%), visit and treatment-by-visit interaction.|24 weeks|Full Analysis Set: all participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized, received ≥1 dose of study insulin and with values in the specified category, except participants from the excluded site.||international units (IU)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828321|NCT01215968|Secondary|Time to Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of Metformin|Metformin was used as a secondary marker in the study to correlate the effect of LY2189265 on gastric emptying to the pharmacokinetics (PK) (measured as Tmax) of concomitant medications. Participants taking metformin for treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) underwent PK assessments for metformin in parallel to their scintigraphy assessments for gastric emptying.|Days 3, 17 and 31|All randomized participants who received both study drug and immediate release metformin, and had pharmacokinetic (PK) data. Those who violated protocol were excluded.||hour||Full Range|Median
828311|NCT01215955|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Weeks in 7-Point Self-Monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Profile|7-Point Self-Monitored Blood Glucose profiles are measures of blood glucose concentration taken 7 time a day at the morning pre-meal, morning 2-hours (HR) postprandial (PP), midday pre-meal, midday 2-hours post-meal, evening pre-meal, bedtime and 0300 hour (3 am). Each participant took measures over any 3 days and the average was calculated for each of the 7 time points. Least Squares (LS) mean calculated using mixed model repeating measure (MMRM) analysis that included baseline, treatment, country, sulfonylurea/meglitinide use, baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) strata (≤8% and >8%), visit and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set: all participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized, received ≥1 dose of study insulin and had values at baseline and the specified timepoint, except participants from the excluded site.||milligrams/deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828312|NCT01215955|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Week Endpoint in 1,5-anhydroglucitol (1,5-AG)|Least Squares (LS) mean calculated using mixed model repeating measure (MMRM) analysis that included baseline treatment, country, sulfonylurea/meglitinide use, baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) strata (≤8% and >8%), visit and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set: all participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized, received ≥1 dose of study insulin with baseline 1,5-AG value, except participants from the excluded site.||microgram/milliliter (mcg/mL)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828313|NCT01215955|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Week Endpoint in Fasting Glucose in Participants ≥65 Years of Age|Least Squares (LS) mean calculated using mixed model repeating measure (MMRM) analysis that included baseline, treatment, country, sulfonylurea/meglitinide use, baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) strata (≤8% and >8%), visit and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, 24 weeks|A subset of the Full Analysis Set: all participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized, received ≥1 dose of study insulin, who are ≥65 years of age with baseline fasting glucose values, except participants from the excluded site.||millimoles/liter (mmoles/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828314|NCT01215955|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Week Endpoint in Fasting Glucose|Least Squares (LS) mean calculated using mixed model repeating measure (MMRM) analysis that included baseline, treatment, country, sulfonylurea/meglitinide use, baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) strata (≤8% and >8%), visit and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set: all participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized, received ≥1 dose of study insulin with baseline fasting glucose values, except participants from the excluded site.||millimoles/liter (mmoles/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828315|NCT01215955|Secondary|Time to Reach Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Target Values|Percentage of participants is the number of participants who achieved HbA1c target values of ≤6.5% or ≤7.0% during the specified time period divided by the total number of participants who did not discontinue from the study but had not reached HbA1c target at the beginning of the specified post baseline time period (≤100 days and ≥101 days). Participants who did not experience an outcome before discontinuation or completion of the study were censored using the date of discontinuation. Participants who were lost to follow up the date of discontinuation were considered to be the date of last contact.|Baseline through 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set: all participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized, received ≥1 dose of study insulin, except participants from the excluded site. Censored participants: Study A: ≤6.5% Q1D=186 and Q3D=197; Study A ≤7.0% Q1D=120 and Q3D=134; Study B: ≤6.5% Q1D=206 and Q3D=212, Study B ≤7.0% Q1D=135 and Q3D=152.||percentage of participants|||Number
828316|NCT01215955|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Week Endpoint in Body Weight|Body weight was measured twice at each indicated visit and the average of the 2 measurements was used for analyses. Least Squares (LS) mean calculated using mixed model repeating measure (MMRM) analysis that included baseline, treatment, country, sulfonylurea/meglitinide use, baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) strata (≤8% and >8%), visit and treatment-by-visit interaction .|Baseline, 24-weeks|Full Analysis Set: all participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized and received ≥1 dose of study insulin with a baseline body weight, except participants from the excluded site.||kilograms (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828317|NCT01215955|Secondary|Percentage of Participants ≥65 Years of Age Achieving Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Target Concentration|Percentage of participants ≥65 years of age achieving HbA1c target concentration of ≤7.0% or ≤6.5%.|24-week endpoint|A subset of the Full Analysis Set: all participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized, received ≥1 dose of study insulin and were ≥65 years of age, except participants from the excluded site. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
828318|NCT01215955|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Target Values|Percentage of participants who achieved HbA1c levels of ≤7.0% or ≤6.5%.|24-week endpoint|Full Analysis Set: all participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized, received ≥1 dose of study insulin, except participants from the excluded site; last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
828319|NCT01215955|Primary|Change From Baseline to 24 Week Endpoint in Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|The change from baseline to 24 weeks in the percentage of HbA1c in plasma. The Least Squares (LS) mean was estimated from a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM) that included the independent variables: fixed effects for treatment, country, sulfonylurea/meglitinide use, visit, treatment by visit interaction with baseline HbA1c as a covariate.|Baseline, 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set: All participants who completed the lead-in period (if applicable), were randomized, received ≥1 dose of study insulin with a baseline value for HbA1C, except participants from the excluded site.||percentage HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828320|NCT01215968|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Effects|Adverse events (AEs) were considered clinically significant effects. A summary of serious adverse events (SAEs) and other nonserious AEs are located in the Reported Adverse Event section.|Baseline through 5 weeks|All enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
828341|NCT01217073|Secondary|Mean 2h-PMG Level at Baseline of the Extension Period|Plasma 2h-PMG levels were measured at baseline (Week 0) for participants who entered the extension period.|Baseline (Week 0)|All participants who entered the extension period of the study with available 2h-PMG baseline data.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828322|NCT01215968|Secondary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Metformin|Metformin was used as a secondary marker in the study to correlate the effect of LY2189265 on gastric emptying to the pharmacokinetics (PK) (measured as Cmax) of concomitant medications. Participants taking metformin for treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) underwent PK assessments for metformin in parallel to their scintigraphy assessments for gastric emptying.|Days 3, 17 and 31|All randomized participants who received both study drug and immediate release metformin, and had pharmacokinetic (PK) data. Those who violated protocol were excluded.||nanograms/milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828323|NCT01215968|Secondary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Metformin|Metformin was used as a secondary marker in the study to correlate the effect of LY2189265 on gastric emptying to the pharmacokinetics (PK) (measured as AUC) of concomitant medications. Participants taking metformin for treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) underwent PK assessments for metformin in parallel to their scintigraphy assessments for gastric emptying. AUC of metformin was calculated during one dosing interval.|Days 3, 17 and 31|All randomized participants who received both study drug and immediate release metformin, and had PK data. Those who violated protocol were excluded.||nanograms*hour/milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828324|NCT01215968|Primary|Time Required for 50% of Radioactivity To Be Emptied From the Stomach by Scintigraphy|After at least 8 hours fasting, participants received a radiolabeled breakfast containing technetium-99m-tin colloid (99mTc-tin colloid). After which serial anterior and posterior scintigraphy images were taken. Data presented are the time required for 50% of radioactivity to be emptied from stomach. The results presented are Geometric Least Squares (LS) Mean. LS Mean values were controlled for weeks.|Days 3, 10,17, 24 and 31|All randomized participants who received study drug, a radiolabeled breakfast, and had scintigraphy images taken. Those who violated protocol were excluded.||hours||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
828325|NCT01215981|Secondary|Number of Subjects With H3 Based Immune Response to Vaccine|The secondary endpoint of this study is to measure the response to the vaccine with laboratory studies including viral specific H3 immune responses (IFN-y Elispot). Response is defined as 4 fold increase in H3N1. Response is listed as a number of subjects (evaluable) that successfully responded.|8 Weeks After Vaccination|One of the 33 participants randomized to receive 1 vaccine dose died prior to the 8 week evaluation.||Patients|||Number
828326|NCT01215981|Primary|Number of Subjects With T-Cell Based Immune Response to Vaccine|The primary endpoint of this study is to measure the response to the vaccine with laboratory studies including viral specific T cell immune responses. Response is defined as 4 times above the background after a filter plate was developed. Response is listed as a number of subjects (evaluable) that successfully responded.|8 Weeks After Vaccination|One of the 33 participants randomized to receive 1 vaccine dose died prior to the 8 week evaluation.||Patients|||Number
828327|NCT01216072|Secondary|Physician-reported Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I)|The CGI-I is a rating scale allowing a physician-reported global evaluation of the subject's improvement over time. The Investigator assessed the subject's clinical change relative to the symptoms at baseline on the CGI-I, a seven-point scale, with rating as follows: 1=Very much improved, 2=Much improved, 3=Minimally improved, 4=No change, 5=Minimally worse, 6=Much worse, 7=Very much worse. The assessments were completed at Month 3 and Month 6. A lower score indicates improvement.|Month 3, Month 6|This analysis was conducted using the Full Analysis Set. The Full Analysis Set comprised all randomized patients to whom study medication was assigned. Patients with month 3 and month 6 assessments were included in this analysis. Missing values were imputed using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828328|NCT01216072|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Depression Using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II)|The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) is a 21-question multiple-choice self-report inventory. Each item is scored from 0 to 3. The questions in the BDI-II refer to how the patient has been feeling over the past two weeks specifically. The BDI-II total score was calculated by summing the 21 item scores. Final scores ranged from 0 to 63 where higher scores indicated more severe depression. If no more than 20% of the items were missing, the total score was the product of the mean response of the non-missing items and the total number of items. If more than 20% of all items were missing, the total score was set to missing. A negative change indicates improvement.|Baseline, Month 3, Month 6|This analysis was conducted using the Full Analysis Set. The Full Analysis Set comprised all randomized patients to whom study medication was assigned. Patients with baseline to 3 month assessments and/or baseline to 6 month assessments were included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828329|NCT01216072|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Health-related Quality-of-life Using the Short Form Health Survey v2 Standard (SF-36 v2)|The SF-36v2 is a validated health-related quality of life instrument used in numerous disease states, including MS. It is a self-administered survey that measures 8 domains of health including: physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, bodily pain, general health perceptions, vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems and general mental health. Additionally, two summary scale scores can be calculated: the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and the Mental Component Summary (MCS). If half or more questions within a domain were answered, then a score was calculated for that domain. Otherwise, the patient score for that domain was set to missing. If the patient was missing any 1 of the 8 scale scores, then the physical and mental component scores were set to missing. An algorithm was used to create a score from 0 to 100 for each domain score and component score. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Month 6|This analysis was conducted using the Full Analysis Set. The Full Analysis Set comprised all randomized patients to whom study medication was assigned. Patients with both baseline and 6 month assessments were included in this analysis. Missing values were imputed using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828330|NCT01216072|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Patient-reported Convenience Subscale Using the TSQM v1.4|The convenience subscale was scored as follows: questions 9 and 10 scored as 1(extremely difficult) to 7 (extremely easy), and question 11 scored as 1(extremely inconvenient) to 7 (extremely convenient). The scores of the domain were added together and an algorithm was used to create a score of 0 to 100. Higher scores indicated greater satisfaction. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Month 6|This analysis was conducted using the Full Analysis Set. The Full Analysis Set comprised all randomized patients to whom study medication was assigned. Patients with both baseline and 6 month assessments were included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828331|NCT01216072|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Patient-reported Side Effects Subscale Using the TSQM v1.4|The Side Effects subscale was scored as follows: question 4 scored as 0(no) or 1(yes); question 5 scored as 1(extremely bothersome) to 5(not at all bothersome); and questions 6 - 8 scored as 1(a great deal) to 5(not at all). The scores of the domain were added together and an algorithm was used to create a score of 0 to 100. Higher scores indicated greater satisfaction. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Month 6|This analysis was conducted using the Full Analysis Set. The Full Analysis Set comprised all randomized patients to whom study medication was assigned. Patients with both baseline and 6 month assessments were included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828332|NCT01216072|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Patient-reported Effectiveness Subscale Using the TSQM v1.4|The effectiveness scale was scored as follows: 1(extremely dissatisfied) to 7(extremely satisfied). The scores of the domain were added together and an algorithm was used to create a score of 0 to 100. Higher scores indicated greater satisfaction. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Month 6|This analysis was conducted using the Full Analysis Set. The Full Analysis Set comprised all randomized patients to whom study medication was assigned. Patients with both baseline and 6 month assessments were included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828333|NCT01216072|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Fatigue Using the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS)|The Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) is a 9-item assessment scale measuring fatigue and its effects, using a scale from 1 to 7, with higher scores indicating greater fatigue, or greater negative effects of fatigue on daily living. The FSS 9 item total score was calculated by summing the first 9 item scores and dividing by the number of non-missing items. If no more than 20% of the items were missing, the total score was the product of the mean response of the non missing items and the total number of items. If more than 20% of all items were missing, the total score was set to missing. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Month 3, Month 6|This analysis was conducted using the Full Analysis Set. The Full Analysis Set comprised all randomized patients to whom study medication was assigned. Patients with baseline to 3 month assessments and/or baseline to 6 month assessments were included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828334|NCT01216072|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Using the Multiple Sclerosis Activities Scale (PRIMUS-Activities) at Month 6|The PRIMUS activity measure is a 15-item assessment of patient-reported ADL. The PRIMUS-Activities total score was calculated by summing the 15 item scores after recoding the responses from 1 - 3 to 0 - 2. Totals scores range from 0 to 30 with higher scores indicating greater activity limitation. If no more than 20% of the items were missing, the total score was the product of the mean response of the non-missing items and the total number of items. If more than 20% of all items were missing, the total score was set to missing. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Month 6|This analysis was conducted using the Full Analysis Set. The Full Analysis Set comprised all randomized patients to whom study medication was assigned. Patients with both baseline and 6 month assessments were included in this analysis. Missing values were imputed using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828335|NCT01216072|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Experienced Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events and Death|In this analysis, patients with all (serious and non-serious) adverse events, serious adverse events and death were reported.|9 months (6 month core + 3 month Extension)|Safety Set included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
828336|NCT01216072|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Global Satisfaction Subscale of the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) at Month 6|The TSQM was developed and validated as a general measure for treatment satisfaction. It contains 14 items assessing the following 4 domains: effectiveness (sum of scores for questions 1 - 3), side effects (sum of scores for questions 4 - 8), convenience (sum of scores for questions 9 - 11) and Global Satisfaction (sum of scores for questions 12 - 14). The primary analysis was on Global Satisfaction. Question 12 scored as 1(not at all confident) to 5 (extremely confident); question 13 scored as 1(not at all certain) to 5(extremely certain); and question 14 scored as 1(extremely dissatisfied) to 7(extremely satisfied). The scores of the domain were added together and an algorithm was used to create a score of 0 to 100. Higher scores indicated greater satisfaction. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Month 6|This analysis was conducted using the Full Analysis Set. The Full Analysis Set comprised all randomized patients to whom study medication was assigned. Patients with both baseline and 6 month assessments were included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828337|NCT01216943|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Diurnal Intraocular Pressure (IOP) in the Study Eye|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. Mean diurnal IOP is the mean of the IOP values at hour 0, hour 2 and hour 8 at each visit in the study eye. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement), and a positive number change from baseline indicates an increase in IOP (worsening).|Baseline, Week 12|Modified Intent to Treat: includes all qualified patients with a baseline and at least 1 postbaseline efficacy evaluation||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
828338|NCT01217073|Secondary|Change From Baseline in FPG Levels at Week 78|Change from baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline level from the Week 78 level.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 78|Extension full analysis set population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of extension study treatment, have baseline and at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of extension study treatment.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828339|NCT01217073|Secondary|Mean FPG Level at Baseline of the Extension Period|Plasma FPG levels were measured at baseline (Week 0) for particiapnts who entered the extension period.|Baseline (Week 0)|All participants who entered the extension period of the study with available FPG baseline data.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828340|NCT01217073|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 2h-PMG at Week 78|Change from baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline level from the Week 78 level.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 78|Extension full analysis set population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of extension study treatment, have baseline and at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of extension study treatment.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828342|NCT01217073|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Plasma A1C Levels at Week 78|A1C levels were measured as a percent. Change from baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline level from the Week 78 level.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 78|Extension full analysis set population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of extension study treatment, have baseline and at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of extension study treatment.||Percent||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828343|NCT01217073|Secondary|Mean Plasma A1C Level at Baseline of the Extension Period|A1C levels were measured as a percent at baseline (Week 0) for participants who entered the extension period.|Baseline (Week 0)|All participants who entered the extension period of the study with available A1C baseline data.||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
828344|NCT01217073|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Levels at Week 12|Change from baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline level from the Week 12 level.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 12|Full analysis set defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and had a baseline measurement or a post-randomization measurement for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828345|NCT01217073|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 2 Hour-post-meal Glucose (2h-PMG) Levels at Week 12|Change from baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline level from the Week 12 level.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 12|Full analysis set defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and had a baseline measurement or a post-randomization measurement for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828346|NCT01217073|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued From Study Drug Due to an Adverse Event During the 66-week Extension Period|An adverse event is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an adverse event. Data presented below excludes data after the initiation of glycemic rescue.|Up to 66 weeks (Weeks 12 to 78)|Analysis population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of extension study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received. Participants who received glycemic rescue during the base period were excluded from this analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828347|NCT01217073|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event During the 66-week Extension Period|An adverse event is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an adverse event. Data presented below excludes data after the initiation of glycemic rescue.|Up to 70 Weeks (Weeks 12 to 78 plus 4-week follow-up period)|Analysis population defined as all randomized participamts who received at least one dose of extension study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received. Participants who received glycemic rescue during the base period were excluded from this analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828348|NCT01217073|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an Adverse Event During the 12-week Base Period|An adverse event is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a pre-existing condition which is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an adverse event. Data presented below excludes data after the initiation of glycemic rescue.|Up to 12 weeks|The all participants as treated population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received during the study.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828349|NCT01217073|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event During the Base Period|An adverse event is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a pre-existing condition which is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an adverse event. Data presented below excludes data after the initiation of glycemic rescue.|Up to 16 weeks (including 28 days following the last dose of study drug)|The all participants as treated population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received during the study.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828350|NCT01217073|Primary|Change From Baseline in Plasma A1C Levels at Week 12|A1C levels were measured as a percent. Change from baseline was calculated by subtracting the baseline level from the Week 12 level.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 12|Full analysis set defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and had a baseline measurement or a post-randomization measurement for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment.||Percent||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828362|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Total Abdominal Fat After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Total Abdominal Fat was measured by magnetic resonance imaging, and the results of the scans were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
829107|NCT01216397|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of Linagliptin in Plasma Over the Time Interval 0 to 72 Hours (AUC0-72)|Geometric mean of AUC0-72 of Linagliptin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||nmol*hr/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828351|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) Score at the End of 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|The BDI-II is a 21 question, multiple choice, self-reported inventory, and is one of the most widely used instruments for measuring the severity of depression. The 21 questions or items each had four possible responses. Each response was assigned a score ranging from zero to three, indicating the severity of the symptom, with a total possible score ranging from zero to 63. A score between zero and 13 indicates ‘minimal depression’. A score between 14 and 19 indicates ‘mild depression’. A score between 20 and 28 indicates ‘moderate depression’, and a score between 29 and 63 indicates ‘severe depression’. As such, an increase from baseline to the end of treatment, a positive value, indicates a deterioration.|Baseline (Day 1) and the End of Treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828352|NCT01217112|Secondary|Adverse Events as a Measure of Patient Safety|The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was recorded for the study duration, and the number of patients who experienced an adverse event is presented.|Day 1 - Day 92|All correctly randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment were included and analysed according to the treatment received.||participants|||Number
828353|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Appetite 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale Score After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Subjects scored their appetite daily using an appetite 0-10 numerical rating scale score where 0 = no appetite (don't feel hungry) and 10 = maximum appetite (completely hungry all the time). The mean change from baseline to the end of treatment in scores were calculated. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828354|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean % Liver Fat After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Percentage liver fat was measured by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and the end of treatment, and the results of the scan were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment in base per cent values, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||percent liver fat||Standard Deviation|Mean
828355|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Abdominal Adiposity After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Abdominal Adiposity was measured by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and the end of treatment, and the results of the scan were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
828356|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Total Fat After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Total Fat was measured by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and the end of treatment, and the results of the scan were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
828357|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Total Subcutaneous Fat After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Total Subcutaneous Fat was measured by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and the end of treatment, and the results of the scan were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
828358|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Total Internal Fat After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Total Internal Fat was measured by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and the end of treatment, and the results of the scan were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
828359|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Total Non-Abdominal Fat After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Total Non-Abdominal Fat was measured by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and the end of treatment, and the results of the scan were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
828360|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Subcutaneous Non-Abdominal Fat After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Subcutaneous Non-Abdominal Fat was measured by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and the end of treatment, and the results of the scan were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
828361|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Internal Non-Abdominal Fat After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Internal Non-Abdominal Fat was measured by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and the end of treatment, and the results of the scan were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
829108|NCT01216397|Primary|Linagliptin: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|Geometric mean of Cmax of Linagliptin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828363|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Subcutaneous Abdominal Fat After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Subcutaneous Abdominal Fat was measured by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and the end of treatment, and the results of the scans were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
828364|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Visceral Abdominal Fat After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Visceral Abdominal Fat was measured by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and the end of treatment, and the results of the scans were analysed blind by a single independent reviewer. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
828365|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Hip Measurement After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Subjects' hip measurements were taken at baseline and the end of treatment. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828366|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Waist Measurement After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Subjects' waist measurements were taken at baseline and the end of treatment. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828367|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Body Weight After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Subject's body weights were measured at baseline and the end of treatment. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
828368|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Waist-to-hip Ratio After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Subject's waist-to-hip ratios were calculated at baseline and the end of treatment. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
828369|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Body Mass Index After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Body Mass Index was calculated at baseline and the end of treatment. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
828370|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Insulin B Cell Function Measured by Homeostasis Model Assessment 2 (HOMA2) After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Changes from baseline to the end of treatment in mean insulin B Cell Function were calculated by HOMA2. HOMA2-IR is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate beta cell function (%B) as a percentage of a normal reference population (normal young adults). An increase from baseline to the end of treatment, a positive value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||percent beta function||Standard Deviation|Mean
828371|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Insulin Sensitivity Measured by Homeostasis Model Assessment 2 (HOMA2) After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Changes from baseline to the end of treatment in mean insulin sensitivity were calculated by HOMA2. HOMA2-IR is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate insulin sensitivity (%S) as a percentage of a normal reference population (normal young adults). An increase from baseline to the end of treatment, a positive value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||percent sensitivity||Standard Deviation|Mean
828372|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Insulin Resistance Measured by Homeostasis Model Assessment 2 (HOMA2-IR) After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|Changes from baseline to the end of treatment in mean insulin resistance were calculated by HOMA2-IR. HOMA2-IR is a computer model that uses fasting plasma insulin and glucose concentrations to estimate insulin resistance, which is the reciprocal of insulin sensitivity (%S)(100/%S) as a percentage of a normal reference population (normal young adults). A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||IR score||Standard Deviation|Mean
828373|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean C-peptide Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of C-peptide concentrations. An increase from baseline to the end of treatment, a positive value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||nmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828374|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Fasting Insulin Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of fasting insulin concentrations. An increase from baseline to the end of treatment, a positive value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||pmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828375|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline to the End of 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment in the Mean Serum Insulin Concentration Two Hours Post Glucose Challenge (Oral Glucose Tolerance Test)|At baseline and the end of treatment, blood samples were taken at -15 and 0 minutes prior to a glucose drink and at 30, 60, 90, 120 and 180 minutes post drink. The OGTT measured the change from baseline in serum insulin levels at two hours (120 minutes) compared to 0 minutes. The extent of the elevation in blood glucose levels following a glucose drink were compared between baseline and the end of treatment. An increase in the elevation of serum insulin levels from baseline to the end of treatment (i.e. a positive value) indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||pmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828376|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline to the End of 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment in the Mean Serum Glucose Concentration Two Hours Post Glucose Challenge (Oral Glucose Tolerance Test [OGTT])|A two-hour OGTT was performed to investigate the rate of glucose metabolism or clearance from the blood with treatment. Blood samples were taken at -15 and 0 minutes prior to a glucose drink and at 30, 60, 90, 120 and 180 minutes post drink. The OGTT measured the change from baseline in serum glucose levels at two hours (120 minutes) compared to 0 minutes. The extent of the elevation in blood glucose levels following a glucose drink were compared between baseline and the end of treatment. A reduction in the elevation of serum glucose levels at the end of treatment (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828377|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Glycated Haemoglobin Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of glycated haemoglobin concentrations. At both time points, values were calculated as a percentage of total haemoglobin. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment in base per cent values, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
828378|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Fructosamine Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of fructosamine concentrations. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||umol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828379|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Fasting Glucose Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of fasting glucose concentrations. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828380|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Serum Non-Esterified Fatty Acid Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of serum Non-Esterified Fatty Acid concentrations. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828381|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Serum Apolipoprotein B : Apolipoprotein A Ratio After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment (i.e. a negative value) in the Apolipoprotein B : Apolipoprotein A ratio indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
828382|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Serum Apolipoprotein B Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of serum Apolipoprotein B. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||umol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828383|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Serum Apolipoprotein A Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of serum Apolipoprotein A. An increase from baseline to the end of treatment, a positive value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||umol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828384|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Triglyceride Concentration by Ultracentrifugation After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of triglyceride concentrations by ultracentrifugation. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828385|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Serum Triglyceride Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of serum triglyceride concentrations. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
829109|NCT01216410|Secondary|Maternal Hemodynamics|The number of patients with systolic blood pressure decrease to less than 20 % of baseline intraoperatively|Intraoperatively|||participants with SBP< 20 % baseline|||Number
828386|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Very Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Concentration by Ultracentrifugation After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of Very Low Density Lipoprotein cholesterol by ultracentrifugation. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828387|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean High Density Lipoprotein : Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Ratio by Ultracentrifugation After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|An increase from baseline (i.e. a positive value) to the end of treatment in the High Density Lipoprotein : Low Density Lipoprotein cholesterol ratio indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
828388|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Serum High Density Lipoprotein : Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Ratio After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|An increase from baseline (i.e. a positive value) to the end of treatment in the High Density Lipoprotein : Low Density Lipoprotein cholesterol ratio indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
828389|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Concentration by Ultracentrifugation After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of Low Density Lipoprotein cholesterol by ultracentrifugation. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828390|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Serum Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of serum Low Density Lipoprotein cholesterol. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828391|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Total Cholesterol Concentration by Ultracentrifugation After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of serum total cholesterol by ultracentrifugation. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828392|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Serum Total Cholesterol Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of serum total cholesterol. A decrease from baseline to the end of treatment, a negative value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828393|NCT01217112|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Mean High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Concentration by Ultracentrifugation After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of High Density Lipoprotein cholesterol by ultracentrifugation. An increase from baseline to the end of treatment, a positive value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828394|NCT01217112|Primary|The Change From Baseline in Mean Serum High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Concentration After 91 Days (13 Weeks) of Treatment|At baseline and the end of treatment, an approximately 30 mL fasting blood sample was taken for measurement of serum High Density Lipoprotein cholesterol. An increase from baseline to the end of treatment, a positive value, indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Day 1) and End of treatment (Day 92)|The analysis population comprised all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had on-treatment efficacy data.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
828395|NCT01217229|Secondary|Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers|Blood samples for serum CSF-1, IL-34 and biomarkers of Fms inhibiton and Hodgkin Lymphoma activity will be obtained from subjects and analyzed for changes in activity.|1 year||||||
828396|NCT01217229|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|Subjects will be monitored for disease progression with contrast CT/18FDG-PET scans every two cycles. One cycle is 28 days.|1 Year||||||
828397|NCT01217229|Primary|Disease Response Using Cheson Criteria|Subjects will be monitored for response and disease progression with contrast CT/18FDG-PET scans every two cycles. Each cycle is 28 days. Response to treatment as defined by Cheson criteria will be reported via descriptive statistics. Per Cheson Criteria: Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is regression of measurable disease and no new sites (≥50% decrease in sum of product diameters of up to 6 largest dominant masses and splenic/liver nodules), and no increase in size of other nodes/liver/spleen; reduction in target lesions, no growth of non-target or new lesions; Progression is any new lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from the nadir.|1 year|By protocol||Response|||Number
828432|NCT01217892|Secondary|Adjusted Percent Change in Body Weight|To compare the percent change from baseline in body weight achieved with each of the 2 BID doses of dapagliflozin (2.5 mg BID, and 5 mg BID) co-administered with metformin versus placebo co-administered with metformin after 16 weeks of double-blind treatment.|Baseline to Week 16|Full Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and Week 16 (LOCF) values||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829110|NCT01216410|Secondary|Satisfaction|1=very satisfied, 2=somewhat satisfied, 3= neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, 4=somewhat dissatisfied, 5= very dissatisfied. Number of very satisfied subjects posted.|24 h|||participants|||Number
828398|NCT01217411|Primary|Response Rate (Complete or Partial Response) (Phase II)|Only participants with measurable disease present at baseline, received at least 6 weeks of therapy, and had disease re-evaluated considered evaluable for response. Complete Response (CR): Disappearance all lesions; Partial Response (PR): =/>50% decrease in sum bidimensional products all lesions reference baseline sum of bidimensional products of all lesions; Progressive Disease (PD): >25% increase in sum bidimensional products of lesions, or progression of any treated lesion not target lesion, or appearance of 1 or > new lesions at least 6 mm in unidimensional size. Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage for PR nor increase for PD, reference smallest sum of bidimensional products of all lesions.|12 weeks||||||
828399|NCT01217411|Primary|MTD of RO4929097 in Combination With Stereotactic Surgery (SRS)|MTD of RO4929097 in combination with SRS, determined according to incidence of DLT graded using the NCI CTCAE version 4.0 (phase I)|4 weeks|Analysis was not available due to small number of patients on the study.|||||
828400|NCT01217411|Primary|Maximum-tolerated Dose (MTD) of RO4929097 in Combination With Whole-brain Radiotherapy (WBRT)|Maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of RO4929097 in combination with WBRT, determined according to incidence of dose limiting toxicity (DLT) graded using the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 (Phase I)|4 weeks|Analysis was not available due to small number of patients on the study.|||||
828401|NCT01217463|Secondary|Relative Wound Area Regression of 40% or More at 6 Week|The incidence of wound area regression of at least 40% at week 6 was considered as an important exploratory secondary efficacy variable. The wound area regression was calculated as percentage change from inclusion at week 6 using centralized wound area data.|6 weeks|The analysis of the efficacy criteria was conducted on the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
828402|NCT01217463|Primary|Wound Closure Rate of Diabetic Foot Ulcers (DFUs) of Neuropathic Topical Daily Application of Trafermin 0.01% Spray Compared With Placebo, in Addition|Wound closure is defined as 100% reepithelialization of the target DFU, without exudate.|12 weeks|The primary analysis of the efficacy criteria was conducted on the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
828403|NCT01217476|Secondary|Relative Wound Area Regression of 40% or More at 6 Week|The incidence of wound area regression of at least 40% at week 6 was considered as an important exploratory secondary efficacy variable. The wound area regression was calculated as percentage change from inclusion at week 6 using centralized wound area data.|6 weeks|The analysis of the efficacy criteria was conducted on the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
828404|NCT01217476|Primary|Wound Closure Rate of Diabetic Foot Ulcers (DFUs) of Neuropathic Origin After a Maximum of 12 Weeks Topical Daily Application of Trafermin 0.01% Spray Compared With Placebo, in Addition to Best Local Cares|wound closure is defined as 100% reepithelialization of the target DFU, without exudates.|12 weeks|The primary analysis of the efficacy criteria was conducted on the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
828405|NCT01217515|Secondary|Assessment of Adverse Events, Clinical Laboratory Results, Vital Signs and Sensitivity Reactions|Number of subjects with adverse events, abnormal clinical laboratory results, vital signs and occurrence of any local sensitivity reactions. Data are presented where the incidence is greater than or equal to 5%.|8 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
828406|NCT01217515|Secondary|Patient's Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I)|Compared to the way you felt prior to starting the study treatment, how would you now describe your problems related to the anal fissure?” Responses will be measured on a 7-point Likert scale where 1 = substantially worse, 2 = moderately worse, 3 = slightly worse, 4 = no change, 5 = slightly improved, 6 = moderately improved, and 7 = substantially improved. Percentage of subjects scoring 5,6 or 7 was assessed.|4 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
828407|NCT01217515|Primary|Change From Baseline in Average of Worst Anal Pain Associated With or Following Defaecation for Week 4 (for the 7 Treatment Days Immediately Preceding the Week 4 Visit).|Change from baseline in average of worst anal pain associated with or following defaecation for Week 4 (for the 7 treatment days immediately preceding the Week 4 visit). Numerical Rating Scale, range 0-10 where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable.|4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
828408|NCT01217606|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Worse Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Analyzed by Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA)|Intraocular pressure (IOP) is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. IOP is evaluated at Hour 0 and Hour 2 in the worse eye, defined as the eye with the worse (higher) IOP at baseline. The mean of Hours 0 and 2 is calculated at Baseline and Week 12 in the worse eye. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement) and a positive number change from baseline indicates an increase in IOP (worsening). Data are analyzed by ANCOVA.|Baseline, Week 1, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12|Modified Intent to Treat: all randomized patients with at least one post-baseline efficacy evaluation||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
828409|NCT01217606|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Worse Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Analyzed by Mixed-Effect Model for Repeated Measure|Intraocular pressure (IOP) is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. IOP is evaluated at Hour 0 and Hour 2 in the worse eye, defined as the eye with the worse (higher) Hour 0 IOP at baseline. The mean of Hours 0 and 2 is calculated at Baseline and Week 12 in the worse eye. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement) and a positive number change from baseline indicates an increase in IOP (worsening). Data are analyzed by a mixed-effect model for repeated measure.|Baseline, Week 1, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12|Modified Intent to Treat: all randomized patients with at least one post-baseline efficacy evaluation and who have data at the noted time point (no missing imputation)||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
828410|NCT01217606|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Worse Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Analyzed by Two-Sample T-Test|Intraocular pressure (IOP) is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. IOP is evaluated at Hour 0 and Hour 2 in the worse eye, defined as the eye with the worse (higher) Hour 0 IOP at baseline. The mean of Hours 0 and 2 is calculated at Baseline and Week 12 in the worse eye. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement) and a positive number change from baseline indicates an increase in IOP (worsening). Data are analyzed using a two-sample t-test.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified Intent to Treat: all randomized patients with at least one post-baseline efficacy evaluation||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
828411|NCT01217749|Primary|Safety During Dose-Limiting Toxicity (DLT) Observation Period|Number of dose-limiting toxicities observed in the first 6 participants enrolled in treatment Groups 1 and 2|56 days for Group 1 and 28 days for Group 2|||participants who experienced DLT|||Number
828412|NCT01217749|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) at 12 Months|"Progressive disease for CLL (Hallek) is characterized by ≥1 of the following:
Appearance of any new lesion, eg lymph nodes (> 1.5 cm), de novo hepatomegaly or splenomegaly, or other organ infiltrates
Increase of ≥50%
in longest diameter of any previous site
in hepatomegaly or splenomegaly
in blood lymphocytes with ≥5x109/L B cells with enlarging lymph node, liver, or spleen
Progressive disease for B cell lymphoma (Cheson) is characterized by any new lesion or increase by ≥ 50% of previously involved sites from nadir:
Appearance of a new lesion(s) >1.5 cm in any axis, ≥ 50% increase in the SPD of >1 node, or ≥50% increase in longest diameter of a previously identified node >1 cm in short axis
Lesions PET+ if FDG-avid lymphoma or PET+ before therapy
50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any liver or spleen lesions
New or recurrent BM involvement
Increase of ≥50% in blood lymphocytes with ≥5x109/L B cells within enlarging lymph node, liver, or spleen"|From first dose of study treatment until disease progression, death, or until 12 months|||percentage of event free participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
828413|NCT01217749|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|Number of participants who had experienced at least one treatment emergent AE|From first dose of study treatment to within 30 days of last dose or until study closure|||participants|||Number
828414|NCT01217749|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Response|The primary endpoint for the study was overall response rate (ORR), defined as the proportion of participants who achieved a best overall response of complete response (CR), CR with incomplete blood count recovery (Cri), or partial response (PR), according to the guidelines from the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (IWCLL1) published in 2008 for CLL participants and International Working Group for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (IWG NHL) 2007 criteria for SLL participants, with the modification that treatment-related lymphocytosis will not be considered progressive disease, as evaluated by the investigators. Assessment of disease is based on radiological exams, physical exam, hematological evaluations and, when appropriate, bone marrow results.|The median follow-up time on study for all treated participants is 12.5 (range 0.5-19.6) months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828415|NCT01217801|Primary|Area Under Plasma Concentration|Calculation of the AUC-Time Curve will be conducted to determine bio-equivalence.|Day 1 and Day 7|All that completed a period||ng*hr/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
828416|NCT01217814|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Serum Concentration of Functional and Bound Sarilumab||Week 12|Analysis was performed in PK population of all participants with at least one non-missing serum concentration data.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828417|NCT01217814|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DAS28 Remission Score < 2.6 at Week 12||Week 12|As the number of participants randomized fell well below target (16 vs. 250), the efficacy data were not systematically collected or cleaned and no datasets have been created to report.|||||
828418|NCT01217814|Secondary|European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response at Week 12||Week 12|As the number of participants randomized fell well below target (16 vs. 250), the efficacy data were not systematically collected or cleaned and no datasets have been created to report.|||||
828419|NCT01217814|Secondary|Disease Activity Score for 28 Joints (DAS28) at Week 12||Week 12|As the number of participants randomized fell well below target (16 vs. 250), the efficacy data were not systematically collected or cleaned and no datasets have been created to report.|||||
828420|NCT01217814|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved at Least 70% Improvement in American College of Rheumatology Core (ACR70) Set Disease Activity Index at Week 12||Week 12|As the number of participants randomized fell well below target (16 vs. 250), the efficacy data were not systematically collected or cleaned and no datasets have been created to report.|||||
828421|NCT01217814|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved at Least 50% Improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR50) Core Set Disease Activity Index at Week 12||Week 12|As the number of participants randomized fell well below target (16 vs. 250), the efficacy data were not systematically collected or cleaned and no datasets have been created to report.|||||
828422|NCT01217814|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved at Least 20% Improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) Core Set Disease Activity Index at Week 12||Week 12|As the number of participants randomized fell well below target (16 vs. 250), the efficacy data were not systematically collected or cleaned and no datasets have been created to report.|||||
828423|NCT01217827|Primary|Referral for Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator||6 months|||participants|||Number
828424|NCT01217840|Secondary|Inflammatory Cytokines||6 months||||||
828425|NCT01217840|Secondary|Blood Pressure||6 months||||||
828426|NCT01217840|Secondary|Glucose Metabolism||6 months||||||
828427|NCT01217840|Secondary|Lipid Profile||6 months||||||
828428|NCT01217840|Primary|25OH Vitamin D||6 months|||ng/mL||Standard Error|Mean
828429|NCT01217892|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With HbA1c<7.0% at Week 16, in Participants Who Had HbA1c ≥7.0% at Baseline.|To compare the adjusted proportions controlling for baseline HbA1c [acc. to Zhang, Tsiatis & Davidian and Davidian, Tsiatis, Zhang & Lu] of participants with HbA1c <7.0% achieved with each of the 2 BID doses of dapagliflozin (2.5 mg BID and 5 mg BID) co-administered with metformin versus placebo co-administered with metformin after 16 weeks of double-blind treatment, in patients who had HbA1c ≥7.0% at baseline.|Baseline to Week 16|Full Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and Week 16 (LOCF) values||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828430|NCT01217892|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 16|To compare the change from baseline in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) achieved with each of the 2 BID doses of dapagliflozin (2.5 mg BID and 5 mg BID) co-administered with metformin versus placebo co-administered with metformin after 16 weeks of double-blind treatment.|Baseline to Week 16|Full Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and Week 16 (LOCF) values||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828431|NCT01217892|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 1|To compare the change from baseline in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) achieved with each of the 2 BID doses of dapagliflozin (2.5 mg BID and 5 mg BID) co-administered with metformin versus placebo co-administered with metformin after 1 week of double-blind treatment.|Baseline to Week 1|Full Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and Week 1 values||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829111|NCT01216410|Secondary|Pruritus||0-24 hrs|||participants|||Number
829112|NCT01216410|Secondary|Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV)||0-2h, 2-6h, 6-24h|||participants|||Number
828433|NCT01217892|Primary|Adjusted Mean Change in HbA1c Levels|To compare the change from baseline in HbA1c achieved with each of the 2 BID doses of dapagliflozin (2.5 mg BID and 5 mg BID) co-administered with metformin versus placebo co-administered with metformin after 16 weeks of double-blind treatment.|Baseline to Week 16|Full Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and Week 16 (LOCF) values||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828434|NCT01217944|Secondary|Number of Ranibizumab Injections Received by Patients Randomized to vPDT With Ranibizumab From Month 3 by Period|Number of ranibizumab injections received by patients randomized to the vPDT with ranibizumab groups, by period.|Month 3 up to month 12|The Safety Set consisted of all patients who received at least one application of study treatment (ranibizumab [sham] and/or vPDT [sham]) and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment.||injections||Standard Deviation|Mean
828435|NCT01217944|Secondary|Number of Ranibizumab Injections Received by Patients Randomized to the Ranibizumab Groups, by Period|Number of ranibizumab injections received by patients randomized to the ranibizumab groups, by period|Day 1 prior to month 6 and prior to month 12|The Safety Set consisted of all patients who received at least one application of study treatment (ranibizumab [sham] and/or vPDT [sham]) and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment||injections||Standard Deviation|Mean
828436|NCT01217944|Secondary|Number of Ranibizumab Injections Received Prior to Month 3|In order to describe exposure to the study drug the number of ejections was evaluated|Day 1 and prior to month 3|The Safety Set consisted of all patients who received at least one application of study treatment (ranibizumab [sham] and/or vPDT [sham]) and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment||injections||Standard Deviation|Mean
828437|NCT01217944|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Choroidal Neovascularization (CNV) Leakage in the Study Eye|CNV leakage assessment plus other choroid and retinal disorders were assessed by Central Reading Center using patient’s fluorescein angiography and color fundus photography images provided by investigators.|Baseline and Month 12|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward||Percentage of Patients|||Number
828438|NCT01217944|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Central Retinal Thickness of the Study Eye Over Time|Retinal thickness was measured by Central Reading Center using patient’s Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) images provided by investigators.|Baseline, Month 3, Month 6 and Month 12|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward||Microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
828439|NCT01217944|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) ≥10 and ≥15 Letter Loss at Month 6 and 12|BCVA score was based on the number of letters read correctly on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity chart assessed at a starting distance of 4 meters. An ETDRS visual acuity score of 85 is approximately 20/20. A decreased score indicates worsening in acuity. This outcome assessed the percentage of participants who lost more than 10 or more than 15 of visual acuity at month 6 and 12.|Months 6 and 12|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward||Percentage of Patients|||Number
828440|NCT01217944|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) ≥10 and ≥15 Letter Loss at Month 3|BCVA score was based on the number of letters read correctly on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity chart assessed at a starting distance of 4 meters. An ETDRS visual acuity score of 85 is approximately 20/20. A decreased score indicates worsening in acuity. This outcome assessed the percentage of participants who lost more than 10 or more than 15 of visual acuity at month 3.|Month 3|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward||Percentage of Patients|||Number
828441|NCT01217944|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) ≥10 and ≥15 Letters Gain or Reach 84 Letters at Month 6 and Month 12|BCVA score was based on the number of letters read correctly on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity chart assessed at a starting distance of 4 meters. An increased score indicates improvement in acuity. This outcome assessed the percentage of participants who gained more than 10 or more than 15 letters of visual acuity at month 6 and month 12.|Months 6 and 12|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward||Percentage of Patients|||Number
828442|NCT01217944|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) ≥10 and ≥15 Letters Gain or Reach 84 Letters at Month 3|BCVA score was based on the number of letters read correctly on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity chart assessed at a starting distance of 4 meters. An ETDRS visual acuity score of 85 is approximately 20/20. An increased score indicates improvement in acuity. This outcome assessed the percentage of participants who gained more than 10 or more than 15 of visual acuity at month 3.|Month 3|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward||Percentage of Patients|||Number
828443|NCT01217944|Secondary|Average Change From Baseline to Month 1 Through Month 12 in Visual Acuity of the Study Eye|The Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was tested using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Visual Acuity (VA) testing protocol. VA measurements were taken in a sitting position at an initial test distance of 4 meters using ETDRS charts at baseline and Month 1 through 12|Baseline and Month 1 through Month 12|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
828444|NCT01217944|Secondary|Average Change From Baseline to Month 6 in Visual Acuity of the Study Eye|The Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was tested using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Visual Acuity (VA) testing protocol. VA measurements were taken in a sitting position at an initial test distance of 4 meters using ETDRS charts at baseline and month 6. The overall BCVA score was calculated using the BCVA worksheet.|Baseline and Month 6|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
828445|NCT01217944|Primary|Average Change From Baseline to Month 1 Through Month 3 on Visual Acuity of the Study Eye|The Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was tested using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Visual Acuity (VA) testing protocol. VA measurements were taken in a sitting position at an initial test distance of 4 meters using ETDRS charts at baseline and compared to the average from month 1 to month 3.|Baseline, Month 1 through Month 3|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis. Missing data were imputed with Last Observation Carried Forward||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
828446|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 2: 1 Year Survival Rate|1-year survival rate is defined as the percentage of participants still alive at year after the first dose of stud drug.|1 year after first dose of study drug|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828447|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 2: Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was measured as the time in months from the first dose of study treatment to the date of the first documented PD or death.|Up to 787 days|The mITT population was defined as all patients who received at least one dose of any study drug in phase 2 or who received at least one dose of any study drug and were treated at the phase 2 dose level during phase 1.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828448|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 2: Duration of Response (DOR)|DOR was measured as the time in months from the date of first documentation of a confirmed response (CR + PR+ VGPR) to the date of the first documented disease progression (PD). Response was assessed by the investigator using International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Criteria. CR=negative immunofixation on the serum and urine and disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and < 5% plasma cells in bone marrow. VGPR=Serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or 90% or greater reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein level < 100 mg per 24 hours.|Up to 787 days|Participants from the Response Evaluable Population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least one post-baseline disease assessment, with data available for analysis. Patients who did not experience PD were censored at the last response assessment that was SD or better.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828449|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 2: Time to Best Response|Time to Best Response was measured as the time in months from the first dose of study treatment to the date of first documented documentation of a confirmed response of partial response (PR) or better.|Up to 787 days|Participants form the response-evaluable population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least one post-baseline disease assessment, with available data.||months||Full Range|Median
828450|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR), Stringent Complete Response (sCR), Very Good Partial Response (VGPR), Near Complete Response (nCR), Partial Response (PR) and Minimal Response (MR)|Response was assessed by the investigator using International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Criteria. CR=Negative immunofixation on the serum and urine + Disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and < 5% plasma cells in bone marrow. sCR= CR + Normal free light chain (FLC) ratio and Absence of clonal cells in bone marrow. PR=≥50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction in 24-hour urinary M-protein by ≥90% or to < 200 mg per 24 hours. VGPR= Serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or 90% or greater reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein level < 100 mg per 24 hours. nCR=Positive immunofixation analysis of serum or urine as the only evidence of disease. Disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and < 5% plasma cells in bone marrow. MR=25% to 49% reduction in serum paraprotein and 50% to 89% reduction in urine light chain excretion for 6 weeks.|Cycles 3, 6, 9 and 12 (Up to 787 days)|The response-evaluable population was defined as all patients who received at least one dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least one post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828451|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) and Very Good Partial Response (VGPR)|Response was assessed by the investigator using International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Criteria. CR is defined as negative immunofixation on the serum and urine and; disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and; < 5% plasma cells in bone marrow. VGPR is defined as Serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or 90% or greater reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein level < 100 mg per 24 hours.|After Cycles 3, 6 and 9 (Up to 787 days)|The response-evaluable population was defined as all patients who received at least one dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least one post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828452|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 2: Overall Response Rate (ORR)|ORR was defined as the percentage of participants with CR, VGPR and Partial Response (PR) assessed by the investigator using IMWG criteria. CR=Negative immunofixation on the serum and urine + Disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and < 5% plasma cells in bone marrow. PR=50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction in 24-hour urinary M-protein by 90% or to < 200 mg per 24 hours. VGPR= Serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or 90% or greater reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein level < 100 mg per 24 hours.|Up to 787 days|The response-evaluable population was defined as all patients who received at least one dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least one post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828453|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 2: Overall Survival (OS)|OS was measured as the time in months from the first dose of study treatment to the date of death + 1 day.|From the first dose of study treatment to the date of death (up to 787 days)|Safety Population included al participants who received 1 of the 3 study drugs. Participants who did not die were censored at the last study visit.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828454|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 2: Time to Progression (TTP)|TTP was measured as the time in months from the first dose of study treatment to the date of the first documented progressive disease (PD).|From the first dose of study treatment to the date of first documented progressive disease (Up to 787 days)|The modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population was defined as all patients who received at least one dose of any study drug in phase 2 or who received at least one dose of any study drug and were treated at the phase 2 dose level during phase 1.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828478|NCT01218243|Secondary|Change of International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at the 18th Week|International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) Range:0-35(0 is best，35 is worst, ordinal),18 week mean minus baseline mean.|baseline and the 18th week|The data analysis of the secondary outcome was based on the ITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828455|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 1: TEmax: Time to the Maximum Observed Inhibition of Whole Blood 20S Proteasome|TEmax is the time to the maximum observed inhibition of whole blood 20S proteasome. The pharmacodynamics 20S Proteasome samples were collected and the assays were performed; however, concerns about the third-party laboratory’s performance of the blood 20S proteasome activity assay were identified that precluded the ability to confirm the accuracy of the data so no data is reported.|Day 1 predose and at multiple time points (up to 168 hours) postdose and Day 15 predose and at multiple time points (up to 336 hours) postdose||||||
828456|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 1: Emax: Maximum Observed Inhibition of Whole Blood 20S Proteasome|Emax is the maximum observed inhibition of whole blood 20S proteasome. The pharmacodynamics 20S Proteasome samples were collected and the assays were performed; however, concerns about the third-party laboratory’s performance of the blood 20S proteasome activity assay were identified that precluded the ability to confirm the accuracy of the data so no data is reported.|Day 1 predose and at multiple time points (up to 168 hours) postdose and Day 15 predose and at multiple time points (up to 336 hours) postdose||||||
828457|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 1: Rac: Accumulation Ratio of Ixazomib|The accumulation ratio (Rac) was estimated as the ratio of AUC(0-168) on Day 15 to the AUC(0-168) on Day 1. AUC(0-168) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 168 hours postdose for ixazomib.|Cycle 1, Day 15|The Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis population, defined as all patients enrolled in the phase 1 portion of the study who had sufficient dosing data and ixazomib concentration-time data to permit calculation of ixazomib pharmacokinetic parameters, with available data.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
828458|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 1: AUC(0-168): Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to 168 Hours Postdose for Ixazomib|AUC(0-168) is a measure of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 168 hours postdose for Ixazomib.|Cycle 1, Days 1 and 15|The Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis population, defined as all patients enrolled in the phase 1 portion of the study who had sufficient dosing data and ixazomib concentration-time data to permit calculation of ixazomib pharmacokinetic parameters, with available data.||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
828459|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 1: Tmax: Time to Reach the Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Ixazomib|Tmax: Time to reach the first maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax), equal to time (hours) to Cmax, obtained directly from the plasma concentration-time curve.|Cycle 1, Days 1 and 15|The Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis population, defined as all patients enrolled in the phase 1 portion of the study who had sufficient dosing data and ixazomib concentration-time data to permit calculation of ixazomib pharmacokinetic parameters, with data available.||hours||Full Range|Median
828460|NCT01217957|Secondary|Phase 1: Cmax: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration for Ixazomib|Cmax: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) is the peak plasma concentration of ixazomib obtained directly from the plasma concentration-time curve.|Cycle 1, Days 1 and 15|The Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis population, defined as all patients enrolled in the phase 1 portion of the study who had sufficient dosing data and ixazomib concentration-time data to permit calculation of ixazomib pharmacokinetic parameters, with available data.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
828461|NCT01217957|Primary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Grade 3 or Higher AEs, SAEs and Treatment Discontinuation|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (example, a clinically significant abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a drug, whether or not it is considered related to the drug. A serious adverse event (SAE) is an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; or congenital anomaly; or a medically important event.|Until occurrence of progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity (Up to 787 days)|The safety population was defined as all patients who received at least one dose of any of the 3 study drugs.||percentage of participants|||Number
828462|NCT01217957|Primary|Phase 1: Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Ixazomib Administered Weekly in Combination With Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone|MTD of ixazomib will be determined by assessing adverse events and serious adverse events, clinical laboratory values, neurotoxicity grading, and vital sign measurements.|Until occurrence of progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity (Up to 336 days)|All Phase 1 participants.||mg/m^2|||Number
828463|NCT01217957|Primary|Phase 1: Recommended Phase 2 Dose of Ixazomib Given in Combination With Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone|RP2D will be determined based on number and type of adverse event and serious adverse events, assessments of clinical laboratory values, neurotoxicity grading, and treatment discontinuation.|Until occurrence of progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity (Up to 336 days)|All Phase 1 participants.||mg/m^2|||Number
828464|NCT01217957|Primary|Phase 2: Objective Response Rate (ORR) Following Treatment With the Combination Of Oral Ixazomib, Lenalidomide And Low-Dose Dexamethasone|ORR was defined as the percentage of participants with Complete (CR) + Very Good Partial Response (VGPR) assessed by the investigatory using International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Criteria. CR=Negative immunofixation on the serum and urine and; disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and; < 5% plasma cells in bone marrow. VGPR=Serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or; 90% or greater reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein level < 100 mg per 24 hours.|Until occurrence of progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity (Up to 787 days)|Participants from the response-evaluable population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least one post-baseline disease assessment, with available data.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828479|NCT01218243|Secondary|Change of Maximum Urinary Flow Rate(Qmax)at the 6th Week|Maximum urinary flow rate was used to assess the bladder function, 6 week mean minus baseline mean|baseline and the 6th week|The data analysis of the secondary outcome was based on the ITT population.||ml/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
828480|NCT01218243|Secondary|Change of Bladder Residual Urine at the 6th Week|Bladder residual urine was used to assess the bladder function, 6 week mean minus baseline mean|baseline and the 6th week|The data analysis of the secondary outcome was based on the ITT population.||ml||Full Range|Median
829113|NCT01216410|Primary|Intraoperative Nausea and Vomiting|Comparison of intraoperative nausea and vomiting between the 3 groups.|Intraoperatively|||participants|||Number
828465|NCT01217957|Primary|Phase 1: Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (example, a clinically significant abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a drug, whether or not it is considered related to the drug. A serious adverse event (SAE) is an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; or congenital anomaly; or a medically important event.|Until occurrence of progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity (Up to 336 days)|The safety population was defined as all patients who received at least one dose of any of the 3 study drugs.||participants|||Number
828466|NCT01218009|Post-Hoc|Pulse at Screening and End of Study|Vital sign measurements (heart rate and blood pressure) were evaluated as part of the safety profile assessment. The participant was seated at least 2 minutes before vital signs were performed. Heart rate was measured by radial pulse.|Days -15 to -8 (Screening), up to Day 49 (End of study)|Safety population||beats/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
828467|NCT01218009|Post-Hoc|Blood Pressure at Screening and End of Study|Vital sign measurements (heart rate and blood pressure) were evaluated as part of the safety profile assessment. The participant was seated at least 2 minutes before vital signs were performed. Either an electronic or manual sphygmomanometer was used.|Days -15 to -8 (Screening), up to Day 49 (End of study)|Safety population||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
828468|NCT01218009|Primary|Changes From Screening in the Vital Signs That Are Clinically Significant in the Opinion of the Investigator|Vital sign measurements (heart rate and blood pressure) were to be evaluated as part of the safety profile assessment. The participant was to be seated at least 2 minutes before vital signs were performed. Either an electronic or manual sphygmomanometer could be used.|Days -15 to -8 (Screening), Week 12, Week 52|Safety population. The study was terminated prior to the during study evaluations.|||||
828469|NCT01218009|Primary|Changes From Screening in the Results of the Electrocardiograms (ECGs) That Are Clinically Significant in the Opinion of the Investigator|A standard 12-lead ECG was to be performed at screening and at week 12 and week 52 (TV15) or early termination/discontinuation of the participant. The ECG recording methods were to be centralized and standardized across all study subjects.|Days -15 to -8 (Screening), Week 12, Week 52|Safety population. The study was terminated prior to the during study evaluations.|||||
828470|NCT01218009|Primary|Changes From Screening in the Results of the Laboratory Evaluations That Are Clinically Significant in the Opinion of the Investigator|Blood samples were to collected for laboratory evaluations at the screening visit and at weeks 12 and 52 or early termination/discontinuation of the participant. The blood samples were to be drawn after an overnight fast of at least 6 hours and analyzed by a central laboratory.|Days -15 to -8 (Screening), Week 12, Week 52|Safety population. The study was terminated prior to the during study evaluations.|||||
828471|NCT01218009|Primary|Changes From Screening in the Results of the Physical Examination That Are Clinically Significant in the Opinion of the Investigator|A complete physical examination was planned at study screening, week 12 and week 52 or early termination/discontinuation of the participant. At weeks 12 and 52,the qualified healthcare professional was to evaluate whether each physical finding is a new finding, worsening, improvement or resolution of an existing condition compared with the baseline physical exam. Where possible, the same qualified healthcare professional that performed the physical examination at study screening should perform all the scheduled physical examinations.|Days -15 to -8 (Screening), Week 12, Week 52|Safety population. The study was terminated prior to the during study evaluations.|||||
828472|NCT01218009|Primary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events|Adverse events (AEs) summarized in this table are those that began or worsened after treatment with study drug (treatment-emergent AEs). An adverse event was defined in the protocol as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Severity was rated by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate and severe, with severe= an AE which prevents normal daily activities. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator. Serious AEs include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, OR an important medical event that jeopardized the patient and required medical intervention to prevent the previously listed serious outcomes.|Day 1 to Day 49 (study termination)|Safety population||participants|||Number
828473|NCT01218087|Secondary|Incidence of Cardiorespiratory|daily log of cardiorespiratory events (apnea, bradycardia, oxygen desaturation) collected on a daily positioning log at the infant's bedside|daily up to 120 days|||cardioresp. events/100hrs of device use|||Number
828474|NCT01218087|Primary|Cranial Abnormalities Were Measured at Hospital Discharge|Cranial abnormality measurements were obtained at hospital discharge by orthotists blinded to the study group assignment. Cranial abnormalities include both cranial index measures and cranial symmetry measures. Cranial index (normal measurement between 73%-85%) was obtained dividing the head width (M-L) by length (A-P) then multiplying it by 100%. Cranial symmetry (normal measurement of<8mm) was obtained by calculating the difference in the right and left anterior-posterior measures.|up to 120 days|||% participant cranial abnormalities|||Number
828475|NCT01218100|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Trough Seated Systolic Blood Pressure at Week 6.||Visit 6/(Week 0) and Visit 9/(Week 6)|||mm HG||Standard Deviation|Mean
828476|NCT01218100|Primary|The Change From Baseline in Trough Seated Diastolic Blood Pressure at Week 6.||Visit 6/(Week 0) and Visit 9/(Week 6)|||mm HG||Standard Deviation|Mean
828477|NCT01218243|Primary|Change of International Prostate Symptom Score(IPSS) at the 6th Week Compared With Baseline(Per-protocol).|International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) Range:0-35(0 is best，35 is worst, ordinal),6 week mean minus baseline mean. And analysis for this outcome measure is based on per-protocol population.|baseline and the 6th week|The data analysis of the primary outcome is also based on per-protocol (PP) population as a supportive analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829114|NCT01216631|Secondary|Rheumatoid Arthritis Outcome Score (RAOS)|Change in RAOS questionnaire score|26 weeks||||||
829115|NCT01216631|Secondary|Rheumatoid Arthritis Outcome Score (RAOS)|Change in RAOS questionnaire score|16 weeks||||||
828481|NCT01218243|Primary|Change of IPSS at the 6th Week Compared With Baseline(Intention to Treat)|International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) Range:0-35(0 is best，35 is worst, ordinal),6 week mean minus baseline mean.And analysis for this outcome measure is based on ITT population.|baseline and the 6th week|The data analysis of the primary outcome was based on the ITT population(data of all participants who are randomized will be analyzed).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828482|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity. Any = Any SAE(s) regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Related = SAEs assessed by the investigator as causally related to the vaccination.|During the entire study period (Day 0 - Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
828483|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Potential Immune-mediated Diseases (pIMDs).|pIMDs were defined as a subset of AEs that included both clearly autoimmune diseases (AID) and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology. Any = Any pIMD(s) regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Related = pIMDs assessed by the investigator as causally related to the vaccination.|During the entire study period (Day 0 - Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
828484|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Related Medically Attended Adverse Events (MAEs).|MAEs were defined as AEs that resulted in medical attention (defined as hospitalization, an emergency room visit or a visit to or from medical personnel for any reason). Any = Any MAE regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Related = MAE assessed by the investigator as causally related to the vaccination.|During the entire study period (Day 0 - Day 180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
828485|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any = Any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 = Unsolicited AE that prevented normal activity. Related = Unsolicited AE assessed by the investigator as causally related to the vaccination.|During the 28-day (Days 0-27) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
828486|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms in Subjects of 5 Years of Age and Above.|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms (Gastro.), headache, joint pain at other location (Joint pain), muscle aches, shivering and temperature. Any = Occurrence of any solicited general symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Any temperature = Axillary temperature ≥ 38.0 °C. Grade 3 symptom = Symptom that prevented normal activity. Related = Symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the vaccination. Grade 3 temperature = Axillary temperature ≥ 39.0°C.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after any vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and with the symptom sheet completed.||subjects|||Number
828487|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms in Subjects Below 5 Years of Age.|Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and temperature. Any = Occurrence of any solicited general symptom regardless of intensity grade and relation to vaccination. Any temperature = Axillary temperature ≥ 38.0 °C. Grade 3 Drowsiness = Drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Irritability = Crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Loss of appetite = not eating at all. Related = General symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination. Grade 3 temperature = Axillary temperature ≥ 39.0°C.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after any vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and with the symptom sheet completed.||subjects|||Number
828488|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited Local Symptoms.|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site. Any = Incidence of a particular symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = Cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful for subjects < 5 years of age or significant pain at rest that prevented normal, everyday activities for subjects ≥ 5 years of age. Grade 3 redness/swelling = Redness/swelling above 100 millimeters (mm) of the injection site. All solicited local symptoms were considered related to vaccination.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) follow-up period after any vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and with the symptom sheet completed.||subjects|||Number
828489|NCT01218308|Secondary|Seroconversion Factors for HI Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease.|Seroconversion factors were defined as the fold increase in serum HI GMTs post-vaccination compared to Day 0. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the Flu A/California/7/09 (H1N1), Flu A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FluB/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and Flu B/Florida/4/06 (Yamagata).|At least 6 months after first vaccination (Month 6)|The ATP Cohort for persistence included, in terms of antibody response measured by the HI assay, all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measure were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
828490|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for HI Antibody Titers Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with a serum HI titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection in adults. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/California/7/09 (H1N1), Flu A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FluB/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and Flu B/Florida/4/06 (Yamagata).|At Day 0 and at least 6 months after first vaccination (Month 6)|The ATP Cohort for persistence included, in terms of antibody response measured by the HI assay, all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measure were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
828491|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for HI Antibody Titers Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains.|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with either a pre-vaccination titer less than (<) 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:40, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥ 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/California/7/09 (H1N1), Flu A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FluB/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and Flu B/Florida/4/06 (Yamagata).|At least 6 months after first vaccination (Month 6)|The ATP Cohort for persistence included, in terms of antibody response measured by the HI assay, all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measure were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
828492|NCT01218308|Secondary|Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Strains|HI antibody titres were expressed as Geometric mean titers (GMTs). The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), Flu A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), Flu B/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and Flu B/Florida/4/06 (Yamagata).|On Day 0 and at least 6 months after first vaccination (Month 6)|The ATP Cohort for persistence included, in terms of antibody response measured by the HI assay, all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measure were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
828493|NCT01218308|Secondary|Seroconversion Factor for Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease.|The seroconversion factor (SCF) was defined as the fold increase in serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) geometric mean titers (GMTs) post vaccination compared to Day 0. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the Flu A/California/7/09 (H1N1), Flu A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FluB/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and Flu B/Florida/4/06 (Yamagata).|At 28 days post vaccination (Day 28 for primed subjects and day 56 for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measure were available.||fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
828494|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had a serum HI titer ≥ 1:40. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the Flu A/California/7/09 (H1N1), Flu A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FluB/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and Flu B/Florida/4/06 (Yamagata).|At Day 0 [PRE] and 28 days post vaccination (Day 28 for primed subjects and day 56 for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measure were available.||subjects|||Number
828495|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease.|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had either a pre-vaccination titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥ 1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer ≥ 1:10 and at least a four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the Flu A/California/7/09 (H1N1), Flu A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FluB/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and Flu B/Florida/4/06 (Yamagata).|At 28 days post vaccination (Day 28 for primed subjects and day 56 for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measure were available.||subjects|||Number
828496|NCT01218308|Secondary|Titers for Serum Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against 4 Strains of Influenza Disease.|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The reference cut-off value was the seropositivity cut-off of 1:10. The 4 influenza strains assessed were the Flu A/California/7/09 (H1N1), Flu A/Victoria/210/09 (H3N2), FluB/Brisbane/60/08 (Victoria) and Flu B/Florida/4/06 (Yamagata).|At Day 0 [PRE] and 28 days post vaccination (Day 28 for primed subjects and day 56 for unprimed subjects) [POST]|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measure were available.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
828497|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting at Least One Culture Confirmed Occurrence of Influenza A or B Due to Any Strain.|To confirm influenza A and/or B disease due to any strain, a positive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) result for influenza A or B virus from a nose and throat swab obtained concurrently with an influenza like illness (ILI) was required. ILI was defined as the presence of an oral or axillary temperature ≥ 37.8 degrees Celsius (°C) in the presence of at least one of the following symptoms on the same day: cough, sore throat, runny nose or nasal congestion.|From Day 14 to Day 180|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for efficacy – Time to event, which included all eligible subjects who met all inclusion criteria and no exclusion criteria, followed their study treatment assignment and were successfully contacted at least once after the first vaccination.||subjects|||Number
828498|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting at Least One Culture Confirmed Occurrence of Influenza A or B Due to Antigenically Matched Strain.|To confirm influenza A and/or B disease due to antigenically matched strain, a positive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) result for influenza A or B virus from a nose and throat swab obtained concurrently with an influenza like illness (ILI) was required. ILI was defined as the presence of an oral or axillary temperature ≥ 37.8 degrees Celsius (°C) in the presence of at least one of the following symptoms on the same day: cough, sore throat, runny nose or nasal congestion.|From Day 14 to Day 180|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for efficacy – Time to event, which included all eligible subjects who met all inclusion criteria and no exclusion criteria, followed their study treatment assignment and were successfully contacted at least once after the first vaccination.||subjects|||Number
829116|NCT01216631|Secondary|Rheumatoid Arthritis Outcome Score (RAOS)|Change in RAOS questionnaire score|14 weeks||||||
829117|NCT01216631|Secondary|Rheumatoid Arthritis Outcome Score (RAOS)|Change in RAOS questionnaire score|8 weeks||||||
828499|NCT01218308|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting at Least One Moderate to Severe Occurrence of Influenza A or B.|"To confirm influenza A and/or B disease moderate to severe cases, a positive RT-PCR result for influenza A or B virus from a nose and throat swab obtained concurrently with an ILI was required. Moderate to severe influenza was defined as RT-PCR-confirmed ILI with:
Fever >39°C, and/or at least one of the following manifestations,
Physician-verified shortness of breath, pulmonary congestion, pneumonia, bronchiolitis, bronchitis, wheezing, croup, or acute otitis media, and/or one of the following,
Physician-diagnosed serious extra-pulmonary complication of influenza, including myositis, encephalitis, seizure, or myocarditis"|From Day 14 to Day 180|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for efficacy – Time to event, which included all eligible subjects who met all inclusion criteria and no exclusion criteria, followed their study treatment assignment and were successfully contacted at least once after the first vaccination.||subjects|||Number
828500|NCT01218308|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting at Least One Confirmed Occurrence of Influenza A or B.|To confirm influenza A and/or B disease, a positive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) result for influenza A or B virus from a nose and throat swab obtained concurrently with an influenza like illness (ILI) was required. ILI was defined as the presence of an oral or axillary temperature ≥ 37.8 degrees Celsius (°C) in the presence of at least one of the following symptoms on the same day: cough, sore throat, runny nose or nasal congestion.|From Day 14 to Day 180|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for efficacy – Time to event, which included all eligible subjects who met all inclusion criteria and no exclusion criteria, followed their study treatment assignment and were successfully contacted at least once after the first vaccination.||subjects|||Number
828501|NCT01218399|Secondary|Adverse Events|Number of adverse events as per MEDRA terms|1 week|||Number adverse events|||Number
828502|NCT01218399|Primary|Percent Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1)|"Asthma symptoms scores reported as measure of FEV1 - Forced Expiratory Volume in one second
FEV1 is given which is a standard outcome in asthma studies and is validated by the NIH (NHLBI)
FEV1 of less than 80 is indicative of severe asthma, 80-90 is moderate asthma, over 90 is mild asthma
http://www.med.umich.edu/1info/FHP/practiceguides/asthma/EPR-3_pocket_guide.pdf"|1 week|||% FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
829118|NCT01216631|Secondary|Rheumatoid Arthritis Outcome Score (RAOS)|Change in RAOS questionnaire score|6 weeks||||||
828604|NCT01211873|Secondary|Measure Blood Sample.||up to 24 hours||||||
828605|NCT01211873|Secondary|Injection-site Tolerance on the Visual Analog Scale From 0 (no Pain) to 10 (Maximal Pain).||up to 24 hours||||||
828606|NCT01211873|Secondary|Measure ECG||up to 24 hours||||||
828607|NCT01211873|Secondary|Measure Vital Signs (Supine Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressures, Pulse).||up to 24 hours||||||
828608|NCT01211873|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability.||up to 29 days||||||
828609|NCT01211873|Secondary|Number of Lesions With MRI Signal Intensity Changes After Contrast Agent Injection.||up to 24 hours as the safety is assessed till 24 hours after injection||||||
828610|NCT01211873|Secondary|Level of Diagnostic Confidence on 5-point Scale Ranging From Nil to Excellent With Poor, Moderate and High as Intermediate Grades.||up to 24 hours as the safety is assessed till 24 hours after injection||||||
829119|NCT01216631|Secondary|Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life Scale (PsQOL)|Change in PsQOL score from baseline|26 weeks||||||
828558|NCT01218477|Secondary|Number of Participants With Grade 3-4 Abnormalities on Laboratory Test Results|ALP=alkaline phosphatase; ALT=alanine aminotransferase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; ULN=upper limit of normal. Abnormalities were graded according to the Common Toxicity Criteria of the National Cancer Institute from 1 (least severe) to 4 (life threatening). ANC (*10^9): Grade 3, <1.0- 0.5; Grade 4, <0.5. Hemoglobin (mmol/L): Grade 3, <4.9-4.0; Grade 4, <4.0. Platelet count (*10^9/L): Grade 3, <50.0-25.0; Grade 4, <25. WBCs (*10^9): Grade 3, <2.0-1.0; Grade 4, <1.0. Hypocalcemia (mmol/L): Grade 3, <1.75-1.5; Grade 4, <1.5. Hyperkalemia (mmol/L): Grade 3, >6.0-7.0; Grade 4, >7.0. Hypokalemia (mmol/L): Grade 3, <3.0-2.5; Grade 4, <2.5. Hyponatremia (mmol/L), Grade 3, <130-120; Grade 4, <120. Hypermagnesemia (mg/dL): Grade 3, >1.23-3.30; Grade 4, >3.30. Phosphorus (mmol/L): Grade 3, <0.6-0.3; Grade 4, <0.3. Lipase (*ULN): Grade 3, >2.0-5.0; Grade 4, >5.0.|Day 1 to Week 80|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
828559|NCT01218477|Secondary|Number of Participants With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Drug-related SAEs, Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation, Drug-related AEs Leading to Discontinuation, at Least 1 Drug-related AE, and Dose-limiting Toxicities|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment and may or may not be related to treatment. SAE=an untoward medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Drug-related=having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug. The following drug-related AEs occurring during the first 28 days of treatment with both agents were considered to be dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs): Grade 4 hematologic AE lasting >7 days; ≥Grade 3 nonhematologic AE, despite adequate medical intervention; ≥Grade 2 AE not controlled by medical intervention and requiring treatment interruption for >7 days.|Day 1 to Week 80, continuously, with observation for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in Weeks 5-8|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
828560|NCT01218477|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Major Hematologic Response (MHR) in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Advanced Phase (CML-Adv) and Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Chronic Phase (CML-CP)|MHR was defined as complete hematologic response (CHR) or no evidence of leukemia (NEL). CHR for CML-Adv criteria: white blood cell count (WBC) ≤upper limit normal; absolute neutrophil count (ANC) ≥1,000/mm^3; platelets ≥100,000/mm^3; no blasts or promyelocytes in peripheral blood (PB); basophils <5% in PB; myelocytes + metamyelocytes < 5% in PB; no extramedullary involvement; blasts must be <5%, if bone marrow assessment (BMA) performed. NEL had same criteria, but with lower thresholds for reconstitution of PB counts, as follows: Platelets ≥ 20,000/mm^3 or ANC >500/mm^3. Confirmed MHR obtained if these criteria met and maintained for ≥28 days. CHR for CML-CP criteria WBC ≤10,000/mm^3; platelets <450,000/mm^3; basophils <5% in PB; no blasts or promyelocytes in PB; myelocytes + metamyelocytes <5% in PB; no extramedullary involvement; blasts must be <5% if BMA performed. Confirmed CHR obtained if these criteria met and maintained for ≥28 days. Nilo=nilotinib; SOR=suboptimal response.|Day 1 to Week 80|Patients without complete hematologic response at dosing start date who received at least 4 weeks of dasatinib and who had at least 1 on-treatment evaluation of both peripheral blood counts and bone marrow cytogenetic response after at least 4 weeks on treatment.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828561|NCT01218477|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Major Cytogenetic Response (MCyR) in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Advanced Phase (CML-Adv) and Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Chronic Phase (CML-CP)|Cytogenetic response (CyR) was based on the proportion of Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) cells in metaphase analysis of bone marrow. Complete cytogenetic response (CCyR)=0 Ph+ cells; Partial CyR (PCyR)=1 to 35 Ph+ cells; Minor CyCR= 36-65 Ph+ cells; Minimal CyCR= 66-95 Ph+ cells; No response= >96 Ph+ cells. MCyR=CCyR + PCyR. Nilo=nilotinib; SOR=suboptimal response.|Day 1 to Week 80|All patients without CCyR at dosing start date who received at least 4 weeks of dasatinib and had at least 1 on-treatment cytogenetic evaluation of the bone marrow data after at least 4 weeks on treatment||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828562|NCT01218477|Primary|Recommended Phase 2 Dose (RP2D) of BMS-833923 Plus Dasatinib in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Chronic Phase|The following drug-related adverse events (AEs) occurring in the first 28 days of treatment were considered dose-limiting toxicities (DLT): Grade 4 hematologic AE lasting >7 days; ≥Grade 3 nonhematologic AE, despite medical intervention; ≥Grade 2 AE uncontrolled by medical intervention and requiring treatment interruption for >7 days. RP2D was that dose at which ≤1 of 6 patients had a DLT in the first 4 weeks of treatment. If <3 patients were DLT-evaluable, up to 6 additional patients entered the same dose level. Accrual to a dose level closed if 6 patients were enrolled and <3 were DLT-evaluable. If ≥3 patients at a dose level had no DLTs when a new patient enrolled, the dose was escalated to next level. If 1 DLT was observed in <6 patients, ≥6 patients were required; if no additional DLT was observed, the dose was escalated to the next highest level. If ≥2 DLTs were observed in <6 patients, that level exceeded the RP2D, and the dose was deescalated to the next lowest level.|Day 1 to Week 80, with observation for DLT in Weeks 5-8|Participants who were dose-limiting toxicity (DLT)-evaluable (DLT-evaluable=received combination therapy on >21 of 28 days in Weeks 5 through 8 or interrupted treatment for drug-related AEs)||mg|||Number
828563|NCT01218594|Primary|Response Rate (RR)|Tumor response was evaluated with thoracic CT scans when CCRT was completed, in accordance with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Group (RECIST).|4 weeks after CCRT|Response rate (RR)include complete response and partial response.||percentage of participants|||Number
828564|NCT01218646|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection Site and Systemic Reactions After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or With Trivalent Influenza Vaccines.|"Solicited injection site reactions: Pain, Erythema and Swelling; Solicited systemic reactions: Fever (Temperature), Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia.
Grade 3 Injection site reactions: Pain - Significant; prevents daily activity; Erythema and Swelling >100 mm.
Grade 3 solicited systemic reactions: Fever (Temperature) ≥102.1°F; Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia - Significant; prevents daily activity."|Day 0 up to day 21 post-vaccination|Solicited injection site and systemic reactions were assessed in all randomized and vaccinated participants, safety population.||Participants|||Number
828611|NCT01211873|Secondary|The Quality of Images on 3-point Scale: Poor, Fair or Good.||up to 24 hours as the safety is assessed till 24 hours after injection||||||
829120|NCT01216631|Secondary|Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life Scale (PsQOL)|Change in PsQOL score from baseline|16 weeks||||||
829121|NCT01216631|Secondary|Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life Scale (PsQOL)|Change in PsQOL score from baseline|14 weeks||||||
828565|NCT01218646|Other Pre-specified|Seroconversion Against Influenza Virus Antigens After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or With Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in Participants Aged 18 Years and Older|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroconversion was defined as either a pre-vaccination HAI titer <1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and ≥ four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer."|Day 21 post-vaccination|Seroconversion to influenza vaccine antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population.||Participants|||Number
828566|NCT01218646|Other Pre-specified|Seroprotection Against Influenza Vaccine Antigens After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or With Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in Participants Aged 18 Years or Older.|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroprotection was defined as a pre-vaccination and post-vaccination titer ≥ 1:40 (l/dil)"|Day 21 post-vaccination|Seroprotection to vaccine antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population||Participants|||Number
828567|NCT01218646|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers Against the Influenza Virus Antigens After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines (TIV) in Participants Aged 18 Years or Older|Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.|Day 0 and Day 21 post-vaccination|Geometric Mean Titers to the influenza vaccine antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
828568|NCT01218646|Other Pre-specified|Seroconversion Against Influenza B Strains After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or With Trivalent Influenza Vaccines Without Corresponding B Strain in Participants Aged 65 Years and Older.|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroconversion was defined as either a pre-vaccination HAI titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer ≥ 1:10 and ≥ four-fold increase in post-vaccination titers."|Day 21 post-vaccination|Seroconversion to influenza vaccine B Strains (cross-reactive antibody) was determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population||Participants|||Number
828569|NCT01218646|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers Against Influenza B Strains After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or After Trivalent Influenza Vaccines Without Corresponding B Strain in Participants Aged 65 Years and Older.|Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.|Day 21 post-vaccination|Geometric Mean Titers to the influenza vaccine B strains (cross-reactive antibody) were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
828570|NCT01218646|Other Pre-specified|Seroconversion Against Influenza B Strains After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or With Trivalent Influenza Vaccines (TIV) With Corresponding B Strains in Participants Aged 65 Years and Older.|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as < 10.
Seroconversion was defined as either a pre-vaccination HAI titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and ≥ four-fold increase in post-vaccination titer."|Day 21 post-vaccination|Seroconversion with respect to influenza vaccine B strains (corresponding B strains) was determined in randomized and vaccinated adult participants, per-protocol population||Participants|||Number
828571|NCT01218646|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers Against Influenza B Strains After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or With Trivalent Influenza Vaccines With Corresponding B Strain in Participants Aged 65 Years and Older.|Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.|Day 21 post-vaccination|Geometric mean titers to the influenza vaccine B antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants with valid serology results for the B antigens, including results reported as less or greater than lower limit of quantitation (<LLOQ or >ULOQ).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
828572|NCT01218802|Primary|Carotid IMT|changes in carotid IMT is a good measure for cardiovascular disease progression|96 weeks|The number of participants who received a final CIMT is less than the number of participants enrolled, due in part to study drop outs and/or invalid data measures.||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
828573|NCT01218802|Primary|Bone Mineral Density (BMD)|Measured by change in bone DEXA from baseline to week 96|96 weeks|The total number of participants who received this outcome who had valid data is less than the total number of enrolled participants, due to drop outs before week 96 and/or invalid testing data from DEXA results.||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
828574|NCT01218867|Secondary|In Vivo Survival of Chimeric T Cell Receptor (CAR) Gene-engineered Cells|Immunological monitoring using both tetramer analysis and staining for the T cell receptor (TCR) will be used to augment polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based analysis. This will provide data to estimate the in vivo survival of lymphocytes derived from the infused cells.|6 years|This outcome measure was not done due to the lack of a minimum number (e.g. 4) of required durable responses in the participants. A durable response is defined as a complete response, partial response, or stable disease in at least 4 participants.|||||
828575|NCT01218867|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|33 months and 25 days|||participants|||Number
828646|NCT01212627|Primary|Determine Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Ridaforolimus With Given With Cetuximab|"the first testing will occur once the first 3 patients are enrolled and have received 1 cycle DLT's will be evaluated- if everything is ok then the next level of medication will begin
Weekly Ridaforolimus Dose Level 1 20 mg/day Dose Level 2 30 mg/day Dose Level 3 40 mg/day"|1 year|||mg/day|||Number
828647|NCT01212757|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events||Up to 5 years||12/2017||||
828576|NCT01218867|Primary|Response to Therapy|Response was assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Complete response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions. Partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD. Progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment starts or the appearance of one or more new lesions. Stable disease (SD) is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD taking as references the smallest sum LD.|6 years|||participants|||Number
828577|NCT01218958|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting at Least 1 Treatment-emergent Adverse Event (TEAE)|A TEAE is any adverse event, whether or not considered drug-related, that develops or worsens in severity after study drug administration begins (ie, from the first administration through the end of the follow-up period).|24 weeks (Baseline to Week 24)|||Participants|||Number
828578|NCT01218958|Primary|Percentage of Heavy Drinking Days Over the Treatment Period|Drinking rates were assessed from participants' self-reports using the validated Timeline Follow-Back (TLFB) method. Using a TLFB calendar, participants reported the number of days they had consumed alcohol along with the amount they consumed on each day. A heavy drinking day was defined as ≥5 drinks/day for men and ≥4 drinks/day for women.|Baseline through Week 24 (168 days)|The last post-baseline observation carried forward (LOCF) of each participant in the intent-to-treat population (all randomized participants who received at least 1 injection of study drug) were utilized for the primary efficacy analysis.||Percentage of days|Days|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828579|NCT01218971|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting at Least 1 Treatment-emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) While in Study|A TEAE is any adverse event, whether or not considered drug-related, that develops or worsens in severity after study drug administration begins (ie, from the first administration through the end of the follow-up period).|Up to 48 weeks (13 injections), not including base study|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug are included in the safety population.||Participants|||Number
828580|NCT01218984|Primary|Slope Change From Baseline for Pupil Size|Photographs of subjects' pupils were measured horizontally and vertically, 15 minutes before the first hydromorphone dose and every 15 minutes after each hydromorphone/placebo for hydromorphone dose, for up to 1 hour. Size was the product of vertical and horizontal measures. The slope, determined by linear regression, was used as a summary measure of the dose-response relationship between the hydromorphone dose and pupil size. The steeper the slope, the greater the hydromorphone effect. A slope of zero indicated no evidence of a hydromorphone effect.|4 weeks (Baseline to Day 28)|Placebo hydromorphone challenge sessions were excluded from the analysis. Results for subjects who discontinued prior to Day 28 were not imputed.||cm(2)/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
828581|NCT01218997|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting at Least 1 Treatment-emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) While on Study|A TEAE was defined as any adverse event (AE) that started or worsened on or after the administration of the first dose of study medication through 30 days after the end of study treatment.|up to 1 year|All subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug are included in the safety population.||Participants|||Number
828582|NCT01211535|Primary|Change From Baseline (Day 0) in Ocular Comfort Rating at Day 14|"Ocular comfort was rated by the participant on a continuous visual analog scale from 0-100, where 0=extremely uncomfortable, 50=neither comfortable nor uncomfortable, and 100=extremely comfortable. The participant marked a horizontal line across the scale at the point that best described, how your eyes feel right now. A positive number indicates increased ocular comfort; a negative number indicates decreased ocular comfort."|Baseline (Day 0), Day 14|All participants who received regimen, satisfied inclusion/exclusion criteria, and completed the 14-day treatment period (per protocol)||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828583|NCT01211613|Secondary|Numeric Pain Rating Score.|Self-reported level of low back pain. We used the mean of 3 numeric pain rating scales: 1) current pain; 2) worst pain in the past 24 hours; and 3) average pain over the past week. Three individual 0 to 10 Likert scales were anchored by 0 indicating “no pain” and 10 indicating “unbearable pain”. Our primary statistical analysis looked at the change in pain scores from baseline to 4 weeks (post treatment).|4 weeks (post treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828584|NCT01211613|Primary|Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index|The Oswestry (OSW) Questionnaire provides the level of self-reported impairment of activity of daily living (ADLs) due to low back pain. There are 10 items in the OSW, each rated on a Likert scale from 0-5. The total range of possible scores is from 0 -50, which is converted to a percentage ranging from 0-100. The percentage of self-reported disability ranges from 0='no impairment' to 100='complete impairment'. Our statistical analysis looked at the change in OSW score (in percentage points) from baseline to 4 weeks (post treatment).|4 weeks (post treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828585|NCT01211665|Primary|Time Course Elimination of Serum Natalizumab Concentration Following Plasma Exchange (PLEX) or Equivalent||Baseline up to 6 months|This study was stopped prematurely due to lack of enrollment; this analysis was not performed.|||||
828586|NCT01211665|Primary|Time Course Change in Clinical Laboratory Values|Clinical laboratory values included chemokines, cytokines, C-reactive protein (CRP), John Cunningham (JC) virus load, and cell count in cerebrospinal fluid.|Screening to 6 months following completion of PLEX (participants began treatment with IVMP within 2 weeks after PLEX [or equivalent]).|This study was stopped prematurely due to lack of enrollment; this analysis was not performed.|||||
828587|NCT01211665|Primary|Time Course Change in Magnetoencephalography (MEG) Results|MEG was used to map brain activity.|Screening to 6 months following completion of PLEX (participants began treatment with IVMP within 2 weeks after PLEX [or equivalent]).|This study was stopped prematurely due to lack of enrollment; no data on this endpoint was collected.|||||
828588|NCT01211665|Primary|Time Course Changes in Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)|The brain MRI data collected included: progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) lesion localization, T2 hyperintense lesion volume, and signs of cerebral edema.|Screening to 6 months following completion of PLEX (participants began treatment with IVMP within 2 weeks after PLEX [or equivalent]).|This study was stopped prematurely due to lack of enrollment; this analysis was not performed.|||||
828857|NCT01221441|Secondary|The Number of Patients Experiencing Injection Site Reactions Related to Treatment|The number of patients with observations of the administration site deemed related to treatment with either active or placebo, including arthralgia, swelling, irritation, pain, stiffness or abnormalities|2 Years|All participants receiving placebo or active treatment||participants|||Number
828589|NCT01211665|Primary|Time Course Change in Cerebral Dysfunction Using the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT)|The SDMT measures the time to pair abstract symbols with specific numbers. The test requires elements of attention, visuoperceptual processing, working memory, and psychomotor speed. The score is the number of correctly coded items from 0-110 in 90 seconds. The total score provides a measure of the speed and accuracy of symbol-digit substitution.|Screening to 6 months following completion of PLEX (participants began treatment with IVMP within 2 weeks after PLEX [or equivalent]).|This study was stopped prematurely due to lack of enrollment; this analysis was not performed.|||||
828590|NCT01211665|Primary|Time Course Change in the Global Clinical Impression of Improvement (GCI-I) Scale|The GCI-I scale is a 7-point scale that assesses how much the participant's illness has improved or worsened relative to a baseline state at the beginning of the intervention, and rates it as: 1=very much improved; 2=much improved; 3=minimally improved; 4=no change; 5=minimally worse; 6=much worse; 7=very much worse.|Screening to 6 months following completion of PLEX (participants began treatment with intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP) within 2 weeks after PLEX [or equivalent]).|This study was stopped prematurely due to lack of enrollment; this analysis was not performed.|||||
828591|NCT01211665|Primary|Severity of AEs and SAEs|AEs and SAEs were categorized as mild, moderate or severe according to the following criteria: Mild=barely noticeable to participant or does not make participant uncomfortable; does not influence performance or functioning; prescription drug not ordinarily needed for relief of symptom(s) but may be given because of personality of participant. Moderate=of a sufficient severity to make participant uncomfortable; performance of daily activity is influenced; participant is able to continue in study; treatment for symptom(s) may be needed. Severe=symptoms cause severe discomfort; symptoms cause incapacity or significant impact on participant’s daily life; severity may cause cessation of treatment with study treatment; treatment for symptom(s) may be given and/or participant hospitalized. Please see Outcome Measure 3 for AE and SAE definitions.|from the first dose of study treatment through the end of the treatment period (6 months) + a 4-week post-treatment period|||events|||Number
828592|NCT01211665|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|AE=any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: results in death; in the view of the Investigator, places the participant at immediate risk of death (a life-threatening event); however, this does not include an event that, had it occurred in a more severe form, might have caused death; requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; or results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect. An SAE may also be any other medically important event that, in the opinion of the Investigator, may jeopardize the participant or may require intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the definition above.|from the first dose of study treatment through the end of the treatment period (6 months) + a 4-week post-treatment period|||participants|||Number
828593|NCT01211665|Primary|Number of Participants Who Survived at 6 Months Following Completion of Plasma Exchange (PLEX)|Following the completion of rapid removal of natalizumab using PLEX or equivalent.|6 months|||participants|||Number
828594|NCT01211665|Primary|Time Course Change in Functional Status Based on Karnofsky Performance Status Index Through 6 Months Following Completion of Plasma Exchange (PLEX)|The Karnofsky Performance Status Index (KPSI) is an assessment tool intended to assist clinicians and caretakers in gauging a patient's functional status and ability to carry out activities of daily living. A KPSI of 100=normal, no complaints, no evidence of disease; 90=able to carry on normal activity, minor signs or symptoms of disease; 80=normal activity with effort, some signs or symptoms of disease; 70=cares for self, unable to carry on normal activity or do active work; 60=requires occasional assistance but is able to care for most personal needs; 50=requires considerable assistance and frequent medical care; 40=disabled, requires special care and assistance; 30=severely disabled, hospitalization is indicated, although death is not imminent; 20=very sick, hospitalization is necessary, active support treatment is necessary; 10=moribund, fatal processes progressing rapidly; 0=dead.|Baseline up to 6 months|This study was stopped prematurely due to lack of enrollment; this analysis was not performed.|||||
828595|NCT01211730|Secondary|Death Within 1 Year|Death following liver transplant between 1 day and 1 year|1 year|||participants|||Number
828596|NCT01211730|Secondary|Overall Graft Survival at 1 Year||1 year following transplantation|||participants|||Number
828597|NCT01211730|Secondary|Rehospitalization Rates||Within 1 year following transplantation|patients undergoing liver transplant||participants|||Number
828598|NCT01211730|Secondary|Infection Rates||Within 1 year following transplantation|patients having had liver transplants||participants|||Number
828599|NCT01211730|Secondary|Hypoglycemia|Participants experiencing hypoglycemia (glucose < 70 mg/dL) within the first 3- days following transplantation|Within first 3 days following transplantation|Patients having liver transplant||participants|||Number
828600|NCT01211730|Primary|Rejection of Liver Transplant|Liver transplant rejection determined by either biopsy or clinical criteria (>2x transaminases, clinical decision, treatment with high dose steroids and other anti-rejection medications|within 1 year of transplantation|Patients undergoing liver transplant||participants|||Number
828601|NCT01211769|Secondary|Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale (OCDS)|The Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale (OCDS) is consisted by 14 items rated 0 – 4. The minimum and maximum values possibly obtained in this scale are respectively 0 and 56, this last one, meaning the most craving possible experienced. It is a short and easy to administer scale (average of 5 minutes per self-rating), built to measure severity and improvement during alcoholism treatment trials.|3 months|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828602|NCT01211769|Secondary|Short Alcohol Dependence Data Questionnaire (SADD)|The Short Alcohol Dependence Data is a self-completion questionnaire designed to evaluate the presence and the degree of severity of alcohol dependence and consists of 15 questions. The minimum and maximum scores possible are 0 and 45 points respectively. The range of 1-9 is considered as low dependence, 10-19 medium dependence and 20 or more high dependence.|3 months|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828603|NCT01211769|Primary|"Drinking Days in the Previous Month"|The Alcohol Timeline Followback (TLFB) is a drinking assessment method that obtains estimates of daily drinking and has been evaluated with clinical and nonclinical populations. Using a calendar, people provide retrospective estimates of their daily drinking over a specified time period that can vary up to 12 months from the interview date.|3 months|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
828612|NCT01211873|Primary|"MRI Lesion Visualization (Border Delineation, Internal Morphology and Contrast Enhancement) at Patient Level for Both Pre and Paired Evaluation, Each Lesion is Scored With 3-point Scales."|"To demonstrate the superiority of combined unenhanced and Dotarem enhanced MRI (PAIRED) compared to unenhanced MRI (PRE) in terms of lesion visualization.
Unenhanced MRI refers to MRI before administration of contrast agent. Enhanced MRI refers to MRI after contrast agent injection. Pre refers to unenhanced MRI. PAIRED refer to combined unenhanced and enhanced MRI.
The measure used a specific scale with 3-point levels to assess lesion visualization. At lesion level, the scale range is from 0 through 1 to 2. Score 0 means a worse outcome and score 2 means a better outcome. Patient score is the sum of all lesion scores. Up to 5 of the largest representative lesions were assessed. At patient level, the maximum score is 10, minimum score is 0."|up to 24 hours as the safety is assessed till 24 hours after injection|The primary analysis was performed at the patient level using off-site readings by 3 readers. The number of participants for analysis depended on the number of evaluable cases (pre and paired)determinted by each reader. Only adult participants included in this data set.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828613|NCT01212094|Secondary|Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC)|The MSFC is a three-part standardized assessment tool that measures arm, leg, and cognitive function. The scoring is based on the average Z-score for all three parts of the the assessment.|0 Months|Only 5 patients per group finished Month 24 following 2 years in study drug phase of trial (2 IV doses and 3 IT doses) at the time the study was terminated for futility.||Z score||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828614|NCT01212094|Secondary|9-Hole Peg Test|"Measure of upper extremity (arm and hand) function where patients are asked to pick up one peg at a time, using one hand only, and putting them into the holes as quickly as possible until all the holes are filled and then removing them one at a time as quickly as possible. The dominant and non-dominant hands are tested twice. The time limit per trial is 5 minutes.
Trial was closed prematurely and therefore formal statistical analysis of the acquired clinical outcomes makes no sense"|0 months|Only 5 patients per group finished Month 24 following 2 years in study drug phase of trial (2 IV doses and 3 IT doses) at the time the study was terminated for futility.||seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828615|NCT01212094|Secondary|Timed 25 Foot Walk|"Measure of mobility and leg function based on a timed 25 foot walk. Patient is directed to walk as quickly as possible, with or without an assitive device, to one end of a 25foot course and this is repeated for a total of 2 times. The score is the average of the two completed trials.
Trial was closed prematurely and therefore formal statistical analysis of the acquired clinical outcomes makes no sense"|0 months|Only 5 patients per group finished Month 24 following 2 years in study drug phase of trial (2 IV doses and 3 IT doses) at the time the study was terminated for futility.||seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828616|NCT01212094|Secondary|Scripps Neurological Rating Scale (NRS)|"NRS is a quantitative assessment based on 22 parameters of the neurological exam with scores ranging from maximum of 100 (normal neurological exam) to a minimum of -10 (death due to MS). The higher the score, the better the patient's level of function.
trial was closed prematurely and therefore formal statistical analysis of the acquired clinical outcomes makes no sense"|0 Months|Only 5 patients per group finished Month 24 following 2 years in study drug phase of trial (2 IV doses and 3 IT doses) at the time the study was terminated for futility.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828617|NCT01212094|Secondary|EDSS|Trial was closed prematurely and therefore formal statistical analysis of the acquired clinical outcomes was not performed. EDSS is a clinical rating scale for disability ranging from 0 (normal neurological exam) to 10 (death due to MS) in half point increments.|0 months|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
828618|NCT01212094|Secondary|Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC)|The MSFC is a three-part standardized assessment tool that measures arm, leg, and cognitive function. The scoring is based on the average Z-score for all three parts of the the assessment.|24 months|Only 5 patients per group finished Month 24 following 2 years in study drug phase of trial (2 IV doses and 3 IT doses) at the time the study was terminated for futility.||Z score||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828619|NCT01212094|Secondary|9-Hole Peg Test|"Measure of upper extremity (arm and hand) function where patients are asked to pick up one peg at a time, using one hand only, and putting them into the holes as quickly as possible until all the holes are filled and then removing them one at a time as quickly as possible. The dominant and non-dominant hands are tested twice. The time limit per trial is 5 minutes.
Trial was closed prematurely and therefore formal statistical analysis of the acquired clinical outcomes makes no sense"|24 months|Only 5 patients per group finished Month 24 following 2 years in study drug phase of trial (2 IV doses and 3 IT doses) at the time the study was terminated for futility.||seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828620|NCT01212094|Secondary|Timed 25 Foot Walk|"Measure of mobility and leg function based on a timed 25 foot walk. Patient is directed to walk as quickly as possible, with or without an assitive device, to one end of a 25foot course and this is repeated for a total of 2 times. The score is the average of the two completed trials.
Trial was closed prematurely and therefore formal statistical analysis of the acquired clinical outcomes makes no sense"|24 months|Only 5 patients per group finished Month 24 following 2 years in study drug phase of trial (2 IV doses and 3 IT doses) at the time the study was terminated for futility.||seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828621|NCT01212094|Secondary|Scripps Neurological Rating Scale (NRS)|"NRS is a quantitative assessment based on 22 parameters of the neurological exam with scores ranging from maximum of 100 (normal neurological exam) to a minimum of -10 (death due to MS). The higher the score, the better the patient's level of function.
trial was closed prematurely and therefore formal statistical analysis of the acquired clinical outcomes makes no sense"|24 months|Only 5 patients per group finished Month 24 following 2 years in study drug phase of trial (2 IV doses and 3 IT doses) at the time the study was terminated for futility.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828622|NCT01212094|Secondary|Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS)|Trial was closed prematurely and therefore formal statistical analysis of the acquired clinical outcomes was not performed. EDSS is a clinical rating scale for disability ranging from 0 (normal neurological exam) to 10 (death due to MS) in half point increments.|24 months|Only 5 patients per group finished Month 24 following 2 years in study drug phase of trial (2 IV doses and 3 IT doses) at the time the study was terminated for futility||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828858|NCT01221441|Secondary|The Incidence of Total Knee Arthroplasty|Quantification of the incidence of total knee arthroplasty of the treated knee subsequent to treatment with TissueGene-C|2 Years|All patients that participated in the study||participants|||Number
828623|NCT01212094|Primary|Analysis of Changes in CSF BAFF Induced by Active Treatment (Rituximab) Measured 3 Months After 1st Drug Administration|This outcome is for interim analysis of the efficacy of B cell depletion from the CSF 3 months after giving rituximab or placebo into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). It compares concentration of B-cell activating factor (BAFF) before and 3 months after administration of drug into the CSF. We averaged two time-points before treatment (CSF collected 1 year apart, at month -12 and month 0) and compared it to the single time-point (month 3), which was 3 months from the initiation of drug dosing. BAFF is consumed by B cells, therefore effective B cell depletion increases levels of BAFF. The protocol-stipulated threshold for trial continuation was at least 50% increase in CSF BAFF induced by active treatment with significance level p=0.025.|3 months|For the decision to continue trial, only change from baseline to 3 months post-treatment was analyzed in patients who received active drug.||percentage of BAFF change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828624|NCT01212094|Primary|Analysis of Changes in CSF CXCL13 Induced by Active Treatment (Rituximab) Measured 3 Months After 1st Drug Administration|This outcome is for interim analysis of the efficacy of B cell depletion from the CSF 3 months after giving rituximab or placebo into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). It compares concentration of chemokine CXCL13 before and 3 months after administration of drug into the CSF. We averaged two time-points before treatment (CSF collected 1 year apart, at month -12 and month 0) and compared it to the single time-point (month 3), which was 3 months from the initiation of drug dosing. CXCL13 is released by activated B cells, T cells and by follicular dendritic cells and has been linked previously with MS inflammation in the brain and spinal cord. The protocol-stipulated threshold for trial continuation was at least 25% decrease in CSF CXCL13 induced by active treatment with significance level p=0.025.|3 months|For the decision to continue trial, only change from baseline to 3 months post-treatment was analyzed in patients who received active drug||percentage of b cell depletion||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828625|NCT01212094|Secondary|Analysis of Changes in CSF B Cell Numbers Between Rituximab and Placebo|This outcome is for interim analysis of the efficacy of B cell depletion from the CSF 3 months after giving rituximab or placebo into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). It compares absolute numbers of CSF B cells calculated as proportion of B cells (identified from flow cytometry data) in all immune cells measured in 50-fold concentrated CSF. We averaged two time-points before treatment (CSF collected 1 year apart, at month -12 and month 0) and compared it to the single time-point (month 3), which was 3 months from the initiation of drug dosing.|3 months|These patients were analyzed for the interim analysis for the efficacy of B cell depletion. Trial stipulated stopping criteria for futility.||percentage of b cell depletion||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828626|NCT01212159|Secondary|LDL Values at Two Week Interval|Participant in the self monitored arm reported LDL every two weeks. LDL goal for treatment was 100 mg/dl and subjects were followed every two weeks to observe mean LDL values.|6 weeks|No self monitoring group had LDL levels only at baseline and 6 months.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
828627|NCT01212159|Secondary|Medication Compliance|Self reported comparison of lipid medication compliance between control and intervention subjects, scale 0-4. Highest compliance value indicated by a score of 4.|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828628|NCT01212159|Primary|LDL Level Change From Baseline|Comparison of serum LDL level between control and intervention subjects|baseline to 6 months|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
828629|NCT01212172|Secondary|Pain Rating Scale|Pain during each treatment was measured subjectively by patients on a 0–10 visual analogue scale (0=no pain, 10=unbearable pain).|12 months|||Units on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828630|NCT01212172|Primary|Change in Hair Growth|% reduction from baseline hair count at time points 1 month, 6 months and 12 months [following last (5th laser) treatment]|1 month, 6 month, 12 month|||% hair reduction||Standard Deviation|Mean
828631|NCT01212185|Secondary|CIWA-Ar Scores|Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol (CIWA) scale modified to include vital sign measurements. The CIWA scale measures each of 10 alcohol withdrawal symptoms between 0 and 6 (least to worst). Also in the modified CIWA score are ratings of body temperature (0-3, normal range to increasingly elevated), pulse (0-6), respirations (0-2), and diastolic blood pressure (0-6). So the range of possible total scores on the modified CIWA is 0-77.|days 1|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828632|NCT01212185|Primary|Total Lorazepam Dosage (in Milligrams)|Total lorazepam (in milligrams) required per subject to complete detoxification|Days 1 to 5|||milligrams of lorazepam||Standard Deviation|Mean
828633|NCT01212302|Primary|Number of Participants Who Were Responders or Low-Responders of Antiplatelet Therapy as a Result of Whole Blood Aggregometry Testing (See Outcome Measure Description)|"In patients treated with aspirin and clopidogrel aggregometry was performed and depending on the results the patients were either responder or low-responder of antiplatelet therapy.
The following definitions were used for clopidogrel low response (CLR: >5 ohm when stimulated with adenosine diphosphate (ADP) 5 μM) and ASA low response (ALR: >0 ohm;stimulated with arachidonic acid 10 μM) with the ChronoLog 590 aggregometer. In the case of low-response alternative antiplatelet therapy was modified according to the study plan (see protocol section)."|2 years|Sample size calculation: With the assumption that the incidence of clopidogrel low response was at least 20% and ASA low response 10%. Choosing a power of 97.5% and a two-sided value of 0.05, an overall sample size was required of at least 400 patients. To compensate for a possible loss of follow-up, we aimed for inclusion of approx. 500 patients.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828634|NCT01212445|Secondary|Mean Participant Global Assessment of Treatment|At the End of Study Visit, the study staff asked the participant to rate their global assessment of the study treatment according to the following categories: 0 = not at all effective, 1 = a little bit effective, 2 = moderately effective, 3 = quite a bit effective, 4 = extremely effective.|From time of study drug administration up to 2 Days|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: defined as all participants randomized regardless of whether they had taken study treatment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828655|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the FACIT-Fatigue Scale Score at Week 52|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828635|NCT01212445|Secondary|Mean VAS Rating for Abdominal Discomfort/Cramping|"The VAS is a psychometric response scale which measures responses along a continuum of values. The Abdominal Discomfort/Cramping VAS uses a 100 mm horizontal line with the two ends representing opposite, extreme limits of the participant's experience with BM-related abdominal discomfort/cramping. Participants marked where they felt they resided between the two ends with a vertical line. The distance from the left end of the VAS (0 mm) to the participant's mark was measured and recorded in mm. Abdominal discomfort/cramping ratings ranged on a continuous scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 mm=None and 100 mm= Painful.
Participants completed a VAS after every BM or attempted BM. The VAS ratings recorded in the diaries for each BM were averaged (with range) to yield a single score for each participant. Participant scores were then averaged by treatment group."|From time of study drug treatment up to 24 hours|Participants in the ITT Population (defined as all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they had taken study treatment) who had data available.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828636|NCT01212445|Secondary|Mean VAS Rating for Bloating|"The VAS is a psychometric response scale which measures responses along a continuum of values. The Bloating VAS uses a 100 mm horizontal line with the two ends representing opposite, extreme limits of the participant's experience with BM-related bloating. Participants marked where they felt they resided between the two ends with a vertical line. The distance from the left end of the VAS (0 mm) to the participant's mark was measured and recorded in mm. Bloating ratings ranged on a continuous scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 mm=None and 100 mm= Severe.
Participants completed a VAS after every BM or attempted BM. The VAS ratings recorded in the diaries for each BM were averaged (with range) to yield a single score for each participant. Participant scores were then averaged by treatment group."|From time of study drug treatment up to 24 hours|Participants in the ITT Population (defined as all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they had taken study treatment) who had data available.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828637|NCT01212445|Secondary|Mean VAS Rating for Gas|"The VAS is a psychometric response scale which measures responses along a continuum of values. The Gas VAS uses a 100 mm horizontal line with the two ends representing opposite, extreme limits of the participant's experience with BM-related gas. Participants marked where they felt they resided between the two ends with a vertical line. The distance from the left end of the VAS (0 mm) to the participant's mark was measured and recorded in mm. Gas ratings ranged on a continuous scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 mm=None and 100 mm= Severe.
Participants completed a VAS after every BM or attempted BM. The VAS ratings recorded in the diaries for each BM were averaged (with range) to yield a single score for each participant. Participant scores were then averaged by treatment group."|From time of study drug treatment up to 24 hours|Participants in the ITT Population (defined as all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they had taken study treatment) who had data available.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828638|NCT01212445|Secondary|Mean Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Rating for BM Control|"The VAS is a psychometric response scale which measures responses along a continuum of values. The BM control VAS uses a 100 mm horizontal line with the two ends representing the opposite, extreme limits of the participant's experience of BM control. Participants marked where they felt they resided between the two ends with a vertical line. The distance from the left end of the VAS (0 mm) to the participant's mark was measured and recorded in mm. BM Control ratings ranged on a continuous scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 mm=Calm, not urgent and 100 mm= Not able to hold BM, very urgent.
Participants completed a VAS after every BM or attempted BM. The VAS ratings recorded in the diaries for each BM were averaged (with range) to yield a single score for each participant. Participant scores were then averaged by treatment group"|From time of study drug treatment up to 24 hours|Participants in the ITT Population (defined as all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they had taken study treatment) who had data available.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828639|NCT01212445|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Successful BM Within 12 Hours of PEG+E Administration|A successful BM was defined as a BM with no straining or hard/lumpy stools.|From time of study drug treatment up to 12 hours|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: defined as all participants randomized regardless of whether they had taken study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
828640|NCT01212445|Secondary|Number of Participants With Time To First Successful BM In 0 Days Through 0.5 Days, >0.5 Days Through 1.0 Days, or >1.0 Days Through 1.5 Days After PEG+E Administration|Time to first successful bowel movement was defined as the duration (in days) from the time of first study dose of study treatment until first successful BM (defined as BM without straining and without hard and/or lumpy stool).|From time of study drug administration up to 3 Days|Participants in the ITT Population (defined as all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they had taken study treatment) who had a successful bowel movement (no straining or hard/lumpy stools). Participants who reported no successful BMs were censored.||participants|||Number
828641|NCT01212445|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Successful Bowel Movement (BM) Within 24 Hours of PEG + E Administration|A successful BM was defined as a BM with no straining or hard/lumpy stools.|From time of study drug treatment up to 24 hours|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: defined as all participants randomized regardless of whether they had taken study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
828642|NCT01212484|Primary|24 Hour Dopamine Levels|Assay of 24 hour dopamine level excretion in urine|4 weeks|||ug/gCR||Standard Deviation|Mean
828643|NCT01212484|Secondary|Number of Episodes of Daily Nausea||4 weeks|||episodes of nausea||Standard Deviation|Mean
828644|NCT01212484|Primary|Composite Daily Score|Daily scores were reported on a modified version of the Rhodes Index of Nausea, Vomiting and Retching, which included all 5 items relating to nausea and retching. Items addressing vomiting/throwing up were omitted, as all participants had antireflux surgery that prevented vomiting (Nissen fundoplication). Retching distress, nausea distress, number of nausea episodes per day, number of retching episodes per day, and the amount of time spent feeling nauseous were graded on a 5-point scale. Scores range from 0 (no nausea/distress) to 20 (most nausea/distress).|4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828645|NCT01212627|Secondary|Check the Tolerability, and Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Several Dosing Schedules of Oral Ridaforolimus.|the first testing will occur once the first 3 patients are enrolled and have received 1 cycle DLT's will be evaluated- if everything is ok then the next level of medication will begin|1 year||||||
828918|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change in Circulating Peripheral T Lymphocytes|Circulating peripheral T lymphocytes were planned to be measured before, during and after dose 1, 4 and 8 of first treatment course. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Days 1, 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828648|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Dactylitis Score of Zero at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 52 weeks.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828649|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a MASES Score of Zero at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 24 weeks. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants with a baseline value > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828650|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 70 Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828651|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828652|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Good or Moderate EULAR Response at Week 52|"A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score.
A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.
A Moderate Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or,
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants|||Number
828653|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 52 weeks.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828654|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 52 weeks. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829122|NCT01216631|Secondary|Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life Scale (PsQOL)|Change in PsQOL score from baseline|8 weeks||||||
828656|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the DAS28 at Week 52|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the DIP joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828657|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the CDAI Score at Week 52|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8 Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10 Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22 High Disease Activity: > 22."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828658|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 52|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a baseline value > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828659|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 52|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a baseline value > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828660|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Patient Assessment of Pain at Week 52|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828661|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified PsARC Response at Week 52|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828662|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the SF-36 Physical Functioning Scale Score at Week 52|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828663|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 52|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828919|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change in CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell Counts|CD4+ and CD8+ T cells were planned to be measured before, during and after dose 1, 4 and 8 of first treatment course. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Days 1, 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||Percent total lymphocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
828664|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 20 Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population consists of all participants who were randomized or re-randomized to apremilast at any time during the study. Only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828665|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Dactylitis Score of Zero at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 24 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828666|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a MASES Score of Zero at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 24 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828667|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Dactylitis Score of Zero at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 16 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828668|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a MASES Score of Zero at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 16 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828669|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 70 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828670|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828920|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change in Total Lymphocyte Count|Total lymphocyte count was planned to be analyzed up to Month 24.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study this endpoint was not collected.|||||
828671|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 70 Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828672|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 50 Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828673|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Good or Moderate EULAR Response at Week 24|"EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score.
A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.
A Moderate Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or,
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828674|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 24 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828675|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 24 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828676|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Good or Moderate European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response at Week 16|"A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score.
A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.
A Moderate Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or,
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828677|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 16 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828812|NCT01213316|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an HIV-1 Viral Load <50 Copies/mL After 48 Weeks of Raltegravir Treatment|The percentage of participants with an HIV-1 viral load <50 copies/mL of HIV-1 RNA after 48 weeks of raltegravir treatment was determined.|Baseline and 48 weeks|The analysis set included all participants who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828678|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 16 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828679|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 24|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828680|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) at Week 24|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the DIP joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828681|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 24|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10; Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: > 22."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828682|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 24|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set. Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included. LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828683|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 24|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828684|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient’s Assessment of Pain at Week 24|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828685|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) Response at Week 24|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828686|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 24|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828687|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 16|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means “not at all,” and 4 means “very much.” The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828688|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) at Week 16|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828689|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 16|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8 Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10 Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22 High Disease Activity: > 22."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828690|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 16|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set. Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828691|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 16|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828692|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient’s Assessment of Pain at Week 16|The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents “no pain,” and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents “pain as severe as can be imagined.” The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828693|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) Response at Week 16|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828694|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 16|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828695|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire- Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 24|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828696|NCT01212757|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 20 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828697|NCT01212757|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire- Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 16|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828698|NCT01212757|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient’s self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set consisting of all participants randomized as specified in the protocol; participants who were randomized in error and did not receive any dose of study drug were excluded. Participants who withdrew early or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
828850|NCT01221350|Secondary|Induced Sputum of Glutathione (GSH)/Glutathione Disulfide (GSSG) Ratio at Baseline|Induced sputum of GSH and GSSG levels at baseline. The ratio GSH/GSSG is considered an index of antioxidant status and reductive -SH groups. GSH and GSSG were measured by a microplate fluorescent assay.|Baseline|||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829123|NCT01216631|Secondary|Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life Scale (PsQOL)|Change in PsQOL score from baseline|6 weeks||||||
828851|NCT01221350|Primary|Spirometric FVC Values at Baseline|Measurement of spirometric predicted parameters at baseline. Forced vital capacity (FVC) is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out after full inspiration, measured in liters.|Baseline|||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
829124|NCT01216631|Secondary|Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life Scale (PsQOL)|Change in PsQOL score from baseline|26 weeks||||||
828777|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Difference of Change From Baseline in Angina Frequency Between Groups|Difference in change from baseline of angina pectoris frequency between two groups after 8 weeks treatment.|After 8 weeks treatment|ITT population was defined as all randomized subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial treatment, who had measurements at baseline for one or more efficacy variables and at least one post baseline measurement for the same variables in the treatment period.||Attacks per week||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828852|NCT01221363|Secondary|Change in High Density Lipoprotein (HDL) From Baseline to 6 Months Follow-up.|Blood samples are drawn at inclusion and at 6 months follow-up. Change in measured HDL (mmol/L) from baseline to 6 months follow-up|Change in measured HDL from baseline and 6 months follow-up|||mmol/Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
828754|NCT01212874|Secondary|Title: Systolic Hypertension|Area under the curve (AUC) of Systolic Blood Pressure Excursions Beyond Predetermined Upper Limits, Normalized Per Hour from Anesthesia Induction to Initiation of Cardiopulmonary Bypass|Duration: during infusion of study drug|Data capture failure lost data from 2 treated patients in each group; these were thus excluded from analysis.||mmHg*min / prebypass hour||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828755|NCT01212874|Primary|Diastolic Blood Pressure Excursions Beyond Predetermined Lower Limits, Normalized Per Hour|Area under the curve (AUC) of Diastolic Blood Pressure Excursions Beyond Predetermined Lower Limits, Normalized Per Hour from Anesthesia Induction to Initiation of Cardiopulmonary Bypass|Participation could last up to 2 weeks, representing the day of surgery until discharge from the hospital.|Data capture failure lost data from 2 treated patients in each group; these were thus excluded from analysis.||mmHg*min/prebypass hour||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828756|NCT01212991|Secondary|Best Overall Soft Tissue Response|The best overall soft tissue objective response is defined as partial response [PR] or complete response [CR] while on study treatment based on investigator assessments of target, nontarget, and new lesions using RECIST 1.1. Soft tissue was assessed by CT or MRI at regularly scheduled visits. Only patients with measurable soft tissue disease (ie, at least 1 target lesion identified per RECIST 1.1) at screening are included in this analysis. All percentages are based on number of participants with measurable soft tissue disease at screening in each treatment group.|During study period (up to 3 years)|Intent to treat (ITT) population With Measurable Disease - All participants who were randomly assigned to treatment and had at least one target lesion at screening.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828757|NCT01212991|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Response ≥ 50%|PSA response was defined as a ≥ 50% reduction in PSA from baseline to the lowest postbaseline PSA value and required confirmation by a consecutive assessment at least 3 weeks later. Patients were evaluable for PSA response rate if a patient had a PSA level measured at baseline and at least one postbaseline assessment.|During study period (up to 3 years)|Evaluable intent to treat (ITT) population - All patients randomly assigned to treatment with PSA values at baseline and at least one postbaseline assessment.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828758|NCT01212991|Secondary|Time to Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) Progression|Time to PSA progression was defined as the time from randomization to date of first confirmed observation of PSA progression for each patient. For patients with PSA declines at week 13, the PSA progression date was defined as the date that a ≥ 25% increase and an absolute increase of ≥ 2 ng/mL above the nadir was documented, and confirmed 3 or more weeks later. For patients with no PSA decline at week 13, the PSA progression date was defined as the date that a ≥ 25% increase and an absolute increase of ≥ 2 ng/mL above baseline was documented, and confirmed 3 or more weeks later. For patients who did not have confirmed PSA progression at the time of the analysis data cutoff, time to PSA progression was censored at the date of the last PSA assessment showing no evidence of confirmed PSA progression or the analysis data cutoff date, whichever was first. Time to PSA progression for patients with no postbaseline assessments was censored on the date of randomization.|During study period (up to 3 years)|Intent to Treat (ITT) - All patients randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828759|NCT01212991|Secondary|Time to Initiation of Cytotoxic Chemotherapy|The time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy is defined as the time from randomization to the date of initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer for each patient. For patients who did not start cytotoxic chemotherapy at the time of the analysis data cutoff, time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy was censored at the date of last assessment where no cytotoxic chemotherapy was indicated or at the analysis data cutoff date, whichever was first. Time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy for patients with no postbaseline assessments was censored on the date of randomization.|During study period (up to 3 years)|Intent to Treat (ITT) - All patients randomly assigned to treatment.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828760|NCT01212991|Secondary|Time to First Skeletal-related Event|Time to first skeletal-related event was defined as the time from randomization to the date of the first occurrence of a skeletal-related event for each patient. A skeletal-related event was defined as radiation therapy or surgery to bone for prostate cancer, pathological bone fracture, spinal cord compression, or initiation/change in antineoplastic therapy to treat bone pain from prostate cancer. Skeletal-related events were recorded at each scheduled and unscheduled study visit and during long-term follow-up if a skeletal-related event was not documented previously. Patients who did not have a skeletal-related event at the time of the analysis data cutoff were censored at the date of last assessment indicating no evidence of skeletal-related event. Patients with no postbaseline assessments were censored on the date of randomization.|During study period (up to 3 years)|Intent to Treat (ITT) - All patients randomly assigned to treatment.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828778|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Difference of Change From Baseline in Angina Frequency Between Groups|Difference in change from baseline of angina pectoris frequency between two groups after 2 weeks treatment.|After 2 weeks treatment|ITT population was defined as all randomized subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial treatment, who had measurements at baseline for one or more efficacy variables and at least one post baseline measurement for the same variables in the treatment period.||Attacks per week||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828996|NCT01222533|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under the Curve 0 to 3 Hours (AUC0-3h) at the End of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 AUC0-3h calculated from zero time to 3 hours using the trapezoidal rule divided by 3 hours. Trough FEV1 will be assigned to zero time. Means are adjusted for sequence, patients within sequences, period and treatment.|4 weeks|FAS with imputed data.||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
828761|NCT01212991|Primary|Radiographic Progression-free Survival|Radiographic progression-free survival was defined as the time from randomization to the first objective evidence of radiographic disease progression assessed by independent central radiology review or death due to any cause within 168 days after treatment discontinuation, whichever was first. Radiographic disease progression was evaluated by CT scan or MRI and radionuclide bone scans at regularly scheduled visits. Radiographic disease progression in bone required a confirmatory scan. Radiographic disease progression in soft tissue did not require a confirmatory scan for purposes of analysis. Radiographic disease progression was evaluated by independent central radiology review using RECIST 1.1 for soft tissue disease and PCWG2 guidelines for bone disease. Patients who did not reach the endpoint were censored at their last assessment.|During study period (up to 20 months)|Intent to Treat (ITT) - All patients randomly assigned to treatment excluding 84 patients who were not randomized before the radiographic Progression-free Survival data cutoff date of 06 May 2012.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828762|NCT01212991|Primary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause. For patients who were alive at the time of the analysis data cutoff, overall survival was censored at the last date the patient was known to be alive or analysis data cutoff date, whichever was first. This included patients who were known to have died after the data analysis cutoff date. Patients with no post-baseline survival information were censored on the date of randomization.|During study period (up to 3 years)|Intent to Treat (ITT) - All patients randomly assigned to treatment.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828763|NCT01213043|Primary|Number of Treatment-Emergent Pulmonary Exacerbations|Total number of treatment-emergent pulmonary exacerbations.|22 Weeks|All safety analyses were performed on the safety population, which comprised of all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of investigational product (Prolastin-C).||Events|||Number
828764|NCT01213043|Primary|Number of Drug-related TEAEs|Total number of drug-related TEAEs reported|22 Weeks|All safety analyses were performed on the safety population, which comprised of all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of investigational product (Prolastin-C).||Events|||Number
828765|NCT01213043|Primary|Number of TEAEs|Total number of TEAEs reported.|22 Weeks|All safety analyses were performed on the safety population, which comprised of all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of investigational product (Prolastin-C).||Events|||Number
828766|NCT01213043|Secondary|Mean Trough|The average trough concentration at steady-state, calculated as the mean value using the four Trough measurements obtained at Weeks 6, 7, 8 and at 7 days (168 hours) post infusion at Week 8 for the first treatment period or prior to the start of the infusions at Weeks 16, 17, 18, and at 7 days (168 hours) post infusion at Week 18 for the second treatment period.|Single measurment immediately prior to infusion at Weeks 6, 7, 8, 9 and Weeks 16, 17, 18, 19|PK Population, which consisted of all subjects who received investigational product (Prolastin-C) and had sufficient and valid serum concentration data to facilitate calculation of PK parameters.||μM||Standard Deviation|Mean
828767|NCT01213043|Primary|Subjects With Severe TEAE(s) or Pulmonary Exacerbation(s)|Number of subjects who experienced at least one severe TEAE or pulmonary exacerbation.|22 weeks|All safety analyses were performed on the safety population, which comprised of all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of investigational product (Prolastin-C).||participants|||Number
828768|NCT01213043|Primary|Subjects With Treatment-Emergent Pulmonary Exacerbation(s)|Number of subjects with at least one treatment-emergent pulmonary exacerbation|22 weeks|All safety analyses were performed on the safety population, which comprised of all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of investigational product (Prolastin-C).||participants|||Number
828769|NCT01213043|Primary|Subjects Withdrawn Due to an AE(s)|Number of subjects who were withdrawn from the study due to at least one AE.|22 weeks|All safety analyses were performed on the safety population, which comprised of all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of investigational product (Prolastin-C).||participants|||Number
828770|NCT01213043|Primary|Subjects With Treatment-Emergent Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Number of subjects who experienced at least one treatment-emergent SAE.|22 weeks|All safety analyses were performed on the safety population, which comprised of all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of investigational product (Prolastin-C).||participants|||Number
828771|NCT01213043|Primary|Subjects With Drug-Related TEAE(s)|Number of subjects with at least one TEAE that was determined by the Investigator to be either “possibly related” or “related” to the investigational product (i.e., Prolastin-C).|22 weeks|All safety analyses were performed on the safety population, which comprised of all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of investigational product (Prolastin-C).||participants|||Number
828772|NCT01213043|Secondary|AUC0-7days|Area Under the Alpha-1 PI Concentration-Time Curve from Day 0 to Day 7|Week 8 and Week 18 at the following timepoints: 0 (pre-infusion), completion of first infusion bag, completion of 2nd infusion bag, and 15 min, 30 min, and 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 48, 120, and 168 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population, which consisted of all subjects who received investigational product (Prolastin-C) and had sufficient and valid serum concentration data to facilitate calculation of PK parameters.||h*mg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828773|NCT01213043|Primary|Subjects With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Number of subjects experiencing at least one TEAE. TEAEs were defined as any adverse event (AE) during the study that began on or after the date of first dose of investigational product (i.e., Prolastin-C).|22 weeks|All safety analyses were performed on the safety population, which comprised of all subjects who were randomized and received at least one dose of investigational product (Prolastin-C).||participants|||Number
828774|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Triglycerides|Difference of change from baseline in TG after 8 weeks treatment between groups.|After 8 weeks treatment|All subjects who received at least one dose of randomized investigational product was included in the safety population.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828775|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose|Difference of change from baseline in FPG after 8 weeks treatment between groups.|After 8 weeks treatment|All subjects who received at least one dose of randomized investigational product was included in the safety population.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828776|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol|Difference of change from baseline in TC after 8 weeks treatment between groups.|After 8 weeks treatment|All subjects who received at least one dose of randomized investigational product was included in the safety population.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828779|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Difference of Change From Baseline in Total Ischemic Burden Between Groups|"Difference in change from baseline in TIB between two groups after 8 weeks treatment.
Total Ischemic Burden (TIB) was defined as the sum of product of each ischemia episode lasting time and maximal ST elevation: TIB=Σ(STmax×Tisc)."|After 8 weeks treatment|ITT population was defined as all randomized subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial treatment, who had measurements at baseline for one or more efficacy variables and at least one post baseline measurement for the same variables in the treatment period.||mm*min||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828780|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Difference of Change From Baseline in Total Ischemic Burden Between Groups|"Difference in change from baseline in TIB between two groups after 2 weeks treatment.
Total Ischemic Burden (TIB) was defined as the sum of product of each ischemia episode lasting time and maximal ST elevation: TIB=Σ(STmax×Tisc)."|After 2 weeks treatment|ITT population was defined as all randomized subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial treatment, who had measurements at baseline for one or more efficacy variables and at least one post baseline measurement for the same variables in the treatment period.||mm*min||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828781|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Proportion of Patients With Resting Heart Rate Controlled to ≤60bpm Between Groups|Difference in proportions of patients who had resting heart rate controlled to ≤60 bpm after 8 weeks treatment between groups|After 8 weeks treatment|ITT population was defined as all randomized subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial treatment, who had measurements at baseline for one or more efficacy variables and at least one post baseline measurement for the same variables in the treatment period.||Participants|||Number
828782|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Proportion of Patients With Resting Heart Rate Controlled to ≤60bpm Between Groups|Difference in proportions of patients who had resting heart rate controlled to ≤60 bpm after 2 weeks treatment between groups|After 2 weeks treatment|ITT population was defined as all randomized subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial treatment, who had measurements at baseline for one or more efficacy variables and at least one post baseline measurement for the same variables in the treatment period.||Participants|||Number
828783|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Different Impact on 24-hr Average Heart Rate From Baseline Within Groups|Difference of the 24-hr average heart rate within groups from baseline after 2 weeks treatment.|After 2 weeks treatment in the study|ITT population was defined as all randomized subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial treatment, who had measurements at baseline for one or more efficacy variables and at least one post baseline measurement for the same variables in the treatment period.||Bpm||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828784|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Different Impact on 24-hr Average Heart Rate Between Two Groups|Difference of the 24-hr average heart rate between two groups after 2 weeks of treatment.|After 2 weeks treatment in the study|ITT population was defined as all randomized subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial treatment, who had measurements at baseline for one or more efficacy variables and at least one post baseline measurement for the same variables in the treatment period.||Bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828785|NCT01213173|Secondary|The Impact on 24-hr Average Heart Rate From Baseline Within Groups|Difference of the 24-hr average heart rate within groups from baseline after 8 weeks treatment.|After 8 weeks treatment in the study|ITT population was defined as all randomized subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial treatment, who had measurements at baseline for one or more efficacy variables and at least one post baseline measurement for the same variables in the treatment period.||Bpm||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828786|NCT01213173|Primary|The Impact on 24-hr Average Heart Rate Between Two Groups (Betaloc ZOK® 95mg vs. 190mg)|Difference of the 24-hr average heart rate between two groups after 8 weeks treatment.|After 8 weeks treatment in the study|ITT population was defined as all randomized subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial treatment, who had measurements at baseline for one or more efficacy variables and at least one post baseline measurement for the same variables in the treatment period.||Bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828787|NCT01213199|Primary|Global Scarring Severity|"Grade Level:
Macular disease
Mild disease
Moderate disease
Severe disease"|Week 24|The analysis population includes 18 subjects whose data were available at this time frame (week 24).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828788|NCT01213251|Secondary|Linear Association Between Change in LVEDV and Selected Clinical Characteristics; Including Peak Creatinine Phosphokinase (CPK), Peak Troponin, Lead Location, Time From MI Onset to Implant, and Change in LV Volumes.|"Linear association between change in LVEDV from baseline to 18-month visit (i.e. ΔLVEDV) and the following clinical characteristics were assessed: age, days from MI to implant, gender, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, peak CPK, infarct location, LV electrode in acceptable place, and baseline LVEF. In order to assess these linear associations, linear regression models were fitted for each of these clinical characteristics (separately). In particular, each linear regression model had baseline LVEDV and the clinical characteristic as covariates, and ΔLVEDV was the response variable.
Variables resulting in statistical significant (p<0.05) are reported."|Baseline - 18 Month Follow Up Visit|All subjects randomized, and if randomized to Dual Site or Single Site, the subject must have had a successful implant. Moreover, only subjects with observed LVEDV at baseline and 18-month follow-up visit are included.||regression coefficient||Standard Error|Mean
828789|NCT01213251|Secondary|Incidence of Sudden Cardiac Death and Total Mortality|"Mortality rates (%) for the events (a) all-cause death and (b) sudden-cardiac death at 18 months post randomization. Calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods.
Per protocol the comparison of mortality rates is between Pooled Pacing (Dual Site + Single Site) and Control."|18 Months post-randomization|Randomized subjects, and if randomized to Dual Site or Single Site, the subject must have had a successful implant.||percentage of subjects at risk||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828790|NCT01213251|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life|"Change in the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MNLWHF) questionnaire from baseline to the 18-month follow-up visit.
Change is defined as month 18 minus baseline.
Per protocol change in MNLWHF is compared between Pooled Pacing (Dual Site + Single Site) and Control."|Baseline - 18 Month Follow Up Visit|Randomized subjects, and if randomized to Dual Site or Single Site, the subject must have had a successful implant. Moreover, only subjects with observed MNLWHF questionnaire score at baseline and 18-month follow-up visits are included.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829125|NCT01216631|Secondary|Pain Visual Analogue Scale|Change in patient's assessment of pain by a 100mm visual analogue score|16 weeks||||||
829126|NCT01216631|Secondary|Pain Visual Analogue Scale|Change in patient's assessment of pain by a 100mm visual analogue score|14 weeks||||||
828791|NCT01213251|Secondary|Change in 6-minute Walk Test Distance|"Change in 6-minute hallwalk distance from 1-month visit to the 18-month visit.
Change is defined as month 18 minus baseline.
Per protocol, change in 6-minute walk test distance is compared between Pooled Pacing (Single site + Dual Site) and Control."|1 Month - 18 Month Follow Up Visit|Randomized subjects, and if randomized to Dual Site or Single Site, the subject must have had a successful implant. Moreover, only subjects with observed 6-minute hallwalk distance at baseline and 18-month follow-up visits are included.||meters||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
828792|NCT01213251|Secondary|Change in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Class|"The New York Heart Association (NYHA) score classifies patients' heart failure according to the severity of their symptoms. In particular, Class I: No limitation of physical activity. Class II: Slight limitation of physical activity. Class III: Marked limitation of physical activity. Class IV: Unable to carry on any physical activity without discomfort.
NYHA change from baseline to 18-month visit. If a subject improved by one NYHA class or more (e.g. NYHA IV to NYHA II, or NYHA III to NYHA I, etc) from the baseline visit, the subject was classified as “Improved”. Similarly for “Worsened” (e.g. subject does not have heart failure to NYHA I, NYHA I to NYHA II, etc.). If the subjects’ NYHA Class is not different than baseline, then the subject was classified as No Change.
Per protocol, change in NYHA is compared between Pooled Pacing (Single site + Dual Site) and Control."|Baseline - 18 Month Follow Up Visit|Subject was randomized, and if randomized to Dual Site or Single Site, the subject must have had a successful implant. Moreover, only subjects with observed NYHA at baseline and 18-month follow-up visit are included.||participants|||Number
828793|NCT01213251|Secondary|Frequency of Hospitalization for Cardiovascular Events|Number of hospitalizations related to cardiovascular events.|Baseline - 18 Month Follow Up Visit|Subject was randomized, and if randomized to Dual Site or Single Site, the subject must have had a successful implant.||participants|||Number
828794|NCT01213251|Secondary|Safety of Implanting a Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With Defibrillator (CRT-D) Device Within 10 Days of Myocardial Infarction (MI), as Measured by the Rate of Reported Adverse Events|Survival estimates at 18 months post-implant for time to first following events: (a) System Related Adverse Event (b) System Related Complication (c) Procedure Related Adverse Event (d) Procedure Related Complication and (e) System Related or Procedure Related Complication.|18 months post-implant|Only subjects with attempt implant are included. Therefore, subjects from the Control Arm are not included.||survival probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828795|NCT01213251|Primary|Change in Left Ventricular End Diastolic Volume (LVEDV)|"Left ventricular end diastolic volume (LVEDV) was measured by echocardiogram. Change was measured as Month 18 LVEDV minus baseline LVEDV.
Per protocol, change in LVEDV is compared between Pooled Pacing (Single site + Dual Site) and Control."|Baseline - 18 Month Follow Up Visit|The primary analysis cohort for the main objective of this study (Change in Left Ventricular End Diastolic Volume) required a subject to be randomized, and if randomized to Dual Site or Single Site, the subject must have had a successful implant. Moreover, only subjects with observed LVEDV at baseline and 18-month follow-up visit are included.||mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
828796|NCT01213264|Primary|Type of NMB-reversal Agent Administered to Study Participants|For all participants who received an NMB-reversal agent, the specific agent administered was recorded.|At administration of NMB-reversal agent (up to approximately 395 minutes after start of surgery)|All study participants who received an NMBA or NMB-reversal agent||participants|||Number
828797|NCT01213264|Secondary|Time From NMB-reversal Agent Administration to Recovery Room Dismissal|This measure is the duration from NMB-reversal agent administration to dismissal of the participant from the Recovery Room. The time of dismissal from the Recovery Room was to be recorded for each participant, irrespective of the criteria used to make the decision to dismiss the participant.|Post-surgical and recovery period (up to approximately 170 hours post-surgery)|Evaluable participants who received an NMB-reversal agent and had available procedure duration data. Participants in the Spontaneous Reversal group did not receive any NMB-reversal agents and therefore were not included in this analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
828798|NCT01213264|Secondary|Time From NMB-reversal Agent Administration to Operating Room Dismissal|This measure is the duration from NMB-reversal agent administration to dismissal of the participant from the Operating Room. The time of dismissal from the Operating Room was to be recorded for each participant, irrespective of the criteria used to make the decision to dismiss the participant.|Post-surgical period (up to approximately 24 hours post-surgery)|Evaluable participants who received an NMB-reversal agent and had available procedure duration data. Participants in the Spontaneous Reversal group did not receive any NMB-reversal agents and therefore were not included in this analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
828799|NCT01213264|Primary|Type of Surgical Procedure Performed in Study Participants|The type of surgical procedure performed in each study participant was recorded.|Day of surgery (Day 1)|All study participants who received a neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) or NMB-reversal agent||participants|||Number
828800|NCT01213264|Primary|Time From End of Surgery (End of Last Stitch) to Extubation|"This measure is the duration from the last surgical wound stitch to the post-surgical extubation of the participant. The time of extubation was to be recorded for each participant, irrespective of the criteria used to make the decision to extubate the participant. Data are presented by TOF-ratio <0.9 and ≥0.9 at extubation. The TOF-ratio is a measure of neuromuscular function ranging from 0.0 to 1.0. The greater the T4/T1 ratio the greater
the recovery from neuromuscular blockade. TOF-ratio <0.9 at extubation is considered to indicate a high risk for development of postoperative residual curarization (i.e, residual neuromuscular blockade), which can result in respiratory complications."|From end of surgery (end of last stitch) to extubation (duration of approximately <1 to 62 minutes)|Evaluable participants with TOF-ratio measurement at time of extubation and available procedure duration data. Three sugammadex participants with duration from end of surgery to extubation >1 hour were excluded from analysis; delay of extubation was considered due to factors unrelated to administration of sugammadex.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
828811|NCT01213316|Primary|Percentage of Aging Participants With an HIV-1 Viral Load <50 Copies/mL After 48 Weeks of Raltegravir Treatment|The percentage of aging participants (>=50 years old at initiation of raltegravir treatment) with an HIV-1 viral load <50 copies/mL of HIV-1 RNA after 48 weeks of raltegravir treatment was determined.|Baseline and 48 weeks|The analysis set included aging participants (Prolonged Participants and Newly Enrolled Participants) who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828801|NCT01213264|Primary|Number of Participants With a Train-Of-Four (TOF)-Ratio <0.9 at Extubation|Neuromuscular function assessment was performed according to routine anesthesiology practice. This typically involves application of repetitive Train-Of-Four (TOF) electrical stimulations to the ulnar nerve and assessment of twitch response at the adductor pollicis muscle. The TOF-ratio, expressed as a decimal from 0.0 up to 1.0, is the ratio of the magnitude of the fourth twitch (T4) to that of the first twitch (T1). The greater the T4/T1 ratio the greater the recovery from neuromuscular blockade. The TOF-ratio was measured at the time of post-surgical extubation. TOF-ratio at time of extubation was to be recorded for each participant, if available, irrespective of the criteria used to make the decision to extubate the participant. TOF-ratio <0.9 at extubation is considered to indicate a high risk for development of postoperative residual curarization (i.e, residual neuromuscular blockade), which can result in respiratory complications.|At extubation (approximately <1 to 125 minutes after end of surgery)|Evaluable participants with TOF-ratio measurement at time of extubation||participants|||Number
828802|NCT01213316|Secondary|Percentage of Aging Participants Taking Concomitant Medications at Baseline|The percentage of aging participants taking concomitant medication in addition to their other antiretroviral therapy was reported. This Outcome Measure was added with Amendment 1 and applies only to aging participants.|Baseline|The analysis set included aging participants (Prolonged Participants and Newly Enrolled Participants) who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828803|NCT01213316|Secondary|Percentage of Aging Participants With Concomitant Diseases at Baseline|The percentage of aging participants with Baseline comorbidities was reported. This Outcome Measure was added with Amendment 1 and applies only to aging participants.|Baseline|The analysis set included aging participants (Prolonged Participants and Newly Enrolled Participants) who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period.||Percentage of participants|||Number
828804|NCT01213316|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean D:A:D Risk Score for the 5-Year Cardiovascular Risk in Aging Participants After 48 Weeks of Raltegravir Treatment|Mean Data Collection on Adverse Events of Anti-HIV Drugs (D:A:D) Risk Score for 5-year cardiovascular risk was determined in aging participants (>=50 years old at initiation of raltegravir treatment) at Baseline and after 48 weeks of raltegravir treatment. The score included the following 8 risk factors: sex, age, systolic blood pressure, family cardiovascular disease history, current smoking, previous cigarette smoker, diabetes, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein, currently on indinavir, currently on lopinavir, currently on abacavir, duration and current use of indinavir and duration and current use of lopinavir. The D:A:D Risk Score is interpreted as low: <1%; moderate: 1-5%; high: 5-10%; and very high: >10%. The change from baseline was calculated as Week 48 minus Baseline; a positive change indicates increased risk. This Outcome Measure was added with Amendment 1 and applies only to aging participants.|Baseline and 48 weeks|The analysis set included aging participants (Prolonged Participants and Newly Enrolled Participants) who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period and had evaluable results.||Percentage risk||Standard Deviation|Mean
828805|NCT01213316|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Framingham Risk Score for the 10-Year Cardiovascular Risk in Aging Participants After 48 Weeks of Raltegravir Treatment|Mean Framingham Risk for 10-year cardiovascular risk was determined in aging participants (>=50 years old at initiation of raltegravir treatment). Points were allotted for each of following 8 risk factors : sex, age, systolic blood pressure, treatment for hypertension, smoking, diabetes, total cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein. The sum of the points for each participant was assigned a percent 10-year cardiovascular risk on a lookup table, and could range from 0% to 100%. The mean Framingham Risk for 10-year cardiovascular risk was then calculated for the analysis population. The change from baseline was calculated as Baseline minus Week 48; a positive change indicates reduced risk. This Outcome Measure was added with Amendment 1 and applies only to aging participants.|Baseline and 48 weeks|The analysis set included aging participants (Prolonged Participants and Newly Enrolled Participants) who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period and had evaluable results.||Percentage risk||Standard Deviation|Mean
828806|NCT01213316|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ T-cell Counts in Aging Participants After 48 Weeks of Raltegravir Treatment|Mean CD4+ T-cell counts were determined in aging participants (>=50 years old at initiation of raltegravir treatment) at baseline and after 48 weeks of raltegravir treatment was determined. A positive change from baseline indicates an increase in CD4+ T-cell count.|Baseline and 48 weeks|The analysis set included aging participants (Prolonged Participants and Newly Enrolled Participants) who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period.||CD4+ T-cells/µL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828807|NCT01213316|Secondary|HIV-1 Viral Load in Aging Participants After 48 Weeks of Raltegravir Treatment|The HIV-1 viral load (log10 copies/mL of HIV-1 RNA) was determined in aging participants (>=50 years old at initiation of raltegravir treatment) at Baseline and after 48 weeks of raltegravir treatment.|Baseline and 48 weeks|The analysis set included aging participants (Prolonged Participants and Newly Enrolled Participants) who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period.||Log10 Copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828808|NCT01213316|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ T-cell Counts After 96 Weeks of Raltegravir Treatment|Mean CD4+ T-cell counts were determined at baseline and after 96 weeks of raltegravir treatment. A positive change from baseline indicates an increase in CD4+ T-cell count.|Baseline and 96 weeks|The analysis set included participants in the Initial Cohort who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period.||CD4+ T-cells/µL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828809|NCT01213316|Secondary|HIV-1 Viral Load After 96 Weeks of Raltegravir Treatment|The HIV-1 viral load (log10 copies/mL of HIV-1 RNA) was determined at Baseline and after 96 weeks of raltegravir treatment.|Baseline and 96 weeks|The analysis set included participants in the Initial Cohort who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period.||Log10 Copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828810|NCT01213316|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an HIV-1 Viral Load <50 Copies/mL After 96 Weeks of Raltegravir Treatment|The percentage of participants with an HIV-1 viral load <50 copies/mL of HIV-1 RNA after 96 weeks of raltegravir treatment was determined.|Baseline and 96 weeks|The analysis set included participants in the Initial Cohort who received at least one dose of raltegravir during the observation period.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829127|NCT01216631|Secondary|Pain Visual Analogue Scale|Change in patient's assessment of pain by a 100mm visual analogue score|8 weeks||||||
828815|NCT01221272|Secondary|Exercise-induced Reversible Total Perfusion Deficit (TPD) at Baseline, End of Period 1, and End of Period 2|Exercise-induced reversible TPD was derived as the exercise TPD at baseline and at the end of Periods 1 and 2 minus the resting TPD at baseline. TPD is measured on a scale of 0-100, with higher scores being worse and lower scores being better. Measurements were obtained by SPECT imaging at baseline both at rest and following exercise and following exercise at the end of Periods 1 and 2.|Up to 33 days|Efficacy Analysis Set||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
828816|NCT01221272|Secondary|Exercise-induced Reversible Perfusion Defect Size (PDS) at Baseline, End of Period 1, and End of Period 2|Exercise-induced reversible PDS was derived as the exercise PDS at baseline and at the end of Periods 1 and 2 minus the resting PDS at baseline. A lower percentage means more of the myocardium is receiving blood flow. Measurements were obtained by SPECT imaging at baseline both at rest and following exercise and following exercise at the end of Periods 1 and 2.|Up to 33 days|Efficacy Analysis Set||percentage of myocardium||Standard Error|Mean
828817|NCT01221272|Secondary|Perfusion Defect Severity at Baseline, End of Period 1, and End of Period 2|Perfusion defect severity was assessed for each participant as the percentage of the 17 myocardium segments with a relative perfusion defect score of 3 or 4 on a 0-4 scale. Segment scores are: 0 = normal perfusion; 1 = mild reduction in counts-not definitely abnormal; 2 = moderate reduction in counts-definitely abnormal; 3 = severe reduction in counts; 4 = absent uptake (lower scores correspond to less severity and higher scores correspond to increased severity). A lower percentage means fewer segments have severely reduced blood flow. Measurements were obtained by SPECT imaging following exercise at baseline and at the end of Periods 1 and 2.|Up to 33 days|Efficacy Analysis Set||percentage of segments||Standard Error|Mean
828818|NCT01221272|Primary|Exercise-induced Total Perfusion Deficit (TPD) Following Ranolazine and Placebo Treatment|TPD is a score that measures the overall impact of a region of decreased myocardial blood flow, incorporating both the amount and severity of the decreased flow. TPD is measured on a scale of 0-100, with higher scores being worse and lower scores being better. Measurements were obtained by SPECT imaging following exercise at the end of the ranolazine and placebo treatment periods.|Up to 33 days|Efficacy Analysis Set||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828819|NCT01221272|Primary|Exercise-induced Perfusion Defect Size (PDS) Following Ranolazine and Placebo Treatment|PDS is the amount (percent) of the myocardium with decreased blood flow. A lower percentage means more of the myocardium is receiving blood flow. Measurements were obtained by gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging following exercise at the end of the ranolazine and placebo treatment periods.|Up to 33 days|Efficacy Analysis Set: 61 randomized and treated participants with data for both end-of-period (EOP) scans, completed ≥ 7 consecutive days treatment in each period, took the morning dose before each EOP scan, and had baseline perfusion defect size ≥ 5% as measured by QPS imaging software||percentage of myocardium||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828820|NCT01221285|Secondary|Change in IgE Fragment Antibody Binding (FAB) Activity (10 Micrograms/mL Cockroach Allergen Extract)|Outcome is the change in mean IgE fragment antibody binding (FAB) activity, baseline to post-baseline. Serum from cockroach subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT)-treated participants were analyzed to determine if treatment inhibits the in-vitro cockroach antigen binding to B-cells after 6-months of treatment with cockroach SCIT, using the per protocol allergenic extract doses. This result is an indicator of immune modulation over time, however its clinical significance is unclear.|Baseline through 6-months of treatment|Intent-to-treat||Percent antibody binding||Standard Error|Mean
828821|NCT01221285|Secondary|Change in German Cockroach-Specific Serum IgG4 Over Time|Outcome is the ratio of geometric means for baseline German cockroach-specific serum Immunoglobulin subclass 4 (IgG4) vs. post-baseline German cockroach-specific serum IgG4. Numerator is geometric mean post-baseline IgG4; denominator is baseline IgG4. This result is an indicator of immune modulation over time, however its clinical significance is unclear.|Baseline through 6-months of treatment|Intent-to-treat||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828822|NCT01221285|Secondary|Change in German Cockroach-Specific Serum IgG Over Time|Outcome is the ratio of geometric means for baseline German cockroach-specific serum Immunoglobulin G (IgG) vs. post-baseline German cockroach-specific serum IgG. Numerator is geometric mean post-baseline IgG; denominator is baseline IgG.This result is an indicator of immune modulation over time, however its clinical significance is unclear.|Baseline through 6-months of treatment|Intent-to-treat||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828823|NCT01221285|Secondary|Change in German Cockroach-Specific Serum IgE Over Time|Outcome is the ratio of geometric means for baseline German cockroach-specific serum Immunoglobulin E (IgE) vs. post-baseline German cockroach-specific serum IgE. Numerator is geometric mean post-baseline IgE; denominator is baseline IgE. This result is an indicator of immune modulation over time, however its clinical significance is unclear.|Baseline through 6-months of treatment|Intent-to-treat||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
828824|NCT01221285|Primary|Number of Reported Treatment-related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Number of SAEs reported as possibly related, probably related, or definitely related to study participation.|Baseline through 6-months of treatment|Intent-to-treat||Events|||Number
828825|NCT01221285|Primary|Number of Reported Treatment-related Adverse Events (AEs)|Number of non-serious adverse events reported as possibly related, probably related, or definitely related to study participation.|Baseline through 6-months of treatment|Intent-to-treat||Events|||Number
828853|NCT01221363|Primary|Change in Objectively Measured Sitting Time From Baseline to 6 Months Follow-up|"Participants wore an ActivePAL monitor for seven days at inclusion and seven days at follow-up. The ActivePAL measures sitting time.
Change in sitting time from baseline to 6 months follow up was evaluated."|7 days of measurement / change in sitting time from baseline and 6 months follow-up|Within group difference||Hours per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828826|NCT01221298|Secondary|Time to Virologic Relapse Through 24 Weeks Post-treatment|Time to confirmed hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) ≥ lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) (2 consecutive measurements ≥ LLOQ) at any point in the post-treatment period among participants with HCV RNA < LLOQ at the end of treatment.|Post-treatment Day 1 to Post-treatment Week 24|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT) with hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) < lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) at the final treatment visit who completed treatment.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
828827|NCT01221298|Secondary|Time to Failure to Suppress or Rebound During Treatment|The time to failure to suppress was defined as first day a participant met any virologic stopping criteria during treatment. The virologic stopping criteria also includes failure to achieve a 2 log10 IU/mL decrease in HCV RNA by Week 1, failure to achieve HCV RNA <LLOQ by Week 6, or rebound, defined as first day of 2 consecutive increases of at least 0.5 log10 IU/mL above nadir (local minimum value) or confirmed HCV RNA > lower limit of detection (LLOD) for participants who previously achieved HCV RNA < LLOD.|Day 1 through Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT).||Days||Standard Error|Mean
828828|NCT01221298|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks (SVR24) Post-Treatment|Sustained Virologic Response 24 (SVR24) is defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) less than the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ; < 25 IU/mL) 24 weeks after the last dose of study drug.|Post-treatment Day 1 to Post-treatment Week 24|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT). Participants with missing data were imputed as failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
828829|NCT01221298|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks (SVR12) Post-treatment|Sustained Virologic Response 12 (SVR12) is defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) less than the lower limit of quantification (< LLOQ; < 25 IU/mL) 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug.|Post-treatment Day 1 to Post-treatment Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT). Participants with missing data were imputed as failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
828830|NCT01221298|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Below the Lower Limit of Quantitation (LLOQ) at Week 4|Analysis of percentage of participants with hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid less than the lower limit of quantitation (< 25 IU/mL).|Week 4|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT). Participants with missing data were imputed as failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
828831|NCT01221298|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) < 1000 International Units Per Milliliter (IU/mL)|Analysis of participants with HCV RNA levels below 1000 IU/mL at Week 2.|Week 2|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT). Participants with missing data were imputed as failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
828832|NCT01221298|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Suppressed Below the Lower Limit of Quantitation (LLOQ) From Week 4 Through Week 12|Analysis of the percentage of participants with hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid less than the lower limit of quantitation (< 25 IU/mL).|Week 4 through Week 12|For the percentage of subjects with HCV RNA suppressed below the LLOQ from Week 4 through Week 12 out of all subjects dosed, it was assumed that if 60% of subjects were successfully suppressed from Week 4 through Week 12 then 20 subjects would give a 95% two-sided confidence interval of (36.1%, 80.9%) using binomial exact methods.||percentage of participants|||Number
828833|NCT01221311|Primary|Early Clinical Success|Early clinical success will be defined as fluoroscopic resolution at the time all stent(s) are removed. If there is a persistent stricture after 12 months of stent therapy in either group, the patient will be classified as a clinical failure. We will compare early clinical success rates in each group.|Post-stent removal (up to one year after enrollment)|The number of participants analyzed is lower than the number of patients randomized, due to patients who dropped out of the study before all stents were removed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
828834|NCT01221350|Secondary|Measurement of Quality of Life With the AQLQ (Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire) at Endpoint|"The Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) was developed to measure the functional problems (physical, emotional, social and occupational) that are most troublesome to adults (17-70 years) with asthma.
There are 32 questions in the AQLQ and they are in 4 domains (symptoms, activity limitation, emotional function and environmental stimuli). The activity domain contains 5 ‘patient-specific’ questions. This allows patients to select 5 activities in which they are most limited and these activities will be assessed at each follow-up. Patients are asked to think about how they have been during the previous two weeks and to respond to each of the 32 questions on a 7-point scale (7 = not impaired at all - 1 = severely impaired). The overall AQLQ score is the mean of all 32 responses and the individual domain scores are the means of the items in those domains (http://www.qoltech.co.uk/aqlq.html)."|60 days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828835|NCT01221350|Secondary|Measurement of Quality of Life With the AQLQ (Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire) at Baseline|"The Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) was developed to measure the functional problems (physical, emotional, social and occupational) that are most troublesome to adults (17-70 years) with asthma.
There are 32 questions in the AQLQ and they are in 4 domains (symptoms, activity limitation, emotional function and environmental stimuli). The activity domain contains 5 ‘patient-specific’ questions. This allows patients to select 5 activities in which they are most limited and these activities will be assessed at each follow-up. Patients are asked to think about how they have been during the previous two weeks and to respond to each of the 32 questions on a 7-point scale (7 = not impaired at all - 1 = severely impaired). The overall AQLQ score is the mean of all 32 responses and the individual domain scores are the means of the items in those domains (http://www.qoltech.co.uk/aqlq.html)."|Baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828854|NCT01221441|Secondary|Change in SF-36 General Health Assessment Questionnaire (Overall Score) From Baseline to 2 Years|Overall assessment of general health as determined by scoring use an SF-36 Questionnaire (Range 0-100 with higher scores better - indicating less disability)|2 Years|Patients with completed SF-36 questionnaire at 104 weeks||scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828855|NCT01221441|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events Due to Clinically Significant Changes in Hematology and Urinalysis Tests|The number of participants with changes in clinical hematology, chemistry, and urinalysis test results through 2 years that were considered Adverse Events|2 Years|All patients||participants|||Number
828836|NCT01221350|Secondary|Measurement of Quality of Life With the ACT (Asthma Control Test) at Endpoint|Assessment of Quality of life scores with the ACT (Asthma Control Test). The ACT is a way to determine if the asthma symptoms are well controlled. The Asthma Control Test™ (ACT™) is a five question health survey used to measure asthma control in individuals 12 years of age and older. The survey measures the elements of asthma control as defined by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). ACT is an efficient, reliable, and valid method of measuring asthma control, with or without, lung functioning measures such as spirometry. Each item includes 5 response options corresponding to a 5-point Likert-type rating scale. In scoring the ACT survey, responses for each of the 5 items are summed to yield a score ranging from 5 (poor control of asthma) to 25 (complete control of asthma).|60 days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828837|NCT01221350|Secondary|Measurement of Quality of Life With the ACT (Asthma Control Test) at Baseline|Assessment of Quality of life scores with the ACT (Asthma Control Test). The ACT is a way to determine if the asthma symptoms are well controlled. The Asthma Control Test™ (ACT™) is a five question health survey used to measure asthma control in individuals 12 years of age and older. The survey measures the elements of asthma control as defined by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). ACT is an efficient, reliable, and valid method of measuring asthma control, with or without, lung functioning measures such as spirometry. Each item includes 5 response options corresponding to a 5-point Likert-type rating scale. In scoring the ACT survey, responses for each of the 5 items are summed to yield a score ranging from 5 (poor control of asthma) to 25 (complete control of asthma).|Baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828838|NCT01221350|Secondary|Inflammatory IL-4 Sputum Levels at Endpoint|Inflammatory IL-4 sputum levels after 60 days of treatment. Sputum induction is a semi-invasive technique used to detect and monitor airway inflammation. IL-4 is a Th2 cytokine that promote airway inflammation in asthma. IL-4 drives the production of IgE in B cells. IL-4 was measured by ELISA.|60 days|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828839|NCT01221350|Secondary|Inflammatory Interleukin-4 (IL-4) Sputum Levels at Baseline|Inflammatory IL-4 sputum levels after 60 days of treatment. Sputum induction is a semi-invasive technique used to detect and monitor airway inflammation. IL-4 is a Th2 cytokine that promote airway inflammation in asthma. IL-4 drives the production of immunoglobulin E (IgE) in B cells. IL-4 was measured by ELISA.|Baseline|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828840|NCT01221350|Secondary|Induced Sputum Eosinophils at Endpoint|Eosinophils, a prominent feature of asthma, are found in increased numbers in the circulation and sputum, usually in relation to the severity of asthma.|60 days|||Eosinophil percentage in sputum cells|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
828841|NCT01221350|Secondary|Induced Sputum Eosinophils at Baseline|Eosinophils, a prominent feature of asthma, are found in increased numbers in the circulation and sputum, usually in relation to the severity of asthma.|Baseline|||Eosinophil percentage in sputum cells|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
828842|NCT01221350|Primary|Spirometric FEF Values at Endpoint|Measurement of spirometric FEF after 60 days of treatment: Forced expiratory flow (FEF) is the flow (or speed) of air coming out of the lung during the middle portion of a forced expiration.|60 days|||Liters/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
828843|NCT01221350|Primary|Spirometric FEF Values at Baseline|Measurement of spirometric parameters at baseline: Forced expiratory flow (FEF) is the flow (or speed) of air coming out of the lung during the middle portion of a forced expiration.|Baseline|||Liters/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
828844|NCT01221350|Primary|Spirometric FEV1 Values at Endpoint|Measurement of spirometric predicted parameters after 60 days of treatment. Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), volume that has been exhaled at the end of the first second of forced expiration.|60 days|||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
828845|NCT01221350|Primary|Spirometric FEV1 Values at Baseline|Measurement of spirometric predicted parameters at baseline: Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), volume that has been exhaled at the end of the first second of forced expiration.|Baseline|||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
828846|NCT01221350|Secondary|Induced Sputum Carbonylated Proteins at Endpoint|Proteins can become modified by a large number of reactions involving reactive oxygen species. Among these, carbonylation is an irreversible and unrepairable oxidative reaction. The main protein modifications originated from oxidative stress comprise direct oxidation of aminoacids with a thiol group, such as cysteine, oxidative glycation, and carbonylation. Oxidative protein carbonylation induce protein degradation in a nonspecific manner. Chemically, oxidative carbonylation preferentially occurs at proline, threonine, lysine, and arginine, presumably through a metal-catalyzed activation of hydrogen peroxide to a reactive intermediate. Carbonylation usually refers to a process that forms reactive ketones or aldehydes that can be reacted by 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) to form hydrazones. Direct oxidation of side chains of lysine, arginine, proline, and threonine residues, among other aminoacids, produces DNPH detectable protein products.|60 days|||nmol/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
828847|NCT01221350|Primary|Spirometric FVC Values at Endpoint|Measurement of spirometric predicted parameters at the baseline and after 60 days of treatment: Forced vital capacity (FVC) is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out after full inspiration, measured in liters.|60 days|Per protocol||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
828848|NCT01221350|Secondary|Induced Sputum Carbonylated Proteins at Baseline|Proteins can become modified by a large number of reactions involving reactive oxygen species. Among these, carbonylation is an irreversible and unrepairable oxidative reaction. The main protein modifications originated from oxidative stress comprise direct oxidation of aminoacids with a thiol group, such as cysteine, oxidative glycation, and carbonylation. Oxidative protein carbonylation induce protein degradation in a nonspecific manner. Chemically, oxidative carbonylation preferentially occurs at proline, threonine, lysine, and arginine, presumably through a metal-catalyzed activation of hydrogen peroxide to a reactive intermediate. Carbonylation usually refers to a process that forms reactive ketones or aldehydes that can be reacted by 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) to form hydrazones. Direct oxidation of side chains of lysine, arginine, proline, and threonine residues, among other aminoacids, produces DNPH detectable protein products|Baseline|||nmol/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
828849|NCT01221350|Secondary|Induced Sputum of Glutathione (GSH)/Glutathione Disulfide (GSSG) Ratio at Endpoint|Change in the induced sputum of antioxidant parameters GSH and GSSG levels after 60 days of treatment. The ratio GSH/GSSG is considered an index of antioxidant status and reductive -SH groups. GSH and GSSG were measured by a microplate fluorescent assay.|60 days|||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829128|NCT01216631|Secondary|Pain Visual Analogue Scale|Change in patient's assessment of pain by a 100mm visual analogue score|6 weeks||||||
828859|NCT01221441|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Knee Function as Determined by the Lower Extremity Functional Scale at 2 Years|Assessment of knee function as determined by the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS); change from baseline to 2 years (Range 0-80 with higher scores signifying lower difficulty in performing knee functions)|2 Years|Patients that completed 2-year follow-up||scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828860|NCT01221441|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change in Pain Severity Measured by Incidence and Dose of Analgesia|The number of participants that had a change in pain severity as measured by the incidence and dose of analgesic medications|2 Years|Patients taking at least one analgesia medication||participants|||Number
828861|NCT01221441|Secondary|Change in Pain Severity From Baseline to 2 Years as Assessed by Questionnaire|Change in pain severity (on a scale from 1 to 4) from baseline to 2 years as measured by a questionnaire (lower scores better)|2 Years|Patients that completed 2 year follow-up||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828862|NCT01221441|Secondary|Comparative Evaluation of Knee Magnetic Resonance Images (MRIs) From Baseline to 1 Year|Comparison of pre-procedure 3T MRI scans to those obtained at months 12 following dose administration by an independent radiographic reviewer. Evaluations will be scored using Whole Organ Magnetic Resonance imaging Score (WORMS) Cartilage Morphology Subscore (Range 0-6, with higher scores being worse)|1 Year|Patients with available baseline and 1-year MRIs||scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828863|NCT01221441|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Articular Cartilage Damage in the Knee as Determined by the Lysholm Knee Score at 2 Years|Measurement to assess outcomes of various chondral disorders of the knee determined by the Lysholm Knee Scale (Range 0-100 with higher scores better). Linear mixed model used for analysis.|2 Years|||scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828864|NCT01221441|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 2 Years|Symptoms, pain and functionality of the knee joint as determined by Total Score of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) (Range 0-100 with higher scores indicating healthier outcomes). Linear mixed model used for analysis.|2 Years|||scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828865|NCT01221441|Primary|Change From Baseline in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score at 1 Year|Reduction in pain as measured by a 100 mm visual analog scale (0= no pain; 100 = extreme pain) from Baseline to 1 Year. Linear mixed model used for analysis.|1 Year|Patients with available baseline and 1 year VAS score||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828866|NCT01221441|Primary|Change From Baseline in the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Score at 1 Year|Symptoms, pain and function of the knee joint determined and scored using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation (Total Score, range 0-100 with higher scores better). Linear mixed model used for analysis.|1 Year|Patients with available baseline IKDC scores||scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828867|NCT01221597|Secondary|Composite Responder Based on Change in Curvature Deformity and Change in Peyronie's Disease Bother Score|A responder was defined as a subject who satisfied the following 2 criteria at that visit: a) percent reduction from baseline in curvature deformity was ≥20% and b) reduction from baseline in PDQ Peyronie’s disease bother score was ≥1, or had a change from reporting no sexual activity at screening to reporting sexual activity.|Week 52|Efficacy analysis is based on the mITT population.||Number of participants|||Number
828868|NCT01221597|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Penile Pain Domain of the PDQ in Subjects With Baseline Penile Pain Score ≥4|Penile pain scale range 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain) on 3 questions; total score range 0 to 30. A decrease in the change from baseline total score in the penile pain domain of the PDQ is indicated by a negative number. Subjects were required to have a penile pain score of 4 or greater at baseline.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy analysis is based on the mITT population. This population only includes those subjects in the mITT population with a baseline penile pain score of 4 or greater.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828869|NCT01221597|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Penile Length|A negative value represents a reduction in measurement from baseline.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy analysis is based on the mITT population.||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
828870|NCT01221597|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Penile Plaque Consistency|Penile plaque consistency score range 1 (non-palpable) to 5 (hard). A decrease in the change from baseline score in penile plaque consistency is indicated by a negative number.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy analysis is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828871|NCT01221597|Secondary|Change in the Overall Satisfaction Domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)|Overall satisfaction domain of the IIEF score range 0 to 5 on 2 questions where higher scores indicate improved function or satisfaction; total score range 0 to 10.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy analysis is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828872|NCT01221597|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Severity of Peyronie's Disease Physical and Psychological Symptoms|Peyronie's disease symptoms (physical and psychological) severity score range 0 (none) to 4 (very severe) on 6 questions; total score range 0 to 24. A decrease in the change from baseline total score in the Peyronie's disease symptoms domain of the PDQ is indicated by a negative number.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy analysis is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828873|NCT01221597|Secondary|A Responder Analysis Based on Subject Overall Global Assessment of Peyronie's Disease|A responder was defined as a subject who recorded his Peyronie’s disease had either improved in a small but important way, moderately improved, or much improved in overall global assessment question.|Week 52|Efficacy analysis was based on the mITT population.||Number of particpants|||Number
828874|NCT01221597|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Peyronie's Disease Bother Domain of the Peyronie's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ)|Peyronie's disease bother score range 0 (no issue or not at all bothered) to 4 (extremely bothered) on 4 questions; total score range 0 to 16. A decrease in the change from baseline total score in the Peyronie's disease bother domain of the PDQ is indicated by a negative number.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828875|NCT01221597|Primary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Penile Curvature|A negative value in the percentage change from baseline in penile curvature deformity (angle measured in degrees) indicates less curvature.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy is based on the modified intent-to-treat population (mITT).||percentage of curvature change||Standard Deviation|Mean
828876|NCT01221623|Secondary|A Composite Responder Analysis Based on Change From Baseline in Penile Curvature and in the Peyronie's Disease Bother Score|"A composite responder is indicated by
a percent reduction from baseline in penile curvature greater than or equal to the threshold, and
a reduction from baseline in Peyronie's disease bother score greater than or equal to the threshold, or change in the overall sexual activity within the last 3 months to having vaginal intercourse from no vaginal intercourse at screening."|Week 52|Composite responder analysis is based on the ITT population.||participants|||Number
828877|NCT01221623|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Penile Pain Domain of the PDQ in Subjects With Baseline Penile Pain Score ≥4|Penile pain scale range 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain) on 3 questions; total score range 0 to 30. A decrease in the change from baseline total score in the penile pain domain of the PDQ is indicated by a negative number. Subjects were required to have a penile pain score of 4 or greater at baseline.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy is based on the mITT population; this population only includes those subjects in the mITT population with a baseline penile pain score of 4 or greater.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828878|NCT01221623|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Penile Length|A negative value represents a reduction in measurement from baseline.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
828879|NCT01221623|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Penile Plaque Consistency|Penile plaque consistency score range 1 (non-palpable) to 5 (hard). A decrease in the change from baseline score in penile plaque consistency is indicated by a negative number.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828880|NCT01221623|Secondary|Change in the Overall Satisfaction Domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)|Overall satisfaction domain of the IIEF score range 0 to 5 on 2 questions where higher scores indicate improved function or satisfaction; total score range 0 to 10.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828881|NCT01221623|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Severity of Peyronie's Disease Symptoms Domain of the PDQ|Peyronie's disease symptoms (physical and psychological) severity score range 0 (none) to 4 (very severe) on 6 questions; total score range 0 to 24. A decrease in the change from baseline total score in the Peyronie's disease symptoms domain of the PDQ is indicated by a negative number.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828882|NCT01221623|Secondary|A Responder Analysis Based on Subject Overall Global Assessment|Subject overall global assessment of Peyronie's disease score range -3 (much worse) to 3 (much improved). A score of 1 (improved in a small but important way), 2 (moderately improved), or 3 indicated a responder.|Week 52|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||participants|||Number
828883|NCT01221623|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Peyronie's Disease Bother Domain of the Peyronie's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ)|Peyronie's disease bother score range 0 (no issue or not at all bothered) to 4 (extremely bothered) on 4 questions; total score range 0 to 16. A decrease in the change from baseline total score in the Peyronie's disease bother domain of the PDQ is indicated by a negative number.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828884|NCT01221623|Primary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Penile Curvature|A negative value in the percentage change from baseline in penile curvature deformity (angle measured in degrees) indicates less curvature.|Baseline and Week 52|Efficacy is based on the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population.||percentage of curvature change||Standard Deviation|Mean
828885|NCT01221727|Secondary|Ratio of PK Cmax Parameter Estimates Between Day 16 (Midazolam Only) and Day 1(Midazolam Only)|The ratio and confidence interval are calculated based on natural log scale data and converted back to the original scale.|From day 1 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose and from day 16 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose|The analysis set will contain all subjects from Midazolam only group for whom the primary endpoint PK parameters (AUC(0-t), AUC(0-inf) and Cmax) can be estimated for both treatment periods.||unitless|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828886|NCT01221727|Secondary|Summary of Percent Change From Baseline to Day 16 for Serum C-Telopeptide Concentration|This table summarizes percent change from baseline to day 16 for serum C-Telopeptide (sCTX) concentration raw values for Midazolam with Denosumab group.|Baseline (day 2 pre-dose) to day 16|Serum CTX will be collected for Midazolam with Denosumab group only. The PD analysis set will contain subjects in Midazolam with Denosumab group who received denosumab administration and for whom serum CTX concentrations are determinable on when assessed.||percentage|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828887|NCT01221727|Primary|Ratio of PK Cmax Parameter Estimates Between Day 16 (Midazolam With the Presence of Denosumab) and Day 1 (Midazolam Only)|The ratio and confidence interval are calculated based on natural log scale data and converted back to the original scale.|From day 1 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose and from day 16 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose|The analysis set will contain all subjects from Midazolam with Denosumab group for whom the primary endpoint PK parameters (AUC(0-t), AUC(0-inf) and Cmax) can be estimated for both treatment periods.||unitless|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828888|NCT01221727|Secondary|Summary of Serum C-Telopeptide Concentration|This table summarizes serum C-Telopeptide (sCTX) concentration raw values for Midazolam with Denosumab group.|Baseline (day 2 pre-dose) to day 16|Serum CTX will be collected for Midazolam with Denosumab group only. The PD analysis set will contain subjects in Midazolam with Denosumab group who received denosumab administration and for whom serum CTX concentrations are determinable on when assessed.||ng/mL|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
828889|NCT01221727|Secondary|Summary of Serum Denosumab Concentration|This table summarizes serum Denosumab for Midazolam with Denosumab group. The Lower Limit Of Quantification (LLOQ) is 20 ng/mL. On Day 2 (pre-dose), the true value is below LLOQ, and is treated as 0 in the analysis.|Baseline (day 2 pre-dose) to day 16|Serum Denosumab will be collected for subjects in Midazolam with Denosumab group only. The analysis set will contain subjects in Midazolam with Denosumab group who received denosumab administration and for whom serum Denosumab concentrations are determinable when assessed.||ng/mL|Participants|Standard Deviation|Median
828890|NCT01221727|Secondary|Estimates of Inter- and Intra-subject Variability for PK Cmax Parameter for Midazolam Only Group|Cmax Subject denotes the inter-subject variability, while Cmax Residual denotes the intra-subject variability.|From day 1 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose and from day 16 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose|The analysis set will contain all subjects from Midazolam only group for whom the primary endpoint PK parameters (AUC(0-t), AUC(0-inf) and Cmax) can be estimated for both treatment periods.||ng/mL|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
828891|NCT01221727|Secondary|Estimates of Inter- and Intra-subject Variability for the PK AUC Parameters for Midazolam Only Group|AUC Subject denotes the inter-subject variability, while AUC Residual denotes the intra-subject variability.|From day 1 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose and from day 16 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose|The analysis set will contain all subjects from Midazolam only group for whom the primary endpoint PK parameters (AUC(0-t), AUC(0-inf) and Cmax) can be estimated for both treatment periods.||ng*hr/mL|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
828892|NCT01221727|Primary|Estimates of Inter- and Intra-subject Variability for PK Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) Parameter for Midazolam With Denosumab Group|Cmax Subject denotes the inter-subject variability, while Cmax Residual denotes the intra-subject variability|From day 1 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose and from day 16 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose|The analysis set will contain all subjects from Midazolam with Denosumab group for whom the primary endpoint PK parameters (AUC(0-t), AUC(0-inf) and Cmax) can be estimated for both treatment periods.||ng/mL|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
828893|NCT01221727|Primary|Estimates of Inter- and Intra-subject Variability for the PK AUC Parameters for Midazolam With Denosumab Group|AUC Subject denotes the inter-subject variability, while AUC Residual denotes the intra-subject variability|From day 1 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose and from day 16 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose|The analysis set will contain all subjects from Midazolam with Denosumab group for whom the primary endpoint PK parameters (AUC(0-t), AUC(0-inf) and Cmax) can be estimated for both treatment periods.||ng*hr/mL|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
828894|NCT01221727|Secondary|Ratio of PK AUC Parameter Estimates Between Day 16 (Midazolam Only) and Day 1(Midazolam Only)|The ratio and confidence interval are calculated based on natural log scale data and converted back to the original scale.|From day 1 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose and from day 16 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose|The analysis set will contain all subjects from Midazolam only group for whom the primary endpoint PK parameters (AUC(0-t), AUC(0-inf) and Cmax) can be estimated for both treatment periods.||unitless|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828895|NCT01221727|Primary|Ratio of Pharmcokinetic (PK) Area Under the Concentration Time Curve (AUC) Parameter Estimates Between Day 16 (Midazolam With the Presence of Denosumab) and Day 1 (Midazolam Only)|The ratio and confidence interval are calculated based on natural log scale data and converted back to the original scale.|From day 1 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose and from day 16 pre-dose to 24 hours post-dose|The analysis set will contain all subjects from Midazolam with Denosumab group for whom the primary endpoint PK parameters (AUC(0-t), AUC(0-inf) and Cmax) can be estimated for both treatment periods.||unitless|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
828896|NCT01221753|Secondary|4-y Overall Survival Rate|4-year overall survival rate is the percentage of patients remaining alive 4-years from study entry.|Patients were followed for survival up to 5 years from study entry. Patients alive have been followed for a mean of 55 months (range 52-60 months).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients. Since all patients have not been followed for survival for 5 years the 4-year rate is provided. All data provided was based on chart review and not from case report forms.||percentage of participants|||Number
828897|NCT01221753|Primary|2-Year Local-Regional Control Rate|2-year local-regional control rate is defined as the proportion of participants who achieve confirmed stable disease (SD) or better by 2-years post study registration based on RECIST 1.0 criteria. Per RECIST 1.0 for target lesions, complete response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions and partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference baseline sum LD. Progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% increase in sum LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started. SD is neither PR nor PD. For non-target lesions, PD is the appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Follow-up for response continued until first progression. Disease assessments occurred at completion of induction cycle 3 along with months 12, 18 and 24 post study registration.|The study was terminated early due to weak accrual. Clinical outcome data were not accessible for results reporting due to the designation of study completed at the institution.|||||
828898|NCT01221948|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improved, No Change or Worsened Global Impression of Change (GIC) as Compared to Baseline, Evaluated by the Neurologist.|Global Impression of Change (GIC) is a comparison to baseline and will be evaluated by rating the global impression of change using a seven-point scale: (“very much improved” to “marked worsening”). This assessment was completed by the neurologist.|52 weeks post first lead implantation|||percentage of participants|||Number
828899|NCT01221948|Primary|Mean Change in UPDRS III Score From Baseline in the Meds Off Condition (no Medications) to 26 Weeks Post First Lead Implantation in the Stim on/Meds Off Condition (Stimulation on and no Medications).|"Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III (UPDRS III) is the motor sub-section of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating scale designed to evaluate overall motor disability, including the classic symptoms of Parkinson's Disease. This section has 14 items.
Each item is scored on a scale from 0 (normal) to 4 (severe, marked, or unable), with the total possible score for the 14 items, including separate questions regarding symptoms present axially and in appendages, ranging from 0 to 108 with lower scores representing better results."|26 weeks post first lead implantation|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828900|NCT01221948|Secondary|Mean Percent Change in Quality of Life Scale Scores: Modified Schwab and England (SE) Scores From Baseline Meds on to 12, 26 and 52 Weeks Post First Lead Implantation Stim on/Meds on|The purpose of the Schwab and England (SE) (13) single-item scale is to quantify a PD patients’ ability to perform activities of daily living. The single item is based on a percentage rating with scores in 10% increments. Scores range from 0% (completely bed-ridden) to 100% (completely independent).|12, 26 and 52 weeks post first lead implantation|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
828901|NCT01221948|Secondary|Mean Percent Change in Quality of Life Scale Scores: Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) From Baseline Meds on to 12, 26 and 52 Weeks Post First Lead Implantation Stim on/Meds on.|"The Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) is a 39-item questionnaire designed to measure the specific impact of PD on quality of life. The questions measure the impact on health-related quality of life along 8 dimensions:
mobility
activities of daily living
emotional well-being
stigma
social support
cognitions
communication
bodily discomfort. Dimension scores range from 0 to 100, with 0 representing perfect health for the measure and 100 representing worst health for the measure."|12, 26 and 52 weeks post first lead implantation|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
829129|NCT01216631|Secondary|US Synovitis Score|Change in US synovitis score of the affected knee at 2 and 8 weeks after treatment initiation|16 weeks||||||
828902|NCT01221948|Secondary|Mean Change in the Number of Waking Hours Per Day With Good Symptom Control and no Troublesome Dyskinesia From Baseline to 12, 26 and 52 Weeks Post First Lead Implantation.|Subjects will complete a 3-day motor diary prior to study visits. At one-hour increments (during waking hours), patients will record “on”, “on with troublesome dyskinesia”, “off”, and “asleep” times for three consecutive days.|12, 26 and 52 weeks post first lead implantation|||hours/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
828903|NCT01221948|Secondary|Mean Change in Antiparkinsonian Medication Use in Mgs (Levodopa or Equivalents) From Baseline to 12, 26 and 52 Weeks Post First Lead Implantation|All parkinsonian medications will be converted to Levodopa dose equivalents (LED)|12, 26 and 52 weeks post first lead implantation|40 completed Baseline, 35 completed Week12, 39 completed Week 26 and 38 completed Week 52||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
828904|NCT01221948|Secondary|Mean Change in UPDRS II Score From Baseline Meds Off to 12, 26 and 52 Weeks Post First Lead Implantation Stim on/Meds Off.|"Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part II (UPDRS II) is a sub-section of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating scale designed to evaluate Activities of Daily Living. This section contains 13 items.
Each item is scored on a scale from 0 (normal) to 4 (disabled), with the total score for the 13 items ranging from 0 to 52."|12, 26 and 52 weeks post first lead implantation|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828905|NCT01221948|Secondary|Mean Change in UPDRS III Score From Baseline Meds Off to 12 and 52 Weeks Post First Lead Implantation Stim on/Meds Off.|"Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III (UPDRS III) is the motor sub-section of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating scale designed to evaluate overall motor disability, including the classic symptoms of Parkinson's Disease. This section has 14 items.
Each item is scored on a scale from 0 (normal) to 4 (severe, marked, or unable), with the total possible score for the 14 items, including separate questions regarding symptoms present axially and in appendages, ranging from 0 to 108 with lower scores representing better results."|12 and 52 weeks post first lead implantation|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
828906|NCT01222078|Secondary|Terminal Phase Half-life (Thalf) of Otelixizumab|Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Pre-dose and EOI on Dosing Day 1, EOI on Dosing Days 2, 3, 5-7 and Pre-dose, EOI, 6 hours post SOI on Dosing days 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||hours||Full Range|Median
828907|NCT01222078|Secondary|Time of Last Observed Quantifiable Concentration (Tlast) of Otelixizumab|Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Pre-dose and EOI on Dosing Day 1, EOI on Dosing Days 2, 3, 5-7 and Pre-dose, EOI, 6 hours post SOI on Dosing days 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||hours||Full Range|Median
828908|NCT01222078|Secondary|Area Under the Serum Concentration-time Curve [AUC(0-tlast)] of Otelixizumab|Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Pre-dose and EOI on Dosing Day 1, EOI on Dosing Days 2, 3, 5-7 and Pre-dose, EOI, 6 hours post SOI on Dosing days 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||Hours times nanograms per milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
828909|NCT01222078|Secondary|Time to Cmax (Tmax) of Otelixizumab|Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Pre-dose and EOI on Dosing Day 1, EOI on Dosing Days 2, 3, 5-7 and Pre-dose, EOI, 6 hours post SOI on Dosing days 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||hours||Full Range|Median
828910|NCT01222078|Secondary|Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmax) of Otelixizumab|Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Pre-dose and EOI on Dosing Day 1, EOI on Dosing Days 2, 3, 5-7 and Pre-dose, EOI, 6 hours post SOI on Dosing days 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
828911|NCT01222078|Secondary|Mean Individual Serum Concentrations of Otelixizumab|Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Pre-dose and EOI on Dosing Day 1, EOI on Dosing Days 2, 3, 5-7 and Pre-dose, EOI, 6 hours post SOI on Dosing days 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||Nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
828912|NCT01222078|Secondary|Mean Saturation of CD3 Antigen on Peripheral Blood T Cells|Assessment of CD3 antigen was planned to be done on Day 1, 4 and 8 of first treatment course. The data was planned to be presented with unit Molecules of Equivalent Soluble Fluorochrome (MESF). Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Days 1, 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||MESF||Standard Deviation|Mean
828913|NCT01222078|Secondary|Mean Circulating CD4+ and CD8+ Subset Counts|Circulating peripheral CD4+ and CD8+ T cells were planned to be measured before, during and after dose 1, 4 and 8 of first treatment course. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Days 1, 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||Percent total lymphocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
828914|NCT01222078|Secondary|Mean Circulating Peripheral T Lymphocytes Count|Circulating peripheral T lymphocytes were planned to be measured before, during and after dose 1, 4 and 8 of first treatment course. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Day 1, 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
828915|NCT01222078|Primary|Proportion of Anti-otelixizumab Neutralizing Antibodies|Antibodies to otelixizumab were planned to be measured at Baseline and at specified post-Baseline visits using a validated immunoassay. If a positive result was detected, the samples were analyzed further in a neutralizing antibody assay to determine if the antibodies were neutralizing. The 12 and 24 month samples were only be taken if a participant had a positive result for antibodies at the last tested time point (Month 9) or if the Month 9 test results were not available.|Up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828916|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Serum Levels of Anti-otelixizumab Binding Antibodies|Antibodies to otelixizumab were planned to be measured at Baseline and at specified post-Baseline visits using a validated immunoassay. If a positive result was detected, the samples were analyzed further in a neutralizing antibody assay to determine if the antibodies were neutralizing. The 12 and 24 month samples were only be taken if a participant had a positive result for antibodies at the last tested time point (Month 9) or if the Month 9 test results were not available.|Up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828917|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change in Circulating Peripheral CD4+ and CD8+ Subset Counts|Circulating peripheral CD4+ and CD8+ T cells were planned to be measured before, during and after dose 1, 4 and 8 of first treatment course. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not analyzed.|Days 1, 4 and 8 of each treatment course|Safety Population||Percent total lymphocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829130|NCT01216631|Secondary|Rheumatoid Arthritis Outcome Score (RAOS)|Change in RAOS questionnaire score|2 weeks||||||
828921|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) Viral Load|Levels of EBV were assessed periodically using Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction. If a participant had an EBV viral load of >=10,000 copies per 10^6 Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMCs) at any visit, the test was repeated as soon as possible to confirm this result. If the result was confirmed, the test was repeated weekly for 2 weeks or until the count decreases to < 10,000 copies per 10^6 PBMCs, whichever was longer. The EBV Load remained zero throughout the study. Participant did not received re-dose of second treatment period and withdrew on study Day 164 because of early study termination. The viral load was to measure using unit copies per 10^6 Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMCs)|Up to Month 24|Safety Population||Copies per 10^6 PBMCs||Standard Deviation|Mean
828922|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Red Blood Cell Count|Hematology parameters were planned to be analyzed from Baseline to Month 24. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828923|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin Value|Hematology parameters were planned to be analyzed from Baseline to Month 24. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828924|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin Value|Hematology parameters were planned to be analyzed from Baseline to Month 24. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828925|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Platelet Count and White Blood Cell Count|Hematology parameters were planned to be analyzed from Baseline to Month 24. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828926|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Value of Estradiol|Clinical chemistry parameters were planned to be analyzed from Baseline to Month 24. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828927|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Value of Calcium, Chloride, Carbon Dioxide Content/Bicarbonate, Glucose, Potassium, Magnesium, Sodium, Inorganic Phosphorus and Urea/Blood Urea Nitrogen|Clinical chemistry parameters were planned to be analyzed from Baseline to Month 24. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828928|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Value of Direct Bilirubin, Total Bilirubin, Creatinine and Uric Acid|Clinical chemistry parameters were planned to be analyzed from Baseline to Month 24. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828929|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Value of Alkaline Phosphatase, Alanine Amino Transferase, Aspartate Amino Transferase, Creatinine Kinase, Follicle Stimulating Hormone, Gamma Glutamyl Tranferase and Lactate Dehydrogenase|Clinical chemistry parameters were planned to be analyzed from Baseline to Month 24. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828930|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Value of Albumin and Total Protein|Clinical chemistry parameters were planned to be analyzed from Baseline to Month 24. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828931|NCT01222078|Primary|Number of Participants With Values Outside the Normal Range for Vitals|Vital included assessment of SBP, DBP, respiration rate, heart rate and temperature were assessed at sitting position. Participant did not received re-dose of second treatment period and withdrew on study Day 164 because of early study termination.|Up to Month 24|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
828932|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Heart Rate|Heart rate was recorded at sitting position at Baseline and post-treatment period. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828933|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Temperature|Temperature was recorded at sitting position at Baseline and post treatment. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828934|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Respiration Rate|Respiration rate was assessed at sitting position at Baseline and post-treatment. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
828935|NCT01222078|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|Blood pressure was assessed at sitting position at Baseline and 1 to 7 hours of post-infusion of first treatment period. Day 1 value was considered to be Baseline value. Change from Baseline was planned to be calculated as any post-Baseline value minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Month 24|Safety Population. Because of the early termination of the study the data was not collected.|||||
829131|NCT01216631|Secondary|Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life Scale (PsQOL)|Change in PsQOL score from baseline|2 weeks||||||
828936|NCT01222078|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious AEs (SAEs)|AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. SAE include adverse events that result in any of the following outcomes: death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, a persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal functions, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect. Important medical events that may not result in death, be life-threatening, or require hospitalization may be considered serious when, based upon appropriate medical judgment, they may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed in this definition. Study was early terminated and participant withdrew on study Day 164.|Up to Month 24|Safety Population consisted of participants who had received at least one dose of infusion.||Participants|||Number
828937|NCT01222104|Secondary|Rate of Minor Vascular Complications by Presence of Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD)|Presence of peripheral vascular disease (PVD) and its effect on minor vascular complications.|30 days|||% of procedures with minor vasc comp.|Participants||Number
828938|NCT01222104|Secondary|Rate of Major Vascular Complications (MVC) by Presence of Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD)|Presence of peripheral vascular disease (PVD) and its effect on Major Vascular Complications (MVC).|30 days|||% of procedures with MVCs|Participants||Number
828939|NCT01222104|Secondary|Impact of Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD) on Achieving Hemostasis by Device|Presence of peripheral vascular disease (PVD) and its effect on hemostasis. Initial hemostasis by device achieved.|30 days|||% of procedures achieving hemostasis|Participants||Number
828940|NCT01222104|Secondary|Impact of Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD) on Use of Closure Device|Presence of peripheral vascular disease (PVD) and its effect on the decision to use a closure device|30 days|||% of procedures using closure device|Participants||Number
828941|NCT01222104|Secondary|Rate of Minor Vascular Complications by Guided Access Mode.|The influence of fluoroscopy and/or ultrasound guided access on minor vascular complications.|30 days|||% of procedures with minor vasc comp.|Participants||Number
828942|NCT01222104|Secondary|Rate of Major Vascular Complications (MVCs) by Guided Access Mode.|The influence of fluoroscopy and/or ultrasound guided access on Major Vascular Complications (MVCs).|30 days|||% of procedures with MVCs|Participants||Number
828943|NCT01222104|Secondary|Impact of Guided Access on Achieving Target Puncture Location.|The influence of fluoroscopy and/or ultrasound guided access on puncture location.|30 days|Deployed subjects with readable angiograms||% within target zone|||Number
828944|NCT01222104|Secondary|Impact of Guided Access on Use of Closure Device.|The influence of fluoroscopy and/or ultrasound guided access on the decision to use a closure device.|30 days|Percentage of procedures with devices deployed||% of procedures using a closure device|Participants||Number
828945|NCT01222104|Secondary|Rate of Minor Vascular Complications|"The following are defined as a minor vascular complication:
Unanticipated access site bleeding requiring ≥ 30 minutes of manual compression to re-achieve hemostasis;
Ipsilateral hematoma >10 cm;
Ipsilateral pseudoaneurysm without intervention;
Ipsilateral arteriovenous fistula;
Ipsilateral deep vein thrombosis;
Local access site infection without prolonged hospitalization"|30 days|||% of procedures with minor vasc comp.|Participants||Number
828946|NCT01222104|Secondary|Time to Hemostasis|Time-to-hemostasis stratified into 3 categories: hemostasis in less than 1 minute alone or in combination with manual compression (standard of care), 1-5 minutes alone or in combination with manual compression (standard of care), and/or hemostasis achieved >5 minutes and/or with additional hemostasis methods required.|Procedure|||% of procedures|Participants||Number
828947|NCT01222104|Primary|Rate of Major Vascular Complications|"Collect data on patients who have undergone a diagnostic and/or interventional radiology procedure in which the St. Jude Medical (SJM) Angio-Seal Evolution or V-Twist Integrated Platform (VIP) Device was deployed, to evaluate the rate of major vascular complications out to 30 days post-procedure.
The following are defined as a major vascular complication:
Vascular injury requiring repair via surgery, angioplasty, ultrasound guided compression, thrombin injection, or other means;
Permanent (unresolved at 30-day post-procedure evaluation) access site-related nerve injury or access site-related nerve injury requiring intervention;
Access site related bleeding requiring transfusion;
New ipsilateral lower extremity ischemia requiring surgical intervention;
Retroperitoneal bleeding;
Generalized infection requiring prolonged hospitalization and/or treatment with IV antibiotics;
Access related complication that results in extended hospital stay;
Death"|30 days|5 subjects underwent vascular closure with Angio-Seal on right and left sides.||Percentage of Procedures|Participants||Number
828948|NCT01222117|Secondary|The Incidence of Major and Minor Bleeding Events, Deaths, Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events, and Abnormal Laboratory Values as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability.|The incidence of major and minor bleeding events, deaths, adverse events, serious adverse events, and abnormal laboratory values as a measure of safety and tolerability.|30 days|Subjects were excluded from the safety population if they did not receive any dose of Plasmin (groups I and J) or placebo (group F)||percentage of participants|||Number
828949|NCT01222117|Primary|The Proportion of Subjects With >50% Thrombolysis|The proportion of subjects with >50% thrombolysis at the end of treatment compared to baseline by arteriography.|5 hours (Treatment Groups A, B, C, G, I, M) or 2 hours (Treatment Groups D, H, J)|In groups A-D, G and H, 8 subjects were excluded (EOT arteriogram missing or not read, did not receive >=90% of dose). In groups I and J, 11 subjects were excluded (BOC not inserted/appropriately inflated, missing an arteriogram). In group F, 1 subject was not dosed and 4 subjects were excluded (did not receive >=90% of dose).||percentage of participants|||Number
828950|NCT01222195|Primary|Number of Patients With a Transfusion Independence Response|Response defined as transfusion independence (no red blood cell transfusions) for at least 8 weeks, anytime during the six 28-day cycles of therapy.|Over six 28-day cycles (approximately 168 days)|Analysis was per protocol.||participants|||Number
828951|NCT01222234|Primary|Change in 24,25(OH)2D Levels in CKD vs. Non-CKD Subjects Receiving Cholecalciferol||8 weeks of therapy|The primary comparison for this outcome of interest was between subjects taking cholecalciferol, so the calcitriol group (group 2) was excluded from the analysis. Only 15 patients per group had data analyzed for this outcome of interest; thus, the number analyzed per group differs from the enrolled numbers.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
829132|NCT01216631|Secondary|Pain Visual Analogue Scale|Change in patient's assessment of pain by a 100mm visual analogue score|2 weeks||||||
828952|NCT01222234|Primary|Monocyte Protein Expression|Flow cytometry analysis of monocyte CD14, ACE, VDR, and Mac-1 expression|8 weeks of therapy|The primary comparison for this outcome was between only CKD groups (groups 1 and 2); therefore data from the non-CKD group (group 3) was not analyzed for this outcome. Only 15 patients per group had data analyzed for this outcome of interest; thus, the number analyzed per group differs from the enrolled numbers.||relative fluorescence units||Standard Deviation|Mean
828953|NCT01222286|Secondary|Secondary Anti-tumor Activity|"any change of M-protein in serum occurring during the study (>25 percentage increase in level of serum M-protein)
progression to active Multiple Myeloma
Definition of active Multiple Myeloma: Evidence of progression based on the IMWG criteria for progressive disease in myeloma and any one or more of the following felt related to the underlying clonal plasma cell proliferative disorder :
Development of new soft tissue plasmacytomas or bone lesions
Hypercalcemia (> 11mg/100ml)
Decrease in hemoglobin of > 2g/100ml
Rise in serum creatinine by 2 mg/100ml or more"|from start to end of study (14 months)|||Participant|||Number
828954|NCT01222286|Secondary|Pharmacodynamics of IPH2101|biological activity of IPH2101 on KIR occupancy at End of Treatment|from start to end of study (14 months)|all subjects who received at least 1 dose of IPH2101||% of occupancy of killer like receptor||Full Range|Mean
828955|NCT01222286|Secondary|Safety Assessment|adverse events, physical examination and biological changes during the whole clinical trial.|Adverse events collected from screening visit (date of signature of Inform Consent Form) up to the End of Study, up to 14 months|The safety population included all subjects who received at least 1 dose of IPH2101||Patients with any AE|||Number
828956|NCT01222286|Primary|Rate of Patients Achieving an Objective Response|The primary end point is the rate of patients achieving an objective response (defined according to the International Myeloma Working Group uniform response criteria), including minimal response, (as derived from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria), achieved at any time until end of study and confirmed on two consecutive assessments at 4 weeks interval.|from start to end of study (14 months)|The ITT population included all randomized subjects.||participants|||Number
828957|NCT01222390|Primary|Breast Projection|The primary outcome of interest for this study was the change in breast projection from the time of maximum tissue expander fill volume, to 3 months after the tissue expander/implant exchange surgery. Upon final fill of the tissue expander, the breast has a certain projection. Once the fully expanded tissue expander is exchanged for the permanent implant, the patients' breast projection changes gradually over time. The change in breast projection is measured in percent change of projection from baseline (the time of the final, maximum expander fill) to 3 months after the tissue expander/implant exchange surgery (at which time a change in projection has occurred).|1.5 years|||percentage loss of projection|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
828958|NCT01222390|Secondary|Location of Volume Change|3-D photos will be taken to assess the location of volume and contour changes in the breast.|1.5 years||||||
828959|NCT01222390|Secondary|Emotional Outcomes|Emotional outcomes will be compared between the two groups using respective questionnaires. Questionnaires will be filled out pre-operatively, prior to implant exchange and 3 months following tissue expander/implant exchange.|1.5 years||||||
828960|NCT01222390|Secondary|Complication Rate|Complications may include hematoma, seroma, infection, implant migration, inflammation or explantation.|1.5 years||||||
828961|NCT01222390|Secondary|Aesthetic Outcomes|Aesthetic outcomes will be compared between the two groups using respective questionnaires. Questionnaires will be filled out pre-operatively, prior to implant exchange and 3 months following tissue expander/implant exchange.|1.5 years||||||
828962|NCT01222403|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) After Vaccination.|The number of subjects reporting any unsolicited AEs, SAEs, AEs leading to withdrawal (WD), AEs of special interest (AESI) following vaccination with Fluad_aTIV and Vantaflu_aTIV.|Day 1 through Day 28 post vaccination|Analysis was done on safety population.||Number of Subjects|||Number
828963|NCT01222403|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited AEs After Vaccination.|The number of subjects reporting any unsolicited AEs following vaccination with Fluad_aTIV and Vantaflu_aTIV.|Day 1 through Day 28 post vaccination|Analysis was done on safety population.||Number of Subjects|||Number
828964|NCT01222403|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Adverse Events (AEs) After Vaccination.|The number of subjects reporting any solicited local and systemic AEs, following vaccination with Fluad_aTIV and Vantaflu_aTIV.|Day 1 through Day 4 after vaccination|Analysis was done on safety population ie. all subjects in the exposed set who provided postvaccination safety data.||Number of Subjects|||Number
828965|NCT01222416|Secondary|Compare and Combine Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRIs) (Obtained From Study BRE0588) and Positron Emission Tomography/ Computed Tomography (PET/CT) Methods to Develop a Robust Assessment of Tumor Status.||48 months|There were insufficient number of patients who had both MRI and PET performed to allow for meaningful statistical comparisons.|||||
828966|NCT01222416|Primary|The Difference in the Change (Pre and End-treatment) of Standard Uptake Value (SUV) Between Pathological Non-responders and Responders (pCR)|The quantitative measures of standard uptake value (SULpeak and SULmax, prone and supine position) from PET were obtained. SUV = (Tracer activity in tissue)/(Injected radiotracer dose/patient weight or lean body mass) with unit microcuries/g/(millicuries/kg) (no unit after simplification). The SUV was averaged over the tumor regions. These averages were computed for each patient at each time point. All patients were were planned to be scanned three times: prior to treatment, during treatment and at the end of treatment. The change of SUV was calculated as the end of treatment value minus the pre-treatment value. Then the difference in the change between the responders and non-responders were estimated using Wilcoxon rank sum test. The pseudomedians and nonparametric confidence intervals for the difference (change of non-responders minus the change of responders) were reported for parameters SULpeak and SULmax measured for different positions. Pathological response were measured at the|up to 6 months (1 scan prior to chemotherapy and 2 scans prior to surgery)|19 Patients had the scanned data at two time points: prior treatment and at the end of treatment.||microcuries/g/(millicuries/kg)||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828997|NCT01222533|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under the Curve 0 to 6 Hours (AUC0-6h) at the End of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 AUC0-6h calculated from zero time to 6 hours using the trapezoidal rule divided by 6 hours. Trough FEV1 will be assigned to zero time. Means are adjusted for sequence, patients within sequences, period and treatment.|4 weeks|FAS with imputed data.||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
829133|NCT01216631|Secondary|US Synovitis Score|Change in US synovitis score of the affected knee at 2 and 8 weeks after treatment initiation|2 weeks||||||
828967|NCT01222507|Primary|Brain Speed Test|This test involves the presentation of two consecutive high or low-frequency sound sweeps that requires the participant to correctly identify the order of presentation of the sound sweeps. Correct identification of the sound sweeps requires intact brain processing speed and attention. Scores are presented relative to age-matched controls used in validating the test. The normative data for the controls for this test will be provided by Posit Science® to the PI.|Initial study visit|The number of subjects who completed the study according to protocol.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Median
828968|NCT01222520|Secondary|Seated Blood Pressure (BP) Normalisation at Trough|Seated blood pressure (BP) normalisation: The numbers of patients whose blood pressure was within normalisation criterion in terms of seated blood pressure after the 8-week double-blind period At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|8 weeks|FAS||Participants|||Number
828969|NCT01222520|Secondary|Seated SBP Response Rate at Trough|SBP response rate: The rate of patients who achieved an adequate response in seated SBP at trough (<140 mmHg and/or reduction from reference baseline ≥20 mmHg) after the 8-week double-blind period At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|8 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
828970|NCT01222520|Secondary|Seated DBP Response Rate at Trough|DBP response rate: The rate of patients who achieved an adequate response in seated DBP at trough (<90 mmHg and/or reduction from reference baseline ≥10 mmHg) after the 8-week double-blind period At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|8 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
828971|NCT01222520|Secondary|Seated SBP Control Rate at Trough|SBP control rate: The rate of patients with controlled seated SBP at trough of less than 140 mmHg after the 8-week double-blind period At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|8 weeks|Patients included in FAS and with seated SBP ≥140 mmHg at reference baseline||Percentage of participants|||Number
828972|NCT01222520|Secondary|Seated DBP Control Rate at Trough|DBP control rate: The rate of patients with controlled seated DBP at trough of less than 90 mmHg after the 8-week double-blind period At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|8 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
828973|NCT01222520|Secondary|Reduction From the Reference Baseline in Mean Seated Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) at Trough|Reference baseline: Status of patients after the 8-week open-label run-in period with telmisartan monotherapy, where patients' eligibility to enter the double-blind treatment period was examined At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|Baseline, 8 weeks|FAS||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828974|NCT01222520|Primary|Reduction From the Reference Baseline in Mean Seated Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) at Trough|Reference baseline: Status of patients after the 8-week open-label run-in period with telmisartan monotherapy, where patients' eligibility to enter the double-blind treatment period was examined At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|Baseline, 8 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS)||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
828975|NCT01222533|Other Pre-specified|VPB Singles|"The outcome measure describes the number of patients with a Ventricular Premature Beat (VPB) single evaluated over the entire 6.5 h Holter monitoring period. The arrhythmia variables were pre-specified for day 29 and analysed post-hoc for day 26. The lines Day 29 1st h and Day 26 1st h are related to the interval 0 h to 1 h, i.e. the first hour after dosing."|6.5 hours (including pre dose)|ECGFAS - including all patients in the treated set for whom continuous 12 lead ECGs (Holter monitoring) were recorded on at least one occasion (pacemaker patients were excluded)||participants|||Number
828976|NCT01222533|Other Pre-specified|VPB Pairs|"The outcome measure describes the number of patients with a Ventricular Premature Beat (VPB) pair evaluated over the entire 6.5 h Holter monitoring period. Pairs were defined as 2 consecutive premature beats in a row. The arrhythmia variables were pre-specified for day 29 and analysed post-hoc for day 26. The lines Day 29 1st h and Day 26 1st h are related to the interval 0 h to 1 h, i.e. the first hour after dosing."|6.5 hours (including pre dose)|ECGFAS - including all patients in the treated set for whom continuous 12 lead ECGs (Holter monitoring) were recorded on at least one occasion (pacemaker patients were excluded)||participants|||Number
828977|NCT01222533|Other Pre-specified|VPB Runs|"The outcome measure describes the number of patients with a Ventricular Premature Beat (VPB) run evaluated over the entire 6.5 h Holter monitoring period. Runs were defined as at least 3 premature beats in a row. The arrhythmia variables were pre-specified for day 29 and analysed post-hoc for day 26. The lines Day 29 1st h and Day 26 1st h are related to the interval 0 h to 1 h, i.e. the first hour after dosing."|6.5 hours (including pre dose)|ECGFAS - including all patients in the treated set for whom continuous 12 lead ECGs (Holter monitoring) were recorded on at least one occasion (pacemaker patients were excluded)||participants|||Number
828978|NCT01222533|Other Pre-specified|VPB Total|"The outcome measure describes the number of patients with a Ventricular Premature Beat (VPB) event evaluated over the entire 6.5 h Holter monitoring period. The arrhythmia variables were pre-specified for day 29 and analysed post-hoc for day 26. The lines Day 29 1st h and Day 26 1st h are related to the interval 0 h to 1 h, i.e. the first hour after dosing."|6.5 hours (including pre dose)|ECGFAS - including all patients in the treated set for whom continuous 12 lead ECGs (Holter monitoring) were recorded on at least one occasion (pacemaker patients were excluded)||participants|||Number
828979|NCT01222533|Other Pre-specified|SVPB Singles|"The outcome measure describes the number of patients with a Supraventricular Premature Beat (SVPB) single evaluated over the entire 6.5 h Holter monitoring period. The arrhythmia variables were pre-specified for day 29 and analysed post-hoc for day 26. The lines Day 29 1st h and Day 26 1st h are related to the interval 0 h to 1 h, i.e. the first hour after dosing."|6.5 hours (including pre dose)|ECGFAS - including all patients in the treated set for whom continuous 12 lead ECGs (Holter monitoring) were recorded on at least one occasion (pacemaker patients were excluded)||participants|||Number
828980|NCT01222533|Other Pre-specified|SVPB Pairs|"The outcome measure describes the number of patients with a Supraventricular Premature Beat (SVPB) pair evaluated over the entire 6.5 h Holter monitoring period. Pairs were defined as 2 consecutive premature beats in a row. The arrhythmia variables were pre-specified for day 29 and analysed post-hoc for day 26. The lines Day 29 1st h and Day 26 1st h are related to the interval 0 h to 1 h, i.e. the first hour after dosing."|6.5 hours (including pre dose)|ECGFAS - including all patients in the treated set for whom continuous 12 lead ECGs (Holter monitoring) were recorded on at least one occasion (pacemaker patients were excluded)||participants|||Number
829096|NCT01216397|Secondary|Metformin: AUC0-infinity|Geometric Mean of AUC0-infinity of Metformin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828981|NCT01222533|Other Pre-specified|SVPB Runs|"The outcome measure describes the number of patients with a Supraventricular Premature Beat (SVPB) run evaluated over the entire 6.5 h Holter monitoring period. Runs were defined as at least 3 premature beats in a row. The arrhythmia variables were pre-specified for day 29 and analysed post-hoc for day 26. The lines Day 29 1st h and Day 26 1st h are related to the interval 0 h to 1 h, i.e. the first hour after dosing."|6.5 hours (including pre dose)|ECGFAS - including all patients in the treated set for whom continuous 12 lead ECGs (Holter monitoring) were recorded on at least one occasion (pacemaker patients were excluded)||participants|||Number
828982|NCT01222533|Other Pre-specified|SVPB Total|"The outcome measure describes the number of patients with a Supraventricular Premature Beat (SVPB) event evaluated over the entire 6.5 h Holter monitoring period. The arrhythmia variables were pre-specified for day 29 and analysed post-hoc for day 26. The lines Day 29 1st h and Day 26 1st h are related to the interval 0 h to 1 h, i.e. the first hour after dosing."|6.5 hours (including pre dose)|ECGFAS - including all patients in the treated set for whom continuous 12 lead ECGs (Holter monitoring) were recorded on at least one occasion (pacemaker patients were excluded)||participants|||Number
828983|NCT01222533|Other Pre-specified|Mean Heart Rate (HR)|"Mean HR evaluated over the entire 6.5 h Holter monitoring period. The arrhythmia variables were pre-specified for day 29 and analysed post-hoc for day 26. The lines Day 29 1st h and Day 26 1st h are related to the interval 0 h to 1 h, i.e. the first hour after dosing."|6.5 hours (including pre dose)|ECGFAS - including all patients in the treated set for whom continuous 12 lead ECGs (Holter monitoring) were recorded on at least one occasion (pacemaker patients were excluded)||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828984|NCT01222533|Other Pre-specified|Maximum Heart Rate (HR)|"Maximum HR evaluated over the entire 6.5 h Holter monitoring period. The arrhythmia variables were pre-specified for day 29 and analysed post-hoc for day 26. The lines Day 29 1st h and Day 26 1st h are related to the interval 0 h to 1 h, i.e. the first hour after dosing."|6.5 hours (including pre dose)|ECGFAS - including all patients in the treated set for whom continuous 12 lead ECGs (Holter monitoring) were recorded on at least one occasion (pacemaker patients were excluded).||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
828985|NCT01222533|Secondary|Minimum Plasma Concentration at Steady-state (Cmin,ss)|Cmin,ss is the minimum measured concentration of tiotropium in plasma at steady-state.|Based on blood sampling for PK assessments done at 4 weeks at the following time points: 5 min before first dosing of study drug (baseline) and at 2 min , 5 min, 7 min, 9 min, 12 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, 40 min, 1 h, 2 h, 4 h and 6 h post dosing.|PK Set. All patients with analysable data.||pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828986|NCT01222533|Secondary|Renal Clearance at Steady-state (CL R,0-6h,ss)|Renal clearance of the drug over the time interval 0 to 6 hours at steady-state. CL R,0-6h,ss was calculated as the quotient of Ae0-6h,ss and AUC0-6h,ss.|Based on blood and urine sampling for PK assessments done at 4 weeks over 6 h post dosing.|PK Set. All patients with analysable data.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828987|NCT01222533|Secondary|Pre-dose Plasma Concentration at Steady-state (Cpre,ss)|Cpre,ss is the measured concentration of tiotropium in plasma before dosing at steady-state.|Based on blood sampling for PK assessments done at 4 weeks at the following time point: 5 minutes (min) before first dosing of study drug (baseline)|PK Set. All patients with analysable data.||pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828988|NCT01222533|Secondary|Amount of Drug Eliminated in Urine at Steady-state (Ae0-6h,ss)|Total quantity of the analyte that is excreted in urine over the time interval 0 to 6 hours at steady state.|Based on urine sampling for PK assessments done at 4 weeks in the following intervals: -1 to 0 hour (h), 0 to 2 h and 2 to 6 h post-dosing.|PK Set. All patients with analysable data.||ng||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828989|NCT01222533|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration at Steady-state (Tmax,ss)|Tmax,ss is the time from dosing to the maximum concentration of tiotropium in plasma-venous blood at steady-state.|Based on blood sampling for PK assessments done at 4 weeks at the following time points: 5 min before first dosing of study drug (baseline) and at 2 min , 5 min, 7 min, 9 min, 12 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, 40 min, 1 h, 2 h, 4 h and 6 h post dosing.|PK Set. All patients with analysable data.||hours||Full Range|Median
828990|NCT01222533|Secondary|Area Under the Curve 0 to 1 Hour at Steady-state (AUC0-1h,ss)|AUC0-1h,ss is the area under the concentration time curve of tiotropium in plasma over the time interval 0 to 1 hour post-dose at steady-state. AUC0-1h,ss was calculated using the linear up/log down algorithm.|Based on blood sampling for PK assessments done at 4 weeks at the following time points: 5 minutes (min) before study drug (baseline) and at 2 min , 5 min, 7 min, 9 min, 12 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, 40 min, 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h and 6 h post dosing.|PK Set. All patients with analysable data.||pg*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828991|NCT01222533|Secondary|FVC at Each Planned Time at the End of Each Treatment Period|Means are adjusted for period, planned time, period*planned time, patient*planned time and patient*treatment*planned time.|4 weeks|FAS with imputed data. One patient with missing FVC data in Placebo and Tio R2.5 period.||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
828992|NCT01222533|Secondary|FEV1 at Each Planned Time at the End of Each Treatment Period|Means are adjusted for period, planned time, period*planned time, patient*planned time and patient*treatment*planned time.|4 weeks|FAS with imputed data.||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
828993|NCT01222533|Secondary|FVC AUC0-3h at the End of Each Treatment Period|FVC AUC0-3h calculated from zero time to 3 hours using the trapezoidal rule divided by 3 hours. Trough FVC will be assigned to zero time. Means are adjusted for sequence, patients within sequences, period and treatment.|4 weeks|FAS with imputed data. One patient with missing FVC data in Placebo and Tio R2.5 period.||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
828994|NCT01222533|Secondary|FVC AUC0-6h at the End of Each Treatment Period|FVC AUC0-6h calculated from zero time to 6 hours using the trapezoidal rule divided by 6 hours. Trough FVC will be assigned to zero time. Means are adjusted for sequence, patients within sequences, period and treatment.|4 weeks|FAS with imputed data. One patient with missing FVC data in Placebo and Tio R2.5 period.||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
828995|NCT01222533|Secondary|Trough Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) at the End of Each Treatment Period|Defined as the pre-dose FVC measured just prior to the last administration of the morning dose of the randomised treatment. Means are adjusted for sequence, patients within sequences, period and treatment.|4 weeks|FAS with imputed data. One patient with missing FVC data in Placebo and Tio R2.5 period.||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
829097|NCT01216397|Primary|Metformin: AUC0-tz|Geometric Mean of AUC0-tz of Metformin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
828998|NCT01222533|Secondary|Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at the End of Each Treatment Period|Defined as FEV1 measured just prior to the last administration of the morning dose of the randomised treatment. Means are adjusted for sequence, patients within sequences, period and treatment.|4 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) with imputed data. FAS includes all patients in the treated set who have analysable data for at least one efficacy endpoint during the relevant crossover period.||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
828999|NCT01222533|Primary|Area Under the Curve 0 to 6 Hours at Steady-state (AUC0-6h,ss)|AUC0-6h,ss is the area under the concentration time curve of tiotropium in plasma over the time interval 0 to 6 hours post-dose at steady-state. AUC0-6h,ss was calculated using the linear up/log down algorithm.|Based on blood sampling for PK assessments done at 4 weeks at the following time points: 5 minutes (min) before study drug (baseline) and at 2 min , 5 min, 7 min, 9 min, 12 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, 40 min, 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h and 6 h post dosing.|PK Set. No PK data for Placebo. The low number of non-missing AUC0-6h,ss results for the Tio R 1.25 and Tio R 2.5 cohorts is due to the exclusion of results below the limit of quantification.||pg*h/ml||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829000|NCT01222533|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration at Steady-state (Cmax,ss)|Cmax,ss is the maximum measured concentration of tiotropium in plasma at steady-state.|Based on blood sampling for PK assessments done at 4 weeks at the following time points: 5 minutes (min) before study drug (baseline) and at 2 min , 5 min, 7 min, 9 min, 12 min, 15 min, 20 min, 30 min, 40 min, 1 hour (h), 2 h, 4 h and 6 h post dosing.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Set. This analysis set includes all patients in the treated set who had at least one blood sample drawn or one urine sample collected for PK analysis. Patients with an important protocol violation relevant to the PK population were excluded. No PK data for placebo. All patients with analysable data.||pg/ml||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829001|NCT01222572|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)|"The MTD is determined by the number of patients who experience a dose limiting toxicity (DLT). The MTD is defined as the highest dose at which fewer than one-third of patients experience a DLT. If no DLTs are observed, the MTD is not reached.
DLTs were defined as follows (CTCAE v4.0):
Grade 2 non-hematologic toxicities: Myelitis; Esophageal fistula, perforation, hemorrhage
Grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities considered to be a direct result of therapy:
Radiation pneumonitis; Pericarditis, pericardial effusion, pericardial tamponade; Esophageal necrosis, stenosis, ulcer; Dyspnea; Myelitis Grade 4 non-hematologic toxicities: Radiation pneumonitis; Pericarditis, pericardial effusion, pericardial tamponade; Esophagitis (not due to mediastinal irradiation unrelated to the stereotactic boost), esophageal necrosis, stenosis, ulcer; Dyspnea; Myelitis Grade 5 non-hematologic toxicity: Any"|7-week chemoradiotherapy period and the subsequent 8-week recovery period|All treated participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and were evaluable for DLT.||participants with DLT|||Number
829002|NCT01222585|Primary|Volume of Distribution|Volume of Distribution (L/kg)|2-5 days of study drug administration|The PK analysis was conducted using samples from 23 subjects. One subject died soon after the loading dose and was excluded from the analysis. Two subjects had no multiple dose samples. Thus data from 20 subjects were used to estimate the PK parameter.||L/kg||Full Range|Median
829003|NCT01222585|Primary|Clearance|Clearance (L/h/kg)|2-5 days of study drug administration|The PK analysis was conducted using samples from 23 subjects. One subject died soon after the loading dose and was excluded from the analysis. Two subjects had no multiple dose samples. Thus data from 20 subjects were used to estimate the PK parameter.||L/h/kg||Full Range|Median
829004|NCT01222585|Primary|Multiple Dose Minimum Concentration|Multiple Dose Minimum Concentration (mg/L)|2-5 days of study drug administration|The sample size contains the number of subjects that had the sample of interest collected.||mg/L||Full Range|Median
829005|NCT01222585|Primary|Multiple Dose Maximum Concentration|Multiple Dose Maximum Concentration (mg/L)|2-5 days of study drug administration|The PK analysis was conducted using samples from 23 subjects. One subject died soon after the loading dose and was excluded from the analysis. Two subjects had no multiple dose samples. Thus data from 20 subjects were used to estimate the multiple dose PK parameter.||mg/L||Full Range|Median
829006|NCT01222585|Primary|Loading Dose Minimum Concentration|Loading Dose Minimum Concentration (mg/L)|2-5 days of study drug administration|The sample size contains the number of subjects that had the sample of interest collected.||mg/L||Full Range|Median
829007|NCT01222585|Primary|Loading Dose Maximum Concentration|Loading Dose Maximum concentration (Cmax)|2-5 days of study drug administration|The sample size contains the number of subjects that had the sample of interest collected.||mg/L||Full Range|Median
829008|NCT01222585|Primary|Area Under the Curve at Steady State|Area under the curve at steady state (AUCss)|pre-dose: 30 min; post-dose:10 min, 3-4,6-8, 12-13, 24-25, 36-37, 48-49, 72-73 hours post dose|The PK analysis was conducted using samples from 23 subjects. One subject died soon after the loading dose and was excluded from the analysis. Two subjects had no multiple dose samples. Thus data from 20 subjects were used to estimate this PK parameter.||mg*hr/L||Full Range|Median
829009|NCT01222689|Secondary|Number of Patients With Dose Modifications and Reason for Dose Modification.|Tabulation of the reasons for dose modification with number of patients|Up to final day of study treatment|Numbers in tabulation total to more than 18 because patients often had 2 or more reasons that prompted dose reduction. For example: Nausea/Vomiting + diarrhea (3), fatigue + diarrhea (2), rash + hypertension (1), rash + diarrhea (1), fatigue + Nausea/Vomiting (1)||participants|||Number
829010|NCT01222689|Primary|Survival at 24 Weeks|Percent survival at 24 weeks (6 months)|24 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
829011|NCT01222689|Other Pre-specified|Plasma Biomarkers Potentially Predictive of Dual MEK/EGFR Inhibition|"The association between candidate plasma biomarkers of interest, their longitudinal changes, and patient outcomes as measured by OS, PFS, and radiographic and biomarker response.
Specifically, correlation of the relative change in allelic frequency of mutations present in both pre-treatment and on-treatment blood samples versus percent change in CA19-9."|Up to 2 years|Patients who had non-germline mutations (circulating cell-free DNA) represented in both their pre-treatment blood and on-treatment blood samples.||R^2|||Number
829098|NCT01216397|Primary|Metformin: Cmax|Geometric Mean of Cmax of Metformin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829099|NCT01216397|Secondary|Linagliptin: Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase Following an Extravascular Dose (Vz/F)|Geometric mean of the Vz/F of linagliptin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||Liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829012|NCT01222689|Other Pre-specified|Circulating Tumor Cell (CTC) Analysis|The association between baseline CTC numbers, their longitudinal changes, and patient outcomes as measured by OS, PFS, and radiographic and biomarker response will be evaluated. The association between expression level of protein markers in CTC with biopsy samples using Pearson's correlation and by unsupervised hierarchical clustering of samples using Pearson correlation as the distance metric will be assessed. Association of longitudinal protein markers in CTC with patient OS will be evaluated using the joint models of longitudinal observations.|Up to 2 years|Data was not collected.|||||
829013|NCT01222689|Other Pre-specified|Protein Expression Levels in Pretherapeutic Core Biopsies|Logistic regression models will be used to associate baseline protein markers and best objective response. Cox models will be used to associate baseline protein markers with overall and progression-free survival. Each selected protein markers will be evaluated individually and ranked by the corresponding p-values. Combinations of markers will also be explored.|Up to 2 years|Data was not collected.|||||
829014|NCT01222689|Secondary|Incidence of Toxicities Graded Using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0|Tabulation of type of adverse events (AE) and the incidence of grade 3 and 4 for each AE|Up to 30 days after completion of study treatment|||events|||Number
829015|NCT01222689|Secondary|Objective Radiographic Response by RECIST Criteria|"Patient's best overall response will be tabulated by level; proportions of complete response (CR) and of CR+partial response will be calculated along with 95% confidence intervals.
Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR, >= 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR+PR."|Up to 2 years|There were no complete or patial responses by RECIST (stable disease, partial response, or complete response) amongst the 46 participants||participants|||Number
829016|NCT01222689|Secondary|CA19-9 Biomarker Response (Defined as a 50% Decline in Serum CA19-9 Level From Baseline in Patients With > 2 x ULN CA19-9 Measurement)|The proportion of patients with CA19-9 response.|Up to 2 years|Patients with baseline levels > 2 x ULN CA19-9 measurement||percentage of participants|||Number
829017|NCT01222689|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|"Calculated according to the method of Kaplan and Meier. Actual and estimated probability of being alive and progression-free, along with a 95% confidence interval, will be calculated.
Response and progression are evaluated in this study using the international criteria proposed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Committee [JNCI 92(Macdonald et al.):205-216, 2000]. Changes in only the largest diameter (unidimensional measurement) of the tumor lesions are used. Progressive Disease is defined as a 20% or higher increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progressions)."|From first dose of study treatment to the date of objective progression, or death due to cancer or unknown cause, or to the date of withdrawal from the trial from unknown reasons, assessed up to 2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829018|NCT01222689|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|Survival will be calculated according to the method of Kaplan and Meier. Both actual and estimated probability of being alive (along with a 95% confidence interval) at 24 weeks (6 months) and for any multiple of 6 months will be calculated for which the number of uncensored subjects is not smaller than 10.|Up to 2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829019|NCT01222715|Other Pre-specified|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival data will be explored using Kaplan Meier analysis. Associations between this outcome and each of the biomarkers will be investigated using univariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.|Up to 5 years||||||
829020|NCT01222715|Other Pre-specified|Levels of Biomarkers Related to the Effect of Temsirolimus on the Unfolded Protein Response||Up to 36 weeks||||||
829021|NCT01222715|Other Pre-specified|Clinical Response|The data reported in 2 groups will be summarized using numbers and percentages of patients in each stratum and at each time point (baseline, after course 2, at the time of best response and end of therapy or progressive disease, whichever comes first). A binomial generalized estimating equation (GEE) model will be fitted to the data. The variables in the model will be time, treatment group and a biomarker. The beta coefficient of the biomarker will quantify the strength of the association between clinical response and the biomarker, beyond the association of the outcome to the other variables.|Up to 5 years||||||
829022|NCT01222715|Other Pre-specified|Clinical Predictors, Including Histologic and Molecular Subtype, Age, Stage, and Site|These known risk factors will be compared to genomic features like gene and ribonucleic acid (RNA) expression values, as well as combinations of the two and splice variants of known genes, in order to identify those features most related to treatment resistance and poor outcome (overall survival and failure-free survival) using a Cox proportional hazards model of gene expression with cross validation.|Up to 5 years||||||
829023|NCT01222715|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Angiogenesis-associated Plasma Markers Between Patients by Treatment|First, the distributions of these markers will be compared at ‘end of 2 cycles’ between treatments using a 2-independent sample non-parametric test. The mean will also be modeled for each of these markers (or a transformation of the marker to near normality) as a function of time and treatment using GEEs which are designed to take into account the internal correlation of repeated measurements taken on the same subject. Associations between progression-free survival and changes in each of the biomarkers will be investigated using univariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.|Baseline up to day 42||||||
829024|NCT01222715|Other Pre-specified|Biomarker Levels|Biomarker data will be summarized for each response category, at each time point using either means and standard deviations or medians and ranges.|Up to 36 weeks||||||
829025|NCT01222715|Secondary|Response Rate (CR + PR)|Complete or partial anatomical response rate. Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|From the date of randomization until a maximum of 2 cycles (21 days per cycle) of treatment in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicities.|Only eligible participants with overall response evaluated were analyzed.||Proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829026|NCT01222715|Primary|Rate of Dose-Limiting Toxicities|The following events will be considered dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs): Toxicity causing delays > 14 days in delivery of a 21-day cycle of therapy; Grade ≥ 3 mucositis > 3 days duration; Grade ≥ 3 thromboembolic events; Grade ≥ 3 bleeding events; Grade ≥ 3 pulmonary events; Grade ≥ 3 hypertension; Grade 3 hyperglycemia (uncontrolled); Grade ≥ 4 hyperglycemia; Grade ≥ 4 hyperlipidemia (including cholesterol and triglycerides) that does not return to ≤ Grade 2 levels with appropriate medical management within 35 days; Grade ≥ 2 perforation including fistula or leak (gastrointestinal or any other organ); Grade ≥ 3 proteinuria; Grade ≥ 3 cardiac toxicity; Grade ≥ 3 intra-abdominal abscess/infection; Grade ≥ 3 wound complication (wound infection or dehiscence); Grade ≥ 1 Reversible Posterior Leukoencephalopathy Syndrome (RPLS); Grade ≥ 1 Microangiopathy, or Hemolytic-uremic syndrome (HUS) or Thrombotic thrombocytopenic Purpura (TTP).|From the date of randomization until a maximum of 12 cycles (21 days per cycle) of treatment in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicities.|Only eligible participants were analyzed.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829027|NCT01222715|Primary|Event Free Survival Probability|Probability of no relapse, secondary malignancy, or death after 1 year in the study.|1 year|Only eligible participants were analyzed.||Probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829028|NCT01222832|Primary|Rate of Infection|Number of participants without infections on post-op visits 90 days.|90 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
829029|NCT01222884|Secondary|Change in Hemoglobin Concentration||6 weeks|The FAS population included all subjects who were randomised into the study, received at least one dose of the study drug, and had a Hb assessment. Subjects were included as randomised, regardless of which treatment they actually received.||g/dL||Full Range|Mean
829030|NCT01222884|Primary|Ability to Maintain Hemoglobin Level|The primary outcome measure was the proportion of subjects who were able to maintain haemoglobin between 9.5 and 12.5 g/dL (both values included) at week 6. Haemoglobin was measured by a blood sample at the different visits. All blood samples were taken before the dialysis from the dialysis catheter. Intravenous iron was administered during dialysis, at least 30 min after the start and at least 1 h before the end of dialysis.|Baseline to 6 weeks|The FAS population included all subjects who were randomised into the study, received at least one dose of the study drug, and had a Hb assessment. Subjects were included as randomised, regardless of which treatment they actually received.||percentage of participants|||Number
829031|NCT01223001|Secondary|Hopkins Verbal Learning Test|To compare the effect of duloxetine vs. placebo on the recovery of memory functions of patients with traumatic brain injury, utilizing the 20-minute delayed recall score of the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (Brandt, 1991) as the secondary efficacy measure.|9 months||||||
829032|NCT01223001|Primary|Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression|To compare the efficacy of duloxetine 30 mg. PO daily to 120mg. PO daily with placebo in the prevention of depression associated with mild/moderate traumatic brain injury, utilizing the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (Hamilton, 1960; HAM-D) as the primary efficacy measure.|9 months|Analysis was not conducted. Study was terminated before interim analysis. Raw data is stored in a secure location, but not able to be accessed.|||||
829033|NCT01223027|Secondary|Pre-dose Concentration in Plasma in Dovitinib|Predose concentrations of dovitinib were summarized by visit using PAS. All concentration data was listed by patient and time point using FAS. Mean pre-dose concentrations along with standard deviation (SD) was plotted over time if appropriate.|Week 2 Day 5, Week 4 Day 5, Week 6 Day 5|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PAS) consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of dovitinib and had at least one evaluable post-Baseline dovitinib concentration measurement.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
829034|NCT01223027|Secondary|Patient-reported Outcomes (PROs): Time to Definitive Deterioration of the Quality of Life (QoL) Scale Scores of EORTC QLQ-C30 by at Least 10%|The EORTC QLQ-C30 contains 30 items and is composed of both multi-item scales and single-item measures. These include five functional scales (physical, role, emotional, social and cognitive functioning), three symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea, and vomiting), a global health status/QoL scale, and six single items (dyspnea, diarrhea, constipation, anorexia, insomnia and financial impact). Each of the multiitem scales includes a different set of items - no item occurs in more than one scale. Each item in the EORTC QLQ-C30 has 4 response categories (1=Not at all, 2= A little, 3= Quite a bit, 4= Very much) with the higher number representing a worse outcome.|from date of randomization|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized patients.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829035|NCT01223027|Secondary|Patient-reported Outcomes (PROs): Time to Definitive Deterioration of the Physical Functioning (PF) Scale of EORTC QLQ-C30 by at Least 10%|The EORTC QLQ-C30 contains 30 items and is composed of both multi-item scales and single-item measures. These include five functional scales (physical, role, emotional, social and cognitive functioning), three symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea, and vomiting), a global health status/QoL scale, and six single items (dyspnea, diarrhea, constipation, anorexia, insomnia and financial impact). Each of the multiitem scales includes a different set of items - no item occurs in more than one scale. Each item in the EORTC QLQ-C30 has 4 response categories (1=Not at all, 2= A little, 3= Quite a bit, 4= Very much) with the higher number representing a worse outcome.|from date of randomization|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized patients.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829036|NCT01223027|Secondary|Patient-reported Outcomes (PROs): Time to Deterioration of Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Kidney Symptom Index, Disease Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS) by at Least 2 Scores|The Kidney Cancer Symptom Index – Disease Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS) is a validated symptom scale used in studies of patients with kidney cancer. It includes 9-items that assess pain, bone pain, fatigue, lack of energy, shortness of breath, fevers, weight loss, coughing, and blood in urine and responses to each question are answered on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 to 4 (e.g., 0 = not at all; 1 = a little bit; 2 = somewhat; 3 = quite a bit; 4 = very much). FKSI-DRS scores range from 0 to 36, where higher scores correspond to better outcomes (eg, fewer symptoms).|from date of randomization, at least 2 score units|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized patients.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829100|NCT01216397|Secondary|Linagliptin: Apparent Clearance of the Analyte in Plasma After Extravascular Administration (CL/F)|Geometric mean of the CL/F of linagliptin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829101|NCT01216397|Secondary|Linagliptin: MRTpo (Mean Residence Time of the Analyte in the Body After Peroral Administration)|Geometric mean of the MRTpo of linagliptin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829037|NCT01223027|Secondary|Time to Definitive Worsening of Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS)|Time to definitive worsening of Karnofsky performance status (KPS) was defined as the time from date of randomization to the date of definitive worsening of KPS or to the date of death whichever occurred earlier. Definitive worsening was defined as a definitive decrease in performance status by at least one Karnofsky category (i.e. at least 10 points less) compared to Baseline. Worsening was considered definitive if no later increase above the defined threshold was observed within the course of the study. A single measure reporting a decrease in Karnofsky performance status was sufficient to consider it as definitive only if it was the last one available for this patient. Time to definitive worsening of KPS was analyzed at the time of the final analysis for PFS.|from date of randomization to the date of definitive worsening of KPS or to the date of death whichever occurred earlier|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consited of all randomized patients.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829038|NCT01223027|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Response Rate (ORR) by Central Radiology Review|Overall response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of patients with best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). Best overall esponse (BOR) for each patient was determined from the sequence of overall (lesion) responses according to the following rules: CR = at least two determinations of CR at least 4 weeks apart before progression where confirmation required or one determination of CR prior to progression where confirmation not required. CR = at least two determinations of CR at least 4 weeks apart before progression where confirmation required or one determination of CR prior to progression where confirmation not required. SD = at least one SD assessment (or better) > 6 weeks after randomization (and not qualifying for CR or PR). PD = progression ≤ 17 weeks after randomization (and not qualifying for CR, PR or SD).|Until disease progression or discontinuation of treatment due to unacceptable toxicity|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized patients.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
829039|NCT01223027|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) Per Investigator's Radiology Review|PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the first documented disease progression or death due to any cause. The primary analysis for PFS (based on central review) was also to be repeated on FAS considering the Investigator assessments and using the same analytical conventions as the primary analysis.|Until disease progression or discontinuation of treatment due to unacceptable toxicity|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized patients.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829040|NCT01223027|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival (OS) was the key secondary endpoint and was defined as the time from date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause. If a patient was not known to have died, survival was censored on the date of last contact.|until at least 386 deaths are documented in the clinical database.|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized patients.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829041|NCT01223027|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) Per Independent Central Radiology Review|Assessed according to RECIST 1.1. PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the first documented disease progression or death due to any cause. If a patient had not progressed or died, on the date of the analysis cut-off or when he/she received any further anti-neoplastic therapy, PFS was censored on the date of last tumor assessment before the cutoff date or the anti-neoplastic therapy date. The distribution of PFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median PFS along with 95% confidence intervals was presented by treatment group.|Until disease progression or discontinuation of treatment due to unacceptable toxicity up to 30-Jun-2014 (discontinuation)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized patients.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829042|NCT01223196|Other Pre-specified|Percentage (%) of Haemoglobin A1C|HbA1c (Haemoglobin A1c) is glycosylated haemoglobin, measured as a % of total Hb in red blood cells by a standard biochemical method (HPLC).|6 months|||Percentage (%) of HbA1c||Standard Error|Mean
829043|NCT01223196|Secondary|Effect of Pioglitazone on TNF (Tumor Necrosis Factor) Alpha Converting Enzyme (TACE) Activity in Skeletal Muscle.|The activity of TACE is measured by detecting the release of a fluorogenic synthetic substrate of TACE and measuring in a fluorometer. It is expressed in Fluorescence Units (F.U.)|6 months|These individuals completed both the baseline and all intermediate and the end of study visits.||Tace Activity in F.U./mg prot||Standard Error|Mean
829044|NCT01223196|Primary|Whole Body Insulin Sensitivity During the Euglycemic Insulin Clamp|"Insulin sensitivity was measured by the euglycemic clamp before and 6 months after PIO (PIOGLITAZONE) or PLAC (PLACEBO) treatment.
The outcome measure is Insulin sensitivity obtained from euglycemic insulin clamp and it is called M/I, where M = whole body glucose uptake during the euglycemic insulin clamp and I = circulating insulin levels during the euglycemic insulin clamp. It is expressed as Mg. of glucose/kg body weight/mU (milli Unit)x l (liter).of insulin (Ins)"|6 months|M/I||Mg. of glucose/kg body w./mUxl ins.||Standard Error|Mean
829102|NCT01216397|Secondary|t1/2 (Terminal Half-life of the Analyte in Plasma)|Geometric mean of the t1/2 of linagliptin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829053|NCT01223365|Secondary|Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) Scores During Both the Open-Label Titration and Open-Label Treatment Periods by Participant Status|The COMM was a clinician-rated scale developed as a brief self-report measure of current aberrant drug-related behavior for patients with chronic pain who were already on long-term opioid therapy. A total score was calculated as the sum of the 17 questions. The total score ranged from 0 to 68. A score of 0 indicates no aberrant drug-related behaviors were seen. Patients with a total score of 9 or greater were classified as exhibiting aberrant drug-related behavior.|Baseline for new participants was Day 1 of open-label titration; rollover participants baseline was in study 3079. End of Open-label Titration Period. Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36 40, 44, 48, 52 and last visit up to week 52|Post titration Safety Analysis set||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829054|NCT01223365|Secondary|Addiction Behavior Checklist (ABC) Total Scores During Both the Open-Label Titration and Open-Label Treatment Periods by Participant Status|The ABC was a clinician rated scale that consisted of a brief (21 item) questionnaire designed to track behaviors characteristic of addiction related to prescription opioid medications in chronic pain populations. Items were focused on observable behaviors noted both during and between clinic visits. Each affirmative response was counted as 1 point, and points were added to calculate the total score. All but 1 of the 21 items (the provider’s impression) was used in calculating the total score, consequently resulting in scores ranging from 0 to 20 (0=no addiction-related behaviors seen and higher scores indicating an increasing number of addition-related behaviors seen). Participants with a total score of 3 or greater were classified as exhibiting inappropriate opioid use during the study.|Baseline for new participants was Day 1 of open-label titration; rollover participants baseline was in study 3079. End of Open-label Titration: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36 40, 44, 48, 52 and last visit up to week 52|Post-titration Safety Analysis set||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829103|NCT01216397|Secondary|Linagliptin: λz (Terminal Elimination Rate Constant in Plasma)|Geometric mean of the λ_z of linagliptin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||1/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829055|NCT01223365|Secondary|Participants by Risk Category for Aberrant Drug Misuse Based on the Total Score in the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients With Pain – Revised (SOAPP-R)|"SOAPP-R is a clinician-rated scale used to assess each patient’s risk of developing aberrant drug use behaviors while on long term opioid therapy. SOAPP-R consists of 24 questions that address 8 concepts: substance abuse history, medication related behaviors, antisocial behaviors/history, psychosocial problems, psychiatric history, physician patient relationship factors, emotional attachment to pain medications, and personal care and lifestyle issues (Butler et al 2008). Each question is answered using a 5 point Likert-like scale, with 0=never, 1=seldom, 2=sometimes, 3=often, and 4=very often for a total range of 0-96. The higher the overall score, the greater the probability the patient is at risk for displaying aberrant behaviors consistent with drug use.
An overall score of 18 or higher is considered positive for predicting aberrant drug related behavior, therefore the reported risk categories are
<18 and
<=18. Results indicate timeframe followed by risk cat"|End of Open-label Titration Period. Weeks 4 and 24 of the Open-label Treatment Period|Safety analysis set||Participants|||Count of Participants
829056|NCT01223365|Secondary|Participant Global Assessment (PGA) of the Method of Pain Control by Participant Status|The PGA of the method of pain control consisted of a asking patients a single question to assess their method of pain control during the previous 24 hours as either poor, fair, good, or excellent (Rothman et al 2009).|Baseline for new participants was Day 1, i.e. the first day of open-label titration. Baseline for rollover participants was the baseline in study 3079. Week 4 (end of titration, start of open-label treatment), Week 52, last visit up to Week 52|Full analysis set included all patients in the safety analysis set who had at least 1 postbaseline efficacy assessment. Participants contributing to each time point are listed in the time point label.||Participants|||Count of Participants
829057|NCT01223365|Primary|Participants With Clinically Significant (CS) Hearing Changes From Baseline in Pure Tone Audiometry Test Results by Patient Status|Pure tone audiometry was performed by trained personnel. During the test, the patient wore headphones and was seated in a quiet room; trained personnel manipulated the audiometry equipment to test the patient’s hearing. For serial audiograms, the criteria for a clinically significant (CS) hearing change were based on the guidance from the American Speech-Language Hearing Association (ASHA) 1994 (Konrad-Martin et al 2005). These criteria included the following: greater than 20 decibels (dB) pure tone threshold shift at 1 frequency; greater than 10 dB shift at 2 consecutive test frequencies; or threshold response shifting to “no response” at 3 consecutive test frequencies.|Baseline for new participants was between Day -7 and -14 (study 3080 screening visit); baseline for rollover participants was the baseline test in study 3079. During study covers both open-label titration and 52-week treatment periods|Safety analysis set. The endpoint value is from the post-titration safety set (n=42, 92, 157, 291)||Participants|||Count of Participants
829058|NCT01223365|Primary|Shifts in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings From Baseline to Overall Study by Participant Status|"A 12-lead ECG was conducted at screening, week 24, and week 52 or at the last postbaseline observation. For rollover participants, the ECG performed at the final visit of study 3079 served as the 1st ECG in study 3080. A qualified physician was responsible for interpreting the ECG. Any ECG finding that was judged by the investigator as a clinically meaningful change (worsening) compared with baseline was considered an adverse event.
For overall results, the worst postbaseline finding for the participant was summarized.
Results below are formatted as Baseline ECG result - Overall ECG result."|Baseline for new participants was between Day -7 and -14 (the study 3080 screening visit); baseline for rollover participants was the last ECG in study 3079. During study ECGs were performed on weeks 24 and 52 of the open-label treatment period|Post-titration Safety analysis set. Only those participants with both baseline and visit electrocardiogram findings were summarized.||Participants|||Count of Participants
829059|NCT01223365|Primary|Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Abnormal Vital Signs Values by Participant Status|"Data represents participants with potentially clinically significant (PCS) vital sign values.
Significance criteria
Pulse - high: >=120 and increase of >= 15 beats/minute from baseline
Pulse - low: <=50 and decrease of >=15 beats/minute
Systolic blood pressure - high: >=180 and increase >=20 mmHg
Systolic blood pressure - low: <=90 and decrease >=20 mmHg
Diastolic blood pressure - high: >=105 and increase of >=15 mmHg
Diastolic blood pressure - low: <=50 and decrease of >=15 mmHg"|Day 1 of open-label titration period - Week 52 of the open-label treatment period|Safety analysis set. One rollover participant did not have vital signs values.||Participants|||Count of Participants
829060|NCT01223365|Primary|Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Abnormal Laboratory Values During the Open-Label Treatment Period by Participant Status|"Data represents participants with PCS abnormal serum chemistry, hematology and urinalysis values.
Significance criteria:
alanine aminotransferase (ALT): >=3 times the upper limit of normal (ULN). Normal range is 6-43 U/L
aspartate aminotransferase (AST): >=3 times ULN. Normal range is 9-36 U/L
blood urea nitrogen (BUN): >=10.71 mmol/L
creatinine: >=177 μmol/L
uric acid: M>=625, F>=506 μmol/L
white blood cell count: <=3.0*10^9/L
hemoglobin: M<=115, F<=95 g/dL
hematocrit: M<0.37, F<0.32 L/L
urine blood (hemoglobin): >=2 unit increase from baseline
urine glucose: >=2 unit increase from baseline"|Day 1 - Week 52 of the open-label treatment period|Posttitration Safety Analysis set. The posttitration safety analysis set included all patients who successfully completed the open label titration period and received 1 or more doses of study drug treatment in the open label treatment period.||Participants|||Count of Participants
829061|NCT01223365|Primary|Participants With Adverse Experiences|An adverse event (AE) was defined in the protocol as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator. Serious AEs include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, OR an important medical event that jeopardized the patient and required medical intervention to prevent the previously listed serious outcomes.|Day 1 of open-label titration period - Week 52 of the open-label treatment period|Safety analysis set||Participants|||Count of Participants
829062|NCT01223469|Primary|Number of Subjects With Operative and Post-operative Serious Adverse Events|"For Right SVT patients 7 days (±1 day) following the index procedure or until hospital discharge whichever is longer.
For AF patients 3 months (±2 weeks)following the index procedure."|3 months for AF arm; 7 days for the right SVT arm|||participants|||Number
829063|NCT01223703|Secondary|Change in Mean New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Class Between Baseline and 12th Month Follow up.|"NYHA class I: No symptoms and no limitation in ordinary physical activity, e.g. shortness of breath when walking, climbing stairs, etc...
NYHA class II: Mild symptoms (mild shortness of breath and/or angina) and slight limitation during ordinary activity.
NYHA class III: Marked limitation in activity due to symptoms, even during less-than-ordinary activity, e.g. walking short distances (20–100 m). Comfortable only at rest NYHA class IV: Severe limitations. Experiences symptoms even while at rest. Mostly bedbound patients."|one year|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829064|NCT01223703|Secondary|Functional Capacity (Change in Peak Oxygen Uptake, VO2)|Change in functional capacity expressed as a peak oxygen uptake (VO2), that was acquired breath-by-breath by pneumotachograph (with bidirectional differential pressure) during cardiopulmonary exercize testing.|one year|||ml/kg/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
829065|NCT01223703|Secondary|LV Diastolic Function|Change in LV diastolic function assessed by echocardiography: mitral diastolic inflow velocities (peak velocity of early ventricular filling [E-wave], peak velocity of late ventricular filling [A-wave], E/A ratio, and E-wave deceleration time), diastolic function score (graded on a scale from 1 to 4) were used.|one year|||E/A ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
829066|NCT01223703|Primary|Change in Left Ventricular (LV) Systolic Function Expressed as Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) Between Baseline and 12-month Follow-up|The primary end point of the study was the change in LV systolic function expressed as LVEF between baseline and 12-month follow-up. The following parameters were measured according to the professional standards defined by the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Echocardiography|one year|A sample of 65 patients in each group was calculated to have 80% power to detect such 0.5 effect size with p<0.05 (2-tailed) at the Student t test for unpaired data.||ejection fraction (percentage)||Standard Deviation|Mean
829067|NCT01216163|Secondary|Participant Global Evaluation of Study Medication|Participant global evaluation of study medication was performed at the 6-hour time point or immediately before taking the rescue medication. It was scored on a 6-point categorical scale where 0 = Very poor, 1 = Poor, 2 = Fair, 3 = Good, 4 = Very Good, and 5 = Excellent.|6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829068|NCT01216163|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Complete Relief|Complete relief was defined as a PRR of 4. PRR was assessed on a 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale where 0=No relief to 4=Complete relief.|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||percentage of participants|||Number
829069|NCT01216163|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Treatment Failure|Percentage of participants who withdrew from the study due to lack of efficacy or received rescue medication.|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||percentage of participants|||Number
829070|NCT01216163|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure|Median time of dropping out of the participants from the study due to lack of efficacy or use of rescue medication, whichever comes first.|0 to 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829071|NCT01216163|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Confirmed First Perceptible Relief|Percentage of participants with first perceptible relief evaluated by stopping the stopwatch labeled 'first perceptible relief' at the moment participant first began to experience any relief. First perceptible relief was considered confirmed if the participant also stopped the second stopwatch indicating meaningful relief. Stopwatch was active up to 6 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered.|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||percentage of participants|||Number
829072|NCT01216163|Secondary|Cumulative Percentage of Participants With Meaningful Relief|Percentage of participants with meaningful relief evaluated by stopping the stopwatch labeled ‘meaningful relief' at the moment participant first began to experience meaningful relief. Stopwatch was active up to 6 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered.|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||percentage of participants|||Number
829073|NCT01216163|Secondary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Relief Rating and Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID)|SPRID: time-weighted sum of PRID over 2 and 3 hours. Total score range: -2 (worst) to 14 (best) for SPRID 0-2, and -3 (worst) to 21 (best) for SPRID 0-3. PRID: sum of PID and PRR at each time point. Total score range for PRID: -1=worst to 7=best. PID: baseline pain severity score minus pain severity score at a given time point (score range 0=none to 3=severe; baseline score range 2=moderate to 3=severe). Total score range for PID: -1 (worst) to 3 (best). PRR: assessed on 5-point pain relief rating scale (0=No relief to 4=Complete relief).|0 to 2, 0 to 3 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829074|NCT01216163|Secondary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Relief Rating (TOTPAR)|TOTPAR: time-weighted sum of PRR over 2, 3, and 6 hours. Total score range: 0 (worst) to 8 (best) for TOTPAR 0-2, 0 (worst) to 12 (best) for TOTPAR 0-3, and 0 (worst) to 24 (best) for TOTPAR 0-6. PRR was evaluated at different time points during the study up to 6 hours, and immediately after taking rescue medication (if necessary). PRR was assessed on a 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale where 0=No relief to 4=Complete relief.|0 to 2, 0 to 3, 0 to 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829075|NCT01216163|Secondary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID)|SPID: time-weighted sum of PID over 2, 3 and 6 hours. Total score range: -2 (worst) to 6 (best) for SPID 0-2, -3 (worst) to 9 (best) for SPID 0-3, and -6 (worst) to 18 (best) for SPID 0-6. PID: baseline pain severity score minus pain severity score at a given time point (score range 0=none to 3=severe; baseline score range 2=moderate to 3=severe). Total score range for PID: -1 (worst) to 3 (best).|0 to 2, 0 to 3, 0 to 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829076|NCT01216163|Secondary|Sum of Pain Relief Rating and Pain Intensity Difference (PRID)|PRID was sum of PID and PRR at each post-dosing time point. The overall possible score range, for PRID was -1 (worst) to 7 (best). PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time point (pain severity score range 0 [none] to 3 [severe]) from the baseline score (Baseline pain severity score range 2 [moderate] to 3 [severe]). Total possible score range for PID: -1 (worst) to 3 (best). PRR was assessed on 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale (0=No relief to 4=Complete relief).|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829077|NCT01216163|Secondary|Pain Intensity Difference (PID)|PID was derived by subtracting the pain severity score at a given post-dosing time point (pain severity score range 0 [none] to 3 [severe]) from the baseline score (Baseline pain severity score range 2 [moderate] to 3 [severe]). Total possible score range for PID: -1 (worst) to 3 (best).|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829078|NCT01216163|Secondary|Pain Relief Rating (PRR)|PRR was evaluated at different time points during the study up to 6 hours after taking the study medication, and immediately before rescue medication was taken (if necessary). PRR was assessed on a 5-point categorical pain relief rating scale where 0=No relief to 4=Complete relief.|0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829079|NCT01216163|Secondary|Time to Confirmed First Perceptible Relief|Participants evaluated the time to first perceptible relief by stopping a stopwatch labeled 'first perceptible relief' at the moment they first began to experience any relief. Stopwatch was active up to 6 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered. The first perceptible relief was considered confirmed if the participant also stopped the second stopwatch indicating meaningful relief.|0 to 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829080|NCT01216163|Primary|Time to Onset of Meaningful Relief|Participants evaluated the time to meaningful relief by stopping a second stopwatch labeled ‘meaningful relief' at the moment they first began to experience meaningful relief. Stopwatch was active up to 6 hours after dosing or until stopped by the participant, or rescue medication was administered.|0 to 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829081|NCT01216163|Primary|Time-weighted Sum of Pain Relief Rating With Pain Intensity Difference From 0 to 6 Hours (SPRID 0-6)|SPRID: time-weighted sum of pain relief rating combined with pain intensity difference (PRID) over 6 hours. Score range: -6(worst) to 42(best) for SPRID 0-6. PRID: sum of pain intensity difference (PID) and pain relief rating (PRR) at each time point. Score range for PRID: -1(worst) to 7(best). PID: baseline pain severity score minus pain severity score at a given time point (score range 0=none to 3=severe; baseline score range 2=moderate to 3=severe). Total score range for PID: -1 (worst) to 3 (best). PRR: assessed on 5-point pain relief rating scale (0=No relief to 4=Complete relief).|0 to 6 hours|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who received study medication and provided a baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829082|NCT01216241|Primary|Percentage of Afebrile Neutropenic Subjects|To determine whether the percentage of neutropenic subjects that become afebrile by five days after fever first develops.|5 days|||participants|||Number
829083|NCT01216319|Secondary|Rate of Patient Satisfaction|Patient satisfaction is defined as patient would recommend the nipple reconstruction operation to others.|12 months|||percentage of patients|||Number
829084|NCT01216319|Primary|Percent Nipple Projection at 12 Months Compared to Baseline (1 Week Post-procedure)||12 months|There were two patients (three nipples) without plastic surgery matrix in place at 12MO.||percentage of projection vs baseline|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829085|NCT01216397|Secondary|Assessment of Tolerability by the Investigator|Qualitative variable assessing the tolerability by the investigator|Day 1 to 4 for period 1, and day 36 to 39 for period 2|Treated Set||Participants|||Number
829086|NCT01216397|Secondary|Participants Who Discontinued the Trial Because of an Adverse Event|Number of participants who discontinued the trial because of an adverse event|Day 1 to 4 for period 1, and day 36 to 39 for period 2|Treated Set||Participants|||Number
829087|NCT01216397|Secondary|Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events|Number of patients with treatment emergent AEs|Day 1 to 4 for period 1, and day 36 to 39 for period 2|Treated Set||Participants|||Number
829088|NCT01216397|Secondary|Electrocardiogram (ECG), Vital Signs, Physical Finding or Laboratory Finding Abnormalities|12-lead-Electrocardiogram (ECG), vital sign (blood pressure and pulse rate), physical finding and laboratory abnormalities|Day 1 to 4 for period 1, and day 36 to 39 for period 2|Treated Set||Participants|||Number
829089|NCT01216397|Secondary|Metformin: Vz/F|Geometric mean of Vz/F of metformin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||Liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829090|NCT01216397|Secondary|Metformin: CL/F|Geometric mean of CL/F of metformin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829091|NCT01216397|Secondary|Metformin: MRTpo (Mean Residence Time of the Analyte in the Body After Peroral Administration)|Geometric mean of MRTpo of metformin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829092|NCT01216397|Secondary|Metformin: t1/2 (Terminal Half-life of the Analyte in Plasma)|Geometric mean of t1/2 of metformin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829093|NCT01216397|Secondary|Metformin: λz (Terminal Elimination Rate Constant in Plasma)|Geometric mean of λz of metformin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||1/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829094|NCT01216397|Secondary|Metformin: Tmax|Median of tmax of metformin|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||hr||Full Range|Median
829095|NCT01216397|Secondary|Metformin: Percentage of AUCtz-∞ Obtained by Extrapolation|Geometric Mean of the percentage of AUCtz-infinity of Metformin, where percentage is the unit of measurement.|Day 1 to 35 for period 1, and Day 36 to 70 for period 2|Treated Set||percentage||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829134|NCT01216631|Primary|Ultrasound Synovitis Score|reduction of ultrasound synovitis score of the affected knee at 8 weeks following intiation of treatment|8 weeks|Only one patient was recruited for this study due to problems with recruitment. Therefore outcome measure data is not analysed as only one patient was recruited.|||||
829135|NCT01216735|Secondary|Flow-mediated Brachial Vasodilation (FMD% Peak Delta)|Flow-mediated vasodilation response in the brachial artery will be measured before and 15 minutes.after albuterol inhalation|3 weeks of treatment|||% change||Standard Error|Mean
829136|NCT01216735|Primary|Albuterol Induced Change in Qaw Before and After Fluticasone or Placebo|Airway Blood flow (Qaw) will be measured before and 15 minutes after albuterol inhalation (delta Qaw).|3 weeks treatment period of ICS or placebo|||% change||Standard Error|Mean
829137|NCT01216748|Secondary|Exhaled Breath Condensate (EBC) pH Variation|"EBC samples were collected at each respiratory maneuver by directing the subject's exhaled breath into a pre-cooled (-10C) tube for 10 min.
pH was measured immediately after collection."|10 minutes after each respiratory manouver.|||pH||Standard Error|Mean
829138|NCT01216748|Primary|Changes in Airway Blood Flow After 180μg Albuterol by Inhalation (ΔQaw) vs Baseline|Effect of airway pH on albuterol responsiveness as reflected by the change in airway blood flow after 180μg albuterol by inhalation (ΔQaw) vs baseline.|15 minutes after albuterol inhalation|||changes from baseline in μl.min-1.ml-1||Standard Error|Mean
829139|NCT01216761|Primary|Blood Culture Contamination|A culture set was considered contaminated if it yielded growth of typical skin contaminants including aerobic gram positive rods, Lactobacillus sp, Propionibacterium acnes, Micrococcus sp, Bacillus sp (not B. anthracis or B. cereus), coag negative Staphylococcus, Neisseria sp (not N. meningitides or N. gonorrhoeae), or gamma-hemolytic streptococci (not Enterococcus sp) from only 1 of 2 or more blood culture sets obtained from different sites.|5 days|Intention to treat analyses. Please note: it is possible for a single patient to have multiple blood culture sets obtained throughout the study. Therefore, number of blood culture sets will differ from the number of unique patients.||blood culture sets|Blood culture sets||Number
829140|NCT01223937|Secondary|Minimum Post-Treatment Serum Sodium Levels|Serum sodium levels were monitored since hyponatremia is a potential serious adverse event associated with daily doses of desmopressin. The serum sodium level must have been within the normal reference range at the Screening Visit for the participant to be eligible for enrollment. A participant was to be withdrawn from the trial if the serum sodium level was <=125 mmol/L at any time.|Day 1 up to 3 months|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
829141|NCT01223937|Secondary|Summary of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|A TEAE was any adverse event occurring after start of treatment and within the time of residual drug effect, i.e., within 1 day of the last dose of desmopressin. An adverse drug reaction (ADR) was any AE assessed by the Investigator as possibly/probably related to study drug.|Day 1 up to 3 months|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
829142|NCT01223937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 24-Hour Urine Volume at Month 3|"Twenty-four hour urine volume was derived from the 3-day urine volume diary. Mean urine volumes were calculated as the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to the Month 3 visit.
The secondary efficacy outcomes (#3-7) used a hierarchical step-down approach in the order listed."|Day 1 (Baseline), Month 3|Full Analysis Set (FAS), including participants with complete data supporting this outcome in the participant diary.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829143|NCT01223937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nocturnal Urine Volume at Month 3|"The nocturnal urine volume was derived from the 3-day urine volume diary. The nocturnal urine volume included the volume of the first morning void. Mean urine volumes were calculated as the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to the Month 3 visit.
The secondary efficacy outcomes (#3-7) used a hierarchical step-down approach in the order listed."|Day 1 (Baseline), Month 3|Full Analysis Set (FAS), including participants with complete data supporting this outcome in the participant diary.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829144|NCT01223937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Time to First Nocturnal Void at Month 3|"The time to first void was defined as the time from going to bed with the intention of sleeping until first nocturnal void or until waking in the morning in cases where there was no nocturnal void. The time to first void was derived from the sleep and voiding diary. The mean time to first void was calculated as the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to the Month 3 visit.
The secondary efficacy outcomes (#3-7) used a hierarchical step-down approach in the order listed."|Day 1 (Baseline), Month 3|Full Analysis Set (FAS), including participants with complete data supporting this outcome in the participant diary.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829145|NCT01223937|Secondary|Adjusted Probability of Participants Achieving a >33% Reduction From Baseline in Number of Nocturnal Voids at Month 3|"Probability of participants achieving 33% responder status at Month 3 employed a longitudinal analysis assessing nocturnal void information captured in the 3-day diary. A 33% responder was defined as a participant with a decrease of at least 33% in the mean number of nocturnal voids relative to baseline. The number of nocturnal voids was the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to Day 1 and prior to the Month 3 visit as recorded in participant diaries. The first morning void was not counted as a nocturnal void.
The secondary efficacy outcomes (#3-7) used a hierarchical step-down approach in the order listed."|Day 1 (Baseline), Month 3|Full Analysis Set (FAS), including participants with complete data supporting this outcome in the participant diary.||probability|||Number
829146|NCT01223937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Nocturnal Voids at Month 3|"The number of nocturnal voids was the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to Day 1 and prior to the during-treatment visits (Month 3 for this outcome) as recorded in participant diaries. The first morning void was not counted as a nocturnal void.
Secondary efficacy outcomes (#3-7) used a hierarchical step-down approach in the order listed."|Day 1 (Baseline), Month 3|Full Analysis Set (FAS), including participants with complete data supporting this outcome in the participant diary.||nocturnal voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829166|NCT01224782|Secondary|Mean Weekly Dose of Zemplar (Paricalcitol)|Compliance was assessed using the mean weekly total dose of Zemplar (paricalcitol).|From Baseline up to 12 months|Secondary analyses were conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with available data.||micrograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
829234|NCT01225354|Primary|Self-esteem|Self-esteem change will be determined by patient self-evaluation using the Heatherton & Polivy State Self-Esteem (HPSS). The primary variable will be measured as improvement in self-esteem from baseline self-evaluations.|2 weeks post optimal cosmetic result|||Participants with improved self-esteem|||Number
829147|NCT01223937|Primary|Adjusted Probability of Participants Achieving a >33% Reduction From Baseline in Number of Nocturnal Voids for All During-Treatment Visits up to Month 3|"Probability of participants achieving 33% responder status during 3 months of treatment employed a longitudinal analysis assessing nocturnal void information captured in the 3-day diary. A 33% responder was defined as a participant with a decrease of at least 33% in the mean number of nocturnal voids relative to baseline. The number of nocturnal voids was the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to Day 1 and prior to the during treatment visits (Week 1, Months 1, 2, 3) as recorded in participant diaries. The first morning void was not counted as a nocturnal void.
This was the second co-primary endpoint. The trial was to be declared positive only if the 25 μg desmopressin group had a statistically significant positive effect as compared to placebo on both co-primary endpoints."|Day 1 (Baseline); Week 1, Months 1, 2, 3 (3-month treatment period)|Full analysis set (FAS).||probability|||Number
829148|NCT01223937|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Nocturnal Voids Averaged Over a 3-Month Period|"The number of nocturnal voids was the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to Day 1 and prior to the during-treatment visits (Week 1, Months 1, 2, 3) as recorded in participant diaries. The first morning void was not counted as a nocturnal void. Change from baseline values for Week 1, and Months 1, 2 and 3 are reported below.
Comparison of the mean number of nocturnal voids at baseline and over a 3-month treatment period (obtained by longitudinal analysis of Week 1, and Months 1, 2 and 3) are reported in the statistical analysis. This was the first co-primary endpoint. The trial was to be declared positive only if the 25 μg desmopressin group had a statistically significant positive effect as compared to placebo on both co-primary endpoints."|Day 1 (Baseline); Week 1, Months 1, 2, 3 (3-month treatment period)|Full analysis set (FAS).||nocturnal voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829149|NCT01224015|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Grade of None or Mild at Maximum Smile Based on the Investigator Facial Wrinkle Scale Assessment of the Severity of Crow's Feet Lines|The investigator assessed the severity of the patient's Crow’s Feet Lines at maximum smile using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale: 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe. The percentage of participants with a score of none or mild at Day 30 is reported.|Day 30|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, consisting of all randomized participants with data available for analysis.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829150|NCT01224626|Primary|Number of Participants Categorized as Responders (Cure and Improved) to Zyvox (Linezolid) Treatment.|Clinical overall effectiveness was evaluated by investigators based on clinical symptoms, laboratory test and investigator judgement, at the end of observation period. Clinical rating (cure/improved/not cured/unable to evaluate) was carried out. Definition of cured was disappearance of clinical symptom and/or Laboratory test abnormality. Definition of improved was improvement in clinical symptoms and/or laboratory test abnormality.|Baseline to 8 weeks|The efficacy analysis population included all subjects from the safety analysis population in whom the efficacy of this drug could be evaluated.||participants|||Number
829151|NCT01224626|Secondary|Adverse Drug Reactions Unlisted in Japanese Package Insert.|The adverse drug reactions that have not been included in Japanese package insert.|Baseline to 8 weeks|Safety analysis population consisted of the participants that satisfied the inclusion and exclusion conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829152|NCT01224626|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reactions.|All observed or volunteered adverse events and the investigator’s opinion of the causal relationship to the study treatment were reported as adverse events. Definition of adverse drug reaction was treatment related adverse events which were evaluated in company with the causal relationship to the investigational product.|Baseline to 8 weeks|Safety analysis population consisted of the participants that satisfied the inclusion and exclusion conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829153|NCT01224639|Secondary|Titers of Vaccine Viremia||14 Days after each vaccination|Due to the low prevalence of vaccine viremia, estimates of average titer levels of viral RNA within study groups would not be meaningful. Therefore as per change in planned analysis only number of participants with positive vaccine viremia of all four vaccine strain serotypes after first and second vaccination was reported.|||||
829154|NCT01224639|Secondary|Duration of Vaccine Viremia||14 Days after each vaccination|Due to the low prevalence of vaccine viremia, estimates of average titer duration of viral RNA within study groups would not be meaningful. Therefore as per change in planned analysis only number of participants with positive vaccine viremia of all four vaccine strain serotypes after first and second vaccination was reported.|||||
829155|NCT01224639|Secondary|Number of Participants Positive for Vaccine Viremia for Each of the Four Vaccine Strain Serotypes After the First and Second Vaccination|Serotype-specific vaccine viremia was assessed for the four vaccine strain serotypes: TDV-1, TDV-2, TDV-3 and TDV-4. Only those serotypes and time-points where at least 1 participant had serotype-specific vaccine viremia detection were reported.|Baseline and at multiple time points up to Day 14 after each vaccination|The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine and for whom valid pre- and post-dosing blood samples were received.||participants|||Number
829156|NCT01224639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Durability of Immune Response|Immune response was considered durable if the participant had detectable neutralizing antibodies (seroconversion) to all 4 dengue serotypes at 90 and 180 days after the second dose (i.e. Days 180 and 270, respectively). Seroconversion is defined as post-vaccination PRNT(50) titer >=10 where pre-vaccination PRNT 50 titer <10, or post-vaccination PRNT(50) Titer >=4-fold the pre-vaccination PRNT(50) titer value where pre-vaccination PRNT(50) titer >=10. Percentage of participants with seroconversion on Days 180 and 270 are based on the number of participants in the FAS with non-missing MN assay samples at each visit. The 95% CIs for percentages are the exact CIs (%) based upon the binomial distribution.|Days 180 and 270|The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine and for whom valid pre- and post-dosing blood samples were received.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829167|NCT01224782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hypercalcemia|The percentage of participants with hypercalcemia (Calcium > 2.6 mmol/L [10.5 mg/dL]) at any timepoint during followup, up to 12 months.|From Baseline up to 12 months|The safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and for whom safety data was collected after administration of the first dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
836878|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 30 Minutes|The scale measure pain after 30 minutes (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|30 minutes|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829157|NCT01224639|Secondary|Rate of Seroconversion to Each of Four Dengue Serotypes After the Second Vaccination|Seroconversion was defined as a PRNT titer resulting in 50% reduction in plaques (PRNT[50]) >=10 (if the pre-vaccination PRNT[50] value was <10, indicated as a value of 5 in the immunogenicity data collection sheet) OR a PRNT(50) value that was >=4-fold the pre-vaccination titer value (if the pre-vaccination PRNT[50] value was >=10). Seroconversion was assessed for the four dengue serotypes: TDV-1, TDV-2, TDV-3 and TDV-4. The 95% CIs for percentages are the exact CIs (%) based upon the binomial distribution. Percentages are based on the number of participants in the FAS with non-missing MN assay samples at each visit (n).|Days 14 and 30 after second vaccination (Days 104 and 120 respectively)|The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine and for whom valid pre- and post-dosing blood samples were received.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829158|NCT01224639|Secondary|Rate of Seroconversion to Each of Four Dengue Serotypes After the First Vaccination|Seroconversion was defined as a Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT) titer resulting in 50% reduction in plaques (PRNT[50]) >=10 (if the pre-vaccination PRNT[50] value was <10, indicated as a value of 5 in the immunogenicity data collection sheet) OR a PRNT(50) value that was >=4-fold the pre-vaccination titer value (if the pre-vaccination PRNT[50] value was >=10). Seroconversion was assessed for the four dengue serotypes: TDV-1, TDV-2, TDV-3 and TDV-4. The 95% CIs for percentages are the exact CIs (%) based upon the binomial distribution. Percentages are based on the number of participants in the FAS with non-missing MN assay samples at each visit.|Days 14, 30, 60 and 90 after first vaccination|The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine and for whom valid pre- and post-dosing blood samples were received.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829159|NCT01224639|Secondary|GMTs of All Four Dengue Serotypes After Second Vaccination|GMT was assessed for the four dengue serotypes: TDV-1, TDV-2, TDV-3 and TDV-4. GMTs and 95% CIs were calculated by taking the anti-logs of the means and 95% CI of the log transformed titers.|Days 14 and 30 after second vaccination (Day 104 and 120 respectively)|The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine and for whom valid pre- and post-dosing blood samples were received. Here 'n' is number of participants with non-missing MN Assay samples.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
829160|NCT01224639|Secondary|Geometric Mean Neutralizing Antibody Titers (GMTs) of All Four Dengue Serotypes After First Vaccination|GMT was assessed for the four dengue serotypes: Dengue TDV-1, TDV-2, TDV-3 and TDV-4. GMTs and 95 percent (%) confidence interval (CIs) were calculated by taking the anti-logs of the means and 95% CI of the log transformed titers.|Days 14, 30, 60 and 90 after first vaccination|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine and for whom valid pre- and post-dosing blood samples were received. Here 'n' is number of participants with non-missing microneutralization (MN) Assay samples.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
829161|NCT01224639|Primary|Number of Participants With Unsolicited Local and Systemic AEs||Baseline up to 30 days after second vaccination (Day 120)|The safety population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine and for whom post-dosing safety data was obtained.||participants|||Number
829162|NCT01224639|Primary|Number of Participants With Solicited Local and Systemic AEs||Within 14 days after either of the vaccination given on Day 1 or 90 (Day 14 for first vaccination, Day 104 for second vaccination)|The safety population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine and for whom post-dosing safety data was obtained.||participants|||Number
829163|NCT01224639|Primary|Number of Participants With Systemic Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity|Solicited systemic AEs were reported using a participant diary. Solicited systemic AEs included fever (>= 37.8°C), headache, muscle pain, joint pain, eye pain, photophobia, fatigue, body rash, nausea, vomiting and other (any other symptom not listed in the diary) and were categorized as Mild: transient symptoms, discomfort noticed but easily tolerated, no interference to normal daily activities; Moderate: marked symptoms, moderate interference with daily activities; Severe: considerable interference with daily activities.|Within 14 days after either of the vaccination given on Day 1 or 90 (Day 14 for first vaccination, Day 104 for second vaccination)|The safety population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine and for whom post-dosing safety data was obtained.||participants|||Number
829164|NCT01224639|Primary|Number of Participants With Local Injection Site Reaction by Severity|Solicited local reactions were reported using a participant diary. Pain was categorized as Mild (aware of pain but it does not interfere with daily activity and no pain medication is taken); Moderate (aware of pain; there is interference with daily activity or it requires use of pain medication); Severe (aware of pain and it prevents daily activity), redness was categorized as Mild (greater than [>] 15 millimeter [mm]); Moderate as (15-30 mm); Severe (>30 mm), swelling was categorized as Mild (<15 mm); Moderate (15-30 mm); Severe (>30 mm), and itching was categorized as Mild (slight itching at injection site); Moderate (moderate itching at injection extremity); Severe (itching over entire body).|Within 14 days after either of the vaccination given on Day 1 or 90 (Day 14 for first vaccination, Day 104 for second vaccination)|The safety population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study vaccine and for whom post-dosing safety data was obtained.||participants|||Number
829165|NCT01224782|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. An Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) is any noxious and undesired reaction related to an experimental drug or experiment. A serious adverse event (SAE) is an AE that results in death, is life-threatening, results in or prolongs hospitalization, results in congenital anomaly, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, spontaneous or elective abortion, or requires intervention to prevent a serious outcome. AEs were rated for severity as either Mild: transient and easily tolerated; Moderate: causes discomfort and interrupts usual activities; or Severe: causes considerable interference with usual activities, may be incapacitating or life-threatening. AEs related to Zemplar (paricalcitol) were assessed as being either probably or possibly related by the investigator.|Adverse events were collected from the screening visit to month 12 (total 13 months); Serious Adverse Events were collected from the time that informed consent was obtained to 30 days after last dose of study drug (up to 13 months)|The safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and for whom safety data was collected after administration of the first dose of study drug .||participants|||Number
829168|NCT01224782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a > 30% Decrease From Baseline in Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH)|The percentage of participants with a decrease in iPTH levels > 30% at any timepoint during followup, up to 12 months.|From Baseline up to 12 Months|Secondary analyses were conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with available data.||percentage of participants|||Number
829169|NCT01224782|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Calcium x Phosphorus Product (CxP) Values > 65 mg˄2/dL˄2 or 5.24 mmol˄2/L˄2|The percentage of participants with Calcium x Phosphorus Product (CxP) values > 65 mg˄2/dL˄2 or 5.24 mmol˄2/L˄2 at any timepoint during followup, up to 12 months.|From Baseline up to 12 Months|The primary analysis was conducted in the per-protocol (PP) population, which included all participants for whom all study criteria were fulfilled at the time of enrollment and who had no major protocol deviation occur in the course of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
829170|NCT01224782|Primary|Time to Achieve a > 30% Decrease From Baseline in Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) Values|Mean time to achieve a > 30% decrease in intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) compared with the initial values at baseline (screening visit).|From Baseline up to 12 Months|The primary analysis was conducted in the per-protocol (PP) population, which included all participants for whom all study criteria were fulfilled at the time of enrollment and who had no major protocol deviation occur in the course of the study, with a > 30% decrease in iPTH compared with the initial values at baseline.||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
829171|NCT01224821|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression or Death for All Participants, as Assessed by the Investigator|Progression-free survival or time to progression is defined as the time from the dosimetric dose to the first documented occurrence of disease progression or death.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only participants with disease progression or those who died were analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829172|NCT01224821|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression or Death for Responders, as Assessed by the Investigator|Progression-free survival or time to progression is defined as the time from the dosimetric dose to the first documented occurrence of disease progression or death.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only participants classified as responders with disease progression or those who died were analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829173|NCT01224821|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from the treatment start date to the date of death from any cause. Time to death is the time from the dosimetric dose to the date of death.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants who died during the study were analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829174|NCT01224821|Secondary|Median Time to Treatment Failure for All Participants|Time to treatment failure is defined as the length of time from the date of enrollment to the first incidence of treatment withdrawal, study removal, progression, and/or alternative therapy for the participant's lymphoma, or death.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829175|NCT01224821|Secondary|Duration of Response for All Unconfirmed Clinical Complete Responders, as Assessed by the Investigator|Duration of response is defined as the time from the first documented response until disease progression. Disease progression is defined as a >=25% increase from the nadir value of the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions or the appearance of any new lesion. Individual lesions must be >2 cm in diameter by radiographic evaluation or >1 cm in diameter by physical examination.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants with a confirmed CCR were analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829176|NCT01224821|Secondary|Duration of Response for All Confirmed Clinical Complete Responders, as Assessed by the Investigator|Responses had to be confirmed by 2 separate evaluations occurring >=4 weeks apart. Duration of response is defined as the time from the first documented response until disease progression. Disease progression is defined as a >=25% increase from the nadir value of the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions or the appearance of any new lesion. Individual lesions must be >2 cm in diameter by radiographic evaluation or >1 cm in diameter by physical examination.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants with a confirmed CCR were analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829177|NCT01224821|Secondary|Duration of Response for All Unconfirmed Complete Responders, as Assessed by the Investigator|Duration of response is defined as the time from the first documented response until disease progression. Disease progression is defined as a >=25% increase from the nadir value of the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions or the appearance of any new lesion. Individual lesions must be >2 cm in diameter by radiographic evaluation or >1 cm in diameter by physical examination.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants with a confirmed CR were analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829178|NCT01224821|Secondary|Duration of Response for All Confirmed Complete Responders, as Assessed by the Investigator|Responses had to be confirmed by 2 separate evaluations occurring >=4 weeks apart. Duration of response is defined as the time from the first documented response until disease progression. Disease progression is defined as a >=25% increase from the nadir value of the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions or the appearance of any new lesion. Individual lesions must be >2 cm in diameter by radiographic evaluation or >1 cm in diameter by physical examination.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants with a confirmed CR were analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829192|NCT01225055|Secondary|C-terminal Telopeptide|Change in C-terminal telopeptide from baseline after 12 month of treatment|12 months|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829179|NCT01224821|Secondary|Duration of Response for All Unconfirmed Responders (CR, CCR, or PR), as Assessed by the Investigator|Duration of response is defined as the time from the first documented response until disease progression. Disease progression is defined as a >=25% increase from the nadir value of the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions or the appearance of any new lesion. Individual lesions must be >2 cm in diameter by radiographic evaluation or >1 cm in diameter by physical examination.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants with a confirmed response were analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829180|NCT01224821|Secondary|Duration of Response for All Confirmed Responders (CR, CCR, or PR), as Assessed by the Investigator|Responses had to be confirmed by 2 separate evaluations occurring >=4 weeks apart. Duration of response is defined as the time from the first documented response until disease progression. Disease progression is defined as a >=25% increase from the nadir value of the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions or the appearance of any new lesion. Individual lesions must be >2 cm in diameter by radiographic evaluation or >1 cm in diameter by physical examination.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants with a confirmed response were analyzed.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829181|NCT01224821|Secondary|Number of Participants With Confirmed CR and CCR, as Assessed by the Investigator|The total number of participants with CR and CCR was reported. Responses had to be confirmed by 2 separate evaluations occurring >=4 weeks apart. CR: complete resolution of all disease-related radiological abnormalities and the disappearance of all signs and symptoms related to the disease. Clinical Complete Response: complete resolution of all disease-related symptoms; residual foci, thought to be residual scar tissue, are present.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants evaluable for confirmed CR and CCR were analyzed.||participants|||Number
829182|NCT01224821|Secondary|Number of Participants With CR and CCR, as Assessed by the Investigator|The total number of participants with CR and CCR was reported. CR: complete resolution of all disease-related radiological abnormalities and the disappearance of all signs and symptoms related to the disease. Clinical Complete Response: complete resolution of all disease-related symptoms; residual foci, thought to be residual scar tissue, are present.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants evaluable for response were analyzed.||participants|||Number
829183|NCT01224821|Secondary|Number of Participants With Confirmed Response (CR, CCR, or PR), as Assessed by the Investigator|Responses had to be confirmed by 2 separate evaluations occurring >=4 weeks apart. Par. with confirmed response include those with Complete Response (CR: complete resolution of all disease-related radiological abnormalities and the disappearance of all signs and symptoms related to the disease), Clinical Complete Response (CCR: complete resolution of all disease-related symptoms; residual foci, thought to be residual scar tissue, are present), or Partial Response (PR: >=50% reduction in the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions; no new lesions).|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants evaluable for confirmed response were analyzed.||participants|||Number
829184|NCT01224821|Secondary|Number of Participants (Par.) With Response (CR, CCR, or PR), as Assessed by the Investigator|Par. with response include those with Complete Response (CR: complete resolution of all disease-related radiological abnormalities and the disappearance of all signs and symptoms related to the disease), Clinical Complete Response (CCR: complete resolution of all disease-related symptoms; residual foci, thought to be residual scar tissue, are present), or Partial Response (PR: >=50% reduction in the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions; no new lesions).|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population. Only those participants evaluable for response were analyzed.||participants|||Number
829185|NCT01224821|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Therapeutic Doses (TD) (Total Body Dose)|Based on their platelet count and body weight. Participants received different TDs of TST. For obese participants (weighing more than 137% of their calculated lean body weight), the calculation to determine the administered activity (mCi) was performed using the maximum effective mass (i.e., the minimum of the participant’s mass and 137% of their calculated lean body weight). The administered activity (mCi) for participants with a Baseline platelet count of 100001–149999 cells/millimeter cubed (mm^3) was reduced to a 65 cGy total body dose, after any adjustment for obesity.|Participants were evaluated for up to 142 months in Study 104731 or were followed in the long-term follow-up study (Study 104526) for up to 136.3 months|ITT Exposed Population||participants|||Number
829186|NCT01224821|Primary|Number of Participants Who Received the Therapeutic Dose at the Seven Clinical Research Sites|The dosimetry methods were validated for seven different clinical research sites.|Day 1 within one hour of infusion (I) and prior to urination (U); Days 2, 3, and 4 after dosimetric dose (DD) I, following U; Days 6 and 7 after DD I, following U|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Exposed Population: all participants who enrolled in the study and received at least one dose of study drug. One participant did not receive the therapeutic dose.||participants|||Number
829187|NCT01225029|Secondary|Time to First Enteral Feed||hour until first enteral feed achieved, an average of approximately 40 hours and a maximum of 100 hours|||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
829188|NCT01225029|Secondary|Duration of ICU Admission||every day until discharge, an average of approximately 8 days and a maximum of 12 days|||calendar days||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
829189|NCT01225029|Primary|Duration of Respiratory Support||every hour until patient stable without respiratory support, an average of approximately 55 hours and a maximum of 205 hours|||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829190|NCT01225055|Secondary|Amino-terminal Propeptide of Type 1 Collagen|Change in Amino-terminal of type 1 collagen from baseline after 12 months of treatment|12 months|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829191|NCT01225055|Secondary|Bone-specific Alkaline Phosphatase|Change in Bone-specific alkaline phosphatase from baseline after 12 month of therapy|12 months|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829196|NCT01225068|Primary|Effect Size of VAS Pain|"Effect size (ES) calculation for VAS pain between milnacipran and placebo groups' ES is dimensionless; Visual analogue scale (VAS) measured pain in integral units from 0 (low end) to 100 (high end); ES (Cohen's d) is a well described statistical construct and is calculated from the difference between the means (determined at baseline and 6 weeks here) divided by the pooled standard deviation.
This is the primary outcome measure."|6 weeks from baseline|per protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829197|NCT01225146|Secondary|Goldman Visual Field Changes|Goldman Visual Field changes at 6 and 12 months from baseline|12 months|Data for this outcome measure were not collected. The study was terminated because the collaborator, Genentech, stopped production of the study drug (2.0 mg ranibizumab). Analysis of this outcome was therefore deferred and is being rolled over to the WAVE study program (NCT01710839, IND 12246)|||||
829198|NCT01225146|Secondary|Changes, by Disc Areas, of Capillary Non-perfusion in the Periphery|Changes, by disc areas, of capillary non-perfusion in the periphery (evaluated by wide-field fluorescein angiography) at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months from baseline.|12 months|Data for this outcome measure were not collected. The study was terminated because the collaborator, Genentech, stopped production of the study drug (2.0 mg ranibizumab). Analysis of this outcome was therefore deferred and is being rolled over to the WAVE study program (NCT01710839, IND 12246)|||||
829199|NCT01225146|Secondary|Mean Change in Central Foveal Volume|Mean change in Central Foveal Volume on High Resolution OCT|12 months|Patients in cohort 2 did not complete the study.||mm^3||Full Range|Mean
829200|NCT01225146|Secondary|Neovascularization Development|Percent of patients that develop neovascularization of the iris, optic nerve and/or elsewhere.|12 months|Patients in cohort 2 did not complete the study.||Percentage of patients|||Number
829201|NCT01225146|Secondary|Incidence and Severity of Adverse Events (Ocular and Non-ocular).|Incidence and severity of adverse events (ocular and non-ocular) from baseline through 12 months will be evaluated.|12 months|||incidents|||Number
829202|NCT01225146|Primary|Mean Change in logMAR|Mean change from baseline in ETDRS NCVA.|12 months.|Patients in cohort 2 did not complete the study.||logMAR||Full Range|Mean
829203|NCT01225159|Secondary|Morbidities and All Causes Mortality|morbidities defined as hypoglycaemia (blood sugar less than 60 mg/dL), Stroke (focal neurological deficit confirmed with CT or MRI), acute renal failure (rising of creatinine)|within the first 30 days after surgery|||participants|||Number
829204|NCT01225159|Primary|Nosocomial Infection|Infection rate referred to the rate of nosocomial infection, including pneumonia, central line infection, surgical wound infection, deep sternal wound infection, urinary tract infection, and sepsis. Infections were defined according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definitions, occurring within 30 days postoperative cardiac surgery.|within the first 30 day after surgery|||participants|||Number
829205|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 4: Absolute Change From Baseline in Weight at Day 56||Cohort 4: Baseline, Day 56|Cohort 4 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received any amount of study drug in Cohort 4. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829206|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 4: Absolute Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI) at Day 56|BMI was defined as weight in kilogram (kg) divided by height*height in square meter (m^2).|Cohort 4: Baseline, Day 56|Cohort 4 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received any amount of study drug in Cohort 4. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||kg/m^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829207|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 4: Absolute Change From Baseline in CFQ-R Respiratory Domain Score at Day 56|CFQ-R respiratory domain is defined in Outcome Measure 17.|Cohort 4: Baseline, Day 56|Cohort 4 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received any amount of study drug in Cohort 4. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829208|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 2 and 3: Absolute Change From Day 28 in Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) Respiratory Domain Score at Day 56|The CFQ-R is a validated participant-reported outcome measuring health-related quality of life for subjects with cystic fibrosis. Respiratory domain assessed respiratory symptoms (for example, coughing, congestion, wheezing), score range: 0-100; higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and better health-related quality of life.|Cohort 2 and 3: Day 28, Day 56|Cohort 2 and 3 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 2 or 3. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829209|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 4: Relative Change From Baseline in Percent Predicted FEV1 at Day 56|FEV1 and ppFEV1 are defined in Outcome Measure 6.|Cohort 4: Baseline, Day 56|Cohort 4 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received any amount of study drug in Cohort 4. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829210|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 2 and 3: Relative Change From Baseline in FEV1 at Day 28 and 56|FEV1 and ppFEV1 are defined in Outcome Measure 6.|Cohort 2 and 3: Baseline, Day 28 and 56|Cohort 2 and 3 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 2 or 3. Here, n = participants evaluable for specified category for each arm, respectively. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829211|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 2 and 3: Absolute Change From Baseline in ppFEV1 at Day 28 and 56|FEV1 and ppFEV1 are defined in Outcome Measure 6.|Cohort 2 and 3: Baseline, Day 28 and 56|Cohort 2 and 3 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 2 or 3. Here, n = participants evaluable for specified category for each arm, respectively. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||percent predicted of FEV1||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829212|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 2 and 3: Relative Change From Day 28 in ppFEV1 at Day 56|FEV1 and ppFEV1 are defined in Outcome Measure 6.|Cohort 2 and 3: Day 28, Day 56|Cohort 2 and 3 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 2 or 3. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829411|NCT01226719|Secondary|To Determine the Acute Toxicity Produced by This Regimen.|The analyses of safety will be based on the frequency of adverse events and their severity for patients who received at least one dose of study treatment.|18 months|All patients on study||participants|||Number
829213|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 2 and 3: Absolute Change From Day 28 in ppFEV1 at Day 56|FEV1 and ppFEV1 are defined in Outcome Measure 6.|Cohort 2 and 3: Day 28, Day 56|Cohort 2 and 3 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 2 or 3. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||percent predicted of FEV1||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829214|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 1: Absolute Change From Day 14 in ppFEV1 at Day 21|FEV1 and ppFEV1 are defined in Outcome Measure 6.|Cohort 1: Day 14, Day 21|Cohort 1 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 1. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||percent predicted of FEV1||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829215|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 1: Absolute Change From Day 14 in FEV1 at Day 21|FEV1 is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out in one second, after full inspiration.|Cohort 1: Day 14, Day 21|Cohort 1 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 1. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829216|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 4: Absolute Change From Baseline in Sweat Chloride at Day 56||Cohort 4: Baseline, Day 56|Cohort 4 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received any amount of study drug in Cohort 4. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829217|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 2 And 3: Absolute Change From Baseline in Sweat Chloride at Day 14||Cohort 2: Baseline, Day 14|Cohort 2 and 3 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 2 or 3. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829218|NCT01225211|Secondary|Cohort 1: Absolute Change From Baseline in Sweat Chloride at Day 14||Cohort 1: Baseline, Day 14|Cohort 1 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 1. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829219|NCT01225211|Primary|Cohort 4: Absolute Change From Baseline in Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (ppFEV1) at Day 56|FEV1 is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out in one second, after full inspiration. ppFEV1 (predicted for age, gender, and height) was calculated using the Hankinson method.|Cohort 4: Baseline, Day 56|Cohort 4 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received any amount of study drug in Cohort 4. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||percent predicted of FEV1||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829220|NCT01225211|Primary|Cohort 2 And 3: Absolute Change From Day 28 in Sweat Chloride at Day 56||Cohort 2 and 3: Day 28, Day 56|Cohort 2 and 3 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 2 or 3. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829221|NCT01225211|Primary|Cohort 1: Absolute Change From Day 14 in Sweat Chloride at Day 21||Cohort 1: Day 14, Day 21|Cohort 1 Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 1. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||millimole per liter (mmol/L)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829222|NCT01225211|Primary|Cohort 4: Safety and Tolerability Assessed by Number of Participants With AEs and SAEs|AEs and SAEs are defined in Outcome Measure 1.|Cohort 4: Day 1 up to 28 days after last dose (Last dose = Day 56)|Cohort 4 Safety Set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 4.||participants|||Number
829223|NCT01225211|Primary|Cohort 2 and 3: Safety and Tolerability Based on Adverse Events (AEs)|Detailed description is provided in Outcome Measure 1. Results are reported separately for monotherapy period (Period 1: Day 1 to Day 28) and combination therapy period (Period 2: Day 29 to Day 56).|Cohort 2 and 3: Day 1 up to 28 days after last dose (Last dose = Day 56)|Cohort 2 and 3 Safety Set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 2 or 3. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||participants|||Number
829224|NCT01225211|Primary|Cohort 1: Safety and Tolerability Based on Adverse Events (AEs)|AE: any untoward medical occurrence in a participant during study; irrespective of relationship with treatment. This includes any newly occurring event or previous condition that has increased in severity or frequency after informed consent. AE includes serious AEs (SAEs) as well as Non-SAEs. SAE (subset of AE): medical event or condition, which falls into any of the following categories, regardless of its relationship to study drug: death, life threatening adverse experience, in-patient hospitalization/prolongation of hospitalization, persistent/significant disability or incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, important medical event. Number of participants with AEs and SAEs are reported. AE that started at/after initial dosing of study drug, or increased in severity after initial dosing of study drug is considered treatment-emergent. Results are reported separately for monotherapy period (Period 1: Day 1 to Day 14) and combination therapy period (Period 2: Day 15 to Day 21).|Cohort 1: Day 1 up to 28 days after last dose (Last dose = Day 21)|Cohort 1 Safety Set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Cohort 1. Number of participants analysed signifies participants evaluable for this outcome.||participants|||Number
829225|NCT01225263|Primary|Migraine Frequency: Change From Baseline 12-week Period to Weeks 13 to 24||Weeks 13 to 24|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829226|NCT01225263|Primary|Migraine Frequency: Change From Baseline 12-week Period to Weeks 1 to 12||Weeks 1 to 12|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829227|NCT01225289|Secondary|Peripheral Blood Mononucleated Cells (PBMCs) Proliferation Assay (BrdU Colorimetric)|difference of PBMCs proliferation stimulated with myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG), before and after of supplementation|first day and after 6 month|||absorbance units||Standard Error|Mean
829228|NCT01225289|Secondary|Difference of Retinol Binding Protein (RBP) / Transthyretin (TTR) Ratio, (Difference of RBP/ TTR Ratio), Before and After of Supplementation||first day and after 6 month|||ratio||Standard Error|Mean
829229|NCT01225289|Secondary|Difference of IL-4 Levels in Supernatant of Peripheral Blood Mononucleated Cells (PBMCs) Stimulated With Phytohemagglutinin (PHA), Before and After of Supplementation||first day and after 6 month|||pg/ml||Standard Error|Mean
829230|NCT01225289|Primary|Difference Serum Levels of High-sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP), Before and After of Supplementation||first day and after 6 month|||mg/L||Standard Error|Mean
829235|NCT01225354|Primary|Self-esteem|Self-esteem change will be determined by patient self-evaluation using the Heatherton & Polivy State Self-Esteem (HPSS). The primary variable will be measured as improvement in self-esteem from baseline self-evaluations.|1 month post-optimal cosmetic result|All subjects completing indicated visit||Participants with improved self-esteem|||Number
829236|NCT01225354|Primary|Blinded Evaluations of First Impression|Upon completion of the study, 300 blinded evaluators will evaluate one of three binders comprised of a random visit photographs from baseline, optimal cosmetic result, and 1 month post optimal cosmetic result of each of the 20 subjects. The 10-point (1=Not at all to 10=Extremely well) First Impression Scales consisting of 8 criteria.|After the 1-month post optimal correction visit for subject 20||||||
829237|NCT01225549|Secondary|Changes in Sputum Eosinophils Differentials (Percentage)|The change form baseline in percentage of sputum eosinophils was assessed on Day 5 (post dose) ,Day 6 ([post dose] 7 hours post allergen challenge) and Day 7 ([post dose] 24 hours post allergen challenge)|Day 7 ([post dose] 24 hours post allergen challenge)|||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
829238|NCT01225549|Secondary|Changes in Sputum Eosinophils Differentials (Percentage)|The change form baseline in percentage of sputum eosinophils was assessed on Day 5 (post dose) ,Day 6 ([post dose] 7 hours post allergen challenge) and Day 7 ([post dose] 24 hours post allergen challenge)|Day 6 ([post dose] 7 hours post allergen challenge)|||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
829239|NCT01225549|Secondary|Changes in Sputum Eosinophils Differentials (Percentage)|The change form baseline in percentage of sputum eosinophils was assessed on Day 5 (post dose) ,Day 6 ([post dose] 7 hours post allergen challenge) and Day 7 ([post dose] 24 hours post allergen challenge)|Day 5 (post dose)|PD Analysis set||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
829240|NCT01225549|Secondary|Airway Hyperresponsiveness by Assessment of Methacholine PC20|The methacholine challenge was performed on Day 1 (pre dose), Day 5 ([post dose] pre AC), and Day 7 ([post dose] 24 hours post AC)|Day 7 ([post-dose] 24 hours post allergen challenge)|||mg/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
829241|NCT01225549|Secondary|Airway Hyperresponsiveness by Assessment of Methacholine PC20|The methacholine challenge was performed on Day 1 (pre dose), Day 5 ([post dose] pre AC), and Day 7 ([post dose] 24 hours post AC)|Day 5 ([post-dose] pre allergen challenge)|||mg/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
829242|NCT01225549|Secondary|Airway Hyperresponsiveness by Assessment of Methacholine PC20|The methacholine challenge was performed on Day 1 (pre dose), Day 5 ([post dose] pre AC), and Day 7 ([post dose] 24 hours post AC)|Day 1 (pre-dose)|PD Analysis set||mg/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
829243|NCT01225549|Secondary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) for FEV1 Over 0-3 and 3-7 h Post Allergen Challenge|AUC was assessed as average percentage of FEV1 remaining 0 to 3 hours and 3 to 7 hours post allergen challenge compared to pre allergen challenge FEV1|From Randomization to end of treatment|PD Analysis set||Percentage||Full Range|Geometric Mean
829244|NCT01225549|Secondary|Early Allergic Response (EAR) by Assessment of Minimum Percentage of FEV1 0-3 h Post Allergen Challenge|Minimum Percentage of FEV1 over 0 to 3 hours post allergen challenge compared to pre allergen challenge FEV1|From Randomization to end of treatment|PD Analysis set||Percentage||Full Range|Geometric Mean
829245|NCT01225549|Primary|Late Allergic Response (LAR) by Assessment of Minimum Percentage of FEV1 3-7 Hours Post Allergen Challenge Compared to Pre Allergen Challenge FEV1|LAR was assessed on Day 6 as minimum percentage of FEV1 over 3 to 7 hours based on the analysis of the minimum percentage of FEV1 remaining over 3 to 7 hours post allergen challenge (post AC) compared to pre allergen challenge (pre AC) FEV1|From Randomization to end of treatment|PD Analysis set||Percentage||Full Range|Geometric Mean
829246|NCT01225562|Primary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of the Percentage of Patients Who Experienced a TIMI Major Bleeding Within 3 Years From First Dose of Study Drug Units: Percentage of Patients|A Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) study group major bleeding is defined as any fatal bleeding (leading directly to death within 7 days), any intrcranial bleeding or any clinically overt signs of haemorrhage associated with a drop in Haemoglobin of >= 5g/dL. Events were adjudicated by a clinical events committee. Censoring ocurrs at 7 days following last dose of study drug. The Kaplan-Meier estimate reports the percentage of patients who experienced a TIMI Major bleeding within 3 years from first dose of study drug|First dosing up to 48 months|The safety analysis set defined as all patients who took at least one dose of study drug||Percentage of Patients|||Number
829247|NCT01225562|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of the Percentage of Patients Who Died From Any Cause Within 3 Years From Randomization|Participants with death from any cause. If no event, censoring occurs at the earliest of the efficacy cut-off date 14 Sep 2014, withdrawal of consent or the last time point the particapant was known to be alive. Events were adjudicated by a blinded endpoint committee. The Kaplan-Meier estimate reports the percentage of patients who died from any cause within 3 years from randomization|Randomization up to 47 months|Intention to treat (ITT) population defined as all participants who were randomized to study treatment||Percentage of Patients|||Number
829248|NCT01225562|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of the Percentage of Patients Who Experienced Cardiovascular Death (CV Death) Within 3 Years From Randomization|Participants with CV death. If no event, censoring occurs at the earliest of the efficacy cut-off date 14 Sep 2014, withdrawal of consent, non-CV death or at the last time point of complete clinical event assessment. Events were adjudicated by a blinded endpoint committee. The Kaplan-Meier estimate reports the percentage of patients who experienced CV Death within 3 years from randomization|Randomization up to 47 months|Intention to treat (ITT) population defined as all participants who were randomized to study treatment||Percentage of Patients|||Number
829249|NCT01225562|Primary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of the Percentage of Patients Who Experienced Cardiovascular Death (CV Death), Myocardial Infarction (MI) or Stroke Within 3 Years From Randomization|Participants with CV death, MI or Stroke. If no event, censoring occurs at the earliest of the efficacy cut-off date 14 Sep 2014, withdrawal of consent, non-CV death or at the last time point of complete clinical event assessment. Events were adjudicated by a blinded endpoint committee. The Kaplan-Meier estimate reports the percentage of patients who experienced CV Death, MI or stroke within 3 years from randomization|Randomization up to 47 months|Intention to treat (ITT) population defined as all participants who were randomized to study treatment||Percentage of Patients|||Number
829281|NCT01225835|Secondary|Number of Frozen Oocytes at Pronuclear Stage|No more than three normally developed embryos were transferred 2-3 days after oocyte retrieval. Other normally developed embryos were frozen.|approximately day 14|Per protocol set of participants who had embryos transferred||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829250|NCT01225731|Primary|Number of Particpants Discontinuing Study Treatment Due to Adverse Events|An adverse event is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body whether or not considered related to the study treatment. Participants may be discontinued from study drug due to adverse events, but remain on the study.|Up to 52 weeks|All particpants receiving at least one dose of study drug during the treatment period.||Participants|||Number
829251|NCT01225731|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing Adverse Events|An adverse event is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body whether or not considered related to the study treatment.|Up to 72 weeks|All participants receiving at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
829252|NCT01225731|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a >=5 Point Reduction in DLQI at Week 16|The DLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures how much participant skin problems have affected their life. Responses range from 0=Not at all to 3=Very much. The DLQI is broken down into 6 subscales: Symptoms and feelings (range 0-6), Daily activities (range 0-6), Leisure (range 0-6), Work and school (range 0-3), Personal relationships (range 0-6), and Treatment (range 0-3). DLQI subscales were summed to yield the DLQI total score, which could range from 0 to 30. For both DLQI subscales and DLQI total score, a higher score indicated a greater negative impact on life.|Week 16|The FAS, all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement, and had data for this endpoint.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829253|NCT01225731|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DLQI Score of 0 or 1 at Week 16|The DLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures how much participant skin problems have affected their life. Responses range from 0=Not at all to 3=Very much. The DLQI is broken down into 6 subscales: Symptoms and feelings (range 0-6), Daily activities (range 0-6), Leisure (range 0-6), Work and school (range 0-3), Personal relationships (range 0-6), and Treatment (range 0-3). DLQI subscales were summed to yield the DLQI total score, which could range from 0 to 30. For both DLQI subscales and DLQI total score, a higher score indicated a greater negative impact on life.|Week 16|The FAS, all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement, and data for this endpoint, excluding all participants on the placebo arm.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829254|NCT01225731|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Week 16|The DLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures how much participant skin problems have affected their life. Responses range from 0=Not at all to 3=Very much. The DLQI is broken down into 6 subscales: Symptoms and feelings (range 0-6), Daily activities (range 0-6), Leisure (range 0-6), Work and school (range 0-3), Personal relationships (range 0-6), and Treatment (range 0-3). DLQI subscales were summed to yield the DLQI total score, which could range from 0 to 30. For both DLQI subscales and DLQI total score, a higher score indicated a greater negative impact on life.|Week 16|The FAS, all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement, and had data for this endpoint.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829255|NCT01225731|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PASI 50 Response at Week 16|The PASI score measures the severity and extent of psoriasis. Using a scale of 0=none to 4= very severe, each body region (head, trunk, arms, and legs) is rated for redness, thickness, and scaling of the largest psoriatic area in that region producing a Lesion Score. The percentage of the area affected by disease is then estimated, ranging from 0 = no lesions to 6 = 90-100% of the region is covered providing an Area Score. Then, the Lesion Score and Area Score for each region are multiplied, producing 4 subtotals. The 4 region subtotals are multiplied by a standardized percentage of body surface area for that region (head = 0.1, trunk = 0.3, arms=0.2, and legs = 0.4); these four region calculations are added to provide the final PASI score, ranging from 0 = no disease to 72 = maximal disease). PASI 50 response was defined as >=50 % improvement in PASI score when compared to the baseline score.|Week 16|The FAS, all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement. The last non-missing post-baseline PASI score was carried forward (LOCF) unless the participant discontinued drug due to lack of efficacy, loss of response, or use of prohibited medications.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829256|NCT01225731|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 12 and 16|The PASI score measures the severity and extent of psoriasis. Using a scale of 0=none to 4= very severe, each body region (head, trunk, arms, and legs) is rated for redness, thickness, and scaling of the largest psoriatic area in that region producing a Lesion Score. The percentage of the area affected by disease is then estimated, ranging from 0 = no lesions to 6 = 90-100% of the region is covered providing an Area Score. Then, the Lesion Score and Area Score for each region are multiplied, producing 4 subtotals. The 4 region subtotals are multiplied by a standardized percentage of body surface area for that region (head = 0.1, trunk = 0.3, arms=0.2, and legs = 0.4); these four region calculations are added to provide the final PASI score, ranging from 0 = no disease to 72 = maximal disease).|Baseline and Weeks 12 and 16|The FAS, all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement, and data for Week 12 and Week 16.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829257|NCT01225731|Secondary|PASI 75 Response Rate by Time|The PASI score measures the severity and extent of psoriasis. Using a scale of 0=none to 4= very severe, each body region (head, trunk, arms, and legs) is rated for redness, thickness, and scaling of the largest psoriatic area in that region producing a Lesion Score. The percentage of the area affected by disease is then estimated, ranging from 0 = no lesions to 6 = 90-100% of the region is covered providing an Area Score. Then, the Lesion Score and Area Score for each region are multiplied, producing 4 subtotals. The 4 region subtotals are multiplied by a standardized percentage of body surface area for that region (head = 0.1, trunk = 0.3, arms=0.2, and legs = 0.4); these four region calculations are added to provide the final PASI score, ranging from 0 = no disease to 72 = maximal disease).PASI 75 response was defined as >=75% improvement in PASI score when compared to the baseline score at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, or 16.|Up to 16 Weeks|The FAS, all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement. and data for the specific Week.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829337|NCT01226043|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)||From week 4 (baseline for re-randomization phase) to week 10 (end of re-randomization phase)|The mITT population for Re-randomization and Observational Phases consisted of all patients who were re-randomized, received at least one dose of Lantus after re-randomization, and had both a re-randomization baseline assessment and at least one post re-randomization assessment of FPG measured during the on-treatment period.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829258|NCT01225731|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PASI 100 Response at Week 16|The PASI score measures the severity and extent of psoriasis. Using a scale of 0=none to 4= very severe, each body region (head, trunk, arms, and legs) is rated for redness, thickness, and scaling of the largest psoriatic area in that region producing a Lesion Score. The percentage of the area affected by disease is then estimated, ranging from 0 = no lesions to 6 = 90-100% of the region is covered providing an Area Score. Then, the Lesion Score and Area Score for each region are multiplied, producing 4 subtotals. The 4 region subtotals are multiplied by a standardized percentage of body surface area for that region (head = 0.1, trunk = 0.3, arms=0.2, and legs = 0.4); these four region calculations are added to provide the final PASI score, ranging from 0 = no disease to 72 = maximal disease). PASI 100 response was defined as 100 % improvement in PASI score when compared to the baseline score.|Week 16|The FAS, all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement, and data fior this endpoint||Percentage of participants|||Number
829259|NCT01225731|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PASI 90 Response at Week 16|The PASI score measures the severity and extent of psoriasis. Using a scale of 0=none to 4= very severe, each body region (head, trunk, arms, and legs) is rated for redness, thickness, and scaling of the largest psoriatic area in that region producing a Lesion Score. The percentage of the area affected by disease is then estimated, ranging from 0 = no lesions to 6 = 90-100% of the region is covered providing an Area Score. Then, the Lesion Score and Area Score for each region are multiplied, producing 4 subtotals. The 4 region subtotals are multiplied by a standardized percentage of body surface area for that region (head = 0.1, trunk = 0.3, arms=0.2, and legs = 0.4); these four region calculations are added to provide the final PASI score, ranging from 0 = no disease to 72 = maximal disease). PASI 90 response was defined as >=90 % improvement in PASI score when compared to the baseline score.|Week 16|The FAS, all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement, and data for this endpoint.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829260|NCT01225731|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) of “Cleared” or “Minimal” at Week 16|The PGA is used to determine the overall severity of a subject’s psoriasis lesions at a given time point. Overall lesions will be graded for induration, erythema, and scaling on a scale from 0 to 5. The sum of the 3 scales will be divided by 3 to obtain the PGA score. PGA is assessed as: 0= Cleared, except for residual discoloration. 1= Minimal, majority of lesions have individual scores that average . 2 =Mild, majority of lesions have individual scores that average 2. 3= Modreate, majority of lesions have individual scores that average 3. 4= Marked, majority of lesions have individual scores that average 4. 5= Severe, majority of lesions have individual scores that average 5.|Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS), all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement. The last non-missing post-baseline PGA value was carried forward (LOCF) unless the participant discontinued drug due to lack of efficacy, loss of response, or use of prohibited medications.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829261|NCT01225731|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI 75 Response at Week 12|The PASI score measures the severity and extent of psoriasis. Using a scale of 0=none to 4= very severe, each body region (head, trunk, arms, and legs) is rated for redness, thickness, and scaling of the largest psoriatic area in that region producing a Lesion Score. The percentage of the area affected by disease is then estimated, ranging from 0 = no lesions to 6 = 90-100% of the region is covered providing an Area Score. Then, the Lesion Score and Area Score for each region are multiplied, producing 4 subtotals. The 4 region subtotals are multiplied by a standardized percentage of body surface area for that region (head = 0.1, trunk = 0.3, arms=0.2, and legs = 0.4); these four region calculations are added to provide the final PASI score, ranging from 0 = no disease to 72 = maximal disease). PASI 75 response was defined as >=75% improvement in PASI score when compared to the baseline score.|Week 12|The FAS, all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement. The last non-missing post-baseline PASI score was carried forward (LOCF) unless the participant discontinued drug due to lack of efficacy, loss of response, or use of prohibited medications.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829262|NCT01225731|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)75 Response at Week 16|The PASI score measures the severity and extent of psoriasis. Using a scale of 0=none to 4= very severe, each body region (head, trunk, arms, and legs) is rated for redness, thickness, and scaling of the largest psoriatic area in that region producing a Lesion Score. The percentage of the area affected by disease is then estimated, ranging from 0 = no lesions to 6 = 90-100% of the region is covered providing an Area Score. Then, the Lesion Score and Area Score for each region are multiplied, producing 4 subtotals. The 4 region subtotals are multiplied by a standardized percentage of body surface area for that region (head = 0.1, trunk = 0.3, arms=0.2, and legs = 0.4); these four region calculations are added to provide the final PASI score, ranging from 0 = no disease to 72 = maximal disease). PASI 75 response was defined as >=75% improvement in PASI score when compared to the baseline score.|Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS), all randomized participants who received >=1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and >=1 post-treatment efficacy measurement. The last non-missing post-baseline PASI score was carried forward (LOCF) unless the participant discontinued drug due to lack of efficacy, loss of response, or use of prohibited medications.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829263|NCT01225822|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve During a Dosing Interval|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve during a dosing interval (at steady-state). The AUC0-12h (for b.i.d. treatment regimens) and AUC0-24h (300 mg q.d.) after the first dose on day of surgery calculated by extrapolation using the elimination rate constant, reported only if the extrapolated fraction of AUC was less than 30 % of the total AUC.|up to day 8+/-2 days visit|||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829264|NCT01225822|Secondary|Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Dabigatran|"Maximum plasma concentration of Dabigatran (at steady-state) and Pre-dose plasma concentrations at steady state.
Cmax represents the maximum concentration of Dabigatran in plasma. Cmax,ss represents the maximum concentration of Dabigatran in plasma at steady state.
Cpre,ss represents pre-dose concentration of Dabigatran in plasma at steady state"|Day 1 to end of treatment|||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829350|NCT01226121|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Obtaining Clinical Success at 90 Days (<=5 Degree Residual Contracture)||90 days|||percentage of patients|||Number
829351|NCT01226121|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Clinical Improvement (> 50% Reduction in Contracture)||30 days after injection|||percentage of participants|||Number
829265|NCT01225822|Secondary|Laboratory Analyses|"Number of patients with possible clinically significant abnormalities, i.e. with values out of normal range.
Normal ranges are defined as:
Haematocrit [%]: (0.35-0.45) for women and (0.39−0.51) for men Haemoglobin [g/dL]: (11.6−15.4) for women and (13.2−17.3) for men White Blood Cell count [10^9/L]: (4-10.3) for women and (3.9−10.3) for men Platelets [10^9/L]: (145-420) for women and men Sodium [mmol/L]: (135-146) for women and men Potassium [mmol/L]: (3.5-5) for women and men Aspartate aminotransferase (AST) [U/L]: (11-37) for women and (11-39) for men Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) [U/L]: (8-43) for women and (8-45) for men Alkaline Phosphatase [U/L]: (36-118) for women and (35-123) for men Creatinine [mg/dL]: (0.57-1.06)for women and (0.72−1.3) for men Bilirubin, total [mg/dL]: (0.22-1.28) for women and men Uric acid [mg/dL]: (2.4-6.47) for women and men"|Screening to end of treatment|Safety Set (SAFE) population. This included all randomised patients who were treated and who had any available data||participants|||Number
829266|NCT01225822|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant, Minor or Any Bleeding Events|"Number of participants with Clinically Significant, minor or any bleeding events. Clinically significant bleeding events are defined as
Spontaneous skin haematoma larger than >25 cm²
Wound haematoma >100 cm²
Spontaneous nose bleed >5 minutes
Macroscopic haematurea, either spontaneous or lasting more than 24 hours if associated with an intervention
Spontaneous rectal bleeding (more than spot on toilet paper)
Gingival bleeding >5 minutes
Any other bleeding event considered as clinically significant by the investigator All other bleeding events that did not fulfil the criteria of MBE or clinically significant bleeding event were classified as minor bleeding events."|Treatment period (up to day 8+/-2 days visit)|Safety Set (SAFE) population. This included all randomised patients who were treated and who had any available data||participants|||Number
829267|NCT01225822|Secondary|Rate of Transfusions Due to Bleedings|Percentage of patients requiring transfusions due to bleeding .Rate of need of transfusion were to be analysed using a logistic regression with treatment and centre.|Day 1 (Day of surgery)|Safety Set (SAFE) population. This included all randomised patients who were treated and who had any available data||Percentage of patients|||Number
829268|NCT01225822|Secondary|Volume of Blood Loss|Volume of blood loss was to be analysed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA), which included treatment and centre.|Day 1 (Day of surgery)|Safety Set (SAFE) population. This included all randomised patients who were treated and who had any available data||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
829269|NCT01225822|Primary|Number of Participants With Major Bleeding Events (MBE)||From approximately 14 days prior to surgery to 4-6 weeks post surgery|Safety Set (SAFE) population. This included all randomised patients who were treated and who had any available data||participants|||Number
829270|NCT01225822|Secondary|Number of Participants With Proximal DVT|Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (proximal) as detected by routine bilateral venography on day 8 +/- 2, plus symptomatic proximal DVT confirmed by venography during the treatment period|Treatment period (up to day 8+/-2 days visit)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population. This included all randomised patients who had at least one subcutaneous injection and one oral dose of study medication and with confirmed VTE data post surgery||participants|||Number
829271|NCT01225822|Secondary|Number of Participants With Proximal DVT, PE (Pulmonary Embolism) and VTE Related Mortality|Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (proximal) as detected by routine bilateral venography on day 8 +/- 2, plus symptomatic proximal DVT confirmed by venography during the treatment period or PE confirmed by objective testing plus VTE related mortality|Treatment period (up to day 10)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population. This included all randomised patients who had at least one subcutaneous injection and one oral dose of study medication and with confirmed VTE data post surgery||participants|||Number
829272|NCT01225822|Secondary|Number of Participants With VTE Events and All Cause Mortality|Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (proximal and distal) as detected by routine bilateral venography on day 8 +/- 2, plus symptomatic DVT confirmed by venography during the treatment period or Pulmonary Embolism (PE) confirmed by objective testing and all deaths.|Treatment period (up to day 8+/-2 days visit)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population. This included all randomised patients who had at least one subcutaneous injection and one oral dose of study medication and with confirmed VTE data post surgery||participants|||Number
829273|NCT01225822|Primary|Number of Participants With Venous Thromboembolic (VTE) Events|Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (proximal and distal) as detected by routine bilateral venography on day 8 +/- 2, plus symptomatic DVT confirmed by venography during the treatment period or PE confirmed by objective testing|Treatment period (up to day 8+/-2 days visit)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population. This included all randomised patients who had at least one subcutaneous injection and one oral dose of study medication and with confirmed VTE data post surgery||participants|||Number
829274|NCT01225835|Secondary|Summary of Pregnancy Outcome|Pregnancy outcomes were reported at the optional long-term follow up visit.|up to 10 months|Per protocol set of participants who reported information during the optional long-term follow up visit.||participants|||Number
829275|NCT01225835|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Pregnancy 6 Weeks After the First Positive Pregnancy Test|A pelvic ultrasound scan was performed approximately 6 weeks after the first positive pregnancy test and the presence of an active foetal heart action indicated a clinical pregnancy.|approximately 2.5 months from start of study, 6 weeks after first positive pregnancy test|Per protocol set||percentage of participants|||Number
829276|NCT01225835|Secondary|Number of Ampoules of Gonadotrophins Used|Number of ampoules of gonadotrophins used with the goal of reaching hCG criteria. Each ampoule contained 75 IU of either menotrophin or follitrophin alpha.|Day 1 up to Day 12|Per protocol set||ampoules||Standard Deviation|Mean
829277|NCT01225835|Secondary|Number of Days Stimulated With Gonadotrophins|Number of days in which gonadotrophins were administered until hCG criteria were met. If hCG criteria were not met by day 13, the participant was withdrawn from the study.|Day 1 up to Day 12|Per protocol set||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
829278|NCT01225835|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Successful Embryo Transfer||approximately day 18|Per protocol set||percentage of participants|||Number
829279|NCT01225835|Secondary|Estradiol (E2) Levels on Day of hCG Administration||approximately day 10|Per protocol set. Five participants from each treatment arm were missing blood samples.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
829280|NCT01225835|Secondary|Endometrial Thickness on Day of hCG Administration|Endometrial thickness was assessed by pelvic ultrasound on the day of hCG administration.|approximately day 10|Per protocol set of participants. One participant in the Follitrophin Alpha arm was missing a measurement.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
829282|NCT01225835|Secondary|Best Quality of an Embryo Transferred|"Embryo quality was measured by the following grades:
Grade 1: Evenly sized cells, regular cleavage, no fragmentation
Grade 2: Regular or slightly irregular cleavage, <=20% fragmentation
Grade 2.5: Regular or slightly irregular cleavage, >20%and <=50% fragmentation
Grade 3: Irregular cleavage, >50% fragmentation, >1 intact cell
Grade 4: Extensive fragmentation, only 1 cell intact
Grade 5: Totally fragmented, no viable cells.
Grade 1 represents the healthiest embryos and Grade 5 embryos are not viable."|approximately day 14|Per protocol set of participants who had embryos transferred||participants|||Number
829283|NCT01225835|Secondary|Number of Embryos Transferred|Mean number of embryos transferred 2-3 days following oocyte retrieval.|approximately day 14|The per-protocol (PP) set who had embryos transferred. PP set is defined as participants of the full analysis set without any major protocol violation (i.e., any deviation which was likely to bias the assessment of the primary endpoint).||embryos||Standard Deviation|Mean
829284|NCT01225835|Secondary|Number of Participants With Pronuclear Stage Oocytes at Each Quality Grade|"The count of participants with different quality grades of pronuclear stage oocytes is offered. Pronuclear stage oocytes are categorized into seven grades (0A, 0B, 1-5) representing different patterns of pronuclear morphology, according to the German Pronuclear Morphology Study Group. 0A is the highest quality oocyte and grade 5 is the lowest quality.
Participants can have pronuclear stage oocytes of different grades and therefore are counted more than once."|approximately day 13|The per-protocol (PP) set -- defined as participants of the full analysis set without any major protocol violation (i.e., any deviation which was likely to bias the assessment of the primary endpoint).||participants|||Number
829285|NCT01225835|Secondary|Number of Pronuclear Oocytes|Pronuclear oocytes are fertilized oocytes.|approximately day 13 after study start|The per-protocol (PP) set of participants with non-missing values.||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829286|NCT01225835|Secondary|Number of Cumulus-oocyte Complexes Retrieved|Cumulus-oocyte complexes are oocytes with surrounding cumulus cells.|approximately day 12 after study start|The per-protocol (PP) set of participants with non-missing values.||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829287|NCT01225835|Secondary|Average Follicle Diameter at hCG Administration||approximately day 10|The per-protocol (PP) set of participants with non-missing values.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
829288|NCT01225835|Secondary|Number of Follicles at hCG Administration|Number of follicles >=17 mm diameter detected by pelvic ultrasound examination at day of hCG administration.|approximately day 10|The per-protocol (PP) set of participants with non-missing values. PP set is defined as participants of the full analysis set without any major protocol violation (i.e., any deviation which was likely to bias the assessment of the primary endpoint).||follicles||Standard Deviation|Mean
829289|NCT01225835|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Ongoing Pregnancy|Ongoing pregnancy is defined as having a positive foetal heart action nine or more weeks after the first positive pregnancy test.|approximately 3.5 months from study start (at least 9 weeks after first positive pregnancy test)|The per-protocol (PP) set -- defined as participants of the full analysis set without any major protocol violation (i.e., any deviation which was likely to bias the assessment of the primary endpoint).||percentage of participants|||Number
829290|NCT01225835|Secondary|Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Analysis of Progesterone as Predictor for Ongoing Pregnancy Rate at Day 7 and Day of hCG Administration|The influence of the progesterone level on the ongoing pregnancy rate (in relation to all randomized patients) was determined by means of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Youden's Index (sensitivity + specificity -1) has a range of 0-1, with 0.5 indicating a random effect.|Day 7, approximately Day 10 (hCG Administration)|Full analysis set||Youden's index|||Number
829291|NCT01225835|Primary|Serum Progesterone (P4) Level in the Morning of the Day of Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin (hCG) Administration|Ovulation induction was performed by administration of hCG once three follicles >=17 mm diameter as shown by pelvic ultrasound examination. This outcome compares the serum progesterone level the morning prior to hCG administration across treatment arm, and also by age stratum (<39 years and >=39 years).|approximately day 10|Full analysis set||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
829297|NCT01225926|Primary|Monocular Uncorrected Distance Visual Acuity (Monocular UCDVA) at Month 3|Uncorrected visual acuity (i.e., visual acuity measured without spectacles or other visual corrective devices) was assessed using Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study charts at 100% contrast and measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR). Each eye was assessed, and both eyes contributed to the mean. LogMAR 0.00 is equivalent of 20/20 and LogMAR 1.0 is equivalent of 20/200. A more negative logMAR value would indicate a greater improvement in visual acuity.|Month 3|Per protocol: All subjects who received IOLs in both eyes and followed the protocol with no major protocol deviations.||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
829511|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Anemia, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829298|NCT01225952|Secondary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity With Glare(18 Cycles/Degree)|In one eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829299|NCT01225952|Secondary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity With Glare(12 Cycles/Degree)|In one eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829300|NCT01225952|Secondary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity With Glare(6 Cycles/Degree)|In one eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829301|NCT01225952|Secondary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity With Glare(3 Cycles/Degree)|In one eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829302|NCT01225952|Secondary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity With Glare(1.5 Cycles/Degree)|In one eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829303|NCT01225952|Secondary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity With Glare(18 Cycles/Degree)|In one eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829304|NCT01225952|Secondary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity With Glare(12 Cycles/Degree)|In one eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829305|NCT01225952|Secondary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity With Glare(6 Cycles/Degree)|In one eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829306|NCT01225952|Secondary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity With Glare (3 Cycles/Degree)|In one eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829307|NCT01225952|Secondary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity With Glare(1.5 Cycles/Degree)|In one eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full analysis set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829308|NCT01225952|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(18 Cycles/Degree)|In two eyes (binocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|Full Analysis Set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
829352|NCT01226420|Secondary|Safety of Alefacept Infusions in Patients With Chronic GVHD.|Assess the safety of alefacept in this patient population. The number of adverse events (including hematological and non-hematological safety events) will be used for safety assessment.|2 years|All enrolled subjects were included in the Analysis of Safety Events||Total adverse events|||Number
829309|NCT01225952|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(12 Cycles/Degree)|In two eyes (binocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|Full Analysis Set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
829310|NCT01225952|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(6 Cycles/Degree)|In two eyes (binocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|Full Analysis Set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
829311|NCT01225952|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(1.5, 3 Cycles/Degree)|In two eyes (binocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|Full Analysis Set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
829312|NCT01225952|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(18 Cycles/Degree)|In two eyes (binocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full Analysis Set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
829313|NCT01225952|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(12 Cycles/Degree)|In two eyes (binocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full Analysis Set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
829314|NCT01225952|Primary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(18 Cycles/Degree)|A single eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829315|NCT01225952|Primary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(12 Cycles/Degree)|A single eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829316|NCT01225952|Primary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(6 Cycles/Degree)|A single eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829317|NCT01225952|Primary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(1.5, 3 Cycles/Degree)|A single eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 4 (day 120-180)|||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829318|NCT01225952|Primary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(18 Cycles/Degree)|A single eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full Analysis Set, non-missing||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829319|NCT01225952|Primary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(12 Cycles/Degree)|A single eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full Analysis Set, non-missing||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829320|NCT01225952|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(6 Cycles/Degree)|In two eyes (binocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full Analysis Set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
829321|NCT01225952|Secondary|Binocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(1.5, 3 Cycles/Degree)|In two eye (Binocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full Analysis Set||log contrast sensitivity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
829322|NCT01225952|Primary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare(6 Cycles/Degree)|A single eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full Analysis Set, non-missing||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829323|NCT01225952|Primary|Monocular Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity Without Glare (1.5, 3 Cycles/Degree)|A single eye (monocular) in dim light (mesopic) measuring contrast sensitivity; The participant is presented with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (cycles/degree of visual angle) where the smaller the number of cycles/degree the wider apart the gradations (vertical lines of grayness). The participant's ability to detect changes in contrast is determined. Higher mean indicates improved contrast sensitivity.|Postoperative visit 3 (day 30-60)|Full Analysis Set||log contrast sensitivity units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829324|NCT01225991|Secondary|Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)|Resilience: the Connor-Davidson Resilience scale (CD-RISC) quantifies stress coping ability.|Week 1 and 12||||||
829325|NCT01225991|Secondary|Profile of Mood States (POMS)|Depressive symptoms: Repeated assessment of depressive symptoms severity will be made using the Profile of Mood States (POMS).|Week 1 and 12||||||
829326|NCT01225991|Secondary|(UKU) Side Effects Rating Scale Profile|Will rate the frequency and intensity of emerging adverse events.|12 weeks- each visit||||||
829327|NCT01225991|Secondary|Visual Analogue Scale to Evaluate Fatigue (VAS-F)|Fatigue: Repeated assessment of fatigue severity across the day will utilize the Visual Analogue Scale to Evaluate Fatigue (VAS-F).|Week 1 and 12||||||
829328|NCT01225991|Primary|Pain Rating Index|Pain & Stiffness: Repeated assessments of pain and stiffness across the day will utilize the Pain Rating Index (PRI), consisting of the sum of the ranked values associated with adjectives depicting the severity of pain from the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). Sixty joints will be evaluated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe), to indicate the extent of pain/tenderness and swelling. The final score was summed for this measure with a range from 0 (no pain) to 45 (worst possible pain).|Change score at baseline and 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829329|NCT01226043|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients With Hypoglycemic Events|The hypoglycemic event was to be recorded on the electronic case report form hypoglycemia page and had to fit in one of the following categories: Mild-to-moderate hypoglycemia (36 mg/dL ≤ Self Monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) <70mg/dL), Severe hypoglycemia (assistance of another person is required, and either a recorded SMBG <36 mg/dL, or treatment with oral carbohydrates, intravenous glucose or glucagon with prompt response) or Hypoglycemia symptoms with or without SMBG values with a documented SMBG >70 mg/dL, or no recorded SMBG value. Only hypoglycemia events associated with coma, loss of consciousness or seizure were considered serious adverse event (SAEs).|each study phase (crossover, re-randomization, observational) up to 40 weeks|The safety population for each phase (crossover, re-randomization, observational) was the total treated population defined as all the patients who were randomized and exposed to at least one dose of Lantus during that phase.||participants having reported the event|||Number
829330|NCT01226043|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Discontinued Investigational Product During the Observational Phase||From week 10 to week 40 (observational phase)|Re-randomized population at week 4 and included in the observational phase at week 10 and exposed to at least one dose of the IP||percentage of patients|||Number
829331|NCT01226043|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Discontinued Investigational Product During the Re-randomization Phase||From week 4 to week 10 (re-randomization phase)|Re-randomized population at week 4 exposed to at least one dose of the IP||percentage of patients|||Number
829332|NCT01226043|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Discontinued Investigational Product (IP) During the Crossover Phase||From baseline to week 4 (crossover phase)|Randomized population (crossover phase) exposed to at least one dose of the IP||percentage of patients|||Number
829333|NCT01226043|Secondary|Time to First Observation of HbA1c <7%||From week 10 to week 40 (observational phase)|The mITT population for Re-randomization and Observational Phases consisted of all patients who were re-randomized, received at least one dose of Lantus after re-randomization, and had both a re-randomization baseline assessment and at least one post re-randomization assessment of HbA1c.||Days since Re-randomization (week 4)||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829334|NCT01226043|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving HbA1c Goal|Percentage of patients achieving HbA1c < 7% at Week 40 (end of the observational phase)|measured at week 40 or at study discontinuation|Patients from the mITT population for Re-randomization and Observational Phases who had at least one post re-randomization assessment of HbA1c.||percentage of patients|||Number
829335|NCT01226043|Secondary|Change in Lantus Dose Injected Per Day||From week 4 (baseline for re-randomization phase) to week 10 (end of re-randomization phase)|The mITT population for Re-randomization and Observational Phases consisted of all patients who were re-randomized, received at least one dose of Lantus after re-randomization, and had both a re-randomization baseline assessment and at least one post re-randomization assessment of FPG.||U (insulin unit)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829336|NCT01226043|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) <110 mg/dL||At week 10 (end of re-randomization phase)|The mITT population for Re-randomization and Observational Phases consisted of all patients who were re-randomized, received at least one dose of Lantus after re-randomization, and had a re-randomization baseline assessment FPG > or = 110 (week 4) and at least one post re-randomization assessment of FPG.||percentage of patients|||Number
829353|NCT01226420|Primary|Efficacy|Proportion of patients with a favorable response, defined as a complete or partial remission at week 12 as compared to baseline in subjects with steroid refractory cGVHD.|2 years|All enrolled subjects||participants|||Number
829338|NCT01226043|Secondary|Healthcare Professional's (HCP) Recommendation|"The overall recommendation score was obtained from the question 20d of the Healthcare Professional Questionnaire: “Overall, how strongly would you recommend each of the insulin delivery systems for your patients?”
5 points scale: from 1= Not Recommended to 5= Recommended"|At week 4 (end of crossover phase)|"The HCP Questionnaire analysis population consisted of HCPs:
who treated at least 1 randomized patient during the crossover phase and this(these) patient(s) received at least one dose of Lantus via both insulin delivery systems during the crossover phase
who completed the HCP Questionnaire."||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
829339|NCT01226043|Secondary|Patient Preference Composite Score|"The patient preference composite score was the sum of the scores of the 3 following individual preference questions from the Patient preference Questionnaire:
Question 14a: How strongly do you prefer each of these insulin delivery systems to control blood sugar?
Question 14b: If using insulin for the first time, how strongly would you prefer using each of these delivery systems to overcome reluctance to use insulin?
Question 14c: How strongly would you prefer each insulin delivery system for long-term use?
Each individual question scored from 1 to 5. The lowest score 1 indicated 'Not Preferred' and the highest score 5 indicated 'Always Preferred'. Therefore the total range of the composite score was 3 to 15."|At week 4 (end of crossover phase)|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population for the Patient Preference Questionnaire analysis consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of Lantus via both insulin delivery systems and completed the questionnaire at Week 4. This analysis included patients who answered to the 3 questions 14a, 14b and 14c.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829340|NCT01226043|Primary|Patient Overall Preference|"The patient preference was assessed in terms of the difference in scores obtained from the overall preference question 14d “Overall, what is your level of preference for each of the insulin delivery systems?”
5 points scale: from 1=Not preferred to 5= Always preferred"|At week 4 (end of crossover phase)|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population for the Patient Preference Questionnaire analysis consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of Lantus via both insulin delivery systems and completed the questionnaire at Week 4. This analysis included patients who answered question 14d.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829341|NCT01226095|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events|Tolerability was assessed by collecting adverse events during the course of the study up to 30 days following the last dose of Brufen Retard. The number of participants experiencing a serious or non-serious adverse event is summarized. See the Reported Adverse Event section for details.|Baseline to 4 weeks|The tolerability population included all enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
829342|NCT01226095|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Ability to Carry Out Normal Activities at Each Visit|The number of participants who were able or unable to carry out normal activities was assessed at each visit.|Baseline, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks|Effectiveness data were analyzed using the intent-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations, each of which consisted of all 519 enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
829343|NCT01226095|Secondary|Number of Participants With 80% Reduction From Baseline in Duration of Morning Stiffness at Visit 2 (2 Weeks of Treatment) and Visit 3 (4 Weeks of Treatment)|The number of participants who achieved an 80% reduction from baseline in morning stiffness was calculated at each visit.|2 and 4 weeks|Data were analyzed for all participants for which data were available.||participants|||Number
829344|NCT01226095|Primary|Number of Participants Who Improved (Reduced Pain), Had no Change (Equal Scores at Baseline and Visit), and Worsened (Increased Pain) at Visit 3 (After 4 Weeks of Treatment).|Scoring of day and night pain for the previous 24 hours was performed on a 9-point scale (0 = no pain to 8 = very severe pain) at each visit. The number of participants at Visit 3 (after 4 weeks of treatment) who improved (had reduced pain; from higher baseline score to lower Visit 3 score), had no change (equal scores at baseline and Visit 3), and worsened (increased pain; from lower baseline score to higher Visit 3 score) was calculated.|4 weeks|Effectiveness data were analyzed using the intent-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations, each of which consisted of all 519 enrolled participants.||Participants|||Number
829345|NCT01226095|Secondary|Duration of Morning Stiffness|The duration of morning stiffness in minutes was assessed at each visit.|Baseline, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks|Effectiveness data were analyzed using the intent-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations, however, only participants with available morning stiffness data were included in the analysis for each visit.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829346|NCT01226095|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Improved (Reduced), Had no Change (Equal at Baseline and Visit), and Worsened (Increased) in Joint Tenderness/Stiffness at Visit 2 (After 2 Weeks of Treatment) and Visit 3 (After 4 Weeks of Treatment).|Duration of morning stiffness at each visit was assessed and the number of participants who improved, had no change, or worsened at each visit, following 2 and 4 weeks of treatment (Visit 2 and Visit 3, respectively) was calculated.|2 and 4 weeks|Effectiveness data were analyzed using the intent-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations, each of which consisted of all 519 enrolled participants.||Participants|||Number
829347|NCT01226095|Secondary|Number of Participants With Joint Tenderness/Stiffness at Each Visit|Joint tenderness/stiffness was measured using a 4-point scale (0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe) at each visit.|Baseline, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks|Effectiveness data were analyzed using the intent-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations, each of which consisted of all 519 enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
829348|NCT01226095|Secondary|Percent of Participant Compliance|The frequency with which the participant forgot to take treatment or changed dose/administration was determined by comparing the actual number of tablets taken by the participant to the scheduled number of tablets since the last visit. Results are presented in percent (0 - 100% scale, with 100% being perfect compliance and 0% being no compliance at all).|2 and 4 weeks|Compliance was calculated for all participants using the dose actually taken and the dose that should have been taken.||percentage of participant compliance|||Number
829349|NCT01226095|Primary|Day and Night Mean Pain Score for the Previous 24 Hours on a Nine-point Scale (0 = no Pain to 8 = Very Severe Pain) at Visit 3 (4 Weeks Following Treatment) in Comparison to Baseline.|Scoring of day and night pain for the previous 24 hours was performed on a nine-point scale (0 = no pain to 8 = very severe pain) at each visit and compared to baseline. The overall mean pain score was calculated for participants who completed the study at each visit.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Effectiveness data were analyzed using the intent-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations, each of which consisted of all 519 enrolled participants.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829354|NCT01226459|Primary|Subject Assessment of Scalp Coverage|Subject assessment of scalp coverage at Week 24 was measured as change from Baseline on a 7-point scale where 0 meant no perceived change in scalp coverage, +1 to +3 indicated progressively increased levels of scalp coverage, and -1 to -3 indicated progressively decreased levels.|Week 24|Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group who received dispensed investigational product. Eighteen participants in vehicle foam group and 23 participants in minoxidil foam group had no scalp coverage information.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829355|NCT01226459|Secondary|Target Area Hair Count|Number of hairs in the area being examined as measured by macrophotography.|Baseline to Week 12|Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group who received dispensed investigational product. Four participants in the vehicle foam group and 3 participants in the minoxidil foam group had no hair count information at Baseline.||hairs per centimeter squared||Standard Error|Mean
829356|NCT01226459|Primary|Target Area Hair Count|Number of hairs in the area being examined as measured by macrophotography.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group who received dispensed investigational product. Four participants in vehicle group and 3 participants in minoxidil foam group had no hair information at Baseline.||hairs per centimeter squared||Standard Deviation|Mean
829357|NCT01226511|Secondary|Percentage of Participants During the 18-Week Extension Period With Treatment-Emergent (New or Worsening) Suicidal Behavior as Assessed by the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|"The C-SSRS captured occurrence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors. Suicidal behavior: a yes answer to any of 5 suicidal behavior questions: preparatory acts or behavior, aborted attempt, interrupted attempt, actual attempt, and completed suicide. Reported as percentage of participants with treatment-emergent (new or worsening) suicidal behavior from baseline=(number of participants with changes compared to baseline/total number of participants at risk)*100."|10 weeks up to 28 weeks|Randomized participants with a C-SSRS suicidal behavior score at the last 2 visits in the acute treatment period and at least 1 C-SSRS suicidal behavior score during the extension treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||percentage of participants|||Number
829358|NCT01226511|Secondary|Percentage of Participants During the 18-Week Extension Period With Treatment-Emergent (New or Worsening) Suicidal Ideation as Assessed by the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|"The C-SSRS captured occurrence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors. Suicidal ideation: a yes answer to any 1 of 5 suicidal ideation questions: wish to be dead, and 4 different categories of active suicidal ideation. Results reported as percentage of participants with treatment-emergent (new or worsening) suicidal ideation from baseline=(number of participants with changes compared to baseline/total number of participants at risk)*100."|10 weeks up to 28 weeks|Randomized participants with a C-SSRS suicidal ideation score <5 at the last 2 visits in the acute treatment period and at least 1 C-SSRS suicidal ideation score during the extension treatment period. Nine (9) participants from 1 site with major quality issues were excluded.||percentage of participants|||Number
829359|NCT01226511|Secondary|Change From 10-Week to 28-Week Endpoint in the Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS)|The CGAS was a clinician-rated assessment of general functioning. CGAS raw scores ranged from 1 (greatest impairment) to 100 (superior functioning). Lower scores indicated a lower level of functioning and greater impairment. Least squares (LS) mean from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was adjusted for pooled investigator, baseline, and age category within reporting groups.|10 weeks, 28 weeks|Randomized participants with a CGAS score during the acute treatment period and at least 1 CGAS score during the extension treatment period [last observation carried forward (LOCF)], excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829360|NCT01226511|Secondary|Change From 10-Week to 28-Week Endpoint on the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Scale|The CGI-S scale evaluated the severity of mental illness at the time of assessment. Scores ranged from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill). Higher scores indicated a greater severity of illness. Least squares (LS) mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach adjusted for pooled investigator, visit, baseline, age category, baseline*visit, and age category*visit within reporting groups.|10 weeks, 28 weeks|Randomized participants with a CGI-S score during the acute treatment period and at least 1 CGI-S score during the extension treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829361|NCT01226511|Secondary|Change From 10-Week to 28-Week Endpoint on the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) Severity Total Score Evaluated for All Symptoms Identified on the PARS Symptom Checklist Symptoms|PARS severity total score was assessed for all symptoms identified on the PARS symptom checklist. PARS severity total score was derived by summing 5 of 7 severity/impairment/interference items (2, 3, 5, 6, 7); each item ranged from 0 (none) to 5 (extreme severity/impairment/interference). PARS severity total scores ranged from 0 (none) to 25 (extreme severity), with a score of 15 indicating moderate illness severity. Least squares (LS) mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach adjusted for pooled investigator, visit, baseline, age category, baseline*visit, and age category*visit within reporting groups.|10 weeks, 28 weeks|Randomized participants with a PARS severity total score during the acute treatment period and at least 1 PARS severity total score during the extension treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829362|NCT01226511|Secondary|Change From 10-Week to 28-Week Endpoint in the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) Severity Score Evaluated for Symptoms Identified on the Generalized Anxiety Subsection of the PARS Symptom Checklist|PARS severity score for GAD was assessed for all symptoms identified in the generalized anxiety section of the PARS symptom checklist. PARS severity score for GAD was derived by summing 5 of 7 severity/impairment/interference items (2, 3, 5, 6, 7); each item ranged from 0 (none) to 5 (extreme severity/impairment/interference). PARS severity scores for GAD ranged from 0 (none) to 25 (extreme severity), with a score of 15 indicating moderate illness severity. Least squares (LS) mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach adjusted for pooled investigator, visit, baseline, age category, baseline*visit, and age category*visit within reporting groups.|10 weeks, 28 weeks|Randomized participants with a PARS severity score for GAD during the acute treatment period and at least 1 PARS severity score for GAD during the extension treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829363|NCT01226511|Secondary|Percentage of Participants During the 10-Week Period With Treatment-Emergent (New or Worsening) Suicidal Behavior as Assessed by the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|"The C-SSRS captured occurrence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors. Suicidal behavior: a yes answer to any of 5 suicidal behavior questions: preparatory acts or behavior, aborted attempt, interrupted attempt, actual attempt, and completed suicide. Reported as percentage of participants with treatment-emergent (new or worsening) suicidal behavior from baseline=(number of participants with changes compared to baseline/total number of participants at risk)*100."|Baseline up to 10 weeks|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline C-SSRS suicidal behavior score during the acute treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||percentage of participants|||Number
829364|NCT01226511|Secondary|Percentage of Participants During the 10-Week Period With Treatment-Emergent (New or Worsening) Suicidal Ideation as Assessed by the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|"The C-SSRS captured occurrence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors. Suicidal ideation: a yes answer to any 1 of 5 suicidal ideation questions: wish to be dead, and 4 different categories of active suicidal ideation. Results reported as percentage of participants with treatment-emergent (new or worsening) suicidal ideation from baseline=(number of participants with changes compared to baseline/total number of participants at risk)*100."|Baseline up to 10 weeks|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline C-SSRS suicidal ideation score during the acute treatment period, whose baseline maximum C-SSRS suicidal ideation score was <5. Nine (9) participants from 1 site with major quality issues were excluded.||percentage of participants|||Number
829365|NCT01226511|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 10-Week Endpoint in the Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS)|The CGAS was a clinician-rated assessment of general functioning. CGAS raw scores ranged from 1 (greatest impairment) to 100 (superior functioning). Lower scores indicated a lower level of functioning and greater impairment. Least squares (LS) mean from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, baseline, and age category.|Baseline, 10 weeks|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline [last observation carried forward (LOCF)] CGAS score during the acute treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829366|NCT01226511|Secondary|Remission Rate at Endpoint for Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) Using Clinical Global Impressions of Severity (CGI-S) Scale|Remission rate was defined as the percentage of participants having a CGI-S score ≤2 at endpoint. The CGI-S scale evaluated the severity of illness at the time of assessment. Scores ranged from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill). Higher scores indicated a greater severity of illness.|10 weeks|Randomized participants with at least 1 post-baseline CGI-S score [last observation carried forward (LOCF)] during the acute treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||percentage of participants|||Number
829367|NCT01226511|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 10-Week Endpoint on the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Scale|The CGI-S scale evaluated the severity of illness at the time of assessment. Scores ranged from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill). Higher scores indicated a greater severity of illness. Least squares (LS) mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, visit, baseline, age category, treatment*visit, baseline*visit, and age category*visit.|Baseline, 10 weeks|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline CGI-S score during the acute treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829368|NCT01226511|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 10-Week Endpoint on the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) Severity Total Score Evaluated for All Symptoms Identified on the PARS Symptom Checklist Symptoms|PARS severity total score was assessed for all symptoms identified on the PARS symptom checklist. PARS severity total score was derived by summing 5 of 7 severity/impairment/interference items (2, 3, 5, 6, 7); each item ranged from 0 (none) to 5 (extreme severity/impairment/interference). PARS severity total scores ranged from 0 (none) to 25 (extreme severity), with a score of 15 indicating moderate illness severity. Least squares (LS) mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach adjusted for treatment, pooled investigator, visit, baseline, age category, treatment*visit, baseline*visit, and age category*visit.|Baseline, 10 weeks|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PARS severity total score during the acute treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829369|NCT01226511|Secondary|Response Rate at Endpoint for Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) Using Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) Severity Score for GAD|Response rate was defined as the percentage of participants having a 50% improvement from baseline to endpoint on the PARS severity score for GAD. PARS severity score for GAD was assessed for all symptoms identified in the generalized anxiety section of the PARS symptom checklist. PARS severity score for GAD was derived by summing 5 of 7 severity/impairment/interference items (2, 3, 5, 6, 7); each item ranged from 0 (none) to 5 (extreme severity/impairment/interference). PARS severity scores for GAD ranged from 0 (none) to 25 (extreme severity), with a score of 15 indicating moderate illness severity.|Baseline, 10 weeks|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PARS severity score for GAD [last observation carried forward (LOCF)] during the acute treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||percentage of participants|||Number
829370|NCT01226511|Primary|Change From Baseline to 10-Week Endpoint in the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) Severity Score Evaluated for Symptoms Identified on the Generalized Anxiety Subsection of the PARS Symptom Checklist|PARS severity score for GAD was assessed for all symptoms identified in the generalized anxiety section of the PARS symptom checklist. PARS severity score for GAD was derived by summing 5 of 7 severity/impairment/interference items (2, 3, 5, 6, 7); each item ranged from 0 (none) to 5 (extreme severity/impairment/interference). PARS severity scores for GAD ranged from 0 (none) to 25 (extreme severity), with a score of 15 indicating moderate illness severity. Least squares (LS) mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach adjusted for baseline, pooled investigator, age category, visit, treatment, treatment*visit, age category*visit, and baseline*visit.|Baseline, 10 weeks|Randomized participants with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PARS severity score for GAD during the acute treatment period, excluding 9 participants from 1 site with major quality issues.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829376|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Indevus Urgency Severity Scale From Baseline to 6 Months|"A disease specific quality of life measure. A self reported measure that assesses urinary urgency severity associated with overactive bladder.
Indevus Urgency Severity Scale (IIUS) The IIUS is a single item scale designed to describe urinary urges. The scale is rated through the patient’s urge: none (0 points), mild (1), moderate (2) and severe (3). A higher score represents more urinary urges."|Baseline to 6 months|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829377|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Indevus Urgency Severity Scale From Baseline to 3 Months|"A disease specific quality of life measure. A self reported measure that assesses urinary urgency severity associated with overactive bladder.
Indevus Urgency Severity Scale (IIUS) The IIUS is a single item scale designed to describe urinary urges. The scale is rated through the patient’s urge: none (0 points), mild (1), moderate (2) and severe (3). A higher score represents more urinary urges."|Baseline to 3 months|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829378|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Indevus Urgency Severity Scale From Baseline to 6 Weeks|"A disease specific quality of life measure. A self reported measure that assesses urinary urgency severity associated with overactive bladder.
Indevus Urgency Severity Scale (IIUS) The IIUS is a single item scale designed to describe urinary urges. The scale is rated through the patient’s urge: none (0 points), mild (1), moderate (2) and severe (3). A higher score represents more urinary urges."|Baseline to 6 weeks|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829379|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Patient Perception of Bladder Condition From Baseline to 6 Months|"Disease specific validated quality of life measures. A single-item global measure for patients with overactive bladder.
Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) The PPBC is a single-item, 6-point scale that asks patients to rate their subjective impression of their current bladder problems. It has been shown to have concurrent and discriminant validity as well as responsiveness to treatment. Patients are asked to rate their perceived bladder condition on a 6-point scale ranging from 1 “no problems at all”, 2 some very minor problems. 3 some minor problems, 4(some) moderate problems, 5 severe problems, and 6 “many severe problems”. A higher score indicates a more negative impression of current bladder problems."|Baseline to 6 months|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829380|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Patient Perception of Bladder Condition From Baseline to 3 Months|"Disease specific validated quality of life measures. A single-item global measure for patients with overactive bladder.
Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) The PPBC is a single-item, 6-point scale that asks patients to rate their subjective impression of their current bladder problems. It has been shown to have concurrent and discriminant validity as well as responsiveness to treatment. Patients are asked to rate their perceived bladder condition on a 6-point scale ranging from 1 “no problems at all”, 2 some very minor problems. 3 some minor problems, 4(some) moderate problems, 5 severe problems, and 6 “many severe problems”. A higher score indicates a more negative impression of current bladder problems."|Baseline to 3 months|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829381|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Patient Perception of Bladder Condition From Baseline to 6 Weeks|"Disease specific validated quality of life measures. A single-item global measure for patients with overactive bladder.
Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) The PPBC is a single-item, 6-point scale that asks patients to rate their subjective impression of their current bladder problems. It has been shown to have concurrent and discriminant validity as well as responsiveness to treatment. Patients are asked to rate their perceived bladder condition on a 6-point scale ranging from 1 “no problems at all”, 2 some very minor problems. 3 some minor problems, 4(some) moderate problems, 5 severe problems, and 6 “many severe problems”. A higher score indicates a more negative impression of current bladder problems."|Baseline to 6 weeks|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829382|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Urogenital Distress Inventory From Baseline to 6 Months Follow-up|"Disease specific quality of life measure. Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence.
The UDI-6 is a 6-point scale that asks patients to respond to questions rating whether they experience and how much they are bothered by UUI. Item responses are assigned values of 0 for “not at all,” 1 for “slightly,” 2 for “moderately,” and 3 for “greatly.” The average score of items responded to is calculated. Higher scores reflect greater distress associated with symptoms. The average, which ranges from 0 to 3, is multiplied by 33 1/3 to put scores on a scale of 0 to 100."|Baseline to 6 months|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829383|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Urogenital Distress Inventory From Baseline to 3 Months Follow-up|"Disease specific quality of life measure. Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence.
The UDI-6 is a 6-point scale that asks patients to respond to questions rating whether they experience and how much they are bothered by UUI. Item responses are assigned values of 0 for “not at all,” 1 for “slightly,” 2 for “moderately,” and 3 for “greatly.” The average score of items responded to is calculated. Higher scores reflect greater distress associated with symptoms. The average, which ranges from 0 to 3, is multiplied by 33 1/3 to put scores on a scale of 0 to 100."|Baseline to 3 months|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829384|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Urogenital Distress Inventory From Baseline to 6 Week Follow-up|"Disease specific quality of life measure. Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence.
Urogenital Distress Inventory – 6 (UDI-6) The UDI-6 is a 6-point scale that asks patients to respond to questions rating whether they experience and how much they are bothered by UUI. Item responses are assigned values of 0 for “not at all,” 1 for “slightly,” 2 for “moderately,” and 3 for “greatly.” The average score of items responded to is calculated. Higher scores reflect greater distress associated with symptoms. The average, which ranges from 0 to 3, is multiplied by 33 1/3 to put scores on a scale of 0 to 100."|Baseline to 6 weeks|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829385|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Incontinence Impact Questionnaire From Baseline to 6 Months Follow-up|"Disease specific validated quality of life measure. Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence.
Incontinences Impact Questionnaire – 7 (IIQ-7) The IIQ-7 is 7-point scale used to rate a patients’ life and the affect of accidental urine loss on activities, relationships, and feelings. Item responses are assigned values of 0 for “not at all,” 1 for “slightly,” 2 for “moderately,” and 3 for “greatly.” The average score of items responded to is calculated. The average, which ranges from 0 to 3, is multiplied by 33 1/3 to put scores on a scale of 0 to 100."|Baseline to 6 months|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829386|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Incontinence Impact Questionnaire From Baseline to 3 Months Follow-up|"Disease specific validated quality of life measure. Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence.
Incontinences Impact Questionnaire – 7 (IIQ-7) The IIQ-7 is 7-point scale used to rate a patients’ life and the affect of accidental urine loss on activities, relationships, and feelings. Item responses are assigned values of 0 for “not at all,” 1 for “slightly,” 2 for “moderately,” and 3 for “greatly.” The average score of items responded to is calculated. The average, which ranges from 0 to 3, is multiplied by 33 1/3 to put scores on a scale of 0 to 100."|Baseline to 3 months|||summary score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829387|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Incontinence Impact Questionnaire From Baseline to 6 Weeks Follow-up|"Disease specific validated quality of life measure. Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence.
Incontinences Impact Questionnaire – 7 (IIQ-7) The IIQ-7 is 7-point scale used to rate a patients’ life and the affect of accidental urine loss on activities, relationships, and feelings. Item responses are assigned values of 0 for “not at all,” 1 for “slightly,” 2 for “moderately,” and 3 for “greatly.” The average score of items responded to is calculated. The average, which ranges from 0 to 3, is multiplied by 33 1/3 to put scores on a scale of 0 to 100."|Baseline to 6 weeks|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829388|NCT01226706|Secondary|Subjective Benefit Assessment at 6 Months|"Self assessed description of how well they believed the Botulinum Toxin type A was working.The patients’ subjective assessment of the treatment’s efficacy was obtained verbally using a four-point rating scale. Rating options were:
dry (complete response),
improvement (> 50% reduction in incontinence),
partial response (≤ 50% reduction in incontinence),
no response to treatment."|Baseline to 6 months|||score on a 4-point rating scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829389|NCT01226706|Secondary|Subjective Benefit Assessment at 3 Months|"Self assessed description of how well they believed the Botulinum Toxin type A was working. The patients’ subjective assessment of the treatment’s efficacy was obtained verbally using a four-point rating scale. Rating options were:
dry (complete response),
improvement (> 50% reduction in incontinence),
partial response (≤ 50% reduction in incontinence),
no response to treatment."|Baseline to 3 months|||score on a 4-point rating scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829390|NCT01226706|Secondary|Subjective Benefit Assessment at 6 Weeks|"Self assessed description of how well they believed the Botulinum Toxin type A was working. The patients’ subjective assessment of the treatment’s efficacy was obtained verbally using a four-point rating scale. Rating options were:
dry (complete response),
improvement (> 50% reduction in incontinence),
partial response (≤ 50% reduction in incontinence),
no response to treatment."|Baseline to 6 weeks|||score on a 4-point rating scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829391|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Night Voids Between Baseline and 24 Months Follow-up|Frequency of night voiding|Baseline and 24 months|||number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829392|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Night Voids Between Baseline and 12 Month Follow-up|Frequency of night voiding|Baseline to 12 months|||number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829393|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Night Voids Between Baseline and 9 Month Follow-up|Frequency of night voiding|Baseline and 9 months|||Number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829394|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Night Voids Between Baseline and 6 Month Follow-up|Frequency of night voiding|Baseline to 6 months|||number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829395|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Night Voids Between Baseline and 3 Month Follow-up|Frequency of night voiding|Baseline to 3 months|||Number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829396|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Night Voids Between Baseline and 6 Week Follow-up|Frequency of night voiding|Baseline to 6 weeks|||number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829397|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Daytime Voids Between Baseline and 24 Month Follow-up|Frequency of daily urination|Baseline to 24 months|||number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829398|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Daytime Voids Between Baseline and 12 Month Follow-up|Frequency of daily urination|Baseline to 12 months|||number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829399|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Daytime Voids Between Baseline and 9 Month Follow-up|Frequency of daily urination|Baseline to 9 months|||number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829400|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Daytime Voids Between Baseline and 6 Month Follow-up|Frequency of daily urination|Baseline to 6 months|||number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829401|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Daytime Voids Between Baseline and 3 Month Follow-up|Frequency of daily urination|Baseline to 3 month|||number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829402|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Number of Daytime Voids Between Baseline and 6 Week Follow-up|Frequency of daily urination|Baseline to 6 weeks|||number of voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
829403|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Incontinence Episodes Between Baseline and 24 Months Follow-up|Incontinence- involuntary leakage of urine|Baseline and 24 months|||number of occurences||Standard Deviation|Mean
829404|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Incontinence Episodes Between Baseline and 12 Month Follow-up|Incontinence- involuntary leakage of urine|Baseline and 12 months|||number of occurences||Standard Deviation|Mean
829405|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Incontinence Episodes Between Baseline and 9 Month Follow-up|Incontinence- involuntary leakage of urine|Baseline to 9 months|||number of occurences||Standard Deviation|Mean
829406|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Incontinence Episodes Between Baseline and 6 Month Follow-up|Incontinence- involuntary leakage of urine|Baseline to 6 month|||number of episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829407|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Incontinence Episodes Between Baseline and 3 Month Follow-up|Incontinence- involuntary leakage of urine|Baseline to 3 month|||number of occurences||Standard Deviation|Mean
829408|NCT01226706|Secondary|Change in Incontinence Episodes Between Baseline and 6 Week Follow-up|Incontinence- involuntary leakage of urine|Baseline to 6 weeks|||number of episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829409|NCT01226706|Primary|Change in Maximum Capacity at Cystoscopy Between Baseline and 6 Month Follow-up|"Cystoscopy is a test performed with a cystoscope, a narrow tube with a tiny camera at its tip, inserted into the urethra and bladder to see the inside of the bladder and urethra.
Maximum bladder capacity--the amount of liquid or gas the bladder can hold under anesthesia. Without anesthesia, capacity is limited by either pain or a severe urge to urinate."|Baseline to 6 months|||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829412|NCT01226719|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|The Length of Time, in Months, That Patients Were Alive From Their First Date of Protocol Treatment Until Worsening of Their Disease. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|18 months|All patients on study||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829413|NCT01226719|Secondary|R0 Resection Rate|To determine the rate of complete (R0) resection for patients treated with this regimen.|18 months|Includes patients who were surgical candidates and underwent surgery on study||percentage of patients with surgery|||Number
829414|NCT01226719|Primary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|The Percentage of Patients Who Experience an Objective Benefit From Treatment. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI or CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|18 months|Includes all patients deemed to be evaluable for response who were evaluated for response||percentage of evaluable participants|||Number
829415|NCT01226732|Secondary|Preliminary Efficacy Assessment: Response Rate (RR)|Response Rate (RR) is defined as the total number of patients with Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) as defined in RECIST v2. CR is defined as the dissappearance of all target lesions, disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumor markers. PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD.|18 months|Includes all patients evaluable for response (4 patients were not evaluable)||participants|||Number
829416|NCT01226732|Secondary|Safety|To evaluate the drug related toxicities associated with different doses of the drugs used in this regimen.|18 months|||participants|||Number
829417|NCT01226732|Primary|Dose Determination|To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of AUY922 plus capecitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors.|18 months|||mg/m^2|||Number
829418|NCT01226745|Primary|Number of Subjects With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs, TEAEs Leading to Death and TEAEs Leading to Discontinuation|An Adverse Event (AE) was defined as any new untoward medical occurrences/worsening of pre-existing medical condition without regard to possibility of causal relationship. A Serious Adverse Event (SAE) was an AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death; life threatening; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; congenital anomaly/birth defect. TEAEs were defined as the AEs that occur between first dose of study drug administration and 35 days after the last dose of study drug administration that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.|From the first dose of study drug administration up to 35 days after the last dose of study drug administration, assessed up to 5 years|Safety analysis set consisted of all the enrolled subjects.||Subjects|||Number
829419|NCT01226745|Primary|Number of Subjects With Clinically Significant Abnormalities in Dermatological Examination|A whole body examination, paying particular attention to identify precancerous or cancerous lesions was done by a dermatologist and based on the clinical judgment of the dermatologist the abnormalities were categorized as clinically significant or clinically not significant. Early termination visit was recorded when the subject was early terminated from the study during the first 2.5 year period, while early termination 2 visit was recorded when the subject early terminated from the study during the additional 2 year period with delay shall be defined.|Baseline up to end of the treatment, assessed up to Week 255|Safety analysis set consisted of all the enrolled subjects.||Subjects|||Number
829420|NCT01226745|Primary|Number of Subjects With Clinically Significant Abnormal Ophthalmologic Examination|Subjects underwent comprehensive ophthalmic examination (COE) including best corrected visual acuity (Snellen), manifest refractions, pupil examination, ocular motility, nystagmus, confrontation visual fields, Ishihara color plates, Amsler grid, and tonometry as well as a biomicroscopy slit lamp examination of the conjunctiva, cornea, anterior chamber, iris and lens; and a fundoscopic examination (with dilation) of the vitreous, optic nerve, retinal vessels, macula, and peripheral retina. Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT): Thicknesses of the macular retina and retinal nerve fiber layer at the optic nerve head in each eye was assessed by OCT using the fast macular thickness map scan and the fast retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) scan features, respectively. The abnormalities of the ophthalmologic examination was judged to be clinically significant or not as per the investigators discretion. The ophthalmologic examination was performed for both right eye (RE) and left eye (LE).|Baseline up to Week 255|Safety analysis set consisted of all the enrolled subjects. Here “n” signifies the number of subjects analyzed for the individual time point in the outcome measure.||Subjects|||Number
829421|NCT01226745|Primary|Number of Subjects With Clinically Significant Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Measures|The 12-lead ECG was recorded after the subject was in supine position for 5 minutes. ECGs were acquired on digital cardiographs. Abnormal findings were analyzed as clinically significant or not clinically significant as per the discretion of the study investigator.|Baseline up to Week 255|Safety analysis set consisted of all the enrolled subjects.||Subjects|||Number
829422|NCT01226745|Primary|Change From Baseline in Diffusing Capacity of Lung for Carbon Monoxide (DLCO)|DLCO was one of the most clinically valuable tests of lung function. The DLCO measure the ability of the lungs to transfer gas from inhaled air to the red blood cells in pulmonary capillaries. Early termination visit was recorded when the subject was early terminated from the study during the first 2.5 year period, while early termination 2 visit was recorded when the subject was early terminated from the study during the additional 2 year period with delay. The values for the DLCO “% of predicted” was defined as the mean value of 2 test results that were within a 10% variability of each other.|Baseline, Week 40, 52, early termination, Week 152, 200, 255|Safety analysis set consisted of all the enrolled subjects. Here “n” signifies the number of subjects analyzed for the individual time point in the outcome measure.||Percentage of predicted value||Standard Deviation|Mean
829449|NCT01219855|Primary|Mean Percent Change From Baseline in Plasma Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) to End of Treatment (Per Protocol Population)|Mean percent change from baseline in plasma intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) from baseline to End of Treatment (EOT) in the Per Protocol population. Subjects in Cohorts 1 and 2 (dose regimens 60/90 and 30 mcg, respectively) were compared to their respective placebo groups.|6 weeks|Per protocol||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
829423|NCT01226745|Primary|Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|FVC (% of predicted value) was the volume of air which was forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. Early termination visit was recorded when the subject was early terminated from the study during the first 2.5 year period, while early termination 2 visit was recorded when the subject early terminated from the study during the additional 2 year period with delay shall be defined.|Baseline, Week 40, 52, 76, 100, 124, 148, early termination, Week 152, 200, early termination 2, Week 255|Safety analysis set consisted of all the enrolled subjects. Here “n” signifies the number of subjects analyzed for the individual time point in the outcome measure||Percentage of predicted value||Standard Deviation|Mean
829424|NCT01226745|Primary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) (Percent (%) Predicted Value)|FEV1 was defined as the maximal volume of air exhaled in the 1st second of a forced expiration from a position of full inspiration. FEV1 was obtained from spirometry, performed before study treatment administration. Early termination visit was recorded when the subject was early terminated from the study during the first 2.5 year period, while early termination 2 visit was recorded when the subject early terminated from the study during the additional 2 year period with delay shall be defined.|Baseline, Week 40, 52, 76, 100, 124, 148, early termination, Week 152, 200, early termination 2, Week 255|Safety analysis set consisted of all the enrolled subjects. Here “n” signifies the number of subjects analyzed for the individual time point in the outcome measure.||Percentage of predicted value||Standard Deviation|Mean
829425|NCT01226745|Secondary|Percent Brain Volume Change (PBVC) From Baseline at the End of Treatment|Brain volume was obtained by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Extension study baseline is defined as the measurement most immediately prior to or on the day of the first dose day of extension study. Brain volume changes very little over time. Hence, the PBVC at the end of treatment was calculated by adding up all the PBVC values from the scans performed during the extension treatment period.|Baseline and at end of treatment (Week 255)|FAS included all subjects who provided any post baseline efficacy data. One randomized error subject was summarized in the sequence 0.15-0.15 as he received 0.15 in core study period and in the sequence Placebo-0.10 mg as he received 0.10 in the extension study period.||Percent brain volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
829426|NCT01226745|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Lesion Volume at the End of the Treatment (EoT)|Brain lesion volume was obtained by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Extension study baseline was defined as the measurement most immediately prior to or on the day of the first dose day of extension study. End of treatment (EOT) was defined as the last visit during the treatment period. Change from extension baseline to EOT = last treatment period value in extension study — extension baseline value.|Baseline, End of treatment (5 years)|FAS included all subjects who provided any post baseline efficacy data.One randomized error subject was summarized in the sequence 0.15-0.15 as he received 0.15 in core study period and in the sequence Placebo-0.10 mg as he received 0.10 in the extension study period.||Cubic centimeter (cc)||Standard Deviation|Mean
829427|NCT01226745|Secondary|Number of Gadolinium (Gd)-Enhanced Lesions|Gd-enhanced lesions were obtained by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at each scheduled assessment visit over the study period. Extension study baseline is defined as the measurement most immediately prior to or on the day of the first dose day of extension study. End of treatment (EoT) lesion count is the average number of lesion counts per scan, calculated by dividing the sum of all lesion counts by number of scans during the extension treatment period. Early termination visit was recorded when the subject was early terminated from the study during the first 2.5 year period, while early termination 2 visit was recorded when the subject early terminated from the study during the additional 2 year period with delay. Extension study baseline is defined as the measurement most immediately prior to or on the day of the first dose day of extension study.Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all subjects who provided any post baseline efficacy data.|Baseline, Week 40, 52, 100, 148, early termination, Week 152, 200, early termination 2, Week 255 and end of treatment (5 years)|"FAS. n” signifies the number of subjects analyzed for individual time point in the outcome measure.One randomized error subject was summarized in the sequence 0.15-0.15 as he received 0.15 in core study period and in the sequence Placebo-0.10 mg as he received 0.10 in the extension study period."||Lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
829428|NCT01226745|Primary|Number of Subjects With Clinically Significant Abnormal Vital Signs|Vital signs included oral temperature, pulse, respiration rate and blood pressure (BP) (taken after 5 minutes in the sitting position). The abnormalities in vital signs were decided as clinically significant or not based on the clinical judgment of the investigator.|Baseline up to Week 255|Safety analysis set consisted of all the enrolled subjects.||Subjects|||Number
829429|NCT01227005|Secondary|30-day Mortality|Evaluate 30-day mortality among those receiving whole blood compared to those receiving component therapy|first 30 days after ED admission|||participants|||Number
829430|NCT01227005|Secondary|24-hour Mortality|Mortality rate at 24 hours after arrival|First 24 hours after ED admission|||participants|||Number
829431|NCT01227005|Primary|In a Prospective, Randomized Trial, Evaluate Transfusion of Stored Whole Blood and Pooled Platelets During Transfusion Therapy.|Compare the ability of whole blood to reduce initial 24-hour transfusion requirements as compared to component therapy (red blood cells, plasma, and platelet units)|first 24 hours after ED admission|||units of blood||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829432|NCT01227018|Other Pre-specified|Biomarker Evaluation|Serum will be tested for biomarkers that may be predictive of response, optional per patient consent.|Pre-treatment and 1 week post-treatment|The study's interim analysis found the study drug to be ineffective. The study was terminated. No biomarkers were performed or analyzed.|||||
829433|NCT01227018|Secondary|Number of Patients With Each Worst Grade Toxicity|Count of patients according to the worst‐grade toxicity experienced by each, where worst‐grade toxicity is per NCI common toxicity criteria: grade 1, mild; grade 2, moderate; grade 3, severe; grade 4, life‐threatening; grade 5, death|On study date to 30 days following final dose of study drug|Total number of patients reported with any toxicity related to study treatment. One patient withdrew before treatment. One patient did not have a toxicity related to study drug or therapy.||participants|||Number
829434|NCT01227018|Secondary|Overall Survival|Estimated probable duration of life from on‐study date to date of death from any cause, using the Kaplan‐Meier method with censoring (see analysis population description for additional details)|study entry to date of death or last date known alive (assessed over 2.5 yrs)|All patients are included in the analysis on intention‐totreat basis. Analysis is by Kaplan‐Meier method, where death is an event, with censoring for non‐expired patients at greater of off‐study date or last known alive date.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829435|NCT01227018|Secondary|Best Response|Number of patients in each response category, per RECIST v1.1, summarized as follows for target lesion criteria (see RECIST v1.1 for additional details): complete response (CR),disappearance of target lesions; partial response (PR), >=30% decrease in sum of longest diameter of target lesions; progressive disease (PD), >=20% increase in sum of LD of target lesions or appearance of new lesions; stable disease (SD), insufficient change in target lesions or new lesions to qualify as either PD or SD. Patients are categorized according to the best response achieved prior to occurrence of progressive disease, where best response hierarchy is CR>PR>SD>PD.|On-treatment date, to date of disease progression (assessed up to 1 year)|All patients with best overall response data; patients are excluded if best overall response data is missing or if the patient is non‐evaluable for best overall response.||participants|||Number
829436|NCT01227018|Primary|Disease Control Rate|Per RECIST criteria v. 1.0: measurable lesions: complete response (CR) disappearance of target lesions, partial response (PR) > 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, stable disease (SD) neither sufficient decrease nor increase of the sum of smallest sum of the LD of target lesions, and progressive disease (PD) > 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions or appearance of new lesions. Disease control is defined as CR + PR + SD after 8 weeks of therapy.|at 8 weeks from the start of therapy|Patients who received treatment and who were available for determination of response.||percentage of participants|||Number
829437|NCT01227057|Secondary|Executive Functioning as Measured by the Delis Kaplan Executive Functioning System (D-KEFS) at 6 Months|The D-KEFS Trail Making Test Condition 4: Number-Letter Switching Scaled Score was used to assess executive functioning. Scaled scores range from 1-19. Higher scores represent less impairment.|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829438|NCT01227057|Secondary|Change in Functional Impairment as Measured by the Activities of Daily Living, Functional Disability Index, Clutter Image Rating Scale||5 years||||||
829439|NCT01227057|Primary|Hoarding Symptom Severity as Measured by the Saving Inventory-Revised (SI-R) at 6 Months|Hoarding symptom severity (primary outcome) will be measured using the Savings Inventory-Revised (SI-R), a 23-item self-report measure used to assess common hoarding symptoms. Subtests include excessive clutter, compulsive acquisition, and difficulty discarding. The SI-R has demonstrated good internal consistency, divergent validity, concurrent validity, divergent validity, test-retest reliability in clinical samples with hoarding. The total score will be used for analyses. The range of the total score is 0-92, with higher scores indicating worse hoarding severity.|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829440|NCT01219673|Primary|Treatment Effects on 5 Selected Symptoms (Average MDASI-HNC Scores)|Treatments ability to reduce values of 5 symptoms comprised of MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI)-Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) scores for fatigue, difficulty swallowing, sleep disturbance, pain, and lack of appetite collected during the 10 weeks of chemoradiation treatment. symptoms that are caused by their disease or by their treatment. Symptom severity score is comprised of average of the five above MDASI core items (fatigue, difficulty swallowing, sleep disturbance, pain, and lack of appetite). Participants were asked to rate severity of each symptom at their worst in last 24 hours; each item rated from 0 to 10, with 0 = symptom not present and 10 = as bad as you can imagine. Total average score range: 0 to 10. Lower scores indicated better outcome.|10 weeks|No analysis was completed. Study terminated with low enrollment.|||||
829441|NCT01219738|Secondary|Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1)|FEV1 will be measured before and up to 6 hours after a single inhaled dose of 360ug, 720ug, and 1440ug budesonide or placebo from a DPI, using a double-blinded randomized design on different days.|participant will be followed up to 6 hours after budesonide dose|||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
829442|NCT01219738|Primary|Airway Blood Flow (Qaw)|Qaw will be measured before and up to 6 hours after a single inhaled dose of 360ug, 720ug, and 1440ug budesonide or placebo from a DPI, using a double-blinded randomized design on different days.|participants will be followed for 6 hours after budesonide dose|||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
829443|NCT01219777|Secondary|Toxicity and Response Rates Based on Imaging and Surgical Outcomes|Determine the safety/toxicity of this regimen in this patient population. Estimate the percent of patients undergoing successful cytoreductive surgery to optimal disease (<1 cm greatest tumor diameter) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin, paclitaxel and bevacizumab in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal cancer and fallopian tube cancer. Assess the 30 day morbidity and mortality following surgical intervention. To describe the response rate for patients treated with neoadjuvant carboplatin, weekly paclitaxel, and bevacizumab using RECIST and GCIG response criteria prior to surgical intervention. Response was determined per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 6 months|||patients|||Number
829444|NCT01219777|Primary|Tolerated Dose|To determine the maximum tolerated dose of carboplatin AUC5 administered Day 1 Cycles 1-4, weekly paclitaxel 60-80mg/m2 administered on Day 1, 8,and 15 for 3 weeks cycles 1-4, bevacizumab 15mg/kg administered Day 1 Cycles 1-3 prior to surgical intervention.|Up to 6 months|||mg/m^2|||Number
829445|NCT01219855|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With Reduction of Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) of at Least 20% at Week 6|Proportion of subjects with at least 20% reduction in plasma intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) and/or mean iPTH reduction to 70 pg/mL or less at End of Treatment (EOT)|Baseline to End of Treatment (6 weeks)|Per protocol population||participants|||Number
829446|NCT01219855|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects With Reduction of Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) of at Least 30% at Week 6|Proportion of subjects with at least 30% reduction in plasma intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) and/or mean iPTH reduction to 70 pg/mL or less at End of Treatment (EOT)|Baseline to End of Treatment (6 weeks)|Per protocol||participants|||Number
829447|NCT01219855|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D at End of Treatment (EOT, Week 6) in the Per Protocol Population|Mean percent change from baseline in serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D at End of Treatment (EOT, week 6) in the per protocol population. Subjects in Cohorts 1 and 2 (dose regimens of 60/90 and 30 mcg, respectively) were compared versus their corresponding placebo groups.|Baseline to End of Treatment (6 weeks)|Per protocol population||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
829448|NCT01219855|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D at Week 6|Mean absolute change from baseline in serum total 25-hydroxyvitamin D to end of treatment (EOT)|Baseline to End of Treatment (6 weeks)|Per protocol population||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829450|NCT01219855|Primary|Proportion (%) of Subjects With Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D ≥30 ng/mL (PP).|The proportion of subjects in the per protocol population with serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D ≥30 ng/mL at End-of-Treatment (EOT; Week 6) in Cohorts 1 and 2 (60/90 and 30 μg groups, respectively) were compared to their corresponding placebo groups.|6 weeks|Per protocol||percentage of participants|||Number
829451|NCT01219881|Secondary|Severity of Coughing|Effect of desflurane versus sevoflurane on the incidence and severity of coughing using a standardized coughing scale|14 days|Determined if patient passed eligibility and completed study.||Patients with a coughing episode|||Number
829452|NCT01219881|Secondary|Time to Extubation|Time from gas discontinuation to eye extubation after eye opening|14 days|Determined if patient passed eligibility and completed study.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829453|NCT01219881|Secondary|Difference in Time to Orientation|Difference in time to orientation as measured by SOMCT between the desflurane group and the sevoflurane group|14 Days|Determined if patient passed eligibility and completed study.||Minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829454|NCT01219881|Primary|Recovery Time|Recovery Time after exposure to desflurane or sevoflurane using a standardized wake up|14 Days|Determined if patients passed all eligibility and completed study.||Minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829455|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With LDA or Remission During the Interventional Phase Assessed Using DAS28-CRP|DAS28 calculated from the number of swollen joints (SJC) and tender joints (TJC) using the 28 joint count, the CRP and PtGA of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28-CRP ≤3.2 and oral GC intake with MP equivalent dose of ≥1 mg and ≤20 mg/day=LDA; DAS28 <2.6 = remission.|Visits 3 (7 months), 4 (8 months), 5 (9 months), 6 (10 months), 7 (11 months), 8 (12 months), 9 (24 weeks after V3) or CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
829456|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With LDA or Remission During the Interventional Phase Assessed Using CDAI|The CDAI is the numerical sum of 4 outcome parameters: TJC and SJC based on a 28-joint assessment, PtGA and PGA assessed on 0-100 mm VAS; higher scores=greater affection due to disease activity. CDAI total score=0-76. CDAI ≤2.8=disease remission and >2.8 to 10=LDA.|Visits 3 (7 months), 4 (8 months), 5 (9 months), 6 (10 months), 7 (11 months), 8 (12 months), and 9 (24 weeks after V3) or CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
829457|NCT01219933|Secondary|CDAI Score During the Interventional Phase|The CDAI is the numerical sum of 4 outcome parameters: TJC and SJC based on a 28-joint assessment, PtGA and PGA assessed on 0-100 mm VAS; higher scores=greater affection due to disease activity. CDAI total score=0-76. CDAI ≤2.8=disease remission, >2.8 to 10=LDA, >10 to 22=moderate disease activity, and >22=high disease activity. V3, CV, and the change from V3 to CV was determined.|V3 (7 months) and CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829458|NCT01219933|Secondary|SF-36 Subscale Scores During the Interventional Phase|SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well-being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. These 8 aspects can also be summarized as physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS). Total of 11 variables were analyzed (8 subscales, 2 composite subscales and Question 2 “how would you rate your health in general now?” (range 1= better, 5= worst). The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). Higher scores reflect higher quality of life. V3, CV, and the change from V3 to CV was determined.|V3 (7 months) and CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829459|NCT01219933|Secondary|Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Mental Component Score (MCS) and Physical Component Score (PCS) During the Interventional Phase|36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well-being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. These 8 aspects can also be summarized as physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS). Total of 11 variables were analyzed (8 subscales, 2 composite subscales and Question 2 “how would you rate your health in general now?” (range 1= better, 5= worst). The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). Higher scores reflect higher quality of life. V3, CV, and the change from V3 to CV was determined.|V3 (7 months) and CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829460|NCT01219933|Primary|Percentage of Participants in the Interventional Phase Who Achieved LDA and Discontinued Oral GC Within 20 Weeks|The percentage of participants with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with LDA was defined as DAS28 ≤3.2, able to discontinue oral GC within 20 weeks and at the latest at V8, confirmed at the Consolidation Visit without loss of clinical response defined as DAS28 (CRP) >3.2.|Visits 3 (7 months), 4 (8 months), 5 (9 months), 6 (10 months), 7 (11 months), and 8 (12 months)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all participants included in the interventional GC reduction phase of the study.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829461|NCT01219933|Primary|Type of GC Taken at the End of the Noninterventional Phase|During the noninterventional phase of the study participants received GC as prescribed by the physician.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety obs population; n=number of participants analyzed for a given parameter at a specified timepoint||percentage of participants|||Number
829476|NCT01219933|Secondary|Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) During the Noninterventional Phase|The CDAI is the numerical sum of 4 outcome parameters: TJC and SJC based on a 28-joint assessment, PtGA and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of disease assessed on 0-100 mm Visual analog scale (VAS); higher scores=greater affection due to disease activity. CDAI total score=0-76. CDAI ≤2.8=disease remission, >2.8 to 10=LDA, >10 to 22=moderate disease activity, and >22=high disease activity.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829462|NCT01219933|Secondary|Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) Score During the Interventional Phase|FACIT-F is a 13-item questionnaire. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The larger the participant’s response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participant’s fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant’s response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-F score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score). V3, CV, and the change from V3 to CV was determined.|V3 (7 months) and CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829463|NCT01219933|Secondary|SJC and TJC During the Interventional Phase|TJC and SJC were assessed for 28 joints. An assessment of 28 joints for swelling and tenderness was made. Joints were assessed and classified as swollen (1)/not swollen (0) and tender (1)/not tender (0) by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination for a total score range of 0-28. Higher scores indicated greater disease activity (tenderness/swelling). V3, CV, and the change from V3 to CV was determined.|V3 (7 months) and CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
829464|NCT01219933|Secondary|VAS for Pain (VAS-Pain) During the Interventional Phase|Participants were asked to mark the line corresponding to the intensity of their pain on a 100-mm VAS, where 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain. The distance from the left edge was measured. Change = V3 mean minus CV mean.|V3 (7 months) and CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint. Only participants with values at both visits were included in the analysis.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
829465|NCT01219933|Secondary|VAS-Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (GDA) During the Interventional Phase|Physician's were asked to determine the overall GDA for each participant using a 100-mm VAS, where 0=no disease activity and 100=maximum disease activity. The physician marked the line corresponding to their assessment and the distance from the left edge was measured. V3, CV, and the change from V3 to CV was determined.|V3 (7 months) and CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint. Only participants with values at both visits were included in the analysis.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
829466|NCT01219933|Secondary|HAQ-DI During the Interventional Phase|HAQ-DI is a self-reported, valid assessment of functional disability in RA. Assessed based on ability of participants to perform daily activities in 8 categories: dressing, arising, eating, walking, reaching, gripping, hygiene, and carrying out daily activities. HAQ-DI score range: 0-3: without any difficulty=0, with some difficulty=1, with much difficulty=2, unable to do=3. HAQ total scores expressed as overall mean score with range 0-3: 0-0.25=normal functioning; 0.25-0.5=mild functional limitation; 0.5-1=moderate functional limitation; more than 1=significant functional limitation. V3, CV, and the change from V3 to CV was determined.|Visit 3 (7 months) and CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Obs Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829467|NCT01219933|Secondary|DAS28-CRP During the Interventional Phase|DAS28-CRP was calculated from the SJC and TJC using the 28-joint count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 10, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-CRP) ≤3.2=LDA and >3.2 to 5.1=moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-CRP <2.6=remission. DAS28-CRP values indicated in the CRF were recalculated by the data manager. The cumulative DAS28 (CRP) value (AUC method) was performed using the calculated DAS28. The recalculated values were used in the statistical analyses.|V3 (7 months) and CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Obs Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829468|NCT01219933|Secondary|Time-Averaged GC Dose Changes During the Interventional Phase|"Area Under the Curve (AUC) of GC dose during the interventional phase was determined using the trapezoidal method and was calculated as:
AUC = sigma(Ti+1 - Ti) x [(Di+1+Di)/2]
With Di=dosage at time Ti
It corresponds to the total GC dose received between Baseline (visit 3) and visit 9 and has been calculated only for the 30 patients achieving visit 9."|V3 (7 months) and CV (4 weeks after GC-free status, maximum of 24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; only participants who completed the study were included in the analysis.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
829469|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Able to Discontinue GCs During the Interventional Phase by V9||V9 (24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; pnly those participants who completed the study at V9 were included in analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829470|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Able to Reduce Oral GCs by ≥50 Percent (%) During the Interventional Phase by V9||V9 (24 weeks after V3)|Safety Int run-in; only those participants who completed the study at V9 were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829471|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Able to Start the GC Reduction Phase at V3|All participants who maintained LDA (defined as DAS28-CRP ≤3.2) from V2 to V3 were included in the interventional phase for reduction of GC.|V3 (7 months)|Safety Int (intervention) run-in: all participants eligible to enter the interventional phase at V2 and who had taken at least 1 dose of MP.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829472|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Changes in RA Treatment During the Noninterventional Phase||V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population||percentage of participants|||Number
829473|NCT01219933|Secondary|Number of Participants With Changes in Tocilizumab Dose During the Noninterventional Phase|The dose of tocilizumab could have been reduced from the recommended 8 mg/kg to 4 mg/kg in participants in the case of adverse events.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population||participants|||Number
829474|NCT01219933|Secondary|Median Dose of Tocilizumab During the Noninterventional Phase||V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population||mg/kg||Full Range|Median
829475|NCT01219933|Secondary|Median Time Interval Between V1 and V2|The noninterventional phase was planned to last for a maximum of 6 months per participant. The time between V1 and V2 was measured in months.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population||months||Full Range|Median
829477|NCT01219933|Secondary|DAS28-ESR During the Noninterventional Phase|DAS28-ESR was calculated from the SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and ESR (millimeters per hour [mm/hr]). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-ESR ≤3.2=LDA and >3.2 to 5.1=moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-ESR <2.6=remission. Timepoint was V2, or before V2 for participants withdrawn before V2; DAS28-ESR values indicated in the CRF were recalculated by the data manager. The recalculated values were used in the statistical analyses.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829478|NCT01219933|Secondary|DAS28-CRP During the Noninterventional Phase|DAS28-CRP was calculated from the swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC) using the 28-joint count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 10, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-CRP ≤3.2=LDA and >3.2 to 5.1=moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-CRP <2.6=remission. Timepoint was V2, or before V2 for participants withdrawn before V2; DAS28-CRP values indicated in the Case Report Form (CRF) were recalculated by the data manager. The recalculated values were used in the statistical analyses.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829479|NCT01219933|Secondary|Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) During the Noninterventional Phase|HAQ-DI is a self-reported, valid assessment of functional disability in RA. Assessed based on ability of participants to perform daily activities in 8 categories: dressing, arising, eating, walking, reaching, gripping, hygiene, and carrying out daily activities. HAQ-DI score range: 0-3: without any difficulty=0, with some difficulty=1, with much difficulty=2, unable to do=3. HAQ total scores expressed as overall mean score with range 0-3: 0-0.25=normal functioning; 0.25-0.5=mild functional limitation; 0.5-1=moderate functional limitation; more than 1=significant functional limitation. Timepoint was V2, or before V2 for participants withdrawn before V2.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829480|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Positive for Anti-cyclic Citrullinated Peptide (Anti-CCP) Antibody During the Noninterventional Phase|Anti-CCP antibodies are important markers of bone erosion in RA. Anti-CCP antibodies were classified as positive if >7 U/mL.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
829481|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Positive for Rheumatoid Factor (RF) During the Noninterventional Phase|RF is the auto antibody directed against immunoglobulin G (IgG) and its concentration is observed in human serum or plasma. RF value higher than 20 units per milliliter (U/mL) is considered positive.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
829482|NCT01219933|Secondary|Number of Erosions During the NonInterventional Phase|In RA, the presence, number, and size of bone erosions and the number of joints with erosions on CRs are hallmarks for diagnosis, staging and prediction of damage progression and are used for treatment monitoring in randomized controlled studies.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||erosions||Standard Deviation|Mean
829483|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Erosions During the NonInterventional Phase|In RA, the presence, number and size of bone erosions and the number of joints with erosions on conventional radiographs (CRs) are hallmarks for diagnosis, staging and prediction of damage progression and are used for treatment monitoring in randomized controlled studies.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
829484|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Acheiving Remission Assessed Using DAS28 While Receiving Oral GC on Background TocilizumabTreatment During the Noninterventional Phase|DAS28 was calculated from the number of swollen joints and tender joints using the 28-joint count, the CRP and PtGA of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28 <2.6 = remission.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs population||percentage of participants|||Number
829485|NCT01219933|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Able to Acheive LDA Assessed Using DAS28 While Receiving Oral GC on Background Tocilizumab Treatment During the Noninterventional Phase|DAS28 was calculated from the number of swollen joints and tender joints using the 28-joint count, the CRP and Patient's Global Assessment (PtGA) of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28 ≤3.2 and oral GC intake with MP equivalent dose of ≥1 mg and ≤20 mg/day= LDA.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety Obs Population||percentage of participants|||Number
829486|NCT01219933|Primary|Number of Participants With GC Switches During the Noninterventional Phase|During the noninterventional phase of the study, once LDA was achieved, GC was switched to MP tablets.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety obs population; n=number of participants analyzed for a given parameter at a specified timepoint||participants|||Number
829487|NCT01219933|Primary|Median GC Dose Taken During the Noninterventional Phase|During the noninterventional phase of the study participants received GC as prescribed by the physician. Doses of all GC administered are expressed as MP equivalents.|V1 and V2 (up to 6 months after V1)|Safety obs population; n (number) equals (=) number of participants analyzed for a given parameter at a specified timepoint||mg||Full Range|Median
829488|NCT01219985|Secondary|Lesions Uptake Measurement (SUVmax)|For each detected uptake (in Ungated or CT-based PET images), observers have to report the corresponding maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax). The SUVmax was obtained automatically in a volume of interest encompassing the entire lesion.|Day 1|The number of participant has been determined on the basis of the annual possible recruitment in the institution to keep the study feasible.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829489|NCT01219985|Primary|Number of Detected Uptakes on PET Images|Observers have to analyse Ungated and/or CT-based PET images. They have to report, for each uptake they see, the corresponding liver segment (according to Couinaud segmental classification).|day 1|Patients who underwent liver resection||number of real metastatic lesions|||Number
829490|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Breast Cancer Pathological Response|The pathological response in lymph nodes was evaluated by presence or absence of tumor cells by histopathological examination. Partial responses mark the disappearance of tumor cells, with only small clusters or dispersed cells remaining (more than 90% loss) while complete response indicate no identifiable malignant cells. However, ductal carcinoma in situ may be present.|During Phase II of the study period, up to Year 3|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829491|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Assessed by the Investigators as Causally Related to GSK2302024A Treatment, by CTCAE Maximum Grade Reported||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829492|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Adverse Events (AEs) Assessed by the Investigators as Causally Related to GSK2302024A Treatment, by CTCAE Maximum Grade Reported||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829493|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), by CTCAE Maximum Grade Reported||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829494|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Neutrophil Count Decreased Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829495|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With White Blood Cell Decreased Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829496|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Platelet Count Decreased Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829497|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs), by CTCAE Maximum Grade Reported||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829498|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Lymphocyte Count Increased Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829499|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Lymphocyte Count Decreased Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829500|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Hyponatremia Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and post 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829501|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Hypokalemia Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829502|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Hypocalcemia Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829503|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Hypoalbuminemia Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829504|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Hypernatremia Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829505|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Hyperkalemia Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829506|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Hypercalcemia Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829507|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Hemoglobin Increased Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829508|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Creatine Increased Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829509|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Blood Bilirubin Increased Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829510|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Aspartate Aminotransferase Increased Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829512|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Alkaline Phosphatase Increased Abnormality, by CTCAE Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829513|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Alanine Aminotransferase Increased Abnormality, by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Maximum Grade||During the treatment period and up to 30 days post last vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829514|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events SAE(s)|A serious adverse event (SAE) is any untoward medical occurrence that: results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, causes disability/incapacity or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study patient. In this study, an event which was part of the natural course of the disease under study (i.e., disease progression/recurrence) was captured in the study/as an efficacy measure. Therefore it was not reported as an SAE. Progression/recurrence of the tumor was recorded in the clinical assessments in the electronic case report form (eCRF). Death due to progressive disease was recorded on a specific form in the eCRF but not as an SAE.|From Week 0 to Week 26/32|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829515|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation patient, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. For marketed medicinal products, this also includes failure to produce expected benefits (i.e., lack of efficacy), abuse or misuse.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) following vaccination|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829516|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Patients With an Anti-Wilm's Tumor Gene (Anti-WT1) Humoral Response|At post-GSK2302024A/placebo Dose 4 (Week 13)|For initially seronegative patients: post-administration antibody concentration ≥ 9 EU/mL For initially seropositive patients: post-administration antibody concentration ≥ 2 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration. The main analysis for the Phase|According-to-Protocol (ATP) Population for immunogenicity included all eligible patients who did not report major protocol deviation, who had at least received the first 4 doses of study product and provided a valid result for immunogenicity measurement within the 4 weeks following Dose 4.||Subjects|||Number
829517|NCT01220128|Primary|Number of Subjects With Severe Toxicities|"Severe toxicity was defined as follows:
A Grade 3 or higher toxicity that is related or possibly related to the combined administration of standard treatment and GSK2302024A/placebo
A decrease in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) from baseline with ≥ 10 points and at < 50% that is related or possibly related to the combined administration of treatment and that is confirmed by a second LVEF assessment within approximately 3 weeks.
A Grade 2 or higher cardiac ischemia/infarction that is related or possibly related to the combined administration of standard treatment and GSK2302024A /placebo.
A Grade 2 or higher allergic reaction occurring within 24 hours following the administration.
A Grade 3 or higher blood/bone marrow toxicity that was considered as related or possibly related to the combined Administration.
A decrease in renal function at the time of administration that was considered as related or possibly related."|During the whole study period, up to Year 3|The Total Treated Population included all patients who have received at least one dose of GSK2302024A study product or placebo.||Subjects|||Number
829518|NCT01220180|Secondary|Number of Participants With PGIC Scale for Fibromyalgia in PP Population|PGIC was defined as participant rated instrument to measure participant's change in overall status on a 7-point scale; range from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Change is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (a little improved), 4 (no change), 5 (a little worse) , 6 (much worse) or 7 (very much worse) on the scale. Higher score is equal to more affected.|Week 6|PP population included participants who received the study medication for at least 6 weeks and indication of use was fibromyalgia.||Participants|||Number
829519|NCT01220180|Secondary|Number of Participants With PGIC Scale for Fibromyalgia in ITT Population|PGIC was defined as participant rated instrument to measure participant's change in overall status on a 7-point scale; range from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Change is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (a little improved), 4 (no change), 5 (a little worse) , 6 (much worse) or 7 (very much worse) on the scale. Higher score is equal to more affected.|Week 6|ITT population included participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication and indication of use was fibromyalgia.||Participants|||Number
829520|NCT01220180|Secondary|Number of Participants With CGIC Scale for Fibromyalgia in PP Population|CGIC: 7-point clinician rated scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Change was defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (a little improved), 4 (no change), 5 (a little worse), 6 (much worse) or 7 (very much worse) on the scale. Higher score is equal to more affected.|Week 6|PP population included participants who received the study medication for at least 6 weeks and indication of use was fibromyalgia.||Participants|||Number
829521|NCT01220180|Secondary|Number of Participants With CGIC Scale for Fibromyalgia in ITT Population|CGIC: 7-point clinician rated scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Change was defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (a little improved), 4 (no change), 5 (a little worse), 6 (much worse) or 7 (very much worse) on the scale. Higher score is equal to more affected.|Week 6|ITT population included participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication and indication of use was fibromyalgia.||Participants|||Number
829522|NCT01220180|Secondary|Number of Participants With PGIC Scale for NeP in PP Population|PGIC was defined as participant rated instrument to measure participant's change in overall status on a 7-point scale; range from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Change was defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (a little improved), 4 (no change), 5 (a little worse) , 6 (much worse) or 7 (very much worse) on the scale. Higher score is equal to more affected.|Week 6|PP population included participants who received the study medication for at least 6 weeks and indication of use was NeP.||Participants|||Number
829523|NCT01220180|Secondary|Number of Participants With Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scale for NeP in ITT Population|PGIC was defined as participant rated instrument to measure participant's change in overall status on a 7-point scale; range from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Change was defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (a little improved), 4 (no change), 5 (a little worse) , 6 (much worse) or 7 (very much worse) on the scale. Higher score is equal to more affected.|Week 6|ITT population included participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication and indication of use was NeP.||Participants|||Number
829524|NCT01220180|Secondary|Number of Participants With CGIC Scale for NeP in PP Population|CGIC: 7-point clinician rated scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Change is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (a little improved), 4 (no change), 5 (a little worse), 6 (much worse) or 7 (very much worse) on the scale. Higher score is equal to more affected.|Week 6|PP population included participants who received the study medication for at least 6 weeks and indication of use was NeP.||Participants|||Number
829525|NCT01220180|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinician's Global Impression of Change (CGIC) Scale for NeP in ITT Population|CGIC: 7-point clinician rated scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Change is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (a little improved), 4 (no change), 5 (a little worse), 6 (much worse) or 7 (very much worse) on the scale. Higher score is equal to more affected.|Week 6|ITT population included participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication and indication of use was NeP.||Participants|||Number
829526|NCT01220180|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sleep Interference Score for Fibromyalgia in PP Population at Week 6|DSIS: participant rated 11-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (pain does not interfere with sleep) to 10 (pain completely interferes with sleep) during past 24-hour period. Higher score indicates a greater level of sleep disturbance. Self-assessment performed daily on awakening prior to taking study medication.|Baseline and Week 6|PP population included participants who received the study medication for at least 6 weeks and indication of use was fibromyalgia.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829527|NCT01220180|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sleep Interference Score for Fibromyalgia in ITT Population at Week 6|DSIS: participant rated 11-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (pain does not interfere with sleep) to 10 (pain completely interferes with sleep) during past 24-hour period. Higher score indicates a greater level of sleep disturbance. Self-assessment performed daily on awakening prior to taking study medication.|Baseline and Week 6|ITT population included participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication and indication of use was fibromyalgia.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829528|NCT01220180|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sleep Interference Score for NeP in PP Population at Week 6|DSIS: participant rated 11-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (pain does not interfere with sleep) to 10 (pain completely interferes with sleep) during past 24-hour period. Higher score indicates a greater level of sleep disturbance. Self-assessment performed daily on awakening prior to taking study medication.|Baseline and Week 6|PP population included participants who received the study medication for at least 6 weeks and indication of use was NeP.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829529|NCT01220180|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sleep Interference Score for NeP in ITT Population at Week 6|Daily Sleep Interference Score (DSIS): participant rated 11-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (pain does not interfere with sleep) to 10 (pain completely interferes with sleep) during past 24-hour period. Higher score indicates a greater level of sleep disturbance. Self-assessment performed daily on awakening prior to taking study medication.|Baseline and Week 6|ITT population included participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication and indication of use was NeP.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829530|NCT01220180|Primary|Change From Baseline in Daily Pain Score for Fibromyalgia in PP Population at Week 6|DPRS: participant rated 11-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain) during past 24-hour period. Higher score indicates greater level of pain.|Baseline and Week 6|PP population included participants who received the study medication for at least 6 weeks and indication of use was fibromyalgia.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829531|NCT01220180|Primary|Change From Baseline in Daily Pain Score for Fibromyalgia in ITT Population at Week 6|DPRS: participant rated 11-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain) during past 24-hour period. Higher score indicates greater level of pain.|Baseline and Week 6|ITT population included participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication and indication of use was fibromyalgia.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829532|NCT01220180|Primary|Change From Baseline in Daily Pain Score for NeP in PP Population at Week 6|DPRS: participant rated 11-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain) during past 24-hour period. Higher score indicates greater level of pain.|Baseline and Week 6|PP population included participants who received the study medication for at least 6 weeks and indication of use was NeP.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829533|NCT01220180|Primary|Change From Baseline in Daily Pain Score for NeP in ITT Population at Week 6|Daily Pain Rating Score (DPRS): participant rated 11-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain) during past 24-hour period. Higher score indicates greater level of pain.|Baseline and Week 6|ITT population included participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication and indication of use was NeP.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829534|NCT01220180|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Seizure Frequency in PP Population|Percentage of participants with improvement in seizure frequency of greater than or equal to 75%; greater than or equal to 50% to 74%; 0% to 49% were considered.|Baseline through Week 12|PP population included participants who received the study medication for at least 12 weeks and indication of use was epilepsy.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829535|NCT01220180|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Seizure Frequency in ITT Population|Percentage of participants with improvement in seizure frequency of greater than or equal to 75%; greater than or equal to 50% to 74%; 0% to 49% were considered.|Baseline through Week 12|ITT population included participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication and indication of use was epilepsy.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829553|NCT01220557|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction / Problem Areas in Dealing With Diabetes|Satisfaction with current diabetes treatment was assessed by a diabetes satisfaction questionnaire developed by Kulzer et al. This questionnaire uncovers problems in dealing with diabetes, also. A high score indicates dissatisfaction with insulin therapy.|6 Month Follow up||||||
829536|NCT01220180|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving 28 Days Seizure Free Period in Per Protocol (PP) Population|Participants were regarded as seizure-free if no seizures (partial or other) were reported for the participant during the period of 28 days in the study.|Baseline through Week 12|PP population included participants who received the study medication for at least 12 weeks and indication of use was epilepsy.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829537|NCT01220180|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving 28 Days Seizure Free Period in Intent-to Treat (ITT) Population|Participants were regarded as seizure-free if no seizures (partial or other) were reported for the participant during the period of 28 days in the study.|Baseline through Week 12|ITT population included participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication and indication of use was epilepsy.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829538|NCT01220297|Secondary|Veno-occlusive Disease (VoD)|Assessed as the incidence of veno-occlusive disease (VoD) at 100 days post-transplant.|100 days post-transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
829539|NCT01220297|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as time from enrollment to time of death or last follow-up, within 2 years.|2 years|||Days||Full Range|Median
829540|NCT01220297|Secondary|Disease-free Survival (DFS)|Assessed as survival without recurrence of disease|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
829541|NCT01220297|Secondary|Acute GvHD (Grade 3 to 4)|"Assessed as the incidence of grade 3 to 4 acute GvHD at Day 100 post-transplant.
Stage of Acute GvHD was assessed as follows.
Stage 1: Skin: rash < 25% of skin. Liver: bilirubin 2 to 3 mg/dL. Gut: diarrhea > 500 mL/day or persistent nausea with positive biopsy for GvHD
Stage 2: Skin: rash 25 to 50% of skin. Liver: bilirubin 3 to 6 mg/dL. Gut: diarrhea >1000 mL/day.
Stage 3: Skin: rash > 50% of skin. Liver: bilirubin 6 to 15 mg/dL. Gut: diarrhea > 1500 mL/day.
Stage 4: Skin: generalized erythroderma with bulla formation. Liver: bilirubin > 15 mg/dL. Gut: severe abdominal pain with or without ileus
Grade of Acute GvHD was determined as follows.
Grade 1: Stage 1-2 Skin + No Liver stage + No Gut stage
Grade 2: Stage 3 Skin OR Stage 1 Liver or Stage 1 Gut
Grade 3: No Skin stage + Stage 2 to 3 Liver Stage 2 to 4 Gut
Grade 4: Stage 4 Skin + or Stage 2 to 3 Liver + No Gut stage"|100 days post-transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
829542|NCT01220297|Primary|Acute Graft-vs-Host Disease (GvHD) (Grade 2 to 4)|"Assessed as the incidence of grade 2 to 4 acute graft-vs-host disease (GvHD) at Day 100 post-transplant.
Stage of Acute GvHD was assessed as follows.
Stage 1: Skin: rash < 25% of skin. Liver: bilirubin 2 to 3 mg/dL. Gut: diarrhea > 500 mL/day or persistent nausea with positive biopsy for GvHD
Stage 2: Skin: rash 25 to 50% of skin. Liver: bilirubin 3 to 6 mg/dL. Gut: diarrhea >1000 mL/day.
Stage 3: Skin: rash > 50% of skin. Liver: bilirubin 6 to 15 mg/dL. Gut: diarrhea > 1500 mL/day.
Stage 4: Skin: generalized erythroderma with bulla formation. Liver: bilirubin > 15 mg/dL. Gut: severe abdominal pain with or without ileus
Grade of Acute GvHD was determined as follows.
Grade 1: Stage 1-2 Skin + No Liver stage + No Gut stage
Grade 2: Stage 3 Skin OR Stage 1 Liver or Stage 1 Gut
Grade 3: No Skin stage + Stage 2 to 3 Liver Stage 2 to 4 Gut
Grade 4: Stage 4 Skin + or Stage 2 to 3 Liver + No Gut stage"|100 days post-transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
829543|NCT01220401|Primary|Past Week Nightmare Frequency|This fill-in-the-blank variable assesses the number of nightmares experienced in the past week (range = 0 - X nightmares). Higher values indicate more nightmares (worse outcome).|pre, one week, two months|||nightmares/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
829544|NCT01220401|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory|This 21-item, self-report measure was designed to assess the severity of depression among adults. Responses on a Likert-type scale range from 0 – 3, and scores may be summed to derive a total score (0-63), with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms. Scores of 18 and above have been suggested to reliably identify depressed patients.|Baseline, 1 week, 2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829545|NCT01220401|Primary|Clinician Administered PTSD Scale|"This semi-structured clinical interview assesses each of 17 DSM-IV-TR criteria for PTSD utilizing separate queries for frequency and severity on a 5-point scale (0 – 4). This study utilized the “FI/I2” rule, where frequency ratings of one or more and intensity ratings of two or more must be present in order for a symptom to count towards diagnosis.
Total scores are comprised of the three factors (reexperiencing, avoidance, and hyperarousal), with 136 being the maximum. 0-19 = asymptomatic or few symptoms. 20-39 = mild PTSD, subthreshold. 40-59 = moderate PTSD at threshold. 60-79 = severe PTSD. 80+ = extreme PTSD."|pre, one week, two months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829546|NCT01220401|Primary|Number of Nights With Nightmares|This fill-in-the-blank variable assesses the number of nights the individual experienced nightmares in the past week (range = 0 - 7 nights). Higher values indicate more nights with nightmares (worse outcome).|pre, one week, two months|||nights/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
829547|NCT01220466|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Eyes With Induced Manifest Refractive Astigmatism Greater Than 2.00 D of Absolute Cylinder as Compared to the Preoperative Refraction|Induced Manifest Refractive Astigmatism is an increase of astigmatism (cylinder) postoperatively that could be caused by the refractive treatment. An increase of greater than 2.0 D is considered a safety endpoint per ANSI Z80.11-2007.|6 Months|Percentage of eyes with induced manifest refractive astigmatism greater than 2.00 D of absolute cylinder power||percentage of eyes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
829548|NCT01220466|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Eyes With Best Spectacle Corrected Visual Acuity (BSCVA) Worse Than 20/40||6 Months|Percentage of eyes with BSCVA worse than 20/40||percentage of eyes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
829549|NCT01220466|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Eyes With Loss of More Than 2 Lines Best Spectacle Corrected Visual Acuity (BSCVA)||6 Months|Percent of eyes that lost more than 2 lines of BSCVA.||percentage of eyes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
829550|NCT01220466|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Eyes With Manifest Refraction Spherical Equivalent Within 1.0 D||6 months|Percent of eyes that achieved manifest refraction spherical equivalent within 1.0 D||percentage of eyes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
829551|NCT01220466|Primary|Percentage of Eyes With Uncorrected Visual Acuity (UCVA) of 20/40 or Better.||6 months|UCVA is reported as percentage of eyes not percentage of subjects achieving UCVA of 20/40 or better||percentage of eyes|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
829552|NCT01220557|Secondary|Evaluation of the Diabetes Education Course|Patients satisfaction with the diabetes education programs was assessed using a self-constructed 12-item scale on specific questions regarding contents and performance of the training. Response mode was a scale ranging from 4 (apply very strong) to 0 (apply not at all). Additionally, patients were asked to give an overall grade for their course ranging from 1 (very good) to 6 (unsatisfactory).|6 month Follow up||||||
829556|NCT01220557|Secondary|Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS)|Diabetes related distress was assessed by a German version of the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS). The DDS is a 17-item self-report scale for the assessment of emotional burdens in diabetes treatment in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.|6 month follow up||||||
829557|NCT01220557|Secondary|Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA)|The Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA) measure is a self-report measure of diabetes self-management assessing several aspects of the diabetes regimen.|6 month||||||
829558|NCT01220557|Secondary|Diabetes Empowerment Score (DES)|Empowerment was measured by a German version of the Diabetes Empowerment Scale, a measure of diabetes-related psychosocial self-efficacy.|6 month follow up||||||
829559|NCT01220557|Secondary|Hypoglycaemia Awareness Score|The hypoglycemia awareness questionnaire provides a score indicating the severity of hypoglycaemia unawareness. This scale ranges from 0 (maximum hypoglycaemia awareness) to 7 (minimum hypoglycaemia awareness), where a score of 4 suggests reduced hypoglycaemia awareness.|6 month||||||
829560|NCT01220557|Secondary|Diabetes Knowledge|To assess knowledge among insulin-treated diabetes patients, participants completed a new developed 11-item diabetes knowledge score. Each item had to be answered by selecting the correct answer from multiple choices. The numbers of correct answers are summed up; thus, the range of the diabetes knowledge score is between 0 and 11.|6 month||||||
829561|NCT01220557|Primary|Changes in Glycemic Control Measured by A1c|Difference between baseline A1c and A1c at 6 month follow up. Equivalent effect on glycemic control measured by A1c (non-inferiority). In case of-non-inferiority test of superiority.|6 month|||Changes in A1c in percentage points||Standard Deviation|Mean
829562|NCT01220609|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the duration of time from study entry to time of death or the date of last contact.|From study entry to death or last contact, up to 5 years of follow-up.|Eligible and treated patients.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829563|NCT01220609|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival is the period of time from study entry to time of disease progression, death or date of last contact, whichever occurs first.|From study entry to disease progression, death or date of last contact, whichever occurs first, up to 5 years of follow-up.|Eligible and treated patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829564|NCT01220609|Primary|Frequency and Severity of Adverse Events as Assessed by NCI CTCAE v. 4.0||Every cycle until completion of study treatment up to 30 days after stopping study treatment||||||
829565|NCT01220609|Primary|Tumor Response|Complete and Partial Tumor Response as assessed by RECIST 1.1|Every other cycle for the first 6 months; then every 3 months thereafter until completion of study treatment; and at any other time if clinically indicated based on symptoms or physical signs suggestive of progressive disease.|Eligible and treated patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
829566|NCT01220739|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Rankin Scale (0 - 1)|Measures the degree of disability or dependence in the daily activities. Minimum score = 0 (best outcome - No symptoms); Maximum Score = 6 (worse outcome - dead)|90 Days from Stroke Onset|||percentage of participants|||Number
829567|NCT01220739|Primary|Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhages||36 hours from tPA initiation|||participants|||Number
829568|NCT01220869|Secondary|Cumulative Probability of no PSA Failure|The time to PSA failure was defined as the days from first dosing (scheduled trial days) where an increase in serum PSA of ≥50% from nadir and at least 5 ng/mL measured on two consecutive occasions at least two weeks apart was noted. The second occasion was the time point of meeting the criterion. The Kaplan-Meier estimate and associated 95% CI were provided.|Day 0, Day 7, Day 28, Day 112, Day 140, Daý 168|The data of all participants who received at least one dose of degarelix and had at least one efficacy assessment after dosing comprised the FAS dataset.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829569|NCT01220869|Other Pre-specified|Cumulative Probability of Participants With Testosterone at Castrate Level <= 0.5 ng/mL From Day 28 to Day 168 - Sensitivity Analysis|Kaplan-Meier estimates of the cumulative probability of testosterone levels below castrate level (<= 0.5 ng/mL) from Day 28 to Day 168 and the associated two-sided 95% CI was based on log-log transformation, Greenwood's formula, and asymptotic maximum likelihood theory. The primary objective was met if the lower limit of this two-sided 95% CI was ≥90%. The definition of the primary endpoint was the Day 28 to Day 168 cumulative probability of testosterone levels below castrate levels (≤0.5 ng/mL). Only patients with a testosterone value on Day 28 and after were included in this analysis. Patients who did not experience a testosterone suppression (≤0.5 ng/mL) were censored at the time of last available testosterone measurement. The FAS analysis results were considered primary, whereas the corresponding PP analysis served as the sensitivity analysis.|From Day 28 to Day 168|The PP analysis set included all participants from the FAS analysis set without major protocol violations.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829570|NCT01220869|Secondary|Percentage Change in Serum Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Levels From Baseline (Day 0) to Day 28|Percentage change in serum prostate specific antigen (PSA levels from Baseline (Day 0) to Day 28|From Day 0 to Day 28|The data of all participants who received at least one dose of degarelix and had at least one efficacy assessment after dosing comprised the FAS dataset||Percentage change of PSA||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829571|NCT01220869|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With Testosterone at Castrate Level (<= 0.5 ng/mL) at Day 3|Proportion of participants with testosterone at castrate level (<= 0.5 ng/mL) at Day 3|Day 3|The data of all participants who received at least one dose of degarelix and had at least one efficacy assessment after dosing comprised the FAS dataset||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829582|NCT01227265|Secondary|"Change From Baseline in Average On Time (Hours Per Day) Without Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 12"|"On time is when a PD participant's symptoms are improved. Mean on time without troublesome dyskinesias is derived from the available diary data collected for 3 days immediately prior to a clinic visit. On time without troublesome dyskinesia is the sum of on time without dyskinesia plus on time with non-troublesome dyskinesia as recorded in the diary. The mean change from baseline in on time was based on a cLDA with treatment, time, and treatment-by-time interaction as fixed effects and subject as random effect."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS): All randomized participants remaining after participants were excluded for failure to receive at least one dose of study treatment, lack of any post-randomization endpoint data subsequent to at least 1 dose of study treatment, or lack of Baseline data for those analyses requiring Baseline data.||hours per day||Standard Error|Mean
829572|NCT01220869|Primary|Cumulative Probability of Participants With Testosterone at Castrate Level <= 0.5 ng/mL From Day 28 to Day 168|Kaplan-Meier estimates of the cumulative probability of testosterone levels below castrate level (<= 0.5 ng/mL) from Day 28 to Day 168 and the associated two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) was based on log-log transformation, Greenwood’s formula, and asymptotic maximum likelihood theory. The primary objective was met if the lower limit of this two-sided 95% CI was ≥90%. The definition of the primary endpoint was the Day 28 to Day 168 cumulative probability of testosterone levels below castrate levels (≤0.5 ng/mL). Only patients with a testosterone value on Day 28 and after were included in this analysis. Patients who did not experience a testosterone suppression (≤0.5 ng/mL) were censored at the time of last available testosterone measurement. The full analysis set (FAS) results were considered primary, whereas the corresponding per protocol (PP) analysis served as the sensitivity analysis.|From Day 28 to Day 168|The data of all participants who received at least one dose of degarelix and had at least one efficacy assessment after dosing comprised the FAS dataset.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829573|NCT01221090|Secondary|Quality of Life (QOL)|Participants where asked the number of days in the past 30 days in which their physical (phys) and/or mental was not good, and whether their usual activity was affected by their physical/mental health.|12 months|Participants were included if they completed the 12-mo follow-up questionnaire. They also had to have answered questions pertaining to quality of life. Missing responses were not included.||Number of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
829574|NCT01221090|Secondary|Diabetes-related Behaviors|Participants were asked the number of days in the past 7 which they participated in various diabetes self-care activities on diet, exercise, home blood glucose monitoring, and foot care.|12 months|Those who completed a questionnaire at baseline and at their 12-month visit were included. Also, they had to have answered questions regarding self-care activities on both surveys since the calculated mean was the average difference in days within the past 7 that individuals participated in self-care activities between 12-months and baseline.||Days (e.g., Avg diff 12mo vs baseline)||Standard Deviation|Mean
829575|NCT01221090|Secondary|Patient Self-reported Perceived Health Status||12 months|Perceived health status was collected using a questionnaire administered during the 12-month follow-up visit. Individuals who did not complete the questionnaire during the follow-up visit or who refused to answer the question were not included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
829576|NCT01221090|Secondary|BMI|Body mass index|12 months|BMI was computed from height & weight measurements from the 12-month follow-up (f/u) visit. Those unable to come in had height and weight abstracted from their EHRs. Measures recorded fell within the range of 10 days prior to and 45 days after participants’ f/u visit dates. Those missing this information was not included in the analysis.||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
829577|NCT01221090|Primary|HbA1c|Measures of HbA1c were collected from electronic health records dating back six months prior to orientation to the last day of study participation (45 days after the 12-month follow-up period). If a participant did not have any HbA1c value within the electronic health record for any particular follow-up visit, a lab test was scheduled to obtain a measure. Of the HbA1c collected six months prior to orientation, the value measured closest to the orientation date was considered as the baseline HbA1c value. HbA1c values that were measured on dates preceding the baseline HbA1c were not included; i.e., HbA1c values included in the analysis were those collected since the baseline HbA1c and until the last day of study participation.|12 months|A participant was included in the analysis if he/she had a HbA1c value collected. A longitudinal analysis was performed, with participants contributing one or more HbA1c values to the model. As such, all participants had at least one HbA1c value and were therefore included in the model.||percentage of gycosylated HbA1c|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829578|NCT01227265|Primary|Change From Baseline in Total Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) at Week 12|The ESS is a self-administered questionnaire providing a measure of a person’s general level of daytime sleepiness, or their average sleep propensity in daily life. The scale consists of 8 situations in which the participant rates their tendency to become sleepy on a scale of 0=no chance of dozing to 3=high chance of dozing. The overall score is the sum of the scores for the 8 situations for a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 24 with a higher score indicating greater sleepiness. The mean change from baseline in total EES was based on a cLDA with treatment, time, and treatment-by-time interaction as fixed effects and subject as random effect.|Baseline and Week 12|All Participants as Treated (APaT): All participants who received at least one (1) dose of study drug.||Score on a Scale||Standard Error|Mean
829579|NCT01227265|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Suicidality|The percentage of participants with suicidality using the Columbia - Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) was reported. The C-SSR was used in this study only for the purpose of safety monitoring by measuring the incidence of different types of suicidality categories during treatment. The assessment was done by the nature of the responses, not by a numbered scale. Participants who reported at least one occurrence of suicidal behavior or suicidal ideation were counted as having experienced suicidality. Suicidal behavior included suicide attempt, aborted attempt, interrupted attempt, or preparatory behavior. Suicidal ideation included a wish to die or active suicidal thought with or without method, intent or plan.|Up to Week 12|All Participants as Treated (APaT): All participants who received at least one (1) dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829580|NCT01227265|Primary|Number of Participants With Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) ≥105 mmHg and 15 mmHg Increase|The number of participants with Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) ≥105 mmHg and 15 mmHg increase was reported. Participants lie supine at rest for 5 minutes, then have a single BP measurement taken (ie, 1 reading). Participants then stand for 3 minutes at rest, followed by a single BP measurement (1 reading) in the standing position.|Up to Week 14|All Participants as Treated (APaT): All participants who received at least one (1) dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
829581|NCT01227265|Primary|Number of Participants With Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) ≥180 mmHg and 20 mmHg Increase|The number of participants with Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) ≥180 mmHg and 20 mmHg increase was reported. Participants lie supine at rest for 5 minutes, then have a single BP measurement taken (ie, 1 reading). Participants then stand for 3 minutes at rest, followed by a single BP measurement (1 reading) in the standing position.|Up to Week 14|All Participants as Treated (APaT): All participants who received at least one (1) dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
829620|NCT01227421|Secondary|Influenza Antibody Response Titer Change: Influenza A 2009 H1N1|change in influenza antibody titer for Influenza A 2009 H1N1|28 days|Member of the intensive virologic follow up group with laboratory confirmed Influenza A 2009 H1N1||Fold change in antibody titer||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829583|NCT01227265|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants With >30% Change (Reduction) From Baseline at Week 12 in Mean Off Time"|"A participant with at least a 30% reduction in mean off time from Baseline to End of Treatment (Week 12) is considered as responder. The on state is defined as the period of time during which a patient's symptoms of PD improve or disappear following treatment with L-dopa or dopamine agonists. The off state is defined as the period of time characterized by the return of symptoms (i..e. tremor, slowness, and rigidity) following treatment with L-dopa or dopamine agonists. Study participants reported their symptoms at half-hour intervals as off, on, or asleep on their daily diary for 3 days before randomization and for the 3 days immediately before their Week 12 visit."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS): All randomized participants remaining after participants were excluded for failure to receive at least one dose of study treatment, lack of any post-randomization endpoint data subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment, or lack of Baseline data for those analyses requiring Baseline data.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829584|NCT01227265|Primary|"Change From Baseline in Average Off Time (Hours Per Day) at Week 12"|"The on state is defined as the period of time during which a patient's symptoms of PD improve or disappear following treatment with L-dopa or dopamine agonists. The off state is defined as the period of time characterized by the return of symptoms (i..e. tremor, slowness, and rigidity) following treatment with L-dopa or dopamine agonists. Study participants reported their symptoms at half-hour intervals as off, on, or asleep on their daily diary for 3 days before randomization (baseline) and for the 3 days immediately before their Week 12 visit. The mean change from baseline in off time was based on a constrained longitudinal data analysis (cLDA) with treatment, time, and treatment-by-time interaction as fixed effects and subject as random effect."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS): All randomized participants remaining after participants were excluded for failure to receive at least one dose of study treatment, lack of any post-randomization endpoint data subsequent to at least 1 dose of study treatment, or lack of Baseline data for those analyses requiring Baseline data.||hours per day||Standard Error|Mean
829585|NCT01227278|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index, Airflow Obstruction, Dyspnea, and Exercise Capacity (BODE) Scores at Day 393|The BODE index is a multi-dimension COPD grading system that incorporates body-mass index (B), degree of airflow obstruction (O), dyspnea (D), and exercise capacity (E) as measured by the modified medical research council (MMRC) dyspnea scale and the 6-minute walk test. The MMRC dyspnea scale is a 5-point scale that measures the level of dyspnea (trouble breathing) experienced by participants where score range is 0 (none) to 4 (very severe ). BODE score is derived into a score range of 0 (healthy) to 10 (severe COPD).|Baseline, Day 393|The PP population included all participants who had no major protocol violations, received at least 6 of the 8 total doses of investigational product, and completed the study through Day 393. Here, 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||units on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829586|NCT01227278|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a 0.5-Point Improvement in Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire Self-administered Standardized Format (CRQ-SAS) Domain Scores at Day 393|The CRQ-SAS is a self-administered questionnaire which consist of 20 items across four domains: dyspnea (5 items), fatigue (4 items), emotional function (7 items), and mastery (4 items). Participants rated their experience on a 7-point scale in response to each item ranging from 1 (maximum impairment) to 7 (no impairment). Individual items were equally weighted, and domain scores were calculated as the mean of all items within each domain; domain score range: 1 (maximum impairment) to 7 (no impairment). Participants with 0.5 point improvement from baseline in the domain scores were observed.|Day 393|The PP population included all participants who had no major protocol violations, received at least 6 of the 8 total doses of investigational product, and completed the study through Day 393. Here, 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
829587|NCT01227278|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire Self-Administered Standardized Format (CRQ-SAS) Domain Scores at Day 393|The CRQ-SAS is a self-administered questionnaire which consist of 20 items across four domains: dyspnea (5 items), fatigue (4 items), emotional function (7 items), and mastery (4 items). Participants rated their experience on a 7-point scale in response to each item ranging from 1 (maximum impairment) to 7 (no impairment). Individual items were equally weighted, and domain scores were calculated as the mean of all items within each domain; domain score range: 1 (maximum impairment) to 7 (no impairment).|Baseline, Day 393|The PP population included all participants who had no major protocol violations, received at least 6 of the 8 total doses of investigational product, and completed the study through Day 393. Here, 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||units on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829588|NCT01227278|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement in COPD-Specific Saint George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ-C) Total Score|SGRQ is a health related quality of life questionnaire consisting of 40 items in three domains: symptoms (respiratory symptoms and severity), activity (activities that cause or are limited by breathlessness) and impacts (social functioning and psychological disturbances due to airway disease). Each question’s response has a unique empirically derived weight where lowest possible weight is zero and the highest is 100. The total score and domain score were derived from the relevant items and converted to a score of 0 to 100 with a higher score indicating poorer health status. Percentage of participants with 4-point, 8-point and 12-point change from baseline in SGRQ-C total score were observed.|Day 393|The PP population included all participants who had no major protocol violations, received at least 6 of the 8 total doses of investigational product, and completed the study through Day 393. Here, 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
829602|NCT01227395|Secondary|Number of Participants Prevented by Azithromycin Treatment.|The physician performed efficacy evaluations at the end of the observation period (or the time of discontinuing administration), compared with the data before the start of administration of this drug, and entered the results.|9 years(MAX)|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
829621|NCT01227421|Secondary|Complications of Influenza|Proportion of patients with a complication of influenza during the course of the study|28 days|All patients who received at least one dose of study medication||Participants|||Number
829589|NCT01227278|Secondary|Change From Baseline in COPD-Specific Saint George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ-C) Total and Domain Scores at Day 393|The SGRQ is a health related quality of life questionnaire consisting of 40 items in three domains: symptoms (respiratory symptoms and severity), activity (activities that cause or are limited by breathlessness) and impacts (social functioning and psychological disturbances due to airway disease). Each question’s response has a unique empirically derived weight where lowest possible weight is zero and the highest is 100. The total score and domain score are derived from the relevant items and converted to a score of 0 to 100 with a higher score indicating poorer health status.|Baseline, Day 393|The PP population included all participants who had no major protocol violations, received at least 6 of the 8 total doses of investigational product, and completed the study through Day 393. Here, 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||units on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829590|NCT01227278|Secondary|Annual Incidence Rate of Hospitalization Due to Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (AECOPD)|An AECOPD is defined as worsening of two or more major symptoms or one major and one minor symptom for two or more consecutive days. Annualized Incidence Rate of hospitalization due to AECOPD was calculated as Rate = total number of hospitalizations/ total person years.|Day 1 up to 393|The PP population included all participants who had no major protocol violations, received at least 6 of the 8 total doses of investigational product, and completed the study through Day 393.||hospitalizations/person-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829591|NCT01227278|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Hospitalized Due to Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (AECOPD)|An AECOPD is defined as worsening of two or more major symptoms or one major and one minor symptom for two or more consecutive days.|Day 1 up to 393|The PP population included all participants who had no major protocol violations, received at least 6 of the 8 total doses of investigational product, and completed the study through Day 393.||percentage of participants|||Number
829592|NCT01227278|Secondary|Number of Participants Hospitalized Due to Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (AECOPD)|An AECOPD is defined as worsening of two or more major symptoms or one major and one minor symptom for two or more consecutive days.|Day 1 up to 393|The PP population included all participants who had no major protocol violations, received at least 6 of the 8 total doses of investigational product, and completed the study through Day 393.||participants|||Number
829593|NCT01227278|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Treatment-Emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs)|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. A serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between administration of study drug and up to Day 561 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pre-treatment state. TEAEs reported below included both SAEs and non-serious AEs.|Day 1 up to 561|The safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of investigational drug.||participants|||Number
829594|NCT01227278|Primary|Annualized Incidence Rate of Moderate or Severe Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (AECOPD)|An AECOPD is defined as worsening of two or more major symptoms or one major and one minor symptom for two or more consecutive days. Annualized Incidence Rate of Moderate or Severe AECOPD was assessed based on AECOPD data up to Day 393 (Rate = total number of moderate or severe AECOPD in each group/total person-year follow-up in each group). The severity of an exacerbation of COPD is defined as: a) Mild exacerbations, which require treatment with an increase in usual therapy, example (eg), increase use of short acting bronchodilators, b) Moderate exacerbations which require treatment with systemic corticosteroids, and or antibiotics and c) Severe exacerbations which require hospitalization.|Day 1 up to 393|The per protocol (PP) population included all participants who had no major protocol violations, received at least 6 of the 8 total doses of investigational product, and completed the study through Day 393.||AECOPD events/person-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829595|NCT01227382|Secondary|Adverse Events|Adverse events were prospectively evaluated at the end of the procedure, at discharge from the endoscopy unit, and by telephone call 24 hours post procedure. Adverse events were defined and graded using the 2010 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy consensus criteria.|24 hours|Percentage of participants with accurate diagnoses of cancer||participants|||Number
829596|NCT01227382|Secondary|Sampling Times for Each Device|The sampling time of the Spybite Biopsy forceps was compared to both the cytology brush and the RJ3 biopsy forceps of any stricture or biliary lesions found on Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).|15 minutes|Percentage of participants with accurate diagnoses of cancer||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829597|NCT01227382|Secondary|Cholangioscopy Visualization Time|The portion of the total ERCP time spent on Cholangioscopy visualization.|30 minutes|Percentage of participants with accurate diagnoses of cancer||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829598|NCT01227382|Secondary|Total Cholangioscopy Time|This is the total time it takes for the dye to be performed during the ERCP.|60 minutes|Percentage of participants with accurate diagnoses of cancer||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829599|NCT01227382|Secondary|Total Procedure Time|The total time to perform ERCP|120 minutes|Percentage of participants with accurate diagnoses of cancer||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
829600|NCT01227382|Secondary|Procedure Technical Success|The procedure technical success was defined when all of the following criteria were met: Successful advancement of the cholangioscope to the desired target, adequate cholangioscopic visualization of the area of interest, and successful applications of of all sampling maneuvers with visible tissue seen macroscopically when obtaining mini forceps and standard forceps biopsy samples.|day 1|Percentage of participants with accurate diagnoses of cancer||participants|||Number
829601|NCT01227382|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Accurate Diagnoses of Cancer|The diagnostic accuracy of the Spybite Biopsy forceps was compared to both the cytology brush and the RJ3 biopsy forceps sampling of any stricture or biliary lesions found on Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). All three methods were used at baseline to obtain a sample for the determination of cancer vs. no cancer.|up to 7 days after the procedure|Percentage of participants with accurate diagnoses of cancer||percentage of accurate diagnoses|||Number
829603|NCT01227395|Secondary|Number of Participants That Responded to Azithromycin Treatment.|The physician performed efficacy evaluations at the end of the observation period (or the time of discontinuing administration), compared with the data before the start of administration of this drug, and entered the results.|9 years(MAX)|The efficacy analysis population basically consists of the evaluable cases in accordance with the separately prepared analysis plan (cases judged to have been evaluated appropriately).||participants|||Number
829604|NCT01227395|Primary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Allergies (Treatment).|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Azithromycin to determine whether with or without allergies is significant risk factor.|9 years(MAX)|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829605|NCT01227395|Primary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Renal Dysfunction (Treatment).|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Azithromycin to determine whether with or without renal dysfunction is significant risk factor.|9 years(MAX)|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829606|NCT01227395|Primary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Gender (Treatment).|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Azithromycin Tablets to determine whether male or female is significant risk factor.|9 years(MAX)|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829607|NCT01227395|Primary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Age (Treatment).|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Azithromycin to determine whether <65 years or >=65 years is significant risk factor.|9 years(MAX)|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829608|NCT01227395|Primary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Allergies (Prophylaxis).|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Azithromycin to determine whether with or without allergies is significant risk factor.|9 years(MAX)|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829609|NCT01227395|Primary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Renal Dysfunction (Prophylaxis).|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Azithromycin to determine whether with or without renal dysfunction is significant risk factor.|9 years(MAX)|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829610|NCT01227395|Primary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Concomitant Drugs (Prophylaxis).|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Azithromycin Tablets to determine whether with or without concomitant drugs is significant risk factor.|9 years(MAX)|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drugs was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829611|NCT01227395|Primary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Gender (Prophylaxis).|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Azithromycin Tablets to determine whether male or female is significant risk factor.|9 years(MAX)|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829612|NCT01227395|Primary|Risk Factors for the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events -Age (Prophylaxis).|Number of participants with Treatment Related Adverse Events(TRAEs) of Azithromycin to determine whether <65 years or >=65 years is significant risk factor.|9 years(MAX)|The safety analysis population consists of the cases that satisfy the cases conditions and in whom administration of this drug was confirmed.||participants|||Number
829613|NCT01227395|Primary|Number of Unlisted Treatment Related Adverse Events in Japanese Package Insert.|Adverse events mean all unfavorable events that occur in participants after administration of Azithromycin, irrespective of causal relationship to Azithromycin (including clinically problematic abnormal changes in laboratory test values). Number of Treatment Related Adverse Events were evaluated in company with the causal relationship to Azithromycin. Unlisted treatment related adverse events were confirmed with listed adverse drug reaction in Japanese package insert.|9 years(MAX)|No statistical analysis provided for the number of the unlisted treatment related adverse events in Japanese Package Insert.||Events|||Number
829614|NCT01227395|Primary|Number of Participants With the Frequency of Treatment Related Adverse Events.|Adverse events mean all unfavorable events that occur in participants after administration of Azithromycin, irrespective of causal relationship to Azithromycin (including clinically problematic abnormal changes in laboratory test values). Treatment related Adverse Events were evaluated in company with the causal relationship to Azithromycin.|9 years(MAX)|No statistical analysis provided for the frequency of treatment related adverse events.||participants|||Number
829615|NCT01227421|Secondary|Influenza Antibody Response: Seroprotection and Seroconversion for Influenza B|Proportion of patients seroprotected and seroconverted at day 28|28 days|Members of intensive virologic follow up group with laboratory confirmed Influenza B||Participants|||Number
829616|NCT01227421|Secondary|Influenza Antibody Response: Seroprotection and Seroconversion for Patients With Influenza A H3N2|Proportion of patients seroprotected and seroconverted at day 28|28 days|Members of intensive virologic follow up group with laboratory confirmed Influenza A H3N2||Participants|||Number
829617|NCT01227421|Secondary|Influenza Antibody Response: Seroprotection and Seroconversion for Patients With Influenza A 2009 H1N1|Proportion of patients seroprotected or seroconverted at day 28|28 days|Members of intensive virologic follow up group with laboratory confirmed Influenza A 2009 H1N1||Participants|||Number
829618|NCT01227421|Secondary|Influenza Antibody Response: Influenza B|Change in antibody titer for Influenza B|28 days|Members of intensive virologic follow up group with laboratory confirmed Influenza B||Fold change in antibody titer||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829619|NCT01227421|Secondary|Influenza Antibody Response: Influenza A H3N2|Change in antibody titer for Influenza A H3N2|28 days|Members of the intensive virologic follow up group with laboratory confirmed influenza A H3N2||Fold change in antibody titer||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829623|NCT01227421|Secondary|Symptom Severity Score Hours|Sum of the symptom severity score hours from first dose to resolution of symptoms. Patients rated each symptom's severity on a score from 0 to 3 (0=absent, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe). Total symptom severity score hours were calculated by multiplying the sum of the severity scores by duration of symptoms.|28 days|Analysis conducted for 257 patients with laboratory confirmed influenza||symptom score *hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
829624|NCT01227421|Secondary|Time to Return to Normal Daily Activities|Time in hours as reported by patient|28 days|Analysis conducted on 257 patients with laboratory confirmed influenza||Hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829625|NCT01227421|Secondary|Time to Cessation of Viral Shedding Measure by 50% Tissue Culture Infective Dose (TCID50)|Median time in hours|28 days|Analysis performed on 107 patients from the intensive virologic follow up population with laboratory confirmed influenza||Hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829626|NCT01227421|Secondary|Mean Change in RT-PCR (Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction) Viral Titer From Baseline|Change in viral titer logarithm with base 10 (log10) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA)copies|7 days|Analysis conducted on 113 patients from the intensive virologic follow up group with laboratory confirmed influenza||LOG10 RNA copies||Standard Deviation|Mean
829627|NCT01227421|Secondary|Mean Change (Standard Deviation)in 50% Tissue Culture Infective Dose (TCID50) Viral Titer From Baseline|Change in viral titer presented as logarithm with base 10 (log10) 50% Tissue Culture Infective Dose (TCID50)|7 days|Analysis conducted on 113 patients from intensive virologic follow up group with laboratory confirmed influenza||LOG10 Titer||Standard Deviation|Mean
829628|NCT01227421|Secondary|Time to Resolution of Each Individual Symptom of Influenza as Reported by the Subjects|Time in hours (Median and Interquartile range)|at least 28 days|624 patients were enrolled based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. Secondary efficacy analyses were conducted on the 257 patients with laboratory confirmed influenza.||Hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829629|NCT01227421|Primary|Time to Resolution of All Clinical Symptoms of Influenza as Reported by the Subjects|The primary efficacy analysis for this study was to demonstrate the efficacy of Nitazoxanide (NTZ) administered as 300 mg b.i.d. for 5 days or 600 mg b.i.d. for 5 days in reducing the time to resolution of all clinical symptoms of influenza in patients with laboratory confirmed influenza infection|Up to 28 days|624 patients were enrolled based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. The primary efficacy analysis was conducted on the 257 patients with laboratory confirmed influenza.||Hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829630|NCT01227434|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|The number of participants with protocol related toxicity described by CTCAE version 4.0|1-2 years|||participants|||Number
829631|NCT01227434|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Efficacy of the small molecule CDK4/6 inhibitor PD 0332991 in patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme or gliosarcoma who are Rb positive was measured by progression free survival. A total of 30 patients was intended to be treated; up to 15 patients were to undergo a planned, intended surgical resection and receive drug for 7 days prior to surgery, followed by drug after recovery from surgery; and up to 15 patients were to receive drug without a planned surgical procedure.|up to 142 weeks|||weeks||Full Range|Mean
829632|NCT01228591|Secondary|Subject Reported Vision at Initial Fit Using Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)|Vision at initial fit was assessed using a subjective vision questionnaire. The CLUE Questionnaire is a validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response with a range of 0 to 120.|Baseline|Subjects analyzed included only those who were enrolled and completed the study.||CLUE points||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829633|NCT01228591|Secondary|Contact Lens Comfort at Initial Fit Using Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)|Comfort was assessed using a subjective comfort questionnaire. The CLUE Questionnaire is a validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response. CLUE scores have a range of 0-120.|Baseline|Analysis was on those who were enrolled and completed the study.||CLUE points||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829634|NCT01228591|Secondary|Subject Reported Vision Using Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE).|Overall vision was assessed by a subjective vision questionnaire. The CLUE Questionnaire is a validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response with a range of 0 to 120.|1 week|Analysis was on those who were enrolled and completed the study.||CLUE points||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829635|NCT01228591|Secondary|Contact Lens Comfort Using Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)|The subjective comfort questionnaire CLUE, assesses the overall lens comfort. The CLUE Questionnaire is a validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response with a range of 0 to 120.|1 week|Analysis was on those who were enrolled and completed the study.||CLUE points||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829636|NCT01228591|Primary|Visual Acuity at Time of Initial Fit|Visual acuity will be measured using ETDRS visual acuity test. ETDRS stands for Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study.|After 10-15 minutes of lens wear|Analysis is conducted on those were enrolled and completed the trial.||LogMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829637|NCT01228591|Primary|Visual Acuity One Week After Lens Wear|Visual acuity was measured using ETDRS visual acuity test. ETDRS stands for Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study. Binocular and monocular measurements were collected.|1 week|Subjects analyzed were those who were enrolled, randomized, and completed the study. Both monocular and binocular measurements were taken and included in analysis.||LogMAR|Participants|Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829678|NCT01229150|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Time between the first day of treatment to the day of disease progression. Progressive disease is at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that's the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20% of at least 5mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more lesions is also considered progression).|2.1 to 4 months|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829643|NCT01228747|Secondary|Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizure Freedom Over the Evaluation Period|A subject with a non-missing weekly generalized tonic-clonic (GTC) baseline seizure frequency and a weekly GTC seizure frequency of zero throughout the Evaluation Period, is considered as a GTC seizure-free subject on the Evaluation Period.|Evaluation Period (Week 12 to Week 28)|Of the 226 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 205 are included in the analysis of this Outcome Measure.||participants|||Number
829644|NCT01228747|Secondary|Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizures 50 % Responder Rate (the Proportion of Subjects With 50 % or More Reduction From the Combined Baseline in the Frequency of Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizures) During the Evaluation Period|"A subject with an at least 50 % reduction in weekly generalized tonic-clonic (GTC) seizure frequency from Combined Baseline Period to the Evaluation Period is considered a GTC 50 % responder.
Combined Baseline means: a 4-week Retrospective Baseline + 4-week Prospective Baseline or 8-week Prospective Baseline"|From Baseline to Evaluation Period (Week 12 to Week 28)|Of the 226 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 205 are included in the analysis of this Outcome Measure.||participants|||Number
829645|NCT01228747|Secondary|Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizures 50 % Responder Rate (the Proportion of Subjects With 50 % or More Reduction From the Combined Baseline in the Frequency of Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizures) During the Treatment Period|"A subject with an at least 50 % reduction in weekly generalized tonic-clonic (GTC) seizure frequency from Combined Baseline Period to the Treatment Period is considered a GTC 50 % responder.
Combined Baseline means: a 4-week Retrospective Baseline + 4-week Prospective Baseline or 8-week Prospective Baseline"|From Baseline to Week 28|Full Analysis Set consisted of all subjects in the SS who had an evaluable Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline GTC seizure count data point for the primary efficacy analysis excluding those who had seriously violated GCP. Evaluable Baseline for the primary efficacy analysis: at least 1 GTC seizure was documented for the Combined Baseline.||participants|||Number
829646|NCT01228747|Secondary|The Percentage Change in Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizure Frequency Per Week From the Combined Baseline Over the Evaluation Period|"Percentage change in generalized tonic-clonic (GTC) seizure frequency per week from combined baseline B over the Evaluation Period A is calculated using the equation:
Percentage change from Baseline = ((A-B)/B)*100. Percentage change from baseline is not defined for subjects whose baseline Information is missing / unknown or equal to zero, or whose seizure frequency per week is missing / unknown. A negative value in change in generalized tonic-clonic (GTC) seizure frequency indicates a reduction of generalized tonic-clonic (GTC) seizure frequency.
Combined Baseline means: a 4-week Retrospective Baseline + 4-week Prospective Baseline or 8-week Prospective Baseline."|From Baseline to Evaluation Period (Week 12 to Week 28)|Of the 226 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 205 are included in the analysis of this Outcome Measure in Evaluation Period.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
829693|NCT01229397|Secondary|Number of Participants With Local and Systemic Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability||Solicited local and systemic AEs were collected from Day 1 (day of vaccination) to Day 4 inclusive using a subject diary|Safety population, all vaccinated subjects||participants|||Number
829647|NCT01228747|Primary|Percentage Change From the Combined Baseline in the Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizure Frequency Per Week Over the 28-week Treatment Period (Dose Adjustment + Evaluation Periods)|"Percentage change in generalized tonic-clonic (GTC) seizure frequency per week from Combined Baseline B over the Treatment Period A is calculated using the equation:
Percentage change from Baseline = ((A-B)/B)*100. Percentage change from baseline is not defined for subjects whose baseline information is missing / unknown or equal to zero, or whose seizure frequency per week is missing / unknown. A negative value in change in generalized tonic-clonic (GTC) seizure frequency indicates a reduction of generalized tonic-clonic (GTC) seizure frequency over the 28-week treatment Period.
Combined Baseline means: a 4-week Retrospective Baseline + 4-week Prospective Baseline or 8-week Prospective Baseline"|From Baseline to Week 28|Full Analysis Set consisted of all subjects in the SS who had an evaluable Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline GTC seizure count data point for the primary efficacy analysis excluding those who had seriously violated GCP. Evaluable Baseline for the primary efficacy analysis: at least 1 GTC seizure was documented for the Combined Baseline.||Percentage Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
829648|NCT01228903|Other Pre-specified|Change in Serum Uric Acid Levels From Baseline to Week 12|Serum uric acid levels were measured both at baseline and after 12 weeks|Baseline and 12 weeks|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829649|NCT01228903|Secondary|Change in Oxidized Low Density Lipoprotein From Baseline to Week 12||Baseline and 12 weeks|||u/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829650|NCT01228903|Secondary|Change in Monocyte Chemotactic Protein-1 From Baseline to Week 12||Baseline and 12 weeks|-4.7||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829651|NCT01228903|Secondary|Change in Serum Interleukin-6 From Baseline to Week 12||Baseline and 12 weeks|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829652|NCT01228903|Secondary|Change in C-reactive Protein From Baseline to Week 12||Baseline and 12 weeks|||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829653|NCT01228903|Primary|Change in Endothelial Dependent Dilation From Baseline to Week 12|Change in Endothelial Dependent Dilation measured by Flow Mediated Dilation at baseline and week 12|Baseline and 12 weeks|||% change||Standard Deviation|Mean
829654|NCT01228929|Primary|Change in Ocular Surface Temperature (OST)|Objectively evaluate the ocular surface temperature prior to and after 30 minutes of acclimation to three different environmental conditions in a controlled-environmental chamber using thermal imaging. 10 eyes were analyzed for each group.|baseline and 30 minutes|||degree celsius|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
829655|NCT01228968|Secondary|Subcutaneous Fat Volume With Manual Segmentation|This is the volume of Abdominal Subcutaneous Fat in cubic centimeters as determined with the older manual segmentation technique.|five minutes|||cubic centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
829656|NCT01228968|Primary|Visceral Fat Volume With Manual Segmentation|This is the measure of visceral fat found with our older manual segmentation method|five minutes|||cm3||Standard Deviation|Mean
829657|NCT01228968|Primary|Visceral Fat Volume With Automated Analysis|This is the measurement of Abdominal Visceral Fat in cubic centimeters as determined with a new automated segmentation program.|five minutes|||cubic centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
829658|NCT01228968|Secondary|Subcutaneous Fat Volume With Automated Analysis|This is the volume of Abdominal Subcutaneous Fat in cubic centimeters as determined with new automated anatomical segmentation software.|five minutes|||cubic centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
829659|NCT01229111|Secondary|Identification of Factors That Predict Survival|Factors that predict survival will be identified by Cox model or extended Cox model.|Up to three years|Statistically, due to the small sample size, analysis could not be done|||||
829660|NCT01229111|Secondary|Estimation of Overall Survival|Time of overall response|Up to 3 years|Patients that received treatment.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829661|NCT01229111|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|Time in months that evaluable subjects survived progression free|Up to 3 years|Patients that were evaluable for response||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829662|NCT01229111|Secondary|Tabulation of the Toxicity Profile of the Combination Therapy|Number of patients that experienced >/= grade 3 treatment related toxicities (definite, probable, possible).|Up to 3 years|All patients that received treatment drug||participants|||Number
829663|NCT01229111|Primary|The Response Rate of Patients Evaluated Using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1|The number of patients with a Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters; Progressive Disease (PD): At least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progressions); Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.|Up to 3 years|Patients that were evaluable||participants|||Number
829664|NCT01229150|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Underwent Mutational Analysis for Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (EGFR), Mitogen-activated Protein Kinase 1 (MEK 1), Proto-oncogene B-Raf (BRAF), and LKB1|Number of participants who underwent mutational analysis for EGFR, MEK 1, BRAF, and LKB1 was to be assessed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR).|At enrollment|Zero participants were analyzed because most of the immunohistochemistry (IHC) specialty assays (e.g. IHC, fluoresense in situ hybridization (FISH), polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were not available (still are not performed in path) and required funding for development that was not provided.|||||
829665|NCT01229150|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Overexpression of Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (EGFR) and c-MET|Number of participants with over expression of EGFR and c-MET was to be assessed by fluoresense in situ hybridization (FISH).|At enrollment|Zero participants were analyzed because most of the immunohistochemistry (IHC) specialty assays (e.g. IHC, fluoresense in situ hybridization (FISH), polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were not available (still are not performed in path) and required funding for development that was not provided.|||||
829666|NCT01229150|Other Pre-specified|Phospho-ERK (p-ERK), Phospho Protein Kinase B (p-AKt) and Phosphatase and Tensin Homolog (PTEN) Expression Testing|p-ERK, p-AKt and PTEN protein expression testing was to be assessed by immunohistochemistry.|At enrollment|Zero participants were analyzed because most of the immunohistochemistry (IHC) specialty assays (e.g. IHC, fluoresense in situ hybridization (FISH), polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were not available (still are not performed in path) and required funding for development that was not provided.|||||
829667|NCT01229150|Other Pre-specified|Change in Programmed Cell Death-1 (PD-1) Expression on Cluster of Differentiation 8 (CD8)+T Cells|Fold change from cycle 1 day 1 was determined by programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) expression on CD8+ T cells measured by the median channel number of fluorescence intensity.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-treatment with Cycle 1 Day 2 (1 day after starting treatment), and Cycle 1 Day 14 (2 weeks after starting treatment)|These are exploratory results and a normal range has not been defined for fold change. No participants were analyzed in the WT KRAS 1 cohort because no samples were available for analysis. Missing numbers in the other cohorts were either not drawn, misplaced or the samples were not viable.||Fold change||Standard Deviation|Mean
829668|NCT01229150|Other Pre-specified|Change in Programmed Cell Death-1 (PD-1) Expression on Tregs|Fold change from cycle 1 day 1 was determined by the PD-1 expression level on Tregs measured by the median channel number of fluorescence intensity.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-treatment with Cycle 1 Day 2 (1 day after starting treatment), and Cycle 1 Day 14 (2 weeks after starting treatment)|These are exploratory results and a normal range has not been defined for fold change. No participants were analyzed in the WT KRAS 1 cohort because no samples were available for analysis. Missing numbers in the other cohorts were either not drawn, misplaced or the samples were not viable.||Fold change||Standard Deviation|Mean
829669|NCT01229150|Other Pre-specified|Change in Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte Associated Protein 4 (CTLA-4) Expression on Tregs|The fold change from cycle 1 day 1 was determined by the level of CTLA-4 expression on Tregs measured by the median channel number of fluorescence intensity.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-treatment with Cycle 1 Day 2 (1 day after starting treatment), and Cycle 1 Day 14 (2 weeks after starting treatment)|These are exploratory results and a normal range has not been defined for fold change. No participants were analyzed in the WT KRAS 1 cohort because no samples were available for analysis. Missing numbers in the other cohorts were either not drawn, misplaced or the samples were not viable.||Fold change||Standard Deviation|Mean
829670|NCT01229150|Other Pre-specified|Change in T Cell Immunoglobulin Mucin 3 (TIM-3) on Tregs|Fold change from cycle 1 day 1 was determined by TIM-3 expression level on Tregs measured by the median channel number of fluorescence intensity.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-treatment with Cycle 1 Day 2 (1 day after starting treatment), and Cycle 1 Day 14 (2 weeks after starting treatment)|These are exploratory results and a normal range has not been defined for fold change. No participants were analyzed in the WT KRAS 1 cohort because no samples were available for analysis. Missing numbers in the other cohorts were either not drawn, misplaced or the samples were not viable.||Fold change||Standard Deviation|Mean
829671|NCT01229150|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Changes in a Tumor's MIB-1 (Ki-67) Rate|Changes in a tumor's MIB-1 (Ki-67) rate was to be assessed by immunohistochemistry.|At enrollment|Tumor MIB-1 (Ki-67) rate testing was not done because it was too costly.|||||
829672|NCT01229150|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Reduction in Phosphorylated Extracellular Signal-Regulated Kinases (p-ERK) in Lymphocytes|Level of p-ERK was measured by the median channel cumber of fluorescence intensity. Data are relative to the level before therapy begins(C1D1).Then we see what the level was after therapy & compare. Every value after therapy is compared to pre-therapy, & every patient is their own control. To do that, we make C1D1 equal to 1 for every patient & then compare the pERK level after therapy by looking at the fold change in pERK level.|Cycle 1 Day 1 pre-treatment with Cycle 1 Day 2 (1 day after starting treatment), and Cycle 1 Day 14 (2 weeks after starting treatment)|Re: number of participants analyzed: Samples were either not drawn or could not be located. WT KRAS 1/WT KRAS 2 are missing because the effect of treatment on the Ras-Raf-MEK-ERK pathway as measured by a reduction in phosphorylated extracellular signal-regulated kinases (p-ERK) in lymphocytes was evaluated in patients with KRAS-mutated tumors only.||participants|||Number
829673|NCT01229150|Secondary|Percentage of Th17 in Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4)+T Cells at Baseline in Relation to Response|First the number of T cells that are CD4+ is determined by staining with an antibody to CD4 and measured in a flow cytometer. Then the number of Th17+ cells is determined by staining with an antibody to IL-17 and measured in a flow cytometer. Then the percentage of CD4+ cells that are also Th17 cells is determined as a simple ratio, i.e. Th17cells/CD4 cells. This ratio is reported here for each category of KRAS mutation status for whom we had patients.|Pretreatment - Cycle 1 Day 1|No participants were analyzed in the WT KRAS 1 cohort because no samples were available for analysis. For all other cohorts, the numbers analyzed indicates some samples were either not drawn or could not be located.||Percentage of Th17 in CD4+T Cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
829674|NCT01229150|Secondary|Overall Survival|Time between the first day of treatment to the time of death.|Up to 26 months|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829675|NCT01229150|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control/Stabilization|Disease control/stabilization is the percentage of participants with partial response (PR) + complete response (CR) + stable disease (SD). Partial response is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Complete response is disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10mm. Stable disease is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease (at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progressions.), taking as reference the smallest sum diameters.|3 cycles or up to 84 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829676|NCT01229150|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For the detailed list of adverse events see the adverse event module.|42 months|The combination of toxicities allows for a more robust understanding of the combined therapy toxicities. The dosage of the combination of erlotinib plus AZD6244 was the same whether the pt has a KRAS mutation versus KRAS wild type. KRAS is a molecular mutation and does not change whether or not a pt has toxicities to the combination of therapies.||Participants|||Number
829677|NCT01229150|Primary|Objective Response|Objective response is complete response + partial response. Complete response is disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10mm. Partial response is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|Up to 37 months|There were no partial or complete responses in the KRAS mut 1 arm.||participants|||Number
829679|NCT01229176|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Solicited Local and Systemic Reaction, After Any Vaccination|"Solicited local reactions were: Adults, children, older infants, infants: erythema, induration and pain/tenderness at the injection site.
Solicited systemic reactions were: Adults: chills, malaise, myalgia, arthralgia, headache, fatigue, rash and fever.
Children, older infants and infants: lethargy, irritability, vomiting, diarrhoea, loss of appetite, rash and fever (and persistent crying in infants)."|During the 7-day follow-up period after vaccination|Analysis was done on as treated safety population.||participants|||Number
829680|NCT01229176|Primary|Anti-Vi ELISA GMC||At 6 months after last vaccination|Intention-to-treat analysis set||ELISA Units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
829681|NCT01229176|Primary|Anti-Vi ELISA Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC)||At 28 days after last vaccination|Intention-to-treat analysis set||ELISA Units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
829682|NCT01229176|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least 4-fold Increase in Anti-Vi ELISA Titer||At 6 months after last vaccination as compared to baseline|Intention-to-treat analysis set||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829683|NCT01229176|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least 4-fold Increase in Anti-Vi Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) Titer||At 28 days after last vaccination as compared to baseline|Intention-to-treat analysis set, which included all participants who received the vaccination, those in whom at least one post-vaccination blood sample was collected, and those for whom at least one ELISA result was available.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829684|NCT01229228|Primary|Analysis of Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) Over 0 to 12 Hours (TOTPAR-12) After Time 0|"Total pain relief as computed as a time-weighted sum of individual patient pain relief scores at each timepoint from 0-12 hours.
Values for TOTPAR are measured from 0 to 4 on the Pain Relief Scale 0 None Min; 1 A little; 2 Some; 3 A lot; 4 Complete Max
The TOTPAR is a weighted measure of the observations; the minimum possible value is 0 and the maximum possible value is 60."|Over 0 to 12 Hours|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829685|NCT01229254|Secondary|Steady-state C12 hr on Days 14, 18, and 21 After Weight and Amiodarone-based Dosing|Betrixaban PK concentration at 12 hr on Days 14, 18, and 21 in amiodarone, low and high weight groups|Days 14, 18, and 21 of the PK period|Full Analysis Set population, which includes all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment within 24 hours prior to steady-state (SS) blood sampling, were ≥ 90% compliant with treatment, and had at least one post SS sample. The endpoint was to summarize the SS C12 hr concentration across treatments and time points as a single arm.||ng/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Least Squares Mean
829686|NCT01229254|Primary|Steady-state C12 hr on Days 14, 18, and 21 After Weight-based Dosing|Betrixaban PK concentration at 12 hr on Days 14, 18, and 21 in low and high weight groups|Days 14, 18, and 21 of the PK period|Per protocol analysis set, which includes all allocated patients who received at least one dose of study treatment and who were ≥ 90% compliant with study treatment, took study treatment within 24 hours prior to steadystate blood sampling, had at least two post steady-state blood samples collected, and not on amiodarone.||ng/mL||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Least Squares Mean
829687|NCT01229371|Primary|Immunogenicity - Seroconversion Rate|"The primary endpoints were the immunogenicity parameters for HA assessed via hemagglutinin inhibition method (HI). These parameters were analyzed according to the EMA Note for guidance on harmonisation of requirements for influenza vaccines, 1997 and they were the following: 1. Seroprotection rate, defined as proportion of subjects with HI antibody titer ≥1:40, 2. Seroconversion rate, defined as proportion of subjects with ≥4-fold increase in HI antibody titer and with a titer of ≥1:40, 3. GMT of HI antibodies and fold-increase in GMT"|3 weeks after vaccination (Day 22 ± 2 days)|Intent-to-treat population, vaccinated subjects with available pre- and post-vaccination titers||percentage subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829688|NCT01229371|Primary|Immunogenicity - Seroprotection Rate|"The primary endpoints were the immunogenicity parameters for HA assessed via hemagglutinin inhibition method (HI). These parameters were analyzed according to the EMA Note for guidance on harmonisation of requirements for influenza vaccines, 1997 and they were the following: 1. Seroprotection rate, defined as proportion of subjects with HI antibody titer ≥1:40, 2. Seroconversion rate, defined as proportion of subjects with ≥4-fold increase in HI antibody titer and with a titer of ≥1:40, 3. GMT of HI antibodies and fold-increase in GMT"|3 weeks after vaccination (Day 22 ± 2 days)|Intent-to-treat population, vaccinated subjects with available pre- and post-vaccination titers||percentage subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829689|NCT01229371|Secondary|Number of Participants With Local and Systemic Adverse Events|"Solicited local and systemic AEs, Unsolicited AEs, Tolerability and acceptability
Unsolicited AEs were collected from baseline (Day 1) to 3 weeks after vaccination (Day 22 ± 2 days).
Solicited local and systemic AEs were collected by subjects diary from Day 1 (day of vaccination) to Day 4"|Baseline (Day 1) and 3 weeks after vaccination (Day 22 ± 2 days)|Safety population, all vaccinated subjects||participants|||Number
829690|NCT01229371|Primary|Immunogenicity - Geometric Mean Titer Fold Increase From Baseline|"The primary endpoints were the immunogenicity parameters for HA assessed via hemagglutinin inhibition method (HI). These parameters were analyzed according to the EMA Note for guidance on harmonisation of requirements for influenza vaccines, 1997 and they were the following: 1. Seroprotection rate, defined as proportion of subjects with HI antibody titer ≥1:40, 2. Seroconversion rate, defined as proportion of subjects with ≥4-fold increase in HI antibody titer and with a titer of ≥1:40, 3. GMT of HI antibodies and fold-increase in GMT"|3 weeks after vaccination (Day 22 ± 2 days)|Intent-to-treat population, vaccinated subjects with available pre- and post-vaccination titers||GMT fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829691|NCT01229397|Primary|Immunogenicity of a Single Full (0.5 mL) Dose and a 0.25 mL 2-dose Regimen of Inflexal V, Using the EMA Guideline for the Re-registration of the Seasonal Influenza Vaccine in Adults (Aged ≥18 to ≤60 Years) as Reference|GMT-fold increase - calculated as the GMT on Day 22 divided by the baseline GMT value|This assesment was done for immunogenicity data collected at Day 29 after completion of designated vaccination regimen|Intention to treat population, vaccinated subjects with available pre- and post-vaccination titers||Fold (ratio)||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829692|NCT01229397|Primary|Immunogenicity of a Single Full (0.5 mL) Dose and a 0.25 mL 2-dose Regimen of Inflexal V, Using the EMA Guideline for the Re-registration of the Seasonal Influenza Vaccine in Adults (Aged ≥18 to ≤60 Years) as Reference|Seroconversion rate|This assesment was done for immunogenicity data collected at Day 29 after completion of designated vaccination regimen|Intention to treat population, vaccinated subjects with available pre- and post-vaccination titers||percentage subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829694|NCT01229397|Primary|Immunogenicity of a Single Full (0.5 mL) Dose and a 0.25 mL 2-dose Regimen of Inflexal V, Using the EMA Guideline for the Re-registration of the Seasonal Influenza Vaccine in Adults (Aged ≥18 to ≤60 Years) as Reference|Seroprotection rate|This assesment was done for immunogenicity data collected at Day 29 after completion of designated vaccination regimen|Intention to treat population, vaccinated subjects with available pre- and post-vaccination titers||percentage subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829695|NCT01229410|Secondary|Percentage of Patient Samples With Plasma Levels of Brimonidine Below the Limit of Quantitation (BLQ)|Percentage of patient samples with plasma levels of brimonidine reported as BLQ (i.e., too low to be determined using standard methods). Plasma is the fluid portion of the blood.|60 Days|Per Protocol: all subjects with qualified pharmacokinetic samples||Percentage of Patient Samples|Participants||Number
829696|NCT01229410|Secondary|Highest Aqueous Humor Level of Brimonidine in the Study Eye|The highest level of brimonidine measured in the aqueous humor of the study eye in any patient is reported for each treatment arm. The aqueous humor is the clear fluid in the chamber of the eye between the cornea and the lens.|60 Days|Per Protocol: all subjects with pharmacokinetic data available||Nanogram/milliliter (ng/mL)|||Number
829697|NCT01229410|Primary|Highest Vitreous Humor Level of Brimonidine in the Study Eye|The highest level of brimonidine measured in the vitreous humor of the study eye in any patient is reported for each treatment arm. The vitreous humor is the clear gel that fills the space between the lens and the retina of the eye.|60 Days|Per Protocol: all subjects with pharmacokinetic data available||Nanogram/milliliter (ng/mL)|||Number
829698|NCT01229423|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Satisfied With Treatment at Week 20|Percentage of subjects satisfied with treatment at week 20 was assessed using the Treatment Satisfaction Scale response to the question “Which best describes your satisfaction with LATISSE®?” Responses were “very satisfied”, “satisfied”, “neutral”, “unsatisfied”, and “very unsatisfied.” Satisfied is defined as responses of “very satisfied” and “satisfied.”|Week 20|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) included all patients enrolled in the trial who received at least one application of study drug.||Percentage of Subjects|||Number
829699|NCT01229423|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With an Improvement in Satisfaction With Overall Eyelash Prominence at Week 20|Percentage of subjects with an improvement in satisfaction with overall eyelash prominence at Week 20. Subject satisfaction with overall eyelash prominence was assessed by response to the question “Overall how satisfied are you with your eyelashes?” Responses were based on a 5-point scale (“very unsatisfied”, “unsatisfied”, “neutral”, “satisfied”, “very satisfied”). Improvement in subject satisfaction is defined as a 1-point increase from baseline.|Week 20|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) included all patients enrolled in the trial who received at least one application of study drug.||Percentage of Subjects|||Number
829700|NCT01229423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Eyelash Intensity (Darkness) at Week 20|Change from baseline in eyelash intensity (darkness) at Week 20. Assessments made were based on the mean eyelash intensity of the upper left and right eyelashes. Intensity was measured on a scale ranging from 0 (black) to 255 (white). A negative change from baseline indicates eyelash darkening in color, and a positive change from baseline indicates eyelash lightening in color.|Baseline, Week 20|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) included all patients enrolled in the trial who received at least one application of study drug.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829701|NCT01229423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Eyelash Thickness at Week 20|Change from baseline in eyelash thickness at Week 20. Assessments made were based on the mean thickness of the upper left and right eyelashes. A positive change from baseline indicates an increase in eyelash thickness, and a negative change from baseline indicates a decrease in eyelash thickness.|Baseline, Week 20|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) included all patients enrolled in the trial who received at least one application of study drug.||Millimeters Squared (mm^2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
829702|NCT01229423|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With an Improvement of at Least 1-Point in Global Eyelash Assessment (GEA) Score at Week 20|Percentage of subjects with an improvement of at least 1-point in GEA score at Week 20 from baseline. The GEA scale is an investigator-graded 4-point scale of overall eyelash prominence where 1=minimal, 2=moderate, 3=marked, and 4=very marked prominence.|Week 20|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) included all patients enrolled in the trial who received at least one application of study drug.||Percentage of Subjects|||Number
829703|NCT01229423|Primary|Change From Baseline in Eyelash Length at Week 20|Change from baseline in eyelash length at Week 20. Measurements made were based on the mean length of the upper left and right eyelashes. A positive change from baseline indicates an increase in eyelash length, and a negative change from baseline indicates a decrease in eyelash length.|Baseline, Week 20|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) included all patients enrolled in the trial who received at least one application of study drug.||Millimeter (mm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
829704|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 180 After Last Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 180 after the last injection, where last injection was a maximum up to fourth injection for a finger. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 180 after last injection|FAS: participants who received >= 1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829705|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 90 After Last Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 90 after the last injection, where last injection was a maximum up to fourth injection for a finger. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 90 after last injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829706|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 30 After Fourth Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 30 after fourth injection for fingers that received 4 injections. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 30 after fourth injection|FAS: participants who received >= 1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829707|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 7 After Fourth Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 7 after fourth injection for fingers that received 4 injections. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 7 after fourth injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829708|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 1 After Fourth Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 1 after fourth injection for fingers that received 4 injections. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 1 after fourth injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829709|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 30 After Third Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 30 after third injection for fingers that received 3 injections. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 30 after third injection|FAS: participants who received >= 1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829710|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 7 After Third Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 7 after third injection for fingers that received 3 injections. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 7 after third injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829711|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 1 After Third Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 1 after third injection for fingers that received 3 injections. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 1 after third injection|FAS: participants who received >= 1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829712|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 30 After Second Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 30 after second injection for fingers that received 2 injections. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 30 after second injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829728|NCT01229436|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA)|Human serum ADA samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-clostridial type I collagenase (AUX-I) and anti-clostridial type II collagenase (AUX-II) antibodies by using the semi-quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|Screening, Follow-up Day 180 after last injection|Safety set included all participants who received at least 1 injection of Xiapex. 'Number of participants' analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||participants|||Number
829713|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 7 After Second Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 7 after second injection for fingers that received 2 injections. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 7 after second injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829714|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 1 After Second Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 1 after second injection for fingers that received 2 injections. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 1 after second injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829715|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 30 After First Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 30 after first injection for fingers that received 1 injection. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 30 after first injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829716|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 7 After First Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 7 after first injection for fingers that received 1 injection. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 7 after first injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829717|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 1 After First Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. TPED was reported at Day 1 after first injection for fingers that received 1 injection. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Day 1 after first injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829718|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Baseline for Fourth Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. Baseline value for fourth injection was the TPED value taken closest and prior to the administration of fourth injection. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Baseline for fourth injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829719|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Baseline for Third Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. Baseline value for third injection was the TPED value taken closest and prior to the administration of third injection. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Baseline for third injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N’ (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual ‘N’ for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829746|NCT01229735|Secondary|Median Percent Reduction in the Weekly Partial Onset Seizure (POS) Frequency From Baseline During the Total Treatment Period From Baseline to Week 52|Reduction from baseline was defined as baseline value minus post-baseline value and therefore is the negative of the change from baseline value.|From Baseline to Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all subjects in the Safety Set (SS) who returned at least 1 postbaseline seizure diary.||percent reduction||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829720|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Baseline for Second Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of PED in the MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. Baseline value for second injection was the TPED value taken closest and prior to the administration of second injection. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Baseline for second injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual ‘N’ for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829721|NCT01229436|Secondary|Number of Days as Assessed Using Dupuytren's Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) Questionnaire|Dupuytren's HCRU is a questionnaire used to assess healthcare usage in participants. Participants answered how many days since their last visit they 1) were hospitalized, 2) were in nursing home, 3) required aids/devices to assist in their daily functioning.|Baseline for cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; C1D7, C1D30, C2D7, C2D30, C3D7, C3D30, C4D7, C4D30, C5D7, C5D30; Follow-up Day 90, 180 after last injection|FAS population. ‘Number of participants’ analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points. Data for number of days was not analyzed for participants who responded that they did not perform the event.||days||Full Range|Median
829722|NCT01229436|Secondary|Number of Events Including Visits, Surgeries, Tests or Devices as Assessed Using Dupuytren's Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) Questionnaire|Dupuytren's HCRU is a questionnaire used to assess healthcare usage in participants. Participants answered how many times since their last visit they 1) had seen any doctor, 2) used any services (including physical or hand therapy, occupational therapy, home health care therapy), 3) were treated in emergency room, 4) had outpatient/day-case surgery, 5) were hospitalized, 6) had diagnostic/therapeutic procedures or tests performed.|Baseline for cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; C1D7, C1D30, C2D7, C2D30, C3D7, C3D30, C4D7, C4D30, C5D7, C5D30; Follow-up Day 90, 180 after last injection|FAS population. 'Number of participants' analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points. Data for number of events was not analyzed for participants who responded that they did not perform the event.||events||Full Range|Median
829723|NCT01229436|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response Assessed on Dupuytren's Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) Questionnaire|Dupuytren's HCRU is a questionnaire used to assess healthcare usage in participants. Participants answered whether or not since their last visit they 1) had seen any doctor, 2) used any services (including physical or hand therapy, occupational therapy, home health care therapy), 3) were treated in emergency room, 4) had outpatient/day-case surgery, 5) were hospitalized, 6) had diagnostic/therapeutic procedures or tests performed, 7) were admitted in nursing home, 8) required aids/devices to assist in their daily functioning.|Baseline for cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; C1D7, C1D30, C2D7, C2D30, C3D7, C3D30, C4D7, C4D30, C5D7, C5D30; Follow-up Day 90, 180 after last injection|FAS: participants who received >= 1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||participants|||Number
829724|NCT01229436|Secondary|Hand Functionality: Unite Rhumatologique Des Affections de la Main (URAM) Scale Total Score|URAM:9-item questionnaire used to assess daily hand functionality.Participants rated their ability to perform following hand functionalities on 0 to 5 scale(0=without difficulty,5=impossible):1)washing themselves with flannel, keeping hand flat,2)washing face,3)holding bottle in one hand,4)shaking someone's hand,5)stroking/caressing someone,6)clapping,7)spreading out fingers, 8)leaning on hand,9)picking up small objects with thumb and index finger.URAM total score=sum of 9 items.Total score range=0 to 45,where higher score= higher difficulty in daily hand functionality.For each cycle, baseline value=pre-injection value reported at that cycle. For follow-up on Day 90,180 after last injection, baseline value (follow-up baseline)=pre-injection value reported at cycle 1. If response was provided to less than or equal to 4 items,URAM total score was considered missing. If response was provided to >=5 items, then average score of answered questions was imputed response to missing questions.|Baseline for cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; C1D30, C2D30, C3D30, C4D30, C5D30; Follow-up Day 90, 180 after last injection|FAS population. 'Number of participants' analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
829725|NCT01229436|Secondary|Time to Recovery|Time to recovery of normal activities was defined as median number of days between the initial injection date and the date on which participant recovered to normal activities, assessed after first, second and third injection for joints that received 1 through 3 injections. If a participant did not achieve recovery to normal activities, the participant's time to recovery was defined as the median number of days between the initial injection date and the date of the participant's the last daily diary recording within the cycle.|Up to Day 30 after first, second and third injection|FAS population. 'Number of participants' analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829726|NCT01229436|Secondary|Number of Days Assessed on Dupuytren’s Treatment Assessment Daily Diary Questionnaire|Dupuytren's daily diary questionnaire assessed number of days during a cycle when 1) participant was absent or sick due to treatment, 2) the work hours were reduced, 3) the job duties were modified, 4) participant was unable to participate in hobbies and 5) participant wore a splint (for participants who were fitted for a splint).|C1D1 to C1D30, C2D1 to C2D30, C3D1 to C3D30, C4D1 to C4D30, C5D1 to C5D30|FAS population. 'Number of participants' analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||days||Full Range|Median
829727|NCT01229436|Secondary|Number of Days of Concomitant Pain Medication Usage|Amount of concomitant pain medication was assessed as the number of days participants used pain medication during the study.|Screening up to Day 180 after last injection|Safety set included all participants who received at least 1 injection of Xiapex. 'Number of participants' analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||days||Full Range|Median
829729|NCT01229436|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Laboratory Abnormalities|Following parameters were analyzed for laboratory examination: hematology (hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell count, platelet count, white blood cell count, total neutrophils, eosinophils, monocytes, basophils, lymphocytes); blood chemistry (blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, glucose, calcium, sodium, potassium, chloride, total bicarbonate, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, uric acid albumin, total protein); urinalysis (decimal logarithm of reciprocal of hydrogen ion activity [pH], glucose, protein, blood, ketones, microscopy[if urine tested positive for blood or protein]).|Screening up to Day 180 after last injection|Safety set included all participants who received at least 1 injection of Xiapex.||participants|||Number
829730|NCT01229436|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Change From Baseline in Vital Signs|Following parameters were analyzed for examination of vital signs: systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, radial pulse and body temperature.|Screening up to Day 180 after last injection|Safety set included all participants who received at least 1 injection of Xiapex.||participants|||Number
829731|NCT01229436|Secondary|Number of Participants With Type of Concomitant Pain Medication Used|Number of participants who took different types of analgesic medications, including acetylsalicylic acid, other analgesics (any other analgesic besides those mentioned, as approved by the investigator), aporex, codis, dihydrocodeine, fentanyl, galenic/paracetamol/codeine/, hot coldrex, metamizole, morphine, oxycodone, panadeine CO (combination of paracetamol and codeine phosphate), paracetamol, paramol-118, pregabalin, solpadeine, tramadol, ultracet, to manage pain symptoms were reported. A single participant may be represented in more than 1 category.|Screening up to Day 180 after last injection|Safety set included all participants who received at least 1 injection of Xiapex.||participants|||Number
829732|NCT01229436|Secondary|Physician Global Assessment of Treatment Satisfaction and Disease Severity|Physician global assessment questionnaire assessed severity of the contracture at baseline, post-injection and TS, improvement from baseline in the treated contracture at post-injection only. Physician’s rated disease severity as normal (no contracture), mild, moderate or severe. Overall satisfaction was rated as very satisfied, satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. Physicians rated participant's improvement in disease severity relative to baseline as very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse or very much worse.|Baseline for cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; cycle 1 Day 30 (C1D30), C2D30, C3D30, C4D30, C5D30; Follow-up (FU) Day 90, 180 after last injection|FAS: participants who received >= 1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||participants|||Number
829733|NCT01229436|Secondary|Participant Global Assessment of Treatment Satisfaction and Disease Severity|Participant global assessment questionnaire assessed severity of the contracture at baseline, post-injection and treatment satisfaction (TS), improvement from baseline in the treated contracture at post-injection only. Participants rated disease severity as normal (no contracture), mild, moderate or severe. Overall satisfaction was rated as very satisfied, satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. Participants rated their improvement in disease severity relative to baseline on a 11-point scale ranging from 0 percent (%) = no improvement to 100% = total recovery, with 10 % increment between each point. Results are reported for number of participants in each category for disease severity, TS and improvement.|Baseline for cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; Cycle 1 Day 30 (C1D30), C2D30, C3D30, C4D30, C5D30; Follow-up (FU) Day 90, 180 after last injection|FAS: participants who received >= 1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points.||participants|||Number
829734|NCT01229436|Secondary|Range of Motion (ROM) for Metacarpophalangeal (MP) and Proximal Interphalangeal (PIP) Joints|Finger goniometry was used to measure the angles of extension and flexion of MP and PIP joints. ROM was measured as the difference between the angle of flexion and the angle of extension of the joint. For each injection, baseline value was the ROM value taken closest and prior to administration of that particular injection. For follow-up on Day 90 and 180 after last injection, baseline value (follow-up baseline) was the ROM value taken closest and prior to administration of first injection in that joint. ROM was reported at Day 1, 7 and 30 after each injection for joints that received 1 through 3 injections and at Day 90 and 180 after the last injection, where last injection was a maximum up to third injection for a joint. 'Number of joints analyzed' signifies total number of MP and PIP joints analyzed for this outcome measure and 'n' signifies number of joints evaluable for this measure at given time points for the mentioned joint.|Baseline for first, second, third injection; Day 1, 7, 30 after first, second, third injection; Follow-up Day 90, 180 after last injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829735|NCT01229436|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Passive Extension Deficit (PED) for Metacarpophalangeal (MP) and Proximal Interphalangeal (PIP) Joints at Day 1, 7 and 30 After First, Second and Third Injection, Day 90 and 180 After Last Injection|PED was measured in MP and PIP joints using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. For each injection, baseline value was the PED value taken closest and prior to administration of that particular injection. For follow-up on Day 90 and 180 after last injection, baseline value (follow-up baseline) was the PED value taken closest and prior to administration of first injection in that joint. Change in PED was reported at Day 1, 7 and 30 after each injection for joints that received 1 through 3 injections and at Day 90 and 180 after the last injection, where last injection was a maximum up to third injection for a joint. 'Number of joints analyzed' signifies total number of MP and PIP joints analyzed for this outcome measure and 'n' signifies number of joints evaluable for this measure at given time points for the mentioned joint.|Baseline for first, second, third injection; Day 1, 7, 30 after first, second, third injection; Follow-up Day 90, 180 after last injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829736|NCT01229436|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Day 1, 7 and 30 After First, Second, Third and Fourth Injection, Day 90 and 180 After Last Injection|TPED was defined as sum of PED in MP, PIP and DIP joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. For each injection, baseline value was TPED value taken closest and prior to administration of that particular injection. Baseline value after first injection was also considered as baseline for follow-up on Day 90, 180 after last injection (follow-up baseline). Change in TPED was reported at Day 1, 7 and 30 after each injection for fingers that received 1 through 4 injections and at Day 90, 180 after last injection, where last injection was a maximum up to fourth injection for a finger. Results are not reported for fifth injection as no finger received 5 injections. 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Baseline for first, second, third, fourth injection; Day 1, 7, 30 after first, second, third, fourth injection; Follow-up Day 90, 180 after last injection|FAS population. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS,however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis. Here, 'n' signifies number of fingers/joints evaluable for this outcome measure at given time points.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829737|NCT01229436|Secondary|Passive Extension Deficit (PED) for Metacarpophalangeal (MP) and Proximal Interphalangeal (PIP) Joints|PED was measured in MP and PIP joints using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. For each injection, baseline value was the PED value taken closest and prior to administration of that particular injection. For follow-up on Day 90 and 180 after last injection, baseline value (follow-up baseline) was the PED value taken closest and prior to administration of first injection in that joint. PED was reported at Day 1, 7 and 30 after each injection for joints that received 1 through 3 injections and at Day 90 and 180 after the last injection, where last injection was a maximum up to third injection for a joint. 'Number of joints analyzed' signifies total number of MP and PIP joints analyzed for this outcome measure and 'n' signifies number of joints evaluable for this measure at given time points for the mentioned joint.|Baseline for first, second, third injection; Day 1, 7, 30 after first, second, third injection; Follow-up: Day 90, 180 after last injection|FAS: participants who received >=1 injection of Xiapex, had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment, whether goniometric or participant-reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual 'N' for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829738|NCT01229436|Primary|Total Passive Extension Deficit (TPED) at Baseline for First Injection|TPED was defined as the sum of passive extension deficits (PED) in the MP, PIP and distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints. PED was measured using finger goniometry. Passive extension=angle of the joint (MP or PIP or DIP) when the finger was passively extended as far possible toward the normal extension. PED=angle of deficit from normal extension. Baseline value for first injection was the TPED value taken closest and prior to the administration of first injection. Baseline value after first injection was also considered as baseline for follow-up on Day 90, 180 after last injection (follow-up baseline). 'Number of fingers/joints analyzed' signifies total number of fingers/joints that were evaluable for this outcome measure.|Baseline for first injection|Full analysis set(FAS):participants who received at least (>=)1 injection of Xiapex,had >=1 post-injection efficacy assessment(goniometric/participant-reported). 'N’(number of participants analyzed) includes total number of participants in FAS, however actual ‘N’ for this outcome is unknown as these data were not calculated as per planned analysis.||degrees|Participants|Full Range|Median
829739|NCT01229462|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Diurnal Intraocular Pressure (IOP) in the Study Eye at Week 4|Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured in the study eye at baseline and Week 4. IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement).|Baseline, Week 4|Intent-to-treat population consisted of all randomized participants.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
829740|NCT01229527|Secondary|Patient's Satisfaction|The degree of satisfaction about the quality of sedation was measured with VAS (Visual Analog Scale) where 0 means no satisfaction and 100 means maximum satisfaction.|After the end of colonoscopy (when patients were completely awake) and 24 h after the procedure via telephone|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829741|NCT01229527|Primary|Discharge Time, the Time to Reach a Modified Aldrete Score ≥18|Ten key parameters (Activity, Respiration, Circulation, Consciousness, O2 Saturation, Dressing, Pain, Ambulation, Fasting-feeding, Urine Output)are included in the Modified Aldrete Score. The maximum and minimum score for each parameter is respectively 2 and 0. The maximum total score is 20 and patient can be discharged when the total score is ≥18.|> 0 minutes|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829742|NCT01229722|Primary|Pill Count|During the clinic visits ever 3 weeks over the course of the study, participants will be asked to bring all their pill bottles and count the contents of each bottle with assistance from the study coordinator. This count will be compared with the refill history for that patient from the pharmacy in order to get a sense of how many pills they have taken.|every 3 weeks, for the 6 month duration of the third user study, from October 2011 through March 2012||||||
829743|NCT01229722|Primary|Self-Report|During the clinic visits ever 3 weeks over the course of the study, participants will be asked to recall what pills they took and what they missed.|every 3 weeks, for the 6 month duration of the third user study, from October 2011 through March 2012||||||
829744|NCT01229722|Primary|Adherence to Anti-retroviral Therapy|MEMS pill caps or boxes will be used to monitor adherence. Each participant will place the drug containing the protease inhibitor, or, if no such drug is being taken, the drug with the highest dosing frequency, inside of a MEMS device, which automatically records each time the pillbox was opened. Participants will bring this to the clinic during their regularly scheduled visits, and those daily measurements will be downloaded to a clinic machine.|daily, for the 6 month duration of the third user study, from October 2011 through March 2012|||percentage adherence||Standard Deviation|Mean
829745|NCT01229735|Secondary|Responders Defined as Number of Subjects With at Least 50 % Reduction in the Weekly POS Frequency From Baseline During the Total Treatment Period From Baseline to Week 52||From Baseline to Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all subjects in the SS who returned at least 1 postbaseline seizure diary.||responders|||Number
829747|NCT01229735|Secondary|Time From the First Study Treatment Intake to Drug Discontinuation Due to Adverse Event (AE)||From Baseline to Week 52|The Safety Set (SS) consists of all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 (partial) dose of study medication.||month||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829748|NCT01229735|Secondary|Number of Subjects With at Least One Adverse Event Reported During the Trial Period From Baseline to Week 52||From Baseline to Week 52|The Safety Set (SS) consists of all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 (partial) dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
829749|NCT01229735|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Continuing the Allocated Investigational Treatment From the First Study Treatment Intake to Week 52, After the Beginning of Investigational Treatment With Levetiracetam Compared to Topiramate||From Baseline to Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all subjects in the Safety Set who returned at least 1 post-baseline seizure diary.||percentage of subjects|||Number
829750|NCT01229891|Secondary|Serum High Density Lipoprotein (HDL)||12-week|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829751|NCT01229891|Secondary|Serum Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL)||12-week|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829752|NCT01229891|Secondary|Serum Total Cholesterol (Tchol)||12-week|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829753|NCT01229891|Secondary|Serum Triglyceride (TG)||12-week|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829754|NCT01229891|Secondary|Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)||12-week|||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
829755|NCT01229891|Secondary|Insulin|fasting serum insulin concentration|12-week|||mU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829756|NCT01229891|Secondary|Fasting Serum Glucose (FSG)||12-week|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829757|NCT01229891|Primary|Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D||12-week|||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829758|NCT01229943|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the time from study entry to death from any cause. The median OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From registration to time of death, assessed up to 3 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829759|NCT01229943|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|The proportion of patients who respond (completely or partially) to each combination regimen will be estimated. Response was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria: Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR) 30% decrease in sum of longest diameter of target lesions.|Up to 3 years|||percentage of participants|||Number
829760|NCT01229943|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Progression Free Survival (PFS) was defined as the time from study entry until disease progression or death, whichever occurs first. The median PFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Progression was assessed per RECIST criteria, and defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameters of target lesions (and an absolute increase of at least 0.5 cm) or the appearance of new lesions.|From study entry to the date of documented progression or death from any cause, up to 3 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829761|NCT01230021|Secondary|Physical Examination (Evaluated as Normal/Abnormal)||From day 0 to day 30|Safety analysis population including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||participants|||Number
829762|NCT01230021|Secondary|Vital Signs - Blood Pressure (Systolic and Diastolic)||Day 0 and day 30|Safety analysis population including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
829763|NCT01230021|Secondary|Vital Signs - Pulse||Day 0 and day 30|Safety analysis population including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||beats/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
829764|NCT01230021|Secondary|Clot Solubility Test (Evaluated as Normal/Abnormal)|Blood samples for clot solubility drawn at each visit (1 hour before and after dose administration). A clot solubility assay was used to screen for FXIII deficiency. The assay is based on the ability of urea to dissolve fibrin clots that have not undergone FXIII-induced stabilization. Normal blood clots generally remain stable for 24 hours or more, while clots in which fibrin molecules have not been cross-linked are soluble within minutes. The outcome of the test is normal (FXIII present; a clot is observed in the test tube) or abnormal (FXIII absent or very low level; no clot in test tube).|Day 0 and day 30|Safety analysis population including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||participants|||Number
829765|NCT01230021|Secondary|Coagulation Related Parameters - Prothrombin Time (PT) (Seconds)||Day 0 and day 30|Safety analysis population including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||Sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
829766|NCT01230021|Secondary|Coagulation Related Parameters - Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT, Seconds)||Day 0 and day 30|Safety analysis population including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||Sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
829767|NCT01230021|Secondary|Coagulation Related Parameters - Fibrinogen||Day 0 and at day 30|Safety analysis population including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829768|NCT01230021|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Development of Anti-rFXIII Antibodies, Including Inhibitors (Neutralising Antibodies Against Factor XIII)||At screening and day 30|Safety analysis population including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
829769|NCT01230021|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With One or More Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||From day 0 to day 30|Safety analysis population including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
829770|NCT01230021|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With One or More Adverse Events (AEs) Recorded||From day 0 to day 30|Safety analysis population including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
829771|NCT01230021|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|Volume of distribution at steady state (Vss) is the theoretical volume that the total amount of administered drug would have to occupy (if it were uniformly distributed), to provide the same concentration as it is in blood plasma at steady state. Steady state is achieved when all variables are constant in spite of ongoing processes.|At steady state|The full analysis set including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||mL/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
829772|NCT01230021|Secondary|Total Plasma Clearance (CL)|The total plasma clearance is a measure of the elimination of a drug from the body. Drugs are excreted primarily by the kidneys into the urine. Clearance is calculated as ‘CL=Dose / AUC0-30 days’).|From day 0 to day 30|The full analysis set including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||mL/h/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
829773|NCT01230021|Secondary|Mean Residence Time (MRT)|The mean residence time (MRT) of a drug in the body and related functions are derived for drugs which are intravenously administered.|From day 0 to day 30|The full analysis set including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
829774|NCT01230021|Secondary|Terminal Half-life (t½)|Time point when half of the maximum plasma concentration is reached.|From day 0 to day 30|The full analysis set including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||hours||Full Range|Mean
829775|NCT01230021|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for FXIII|Maximum plasma concentration of the drug reached.|At pre-dose, 30 minutes, 24 hours, 7, 14, 21 and 30 days after dosing|The full analysis set including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||U/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829776|NCT01230021|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration vs. Time Curve (AUC0-∞)|A measure of exposure.|From day 0 to day 30|The full analysis set including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||IU*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829777|NCT01230021|Primary|Area Under the Concentration vs. Time Curve (AUC)|A measure of the exposure. Blood samples for the PK assessment were drawn pre-dose and up to 30 days after dosing. The PK of FXIII in children was assessed after a single i.v. dose of rFXIII 35 IU/kg.|At pre-dose, 30 minutes, 24 hours, 7, 14, 21 and 30 days after dosing|The full analysis set including all 6 children exposed to FXIII. All 6 children were exposed to one dose of trial product.||IU*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829778|NCT01230060|Primary|Visual Acuity|Number of participants achieving best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 20/40 or better following cataract extraction and intraocular lens implantation.|120-180 days (visit 4)|All non missing implanted eyes, consistent set||Participants|||Number
829779|NCT01230177|Primary|Change in Disease Activity Score of 28 Joints (DAS28: 4/Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate [ESR])|"DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and PtGA of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0-9.4, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4 (ESR) <= 3.2 implied low disease activity and >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-4 (ESR) <2.6 = remission.
DAS28-3 (ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour). Total score range: 0-9.4, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-3 (ESR) <= 3.2 implied low disease activity and >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-3 (ESR) <2.6 = remission."|12 weeks|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
829780|NCT01230177|Secondary|Physician's Assessment of Clinical Effect of Etanercept on the Symptoms of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Change in Laboratory Values|"On the basis of how well the clinical symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis were controlled at baseline, the physician assessed the clinical effect of etanercept in two grades: effective or ineffective. To assess the clinical efficacy of etanercept, the degrees of the symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and laboratory test values were compared between at baseline and at the 12th week of the investigation."|12 weeks|The efficacy analysis population consisted of the participants in whom the change in DAS28 (4/ESR and 3/ESR) was calculated. No descriptive statistic on the change in DAS28 (4/ESR and 3/ESR) was calculated due to a very small number of participants (n = 3).||participants|||Number
829781|NCT01230177|Secondary|Physician's Assessment of Clinical Effect of Etanercept on the Symptoms of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Change in Laboratory Values|"On the basis of how well the clinical symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis were controlled at baseline, the physician assessed the clinical effect of etanercept in two grades: effective or ineffective. To assess the clinical efficacy of etanercept, the degrees of the symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and laboratory test values were compared between at baseline and at the 12th week of the investigation."|12 weeks|The efficacy analysis population consisted of the participants in whom the change in DAS28 (4/ESR and 3/ESR) was calculated. No descriptive statistic on the change in DAS28 (4/ESR and 3/ESR) was calculated due to a very small number of participants (n = 3).||participants|||Number
829782|NCT01230177|Primary|Disease Activity Score of 28 Joints (DAS28: 4/Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate [ESR])|"DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and PtGA of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0-9.4, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4 (ESR) <= 3.2 implied low disease activity and >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-4 (ESR) <2.6 = remission.
DAS28-3 (ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour). Total score range: 0-9.4, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-3 (ESR) <= 3.2 implied low disease activity and >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-3 (ESR) <2.6 = remission."|12 weeks|||Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
829783|NCT01230177|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment Related Adverse Events|Adverse events are defined as any unfavorable events, including clinically significant abnormal changes in laboratory test values, which develop in participants after the administration of etanercept regardless of the causal relationship to etanercept. The causal relationship between an adverse event and etanercept was evaluated by the sponsor.|12 weeks|The safety analysis population consisted of the participants in whom the regimen of etanercept was changed from 10 mg twice weekly to 25 mg once weekly for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.||participants|||Number
829784|NCT01230307|Secondary|Vitamin D Genomics|Genotyped for the restricted fragment length polymorphism at the BsmI site. In addition CYP2R1, CYP27B1, CYP24 will also be genotyped.|Baseline|Because enrollment was less than 30% of original goal (6 vs 4 patients) and therefore would not have scientific validity, in addition there is significant time and costs associated with this measurement which would result in data that would lead to no conclusions, this outcome was not analyzed.|||||
829785|NCT01230307|Secondary|Quality of Life Measured by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire|Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire for quality of life is measured on a scale of 0 - 100, with 100 being best.|6 months|Because enrollment was less than 30% of original goal (6 vs 4 patients) and therefore would not have scientific validity and no conclusions could be determined, this outcome was not analyzed.|||||
829787|NCT01230307|Primary|Biomarkers|Biomarkers - C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-a (TNF-a), propeptide procollagen type I, plasma procollagen III, matrix metalloproteinase 2 (MMP-2), MMP-9 and tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases-1 (TIMP-1).|6 months|Because enrollment was less than 30% of original goal (6 vs 4 subjects) and therefore would not have scientific validity and would be a waste of financial resources, this outcome was not analyzed.|||||
829788|NCT01230424|Secondary|Change in Time to Complete 5 Chair Stands.|Change in time (seconds) to complete 5 chair stands. Missing data were imputed.|Baseline to 2 years|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829789|NCT01230424|Secondary|Change in Time to Complete a Twenty-meter Walk.|Change in time (seconds) to complete a twenty-meter walk. Missing data were imputed.|Baseline to 2 years|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829790|NCT01230424|Secondary|Change in Patient's Global Assessment (Visual Analogue Scale).|"The response to the question, Considering all the ways your knee affects you, how much pain are you having today?, was measured and the change in the scoring was evaluated. The Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) is measured on a scale of 0 to 100 millimeters. Higher scores represent a higher level of disease activity or a worse global health. Missing data were imputed."|Baseline to 2 years|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829791|NCT01230424|Secondary|Change in Knee Stiffness During the Past 48 Hours From the WOMAC LK3.1 Stiffness Score Questionnaire.|"Stiffness subscale score was calculated from patient's responses on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Likert-type 3.1 Questionnaire. The questionnaire includes 24 items divided into 3 subscales, Pain, Stiffness, Physical Function. Only the Stiffness subscale score was used for this outcome measure. The Stiffness subscale consists of two items, each ranging from 0 to 4, making the total Stiffness subscore 0 to 8. Higher scores represent higher levels of stiffness, whereas lower scores represent lower levels of stiffness.
Missing data were imputed."|Baseline to 2 years|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829792|NCT01230424|Secondary|Change in Function Severity During the Past 48 Hours From the WOMAC LK3.1 Function Score Questionnaire.|"Physical Function subscale score was calculated from patient's responses on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Likert-type 3.1 Questionnaire. The questionnaire includes 24 items divided into 3 subscales, Pain, Stiffness, Physical Function. Only the Physical Function subscale score was used for this outcome measure. The Physical Function subscale consists of 17 items, each ranging from 0 to 4, making the total Function subscore 0 to 68. Higher scores represent higher levels of difficulty performing daily activities, whereas lower scores represent lower levels of difficulty performing daily activities.
Missing data were imputed."|Baseline to 2 years|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829793|NCT01230424|Secondary|Change in Volumetric Cartilage Damage Index (CDI) Measured on Knee MRI in the Index Compartment (Compartment With the Most Damage).|Change in volumetric cartilage damage index (CDI) measured on knee MRI in the index compartment (compartment with the most damage). Missing data were imputed.|Baseline to 2 years|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||mm^3||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829794|NCT01230424|Secondary|Change in Area of Denudation Measured on Knee MRI in the Index Compartment (Compartment With the Most Damage).|Change in area of denudation measured on knee MRI in the index compartment (compartment with the most damage). Missing data were imputed.|Baseline to 2 years|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||mm^2||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829795|NCT01230424|Secondary|Change in Effusion Volume Measured on Knee MRI.|Change in effusion volume measured on knee MRI on the log scale. Missing data were imputed.|Baseline to 2 years|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||log mm^3||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829796|NCT01230424|Secondary|Change in Volume of Peri-articular Bone Marrow Lesions Measured on Knee MRI.|Change in volume of peri-articular bone marrow lesions measured on knee MRI on the log scale. Missing data were imputed.|Baseline to 2 years.|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||log mm^3||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829797|NCT01230424|Primary|Change in Knee Pain Severity During the Past 48 Hours From the WOMAC LK3.1 Pain Score Questionnaire.|"Pain subscale score was calculated from patient's responses on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Likert-type 3.1 Questionnaire. The questionnaire includes 24 items divided into 3 subscales, Pain, Stiffness, Physical Function. Only the Pain subscale score was used for this outcome measure. The Pain subscale consists of five items, each ranging from 0 to 4, making the total Pain subscore 0 to 20. Higher scores represent higher levels of pain, whereas lower scores represent lower levels of pain.
Missing data were imputed."|Baseline to 2 years|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829798|NCT01230424|Primary|Change in Mean Cartilage Thickness in the Index Compartment (Compartment With the Most Damage)|Mean cartilage thickness was measured on knee MRI (Philips Achieva X-Series 3.0 Tesla scanner). Missing data were imputed.|Baseline to 2 years|All individuals were included in analysis, which was performed on multiply imputed data.||mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829799|NCT01230502|Primary|Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Estimation of Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR)|"This outcome measure is used to determine if the reduction of calcineurin inhibitor immunosuppression leads to improved native kidney function. Native kidney function is assessed using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) from serum or plasma creatinine samples at the reported time points.
Reference intervals include:
Healthy 18 years and up: 60-120 mL/min/1.73 sqm Chronic kidney disease: GFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 sqm Kidney failure: GFR < 15 mL/min/1.73 sqm"|12 months post enrollment/randomization|||mL/min/1.73 sqm||Standard Deviation|Mean
829827|NCT01230892|Primary|Number of Participants With Reduction of Thin-cap Fibroatheromas (TCFA) as Defined by VH-IVUS|Presence of thin-cap fibroatheroma as defined by virtual histology-intravascular ultrasound (VH-IVUS)|1 year|4 subjects either withdrew or were lost to follow-up and not included in analysis population. Additionally, one subject in the Atenolol arm was removed from analysis population due to IVUS occurring in the incorrect artery and one subject in the Nebivolol arm was removed due to the IVUS catheter malfunctioning.||participants|||Number
829800|NCT01230502|Primary|Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Estimation of Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR)|"This outcome measure is used to determine if the reduction of calcineurin inhibitor immunosuppression leads to improved native kidney function. Native kidney function is assessed using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) from serum or plasma creatinine samples at the reported time points.
Reference intervals include:
Healthy 18 years and up: 60-120 mL/min/1.73 sqm Chronic kidney disease: GFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 sqm Kidney failure: GFR < 15 mL/min/1.73 sqm"|6 months post enrollment/randomization|||mL/min/1.73 sqm||Standard Deviation|Mean
829801|NCT01230710|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control|A participant with disease control was defined as a participant with either a complete response (CR), a partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD), as determined using RECIST v1.1. A CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions (TL). A PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of TLs taking as reference the Baseline sum longest diameter (SLD). SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease (PD), taking as reference the smallest SLD since treatment started. For non-TLs, SD was defined as the persistence of 1 or more lesions. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the SLD of TLs, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded since treatment started or the unequivocal progression of existing non-TLs. A SLD for all TLs will be calculated and reported as the Baseline SLD. Tumor assessments were done by magnetic resonance imaging according to RECIST v1.1.|From the date of enrolment until the end of the study (up to 2 years, 6 months).|Full analysis set: All enrolled participants. The analysis only included 47 participants as data for 4 participants was not available.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829802|NCT01230710|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Complete Response (CR) or a Partial Response (PR)|A CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions. A PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions taking as reference the Baseline sum longest diameter. All measurable lesions up to a maximum of 2 lesions per organ and 5 lesions in total, representative of all involved organs, should be identified as target lesions at Baseline. All other lesions (or sites of disease) should be identified as non-target lesions. Target lesions should be selected on the basis of their size (lesions with the longest diameter) and their suitability for accurate repeated measurements (either by imaging techniques or clinically). A sum of the longest diameter for all target lesions will be calculated and reported as the Baseline sum longest diameter. Tumor assessments were done by magnetic resonance imaging according to RECIST v1.1.|From the date of enrolment until the end of the study (up to 2 years, 6 months).|Full analysis set: All enrolled participants. The analysis only included 47 participants as data for 4 participants was not available.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829803|NCT01230710|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of enrolment to the date of death from any cause.|From the date of enrolment until the end of the study (up to 2 years, 6 months).|Full analysis set: All enrolled participants.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829804|NCT01230710|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from the date of enrolment to the date of disease progression (PD) or death, whichever occurred first. Tumor assessments were done by magnetic resonance imaging according to RECIST v1.1. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions (TL), taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter recorded since treatment started or the unequivocal progression of existing non-TLs. All measurable lesions up to a maximum of 2 lesions per organ and 5 lesions in total, representative of all involved organs, should be identified as TLs at Baseline. TLs should be selected on the basis of their size (lesions with the longest diameter) and their suitability for accurate repeated measurements (either by imaging techniques or clinically). A sum of the longest diameter for all TLs will be calculated and reported as the Baseline sum longest diameter.|From the date of enrolment until the end of the study (up to 2 years, 6 months).|Full analysis set: All enrolled participants.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829805|NCT01230710|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Progression-free Survival at Week 52|A participant had progression-free survival if they did not have disease progression and were alive. Tumor assessments were done by magnetic resonance imaging according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. Disease progression was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter recorded since treatment started or the unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. All measurable lesions up to a maximum of 2 lesions per organ and 5 lesions in total, representative of all involved organs, should be identified as target lesions at Baseline. Target lesions should be selected on the basis of their size (lesions with the longest diameter) and their suitability for accurate repeated measurements (either by imaging techniques or clinically). A sum of the longest diameter for all target lesions will be calculated and reported as the Baseline sum longest diameter.|From the date of enrolment in the study until the date of disease progression or death from any cause (up to 2 years, 6 months).|Full analysis set: All enrolled participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829806|NCT01230749|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Day 29 in Body Weight|Difference is calculated as the change in body weight in Least Square Mean (LSM) from baseline to Day 29 of each treatment group (pioglitazone, JNJ-41443532 250 mg, JNJ-41443532 1000 mg, and placebo). The statistical analyses shows the treatment differences (ie, each study medication group minus placebo) in the LSM change.|From baseline to Day 29|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of JNJ-41443532 or placebo and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic assessment posttreatment.||Kilograms||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829807|NCT01230749|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Day 28 in Systemic Levels of C-Reactive Protein (CRP)|Difference is calculated as the geometric mean change in CRP from baseline to Day 28 of each treatment group (JNJ-41443532 250 mg, JNJ-41443532 1000 mg, and placebo). The statistical analyses shows the treatment differences (ie, each study medication group minus placebo) in the geometric mean change. CRP was not measured for pioglitazone group.|From baseline to Day 28|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of JNJ-41443532 or placebo and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic assessment posttreatment.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
829860|NCT01233232|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of AZD5069 After 1 Hour of Dosing|At this visit, approximately 1 hour after dosing (at the clinic), a blood sample was collected for determination of drug concentration in plasma.|End of Treatment (Day 28), 1 hour after dosing|||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829808|NCT01230749|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Day 28 in Systemic Levels of Interleukin 18 (IL-18)|Difference is calculated as the geometric mean change in IL-18 from baseline to Day 28 of each treatment group (JNJ-41443532 250 mg, JNJ-41443532 1000 mg, and placebo). The statistical analyses shows the treatment differences (ie, each study medication group minus placebo) in the geometric mean change. IL-18 was not measured for pioglitazone group. The unit of IL-18 is picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)|From baseline to Day 28|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of JNJ-41443532 or placebo and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic assessment posttreatment.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
829809|NCT01230749|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Day 28 in Systemic Levels of Interleukin 6 (IL-6)|Difference is calculated as the geometric mean change in IL-6 from baseline to Day 28 of each treatment group (JNJ-41443532 250 mg, JNJ-41443532 1000 mg, and placebo). The statistical analyses shows the treatment differences (ie, each study medication group minus placebo) in the geometric mean change. IL-6 is a systemic inflammatory markers and is an independent predictors of insulin resistance and progression to type 2 diabetes mellitus. IL-6 was not measured for pioglitazone guoup. The unit of IL-6 is picograms per milliliter (pg/mL).|From baseline to Day 28|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of JNJ-41443532 or placebo and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic assessment posttreatment.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
829810|NCT01230749|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Day 28 in Insulin Resistance|Difference is calculated as the change in insulin resistance in Least Square Mean (LSM) from baseline to Day 28 of each treatment group (pioglitazone, JNJ-41443532 250 mg, JNJ-41443532 1000 mg, and placebo). The statistical analyses shows the treatment differences (ie, each study medication group minus placebo) in the LSM change. Insuline sensitivity is measured by absolute change in Homeostasis Model Assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). Insulin sensitivity is HOMA-%S and HOMA-IR is the reciprocal of HOMA-%S. HOMA-IR calculated as: (Glucose [mg/dL]) multiplied by Insulin [pmol/L]) divided by (405 multiplied by 6.945). Lower value is better (signifies improvement relative to baseline).|From baseline to Day 28|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of JNJ-41443532 or placebo and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic assessment posttreatment. Two participants (1 in JNJ-41443532 250-mg group and 1 in Pioglitazone group) were excluded from the analysis because a blood sample for HOMA-IR was not collected on Day 28.||HOMA-IR score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829811|NCT01230749|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Day 28 in Insulin Secretion|Difference is calculated as the change in insulin secretion in Least Square Mean (LSM) from baseline to Day 28 of each treatment group (pioglitazone, JNJ-41443532 250 mg, JNJ-41443532 1000 mg, and placebo). The statistical analyses shows the treatment differences (ie, each study medication group minus placebo) in the LSM change. Insulin secretion is measured by the absolute change in Homeostasis Model Assessment of steady state islet beta cell (HOMA-%B). HOMA-%B calculated as: (360 multiplied by Insulin [pmol/L]) divided by ([Glucose {mg/dL} minus 63] multiplied by 6.945). Higher value is better (signifies improvement relative to baseline).|From baseline to Day 28|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of JNJ-41443532 or placebo and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic assessment posttreatment. Two participants (1 in JNJ-41443532 250-mg group and 1 in Pioglitazone group) were excluded from the analysis because a blood sample for HOMA-%B was not collected on Day 28.||HOMA-B score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829812|NCT01230749|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Day 28 in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)|Difference is calculated as the change in FPG in Least Square Mean (LSM) from baseline to Day 28 of each treatment group (pioglitazone, JNJ-41443532 250 mg, JNJ-41443532 1000 mg, and placebo). The statistical analyses shows the treatment differences (ie, each study medication group minus placebo) in the LSM change.|From baseline to Day 28|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of JNJ-41443532 or placebo and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic assessment posttreatment. Two participants (1 in JNJ-41443532 250-mg group and 1 in Pioglitazone group) were excluded from the analysis because a blood sample for FPG was not collected on Day 28.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829813|NCT01230749|Primary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28 in Twenty-Four-Hour Weighted Average Glucose (24-Hour WAG)|Difference is calculated as the change in 24-hour WAG in Least Square Mean (LSM) from baseline to Day 28 of each treatment group (pioglitazone, JNJ-41443532 250 mg, JNJ-41443532 1000 mg, and placebo). The statistical analyses shows the treatment differences (ie, each study medication group minus placebo) in the LSM change. 24-hour WAG is defined as the area under the plasma glucose concentration time curve over 0 to 24 hours, divided by 24.|From baseline (Day -1) to Day 28|Analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of JNJ-41443532 or placebo and had at least 1 pharmacodynamic assessment posttreatment.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
829814|NCT01230788|Secondary|Prednisone Effect|To correlate the effect of prednisone on CD20 expression using serial measurements of CD20 expression in leukemic blasts.|one month after treatment||||||
829815|NCT01230788|Secondary|Minimal Residual Disease|To perform serial minimal residual disease (MRD) measurements to provide an objective determination of the effectiveness of this therapy.|one month after treatment|The one subject was enrolled became a screen failure as she started a prohibited medication prior to going on study.|||||
829816|NCT01230788|Primary|Remission Induction Rate|To estimate the remission induction rate of the addition of rituximab to cytotoxic chemotherapy (prednisone/etoposide/ifosfamide) in patients with second relapse/refractory ALL.|one month|The one subject was enrolled became a screen failure as she started a prohibited medication prior to going on study.|||||
829817|NCT01230788|Primary|Toxicities of Rituximab|To describe the toxicities of rituximab in addition to prednisone, etoposide, and ifosfamide.|two months after treatment|The one subject was enrolled became a screen failure as she started a prohibited medication prior to going on study.|||||
829818|NCT01230788|Primary|4 Month Event Free Survival (EFS)|To estimate the 4 month EFS after therapy with rituximab and cytotoxic chemotherapy (prednisone/etoposide/ifosfamide) in patients with second relapse/refractory ALL.|one year after enrollment|The one subject was enrolled became a screen failure as she started a prohibited medication prior to going on study.|||||
829861|NCT01233232|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment for Total Protein (Urinalysis)|The change in total protein in urine is calculated as the End of Treatment value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (last non-missing assessment prior to first dose of study medication) and End of Treatment (Day 28)|||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
830366|NCT01235715|Primary|Number of Autologous Transfusion Units Over the Course of the Hospital Stay|Units of autologous transfusion for each patient over the course of the hospital stay (an average of 3 days) were recorded.|perioperatively|||units||Standard Error|Mean
829819|NCT01230814|Secondary|Efficacy of Monthly Periodic Presumptive Treatment (PPT) Using Metronidazole With Miconazole Intravaginal Suppositories Versus Matching Placebo Nightly for Five Nights Each Month for Preventing BV by Clinical Criteria (Amsel’s Criteria).|Percentage of follow-up visits (Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12) positive for BV by clinical criteria (Amsel's criteria).|Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12.|Intention to treat population which consisted of all women who were randomized and had at least one follow-up visit. Two women in the metronidazole with miconazole arm did not return after enrollment.||percentage of follow-up visits|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
829820|NCT01230814|Secondary|Efficacy of Monthly Periodic Presumptive Treatment (PPT) Using Metronidazole With Miconazole Intravaginal Suppositories Versus Placebo for Preventing Any Vaginal Infection (a Combined Endpoint Including BV, VVC, and Trichomonas Vaginalis Infection).|Percentage of follow-up visits (Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12) positive for any of three vaginal infections (BV, VVC, Trichomonas vaginalis infection).|Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12.|Intention to treat population which consisted of all women who were randomized and had at least one follow-up visit. Two women in the metronidazole with miconazole arm did not return after enrollment.||percentage of follow-up visits|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
829821|NCT01230814|Primary|Efficacy of Monthly Periodic Presumptive Treatment (PPT) Using Metronidazole With Miconazole Intravaginal Suppositories Versus Matching Placebo Nightly for Five Nights Each Month for Preventing Bacterial Vaginosis (BV).|Percentage of follow-up visits (Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12) positive for BV as determined by applying standard microscopic scoring criteria (Nugent’s criteria) to vaginal Gram stained slides. BV is diagnosed when the score is greater than or equal to 7.|Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12.|Intention to treat population which consisted of all women who were randomized and had at least one follow-up visit. Two women in the metronidazole with miconazole arm did not return after enrollment.||percentage of follow-up visits|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
829822|NCT01230814|Primary|Efficacy of Monthly Periodic Presumptive Treatment (PPT) Using Metronidazole With Miconazole Intravaginal Suppositories Versus Matching Placebo Nightly for Five Nights Each Month for Preventing Vulvovaginal Candidiasis (VVC).|Percentage of follow-up visits (Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12) positive for VVC based on the presence of fungal elements (pseudohyphae, blastoconidia, or both) on vaginal saline wet mount plus a positive culture showing yeast on Sabouraud’s agar.|Months 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12.|Intention to treat population which consisted of all women who were randomized and had at least one follow-up visit. Two women in the metronidazole with miconazole arm did not return after enrollment.||percentage of follow-up visits|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
829823|NCT01230827|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Clinical Remission While on Medication for Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) at Week 48|Clinical remission while on medication for JIA is defined as inactive disease at each visit for a period of 6 months or more while on medication. Inactive disease is indicated by the presence of all of the following: no joints with active arthritis; no fever, rash, serositis, splenomegaly, hepatomegaly, or generalized lymphadenopathy attributable to juvenile idiopathic arthritis; no active uveitis (eye disease), normal erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C-reactive protein; physician global assessment of disease activity indicating no active disease; and duration of morning stiffness less than 15 minutes.|Week 16 through Week 48|ITT population included all participants achieving ACR Ped 30 response who were randomized at Week 16.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
829824|NCT01230827|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 30 Response Who Had Inactive Disease at Week 48|Inactive disease is indicated by the presence of all of the following: no joints with active arthritis; no fever, rash, serositis, splenomegaly, hepatomegaly, or generalized lymphadenopathy attributable to juvenile idiopathic arthritis; no active uveitis (eye disease), normal erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C-reactive protein; physician global assessment of disease activity indicating no active disease; and duration of morning stiffness less than 15 minutes.|Week 16 through Week 48|ITT population included all participants achieving ACR Ped 30 response who were randomized at Week 16.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
829825|NCT01230827|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 30 Response at Week 48|Percentage of participants with ACR 30 response at Week 48 was calculated as number of participants with ACR 30 response at Week 48 divided by number of participants randomized. ACR Ped 30 response was defined as the worsening from Week 16 by 30% or more in 3 of the 6 ACR Pediatric (Ped) Core Set Variables with no more than 1 of the 6 ACR Ped Core Set variables improving by more than 30% at the time of the flare. The 6 variables are: physicians global assessment of disease, participants/parent global assessment of overall well-being, number of active joints (defined as either swelling, or in absence of swelling, limited range of motion associated with pain on motion or tenderness), number of joints with limited range of motion, physical function by childhood health assessment questionnaire, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate.|Week 16 through Week 48|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all participants achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Pediatric (Ped) 30 response who were randomized at Week 16.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
829826|NCT01230827|Primary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 30 Response at Week 16 Who Did Not Experienced a Flare of Disease Through Week 48|Percentage of participants with American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Ped 30 responders at Week 16 who did not experience a flare of disease between Week 16 and Week 48 calculated as number of participants with response and who did not experience flare divided by number of participants randomized. Flare of disease was defined as the worsening from Week 16 by 30% or more in 3 of the 6 ACR Pediatric (Ped) Core Set Variables with no more than 1 of the 6 ACR Ped Core Set variables improving by more than 30% at the time of the flare. The 6 variables are: physicians global assessment of disease, participants/parent global assessment of overall well-being, number of active joints (defined as either swelling, or in absence of swelling, limited range of motion associated with pain on motion or tenderness), number of joints with limited range of motion, physical function by childhood health assessment questionnaire, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate.|Week 16 through Week 48|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all participants achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Pediatric (Ped) 30 response who were randomized at Week 16.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
829862|NCT01233232|Primary|Number of Participants Who Developed High Transaminase Values (Clinical Chemistry)|High Transaminase Values are defined as a measurment of ALT (alanine aminotransferase) or AST (aspartate aminotransferase) greater than or equal to 3 times the upper limit of normal (ALT ULN = 36 IU/L, AST ULN = 33 IU/L).|Up to Follow-up Visit (3 to 18 days after End of Treatment [Day 28])|||Participants|||Number
829828|NCT01224171|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|"An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a patient administered a pharmaceutical product, which did not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment. A serious adverse event (SAE) was any AE, occurring at any dose and regardless of causality that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, was a congenital anomaly/birth defect, was an important medical event based upon appropriate medical judgment that may have jeopardized the patient and may have required medical or surgical intervention to prevent 1 of the outcomes listed above, or any diagnosis of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML).
Relationship to study drug administration was determined by the investigator responding yes or no to the question: Is there a reasonable possibility that the AE is associated with the study drug?"|From the date of first study drug administration to Week 22, through the 14 March 2012 database lock date. At the time of this database lock, 7 patients had completed Week 10 or early termination assessments but not Week 22 assessments.|Overall Safety Population||participants|||Number
829829|NCT01224171|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Enhanced Clinical Response at Week 6 in the TNFα Antagonist Failure Subpopulation|"Enhanced clinical response is defined as a ≥ 100-point decrease in CDAI score from Baseline.
The CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's disease and consists of eight factors, each summed after adjustment with a weighting factor. The components of the CDAI are:
Number of liquid or soft stools each day for 7 days;
Abdominal pain (graded from 0-3 on severity) each day for 7 days;
General well-being, subjectively assessed from 0 (well) to 4 (terrible) each day for 7 days;
Presence of complications;
Taking Lomotil or opiates for diarrhea;
Presence of an abdominal mass (0 as none, 2 as questionable, 5 as definite);
Hematocrit of < 0.47 in men and < 0.42 in women;
Percent deviation from standard weight.
The total score ranges from 0 to approximately 600 and with higher scores indicating greater disease activity.
All participants who prematurely discontinued for any reason were considered as not achieving enhanced clinical response."|Baseline and Week 6|TNFα Antagonist Failure ITT Subpopulation||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829830|NCT01224171|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Clinical Remission in the Overall Population|"Sustained clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score ≤ 150 points at both Week 6 and Week 10. The CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's disease and consists of eight factors, each summed after adjustment with a weighting factor. The components of the CDAI are:
Number of liquid or soft stools each day for 7 days;
Abdominal pain (graded from 0-3 on severity) each day for 7 days;
General well-being, subjectively assessed from 0 (well) to 4 (terrible) each day for 7 days;
Presence of complications;
Taking Lomotil or opiates for diarrhea;
Presence of an abdominal mass (0 as none, 2 as questionable, 5 as definite);
Hematocrit of < 0.47 in men and < 0.42 in women;
Percentage deviation from standard weight.
The total score ranges from 0 to approximately 600 and with higher scores indicating greater disease activity.
All participants who prematurely discontinued for any reason were considered as not achieving sustained clinical remission."|Week 6 and Week 10|Overall ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829831|NCT01224171|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Clinical Remission in the TNFα Antagonist Failure Population|"Sustained clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score ≤ 150 points at both Week 6 and Week 10. The CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's disease and consists of eight factors, each summed after adjustment with a weighting factor. The components of the CDAI are:
Number of liquid or soft stools each day for 7 days;
Abdominal pain (graded from 0-3 on severity) each day for 7 days;
General well-being, subjectively assessed from 0 (well) to 4 (terrible) each day for 7 days;
Presence of complications;
Taking Lomotil or opiates for diarrhea;
Presence of an abdominal mass (0 as none, 2 as questionable, 5 as definite);
Hematocrit of < 0.47 in men and < 0.42 in women;
Percentage deviation from standard weight.
The total score ranges from 0 to approximately 600 and with higher scores indicating greater disease activity.
All participants who prematurely discontinued for any reason were considered as not achieving sustained clinical remission."|Week 6 and Week 10|TNFα Antagonist Failure ITT Subpopulation||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829832|NCT01224171|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission at Week 10 in the Overall Population|"Clinical remission is defined as a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score ≤ 150 points.
The CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's disease and consists of eight factors, each summed after adjustment with a weighting factor. The components of the CDAI are:
Number of liquid or soft stools each day for 7 days;
Abdominal pain (graded from 0-3 on severity) each day for 7 days;
General well-being, subjectively assessed from 0 (well) to 4 (terrible) each day for 7 days;
Presence of complications;
Taking Lomotil or opiates for diarrhea;
Presence of an abdominal mass (0 as none, 2 as questionable, 5 as definite);
Hematocrit of < 0.47 in men and < 0.42 in women;
Percentage deviation from standard weight.
The total score ranges from 0 to approximately 600 and with higher scores indicating greater disease activity.
All participants who prematurely discontinued for any reason were considered as not achieving clinical remission."|Week 10|Overall ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829833|NCT01224171|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission at Week 10 in the TNFα Antagonist Failure Subpopulation|"Clinical remission is defined as a Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score ≤ 150 points.
The CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's disease and consists of eight factors, each summed after adjustment with a weighting factor. The components of the CDAI are:
Number of liquid or soft stools each day for 7 days;
Abdominal pain (graded from 0-3 on severity) each day for 7 days;
General well-being, subjectively assessed from 0 (well) to 4 (terrible) each day for 7 days;
Presence of complications;
Taking Lomotil or opiates for diarrhea;
Presence of an abdominal mass (0 as none, 2 as questionable, 5 as definite);
Hematocrit of < 0.47 in men and < 0.42 in women;
Percentage deviation from standard weight.
The total score ranges from 0 to approximately 600 and with higher scores indicating greater disease activity.
All participants who prematurely discontinued for any reason were considered as not achieving clinical remission."|Week 10|TNFα Antagonist Failure Intent-to-treat (ITT) Subpopulation||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829863|NCT01233232|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment for FEV1 Post-bronchodilator (Lung Function Test)|The change in FEV1 Post-bronchodilator is calculated as the End of Treatment value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (last non-missing assessment prior to first dose of study medication) and End of Treatment (Day 28)|||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829834|NCT01224171|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission at Week 6 in the Overall Population|"Clinical remission is defined as a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score ≤ 150 points.
The CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's disease and consists of eight factors, each summed after adjustment with a weighting factor. The components of the CDAI are:
Number of liquid or soft stools each day for 7 days;
Abdominal pain (graded from 0-3 on severity) each day for 7 days;
General well-being, subjectively assessed from 0 (well) to 4 (terrible) each day for 7 days;
Presence of complications;
Taking Lomotil or opiates for diarrhea;
Presence of an abdominal mass (0 as none, 2 as questionable, 5 as definite);
Hematocrit of < 0.47 in men and < 0.42 in women;
Percentage deviation from standard weight.
The total score ranges from 0 to approximately 600 and with higher scores indicating greater disease activity.
All participants who prematurely discontinued for any reason were considered as not achieving clinical remission."|Week 6|Overall ITT population, consisting of all randomized participants who received any amount of blinded study drug.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829835|NCT01224171|Primary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission in the Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNFα) Antagonist Failure Subpopulation|"Clinical remission is defined as a Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score ≤ 150 points.
The CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's disease and consists of eight factors, each summed after adjustment with a weighting factor. The components of the CDAI are:
Number of liquid or soft stools each day for 7 days;
Abdominal pain (graded from 0-3 on severity) each day for 7 days;
General well-being, subjectively assessed from 0 (well) to 4 (terrible) each day for 7 days;
Presence of complications;
Taking Lomotil or opiates for diarrhea;
Presence of an abdominal mass (0 as none, 2 as questionable, 5 as definite);
Hematocrit of < 0.47 in men and < 0.42 in women;
Percentage deviation from standard weight.
The total score ranges from 0 to approximately 600 and with higher scores indicating greater disease activity.
All participants who prematurely discontinued for any reason were considered as not achieving clinical remission."|Week 6|TNFα Antagonist Failure Intent-to-treat (ITT) subpopulation which consisted of all randomized participants who received any amount of blinded study drug who met the TNFα antagonist failure criterion.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829836|NCT01224236|Secondary|Transfusions|# of transfusions infants required after enrollment.|enrollment to 36 weeks postmenstrual age (PMA)|||transfusions||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829837|NCT01224236|Primary|Hematocrit (Hct)|For infants discharged from the hospital before 36 weeks' postmenstrual age (PMA), the last Hct before discharge was used. For infants transferred before 36 weeks PMA, the Hct at 36 weeks was sought from the receiving hospital and used if available. For infants transferred before 36 weeks with no available Hct at 36 weeks, the last Hct before transfer was used. For those who died before 36 weeks PMA, the Hct at 36 weeks was considered to be missing.|36 weeks postmenstrual age (PMA)|||percentage of red blood cells in blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
829838|NCT01224431|Secondary|Heart Rate|patient on Cardiopulmonary monitoring|On average the first hour in the emergency department, at 4 time points during lumbar puncture procedure.||||||
829839|NCT01224431|Secondary|Length of Cry|cry video recorded and measured after needle stick until pt stopped crying|On average the first hour in the emergency department; from needle stick to end of lumbar puncture||||||
829840|NCT01224431|Primary|Pain, Measured as Units on a Scale|Pain scores at time of needle insertion using neonatal facial coding score. The scale has five components; cry, brow bulge, eye squeeze; nasolabial fold and open month. Each component is either present or absent, with a value of 0 or 1 given. Minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 5 possible|on average the first hour in emergency department at 4 time points during entire lumbar puncture procedure.|||units on scale, 0-5||Standard Deviation|Mean
829841|NCT01224444|Secondary|Incomplete Adenoma Resection of Small and Large Adenomas|Comparison of the proportion of incompletely resected adenomatous polyps by size (5-9mm versus 10-20mm).|1 year||||||
829842|NCT01224444|Primary|Percent of Incompletely Resected Adenomatous Polyps|Proportion of incompletely resected adenomatous polyps (5 to 20mm), defined by remaining adenomatous tissue in marginal biopsies after snare resection.|1 year|||percentage of incomplete resection|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
829843|NCT01231230|Primary|Maximum Change From Baseline in Airway Blood Flow (Qaw)||maximum change in Qaw within 240 minutes post drug inhalation|||change from baseline ( µl/min/ml)||Standard Error|Mean
829844|NCT01231321|Secondary|Change in Disease Activity Score (DAS28) Compared With Baseline|The DAS28 is validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, C-reactive protein, and general health (patient's global assessment of disease activity) were included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 1 (inactive disease) to 10 (very active disease).|Baseline and 24 weeks|All subjects with data available from both Baseline and Week 24 were included in this intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829845|NCT01231321|Primary|Vital Sign Values|"Vital signs values were assessed for values above and below the normal (reference) ranges used by the central laboratory.
Note, in table, BP = blood pressure."|24 weeks|All subjects with available data were included in this intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis.||participants|||Number
829846|NCT01231321|Primary|Deviation From Normal Laboratory Ranges|"Laboratory values were assessed for values above and below the normal (reference) ranges used by the central laboratory.
Note abbreviations used in table:
Alk. phosphatase = alkaline phosphatase, ALT = alanine aminotransferase, AST = aspartate aminotransferase, ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate"|24 weeks|All subjects with available data were included in this intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The number of subjects with available data is indicated for each laboratory assessment.||participants|||Number
829847|NCT01231321|Primary|Changes of Physical Examination|Physical examination findings were compared between Baseline and Week 24, and changes were recorded (Normal at Baseline to Abnormal at Week 24; or Abnormal at Baseline to Normal at Week 24). Physical examination criteria (normal vs. abnormal) were at the clinical judgement of the examining physician. Significant changes in physical examination from Baseline were considered to be adverse events.|Baseline and 24 weeks|All enrolled subjects with available data were included in this intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis.||participants|||Number
829864|NCT01233232|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment for FEV1 Pre-bronchodilator (Lung Function Test)|The change in FEV1 Pre-bronchodilator is calculated as the End of Treatment value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (last non-missing assessment prior to first dose of study medication) and End of Treatment (Day 28)|||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829848|NCT01231321|Primary|Frequency of Adverse Events|"Serious adverse events were collected from the time of informed consent, and nonserious adverse events were collected from the time of first dose of adalimumab, until 70 days after the last injection of adalimumab. Refer to the Reported Adverse Events section of this results disclosure for specific adverse events reported.
Note:
Severe events considerably interfered in patients' usual activities and may have been life-threatening.
Serious events were life-threatening; resulted in hospitalization, congenital anomalies, or disability; or required intervention to prevent seriousness."|Up to 34 weeks (24 week study treatment plus 70-day follow-up period)|All enrolled subjects were included in this intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis.||participants|||Number
829849|NCT01231334|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a One Point Decrease in the Global Acne Assessment Score (GAAS) at Week 12|GAAS was conducted by the investigator at Baseline and Week 12. The patient's facial acne was evaluated on a 5 point scale 0=None (no evidence of acne), 1=Minimal (few lesions), 2=Mild (several to many non-inflammatory lesions; few inflammatory lesions), 3=Moderate (many lesions) to 4=Severe (Significant degree of inflammatory disease; papules/pustules present, few nodulo-cystic lesions; comedones may be present). Papules/nodules are round, solid elevations of the skin with no visible fluid. The percentage of participants with at least a one point decrease (improvement) in GAAS was calculated.|Baseline, Week 12|Per-Protocol Population consists of all randomized participants who completed the study to week 12 without any major protocol violation.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829850|NCT01231334|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Demonstrating a ≥ 1 Category Increase in Tolerability From Baseline at Week 12|The investigator rated the patient's current symptoms of erythema, dryness, peeling, and oiliness on a 5 point scale from 0 (Absent) to 4 (Severe). The investigator rated the symptoms of pruritus and burning since last visit on a 6 point scale of 0 (Absent) to 5 (Severe)-interfering with daily activities. Percentage of participants demonstrating a ≥1 category increase (improvement) in tolerability from baseline is calculated.|Baseline, Week 12|Per-Protocol Population consists of all randomized participants who completed the study to week 12 without any major protocol violation.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829851|NCT01231334|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Lesion Count at Week 12|Percent change in total lesion counts: inflammatory (papules, pustules and nodules) and non-inflammatory (comedones) lesion counts from baseline. Papules and nodules are round, solid elevations of the skin with no visible fluid; papules are smaller (less than 5 or 10 millimeters ) and nodules are larger (greater than 5 or 10 millimeters). Pustules are small elevations of the skin containing cloudy material. Comedones are small bumps on the skin caused by acne and found at the opening of a skin pore. A negative change from baseline indicates a reduction in lesion counts (improvement).|Baseline, Week 12|Per-Protocol Population consists of all randomized participants who completed the study to week 12 without any major protocol violation.||Percent change||Full Range|Median
829852|NCT01231334|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Non-inflammatory Lesion Counts at Week 12|"Percent Change from baseline in non-inflammatory lesion counts (open/closed comedones) at week 12. Comedones are small bumps on the skin (lesions) caused by acne and found at the opening of a skin pore. Open comedones (also known as a blackheads) have a microscopic opening to the skin surface, while closed comedones (also known as whiteheads or pimples) lack the opening to the skin. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in lesion counts (improvement)."|Baseline, Week 12|Per-Protocol Population consists of all randomized participants who completed the study to week 12 without any major protocol violation.||Percent change||Full Range|Median
829853|NCT01231334|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Inflammatory Lesion Counts at Week 12|Percent Change from baseline in inflammatory lesion counts (papules, pustules and nodules) at week 12. Papules and nodules are round, solid elevations of the skin with no visible fluid; papules are smaller (less than 5 or 10 millimeters in width and depth) and nodules are larger (greater than 5 or 10 millimeters in width and depth). Pustules are small elevations of the skin containing cloudy material. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in lesion counts (improvement).|Baseline, Week 12|Per-Protocol Population consists of all randomized participants who completed the study to week 12 without any major protocol violation.||Percent change||Full Range|Median
829854|NCT01231334|Secondary|Percentage of Participants at Week 12 Having at Least a One Point Decrease in Overall Disease Severity|The overall disease severity was evaluated by the investigator at Baseline and Week 12 using a 7-point scale to rate the overall acne severity (lesions, inflammation, facial redness and skin condition), where 0=no acne lesions and 6=most severe acne. The percentage of participants with at least a one point decrease (improvement) from baseline is calculated.|Baseline, Week 12|Per-Protocol Population consists of all randomized participants who completed the study to week 12 without any major protocol violation.||Percentage of participants|||Number
829855|NCT01231334|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Global Acne Assessment Score (GAAS) at Week 12|GAAS was conducted by the investigator. The patient's facial acne was evaluated on a 5 point scale 0=None (no evidence of acne), 1=Minimal (few lesions), 2=Mild (several to many non-inflammatory lesions; few inflammatory lesions), 3=Moderate (many lesions) to 4=Severe (Significant degree of inflammatory disease; papules/pustules present, few nodulo-cystic lesions; comedones may be present). Papules and nodules are round, solid elevations of the skin with no visible fluid. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Per-Protocol Population consists of all randomized participants who completed the study to week 12 without any major protocol violation.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829856|NCT01233232|Secondary|Maximum Reduction of Circulating Neutrophils in Blood, From Baseline|The change in circulating neutrophils in blood is calculated as the visit value minus the Baseline value. Only participants with reduction are considered.|Baseline (last non-missing assessment prior to first dose of study medication), weeks 1, 2 and 3, and End of Treatment (Day 28)|||10^9/L cells/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829857|NCT01233232|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration for AZD5069|Time (in relation to dosing) at which the maximum plasma concentration is observed.|End of Treatment (Day 28); pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, and 5 hours after dosing|||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829858|NCT01233232|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration for AZD5069|The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) is the highest level of drug in plasma.|End of Treatment (Day 28); pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, and 5 hours after dosing|||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829859|NCT01233232|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Curve of AZD5069|The area under the plasma concentration curve is estimated from time 0 (dosing) to 24 hours after dosing.|End of Treatment (Day 28); pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, and 5 hours after dosing|||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829865|NCT01233232|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment for Pulse Rate (Vital Signs)|The change in pulse rate (Vital Sign) is calculated as the End of Treatment value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (last non-missing assessment prior to first dose of study medication) and End of Treatment (Day 28)|||beats/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
829866|NCT01233232|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment for Diastolic Blood Pressure (Vital Signs)|The change in diastolic blood pressure (Vital Sign) is calculated as the End of Treatment value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (last non-missing assessment prior to first dose of study medication) and End of Treatment (Day 28)|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
829867|NCT01233232|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment for Systolic Blood Preassure (Vital Signs)|The change in systolic blood pressure (Vital Sign) is calculated as the End of Treatment value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (last non-missing assessment prior to first dose of study medication) and End of Treatment (Day 28)|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
829868|NCT01233232|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment for Body Temperature|The change in body temperature (oral) is calculated as the End of Treatment value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (last non-missing assessment prior to first dose of study medication) and End of Treatment (Day 28)|||degrees C||Standard Deviation|Mean
829869|NCT01233232|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment for Leucocytes Count in Blood (Safety Blood Sample)|The change in circulating leucocyte counts (including neutrophils) is calculated as the End of Treatment value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (last non-missing assessment prior to first dose of study medication) and End of Treatment (Day 28)|||10^9/L cells/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829870|NCT01233232|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG)|ECGs were recorded in the supine position after the patient has rested for 10 minutes. Heart rate, QRS duration, PR, RR and QT intervals were recorded. Overall evaluation of the ECG is classified as normal, abnormal or borderline. Only participants with ECG at baseline classified as normal are reported (ie, only changes from normal to abnormal).|Baseline (last non-missing assessment prior to first dose of study medication) and End of Treatment (Day 28)|||Participants|||Number
829871|NCT01233232|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Physical Examination Findings|Physical examination includes assessment of general appearance, skin, head and neck (including ears, eyes, nose and throat), lymph nodes, musculo-skeletal (including spine and extremities), cardiovascular, lungs and abdomen. The findings were deemed to be normal/abnormal based on the clinical judgment of the investigator.|Last Observation on Treatment (up to Day 28)|||Participants|||Number
829872|NCT01233232|Primary|Patients Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Events(s)|Adverse event (AE) data, both serious and non-serious. An AE is the development of an undesirable medical condition (eg, nausea, chest pain, tachycardia, laboratory findings) or the deterioration of a pre-existing medical condition following or during exposure to a pharmaceutical product, whether or not considered causally related to the product.|From start of treatment (Day 0) up to 28 days (End of Treatment)|||Participants|||Number
829873|NCT01233258|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Inhibitory Antibody Formation|A test to ensure that participants have not developed antibodies that will interfere with the action of rFVIII (BAY81-8973)|3, 6, 9 and 12 months after baseline|Safety population||Participants|||Number
829874|NCT01233258|Other Pre-specified|Number of Bleeds During Treatment|The number of bleeds experienced by each participant|12 months|ITT||Bleeds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829875|NCT01233258|Secondary|Percentage of Bleeds Per Participant Controlled With ≤ 2 Injections in Participants Treated on Demand With rFVIII (BAY81-8973)|The percentage of bleeds per participant on on-demand treatment that stopped after two or fewer injections|Up to 12 months (6 months per mode of potency assignment according to the randomized cross-over design)|ITT||Percentage of bleeds||Full Range|Median
829876|NCT01233258|Secondary|Annualized Number of All Bleeds During CS/ADJ Period|The annualized number of bleeds experienced by participants while they were taking rFVIII (BAY81-8973) assayed by CS/ADJ|Up to 6 months (6 months on CS/ADJ potency assignment)|ITT. Low and high dose prophylaxis arms combined as planned for the statistical analysis to achieve sufficient sample size.||Bleeds per year per participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
829877|NCT01233258|Secondary|Annualized Number of All Bleeds During CS/EP Period|The annualized number of bleeds experienced by participants while they were taking rFVIII (BAY81-8973) assayed by CS/EP|Up to 6 months (6 months on CS/EP potency assignment)|ITT. Low and high dose prophylaxis arms combined as planned for the statistical analysis to achieve sufficient sample size.||Bleeds per year per participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
829878|NCT01233258|Primary|Annualized Number of All Bleeds|The annualized number of bleeds experienced by participants|Up to 12 months (6 months per mode of potency assignment according to the randomized cross-over design)|ITT (Intent to Treat). Low and high dose prophylaxis arms and both potencies combined as planned for the statistical analysis to achieve intended sample size.||Bleeds per year per participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
829879|NCT01233284|Secondary|FVC Area Under the Curve Within 24 Hours (h) Response (FVC AUC0-12h, FVC AUC12-24h, FVC AUC0-24h)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. FVC AUC0-12, FVC AUC12-24 and FVC AUC0-24 were calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (12h resp. 24h) to report in litres.|10 minutes (min) before drug administration and 30 min, 1h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 11h 50min, 12h 30min, 13h, 14h, 15h, 16h, 18h, 20h, 22h, 23h, 23h 50min after drug administration|FAS24 was defined as all patients in the FAS who gave informed consent for the 24-h PFT and who participated in this optional PFT.||Litres||Standard Error|Mean
829880|NCT01233284|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under the Curve Within 24 Hours (h) Response (FEV1 AUC0-12h, FEV1 AUC12-24h, FEV1 AUC0-24h)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. FEV1 AUC0-12, FEV1 AUC12-24 and FEV1 AUC0-24 were calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (12h resp. 24h) to report in litres.|10 minutes (min) before drug administration and 30 min, 1h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 11h 50min, 12h 30min, 13h, 14h, 15h, 16h, 18h, 20h, 22h, 23h, 23h 50min after drug administration|FAS24 was defined as all patients in the FAS who gave informed consent for the 24-h PFT and who participated in this optional PFT.||Litres||Standard Error|Mean
829907|NCT01233726|Primary|Primary Outcome: Measure of Biochemical Parameters and Evaluation of Infectious Complications 6.1|This table shows the number of capillary glycemia measurements|28 days post-admission|||number of capillary glycemia measurement|||Number
829881|NCT01233284|Secondary|Mean Number of Night Awakenings During the Last Week on Treatment (Score, Response Values)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared (measured by patients at home using the AM2+ device).|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing data for nighttime awakenings||Night awakenings||Standard Error|Mean
829882|NCT01233284|Secondary|Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication During Nighttime (Last Week on Treatment, Response Values)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared (measured by patients at home using the AM2+ device).|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing data for rescue medication.||Puffs||Standard Error|Mean
829883|NCT01233284|Secondary|Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication During Daytime (Last Week on Treatment, Response Values)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared (measured by patients at home using the AM2+ device).|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing data for rescue medication.||Puffs||Standard Error|Mean
829884|NCT01233284|Secondary|Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication During the Whole Day (Last Week on Treatment, Response Values)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared (measured by patients at home using the AM2+ device).|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing data for rescue medication.||Puffs||Standard Error|Mean
829885|NCT01233284|Secondary|PEF Variability Response (Last Week on Treatment)|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. PEF variability is the absolute difference between morning and evening PEF value divided by the mean of these two values, expressed as a percent . Weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing morning and evening PEF data.||Percentage of the mean daily PEF||Standard Error|Mean
829886|NCT01233284|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Evening PEF (PEF p.m.) Response During the Last Week on Treatment|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared (measured by patients at home using the AM2+ device).|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing evening PEF data.||Litre/min||Standard Error|Mean
829887|NCT01233284|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Morning PEF (PEF a.m.) Response During the Last Week on Treatment|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Weekly means obtained during the last week of each period of randomised treatment will be compared (measured by patients at home using the AM2+ device).|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing morning PEF data.||Litre/min||Standard Error|Mean
829888|NCT01233284|Secondary|Individual Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Over Time (at Each Timepoint at Visits) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing PEF data.||Litre/min||Standard Error|Mean
829889|NCT01233284|Secondary|Individual FVC Over Time (at Each Timepoint at Visits) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing FVC data.||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
829890|NCT01233284|Secondary|Individual FEV1 Over Time (at Each Timepoint at Visits) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing FEV1 data.||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
829891|NCT01233284|Secondary|FVC AUC0-3h Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. FVC AUC0-3h was calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (3 hours) to report in litres.|10 minutes (min) before drug administration and 30 min, 1h, 2h, 3h after drug administration|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing FVC data.||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
829892|NCT01233284|Secondary|Trough FVC Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Trough FVC was measured just prior to the last administration of randomised treatment.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing FVC data.||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
829893|NCT01233284|Secondary|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Peak Within 0-3 Hours Post-dose Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|10 minutes (min) before drug administration and 30 min, 1h, 2h, 3h after drug administration|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing FVC data.||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
829894|NCT01233284|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under the Curve 0-3 Hours (AUC0-3h) Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. FEV1 AUC0-3h was calculated using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (3 hours) to report in litres.|10 minutes (min) before drug administration and 30 min, 1h, 2h, 3h after drug administration|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing FEV1 data.||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
829895|NCT01233284|Secondary|Trough FEV1 Response|MMRM results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. Trough FEV1 was measured just prior to the last administration of randomised treatment.|Baseline and 4 weeks|FAS reduced to patients with non-missing FEV1 data.||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
829896|NCT01233284|Primary|Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) Peak Within 0-3 Hours Post-dose Response|Mixed model repeated measurement (MMRM) results. Response was defined as change from baseline at the end of of each 4-week treatment period. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|10 minutes (min) before drug administration and 30 min, 1h, 2h, 3h after drug administration|Full analysis set (FAS) reduced to patients with non-missing FEV1 data. The FAS is defined as patients randomised, treated, with baseline data and at least one on-treatment efficacy measurement after 4 weeks on treatment within a period.||Litre||Standard Error|Mean
829897|NCT01233687|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall Survival was computed for all participants and is defined as the time between start of treatment and death. The (median) length of time in months that subjects with previously-treated advanced NSCLC, treated with the combination of AMG 102 and erlotinib, remain alive estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method.|Up to 24 months (after the first evaluable patient is accrued)|All patients who who received at least one dose of AMG 102 and had post-treatment imaging studies for response evaluation using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Criteria at six weeks (RESPONSE EVALUABLE)||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
829898|NCT01233687|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression-free survival is defined as the time from the start of treatment until first evidence of disease progression, death, or date of last contact. The (median) length of time that subjects with previously-treated advanced NSCLC, who were treated with the combination of AMG 102 and erlotinib, are both alive and free of disease progression as estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. For participants not known to have died as of the data cut-off date and who did not have PD, the PFS date was censored at the last contact date (contacts considered in the determination of last progression free disease assessment).|Up to 24 months (after the first patient is accrued)|All patients who who received at least one dose of AMG 102 and had post-treatment imaging studies for response evaluation using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Criteria at six weeks (RESPONSE EVALUABLE)||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
829899|NCT01233687|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR/Clinical Response)|Using RECIST v1.1 criteria, ORR was determined by following equation: the number of partial response (PR) participants / the number of partial response (PR) participants + the number of stable disease (SD) participants + the number of progressive disease (PD) participants.|Up to 6 months|All patients who who received at least one dose of AMG 102 and had post-treatment imaging studies for response evaluation using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Criteria at six weeks (RESPONSE EVALUABLE)||percentage of patients||90% Confidence Interval|Number
829900|NCT01233687|Primary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|Using RECIST v1.1 criteria, DCR was determined by following equation: the number of complete response (CR) participants + the number of partial response (PR) participants + the number of stable disease (SD) participants / the number of complete response (CR) participants + the number of partial response (PR) participants + the number of stable disease (SD) participants + the number of progressive disease (PD) participants.|Six weeks from initiation of treatment with AMG 102 + Erlotinib|All patients who who received at least one dose of AMG 102 and had post-treatment imaging studies for response evaluation using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Criteria at six weeks (RESPONSE EVALUABLE)||percentage of patients||90% Confidence Interval|Number
829901|NCT01233687|Primary|Percentage of Participants That Experienced a Dose Limiting Toxicity|Determination of the safety and recommended phase II dose of AMG 102 when combined with erlotinib for the treatment of patients with advanced, previously-treated NSCLC.|During first cycle of treatment (3 weeks)|In the absence of DLTs among the first 7 pts treated, AMG 102 + Erlotinib (150 mg) daily (3 weeks) was declared the RP2D.||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
829902|NCT01233726|Secondary|Assessment of Critical Ill Patients Progress During Hospital Stay 4|Number of participants with infectious complications is provided in this table.|100 days of treatment|Age ≥18 years, ICU stay ≤48 hours upon randomization to EN formula, mechanical ventilation, EN indicated for an expected time ≥5 days. Patients were also required to meet American Diabetes Association criteria for diabetes/hyperglycemia (baseline blood glucose >126 mg/dL after fasting or>200 mg/dL otherwise) in the first 48 h of ICU admission.||participants|||Number
829903|NCT01233726|Secondary|Assessment of Critical Ill Patients Progress During Hospital Stay 3|The incidence of tracheobronchitis and ventilator-associated pneumonia per 1000 days of mechanical ventilation are provided in this table.|28 days post-admission|Age ≥18 years, ICU stay ≤48 hours upon randomization to EN formula, mechanical ventilation, EN indicated for an expected time ≥5 days. Patients were also required to meet American Diabetes Association criteria for diabetes/hyperglycemia (baseline blood glucose >126 mg/dL after fasting or>200 mg/dL otherwise) in the first 48 h of ICU admission.||number of new cases per 1000 days|||Number
829904|NCT01233726|Secondary|Assessment of Critical Ill Patients Progress During Hospital Stay 2|Number of participants with catheter-associated bloodstream infection, primary bloodstream infection or urinary tract infection are provided in this table|28 days post-admission|Age ≥18 years, ICU stay ≤48 hours upon randomization to EN formula, mechanical ventilation, EN indicated for an expected time ≥5 days. Patients were also required to meet American Diabetes Association criteria for diabetes/hyperglycemia (baseline blood glucose >126 mg/dL after fasting or>200 mg/dL otherwise) in the first 48 h of ICU admission.||participants|||Number
829905|NCT01233726|Secondary|Assessment of Critical Ill Patients Progress During Hospital Stay 1|Infectious complication incidence rate per 100 days of treatment are provided in this table.|100 days of treatment|Age ≥18 years, ICU stay ≤48 hours upon randomization to EN formula, mechanical ventilation, EN indicated for an expected time ≥5 days. Patients were also required to meet American Diabetes Association criteria for diabetes/hyperglycemia (baseline blood glucose >126 mg/dL after fasting or>200 mg/dL otherwise) in the first 48 h of ICU admission.||percentage of patients with infection|||Number
829906|NCT01233726|Primary|Measure of Biochemical Parameters and Evaluation of Infectious Complications 6.2|"This table shows the rates of:
Controls analysis on 80-150 mg/dL: optimal level of glycemia rate.
Hypoglycemia (50-80 mg/dL): moderate hypoglycemia rate.
Hypoglycemia (<50 mg/dL): severe hypoglycemia episodes rate."|28 days post-admission|Age ≥18 years, ICU stay ≤48 hours upon randomization to EN formula, mechanical ventilation, EN indicated for an expected time ≥5 days. Patients were also required to meet American Diabetes Association criteria for diabetes/hyperglycemia (baseline blood glucose >126 mg/dL after fasting or>200 mg/dL otherwise) in the first 48 h of ICU admission.||% of capillary glycemia measurements|||Number
829908|NCT01233726|Primary|Measure of Biochemical Parameters and Evaluation of Infectious Complications 5|"The variables recorded related to Glycemic CV (%) are provided in this table:
Glycemic Coeficient of variation (%) after 28 days in ICU
Glycemic Coeficient of variation (%) after 7 days in ICU."|28 days post-admission|Age ≥18 years, ICU stay ≤48 hours upon randomization to EN formula, mechanical ventilation, EN indicated for an expected time ≥5 days. Patients were also required to meet American Diabetes Association criteria for diabetes/hyperglycemia (baseline blood glucose >126 mg/dL after fasting or>200 mg/dL otherwise) in the first 48 h of ICU admission.||percentage of Glycemic CV||Standard Deviation|Mean
829909|NCT01233726|Primary|Measure of Biochemical Parameters and Evaluation of Infectious Complications 4|The variables recorded related to the number of measurements per patient per day are provided in this table|28 days post-admission|Age ≥18 years, ICU stay ≤48 hours upon randomization to EN formula, mechanical ventilation, EN indicated for an expected time ≥5 days. Patients were also required to meet American Diabetes Association criteria for diabetes/hyperglycemia (baseline blood glucose >126 mg/dL after fasting or>200 mg/dL otherwise) in the first 48 h of ICU admission.||Measurements per patient/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
829910|NCT01233726|Primary|Measure of Biochemical Parameters and Evaluation of Infectious Complications 3|The variables recorded related to number of capillary glycemia measurements are provided in this table|28 days post-admission|Age ≥18 years, ICU stay ≤48 hours upon randomization to EN formula, mechanical ventilation, EN indicated for an expected time ≥5 days. Patients were also required to meet American Diabetes Association criteria for diabetes/hyperglycemia (baseline blood glucose >126 mg/dL after fasting or>200 mg/dL otherwise) in the first 48 h of ICU admission.||Capillary glycemia measurements|||Number
829911|NCT01233726|Primary|Measure of Biochemical Parameters and Evaluation of Infectious Complications 2|The variables recorded related to administered insulin in IU/day are provided in this table|28 days post-admission|Age ≥18 years, ICU stay ≤48 hours upon randomization to EN formula, mechanical ventilation, EN indicated for an expected time ≥5 days. Patients were also required to meet American Diabetes Association criteria for diabetes/hyperglycemia (baseline blood glucose >126 mg/dL after fasting or>200 mg/dL otherwise) in the first 48 h of ICU admission.||IU/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
829912|NCT01233726|Primary|Measure of Biochemical Parameters and Evaluation of Infectious Complications 1|The variables recorded related to glycemic control in mg/dL are provided in this table.|28 days post-admission|Age ≥18 years, ICU stay ≤48 hours upon randomization to EN formula, mechanical ventilation, EN indicated for an expected time ≥5 days. Patients were also required to meet American Diabetes Association criteria for diabetes/hyperglycemia (baseline blood glucose >126 mg/dL after fasting or>200 mg/dL otherwise) in the first 48 h of ICU admission.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829913|NCT01233817|Primary|Strength|Primary Outcome Measure was muscle strength. Strength was measured using a fixed myometry evaluation, quantitative muscle analysis (QMA). QMA utilizes a relative fixed point for the participant to exert effort. Each muscle of interest was tested using QMA.|12 weeks|||kilograms||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829914|NCT01233869|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings|ECGs were centrally evaluated. ECG parameters included PR interval, QRS interval, and corrected QT interval using Fridericia's formula (QTcF). Criteria for ECG changes meeting potential clinical concern included: PR interval greater than or equal to (≥)300 milliseconds (msec) or ≥25% increase when baseline is greater than (>)200 msec and ≥50% increase when baseline is less than or equal to (≤)200 msec; QRS interval ≥200 msec or ≥25%/50% increase from baseline; and QTcF ≥450 msec or ≥30 msec increase.|Baseline up to 30 days after last study drug administration|The safety analysis population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug; n=the number of participants analyzed in the respective arms.||participants|||Number
829915|NCT01233869|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Vital Signs Findings|Vital signs assessment included pulse rate and blood pressure. Criteria for vital sign values meeting potential clinical concern included: supine/sitting pulse rate <40 or >120 beats per minute (bpm), standing pulse rate <40 or >140 bpm; systolic blood pressure (SBP) of >=30 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg) change from baseline in same posture or SBP <90 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure (DBP) >=20 mmHg change from baseline in same posture or DBP <50 mm Hg.|Baseline up to 30 days after last study drug administration|The safety analysis population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug; n=the number of participants analyzed in the respective arms.||participants|||Number
829916|NCT01233869|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Laboratory Abnormalities Meeting the Criteria for Potential Clinical Concern|The following laboratory parameters were analyzed: hematology (hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell [RBC] count, RBC morphology, platelet count, white blood cell [WBC] count, total neutrophils, eosinophils, monocytes, basophils, lymphocytes); blood chemistry (blood urea nitrogen [BUN], creatinine, glucose, calcium, sodium, potassium, chloride, total bicarbonate, aspartate aminotransferase [AST], alanine aminotransferase [ALT], total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, uric acid, albumin, and total protein; urinalysis (pH, glucose, protein, blood, ketones, nitrites, leukocyte esterase, microscopy [if urine dipstick was positive for blood, protein, nitrites or leukocyte esterase]); others (coagulation panel, circulating immune complex, and complement activation).|Baseline up to 30 days after last study drug administration|The safety analysis population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
829917|NCT01233869|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 30 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pre-treatment state. AEs included both SAEs and non-SAEs.|Baseline up to 30 days after last study drug administration|The safety analysis population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
829977|NCT01234714|Secondary|Operative Time|The operation duration was measured according to the total minutes from the beginning of the operation until the end.|December 2010|According to MRI||min||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829918|NCT01233869|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQoL)-36 Scale Scores at Month 25|The KDQoL-36 is a 36-item questionnaire on kidney disease-specific measure of patient-reported quality of life with 5 subscales: physical and mental functioning (items 1-12); burden of kidney disease subscale (items 13-16); symptoms and problems (items 17-28); effects of kidney disease on daily life subscale (items 29-36). The raw scores are transformed linearly to a range of 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life.|Baseline and end of ITPV (Month 25)|The mITT-2 population included all participants who were randomized and received at least 2 weeks' worth of treatment and have at least 1 post-randomization follow-up MRI assessment (elimination of 1-month washout); n=the number of participants analyzed in the respective arms.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829919|NCT01233869|Secondary|Observed Accumulation Ratio (Rac) of Bosutinib|Observed accumulation ratio (Rac) was calculated as AUC from time 0 to 24 hours (Day 15) divided by AUC from time 0 to 24 hours (Day 1).|Day 15 (pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 24 hours post-dose)|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829920|NCT01233869|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Half-Life (t1/2) of Bosutinib|t1/2 is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Day 1 (pre-dose and 1, 3, 5 and 24 hours post-dose), Day 15 (pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 24 hours post-dose)|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest. There was no sufficient data to well-characterize the terminal phase, therefore t1/2 was not reported.|||||
829921|NCT01233869|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) of Bosutinib|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (Vz/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|Day 1 (pre-dose and 1, 3, 5 and 24 hours post-dose), Day 15 (pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 24 hours post-dose)|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest. There was no sufficient data to well-characterize the terminal phase, therefore Vz/F was not reported.|||||
829922|NCT01233869|Secondary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F) of Bosutinib|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood.|Day 15 (pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 24 hours post-dose)|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||L/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829923|NCT01233869|Secondary|Lowest Concentration Observed During the Dosing Interval (Cmin) of Bosutinib||Day 15 (pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 24 hours post-dose)|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829924|NCT01233869|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-Time Profile From Time 0 to the Dosing Interval (AUCtau) of Bosutinib|Area under the concentration-time profile from time 0 to time tau, the dosing interval, where tau=24 hours.|Day 1 (pre-dose and 1, 3, 5 and 24 hours post-dose), Day 15 (pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 24 hours post-dose)|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829925|NCT01233869|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Bosutinib||Day 1 (pre-dose and 1, 3, 5 and 24 hours post-dose), Day 15 (pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 24 hours post-dose)|The PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||hours||Full Range|Median
829926|NCT01233869|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Bosutinib||Day 1 (pre-dose and 1, 3, 5 and 24 hours post-dose), Day 15 (pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 24 hours post-dose)|The pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829927|NCT01233869|Secondary|Number of Participants With High Serum Creatinine (SCr) Levels|A SCr test can reveal how well the kidneys are working by measuring the amount of urea nitrogen in the blood. A high SCr level (>1.3 times the upper limit of normal) may suggest that the kidneys are not working properly. Month 25 is the end of the ITPV.|Day 15, Months 6, 12, 18, 24, and 25 (end of ITPV)|The safety analysis population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
829928|NCT01233869|Secondary|Number of Participants With High Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) Levels|A BUN test can reveal how well the kidneys are working by measuring the amount of urea nitrogen in the blood. A high BUN level (>1.3 times the upper limit of normal) may suggest that the kidneys are not working properly. Month 25 is the end of the ITPV.|Day 15, Months 6, 12, 18, 24, and 25 (end of ITPV)|The safety analysis population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
829929|NCT01233869|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence of End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Requiring Dialysis >=56 Days|ESRD is when the kidneys permanently fail to work at a level needed for daily life. No participants developed ESRD during the treatment period, therefore the analysis of the onset of ESRD requiring ≥56 days of dialysis was not performed.|Baseline up to Month 25 (end of ITPV)|The mITT-2 population included all participants who were randomized and received at least 2 weeks' worth of treatment and have at least 1 post-randomization follow-up MRI assessment (elimination of 1-month washout requirement).||days|||Number
829930|NCT01233869|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence of Proteinuria|Proteinuria is the presence of an excess of serum proteins in the urine, which may be an early sign of kidney disease. The numbers presented correspond to the very first occurrence of proteinuria in that treatment group.|Baseline up to Month 25 (end of ITPV)|The mITT-2 population included all participants who were randomized and received at least 2 weeks' worth of treatment and have at least 1 post-randomization follow-up MRI assessment (elimination of 1-month washout requirement).||days|||Number
829931|NCT01233869|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence of Gross Hematuria|Gross hematuria is the presence of blood in the urine (defined as pink, red, or cola-colored urine due to the presence of red blood cells). The numbers presented correspond to the very first occurrence of gross hematuria in that treatment group.|Baseline up to Month 25 (end of ITPV)|The mITT-2 population included all participants who were randomized and received at least 2 weeks' worth of treatment and have at least 1 post-randomization follow-up MRI assessment (elimination of 1-month washout requirement).||days|||Number
829932|NCT01233869|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence or Worsening of Back and/or Flank Pain|The time to first occurrence or worsening of back and/or flank pain was observed (defined as initial onset of polycystic kidney disease [PKD]-related chronic back and/or flank pain; initiation of pain medication treatment for PKD-related chronic back and/or flank pain; addition of a pain medicine for treatment of PKD-related chronic back and/or flank pain; increase in dose of pain medication for treatment of PKD-related chronic back and/or flank pain). The numbers presented correspond to the very first occurrence or worsening of back and/or flank pain in that treatment group.|Baseline up to Month 25 (end of ITPV)|The mITT-2 population included all participants who were randomized and received at least 2 weeks' worth of treatment and have at least 1 post-randomization follow-up MRI assessment (elimination of 1-month washout requirement).||days|||Number
829933|NCT01233869|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence or Worsening of Hypertension|The time to first occurrence or worsening of hypertension was observed (defined as the need for increased dose of or need for additional anti-hypertensive medication). The numbers presented correspond to the very first occurrence or worsening of hypertension in that treatment group.|Baseline up to Month 25 (end of ITPV)|The mITT-2 population included all participants who were randomized and received at least 2 weeks' worth of treatment and have at least 1 post-randomization follow-up MRI assessment (elimination of 1-month washout requirement).||days|||Number
829934|NCT01233869|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) at Months 12, 24, 25 and Early Termination|eGFR was centrally evaluated. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is an index of kidney function that describes the flow of filtered fluid through the kidney. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation was used to calculate eGFR. Month 25 is the end of the ITPV.|Baseline, Month 12, Month 24, Month 25 (end of ITPV), and early termination|The mITT population included all participants who were randomized and received at least 2 weeks' worth of treatment and have at least 1 post-randomization follow-up MRI assessment; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
829935|NCT01233869|Primary|Change From Baseline (CFB) in Total Kidney Volume (TKV) at Month 25|TKV was measured by centrally evaluated Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI).|Baseline and Month 25 (end of Initial Treatment Period Visit [ITPV])|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population included all participants who were randomized and received at least 2-weeks' worth of treatment and have at least 1 follow-up MRI assessment that was preceded by a 1-month washout of the study drug; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||centimeter cube (cm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
829936|NCT01233921|Secondary|Changes in the Number of Naive CD4 T Cells in the Blood|Naive CD4 T cells will be defined according to co-expression of CD3, CD4, CD45RA, and CCR7. Positive results indicate an increase in the number of cells between baseline and 4 weeks. Negative results indicate a decrease in the number of cells between baseline and 4 weeks.|Baseline and 4 weeks after administration of palifermin|||cells per microliter of blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
829937|NCT01233921|Primary|Changes in the Number of Recent Thymic Emigrants (RTE) Cluster of Differentiation (CD)4 T Cells in the Blood|RTE CD4 T cells will be defined according to co-expression of CD3, CD4, CD31, CD45RA, and CCR7. Cells will be counted by flow cytometry at baseline and at 4 weeks and changes will be measured as cells per microliter of blood. Positive results indicate an increase in the number of cells between baseline and 4 weeks. Negative results indicate a decrease in the number of cells between baseline and 4 weeks.|Baseline and 4 weeks after administration of palifermin|||cells per microliter of blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
829938|NCT01233999|Primary|Mean Digital Temperature Difference From Baseline|Each digit temperature was measured and recorded at baseline, and then measured and re-recorded after 3 minute intervals following a 20 second 4 degree Celsius ice bath immersion.|6 weeks|||Celsius||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
829939|NCT01234103|Secondary|Self-reported Behavioral Measures Related to STI/HIV Prevention||6 to 9 months|No data were collected from participants. Participants only attended intervention sessions.|||||
829940|NCT01234103|Primary|Incidence of Sexually Transmitted Infections and the Self-reported Numbers of Unintended Pregnancies||6 to 9 months|No data were collected from participants. Participants only attended intervention sessions.|||||
829941|NCT01234207|Primary|Questionnaire Battery|Forced-choice Likert scale preference questionnaire|At study exit, after both Test and Control spectacles had been worn for 1 week each|95 presbyopic subjects wearing standard, non-free-form, non-customized PAL spectacles for 1 week, and individually customized, free-form surfaced PAL spectacles for 1 week, in randomized order, with a 1-week washout period||percentage of participants|||Number
829942|NCT01234207|Primary|Horizontal Extent of Undistorted Vision at Reading Distance|Novel apparatus designed to immobilize head and allow subject to indicate point of peripheral optical distortion on a modified Amsler-type grid|Post-1 week of wear of Test Spectacles and post-1 week of wear of Control Spectacles|95 presbyopic subjects wearing standard, non-free-form, non-customized PAL spectacles for 1 week, and individually customized, free-form surfaced PAL spectacles for 1 week, in randomized order, with a 1-week washout period||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
829943|NCT01234207|Primary|30-degree Off-axis Distance Visual Acuity, Low Contrast Chart|Measured with subject immobilized in specially designed apparatus, keeping head pointed straight forward and moving only the eyes to left or right to view the off-axis chart|Post-1 week of wear of Test Spectacles and post-1 week of wear of Control Spectacles|95 presbyopic subjects wearing standard, non-free-form, non-customized PAL spectacles for 1 week, and individually customized, free-form surfaced PAL spectacles for 1 week, in randomized order, with a 1-week washout period||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
829978|NCT01234714|Secondary|Intra-operative Blood Loss|Intra-operative blood loss was defined according to the total volume of blood loss from the beginning until the end of the operation.|December 2010|According to MRI||ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839185|NCT01324622|Primary|Sagittal Angle Success|Success defined as ≤ +15º (kyphosis) as indicated by a neutral lateral radiograph|12 months|Number of subjects with radiographic data available at 12 month visit||participants|||Number
829944|NCT01234207|Primary|30-degree Off-axis Distance Visual Acuity, High Contrast Chart|Measured with subject immobilized in specially designed apparatus, keeping head pointed straight forward and moving only the eyes to left or right to view the off-axis chart|Post-1 week of wear of Test Spectacles and post-1 week of wear of Control Spectacles|95 presbyopic subjects wearing standard, non-free-form, non-customized PAL spectacles for 1 week, and individually customized, free-form surfaced PAL spectacles for 1 week, in randomized order, with a 1-week washout period||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
829945|NCT01234207|Primary|Visual Acuity, Low Contrast, Near Chart|Standard assessment of low contrast visual acuity at near, as in normal clinical practice, using Baily-Lovey charts and the M&S Technologies Smart System II visual acuity projection system.|Post-1 week of wear of Test Spectacles and post-1 week of wear of Control Spectacles|95 presbyopic subjects wearing standard, non-free-form, non-customized PAL spectacles for 1 week, and individually customized, free-form surfaced PAL spectacles for 1 week, in randomized order, with a 1-week washout period||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
829946|NCT01234207|Primary|Visual Acuity, High Contrast, Near Chart|Standard assessment of high contrast visual acuity at near, as in normal clinical practice, using Baily-Lovey charts and the M&S Technologies Smart System II visual acuity projection system.|Post-1 week of wear of Test Spectacles and post-1 week of wear of Control Spectacles|95 presbyopic subjects wearing standard, non-free-form, non-customized PAL spectacles for 1 week, and individually customized, free-form surfaced PAL spectacles for 1 week, in randomized order, with a 1-week washout period||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
829947|NCT01234207|Primary|Visual Acuity, Low Contrast, Distance Chart|Standard assessment of low contrast visual acuity at distance, as in normal clinical practice, using Baily-Lovey charts and the M&S Technologies Smart System II visual acuity projection system.|Post-1 week of wear of Test Spectacles and post-1 week of wear of Control Spectacles|95 presbyopic subjects wearing standard, non-free-form, non-customized PAL spectacles for 1 week, and individually customized, free-form surfaced PAL spectacles for 1 week, in randomized order, with a 1-week washout period||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
829948|NCT01234207|Primary|Visual Acuity, High Contrast, Distance Chart|Standard assessment of high contrast visual acuity at distance, as in normal clinical practice, using Baily-Lovey charts and the M&S Technologies Smart System II visual acuity projection system.|Post-1 week of wear of Test Spectacles and post-1 week of wear of Control Spectacles|95 presbyopic subjects wearing standard, non-free-form, non-customized PAL spectacles for 1 week, and individually customized, free-form surfaced PAL spectacles for 1 week, in randomized order, with a 1-week washout period||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
829949|NCT01234337|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Grade 3 and 4 Laboratory Abnormalities|Hematological (anemia, hemoglobin, international normalized ratio [INR], lymphocyte, neutrophil, platelet, white blood cell [WBC]), biochemical (ALT [alanine aminotransferase], AST [aspartate aminotransferase], GGT [gamma-glutamyl-transferase], lipase, hypoalbuminemia, hypocalcemia, hyperglycemia, hyperuricemia) evaluations were done. Common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) version 4-Grade 3: Severe or medically significant; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization and CTCAE version 4-Grade 4: life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention were indicated.|From the start of study treatment up to 30 days after the last dose|Safety Analysis Set (SAF) was comprised of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication (sorafenib, placebo or capecitabine). Participants were analyzed as treated.||Paricipants|||Number
829950|NCT01234337|Other Pre-specified|Area Under Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-tlast]) of Capecitabine and 5-fluorouracil|AUC(0-tlast) is defined as AUC from time 0 to the last data point, calculated up by linear trapezoidal rule, down by logarithmic trapezoidal rule. Geometric mean and percentage geometric coefficient of variation (%CV) were reported. In the listed categories below, 'N' signifies the number of evaluable participants for the drug administered.|Pre-dose and 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 hours after capecitabine dosing at Cycle 2, Day 14|PKS||milligram*hour per liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829951|NCT01234337|Other Pre-specified|Maximum Observed Drug Concentration (Cmax) of Capecitabine and 5-fluorouracil|Maximum observed drug concentration, directly taken from analytical data. Geometric mean and percentage geometric coefficient of variation (%CV) were reported. In the listed categories below, 'N' signifies the number of evaluable participants for the drug administered.|Pre-dose and 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 hours after capecitabine dosing at Cycle 2, Day 14|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PKS) included all participants with a valid pharmacokinetic profile of capecitabine.||milligram per liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829952|NCT01234337|Other Pre-specified|Patient Reported Outcomes: Euroqol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) - Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score|The EQ-5D was a generic QoL preference based instrument and has been validated in the cancer populations. VAS was generated from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). This VAS score was referred to as the EQ-5D self-reported health status score. The results on ANCOVA of time-adjusted AUC were reported. The time-adjusted AUC was calculated by dividing the AUC by duration (in days) over the period of interest, and reported as 'scores on a scale'.|Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25, 28, and EOT (21 days after last dose of study drug)|FAS participants with a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment during the study.||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829953|NCT01234337|Other Pre-specified|Patient Reported Outcomes: Euroqol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) - Index Score|The EQ-5D was a generic Quality of life (QoL) based instrument validated in cancer populations. EQ-5D questionnaire contained a 5-item descriptive system of health states (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) and visual analogue scale (VAS). A single HRQoL score ranging from -0.59 to 1 was generated from standard scoring algorithm developed by the EuroQoL was the EQ-5D index score, higher scores represent better health status. A change of at least 0.10 to 0.12 points was considered clinically meaningful. The results on the ANCOVA of time-adjusted AUC for the EQ-5D - Index Score were reported. The time-adjusted AUC was calculated by dividing the AUC by duration (in days) over the period of interest, and reported as 'scores on a scale'.|Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25, 28, and EOT (21 days after last dose of study drug)|FAS participants with a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment during the study.||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829979|NCT01234714|Secondary|Post-operative Alanine Transaminase (ALT) Levels|Alanine Transaminase is commonly measured clinically as a part of a diagnostic evaluation of hepatocellular injury, to determine liver health.|December 2010|According to the MRI liver fat content measurement.||Units/liter||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829954|NCT01234337|Other Pre-specified|Patient Reported Outcomes: Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Symptom Index (8 Item) (FBSI-8)|The FBSI-8 was an 8-item questionnaire. Participants responded to each item using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). A total scale score was calculated (range from 0 to 32), with higher scores indicating low symptomatology and reflecting a better Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). The results on the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) of time-adjusted area under curve (AUC) for the FBSI-8 score were reported. The time-adjusted AUC was calculated by dividing the AUC by duration (in days) over the period of interest, and reported as 'scores on a scale'.|Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, 37, and end of treatment (EOT, 21 days after last dose of study drug)|FAS participants with a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment during the study.||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
829955|NCT01234337|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR) by Central Reader|DOR was defined as the time from date of first response (CR or PR) to the date when PD is first documented, or to the date of death, whichever occurred first according to RECIST version 1.1. CR=all target lesions disappeared, and any pathological lymph node, whether target or non-target, had a reduction in short axis to <10 mm. If any residual lesion was present, cyto-histology was made available to unequivocally document benignity. PR=at least 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Participants still having CR or PR and have not died at the time of analysis were censored at their last date of tumor evaluation. DOR defined for confirmed responders only (that is, CR or PR). 'NA' indicates that value could not be estimated due to censored data. Median and 95% CIs were computed using Kaplan-Meier estimates.|From randomization of the first participant until approximately 3 years later or until disease radiological progression|Only responders in FAS were evaluated for this outcome measure.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829956|NCT01234337|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR) by Central Review|DCR was defined as the proportion of participants whose best response was CR, PR, stable disease (SD) or Non-CR/Non-PD. Per RECIST version 1.1, CR=all target lesions disappeared, any pathological lymph node, target/non-target, a reduction in short axis to <10 mm. PR=at least 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference baseline sum diameters. PD=at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of the target lesions, taking as a reference smallest sum on study. Appearance of new lesions and unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. SD=neither sufficient shrinkage qualified for PR nor sufficient increase qualified for PD, taking smallest sum of diameters as a reference. Non-CR/Non-PD=persistence of 1/more non-target lesion(s) and/or maintenance of tumor marker level above normal limits. DCR=CR+PR+SD or Non-CR/Non-PD. CR and PR confirmed by another scan at least 4 weeks later. SD and Non-CR/Non-PD documented at least 6 weeks after randomization.|From randomization of the first participant until approximately 3 years later or until disease radiological progression|FAS||percentage (%) of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829957|NCT01234337|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) by Central Review|ORR was defined as the best tumor response (Complete Response [CR] or Partial Response [PR]) observed during treatment or within 30 days after termination of study treatment, assessed according to the RECIST version 1.1. CR=all target lesions disappeared, and any pathological lymph node, whether target or non-target, had a reduction in short axis to <10 mm. If any residual lesion was present, cyto-histology was made available to unequivocally document benignity. PR=at least 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. ORR=CR+PR. CR and PR were confirmed by another scan at least 4 weeks later.|From randomization of the first participant until approximately 3 years later or until disease radiological progression|FAS||Percentage (%) of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829958|NCT01234337|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP) by Central Review|TTP was defined as the time from date of randomization to disease radiological progression by central review. Per RECIST version 1.1, progressive disease was determined when there was at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of the target lesions, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the baseline sum if that was the smallest sum on trial). In addition to a relative increase of 20%, the sum had demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Appearance of new lesions and unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions was also interpreted as progressive disease. Participants without progression or death at the time of analysis were censored at their last date of evaluable tumor evaluation. Median and other 95% confidence intervals (CIs) computed using Kaplan-Meier estimates.|From randomization of the first participant until approximately 3 years later or until disease radiological progression|FAS||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829959|NCT01234337|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from date of randomization to death due to any cause. Participants still alive at the time of analysis were censored at their last known alive date. Median and other 95% CIs computed using Kaplan-Meier estimates.|From randomization of the first participant until approximately 3 years later|FAS||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829960|NCT01234337|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) Assessed by the Independent Review Panel According to Response Evaluation Criteria for Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1|PFS was defined as the time from date of randomization to disease progression, radiological or death due to any cause, whichever occurs first. Per RECIST version 1.1, progressive disease was determined when there was at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of the target lesions, taking as a reference the smallest sum on study (this included the baseline sum if that was the smallest sum on trial). In addition to a relative increase of 20%, the sum had demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Appearance of new lesions and unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions was also interpreted as progressive disease. Participants without progression or death at the time of analysis were censored at their last date of evaluable tumor evaluation. Median and other 95% confidence intervals (CIs) computed using Kaplan-Meier estimates.|From randomization of the first participant until approximately 3 years or until disease radiological progression|Full Analysis Set (FAS), also considered as Intent-to-treat (ITT) set, was defined as all randomized participants even if randomized but received no drug or if randomized and initially received incorrect drug prior to switching to correct study drug, these were included in FAS.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829995|NCT01235195|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)]|AUC (0 - ∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|Predose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose|All participants.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
829961|NCT01234467|Secondary|Evaluate the Toxicity and Tolerability of Bendamustine in Combination With Rituximab|The major grade 3 or higher adverse events were haematological toxicities. The results below include common haematological and non-haematological toxicities of grade 3 or higher. A complete record of all adverse events are reported in the adverse events section. National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0 were used to assess toxicity.|Adverse events were collected while patients were on active treatment. The median treatment time was 18 weeks.|This represents the data after inclusion of the first 23 patients at the planned interim analysis. The data analysis was performed prior to the previously determined 3-year follow-up period because the study did not reach the initially planned sample size to determine the survival rates in a statistically significant manner as secondary objectives.||percentage of patients|||Number
829962|NCT01234467|Secondary|Overall Survival|This represents the Kaplan-Meier estimates of median overall survival defined as the time from start of treatment until death as a result of any cause.|2 years with the median follow-up of 29 months|This represents the data after inclusion of the first 23 patients at the planned interim analysis. The data analysis was performed prior to the previously determined 3-year follow-up period because the study did not reach the initially planned sample size to determine the survival rates in a statistically significant manner as secondary objectives.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829963|NCT01234467|Secondary|Estimate of Progression-Free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) will be summarized using the Kaplan-Meier method. PFS was defined as the time from the start of treatment until lymphoma progression or death as a result of any cause. Progression was defined by The International Harmonization Project for Response Criteria as any new lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from nadir.|2 years with the median follow-up of 29 months|This represents the data after inclusion of the first 23 patients at the planned interim analysis. The data analysis was performed prior to the previously determined 3-year follow-up period because the study did not reach the initially planned sample size to determine the survival rates in a statistically significant manner as secondary objectives.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
829964|NCT01234467|Secondary|Partial Response Rate|The percentage of participants achieving a partial response (PR). PR is defined by The International Harmonization Project for Response Criteria as regression of measurable disease and no new sites.|2 years|This represents the data after inclusion of the first 23 patients at the planned interim analysis. The data analysis was performed prior to the previously determined 3-year follow-up period because the study did not reach the initially planned sample size to determine the survival rates in a statistically significant manner as secondary objectives.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829965|NCT01234467|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|The ORR consists of the complete response rate + the partial response rate (percentage of participants achieving a complete or partial response). Complete response is defined by The International Harmonization Project for Response Criteria as the complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present before therapy. Partial response is defined as regression of measurable disease and no new sites.|2 years|This represents the data after inclusion of the first 23 patients at the planned interim analysis. The data analysis was performed prior to the previously determined 3-year follow-up period because the study did not reach the initially planned sample size to determine the survival rates in a statistically significant manner as secondary objectives.||percentage of participants|||Number
829966|NCT01234467|Primary|Complete Response (CR) Rate as Defined by The International Harmonization Project for Response Criteria|Complete response (CR) is defined as the complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present before therapy. The complete response rate is the percentage of participants achieving a CR.|2 years|This represents the data after inclusion of the first 23 patients at the planned interim analysis. The data analysis was performed prior to the previously determined 3-year follow-up period because the study did not reach the initially planned sample size to determine the survival rates in a statistically significant manner as secondary objectives.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
829967|NCT01234675|Primary|Percentage of Total Sleep Time|Sleep measures at week 5 of the treatment period I; and upto week 12 for treatment period II Percentage of Total Sleep Time that was spent in various stages of sleep|Overnight PSG week 5/ up to week 12; milnacipran treatment|||Percent of total sleep time||Standard Error|Mean
829968|NCT01234675|Primary|Arousal Index|Number of arousal per hours|Overnight PSG week 5/ upto week 12; milnacipran treatment|||Number of Arousals per hour||Standard Error|Mean
829969|NCT01234675|Primary|Sleep Efficiency|Percentage of Total sleep time|Overnight PSG week 5/ upto week 12; milnacipran treatment|||Percentage of total sleep time||Standard Error|Mean
829970|NCT01234675|Primary|Number of Awakenings After Sleep Onset||Overnight PSG week 5/ upto week 12; milnacipran treatment|||Number of Awakenings||Standard Error|Mean
829971|NCT01234675|Secondary|Subjective Measures With Change in Sleep and Change in Pain Measures|"Subjective assessments will constitute secondary endpoints and will include:
• Clinical Global Impression Improvement of Illness Scale (CGI-I) Clinical Global Impression- Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S); Medical Outcomes study Sleep Scale (MOS-SS); Fibromyalgia impact questionnaire (FIQ); Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) score-short form; Patient Global Impression of change (PGI-C); Beck Depression Inventory (BDI; Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS; Numeric Rating Scale-Sleep (NRS-S), part of subjective sleep questionnaire"|assessments made at week 1, week 6, week 14||||||
829972|NCT01234675|Primary|Overnight Polysomnography to Measure Sleep Disturbance With Milnacipran Treatment|Sleep measures at week 5 of the treatment period I; and upto week 12 for treatment period II|Overnight PSG week 5/ up to week 12; milnacipran treatment|||minutes||Standard Error|Mean
829973|NCT01234714|Secondary|Type of Post-operative Complications|There are several different types of post-operative complications associated with liver surgery, such as liver failure, multi-organ failure, bleeding, bile leak, and sepsis.|December 2010||||||
829974|NCT01234714|Secondary|Cost|The total in-hospital costs were calculated for each patient in Euros.|December 2010|According to MRI||Euros||Standard Deviation|Mean
829975|NCT01234714|Secondary|Hospital Stay|The patient hospital stay was calculated according to the total number of days the patient was hospitalized.|December 2010|According to MRI||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829976|NCT01234714|Secondary|Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Stay|The Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stay was calculated according to the total number of days the patients were managed in the ICU. This included also multiple ICU admissions.|December 2010|According to MRI||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829980|NCT01234714|Primary|Percentage of Liver Fat Content on MRI in Patients With Serious Post-operative Complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥IV)|"Liver fat content, measured by MRI, uses the in-phase/out-of-phase imaging calculated in terms of fat signal fraction (FSF).
The Clavien-Dindo Classification of Surgical Complications:
Grade I: Any deviation from the normal postoperative course without the need for treatment. Grade II: Requiring pharmacological treatment with drugs. Grade III: Requiring surgical, endoscopic or radiological intervention. Grade IV: Life-threatening complication requiring IC/ICU-management. Grade V: Death of a patient"|December 2010|According to the Clavien-Dindo Classification of surgical complications: (please see) http://www.surgicalcomplication.info/||Percentage of liver fat content||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
829988|NCT01234870|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events to Demonstrate Feasibility of a Comprehensive Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Protocol|Adverse events relating to administration of adenosine during a coronary heart disease comprehensive cardiac MRI study.|14 days|||occurances of adverse events|||Number
829989|NCT01234870|Primary|Magnetic Resonance Image Quality Rating|The purpose of the study is to assess the incremental value of diagnostic performance using a fully-automated, motion-corrected (MC) first pass myocardial perfusion image acquisition protocol compared to images obtained under a non-corrected, breath-hold, shallow-breathing first pass myocardial perfusion image acquisition protocol in patients with suspected ischemic heart disease. The MR images resulting from two different image acquisition techniques, including Non-Corrected Breath-Hold Shallow-Breathing and Motion-Corrected, were assessed independently by two radiologists (average of 7 years of experience in reading cardiac MRI) using the American Heart Association modified 16 segment model and were evaluated using a four point Likert scale (1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, and 4 = excellent) for image quality|Cross sectional study; magnetic resonance images were obtained on all patients using two different acquisition methods.|||units on a likert scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
829990|NCT01234883|Primary|Venous Serum Bicarbonate: Modified Intent to Treat Population (mITT); Obtained at Hour 4|The primary efficacy variable was venous serum bicarbonate (marker of metabolic acidosis) at Hour 4 (+/- 1 hour) from the start of the First IV Bolus at Hour 0.|4 hour|The mITT population is all subjects with Baseline bicarbonate value ≤ 22 mmol/L. The mITT population was used for efficacy evaluation. The AT analysis set was defined as all subjects who received at least 5 mL of study treatment and were classified according to actual treatment received. AT population was used for AE analysis.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
829991|NCT01234922|Secondary|Change in Ang II, VEGF, PlGF, and ACE Levels||1 week||||||
829992|NCT01234922|Primary|Changes in Ang1-7 Levels Among Patients After ACE-I/ARB Treatment Measured in Picogram/Milliliter||7 days post-baseline|||Picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
829993|NCT01235195|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Predose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose|All participants.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
829994|NCT01235195|Secondary|Residual Area Under the Concentration Time Curve [AUC(Res%)]|AUC(res%) is the residual AUC defined as (AUCinf minus AUClast) divided by AUCinf. AUCinf is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinite time. AUClast is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to the last measured concentration.|Predose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose|This parameter was not analyzed. It is reported individually for each subject and not analyzed statistically.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
829996|NCT01235195|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||Predose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose|All participants.||hours||Full Range|Median
829998|NCT01235195|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to 72 Hours [AUC (0-72)]|AUC (0-72)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to 72 hours (0-72).|Predose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose|All participants: all treated participants with at least one sertraline concentration were evaluated for pharmacokinetics.||nanogram hour per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
829999|NCT01235234|Secondary|Ocular Surface Disease Index|Change from Baseline in Ocular Surface Disease Indexat Week 24|24 weeks||||||
830000|NCT01235234|Secondary|Increase in Schirmer Test Tearing by >9mm Over Baseline|Proportion of subjects with ST wetting increase over Baseline of ≥10 mm with or without anesthesia in either eye at Week 24|24 weeks||||||
830001|NCT01235234|Primary|Nature and Frequency of Adverse Events|The primary efficacy comparison with respect to the rates of complete clearing of corneal staining at Week 24 was performed using a 2-sided test at level 0.025 to adjust for the comparison of 2 doses of CF101 to placebo. All between-treatment comparisons with respect to all secondary efficacy endpoints were performed using 2-sided tests at level 0.025. Between-treatment comparisons with respect to ancillary efficacy endpoints were performed using 2-sided tests at level 0.05. The primary comparison, as well as the comparisons with respect to the proportion of subjects with complete central corneal clearing (i.e., central corneal FS score=0) in the target eye and the proportion of subjects with ST ≥10 mm with or without anesthesia in either eye, was performed using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by duration of symptoms at Baseline (≤5 years or>5 years) and disease severity at Baseline (ST1-3or4-6 mm/5 minutes without anesthesia).|24 weeks||||||
830002|NCT01235234|Primary|Efficacy by Proportion of Subjects Who Achieved Complete Clearing of Corneal Staining (i.e., Total Corneal FS Score = 0) at Week 24|Complete clearing of corneal staining by fluorescein staining (FS). The primary efficacy analysis was performed for 1eye (target eye), defined as the eye with the larger corneal FS value at Baseline. If both eyes had the same corneal FS value at baseline, the target eye was considered the eye with the larger central corneal staining value at Baseline. Corneal FS defined as a corneal punctate fluorescein staining score of ≥4 in either eye by the National Eye Institute evaluation scale summed over 5 areas each with a 0-3 scoring scale|24 weeks|||participants|||Number
830003|NCT01235338|Secondary|Pulse Rate||Baseline and up to 39 days|SAS||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
830004|NCT01235338|Primary|Tmax of Composite (Venlafaxine + o-Desmethylvenlafaxine)||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
830005|NCT01235338|Primary|Tmax of o-Desmethylvenlafaxine||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
830006|NCT01235338|Primary|Tmax of Venlafaxine Hydrochloride||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
830007|NCT01235338|Primary|Tmax of d-Amphetamine||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
830008|NCT01235338|Primary|Time of Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
830009|NCT01235338|Primary|AUC of Composite (Venlafaxine + o-Desmethylvenlafaxine)||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||ng*hr/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830010|NCT01235338|Primary|AUC of o-Desmethylvenlafaxine||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||ng*hr/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830011|NCT01235338|Primary|AUC of Venlafaxine Hydrochloride||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||ng*hr/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830012|NCT01235338|Primary|AUC of d-Amphetamine||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||ng*hr/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830013|NCT01235338|Primary|Area Under the Steady-state Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||ng*hr/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830014|NCT01235338|Primary|Cmax of Composite (Venlafaxine + o-Desmethylvenlafaxine)||Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830015|NCT01235338|Primary|Cmax of o-Desmethylvenlafaxine|Venlafaxine, after oral administration, is metabolized in the liver to an active metabolite, o-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830016|NCT01235338|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure||Baseline and up to 39 days|SAS||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
830017|NCT01235338|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure||Baseline and up to 39 days|Safety Analysis Set (SAS) defined as all enrolled subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product and had at least 1 post-dose safety assessment.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
830018|NCT01235338|Primary|Cmax of Venlafaxine Hydrochloride|Venlafaxine Hydrochloride is the active ingredient of Effexor XR|Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830019|NCT01235338|Primary|Cmax of d-Amphetamine|d-Amphetamine is the active isomer of Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (SPD489) and is responsible for the drug's therapeutic activity.|Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|PAS||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830020|NCT01235338|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate|Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (SPD489) itself is inactive, but following oral administration is converted to the active isomer, d-amphetamine, that is responsible for the drug's therapeutic activity.|Day 15 and Day 30 (24 hour sampling)|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PAS) defined as all subjects who took a t least 1 dose of investigational product and had at least 1 post-dose safety assessment and who had no major deviations related to investigational product intake (e.g. vomiting) and for whom the primary pharmacokinetic data were considered sufficient and interpretable.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830021|NCT01235377|Secondary|Factors Associated With Prescribing Patterns|factors (barriers and facilitators) associated with prescribing according to the Cluster Designation|nine months||||||
830022|NCT01235377|Primary|Prescription Rates|rates of provider prescribing of the Cluster Designated drug|nine months|providers prescribing a thiazide at least once in the study period||% new thiazide prescriptions||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
830023|NCT01235403|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Retained on Vimpat Through the End of the 24-week Treatment Period|"The number of subjects continuing on Vimpat up to and including Visit 4 (Week 24) divided by the number of patients who took at least 1 dose of Vimpat multiplied by 100.
The overall Treatment Period comprises of a 12-week Titration Phase and 12-week Maintenance Phase."|End of Treatment Period (24-week)|Safety Set||percentage of subjects|||Number
830835|NCT01240200|Primary|Treatment Satisfaction Based on Patient Survey|The primary outcome of the study is to determine differences in treatment satisfaction scores in elderly patients with diabetes treated with basal insulin delivered via a pen device versus a syringe.|at 0 weeks||||||
830024|NCT01235403|Primary|Number of Subjects Prematurely Discontinuing Due to a TEAE During the Study|Number of subjects prematurely discontinuing due to a TEAE during the study. The study is comprised of a 12-week Titration Phase, a 12 -week Maintenance Phase, and a 3 to 4 week Taper Phase if needed.|During the study (up to 24 - 28 weeks)|Safety Set||subjects|||Number
830025|NCT01235403|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting at Least 1 Treatment-Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) During the Study|Number of subjects reporting at least 1 Treatment-Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) during the study. The study is comprised of a 12-week Titration Phase, a 12 -week Maintenance Phase, and a 3 to 4 week Taper Phase if needed.|During the study ( up to 24 - 28 weeks)|Safety Set||subjects|||Number
830026|NCT01235442|Secondary|sPGA (0,1) at Week 24|The percentage of participants achieving sPGA 0 or 1 at week 24. Static physician global assessment of psoriasis (sPGA) is a physician’s global assessment of the participant's psoriasis based on severity of induration, scaling, and erythema. The sPGA of psoriasis comprises a 6-point scale ranging from 0 (clear) to 5 with increasing severity.|Week 24|Intention-to-Treat with last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation||Percentage of participants|||Number
830027|NCT01235442|Secondary|PASI 75 at Week 24|The percentage of participants with the Psoriasis Area and Severity Indexs (PASI) 75 responses at week 24. PASI is an assessment of psoriasis based on severity of erythema, infiltration, and desquamation as well as area of involvement. The PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher score represents the worse symptom severity. A response was considered a 75% reduction in the PASI score from Baseline.|Week 24|Intention-to-Treat with last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation||Percentage of participants|||Number
830028|NCT01235442|Secondary|Percent PASI Improvement From Baseline at Week 12|The percentage of the improvement in PASI score at week 12 from baseline. PASI is an assessment of psoriasis based on severity of erythema, infiltration, and desquamation as well as area of involvement. The PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher score represents the worse symptom severity.|Week 12|Intention-to-Treat with last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation||Percentage of Improvement in PASI score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830029|NCT01235442|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction at Week 12|Patient assessment of treatment satisfaction status at week 12. It is a measure of a participant's level of satisfaction with the medication’s control of psoriasis, ranging from “very satisfied” to “very dissatisfied.”|Week 12|PRO analysis set, including all subjects randomized and also complete the baseline and at least 1 of the post-baseline PRO assessment with last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation||Percentage of participants|||Number
830030|NCT01235442|Secondary|PASI 90 at Week 12|The percentage of participants with the Psoriasis Area and Severity Indexs (PASI) 90 responses at week 12. PASI is an assessment of psoriasis based on severity of erythema, infiltration, and desquamation as well as area of involvement. The PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher score represents the worse symptom severity. A response was considered a 90% reduction in the PASI score from Baseline.|Week 12|Intention-to-Treat with last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation||Percentage of participants|||Number
830031|NCT01235442|Secondary|sPGA (0,1) at Week 12|The percentage of participants achieving sPGA 0 or 1 at week 12. Static physician global assessment of psoriasis (sPGA) is a physician’s global assessment of the participant's psoriasis based on severity of induration, scaling, and erythema. The sPGA of psoriasis comprises a 6-point scale ranging from 0 (clear) to 5 with increasing severity.|Week 12|Intention-to-Treat with last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation||Percentage of participants|||Number
830032|NCT01235442|Primary|PASI 75 at Week 12|The percentage of participants with the Psoriasis Area and Severity Indexs (PASI) 75 responses at week 12. PASI is an assessment of psoriasis based on severity of erythema, infiltration, and desquamation as well as area of involvement. The PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher score represents the worse symptom severity. A response was considered a 75% reduction in the PASI score from Baseline.|Week 12|Intention-to-Treat with last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation||Percentage of participants|||Number
830033|NCT01235507|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and AEs of Special Interest (AESIs)|AEs, SAEs and AESI were recorded from the Screening Visit until the final visit at Week 24.|Screening Visit, Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|Safety Analysis Population: All participants enrolled in the study who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline assessment of safety (such as laboratory data, vital signs, or AEs) were included.||percentage of participants|||Number
830034|NCT01235507|Secondary|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)|ESR is a marker of inflammation and is measured in millimeters per hour (mm/hour). A negative change from baseline represents an improvement.|Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified time point||mm/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
830035|NCT01235507|Secondary|CRP Levels|CRP is a marker of acute phase inflammation and is measured in mg/L. A negative change from baseline represents an improvement.|Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified time point||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
830036|NCT01235507|Secondary|Participant's Global Assessment of Pain|Participant's global assessment of pain was performed using a 100 mm VAS ranging from no pain (0) at the left edge to unbearable pain (100) at the right edge. The distance in mm from the left edge of the scale was measured. A negative change from baseline represents an improvement.|Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified time point||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
830037|NCT01235507|Secondary|Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity|Participant's global assessment of disease activity was performed using a 100 mm VAS ranging from no arthritis activity (0) to maximal arthritis activity (100). The distance in mm from the left edge of the scale was measured. Higher scores indicated higher disease activity. A negative change from baseline represents an improvement.|Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified time point||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
830038|NCT01235507|Secondary|Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity|Physician's global assessment of disease activity was performed using a 100 mm VAS ranging from no arthritis activity (0) to maximal arthritis activity (100). The distance in mm from the left edge of the scale was measured. Higher scores indicated higher disease activity. A negative change from baseline represents an improvement.|Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24|ITT Population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified time point||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
830039|NCT01235507|Secondary|Swollen and Tender Joint Counts|66 and 68 joints were assessed by the physician for tenderness or swelling respectively. The joints were counted as tender/not tender (tender=1; not tender=0) and swollen/not swollen (swollen=1; not swollen=0) and scored. The scores ranged from 0 to 66 for TJC and 0 to 68 for SJC. A negative change from baseline represents an improvement.|Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24|ITT Population; n= number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified time point||Joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
830040|NCT01235507|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Low Disease Activity (LDA) and Clinical Remission (CR) as Assessed Using DAS28|"DAS28 was calculated using the 28 joints count, the CRP and PtGA of disease activity. The following formula was used to determine DAS28.
DAS28 = 0.56 × √(TJC28) + 0.28 × √(SJC28) + 0.36 × ln(CRP+1) + 0.014 × GH + 0.96 where, TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJC28 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ln = natural log, CRP = C-reactive protein (mg/L), and GH = general health, determined by participant's global assessment of disease activity (100-mm VAS).
The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. Participants were considered to have low disease activity when DAS28 was less than or equal to (≤) 3.2 and in clinical remission when DAS28 scores were less than (<) 2.6"|Weeks 8, 16 and 24|ITT Population; n= number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified time point||percentage of participants|||Number
830041|NCT01235507|Secondary|Mean Disease Activity Score Based on 28 Joint Count (DAS28) by Visit|"DAS28 was calculated using the 28 joints count, the C-reactive protein levels (CRP) and participant's global assessment (PtGA) of disease activity. The following formula was used to determine DAS28.
DAS28 (equals) = 0.56 × (square root of) √(TJC28) + 0.28 × √(SJC28) + 0.36 × ln(CRP+1) + 0.014 × GH + 0.96 where, TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJC28 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ln = natural log, CRP = C-reactive protein (mg/L), and GH = general health, determined by participant's global assessment of disease activity (100- millimeter [mm] visual analog scale [ VAS]).
The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity."|Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24|ITT Population; number (n) = number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified time point||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830042|NCT01235546|Other Pre-specified|Infant Pyloric Stenosis|Any diagnosis of pyloric stenosis based on clinical presentation and radiological and/or surgical confirmation|up to 3 months after birth|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830043|NCT01235546|Other Pre-specified|Neonatal Serious Adverse Events|Composite for all neonatal serious adverse events|Up to 3 months after birth|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830044|NCT01235546|Other Pre-specified|Maternal Serious Adverse Events|All maternal serious adverse events|Up to 6 weeks after delivery|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830045|NCT01235546|Other Pre-specified|Maternal Postpartum Antibiotic Use|Maternal postpartum use of antibiotics|Up to 6 weeks after delivery|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830046|NCT01235546|Other Pre-specified|Maternal Postpartum Readmission or Unscheduled Visit|Maternal postpartum unscheduled visit or readmission to the hospital|Up to 6 weeks after delivery|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830047|NCT01235546|Other Pre-specified|Maternal Fever||Up to 6 weeks after delivery|Postpartum Fever||Participants|||Count of Participants
830048|NCT01235546|Other Pre-specified|Neonatal Readmission||Up to 3 months after birth|Hospitalization after discharge||Participants|||Count of Participants
830049|NCT01235546|Other Pre-specified|Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) Admission|Neonates who are admitted to the NICU due to morbidities diagnosed from birth and up to three months of life. Morbidities as defined in the Neonatal morbidities outcome measure.|Up to 3 months after birth|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830050|NCT01235546|Other Pre-specified|Neonatal Morbidities (Listed Below)|morbidities include: death, Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS), Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia (BPD), Periventricular Leukomalacia (PVL) suspected or proven sepsis, Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC) Intraventricular Hemorrhage (IVH) and systemic inflammatory response syndrome|Up to 3 months after birth|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830051|NCT01235546|Primary|Participants With Endometritis and/or Wound Infection and/or Other Post-cesarean Infections (Occurring Within 6 Weeks of Delivery)|Endometritis was defined as the presence of at least two of the following signs with no other recognized cause: fever (temperature of at least 38°C [100.4°F]), abdominal pain, uterine tenderness, or purulent drainage from the uterus. Wound infection was defined as the presence of either superficial or deep incisional surgical-site infection characterized by cellulitis or erythema and induration around the incision or purulent discharge from the incision site with or without fever and included necrotizing fasciitis. Wound hematoma, seroma, or breakdown alone in the absence of the preceding signs did not constitute infection.|Up to 6 weeks after delivery|The specific characteristics related to the cesarean delivery, including indications for cesarean delivery, receipt of standard prophylaxis, timing of receipt of study medication, and type of surgical skin preparation, were similar in the two groups.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830052|NCT01235598|Secondary|Change From Baseline for the Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS) Synovitis Score at Week 2 Placebo (PBO) Versus Certolizumab Pegol (CZP)|"Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS):
Synovitis is defined as an area in the synovial compartment that shows above normal postgadolinium enhancement of a thickness greater than the width of the normal synovium. T1-weighted images were acquired before and after the administration of intravenous contrast agent containing gadolinium. Intravenous contrast was required to demonstrate enhancing synovitis. Synovitis was scored 0 to 3 in 3 wrist regions (the distal radioulnar; the radiocarpal joint; the intercarpal and carpometacarpal joints) and in each of the second through fifth metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints. A score of 0 is normal, with no enhancement or enhancement up to the thickness of normal synovium, while scores of 1 to 3 (mild, moderate, severe) refer to increments of one-third of the presumed maximum volume of enhancing tissue in the synovial compartment.
A negative value in synovitis change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 2|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (last observation carried forward) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication, and had a valid Baseline efficacy assessment and at least one valid post-Baseline efficacy assessment.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830836|NCT01240330|Secondary|Subject Comfort|Subject comfort was measured on a scale 1 to 5 (1=negative response; 5=positive response) during the sleeve installation, during use, and completion.|10 min therapy|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830053|NCT01235598|Secondary|Change From Baseline for the Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS) Synovitis Score at Week 1 Placebo (PBO) Versus Certolizumab Pegol (CZP)|"Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS):
Synovitis is defined as an area in the synovial compartment that shows above normal postgadolinium enhancement of a thickness greater than the width of the normal synovium. T1-weighted images were acquired before and after the administration of intravenous contrast agent containing gadolinium. Intravenous contrast was required to demonstrate enhancing synovitis. Synovitis was scored 0 to 3 in 3 wrist regions (the distal radioulnar; the radiocarpal joint; the intercarpal and carpometacarpal joints) and in each of the second through fifth metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints. A score of 0 is normal, with no enhancement or enhancement up to the thickness of normal synovium, while scores of 1 to 3 (mild, moderate, severe) refer to increments of one-third of the presumed maximum volume of enhancing tissue in the synovial compartment.
A negative value in synovitis change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 1|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (last observation carried forward) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication, and had a valid Baseline efficacy assessment and at least one valid post-Baseline efficacy assessment.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830054|NCT01235598|Secondary|Correlation of Change in Synovitis From Baseline as Measured by Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) With Changes in Hand Bone Mineral Density as Measured by Digital XRay (DXR) at Week 16|"Radiographic assessment of bone mineral density in one hand and wrist were conducted by Digital X Ray (DXR) using a standardized imaging methodology. The hand and wrist to be assessed by DXR were the same as for the Magnetic Resonance Images (MRIs). The same hand and wrist were used for all x rays. The evaluation of all DXRs was performed centrally.
A negative correlation coefficient indicates that reductions in synovitis from Baseline to Week 16 are associated with increases in bone mineral density at Week 16."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. Correlations between the change from Baseline in total synovitis score at Week 16 and the clinical efficacy variables are restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm only.||Spearman rank correlation coefficient|||Number
830055|NCT01235598|Secondary|Correlation of Change in Synovitis From Baseline as Measured by Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) With Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28 (CRP)) Response at Week 16|"The DAS28(CRP) was calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) and swollen joint count (SJC), C-Reactive Protein (CRP in mg/L) and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS in mm).
A positive correlation coefficient indicates that reductions in synovitis from Baseline to Week 16 are associated with reductions in DAS28(CRP) at Week 16."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. Correlations between the change from Baseline in total synovitis score at Week 16 and the clinical efficacy variables are restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm only.||Spearman rank correlation coefficient|||Number
830056|NCT01235598|Secondary|Correlation of Change in Synovitis From Baseline as Measured by Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) With American College of Rheumatology 70 % Criteria (ACR70) at Week 16|"Subjects who meet the ACR70 criteria are those subjects with at least 70 % improvement from Baseline for Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-Reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale (PAAP-VAS), 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS), 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PhGA-VAS).
A negative correlation coefficient indicates that reductions in synovitis from Baseline to Week 16 are associated with an ACR70 response at Week 16."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. Correlations between the change from Baseline in total synovitis score at Week 16 and the clinical efficacy variables are restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm only.||Spearman rank correlation coefficient|||Number
830057|NCT01235598|Secondary|Correlation of Change in Synovitis From Baseline as Measured by Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) With American College of Rheumatology 50 % Criteria (ACR50) at Week 16|"Subjects who meet the ACR50 criteria are those subjects with at least 50 % improvement from Baseline for Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-Reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale (PAAP-VAS), 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS), 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PhGA-VAS).
A negative correlation coefficient indicates that reductions in synovitis from Baseline to Week 16 are associated with an ACR50 response at Week 16."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. Correlations between the change from Baseline in total synovitis score at Week 16 and the clinical efficacy variables are restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm only.||Spearman rank correlation coefficient|||Number
830058|NCT01235598|Secondary|Correlation of Change in Synovitis From Baseline as Measured by Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) With American College of Rheumatology 20 % Criteria (ACR20) at Week 16|"Subjects who meet the ACR20 criteria are those subjects with at least 20 % improvement from Baseline for Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-Reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale (PAAP-VAS), 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS), 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PhGA-VAS).
A negative correlation coefficient indicates that reductions in synovitis from Baseline to Week 16 are associated with an ACR20 response at Week 16."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. Correlations between the change from Baseline in total synovitis score at Week 16 and the clinical efficacy variables are restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm only.||Spearman rank correlation coefficient|||Number
830059|NCT01235598|Secondary|Correlation of Change in Synovitis From Baseline as Measured by Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response at Week 16|"EULAR (European League Against Rheumatism) response: EULAR response is based upon current Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) level and corresponding change from Baseline in DAS28.
Good EULAR response is defined as: DAS28 C-Reactive Protein (CRP) ≤ 3.2 and decrease from Baseline by > 1.2; moderate response is defined as achievement of one of the following:
DAS28(CRP) ≤ 3.2 and decrease from Baseline > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2
DAS28(CRP) > 3.2 and ≤ 5.1 and decrease from Baseline > 0.6
DAS28(CRP) > 5.1 and decrease from Baseline > 1.2
A negative correlation coefficient indicates that reductions in synovitis from Baseline to Week 16 are associated with better EULAR responses."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. Correlations between the change from Baseline in total synovitis score at Week 16 and the clinical efficacy variables are restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm only.||Spearman rank correlation coefficient|||Number
830060|NCT01235598|Secondary|C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Ratio to Baseline at Week 16|"The C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is considered a marker of inflammation in subjects with Rheumatoid Arthritis.
A ratio to Baseline < 1 indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication, and had a valid Baseline efficacy assessment and at least one valid post-Baseline efficacy assessment.||ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830061|NCT01235598|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI)|The Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) is a subject reported questionnaire that provides an assessment of the impact of the disease and its treatment on physical function. The HAQ-DI assesses the degree of difficulty experienced in 8 domains of daily living activities using 20 questions. The domains are dressing and grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and common daily activities, and each domain (activity) consists of 2 or 3 items. For each question the level of difficulty is scored from 0 to 3 where 0 = no difficulty, 1 = some difficulty, 2 = much difficulty and 3 = unable to do. A total score is computed from the item scores using the scoring rules provided by the author (Fries, 1980). The total score ranges from 0 to 3 with lower scores meaning lower disability. A negative value in HAQ-DI change from Baseline indicates an improvement.|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830062|NCT01235598|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in Swollen Joint Count (SJC)|"The joint assessment was carried out on 28 joints. Swelling and tenderness were graded on a 2-point scale (answered with Yes/No). No indicated None swelling response and Yes indicated that there was a detectable synovial thickening with or without loss of bony contours, or bulging synovial proliferation with or without cystic characteristics. If there were missing observations in the SJC, then the remaining observations were assessed and weighted by dividing by the number of non-missing joint counts and multiplying by 28. SJC ranges from 0 to 28 with 0 indicating no swollen joints and 28 indicating swelling in all joints. A negative value in SJC change from Baseline indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830063|NCT01235598|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in Tender Joint Count (TJC)|"The joint assessment was carried out on 28 joints. Swelling and tenderness were graded on a 2-point scale (answered with Yes/No). No indicated Not tender; Yes indicated a positive tenderness response that was defined as a positive response to questioning (tender), spontaneous response elicited (tender and winced) or withdrawal by subject on examination (tender, winced, and withdrew). If there were missing observations in the TJC, then the remaining observations were assessed and weighted by dividing by the number of non-missing joint counts and multiplying by 28. TJC ranges from 0 to 28 with 0 indicating no tender joints and 28 indicating tenderness in all joints. A negative value in TJC change from Baseline indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830064|NCT01235598|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in Bone Mineral Density as Measured by Digital XRay (DXR)|"Radiographic assessment of bone mineral density in one hand and wrist were conducted by Digital X Ray (DXR) using a standardized imaging methodology. The hand and wrist to be assessed by DXR were the same as for the Magnetic Resonance Images (MRIs). The same hand and wrist were used for all x rays. The evaluation of all DXRs was performed centrally.
A positive value in Bone Mineral Density change from Baseline indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication.||g/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
830065|NCT01235598|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28 (CRP)) Remission Status (DAS28 (CRP) < 2.6) at Week 16|DAS28[CRP] is a composite index and is calculated using the Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC) C-reactive protein (CRP in mg/l), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (VAS in mm) using the following formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.36 x lognat (CRP+1) + 0.014 x Global Assessment of Arthritis + 0.96 where 28 joints are examined and a lower score indicates less disease activity. A DAS(28) score of higher than 5.1 is indicative of high disease activity whereas a DAS score below 3.2 indicates low disease activity. A patient is considered to be in remission if they have a DAS28 lower than 2.6.|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication, and had a valid Baseline efficacy assessment and at least one valid post-Baseline efficacy assessment.||percentage of subjects|||Number
830145|NCT01227629|Secondary|Thromboembolic Events: Number of Participants With Other Major Cardiac Events|Occurence of other major adverse cardiac events|12 weeks|All randomized patients. No statistical comparisons were performed, due to the extremely small number of events.||Participants|||Number
830146|NCT01227629|Secondary|Thromboembolic Events: Number of Participants With Myocardial Infarction|Occurence of a myocardial infarction|12 weeks|All randomized patients. No statistical comparisons were performed, due to the extremely small number of events.||Participants|||Number
830066|NCT01235598|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in the Disease Activity Score-28 (C-Reactive Protein) (DAS28 (CRP)) Response|DAS28[CRP] is a composite index and is calculated using the Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC) C-reactive protein (CRP in mg/l), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (VAS in mm) using the following formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.36 x lognat (CRP+1) + 0.014 x Global Assessment of Arthritis + 0.96 where 28 joints are examined and a lower score indicates less disease activity. A DAS(28) score of higher than 5.1 is indicative of high disease activity whereas a DAS score below 3.2 indicates low disease activity. A patient is considered to be in remission if they have a DAS28 lower than 2.6. A negative value in DAS28[CRP] change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline.|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830067|NCT01235598|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Meeting the American College of Rheumatology 70 % Criteria (ACR70) at Week 16|Subjects who meet the ACR70 criteria are those subjects with at least 70 % improvement from Baseline for Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-Reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale (PAAP-VAS), 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS), 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PhGA-VAS).|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of subjects|||Number
830068|NCT01235598|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Meeting the American College of Rheumatology 50 % Criteria (ACR50) at Week 16|Subjects who meet the ACR50 criteria are those subjects with at least 50 % improvement from Baseline for Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-Reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale (PAAP-VAS), 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS), 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PhGA-VAS).|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of subjects|||Number
830069|NCT01235598|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Meeting the American College of Rheumatology 20 % Criteria (ACR20) at Week 16|Subjects who meet the ACR20 criteria are those subjects with at least 20 % improvement from Baseline for Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-Reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale (PAAP-VAS), 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS), 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale (PhGA-VAS).|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of subjects|||Number
830070|NCT01235598|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving a Good European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response at Week 16|"EULAR (European League Against Rheumatism) response: EULAR response is based upon current Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) level and corresponding change from Baseline in DAS28.
Good EULAR response is defined as: DAS28 C-Reactive Protein (CRP) ≤ 3.2 and decrease from Baseline by > 1.2; moderate response is defined as achievement of one of the following:
DAS28(CRP) ≤ 3.2 and decrease from Baseline > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2
DAS28(CRP) > 3.2 and ≤ 5.1 and decrease from Baseline > 0.6
DAS28(CRP) > 5.1 and decrease from Baseline > 1.2"|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (observed case) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of subjects|||Number
830071|NCT01235598|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in the Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) Parameter, Number of Voxels (Nvox) With Plateau and Washout Pattern|"Contrast enhancement can be quantified in terms of the dynamic MRI parameters initial rate of enhancement (IRE), maximum enhancement (ME), and number of voxels (Nvox) with Plateau and Washout pattern. These parameters are extracted by examining individual signal intensity versus time curves derived from defined regions of interest.
Nvox indicates the number of voxels showing enhancement patterns. It is representative of the size or volume of enhancement and representative of underlying inflammation. The higher the value, the higher the volume .
ME and IRE values quantify the intensity of signal within the enhancing voxels. The absolute values and changes from Baseline in the MRI parameters of IRE, ME, and Nvox of the selected hand and wrist were estimated at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16.
The values presented are for Proximal Interphalangeal (PIP) and Metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints combined. A negative value in Nvox change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (last observation carried forward) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. As pre-specified in the protocol, this analysis is restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm.||voxels||Standard Deviation|Mean
830072|NCT01235598|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in the Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) Parameter, Maximal Enhancement (ME)|"Contrast enhancement can be quantified in terms of the dynamic MRI parameters initial rate of enhancement (IRE), maximum enhancement (ME), and number of voxels (Nvox) with Plateau and Washout pattern. These parameters are extracted by examining individual signal intensity versus time curves derived from defined regions of interest.
Nvox indicates the number of voxels showing enhancement patterns. It is representative of the size or volume of enhancement and representative of underlying inflammation. The higher the value, the higher the volume .
ME and IRE values quantify the intensity of signal within the enhancing voxels. The absolute values and changes from Baseline in the MRI parameters of IRE, ME, and Nvox of the selected hand and wrist were estimated at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16.
The values presented are for Proximal Interphalangeal (PIP) and Metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints combined. A negative value in ME change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (last observation carried forward) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. As pre-specified in the protocol, this analysis is restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm.||percent change over pre-contrast||Standard Deviation|Mean
830073|NCT01235598|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in the Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) Parameter, Initiation Rate of Enhancement (IRE)|"Contrast enhancement can be quantified in terms of the dynamic MRI parameters initial rate of enhancement (IRE), maximum enhancement (ME), and number of voxels (Nvox) with Plateau and Washout pattern. These parameters are extracted by examining individual signal intensity versus time curves derived from defined regions of interest.
Nvox indicates the number of voxels showing enhancement patterns. It is representative of the size or volume of enhancement and representative of underlying inflammation. The higher the value, the higher the volume .
ME and IRE values quantify the intensity of signal within the enhancing voxels. The absolute values and changes from Baseline in the MRI parameters of IRE, ME, and Nvox of the selected hand and wrist were estimated at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16.
The values presented are for Proximal Interphalangeal (PIP) and Metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints combined. A negative value in IRE change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (last observation carried forward) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. As pre-specified in the protocol, this analysis is restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm.||percent per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
830074|NCT01235598|Primary|Change in Synovitis Measured by Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS) Score at Week 1 Compared to Baseline for Certolizumab Pegol Arm|"Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS):
Synovitis is defined as an area in the synovial compartment that shows above normal postgadolinium enhancement of a thickness greater than the width of the normal synovium. T1-weighted images were acquired before and after the administration of intravenous contrast agent containing gadolinium. Intravenous contrast was required to demonstrate enhancing synovitis. Synovitis was scored 0 to 3 in 3 wrist regions and in each of the second through fifth metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints. A score of 0 is normal, with no enhancement or enhancement up to the thickness of normal synovium, while scores of 1 to 3 (mild, moderate, severe) refer to increments of one-third of the presumed maximum volume of enhancing tissue in the synovial compartment. Total synovitis score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 21. A negative value in synovitis change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 1|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (last observation carried forward) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. As pre-specified in the protocol, this analysis is restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830075|NCT01235598|Primary|Change in Synovitis Measured by Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS) Score at Week 2 Compared to Baseline for Certolizumab Pegol Arm|"Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS):
Synovitis is defined as an area in the synovial compartment that shows above normal postgadolinium enhancement of a thickness greater than the width of the normal synovium. T1-weighted images were acquired before and after the administration of intravenous contrast agent containing gadolinium. Intravenous contrast was required to demonstrate enhancing synovitis. Synovitis was scored 0 to 3 in 3 wrist regions and in each of the second through fifth metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints. A score of 0 is normal, with no enhancement or enhancement up to the thickness of normal synovium, while scores of 1 to 3 (mild, moderate, severe) refer to increments of one-third of the presumed maximum volume of enhancing tissue in the synovial compartment. Total synovitis score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 21. A negative value in synovitis change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 2|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (last observation carried forward) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. As pre-specified in the protocol, this analysis is restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830076|NCT01235598|Primary|Change in Synovitis Measured by Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS) Score at Week 4 Compared to Baseline for Certolizumab Pegol Arm|"Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS):
Synovitis is defined as an area in the synovial compartment that shows above normal postgadolinium enhancement of a thickness greater than the width of the normal synovium. T1-weighted images were acquired before and after the administration of intravenous contrast agent containing gadolinium. Intravenous contrast was required to demonstrate enhancing synovitis. Synovitis was scored 0 to 3 in 3 wrist regions and in each of the second through fifth metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints. A score of 0 is normal, with no enhancement or enhancement up to the thickness of normal synovium, while scores of 1 to 3 (mild, moderate, severe) refer to increments of one-third of the presumed maximum volume of enhancing tissue in the synovial compartment. Total synovitis score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 21. A negative value in synovitis change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 4|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (last observation carried forward) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. As pre-specified in the protocol, this analysis is restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830077|NCT01235598|Primary|Change in Synovitis Measured by Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS) Score at Week 8 Compared to Baseline for Certolizumab Pegol Arm|"Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS):
Synovitis is defined as an area in the synovial compartment that shows above normal postgadolinium enhancement of a thickness greater than the width of the normal synovium. T1-weighted images were acquired before and after the administration of intravenous contrast agent containing gadolinium. Intravenous contrast was required to demonstrate enhancing synovitis. Synovitis was scored 0 to 3 in 3 wrist regions and in each of the second through fifth metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints. A score of 0 is normal, with no enhancement or enhancement up to the thickness of normal synovium, while scores of 1 to 3 (mild, moderate, severe) refer to increments of one-third of the presumed maximum volume of enhancing tissue in the synovial compartment. Total synovitis score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 21. A negative value in synovitis change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 8|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (last observation carried forward) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. As pre-specified in the protocol, this analysis is restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830078|NCT01235598|Primary|Change in Synovitis Measured by Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS) Score at Week 16 Compared to Baseline for Certolizumab Pegol Arm|"Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Image Scoring System (RAMRIS):
Synovitis is defined as an area in the synovial compartment that shows above normal postgadolinium enhancement of a thickness greater than the width of the normal synovium. T1-weighted images were acquired before and after the administration of intravenous contrast agent containing gadolinium. Intravenous contrast was required to demonstrate enhancing synovitis. Synovitis was scored 0 to 3 in 3 wrist regions and in each of the second through fifth metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints. A score of 0 is normal, with no enhancement or enhancement up to the thickness of normal synovium, while scores of 1 to 3 (mild, moderate, severe) refer to increments of one-third of the presumed maximum volume of enhancing tissue in the synovial compartment. Total synovitis score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 21. A negative value in synovitis change from Baseline score indicates an improvement."|From Baseline to Week 16|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS) (last observation carried forward) which consists of all randomized subjects that received at least one dose of study medication. As pre-specified in the protocol, this analysis is restricted to the Certolizumab Pegol (CZP) arm.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830079|NCT01227512|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Requiring Rescue Therapy for Hyponatremia|Percentage of participants requiring rescue therapy within first 7 days of treatment for hyponatremia.|7 days|Analysis was performed on the modified intent-to-treat population (MITT) which included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug regardless of any protocol violation. Data were missing for 3 participants in the placebo group.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830080|NCT01227512|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Score Improved to a Score of 1 or 2.|Percentage of responders (defined as CGI-I score of 1 = very much improved or 2 = much improved) at 48 hours post-first dose, or at discharge/rescue therapy, if earlier. Participants given rescue therapy were given a score of 7.|48 hours post dose|Analysis was performed on the modified intent-to-treat population (MITT) which included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug regardless of any protocol violation. Data were missing for 2 participants in the tolvaptan group and 3 participants in the placebo group.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830081|NCT01227512|Secondary|Time to First 2-point Improvement in CGI-S Score.|CGI-S data up to 72 hours were used to identify 2-point improvements. Please refer to outcome measure 2 for details on the scale. For the analysis of time to first 2-point improvement in CGI-S, CGI-S data up to Hour 72 were used to identify 2-point improvements. Data for participants who received rescue therapy were censored at the time of receiving rescue therapy. For participants who were discharged before Hour 72 without reaching 2-point improvement in CGI-S, data were censored at the time of discharge. Other participants who did not reach the 2-point improvement during the 72 hours also had their data censored at their last CGI-S observations within 72 hours.|Up to 72 hours|Analysis was performed on the modified intent-to-treat population (MITT) which included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug regardless of any protocol violation. Data were missing for 1 participant in the tolvaptan group and 3 participants in the placebo group.||Hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830082|NCT01227512|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Sodium Concentration (24 Hour Area Under the Curve [AUC]).|"Average 24 hour AUC of serum sodium concentration change from baseline, from Day 1 Hour 0 up to 72 hours post-first dose was assessed.
A serum sodium sample was drawn at pre-treament and 8, 24, 48, and 72 hours post-first dose. Serum sodium was also assessed between 36 and 72 hours after the last dose.
Analysis of AUC was for daily average AUC, hence the units or AUC are mEq/L/24 hours."|0 to 72 hours|"Analysis was performed on the modified intent-to-treat population (MITT) which included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug regardless of any protocol violation.
Data were missing for 3 participants in the tolvaptan group and 1 participant in the placebo group."||mEq/L||Full Range|Least Squares Mean
830083|NCT01227512|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 48 Hours Post Dose in Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score of Hyponatremia Symptoms.|"Change in CGI-I score at 48 hours post-first dose or discharge/rescue therapy, if earlier was assessed.
The CGI-I is a one-question rating scale where the participant is asked to rate total improvement whether or not, in their judgment, it is due entirely to trial treatment. Compared to his/her condition at admission to the trial, how much has he/she changed? 0=not assessed; 1=very much improved; 2=much improved; 3=minimally improved; 4=no change; 5=minimally worse; 6=much worse; 7=very much worse"|Baseline to 48 hours post dose|Analysis was performed on the modified intent-to-treat population (MITT) which included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug regardless of any protocol violation. Data were not available for 2 participants in the tolvaptan group.||Units on a scale||Full Range|Median
830084|NCT01227512|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 and 72 Hours Post Dose in CGI-S of Hyponatremia Symptoms.|"Change in CGI-S of hyponatremia symptoms from pretreatment baseline at 24 and 72 hours post-first dose, or at discharge/rescue therapy if earlier was assessed.
The CGI-S is a one-question rating scale which was as follows: “Considering your total clinical experience with hyponatremia symptoms in this particular population, how symptomatic is the patient at this time?” 0=not assessed; 1=normal, not at all symtpmatic; 2=borderline symptomatic; 3=mildly symptomatic; 4=moderately symptomatic; 5=markedly symptomatic; 6=severely symptomatic; 7=among the most severly symptomatic patients."|Baseline to 24 and 72 hours post dose|"Analysis was performed on the modified intent-to-treat population (MITT) which included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug regardless of any protocol violation.
Data were missing for one participant in the Tolvaptan group."||Units on a scale||Full Range|Median
830095|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PDQ – Subject – Total Score|The PDQ is a tool consisting of 20 questions and is designed to assess perceived cognitive deficits from the participant’s perspective. The instrument assessed a variety of questions in the following areas: attention/concentration, retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning/organization. The Total Score is computed by adding raw scores for all of the items (or all 4 domain scores) together. It could range from 0 – 80, with higher scores indicating greater perceived cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
839375|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 8 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830085|NCT01227512|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 48 Hour Post Dose in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) of Hyponatremia Symptoms.|"Change from baseline in blinded rater assessed CGI-S at 48 hours post-first dose or at discharge/rescue therapy, if earlier was assessed.
The CGI-S is a one-question rating scale which was as follows: “Considering your total clinical experience with hyponatremia symptoms in this particular population, how symptomatic is the patient at this time?” 0=not assessed; 1=normal, not at all symtpmatic; 2=borderline symptomatic; 3=mildly symptomatic; 4=moderately symptomatic; 5=markedly symptomatic; 6=severely symptomatic; 7=among the most severly symptomatic patients."|Baseline to 48 hours post dose|"Analysis was performed on the modified intent-to-treat population (MITT) which included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug regardless of any protocol violation.
Data were missing for one participant in the Tolvaptan group."||Units on a scale||Full Range|Median
830086|NCT01227512|Primary|Length of Hospital Stay (LoS)|LoS was time to clinically ready to be hospital discharged (CRBD) from study treatment initiation, disregarding prolonged hospitalization due solely to social factors.|45 days|Analysis was performed on the modified intent-to-treat population (MITT) which included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug regardless of any protocol violation.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830087|NCT01227551|Secondary|Durable Response Rate|Per Immune-Related Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT/MRI or calipers: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Durable Response Rate (DRR) = CR + PR.|6 months or more|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
830088|NCT01227551|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Immune-related Progression-Free Survival (irPFS) at 6 Months|To assess the clinical efficacy of Intratumoral (IT) CVA21 in terms of immune-related Progression-Free Survival (irPFS) at 6 months.|6 months|ITT Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830089|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Alzheimer’s Disease Medication Administration Concerns Questionnaire (AD MACQ)|The AD MACQ was administered to the study partner to address preferences for medication administration by assessing: Question a: I would find it easy to give the study medication to the patient myself. Question b: The number of times the medication was given was convenient. Question c: I would prefer to have the study medication given at home by me instead of at the doctor's office by the doctor or nurse. Question d: I would prefer to have the study medication given at home by a nurse instead of at the doctor's office by the doctor or nurse. Question e: Overall, I am satisfied with the way the medication was given.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||percentage of participants|||Number
830090|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PDQ-R – Relative – Total Score|The PDQ-R is a tool consisting of 20 questions, is designed to assess perceived cognitive deficits, and was administered to the study partner. The instrument assessed a variety of questions in the following areas: attention/concentration, retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning/organization. The Total Score is computed by adding raw scores for all of the items (or all 4 domain scores) together. It could range from 0 – 80, with higher scores indicating greater perceived cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830091|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PDQ-R – Relative – Planning/Organization Domain Score|The PDQ-R is a tool consisting of 20 questions, is designed to assess perceived cognitive deficits, and was administered to the study partner. The instrument assessed a variety of questions in the following areas: attention/concentration, retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning/organization. The Planning/Organization Domain Score is the sum of the raw scores on items 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20, with a range from 0 – 4 for each of the 5 items. So the Planning/Organization Domain Score could range from 0 – 20, with higher scores indicating greater perceived cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830092|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PDQ-R – Relative – Prospective Memory Domain Score|The PDQ-R is a tool consisting of 20 questions, is designed to assess perceived cognitive deficits, and was administered to the study partner. The instrument assessed a variety of questions in the following areas: attention/concentration, retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning/organization. The Prospective Memory Domain Score is the sum of the raw scores on items 3, 7, 11, 15, and 19, with a range from 0 – 4 for each of the 5 items. So the Prospective Memory Domain Score could range from 0 – 20, with higher scores indicating greater perceived cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830093|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PDQ-R – Relative – Retrospective Memory Domain Score|The PDQ-R is a tool consisting of 20 questions, is designed to assess perceived cognitive deficits, and was administered to the study partner. The instrument assessed a variety of questions in the following areas: attention/concentration, retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning/organization. The Retrospective Memory Domain Score is the sum of the raw scores on items 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18, with a range from 0 – 4 for each of the 5 items. So the Retrospective Memory Domain Score could range from 0 – 20, with higher scores indicating greater perceived cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830094|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PDQ-R – Relative – Attention/Concentration Domain Score|The PDQ-R is a tool consisting of 20 questions, is designed to assess perceived cognitive deficits, and was administered to the study partner. The instrument assessed a variety of questions in the following areas: attention/concentration, retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning/organization. The Attention/Concentration Domain Score is the sum of the raw scores on items 1, 5, 9, 13, and 17, with a range from 0 – 4 for each of the 5 items. So the Attention/Concentration Domain Score could range from 0 – 20, with higher scores indicating greater perceived cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830147|NCT01227629|Secondary|Thromboembolic Events: Number of Participants With Systemic Thromboembolism|Occurence of a systemic thromboembolism|12 weeks|All randomized patients. No statistical comparisons were performed, due to the extremely small number of events.||Participants|||Number
830096|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PDQ – Subject – Planning/Organization Domain Score|The PDQ is a tool consisting of 20 questions and is designed to assess perceived cognitive deficits from the participant’s perspective. The instrument assessed a variety of questions in the following areas: attention/concentration, retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning/organization. The Planning/Organization Domain Score is the sum of the raw scores on items 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20, with a range from 0 – 4 for each of the 5 items. So the Planning/Organization Domain Score could range from 0 – 20, with higher scores indicating greater perceived cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830097|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PDQ – Subject – Prospective Memory Domain Score|The PDQ is a tool consisting of 20 questions and is designed to assess perceived cognitive deficits from the participant’s perspective. The instrument assessed a variety of questions in the following areas: attention/concentration, retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning/organization. The Prospective Memory Domain Score is the sum of the raw scores on items 3, 7, 11, 15, and 19, with a range from 0 – 4 for each of the 5 items. So the Prospective Memory Domain Score could range from 0 – 20, with higher scores indicating greater perceived cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830098|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PDQ – Subject – Retrospective Memory Domain Score|The PDQ is a tool consisting of 20 questions and is designed to assess perceived cognitive deficits from the participant’s perspective. The instrument assessed a variety of questions in the following areas: attention/concentration, retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning/organization. The Retrospective Memory Domain Score is the sum of the raw scores on items 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18, with a range from 0 – 4 for each of the 5 items. So the Retrospective Memory Domain Score could range from 0 – 20, with higher scores indicating greater perceived cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830099|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Perceived Deficits Questionnaire (PDQ) – Subject – Attention/Concentration Domain Score|The PDQ is a tool consisting of 20 questions and is designed to assess perceived cognitive deficits from the participant’s perspective. The instrument assessed a variety of questions in the following areas: attention/concentration, retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning/organization. The Attention/Concentration Domain Score is the sum of the raw scores on items 1, 5, 9, 13 and 17, with a range from 0 – 4 for each of the 5 items. So the Attention/Concentration Domain Score could range from 0 – 20, with higher scores indicating greater perceived cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830100|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Geometric Mean Anti-Aβ IgM ELISA Titers|Site personnel collecting the samples for anti-Aβ antibody titers were blinded to the participant treatment group assignment. The LLOQ determined for this assay was 50 U/mL. For any anti-Aβ IgM antibody level that was below the LLOQ (50 U/mL), the LLOD defined as 0.5*LLOQ was imputed.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||U/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830101|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Geometric Mean Anti-Aβ IgG Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) Titers|Site personnel collecting the samples for anti-Aβ antibody titers were blinded to the participant treatment group assignment. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) determined for this assay was 100 U/mL. For any anti-Aβ IgG antibody level that was below the LLOQ (100 U/mL), the lower limit of detection (LLOD) defined as 0.5*LLOQ was imputed.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||U/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830102|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With a Global CDR Score of Equal to or Greater Than 1 for the First Time|CDR is a global clinical staging instrument that was administrated by a trained rater to assess a participant’s level of impairment in six domains including: Memory, Orientation, Judgement and Problem Solving, Community Affairs, Home and Hobbies, and Personal Care, based on the CDR interview. The CDR included discussions with the participant and study partner using a structured format. CDR global score was derived from the six domains according to a complex algorithm with emphasis on the Memory Domain score. Global CDR score = 0.5 with memory box score of 0.5. The total CDR-SB score is calculated as the sum of the six clinical ratings. The CDR-SOB score range for each domain is 0 to 3, with higher score indicating no significant function. If any individual item is missing, then the CDR-SB is set to missing.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||percentage of participants|||Number
830103|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in RUD (Abbreviated) (RUD-Lite) - Other Caregivers|An abbreviated administration of the RUD (RUD-Lite) was used. The RUD-Lite is a comprehensive tool for addressing the magnitude and nature of study partner/caregiver effort in cases of dementia. Since a significant portion of care in Alzheimer’s related-dementia was performed informally by the participant’s friends or family, it was desirable to measure the extent of this care for use in economic evaluations of disease. The total time spent by the other caregivers providing support on ADL, IADL and supervising, respectively, was calculated in two components. Total number of days spent during the past month on each of ADL, IADL and supervising; and: time per day during the past month on each of ADL, IADL, and supervising. The total Other Caregiver Time per month could range from 0 – 720. This was calculated by multiplying the number of days per month (30) by the number of hours per day (24).|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830111|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) Total Score|FAQ is a 10-item, caregiver-based questionnaire and was administered to the study partner who was asked to rate the participant’s ability to perform a variety of activities ranging from shopping, doing the laundry, simple financial transactions, comprehension of current events, some recreational or avocational activities, and reading. FAQ total score was calculated by adding the scores from each of the 10 items. A negative change indicated an improvement from baseline. FAQ Total Score is the sum of 10 items, ranging from 0 (best possible outcome) to 100 (worst possible outcome).|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830104|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Resource Utilization in Dementia (RUD) (Abbreviated) (RUD-Lite) - Primary Caregiver|An abbreviated administration of the RUD (RUD-Lite) was used. The RUD-Lite is a comprehensive tool for addressing the magnitude and nature of study partner/caregiver effort in cases of dementia. Since a significant portion of care in Alzheimer’s related-dementia was performed informally by the participant’s friends or family, it was desirable to measure the extent of this care for use in economic evaluations of disease. The total time spent by the primary caregiver providing support on activities of daily living (ADL), instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) and supervising, respectively, was calculated in two components. Total number of days spent during the past month on each of ADL, IADL, and supervising; and: time per day during the past month on each of ADL, IADL and supervising. The total Primary Caregiver Time per month could range from 0 – 720. This was calculated by multiplying the number of days per month (30) by the number of hours per day (24).|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830105|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Dependence Scale (DS) Score|An abbreviated administration (first 6 items) of the DS was used in this study. The DS is a brief study partner-completed measure which assesses the degree of support required by a subject with AD. Since the goal of treatment was to delay or arrest the processes leading to increased dependence, the DS represented a meaningful endpoint for clinical studies in AD. The dependence score was derived by summing the first 6 items of the DS. Item 1 and 2 ranged from 0 – 2 and item 3 – 6 ranged from 0 – 1. The total score was calculated by summing the score from each of the 6 items. So the total score could range from 0 – 8, with higher scores indicating greater dependence.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830106|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in 13-item Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - Cognitive (ADAS-Cog) Total Score|The ADAS-Cog is a global cognitive measure. For the following 13 items, the participants were rated: Word Recall, Commands, Construction Praxis, Delayed Word Recall Task, Naming Task, Ideational Praxis, Orientation, Word Recognition Task, Remembering Test Instructions, Spoken Language Ability, Word-Finding Difficulty in Spontaneous Speech, Comprehension, and Number Cancellation. The ADAS-cog is a structured scale that evaluates memory, orientation, attention, reasoning, language and constructional praxis. The total score was the sum of the scores from the 13 individual items. This study used a modified 85 point scale with a scoring range of 0 to 85 (13 items). Higher scores of the 13 individual items indicated greater cognitive impairment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830107|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) Total Score|The MMSE is a brief, structured examination of cognitive function consisting of the 11 item: Orientation-What, Orientation-Where, Registration-Objects, Attention and Calculation, Recall, Language-Naming, Language-Repetition, Language-Comprehension, Language-Reading, Language-Writing, and Language- Drawing. MMSE total score was the sum of the 11 item scores and it ranges from 0 to 30 with higher score indicating greater cognitive functioning. If any individual item is missing, then the MMSE total score is set to missing. A positive change indicating an improvement from baseline.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830108|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in NPI Distress Score (NPI-D)|The NPI scale assesses 12 domains (delusions, hallucinations, agitation, depression, anxiety, euphoria, apathy, disinhibition, irritability, aberrant motor behavior, nighttime behavior, and appetite and eating changes). The symptoms were rated on the basis of questions administered to the study partner. For each domain, the study partner also rated his/her own ‘emotional or psychological’ distress caused by the participant’s behavior on a 6-point scale. The study partner NPI-D total score was calculated by summing the scores of the 12 sub-scale distress scores. A negative change indicated an improvement from baseline. The caregiver distress (NPI-D) total score is calculated by summing the scores of the 12 sub-scale distress scores. The NPI-D total scores ranges from 0 to 60 with higher scores indicating greater distress.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830109|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) Total Score|The NPI scale assesses 12 domains (delusions, hallucinations, agitation, depression, anxiety, euphoria, apathy, disinhibition, irritability, aberrant motor behavior, nighttime behavior, and appetite and eating changes). The symptoms were rated on the basis of questions administered to the study partner. If a preliminary question for each domain was answered as ‘Yes’, each domain was rated on a 4-point frequency scale and on a 3-point severity scale. If the preliminary question was answered as ‘No’, the frequency, severity, and distress scales were set to zero. A negative change indicated an improvement from baseline. For each of the 12 domains, a sub-scale score is calculated as frequency*severity and ranges from 0 to 12. The NPI total score is then calculated by summing the scores of the 12 sub-scale scores. The NPI total scores ranges from 0 to 144 with higher scores indicating greater behavioral impairment. The caregiver distress score is not included in the NPI total score.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830110|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDR-SOB)|Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) is a global clinical staging instrument that was administrated by a trained rater to assess a participant’s level of impairment in six domains including: Memory, Orientation, Judgement and Problem Solving, Community Affairs, Home and Hobbies, and Personal Care, based on the CDR interview. The CDR included discussions with the participant and study partner using a structured format. A CDR-SOB score was derived based on individual scores from the six domains. A negative change indicated an improvement from baseline. The total CDR-SB score is calculated as the sum of the six clinical ratings. The CDR-SOB score range for each domain is 0 to 3. The CDR-SOB total score ranges from 0 to 18, with higher scores indicating greater dementia. If any individual item is missing, then the CDR-SB is set to missing.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830140|NCT01227629|Secondary|Ecarin Clotting Time (ECT): Difference From Baseline||baseline and 12 weeks|All treated patients. No statistical comparisons due to high variability||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
830112|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Neuropsychological Test Battery (NTB)|The NTB evaluated cognitive domains that are known to be affected early in the course of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The cognitive tests included in the NTB were: Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test – Immediate recall, Detection, Identification, Go-No-Go Task, One Back Task, Controlled Oral Word Association Test, Category Fluency Test, and Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test – delayed recall and recognition. For each of the eight NTB components, an individual z-score was derived based on the primary raw score of each test. Based on the individual z-scores, a composite z-score was derived using the formula: (z1-z2-z3-z4+z5+z6+z7+z8)/8. Positive change indicating an improvement from baseline.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||z-scores||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830113|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Volumetric Brain MRI Measurements in HBSI, Right|Right HBSI measures the right hippocampal atrophy from registered MRI scan pairs, by subtracting the corresponding area under the intensity profile across a boundary in the repeat scans.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830114|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Volumetric Brain MRI Measurements in HBSI, Left|Left HBSI measures the left hippocampal atrophy from registered MRI scan pairs, by subtracting the corresponding area under the intensity profile across a boundary in the repeat scans.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830115|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Volumetric Brain MRI Measurements in Hippocampal Boundary Shift Integral (HBSI), Total|Left HBSI and Right HBSI respectively measure the left hippocampal atrophy and the right hippocampal atrophy from registered MRI scan pairs, by subtracting the corresponding area under the intensity profile across a boundary in the repeat scans. HBSI (Total) is defined as the summation of the left HBSI and the right HBSI.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830116|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Volumetric Brain MRI Measurements in Ventricular Boundary Shift Integral (VBSI)|VBSI measures ventricular volume change from registered MRI scan pairs, by subtracting the area under the intensity profile across a boundary in the repeat scans.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830117|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Volumetric Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Measurements in Brain Boundary Shift Integral (BBSI)|BBSI measures whole brain atrophy from registered MRI scan pairs, by subtracting the area under the intensity profile across a boundary in the repeat scans from the initial scan (baseline).|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830118|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Plasma Aβ x-40|Site personnel collecting the samples for plasma Aβ (x-40) concentrations and the results were blinded to the participant treatment group assignment.|104 weeks|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||pg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830119|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in CSF Total Tau|For the majority of the participants, the lumbar puncture for the first CSF sample was collected up to 3 days prior to injection of investigational product. For the participants who had a CSF being already drawn at week 80, no CSF sample was drawn at week 104, nor at ET visit. For those participants who early terminated the study before week 80, CSF was drawn at ET visit.|Week 80 or Week 104|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||μg/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830120|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in CSF p-Tau|For the majority of the participants, the lumbar puncture for the first CSF sample was collected up to 3 days prior to injection of investigational product. For the participants who had a CSF being already drawn at week 80, no CSF sample was drawn at week 104, nor at ET visit. For those participants who early terminated the study before week 80, CSF was drawn at ET visit.|Week 80 or Week 104|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||μg/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830121|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in CSF Aβ x-42|For the majority of the participants, the lumbar puncture for the first CSF sample was collected up to 3 days prior to injection of investigational product. For the participants who had a CSF being already drawn at week 80, no CSF sample was drawn at week 104, nor at ET visit. For those participants who early terminated the study before week 80, CSF was drawn at ET visit.|Week 80 or Week 104|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||μg/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830122|NCT01227564|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) Aβ x-40|For the majority of the participants, the lumbar puncture for the first CSF sample was collected up to 3 days prior to injection of investigational product. For the participants who had a CSF being already drawn at week 80, no CSF sample was drawn at week 104, nor at the Early termination (ET) visit. For those participants who early terminated the study before week 80, CSF was drawn at ET visit.|Week 80 or Week 104|FAS population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||μg/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830123|NCT01227564|Primary|Change From Baseline in Brain Fibrillar Beta-Amyloid Protein (Aβ) at Week 104 as Measured by Standard Uptake Value Ratios (SUVRs) Over the Composite Regions of Interest (ROIs)|Fibrillar brain Aβ was measured by retention of florbetapir F18 as measured by positron emission tomography (PET) scans. A positive change indicating an improvement from baseline.|104 weeks|The full analysis set (FAS) population included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of investigational product.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830141|NCT01227629|Secondary|11-dehydrothromboxane B2 (TXB2): Difference From Baseline|Difference from baseline to visit 7|baseline and 12 weeks|All treated patients. No statistical comparisons due to high variability||pg/mg Creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
830142|NCT01227629|Secondary|Soluble Fibrin: Difference From Baseline|Difference from baseline to visit 7|baseline and 12 weeks|All randomised patients, only per-protocol data included.||µg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830124|NCT01227577|Secondary|Event-free Survival, Progression-free Survival and Overall Survival|Event-free survival was defined as the time from the date of enrollment to the date of first occurrence of any of the following: loss of Complete Hematological Response (CHR), loss of CCyR, loss of Partial Cytogenetic Response (PCyR), progression to the accelerated phase or blast crisis, and death from any cause. Progression-free survival was defined as the time from the date of enrollment to the date of first occurrence of any of the following: progression to the accelerated phase or blast crisis, death, and loss of CMR. Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of enrollment until death due to any cause.|4 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS): The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830125|NCT01227577|Secondary|Number of Participants With CMR Who Were Dosed to 400 mg b.i.d.|CMR was defined as at least 4.5 log reduction of breakpoint cluster region gene/Abelson proto-oncogene (Bcr-Abl) transcipts from the standardized baseline on the international scale (equivalent to Bcr-Abl <=0.0032% IS) with a minimum of 25,614 ABL control copies. CMR was to be confirmed by a second polymerase chain reaction (PCR) sample drawn 3 months later where the results should be less than or equal to 0.0032% with a minimum of 25,614 Abelson proto-oncogene (ABL) control copies.|4 years|Of the 128 participants analyzed, 3 participants received an escalated dose of 400 mg b.i.d.||Participants|||Number
830126|NCT01227577|Secondary|Number of Participants With Loss of CCyR, MMR and CMR|Rate of loss of CMR was defined as an increase in the Bcr-Abl transcripts to greater than 0.0032% IS. Rate of loss of CCyR was defined as an increase in the Ph+ bone marrow cells to greater than 0%. Rate of loss of MMR was defined as an increase in the Bcr-Abl transcripts to greater than 0.1% IS.|4 years|Numbers are based on the total number of participants who achieved and experienced loss of CMR (34 participants), CCyr (93 participants) and MMR (94 participants), respectively.||Participants|||Number
830127|NCT01227577|Secondary|Time to Progression of AP/BC|Time to progression of AP/BC was defined as the time from the date of the first dose of study drug to the date of first documented progression of AP/BC.|4 years|Of the 128 participants analyzed, 1 participant experienced progression to AP/BC.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830128|NCT01227577|Secondary|Number of Participants With Progression to Accelerated Phase/Blastic Crisis (AP/BC)|Progression to AP/BC is defined as loss of CCyR, MMR, and CMR and was summarized by frequencies and percentages.|4 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS): The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
830129|NCT01227577|Secondary|Duration of CMR, CCyR and MMR|Duration of CMR, CCyR and MMR were defined as the time from the first date of achievement of the response to the date of first documented loss of the response.|4 years|Of the 128 participants analyzed, 34 participants achieved CMR within 18 months of treatment, 93 participants achieved CCyR and did not experience loss of CCyR during the study, and 94 participants achieved MMR with up to 24 months of treatment (most achieved MMR within 12 months of treatment).||Months||Standard Deviation|Mean
830130|NCT01227577|Secondary|Time to CMR, CCyR and MMR|Time to CMR, CCyR, and MMR was defined as the time from the date of enrollment to the date of first documented CMR, CCyR and MMR, respectively.|4 years|Of the 128 participants analyzed, 34 participants achieved CMR within 18 months of treatment, 93 participants achieved CCyR and did not experience loss of CCyR during the study, and 94 participants achieved MMR with up to 24 months of treatment (most achieved MMR within 12 months of treatment).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830131|NCT01227577|Secondary|Number of Participants With Complete Cytogenetic Response (CCyR) and Major Molecular Response (MMR)|"CCyR was defined as 0% Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) metaphases in the bone marrow. MMR was defined as a 3 log reduction of Bcr-Abl transcripts from the standardized baseline on the international scale (equivalent to Bcr-Abl ≤ 0.1% IS).
Bcr-Abl transcripts assessed by peripheral blood quatitative real time polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) were used for the determination of all molecular responses."|4 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS): The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
830132|NCT01227577|Primary|Number of Participants With Confirmed Complete Molecular Response (CMR)|CMR was defined as at least 4.5 log reduction of breakpoint cluster region gene/Abelson proto-oncogene (Bcr-Abl) transcipts from the standardized baseline on the international scale (equivalent to Bcr-Abl <=0.0032% IS) with a minimum of 25,614 ABL control copies. CMR was to be confirmed by a second polymerase chain reaction (PCR) sample drawn 3 months later where the results should be less than or equal to 0.0032% with a minimum of 25,614 Abelson proto-oncogene (ABL) control copies.|4 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS): The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
830133|NCT01227629|Secondary|Severity of Adverse Events|Total number of patients with any adverse event of worst intensity 'mild', 'moderate' and 'severe'.|12 weeks|Treated patients(Numbers of patients for adverse events are counted for each treatment and are in their sum greater than the total number of patients randomized as 14 patients on Dabigatran with ASA changed treatment,12 patients down titrated Dabigatran bid to qd of which one did the down titration at the same time as the stop of the ASA treatment)||participants|||Number
830134|NCT01227629|Secondary|Number of Participants With Increase of Alanine-Aminotransferase (ALT) to >2*Baseline|Number of Participants with Increase of ALT to more than two times the baseline value|12 weeks|All treated patients. No statistical comparisons due to extremely small number of cases||Participants|||Number
830135|NCT01227629|Secondary|Number of Participants With Increase of Bilirubin to >2*Baseline|Increase of Bilirubin to more than two times the baseline value|12 weeks|All treated patients. No statistical comparisons due to extremely small number of cases||Participants|||Number
830136|NCT01227629|Secondary|Number of Participants With Increase of Alkaline Phosphatase (AP) to >2*Baseline|Increase of AP to more than two times the baseline value|12 weeks|All treated patients. No statistical comparisons due to extremely small number of cases||Participants|||Number
830137|NCT01227629|Secondary|Number of Participants With Increase of Aspartat-Aminotransferase (AST) to >2*Baseline|Increase of AST to more than two times the baseline value|12 weeks|All treated patients. No statistical comparisons due to extremely small number of cases||Participants|||Number
830138|NCT01227629|Secondary|Trough Plasma Concentration of Dabigatran (BIBR 953)|The values of the trough plasma concentration of dabigatran (BIBR 953) are the by-patient geometric means of week 1, 4 and 12.|12 weeks|All treated patients||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
830139|NCT01227629|Secondary|Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT): Difference From Baseline||baseline and 12 weeks|All treated patients. No statistical comparisons due to high variability||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
830150|NCT01227629|Secondary|Number of Participants With Thromboembolic Events: Composite Endpoint|Combination of ischemic stroke (fatal or non fatal), transient ischemic attack, systemic thromboembolism, myocardial infarction (fatal or non fatal), other major adverse cardiac event and all cause mortality|12 weeks|All randomized patients. No statistical comparisons were performed, due to the extremely small number of events.||Participants|||Number
830151|NCT01227629|Primary|Number of Participants With Minor/Nuisance Bleeding Events|All bleeding events not fulfilling one of the criteria for major bleeding event or minor/relevant bleeding events.|12 weeks|All treated patients. No statistical comparisons were performed, due to the small number of events per group||Participants|||Number
830152|NCT01227629|Primary|Number of Participants With Minor/Relevant Bleeding Events|Haematuria, rectal bleeding, gingival bleeding, skin hematoma of 25cm^2 or more, nose bleed of more than 5 minutes duration, bleeding leading to a hospitalization, leading to a transfusion of less than 2 units or any other clinically relevant bleeding|12 weeks|All treated patients. No statistical comparisons were performed, due to the small number of events per group||Participants|||Number
830153|NCT01227629|Primary|Number of Participants With Fatal or Life-threatening Major Bleeding Events|Retroperitoneal, intracranial, intraocular, or intraspinal bleeding, or requiring surgical treatment, or leading to a transfusion of 2 units or more, or leading to a fall in hemoglobin of 20g/L or more|12 weeks|All treated patients. No statistical comparisons were performed, due to the extremely small number of events.||Participants|||Number
830154|NCT01227655|Secondary|Non-motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS)|"The Non-motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) consists of 30 questions, covering 9 dimensions, whereby each item is scored for severity and frequency: Severity None 0 Mild (symptoms present but causes little distress) 1 Moderate (some distress or disturbance to subject) 2 Severe (major source of distress or disturbance to subject) 3
Frequency Rarely (<1/wk) 1 Often (1/wk) 2 Frequent (several times per week) 3 Very Frequent (daily or all the time) 4
The product of frequency and severity is calculated for each item and each dimension score is defined as the sum of the frequency*severity of the respective items. If frequency or severity of a single item is missing, the domain score will not be calculated. The NMSS total score is defined as the sum of all domain scores.
The NMSS total score is calculated by adding all domain scores (0–360), and lower scores mean less disability."|14-15 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830155|NCT01227655|Secondary|Parkinson’s Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS)|"The Parkinson’s disease Sleep Scale (PDSS) is a specific scale for the assessment of sleep disturbances in subjects with PD. The PDSS score is calculated as the sum of all single items. If one or two items are missing, they will be imputed with the mean of the non-missing items. If three or more items are missing, no imputation will be done and the score will be set to missing.
Subscale has 0-10 ratings, where 0 = severe and 10 = normal
The PDSS total score is a sum score of all 15 questions and ranges from 0 to 150, with lower scores meaning more disability."|14-15 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830156|NCT01227655|Secondary|UPDRS (Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale) Sections I (ON), II (ON and OFF), and III (ON)|"Total UPDRS SCORE (I, II (ON), and III) Change from Baseline to Endpoint
UPDRS I evaluation of mentation, behavior, and mood
UPDRS II self-evaluation of the activities of daily life (ADLs) including speech, swallowing, handwriting, dressing, hygiene, falling, salivating, turning in bed, walking, and cutting food
UPDRS III clinician-scored monitored motor evaluation The UPDRS I, II and III scores and subscores are calculated as the sum of all individual items. If one or two items in a scale are missing, they will be imputed with the mean of the non-missing items of that scale.
Subscale has 0-4 ratings, where 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe
The final cumulative score will range from 0 (no disability) to 199 (total disability)."|14-15 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830157|NCT01227655|Primary|Efficacy of 2 BIA 9-1067 (25 mg, and 50 mg) Compared With Placebo, When Administered With the Existing Treatment of L-DOPA Plus a DDCI (DOPA Decarboxylase Inhibitor)|Efficacy of 2 BIA 9-1067 (25 mg, and 50 mg) compared with placebo, when administered with the existing treatment of L-DOPA plus a DDCI (DOPA decarboxylase inhibitor), in patients with PD and end-of-dose motor fluctuations. The primary efficacy variable will be the change from baseline in absolute OFF-time at the end of the DB period.|14-15 weeks|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
830158|NCT01227668|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation, and Treatment-related AEs During Phase 2|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Treatment-related=having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug.|Weekly from Weeks 1 through 16 (end of treatment) of Phase 2|All participants who were randomized and took at least 1 dose of double-blind medication in Phase 2||Participants|||Number
830159|NCT01227668|Secondary|Number of Participants With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), and Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation During Phase 1|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization.|Weekly from Week 1 to Week 26 and continuously to end of treatment|All participants who took at least 1 dose of single-blind aripiprazole in Phase 1||Participants|||Number
830170|NCT01227707|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Relapse During Follow-Up|The percentage of participants with local and/or regional relapse during follow-up. New lesions located at rectum or at colon or at lymph node detected at the end of NAT were evaluated as local and/or regional relapse.|BL, within 6 weeks after the completion of neoadjuvant treatment, every 2 weeks for 1 year following surgery, every 3 months thereafter until progression, up to 45 months|ITT population; only participants who underwent radical surgery were included in the analysis||percentage of participants|||Number
830171|NCT01227707|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With New Lesions at the Primary Tumor Site at the End of Neoadjuvant Treatment|The percentage of participants with new lesions located at the primary tumor site were evaluated at the end of NAT.|BL and within 6 weeks after the completion of study treatment|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
839448|NCT01325181|Secondary|Change From Baseline in logMAR BCVA|the changes from baseline in logMAR BCVA throughout the follow-up period|12 months||||||
830160|NCT01227668|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Clinical Global Impression Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score at Week 16 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|CG-I rating scale permits global evaluation of patient’s improvement over time. At baseline (BL), CGI Severity of Illness assessment is performed, in which the clinician rates severity of patient’s condition on a 7-point scale ranging from 1=no symptoms to 7=very severe symptoms. Higher total score=worse symptoms. At subsequent visits, clinician assesses patient’s improvement relative to symptoms at baseline on CGI-I 7-point scale ranging from 1=very much improved to 7=very much worse. Since the drug targets irritability symptoms, the CGI focuses on severity of irritability secondary to autistic disorder. Lower score=more improved symptoms. LOCF data set includes data recorded at a given visit or, if nothing recorded, data areccarried forward from the prior visit. For secondary endpoints (endpt), hierarchical testing was used to keep overall experiment-wise type I error rate to <=0.05. diff=difference; IS=irritability scale; PA=primary analysis; signif=significance/significantly.|From Baseline (end of Phase 1) to Week 16 of Phase 2|All participants who were randomized and took at least 1 dose of double-blind medication in Phase 2 and who had at least 1 efficacy evaluation after the start of Phase 2 study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830161|NCT01227668|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline to Week 16 on the Aberrant Behavior Checklist Irritability (ABC-I) Subscale Score (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])|ABC is an informant-based checklist used to assess and classify problem behaviors of children and adolescents with mental retardation. The 58 items are rated on a 4-point scale (0=not at all a problem to 3=the problem is severe in degree), and resolve into 5 subscales: 1) irritability, agitation; 2) lethargy, social withdrawal; 3) stereotypic behavior; 4) hyperactivity, noncompliance; and 5) inappropriate speech. The ABC can be completed by parents, special educators, psychologists, direct caregivers, nurses, and others knowing the participant. Psychometric assessment of the ABC indicates that its subscales have high internal consistency, adequate reliability, and established validity. The ABC-I Subscale Score ranges from 0 to 45, with a negative change in score signifying improvement. LOCF data set includes data recorded at a given visit or, if no observation was recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the prior visit. chg=change; BL=baseline; APR=aripiprazole; vs=versus.|From Baseline (end of Phase 1) to Week 16 of Phase 2|All participants who were randomized and took at least 1 dose of double-blind medication in Phase 2 and who had at least 1 efficacy evaluation after the start of Phase 2 study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830162|NCT01227668|Primary|Percentage of Patients Relapsing by Week 16|"Time of relapse=date when patient meets relapse criteria. There are 4 definitions for relapse: 1. Patient meets the following criteria for 2 consecutive visits: (a) Aberrant Behavior Checklist Irritability score ≥25% than score at end of Phase 1 AND (b) Clinical Global Impression Improvement scale rating of ‘Much Worse’ or ‘Very Much Worse’ relative to rating at end of Phase 1. If relapse criteria met at 1 visit, 2nd visit should occur in about 1 week to reevaluate whether relapse criteria are still met. 2. Patient discontinues for Lost to Follow-up after a visit in which he or she met Definition 1 criteria (a&b). 3. Patient begins a prohibited drug (whether a study investigator or outside source prescribed) to treat worsening symptoms of irritability of autistic disorder after a visit where patient met Definition 1 criteria (a&b). 4. Patient discontinues due to hospitalization for worsening symptoms of irritability or due to lack of efficacy based on investigator’s assessment."|From end of Phase 1 (Date of randomization) to Week 16 of Phase 2 and end of treatment|All participants who were randomized in Phase 2||Percentage of participants|||Number
830163|NCT01227681|Primary|Motor Performance of Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale|To assess Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale part III (motor function) scores from baseline Medication-off status to Medication-off status after G-CSF injection one year. Scores of UPDRS Part III ranges from 0 to 108 and higher values indicate worse outcome.|2 years|||scores on a scale||Full Range|Mean
830164|NCT01227707|Secondary|TTP - Time to Event|TTP was defined as the time from date of treatment start until first documented progression of disease or death due to underlying cancer. TTP was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|BL, within 6 weeks after the completion of neoadjuvant treatment, every 2 weeks for 1 year following surgery, every 3 months thereafter until death, up to 45 months|ITT population||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
830165|NCT01227707|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression (TTP) - Percentage of Participants With an Event|TTP was defined as the time from date of treatment start until first documented progression of disease or death due to underlying cancer.|BL, within 6 weeks after the completion of neoadjuvant treatment, every 2 weeks for 1 year following surgery, every 3 months thereafter until death, up to 45 months|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
830166|NCT01227707|Secondary|OS - Time to Event|OS was defined as the time from the date of first day of treatment until death due to any cause or the last date the participant was known to be alive. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|BL, within 6 weeks after the completion of neoadjuvant treatment, every 2 weeks for 1 year following surgery, every 3 months thereafter until death, up to 45 months|ITT population||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
830167|NCT01227707|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) - Percentage of Participants With an Event|OS was defined as the time from the date of first day of treatment until death due to any cause or the last date the participant was known to be alive.|BL, within 6 weeks after the completion of neoadjuvant treatment, every 2 weeks for 1 year following surgery, every 3 months thereafter until death, up to 45 months|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
830168|NCT01227707|Secondary|DFS - Time to Event|The time in months from date of start-of-treatment to the date of event defined as the first documented disease progression or death due to any cause. If a participant did not have an event, the time was censored at the date of last adequate tumor assessment. DFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|BL, within 6 weeks after the completion of neoadjuvant treatment, every 2 weeks for 1 year following surgery, every 3 months thereafter until progression, up to 45 months|ITT population||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
830169|NCT01227707|Secondary|Disease-Free Survival (DFS) - Percentage of Participants With an Event|DFS was defined as the time from treatment start date to the date of first progression of disease or date of death due to any cause.|BL, within 6 weeks after the completion of neoadjuvant treatment, every 2 weeks for 1 year following surgery, every 3 months thereafter until progression, up to 45 months|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
830209|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Implant for Right Atrium (RA) Sensing Amplitude|RA Sensed Amplitude results were reported for implant for CRT-D and ICD patients|implant|55 CRT-D patients and 11 ICD patients had available data at implant.||milli volt (mV)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830172|NCT01227707|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Overall Response of CR at the End of Neoadjuvant Treatment|Percentage of participants with an overall response of CR was evaluated as the proportion of participants with CR for the target and non-target lesions plus absence of new lesions at the end of NAT according to RECIST. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions, all non-target lesions, and normalization of tumor marker levels.|BL and within 6 weeks after the completion of study treatment|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
830173|NCT01227707|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) at the End of Neoadjuvant Treatment|Percentage of participants with CR was evaluated as the proportion of participants with complete response for the target and non-target lesions, separately, at the end of NAT according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions or all non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker levels.|BL and within 6 weeks after the completion of study treatment|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
830174|NCT01227707|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Undergoing Sphincter-Saving Surgery by Type of Procedure||6 to 8 weeks after completion of study treatment|ITT population; only participants who underwent surgery were included in the analysis. n (number) equals (=) number of participants assessed for the specified parameter (colostomy)||percentage of participants|||Number
830175|NCT01227707|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by Primary Tumor (T), Regional Lymph Nodes (N), and Distant Metastasis (M) Clinical Stage at Baseline and at the End of Neo-Adjuvant Treatment (NAT)|The frequencies of clinical tumor stage T (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, or X), regional lymph nodes stage N (0, 1, 2, 3, or 4), and distant metastasis clinical stage M (0, 1, or X) at baseline and at the end of NAT were assessed. The frequencies of pathological tumor stage T and regional lymph nodes stage N at surgery were evaluated. The clinical tumor and lymph node status was assessed by clinical examination, endosonography, and/or rectosigmoidoscopy, and pelvic and abdomen computerized tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Response to treatment had to be assessed within 6 weeks after end of treatment by using the same techniques performed at baseline.|Baseline (BL) and end of neoadjuvant treatment (within 6 weeks after the completion of study treatment)|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
830176|NCT01227707|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Pathological Complete Response (pCR)|pCR was defined as the absence of viable tumor cells, as determined by standard histologic procedure, in the tumor specimen (including regional lymph nodes) obtained at surgery. In order to minimize evaluation bias, tumor specimens were analyzed by both a central and local pathologist. The number of participants with pathological tumor stage 0 (pT0) and regional lymph nodes stage 0 (pN0) at surgery was determined. pCR was defined as the number of participants with pT0 and pN0 at surgery divided by the total number of participants with pathological tumor stage data collected.|6 to 8 weeks following completion of neoadjuvant treatment|ITT population; only participants who underwent surgery and had pathological tumor stage data were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830177|NCT01227785|Primary|Wanded Telemetry Issues at Pre-discharge Follow-up|The Investigators completed a questionnaire based on the performance of the wanded telemetry during device interrogations at pre-discharge follow-up. The number of problems reported were counted from the entire study cohort.|Pre-Discharge visit occurred after implant but prior to 1 month follow-up visit|118 was the total number of questionnaires completed and available from the PI for analysis.||issues|||Number
830178|NCT01227785|Primary|Spontaneous Episode Conversion Success Rate at 3 Months|Of the total patients that experienced a spontaneous episode, the % of patients with a spontaneous rhythm conversion that was successful was determined.|3-month|Of the 13 CRT-D and 8 ICD patients that experienced a spontaneous episode, the successful conversions were reported.||percentage of successful conversions|Participants||Number
830179|NCT01227785|Primary|Induced Episode Detection Times at 3 Months|The mean time it took to complete a successful conversion after inducing a VT/VF episode was analyzed for available data from CRT and ICD group patients. The time was recorded (in seconds) for the time duration that was required to successfully convert the patient after inducing VT/VF.|3-month|Of the 6 CRT-D and 3 ICD patients with available data that had succesful conversion after induced VT/VF episodes, the mean time was determined at 3 months||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
830180|NCT01227785|Primary|Induced Episode Detection Times at 1-month|The mean time it took to complete a successful conversion after inducing a VT/VF episode was analyzed for available data from CRT and ICD group patients. The time was recorded (in seconds) for the time duration that was required to successfully convert the patient after inducing VT/VF.|1-month|Of the 1 CRT-D and 1 ICD patients that underwent induced VT/VF at 1month, the mean time for successful conversion was reported.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
830181|NCT01227785|Primary|Induced Episode Detection Times at Implant|The mean time it took to complete a successful conversion after inducing a VT/VF episode was analyzed for available data from CRT and ICD group patients. The time was recorded (in seconds) for the time duration that was required to successfully convert the patient after inducing VT/VF.|implant|Of the 30 CRT-D and 22 ICD patients with induced VT/VF episodes, the mean time required for conversion was reported for all available data||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
830182|NCT01227785|Primary|Induced VT/VF Episode Successful Conversion Rates at 3-months|The % of successful conversions after inducing a VT/VF episode was analyzed for available data from CRT and ICD group patients. All episodes of induced VT/VF that resolved with successful conversion were counted from the total attempted conversions and reported as the % of successful conversions from those attempted.|3-month|Of the 6 CRTD and 3 ICD patients that had induced VT/VF episodes at 3-month follow-up, the number of those that were converted successfully was reported in %||percentage of successful conversions|||Number
830183|NCT01227785|Primary|Induced VT/VF Episode Successful Conversion Rates at 1-month|The % of successful conversions after inducing a VT/VF episode was analyzed for available data from CRT and ICD group patients. All episodes of induced VT/VF that resolved with successful conversion were counted from the total attempted conversions and reported as the % of successful conversions from those attempted.|1-month|Of all patients that experienced an induced VT/VF episode at 1-month, the number that had successful conversions was reported for both CRT-D and ICD patients.||percentage of successful conversions|||Number
830210|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at1-month for Left Ventricular (LV) Sensing Amplitude for CRT-D Patients|LV Sensed Amplitude results were reported at 1-month post-implant for CRT-D patients.|1-month|68 patients in the CRT-D cohort had available data at 1month visit||milli volt (mV)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830184|NCT01227785|Primary|Induced Ventricular Tachycardia / Ventricular Fibrillation (VT/VF) Episode Successful Conversion Rates at Implant|The % of successful conversions after inducing a VT/VF episode was analyzed for available data from CRT and ICD group patients. All episodes of induced VT/VF that resolved with successful conversion were counted from the total attempted conversions and reported as the % of successful conversions from those attempted.|implant|Of the 30 CRT-D and 22 ICD patients with induced episodes, the number with successful conversions was determined. The % of patients that had successful conversion was then reported.||percentage of successful conversions|||Number
830185|NCT01227785|Primary|Product Experiences Reported by the Site for All Patients for Study Duration|Product experiences reported may include the shock impedance noise display, problems encountered with the universal serial bus (USB), a program parameter mismatch, reverse mode switches, electrogram (EGM) noise without oversensing, lead connection issues, or customer device feedback.|Overall study results|All patients from overall study population were considered. Of the total population, the number of product experiences was reported.||experiences|||Number
830186|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at 1-month for RA Pacing Impedance|RA pacing impedance results were reported at 1-month post-implant|1-month|54 CRT-D and 11 ICD patients had data available at 1-month||Ohms||Standard Deviation|Mean
830187|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Pre-discharge for RA Pacing Impedance|RA pacing impedance results were reported at pre-discharge|pre-discharge|57 CRT-D and 11 ICD patients had data available at pre-discharge||Ohms||Standard Deviation|Mean
830188|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Implant for RA Pacing Impedance|RA pacing impedance results were reported at implant|implant|56 CRT-D and 11 ICD patients had data available at implant||Ohms||Standard Deviation|Mean
830189|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at 1-month for RV Pacing Impedance|RV pacing impedance results were reported at 1-month post-implant|1-month|75 CRT-D and 43 ICD patients had data available at 1-month visit||Ohms||Standard Deviation|Mean
830190|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Pre-discharge for RV Pacing Impedance|RV pacing impedance results were reported for pre-discharge|pre-discharge|78 CRT-D and 45 ICD patients had data available at pre-discharge||Ohms||Standard Deviation|Mean
830191|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Implant for RV Pacing Impedance|RV pacing impedance results were reported at implant|implant|79 CRT-D and 46 ICD patients had data available at implant||Ohms||Standard Deviation|Mean
830192|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at 1-month for LV Pacing Impedance for CRT-D.|LV pacing impedance results were reported at 1-month post-implant|1-month|73 CRT-D patients had data available at 1-month visit||Ohms||Standard Deviation|Mean
830193|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Pre-discharge for LV Pacing Impedance for CRT-D.|LV pacing impedance results were reported for pre-discharge visit|pre-discharge|75 CRT-D patients had data available at pre-discharge||Ohms||Standard Deviation|Mean
830194|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Implant LV Pacing Impedance for CRT-D.|LV pacing impedance results at implant were measured in CRT-D.|implant|78 CRT-D patients had data available at implant||Ohms||Standard Deviation|Mean
830195|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at 1-month for RA Pacing Threshold|RA pacing threshold results were reported at 1-month post-implant|1-month|54 CRT-D and 11 ICD patients had data available at 1-month visit||volts (V)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830196|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Pre-discharge for RA Pacing Threshold|RA pacing threshold results were reported at pre-discharge|pre-discharge|57 CRT-D and 11 ICD patients had data available at pre-discharge||volts (V)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830197|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Implant for RA Pacing Threshold|RA pacing threshold results were reported for implant|implant|56 CRT-D and 11 ICD patients had data available at implant||volts (V)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830198|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at 1-month for RV Pacing Threshold|RV pacing threshold results were reported at 1-month post-implant|1-month|75 CRT-D and 43 ICD patients had data available at 1-month visit.||volts (V)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830199|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Pre-discharge for RV Pacing Threshold|RV pacing threshold results were reported at pre-discharge|pre-discharge|78 CRT-D and 45 ICD patients had data available at pre-discharge||volts (V)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830200|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Implant for RV Pacing Threshold|RV pacing threshold results were reported at implant|implant|79 CRT-D and 46 ICD patients had data available at implant.||volts (V)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830201|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at1-month for LV Pacing Threshold|LV pacing threshold results were reported at 1-month post-implant for CRT-D patients.|1-month|73 CRT-D patients had data available at 1-month visit.||volts (V)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830202|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Pre-discharge for LV Pacing Threshold|LV pacing threshold results were reported at pre-discharge for CRT-D patients.|pre-discharge|75 patients had data available at pre-discharge||volts (V)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830203|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Implant for LV Pacing Threshold|LV pacing threshold results were reported for CRT-D patients at implant.|implant|78 CRT-D patients had data available at implant.||volts (V)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830204|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at1-month for Right Ventricle (RV) Sensing Amplitude|RV Sensed Amplitude results were reported at 1-month post-implant for CRT-D and ICD patients|1month|68 CRT-D and 43 ICD patients had data available at 1month visit.||milli volt (mV)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830205|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Pre-discharge for Right Ventricle (RV) Sensing Amplitude|RV Sensed Amplitude results were reported at pre-discharge for CRT-D and ICD patients|pre-discharge|73 CRT-D and 44 ICD patients had data available at pre-discharge visit.||milli volt (mV)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830206|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Implant for Right Ventricle (RV) Sensing Amplitude|RV Sensed Amplitude results were reported at implant for CRT-D and ICD patients|implant|74 CRT-D and 45 ICD patients had data available at implant||milli volt (mV)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830207|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at1-month for RA Sensing Amplitude|RA Sensed Amplitude results were reported at 1-month post-implant for CRT-D and ICD patients|1-month|53 CRT-D and 11 ICD patients had data available at 1-month visit.||milli volt (mV)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830208|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Pre-discharge for RA Sensing Amplitude|RA Sensed Amplitude results were reported at pre-discharge for CRT-D and ICD patients|pre-discharge|55 CRT-D and 11 ICD patients had data available at pre-discharge visit.||milli volt (mV)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830211|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance at Pre-discharge for LV Sensing Amplitude for CRT-D Patients|Left Ventricular (LV) Sensed Amplitude results were reported pre-discharge for CRT-D patients.|pre-discharge|69 patients in the CRT-D arm had available data at pre-discharge visit.||milli volt (mV)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830212|NCT01227785|Secondary|Evaluate the Daily Median Respiratory Rate Trend in Patients Who Experience a HF-event Compared to Patients Who do Not Experience a HF-event.|A comparison of the change in respiratory rate trend over time was made between patients who experienced a protocol-defined HF event (HFE) (Group1: Patients with a HFE) and patients who did not experience a protocol-defined heart failure event (Group 2: Patients without a HFE). Only patients with at least 3 valid daily respiratory rate values (60%) out of each 5-day window were evaluated. The objective was to show that daily median respiratory rate increases more in patients who experience a HFE (Group 1) than in patients who do not experience an HFE (Group 2). A comparison between patients who experience a HFE (Group 1) and patients who do not experience a HFE (Group 2). Two average daily median respiratory rates were done per patient: 60 to 56 days before an index time and 11 to 7 days before the same index time; the difference between these two averaged daily median respiratory rates was done. Index time=day of the first HFE (Group 1) and day of 6-month visit (Group 2).|Results were captured from implant time window to the first event for patients with HFE, up to an average of 9 months|HF events were reported and adjudicated to classify patients into group 1 or 2. Group 1=17 HFEs in 13 patients. For patients with multiple HFEs,only the first with sufficient data was used. 8/13 with a HFE had data for the endpoint analysis.Group 2=95 patients with 9 month follow-up. 90/95 had data eligible for inclusion in the endpoint analysis.||breaths/min||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
830213|NCT01227785|Primary|Clinical Performance for Left Ventricular (LV) Sensing Amplitude at Implant for CRT-D Patients|Left Ventricular (LV) Sensed Amplitude results were reported at implant for CRT-D patients.|implant|The number of CRT-D patients with available data at implant||milli volt (mV)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830214|NCT01227824|Secondary|Cmax and Ctau of DTG|The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and concentration at the end of a dosing interval (Ctau) of DTG were assessed at Week 48. The predicted individual Cmax and Ctau were obtained from the final population PK model by simulation of the concentration-time profiles. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessments were collected at pre-dose (within 15 minutes prior to dose) at Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48 and 1 to 3 hours post-dose or 4 to 12 hours post-dose at Week 4 and Week 24. If 1 to 3 hour post-dose was completed at Week 4, then the 4 to12 hour post-dose must be obtained at Week 48, and vice versa.|Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|The Pharmacokinetic (PK) Concentration Population: all participants who received DTG, had undergone PK sampling during the study, and provided evaluable DTG plasma concentration data.||Micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830215|NCT01227824|Secondary|AUC(0-tau) of DTG|AUC is defined as the area under the DTG concentration-time curve as a measure of drug exposure over time. AUC(0-tau) is defined as the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time tau over a dosing interval at steady state, where tau is the length of the dosing interval of DTG. The predicted individual AUC(0-tau) were obtained from the final population PK model by an empirical Bayes estimation. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessments were collected at pre-dose (within 15 minutes prior to dose) at Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48 and 1 to 3 hours post-dose or 4 to 12 hours post-dose at Week 4 and Week 24. If 1 to 3 hours post-dose was completed at Week 4, then the 4 to12 hour post-dose must be obtained at Week 48, and vice versa. AUC was estimated using population PK modeling based on PK data from all visits.|Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|The Pharmacokinetic (PK) Concentration Population: all participants who received DTG, had undergone PK sampling during the study, and provided evaluable DTG plasma concentration data.||Micrograms*hour per milliliter(µg*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830216|NCT01227824|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Grade 1 to 4 Clinical Chemistry and Hematology Toxicities/Laboratory Adverse Events (AEs)|All Grade 1 to 4 post-Baseline-emergent chemistry toxicities included alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), asparate aminotransferase (AST), carbon dioxide (CO2) content/bicarbonate, cholesterol, creatine kinase (CK), creatinine, hyperglycemia, hyperkalemia, hypernatremia, hypoglycemia, hypokalemia, hyponatremia, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol calculation, lipase, phosphorus inorganic, total bilirubin, and triglycerides. All Grade 1 to 4 post-Baseline-emergent hematology toxities included hemoglobin, platelet count, total neutrophils, and white blood cell count. The Division of AIDS (DAIDS) defined toxicity grades as follows: Grade 1, mild; Grade 2, moderate; Grade 3, severe; Grade 4, potentially life threatening; Grade 5, death.|From Baseline until Week 96|Safety Population: all participants who received at least one dose of investigational product||Participants|||Number
830217|NCT01227824|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Post-baseline HIV-associated Conditions and Progression, Excluding Recurrences|Clinical disease progression (CDP) was assessed according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) HIV-1 classification system. Category (CAT) A: one or more of the following conditions (CON), without any CON listed in Categories B and C: asymptomatic HIV infection, persistent generalized lymphadenopathy, acute (primary) HIV infection with accompanying illness or history of acute HIV infection. CAT B: symptomatic CON that are attributed to HIV infection or are indicative of a defect in cell-mediated immunity; or that are considered by physicians to have a clinical course or to require management that is complicated by HIV infection; and not included among CON listed in clinical CAT C. CAT C: the clinical CON listed in the AIDS surveillance case definition. Indicators of CDP were defined as: CDC CAT A at Baseline (BS) to a CDC CAT C event (EV); CDC CAT B at BS to a CDC CAT C EV; CDC CAT C at BS to a new CDC CAT C EV; or CDC CAT A, B, or C at BS to death.|From Baseline until Week 96|ITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
830218|NCT01227824|Secondary|Absolute Values in CD4+ Cell Counts Over Time|CD4 lymphocyte cells (also called T-cells or T-helper cells) are the primary targets of HIV. The CD4 count and the CD4 percentage mark the degree of immunocompromise. The CD4 count is used to stage the patient's disease, determine the risk of opportunistic illnesses, assess prognosis, and guide decisions about when to start antiretroviral therapy.bsolute values in CD4+ cell counts over time was assessed at Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, and 96.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, and 96|ITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||cells per millimeters cubed (cells/mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831572|NCT01247272|Secondary|Cmax of Norfluoxetine.|Informational comparison of Cmax values for the metabolite Norfluoxetine.|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830219|NCT01227824|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cluster of Differentiation (CD)4+ Cell Counts Over Time|CD4 lymphocyte cells (also called T-cells or T-helper cells) are the primary targets of HIV. The CD4 count and the CD4 percentage mark the degree of immunocompromise. The CD4 count is used to stage the patient's disease, determine the risk of opportunistic illnesses, assess prognosis, and guide decisions about when to start antiretroviral therapy. Changes from Baseline in CD4+ cell counts over time was assessed at Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, and 96. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, and 96|ITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Cells per cubic millimeter (cells/mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830220|NCT01227824|Secondary|Absolute Values in Plasma HIV-1 RNA Over Time|Absolute values in plasma HIV-1 RNA over time was assessed at Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, and 96.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, and 96|ITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||log10 c/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830221|NCT01227824|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Plasma HIV-1 RNA Over Time|Change from baseline in plasma HIV-1 RNA over time was assessed at Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, and 96. Change from baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, and 96|ITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||log10 c/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830222|NCT01227824|Secondary|Number of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 c/mL|The number of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA level <400 c/mL was assessed at Week 48 and Week 96.|Week 48 and Week 96|ITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
830223|NCT01227824|Secondary|Number of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL|The number of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA level <50 c/mL was assessed at Week 96.|Week 96|ITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
830224|NCT01227824|Secondary|Number of Participants With Detectable HIV-1 Virus That Has Genotypic or Phenotypic Evidence of INI Resistance.|Number of participants with detectable virus that has genotypic or phenotypic evidence of Integrase Inhibitor (INI) resistance were assessed at Week 48 and Week 96. Integrase inhibitors are a class of antiretroviral drug designed to block the action of integrase, a viral enzyme that inserts the viral genome into the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) of the host cell.|Week 48 and Week 96|ITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
830225|NCT01227824|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1RNA <50 Copies (c)/Milliliter (mL) Through Week 48.|Percentage of participants with plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 (HIV-1) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) with <50 c/mL was assessed using the Missing, Switch or Discontinuation = Failure (MSDF), as codified by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) “snapshot” algorithm. The algorithm treats all participants without HIV-1 RNA data as non-responders, as well as participants who switch their concomitant Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) prior to Week 48 as follows: background ART substitutions not permitted per study; background ART substitutions permitted per study unless the decision to switch was documented as being before or at the first on-treatment visit where HIV-1 RNA was assessed. Otherwise, virologic success or failure will be determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the subject was on-treatment.|Baseline to Week 48|Intent-to-Treat Exposed (ITT-E) Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Percentage of participants|||Number
830226|NCT01227889|Secondary|Agreement Rate for V600E Mutation Validation of the BRAF Mutation Assay|Analytical and clinical validation of the companion diagnostic (cDx) assay was performed to determine the extent of agreement between the bioMerieux cDx assay (THxID BRAF Assay) and the Clinical Trial Assay (CTA) to detect BRAF mutations to determine participant eligibility into the study. Skin tissue samples collected at the Screening visit were used for this analysis. Multiple specimen per participant were analyzed.|Screening|V600E positive participants screened for BREAK-3 study||Percent agreement||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830227|NCT01227889|Secondary|Number of Participants With Non-melanoma Skin Lesions: Randomized Phase|Dermatological examinations were performed by the investigator, or at the discretion of the investigator, referred to a dermatologist. The number of participants with non-melanoma skin lessions was assessed from the time of Screening until study completion or discontinuation from the study for any reason.|From Screening until study completion or discontinuation from the study (up to 9.9 months)|Safety Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, based on the actual treatment received, if this differed from that to which the participant was randomized||participants|||Number
830228|NCT01227889|Secondary|Duration of Response as Assessed by the Investigator: Crossover Phase|Duration of response for participants with either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) was defined as the time from the first documented evidence of a PR or CR until the first documented sign of PD or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm.|Time from the first documented evidence of PR or CR until the first documented sign of disease progression or death due to any cause (up to 6.4 months)|Crossover Population. Only participants with a confirmed CR or PR were assessed for duration of response.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830229|NCT01227889|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Best Overall Response of Confirmed Complete Response (CR) or Confirmed Partial Response (PR) as Assessed by the Investigator: Crossover Phase|A participant was defined as a responder if he/she achieved either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]). Response was evaluated by an investigator per RECIST, version 1.1. A participant without a post-Baseline assessment of response was considered a non-responder. Confirmation, per RECIST version 1.1, requires a confimatory disease assessment of CR or PR at least 28 days after the initial disease assessment of CR or PR.|From randomization until the first documented evidence of a confirmed complete response or partial response (up to 6.4 months)|Crossover Treatment Population. At the time data were analyzed for overall response, only 37 participants had crossed over from DTIC treatment to GSK25118436 treatment.||participants|||Number
830230|NCT01227889|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS2) as Assessed by the Investigator: Crossover Phase|PFS2 is defined as the time from the first dose of GSK2118436, in participants randomized to DTIC who crossed over to GSK2118436 after initial progression, to the earliest date of radiographic or photographic disease progression or death due to any cause. Disease progression was based on radiographic or photographic evidence, and assessments were made by the investigator according to RECIST version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm. For participants who did not progress or die, PFS was censored at the date of last contact.|Time from first dose of GSK2118436 in participants who crossover after initial progression to the earliest date of radiographical or photographical PD or death due to any cause (up to 6.4 months)|Crossover Treatment Population: the subset of participants who were randomized to the DTIC arm, and who elected at the point of disease progression to receive GSK2118436. Only participants who received at least one dose of GSK2118436 were included in the Crossover Treatment Population.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830231|NCT01227889|Secondary|Duration of Response as Assessed by an Independent Radiologist: Randomized Phase|Duration of response for participants with either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) was defined as the time from the first documented evidence of a PR or CR until the first documented sign of PD or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm. NA indicates that data is not available.|Time from the first documented evidence of PR or CR until the first documented sign of disease progression or death due to any cause (up to 7.4 months)|ITT Population. Only participants with a confirmed CR or PR were assessed for duration of response.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830232|NCT01227889|Secondary|Duration of Response as Assessed by the Investigator: Randomized Phase|Duration of response for participants with either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) was defined as the time from the first documented evidence of a PR or CR until the first documented sign of PD or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm.|Time from the first documented evidence of PR or CR until the first documented sign of disease progression or death due to any cause (up to 65.6 weeks)|ITT Population. Only participants with a confirmed CR or PR were assessed for duration of response.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830233|NCT01227889|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Best Overall Response of Confirmed CR or PR as Assessed by an Independent Radiologist: Randomized Phase|A participant was defined as a responder if he/she achieved either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]). Response was evaluated by an independent radiologist per RECIST, version 1.1. A participant without a post-Baseline assessment of response was considered a non-responder. Confirmation, per RECIST version 1.1, requires a confimatory disease assessment of CR or PR at least 28 days after the initial disease assessment of CR or PR.|From randomization until the first documented evidence of a confirmed complete response or partial response (median of 12.0 weeks)|ITT Population||participants|||Number
830234|NCT01227889|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Best Overall Response of Confirmed Complete Response (CR) or Confirmed Partial Response (PR) as Assessed by the Investigator: Randomized Phase|A participant was defined as a responder if he/she achieved either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis.) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]). Response was evaluated by an investigator per RECIST, version 1.1. A participant without a post-Baseline assessment of response was considered a non-responder. Confirmation, per RECIST version 1.1, requires a confimatory disease assessment of CR or PR at least 28 days after the initial disease assessment of CR or PR.|From randomization until the first documented evidence of a confirmed complete response or partial response (median of 6.6 weeks)|ITT Population||participants|||Number
830235|NCT01227889|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the interval of time between the date of randomization and the date of death due to any cause. For participants who did not die, overall survival was censored at the date of last contact.|Time interval between the date of randomization and the date of death due to any cause (up to 22.1 months)|ITT Population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830236|NCT01227889|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by an Independent Radiologist: Randomized Phase|PFS is defined as the interval of time between the date of randomization and the earlier of the date of disease progression or the date of death due to any cause. Disease progression was based on radiographic or photographic evidence, and assessments were made by an independent radiologist according to RECIST version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 mm. For participants who did not progress or die, PFS was censored at the date of last contact.|Time interval between the date of randomization and the earlier of the date of disease progression or the date of death due to any cause (up to 9.9 months)|ITT Population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839449|NCT01325311|Secondary|Percent of Participants With CYP24 and CYP27B1 SNPs (DNA From Paxgene)||up to Day 35|||percentage of participants|||Number
830237|NCT01227889|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by the Investigator|PFS is defined as the interval of time between the date of randomization and the earlier of the date of disease progression or the date of death due to any cause. Disease progression was based on radiographic or photographic evidence, and assessments were made by the investigator according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 millimeters (mm). For participants who did not progress or die, PFS was censored at the date of last contact. Data are presented as median and 96% confidence interval.|Time interval between the date of randomization and the earlier of the date of disease progression or the date of death due to any cause (up to 9.9 months)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants regardless of whether or not treatment was administered||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830238|NCT01227902|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the PGI-C Score: Current Ability to do the Things You Want to do|The PGI-C questionnaire was to be completed by the participant. Participants were asked the following question: Compared to before you started this study, how would you rate your current ability to do the things you want to do: Much better, Moderately better, A little better, Unchanged, A little worse, Moderately worse, Much worse? Rating scores are integers from 1 to 7, with 1=Much better and 7=Much worse.|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830239|NCT01227902|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Response for the Current Ability to do the Things You Want to do Component of the PGI-C Score|The PGI-C questionnaire was to be completed by the participant. Participants were asked the following question: Compared to before you started this study, how would you rate your current ability to do the things you want to do: Much better, Moderately better, A little better, Unchanged, A little worse, Moderately worse, Much worse.|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
830240|NCT01227902|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the PGI-C Score: Current Ability to do the Things You Need to do|The PGI-C questionnaire was to be completed by the participant. Participants were asked the following question: Compared to before you started this study, how would you rate your current ability to do the things you need to do: Much better, Moderately better, A little better, Unchanged, A little worse, Moderately worse, Much worse? Rating scores are integers from 1 to 7, with 1=Much better and 7=Much worse.|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830241|NCT01227902|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Response for the Current Ability to do the Things You Need to do Component of the PGI-C Score|The PGI-C questionnaire was to be completed by the participant. Participants were asked the following question: Compared to before you started this study, how would you rate your current ability to do the things you need to do: Much better, Moderately better, A little better, Unchanged, A little worse, Moderately worse, Much worse?|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
830242|NCT01227902|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the PGI-C Score: Epilepsy-related Worry|The PGI-C questionnaire was to be completed by the participant. Participants were asked the following question: Compared to before you started this study, how would you rate your current epilepsy-related worry: Much better, Moderately better, A little better, Unchanged, A little worse, Moderately worse, Much worse? Rating scores are integers from 1 to 7, with 1=Much better and 7=Much worse.|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830243|NCT01227902|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Response for the Epilepsy-related Worry Component of the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) Score|The PGI-C questionnaire was to be completed by the participant. Participants were asked the following question: Compared to before you started this study, how would you rate your current epilepsy-related worry: Much better, Moderately better, A little better, Unchanged, A little worse, Moderately worse, Much worse?|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
830244|NCT01227902|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the SF-36v2 Mental Component Summary Score at Week 20/Early Withdrawal|The SF-36 v2 Health Survey is a self-administered, generic, 36-item questionnaire designed to measure 8 domains of functional health status and well-being: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health perceptions, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Each domain is scored from 0 (poorer health) to 100 (better health).The mental component summary (MCS) score is a summary score representing overall mental health, which is derived from the 8 domains. As with the domains, MCS scores range from 0 to 100; higher scores represent better health. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline score minus the Baseline score. Positive changes from Baseline indicate improvement.|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830245|NCT01227902|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the SF-36v2 Physical Component Summary Score at Week 20/Early Withdrawal|The SF-36 v2 Health Survey is a self-administered, generic, 36-item questionnaire designed to measure 8 domains of functional health status and well-being: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health perceptions, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Each domain is scored from 0 (poorer health) to 100 (better health).The physical component summary (PCS) score is a summary score representing overall physical health, which is derived from the 8 domains. As with the domains, PCS scores range from 0 to 100; higher scores represent better health. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline score minus the Baseline score. Positive changes from Baseline indicate improvement.|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830365|NCT01235715|Primary|Units of Homologous Transfusion Over the Course of the Hospital Stay|Units of homologous transfusion for each patient over the course of the hospital stay (an average of 3 days) were recorded.|three days postoperatively|All patients who completed the study were included in analysis.||units||Standard Deviation|Median
830246|NCT01227902|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Short Form 36 Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36v2) Domain Scores at Week 20/Early Withdrawal|The SF-36v2 health survey is a self-administered, generic, 36-item questionnaire designed to measure 8 domains of functional health status and well-being: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health perceptions, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Each domain is scored from 0 (poorer health) to 100 (better health). Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline score minus the Baseline score. Positive changes from Baseline indicate improvement.|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830247|NCT01227902|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Functional Status: Percentage of Days With no Missed Work or School Time|"Participants were asked the following question daily: Did you miss any time from work or school in the last 24 hours due to epilepsy? Possible responses were Yes, No, and NA=Not Applicable (no planned work or school in the last 24 hours). The variable summarized is the percentage of days with no missed work or school. Baseline and Treatment Phase averages were calculated for each participant. The denominators for these by-phase averages were the number of non-missing days for each variable and phase. The by-phase averages were used as follows in the calculation of percent change from Baseline for each participant: 100 x Treatment Phase average – Baseline Phase average) / Baseline Phase average. A positive percent change from Baseline indicates a reduction from Baseline in missed work or school."|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
830248|NCT01227902|Secondary|Functional Status Diary (FSD): Percent Change From Baseline in Epilepsy-related Limitation of Ability to do What You Wanted to|"Participants were asked the following question daily: How would you rate the extent to which epilepsy limited your ability to do what you wanted to do over the last 24 hours? The original possible responses were 0-10, with 0=Not at all limited and 10=Unable to do anything I wanted to. However, in the summarization, 1 was added to each participant's daily response, changing the possible values to 1-11, so that there would be no possibility of the percent change from Baseline being undefined. Baseline and Treatment Phase averages were calculated for each participant. The denominators for these by-phase averages were the number of non-missing days for each variable and phase. The by-phase averages were used as follows in the calculation of percent change from Baseline for each participant: 100 x Treatment Phase average – Baseline Phase average) / Baseline Phase average. A negative percent change from Baseline indicates a reduction from Baseline."|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
830249|NCT01227902|Secondary|Functional Status Diary (FSD): Percent Change From Baseline in Epilepsy-related Limitation of Ability to do What You Needed to|"Participants were asked the following question daily: How would you rate the extent to which epilepsy limited your ability to do what you needed to do over the last 24 hours? The original possible responses were 0-10, with 0=Not at all limited and 10=Unable to do anything I needed to. However, in the summarization, 1 was added to each participant's daily response, changing the possible values to 1-11, so that there would be no possibility of the percent change from Baseline being undefined. Baseline and Treatment Phase averages were calculated for each participant. The denominators for these by-phase averages were the number of non-missing days for each variable and phase. The by-phase averages were used as follows in the calculation of percent change from Baseline for each participant: 100 x Treatment Phase average – Baseline Phase average) / Baseline Phase average. A negative percent change from Baseline indicates a reduction from Baseline."|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
830250|NCT01227902|Secondary|Functional Status Diary (FSD): Percent Change From Baseline in Epilepsy-related Worry|"Participants were asked the following question daily: How would you rate your epilepsy-related worry over the last 24 hours? The original possible responses were 0-10, with 0=No worry and 10=Worst worry imaginable. However, in the summarization, 1 was added to each participant's daily response, changing the possible values to 1-11, so that there would be no possibility of the percent change from Baseline being undefined. Baseline and Treatment Phase averages were calculated for each participant. The denominators for these by-phase averages were the number of non-missing days for each variable and phase. The by-phase averages were used as follows in the calculation of percent change from Baseline for each participant: 100 x Treatment Phase average – Baseline Phase average) / Baseline Phase average. A negative percent change from Baseline indicates a reduction from Baseline."|Baseline through Week 20/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
830251|NCT01227902|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Partial-onset Seizure Frequency|Percent change from Baseline was calculated as the difference in the partial-onset seizure frequency (Treatment Phase minus the Baseline Phase) divided by the Baseline Phase frequency, multiplied by 100. Negative values indicate reductions from Baseline. A partial-onset seizure is a seizure that has its onset in a limited area on one side of the brain. Partial-onset seizures may remain limited or may spread to involve both sides of the brain.|From Baseline through Week 20 (Day 140)/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
830252|NCT01227902|Secondary|Number of Participants With a >=25%, >=75%, or 100% Reduction in Partial-onset Seizure Frequency From Baseline|The number of participants experiencing a >=25%, >=75%, and 100% reduction from Baseline in partial-onset seizure frequency during the Treatment Phase (TP) (i.e., Titration Phase and Flexible Dose Evaluation [FDE] Phase) was measured. A partial-onset seizure is a seizure that has its onset in a limited area on one side of the brain. Partial-onset seizures may remain limited or may spread to involve both sides of the brain.|From Baseline through Week 20 (Day 140)/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population||participants|||Number
830253|NCT01227902|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Reduction or Increase From Baseline in Partial-onset Seizure Frequency|Participants were assessed for the percent change from Baseline in seizure frequency; changes were categorized as Any Decrease (>0 to 25%, 25 to <50%, 50 to 75%, >75 to 100%) or No Change or Any Increase (>25%, 0 to 25%). A partial-onset seizure is a seizure that has its onset in a limited area on one side of the brain. Partial-onset seizures may remain limited or may spread to involve both sides of the brain.|From Baseline through Week 20 (Day 140)/Early Withdrawal|ITT Population||participants|||Number
830254|NCT01227902|Primary|Number of Participants With a >=50% Reduction in Partial-onset Seizure (POS) Frequency From Baseline|The number of participants experiencing a >=50% reduction from Baseline (BL) in POS frequency during the Treatment Phase (TP) (i.e., Titration Phase and Flexible Dose Evaluation [FDE] Phase) was measured. A POS has its onset in a limited area on one side of the brain. POSs may remain limited or may spread to involve both sides of the brain. For both the Baseline Phase and the TP, seizure frequency was calculated as a 28-day rate using the following formula: 28 x {[(number of countable partial seizures in Phase) + (10 x number of days with innumerable seizures in Phase) + (number of occurrences of status epilepticus in Phase)] / number of applicable days in the Phase}, where all days in the Phase are considered applicable (including days with 0 seizures), except for days on which the participant failed to complete the Seizure Diary. >= 50% reduction from BL is calculated as 100 x (28-day partial seizure rate [PSR] for the TP - 28-day PSR for the BL Phase) / 28-day PSR for the BL Phase.|From Baseline through Week 20 (Day 140)/Early Withdrawal|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants in the Safety Population (all participants who took at least one dose of investigational product) who provided at least one post-Baseline efficacy assessment||participants|||Number
830255|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status Shifts From Baseline Grades of 0, 1, and 2|The ECOG performance status scales and criteria are used by doctors and researchers to assess how a participant's disease is progressing, assess how the disease affects the daily living abilities of the participant, and determine appropriate treatment and prognosis. Grade 0, fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction. Grade 1, restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work. Grade 2, ambulatory and capable of all selfcare, but unable to carry out any work activities; up and about more than 50% of waking hours. Grade 3, capable of only limited selfcare; confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking hours. Grade 4, completely disabled; cannot carry on any selfcare; totally confined to bed or chair. Grade 5, dead.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population. The cut off for these data was October 12, 2012.||participants|||Number
830256|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case On-therapy Chemistry Parameter Grade Shifts From Baseline Grade|Grade shifts from Baseline were assessed as any grade increase (AGI), increase to Grade (G) 3 (ITG3), and increase to Grade 4 (ITG4). Toxicities were graded according to the National Cancer Institute common toxicity criteria (NCI-Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events), version 4.0. Grade refers to the severity of the toxicity. The CTCAE displays Grades (G) 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each toxicity based on the following general guideline: G1, mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated; G2, moderate; minimal, local or noninvasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living (ADL); G3, severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL; G4, Life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated.; G5, death related to AE.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population. Data are presented for only those participants with laboratory values. The cut off for these data was October 12, 2012.||participants|||Number
830257|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case On-therapy Hematology Parameter Grade Shifts From Baseline Grade|Grade shifts from Baseline were assessed as any grade increase (AGI), increase to Grade (G) 3 (ITG3), and increase to Grade 4 (ITG4). Toxicities were graded according to the National Cancer Institute common toxicity criteria (NCI-Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events), version 4.0. Grade refers to the severity of the toxicity. The CTCAE displays Grades (G) 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each toxicity based on the following general guideline: G1, mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated; G2, moderate; minimal, local or noninvasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living (ADL); G3, severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL; G4, Life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated.; G5, death related to AE.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population. Data are presented for only those participants with laboratory values. The cut off for these data was October 12, 2012.||participants|||Number
830258|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case On-therapy Shift From Baseline in Bazett's Corrected QT Interval (QTc)|12-lead ECGs were obtained at the scheduled visits. A worst-case on-therapy shift is defined as the worst shift that occurred at any time during the treatment period. The QTc is a measure of the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave in the heart's electrical cycle. In general, the faster the heart rate the shorter the QTc. If a QTc >=500 milliseconds (msec) was noted on a scheduled or unscheduled electrocardiogram (ECG), then two additional ECGs should have been obtained within 5 minutes to confirm the abnormality. The average QTc was determined from the three ECG tracings by manual evaluation and was used to determine continued eligibility.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population. Only those participants for which a post-Baseline ECG was conducted were analyzed. The cut off for these data was October 12, 2012.||participants|||Number
830259|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case On-therapy Blood Pressure Shifts From Baseline|Systolic blood pressure (SBP) and Diatolic blood pressure (DBP) are measured in millimeters of mercury (mmHg). A participant could have been counted in more than one shift category. Participants who experienced shifts in both SBP and DBP are represented under each individual parameter. A worst-case on-therapy shift is defined as the worst shift that occurred at any time during the treatment period.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population. One participant on placebo did not report any blood pressure measurements post-Baseline. The cut off for these data was January 10, 2014.||participants|||Number
830328|NCT01228019|Primary|Change From Baseline in High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) at Week 24|Serum HDL-C levels were measured at start of treatment (baseline) and after 24 weeks of treatment with TREDAPTIVE|Baseline and Week 24|Participants in safety population whose case report form contained baseline and Week 24 data for HDL-C levels and had received TREDAPTIVE for 24 weeks||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830260|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any SAE, Any SAE Related to Study Treatment, and Any Fatal SAE|An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalizaton or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. See the non-serious AE/SAE module for a list of specific events. Relatedness was assessed by the Investigator.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product. Treatment assignments in the All Treated Population were based on the actual treatment received, if different from the randomized treatment. The cut off for these data was January 10, 2014.||participants|||Number
830261|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With AEs Leading to Permanent Discontinuation of Study Treatment, Dose Interruption, and Dose Reduction|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. Dose interruptions or reductions may have been required following potential drug-related toxicities. As a general rule, if dose reduction of investigational product (IP) was necessary, the dose should have been reduced stepwise by 200 mg at each step, and the participant should have been monitored for 10 to 14 days. If toxicity recurred or worsened during this monitoring time, the IP could have been interrupted and/or the dose of IP further decreased, with continued monitoring for an additional 10 to 14 days, and so on.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product. Treatment assignments in the All Treated Population were based on the actual treatment received, if different from the randomized treatment. The cut off for these data was January 10, 2014.||participants|||Number
830262|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated On-therapy Grade 3-5 AEs|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. On-therapy AEs were those reported from the first day that randomized study drug was received to 28 days after the last dose of randomized study drug, and within 28 days of dose interruption. The NCI-CTCAE Version 3.0 was used to grade AEs per the following scale to assess severity: Grade 1, mild; Grade 2, moderate; Grade 3, severe; Grade 4, life-threatening or disabling AE; Grade 5, death related to AE. ALT=alanine aminotransferase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product. Treatment assignments in the All Treated Population were based on the actual treatment received, if different from the randomized treatment. The cut off for these data was January 10, 2014.||participants|||Number
830263|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Grade 3 or 4 AE|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. The NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) Version 3.0 was used to grade AEs per the following scale to assess severity: Grade 1, mild; Grade 2, moderate; Grade 3, severe; Grade 4, life-threatening or disabling AE; Grade 5, death related to AE.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product. Treatment assignments in the All Treated Population were based on the actual treatment received, if different from the randomized treatment. The cut off for these data was January 10, 2014.||participants|||Number
830264|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any On-therapy AE and Any AE Related to Study Treatment|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. On-therapy AEs were those reported from the first day that randomized study drug was received to 28 days after the last dose of randomized study drug, and within 28 days of dose interruption. Relatedness was assessed by the Investigator.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product. Treatment assignments in the All Treated Population were based on the actual treatment received, if different from the randomized treatment. The cut off for these data was January 10, 2014.||participants|||Number
830265|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Non-serious Adverse Event (AE) and Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalizaton or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. See the non-serious AE/SAE module for a list of specific events.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product. Treatment assignments in the All Treated Population were based on the actual treatment received, if different from the randomized treatment. The cut off for these data was January 10, 2014.||participants|||Number
830329|NCT01228019|Primary|Change From Baseline in Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) at Week 24|Serum LDL-C levels were measured at start of treatment (baseline) and after 24 weeks of treatment with TREDAPTIVE|Baseline and Week 24|Participants in safety population whose case report form contained baseline and Week 24 data for LDL-C levels and had received TREDAPTIVE for 24 weeks||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830266|NCT01227928|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Dose Reduction or Any Dose Interruption|Dose interruptions or reductions may have been required following potential drug-related toxicities. As a general rule, if dose reduction of investigational product (IP) was necessary, the dose should have been reduced stepwise by 200 mg at each step, and the participant should have been monitored for 10 to 14 days. If toxicity recurred or worsened during this monitoring time, the IP could have been interrupted and/or the dose of IP further decreased, with continued monitoring for an additional 10 to 14 days, and so on. The cut off for these data was October 12, 2012.|From Week 1 until the end of the treatment period (up to Study Week 108)|All Treated Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product. Treatment assignments in the All Treated Population were based on the actual treatment received, if different from the randomized treatment.||participants|||Number
830267|NCT01227928|Secondary|PFS by Gynaecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) Criteria|"PFS by GCIG criteria is defined as the time from the randomization date to the earliest date of disease progression (PD) per GCIG criteria or death due to any cause. Per GCIG criteria, an objective progression is defined as the earliest event of either tumor progression based on RECIST v1.0 or confirmed CA-125 progression. A participant is counted as Progressed per RECIST if the radiological PD per RECIST occurred prior to or on the same day as CA-125 progression. A participant is counted as Progressed per CA-125 if the radiological PD occurred after CA-125 progression. Per RECIST, PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. Participants who were alive and had not progressed at the time of analysis were censored at the date associated with the last visit with adequate assessment."|From randomization to the earliest date of disease progression per GCIG criteria or death due to any cause (average of 15.2 months)|ITT Population. The cut off for these data was October 12, 2012.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830268|NCT01227928|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time interval from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause.|From randomization until death due to any cause (average of 29.4 months)|ITT Population. Participants who were alive as of study completion were censored at the last contact date. The cut off for these data was January 10, 2014.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830269|NCT01227928|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS is defined as the time interval between randomization and evidence of progressive disease (PD), as assessed by the investigator using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.0, or death, whichever occurred first. A visit-based analysis approach to determine participants’ dates of progression was applied in the analysis method. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. Participants who were alive and had not progressed at the time of analysis were censored at the date associated with the last visit with adequate assessment.|From randomization until evidence of progressive disease or death, whichever occurred first (average of 15.2 months)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants who were not screen failures. Participants who were screen failures and randomized by mistake, but who did not receive study treatment, were not included. The treatment assignment in the ITT Population was based on the randomized treatment. The data cut off was October 12, 2012.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830270|NCT01227954|Secondary|ApoE4 Genotype and Other Potentially Predictive Biomarkers of Cognitive Function|Per the protocol, the feasibility of the proposed translational studies were to be assessed following completion of accrual and sample collection. The decision was made not to pursue this outcome measure. No assays were performed and no data were collected for this Outcome Measure|Baseline and 4 months from start of treatment||||||
830271|NCT01227954|Secondary|The Frequency of Patients With Grade 3 and Higher Adverse Events (AE) Related to Treatment|For each patient the highest grade adverse event related to treatment was calculated. Those with their highest grade of 3 or higher were counted. Adverse events are graded using CTCAE v4.0. Grade refers to the severity of the AE. The CTCAE v4.0 assigns Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each AE based on this general guideline: Grade 1 Mild AE, Grade 2 Moderate AE, Grade 3 Severe AE, Grade 4 Life-threatening or disabling AE, Grade 5 Death related to AE|From start of treatment to 12 months from start of treatment|Eligible patients who started study treatment||Participants|||Count of Participants
830272|NCT01227954|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression (radiographic) is defined as an increase in perpendicular bidimensional tumor area (at lease 50% for lesions < 1cm, at least 25% for lesions >=1cm) for any of the 1-3 tracked brain metastases, or the appearance of any new brain metastasis on a follow-up MRI. Progression-free survival was calculated instead of time to progression. Progression-free survival time was measured from registration to the date of progression, death, or last known follow-up (censored). The Kaplan-Meier method used to determine median time (along with 95% confidence intervals).|Analysis occurs after all patients have been on study for at least 4 months. (Patients are followed from registration to death or study termination whichever occurs first.)|Eligible patients who started study treatment||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830273|NCT01227954|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was measured from registration to the date of death or last known follow-up (censored). Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to median survival time and 95% confidence interval.|Analysis occurs after all patients have been on study for at least 4 months. (Patients are followed from registration to death or study termination whichever occurs first.)|Eligible patients who started study treatment||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830274|NCT01227954|Secondary|Quality of Life as Measured by the Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living (ADL)|The Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living (ADL) is a 10-item assessment. Patient scores on the ADL range from 0 to 20 with lower scores indicating declining functional status.|Baseline and 4 months from start of treatment|Eligible patients who started treatment and completed at least one ADL assessment||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
830286|NCT01227967|Secondary|Time to Feeling as Good as Before the Onset of the Influenza Illness|Time to feeling as good as before influenza is defined as time to the first of two successive 'yes' responses to the question of 'feeling as good as you did before you had the flu'.For participants who did not have two successive records meeting this criterion, follow-up was censored for analysis purposes at the time of the last but one diary card record with question answered.|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which included all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830275|NCT01227954|Secondary|Quality of Life as Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain (FACT-Br)|The FACT-Br is a 19-item self-report instrument designed to measure multidimensional quality of life in patients with brain cancer. It is to be administered with the FACT-General. The FACT-G is a validated, 27-item measure where a higher score represents higher QOL. In addition to a total QOL score, subscale scores for physical, functional, social and emotional well-being are produced. There are 5 responses options, 0=Not a lot to 4=Very much. All subscale items are added together, multiplied by the number of items in the subscale, then divided by the number of items answered to obtain subscale totals. Scores range 0-108 for FACT-G total, 0-28 for physical, social, functional subscales, 0-24 for emotional subscale, 0-76 for brain subscale. Certain items must be reversed before it is added by subtracting the response from 4. Subscale requires >= 50% of items to be completed while the overall response rate must be > 80%. If items are missing, the subscale scores can be prorated.|Baseline and 4 months from start of treatment|Eligible patients who started treatment and completed at least one FACT-Br assessment||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
830276|NCT01227954|Secondary|Percent Change at 4 Months in Visual Learning Measured by Cogstate's One Card Learning Test (OCLT)|The score is the arcsine of the square root of the proportion of correct responses. A higher score indicates a better performance. Each patient served as her or his own control, and the percent change in OCLT score from baseline to 4 months was calculated as 100*[(baseline score - 4 month score)/ baseline score].|Baseline and 4 months from start of treatment|Eligible patients who started treatment and had baseline and 4 month data||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830277|NCT01227954|Secondary|Percent Change at 4 Months in Auditory Learning Measured by Cogstate's International Shopping List Test (ISLT)|The score is the total number of correct responses made in remembering the list on three consecutive trials in a single session. A higher score indicates a better performance. Each patient served as her or his own control, and the percent change in ISLT score from baseline to 4 months was calculated as 100*[(baseline score - 4 month score)/ baseline score].|Baseline and 4 months from start of treatment|Eligible patients who started treatment and had baseline and 4 month data||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830278|NCT01227954|Primary|Percent Change in Delayed Recall at 4 Months as Measured by the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R)|Change in Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised delayed recall (HVLT_R DR) score from baseline to 4 months after the start of treatment calculated as (baseline score - 4 month score)/ baseline score. A positive change indicates a decline in function. The HVLT-R assesses verbal learning and memory. It incorporates 6 different forms, helping to mitigate practice effects of repeated administrations. Each form includes 12 nouns (targets) with 4 words drawn from 3 semantic categories, which differ across the 6 forms. Delayed recall involves recalling a list of 12 targets after a 20-minute delay. The score is the sum of the number of targets correctly recalled. Percent change calculated as 100*[(baseline score - 4 month score)/ baseline score]|Baseline and 4 months from start of treatment|Eligible patients who started treatment and had baseline and 4 month data||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830279|NCT01227967|Secondary|28-day Mortality|Number of deaths|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which included all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
830280|NCT01227967|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Required Hospitalization.|The percentage of participants hospitalized by 28 days was estimated from the Kaplan-Meier curves.|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which included all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants analyzed||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830281|NCT01227967|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Required New or Increased Use of Supplemental Oxygen|Percentage of participants who required new or increased use of supplemental oxygen|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which included all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
830282|NCT01227967|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Develop Bronchitis, Pneumonia, or Other Complications of Influenza After Day 0.|Participants were assessed for the signs/symptoms suggestive of one of the following complications: Sinusitis, Otitis Media ,Bronchitis / Bronchiolitis, Pneumonia and antibiotic use for reason other than above.|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which included all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug. The categories in the table are not mutually exclusive (because some participants had multiple complications) and the last row of the table summarizes all incidents.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
830283|NCT01227967|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Failure at Day 5|Clinical failure at Day 5 is defined as the need for continued (non-study) antiviral use after Day 5.|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which included all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
830284|NCT01227967|Secondary|Time to Return of Physical Function to Pre-illness Leve|Time to return of physical function to pre-illness level was defined as the time from Day 0 to the first of two successive measurements at which the physical function score equals or is better than the pre-illness score (obtained by recall at enrollment).For subjects who did not have two successive records meeting this criterion, follow-up was censored for analysis purposes at the time of the last but one diary card record with physical function evaluated.|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which included all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830285|NCT01227967|Secondary|Time to Return to Pre-influenza Function|Time to return to pre-influenza function is defined as the time from Day 0 to the first of two successive 'Yes' answers to the global assessment question 'Are you functioning as well as you were before you had the flu'.For participants who did not have two successive records meeting this criterion, follow-up was censored for analysis purposes at the time of the last but one diary card record with question answered.|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which included all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830287|NCT01227967|Secondary|Time to Resolution of All Symptoms AND Fever|The assessed symptoms were cough, nasal obstruction (stuffy nose), sore throat, fatigue, headache, muscle aches, feverishness, rhinorrhea, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea. Fever was considered present based on the diary cards if a subject reported a maximal temperature ≥38.0°C (for the period since the diary card was previously completed) or reported having taken an antipyretic drug (also for the period since the diary card was previously completed). Time to resolution of all clinical symptoms and fever is defined as the time from Day 0 to the first of two successive measurements at which all clinical symptoms are grade 0 (absent) or 1(mild) and no fever >=38.0 C or antipyretic drug is reported. For participants who did not have two successive records meeting this criterion, follow-up was censored for analysis purposes at the time of the last but one diary card record with symptoms and fever evaluated.|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which includes all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830288|NCT01227967|Secondary|Time to Absence of Fever|Fever was considered present based on the diary cards if a subject reported a maximal temperature ≥38.0°C (for the period since the diary card was previously completed) or reported having taken an antipyretic drug (also for the period since the diary card was previously completed). Otherwise, fever was considered not present during the period since the diary card was previously completed, except that the evaluation was considered missing if either the temperature or the antipyretic drug use entry was not completed on the diary card. The duration of fever was defined as the time from Day 0 to the first of two successive assessments (through to Day 7) or to the first assessment (Day 8 onwards) at which no fever was present according to this definition.For participants who did not have two successive records meeting this criterion, follow-up was censored for analysis purposes at the time of the last but one diary card record with fever evaluated.|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which included all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830289|NCT01227967|Secondary|Time to Alleviation of Influenza Clinical Symptoms.|The assessed symptoms were cough, nasal obstruction (stuffy nose), sore throat, fatigue, headache, muscle aches, feverishness, rhinorrhea, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea. Duration of clinical symptoms is defined as the time from Day 0 to the first of two successive measurements at which all clinical symptoms are grade 0 (absent) or 1 (mild). A measurement is considered to be the 8AM or 8PM assessment during Days 0 to 7 (so two measurements are obtained per day) and then the daily assessment thereafter. Time will then be calculated in half-days through to Day 7. If a subject’s first two assessments on (baseline assessment and first subsequent diary card assessment) satisfy this criterion, then the duration will be set to zero. For participants who did not have two successive records meeting this criterion, follow-up was censored for analysis purposes at the time of the last but one diary card record with symptoms evaluated.|From treatment initiation to Day 28|The population analyzed is the Intention To Treat (ITT) Population, which included all participants who were randomized properly and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830290|NCT01227967|Secondary|Number of Participants Shedding Virus|Number of participants with undetectable viral load at both Day 3 and Day 7; detectable at Day 3 and undetectable at Day 7; detectable at Day 7 (irrespective of whether or not detectable at Day 3).|At day 3 and 7.|The population analyzed is the Primary Efficacy Population (PEP), which included all participants who were randomized properly, had received at least one dose of study drug, and had influenza virus isolated and typed in the qualitative PCR evaluation at Day 0 from central laboratory testing.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830291|NCT01227967|Secondary|qPCR Viral Shedding|Median, 25% and 75% percentile of the value of viral shedding (Results <LOD were imputed as the LOD value, and Results >= LOD, <LLOQ were imputed as the LLOQ value.)|At Day 0, 3 and 7|The population analyzed is the Primary Efficacy Population (PEP), which included all participants who were randomized properly, had received at least one dose of study drug, and had influenza virus isolated and typed in the qualitative PCR evaluation at Day 0 from central laboratory testing.||Log10 copies/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
830292|NCT01227967|Secondary|Number of Participants by Virus Detection Status|Number of participants who had undetectable values (less than the limit of detection [LOD]), who had values between the LOD and the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ), and who had values ≥LLOQ|At Day 0, 3 and 7.|The population analyzed is the Primary Efficacy Population (PEP), which included all participants who were randomized properly, had received at least one dose of study drug, and had influenza virus isolated and typed in the qualitative PCR evaluation at Day 0 from central laboratory testing.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830293|NCT01227967|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Virus Detectable by Quantitative PCR (qPCR) in Nasopharyngeal (NP) Swabs|The central laboratory performed a qualitative PCR test on the NP sample from Day 0 in order to confirm influenza infection and to determine the influenza type and subtype. For participants with a positive influenza test result at Day 0 from this qualitative PCR testing, the laboratory then performed qPCR testing of subsequent samples to quantify viral shedding.|At Day 3|The population analyzed was restricted to the 407 participants who had a confirmed positive test for influenza by qPCR in the central laboratory testing and were not in the pilot study for IRC003. 13 participants (5 in the Combination Therapy and 8 in the Oseltamivir Monotherapy) had missing endpoint samples so were excluded from the analysis.||percentage of participants analyzed|||Number
830294|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|90 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830295|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|75 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830296|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|60 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830297|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|45 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830298|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|30 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830299|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|15 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830300|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|5 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830301|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Stress Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|15 minutes prior to the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830302|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|90 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830303|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|75 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830304|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|60 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830305|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|45 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830306|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|30 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830307|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|15 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830308|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|5 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830309|NCT01227980|Primary|Alcohol Craving in Response to the Alcohol Cue Script|Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value).|15 minutes prior to the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 24, 25, or 26 of the treatment period|The analyses included only those subjects who completed all three script types (neutral, alcohol, stress)||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830310|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Autofluorescence Patterns in the Fellow Eye as Observed on Fundus Autofluorescence (FAF) Imaging at Two Years Compared to Baseline||Baseline and 2 years||||||
830311|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Autofluorescence Patterns in the Study Eye as Observed on Fundus Autofluorescence (FAF) Imaging at Two Years Compared to Baseline||Baseline and 2 years||||||
830312|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Plaque Size in the Fellow Eye as Observed on Indocyanine Green (ICG) Imaging at Two Years Compared to Baseline||Baseline and 2 years||||||
830313|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Plaque Size in the Study Eye as Observed on Indocyanine Green (ICG) Imaging at Two Years Compared to Baseline||Baseline and 2 years||||||
830314|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Area of Leakage in the Fellow Eye as Observed on Fluorescein Angiography (FA) Imaging at Two Years Compared to Baseline||Baseline and 2 years||||||
830315|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Area of Leakage in the Study Eye as Observed on Fluorescein Angiography (FA) Imaging at Two Years Compared to Baseline||Baseline and 2 years||||||
830316|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Subretinal Fluid in the Fellow Eye as Assessed by Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) at Two Years Compared to Baseline||Baseline and 2 years||||||
830317|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye as Assessed by Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) at Two Years Compared to Baseline||Baseline and 2 years||||||
830318|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in 24-hour Urine Cortisol Levels at Two Years Compared to Baseline|The amount of cortisol found in urine was assessed from each participant at baseline and at two years. The mean change from baseline to two years is reported here in micrograms.|Baseline and 2 years|||µg||Standard Deviation|Mean
830319|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Serum DHT Levels at Two Years Compared to Baseline|The concentration of dihydrotestosterone (DHT) in blood serum was assessed from each participant at baseline and at two years. The mean change from baseline to two years is reported here in picograms of DHT per milliliter of serum.|Baseline and 2 years|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830320|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Serum Testosterone Levels at Two Years Compared to Baseline|The concentration of testosterone in blood serum was assessed from each participant at baseline and at two years. The mean change from baseline to two years is reported here in nanograms of testosterone per decaliter of serum.|Baseline and 2 years|||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830321|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Fellow Eye at One Year Compared to Baseline|Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.|Baseline and 1 year|||ETDRS letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
830322|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Study Eye at One Year Compared to Baseline|Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.|Baseline and 1 year|||ETDRS letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
830323|NCT01227993|Secondary|Change in Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Fellow Eye at Two Years Compared to Baseline|Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.|Baseline and 2 years|||ETDRS letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
830324|NCT01227993|Primary|Change in Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Study Eye at Two Years Compared to Baseline|Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.|Baseline and 2 years|||ETDRS letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
830325|NCT01228019|Primary|Investigator's Overall Efficacy Evaluation at Week 24|The investigator evaluated all available data after 24 weeks of TREDAPTIVE and assigned an overall evaluation of “Improved”, “Unchanged” or “Worsened” when compared to baseline.|Baseline and Week 24|Participants in safety population whose case report form contained the investigator's overall assessment after 24 weeks of treatment with TREDAPTIVE||Percentage of Participants|||Number
830326|NCT01228019|Primary|Investigator's Overall Efficacy Evaluation at Week 12|The investigator evaluated all available data after 12 weeks of TREDAPTIVE and assigned an overall evaluation of “Improved”, “Unchanged” or “Worsened” when compared to baseline.|Baseline and Week 12|Participants in safety population whose case report form contained the investigator's overall assessment after 12 weeks of treatment with TREDAPTIVE||Percentage of Participants|||Number
830327|NCT01228019|Primary|Change From Baseline in Triglycerides at Week 24|Serum triglyceride levels were measured at start of treatment (baseline) and after 24 weeks of treatment with TREDAPTIVE|Baseline and Week 24|Participants in safety population whose case report form contained baseline and Week 24 data for triglyceride levels and had received TREDAPTIVE for 24 weeks||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830330|NCT01228019|Primary|Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol at Week 24|Serum cholesterol levels were measured at start of treatment (baseline) and after 24 weeks of treatment with TREDAPTIVE|Baseline and Week 24|Participants in safety population whose case report form contained baseline and Week 24 data for total cholesterol levels and had received TREDAPTIVE for 24 weeks||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830331|NCT01228019|Primary|Change From Baseline in Triglycerides at Week 12|Serum triglyceride levels were measured at start of treatment (baseline) and after 12 weeks of treatment with TREDAPTIVE|Baseline and Week 12|Participants in safety population whose case report form contained baseline and Week 12 data for triglyceride levels.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830332|NCT01228019|Primary|Change From Baseline in High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) at Week 12|Serum HDL-C levels were measured at start of treatment (baseline) and after 12 weeks of treatment with TREDAPTIVE|Baseline and Week 12|Participants in safety population whose case report form contained baseline and Week 12 data for HDL-C levels.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830333|NCT01228019|Primary|Change From Baseline in Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) at Week 12|Serum LDL-C levels were measured at start of treatment (baseline) and after 12 weeks of treatment with TREDAPTIVE|Baseline and Week 12|Participants in safety population whose case report form contained baseline and Week 12 data for LDL-C levels.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830334|NCT01228019|Primary|Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol at Week 12|Serum cholesterol levels were measured at start of treatment (baseline) and after 12 weeks of treatment with TREDAPTIVE|Baseline and Week 12|Participants in safety population whose case report form contained baseline and Week 12 data for total cholesterol levels.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830335|NCT01228019|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Drug Reactions|An adverse drug reaction was an adverse event of which the relationship to the study drug could not be ruled out. An adverse event was any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the study drug, was also an adverse event.|From start of treatment through 14 days after the last dose (Up to 26 weeks)|Safety population: all enrolled participants who met entry criteria regarding safety data||Percentage of Participants|||Number
830336|NCT01228019|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Any Adverse Experience|An adverse event was any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the study drug, was also an adverse event.|From start of treatment through 14 days after the last dose (Up to 26 weeks)|Safety population: all enrolled participants who met entry criteria regarding safety data||Percentage of participants|||Number
830337|NCT01228071|Primary|Gel Drying Time|Testosterone gel 2% drying time was assessed with a stopwatch. On Day 14 at the time of application of the gel directly to the first anteromedial thigh, the subject started a stopwatch. The gel was spread as evenly as possible over an area of 1 g/100 cm2. The total coverage area on the thigh was approximately equal to two (2) 3”× 5” postcards. The subject gently rubbed the gel with his fingertip in a circular motion (avoiding contact with the scrotal region) until the gel was dry. At this time, the stopwatch was stopped and the time expended was recorded in the eCRF.|1 day; drying time measured following gel application on Day 14|The PK population consisted of all subjects who had a drug drying time, required trough concentrations values, and no protocol violations significantly affecting the PK data.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830338|NCT01228071|Primary|Time to Steady State (SS)|Trough total testosterone levels were obtained at Day 2, Day 3, Day 4, Day 7, and Day 14 to assess time to steady state. Trough concentrations over the 14-day period were used to calculate time SS.|14 days|The PK population consisted of all subjects who had a drug drying time, required trough concentrations values, and no protocol violations significantly affecting the PK data.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830339|NCT01228071|Primary|Time to Target Eugonadal Range|The time to eugonadal range (ie, testosterone ≥300 ng/dL) was assessed based on the 24-hour PK serum concentration data.|24 hours|Of the 31 subjects in the PK population, 7 subjects were not included in the analysis for time to eugonadal range. Five (5) subjects had total testosterone serum concentrations of ≥300 ng/dL at Visit 2 (baseline, time 0) and 2 subjects had total testosterone serum concentrations that never reached 300 ng/dL.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830340|NCT01228084|Secondary|Half-life of SFN in Blood Among Patients With Glutathione-S-Transferase Mu 1 (GSTM1) Intact Genotype||Day 1 of study treatment|||hours||Full Range|Median
830341|NCT01228084|Secondary|Half-life of SFN in Blood Among Patients With Glutathione-S-Transferase Mu 1 (GSTM1) Null Genotype||Day 1 of study treatment|||Hours||Full Range|Median
830342|NCT01228084|Secondary|Half-life of Sulforaphane (SFN) in Blood||Day 1 of study treatment|||hours||Full Range|Median
830343|NCT01228084|Secondary|Incidence of Grade 3 or Higher Treatment Related Toxicity|Toxicities will be graded based on the NIH Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) Common Toxicity Criteria of Adverse Events Version 4.0 (http://ctep.cancer.gov). All adverse events of any grade (for example, abnormal laboratory values, etc.) deemed clinically significant by the investigator will be recorded as a measure of the safety profile of sulforaphane|Continually through study and 14-30 days after last drug dose.|||participants|||Number
830344|NCT01228084|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Whose PSA Levels Have Not Doubled||While on treatment with sulforaphane (less than or equal to 20 weeks.)|||percentage of participants|||Number
830345|NCT01228084|Secondary|Minimum Percent Change in PSA (i.e., the Smallest Increase for Those With Increased PSA and the Greatest Decline for Those With Decreased PSA)||PSA measured every 28 days while on study treatment, an average of 5 months|||percent change||Full Range|Median
830346|NCT01228084|Secondary|Percent Change in PSA From Baseline to Final Measured Value at End of Study|To determine the percentage change in PSA from baseline to the final measured value at the end of study.|Measure at baseline and after stopping study treatment (less than or equal to 20 weeks of treatment with sulforaphane.)|||Percent change||Full Range|Median
830364|NCT01235715|Secondary|Range of Motion at 6 Weeks|A measurement of the degrees of motion of the operated knee six weeks after surgery.|6 weeks postoperatively|Patients whose range of motion at 6-week followup appointment was taken were included in analysis.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
830347|NCT01228084|Primary|Proportion of Patients Who Achieve a 50% Decline in Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Levels|To determine the proportion of patients who achieve a decline in PSA levels while receiving sulforaphane treatment. as a measure of anti-tumor activity in men with recurrent prostate cancer.|Less than or equal to 20 weeks of sulforaphane treatment.|||percentage of participants|||Number
830348|NCT01228149|Secondary|Number of Suture Lyses|Number of suture lyses at visit 5 (week 12 after surgery)|week 12|Intention-to- treat population||Participants|||Count of Participants
830349|NCT01228149|Secondary|Change in Conjunctival Redness|"Conjunctival redness (ORA Scale) evaluated from 16 up to 28 days (time window) prior surgery and 1 day prior surgery. The investigator compares patient's study eye with a set of reference photos showing various degrees of redness. Redness was scored on a scale of none, mild, moderate, severe and very severe. Absolute and relative frequencies of visit 1 and 2 were compared descriptively."|24 weeks|ITT population||Participants|||Count of Participants
830350|NCT01228149|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life|"Change in quality of life measure by a certified National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire containing 25 questions (NEI VFQ-25).Patients tick a score at every question to present their visual functioning (usually from 1-5 or 1-6 in which 1 is best and 6 worse). Every single item/score is transformed to a scale between 0 and 100 (0 best, 100 worse). For the total score, the mean of all transformed scores/items is calculated.
NEI VFQ 25 Quality of Life Questionnaire composite score at V5 (week 12 after surgery).
Outcome shows mean of differences and 95% confidence intervall."|12 weeks|ITT Population||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830351|NCT01228149|Secondary|Filtration Bleb Classification|"Filtration bleb classification (Grehn) in both Groups 1 week, 4 weeks, 12 weeks and 24 week after surgery.
For classification the following criteria were evaluated and scored as described below:
vascularisation (0=None, 1=mild, 2=a few corkscrew vessels)
identifiability (0=no borders to sides; 1=demarcation nasally or temporally; 2= demarcation to both sides; 3= encapsulated)
Thickness (0= a least 3mm; 1=2mm; 2= 1mm; 3=flat)
Microcysts (0=no; 1= yes)
Transparency (0= highly transparent; 2=moderate; 2=not transparent)
Mobility (0= yes; 1= no)
Leakage (0=yes, 1=no)
For the change in the filtration bleb classification (only thickness at visit 5/week 12 mentioned below) descriptive statistics were presented only."|24 weeks|PP Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
830352|NCT01228149|Secondary|Change in IOP Between Visit 1 and 2|Change in IOP between Visit 1 (Screening visit 16 to 28 day prior trabeculectomy) and Visit 2 (1 day before trabeculectomy). Outcome shows mean of differences and 95% confidence intervall.|28 days|PP Population||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830353|NCT01228149|Secondary|Ocular Hypotension Rate|Ocular hypotension rate (0-5 mmHg of the study eye) indicated by the number of patients with ocular hypertension|24 weeks|PP Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
830354|NCT01228149|Secondary|Number of Necessary 5-Fluorouracil (5FU) Injections|Number of post-operative necessary 5-Fluorouracil (5FU) injections at week 12|12 weeks|PP Population (n=58)||number of injections||Standard Deviation|Mean
830355|NCT01228149|Secondary|Number of Needling|number of patients requirering needling|12 weeks|Patients of the PP population||Participants|||Count of Participants
830356|NCT01228149|Primary|Change in Intraocular Pressure (IOP) (ΔIOP) Three Months After Trabeculectomy in Comparison to the Mean Preoperative IOP|Change in IOP (ΔIOP) three months after trabeculectomy in comparison to the mean preoperative IOP at one day prior surgery|12 weeks|In total 62 patients were randomized, 30 to COSOPT-S®, 32 to DIAMOX+Dexa edo® (intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Per-protocol (PP) population (treated >8 days and did not take any medication that interfered with the study): n=58 patients: 27 p. in COSOPT-S®, 31 p. in DIAMOX+Dexa edo®. Analysis population: patients who completed the study n=53||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830357|NCT01228175|Primary|Cigarettes Per Smoking Day||up to 36 weeks|||Cigarettes smoked||Standard Deviation|Mean
830358|NCT01228435|Secondary|Safety|Further document the safety of this regimen. Treatment-emergent adverse events will be summarized by MedDEA coding terms and seperate tabulations will be produced for treatment-related adverse events, treatment-emergent serious adverse events, discontinuations due to adverse events, and treatment-emergent events of at least Grade 3 severity.|2 years||||||
830359|NCT01228435|Primary|Response Rate|The response rate was defined as the number of patients achieving a RECIST 1.0 defined response divided by the number of patients treated and was to be calculated seperately for each arm. A response by RECIST criteria means that the pre-defined target lesions (sum of the longest diameters) had to decrease by 30% or more and this response needed to be confirmed on a second scan at least 4 weeks later.|2 years|||participants|||Number
830360|NCT01235715|Secondary|Visual Analog Pain Scale (At Night) At 6 Weeks|The visual analog pain scale is a patient-reported measure of pain on a 10-point scale with 0 being no pain and 10 being worst possible pain. Drawings of faces indicate the level of pain associated with different points on the scale. For the measure of pain at night, the patient indicates their level of pain during or before sleep.|6 weeks postoperatively|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830361|NCT01235715|Secondary|Visual Analog Pain Scale (During Therapy) at 6 Weeks|The visual analog pain scale is a patient-reported measure of pain on a 10-point scale with 0 being no pain and 10 being worst possible pain. Drawings of faces indicate the level of pain associated with different points on the scale. For the measure of pain during, the patient indicates their level of pain during physical therapy.|6 weeks postoperatively|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830362|NCT01235715|Secondary|Visual Analog Pain Scale (During Activity) at 6 Weeks|The visual analog pain scale is a patient-reported measure of pain on a 10-point scale with 0 being no pain and 10 being worst possible pain. Drawings of faces indicate the level of pain associated with different points on the scale. For the measure of pain during, the patient indicates their level of pain while doing activities of daily living such as walking and moving from sitting to standing.|6 weeks postoperatively|Patients whose visual analog pain scale at 6-week followup appointment was taken were included in analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830363|NCT01235715|Secondary|Visual Analog Pain Scale (at Rest) at 6 Weeks|The visual analog pain scale is a patient-reported measure of pain on a 10-point scale with 0 being no pain and 10 being worst possible pain. Drawings of faces indicate the level of pain associated with different points on the scale. For the measure of pain at rest, the patient indicates their level of pain while seated or lying down, not moving.|6 weeks postoperatively|Patients whose visual analog pain scale at 6-week followup appointment was taken were included in analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830367|NCT01235715|Primary|Drain Output|A measurement of the amount of blood drained from the knee.|24 hours post-operatively|All patients enrolled in study were subject to analysis; occasionally a patient's levels were not taken or were not available for analysis for various reasons||mL||Standard Error|Mean
830368|NCT01235715|Primary|Change in Hematocrit on Day 2 Compared to Preoperatively||preoperatively and two days after surgery|All patients enrolled in study were subject to analysis; occasionally a patient's levels were not taken or were not available for analysis for various reasons.||percentage of red blood cell||Standard Deviation|Mean
830369|NCT01235715|Primary|Change in Hemoglobin on Day 2 Compared to Preoperatively||preoperatively and two days after surgery|All patients enrolled in study were subject to analysis; occasionally a patient's levels were not taken or were not available for analysis for various reasons.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830370|NCT01235715|Primary|Change in Hematocrit on Day 1 Compared to Preoperatively||preoperatively and one day after surgery|All patients enrolled in study were subject to analysis; occasionally a patient's levels were not taken or were not available for analysis for various reasons.||percentage of red blood cell||Standard Deviation|Mean
830371|NCT01235715|Primary|Change in Hemoglobin On Day 1 Compared to Preoperatively||preoperatively and one day after surgery|All patients enrolled in study were subject to analysis; occasionally a patient's levels were not taken or were not available for analysis for various reasons.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830372|NCT01235715|Primary|Change in Hematocrit on Day 0 Compared to Preoperatively||preoperatively and day of surgery|All patients enrolled in study were subject to analysis; occasionally a patient's levels were not taken or were not available for analysis for various reasons.||percentage of red blood cell||Standard Error|Mean
830373|NCT01235715|Secondary|Visual Analog Pain Scale on Day 3|The visual analog pain scale is a patient-reported measure of pain on a 10-point scale with 0 being no pain and 10 being worst possible pain. Drawings of faces indicate the level of pain associated with different points on the scale.|3 days postoperatively|||points on VAS scale||Standard Error|Mean
830374|NCT01235715|Secondary|Range of Motion on Day 3|A measurement of the degrees of motion of the operated knee three days after surgery.|3 days postoperatively|||degrees||Standard Error|Mean
830375|NCT01235715|Secondary|Change in International Normalized Ratio (INR) Level on Day 2 Compared to Preoperatively|The INR, a measure of the clotting tendency of blood, is a ratio of a patient's prothrombin time (the time a blood plasma takes to clot after the addition of tissue factor) to a normal prothrombin time.|preoperatively and two days after surgery|All patients who completed the study were included in analysis.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
830376|NCT01235715|Primary|Change in Hemoglobin on Day 0 Compared to Preoperatively||preoperatively and on the day of surgery|All patients enrolled in study were subject to analysis; occasionally a patient's levels were not taken or were not available for analysis for various reasons.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830377|NCT01235728|Secondary|Mean Maximum Plasma Concentrations at Trough of Day 8, 15, 22, and 29 Following Topical Administration of MK-0873 to Psoriatic Patients|Plasma samples were collected at 12 hours post-dose on Days 8, 15, 22, and 28 to evaluate the mean maximum plasma concentration at trough of MK-0873.|Day 8, 15, 22, 29|The population consisted of all participants that received treatment, had no major protocol violations, and had MK-0873 plasma trough values available for the Day 8, 15, 22, and 28 treatment.||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
830378|NCT01235728|Secondary|Least Squares Mean Percent Change From Baseline (Predose Day 1) of TLS Score for Lesions Treated With MK-0873 and Lesions Treated With Calcitriol|Each lesion was evaluated for 3 components: erythema, induration, and scaling. Each component was given a score using the following scale: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked, with increasing score reflecting increased lesion severity. The TLS score (range 0 to 12) is calculated as the sum of the 3 components.|Baseline and Day 29|The population consisted of all participants that received treatment, had no major protocol violations, and had TLS scores available at baseline and Day 29||Percent Change|Lesions|95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830379|NCT01235728|Primary|Least Squares Mean Percent Change From Baseline (Predose Day 1) of Target Lesion Severity (TLS) Score for Lesions Treated With MK-0873 and Lesions Treated With MK-0873 Vehicle|Each lesion was evaluated for 3 components: erythema, induration, and scaling. Each component was given a score using the following scale: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked, with increasing score reflecting increased lesion severity. The TLS score (range 0 to 12) is calculated as the sum of the 3 components.|Baseline and Day 29|The population consisted of all participants that received treatment, had no major protocol violations, and had TLS scores available at baseline and Day 29.||Percent Change|Lesions|95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830380|NCT01235741|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 6 Follow-Up in Lipids - Intent to Treat Population|Baseline was Day 1 measurement or the last measurement taken prior to first dose of randomized study medication, if Day 1 measure was missing. Follow up was 6 months post last dose of randomized study medication. Lipids measured included total cholesterol, high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and triglycerides. Lipids were measured in milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL).|Baseline up to Month 6 Follow-Up|The intent to treat (ITT) population received at least one dose of randomized study treatment. The number analyzed in the ITT included those participants who provided a laboratory measurement up to Month 6 Follow-Up.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830381|NCT01235741|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 6 Follow-Up in Insulin - Intent to Treat Population|Baseline was Day 1 measurement or the last measurement taken prior to first dose of randomized study medication, if Day 1 measure was missing. Follow up was 6 months post last dose of randomized study medication. Insulin measured in milliunits per liter (mU/L).|Baseline up to Month 6 Follow-Up|The intent to treat (ITT) population received at least one dose of randomized study treatment. The number analyzed in the ITT included those participants who provided a laboratory measurement.||mU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
830382|NCT01235741|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to 6 Month Follow-Up in Fasting Plasma Glucose - Intent to Treat Population|Baseline was Day 1 measurement or the last measurement taken prior to first dose of randomized study medication, if Day 1 measure was missing. Follow up was 6 months post last dose of randomized study medication. Fasting glucose measured in milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL).|Baseline to 6 Month Follow-Up|The intent to treat (ITT) population received at least one dose of randomized study treatment. The number analyzed in the ITT included those participants who provided a laboratory measurement up to Month 6 Follow-Up.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830383|NCT01235741|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 6 Follow-Up in Heart Rate - Intent to Treat Population|Baseline was Day 1 measurement or the last measurement taken prior to first dose of randomized study medication, if Day 1 measure was missing. Heart rate was measured in beats per minute (beats/min).|Baseline up to Month 6 Follow-Up|The intent to treat (ITT) population received at least one dose of randomized study treatment. The number analyzed in the ITT included those participants who provided a vital sign measurement.||beats/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
830384|NCT01235741|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 6 Follow-Up in Blood Pressure - Intent to Treat Population|Baseline was Day 1 measurement or the last measurement taken prior to first dose of randomized study medication, if Day 1 measure was missing. Follow-up was up to 6 months post treatment. Blood pressure included systolic and diastolic pressures measured in millimeters of mercury (mmHg).|Baseline to Month 6 Follow-Up|The intent to treat (ITT) population received at least one dose of drug treatment. The number analyzed in the ITT included those participants who provided a vital sign measurement up to 6 Months follow-up.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
830385|NCT01235741|Primary|Number of Participants With Chemistry Laboratory Value of Potential Clinical Importance - Intent to Treat Population|Criteria for laboratory values of potential clinical importance for obese and overweight (BMI >= 25 kg/m^2) participants: Total bilirubin High (H) > 2 mg/dL; Plasma or serum glucose fasting or non-fasting H > 200 mg/dL, low (L) < 60 mg/dL; Albumin L <2.5 g/dL; Creatine kinase H > 3*Upper limit of Normal (ULN); Sodium L <130 milliequivalents per liter (mEq/L), H > 150 mEq/L; potassium L<3.0 mEq/L, H> 5.5 mEq/L; bicarbonate L<18 mEq/L, H>35 mEq/L;calcium L <8mg/dL, H> 11 mg/dL; triglycerides H> 500 mg/dL; Cholesterol L < 100 mg/dL, H > 350 mg/dL; Alkaline phosphatase H > 3*ULN; Gamma-glutamyltransferase H>3*ULN; creatinine males > 1.6 mg/dL, females > 1.4 mg/dL; alanine aminotransferase H > 3*ULN; aspartate aminotransferase H > 3*ULN; urea nitrogen H > 45 mg/dL; uric acid males > 10.0 mg/dL, females > 8.0 mg/dL; Phosphorus L < 1.0 mg/dL H > 6.0 mg/dL.|Screening to Month 6 Follow-Up|The intent to treat (ITT) population received at least one dose of randomized study treatment. The number analyzed in the ITT included those participants who provided a laboratory measurement.||participants|||Number
830386|NCT01235741|Primary|Number of Participants With Hematology and Urinalysis Laboratory Values of Potential Clinical Importance - Intent to Treat Population|Criteria for laboratory values of potential clinical importance for obese and overweight (BMI >= 25 kg/m^2) participants: Platelets high (H) >500,000/µL; low (L) <75,000/µL. Hematocrit males <36%, females <30%. Hemoglobin males <12 g/dL, females <10 g/dL. White blood cell count (WBC) H >18,000/µL; L <1,500/µL. Urine protein H >= 3+ or >= 500 mg/dL. Urine glucose H >= 3+ or >= 500 mg/dL. Urine ketones >= 3+ or Large.|Screening to 6 Month Follow-Up|The intent to treat (ITT) population received at least one dose of randomized study treatment. Number analyzed (n) in ITT included participants who provided a laboratory measurement. Hemoglobin, hematocrit n=27, 29 in placebo and pramlintide + metreleptin, respectively; urinalysis n=31, 29, in placebo and pramlintide + metreleptin, respectively.||participants|||Number
830387|NCT01235741|Primary|Number of Participants With Neutralizing Activity to Metreleptin at Early Termination or During Post Treatment Follow-Up - Intent to Treat Population Who Received Metreleptin|In vitro assays were conducted to determine if neutralizing activity to metreleptin developed in participants treated with at least one dose of the drug during the study. Baseline is Day 1 of the Randomization Period, prior to administration of metreleptin.|Baseline to Month 6 Follow-Up|||participants|||Number
830388|NCT01235741|Primary|Number of Participants With Anti-leptin Antibodies Who Received Metreleptin - Intent to Treat Population|Anti-leptin antibodies measured at Weeks 1 and 2 of drug treatment, early termination visit, and at Months 2, 4, and 6 post treatment follow-up in participants who received metreleptin.|Week 1 to Month 6 Follow-Up|All participants who received at least one dose of metreleptin and provided a sample to analyze; number analyzed (n) for Week 1, Week 2, early termination, Month 2, Month 4, Month 6 Follow-up were: n=22, 5, 35, 32, 25, 28.||participants|||Number
830389|NCT01235741|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 2, and to Follow up Months 2, 4, 6 in Fasting Leptin Concentration - Intent to Treat Population|Participants who received metreleptin were analyzed; no placebo treated participants were analyzed. Baseline was Day 1 measurement or the last measurement taken prior to first dose of randomized study medication, if Day 1 measure was missing. Leptin was measured in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL).|Baseline to Month 6 Follow Up|All participants who received a dose of metreleptin and provided a sample were analyzed. Number of participants analyzed for Week 2, and follow up Months 2, 4, 6 were 6, and 33, 29, 29, respectively.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830390|NCT01235741|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events and Number With Post Treatment Adverse Events - Intent to Treat Population|Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events are defined as those with an onset date and time on or after the first dose of randomized study medication and on or before the last dose of randomized study medication. Post-treatment Adverse Events are defined as those with an onset date after the date of last dose (imputed if not available) of randomized study medication. Participants experiencing multiple episodes of a given adverse event are counted once.|Day 1 up to Month 6 Follow-Up|The intent to treat (ITT) population received at least one dose of randomized study treatment.||participants|||Number
830391|NCT01235741|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline to Week 1 and From Baseline to Month 6 Follow-up in Body Weight - Intent to Treat Population|Baseline was Day 1 measurement or the last measurement taken prior to first dose of randomized study medication, if Day 1 measure was missing. Follow up was 6 months post last dose of randomized study medication.|Baseline up to Month 6 Follow-Up|The intent to treat (ITT) population received at least one dose of randomized study treatment. The number analyzed in the ITT included those participants who provided a measurement. Number analyzed (n) for Week 1 provided above; 6 Month Follow-Up n=27, 29, in placebo and Pramlintide + Metreleptin, respectively.||percentage of change in weight||Standard Deviation|Mean
830406|NCT01235975|Secondary|Anti-PSA, Anti-PSC, Anti-PSW-135 and Anti-PSY Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL).|At Day 0 (PRE) and Month 1|The primary analysis was performed on a subset of of the 2 treatment groups and 2 age strata of the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, 50% of subjects were tested for anti-PSA and anti-PSC and the other 50% of subjects were tested for anti-PSW-135 and anti-PSY.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830837|NCT01240330|Secondary|PFV Percent Augmentation|Peak Flow Velocity (PFV) from the compression phase subtracted from the PFV from the decompression phase divided by the PFV from the decompression phase expressed as the percent augmentation.|3 measurements/10 minute therapy|||percentages||Standard Deviation|Mean
830392|NCT01235897|Secondary|Best Disease Response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST), Version 1.1|"Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm.
Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.
Progressive Disease (PD): At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression).
Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufﬁcient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufﬁcient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study
Non-PR/Non-PD: clinical response of chest wall disease not evaluable by RECIST"|60 days after dose inititation|Analysis included all patients receiving at least 8 weeks of study therapy||participants|||Number
830393|NCT01235897|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) and Recommended Phase 2 Dose of MK-2206 Administered Weekly in Combination With Weekly Paclitaxel 80 mg/m^2 and Trastuzumab 2 mg/m^2|The MTD was defined as the dose level resulting in 3 or fewer DLTs in 11 patients, per the modified toxicity probability interval (TPI) method (Ji Y, Li Y, Nebiyou Bekele B: Dose-ﬁnding in phase I clinical trials based on toxicity probability intervals. Clin Trials 4:235-244, 2007), and confirmed in 4 additional patients. Based on interim toxicity data from other studies, the dose was not escalated beyond 135 mg weekly.|30 days from initiation of dose|Sixteen participants completed at least one cycle of therapy and were evaluable for DLT per protocol. Patients were assessed for DLT during the first 4-week cycle.||mg|||Number
830394|NCT01235910|Secondary|Blood Pressure||2 weeks||||||
830395|NCT01235910|Secondary|Aliskiren Plasma Concentrations|Maximum plasma concentration; area under the concentration-time curve, half-life, oral clearance|2 weeks||||||
830396|NCT01235910|Primary|Dose-normalized Cyclosporine Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC)|The study was stopped due to difficulty finding patients who met the strict inclusion criteria. Only one patient was started on the study drug. as a result we did not analyze any cyclosporine PK (e.g.(AUCs) for this study.|7 days, 14 days, 30 days (End of Study)|||ng*h/ml/mg|||Number
830397|NCT01235923|Primary|Reticulocyte Count|reticulocyte count at 4 weeks (end of study)|4 weeks|Power analysis based on difference in mean retic count (baseline versus 4 weeks) of 75 (standard deviation 50), alpha 0.05, 80% power.||cells x 1000/microliter||Standard Error|Mean
830398|NCT01235923|Primary|Baseline Retic Count|retic count measured at study entry|baseline|All study subjects had baseline retic count measured.||x1000 cells/microliter||Standard Error|Mean
830399|NCT01235975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With New Onset Chronic Illnesses (NOCI)|NOCIs include autoimmune disorders, asthma, type I diabetes, allergies.|Within 31 days (Day 0 to 30) after vaccination|The primary analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort (TVC), which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
830400|NCT01235975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|Within 31 days (Day 0 to 30) after vaccination|The primary analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort (TVC), which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
830401|NCT01235975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|Within 31 days (Day 0 to 30) after vaccination|The primary analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort (TVC), which cohort included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
830402|NCT01235975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue,gastrointestinal symptoms, headache and temperature [defined as orally temperature equal to or above (≥) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of any general symptom regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 temperature = temperature above (>) 39.5 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|Within 4 days (Day 0 to 3) post-vaccination|The primary analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort (TVC), which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
830403|NCT01235975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = significant pain at rest or pain that prevented normal every day activities. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 50 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|Within 4 days (Day 0 to 3) post-vaccination|The primary analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort (TVC), which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
830404|NCT01235975|Secondary|Anti-tetanus Toxoid (Anti-TT) Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|At Day 0 (PRE) and Month 1|The primary analysis was performed on the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who met all eligibility criteria, who complied with the protocol requirements and for whom immunogenicity measures were available.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830405|NCT01235975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-tetanus Toxoid (Anti-TT) Antibody Concentrations ≥ the Cut-off Value|The cut-off value for the anti-TT concentrations was greater than or equal to (≥) 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|At Day 0 (PRE) and Month 1|The primary analysis was performed on the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who met all eligibility criteria, who complied with the protocol requirements and for whom immunogenicity measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
830466|NCT01236768|Other Pre-specified|Irritation and Itching at Application Site|"AG200-15 irritation and itching scores are defined as follows:
0=none
mild
moderate
severe"|6 months|Subject self-reported worse irritation score in a cycle.||Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830407|NCT01235975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-PSA, Anti-PSC, Anti-PSW-135 and Anti-PSY Antibody Concentrations ≥ the Cut-off Value|The cut-off value for the anti-polysaccharide concentrations was greater than or equal to (≥) 2.0 micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL).|At Day 0 (PRE) and Month 1|The primary analysis was performed on a subset of of the 2 treatment groups and 2 age strata of the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, 50% of subjects were tested for anti-PSA and anti-PSC and the other 50% of subjects were tested for anti-PSW-135 and anti-PSY.||Subjects|||Number
830408|NCT01235975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-polysaccharide Meningococcal Serogroup A (Anti-PSA), Serogroup C (Anti-PSC), Serogroup W-135 (Anti-PSW-135) and Serogroup Y (Anti-PSY) Antibody Concentrations ≥ the Cut-off Value|The cut-off value for the anti-polysaccharide concentrations was greater than or equal to (≥) 0.3 micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL).|At Day 0 (PRE) and Month 1|The primary analysis was performed on a subset of of the 2 treatment groups and 2 age strata of the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, 50% of subjects were tested for anti-PSA and anti-PSC and the other 50% of subjects were tested for anti-PSW-135 and anti-PSY.||Subjects|||Number
830409|NCT01235975|Secondary|rSBA-MenA, rSBA-MenC, rSBA-MenW-135 and rSBA-MenY Antibody Titers|Antibody titers were presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|At Day 0 (PRE) and Month 1|The primary analysis was performed on the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who met all eligibility criteria, who complied with the protocol requirements and for whom immunogenicity measures were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830410|NCT01235975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With rSBA-MenA, rSBA-MenC, rSBA-MenW-135 and rSBA-MenY Antibody Titers ≥ the Cut-off Value|The cut-off value for the rSBA titers was greater than or equal to (≥) 1:128.|At Day 0 (PRE) and Month 1|The primary analysis was performed on the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who met all eligibility criteria, who complied with the protocol requirements and for whom immunogenicity measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
830411|NCT01235975|Secondary|Number of Subjects With rSBA-MenA, rSBA-MenC, rSBA-MenW-135 and rSBA-MenY Antibody Titers ≥ the Cut-off Value|The cut-off value for the rSBA titers was greater than or equal to (≥) 1:8.|At Day 0 (PRE) and Month 1|The primary analysis was performed on the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who met all eligibility criteria, who complied with the protocol requirements and for whom immunogenicity measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
830412|NCT01235975|Primary|Vaccine Response to Meningococcal Antigens (MenA, MenC, MenW-135 and MenY)|Vaccine response for serum bactericidal assay using rabbit complement (rSBA) antibodies against Neisseria meningitides serogroups A, C , W-135, Y (rSBA-MenA, rSBA-MenC, rSBA-MenW-135 and rSBA-MenY) was defined as: for initially seronegative subjects [rSBA titer below (<) 1:8], post-vaccination rSBA titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1: 32; for initially seropositive subjects with rSBA titer between 1:8 and 1:128, at least four-fold increase in rSBA titer from pre to post vaccination; and for initially seropositive subjects with rSBA titer ≥1:128, at least two-fold increase in rSBA titer from pre to post vaccination.|One month after vaccination (Month 1)|The primary analysis was performed on the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who met all eligibility criteria, who complied with the protocol requirements and for whom immunogenicity measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
830413|NCT01236001|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects by Category of Clinical Evolution of Seizure Control at 6 Months|Clinical evolution of seizures following administration of VIMPAT compared to baseline before start of VIMPAT. The evolution of seizure control is subjectively assessed by the investigator on a four categorical scale, with options being 1=worsened, 2=stable, 3=improved, 4=much improved. If seizure control is worse, the investigator will try to document the reason|6 months|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 168 subjects had Vimpat dosing data available at the 6-month visit and are included in this analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
830414|NCT01236001|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects by Category of Clinical Evolution of Seizure Control at 3 Months|Clinical evolution of seizures following administration of VIMPAT compared to baseline before start of VIMPAT. The evolution of seizure control is subjectively assessed by the investigator on a four categorical scale, with options being 1=worsened, 2=stable, 3=improved, 4=much improved. If seizure control is worse, the investigator will try to document the reason.|3 months|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 152 subjects had Vimpat daily dosing information available at the 3-month visit and are included in this analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
830415|NCT01236001|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects by Category of Clinical Evolution of Seizure Control at Baseline|"This outcome will be only provided for subjects who were already treated by VIMPAT® at Baseline.
Clinical evolution of seizures following administration of VIMPAT compared to baseline before start of VIMPAT. The evolution of seizure control is subjectively assessed by the investigator on a four categorical scale, with options being 1=worsened, 2=stable, 3=improved, 4=much improved. If seizure control is worse, the investigator will try to document the reason."|Baseline|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 105 subjects were treated with Vimpat at Baseline are included in this analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
830416|NCT01236001|Secondary|Treatment Persistence of VIMPAT® After 6 Months|Treatment persistence is defined as the percentage of subjects being treated under VIMPAT® after a given duration (>=6 months).|>=6 months|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 192 are included in this analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
830417|NCT01236001|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Received Concomitant Antiepileptic Drug Treatment|Concomitant antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are defined as treatments which started after or at the date of the first administration of VIMPAT®.|From baseline to study termination (6 months)|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 192 are included in this analysis.||percentage of patients|||Number
830418|NCT01236001|Primary|Galenic Formulation Repartition in Subjects Treated by VIMPAT® at 6 Months|VIMPAT is available as tablet and oral solution formulation in Belgium. The use of each galenic formulation will be presented with number of subjects by formulation.|6 months|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 154 subjects had Vimpat dosing data available at the 6-month visit and are included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
830419|NCT01236001|Primary|Galenic Formulation Repartition in Subjects Treated by VIMPAT® at 3 Months|VIMPAT is available as tablet and oral solution formulation in Belgium. The use of each galenic formulation will be presented with number of subjects by formulation.|3 months|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 137 subjects had Vimpat daily dosing information available at the 3-month visit and are included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
830420|NCT01236001|Primary|Galenic Formulation Repartition in Subjects Treated by VIMPAT® at Baseline|"This outcome will be only provided for subjects who were already treated by VIMPAT® at Baseline.
VIMPAT is available as tablet and oral solution formulation in Belgium. The use of each galenic formulation will be presented with number of subjects by formulation."|Baseline|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 105 subjects were treated with Vimpat at Baseline are included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
830421|NCT01236001|Primary|Mean Total Daily Dose of VIMPAT® (mg) at 6 Months||6 months|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 154 subjects had Vimpat dosing data available at the 6-month visit and are included in this analysis.||mg/day of Vimpat||Standard Deviation|Mean
830422|NCT01236001|Primary|Mean Total Daily Dose of VIMPAT® (mg) at 3 Months||3 months|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 137 subjects had Vimpat daily dosing information available at the 3-month visit and are included in this analysis.||mg/day of Vimpat||Standard Deviation|Mean
830423|NCT01236001|Primary|Mean Total Daily Dose of VIMPAT® (mg) at Baseline|Mean total daily dose at baseline will be only provided for subjects who were already treated by VIMPAT® at Baseline.|Baseline|Of the 192 subjects in the Safety Set (SS), 105 subjects were treated with Vimpat at Baseline are included in this analysis.||mg/day of Vimpat||Standard Deviation|Mean
830424|NCT01236300|Primary|NPV (Negative Predictive Value)|"Using the descriptive criteria of the nCLE images of mucinous vs. non mucinous cysts determined in stage 1, we assessed diagnostic parameters of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy of for the detection of pancreatic cystic neoplasia in stage 2.
For patients who underwent surgery, a gold standard diagnosis was obtained by histopathological diagnosis of the surgical specimen. The local pathologist reviewed the histology slides and selected key areas for high-resolution digital photography. Digital images for all surgical cases were sent to the central pathologist (J.H.) for review.
In patients who did not undergo surgery, the final diagnosis was established by clinical diagnosis after a review by five investigators. These investigators independently reviewed the patients’ clinical factors, cross-sectional image findings, EUS findings and images, and cyst fluid results, and follow-up imaging studies ranging from 10 to 22 months, if available."|October 2011|Among 66 patients, 26 patients who categorized in Stage 1 only used to develop terms for specific findings, 8 patients were excluded due to insufficient information available to make a consensus diagnosis, and 31 patients in Stage 2 were analyzed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830425|NCT01236300|Primary|PPV (Positive Predictive Value)|"Using the descriptive criteria of the nCLE images of mucinous vs. non mucinous cysts determined in stage 1, we assessed diagnostic parameters of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy of for the detection of pancreatic cystic neoplasia in stage 2.
For patients who underwent surgery, a gold standard diagnosis was obtained by histopathological diagnosis of the surgical specimen. The local pathologist reviewed the histology slides and selected key areas for high-resolution digital photography. Digital images for all surgical cases were sent to the central pathologist (J.H.) for review.
In patients who did not undergo surgery, the final diagnosis was established by clinical diagnosis after a review by five investigators. These investigators independently reviewed the patients’ clinical factors, cross-sectional image findings, EUS findings and images, and cyst fluid results, and follow-up imaging studies ranging from 10 to 22 months, if available."|October 2011|Among 66 patients, 26 patients who categorized in Stage 1 only used to develop terms for specific findings, 8 patients were excluded due to insufficient information available to make a consensus diagnosis, and 31 patients in Stage 2 were analyzed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830426|NCT01236300|Primary|Specificity|"Using the descriptive criteria of the nCLE images of mucinous vs. non mucinous cysts determined in stage 1, we assessed diagnostic parameters of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy of for the detection of pancreatic cystic neoplasia in stage 2.
For patients who underwent surgery, a gold standard diagnosis was obtained by histopathological diagnosis of the surgical specimen. The local pathologist reviewed the histology slides and selected key areas for high-resolution digital photography. Digital images for all surgical cases were sent to the central pathologist (J.H.) for review.
In patients who did not undergo surgery, the final diagnosis was established by clinical diagnosis after a review by five investigators. These investigators independently reviewed the patients’ clinical factors, cross-sectional image findings, EUS findings and images, and cyst fluid results, and follow-up imaging studies ranging from 10 to 22 months, if available."|October 2011|Among 66 patients, 26 patients who categorized in Stage 1 only used to develop terms for specific findings, 8 patients were excluded due to insufficient information available to make a consensus diagnosis, and 31 patients in Stage 2 were analyzed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830427|NCT01236300|Secondary|Overall Complication Rate|Assess the safety of nCLE, by recording any possible adverse event or complications occurring during or shortly after the EUSFNA and nCLE procedure|August 2011|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830428|NCT01236300|Primary|Sensitivity|"Using the descriptive criteria of the nCLE images of mucinous vs. non mucinous cysts determined in stage 1, we assessed diagnostic parameters of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy of for the detection of pancreatic cystic neoplasia in stage 2.
For patients who underwent surgery, a gold standard diagnosis was obtained by histopathological diagnosis of the surgical specimen. The local pathologist reviewed the histology slides and selected key areas for high-resolution digital photography. Digital images for all surgical cases were sent to the central pathologist (J.H.) for review.
In patients who did not undergo surgery, the final diagnosis was established by clinical diagnosis after a review by five investigators. These investigators independently reviewed the patients’ clinical factors, cross-sectional image findings, EUS findings and images, and cyst fluid results, and follow-up imaging studies ranging from 10 to 22 months, if available."|October 2011|Among 66 patients, 26 patients who categorized in Stage 1 only used to develop terms for specific findings, 8 patients were excluded due to insufficient information available to make a consensus diagnosis, and 31 patients in Stage 2 were analyzed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830429|NCT01236326|Secondary|Recovered by 2 Months After Donation||2 months|||participants|||Number
830430|NCT01236326|Secondary|Days to Normal Day-to-day Activities||2 months|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
830431|NCT01236326|Secondary|Days Before Going Back to Work||2 months|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
830432|NCT01236326|Secondary|Days on Oral Pain Medication After Discharge||2 months|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
830535|NCT01238341|Secondary|Successful Endoscopic Therapy||During procedure, up to 3 hours|||ERCPs|Participants||Number
830433|NCT01236326|Primary|The Primary End Point of the Study Was the Mean/Median Number of Days Postsurgery Required for Each Group to Return to 100% Functioning Capacity.|"The Primary Endpoint of the Study Will be Patient Self-reported Return to 100%, as Measured by the Number of Days Post-surgery That the Patient Reports His or Her Return to 100% Functioning Capacity."|1 year|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
830434|NCT01236339|Secondary|Liver Disease Complications (Adverse Events)|Overall frequency and component frequencies. Complications will include hepatic encephalopathy, hepatic hydrothorax, hepatoma, hepatorenal syndrome (Type 1 or Type 2), hyponatremia (<130mEq / L), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and variceal bleeding.|Through 24 months|||participants|||Number
830435|NCT01236339|Secondary|Procedural Success|"Successful creation of a VIATORR(R) device lined portosystemic shunt spanning a hepatic vein and intrahepatic branch of the portal vein
*Note: Control (LVP) arm includes only subjects who crossed over to TIPS"|Time of TIPS Procedure (within 2 weeks of enrollment for TIPS arm, at least 6 months after enrollment for Control arm crossover participants)|||participants|||Number
830436|NCT01236339|Secondary|Frequency of Hepatic Encephalopathy|Number of episodes of West Haven grade 2 or greater|Through 24 months|||Number of episodes|||Number
830437|NCT01236339|Secondary|Frequency of Paracentesis|Number of paracentesis post randomization|Through 24 months|||Number of episodes|||Number
830438|NCT01236339|Secondary|Time to Transplant|"Time from randomization to transplant. Subjects without an event will be censored at the date of last follow-up or date of death without transplant.
*Note: Outcome measure entered is number of subjects who received a liver transplant at time of study termination."|Through 24 months|||participants|||Number
830439|NCT01236339|Secondary|Overall Survival|"Time from randomization to death from any cause. Subjects without an event will be censored at the date of last follow-up. >
*Note: Outcome measure entered below is number of subjects alive at time of study termination."|Through 24 months|||participants|||Number
830440|NCT01236339|Primary|Transplant-free Survival|"Time from randomization to death from any cause prior to transplant. Subjects who undergo liver transplant will be censored at the time of transplant. Subjects without an event will be censored at the date of last follow-up.
Note: The outcome entered below is the number of participants who were either alive or had a liver transplant at time of study termination."|Through 24 months|||participants|||Number
830441|NCT01236365|Primary|Hs-CRP Levels Assessed at Randomization and 6 Months|To assess if the use of statins in children with type 1 DM decreases the concentration of inflammatory markers.|Randomization and 6 months|||mg/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
830442|NCT01236365|Secondary|Subclinical Atherosclerosis and Vascular Stiffness With the Use of Abdominal Aortic MRI.|T1DM patients will have an MRI scan of the abdominal aorta using an image acquisition protocol to measure subclinical atherosclerosis and arterial stiffness. Subjects will be rescanned at the conclusion of the 6 month trial. A group of healthy, non diabetic age-matched controls will be scanned as well.|6 months||||||
830443|NCT01236365|Secondary|Gene Expression and Concentration of Key Molecules That Participate in the Inflammatory Process and Arterial Plaque Formation.|We will restrict participation in protocol #2 to those with T1DM for >3 years and a HbA1C >8% using a stratified balanced randomization. Blood will be withdrawn for a special genetic test. Age-matched, non-diabetic healthy controls will be recruited for comparison.|6 months||||||
830444|NCT01236365|Secondary|Relationship Between Glycemic Variability- Measured by the Mean Amplitude of Glycemic Excursion With Continuous Glucose Monitoring.|At randomization, 3 and 6 months a CGM (IPro®, Medtronic Minimed) will be worn blindly for 6d to assess glucose variability to correlate mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE) with changes in Lp particles and hsCRP.|Randomization and 6 months||||||
830445|NCT01236365|Primary|LDL-C Levels Assessed at Randomization and 6 Months|To assess if the use of statins in children with type 1 DM is safe, improves measures of LDL-C. Subjects will have a physical exam, laboratories, nutritional counseling and moderate aerobic exercise recommended. Diabetes management will be intensified. At 3 months fasting lipoprotein fractions (ion mobility)re-drawn and if LDL-C >100mg/dl patients will be randomized to treatment with statins or placebo for 6 months, randomization stratified by BP and microalbuminuria, duration of diabetes and HgA1C. At 1 month safety labs will be repeated and blood withdrawn again at 3 and 6 months from baseline.|Randomization and 6 months|Adjusted for age, gender and ISS (Insulin sensitivity score)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
830446|NCT01236378|Secondary|Number of Participants With Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) Less Than (<) 60 mL/Min/1.73 m^2|GFR, an index of kidney function, describes flow rate of filtered fluid through the kidney. GFR can be measured directly or estimated using established formulas. GFR was calculated using the Simplified Modification of Diet in Renal Dysfunction (MDRD) GFR equation. Normal GFR is >90 mL/min/1.73 m^2; children and older people usually have lower GFR. Often, kidney transplant recipients do not have normal GFRs. Lower values indicate poor kidney function. GFR <15 mL/min/1.73 m^2 is consistent with kidney failure. For this posting, the number of subjects with a GFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m^2 is listed.|From baseline up to Day 4|All participants.||participants|||Number
830447|NCT01236378|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serum Creatinine Levels More Than (>) 1.3 Times the Upper Limit of Normal|Serum creatinine, an indicator of kidney function, formed from the metabolism of creatine, commonly found in blood, urine, and muscle tissue, is removed from blood by kidneys and excreted in urine. Increased creatinine in blood indicates decreased kidney function. Creatinine levels are age, gender and race dependent as they are related to an individual’s muscle mass. Renal transplant recipients may have elevated serum creatinine. For this study an abnormal serum creatinine level is defined as 1.3 times the upper limit of normal (ULN) for the laboratory where the determination was performed.|From baseline up to Day 4|All participants.||participants|||Number
830448|NCT01236378|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F)|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Clearance was estimated from population pharmacokinetic (PK) modeling. Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed.|Predose (0 hour) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose|PK Parameter Analysis Population||liter per hour (L/h)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830563|NCT01238588|Primary|Changes in Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-Positron Emission Tomography (PET): FDG-PET/CT Dual Scan Score||Baseline and 6 months|Scans were done but not analyzed due to early study termination (per funding source).|||||
830449|NCT01236378|Primary|Degree of Fluctuation (DF)|DF, also known as peak to trough fluctuation (PTF) (calculated as [Cmax minus Ctrough] divided by Cave), is a unit-less ratio of the Cmax to Ctrough decrease expressed as a fraction of the average concentration during a dosing interval.|Predose (0 hour) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose|PK Parameter Analysis Population||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
830450|NCT01236378|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to End of Dosing Interval (AUCtau) at Steady State||Predose (0 hour) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose|PK Parameter Analysis Population||nanogram hour per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830451|NCT01236378|Primary|Average Blood Concentration at Steady State (Cave,ss)||Predose (0 hour) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose|PK Parameter Analysis Population||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830452|NCT01236378|Primary|Observed Blood Trough Concentration at Steady State (Ctrough,ss)||Predose (0 hour) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose|PK Parameter Analysis Population||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830453|NCT01236378|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Blood Concentration at Steady State (Tmax,ss)||Predose (0 hour) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose|PK Parameter Analysis Population||hours||Full Range|Median
830454|NCT01236378|Primary|Maximum Observed Blood Concentration at Steady State (Cmax,ss)||Predose (0 hour) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose|PK parameter analysis population: All treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830455|NCT01236391|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Cycle 5 in EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status Score|Mean change from baseline to Cycle 5 in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) Global Health Status Score according to EORTC QLQ-C30 Scoring Manual (3rd Edition, 2001). For global health status, positive changes indicated better health status or functioning, and negative changes indicated worsening of health status or functioning. Scale scores range from 0 to 100. A change in 5 to 10 points in either direction represents a small change; 10 to 20 points represents a moderate change and greater than 20 points represents a large change.|From Baseline to Cycle 5 (Week 20)|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830456|NCT01236391|Secondary|PCI-32765 and Its Metabolite (PCI-45227) AUC0-24h After Repeat Dosing of PCI-32765|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve using data collected at 0, 1, 2, 4, 6-8, and 24 hours post dose (AUC0-24h)|Performed During the First Month of Receiving PCI-32765|PK samples were collected in a subset of participants (n=48) in this trial (n=111). PK parameters reported here reflects those that were PK evaluable from the 48 participants.||AUC0-24h (ng*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830457|NCT01236391|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|Number of participants who had experienced at least one treatment emergent AE|From first dose of PCI-32765 to within 30 days of last dose for each participant or until study closure|||participants|||Number
830458|NCT01236391|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Response|The primary endpoint of the study was overall response rate (ORR), defined as the proportion of participants who achieved a best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR), according to the revised International Working Group Criteria for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (Cheson et al, 2007), as assessed by the investigator. CR is a complete disappearance of all disease, no new lesions, lymph nodes must have regressed and be PET negative, spleen and liver should not be palpable and without nodules, and bone marrow must be negative. PR is a >/= 50% decrease in the sum of the product of diameters of the target lesions, and >/= 50% decrease of splenic and hepatic nodules from baseline, no new lesions and no increase in the size of liver, spleen or non-target lesions.|The median follow-up time on study for all treated participants is 15.3 (range 1.9 - 22.3) months|Participants who received at least 1 dose of PCI-32765 and constitute the all treated population||percentage of participants with response||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830459|NCT01236534|Secondary|Number of Participants With Diarrheic Events.|To determine the safety of lubiprostone based on adverse event (AE) type, frequency, and severity. Hypothesis: AE type, frequency, and severity will be comparable in lubiprostone and placebo treated patients.|21 days|per protocol||participants|||Number
830460|NCT01236534|Primary|Number of Spontaneous Bowel Movements in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis (MS)-Associated Constipation Per Day.|Number of of lubiprostone 24 mcg twice daily on spontaneous bowel movements (SBM) in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS)-associated constipation per day. Hypothesis: Lubiprostone-treated patients will have more SBM's than placebo-treated patients.|21 days|per protocol||spontaneous bowel movements||Standard Deviation|Mean
830461|NCT01236573|Primary|Response (Complete Response (CR) + Partial Response (PR)) to Therapy|Response was determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.0. Complete response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions. Partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline um LD. Progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more lesions.|4 years|||participants|||Number
830462|NCT01236573|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|49 months and 20 days|||participants|||Number
830463|NCT01236573|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)|The MTD was determined by evaluating dose limiting toxicities (DLT) of participants that received increasing doses of intravenous infusion of IL-12 gene transduced tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) (i.e., 1x10^6, 3x10^6, 3x10^7, 1x10^7, 3x10^7, 1x10^8, 3x10^8, 1x10^9, and 3x10^9) in cohorts 1-10. Maximum tolerated cell dose is the highest dose at which </= 1 of 6 patients experienced a DLT (i.e. grade 2 or greater allergic reaction)).|4 years|||Cells|||Number
830464|NCT01236768|Other Pre-specified|Adhesion at Application Site|"Measurement of adhesion of application site is defined as follows:
0: >=90% adhered (no lifting)
>=75% adhered but <90% (some edges showing lifting)
>=50% adhered but <75% (half of the patch lifts off)
<50% (> half of patch lifts off, but not detached)
patch completely detached"|6 months|Subjects that have documented adhesion scores.||Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830465|NCT01236768|Other Pre-specified|Pharmacokinetics of Levonorgestrel (LNG) and Ethinyl Estradiol (EE)|Measurement of plasma levels of levonorgestrel and ethinyl estradiol.|3 months and 6 months|Number of subjects with available LNG data for cycle 3 or cycle 6||pg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830467|NCT01236768|Other Pre-specified|Cycle Control|The percentage of cycles with breakthrough bleeding or spotting episodes during all cycles. Numerator is total number of cycles with event, denominator is total number of cycles.|6 months|Subjects with relevant breakthrough bleeding (BTB) and/or spotting (BTS), and drug information for a cycle.||percent cycles with BTB or BTS|||Number
830468|NCT01236768|Secondary|Safety|Adverse events|6 months|Any subject who applied a patch.||Events|||Number
830469|NCT01236768|Primary|Pregnancy Reported as Pearl Index|Pearl Index is the number of on-therapy pregnancies times 1300 divided by the number of 28-day on-therapy cycles and is an estimate of the number of pregnancies per 100 woman-years of product use.|6 months|Intent-to-treat population ages 18-35.||Pearl Index||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830470|NCT01237054|Secondary|Comparison of Microvessel Density (MVD) Between MGUS and SMM/MM Groups|Microvessel density was estimated by determining the average number of CD34-stained microvessels in 10 areas of maximal MVD counted at a high-power field (h.p.f. x 500 magnification).|60 days|Serum was not available for three patients in the SMM group.||microvessels/hpf||Standard Error|Mean
830471|NCT01237054|Secondary|Comparison of Serum Angiogenic Marker Reverse Contrast Transfer Rate (Kep) Between MGUS and SMM/MM Groups|Pharmacokinetic parameter Kep was measured by dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI).|60 days|Serum was not available for three patients in the SMM group.||per min||Standard Error|Mean
830472|NCT01237054|Secondary|Comparison of Reverse Contrast Transfer Rate (Kep) and Forward Contrast Transfer Rate (Ktrans) Among Patients With MGUS, SMM, and MM|Pharmacokinetic parameters Kep and Ktrans were measured by dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI).|60 days|Three patients with MM did not undergo bone marrow biopsies and were not included in this analysis.||per min||Full Range|Median
830473|NCT01237054|Secondary|Comparison of Microvessel Density (MVD) Among Patients With MGUS, SMM, and MM|Microvessel density was estimated by determining the average number of cluster of differentiation 34 (CD34)-stained microvessels in 10 areas of maximal MVD counted at a high-power field (h.p.f. x 500 magnification). Large vessels and vessels in the periosteum on bone were excluded. Areas of staining with no discrete breaks were counted as a single vessel. The presence of a lumen was not required.|60 days|Three patients with MM did not undergo bone marrow biopsies and were not included in this analysis.||microvessels/hpf||Full Range|Median
830474|NCT01237054|Secondary|Comparison of Serum Angiogenic Markers Ang2 (Angiopoietin), G-CSF (Granulocyte-colony Stimulating Factor), Follistatin, HGF (Hepatocyte Growth Factor), FGF-1, Endothelin 1, and VEGF-A (Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor-A) Between MGUS and SMM/MM Groups|The assay was performed according to the manufacture's protocol, and all samples were diluted 1:3. Cytokine values were calculated using a five-parameter standard curve with Bio-Plex Manager 6.1.|60 days|Serum was not available for three patients in the SMM group.||pg/ml||Standard Error|Mean
830475|NCT01237054|Primary|Count of Participants With Positive DCE-MRI Imaging Results|DCE-MRI, an FDA approved gadolinium chelate (e.g. Magnevist, Berlex Laboratories, NJ, USA) will be administered intravenously at 3 cc/sec using an automated pump injector (Medrad, Pittsburgh, PA, USA). The criteria was presence of early and diffuse hyper-enhancement compared to the surrounding bone marrow. The pattern of marrow involvement on MRI was characterized as: (1) normal when there was no evidence of abnormal signal intensity; (2) focal, which consisted of localized areas of abnormal marrow; the lesions are darker than yellow marrow and slightly darker than or isointense to red marrow on T1-weights images; (3) diffuse, in which normal bone marrow signal intensity is completely absent, the intervertebral disks appear brighter than or isointense to the diseased marrow; and finally (4) heterogeneous that consists of innumerable small foci of disease on a background of intact marrow, with small dark lesions on T1-weighted images, which become bright on T2-weighted image.|60 days|Missing means the imaging test was not done. Unclear means it is indeterminate whether an imaging result is positive or negative.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830476|NCT01237054|Primary|Count of Participants With Positive and Negative 18F-FDG PET CT and F18-NaF PET CT Imaging Results in Individuals With MGUS, SMM, and MM.|18F-FDG PET CT and F18-NaF PET CT imaging results were compared in participants with MGUS, SMM, and MM. Lesions were considered positive if focal uptake corresponded to lesions identified on CT for NaF and negative if no uptake seen in lesions. Criteria to define FDG positivity included parameters published by Zamagni et al with focal abnormal uptake more intense than background.|60 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830477|NCT01237080|Primary|Time to Intubate||From when the anaesthetist picked up the GS / FT until a typical capnogram was seen on the capnograph.|The sample size was calculated to 40 in each group (50 patients were included in each group): minimum relevant difference in intubation time of 20 s and a standard deviation of 28 s. A significance level of 0.05 and an acceptable risk of Type 2 error of 0.1 were used.||sec||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830478|NCT01237080|Secondary|Postoperative Throat Pain.||one hour postoperative||||||
830479|NCT01237080|Secondary|Postoperative Hoarseness.||one hour postoperative.||||||
830480|NCT01237080|Secondary|Intubation of the Esophagus.||detected immediately||||||
830481|NCT01237080|Secondary|Subjectively Intubation Difficulty||measured immediately on a visual analogue scale.||||||
830482|NCT01237080|Secondary|Mucosal Lesion||inspection during intubation and one hour postop.||||||
830483|NCT01237080|Secondary|Lowest Saturation During Intubation.||measured on the monitor||||||
830484|NCT01237080|Primary|Number of Patients Intubated in the First Attempt|The intubation attempt was considered a failure if the GS or the FT was removed from the patient’s mouth and required reinsertion or if the cuff had been inflated and the tube needed to be replaced (e.g., in oesophageal intubation).|please see description|||participants|||Number
830485|NCT01237197|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index at 3-months|As results are measured by BMI reduction, percent change (reduction) in BMI is primary outcome measure.|Baseline and 3-months|||percentage of change in BMI||Standard Deviation|Mean
830486|NCT01237223|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events and Death|Number of patients with adverse events regardless of study drug relationship during the double-blind treatment period were reported. Serious adverse events of double blind period were reported.|8 weeks|Safety set: All patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study medication.||Participants|||Number
830564|NCT01238640|Secondary|Product Dissolution Time|Product Dissolution Time is the time from administration until the investigational products were completely dissolved.|During 10 hours post-dose|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
830487|NCT01237223|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Successful Response Rate|The response rate was defined as percentage of participants who achieved msDBP < 90 mmHg or its reduction ≥ 10 mmHg from baseline to endpoint.|8 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients received at least one dose of double-blind study medication||percentage of participants|||Number
830488|NCT01237223|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Blood Pressure Control at Endpoint|Blood pressure control is defined as having as a msDBP < 90 mmHg and a msSBP < 140 mmHg.|8 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients received at least one dose of double-blind study medication||percentage of participants|||Number
830489|NCT01237223|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP) to End of Study (Week 8)|Sitting blood pressure was measured at trough (24 hours ± 2 hours post dose) and recorded at all study visits. At the first study visit, blood pressure was measured in both arms and the arm with highest sitting DBP was found and used for all subsequent readings throughout the study. The repeat sitting measurements were made at 1-2 minute intervals and the mean of these three sitting blood pressure measurements were used as the average sitting blood pressure for that visit. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model contained treatment and region as two factors and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, Week 8|Full analysis set (FAS): All randomized patients received at least one dose of double-blind study medication.||mm Hg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830490|NCT01237223|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP) to End of Study (Week 8)|Sitting blood pressure was measured at trough (24 hours ± 2 hours post dose) and recorded at all study visits. At the first study visit, blood pressure was measured in both arms and the arm with highest sitting DBP was found and used for all subsequent readings throughout the study. The repeat sitting measurements were made at 1-2 minute intervals and the mean of these three sitting blood pressure measurements were used as the average sitting blood pressure for that visit. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model contained treatment and region as two factors and baseline as a covariate.|Baseline, Week 8|Full analysis set (FAS): All randomized patients received at least one dose of double-blind study medication.||mm Hg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830491|NCT01237301|Secondary|The Secondary Objective is to Determine the Incremental Benefit of CGM for Clinical Decision-making.|"Outcome will be measured by:
i. HbA1c ii. Glucose exposure (area under the diurnal median curve) iii. Glucose variability (inter-quartile range) iv. Glucose stability (hourly change in the median curve) v. Incidence of hypoglycemia (degree, duration, frequency)"|16 weeks||||||
830492|NCT01237301|Primary|Percentage Change in Hemoglobin A1c||2 week baseline to 18 week final|Per Protocol||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
830493|NCT01237327|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure (TTF)|TTF = time between first day of study treatment and date of diagnosis of progression, withdrawal from study treatment for any reason, administration of other antitumor treatment, or death from any cause, whichever was the earliest event.|Every 12 weeks up to 6 years|ITT||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830494|NCT01237327|Secondary|Time to Tumor Progression (TTP)|TTP = time between first day of study treatment and date of documented disease progression, or date of tumor-related death in the absence of previously documented progressive disease (PD). PD defined as a 25% or greater increase in size of 1 or more lesions compared to smallest previous assessment, or appearance of new lesion, or unequivocal worsening of bone lesions, or progression of nonevaluable lesions.|Every 12 weeks up to 6 years|ITT||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830495|NCT01237327|Secondary|Duration of Response (DR)|Duration of objective response (complete response [CR] or partial response [PR]) calculated from date objective response was first documented to date of progressive disease. For subjects proceeding from PR to CR, the onset of PR was taken as the onset of objective response.|Every 12 weeks up to 6 years|ITT.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830496|NCT01237327|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|Percentage of participants achieving an objective response (OR) defined as complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) out of the total number of participants randomized in each treatment group|Every 12 weeks up to 6 years|ITT||percentage of participants|||Number
830497|NCT01237327|Primary|Overall Survival|Overall survival in months measured from date of starting treatment in core study to date of death for any reason.|Every 12 weeks up to 6 years|Intent-to-treat (ITT): participants randomized to study medication in core study who consented to participation in extension study.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830498|NCT01237340|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Adverse events (AEs): Any untoward medical occurrence in the form of signs, clinically significant abnormalities in laboratory findings, diseases, symptoms, or worsening of complications. TEAEs: AEs occurring after the first administration of Saizen® solution for injection (on Day 1) up to the scheduled routine post treatment follow-up visit (4 weeks [28 days] after the final administration of Saizen® solution for injection).|Day 1 up to 28 days after last dose of study treatment|Safety population consisted of all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment.||participants|||Number
830499|NCT01237340|Secondary|Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 (IGFBP-3) Levels||Baseline, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 13, Week 18, Week 26|"Safety population consisted of all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment. Here n signifies number of participants analyzed at that particular time point for each arm group respectively."||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
830500|NCT01237340|Secondary|Insulin-like Growth Factor-I Standard Deviation Score (IGF-1 SDS)|Insulin-like Growth Factor-1 Standard Deviation Score (IGF-1 SDS) was provided by the central laboratory; its calculation is based on the actual value of IGF-1 minus mean reference value of IGF-1 divided by reference standard deviation of IGF-1.|Baseline, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 13, Week 18, Week 26|"Safety population consisted of all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment. ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) = participants who were evaluated for this measure and n= participants who were analyzed at that particular time point for each arm group respectively."||standard deviation score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830501|NCT01237340|Secondary|Insulin-like Growth Factor-I (IGF-1) Levels||Baseline, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 13, Week 18, Week 26|"Safety population consisted of all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment. ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) = participants who were evaluated for this measure and n= participants who were analyzed at that particular time point for each arm group respectively."||nanomole per liter (nmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830502|NCT01237340|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Developed Positive Neutralizing Antibodies (NAbs+) to Saizen®|Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) are defined as a subgroup of BAbs which bind to the active sites of the investigational drug molecule (Saizen®) and therefore neutralize its potency.|Baseline up to Week 26|MITT population consisted of all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline BAbs assessment.||participants|||Number
830503|NCT01237340|Primary|Number of Participants Who Developed Positive Binding Antibodies (BAbs+) to Saizen®|Binding antibodies (BAbs) are all antibodies which are capable of binding to the investigational drug molecule (Saizen®), irrespective of their binding site.|Baseline up to Week 26|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) population consisted of all the participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline BAbs assessment.||participants|||Number
830504|NCT01237353|Secondary|Duration of Gastric pH Status|When subject's pH remained above 4.0 for at least 15 minutes, a 1500 mg dose of betaine HCl was given orally with 90 mL of water, and gastric pH was continuously monitored for 2 hours|2 hours after dose of betaine HCl|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
830505|NCT01237353|Primary|Change in Gastric pH After Administration of Betaine Hydrochloride (HCl)|Gastric pH levels monitored with a Heidelberg pH capsule (HC) which sends real-time signals to a computer system that visually plots intestinal pH on a minute-by-minute basis. When subject's pH remained above 4.0 for at least 15 minutes, a 1500 mg dose of betaine HCl was given orally with 90 mL of water, and gastric pH was continuously monitored for 2 hours.|30 minutes|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830506|NCT01237613|Secondary|Clinical Evaluation Including Adverse Events||12 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830507|NCT01237613|Secondary|Return to Work and Previous Physical Activities||12 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830508|NCT01237613|Secondary|Subjective Evaluation of Treatment||12 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830509|NCT01237613|Secondary|Range of Motion, Strength and Calf Circumference||12 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830510|NCT01237613|Secondary|General Measure of Health-related Quality of Life Using the EuroQoL (EQ-5D) Questionnaire||12 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830511|NCT01237613|Secondary|The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Clinical Rating System for Ankle-hindfoot||12 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830512|NCT01237613|Secondary|Clinical Evaluation Including Adverse Events||6 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830513|NCT01237613|Secondary|Return to Work and Previous Physical Activities||6 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830514|NCT01237613|Secondary|Subjective Evaluation of Treatment||6 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830515|NCT01237613|Secondary|Range of Motion, Strength and Calf Circumference||6 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830516|NCT01237613|Secondary|General Measure of Health-related Quality of Life Using the EuroQoL (EQ-5D) Questionnaire||6 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830517|NCT01237613|Secondary|The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Clinical Rating System for Ankle-hindfoot||6 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830518|NCT01237613|Secondary|Clinical Evaluation Including Adverse Events||3 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830519|NCT01237613|Secondary|Return to Work and Previous Physical Activities||3 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830520|NCT01237613|Secondary|Subjective Evaluation of Treatment||3 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830521|NCT01237613|Secondary|Range of Motion, Strength and Calf Circumference||3 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830522|NCT01237613|Secondary|General Measure of Health-related Quality of Life Using the EuroQoL (EQ-5D) Questionnaire||3 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830523|NCT01237613|Secondary|The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Clinical Rating System for Ankle-hindfoot||3 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830524|NCT01237613|Primary|The Foot Function Index (FFI) for Evaluation of Foot Pain and Disability||12 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830525|NCT01237613|Primary|The Foot Function Index (FFI) for Evaluation of Foot Pain and Disability||6 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830526|NCT01237613|Primary|The Foot Function Index (FFI) for Evaluation of Foot Pain and Disability||3 months|Data not analyzed as study was terminated due to sponsor bankruptcy.|||||
830527|NCT01238211|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) is defined as time from registration to death. The median OS with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Up to 10 years||||||
830528|NCT01238211|Secondary|Disease-free Survival|Disease free survival (DFS) is defined as the time from achievement of CR to relapse or death, whichever comes first. The median DFS with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Up to 10 years||||||
830529|NCT01238211|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Death||Up to 10 years||||||
830530|NCT01238211|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Relapse||Up to 10 years||||||
830531|NCT01238211|Secondary|Complete Response Rate|"Percentage of participants who achieve a CR.
CR is defined in the above outcome measure."|Up to 10 years||||||
830532|NCT01238211|Secondary|Event-free Survival|"Event free survival (EFS) is defined as the time from registration to failure to achieve complete remission (CR), relapse after CR is attained or death, whichever comes first. The median EFS with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method,
Complete remission (CR) is defined as: disappearance of all clinical and/or radiologic evidence of disease. Neutrophil count > 1.0 x 10^9/L and platelet count > 100 x 10^9/L, and normal bone marrow differential (< 5% blasts)."|Up to 10 years||||||
830533|NCT01238211|Primary|30 Day Survival Rate|Percentage of participants who were alive 30 days after starting induction treatment.|30 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830534|NCT01238341|Secondary|Total Procedure Time||During procedure, up to 3 hours|||minutes|Participants|Full Range|Mean
830536|NCT01238341|Secondary|Successful Cannulation of the Duct of Intent|Deep cannulation of the bile/pancreatic duct was indicated in 12 of 13 ERCPs, one procedure was performed for stent removal only. This outcome was only relevant when deep cannulation was clinically indicated, therefore this outcome was determined out of 12 ERCPs.|During procedure, up to 3 hours|||ERCPs|Participants||Number
830537|NCT01238341|Primary|Papilla or Duct-enterostomy Was Reached||During procedure, up to 3 hours|||ERCPs|Participants||Number
830538|NCT01238471|Secondary|Safety of Propranolol Therapy in Premature Infants|Close monitoring for possible side effects of propranolol in premature infants|4 weeks of propranolol therapy in premature infants||||||
830539|NCT01238471|Primary|Regression of Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) in Premature Infants by Propranolol Therapy|"If ROP regresses without the need for treatment (laser and/or CRYO), this will be considered a favorable outcome. On the other hand, if ROP progresses to require treatment, it will be regarded as an unfavorable outcome.
Evidence for regression of ROP was observed by serial retinal examinations performed by ophthalmologists as well as by reduction for the need of invasive interventions such as laser photocoagulation of disease areas in the retina."|propranolol therapy for up 4 weeks|||cases|||Number
830540|NCT01238575|Secondary|ADHD Rating Scale - Total|The ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) is an 18-item scale directly derived from DSM-IV criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder with established reliability, validity and sensitivity to change. The ADHD Rating Scale-IV is completed independently by the parent and scored by a clinician. The scale consists of 2 subscales: inattention (9 items) and hyperactivity-impulsivity (9 items). If 3 or more items are skipped, the clinician should use extreme caution in interpreting the scale. Results from this rating scale alone should not be used to make a diagnosis. The total score can range from 0 to 54, with a higher score indicating greater severity.|Baseline|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830541|NCT01238575|Secondary|ADHD Rating Scale - Hyperactivity Subscale|The ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) is an 18-item scale directly derived from DSM-IV criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder with established reliability, validity and sensitivity to change. The ADHD Rating Scale-IV is completed independently by the parent and scored by a clinician. The scale consists of 2 subscales: inattention (9 items) and hyperactivity-impulsivity (9 items). If 3 or more items are skipped, the clinician should use extreme caution in interpreting the scale. Results from this rating scale alone should not be used to make a diagnosis. This subscale can range from 0 to 27 for scoring, with a higher score indicating greater severity.|Baseline|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830542|NCT01238575|Secondary|ADHD Rating Scale - Inattention Subscale|The ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) is an 18-item scale directly derived from DSM-IV criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder with established reliability, validity and sensitivity to change. The ADHD Rating Scale-IV is completed independently by the parent and scored by a clinician. The scale consists of 2 subscales: inattention (9 items) and hyperactivity-impulsivity (9 items). If 3 or more items are skipped, the clinician should use extreme caution in interpreting the scale. Results from this rating scale alone should not be used to make a diagnosis. This subscale can range from 0 to 27 for scoring, with a higher score indicating greater severity.|Baseline|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830543|NCT01238575|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist Inappropriate Speech Subscale|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors in individuals ages 6 to 54 with mental retardation. The full ABC is a 58-item parent-rating with five factors: Irritability, Social Withdrawal, Stereotypy, Hyperactivity and Inappropriate Speech. It has been used as a primary outcome measure in several trials of children with developmental disabilities. The interpretation of the tool and its sub-scales is that a greater number of items, indicates greater severity. This subscale's scores can range from 0 to 12.|Baseline|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830544|NCT01238575|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist Sterotypy Subscale|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors in individuals ages 6 to 54 with mental retardation. The full ABC is a 58-item parent-rating with five factors: Irritability, Social Withdrawal, Stereotypy, Hyperactivity and Inappropriate Speech. It has been used as a primary outcome measure in several trials of children with developmental disabilities. The interpretation of the tool and its sub-scales is that a greater number of items, indicates greater severity. This subscale's scores can range from 0 to 21.|Baseline|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830545|NCT01238575|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist Social Withdrawal Subscale|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors in individuals ages 6 to 54 with mental retardation. The full ABC is a 58-item parent-rating with five factors: Irritability, Social Withdrawal, Stereotypy, Hyperactivity and Inappropriate Speech. It has been used as a primary outcome measure in several trials of children with developmental disabilities. The interpretation of the tool and its sub-scales is that a greater number of items, indicates greater severity. This subscale's scores can range from 0 to 48.|Baseline|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830546|NCT01238575|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist Irritability Subscale|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors in individuals ages 6 to 54 with mental retardation. The full ABC is a 58-item parent-rating with five factors: Irritability, Social Withdrawal, Stereotypy, Hyperactivity and Inappropriate Speech. It has been used as a primary outcome measure in several trials of children with developmental disabilities. The interpretation of the tool and its sub-scales is that a greater number of items, indicates greater severity. Scores for this subscale can range from 0 to 45.|Baseline|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830547|NCT01238575|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist Hyperactivity Subscale|"The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors in individuals ages 6 to 54 with mental retardation. The full ABC is a 58-item parent-rating with five factors: Irritability, Social Withdrawal, Stereotypy, Hyperactivity and Inappropriate Speech.
The 16-item Hyperactivity subscale covers over-activity (7 items), impulsiveness (2 items), inattention (3 items) and noncompliance (4 items). It has been used as a primary outcome measure in several trials of children with developmental disabilities. The interpretation of the tool and its sub-scales is that a greater number of items, indicates greater severity. The range of scores is 0 to 48."|Baseline|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830565|NCT01238640|Primary|AUC(0-∞)|AUC (0-∞) is the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time. It is obtained from calculating AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞).|10 hours post-dose|||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830548|NCT01238575|Secondary|ADHD Rating Scale - Hyperactivity Subscale|The ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) is an 18-item scale directly derived from DSM-IV criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder with established reliability, validity and sensitivity to change. The ADHD Rating Scale-IV is completed independently by the parent and scored by a clinician. The scale consists of 2 subscales: inattention (9 items) and hyperactivity-impulsivity (9 items). If 3 or more items are skipped, the clinician should use extreme caution in interpreting the scale. Results from this rating scale alone should not be used to make a diagnosis. This subscale can range from 0 to 27 for scoring,with a higher score indicating greater severity.|8 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830549|NCT01238575|Secondary|ADHD Rating Scale - Inattention Subscale|The ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) is an 18-item scale directly derived from DSM-IV criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder with established reliability, validity and sensitivity to change. The ADHD Rating Scale-IV is completed independently by the parent and scored by a clinician. The scale consists of 2 subscales: inattention (9 items) and hyperactivity-impulsivity (9 items). If 3 or more items are skipped, the clinician should use extreme caution in interpreting the scale. Results from this rating scale alone should not be used to make a diagnosis. This subscale can range from 0 to 27 for scoring, with a higher score indicating greater severity.|8 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830550|NCT01238575|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist Inappropriate Speech Subscale|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors in individuals ages 6 to 54 with mental retardation. The full ABC is a 58-item parent-rating with five factors: Irritability, Social Withdrawal, Stereotypy, Hyperactivity and Inappropriate Speech. It has been used as a primary outcome measure in several trials of children with developmental disabilities. The interpretation of the tool and its sub-scales is that a greater number of items, indicates greater severity. This subscale's scores can range from 0 to 12.|8 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830551|NCT01238575|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist Sterotypy Subscale|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors in individuals ages 6 to 54 with mental retardation. The full ABC is a 58-item parent-rating with five factors: Irritability, Social Withdrawal, Stereotypy, Hyperactivity and Inappropriate Speech. It has been used as a primary outcome measure in several trials of children with developmental disabilities. The interpretation of the tool and its sub-scales is that a greater number of items, indicates greater severity. This subscale's scores can range from 0 to 21.|8 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830552|NCT01238575|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist Social Withdrawal Subscale|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors in individuals ages 6 to 54 with mental retardation. The full ABC is a 58-item parent-rating with five factors: Irritability, Social Withdrawal, Stereotypy, Hyperactivity and Inappropriate Speech. It has been used as a primary outcome measure in several trials of children with developmental disabilities. The interpretation of the tool and its sub-scales is that a greater number of items, indicates greater severity. This subscale's scores can range from 0 to 48.|8 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830553|NCT01238575|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist Irritability Subscale|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors in individuals ages 6 to 54 with mental retardation. It is a 58 item checklist which takes about 10 – 15 minutes to complete. There are five subscales: a) Irritability and Agitation b) Lethargy and Social Withdrawal c) Stereotypic Behavior d) Hyperactivity and Noncompliance and e) Inappropriate Speech. The higher the number of items (score), the greater the amount of symptoms. Scores can range from 0 to 45.|8 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830554|NCT01238575|Secondary|ADHD Rating Scale - Total|The ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) is an 18-item scale directly derived from DSM-IV criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder with established reliability, validity and sensitivity to change. The ADHD Rating Scale-IV is completed independently by the parent and scored by a clinician. The scale consists of 2 subscales: inattention (9 items) and hyperactivity-impulsivity (9 items). If 3 or more items are skipped, the clinician should use extreme caution in interpreting the scale. Results from this rating scale alone should not be used to make a diagnosis. The total score can range from 0 to 54, with a higher score indicating greater severity.|Week 8|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830555|NCT01238575|Primary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist Hyperactivity Subscale|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a symptom checklist for assessing problem behaviors in individuals ages 6 to 54 with mental retardation. The full ABC is a 58-item parent-rating with five factors: Irritability, Social Withdrawal, Stereotypy, Hyperactivity and Inappropriate Speech. The 16-item Hyperactivity subscale covers over-activity (7 items), impulsiveness (2 items), inattention (3 items) and noncompliance (4 items). It has been used as a primary outcome measure in several trials of children with developmental disabilities. The interpretation of the tool and its sub-scales is that a greater number of items, indicates greater severity. The range of scores is 0 to 48.|Week 8|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
830556|NCT01238588|Secondary|Hemodialysis Access Stenosis/Thrombosis||Baseline and 6 months|Data for this outcome measure was not collected from the medical record due to early termination of the study (per funding source).|||||
830557|NCT01238588|Secondary|Rate of Cardiovascular Events||Baseline and 6 months|Data for this outcome measure was not collected from the medical record due to early termination of the study (per funding source).|||||
830558|NCT01238588|Secondary|Hemoglobin Level||Baseline and 6 months|Clinical lab data for this outcome measure was not collected from the medical record (for research purpose) due to early termination of the study (per funding source)|||||
830559|NCT01238588|Secondary|Erythropoiesis Stimulating Agent (ESA) Dose Requirement||Baseline and 6 months|Data for this outcome measure was not collected from the medical record due to early termination of the study (per funding source).|||||
830560|NCT01238588|Secondary|Albumin Levels||Baseline and 6 months|Clinical lab data for this outcome measure was not collected from the medical record (for research purpose) due to early termination of the study (per funding source)|||||
830561|NCT01238588|Primary|Changes in Interleukin-6 (IL-6) Level||Baseline and 6 months|Blood samples were collected but the measurements were not done due to early study termination (per funding source).|||||
830562|NCT01238588|Primary|Changes in High Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) Level||Baseline and 6 months|Blood samples were collected but the measurements were not done due to early study termination (per funding source).|||||
830566|NCT01238640|Primary|Area Under the Curve [AUC(0-t)]|Bioavailability within the Set Period [AUC(0-t)] is the area under the plasma concentration verses time curve from start of drug administration until the time of the last measurable plasma concentration, calculated as hour * nanograms (ng) per milliliter (mL).|During 10 hours post-dose|||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830567|NCT01238640|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|Cmax, which is the maximum observed plasma concentration after a dose is administered, measured in nanograms/milliliter (ng/mL)|During 10 hours post-dose|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830568|NCT01231373|Secondary|Change From Baseline at 8 Weeks Post-Treatment in IPR-V3 Score--Physician Photographic Review of Appearance|The Independent Photography Review--Visible Varicose Veins (IPR-V3) instrument is a 5-point scale used to assess the appearance of a patient's visible varicose veins. At baseline and Week 8, standardized digital photographs were taken of the medial view of the patient's target leg, from groin to ankle. An independent photography review panel, consisting of 3 trained, blinded clinicians, evaluated the appearance of the patient's visible varicose veins using the IPR-V3 instrument's 5-point scale (0-4, where 0=none and 4=very severe visible varicose veins).|8 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830569|NCT01231373|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 8 Weeks in Appearance as Rated by Patient (PA-V3)|"The Patient Self-assessment of Visible Varicose Veins (PA-V3) instrument is a 5-point scale used by patients to evaluate the appearance of their visible varicose veins. On this single-item paper questionnaire, the instructions included a diagram fo the medial view of a leg with the area between the ankle and the groin circled. The patient was instructed to choose 1 of 5 response options that best described the appearance of the visible varicose veins of the leg that was treated in the study. The patient was instructed not to consider the appearance of the leg outside the circled area or of any spider veins. Possible responses ranged from Not at all noticeable (a score of 0) to Extremely noticeable (a score of 4)."|8 weeks|patients with a baseline and week 8 visit.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830570|NCT01231373|Primary|Change in Patient-Reported Symptoms of Varicose Veins (VVSymQ Score)|The 9 varicose vein symptoms were to be assessed and graded on a 6-point (i.e., 0-5) duration scale and an 11-point (i.e., 0-10) intensity scale, and the patient's level activity for that day was to be assessed and graded on the 6-point (i.e., 0-5) duration scale. The 9 varicose vein symptoms assessed using the e-diary were derived from the first question of the modified Venous Insufficiency Epidemiologic and Economic Study-Quality of Life/Symptoms (VEINES-QOL/Sym) instrument. The VVSymQ is a subset of 5 VEINES QOL/Sym items that have been determined in earlier studies to be most important to patients. The daily VVSymQ score is the sum of the duration scores for these 5 symptoms (scores range from 0 to 25). At Visit 2/baseline, Week 8, scores were calculated.|8 weeks|Number of subjects with a baseline value (VVSymQ) and value at the 8 week visit.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830571|NCT01231399|Primary|Overall Survival|Estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan and Meier. From the date treatment started until the date of death from any cause.|Up to 5 years.|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830572|NCT01231399|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan and Meier. From the date treatment started until the date of first documented progression or date of death from any cause, whichever came first. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|up to 5 years|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830573|NCT01231399|Primary|Number of Subject With Overall Response|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR|Up to 5 years|||participants|||Number
830574|NCT01231399|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Everolimus|The highest dose tested in which fewer than 33% of patients experience an attributable DLT to the study drug, when at least 6 patients are treated at that dose and are evaluable for toxicity. Toxicities will be assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0.|Course 1 (first 28 days)|All patients observed for 28 days while receiving a full course of therapy or who experienced a DLT. Patients withdrawing before completion of the first course, for reasons other than DLT, were replaced.||mg|||Number
830575|NCT01231464|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Visit 2) to the End of Study (Visit 4/Early Withdrawal) in Severity of Overall Interference in Activities of Daily Living|The severity of overall interference in activities of daily living at baseline and the end of study was assessed by the investigator on the scale of 0=None, 1=Mild, 2=Moderate, 3=Severe. The mean change from baseline to the end of study in severity of overall interference in activities of daily living was calculated as the severity of overall interference in activities of daily living at Visit 4/Early Withdrawal minus severity of overall interference in activities of daily living at Visit 2.|Baseline through end of study (Day 1 through Day 15/Early Withdrawal)|FAS Population. Only participants for whom both baseline and post-baseline data were available were included in the analysis.||Points on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830576|NCT01231464|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Visit 2) to the End of Study (Visit 4/Early Withdrawal) in Nasal Finding Score by Rhinoscopy|The nasal finding score by rhinoscopy (possible score of 0-12) is the sum of 4 individual investigator assessed scores for swelling of inferior nasal concha mucosa, color of inferior nasal concha mucosa, watery secretion volume, and description of rhinorrhea. The symptoms were assessed using a scale of 0=None, 1=Mild, 2=Moderate, 3=Severe. Mean change from baseline to the end of study in nasal finding score by rhinoscopy was calculated as the nasal finding score by rhinoscopy at Visit 4/Early Withdrawal minus the nasal final finding score by rhinoscopy at Visit 2.|Baseline through end of study (Day 1 through Day 15/Early Withdrawal)|FAS Population. Only participants for whom both baseline and post-baseline data were available were included in the analysis.||Points on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830587|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed include pain, redness and swelling. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Week 10 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830577|NCT01231464|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline Over the Entire Treatment Period in the Daily Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS)|The Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS; possible score of 0-12) is the sum of 4 individual participant-assessed symptom scores for rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing, each evaluated using a scale of 0=None, 1=Mild, 2=Moderate, or 3=Severe. The rTNSS was performed in the morning (AM rTNSS) and evening (PM rTNSS) and assessed the participant's symptoms over the preceding 12 hours. The daily rTNSS is the average of the AM rTNSS and PM rTNSS assessments. Mean changes from baseline over the entire treatment period were calculated as treatment period rTNSS minus baseline rTNSS.|Baseline through entire treatment period (Day 1 through Day 14)|Full Analysis Set (FAS): all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication. Only participants for whom both baseline and post-baseline data were available were included in this analysis.||Points on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830578|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include Drowsiness, Fever (temperature by axillary route ≥ 37.5°C), Irritability/Fussiness and Loss of appetite. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity or relationship to vaccination.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Month 9 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830579|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include Drowsiness, Fever (temperature by axillary route ≥ 37.5°C), Irritability/Fussiness and Loss of appetite. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity or relationship to vaccination. RTS,S Neo-10-14 Group, RTS,S 6-10-14 Group and Engerix-B Neo Group didn’t receive any vaccination at this time point|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Week 26 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830580|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include Drowsiness, Fever (temperature by axillary route ≥ 37.5°C), Irritability/Fussiness and Loss of appetite. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity or relationship to vaccination.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Week 14 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830581|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include Drowsiness, Fever (temperature by axillary route ≥ 37.5°C), Irritability/Fussiness and Loss of appetite. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity or relationship to vaccination.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Week 10 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830582|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include Drowsiness, Fever (temperature by axillary route ≥ 37.5°C), Irritability/Fussiness and Loss of appetite. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity or relationship to vaccination.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Week 6 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830583|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include Drowsiness, Fever (temperature by axillary route ≥ 37.5°C), Irritability/Fussiness and Loss of appetite. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity or relationship to vaccination.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Week 0 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830584|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed include pain, redness and swelling. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Month 9 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830585|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed include pain, redness and swelling. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity. RTS,S Neo-10-14 Group, RTS,S 6-10-14 Group and Engerix-B Neo Group didn’t receive vaccination at this time point.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Week 26 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830586|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed include pain, redness and swelling. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Week 14 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830588|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed include pain, redness and swelling. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Week 6 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830589|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed include pain, redness and swelling. “Any” about a specific symptom is defined as incidence of this symptom, regardless of its intensity.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after Week 0 vaccination|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830590|NCT01231503|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Measles Antigens|The seropositivity cut-off for the assay was an anti-measles antibody (Anti-Measles Ab) concentration ≥ 150 milli-international units per millilitre (mIU/mL). Please note that this outcome measure was only assessed in subjects in the RTS,S 14-26-9M and Engerix-B Neo groups.|At Month 10|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, that is, subjects from the Total Vaccinated cohort who received all vaccinations, complied to protocol procedures, and for whom results were available for the antibody concentrations/titers assessed in the specified outcome measure.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830591|NCT01231503|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Acellular B-pertussis (BPT)|Concentrations of anti-BPT antibodies were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (≥) 15 EL.U/mL.|At Month 5|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, that is, subjects from the Total Vaccinated cohort who received all vaccinations, complied to protocol procedures, and for whom results were available for the antibody concentrations/titers assessed in the specified outcome measure.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830592|NCT01231503|Secondary|Anti-polio Type 1, 2 and 3 (Anti-Polio 1, 2 and 3) Antibody Titers|Anti-Polio 1, 2 and 3 antibody titers were calculated, expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs) and tabulated. The seroprotection cut -off for the assay was ≥ 8. Results will be posted when they become available.|At Month 5||12/2016||||
830593|NCT01231503|Secondary|Anti-polyribosyl Ribitol Phosphate (Anti-PRP) Antibody Concentrations|Anti-PRP antibody concentrations were calculated, expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in microgram per milliliter (microg/mL), and tabulated. The seroprotection cut -off for the assay for the purpose of this endpoint was ≥ 0.15 microg/mL.|At Month 5|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, that is, subjects from the Total Vaccinated cohort who received all vaccinations, complied to protocol procedures, and for whom results were available for the antibody concentrations/titers assessed in the specified outcome measure.||microg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830594|NCT01231503|Secondary|Anti-diphtheria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus Toxoids (Anti-TT) Antibody Concentrations|Anti-D and anti-TT antibody concentrations were calculated, expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in International units per milliliter (IU/mL), and tabulated. The seropositivity cut-off for the assay was ≥ 0.1 IU/mL.|At Month 5|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, that is, subjects from the Total Vaccinated cohort who received all vaccinations, complied to protocol procedures, and for whom results were available for the antibody concentrations/titers assessed in the specified outcome measure.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830595|NCT01231503|Secondary|Anti-Hepatitis B Surface Antibody (Anti-HBs) Concentrations.|Concentrations, by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), and expressed in milli-international units per milliliter (mIU/mL). The seropositivity and seroprotection cut-offs were than or equal to (≥) 6.2 and 10 mIU/mL, respectively.|At Screening (SCR), at Month 5 (M5), at Month 7 (M7) and at Month 10 (M10), according to the vaccination scheduling|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, that is, subjects from the Total Vaccinated cohort who received all vaccinations, complied to protocol procedures, and for whom results were available for the antibody concentrations/titers assessed in the specified outcome measure.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830596|NCT01231503|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Circumsporozoite Protein of Plasmodium Falciparum (Anti-CS Antibodies)|Anti-CS antibody concentrations were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) expressed in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The seropositivity cut-off for the endpoint was a GMC value greater than or equal to (≥) 0.5 EL.U/mL.|At Screening (SCR), at Month (M) 4, at M5, at M7 and/or at M10, according to the vaccination scheduling for the specific group assessed concerned group|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, that is, subjects from the Total Vaccinated cohort who received all vaccinations, complied to protocol procedures, and for whom results were available for the antibody concentrations/titers assessed in the specified outcome measure.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830597|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Haematological Abnormalities, for the White Blood Cells (WBC) Parameter|This outcome measure concerns haematological abnormalities, for the white blood cells (WBC) parameter. Subjects’ levels were assessed as either normal, Grade 1, Grade 2, Grade 3, Grade 4, Missing or Out of range (OOR). Normal WBC level was defined as > 2.5 x 10 exp 9 WBC per liter (Billions WBC/L). Grade 1 WBC level was defined as 2.0 to 2.5 Billions WBC/L. Grade 2 WBC level was defined as 1.5 to 1.999 Billions WBC/L. Grade 3 WBC level was defined as 1.0 to 1.499 Billions WBC/L. Grade 4 WBC level was defined as < 1.0 Billions WBC/L.|At screening (SCR), at Study Day 6 (D6), at 6 days post Study Week 6 (W6+6D), at 6 days post Study Week 10 (W10+6D), at 6 days post Study Week 14 (W14+6D), at Month 5 (M5), at Month 7 (M7) and at Month 10 (M10).|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830598|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Haematological Abnormalities, for the Platelets (PLA) Parameter|This outcome measure concerns haematological abnormalities, for the platelets (PLA) parameter. Subjects’ levels were assessed as either normal, Grade (G) 1, G2, G3, G4, Missing or Out of range (OOR). Normal PLA level was defined as > 125 x 10 exp 9 PLA per liter (Billions PLA/L). Grade 1 PLA level was defined as 100 to 125 Billions PLA/L. Grade 2 PLA level was defined as 50 to 99 Billions PLA/L. Grade 3 PLA level was defined as 25 to 49 Billions PLA/L. Grade 4 PLA level was defined as < 25 Billions PLA/L.|At screening (SCR), at Study Day 6 (D6), at 6 days post Study Week 6 (W6+6D), at 6 days post Study Week 10 (W10+6D), at 6 days post Study Week 14 (W14+6D), at Month 5 (M5), at Month 7 (M7) and at Month 10 (M10).|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830599|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Haematological Abnormalities, for the Haemoglobin (HAE) Parameter|This outcome measure concerns haematological abnormalities, for the haemoglobin (HAE) parameter. Subjects’ levels were assessed as either normal, Grade (G) 1, G2, G3, G4, Missing or Out of range (OOR). Normal HAE level was defined as HAE > 13.0 and 10.5 grams per deciliter (g/dL) for subjects aged 1 to 21 and 22 to 35 days respectively. Grades were defined as follows: 1) In subjects aged 1 to 21 days: G1 = HAE as 12.0 to 13.0 g/dL, G2 = HAE as 10.0 to 11.9 g/dL, G3 = HAE as 9.0 to 9.9 g/dL, G4 = HAE < 9.0 g/dL; 2) In subjects aged 22 to 35 days: G1 = HAE as 9.5 to 10.5 g/dL, G2 = HAE as 8.0 to 9.4 g/dL, G3 = HAE as 7.0 to 7.9 g/dL, G4 = HAE < 7.0 g/dL; 3) In subjects aged 36 to 56 days: G1 = HAE as 8.5 to 9.4 g/dL, G2 = HAE as 7.0 to 8.4 g/dL, G3 = HAE as 6.0 to 6.9 g/dL, G4 = HAE < 6.0 g/dL; 4) In subjects aged ≥ 57 days: G1 = HAE as 10.0 to 10.9 g/dL, G2 = HAE as 9.0 to 9.9 g/dL, G3 = HAE as 7.0 to 8.9 g/dL, G4 = HAE < 7.0 g/dL.|At screening (SCR), at Study Day 6 (D6), at 6 days post Study Week 6 (W6+6D), at 6 days post Study Week 10 (W10+6D), at 6 days post Study Week 14 (W14+6D), at Month 5 (M5), at Month 7 (M7) and at Month 10 (M10).|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830600|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Biochemical Abnormalities, for the Creatinine (CREA) Parameter|This outcome measure concerns biochemical abnormalities, for the creatinine (CREA) parameter. Subjects’ levels were assessed as either normal, Grade 1, Grade 2, Grade 3, Grade 4, Missing or Out of range (OOR). Normal CREA level was defined as CREA ≤ 106, 88 and 71 micromoles per liter (µmol/L) for subjects 1, 2 or ≥ 2 days of age, respectively. Grade 1 CREA level was defined as 1.1 to 1.3 times the upper limit of normal (ULN). Grade 2 CREA level was defined as 1.4 to 1.8 times the ULN. Grade 3 CREA level was defined as 1.9 to 3.4 times the ULN. Grade 4 CREA level was defined as ≥ 3.5 times the ULN.|At screening (SCR), at Study Day 6 (D6), at 6 days post Study Week 6 (W6+6D), at 6 days post Study Week 10 (W10+6D), at 6 days post Study Week 14 (W14+6D), at Month 5 (M5), at Month 7 (M7) and at Month 10 (M10).|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830601|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Biochemical Abnormalities, for the Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Parameter|This outcome measure concerns biochemical abnormalities, for the alanine aminotransferase (ALT) parameter. Subjects’ levels were assessed as either normal, Grade 1, Grade 2, Grade 3, Grade 4, Missing or Out of range (OOR). Normal ALT level was defined as ALT< 60 International units per milliliter (IU/mL). Grade 1 ALT level was defined as 1.1 to 2.5 times the upper limit of normal (ULN). Grade 2 ALT level was defined as 2.6 to 5.0 times the ULN. Grade 3 ALT level was defined as 5.1 to 10.0 times the ULN. Grade 4 ALT level was defined as > 10.0 times the ULN.|At screening (SCR), at Study Day 6 (D6), at 6 days post Study Week 6 (W6+6D), at 6 days post Study Week 10 (W10+6D), at 6 days post Study Week 14 (W14+6D), at Month 5 (M5), at Month 7 (M7) and at Month 10 (M10).|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830602|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that: results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or may evolve into one of the outcomes listed above. “Any” is defined an incidence of a SAE regardless of intensity/severity.|From study start at Month 0 up to Month 18 (corresponding data lock point =23 March 2015)|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment.||Subjects|||Number
830603|NCT01231503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reported With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. “Any” is defined an incidence of an unsolicited AE regardless of intensity or relationship to study vaccination. Please note that, for this outcome measure, analysis was performed only on subjects with at least one administered dose of RTS,S/AS01E and/or DTPwHepB/Hib for the Engerix-B Neo Group.|During the 30-day (Days 0-29) post vaccination period following 3 doses of RTS,S/AS01E versus DTPwHepB/Hib for the Engerix-B Neo Group|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment. This analysis was done solely on subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
830625|NCT01231607|Secondary|Serum Dihydrotestosterone (DHT) at Week 12, Week 24, and Follow-up (Week 26)|Serum concentrations of DHT were measured after 12 weeks and 24 weeks of study treatment and at follow-up (approximately 2 weeks after the last dose of study treatment).|Week 12, Week 24, and Week 26|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24 were assessed.||nanomoles per liter (nmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830604|NCT01231503|Primary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Circumsporozoite Protein of Plasmodium Falciparum (Anti-CS Antibodies)|Anti-CS antibody concentrations were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) expressed in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The seropositivity cut-off for the endpoint was a GMC value greater than or equal to (≥) 0.5 EL.U/mL.|At 1 month (M) post Dose 3 of RTS,S/AS01E, e. a. M5 for RTS,S Neo-10-14, RTS,S 6-10-14 and Engerix-B Neo groups, M7 for RTS,S Neo-10-26, RTS,S 6-10-26, Engerix-B Neo/RTS,S 6-10-26, and RTS,S 10-14-26 groups), and M10 for RTS,S 14-26-9M Group|Analysis was done on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, that is, subjects from the Total Vaccinated cohort who received all vaccinations, complied to protocol procedures, and for whom results were available for the antibody concentrations/titers assessed in the specified outcome measure.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830605|NCT01231503|Primary|Number of Subjects Reported With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that: results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or may evolve into one of the outcomes listed above. “Any” is defined an incidence of a SAE regardless of intensity/severity.|From study start at Month 0 up to Month 10.|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects who were randomized and received a dose of BCG tuberculosis vaccine. Analyses on this cohort were performed per treatment assignment.||Subjects|||Number
830606|NCT01231516|Secondary|DTG PK Parameters Including AUC(0-tau)|AUC is defined as the area under the DTG concentration-time curve as a measure of drug exposure over time. AUC(0-tau) is defined as the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time tau over a dosing interval at steady state, where tau is the length of the dosing interval of DTG. AUC was assessed by population pharmacokinetic (PK) modeling using sparse PK samples which were collected as follows: one pre-dose sample and one post-dose sample at 1 to 3 hours/4 to 12 hours at Week 4, one pre-dose sample at Week 24, and one pre-dose sample and one post-dose sample at 1 to 3 hours/4 to 12 hours at Week 48.|Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|PK Concentration Population: all participants who received DTG, underwent sparse PK sampling during the study, and provided evaluable DTG plasma concentration data. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Micrograms*hour per milliliter (µg*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830607|NCT01231516|Secondary|DTG PK Parameters Including Cmax, Cmin, C0, and C0_avg|The maximal concentration (Cmax), and the minimal concentration (Cmin) were assessed by population pharmacokinetic (PK) modeling using sparse PK samples which were collected as follows: one pre-dose sample and one post-dose sample at 1 to 3 hours/4 to 12 hours at Week 4, one pre-dose sample at Week 24, and one pre-dose sample and one post-dose sample at 1 to 3 hours/4 to 12 hours at Week 48. DTG predose concentration (C0) at Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48 as well as the average C0 (C0_avg) , Cmax and Cmin were estimated and reported here.|Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|"PK Concentration Population: all participants who received DTG, underwent sparse PK sampling during the study, and provided evaluable DTG plasma concentration data. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed. The number of participants assessed at each time point is indicated by n=X."||microgram/milliliter (µg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830608|NCT01231516|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Post-Baseline Emergent Grade 1 to 4 Clinical Chemistry and Hematology Toxicities/Laboratory Adverse Events (AEs)|All Grade 1 to 4 post-Baseline-emergent chemistry toxicities included alanine aminotransferase (ALT), albumin, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), asparate aminotransferase (AST), carbon dioxide (CO2) content/bicarbonate, cholesterol, creatine kinase (CK), creatinine, hyperglycemia, hyperkalemia, hypernatremia, hypoglycemia, hypokalemia, hyponatremia, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol calculation, lipase, total bilirubin, and triglycerides. All Grade 1 to 4 post-Baseline-emergent hematology toxities included hemoglobin, platelet count, total neutrophils, and white blood cell count. The Division of AIDS (DAIDS) defined toxicity grades as follows: Grade 1, mild; Grade 2, moderate; Grade 3, severe; Grade 4, potentially life threatening; Grade 5, death. .|From Baseline until Week 48, including participants with post-treatment events occurring after Week 48 for participants not entering the post-Week 48 Open-Label phase of the study|Safety Population: all participants who received at least one dose of IP (i.e., DTG or RAL)||Participants|||Number
830609|NCT01231516|Secondary|Number of Participants With Indicated Post-Baseline HIV-associated Conditions, Excluding Recurrences, and Disease Progressions|Clinical disease progression (CDP) was assessed according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) HIV-1 classification system. Category (CAT) A: one or more of the following conditions (CON), without any CON listed in Categories B and C: asymptomatic HIV infection, persistent generalized lymphadenopathy, acute (primary) HIV infection with accompanying illness or history of acute HIV infection. CAT B: symptomatic CON that are attributed to HIV infection or are indicative of a defect in cell-mediated immunity; or that are considered by physicians to have a clinical course or to require management that is complicated by HIV infection; and not included among CON listed in clinical CAT C. CAT C: the clinical CON listed in the AIDS surveillance case definition. Indicators of CDP were defined as: CDC CAT A at Baseline (BS) to a CDC CAT C event (EV); CDC CAT B at BS to a CDC CAT C EV; CDC CAT C at BS to a new CDC CAT C EV; or CDC CAT A, B, or C at BS to death.|From Baseline (Day 1) until Week 48|mITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
830610|NCT01231516|Other Pre-specified|Absolute Values and Change From Baseline in Cluster of Differentiation 8+ (CD8+) Cell Counts at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 48|The absolute value data for CD8+ cell count (cells per millimeters cubed [mm^3]) were only reported on a per-participant basis and were not summarized.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 48|mITT-E Population|||||
830611|NCT01231516|Secondary|Absolute Values and Change From Baseline in Cluster of Differentiation 4+ (CD4+) Cell Counts at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 48|The absolute value for CD4+ cell count (cells per millimeters cubed [mm^3]) was assessed at Baseline (BL), Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 24, Week 32, Week 40 and Week 48. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 48|"mITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed. The number of participants assessed at each visit is indicated by n=X, X."||cells/mm^3||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
830697|NCT01232504|Secondary|Graft Versus Host Disease (aGVHD) Related Mortality|Graft versus host disease (aGVHD) related mortality after a median follow-up of 600 days .|3-1099 days|The number of intention-to-treat patients is 206. The IFD related mortality analysis is based on intention-to-treat (ITT) patients .||percentage of participants|||Number
830612|NCT01231516|Secondary|Number of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 c/mL at Week 24 and Week 48|"The number of participants with Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 (HIV-1) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <400 c/mL at the visit of interest was assessed using the Missing, Switch or Discontinuation = Failure (MSDF), as codified by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm. This algorithm treated all participants without HIV-1 RNA at the visit of interest as nonresponders, as well as participants who switched their concomitant ART prior to the visit of interest as follows: background ART substitutions non-permitted per protocol (one background ART substitution was permitted for safety or tolerability); background ART substitutions permitted per protocol unless the decision to switch was documented as being before or at the first on-treatment visit where HIV-1 RNA was assessed. Otherwise, virologic success or failure was determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA measurment (within window) for the timepoint of interest while the participant was on-treatment."|Week 24, Week 48|mITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
830613|NCT01231516|Secondary|Number of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL at Week 24|"The number of participants with Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 (HIV-1) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <50 c/mL at Week 24 was assessed using the Missing, Switch or Discontinuation = Failure (MSDF), as codified by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm. This algorithm treated all participants without HIV-1 RNA at Week 24 as nonresponders, as well as participants who switched their concomitant ART prior to Week 24 as follows: background ART substitutions non-permitted per protocol (one background ART substitution was permitted for safety or tolerability); background ART substitutions permitted per protocol unless the decision to switch was documented as being before or at the first on-treatment visit where HIV-1 RNA was assessed. Otherwise, virologic success or failure was determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA measurement through Week 24 (within window) while the participant was on-treatment. The result below corresponds to the Week 24 interim analysis."|Week 24|mITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
830614|NCT01231516|Secondary|Number of Participants (Par.) With Detectable Virus That Has Genotypic or Phenotypic Evidence of Treatment-emergent INI Resistance at Time of Protocol Defined Virology Failure (PDVF)|For par. meeting one of the criteria for PDVF, plasma samples collected at the time point of virologic failure and Baseline were tested to evaluate any potential genotypic and/or phenotypic evolution of resistance. PDVF was defined as (A) virologic non-response: a decrease in plasma HIV-1 RNA of <1 log10 copies/mL by Week 16, with subsequent confirmation, unless plasma HIV-1 RNA is <400 copies/mL; confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA levels >=400 copies/mL on or after Week 24 or (B) virologic rebound: confirmed rebound in plasma HIV-1 RNA levels to >=400 copies/mL after prior confirmed suppression to <400 copies/mL; confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA levels >1 log10 copies/mL above the nadir value, where nadir is >=400 copies/mL.Treatment-emergent IN mutations are those detected at the time of PDVF but not at Baseline.|Baseline until PDVF up to Week 48|mITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
830615|NCT01231516|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA <50 Copies/Milliliter (c/mL) at Week 48|"The percentage of participants with Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 (HIV-1) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <50 c/mL at Week 48 was assessed using the Missing, Switch or Discontinuation = Failure (MSDF), as codified by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm. This algorithm treated all participants without HIV-1 RNA at Week 48 as nonresponders, as well as participants who switched their concomitant ART prior to Week 48 as follows: background ART substitutions non-permitted per protocol (one background ART substitution was permitted for safety or tolerability); background ART substitutions permitted per protocol unless the decision to switch was documented as being before or at the first on-treatment visit where HIV-1 RNA was assessed. Otherwise, virologic success or failure was determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the participant was on-treatment in the randomized phase of the study."|Week 48|Modified Intent-To-Treat Exposed (mITT-E) Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of IP excluding four participants at one site, which was closed due to Good Clinical Practice (GCP) non-compliance issues in another ViiV sponsored trial.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830616|NCT01231581|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline Increase to Grade 3/Grade 4 in Lab Hematology Test Measurements|A grading (severity) scale is provided for each laboratory toxicity. Grade refers to the severity of the toxicity. The CTCAE version 3.0 displays Grades 1 through 5, with unique clinical descriptions of the severity for each toxicity based on the general guideline: Grade 1, mild toxicity; Grade 2, moderate toxicity; Grade 3, severe toxicity; Grade 4, life-threatening or disabling toxicity; Grade 5, death related to toxicity.|From the start of the first dose of study treatment until 28 days following discontinuation of the study treatment or until the data cutoff of 17-April-2012 (up to 17 months)|Safety Population. Only those par. with laboratory values for worst-case on therapy were analyzed. The same par. were not necessarily analyzed for each laboratory parameter; thus, the number of par. analyzed reflects all par. in the Safety Population. The number of par. analyzed for a particular parameter is included in the parameter title.||participants|||Number
830617|NCT01231581|Secondary|Number of Participants (Par.) With a Worst-case Change to Grade 3 or Grade 4 From Baseline Grade in Chemistry Parameters|A grading (severity) scale is provided for each laboratory toxicity. Grade refers to the severity of the toxicity. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 displays Grades 1 through 5 based on the general guideline: Grade 1, mild toxicity; Grade 2, moderate toxicity; Grade 3, severe toxicity; Grade 4, life-threatening or disabling toxicity; Grade 5, death related to toxicity.|From the start of the first dose of study treatment until 28 days following discontinuation of the study treatment or until the data cutoff of 17-April-2012 (up to 17 months)|Safety Population. Only those par. with laboratory values for worst-case on therapy were analyzed. The same par. were not necessarily analyzed for each laboratory parameter; thus, the number of par. analyzed reflects all par. in the Safety Population. The number of par. analyzed for a particular parameter is included in the parameter title.||participants|||Number
830626|NCT01231607|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Dutasteride at Week 12, Week 24, and Follow-up (Week 26)|Serum concentrations of dutasteride were measured after 12 weeks and 24 weeks of study treatment and at follow-up (approximately 2 weeks after the last dose of study treatment).|Week 12, Week 24, and Week 26|ITT Population. All participants for whom data were collected at Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24 were assessed.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830698|NCT01232504|Secondary|Relapse Related Mortality|Relapse related mortality after a median follow-up of 600 days.|3～1099 days|The number of intention-to-treat patients is 206. The IFD related mortality analysis is based on intention-to-treat (ITT) patients .||percentage of participants|||Number
830618|NCT01231581|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) and Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered to be related to the medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury. Per protocol other events were considered SAEs like symptomatic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) decreases or cases of central serous retinopathy (CSR) or retinal vein occlusion (RVO). AE and SAE data were collected from the start of the first dose of study treatment and continued until 28 days following discontinuation of the study treatment or death. Refer to the general AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs and SAEs.|From the start of the first dose of study treatment until 28 days following discontinuation of the study treatment or until the data cutoff of 15-March-2013 (up to 21 months)|Safety Population: all participants who were randomized and took at least one dose of study medication. This population was based on the actual treatment received, if it differed from that to which the participant was randomized.||participants|||Number
830619|NCT01231581|Secondary|Investigator-Assessed Duration of Response|Duration of response is defined, for the subset of participants with a CR or PR, as the time from the first documented evidence of CR or PR until the first documented disease progression or death due to any cause. CR is defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis. PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the baseline sum of the diameters (e.g., percent change from baseline). PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start).|From the first documented CR or PR until disease progression or death due to any cause or until the data cutoff of 17-April-2012 (up to 13 months)|MD Population. Duration of response was assessed for only those participants with a CR or PR.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830620|NCT01231581|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Investigator-assessed Best Response, With or Without Confirmation, of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|CR is defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be <10 mm in the short axis. PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the baseline sum of the diameters (e.g., percent change from baseline). CR and PR were evaluated by the Investigator using standard criteria (RECIST version 1.1). Confirmation of response was not required.|From randomization until disease progression or death due to any cause or until the data cutoff of 17-April-2012 (up to 15 months)|Measurable Disease (MD) Population: all randomized participants regardless of whether or not treatment was administered who had measurable disease at baseline||participants|||Number
830621|NCT01231581|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by the Investigator|PFS is defined as the time from randomization until the earliest date of radiological PD or death due to any cause. PD was based on radiographic or photographic evidence, and assessments were made by the investigator according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 millimeters (mm). PD was also based on unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. If the participant received subsequent anti-cancer therapy prior to the date of documented progression or death, or did not have a documented date of progression or death, PFS was censored at the last adequate assessment.|From randomization until disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause or until the data cutoff of 17-April-2012 (up to 15 months)|ITT Population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830622|NCT01231581|Primary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from randomization until death due to any cause. For the analysis of overall survival, the last date of known contact was used for those participants who were not dead at the time of analysis; such participants were considered censored.|From randomization until death due to any cause or until the data cutoff of 15-March-2013 (up to 24 months)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants regardless of whether or not treatment was administered||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830623|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Hair Growth Satisfaction Scale (HGSS) Scores at Weeks 12 and 24|Participant satisfaction with hair appearance/growth was assessed by 5 questions (each scored on a 7-point scale: How satisfied do you feel about: [1] The overall appearance of your hair; [2] The appearance of the thinning area[s] [TAs] on your head; [3] The amount of scalp that can be seen in the TAs; [4] The amount of hair in the TAs; [5] The growth of hair in the TAs): -3, Very dissatisfied (DS); -2, DS; -1, Somewhat DS; 0, Neutral (neither satisfied nor DS); 1, Somewhat satisfied (SA); 2, SA; 3, Very SA. The scores for the 5 questions were summed to obtain the HGSS total score (-15 to 15).|Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at Week 12 and Week 24 were assessed.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830624|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hair Growth Index (HGI) Scores at Weeks 12 and 24|"Participant-perceived change in HG was assessed by 3 questions (each scored on a 7-point scale) on a health outcome questionnaire: Since the start of treatment, when I look at my thinning area, I can see..., Since the start of treatment, my hair now covers…, and Since the start of treatment, the appearance (thickness/quality/amount) of the thinning area on my head is… -3, Much less; -2, Moderately less; -1, Slightly less; 0, The same amount; 1, Slightly more; 2, Moderately more; 3, Much more scalp. The scores for the 3 questions were summed to obtain the HGI total score (-9 to 9)."|Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at Week 12 and Week 24 were assessed.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830645|NCT01231750|Primary|Time-to-onset of Angina or Angina Equivalent Symptoms|Onset of angina or angina-equivalent symptoms was assessed from beginning of exercise.|Application was 45 minutes prior to exercise|Data collected are no longer accessible.|||||
830627|NCT01231607|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Change From Baseline (BL) in the Stage (S) of Androgenic Alopecia (AGA) According to the Norwood-Hamilton Scale at Week 24|"The investigator/designee assessed the stage (Stage I to Stage VII) of AGA (i.e., male pattern baldness [MPB]) by utilizing the Norwood-Hamilton scale, used to measure the progression of MPB. Stage VII indicates worse balding than stage I. Assessment was made by direct visual examination (aided by pictures) of the participant at Baseline and Week 24 (W24). v, vertex; most of the hair loss (commonly seen with advancing age) is on the vertex. a, type a variant; major features are (1) the entire anterior hairline border recedes in unison; (2) there is no simultaneous balding of the vertex."|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline and Week 24 were assessed. The number of participants analyzed reflects the sum of the participants with the three BL stages.||participants|||Number
830628|NCT01231607|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Change From Baseline (BL) in the Stage (S) of Androgenic Alopecia (AGA) According to the Norwood-Hamilton Scale at Week 12 (W12)|"The investigator/designee assessed the stage (Stage I to Stage VII) of AGA (i.e., male pattern baldness [MPB]) by utilizing the Norwood-Hamilton scale, used to measure the progression of MPB. Stage VII indicates worse balding than stage I. Assessment was made by direct visual examination (aided by pictures) of the participant at Baseline and Week 12 (W12). v, vertex; most of the hair loss (commonly seen with advancing age) is on the vertex. a, type a variant; major features are (1) the entire anterior hairline border recedes in unison; (2) there is no simultaneous balding of the vertex."|Baseline and Week 12|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline and Week 12 were assessed. The number of participants analyzed reflects the sum of the participants with the three BL stages.||participants|||Number
830629|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Investigator Photographic Assessment Questionnaire (IPAQ) Scores Assessed at Week 24 for Vertex and Frontal Views Separately|The IPAQ was completed by the Investigator or designee by comparing the global photographs obtained at Baseline with those obtained at Week 12. This assessment was made separately based on the global photography of the vertex and frontal views. The change from Baseline in hair growth was assessed using the following 7-point scale: –3 = greatly decreased, –2 = moderately decreased, –1 = slightly decreased, 0 = no change, +1 = slightly increased, +2 = moderately increased, +3 = greatly increased.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline and Week 24 were assessed.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830630|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Investigator Photographic Assessment Questionnaire (IPAQ) Scores Assessed at Week 12 for Vertex and Frontal Views Separately|The IPAQ was completed by the Investigator or designee by comparing the global photographs obtained at Baseline with those obtained at Week 12. This assessment was made separately based on the global photography of the vertex and frontal views. The change from Baseline in hair growth was assessed using the following 7-point scale: –3 = greatly decreased, –2 = moderately decreased, –1 = slightly decreased, 0 = no change, +1 = slightly increased, +2 = moderately increased, +3 = greatly increased.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline and Week 12 were assessed.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830631|NCT01231607|Secondary|Global Assessment of Improvement From Baseline to Week 24 Assessed for Vertex and Frontal Views Separately|A central panel of 3 dermatologists independently assessed change in hair growth from Baseline to Week 24 using a 7-point scale: greatly decreased (-3), moderately decreased (-2), slightly decreased (-1), no change (0), slightly increased (1), moderately increased (2), and greatly increased (3). The median score, across the 3 panel members, is summarized. This assessment was performed by comparing the global photographs obtained at Baseline with those subsequently obtained at Week 24. This assessment was made separately based on the global photography of the vertex and frontal views.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline and Week 24 were assessed.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830632|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Terminal Hair Count Within a 1.13 cm (0.44 Inch) Diameter Circle at the Vertex at Week 12 and Week 24, as Assessed by MT|The THC (thick, long, and dark hair) was the sum of all nonvellus hairs (>=60 μm in width; thick and noticeable hair) within a target 1.13 cm (0.44 inch) diameter circle at the vertex (crown, topmost part of the head). A cosmetic ink dot was placed by tattoo at BL so that the same area could be identified at BL and post-BL. If the ink dot faded, it was re-done in exactly the same location to ensure visibility for subsequent photographs. For the MT, hair was clipped before each photograph; HC was based on hair follicles in the photographs. Change from BL=Week 12/Week 24 value minus BL value.|Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24 were assessed.||Hair count||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830633|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Terminal Hair Count (THC) Within a 2.54 cm (1 Inch) Diameter Circle at the Vertex at Week 12 and Week 24, as Assessed by MT|The THC (thick, long, and dark hair) was the sum of all nonvellus hairs (>=60 μm in width; thick and noticeable hair) within a target 2.54 cm (1 inch) diameter circle at the vertex (crown, topmost part of the head). A cosmetic ink dot was placed by tattoo at BL so that the same area could be identified at BL and post-BL. If the ink dot faded, it was re-done in exactly the same location to ensure visibility for subsequent photographs. For the MT, hair was clipped before each photograph; HC was based on the hair follicles in the photographs. Change from BL=Week 12/Week 24 value minus BL value.|Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24 were assessed.||Hair count||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830646|NCT01231750|Primary|Time-to-onset of 1mm ST Segment Depression|Continuous ECG was recorded during exercise. ECG was reviewed by a board-certified cardiologist.|Application was 45 minutes prior to exercise|Data collected are no longer accessible.|||||
830647|NCT01231750|Primary|Symptom-limited Exercise Duration as an Indicator of Exercise Capacity|Subjects walked on the treadmill as long as they could tolerate, symptom-limited.|Application was 45 minutes prior to exercise|Data collected are no longer accessible.|||||
830634|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Width Within a 1.13 cm (0.44 Inch) Diameter Circle at the Vertex at Week 12 and Week 24, as Assessed by MT|The target area hair width was the sum of all nonvellus hairs (>=30 µm in width; thick and noticeable hair) within a target 1.13 cm (0.44 inch) diameter circle at the vertex (crown, topmost part of the head). For the MT, hair was clipped before each photograph. A cosmetic ink dot was placed by tattoo at Baseline so that the same area could be identified at Baseline and post-Baseline. If the ink dot faded, it was re-done in exactly the same location to ensure it was visible for subsequent photographs. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 12 or Week 24 value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24 were assessed.||millimeters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830635|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Width Within a 2.54 cm (1 Inch) Diameter Circle at the Vertex at Week 12 and Week 24, as Assessed by MT|The target area hair width was the sum of all nonvellus hairs (>=30 µm in width; thick and noticeable hair) within a target 2.54 cm (1 inch) diameter circle at the vertex (crown, topmost part of the head). For the MT, hair was clipped before each photograph. A cosmetic ink dot was placed by tattoo at Baseline so that the same area could be identified at Baseline and post-Baseline. If the ink dot faded, it was re-done in exactly the same location to ensure it was visible for subsequent photographs. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 12 or Week 24 value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at Baseline, Week 12, and Week 24 were assessed.||millimeters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830636|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Count Within a 1.13 cm (0.44 Inch) Diameter Circle at the Vertex, as Assessed by MT at Week 12|The primary target area HC was based on the nonvellus hair (>=30 micrometers [μm] in width; thick and noticeable hair) count within a target 1.13 cm (0.44 inch) diameter circle at the vertex (crown, topmost part of the head). A cosmetic ink dot was placed by tattoo at BL so that the same area could be identified at BL and post-BL. If the ink dot faded, it was re-done in exactly the same location to ensure visibility for subsequent photographs. For the MT, hair was clipped before each photograph; HC was based on hair follicles in the photographs. Change from BL=Week 12 value minus the BL value.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline and Week 12 were assessed.||Hair count||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830637|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Count Within a 2.54 cm (1 Inch) Diameter Circle at the Vertex at Week 12 as Assessed by MT|The primary target area HC was based on the nonvellus hair (>=30 micrometers [μm] in width; thick and noticeable hair) count within a target 2.54 cm (1 inch) diameter circle at the vertex (crown, topmost part of the head). A cosmetic ink dot was placed by tattoo at BL so that the same area could be identified at BL and post-BL. If the ink dot faded, it was re-done in exactly the same location to ensure visibility for subsequent photographs. For the MT, hair was clipped before each photograph; HC was based on hair follicles in the photographs. Change from BL=Week 12 value minus the BL value.|Baseline and Week 12|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline and Week 12 were assessed.||Hair count||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830638|NCT01231607|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Count Within a 1.13 cm (0.44 Inch) Diameter Circle at the Vertex at Week 24, as Assessed by MT|The primary target area HC was based on the nonvellus hair (>=30 micrometers [μm] in width; thick and noticeable hair) count within a target 1.13 cm (0.44 inch) diameter circle at the vertex (crown, topmost part of the head). A cosmetic ink dot was placed by tattoo at BL so that the same area could be identified at BL and post-BL. If the ink dot faded, it was re-done in exactly the same location to ensure visibility for subsequent photographs. For the MT, hair was clipped before each photograph; HC was based on hair follicles in the photographs. Change from BL=Week 24 value minus the BL value.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Calculation was based on the LOCF imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline and Week 24 were assessed.||Hair count||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830639|NCT01231607|Primary|Change From Baseline (BL) in Target Area Hair Count (HC) Within a 2.54 Centimeter (cm) (1 Inch) Diameter Circle at the Vertex at Week 24, as Assessed by Macrophotographic Technique (MT)|The primary target area HC was based on the nonvellus hair (>=30 micrometers [μm] in width; thick and noticeable hair) count within a target 2.54 cm (1 inch) diameter circle at the vertex (crown, topmost part of the head). A cosmetic ink dot was placed by tattoo at BL so that the same area could be identified at BL and post-BL. If the ink dot faded, it was re-done in exactly the same location to ensure visibility for subsequent photographs. For the MT, hair was clipped before each photograph; HC was based on hair follicles in the photographs. Change from BL=Week 24 value minus the BL value.|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants regardless of whether or not treatment was administered. Calculation was based on the last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation method for missing data. All participants for whom data were collected at both Baseline and Week 24 were assessed.||Hair count||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830640|NCT01231646|Primary|Levels of Folate Receptor Autoantibodies|ELISA assays using immobilized folate receptor protein were performed to determine the titers of immunoglobulin G, immunoglobulin M, and combined immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin M to folate receptor in serum samples collected from both groups of women.|On the same day after informed consent was obtained|||ug/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830641|NCT01231750|Primary|Severity of Angina Was Measured.|Severity of angina was measured using numerical score 1 to 10, where 10 is the worst intensity and 1 is the least.|Application was 45 minutes prior to exercise||||||
830642|NCT01231750|Primary|Magnitude of Reversible Perfusion Defect in SPECT With Wall Motion Assessment (Phase 2)|Phase 2 of the study involving nuclear imaging was not done because the study was stopped early for lack of enrollment.|Phase 2 was not done.||||||
830643|NCT01231750|Primary|Maximal Estimated Workload (in METS)|Maximal estimated workload (in METS) was measured during exercise tolerance test (ETT).|Application was 45 minutes prior to exercise|Data collected are no longer accessible.|||||
830644|NCT01231750|Primary|Maximal ST Depression|Exercise ECG data was reviewed by a board certified cardiologist to assess maximal ST depression.|Application was 45 minutes prior to exercise|Data collected are no longer accessible.|||||
830650|NCT01231841|Primary|Patients Treated With Rabbit Antithymocyte Globulin (r-ATG/Thymoglobulin) and Cyclosporine (CsA) Achieving at Least a Partial Remission (PR) at 6 Months|Patients will be classified as responders if they have transfusion independence and meet two of the following three criteria: ANC greater than 500/mm3; platelet count greater than 20,000/mm3; and reticulocyte count greater than 40,000/mm3. Transfusion independence is defined as no need for transfusions for one month prior to response assessment.|At 6 months|||participants|||Number
830651|NCT01231984|Secondary|Number of Serious, Unexplained Hyperglycemic Events, Reported as Number of Events by Needle.|"Subjects were asked to record hyperglycemic events in his/her diary anytime his/her blood glucose (BG) was above 400mg/dL, or s/he required medical attention for treatment for hyperglycemia.
Hyperglycemia was defined as serious when the subject required the assistance of another person to be treated, or when the hyperglycemic event met the per-protocol definition of a Serious Adverse Event. An unexplained episode was defined as one with no known cause (for example, the subject missed an insulin dose). Subjects were asked to record these events in a diary."|During Study Period 1 (12 weeks) and Study Period 2 (12 weeks)|Two hundred seventy-four subjects were randomized into the study. Data from all subjects randomized were included in the analysis of subjects with serious, unexplained hyperglycemic events.||Adverse Events|||Number
830652|NCT01231984|Primary|Glycemic Control as Measured by HbA1c (4 mm vs. 12.7 mm)|"Subjects’ glycemic control was assessed by comparing hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels measured at the end of each 12 week Study Period (e.g., at Visit 5 or Visit 7) to the HbA1c measured at the start of that Study Period, i.e. the baseline (Visit 3) for Period 1 and the Period 1/2 crossover (Visit 5) for Period 2.
Analysis included only subjects with HbA1C values at baseline (Visit 3) and at the end of Study Period 1 (Visit 5) and end of Period 2 (Visit 7)."|Over each 12 week study period|115 subjects completed all main study visits. Two subjects were excluded from the 4 vs. 12.7 primary analysis due to protocol deviations. The total population size evaluated for this analysis is therefore 113.||HbA1c (%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830653|NCT01231984|Secondary|Number of Serious, Unexplained Hypoglycemic Events, Reported as Number of Events by Needle.|"Subjects were asked to record hypoglycemic events in his/her diary anytime his/her blood glucose (BG) was below 50mg/dL, s/he had signs/symptoms of hypoglycemia, or s/he required medical attention for treatment.
Hypoglycemia was defined as serious when the subject required the assistance of another person to be treated, or when the hypoglycemic event met the per-protocol definition of a Serious Adverse Event. An unexplained episode was defined as one with no known cause (for example, the subject skipped a meal or exercised vigorously)."|During Study Period 1 (12 weeks) and Study Period 2 (12 weeks)|Two hundred seventy-four subjects were randomized into the study. Data from all subjects randomized were included in the analysis of subjects with serious, unexplained hypoglycemic events.||Adverse Events|||Number
830654|NCT01231984|Secondary|Injection Pain Scores (4 mm vs. 12 mm)|"At the end of second study period, subjects were asked to rate the level of pain experienced with study period 2 needle compared to the pen needle used in study period 1, using a 150 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS is a measure of the pain perceived with the needle they are using at that point in the study relative to the needle they used the previous period. The VAS is anchored at the center (0mm) with as painful and at each extreme with much less painful (-75mm) and much more painful (+75mm); therefore a negative pain rating means the period 2 needle was perceived as less painful than the period 1 needle."|At the end of Study Period 2|115 subjects in the 4mm vs. 12 mm study arm completed all main study visits. One of the subjects was excluded from all primary and secondary analyses due to protocol deviations.||mm||Standard Error|Mean
830655|NCT01231984|Secondary|Injection Pain Scores (4 mm vs. 8 mm)|"At the end of second study period, subjects were asked to rate the level of pain experienced with study period 2 needle compared to the pen needle used in study period 1, using a 150 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS is a measure of the pain perceived with the needle they are using at that point in the study relative to the needle they used in Period 1. The VAS is anchored at the center (0mm) with as painful and at each extreme with much less painful (-75mm) and much more painful (+75mm); therefore a pain rating < 0 indicates that the Period 2 needle was perceived as less painful than the Period 1 needle."|At the end of Study Period 2|115 subjects in the 4mm vs. 8 mm study arm completed all main study visits. Two of the 115 subjects were excluded from all primary and secondary analyses due to protocol deviations. The total number of subjects analyzed for perceived pain for this study was therefore 113.||mm||Standard Error|Mean
830656|NCT01231984|Secondary|Glycemic Control as Measured by HbA1c, in High Dose Insulin (at Least One Dose of ≥ 40 Units) Users|Glycemic control was assessed as by difference between the subjects' HbA1c (%) at baseline (randomization, Visit 3) and at the end of each 12 week study period,in the same manner as for the primary outcome measures. The 95% confidence interval for the mean difference in HbA1c values between the 4mm PN and the longer PN will be estimated based on general linear models adjusting for baseline HbA1c.|Subjects were randomly assigned to use the BD Ultra-Fine™ 4mm pen needle for one - 12 week study period and either the BD Ultra-Fine™ 8mm pen needle or the BD Ultra-Fine™ 12.7mm pen needle for one - 12 week study period.|Of the 226 subjects who were considered for the Primary analysis, 107 subjects had at least one dose of insulin that was at least 40 units. The glycemic control of this sub-group of subjects was analyzed as in the Primary Analysis.The same analysis was performed for the high insulin dose subjects, with the two longer PN study arms pooled together.||HbA1C (%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830657|NCT01231984|Primary|Glycemic Control as Measured by HbA1c (4 mm vs. 8 mm)|"Subjects’ glycemic control was assessed by comparing hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels measured at the end of each 12 week Study Period (e.g., at Visit 5 or Visit 7) to the HbA1c measured at the start of that Study Period, i.e. the baseline (Visit 3) for Period 1 and the Period 1/2 crossover (Visit 5) for Period 2.
Analysis included only subjects with HbA1C values at baseline (Visit 3) and at the end of Study Period 1 (Visit 5) and end of Period 2 (Visit 7)."|Over each 12 week study period|115 subjects completed all main study visits. Two subjects were excluded from the 4 vs. 8 primary analysis due to protocol deviations. The total population size evaluated for the primary objective (4 vs. 8) is therefore 113.||HbA1c (%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830699|NCT01232504|Secondary|IFD Related Mortality|IFD-related mortalities after a median follow-up of 600 days.|3-1099 days|The number of intention-to-treat patients is 206. The IFD related mortality analysis is based on intention-to-treat (ITT) patients .||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840388|NCT01328756|Primary|Change From Baseline in Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)||Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Safety population with participants evaluable for this outcome||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
830658|NCT01232127|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Laboratory Test Results|PreRX=pretreatment; ULN=upper limit of normal. Neutrophils, (absolute), low (10*3 c/uL): <0.85*PreRx, if PreRx <1.5; <1.5 if PreRx ≥1.5. Alanine aminotransferase, high (U/L): >1.25*PreRx if PreRx >ULN; >1.25*ULN if PreRx ≤ULN. Bilirubin, direct (mg/dL), high: >1.1*ULN if PreRx ≤ULN;> 1.1*ULN if PreRx is missing; >1.25*PreRx if PreRx >ULN. Bilirubin, total (mg/dL), high: >1.1*ULN if PreRx ≤ULN;> 1.1*ULN if PreRx is missing; >1.25*PreRx if PreRx >ULN.|Days 11, 18, and 25 (end of study) and at study discharge for those who discontinued prematurely.|Participants who received study drug and were evaluable.||Participants|||Number
830659|NCT01232127|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings|ECG findings include heart rate, ECG intervals (including PR, QRS, QT, and corrections to QT using both Bazett’s and Fridericia’s formulae), and Investigator-identified ECG abnormalities.|Days 1 and 25 (end of study) and at study discharge for those who discontinued prematurely.|Participants who received study drug and were evaluable.||Participants|||Number
830660|NCT01232127|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve in 1 Dosing Interval (Time 0 to 24 Hours Postdose) (AUC[TAU]) for Atazanavir and Ritonavir||Days 10, 11, 17, 18, 24, and 25 (end of study) and at study discharge for those who discontinued prematurely.|Participants who received study drug and had adequate PK profiles.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830661|NCT01232127|Primary|Time of Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for Atazanavir and Ritonavir||Days 10, 11, 17, 18, 24, and 25 (end of study) and at study discharge for those who discontinued prematurely.|Participants who received study drug and had adequate PK profiles.||Hours||Full Range|Median
830662|NCT01232127|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) and Trough Observed Plasma Concentration (Ctrough) for Atazanavir and Ritonavir||Days 10, 11, 17, 18, 24, and 25 (end of study) and at study discharge for those who discontinued prematurely.|Participants who received study drug and had adequate PK profiles.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830663|NCT01232127|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Vital Signs|Vital signs include temperature, respiratory rate, seated blood pressure, and heart rate.|Days 1, 11, 18, and 25 (end of study) and at study discharge for those who discontinued prematurely.|Participants who received study drug and were evaluable.||Participants|||Number
830664|NCT01232127|Secondary|Number of Participants With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation, AES, and AEs of Clinical Interest|An AE is any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. An SAE is any unfavorable medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency or abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization.|Days 1 through 25 (end of study), continuously, and at study discharge for those who discontinued prematurely.|Participants who received study drug and were evaluable.||Participants|||Number
830665|NCT01232205|Primary|Preeclampsia|Preeclampsia was defined as gestational hypertension (systolic pressure ≥140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 90 mmHg [Korotkoff V] on ≥ 2 occasions after 20 weeks gestation) with proteinuria (> 0.3 g/day). Severe preeclampsia was defined by the presence of >1 of the following: (a) severe gestational hypertension (systolic pressure ≥160 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≥110 mmHg on 2 occasions after gestational week 20), or (b) severe proteinuria (≥5g protein in a 24-h urine specimen or ≥3 g in 2 random urine samples collected ≥4 h apart)|9 months|||participants|||Number
830666|NCT01232205|Secondary|Cell-free mRNA|Secondary outcome were level of mRNA level of angiogenic factors (vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1 (VEGFR-1), placental growth factor (PlGF) and endoglin(ENG)); antioxidant status (FRAP, heme oksigenase-1 (HO-1) and superoxide-dismutase (SOD))|40 weeks||||||
830667|NCT01232205|Primary|Preeclampsia|Preeclampsia was defined as gestational hypertension (systolic pressure ≥140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 90 mmHg [Korotkoff V] on ≥ 2 occasions after 20 weeks gestation) with proteinuria (> 0.3 g/day). Severe preeclampsia was defined by the presence of >1 of the following: (a) severe gestational hypertension (systolic pressure ≥160 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≥110 mmHg on 2 occasions after gestational week 20), or (b) severe proteinuria (≥5g protein in a 24-h urine specimen or ≥3 g in 2 random urine samples collected ≥4 h apart)|40 weeks||||||
830668|NCT01232283|Secondary|Number of Participants With Psoriasis Flare or Rebound in the Placebo Controlled Phase|Psoriasis flare was defined as a sudden intensification of psoriasis requiring medical intervention, or a diagnosis of new generalized erythrodermic, inflammatory, or pustular psoriasis. Rebound is defined as a severe and sudden worsening of disease that occurs after treatment has been discontinued. Note categories below. [1] Psoriasis adverse events (ie, preferred term as Guttate psoriasis, Psoriasis, Pustular psoriasis) started on or after the first dose date and on or before the last dose date within the phase. [2] Psoriasis adverse events (ie, preferred term as Guttate psoriasis, Psoriasis, Pustular psoriasis, Rebound psoriasis) started after the last dose date for participants who discontinued within the phase. [3] PASI >= 125% of baseline score at any visit after the last dose date for participants who discontinued within the phase and were not included in [1] and/or [2].|Week 0 to Week 16|Safety population, included all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of IP. Participants with a PASI ≥ 125% of Baseline score after last dose who did not have psoriasis rebound captured as a Treatment Emergent Adverse Event.||participants|||Number
830669|NCT01232283|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE) in the Placebo Controlled Phase|An AE was any noxious, unintended, or untoward medical occurrence, that may appear or worsen in a participant during the course of study. It may be a new intercurrent illness, a worsening concomitant illness, an injury, or any concomitant impairment of the participant's health, including laboratory test values regardless of etiology. Any worsening (ie, any clinically significant adverse change in the frequency or intensity of a preexisting condition) was considered an AE. A serious AE (SAE) is any untoward adverse event that is fatal, life-threatening, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, requires or prolongs existing in-patient hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is a condition that may jeopardize the patient or may require intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above. An AE is a treatment emergent AE if the AE start date is on or after the date of the first dose of study drug and no later than 28 days after the last dose.|Baseline to Week 16|Safety population consisted of all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of Investigational Product (IP)||participants|||Number
830670|NCT01232283|Secondary|Time to Loss of Effect (Loss of 50% Improvement in PASI Score Obtained at Week 32 Compared to Baseline) During the Randomized Treatment Withdrawal Phase|Time to loss was the time between the re-randomization date and the date of the first assessment with loss of 50% PASI improvement (event), or the time between the re-randomization date and the date of the last PASI assessment in the randomized withdrawal phase prior to addition of topical/phototherapy or other effective psoriasis therapies, or resumption of apremilast 30 mg BID, or discontinuation, or Week 52 if no loss (censored), whichever was earlier|Weeks 32 to Week 52|Analysis population consisted of participants who were re-randomized to placebo or Apremilast 30mg BID at Week 32.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830671|NCT01232283|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Both a 75% Improvement (Response) in the PASI and sPGA Score of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) With at Least 2 Points Reduction at Week 16 From Baseline|"PASI-75 response is the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at Week 16. The improvement in PASI score was used as a measure of efficacy. See Outcome measure #1 for further description.
sPGA is a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (clear), 1 (almost clear), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate), to 4 (severe), incorporating an assessment of the severity of the three primary signs of the disease: erythema, scaling and plaque elevation. See Outcome Measure #2 for further description."|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
830672|NCT01232283|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Mental Component Summary (MSC) Score of the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-item (SF-36) Health Survey Version 2.0 at Week 16|"The SF-36 was a 36-item general health instrument and consists of 8 scales: physical function (PF), role limitations–physical (RP), vitality (VT), general health perceptions (GH), bodily pain (BP), social function (SF), role limitations–emotional (RE), and mental health (MH). Scale scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. Two overall summary scores were obtained − a Physical Component Summary score (PCS) and a Mental Component Summary score (MCS).
Scores from the 8 scales, PCS and MCS were transformed to the norm-based scores using weights from U.S. general population, with 50 as the average and 10 as the standard deviation, higher scores indicating better health. For norm based scores, change from baseline were calculated for the 8 scales and the two summary scales, where change = visit value − baseline value."|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used. Participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830673|NCT01232283|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Total Score at Week 16|DLQI is a simple, compact, and practical questionnaire for use in a dermatology clinical setting to assess limitations related to the impact of skin disease. The instrument contains ten items dealing with the participant’s skin. With the exception of Item Number 7, the participant responds on a four-point scale, ranging from “Very Much” (score 3) to “Not at All” or “Not relevant” (score 0). Item Number 7 is a multi-part item, the first part of which ascertains whether the participant’s skin prevented them from working or studying (Yes or No, scores 3 or 0 respectively), and if “No,” then the subject is asked how much of a problem the skin has been at work or study over the past week, with response alternatives being “A lot,” “A little,” or “Not at all” (scores 2, 1, or 0 respectively). The DLQI total score was derived by summing all item scores, which has a possible range of 0 to 30, with 30 corresponding to the worst quality of life, and 0 corresponding to the best.|Baseline and Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used. Participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value are included||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830674|NCT01232283|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pruritus Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score at Week 16|The Pruritus Visual Analog Scores (VAS) were used to measure the amount of itching and discomfort a participant experiences. Participant's Assessment of Pruritus (Itch) asked: On average, how much itch have you had because of your condition in the past week? All VAS values range from 0 to 100. Higher scores correspond to more severe symptom or disease. Change from baseline was calculated for the VAS scale, where change = visit value − baseline value.|Baseline and Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used. Participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830675|NCT01232283|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a 50% Improvement (Response) in the PASI Score (PASI-50) at Week 16 From Baseline|PASI-50 response is the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 50% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at Week 16. The improvement in PASI score was used as a measure of efficacy. The PASI is a measure of psoriatic disease severity taking into account qualitative lesion characteristics (erythema, thickness, and scaling) and degree of skin surface area involvement on defined anatomical regions. PASI scores range from 0 to 72, with higher scores reflecting greater disease severity. Erythema, thickness, and scaling are scored on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (very severe) on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs. Degree of involvement on each of the 4 anatomic regions is scored on a scale of 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement). The PASI score was set to missing if any severity score or degree of involvement is missing.|Baseline and Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
830700|NCT01232504|Primary|Incidences of Invasive Fungal Diseases (IFD)|The incidence of proven and probable Invasive fungal diseases (IFD) within 100 days post transplantation|100 day post transplant|The number of intention-to-treat patients is 206. The incidence of invasive fungal infection analysis within 100 day is based on intention-to-treat (ITT)patients .||percentage of partipants|||Number
830676|NCT01232283|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) Score at Week 16|Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) scores range from 0 to 72, with higher scores reflecting greater disease severity. Erythema, thickness, and scaling are scored on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (very severe) on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs. Degree of involvement on each of the 4 anatomic regions is scored on a scale of 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement). The total qualitative score (sum of erythema, thickness, and scaling scores) is multiplied by the degree of involvement for each anatomic region and then multiplied by a constant. These values for each anatomic region are summed to yield the PASI score. The PASI score was set to missing if any severity score or degree of involvement is missing.|Baseline and Week 16|FAS consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used. Participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value are included.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830677|NCT01232283|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in the Affected Body Surface Area (BSA) at Week 16|"BSA was a measurement of involved skin. The overall BSA affected by psoriasis was estimated based on the palm area of the participant’s hand (entire palmar surface or “handprint” including the fingers), which equates to approximately 1% of total body surface area.
BSA percent change from baseline (Visit 2 Week 0) was determined at each visit of the study, which is calculated as 100*(visit BSA – baseline BSA) / baseline BSA (%)."|Baseline and Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value were included. Last observation carried forward imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830678|NCT01232283|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Static Physician Global Assessment (sPGA) Score of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) With at Least 2 Points Reduction From Baseline|The sPGA was a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (clear), 1 (almost clear), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate), to 4 (severe), incorporating an assessment of the severity of the three primary signs of the disease: erythema, scaling and plaque elevation. When making the assessment of overall severity, the Investigator must have factored in areas that have already been cleared (ie, have scores of 0) and not just evaluate remaining lesions for severity, ie, the severity of each sign was averaged across all areas of involvement, including cleared lesions. In the event of different severities across disease signs, the sign that is the predominant feature of the disease should be used to help determine the sPGA score.|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
830679|NCT01232283|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved at Least a 75% Improvement (Response) in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI-75) at Week 16 From Baseline|PASI-75 response is the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at week 16. The improvement in PASI score was used as a measure of efficacy. The PASI is a measure of psoriatic disease severity taking into account qualitative lesion characteristics (erythema, thickness, and scaling) and degree of skin surface area involvement on defined anatomical regions. PASI scores range from 0 to 72, with higher scores reflecting greater disease severity. Erythema, thickness, and scaling are scored on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (very severe) on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs. Degree of involvement on each of the 4 anatomic regions is scored on a scale of 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement). The PASI score was set to missing if any severity score or degree of involvement is missing.|Baseline to Week 16|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who were randomized per protocol. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized APR 30 BID or placebo for the FAS. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used. .||percentage of participants|||Number
830680|NCT01232296|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter of AUCtau Following a Single Dose of TKI258|The mean AUC from time zero to the last measurable concentration sampling time (t last) (mass x time x volume-1)|Week 1 day 1, week 4 day 5|The Full-PK analysis set: all patients who were selected for full PK sampling and provided at least one evaluable PK concentration profile||(ng.h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830681|NCT01232296|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter of Tmax Following a Single Dose of TKI258|Tmax will be evaluated after a single dose of TKI258 following a 5 days on/2 days off dosing schedule. Tmax is the time to to reach maximum (peak) plasma, blood, serum, or other body fluid drug concentration after a single dose administration (time)|Week 1 day 1, week 4 day 5|The Full-PK analysis set: all patients who were selected for full PK sampling and provided at least one evaluable PK concentration profile||hours||Full Range|Median
830682|NCT01232296|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter of Cmax Following a Single Dose of TKI258|Cmax will be evaluated after a single dose of TKI258 following a 5 days on/2 days off dosing schedule. Cmax is the maximum (peak) observed plasma, blood, serum, or other body fluid drug concentration after a single dose administration (mass x volume - 1).|Week 1 day 1, week 4 day 5|The Full-PK analysis set: all patients who were selected for full PK sampling and provided at least one evaluable PK concentration profile||(ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830683|NCT01232296|Secondary|Time to Definitive Deterioration in ECOG Performance Status (PS)|Time to definitive deterioration on ECOG PS scale (by at least one point) was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of definitive deterioration of the ECOG PS by at least one category of the score from baseline or to the date of death whichever occurred earlier. 0 is Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction, 1 is Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g. light housework, office work and 2 is ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours.|Every 6 weeks from date of randomization until the patient has progressed, or the patient can no longer be followed, or at least 130 deaths have been observed in the study, whichever came first|The Full Analysis Set (FAS): all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment (and strata) they were assigned to during the randomization procedure. Only Total number of definitive deterioration events included in the analysis||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830684|NCT01232296|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (Tumor Assessment)|Disease Control Rate (DCR) is defined as the proportion of patients whose best overall response is either complete response [CR], partial response [PR] or stable disease [SD] according to RECIST 1.1.|Every 6 weeks from date of randomization until the patient has progressed, or the patient can no longer be followed, or at least 130 deaths have been observed in the study, whichever came first.|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises of all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment (and strata) they were assigned to during the randomization procedure.||Participants|||Number
830685|NCT01232296|Secondary|Time to Tumor Progression (Tumor Assessment)|Disease progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1). For target lesions, disease progression mean at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameter of all measured target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of diameter of all target lesions recorded at or after baseline. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. For non-target lesions, disease progression refers to unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. In addition, the appearance of new lesions is always considered as disease progression.|Every 6 weeks from date of randomization until the patient has progressed, or the patient can no longer be followed, or at least 130 deaths have been observed in the study, whichever came first.|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises of all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment (and strata) they were assigned to during the randomization procedure.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830686|NCT01232296|Primary|Overall Survival - Overall Survival|The overall survival (OS), defined as the time from date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. If a patient was not known to have died at the date of analysis cut-off, OS was censored at the last date of contact. Survival information was collected every 6 wks until at least 130 deaths have been observed|Every 6 weeks from date of randomization until the patient has progressed, or the patient can no longer be followed, or at least 130 deaths have been observed in the study, whichever came first.|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises of all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment (and strata) they were assigned to during the randomization procedure.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830687|NCT01232465|Primary|Pregnancy|detemining whether the sperm sample (tested for DNA integrity) used to insemenate IVF retrieved eggs, results in a live birth|9 months|||participants|||Number
830688|NCT01232491|Secondary|Rate of Nocturnal Treatment Emergent Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Corresponds to rate of treatment emergent hypoglycaemic episodes per patient exposure year. A hypoglycaemic episode was defined as treatment emergent if the onset of the episode was on or after the first day of exposure to randomised treatment and no later than 1 day after the last day of randomised treatment. A hypoglycaemic episode with time of onset between 00:01 and 05:59 a.m. (both included) was considered nocturnal. Severe, if assistance was required to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagons or other resuscitative actions.|Week 0 to Week 26|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of insulin detemir.||rate per year of patient exposure|||Number
830689|NCT01232491|Secondary|Rate of All Treatment Emergent Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Corresponds to rate of treatment emergent hypoglycaemic episodes per patient exposure year. A hypoglycaemic episode was defined as treatment emergent if the onset of the episode was on or after the first day of exposure to randomised treatment and no later than 1 day after the last day of randomised treatment. Severe, if assistance was required to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagons or other resuscitative actions.|Week 0 to Week 26|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of insulin detemir.||rate per year of patient exposure|||Number
830690|NCT01232491|Secondary|Rate of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Corresponds to rate of adverse events (AEs) per 100 patient years of exposure. Mild AEs: no or transient symptoms, no interference with subject's daily activities. Moderate AEs: marked symptoms, moderate interference with subject's daily activities. Severe AEs: considerable interference with subject's daily activities, unacceptable. Serious AEs: AEs that at any dose results in any of the following: death, a life-threatening experience, in-subject hospitalization/prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent/significant disability/incapacity/congenital anomaly/birth defect.|Week 0 to Week 26|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of insulin detemir.||rate per 100 years of patient exposure|||Number
830691|NCT01232491|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)|Estimated mean change from baseline in FPG after 26 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830692|NCT01232491|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c)|Estimated mean change from baseline in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830693|NCT01232491|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI)|Estimated mean change from baseline in BMI after 26 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||kg/m^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830694|NCT01232491|Primary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight|Estimated mean change from baseline in body weight after 26 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) includes all randomised subjects and missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830695|NCT01232504|Secondary|Infection Related Mortality|Infection related mortality after a median follow-up of 600 days.|3～1099 days)|The number of intention-to-treat patients is 206. The IFD related mortality analysis is based on intention-to-treat (ITT) patients .||percentage of participants|||Number
830696|NCT01232504|Secondary|Hemorrhage Related Mortality|Hemorrhage related mortality after a median follow-up of 600 days|3-1099 days|The number of intention-to-treat patients is 206. The IFD related mortality analysis is based on intention-to-treat (ITT) patients .||percentage of participants|||Number
830701|NCT01232504|Secondary|Incidence of Ⅱ- Ⅳ Acute Graft Versus Host Disease (aGVHD)|Incidence of Ⅱ- Ⅳacute graft versus host disease (aGVHD) within 100 days after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (Allo-HSCT).The severity of acute GVHD in the three main target organs (skin, liver, gastrointestinal tract) was assigned stage 1 to 4 based on accepted criteria (Consensus Conference on Acute GVHD Grading).|100 days post transplant|The number of intention-to-treat patients is 206. The incidence of aGVHD analysis is based on intention-to-treat (ITT) patients .||percentage of partipants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830702|NCT01232504|Secondary|Transplant Related Mortality|Transplant related mortality within 100 days after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation (Allo-HSCT).|100 days post transplant|The number of intention-to-treat patients is 206. The transplant related mortality analysis within 100 day is based on intention-to-treat (ITT) patients .||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830703|NCT01232504|Secondary|Hematological Engraftment|The median time of neutrophil and platelet recovery .|100 days post transplant|The number of intention-to-treat patients is 206. The hematological engraftment analysis within 100 day is based on intention-to-treat (ITT)patients .||days||Full Range|Median
830704|NCT01232569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin at Week 24||Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
830705|NCT01232569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Scores of the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey at Week 24|The SF-36 Health Survey uses patient-reported symptoms on 8 subscales to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The Physical Component Summary (PCS) score summarizes the subscales Physical Functioning, Role−Physical, Bodily Pain, and General Health. The Mental Component Summary (MCS) score summarizes the subscales Vitality, Social Functioning, Role−Emotional, and Mental Health. Each score was scaled from 0 to 100 with a higher score indicating better HRQoL. A positive change score indicates an improvement in HRQoL.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830706|NCT01232569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Van Der Heijde Modified Sharp Radiographic Score at Week 24|The degree of joint damage was assessed using the van der Heijde modified total Sharp score (mTSS). The methodology quantifies the extent of bone erosions for 44 joints and joint space narrowing (JSN) for 42 joints, with higher scores representing greater damage. The independent read of X-ray images was performed by 2 primary readers. In case of discrepancy between the 2 primary readers, an adjudicator was involved. The mTSS can range from 0 to 448 with a higher score indicating more joint damage. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830707|NCT01232569|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Good, Moderate, or no European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Responses at Week 24|Change of the Disease Activity Score 28 score from baseline was used to determine EULAR responses of good, moderate, or no response. For a post-baseline score ≤ 3.2, a change from baseline of < -1.2 was a good response, < -0.6 to ≥ -1.2 was a moderate response, and ≥ -0.6 was no response. For a post-baseline score > 3.2 to ≤ 5.1, a change from baseline of < -0.6 was a moderate response and ≥ -0.6 was no response. For a post-baseline score > 5.1, a change from baseline < -1.2 was a moderate response and ≥ -1.2 was no response. A good response could not be achieved for post-baseline scores > 3.2.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Percentage of patients|||Number
830708|NCT01232569|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With a DAS28 Score < 2.6 (DAS28 Remission) at Week 24|The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in rheumatic arthritis (RA) and includes swollen and tender joint counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and general health (GH) status. The index is calculated with the following formula: DAS28 = (0.56 × √(TJC28)) + (0.28 × √(SJC28)) + (0.7 × log(ESR)) + (0.014 × GH), where TJC28 = tender joint count and SJC28 = swollen joint count, each on 28 joints. GH = a patient’s global assessment of disease activity in the previous 24 hours on a 100 mm visual analog scale (left end = no disease activity [symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms], right end = maximum disease activity [maximum arthritis disease activity]). When ESR equaled 0 mm/hr, it was set to 1 mm/hr. The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830709|NCT01232569|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With a DAS28 Score ≤ 3.2 (DAS28 Low Disease Activity) at Week 24|The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in rheumatic arthritis (RA) and includes swollen and tender joint counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and general health (GH) status. The index is calculated with the following formula: DAS28 = (0.56 × √(TJC28)) + (0.28 × √(SJC28)) + (0.7 × log(ESR)) + (0.014 × GH), where TJC28 = tender joint count and SJC28 = swollen joint count, each on 28 joints. GH = a patient’s global assessment of disease activity in the previous 24 hours on a 100 mm visual analog scale (left end = no disease activity [symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms], right end = maximum disease activity [maximum arthritis disease activity]). When ESR equaled 0 mm/hr, it was set to 1 mm/hr. The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830710|NCT01232569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) at Week 24|The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in rheumatic arthritis (RA) and includes swollen and tender joint counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and general health (GH) status. The index is calculated with the following formula: DAS28 = (0.56 × √(TJC28)) + (0.28 × √(SJC28)) + (0.7 × log(ESR)) + (0.014 × GH), where TJC28 = tender joint count and SJC28 = swollen joint count, each on 28 joints. GH = a patient’s global assessment of disease activity in the previous 24 hours on a 100 mm visual analog scale (left end = no disease activity [symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms], right end = maximum disease activity [maximum arthritis disease activity]). When ESR equaled 0 mm/hr, it was set to 1 mm/hr. The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830711|NCT01232569|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With an Improvement of ≥ 0.3 Units From Baseline in the HAQ-DI Score at Week 24|The HAQ-DI is a questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis and consists of 20 questions referring to 8 domains: Dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities. Patients completed the questionnaire by answering the 20 questions on a scale of 0 (without difficulty) to 3 (unable to do). The total score ranges from 0 (no disability) to 3 (completely disabled). A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830712|NCT01232569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 24|The HAQ-DI is a questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis and consists of 20 questions referring to 8 domains: Dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities. Patients completed the questionnaire by answering the 20 questions on a scale of 0 (without difficulty) to 3 (unable to do). The total score ranges from 0 (no disability) to 3 (completely disabled). A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830713|NCT01232569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Patient’s Pain Visual Analog Score|Patients assessed their pain in the previous 24 hours on a visual analog scale, where the extreme left end of the line represented “no pain” and the extreme right end represented “unbearable pain”. Scores ranged from 0 to 100 with a higher score indicating more pain. A negative change score indicated less pain.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830714|NCT01232569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Patient’s and the Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity Visual Analog (VAS) Score|Patients and physicians assessed the patient’s disease activity in the previous 24 hours on a 100 mm visual analog scale, where the extreme left end of the line represented “no disease activity” (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the extreme right end represented “maximum disease activity”. Scores ranged from 0 to 100 with a higher score indicating more disease activity. A negative change score indicated less disease activity.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830715|NCT01232569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate at Week 24||Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
830716|NCT01232569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-reactive Protein at Week 24||Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830717|NCT01232569|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Tender Joint Count (TJC) and Swollen Joint Count (SJC) at Week 24|Joints (28 joints) will be assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen and tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Joint count||Standard Deviation|Mean
830718|NCT01232569|Secondary|Time to Onset of ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 Responses|Time to first ACR response was calculated as the number of days between the date of the first ACR response minus the date of the first dose of study drug. Median days are reported.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830719|NCT01232569|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With ACR50 and ACR70 Responses at Week 24|A patient had an ACR50 response if there was at least a 50% improvement in the ACR scores. A patient had an ACR70 response if there was at least a 70% improvement in the ACR scores.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830720|NCT01232569|Primary|Percentage of Patients With an American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 24|A patient had an ACR20 response if there was at least a 20% improvement, ie, reduction from baseline, in tender and swollen joint counts (28 assessed joints) and in at least 3 of the following 5 parameters: Separate patient and physician assessments of patient disease activity in the previous 24 hours on a visual analog scale (VAS, left end=no disease activity [symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms], right end=maximum disease activity; patient assessment of pain in previous 24 hours on a VAS (left end=no pain and right end=unbearable pain); Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (20 questions, 8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities, 0=without difficulty to 3=unable to do); and acute-phase reactant (either C-reactive protein or erythrocyte sedimentation rate).|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients were assigned to the ITT population as randomized, irrespective of the treatment actually received. Only patients with available data were included in the analysis.||Percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830721|NCT01232790|Secondary|Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS)Total Score|"Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) utilized before and after treatment. BPRS total score is a total of the 18 item scores with a range of 18-126. It is used to measure schizophrenia symptoms and to assess change in them over time. There are 18 symptom sub scores. Each symptom is rated 1-7 (not present to extremely severe) and then all items are summed for the total score. Higher scores indicate more severe symptoms.
The BPRS is the gold-standard overall measure of schizophrenia symptoms which will be utilized to demonstrate that the intervention does not cause worsening of the illness symptoms apart from the usual fluctuations of the natural course."|Change from PreScreening at End of Trial|Analyses only used matched cases and does not include participants with incomplete data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830722|NCT01232790|Secondary|Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS)Total Score|"Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) utilized before and after treatment. BPRS total score is a total of the 18 item scores with a range of 18-126. It is used to measure schizophrenia symptoms and to assess change in them over time. There are 18 symptom sub scores. Each symptom is rated 1-7 (not present to extremely severe) and then all items are summed for the total score. Higher scores indicate more severe symptoms.
The BPRS is the gold-standard overall measure of schizophrenia symptoms which will be utilized to demonstrate that the intervention does not cause worsening of the illness symptoms apart from the usual fluctuations of the natural course."|End of Trial|Per protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830723|NCT01232790|Secondary|Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS)Total Score|"Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) utilized before and after treatment. BPRS total score is a total of the 18 item scores with a range of 18-126. It is used to measure schizophrenia symptoms and to assess change in them over time. There are 18 symptom sub scores. Each symptom is rated 1-7 (not present to extremely severe) and then all items are summed for the total score. Higher scores indicate more severe symptoms.
The BPRS is the gold-standard overall measure of schizophrenia symptoms which will be utilized to demonstrate that the intervention does not cause worsening of the illness symptoms apart from the usual fluctuations of the natural course."|Pre Screening|Per protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830724|NCT01232790|Secondary|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) RAW SCORE.|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) is a measure of visuospatial memory. This task includes three trials of six geometric figures printed in a 2 x 3 array on separate pages. The respondent views the stimulus page for 10 seconds and is asked to draw as many of the figures as possible in their correct location on a page in the response booklet. A Delayed Recall Trial is administered after a 25-minute delay. Scoring is based on accuracy of the figure as well as its location on the page. A range of 0-12 per trial is possible(0-36 total). Higher scores are better.|Follow Up 2nd Leg of Crossover (5 Days)|Per protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830725|NCT01232790|Secondary|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) RAW SCORE.|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) is a measure of visuospatial memory. This task includes three trials of six geometric figures printed in a 2 x 3 array on separate pages. The respondent views the stimulus page for 10 seconds and is asked to draw as many of the figures as possible in their correct location on a page in the response booklet. A Delayed Recall Trial is administered after a 25-minute delay. Scoring is based on accuracy of the figure as well as its location on the page. A range of 0-12 per trial is possible(0-36 total). Higher scores are better.|Baseline 2nd Leg of Crossover|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at 2nd baseline in the crossover and could include those that had dropped from the study if data was collected prior to drop out.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830726|NCT01232790|Secondary|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) RAW SCORE.|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) is a measure of visuospatial memory. This task includes three trials of six geometric figures printed in a 2 x 3 array on separate pages. The respondent views the stimulus page for 10 seconds and is asked to draw as many of the figures as possible in their correct location on a page in the response booklet. A Delayed Recall Trial is administered after a 25-minute delay. Scoring is based on accuracy of the figure as well as its location on the page. A range of 0-12 per trial is possible(0-36 total). Higher scores are better.|Follow Up 1st Leg of Crossover (5 Days)|Per protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830727|NCT01232790|Primary|BACS Composite RAW Score|"The Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) is an instrument that assesses the aspects of cognition found to be most impaired and most strongly correlated with outcome in patients with schizophrenia.
The BACS composite raw score the total of the raw scores for the 6 subtests of the BACS (Verbal memory, token motor, digit sequencing, verbal fluency, symbol coding and executive functioning). The range, so we could be from 0-435. A high score total score is more favorable and indicates a higher level of cognition.
The BACS requires less than 35 min to complete in patients with schizophrenia, yields a high completion rate in these patients, and has high reliability. The BACS was found to be as sensitive to cognitive impairment in patients with schizophrenia as a standard battery of tests that required over 2 h to administer. It is the raw sum of the test items and higher scores are favorable."|Follow Up 2nd Leg of Crossover (5 Days)|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at follow up and does not include those dropped out from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830745|NCT01232829|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|Eighteen patients were evaluable for the time to disease progression endpoint.|From registration to documentation of disease progression, assessed up to 2 years|All patients meeting the eligibility criteria and who received treatment per protocol (n=18) were evaluable for the progression-free survival.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830728|NCT01232790|Primary|BACS Composite RAW Score|"The Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) is an instrument that assesses the aspects of cognition found to be most impaired and most strongly correlated with outcome in patients with schizophrenia.
The BACS composite raw score the total of the raw scores for the 6 subtests of the BACS (Verbal memory, token motor, digit sequencing, verbal fluency, symbol coding and executive functioning). The range, so we could be from 0-435. A high score total score is more favorable and indicates a higher level of cognition.
The BACS requires less than 35 min to complete in patients with schizophrenia, yields a high completion rate in these patients, and has high reliability. The BACS was found to be as sensitive to cognitive impairment in patients with schizophrenia as a standard battery of tests that required over 2 h to administer. It is the raw sum of the test items and higher scores are favorable."|Baseline 2nd Leg of Crossover|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at baseline prior to dropout from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830729|NCT01232790|Secondary|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) RAW SCORE.|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) is a measure of visuospatial memory. This task includes three trials of six geometric figures printed in a 2 x 3 array on separate pages. The respondent views the stimulus page for 10 seconds and is asked to draw as many of the figures as possible in their correct location on a page in the response booklet. A Delayed Recall Trial is administered after a 25-minute delay. Scoring is based on accuracy of the figure as well as its location on the page. A range of 0-12 per trial is possible(0-36 total). Higher scores are better.|Baseline 1st Leg of Crossover|Per protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830730|NCT01232790|Secondary|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) RAW SCORE.|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) is a measure of visuospatial memory. This task includes three trials of six geometric figures printed in a 2 x 3 array on separate pages. The respondent views the stimulus page for 10 seconds and is asked to draw as many of the figures as possible in their correct location on a page in the response booklet. A Delayed Recall Trial is administered after a 25-minute delay. Scoring is based on accuracy of the figure as well as its location on the page. A range of 0-12 per trial is possible(0-36 total). Higher scores are better.|Change from Baseline at Follow Up (Baseline - Follow Up)|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at all timepoints and does not include those that had dropped from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830731|NCT01232790|Primary|BACS Composite RAW Score|"The Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) is an instrument that assesses the aspects of cognition found to be most impaired and most strongly correlated with outcome in patients with schizophrenia.
The BACS composite raw score the total of the raw scores for the 6 subtests of the BACS (Verbal memory, token motor, digit sequencing, verbal fluency, symbol coding and executive functioning). The range, so we could be from 0-435. A high score total score is more favorable and indicates a higher level of cognition.
The BACS requires less than 35 min to complete in patients with schizophrenia, yields a high completion rate in these patients, and has high reliability. The BACS was found to be as sensitive to cognitive impairment in patients with schizophrenia as a standard battery of tests that required over 2 h to administer. It is the raw sum of the test items and higher scores are favorable."|Follow Up 1st Leg of Crossover (5 Days)|Per protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830732|NCT01232790|Secondary|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) RAW SCORE.|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) is a measure of visuospatial memory. This task includes three trials of six geometric figures printed in a 2 x 3 array on separate pages. The respondent views the stimulus page for 10 seconds and is asked to draw as many of the figures as possible in their correct location on a page in the response booklet. A Delayed Recall Trial is administered after a 25-minute delay. Scoring is based on accuracy of the figure as well as its location on the page. A range of 0-12 per trial is possible(0-36 total). Higher scores are better.|Follow Up (5 days)|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at follow up in the crossover and does not include those that had dropped from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830733|NCT01232790|Secondary|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) RAW SCORE.|Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) is a measure of visuospatial memory. This task includes three trials of six geometric figures printed in a 2 x 3 array on separate pages. The respondent views the stimulus page for 10 seconds and is asked to draw as many of the figures as possible in their correct location on a page in the response booklet. A Delayed Recall Trial is administered after a 25-minute delay. Scoring is based on accuracy of the figure as well as its location on the page. A range of 0-12 per trial is possible(0-36 total). Higher scores are better.|Baseline|All participants were analyzed that had baseline data collected (including any that did not complete the time frame).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830734|NCT01232790|Secondary|Letter/Number Sequencing Task Tests for Attention, Concentration & Mental Control (LNS) RAW SCORE.|Letter Number Sequencing (LNS) is a brief, standardized executive function task used to assess verbal working memory performance. The test involves a 24-item Experimental Condition, in which participants are read a series of letters and numbers and asked to recite both back in ascending order, with the numbers first and then the letters. Participants receive one point for each correct answer for a range of 0-24. Higher scores are better.|Follow Up 2nd Leg of Crossover (5 Days)|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at 2nd follow up in the crossover and does not include those that had dropped from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830735|NCT01232790|Secondary|Letter/Number Sequencing Task Tests for Attention, Concentration & Mental Control (LNS) RAW SCORE.|Letter Number Sequencing (LNS) is a brief, standardized executive function task used to assess verbal working memory performance. The test involves a 24-item Experimental Condition, in which participants are read a series of letters and numbers and asked to recite both back in ascending order, with the numbers first and then the letters. Participants receive one point for each correct answer for a range of 0-24. Higher scores are better.|Baseline 2nd Leg of Crossover|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at 2nd baseline in the crossover and could include those that had dropped from the study if data was collected prior to drop out.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830736|NCT01232790|Secondary|Letter/Number Sequencing Task Tests for Attention, Concentration & Mental Control (LNS) RAW SCORE.|Letter Number Sequencing (LNS) is a brief, standardized executive function task used to assess verbal working memory performance. The test involves a 24-item Experimental Condition, in which participants are read a series of letters and numbers and asked to recite both back in ascending order, with the numbers first and then the letters. Participants receive one point for each correct answer for a range of 0-24. Higher scores are better.|Follow Up 1st Leg of Crossover (5 Days)|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at follow up and does not include those that had dropped from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830737|NCT01232790|Secondary|Letter/Number Sequencing Task Tests for Attention, Concentration & Mental Control (LNS) RAW SCORE.|Letter Number Sequencing (LNS) is a brief, standardized executive function task used to assess verbal working memory performance. The test involves a 24-item Experimental Condition, in which participants are read a series of letters and numbers and asked to recite both back in ascending order, with the numbers first and then the letters. Participants receive one point for each correct answer for a range of 0-24. Higher scores are better.|Baseline 1st Leg of Crossover|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at baseline prior to dropout from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830738|NCT01232790|Secondary|Letter/Number Sequencing Task Tests for Attention, Concentration & Mental Control (LNS) RAW SCORE.|Letter Number Sequencing (LNS) is a brief, standardized executive function task used to assess verbal working memory performance. The test involves a 24-item Experimental Condition, in which participants are read a series of letters and numbers and asked to recite both back in ascending order, with the numbers first and then the letters. Participants receive one point for each correct answer for a range of 0-24. Higher scores are better.|Change from Baseline at Follow Up (5 days)|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at follow up and does not include those that had dropped from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830739|NCT01232790|Secondary|Letter/Number Sequencing Task Tests for Attention, Concentration & Mental Control (LNS) RAW SCORE.|Letter Number Sequencing (LNS) is a brief, standardized executive function task used to assess verbal working memory performance. The test involves a 24-item Experimental Condition, in which participants are read a series of letters and numbers and asked to recite both back in ascending order, with the numbers first and then the letters. Participants receive one point for each correct answer for a range of 0-24. Higher scores are better.|Follow Up (5 days)|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at follow up and does not include those that had dropped from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830740|NCT01232790|Secondary|Letter/Number Sequencing Task Tests for Attention, Concentration & Mental Control (LNS) RAW SCORE.|Letter Number Sequencing (LNS) is a brief, standardized executive function task used to assess verbal working memory performance. The test involves a 24-item Experimental Condition, in which participants are read a series of letters and numbers and asked to recite both back in ascending order, with the numbers first and then the letters. Participants receive one point for each correct answer for a range of 0-24. Higher scores are better.|Baseline|All participants were analyzed that had baseline data collected (including any that did not complete the time frame).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830741|NCT01232790|Primary|BACS Composite RAW Score|"The Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) is an instrument that assesses the aspects of cognition found to be most impaired and most strongly correlated with outcome in patients with schizophrenia.
The BACS composite raw score the total of the raw scores for the 6 subtests of the BACS (Verbal memory, token motor, digit sequencing, verbal fluency, symbol coding and executive functioning). The range, so we could be from 0-435. A high score total score is more favorable and indicates a higher level of cognition.
The BACS requires less than 35 min to complete in patients with schizophrenia, yields a high completion rate in these patients, and has high reliability. The BACS was found to be as sensitive to cognitive impairment in patients with schizophrenia as a standard battery of tests that required over 2 h to administer. It is the raw sum of the test items and higher scores are favorable."|Baseline 1st Leg of Crossover|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at baseline prior to dropout from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830742|NCT01232790|Primary|BACS Composite RAW Score|"The Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) is an instrument that assesses the aspects of cognition found to be most impaired and most strongly correlated with outcome in patients with schizophrenia.
The BACS composite raw score the total of the raw scores for the 6 subtests of the BACS (Verbal memory, token motor, digit sequencing, verbal fluency, symbol coding and executive functioning). The range, so we could be from 0-435. A high score total score is more favorable and indicates a higher level of cognition.
The BACS requires less than 35 min to complete in patients with schizophrenia, yields a high completion rate in these patients, and has high reliability. The BACS was found to be as sensitive to cognitive impairment in patients with schizophrenia as a standard battery of tests that required over 2 h to administer. It is the raw sum of the test items and higher scores are favorable."|Change from Baseline at Follow Up (5 days)|Subjects analyzed are only those with complete data at baseline and 5 day follow up in the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830743|NCT01232790|Primary|BACS Composite RAW Score|"The Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) is an instrument that assesses the aspects of cognition found to be most impaired and most strongly correlated with outcome in patients with schizophrenia.
The BACS composite raw score the total of the raw scores for the 6 subtests of the BACS (Verbal memory, token motor, digit sequencing, verbal fluency, symbol coding and executive functioning). The range, so we could be from 0-435. A high score total score is more favorable and indicates a higher level of cognition.
The BACS requires less than 35 min to complete in patients with schizophrenia, yields a high completion rate in these patients, and has high reliability. The BACS was found to be as sensitive to cognitive impairment in patients with schizophrenia as a standard battery of tests that required over 2 h to administer. It is the raw sum of the test items and higher scores are favorable."|Follow Up (5 days)|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at follow up and does not include those that had dropped from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830744|NCT01232790|Primary|BACS Composite RAW Score|"The Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) is an instrument that assesses the aspects of cognition found to be most impaired and most strongly correlated with outcome in patients with schizophrenia.
The BACS composite raw score the total of the raw scores for the 6 subtests of the BACS (Verbal memory, token motor, digit sequencing, verbal fluency, symbol coding and executive functioning). The range, so we could be from 0-435. A high score total score is more favorable and indicates a higher level of cognition.
The BACS requires less than 35 min to complete in patients with schizophrenia, yields a high completion rate in these patients, and has high reliability. The BACS was found to be as sensitive to cognitive impairment in patients with schizophrenia as a standard battery of tests that required over 2 h to administer. It is the raw sum of the test items and higher scores are favorable."|Baseline|Subjects analyzed are those with complete data at baseline prior to dropout from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832071|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Plasmin-Antiplasmin (PAP) Complex|The plasmin-antiplasmin (PAP) complex is a marker of thrombin and fibrin formation and turnover.|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830746|NCT01232829|Secondary|Survival|Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier (1958) method.|From registration to death due to any cause, assessed up to 2 years|All patients meeting the eligibility criteria and who received treatment per protocol (n=18) were evaluable for the overall survival endpoint.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830747|NCT01232829|Primary|Survival Rate|The primary endpoint of the study was 6-month survival. The proportion of successes was estimated by the number of successes divided by the total number of evaluable patients.|6 months|All patients meeting the eligibility criteria and who received treatment were considered evaluable for the primary endpoint. All patients treated per protocol (n=18) were evaluable for the 6-month survival endpoint.||participants|||Number
830750|NCT01232894|Primary|Change From Baseline on Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) Score|The Clinical Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary disease (COPD) Questionnaire (CCQ) is a self-administered questionnaire containing ten questions, divided into three domains: symptoms, mental and functional state. The questions are based on a 7-point scale where a '0' means having no limitations and a '6' means extreme or complete limitations. The final score is the mean of all ten questions. The CCQ score was recalculated according to the paper by Van der Molen et al., 2003. The statistical significance remained the same.|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full analysis Set: all patients who received at least one dose of study drug and have evaluable data for analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830751|NCT01232920|Secondary|Number of Eyes With Resolution of Macular Edema||6 months|||Eyes|Participants||Number
830752|NCT01232920|Secondary|Change in Best Spectacle-corrected Visual Acuity (BSCVA)|Change in best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) from baseline. Analysis on eye level|6 months|||LogMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
830753|NCT01232920|Secondary|Time to Control of Inflammation||6 months|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
830754|NCT01232920|Primary|Number of Participants Achieving Treatment Success|"TREATMENT SUCCESS is defined as controlled ocular inflammation in both eyes with less than or equal to 10 mg/day of prednisone and/or 2 topical steroid drops/day sustained for 2 visits separated by at least 28 days (control of inflammation and prednisone dose must be achieved by 5-month visit and sustained until 6-month visit).
Discontinuation of study medication at any time due to efficacy, tolerability, or safety may result in a declaration of TREATMENT FAILURE. Note that all patients will be classified as either a treatment success or failure."|6 months|||participants|||Number
830755|NCT01233050|Secondary|Analysis of Inappropriately Used Antibiotics||within 35 days of randomization to treatment assignment||||||
830756|NCT01233050|Secondary|Length of Hospital Stay||within 35 days of randomization to treatment assignment|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
830757|NCT01233050|Secondary|Number and Percentage of Participants With Organ Space Infection||within 35 days of randomization to treatment assignment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830758|NCT01233050|Secondary|Number and Percentage of Participants With Deep Wound Infection||within 35 days of randomization to treatment assignment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830759|NCT01233050|Secondary|Bacterial Pathogens Present in Documented Surgical Site Infection||within 35 days of randomization to treatment assignment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830760|NCT01233050|Secondary|Time to Develop Surgical Site Infection|average time from surgery to surgical site infection diagnosis|within 35 days of randomization to treatment assignment|||days||Standard Error|Mean
830761|NCT01233050|Primary|The Primary Objective Measures the Proportion of Patients With Superficial Site Infection as Defined by the CDC.|The primary objective compares the efficacy of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate / 70% isopropyl alcohol (ChloraPrep) to Iodine Povacrylex [0.7% available Iodine] / 74% Isopropyl Alcohol (DuraPrep) in the prevention of superficial surgical site infection. The primary objective will be measured by the number and percentage of patients with superficial site infection as defined by the CDC.|within 35 days of randomization to treatment assignment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830762|NCT01233076|Primary|Overall Vision Quality|Overall vision quality, as interpreted by the participant and recorded on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 1 week of wear. Overall vision quality is evaluated binocularly and rated on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|1 week of wear|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as: major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830763|NCT01238822|Primary|Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder Total Sum Score of All 18 ADHD Symptom Items|"Parent and teacher Vanderbilt ADHD Rating Scales - Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder Total sum score of all 18 ADHD symptom items - range equals 0-54
O - No ADHD symptoms 54 - Highest ADHD symptoms"|end of first week, end of second week, end of third week, end of fourth week. Total of 4 weeks.|Intent to treat with imputation for missing data.||Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
830764|NCT01238848|Primary|Hospitalization Days|hospitalization days|Participants will be followed for the duration of hospitalization, an expected average of 4 days|||days||Standard Deviation|Median
830765|NCT01238848|Secondary|Length of Oxygen Use|Length of oxygen use (days)|Participants will be followed for the duration of hospitalization, an expected average of 4 days|||days||Standard Deviation|Median
830783|NCT01238900|Secondary|Frequency and Severity of Adverse Events (Including Stent Migration)|Adverse events were defined and graded using the 2010 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy consensus criteria|up to 12 months|Stent migration was seen in 9/23 patients (5 downstream, 4 upstream). It was without clinical complications except in one case. Post-procedure pain experienced by 1 patient was effectively treated by downgrading the stent size to a smaller diameter.||participants|||Number
830766|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Fraction Exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO) at Week 52|Data was summarized by each treatment group. In addition, data was summarized together for “EOS+ and EOS- Placebo” arms and “EOS+ and EOS- benralizumab 100 mg” arms.|Baseline up to Week 52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively."||parts per billion||Standard Deviation|Mean
830767|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage of Nocturnal Awakening-Free Nights at Week 51-52|Percentage of nocturnal awakening-free nights were analyzed on a bi-weekly basis and compared to baseline scores. Data was summarized by each treatment group. In addition, data was summarized together for “EOS+ and EOS- Placebo” arms and “EOS+ and EOS- benralizumab 100 mg” arms.|Baseline up to Week 51-52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively."||percent nocturnal awakening-free nights||Standard Deviation|Mean
830768|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Week 52|The utility-based EQ-5D questionnaire comprises of two parts and provides a generic measure of health for clinical and economic appraisal. The EQ-5D VAS was measured from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). Data was summarized by each treatment group. In addition, data was summarized together for “EOS+ and EOS- Placebo” arms and “EOS+ and EOS- benralizumab 100 mg” arms.|Baseline and Week 52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830769|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Health State Evaluation at Week 52|The utility-based EQ-5D questionnaire comprises of two parts and provides a generic measure of health for clinical and economic appraisal. The health state valuation was the summary score of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression on a 3 category scale (no problem, moderate problem, severe problems). Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state. Data was summarized by each treatment group. In addition, data was summarized together for “EOS+ and EOS- Placebo” arms and “EOS+ and EOS- benralizumab 100 mg” arms.|Baseline and Week 52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830770|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (Standardized Version) (AQLQ[S]) Score at Week 52|AQLQ: a 32-item questionnaire evaluating quality of life of participants with asthma including 4 domains (symptoms, activity limitations, emotional function, and environmental stimuli). Participants were asked to recall their experiences during the previous 2 weeks and to score each of the 32 questions on a 7-point scale ranging from 7 (no impairment) to 1 (severe impairment). The overall score was calculated as the mean response to all questions. The 4 domain scores were the means of the responses to the questions in each of the domains. Overall AQLQ score and 4 domain scores ranged from 7 (no impairment) to 1 (severe impairment). The AQLQ(S) responses were categorized as improvement (defined as change from baseline >=0.5), no change (defined as change from baseline >= -0.5 to less than [<] 0.5), and worse (defined as change from baseline < -0.5). Data was summarized by each treatment group.|Baseline and Week 52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively. Data was summarized together for “EOS+ and EOS- Placebo” arms and “EOS+ and EOS- benralizumab 100 mg” arms."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830771|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) at Week 52|The PEF is a participant’s maximum speed of expiration, as measured with a peak flow meter. Peak flow testing for PEF was performed while sitting or standing prior to using any medication (if needed) for asthma. Home PEF was determined separately for morning and evening, and were averaged for each participant. Data was summarized by each treatment group. In addition, data was summarized together for “EOS+ and EOS- Placebo” arms and “EOS+ and EOS- benralizumab 100 mg” arms.|Baseline and Week 52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively."||liters per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
830772|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) at Week 52|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) was the volume of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible.|Baseline and Week 52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively."||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
830773|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) at Week 52|FEV1 was the maximal volume of air exhaled in the first second of a forced expiration from a position of full inspiration. Data was summarized by each treatment group. In addition, data was summarized together for “EOS+ and EOS- Placebo” arms and “EOS+ and EOS- benralizumab 100 mg” arms.|Baseline and Week 52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively."||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
830784|NCT01238900|Secondary|Ease of Stent Removal|The ease of stent removal was graded on a 4-point scale (with ease, mild difficulty, significant difficulty, and failed).|at time of procedure|||participants|||Number
830785|NCT01238900|Secondary|Number of Endoscopic Treatments Per Patient|The average number of ERCPs performed per patient required for resolution of benign strictures.|At time of procedure|||endoscopic treatments||Full Range|Mean
830795|NCT01238991|Primary|Number of Participants With Brain Abnormalities in Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Data|Number of participants with brain abnormalities in MRI data that are either consistent or not consistent with AD, as determined by radiologists.|Baseline up to 24 months|The population for safety analysis consisted of all enrolled participants who received at least one injection of study medication in this study. Since the study was early terminated and the data could not be obtained as planned, the MRI data were not summarized.|||||
830774|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rescue Medication Use at Week 51-52|Participants were provided inhalers of the same dose (medium- or high-dose) inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) plus long-acting beta antagonist (LABA) combination product as baseline prophylactic medication and continued with same dose throughout the study. Rescue medications such as short-term beta2 agonists were used as first-line treatment for worsening asthma symptoms. Investigator prescribed additional short term asthma controller medications included additional ICS, theophylline, inhaled cromones or antimuscarinics; if asthma symptoms remained mild but not resolved. If asthma symptoms worsened, participants received an oral corticosteroid burst. All rescue medications use with prophylactic medication (+ prophylactic) and without prophylactic medication (- prophylactic) was recorded in asthma symptom dairy by participant. Rescue medication use was analyzed on a bi-weekly basis and compared to baseline scores.|Baseline up to Week 51-52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively. Data was summarized together for “EOS+ and EOS- Placebo” arms and “EOS+ and EOS- benralizumab 100 mg” arms."||rescue medication per 2 weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
830775|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Asthma Symptom Diary Score at Week 51-52|Asthma Symptom Diary included 7 questions about the participant symptom and the overall impact of treatment on the disease during the study period. Mean scores of the 7 questions were calculated to identify asthma symptom-free days. Asthma Symptom Diary Scores were analyzed on a bi-weekly basis and compared to baseline scores. Overall symptom score=(daytime frequency score + daytime severity score + nighttime severity score)/3, where total score ranges from 0 to 9. Higher score represents worsening. Mean asthma symptom diary score were summarized together for all participants. Mean asthma symptom diary score were summarized together for all participants. In addition, data was summarized together for “EOS+ and EOS- Placebo” arms and “EOS+ and EOS- benralizumab 100 mg” arms.|Baseline up to Week 51-52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830776|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Total Nasal Symptoms Score (TNSS) at Week 52|Total Nasal Symptoms Score (TNSS) is a 3-item questionnaire, the sum of nasal symptoms, namely, nasal obstruction (rhinorrhea), nasal congestion, and nasal itching/sneezing. Each symptom was rated on a scale from 0-3, with 0 representing no symptoms, 1 mild, 2 moderate, and 3 severe symptoms. TNSS score was a summation of the 3 individual nasal symptom. TNSS score could range from 0 to 9 where higher score indicates worsening. Data was summarized by each treatment group. In addition, data was summarized together for “EOS+ and EOS- Placebo” arms and “EOS+ and EOS- benralizumab 100 mg” arms.|Baseline up to Week 52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830777|NCT01238861|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (6-items) (ACQ-6) Score at Week 52|Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) is a participant-reported questionnaire to assess the asthma control with 6 items assessing night-time waking, symptoms on waking, activity limitation, shortness of breath, wheeze, and rescue short-acting beta agonist use. Each item was rated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (no impairment) to 6 (maximum impairment). Overall ACQ score was the mean of the 6 item scores with a score range of 0 (well controlled) to 6 (extremely poor controlled). Data collected on Day 1 prior to dosing was considered as baseline. Results were reported for overall ACQ score. ACQ-6 score was summarized together for all participants.|Baseline up to Week 52|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product. Here n signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure for the specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830778|NCT01238861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADA) to Benralizumab in Eosinophilic Phenotype (EOS+) Participants|Immunogenicity assessment included determination of anti-drug (benralizumab) antibodies in serum samples. ADA positive was defined as a titer >=50 at any point in the study. It was observed at baseline and any visit during the study.|Baseline up to Week 92|The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product.||percentage of participants|||Number
830779|NCT01238861|Secondary|Dose-Normalized Minimum Observed Serum Trough Concentration for Benralizumab at Steady-State (Ctrough, ssD)||Pre-dose (0 hour), Post-dose on Day 1, 6, Week 4, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 52|The PK Population included all participants who received at least one dose of benralizumab and had at least one quantifiable PK observation. One participant, randomized to the EOS- placebo group received a single dose of 100 mg benralizumab on Week 16 and was analyzed for PK in the 100 mg benralizumab group.||microgram per milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
830780|NCT01238861|Secondary|Minimum Observed Serum Trough Concentration for Benralizumab at Steady-State (Ctrough, ss)||Pre-dose (0 hour), Post-dose on Day 1, 6, Week 4, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 52|The Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population included all participants who received at least one dose of benralizumab and had at least one quantifiable PK observation. One participant, randomized to the EOS- placebo group received a single dose of 100 mg benralizumab on Week 16 and was analyzed for PK in the 100 mg benralizumab group.||microgram per milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
830781|NCT01238861|Secondary|Dose Response in EOS+ Participants||Baseline up to Week 66|Due to change in planned analysis after unblinding of study data, dose response was not performed.|||||
830782|NCT01238861|Primary|Annual Asthma Exacerbation Rate (AER) for Eosinophilic Phenotype (EOS+) Participants|The annual asthma exacerbation rate (AER) was calculated as the total number of observed exacerbations in each group up to week 52, divided by total duration of person-year follow-up in each group. An asthma exacerbation is defined as a progressive increase of asthma symptoms (cough, wheeze, chest tightness, and/or shortness of breath) that does not resolve after the initiation of rescue medications and remains troublesome for the participant resulting in either 1) use of systemic corticosteroids or increase of a stable systemic maintenance dose for a duration of at least 3 days as prescribed or administered by the investigator or healthcare provider; or 2) participant initiation of systemic corticosteroids (tablets, suspension or injection) for a duration of at least 3 days as outlined in the Asthma Action Plan provided to the participant by the investigator on Day 1.|Week 1 up to Week 52|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population included all randomized participants who received any dose of investigational product.||AER events/person-year|||Number
830786|NCT01238900|Primary|Long-term Success Rate in Resolution of Biliary Strictures|Long-term success was defined as no clinical evidence of recurrence of the biliary stricture during the follow-up period as documented by laboratory findings or imaging and no further need for further endoscopic or surgical interventions.|at least 12 months after stent removal|Per-protocol analysis, the 18 participants available for long term success follow-up consisted of: 11 with CP, 3 with OLT, and 4 others. Intention to treat analysis of long-term success consisted of 22 overall patients, 12 CP patients, 3 OLT patients, and 7 other patients. This analysis included all patients lost to follow-up as long-term failures.||participants|||Number
830787|NCT01238900|Primary|Short Term Success Rate in the Resolution of Biliary Strictures|Short-term success was defined as resolution of the stricture as documented by rapid drainage of contrast out of the proximal biliary tree and easy passage of stone extraction balloon inflated to the size of the proximal bile duct. If the biliary stricture had resolved at the 6-month follow-up ERCP, patients were classified as short-term success. If stricture was not resolved at 6-month ERCP then a new SEMS was placed; if the stricture had resolved at the time of the second stent removal, the patient was also classified as short-term success.|6 months|Of the 23 participants that entered the study, 22 saw short-term success. The population consisted of 14 Chronic pancreatitis patients, 4 postorthotopic liver transplant patients, and 5 others.||participants|||Number
830788|NCT01238991|Other Pre-specified|The Mean Changes in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) Score From Baseline at Week 12, 26, 36, 52, 66, 78, 91 and 104.|The MMSE is a brief, structured examination of cognitive function. It has a total score of 30 points, and any score equal to or lower than 26 points indicates cognitive impairment.|Baseline up to 24 Months|The efficacy analysis population was all of the participants who received at least one injection in this study and had baseline efficacy evaluation in the preceding study and at least one efficacy evaluation post injection. Since the study was early terminated and the data could not be obtained as planned, the MMSE scores were not summarized.|||||
830789|NCT01238991|Other Pre-specified|The Mean Changes in Neuropsychological Test Battery (NTB) Score From Baseline at Week 26, 52, 78 and 104.|The NTB is a composite of nine widely used neuropsychological tests that assess immediate and delayed recall of verbal and visual information, attention, verbal fluency and executive function. The cognitive tests included in the NTB are the Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS) Visual-Paired Associates (immediate and delayed), WMS-Verbal Paired Associates (immediate and delayed), Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (immediate and delayed), WMS-Digit Span, Controlled Word Association Test, and Category Fluency Test. The NTB z-score is used for analysis. The z-score for each component is calculated through the following formula: z = (y_visit – y_base)/SD_base, where y_visit is a value at a particular time point and y_base is the average test score, and SD_base is the SD based on all participants’ observed baseline scores in the study.|Baseline up to 24 Months|The efficacy analysis population was all of the participants who received at least one injection in this study and had baseline efficacy evaluation in the preceding study and at least one efficacy evaluation post injection. Since the study was early terminated and the data could not be obtained as planned, the NTB scores were not summarized.|||||
830790|NCT01238991|Other Pre-specified|The Mean Changes in Disability Assessment for Dementia (DAD) Score From Baseline at Week 26, 52,78 and 104.|The DAD is administered through an interview with the caregiver and measures instrumental and basic activities of daily living. A total score is obtained by adding the rating for each question and converting this total score out of 100. Higher scores represent less disability in ADL while lower scores indicate more dysfunction.|Baseline up to 24 Months|The efficacy analysis population was all of the participants who received at least one injection in this study and had baseline efficacy evaluation in the preceding study and at least one efficacy evaluation post injection. Since the study was early terminated and the data could not be obtained as planned, the DAD scores were not summarized.|||||
830791|NCT01238991|Other Pre-specified|The Mean Changes in Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Behavior (ADAS-Cog) Score From Baseline at Week 26, 52, 78 and 104.|The ADAS-Cog is a 12-item,objective measure of cognitive function, consisting of 1) Word Recall, 2) Naming Objects and Fingers, 3) Following Commands, 4) Constructional Praxis, 5) Ideational Praxis, 6) Orientation, 7) Word Recognition, 8) Recall of Test Instructions, 9) Spoken Language Ability, 10) Word-Finding Difficulty, 11) Comprehension of Spoken Language and 12) Concentration/Distractibility. For this study, the ADAS-Cog total score is derived by summing the individual scores from items 1 to 11, with higher scores indicating a greater degree of impairment. The total score ranges from 0 (no impairment) to 70 (worst impairment).|Baseline up to 24 Months|The efficacy analysis population was all of the participants who received at least one injection in this study and had baseline efficacy evaluation in the preceding study and at least one efficacy evaluation post injection. Since the study was early terminated and the data could not be obtained as planned, the ADAS-Cog scores were not summarized.|||||
830792|NCT01238991|Other Pre-specified|Anti-A-beta IgM (Immunoglobulin M) Titer at Specified Visits|Geotmetric mean of anti-a-beta IgM titer from baseline of the preceding studies through the end of this study|Baseline of preceding studies to month 24 of this study (Week 210)|The immunogenicity analysis population consisted of those in the safety analysis population who had baseline immunogenicity evaluation in the preceding study and at least one immunogenicity evaluation post injection. Since the study was early terminated and the data could not be obtained as planned, the IgM data were not summarized.|||||
830793|NCT01238991|Other Pre-specified|Anti-A-beta IgG (Immunoglobulin G) Titer at Specified Visits|Geometric mean of anti-a-beta IgG titer from baseline of the preceding studies through the end of this study|Baseline of preceding studies to month 24 of this study (Week 210)|The immunogenicity analysis population consisted of those in the safety analysis population who had baseline immunogenicity evaluation in the preceding study and at least one immunogenicity evaluation post injection.||Units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830794|NCT01238991|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Neurological Examination|Number of participants with abnormalities in neurological examinations as determined by the investigators. Neurological examinations included Mental Status, Speech, Cranial Nerve Function, Cranial Nerve II, Sensory Function, Motor Function, Coordination, Gait and Station, Reflexes and Deep Tendon Reflexes.|Baseline of the preceding studies through 24 months of this study|The population for safety analysis consisted of all enrolled participants who received at least one injection of study medication in this study.||Participants|||Number
840389|NCT01328756|Primary|Change From Baseline in Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)||Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Safety population with participants evaluable for this outcome||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
830796|NCT01238991|Primary|Number of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity|Number of mild, moderate, and severe AEs (mild = does not interfere with subject's usual function; moderate = interferes to some extent with subject's usual function; severe = interferes significantly with subject's usual function)|Baseline up to 24 months|The population for safety analysis consisted of all enrolled participants who received at least one injection of study medication in this study.||Events|||Number
830797|NCT01239680|Primary|Biological Response as Characterized by Selected Cytokines, Specifically Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNFα), Interleukin One (IL-1β), and Interleukin Six (IL-6).|Biological response as characterized by selected cytokines, specifically tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), interleukin one (IL-1β), and interleukin six (IL-6). These are measured using ELISA. Baseline values are expected to be either unobtainable, or in any case less than 50 picograms/ml. If there is a significant inflammatory response, values at 24 hours should be more than 100 picograms/ml for TNFα, IL-1β, and IL-6. Our hypothesis is that there will be a difference between study and control group patients of at least 50 picograms/ml in the levels of these cytokines at 24 hours. Cytokine response is quite variable, and the percentage of outliers (with no cytokine response) in either group may be as high as 50%. .|Change from Baseline in Cytokine Levels at 24 hours|The number of participants who had an intervention and completed the study with all 3 required blood draws.|||||
830798|NCT01239732|Secondary|Biological Progression-free Interval|Biological progression-free interval is defined as the interval from the date of the first administration of any study treatment to the date of the first documented serial elevation of the ovarian cancer mucin CA-125. More precisely, this is defined as the first documented increase in CA-125 levels as follows: (1) CA-125 greater than or equal to 2 times the upper level of normal (ULN) on 2 occasions at least 1 week apart (for participants with CA-125 within normal range pre-treatment) or (2) CA-125 greater than or equal to 2 times the ULN on 2 occasions at least 1 week apart (for participants with elevated CA-125 pre-treatment and initial normalization of CA-125 on-treatment) or (3) CA-125 greater than or equal to 2 times the nadir value, which is the lowest observed CA-125 value per participant on 2 occasions at least 1 week apart (for participants with elevated CA-125 pre-treatment which never normalized).|3 days prior to Day 1 of every cycle, then every 6 weeks during the first year, every 3 months in the second and third year, every 6 months in the fourth year of the study (until data cutoff 07 December 2014, up to 4 years)|Previous studies linking CA-125 levels with bevacizumab exposure as a potential secondary outcome measure for PFS did not produce any reliable information. Therefore, it was decided that data for this outcome measure should not be analyzed, as agreed with the study steering committee.|||||
830799|NCT01239732|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from the date of the first administration of any study treatment to the date of death, regardless of the cause of death. Participants without the event of death were censored at the last date in the study, defined as the latest date of the following: the date of first administration of study treatment, date of last study treatment, date of last visit, or date last known to be alive. Kaplan-Meier estimation was used for OS.|First administration of any study treatment until death or data cutoff 07 December 2014, up to 4 years|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830800|NCT01239732|Secondary|Duration of Objective Response (DOR)|DOR was defined as the time from the first documented response (CR or PR per RECIST v1.0), to the first documented protocol-defined disease progression (i.e., radiologically by RECIST, clinical, or symptomatic) or death, whichever occurred first. Participants who had neither progressed nor died at the time of data cut-off (07 December 2014), or participants who were withdrawn from study, or lost to follow-up without documented progression, were censored. RECIST responders: Participants achieving an overall response of CR (disappearance of all target lesions and non-target lesions) or PR (>=30% decrease in sum of the LD of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum LD according to RECIST associated to non-progressive disease response for non-target lesions). Disease progression: Natural progression or deterioration of the malignancy under study (including new sites of metastasis).|Day 1, at end of Cycles 3 and 6, then every 6 cycles while receiving bevacizumab, and then at bevacizumab cessation, every 26 weeks after cessation of bevacizumab until disease progression or death until data cutoff 07 December 2014, up to 4 years|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830801|NCT01239732|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Overall Response by RECIST Version 1.0 and/or 50% CA-125 Response Criteria|Overall response was only evaluated for participants who were evaluable according to RECIST v1.0 with a measurable disease at baseline and/or according to CA-125 with a pre-treatment CA-125 within 3 days prior to start of any study treatment of at least twice the ULN. RECIST responders: Participants achieving an overall response of CR (disappearance of all target lesions and non-target lesions) or PR (>=30% decrease in sum of the LD of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum LD according to RECIST associated to non-progressive disease response for non target lesions). CA-125 responders: Participants with the value of CA-125 reduced by at least 50% and confirmed with a consecutive CA-125 assessment performed at an interval of at least 28 days.|RECIST: Day 1, at end of Cycles 3 and 6, then every 6 cycles, at bevacizumab cessation, Q26W after cessation; CA-125: 3 days before Day 1 of every cycle, then Q6W(1st year), Q3M(2nd-3rd year), Q6M(4th year); until data cutoff 07Dec2014, up to 4 years|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830802|NCT01239732|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Overall Response by 50% Carcinoma Antigen 125 (CA-125) Response Criteria|CA-125 responders: Participants with the value of CA-125 reduced by at least 50% and confirmed with a consecutive CA-125 assessment performed at an interval of at least 28 days. Overall response according to CA-125 was only evaluated for participants with a pre-treatment CA-125 within 3 days prior to start of any study treatment of at least twice the upper limit of normal (ULN).|3 days prior to Day 1 of every cycle, then every 6 weeks (Q6W) during the first year, every 3 months (Q3M) in the second and third year, every 6 months (Q6M) in the fourth year of the study (until data cutoff 07 December 2014, up to 4 years)|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830833|NCT01240200|Primary|Treatment Satisfaction|The primary outcome of the study is to determine differences in treatment satisfaction scores in elderly patients with diabetes treated with basal insulin delivered via a pen device versus a syringe.|at 24 weeks||||||
840390|NCT01328756|Primary|Change From Baseline in Pulse Rate at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)||Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Safety population with participants evaluable for this outcome||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
830803|NCT01239732|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Best Overall Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) According to RECIST Version 1.0|Best overall response (BOR) according to RECIST Version 1.0 was categorized as: CR, PR, progressive disease (PD), stable disease (SD). CR: disappearance of all target lesions and non-target lesions. PR: >=30% decrease in sum of the longest diameters (LD) of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum LD according to RECIST associated to non-progressive disease response for non-target lesions. PD: Natural progression or deterioration of the malignancy under study (including new sites of metastasis). SD: neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for partial response nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease, taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter since the treatment started. Participants with a BOR of CR and PR were defined as responders, while participants with a BOR of SD, PD, or unable to assess were defined as non-responders.|Day 1, at end of Cycles 3 and 6, then every 6 cycles while receiving bevacizumab, and then at bevacizumab cessation, every 26 weeks (Q26W) after cessation of bevacizumab until disease progression or death until data cutoff 07 December 2014, up to 4 years|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830804|NCT01239732|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time between the date of first administration of any study treatment and the date of first documented protocol-defined disease progression (that is [i.e.], radiologically by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors [RECIST], clinical, or symptomatic) or death, whichever occurred first. Participants who had neither progressed nor died at the time of data cut-off (07 December 2014), or participants who were withdrawn from study, or lost to follow-up without documented progression, were censored. Kaplan-Meier estimation was used for median time to PFS.|Day 1, at end of Cycles 3 and 6, then every 6 cycles while receiving bevacizumab, and then at bevacizumab cessation, every 26 weeks after cessation of bevacizumab until disease progression or death until data cutoff 07 December 2014, up to 4 years|Intent to treat population included all participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830805|NCT01239732|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least One Adverse Event (AE)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship.|Day 1 up to 30 days after last dose of study treatment (until data cutoff 07 December 2014, up to 4 years)|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
830806|NCT01239745|Secondary|Overall Survival|Time in months from the start of study treatment to date of death due to any cause. OS was calculated as (the death date minus the date of first dose of study medication plus 1) divided by 30.4. Death was determined from adverse event data (where outcome was death) or from follow-up contact data (where the participant current status was death).|Baseline until death (up to Month 36)|Data was not analyzed as the study was terminated due to insufficient number of participants enrolled in the study.|||||
830807|NCT01239745|Secondary|Recurrence-free Survival|Recurrence-free survival defined as the time from the initiation of study medication to the date of confirmation of any recurrence - as local or distant breast cancer recurrence; new primary breast cancer (ipsilateral or contralateral), death due to any cause.|Baseline up to Month 36|Data was not analyzed as the study was terminated due to insufficient number of participants enrolled in the study.|||||
830808|NCT01239745|Secondary|Time to Discontinuation||Baseline up to Month 36|Data was not analyzed as the study was terminated due to insufficient number of participants enrolled in the study.|||||
830809|NCT01239745|Secondary|Number of Participants With Reasons for Discontinuation From Study Medication||Baseline up to Month 36|Data was not analyzed as the study was terminated due to insufficient number of participants enrolled in the study.|||||
830810|NCT01239745|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued the Study Medication||Baseline up to Month 36|Data was not analyzed as the study was terminated due to insufficient number of participants enrolled in the study.|||||
830811|NCT01239745|Secondary|Number of Participants With Concomitant Medications|Concomitant medication (any medication other than, and in addition to, the study medication) taken for any period of time during the study and was coded by World Health Organization (WHO) medical dictionary.|Baseline up to Month 36|Safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of the study medication during the observation period.||participants|||Number
830812|NCT01239745|Secondary|Number of Participants With Concomitant Morbidities|Participants who had a concomitant morbidity during the study for any period of time; participants with more than one concomitant morbidity were counted for each of the concomitant morbidity classes applicable.|Baseline up to Month 36|Safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of the study medication during the observation period.||participants|||Number
830813|NCT01239745|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|Counts of participants who had treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), defined as newly occurring or worsening after first dose. Relatedness (to study drug) was assessed by the investigator (Yes/No). Participants with multiple occurrences of an AE within a category were counted once within the category.|Baseline up to Month 36|Safety analysis set included participants who received at least one dose of the study medication during the observation period.||participants|||Number
830814|NCT01239797|Secondary|Change in Baseline of Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) Scores|"Outcome measure reports the change from baseline of the mean score of pain severity and the change from baseline of the mean score of pain interference between the two treatments using the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF). The BPI-SF is a self administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain (the sensory dimension) as well as the degree to which pain interferes with function (the reactive dimension). The BPI-SF uses 0 (No pain, No interference) to 10 (Pain as bad as you can imagine, Highest imaginable interference) numeric rating scale."|Baseline to Study Completion (up to 7 years)||10/2019||||
830815|NCT01239797|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (OS)|Overall Survival (OS), measured in months, was based on Kaplan Meier estimates.|Randomization to 427 deaths (approximately 7 years)||10/2019||||
830834|NCT01240200|Primary|Treatment Satisfaction|The treatment satisfaction scores were obtained from the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire: Status (DTSQs). The questionnaire contains eight items scored on a seven-point scale (0-6). DTSQs scores range from, e.g, 6 = very satisfied to 0 = very dissatisfied. The total satisfaction score when using the DTSQs ranges from 0 to 36; and the total score is obtained from summed scores from questions 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. This outcome measure is assessed after the first intervention (at 12 weeks into the study).|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830816|NCT01239797|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|Objective response rate (ORR) defined as the proportion of participants with a best response on-study of partial response (PR) or better (stringent CR [sCR], complete response [CR], very good partial response [VGPR], and partial response [PR]) based on the Independent Review Committee (IRC) assessment of best response using the European Group for Blood and Bone Marrow Transplant (EBMT) assessment criteria. Participants were censored at the last adequate assessment prior to the start of any subsequent systemic-therapy or at the last adequate assessment prior to 2 missing assessments (> 10 weeks). Participants who died more than 10 weeks after the randomization date and had no on-treatment assessment were censored at the randomization date. Clinical deterioration was not considered progression. Assessments were made every 4 weeks.|Randomization to end of treatment (approximately 2 years)|All participants randomized to any treatment group||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830817|NCT01239797|Primary|Median Progression Free Survival (PFS)|Primary definition of Progression-free survival (PFS) defined as the time from randomization to the date of first documented tumor progression or death due to any cause. Participants were censored at the last adequate assessment prior to the start of any subsequent systemic-therapy or at the last adequate assessment prior to 2 missing assessments (> 10 weeks). Participants who died more than 10 weeks after the randomization date and had no on-treatment assessment were censored at the randomization date. Clinical deterioration was not considered progression. The primary analysis of PFS was based on the primary definition using the Independent Review Committee (IRC) tumor assessment using the European Group for Blood and Bone Marrow Transplant (EBMT) criteria. Tumor assessments were made every 4 weeks (±1 week) relative to the first dose of study medication.|Randomization until 326 events (approximately 2 years)|All participants randomized to any treatment group||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830818|NCT01239992|Other Pre-specified|LDL-cholesterol|Percent change of LDL-cholesterol at 12 weeks compared to baseline|baseline and 12 weeks after treatment|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
830819|NCT01239992|Secondary|Fasting Triglycerides|Percent change of fasting triglycerides at 12 weeks compared to baseline|baseline and 12 weeks after treatment|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
830820|NCT01239992|Secondary|HDL Cholesterol|Percent change of HDL-cholesterol at 12 weeks compared to baseline.|baseline and 12 weeks after treatment|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
830821|NCT01239992|Primary|Incremental Area Under the Plasma Triglyceride Curve Over 8 Hours Following a Standardized Oral Fat Tolerance Test|Percent change of incremental AUC at 12 weeks compared to baseline.|baseline and 12 weeks after treatment|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
830822|NCT01240122|Secondary|Overall Ocular Comfort|All subjects were asked to rate their lens comfort at each visit based on an 11 point scale where 0 meant that the lens could not be tolerated and 10 indicated that the lens could not be felt.|Day 4|All subjects who completed the study were included in the analysis per protocol.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830823|NCT01240122|Secondary|Subjective Solution Preference|Subject asked which solution they prefer based on comfort level.|Day 4||||||
830824|NCT01240122|Primary|Corneal Staining by Wear Time|All participants were contact lenses wearers and were evaluated with a Corneal Staining at 1 hour, 2 hours, 4 hours and end of day. The corneal staining test is performed using fluorescein drops in the eye and ultraviolet illumination to determine if there has been any damage to the cornea from the use of the lens solutions or from the use of the contact lens.|1 hour on Day 1, 2 hours on Day 2, 4 hours on Day 3 and End of Day on Day 4|Corneal Staining Severity at Scheduled Visits (Safety Population)||participants|||Number
830825|NCT01240135|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline for Circumlimbal Conjunctival Staining Sum Score|The bulbar conjunctiva was assessed by the investigator at baseline and Day 14 utilizing a slit-lamp and ophthalmic dye. Staining coverage was scored separately in each of four regions (nasal, temporal, inferior, and superior) using a 5-point photographic reference scale, where 0=0.00% coverage and 4=10% or greater coverage. The scores for the four regions were summed, with a sum score range of 0-16.|Day 14 of lens wear|Intent to treat: All randomized subjects with at least one post-baseline assessment after dispensing, according to randomized treatment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830826|NCT01240135|Primary|Lens Fit|As assessed by the investigator using a composite score based on three lens fit measures: static, push-up, and centration. Static and pushup were assessed on a 5-point scale, where -2=reduced movement unacceptable, -1=reduced movement acceptable, 0=optimal movement, 1=excessive movement acceptable, 2=excessive movement unacceptable. Centration was assessed on a 3-point scale, where 0=optimal lens centration, 1=acceptable decentration, 2=unacceptable decentration. A subject with an assessment of optimal or acceptable for each measure was considered acceptable on all measurements.|Day 14 of lens wear|Intent to treat: All randomized subjects with at least one post-baseline assessment after dispensing, according to randomized treatment.||percentage of acceptable fit|||Number
830827|NCT01240200|Secondary|Blood Glucose (Low Blood Glucose)|"Secondary outcomes include differences between treatment regimens in any of the following measures:
Number of episodes of nocturnal hypoglycemia, any hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia
Accuracy of insulin dosing at weeks 0,12 and 24"|at 24 weeks||||||
830828|NCT01240200|Secondary|Blood Glucose (Low Blood Glucose)|"Secondary outcomes include differences between treatment regimens in any of the following measures:
Number of episodes of nocturnal hypoglycemia, any hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia
Accuracy of insulin dosing at weeks 0,12 and 24"|at 24 weeks||||||
830829|NCT01240200|Secondary|Blood Glucose (Low Blood Glucose)|"Secondary outcomes include differences between treatment regimens in any of the following measures:
Number of episodes of nocturnal hypoglycemia, any hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia
Accuracy of insulin dosing at weeks 0,12 and 24"|at 12 weeks||||||
830830|NCT01240200|Secondary|Blood Glucose Control|Percent of subjects with A1c <7.0% without hypoglycemia, A1c and mean fasting blood glucose at the end of each 12 week treatment period and percent with mean fasting glucose <130 mg/dL without hypoglycemia|at 12 weeks||||||
830831|NCT01240200|Secondary|Blood Glucose Control|"Secondary outcomes include differences between treatment regimens in any of the following measures:
Number of episodes of nocturnal hypoglycemia, any hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia
Accuracy of insulin dosing at weeks 0,12 and 24"|at 0 weeks||||||
830832|NCT01240200|Secondary|Blood Glucose Control|"Secondary outcomes include differences between treatment regimens in any of the following measures:
Percent of subjects with A1c <7.0% without hypoglycemia, A1c and mean fasting blood glucose at the end of each 12 week treatment period and percent with mean fasting glucose <130 mg/dL without hypoglycemia"|at 0 weeks||||||
830838|NCT01240330|Primary|Change in Femoral Venous Peak Flow Velocity Compared to Resting Baseline|The femoral vein in the mid-thigh area was located and the femoral venous Peak Flow Velocity (PFV)was measured using duplex ultrasound during the compression phase of treatment. PFV is the maximum velocity of blood flow achieved when the foot and calf compression is applied. The PFV was then compared to the subject's own baseline PFV using a paired t-test.|3 measurements/10 min. therapy|||cm/s||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
830839|NCT01240356|Primary|Number of Participants in Phase I Group With Neurological Deterioration as Measured by Neurological Examination|The neurological examinations comprised assessments of mental status and orientation, cranial nerve examination, muscle strength and tone, deep tendon reflexes, sensory testing, coordination, and gait.|2-3 hours after treatment|||participants|||Number
830840|NCT01240356|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Phase II Group With Excellent Outcome as Measured by Modified Rankin Scale (mRS)|A modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0 or 1 indicates an excellent outcome. The mRS is a commonly used scale for measuring the degree of disability or dependence in the daily activities of people who have suffered a stroke or other causes of neurological disability. The mRS scale ranks patients from 0 to 6 (0 is the best score, 6 is the worst score).|at 3-months from enrollment|ITT with modified Ranking scores (mSR) at 90 days. % displayed is % with excellent outcome (mRS of 0-1).||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830841|NCT01240356|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Phase II Group With Neurological Worsening as Determined by the NIH Stroke Scale|The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, or NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) is a tool used by healthcare providers to objectively quantify the impairment caused by a stroke. Each item on the NIHSS scores a specific ability between a 0 and 4. For each item, a score of 0 typically indicates normal function in that specific ability, while a higher score is indicative of some level of impairment. The individual scores from each item are summed in order to calculate a patient's total NIHSS score. The maximum possible score is 42, with the minimum score being a 0.|within 90 days of enrollment|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830842|NCT01240356|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in the Phase II Group That Show Arterial Recanalization as Measured Using Standard Transcranial Doppler Ultrasound Systems|Ischemic stroke patients: 2-hour rates of arterial complete and partial recanalization as measured using standard Transcranial Doppler Ultrasound systems.|2-3 hours after treatment|ITT - Percent of patients who had complete recanalization after treatment.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830843|NCT01240356|Secondary|Number of Participants in Phase I Group With Adverse Events During and After Study Treatment With HF TCD|Phase I - A group of healthy volunteers will be assessed to determine the feasibility and activity of hands-free (HF) transcranial Doppler (TCD). Adverse events include subject complaints regarding discomfort of the device and dermatological adverse events as evidenced by a detailed physical examination of skin integrity post-insonation.|2-3 hours after treatment|ITT||participants|||Number
830844|NCT01240356|Primary|Safety in Phase II Group as Measured by Incidence of Symptomatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage|Phase II: Determine if the Hands-Free TCD will not result in higher than 10% rate of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) within 24 hours (defined as clinical worsening > 4 NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) points and presence of hemorrhage on CT scan that in the opinion of the treating physician is causatively related to ICH on CT) in 0-3 hours acute stroke patients treated with intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator (IV-t-PA).|within 24 hours|Intention to Treat (ITT)||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830845|NCT01240356|Primary|Number of Participants in Phase I Group With Blood-brain-barrier Disruption (BBB) as Measured by MRI of the Brain|Phase I : Imaging of the brain via MRI scans was performed to determine if the Hands-Free transcranial Doppler (TCD) system results in any BBB-disruption or deterioration in permeability.|2-3 hours after treatment|||participants|||Number
830846|NCT01240382|Primary|Mean Change in Rose Bengal Staining Score From Baseline|"Rose bengal staining were scored according to the protocol by Shimmura et al. The ocular surface was divided into 5 zones: nasal and temporal conjunctival, and upper, middle, and lower corneal areas. A staining score between 0 and 3 points was used in each zone, with the minimum and maximum total staining scores ranging between 0 and 15 points.0 is better.
The degree of staining with Rose bengal dyes was scored as follows: 0 = no staining, 1= staining of less than half of the area, 2= staining of more than half of the area, 3= staining in the whole area."|Baseline and 4-week (discontinued (LOCF))|Efficacy analysis was performed full analysis set (FAS). In 0.1% sodium hyaluronate ophthalmic solution group, 2 subjects were excluded from analysis because there was no available efficacy data in rose bengal staining.||points||Standard Deviation|Mean
830847|NCT01240382|Primary|Mean Change in Fluorescein Staining Score From Baseline|"Fluorescein staining was scored according to the protocol by Shimmura et al. The cornea was divided into 3 equal zones: upper, middle, and lower. Each zone had a staining score ranging between 0 and 3 points, with minimum and maximum total staining scores ranging between 0 and 9 points. 0 is better.
The degree of staining with Fluorescein dyes was scored as follows: 0 = no staining, 1= staining of less than half of the area, 2= staining of more than half of the area, 3= staining in the whole area."|Baseline and 4-week (discontinued (LOCF))|Efficacy analysis was performed full analysis set (FAS). In 0.1% sodium hyaluronate ophthalmic solution group, 1 subject was excluded from analysis because there was no available efficacy data in fluorescein staining.||points||Standard Deviation|Mean
830848|NCT01240551|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For the detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|52.5 months|||participants|||Number
830849|NCT01240551|Primary|Number of Participants With Present or Not Present Bone Metastasis|Present and not present bone metastasis was determined by sodium fluoride (NaF) PET (positron emission imaging)/CT (computed tomography) imaging. Present bone metastasis is defined as greater than normal bone uptake. Not present bone metastasis is defined as physiological bone uptake of F-18 NaF on PET/CT imaging (i.e. excluding traumatic and degenerative foci of increased F-18 NaF uptake.|Single imaging sessions will be acquired at baseline, between 4-6 months and between 10-12 months on emolument.|Patient with known prostate cancer. One group with known metastatic bone disease, based on prior clinical imaging scan (Tc-99m bone scan or NaF-18 bone scan or CT, and a second group with clinical risk factors for obtaining bony metastatic disease (i.e. pelvic soft tissue mets, high PSA (prostate specific antigen) blood levels).||participants|||Number
830850|NCT01240590|Secondary|Tumor Growth Rate Constant|Difference in time (days) required for the treated tumors to reach a predetermined target size.|21 days|This outcome measure was not analyzed because few if any re-assessments were done, thus there was not enough data to assess the growth rate constant on the patients.|||||
830851|NCT01240590|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Underwent Medically-Necessary Interventions|Enrolled participants who had surgical procedures deemed medically necessary for their clinical care.|4.5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
830852|NCT01240590|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious and Non-Serious Adverse Events (Phase I & II)|Here is the number of participants with serious and non-serious adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|4 years, 6 months and 26 days|||participants|||Number
830853|NCT01240590|Primary|Progression Free Survival (Phase II)|Progression free survival (PFS) is defined as the duration of time from start of study treatment to time of progression. Response is determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and is defined as: Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD. Progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions; and stable disease (SD) is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started.|6 weeks|The outcome was not met because the patients died and were not scanned before their death.|||||
830854|NCT01240590|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Crolibulin (Phase I)|MTD is defined as the dose level immediately preceding the dose level at which 2 dose limiting toxicities (DLT) occurred. A DLT is defined as a hematologic or non-hematologic adverse event judged to be possibly, probably, or definitely related to cisplatin per the Common Terminology Criteria in Adverse Events (CTCAE).|3 weeks|||mg/m^2|||Number
830855|NCT01240590|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Cisplatin (Phase I)|MTD is defined as the dose level immediately preceding the dose level at which 2 dose limiting toxicities (DLT) occurred. A DLT is defined as a hematologic or non-hematologic adverse event judged to be possibly, probably, or definitely related to cisplatin per the Common Terminology Criteria in Adverse Events (CTCAE).|3 weeks|||mg/m^2|||Number
830856|NCT01240746|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Aged 3 Years to <9 Years Reporting Solicited Injection Site and Systemic Reactions Following Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines|Solicited injection site reactions: Pain, Redness, and Swelling. Solicited systemic reactions: Fever (Temperature); Headache, Malaise and Myalgia Grade 3 Pain: incapacitating, unable to perform usual activities; Redness and Swelling: ≥ 50 mm; Fever: ≥ 102.1°F; Headache, Malaise and Myalgia: Significant, prevents daily activity, respectively.|Day 0 up to Day 7 post-vaccination|Safety profile were assessed in all randomized and vaccinated participants, safety population. Values presented for participants aged 3 years to <9 years with available data for the relevant endpoint.||Participants|||Number
830857|NCT01240746|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Aged 6 Months to <36 Months Reporting Solicited Injection Site and Systemic Reactions Following Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines.|"Solicited injection site reactions (Age 6-23 Months): Tenderness, Erythema and Swelling. Solicited systemic reactions: Fever (Temperature), Vomiting, Abnormal crying, Drowsiness, Loss of appetite, and Irritability.
Grade 3: Tenderness: cries when injected limb is moved; Erythema and Swelling ≥ 50 mm; Fever: >103.1°F; Vomiting: ≥6 episodes/24 hours; Abnormal crying: >3 hours; Drowsiness: Sleeping most of the time; Loss of appetite: refuses ≥3 feeds/meals or most feeds/meals; Irritability: inconsolable.
Solicited Injection site reactions (Age 24 Months to < 36 months): Pain, Erythema, and Swelling. Systemic reactions: Fever (Temperature), Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia.
Grade 3: Pain: Incapacitating, unable to perform usual activities; Redness and Swelling: ≥ 50 mm; Fever: ≥102.1°F; Headache, Malaise and Myalgia: Significant, prevents daily activity."|Day 0 up to Day 7 post-vaccination|Safety profile were assessed in all randomized and vaccinated participants, safety population. Values presented for participants aged 6 months to <36 months with available data for the relevant endpoint.||Participants|||Number
830858|NCT01240746|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers Against Influenza Vaccine Antigens After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in Participants Aged 3 Years to Less Than 9 Years.|Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.|Day 28 post-vaccination|Geometric mean titers to influenza vaccine antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants aged 3 years to less than 9 Years with valid serology results for the particular antigen.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830859|NCT01240746|Other Pre-specified|Seroprotection Against Influenza Vaccine Antigens After Vaccination With Two Doses of Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in All Participants|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroprotection was defined as a pre-vaccination and post-vaccination titer ≥ 40 (l/dil)."|Day 28 post final vaccination|Seroprotection against influenza vaccine antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants with valid serology results for the particular antigen.||Participants|||Number
830860|NCT01240746|Other Pre-specified|Seroprotection Against Influenza Vaccine Antigens After Vaccination With One Dose of Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in All Participants|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroprotection was defined as a pre-vaccination and post-vaccination titer ≥ 40 (l/dil)."|Day 28 post-vaccination|Seroprotection against influenza vaccine antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants with valid serology results for the particular antigen.||Participants|||Number
830861|NCT01240746|Other Pre-specified|Seroprotection Against Influenza Vaccine Antigens After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in Participants Aged 3 Years to Less Than 9 Years.|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroprotection was defined as a pre-vaccination and post-vaccination titer ≥ 40 (l/dil)."|Day 28 post-vaccination|Seroprotection against influenza vaccine antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants aged 3 years to less than 9 years with valid serology results for the particular antigen.||Participants|||Number
830862|NCT01240746|Other Pre-specified|Seroprotection Against Influenza Vaccine Antigens After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in Participants Aged 6 Months to Less Than 36 Months.|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroprotection was defined as a pre-vaccination and post-vaccination titer ≥ 40 (l/dil)."|Day 28 post final vaccination|Seroprotection against influenza vaccine antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants aged 6 months to less than 36 months with valid serology results for the particular antigen.||Participants|||Number
830863|NCT01240746|Other Pre-specified|Seroconversion Against Influenza B Strains After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines Without Corresponding B Strain in All Participants.|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroconversion was defined as either a pre vaccination HAI titer <1:10 and a post vaccination titer ≥1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and a four-fold increase in post-vaccination."|Day 28 post final vaccination|Seroconversion with respect to influenza vaccine B antigens (cross-reactive antibody) was determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants with valid serology results for the B antigens.||Participants|||Number
830864|NCT01240746|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers Against Influenza Vaccine Antigens After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in Participants Aged 6 Months to Less Than 36 Months.|Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.|Day 28 post final vaccination|Geometric mean titers to influenza vaccine antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants aged 6 months to less than 36 months with valid serology results for the particular antigen.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830865|NCT01240746|Other Pre-specified|Seroconversion Against Influenza Vaccine Antigens After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in All Participants|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroconversion was defined as either a pre vaccination HAI titer <1:10 and a post vaccination titer ≥1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and a four-fold increase in post-vaccination."|Day 28 post final vaccination|Seroconversion with respect to vaccine antigens (cross-reactive antibody) were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants with valid serology results for the particular antigen.||Participants|||Number
830866|NCT01240746|Other Pre-specified|Seroprotection Against Influenza Vaccine Antigens After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in All Participants|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroprotection was defined as a pre-vaccination and post-vaccination titer ≥ 40 (l/dil)"|Day 28 post final vaccination|Seroprotection against influenza vaccine antigens was determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants with valid serology results for the particular antigen.||Participants|||Number
830867|NCT01240746|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers Against Influenza B Strains After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines Without Corresponding B Strain in All Participants|Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.|Day 28 post final vaccination|Geometric mean titers to influenza vaccine B antigens (cross-reactive antibody) were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants with valid serology results for the B antigen.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830868|NCT01240746|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers Against Influenza B Strains After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines With Corresponding B Strain in All Participants|Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.|Day 28 post final vaccination|Geometric mean titers to influenza vaccine B antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. Data presented for participants with valid serology results for the B antigen.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830869|NCT01240746|Other Pre-specified|Seroconversion Against Influenza B Strains After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines With Corresponding B Strain in All Participants|"Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by HAI assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.
Seroconversion was defined as either a pre-vaccination HAI titer <1:10 and a post-vaccination titer ≥1:40 or a pre-vaccination titer ≥1:10 and ≥four-fold increase in post-vaccination"|Day 28 post final vaccination|Seroconversion with respect to influenza vaccine B antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population||Participants|||Number
830870|NCT01240746|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers Against Influenza A Strains After Vaccination With Fluzone® Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine or Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in All Participants|Immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in serum samples by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay. The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was set at the lowest dilution used in the assay, 1/10. Titers below this level were reported as <10.|Day 28 post final vaccination|Geometric mean titers (GMT) to influenza vaccine A antigens were determined in randomized and vaccinated participants, per-protocol population. The GMT data for antigen A/Victoria/210/2009 and A/California/07/2009 were pooled for participants vaccinated with either 2010-2011 TIV or the investigational TIV. Data presented in column for Group 1.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
830871|NCT01240785|Secondary|Child Outcome at 2 Years Per Arm|neuropsychological and motor skills testing|2 years after birth||||||
830872|NCT01240785|Secondary|Neonate Transfer to Intensive Care Unit Per Arm||0-5 days after delivery|||participants|||Number
830873|NCT01240785|Secondary|Apgar Score at 5 Min After Delivery Per Arm|Apgar score 0-10. 0-2 points from heart rate; 0-2 points for respiratory effort; 0-2 points for skin colour; 0-2 points for muscle tone; 0-2 points for reflex response. For all items the higher the value, the better the outcome|5 minutes after delivery|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830874|NCT01240785|Secondary|Neonatal Hyperbilirubinemia Per Arm||0-3 days after delivery|||participants|||Number
830875|NCT01240785|Secondary|Neonatal Hypoglycemia Per Arm||0-24 h after delivery|||participants|||Number
830876|NCT01240785|Secondary|Shoulder Dystocia Per Arm||delivery|||participants|||Number
830877|NCT01240785|Secondary|Induction of Delivery Per Arm||delivery|||participants|||Number
830878|NCT01240785|Secondary|Gestational Weeks at Delivery Per Arm||delivery|||weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
830879|NCT01240785|Secondary|Mode of Delivery Per Arm||delivery|||no of cesarean section|||Number
830880|NCT01240785|Secondary|Pre-eclampsia Per Arm||up to on the average 40 weeks of gestation|||participants|||Number
830881|NCT01240785|Secondary|Maternal Weight Gain Per Arm||up to on the average 40 weeks of gestation|||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
830882|NCT01240785|Secondary|Pregnancy Induced Hypertension Per Arm|Participants with pregnancy induced hypertension defined as blood pressure over 140/90 mmHg or increase in systolic blood pressure > 30 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure > 15 mmHg|up to on the average 40 weeks of gestation|||participants|||Number
830883|NCT01240785|Primary|Birth Weight Per Arm|birth weight adjusted for gestational weeks expressed as standard deviation units using data from Finnish fetal growth charts in normal pregnancies|delivery|||g||Standard Deviation|Mean
830884|NCT01240811|Secondary|Vaginal and Endometrial Flora|Changes in vaginal and endometrial flora as assessed by qualitative and quantitative culture|2 Months||||||
830885|NCT01240811|Primary|%CD4 Expressing CCR5 HIV Co-receptor in the Cervix and Endometrium|Change in CCR5 expression on T-lymphocytes 2 months after insertion of IUD (either hormonal LNG-IUD or non-hormonal Cu-IUD) in cervix and endometrium as measured by flow cytomety|2 months|All 40 participants who completed the study were included in the analysis. There were no lost-to-follow up participants. One participant withdrew and one participant was excluded post-enrollment. Both of these participants were replaced to fill our goal enrollment of 40 participants in the study.||% of T-cells expressing CCR5||Standard Deviation|Mean
830886|NCT01240863|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Double-Blind Treatment Phase in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters|A 12-lead ECG was conducted at baseline and the last visit during the double-blind treatment period (week 12, or early termination).|Baseline (end of Open-Label Titration Period), Endpoint (last visit up to Week 12) of the Double-blind treatment period|FAS of participants contributing baseline and endpoint data.||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
830887|NCT01240863|Secondary|Current Opioid Misuse Measures (COMM) Total Scores During Both the Open-Label Titration and Double-Blind Treatment Periods|"The COMM was a clinician rated scale developed as a brief self report measure of current aberrant drug-related behavior for patients with chronic pain who were already on long term opioid therapy. A total score was calculated as the sum of the 17 questions. The total score ranged from 0 to 68. A score of 0 indicates no aberrant drug-related behaviors were seen. Patients with a total score of 9 or greater were classified as exhibiting aberrant drug-related behavior.
The COMM was to be performed at visits 2 and 7 (beginning and end of Open-label Titration period) and weeks 1, 4, 8, and 12 (Double-blind Treatment period) or early termination."|Baseline for Open-Label Titration period, Baseline for Double-Blind Treatment period (which is also the end of the Open-Label Titration period), Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, and Endpoint (last visit up to Week 12) of the Double-blind Treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830888|NCT01240863|Secondary|Addiction Behavior Checklist (ABC) Total Scores During Both the Open-Label Titration and Double-Blind Treatment Periods|"The ABC was a clinician rated scale that consisted of a brief (20 item) questionnaire designed to track behaviors characteristic of addiction related to prescription opioid medications in chronic pain populations. Items were focused on observable behaviors noted both during and between clinic visits. Each affirmative response was counted as one point, and points were added to calculate the total score, consequently resulting in scores ranging from 0 to 20 (0=no addiction-related behaviors seen and higher scores indicating an increasing number of addition-related behaviors seen).
The ABC was to be performed at visits 2 and 7 (beginning and end of Open-label Titration period) and weeks 1, 4, 8, and 12 (Double-blind Treatment period) or early termination."|Baseline for Open-Label Titration period, Baseline for Double-Blind Treatment period (which is also the end of the Open-Label Titration period), Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, and Endpoint (last visit up to Week 12) of the Double-blind Treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831184|NCT01244490|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) - LOCF|CGI-S assesses the severity of the subject's condition on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill). Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. Not all subjects in the FAS population had data for this outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
830889|NCT01240863|Secondary|Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scales (COWS) Scores During the Double-Blind Treatment Period|"The COWS was a clinician rated scale used to measure a participant’s signs and symptoms of withdrawal from opiates, with ratings based only on apparent relationship to withdrawal. The COWS was performed at day 0 and weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 (double blind treatment period) or early termination. The scale contained 11 signs/symptoms whose intensity the clinician rated on a scale of 0 to 4 or 5.
A total score was calculated as the sum of the responses to the 11 signs/symptoms for a total range of 0-48. Withdrawal severity was classified, based on the total score, as follows:
0 to 4=normal
5 to 12=mild
13 to 24=moderate
25 to 36=moderately severe
>36=severe"|Baseline (end of Open-Label Titration Period), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and Endpoint (last visit up to Week 12) of the Double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830890|NCT01240863|Secondary|Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scales (SOWS) Scores During the Double-Blind Treatment Period|The results of the SOWS were collected in the e-diary daily during the first 4 weeks of the double blind treatment period and then during clinic visits at weeks 8 and 12 or early termination. The SOWS was a self administered questionnaire used to measure a participant’s signs and symptoms of withdrawal from opiates. The scale contained 16 symptoms (eg, my nose is running; I feel restless), the participant rated the intensity on a scale of 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely) for a total score of 0-64. The daily total score for the first 4 weeks was the largest score observed during the time period preceding that visit. For example, the week 1 score for each participant was the largest total score on any day between baseline and the night before the week 1 visit; the week 4 score for each participant was the largest score observed between the week 2 visit and the night before the week 4 visit.|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and Endpoint (last visit up to Week 12) of the Double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830891|NCT01240863|Secondary|Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Abnormal Laboratory Values During the Double-Blind Treatment Period|"Data represents participants with potentially clinically significant abnormal serum chemistry, hematology and urinalysis values.
Significance criteria:
Blood urea nitrogen: >=10.71 mmol/L
Uric acid: M>=625, F>=506 μmol/L
Hemoglobin: M<=115, F<=95 g/dL
Hematocrit: M<0.37, F<0.32 %
Urinalysis: blood (hemoglobin) and total protein: >=2 unit increase from baseline"|Day 1 up to Day 128 in Double-Blind Treatment period|Full analysis set including participants with laboratory assessments||Participants|||Count of Participants
830892|NCT01240863|Secondary|Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Abnormal Vital Signs Values During the Double-Blind Treatment Period|"Data represents participants with potentially clinically significant (PCS) vital sign values.
Significance criteria
Pulse - high: >=120 and increase of >= 15 beats/minute from baseline
Pulse - low: <=50 and decrease of >=15 beats/minute
Systolic blood pressure - high: >=180 and increase >=20 mmHg
Systolic blood pressure - low: <=90 and decrease >=20 mmHg
Diastolic blood pressure - high: >=105 and increase of >=15 mmHg
Diastolic blood pressure - low: <=50 and decrease of >=15 mmHg"|Day 1 up to Day 128 in Double-Blind Treatment period|FAS||Participants|||Count of Participants
830893|NCT01240863|Secondary|Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) was defined in the protocol as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Severity was rated by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate and severe, with severe= an inability to carry out usual activities. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator. Serious AEs include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, OR an important medical event that jeopardized the patient and required medical intervention to prevent the previously listed serious outcomes.|Day 1 up to Day 52 in Open-Label Titration; Day 1 up to Day 128 in Double-Blind Treatment period|Safety analysis set (Open-Label Titration) and FAS (Double-Blind Treatment)||Participants|||Count of Participants
830894|NCT01240863|Secondary|Brief Pain Inventory – Short Form (BPI-SF) Pain Interference Mean Score During the Double-Blind Treatment Period|For pain interference, the BPI-SF used numerical scales to measure how much pain had interfered with 7 daily activities, including general activity, walking, work, mood, enjoyment of life, relations with others, and sleep in the past 24 hours. The scale used an 11 point Likert scale; range: 0 [does not interfere] to 10 [completely interferes]. BPI pain interference was typically scored as the mean of the 7 interference items. This mean could be used if at least 4 of 7 items had been completed on a given administration.|Baseline (end of Open-Label Titration Period), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and Endpoint (last visit up to week 12) of the Double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830895|NCT01240863|Secondary|Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical and Mental Component Summary Scores at Baseline, Week 12 and Endpoint|SF-36 is a generic 36-item questionnaire measuring health-related quality of life (HRQL) covering 2 summary measures: physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). The SF-36 consists of 8 subscales. The PCS is represented by 4 subscales: physical function, role limitations due to physical problems, pain, and general health perception. The MCS is represented by 4 subscales: vitality, social function, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health. Participants self-report on items in a subscale that have between 2-6 choices per item using Likert-type responses (e.g. none of the time, some of the time, etc.). PCS and MCS scores are constructed as a T-score with a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 and no minimum or maximum score; higher scores indicate better health status.|Baseline (end of Open-Label Titration Period), Week 12 and Endpoint (last visit up to week 12) of the Double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830935|NCT01240915|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Mayo Scores at Week 8|Mayo Score is an instrument designed to measure disease activity of ulcerative colitis, with total score ranging from 0 to 12. It consists of 4 subscores (stool frequency, rectal bleeding, findings of flexible proctosigmoidoscopy, and physician global assessment [PGA]), each graded from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease.|Baseline, Week 8|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830896|NCT01240863|Secondary|Clinician Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) of Illness Scores During the Double-blind Treatment Period|"The CGI-S is a clinician-rated scale that assesses the severity of the patient’s pain condition and response to the treatment. Severity of illness, as related to moderate to severe pain, consists of the following 7 categories:
1 normal–shows no sign of illness,
2 borderline ill,
3 mildly (slightly) ill,
4 moderately ill,
5 markedly ill,
6 severely ill, and
7 among the most extremely ill (Guy 1976).
The clinician assesses the severity of the patient’s condition, based on the clinician’s total clinical experience with patients with this condition, in response to treatment.
Endpoint values are the last observed postbaseline data."|Baseline (end of Open-Label Titration Period), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 of the Double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830897|NCT01240863|Secondary|Patient Assessment of Function (PAF) at Endpoint|"The PAF is a self-administered questionnaire used to measure patients’ assessment of their own ability to function in normal activities. Answers to the 7 questions were rated on a 7 point scale in which 1 was very much worsened and 7 were very much improved since the start of the study.
The seven functional areas are:
ability to go to work
ability to perform at work (includes both work outside the home and housework)
ability to walk
ability to exercise
ability to participate in social events
ability to have sex
ability to enjoy life
Endpoint values are the last observed postbaseline data."|Endpoint of the Double-blind Treatment Period (up to week 12)|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830898|NCT01240863|Secondary|Patient Assessment of Function (PAF) at Week 12|"The PAF is a self-administered questionnaire used to measure patients’ assessment of their own ability to function in normal activities. Answers to the 7 questions were rated on a 7 point scale in which 1 was very much worsened and 7 were very much improved since the start of the study.
The seven functional areas are:
ability to go to work
ability to perform at work (includes both work outside the home and housework)
ability to walk
ability to exercise
ability to participate in social events
ability to have sex
ability to enjoy life"|Week 12 of the Double-blind Treatment Period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830899|NCT01240863|Secondary|Patient Assessment of Function (PAF) at Week 8|"The PAF is a self-administered questionnaire used to measure patients’ assessment of their own ability to function in normal activities. Answers to the 7 questions were rated on a 7 point scale in which 1 was very much worsened and 7 were very much improved since the start of the study.
The seven functional areas are:
ability to go to work
ability to perform at work (includes both work outside the home and housework)
ability to walk
ability to exercise
ability to participate in social events
ability to have sex
ability to enjoy life"|Week 8 of the Double-blind Treatment Period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830900|NCT01240863|Secondary|Patient Assessment of Function (PAF) at Week 4|"The PAF is a self-administered questionnaire used to measure patients’ assessment of their own ability to function in normal activities. Answers to the 7 questions were rated on a 7 point scale in which 1 was very much worsened and 7 were very much improved since the start of the study.
The seven functional areas are:
ability to go to work
ability to perform at work (includes both work outside the home and housework)
ability to walk
ability to exercise
ability to participate in social events
ability to have sex
ability to enjoy life"|Week 4 of the Double-blind Treatment Period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830901|NCT01240863|Secondary|Clinician Assessment of Patient Function (CAPF) at Endpoint|"Clinicians assessed participants across 5 dimensions:
Patients general activities
Patients walking ability
Patients ability to work/perform activities of daily living
Patients relationships with others
Patients enjoyment of life
Assessments are rated on a 7-point scale, in which 1 is very much worsened and 7 is very much improved since the start of the study.
Endpoint values are the last observed postbaseline data."|Endpoint of the Double-blind Treatment Period (up to week 12)|FAS of participants with assessments at the timeframe||Participants|||Count of Participants
830902|NCT01240863|Secondary|Clinician Assessment of Patient Function (CAPF) at Week 12|"Clinicians assessed participants across 5 dimensions:
Patients general activities
Patients walking ability
Patients ability to work/perform activities of daily living
Patients relationships with others
Patients enjoyment of life
Assessments are rated on a 7-point scale, in which 1 is very much worsened and 7 is very much improved since the start of the study."|Week 12 of the Double-blind Treatment Period|FAS of participants with assessments at the timeframe||Participants|||Count of Participants
830903|NCT01240863|Secondary|Clinician Assessment of Patient Function (CAPF) at Week 8|"Clinicians assessed participants across 5 dimensions:
Patients general activities
Patients walking ability
Patients ability to work/perform activities of daily living
Patients relationships with others
Patients enjoyment of life
Assessments are rated on a 7-point scale, in which 1 is very much worsened and 7 is very much improved since the start of the study."|Week 8 of the Double-blind Treatment Period|FAS of participants with assessments at the timeframe||Participants|||Count of Participants
830904|NCT01240863|Secondary|Clinician Assessment of Patient Function (CAPF) at Week 4|"Clinicians assessed participants across 5 dimensions:
Patients general activities
Patients walking ability
Patients ability to work/perform activities of daily living
Patients relationships with others
Patients enjoyment of life
Assessments are rated on a 7-point scale, in which 1 is very much worsened and 7 is very much improved since the start of the study."|Week 4 of the Double-blind Treatment Period|FAS of participants with assessments at the timeframe||Participants|||Count of Participants
830905|NCT01240863|Secondary|Weekly Average Worst Pain Intensity (WPI) Scores During the Double-blind Treatment Period|"The WPI was recorded by the patient in the e-diary daily throughout the study, based on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11). Participants were asked to select the number that best described their WPI over the previous 24 hours. Values were averaged for each week.
The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) is an 11–point scale for patient self-reporting of pain on a Likert-type scale in which 0 is no pain and 10 is the worst pain imaginable."|Baseline (end of Open-Label Titration Period), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 of the Double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830906|NCT01240863|Secondary|Weekly Average Pain Intensity (wAPI) Scores During the Double-blind Treatment Period|"The API over the previous 24 hours, based on the 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS 11), was collected daily by e-diary. The wAPI scores from the previous 7 days were calculated for each study visit and averaged. The baseline wAPI score was calculated by averaging API scores from 3 to 12 days when the successful dose of hydrocodone extended release was confirmed at the end of the open label titration period, before patients were randomly assigned study drug.
The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) is an 11–point scale for patient self-reporting of pain on a Likert-type scale in which 0 is no pain and 10 is the worst pain imaginable."|Baseline (end of Open-Label Titration Period), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 of the Double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830907|NCT01240863|Secondary|Participants With a Weekly Average Pain Intensity (wAPI) Increase From Baseline Exceeding 50%|"The API over the previous 24 hours, based on the 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS 11), was collected daily by e-diary. The wAPI scores from the previous 7 days were calculated for each study visit and averaged. The baseline wAPI score was calculated by averaging API scores from 3 to 12 days when the successful dose of hydrocodone extended release was confirmed at the end of the open label titration period, before patients were randomly assigned study drug.
The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) is an 11–point scale for patient self-reporting of pain on a Likert-type scale in which 0 is no pain and 10 is the worst pain imaginable."|Baseline (end of Open-Label Titration Period), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 of the Double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830908|NCT01240863|Secondary|Participants With a Weekly Average Pain Intensity (wAPI) Increase From Baseline Exceeding 33%|"The API over the previous 24 hours, based on the 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS 11), was collected daily by e-diary. The wAPI scores from the previous 7 days were calculated for each study visit and averaged. The baseline wAPI score was calculated by averaging API scores from 3 to 12 days when the successful dose of hydrocodone extended release was confirmed at the end of the open label titration period, before patients were randomly assigned study drug.
The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) is an 11–point scale for patient self-reporting of pain on a Likert-type scale in which 0 is no pain and 10 is the worst pain imaginable."|Baseline (end of Open-Label Titration Period), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 of the Double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set. Participants contributing to each time point are included in the number analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
830909|NCT01240863|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Time to Discontinuation From the Study|Kaplan-Meier estimates for time to discontinuation from the study (due to any cause) was calculated as the number of days since participants were randomly assigned to study drug treatment, ie, the difference between the date the participants withdrew and the date participants were randomly assigned to study drug treatment. The censoring flag was set to 0 if a participant was withdrawn from study drug treatment early and was set to 1 if the participant completed the 12 week treatment period. Censoring time was calculated as the difference of treatment completion date (ie, date of last study drug administration) and date participant was randomly assigned to study drug treatment.|Day 1 to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
830910|NCT01240863|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Withdrawn From the Study During the Double-Blind Treatment Period By Reason|Percentage of participants who withdrew from the study during the double-blind treatment period. Withdrawal is due to any cause, including lack of efficacy.|Day 1 to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period|Full analysis set||percentage of participants|||Number
830911|NCT01240863|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Weekly Average Pain Intensity (wAPI)|"The primary efficacy variable was the change from baseline to week 12 in the wAPI. The API over the previous 24 hours, based on the 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS 11), was collected daily by e-diary. The Week 12 wAPI scores from the previous 7 days were calculated for each study visit and averaged. The baseline wAPI score was calculated by averaging API scores from 3 to 12 days when the successful dose of hydrocodone extended release was confirmed at the end of the open label titration period, before patients were randomly assigned study drug. In the case of missing week-12 data due to early withdrawal from the study, or excessive rescue medication usage, the wAPI for week 12 was imputed.
The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) is an 11–point scale for patient self-reporting of pain on a Likert-type scale in which 0 is no pain and 10 is the worst pain imaginable. Negative change from baseline values indicate lessening in pain intensity."|Baseline (end of Open-Label Titration Period), Week 12 of Double-blind Treatment Period|Full analysis set (FAS). One placebo patient was withdrawn from the study prior to receiving drug in the Double-blind Treatment period and is not included in the FAS. In the case of missing week-12 data due to early withdrawal from the study, or excessive rescue medication usage, the wAPI for week 12 was imputed.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
830932|NCT01240915|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-Reported Rectal Bleeding up to Week 16|Patient-reported diary data assessed the number of bowel movements (BM) per day when not having a flare and the presence of blood in the stools (rectal bleeding [RB]), if any.|Baseline and Week 16|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830933|NCT01240915|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Biopsy Histology Scores at Week 8|A 15 to 25 centimeter (cm) biopsy sample of inflamed mucosal tissue was taken from the worst affected area and scored using the Riley Index. The Riley Index is a histologic scoring system for the assessment of the activity and severity of ulcerative colitis, ranging from 0 to 24. It consists of 6 histologic features (acute inflammatory cell infiltrate, crypt abscesses, mucin depletion, surface epithelial integrity, chronic inflammatory cell infiltrate, and crypt architectural irregularities), all scored on a 4-point scale (higher scores indicate more severe disease).|Baseline and Week 8|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830934|NCT01240915|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Partial Mayo Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Mayo Score is an instrument designed to measure disease activity of ulcerative colitis. Mayo Score ranges from 0 to 12 points. It consists of 4 subscores, each graded from 0 to 3 with higher scores indicating more severe disease. A Partial Mayo Score (Mayo score without endoscopy) ranges from 0 (normal or inactive disease) to 9 (severe disease) and calculated as the sum of 3 subscores (stool frequency, rectal bleeding and PGA) with each ranging from 0 to 3 (0=normal, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe). Higher scores indicate more severe disease.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831320|NCT01245140|Secondary|Mean Heart Rate (HR) at Baseline, Screening, and EOT (Week 24)|HR is defined as the rate at which the heart beats.|Screening, Baseline, and EOT (Week 24)|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
830936|NCT01240915|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Response at Week 8|Clinical response is defined as a decrease in total Mayo score from baseline of at least 3 points and at least 30 percent (%), with an accompanying decrease in the subscore for rectal bleeding of at least 1 point or an absolute subscore for rectal bleeding of 0 or 1.|Week 8|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
830937|NCT01240915|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Endoscopic Response at Week 8|Endoscopic response is defined as a decrease in modified Baron endoscopic score from baseline of at least 2 points.|Week 8|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
830938|NCT01240915|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Decrease From Baseline of at Least 1 Point in Rectal Bleeding Mayo Subscore at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Mayo subscores for rectal bleeding range from 0 to 3 (0=no blood seen; 1=streaks of blood with stool less than half the time; 2=obvious blood with stool most of the time; 3=blood alone passes). A decrease from baseline score indicates improvement.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
830939|NCT01240915|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission at Week 8|Clinical remission is defined as a total Mayo score of 2 points or lower, with no individual subscores exceeding 1 point.|Week 8|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
830940|NCT01240915|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Endoscopic Remission at Week 8|Modified Baron Score is an instrument designed to measure endoscopic activity of ulcerative colitis. It classifies the mucosal inflammation in 4 grades (0=normal, 1=granular mucosa with an abnormal vascular pattern, 2=friable mucosa, 3=microulceration with spontaneous bleeding, 4=gross ulceration with spontaneous bleeding). Endoscopic remission is defined as modified Baron Endoscopic Score equal to 0.|Week 8|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
830941|NCT01240915|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Rectal Bleeding Mayo Subscore of Zero at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Mayo subscores for rectal bleeding range from 0 to 3 (0=no blood seen; 1=streaks of blood with stool less than half the time; 2=obvious blood with stool most of the time; 3=blood alone passes).|Week 4, 8, 12 and 16|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
830942|NCT01240915|Secondary|Fold Change From Baseline in C-Reactive Protein (CRP) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|CRP is an acute-phase protein which provides an objective criterion of inflammatory activity. CRP has a short half-life (19 hours) and therefore rises early after the onset of inflammation and rapidly decreases after resolution of the inflammation. It is induced by interleukin-6, TNF-alpha and other pro-inflammatory cytokines that are produced within the intestinal lamina propria.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||fold change||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830943|NCT01240915|Secondary|Fold Change From Baseline in Fecal Calprotectin at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Fecal calprotectin, a very stable marker, is a 36kDa calcium and zinc binding protein which is neutrophil-derived. It represents 60% of cytosolic proteins in granulocytes and is a measurement of neutrophil migration to the gastrointestinal tract.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||fold change||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830944|NCT01240915|Secondary|Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Vital Signs Findings|Vital signs assessment included pulse rate, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Criteria for vital sign values meeting potential clinical concern included: SBP <90 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg) and >=30 mm Hg increase/decrease from baseline, DBP <50 mm Hg and >=20 mm Hg increase/decrease from baseline, pulse rate <40 or >120 beats per minute (bpm),|Baseline up to Week 52|The safety analysis population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
830945|NCT01240915|Secondary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Abnormalities|The total number of participants with laboratory test abnormalities with or without regard to baseline abnormality was assessed. Laboratory parameters included: hematology (hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell [RBC] count, platelet count, white blood cell [WBC] count, total neutrophils, eosinophils, monocytes, basophils, lymphocytes, erythrocyte sedimentation rate); chemistry (blood urea nitrogen and creatinine, glucose, calcium, sodium, potassium, chloride, total bicarbonate, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, uric acid, albumin, total protein; urinalysis (pH, glucose, protein, blood, ketones, nitrites, leukocyte esterase, microscopy (only if urine dipstick was positive for blood, protein, nitrites or leukocyte esterase); other (follicle-stimulating hormone, human chorionic gonadotropin, stool microbiology, creatinine kinase, direct bilirubin, indirect bilirubin, gamma-glutamyl transferase, international normalized ratio.|Baseline up to Week 24|The safety analysis population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||participants|||Number
831573|NCT01247272|Primary|AUC0-inf of Fluoxetine.|Bioequivalence based on Fluoxetine AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
830946|NCT01240915|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rectal Bleeding Mayo Subscore at Week 12 and Week 16|Mayo Score is an instrument designed to measure disease activity of ulcerative colitis. Mayo subscores for rectal bleeding range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 16|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830947|NCT01240915|Primary|Number of Treatment-Emergent AEs by Severity|The intensity grades were defined as follows: mild=does not interfere with participant's usual function; moderate=interferes to some extent with participant's usual function; severe=interferes significantly with participant's usual function.|Baseline up to Week 52|The safety analysis population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||adverse events|||Number
830948|NCT01240915|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent AEs by System Organ Class (SOC)||Baseline up to Week 52|The safety analysis population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
830949|NCT01240915|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 30 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pre-treatment state. AEs included both SAEs and non-SAEs.|Baseline up to Week 52|The safety analysis population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
830950|NCT01240915|Primary|Change From Baseline in Rectal Bleeding Mayo Subscore at Week 8|Mayo Score is an instrument designed to measure disease activity of ulcerative colitis. Mayo subscores for rectal bleeding range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease.|Baseline and Week 8|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830951|NCT01240915|Primary|Change From Baseline in Rectal Bleeding Mayo Subscore at Week 4|Mayo Score is an instrument designed to measure disease activity of ulcerative colitis. Mayo subscores for rectal bleeding range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease.|Baseline and Week 4|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint; n=the number of participants analyzed at that time point in the respective arms.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830952|NCT01240915|Primary|Change From Baseline in Endoscopic Score (as Measured by Modified Baron Score) at Week 8|Modified Baron Score is an instrument designed to measure endoscopic activity of ulcerative colitis. It classifies the mucosal inflammation in 4 grades (0=normal, 1=granular mucosa with an abnormal vascular pattern, 2=friable mucosa, 3=microulceration with spontaneous bleeding, 4=gross ulceration with spontaneous bleeding).|Baseline and Week 8|The full analysis set included all available observed data from all randomized participants who completed at least 1 infusion and were either withdrawn as a treatment failure, or had at least 1 valid post-dose measurement on a primary endpoint. Baseline observation carried forward (BOCF) was used for treatment failures.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
830953|NCT01241240|Secondary|Mean Worse Eye IOP|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. For each eye, the IOP was either the average of 2 measurements, or, if a third measurement was required, the median of the 3 measurements. The worse eye was determined based on the IOP results at Baseline. The mean worse eye IOP was the average of the IOP measurements of the worse eye at hours 0 and 2 at each time-point.|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12|Participants from the mITT population, that included all randomized participants who had at least 1 post-baseline IOP measurement, with data available for analysis at the given time-point.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
830954|NCT01241240|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Worse Eye IOP|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. For each eye, the IOP was either the average of 2 measurements, or, if a third measurement was required, the median of the 3 measurements. The worse eye was determined based on the IOP results at Baseline. The mean worse eye IOP was the average of the IOP measurements of the worse eye at hours 0 and 2 at each visit. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4 and 8|Participants from the mITT population, that included all randomized participants who had at least 1 post-baseline IOP measurement, with data available for analysis at the given time-point.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
830955|NCT01241240|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Worse Eye Intraocular Pressure (IOP) at Week 12|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. For each eye, the IOP was either the average of 2 measurements, or, if a third measurement was required, the median of the 3 measurements. The worse eye was determined based on the IOP results at Baseline. The mean worse eye IOP was the average of the IOP measurements of the worse eye at hours 0 and 2 at week 12. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Participants from the modified Intent-to-treat (mITT) population, that included all randomized participants who had at least 1 post-baseline IOP measurement, with data available for analysis at the given time-point.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
830956|NCT01241279|Secondary|Visual Acuity|Number of correct letters on an early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) chart to measure distance visual acuity and the smallest readable print size on an Minnesota Low-Vision Reading (MNREAD) acuity chart for intermediate and near visual acuity (VA). Visual acuity measured in LogMAR.|All visits through visit 4 (day 160-180)|DUE TO THE SMALL SAMPLE SIZE, NO STATISTICAL OR CLINICALLY MEANINGFUL CONCLUSIONS RELATED TO THE STUDY ENDPOINTS CAN BE MADE.|||||
830957|NCT01241279|Primary|Amplitude of Accommodation|The measurement of optical change in the power of the eye when viewing from far to near. Accommodation decreases as age increases resulting in an inability to focus on near objects.|Visit 4 (postoperative day 120-180)|DUE TO THE SMALL SAMPLE SIZE, NO STATISTICAL OR CLINICALLY MEANINGFUL CONCLUSIONS RELATED TO THE STUDY ENDPOINTS CAN BE MADE.|||||
830958|NCT01241292|Secondary|Number of Participants Positive for Anti-Elotuzumab Anti-drug Antibodies - Treated Participants|The detection of anti-elotuzumab anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) in human serum was performed using a validated bridging electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLA) on the Meso Scale Discovery (MSD) platform. Sample collection was performed prior to administration of elotuzumab at Day 1 of each cycle.|First dose (Day 1) to last dose plus 60 days, up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication were summarized.||participants|||Number
830959|NCT01241292|Primary|Number of Participants With Worst Toxicity Grade Chemistry Laboratory Tests|NCI CTCAE, version 3.0 was used to measure toxicity scale. Sodium high (H) Gr 1:>ULN - 150; Gr 2: >150 – 155; Gr 3: >155 – 160; Gr 4: >160 mmol/L; Sodium low(L) Gr 1:<LLN – 130; Gr 3: <130 – 120; Gr 4: <120 mmol/L. Potassium (H) Gr 1: >ULN – 5.5; Gr 2: >5.5 – 6.0; Gr 3: > 6.0 – 7.0; Gr 4: >7.0 mmol/L; Potassium (L) Gr 1 - Gr 2: <LLN – 3.0; Gr 3: < 3.0 – 2.5; Gr 4: <2.5 mmol/L.|First dose (Day 1) to last dose plus 60 days, up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication were summarized.||participants|||Number
830960|NCT01241292|Primary|Number of Participants With Worst Toxicity Grade Renal and Liver Function Laboratory Tests|National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 3.0 was used to measure toxicity scale. Lower Limits of Normal (LLN). Upper Limits of Normal (ULN). Alanine transaminase (ALT); Aspartate aminotransferase (AST); Alkaline phosphatase (ALP). ALT Grade (Gr)1:>1.0 to 2.5*ULN; Gr 2: >2.5 to 5.0*ULN; Gr 3: >5.0 to 20.0*ULN; Gr 4: >20.0*ULN. AST Gr 1: >1.0 to 2.5*ULN; Gr 2: >2.5 to 5.0*ULN; Gr 3: >5.0 to 20.0*ULN; Gr 4: >20.0*ULN. Total bilirubin Gr 1: >1.0 to 1.5*ULN; Gr 2: >1.5 to 3.0*ULN; Gr 3: >3.0 to 10..0*ULN; Gr 4: >10.0.0*ULN. ALP (U/L) Gr1:>1.0 to 2.5*ULN, Gr2:>2.5 to 5.0*ULN, Gr3:>5.0 to 20.0*ULN, Gr4:>20.0*ULN. Albumin (low) Gr 1:<LLN to 3 grams per deciliter (g/dL); Gr 2: <3.0 – 2.0 g/L; Gr 3: < 2 g/dL. Creatinine Gr 1: >1 – 1.5*baseline (BL)to >ULN – 1.5*ULN; Gr 2: >1.5 – 3.0*BL to > 1.5 – 3.0*ULN; Gr 3: >3.0*BL to > 3.0 – 6.0*ULN; Gr 4: >6.0*ULN.|First dose (Day 1) to last dose plus 60 days, up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication were summarized.||participants|||Number
830961|NCT01241292|Primary|Number of Participants With Worst Toxicity Grade Hematology Laboratory Tests|National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 3.0 was used to measure toxicity scale. Lower Limits of Normal (LLN). Hemoglobin Gr 1:<LLN to 10.0 g/dL, Gr 2:<10.0 to 8.0 g/dL, Gr 3:<8.0 to 6.5 g/dL, Gr 4:<6.5 g/dL. Lymphocytes (absolute) Gr 1: <1.5 to 0.8 *10^3 c/µL, Gr 2 <0.8 to 0.5 *10^3 c/µL, Gr 3: <0.5 to 0.2 *10^3 c/µL, Gr 4: <0.2*10^3 c/µL. Neutrophils (absolute): Gr 1:<LLN to 1.5*10^9/L, Gr 2:<1.5 to 1.0*10^9/L, Gr 3:<1.0 to 0.5*10^9/L, Gr 4:<0.5*10^9/L. Platelet count Gr 1:LLN to 75.0*10^9/L, Gr 2:<75.0 to 50.0*10^9/L, Gr 3:<50.0 to 25.0*10^9/L, Gr 4:<25.0 to 10^9/L. Leukocytes Gr 1:<LLN to 3.0 *10^3 c/µL, Gr 2; <3.0 to 2.0 *10^3 c/µL, Gr 3: <2.0 to 1.0 *10^3 c/µL, Gr 4: <1.0 *10^3 c/µL.|First dose (Day 1) to last dose plus 60 days, up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication were summarized.||participants|||Number
830962|NCT01241292|Secondary|Geometric Mean Minimum Observed Serum Elotuzumab Concentration (Cmin) During Cycles 1, 2, and 3|The quantification of elotuzumab in human serum was performed using a validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Cmin was measured in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). Samples of serum were obtained at: Cycle 1, Day 1: 0 hour (h), 30 minutes (min) 2 h post dose; Day 8: 0h, 2 h; Day 15: 0h, 30 min; Day 22: 0h, 30min, 2h. Cycle 2, Day 1, 22 0h, 2h. Cycle 3, Day 1: 0h, 30h, 2h; Day 15: 0h.|Days 8, 15 and 22 of cycle 1, Days 1 and 22 of cycle 2, Days 1 and 15 of cycle 3|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had adequate PK concentration profiles were summarized.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830963|NCT01241292|Secondary|Geometric Mean Maximum Observed Serum Elotuzumab Concentration (Cmax) During Cycles 1, 2, and 3|The quantification of elotuzumab in human serum was performed using a validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Cmax was measured in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). Samples of serum were obtained at: Cycle 1, Day 1: 0 hour (h), 30 minutes (min) 2 h post dose; Day 8: 0h, 2 h; Day 15: 0h, 30 min; Day 22: 0h, 30min, 2h. Cycle 2, Day 1, 22 0h, 2h. Cycle 3, Day 1: 0h, 30h, 2h; Day 15: 0h.|Days 1, 8, 15 and 22 of cycle 1, Days 1 and 22 of cycle 2, Days 1 and 15 of cycle 3|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had adequate Pharmacokinetic (PK) concentration profiles were summarized.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830964|NCT01241292|Secondary|Number of Participants With Best Overall Response - Treated Participants|Complete response (CR) and Partial Response (PR) were based on the European Group for Blood and Bone Marrow Transplant (EBMT) Criteria. Very Good Partial response was derived from the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. Participants who had a reduction in M-protein or plasmacytoma but did not meet the EBMT criteria for PR were classified as minimal response (MR). Hematologic, radiologic and/or clinical assessments were done every cycle starting with cycle 2. Each cycle is 4 weeks in length (Day 1, Day 8, Day 15, Day 22). Cycle 2 began on study Day 29. CR=negative immunofixation 6 weeks, <5% plasma cells, no increase in size or number of lytic lesions, complete disappearance of extramedullary plasmacytoma. PR=≥50%reduction in M-protein for 6 weeks, ≥90% reduction of urinary light chain excretion or < 200 mg/24hours for 6 weeks, ≥50% reduction in size of extramedullary plasmacytoma present at baseline, no increase in size or number of lytic lesions.|Cycle 2 (Study Day 29) to last dose, up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication were summarized (Treated Participants).||participants|||Number
830965|NCT01241292|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Relevant Vital Sign Findings|Vital signs (body temperature, seated blood pressure, heart rate, and respiration rate) were recorded at screening on Days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of Cycles 1 and 2, on Days 1 and 15 of Cycle 3, and at the end of treatment. Blood pressure (Diastolic and Systolic) and heart rate were recorded after the participant sat quietly for at least 5 minutes. Clinical relevance of vital sign data was determined by the investigator.|First dose (Day 1) to last dose plus 60 days, up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication were summarized.||participants|||Number
831016|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean SF-36 Domain Scores at Baseline and Week 12|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Baseline and Week 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830966|NCT01241292|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation, Deaths|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Treatment-related=having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug. Grade (Gr) 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4= Potentially Life-threatening or disabling. Data cut-off February 2014.|First dose (Day 1) to last dose plus 60 days, up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication were summarized (Treated Participants).||participants|||Number
830967|NCT01241513|Primary|Arterial Oxygen Saturation|Finger Pulse Oximetry to measure arterial oxygen saturation|Day 4 of treatment during acute altitude exposure|||percentage of oxygen saturation||Standard Deviation|Mean
830968|NCT01241539|Secondary|Additional Safety Parameters|By study design abnormalities could be due to dialysis or Dabigatran.|2 periods of 5 days each|TS||Participants|||Number
830969|NCT01241539|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability|Tolerability refers to the number of non-tolerable patients as assessed through the subjective examination of adverse events (AE). Safety refers to the number of patients with treatment emergent AEs. These numbers are presented on the overall Dabigatran treatment.|2 periods of 5 days each|TS||Participants|||Number
830970|NCT01241539|Secondary|Coagulation Parameters|Assessment of blood coagulation parameters 'activated partial thromboplastin time' (aPTT) and 'factor IIa inhibition' (anti-FIIa) measured with the diluted thrombin time assay. Time to the formation of a fibrin clot (coagulation) is measured in seconds.|Day 3|TS||sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
830971|NCT01241539|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|Time to maximum plasma concentration of total and free dabigatran in plasma after the third administration of dabigatran.|Day 3|PKS||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830972|NCT01241539|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentrations of Dabigatran (Cmax)|Maximum measured concentration of total and free dabigatran in plasma after the second and third administration of dabigatran.|Days 2 and 3|PKS||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830973|NCT01241539|Secondary|Area Under the Curve Exposure to Dabigatran During the First 8 Hours Post Dose (AUC0-8h)|Area under the concentration-time curve of total and free dabigatran in plasma over the time interval from 0 to 8 hours after the second and third administration of dabigatran.|Days 2 and 3|Pharmacokinetic set (PKS) includes all evaluable patients of the TS who received at least 1 dose of dabigatran etexilate, who provided at least 1 observation for at least 1 Pharmacokinetics (PK) endpoint, and who did not have important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830974|NCT01241539|Primary|Plasma Concentration Extraction Ratio|Plasma concentration extraction ratio was measured directly at the dialysis machine and computed as the difference of the predialysis plasma concentration and the postdialysis plasma concentration relative to the predialysis concentration on the percentage scale (minimum: 0 percent of extraction (worst), maximum: 100 percent of extraction).|4 hours|PKS||Percentage||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830975|NCT01241539|Primary|Extent Cleared From Circulation (Plasma) During 1 Complete Cycle of Dialysis|Extent of dabigatran that is removed from blood during one complete 4-hour cycle of dialysis was computed by the difference of plasma concentration at the start and at the end of dialysis relative to the start concentration and is therefore measured as a percentage.|4 hours|PKS||Percentage||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830976|NCT01241539|Primary|Dialysis Clearance of Dabigatran|Dialysis clearance of dabigatran from blood (CLD,b) and dialysis clearance of dabigatran from plasma (CLD) were calculated and indicate how quickly dabigatran is cleared out from blood or plasma.|4 hours|Pharmacokinetic set (PKS) includes all evaluable patients of the treated set who received at least one dose of dabigatran etexilate and who provide at least one observation for at least one Pharmacokinetic (PK) endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
830977|NCT01241552|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Compromised Immunity at Study Entry With CDI Recurrence|CDI recurrence is defined as the development of a new episode of diarrhea (3 or more loose stools in 24 or fewer hours) and a positive local or central lab stool test for toxigenic C. difficile following clinical cure of the initial CDI episode. Compromised immunity is defined as follows: an active hematological malignancy (including leukemia, lymphoma, multiple myeloma), an active malignancy requiring recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, receipt of a prior hematopoietic stem cell transplant, receipt of a prior solid organ transplant, asplenia, or neutropenia/pancytopenia due to other conditions.|Up to 12 weeks|Participants with compromised immunity at study entry who received infusion of study medication; had a positive local stool test for toxigenic C. difficile; received protocol defined standard of care therapy within 1 day window of the infusion; and complied with Good Clinical Practice.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830978|NCT01241552|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Epidemic Strain of C. Difficile (Ribotypes 027, 014, 002, 001, 106, and 020) at Study Entry With CDI Recurrence|CDI recurrence is defined as the development of a new episode of diarrhea (3 or more loose stools in 24 or fewer hours) and a positive local or central lab stool test for toxigenic C. difficile following clinical cure of the initial CDI episode.|Up to 12 weeks|Participants with an epidemic strain of C. difficile at study entry who received infusion of study medication; had a positive local stool test for toxigenic C. difficile; received protocol defined standard of care therapy within 1 day window of the infusion; and complied with Good Clinical Practice.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830979|NCT01241552|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With the B1/NAP1/027 Strain of C. Difficile at Study Entry With CDI Recurrence|CDI recurrence is defined as the development of a new episode of diarrhea (3 or more loose stools in 24 or fewer hours) and a positive local or central lab stool test for toxigenic C. difficile following clinical cure of the initial CDI episode.|Up to 12 weeks|Participants with the B1/NAP1/027 strain of C. difficile at study entry who received infusion of study medication; had a positive local stool test for toxigenic C. difficile; received protocol defined standard of care therapy within 1 day window of the infusion; and complied with Good Clinical Practice.||Percentage of participants|||Number
831029|NCT01241591|Secondary|Median Time to Achieve PASI75 Response During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment||Baseline up to Week 12|FAS; OC||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
830980|NCT01241552|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinically Severe CDI at Study Entry With CDI Recurrence|CDI recurrence is defined as the development of a new episode of diarrhea (3 or more loose stools in 24 or fewer hours) and a positive local or central lab stool test for toxigenic C. difficile following clinical cure of the initial CDI episode. Clinically severe CDI is defined as a Zar Score ≥ 2 based on the presence of 1 or more of the following: 1) age >60 years old (1 point); 2)body temperature >38.3°C (>100°F) (1 point); 3) albumin level ˂2.5 mg/dL (1 point); 4) peripheral white blood cell count >15,000 cells/mm^3 within 48 hours (1 point); 5) endoscopic evidence of pseudomembranous colitis (2 points); and 6) treatment in Intensive Care Unit (2 points).|Up to 12 weeks|Participants with clinically severe CDI at study entry who received infusion of study medication; had a positive local stool test for toxigenic C. difficile; received protocol defined standard of care therapy within 1 day window of the infusion; and complied with Good Clinical Practice.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830981|NCT01241552|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a History of CDI in the 6 Months Prior to Enrollment With CDI Recurrence|CDI recurrence is defined as the development of a new episode of diarrhea (3 or more loose stools in 24 or fewer hours) and a positive local or central lab stool test for toxigenic C. difficile following clinical cure of the initial CDI episode.|Up to 12 weeks|Participants with a history of CDI in the 6 months prior to enrollment who received infusion of study medication; had a positive local stool test for toxigenic C. difficile; received protocol defined standard of care therapy within 1 day window of the infusion; and complied with Good Clinical Practice.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830982|NCT01241552|Secondary|Percentage of Participants ≥ 65 Years of Age at Study Entry With CDI Recurrence|CDI recurrence is defined as the development of a new episode of diarrhea (3 or more loose stools in 24 or fewer hours) and a positive local or central lab stool test for toxigenic C. difficile following clinical cure of the initial CDI episode.|Up to 12 weeks|Participants ≥ 65 years of age at study entry who received infusion of study medication; had a positive local stool test for toxigenic C. difficile; received protocol defined standard of care therapy within 1 day window of the infusion; and complied with Good Clinical Practice.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830983|NCT01241552|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Infusion-specific AEs|Infusion-specific AEs included local infusion site AEs; and systemic AEs which include nausea, vomiting, chills, fatigue, feeling hot, infusion site conditions (bruising, coldness, erythema, extravasation, pain, phlebitis, pruritus), pyrexia, arthralgia, musculoskeletal pain, myalgia, dizziness, headache, dysphonia, nasal congestion, pruritus, rash, pruritic rash, urticaria, flushing, hot flush, hypertension, and hypotension.|Up to 24 hours|All randomized participants who received infusion of study medication, based on the treatment actually received. One participant randomized to receive MK-3415A, and two participants randomized to receive MK-6072 actually received placebo instead.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830984|NCT01241552|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Study Medication Due to an AE During 4 Weeks Following Infusion|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended signs (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product or protocol-specific procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product or protocol-specific procedure. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition that is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an AE.|Up to 28 days|All randomized participants who received infusion of study medication, based on the treatment actually received. One participant randomized to receive MK-3415A, and two participants randomized to receive MK-6072 actually received placebo instead.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830985|NCT01241552|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Any Serious Drug-related Adverse Events During 4 Weeks Following Infusion|A SAE is any AE occurring at any dose or during any use of Sponsor’s product that: results in death; or is life threatening; or results in a persistent or significant disability/incapacity; or results in or prolongs an existing inpatient hospitalization; or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or is a cancer, or is associated with an overdose (whether accidental or intentional); or is other important medical events. A serious drug-related AE was a SAE determined by the investigator to be related to the drug.|Up to 28 days|All randomized participants who received infusion of study medication, based on the treatment actually received. One participant randomized to receive MK-3415A, and two participants randomized to receive MK-6072 actually received placebo instead.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830986|NCT01241552|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) During 4 Weeks Following Infusion|A SAE is any AE occurring at any dose or during any use of Sponsor’s product that: results in death; or is life threatening; or results in a persistent or significant disability/incapacity; or results in or prolongs an existing inpatient hospitalization; or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or is a cancer, or is associated with an overdose (whether accidental or intentional); or is other important medical events.|Up to 28 days|All randomized participants who received infusion of study medication, based on the treatment actually received. One participant randomized to receive MK-3415A, and two participants randomized to receive MK-6072 actually received placebo instead.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830987|NCT01241552|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Any Drug-related AE During 4 Weeks Following Infusion|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended signs (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product or protocol-specific procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product or protocol specific procedure. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition that is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an AE. A drug-related AE was an AE determined by the investigator to be related to the drug.|Up to 28 days|All randomized participants who received infusion of study medication, based on the treatment actually received. One participant randomized to receive MK-3415A, and two participants randomized to receive MK-6072 actually received placebo instead.||Percentage of participants|||Number
831615|NCT01247428|Secondary|Lesion Success|Achievement of a final in-stent residual diameter stenosis of <50% (by QCA) using any percutaneous method|8 hours|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830988|NCT01241552|Primary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Adverse Events (AEs) During 4 Weeks Following Infusion|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended signs (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product or protocol-specific procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product or protocol specific procedure. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition that is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an AE.|Up to 28 days|All randomized participants who received infusion of study medication, based on the treatment actually received. One participant randomized to receive MK-3415A, and two participants randomized to receive MK-6072 actually received placebo instead.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830989|NCT01241552|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CDI Recurrence in Those With Clinical Cure of the Initial CDI Episode|CDI recurrence is defined as the development of a new episode of diarrhea (3 or more loose stools in 24 or fewer hours) and a positive local or central lab stool test for toxigenic C. difficile following clinical cure of the initial CDI episode. Clinical cure is defined as participants who received ≤ 14 day regimen of SOC therapy and have no diarrhea (≤2 loose stools per 24 hours) for two consecutive days following completion of SOC therapy for the baseline CDI episode.|Up to 12 weeks|Participants who received infusion of study medication; had a positive local stool test for toxigenic C. difficile; received protocol defined standard of care therapy within 1 day window of the infusion; complied with Good Clinical Practice; and achieved clinical cure of the initial CDI episode.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830990|NCT01241552|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Global Cure|Global Cure is defined as the clinical cure of the initial CDI episode and no CDI recurrence through Week 12. Clinical cure is defined as participants who received ≤ 14 day regimen of SOC therapy and have no diarrhea (≤2 loose stools per 24 hours) for two consecutive days following completion of SOC therapy for the initial CDI episode.|Up to 12 weeks|Participants who received infusion of study medication; had a positive local stool test for toxigenic C. difficile; received protocol defined standard of care therapy within 1 day window of the infusion; and complied with Good Clinical Practice.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830991|NCT01241552|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Clostridium Difficile Infection (CDI) Recurrence|CDI recurrence is defined as the development of a new episode of diarrhea (3 or more loose stools in 24 or fewer hours) and a positive local or central lab stool test for toxigenic Clostridium (C.) difficile following clinical cure of the initial CDI episode|Up to 12 weeks|Participants who received infusion of study medication; had a positive local stool test for toxigenic C. difficile; received protocol defined standard of care therapy within 1 day window of the infusion; and complied with Good Clinical Practice.||Percentage of participants|||Number
830992|NCT01241565|Secondary|Incidence of Serosal Tearing||Day 30|||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
830993|NCT01241565|Secondary|Duration of Chest Tube Following Surgery|Chest tube duration was calculated as removal date – placement date + 1|Approximately Day 5|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
830994|NCT01241565|Secondary|Length of Hospital Stay||Approximately Day 6|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
830995|NCT01241565|Secondary|Duration of Air Leak|Measured in days. For patients discharged from the hospital with a Heimlich valve, the duration will be censored on the date of discharge.|Day 30|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
830996|NCT01241565|Secondary|Incidence of Air Leaks|As recorded on the air leak log.|Day 30|||number of patients with air leaks|||Number
830997|NCT01241565|Primary|Incidence of Prolonged Air Leaks|Defined as > 5 days by the Society for Thoracic Surgery|Day 30|||participants|||Number
830998|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in PQOL-12 Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The PQOL-12 is a 12-item questionnaire; 8 of the items on the PQOL-12) focus on emotional issues associated with psoriasis (self conscious, helpless, embarrassed, ability to enjoy life). The last 4 items deal with physical symptoms (pain or soreness, itch, physical irritation) and choice of clothing. The recall period is over the past month. The questions are answered on a scale from 0 to 10 with 0 being best and 10 being worst. Scores from each question are summed to give a total score (range 0 -120); higher scores indicate greater impairment to quality of life.|Week 12|FAS; OC||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
830999|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Psoriasis Quality of Life 12 (PQOL-12) Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The PQOL-12 is a 12-item questionnaire; 8 of the items on the Koo-Menter Psoriasis Index 12-item Quality of Life Questionnaire (PQOL-12) focus on emotional issues associated with psoriasis (self conscious, helpless, embarrassed, ability to enjoy life). The last 4 items deal with physical symptoms (pain or soreness, itch, physical irritation) and choice of clothing. The recall period is over the past month. The questions are answered on a scale from 0 to 10 with 0 being best and 10 being worst. Scores from each question are summed to give a total score (range 0 -120); higher scores indicate greater impairment to quality of life.|Baseline and Week 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831000|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Work-Impacted Events During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization Questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work.|Week 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831001|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Employed or Not Employed and the Impact of Psoriasis on Work|Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization Questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The questionnaire assesses employment status of participant (employed: yes or no) and if currently employed it asks the participant if they were absent or on sick leave from work due to psoriasis; if unemployed it asks the participant if the unemployment is due to psoriasis.|Baseline and Week 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831002|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Healthcare Resource Use Events During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment||Week 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831244|NCT01244893|Primary|Visual Acuity (VA)|Snellen VA was measured to the nearest letter then converted to the logMAR scale for the analysis. Values < 0 imply a clinically positive result; while values > 0 infer a clinically negative result.|6-8 days after lens wear|Population analyzed are those who were enrolled, randomized, and completed the study.||logMAR scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831003|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Interacting With Healthcare Professionals During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use (interactions with healthcare providers such as general practitioners [GPs], primary care physicians [PCPs], or family medicine physicians [FMP], emergency room visits, and hospitalizations), and the second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work.|Baseline (BL) and Week 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831004|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Dimension Health State Score at Week 12|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed)."|Week 12|FAS; OC||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831005|NCT01241591|Secondary|Dimension Health State EQ-5D Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. The score for each of the 5 dimensions can range from 1 to 3; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed)."|Baseline and Week 12|FAS; OC||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831006|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in EQ-5D VAS at Week 12|EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 mm (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.|Week 12|FAS; OC||mm||Standard Error|Mean
831007|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean EQ-5D Visual Analog Score (VAS) During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 mm (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.|Baseline and Week 12|FAS; OC||mm||Standard Error|Mean
831008|NCT01241591|Secondary|Least Squares (LS) Mean Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Health State Utility Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state."|Week 12|FAS; OC||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831009|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean European Quality of Life 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) Health State Utility Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state."|Baseline and Week 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831010|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving PSSM Response of 'Very Satisfied' or 'Somewhat Satisfied' at Week 12|The PSSM is a single, 7 point item that evaluates overall participant satisfaction with the study treatment. Response options range from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied” with the study medication.|Week 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831011|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Patient Satisfaction With Study Medication (PSSM) Category During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The PSSM is a single, 7 point item that evaluates overall participant satisfaction with the study treatment. Response options range from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied” with the study medication.|Week 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831012|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PtGA Response During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The PtGA asks the participant to evaluate the overall cutaneous disease at that point in time on a single item, 5-point scale (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; 4=severe). Response defined as score of 0 or 1.|Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831013|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Patient Global Assessment of Psoriasis (PtGA) Category During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The PtGA asks the participant to evaluate the overall cutaneous disease at that point in time on a single item, 5-point scale (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; 4=severe).|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, and 8|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831014|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in SF-36 Domain Scores|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Week 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831015|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in SF-36 MCS and PCS Scores|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). A PCS score and MCS score are based on a normalized sum of the 8 scale scores; PCS/MCS summary concept score = (raw score*10) plus 50. Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Week 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831017|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Short Form 36 (SF-36) Mental Component Summary (MCS) and Physical Component Summary (PCS) Scores at Baseline and Week 12|The SF-36 is a general health status questionnaire that assesses 8 domains of functional health and well being: Physical Functioning, Role Limitations due to Physical Health Problems, Bodily Pain, Social Functioning, Mental Health, Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems, Vitality, and General Health Perceptions. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). A PCS score and MCS score are based on a normalized sum of the 8 scale scores; PCS/MCS summary concept score = (raw score*10) plus 50. Higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Baseline and Week 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831018|NCT01241591|Secondary|Median Time to DLQI Response|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. DLQI Response was defined as a 5-point reduction in the total DLQI score.|Weeks 4 and 12|Data were not analyzed as the endpoint of proportion of participants achieving a 5-point reduction from baseline in DLQI provided similar information.|||||
831019|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DLQI Response ≤1 During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Weeks 4 and 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831020|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DLQI Response ≥5 During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Weeks 4 and 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831021|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in DLQI Subscale Scores During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The DLQI can be analyzed under 6 subscales by combining questions and is categorized as follows: symptoms and feelings (maximum score=6); daily activities (maximum score=6); leisure (maximum score=6); work and school (maximum score=3); personal relationships (maximum score=6); and treatment (maximum score=3). The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4 and 12|FAS; OC||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831022|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean DLQI Subscale Scores During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The DLQI can be analyzed under 6 subscales by combining questions and is categorized as follows: symptoms and feelings (maximum score=6); daily activities (maximum score=6); leisure (maximum score=6); work and school (maximum score=3); personal relationships (maximum score=6); and treatment (maximum score=3).|Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831023|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in DLQI Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. The minimally important difference for the DLQI has been estimated as a 2 to 5 point change from baseline.|Weeks 4 and 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831024|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI questions are rated by the participant as 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831025|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an ISI Score of 0 During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|ISI assessed severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis. ISI is a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831026|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in ISI Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|ISI assessed severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis. ISI is a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831027|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Itch Severity Item (ISI) Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|ISI assessed severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis. ISI is a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate “your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours” on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms “No itching” (0) and “Worst possible itching” (10) at the ends.|Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831028|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI Score Greater Than or Equal to (≥)125% of the Baseline PASI Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment||Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831030|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a 90% Reduction in PASI Relative to Baseline (PASI90) During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|PASI quantifies severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite score by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis.|Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831031|NCT01241591|Secondary|Median Time to PASI50 Response During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment||Baseline up to Week 12|FAS; OC||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831032|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a 50% Reduction in PASI Relative to Baseline (PASI50) During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|PASI quantifies severity of psoriasis based on both lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite score by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis.|Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participatns|||Number
831033|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Percent Change From Baseline in Total Psoriatic BSA During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The %surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant(fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis.|Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||percent change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
831034|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Percentage of Total Psoriatic BSA During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The % surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||percent psoriatic BSA||Standard Error|Mean
831035|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in PASI Component Scores by Body Region During the 12-Week Double Blind Treatment|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis.|Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831036|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean PASI Component Scores by Body Region During the 12-Week Double Blind Treatment|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831037|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in PASI Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis.|Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831038|NCT01241591|Secondary|Mean PASI Score During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0(no disease)-72(maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated:0(0%)-6(90–100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4). PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1; higher scores represent greater severity of psoriasis.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831039|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI75 Response During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI75 response was defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to baseline/Day 1.|Weeks 2, 4, and 8|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831040|NCT01241591|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each PGA Category During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 to 4). The severity scores are summed and averaged after which the total average is rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe).|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|FAS; OC||percentage of participants|||Number
831041|NCT01241591|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants With a PGA Response of Clear or Almost Clear During the 12-Week Double-Blind Treatment"|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 to 4). The severity scores are summed and averaged after which the total average is rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response is defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Weeks 2, 4, and 8|FAS; Observed Case (OC): no imputation||percentage of participants|||Number
831042|NCT01241591|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI75) Response at Week 12|The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both lesion severity and the percent of body surface area (BSA) affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI75 response was defined as at least a 75 percent (%) reduction in PASI relative to baseline/Day 1.|Week 12|FAS; NRI||percentage of participants|||Number
831043|NCT01241591|Primary|"Percentage of Participants With a Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) Response of Clear or Almost Clear at Week 12"|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 to 4). The severity scores are summed and averaged after which the total average is rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS): all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550, etanercept, or placebo); Non-Responder Imputation (NRI) method: participants with missing values were considered to be non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
831044|NCT01241760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants of Each IL28B Genotype Achieving Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks After the Last Planned Dose of Study Medication (SVR12 Planned)|The table below shows the effect of interleukin 28B (IL28B) gene's subtype (CC, CT or TT genotype) on the primary outcome measure: SVR12 planned.|End of trial, 12 weeks after the last planned dose|All analyses were performed on the full analysis (FA) set, which was defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants with response|||Number
831045|NCT01241760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Relapsed During Follow-up Period|The table below shows the percentage of participants who relapsed (ie, those having confirmed detectable hepatitis C virus [HCV] ribonucleic acid [RNA] during the 12-week follow-up period after previous HCV RNA <25 IU/mL, target not detected, at end of treatment).|During Follow-Up (24 weeks after the last dose of study drug)|The analysis was performed on subjects with HCV RNA <25 IU/mL at the planned end of treatment, which included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had data at the follow-up visit performed 24 weeks after the last dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
831046|NCT01241760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Virologic Failure Which Required Them to Permanently Discontinue All Study Drugs|The table below shows the percentage of participants who met a stopping rule, defined as having a hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) value at Week 4 >1000 IU/mL and at Weeks 12, 24, 32 and 40 ≥25 IU/mL.|Week 4, 12, 24, 32, 40|All analyses were performed on the full analysis (FA) set, which was defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
831047|NCT01241760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Values of Less Than 25 IU/ml, Target Not Detected, at Different Time Points.|The table below shows the percentage of participants with undetectable hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) levels, which means less than 25 IU/ml, target not detected, at different time points during the study.|Baseline, Week 4 and Week 4+12.|All analyses were performed on the full analysis (FA) set, which was defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants with response|||Number
831048|NCT01241760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 72 Weeks After the Start of Study Medication (SVR72 Planned)|The table below shows the percentage of participants achieving SVR 72 weeks after the start of study medication (SVR72 planned). SVR was defined as having plasma Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) levels less than 25 IU/mL, target not detected, at end of treatment and up to 72 weeks after start of study medication (i.e., no confirmed detectable HCV RNA in between).|End of trial, 72 weeks after the start of study medication|All analyses were performed on the full analysis (FA) set, which was defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants with response|||Number
831049|NCT01241760|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks After the Last Planned Dose of Study Drugs (SVR24 Planned)|The table below shows the percentage of participants achieving SVR 24 weeks after the last planned dose of study medication. SVR was defined as having Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) levels less than 25 international units/milliliter (IU/mL). The response for T12(b.i.d)/PR group is higher than that after 12 weeks because HCV RNA data for two participants were missing for SVR assessment at that time. Consequently, by definition of SVR12, they were counted as not having achieved SVR12.|End of trial, 24 weeks after last planned dose|All analyses were performed on the full analysis (FA) set, which was defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants with response|||Number
831050|NCT01241760|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response (SVR) 12 Weeks After the Last Planned Dose of Study Drugs (SVR12 Planned)|The table below shows the percentage of participants achieving Sustained Virologic Response 12 weeks after last planned dose of study medication (SVR12 planned). SVR was defined as having Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) levels less than 25 international units/milliliter (IU/mL).|End of trial, 12 weeks after last planned dose|All analyses were performed on the full analysis (FA) set, which was defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants with response|||Number
831051|NCT01241903|Secondary|Biomarkers of Platelet Function and Myocardial Necrosis||up to 30 days||||||
831052|NCT01241903|Primary|Platelet - Leukocyte Aggregates|measured by flow cytometry|within first 24 hours|||% leukocytes with platelets attached||Standard Error|Mean
831053|NCT01241916|Secondary|Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) Questionnaire|The DASH questionnaire measures arm-specific perceived disability. It contains 30 items and is scaled between zero and 100 with higher scores indicating worse upper-extremity function.|12 months|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
831054|NCT01241916|Primary|Change in Arc of Flexion and Extension|Active ulnohumeral motion will be measured using a hand-held goniometer by the co-investigator not involved in the care of the patient at enrollment and 6 months after enrollment.|baseline and 6 months|||Degrees||Full Range|Mean
831055|NCT01242020|Secondary|Microvascular Flow in the Periadventitial, Subcutaneous and Skeletal Muscle Tissues||up to 30 days|Reliable data for periadventitial microvascular flow, subcutaneous microvascular flow, and skeletal muscle microvascular flow were not be collected for this outcome measure.|||||
831056|NCT01242020|Primary|Variability of Repeated Measures for Each Subject|The variability of repeated measures for each subject, expressed as coefficient of variation (CV), in the periadventitial microvascular flow, subcutaneous microvascular flow and skeletal muscle flow.|up to 30 days|Reliable data for periadventitial microvascular flow, subcutaneous microvascular flow, and skeletal microvascular flow were not collected for the Outcome Measure.|||||
831057|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Renal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident renal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 9600.0 grams). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 11610.0 grams).|The case index date was the date of incident renal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831058|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Renal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident renal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident renal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831059|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Renal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident renal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.56 months), and Tertile 3 (5.57 - 105.82 months). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.72 months), and Tertile 3 (5.73 - 123.70 months).|The case index date was the date of incident renal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831060|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Renal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident renal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), Tertile 3 (8-298 prescriptions). Tertiles without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), and Tertile 3 (8-388 prescriptions).|The case index date was the date of incident renal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831245|NCT01244906|Secondary|Number of Patients With Overall Survival at 2 Years.||2 years|||participants|||Number
831246|NCT01244906|Secondary|Number of Patients to Achieve Full Donor Chimerism|Characterize rate of achievement of full donor chimerism|1 year|||participants|||Number
831061|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Renal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident renal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident pancreatic cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831062|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Pancreatic Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident pancreatic cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 9600.0 grams). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 11610.0 grams).|The case index date was the date of incident pancreatic cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831063|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Pancreatic Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident pancreatic cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident pancreatic cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831064|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Pancreatic Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident pancreatic cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.56 months), and Tertile 3 (5.57 - 105.82 months). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.72 months), and Tertile 3 (5.73 - 123.70 months).|The case index date was the date of incident pancreatic cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831065|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Pancreatic Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident pancreatic cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), Tertile 3 (8-298 prescriptions). Tertiles without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), and Tertile 3 (8-388 prescriptions).|The case index date was the date of incident pancreatic cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831066|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Pancreatic Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident pancreatic cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident pancreatic cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831157|NCT01244126|Primary|Maximum Postoperative Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) Pain Score.|FLACC assigns 0-2 points for each of 5 categories (face, legs, activity, cry, consolability)and sums these points to give a total score where high scores indicate worse pain (Paediatr Anaesth 2006; 16: 258-65)|Upon arrival in the PACU, and at 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60 minutes and at discharge|Analysis was performed on per protocol basis excluding patients with protocol violations||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831247|NCT01244906|Secondary|Number of Patients With Disease Free Survival at 2 Years||2 years|||participants|||Number
831067|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Other Nervous System (ONS) Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident ONS cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.1-30.0 grams [g]), T 2 (30.1-189.0 g), and T 3 (189.1-9600.0 g). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.1-30.0 g), T 2 (30.1-189.0 g), and T 3 (189.1-11610.0 g). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident other nervous system cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was same as for case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831068|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Other Nervous System Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident other nervous system cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident other nervous system cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was same as for case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831069|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Other Nervous System (ONS) Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident ONS cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.01-1.38 months [mo.]), T 2 (1.39-5.56 mo.), and T 3 (5.57-105.82 mo.). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.01-1.38 mo.), T 2 (1.39-5.72 mo.), and T 3 (5.73-123.70 mo.). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident other nervous system cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was same as for case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831070|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Other Nervous System (ONS) Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident ONS cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (1-2 prescriptions [prescrip.]), T 2 (3-7 prescrip.), T 3 (8-298 prescrip.). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (1-2 prescrip.), T 2 (3-7 prescrip.), and T 3 (8-388 prescrip.). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident other nervous system cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his cohort entry was same as for case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831071|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Other Nervous System Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident other nervous system cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date. Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gabapentin-exposed cancer cases or no gabapentin-exposed controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident other nervous system cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his cohort entry was the same as case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831072|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Bladder Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident bladder cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 9600.0 grams). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 11610.0 grams).|The case index date was the date of incident bladder cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831248|NCT01244906|Secondary|Number of Participants With Non-Relapse Mortality||1 year|||participants|||Number
831073|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Bladder Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident bladder cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident bladder cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831074|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Bladder Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident bladder cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.56 months), and Tertile 3 (5.57 - 105.82 months). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.72 months), and Tertile 3 (5.73 - 123.70 months).|The case index date was the date of incident bladder cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831075|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Bladder Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident bladder cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), Tertile 3 (8-298 prescriptions). Tertiles without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), and Tertile 3 (8-388 prescriptions).|The case index date was the date of incident bladder cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831076|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Bladder Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident bladder cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident bladder cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831077|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Penile Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident penile cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.1-30.0 grams [g]), T 2 (30.1-189.0 g), and T 3 (189.1-9600.0 g). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.1-30.0 g), T 2 (30.1-189.0 g), and T 3 (189.1-11610.0 g). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident penile cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831078|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Penile Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident penile cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident penile cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831158|NCT01244243|Primary|Arm Motor Fugl-Meyer Test|The Arm Motor Fugl-Meyer test is an assessment of Sensorimotor Recovery After Stroke. It is a 33 item measure with 3 subgroups which are Proximal, Wrist/Hand, and Coordination/Speed. The scaling for each item works on a scale of 0-2 with 0 being not able to be done, 1 being partially done, and 2 being done normally. The scoring goes from 0-66, higher is better, 66 is considered a normal score with no noticable complications in movement.|change from baseline to 1 month post-end treatment, Intention To Treat|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831079|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Penile Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident penile cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.01-1.38 months [mo.]), T 2 (1.39-5.56 mo.), and T 3 (5.57-105.82 mo.). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.01-1.38 mo.), T 2 (1.39-5.72 mo.), and T 3 (5.73-123.70 mo.). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident penile cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831080|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Penile Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident penile cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (1-2 prescriptions [prescrip.]), T 2 (3-7 prescrip.), T 3 (8-298 prescrip.). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (1-2 prescrip.), T 2 (3-7 prescrip.), and T 3 (8-388 prescrip.). Inestimable OR/95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident penile cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831081|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Penile Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident penile cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident penile cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831082|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Breast Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident breast cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 9600.0 grams). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 11610.0 grams).|The case index date was the date of incident breast cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831083|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Breast Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident breast cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident breast cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831084|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Breast Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident breast cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.56 months), and Tertile 3 (5.57 - 105.82 months). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.72 months), and Tertile 3 (5.73 - 123.70 months).|The case index date was the date of incident breast cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831249|NCT01244906|Secondary|Incidence of Absolute Neutrophil Count (ANC)/Platelet Engraftment|To estimate the incidence of neutrophil and platelet engraftment|Approximately Day 30|||participants|||Number
831085|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Breast Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident breast cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), Tertile 3 (8-298 prescriptions). Tertiles without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), and Tertile 3 (8-388 prescriptions).|The case index date was the date of incident breast cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831086|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Breast Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident breast cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident breast cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831087|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Bone/Joint Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident bone/joint cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.1-30.0 grams [g]), T 2 (30.1-189.0 g), and T 3 (189.1-9600.0 g). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.1-30.0 g), T 2 (30.1-189.0 g), and T 3 (189.1-11610.0 g). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident bone/joint cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831088|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Bone/Joint Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident bone/joint cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident bone/joint cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831089|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Bone/Joint Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident bone/joint cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.01-1.38 months [mo.]), T 2 (1.39-5.56 mo.), and T 3 (5.57-105.82 mo.). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.01-1.38 mo.), T 2 (1.39-5.72 mo.), and T 3 (5.73-123.70 mo.). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident bone/joint cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831090|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Bone/Joint Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident bone/joint cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (1-2 prescriptions [prescrip.]), T 2 (3-7 prescrip.), T 3 (8-298 prescrip.). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (1-2 prescrip.), T 2 (3-7 prescrip.), and T 3 (8-388 prescrip.). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident bone/joint cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831250|NCT01244906|Primary|Incidence of GVHD|To estimate the incidence of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) when utilizing post-transplant cyclophosphamide (Cy) and sirolimus for GVHD prophylaxis following reduced intensity allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (SCT) in patients with high risk hematologic malignancies.|1 year|||participants|||Number
831091|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Bone/Joint Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident bone/joint cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date. Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gabapentin-exposed cancer cases or no gabapentin-exposed controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident bone/joint cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831092|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Lung Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident lung cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 9600.0 grams). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 11610.0 grams).|The case index date was the date of incident lung cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831093|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Lung Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident lung cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident lung cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831094|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Lung Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident lung cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.56 months), and Tertile 3 (5.57 - 105.82 months). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.72 months), and Tertile 3 (5.73 - 123.70 months).|The case index date was the date of incident lung cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831095|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Lung Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident lung cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), Tertile 3 (8-298 prescriptions). Tertiles without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), and Tertile 3 (8-388 prescriptions).|The case index date was the date of incident lung cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831096|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Lung Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident lung cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident lung cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831197|NCT01244529|Primary|Lens Centration Acceptance|Investigator evaluated as acceptable (centered/slightly decentered) or unacceptable (substantially decentered). Number of eyes in each category will be reported by lens. This is an aggregate reporting of the lenses, combining the different base curves into a category by lens type. This is done per protocol, due to this primary outcome not being stratified by base curve.|after 15 minutes of contact lens wear|Analysis was on those completed subjects who were enrolled, randomized, and assigned to a study arm.||eyes|eyes||Number
831097|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Anal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident anal cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.1-30.0 grams [g]), T 2 (30.1-189.0 g), and T 3 (189.1-9600.0 g). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.1-30.0 g), T 2 (30.1-189.0 g), and T 3 (189.1-11610.0 g). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident anal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831098|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Anal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident anal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident anal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831099|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Anal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident anal cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.01-1.38 months [mo.]), T 2 (1.39-5.56 mo.), and T 3 (5.57 -105.82 mo.). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.01-1.38 mo.), T 2 (1.39-5.72 mo.), and T 3 (5.73-123.70 mo.). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident anal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831100|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Anal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident anal cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (1-2 prescriptions [prescrip.]), T 2 (3-7 prescrip.), T 3 (8-298 prescrip.). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (1-2 prescrip.), T 2 (3-7 prescrip.), and T 3 (8-388 prescrip.). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident anal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831101|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Anal Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident Anal cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident anal cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831102|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Stomach Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incident stomach cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.1-30.0 grams [g]), T 2 (30.1-189.0 g), and T 3 (189.1-9600.0 g). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.1-30.0 g), T 2 (30.1-189.0 g), and T 3 (189.1-11610.0 g). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident stomach cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831321|NCT01245140|Secondary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) at Screening, Baseline, and EOT (Week 24)|SBP and DBP were assessed at Screening, Baseline, and EOT.|Screening, Baseline, and EOT (Week 24)|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831103|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Stomach Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident stomach cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident stomach cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831104|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Stomach Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident stomach cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.01-1.38 months [mo.]), T 2 (1.3-5.56 mo.), and T 3 (5.57-105.82 mo.). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (0.01-1.38 m.), T 2 (1.39-5.72 mo.), and T 3 (5.73-123.70 mo.). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident stomach cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831105|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Stomach Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incident stomach cancer. Gabapentin (Gaba.) Exposure Description: With 2 year (yr) lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to 2 yr prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 yr lag=Gaba. exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertiles (T) with 2 yr lag: T 1 (1-2 prescriptions [prescrip]), T 2 (3-7 prescrip), T 3 (8-298 prescrip). Tertiles without 2 yr lag: T 1 (1-2 prescrip), T 2 (3-7 prescrip), and T 3 (8-388 prescrip). Inestimable OR and 95% CI when no gaba.-exposed cancer cases or controls at the exposure level.|The case index date was the date of incident stomach cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831106|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of Stomach Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incident stomach cancer. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident stomach cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831107|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of All-Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Cumulative Dose of Gabapentin|Incidence of all cancers. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 9600.0 grams). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.1 - 30.0 grams), Tertile 2 (30.1 - 189.0 grams), and Tertile 3 (189.1 - 11610.0 grams).|The case index date was the date of incident cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831108|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of All-Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Long Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incidence of all cancers. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date.|The case index date was the date of incident cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831159|NCT01244243|Primary|Action Research Arm Test|The Action Research Arm Test is a 19 item measure divided into 4 sub-tests (grasp, grip, pinch, and gross arm movement). Performance on each item is rated on a 4-point ordinal scale ranging from: 3: Performs test normally 2: Completes test, but takes abnormally long or has great difficulty 1: Performs test partially 0: Can perform no part of test. The test is used to determine upper limb function, 0-57 points with higher is better, 57 is the highest score indicating normal arm movement.|change from baseline to 1 month post-end treatment, Intention To Treat|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831109|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of All-Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Duration of Exposure to Gabapentin|Incidence of all cancers. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.56 months), and Tertile 3 (5.57 - 105.82 months). Tertile’s without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (0.01 - 1.38 months), Tertile 2 (1.39 - 5.72 months), and Tertile 3 (5.73 - 123.70 months).|The case index date was the date of incident cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831110|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of All-Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Number of Gabapentin Prescriptions|Incidence of all cancers. Gabapentin Exposure Description: With 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer). Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin exposure from cohort entry to index date. Tertile’s with 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), Tertile 3 (8-298 prescriptions). Tertiles without 2 year lag: Tertile 1 (1-2 prescriptions), Tertile 2 (3-7 prescriptions), and Tertile 3 (8-388 prescriptions).|The case index date was the date of incident cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831111|NCT01236053|Primary|Number of All-Cancer Cases and Matched Controls With the Indicated Exposure to Gabapentin|Incidence of all cancers. Gabapentin Exposure Description: Without 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to index date. With 2 year lag = Gabapentin prescription from cohort entry to 2 years prior to index date (to control for prediagnostic prescribing for pain symptoms possibly related to cancer).|The case index date was the date of incident cancer diagnosis ascertained in the GPRD study cohort 1995-2008. The matched control index date was the date at which the follow-up time from his/her cohort entry was the same as that for the case.|Cases & controls drawn from the GPRD study cohort. Entry into study cohort began January 1, 1993, or at time of GPRD registration if after Jan. 1, 1993. Follow-up ended December 31, 2008, or earlier if respective cancer was diagnosed or if participant left the GPRD for any reason including death. Participants with prior history of cancer excluded.||participants|||Number
831112|NCT01236105|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for LY2624803 and the Metabolite, LSN2797276|Tmax, estimated for both LY2624803 and the metabolite LSN2797276.|Predose and up to day 4|All participants who received at least 1 dose of LY2624803 and have evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||hours (h)||Full Range|Median
831113|NCT01236105|Primary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) for LY2624803 and the Metabolite, LSN2797276,|Cmax estimated for both LY2624803 and the metabolite LSN2797276.|Predose and up to Day 4|All participants who received at least 1 dose of LY2624803 and have evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831114|NCT01236105|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve (AUC) for LY2624803 and the Metabolite LSN2797276|AUC from time 0, extrapolated to infinity, estimated for both LY2624803 and the metabolite LSN2797276.|Predose and up to Day 4|All participants who received at least 1 dose of LY2624803 and have evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanogram*hour per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831115|NCT01236118|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) [Clinically Significant Events]|Data presented are the number of participants who experienced 1 or more AEs (all causalities and drug-related) and serious AEs (SAEs). A summary of SAEs and other non-serious AEs, regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events section of this report.|Baseline through study completion (up to Week 56)|All enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
831116|NCT01236170|Secondary|Wheelchair Activity||over a two week period following baseline||||||
831117|NCT01236170|Secondary|Participation in Society|"We assessed participation in society with a modified version of the Craig Handicap Assessment and Reporting Technique Short Form (CHART-SF). The CHART was designed to provide a simple measure of involvement in life situations (“In a typical week, how many days do you get out of your house and go somewhere?”) with sub-scales measuring physical independence, cognitive independence, mobility, occupation, social integration and economic self-sufficiency. The CHART-SF produces scores ranging from 0 (severe handicap) to 100 (no handicap) for each of the sub-scales and a total score ranging from 0-600. The CHART-SF is the most widely used participation measure in rehabilitation research. It has been used in various ethnic groups, and has well-established psychometric properties (test-retest reliability = .93; inter-rater reliability = .83). We dichotomized into Disabled and Not Disabled where disabled are those with a CHART score <100, and not disabled are those with a CHART score >=100"|Measured at baseline|452/482 participants were included in this analysis because 30 participants had missing data.||participants|||Number
831118|NCT01236170|Secondary|Satisfaction With Prescribed Wheelchair|We assessed Satisfaction with patients’ prescribe wheelchair using the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology ( (QUEST). We used an 8-item subset of the QUEST to assess patients’ satisfaction with their wheelchair. QUEST is the first and only standardized satisfaction assessment tool that was designed specifically for assistive technology devices. Its’ development was based on major theoretical models of assistive technology. The QUEST has been widely cited and used in clinical and research settings, and demonstrates strong psychometric properties (Cronbach’s alpha = .82). The 8 item subset focuses specifically on patients’ satisfaction with different aspects of their wheelchair (e.g., “How satisfied are you with the dimensions (size, height, length, width) of your assistive device?”). Responses range from 1(not satisfied at all) to 5(very satisfied). Cronbach’s alpha = .80 for the 8-item wheelchair subset. We chose to eliminate the other four items|one time use, at baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831119|NCT01236170|Secondary|Satisfaction With Wheelchair Service Delivery|We assessed Satisfaction with Wheelchair Service Delivery using the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8). The CSQ-8 is an 8-item, easily administered and scored measure of client satisfaction with services (e.g., “How would you rate the quality of service you have received?”). For the purpose of this study, we asked patients to focus specifically on satisfaction with service at their SCI or AL wheelchair clinic. The scale is unidimensional, yielding a homogenous estimate of general satisfaction with services. It is scored by summing the individual items and produces a score ranging from 8-32, with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction. The CSQ-8 has been extensively used in a variety of healthcare settings, operates similarly across ethnic groups, and demonstrates excellent psychometric properties (Cronbach’s alpha = .83-.93).|one time use, at baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831120|NCT01236170|Primary|Quality of Life|We will assess QOL with the Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey (VR-12)and two additional physical function items designed for patients with SCI. Eight QOL domains are assessed, including physical functioning, vitality, role limitations due to physical problems, role limitations due to emotional problems, bodily pain, general health, social functioning, and mental health. The VR-12 has been used extensively with Veterans in a variety of health domains and has shown to be reliable and valid in ambulatory care populations (Cronbach’s alpha= .83-.85). The additional two items were added because previous research demonstrated that existing measures of physical function in the VR12 are not appropriate to patients with SCI and are not able to reveal differences in physical function among SCI patients. We assessed physical QOL and mental QOL, both scales range from 0 (worst possible outcome) to 100 (best possible outcome).|Measured at baseline|Only 468/482 participants were included in this analysis due to 14 participants having missing data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831121|NCT01236196|Primary|Pain Intensity|Pain Intensity Rating, ranging from 0-6, higher score indicates greater pain intensity|Baseline, 46 weeks|OEF/OIF/OND military veterans with chronic pain||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831122|NCT01236196|Primary|Pain Behavior|Pain behavior measured as total score on Pain Behavior Checklist (range 0-6), higher score indicating more pain behavior|Baseline, 46 weeks|OEF/OIF/OND military veterans with chronic pain||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831123|NCT01236196|Primary|Depressive Symptoms|Depressive symptoms, measured on Beck Depression Inventory-II (total score with range from 0 to 63)|Baseline, 46 weeks|OEF/OIF/OND military veterans with chronic pain||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831124|NCT01236196|Primary|Level of Functioning|Physical health (quality of life), reported on the SF-12, range 0-100, higher scores reflect better quality of life and higher level of functioning|Baseline, 46 weeks|OEF/OIF/OND military veterans with chronic pain||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831125|NCT01242085|Primary|Alignment of Knee - Measured Mechanical Axis From CT Data|the mean knee mechanical axis was determined from 3D CT data - negative value designates varus alignment|postoperatively - CT done within 1 week of surgery|all participants who completed the study||degrees||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831126|NCT01242085|Secondary|Surgical Time|the difference between the average surgical time will be determined and compared with 95% CI|intraoperative surgical time|particpants who completed study||delta between means in minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831127|NCT01242111|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Respiratory Function Test FVC During the Pilot Trial (MOR-002) and Current Extension Trial (MOR-100).|Percent Change from baseline in Forced Vital Capacity.|Baseline and every 12 weeks for up to 72 weeks during the MOR-002 pilot trial and every 24 weeks for up to 192 weeks during the MOR-100 extension trial|Intent-to-Treat population (all subjects who enrolled in the study). The analysis was based on observed cases.||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
831128|NCT01242111|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Respiratory Function Test MVV During the Pilot Trial (MOR-002) and Current Extension Trial (MOR-100).|Percent Change from baseline in Maximum Voluntary Ventilation.|Baseline and every 12 weeks for up to 72 weeks during the MOR-002 pilot trial and every 24 weeks for up to 192 weeks during the MOR-100 extension trial|Intent-to-Treat population (all subjects who enrolled in the study). The analysis was based on observed cases.||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
831129|NCT01242111|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Urine Keratan Sulfate (uKS) Levels During the Pilot Trial (MOR-002) and Current Extension Trial (MOR-100).|Percent Change from baseline in Normalized Urine KS. The percent change was calculated (Week X value - baseline value)/baseline value *100%|Baseline and every 12 weeks for up to 72 weeks during the MOR-002 pilot trial and every 24 weeks for up to 168 weeks during the MOR-100 extension trial|Intent-to-Treat population (all subjects who enrolled in the study). The analysis was based on observed cases.||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
831130|NCT01242111|Secondary|Change in Baseline in Endurance as Measured by the 3 Minute Stair Climb During the Pilot Trial (MOR-002) and Current Extension Trial (MOR-100).|Change from baseline in the 3-minute Stair Climb Test (3MSCT). Patients walked up stairs that have a railing, which could be used for support, for 3 minutes, with the number of stairs climbed recorded. The test result was the number of steps climbed per minute.|Baseline and every 12 weeks for up to 72 weeks during the MOR-002 pilot trial and every 24 weeks for up to 192 weeks during the MOR-100 extension trial|Intent-to-Treat population (all subjects who enrolled in the study). One patient was developmentally unable to perform the 3MSCT and the test scores were set to missing. The analysis was based on observed cases.||steps/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
831131|NCT01242111|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Endurance as Measured by the 6-minute Walk Test During the Pilot Trial (MOR-002) and Current Extension Trial (MOR-100).|Change from baseline in meters in 6-minute Walk Test. As a measure of endurance, a 6-minute walk test (6MWT) was performed according to the American Thoracic Society Guidelines. Patients were instructed to walk as far as possible in 6 minutes.|Baseline and every 12 weeks for up to 72 weeks during the MOR-002 pilot trial and every 24 weeks for up to 192 weeks during the MOR-100 extension trial|Intent-to-Treat population (all subjects who enrolled in the study). Two patients were either physically (score was designated as 0 m) or developmentally (score was set to missing) unable to perform the 6MWT. The analysis was based on observed cases.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
831132|NCT01242111|Primary|Safety Evaluation|"The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the safety of weekly infusions of BMN 110; the safety variables included Adverse Events (AEs).
The primary outcome measure data is presented in more detail under the Adverse Events section."|Entire Study Period, up to 240 weeks|The primary outcome measure data is presented in more detail under the Adverse Events section.||participants|||Number
831133|NCT01242176|Secondary|Area Under the Curve 0 to the Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV (%)."|30 minutes (mins) before drug administration and 20min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication and who provided evaluable data for at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||nmol*h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
831134|NCT01242176|Primary|Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma.
Note the standard deviation is actually the CV (%)."|30 minutes (mins) before drug administration and 20min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication and who provided evaluable data for at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
831135|NCT01242176|Primary|Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
Note the standard deviation is actually the coefficient of variation (CV (%))."|30 minutes (mins) before drug administration and 20min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication and who provided evaluable data for at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||nmol*h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
831136|NCT01242371|Secondary|Measurement of Gliadin and Casein Antibody Levels||16 weeks (baseline prior to placebo run in to week 14)||||||
831137|NCT01242371|Secondary|Gastrointestinal Functioning From the Beginning to the End of the Double-blind Treatment Phase Weeks 0-14|"Self report rating of difficulty moving bowels on a 4 point scale from no difficulty to severe difficulty"|14 weeks (weeks 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 & 14)||||||
831138|NCT01242371|Primary|Change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Score From the Start to the End of the Double-blind Treatment Phase (Week 0 to Week 14)|The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) measures psychiatric symptomatology, especially related to psychosis. The complete PANSS contains ratings for 30 symptoms, including 7 positive symptoms, 7 negative symptoms, and 16 general psychiatric symptoms. The severity of each symptom is rated on a scale ranging from 1 (minimal) to 7 (extreme); higher scores indicate increased symptomatology. Total PANSS scores include scores from all categories and range from 30 to 210 units on a scale.|14 weeks (week 0 to week 14)|Week 0 data is based on the number of participants in the probiotic supplement group (n=33) and the placebo group (n=32) who began the treatment phase. Week 14 data is based on the number of participants in the probiotics supplement group (n=31) and the placebo group (n=27) who completed the treatment phase.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831139|NCT01243892|Secondary|Annualized Height Velocity in Response to rhGH Treatment Using the NuSpin Device During the Second Year of Therapy|The annualized height velocity (cm/yr) for second year was calculated as: [(height in cm at t24 – height in cm at t12) divided by (date at t24 – date at t12)] multiplied by 365.25, where, t12 is the 1-year measurement visit and t24 is the 2-year measurement visit.|Month 12 to Month 24 (Year 1 to Year 2)|Data for this outcome measure was not collected as the study was terminated prematurely due to slow enrollment.|||||
831140|NCT01243892|Secondary|Annualized Height Velocity in Response to rhGH Treatment Using the NuSpin Device for First Year of Treatment|The annualized height velocity (cm/yr) after 1 year was calculated as: [(height in cm at t12 – height in cm at t0) divided by (date at t12 – date at t0)] multiplied by 365.25, where, t0 is the baseline measurement visit and t12 is the 1-year measurement visit.|Baseline up to Month 12 (Year 1)|Data for this outcome measure was not collected as the study was terminated prematurely due to slow enrollment.|||||
831141|NCT01243892|Primary|Annualized Height Velocity in Response to rhGH Treatment Using the NuSpin Device After Two Years of Treatment|The annualized height velocity (cm per year [cm/yr]) over 2 years was calculated as: [(height in cm at t24 minus (–) height in cm at t0) divided by (date at t24 – date at t0)] multiplied by 365.25, where, t0 is the baseline measurement visit and t24 is the 2-year measurement visit.|Baseline up to Month 24 (Year 2)|Data for this outcome measure was not collected as the study was terminated prematurely due to slow enrollment.|||||
831142|NCT01243944|Secondary|Estimated Duration of the Complete Hematological Remission|"Duration of the complete hematological remission is defined as the time from the first occurrence of complete hematological remission until the date of the first documented progression (end of response).
Kaplan-Meier estimates are provided for duration of complete hematological remission."|Through study completion, analysis was conducted when all patients had completed the Week 80 visit or discontinued the study|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization. Duration of response was pre-specified in the protocol to be analyzed for the ruxolitinib arm only considering the study design which allowed crossover for the BAT arm beginning at Week 32.||probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831143|NCT01243944|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Achieving a Durable Complete or Partial Clinicohematologic Response at Week 48|Durable Complete or Partial Clinicohematologic Response was defined as any subject who achieved complete or partial clinicohematologic response per the European LeukemiaNet modified criteria for response in polycythemia vera at Week 32 and maintained that response 48 weeks after randomization.|48 Weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization.||percentage of participants|||Number
831144|NCT01243944|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Who Achieved Overall Clinicohematologic Response at Week 32|Overall Clinicohematologic Response is defined as any subject who achieved a complete or partial clinicohematologic response per the European LeukemiaNet modified criteria for response in polycythemia vera (PV). A Complete Response (CR) is defined as: hematocrit control, spleen volume reduction at least 35% from baseline, platelet count less than or equal to 400 x 10(9)/L, and white blood cell count less than or equal to 10 x 10(9)/L. A Partial Response (PR) is defined as hematocrit control or response in all 3 of the other criteria.|32 Weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization.||percentage of participants|||Number
831145|NCT01243944|Secondary|Estimated Duration of the Primary Response|"Duration of the primary response is defined as the time from the first occurrence when both components of the primary endpoint are met until the date of the first documented disease progression (end of response).
Kaplan-Meier estimates are provided for duration of primary response."|Through study completion, analysis was conducted when all patients had completed the Week 80 visit or discontinued the study|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization. Duration of response was pre-specified in the protocol to be analyzed for the ruxolitinib arm only considering the study design which allowed crossover for the BAT arm beginning at Week 32.||probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831146|NCT01243944|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Who Achieved Durable Spleen Volume Reduction at Week 48|Durable Spleen Volume Reduction was defined as a subject who achieved at least 35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume at Week 32 and maintained that response 48 weeks after randomization.|48 Weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831147|NCT01243944|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Who Achieved a Durable Hematocrit Control at Week 48|Durable Hematocrit Control was defined as any subject who achieved phlebotomy eligibility independence from Week 8 to Week 32 and maintained hematocrit control up to 48 weeks after randomization.|48 Weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831148|NCT01243944|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Who Achieved a Durable Complete Hematological Remission at Week 48|Durable Complete Hematological Remission was defined as any subject who achieved Complete Hematological Remission at Week 32 and maintained their response up to 48 weeks after randomization.|48 Weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831149|NCT01243944|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Achieving Complete Hematological Remission at Week 32|Complete Hematological Remission at Week 32 was defined as any subject who achieved hematocrit control with a platelet count less than or equal to 400 X 10^9/L and a white blood cell count less than or equal to 10 X 10^9/L.|32 Weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831150|NCT01243944|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Achieving a Durable Primary Response at Week 48|Durable Primary Response was defined as any subject who achieved the primary outcome measure and who maintained their response up to 48 weeks after randomization.|48 Weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831151|NCT01243944|Primary|The Percentage of Subjects Achieving a Primary Response at Week 32|Primary response was defined as having achieved hematocrit control (the absence of phlebotomy eligibility beginning at the Week 8 visit and continuing through Week 32) and Spleen Volume Reduction (a greater than or equal to 35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume at Week 32).|32 Weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients to whom study treatment had been assigned by randomization.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831152|NCT01244061|Secondary|7-day Point Prevalence (PP) of Abstinence at Weeks 12, 24, and 52|The secondary endpoint of 7-day point prevalence of smoking cessation was determined by evaluating a participant's cigarette smoking status, and other nicotine (and/or other tobacco) use, based on the “last 7 days” questions in the Nicotine Use Inventory. Additionally, a participant was not considered a responder if the expired CO was >10 ppm at the time point being summarized. Participants were considered responders independently at each visit.|Weeks 12, 24 and 52|The FAS included all participants as the primary participant population for efficacy analyses in this study and was defined as all participants who had received ≥1 dose, including partial doses, of randomized study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
831153|NCT01244061|Secondary|CAR From Week 9 Through Week 24|The percentage of participants who, from Week 9 through Week 24, reported no smoking (Weeks 9 through 24) and no use of other nicotine-containing products (Weeks 9 through 12), or no use of other tobacco products (Weeks 13 through 24), since the last study visit/last contact (on the Nicotine Use Inventory) and who did not have CO >10 ppm at any of these visits during this time frame.|Week 9 through Week 24|The FAS included all participants as the primary participant population for efficacy analyses in this study and was defined as all participants who had received ≥1 dose, including partial doses, of randomized study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
831154|NCT01244061|Secondary|CAR From Week 9 Through Week 52|The percentage of participants who, from Week 9 through Week 52, reported no smoking (Weeks 9 through 52) and no use of other nicotine-containing products (Weeks 9 through 12), or no use of other tobacco products (Weeks 13 through 52), since the last study visit/last contact (on the Nicotine Use Inventory) and who did not have CO >10 ppm at any of these visits during this time frame.|Week 9 through Week 52|The FAS included all participants as the primary participant population for efficacy analyses in this study and was defined as all participants who had received ≥1 dose, including partial doses, of randomized study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
831155|NCT01244061|Primary|Continuous Abstinence Rate (CAR) From Week 9 Through Week 12|The percentage of participants who, from Week 9 through Week 12, reported no smoking and no use of other nicotine-containing products since the last study visit/last contact (on the Nicotine Use Inventory) and who did not have carbon monoxide (CO)> 10ppm at any visits during this time frame.|Week 9 through Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all participants as the primary participant population for efficacy analyses in this study and was defined as all participants who had received ≥1 dose, including partial doses, of randomized study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
831156|NCT01244126|Secondary|Maximum PAED Score|"Maximum score on the Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence delirium scale. This has 5 items ranging from 1-4 and higher scores indicate greater emergence delirium.
1. eye contact with care giver ,score 1-4, purposeful actions 1-4, aware of surrounding 1-4,restless 1-4, inconsolable 1-4, Maximum score 20."|Upon arrival in the PACU, and at 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60 minutes and at discharge|The sample size was based on the assumption that the pain scores in the intranasal fentanyl group would be similar to those in previously published data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831160|NCT01244412|Primary|Number of Participants Who Have an Acceptable Image (Image Score of 3 or Higher) of Their Eye With the Hand Held Camera|"Will determine if the hand held camera is comparable to the traditional table mount camera in quality of images. The quality of the image of the participant's eye taken with the hand held camera will be compared to the quality of the image taken with the table mount camera using the following scale. We will determine the number of participants who have a score of 3 or higher.
Scale Image scored as follows
Unacceptable: cannot see fundus detail
Unacceptable: fundus detail visualized, but inadequate for meaningful analysis
Acceptable: fundus detail visualized to make general comments, modest improvement image would be of sufficient quality for use
Good: fundus detail visualized, meaningful analysis possible, std photo superior
Excellent: fundus detail visualized as well as std photo
Superior: fundus detail of higher quality than std photo"|estimated 3 months|||participants|||Number
831161|NCT01244425|Secondary|Median Total Volume of Postoperative Drainage Fluid Within 48 Hours After Surgery||Within 48 hours after surgery|"Full analysis (data) set
Participants who received a drain and for whom the volume for the first 48 hours after surgery is available"||mL||Full Range|Median
831162|NCT01244425|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Transfusion Requirements Until Discharged From Surgical Ward|Transfusions administered included whole blood, packed red blood cells, fresh frozen plasma, and thrombocyte concentrate.|Intra- and postoperative until discharged from surgical ward|Full analysis (data) set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831163|NCT01244425|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Postoperative Rebleeding|Rebleeding until discharged from the surgical ward, defined as any rebleeding from the treated liver resection surface requiring surgical reexploration|Postoperative until discharged from surgical ward|Full analysis (data) set||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831164|NCT01244425|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Intraoperative Rebleeding After Occurrence of Hemostasis|Intraoperative rebleeding from the treated liver resection surface after occurrence of hemostasis.|Intraoperative day 0|Full analysis (data) set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831165|NCT01244425|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Intraoperative Hemostasis at 10 Minutes After Application of the Randomized Treatment|Hemostasis defined as no visible bleeding on the liver resection surface (liver surgical site) after treatment application. Hemostasis had to be maintained until surgical closure. Time recording started with treatment application, ie, with the start of spraying Fibrin Sealant, Vapor Heated, Solvent/Detergent treated with 500 IU/mL thrombin and synthetic aprotinin (FS VH S/D 500 s-apr) or with the application of manual compression.|10 minutes after start of treatment application|Full analysis (data) set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831166|NCT01244425|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Intraoperative Hemostasis at 8 Minutes After Application of the Randomized Treatment|Hemostasis defined as no visible bleeding on the liver resection surface (liver surgical site) after treatment application. Hemostasis had to be maintained until surgical closure. Time recording started with treatment application, ie, with the start of spraying Fibrin Sealant, Vapor Heated, Solvent/Detergent treated with 500 IU/mL thrombin and synthetic aprotinin (FS VH S/D 500 s-apr) or with the application of manual compression.|8 minutes after start of treatment application|Full analysis (data) set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831167|NCT01244425|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Intraoperative Hemostasis at 6 Minutes After Application of the Randomized Treatment|Hemostasis defined as no visible bleeding on the liver resection surface (liver surgical site) after treatment application. Hemostasis had to be maintained until surgical closure. Time recording started with treatment application, ie, with the start of spraying Fibrin Sealant, Vapor Heated, Solvent/Detergent treated with 500 IU/mL thrombin and synthetic aprotinin (FS VH S/D 500 s-apr) or with the application of manual compression.|6 minutes after start of treatment application|Full analysis (data) set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831168|NCT01244425|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Intraoperative Hemostasis at 4 Minutes After Treatment Application|"Hemostasis defined as no visible bleeding on the liver resection surface (liver surgical site) after treatment application. Hemostasis had to be maintained until surgical closure. Time recording started with treatment application, ie, with the start of spraying Fibrin Sealant, Vapor Heated, Solvent/Detergent treated with 500 IU/mL thrombin and synthetic aprotinin (FS VH S/D 500 s-apr) or with the application of manual compression.
The following were regarded as treatment failures:
No hemostasis achieved at 4 minutes post treatment application (for the FS VH S/D 500 s-apr arm, the “time to hemostasis” was used; a time window of +5 seconds was acceptable for showing a success)
Additional hemostatic treatment (ie, hemostatics in addition to the randomized treatment) was required
Reapplication of FS VH S/D 500 s-apr after 4 minutes
Intraoperative rebleeding after the first 4 minutes of the observation period"|4 minutes post start of treatment application|full analysis (data) set (FAS)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831173|NCT01244490|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|C-SSRS is a semi-structured interview that captures the occurence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors during the assessment period. The interview includes definitions and suggested questions to solicit the type of information needed to determine if a suicide-related thought or behaviour occurred. The assessment is done by the nature of the responses, not by a numbered scale. Outcome measure is at 12 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 15 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 12 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 15 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|SP||participants|||Number
831174|NCT01244490|Secondary|Structure Side-Effect Questionnaire|The Structured Side-effect Questionnaire is a simple checklist of 17 side effects. The subject indicates whether a side effect has occurred since the last visit by marking ‘yes’ on the checklist for each of the events listed. Outcome measure is at 12 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 15 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 12 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 15 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Safety Population||participants|||Number
831175|NCT01244490|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale for Children (BPRS-C) Total Score at Weeks 10/13 - LOCF|The BPRS-C characterizes childhood behavioral and emotional symptomatology. A total of 21 items are rated on a scale from 0 (not present) to 6 (extremely severe) with a total score ranging from 0 to 126. A decrease in score indicates a reduction in psychopathology. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Baseline and up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Safety Population defined as of randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831176|NCT01244490|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Risk Domain Score at Week 10/13 - LOCF|The WFIRS-P Risk Domain is the mean of 10 items, ranging from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. If more than 30% of items used to derive the score were missing, the corresponding score was considered as missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831177|NCT01244490|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Social Domain Score at Week 10/13 - LOCF|The WFIRS-P Social Domain is the mean of 7 items, ranging from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. If more than 30% of items used to derive the score were missing, the corresponding score was considered as missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831178|NCT01244490|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Child Self-Concept Domain Score at Week 10/13 - LOCF|The WFIRS-P Child Self-Concept Domain is the mean of 3 items, ranging from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. If more than 30% of items used to derive the score were missing, the corresponding score was considered as missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831179|NCT01244490|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Life Skills Domain Score at Week 10/13 - LOCF|The WFIRS-P Life Skills Domain is the mean of 10 items, ranging from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. If more than 30% of items used to derive the score were missing, the corresponding score was considered as missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831180|NCT01244490|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Behavior in School Domain Score at Week 10/13 - LOCF|The WFIRS-P Behavior in School Domain is the mean of 6 items, ranging from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. If more than 30% of items used to derive the score were missing, the corresponding score was considered as missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831181|NCT01244490|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Academic Performance Domain Score at Week 10/13 - LOCF|The WFIRS-P Academic Performance Domain is the mean of 4 items, ranging from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. If more than 30% of items used to derive the score were missing, the corresponding score was considered as missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831182|NCT01244490|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Global Score at Week 10/13 - LOCF|The WFIRS-P Global Score is the mean of 50 items, ranging from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Baseline and Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. If more than 30% of items used to derive the score were missing, the corresponding score was considered as missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831183|NCT01244490|Secondary|Health Utilities Index-2/3 (HUI 2/3) Scores - LOCF|HUI is used to describe health status and to obtain utility scores by collecting data using one or more questionnaires in formats selected to match the specific study design criteria. Scoring ranges from 0.00 (dead) to 1.00 (perfect health). Higher scores represent better health status. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. Not all subjects in the FAS population had data for this outcome.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831251|NCT01244984|Secondary|Number of Rescue Medication Inhalations|Salbutamol inhaler was used as the rescue medication. Participants entered the number of rescue medication inhalations in the patient diary twice daily (morning and evening).|Baseline up to Week 52|ITT Population. The number of participants analyzed depends on the number of participants remaining in the indaicated time period.||Number of inhalations||Standard Deviation|Mean
831185|NCT01244490|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the WFIRS-P Family Domain Score at Week 10/13 - LOCF|The WFIRS-P Family Domain is the mean of 10 items, ranging from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Baseline and Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. If more than 30% of items used to derive the score were missing, the corresponding score was considered as missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831186|NCT01244490|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale - Parent Report (WFIRS-P) Learning and School Domain Scores at Week 10/13 - LOCF|The WFIRS-P Learning in School Domain is the mean of 10 items, ranging from 0 (never/not at all) to 3 (very often/very much). Higher scores indicate greater functional impairment. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Baseline and Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. If more than 30% of items used to derive the score were missing, the corresponding score was considered as missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831187|NCT01244490|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement on Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Scores|Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) consists of a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Improvement is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) on the scale. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set. Not all subjects in the FAS population had data for this outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
831188|NCT01244490|Primary|Change From Baseline in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-fourth Edition (ADHD-RS-IV) Total Score at Week 10/13 - Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|The ADHD-RS-IV consists of 18 items scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (severe symptoms) with total score ranging from 0 to 54. Outcome measure is at 10 weeks for ages 6-12 years and at 13 weeks for ages 13-17 years.|Baseline and Up to 10 weeks for children aged 6-12 years and up to 13 weeks for adolescents aged 13-17 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS) defined as all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of investigational product. If more than 20% of the items used for summing a score were missing, the score was set to missing.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831189|NCT01244503|Secondary|Histology -NAS Scoring of Liver Biopsy|"OBT will be compared to histology (including NAS score as described above)and other parameters to develop severity score. Only subjects with biopsy from routine clinical practice will be enrolled.
NAS (Non-alcoholic-steatohepatitis (NASH) Activity Score) scoring system includes the following components: steatosis, which is scaled from 0-3, lobular inflammation, which is scaled from 0-3 and hepatocellular ballooning, which is scaled from 0-2. NAS score greater or equal to 5 indicates NASH. The range of the NAS score is from 0-8."|Up to 6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831190|NCT01244503|Primary|The Peak Value of the PDR (Percentage Dose Recovery of 13C) of OBT (Octanoate Breath Test)|To assess the ability of the OBT to assess disease severity in patients with suspected NAFLD (non alcoholic fatty liver disease) compared to NAS (Non-alcoholic-steatohepatitis (NASH) Activity Score) scoring system, where steatosis is scaled from 0-3, lobular inflammation is scaled from 0-3 and hepatocellular ballooning is scaled from 0-2. NAS score greater or equal to 5 indicates NASH. The higher the PDR peak, the better the liver health and function.PDR units are percent per hour of 13C dose recovery and describes rate of metabolism. The PDR peak is the highest rate of metabolism the liver reaches.The total range of NAS is 0-8.|1 hour|||PDR peak value (%/hour)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831191|NCT01244516|Secondary|Overall Subjective Lens Handling|Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response with a range of 0 to 120. Only galyficlon A and comfilcon A were evaluated.|after 2 weeks of contact lens wear|Analysis is on those subjects who completed the study (n=331) and where assigned to these two arms. Analysis is restricted to these two arms for this outcome as specified per protocol.||CLUE score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831192|NCT01244516|Primary|Corneal Staining|Investigator evaluated corneal staining. Percent of eyes with corneal staining presence or absence is evaluated.|after 2 weeks of contact lens wear|Analysis is on those subjects who completed the study (n=501).||percentage of eyes|Participants||Number
831193|NCT01244516|Primary|Overall Subjective Comfort|Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|after 2 weeks of contact lens wear|Analysis is on those subjects who completed the study (n=501).||CLUE score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831194|NCT01244529|Secondary|New Lens Power Fit Match to Control Lenses|The lens power fit of test lenses will be compared to control lenses to determine if the power matches. Percent of eyes with exact power fit will be evaluated.|after 15 minutes of contact lens wear|Analysis was on those completed subjects who were enrolled, randomized, and assigned to a study arm.||percentage of eyes|eyes||Number
831195|NCT01244529|Primary|Fit Acceptability|Investigator evaluated lens fit using a six point scale: 5-optimal...3-borderline acceptable...2-unacceptable. Percent of eyes in each category will be evaluated.|after 15 minutes of contact lens wear|Analysis was on those completed subjects who were enrolled, randomized, and assigned to a study arm.||percentage of eyes|eyes||Number
831196|NCT01244529|Primary|Primary Gaze Lens Movement|Investigator evaluated as acceptable (minimal or moderate movement) or unacceptable (insufficient or excessive movement). Percent of eyes in each category will be evaluated.|after 15 minutes of contact lens wear|Analysis was on those completed subjects who were enrolled, randomized, and assigned to a study arm.||percentage of eyes|eyes||Number
831394|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With PED at Week 18|PED assessed by Investigator at Visit 5, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent.|Week 18|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831198|NCT01244620|Primary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Steady state volume of distribution (Vss) is the apparent volume of distribution at steady-state.|Day 6 (predose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours post dose)|Not analyzed due to early study termination.||Liter (L)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
831199|NCT01244620|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Day 6 (predose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours post dose)|Not analyzed due to early study termination.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
831200|NCT01244620|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F)|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Clearance was estimated from population pharmacokinetic (PK) modeling. Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood.|Day 6 (predose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours post dose)|Not analyzed due to early study termination.||mL/minute||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
831201|NCT01244620|Primary|Area Under the Curve of the 24 Hour Dosing Interval (AUC24)||Day 6 (predose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours post dose)|Not analyzed due to early study termination.||nanogram hour per milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
831202|NCT01244620|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Day 6 (predose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours post dose)|Not analyzed due to early study termination.||micrograms per milliliter (mcg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
831203|NCT01244620|Primary|Trough Plasma Concentrations (Ctrough)|Minimum or “trough”concentrations|Day 6 (predose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours post dose)|Not analyzed due to early study termination.||nanograms (ng)/milliliter (mL)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
831204|NCT01244620|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||Day 6 (predose and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours post dose)|Not analyzed due to early study termination.||hours||Full Range|Median
831205|NCT01244633|Secondary|Columbia Scale for Suicide Risk|This test monitors whether the patient has any feelings of committing self-harm. It is mandated by the FDA to include this scale in all clinical trials of new central nervous system drugs.|Every 7 days||||||
831206|NCT01244633|Secondary|Safety Assessments|Patients will be evaluated for any adverse events, and they will have a variety of blood tests to examine if any changes occur.|Every 7 days||||||
831207|NCT01244633|Secondary|Clinician Global Impression – Improvement and Severity Scales (CGI)|This is a measure of how the treating physician perceives the effectiveness of a drug treatment, and it is typically used in these types of clinical trials.|End of trial||||||
831208|NCT01244633|Secondary|Premonitory Urge for Tics Scale (PUTS-1)|This is a measure of the tic behavior that is seen in Tourette's patients, and it is typically used in these types of trials.|Every 7 days||||||
831209|NCT01244633|Secondary|Hamilton Depression Scale|This is a measure of feelings of depression that the patient might have.|Every 7 days||||||
831210|NCT01244633|Secondary|Adult Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) Self-report Symptom Checklist (ASRS)|This is a standard measure of ADHD severity that is typically used in these types of clinical trials.|Every 7 days||||||
831211|NCT01244633|Primary|Yale Global Tic Severity Score|The Yale Global Tic Severity Score is a composite of subject reported severity of motor (range 0-25) and vocal (range 0-25) tics , as well as an impairment score (range 0-50). The outcome we are using is the Total Tic Severity score which is the sum of the motor and vocal tic severity scores (range 0-50). The higher the score on this scale, the more severe the symptoms. A positive drug effect is associated with a decrease from baseline.|8 weeks|Subjects completing the study||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831212|NCT01244711|Primary|Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)|For MDD: The primary efficacy measures will be change from baseline to endpoint in the MADRS and the change in mean daily benzodiazepine dose in diazepam equivalents during the past week. Range is 0 (least severe) to 50 (most severe).|12 weeks|Change in total score on the MADRS from baseline to final visit||units on a scale|||Number
831213|NCT01244724|Secondary|National Hospital Seizure Severity Scale||12 weeks||||||
831214|NCT01244724|Primary|Hamilton Depression Scale|Measure of severity of depression -total score of Hamilton Depression Scale ranges from 0 (no depression) to 60 (worst depression possible)|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831215|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PQ-LES-Q Overall Score (i.e., Item 15) at Day 21|PQ-LES-Q is a questionnaire to assess quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction in children and adolescents. The participant is asked to rate 15 items reflecting quality of life with respect to the previous week on a scale of 1=very poor to 5=very good. Items 1-14 assess specific areas (e.g., your health, your mood or feelings); Item 15 is a global assessment of overall quality of life. The Item 15 result is defined to be the PQ-LES-Q overall score, and ranged from 1 to 5 with a higher score indicating better quality of life. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 21; improvement in quality of life is represented by positive values. This analysis used an LOCF approach; if no Day 21 value was available for a participant, the last available post-baseline on-treatment assessment prior to the Day 21 assessment was used.|Baseline and Day 21|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment value of PQ-LES-Q overall score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831223|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CGI-BP Depression Score at Day 7|The CGI-BP is a clinician-rated instrument for assessing bipolar illness that includes subscales assessing mania and depression. This measure reports one item within the CGI-BP, which is a 7-point scale assessing the severity of the depression component of the participant’s bipolar illness, with ratings from 1=normal, not ill to 7=very severely ill. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 7; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 7|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 7 value of CGI-BP depression score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831216|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pediatric Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (PQ-LES-Q) Total Score at Day 21|PQ-LES-Q is a questionnaire to assess quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction in children and adolescents. The participant is asked to rate 15 items reflecting quality of life with respect to the previous week on a scale of 1=very poor to 5=very good. Items 1-14 assess specific areas (e.g., your health, your mood or feelings); Item 15 is a global assessment of overall quality of life. The PQ-LES-Q total score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the first 14 items, and ranged from 14 to 70 with a higher score indicating better quality of life. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 21; improvement in quality of life is represented by positive values. This analysis used an LOCF approach; if no Day 21 value was available for a participant, the last available post-baseline on-treatment assessment prior to the Day 21 assessment was used.|Baseline and Day 21|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment value of PQ-LES-Q total score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831217|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Children’s Global Assessment Scale (CGAS) Score at Day 21|CGAS is a 100-point scale measuring psychological, social, and school functioning in children aged 6-17. Minimum scores ranged from 1-10, representing the need for constant supervision (worse result) to maximum scores of 91-100, representing superior functioning (better result). The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 21; improvement in functioning is represented by positive values. This analysis used an LOCF approach; if no Day 21 value was available for a participant, the last available post-baseline on-treatment assessment prior to the Day 21 assessment was used.|Baseline and Day 21|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment value of CGAS score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831218|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CDRS-R Total Score at Day 21|The CDRS-R is a 17-item clinician-rated instrument for assessing the presence and severity of depressive symptoms in children. Fourteen of the 17 items are rated on a scale of 1-7 and 3 of the items are rated on a scale of 1-5, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms. The CDRS-R total score for each participant is the sum of the ratings for the 17 individual items, and can range from 17-113, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 21; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 21|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 21 value of CDRS-R total score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831219|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CDRS-R Total Score at Day 14|The CDRS-R is a 17-item clinician-rated instrument for assessing the presence and severity of depressive symptoms in children. Fourteen of the 17 items are rated on a scale of 1-7 and 3 of the items are rated on a scale of 1-5, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms. The CDRS-R total score for each participant is the sum of the ratings for the 17 individual items, and can range from 17-113, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 14; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 14|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 14 value of CDRS-R total score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831220|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Children's Depression Rating Scale, Revised (CDRS-R) Total Score at Day 7|The CDRS-R is a 17-item clinician-rated instrument for assessing the presence and severity of depressive symptoms in children. Fourteen of the 17 items are rated on a scale of 1-7 and 3 of the items are rated on a scale of 1-5, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms. The CDRS-R total score for each participant is the sum of the ratings for the 17 individual items, and can range from 17-113, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 7; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 7|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 7 value of CDRS-R total score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831221|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CGI-BP Depression Score at Day 21|The CGI-BP is a clinician-rated instrument for assessing bipolar illness that includes subscales assessing mania and depression. This measure reports one item within the CGI-BP, which is a 7-point scale assessing the severity of the depression component of the participant’s bipolar illness, with ratings from 1=normal, not ill to 7=very severely ill. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 21; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 21|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 21 value of CGI-BP depression score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831222|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CGI-BP Depression Score at Day 14|The CGI-BP is a clinician-rated instrument for assessing bipolar illness that includes subscales assessing mania and depression. This measure reports one item within the CGI-BP, which is a 7-point scale assessing the severity of the depression component of the participant’s bipolar illness, with ratings from 1=normal, not ill to 7=very severely ill. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 14; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 14|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 14 value of CGI-BP depression score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831616|NCT01247428|Secondary|Device Success|Achievement of a final in-stent residual diameter stenosis of <50% (by QCA), using the assigned device only|8 hours|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831224|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CGI-BP Depression Score at Day 4|The CGI-BP is a clinician-rated instrument for assessing bipolar illness that includes subscales assessing mania and depression. This measure reports one item within the CGI-BP, which is a 7-point scale assessing the severity of the depression component of the participant’s bipolar illness, with ratings from 1=normal, not ill to 7=very severely ill. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 4; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 4|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 4 value of CGI-BP depression score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831225|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CGI-BP Mania Score at Day 21|The CGI-BP is a clinician-rated instrument for assessing bipolar illness that includes subscales assessing mania and depression. This measure reports one item within the CGI-BP, which is a 7-point scale assessing the severity of the mania component of the participant’s bipolar illness, with ratings from 1=normal, not ill to 7=very severely ill. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 21; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 21|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 21 value of CGI-BP mania score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831226|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CGI-BP Mania Score at Day 14|The CGI-BP is a clinician-rated instrument for assessing bipolar illness that includes subscales assessing mania and depression. This measure reports one item within the CGI-BP, which is a 7-point scale assessing the severity of the mania component of the participant’s bipolar illness, with ratings from 1=normal, not ill to 7=very severely ill. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 14; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 14|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 14 value of CGI-BP mania score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831227|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CGI-BP Mania Score at Day 7|The CGI-BP is a clinician-rated instrument for assessing bipolar illness that includes subscales assessing mania and depression. This measure reports one item within the CGI-BP, which is a 7-point scale assessing the severity of the mania component of the participant’s bipolar illness, with ratings from 1=normal, not ill to 7=very severely ill. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 7; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 7|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 7 value of CGI-BP mania score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831228|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CGI-BP Mania Score at Day 4|The CGI-BP is a clinician-rated instrument for assessing bipolar illness that includes subscales assessing mania and depression. This measure reports one item within the CGI-BP, which is a 7-point scale assessing the severity of the mania component of the participant’s bipolar illness, with ratings from 1=normal, not ill to 7=very severely ill. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 4; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 4|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 4 value of CGI-BP mania score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831229|NCT01244815|Secondary|Total Y-MRS 50% Responders at Days 4, 7, 14 and 21|A total Y-MRS 50% responder was defined as a participant who had a reduction from baseline to the identified study visit of at least 50% in the Y-MRS total score. The Y-MRS is an 11-item clinician-rated instrument for assessing the severity of manic episodes. A severity rating is assigned to each of the 11 items, based on the participant’s subjective report of his or her condition over the previous 48 hours and the clinician’s observations during the interview, with the emphasis on the latter. The Y-MRS total score for each participant is the sum of the ratings for the 11 individual items, and can range from 0-60 with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms. This analysis used a Last-Observation-Carried-Forward (LOCF) approach; if at a given visit no Y-MRS total score was available for determining whether a participant was a responder, the last available post-baseline on-treatment assessment prior to that visit was used.|Baseline and Days 4, 7, 14 and 21|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included for a visit, a Y-MRS total score must be available for that visit or a prior post-baseline on-treatment visit||participants|||Number
831230|NCT01244815|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression Scale for Use in Bipolar Disorder (CGI-BP) Overall Score at Day 21|Change from baseline in CGI-BP overall score at Day 21 is the Key Secondary Outcome Measure. The CGI-BP is a clinician-rated instrument for assessing bipolar illness that includes subscales assessing mania and depression. This measure reports one item within the CGI-BP, which is a 7-point scale assessing the severity of the participant’s overall bipolar illness, with ratings from 1=normal, not ill to 7=very severely ill. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 21; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 21|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy FAS); also, to be included a baseline and an on-treatment Day 21 value of CGI-BP overall score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831243|NCT01244893|Secondary|Corneal Staining|Corneal staining type was assessed by Investigator using a slit lamp and graded on a 5-point scale; 0=none, 1=trace, 2=mild, 3=moderate, 4=severe.|6-8 days after lens wear|Population analyzed are those who were enrolled, randomized, and completed the study.||units on a scale|eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
831395|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With PED at Week 12|PED assessed by Investigator at Visit 4, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent.|Week 12|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831231|NCT01244815|Primary|Change From Baseline in Y-MRS Total Score at Day 21|The Y-MRS is an 11-item clinician-rated instrument for assessing the severity of manic episodes. A severity rating is assigned to each of the 11 items (Elevated mood, Increased motor activity-energy, Sexual interest, Sleep, Irritability, Speech, Language-thought disorder, Thought content, Disruptive-aggressive behavior, Appearance, Insight), based on the participant’s subjective report of his or her condition over the previous 48 hours and the clinician’s observations during the interview, with the emphasis on the latter. Seven of the 11 items are rated on a scale of 0-4 and 4 of the items are rated on a scale of 0-8, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms. The Y-MRS total score for each participant is the sum of the ratings for the 11 individual items, and can range from 0-60, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Day 21; improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Day 21|Randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had both a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline on-treatment Y-MRS total score (this group is termed the efficacy Full Analysis Set [FAS]); also, to be included an on-treatment Day 21 value of Y-MRS total score must be available for a participant.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831232|NCT01244828|Primary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Total Score at Final Assessment|The PANSS is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument for assessing the symptoms of schizophrenia. It consists of 3 subscales: positive subscale (7 items), negative subscale (7 items), and general psychopathology subscale (16 items). Positive symptoms refer to an excess or distortion of normal mental status (e.g., delusions). Negative symptoms represent a diminution or loss of normal functions (e.g., emotional withdrawal). For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS total score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 30 PANSS items, and ranged from 30 to 210 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at the final assessment for a participant (calculated for a participant as final assessment value minus baseline value); improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline up to Week 52|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline PANSS measurement.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831233|NCT01244828|Primary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Total Score at Week 52|The PANSS is a 30-item clinician-rated instrument for assessing the symptoms of schizophrenia. It consists of 3 subscales: positive subscale (7 items), negative subscale (7 items), and general psychopathology subscale (16 items). Positive symptoms refer to an excess or distortion of normal mental status (e.g., delusions). Negative symptoms represent a diminution or loss of normal functions (e.g., emotional withdrawal). For each item, symptom severity was rated on a 7-point scale, from 1=absent to 7=extreme. The PANSS total score for each participant was calculated as the sum of the rating assigned to each of the 30 PANSS items, and ranged from 30 to 210 with a higher score indicating greater severity of symptoms. The reported measure is the change from baseline at Week 52 (calculated for a participant as Week 52 value minus baseline value); improvement in symptoms is represented by negative values.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both a baseline and a Week 52 PANSS measurement.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831234|NCT01244828|Primary|Change From Baseline in Prolactin at Week 52|Blood samples for determination of prolactin level were obtained at baseline and during the study. For each participant, change from baseline in prolactin at Week 52 was calculated as the Week 52 level minus the baseline level.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both a baseline and a Week 52 value of the measure.||µg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
831235|NCT01244828|Primary|Change From Baseline in Insulin at Week 52|Blood samples for determination of insulin level were obtained at baseline and during the study. For each participant, change from baseline in insulin at Week 52 was calculated as the Week 52 level minus the baseline level.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both a baseline and a Week 52 value of the measure.||µIU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831236|NCT01244828|Primary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Glucose at Week 52|Blood samples for determination of fasting glucose level were obtained at baseline and during the study. For each participant, change from baseline in fasting glucose at Week 52 was calculated as the Week 52 level minus the baseline level.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both a baseline and a Week 52 value of the measure.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
831237|NCT01244828|Primary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Week 52|Blood samples for determination of HbA1c were obtained at baseline and during the study. For each participant, change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 52 was calculated as the Week 52 value minus the baseline value.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both a baseline and a Week 52 value of the measure.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
831238|NCT01244828|Primary|Number of Participants With Extrapyramidal Symptoms|This measure reports the overall number of participants with any of a group of adverse events that were defined to represent extrapyramidal symptoms. The number of participants with each of the individual adverse events within this definition is also presented, for terms that occurred in at least one participant. For this measure, all adverse event terms within the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) Standardized MedDRA Query (SMQ) for “extrapyramidal syndrome” were treated as extrapyramidal symptoms.|Up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Up to approximately 56 weeks)|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
831239|NCT01244828|Primary|Change From Baseline in BMI at Week 52|For each participant, change from baseline in BMI was calculated as the Week 52 value minus the baseline value.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both a baseline and a Week 52 value of the measure.||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
831240|NCT01244828|Primary|Change From Baseline in Weight at Week 52|For each participant, change from baseline in weight was calculated as the Week 52 value minus the baseline value.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had both a baseline and a Week 52 value of the measure.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
831241|NCT01244893|Secondary|Bulbar Redness|Scale of 0 increasing to 4. 0=None, 4=Severe Redness|6-8 days after lens wear|Population analyzed consisted of those who were enrolled, randomized, and completed the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831242|NCT01244893|Secondary|Limbal Redness|Limbal redness was assessed by using a 5-point scale: 0=none, 1=trace, 2=mild, 3=moderate, 4=severe.|6-8 days after lens wear|Population analyzed are those who were enrolled, randomized, and completed the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831252|NCT01244984|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Rescue-free 24-hour Periods|The time span during which the participants did not have to take any rescue medication (medication intended to relieve symptoms immediately) was considered as a rescue free period. Change from Baseline is calculated as the value at Week 52 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline up to Week 52|ITT Population||Percentage of rescue free 24-hour period||Standard Deviation|Mean
831253|NCT01244984|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Symptom-free 24-hour Periods During the Study Treatment|Participants who were symptom free for 24-hours were assessed. Change from Baseline is calculated as the value at Week 52 minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline up to Week 52|ITT Population||Percentage of symptom-free days||Standard Deviation|Mean
831254|NCT01244984|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Symptom Score During the Study Treatment|The Baseline value was calculated as the mean of all available data recorded during the 7 days immediately prior to Visit 2 (treatment assignment visit). Participants entered their asthma symptom score in the patient diary twice daily (morning and evening). Daytime asthma symptom scores: 0-no asthma symptoms, 1-one episode of short-time asthma symptoms, 2-two or more episodes of short-time asthma symptoms, 3-asthma symptoms occurring during most part of daytime without interference with daily life activities, 4-asthma symptoms occurring during most part of daytime with interference with daily life activities, 5-severe asthma symptoms that disable working or daily life activities. Nighttime asthma symptom scores: 0-no asthma symptoms, 1-one awakening due to asthma symptoms, 2-two or more awakenings due to asthma symptoms, 3-asthma symptoms almost prevented the participant from sleeping, 4-severe asthma symptoms completely prevented from sleeping.|Baseline up to Week 52|ITT Population||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831255|NCT01244984|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Diary Data - Morning (AM) Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) and Evening (PM) PEF During the Study Treatment|Change from Baseline in AM and PM PEF at 52 weeks of evaluation period during study treatment was recorded in the dairy record card. The Baseline value was calculated as the mean of all available data recorded during the7 days immediately prior to the treatment start date (including Day 1: Day 1 is treatment start date). The PEF is defined as the greatest rate of airflow that can be achieved during forced exhalation beginning with the lungs fully inflated.|Baseline up to Week 52|ITT Population||Litres per Minute (L/min)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831256|NCT01244984|Secondary|Number of Participants With Severe Asthma Exacerbation During the Study Treatment|A severe asthma exacerbation is defined as the deterioration of asthma requiring the use of systemic corticosteroids (tablets, suspension, or injection) for at least 3 days or an in-patient hospitalization or emergency department visit due to asthma that required systemic corticosteroids. Courses of corticosteroids separated by 1 week or more were treated as separate severe exacerbations.|Baseline up to Week 52|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
831257|NCT01244984|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings|A 12-lead ECG was recorded in a supine position after the participant was kept at rest in this position for at least 5 minutes at assessment time points (Baseline[Week -2], Week 12, 24 and Week 52/WD) in the treatment period. Data are presented for clinically significant (CS) as well as not clinically significant (NCS) abnormal (Abn) findings. Any abnormal ECG, including those that worsen from Baseline, and determined clinically significant by the assessment of the investigator were recorded as CS.|Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. . Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Participants|||Number
831258|NCT01244984|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (HR)|Heart rate was measured in a sitting position after a participant was kept at rest for at least 5 minutes at Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 12, 24 and Week 52/WD. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|ITT Population. Only those participants with post-Baseline data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Beats/Minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
831259|NCT01244984|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Pressure|Blood pressure measurement included systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) at Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 12, 24 and Week 52/WD. Blood pressure was measured in a sitting position after a participant was kept at rest for at least 5 minutes. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|ITT Population. Only those participants with post-Baseline data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831260|NCT01244984|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the 24-hour Urinary Cortisol Excretion|Urine samples were collected for measurement of urinary cortisol excretion at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week 0), Week 24, and Week 52/WD. The 24-hour urinary cortisol excretion was calculated by multiplying the total volume of urine by the concentration of urinary cortisol. Cortisol is a hormone released from the adrenal gland that helps in fat, protein, and carbohydrate metabolism. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at post-Baseline time point minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Urine cortisol (UC) Population: all participants in the ITT Population from whom urine specimens were collected and who were considered not to have any confounding factors that might affect the analysis of the results of the specimens. Only those participants with post-Baseline data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Nanomoles (nmol)/24 hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831261|NCT01244984|Secondary|Number of Participants for the Indicated Uninalysis Parameters Tested by Dipstick at Baseline (BL), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Urinalysis parameters included: Urine Occult Blood (UOB), Urine Glucose (UG), Urine Ketones (UK), Urine Protein (UP), and Urine Leukocyte Esterase test for detecting White Blood Cell (UWBC). The dipstick was a strip used to detect the presence or absence of these parameters in the urine sample. The dipstick test gives results in a semi-quantitative manner, and results can be read as negative (Neg), Trace (TRA), 1+, 2+, and 3+, indicating proportional concentrations in the urine sample. Data are reported as the number of participants who had neg, trace, 1+, 2+, and 3+ levels at Baseline (Week -2) and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Participants|||Number
831262|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameter of Urine Specific Gravity (USG) at Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Urine samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||ratio of urine density to water density||Standard Deviation|Mean
831263|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameter of Urine Potential of Hydrogen (pH) at Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Urine samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||pH||Standard Deviation|Mean
831264|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameter of Chloride, Carbon Dioxide Content/Bicarbonate, Glucose, Potassium, Sodium, and Urea/Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) at Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Blood samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Millimoles per Liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831265|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameter of Bilirubin (Direct [BD], Indirect [BI], Total [BT], Creatinine, and Uric Acid at Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Blood samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Micromoles per Liter (µmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831266|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameter of Alkaline Phosphatase (AP), Alanine Amino Transferase (ALT), Aspartate Amino Transferase (AST), Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase (GGT), and Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH) at BL (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Blood samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (BL) (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||International unit per liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831267|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameter of Albumin and Total Protein (TP) at Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Blood samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
831268|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameter of Red Blood Cell Count at Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Blood samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||10^12 per liter (Ti/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831269|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameter of Hematocrit at Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Blood samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Proportions of I||Standard Deviation|Mean
831270|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameter of Hemoglobin at Baseline (Week -2), Week 12,Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Blood samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Grams per liter (g/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831271|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameters of Eosinophils, Platelet Count, White Blood Cell (WBC), and Total Neutrophils at Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Blood samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||10^9 per liter (Gi/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831282|NCT01245049|Secondary|Anti-Polio Type 1, 2 and 3 Antibody Titers|Antibody titers were presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|At Month 0, before the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831272|NCT01244984|Secondary|Laboratory Parameters of Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, and Total Neutrophils at Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|Blood samples were collected for measurement at the following scheduled time points: Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24 and Week 52/WD.|Baseline (Week -2), Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52/WD|"ITT Population. Only participants remaining in the study and contributing evaluable data at the indicated time points were analyzed.; thus the number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT Population. The number of participants assessed for each parameter is indicated by n=X, X."||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
831273|NCT01244984|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Non-serious Adverse Event (AE) and Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the definition above, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury. Refer to the general AE/SAE module for a list of AEs (occurring at a frequency threshold >=5%) and SAE.|From the start of investigational product to the last dose of treatment (up to Week 52/Withdrawal [WD])|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who had been randomized to and received at least one dose of randomized medication in the treatment period||Participants|||Number
831274|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|During the entire study period (From Day 0 to Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831275|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) follow-up period after booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831276|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and temperature [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) follow-up period after booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented, who had their symptoms sheet filled in and for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831277|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 4-day (Days 0–3) follow-up period after booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented, who had their symptoms sheet filled in and for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831278|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Anti-mumps|Seroconversion for anti-mumps was defined as the appearance of antibodies after vaccination in subjects who were initially seronegative [with antibody concentrations ≥ 231 units per millilitre (U/mL)].|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831279|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Anti-measles|Seroconversion for anti-measles was defined as the appearance of antibodies after vaccination in subjects who were initially seronegative [with antibody concentrations ≥ 150 milli-international units per millilitre (mIU/mL)].|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831280|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Booster Response for Polio Type 1, 2 and 3 Antigens|Booster response defined as: For initially seronegative subjects, antibody titers at least four times the cut-off (post-vaccination titer ≥ 32); For initially seropositive subjects, an increase in antibody titers of at least four times the Pre booster vaccination titer.|At Month 1, one month after the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831281|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Booster Response to PT, FHA and PRN Antigens|Booster response was defined as: For initially seronegative subjects (pre-vaccination concentration < 5 EL.U/mL), antibody concentrations at least four times the assay cut-off (post vaccination concentration ≥ 20 EL.U/mL). For initially seropositive subjects (with pre-vaccination concentration ≥ 5 EL.U/mL and < 20 EL.U/mL), an increase in antibody concentrations of at least four times the Pre booster vaccination concentration. For initially seropositive subjects (with pre-vaccination concentration ≥ 20 EL.U/mL), an increase in antibody concentrations of at least two times the Pre booster vaccination concentration.|At Month 1, one month after the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831283|NCT01245049|Secondary|Anti-rubella Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in IU/mL.|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831284|NCT01245049|Secondary|Anti-measles Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in mIU/mL.|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831285|NCT01245049|Secondary|Anti-mumps Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in U/mL.|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831286|NCT01245049|Secondary|Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in EL.U/mL.|At Month 0, before the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831287|NCT01245049|Secondary|Anti-D and Anti-T Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in IU/mL.|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831288|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-rubella Antibody|A seropositive subject was defined as a subject with anti-rubella antibody titers ≥ 4 IU/mL.|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831289|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-mumps Antibody|A seropositive subject was defined as a subject with anti-mumps antibody titers ≥ 231 U/mL.|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831290|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-measles Antibody|A seropositive subject was defined as a subject with anti-measles antibody titers ≥ 150 mIU/mL.|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831291|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Polio Type 1, 2 and 3|A seroprotected subject was defined as a subject with anti-polio type 1, 2 and 3 antibody titres ≥ the value of 8.|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831292|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN|A seropositive subject for anti-PT, anti-FHA and anti-PRN was a subject whose antibody concentration was ≥ 5 EL.U/mL.|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831293|NCT01245049|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Diphteria (D) and Tetanus (T)|A seroprotected subject was defined a subject with anti-D and anti-T antibody concentrations ≥ 0.1 international units per millilitre (IU/mL).|Before (Month 0) and one month after (Month 1) the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831294|NCT01245049|Primary|Anti-Polio Virus Type 1, 2 and 3 Antibody Titers|Antibody titers were presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|At Month 1, one month after the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831295|NCT01245049|Primary|Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA) and Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units per milliliter (EL.U/mL).|At Month 1, one month after the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831296|NCT01245049|Primary|Number of Subjects With a Booster Response to Diphtheria (D) and Tetanus (T) Antigens|Booster response was defined as: For initially seronegative subjects [i.e. pre-vaccination concentration below (<) cut-off value of 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL)] antibody concentrations at least four times the assay cut-off [post vaccination concentration greater than or equal to (≥) 0.4 IU/ml]. For initially seropositive subjects (pre-vaccination concentration ≥ 0.1 IU/ml), an increase in antibody concentrations of at least four times the Pre booster vaccination concentration.|At Month 1, one month after the booster vaccination|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831317|NCT01245140|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at EOT (Week 24)|HR is defined as the rate at which the heart beats. Change from Baseline is defined as the value at EOT minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and EOT (Week 24)|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
831318|NCT01245140|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SBP and DBP at EOT (Week 24)|Change from Baseline is defined as the value at EOT minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and EOT (Week 24)|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
831312|NCT01245101|Secondary|Markers of Immune Activation|Flow cytometry will be performed in whole blood for analysis of markers of immune activation by standard methodology using a LSR-II flow cytometer. Percentage and absolute counts of CD8+CD38+ cells will be determined as the main outcome measure.|16 weeks|11 of 12 subjects meeting the per protocol definition were analyzed for the Raltegravir then Observation arm. Poor enrollment led to early termination of study before second arm was activated.||Percentage of activated CD8+CD38+ cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
831313|NCT01245101|Primary|Episomal HIV cDNA Formation|These are linear viral cDNAs that are subsequently circularized by the DNA repair apparatus of the host cell to form episomes. They are markers of ongoing viral replication.|16 weeks|11 of 12 subjects meeting the per protocol definition were analyzed for the Raltegravir then Observation arm. Poor enrollment led to early termination of study before second arm was activated.||copies/million||Standard Deviation|Mean
831314|NCT01245140|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Negative Serum Pregnancy Test at Screening; Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and Safety Follow-up (Week 29)|Serum pregnancy tests were performed at each visit for females of childbearing potential.|Screening; Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); safety follow-up (Week 29)|Safety population. Only female participants were analysed for serum pregnancy test.||Participants|||Number
831315|NCT01245140|Secondary|Number of Participants With Normal/Abnormal Physical Status at Baseline With a Worst Post-Baseline Finding of Normal/Abnormal|A physical examination for each participant was performed at Baseline and at EOT (Week 24). The primary investigator classified physical status as either normal or abnormal.|Baseline and EOT (Week 24)|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
831316|NCT01245140|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weight at EOT (Week 24)|Change from Baseline is defined as the value at EOT minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline and EOT (Week 24)|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
831319|NCT01245140|Secondary|Mean Body Weight at Screening, Baseline ,and EOT (Week 24)|Body weight was measured at Screening, Baseline, and EOT.|Screening, Baseline, and EOT (Week 24)|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Kilograms (kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831322|NCT01245140|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in the CSSRS Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and Safety Follow-up (Week 29)|The assessment of suicidality was conducted using the CSSRS, a brief questionnaire designed to assess severity and change in suicidality using a semi-structured interview to probe participant responses. The suicidal ideation intensity total score was the sum of suicidal ideation severity rating scores for frequency, duration, controllability, deterrents, and reasons for ideation. For each item, each participant got an intensity score from 0(none) to 5(worst). Therefore, the suicidal ideation intensity total score range from 0 to 25, with a score of 0 given for no suicidal ideation. CSSRS scores were reported at Baseline; Week 4, 8, 12, 16, 20; EOT (Week 24); and safety follow-up (Week 29). Change from Baseline is defined as the value at the post-Baseline visit minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and safety follow-up (Week 29)|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831323|NCT01245140|Secondary|Mean Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (CSSRS) Scores at Screening; Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and Safety Follow-up (Week 29)|The assessment of suicidality was conducted using the CSSRS, a brief questionnaire designed to assess severity and change in suicidality using a semi-structured interview to probe participant responses. The suicidal ideation intensity total score was the sum of suicidal ideation severity rating scores for frequency, duration, controllability, deterrents, and reasons for ideation. For each item, each participant got an intensity score from 0(none) to 5(worst). Therefore, the suicidal ideation intensity total score range from 0 to 25, with a score of 0 given for no suicidal ideation. CSSRS scores were reported at Screening; Baseline; Week 4, 8, 12, 16, 20; EOT (Week 24);and safety follow-up (Week 29).|Screening; Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24), and safety follow-up (Week 29)|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831324|NCT01245140|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline (BL) in CES-D Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and Safety Follow-up (Week 29)|The CES-D scale is a short, self-report scale designed to measure depressive symptomatology in the general population. The CES-D consists of 20 questions. Participants were instructed to circle the number for each statement that best described how often they felt or behaved a particular way during the past week. The score was the sum of the weights of the 20 items. Responses range from 0 to 3 for each item (0=rarely or none of the time, 1=some or little of the time, 2=moderately or much of the time, 3=most or almost all the time). The CES-D score ranges from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater depression. Participants with a CES-D score of >=20 were re-evaluated within 2 weeks. If a CES-D score of >=20 was confirmed on the second occasion, and if the score represents an increase over BL of 4 points or more, study treatment was interrupted and the participants were referred for psychiatric evaluation. Change from BL is defined as the post-BL value minus the BL value.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and safety follow-up (Week 29)|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831325|NCT01245140|Secondary|Mean Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) Scores at Screening; Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and Safety Follow-up (Week 29)|The CES-D scale is a short, self-report scale designed to measure depressive symptomatology in the general population. The CES-D consists of 20 questions. Participants were instructed to circle the number for each statement that best described how often they felt or behaved a particular way during the past week. The score was the sum of the weights of the 20 items. Responses range from 0 to 3 for each item (0=rarely or none of the time, 1=some or little of the time, 2=moderately or much of the time, 3=most or almost all the time). The CES-D score ranges from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater depression. Participants with a CES-D score of 20 or higher were re-evaluated within 2 weeks. If a CES-D score of 20 or higher was confirmed on the second occasion, and if the score represents an increase over Baseline of 4 points or more, study treatment was interrupted and the participants were referred for psychiatric evaluation.|Screening; Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and safety follow-up (Week 29)|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831326|NCT01245140|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Shift in the Indicated Laboratory Values From Baseline (BL) to EOT (Week 24)|Laboratory parameters included triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, LDL/HDL ratio, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), bilirubin, and amylase and lipase. The central laboratory classified a finding as either abnormal or normal.|From Baseline until EOT (Week 24)|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
831327|NCT01245140|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Fasted LDL/HDL Ratio at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and at Safety Follow-up (Week 29)|Change from Baseline is defined as the value at the safety follow up visit minus baseline value.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24) and safety follow-up (Week 29)|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
831328|NCT01245140|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Fasted Lipid Laboratory Test Values at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and at Safety Follow-up (Week 29)|Fasted lipid laboratory parameters included triglycerides, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. Change from Baseline is defined as the value at the post-Baseline visit minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; EOT (Week 24); and safety follow-up (Week 29)|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831329|NCT01245140|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE) and an AE/SAE Related to Study Treatment|An AE was any adverse change from the participant’s Baseline (pre-treatment) clinical condition, including intercurrent illness, which occurred during the course of a clinical study after written informed consent had been given, whether considered related to treatment or not. The relationship of AEs to the study treatment was assessed as unrelated, remotely related, possibly related, and probably related. For an AE to be considered serious, it fell into one or more of the following categories: results in death, is life threatening, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, results in or prolongs inpatient hospitalization, and is a congenital abnormality or birth defect.|From Baseline until safety follow up (Week 29)|Safety Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Participants|||Number
831330|NCT01245140|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in NAPSI Score for Nail Bed Psoriasis and Nail Matrix Psoriasis at Week 12, and EOT (Week 24)|The severity of nail lesions was assessed for all participants with psoriatic nail involvement by obtaining the NAPSI score. Scores were taken for fingernails only. No scores were taken for participants with traumatic or fungal changes in nails. The nail was divided into four quadrants, each of which was rated with a 0 or 1, based on the absence (0) or presence (1) of pathological signs resulting from involvement of both the nail matrix and the nail bed. Each nail was given a score for nail bed psoriasis (0-4) and nail matrix psoriasis (0-4) depending on the presence of nail psoriasis in that quadrant. Possible scores for matrix and nail bed psoriasis: 0=none, 1=present in 1/4 nail, 2=present in 2/4 nail, 3=present in 3/4 nail, 4=present in 4/4 nail. NAPSI score for nail matrix (0-4) and nail bed (0-4) were reported at Baseline, Week 12, and at the EOT visit (Week 24). Change from Baseline is defined as the value at the post-Baseline visit minus the Baseline value.|Baseline, Week 12, and EOT (Week 24)|Full Analysis Set. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831331|NCT01245140|Secondary|Mean Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score for Nail Bed Psoriasis and Nail Matrix Psoriasis at Baseline, Week 12, and EOT (Week 24)|The severity of nail lesions was assessed for all participants with psoriatic nail involvement by obtaining the NAPSI score. Scores were taken for fingernails only. No scores were taken for participants with traumatic or fungal changes in nails. The nail was divided into four quadrants, each of which was rated with a 0 or 1, based on the absence (0) or presence (1) of pathological signs resulting from involvement of both the nail matrix and the nail bed. Each nail was given a score for nail bed psoriasis (0-4) and nail matrix psoriasis (0-4) depending on the presence of nail psoriasis in that quadrant. Possible scores for matrix and nail bed psoriasis: 0=none, 1=present in 1/4 nail, 2=present in 2/4 nail, 3=present in 3/4 nail, 4=present in 4/4 nail. NAPSI score for nail matrix (0-4) and nail bed (0-4) were reported at Baseline, Week 12, and at the EOT visit (Week 24).|Baseline, Week 12, and EOT (Week 24)|Full Analysis Set. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831332|NCT01245140|Secondary|Number of Participants With mPASI 50 Response and mPASI 75 Response|Psoriatic plaques were graded based on three criteria: redness (R), thickness (T), and scaliness (S). Severity was rated for each criterion on a 5-point scale (0=no involvement, up to 4=severe involvement). The fraction of the total surface area affected on the head, upper extremities, trunk, and lower extremities was graded on a 7-point scale (0=no involvement, up to 6=greater than 90% involvement). The four body regions were weighted to reflect their respective proportion of body surface area, and the composite mPASI score for all body regions was calculated. mPASI 50 response and mPASI 75 response is defined as a 50% and 75% decrease, respectively, in the mPASI score from Baseline.|From Baseline until EOT (Week 24)|Full analysis set. Participants with lesions in areas of the body other than the hands and feet were assessed.||Participants|||Number
831333|NCT01245140|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the mPASI Score at EOT (Week 24) or at the Last Assessment|Psoriatic plaques were graded based on three criteria: redness (R), thickness (T), and scaliness (S). Severity was rated for each criterion on a 5-point scale (0=no involvement, up to 4=severe involvement). Fraction of the total surface area affected on the head, upper extremities, trunk, and lower extremities was graded on a 7-point scale (0=no involvement, up to 6=greater than 90% involvement). The four body regions were weighted to reflect their respective proportion of body surface area, and the composite mPASI score for all body regions was calculated based on redness, thickness, and scaliness scores of plaques (0-4 each) for head, upper extremities, trunk, lower extremities and area of psoriatic involvement score (0-6). Lowest possible mPASI score was 0 and highest up to 72; Higher score values represents greater severity of psoriasis. mPASI scores were continuous, with 0.1 increments within these values. Change from Baseline is defined as the value at EOT minus baseline value.|Baseline and EOT (Week 24) or the last assessment|Full Analysis Set||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831334|NCT01245140|Secondary|Mean Modified Psoriasis Area Severity Index (mPASI) Score at Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; and EOT (Week 24)|Psoriatic plaques were graded based on three criteria: redness (R), thickness (T), and scaliness (S). Severity was rated for each criterion on a 5-point scale (0=no involvement, up to 4=severe involvement). Fraction of the total surface area affected on the head, upper extremities, trunk, and lower extremities was graded on a 7-point scale (0=no involvement, up to 6=greater than 90% involvement). The four body regions were weighted to reflect their respective proportion of body surface area, and the composite mPASI score for all body regions was calculated based on the redness, thickness, and scaliness scores of plaques (0-4 each) for the head, upper extremities, trunk, and lower extremities and the area of psoriatic involvement score (0-6). The lowest possible mPASI score was zero and highest up to 72; Higher score values represents greater severity of psoriasis. mPASI scores were continuous, with 0.1 increments within these values.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; and EOT (Week 24)|Full Analysis Set. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831335|NCT01245140|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline (BL) in Total Pustule Count at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 and at EOT (Week 24)|The overall number of fresh and older pustules on the left and right palms and soles was assessed at Baseline, at each visit during the treatment period (Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20), and at the End of Treatment visit. The total pustule count was calculated as the sum of the pustule count for the left/right palm and left/right sole. Change from Baseline is defined as the value at the post-Baseline visit minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; and EOT (Week 24)|Full Analysis Set. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Pustule count||Standard Deviation|Mean
831336|NCT01245140|Secondary|Total Pustule Count at Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; and at EOT (Week 24)|The overall number of fresh and older pustules on the left and right palms and soles was assessed at Baseline, at each visit during the treatment period (Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20), and at the EOT visit. The total pustule count was calculated as the sum of the pustule count for the left/right palm and left/right sole.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20; and EOT (Week 24)|Full Analysis Set. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (n=X, X).||Pustule count||Standard Deviation|Mean
831349|NCT01245283|Secondary|Chair Rise Time and Stair Climb Time; Change From Baseline at 4 Months|Functional abilities related to moving body weight will be captured using two standard tests, the chair rise time and stair climb time. Subjects will complete the tests at the time intervals indicated to document any change in their functional abilities.|Baseline, 4 Months|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
831337|NCT01245140|Primary|Number of Participants With PPPASI 50 Response and PPPASI 75 Response|The investigator evaluated the PPPASI score on a 5-point scale. The parameters of erythema, total number of pustules, and desquamation were scored for the right/left palm and the right/left sole. After correcting the scores for area (based on a 7-point scale) and the site involved (palm or sole), the PPPASI score per palm/sole was produced. The final PPPASI score was calculated as the sum of the PPPASI score for the right sole + the PPPASI score for the left sole + the PPPASI score for the right palm + the PPPASI score for the left palm and ranges from 0 (no palmo-plantar pustulosis psoriasis [PPP]) to 72 (most severe PPP). Change from Baseline is defined as value at the EOT minus the Baseline value. PPPASI 50 response and PPPASI 75 response are defined as a 50% and 75% decrease, respectively, in the PPPASI score from Baseline.|From Baseline until EOT (Week 24) or the last assessment|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
831338|NCT01245140|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Palmo-plantar Pustulosis Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PPPASI) Score at the End of Treatment (EOT) (Week 24) or at the Last Assessment|The investigator evaluated the PPPASI score on a 5-point scale. The parameters of erythema, total number of pustules, and desquamation were scored for the right/left palm and the right/left sole. After correcting the scores for area (based on a 7-point scale) and the site involved (palm or sole), the PPPASI score per palm/sole was produced. The final PPPASI score was calculated as the sum of the PPPASI score for the right sole + the PPPASI score for the left sole + the PPPASI score for the right palm + the PPPASI score for the left palm and ranges from 0 (no palmo-plantar pustulosis psoriasis [PPP]) to 72 (most severe PPP). Change from Baseline is defined as value at the EOT minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and EOT (Week 24) or the last assessment|Full Analysis Set : treated participants with >=1 efficacy result after receiving study medication.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831339|NCT01245270|Secondary|Bioavailability in Urine|To measure the amount of anthocyanins and phenolic-derived metabolites by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS) being absorbed from the gut and excreted following the single intervention.|Urine will also be collected (if possible) 0, 1, 3 and 5 hours, with all urine collected within the 24 hour time period post intervention||08/2017||||
831340|NCT01245270|Secondary|Bioavailability in Plasma|To measure the amount of anthocyanins and phenolic-derived metabolites by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS) being absorbed from the gut and excreted following the single intervention.|Plasma will also be collected -15,-10, -5, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, and 300 minutes and 24 hours post intervention||08/2017||||
831341|NCT01245270|Primary|Plasma Insulin iAUC (Incremental Area Under the Curve; ng/ml*Min)|"Volunteers were fasted (10–12 h) overnight before the OGTT. Venous blood samples were taken through an indwelling cannula inserted into a forearm vein at –15, –10 and –5 (fasted) and at 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 300 min after consuming 75 g of Polycal liquid (carbohydrate, 61•9%; polysaccharide, 49•2
%; sugars, 12•2%; glucose, 0•6%; maltose, 11•6%; http://www. nutricia.co.uk). Polycal was selected as the main carbohydrate as it is in the form of polysaccharides and this is closer to normal dietary consumption than glucose only.The volunteers consumed the appropriate capsule (0 min), glucose load and a further sample of water (70 ml) within 3 min.
For those volunteers taking the control capsule, additional sugar (fructose and dextrose/glucose) was added double-blinded to the water to match the free sugar content of the Mirtoselect® capsules. Movement during the 300 min OGTT was kept to a minimum."|Plasma was collected at -15, -10 and -5 (fasted) and at 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 300 min after the capsule|||insulin iAUC (ng/ml*min)||Standard Error|Mean
831342|NCT01245270|Primary|Plasma Glucose iAUC (Incremental Area Under the Curve; mM*Min)|"Volunteers were fasted (10–12 h) overnight before the OGTT. Venous blood samples were taken through an indwelling cannula inserted into a forearm vein at –15, –10 and –5 (fasted) and at 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 300 min after consuming 75 g of Polycal liquid (carbohydrate, 61·9%; polysaccharide, 49·2
%; sugars, 12·2%; glucose, 0·6%; maltose, 11·6%; http://www. nutricia.co.uk). Polycal was selected as the main carbohydrate as it is in the form of polysaccharides and this is closer to normal dietary consumption than glucose only.The volunteers consumed the appropriate capsule (0 min), glucose load and a further sample of water (70 ml) within 3 min.
For those volunteers taking the control capsule, additional sugar (fructose and dextrose/glucose) was added double-blinded to the water to match the free sugar content of the Mirtoselect® capsules. Movement during the 300 min OGTT was kept to a minimum."|Plasma was collected at -15, -10 and -5 (fasted) and at 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 300 min post capsule|||glucose iAUC (mM*min)||Standard Error|Mean
831343|NCT01245283|Secondary|Seated Row Test; Change From Baseline at 4 Months|Each participant will perform a one repetition maximum. Participants will do a seated row test which is pulling on a cable to lift weight from a seated row position. This resistence is measured in pounds.|Baseline, 4 Months|||foot x pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
831344|NCT01245283|Secondary|Shoulder Press Test; Change From Baseline at 4 Months|Each participant will perform a one repetition maximum. Participants will perform the shoulder press which is a weight training exercise, typically performed while standing, in which a weight is pressed straight upwards from the shoulders until the arms are locked out overhead. This resistence is measured in pounds.|Baseline, 4 Months|||foot x pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
831345|NCT01245283|Secondary|Chest Press; Change From Baseline at 4 Months|Each participant will perform a one repetition maximum. Participants will perform a chest press which is an upper body strength training exercise that consists of pressing a weight upwards from a supine position. This resistence is measured in pounds.|Baseline, 4 Months|||foot x pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
831346|NCT01245283|Secondary|Leg Curl Test; Change From Baseline at 4 Months|Each participant will perform a one repetition maximum. Participant will perform a leg curl which is an isolation exercise that targets the hamstring muscles. The exercise involves flexing the lower leg against resistance towards the buttocks. This resistence is measured in pounds.|Baseline, 4 Months|||foot x pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
831347|NCT01245283|Secondary|Leg Extensions Test; Change From Baseline at 4 Months|Each participant perform a one repetition maximum . Participants will perform a leg extension which is a resistance weight training exercise that targets the quadriceps muscle in the legs. The exercise is done using a machine called the Leg Extension Machine. This resistence is measured in pounds.|Baseline, 4 Months|||foot x pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
831348|NCT01245283|Secondary|Leg Press Test; Change From Baseline at 4 Months|Each participant will do a one repetition maximum. Participants will perform a leg press. The leg press is a weight training exercise in which the individual pushes a weight or resistance away from them using their legs.|Baseline, 4 Months|||foot x pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
831350|NCT01245283|Secondary|Six Minute Walk Test; Change From Baseline at 4 Months|Each participant will walk at a self-selected pace in the lab around a pre-measured loop for a period of six minutes. Subjects will complete the walk test at the time intervals indicated to document any change. 6 minute walk test is a baseline and 4 month post intervention measurement. It is used to measure distance covered while walking during 6 minutes.|Baseline, 4 Months|||feet||Standard Deviation|Mean
831351|NCT01245283|Primary|Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC Score); Change From Baseline at 4 Months|"The WOMAC is a standard, multidimensional, self-administered functional-health status instrument for patients with lower limb OA. Subjects will complete the self-assessment at the time intervals indicated to document any change in their perception of their functional health status.
Scale for Total score: the higher score means the worst the function and pain Total WOMAC scores will have a range of 0 to 96 (best and worst scores possible).
0-20 Womac pain (0= best, 20=worst) 0-8 Womac stiffness (0= best, 8=worst) 0-68 Womac functional (0= best, 68=worst) 0-96 Womac Total (0= best, 96=worst)"|Baseline, 4 Months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831352|NCT01245374|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Adverse Events, Medical Events of Special Interest (MESI) and Technical Problems With Devices Used in Trial||Weeks 0 - 6|The safety set consisted of all participants included in the trial and having taken at least one dose of trial treatment. The adverse events and technical complaints were collected during the treatment period (6 weeks after inclusion).||participants|||Number
831353|NCT01245374|Secondary|Patient Preference: Percentage of Participants Preferring System for Continuation of Growth Hormone Treatment|The patient preference was evaluated using the percentage of participants preferring the new system, old system or none of them for their growth hormone therapy.|Week 6|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form. For two patients, no data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
831354|NCT01245374|Secondary|Patient Autonomy: Percentage of Patients Performing Operations for Treatment Injection|The patient autonomy was evaluated using percentage of participants who performed all the operations of the treatment administration including dose selection, dose modification in case of error and injection.|Week 6|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form.||percentage of participants|||Number
831355|NCT01245374|Secondary|Patient Autonomy: Percentage of Patients Performing Operations for Treatment Injection|The patient autonomy was evaluated using percentage of participants who performed all the operations of the treatment administration including dose selection, dose modification in case of error and injection.|Week 0|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form.||percentage of participants|||Number
831356|NCT01245374|Secondary|Ease of Learning Assessed by the Physician or the Nurse: Added Values of the Products|The person in charge, physician or nurse, of giving all the instruction of use to patients or parents assessed the ease of learning of the Nordiflex® device. An added value of device was evaluated by the physician or the nurse using categorical variables.|Week 6|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form.||percentage of participants|||Number
831357|NCT01245374|Secondary|Ease of Learning Assessed by the Physician or the Nurse: Time Learning|The person in charge, physician or nurse, of giving all the instruction of use to patients or parents assessed the ease of learning of the Nordiflex® device. Time to learning was assessed using time intervals: 6-10 minutes, 11-15 minutes, 16-30 minutes and 31 minutes to 1 hour.|Week 6|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form. For three patients, no data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
831358|NCT01245374|Secondary|Ease of Learning Assessed by the Physician or the Nurse: Ease of Training|The person in charge, physician or nurse, of giving all the instruction of use to patients or parents assessed the ease of learning of the Nordiflex® device. Ease of learning was evaluated using ordinal variables (very easy, easy and difficult).|Week 6|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form.||percentage of participants|||Number
831359|NCT01245374|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Evaluating Simplicity of Use: Time Spent in the Preparation of the Injection|The overall simplicity of use was evaluated at every step of the injection preparation (dose selection, injection and dose modification) and using the time spent in the preparation of the injection. This was evaluated using time intervals: below 5 minutes, 5-10 minutes, 10-20 minutes.|Week 6|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form. For one patient, no data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
831360|NCT01245374|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Evaluating Simplicity of Use: Injection Easiness|The overall simplicity of use was evaluated at every step of the injection preparation (dose selection, injection and dose modification) and using the time spent in the preparation of the injection. Ordinal variables were used for the evaluation (very easy, easy, fairly easy, difficult and very difficult).|Week 6|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form. For one patient, no data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
831361|NCT01245374|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Evaluating Simplicity of Use: Dose Modification|The overall simplicity of use was evaluated at every step of the injection preparation (dose selection, injection and dose modification) and using the time spent in the preparation of the injection. Ordinal variables were used for the evaluation (very easy, easy, fairly easy, difficult and very difficult).|Week 6|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form. For three patients, no data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
831362|NCT01245374|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Evaluating Simplicity of Use: Dose Selection Easiness|The overall simplicity of use was evaluated at every step of the injection preparation (dose selection, injection and dose modification) and using the time spent in the preparation of the injection. Ordinal variables were used for the evaluation (very easy, easy, fairly easy, difficult and very difficult).|Week 6|"Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form.
For one patient, no data available."||percentage of participants|||Number
831393|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With PED at Week 24|PED assessed by Investigator at Visit 6, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent.|Week 24|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831363|NCT01245374|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Evaluating Simplicity of Use: Time Spent in the Preparation of the Injection|The overall simplicity of use was evaluated at every step of the injection preparation (dose selection, injection and dose modification) and using the time spent in the preparation of the injection. This was evaluated using time intervals: below 5 minutes, 5-10 minutes, 10-20 minutes.|Week 0|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form.||percentage of participants|||Number
831364|NCT01245374|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Evaluating Simplicity of Use: Injection Easiness|The overall simplicity of use was evaluated at every step of the injection preparation (dose selection, injection and dose modification) and using the time spent in the preparation of the injection. Ordinal variables were used for the evaluation (very easy, easy, fairly easy, difficult and very difficult).|Week 0|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form. For three patients, no data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
831365|NCT01245374|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Evaluating Simplicity of Use: Dose Modification|The overall simplicity of use was evaluated at every step of the injection preparation (dose selection, injection and dose modification) and using the time spent in the preparation of the injection. Ordinal variables were used for the evaluation (very easy, easy, fairly easy, difficult and very difficult).|Week 0|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form. For seven patients, no data available.||percentage of participants|||Number
831366|NCT01245374|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Evaluating Simplicity of Use: Dose Selection Easiness|The overall simplicity of use was evaluated at every step of the injection preparation (dose selection, injection and dose modification) and using the time spent in the preparation of the injection. Ordinal variables were used for the evaluation (very easy, easy, fairly easy, difficult and very difficult).|Week 0|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form.||percentage of participants|||Number
831367|NCT01245374|Primary|The Relative Ease of Use of NordiFlex® Compared to the Device Previously Used|Analysed for the PP (per protocol) analysis set: The relative ease of use of the trial injection device compared to the device previously used was assessed using a quantitative scale, ranging from 0 to 10 with 0 = NordiFlex® is far less simple, 5 = equivalent simplicity and 10 = NordiFlex® is far more simple. The participants had to circle the number that represented their perception of the current state.|Week 6|Per protocol set (PP): All subjects in the ITT set using NordiFlex® and had completed the trial without any significant violation of the inclusion/exclusion criteria or any other aspect of the protocol considered to potentially affect the efficacy results.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831368|NCT01245374|Primary|The Relative Ease of Use of NordiFlex® Compared to the Device Previously Used|Analysed for the ITT (intent-to-treat) analysis set: The relative ease of use of the trial injection device compared to the device previously used was assessed using a quantitative scale, ranging from 0 to 10 with 0 = NordiFlex® is far less simple, 5 = equivalent simplicity and 10 = NordiFlex® is far more simple. The participants had to circle the number that represented their perception of the current state.|Week 6|Intent-to-treat (ITT) consists of all participants included in the trial and having signed the informed consent form.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831369|NCT01245387|Other Pre-specified|IOP Mean Difference (Within a Participant)|Average predose minus postdose mean difference in IOP within a participant|Baseline, every 6 weeks up to Month 24 or early termination|Safety Set; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
831370|NCT01245387|Other Pre-specified|Change in IOP Between Predose and Postdose Assessment|IOP measured at each visit using either applanation tonometry or non-contact before and after intraviterial injection. Change in IOP equals postdose IOP minus predose IOP.|Baseline, every 6 weeks up to Month 24 or early termination|Safety Set; N=number of participants with evaluable data; Last Visit: last available postbaseline value.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
831371|NCT01245387|Other Pre-specified|Intraocular Pressure (IOP)|IOP measured at each visit using either applanation tonometry or non-contact before intraviterial injection, reported as pre-dose pressure of treated eye in millimeters of mercury (mmHg). The timeframe was as follows: Visit 1: IOP before any injection; Visit 2: IOP before first injection; Visit 3: IOP before second injection.|Baseline, every 6 weeks up to Month 24 or early termination|Safety Set; N=number of participants with evaluable data; Last Visit: last available postbaseline value.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
831372|NCT01245387|Other Pre-specified|Treatment Tolerability|Investigator's overall evaluation of tolerability; Categories included: Very Good, Good, Moderate, and Poor.|Month 24 or early termination|Safety Set; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831373|NCT01245387|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Complications Associated With Injection|Complications associated with injection during the study with onset at or after date of first injection was recorded by the Investigator.|Baseline up to Month 24 or early termination|Safety Set; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831374|NCT01245387|Other Pre-specified|Time to First Adverse Event (AE)|Time to first AE during the study evaluated by Kaplan-Meier Product-limit methods. AE:any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a product or medical device in the context of study; the event need not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment or usage.|Baseline up to Month 24 or early termination|Safety Set: all participants who received at least 1 Macugen (pegaptanib) injection and provided data post baseline. Data not analyzed due to low number of AEs.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831375|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Last Visit|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at the Last Visit, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the % classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic). Last Visit: last available postbaseline value.|Month 24 or early termination|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831376|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Week 54|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at Visit 11, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the % classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic).|Week 54|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831377|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Week 48|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at Visit 10, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the % classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic).|Week 48|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831378|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Week 42|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at Visit 9, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the % classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic).|Week 42|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831379|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Week 36|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at Visit 8, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the % classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic).|Week 36|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831380|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Week 30|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at Visit 7, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the percent (%) classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic).|Week 30|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831381|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Week 24|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at Visit 6, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the percent [%] classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic).|Week 24|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831382|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Week 18|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at Visit 5, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the percent [%] classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic).|Week 18|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831383|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Week 12|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at Visit 4, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the percent [%] classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic).|Week 12|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831384|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Week 6|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at Visit 3, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the percent [%] classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic).|Week 6|FAS;N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831385|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Angiographic Subtype Reported at Baseline|Angiographic subtype assessed by Investigator at Baseline, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein angiography or indocyanine green angiography) and the percent [%] classic fraction categories included unclear, occult (0% classic), minimally classic (1-49% classic), predominantly classic (50-99% classic), and pure classic (100% classic).|Baseline|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831386|NCT01245387|Primary|Central Retinal Thickness|Central retinal thickness assessed by Investigator every 6 weeks, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (optical coherence tomography) and reported as mean central retinal thickness. The timeframe was as follows: Visit 1: before first injection; Visit 3: 6 weeks after first injection (second injection).|Baseline, every 6 weeks up to Month 24 or early termination|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data; Last Visit: last available postbaseline value.||Micrometers (Mcm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831387|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With PED at Last Visit|PED assessed by Investigator at Last Visit, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent. Last Visit: last available postbaseline value.|Month 24 or early termination|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831388|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With PED at Week 54|PED assessed by Investigator Visit 11, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent.|Week 54|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831389|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With PED at Week 48|PED assessed by Investigator at Visit 10, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent.|Week 48|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831390|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With PED at Week 42|PED assessed by Investigator at Visit 9, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent.|Week 42|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831391|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With PED at Week 36|PED assessed by Investigator at Visit 8, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent.|Week 36|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831392|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With PED at Week 30|PED assessed by Investigator at Visit 7, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent.|Week 30|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831396|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With PED at Week 6|PED assessed by Investigator at Visit 3, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent.|Week 6|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831397|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Pigment Epithelial Detachment (PED) at Baseline|PED assessed by Investigator at baseline as part of SOC for participants with age-related macular degeneration; Standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included present or absent.|Baseline|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831398|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Last Visit|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at the Last Visit, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity. Last Visit: last available postbaseline value.|Month 24 or early termination|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831399|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 72|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 14, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 72|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831400|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 66|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 13, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 66|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831401|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 60|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 12, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 60|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831402|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 54|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 11, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 54|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831403|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 48|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 10, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 48|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831404|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 42|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 9, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 42|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831405|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 36|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 8, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 36|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831406|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 30|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 7, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 30|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831407|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 24|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 6, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 24|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831408|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 18|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 5, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 18|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831409|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 12|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 4, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 12|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831410|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Activity of Neovascular Membrane at Week 6|Neovascular membrane activity (measured by leakage) assessed by Investigator at Visit 3, as part of SOC, using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Categories included increased, unchanged or decreased neovascular membrane activity.|Week 6|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831434|NCT01245439|Secondary|Number of Participants With Elevations in Lipids According to Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III Guidelines|ATP III guidelines classify LDL cholesterol >160 mg/dL, Total cholesterol >240 mg/dL, High Density Lipoprotein (HDL) >60 mg/dL and Triglycerides (TG) >199 as elevated.|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4),12 (Visit 5),16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|Safety population; Number (n) equals (=) number of participants analyzed at the specified visit for the given parameter.||participants|||Number
831411|NCT01245387|Primary|Lesion Size (Number of Optic Disc Areas)|Lesion size measured by Investigator after each injection as part of standard of care (SOC), using standard clinical methods practiced (fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography); Reported as the number of optic-disk areas, each of which were 2.54 millimeters squared (mm^2). Lesion size included choroidal neovascularization, exudation area, and hemorrhage, if present. The timeframe was as follows: Visit 1: before first injection; Visit 3: 6 weeks after first injection (second injection).|Baseline, every 6 weeks up to Month 24 or early termination|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data; Last Visit: last available postbaseline value.||number of optic disc areas||Standard Deviation|Mean
831412|NCT01245387|Primary|Number of Participants With Investigator Assessments of Efficacy|Investigator's categorical assessment of the efficacy of Macugen (pegaptanib) treatment at the final visit or termination of therapy; Categories included Very Good, Good, Moderate, and Poor.|Month 24 or early termination|FAS; N = number of participants with evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
831413|NCT01245387|Primary|Vision-related Functioning and Quality of Life Using the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 (NEI-VFQ-25): Overall Composite Score|Participant-reported vision-related functioning and quality of life measured using the 25 item NEI-VFQ-25. Converted scale 0-100 where higher score represented better functioning: General Health: item 1; General Vision: item 2; Ocular Pain: 4,19; Near Vision: 5,6,7; Distance Vision: 8,9,14; Social Functioning: 11,13; Mental Health Activities: 3,21,22,25; Role Difficulties: 17,18; Dependency: 20,23,24; Driving: 15c,16, 16a; Color Vision: 12; Peripheral Vision: 10.|Baseline, every 6 months up to Month 24 or early termination|FAS; N=number of participants with evaluable data; Last Visit: last available postbaseline value.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831414|NCT01245387|Primary|Visual Acuity (VA)|VA measured at each follow-up visit as the number of lines read on a standard eye chart (Snellen or Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study [EDTRS]) using a 5 meter distance, 1 meter distance, or verifying if participant was able to count fingers, perceive hand motion, or light. Follow-up visits occurred only if considered part of standard medical treatment. The timeframe was as follows: Visit 1: before first injection; Visit 2: first injection; Visit 3: 6 weeks after first injection (second injection).|Baseline, every 6 weeks up to Month 24 or early termination|Full Analysis Set (FAS):participants who received at least 1 Macugen (pegaptanib) injection and had at least 1 VA measurement postbaseline. Participants with light perception or no light perception any time during study were excluded from FAS; N=participants with evaluable data; Last Visit: last available postbaseline value.||lines of VA||Standard Deviation|Mean
831415|NCT01245413|Primary|Visual Inspection of Baseplate Loosening|The area of the adhesive that was detached from the skin based on visual evaluation of the Athena and Sensura adhesives on the stomach after 1 hour of cycling at moderate intensity. The evaluation was done by marking the detached areas at the baseplate on a transparent wound tracing sheet with a permanent marker. Subsequently the areas were measured by scanning the tracing sheet and calculating the area with the use of Imagepro image macro which calculates the result in cm^2|1 hour|ITT||cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
831416|NCT01245439|Secondary|Health Assessment Questionnaire Score (General Score)|The Stanford HAQ disability index is a participant completed questionnaire specific for RA. It consists of 20 questions referring to 8 component sections: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities. The questionnaire was provided in validated translation into the local languages at the participating sites and was scored. Every question in each section was scored at a scale from 0 to 3 by the participant where 0 = able to perform the activity without any difficulty and 3 = unable to perform the activity. General score was calculated as an average of the 8 sections.|Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831417|NCT01245439|Secondary|Participant's Assessment of Pain|VAS is a visual scale of 100 mm for the assessment of disease activity by participants or investigator. Disease activity/pain increases while approaching 100 mm. For the screening visit (baseline visit) there's only investigator assessment data, for other visits participant's pain assessment, participant's disease activity assessment and investigator's disease activity assessment parameters were collected.|Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
831418|NCT01245439|Secondary|Participant's (PT) and Investigator's (IN) Assessment of Disease Activity|VAS is a visual scale of 100 mm for the assessment of disease activity by participants or investigator. Disease activity/pain increases while approaching 100 mm. For the screening visit (baseline visit) there's only investigator assessment data, for other visits participant's pain assessment, participant's disease activity assessment and investigator's disease activity assessment parameters were collected.|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
831419|NCT01245439|Secondary|Mean Number of Tender and Swollen Joints|Participants were asked to classify 28 joints as tender or not tender and swollen or not swollen to count the total number of tender and swollen joints by visit.|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population||joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
831420|NCT01245439|Secondary|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate|ESR is an inflammatory marker used to measure inflammation in RA and is measured as millimeters per hour (mm/hr).|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population; number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome and n = participants who were evaluable for specified category||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
831421|NCT01245439|Secondary|C-Reactive Protein Levels|CRP is an inflammatory marker used to measure inflammation in RA and is measured as mg/dL.|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population; number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome and n = participants who were evaluable for specified category.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831435|NCT01245439|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Lowest Value for Absolute Neutrophil Count (ANC)|ANC is a measure of number of neutrophil granulocytes. An ANC less than 500 cells per microliter (cells/µL) is defined as neutropenia and significantly increases risk of infection. The change from baseline was calculated as: baseline value minus the highest value observed post-baseline. ANC was measured in cells/µL.|Baseline to Week 24|Safety population||cells/µL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831422|NCT01245439|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, ACR 70 and ACR 90 Response|ACR20/50/70/90 response: ≥ 20/50/70/90 % improvement in TJC; ≥20/50/70/90% improvement in SJC; and ≥20/50/70/90% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]); and C-Reactive Protein (CRP). Improvements were assessed on the basis of prior visit. .|Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4),12 (Visit 5),16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population; number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||Percentage of participants|||Number
831423|NCT01245439|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, ACR 50, ACR 70 and ACR 90 Response|ACR20/50/70/90 response: greater than or equal to (≥) 20/50/70/90 percent (%) improvement in TJC; ≥20/50/70/90% improvement in SJC; and ≥20/50/70/90% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]); and C-Reactive Protein (CRP). Improvements were assessed on the basis of prior visit.|Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4),12 (Visit 5),16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population; number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||participants|||Number
831424|NCT01245439|Secondary|Disease Activity Score as Measured By DAS28 at Each Visit|"The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, acute phase response, and general health status. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 = 0.56 x (TJC28)^0.5 + 0.28 x (SJC28)^0.5 + 0.70 x In(ESR) + 0.014 x GH Where TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJCz8 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ın = natural log, ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate and GH = general health (participant's global assessment of disease activity). DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A score of < 2.6 represents clinical remission, a score of: <3.2 LDA, and a score of > 5.1 represents severe disease. A reduction of at least 1.2 units in DAS28 is considered to be a clinically meaningful improvement."|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population. n = participants who were evaluable for specified category||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831425|NCT01245439|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Their First Remission Status By Visit|"The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, acute phase response, and general health status. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 = 0.56 x (TJC28)^0.5 + 0.28 x (SJC28)^0.5 + 0.70 x In(ESR) + 0.014 x GH Where TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJCz8 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ın = natural log, ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate and GH = general health (participant's global assessment of disease activity). DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A score of < 2.6 represents clinical remission, a score of: <3.2 LDA, and a score of > 5.1 represents severe disease. A reduction of at least 1.2 units in DAS28 is considered to be a clinically meaningful improvement."|Weeks 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||Percentage of participants|||Number
831426|NCT01245439|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Remission (DAS28) At Every Visit|"The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, acute phase response, and general health status. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 = 0.56 x (TJC28)^0.5 + 0.28 x (SJC28)^0.5 + 0.70 x In(ESR) + 0.014 x GH Where TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJCz8 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ın = natural log, ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate and GH = general health (participant's global assessment of disease activity). DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A score of < 2.6 represents clinical remission, a score of: <3.2 LDA, and a score of > 5.1 represents severe disease. A reduction of at least 1.2 units in DAS28 is considered to be a clinically meaningful improvement."|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome and n = participants who were evaluable for specified category.||percentage of participants|||Number
831427|NCT01245439|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved Remission (DAS28) By Visit|"The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, acute phase response, and general health status. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 = 0.56 x (TJC28)^0.5 + 0.28 x (SJC28)^0.5 + 0.70 x In(ESR) + 0.014 x GH Where TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJCz8 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ın = natural log, ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate and GH = general health (participant's global assessment of disease activity). DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A score of < 2.6 represents clinical remission, a score of: <3.2 LDA, and a score of > 5.1 represents severe disease. A reduction of at least 1.2 units in DAS28 is considered to be a clinically meaningful improvement."|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT population. Number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome and n = participants who were evaluable for specified category||participants|||Number
831436|NCT01245439|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Highest Values for Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL) and Total Cholesterol|Elevations in LDL and total cholesterol could lead to heart disease. The change from baseline was calculated as: baseline value minus the highest value observed post-baseline and was measured as milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL).|Baseline to Week 24|Safety population; number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831437|NCT01245439|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Highest Values for ALT and AST|Elevations in ALT and AST could indicate hepatotoxicity. These enzymes were measured as International Units per Liter (IU/L). The change from baseline was calculated as: baseline value minus the highest value observed post-baseline for each enzyme.|Baseline to Week 24|Safety population||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
831428|NCT01245439|Secondary|Time to LDA (DAS28 ) Based on First Visit When LDA Was Observed|"The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, acute phase response, and general health status. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 = 0.56 x (TJC28)^0.5 + 0.28 x (SJC28)^0.5 + 0.70 x In(ESR) + 0.014 x GH Where TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJCz8 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ın = natural log, ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate and GH = general health (participant's global assessment of disease activity). DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A score of < 2.6 represents clinical remission, a score of: <3.2 LDA, and a score of > 5.1 represents severe disease. A reduction of at least 1.2 units from previous visit in DAS28 is considered to be a clinically meaningful improvement."|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT Population; Number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome||Percentage of participants|||Number
831429|NCT01245439|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved LDA By Visit|"TThe DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, acute phase response, and general health status. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 = 0.56 x (TJC28)^0.5 + 0.28 x (SJC28)^0.5 + 0.70 x In(ESR) + 0.014 x GH Where TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJCz8 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ın = natural log, ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate and GH = general health (participant's global assessment of disease activity). DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A score of < 2.6 represents clinical remission, a score of: <3.2 represents LDA, and a score of > 5.1 represents severe disease. A reduction of at least 1.2 units from previous visit in DAS28 is considered to be a clinically meaningful improvement."|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT Population; Number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome and n = number of participants who were evaluable for the specified category.||percentage of participants|||Number
831430|NCT01245439|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved LDA By Visit|"The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, acute phase response, and general health status. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 = 0.56 x (TJC28)^0.5 + 0.28 x (SJC28)^0.5 + 0.70 x In(ESR) + 0.014 x GH Where TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJCz8 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ın = natural log, ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate and GH = general health (participant's global assessment of disease activity). DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A score of < 2.6 represents clinical remission, a score of: <3.2 represents LDA, and a score of > 5.1 represents severe disease. A reduction of at least 1.2 units from previous visit in DAS28 is considered to be a clinically meaningful improvement."|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT Population; Number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome and n = number of participants who were evaluable for the specified category.||participants|||Number
831431|NCT01245439|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Clinically Meaningful Improvement in DAS28 At Every Visit|"The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, acute phase response, and general health status. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 = 0.56 x (TJC28)^0.5 + 0.28 x (SJC28)^0.5 + 0.70 x In(ESR) + 0.014 x GH Where TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJCz8 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ın = natural log, ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate and GH = general health (participant's global assessment of disease activity). DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A score of < 2.6 represents clinical remission, a score of: < 3.2 represents LDA, and a score of > 5.1 represents severe disease. A reduction of at least 1.2 units from previous visit in DAS28 is considered to be a clinically meaningful improvement."|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4),12 (Visit 5),16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|ITT Population; Number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome and n = participants who were evaluable for specified category.||percentage of participants|||Number
831432|NCT01245439|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved Clinically Meaningful Improvement in Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) At Every Visit|"The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, acute phase response, and general health status. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 = 0.56 x (TJC28)^0.5 + 0.28 x (SJC28)^0.5 + 0.70 x In(ESR) + 0.014 x GH Where TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJCz8 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ın = natural log, ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate and GH = general health (participant's global assessment of disease activity). DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity. A score of less than (<) 2.6 represents clinical remission, a score of: <3.2 represents low disease activity (LDA), and a score of > 5.1 represents severe disease. A reduction from previous visit of at least 1.2 units in DAS28 is considered to be a clinically meaningful improvement."|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|Intent- to- Treat (ITT) Population: all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome and n = participants who were evaluable for specified category||participants|||Number
831433|NCT01245439|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Elevations in Lipids According to ATP III Guidelines|ATP III guidelines classify LDL cholesterol >160 mg/dL , Total cholesterol >240 mg/dL, HDL >60 mg/dL and TG >199 as elevated.|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|Safety population; n = number of participants analyzed at the specified visit for the given parameter.||percentage of participants|||Number
831565|NCT01246479|Primary|Rate of Subjects With PRNT50 Titers of ≥ 1:10 at Month 12 After the First IC51 Vaccination (in Study IC51-322)|Rate of subjects with PRNT50 titers of ≥ 1:10 at Month 12 after the first IC51 vaccination (in study IC51-322)|Month 12|intention to treat population; assessment of seroprotection ~1 year post primary vaccination series in parent study IC51-322||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831438|NCT01245439|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Infections|A serious infection was an infection which was also considered as an SAE. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly|Weeks 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), and 16 (Visit 6)|Safety population||participants|||Number
831439|NCT01245439|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Serious Infections|A serious infection was an infection which was also considered as an SAE. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly|Weeks 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), and 16 (Visit 6)|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
831440|NCT01245439|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ALT and AST Elevations of >1.5 ULN, >3 ULN and > 5 ULN|Elevations in ALT and AST could indicate hepatotoxicity.|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
831441|NCT01245439|Secondary|Number of Participants With Alanine Transaminase (ALT) and Asapartate Transaminase (AST) Elevations of Greater Than (>) 1.5 Upper Limit of Normal (ULN), >3 ULN and > 5 ULN|Elevations in ALT and AST could indicate hepatotoxicity.|Screening (Visit 1), Weeks 0 (Visit 2), 4 (Visit 3), 8 (Visit 4), 12 (Visit 5), 16 (Visit 6), 20 (Visit 7) and 24 (Visit 8)|Safety population||participants|||Number
831442|NCT01245439|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With All-Cause Discontinuation|Participants who discontinued treatment due to any reason were included in this measure.|24 weeks|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
831443|NCT01245439|Primary|Safety: Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse /Serious Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. A serious AE (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. An AE was considered treatment emergent if the date of onset of the AE was on or after the date of first dose of study medication. AEs of special interest included Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) (including strokes), infections, and infusion reactions. An AE was considered an infection if the preferred term was in the predefined infection AE group term. A serious infection was an infection which was also considered as an AE. An AE was considered an infusion reaction if it occurred during or within 24 hours of an infusion.|24 weeks|The safety population consisted of all participants included in the study who received at least one dose of study medication and who had at least one post-baseline assessment of safety (that is post-baseline laboratory data, vital signs or adverse events).||percentage of participants|||Number
831444|NCT01245595|Primary|Acute Kidney Injury Measured by Kidney Diseases: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) AKI Serum Creatinine Criteria|Acute Kidney Injury measured by Kidney Diseases: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) AKI Serum Creatinine criteria; KDIGO Stage is a measure of acute kidney injury.|5 days|||participants|||Number
831445|NCT01245647|Secondary|CD4 Count (Mean)|Results from CD4 cell count result obtained either as lab specifically for this study, or from lab results that were collected at the same time point for a different study or clinical indication.|4 months|||CD4 count (cells/ml)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831446|NCT01245647|Secondary|HIV Viral Load Suppressed|Viral load was classified as either suppressed (HIV viral load <50 copies/ml) or not suppressed (HIV viral load >50 copies/ml). We report the proportion of participants who had a suppressed viral load (higher number is better)|4 months|||percentage of persons with suppressed VL|||Number
831447|NCT01245647|Secondary|Risky Sexual Behaviors|Risky sexual behavior was a dichotomous outcome for each participant at each time point, defined as having any non-condom-protected sex with a males who have an unknown/negative HIV status in the previous 30 days.|4 months|||percentage of persons with risky sex|||Number
831448|NCT01245647|Secondary|HIV Medication Adherence (95% or Better)|Medication adherence was measured on a visual analogue scale ranging from 0 - 100, and indicating what percentage of the persons' HIV medication was taken on schedule over the past week (self-report). A score of 95% or better was considered adherent, and we report the proportion of persons who were adherent in each group.|Month 4|Only persons who reported current HIV medication use (n=13) were considered for this outcome, and we included data from the 10 persons who completed the 4-month assessment.||percentage of participants|||Number
831449|NCT01245647|Primary|Number of Drinks Per Week|Average number of standard alcohol drinks per week, as measured by timeline follow-back. A drink typically contains about 0.6 grams of alcohol, and generally represents 1 12-oz beer, 1 5-oz glass of wine, or one shot of liquor.|Month 4|All participants who provided data at the 4-month follow-up were included (n=15), which is 79% of persons who were randomized.||standard alcohol drinks per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
831450|NCT01245738|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Target Lipid Levels of HDL-C But Did Not Achieve Target Lipid Levels for TG and LDL-C After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Statins|The percentage of participants who achieved predefined lipid target levels after 12 weeks of treatment with statins. Predefined lipid target levels were: LDL-C less than 70 mg/dL, HDL-C greater than 40 mg/dL, and TG less than 150 mg/dL.|Week 12|Participants of the FAS Population who had HDL-C, TG, and LDL-C measurements and Week 12.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
831451|NCT01245738|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Target Lipid Levels for TG But Did Not Achieve Target Lipid Levels for HDL-C and LDL-C After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Statins|The percentage of participants who achieved predefined lipid target levels after 12 weeks of treatment with statins. Predefined lipid target levels were: LDL-C less than 70 mg/dL, HDL-C greater than 40 mg/dL, and TG less than 150 mg/dL.|Week 12|Participants of the FAS Population who had HDL-C, TG, and LDL-C measurements and Week 12.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
831452|NCT01245738|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Did Not Achieve Target Lipid Levels for LDL-C, HDL-C, and TG After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Statins|The percentage of participants who achieved predefined lipid target levels after 12 weeks of treatment with statins. Predefined lipid target levels were: LDL-C less than 70 mg/dL, HDL-C greater than 40 mg/dL, and TG less than 150 mg/dL.|Week 12|Participants of the FAS Population who had HDL-C, TG, and LDL-C measurements and Week 12.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
831453|NCT01245738|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Target Lipid Levels of HDL-C and LDL-C But Did Not Achieve Target Lipid Levels for TG After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Statins|The percentage of participants who achieved predefined lipid target levels after 12 weeks of treatment with statins. Predefined lipid target levels were: LDL-C less than 70 mg/dL, HDL-C greater than 40 mg/dL, and TG less than 150 mg/dL.|Week 12|Participants of the FAS Population who had HDL-C, TG, and LDL-C measurements and Week 12.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
831454|NCT01245738|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Target Lipid Levels for TG and LDL-C But Did Not Achieve Target Lipid Levels for HDL-C After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Statins|The percentage of participants who achieved predefined lipid target levels after 12 weeks of treatment with statins. Predefined lipid target levels were: LDL-C less than 70 mg/dL, HDL-C greater than 40 mg/dL, and TG less than 150 mg/dL.|Week 12|Participants of the FAS Population who had HDL-C, TG, and LDL-C measurements and Week 12.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
831455|NCT01245738|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Target Lipid Levels for LDL-C But Did Not Achieve Target Lipid Levels for HDL-C and TG After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Statins|The percentage of participants who achieved predefined lipid target levels after 12 weeks of treatment with statins. Predefined lipid target levels were: LDL-C less than 70 mg/dL, HDL-C greater than 40 mg/dL, and TG less than 150 mg/dL.|Week 12|Participants of the FAS Population who had HDL-C, TG, and LDL-C measurements at Week 12.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
831456|NCT01245738|Primary|Change From Baseline in TG Levels After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Statins|TG levels were measured after 12 weeks of treatment with a statin. The change from baseline was calculated as the difference between Baseline and Week 12 values.|Baseline and at Week 12|Participants of the FAS Population who had TG measurements at baseline and Week 12.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831457|NCT01245738|Primary|Change From Baseline in HDL-C Levels After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Statins|HDL-C levels were measured after 12 weeks of treatment with a statin. The change from baseline was calculated as the difference between baseline and Week 12 values.|Baseline and at Week 12|Participants of the FAS Population who had HDL-C measurements at baseline and Week 12.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831458|NCT01245738|Primary|Change From Baseline in LDL-C Levels After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Statins|LDL-C levels were measured after 12 weeks of treatment with a statin. The change from baseline was calculated as the difference between baseline and Week 12 values.|Baseline and at Week 12|Participants of the FAS Population who had LDL-C measurements at baseline and Week 12.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831459|NCT01245738|Primary|Change From Baseline in TC Levels After Treatment|TC levels were measured after 12 weeks of treatment with a statin. The change from baseline was calculated as the difference between baseline and Week 12 values.|Baseline and at Week 12|Participants of the Full Analysis Set (FAS) Population who had a TC measurements at baseline and Week 12.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831460|NCT01245738|Primary|Triglycerides (TG) Levels at First Acute Coronary Event|At the time of hospital admission for a first acute coronary event, the TG levels of eligible participants were taken. This level was considered the baseline value. A TG level of >150 mg/dL is considered an abnormal lipid value (dyslipidemia).|At hospital presentation (Day 1)|Participants who had a TG measurement at baseline.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831461|NCT01245738|Primary|High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) Levels at First Acute Coronary Event|At the time of hospital admission for a first acute coronary event, the HDL-C levels of eligible participants were taken. This level was considered the baseline value. A HDL-C level of <40 mg/dL is considered an abnormal lipid value (dyslipidemia).|At hospital presentation (Day 1)|Participants who had a HDL-C measurement at baseline.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831462|NCT01245738|Primary|Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) Levels at First Acute Coronary Event|At the time of hospital admission for a first acute coronary event, the LDL-C levels of eligible participants were taken. This level was considered the baseline value. A LDL-C level of >70 mg/dL is considered an abnormal lipid value (dyslipidemia).|At hospital presentation (Day 1)|Participants who had a LDL-C measurement at baseline.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831463|NCT01245738|Primary|Total Cholesterol (TC) Levels at First Acute Coronary Event|At the time of hospital admission for a first acute coronary event, the TC levels of eligible participants were taken. This level was considered the baseline value. A TC level of >240 mg/dL is considered an abnormal lipid value (dyslipidemia).|At hospital presentation (Day 1)|Participants who had a total cholesterol measurement at baseline.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831464|NCT01245751|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting One or More Adverse Experiences|An adverse experience (AE) is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine is also an adverse experience. A serious adverse experience is any AE that results in death, is life threatening, results in persistent disability/incapacity, results in or prolongs existing inpatient hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, is a cancer, is an overdose, or is another important medical event that may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention. Vaccine-related AEs were those assessed by the investigator as definitely, probably, or possibly related to vaccine administration. This outcome measure applies only to AEs collected after vaccination in Part 1 of the current study.|Up to 42 days postvaccination|Analysis included all vaccinated participants who had any safety follow-up||Participants|||Number
831465|NCT01245751|Primary|Geometric Mean Fold Rise (GMFR) From Day 1 (Baseline) to Week 6 Postvaccination in VZV Antibody Titers|VZV antibody titers were determined by gpELISA. The GMFR measures the rise in VZV antibodies from Day 1 (Baseline) to Week 6 postvaccination.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 6 postvaccination|Analysis included all vaccinated participants except those who had protocol deviations that interfered with the assessment of VZV antibody response, who developed varicella or herpes zoster rashes before a blood sample was taken, or who reported exposure to varicella or herpes zoster. The planned analysis included Group 1 only.||Fold Rise||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831480|NCT01246076|Secondary|Time to Progression|The time to progression is defined as the time from registration to the date of progression or last follow-up. Those who die will be considered to have had disease progression unless documented evidence clearly indicates no progression has occurred.|Up to 6 months after completion of treatment (up to 82 weeks from start of treatment)|Time to progression was not analyzed. This was a prespecified secondary outcome but due to the early termination of the study time to progression was not followed.|||||
831466|NCT01245751|Primary|Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) of the Antibody Responses to Varicella-Zoster Virus (VZV)|VZV antibody titers were determined by glycoprotein enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (gpELISA)|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 6 postvaccination|Analysis included all vaccinated participants except those who had protocol deviations that interfered with the assessment of VZV antibody response, who developed varicella or herpes zoster rashes before a blood sample was taken, or who reported exposure to varicella or herpes zoster. The planned analysis included Group 1 versus Group 2 only.||gpELISA Units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831467|NCT01245764|Secondary|GMT of Anti-HPV Type 18 Antibody|Anti-HPV Type 18 antibodies were measured by cLIA. The seropositive cut-off threshold for this assay is defined as 24 milli Merck U/mL.|Month 7 (1 month postdose 3 in study Phase A)|Participants analyzed included those who received all 3 vaccinations in study Phase A and provided a sample for Month 7 serology testing. This analysis pooled results for participants receiving GARDASIL and compared these with results for participants receiving placebo.||milli Merck U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831468|NCT01245764|Secondary|GMT of Anti-HPV Type 16 Antibody|Anti-HPV Type 16 antibodies were measured by cLIA. The seropositive cut-off threshold for this assay is defined as 20 milli Merck U/mL.|Month 7 (1 month postdose 3 in study Phase A)|Participants analyzed included those who received all 3 vaccinations in study Phase A and provided a sample for Month 7 serology testing. This analysis pooled results for participants receiving GARDASIL and compared these with results for participants receiving placebo.||milli Merck U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831469|NCT01245764|Secondary|GMT of Anti-HPV Type 11 Antibody|Anti-HPV Type 11 antibodies were measured by cLIA. The seropositive cut-off threshold for this assay is defined as 16 milli Merck U/mL.|Month 7 (1 month postdose 3 in study Phase A)|Participants analyzed included those who received all 3 vaccinations in study Phase A and provided a sample for Month 7 serology testing. This analysis pooled results for participants receiving GARDASIL and compared these with results for participants receiving placebo.||milli Merck U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831470|NCT01245764|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) of Anti-HPV Type 6 Antibody|Anti-HPV Type 6 antibodies were measured by cLIA. The seropositive cut-off threshold for this assay is defined as 20 milli Merck U/mL.|Month 7 (1 month postdose 3 in study Phase A)|Participants analyzed included those who received all 3 vaccinations in study Phase A and provided a sample for Month 7 serology testing. This analysis pooled results for participants receiving GARDASIL and compared these with results for participants receiving placebo.||milli Merck U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831471|NCT01245764|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Experiences|A serious adverse experience is any adverse experience that results in death, is life threatening, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, results in or prolongs existing inpatient hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, is a cancer, is an overdose, or is another important medical event that may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention|From the time of informed consent is signed through the last study visit (up to 19 months)|The analysis included all participants receiving at least 1 vaccination in study Phase A or B and who had postvaccination follow-up||Participants|||Number
831472|NCT01245764|Primary|Number of Participants With Elevated Temperature (Oral Temperature >=100 °F)||Up to Day 5 after any vaccination in study Phase A|The analysis included all participants receiving at least 1 vaccination in study Phase A and who had temperature data||Participants|||Number
831473|NCT01245764|Primary|Number of Participants With Injection-site Adverse Experiences|Participants were prompted to report injection-site experiences of pain, erythema, or swelling and were also asked to report any other injection-site adverse experiences|Up to Day 5 after any vaccination in study Phase A|The analysis included all participants receiving at least 1 vaccination in study Phase A and who had postvaccination follow-up||Participants|||Number
831474|NCT01245764|Primary|Number of Participants Who Seroconvert to HPV Type 18|Seroconversion was defined as achieving an anti-HPV Type 18 cLIA level of >=24 milli Merck U/mL. The dilution-corrected limit of detection for the Type 18 cLIA was 5.8 milli Merck U/mL.|Month 7 (1 month postdose 3 in study Phase A)|Participants analyzed included those who received all 3 vaccinations in study Phase A and provided a sample for Month 7 serology testing. This analysis pooled results for participants receiving GARDASIL and compared these with results for participants receiving placebo.||Participants|||Number
831475|NCT01245764|Primary|Number of Participants Who Seroconvert to HPV Type 16|Seroconversion was defined as achieving an anti-HPV Type 16 cLIA level of >=20 milli Merck U/mL. The dilution-corrected limit of detection for the Type 16 cLIA was 9.7 milli Merck U/mL.|Month 7 (1 month postdose 3 in study Phase A)|Participants analyzed included those who received all 3 vaccinations in study Phase A and provided a sample for Month 7 serology testing. This analysis pooled results for participants receiving GARDASIL and compared these with results for participants receiving placebo.||Participants|||Number
831476|NCT01245764|Primary|Number of Participants Who Seroconvert to HPV Type 11|Seroconversion was defined as achieving an anti-HPV Type 11 cLIA level of >=16 milli Merck U/mL. The dilution-corrected limit of detection for the Type 11 cLIA was 3.9 milli Merck U/mL.|Month 7 (1 month postdose 3 in study Phase A)|Participants analyzed included those who received all 3 vaccinations in study Phase A and provided a sample for Month 7 serology testing. This analysis pooled results for participants receiving GARDASIL and compared these with results for participants receiving placebo.||Participants|||Number
831477|NCT01245764|Primary|Number of Participants Who Seroconvert to Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Type 6|Seroconversion was defined as achieving an anti-HPV Type 6 competitive Luminex Immunoassay (cLIA) level of >=20 milli Merck U/mL. The dilution-corrected limit of detection for the Type 6 cLIA was 4.2 milli Merck U/mL.|Month 7 (1 month postdose 3 in study Phase A)|Participants analyzed included those who received all 3 vaccinations in study Phase A and provided a sample for Month 7 serology testing. This analysis pooled results for participants receiving GARDASIL and compared these with results for participants receiving placebo.||Participants|||Number
831478|NCT01246011|Secondary|Major Bleeding Events.|Intracranial bleed or any clinically overt sign of hemorrhage that is associated with a fall in hemoglobin > 5 g/dL.|At 2weeks post CABG||||||
831479|NCT01246011|Primary|Coronary Artery Bypass Vein Graft Patency|Vein graft patency as measured by computed tomography|Approximately 30 Days post CABG|No analysis will be done due to early study termination||Vein Grafts|||Number
831481|NCT01246076|Secondary|Toxicity as Measured by Number of Participants Who Experienced Related Grade 3-5 Adverse Events Based on CTCAE Version 4||30 days after end of treatment (up to 60 weeks)|||participants|||Number
831485|NCT01246076|Primary|Number of Participants With Confirmed Responses (Complete Remission, Partial Remission, or Hematologic Improvement) as Defined by the International Working Group Criteria|"Complete remission (CR): ≤5% myeloblasts bone marrow blasts, normal maturation in all cell lines (dysplasia will be noted), ≥11 g/dl peripheral blood hemoglobin, ≥100x10^9cells/μL peripheral blood platelets, ≥1000 cells/ μL peripheral blood absolute neutrophil count (ANC), and 0% peripheral blood blasts.
Marrow complete remission (MCR): ≤5% myeloblasts and decreased by ≥50% compared to pre-treatment bone marrow blasts, bone marrow morphology not relevant, and peripheral blood (if hematological improvement they will be noted in addition to marrow CR).
Partial remission (PR): previously had ≥5% myeloblasts and now have ≥5% myeloblasts but decreased by ≥50% compared to pre-treatment, bone marrow morphology not relevant, ≥11 g/dl peripheral blood hemoglobin, ≥100x109cells/μL peripheral blood platelets, ≥1000 cells/ μL peripheral blood ANC, and 0% peripheral blood blasts"|Up to 56 weeks (14 cycles of treatment)|8 participants were not evaluable for this outcome measure because they did not complete at least one cycle of therapy.||participants|||Number
831486|NCT01246206|Secondary|Determine Time to Engraftment|Time to engraftment (“PLT20”)|Followed for up to two years post transplant|All paarticipants||days||Full Range|Median
831487|NCT01246206|Secondary|Determine Time to Engraftment|Time to engraftment (“G500”)|Followed for up to two years post transplant|All paarticipants||days||Full Range|Median
831488|NCT01246206|Secondary|Overall Survival at Two Year,||Followed for up to two years post transplant|All participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831489|NCT01246206|Secondary|Estimate Incidence of Chronic GVHD at Two Years|Cumulative Incidence of chronic GVHD with relapse or NRM as competing risks|Followed for up to two years post transplant|All participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831490|NCT01246206|Secondary|Determine Incidence of Opportunistic Infections||Followed for up to two years post transplant|All participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831491|NCT01246206|Primary|Severity of Acute GVHD|Cumulative Incidence of grade III-V acute GVHD with relapse or NRM as competing risks|Assessed first 6 months post transplant|Those participants who contracted Acute GVHD||% of participants with sever aGVHD||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831492|NCT01246206|Primary|Safety Defined by Serious Adverse Events|Counted the number of participants that experienced any type of grade 3 or higher toxicity.|Assessed first 6 months post transplant|||participants|||Number
831493|NCT01246206|Primary|Incidence of Acute GVHD|Cumulative Incidence of grade II-V acute GVHD with relapse or NRM as competing risks|Assessed first 6 months post transplant|All participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831494|NCT01246258|Other Pre-specified|Utricular Centrifugation Test (UCF)|balance assessment|one day|||participants|||Number
831495|NCT01246258|Primary|Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials (VEMPs)|These are the balance tests that specifically assess the otolith organ.|one day|||participants|||Number
831496|NCT01246349|Primary|Child Dietary Self-Efficacy Scale|"A second self-efficacy scale, the Child Dietary Self-Efficacy Scale (CDSS; Parcel et al., 1995) was used to measure participants' confidence in their ability to choose lower fat, lower sodium foods.
The questionnaire is made up of 20 likert items with 3 response options, including not sure, a little sure, and very sure. Each item asks the participant to indicate how sure he/she is that they would make a healthy choice, for example, How sure are you that you could eat cereal instead of a donut? Individual items are scored -1, 0, or 1 and subsequently summed for a total score, with the lowest possible score a -20 and the highest a 20, whereby higher scores signify higher dietary self efficacy."|Baseline, 6 month follow-up|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831497|NCT01246349|Secondary|Psychological Well-being|Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale, Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PEDS QL), Child depression inventory, Adolescent coping (A-COPE)|Change over time from Baseline to 6 months (measured monthly) with a 12 months reassessment||||||
831498|NCT01246349|Secondary|Physiological Outcomes: Waist Circumference|Measurements of waist circumference, an indirect measure of central adiposity (or fatness), were also obtained.|Baseline, 6 month follow-up|||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
831499|NCT01246349|Secondary|Physiological Outcomes: BMI|The study used a Body Mass Index (BMI) percentile for age as the main indicator of weight-loss. Height and weight was measured by the pediatrician at the treatment site and BMI as well as BMI percentile for age was determined with the use of an age appropriate growth curve chart.|Baseline, 6 month follow-up|||z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
831500|NCT01246349|Primary|Weight Efficacy Life-style Questionnaire|"A self-efficacy instrument, the Weight Efficacy Life-style Questionnaire (WEL; Clark, Abrams, Niaura, Eaton, & Rossi, 1991) was used to measure participants' beliefs about and confidence in their own ability to make a behavior change, specifically their ability to lose weight.
The questionnaire yields a total score, with higher scores indicating higher levels of health-related self-efficacy, as well as 5 situational sub-scores (negative emotions, availability, social pressure, physical discomfort, and positive activities). Individuals rate statements on a 10-point scale ranging from 0 (not confident) to 9 (very confident).
The WEL is made up of 20 items (4 items per sub-scale) which are summed to obtain a total score, with the lowest total score possible being 0 and the highest 180. Only the total WEL score was used in the study's analyses.
The difference in self-efficacy (WEL) change between treatment and control groups from baseline to a 6 month follow-up was examined."|Baseline, 6 month follow-up|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831501|NCT01239043|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Achieved a Four-Fold Rise in Bactericidal Antibody Titers From Baseline After Vaccination With Either Menomune or Menactra Vaccine|Titers of antibodies to serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 were measured by serum bactericidal assay with baby rabbit complement (SBA-BR).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Antibody titers were assessed in participants who met all inclusion, but no exclusion criteria; received assigned study vaccine; and had serology samples with valid test results (Per-Protocol Population).||Participants|||Number
831502|NCT01239043|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Antibody Titers at ≥ 1:8 for Each of the Vaccine Serogroups Before and After Vaccination With Either Menomune or Menactra Vaccine|Titers of antibodies to vaccine serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 were measured by serum bactericidal assay with baby rabbit complement (SBA-BR).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Antibody titers were assessed in participants who met all inclusion, but no exclusion criteria; received assigned study vaccine and serology samples with valid test results (Per-Protocol Population).||Participants|||Number
831503|NCT01239043|Other Pre-specified|Geometric Mean Titers of Individual Antibodies to Vaccine Antigens Following Vaccination With Either Menomune or Menactra Vaccine (SBA-BR)|Geometric mean titers (GMTs) of antibodies to serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 were measured by serum bactericidal assay with baby rabbit complement (SBA-BR).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|GMTs were assessed in participants who met all inclusion, but no exclusion criteria; received assigned study vaccine; and had serology samples with valid test results (Per-Protocol Population).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831504|NCT01239043|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Achieved a Four-Fold Rise in Bactericidal Antibody Titers From Baseline Following Vaccination With Either Menomune or Menactra Vaccine.|Titers of antibodies to serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 were measured by serum bactericidal assay with human complement (SBA-HC).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Antibody titers were assessed in participants who met all inclusion, but no exclusion criteria; received assigned study vaccine; and had serology samples with valid test results (Per-Protocol Population).||Participants|||Number
831505|NCT01239043|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Participants Antibody Titers for Each of the Vaccine Serogroups Before and 28 Days After Vaccination With Either Menomune or Menactra Vaccine.|Titers of antibodies to serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 for each participant were measured by serum bactericidal assay with human complement (SBA-HC).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Antibody titers were assessed in participants who met all inclusion, but no exclusion criteria; received assigned study vaccine; and had serology samples with valid test results (Per-Protocol Population).||Participants|||Number
831506|NCT01239043|Other Pre-specified|Geometric Mean Titers of Individual Antibodies to Vaccine Antigens Following Vaccination With Either Menomune or Menactra Vaccine|Geometric mean titers (GMTs) of antibodies to serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 were measured by serum bactericidal assay with human complement (SBA-HC).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|GMTs were assessed in participants who met all inclusion, but no exclusion criteria; received assigned study vaccine; and had serology samples with valid test results (Per-Protocol Population).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831507|NCT01239043|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection Site or Systemic Reactions Following Vaccination With Either Menomune or Menactra Vaccine|"Solicited Injection Site Reactions: Pain, Erythema, Swelling. Solicited Systemic Reactions: Fever (Temperature), Headache, Malaise, Myalgia.
Grade 3 reactions were defined as: Pain, headache, malaise, and myalgia - significant, prevents daily activity; Erythema and swelling - > 100 mm; Fever, temperature of ≥ 39.0ºC or ≥ 102.1ºF."|Day 0 to Day 7 post-vaccination|Solicited reactions were assessed in all subjects who received at a dose of study vaccine, according to the vaccine actually received (Safety Analysis Population).||Participants|||Number
831508|NCT01239056|Secondary|Adverse Events||1 year|||participants|||Number
831509|NCT01239056|Primary|Technical Success of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Single-access Pseudocyst Drainage With a Fully Covered Self-expanding Metal Stent ; Anchored With a Double Pigtail Plastic Stent Inserted Through the Metal Stent Lumen|"Technical success was evaluated by the ability to achieved pseudocyst drainage after endoscopically placing a Fully Covered Self-expanding Metal Stent in the pseudocyst .
Technical failure was evaluated by the inability to fully drain the pancreas pseudocyst after endoscopically placing a Fully Covered Self-expanding Mental Stent in the pseudocyst."|baseline|||participants|||Number
831510|NCT01239056|Secondary|Resolution of Pancreatic Pseudocyst After Placement of Fully Covered Self-expanding Metal Stent (CSEMS).||6 to 12 weeks after baseline|||participants|||Number
831511|NCT01239121|Secondary|Medication-related Symptoms|Patient's self-report of medication-related symptoms by telephone questionnaire|Up to 1 month after hospital discharge|"For this outcome 66 and 87 participants unable to be reached by telephone in first and second arms, respectively.
Outcome not ascertained in the third arm because those participants were not hospitalized."||participants|||Number
831512|NCT01239121|Secondary|Adverse Drug Events|Actual harm to patient from hospital medication discrepancies by record review|During hospital stay and up to 1 month after hospital discharge|Outcome not ascertained in the third arm because those participants were not hospitalized.||participants|||Number
831513|NCT01239121|Primary|Transition Drug Risk|Rating of potential for harm to patient from hospital medication discrepancies by record review. Minimum=0 Maximum=no maximum. Higher values represent increased detection of medication discrepancies. Although medication discrepancies are undesirable, increasing their detection might facilitate prevention of adverse drug events.|During hospital stay and up to 1 month after hospital discharge|Outcome not ascertained in the third arm because those participants were not hospitalized.||units: risk-weighted discrepancies||Standard Deviation|Mean
831514|NCT01239212|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Participants' medical records will be reviewed for any adverse effects of the medication seen in the 24 hours after the loading dose.|24 hours after dose||||||
831515|NCT01239212|Secondary|Change in Vital Sign Baseline|Short term treatment-emergent adverse effects of levetiracetam will be measured by change from vital sign baseline in the 24 hours after the dose.|24 hours after loading dose||||||
831516|NCT01239212|Primary|Pharmacokinetic Profile|3 levels for levetiracetam and its metabolite L057 will be drawn: at 5-20 minutes after the dose, 1-2 hours after the dose, and 6-10 hours after the dose. In infants who remain on maintenance doses of the medication, a steady state level will be drawn 4-7 days after the loading dose. Outcome reported is clearance. The median maximum clearance rate was measured in each participant and determined by evaluating the levels of levetiracetam at each time point using MW Pharm.|5-20 minutes after the dose, 1-2 hours after the dose, 6-10 hours after the dose, and possibly 4-7 days after loading dose (if infants remained on maintenance doses)|all participants had adequate levels drawn for analysis||ml/min/kg||Full Range|Median
831517|NCT01239316|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters of Vismodegib, CSF Penetration|The estimated median of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drug penetration is reported when expressed as an AUC ratio of CSF vismodegib to that of unbound drug in plasma.|up to 12 month|The calculation of drug penetration is based on patients who had the course 1 plasma and CSF drug concentration data||penetration rate||Full Range|Median
831566|NCT01246713|Primary|Acetaminophen Metabolites|Area-under-curve from time zero to 8 hours for APAP-cysteinate metabolite. Serum was collected just prior to and at hours 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 after administration of the APAP dose.|8 hours|||mcg.hr/ml||Standard Error|Mean
831567|NCT01247220|Secondary|Retinal Thickness|central foveal thickness on optical coherence tomography|6 and 12 months|||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
831518|NCT01239316|Secondary|Duration of Objective Response|The duration of objective response is measured from the initial scan documenting complete or partial response that was subsequently confirmed until the earlier of documented progression or death on study. Duration of objective response is censored at the last tumor assessment date for patients without disease progression who have not died within 30 days of last exposure to study treatment.|From start of treatment up to 2 years|Patient with sustained objective response||months|||Number
831519|NCT01239316|Primary|Pharmacokinetics (Plasma) of GDC-0449|plasma GDC-0449 concentration of day 21 in first course|up to 12 month|Patients who have day 21 plasma GDC-0449 concentration data available||uM||Full Range|Median
831520|NCT01239316|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) is measured from the date of initial treatment with GDC-0449 until the earliest of progression or death on study. PFS is censored at the last tumor assessment date for patients without disease progression who have not died within 30 days of last exposure to study treatment. Kaplan-Meier method is used to estimate the progression-free survival.|From start of treatment up to 2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831521|NCT01239316|Primary|Objective Response (CR+PR) Sustained for ≥ 8 Weeks|Objective response is either a complete response or a partial response sustained for 8 weeks in a patient. The objective response rate will be reported separately for patients of each stratum. CR is complete disappearance of all enhancing tumor. PR is >= 50% reduction in tumor size.|Up to 12 months|||participants|||Number
831522|NCT01239342|Secondary|Time to Failure (TTF)|TTF defined as Time interval between the date of treatment and the date of disease progression, date of death, date of treatment discontinuation due to severe toxicity or last follow-up date.|Time interval between the date of treatment and the date of disease progression, date of death, date of treatment discontinuation due to severe toxicity or last follow-up date, assessed up to 5 years|No participants analyzed. Data not collected.|||||
831523|NCT01239342|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (OS) in Months|Overall survival reported in months as time interval between the date of treatment and the date of death or last follow-up.|Time interval between the date of treatment and the date of death or last follow-up, assessed up to 5 years|||Months||Full Range|Median
831524|NCT01239342|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR) Defined as Complete Response (CR) + Partial Response (PR)|Response for CR + PR defined by RECIST version 1.1. Repeat radiologic studies to evaluate disease progression or response (in accordance with restaging of disease) every 8 weeks. Complete Response (CR): Disappearance all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. Partial Response (PR): >30% decrease in sum diameters of target lesions, reference baseline sum diameters. Progressive Disease (PD): >20% increase in sum diameters of target lesions, reference smallest sum on study (includes baseline sum if is smallest on study). In addition to relative increase of 20%, sum must demonstrate absolute increase >5 mm. (Note: appearance 1/+ new lesions considered progressions). Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, reference smallest sum diameters.|Up to 5 years|One participant in each group left study before restaging therefore are excluded from response outcome analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
831525|NCT01239342|Secondary|Summary of Selected Toxicities Grade 3 or Greater Toxicity Based on the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0|Adverse Events (AEs) list of reported events with associated intervention agent in a uniform presentation of events. The method of Thall, Simon and Estey (1995, 1996) was used to collect study participants’ safety data summarized by treatment arm, category, severity and relevance. Comprehensive listing of AEs collected on study can be found in Adverse Event section separated by severity, Serious and Other AEs and represented by treatment arm, organ system-category within defined severity.|Up to 5 years|||Toxicities|||Number
831526|NCT01239342|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Defined as Number of Participants With Complete Response (CR) + Partial Response (PR) + Stable Disease (SD)|Clinical benefit defined as participants' with CR+PR+SD assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Repeat radiologic studies to evaluate disease progression or response (in accordance with restaging of disease) every 8 weeks. Complete Response (CR): Disappearance all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. Partial Response (PR): >30% decrease in sum diameters of target lesions, reference baseline sum diameters. Progressive Disease (PD): >20% increase in sum diameters of target lesions, reference smallest sum on study (includes baseline sum if is smallest on study). In addition to relative increase of 20%, sum must demonstrate absolute increase >5 mm. (Note: appearance 1/+ new lesions considered progressions). Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, reference smallest sum diameters.|Up to 5 years|One participant in each group left study before restaging therefore are excluded from outcome analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831527|NCT01239342|Primary|Median Progression Free Survival (PFS) in Months|PFS defined as Time interval between date of treatment and date of disease progression, date of death or last follow-up date, whichever occurs first. Progression defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a nontarget lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|Time interval between date of treatment and date of disease progression, date of death or last follow-up date, whichever occurs first, assessed up to 5 years|One participant in each group left study before restaging therefore are excluded from response outcome analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831528|NCT01239355|Secondary|Overall Survival|Survival will be estimated by the product-limit (Kaplan-Meier) estimator.|Until death, up to 26 months|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831529|NCT01239355|Secondary|Objective Response|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Objective Response (OR) = CR + PR|Evaluated for response every 2 cycles (8 weeks) with confirmatory evaluation at least 4 weeks following initial documentation of objective response, up to 26 months|||participants|||Number
831568|NCT01247220|Secondary|Number of Ranibizumab Injections|Number of ranibizumab injections needed by decreased visual acuity and/or increasing retinal thickness in second six months of observation period|12 months|||injections||Full Range|Mean
831569|NCT01247220|Primary|Visual Acuity|ETDRS visual acuity|6 and 12 months|||letters on ETDRS Visual Acuity Chart||Standard Deviation|Mean
831530|NCT01239355|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan and Meier. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions (the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm), or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|Until disease progression or death, up to 26 months|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831531|NCT01239381|Secondary|Median Survival Among Participants With Colorectal Cancer|The median amount of time participants survived from the start of treatment, among the participants with colorectal cancer.|2 years|The 35 participants with colorectal cancer as the primary cancer.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831532|NCT01239381|Secondary|1 Year Local Control Rate Among Participants With Colorectal Cancer|The percentage of participants with local control at one year among the participants with colorectal cancer as the primary cancer.|1 year|Participants with colorectal cancer||percentage of participants|||Number
831533|NCT01239381|Secondary|2-year Local Control Rate|The percentage of participants with local control 2 years after the start of study treatment.|2 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831534|NCT01239381|Secondary|Median Progression Free Survival|The median amount of time participants survived without cancer progression following the start of study treatment. Progression was assessed using RECIST v1.0. Progressive Disease (PD) is defined as at least a 20% increase in the Longest Diameter (LD) of the lesion, taken as the reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.|1 years|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831535|NCT01239381|Secondary|Median Overall Survival|The median overall survival (in months) of participants as measured from the start of treatment.|2 years|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831536|NCT01239381|Secondary|Median Follow-up Time|The median follow-up time among the 39 participants still alive at the time of analysis, measured from the start of treatment until the time of analysis.|1 year|the 39 participants still alive at the time of analysis||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831537|NCT01239381|Primary|Local Control Rate|"The percentage of participants with local control at primary tumor site at one year. Local is evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST). Local control is defined as achieving either Complete response (CR), Partial Response (PR), or Stable Disease (SD).
(CR): Disappearance of entire lesion, with no additional evidence of disease.
(PR): At least a 30% decrease in the (sum of) the longest diameter (LD) of the primary lesion, taken as reference the baseline sum LD.
(SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started."|1 year|The 90 participants that started study treatment||percentage of participants|||Number
831542|NCT01239511|Secondary|Dose-response Relationship of Three Different Dose Levels of STA-2 Versus Placebo Control in Change in Total Exercise Time.||6 weeks||||||
831543|NCT01239511|Secondary|Change in Lipid Profiles (HDL-C, LDL-C, Total Cholesterol, Triglyceride) From Baseline to All Visits||6 weeks||||||
831544|NCT01239511|Secondary|Change in Pharmacological Parameters (Oxidized-LDL), Isoprostane and High-sensitivity Hs-CRP From Baseline to All Visits||6 weeks||||||
831545|NCT01239511|Secondary|Change in Consumption of Short-acting Nitrates From Baseline to All Visits||6 weeks||||||
831546|NCT01239511|Secondary|Changes in Angina Frequency in Subject's Diary From Baseline to All Visits||6 weeks||||||
831547|NCT01239511|Secondary|Changes in Time to Maximum ST-segment Depression During ETT From Baseline to the Final Visit||6 weeks||||||
831548|NCT01239511|Secondary|Changes in Time to 1mm ST-segment Depression During ETT From Baseline to Final Visit||6 weeks||||||
831549|NCT01239511|Secondary|Change in Time to Onset of Angina From Baseline to the Final Visit||6 weeks||||||
831550|NCT01239511|Primary|Change in Total Exercise Time (Seconds)|the time difference of total exercise time from V2 to V5 compare to placebo|6 weeks after the first exercise tolerance testing is conducted|ITT (intend-to-treat) population will be used for analysis||second||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
831551|NCT01246401|Secondary|ART Adherence for 4 or More Injections XR-NTX Versus Placebo and 3 or Less Injections of XR-NTX|The arm/group number of the participants vary from the primary outcome because this is a treatment effect analysis. All client with missing data at 6 months were considered as failure - meaning - they had less than 100% ART adherence.|6 months|All client with missing data at 6 months were considered as failure - meaning - they had less than 100% ART adherence.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831570|NCT01247272|Secondary|AUC0-inf of Norfluoxetine.|Bioequivalence based on Norfluoxetine AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831552|NCT01246401|Secondary|Opioid Abstinence at 6 Months for Those With More Than 4 Injections|Based on self reported opioids (heroin) use. All participants receiving Placebo as well as participants who received 3 or less XR-NTX injections were compared to those who receive 4 or more XR-NTX injection.|6 months|Collected via Time Line Fall Back (TLFB). Total N analyzed is 74. 12 of the clients had initial or some TLFB data indicating relapse but were counted as lost at 6 months for outcome 4. 19 Clients did not have TLFB data or if they did within 6 month it did not indicate any relapse. These were treated as missing and not included in analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831553|NCT01246401|Secondary|Participants With Opiate Abstinence Via By Doing Urine Toxicology Test|Percent of subjects with no opiate use at 6 month. Missing data was treated as failure (opiate positive).|6 month|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831554|NCT01246401|Secondary|Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) Adherence 100%|Number of subjects with 100% adherence at 6 months measured using Visual Analogue Scale: 0% to 100%|6 months|56 participants with missing data were considered as failure - meaning - with adherence less than 100%, and included into the analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831555|NCT01246401|Secondary|Craving for Opioids|Craving at baseline compared to 6 month. This is assessed through a self report scale rated 0 to 10; 0 meaning not craving and 10 meaning highest craving. Change in craving score was categorized as 1)no change between baseline and 6 month; 2)increased craving - baseline craving was reported lower than at 6 month; 3)decreased craving - baseline craving was reported higher than 6 month craving.|6 months|Data available at 6 month determined who was included into the analysis. In this case a total of 47 data points (those with both baseline and 6 month data points) were included into the analysis (32 Extended-Release Naltrexone and 15 Placebo).||Participants|||Count of Participants
831556|NCT01246401|Secondary|Addiction Severity|"The Addiction Severity Index (ASI) questionnaire will be used to assess addiction severity. The ASI composite scoreprovides reliable and valid measure of patient status in a particular module of interest which can then be usecompared at the beginning of treatment to the evaluation endpoint to note the improvement or lack thereof. In this assessment the drug composite score was calculated using algorithm by Treatment Research Institute. If the score increases then it shows increase in severity where as if it decreases then it shows decrease in severity for that measured module. The scale ranges from 0 to 1.
The mean composite scores for drug use from baseline to 6 months were compared using Nonparametric test."|baseline, and 6 months|An additional subject's data from the experimental group was not collected at baseline. For the 6 months data, the total number of participants with completed assessment used for the analysis was 46 (31 in XR-NTX group and 15 in Placebo group).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831557|NCT01246401|Secondary|Time to Opioid Relapse or End of Intervention|Measuring days to first relapse based on self reported opioids (heroin) use within the 6 month (180 days) intervention period. If participants had no follow-up visits, and thus no self reported opiate use, they were treated as missing. Those who did not relapse within the 6 month intervention period were treated as having 180 days until relapse.|6 months|Data collected via Time Line Fall Back (TLFB). 15 in XR-NTX group and 4 in Placebo did not have data because of attrition - treated as missing. An additional 19 people in the treatment arm and 9 in placebo filled out the TLFB at 9 or 12 months, and this data was used to fill in missing information.||days||Full Range|Median
831558|NCT01246401|Secondary|CD4 Cell Count (Cells/mL)|Baseline labs will be drawn while subject is in prison, one to three months prior to release. Additional labs will be drawn every 3 months for 1 year to monitor changes in CD4 levels.|Baseline and 6 months|Data was collected via labs. At month 6, due to attrition, data was only available for a total of 46 subjects. These include, 14 in Placebo and 32 in Extended-Release Naltrexone. The mean and STD are presented below.||cells/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
831559|NCT01246401|Secondary|Particpants Who Had Undetectable HIV-1 RNA Levels at Less Than 50 Copies/mL|Baseline labs will be drawn while subject is in prison, one to three months prior to release. Additionally, labs will be drawn every 3 months for 1 year to monitor changes in HIV-1 RNA levels. Treatment time period was the first 6 months where the primary outcome data will be based on.|6 months|A total of 80 participants had viral load data at 6 months (56 in XR-NTX group and 24 in Placebo group). The remaining 13 participants (10 in XR-NTX group and 3 in Placebo group) with missing viral load data at 6 months were considered as failure - meaning - having a viral load of 400 or more. Thus included into the final analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831560|NCT01246401|Primary|Participants Who Had Undetectable HIV-1 RNA Levels at Less Than 400 Copies/mL at Six Month|Baseline labs will be drawn while subject is in prison, one to three months prior to release. Additionally, labs will be drawn every 3 months for 1 year to monitor changes in HIV-1 RNA levels. Treatment time period was the first 6 months where the primary outcome data will be based on.|6 months|A total of 80 participants had viral load data at 6 months (56 in XR-NTX group and 24 in Placebo group). The remaining 13 participants (10 in XR-NTX group and 3 in Placebo group) with missing viral load data at 6 months were considered as failure - meaning - having a viral load of 400 or more. Thus included into the final analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
831561|NCT01246479|Secondary|Rate of Subjects With AEs and Medically Attended AEs up to Months 12, 24 and 36 After the First IC51 Vaccination (in Study IC51-322). Severity, Duration and Relationship to Vaccinations.|Rate of subjects with AEs and medically attended AEs up to Months 12, 24 and 36 after the first IC51 vaccination (in study IC51-322). Severity, duration and relationship to vaccinations.|Months 12, 24 and 36||||||
831562|NCT01246479|Secondary|Rate of Subjects With SAEs Following Immunization up to Months 12, 24 and 36 After the First IC51 Vaccination (in Study IC51-322)|Rate of subjects with SAEs following immunization up to Months 12, 24 and 36 after the first IC51 vaccination (in study IC51-322)|Months 12, 24 and 36||||||
831563|NCT01246479|Secondary|GMTs and Rate of Subjects With PRNT50 Titers of ≥ 1:10 at Months 24 and 36 After the First IC51 Vaccination (in Study IC51-322)|GMTs and rate of subjects with PRNT50 titers of ≥ 1:10 at Months 24 and 36 after the first IC51 vaccination (in study IC51-322)|Month 24, 36||||||
831564|NCT01246479|Secondary|GMT for JEV Neutralizing Antibodies Measured Using the PRNT at Month 12 After the First IC51 Vaccination (in Study IC51-322)|GMT for JEV neutralizing antibodies measured using the PRNT at Month 12 after the first IC51 vaccination (in study IC51-322)|Month 12||||||
831571|NCT01247272|Secondary|AUC0-t of Norfluoxetine.|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for the metabolite Norfluoxetine.|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831574|NCT01247272|Primary|AUC0-t of Fluoxetine.|Bioequivalence based on Fluoxetine AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831575|NCT01247272|Primary|Cmax of Fluoxetine.|Bioequivalence based on Fluoxetine Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831576|NCT01247285|Secondary|AUC0-inf of Norfluoxetine.|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for the metabolite Norfluoxetine.|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831577|NCT01247285|Secondary|AUC0-t of Norfluoxetine.|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for the metabolite Norfluoxetine.|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831578|NCT01247285|Secondary|Cmax of Norfluoxetine.|Informational comparison of Cmax values for the metabolite Norfluoxetine.|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831579|NCT01247285|Primary|AUC0-inf of Fluoxetine.|Bioequivalence based on Fluoxetine AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831580|NCT01247285|Primary|AUC0-t of Fluoxetine.|Bioequivalence based on Fluoxetine AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831581|NCT01247285|Primary|Cmax of Fluoxetine.|Bioequivalence based on Fluoxetine Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 25 day period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831582|NCT01247298|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Local Failure Patterns|Assess local failure patterns of patients treated with TACE & SBRT. This is assessed by the percentage of patients where recurrence occurred|Baseline up to 2 years after treatment completed|||percentage of participants|||Number
831583|NCT01247298|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Survival|Assess overall survival (OS) of patients treated with TACE & SBRT. This is assessed by the length of time from either the date of diagnosis or the start of treatment that patients diagnosed with the disease are still alive.|up to 2 years after treatment completed|Survival analysis was performed for all patients.||percentage of participants|||Number
831584|NCT01247298|Primary|Local Recurrence Rate|Evaluate the number of patients with local recurrence. Patient will be asked to visit their study doctor for follow-up exams every 3 months for 2 years while participating in this study.Patient will be asked to visit their study doctor for follow-up exams and imaging (CT or MRI) every 3 months. This will be measured by number of patients with recurrence on their follow-up imaging.|Baseline to up to 2 years after treatment completed|||participants|||Number
831585|NCT01247298|Primary|Median Progression Free Survival (PFS) Treated With a Combination of TACE & SBRT.|Patient will be asked to visit their study doctor for follow-up exams and imaging (CT or MRI) every 3 months until complete response or progression. This will be measured by tumor progression and/or death on follow-up imaging from completion of treatment.|Baseline to up to 2 years after treatment completed|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831586|NCT01247298|Primary|Safety of a Combination Therapy|Evaluate the safety of a combination of TACE and high dose SBRT. Patients were evaluated for toxicity during their follow-up exams every 3 months for 2 years while participating in this study. Patients were also instructed to notify the PI between visits if any related toxicity issues occurred.|Baseline to 45 day after completing combination treatment.|All enrolled patients were analyzed.||participants|||Number
831617|NCT01247428|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE)|Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) defined as death, myocardial infarction (Q-wave and non-Q-wave) and target vessel revascularization (TVR)|240 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831618|NCT01247428|Primary|Angiographic In-Stent Late Lumen Loss|In-stent late lumen loss as measured by the angiographic core laboratory as the difference between the post-procedure minimal lumen diameters (MLD) in the treated segment (stented region) minus the MLD in the same region at follow-up.|8 months|Last observation used, such that patients (n=10) in the 8 month analysis is reported.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
831619|NCT01247571|Secondary|Overall Survival|The observed length of life from entry into the study to death or the date of last contact.|Time from start of treatment to time of death or the date of last contact, assessed up to 5 years|Eligible and treated patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831601|NCT01247428|Secondary|OCT Evaluation: % Stent Strut Uncovered|% stent strut uncovered is defined as the ratio of uncovered struts to total struts in all cross-sections.|18 M|27 out of 30 patients analyzed||percentage of struts uncovered||Full Range|Median
831602|NCT01247428|Secondary|Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Evaluation: % Stent Strut Uncovered|% stent strut uncovered is defined as the ratio of uncovered struts to total struts in all cross-sections.|8 months|Patients evaluated at 4(n=10), 6(n=10) and 8(n=10) months. Only 9/30 patients had evaluable OCT at the 8 month timeframe.||percentage of struts uncovered||Full Range|Median
831603|NCT01247428|Secondary|IVUS Evaluation: % Neointimal Volume Obstruction|% neointimal volume obstruction is defined as the neointimal volume divided by stent volume.|18 months|20 out of 30 participants analyzed||percentage of volume obstruction||Standard Deviation|Mean
831604|NCT01247428|Secondary|Intravascular Ultrasound (IVUS) Evaluation: % Neointimal Volume Obstruction|% neointimal volume obstruction is defined as the neointimal volume divided by stent volume.|8 months|Patients evaluated at 4(n=10), 6(n=10) and 8(n=10) months. Only 25/30 patients had evaluable IVUS data.||percentage of volume obstruction||Standard Deviation|Mean
831605|NCT01247428|Secondary|Angiographic Evaluation: In-stent Binary Restenosis|Binary Restenosis is defined as ≥50% luminal narrowing at follow-up angiography.|18 months|Population includes participants from whom data was collected.||participants|||Number
831606|NCT01247428|Secondary|Angiographic Evaluation: In-stent Binary Restenosis|Binary Restenosis is defined as ≥50% luminal narrowing at follow-up angiography.|4 months, 6 months, 8 months|Patients evaluated at 4(n=10), 6(n=10) and 8(n=10) months.||participants|||Number
831607|NCT01247428|Secondary|Stent Thrombosis|The presence of an intracoronary thrombus that originates in the stent or in the segments 5 mm proximal or distal to the stent post-procedure|240 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831608|NCT01247428|Secondary|Target Lesion Failure (TLF)|"Target lesion failure (TLF) is defined as the composite endpoint of:
cardiac death,
target-lesion myocardial infarction (Q wave or non-Q wave), and
clinically indicated target lesion revascularization"|240 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831609|NCT01247428|Secondary|Target Vessel Failure (TVF)|"Target vessel failure (TVF) is defined as the composite endpoint of:
cardiac death,
target-vessel myocardial infarction (Q wave or non-Q wave), and
clinically indicated target vessel revascularization"|240 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831610|NCT01247428|Secondary|Clinically-driven Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR) Rates|"A revascularization is considered clinically driven if angiography at follow-up shows a percent diameter stenosis ≥ 50% (Angiographic Core Laboratory QCA assessment) and if one of the following occurs:
A positive history of recurrent angina pectoris, presumably related to the target vessel;
Objective signs of ischemia at rest (ECG changes) or during exercise test (or equivalent), presumably related to the target vessel;
Abnormal results of any invasive functional diagnostic test (e.g., Doppler flow velocity reserve, fractional flow reserve);
A target vessel revascularization (TVR) with a diameter stenosis ≥ 70% even in the absence of the above-mentioned ischemic signs or symptoms."|240 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831611|NCT01247428|Secondary|Clinically-driven Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR) Rates|"A revascularization is considered clinically driven if angiography at follow-up shows a percent diameter stenosis ≥ 50% (Angiographic Core Laboratory QCA assessment) and if one of the following occurs:
A positive history of recurrent angina pectoris, presumably related to the target vessel;
Objective signs of ischemia at rest (ECG changes) or during exercise test (or equivalent), presumably related to the target vessel;
Abnormal results of any invasive functional diagnostic test (e.g., Doppler flow velocity reserve, fractional flow reserve);
A target lesion revascularization (TLR) with a diameter stenosis ≥ 70% even in the absence of the above-mentioned ischemic signs or symptoms."|240 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831612|NCT01247428|Secondary|Total Myocardial Infarction (MI)|"Q-wave MI (QWMI): requires one of the following criteria: the development of new abnormal Q waves in ≥2 contiguous ECG leads not present on the patient's baseline (i.e., before intervention) in association with a >2x upper limit normal elevation of creatine kinase (CK) levels. In the absence of ECG data, the clinical events committee may adjudicate a Q-wave MI based on the clinical scenario and appropriate cardiac enzyme data; chest pain or other acute symptoms consistent with myocardial ischemia and new pathological Q waves in ≥2 contiguous ECG leads in the absence of timely cardiac enzyme data.
Non-Q-wave MI (NQWMI): the elevation of CK levels (≥2 times ULN) with elevated CK-MB enzyme levels in the absence of new pathologic Q waves."|240 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831613|NCT01247428|Secondary|Total Mortality|Total mortality (cardiac and non-cardiac)|240 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831614|NCT01247428|Secondary|Procedural Success|Achievement of a final in-stent residual diameter stenosis of <50% (by QCA) using the assigned device (including any adjunctive devices) without cardiac death, Myocardial infarction (MI) or repeat revascularization of the target lesion pre-hospital discharge|8 hours|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831620|NCT01247571|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival is the period from study entry until disease progression, death or date of last contact|From start of treatment to time of progression or death, assessed up to 5 years|Eligible and Treated Patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831621|NCT01247571|Primary|Number of Patients With Grade 3 or Higher Adverse Events|Grade 3 or higher adverse events were graded by CTCAE v4.|Every cycle while on treatment|Eligible and Treated Patients||participants|||Number
831622|NCT01247571|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Progression-free Survival (PFS) at 6 Months|Progression-free survival is the period from study entry until disease progression, death or date of last contact. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20 % increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|6 months|Eligible and treated patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
831623|NCT01247571|Primary|Objective Tumor Response (Complete or Partial)|Complete and Partial Tumor Response by RECIST 1.0. Per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR|CT scan or MRI if used to follow lesion(s) for measurable disease every other cycle for the first 6 mnths; then every 3 mnths thereafter until dx progression is confirmed; also repeat any other time clinically indicated, assessed up to 6 months.|Eligible and Treated Patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
831624|NCT01247675|Secondary|Emax of IGF-I|"As part of the following endpoint:
Pharmacodynamic (PD) response of serum Insulin-like Growth Factor-I (IGF-I) from ACP-001 treated dose groups compared to the PD response of IGF-I from the daily Omnitrope treated group.
Emax (maximum observed response) values at Week 4"|Days 22 to 29|Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis was performed on all patients who had at least one measurement of the primary variable and who had attended the Day 28 study visit. Two patients in Cohort 2 (ACP-001, 0.04 mg hGH/kg/wk) were withdrawn from the study before Day 28 and were therefore excluded from the analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831625|NCT01247675|Secondary|Cmax of hGH|"As part of the following endpoint:
Pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of serum human Growth Hormone (hGH) from ACP-001 treated dose groups compared to the PK profile of hGH from the daily Omnitrope treated group.
Cmax (maximum value of concentration) values at Week 4"|Days 22 to 29|Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis was performed on all patients who had at least one measurement of the primary variable and who had attended the Day 28 study visit. Two patients in Cohort 2 (ACP-001, 0.04 mg hGH/kg/wk) were withdrawn from the study before Day 28 and were therefore excluded from the analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831626|NCT01247675|Primary|Incidence of Treatment Emergent Anti-hGH Binding Antibody Formation|Number of subjects with treatment emergent anti-hGH binding antibodies|Start of study treatment through Day 42|All patients who were randomized and received at least one dose of test product were included in the Safety analysis.||Participants|||Number
831627|NCT01247675|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Local Tolerability Events (Assessed by the Patient and Investigator)|Assessment of local tolerability was performed by examining injection sites by the investigator during study visits, and on the basis of records in the Patient Diary. Assessments included erythema, swelling, or pain.|Start of study treatment through Week 4|All patients who were randomized and received at least one dose of test product were included in the Safety analysis.||Number of subjects with any symptom|||Number
831628|NCT01247922|Secondary|Median Treatment Duration||From first dose of study drug up to last dose of study drug (The mean treatment duration was 170.5 days)|SAF||days||Full Range|Median
831629|NCT01247922|Secondary|Best Overall Response|Best overall response was derived from an integrated clinical assessment by the study investigator as per institutional standards. This included radiographic assessments deemed appropriate by the investigator in the normal care of the patient. A determination of best overall response at the end of study treatment (complete response, partial response, minor response or stable disease) was only made if (1) any disease-related neurologic symptoms were stable or improving over the interval of the radiographic assessment and (2) corticosteroid dosing for the control of tumor-related signs/symptoms was stable or decreasing.If the investigator deems that a radiographic assessment is not needed, then evidence of clinical improvement may be used to determine best response provided that corticosteroid dosing for tumor-related signs/symptoms is stable or decreasing.|End of treatment (The mean treatment duration was 170.5 days.)|SAF||participants|||Number
831630|NCT01247922|Primary|Safety Assessed Through Evaluation of Physical Examinations, Vital Signs, Clinical Laboratory Tests, and Adverse Events (AEs)|Safety is monitored through AEs, which includes abnormal or clinically significant vital sign assessments, laboratory test, physical examination findings associated with signs and/or symptoms requiring withdrawal, dose modification or medical intervention. A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was defined as an adverse event observed after starting administration of the study drug. An AE was considered serious (SAE) if it resulted in death, a life-threatening situation, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of an existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a patient who received study drug or other important medical events.|From first dose of study drug to 30 days after last dose of study drug (The mean treatment duration was 170.5 days)|The analysis population is the Safety Analysis Set (SAF) consisted of all enrolled patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
831631|NCT01247974|Primary|Primary Effectiveness Endpoint|Rate of new onset postoperative atrial fibrillation during the first seven days postoperatively or prior to hospital discharge, whichever was sooner.|7 days postoperatively or hospital discharge, whichever is sooner|Primary analysis was based upon the ITT population using multiple imputation to impute missing values. The ITT population was defined as all subjects who provided informed consent and were randomized in the trial.||percentage of participants|||Number
831632|NCT01247974|Primary|Primary Safety Endpoint|"A composite endpoint consisting of the following procedure- related serious adverse events occurring within 30 days postprocedure:
Death
Myocardial Infarction (MI)
Stroke
Mediastinal Reoperation
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI)"|30 days postprocedure|Performed with the FAS population using multiple imputation methods to impute values for missing or incomplete data. FAS population was defined as subjects in the ITT population who had CABG surgery and received their assigned treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
831633|NCT01248013|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Significant Reduction in Their IBS Symptom Severity Score One Year After Completion of Therapy.|The IBS Symptom Severity Scale has four components, severity of abdominal pain, number of days with pain in past 10 days, abdominal distension, bowel habit and interference with life in general. Maximum score is 500, minimum score is 0. The lower the score, the lower the symptom severity. Participants are considered clinically improved if they have a reduction in score of 50 points or greater.|One year after termination of treatment|||percentage of participants|||Number
831634|NCT01248013|Secondary|Outcome Predictors|to determine whether relationship quality, or attribution of symptoms to physical or emotional causation correlated with result|one year||||||
831635|NCT01248013|Primary|Effectiveness of Group Hypnotherapy in Irritable Bowel Syndrome|assessed by symptom severity scale given before treatment began and after 7 bi-weekly sessions, at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months|one year||||||
831636|NCT01248065|Secondary|Exacerbations|Outcome defined as number of exacerbations per person-year.|Overall exacerbation rate during 28-week trial|||Exacerbations/person-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831637|NCT01248065|Secondary|Lung Function Change From Baseline|FEV1 (liters) and methacholine PC20 will be evaluated. Changes are measured as 28 weeks minus baseline.|Change is measured as value at 28 weeks minus baseline value.|||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
831638|NCT01248065|Primary|Treatment Failure|Treatment failure is a well-defined asthma outcome reflecting overall asthma control that has been used previously in multiple clinical trials. Treatment failure as defined in the current proposal and prior trials is consistent with the American Thoracic Society (ATS)/European Respiratory Society(ERS) definition of a moderate exacerbation - a deterioration in symptoms and/or lung function with increased rescue bronchodilator use that lasts 2 days or more. The percentages of participants experiencing a treatment failure are Kaplan-Meier estimates of failure rate.|Twenty-eight week intervention period from randomization until end of trial.|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831639|NCT01248130|Primary|Change in NIMH Clinical Global Impression Scale for Pervasive Developmental Disorders (CGI-PDD) Improvement Scores||weekly||||||
831640|NCT01248130|Primary|Change in Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) Total Raw Score|Change in SRS Total Raw Score|pre-treatment, 6 weeks, post-treatment (12 weeks)||||||
831641|NCT01248221|Secondary|Gastric Emptying at 60, 120, and 240 Minutes Measured by 13C Spirulina Gastric Emptying Breath Test (GEBT)|A multiple linear regression model approach was used to estimate gastric emptying based on the breath test samples at each time point. Gastric emptying (GE) metric is the proportion of tracer emptied from the stomach at time, t.|60, 120, and 240 minutes after ingestion of standard meal|||proportion of tracer||Standard Deviation|Mean
831642|NCT01248221|Secondary|Gastric Emptying at 60, 120, and 240 Minutes Measured by Scintigraphy|The scintigraphic gastric emptying (GE) metric is the proportion of tracer emptied from the stomach at time, t.|60, 120, and 240 minutes after ingestion of standard meal|||proportion of tracer||Standard Deviation|Mean
831643|NCT01248221|Primary|Gastric Emptying Half Time Measured by 13C Spirulina Gastric Emptying Breath Test (GEBT)|Gastric emptying half time is the time for half of the ingested solids to leave the stomach. This value was measured by the 13C spirulina GEBT.|4 hours after ingestion of standard meal|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
831644|NCT01248221|Primary|Gastric Emptying Half Time Measured by Scintigraphy|Gastric emptying half time is the time for half of the ingested solids to leave the stomach. This value was measured by standard 99m Tc scintigraphy.|4 hours after ingestion of standard meal|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
831645|NCT01248364|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rate of Endogenous Glucose Production: iAUC 5h, at Day 28|"Change from baseline in the incremental area under the curve of endogenous glucose production from 0 to 5 hours (EGP iAUC 5h), defined as the area under the curve of timepoints 0 to 5 hours after meal reduced by the pre-meal endogenous glucose production at 0 hour.
Note, healthy subjects only received a single dose of empa so assessments at day 28 are not applicable."|0 minutes (min), 15min, 30min, 45min, 1hour (h), 1h 30min, 2h, 2h 30min, 3h, 3h 30min, 4h, 4h 30min and 5h after drug administration at baseline and day 28|Treated set (OR) for patients who completed the day 28 visit||g||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831646|NCT01248364|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rate of Endogenous Glucose Production: iAUC 5h, at Day 1|Change from baseline in the incremental area under the curve of endogenous glucose production from 0 to 5 hours (EGP iAUC 5h), defined as the area under the curve of timepoints 0 to 5 hours after meal reduced by the pre-meal endogenous glucose production at 0 hour.|0 minutes (min), 15min, 30min, 45min, 1hour (h), 1h 30min, 2h, 2h 30min, 3h, 3h 30min, 4h, 4h 30min and 5h after drug administration at baseline and day 1|Treated set (OR)||g||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831647|NCT01248364|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rate of Endogenous Glucose Production: AUC 5h, at Day 28|"Change from baseline in the area under the curve of endogenous glucose production (EGP) from 0 to 5 hours (EGP AUC 5h) after meal.
Note, healthy subjects only received a single dose of empa so assessments at day 28 are not applicable."|0 minutes (min), 15min, 30min, 45min, 1hour (h), 1h 30min, 2h, 2h 30min, 3h, 3h 30min, 4h, 4h 30min and 5h after meal at baseline and day 28|Treated set (OR) for patients who completed the day 28 visit||g||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831648|NCT01248364|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glucose Metabolism (Pre-meal and Postprandial Glucose), PPG iAUC 5h, at Day 28|"Change from baseline in the incremental area under the curve of postprandial plasma glucose from 0 to 5 hours (PPG iAUC 5h), defined as the area under the curve of timepoints 0 to 5 hours after meal reduced by the pre-meal plasma glucose at 0 hours.
Note, healthy subjects only received a single dose of empa so assessments at day 28 are not applicable."|0 minutes (min), 15min, 30min, 45min, 1hour (h), 1h 30min, 2h, 2h 30min, 3h, 3h 30min, 4h, 4h 30min and 5h after meal at baseline and day 28|Treated set (OR) for patients who completed the day 28 visit||g/dL/h||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831649|NCT01248364|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glucose Metabolism (Pre-meal and Postprandial Glucose), PPG iAUC 5h, at Day 1|Change from baseline in the incremental area under the curve of postprandial plasma glucose from 0 to 5 hours (PPG iAUC 5h), defined as the area under the curve of timepoints 0 to 5 hours after meal reduced by the pre-meal plasma glucose at 0 hours.|0 minutes (min), 15min, 30min, 45min, 1hour (h), 1h 30min, 2h, 2h 30min, 3h, 3h 30min, 4h, 4h 30min and 5h after meal at baseline and day 1|Treated set (OR)||g/dL/h||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831650|NCT01248364|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rate of Endogenous Glucose Production: AUC 5h, at Day 1|Change from baseline in the area under the curve of endogenous glucose production (EGP) from 0 to 5 hours (EGP AUC 5h) after meal.|0 minutes (min), 15min, 30min, 45min, 1hour (h), 1h 30min, 2h, 2h 30min, 3h, 3h 30min, 4h, 4h 30min and 5h after meal at baseline and day 1|Treated set (OR)||g||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831651|NCT01248364|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rate of Endogenous Glucose Production: Fast, at Day 28|"Change from baseline in rate of endogenous glucose production (EGP) fast after 28 days of treatment.
Note, healthy subjects only received a single dose of empa so assessments at day 28 are not applicable."|Baseline and day 28|Treated set (OR) for patients who completed the day 28 visit||umol/kgFFM/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831652|NCT01248364|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rate of Endogenous Glucose Production: Fast, at Day 1|Change from baseline in rate of endogenous glucose production (EGP) fast after one dose|Baseline and day 1|Treated set (OR)||umol/kgFFM/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831653|NCT01248364|Primary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Day 28|"Change from baseline of Fasting Plasma glucose (FPG) 3 hours and 35 minutes before meal at day 28.
Note, healthy subjects only received a single dose of empa so assessments at day 28 are not applicable"|Baseline and day 28|Treated set, which included all patients/healthy subjects with at least one dose of empagliflozin (original result (OR)), for patients who completed the day 28 visit||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831654|NCT01248364|Primary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Day 1|Change from baseline of Fasting Plasma glucose (FPG) 3 hours and 35 minutes before meal at day 1|Baseline and day 1|Treated set which included all patients/healthy subjects with at least one dose of empagliflozin (original result (OR))||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831655|NCT01248455|Secondary|Count of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|3 years, 5 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831656|NCT01248455|Primary|Response Rate|Response rate is defined as the percentage of participants with a 50% decline in monoclonal protein (M-protein) assessed by the International Multiple Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) for multiple myeloma (MM) criteria. Minimal response (MR) is MR >25% and <50% decrease in M-protein. Biochemical progression (BP) is asymptomatic, ≥ 25% M-protein increase from baseline and an absolute increase of M-protein of 0.75 g/dL demonstrated on two separate occasions. Progressive disease (PD), (clinical progression to symptomatic MM) is development of CRAB (hyperCalcemia (corrected calcium >2.75 mmol/L), Renal insufficiency (attributed to MM), Anemia (hemoglobin <10g/dL), and Bone lesions (lytic lesions or osteoporosis with compression fractures) criteria end organ damage. Stable disease (SD) is not meeting the criteria for minimal response, biochemical progression and progressive disease.|1 year|Study stopped after the first stage due to the lack of patients meeting the defined primary objective (50% decline in M-protein).||percentage of participants|||Number
831657|NCT01248468|Secondary|Percent of Subjects Who Are Free of Photophobia at 2 Hours.|Subjects assessed severity of relevant symptom on a 4 point scale (0=none, …, 3=severe) at set time points after dosing through 4 hours. Subjects who indicated severity of relevant symptom=none at 2 hours were considered relevant symptom free at 2 hours|2 hours|||Percent of participants|||Number
831658|NCT01248468|Secondary|Percent of Subjects Who Are Free of Phonophobia at 2 Hours.|Subjects assessed severity of relevant symptom on a 4 point scale (0=none, …, 3=severe) at set time points after dosing through 4 hours. Subjects who indicated severity of relevant symptom=none at 2 hours were considered relevant symptom free at 2 hours|2 hours|The basic population for efficacy analysis was ITT. No explicit process to impute missing values at any given assessment timepoint. Missing values were implicitly imputed by the repeated measures analysis statistical model. Consequently, at any given timepoint, the number of subjects analyzed is slightly less than the total ITT population.||Percent of participants|||Number
831659|NCT01248468|Secondary|Percent of Subjects Who Are Free of Nausea at 2 Hours.|Subjects assessed severity of relevant symptom on a 4 point scale (0=none, …, 3=severe) at set time points after dosing through 4 hours. Subjects who indicated severity of relevant symptom=none at 2 hours were considered relevant symptom free at 2 hours|2 hours|The basic population for efficacy analysis was ITT. No explicit process to impute missing values at any given assessment timepoint. Missing values were implicitly imputed by the repeated measures analysis statistical model. Consequently, at any given timepoint, the number of subjects analyzed is slightly less than the total ITT population.||percent of participants|||Number
831660|NCT01248468|Primary|Percent of Subjects Who Are Pain Free at 2 Hours.|Subjects assessed severity of pain on a 4 point scale (0=none, …, 3=severe) at set time points after dosing through 4 hours. Subjects who indicated severity of pain=none at 2 hours were considered pain free at 2 hours|2 hours|The basic population for efficacy analysis was ITT. No explicit process to impute missing values at any given assessment timepoint. Instead, missing values were implicitly imputed by the repeated measures analysis statistical model. So, at any given timepoint, the number of subjects analyzed is slightly less than the total ITT population.||Percent of participants|||Number
831661|NCT01248715|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hospital Mortality.|Number of subjects who died while hospitalized|Through study completion|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831662|NCT01248715|Secondary|Length of Hospital Stay|Duration of hospitalization calculated as the day of discharge minus the day of admission.|Through study completion|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
831663|NCT01248715|Secondary|Days to Reach Clinical Stability|Time to clinical improvement. The criteria for clinical improvement were followed during the first week from the day of admission and defined as follows: a) improvement of signs and symptoms of LRTI reported by patient b) afebrile for at least 8 hours, c) decrease in white blood cell count to more than 10% from the prior day, and d) able to tolerate oral feeding. A patient was considered clinically improved on the day that these four criteria were all met.|30 days|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
831664|NCT01248715|Primary|Number of Participants That Had Short-term Mortality|Number of subjects who died within 30 days of enrollment|30 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831665|NCT01248715|Primary|Number of Participants That Required Re-hospitalization|Participants that were re-hospitalized within 30 days after enrollment.|30 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
832021|NCT01251653|Secondary|Duration of Disease Control According to RECIST v1.1|Duration of disease control according to RECIST v1.1.|From the first administration of study medication to the time of disease progression or death|TS for patients who experienced disease control.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
831666|NCT01248715|Primary|Number of Participants to Transfer to ICU After 24 h|Number of subjects that were transfered to an intensive care unit (ICU) after 24 hours of hospitalization. A patient transferred to ICU within 24 hours of admission was considered as a direct admission to ICU and not meeting criteria for clinical failure.|24 h|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831667|NCT01248715|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Failure (Failure to Reach Clinical Stability)|Number of subject that showed lack of clinical improvement within 7 days. Criteria for clinical improvement include no fever; white blood cell count decreases, or increases in the case of leukopenia, to more than 10% from the prior day; the evaluation of signs and symptoms of CAP to define when the patient is subjectively better, and the patient is able to tolerate food by mouth.|7 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831668|NCT01248728|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Preschool Language Scale (PLS-4) - Total Language|"The PLS-4 is a language measure that provides a global assessment of a child's language functioning abilities, receptive and expressive language.
Secondary outcome measure domain: Total language standard score
Total Language Standard Score Range:
Minimum range: 50 (lower language abilities) Maximum range: 150 (higher language abilities)
The total language standard score is computed from a sum of the auditory comprehension and expressive communication standard scores, then converted into the total language standard score.
Change of total language standard scores from baseline to week 24 is reported. Positive change indicates improvement"|Baseline and 24 Weeks|1 participant was dropped from the analysis in the Omega-3 group as there was insufficient data due to early termination.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831669|NCT01248728|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Vineland Adaptive Behavioral Scales (VABS) - Adaptive Functioning Composite|"The VABS is a measure of adaptive behavior in daily settings. Secondary measure domain: The adaptive functioning composite describes an individuals overall functioning
Adaptive Behaviour Composite Standard Score Range:
Minimum range: 20 (low adaptive functioning) Maximum range: 160 (high adaptive functioning)
The adaptive behaviour composite standard score is computed from the sum of standard scores from the communication, daily living skills, socialization and motor skills domains and converted into the adaptive behavior composite standard score.
Change in the adaptive behaviour composite standard score from baseline to week 24 is reported. Positive change indicates improvement."|Baseline and 24 Weeks|1 participant was dropped from the analysis in the Omega-3 group as there was insufficient data due to early termination.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831670|NCT01248728|Secondary|Number of Participants Classified as Responders by the Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I)|"The CGI-I is a seven-point scale that provides a clinician rating of global improvement and as such is already inherently a measure of change. It requires the clinician to assess the degree to which the participant's illness has improved or worsened relative to a baseline state before the intervention.
Change is rated as:
0- Not assessed
Very Much Improved
Much Improved
Minimally Improved
No Change
Minimally Worse
Much Worse
Very Much Worse
Participants are classified as responders if their CGI-I score was 1 or 2 and non-responders for CGI-I scores of 3 to 7."|24 weeks|1 participant was dropped from the analysis in the Omega-3 group as there was insufficient data due to early termination.||participants classified as responders|||Number
831671|NCT01248728|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Behaviour Assessment System for Children (BASC-2) - Externalizing Problems Composite|"The BASC-2 externalizing problems composite measures hyperactivity and aggressive behaviours.
Primary Outcome domain: Externalizing Problems composite
Externalizing Problems Composite T-Score Range:
Minimum Range: 10 (lower externalizing problems) Maximum Range: 120 (higher externalizing problems)
The Externalizing Problems composite is computed from the sum of t-scores from the hyperactivity and aggression subscales then converted into the externalizing problems composite t-score.
Mean change between baseline and week 24 is reported. A negative change indicates improvement."|Baseline and 24 Weeks|1 participant was dropped from the analysis in the Omega-3 group as there was insufficient data due to early termination.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831672|NCT01248728|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Behavioral Inventory (PDDBI) - Autism Composite Score|"The PDDBI measures autism symptomology. The autism composite score was used as the primary outcome measure for autism symptom severity.
PDDBI Autism Composite Scale Range:
Minimum Range = 10 (lower autism symptom severity) Maximum Range = 100 (higher autism symptom severity)
The Autism Composite is calculated from the sum of T-scores of the Sensory/Perceptual Approach Behaviours, Ritualisms/Resistance to Change, Social Pragmatic Problems, and Semantic/Pragmatic Problems domains subtracted by the sum of T-scores of the Social Approach Behaviours, and Expressive Language domain then converted into the Autism Composite as a T-score.
Mean change between baseline and week 24 is reported. A negative change indicates improvement"|Baseline and 24 Weeks|1 participant was dropped from the analysis in the Omega-3 group as there was insufficient data due to early termination.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831673|NCT01248780|Secondary|HAQ (Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire) Score Change From Baseline|The HAQ assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 categories (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). The full range of the HAQ scale is 0-24 with 0 being the best possible outcome. The HAQ score is calculated as the sum of the category scores divided by the number of categories scored, giving a possible range of scores from 0 to 3 with 0 being the best possible outcome (0=without any difficulty, 1=with some difficulty, 2=with much difficulty, or 3=unable to do). The mean change from baseline at Week 24 in HAQ score is provided below for each treatment group. A negative change from baseline is indicative of a lesser degree of difficulty in accomplishing tasks assessed in the HAQ.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants randomized (ie, intent-to-treat population) according to their assigned treatment group regardless of whether or not they received the assigned treatment.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831674|NCT01248780|Secondary|American College of Rheumatology 20 Response, Using CRP, at Week 24|ACR 20 response is defined as >= 20% improvement in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) symptoms and disease activity.|Week 24|Participants randomized (ie, intent-to-treat population) according to their assigned treatment group regardless of whether or not they received the assigned treatment.||Number of participants|||Number
831686|NCT01248884|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Solicited Local Symptoms.|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of any local symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 8-day (Days 0-7)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
831675|NCT01248780|Secondary|Disease Activity Index Score (DAS 28) Response, Using CRP (C-reactive Protein)|"DAS28 using CRP is a measure of tender and swollen joints (28 joints each) and the patient’s assessments of disease activity. A score of higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, and a score below 3.2 indicates low disease activity. A DAS28 (using CRP) responder is defined as a participant with a DAS28 response of “Good” or “Moderate” at Week 14. A Good response is defined as a patient with a DAS28 score of <= 3.2 at Week 14 with improvement from Baseline in DAS28 score of > 1.2. A “Moderate” response was defined as a patient with DAS28 score of >3.2-5.1 at Week 14 with improvement from baseline in DAS28 score of >0.6 to >1.2 The table below shows the number of participants in each treatment group who were DAS28 responders at Week 14."|Week 14|Participants randomized (ie, intent-to-treat population) according to their assigned treatment group regardless of whether or not they received the assigned treatment.||Number of participants|||Number
831676|NCT01248780|Primary|American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response, Using CRP (C-reactive Protein), at Week 14|ACR 20 response is defined as >= 20% improvement in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) symptoms and disease activity.|Week 14|Participants randomized (ie, intent-to-treat population) according to their assigned treatment group regardless of whether or not they received the assigned treatment.||Number of participants|||Number
831677|NCT01248793|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) at Week 14|BASMI is a combined score of 5 components of spine flexibility, ranging from 0 (least impairment) to 10 (most impairment). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 14|Intent-to-treat population according to their assigned treatment group regardless of whether or not they receive the assigned treatment||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831678|NCT01248793|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) at Week 14|BASFI is a participant’s self-assessment, represented as a mean (Visual Analogue Scale [Score]; 0 cm [easy] to 10 cm [impossible]) of 10 questions, 8 of which relate to the participant’s functional anatomy and 2 of which relate to a participant’s ability to cope with everyday life. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 14|Intent-to-treat population according to their assigned treatment group regardless of whether or not they receive the assigned treatment||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831679|NCT01248793|Secondary|Assessment of Ankylosing Spondylitis Response (ASAS 20) at Week 24|Number of patients who achieved a >= 20% improvement in ankylosing spondylitis symptoms, including back pain, function, and inflammation|Week 24|Intent-to-treat population according to their assigned treatment group regardless of whether or not they receive the assigned treatment||Participants|||Number
831680|NCT01248793|Primary|Assessment of Ankylosing Spondylitis Response (ASAS 20) at Week 14|Number of patients who achieved a >= 20% improvement in ankylosing spondylitis symptoms, including back pain, function, and inflammation|Week 14|Intent-to-treat population according to their assigned treatment group regardless of whether or not they receive the assigned treatment||Participants|||Number
831681|NCT01248884|Primary|Concentrations for Anti-HBs Antibodies ≥ 10 and 100 mIU/mL|A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis. Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) in milli-International units per milliliter (mIU/mL).|At Month 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831682|NCT01248884|Primary|Number of Subjects With Anti-hepatitis B (Anti-HBs) Antibody Concentration Equal to or Above (≥) 10 and 100 Milli-International Units Per Milliliter (mIU/mL)|A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HB enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis.|At Month 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
831683|NCT01248884|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects. Any SAE = any SAE regardless of assessment of relationship to study vaccination.|During the entire study period (Month 0 to Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
831684|NCT01248884|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE is any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any = occurrence of an AE regardless of intensity grade or relationship to study vaccination.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) follow up period after vaccination.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
831685|NCT01248884|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Solicited General Symptoms.|Solicited local symptoms assessed were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever [axillary temperature above (≥) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of any local symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 8-day (Days 0-7)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects for whom data were available.||Subjects|||Number
832072|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in D-dimer|D-dimer is the degradation product of cross-linked fibrin and is a marker of thrombin and fibrin formation and turnover.|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831687|NCT01248884|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Vaccine Response to PT and PRN.|Vaccine response defined as: for initially seronegative subjects, antibody concentration ≥ 5 EL.U/mL at 1 month post primary vaccination (Month 3); for initially seropositive subjects, antibody concentration at 1 month post primary vaccination (Month 3) ≥ 1 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration.|At Month 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
831688|NCT01248884|Secondary|Concentrations for Anti-PNE Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seropositivity cut-off of the assay was 0.15 µg /mL. The anti-PNE serotypes assessed were 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F and 23F.|At Month 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||µg /mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831689|NCT01248884|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-pneumococcal (Anti-PNE) Serotypes.|A seropositive subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had anti- pneumococcal antibody concentrations ≥ 0.15 micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The anti-PNE serotypes assessed were 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F and 23F.|At Month 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
831690|NCT01248884|Secondary|Concentrations for Anti-polyribosyl-ribitol-phosphate (Anti-PRP) Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was ≥ 0.15 µg/mL.|At Month 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831691|NCT01248884|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Anti-polyribosyl-ribitol-phosphate (Anti-PRP) Antibodies.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had anti-PRP antibody concentrations ≥ 0.15 micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL).|At Month 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
831692|NCT01248884|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT) and Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) Antibodies.|A seropositive subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had anti-PT and anti-PRN antibody concentrations ≥ 5 EL.U/mL.|At Months 0 and 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
831693|NCT01248884|Primary|Concentrations for Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT) and Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was ≥ 5 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units per milliliters (EL.U/mL).|At Months 0 and 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831694|NCT01248884|Secondary|Concentrations for Anti-diphtheria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus (Anti-T) Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was 0.1 IU/mL.|At Months 0 and 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
831695|NCT01248884|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Anti-diphtheria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus (Anti-T) Antibodies.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had anti-D and anti-T antibody concentrations ≥ 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|At Months 0 and 3|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects, who complied with the protocol, for whom immunogenicity data were available and for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after at least one vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
831696|NCT01248936|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Serious Adverse Event, Death and Cause of Death|Serious Adverse Event (SAEs) is defined as those events that were fatal or immediately life-threatening, and those events that resulted in hospitalization; prolonged an existing hospitalization; resulted in disability; or was a congenital anomaly. Number of participants who died and the cause of death are also recorded.|Up to 1 year|The safety population was defined as participants who received at least one dose, or a partial dose, of vemurafenib.||participants|||Number
831697|NCT01248936|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event, Adverse Events With Severity, Adverse Events Leading to Discontinuation|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. AEs will be graded according to the ‘National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events’ (NCI CTCAE, v4.0). However Laboratory data will be summarized by grade using the NCI CTCAE, v4.0 toxicity grade.|Up to 1 year|The safety population was defined as participants who received at least one dose, or a partial dose, of vemurafenib.||participants|||Number
831698|NCT01248936|Secondary|Mean Time to Complete Response/Partial Response|Mean time to Complete Response (CR)/Partial Response(PR) (confirmed or unconfirmed was assessed). Participants were assessed for best overall response by investigator as per RECIST v1.1.|Up to 1 year|The efficacy population was defined as treated participants who had measurable disease at baseline and at least one post-baseline tumor assessment.||Months||Standard Deviation|Mean
831699|NCT01248936|Secondary|Number of Participants With Best Overall Response (Confirmed) by ECOG Performance|The best overall response recorded from the start of the treatment until disease progression/recurrence which was confirmed in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 2 or 3/0 or 1. Following are ECOG grades. 0: Fully active, perform all pre-disease activities without restriction. 1: Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory, carry out work of a light or sedentary nature. 2: Ambulatory, capable of selfcare, unable to carry out any work activities, up and about more than (>) 50% of waking hours. 3: Capable of limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair >50% of waking hours. 4: Completely disabled, not capable of any selfcare, totally confined to bed or chair. 5: Dead. Participants were assessed for best overall response by investigator as per RECIST v1.1. The ‘n’ is number of participants with ECOG performance status in each criteria.|Up to 1 year|The efficacy population was defined as treated participants who had measurable disease at baseline and at least one post-baseline tumor assessment.||Participants|||Number
831700|NCT01248936|Secondary|Number of Participants With Best Overall Response (Confirmed)|The best overall response (confirmed) is the best response recorded from the start of the treatment until disease progression/recurrence which was confirmed. Participants were assessed for best overall response by investigator as per RECIST v1.1.|Up to 1 year|The efficacy population was defined as treated participants who had measurable disease at baseline and at least one post-baseline tumor assessment.||Participants|||Number
831701|NCT01248936|Secondary|Number of Participants With Best Overall Response (Unconfirmed) by ECOG Performance|The best overall response recorded from the start of the treatment until disease progression/recurrence which was unconfirmed in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 2 or 3/0 or 1. Following are ECOG grades. 0: Fully active, perform all pre-disease activities without restriction. 1: Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory, carry out work of a light or sedentary nature. 2: Ambulatory, capable of selfcare, unable to carry out any work activities, up and about more than (>) 50% of waking hours. 3: Capable of limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair >50% of waking hours. 4: Completely disabled, not capable of any selfcare, totally confined to bed or chair. 5: Dead. This endpoint was tumor response category according to investigator assessment per RECIST v1.1 for efficacy assessment. The ‘n’ is number of participants with ECOG performance status in each criteria.|Up to 1 year|The efficacy population was defined as treated patients who had measurable disease at baseline and at least one post-baseline tumor assessment.||Participants|||Number
831702|NCT01248936|Secondary|Number of Participants With Best Overall Response (Unconfirmed)|The best overall response (unconfirmed) is the best response recorded from the start of the treatment until disease progression/recurrence which was unconfirmed. Participants were assessed for best overall response by investigator as per 'Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors' (RECIST v1.1).|Up to 1 year|The efficacy population was defined as treated participants who had measurable disease at baseline and at least one post-baseline tumor assessment.||participants|||Number
831703|NCT01248949|Primary|Number of Participants With a Decline in Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) of ≥ 20 Points at Worst Record On-study Compared With Baseline|KPS scale: 100 is no evidence of disease; 90 is able to carry on normal activity, minor symptoms of disease; 80 is normal activity with effort, some symptoms of disease; 70 is cares for self; unable to do active work; 60 is requires occasional assistance, but is able to care for most of his needs; 50 is requires considerable assistance with frequent medical care; 40 is disabled, requires special care; 30 is severely disabled, hospitalization is indicated although death is not imminent; 20 is very sick, hospitalization necessary, active support treatment necessary; 10 is moribund, fatal processes progressing rapidly, 0 is dead.|From start of study drug administration up to 30 days after the last dose of MEDI3617|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617||Participants|||Number
831704|NCT01248949|Secondary|Circulating Levels of Angiopoietin 2 (Ang2)|Profile of Ang2 post MEDI3617 administration in relation to time course of antibody concentrations.|Prior to infusion on Cycle 4 and Cycle 5|All participants who received treatment with MEDI3617 and for whom PD blood samples were collected and evaluated.||nanogram per millileter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831705|NCT01248949|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival is defined as the time from the start of treatment with MEDI3617 until death. For the participants who were alive at the end of study or lost to follow-up, overall survival was censored on the last date when participants were known to be alive. Overall survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Time from the first dose of investigational product until death due to any cause|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||months||Full Range|Median
831706|NCT01248949|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was measured from the start of treatment with MEDI3617 until the documentation of disease progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. PFS was censored on the date of last tumor assessment documenting absence of tumor progression for participants who have no documented progression and were still alive prior to data cutoff, dropout, or the initiation of alternate anticancer treatment. Participants having no tumor assessments after the start of treatment with MEDI3617 had PFS censored on the first date of treatment with MEDI3617. PFS was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Time from the first dose of investigational product until end of study|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||months||Full Range|Median
831707|NCT01248949|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP)|Time to progression (TTP) is defined as time from the start of treatment with MEDI3617 until the documentation of disease progression. The TTP was censored on the date of last tumor assessment documenting absence of tumor progression for participants who have no documented progression prior to data cutoff, dropout, or the initiation of alternate anticancer treatment. Participants having no tumor assessments after the start of treatment with MEDI3617 had TTP censored on the first date of treatment with MEDI3617. TTP was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Time from the first dose of investigational product until end of study|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||months||Full Range|Median
831708|NCT01248949|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR)|Duration of response is defined as the duration from the first documentation of objective disease response (ie, confirmed CR or confirmed PR) to the first documented disease progression. The duration of response was censored on the date of last tumor assessment documenting absence of disease progression for participants who have no documented progression prior to data cutoff, dropout, or the initiation of alternate anticancer treatment. Duration of response was evaluated for the subgroup of participants with an objective response using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Time from the first dose of investigational product until end of study|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||months||Full Range|Median
831709|NCT01248949|Secondary|Time to Response (TTR)|Time to response (TTR) is defined as the time from the study entry to the first documentation of confirmed CR or confirmed PR. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions, any pathological lymph nodes must have reduction in short axis to less than (<) 10 millimeter (the sum may not be “0” if there are target nodes). PR was defined as at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Analysis was based on responses confirmed at a repeat assessment made at least 4 weeks after the initial response, with the TTR taken as the first time the response was observed, not the confirmation assessment. TTR was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Time from the first dose of investigational product until end of study|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||months||Full Range|Median
831710|NCT01248949|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|Objective response rate defined as the number of participants with confirmed complete response (CR) or confirmed partial response (PR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions, any pathological lymph nodes must have reduction in short axis to less than (<) 10 millimeter (the sum may not be “0” if there are target nodes). PR was defined as at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|Time from the first dose of investigational product until end of study|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||Participants|||Number
831711|NCT01248949|Secondary|Number of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA)|The immunogenic potential of MEDI3617 was assessed by summarizing the number and percentage of participants who develop detectable ADA. Immunogenicity assessment included determination of anti-drug (MEDI3617) antibodies in serum samples. Samples were measured for the presence of ADA using validated immunoassays.|Presence of ADA to MEDI3617 were assessed prior to infusion with MEDI3617 on Day 1 of each dosing cycle, as well as the end of treatment, and 30 days, 3 months, and 6 months post last dose of MEDI3617|All participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||participants|||Number
831712|NCT01248949|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Half Life (t1/2) of MEDI3617|"The t1/2 is the time in days required for the concentration of the drug to reach half of its original value. Here, n is number of participants analyzed for this endpoint at a specific dose."|Days 1, 2 (MEDI3617 single agent only), 4, 8, 15 (Cycle 1); Day 1 (Cycle 2 and every cycle after), Day 15 (MEDI3617 + bev Q2W and MEDI3617 + paclitaxel only, Cycle 2 and every cycle after); end of treatment; 30 days and 3 months post last dose|All participants who received treatment with MEDI3617 and for whom PK blood samples were collected and evaluated.||day||Standard Deviation|Mean
831713|NCT01248949|Secondary|Systemic Clearance (CL) of MEDI3617|"Systemic clearance describes the removal of drug from a volume of serum in a given unit of time (drug loss from the body). It is measured as milliliter per day (mL/day). Here, n is number of participants analyzed for this endpoint at a specific dose."|Days 1, 2 (MEDI3617 single agent only), 4, 8, 15 (Cycle 1); Day 1 (Cycle 2 and every cycle after), Day 15 (MEDI3617 + bev Q2W and MEDI3617 + paclitaxel only, Cycle 2 and every cycle after); end of treatment; 30 days and 3 months post last dose|All participants who received treatment with MEDI3617 and for whom PK blood samples were collected and evaluated.||milliliter per day (mL/day)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831714|NCT01248949|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC0-inf) of MEDI3617|"The AUC0-inf is the Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to infinity of MEDI3617. Here, n is number of participants analyzed for this endpoint at a specific dose."|Days 1, 2 (MEDI3617 single agent only), 4, 8, 15 (Cycle 1); Day 1 (Cycle 2 and every cycle after), Day 15 (MEDI3617 + bev Q2W and MEDI3617 + paclitaxel only, Cycle 2 and every cycle after); end of treatment; 30 days and 3 months post last dose|All participants who received treatment with MEDI3617 and for whom PK blood samples were collected and evaluated.||day*mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831715|NCT01248949|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC0-last) of MEDI3617|"AUC0-last is the Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration of MEDI3617. Here, n is number of participants analyzed for this endpoint at a specific dose."|Days 1, 2 (MEDI3617 single agent only), 4, 8, 15 (Cycle 1); Day 1 (Cycle 2 and every cycle after), Day 15 (MEDI3617 + bev Q2W and MEDI3617 + paclitaxel only, Cycle 2 and every cycle after); end of treatment; 30 days and 3 months post last dose|All participants who received treatment with MEDI3617 and for whom PK blood samples were collected and evaluated.||day*mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831716|NCT01248949|Secondary|Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmax) of MEDI3617|"Cmax is the maximum observed serum concentration of MEDI3617. Here, n is number of participants analyzed for this endpoint at a specific dose."|Days 1, 2 (MEDI3617 single agent only), 4, 8, 15 (Cycle 1); Day 1 (Cycle 2 and every cycle after), Day 15 (MEDI3617 + bev Q2W and MEDI3617 + paclitaxel only, Cycle 2 and every cycle after); end of treatment; 30 days and 3 months post last dose|All participants who received treatment with MEDI3617 and for whom PK blood samples were collected and evaluated.||microgram per milliliter (mcg/ml)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831717|NCT01248949|Primary|Number of Participants With Electrocardiogram Abnormalities Recorded as Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered investigational product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. AEs related to electrocardiogram abnormalities were recorded and reported. The only AE reported was electrocardiogram QT prolonged in the MEDI3617 + Bevacizumab Q2W total group.|From start of study drug administration up to 90 days after the last dose of MEDI3617|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617||Participants|||Number
832680|NCT01250730|Primary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio AUClast|The metabolic ratio (MR) is calculated by first converting the AUClast for both crizotinib and metabolite (PF-06260182) from mass units to molar units.|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
831718|NCT01248949|Primary|Number of Participants With Echocardiogram Abnormalities Recorded as Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered investigational product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. AEs related to echocardiogram abnormalities were recorded and reported. The only AE reported was ejection fraction decreased in the MEDI3617 + Paclitaxel total group.|From start of study drug administration up to 90 days after the last dose of MEDI3617|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||Participants|||Number
831719|NCT01248949|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Sign Abnormalities Recorded as Adverse Events (AEs)|Vital signs included parameters such as heart rate, blood pressure, temperature, weight and respiratory rate. An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered investigational product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. AEs related to vital signs abnormalities were recorded and reported.|From start of study drug administration up to 90 days after the last dose of MEDI3617|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||Participants|||Number
831720|NCT01248949|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Abnormalities Recorded as Adverse Events (AEs)|Laboratory evaluations were performed, including hematology and serum chemistry. An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered investigational product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. AEs related to laboratory abnormalities were recorded and reported.|From start of study drug administration up to 90 days after the last dose of MEDI3617|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||Participants|||Number
831721|NCT01248949|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs)|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered investigational product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. A serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent AEs were events occurring after administration of investigational product.|From start of study drug administration up to 90 days after the last dose of MEDI3617|Safety population included all participants who received treatment with MEDI3617.||Participants|||Number
831722|NCT01248949|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)|The dose-escalation phase used a 3 + 3 design. If greater than or equal to 2 (≥ 2) participants in a dose cohort experienced a DLT during the DLT period, the MTD was exceeded and no further participants were enrolled into that dose cohort. If this occurred, the preceding dose cohort was evaluated for the MTD and a total of 6 participants were treated at the preceding dose. If less than or equal to 1 (≤ 1) of 6 participants experienced a DLT at the preceding dose, then this dose level was the MTD. DLTs were defined as any treatment-related, grade 3 or higher toxicity (according to the National Cancer Institute’s Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [NCI CTCAE] version 4.0); occurring during the first 21 or 28 days after the initial administration of MEDI3617.|From the time of first administration of MEDI3617 single agent or MEDI3617 combination therapy through the first 21-day or 28-day cycle (Cycle 1)|DLT Evaluable population included all participants enrolled in dose-escalation, who received at least 1 full assigned dose of single-agent MEDI3617 or full assigned doses of MEDI3617 and standard therapeutic agents on Cycle 1 and completed safety follow-up or experienced a DLT at any point during the 21-day or 28-day DLT evaluation period.||milligram (mg)|||Number
831723|NCT01248949|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs)|DLT was defined as any treatment-related, grade 3 or higher toxicity (according to the National Cancer Institute’s Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [NCI CTCAE] version 4.0); occurring during the first 21 or 28 days after the initial administration of MEDI3617.|From the time of first administration of MEDI3617 single agent or MEDI3617 combination therapy through the first 21-day or 28-day cycle (Cycle 1)|DLT Evaluable population included all participants enrolled in dose-escalation, who received at least 1 full assigned dose of single-agent MEDI3617 or full assigned doses of MEDI3617 and standard therapeutic agents on Cycle 1 and completed safety follow-up or experienced a DLT at any point during the 21-day or 28-day DLT evaluation period.||Participants|||Number
831724|NCT01249092|Secondary|Safety of Therapy in the Pilot Study of PTX Therapy in Patients With PBC Will be Assessed|The number of participants that experienced any severe adverse events will be monitored and recorded.|6 months|||participants|||Number
831725|NCT01249092|Secondary|Change in Serum Concentration of Tissue Inhibitor Metalloproteinase 1 (TIMP-1) After PTX Therapy.|Serum concentration of tissue inhibitor metalloproteinase 1 (TIMP-1), a fibrosis biomarker of interest, will be measured and the change in serum levels between entry and end of study will be calculated.|6 months|Serum samples from both timepoints (entry and end of study) were available in only 16 of the 18 subjects who completed the study.||ng/mL||Standard Error|Mean
831726|NCT01249092|Primary|Change in Serum Alkaline Phosphatase Levels.|Serum alkaline phosphatase levels at entry and at 6 months of therapy with PTX will be measured and compared.|6 months|||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
831727|NCT01249118|Primary|Percent of GDC-0973 Excreted in the Urine (% Excreted) for IV and Oral GDC-0973|% Excreted is the mean percentage of dose recovery in urine and calculated as: (Aeu divided by dose) multiplied by 100, where Aeu was amount of drug excreted in urine from time 0 to 96 hrs post-dose.|Part 2: 0 to 12, 12 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, and 72 to 96 Hrs post-dose|Full analysis population.||Percent dose excreted||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831728|NCT01249118|Primary|Renal Clearance (CLR) of IV and Oral GDC-0973|CLR was calculated as Aeu divided by AUC (0 - ∞), where Aeu was amount of drug excreted in urine from time 0 to 96 hrs post-dose and AUC(0 - ∞) was area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity hrs post-dose.|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1 for plasma; 0 to 12, 12 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, and 72 to 96 Hrs post-dose for urine|Full analysis population.||L/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831744|NCT01249118|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of IV and Oral GDC-0973||Part 2: 0 hours (Hrs) (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population included participants who were randomized, received study drug, and had at least 1 valid PK parameter.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831729|NCT01249118|Primary|Amount of Drug Excreted in the Urine (Aeu) of IV and Oral GDC-0973|The cumulative amount of drug excreted in urine over the entire collection interval of 96 hrs was calculated by adding the Aeu of the intervals 0 to 12, 12 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, and 72 to 96 hrs where Aeu was calculated by multiplying the urine volume within the collection interval by the associated drug concentration.|Part 2: 0 to 12, 12 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, and 72 to 96 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population.||mg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831730|NCT01249118|Primary|Mean Absorption Time (MAT)|MAT is mean time required for the drug to reach the central compartment. MAT was estimated from the mean resident time (MRT) from oral and IV administration. MAT was calculated as MRT last of oral dose minus MRT last of IV dose. MAT is analyzed when drug is administered orally (only for non-IV routes of administration).|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|"Full analysis population who received oral dose of GDC-0973. Here, number of participants analyzed signified those participants who were evaluable for this outcome."||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831731|NCT01249118|Primary|Absolute Oral Bioavailability (F) of GDC-0973|Absolute oral bioavailability is the amount of drug from a formulation that reaches the systemic circulation relative to an IV dose. F = [AUC (0-∞), oral multiplied by Dose IV] divided by [AUC (0-∞), IV multiplied by Dose oral]. Absolute oral bioavailability is determined for drugs which are administered orally. IV dose is 100% in systemic circulation (dosed directly) and hence no estimation is required.|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population who received oral dose of GDC-0973.||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831732|NCT01249118|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) of Oral GDC-0973|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug. Vz/F is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population who received oral dose of GDC-0973.||Liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831733|NCT01249118|Primary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss) of IV GDC-0973|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Vss is the apparent volume of distribution at steady-state.|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose of Day 1|Full analysis population who received IV dose of GDC-0973.||Liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831734|NCT01249118|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F) of Oral GDC-0973|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Clearance was estimated from population PK modelling. Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood.|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population who received oral dose of GDC-0973.||L/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831735|NCT01249118|Primary|Systemic Clearance (CL) of IV GDC-0973|CL is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body.|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population who received IV dose of GDC-0973.||Liter (L)/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831736|NCT01249118|Primary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2) of IV and Oral GDC-0973|t1/2 is the time measured for the plasma concentration of GDC-0973 to decrease by one half.|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831737|NCT01249118|Primary|Dose Normalized AUC (0 - ∞) [AUC (0 - ∞)dn] of IV and Oral GDC-0973|AUC (0 - ∞)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞). AUC (0 - ∞)dn is AUC(0 - ∞) divided by dose.|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population.||ng*hr/mL/mg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831738|NCT01249118|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)] of IV and Oral GDC-0973|AUC (0 - ∞)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831739|NCT01249118|Primary|Dose Normalized AUC (0-t) [AUC (0-t)dn] of IV and Oral GDC-0973|AUC (0-t)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (0-t). AUC (0-t)dn is AUC (0-t) divided by dose.|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population.||ng*hr/mL/mg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831740|NCT01249118|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration [AUC (0-t)] of IV and Oral GDC-0973|AUC (0-t)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (0-t).|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831741|NCT01249118|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of IV and Oral GDC-0973||Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population.||hr||Full Range|Median
831742|NCT01249118|Primary|Minimum Observed Plasma Trough Concentration (Cmin) of IV and Oral GDC-0973||Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831743|NCT01249118|Primary|Dose Normalized Cmax [Cmax(dn)] of IV and Oral GDC-0973|Cmax(dn) is Cmax divided by dose.|Part 2: 0 Hrs (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 Hrs post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis population.||ng/mL/mg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831840|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin Concentration Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 days|||gm/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831745|NCT01249131|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (V/F)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (Vz/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|Day 1 at 0 hour (predose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 hours postdose|Pharmacokinetic parameters populations included all enrolled participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||Liters (L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831746|NCT01249131|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F)|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Clearance was estimated from population pharmacokinetic modeling. Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood.|Day 1 at 0 hour (predose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 hours postdose|Pharmacokinetic parameters populations included all enrolled participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||Liters per hour (L/hr)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831747|NCT01249131|Primary|Minimum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmin)||Day 1 at 0 hour (predose)|Pharmacokinetic parameters populations included all enrolled participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831748|NCT01249131|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Day 1 at 0 hour (predose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 hours postdose|Pharmacokinetic parameters populations included all enrolled participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831749|NCT01249131|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (AUCinf)|AUCinf = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - inf). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - inf).|Day 1 at 0 hour (predose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 hours postdose|Pharmacokinetic parameters populations included all enrolled participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||nanograms*hours/milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831750|NCT01249157|Primary|To Evaluate the Accuracy of Preoperative 18FDG PEM|using pathology as the gold standard and descriptively compare it to the accuracy of breast MRI in an exploratory analysis which will generate data for future studies. The first 5 patients who consent to the study were used for training purposes only.|2 years|No data displayed because Outcome Measure has zero total participants analyzed.|||||
831751|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Total Proximal Femur BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 12/Endpoint, ITT Population|Baseline, Year 1 compared with Endpoint (last measurement during the treatment period through Month 12), Year 8. Allowed equipment Hologic or Lunar. Same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 12/Endpoint (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831752|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Total Proximal Femur BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 12, ITT Population|Baseline, Year 1 compared with Month 12, Year 8. Allowed equipment Hologic or Lunar. Same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 12 (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831753|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Total Proximal Femur BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 6, ITT Population|Baseline, Year 1 compared with Month 6, Year 8. Allowed equipment Hologic or Lunar. Same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 6 (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831754|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Femoral Trochanter BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 12/Endpoint, ITT Population|Endpoint is the last measurement during the treatment period (through Month 12, Year 8) compared with baseline Year 1. Allowed equipment Hologic or Lunar. Same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 12/Endpoint (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831755|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Femoral Trochanter BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 12, ITT Population|Baseline, year 1 compared with Month 12, year 8. Allowed equipment Hologic or Lunar. Same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 12 (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831756|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Femoral Trochanter BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 6, ITT Population|Month 6, Year 8 compared to Baseline, Year 1. Allowed equipment Hologic or Lunar. Same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 6 (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831757|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Femoral Neck BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 12/Endpoint, ITT Population|Endpoint is the last measurement during the treatment period (thru Month 12, Year 8). Allowed equipment Hologic or Lunar. Same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. Normalized baseline femoral neck BMD lunar equipment only 0.836*BMD - 0.008; Hologic reference. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 12/Endpoint (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831758|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Femoral Neck BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 12, ITT Population|Allowed equipment Hologic or Lunar. Same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. Normalized baseline femoral neck BMD lunar equipment only 0.836*BMD - 0.008; Hologic reference. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 12 (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831759|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Femoral Neck BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 6, ITT Population|Allowed equipment Hologic or Lunar. Same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. Normalized baseline femoral neck BMD lunar equipment only 0.836*BMD - 0.008; Hologic reference. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 6 (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831760|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Lumbar Spine BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 12/Endpoint, ITT Population|Endpoint is the last measurement during the 12 month treatment period during Year 8. Hologic or Lunar Machines: same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. sBMD (standardized BMD): Lunar sBMD = 952.2*BMD, Hologic sBMD = 1075.5*BMD. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 12/Endpoint (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831761|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Lumbar Spine BMD From Core Study Baseline, Month 12, ITT Population|Hologic or Lunar Machines: same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. sBMD (standardized BMD): Lunar sBMD = 952.2*BMD, Hologic sBMD = 1075.5*BMD. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 12 (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831762|NCT01249261|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density (BMD) From Core Study Baseline, Month 6, Intention to Treat (ITT) Population|Hologic or Lunar Machines: same equipment used in prior study should be used for all patient visits. sBMD (standardized BMD): Lunar sBMD = 952.2*BMD, Hologic sBMD = 1075.5*BMD. All scans analyzed centrally by Synarc (Portland, OR).|Baseline Core Study (Year 1) to Month 6 (Year 8)|ITT Population||Percent Change||Standard Error|Mean
831763|NCT01249274|Post-Hoc|Relapse to Cocaine Use During Treatment Period or 3 Months Post Treatment|Post-hoc sensitivity test to compare hazard of relapse to cocaine use between two treatment groups among participants (n=41) who did not report using cocaine at intake.|baseline to 3 months post 12-week trial period|intent-to-treat||participants who relapsed to cocaine use|||Number
831764|NCT01249274|Post-Hoc|Relapse to Cocaine Use During Treatment Period|Post-hoc sensitivity test to compare hazard of relapse to cocaine use between two treatment groups among participants (n=41) who did not report using cocaine at intake.|baseline to 12 weeks|intent-to-treat||participants who relapsed to cocaine use|||Number
831765|NCT01249274|Secondary|Salivary Progesterone Concentrations|A comparison of salivary progesterone concentrations across all samples for all timepoints|week 2, week 6, week 10, week 12|intent-to-treat||pg/ml of salivary progesterone||Standard Error|Mean
831766|NCT01249274|Secondary|Depression (Measured Weekly Using Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS))|EPDS scores were measured to detect depression as a possible adverse event and compare scores between the two groups. The scale consists of 10 items. Each item is scored from 0 to 3, and the 10 items are summed to calculate a total score with a possible range of 0 to 30 and higher scores indicating more severe depression.|baseline to 12 weeks|intent-to-treat||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
831767|NCT01249274|Secondary|Cocaine Craving (Measured Weekly Using CCQ-Brief)|CCQ-Brief is a ten-item questionnaire developed from the 45-item CCQ. Each item is scored on a visual analogue scale ranging from 1-7, and items are averaged to yield a score from 1 to 7. Higher scores indicate stronger cocaine cravings.|baseline to 12 weeks|intent-to-treat||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831768|NCT01249274|Secondary|Overall Comparison of Adverse Events Between Women in Placebo and Progesterone Group|To obtain information about the safety and tolerability of progesterone treatment in the postpartum period, women were queried at every visit about onset of adverse events, their seriousness, and their relatedness to study medication. Such data was monitored in SAETRS.|12 weeks postpartum|intent-to-treat||adverse events|||Number
831769|NCT01249274|Primary|Proportion of Positive Urine Samples Per Week|Primary aim: to evaluate whether postpartum women with a history of cocaine abuse or dependence use less cocaine if they are randomized to progesterone than placebo. Urine tox tests obtained qualitative and quantitative data on cocaine metabolites and other substances.|baseline, end of trial (week 12) and 3-month post-trial follow-up|intent-to-treat||proportion of positive urines per week||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831770|NCT01249274|Primary|Proportion of Positive Urine Samples Per Week|Primary aim: to evaluate whether postpartum women with a history of cocaine abuse or dependence use less cocaine if they are randomized to progesterone than placebo. Urine tox tests obtained qualitative and quantitative data on cocaine metabolites and other substances.|weekly measurements, baseline to 12 weeks|intent-to-treat||proportion of positive urines per week||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831771|NCT01249274|Primary|Number of Days of Cocaine Use Between 12 Week Visits & the 3 Month Follow up|Primary aim: to evaluate whether postpartum women with a history of cocaine abuse or dependence use less cocaine if they are randomized to progesterone than placebo. Measured by self-reported days of cocaine use per week during the trial period and during 3 month follow up using the substance use calendar|baseline, end of trial (week 12), 3-month post-trial follow-up|intent-to-treat||days of cocaine use between visits||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831772|NCT01249274|Primary|Mean Number of Days Per Week of Cocaine Use|Primary aim: to evaluate whether postpartum women with a history of cocaine abuse or dependence use less cocaine if they are randomized to progesterone than placebo. Measured by self-reported days of cocaine use per week via substance use calendar.|Weekly measurements, Baseline to 12 weeks|intent-to-treat||number of days per week of cocaine use||Standard Deviation|Mean
831773|NCT01249417|Secondary|Goal Attainment Scale (GAS) Score|GAS is a functional scale used to measure progress towards individual therapy goals. Individual goals defined for each subject by the physician, and the child's parents (caregiver) where applicable, prior to treatment. Post-baseline, the GAS for each goal rated using a defined scale (-2: Much less than expected outcome, -1: somewhat less than expected outcome, 0: expected outcome, 1: somewhat more than expected outcome, and 2: Much more than expected outcome).|Week 4|ITT population, defined as all randomised subjects who received at least one injection of study treatment and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed both at baseline and at Week 4.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
831774|NCT01249417|Secondary|Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) of the Treatment Response.|PGA Scale of the Treatment Response: Global assessment of treatment response assessed by asking the Investigator the following question: “how would you rate the response to treatment in the subject’s lower limb(s) since the last injection?” Answers will be made on a 9 point rating scale (-4: markedly worse, -3: much worse, -2: worse, -1: slightly worse, 0: no change, +1: slightly improved, +2: improved, +3: much improved, +4: markedly improved).|Week 4|ITT population, defined as all randomised subjects who received at least one injection of study treatment and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed both at baseline and at Week 4.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
831841|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||pg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831775|NCT01249417|Primary|Change in MAS Score in the Gastrocnemius-soleus Complex (GSC) at the Ankle Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|The MAS is a 6-point scale which measures the intensity of muscle tone by measuring the resistance of the muscle to passive lengthening or stretching. Investigator will grade muscle tone in the GSC from 0 (no increase in tone) to 4 (affected parts rigid in flexion or extension).|Change from baseline to Week 4|ITT population, defined as all randomised subjects who received at least one injection of study treatment and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed both at baseline and at Week 4.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
831776|NCT01249651|Secondary|Change in the Maximum Severity of Heartburn During the 7-day Period Prior to the 8 Week Visit (Visit 3) Compared to the Frequency of Heartburn During the 7-day Period Prior to Baseline (Visit 1)|"Maximum severity of heartburn during 7 days at baseline and at 8 weeks was obtained (None, Mild, Moderate, Severe). If the value at 8 weeks was better than at baseline in a participant, the participant was s categorized into Improved. If the value was same, then categorised into Unchanged. If the value was worsened, categorised into Worsened."|Baseline to 8 weeks|Full analysis set (96 participants)||Participants|||Number
831777|NCT01249651|Secondary|Change in the Maximum Severity of Heartburn During the 7-day Period Prior to the 4 Week Visit (Visit 2) Compared to the Frequency of Heartburn During the 7-day Period Prior to Baseline (Visit 1)|"Maximum severity of heartburn during 7 days at baseline and at 4 weeks was obtained (None, Mild, Moderate, Severe). If the value at 4 weeks was better than at baseline in a participant, the participant was s categorized into Improved. If the value was same, then categorised into Unchanged. If the value was worsened, categorised into Worsened."|Baseline and 4 weeks|92 Participants in the Full analysis set (96 participants) had data of heartburn at week 4.||Participants|||Number
831778|NCT01249651|Secondary|Change in the Frequency of Heartburn During the 7-day Period Prior to the 4 Week Visit (Visit 2) Compared to the Frequency of Heartburn During the 7-day Period Prior to Baseline (Visit 1)|The number of days with heartburn during the 7-day period prior to the 4 week visit (Visit 3) was compared to the number of days with heartburn during the 7-day period prior to baseline (Visit 1). The difference in the number of days with heartburn from baseline to 4 weeks was analysed.|Baseline and 4 weeks|92 Participants in the Full analysis set (96 participants) had data of heartburn.||Number of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
831779|NCT01249651|Primary|Change in the Frequency of Heartburn During the 7-day Period Prior to the 8 Week Visit (Visit 3) Compared to the Frequency of Heartburn During the 7-day Period Prior to Baseline (Visit 1)|The number of days with heartburn during the 7-day period prior to the 8 week visit (Visit 3) was compared to the number of days with heartburn during the 7-day period prior to baseline (Visit 1). The difference in the number of days with heartburn from baseline to 8 weeks was analysed.|Baseline to 8 weeks|Full analysis set (96 participants)||Number of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
831780|NCT01242514|Secondary|Mean HAQ-DI Score|HAQ-DI: Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index, a measure of physical function. The HAQ-DI score is then calculated by summing the category scores from 8 sub-categories (ie, scores for patient ability in dressing and grooming, rising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and common daily activities) and dividing by the number of categories completed. The HAQ-DI score takes values between 0 and 3, with a higher score indicating greater disability. Number of participants are those with data at entry to this study (Week 0). As no imputation was applied, the numbers at subsequent visits are lower. bid = twice daily, qd = once daily|Weeks 0, 12, 24, 36 and 52|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product, and were summarised according to treatment first received in this study (intention-to-treat principle).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831781|NCT01242514|Secondary|Mean mTSS Score|mTSS: modified total sharp score, a measure of structural progression based upon X-rays. Hand and foot joints are scored for erosions and joint space narrowing and the results summed to give a value between 0 and 488. A higher value represents more serious progression of the disease. Number of participants are those with data at entry to this study (Week 0). As no imputation was applied, the numbers at subsequent visits are lower. bid = twice daily, N/A = not applicable, qd = once daily|Weeks 0 and 52|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product, and were summarised according to treatment first received in this study (intention-to-treat principle).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831782|NCT01242514|Primary|Percentage of Patients Who Had at Least 1 Adverse Event in Any Category|AE = adverse event, bid = twice daily, IP = investigational product, qd = once daily, SAE = serious adverse event|Entry in extension to end of study (variable duration; maximum 109 weeks)|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product, and were summarised according to treatment first received in this study (intention-to-treat principle).||Percentage of patients|||Number
831783|NCT01242514|Secondary|Mean DAS28-CRP Score|DAS28-CRP: Disease Activity Score based on a count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (CRP) and the patient's own assessment. Scores can take any positive value with a lower value indicating a better clinical condition. Number of participants are those with data at entry to this study (Week 0). As no imputation was applied, the numbers at subsequent visits are lower. bid = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, qd = once daily|Weeks 0, 12, 24, 36 and 52|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product, and were summarised according to treatment first received in this study (intention-to-treat principle).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831784|NCT01242527|Primary|Fasting Serum Triglycerides|The primary endpoints are the differences in mean percent changes from baseline to end-of-treatment in triglycerides between placebo and the 2g/day, 3g/day and 4g/day Epanova groups|12 weeks|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population was comprised of all subjects who were randomized. In the event that randomized subjects terminated before treatment or had no post-treatment efficacy assessments, a modified ITT Population was implemented.||Percent change from baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
831785|NCT01242748|Secondary|Serum Levels of Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) During 3 Years’ Treatment With Degarelix or Goserelin|Median PSA levels are presented as absolute values in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) at baseline and after 1, 6, 12, 19, and 22 months. One month equals 28 days. After 22 months, only a limited number of samples were analysed.|Baseline and after 1, 6, 12, 19, and 22 months|CS35 (NCT00946920)/CS35A Full Analysis Set (degarelix n=565; goserelin n=282). The analysis population was pre-specified in the study protocol and statistical analysis plan.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
831786|NCT01242748|Secondary|Serum Levels of Testosterone During 3 Years’ Treatment With Degarelix or Goserelin|Median testosterone levels are presented as absolute values in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) at baseline and after 1, 6, 12, 19, and 22 months. One month equals 28 days. After 22 months, only a limited number of samples were analysed.|Baseline and after 1, 6, 12, 19, and 22 months|CS35 (NCT00946920)/CS35A Full Analysis Set (degarelix n=565; goserelin n=282). The analysis population was pre-specified in the study protocol and statistical analysis plan.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
831787|NCT01242748|Secondary|Hazard Ratio of Mortality Rates During 3 Years’ Treatment Between Degarelix and Goserelin|The number below present the unadjusted rates (estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method) of death.|From baseline to 3 years|CS35 (NCT00946920)/CS35A Full Analysis Set (degarelix n=565; goserelin n=282). The analysis population was pre-specified in the study protocol and statistical analysis plan.||percentage of deaths||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831788|NCT01242748|Secondary|Hazard Ratio of the Rates of Introduction of Additional Therapy Related to Prostate Cancer During 3 Years’ Treatment Between Degarelix and Goserelin|Additional therapy related to prostate cancer included radiation, anti-androgens and second-line treatment. The number below present the unadjusted rates (estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method) of no additional therapy related to prostate cancer.|From baseline to 3 years|CS35 (NCT00946920)/CS35A Full Analysis Set (degarelix n=565; goserelin n=282). The analysis population was pre-specified in the study protocol and statistical analysis plan.||percentage of no additional therapy||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831789|NCT01242748|Secondary|Hazard Ratio of Testosterone Escape Rates During 3 Years’ Treatment Between Degarelix and Goserelin|Testosterone escape is defined as serum levels >0.5 ng/mL. The number below present the unadjusted rates (estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method) of no testosterone escape.|From baseline to 3 years|CS35 (NCT00946920)/CS35A Full Analysis Set (degarelix n=565; goserelin n=282). The analysis population was pre-specified in the study protocol and statistical analysis plan.||percentage of no testosterone escape||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831790|NCT01242748|Secondary|Hazard Ratio of PSA Failure Rates During 3 Years Treatment Between Degarelix and Goserelin|PSA failure is defined as increase in serum PSA of 50%, and at least 5 ng/mL, compared to nadir, measured on two consecutive occasions at least 2 weeks apart. The number below present the unadjusted rates (estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method) of no PSA failure.|From baseline to 3 years|CS35 (NCT00946920)/CS35A Full Analysis Set (degarelix n=565; goserelin n=282). The analysis population was pre-specified in the study protocol and statistical analysis plan.||percentage of no PSA failure||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831791|NCT01242748|Secondary|Hazard Ratio of PFS Failure Rates During 3 Years Treatment Between Degarelix and Goserelin|PFS failure is defined as either PSA failure, introduction of additional therapy related to prostate cancer (radiation, anti-androgens or second-line treatment), or death, whichever is first. The number below present the unadjusted rates (estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method) of no PFS failure.|From baseline to 3 years|CS35 (NCT00946920)/CS35A Full Analysis Set (degarelix n=565; goserelin n=282). The analysis population was pre-specified in the study protocol and statistical analysis plan.||percentage of no PFS failure||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831792|NCT01242748|Primary|Hazard Ratio of Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) Progression-free Survival (PFS) Failure Rates During 3 Years’ Treatment Between Degarelix and Goserelin|PSA PFS failure is defined as either PSA failure (defined as increase in serum PSA of 50%, and at least 5 ng/mL, compared to nadir, measured on two consecutive occasions at least 2 weeks apart) or death, whichever is first. The number below present the unadjusted rates (estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method) of no PSA-PFS.|From baseline to 3 years|CS35 (NCT00946920)/CS35A Full Analysis Set (degarelix n=565; goserelin n=282). The analysis population was pre-specified in the study protocol and statistical analysis plan.||percentage of no PSA-PFS||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831793|NCT01242813|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-canakinumab Antibodies at Any Visit|Immunogenicity assessment included determination of anti-canakinumab (ACZ885) antibodies in serum samples using BIAcore system.|Day 1 up to Day 953 (End of study)|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Number of participants|||Number
831794|NCT01242813|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Total Interleukin-1β Antibody (IL-1β)|Pharmacodynamics of canakinumab was assessed by total IL-1β (sum of free and bound canakinumab) concentration, determined in serum by means of competitive Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with limit of detection at 0.25 picogram/milliliter (pg/mL).|Day 3, 8, 15, 29, 57, 85, 113, 141, 169, 197, 225, 253, 281, 309, 337, 365, 393, 421, 449, 533, 561, 589, 617, 645, 673, 729, 785, 841, 897, 925 and 953|The analysis was performed on the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831795|NCT01242813|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Canakinumab|Canakinumab concentrations in serum were assessed for evaluating pharmacokinetics of the drug.|Day 3, 8, 15, 29, 57, 85, 113, 141, 169, 197, 225, 253, 281, 309, 337, 365, 393, 421, 449, 533, 561, 589, 617, 645, 673, 729, 785, 841, 897, 925 and 953|The analysis was performed on the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||microgram(s)/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
831796|NCT01242813|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Relapsed and Received Rescue Medication|Participants who relapsed after the last dose of canakinumab and received either corticosteroid treatment or NSAID or both corticosteroid treatment and NSAID as rescue medication.|Day 85 to Day 953 (End of treatment period to End of study)|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831797|NCT01242813|Secondary|Time to Relapse After Last Dose of Canakinumab|Relapse was defined as a Physician’s Global Assessment score of 2 (and an increase of at least 1 point compared to Day 15) and CRP and/or SAA ≥ 30 mg/L representing a 30% increase from Day 15.|Day 85 to Day 253 (End of treatment period to Follow-up period)|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831798|NCT01242813|Secondary|Percentage of Relapsed Participants|Relapse was defined as a Physician’s Global Assessment score of 2 (and an increase of at least 1 point compared to Day 15) and CRP and/or SAA ≥ 30 mg/L representing a 30% increase from Day 15.|Day 15, 29, 57, 85, 113, 141, 169, 197, 225, 253, 281, 309, 337, 365, 393, 421, 449,477,505, 533, 561, 589, 617, 645, 673,701, 729,757, 785, 813, 841,869, 897, 925 and 953|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831842|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In Mean Corpuscular Volume Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 days|||fL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831799|NCT01242813|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Defined Grades in Participant's Global Assessment Score|Participants assessed the disease condition based on a 5-point participant's global assessment scale based on TRAPS associated signs and symptoms as: 0 = None/absent; 1 = Minimal; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Day 1 up to Day 253 (End of follow-up period)|"The analysis was performed on the FAS population. Here, Number of Participants Analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||Percentage of participants|||Number
831800|NCT01242813|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Defined Grades in Physician’s Global Assessment Score|Participants were assessed based by physician on Physician’s Global Assessment measured on a 5-point scale for TRAPS associated signs and symptoms as: 0 = None/absent; 1 = Minimal; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Day 1 up to Day 953 (End of study)|"The analysis was performed on the FAS population. Here, Number of Participants Analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||Percentage of participants|||Number
831801|NCT01242813|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Defined Grades for Skin Rash, Eye Manifestations, Extremity Pain and Abdominal Pain|TRAPS signs and symptoms were assessed in 4 key categories: skin disease (skin rash), eye manifestations, extremity pain (musculoskeletal), and abdominal pain. Participants were assessed for TRAPS associated signs and symptoms a 5-point Physician’s global assessment scale: None/absent (no); 1 = Minimal; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Day 113 (end of treatment period) up to Day 925 (End of study)|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
831802|NCT01242813|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in C-reactive Protein (CRP) and Serum Amyloid A (SAA) Concentration to End of Study|The CRP and SAA were used as inflammatory markers. The target level concentration was ≤ 10 mg/L. Negative percent change in concentration of inflammatory markers indicated improvement.|Day 1 up to Day 953 (End of study)|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Percent change||Full Range|Median
831803|NCT01242813|Secondary|Time to Participant's Assessed Clinical Remission|Time period for complete remission after initial canakinumab treatment as assessed by participants was defined as a participant's Global Assessment of TRAPS symptoms of scale 1 or less. The participant's Global Assessment was based on a 5-point scale: 0 = None/absent (no) ; 1 = Minimal; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Baseline up to Day 15|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831804|NCT01242813|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete or Almost Complete Response at Day 15 After Receiving Additional Dose at Day 8|Participants who had not achieved a complete response at Day 8 were given an additional dose of canakinumab. Complete response was defined as clinical remission (Physician’s Global Assessment of TRAPS activity absent or minimal) and serological remission (CRP and/or SAA < 10 mg/L). Almost complete response was defined as clinical remission and a partial serological remission (≥ 70% reduction of baseline CRP and/or SAA).|Day 15|"The analysis was performed on the FAS population. Here, Number of Participants Analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831805|NCT01242813|Secondary|Time to Physician’s Assessed Clinical Remission|Time period for complete remission after initial canakinumab treatment as assessed by participants was defined as a Physician’s Global Assessment of TRAPS symptoms of scale 1 or less. The physician's Global Assessment was based on a 5-point scale: 0 = None/absent ; 1 = Minimal; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Baseline up to Day 15|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831806|NCT01242813|Secondary|Percentage of Participant With Target Levels of C-reactive Protein (CRP) and Serum Amyloid A Protein (SAA) at Day 8 and 15|The CRP and SAA were used as inflammatory markers. The target level concentration was ≤ 10 mg/L.|Day 8 and Day 15|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831807|NCT01242813|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Clinical Remission at Day 8 and 15|Complete clinical remission was defined as Physician’s Global Assessment of TRAPS activity to be absent or minimal (1). TRAPS associated clinical signs and symptoms were assessed by the investigator at every visit on a 5-point scale: 0 = Absent; 1 = Minimal; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Day 8 and Day 15|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831808|NCT01242813|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete or Almost Complete Response at Day 8|Complete response was defined as clinical remission and serological remission. Clinical remission was defined as Physician’s Global Assessment of TRAPS activity absent or minimal and serological remission was defined as CRP and/or SAA < 10 mg/L. Almost complete response was defined as clinical remission and a partial serological remission (≥70% reduction of baseline CRP and/or SAA).|Day 8|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831809|NCT01242813|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Complete or Almost Complete Response at Day 15|Complete response was defined as clinical remission and serological remission. Clinical remission was defined as Physician’s Global Assessment of TRAPS activity absent or minimal and serological remission was defined as C reactive protein (CRP) and/or Serum amyloid A protein (SAA) to be less than (<) 10 milligram per liter (mg/L). Almost complete response was defined as clinical remission and a partial serological remission (equal to or more than [≥] 70% reduction of baseline CRP and/or SAA).|Day 15|The primary analysis was performed on the Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and had at least one post-baseline assessment for primary efficacy.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831810|NCT01243112|Primary|Onset of Action|Time from infusion of local anesthetic to loss of sensation to sharp.|Up to 5 minutes|||second||Standard Deviation|Mean
831811|NCT01243112|Primary|Length of Action|The time from onset of local anesthesia until cessation of effect by sensation of sharp measured in 15 minute increments.|Up to 12 hours|A calculation was made to power the study appropriately to determine a difference of 5 minutes based on previous studies which did not include the use of epinephrine.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
831843|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In Hematocrit Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831844|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In Hemoglobin Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||gm/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831845|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In Red Blood Count Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||m/uL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831818|NCT01243242|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI-I)Score|"The CGI is rated on a 7-point scale, with the severity of illness scale using a range of responses from 1 (normal) through to 7 (amongst the most severely ill patients). CGI-I scores range from 1 (‘very much improved’) through to 7 (‘very much worse’).
During the conduct of the study, CGI-I evaluations were not done correctly and thus data interpretation is limited."|6 weeks from visit 1 baseline to visit 6|"The ITT population included all randomized subjects who completed at least one post-randomization visit.
During the conduct of the study, CGI-I evaluations were not done correctly and thus data interpretation is limited."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831819|NCT01243242|Secondary|Adult ADHD Quality of Life (AAQoL)- Measuring Change in Total Score of AAQoL From Visit 1 to Visit 6|The AAQoL scale provides a validated disease-specific measure of the impact of ADHD on quality of life.It is scored as an overall score (29 items) and four subscale scores: life productivity (11 items), psychological health (6 items), life outlook (7 items) and relationships (5 items). Individual items are scored on a five-point Likert-like scale from ‘Not at all/Never’ (1) to ‘Extremely/Very Often’ (5).|6 weeks (from visit 1 baseline to visit 6)|The ITT population included all randomized subjects who completed at least one post-randomization visit||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831820|NCT01243242|Secondary|Test of Variables of Attention (TOVA) (Change in ADHD Score From Screening to Visit 6)|The TOVA is a computerized test that provides information about an individual's sustained attention, speed and consistency of responding, and behavioral self-regulation and executive functioning. ADHD score is a comparison of the subject's response to the CPT test to those of an ADHD group, and is reported as a Z-score. An ADHD score of -1.80 and less fits the profile of the ADHD sample. A score of more than -1.80 (more positive) does not fit the ADHD profile. When comparing ADHD scores the higher the ADHD score the better the performance.|6 weeks( visit 1 baseline to visit 6)|The ITT population included all randomized subjects who completed at least one post-randomization visit.||Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
831846|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In White Blood Count Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||k/uL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831821|NCT01243242|Primary|Conners’ Adult ADHD Rating Scales (CAARS™)|The primary efficacy endpoint is the difference in change (decrease) in CAARS (Total ADHD Symptoms Score) between the study groups. The CAARS assess the presence and severity of ADHD symptoms and behaviors in adults. Respondents are asked to report their own experiences by rating items pertaining to their behavior/problems using a 4-point Likert-style format ranging from 0 (‘Not at all’, ‘never’) to 3 (‘Very much’, ‘very frequently’). The scale measures ADHD symptoms using a 30-item questionnaire.Total score is the sum of all the items ,min=30 Max=90|6 weeks (from visit 1 baseline to visit 6)|The ITT population included all randomized subjects who completed at least one post-randomization visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831822|NCT01243294|Secondary|Wear Time (Registered by Subject When Applying and Removing a Product)|Wear time was calculated from the time the subjects applied their product (date, year, time) to the time they detached the product (date, year, time). Wear time was estimated in hours per subject per base plate and mean value was calculated.|After each base plate change measured over a period of 10 +/- 2 days. Base plates are changed 1-6 times a day|"As this is a cross-over investigation 26 started at SS and crossed over to SenSura, and 28 started at SenSura and crossed to SS leading to a total population of 54 evaluating each medical device.
Population is ITT"||Hours|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
831823|NCT01243294|Secondary|Comfort (Subjects Own Assessment)|"Comfort where evaluated by subjects own assessment on a 5 point scale from very uncomfortable to very comfortable.
Results of participants who answered on own assessment of comfort of wearing the product on a 5 point scale (very uncomfortable, uncomfortable, acceptable, comfortable, very comfortable). Comfortable and very comfortable are the preferred end points and it is these results that are presented here.
Unit of measure is: Percentage of participants answering 'very comfortable' and 'comfortable'"|After each test period, i.e. after 10 (±2) days with one test product and after 10 (±2) days with the other test product|"As this is a cross-over investigation 26 started at SS and crossed over to SenSura, and 28 started at SenSura and crossed to SS leading to a total population of 54 evaluating each medical device.
Population is ITT"||Percent of participants|||Number
831824|NCT01243294|Secondary|Handling at Appliance (Subjects Own Assessment)|"Handling at appliance where evaluated by subjects own assessment on a 5 point scale from very difficult to very easy.
Results of participants who answered on own feeling of handling at appliance on a 5 point scale (very difficult, difficult, acceptable, easy, very easy). Easy and very easy are the preferred end points and it is the these results that are presented here.
Unit of measure is: Percentage of participants answering 'very easy' and 'easy'"|After each test period, i.e. after 10 (±2) days with one test product and after 10 (±2) days with the other test product|"As this is a cross-over investigation 26 started at SS and crossed over to SenSura, and 28 started at SenSura and crossed to SS leading to a total population of 54 evaluating each medical device.
Population is ITT"||Percent of participants|||Number
831825|NCT01243294|Secondary|Security (Subjects Own Assessment)|"Results of participants who answered on own assessment of security on a 5 point scale ('very poor', 'poor', 'acceptable', 'good' and 'very good'). 'Good' and 'very good' are the preferred end points The 'very good' result are presented here.
Unit of measure is: Percentage of participants answering 'very good'"|After each test period, i.e. after 10 (±2) days with one test product and after 10 (±2) days with the other test product|"As this is a cross-over investigation 26 started at SS and crossed over to SenSura, and 28 started at SenSura and crossed to SS leading to a total population of 54 evaluating each medical device.
Population is ITT"||Percent of participants|||Number
831826|NCT01243294|Secondary|Adverse Events|Safety is evaluated by adverse events occuring continues while the subjects are testing the devices|During the investigation ~ 24 days per subject|"As this is a cross-over investigation 26 started at SS and crossed over to SenSura, and 28 started at SenSura and crossed to SS leading to a total population of 54 evaluating each medical device.
Population is ITT"||Adverse events|||Number
831827|NCT01243294|Primary|Leakage (Percent of All Base Plates With Leakage)|Leakage is evaluated after each change of base plate on a 4-point scale from no leakage, leakage on the base plate, leakage soiling clothe and sudden leakage - the 3 last mentioned are all defined as leakage. No leakage is the preferred end point|After each base plate change measured over a period of 10 +/- 2 days. Base plates are changed 1-6 times a day|Intention to treat. As this is a cross-over investigation 26 started at SS and crossed over to SenSura, and 28 started at SenSura and crossed to SS leading to a total population of 54 evaluating each medical device||Percent of Base plates|Participants||Number
831828|NCT01243320|Primary|Change in Quinone Oxidoreductase 1 Gene|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831829|NCT01243320|Primary|Change in Monocyte Chemotactic Protein 1|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831830|NCT01243320|Primary|Change to Interleukin-1 Beta Receptor|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831831|NCT01243320|Primary|Change to Interleukin-1 Alpha Receptor|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831832|NCT01243320|Primary|Change to Interleukin-8 Receptor|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831833|NCT01243320|Primary|Sputum Reactive Oxygen Species Change|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||uM||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831834|NCT01243320|Primary|Change in Eosinophil Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831835|NCT01243320|Primary|Change in Basophils Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831836|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In Monocytes Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831837|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In Lymphocytes Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831838|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In Granulocytes Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831839|NCT01243320|Primary|Change In Platelet Blood Levels|All participants received the 10ppm Silver, then progressed to the 32 ppm Silver.|14 Days|||k/uL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
831865|NCT01243411|Secondary|A Composite Responder Analysis Based on Change From Baseline in Penile Curvature and in the Peyronie's Disease Bother Score|"A composite responder is indicated by
a percent reduction from baseline in penile curvature greater than or equal to the threshold, and
a reduction from baseline in Peyronie's disease bother score greater than or equal to the threshold, or change in the overall sexual activity within the last 3 months to having vaginal intercourse from no vaginal intercourse at screening."|Week 36|Composite responder analysis is based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population.||participants|||Number
831866|NCT01243411|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Penile Plaque Consistency|Penile plaque consistency score range 1 (non-palpable) to 5 (hard). A decrease in the change from baseline in penile plaque consistency is indicated by a negative number.|Baseline and Week 36|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831867|NCT01243411|Secondary|Change in the Overall Satisfaction Domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)|Overall satisfaction domain of the IIEF score range 0 to 5 on 2 questions where higher scores indicate improved function or satisfaction; total score range 0 to 10.|Baseline and Week 36|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831868|NCT01243411|Secondary|A Responder Analysis Based on Subject Overall Global Assessment|Subject overall global assessment of Peyronie's disease score range -3 (much worse) to 3 (much improved). A score of 1 (improved in a small but important way), 2 (moderately improved), or 3 indicate a responder.|Week 36|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||participants|||Number
831869|NCT01243411|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Penile Pain Domain of the PDQ in Subjects With Baseline Penile Pain Score ≥4|Penile pain scale range 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain) on 3 questions; total score range 0 to 30. A decrease in the change from baseline total score in the penile pain domain of the PDQ is indicated by a negative number. Subjects were required to have a penile pain score of 4 or greater at baseline.|Baseline and Week 36|Efficacy is based on the mITT population; this population only includes those subjects in the mITT population with a baseline penile pain score of 4 or greater.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831870|NCT01243411|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Severity of Peyronie's Disease Symptoms Domain of the PDQ|Peyronie's disease symptoms (physical and psychological) severity score range 0 (none) to 4 (very severe) on 6 questions; total score range 0 to 24. A decrease in the change from baseline total score in the Peyronie's disease symptoms domain of the PDQ is indicated by a negative number.|Baseline and Week 36|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831871|NCT01243411|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Peyronie's Disease Bother Domain of the Peyronie's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ)|Peyronie's disease bother score range 0 (no issue or not at all bothered) to 4 (extremely bothered) on 4 questions; total score range 0 to 16. A decrease in the change from baseline total score in the Peyronie's disease bother domain of the PDQ is indicated by a negative number.|Baseline and Week 36|Efficacy is based on the mITT population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831872|NCT01243411|Primary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Penile Curvature|A negative value in the percentage change from baseline in penile curvature deformity (angle measured in degrees) indicates less curvature.|Baseline and Week 36|Efficacy is based on the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population.||percentage of curvature change||Standard Deviation|Mean
831873|NCT01243450|Primary|Acne Lesion Percent Reduction|Reduction in number of Acne lesions by counting over 12 weeks|12 week|||percent reduction of number of lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
831874|NCT01243567|Secondary|Absolute Difference Between Patient's Lowest IOP Reading at Baseline (Day 0) and the Corresponding IOP Reading|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. Two or three measurements of IOP are taken for each eye at each time point. The lowest IOP values between the two eyes for each patient at each time point are used to calculate the absolute difference.|Baseline, Month 3|Intent to Treat: all randomized patients.||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831875|NCT01243567|Secondary|Absolute Difference Between Patient's Highest IOP Reading at Baseline (Day 0) and the Corresponding IOP Reading|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. Two or three measurements of IOP are taken for each eye at each time point. The highest IOP values between the two eyes for each patient at each time point are used to calculate the absolute difference.|Baseline, Month 3|Intent to Treat: all randomized patients.||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831876|NCT01243567|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Reaching a Predefined Target Pressure Threshold|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. For each patient, the IOP is the average of the two eyes. The predefined target pressure thresholds are at least a 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50% reduction in IOP from baseline.|Baseline, Month 3|Intent to Treat: all randomized patients.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
831877|NCT01243567|Secondary|Change From Baseline IOP|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. For each patient, the IOP is the average of the two eyes. IOP is recorded at the 08:00 (8:00 am), 12:00 (noon) and 16:00 (4:00 pm) hour time points for each patient at each visit. A negative number change from Baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement).|Baseline, Month 3|Intent to Treat: all randomized patients.||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831878|NCT01243567|Primary|Change From Baseline in Average Intraocular Pressure (IOP)|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. For each patient, the IOP is the average of the two eyes. The average IOP is the average of the 08:00, 12:00 and 16:00 hour time points at each visit for each patient. A negative number change from Baseline indicates a reduction in average IOP (improvement).|Baseline, Month 3|Intent to Treat: all randomized patients.||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831879|NCT01243619|Other Pre-specified|Analyze Correlation Between FDG and FLT PET Scans, and the Correlation Between Both Types of PET Scan and the Response to Treatment.|We will compare the findings of FDG and FLT PET scans at pre-treatment, mid-treatment and post-treatment time points to determine how closely they correlate with each other, and if there is a specific time point at which any observed differences between FDG and FLT PET scans are most pronounced. We will also determine which of the six PET scans may correlate most closely with the response to treatment as determined by pathologic findings at esophagectomy.|1 year||||||
831955|NCT01251354|Secondary|Determination of Time to Progression (TTP) in This Patient Population|Time to Progression (TTP): Time from first study treatment to first documentation of objective tumour progression.|After the last enrolled patient has been followed for at least 6 months or has progressed or died|The study was terminated early and due to the low number of patients enrolled, data was not collected/analysed for this endpoint|||||
831880|NCT01243619|Primary|Feasibility: Determined by the Number of Participants Who Had All Three Sets of Completed Serial PET Scans That Were Imported for Analysis|Determine the possibility of aquiring three sets of serial Positron emission tomography (PET) scans from 5 patients at designated time points and to develop a mechanism to import and analyze images from F-fluoro-3'-deoxy-3'-L-fluorothymidine (FLT)-PET, Fluorodeoxyglucose(FDG)-PET and Computed Tomography (CT) on a single advanced software platform with deformable image registration capability. We will report patient acceptance of and compliance with this regimen, as well as the utility of the software platform for conducting the proposed analysis.|1 year|||participants|||Number
831881|NCT01243671|Secondary|Median Change From Baseline in C-Reactive Protein (CRP) at Week 24 and Week 52|C-Reactive Protein (CRP) normal range was defined as ≤0.3 mg/dL.|Baseline, 24 weeks, 52 weeks|Full analysis set (all participants). Those with missing evaluations were imputed by last observation carried forward.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
831882|NCT01243671|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Short Form-36 (SF-36) Summary Scores at Week 24 and Week 52|The Short-Form-36 (SF-36) Health Survey is a comprehensive quality of life scale. An increase in SF-36 score indicates alleviation of the disease and a decrease in score indicates aggravation of disease. The physical component reflects activity level, activity limitations, pain and rating of one's health. Score on the physical component ranges from 0 (poorest health) to 100 (best health). The mental component reflects vitality, social functioning, role-emotional and mental health. Score on the mental component ranges from 0 (poorest health) to 100 (best health).|Baseline, 24 weeks, 52 weeks|Full analysis set (all participants). Those with missing evaluations were imputed by last observation carried forward.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831883|NCT01243671|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) at Week 24 and Week 52|Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) is the standard questionnaire to assess the quality of life of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. The IBDQ is a 32-item questionnaire consisting of 4 dimensions: bowel-related symptoms, systemic function, social function and emotional status. The responses to each question within each domain range from 1 (significant impairment) to 7 (no impairment), with total score ranging from 32 (very poor) to 224 (perfect health-related quality of life).|Baseline, 24 weeks, 52 weeks|Full analysis set (all participants). Those with missing evaluations were imputed by last observation carried forward.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831884|NCT01243671|Secondary|Number of Participants With Resolution of Behçet's Disease Symptoms (Other Than Gastrointestinal Symptoms) at Week 24 and Week 52|Investigators assessed oral aphthous (mouth ulcers), skin symptoms, eye symptoms and vulval (genital) ulcers during 4 weeks before study visit via participant interview, using the following grades. Oral aphthous: 0=None; 1=Symptom existed less than 2 weeks in recent 4 weeks; 2=Symptom existed 2 weeks or more in recent 4 weeks; 3=Symptom existed mostly in recent 4 weeks. Skin (Erythema nodosum rash): 0=None; 1=Symptom existed less than 2 weeks in recent 4 weeks; 2=Symptom existed 2 weeks or more in recent 4 weeks; 3=Symptom existed mostly in recent 4 weeks. Eye (Uveitis): 0=None; 1=one eye crisis in recent 4 weeks; 2=two eye crises in recent 4 weeks; 3=three eye crises in recent 4 weeks. Vulval (genital) ulcer: 0=None; 1=Symptom existed less than 2 weeks in recent 4 weeks; 2=Symptom existed 2 weeks or more in recent 4 weeks; 3=Symptom existed mostly in recent 4 weeks. Resolution was defined as: Behçet's disease symptoms other than gastrointestinal symptoms were graded 0 (disappeared).|24 weeks, 52 weeks|Full analysis set (all participants). n=number of participants who had any symptom at baseline. Those with missing evaluations were imputed as non-responders.||participants|||Number
831885|NCT01243671|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abdominal Pain, Diarrhea and Other Gastrointestinal (GI) Symptoms Grade ≤1 and Improvement of ≥1 Grade at Week 24 and Week 52|Participants assessed their abdominal pain, diarrhea and other gastrointestinal symptoms (abdominal discomfort, abdominal fullness, etc) during 2 weeks before assessment visit in 5 grades. Investigator confirmed the assessment through interview with participants. Assessment is graded from 0 to 4: 0=free of symptoms; 1=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks but did not affect participant’s daily life; 2=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and slightly affected participant’s daily life; 3=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and affected participant’s daily life; 4=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and critically affected participant’s daily life. Improvement of ≥1 grade from baseline is also presented.|24 weeks, 52 weeks|Full analysis set (all participants). n=number of participants who had any symptom at baseline. Those with missing evaluations were imputed as non-responders.||participants|||Number
831886|NCT01243671|Secondary|Number of Participants With Endoscopic Improvement Grades 0, ≤1 and ≤2 at Week 24 and Week 52|Endoscopic improvement was assessed in 4 grades compared to the screening (baseline) endoscopy based on the longest diameter (none, ≥1 cm to <2 cm, ≥2 cm to <3 cm, ≥3 cm) of ileocecal largest open ulcer (area of mucosal defect). Grades are: 0=healing; 1=marked reduction (reduction to ≤1/4); 2=reduction (reduction to ≤1/2 - 1/4); 3=no change or worse (reduction less than 1/2 or expansion).|24 weeks, 52 weeks|Full analysis set (all participants). Those with missing evaluations were imputed as non-responders.||participants|||Number
831887|NCT01243671|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Global Assessment of Gastrointestinal Symptoms Grade 0 or ≤1 and Improvement of ≥1 Grade at Week 24 and Week 52|Study participants completed a global assessment of their gastrointestinal symptoms (Behçet’s disease symptoms other than gastrointestinal symptoms were excluded) during 2 weeks before assessment visit on a 5-grade scale. The investigator confirmed this assessment via interview with participants. Assessment is graded from 0 to 4: 0=free of symptoms; 1=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks but did not affect participant’s daily life; 2=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and slightly affected participant’s daily life; 3=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and affected participant’s daily life; 4=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and critically affected participant’s daily life. Global assessment of grade 0 or ≤1 and improvement of ≥1 (from baseline) is presented.|24 weeks, 52 weeks|Full analysis set (all participants). Those with missing evaluations were imputed as non-responders.||participants|||Number
831904|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Lost at Least 10 Letters in BCVA at Week 48 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 48|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831956|NCT01251354|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events||Up to 28 days after last dose|All Screened Population||participants|||Number
831888|NCT01243671|Secondary|Number of Participants With Complete Remission at Week 24 and Week 52|Complete remission was defined as both endoscopic improvement and global assessment of gastrointestinal symptoms grades of 0. Endoscopic improvement was assessed in 4 grades compared to the screening (baseline) endoscopy based on the longest diameter (none, ≥1 cm to <2 cm, ≥2 cm to <3 cm, ≥3 cm) of ileocecal largest open ulcer (area of mucosal defect). Grades are: 0=healing; 1=marked reduction (reduction to ≤1/4); 2=reduction (reduction to ≤1/2 - 1/4); 3=no change or worse (reduction less than 1/2 or expansion). Global assessment of gastrointestinal symptoms is a participant-assessed, investigator-confirmed grading of global symptoms from 0 to 4: 0=free of symptoms; 1=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks but did not affect participant's daily life; 2=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and slightly affected participant's daily life; 3=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and affected participant's daily life; 4=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and critically affected participant's daily life.|24 weeks, 52 weeks|Full analysis set (all participants). Those with missing evaluations were imputed as non-responders.||participants|||Number
831889|NCT01243671|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Improvement at Week 52|Marked improvement is defined as the combination of both global assessment of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and endoscopic improvement grades of ≤1. Global assessment of GI symptoms is a participant-assessed, investigator-confirmed grading of global symptoms from 0 to 4: 0=free of symptoms; 1=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks but did not affect participant’s daily life; 2=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and slightly affected participant’s daily life; 3=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and affected participant’s daily life; 4=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and critically affected participant’s daily life. Endoscopic improvement was assessed in 4 grades compared to the screening endoscopy based on the longest diameter (none, ≥1 cm to <2 cm, ≥2 cm to <3 cm, ≥3 cm) of ileocecal largest open ulcer (area of mucosal defect). Grades are: 0=healing; 1=marked reduction (reduction to ≤1/4); 2=reduction (reduction to ≤1/2 - 1/4); 3=no change or worse (reduction less than 1/2 or expansion).|52 weeks|Full analysis set (all participants). Those with missing evaluations were imputed as non-responders.||participants|||Number
831890|NCT01243671|Primary|Number of Participants With Marked Improvement at Week 24|Marked improvement is defined as the combination of both global assessment of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and endoscopic improvement grades of ≤1. Global assessment of GI symptoms is a participant-assessed, investigator-confirmed grading of global symptoms from 0 to 4: 0=free of symptoms; 1=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks but did not affect participant’s daily life; 2=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and slightly affected participant’s daily life; 3=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and affected participant’s daily life; 4=symptoms existed in past 2 weeks and critically affected participant’s daily life. Endoscopic improvement was assessed in 4 grades compared to the screening endoscopy based on the longest diameter (none, ≥1 cm to <2 cm, ≥2 cm to <3 cm, ≥3 cm) of ileocecal largest open ulcer (area of mucosal defect). Grades are: 0=healing; 1=marked reduction (reduction to ≤1/4); 2=reduction (reduction to ≤1/2 - 1/4); 3=no change or worse (reduction less than 1/2 or expansion).|24 weeks|Full analysis set (all participants). Those with missing evaluations were imputed as non-responders.||participants|||Number
831891|NCT01243775|Secondary|Neutropenia Grade 3-4|Toxicity (CECAE ver 4.0) and Safety|2 years|||participants|||Number
831892|NCT01243775|Secondary|Overall Survival||2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831893|NCT01243775|Secondary|Progression Free Survival||2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831894|NCT01243775|Primary|Response Rate|RECIST version 1.1|6th week|Intention to treat population||participants|||Number
831895|NCT01249664|Secondary|Mean Change in Area of Leakage From Baseline at Week 24 - LOCF|A negative change from baseline indicates improvement, ie, less leakage.|Baseline, Week 24|||Disc areas||Standard Deviation|Mean
831896|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Were Withdrawn From Study Drug During the First 24 Weeks||Baseline, Week 24|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831897|NCT01249664|Secondary|Mean Change in National Eye Institute 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) Total Score From Baseline to Week 24 - LOCF|The NEI VFQ-25 total score ranges from 0-100 with a score of 0 being the worst outcome and 100 being the best outcome. The NEI VFQ questionnaire is organized as a collection of subscales which are all scored from 0-100. To reach the overall composite score, each sub-scale score is averaged in order to give each sub-scale equal weight.|Baseline, Week 24|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831898|NCT01249664|Secondary|Mean Change in European Five-dimensional Health Scale (EQ-5D) Score From Baseline to Week 24 - LOCF|EQ-5D is a quality of life questionnaire based on a scale from -0.594 (worst) to 1.00 (best).|Baseline, Week 24|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831899|NCT01249664|Secondary|Mean Change in Choroidal Neovascularization (CNV) Lesion Size as Assessed by Fluorescein Angiography (FA) From Baseline to Week 48 - LOCF|CNV area values measured in square millimeters, each disc area is equivalent to 2.54 mm^2 on the retina; lower values represent better outcomes|Baseline, Week 48|||Disc areas||Standard Deviation|Mean
831900|NCT01249664|Secondary|Mean Change in Choroidal Neovascularization (CNV) Lesion Size as Assessed by Fluorescein Angiography (FA) From Baseline to Week 24 - LOCF|CNV area values measured in square millimeters, each disc area is equivalent to 2.54 mm^2 on the retina; lower values represent better outcomes|Baseline, Week 24|||Disc areas||Standard Deviation|Mean
831901|NCT01249664|Secondary|Mean Change in Central Retinal Thickness (CRT) as Assessed by Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) From Baseline to Week 48 - LOCF|A negative number indicates improvement (reduced thickness).|Baseline, Week 48|||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
831902|NCT01249664|Secondary|Mean Change in Central Retinal Thickness (CRT) as Assessed by Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) From Baseline to Week 24 - LOCF|A negative number indicates improvement (reduced thickness).|Baseline, Week 24|||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
831903|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Lost at Least 5 Letters in BCVA at Week 48 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 48|||Percentage of participants|||Number
832128|NCT01253044|Secondary|Sheehan Disability Inventory|To determine if receiving ACT, as compared to PCT, is associated with reduced functional impairment at the end of treatment. The score used is an average (range 0-10) of completed items, with higher scores indicating greater disability.|Baseline and week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831905|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Lost at Least 15 Letters in BCVA at Week 48 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 48|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831906|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Lost at Least 5 Letters in BCVA at Week 24 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 24|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831907|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Lost at Least 10 Letters in BCVA at Week 24 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 24|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831908|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Lost at Least 15 Letters in BCVA at Week 24 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 24|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831909|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Gained at Least 5 Letters in BCVA at Week 48 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 48|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831910|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Gained at Least 10 Letters in BCVA at Week 48 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 48|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831911|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Gained at Least 15 Letters in BCVA at Week 48 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 48|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831912|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Gained at Least 5 Letters in BCVA at Week 24 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 24|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831913|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Gained at Least 10 Letters in BCVA at Week 24 - LOCF|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 24|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831914|NCT01249664|Secondary|Mean Change in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) as Measured by ETDRS From Baseline to Week 24 - Observed Cases|Data as observed at visit, no carrying forward from latest observation if missing data at later time points. Defined study baseline range of ETDRS Best Corrected Visual Acuity letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning.|Baseline, Week 24|||Letters correctly read||Standard Deviation|Mean
831915|NCT01249664|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Gained at Least 15 Letters in BCVA as Measured by ETDRS at Week 24 Using the LOCF Approach|Defined study baseline range of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning. Nominator = (Number of participants who maintained vision * 100); Denominator = Number of participants analyzed.|Baseline, Week 24|||Percentage of participants|||Number
831916|NCT01249664|Primary|Mean Change in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) as Measured by Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) From Baseline to Week 24 - Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|Defined study baseline range of ETDRS Best Corrected Visual Acuity letter score of 73 to 35 letters (ETDRS equivalent of 20/40 to 20/200) in the study eye; a higher score represents better functioning.|Baseline, Week 24|||Letters correctly read||Standard Deviation|Mean
831917|NCT01249833|Other Pre-specified|Change in Mood Assessment|"Mood was assessed using the Bond-Lader 10 cm (100 mm) visual analogue scales for mood (16 scales in total); factored for alertness (mean of 9 scales), calmness (mean of 2 scales) and contentment (mean of 5 scales).
The range in score for each scale and for each factor (alertness, calmness and contentment) was 0 - 100 mm.
Each scale was anchored such that the lower the value, the better the mood."|Change from baseline at Day 4|All randomised subjects with data collected at both Baseline and Day 4. Baseline data was available for all randomized subjects in both groups; Day 4 data was available for 54 of 59 randomized subjects in the Oseltamivir Group (54 analysed) and for 58 of 63 randomized subjects in the Standard of Care Alone Group (58 analysed).||millimeter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832022|NCT01251653|Secondary|Duration of Objective Response According to RECIST v1.1|Duration of objective response was the time from the first documented complete response or partial response to disease progression or death.|From the first documented complete response or partial response to the time of disease progression or death|TS for patients who experienced objective response.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
831918|NCT01249833|Secondary|Change in Processing Speed Assessment|"Processing speed assessed with the animal number decoding subtest
The lower the value, the better the processing speed"|Change from baseline at Day 4|All randomized subjects for whom data was collected at both Baseline and Day 4. Oseltamivr Group: Baseline data available for all randomized subjects (59); Day 4 data available for 54 subjects (54 analysed). Standard of Care Alone Group: Baseline data available for all randomized subjects (63); Day 4 data available for 58 subjects (58 analysed).||Millliseconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831919|NCT01249833|Secondary|Change in Working Memory Assessment|"Working memory assessed with the Dot Memory Test.
The higher the value, the better the working memory."|Change from baseline at Day 4|All randomised subjects with data collected at both Baseline and Day 4. Oseltamivir Group: Baseline values collected for all randomized subjects (59); Day 4 data available for 54 subjects (54 analysed). Standard of Care Alone Group: Baseline values collected for all randomized subjects (63); Day 4 data available for 58 subjects (58 analysed)||Number of correct answers||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831920|NCT01249833|Primary|Change in Attention Assessment|"Attention assessed using simple reaction time measured in milliseconds. Simple reaction time calculated as the mean of the following 2 sub-tests:
Reaction Time Subtest
Cued Reaction Time Subtest
The lower the value, the better the attention."|Change from baseline at Day 4|All randomised subjects for whom data was collected at both baseline and Day 4. Oseltamivir group: baseline data available for 58 of 59 randomised subjects and Day 4 data for 53 subjects (53 subjects analysed). Standard of Care Alone group: baseline data available for 61 of 63 subjects and Day 4 data for 55 subjects (55 subjects analysed).||milliseconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
831921|NCT01249872|Secondary|Change From Baseline of Spirometric Values|Preoperatively, after a detailed demonstration, baseline spirometry measurements of forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) were measured, using a bedside spirometer (PowerCubeΤΜ, Ganshorn Medizin Electronic, Germany), on-line connected to a PC. Spirometry was standardized with each patient in a 30o head-up position and it was performed at least three times and the best measurement was recorded, according to the criteria of the European Respiratory Society .Postoperatively, spirometric values (FVC= Forced Vital Capacity, FEV1=Forced Expiratory Volume at 1 sec , PEFR= Peak Expiratory Flow Rate)were recorded at 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 144 hours . Data are expressed as percentage of preoperative values, which are 100%.|up to 6th day postoperatively|||percentage of preoperative values||Standard Deviation|Mean
831922|NCT01249872|Secondary|Cumulative Consumption of Epidural Morphine at 24h and 48h Postoperatively|Cumulative consumption of epidural morphine administered as loading dose, intraoperatively, of 1mg(groups B and E)or 2mg (groups C and F) and as continuous infusion of 0,2mg/h ( all groups) at 24h and 48h postoperatively.All participants in each Group received the same dose of epidural morphine, as no participant missed a scheduled dose.|up to 48 hours postoperatively|||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
831923|NCT01249872|Secondary|Consumption of Levobupivacaine at 24h and 48 h Postoperatively|Cumulative consumption of levobupivacaine administered via patients controlled epidural analgesia pump( PCEA) at 24h and 48 h postoperatively|up to 48 hours postoperatively|||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
831924|NCT01249872|Secondary|Time to First Postoperative Ambulation|Time to being able to walk without assistance within the room or outside the room|up to 6 days|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
831925|NCT01249872|Secondary|Time to Postoperative Bowel Recovery|Time to postoperative recovery of bowel function assessed by first flatus or stool, noticed by the patient|up to 6 days|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
831926|NCT01249872|Primary|Change From Baseline in Pain Scores (Visual Analogue Scale)|Pain scores at rest and on cough using a 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(0=no pain, 10=worst possible pain) were assessed up to 48h postoperatively.|up to 48 h postoperatively|The sample size was chosen in order to detect a difference in the epidural levobupivacaine PCEA consumption at 48 hrs. We calculated that 14 patients per group would be adequate to detect statistical significance (α = 0.05, power = 90%), using data from a previous pilot study Then, we increased the sample size by 15%.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831927|NCT01251120|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Months 6 and 12 in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score|HAQ-DI includes 20 questions concerning participant’s activities of daily life, grouped in 8 scales of 2 to 3 questions for each activity. To respond to each question, a four-level response (score of 0 to 3 points), with higher scores showing larger functional limitations, was chosen. Overall score was computed as the sum of the domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range was 0-3 where 0=without difficulties; 1= with some difficulties; 2=with great difficulties; and 3=unable to perform these actions at all.|Baseline and Months 6 and 12|Because of the limited number of participants (n=2), the study was terminated prematurely. No statistical analysis could be performed.|||||
831928|NCT01251120|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Months 6 and 12 in European Quality of Life-5D (EQ-5D) Score|EQ-5D is a participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQoL Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.|Baseline and Months 6 and 12|Because of the limited number of participants (n=2), the study was terminated prematurely. No statistical analysis could be performed.|||||
831929|NCT01251120|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Months 6 and 12 in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT F) Scores|The FACIT-Fatigue score was calculated according to a 13-item questionnaire that assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. FACIT-F is a 13-item questionnaire. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participants fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score). Clinically relevant improvement is defined as a ≥5-point change from Baseline.|Baseline and Months 6 and 12|Because of the limited number of participants (n=2), the study was terminated prematurely. No statistical analysis could be performed.|||||
831930|NCT01251120|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission at Months 6 and 12 Assessed Using Clinical Activity Disease Index (CDAI)|The CDAI is a purely clinical index to measure disease activity. The index includes swollen and tender joint counts, participant global assessment of disease activity, and evaluator global assessment of disease activity (EGA).|Months 6 and 12|Because of the limited number of participants (n=2), the study was terminated prematurely. No statistical analysis could be performed.|||||
831931|NCT01251120|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Responses According to American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Criteria|The ACR definition of response includes tender and swollen joint counts, VAS scales for pain, participant and investigator global assessment of disease activity, participant-assessed disability using Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and acute phase response.|Months 6 and 12|Because of the limited number of participants (n=2), the study was terminated prematurely. No statistical analysis could be performed.|||||
831932|NCT01251120|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Disease Remission at Month 6 Assessed Using DAS28|"The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes SJC and TJC, acute phase response, and general health status. For this study ESR was to be used to calculate DAS28 score. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS which includes a 44 swollen joint count. The DAS28 has been validated in RA. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 = 0.56 × √(TJC) + 0.28 × √(SJC) + 0.70 × ln(ESR) + 0.014 × GH Where, TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJC28 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ln = natural log, ESR measured as millimeters per hour (mm/hr), and GH = general health, which is participant’s global assessment of disease activity (100-mm VAS). DAS28 ≤ 2.6 defined remission."|Month 6|Because of the limited number of participants (n=2), the study was terminated prematurely. No statistical analysis could be performed.|||||
831933|NCT01251120|Secondary|Number of Hours Absent From Work|Work productivity measures include absence from work (participant reported and registries), permanent work disability (pension, participant reported and registries), presenteeism (Quantity and Quality instrument, QQ).|Baseline and 6 and 12 months|Because of the limited number of participants (n=2), the study was terminated prematurely. No statistical analysis could be performed.|||||
831934|NCT01251120|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Disease Remission at Month 12 Assessed Using the Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count (DAS28)|"The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). The index includes swollen and tender joint counts (SJC and TJC), acute phase response, and general health status. For this study Erythrocyte sedimentation Rate (ESR) was to be used to calculate DAS28 score. The DAS28, which uses a 28 joint count, is derived from the original DAS which includes a 44 swollen joint count. The DAS28 has been validated in RA. The index is calculated using the following formula:
DAS28 equals (=) 0.56 times (×) square root of √(TJC) plus (+) 0.28 × √(SJC) + 0.70 × ln(ESR) + 0.014 × GH Where, TJC28 = tender joint count on 28 joints, SJC28 = swollen joint count on 28 joints, ln = natural log, ESR measured as millimeters per hour (mm/hr), and GH = general health, which is participant’s global assessment of disease activity (100-mm Visual Analog Scale [VAS]). DAS28 less than/equal to (≤) 2.6 defined remission."|Month 12|Because of the limited number (n) of participants (n=2), the study was terminated prematurely. No statistical analysis could be performed.|||||
831935|NCT01251146|Secondary|Number of Participants Compliant With Study Treatment|Participants compliant with study treatment were the participants who have completed the study treatment regimen.|Baseline up to end of follow-up (Week 4 or Week 6 or Week 8)|ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
831936|NCT01251146|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|AE: any new untoward medical occurrence/worsening of pre-existing medical condition, whether or not related to study drug. SAE: Any AE that resulted in death; was life threatening; resulted in persistent/significant disability/incapacity; resulted in/prolonged an existing in-patient hospitalization; was a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or was a medically important condition|Baseline up to end of follow-up (Week 4 or Week 6 or Week 8)|Safety population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
831937|NCT01251146|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Attaining Heart Rate Goal at Week 2, 4 and 6|Heart rate goal was defined as attainment of heart rate less than or equal to 65 bpm.|Attainment of heart rate goal (Week 2 or Week 4 or Week 6)|ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
831938|NCT01251146|Secondary|Number of Participants Attaining Heart Rate Goal at Dosage 1, 2 and 3 of Study Treatment|Dosage 1, 2 and 3 for bisoprolol group was defined as 5 mg, 7.5 mg and 10 mg once daily and for atenolol group as 50 mg, 75 mg and 100 mg once daily, respectively. Heart rate goal was defined as attainment of heart rate less than or equal to 65 bpm.|Baseline up to attainment of heart rate goal (Week 2 or Week 4 or Week 6)|ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
831939|NCT01251146|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ratio of Heart Rate Variability (HRV) for Low Frequency Power (LF) to Heart Rate Variability Power (HRV) for High Frequency (HF) (LF/HF) at Attainment of Heart Rate Goal and End of Follow-up|Heart rate variability (HRV) is used to describe the variations of both instantaneous HR and resting rate (RR) intervals and was evaluated for low frequency power (LF) and for high frequency power (HF). Heart rate goal was defined as attainment of heart rate less than or equal to 65 bpm.|Baseline, attainment of heart rate goal (Week 2 or Week 4 or Week 6) and end of follow-up (Week 4 or Week 6 or Week 8)|"ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. N signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the specified time point for each treatment arm group respectively."||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
831954|NCT01251354|Secondary|Determination of Progression Free Survival (PFS) in This Patient Population|Progression Free Survival (PFS): Time from first study treatment until objective tumour progression or death from any cause.|After the last enrolled patient has been followed for at least 6 months or has progressed or died|The study was terminated early and due to the low number of patients enrolled, data was not collected/analysed for this endpoint|||||
832131|NCT01253070|Secondary|OS|OS was defined as the time from registration to death of any cause. Surviving patients were censored at the date of last follow-up. The median OS with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method.|Time from registration to death (up to 10 years)|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
831940|NCT01251146|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate Variability (HRV) for Low Frequency Power (LF) and for High Frequency Power (HF) at Attainment of Heart Rate Goal and End of Follow-up|Heart rate variability (HRV) is used to describe the variations of both instantaneous HR and resting rate (RR) intervals and was evaluated for low frequency power (LF) and for high frequency power (HF). Heart rate goal was defined as attainment of heart rate less than or equal to 65 bpm.|Baseline, attainment of heart rate goal (Week 2 or Week 4 or Week 6) and end of follow-up (Week 4 or Week 6 or Week 8)|"ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. N signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the specified time point for each treatment arm group respectively."||millisecond square (ms^2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
831941|NCT01251146|Primary|Change From Baseline in Baroreflex Sensitivity (BRS) at End of Follow-up|Baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) is an important characteristic of baroreflex control and often noninvasively assessed by relating heart rate (HR) fluctuations to blood pressure (BP) fluctuations. Heart rate goal was defined as attainment of heart rate less than or equal to 65 bpm.|Baseline and end of follow-up (Week 4 or Week 6 or Week 8)|"ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. N signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure."||millisecond per millimeter of mercury||Standard Deviation|Mean
831942|NCT01251146|Primary|Change From Baseline in Baroreflex Sensitivity (BRS) at Attainment of Heart Rate Goal|Baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) is an important characteristic of baroreflex control and often noninvasively assessed by relating heart rate (HR) fluctuations to blood pressure (BP) fluctuations. Heart rate goal was defined as attainment of heart rate less than or equal to 65 beats per minute (bpm).|Baseline and attainment of heart rate goal (Week 2 or Week 4 or Week 6)|"Intention to treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. N signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure. n signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the specified time point for each treatment arm group respectively."||millisecond per millimeter of mercury||Standard Deviation|Mean
831943|NCT01251276|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Serious Adverse Experiences|A serious adverse experience is an adverse experience that results in death, is life threatening, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, results in or prolongs a hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly or birth defect, is a cancer, or may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention. The percentage of participants with one or more serious adverse experiences was assessed.|Up to Month 1 after challenge dose|Participants who received a challenge dose and had safety follow-up||Percentage of participants|||Number
831944|NCT01251276|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Systemic Adverse Experiences|The percentage of participants with one or more systemic adverse experiences was assessed.|Up to Day 15 after challenge dose|Participants who received a challenge dose and had safety follow-up||Percentage of participants|||Number
831945|NCT01251276|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Injection-site Adverse Experiences|The percentage of participants with one or more injection-site adverse experiences was assessed.|Up to Day 15 after challenge dose|Participants who received a challenge dose and had safety follow-up||Percentage of participants|||Number
831946|NCT01251276|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued the Study Due to an Adverse Experience|The percentage of participants who discontinued the study due to an adverse experience was assessed.|Up to Month 7|Participants who received a challenge dose and had safety follow-up||Percentage of participants|||Number
831947|NCT01251276|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Adverse Experiences|An adverse experience is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the sponsor's product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the sponsor’s product, is also an adverse experience. The percentage of participants with one or more adverse experiences was assessed.|Up to Day 15 after challenge dose|Participants who received a challenge dose and had safety follow-up||Percentage of participants|||Number
831948|NCT01251276|Primary|Percentage of Seroresponders Before and After the Challenge Vaccination|A seroresponder was a participant with an anti-hepatitis B surface antibody titer >=10 milli Merck U/mL. The percentage of seroresponders was assessed before and after the challenge dose.|Predose (Day 1) and 1 month after challenge dose (Month 1)|Vaccinated participants with immunogenicity results, excluding those with protocol violations that might interfere with the immunogenicity evaluation||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
831949|NCT01251315|Primary|Intracellular Glutathione Level|Mean intracellular glutathione level every 2 hour|6 hours|Intention-to-treat||µmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
831950|NCT01251315|Secondary|Augmentation Index|"Augmentation index (%) is defined as the percentage of the central pulse pressure which is attributed to the reflected pulse wave and, therefore, reflects the degree to which central arterial pressure is augmented by wave reflection if appropriate augmentation index has been shown to be a predictor of adverse cardiovascular events in a high risk patient populations,higher augmentation index is associated with target organ damage. Absolute change of augmentation index from baseline to 6 hours will be estimated for the analysis."|Baseline and 6 hours|||percentage of the central pulse pressure||Standard Deviation|Mean
831951|NCT01251354|Secondary|Determination of Overall Survival in This Patient Population|Overall Survival (OS): Defined as the time from first study treatment to death due to any cause.|2 years after the last patient enrolled|The study was terminated early and due to the low number of patients enrolled, data was not collected/analysed for this endpoint|||||
831952|NCT01251354|Secondary|Determination of Duration of Response in This Patient Population|Duration of Response (DR): Time from the first documentation of objective tumour response (defined as CR or PR) to the first documentation of objective tumour progression or death on study due to any cause.|After the last enrolled patient has been followed for at least 6 months or has progressed or died|The study was terminated early and due to the low number of patients enrolled, data was not collected/analysed for this endpoint|||||
831953|NCT01251354|Secondary|Determination of Overall Response Rate (ORR) in This Patient Population|Overall Response Rate (ORR): Defined as the sum of CR and PR.|After the last enrolled patient has been followed for at least 6 months or has progressed or died|The study was terminated early and due to the low number of patients enrolled, data was not collected/analysed for this endpoint|||||
831957|NCT01251354|Primary|Determination of Clinical Benefit (CB), Defined as Sum of Patients Who Present Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) or Stable Disease (SD) ≥12 Weeks (CB=CR+PR+SD≥12 Weeks) Using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST Version1.1)|"CR defined as: Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm.
PR defined as: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.
SD defined as: Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for Progressive Disease (PD), taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.
PD defined as: At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression)."|12 weeks|The study was terminated early and due to the low number of patients enrolled, data was not collected/analysed for this endpoint|||||
831958|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From DB Baseline in the PedsQL Score (Generic Core Scores) at Each Study Visit Except Week 4|"The PedsQL is a validated quality of life questionnaire, designed for children from 2 to 18 years of age. The Generic Core Scale covers four multidimensional scales including physical, emotional, social and school aspects, with three summary scales of total scale score, physical health summary score and psychosocial health summary score.
Each generic core scale was calculated as follows: (1) Individual item scores were reversed and transformed from a 0-4 scale to a 0-100 scale by assigning 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25 and 4=0; (2) Each scale score was calculated as the sum of the transformed individual item scores, divided by the number of non-missing items. Higher scores indicated better quality of life (fewer symptoms or problems).
A scale score was only calculated if at least 50% of the associated items were non-missing."|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Treatment Cycle 4, Week 12 was not included in the study design. Subjects who completed the study or withdrew were counted as missing at subsequent visits. PHS = pyschosocial health summary; W12 = Week 12.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831959|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From DB Baseline in the PedsQL Score (CP Module Scores) at Each Study Visit Except Week 4|"The PedsQL has a disease specific CP module that is relevant to the study population and complements the core modules.
The 35-item questionnaire encompassed 7 scales including (1) daily activities (2) school activities (3) movement and balance (4) pain and hurt (5) fatigue (6) eating activities and (7) speech and communication. A 5-point scale was utilised for parent proxy-report: 0 = never a problem; 1 = almost never a problem; 2 = sometimes a problem; 3 = often a problem; 4 = almost always a problem.
Each CP score was calculated as follows: (1) Individual item scores were reversed and transformed from a 0-4 scale to a 0-100 scale by assigning 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25 and 4=0; (2) Each scale score was calculated as the sum of the transformed individual item scores, divided by the number of non-missing items. Higher scores indicated better quality of life (fewer symptoms or problems).
A scale score was only calculated if at least 50% of the associated items were non-missing."|Baseline and Week 12|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Treatment Cycle 4, Week 12 was not included in the study design. Subjects who completed the study or withdrew were counted as missing at subsequent visits.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831960|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From DB Baseline in the Observational Gait Scale (OGS) Total Score of the (Most) Affected Leg|"The OGS is a measurement tool used to objectively quantify positive and negative features (impairments) of the upper motor neurone syndrome. The OGS is useful when children are too young or insufficiently cooperative for instrumented gait analysis. It is based on the Physicians Rating Scale but has some modifications to improve its sensitivity to detect changes following administration of Botulinum Toxin Type A (BTX-A).
The OGS total score was calculated as the sum of the individual question scores for Questions 1 to 7, with the highest possible score being 20. The parameters collected were: knee position in midstance, initial foot contact, foot contact at midstance, timing of heel raise, hindfoot at midstance, base of support and gait assistive devices. Higher scores indicate better gait.
The mean change from baseline (in the DB study) in the OGS total score of the (most) affected leg was derived."|DB Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 10 U/kg and 15 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the GSC of the (most) affected leg were >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg and >12.5 to ≤17.5 U/kg, respectively. The analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤7.5 or >17.5 U/kg.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831961|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Prior to the First Injection Cycle in the Hamstrings) in Y Derived From the TS, in the Knee Flexors Assessed at the Knee Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|"The mean change from baseline (prior to the first injection cycle in the hamstrings) in Y was derived from the TS.
Y was graded according to the following scale: Grade 0 - no resistance throughout passive movement (best outcome); Grade 1 - slight resistance throughout passive movement; Grade 2 - clear catch at precise angle, interrupting passive movement, followed by release; Grade 3 - fatigable clonus (less than 10 sec when maintaining pressure) occurring at a precise angle, followed by release; Grade 4 - unfatigable clonus (more than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at a precise angle; Grade 5 - joint immovable (worst outcome).
Catch without release was graded 0 if XV1=XV3, ‘unratable’ spasticity otherwise; catch with 'minimal' release was graded 2 if XV3 was consistent and consistently less than XV1.
Angle 0 = position of minimal stretch of the tested muscle. For Grades 0 and 1, spasticity angle X = 0 by definition."|Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Baseline and Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 5 U/kg and 10 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the hamstring of the (most) affected leg were >3 to ≤7.5 U/kg and >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg, respectively. Analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤3 or >12.5 U/kg. Only data from subjects injected in the hamstring are presented.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
831997|NCT01251614|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 75 Response Over Time|"PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis).
A PASI 75 response is at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from Baseline in PASI score."|Baseline, Period A, Weeks 4, 8, and 11, Period C, Weeks 0 and 16, Period D, Weeks 0, 16, 28, 40 and 52|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
831962|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Prior to the First Injection Cycle in the Hamstrings) in X Derived From the TS, in the Knee Flexors Assessed at the Knee Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|"The TS was used to measure spasticity in the knee flexors at the knee joint of the (most) affected lower limb.
The Investigator assessed muscle reactions of the tested muscle to passive stretch at two velocities: SLOW = V1: as slow as possible (slower than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity); FAST = V2 (speed of the limb segment falling under gravity) or V3 (as fast as possible - faster than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity).
X (threshold) was derived as XV1 at slow speed minus XV3 at fast speed and the mean change from baseline (prior to the first injection cycle in the hamstrings) was calculated."|Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Baseline and Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 5 U/kg and 10 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the hamstring of the (most) affected leg were >3 to ≤7.5 U/kg and >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg, respectively. Analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤3 or >12.5 U/kg. Only data from subjects injected in the hamstring are presented.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
831963|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Prior to the First Injection Cycle in the Hamstrings) in XV3 Derived From the TS, in the Knee Flexors Assessed at the Knee Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|"The TS was used to measure spasticity in the knee flexors at the knee joint of the (most) affected lower limb.
The Investigator assessed muscle reactions of the tested muscle to passive stretch at two velocities: SLOW = V1: as slow as possible (slower than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity); FAST = V2 (speed of the limb segment falling under gravity) or V3 (as fast as possible - faster than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity).
The mean change from baseline (prior to the first injection cycle in the hamstrings) in XV3 at fast speed was derived."|Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Baseline and Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 5 U/kg and 10 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the hamstring of the (most) affected leg were >3 to ≤7.5 U/kg and >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg, respectively. Analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤3 or >12.5 U/kg. Only data from subjects injected in the hamstring are presented.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
831964|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Prior to the First Injection Cycle in the Hamstrings) in XV1 Derived From the TS, in the Knee Flexors Assessed at the Knee Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|"The TS was used to measure spasticity in the knee flexors at the knee joint of the (most) affected lower limb.
The Investigator assessed muscle reactions of the tested muscle to passive stretch at two velocities: SLOW = V1: as slow as possible (slower than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity); FAST = V2 (speed of the limb segment falling under gravity) or V3 (as fast as possible - faster than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity).
The mean change from baseline (prior to the first injection cycle in the hamstrings) in XV1 at slow speed was derived."|Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Baseline and Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 5 U/kg and 10 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the hamstring of the (most) affected leg were >3 to ≤7.5 U/kg and >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg, respectively. Analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤3 or >12.5 U/kg. Only data from subjects injected in the hamstring are presented.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
831965|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From DB Baseline in Spasticity Grade (Y) Derived From the TS, in the GSC Assessed at the Ankle Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|"The mean change from baseline (in the DB study) in Y was derived from the TS.
Y was graded according to the following scale: Grade 0 - no resistance throughout passive movement (best outcome); Grade 1 - slight resistance throughout passive movement; Grade 2 - clear catch at precise angle, interrupting passive movement, followed by release; Grade 3 - fatigable clonus (less than 10 sec when maintaining pressure) occurring at a precise angle, followed by release; Grade 4 - unfatigable clonus (more than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at a precise angle; Grade 5 - joint immovable (worst outcome).
Catch without release was graded 0 if XV1=XV3, ‘unratable’ spasticity otherwise; catch with 'minimal' release was graded 2 if XV3 was consistent and consistently less than XV1.
Angle 0 = position of minimal stretch of the tested muscle. For Grades 0 and 1, spasticity angle X = 0 by definition."|DB Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 10 U/kg and 15 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the GSC of the (most) affected leg were >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg and >12.5 to ≤17.5 U/kg, respectively. The analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤7.5 or >17.5 U/kg.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
831966|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From DB Baseline in Spasticity Angle (X) Derived From the TS, in the GSC Assessed at the Ankle Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|"The TS was used to measure spasticity in the GSC at the ankle joint of the (most) affected lower limb.
The Investigator assessed muscle reactions of the tested muscle to passive stretch at two velocities: SLOW = V1: as slow as possible (slower than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity); FAST = V2 (speed of the limb segment falling under gravity) or V3 (as fast as possible - faster than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity).
X (threshold) was derived as XV1 at slow speed minus XV3 at fast speed and the mean change from DB baseline was calculated."|DB Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 10 U/kg and 15 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the GSC of the (most) affected leg were >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg and >12.5 to ≤17.5 U/kg, respectively. The analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤7.5 or >17.5 U/kg.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
831967|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From DB Baseline in Angle of Catch (XV3) Derived From the TS, in the GSC Assessed at the Ankle Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|"The TS was used to measure spasticity in the GSC at the ankle joint of the (most) affected lower limb.
The Investigator assessed muscle reactions of the tested muscle to passive stretch at two velocities: SLOW = V1: as slow as possible (slower than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity); FAST = V2 (speed of the limb segment falling under gravity) or V3 (as fast as possible - faster than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity).
The mean change from DB baseline in XV3 at fast speed was derived."|DB baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 10 U/kg and 15 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the GSC of the (most) affected leg were >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg and >12.5 to ≤17.5 U/kg, respectively. The analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤7.5 or >17.5 U/kg.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
831968|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From DB Baseline in Angle of Arrest (XV1) Derived From the Tardieu Scale (TS), in the GSC Assessed at the Ankle Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|"The TS was used to measure spasticity in the GSC at the ankle joint of the (most) affected lower limb.
The Investigator assessed muscle reactions of the tested muscle to passive stretch at two velocities: SLOW = V1: as slow as possible (slower than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity); FAST = V2 (speed of the limb segment falling under gravity) or V3 (as fast as possible - faster than the rate of natural drop of the limb segment under gravity).
The mean change from DB baseline in XV1 at slow speed was derived."|DB baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 10 U/kg and 15 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the GSC of the (most) affected leg were >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg and >12.5 to ≤17.5 U/kg, respectively. The analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤7.5 or >17.5 U/kg.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
831969|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Goal Attainment Scale (GAS) Score|Individual goals were defined prior to treatment in each treatment period. The GAS is a functional scale used to measure progress towards individual therapy goals. Individual goals were defined for each subject by the physician, and the child's parents (caregiver) where applicable, prior to treatment. After treatment in each treatment cycle, the GAS for each goal was rated using a defined scale (-2: Much less than expected outcome, -1: Somewhat less than expected outcome, 0: Expected outcome, 1: Somewhat more than expected outcome, and 2: Much more than expected outcome).|Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 10 U/kg and 15 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the GSC of the (most) affected leg were >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg and >12.5 to ≤17.5 U/kg, respectively. The analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤7.5 or >17.5 U/kg.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831970|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) Score|Global assessment of treatment response based on changes since the first injection in the DB study. PGA Scale of the Treatment Response: Global assessment of treatment response was assessed by asking the Investigator the following question: “how would you rate the response to treatment in the subject’s lower limb(s) since the first injection in the DB study?” Answers were made on a 9 point rating scale (-4: markedly worse, -3: much worse, -2: worse, -1: slightly worse, 0: no change, +1: slightly improved, +2: improved, +3: much improved, +4: markedly improved).|Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4.|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 10 U/kg and 15 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the GSC of the (most) affected leg were >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg and >12.5 to ≤17.5 U/kg, respectively. The analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤7.5 or >17.5 U/kg.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831971|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Prior to the First Injection Cycle in Upper Limb Muscle Groups) in the Mean MAS Score for All Injected Upper Limb Muscle Groups From Treatment Cycle 2 Onwards|Baseline was defined as the value obtained prior to the first injection in the upper limb(s). The MAS is a 6-point scale which measures the intensity of muscle tone by measuring the resistance of the muscle to passive lengthening or stretching. The investigator graded muscle tone in the GSC from 0 (no increase in tone) to 4 (affected parts rigid in flexion or extension). No subjects were treated in the upper limb in Treatment Cycle 4.|Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 2 and 3.|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. Only data from subjects injected in the upper limb muscle groups are presented. TC = Treatment Cycle.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831972|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Prior to the First Injection Cycle in the Hamstrings) in the MAS Score in the Knee Flexors Assessed at the Knee Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|Baseline was defined as the value obtained prior to the first injection in the hamstrings. The MAS is a 6-point scale which measures the intensity of muscle tone by measuring the resistance of the muscle to passive lengthening or stretching. The investigator graded muscle tone in the GSC from 0 (no increase in tone) to 4 (affected parts rigid in flexion or extension).|Baseline and Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Baseline and Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4.|ITT population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 5 U/kg and 10 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the hamstring of the (most) affected leg were >3 to ≤7.5 U/kg and >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg, respectively. Analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤3 or >12.5 U/kg. Only data from subjects injected in the hamstring are presented.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831973|NCT01251380|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (in the DB Study) in the MAS Score in the GSC Assessed at the Ankle Joint of the (Most) Affected Lower Limb|Baseline for the 'change from DB baseline' was defined as the baseline of Study 141 for all treatment cycles. The Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) is a 6-point scale which measures the intensity of muscle tone by measuring the resistance of the muscle to passive lengthening or stretching. The investigator graded muscle tone in the GSC from 0 (no increase in tone) to 4 (affected parts rigid in flexion or extension).|DB baseline; Weeks 4 and 12 of Treatment Cycles 1 to 3; Week 4 of Treatment Cycle 4|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population where n represents number of subjects with data. For Dysport 10 U/kg and 15 U/kg, the actual administered doses in the GSC of the (most) affected leg were >7.5 to ≤12.5 U/kg and >12.5 to ≤17.5 U/kg, respectively, in the OL study. The analysis excluded subjects with doses ≤7.5 or >17.5 U/kg.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831974|NCT01251380|Primary|Number of Subjects With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Reported in the Double Blind (DB) + Open Label (OL) Period.|Adverse events (AEs) were monitored from the time of informed consent to the end of the study. All AEs were elicited by direct, non-leading questioning or by spontaneous reports.|From baseline (Day 1) until end of study (Week 40) of Cycle 1 and up to Week 28 of Cycles 2 to 4.|Safety Population - all enrolled subjects. One subject received placebo in the DB study and two treatment cycles of Dysport in the OL study. However, as both Dysport treatments were outside of the ranges specified (≤7.5 U/kg in Treatment Cycle 1 and Treatment Cycle 2), the subject was excluded from the analysis (no TEAEs reported for this subject).||participants|||Number
831975|NCT01251588|Secondary|Number of Participants Having Subsequent Surgical Procedures (SSPs) in Target Knee||Years 2 through 5 post treatment (MACI or microfracture)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831976|NCT01251588|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||Years 2 through 5 post treatment (MACI or microfracture)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831977|NCT01251588|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)||Years 2 through 5 post treatment (MACI or microfracture)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831978|NCT01251588|Secondary|Change From MACI00206 Baseline in the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score|The EQ-5D is a standardized instrument for use as a measure of health outcome (see the EuroQOL Website for details: www.euroqol.org). Applicable to a wide range of health conditions and treatments, it provides a simple descriptive profile and a single index value for health status. The EQ Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used to record the respondents’ self-rated health status on a vertical graduated (0-100) VAS where 0 is ‘the worst health you can imagine’ and 100 is ‘the best health you can imagine’.|MACI00206 Baseline and Week 260|65 of the 65 MACI-treated patients and 58 of the 63 microfracture-treated patients enrolled in MACI00809 completed the EQ-5D VAS Score at Week 260.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
831979|NCT01251588|Secondary|Change From MACI00206 Baseline in the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) Physical and Mental Component Scores|"The SF-12 is a subset of the 36-Item Short–Form Health Survey (SF-36) and includes 8 subscales (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health) that are used to calculate the physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) summary component scores.
MCS and PCS are summarized as Z-scores using standard SF-12 scoring and a US population means. The Z-score indicates how many standard deviations a score is from the population mean. Higher values reflect better health. Changes from Baseline are reported."|MACI00206 Baseline and Week 260|65 of the 65 MACI-treated patients and 55 of the 63 microfracture-treated patients enrolled in MACI00809 completed the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey at Week 260.||Z-score||Full Range|Mean
831980|NCT01251588|Secondary|Change From MACI00206 Baseline in the Patient's Evaluation of Overall Knee Condition Using the Modified Cincinnati Knee Rating System|The Modified Cincinnati Knee Rating System is a self-assessment of the intensity of sports participation, functional limitations, and the ability to participate in different types of sports. The Modified Cincinnati Knee Rating System overall knee condition score ranges from 1 (poor) to 10 (excellent).|MACI00206 Baseline and Week 260|65 of the 65 MACI-treated patients and 59 of the 63 microfracture-treated patients enrolled in MACI00809 completed the Modified Cincinnati Knee Rating System at Week 260.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
831981|NCT01251588|Secondary|Change From MACI00206 Baseline in the Patient's Evaluation of Overall Knee Condition Using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form|"The IKDC Subjective Knee Evaluation Form is a validated knee-specific measure of symptoms, function, and sports activity that is appropriate for patients with a wide variety of knee problems. The form consists of 18 items covering the domains of symptoms, functioning during activities of daily living and sports, and current function of the knee.
The IKDC Subjective Knee Evaluation Form is scored by summing the scores for the individual items and then transforming the score to a scale that ranges from 0 to 100. The transformed score is interpreted as a measure of function such that higher scores represent higher levels of function and lower levels of symptoms. A score of 100 is interpreted to mean no limitation with activities of daily living or sports activities and the absence of symptoms."|MACI00206 Baseline and Week 260|64 of the 65 MACI-treated patients and 59 of the 63 microfracture-treated patients enrolled in MACI00809 completed the IKDC form at Week 260.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
831982|NCT01251588|Secondary|Change From MACI00206 Baseline in the Remaining 3 Subscales (Activities of Daily Living, Quality of Life, and Other Symptoms) of KOOS|The KOOS is a validated knee-specific instrument developed to assess the patients' opinion of their knee and associated problems. KOOS consists of 5 subscales: Pain, Function in sports and recreational activities, other Symptoms, Function in activities of daily living (ADL), and knee related Quality of life (QOL). A 5-point Likert scale was used to record the response to each item ranging from 0 (no problems) to 4 (extreme problems). Within each subscale, items were added up and normalized to a value between 0 (extreme problems) and 100 (no problems). Subscales are not combined to calculate a total score.|MACI00206 Baseline and Week 260|Analysis population includes all participants who completed each KOOS subscale at Week 260.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
831983|NCT01251588|Secondary|Average Time to Treatment Failure|"ANALYSIS NOT DONE: The planned analyses concerning time to treatment failure were not conducted due to the small number of per protocol treatment failure cases. The number of per protocol treatment failures in each treatment group are reported here.
Patients were considered as a treatment failure if all of the following 5 criteria were met:
Patient’s global assessment of their knee joint compared to Baseline was the same or worse
Physician’s global assessment of the patient’s knee joint compared to Baseline was the same, worse, or significantly worse.
Percent improvement from Baseline in KOOS Pain score was less than 10%.
Physician diagnostic evaluation of failure excluded etiologies (eg, meniscal tear) other than failed treatment of the index lesion.
The physician decided that surgical re-treatment of the index lesion(s) was required that involved either extensive debridement for lesion expansion, violation of the subchondral bone, or ACI."|Up to 260 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831984|NCT01251588|Secondary|The Proportion of Patients in Each Treatment Group Assessed as Treatment Failures|"Patients were considered as a treatment failure if all of the following 5 criteria were met:
Patient's global assessment of their knee joint compared to Baseline was the same or worse
Physician's global assessment of the patient's knee joint compared to Baseline was the same, worse, or significantly worse.
Percent improvement from Baseline in KOOS Pain score was less than 10%.
Physician diagnostic evaluation of failure excluded etiologies (eg, meniscal tear) other than failed treatment of the index lesion.
The physician decided that surgical re-treatment of the index lesion(s) was required that involved either extensive debridement for lesion expansion, violation of the subchondral bone, or ACI."|Years 2 through 5 post treatment (MACI or microfracture)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831985|NCT01251588|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Who Achieve at Least a 10-point Improvement From MACI00206 Baseline in KOOS Pain and Function (Sports and Recreational Activities) Scores|A responder is defined as a participant with at least a 10-point improvement in both the KOOS Pain and Function (Sports and Recreational activities) scores from MACI00206 Baseline scores.|Up to week 260|||Participants|||Count of Participants
831986|NCT01251588|Secondary|Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Assessments of Degree of Defect Fill|MRI was assessed by the independent blinded evaluators by means of consensus. The number of participants with a degree of defect fill of >50% is reported.|Week 260|all participants with an MRI at Week 260||Participants|||Count of Participants
832577|NCT01256567|Secondary|Clearance (Cl) of Ramucirumab|Clearance (Cycle 1) and at steady state (Clss, Cycle 4) of ramucirumab are provided.|Day 1 of Cycle 1 and Cycle 4 (cycle=21 days)|All participants with evaluable clearance data at the specified time points.||milliliters per hour (mL/hr)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831987|NCT01251588|Secondary|Change From MACI00206 Baseline for the Participant's KOOS Pain and Function (Sports and Recreational Activities) Scores|The KOOS is a validated knee-specific instrument developed to assess the patients' opinion of their knee and associated problems. KOOS consists of 5 subscales: Pain, Function in sports and recreational activities, other Symptoms, Function in activities of daily living (ADL), and knee related Quality of life (QOL). A 5-point Likert scale was used to record the response to each item ranging from 0 (no problems) to 4 (extreme problems). Within each subscale, items were added up and normalized to a value between 0 (extreme problems) and 100 (no problems). Subscales are not combined to calculate a total score.|MACI00206 Baseline and Week 260|Analysis population includes all participants who completed each KOOS subscale at Week 260.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
831988|NCT01251588|Primary|Change From MACI00206 Baseline for the Participant's Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome (KOOS) Pain and Function (Sports and Recreational Activities) Scores.|The KOOS is a validated knee-specific instrument developed to assess the patients' opinion of their knee and associated problems. KOOS consists of 5 subscales: Pain, Function in sports and recreational activities, other Symptoms, Function in activities of daily living (ADL), and knee related Quality of life (QOL). A 5-point Likert scale was used to record the response to each item ranging from 0 (no problems) to 4 (extreme problems). Within each subscale, items were added up and normalized to a value between 0 (extreme problems) and 100 (no problems). Subscales are not combined to calculate a total score.|MACI00206 Baseline to Week 156|The analysis population (n=128) consists of a subpopulation of participants enrolled in the SUMMIT study (n=144). 65 of 65 MACI treated patients and 57 of 63 microfracture-treated patients completed the KOOS at Week 156.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
831989|NCT01251614|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Children's Depression Inventory: Short (CDI:S)|The CDI:S is a short 10-item self-rated symptom-oriented scale used to screen for depressive symptoms. CDI:S scores range from 0 to 100, with a lower score indicating fewer depressive symptoms.|Baseline, Period A, Weeks 4, 8, and 16|LOCF imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population with available data at baseline.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831990|NCT01251614|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PedsQL Over Time|The PedsQL Measurement Model measures health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in children and adolescents. The 23-item PedsQL Generic Core Scale includes Physical, Emotional, Social, School Functioning dimensions. Each item is scored from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale, so that higher scores indicate better HRQOL; the total score therefore ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best).|Baseline, Period A, Weeks 4 and 8, Period C, Weeks 0 and 4, Period D, Weeks 0, 11, 28, and 52|LOCF imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population with available data at baseline.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831991|NCT01251614|Secondary|Time to PASI 50/75/90/100 Response in Period A|Participants who did not have a response during Period A were censored.|Period A, 16 weeks|Analysis was conducted in the intent to-treat (ITT) population.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
831992|NCT01251614|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CDLQI = 0 Over Time|The Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) is a 10-item questionnaire to measure the quality of life in children aged from 4 to 16 years. Each question is scored from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much). The CDLQI is calculated by summing the score of each question resulting in a maximum of 30 and a minimum of 0. The higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired and a score of 0 indicates no impairment in quality of life.|Period A, Weeks 4, 8 and 16, Period C, Weeks 0 and 4, Period D, Weeks 0, 11, 28, and 52|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the intent to-treat (ITT) population.||percentage of participants|||Number
831993|NCT01251614|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CDLQI Over Time|The Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) is a 10-item questionnaire to measure the quality of life in children aged from 4 to 16 years. Each question is scored from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much). The CDLQI is calculated by summing the score of each question resulting in a maximum of 30 and a minimum of 0. The higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired.|Baseline, Period A, Weeks 4, and 8, Period C, Weeks 0 and 4, Period D, Weeks 0, 11, 28, and 52|LOCF imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population with available data at baseline.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
831994|NCT01251614|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in PASI Score Over Time|PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis).|Baseline, Period A, Weeks 4, 8, 11 and 16, Period C, Weeks 0 and 16, Period D, Weeks 0, 16, 28, 40 and 52|LOCF imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
831995|NCT01251614|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 100 Response Over Time|"PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis).
A PASI 100 response is a 100% reduction (improvement) from Baseline in PASI score."|Baseline, Period A, Weeks 4, 8, and 11, Period C, Weeks 0 and 16, Period D, Weeks 0, 16, 28, 40 and 52|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
831996|NCT01251614|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 90 Response Over Time|"PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis).
A PASI 90 response is at least a 90% reduction (improvement) from Baseline in PASI score."|Baseline, Period A, Weeks 4, 8 and 11, Period C, Weeks 0 and 16, Period D, Weeks 0, 16, 28, 40 and 52|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
832018|NCT01251653|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) Tau,ss of Afatinib|Area under the concentration-time curve of Afatinib in plasma over a uniform dosing interval t at steady state.|PK samples were taken at hours; 167:55, 479:55, 481:05, 482:05, 483:05, 485:05, 487:05 and on day 22 at hours; -0:10, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23:55|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) was a subset of the Treated Set that included all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom at least 1 valid plasma concentration was available.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
831998|NCT01251614|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50 Response Over Time|"PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis).
A PASI 50 response is at least a 50% reduction (improvement) from Baseline in PASI score."|Baseline, Period A, Weeks 4, 8, 11 and 16, Period C, Weeks 0 and 16, Period D, Weeks 0, 16, 28, 40 and 52|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
831999|NCT01251614|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants Achieving a PGA of Cleared (0) Over Time"|"The PGA is a 6-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the evaluation. The degree of overall lesion severity was evaluated using the following categories: 0 (Cleared): No evidence of scaling, erythema, or plaque elevation; 1 (Minimal): Occasional fine scale over <5% of lesions, faint erythema, minimal plaque elevation; 2 (Mild): Fine scale dominates, light red coloration, mild plaque elevation; 3 (Moderate): Course scale dominates, moderate red coloration, moderate plaque elevation; 4 (Marked): Thick non-tenacious scale dominates, bright red coloration, marked plaque elevation; 5 (Severe): Very thick tenacious scale predominates, dusky to deep red coloration, severe plaque elevation.
The percentage of participants achieving a score of clear (0) is reported."|Period A, Weeks 4, 8, 11 and 16, Period C, Weeks 0 and 16, Period D, Weeks 0, 16, 28, 40 and 52|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
832000|NCT01251614|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants Achieving a PGA of Cleared (0) or Minimal (1) Over Time"|The PGA is a 6-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the evaluation. The degree of overall lesion severity was evaluated using the following categories: 0 (Cleared): No evidence of scaling, erythema, or plaque elevation; 1 (Minimal): Occasional fine scale over <5% of lesions, faint erythema, minimal plaque elevation; 2 (Mild): Fine scale dominates, light red coloration, mild plaque elevation; 3 (Moderate): Course scale dominates, moderate red coloration, moderate plaque elevation; 4 (Marked): Thick non-tenacious scale dominates, bright red coloration, marked plaque elevation; 5 (Severe): Very thick tenacious scale predominates, dusky to deep red coloration, severe plaque elevation. The percentage of participants achieving a score of clear (0) or minimal (1) is reported.|Period A, Weeks 4, 8 and 11, Period C, Weeks 0 and 16, Period D, Weeks 0, 16, 28, 40 and 52|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
832001|NCT01251614|Secondary|Time to Loss of Disease Control for Participants Who Entered Period B|"Loss of disease control was defined as a worsening of PGA scores in comparison to Week 16 of Period A by at least 2 grades after treatment withdrawal. The PGA is a 6-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the evaluation. Scores range from 0 (no evidence of scaling, erythema, or plaque elevation) to 5 (very thick tenacious scale predominates, dusky to deep red coloration, severe plaque elevation).
Participants who did not lose disease control in period B continued off drug into period D and were observed off-drug until they finally lost disease control or until the end of the 52 weeks of period D."|Period B (36 weeks) and Period D (52 weeks)|This analysis was conducted in the ITT population who entered period B, no imputation was used.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832002|NCT01251614|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants Achieving a PGA of Cleared (0) or Minimal (1) Upon Re-Treatment in Period C"|The PGA is a 6-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the evaluation. The degree of overall lesion severity was evaluated using the following categories: 0 (Cleared): No evidence of scaling, erythema, or plaque elevation; 1 (Minimal): Occasional fine scale over < 5% of lesions, faint erythema, minimal plaque elevation; 2 (Mild): Fine scale dominates, light red coloration, mild plaque elevation; 3 (Moderate): Course scale dominates, moderate red coloration, moderate plaque elevation; 4 (Marked): Thick non-tenacious scale dominates, bright red coloration, marked plaque elevation; 5 (Severe): Very thick tenacious scale predominates, dusky to deep red coloration, severe plaque elevation. The percentage of participants achieving a score of clear (0) or minimal (1) is reported.|Period C, Week 16|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the ITT population who entered Period C.||percentage of participants|||Number
832003|NCT01251614|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) Score at Week 16|The PedsQL Measurement Model measures health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in children and adolescents. The 23-item PedsQL Generic Core Scale includes Physical, Emotional, Social, School Functioning dimensions. Each item is scored from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale, so that higher scores indicate better HRQOL; the total score therefore ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best).|Baseline and Week 16|LOCF imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population; only participants with Baseline and at least one post-baseline value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832004|NCT01251614|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) Score at Week 16|The Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) is a 10-item questionnaire to measure the quality of life in children aged from 4 to 16 years. Each question is scored from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much). The CDLQI is calculated by summing the score of each question resulting in a maximum of 30 and a minimum of 0. The higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired.|Baseline and Week 16|Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population; only participants with Baseline and at least one post-baseline value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832005|NCT01251614|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 100 Response at Week 16|"PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis).
A PASI 100 response is a 100% reduction (improvement) from Baseline in PASI score at Week 16."|Baseline and Week 16|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population.||percentage of participants|||Number
832019|NCT01251653|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival was defined as the time from the first administration of study medication to the time of death from any cause.|From the first administration of study medication to the time of death|TS, MTD cohort||Weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832578|NCT01256567|Secondary|Half Life (t 1/2) of Ramucirumab||Day 1 of Cycles 1 and 4 (cycle=21 days)|All participants with evaluable t1/2 data at the specified time points.||days||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832006|NCT01251614|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 90 Response at Week 16|"PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis).
A PASI 90 response is at least a 90% reduction (improvement) from Baseline in PASI score at Week 16."|Baseline and Week 16|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population.||percentage of participants|||Number
832007|NCT01251614|Primary|"Percentage of Participants Achieving a Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PGA) of Cleared (0) or Minimal (1) at Week 16"|"The PGA is a 6-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the evaluation. The degree of overall lesion severity was evaluated using the following categories:
0 (Cleared): No evidence of scaling, erythema, or plaque elevation;
1 (Minimal): Occasional fine scale over <5% of lesions, faint erythema, minimal plaque elevation;
2 (Mild): Fine scale dominates, light red coloration, mild plaque elevation;
3 (Moderate): Course scale dominates, moderate red coloration, moderate plaque elevation;
4 (Marked): Thick non-tenacious scale dominates, bright red coloration, marked plaque elevation;
5 (Severe): Very thick tenacious scale predominates, dusky to deep red coloration, severe plaque elevation.
The percentage of participants achieving a score of clear (0) or minimal (1) is reported."|Week 16|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
832008|NCT01251614|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 Response at Week 16|PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). A PASI 75 response is defined as at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from Baseline in PASI score at Week 16.|Baseline and Week 16|Non-responder imputation was used, the analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population.||percentage of participants|||Number
832009|NCT01251653|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss) of Docetaxel|Apparent volume of distribution at steady state (Vss) of Docetaxel.|PK samples were taken on day 1 at hours; -0:05, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23:55 and on day 22 at hours; -0:10, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23:55|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) was a subset of the Treated Set that included all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom at least 1 valid plasma concentration was available.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832010|NCT01251653|Secondary|Total Clearance (CL) of Docetaxel|Total Clearance (CL) of Docetaxel from plasma.|PK samples were taken on day 1 at hours; -0:05, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23:55 and on day 22 at hours; -0:10, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23:55|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) was a subset of the Treated Set that included all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom at least 1 valid plasma concentration was available.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832011|NCT01251653|Secondary|Cmax of Docetaxel|Maximum concentration of docetaxel in plasma.|PK samples were taken on day 1 at hours; -0:05, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23:55 and on day 22 at hours; -0:10, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23:55|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) was a subset of the Treated Set that included all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom at least 1 valid plasma concentration was available.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832012|NCT01251653|Secondary|AUC 0-24 of Docetaxel|Area under the concentration-time curve of docetaxel in plasma over the time interval from 0 up to 24 hours|PK samples were taken on day 1 at hours; -0:05, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23:55 and on day 22 at hours; -0:10, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23:55|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) was a subset of the Treated Set that included all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom at least 1 valid plasma concentration was available.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832013|NCT01251653|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss) of Gemcitabine|Apparent volume of distribution at steady state (Vss) of Gemcitabine.|PK samples were taken on day 1 at hours; -0:05, 0:30, 1, 1:30, 2, 3 and on day 22 at hours; -0:10, 0:30, 1, 1:30, 2, 3|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) was a subset of the Treated Set that included all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom at least 1 valid plasma concentration was available.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832014|NCT01251653|Secondary|Total Clearance (CL) of Gemcitabine|Total Clearance (CL) of Gemcitabine from plasma.|PK samples were taken on day 1 at hours; -0:05, 0:30, 1, 1:30, 2, 3 and on day 22 at hours; -0:10, 0:30, 1, 1:30, 2, 3|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) was a subset of the Treated Set that included all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom at least 1 valid plasma concentration was available.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832015|NCT01251653|Secondary|Cmax of Gemcitabine|Maximum concentration of Gemcitabine in plasma.|PK samples were taken on day 1 at hours; -0:05, 0:30, 1, 1:30, 2, 3 and on day 22 at hours; -0:10, 0:30, 1, 1:30, 2, 3|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) was a subset of the Treated Set that included all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom at least 1 valid plasma concentration was available.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832016|NCT01251653|Secondary|AUC 0-tz of Gemcitabine|Area under the concentration-time curve of Gemcitabine in plasma over the time interval from 0 up to the last quantifiable data point|PK samples were taken on day 1 at hours; -0:05, 0:30, 1, 1:30, 2, 3 and on day 22 at hours; -0:10, 0:30, 1, 1:30, 2, 3|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) was a subset of the Treated Set that included all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom at least 1 valid plasma concentration was available.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832017|NCT01251653|Secondary|Cmax,ss of Afatinib|Maximum concentration of Afatinib in plasma at steady state.|PK samples were taken at hours; 167:55, 479:55, 481:05, 482:05, 483:05, 485:05, 487:05 and on day 22 at hours; -0:10, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23:55|The Pharmacokinetic Set (PKS) was a subset of the Treated Set that included all patients who had taken at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom at least 1 valid plasma concentration was available.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832020|NCT01251653|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from the first administration of study medication to the time of disease progression or death, whichever occurred first.|From the first administration of study medication to the time of disease progression or death|TS, MTD cohort||Weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832023|NCT01251653|Secondary|Time to Objective Response According to RECIST v1.1|Objective response according to RECIST v1.1. Objective response is complete response or partial response for patients with measurable disease. Time to objective response is the time from the start of treatment to the date of first documented complete response or partial response. Descriptive analyses has been performed for the time to objective response (N(%) of patients with first occurrence of objective response at 6, 12 and 24 weeks). Onset of objective response is derived for patient with measurable disease.|6 weeks, 12 weeks and 24 weeks|TS||Participants|||Number
832024|NCT01251653|Secondary|Objective Response According to RECIST v1.1|Objective response according to RECIST v1.1. Objective response is complete response or partial response for patients with measurable disease. Missing categories signify that no tumour imaging has been performed post baseline, and therefore the response status could not be assessed.|From first drug administration until 28 days after last drug administration, up to 717 days.|TS||Participants|||Number
832025|NCT01251653|Secondary|Disease Control According to RECIST v1.1|Disease control according to RECIST v1.1 Disease control is complete response, partial response or stable disease for measurable patients and complete response or non−CR/non−PD for non−measurable patients. Missing categories signify that no tumour imaging has been performed post baseline, and therefore the response status could not be assessed.|From first drug administration until 28 days after last drug administration, up to 717 days.|TS||Participants|||Number
832026|NCT01251653|Secondary|Best Overall Response According to RECIST v1.1 Criteria|Best overall response (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours [RECIST] version 1.1) was the best response recorded at any time from the date of the first administration of afatinib or gemcitabine/docetaxel to the end of treatment (EOT). Partial response is for patients with measurable disease. Missing categories signifies that no tumour imaging has been performed post baseline, and therefore the response status could not be assessed.|From first drug administration until 28 days after last drug administration, up to 717 days.|TS||Participants|||Number
832027|NCT01251653|Secondary|The Incidence and Intensity of AEs With Grading According to CTCAE.|The incidence and intensity of adverse events with grading according to CTCAE. The CTCAE grades are: 1 (mild AE), 2 (moderate AE), 3 (severe AE), 4 (life-threatening or disabling AE), 5 (death related to AE).|From first drug administration until 28 days after last drug administration, up to 717 days.|TS||Participants|||Number
832028|NCT01251653|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) in Process for the Determination of the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD).|DLT was based on following criterions: 1. Grade 4 uncomplicated (not associated with fever >38.5° C (Celsius)) neutropenia for ≥7 days. 2. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia concomitant with fever >38.5º C or Grade ≥3 infection. 3. Platelet count of <25x 10^9/L or <50x 10^9/L with bleeding requiring whole blood transfusion. 4. Grade ≥3 non-haematological toxicity (except untreated nausea, untreated vomiting, or untreated diarrhoea). 5. Grade ≥2 decrease in cardiac left ventricular function. 6. Grade ≥2 worsening of renal function as measured by serum creatinine, newly developed proteinuria, or a newly developed decrease in glomerular filtration rate. Toxicity grading was based on National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE) version 3.0|3 weeks|Treated Set (TS)||Participants|||Number
832029|NCT01251757|Secondary|Percentage With Good (<=100mg/dL) Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL) Control|Using the last LDL measurement (fasting or nonfasting) available in the EMR post randomization, we defined good control as an LDL level <= 100 mg/dL.|12 months post randomization|All randomized participants who were taking a statin at the time of randomization and who had at least one post randomization LDL measurement recorded in the EMR. Missing data were not imputed.||percentage with controlled LDL|||Number
832030|NCT01251757|Secondary|Post Intervention Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL) Level|We used the latest LDL (fasting or nonfasting) available during 12 months post randomization. no missing data were imputed.|12 months post randomization|All randomized participants who were taking statin at the time of randomization and who had at least one post randomization LDL measurement recorded in the EMR. Missing data were not imputed.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832031|NCT01251757|Secondary|Percentage With Good (<140/90 mmHg) Blood Pressure Control|Using the mean of last 5 available blood pressure measurements post randomization, we defined BP control as a means systolic BP <140 mmHg and a mean diastolic BP < 90 mmHg.|12 months post randomization|All randomized participants who were taking an ACEI or an ARB at the time of randomization and who had at least one post randomization BP recorded in the EMR. Missing data were not imputed.||percentage of subjects with good control|||Number
832032|NCT01251757|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|Mean of last 5 SBP measurements captured in the electronic medical record for the 12 months post randomization.|12-months post randomization|The analysis sample was restricted to ACEI/ARB users with at least one post intervention SBP measurement recorded in the EMR. We did not impute any missing data.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832033|NCT01251757|Secondary|Percentage With Good (>80%) ACEI/ARB Adherence|Binary indicator of good ACEI/ARB adherence, defined as an mMPR>0.80. 1=yes, 0=no.|12 months post randomization|All randomized participants who were taking an ACEI or an ARB at the time of randomization||Percent with good adherence|||Number
832034|NCT01251757|Secondary|Percentage With Good (>80%) Statin Adherence|Binary indicator of good statin adherence, defined as an mMPR>0.80. 1=yes, 0=no.|12 months post randomization|All randomized participants who were taking statins at the time of randomization.||percent with good adherence|||Number
832035|NCT01251757|Primary|Adherence to Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEIs) and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARBs)|We used medication dispensing data from the Kaiser outpatient pharmacies to calculate a modified medication possession ratio (mMPR) for the subset of randomized participants who were using ACEIs or ARBs. Nominally mMPR provides an estimate of the proportion of days during the follow-up period during which the participant was adherent to their prescribed medications.|12 months post randomization|All randomized participants who were taking an ACEI or an ARB at the time of randomization||mMPR expressed as a fraction||Standard Deviation|Mean
832070|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (APTT) Based Activated Protein-C Resistance (APC)|"The APC resistance assay is a clotting test that measures the ratio of APTT clotting times in the presence and absence of a standard amount of exogenous APC. APC resistance is calculated as the ratio of the clotting time after APC addition over the clotting time with no APC addition.
APC resistance is defined as a poor anticoagulant response of plasma to APC (minimal prolongation of the APTT) and a correspondingly low ratio."|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population with available data||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832036|NCT01251757|Primary|Adherence to Statins|"We used a modification of the Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) as our primary outcome measure. The MPR is computed as the number of days’ supply of medication dispensed during a given time window divided by the time between the first dispensing in the window and the end of the window. Our modified MPR (mMPR) also accounted for medication that was on hand at the start of the window and ignored any days’ supply that would extend beyond the end of the window.
We used medication dispensing data from the Kaiser outpatient pharmacies to calculate a modified medication possession ratio (mMPR) for statins among the subset of randomized participants who were using these drugs. Nominally mMPR provides an estimate of the proportion of days during the follow-up period during which the participant was adherent to their prescribed medications."|12 months post randomization|All randomized participants who were taking statins at the time of randomization||mMPR as a fraction||Standard Deviation|Mean
832037|NCT01251770|Secondary|IV Fluid Intake||12 hours from baseline|||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832038|NCT01251770|Primary|Change in Sodium Levels||Change from baseline in sodium level after 12 hours|||mEq/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832039|NCT01251952|Secondary|To Evaluate the Effect of Ontak on Engraftment of Neutrophils and Platelets Post Transplant at Each Dose.|During hospitalization stay (approximately 2 weeks), participants will receive injections of G-CSF on a daily basis starting on Day 6 and ending when white blood cells have engrafted. Participants usually remain hospitalized until engraftment.|days 0 and 21 post autologous stem cell transplantation||||||
832040|NCT01251952|Secondary|To Evaluate the Effect of Ontak on T Cell CD4/CD8 Reconstitution Post Transplant at Each Dose.||days 0 and 21 post autologous stem cell transplantation||||||
832041|NCT01251952|Secondary|To Evaluate the Effect of Ontak on the Number and Percentage of Regulatory T Cells in the Peripheral Blood Post Transplant at Each Dose Level.||days 0 and 21 post autologous stem cell transplantation||||||
832042|NCT01251952|Primary|Assess Toxicities of Giving Two Doses of Ontak at Days 0 and 21 Post Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in a Dose Escalation Fashion.|After drug infusion, participants will be closely monitored for at least 4 hours for side effects|Up to 21 days post transplant||||||
832043|NCT01251978|Secondary|Visual Acuity (LogMar)||12 months|||LogMar|||Number
832044|NCT01251978|Secondary|Tumor Thickness||baseline and 1 year|||millimeters (mm)||Full Range|Mean
832045|NCT01251978|Primary|To Evaluate the Safety/Efficacy of Intravitreal Injection of High Dose Ranibizumab Combined With TTT + ICG-based Photodynamic Therapy in the Treatment of Choroidal Melanoma by Reporting the Number of Participants With Complications.||1 year|complications were only assessed in the high dose group||participant|||Number
832047|NCT01252134|Secondary|Corneal Staining Extent|Area (extent) of corneal staining was estimated for each of the five regions of the cornea as a percentage i.e., 0%=no staining in the region and 100%=staining covering the entire region). A staining area percentage was calculated for each eye based on the average staining area measured across all five regions, and the eyes were averaged.|8 hours|This reporting group includes all participants who completed the study.||percentage of cornea||Standard Deviation|Mean
832048|NCT01252134|Secondary|Corneal Staining Type|Five regions of the cornea (central, inferior, temporal, superior, and nasal) were evaluated for staining using cobalt light and a #12 Wratten filter. The type of staining was recorded on a scale of 0 to 100 for each corneal region with 0-none, 25=micropunctate, 50=macropunctate, 75=coalescent, and 100=patch. The five regions for each eye were averaged, and the eyes were averaged.|8 hours|This reporting group includes all participants who completed the study.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832049|NCT01252134|Secondary|Subjective Comfort|Subjective comfort was assessed by the participant on a scale of 0 to 100, with 0 being very poor comfort and 100 being excellent comfort. The ratings for the right eye and left eye were averaged.|8 hours|This reporting group includes all participants who completed the study.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832050|NCT01252134|Primary|Ex Vivo Contact Angle|Study lens was removed from the eye according to protocol-specified procedures. The OCA15 Dynamic Contact Angle Instrument was used to observe, record, and calculate contact angle measurements. The measurements from the right eye and left eye were averaged. A lower contact angle measurement indicates a more wettable lens.|8 hours|This reporting group includes all participants who completed the study, minus one response in Synergi group due to a measurement error.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
832051|NCT01252147|Primary|Overall Intra-Rater Reliability of Assessing Overall Eyelash Prominence Using the Japanese Global Eyelash Assessment Scale (GEA-J) at Day 1|Intra-rater (within raters) agreement of the GEA-J scores (1=minimum, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked) to assess eyelash prominence was evaluated by weighted Kappa statistics. Weighted Kappa statistics were calculated for each of 7 rater who evaluated 68 subjects using GEA-J scale with photonumeric guide, assessing agreement between 2 different time points at day 1. The overall intra-rater agreement for Kappa statistics for all raters combined was estimated by pooling Kappa statistics for each rater using a chi-square statistic. The degree of agreement of the point estimates of Kappa statistics was interpreted according to the reference range scale that was pre-defined as: <=0: poor, 0.00-0.20: slightly, 0.21-0.40: fair, 0.41-0.60: moderate, 0.61-0.80: substantial, 0.81-1:00: almost perfect. The 95% confidence interval for Kappa statistics is provided.|Day 1|Enrolled population, defined as all patients who were enrolled in (started) the study.||Kappa statistics||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832069|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Endogenous Thrombin Potential (EPT) Based Activated Protein-C Resistance (APC)|"This assay is based on measurement of the effect of activated protein C on the endogenous thrombin potential, the time integral of thrombin generation initiated in plasma through the extrinsic coagulation pathway.
The APC resistance assay measures the ratio of endogenous thrombin potential in the presence and absence of a standard amount of exogenous APC.
APC resistance is calculated as the ratio of EPT after APC addition over the EPT with no APC addition.
APC resistance is defined as a poor anticoagulant response of plasma to APC (less inhibition of thrombin formation) and a correspondingly higher ratio."|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832052|NCT01252147|Primary|Overall Inter-Rater Reliability of Assessing Overall Eyelash Prominence Using the Japanese Global Eyelash Assessment Scale (GEA-J) at Day 1|Inter-rater agreement (among raters) of the GEA-J scores (1=minimum,2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked) to assess eyelash prominence was evaluated using Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (Kendall’s W). Each of 7 raters who scored 68 subjects’ eyelashes using GEA-J Scale with photonumeric guide at 2 different time points at day 1. The overall inter-rater agreement for Kendall’s W for all raters combined was estimated based on the average of the scores from those 2 different time points. The degree of agreement of the point estimates of Kendall’s W was interpreted according to the reference range scale that was pre-defined as: <=0: poor, 0.00-0.20: slightly, 0.21-0.40: fair, 0.41-0.60: moderate, 0.61-0.80: substantial, 0.81-1:00: almost perfect. The 95% confidence interval for Kendall’s W is provided.|Day 1|Enrolled population, defined as all patients who were enrolled in (started) the study.||Kendall's W||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832053|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Sex Hormone Binding Globulin (SHBG)||Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population with available data||mIU/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832054|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Corticosteroid Binding Globulin||Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population with available data||nmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832055|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Total Cortisol||Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||nmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832056|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Thyroid Stimulating Hormone (TSH)||Baseline top Month 6|Per-protocol population with available data||mIU/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832057|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Tissue Factor Pathway Inhibitor (TFPI)|Tissue Factor Pathway Inhibitor (TFPI) is an anti-coagulation protein that binds to activated protein X.|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832058|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Total Protein S|"Protein S helps to regulate blood clot formation. Protein S exists in two forms: a free form and a complex form. Free protein S combines with activated protein C to degrade coagulation factors VIIIa and Va, slowing down the generation of new thrombin and inhibiting further clotting.
Results are reported as a percent of the amount expected in normal plasma. By definition, the mean value in normal plasma is 100%. The reference range is approximately 70% to 140%; lower for women than for men."|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||percentage of normal||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832059|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Free Protein S|"Protein S helps to regulate blood clot formation. Protein S exists in two forms: a free form and a complex form. Free protein S combines with Protein C to degrade coagulation factors VIIIa and Va, slowing down the generation of new thrombin and inhibiting further clotting.
Results are reported as a percent of the amount expected in normal plasma. By definition, the mean value in normal plasma is 100%. The reference range is approximately 70% to 140%; lower for women than for men."|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||percentage of normal||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832060|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Protein C Antigen|"Protein C helps to regulate blood clot formation. Activated Protein C (APC) combines with Protein S (a cofactor) to degrade coagulation factors VIIIa and Va, slowing down the generation of new thrombin and inhibiting further clotting.
Results are reported as a percent of the amount expected in normal plasma. By definition, the mean value in normal plasma is 100%. The reference range is approximately 70% to 140% in adults."|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||percentage of normal||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832061|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Protein C Activity|"Protein C helps to regulate blood clot formation. Activated Protein C (APC) combines with Protein S (a cofactor) to degrade coagulation factors VIIIa and Va, slowing down the generation of new thrombin and inhibiting further clotting.
Results are reported as a percent of the amount expected in normal plasma. By definition, the mean value in normal plasma is 100%. The reference range is approximately 70% to 140% for adults."|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||percentage of normal||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832062|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Antithrombin|"Antithrombin is a protein in the blood that naturally blocks blood clots from forming.
Results are reported as a percent of the amount expected in normal plasma. By definition, the mean value in normal plasma is 100%. The reference range is approximately 80% to 130%.for adults."|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||percentage of normal||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832063|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Factor VIII|"Clotting factor VIII, also known as anti-hemophilic factor (AHF), functions in blood coagulation by stabilizing fibrin clots.
Results are reported as a percent of the amount expected in normal plasma. By definition, the mean value in normal plasma is 100%. The reference range is approximately 70% to 140%.for adults."|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||percentage of normal||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832064|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Factor VII|"Clotting factor VII, also called proconvertin or autoprothrombin I, functions in blood coagulation.
Results are reported as percent of normal plasma concentrations. By definition, normal plasma contains 100% (1 unit/mL) of each factor. The reference range is approximately 60% to 140% for adults."|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||percentage of normal||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832065|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Factor II|Clotting factor II, also called prothrombin, functions in blood coagulation. Results are reported as percent of normal plasma concentrations. By definition, normal plasma contains 100% (1 unit/mL) of each factor. The reference range is approximately 60% to 140% for adults.|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||percentage of normal||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832066|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Tissue Plasminogen Activator (t-PA)|Tissue plasminogen activator catalyzes the conversion of plasminogen to plasmin, the major enzyme responsible for the breakdown of blood clots.|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||µg/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832067|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Plasminogen|Plasminogen is the precursor of plasmin, which lyses fibrin clots.|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||g/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832068|NCT01252186|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Fibrinogen|Fibrinogen (factor I) is a glycoprotein that helps in the formation of blood clots.|Baseline to Month 6|Per-protocol population||g/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832073|NCT01252186|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Month 6 in Prothrombin Fragment 1+2 Levels|Prothrombin fragment 1+2 is a coagulation factor, released when prothrombin is cleaved by activated factor X. Elevated plasma levels of prothrombin fragment 1+2 indicate high risk of thrombosis.|Baseline to Month 6|Per-Protocol (PP) Population included all data from ITT participants obtained prior to experiencing major protocol violations.||pmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832074|NCT01252238|Primary|Diastolic Function||12 weeks||||||
832075|NCT01252238|Primary|Aortic Compliance||12 weeks||||||
832076|NCT01252238|Primary|Change in Insulin Sensitivity by HOMA at 12 Weeks|The difference (change) in HOMA calculated as Baseline HOMA minus 12-week HOMA value|12 weeks|||HOMA Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832077|NCT01252251|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (OS)||Up to 3 years|||months||Full Range|Median
832078|NCT01252251|Secondary|Safety and Toxicity in This Patient Population.|Safety assessments will consist of monitoring and recording all adverse events, including serious adverse events, the regular monitoring of hematology (including glycosylated hemoglobin and coagulation parameters), blood chemistry (including fasting glucose, thyroid function tests, GH, IGF-1 and prolactin), urinalysis, regular monitoring of vital signs, echocardiography, ECGs, and body weight. Toxicity will be assessed using the NCI-CTC for Adverse Events, version 4.0 (CTCAEv4.0,|16 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
832079|NCT01252251|Secondary|Median Progression Free Survival(PFS)||Up to 3 years|||weeks||Full Range|Median
832080|NCT01252251|Primary|Number of Participants With Stable Disease (SD)|For patients with metastatic uveal melanoma treated with RAD001 and pasireotide LAR.|at 16 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
832081|NCT01252251|Primary|Number of Participants With Partial Response (PR)|For patients with metastatic uveal melanoma treated with RAD001 and pasireotide LAR.|at 16 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
832082|NCT01252251|Primary|Number of Participants With Complete Response (CR)|For patients with metastatic uveal melanoma treated with RAD001 and pasireotide LAR.|at 16 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
832083|NCT01252277|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life.|Change in score on Breast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom Checklist. 43 symptoms, each scored as 0 to 4, are summed to provide a global score (range 0 to 172). Increasing score represents increasing problems with side effects. For change in score over period of intervention, a negative score indicates an improvement in quality of life while a positive score indicates increasing interference with daily activities due to worsening symptoms. Theoretically, the range of change could be -172 to +172.|duration of intervention, baseline to ~ 6 months|Subjects completing intervention||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832084|NCT01252277|Secondary|Change in (DHA+EPA):AA Ratio for Phospholipids in Plasma.|Change (from baseline to end of study) for the ratio derived from levels of DHA, EPA, and Arachadonic Acid (AA); measured as percent of total fatty acid content in the phospholipid compartment of plasma.|baseline to end of intervention (~6 months)|Subjects completing intervention||ratio||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832085|NCT01252277|Secondary|Modulation of Ki-67 Expression|Change (baseline to end of study) in percent of benign breast epithelial cells exhibiting immunostaining for Ki-67|6 month value compared to baseline value|||Change in percent Ki-67 expression||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832086|NCT01252277|Secondary|Modulation of the Risk Biomarker Masood Score|Change in the semiquantitative cytology index score (Masood score) from baseline to end of study. Masood Score range 6 - 24; increasing values denote increasing cytologic abnormality. Thus, negative values for change reflect an improvement, i.e., less cytologic abnormality after intervention.|6 month value compared to baseline value|||change in units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832087|NCT01252277|Primary|The Proportion of Subjects That Complete an Intervention of Lovaza™ 4 Grams Per Day|The proportion of subjects that complete an intervention of Lovaza™ 4 grams per day (~ 1800 mg EPA and 1500 mg DHA) administered for 6 months to premenopausal women under age 55.|6 month visit|||proportion of enrolled participants|||Number
832088|NCT01252290|Secondary|Change in Ki-67 Expression|Immunocytochemical staining for Ki-67 antibody. Percent of 500 benign breast epithelial cells scored that are classified as positively staining.|6 month value compared to baseline value|||change in percent Ki-67 expression||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832089|NCT01252290|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life|Change in score on Breast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom Checklist. Summation score of degree of difficulty (scored 0 to 4 each) with 43 individual activities. Thus total score ranges from 0 to 172. Increasing score represents increasing problems with side effects.|Change from Baseline to Month 6|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
832090|NCT01252290|Secondary|Change in (DHA+EPA):AA Ratio for Phospholipids in Plasma|Change (from baseline to end of study) for the ratio derived from levels of DHA, EPA, and AA (measured as percent of total fatty acid content) in the phospholipid compartment of plasma.|Change from Baseline to Month 6|||ratio||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832091|NCT01252290|Secondary|Modulation of the Risk Biomarker Masood Score|Change in the semiquantitative cytology index score (Masood score) from baseline to end of study. Masood Score range 6 - 24; increasing values denote increasing cytologic abnormality. Thus, negative values for change reflect an improvement, i.e., less cytologic abnormality after intervention.|6 month value compared to baseline value|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832092|NCT01252290|Primary|The Proportion of Subjects That Complete Intervention of Lovaza™ 4 Grams Per Day|To determine the feasibility of an intervention of Lovaza™ 4 grams per day (~ 1800 mg EPA and 1500 mg DHA) administered for 6 months to post-menopausal women under the age of 50.|6 month visit|||proportion of enrolled participants|||Number
832093|NCT01252355|Other Pre-specified|Liver Function: Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Abnormalities (PCSA)|PCSA values are abnormal values considered medically important by the Sponsor according to predefined criteria based on literature review. Hepatic parameters thresholds were defined as follows: Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) >3, 5 or 10 Upper Limit of Normal (ULN); Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) >3, 5 or 10 ULN; Alkaline Phosphatase >1.5 ULN; Total Bilirubin (TB) >1.5 ULN; and ALT >3 ULN and TB >2 ULN.|First study drug intake up to 28 days after last study drug intake, for up to 112 weeks|Safety population as previously defined but including only participants who had post-baseline values.||participants|||Number
832274|NCT01253811|Secondary|Clinical Laboratory Assessments: Haematology: Haematocrit|Clinical laboratory values for haematocrit collected from week 0 to end of trial visit.|Every 6th month, from week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||percentage of red blood cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
832094|NCT01252355|Secondary|Overview of Adverse Events (AEs)|AEs are any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, syndrome, or illness observed by the investigator or reported by the participant during the study.|First study drug intake up to 28 days after last study drug intake, for up to 112 weeks|Safety population: all randomized and treated participants. Participants were included in the treatment group according to the drug actually received.The participant randomized to Teriflunomide 14 mg group who received Teriflunomide 7 mg was analyzed in the Teriflunomide 7 mg group.||participants|||Number
832095|NCT01252355|Secondary|Resource Utilization When Relapse|Resource utilization each time a participant experiences an MS relapse, specifically the number of hospitalizations, the number of over night spent in the hospital and number of intensive care admissions if hospitalized were to be reported.|Up to a maximum of 108 weeks depending on time of enrollment|Data for this outcome was not analyzed because of insufficient data after early study termination.|||||
832096|NCT01252355|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form Generic Health Survey - 36 Items, Version 2 (SF-36v2) Summary Scores at Week 24|SF-36 scale is a generic, self-administered, health-related quality-of-life (QOL) instrument.|Baseline, Week 24|Data for this outcome was not analyzed because of insufficient data after early study termination.|||||
832097|NCT01252355|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS) Total Score at Week 24|FIS is a participant-reported scale that qualifies the impact of fatigue on daily life in participants with MS.|Baseline, Week 24|Data for this outcome was not analyzed because of insufficient data after early study termination.|||||
832098|NCT01252355|Secondary|Time to Relapse: Kaplan-Meier Estimates of the Probability of no Relapse at Week 24, 48, and 72|Probability of no relapse at 24, 48 and 72 weeks was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method on the time to relapse defined as the time from randomization to first EDSS confirmed relapse. Participants free of confirmed relapse (no EDSS confirmed relapse observed on treatment) were censored at the date of the last study drug intake. Kaplan-Meier method consists in computing probabilities of non-occurrence of event at any observed time of event and multiplying successive probabilities for time <=t by any earlier computed probabilities to estimate the probability of being event-free for the amount of time t.|Up to a maximum of 108 weeks depending on time of enrollment|ITT population as previously defined.||percent probability of no relapse||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832099|NCT01252355|Secondary|Brain MRI Assessment: Change From Baseline in Total Lesion Volume (Burden of Disease) at Week 24|The total lesion volume (burden of disease) is the total volumes of hyperintense on T2 plus hypointense on T1 as measured by MRI scan. Least-square means were estimated using a Mixed-effect model with repeated measures (MMRM) on cubic root transformed volume data with factors for treatment, region, IFN-beta dose stratum, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, cubic root transformed baseline burden of disease, and baseline-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 24|ITT population as previously defined but including only participants who had post-baseline data.||milliliter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832100|NCT01252355|Secondary|Brain MRI Assessment: Volume of Gd-enhancing T1-lesions Per MRI Scan|Total volume of Gd-enhancing T1-lesions per scan is the sum of the volumes of Gd-enhancing T1-lesions observed during the treatment period divided by the total number of scans performed during the treatment period.|Up to a maximum of 108 weeks depending on time of enrollment|ITT population as previously defined but including only participants who had post-baseline data.||milliliters per scan|||Number
832101|NCT01252355|Secondary|Time to 12-Week Sustained Disability Progression|The 12-week sustained disability progression was defined as an increase from baseline of at least 1-point in EDSS score (at least 0.5-point for participants with baseline EDSS score >5.5) that persisted for at least 12 weeks. Probability of disability progression was to be estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.|Up to a maximum of 108 weeks depending on time of enrollment|Data for this outcome was not analyzed because of insufficient data after early study termination.|||||
832102|NCT01252355|Secondary|Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Assessment: Number of Gadolinium Enhancing (Gd-enhancing) T1-lesions Per Scan (Poisson Regression Estimates)|Number of Gd-enhancing T1-lesions per scan is the total number of Gd-enhancing T1-lesions that occurred during the treatment period divided by the total number of scans performed during the treatment period. To account for the different number of scans among participants, a Poisson regression model with robust error variance was used (total number of Gd-enhancing T1-lesions as response variable; log-transformed number of scans as offset variable; treatment group, region of enrollment, IFN-beta dose stratum and baseline number of Gd-enhancing T1-lesions as covariates).|Up to a maximum of 108 weeks depending on time of enrollment|ITT population as previously defined but including only participants who had post-baseline data.||lesions per scan||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832103|NCT01252355|Primary|Annualized Relapse Rate (ARR) (Poisson Regression Estimates)|"ARR is the total number of confirmed relapses that occurred during the treatment period divided by the total number of patient-years treated. Each episode of relapse (appearance, or worsening of a clinical symptom that was stable for at least 30 days, that persisted for a minimum of 24 hours in the absence of fever) was to be confirmed by an increase in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score or Functional System scores. To account for the different treatment durations among participants, a Poisson regression model with robust error variance was used (total number of confirmed relapses as response variable; log-transformed treatment duration as offset variable; treatment group, region of enrollment and IFN-beta dose stratum, and number of relapses in the year prior to randomization as covariates)."|Up to a maximum of 108 weeks depending on time of enrollment|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: all randomized and treated participants. Participants were considered in the treatment group to which they were randomized regardless of the drug they actually received.||relapses per patient-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832104|NCT01252810|Secondary|Assessing the Incidence of Renal Biomarker-based Contrast-induced Acute Kidney Injury (CI-AKI) in Subjects Post Administration of Ioforminol or Iopamidol Injections|Analyzing the number of subjects with renal biomarker-based contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI).|2, 6 and 24 hours post Ioforminol and Iopamidol adminstration|Summary of subjects with renal biomarker-based CI-AKI by time point (Per Protocol Population).||Subjects|||Number
832129|NCT01253044|Primary|Brief Symptom Inventory 18 (BSI-18)|To determine if receiving ACT, as compared to PCT, is associated with reduced distress as measured by the BSI-18 General Symptom Index (GSI) at the end of treatment. The BSI-18 GSI summarizes a respondent's overall level of distress. The score used in a normatively based T-score (range 1-100) calculated from the sum of responses. Higher scores are indicative of greater distress.|Baseline and week 12|||T-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
832105|NCT01252810|Secondary|To Determine Incidence Rates of the Overall AEs, Organ-specific AEs (i.e., Delayed Skin Reactions, General Subject Comfort, and Allergic/Immunologic Reactions, Etc.) and SAEs Following Administration|"To determine incidence rates of the overall AEs, organ-specific AEs (i.e., delayed skin reactions, general subject comfort, and allergic/immunologic reactions, etc.) and SAEs following administration of GE-145 or iopamidol.
To determine incidence rates and onset time of biomarker-based and SCr-based CI-AKI following administration of GE-145 or iopamidol.
Summary of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) in greater than of equal to 2% of Subjects."|Time zero equals the date of contrast imaging and for up to 7 days for safety monitoring post contrast administration.|Summary of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) in greater than of equal to 2% of Subjects.||Number of events|||Number
832106|NCT01252810|Primary|Comparison of Overall Image Quality Between Ioforminol and Iopamidol-enhanced Images as Determined by an Independent Reader.|Overall image quality (excellent, adequate or poor) and diagnostic usefulness (diagnostic or non-diagnostic) were assessed using qualitative scales.|After the imaging date for either Ioforminol or Iopamidol.|The measured values are looking at 1) Overall Image Quality and, 2) Diagnostic Usefulness.||Number of subjects|||Number
832107|NCT01252940|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Triglycerides Through Week 48|"The mean (SD) change from baseline in fasting triglycerides through Week 48 was analyzed.
By Week 48, participants FTC/RPV/TDF had received 48 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF, while those in the SBR/Delayed Switch group had received only 24 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF."|Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set who had measurements for triglycerides at both baseline and Week 48 were analyzed.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832108|NCT01252940|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Triglycerides Through Week 24|The mean (SD) change from baseline in fasting triglycerides through Week 24 was analyzed.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set who had measurements for triglycerides at both baseline and Week 24 were analyzed.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832109|NCT01252940|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Direct LDL Cholesterol Through Week 48|"The mean (SD) change from baseline in fasting direct LDL cholesterol (mg/dL) through Week 48 was analyzed.
By Week 48, participants FTC/RPV/TDF had received 48 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF, while those in the SBR/Delayed Switch group had received only 24 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF."|Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set who had measurements for direct LDL cholesterol at both baseline and Week 48 were analyzed.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832110|NCT01252940|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Direct Low-density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol Through Week 24|The mean (SD) change from baseline in fasting direct LDL cholesterol (mg/dL) through Week 24 was analyzed.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set who had measurements for direct LDL cholesterol at both baseline and Week 24 were analyzed.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832111|NCT01252940|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting HDL Cholesterol Through Week 48|"The mean (SD) change from baseline in fasting HDL cholesterol (mg/dL) through Week 48 was analyzed.
By Week 48, participants FTC/RPV/TDF had received 48 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF, while those in the SBR/Delayed Switch group had received only 24 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF."|Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set who had measurements for HDL cholesterol at both baseline and Week 48 were analyzed.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832112|NCT01252940|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting High-density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol Through Week 24|The mean (SD) change from baseline in fasting HDL cholesterol (mg/dL) through Week 24 was analyzed.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set who had measurements for HDL cholesterol at both baseline and Week 24 were analyzed.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832113|NCT01252940|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Total Cholesterol Through Week 48|"The mean (SD) change from baseline in fasting total cholesterol (mg/dL) through Week 48 was analyzed.
By Week 48, participants FTC/RPV/TDF had received 48 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF, while those in the SBR/Delayed Switch group had received only 24 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF."|Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set who had measurements for total cholesterol at both baseline and Week 48 were analyzed.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832114|NCT01252940|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Total Cholesterol Through Week 24|The mean (SD) change from baseline in fasting total cholesterol (mg/dL) through Week 24 was analyzed.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set who had measurements for total cholesterol at both baseline and Week 24 were analyzed.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832115|NCT01252940|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4 Count Through Week 48|"The mean (SD) change in CD4 count was analyzed from baseline through Week 48.
By Week 48, participants FTC/RPV/TDF had received 48 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF, while those in the SBR/Delayed Switch group had received only 24 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF."|Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the Full Analysis Set who had CD4 measurements at both baseline and Week 48 were analyzed.||cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
832116|NCT01252940|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) Count Through Week 24|The mean (SD) change in CD4 count was analyzed from baseline through Week 24.|Baseline to Week 24|Participants in the Full Analysis Set who had CD4 measurements at both baseline and Week 24 were analyzed.||cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
832117|NCT01252940|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48 (FDA Snapshot Analysis)|"The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 48 was analyzed using the FDA snapshot analysis.
By Week 48, participants FTC/RPV/TDF had received 48 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF, while those in the SBR/Delayed Switch group had received only 24 weeks of treatment with FTC/RPV/TDF."|Week 48|Participants in the Full Analysis Set in the FTC/RPV/TDF and the Delayed Switch to FTC/RPV/TDF groups were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
832118|NCT01252940|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 24 (FDA Snapshot Analysis)|The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 24 was analyzed using the FDA snapshot analysis.|Week 24|Full Analysis Set: participants who were randomized into the study and received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
832130|NCT01253070|Secondary|Event-free Survival|Event-free survival (EFS) was defined as the time for registration to failure to achieve CR during induction, relapse or death. Participants without events were censored at date of last follow-up. The median EFS with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method.|Time from registration to death or relapse (up to 10 years)|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832119|NCT01252966|Secondary|Cognitive Performance (Attention)|Change in performance on the Continuous Performance Task (attention) between Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 12). In this task, participants are presented with a series of letters at 2.5s intervals and are instructed to respond by pressing the space bar if the same letter appears twice in a row. The outcome is the change in the number of commission errors (the number of times the participant responded to a non-target at EOT minus baseline). There are a total of 125 trials, with 20 target trials (response required) and 85 non-target trials (no response required); therefore the possible range for the change score is -85 to 85. Negative numbers indicate a decrease in commission errors (better performance at EOT compared to baseline); positive numbers indicate an increase in commission errors (worse performance at EOT compared to baseline); and 0 indicates no change.|Baseline and Week 12 (EOT)|Participants with performance >3SD from the mean at Baseline were excluded as outliers.||Change in number of commission errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
832120|NCT01252966|Secondary|Cognitive Performance (Response Inhibition)|"Change in performance on the Go/No-Go Task (response inhibition) between Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 12). In this task, participants are presented with a series of stimuli (the word PRESS in either green or red). Participants are instructed to respond by pressing the spacebar when the stimulus is green, and to withhold a response when the stimulus is red. The outcome is the change in number of commission errors (failure to withhold a response to a red stimulus) from EOT minus baseline. The potential range for the change score is -42 to 42. Negative numbers indicate a decrease in the number of commission errors (improved performance) from baseline to EOT; positive numbers indicate an increase in commission errors (worse performance); 0 indicates no change."|Baseline and Week 12 (EOT)|Participants with performance >3SD from the mean at baseline were excluded as outliers.||Change in number of commission errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
832121|NCT01252966|Secondary|Cognitive Performance (Working Memory)|Change in performance on the Digit Span Forward task (working memory) between Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 12). In this task, participants are presented with a series of digits on the computer screen at one second intervals. Participants are then required to enter the digits in order. The number of digits in each series ranges from 3 to 7, and the maximum recall span is the length of the largest series entered correctly. The outcome measure is the change score (calculated by subtracting the Baseline score from the end of treatment score). Change scores can range from -4 to 4. Negative numbers indicate worse performance at EOT; positive numbers indicate better performance at EOT; and 0 indicates no change.|Baseline and Week 12 (EOT)|Participants with performance >3SD from the mean at baseline were excluded as outliers.||Change in maximum recall span||Standard Deviation|Mean
832122|NCT01252966|Secondary|Point-prevalence Abstinence at 6-month Follow-up|Daily smoking from the Target Quit Date to 6 month follow-up was assessed by a validated timeline follow-back measure. Based on guidelines for smoking cessation trials, the secondary outcome was 7-day point prevalence abstinence at the 6 month follow-up, and abstinence was defined as no self-reported smoking (even a puff) for at least 7 days, with in-person verification by carbon monoxide breath levels (CO <8ppm). Following standard convention, participants who withdrew or were lost to follow-up were considered smokers.|6 month follow-up|||Percentage of participants|||Number
832123|NCT01252966|Primary|Point-prevalence Abstinence at End of Treatment|Daily smoking, from the Target Quit Date to End of Treatment (EOT), was assessed by a validated timeline follow-back measure. Based on guidelines for smoking cessation trials, the primary outcome was 7-day point prevalence abstinence at EOT, and abstinence was defined as no self-reported smoking (even a puff) for at least 7 days, with in-person verification by carbon monoxide breath levels (CO <8ppm). Following standard convention, participants who withdrew or were lost to follow-up were considered smokers.|End of treatment (Week 12)|||Percentage of participants|||Number
832124|NCT01253018|Secondary|Stroke Impact Scale: Hand Subscale|The Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) is a self-report structured interview consisting of eight domains designed to assess changes in impairment, disabilities, and handicap following stroke that contribute to quality of life. It has been tested and found to be reliable, valid, and sensitive to change in the stroke population. There are four physical domains that that can be analyzed separately. The hand domain was analyzed for this study and the scores for this domain range from 0-100. Higher scores indicate greater function.|Baseline, 12 week and 24 week retention|All participants completing the 12 week intervention including evaluations at baseline, weeks 12 and the 24 week retention evaluation. The change score from baseline to the final (12 week) evaluation was examined. 1 participant in each group did not return for retention and were not included in the retention analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832125|NCT01253018|Secondary|Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT)|The Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) examines UE function based on task performance time, quality of movement, and ability to hold a weight. Functional use and speed of movement are based on fifteen timed activities and two strength activities. It has high inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability. Timed tasks that cannot be completed default to a time score of 120 seconds. Faster times or a lower score in seconds represent better function. Improvement is represented by a decreased time to complete the tasks therefore a negative change score from baseline to follow-up indicates improvement.|Baseline, 12 week, and 24 week retention|All participants completing the 12 week intervention including evaluations at baseline, weeks 4, 8, 12 and at the 24 week retention evaluation. The change score from baseline to the final (12 week) evaluation was examined. 1 participant in each group did not return for retention and were not included in the retention analysis.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
832126|NCT01253018|Secondary|Motor Cortex Excitability Via Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS)||week 12|The severity of the patients enrolled in the study were such that TMS did not evoke the number of motor action potentials needed for analysis.|||||
832127|NCT01253018|Primary|Fugl-Meyer Motor Upper Extremity Assessment|This is a stroke-specific measure of impairment of the upper extremity that has been shown to be valid and reliable with high inter-rater and test-retest reliability. It provides a direct-observational assessment of volitional movement and motor impairment related to reflexes, sensation, and abnormal synergies. Each item on the FM is rated on a three-point ordinal scale (0 = cannot perform, 1 = performs partially, 2 = performs fully). The scale ranges from 0-66 with higher scores representing less motor impairment.|Baseline, 12 week, and 24 week retention|All participants completing the 12 week intervention including evaluations at baseline, weeks 4, 8, 12 and at the 24 week retention evaluation. 1 participant in each group did not return for retention and were not included in the retention analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832132|NCT01253070|Primary|Overall Survival (OS) Rate|Percentage of patients who were alive at 1 year. The analysis was split between patients with having a FLT3 (FMS-like tyrosine kinase-3) ITD (internal tandem duplication) or TKD (tyrosine kinase domain) mutation. The FLT3 mutation testing at baseline was performed centrally for all patients.|1 year|Three participants withdrew consent to protocol treatment and follow-up prior to 1 year post registration (2 ITD; 1 TKD). These participants have been excluded from the primary endpoint analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832133|NCT01253135|Primary|Median Time (in Days) to Wound Closure (Healing) Defined as Skin Re-epithelialization, Without Drainage or Dressing Requirements.|The target wounds were evaluated wound status (open/closed)|All thermal wound injury was done on Day 1. Application of test articles started on Day 2. Target wound assessment was performed on Day 3 and Day 5; subsequent assessments were done Monday through Friday for 2 weeks and subjects exited study on Day 22|ITT Populations: Subjects who participated in version 2 of the protocol. The primary efficacy endpoint was analyzed, using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, to estimate the median time to wound closure over the 21-day treatment period. Any wound which did not heal by Day 21 was censored in the analysis.||days to closure||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832134|NCT01253135|Primary|Time (in Days) to Wound Closure (Healing) Defined as Skin Re-epithelialization, Without Drainage or Dressing Requirements.|The target wounds were evaluated wound status (open/closed).|All thermal wound injury was done on Day 1. Application of test articles started on Day 2. Target wound assessment was performed on Day 3 and Day 5; subsequent assessments were done Monday through Friday for 2 weeks and subjects exited study on Day 22|ITT Populations: Subjects who participated in version 2 of the protocol. Inter-group comparison was done using a paired Prentice-Wilcoxon method, which is applicable to censored data.||days to wound closure||Standard Deviation|Mean
832135|NCT01253148|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|Tumor Response according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1. Complete Response (CR): Complete disappearance of all target and non-target lesions; no new lesions. Partial Response (PR): Applies only to patients with at least one measurable lesion; Greater than or equal to 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of appropriate diameters of all target measurable lesions; No unequivocal progression of non-measurable disease; No new lesions.|End of post treatment follow-up period of up to 20 months|All participants||percentage of participants|||Number
832136|NCT01253148|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (OS)|OS is defined as the duration of time from enrollment to time of death from any cause.|Up to 36 months|All participants||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832137|NCT01253148|Primary|Median Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS is defined as the duration of time from enrollment to time of progression or death from any cause. Progression will be defined as progressive disease in the treated lobe. If progression is seen in a treated lobe, this will be considered a treatment failure. Progressive Disease (PD) according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST) Version 1.1.: At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.|End of post treatment follow-up period of 20 months|All participants||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832138|NCT01253174|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of L-5-methyl-THF|Tmax refers to the time after dosing when a drug attains its highest measurable concentration (Cmax). It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content|up to 12 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||hour||Full Range|Median
832139|NCT01253174|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of DRSP|Tmax refers to the time after dosing when a drug attains its highest measurable concentration (Cmax). It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content|up to 168 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||hour||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832140|NCT01253174|Secondary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Administration up to 72h AUC(0-72h) of DRSP|The AUC is a measure of systemic drug exposure, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample|up to 72 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||ng∙h/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832141|NCT01253174|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of EE|Tmax refers to the time after dosing when a drug attains its highest measurable concentration (Cmax). It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content|up to 96 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||hour||Full Range|Median
832142|NCT01253174|Primary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Administration to the Last Measurement [AUC(0-tlast)] of L-5-methyl-THF (Baseline Uncorrected) Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The baseline uncorrected AUC is a measure of the systemic drug exposure provided by the treatment including the endogenous L-5-methyl-THF level. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of L-5-methyl-THF in each sample.|up to 12 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||nmol∙h/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832143|NCT01253174|Primary|Mean Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of L-5-methyl-THF (Baseline Uncorrected) Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The baseline uncorrected Cmax is a measure of the highest measured drug concentration including the endogenous L-5-methyl-THF level. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of L-5-methyl-THF in each sample.|up to 12 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||nmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832172|NCT01253304|Primary|Pharmacokinetics: Apparent Terminal Elimination Half-life (t1/2)|The half life associated with the terminal rate constant is summarized. This measure was calculated using non-compartmental analysis techniques.|Predose to 336 hours postdose|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265) with evaluable LY2189265 concentration data.||hours||Full Range|Geometric Mean
832144|NCT01253174|Primary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Administration to the Last Measurement [AUC(0-tlast)] of L-5-methyl-THF (Baseline Corrected) Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The baseline corrected AUC is a measure of the systemic drug exposure provided by the treatment excluding the endogenous L-5-methyl-THF level. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples, measuring the concentrations of L-5-methyl-THF in each sample and by subtracting the pre-treatment concentration.|up to 12 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||nmol∙h/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832145|NCT01253174|Primary|Mean Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of L-5-methyl-THF (Baseline Corrected) Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The baseline corrected Cmax is a measure of the highest measured drug concentration provided solely by the treatment after subtracting endogenous L-5-methyl-THF level. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples, measuring the concentrations of L-5-methyl-THF in each sample and by subtracting the pre-treatment concentration.|up to 12 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||nmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832146|NCT01253174|Primary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of DRSP Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The AUC is a measure of systemic drug exposure, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample|up to 168 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||ng∙h/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832147|NCT01253174|Primary|Mean Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of DRSP Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|Cmax refers to the highest measured drug concentration which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample.|up to 168 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832148|NCT01253174|Primary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Administration to the Last Measurement [AUC(0-tlast)] of EE Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The AUC is a measure of systemic drug exposure, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample|up to 96 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||pg∙h/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832149|NCT01253174|Primary|Mean Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of EE Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|Cmax refers to the highest measured drug concentration which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample.|up to 96 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||pg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832150|NCT01253187|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of L-5-methyl-THF|Tmax refers to the time after dosing when a drug attains its highest measurable concentration (Cmax). It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content|up to 12 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||hours||Full Range|Median
832151|NCT01253187|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of DRSP|Tmax refers to the time after dosing when a drug attains its highest measurable concentration (Cmax). It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content|up to 168 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||hours||Full Range|Median
832152|NCT01253187|Secondary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Administration up to 72h AUC(0-72h) of DRSP|The AUC is a measure of systemic drug exposure, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample|up to 72 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||ng·h/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832153|NCT01253187|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of EE|Tmax refers to the time after dosing when a drug attains its highest measurable concentration (Cmax). It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples at various times after dosing, and measuring them for drug content|up to 96 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||hours||Full Range|Median
832154|NCT01253187|Primary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Administration to the Last Measurement [AUC(0-tlast)] of L-5-methyl-THF (Baseline Uncorrected) Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The baseline uncorrected AUC is a measure of the systemic drug exposure provided by the treatment including the endogenous L-5-methyl-THF level. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of L-5-methyl-THF in each sample.|up to 12 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||nmol·h/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832155|NCT01253187|Primary|Mean Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of L-5-methyl-THF (Baseline Uncorrected) Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The baseline uncorrected Cmax is a measure of the highest measured drug concentration including the endogenous L-5-methyl-THF level. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of L-5-methyl-THF in each sample.|up to 12 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||nmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832173|NCT01253304|Primary|Pharmacokinetics: AUC From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC[0-infinity])|This measure was calculated using non-compartmental analysis techniques.|Predose to 336 hours postdose|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265) with evaluable concentration data.||nanograms times hr/milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832156|NCT01253187|Primary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Administration to the Last Measurement [AUC(0-tlast)] of L-5-methyl-THF (Baseline Corrected) Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The baseline corrected AUC is a measure of the systemic drug exposure provided by the treatment excluding the endogenous L-5-methyl-THF level. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples, measuring the concentrations of L-5-methyl-THF in each sample and by subtracting the pre-treatment concentration.|up to 12 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||nmol·h/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832157|NCT01253187|Primary|Mean Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of L-5-methyl-THF (Baseline Corrected) Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The baseline corrected Cmax is a measure of the highest measured drug concentration provided solely by the treatment after subtracting endogenous L-5-methyl-THF level. It is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples, measuring the concentrations of L-5-methyl-THF in each sample and by subtracting the pre-treatment concentration.|up to 12 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||nmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832158|NCT01253187|Primary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Administration to the Last Measurement [AUC(0-tlast)] of DRSP Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The AUC is a measure of systemic drug exposure, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample|up to 168 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||ng·h/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832159|NCT01253187|Primary|Mean Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of DRSP Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|Cmax refers to the highest measured drug concentration which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample|up to 168 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832160|NCT01253187|Primary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Administration to the Last Measurement [AUC(0-tlast)] of EE Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|The AUC is a measure of systemic drug exposure, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample|up to 96 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||pg·h/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832161|NCT01253187|Primary|Mean Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of EE Incl. Bioequivalence (BE) Evaluation|Cmax refers to the highest measured drug concentration which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample|up to 96 hours after administration|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||pg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832162|NCT01253265|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics - Time of Maximum Observed Drug Concentration (Tmax) at Steady State (ss)|tmax,ss = time of maximum observed drug concentration (tmax) at steady state (ss)|Week 10 pre-dose up to 2 weeks post-dose (Week 12)|All randomized participants with analyzable pharmacokinetic data.||days||Full Range|Median
832163|NCT01253265|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics - Maximum Plasma Drug Concentration (Cmax) at Steady State (ss)|Cmax,ss = maximum observed drug concentration (Cmax) at steady state (ss)|Week 10 pre-dose up to 2 weeks post-dose (Week 12)|All randomized participants with analyzable pharmacokinetic data.||micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832164|NCT01253265|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics - Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) at Steady State (ss)|AUCτ,ss= area under the concentration versus time curve (τ) at steady state (ss)|Week 10 pre-dose up to 2 weeks post-dose (Week 12)|All randomized participants with analyzable pharmacokinetic data.||micrograms•day per milliliter(μg•day/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832165|NCT01253265|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Week Endpoint in Lymphocyte Counts||Baseline, 26 weeks|All randomized participants.||10^9 cells per liter (GI/L)||Full Range|Median
832166|NCT01253265|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 26 Week Endpoint in Neutrophil Counts||Baseline, 26 weeks|All randomized participants.||10^9 cells per liter (GI/L)||Full Range|Median
832167|NCT01253265|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline to 16 Week Endpoint in Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)|Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) is a disease related biomarker and measured in millimeters per hour (mm/h).|Baseline, 16 weeks|All randomized participants.||percentage change in ESR||Full Range|Median
832168|NCT01253265|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline to 16 Week Endpoint in C-Reactive Protein|C-reactive protein (CRP) is a disease related biomarker and measured in milligrams per liter.|Baseline, 16 weeks|All randomized participants.||percentage change in C-Reactive Protein||Full Range|Median
832169|NCT01253265|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Effects|Clinically significant events were defined as serious and other non-serious adverse events. A summary of serious and all other non-serious adverse events is located in the Reported Adverse Event module.|Baseline up to 26 weeks|All randomized participants.||participants|||Number
832170|NCT01253304|Primary|Pharmacokinetics: Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F)|The apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase after extra vascular administration is summarized. This measure was calculated using non-compartmental analysis techniques.|Predose to 336 hours postdose|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265) with evaluable LY2189265 concentration data.||liters (L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832171|NCT01253304|Primary|Pharmacokinetics: Apparent Total Plasma Clearance (CL/F)|The apparent total body clearance of drug calculated after extra vascular administration is summarized. This measure was calculated using non-compartmental analysis techniques.|Predose to 336 hours postdose|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265) with evaluable LY2189265 concentration data.||liters/hour (L/h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832275|NCT01253811|Secondary|Clinical Laboratory Assessments: Haematology: Erythrocytes|Clinical laboratory values for erythrocytes collected from week 0 to end of trial visit.|Every 6th month, from week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||10^12 cells/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832174|NCT01253304|Primary|Pharmacokinetics: Area Under the Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time Zero to the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-tlast])|This measure was calculated using non-compartmental analysis techniques.|Predose to 336 hours postdose|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265) with evaluable LY2189265 concentration data.||nanograms times hour/milliliter(ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832175|NCT01253304|Primary|Pharmacokinetics: Time of Maximum Concentration (Tmax)|This measure was calculated using non-compartmental analysis techniques.|Predose to 336 hours postdose|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265) with evaluable LY2189265 concentration data.||hours||Full Range|Median
832176|NCT01253304|Primary|Pharmacokinetics: Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax)|This measure was calculated using non-compartmental analysis techniques.|Predose to 336 hours postdose|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265) with evaluable concentration data.||nanograms/milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832177|NCT01253317|Secondary|Change in Social Avoidance Subscale Scores on the ADAMS From Pre-OLE to Post-OLE|The Anxiety Depression and Mood Scale (ADAMS) is completed by the parent/caregiver and consists of 29 items which are scored on a 4-point rating scale that combines frequency and severity ratings. The Social Avoidance subscale [0 = best; 20 = worst] of the ADAMS is reported as a secondary outcome measure. A negative value indicates a decrease in the Social Avoidance subscale; which represents an improved outcome.|Pre-OLE (visit 1) and post-OLE (after 20 weeks of IGF-1 therapy)|The ADAMS was not completed during the MAD.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
832178|NCT01253317|Secondary|Change From Pre-MAD Apnea Index at Post-OLE|Apnea indices were compared from pre-MAD (prior to initiating treatment) to post-OLE (after 20 weeks of IGF-1 therapy). A negative value indicates a reduction in apnea index; representing an improved outcome. Apnea Index is defined as the number of apneas (≥ 10 seconds in length) occuring within one hour. The Apnea Index is calculated by dividing the number of qualifying apneic events by the number of hours in which they occurred. An apnea index greater than or equal to 5 is considered clinically significant by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM).|pre-MAD (baseline) to post-OLE (after 20 weeks of IGF-1 treatment)|Two subjects enrolled in the MAD did not continue participation in the OLE and one subject was excluded from the analysis because, upon further medical record review, she did not meet diagnostic criteria for Rett syndrome.||apneas per hour||Standard Error|Mean
832179|NCT01253317|Primary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Profile - Areas Under the Curve (AUCt)||60 minutes pre-dose and 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 8.0, and 12.0 hours post-dose on days 1, 8, 15 and 29.|||ng.h/mL||Standard Error|Mean
832180|NCT01253317|Primary|Adverse Events||biweekly during the MAD and every five weeks during the OLE|Subjects that had the same adverse event more than once are counted only one time using the closest relationship to study medication.||Adverse events|||Number
832181|NCT01253343|Primary|Salivary Hormone Correlation With Brief Rating of Aggression by Children and Adolescent (BRACHA) Score.|We collected three saliva samples from each participant over a 24-hour period on one of the initial three hospital days to determine the peripheral concentrations of cortisol, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), and testosterone. We then compared these levels with the participants BRACHA score. We wanted to determine if hormone concentrations could improve the BRACHA's accuracy of predicting pediatric aggression during psychiatric hospitalization.|Collected on one or two days|The number of participants for analysis was supposed to be 24 based on Kelsey's sample size calculation (Kelsey et al., Methods in Observational Epidemiology, 2nd Edition, Table 12-15). However, due to funding constraints we only collected samples from 17 participants.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832182|NCT01253343|Primary|Salivary Hormone Correlation With Brief Rating of Aggression by Children and Adolescent (BRACHA) Score|We collected three saliva samples from each participant over a 24-hour period on one of the initial three hospital days to determine the peripheral concentrations of cortisol, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), and testosterone. We then compared these levels with the participants BRACHA score. We wanted to determine if hormone concentrations could improve the BRACHA's accuracy of predicting pediatric aggression during psychiatric hospitalization.|Collected on one or two days|The number of participants for analysis was supposed to be 24 based on Kelsey's sample size calculation (Kelsey et al., Methods in Observational Epidemiology, 2nd Edition, Table 12-15). However, due to funding constraints we only collected samples from 17 participants.||ul/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832183|NCT01253369|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on RECIST 1.1 criteria on treatment. Per RECIST 1.1 for target lesions: CR is complete disappearance of all target lesions and PR is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference baseline sum LD. PR or better objective response assumes at a minimum incomplete response/stable disease (SD) for the evaluation of non-target lesions and absence of new lesions.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and every 8 weeks on treatment; Treatment continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Treatment duration was a median of 3 cycles range (1-20).|The analysis dataset is comprised of evaluable patients. Patients who had measurable disease at baseline, received at least 1 cycle of therapy and had their disease re-evaluated were considered evaluable for response.||proportion of patients||80% Confidence Interval|Number
832184|NCT01253369|Primary|8-Week Progression-Free Rate|The 8-week progression free rate (PFR) was defined as achieving complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) based on RECIST 1.1 criteria by the time of the first disease assessment (8 weeks). Per RECIST 1.1 for target lesions: CR is complete disappearance of all target lesions; PR is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference baseline sum LD; and SD is neither sufficient decrease to qualify as PR nor sufficient increase to qualify as progressive disease (PD). PD is at least a 20% increase in sum LD, taking as reference the smallest sum on study with at least 5 mm absolute increase. Response needed confirmation within 4 weeks. For non-target lesions, progression-free means no new lesions or unequivocal progression on existing non-target lesions.|For this endpoint, disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and week 8 on treatment; Treatment continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Treatment duration was a median of 3 cycles range (1-20).|The analysis dataset is comprised of evaluable patients. Patients who had measurable disease at baseline, received at least 1 cycle of therapy and had their disease re-evaluated were considered evaluable for response.||proportion of patients||80% Confidence Interval|Number
832185|NCT01253408|Primary|Colonic Transit Geometric Center at 24 Hours|The scintigraphic method is used to measure colonic transit. An isotope is adsorbed on activated charcoal particles and delivered to the colon in a delayed release capsule. Anterior and posterior gamma images are taken hourly. The geometric center (GC) is the weighted average of counts in the different colonic regions. The scale ranges from 1 to 5; a high GC implies faster colonic transit, a GC of 1 implies all isotope is in the ascending colon, and a GC of 5 implies all isotope is in the stool.|24 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832186|NCT01253408|Secondary|Gastric Emptying at 2 and 4 Hours|Proportion of stomach contents emptied at a 2 and 4 hours.|2, 4 hours|||proportion of stomach contents||Standard Deviation|Mean
832187|NCT01253408|Secondary|Ascending Colon Emptying T 1/2|Ascending colon emptying t1/2 will be estimated by power exponential analysis of the proportionate emptying over time of counts from the colon. The primary data for this analysis will be the proportion of decay and depth-corrected counts in the ascending colon on the hourly scans on the first day of transit measurement and the 48 hour data.|48 hours after radiolabeled meal was ingested|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832188|NCT01253408|Secondary|Colonic Filling at 6 Hours|Percent of the radio-labeled meal that reached the colon at 6 hours, indirectly reflecting small bowel transit time.|6 hours after radiolabeled meal was ingested|||percentage of meal||Standard Deviation|Mean
832189|NCT01253408|Secondary|Gastric Emptying Half-Time (t1/2)|The time for half of the ingested solids or liquids to leave the stomach.|Approximately 2 hours after radiolabel meal is ingested|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
832190|NCT01253408|Secondary|Colonic Transit Geometric Center|The scintigraphic method is used to measure colonic transit. An isotope is adsorbed on activated charcoal particles and delivered to the colon in a delayed release capsule. Anterior and posterior gamma images are taken hourly. The geometric center (GC) is the weighted average of counts in the different colonic regions. The scale ranges from 1 to 5; a high GC implies faster colonic transit, a GC of 1 implies all isotope is in the ascending colon, and a GC of 5 implies all isotope is in the stool.|28, 32, and 48 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832191|NCT01253447|Secondary|Maximum Percentage Change in Apoptosis|Peripheral blood AML cells (total 2 x 10^6) used to determine induction of apoptosis in AML stem cells by 4-color flow cytometry assay (CD34/CD38/CD123/annexin). Two-sample t-test conducted to compare changes between the responders and non-responders. Responders are participants who obtain a CR, CRp, or PR, with or without cytogenetic response.|Baseline to 12 courses||||||
832192|NCT01253447|Primary|Treatment-related Non-hematological Toxicity|Toxicity assessed using the NIH-NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0 (CTCAEv4.0)|Up to 30 days post-treatment||||||
832193|NCT01253447|Primary|Number of Participants With a Response of CR, CRp, or PR|Responses defined by International Working Group (IWG) 2003 Response Criteria: Morphologic Complete Response (CR): Peripheral blood counts: No circulating blasts, Neutrophil count >/= 1.0 x10^9/L, Platelet count >/= 100 x10^9/L; Bone marrow aspirate and biopsy: </= 5% blasts, No detectable Auer rods, No extramedullary leukemia. Partial Response (PR): No circulating blasts, Neutrophil count >/=1.0 x10^9/L, Platelet count >/= 100 x10^9/L, >/= 50 % reduction in bone marrow blast to 6% to 25%, or blasts </= 5% if Auer rods are present. Morphologic CR with incomplete count recovery (CRp): All criteria for CR except for residual neutropenia (<1x10^9/L) or thrombocytopenia (<100 x10^9/L).|12 weeks of treatment|No participant was not evaluable for response.||participants|||Number
832194|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Steady State Volume of Distribution (Vss) for Cycle 4|Due to sparse pharmacokinetic sampling Vss for ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) could not be calculated in Cycle 4.|Cycle 4: Pre-infusion, Day 1 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832195|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Clearance (CL) for Cycle 4|Due to sparse pharmacokinetic sampling CL for ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) could not be calculated in Cycle 4.|Cycle 4: Pre-infusion, Day 1 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832196|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Half-Life (t 1/2) for Cycle 4|Due to sparse pharmacokinetic sampling t1/2 for ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) could not be calculated in Cycle 4.|Cycle 4: Pre-infusion, Day 1 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832197|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Area Under the Concentration Time Curve (AUC) for Cycle 4|Due to sparse pharmacokinetic sampling AUC within the dosing interval (0-τ) for ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) could not be calculated in Cycle 4.|Cycle 4: Pre-infusion, Day 1 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832198|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Maximum Serum Concentration (Cmax) for Cycle 4|Due to sparse pharmacokinetic sampling ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) Cmax could not be calculated in Cycle 4.|Cycle 4: Pre-infusion, Day 1 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832199|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Steady State Volume of Distribution (Vss) for Cycle 3|Due to sparse pharmacokinetic sampling Vss for ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) could not be calculated in Cycle 3.|Cycle 3: Pre-infusion, Day 1 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832200|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Clearance (CL) for Cycle 3|Due to sparse pharmacokinetic sampling CL could not be calculated for ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) in Cycle 3.|Cycle 3: Pre-infusion, Day 1 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832201|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Half-Life (t 1/2) for Cycle 3|Due to sparse pharmacokinetic sampling ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) t1/2 could not be calculated in Cycle 3.|Cycle 3: Pre-infusion, Day 1 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832202|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Area Under the Concentration Time Curve (AUC) for Cycle 3|Due to the sparse pharmacokinetic sampling ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) AUC within the dosing interval (0-τ) could not be calculated in Cycle 3.|Cycle 3: Pre-infusion, Day 1 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832203|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Maximum Serum Concentration (Cmax) for Cycle 3|Due to sparse pharmacokinetic sampling ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) Cmax could not be calculated in Cycle 3.|Cycle 3: Pre-infusion, Day 1 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832204|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Steady State Volume of Distribution (Vss) for Cycle 2|Vss [distribution of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) in in the body at steady state] is not calculated for multiple doses of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B).|Cycle 2: Pre-infusion, Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 15 of 28-day cycle|Zero participants were analyzed.|||||
832205|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Clearance (CL) for Cycle 2|CL [the volume of plasma or serum cleared of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) per unit time] at steady state after multiple doses of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B).|Cycle 2: Pre-infusion, Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 15 of 28-day cycle|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug and had evaluable CL values.||liters/hour (L/h)||Standard Deviation|Mean
832206|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Half-Life (t1/2) for Cycle 2|Terminal t1/2 [the time it takes for the concentration of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) in plasma or serum to decline by 50%] after multiple doses of ramucirumab(IMC-1121B).|Cycle 2: Pre-infusion, Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 15 of 28-day cycle|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug and had evaluable t1/2 values.||hours (h)||Full Range|Median
832207|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Area Under the Concentration Time Curve (AUC) for Cycle 2|AUC within the dosing interval (0-τ) after multiple doses of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B).|Cycle 2: Pre-infusion, Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 15 of 28-day cycle|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug and had evaluable AUC 0-τ values.||micrograms*hour/milliliter (µg*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
832208|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Maximum Serum Concentration (Cmax) for Cycle 2|Cmax after multiple doses of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B).|Cycle 2: Pre-infusion, Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 15 of 28-day cycle|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug and had evaluable Cmax values.||micrograms/milliliter (µg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
832209|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Steady State Volume of Distribution (Vss) for Cycle 1|Vss [distribution of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) in the body at steady state] after a single dose of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B).|Cycle 1: Pre-infusion, Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 15 of 28-day cycle|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug and had evaluable Vss values.||liters (L)||Standard Error|Mean
832210|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Clearance (CL) or Cycle 1|CL [the volume of plasma or serum cleared of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) per unit time] after a single dose of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B).|Cycle 1: Pre-infusion, Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 15 of 28-day cycle|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug and had evaluable CL values.||liters/hour (L/h)||Standard Deviation|Mean
832211|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Half-Life (t1/2) for Cycle 1|Terminal t1/2 (the time it takes for the concentration of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) in plasma or serum to decline by 50%) after a single dose of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B).|Cycle 1: Pre-infusion, Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 15 of 28-day cycle|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug and had evaluable t1/2 values.||hours (h)||Full Range|Median
832212|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Area Under the Concentration Time Curve (AUC) for Cycle 1|AUC from time 0 to infinity (0-∞) after a single dose of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B).|Cycle 1 Pre-infusion, Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 15 of 28-day cycle|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug and had evaluable AUC0-∞ values.||micrograms*hour/milliliter (µg*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
832213|NCT01253525|Secondary|Serum Anti-Ramucirumab Antibody Assessment (Immunogenicity)|The percentage of participants who were treatment-emergent positive for anti-ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) antibodies.|Cycle 1 through Cycle 5 (28-day cycles)|All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and were analyzed for anti-ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) antibodies.||percentage of participants|||Number
832214|NCT01253525|Secondary|Ramucirumab Maximum Serum Concentration (Cmax) for Cycle 1|Cmax after a single dose of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B).|Cycle 1 Pre-infusion, Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 15 of 28-day cycle|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug and had evaluable Cmax values.||micrograms/milliliter (µg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
832215|NCT01253525|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|The number of participants who experienced SAEs that were considered to be related to ramucirumab [RAM (IMC-1121B)] or paclitaxel (PAC). A summary of SAEs and all other non-SAEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Up to 47 weeks post baseline|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug.||participants|||Number
832216|NCT01253525|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|The number of participants who experienced AEs of any grade, AEs of Grade ≥3 or AEs resulting in death that were considered to be related to ramucirumab [RAM (IMC-1121B)] or paclitaxel (PAC). A summary of serious adverse events (SAEs) and all other non-SAEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Up to 47 weeks post baseline|All enrolled participants who received any quantity of study drug.||participants|||Number
832217|NCT01253525|Primary|Number of Participants With a Dose-Limiting Toxicity (DLT) During Cycle 1|DLT based on National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCICTCAE v4.02) in Cycle (Cy) 1 due to study drug (SD) with (w/): Grade (Gr) ≥3 neutropenia w/fever ≥38.5°C or w/bacteremia or sepsis, thrombocytopenia w/bleeding and platelet substitution, prothrombin and/or partial thromboplastin time w/no anticoagulation, hyperbilirubinemia; Gr 4: neutropenia >5 days, thrombocytopenia, Gr 4 or uncontrollable hypertension QTc>500 milliseconds (ms) or increase ≥100 ms increase in 24 hours after SD or significant arrhythmia in this period; Gr ≥3 nonhematologic toxicity (tox), excluding Gr 3 hypersensitivity, hypertension, injection-site reaction, arthralgia/myalgia, asthenia/fatigue, diarrhea w/out loperamide/nausea/vomiting w/out antiemetic and transient aminotransferase elevation. SD tox=delay >1 week in ramucirumab (RAM) dose or omission of 1 dose of RAM or 2 paclitaxel doses due to tox in Cy 1 or delay >2 weeks between Cy 1 and Cy 2 due to persistent tox.|Cycle 1 of 28-day cycle|All enrolled participants who complete the first cycle of study drug or discontinued study drug due to a DLT during Cycle 1.||participants|||Number
832218|NCT01253564|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Physician's Assessment of Global Performance Status|Physician’s Assessment of Global Performance Status was assessed on 7 point scale (1- Very much better, 2-Much better, 3-A little better, 4-No change, 5-A little worse, 6-Much worse, 7- Very much worse). An improvement was classed as a difference from baseline of at least -1 point. Percentage of participants with 95% Clopper-Pearson CI were reported for participants with improvement in Physician's Assessment of Global Performance Status at any visit.|Baseline, Day 1 of every 28-day cycle, at end of study and at the 28-day follow-up visit (up to 16 months)|Safety population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832219|NCT01253564|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Assessment of Pain|VAS is a measure of pain intensity. The participant was asked to mark on a 100 mm line where their pain level was on the day they completed the scale. The beginning of the line represented no pain and the end of the line represented maximum pain. Total score ranged from 0 - 100. Reported values are decrease in VAS of greater than (>) 20 mm or >30 mm from baseline.|Baseline; Day 1 of Cycles 2-8 (28-day cycle) and at the end of study visit (up to 16 months)|Safety population. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with available data for specified category.||percentage of participants|||Number
832331|NCT01254331|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Fatigue||Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24|Safety population; n=number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified visit||percentage of participants|||Number
832220|NCT01253564|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Total Daily Dose of Narcotic Pain Analgesic|An improvement in narcotic pain analgesics was defined as a dose reduction of at least 33% of baseline dose for at least 28 days or stopping use completely.|Baseline, every week during the first 8 weeks and every second week thereafter up to last dose (0.1 to 11.3 months) plus 28 days|Safety Population||percentage of participants|||Number
832221|NCT01253564|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Total Daily Dose of Corticosteroids|An improvement in corticosteroid dose was defined as a dose reduction of at least 33% of baseline dose for at least 28 days or stopping use completely. Percentage of participants and 95% Clopper-Pearson CI are reported.|Baseline, every week during the first 8 weeks and every second week thereafter up to last dose (0.1 to 11.3 months) plus 28 days|Safety Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832222|NCT01253564|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from the date of first treatment to the date of death, regardless of the cause of death. Participants who discontinued the study treatment for any reason other than withdrawal of consent were continued to be followed for survival. The end of study occurred when all participants had been followed for a period of 6 months, had died, withdrawn consent or were lost to follow-up, whichever occurred first. OS was calculated by Kaplan-Meier estimates.|From start of treatment up to end of the study and every 3 months during follow up (up to 16 months)|Safety population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832223|NCT01253564|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died|Percentage of participants who died due to any reason are reported.|Baseline up to end of the study and every 3 months during follow-up (up to 16 months)|Safety Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
832224|NCT01253564|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time interval between the date of the first treatment and the date of progression or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. Disease progression (according to RECIST version 1.1) was defined as at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study or absolute increase and at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. PFS was calculated by Kaplan-Meier estimates separately for brain, other sites (extracranial) and whole body.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8 and thereafter every eighth week until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, consent withdrawal, death or other reasons deemed by the investigator (up to 16 months)|Safety Population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832225|NCT01253564|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression or Death by Disease Site|Disease progression (according to RECIST version 1.1) was defined as at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study or absolute increase and at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. Percentage of participants with disease progression by brain, other sites (extracranial) and whole body are reported.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8 and thereafter every 8th week until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, consent withdrawal, death or other reasons deemed by the investigator (up to 16 months)|Safety Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
832226|NCT01253564|Secondary|Time to New Lesion by Disease Site|Time to new lesions was defined as the interval between the date of first treatment and the date of first documentation of new lesions. Time to new lesion was calculated by Kaplan-Meier estimates separately for brain, other sites (extracranial) and whole body.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8 and thereafter every eighth week until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, consent withdrawal, death or other reasons deemed by the investigator (up to 16 months)|Safety population. Here, ‘n’ signifies number of participants with measurable disease at baseline for specified category.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832227|NCT01253564|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease (SD) by Disease Site|Duration of SD was defined as the time between the first documented date of SD and date of PD or death from any cause. SD was defined (according to RECIST version 1.1) as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. PD was defined as at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. Duration of SD was calculated by Kaplan-Meier estimates separately for brain, other sites (extracranial) and whole body.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8 and thereafter every 8th week until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, consent withdrawal, death or other reasons deemed by the investigator (up to 16 months)|Safety Population. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with measurable disease at baseline for specified category.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832228|NCT01253564|Secondary|Time to Response by Disease Site|Time to response was defined as the interval between the date of first treatment and the date of first documentation of CR or PR (whichever occurred first). CR and PR were assessed by investigator according to RECIST version 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. Time of response was calculated by Kaplan-Meier estimates separately for brain, other sites (extracranial) and whole body.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8 and thereafter every 8th week until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, consent withdrawal, death or other reasons deemed by the investigator (up to 16 months)|Safety population. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with measurable disease for specified category.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832240|NCT01246791|Primary|Plasma Half Life (t1/2) on Norethisterone of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of plasma Half life (t1/2) of norethisterone that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832241|NCT01246791|Primary|Time to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax) on Ethinyl Estradiol of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of time to peak plasma concentration (Tmax) of ethinyl estradiol that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832229|NCT01253564|Secondary|Duration of Response by Disease Site|Duration of response was defined as the time interval between the date of the earliest qualifying response and the date of progressive disease (PD) or death, only for those participants whose best overall response was CR or PR. CR and PR were assessed by investigator according to RECIST version 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. PD was defined as at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 millimeter (mm), progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. Duration of response was calculated by Kaplan-Meier estimates separately for brain, other sites (extracranial) and whole body.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8 and thereafter every 8th week until progressive disease or death (up to 16 months)|Safety population. Here, 'n' signifies number of participants with best overall response of CR or PR for specified category.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832230|NCT01253564|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Best Overall Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) by Disease Site|Objective response was assessed by the investigator according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) (Version 1.1). CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. Best overall response was calculated separately for brain, other sites (extracranial) and whole body. Percentage of participants with 95 percent (%) Clopper-Pearson confidence interval (CI) are reported.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8 and thereafter every 8th week until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, consent withdrawal, death or other reasons deemed by the investigator (up to 16 months)|Safety population. Here, 'n' signifies the number of participants with measurable disease at baseline for specified category.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832231|NCT01253564|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|AE:any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease associated with use of study drug, regardless of relation to study drug. Pre-existing conditions that worsened and laboratory or clinical tests that resulted in change in treatment or discontinuation from study drug were reported as AEs. Serious AE: resulted in death, life-threatening, required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, was congenital anomaly/birth defect or was medically significant. Grade-1:discomfort but no disruption of normal daily activity. Grade-2:discomfort sufficient to reduce or affect daily activity,no intervention indicated.Grade-3:inability to perform normal daily activity,intervention indicated.Grade-4:immediate threat to life or leading to permanent mental or physical condition that prevented performing normal daily activities.Grade 5: death. Any AE included participants with serious and non-serious AE.|From baseline up to last dose (0.1 to 11.3 months) plus 28 days|Safety Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
832232|NCT01253577|Secondary|Percentage of Sinuses That Developed Frank Polyposis|Frank polyposis means polyps grade 2 or 3, which was determined from video-endoscopies reviewed by a panel of independent blinded sinus surgeons.|30 days|All 105 subjects were present for this endpoint exam. However n=85 is the number of subjects where both sinus sides had video-endoscopies able to be graded by the independent panel.||percentage of sinuses||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832233|NCT01253577|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Clinically Significant Increase in Intra-ocular Pressure|clinically significant IOP elevation is a change from baseline of >10 mm Hg on sinus side with drug-coated implant but not on side with control implant|90 days|Two patients did not have their ocular exam performed at day 90 (LTFU) but had ocular exams at earlier time points.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832234|NCT01253577|Primary|Percentage of Sinuses Requiring Post-operative Intervention|Post-operative interventions include either need for surgical adhesion lysis or the need for oral steroids prescription, as determined from video-endoscopies reviewed by a panel of independent blinded sinus surgeons.|30-days|All 105 subjects were present for the primary endpoint exam. However n=96 is the number of subjects where both sinus sides had video-endoscopies able to be graded by the independent panel.||percentage of sinuses||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832235|NCT01246791|Primary|Elimination Rate Constant (Kel) on Ethinyl Estradiol of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of elimination rate constant (kel) of ethinyl estradiol that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||hr^-1||Standard Deviation|Mean
832236|NCT01246791|Primary|Elimination Rate Constant (Kel) on Norethisterone of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of elimination rate constant (kel) of norethisterone that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||hr^-1||Standard Deviation|Mean
832237|NCT01246791|Primary|Mean Residence Time (MRT) on Ethinyl Estradiol of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of mean residence time (MRT) of ethinyl estradiol that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832238|NCT01246791|Primary|Mean Residence Time (MRT) on Norethisterone of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of mean residence time (MRT) of norethisterone that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832239|NCT01246791|Primary|Plasma Half Life (t1/2) on Ethinyl Estradiol of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of plasma Half life (t1/2) of ethinyl estradiol that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832242|NCT01246791|Primary|Time to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax) on Norethisterone of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of time to peak plasma concentration (Tmax) of norethisterone that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832243|NCT01246791|Primary|Peak Plasma Concentration (Cmax) on Ethinyl Estradiol of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of peak plasma concentration (Cmax) of ethinyl estradiol that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832244|NCT01246791|Primary|Peak Plasma Concentration (Cmax) on Norethisterone of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of peak plasma concentration (Cmax) of norethisterone that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832245|NCT01246791|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC) on Ethinyl Estradiol of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) of ethinyl estradiol that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||pg･hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832246|NCT01246791|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC) on Norethisterone of NPC-01|Multiple blood samples will obtains at pretreatment(0 hour), 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 and 24.0 hours after dosing of NPC-01(1mg norethisterone and 0.02mg ethinyl estradiol) and determination of area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) of norethisterone that are active substances of NPC-01.|0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0, 24.0 hours after single dosing of NPC-01|||ng･hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832247|NCT01246960|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|Reported are the number of participants who had ramucirumab/placebo-related: AEs, serious AEs (SAEs), AEs based on common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) ≥Grade 3, AEs = CTCAE Grade 5, as well as, AEs leading to treatment discontinuation and AEs resulting in death. A summary of serious and other non-serious AEs regardless of causality is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through study completion (up to Month 28.3)|Safety population: randomized participants who received any quantity of study drug (Ramucirumab, mFOLFOX6, or placebo).||participants|||Number
832248|NCT01246960|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Anti-Ramucirumab Antibodies|Participants with treatment-emergent anti-ramucirumab antibodies were participants with a 4-fold increase (2 dilution increase) in immunogenicity titer over baseline titer, or participants who tested negative at baseline and positive post-baseline (at titer of ≥1:20).|Months 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8|Randomized participants who received any quantity of ramucirumab or placebo, and were evaluated for the presence of anti-ramucirumab antibodies.||participants|||Number
832249|NCT01246960|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression (TTP)|TTP was defined using RECIST v. 1.1 as the time from study randomization to the first date of PD. PD was a ≥20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with the sum demonstrating an absolute increase of ≥5 mm; the appearance of ≥1 new lesions or unequivocal progression of non-target lesions. TTP was censored at the date of last adequate tumor assessment if death was due to causes other than PD.|Randomization to measured PD (up to Month 25.0)|ITT population: all randomized participants. Thirty-five participants in the Ramucirumab and mFOLFOX6 treatment arm and 31 participants in the Placebo and mFOLFOX6 treatment arm were censored.||months||Full Range|Median
832250|NCT01246960|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response was defined using RECIST v. 1.1 criteria as the time from the date criteria were met for the first objectively recorded CR or PR until the first date criteria for PD were met or death from any cause. CR was the disappearance of all lesions and pathological lymph node reduction in the short axis to <10 mm. PR was a ≥30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions. PD was a ≥20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with the sum demonstrating an absolute increase of ≥5 mm; the appearance of ≥1 new lesions or unequivocal progression of non-target lesions. Participants who were not known to have died and who did not have PD were censored at the date of the last tumor assessment prior to the date of any subsequent systemic anticancer therapy.|Time of first response to measured PD (up to Month 23.0)|Randomized participants who achieved an objective response of CR or PR. Eight participants in the Ramucirumab and mFOLFOX6 treatment arm and 8 participants in the Placebo and mFOLFOX6 treatment arm were censored.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832251|NCT01246960|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Objective Response (Objective Response Rate)|The percentage of participants who achieved a best overall response of partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) is reported. Response was defined using RECIST, v. 1.1 criteria. CR was the disappearance of all lesions and pathological lymph node reduction in the short axis to <10 mm. PR was a ≥30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions. The percentage of participants with objective response=(number of participants whose best overall response achieved was CR or PR/number of participants treated)*100.|Randomization to measured PD (up to Month 23.0)|ITT population: all randomized participants.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832252|NCT01246960|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause. OS was censored at the date of the last follow-up visit for participants who were alive or lost to follow-up.|Randomization to date of death from any cause (up to Month 28.3)|ITT population: all randomized participants. Twenty-seven participants in the Ramucirumab and mFOLFOX6 treatment arm and 32 participants in the Placebo and mFOLFOX6 treatment arm were censored.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832273|NCT01253811|Secondary|Physical Examinations|Number of subjects in percentage with changes in values of physical examinations from week 0 to end of trial visit were collected.|Week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product. Two abnormal physical examination findings related to skin and musculo-skeletal system were assessed as clinically significant by the investigator during the trial.||percentage of subjects|||Number
832253|NCT01246960|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST version (v.) 1.1] as the time from randomization to the first observation of progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause, whichever came first. PD was a ≥20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with the sum demonstrating an absolute increase of ≥5 millimeters (mm); the appearance of ≥1 new lesions or unequivocal progression of non-target lesions. If a participant did not have a baseline disease assessment, PFS time was censored at the randomization date, regardless of whether or not PD or death was observed. Participants not known to have died or have objective PD were censored at the last post-baseline radiological assessment date.|Randomization to measured PD or date of death from any cause (up to Month 25.0)|ITT population: all randomized participants. Fourteen participants in the Ramucirumab and mFOLFOX6 treatment arm and 15 participants in the Placebo and mFOLFOX6 treatment arm were censored.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832254|NCT01246973|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Moist Desquamation|Moist desquamation was measured by the presence of wet, patchy crusting, oozing, or ulcerated skin in areas where skin was peeling in sheets.|6 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
832255|NCT01246973|Primary|Mean Radiation Dermatitis Severity Score|The outcome measures will be the severity of radiation dermatitis, using the Radiation Dermatitis Score (RDS), at the end of treatment in each treatment arm. (Objective: To examine the efficacy of curcumin in preventing and/or reducing the severity of dermatitis in radiation treatment site in breast cancer patients). The RDS score ranges from 0-4 with higher scores indicating worse outcome.|6 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832256|NCT01246999|Secondary|Mean Peak Influenza B Virus Titer, Dose 2|After the second dose of vaccine, the virus titer from nasal secretions was measured in tissue culture on days 2, 4 and 7 and the highest titer from one of those three time points was reported.|days 2, 4 and 7|||log10 TCID(50)/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832257|NCT01246999|Secondary|Mean Peak H3N2 Virus Titer, Dose 2|After the second dose of vaccine, the virus titer from nasal secretions was measured in tissue culture on days 2, 4 and 7 and the highest titer from one of those three time points was reported.|days 2, 4 and 7|||log10 TCID(50)/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832258|NCT01246999|Secondary|Mean Peak H1N1 Virus Titer, Dose 2|After the second dose of vaccine, the virus titer from nasal secretions was measured in tissue culture on days 2, 4 and 7 and the highest titer from one of those three time points was reported.|days 2, 4 and 7|||log10 TCID(50)/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832259|NCT01246999|Secondary|Mean Peak Influenza B Virus Titer, Dose 1|After the first dose of vaccine, the virus titer from nasal secretions was measured in tissue culture on days 2, 4 and 7 and the highest titer from one of those three time points was reported.|days 2, 4 and 7|||log10 TCID(50)/ml||Standard Deviation|Log Mean
832260|NCT01246999|Secondary|Mean Peak H3N2 Virus Titer, Dose 1|After the first dose of vaccine, the virus titer from nasal secretions was measured in tissue culture on days 2, 4 and 7 and the highest titer from one of those three time points was reported.|days 2, 4 and 7|||log10 TCID(50)/ml||Standard Deviation|Log Mean
832261|NCT01246999|Secondary|Mean Peak H1N1 Virus Titer, Dose 1|After the first dose of vaccine, the virus titer from nasal secretions was measured in tissue culture on days 2, 4 and 7 and the highest titer from one of those three time points was reported.|days 2, 4 and 7|||log10 TCID(50)/ml||Standard Deviation|Log Mean
832262|NCT01246999|Primary|Number of Subjects Shedding Vaccine Virus of Each Subtype by PCR|Nasal washes were collected on days 2, 4 and 7 after vaccination. Nasal swab specimens were tested for the presence of vaccine viruses by quantitative viral culture in MDCK cells at 33º C and by real-time quantitative reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) amplification. The limit of detection of vaccine viruses was 10^0.6 tissue culture infectious doses (50%)/ml for virus culture and 10^0.4 tissue culture infectious doses (50%)/ml for qRT-PCR.|baseline to day 7|Outcome for shedding of live vaccine in all participants who received a live vaccine||participants|||Number
832263|NCT01247064|Secondary|Parental Perception of Improvement of Breathing After Study Medication||1 hour|||percentage of participants|||Number
832264|NCT01247064|Secondary|Oxygen Saturation Change||Baseline and 1 hour|||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832265|NCT01247064|Secondary|Respiratory Rate Change||Baseline and 1 hour|||breaths per minute||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832266|NCT01247064|Secondary|Rate of Hospitalization||1 day|||percentage of participants|||Number
832267|NCT01247064|Primary|Respiratory Assessment Change Score (RACS)|The Respiratory Assessment Change Score (RACS) assesses change in respiratory status using the change in the Respiratory Distress Assessment Instrument (RDAI) and a standardized change in respiratory rate, with points being assigned by change increments of 10%. Thus, a change in respiratory rate of ≤5% from baseline counted as a change of 0 units, decrease/increase of 6% to 15% counted as improvement/deterioration of 1 unit, etc. The overall RACS is the arithmetic sum of the RDAI change and the standardized respiratory rate change between assessments with a decrease in RACS signifying improvement.|Baseline and 1 hour|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832268|NCT01247090|Primary|Change in Mean Interdialytic 44-hour Ambulatory Systolic Blood Pressure Over a 2 Week Follow-up Period||Baseline and Two Weeks|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832269|NCT01253811|Secondary|Rate (Number Per Subject Year) of All Bleeding Episodes Requiring Treatment With a FXIII Containing Product Other Than Recombinant Factor XIII.|The rate (number per subject year) of all spontaneous, traumatic and intracranial bleeding episodes requiring treatment with FXIII-containing products during the rFXIII treatment period was assessed for treatment period.|Weeks 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|There were no bleeding episodes requiring treatment with a haemostatic agent (rFXIII) during the trial, which included subjects from full analysis set who received at least one dose of the trial product.|||||
832270|NCT01253811|Secondary|Vital Signs: Pulse|Values collected for pulse from week 0 to end of trial visit.|Week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||beats/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
832271|NCT01253811|Secondary|Vital Signs: Diastolic BP (Blood Pressure)|Values collected for diastolic BP from week 0 to end of trial visit.|Week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set one dose of the trial product.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832272|NCT01253811|Secondary|Vital Signs: Systolic BP (Blood Pressure)|Values collected for systolic BP from week 0 to end of trial visit.|Week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832276|NCT01253811|Secondary|Clinical Laboratory Assessments: Haematology: Thrombocytes|Clinical laboratory values for thrombocytes collected from week 0 to end of trial visit.|Every 6th month, from week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||10^9 cells/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832277|NCT01253811|Secondary|Clinical Laboratory Assessments: Haematology: Leucocytes|Clinical laboratory values for leucocytes collected from week 0 to end of trial visit.|Every 6th month, from week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||10^9 cells/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832278|NCT01253811|Secondary|Clinical Laboratory Assessments: Haematology: Haemoglobin|Clinical values for haemoglobin collected from week 0 to end of trial visit.|Every 6th month, from week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832279|NCT01253811|Secondary|Clinical Laboratory Assessments: Biochemistry: Aspartate Aminotransferase (ASAT)|Clinical laboratory assessments for ASAT at week 24 to end of trial visit.|Every 6th month, from week 24 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832280|NCT01253811|Secondary|Clinical Laboratory Assessments: Biochemistry: Alanine Aminotransferase (ALAT)|Clinical laboratory assessments for ALAT at week 24 to end of trial visit.|Every 6th month, from week 24 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832281|NCT01253811|Secondary|Clinical Laboratory Assessments: Biochemistry: Urea|Clinical laboratory assessments for urea at week 24 to end ot trial visit.|Every 6th month, week 24 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832282|NCT01253811|Secondary|Clinical Laboratory Assessments: Biochemistry: Creatinine|Clinical laboratory assessments for creatinine at week 24 to end of trial visit.|Every 6th month, from week 24 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832283|NCT01253811|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Development of Anti-rFXIII Antibodies, Including Inhibitors.|All subjects who received rFXIII were monitored for the frequency of development of anti-rFXIII antibodies. Samples passed through 2 tiers of ELISA testing: an initial screen with a specific cut-off point (including ~5% false positives) and a second confirmatory assay for samples yielding a result above the screening cut-off point. If samples were confirmed as antibody positive in the confirmation assay, an inhibitor assay was also carried out to detect functional inhibitors.|Week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173).|The SAS included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product. There were no antibodies against rFXIII detected in any patient during the trial.||percentage of subjects|||Number
832284|NCT01253811|Primary|Number of Treatment Emergent (Serious and Non-serious) Adverse Events|An adverse event was described as any untoward medical occurrence in a subject or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product, and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. Treatment emergent adverse events (serious and non-serious), defined as adverse events occurring from first trial product administration to the end of the subject’s participation in the trial.|Week 0 to end of trial visit (week 173) for a minimum period of 52 weeks.|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the trial product.||number of events|||Number
832285|NCT01253824|Secondary|Comparing LH AUC of Menstrual Period During Study Drug Administration With Pre and Post Study Drug Administration (Baseline(BL)-Study Drug Administration(SDA), Follow up(FU)-Study Drug Administration(ADA))|LH was measured on day 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 on 3 consecutive menstrual period (pre administration/Baseline(BL), study drug administration(SDA), post administration/follow up(FU)) and calculated AUC from these data|Day 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 of menstrual cycles|||mIU･day/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832286|NCT01253824|Primary|Comparing Progesterone AUC of Menstrual Period During Study Drug Administration With Pre and Post Study Drug Administration (Baseline(BL)-Study Drug Administration(SDA), Follow up(FU)-Study Drug Administration(ADA))|Progesterone was measured on day 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 on 3 consecutive menstrual period (pre administration/Baseline(BL), study drug administration(SDA), post administration/follow up(FU)) and calculated AUC from these data|Day 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 of menstrual cycles|||ng･day/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832287|NCT01253824|Secondary|Comparing FSH AUC of Menstrual Period During Study Drug Administration With Pre and Post Study Drug Administration (Baseline(BL)-Study Drug Administration(SDA), Follow up(FU)-Study Drug Administration(ADA))|FSH was measured on day 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 on 3 consecutive menstrual period (pre administration/Baseline(BL), study drug administration(SDA), post administration/follow up(FU)) and calculated AUC from these data|Day 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 of menstrual cycles|||mIU･day/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832288|NCT01253824|Primary|Comparing Estradiol AUC of Menstrual Period During Study Drug Administration With Pre and Post Study Drug Administration (Baseline(BL)-Study Drug Administration(SDA), Follow up(FU)-Study Drug Administration(ADA))|Estradiol was measured on day 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 on 3 consecutive menstrual period (pre administration/Baseline(BL), study drug administration(SDA), post administration/follow up(FU)) and calculated AUC from these data|Day 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 of menstrual cycles|||pg･day/mL,||Standard Deviation|Mean
832289|NCT01253902|Secondary|Mean Tear Break Up Time (TBUT) at Week 12|Tear Break Up Time was analyzed using the average of the readings of both eyes. TBUT is defined as the time (seconds) required for dry spots to appear on the surface of the eye after blinking. The longer it takes, the more stable the tear film.|Week 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized and received study medication.||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
832290|NCT01253902|Secondary|Mean Corneal Staining With Fluorescein at Week 12|Corneal staining was analyzed using the average of the scores of both eyes. The cornea is the transparent front part of the eye which covers the iris and pupil. To detect the presence or absence of corneal puncta (tiny disruptions in the surface of the eye), fluorescein dye is administered into the eye and the eye is graded using a 5-point scale where 0=None (no puncta), 0.5=Trace (1-5 puncta), 1=Mild (6-20 puncta), 2=Moderate (>20 puncta) and 3=Severe (too many puncta to count).|Week 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized and received study medication.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832291|NCT01253902|Primary|Mean Conjunctival Hyperemia at Week 12|Conjunctival hyperemia was analyzed using the average of the scores of both eyes. Hyperemia is engorgement of the blood vessels (redness) of the bulbar conjunctiva of the eye (the clear membrane covering the white surface of the eye). Hyperemia was graded on a 5 point scale where 0=none (normal), 0.5=trace (trace flush reddish pink), 1=Mild (mild flush reddish color), 2=Moderate (bright red color) and 3=severe (deep bright diffuse redness).|Week 12|Intent-to-treat population (ITT) included all participants who were randomized to study medication.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832292|NCT01254292|Secondary|User Satisfaction – Acceptability of the Administration of Study Treatment|The degree of user satisfaction was assessed at the end-of-study visit using an eight item questionnaire. One of the items assessed was acceptability of study treatment which was categorized into the following: acceptable without I/D, acceptable with some I/D, not acceptable with moderate I/D, and not acceptable with extreme I/D.|At 12 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of these questions of the user satisfaction questionnaire at 12 months)||Participants|||Number
832293|NCT01254292|Secondary|User Satisfaction – Acceptability of the Administration of Study Treatment|The degree of user satisfaction was assessed at the end-of-study visit using an eight item questionnaire. One of the items assessed was acceptability of study treatment which was categorized into the following: acceptable without I/D, acceptable with some I/D, not acceptable with moderate I/D, and not acceptable with extreme I/D.|At 6 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of these questions of the user satisfaction questionnaire at 6 months)||Participants|||Number
832294|NCT01254292|Other Pre-specified|Participants’ Evaluation of Pain During IUS Removal Procedure||Up to 36 months|Full analysis set (only subjects in the LCS12 arm with documented removal of the IUS)||Participants|||Number
832295|NCT01254292|Other Pre-specified|Investigator's Evaluation of IUS Removal Procedure||Up to 36 months|Full analysis set (only subjects in the LCS12 arm with documented removal of the IUS)||Participants|||Number
832296|NCT01254292|Other Pre-specified|Participants’ Evaluation of Pain During Successful IUS Insertion Procedure||Up to 18 months|Full analysis set||Participants|||Number
832297|NCT01254292|Other Pre-specified|Investigator's Evaluation of Successful IUS Insertion Procedure||Up to 18 months|Full analysis set||Participants|||Number
832298|NCT01254292|Other Pre-specified|Cumulative Number of Participants With Partial or Total Expulsion|Total expulsion is confirmed if the IUS is observed in the vagina, the IUS is not shown in the uterine cavity by ultrasound, and / or the subject confirms that the system was expelled. Partial expulsion is diagnosed if the IUS can be partially seen in the vagina or is displaced in the cervical canal.|Up to 18, 24, 36 months|Full analysis set||Participants|||Number
832299|NCT01254292|Secondary|Compliance Rate for Yasmin Pill Intake||Up to 18 months|Full analysis set||Percentage of participants|||Number
832300|NCT01254292|Secondary|Pearl Index (PI)|The Pearl Index was defined as the number of pregnancies per 100 woman years (WYs). Given the assumption that the number of pregnancies follows a Poisson distribution, the Pearl Index thus is the mean of this distribution.|Up to 18, 24, 36 months|Full analysis set||Pregnancies per 100 women years||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832301|NCT01254292|Secondary|Cumulative Drop-out Rate|The drop-out rate is the amount of participants that could not complete the study for various reasons. Discontinuation rates due to the following reasons and overall discontinuations were calculated: • LCS12 expulsions • Bleeding pattern alterations • Bleeding pattern alterations with increased bleeding (amount) • Bleeding pattern alterations with decreased bleeding (amount) • Adverse Events The analyses described above were also done by parity. Furthermore, overall discontinuation rates were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier analyses and presented as cumulative half-yearly drop-out rates.|Up to 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months|Full analysis set||Percentage of participants|||Number
832302|NCT01254292|Secondary|EVAPIL-R Scores at 18 Months/EOS|The EVAPIL-R scale is a self-questionnaire aimed to assess tolerability of oral contraceptives. A composite score was derived from 16 items and the ratings for presence/absence (rated as 1/0), frequency (rated with values from 0 to 2), intensity (rated from 1 to 3) and bother (rated from 1 to 4) for each item. To calculate the composite score, the bother rating of each item was multiplied by an item- specific multiplier and a weight. Range is 0-12, with higher values indicating more severe symptoms/less tolerability. The 18-month Treatment Visit served as the End-of-Study (EOS) Visit for participant in the COC group and LCS12 participant who did not enter the Extension Phase.|At 18 months/EOS|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of the EVAPIL questionnaire at 18 months/end of study where the scores could be calculated)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832303|NCT01254292|Secondary|EVAPIL-R Scores at 12 Months - Composite Score|The EVAPIL-R scale is a self-questionnaire aimed to assess tolerability of oral contraceptives. A composite score was derived from 16 items and the ratings for presence/absence (rated as 1/0), frequency (rated with values from 0 to 2), intensity (rated from 1 to 3) and bother (rated from 1 to 4) for each item. To calculate the composite score, the bother rating of each item was multiplied by an item- specific multiplier and a weight. Range is 0-12, with higher values indicating more severe symptoms/less tolerability.|At 12 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of the EVAPIL questionnaire at 12 months where the composite score could be calculated)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832304|NCT01254292|Secondary|EVAPIL-R Scores at 12 Months - Bother Score|The EVAPIL-R scale is a self-questionnaire aimed to assess tolerability of oral contraceptives. A composite score was derived from 16 items and the ratings for presence/absence (rated as 1/0), frequency (rated with values from 0 to 2), intensity (rated from 1 to 3) and bother (rated from 1 to 4) for each item. To calculate the composite score, the bother rating of each item was multiplied by an item- specific multiplier and a weight. Range is 0-12, with higher values indicating more severe symptoms/less tolerability.|At 12 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of the EVAPIL questionnaire at 12 months where the bother score could be calculated)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832305|NCT01254292|Secondary|EVAPIL-R Scores at 6 Months|The EVAPIL-R scale is a self-questionnaire aimed to assess tolerability of oral contraceptives. A composite score was derived from 16 items and the ratings for presence/absence (rated as 1/0), frequency (rated with values from 0 to 2), intensity (rated from 1 to 3) and bother (rated from 1 to 4) for each item. To calculate the composite score, the bother rating of each item was multiplied by an item- specific multiplier and a weight. Range is 0-12, with higher values indicating more severe symptoms/less tolerability.|At 6 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of the EVAPIL questionnaire at 6 months where the scores could be calculated)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832306|NCT01254292|Secondary|EVAPIL-R Scores at Screening - Bother Score|The EVAPIL-R scale is a self-questionnaire aimed to assess tolerability of oral contraceptives. A composite score was derived from 16 items and the ratings for presence/absence (rated as 1/0), frequency (rated with values from 0 to 2), intensity (rated from 1 to 3) and bother (rated from 1 to 4) for each item. To calculate the composite score, the bother rating of each item was multiplied by an item- specific multiplier and a weight. Range is 0-12, , with higher values indicating more severe symptoms/less tolerability.|At screening|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of the EVAPIL questionnaire at screening where the bother score could be calculated)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832307|NCT01254292|Secondary|EVAPIL-R Scores at Screening - Composite Score|The EVAPIL-R scale is a self-questionnaire aimed to assess tolerability of oral contraceptives. A composite score was derived from 16 items and the ratings for presence/absence (rated as 1/0), frequency (rated with values from 0 to 2), intensity (rated from 1 to 3) and bother (rated from 1 to 4) for each item. To calculate the composite score, the bother rating of each item was multiplied by an item- specific multiplier and a weight. Range is 0-12, with higher values indicating more severe symptoms/less tolerability.|At screening|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of the EVAPIL questionnaire at screening where the composite score could be calculated)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832308|NCT01254292|Secondary|User Satisfaction – Rating of Usual Menstrual Pain Intensity|The 18-month Treatment Visit served as the End-of-Study (EOS) Visit for participant in the COC group and LCS12 participant who did not enter the Extension Phase.|At 18 months/EOS|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of this questions of the user satisfaction questionnaire at 18 months/end of study)||Participants|||Number
832309|NCT01254292|Secondary|User Satisfaction – Comparison of Menstrual Pain Intensity Between Now and Before Treatment|The 18-month Treatment Visit served as the End-of-Study (EOS) Visit for participant in the COC group and LCS12 participant who did not enter the Extension Phase.|At 18 months/EOS|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of this questions of the user satisfaction questionnaire at 18 months/end of study)||Participants|||Number
832310|NCT01254292|Secondary|User Satisfaction – Satisfaction With Menstrual Bleeding Absence|The 18-month Treatment Visit served as the End-of-Study (EOS) Visit for participant in the COC group and LCS12 participant who did not enter the Extension Phase.|At 18 months/EOS|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of this questions of the user satisfaction questionnaire at 18 months/end of study)||Participants|||Number
832311|NCT01254292|Secondary|User Satisfaction – Frequency of Experiencing Unexpected Bleeding|The 18-month Treatment Visit served as the End-of-Study (EOS) Visit for participant in the COC group and LCS12 participant who did not enter the Extension Phase.|At 18 months/EOS|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of this questions of the user satisfaction questionnaire at 18 months/end of study)||Participants|||Number
832312|NCT01254292|Secondary|User Satisfaction – Satisfaction With Menstrual Bleeding Pattern|The 18-month Treatment Visit served as the End-of-Study (EOS) Visit for participant in the COC group and LCS12 participant who did not enter the Extension Phase.|At 18 months/EOS|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of this questions of the user satisfaction questionnaire at 18 months/end of study)||Participants|||Number
832313|NCT01254292|Secondary|User Satisfaction – Amount of Menstrual Bleeding|The 18-month Treatment Visit served as the End-of-Study (EOS) Visit for participant in the COC group and LCS12 participant who did not enter the Extension Phase.|At 18 months/EOS|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of this questions of the user satisfaction questionnaire at 18 months/end of study)||Participants|||Number
832314|NCT01254292|Secondary|User Satisfaction – Choices Upon Completion of the Study|The 18-month Treatment Visit served as the End-of-Study (EOS) Visit for participant in the COC group and LCS12 participant who did not enter the Extension Phase.|At 18 months/EOS|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of this questions of the user satisfaction questionnaire at 18 months/end of study)||Participants|||Number
832315|NCT01254292|Secondary|User Satisfaction – Acceptability of the Administration of Study Treatment|The 18-month Treatment Visit served as the End-of-Study (EOS) Visit for participant in the COC group and LCS12 participant who did not enter the Extension Phase.|At 18 months/EOS|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of this questions of the user satisfaction questionnaire at 18 months/end of study)||Participants|||Number
832316|NCT01254292|Secondary|Overall Satisfaction Rate at 12 Months (LOCF)|Satisfaction was to be assessed by the subject based on a 5-point Likert item, using the following question: How satisfied are you with the birth control method used during the study? 1. Very satisfied 2. Satisfied 3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4. Dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied The overall satisfaction rate was to be the percentage of subjects selecting “1. Very satisfied” or “2. Satisfied” for the above question.|At 12 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of overall satisfaction rating at 12 months)||Percentage of participants|||Number
832317|NCT01254292|Secondary|Overall Satisfaction Rate at 6 Months (LOCF)|Satisfaction was to be assessed by the subject based on a 5-point Likert item, using the following question: How satisfied are you with the birth control method used during the study? 1. Very satisfied 2. Satisfied 3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4. Dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied The overall satisfaction rate was to be the percentage of subjects selecting “1. Very satisfied” or “2. Satisfied” for the above question.|At 6 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of overall satisfaction rating at 6 months or before)||Percentage of participants|||Number
832318|NCT01254292|Secondary|Overall Satisfaction Rating by the 5-point Likert Item at End of Study (EOS)|"Satisfaction was to be assessed by the subject based on a 5-point Likert item, using the following question: How satisfied are you with the birth control method used during the study? 1. Very satisfied 2. Satisfied 3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4. Dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied The overall satisfaction rate was to be the percentage of subjects selecting “1. Very satisfied” or “2. Satisfied” for the above question.
The 18-month Treatment Visit served as the End-of-Study (EOS) Visit for participant in the COC group and LCS12 participant who did not enter the Extension Phase."|At 18 months/EOS|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of overall satisfaction rating at 18 months/end of study)||Percentage of participants|||Number
832681|NCT01250730|Primary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio AUC(0-inf)|The metabolic ratio (MR) is calculated by first converting the AUC(0-inf) for both crizotinib and metabolite (PF-06260182) from mass units to molar units.|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832319|NCT01254292|Secondary|Overall Satisfaction Rating by the 5-point Likert Item at 18 Months|Satisfaction was to be assessed by the subject based on a 5-point Likert item, using the following question: How satisfied are you with the birth control method used during the study? 1. Very satisfied 2. Satisfied 3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4. Dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied The overall satisfaction rate was to be the percentage of subjects selecting “1. Very satisfied” or “2. Satisfied” for the above question.|At 18 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of overall satisfaction rating at 18 months)||Percentage of participants|||Number
832320|NCT01254292|Secondary|Overall Satisfaction Rating by the 5-point Likert Item at 12 Months|Satisfaction was to be assessed by the subject based on a 5-point Likert item, using the following question: How satisfied are you with the birth control method used during the study? 1. Very satisfied 2. Satisfied 3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4. Dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied The overall satisfaction rate was to be the percentage of subjects selecting “1. Very satisfied” or “2. Satisfied” for the above question.|At 12 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of overall satisfaction rating at 12 months)||Percentage of participants|||Number
832321|NCT01254292|Secondary|Overall Satisfaction Rating by the 5-point Likert Item at 6 Months|Satisfaction was to be assessed by the subject based on a 5-point Likert item, using the following question: How satisfied are you with the birth control method used during the study? 1. Very satisfied 2. Satisfied 3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4. Dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied The overall satisfaction rate was to be the percentage of subjects selecting “1. Very satisfied” or “2. Satisfied” for the above question.|At 6 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with an assessment of overall satisfaction rating at 6 months)||Percentage of participants|||Number
832322|NCT01254292|Primary|Overall Satisfaction Rate at 18 Months (Last Observation Carried Forward, LOCF)|Satisfaction was to be assessed by the subject based on a 5-point Likert item, using the following question: How satisfied are you with the birth control method used during the study? 1. Very satisfied 2. Satisfied 3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4. Dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied The overall satisfaction rate was to be the percentage of subjects selecting “1. Very satisfied” or “2. Satisfied” for the above question.|At 18 months|Full analysis set (only subjects with at least one assessment of the overall satisfaction rating)||Percentage of participants|||Number
832323|NCT01254305|Primary|Change in Patient Global Impressions of Severity (PGI-S) for Fatigue Score|The PGI-S is a clinician-rated scale that rates was used to rate the severity of the patient’s current state of overall fatigue. Patients were rated on a scale from 1 to 7, with 1 indicating no symptoms of fatigue and 7 indicating extreme fatigue.|From Baseline to Week 8|"The Randomized Population consisted of 262 patients, with 251 patients who took at least 1 dose of double-blind treatment to comprise the Safety population.
The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population consisted of 248 patients in the Safety Population who had a baseline and at least 1 postbaseline assessment of either the CGI-S or PGI-I fatigue score."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832324|NCT01254305|Secondary|Change in Cognitive and Physical Functioning Questionnaire (CPFQ), Last Observation Carried Forward|The Cognitive and Physical Functioning Questionnaire is a patient-rated, 7-item scale used to measure cognitive and executive dysfunction in mood and anxiety disorders. The CPFQ is sensitive to change with treatment and displays convergent validity by significant correlations with other measures of sleepiness, fatigue, apathy, and neuropsychological functioning. Patients are rated on a scale from 1 to 6 for seven common complaints of depressed patients reporting fatigue or cognitive/executive problems—with 1 indicating greater than normal functioning, 2 indicating normal functioning, and 3 to 6 indicating degrees of impaired functioning. The CPFQ ranges from the best possible score of 7 (greater than normal functioning) to the worst possible score of 42 (totally absent).|From Baseline to Week 8|The Randomized Population consisted of 262 patients, with 251 patients who took at least 1 dose of double-blind treatment to comprise the Safety population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832325|NCT01254305|Primary|Change in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) for Fatigue Score|The CGI-S is a clinician-rated scale that rates the severity of the patient’s current state of fatigue based on the Investigator’s clinical opinion with regard to the patient population with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). Patient were rated on a scale from 1 to 7, with 1 indicating a normal state and 7 indicating that the patient was among the most extremely fatigued|From Baseline to Week 8|"The Randomized Population consisted of 262 patients, with 251 patients who took at least 1 dose of double-blind treatment to comprise the Safety population.
The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population consisted of 248 patients in the Safety Population who had a baseline and at least 1 postbaseline assessment of either the CGI-S or PGI-I fatigue score."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832326|NCT01254318|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Invasive Fungal Infections in Canada|Data were to be extracted from participant hospital records from 5-9 centers across Canada starting from the time of initiating chemotherapy or conditioning regimen for their stem cell transplant (index date) until one year post-index date, in order to determine the percentage of high risk participants with non-Candida invasive fungal infections.|365 days|Whereas enrollment at 5-9 centers in Canada was planned, this was not accomplished, as data were only collected from a single institution in Canada.|||||
832327|NCT01254318|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Specific Fungal Pathogen at a Single Institution|Data were extracted from participant hospital records from the time of initiating chemotherapy or conditioning regimen for their stem cell transplant (index date) until one year post-index date, in order to determine the percentage of participants with a specific fungal pathogen.|365 days|All enrolled participants who received stem cell transplant and high dose chemotherapy for leukemia.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832328|NCT01254318|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Non-Candida Invasive Fungal Infections at a Single Institution|Data were extracted from participant hospital records from the time of initiating chemotherapy or conditioning regimen for their stem cell transplant (index date) until one year post-index date, in order to determine the percentage of high risk participants with non-Candida invasive fungal infections.|365 days|All enrolled participants who received stem-cell transplant and high dose chemotherapy for leukemia.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832329|NCT01254331|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Tocilizumab||Week 52|Safety population||participants|||Number
832330|NCT01254331|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious AEs (SAEs), Related AEs, Discontinuation Due to AEs, or Death||Baseline, every 4 weeks through Week 52|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
832332|NCT01254331|Secondary|Mean Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) Levels|ESR is an acute phase reactant and levels of ESR increase with inflammation. ESR is measured as mm/hour.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population; n=number of participants assessed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||mm/hour||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832333|NCT01254331|Secondary|Mean C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Levels|CRP is an acute phase reactant and levels of CRP increase with inflammation. CRP is measured as milligrams per liter (mg/L).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population; n=number of participants assessed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||mg/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832334|NCT01254331|Secondary|Assessment of Physical Function Using Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)|Physical function was assessed using the HAQ. The HAQ scores range from 0 to 3 with, 0: no assistance needed, 1: participant uses a special device for day-to-day activities, 2: participant usually needs help from another person, and 3: participant uses BOTH a special device AND another person's help for day-to-day activities.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population; n=number of participants assessed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832335|NCT01254331|Secondary|Assessment of Global Disease by the Physician Using Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"The physician's global assessment of disease activity was assessed using a 0 to 100 mm horizontal VAS by the physician. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as no disease activity (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm, as maximum disease activity (maximum arthritis disease activity). The physician marked the line corresponding to their assessment of disease activity and the distance from the left edge was measured."|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population; n=number of participants assessed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832336|NCT01254331|Secondary|Assessment of Global Disease by the Participant Using VAS|"The participant's global assessment of disease activity was assessed using a 0 to 100 mm horizontal VAS by the participant. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as no disease activity (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm, as maximum disease activity (maximum arthritis disease activity). The participants marked the line corresponding to their assessment of disease activity and the distance from the left edge was measured."|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population; n=number of participants assessed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832337|NCT01254331|Secondary|Assessment of Pain by the Participant Using Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"The participants assessed their pain using a 0 to 100 millimeter (mm) horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as no pain and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm as unbearable pain. The participants marked the line corresponding to their level of pain and the distance from the left edge was measured."|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population; n=number of participants assessed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832338|NCT01254331|Secondary|SJC and TJC|28 joints were assessed for swelling and tenderness. Joints were classified as swollen (1)/not swollen (0) and tender (1)/not tender (0) giving a total possible SJC and TJC score of 0 to 28 each.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population; n=number of participants assessed for the given parameter at the specified timepoint.||joints||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832339|NCT01254331|Secondary|Time To Achieve ACR20/ACR50/ACR70|The ACR response rates ACR20/ACR50/ACR70 are defined as ≥20%, ≥50%, or ≥70% improvement, respectively, in SJC and TJC, as well as a ≥20%, ≥50%, or ≥70% improvement, respectively, in 3 of the 5 remaining core ACR assessments: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participant's assessment of disease activity, 3) participant's assessment of pain, 4) participant's assessment of functional disability via (HAQ, and 5) CRP at each visit. The median time to achieve ACR20/ACR50/ACR70 was calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population||weeks||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832340|NCT01254331|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Improvement (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)|The ACR response rates ACR20/ACR50/ACR70 are defined as ≥20%, ≥50%, or ≥70% improvement, respectively, in SJC and TJC, as well as a ≥20%, ≥50%, or ≥70% improvement, respectively, in 3 of the 5 remaining core ACR assessments: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participant's assessment of disease activity, 3) participant's assessment of pain, 4) participant's assessment of functional disability via a Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), and 5) C-reactive protein (CRP) at each visit.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
832341|NCT01254331|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission Assessed Using DAS28|DAS28 calculated from the SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count, the ESR (mm/hour) and PtGA of disease activity (VAS) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity. Participants were considered in remission when reaching a DAS28 score <2.6.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population; n=number of participants analyzed at a specific visit||percentage of participants|||Number
832342|NCT01254331|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA Assessed Using DAS28|DAS28 calculated from the SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count, the ESR (mm/hour) and PtGA of disease activity (VAS) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity. DAS28 less than (<) 3.2 = LDA.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population; n=number of participants analyzed at a specific visit||percentage of participants|||Number
832343|NCT01254331|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Clinically Significant Improvement Assessed Using Disease Activity Score Based on 28 Joints (DAS28)|DAS28 calculated from the swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC) using the 28 joints count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (millimeters per hour [mm/hour]) and participant's global assessment (PtGA) of disease activity by Visual analog Scale (VAS; participant rated arthritis activity assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28 less than or equal to (≤) 3.2 equals (=) low disease activity (LDA), DAS28 greater than (>) 3.2 to 5.1 = moderate to high disease activity. A reduction of at least 1.2 units in DAS28 was considered clinically significant improvement.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48 and 52|Safety population; number (n)= number of participants analyzed at a specific visit||percentage of participants|||Number
832344|NCT01254344|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Favorable Clinical Response|Percentage of participants who have no signs or symptoms of infection at the surgical site and do not require surgical intervention for infection|4 weeks posttreatment|Population analyzed was participants who had no signs or symptoms of infection at the surgical site and did not require surgical intervention for infection.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832345|NCT01254344|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Success of Prophylaxis|Percentage of participants who have no signs or symptoms of infection at the surgical site, do not require surgical intervention for infection, and have no need for further antimicrobial therapy|From study drug dose (day of surgery) up to 4 weeks post therapy|"Primary analysis results are for evaluable-patients-only, defined as patients who received a complete dose of prophylaxis, underwent elective colorectal surgery with completion of bowel preparation procedure, had primary skin closure of the wound, and did not receive any prohibited systemic antibiotics or other prohibited anti-infective agents."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832346|NCT01254396|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 hrs post-dose|Pharmacokinetic parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. Here, the 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||hrs||Standard Deviation|Mean
832347|NCT01254396|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast).|0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 hours (hrs) post-dose|Pharmacokinetic parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832348|NCT01254396|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0-∞)]|AUC (0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞). It is obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞).|0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 hrs post-dose|Pharmacokinetic parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. Here, the 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832349|NCT01254396|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 hrs post-dose|Pharmacokinetic parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hrs||Full Range|Median
832350|NCT01254396|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 hrs post-dose|Pharmacokinetic parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832351|NCT01254409|Secondary|SGRQ (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire) Total Score Change From Baseline|St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire Total Score. Scores range from 0 (no impairment) to 100 (maximum impairment). A decrease in score represents a decrease in disease related symptoms. The SGRQ is not validated for IPF.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Day 57|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832352|NCT01254409|Secondary|6MWT (6 Minute Walk Test) Distance Walked Change From Baseline|Change from baseline (measured during screening period) in distance walked during a 6 minute walk test|Screening (between Day -35 and Day 1) and Day 57|||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
832353|NCT01254409|Secondary|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume 1sec )(%) Change From Baseline||Day 1 (Baseline) and Day 57|||Absolute change in FEV1 % predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
832354|NCT01254409|Secondary|DLCO (%) (Diffusing Capacity of Carbon Monoxide) Change From Baseline||Day 1 (Baseline) and Day 57|||Absolute change in % predicted DLCO||Standard Deviation|Mean
832355|NCT01254409|Secondary|FVC (Forced Vital Capacity) % Predicted Change From Baseline||Day 1 (Baseline) and Day 57|||absolute change in % predicted FVC||Standard Deviation|Mean
832356|NCT01254409|Secondary|FVC (Forced Vital Capacity) Change From Baseline to Day 57||Change from Day 1 (Baseline) to Day 57|||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
832357|NCT01254409|Secondary|Vss|Volume of Distribution at Steady State|Day 15|||mL/kg||Full Range|Mean
832358|NCT01254409|Secondary|Total Body Clearance||Day 15|||ml/hr/kg||Full Range|Mean
832359|NCT01254409|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Half Life||Day 15|||hour||Full Range|Mean
832360|NCT01254409|Secondary|AUC48|Area under the curve from 0 to 48 hrs post dose, with samples collected at 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3,4,6,8,12,16, 24 and 48 hours post Day 15 dose.|Day 15|||µg*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832361|NCT01254409|Secondary|Tmax|Time of Maximum observed concentration|Day 15|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832362|NCT01254409|Secondary|Cmax|Maximum concentration|Day 15|Subjects who received all doses of study treatment||µg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832363|NCT01254409|Primary|Safety and Tolerability|Number of subjects with Dose Limiting Toxicities, Number of Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Events and Adverse Events|From first dose on Day 1 through Day 57|All subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment||participants|||Number
832364|NCT01254565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Mean Phosphorus ≤ 4.5 mg/dL or ≤ 5.5 mg/dL During the Efficacy Assessment Phase||Efficacy assessment phase|Modified intent to treat population||percentage of participants|||Number
832365|NCT01254565|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Corrected Calcium Phosphorus Product (cCa x P) During the Efficacy Assessment Phase|Baseline is defined as the average of pre-hemodialysis values obtained on day -2 and day 1. The efficacy assessment phase (defined as 3 days before and 3 days after the last dose of investigational product) value is the mean of all predialysis values obtained during that period.|Baseline and the efficacy assessment phase (from 3 days before to 3 days after the last dose of study drug; approximately 2 weeks for Cohort 1 and 4 weeks for Cohorts 2 and 3)|Modified intent-to-treat population with available data; Phosphorus data were not collected at baseline for participants in Cohort 1.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
832366|NCT01254565|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Phosphorus (P) During the Efficacy Assessment Phase|Baseline is defined as the average of pre-hemodialysis values obtained on day -2 and day 1. The efficacy assessment phase (defined as 3 days before and 3 days after the last dose of investigational product) value is the mean of all predialysis values obtained during that period.|Baseline and the efficacy assessment phase (from 3 days before to 3 days after the last dose of study drug; approximately 2 weeks for Cohort 1 and 4 weeks for Cohorts 2 and 3)|Modified intent-to-treat population with available data; Phosphorus data were not collected at baseline for participants in Cohort 1.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
832367|NCT01254565|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Corrected Calcium (cCa) During the Efficacy Assessment Phase|Baseline is defined as the average of pre-hemodialysis values obtained on day -2 and day 1. The efficacy assessment phase (defined as 3 days before and 3 days after the last dose of investigational product) value is the mean of all predialysis values obtained during that period.|Baseline and the efficacy assessment phase (from 3 days before to 3 days after the last dose of study drug; approximately 2 weeks for Cohort 1 and 4 weeks for Cohorts 2 and 3)|Modified intent-to-treat population with available data||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
832368|NCT01254565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Mean Parathyroid Hormone ≤ 300 pg/mL During the Efficacy Assessment Phase|The efficacy assessment phase (defined as 3 days before and 3 days after the last dose of investigational product) value is the mean of all predialysis values obtained during that period.|Efficacy assessment phase (from 3 days before to 3 days after the last dose of study drug; approximately 2 weeks for Cohort 1 and 4 weeks for Cohorts 2 and 3)|Modified intent-to-treat population||percentage of participants|||Number
832369|NCT01254565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ≥ 30% Reduction From Baseline in Mean Parathyroid Hormone During the Efficacy Assessment Phase|Baseline is defined as the average of pre-hemodialysis values obtained on day -2 and day 1. The efficacy assessment phase (defined as 3 days before and 3 days after the last dose of investigational product) value is the mean of all predialysis values obtained during that period.|Baseline and the efficacy assessment phase (from 3 days before to 3 days after the last dose of study drug; approximately 2 weeks for Cohort 1 and 4 weeks for Cohorts 2 and 3)|Modified intent-to-treat population||percentage of participants|||Number
832370|NCT01254565|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Pre-hemodialysis Parathyroid Hormone (PTH) During the Efficacy Assessment Phase|Baseline is defined as the average of pre-hemodialysis values obtained on day -2 and day 1. The efficacy assessment phase (defined as 3 days before and 3 days after the last dose of investigational product) value is the mean of all predialysis values obtained during that period.|Baseline and the efficacy assessment phase (EAP; defined as the period between 3 days before and 3 days after the last dose of study drug; approximately 2 weeks for Cohort 1 and 4 weeks for Cohorts 2 and 3)|Modified intent-to-treat population||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
832371|NCT01254604|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an AE|An AE is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Participants who discontinued study drug treatment due to an AE are counted once in this summary.|Up to Week 4|APaT population||participants|||Number
832372|NCT01254604|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event (AE)|An AE is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Participants with one or more AEs during the study are counted once in this summary.|Up to 14 days after Week 4 visit|APaT population||participants|||Number
832373|NCT01254604|Secondary|Number of Participants With ≥25% Reduction in IOP From Baseline to Week 4 - Study Eye|IOP was measured at baseline, Week 2 and Week 4 using a Goldmann applanation tonometer. At each of these visits, IOP measurement was performed at 0800, 1000 and 1600 hours. At each IOP assessment time point during a visit, 2 consecutive IOP measurements were made. If these 2 measurements differed by ≤2 mmHg, then the average of the 2 IOP values was recorded. If the 2 measurements differed by >2 mmHg, then a third measurement was obtained and the median of these 3 measurements was recorded. The IOP value for a visit (e.g., Week 4) was the mean of the values recorded at the 3 time points during the visit. For each participant, one “study eye” was identified for data summarization and analysis. The “study eye” was the eye with the higher (i.e., “worse”) IOP at baseline, or if both eyes had the same baseline IOP value, the right eye was designated the “study eye.” Percent reduction in IOP at Week 4 = ([baseline IOP value − Week 4 IOP value]/Baseline IOP value)*100.|Baseline and Week 4|Per Protocol population: Participants who received at least one dose of study drug, had at least one efficacy measurement available for an analysis endpoint and did not have any protocol violations that may substantially affect the results of the primary efficacy endpoint||participants|||Number
832374|NCT01254604|Primary|Mean Diurnal IOP Change From Baseline at Week 4 - Study Eye|IOP was measured at baseline, Week 2 and Week 4 using a Goldmann applanation tonometer. At each of these visits, IOP measurement was performed at 0800, 1000 and 1600 hours. At each IOP assessment time point during a visit, 2 consecutive IOP measurements were made. If these 2 measurements differed by ≤2 mmHg, then the average of the 2 IOP values was recorded. If the 2 measurements differed by >2 mmHg, then a third measurement was obtained and the median of these 3 measurements was recorded. The IOP value for a visit (e.g., Week 4) was the mean of the values recorded at the 3 time points during the visit. For each participant, one “study eye” was identified for data summarization and analysis for this primary efficacy outcome measure. The “study eye” was the eye with the higher (i.e., “worse”) IOP at baseline, or if both eyes had the same baseline IOP value, the right eye was designated the “study eye.” Change from baseline in IOP at Week 4 = Week 4 IOP value − baseline IOP value.|Baseline and Week 4|Per Protocol population: Participants who received at least one dose of study drug, had at least one efficacy measurement available for an analysis endpoint and did not have any protocol violations that may substantially affect the results of the primary efficacy endpoint||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832384|NCT01254656|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ Lymphocyte Counts (Absolute) at 144 Weeks From Day 1 of the Parent Protocol|Participant's immunological status assessed by CD4+ lymphocyte count (absolute and percentage) at 48 weeks (ie, 144 weeks from Day 1 of the parent protocol)|144 Weeks from Day 1 of the parent protocol|All participants enrolled in this protocol constituted the analysis population associated with each of the parent protocols and all available data were used for efficacy analyses. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing values.||cells/uL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832375|NCT01254643|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) for Each of the HPV Types Contained in the Vaccine|Serum antibody titers for HPV virus-like particles (VLPs), Types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58 were determined 4 weeks post-vaccination 3 using cLIA. Titers are reported in milli Merck Units/mL.|4 weeks post-vaccination 3 (Month 7)|Participants who received all 3 vaccinations and met criteria for Per Protocol Immunogenicity (PPI) Population (not a general protocol violator, received all vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, seronegative at Day 1 for HPV type(s), and had a Month 7 serum sample collected within an acceptable day range) for at least 1 of the 9 HPV types.||milli Merck units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832376|NCT01254643|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Vaccine-related AE|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the vaccine. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine is also an AE. Adverse experience that is judged by the Investigator to be “definitely related,” “probably related,” or “possibly related” to the study drug is defined as a vaccine-related AE.|up to 15 days after any vaccination|Safety Population, which consists of all participants who received at least one vaccination and had available follow-up data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
832377|NCT01254643|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Non-Injection Site (Systemic) AE|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the vaccine. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine is also an AE. Systemic AEs were those not categorized as injection-site AEs.|up to 15 days after any vaccination|Safety Population, which consisted of all participants who received at least one vaccination and had available follow-up data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
832378|NCT01254643|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Injection-site Adverse Event (AE)|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the vaccine. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine is also an AE. AEs such as redness, swelling, and pain/tenderness/soreness at the injection site were recorded.|up to 5 days after any vaccination|Safety Population, which consisted of all participants who received at least one vaccination and had available follow-up data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
832379|NCT01254643|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Seroconvert to Each of the HPV Types Contained in the Vaccine|Serum antibody titers for HPV virus-like particles (VLPs), Types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58 were determined 4 weeks post-vaccination 3 using competitive luminex immunoassay (cLIA). The serostatus cutoffs (milli Merck U/mL) for HPV types were as follows: HPV Type 6: ≥30, HPV Type 11: ≥16; HPV Type 16: ≥20, HPV Type 18: ≥24, HPV Type 31: ≥10, HPV Type 33: ≥8, HPV Type 45: ≥8, HPV Type 52: ≥8, and HPV Type 58: ≥8.|4 weeks post-vaccination 3 (Month 7)|Participants who received all 3 vaccinations and met criteria for Per Protocol Immunogenicity (PPI) Population (not a general protocol violator, received all vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, seronegative at Day 1 for HPV type(s), and had a Month 7 serum sample collected within an acceptable day range) for at least 1 of the 9 HPV types.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832380|NCT01254656|Secondary|Virology Analysis Participant Accountability From Week 96 Through Study Termination|Virology analysis included virus susceptibility (phenotype and genotype)to a standard panel of approved antiretrovirals as determined by the Monogram Biosciences PhenoSense GT assay. Below analysis table included the following parameters: 1. “protocol-defined treatment failure” was defined as an increase in HIV-1 RNA to detectable levels (≥50 copies/mL) on 2 consecutive measurements, the second measurement taken no more than 14 days after the first measurement); 2. “Treatment failure”: treatment failure (both virologic and non-virologic) was defined as a subject who met the protocol-defined treatment failure criterion or discontinued from the study; 3. “NRTI or NNRTI resistance mutations”: nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or lersivirine-associated resistance-associated mutations (RAM) based on the International AIDS Society–USA (IAS-USA) RAM guidelines; 4. ‘with result’ meant an analyzed sample returned genotypic result or phenotypic result or both.|Week 96 through study termination|The virology analysis set included only evaluable participants i.e. those having samples with valid genotypic or phenotypic susceptibility testing results and HIV-1 RNA >500 copies/mL. However, samples with observed emergence of resistance-associated mutations and HIV-1 RNA level ≤500 copies/mL or missing HIV-1 RNA level, were also noted.||Participants|||Number
832381|NCT01254656|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ Lymphocyte Counts (Percentage) at 192 Weeks From Day 1 of the Parent Protocol|Participant's immunological status assessed by CD4+ lymphocyte count (absolute and percentage) at 192 weeks from Day 1 of the parent protocol.|192 Weeks from Day 1 of the parent protocol|Analyses included all enrolled participants. Week 192 data are presented as Week 208 had few participants. For participants who discontinued prematurely, LOCF was used to impute values for post discontinuation visits. Participants who discontinued due to termination of the program were not included in the analysis for the post termination visits.||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
832382|NCT01254656|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ Lymphocyte Counts (Absolute) at 192 Weeks From Day 1 of the Parent Protocol|Participant's immunological status assessed by CD4+ lymphocyte count (absolute and percentage) at 192 weeks from Day 1 of the parent protocol.|192 Weeks from Day 1 of the parent protocol|Analyses included all enrolled participants. Week 192 data are presented, as Week 208 had few participants. For participants who discontinued prematurely, LOCF was used to impute values for post discontinuation visits. Participants who discontinued due to termination of the program were not included in the analysis for the post termination visits.||cells/uL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832383|NCT01254656|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ Lymphocyte Counts (Percentage) at 144 Weeks From Day 1 of the Parent Protocol|Participant's immunological status assessed by CD4+ lymphocyte count (absolute and percentage) at 48 weeks (ie, 144 weeks from Day 1 of the parent protocol)|144 Weeks from Day 1 of the parent protocol|All participants enrolled in this protocol constituted the analysis population associated with each of the parent protocols and all available data were used for efficacy analyses. LOCF was used to impute missing values.||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
832413|NCT01255423|Secondary|Onset of Pain Relief|Onset of perceptible pain relief|Day 1|||Hour||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832385|NCT01254656|Secondary|Number of Participants With Plasma HIV‑1 RNA Level <50 Copies/mL up to Week 208|Number of participants with HIV-1 RNA level <50 copies/mL plasma was summarized at last visit. Abbott RealTime HIV-1 assay was used to measure the HIV-1 RNA level.|Up to Week 208|Analyses included all enrolled participants. Last visit used the last available visit of each participant. Discontinued from study, lost to follow-up, or missing HIV-1 RNA level data at last visit were considered to have HIV-1 RNA levels >=50 copies/mL. Participants discontinued due to program termination were not considered as discontinuations.||Participants|||Number
832386|NCT01254656|Primary|Number of Participants With Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus - 1 (HIV‑1) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Level <50 Copies/mL at 144 Weeks From Day 1 of the Parent Protocol|Number of participants with HIV-1 RNA level <50 copies/mL plasma was summarized at 48 weeks i.e. 144 weeks from Day 1 of the parent protocol. Roche Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor assay was used to measure the HIV-1 RNA level.|144 Weeks from Day 1 of the parent protocol|All participants enrolled in this protocol constituted the analysis population associated with each of the parent protocols and all available data were used for efficacy analyses.||Participants|||Number
832387|NCT01254669|Secondary|The Secondary Outcome Will be Maternal Knowledge About HPV Vaccine.|post-educational intervention assessment of HPV knowledge ranges from 0 (minimal knowledge) to 12 (maximal knowledge)|1 hour after intervention|The number of participants for analysis was determined based on the total enrolled and who responded to knowledge questions||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832388|NCT01254669|Primary|The Receipt of the First HPV Vaccination|Receipt of the first HPV vaccination among adolescent daughters of the participants|within 1 month of randomization|The number of participants for analysis was determined based on number of participants enrolled and who answered questions of interest.||percentage of participants|||Number
832389|NCT01254721|Primary|The Changes From Baseline in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) Total Score to Day 29|The Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) is an eleven-item, multiple-choice diagnostic questionnaire which psychiatrists use to measure the severity of manic episodes. There are four items that are graded on a 0 to 8 scale (irritability, speech, thought content, and disruptive/aggressive behavior), while the remaining seven items are graded on a 0 to 4 scale. These four items are given twice the weight of the others to compensate for poor cooperation from severely ill patients. Total score is summed of 11items. Total score rage is from 0 to 60 and the higher score represent a worse oucome.|From Baseline to Day 29|||scores on the scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832390|NCT01254721|Secondary|The Change From Baseline up to Day 29 and Final Assessment in the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness Scale (CGI-S)|The Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S) is scored to rate the patient’s current clinical state. The score range is form 0 to 7. A CGI-S score of 1 indicates that a patient is “Normal, not at all ill” and a score of 7 indicates that a patient is “Among the most extremely ill patients”.|From Baseline to Day 29|||scores on the scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832391|NCT01254747|Secondary|Overall Satisfaction|Overall satisfaction was recorded on a 5-point Likert scale as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. The following scale was used: 2=very satisfied, 1=somewhat satisfied, 0=neither, -1=somewhat dissatisfied, and -2=very dissatisfied.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832392|NCT01254747|Secondary|Corrected Visual Acuity|Corrected visual acuity was tested for each eye while the participant read distant charts in normal lighting. Corrected visual acuity was measured with a Snellen chart, which was converted into logMAR units (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution). A 20/20 Snellen acuity equates to a logMAR acuity of 0.0 and is considered normal distance eyesight. Positive logMAR values indicate poorer vision, and negative values denote better visual acuity.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832393|NCT01254747|Secondary|Lens Fit|Lens fit was assessed by the investigator for each eye using a biomicroscope, which magnifies the appearance of the contact lens on the participant's eye. Lens fit was graded on a 5-point scale, with 2=unacceptable loose, 1=acceptable loose, 0=optimal, -1=acceptable tight, and -2=unacceptable tight.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832394|NCT01254747|Primary|Average Daily Wear Time|Average daily wear time (hours) was reported by the participant as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832395|NCT01254747|Primary|Dryness Throughout the Day|Dryness throughout the day was assessed and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Dryness throughout the day was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very dry and 10 being not dry.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832396|NCT01254747|Primary|Overall Handling|Overall handling was assessed and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Overall handling was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832397|NCT01254747|Primary|Vision Quality During the Day|Vision quality during the day was assessed and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Vision quality during the day was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832398|NCT01254747|Primary|Overall Comfort|Overall comfort was assessed and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Overall comfort was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832399|NCT01254760|Secondary|Overall Fit|Overall lens fit was assessed by the investigator at study visit using a biomicroscope, which magnifies the appearance of the contact lens on the participant's eye. Lens fit was assessed by eye and graded on a 5-point scale, with 2=unacceptably loose, 1= acceptably loose, 0=optimal, -1=acceptably tight, and -2=unacceptably tight|Day 5, lenses replaced daily|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as: major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832400|NCT01254760|Primary|Overall Vision|Overall vision was interpreted and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 5 days of wear. Overall vision was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|5 days of wear, lenses replaced daily|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as: major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832401|NCT01254760|Primary|Handling at Removal|Handling at removal was interpreted and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 5 days of wear. Handling at removal was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor/difficult and 10 being excellent/easy.|5 days of wear, lenses replaced daily|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as: major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832402|NCT01254760|Primary|End of Day Dryness|End of day dryness was interpreted and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 5 days of wear. End of day dryness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very dry and 10 being not dry.|5 days of wear, lenses replaced daily|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as: major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832403|NCT01254760|Primary|End of Day Comfort|End of day comfort was interpreted and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 5 days of wear. End of day comfort was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|5 days of wear, lenses replaced daily|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as: major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832404|NCT01254851|Primary|Number of Steps Taken in 24 Hours.|The primary outcome assessed was the number of steps taken in the 24 hour period prior to discharge as assessed by the electronic pedometer readings.|1 day|The analysis is an intention to treat (ITT) analysis comprising all participants who were randomized.||Steps||Full Range|Median
832405|NCT01254890|Secondary|Phase II: Number of Participants With Response|Response according to International Working Group response criteria for Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (JCO 2003; 21: 4642-9): CR defined by presence of <5% blasts in the bone marrow (BM), with >1 X 10^9/L neutrophils and >100 x 10^9/L platelets in the peripheral blood (PB) with no detectable extramedullary disease. Participants who met the above criteria but had neutrophil or platelet counts less than the stated values were considered to have achieved CRi (CR with incomplete recovery of PB counts) or CR with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp) if CR but platelets < 100 x 10^9/L but ≥ 50 x 10^9/L and platelet transfusion independent. Partial response (PR) required all of the hematologic values for a CR but with a decrease of >/= 50% in the percentage of blasts to 5% to 25% in the BM aspirate.|90 days|Nine participants were not evaluable for response.||participants|||Number
832406|NCT01254890|Primary|Phase I: Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Sorafenib Given With Azacitidine|MTD is defined as highest dose level in which 6 patients treated with at most 1 experiencing a dose limiting toxicity (DLT) during 1st cycle. One cycle of therapy is 7 days of azacitidine (AZA) and 28 days of sorafenib. Starting dose of Sorafenib is 200 mg twice a day azacitidine|28 day cycle|||mg/twice daily|||Number
832407|NCT01255137|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse events module.|3/2/11 - 8/2/12|||Participants|||Number
832408|NCT01255137|Primary|Response Rate (RR) of Axitinib Administered Daily, in Patients With Recurrent, Metastatic, or Primary Unresectable Adrenocortical Cancer (ACC)|Response was defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Complete response (CR) is a disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10mm. Partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameter. Progressive disease (PD) is a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5mm (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression). Stable disease (SD) is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking s reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.|2 years|||Participants|||Number
832409|NCT01255306|Secondary|Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness Change in Patients With Raised Intraocular Pressure Secondary to Silicone Oil Endotamponade|To assess whether retinal nerve fiber layer thickness changes in patients with raised intraocular pressure secondary to silicone oil endotamponade.|6 months|We included all patients who completed follow up visits and who had valid OCT measurements as defined per protocol.||micrometer|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832410|NCT01255306|Primary|Evidence of Retinal Nerve Fibre Layer Thickness Change Measured by Optical Coherence Tomography|Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness change measured by optical coherence tomography might be an additional parameter that could provide new insights into clinical decision making in patients with silicone oil tamponade.|6 months|We included all patients that have completed necessary follow up visits and have had optical coherence tomography measurements at all visits in the final analysis.||micrometer|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832411|NCT01255423|Secondary|Ankle Joint Function|"Ankle joint function score (Karlsson Scoring scale which ranges from 0 worst possible score to 90 best possible score)at 24 and 72 hours and 7 days."|24 and 72 hours, 7 days|||Total score||Standard Deviation|Mean
832412|NCT01255423|Secondary|Tenderness|Tenderness at 24 and 72 hours and 7 days. Change from baseline. Tenderness was measured by a calibrated algometer in order to quantify the pressure pain threshold, a measure of tenderness.|Change from baseline at 24 and 72 hours, 7 days|||N/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
832416|NCT01255436|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Controlled Blood Pressure at the End of 12 Weeks|The percentage of patients with systolic blood pressure less than 140 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure less than 90 mmHg at the end of 12 weeks|12 weeks|Only patients who completed follow up and had evaluable data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
832417|NCT01255436|Secondary|Medication Adherence Rate|The percentage of patients with an improvement of at least one point in adherence score as measured by the Adherence Self-Report Questionnaire at the end of 12 weeks Scale Range: 1 to 6, with 1 being the highest (most adherent) and 6 being the lowest (least adherent)|12 weeks|Only patients who completed follow up and had evaluable data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
832418|NCT01255436|Primary|Mean Absolute Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure After 12 Weeks|Absolute change in diastolic blood pressure from baseline to 12 weeks|baseline and 12 weeks|Only patients who completed follow up and had evaluable data were analyzed.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832419|NCT01255436|Primary|Mean Absolute Change in Systolic Blood Pressure After 12 Weeks|Absolute change in systolic blood pressure from baseline to 12 weeks|baseline and 12 weeks|Only participants who completed follow up and had evaluable data were analyzed.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832420|NCT01255449|Secondary|Post-HSCT Changes in Lung Tissue Density|Changes in lung tissue density were measured by quantitative computed tomography(CT) scan 2 weeks before and 2 months after HSCT|Before and 2 months after HSCT|CT scans, in a format suitable for software analysis, were available in 8 patients only||g/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832421|NCT01255449|Primary|Airway Distensibility With Lung Inflation After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT)|We studied 26 subjects, 2 weeks before and 2 months after HSCT. Within-breath respiratory system conductance (Grs) at 5, 11 and 19 Hz was measured by forced oscillation technique (FOT) at functional residual capacity (FRC) and total lung capacity (TLC)|2 weeks before and 2 months after HSCT|||1/cmH2O*s||Standard Deviation|Mean
832422|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Interleukin-8 (IL-8) in Serum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832423|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Interleukin-1 Beta (IL-1β) in Serum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832424|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) in Serum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832425|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Growth-related Oncogene-α (GRO-α) in Serum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832426|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNF-α) in Serum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832427|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of C-reactive Protein (CRP) in Serum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832428|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Serum Amyloid A (SAA) in Serum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832429|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Neutrophil Elastase Activity in Sputum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832430|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Interleukin-8 (IL-8) in Sputum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832431|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Growth-related Oncogene-α (GRO-α) in Sputum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832432|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNF-α) in Sputum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832433|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Monocyte Chemoattractant Protein-1 (MCP-1) in Sputum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832434|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Regulated on Activation, Normal T Cell Expressed and Secreted (RANTES) in Sputum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832435|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) in Sputum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832436|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of Interleukin-1 Beta (IL-1β) in Sputum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832437|NCT01255592|Secondary|Change From Baseline Total and Domain Scores in St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD Patients (SGRQ-C)|"SGRQ-C total score shows the impact of COPD on patient's health status, and expressed as a percentage of impairment with scale from 0 (best health status) to 100 (worst possible status). The SGRQ-C contains 3 domains:
Symptom (distress due to respiratory symptoms), Activity (disturbance of physical activity) and Impact (overall impact on daily life and well being). All three domains with scale from 0 (best health status) to 100 (worst possible status)."|Baseline and end of treatment (Day 28)|The efficacy analysis set included all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832438|NCT01255592|Secondary|Change From Baseline for the Symptom Scores of the Bronkotest Diary Card|The Bronkotest diary card is a paper based diary card that was filled out by patients daily, recording values from morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurements and answering 8 questions on signs and symptoms. Symptom scores were recorded for night-time symptoms, breathing, sputum colour, sputum amount, sputum type, wellbeing, number of puffs of inhalers, and cough, generally scored on a scale from 0 (no symptoms) to 4 (worst symptoms). Summary statistics for baseline (mean of the last 7 days prior to first dose) and change (mean of the last 7 days on treatment - baseline) only contain patients included in the analysis. For symptom scores a decrease is an improvement, for PEF an increase is an improvement.|Baseline and Last 7 days on treatment|The efficacy analysis set included all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832449|NCT01255631|Secondary|Lymphedema|No participants were assessed for this secondary outcome measure: lymphedema. No data was collected/calculated, and hence the data cannot be summarized to include in the data tables. No meaningful quantifiable data could be obtained on degree of lymphedema, and thus effect of PEMF intervention could not be analyzed.|Pre- and Post-Operative Period|No participants were assessed for this secondary outcome measure: lymphedema. No data was collected/calculated, and hence the data cannot be summarized to include in the data tables. No meaningful quantifiable data could be obtained on degree of lymphedema, and thus effect of PEMF intervention could not be analyzed.|||||
832439|NCT01255592|Secondary|Change From Baseline for the Morning PEF and Evening PEF of the Bronkotest Diary Card|The Bronkotest diary card is a paper based diary card that was filled out by patients daily, recording values from morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurements and answering 8 questions on signs and symptoms. Summary statistics for baseline (mean of the last 7 days prior to first dose) and change (mean of the last 7 days on treatment - baseline) only contain patients included in the analysis. For symptom scores a decrease is an improvement, for PEF an increase is an improvement.|Baseline and Last 7 days on treatment|The efficacy analysis set included all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||L/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832440|NCT01255592|Secondary|Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) at End of Treatment (Day 28)|TDI measures changes in dyspnea severity from the baseline as established by the Baseline Dyspnea Index (BDI). TDI is an interviewer-administered rating of severity of dyspnea that assesses Change in Functional Impairment, Change in Magnitude of Task, and Change in Magnitude of Effort domains on a 7-point scale ranging from -3 (major deterioration) to +3 (major improvement). Total score ranges from -9 to +9. The lower the score, the more deterioration in severity of dyspnea.|Baseline to end of treatment (Day 28)|The efficacy analysis set included all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832441|NCT01255592|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Flow Between 25% and 75% of Forced Vital Capacity (FEF25-75)|Lung function tests consisted of 3 forced expiratory maneuvers in which the patient expired forcefully from total lung capacity to residual volume, recorded using a spirometer. FEF25-75 is flow rate during the middle half of forced vital capacity (25%-75% of the total volume (FVC) exhaled).|Baseline to end of treatment (Day 28)|The efficacy analysis set included all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||liters/second||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832442|NCT01255592|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1)|Lung function tests consisted of 3 forced expiratory maneuvers in which the patient expired forcefully from total lung capacity to residual volume, recorded using a spirometer. FEV1 is the volume expired in the first second of maximal expiration after a full inspiration.|Baseline to end of treatment (Day 28)|The efficacy analysis set included all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832443|NCT01255592|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|Lung function tests consisted of 3 forced expiratory maneuvers in which the patient expired forcefully from total lung capacity to residual volume, recorded using a spirometer. FVC is the maximum volume of air which can be exhaled or inspired during a forced maneuver.|Baseline to end of treatment (Day 28)|The efficacy analysis set included all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832444|NCT01255592|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Slow Vital Capacity (SVC)|Lung function tests consisted of 3 forced expiratory maneuvers in which the patient expired forcefully from total lung capacity to residual volume, recorded using a spirometer. SVC is the measure of the change in volume of gas in the lungs from complete inspiration to complete expiration.|Baseline to end of treatment (Day 28)|The efficacy analysis set included all patients who were randomized (defined as having a randomization code recorded on the demography case report form), received at least one dose of study medication, and contributed sufficient data for at least one efficacy endpoint.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832445|NCT01255592|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weight of 24-hour Sputum Collection|Patients collected all sputum produced during a 24-hour period at baseline and Day 28.|Baseline and end of treatment (Day 28)|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||grams||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832446|NCT01255592|Secondary|Ratio of the Percentage Neutrophil Cell Count in Sputum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832447|NCT01255592|Primary|Ratio of Absolute Neutrophil Cell Count in Sputum at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|Ratio of the mean of 3 visits at the end of the treatment period to the mean of the 3 baseline visits.|End of treatment values from 3 visits (day 21 to 28) and baseline values from 3 visits.|The PD analysis set comprised all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and for whom PD samples (absolute and percentage neutrophil cell count in sputum, sputum collection weight, inflammatory markers in sputum and serum) were available (assumed not to be affected by factors such as protocol violations).||ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832448|NCT01255631|Secondary|Narcotic Pain Medications|No participants were assessed for this secondary outcome measure: narcotic pain medications. No data was collected/calculated, and hence the data cannot be summarized to include in the data tables. Patients were instructed to complete logs at home indicating narcotic pain medications, and patients did not submit necessary logs assessing need for pain medications and level of nausea and vomiting; therefore, no meaningful data could be analyzed.|Post-Operative Period|No participants were assessed for this secondary outcome measure: narcotic pain medications. No data was collected/calculated, and hence the data cannot be summarized to include in the data tables. Patients were instructed to complete logs at home indicating narcotic pain medications, and patients did not submit necessary logs.|||||
832450|NCT01255631|Secondary|Clinical Assessment of Shoulder and Arm Symptoms Before and After PEMF|No participants were assessed for this secondary outcome measure: clinical assessment of shoulder and arm symptoms before and after PEMF. No data was collected/calculated, and hence the data cannot be summarized to include in the data tables. There was a lack of post-clinical assessment data as well as poor patient compliance with the 14 day mark follow up. Therefore, no meaningful results could be derived since there was no quantifiable means to compare before and after PEMF data points.|Pre- and Post-Operative Period|No participants were assessed for this secondary outcome measure: clinical assessment of shoulder and arm symptoms before and after PEMF. No data was collected/calculated, and hence the data cannot be summarized to include in the data tables due to lack of post-clinical assessment data and poor patient compliance with the 14 day mark follow up.|||||
832451|NCT01255631|Secondary|Patient Self-Assessment of Shoulder and Arm Symptoms Before and After PEMF|No participants were assessed for this secondary outcome measure: patient self-assessment of shoulder and arm symptoms before and after PEMF. No data was collected/calculated, and hence the data cannot be summarized to include in the data tables. Patients did not complete the necessary surveys assessing their shoulder and arm symptoms; therefore, no meaningful results could be derived since there were no surveys to compare before and after PEMF data points.|Pre- and Post-Operative Period|No participants were assessed for this secondary outcome measure: patient self-assessment of shoulder and arm symptoms before and after PEMF. No data was collected/calculated, and hence the data cannot be summarized to include in the data tables. Patients did not complete the necessary surveys assessing their shoulder and arm symptoms.|||||
832452|NCT01255631|Secondary|Jackson Pratt (JP) Drain Output|Total volume (in units of millimeters - mL) of Jackson Pratt (JP) drain output on post-operative day 1 and day 2 were recorded for patients in the study.|Post-Operative Day 1 & 2 (2 Days)|For the 7 patients who completed the study, the mean and standard deviations for the total JP drain output (in milliliters - mL) from post-operative days 1 & 2 (2 days total) were analyzed as a secondary outcome.||milliliters (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
832453|NCT01255631|Primary|Pain Level on Visual Analog Scale|Pain will be the primary outcome measured by patient level of pain as quantified by a visual analog scale with written descriptions, and amount of pain medication used hourly until the patient is discharged (up to a maximum of six hours post-op), then daily for a total of two weeks post-op. The VAS pain scale ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain).|2 weeks|Only 7 patients completed the study by quantifying the level of their pain post-operatively on a visual analog scale from 0-10. The medication logs and two week post-op analogs could not be utilized for the analysis since all 7 patients did not complete these logs.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832454|NCT01255722|Secondary|Average Contrast-to-noise Ratio (Average CNR)|"Signal attenuation was measured by off-site radiologists in the lumen of 4 coronary segments in the ascending aorta and the in left ventricle and expressed in Hounsfield Unit (HU).
A measure of noise in CT scans was collected at least in the aorta and if possible in the muscle and/or air.
In territories where pre and post signal attenuation measures were both available, the contrast-to-noise ratio was computed according to the following formula: CNR = (Post Att – Baseline Att) / Image Noise"|<1h|Full Analysis Set: included all patients who underwent the examination and had available assessments of the primary endpoint.||Hounsfield Units:Hounsfield Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
832455|NCT01255722|Secondary|Average Signal-to-Noise Ratio (Average SNR)|"Signal attenuation was measured by off-site radiologists in the lumen of 4 coronary segments, in the ascending aorta and in the left ventricle and was expressed in Hounsfield Unit (HU). Measurements were set in post-injection images for the 6 territories.
A measure of noise in CT scans was collected at least in the aorta and if possible in the muscle and/or air.
Signal-to-Noise Ratios (SNR) of post-injection images were derived in all territories from attenuation measurements according to the following formula:
SNR Territory = Post Attenuation / Image Noise"|<1h|Full Analysis Set: included all patients who underwent the examination and had available assessments of the primary endpoint.||Hounsfield Units:Hounsfield Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
832456|NCT01255722|Secondary|Average Signal Attenuation After IV Injection of Contrast|Attenuation of signal was measured off-site on post-injection images of four coronary segments, in the ascending aorta and in the left ventricle, then it was averaged at the patient level.|<1h|Full Analysis Set: all patients who underwent the coronary CT scan examination and had available assessments of the primary endpoint.||Hounsfield Units||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832457|NCT01255722|Secondary|Coronary Track Rate|A post processing software automatically tracked the number of distal segments of the left anterior descending coronary artery, the left circumflex coronary artery and the right coronary artery . The number of segments tracked per patient were assessed by an independent off-site radiologist.|<24h|Full Analysis Set population: all patients who underwent the coronary CT scan examination and had available assessments of the primary endpoint.||Number of tracked segments per patient||Standard Deviation|Mean
832458|NCT01255722|Secondary|Average Image Quality According to Off-site Reading|For each patient, all 18 coronary segments were graded for image quality using a 5-point evaluation scale (from 0=non-diagnostic to 4=excellent). The average image quality was evaluated using the off-site readings, by averaging the scores obtained for the 18 segments used to determine the CT evaluability (primary criteria).|<24h|Full Analysis Set: all patients who underwent the coronary CT scan examination and had available assessments of the primary endpoint.||Image quality Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832459|NCT01255722|Primary|Rate of Patients With Evaluable CT Scans i.e. Allowing Identification of Coronary Artery Stenosis According to Off-site Reading Assessment|"Evaluability was based upon the off-site assessment of 18-coronary segments graded for image quality with a 5-point scale.4= Excellent quality, fully confidence without any doubts concerning the presence/absence of luminal stenosis; 3= Good quality, confidence concerning the presence/absence of luminal stenosis; 2= Moderate quality, relative confidence, with minor doubts concerning the presence/absence of luminal stenosis; 1= Poor quality, some doubts concerning the presence/absence of stenosis; 0= Non diagnostic.
A patient’s CT scan was considered as evaluable for identification of coronary artery stenosis if none of the 18 coronary segments had a score of 0."|< 24h|Full Analysis Set: all patients who underwent the coronary CT scan examination and had available assessments of the primary endpoint.||Percentage of patients||Standard Error|Geometric Mean
832508|NCT01256008|Secondary|Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)|"The scale is used to assess the pain intensity of patients.
The scale range of VAS is 0-10. Higher score indicates a higher intensity of pain.
The scale was assessed at baseline,4 week,8 week,12 week,24 week"|baseline,4 w,8 w,12 w,24 w|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832460|NCT01255761|Secondary|Interference With Household Work Productivity (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 52|"The arthritis interference in the last month with household work productivity is measured on a scale that ranges from 0 (no interference) to 10 (complete interference).
The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity."|Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832461|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Days With Hired Outside Help (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 52|Number of days with hired outside help in the last month. The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Days with hired outside help||Standard Deviation|Mean
832462|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Days Missed of Family/Social/Leisure Activities (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 52|Number of days missed of family/social/leisure activities in the last month. The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Activity days missed||Standard Deviation|Mean
832463|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Days With Reduced Household Work Productivity (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 52|Number of days with reduced household work productivity in the last month. The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Days with reduced household work||Standard Deviation|Mean
832464|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Days With No Household Work (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 52|Number of days with no household work in the last month. The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Days with no household work||Standard Deviation|Mean
832465|NCT01255761|Secondary|Interference With Work Productivity (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 52|"The arthritis interference in the last month with work productivity is measured on a scale that ranges from 0 (no interference) to 10 (complete interference).
The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity."|Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832466|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Work Days With Reduced Productivity (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 52|Number of work days with reduced productivity in the last month. The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Work days with reduced work productivity||Standard Deviation|Mean
832467|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Work Days Missed (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 52|Number of work days missed in the last month. The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Number of work days missed in last month||Standard Deviation|Mean
832468|NCT01255761|Secondary|Interference With Household Work Productivity (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 12|"The arthritis interference in the last month with household work productivity is measured on a scale that ranges from 0 (no interference) to 10 (complete interference).
The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity."|Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832469|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Days With Hired Outside Help (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 12|Number of days with hired outside help in the last month The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Days with hired outside help||Standard Deviation|Mean
832470|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Days Missed of Family/Social/Leisure Activities (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 12|Number of days missed of family/social/leisure activities in the last month The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Activity days missed||Standard Deviation|Mean
832471|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Days With Reduced Household Work Productivity (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 12|Number of days with reduced household work productivity in the last month The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Days with reduced household work||Standard Deviation|Mean
832472|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Days With No Household Work (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 12|Number of days with no household work in the last month The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Days with no household work||Standard Deviation|Mean
832682|NCT01250730|Primary|Time to Cmax (Tmax) of Plasma Active Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
832473|NCT01255761|Secondary|Interference With Work Productivity (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 12|The arthritis interference in the last month with work productivity is measured on a scale that ranges from 0 (no interference) to 10 (complete interference) The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832474|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Work Days With Reduced Productivity (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 12|Number of work days with reduced productivity in the last month The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Work days with reduced work productivity||Standard Deviation|Mean
832475|NCT01255761|Secondary|Number of Work Days Missed (Work Productivity Survey - Rheumatoid Arthritis [WPS-RA]) at Week 12|Number of work days missed in the last month The WPS-RA is a 9-item survey measuring the effect of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and its treatment on the patient’s work productivity.|Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement.||Number of work days missed in last month||Standard Deviation|Mean
832476|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With RAPID3 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data) Remission (RAPID3 ≤ 3.0) at Week 52|"RAPID3 is the sum of the Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscores of physical function, pain, and patient’s global status.
The range for the RAPID3 is 0 - 30 with a negative change in RAPID3 score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Week 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832477|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With RAPID3 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data) Remission (RAPID3 ≤ 3.0) at Week 12|"RAPID3 is the sum of the Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscores of physical function, pain, and patient’s global status.
The range for the RAPID3 is 0 - 30 with a negative change in RAPID3 score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832478|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With RAPID3 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data) Low Disease Activity (RAPID3 ≤ 6.0) at Week 52|"RAPID3 is the sum of the Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscores of physical function, pain, and patient’s global status.
The range for the RAPID3 is 0 - 30 with a negative change in RAPID3 score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Week 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832479|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With RAPID3 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data) Low Disease Activity (RAPID3 ≤ 6.0) at Week 12|"RAPID3 is the sum of the Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscores of physical function, pain, and patient’s global status.
The range for the RAPID3 is 0 - 30 with a negative change in RAPID3 score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832480|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With CDAI (Clinical Disease Activity Index) Remission (CDAI ≤ 2.8) at Week 52|"CDAI is calculated as the sum of tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore, and Investigator's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined.
The range for the CDAI is 0 - 76 with a negative change in CDAI score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Week 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832481|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With CDAI (Clinical Disease Activity Index) Remission (CDAI ≤ 2.8) at Week 12|"CDAI is calculated as the sum of tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore, and Investigator's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined.
The range for the CDAI is 0 - 76 with a negative change in CDAI score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832509|NCT01256008|Primary|Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17)|"The scale(HAMD-17) is used to assessed the depression symptoms of patients.
The scale range is 0-53.Higher value represents a worse outcome.
The scale was assessed at baseline,2 week,4 week,8 week,12 week,16 week,24 week"|baseline,2 w,4 w,8 w,12 w,16 w,24 w|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832482|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With CDAI (Clinical Disease Activity Index) Low Disease Activity (CDAI ≤ 10) at Week 52|"CDAI is calculated as the sum of tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore, and Investigator's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined.
The range for the CDAI is 0 - 76 with a negative change in CDAI score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Week 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832483|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With CDAI (Clinical Disease Activity Index) Low Disease Activity (CDAI ≤ 10) at Week 12|"CDAI is calculated as the sum of tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore, and Investigator's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined.
The range for the CDAI is 0 - 76 with a negative change in CDAI score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832484|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With DAS28(ESR) (Disease Activity Score 28 [Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate]) Remission (DAS28[ESR] < 2.6) at Week 52|DAS28(ESR) is calculated from the tender joint count, swollen joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore using this formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.70 x lognat (ESR) + 0.014 x Global Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined. Lower scores indicate less disease activity.|Week 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832485|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With DAS28(ESR) (Disease Activity Score 28 [Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate]) Remission (DAS [ESR] < 2.6) at Week 12|DAS28(ESR) is calculated from the tender joint count, swollen joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore using this formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.70 x lognat (ESR) + 0.014 x Global Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined. Lower scores indicate less disease activity.|Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832486|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With DAS28(ESR) (Disease Activity Score 28 [Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate]) Low Disease Activity (DAS28[ESR] ≤ 3.2) at Week 52|DAS28(ESR) is calculated from the tender joint count, swollen joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore, using this formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.70 x lognat (ESR) + 0.014 x Global Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined. Lower scores indicate less disease activity.|Week 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832487|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With DAS28(ESR) (Disease Activity Score 28 [Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate]) Low Disease Activity (DAS28[ESR] ≤ 3.2) at Week 12|DAS28(ESR) is calculated from the tender joint count, swollen joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore, using this formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.70 x lognat (ESR) + 0.014 x Global Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined. Lower scores indicate less disease activity.|Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of subjects|||Number
832488|NCT01255761|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) Assessed at Week 52|"RAPID3 is the sum of the Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscores of physical function, pain, and patient’s global status.
The range for the RAPID3 is 0 - 30 with a negative change in RAPID3 score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used for this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832489|NCT01255761|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) Assessed at Week 12|"RAPID3 is the sum of the Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscores of physical function, pain, and patient’s global status.
The range for the RAPID3 is 0 - 30 with a negative change in RAPID3 score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used for this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832510|NCT01256034|Secondary|Plasma IL-6, CRP, Th1/Th2 Balance||14 days||||||
832490|NCT01255761|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Assessed at Week 52|"CDAI is calculated as the sum of tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore, and Investigator's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined.
The range for the CDAI is 0 - 76 with a negative change in CDAI score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used for this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832491|NCT01255761|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Assessed at Week 12|"CDAI is calculated as the sum of tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore, and Investigator's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined.
The range for the CDAI is 0 - 76 with a negative change in CDAI score indicating an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicating a worsening of disease activity."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used for this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832492|NCT01255761|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score 28 Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate [DAS28 (ESR)] Assessed at Week 52|"The DAS28(ESR) score is a measure of the subject's disease activity.
DAS28(ESR) is calculated from the tender joint count (28 joints), swollen joint count (28 joints), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore using this formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.70 x lognat (ESR) + 0.014 x Global Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined. Lower scores indicate less disease activity."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 52|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used for this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832493|NCT01255761|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Score 28 Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate [DAS28 (ESR)] Assessed at Week 12|"The DAS28(ESR) score is a measure of the subject's disease activity.
DAS28(ESR) is calculated from the tender joint count (28 joints), swollen joint count (28 joints), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore using this formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.70 x lognat (ESR) + 0.014 x Global Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined. Lower scores indicate less disease activity."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline and valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) was used for this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832494|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of All Subjects Who Are Both Responders at Week 12 and With Non-remission (Disease Activity Score 28 [Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate] > 2.6) at Week 52|"For subjects randomized to CDAI, response is defined as CDAI ≤10 or 20% improvement from Baseline. For subjects randomized to RAPID3, response is defined as RAPID3 ≤6 or 20% improvement from Baseline.
DAS28(ESR) is calculated from the tender joint count, swollen joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore using this formula: 0.56x√(TJC) + 0.28x√(SJC) + 0.70xlognat (ESR) + 0.014xGlobal Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of participants|||Number
832495|NCT01255761|Secondary|Responders at Week 12 Achieving Remission (Disease Activity Score 28 [Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate] < 2.6) at Week 52|"For subjects randomized to CDAI, response is defined as CDAI ≤10 or 20% improvement from Baseline. For subjects randomized to RAPID3, response is defined as RAPID3 ≤6 or 20% improvement from Baseline.
DAS28(ESR) is calculated from the tender joint count, swollen joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore using this formula: 0.56x√(TJC) + 0.28x√(SJC) + 0.70xlognat (ESR) + 0.014xGlobal Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 52|"The measurement only includes subjects that were responders at Week 12, and this is the denominator for the percentages.
The Full Analysis Set (FAS)-Nonresponse imputation (NRI) population set was used for this analysis."||percentage of participants|||Number
832496|NCT01255761|Secondary|Percentage of All Subjects Who Are Both Responders at Week 12 and With Non-low Disease Activity (Disease Activity Score 28 [Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate] > 3.2) at Week 52|"For subjects randomized to CDAI, response is defined as CDAI ≤10 or 20% improvement from Baseline. For subjects randomized to RAPID3, response is defined as RAPID3 ≤6 or 20% improvement from Baseline.
DAS28(ESR) is calculated from the tender joint count, swollen joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore using this formula: 0.56x√(TJC) + 0.28x√(SJC) + 0.70xlognat (ESR) + 0.014xGlobal Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of participants|||Number
832511|NCT01256034|Primary|Postoperative Infectious Complication||30 days|||participants|||Number
832512|NCT01256060|Other Pre-specified|Measures of Social Function - The Clinical Global Impressions - Social Scale (Baseline to Week 12)|"Social Function
a) Clinical Global Impressions - Social Scale (1-7) (lower score=positive response). The results will be reported as the number of participants that were classified as a social responder (achieving a score of 1 or 2 on the scale)."|12 Weeks|||participants|||Number
832497|NCT01255761|Primary|Responders at Week 12 (as Assessed by Randomized Tool Clinical Disease Activity Index [CDAI] or Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data [RAPID3]) Achieving Low Disease Activity (Disease Activity Score 28 [Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate]≤3.2) at Week 52|"For subjects randomized to CDAI, response is defined as CDAI ≤10 or 20% improvement from Baseline. For subjects randomized to RAPID3, response is defined as RAPID3 ≤6 or 20% improvement from Baseline.
DAS28(ESR) is calculated from the tender joint count, swollen joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore using this formula: 0.56x√(TJC) + 0.28x√(SJC) + 0.70xlognat (ESR) + 0.014xGlobal Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of participants|||Number
832498|NCT01255761|Primary|Response at Week 12 as Assessed by Randomized Tool [Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) or Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3)]|"For subjects randomized to CDAI, response is defined as CDAI ≤10 or 20% improvement from Baseline. For subjects randomized to RAPID3, response is defined as RAPID3 ≤6 or 20% improvement from Baseline.
CDAI is the sum of tender joint count, swollen joint count, Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity as assessed by Multi-dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) subscore, and Investigator's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - VAS (VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined.
RAPID3 is the sum of the MDHAQ subscores of physical function, pain, and patient’s global status."|Baseline (Week 0) to Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized subjects who had a valid Baseline & valid Post-Baseline efficacy measurement. For all binary efficacy endpoints assessing response, subjects who withdrew early or had a missing assessment at the given visit were considered nonresponders at that visit. This is known as nonresponse imputation (NRI).||percentage of participants|||Number
832499|NCT01255787|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score at Week 8|The Sheehan Disability Scale assesses functional impairment in 3 domains: work/school, social life or leisure activities, and family life or home responsibilities. The participant rates the extent to which each aspect is impaired on a 10-point visual analog scale, from 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely). The 3 scores are added together to calculate the total score, which ranges from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating more impairment. LS means were from an ANCOVA model with treatment as a fixed factor and the Baseline value as a covariate.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set, only participants with Baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value are included. LOCF was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832500|NCT01255787|Secondary|Mean Clinical Global Impression Scale - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 8|The Clinical Global Impression - Global Improvement scale assesses the participant's improvement (or worsening) as assessed by the clinician relative to Baseline on a 7-point scale: 1, very much improved; 2, much improved; 3, minimally improved; 4, no change; 5, minimally worse; 6, much worse; or 7, very much worse. LS means were from an ANCOVA model with treatment as a fixed factor and the Baseline Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score as a covariate.|Week 8|Full analysis set, only participants with Baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value are included. LOCF was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832501|NCT01255787|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in MADRS Remission at Week 8|Remission is defined as a participant with a Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≤10. The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 to 6. The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). Decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement.|Week 8|Full analysis set, only participants with Baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value are included. LOCF was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
832502|NCT01255787|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a MADRS Response at Week 8|Response is defined as a participant with a ≥50% decrease in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from Baseline. The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 to 6. The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). Decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set, only participants with Baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value are included. LOCF was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
832503|NCT01255787|Primary|Change From Baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score|The MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 (normal) to 6 (most abnormal). The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The overall score ranges from 0 (symptoms absent) to 60 (severe depression). A decrease in the total score or on individual items indicates improvement. Least squares (LS) means were from an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment as a fixed factor and the Baseline value as a covariate.|Baseline and Week 8|The full analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. One patient in the placebo arm was excluded from all datasets due to enrollment in another clinical study. Only participants with Baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value are included. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832504|NCT01255904|Primary|Time to Complete Study|Time from medication administration to study completion.|60-180 minutes|||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832505|NCT01256008|Secondary|Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment (FACT-B)|"The scale is used to assess the life quality of patients.
The scale includes 5 subscales. The scores of each scale are summed to compute a total score.
The scale range is 0-144. Higher score indicates better life quality.
The scale was assessed at baseline,4 week,12 week,24 week."|baseline, 4w,12w,24w|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832506|NCT01256008|Secondary|Athens Insomnia Scale(AIS)|"The scale is used to assess the sleep quality of patients.
The scale range of AIS is 0-21. Higher score indicates worse sleep quality.
The scale was assessed at baseline,4 week,8 week,12 week,24 week"|baseline, 4w,8w,12w,24w|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832507|NCT01256008|Primary|Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA-14)|"The scale(HAMA-14) is used to assessed the anxiety symptoms of patients.
The scale range is 0-56.Higher value represents a worse outcome.
The scale was assessed at baseline,2 week,4 week,8 week,12 week,16 week,24 week."|baseline,2 w,4 w,8 w,12 w,16 w,24 w|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832513|NCT01256060|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Measures of Social Cognition, Social Function, Repetitive Behaviors, and Anxiety (Baseline to Week 12)|"Social Cognition (higher score=positive response)
Let's Face It Skills Battery; i. Matchmaker (0-100); ii. Faces (0-100); iii. Houses (0-100)
Eyes Test (0-28)
Strange Stories (0-16)
Irony and Empathy (0-24)
Social Function
Aberrant Behavior Checklist (0-48) (lower score=positive response)
Behavioral Assessment System for Children (higher score=positive response); i. Social: age 8 to 11 & 15 to 18 (18-69); age 12 to 14 (21-70); ii. Functional: age 8 to 14 (10-66); age 15 to 18 (10-64)
Social Responsiveness Scale (higher score=positive response); male (34-127); female (35-142)
Anxiety (lower score=positive response)
a. Child Symptom Inventory; i. Separation: male (44-106); female (44-101); ii. Generalized: male (40-101); female (41-96)
Repetitive Behaviors (lower score=positive response)
Child Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (0-20)
Repetitive Behavior Scale (0-129)
Measures insensitive to change will be omitted from results."|12 Weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832514|NCT01256060|Secondary|Blood Levels of Oxytocin During the Trial in Relation to Safety or Treatment Response|Children and adolescents with minimal changes in plasma level of oxytocin after treatment will be less responsive to treatment. Children and adolescents with atypical patterns of increase in oxytocin may be more sensitive to dose-related tolerability.|12 Weeks||12/2016||||
832515|NCT01256060|Secondary|Baseline Levels of Oxytocin in Relation to Either Safety or Treatment Response|Children and adolescents with lower plasma oxytocin levels at baseline will show treatment related changes in social cognition. Children and adolescents with higher oxytocin plasma levels will show diminished or less dramatic treatment responses and may have more difficulty tolerating the treatment.|12 Weeks||12/2016||||
832516|NCT01256060|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events|This will be reported as the number of participants who experienced a serious advert event throughout the study.|24 Weeks|||participants|||Number
832517|NCT01256060|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)|The hypothesis is that the maximum tolerated dose in a range of 0.2-0.4 IU/kg / dose will be 0.4 IU/kg / dose, as was the case in the adult study, given that oxytocin is not stored in body fat and does not depend on liver or renal clearance.|12 Weeks|||IU / kg|||Number
832518|NCT01256086|Primary|PC20 = Provocation Concentration of Methacholine That Cause a 20% Decrease in Forced Expiratory Volume in the First Second (FEV1)|The primary variable is the methacholine PC20 after inhalation of study medication; the PC20 is the concentration of methacholine that - despite protection by study medication - causes a 20% fall in FEV1 compared to the pre-methacholine (post-saline) level of the given study day.|60 min after application of study medication|Per Protocol Population||mg/ml||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832519|NCT01256164|Secondary|Number of Patients Achieving Hemostasis at 10 Minutes||10 minutes|||participants|||Number
832520|NCT01256164|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Hemostasis at 5 Minutes||5 minutes|||participants|||Number
832521|NCT01256164|Secondary|Number of Subjects Achieving Hemostasis at 3 Minutes||3 minutes|||participants|||Number
832522|NCT01256164|Secondary|Safety|Number of participants with Adverse events and clinically-significant changes/findings on labs and physical examination as well as incidence of re-operation for bleeding at the TBS|28 Days|All subjects treated were analyzed for safety.||participants|||Number
832523|NCT01256164|Primary|Mean Time to Hemostasis (TTH)|Time to hemostasis recorded from the first application of study treatment until cessation of bleeding|0-10 minutes|All subjects treated with a time to hemostasis were included in the analysis||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
832524|NCT01256177|Secondary|Incidence of Treatment-emergent Mania (AE of Mania or Hypomania, Defined as Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS] Score ≥16 on 2 Consecutive Assessments or Final Assessment)|The incidence of treatment-emergent mania is defined as ≥16 of YMRS total score on 2 consecutive assessments or at final assessment, YMRS total score range: 0-60, the higher is the total score the more severe is the disease.|After 8 weeks of start of treatment|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
832525|NCT01256177|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 8 in Item 10 of Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) for Suicidal Ideation|MADRS item 10 (suicidal ideation) score range: 0 to 6, the higher the score, the more severe, Change: MADRS item 10 score at week 8 minus score at baseline|Baseline to Week 8|Full Analysis Set (Number of Participants at Week 8: Placebo=100; Quetiapine XR=114)||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832526|NCT01256177|Secondary|The Proportion of Patients at Week 8 With a Clinical Global Impression – Bipolar - Change (CGI-BP-C) of “Much” or “Very Much” Improved|Clinical Global Impression - Bipolar - Change (CGI-BP-C) of “much” or “Very much” improved is defined as a change in CGI-BP overall bipolar illness score ≤ 2 where 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved.|After 8 weeks of start of treatment|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
832527|NCT01256177|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 8 Assessment in the Clinical Global Impression Bipolar – Severity (CGI-BP-S)|CGI-BP severity of illness-Overall bipolar range = 1-7, the higher is the total score,the more severe is the disease. CGI-BP severity of illness-Depression range: 1-7, the higher is the total score, the more severe is the disease|Baseline to Week 8|Full Anlaysis Set (Number of Participants at Week 8: Placebo=100; Quetiapine XR=112)||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832528|NCT01256177|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 8 in HAM-D Total Scores|HAM-D total score range: 0 to 53, the higher the score, the more severe. Change : Total HAM-D score at week 8 minus score at baseline|Baseline to Week 8|Full Analysis Set (Number of Participants at Week 8: Placebo=100; Quetiapine XR=114).||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832529|NCT01256177|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Each Assessment in MADRS Total Score|MADRS total score range: 0 to 60, the higher the score, the more severe.|Baseline to Week 8|Full Analysis Set (Number of participants at each assessment : Baseline (Placebo=140, Quetiapine XR= 139), Week 1 (Placebo=140, Quetiapine XR= 139), Week 2 (Placebo=127, Quetiapine XR= 128), Week 4 (Placebo=114, Quetiapine XR= 120), Week 6 (Placebo=102, Quetiapine XR= 114), Week 8 (Placebo=100, Quetiapine XR= 114)).||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832530|NCT01256177|Secondary|Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score Remission (the Proportion of Subjects With a MADRS Total Score ≤ 12 at Week 8 Assessment)|Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score range: 0 to 60, the higher the score, the more severe, Remission was defined as MADRS total score ≤12|After 8 week of start of treatment|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
832531|NCT01256177|Secondary|Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score Response (Subjects With ≥50% Reduction From Baseline to Week 8 in MADRS Total Score)|Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score range: 0 to 60, the higher the score, the more severe, Response was defined as ≥50% reduction in MADRS total score from baseline|8 weeks from baseline|Full Analysis set||Participants|||Number
832532|NCT01256177|Primary|Change From Baseline (Visit 2) to End of Study (Week 8) in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score|MADRS total score range: 0 to 60, the higher the score, the more severe, Change : Total MADRS score at week 8 minus score at baseline|Baseline to Week 8|Full Analysis Set (Number of participants at Week 8: Placebo=100; Quetiapine XR=114)||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832533|NCT01256190|Secondary|Number of Patients Achieving Hemostasis at 10 Minutes||10 minutes|||participants|||Number
832534|NCT01256190|Secondary|Number of Subjects Achieving Hemostasis at 3 Minutes||3 minutes|||participants|||Number
832535|NCT01256190|Secondary|Incidence of Hemostasis at 5 Minutes|Number of subjects in each group that achieved hemostasis at pre-specified times after treatment|5 minutes|||participants|||Number
832536|NCT01256190|Secondary|Safety|Number of participants with Adverse events and clinically significant changes/findings on labs and physical examination as well as incidence of re-operation for bleeding at the target bleeding site (TBS)|28 days|All subjects treated were analyzed for safety. There were 39 subjects treated with Fibrocaps and 16 treated with gelatin sponge only, since 1 gel sponge subject was randomized but not treated.||participants|||Number
832537|NCT01256190|Primary|Time to Hemostasis|Time from application of treatment to cessation of bleeding|0-10 minutes|All subjects treated with a time to hemostasis were included in the analysis||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
832538|NCT01256281|Primary|Pain Score in Legs (0-10)|"Pain score in legs at 2-4 hours after intervention will be the primary outcome.
Data analysis not done."|2-4 hours after intervention||||||
832539|NCT01256294|Primary|Dose-normalized Maximum Plasma Drug Concentration (Cmax) at Steady State|Maximum (peak) plasma drug concentration after drug administration at steady state (after 14 days of treatment with each study drug). Geometric mean and 95% confidence intervals were determined from an analysis of variance (ANOVA) model for the dose-normalized log transformed values with treatment, period and sequence as fixed factors and patients nested within sequences as a random factor.|Days 14 and 28: Predose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 3, 4, 8 and 12 hours after dosing.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included the subset of patients from the Full Analysis Set (all patients to whom study medication had been assigned) with evaluable PK data.||ng/mL/mg||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832540|NCT01256294|Secondary|Number of Participants With Reported Biopsy Proven Acute Rejection Episodes||28 Days|Full analysis set.||participants|||Number
832541|NCT01256294|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|An AE was defined as the appearance or worsening of any undesirable sign, symptom, or medical condition occurring after starting the study drug even if the event was not considered to be related to study drug. An SAE was an event which: was fatal or life-threatening; resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; constituted a congenital anomaly/birth defect; required or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; was medically significant, i.e., an event that jeopardized the patient or required medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above.|28 Days|Safety set||participants|||Number
832542|NCT01256294|Secondary|Trough Plasma Drug Concentration (C0) at Steady State|Trough plasma drug concentration measured prior to drug administration at steady state (after 14 days of treatment with each study drug).|Days 14 and 28: predose|PK analysis set, where data were available.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832543|NCT01256294|Secondary|Intra-patient Variability of Tacrolimus Pharmacokinetic Parameters|The intra-patient variability of tacrolimus pharmacokinetics of each formulation was evaluated by comparing AUC0-12h, maximum drug concentration (Cmax) and trough drug concentration (C0) at Days 7 and 14, and Days 21 and 28. Intra-patient variability was assessed by a calculation of the coefficient of variation, by patient, using the repeated measurements within each Period, where the coefficient of variation (%) = standard deviation/mean*100.|Days 7 and 14, and Days 21 and 28.|PK Analysis set.||percent coefficient of variation||Standard Error|Mean
832544|NCT01256294|Primary|Dose-Normalized Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to 12 Hours (AUC0-12h) at Steady State|"Dose-normalized area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to 12 hours (AUC0-12h) at steady state after 14 days of treatment with each study drug.
Geometric mean and 95% confidence intervals were determined from an analysis of variance (ANOVA) model for the dose-normalized log transformed values with treatment, period and sequence as fixed factors and patients nested within sequences as a random factor."|Days 14 and 28: Predose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 3, 4, 8 and 12 hours after dosing.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included the subset of patients from the Full Analysis Set (all patients to whom study medication had been assigned) with evaluable PK data.||ng*hr/mL/mg||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832545|NCT01256385|Secondary|Percentage of Responses/Disease Stabilization for Patients Crossing Over to the Combination Therapy After Progressing on Arm B.|Assessed according to RECIST. This is includes complete and partial responses as well as stable disease, and is different from Outcome Measure 6 above, which includes only complete and partial responses.|Up to 5 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832546|NCT01256385|Secondary|PFS of Myofibroblast (+) Cohort||From start of treatment to time of progression or death of any cause, assessed up to 5 years|Myofibroblast status was not determined. Concerns about the validity/technical feasibility as well as availability of the assay led us to decide to not perform the assay. We do not intend to perform this assay anymore.|||||
832547|NCT01256385|Secondary|Percentage of Responses After Crossover From Control Arm to the Combination Arm, Assessed According to RECIST|Percentage of responses (if any) after crossover from the control arm to the combination arm will be evaluated qualitatively. This is includes complete and partial responses, and is different from Outcome Measure 8 below, which includes complete and partial responses as well as stable disease.|Up to 5 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832548|NCT01256385|Secondary|Grade 3 or Higher Hematological Toxicity|Incidence of hematological toxicities at least possibly related to study drug, graded based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4|Up to 5 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832549|NCT01256385|Secondary|PFS vs. Historical Control Cohort|PFS at 4 months in Arm A and Arm B will each be compared with a 4-month historical control rate of 21.4%. The historical data appears in two publications, an ASCO abstract: Abidoye, ASCO Annual Meeting 2006: 5568 and de Souza, Davis, et al, Clin Cancer Res 2012; 18(8):2336-2343.|From start of treatment to time of progression or death of any cause, assessed at 4 months|Note: Each arm is separately compared to an historical rate of 21.4%, based on a one-sided test at the 0.05 significant level. Since the 90% CIs each exclude 21.4%, the 4-month PFS rate in both arms exceeds the fixed historical control rate.||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
832550|NCT01256385|Secondary|Overall Response Rates (OR)|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by CT or MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Statistics reported are for Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 5 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832551|NCT01256385|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Time from randomization until death from any cause|Up to 5 years|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832552|NCT01256385|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression determined using RECIST criteria: >=20% increase in the sum of the longest diameters of target lesions from nadir, occurrence of new lesions, or progression of non-target lesions.|From start of treatment to time of progression or death from any cause, assessed up to 5 years|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832553|NCT01256411|Secondary|Number of Participants With Blood Pressure Control Rate of <140/90 mmHg (Analysis by Mono or Combination Therapy)|Blood pressure (BP) control is defined as BP <140/90 mmHg.|Baseline to 12 months|Treated set: The treated set included all participants who received at least one dose of extension study medication. One participant in the LCZ696 combination group discontinued after 1 day in the extension study without having any BP measurements taken during the extension. Therefore, this participant was excluded from the analysis.||Participants|||Number
832554|NCT01256411|Secondary|Number of Participants With Blood Pressure Control Rate of <140/90 mmHg (Analysis by Maximum Treatment)|Blood pressure (BP) control is defined as BP <140/90 mmHg.|Baseline to 12 months|Treated set: The treated set included all participants who received at least one dose of extension study medication. One participant in the LCZ696 400 mg/Amlodopine group discontinued after 1 day in the extension study without having any BP measurements taken during the extension. Therefore, this participant was excluded from the analysis.||Participants|||Number
832555|NCT01256411|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP) and Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP) (Analysis by Mono or Combination Therapy)|Sitting BP measurements were performed at every study visit. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 12 months|Treated set: The treated set included all participants who received at least one dose of extension study medication. One participant in the LCZ696 combination group discontinued after 1 day in the extension study without having any BP measurements taken during the extension. Therefore, this participant was excluded from the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832556|NCT01256411|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP) and Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP) (Analysis by Maximum Treatment)|Sitting BP measurements were performed at every study visit. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 12 months|Treated set: The treated set included all participants who received at least one dose of extension study medication. One participant in the LCZ696 400 mg/Amlodopine group discontinued after 1 day in the extension study without having any BP measurements taken during the extension. Therefore, this participant was excluded from the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832557|NCT01256411|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events, and Deaths (Analysis by Actual Treatment)|Participants were monitored throughout the study for adverse events, serious adverse events and deaths.|Baseline to 12 months|Actual extension treatment received: The participants are included in each treatment group for which they received treatment. For example, if a participant started on LCZ696 200 mg but was then down-titrated to LCZ696 100 mg, the participant was counted once in the LCZ696 100 mg group and once in the LCZ696 200 mg group.||Participants|||Number
832558|NCT01256424|Post-Hoc|Comparison of Response Rates of Three Different Doses of HAL PDT and Placebo at 9 Months After First Treatment|Response was defined as absence of HSIL, and absence of oncogenic HPF if LSIL|9 months after first treatment|Patients diagnosed with HSIL histology by a panel of pathologists were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
832559|NCT01256424|Post-Hoc|Comparison of Response Rates of Three Different Doses of HAL PDT and Placebo at 6 Months After First Treatment.|Response was defined as absence of HSIL, and absence of oncogenic HPV if LSIL.|6 months after first treatment|Patients diagnosed with HSIL histology by a panel of pathologists were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
832560|NCT01256424|Secondary|Comparison of HPV Response of Three Different Doses of HAL PDT and Placebo at 3 Months After Treatment.|HPV response was defined as clearance of baseline HPV infection, asssessed by genotype|3 months after treatment|Patients with CIN2 at baseline, based on central histology read, and HPV positive at baseline||percentage of patients|||Number
832561|NCT01256424|Primary|Comparison of Lesion Response Rates of Three Different Doses of HAL PDT and Placebo at 3 Months After Treatment.|Lesion response was defined by three variables: Histology, cytology and HPV. Patient response at three months required histology regression to CIN1 or normal, cytology of LSIL or less severe, and HPV negative.|3 months after last treatment|Patients with CIN2 at baseline, based on central histology review||percentage of patients|||Number
832562|NCT01256450|Secondary|Use of Rescue Medication|Calculated from the use of rescue medication recorded in subject diary as the sum of all rescue medication tablets used in the last 7 days previous to the derived visit, divided by the number of days in this duration where the amount was reported.|Day 7, 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, 84, and 91 within double-blind treatment phase|Analysis based on ITT population; all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication||Tablets per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
832563|NCT01256450|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Investigator’s Overall Satisfaction With Study Drug|Investigators rated their overall satisfaction with the study drug administered to a given subject on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent).|Baseline, Week 12|Analysis based on ITT population; all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832564|NCT01256450|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Subject’s Overall Satisfaction With Study Drug|Subjects were asked to rate their overall satisfaction with their study drug on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent).|Baseline, Week 12|Analysis based on ITT population; all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832565|NCT01256450|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire|Subjects assess disability due to back pain using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) consisting of 24 statements of disability. The score of the RMDQ is the total number of items checked, ranging from 0 to 24 with higher scores indicating greater disability.|Baseline, Week 12|Analysis based on ITT population; all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832566|NCT01256450|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Treatment Satisfaction Using TSQM|The Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) is a 14-item instrument used to assess the subject’s satisfaction with the ability of the study medication to prevent or treat the condition of chronic low back pain (CLBP) for effectiveness, side effects, convenience, and global satisfaction. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a higher score indicates less dissatisfaction (ie, greater satisfaction).|Baseline, Week 12|Analysis based on ITT population; all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832567|NCT01256450|Secondary|Subject Impression of Change in Pain Intensity From Baseline to Week 12 Using PGIC Scale|Subjects assessed changes in activity, limitations, symptoms, and overall quality of life related to their painful condition since beginning treatment using the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), a balanced 7-point scale from 1 (no change or condition got worse) to 7 (a great deal better and considerable improvement that has made all the difference).|Baseline, Week 12|Analysis based on ITT population; all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832568|NCT01256450|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment Failure in the Double-blind Treatment Phase (up to 12 Weeks)|Treatment failure is defined as study discontinuation due to lack of efficacy or due to adverse event in the double-blind treatment phase.|Baseline to treatment failure or end of double-blind treatment phase (up to 12 weeks)|Analysis based on ITT population; all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
832569|NCT01256450|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response to Treatment as Assessed by an NRS Scale|Responses are defined as the relative improvement in pain score at week 12 from baseline, calculated from ratings of average pain intensity over the last 24 hours on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable).|Week 12|Analysis based on ITT population; all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication.||participants|||Number
832570|NCT01256450|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain Intensity Over Time Using NRS Scale|Change in pain intensity = average of daily pain scores from the last 7 days prior to each visit – average of daily pain scores for the last 7 days prior to randomization. Average pain intensity over the last 24 hours was rated on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable).|Baseline; Day 14, Day 28, Day 42, Day 56, Day 70, and Day 84|Analysis based on ITT population; all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832571|NCT01256450|Primary|Change in Pain Intensity From Baseline to Week 12|Change in pain intensity = average of daily pain scores from the last 7 days prior to week 12 visit – average of daily pain scores for the last 7 days prior to randomization. Average pain intensity over the last 24 hours was rated on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable).|Baseline, Week 12|Analysis based on Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population; all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832572|NCT01256476|Primary|Mean Percent Change in Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol(LDL-C) From Baseline to Week 12||Baseline and 12 weeks|All randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug, had a baseline efficacy measurement, and had at least 1 valid post-baseline efficacy measurement.||percent||Standard Error|Mean
832573|NCT01256502|Secondary|Investigator Satisfaction Following Use of SERI® Surgical Scaffold at Other Time Points|Investigator satisfaction with SERI® Surgical Scaffold was evaluated at Stage II surgery and Months 12, 18 and 24 after surgery/implantation using an 11-point scale, where 0=very dissatisfied to 10=very satisfied.|Stage 2 Surgery, Months 12, 18 and 24|Participants from the Full Analysis population (139 participants, 214 breasts), all enrolled participants who had SERI® Surgical Scaffold surgery/implant, with data at the given time-point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832574|NCT01256502|Secondary|Investigator Ease of Use Assessment at the Time of SERI® Placement During Stage I Surgery|Ease of Use assessments of SERI® Surgical Scaffold by the investigator were collected on Case Report Forms (CRFs) following stage I surgery. Ease of Use was assessed separately using a 5-point scale, where 0=very difficult to 5=very easy to use for the following criteria: • SERI® preparation before implantation (excluding cutting or shaping) • SERI® cutting and shaping before implantation • SERI® positioning/drapability during implantation • SERI® cutting and shaping after implantation • SERI® suturing during implantation (including tension and stretch). The number of participants who were implanted with SERI® Surgical Scaffold (n=139) by Investigator Ease of Use response for each category is reported.|Immediately following Stage I surgery|Full analysis population included all enrolled participants who had SERI® Placement during Stage I Surgery.||participants|||Number
832575|NCT01256502|Primary|Investigator Satisfaction Following Use of SERI® Surgical Scaffold at 6 Months|The primary outcome measure was investigator satisfaction at 6 months after stage I surgery/implantation of SERI® Surgical Scaffold. Satisfaction was evaluated using an 11-point scale, where 0=very dissatisfied to 10=very satisfied.|6 months|Of the 139 participants, 214 breasts, implanted with SERI® during Stage I breast reconstruction, 4 discontinued the study and 1 missed the 6-month visit, leaving 134 subjects, 205 breasts in the primary analysis population.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832576|NCT01256567|Secondary|Steady State Volume of Distribution (Vss) of Ramucirumab||Day 1 of Cycle 1 and 4 (cycle=21 days)|All participants with evaluable Vss data at the specified time points.||liters (L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832579|NCT01256567|Secondary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Ramucirumab|AUC from time zero to infinity (AUC[0-inf], Cycle 1) and at steady state (AUC tau, Cycle 4) of ramucirumab are provided.|Day 1 of Cycles 1 and 4 (cycle=21 days)|All participants with evaluable AUC data at the specified time points.||micrograms*day/milliliter (mcg*day/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832580|NCT01256567|Secondary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Ramucirumab|Cmax (Cycle 1) and Cmax at steady state (Cmax,ss, Cycle 4) of ramucirumab are provided.|Day 1 of Cycle 1 and Cycle 4 (cycle=21 days)|All participants with evaluable Cmax data at the specified time points.||micrograms per milliliter (mcg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832581|NCT01256567|Secondary|Serum Anti-IMC-1121B Antibody Assessment (Immunogenicity)|The number of participants with a positive anti-IMC-1121B titer at any point during the study.|Baseline up to data cut off (approximately 48.3 weeks)|All participants with evaluable antibody assessment data.||participants|||Number
832582|NCT01256567|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Number participants with drug related dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) during Cycle 1; ramucirumab related: treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE), serious adverse events (SAE), Grade 3 or higher TEAE, or TEAE leading to discontinuation or ramucirumab dose modification. DLT=G4 neutropenia >7days; G ≥3 neutropenia with fever ≥38.5°C requiring IV antibiotics or bacteriemia or sepsis; G4 thrombocytopenia; G ≥3 thrombocytopenia with bleeding requiring platelets; G≥3 prothrombin time and/or partial thromboplastin time in absence of anticoagulants; G≥2 hyperbilirubinemia ≥5 days; QTc >500 milliseconds (ms) or increase ≥100 ms or arrhythmia; G≥4 or uncontrollable hypertension; G≥3 nonhematologic toxicity (excluding G3: hypersensitivity, injection-site reaction, arthralgia/myalgia, asthenia/fatigue, diarrhea without loperamide therapy, nausea/vomiting without antiemetics, transient G3/4 elevation of aminotransferases); treatment delay >2 weeks due to toxicity.|Baseline up to data cut off (approximately 48.3 weeks)|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
832583|NCT01256658|Secondary|Cumulative Number of Subjects With Symptomatic Malaria Episode, RDT-confirmed, With Parasitemia ≥5000/μL From Week 1 to Week 50|"Cumulative number of asymptomatic carriers having Symptomatic malaria episode, RDT-confirmed, with parasitemia ≥5000/μL (SMRC5000) from Week 1 to Week 50, was measured from group of participants diagnosed as asymptomatic carriers at Community Screening Campaign (CSC1)/Day1. Number of participants affected before and after diagnosed with ≥1 symptomatic malaria episode, RDT-confirmed, with parasitemia ≥5000/μL (SMRC5000) (complicated and uncomplicated episodes combined). Number of SMRC5000s was detected by Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) using a blood sample from each participant and later confirmed to have a parasite density > or = 5000/uL by microscopy.
Week (1-2) indicates day1 to day14, week (3-4) indicates day 15 to day 28, week (5-6) indicates day 29 to day 42, etc. After first diagnosis of asymptomatic carriers at CSC1/Day1."|Week 1 to Week 50|Individual subject data from eligible randomized participants from Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1) for which data on Symptomatic malaria episode, RDT-confirmed (SMRCs) was collected and available form analysis and census data was obtained as per protocol.||participants|||Number
832584|NCT01256658|Secondary|Number of Asymptomatic Carriers With Complicated and Uncomplicated Episodes Combined|Number of asymptomatic carriers diagnosed with 1 Symptomatic malaria episode, RDT-confirmed, with parasitemia ≥5000/μL (SMRC5000), 2 SMRC5000, 3 SMRC5000 and >3 SMRC5000 (complicated and uncomplicated episodes combined). Number of SMRC5000s is measured by Rapid diagnostic test (RDT) and later confirmed to have a parasite density ≥ 5000/uL by microscopy.|12 months - period 1|Individual subject data from eligible clusters set defined as all participants randomized for which data on Symptomatic malaria episode, RDT-confirmed (SMRCs) was collected and census data was obtained as per protocol.||participants|||Number
832585|NCT01256658|Secondary|Number of Symptomatic Malaria Episode, RDT-confirmed, With Parasitemia ≥5000/μL (SMRC5000) in Asymptomatic Carriers at Any Time of Diagnosis (Per Cluster)|"Data is presented per cluster. Number of Symptomatic malaria episode, RDT-confirmed, with parasitemia ≥5000/μL (SMRC5000) in asymptomatic carriers by study arm from all inhabitants diagnosed at any time for asymptomatic carriers. Number of SMRC5000s is measured by Rapid diagnostic test (RDT) and later confirmed to have a parasite density ≥ 5000/uL by microscopy."|12 months - period 1|The number of units represents the number of clusters that include all participants randomized for which data on Symptomatic malaria episode, RDT-confirmed (SMRCs) were collected and census data were obtained as per protocol.||percentage of participants|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832586|NCT01256658|Secondary|Number of Asymptomatic Carriers With Increase in Hemoglobin Levels by at Least 0.5 g/dL From Day 1 to Day 28 of Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1) in Infants and Children (>6 Months and <5 Years)- Cluster Data|"Data is presented per cluster. Cluster data of number of asymptomatic carriers with increase in hemoglobin levels by at least 0.5 g/dL from Day 1 to Day 28 of Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1) in infants and children (>6 months and <5 years) was measured by Hemoglobin levels based on microscopy reading.
Mean and Standard Deviation (SD) percent were measured indicating the mean and SD of percentages of cluster frequencies under the study arm for that particular category."|Day 1 to day 28 - period 1|The number of units represents the number of clusters that include all infants and children (>6 months and <5 years) randomized for which CSC1 was conducted, data was available, and census data were obtained as per protocol.||participants|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832587|NCT01256658|Secondary|Number of Asymptomatic Carriers With Increase in Hemoglobin Levels by at Least 0.5 g/dL From Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1) Infants and Children (>6 Months and <5 Years)- Individual Data|Individual data of number of asymptomatic carriers with increase in hemoglobin levels by at least 0.5 g/dL from Day 1 to Day 28 from Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1) infants and children (>6 months and <5 years). Hemoglobin levels were measured using the HemoCue® rapid test. This test was performed with a drop of blood collected from the fingertip at Day 1 and at Day 28.|Day 1 to Day 28- period 1|Individual subject data from eligible clusters set defined as all infants and children (>6 months and <5 years) randomized for which CSC1 was conducted, data was available, and census data was obtained as per protocol.||participants|||Number
832627|NCT01250119|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Tested Positive for EGFR Mutations|All participants newly diagnosed with recurrent or metastatic NSCLC were tested for EGFR exon 19 deletion or exon 21 mutations.|14 days|Diagnostic population; Only participants who were tested for EGFR mutations were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
832683|NCT01250730|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Plasma Active Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832588|NCT01256658|Secondary|Percentage of Microscopy-confirmed Gametocyte Carriers Treated With COA566 for Asymptomatic Carriers|Percentage of microscopy-confirmed gametocyte asymptomatic carriers treated with COA566 for asymptomatic carriers in Community Screening Campaign 1, 2 and 3 (CSC1, CSC2 and CSC3).|Day 1, day 7 and day 28 - period 1|Treated asymptomatic carriers from CSC1, CSC2 and CSC3 confirmed by microscopy and treated with study medication. Subjects are counted multiple times if diagnosed and treated more than once during the study. Subjects missing day 7 parasitemia data are excluded. Percentages are based on the number of subjects treated with any formulation.||percentage of participants|||Number
832589|NCT01256658|Secondary|Percentage of COA566-treated Microscopy-confirmed Asymptomatic Carriers at Community Screening Campaign 1, 2 and 3 (CSC1, CSC2 and CSC3) With Parasitological Cure Rate at Day 7|Percentage of participants with parasitological cure confirmed via microscopy at day 7 after treatment with COA566. This assessment was done on asymptomatic carriers from Community Screening Campaigns 1, 2 and 3 (CSC1, CSC2 and CSC3) from the intervention group only.|Day 7 of CSC1, CSC2 and CSC3 - period 1|Treated asymptomatic carriers from CSC1, CSC2 and CSC3 confirmed by microscopy and treated with study medication. Subjects are counted multiple times if diagnosed and treated more than once during the study. Subjects missing day 7 parasitemia data are excluded. Percentages are based on the number of subjects treated with any formulation.||percentage of participants|||Number
832590|NCT01256658|Secondary|Hemoglobin Level (g/dL) in Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1)/Day 1 and CSC4/Day 1 by Study Arm and Age Group (Per Cluster)|"Data is presented per cluster. Hemoglobin levels at Community Screening Campaign 1 and 4 (CSC1 and CSC4) on day 1 per age group (5-9 years, 10-14 years, and ≥15 years) in the intervention versus the control arm was measured using the HemoCue® rapid test. This test was performed using a drop of blood collected from the fingertip of each participant."|Day 1 (CSC1/day 1) and month 12 (CSC4/day 1) - period 1|The number of units represents the number of clusters that include all randomized participants (ages 5-9 years, 10-14 years, and ≥15 years) clusters for which CSC1 and CSC4 was conducted, data was available, and census data were obtained as per protocol.||g/dL|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832591|NCT01256658|Secondary|Anemia Status Based on Community Screening Campaign 4 (CSC4)/Day 1 in Infants and Children (>6 Months and <5 Years)|Anemia status based on Community Screening Campaign 4 (CSC4/Day 1) in infants and children (>6 months and <5 years) was measured via hemoglobin levels using the HemoCue® rapid test. This test was performed using a drop of blood collected from the fingertip of each participant. The anemic status is defined as follows: hemoglobin (Hb) <5 g/dL = severe anemia, Hb 5 to <8 g/dL = moderate anemia, Hb 8 to <11 g/dL = mild anemia, Hb ≥11 g/dL = no anemia).|Month 12 (CSC4/day 1) - period 1|Individual subject data from eligible clusters set defined as all infants and children (>6 months and <5 years) randomized for which CSC4 was conducted, data was available, and census data was obtained as per protocol.||participants|||Number
832592|NCT01256658|Secondary|Anemia Status Based on Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1)/Day 1 in Infants and Children (>6 Months and <5 Years)|Anemia status based on Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1)/Day 1 in infants and children (>6 months and <5 years) was measured via hemoglobin levels using the HemoCue® rapid test. This test was performed using a drop of blood collected from the fingertip of each participant. The anemic status is defined as follows: hemoglobin (Hb) <5 g/dL = severe anemia, Hb 5 to <8 g/dL = moderate anemia, Hb 8 to <11 g/dL = mild anemia, Hb ≥11 g/dL = no anemia).|Day 1 (CSC1/day 1) - period 1|Individual subject data from eligible clusters set defined as all infants and children (>6 months and <5 years) randomized for which CSC1 was conducted, data was available, and census data were obtained as per protocol.||participants|||Number
832593|NCT01256658|Secondary|Change in Hemoglobin Level (g/dL) From Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1)/Day 1 to CSC1/Day 28 in Infants and Children (>6 Months and <5 Years) for Asymptomatic Carriers at CSC1|Change in hemoglobin level (g/dL) from Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1)/Day 1 to CSC1/Day 28 in infants and children (>6 Months and <5 Years) for asymptomatic carriers at CSC1 was measured via hemoglobin levels using the HemoCue® rapid test. This test was performed using a drop of blood collected from the fingertip of each participant. The anemic status is defined as follows: hemoglobin (Hb) <5 g/dL = severe anemia, Hb 5 to <8 g/dL = moderate anemia, Hb 8 to <11 g/dL = mild anemia, Hb ≥11 g/dL = no anemia).|Day 1 and day 28 - period 1|Individual subject data from eligible clusters set defined as all infants and children (>6 months and <5 years) randomized for which CSC1 was conducted, data was available, and census data were obtained as per protocol.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832594|NCT01256658|Secondary|Number of Microscopy and qRT-PCR-confirmed Gametocyte Carriers at Community Screening Campaign 4 (CSC4)|Number of gametocyte carriers at Community Screening Campaign 4 (CSC4) was measured via microscopy and confirmed using Quantitative Reverse Transcription PCR (qRT-PCR) at day 1 of CSC4.|Month 12 (CSC4/day 1) - period 1|Individual subject data from eligible clusters set defined as all randomized participants for which CSC4 was conducted, data was available, and census data was obtained as per protocol.||participants|||Number
832595|NCT01256658|Secondary|Mean Number of Microscopy-confirmed Gametocyte Carriers at Day 1 of Community Screening Campaign 1,2,3,4 (CSC1, CSC2, CSC3 and CSC4) (Per Cluster)|"Data is presented per cluster. Mean number of gametocyte carriers at Day 1 for Community Screening Campaign 1,2,3,4 (CSC1, CSC2, CSC3 and CSC4) was measured using gametocyte assessments (prevalence and density) via microscopy.
Mean measured in this analysis is the mean percent indicating the mean of percentages of cluster frequencies under the study arm for that particular category."|12 months - period 1|Eligible clusters set consisted of all randomized participants for which CSCs 1, 2, 3 and 4 were conducted, data was available, and census data were obtained as per protocol.||participants|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832596|NCT01256658|Secondary|Mean of Microscopy-confirmed Asymptomatic Carriers From Community Screening Campaigns 1, 2, 3 and 4 (CSC1, CSC2, CSC3 and CSC4) (Per Cluster)|"Data is presented per cluster. Mean number of asymptomatic carriers from Community Screening Campaigns 1, 2, 3 and 4 (CSC1, CSC2, CSC3 and CSC4) was measured by confirmed positive microscopy for P. falciparum asexual forms in participants with absence of clinical signs and symptoms of malaria.
Mean measured in this analysis is the mean percent indicting the mean of percentages of cluster frequencies under the study arm for that particular category."|12 months - period 1|The number of units represents the number of clusters that include all randomized participants for which CSC 1, 2 3 and 4 was conducted, data was available, and census data were obtained as per protocol.||participants|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832597|NCT01256658|Secondary|Number of Participants (Infants and Children (> 6 Months and < 5 Years)) With Hospitalizations, Severe Malaria Episodes or Death Post Community Screening Campaign (CSC)|Total number of participants (infants and children (> 6 months and < 5 years)) with hospitalizations, severe malaria episodes or death after Community Screening Campaign (CSC) was assessed.|12 months - period 1|Safety analyzable carriers set consisted of all infants and children (> 6 months and < 5 years)) from intervention clusters confirmed positive for P. falciparum asexual forms at any CSC or when migrating into the cluster, who in the absence of clinical signs and symptoms received at least one dose of COA566 for the diagnosed asymptomatic infection.||participants|||Number
832598|NCT01256658|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hospitalizations, Severe Malaria Episodes or Death Post Community Screening Campaign (CSC)|Total number of participants (all ages) with hospitalizations, severe malaria episodes or death after Community Screening Campaign (CSC) was assessed.|12 months - period 1|Safety analyzable asymptomatic carriers set consisted of all consenting inhabitants from intervention clusters confirmed positive by RDT for P. falciparum asexual forms at any CSC or when migrating into the cluster, in the absence of clinical signs and symptoms who received at least one dose of COA566 to treat the diagnosed asymptomatic infection.||participants|||Number
832599|NCT01256658|Secondary|Number of Symptomatic Malaria Episode, RDT-confirmed, With Parasitemia ≥5000/μL (SMRC5000s) Per Person-year in Post Community Screening Campaign (CSC)|"Number of Symptomatic malaria episode, RDT-confirmed, with parasitemia ≥5000/μL (SMRC5000s) per person-year in post Community Screening Campaign (CSC), by study arm (individual level data) was detected by Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) (using a blood sample from each participant) and later confirmed to have a parasite density ≥5000/uL by microscopy.
Number of SMRC5000: sum of all SMRC5000 for all subjects in post CSC. Person-year observed: sum of duration (in days) in post CSC for all subjects present in study /365.25.
Number of SMRC5000 per person-year = number of SMRC5000/person-year observed."|12 months - period 1|Individual subject data from eligible clusters set defined as all randomized participants for which CSCs 1, 2, 3 and 4 were conducted, data was available, and census data were obtained as per protocol.||SMRC5000 per person-year|||Number
832600|NCT01256658|Secondary|Change in Hemoglobin Level (g/dL) From Community Screening Campaign 1(CSC1)/Day 1 to Community Screening Campaign 4 (CSC4)/Day 1 (Per Cluster)|"Data is presented per cluster. Comparison of hemoglobin level (g/dL) from Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1)/Day 1 to Community Screening Campaign 4 (CSC4)/Day 1 in infants and children (>6 months and <5 years) by study arm was measured using the HemoCue® rapid test. This test was performed using a drop of blood collected from the fingertip of each participant."|Day 1 (CSC1/day 1) and month 12 (CSC4/day 1) - period 1|The number of units represents the number of clusters that include all infants and children (>6 months and <5 years) randomized participants for which CSCs 1 and 4 were conducted, data was available, and census data were obtained as per protocol.||g/dL|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832601|NCT01256658|Secondary|Microscopy Confirmed Asymptomatic Carriers of P. Falciparum at Community Screening Campaign 4 (CSC4) (Per Cluster)|"Data is presented per cluster. Microscopy confirmation of asymptomatic carriers of P. falciparum at Community Screening Campaign 4 (CSC4) was conducted at month 12. Blood films were histologically treated and examined microscopically. When it was ascertained that P. falciparum was present, a count of the asexual forms against leukocytes was made using a tally counter."|Month 12 - period 1|The number of units represents the number of clusters that include all randomized participants for which CSC4 was conducted, data was available, and census data was obtained as per protocol.||participants|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
832602|NCT01256658|Secondary|Microscopy-confirmed Gametocyte Carriers at Community Screening Campaign 4 (CSC4) (Per Cluster)|"Data is presented per cluster. Microscopy confirmed gametocyte carriers at Community Screening Campaign 4(CSC4) were assessed via microscopy at month 12 of period 1. Blood films were histologically treated and examined microscopically."|Month 12 - period 1|The number of units represents the number of clusters that include all randomized participants for which CSC4 was conducted, data was available, and census data were obtained as per protocol.||participants|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
832603|NCT01256658|Primary|Change in Hemoglobin Level (g/dL) in Asymptomatic Carriers >6 Months of Age (Per Cluster)|"Data is presented per cluster. Change in hemoglobin levels from day 1 to day 28 was measured using the HemoCue® rapid test. This test was performed using a drop of blood collected from the fingertip of each asymptomatic carrier from Community Screening Campaign 1 (CSC1), > 6 months of age, at day 1 and at day 28."|Day 1 and day 28 of period 1|The number of units represents the number of clusters that include all randomized, > 6 months of age participants for which CSC1 was conducted, data was available and census data were obtained as per protocol.||g/dL|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832604|NCT01256658|Primary|Number of Symptomatic Malaria Episode, RDT-confirmed, With Parasitemia ≥5000/μL (SMRC5000s) Per Person-year in Infants and Children (<5 Years) in Post Community Screening Campaign (CSC) at Month 12 (Per Cluster)|"Data is presented per cluster. Number of Symptomatic malaria episode, RDT-confirmed, with parasitemia ≥5000/μL (SMRC5000s) per person-year in infants and children (<5 years) in post Community Screening Campaign (CSC) at month 12 was detected by Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) (using a blood sample from each participant) and later confirmed to have a parasite density ≥5000/uL by microscopy.
Number of SMRC5000: sum of all SMRC5000 for all infants and children (<5 years) in post CSC.
Person-year observed: sum of duration (in days) for all infants and children (<5 years) in post CSC present in study /365.25.
Number of SMRC5000 per person-year = number of SMRC5000/person-year observed."|Month 12 of period 1|The number of units represents the number of clusters that include all randomized infants and children (<5 years) for which CSCs 1, 2, and 3 were conducted, data was available, and census data were obtained as per protocol.||SMRC5000 per person-year|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
832605|NCT01256684|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Severity of Vaginal Atrophy as Evaluated From Vaginal Color|To evaluate the aspect of the mucosa and the local tolerance to DHEA suppositories, the vaginal color (one of the four main signs of vaginal atrophy) evaluated by the physician/gynecologist as corresponding to none, mild, moderate, or severe atrophy was then analyzed using the values of 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 12 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 12 are presented.|Baseline and Week 12|Analyses were performed primarily on the Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all subjects who have received at least one dose of study drug with a baseline (Day 1) evaluation meeting the study entry criteria.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
832606|NCT01256684|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Severity of Vaginal Atrophy as Evaluated From Vaginal Epithelial Surface Thickness|To evaluate the aspect of the mucosa and the local tolerance to DHEA suppositories, the vaginal epithelial surface thickness (one of the four main signs of vaginal atrophy) evaluated by the physician/gynecologist as corresponding to none, mild, moderate, or severe atrophy was then analyzed using the score values of 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 12 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 12 are presented.|Baseline and Week 12|Analyses were performed primarily on the Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all subjects who have received at least one dose of study drug with a baseline (Day 1) evaluation meeting the study entry criteria.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
832607|NCT01256684|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Severity of Vaginal Atrophy as Evaluated From Vaginal Epithelial Integrity|To evaluate the aspect of the mucosa and the local tolerance to DHEA suppositories, the vaginal epithelial integrity (one of the four main signs of vaginal atrophy) evaluated by the physician/gynecologist as corresponding to none, mild, moderate, or severe atrophy was then analyzed using the score values of 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 12 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 12 are presented.|Baseline and Week 12|Analyses were performed primarily on the Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all subjects who have received at least one dose of study drug with a baseline (Day 1) evaluation meeting the study entry criteria.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
832608|NCT01256684|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Severity of Vaginal Atrophy as Evaluated From Vaginal Secretions|To evaluate the aspect of the mucosa and the local tolerance to DHEA suppositories, the vaginal secretions (one of the four main signs of vaginal atrophy) evaluated by the physician/gynecologist as corresponding to none, mild, moderate, or severe atrophy were then analyzed using the score values of 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 12 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 12 are presented.|Baseline and Week 12|Analyses were performed primarily on the Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all subjects who have received at least one dose of study drug with a baseline (Day 1) evaluation meeting the study entry criteria.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
832609|NCT01256684|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Severity of Vaginal Dryness|The severity of vaginal dryness was evaluated by a questionnaire filled out by women. The severity of vaginal dryness recorded as none, mild, moderate or severe was analyzed using the score values of 0, 1, 2 or 3, respectively. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 12 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 12 are presented.|Baseline and Week 12|Efficacy analyses on vaginal dryness were performed on a sub-group of the Intent to Treat (ITT) population (defined as all subjects who have received at least one dose of study drug with a baseline (Day 1) evaluation meeting the study entry criteria) who have self-identified moderate to severe vaginal dryness at Baseline.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
832610|NCT01256684|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Severity of the Most Bothersome Symptom of Dyspareunia|The severity of dyspareunia was evaluated by a questionnaire filled out by women. The severity of dyspareunia recorded as none, mild, moderate or severe was analyzed using the score values of 0, 1, 2 or 3, respectively. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 12 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 12 are presented.|Baseline and Week 12|Efficacy analyses were performed primarily on the Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all subjects who have received at least one dose of study drug with a baseline (Day 1) evaluation meeting the study entry criteria.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
832611|NCT01256684|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Vaginal pH|A pH strip fixed on an Ayre spatula (or equivalent) was applied directly to the lateral wall of the vagina. The change in color of the pH indicator strip was compared to the color chart for pH evaluation. The corresponding pH value (with one decimal) was recorded. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 12 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 12 are presented.|Baseline and Week 12|Efficacy analyses were performed primarily on the Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all subjects who have received at least one dose of study drug with a baseline (Day 1) evaluation meeting the study entry criteria.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
832612|NCT01256684|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Percentage of Superficial Cells in the Maturation Index of the Vaginal Smear|The percentage of superficial cell was determined from the vaginal smears collected during the study. A 100-cell count was performed by a central laboratory to classify cells as parabasal (P) (including the basal), intermediate (I), and superficial (S) squamous cell types. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 12 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 12 are presented.|Baseline and Week 12|Efficacy analyses were performed primarily on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population defined as all subjects who have received at least one dose of study drug with a baseline (Day 1) evaluation meeting the study entry criteria.||Percentage of superficial cells||Standard Error|Mean
832613|NCT01256684|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Percentage of Parabasal Cells in the Maturation Index of the Vaginal Smear|The percentage of parabasal cell was determined from the vaginal smears collected during the study. A 100-cell count was performed by a central laboratory to classify cells as parabasal (P) (including the basal), intermediate (I), and superficial (S) squamous cell types. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 12 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 12 are presented.|Baseline and Week 12|Efficacy analyses were performed primarily on the Intent to Treat (ITT) population defined as all subjects who have received at least one dose of study drug with a baseline (Day 1) evaluation meeting the study entry criteria.||Percentage of parabasal cells||Standard Error|Mean
832614|NCT01250002|Secondary|Opioid Consumption (Morphine Equivalents)|opioid consumption (morphine equivalents)post operatively|24 hours|||mg||Full Range|Median
832615|NCT01250002|Primary|Quality of Recovery 40 Score|Quality of recovery 40 score on the day after surgery. Scale ranges from a low of 40 (poor recovery) to a high of 200 (good recovery).|24 hours post surgery|Intent to treat.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
832616|NCT01250054|Primary|Overall Vision|Overall vision, as interpreted by the participant and recorded by the investigator as a single, retrospective evaluation of one week’s wear time. Overall vision was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being worst and 10 being best.|One week of wear|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as: major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833441|NCT01258049|Secondary|Parasite Clearance Time (PCT) [MITT Population]|Parasite clearance time (PCT). Time in hours from the initiation of therapy until the first of two successive parasite negative smears (zero parasite counts) are obtained|28 days after start of treatment|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832617|NCT01250119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Anxiety/Depression as Assessed Using the EQ-5D|The EQ-5D contains a descriptive system which measures 5 health dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activity, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The participants were required to rate their pain as the following categories: Category 1. I am not anxious or depressed; Category 2. I am moderately anxious or depressed; Category 3.I am extremely anxious or depressed.|Baseline (Visit 1), Days 10 to 14 (Visit 2), Day 1 of every 6 weeks until PD, Death, Unacceptable toxicity or Withdrawal of consent up to 34 months|ITT population; n = number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
832618|NCT01250119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pain/Discomfort as Assessed Using the EQ-5D|The EQ-5D contains a descriptive system which measures 5 health dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activity, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The participants were required to rate their pain as the following categories: Category 1. I have no pain or discomfort; Category 2. I have moderate pain or discomfort; Category 3. I have extreme pain or discomfort.|Baseline (Visit 1), Days 10 to 14 (Visit 2), Day 1 of every 6 weeks until PD, Death, Unacceptable toxicity or Withdrawal of consent up to 34 months|ITT population; n = number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
832619|NCT01250119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Problems With Usual Activities as Assessed Using the EQ-5D|The EQ-5D contains a descriptive system which measures 5 health dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activity, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The participants were required to rate their ability to perform usual activities as the following categories: Category 1. I have no problems with performing my usual activities; Category 2. I have some problems with performing my usual activities; Category 3. I am unable to perform my usual activities.|Baseline (Visit 1), Days 10 to 14 (Visit 2), Day 1 of every 6 weeks until PD, Death, Unacceptable toxicity or Withdrawal of consent up to 34 months|ITT population; n = number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
832620|NCT01250119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Problems With Self-Care as Assessed Using the EQ-5D|The EQ-5D contains a descriptive system which measures 5 health dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activity, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The participants were required to rate their self-care as the following categories: Category 1. I have no problems with self-care; Category 2. I have some problems washing or dressing myself; Category 3. I am unable to wash or dress myself.|Baseline (Visit 1), Days 10 to 14 (Visit 2), Day 1 of every 6 weeks until PD, Death, Unacceptable toxicity or Withdrawal of consent up to 34 months|ITT population; n = number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
832621|NCT01250119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Problems With Mobility as Assessed Using the EQ-5D|The EQ-5D contains a descriptive system which measures 5 health dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activity, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The participants were required to rate their mobility as the following categories: Category 1. I have no problems in walking about; Category 2. I have some problems in walking about; Category 3. I am confined to bed.|Baseline (Visit 1), Days 10 to 14 (Visit 2), Day 1 of every 6 weeks until PD, Death, Unacceptable toxicity or Withdrawal of consent up to 34 months|ITT population; n = number of participants analyzed at for the given parameter at the specified visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
832622|NCT01250119|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessment Using EuroQol(EQ) 5D Visual Analog Score (VAS) Instrument|The EQ-5D contains a descriptive system that measures 5 health dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activity, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The EQ-5D also contains a visual analog scale (EQ-VAS), which records the respondent's self-rated health status on a vertical graduated visual analog scale ranging from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). A negative change indicates improvement.|Screening, Baseline and Final or Withdrawal Visit up to 34 months|ITT population; number (n) = number of participants analyzed for the given parameter at the specified visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
832623|NCT01250119|Secondary|Survival Time in Months|Duration of time in months from Screening until Death due to any cause.|Baseline, Day 1 of each 6-week visit starting from Visit 3 until PD, Death, Unacceptable toxicity or Withdrawal of consent up to 34 months|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832624|NCT01250119|Secondary|Probability of Being Alive and Free of Progression by Timepoint|Progression Free Survival (PFS) was defined as the interval (number of days) from the trial treatment start date to the earlier of the date of the first tumor response assessment of PD or the date of death by any cause. Participants who experienced neither of these events or who were lost to followup at the time of the analysis were censored at date of last contact. PFS was summarized according to the Kaplan-Meier method.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18|ITT population||probability of being alive||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832625|NCT01250119|Primary|Percentage of Participants With EGFR Mutations by Subgroup|Incidence of EGFR mutations were summarized with respect to different subgroups as follows: (1) equals (=) Histopathology, (2) = Stage of disease, (3) = Age at consent, (4) = Gender, (5) = Race, (6) = Smoking history.|14 Days|Only participants with a valid EGFR mutations test result were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
832626|NCT01250119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Response by Best Objective Tumor Response|Best objective response was defined as the best response recorded from the start of treatment until disease progression/recurrence. Tumor response was assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1”. Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to less than (<)10 millimeters (mm). Partial Response (PR): At least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters. Progressive Disease (PD): At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this may include the baseline sum). The sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD.|Screening, Day 1 of each 6 week visit starting from Visit 3 until PD, Death, Unacceptable Toxicity or Withdrawal of Consent up to 34 months|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population: All participants in the target population who were eligible for treatment and who actually received one dose of treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
833982|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 28).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 28 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 28.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832628|NCT01250145|Secondary|Part B - Patch Adhesion Score|Number of patches with adhesion score. Score 0 = ≥90% adhered (essentially no lift off the skin); Score 1= ≥75% to <90% adhered (some edges only lifting off the skin); Score 2 = ≥50% to <75% adhered (less than half of the patch lifting off the skin); Score 3 = >0% to <50% adhered but not detached (more than half of the patch lifting off the skin without falling off); Score 4 = 0% adhered - patch detached (patch completely off the skin).|Days 1 - 19 and 34 - 37|All randomized participants who received a patch.||patches with adhesive score|Participants||Number
832629|NCT01250145|Primary|Part B - Skin Irritation and Sensitization by Draize Score|Number of evaluation points (patches) showing defined Draize score. Erythema and edema were used to determine skin irritation and sensitization. Score 0 = No Erythema/Edema; Score 1 = Very slight Erythema/Edema (barely perceptible); Score 2 = Well defined Erythema/Edema (edges of area well defined by definite raising); Score 3 = Moderate to Severe Erythema/Edema (raised approximately 1 mm); Score 4 = Severe Edema (raised more than 1 mm and extending beyond area of exposure).|Days 1 - 19 and 34 - 37|All participants who entered the study and received patches are included in the analysis.||patches with Draize scores|Participants||Number
832630|NCT01250145|Secondary|Part A - Patch Adhesion Score|Number of patches with adhesion score. Score 0 = ≥90% adhered (essentially no lift off the skin); Score 1= ≥75% to <90% adhered (some edges only lifting off the skin); Score 2 = ≥50% to <75% adhered (less than half of the patch lifting off the skin); Score 3 = >0% to <50% adhered but not detached (more than half of the patch lifting off the skin without falling off); Score 4 = 0% adhered - patch detached (patch completely off the skin).|Day 1 through Day 22|All randomized participants who received a patch.||patches with adhesive score|Participants||Number
832631|NCT01250145|Primary|Part A - Cumulative Skin Irritation by Draize Score|Number of evaluation points (patches) showing defined Draize score. Erythema and edema were used to determine skin irritation. Score 0 = No Erythema/Edema; Score 1 = Very slight Erythema/Edema (barely perceptible); Score 2 = Well defined Erythema/Edema (edges of area well defined by definite raising); Score 3 = Moderate to Severe Erythema/Edema (raised approximately 1 millimeter [mm]).|Day 1 through Day 22|All participants who entered the study and received patches are included in the analysis.||patches with Draize scores|Participants||Number
832632|NCT01250171|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity at Weeks 1, 4, and 8|Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was assessed in the study eye. BCVA measurements were taken in a standing position using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity testing charts at an initial testing distance specific to the test charts. The BCVA score is the number of letters read correctly by the patient. A decrease in the BCVA score indicates a worsening of vision. A positive change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Weeks 1, 4, and 8|All patient population: All randomized patients that received 1 full dose of a study drug per protocol. Two patients were not included in the all patient population (1 in each drug group) as they were not dosed per protocol or they did not receive the full dose of the assigned treatment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832633|NCT01250171|Secondary|Desire for Artificial Tear Use at Day 1 and Weeks 1, 4, and 8|Patients were instructed to record each occurrence of a desire for topical lubricant use in a patient diary. The percentage of patients in each of 6 categories (0-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, 21-25, > 25 times) indicating the number of times a patient records a desire for artificial tear use per day was calculated at each time point. The percentage was calculated using the number of patients with any reported data on that day in the respective treatment group as the denominator.|Day 1 and Weeks 1, 4, and 8|All patient population: All randomized patients that received 1 full dose of a study drug per protocol. Two patients were not included in the all patient population (1 in each drug group) as they were not dosed per protocol or they did not receive the full dose of the assigned treatment.||Percentage of patients|||Number
832634|NCT01250171|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) at Weeks 1, 4, and 8|The OSDI is an instrument for measuring dry eye disease severity and effect on vision-related functions. Patients were asked a series of 12 questions; patients responded to the questions in regard to both eyes. Responses ranged from 0=None of the time to 4=All of the time. OSDI was calculated as the sum of the 12 question scores x 25/number of questions answered. The total score ranged from 0-100. A higher score indicates drier eyes. A negative change score indicates improvement in dryness.|Baseline to Weeks 1, 4, and 8|All patient population: All randomized patients that received 1 full dose of a study drug per protocol. Two patients were not included in the all patient population (1 in each drug group) as they were not dosed per protocol or they did not receive the full dose of the assigned treatment.||Units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
832635|NCT01250171|Secondary|Change From Baseline on the Conjunctival Redness Scale (Ora) at Weeks 1, 4, and 8|Conjunctival redness was measured in the study eye at each visit by a masked evaluator. The evaluator compared the patient’s study eye with a set of 5 reference photos showing a normal eye and eyes with various degrees of redness. Redness was scored on a scale of 0-5 with a white normal eye = 0 and an eye with the most redness = 5. A higher score indicates more redness. A negative change score indicates improvement in redness.|Baseline to Weeks 1, 4, and 8|All patient population: All randomized patients that received 1 full dose of a study drug per protocol. Two patients were not included in the all patient population (1 in each drug group) as they were not dosed per protocol or they did not receive the full dose of the assigned treatment.||Units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
832636|NCT01250171|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Tear Film Breakup Time at Weeks 1, 4, and 8|Tear film breakup time was defined as the time of last blink to the appearance of the first growing micelle after instilling 5 μl of non-preserved 2% sodium fluorescein into the lower palpebral conjunctiva of the study eye. Measurement was repeated 3 times and a mean tear film breakup time calculated. A lower score indicates a drier eye. A positive change score indicates improvement in dryness.|Baseline to Weeks 1, 4, and 8|All patient population: All randomized patients that received 1 full dose of a study drug per protocol. Two patients were not included in the all patient population (1 in each drug group) as they were not dosed per protocol or they did not receive the full dose of the assigned treatment.||Seconds||Full Range|Mean
832684|NCT01250730|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time Zero to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) of Plasma Active Metabolite (PF-06260182)|AUClast of crizotinib is estimated from the crizotinib concentration. It is obtained from Linear/Log trapezoidal method.|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832637|NCT01250171|Secondary|Change From Baseline on the Schirmer Test at Weeks 1, 4, and 8|The Schirmer test measures the production of tears. A small strip of filter paper is placed inside the lower eyelid (conjunctival sac) of each eye and the eyes are kept closed for 5 minutes. The paper is removed and the length of paper that is wet is measured as an index of tear production. The amount of tear production in the study eye was ranked on a 4 point scale: 0=Normal (≥ 15 mm wetting of the paper), 1=Mild (14-9 mm wetting of the paper), 2=Moderate (8-4 mm wetting of the paper), and 3=Severe (< 4 mm wetting of the paper). A higher score indicates a drier eye. A negative change score indicates improvement in dryness.|Baseline to Weeks 1, 4, and 8|All patient population: All randomized patients that received 1 full dose of a study drug per protocol. Two patients were not included in the all patient population (1 in each drug group) as they were not dosed per protocol or they did not receive the full dose of the assigned treatment.||Units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
832638|NCT01250171|Secondary|Change From Baseline on the Ora Corneal Staining Scale at Weeks 1, 4, and 8|Corneal staining was done with 2% sodium fluorescein instilled into the lower palpebral conjunctiva of the study eye. Staining was assessed in 3 regions (inferior, superior, and central) of the cornea and rated on a scale of 0 (no staining) to 4 (confluent staining). A mean of the 3 zones was calculated. A higher score indicates a drier eye. A negative change score indicates improvement in dryness.|Baseline to Weeks 1, 4, and 8|All patient population: All randomized patients that received 1 full dose of a study drug per protocol. Two patients were not included in the all patient population (1 in each drug group) as they were not dosed per protocol or they did not receive the full dose of the assigned treatment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832639|NCT01250171|Primary|Change From Baseline on the National Eye Institute Corneal Staining Scale (NEI-CSS) at Week 4|Corneal staining was done with 2% sodium fluorescein instilled into the lower palpebral conjunctiva of each eye. Staining was assessed in 5 zones of the cornea (central plus 4 quadrants) and rated on a scale of 0 (no staining) to 3 (severe, confluent staining). A mean of the 5 zones for the study eye was calculated. A higher score indicates a drier eye. A negative change score indicates improvement in dryness.|Baseline to Week 4|All patient population: All randomized patients that received 1 full dose of a study drug per protocol. Two patients were not included in the all patient population (1 in each drug group) as they were not dosed per protocol or they did not receive the full dose of the assigned treatment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832640|NCT01250184|Secondary|Quality of Life SF-36|The SF-36 consists of 36 items addressing the patient's perception of their quality of life (QoL) in the following eight domains: physical function (PF), role limitations due to physical problems (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role limitations due to emotional problems (RE), and mental health (MH), and one item change in health. Sub-scale scores range from 0 to 100, with 100 as the best, most positive QoL in that area and 0 is the worst. There is a total scale score, all subscales range from 0 to 100. This scale was validated in Colombia.|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832641|NCT01250184|Secondary|PHQ 9 Function Measured With the Hand Back and Hand Mouth Maneuvers. Complications and Adverse Reactions Need for Rescue Medication|The PHQ-9 was developed from the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders. The self-report instrument asks individuals how much they had been bothered by any of the nine problems over the prior two weeks. Items are scored from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day). Items are summed and the total score (from 0 to 27) represents the severity of depressive symptoms. 0 - 4 None-minimal None, 5 - 9 Mild, 10 - 14 Moderate, 15 - 19 Moderately Severe, 20 - 27 Severe|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832642|NCT01250184|Primary|Visual Analogue Scale|VAS with a score of 0-100, where 100 is the value representing the highest degree of pain and 0 the lowest. Successful treatment was defined as a reduction in pain of at least 20% of the previous score on the VAS after 4 weeks of the initial evaluation, or 14 mm on the VAS; this scale is a reliable pain assessment measure that has been validated previously|12 weeks|"Was calculated with the software Sample Size from Javeriana University, was taken into account an error type I of 0.05 and error type II of 0.2, number of measurements before randomization = 1, after performing scrambling = 2, correlation between measurements of 0.6, clinically important difference of 0.35, for a total number of = 45 each"||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832643|NCT01250184|Secondary|Quality of Life SF-36|The SF-36 consists of 36 items addressing the patient's perception of their quality of life (QoL) in the following eight domains: physical function (PF), role limitations due to physical problems (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role limitations due to emotional problems (RE), and mental health (MH), and one item change in health. Sub-scale scores range from 0 to 100, with 100 as the best, most positive QoL in that area and 0 is the worst. There is a total scale score, all subscales range from 0 to 100. This scale was validated in Colombia.|4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832644|NCT01250184|Secondary|PHQ 9 Function Measured With the Hand Back and Hand Mouth Maneuvers. Complications and Adverse Reactions Need for Rescue Medication|The PHQ-9 was developed from the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders. The self-report instrument asks individuals how much they had been bothered by any of the nine problems over the prior two weeks. Items are scored from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day). Items are summed and the total score (from 0 to 27) represents the severity of depressive symptoms. 0 - 4 None-minimal None, 5 - 9 Mild, 10 - 14 Moderate, 15 - 19 Moderately Severe, 20 - 27 Severe|4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832645|NCT01250184|Primary|Visual Analogue Scale|VAS with a score of 0-100, where 100 is the value representing the highest degree of pain and 0 the lowest. Successful treatment was defined as a reduction in pain of at least 20% of the previous score on the VAS after 4 weeks of the initial evaluation, or 14 mm on the VAS; this scale is a reliable pain assessment measure that has been validated previously|4 weeks|"Was calculated with the software Sample Size from Javeriana University, was taken into account an error type I of 0.05 and error type II of 0.2, number of measurements before randomization = 1, after performing scrambling = 2, correlation between measurements of 0.6, clinically important difference of 0.35, for a total number of = 45 each"||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832729|NCT01250834|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Ortho-Hydroxyatorvastatin: Area Under the Curve (AUC)|This measure is based on the pharmacokinetic area under the ortho-hydroxyatorvastatin concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity.|Pre-dose to 56 hours post-dose|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and have evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanogram*hour per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832646|NCT01250379|Primary|Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Alive and Free of Second-Line Disease Progression at Month 24|Second­line PFS was defined as the time from randomization to PD or death due to any cause during their second­line of treatment with bevacizumab and/or chemotherapy, whichever occurred first. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without second­line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non­progression was documented.|Month 24|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832647|NCT01250379|Primary|Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Alive and Free of Second-Line Disease Progression at Month 18|Second­line PFS was defined as the time from randomization to PD or death due to any cause during their secondline of treatment with bevacizumab and/or chemotherapy, whichever occurred first. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without second­line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non­progression was documented.|Month 18|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832648|NCT01250379|Primary|Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Alive and Free of Second-Line Disease Progression at Month 12|Second­line PFS was defined as the time from randomization to PD or death due to any cause during their second­line of treatment with bevacizumab and/or chemotherapy, whichever occurred first. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without secondline PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non­progression was documented.|Month 12|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832649|NCT01250379|Secondary|Change From Baseline in FACT-B Scores (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|"The FACT-B is composed of 5 multi-item sections where participants responded to questions assessing symptoms (scale: 0-4; 0=not at all and 4=very much), as follows: PWB (7 items, total score 0-28), SWB (7 items, total score 0-28), EWB (6 items, total score 0-24), FWB (7 items, total score 0-28); and breast cancer score based on the additional concerns section of FACT-B (10 items, total score 0-40). The FACT-B TOI score=sum of PWB, FWB, and breast cancer score subscale scores (total score 0-96). The FACT-G total score=sum of PWB, SWB, EWB, and FWB subscales scores (total score 0-108). The FACT-B total score=sum of PWB, SWB, EWB, FWB, and breast cancer score subscale scores (total score 0-148). In all cases a higher value indicated a better perceived quality of life."|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter until second-line PD (up to approximately 3 years)|ITT population. Here, Number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for this outcome measure and n=number of participants who completed the assessment at the specified timepoint.||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832650|NCT01250379|Secondary|Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) Scores (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|"The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) is composed of 5 multi-item sections where participants responded to questions assessing symptoms (scale: 0-4; 0=not at all and 4=very much), as follows: physical well-being (PWB) (7 items, total score 0-28), social/family well-being (SWB) (7 items, total score 0-28), emotional well-being (EWB) (6 items, total score 0-24), functional well-being (FWB) (7 items, total score 0-28); and breast cancer score based on the additional concerns section of FACT-B (10 items, total score 0-40). The FACT-B Trial Outcomes Index (TOI) score=sum of PWB, FWB, and breast cancer score subscale scores (total score 0-96). The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) total score=sum of PWB, SWB, EWB, and FWB subscales scores (total score 0-108). The FACT-B total score=sum of PWB, SWB, EWB, FWB, and breast cancer score subscales scores (total score 0-148). In all cases a higher value indicated a better perceived quality of life."|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter until second-line PD (up to approximately 3 years)|ITT population. Here, Number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for this outcome measure and n=number of participants who completed the questionnaire at the specified timepoints.||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832651|NCT01250379|Secondary|Change From Baseline in VAS Scores (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|The participant was asked to rate their overall health on a 0-100 mm vertical scale, where the lowest endpoint = 0 (labeled as worst imaginable health state) and the highest endpoint =100 (labeled as the best imaginable health state). The participant marked the line corresponding to their assessment and the distance from the bottom was measured in millimeters. A negative value indicated a worsening of perceived quality of life and a positive value indicated an improvement of perceived quality of life.|Baseline, during second-line treatment at Weeks 8 and 16 (4-week cycles) or Weeks 9 and 18 (3-week cycles) and at second-line PD (up to approximately 3 years)|ITT population. Here, Number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for this outcome measure and n=number of participants who completed the assessment at the specified timepoint.||mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832652|NCT01250379|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessed Using the EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|The participant was asked to rate their overall health on a 0-100 millimeter (mm) vertical scale, where the lowest endpoint=0 (labeled as worst imaginable health state) and the highest endpoint =100 (labeled as the best imaginable health state). The participant marked the line corresponding to their assessment and the distance from the bottom was measured in millimeters. A higher value indicated a better health state.|Baseline, during second-line treatment at Weeks 8 and 16 (4-week cycles) or Weeks 9 and 18 (3-week cycles) and at second-line PD (up to approximately 3 years)|ITT population; n=number of participants who completed the assessment at the specified timepoint.||mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832662|NCT01250379|Secondary|Second- and Third-Line PFS|The median time, in months, from randomization to second-line and third-line PFS event. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without third-line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented.|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter according to the standard of care of the treatment site until approximately 4 years|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832653|NCT01250379|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Index Scores (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|"The EQ-5D is composed of 5 single-item measures where participants responded to questions assessing health status by responding with either no problems, some problems, or extreme problems in the following categories: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Based on large population surveys, an algorithm was used to combine the responses to each of these 5 measures into 1 single EQ-5D index score ranging from -0.59 (extreme problems) to +1 (no problems) where a negative value indicated a worsening of perceived quality of life and a positive value indicated an improvement of perceived quality of life."|Baseline, during second-line treatment at Weeks 8 and 16 (4-week cycles) or Weeks 9 and 18 (3-week cycles) and at second-line PD (up to approximately 3 years)|ITT population. Here, Number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for this outcome measure and n=number of participants who completed the assessment at the specified timepoint.||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832654|NCT01250379|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessed As an Index Score Using the EQ-5D (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|The EQ-5D is composed of 5 single-item measures where participants responded to questions assessing health status by responding with either “no problems”, “some problems”, or “extreme problems” in the following categories: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Based on large population surveys, an algorithm was used to combine the responses to each of these 5 measures into 1 single EQ-5D index score ranging from -0.59 (extreme problems) to +1 (no problems).|Baseline, during second-line treatment at Weeks 8 and 16 (4-week cycles) or Weeks 9 and 18 (3-week cycles) and at second-line PD (up to approximately 3 years)|ITT population. Here, Number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for this outcome measure and n=number of participants who completed the assessment at the specified timepoint||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832655|NCT01250379|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Problems by European Quality of Life Instrument (EQ-5D) Category (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|The EQ-5D is composed of 5 single-item measures where participants responded to questions assessing health status by responding with either “no problems”, “some problems”, or “extreme problems” in the following categories: mobility (M) (“no problems”=“I have no problems in walking about” to “extreme problems”=“I am confined to bed”), self-care (SC) (“no problems”=“I have no problems with self-care” to “extreme problems”=”I am unable to wash or dress myself”), usual activities (UA) (“no problems”=“I have no problems performing my usual activities” to “extreme problems”=“I am unable to perform my usual activities”), pain/discomfort (P/D) (“no problems”=“I have no pain or discomfort” to “extreme problems”=“I have extreme pain or discomfort”), and anxiety/depression (A/D) (“no problems”=“I am not anxious or depressed” to “extreme problems”=‘I am extremely anxious or depressed”).|Baseline, during second-line treatment at Weeks 8 and 16 (4-week cycles) or Weeks 9 and 18 (3-week cycles) and at second-line PD (up to approximately 3 years)|ITT population. Here, Number of participants analyzed = participants evaluable for this outcome measure and n=number of participants completing the questionnaires at the corresponding timepoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
832656|NCT01250379|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Surviving at Months 6, 12, 18, and 24|OS was defined as the median time, in months, from the date of randomization to the date of death, due to any cause.|Months 6, 12, 18, and 24|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832657|NCT01250379|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the median time, in months, from the date of randomization to the date of death, due to any cause. Participants who had not died were censored at the date the patient was last known to be alive.|Baseline until death (up to approximately 4 years)|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832658|NCT01250379|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died|Percentage of participants who died due to any reason were reported.|Baseline until death (up to approximately 4 years)|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
832659|NCT01250379|Primary|Percentage of Participants Estimated to be Alive and Free of Second-Line Disease Progression at Month 6|Second-line PFS was defined as the time from randomization to PD or death due to any cause during their second-line of treatment with bevacizumab and/or chemotherapy, whichever occurred first. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without second-line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented.|Month 6|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832660|NCT01250379|Secondary|Time to Second- and Third-Line Tumor Progression|The median time, in months, from randomization to second- and third-line tumor progression. Second­ and third­line tumor progression was defined as third­line PD according to RECIST v1.1 or death due to progression of disease. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without third-line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented.|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter according to the standard of care of the treatment site until approximately 4 years|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832661|NCT01250379|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Second- and Third-Line Tumor Progression|Second- and third-line tumor progression was defined as occurrence of third-line PD according to RECIST v1.1 or death due to progression of disease. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without third-line PD or death due to progression of disease were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented.|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter according to the standard of care of the treatment site until approximately 4 years|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
832679|NCT01250730|Primary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio Cmax|The metabolic ratio (MR) is calculated by first converting the Cmax for both crizotinib and metabolite (PF-06260182) from mass units to molar units.|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832663|NCT01250379|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Second- and Third-Line PFS According to RECIST v1.1|Second- and third-line PFS was defined as the time from the date randomization to the date of third-line PD or death due to any cause. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without third-line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented.|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter according to the standard of care of the treatment site until approximately 4 years|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
832664|NCT01250379|Secondary|Third-Line PFS|The median time, in months, from the first dose of third-line bevacizumab and/or chemotherapy to third-line PD or death due to any cause. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without third-line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented.|First dose of third-line treatment until PD or death due to any cause (over a period of approximately 14 months)|Third line ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832665|NCT01250379|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Third-Line PFS According to RECIST v1.1|Third-line PFS was defined as the time from the date of first dose of third-line bevacizumab and/or chemotherapy to the date of third-line PD or death due to any cause. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without second-line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented. Participants without third-line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented.|First dose of third-line treatment until PD or death due to any cause (assessed every 8-9 weeks, over a period of approximately 14 months)|Third line ITT population: all randomized participants who received third-line treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
832666|NCT01250379|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Second-Line Documented CR or PR According to RECIST v1.1 Estimated to be Alive and Free of Disease Progression at Months 3, 6, and 9 (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|Duration of objective response was defined as the median time, in months, from the date of the first second-line documentation of CR or PR to the date of the first second-line documentation of PD or death due to any cause. For TLs, CR was defined as the disappearance of all TLs; PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the SLD of the TLs, taking as a reference the baseline SLD; and PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the SLD of TLs, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded since the treatment started. For NTLs, CR was defined as the disappearance of all NTLs and normalization of tumor marker levels, and PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants with CR or PR who had experienced neither disease progression nor died were censored at the date of the last available tumor assessment when the participant was known to be progression free.|Months 3, 6, and 9|ITT population; only randomized participants with a CR or PR were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832667|NCT01250379|Secondary|Duration of Second-Line Objective Response (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|The median time, in months, from the date of the first second-line documentation of CR or PR according to RECIST v1.1 to the date of the first second-line documentation of PD or death due to any cause. For TLs, CR was defined as the disappearance of all TLs; PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the SLD of the TLs, taking as a reference the baseline SLD; and PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the SLD of TLs, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded since the treatment started. For NTLs, CR was defined as the disappearance of all NTLs and normalization of tumor marker levels, and PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants with CR or PR who had experienced neither disease progression nor died were censored at the date of the last available tumor assessment when the participant was known to be progression free.|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter according to the standard of care of the treatment site until approximately 3 years|ITT population; only randomized participants with a CR or PR were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832668|NCT01250379|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Second-Line CR, PR, Stable Disease, and PD According to RECIST v1.1 (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|For TLs, CR was defined as the disappearance of all TLs; PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the SLD of the TLs, taking as a reference the baseline SLD; SD was defined as neither sufficient decrease in SLD to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase in SLD to qualify for PD; and PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the SLD of TLs, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded since the treatment started. For NTLs, CR was defined as the disappearance of all NTLs and normalization of tumor marker levels; stable disease was defined as the persistence of 1 or more NTLs and/or maintenance of tumor marker levels above normal limits; and PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. The 95% CI was determined using the Pearson-Clopper method.|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter according to the standard of care of the treatment site until approximately 3 years|ITT population; only randomized participants with measurable disease at baseline were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832669|NCT01250379|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Second-Line Best Overall Response (BOR) of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) According to RECIST v1.1 (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|BOR was defined as a confirmed CR or PR during second-line treatment. For TLs, CR was defined as the disappearance of all TLs, and PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the SLD of the TLs, taking as a reference the baseline SLD. For NTLs, CR was defined as the disappearance of all NTLs and normalization of tumor marker levels. The 95% Cl was determined using the Pearson-Clopper method.|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter according to the standard of care of the treatment site until approximately 3 years|ITT population; only randomized participants with measurable disease at baseline were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832670|NCT01250379|Secondary|Second-Line PFS by Baseline Risk Factor (Data Cutoff 20 December 2013)|The median time, in months, from randomization to second-line PFS event according to the following baseline risk factors: hormone receptor negative, HER2 negative (triple negative), hormone receptor positive/HER-2 negative (HR-pos/HER-neg), first-line PFS less than (<) 6 months, first-line PFS greater than or equal to (≥) 6 months, taxane chemotherapy (chemo), non-taxane chemo, vinorelbine chemo, LDH ≤ 1.5 upper limit of normal (ULN), LDH greater than (>) 1.5 ULN, < 65 years of age, ≥ 65 years of age, < 70 years of age, ≥ 70 years of age, < 3 metastatic organ sites, ≥ 3 metastatic organ sites, bevacizumab-free (B-free) interval ≤ 6 weeks, B-free > 6 weeks, disease-free (D-free) interval ≤ 24 months, D-free > 24 months, D-free ≤ 12 months, and D-free > 12 months. Participants without second-line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented. PD: defined in Outcome measure 1. The 95% CI was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methodology.|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter according to the standard of care of the treatment site until approximately 3 years|ITT population. Here, Number of participants analyzed equals (=) participants evaluable for this outcome measure and number (n) = number of participants included in the analysis for the specified risk factor.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832671|NCT01250379|Primary|Second-Line PFS|The median time, in months, from randomization to second-line PFS event. For TLs, PD was defined at least a 20% increase in the SLD, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For NTLs, PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without second-line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented.|Baseline (≤28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter according to the standard of care of the treatment site until approximately 3 years|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832672|NCT01250379|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Second-Line Progression-Free Survival (PFS) According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Version 1.1 (v1.1)|Second-line PFS was defined as the time from randomization to progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause during their second-line of treatment with bevacizumab and/or chemotherapy, whichever occurred first. For target lesions (TLs), PD was defined at least a 20 percent (%) increase in the sum of the largest diameter (SLD), taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded from baseline or the appearance of one or more new lesions. For non-target lesions (NTLs), PD was defined as the appearance of 1 or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing NTLs. Participants without second-line PD or death were censored at the date of last tumor assessment where non-progression was documented.|Baseline (less than or equal to [≤] 28 days after randomization), every 8-9 weeks thereafter according to the standard of care of the treatment site until approximately 3 years|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population - all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
832673|NCT01250418|Primary|TcCO2 Above 50|% Time Tosca Monitor (TcCO2) above 50. A TcCo2 above 50 is indicative of hypoventilation.|Intraoperative, an average of about 1 and 1/2 hours.|||Percent time intraoperatrive||Standard Deviation|Mean
832674|NCT01250509|Secondary|Change in Psychological Stress (Baseline and 4 Months)|The 10-item Perceived Stress Scale was used to evaluate perception of stressful events over the past month by using a 5-point Likert scale (0 = never to 4 = very often) (Cohen et al., 1983). The mean of the ten items was used in analysis. Higher scores indicate greater perceived stress.|Change from Baseline in Psychological Stress|An intention-to-treat analysis was conducted. Assuming participants lost to followup did not change over time, missing data at postintervention were imputed using preintervention values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832675|NCT01250509|Secondary|Telomerase Activity|Cryopreserved peripheral blood nuclear cells (PBMCs) were thawed and live cells counted using a hemocytometer by the Trypan blue exclusion method. For each sample, an extract of 5000 cells per microliter was made and two concentrations, corresponding to 5000 and 10,000 cells, were assayed for each sample to ensure the assay was in the linear range. Telomerase activity was assayed by the Telomerase Repeat Amplification Protocol (TRAP) using a commercial kit (TRAPeze, Telomerase Detection kit, Upstate/ CHEMICON, Temecula, CA). Baseline and post-intervention samples for the same participant were assayed in the same batch and run on the same gel to eliminate any differences caused by reaction or procedural batch-to-batch variations. Technicians were blind to group assignment. Telomerase activity is defined as 1 unit = the amount of product from one 293T cell/10,000 PBMCs, and was quantified using the software ImageQuant 5.2 (GE Healthcare, Piscataway, NJ).|Change from Baseline in Telomerase Activity at 4 months|Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted.||Standard arbitrary units, see above||Standard Deviation|Mean
832676|NCT01250509|Secondary|Weight||Change in Weight (baseline and 4 months)|Intention to treat analysis was conducted. Assuming participants lost to followup did not change over time, missing data at postintervention were imputed using preintervention values.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832677|NCT01250509|Primary|Change in Abdominal Fat|Whole-body dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans were performed to assess body fat distribution. The DEXA densitometry (GE Healthcare Lunar Prodigy, Madison, Wis, USA) was adjusted to the fan beam mode and EnCore software version 9.15 was used. The primary region of interest was fat tissue from a rectangular region in the abdominal area defined by the upper boundary of the second lumbar vertebra to the lower edge of the fourth lumbar vertebra. The vertical sides were defined as the continuation of the lateral sides of the rib cage.|Change from Baseline in Abdominal Fat (baseline and 4 months)|Intent-to-treat analyses were conducted. Assuming participants lost to followup did not change over time, missing data at postintervention were imputed using preintervention values.||grams||Standard Deviation|Mean
832678|NCT01250717|Primary|Pathologic Complete Response Was Assessed by Rigorous Pathological Examination by One of Two Pathologists|One of two pathologists (SR, EG), assigned the Gleason scores for each patient from pre-treatment prostate biopsies and assessed pathological staging on post- prostatectomy specimens. Staging including a description of all tumor foci within the gland, presence or absence of perineural invasion and/or lymphovascular invasion, presence of extraprostatic extension of tumor (including seminal vesicle invasion), and margin status. The pathologists reviewed the presence or absence of cancer in each prostate gland removed on the study patients. RECIST has to my knowledge not been used for pathological examination in neoadjuvant studies. 0 out of 28 participants acheived complete response. RECIST is not appropriate as cancer within the gland at the time of treatment is not measurable by RECIST. The primary outcome is a pathological complete response.|status post prostectomy|||participants|||Number
832685|NCT01250730|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time Zero Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUC0-inf) of Plasma Active Metabolite (PF-06260182)|"AUC(0-inf) of PF-06260182 is estimated from the PF-06260182 concentration. It is obtained from AUClast plus (Clast/kel).
AUClast = area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero time until the last measurable concentration.
Clast = the last quantifiable concentration. Kel = terminal phase elimination rate constant."|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832686|NCT01250730|Primary|Dose Normalized Cmax of Crizotinib|Dose normalized (to 150 mg dose) Cmax is obtained from Cmax / (Dose/150).|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832687|NCT01250730|Primary|Dose Normalized AUClast of Crizotinib|Dose normalized (to 150 mg dose) AUClast is obtained from AUClast / (Dose/150).|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832688|NCT01250730|Primary|Dose Normalized AUC(0-inf) of Crizotinib|Dose normalized (to 150 mg dose) AUC(0-inf) is obtained from AUC(0-inf) / (Dose/150).|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832689|NCT01250730|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) of Crizotinib|"Vz/F of crizotinib is obtained from a Dose / (AUCinf *kel).
Kel = terminal phase elimination rate constant"|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||Liter||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832690|NCT01250730|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F) of Crizotinib|CL/F of crizotinib is obtained from a Dose per AUCinf.|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||liter per hour||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832691|NCT01250730|Primary|Terminal Elimination Half-life (t1/2) of Crizotinib|"t1/2 of crizotinib is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half. It is obtained from a Loge(2)/kel.
Kel = terminal phase elimination rate constant"|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832692|NCT01250730|Primary|Time to Cmax (Tmax) of Crizotinib||0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
832693|NCT01250730|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Crizotinib||0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832694|NCT01250730|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time Zero to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) of Crizotinib|AUClast of crizotinib is estimated from the crizotinib concentration. It is obtained from Linear/Log trapezoidal method.|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832695|NCT01250730|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Profile From Time Zero Extrapolated to Infinite Time [AUC(0-inf)] of Crizotinib|"AUC(0-inf) of crizotinib is estimated from the crizotinib concentration. It is obtained from AUClast plus (Clast/kel).
AUClast = area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero time until the last measurable concentration.
Clast = the last quantifiable concentration. Kel = terminal phase elimination rate constant."|0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144 hours post-dose|||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
832696|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Post Infant Series Catch-up Dose 3 (13 to 16.5 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]), were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Catch-up Dose 3|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic event. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832697|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Post Infant Series Catch-up Dose 2 (7 to 13 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]), were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Catch-up Dose 2|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic event. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832698|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Post Infant Series Catch-up Dose 1 (6 to 11.5 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]), were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Catch-up Dose 1|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic event. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832699|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Toddler Dose (12 to 15 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]), were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after the toddler dose|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic event. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832715|NCT01250756|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Antigen-specific Acellular Pertussis Antibody 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|GMCs were measured in EU/mL and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated for PT and FHA antibodies.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity set: eligible participants who received vaccine to which they were randomized at all 4 doses, had blood drawn within protocol-specified time, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result after toddler dose for analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832700|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Infant Series Dose 3 (5 to 10 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]), were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 3 of the infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic event. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832701|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Infant Series Dose 2 (4 to 8 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]), were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 2 of the infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic event. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832702|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Systemic Events: Infant Series Dose 1 (3 to 6 Months of Age)|Systemic events (any fever >= 37.5 degrees Celsius [C], decreased appetite, irritability, increased sleep, decreased sleep, and hives [urticaria]), were reported using an electronic diary. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.|Within 7 days after Dose 1 of the infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any systemic event. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for specified systemic reaction for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832703|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Post Infant Series Catch-up Dose 3 (13 to16.5 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Erythema and induration were scaled as Any (erythema and induration present); Mild (0.5 to 2.0 centimeters [cm]); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Injection site being evaluated for local reactions was catch-up 7vPnC injection site in the DTaP (Catch-up 7vPnC) group.|Within 7 days after Catch-up Dose 3|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832704|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Post Infant Series Catch-up Dose 2 (7 to 13 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Erythema and induration were scaled as Any (erythema and induration present); Mild (0.5 to 2.0 centimeters [cm]); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Injection site being evaluated for local reactions was catch-up 7vPnC injection site in the DTaP (Catch-up 7vPnC) group.|Within 7 days after Catch-up Dose 2|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832705|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Post Infant Series Catch-up Dose 1 (6 to 11.5 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Erythema and induration were scaled as Any (erythema and induration present); Mild (0.5 to 2.0 centimeters [cm]); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Injection site being evaluated for local reactions was catch-up 7vPnC injection site in the DTaP (Catch-up 7vPnC) group.|Within 7 days after Catch-up Dose 1|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832706|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Toddler Dose (12 to 15 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Erythema and induration were scaled as Any (erythema and induration present); Mild (0.5 to 2.0 centimeters [cm]); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Injection site being evaluated for local reactions was 7vPnC injection site in the 7vPnC+DTaP group, and DTaP injection site in the DTaP (Catch-up 7vPnC) group.|Within 7 days after the toddler dose|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832716|NCT01250756|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Antigen-specific Diphtheria and Tetanus Antibody 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|GMCs were measured in IU/mL and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated for diphtheria and tetanus antibodies.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity set: eligible participants who received vaccine to which they were randomized at all 4 doses, had blood drawn within protocol-specified time, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result after toddler dose for analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832730|NCT01250834|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Ortho-Hydroxyatorvastatin: Maximum Concentration (Cmax)||Pre-dose to 56 hours post-dose|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and have evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832707|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Infant Series Dose 3 (5 to 10 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Erythema and induration were scaled as Any (erythema and induration present); Mild (0.5 to 2.0 centimeters [cm]); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Injection site being evaluated for local reactions was 7vPnC injection site in the 7vPnC+DTaP group, and DTaP injection site in the DTaP (Catch-up 7vPnC) group.|Within 7 days after Dose 3 of the infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832708|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Infant Series Dose 2 (4 to 8 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Erythema and induration were scaled as Any (erythema and induration present); Mild (0.5 to 2.0 centimeters [cm]); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Injection site being evaluated for local reactions was 7vPnC injection site in the 7vPnC+DTaP group, and DTaP injection site in the DTaP (Catch-up 7vPnC) group.|Within 7 days after Dose 2 of the infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832709|NCT01250756|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Reporting Pre-Specified Local Reactions: Infant Series Dose 1 (3 to 6 Months of Age)|Local reactions were reported using an electronic diary. Tenderness was scaled as Any (tenderness present); Significant (present and interfered with limb movement). Erythema and induration were scaled as Any (erythema and induration present); Mild (0.5 to 2.0 centimeters [cm]); Moderate (2.5 to 7.0 cm); Severe (> 7.0 cm). Participants may be represented in more than 1 category. Injection site being evaluated for local reactions was 7vPnC injection site in the 7vPnC+DTaP group, and DTaP injection site in the DTaP (Catch-up 7vPnC) group.|Within 7 days after Dose 1 of the infant series|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study vaccine. 'N' (number of participants analyzed)=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for any local reaction. 'n'=participants reporting yes for at least 1 day or no for all days for the specified local reaction for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832710|NCT01250756|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) of Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody 1 Month After Catch-up Dose 3|Antibody GMCs for 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) were presented. GMC and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. GMs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|1 month after the catch-up dose 3|Catch-up immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 catch-up doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result for proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832711|NCT01250756|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Level >=0.35 Mcg/mL 1 Month After Catch-up Dose 3|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody threshold >=0.35 mcg/mL along with the corresponding 95% CI for the 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F) were presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants.|1 month after the catch-up dose 3|Catch-up immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 catch-up doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result for proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832712|NCT01250756|Secondary|Geometric Mean Fold Rise (GMFR) of Pneumococcal Antibodies From Pretoddler Dose to 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|Geometric mean fold rises (GMFRs) for the 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) from prevaccination to 1 month postvaccination were computed using the logarithmically transformed assay results. CI for the GMFRs were back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the logarithmically transformed assay results.|Pre-toddler dose, 1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity set: eligible participants who received vaccine to which they were randomized at all 4 doses, had blood drawn within protocol-specified time, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result after toddler dose for analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||Fold Rise||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832713|NCT01250756|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) of Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|Antibody GMCs for 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) were presented. GMC and corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs were evaluated. GMs were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity set: eligible participants who received vaccine to which they were randomized at all 4 doses, had blood drawn within protocol-specified time, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result after toddler dose for analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832714|NCT01250756|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Level >=0.35 Mcg/mL 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody threshold >=0.35 mcg/mL along with the corresponding 95% CI for the 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F) were presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity set: eligible participants who received vaccine to which they were randomized at all 4 doses, had blood drawn within protocol-specified time, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result after toddler dose for analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832717|NCT01250756|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Predefined Antibody Levels for Diphtheria Toxoid, Tetanus Toxoid, and Pertussis Antigens 1 Month After the Toddler Dose|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody level along with the corresponding 95% CI were presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants. Predefined antibody levels were 0.1 IU/mL for diphtheria, 0.01 IU/mL for tetanus, 5 EU/mL for PT, and 5 EU/mL for FHA.|1 month after the toddler dose|Evaluable toddler immunogenicity set: eligible participants who received vaccine to which they were randomized at all 4 doses, had blood drawn within protocol-specified time, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result after toddler dose for analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832718|NCT01250756|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) of Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody 1 Month After the Infant Series|Antibody geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) for 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F) were presented. GMC and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated. Geometric means (GMs) were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result for proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832719|NCT01250756|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody Level Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.35 Microgram Per Milliliter (Mcg/mL) 1 Month After the Infant Series|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody threshold >=0.35 mcg/mL along with the corresponding 95% CI for the 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F) were presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result for proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832720|NCT01250756|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Antigen-specific Acellular Pertussis Antibody 1 Month After the Infant Series|GMCs were measured in EU/mL and corresponding 2-sided 95% CI were evaluated for PT and FHA antibodies.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result for proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832721|NCT01250756|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Antigen-specific Diphtheria and Tetanus Antibody 1 Month After the Infant Series|Geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) were measured in IU/mL and corresponding 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) were evaluated for diphtheria and tetanus antibodies.|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result for proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
832722|NCT01250756|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Predefined Antibody Levels for Diphtheria Toxoid, Tetanus Toxoid, and Pertussis Antigens 1 Month After the Infant Series|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody level along with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were presented. Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants. Predefined antibody levels were 0.1 International Units/mL (IU/mL) for diphtheria, 0.01 IU/mL for tetanus, 5 Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) units/mL (EU/mL) for pertussis toxoid (PT), and 5 EU/mL for filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA).|1 month after the infant series|Evaluable infant immunogenicity population: eligible participants who received the vaccine to which they were randomized at all 3 doses, had blood drawn within the protocol-specified time frames, had at least 1 valid, determinate assay result for proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832723|NCT01250769|Secondary|Gingival Bleeding Index|Gingival bleeding evaluation using a ordinal scale of 0 to 3; (0 is best; 3 is worst)|28 days|Analysis of efficacy data was performed using a modified intent-to-treat population (MITT). The MITT Population included all randomized subjects with both a baseline and endpoint evaluation. Missing data were not imputed.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832724|NCT01250769|Secondary|Gingival Bleeding Index|Gingival bleeding evaluation using an ordinal scale of 0 to 3; (0 is best; 3 is worst)|14 days|Analysis of efficacy data was performed using a modified intent-to-treat population (MITT). The MITT Population included all randomized subjects with both a baseline and endpoint evaluation. Missing data were not imputed.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832725|NCT01250769|Secondary|Modified Gingival Index|Gingival inflammation evaluation on an ordinal scale of 0 to 4 (0 is best ; 4 is worst)|28 days|Analysis of efficacy data was performed using a modified intent-to-treat population (MITT). The MITT Population included all randomized subjects with both a baseline and endpoint evaluation. Missing data were not imputed.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832726|NCT01250769|Secondary|Modified Gingival Index|Gingival inflammation evaluation on an ordinal scale of 0 to 4 (0 is best ; 4 is worst)|14 days|Analysis of efficacy data was performed using a modified intent-to-treat population (MITT). The MITT Population included all randomized subjects with both a baseline and endpoint evaluation. Missing data were not imputed.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832727|NCT01250769|Secondary|Residual Protein Concentration|Residual protein concentration of interproximal plaque samples|28 days|Analysis of efficacy data was performed using a modified intent-to-treat population (MITT). The MITT Population included all randomized subjects with both a baseline and endpoint evaluation. Missing data were not imputed.||ug/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832728|NCT01250769|Primary|Residual Protein Concentration|Residual protein concentration of interproximal plaque samples|14 days|Analysis of efficacy data was performed using a modified intent-to-treat population (MITT). The MITT Population included all randomized subjects with both a baseline and endpoint evaluation. Missing data were not imputed.||ug/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
832731|NCT01250834|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Para-Hydroxyatorvastatin: Area Under the Curve (AUC)|This measure is based on the pharmacokinetic area under the para-hydroxyatorvastatin concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity. The outcome is not available for this metabolite since the terminal elimination phase was not determinable.|Pre-dose to 56 hours post-dose|No participants were analyzed for this outcome measure since the terminal elimination phase was not determinable.|||||
832732|NCT01250834|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Para-Hydroxyatorvastatin: Maximum Concentration (Cmax)||Pre-dose to 56 hours post-dose|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and have evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832733|NCT01250834|Primary|Pharmacokinetics of Atorvastatin: Area Under the Curve (AUC)|This measure is based on the pharmacokinetic area under the atorvastatin plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity.|Pre-dose to 56 hours post-dose|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and have evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanogram*hour per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832734|NCT01250834|Primary|Pharmacokinetics of Atorvastatin: Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Pre-dose to 56 hours post-dose|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and have evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832735|NCT01250899|Primary|Success Rate in Achieving a 25(OH)D Level ≥30ng/mL After 12 Weeks of Oral Vitamin D Supplementation.|Percentage of participants successfully repleted to 25(OH)D ≥30ng/mL after 12 weeks of oral vitamin D supplementation.|12 weeks|After 12 weeks of oral vitamin D supplementation, serum 25(OH)D levels were measured in the Vitamin D Insufficient arm. 81% (n=66) of insufficient persons achieved 25(OH)D ≥30ng/mL (p=0.32 vs. historical controls).||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832736|NCT01250925|Primary|Corneal Epithelial Immune Non-Dendritic Cell Density (Temporal Cornea)|The primary statistical objective is to describe differences in efficacy between regimens, specifically for measures of epithelial immune status. Immune status will be assessed via density of dendritic and non-dendritic immune cells.|Six weeks|Participants who completed all visits were analyzed.||cells/mm2|eyes|Standard Error|Mean
832737|NCT01250925|Primary|Corneal Epithelial Immune Non-Dendritic Cell Density (Superior Cornea)|The primary statistical objective is to describe differences in efficacy between regimens, specifically for measures of epithelial immune status. Immune status will be assessed via density of dendritic and non-dendritic immune cells.|Six weeks|Participants who completed all visits were analyzed.||cells/mm2|eyes|Standard Error|Mean
832738|NCT01250925|Primary|Corneal Epithelial Immune Non-Dendritic Cell Density (Nasal Cornea)|The primary statistical objective is to describe differences in efficacy between regimens, specifically for measures of epithelial immune status. Immune status will be assessed via density of dendritic and non-dendritic immune cells.|Six weeks|Participants who completed all visits were analyzed.||cells/mm2|eyes|Standard Error|Mean
832739|NCT01250925|Primary|Corneal Epithelial Immune Non-Dendritic Cell Density (Inferior Cornea)|The primary statistical objective is to describe differences in efficacy between regimens, specifically for measures of epithelial immune status. Immune status will be assessed via density of dendritic and non-dendritic immune cells.|Six weeks|Participants who completed all visits were analyzed.||cells/mm2|eyes|Standard Error|Mean
832740|NCT01250925|Primary|Corneal Epithelial Immune Non-Dendritic Cell Density (Central Cornea)|The primary statistical objective is to describe differences in efficacy between regimens, specifically for measures of epithelial immune status. Immune status will be assessed via density of dendritic and non-dendritic immune cells.|Six weeks|Participants who completed all visits were analyzed.||cells/mm2|eyes|Standard Error|Mean
832741|NCT01250925|Primary|Corneal Epithelial Immune Dendritic Cell Density (Temporal Cornea)|The primary statistical objective is to describe differences in efficacy between regimens, specifically for measures of epithelial immune status. Immune status will be assessed via density of dendritic and non-dendritic immune cells.|Six weeks|Participants who completed the study visits were analyzed.||cells/mm2|eyes|Standard Error|Mean
832742|NCT01250925|Primary|Corneal Epithelial Immune Dendritic Cell Density (Superior Cornea)|The primary statistical objective is to describe differences in efficacy between regimens, specifically for measures of epithelial immune status. Immune status will be assessed via density of dendritic and non-dendritic immune cells.|Six weeks|Participants who completed the study visits were analyzed.||cells/mm2|eyes|Standard Error|Mean
832743|NCT01250925|Primary|Corneal Epithelial Immune Dendritic Cell Density (Nasal Cornea)|The primary statistical objective is to describe differences in efficacy between regimens, specifically for measures of epithelial immune status. Immune status will be assessed via density of dendritic and non-dendritic immune cells.|Six weeks|Participants who completed the study visits were analyzed.||cells/mm2|eyes|Standard Error|Mean
832744|NCT01250925|Primary|Corneal Epithelial Immune Dendritic Cell Density (Inferior Cornea)|The primary statistical objective is to describe differences in efficacy between regimens, specifically for measures of epithelial immune status. Immune status will be assessed via density of dendritic and non-dendritic immune cells.|Six weeks|Participants who completed the study visits were analyzed.||cells/mm2|eyes|Standard Error|Mean
832745|NCT01250925|Secondary|Number of Participants With Slit-lamp Findings, Corrected Visual Acuity (Snellen) and Adverse Events|The safety analysis will be based on slit-lamp findings, corrected visual acuity (Snellen) and adverse events (if any). No inferential statistical analyses are planned for any safety variable.|Six weeks|Participants who completed the study visits were analyzed.||participants|eyes||Number
832746|NCT01250925|Primary|Corneal Epithelial Immune Dendritic Cell Density (Central Cornea)|The primary statistical objective is to describe differences in efficacy between regimens, specifically for measures of epithelial immune status. Immune status will be assessed via density of dendritic and non-dendritic immune cells.|Six weeks|Participants who completed all visits were analyzed.||cells/mm2|eyes|Standard Error|Mean
832767|NCT01256944|Primary|LDL|"Lipid profiles, including total cholesterol, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG).
Abnormal LDL was ≧4.14mmol/L."|1 year|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832796|NCT01258985|Secondary|Change in Medical Outcomes Short Form-36 PCS|The Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Score (PCS) is the summary score for the physical quality-of-life components (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status)|From Week 0, to Week 12, or to week 24, or to week 52|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832747|NCT01250990|Primary|Rate of Appearance of 3H Cholesterol in the Total HDL Fraction Before and After 12 Weeks of Treatment With Niacin|Subjects were injected with a bolus of 3-H cholesterol mixed with human serum albumin as an intravenous bolus. This injected labelled cholesterol is taken up by macrophages. The rate of appearance of labelled cholesterol in plasma HDL- cholesterol is a measure of reverse cholesterol transport. We assessed HDL cholesterol enrichment as percent of injected tritiated tracer appearing in plasma total HDL cholesterol between 60 and 240 minutes post-injection expressed as percent 3-H cholesterol/mol HDL cholesterol/hour. The tracer study was performed at baseline and after 12 weeks of niacin or placebo.|Baseline and 12 weeks|Of the 22 subjects enrolled, only subjects who completed the baseline and 12 week reverse cholesterol transport studies were included in the final outcome analysis.||%/mol/h||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832748|NCT01251042|Secondary|Frequency of Allogenic Blood Transfusion||Up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||percentage of participants|||Number
832749|NCT01251042|Secondary|Mean Blood Loss Volume|Estimated blood loss during and after surgery.|After surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||ml||Full Range|Mean
832750|NCT01251042|Secondary|Interferon Gamma (IFN-γ) Concentration|Systemic IFN-γ concentration from screening until 96 hours after surgery.|At screening and up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832751|NCT01251042|Secondary|Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNF-α) Concentration|Systemic TNF-α concentration from screening until 96 hours after surgery.|At screening and up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832752|NCT01251042|Secondary|Interleukin-10 (IL-10) Concentration|Systemic IL-10 concentration from screening until 96 hours after surgery.|At screening and up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832753|NCT01251042|Secondary|Interleukin-8 (IL-8) Concentration|Systemic IL-8 concentration from screening until 96 hours after surgery.|At screening and up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832754|NCT01251042|Secondary|Interleukin-6 (IL-6) Concentration|Systemic IL-6 concentration from screening until 96 hours after surgery.|At screening and up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832755|NCT01251042|Secondary|Interleukin-1-alpha (IL-1-α) Concentration|Systemic IL-1-α concentration from screening until 96 hours after surgery.|At screening and up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832756|NCT01251042|Primary|Difference in Plasma Free Hemoglobin (p-Hb) Concentration|Difference in plasma free hemoglobin (p-Hb) concentration between screening and 24 hours after surgery|At screening and 24 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||g/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
832757|NCT01251042|Secondary|Creatinine Concentration|Systemic creatinine concentration from screening until 96 hours after surgery.|At screening and up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||μmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
832758|NCT01251042|Secondary|Potassium Concentration|Systemic potassium concentration from screening until 96 hours after surgery.|At screening and up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
832759|NCT01251042|Secondary|Hemoglobin Concentration|Systemic hemoglobin concentration from screening until 96 hours after surgery.|At screening and up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||g/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
832760|NCT01251042|Secondary|Plasma Free Hemoglobin (p-Hb) Concentration|Systemic plasma free hemoglobin (p-Hb) concentration from screening until 96 hours after surgery.|At screening and up until 96 hours after surgery (surgery takes place 1-7 days after screening)|All subjects randomized.||g/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
832761|NCT01256918|Primary|Correlation Between Lens Thickness and Phacodepth|"Pearson correlation coefficient would be calculated to look for any correlation between
length thickness measurement using A scan biometer for each cataract and
penetration of phacotip required to achieve a full thickness nuclear crack in vertical chop during phacoemulsification of the cataractous lens"|day 0 of surgery|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832762|NCT01256918|Primary|Correlation Between Nuclear Opalescence and Phacodepth|"Pearson correlation coefficient would be calculated to look for any correlation between
nuclear opalescence as per LOCS III grading system for each cataract and
penetration of phacotip required to achieve a full thickness nuclear crack in vertical chop during phacoemulsification of the cataractous lens"|day 0 of surgery|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832763|NCT01256918|Primary|Correlation Between Nuclear Colour and Phacodepth Required for a Safe and Effective Vertical Chop During Phacoemulsification|the nuclear colour grading as per LOCS III criteria for each case and the depth of penetration of phacotip required during a vertical chop was analysed to look for any correlation between the two.|day 0 of surgery|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832764|NCT01256918|Secondary|Posterior Capsular Rupture|A note shall be made of any posterior capsular rupture attributable to the attempted vertical chop .|day 0 of surgery.|". In this observational study sample size was achieved by consecutive sampling of all eyes with cataract reporting to the eye OPD of Dr. R.M.L.Hospital and fulfilling the inclusion criteria from Nov.2010 till March 2011 ,after a written informed consent.
Occurence of any posterior capsular rupture during vertical chop was noted as per protocol."||participants|||Number
832765|NCT01256918|Primary|Phacodepth Required to Achieve Full Thickness Nuclear Crack|phacodepth is the term used to describe the depth penetrated by the phacotip into the substance of lens.A note of depth penetrated by the tip to achieve full thickness nuclear crack shall be made.|day 0 of surgery|A consecutive sample of all eyes with cataract reporting to the eye OPD of Dr. R.M.L.Hospital and fulfilling the inclusion criteria, were enrolled in the study starting Nov.2010 till Jan 2011 ,after a written informed consent.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
832766|NCT01256944|Primary|Impaired Glucose Tolerance|Impaired glucose tolerance was defined as two hour glucose levels of 7.8–11.1 mmol/L in the 75 g oral glucose tolerance test. In women with impaired glucose tolerance, the fasting plasma glucose level should be <7 mmol/L.|1 years|||percentage of participants|||Number
832768|NCT01256944|Primary|HDL|"Metabolic syndrome was defined (2005 National Cholesterol Education Program, Adult Treatment Panel III) as the presence of at least three of the following criteria:
abdominal obesity (waist circumference >80 cm in women); serumtriglycerides≥1.7 mmol/L; serumHDL<1.3 mmol/L; systolic blood pressure ≥130 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥85 mmHg; and fasting plasma glucose ≥7.0 mmol/L."|1 year|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832769|NCT01256944|Primary|Triglycerides|Abnormal serum triglycerides defined as ≥ 1.7 mmol/L|1 year|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832770|NCT01256944|Primary|Cholesterol|Hypercholesterolemia was defined as >6 mmol / L.|1 year|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832771|NCT01256944|Primary|Homeostasis Model Assessment Insulin Resistance Index (HOMA-IR)|HOMA-IR = [fasting insulin (in μIU/mL) × fasting glucose (in mg/dL)]/405.|1 year|||unitless||Standard Deviation|Mean
832772|NCT01256944|Primary|Two Hour Glucose|"2-hour postprandial blood sugar measures blood glucose exactly 2 hours after you start eating a meal. This is not a test used to diagnose diabetes.
World Health Organization 2006 diagnostic criteria for diabetes were employed (fasting plasma glucose ≥7.0 mmol/L or two hour plasma glucose ≥11.1 mmol/L)."|1 year|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832773|NCT01256944|Primary|Fasting Glucose|"Fasting blood sugar (FBS) measures blood glucose after you have not eaten for at least 8 hours. It is often the first test done to check for prediabetes and diabetes.
World Health Organization 2006 diagnostic criteria for diabetes were employed (fasting plasma glucose ≥7.0 mmol/L or two hour plasma glucose ≥11.1 mmol/L)."|1 year|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832774|NCT01256944|Primary|Fasting Insulin|A fasting serum insulin level of greater than the upper limit of normal for the assay used (approximately 60 pmol/L) is considered evidence of insulin resistance.|1 year|||μIU/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832775|NCT01256944|Primary|BMI|BMI categorization was based on the WHO Asia–Pacific classification for obesity, which was defined as BMI ≧ 25 kg/m2(WHO: Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Geneva: WHO; 2000).|1 year|||kg/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
832776|NCT01256944|Primary|Total Testosterone|Using serum total testosterone to represent the severity of hyperandrogenism.|1 year|||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832777|NCT01256983|Primary|Bedtime|"The mean bedtime assessed by actimetry of each 3 week period (day 21, 42, 63 ) was used as outcome to be compared with the control group.
Bedtime is expressed in time (hours and minutes)"|Mean Bedtimes over 21 days for each period|||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832778|NCT01258790|Primary|Yale Global Tic Severity Scale|The tic severity score based on Yale Global Tic Severity Scale ranges from 0 - 50. A person who has no tics would have a score of 0. High score means a person has severe tics.|1 week|||units on a scale (0 - 50)||Standard Deviation|Mean
832779|NCT01258803|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) After a Single Dose of MF/F MDI With Spacer, MF/F MDI Without Spacer, F DPI or Placebo MDI Combined With or Without Spacer at 5 and 30 Minutes, 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12 Hours Postdose|Baseline was defined as the average of 2 predose FVC measurements (taken 30 minutes and immediately before dosing).|Baseline and 5 and 30 minutes, 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12 hours postdose|Participants who received each assigned single-dose treatment, performed at least the 0- and 2-hour spirometry evaluations and met the following criteria: did not use any prohibited concomitant medications; demonstrated satisfactory use of inhaler, space and spirometry maneuvers; and used >80% of prescribed MF DPI across the entire study treatment||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832780|NCT01258803|Secondary|AUC (0-12h) of the Change From Baseline in FEV1 After a Single Dose of F DPI Compared to Placebo MDI Combined With or Without Spacer|The AUC was standardized to liters by dividing the length of time for which measurements of FEV1 were included in the calculation of the AUC. Baseline was defined as the average of 2 pre-dose FEV1 measurements (taken 30 minutes before and immediately before dosing), which was subtracted from each of the serial FEV1 measurements over the 12-hour period. The AUC was calculated based on these changes from the baseline evaluations using the trapezoidal rule.|Up to 12 hours postdose|Participants who received each assigned single-dose treatment, performed at least the 0- and 2-hour spirometry evaluations and met the following criteria: did not use any prohibited concomitant medications; demonstrated satisfactory use of inhaler, space and spirometry maneuvers; and used >80% of prescribed MF DPI across the entire study treatment||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832781|NCT01258803|Secondary|AUC (0-12h) of the Change From Baseline in FEV1 After a Single Dose of MF/F Without Spacer Compared to F DPI|The AUC was standardized to liters by dividing the length of time for which measurements of FEV1 were included in the calculation of the AUC. Baseline was defined as the average of 2 pre-dose FEV1 measurements (taken 30 minutes before and immediately before dosing), which was subtracted from each of the serial FEV1 measurements over the 12-hour period. The AUC was calculated based on these changes from the baseline evaluations using the trapezoidal rule.|Up to 12 hours postdose|Participants who received each assigned single-dose treatment, performed at least the 0- and 2-hour spirometry evaluations and met the following criteria: did not use any prohibited concomitant medications; demonstrated satisfactory use of inhaler, space and spirometry maneuvers; and used >80% of prescribed MF DPI across the entire study treatment||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832782|NCT01258803|Secondary|AUC (0-12h) of the Change From Baseline in FEV1 After a Single Dose of MF/F With Spacer Compared to F DPI|The AUC was standardized to liters by dividing the length of time for which measurements of FEV1 were included in the calculation of the AUC. Baseline was defined as the average of 2 pre-dose FEV1 measurements (taken 30 minutes before and immediately before dosing), which was subtracted from each of the serial FEV1 measurements over the 12-hour period. The AUC was calculated based on these changes from the baseline evaluations using the trapezoidal rule.|Up to 12 hours postdose|Participants who received each assigned single-dose treatment, performed at least the 0- and 2-hour spirometry evaluations and met the following criteria: did not use any prohibited concomitant medications; demonstrated satisfactory use of inhaler, space and spirometry maneuvers; and used >80% of prescribed MF DPI across the entire study treatment||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832795|NCT01258985|Secondary|Change in 6 Minute Walk|The 6 minute Walk Test is a measure of functional exercise capacity. Participants are asked to walk as far as possible within a six-minute period, and the distance covered at the end is noted and recorded.|From Week 0, to Week 12, or to week 24, or to week 52|||meters||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833983|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 24).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 24 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832783|NCT01258803|Secondary|Change From Baseline in FEV1 After a Single Dose of MF/F MDI With Spacer, MF/F MDI Without Spacer, F DPI or Placebo MDI Combined With or Without Spacer at 5 and 30 Minutes, 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12 Hours Postdose|Baseline was defined as the average of 2 predose measurements (taken 30 minutes and immediately before dosing).|Baseline and 5 and 30 minutes, 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12 hours postdose|Participants who received each assigned single-dose treatment, performed at least the 0- and 2-hour spirometry evaluations and met the following criteria: did not use any prohibited concomitant medications; demonstrated satisfactory use of inhaler, spacer and spirometry maneuvers; and used >80% of prescribed MF DPI across the entire study treatment||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832784|NCT01258803|Secondary|AUC(0-12h) of the Change From Baseline in FEV1 After a Single Dose of MF/F MDI With Spacer Compared to MF/F MDI Without Spacer|The AUC was standardized to liters by dividing the length of time for which measurements of FEV1 were included in the calculation of the AUC. Baseline was defined as the average of 2 pre-dose FEV1 measurements (taken 30 minutes before and immediately before dosing), which was subtracted from each of the serial FEV1 measurements over the 12-hour period. The AUC was calculated based on these changes from the baseline evaluations using the trapezoidal rule.|Up to 12 hours postdose|Participants who received each assigned single-dose treatment, performed at least the 0- and 2-hour spirometry evaluations and met the following criteria: did not use any prohibited concomitant medications; demonstrated satisfactory use of inhaler, spacer and spirometry maneuvers; and used >80% of prescribed MF DPI across the entire study treatment||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832785|NCT01258803|Secondary|AUC(0-12h) of the Change From Baseline in FEV1 After a Single Dose MF/F MDI Without Spacer Compared to Placebo MDI Combined With or Without Spacer|The AUC was standardized to liters by dividing the length of time for which measurements of FEV1 were included in the calculation of the AUC. Baseline was defined as the average of 2 pre-dose FEV1 measurements (taken 30 minutes before and immediately before dosing), which was subtracted from each of the serial FEV1 measurements over the 12-hour period. The AUC was calculated based on these changes from the baseline evaluations using the trapezoidal rule.|Up to 12 hours postdose|Participants who received each assigned single-dose treatment, performed at least the 0- and 2-hour spirometry evaluations and met the following criteria: did not use any prohibited concomitant medications; demonstrated satisfactory use of inhaler, spacer and spirometry maneuvers; and used >80% of prescribed MF DPI across the entire study treatment||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832786|NCT01258803|Primary|Area Under the Curve From 0-12 Hours (AUC[0-12h]) of the Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) After a Single Dose of MF/F MDI With Spacer Compared to Placebo MDI Combined With or Without Spacer|The AUC was standardized to liters by dividing the length of time for which measurements of FEV1 were included in the calculation of the AUC. Baseline was defined as the average of 2 pre-dose FEV1 measurements (taken 30 minutes before and immediately before dosing), which was subtracted from each of the serial FEV1 measurements over the 12-hour period. The AUC was calculated based on these changes from the baseline evaluations using the trapezoidal rule.|Up to 12 hours postdose|Participants who received each assigned single-dose treatment, performed at least the 0- and 2-hour spirometry evaluations and met the following criteria: did not use any prohibited concomitant medications; demonstrated satisfactory use of inhaler, spacer and spirometry maneuvers; and used >80% of prescribed MF DPI across the entire study treatment||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832787|NCT01258985|Secondary|Change in Western Ontario and McMasters University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale|The WOMAC (version VA3.1) is a validated, self-administered, visual analogue scale specifically designed to evaluate knee and hip osteoarthritis. It has three subscales that are analyzed separately: pain (score range, 0-500), stiffness (0-200), and function (0-1700), with higher scores indicating more severe disease.|From Week 0, to week 24 or to week 52|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832788|NCT01258985|Secondary|Outcome Expectation Scale|The Outcome Expectations for Exercise Scale (range, 1 to 5, with 1 indicating no expectations for exercise and 5 the highest expectations for exercise) is a self-report measure of outcome expectations for exercise.|Week 0|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832789|NCT01258985|Secondary|Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function|The WOMAC (version VA3.1) is a validated, self-administered, visual analogue scale specifically designed to evaluate knee and hip osteoarthritis. It has three subscales that are analyzed separately: pain (score range, 0–500), stiffness (0–200), and function (0–1700), with higher scores indicating more severe disease.|From Week 0, to Week 12, or to week 24, or to week 52|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832790|NCT01258985|Secondary|Change in Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Score (MCS)|The Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Score (MCS) is the summary score for the mental quality-of-life components (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status)|From Week 0, to Week 12, or to week 24, or to week 52|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832791|NCT01258985|Secondary|Change in Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale|The Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale is a self-report score measuring self-efficacy with respect to arthritis (range, 1 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater self-efficacy).|From Week 0, to Week 12, or to week 24, or to week 52|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832792|NCT01258985|Secondary|Change in Beck II Depression Inventory|Beck II Depression Inventory (BDI), second edition, is a 21-question, validated, self-report instrument that measures the severity of depressive symptoms. Total scores range from 0-63, and higher scores reflect greater depressive symptoms. BDI scores ranging from 0-13 represent minimal depressive symptoms; scores from 14-19 are mild; scores from 20-28 are moderate; and scores from 29-63 represent severe depressive symptoms.|From Week 0, to Week 12, or to week 24, or to week 52|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832793|NCT01258985|Secondary|Change in Patient Global VAS|Patients' global assessment score (Patient Global VAS) was assessed separately by the participant, who was unaware of the group assignment, with the use of a visual-analogue scale (VAS) (range, 0 to 10,with higher scores indicating greater pain).|From Week 0, to Week 12, or to week 24, or to week 52|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832794|NCT01258985|Secondary|Change in 20 Meter Walk Test|the 20-meter walk test is a performance measurement of walking ability (measured as the total number of seconds it takes to walk 20 meters); lower scores indicate improved walking ability|From Week 0, to Week 12, or to week 24, or to week 52|||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832797|NCT01258985|Primary|Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC)Pain Subscale From Baseline to 12 Weeks|The WOMAC (version: Visual Analog Scale 3.1) is a validated, self-administered, visual analogue scale specifically designed to evaluate knee and hip osteoarthritis. It has three subscales that are analyzed separately: pain (score range, 0–500), stiffness (0–200), and function (0–1700), with higher scores indicating more severe disease.|From Week 0 to Week 12|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832798|NCT01258998|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events as Graded by the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0|Toxicity data will be summarized by frequency tables. The association between both type and severity of toxicity and the treatment groups will be evaluated.|Up to 30 days||||||
832799|NCT01258998|Secondary|Change in Biomarker Levels of Interest (Akt, pAKT, and Apoptosis [Annexin-V])|Association between markers and OR using logistic regression models, and the association between markers and time-to-event outcomes using Cox proportional hazards models.|Baseline to up to 30 days post-treatment||||||
832800|NCT01258998|Secondary|Change in Chemokine Levels|Association between markers and OR using logistic regression models, and the association between markers and time-to-event outcomes using Cox proportional hazards models.|Baseline to up to 30 days post-treatment||||||
832801|NCT01258998|Secondary|Change in Cytokine Levels|Association between markers and OR using logistic regression models, and the association between markers and time-to-event outcomes using Cox proportional hazards models.|Baseline to up to 30 days post-treatment||||||
832802|NCT01258998|Secondary|Overall Survival|Will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The log-rank test will be performed to test the difference in time-to-event distributions between patient groups. Cox proportional hazards model will be used to include multiple covariates in the time-to-event analysis.|Up to 30 days||||||
832803|NCT01258998|Secondary|Duration of Response|Will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The log-rank test will be performed to test the difference in time-to-event distributions between patient groups. Cox proportional hazards model will be used to include multiple covariates in the time-to-event analysis.|From the time measurement criteria are met for complete response or partial response (whichever is first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented, assessed up to 30 days||||||
832804|NCT01258998|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The log-rank test will be performed to test the difference in time-to-event distributions between patient groups. Cox proportional hazards model will be used to include multiple covariates in the time-to-event analysis.|From start of treatment to time of progression or death, whichever occurs first, assessed up to 30 days||||||
832805|NCT01258998|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|Objective response rate. Logistic regression utilized to assess the effect of patient demographic factors on OR.|4 months|Based on intent-to-treat analysis.||participants|||Number
832806|NCT01259011|Secondary|Change Over Time: Post-traumatic Distress Symptom Score|The Post-Traumatic Symptoms Scale-10 (PTSS-10) was used to assess the presence and intensity of PTSD symptoms during the preceding 7 days. This self-report scale consists of 10 statements that specifically mention symptoms related to PTSD criteria (e.g., sleep problems, nightmares, tension in the body, irritation, startle, etc.) rated on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (Never/Rare) to 7 (Very often/Always). A total score (range 10 - 70) of > 35 is associated with a high probability that the person meets the diagnostic criteria for PTSD.|2 weeks and 3 and 6 months after patient death|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832807|NCT01259011|Secondary|Change Over Time: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Scores|Hospital anxiety and depression (HADS) scores range from 0 to 21 with higher scores indicating greater symptom severity.|2 Weeks, and at 3 and 6 months post death|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832808|NCT01259011|Primary|Dyad Congruence|patient and surrogate congruence on the goals of care|2, 6, 12 months|patients on dialysis and their surrogates||percentage of congruent dyads|||Number
832809|NCT01259024|Secondary|To Track Survival Following Treatment With DEB to Confirm That Any Gains in Response Are Associated With an Increase in Survival.|4-6 weeks after initial treatment, follow-up imaging will be obtained. With positive response to treatment, follow-up imaging will be obtained every 12 weeks. If a new tumor develops or if local progression of the treated malignancy occurs, the patient may be retreated with LC Beads 4-6 weeks after the first treatment with re-imaging 4-6 weeks following each subsequent treatment.|Patients will participate in protocol until date of death, liver transplantation, or withdrawal from study.||||||
832810|NCT01259024|Primary|Monitor Safety After Treatment of DEB by Measuring Liver Function Tests and Assessing Performance Status.|4-6 weeks after initial treatment, follow-up imaging will be obtained. With positive response to treatment, follow-up imaging will be obtained every 12 weeks. If a new tumor develops or if local progression of the treated malignancy occurs, the patient may be retreated with LC Beads 4-6 weeks after the first treatment with re-imaging 4-6 weeks following each subsequent treatment.|Patients will participate in protocol until date of death, liver transplantation, or withdrawal from study.||||||
832811|NCT01259024|Primary|Determine Efficacy (Based on Whether the Study is Positive or Negative) of the Embolization With the LC Bead in Treatment of HCC With Imaging Outcomes Using Modified RECIST and EASL Criteria.|4-6 weeks after initial treatment, follow-up imaging will be obtained. With positive response to treatment, follow-up imaging will be obtained every 12 weeks. If a new tumor develops or if local progression of the treated malignancy occurs, the patient may be retreated with LC Beads 4-6 weeks after the first treatment with re-imaging 4-6 weeks following each subsequent treatment.|Patients will participate in protocol until date of death, liver transplantation, or withdrawal from study.||||||
832812|NCT01259024|Primary|To Collect Data on Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) Being Treated With Chemoembolization With Doxorubicin Eluting Beads (DEB).|4-6 weeks after initial treatment, follow-up imaging will be obtained. With positive response to treatment, follow-up imaging will be obtained every 12 weeks. If a new tumor develops or if local progression of the treated malignancy occurs, the patient may be retreated with LC Beads 4-6 weeks after the first treatment with re-imaging 4-6 weeks following each subsequent treatment.|Patients will participate in protocol until date of death, liver transplantation, or withdrawal from study.|One participant was enrolled on this IDE and was treated on protocol for 14 weeks. After being made aware that CMS would not provide reimbursement, the PI decided to withdraw the patient and continued to treat off protocol.|||||
832813|NCT01259102|Secondary|Period 2: Tmax0-7d.|"Period 2 was the second application of BTDS 10: The time for absorption to return to normal measured by Tmax0-7d.
Tmax0-7d - The time from dosing to the maximum observed concentration was taken directly from the plasma concentration-time course profile. If the maximum plasma concentration was observed at 2 or more consecutive time points, the earliest time point was used for Tmax."|0 to 7 days|Pharmacokinetic Population: All subjects who satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, received both applications of BTDS, and submitted to postbaseline phlebotomy through at least the 72-hour time point of both applications.||hour||Standard Error|Mean
832814|NCT01259102|Secondary|Period 1: Tmax0-7d.|"Period 1 was the first application of BTDS 10: The time for absorption to return to normal measured by Tmax0-7d.
Tmax0-7d - The time from dosing to the maximum observed concentration was taken directly from the plasma concentration-time course profile. If the maximum plasma concentration was observed at 2 or more consecutive time points, the earliest time point was used for Tmax."|0 to 7days|Pharmacokinetic Population: All subjects who satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, received both applications of BTDS, and submitted to postbaseline phlebotomy through at least the 72-hour time point of both applications.||hour||Standard Error|Mean
832815|NCT01259102|Secondary|Period 2: Cmax0-7d|"Period 2 was the second application of BTDS 10: The time for absorption to return to normal measured by Cmax0-7d.
Cmax0-7d - The maximum observed concentration taken directly from the plasma concentration-time course profile."|0 to 7 days|Pharmacokinetic Population: All subjects who satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, received both applications of BTDS, and submitted to postbaseline phlebotomy through at least the 72-hour time point of both applications.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
832816|NCT01259102|Secondary|Period 1: Cmax0-7|"Period 1 was the first application of BTDS 10: The time for absorption to return to normal measured by Cmax0-7.
Cmax0-7d - The maximum observed concentration taken directly from the plasma concentration-time course profile."|0 to 7 days|Pharmacokinetic Population: All subjects who satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, received both applications of BTDS, and submitted to postbaseline phlebotomy through at least the 72-hour time point of both applications.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
832817|NCT01259102|Secondary|Period 2: AUC0-7d|"Period 2 was the second application of BTDS 10: The time for absorption to return to normal measured by AUC0-7d.
AUC0-7d - The area under the plasma concentration-time course profile from time = 0 (dosing) to BTDS removal."|0 to 7 days|Pharmacokinetic Population: All subjects who satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, received both applications of BTDS, and submitted to postbaseline phlebotomy through at least the 72-hour time point of both applications.||pg/mL*h||Standard Error|Mean
832818|NCT01259102|Secondary|Period 1: AUC0-7d.|"Period 1 was the first application of BTDS 10: The time for absorption to return to normal measured by AUC0-7d.
AUC0-7d - The area under the plasma concentration-time course profile from time = 0 (dosing) to BTDS removal."|0 to 7 days|Pharmacokinetic Population: All subjects who satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, received both applications of BTDS, and submitted to postbaseline phlebotomy through at least the 72-hour time point of both applications.||pg/mL*h||Standard Error|Mean
832819|NCT01259102|Primary|Period 2: Cmax0-3d|"Period 2 was the second application of BTDS 10: To determine the minimum application site rest periods that ensured that the reapplication of BTDS to the same site in the deltoid region did not result in increased absorption of the drug as measured by Cmax0-3d.
Cmax0-3d (pg/mL) - The maximum observed concentration taken directly from the plasma concentration-time course profile from time = 0 (dosing) through day 3 (to 72 hours). This was considered an index of maximum (peak) exposure to the study drug."|0 to 3 days|Pharmacokinetic Population: All subjects who satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, received both applications of BTDS, and submitted to postbaseline phlebotomy through at least the 72-hour time point of both applications.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
832820|NCT01259102|Primary|Period 1: Cmax0-3d|"Period 1 was the first application of BTDS 10: To determine the minimum application site rest periods that ensured that the reapplication of BTDS to the same site in the deltoid region did not result in increased absorption of the drug as measured by Cmax0-3d.
Cmax0-3d - The maximum observed concentration taken directly from the plasma concentration-time course profile from time = 0 (dosing) through day 3 (to 72 hours). This was considered an index of maximum (peak) exposure to the study drug."|0 to 3 days|Pharmacokinetic Population: All subjects who satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, received both applications of BTDS, and submitted to postbaseline phlebotomy through at least the 72-hour time point of both applications.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
832821|NCT01259102|Primary|Period 2: AUC0-3d.|"Period 2 was the second application of BTDS 10: To determine the minimum application site rest periods that ensured that the reapplication of BTDS to the same site in the deltoid region did not result in increased absorption of the drug as measured by AUC0-3d.
AUC0-3d - The area under the plasma concentration-time course profile from time = 0 (dosing) through day 3 (to 72 hours)."|0 to 3 days|Pharmacokinetic Population: All subjects who satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, received both applications of BTDS, and submitted to postbaseline phlebotomy through at least the 72-hour time point of both applications.||pg/mL*h||Standard Error|Mean
832822|NCT01259102|Primary|Period 1: AUC0-3d|Period 1 was the first application of BTDS 10: To determine the minimum application site rest periods that ensured that the reapplication of BTDS to the same site in the deltoid region did not result in increased absorption of the drug as measured by AUC0-3d [The area under the plasma concentration-time course profile from time = 0 (dosing) through day 3 (to 72 hours)].|0 to 3 days (72 hours)|Pharmacokinetic Population: All subjects who satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria, received both applications of BTDS, and submitted to postbaseline phlebotomy through at least the 72-hour time point of both applications.||pg/mL*h||Standard Error|Mean
832823|NCT01259115|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) as a Measure of Safety.|Safety assessments consisted of monitoring and recording medical history, physical examinations, vital signs (including temperature, heart rate, blood pressure and respiratory rate), reports of adverse experiences, and laboratory abnormalities (including electrocardiogram [ECG]).|The first day of study drug administration to 30 days after the last dose of study drug.|Safety Population: Safety analyses were performed on all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and for whom at least 1 postdose safety observation was recorded.||participants|||Number
832842|NCT01259245|Primary|SGRQ HKC-Impact|SGRQ HKC -Impact is calculated by dividing the summed weights by the adjusted maximum possible weight for that component and expressing the result as a percentage. SGRQ-impact score from 0 to 100, where zero indicates best health and 100 indicating maximum disability.|6 months post-intervention|intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832824|NCT01259115|Primary|Cmax of Buprenorphine-3-glucuronide With and Without Ketoconazole|"For buprenorphine-3-glucuronide pharmacokinetic metric, Cmax (maximum observed plasma concentration), log transformed data were analyzed.
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid PK metric.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832825|NCT01259115|Primary|AUCinf of Buprenorphine-3-glucuronide With and Without Ketoconazole|"For buprenorphine-3-glucuronide pharmacokinetic metric, AUCinf (the area under the plasma-concentration time course profile from time 0 [dosing] to infinity), log transformed data were analyzed.
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid PK metric.|||||
832826|NCT01259115|Primary|AUCt of Buprenorphine-3-glucuronide With and Without Ketoconazole|"For buprenorphine-3-glucuronide pharmacokinetic metric, AUCt (area under the plasma concentration-time curve from hour 0 to the last measurable plasma concentration), log transformed data were analyzed.
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid PK metric.||pg/mL*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
832827|NCT01259115|Primary|Cmax of Nor-buprenorphine Glucuronide With and Without Ketoconazole|"For nor-buprenorphine glucuronide pharmacokinetic metric, Cmax (maximum observed plasma concentration), log transformed data were analyzed.
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid PK metric.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832828|NCT01259115|Primary|AUCinf of Nor-buprenorphine Glucuronide With and Without Ketoconazole|"For nor-buprenorphine glucuronide pharmacokinetic metrics, AUCinf (the area under the plasma-concentration time course profile from time 0 [dosing] to infinity) log transformed data were analyzed.
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid PK metric.||pg/mL*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
832829|NCT01259115|Primary|AUCt of Nor-buprenorphine Glucuronide With and Without Ketoconazole|"For nor-buprenorphine glucuronide pharmacokinetic metrics, AUCt (area under the plasma concentration-time curve from hour 0 to the last measurable plasma concentration), log transformed data were analyzed.
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid PK metric.||pg/mL*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
832830|NCT01259115|Primary|Cmax of Nor-buprenorphine With and Without Ketoconazole|"For nor-buprenorphine pharmacokinetic metric, Cmax (maximum observed plasma concentration), log transformed data were analyzed.
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid PK metric.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832843|NCT01259245|Primary|SGRQ HKC-Activity|SGRQ HKC-Activity is calculated by dividing the summed weights by the adjusted maximum possible weight for that component and expressing the result as a percentage. SGRQ-Activity score from 0 to 100, where zero indicates best health and 100 indicating maximum disability.|6 months post-intervention|Intention to treat analysis||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833984|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 20).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 20 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 20.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832831|NCT01259115|Primary|AUCinf of Nor-buprenorphine With and Without Ketoconazole|"For nor-buprenorphine pharmacokinetic metric, AUCinf (the area under the plasma-concentration time course profile from time 0 [dosing] to infinity).
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid PK metric.||pg/mL*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
832832|NCT01259115|Secondary|CYP3A4 Inhibition by Observation of Plasma Nor-buprenorphine Production Assessed by the Erythromycin Breath Test.|As part of subject screening, Erythromycin Breath Tests (EBT) were done on all potential subjects (enrolled population). CYP 3A4 inhibition was calculated by taking the difference of the baseline 14C erythromycin metabolism, subtracting the 14C erythromycin metabolism during ketoconazole treatment, dividing this difference by the baseline 14C erythromycin metabolism, and multiplying by 100 to express results in the form of percent inhibition. CYP3A4 inhibition was only done when subjects were on ketoconazole.|One time at screening and one time during ketoconazole treatment|Enrolled Population: All subjects who participated in the study. CYP3A4 Inhibition was only done when subjects were on Ketoconazole.||Percentage of participants||Standard Deviation|Mean
832833|NCT01259115|Primary|AUCt of Nor-buprenorphine With and Without Ketoconazole|"For nor-buprenorphine pharmacokinetic metric, AUCt (area under the plasma concentration-time curve from hour 0 to the last measurable plasma concentration).
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid PK metric.||pg/mL*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
832834|NCT01259115|Primary|Cmax of Buprenorphine With and Without Ketoconazole.|"Cmax (maximum observed plasma concentration) of buprenorphine transdermal patch 10 with and without ketoconazole 200 mg oral tablets twice daily,
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid PK metric.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832835|NCT01259115|Primary|AUCinf of Buprenorphine With and Without Ketoconazole.|"AUCinf (the area under the plasma-concentration time course profile from time 0 [dosing] to infinity) of buprenorphine transdermal patch 10 with and without ketoconazole 200 mg oral twice daily.
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid pharmacokinetic metric.||pg /mL•h||Standard Deviation|Mean
832836|NCT01259115|Primary|AUCt of Buprenorphine With and Without Ketoconazole.|"AUCt (area under the plasma concentration-time curve from hour 0 to the last measurable plasma concentration) of buprenorphine transdermal patch 10 with and without ketoconazole 200 mg oral twice daily.
Period 1, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 3 and 10 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 1 and 11. Washout period of 4 to 18 days. Period 2, subjects wore BTDS 10 patch between days 19 and 26 and took ketoconazole (200 mg orally twice daily) or Ketoconazole placebo (orally twice daily) between days 17 and 27."|BTDS Days 3, 10, 19, and 26; ketoconazole or placebo Days 9 and 25|The full analysis population for pharmacokinetics was defined as those subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not have any incidents of emesis for at least 12 hours from dosing during at least 1 period and had at least 1 valid pharmacokinetic metric.||pg/mL*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
832837|NCT01259245|Secondary|FEV1% Pred|Pred FEV1 percent predicted normal values;measured using spirometry|6 months post-intervention|Intention to treat||percentage of FEV1 predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
832838|NCT01259245|Secondary|FEV1|Forced expiratory volume in one second, measured in liters, component of lung function test measured by spirometry|6 months post-intervention|Intention to treat analysis||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
832839|NCT01259245|Secondary|FVC|Forced vital capacity, measured in liters, component of lung function parameters measured by spirometry|6 months post intervention|Intention to treat analysis||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
832840|NCT01259245|Secondary|6 MWT in Meters|The 6 minute walking test ( 6MWT) was conducted according to protocol recommended by American Thoracic Society (ATS) guidelines to measure functional exercise capacity.This test measured the self paced distance in meters that a patient could quickly walk on a flat, hard surface in a period of 6 minutes.|6 months post-intervention|Intention to treat analysis||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
832841|NCT01259245|Primary|SGRQ HKC Total|SGRQ HKC-Total is calculated by summing all positive responses in the questionnaire and expressing the result as a percentage of the toal weight for the questionnaire. A total score is calculated from all three components. The SGRQ-total score ranged from 0 to 100, where zero indicates best health and 100 indicating maximum disability.|6 months post-intervention|Intention to treat analysis||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832844|NCT01259245|Primary|SGRQ HKC-Symptoms|SGRQ HKC-Symptoms is calculated by dividing the summed weights by the adjusted maximum possible weight for that component and expressing the result as a percentage. SGRQ-Symptoms score ranged from 0 to 100, where zero indicates best health and 100 indicating maximum disability.|6 months post-intervention|Intention to treat analysis||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832845|NCT01259245|Primary|Self- Efficacy : Self-Efficacy for Managing Shortness of Breath ( SEMSOB)|The SEMSOB is a single question 1-10 scale, valid and reliable instrument that measures patients’ overall confidence in keeping breathing difficulties from interfering with what they want to do with higher score indicating greater self efficacy.|Change in SEMSOB at 6 months post-intervention|Intention to treat||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832846|NCT01259245|Primary|Self Efficacy :COPD Self Efficacy Scale (CSES)|"34 item questionnaire consisting of likert scale with 5 responses ranging from 1 indicating  not at all confident to 5 indicating  very confident with higher scores representing higher self efficacy. In this study , we used the rating score in the analysis as some items were considered non-applicable in some cases. Rating score from 0.2 to 1 with 0.2 as not at all confident and 1 as very confident. The validated Chinese version of CSES was also used"|Change in CSES at 6 months post-intervention|Intention to treat was used in the analysis||rating score of 0.2 to 1||Standard Deviation|Mean
832847|NCT01259284|Primary|Incidences of Atrial Fibrillation During First 4 Days After Lung Resection|New onset of sustained (15 min or >) or clinically significant (requiring intervention) atrial fibrillation (AF) during first 4 days post surgery as defined by on American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association Physician Consortium.|Baseline to 4 days post surgery|Analysis was to be per protocol. There is no analysis due to an inadequate number of enrolled participants in study which resulted in early termination.|||||
832848|NCT01259297|Secondary|Number of Participants With Total Mortality in Aliskiren Based Regimen Versus Non-aliskiren Based Regimen|The total mortality endpoint was defined as time to death from any cause. Total mortality analysis used the date of last follow-up including the washout period as the censoring date.|End of study (209 days (median))|Full Analysis set. 1759 patients were randomized as against the originally planned 11,000. The duration of study follow-up was 209 days (median) as against the planned follow-up of average 5 years. These low numbers significantly limit interpretation of the results.||Participants|||Number
832849|NCT01259297|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP)|Mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (msDBP) is the average of 2 sitting DBP measurements (2 minutes apart). Since each patient had their final follow-up visit at a different time in the trial, these measurements were classified as falling into the 6 week, 6 month, or 12 month measurement period. All available blood pressures were sorted within these periods and the last value within each time range used for analysis. At each timepoint, a patient must have both baseline and postbaseline values to be included in the analysis.|Baseline (BL), 6 week, 6 month and 12 month|Full analysis Set : All randomized patients, regardless of receiving study medication. n=number of patients with non-missing assessments at baseline and each post-baseline visit.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832850|NCT01259297|Secondary|Number of Participants With Renal Dysfunction in Aliskiren Based Regimen Versus Non-Aliskiren Based Regimen|"The renal dysfunction (composite endpoint) was defined as the first occurrence of either of the following:
End-stage renal disease [ESRD] requiring dialysis or transplantation
Doubling of serum creatinine and reaching an eGFR < 45 ml/min/1.73 m^2."|End of study (209 days (median))|Full Analysis set. 1759 patients were randomized as against the originally planned 11,000. The duration of study follow-up was 209 days (median) as against the planned follow-up of average 5 years. These low numbers significantly limit interpretation of the results.||participants|||Number
832851|NCT01259297|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Standard Assessment of Global Activities in the Elderly (SAGE) Dimensions (Part II)|"Decline in ability to perform everyday activities independently was measured primarily by using the Standard Assessment of Global Activities in the Elderly (SAGE) scale. The SAGE was comprised of 15 questions, each describing an activity. Patient had to indicate how much difficulty he/she had encountered in performing the activity in the last month. Each question’s score ranges from 0 (No difficulty) to 3 (difficulty levels were mild (score = 1), moderate (score =2) and severe (score=3)).
Part II of SAGE included 2 dimensions:
Normal if the scores of all SAGE questions is 0 (i.e., No difficulty)
Mobility Only if scores of both SAGE questions 11 and 12 are 0"|End of study (209 days [median])|Full Analysis Set. Number of patients with all SAGE questions non-missing for the specific visit are included in this population. Due to the sparse post-baseline data following early termination of the study, this analysis was not performed as planned in protocol.Hence, no meaningful conclusion could be drawn.||percentage of participants|||Number
832852|NCT01259297|Primary|Number of Participants With Composite Cardiovascular Endpoints in Aliskiren+Amlodipine/HCTZ Group Versus All Placebo Group|The composite CV endpoint is based on the following first adjudicated events: CV death, non-fatal MI,non-fatal stroke, significant heart failure|End of study (209 days (median))|Full Analysis set. 1759 patients were randomized as against the originally planned 11,000. A total of 25 primary CV composite endpoints had accrued during median follow-up of 209 days versus planned 2000 primary endpoints during planned follow-up of average 5 years. These low numbers significantly limit interpretation of the results.||participants|||Number
832853|NCT01259297|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP)|Mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) is the average of 2 sitting SBP measurements (2 minutes apart). Since each patient had their final follow-up visit at a different time in the trial, these measurements were classified as falling into the 6 week, 6 month, or 12 month measurement period. All available blood pressures were sorted within these periods and the last value within each time range used for analysis. At each timepoint, a patient must have both baseline and postbaseline values to be included in the analysis.|Baseline (BL), 6 week, 6 month and 12 month|Full analysis Set : All randomized patients, regardless of receiving study medication. n=number of patients with non-missing assessments at baseline and each post-baseline visit.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832868|NCT01259427|Primary|Maryland Assessment of Recovery for Serious Mental Illness Scale (Recovery)|The Maryland Assessment of Recovery in Serious Mental Illness is a self-report measure of recovery in people with serious mental illness. A total score was calculated by summing item responses (range=25 to 125), with higher total scores indicating greater self-reported recovery.|~3 1/2 months (post-treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832854|NCT01259297|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Study in Standard Assessment of Global Activities in the Elderly (SAGE) Dimensions (Part I)|"Decline in ability to perform everyday activities independently was measured primarily by using the Standard Assessment of Global Activities in the Elderly (SAGE) scale. The SAGE comprised of 15 questions, each describing an activity. Patient had to indicate how much difficulty he/she had encountered in performing the activity in last month. Each question’s score ranges from 0 (No difficulty) to 3 (difficulty levels were mild (score = 1), moderate (score =2) and severe (score=3)). Part I of SAGE included 4 dimensions:
Community Cognition (maximum of scores of questions 1 to 6);
Instrumental Activities of daily Living (IADL) (maximum of scores of questions 7 to 10);
Mobility (maximum of scores of questions 11 and 12);.
Basic Activities of daily Living (ADL) (maximum of scores of questions 13 to 15) Each dimension’s total score ranged from 0 to 3. 0=best, 3=worst A negative change in value from baseline means improvement in the ability to perform everyday activities."|Baseline, End of study (209 days [median])|Full Analysis Set: Due to the sparse post-baseline data following early termination of the study, this analysis was not performed as planned in protocol.Hence, no meaningful conclusion could be drawn. Patients who completed both baseline and post-baseline SAGE questionnaires (Part II) were included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832855|NCT01259297|Primary|Number of Participants With Composite Cardiovascular Endpoints in Aliskiren Based Regimen Versus Non-Aliskiren Based Regimen|The composite CV endpoint is based on the following first adjudicated events: CV death, non-fatal MI,non-fatal stroke, significant heart failure|End of study (209 days (median))|Full Analysis set. 1759 patients were randomized as against the originally planned 11,000. A total of 25 primary CV composite endpoints had accrued during median follow-up of 209 days versus planned 2000 primary endpoints during planned follow-up of average 5 years. These low numbers significantly limit interpretation of the results.||participants|||Number
832856|NCT01259375|Secondary|Differential Response to Amurbicin Among Certain Histologic Subtypes of Sarcoma.|Per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors criteria (RECIST 1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR) >= 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|48 months|||participants|||Number
832857|NCT01259375|Secondary|Quality of Response With Radiographic Evaluation Using Both Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) and Choi Criteria.|Per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors criteria (RECIST 1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR) >= 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR. Exploratory CT evaluations according to Choi response criteria will be also performed and correlated with RECIST response.|48 months|This exploratory objective was not assessed.|||||
832858|NCT01259375|Secondary|Overall Survival|This variable reviews the percentage of Overall Survival at 24 months and presents the percentage of participants who survived at 2 years.|two years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832859|NCT01259375|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events||4 months|One patient discontinued study treatment after the first cycle due to side effects and was not evaluable for response, but was evaluable for safety and toxicity.||participants who experienced an SAE|||Number
832860|NCT01259375|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v 1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT; time elapsed between treatment initiation and tumor progression or death. In target lesions, progression is defined per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST 1.1) as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. In non-target lesions, progression is defined via RECIST v 1.1 as the appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|six months|||percentage of pt with 6 mnth PFS||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832861|NCT01259375|Primary|Response Rate for Amrubicin in Patients With Metastatic or Advanced Sarcoma as First Line Therapy.|Per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors criteria (RECIST 1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR) >= 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR|48 months|One patient discontinued study treatment after the first cycle due to side effects and was not evaluable for response.||percentage of pt with a partial response||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832862|NCT01259401|Primary|Sleep Efficiency|Percentage of time asleep while in bed estimated by actigraphy.|4-month follow-up|Two SIP subjects had missing data for this variable.||percentage of time in bed asleep||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832863|NCT01259401|Primary|Sleep Efficiency|Percentage of time asleep while in bed estimated by actigraphy|End of 4-week intervention|Two SIP subjects had missing data for this variable.||percentage of time in bed spent asleep||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832864|NCT01259427|Secondary|Social Engagement/Withdrawal|The total score of the Social Engagement/Withdrawal subscale of the Social Functioning Scale was used to measure social engagement. The total score ranges from 0 to 15 with higher scores indicating greater social engagement.|~3 1/2 months (post-treatment)|||unit on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832865|NCT01259427|Secondary|Quality of Life|The Satisfaction with Life in General item from the Brief Quality of Life Scale was used to assess self-reported life satisfaction. The item is rated on a 7-point scale that ranges from terrible to delighted (range=1 to 7), with greater scores indicating more satisfaction.|~3 1/2 months (post-treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832866|NCT01259427|Primary|Sense of Belonging Instrument (Belonging)|The Sense of Belonging Instrument was used to measure perceived belongingness. The measure includes two subscales: the psychological experience of belonging (SOBI-P) and antecedents that foster belonging (SOBI-A). An average of the sum of the items in each subscale were used to calculate the total score for that subscale. The total score of the SOBI-P ranges from 18 to 72, with higher scores indicating less experienced belonging. The total score of the SOBI-A ranges from 14-56 with higher score indicating greater antecedents that foster belonging.|~3 1/2 months (post-treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832867|NCT01259427|Primary|General Self-Efficacy Scale|The General Self-efficacy measure was used to measure of self-efficacy. A total score was calculated by averaging the responses on the items (range=1 to 5), with higher scores indicating greater self-efficacy.|~3 1/2 months (post-treatment)|||unit on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832869|NCT01259427|Primary|Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness Inventory (Internalized Stigma)|The Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness Inventory was used to measure of internalized or self-stigma. A total score is calculated by taking an average of the responses on the items (range=1 to 4). Higher total scores indicate greater internalized stigma.|~3 months (post-treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832870|NCT01259440|Primary|Treatment Adherence|Nightly CPAP adherence measured over the two-month period .|2 months|||hours/night||Standard Deviation|Mean
832871|NCT01259466|Secondary|Percent Weight Change|% Weight change: ((post-treatment weight - pre-treatment weight)/ pre-treatment weight) * 100|Post-treatment (12 weeks)|||Percent weight change||Standard Deviation|Mean
832872|NCT01259466|Primary|Number of Participants With Verified Smoking Cessation (Abstinence)|Continuous abstinence during the last 14 days of treatment, confirmed by biologically verified abstinence (CO level <10ppm)|Post-treatment (12-weeks)|||participants|||Number
832873|NCT01259492|Secondary|Change From Baseline Period 3 (Baseline 2) to End of Period 3 in ASRS Total Score by Treatment|"The ASRS is a self-rating scale designed to assess ADHD symptoms in adults and is now part of the World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview. It consists of 18 items written to reflect the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for ADHD and are rated from 0 (Never) to 4 (Very often). The total score ranges from 0 to 72."|Baseline 2 to end of Period 3 (end of withdrawal period 40 weeks)|Full Analysis Set for Period 3 (FAS P3) – all re-randomized patients who take one dose of study medication in period 3. Patients will be assigned to their re-randomized treatment; Ritalin (pooled doses) or placebo.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832874|NCT01259492|Secondary|Change From Baseline Period 3 (Baseline 2) to End of Period 3 in Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scales Observer: Short Version (CAARS-O:S:) Total Score by Treatment|CAARS is an instrument to assess ADHD symptoms and behaviors in adults. This study utilizes the Observer Short Version (CAARS-O: S), consisting of 26 items and 6 subscales: Inattention/Memory Problems, Hyperactivity/Restlessness, Impulsivity/Emotional Lability, Problems with Self-Concept, ADHD Index (to distinguish ADHD adults from non-clinical adults), and Inconsistency Index (to identify random or careless responding) and is rated by someone close to the patient in their daily life such as a spouse, friend, or coworker. The observer is asked to notice the patient carefully and decide how much or how frequently each of the 26 items of the scale describes the patient recently. The response to every question in increasing order of severity is “not at all, never = 0; Just a little, once in a while = 1; Pretty much, often = 2; Very much, very frequently = 3”. The total score combined from all the 26 items ranges from 0 to 88.|Baseline 2 to end of Period 3 (end of withdrawal period 40 weeks)|Full Analysis Set for Period 3 (FAS P3) – all re-randomized patients who take one dose of study medication in period 3. Patients will be assigned to their re-randomized treatment; Ritalin (pooled doses) or placebo.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832875|NCT01259492|Secondary|Number of Patients With Worsening on CGI-S Scale From Baseline Period 3 (Baseline 2) to End of Period 3 by Treatment|CGI-S assesses the patient’s current illness state. CGI-S consists of 7 ratings that range from 1 = “normal, not at all ill” , 2 = “borderline mentally ill”, 3 =” mildly ill”, 4 = “moderately ill”, 5 = “markedly ill”, 6 = “severely ill”, 7 = “among the most extremely ill patients”|Baseline 2 to end of Period 3 (end of withdrawal period 40 weeks)|Full Analysis Set for Period 3 (FAS P3) – all re-randomized patients who take one dose of study medication in period 3. Patients will be assigned to their re-randomized treatment; Ritalin (pooled doses) or placebo. Evaluable patients with both baseline 2 and post-baseline (end of week 40) assessments were included.||Participants|||Number
832876|NCT01259492|Secondary|Number of Patients With Worsening on CGI-I Scale From Baseline Period 3 (Baseline 2) to End of Period 3 by Treatment|On the CGI-I scale, a lower score reflects greater improvement between 1 and 3, a score of 4 is “no change”, scores higher than 4 reflect worsening. The CGI-I consists of 7 ratings that range from 1 = “Very much improved” to 7 =“Very much worse”. Improvement on the CGI-I scale is defined as a visit rating of 1 “very much improved” or 2 “much improved” on the CGI-I scale.|Baseline 2 to end of Period 3 (end of withdrawal period 40 weeks)|Full Analysis Set for Period 3 (FAS P3) – all re-randomized patients who take one dose of study medication in period 3. Patients will be assigned to their re-randomized treatment; Ritalin (pooled doses) or placebo. Evaluable patients with both baseline 2 and post-baseline (end of week 40) assessments were included.||participants|||Number
832877|NCT01259492|Secondary|Change From Baseline Period 3 (Baseline 2) to End of Period 3 on SDS Total Score by Treatment|The Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) is a self-rating scale designed to assess the extent to which the patient’s work social life/leisure activities and home life are impaired by his or her symptoms. The scale generates 4 scores: a work disability score, a social life disability score, a family life disability score and a total score. To get a total score the 3 individual scores (work: social life: family life) are totaled. The maximum possible score is 30 The higher the score, the more “impaired” a patient’s work, social life, family life is.|Baseline 2 to end of Period 3 (end of withdrawal period 40 weeks)|Full Analysis Set for Period 3 (FAS P3) – all re-randomized patients who take one dose of study medication in period 3. Patients will be assigned to their re-randomized treatment; Ritalin (pooled doses) or placebo.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832878|NCT01259492|Secondary|Change From Baseline Period 3 (Baseline 2) to End of Period 3 on DSM-IV Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale ADHD RS Total Score by Treatment|The ADHD-RS-IV is an 180 item clinician rated scale to assess ADHD by DSM-IV-TR, defined criteria using symptom terminology appropriate for the adult population. Each item pertains to inattention (odd-numbered) or hyperactivity/impulsivity (even-numbered) and is scored on a scale of 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (severe symptoms). A total added score can range from 0-54.|Baseline 2 to end of Period 3 (end of withdrawal period 40 weeks)|Full Analysis Set for Period 3 (FAS P3) – all re-randomized patients who take one dose of study medication in period 3. Patients will be assigned to their re-randomized treatment; Ritalin (pooled doses) or placebo.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832886|NCT01259596|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) to Week 13|Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, IV edition (DSM-IV0) symptoms of Generalized Anxiety Disorder; scores range from 0 to 24 with higher scores indicating greater symptoms of GAD; higher score represents worse outcome|baseline to week 13|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832887|NCT01259596|Secondary|Insomnia Severity Index (ISI)|self-report symptoms of insomnia; scores range from 0 to 28 with higher scores indicating greater symptoms of sleep disturbance; higher score represents worse outcomes|week 13||||||
832879|NCT01259492|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Global Impression – Improvement Scale Severity of Illness (CGI-S) Rating at the End of Period 2 (Visit 13/ Week 14)|CGI-S assesses the patient’s current illness state. CGI-S consists of 7 ratings that range from 1 = “normal, not at all ill” , 2 = “borderline mentally ill”, 3 =” mildly ill”, 4 = “moderately ill”, 5 = “markedly ill”, 6 = “severely ill”, 7 = “among the most extremely ill patients”|Baseline 1 to End of Period 2 (Week 14)|Full Analysis Set for Period 2 (FAS P2) – all randomized patients who took one dose of study medication in Period 2; Patients with CGI-S assessment both at Baseline 1 and Period 2 was included.||number of participants|||Number
832880|NCT01259492|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Global Impression – Improvement Scale (CGI-I) Rating at the End of Period 2 (Visit 13/ Week 14)|CGI-I assesses the overall change of illness relative to baseline. CGI-I consists of 7 ratings that range from 1 = “very much improved”, 2 = “much improved”, 3 = “minimally improved”, 4 = “no change from baseline”, 5 = “minimally worse”, 6 = “much worse” 7 = “very much worse”|Baseline 1 to End of Period 2 (Week 14)|Full Analysis Set for Period 2 (FAS P2) – all randomized patients who took one dose of study medication in Period 2 Patients with CGI-I assessment both at Baseline 1 and Period 2 was included.||number of participants|||Number
832881|NCT01259492|Secondary|Change From Baseline 1 in DSM-IVADHD RS Total Score, SDS Total Score, The Conners’ Adult ADHD Rating Scale Observer Short Version (CAARS-O:S) Total Score and Adult Self-Report Scale (ASRS) Total Score at the End of Period 2 (Visit 13/ Week 14)|"DSM-IV ADHD RS consists of 18 items directly adapted from the ADHD symptom list according to the DSM-IV. The SDS is a five-item, self-rated questionnaire that has been used widely in clinical trials and observational studies. CAARS-O: S consists of 26 items and 6 subscales: Inattention/Memory Problems, Hyperactivity/Restlessness, Impulsivity/Emotional Lability, Problems with Self-Concept, ADHD Index, and Inconsistency Index and is rated by someone close to the patient in their daily life such as a spouse, friend, or coworker. The Adult Self-Report Scale (ASRS) is a self-rating scale designed to assess Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) symptoms. The 18 items are written to reflect the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for ADHD and are rated from 0 (Never) to 4 (Very often)."|Baseline 1 to End of Period 2 (Week 14)|Full Analysis Set for Period 2 (FAS P2) – all randomized patients who took one dose of study medication in Period 2||Score on Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832882|NCT01259492|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Improvement on Clinical Global Impression – Improvement Scale (CGI-I) From Baseline Period 1 (Baseline 1) to End of Period 1|On the CGI-I scale, a lower score reflects greater improvement between 1 and 3, a score of 4 is “no change”, scores higher than 4 reflect worsening. The CGI-I consists of 7 ratings that range from 1 = “Very much improved” to 7 =“Very much worse”. Improvement on the CGI-I scale is defined as a visit rating of 1 “very much improved” or 2 “much improved” on the CGI-I scale. Percentage has been calculated from the evaluable patients (N) as Percentage = n/N * 100.|Baseline 1 to End of Period 1 (Week 9)|Full Analysis Set for Period 1 (FAS P1) – all randomized patients who take one dose of study medication in period 1. Patients will be assigned to their randomized fixed dose. Evaluable patients with both baseline and post-baseline (end of week 9) assessments were included.||Percentage of Patients|||Number
832883|NCT01259492|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment Failures During Period 3|Treatment failure is defined as: 100×(DSM-IV ADHD RS total score during Period 3 – DSM-IV ADHD RS total score at re-randomization (visit 13))/DSM-IV ADHD RS total score at re-randomization (visit 13) >= 30% AND 100×(DSM-IV ADHD RS total score during Period 3 – DSM-IV ADHD RS total score at randomization (visit 2))/DSM-IV ADHD RS total score at randomization (visit 2) > - 30%. The ADHD-RS-IV is an 180item clinician rated scale to assess ADHD by DSM-IV-TR, defined criteria using symptom terminology appropriate for the adult population. Each item pertains to inattention (odd-numbered) or hyperactivity/impulsivity (even-numbered) and is scored on a scale of 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (severe symptoms). A total added score can range from 0-54|Baseline Period 1 (Baseline 1) and Baseline Period 3 (Baseline 2) to End of Week 40|Full Analysis Set for Period 3 (FAS P3) – all re-randomized patients who take one dose of study medication in period 3. One patient in Ritalin LA 80mg did not have post baseline 2 measurements and was not included in the categories under without imputation.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832884|NCT01259492|Primary|Change From Baseline Period 1 (Baseline 1) to End of Period 1 on Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score by Treatment|SDS, a 5-self-rated questionnaire to measure the extent a pt’s disability due to an illness/health problem interferes with work/school, social life/leisure, family life/home. First 3 items, pts are asked how their symptoms disrupted their reg. activities over the past 7d in ea. using a scale from 0(not at all)-10(extremely) Ea. subscale(work disability, social life disability, family life disability) can be scored independently or combined into a total score(sum of the non-missing responses for items 1-3)from 0-30,higher scores indicate significant functional impairmt. Subscale scores >5 suggest impairment in that subscale area. Final 2 items ask pts about the # of days their symptoms caused them to miss school/work and # of days their symptoms caused them to be underproductive at school/work.(These items were not included in the total score.) Before responding to SDS items 1-3, pts were verbally instructed to recall the past 7d, items 4-5 refer to the last week w/in the item wording.|Baseline 1 to End of Period 1 (Week 9)|Full Analysis Set for Period 1 (FAS P1) – all randomized patients who take one dose of study medication in period 1. Patients will be assigned to their randomized fixed dose. Patients with both baseline and post-baseline (end of week 9) assessments were included.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832885|NCT01259492|Primary|Change From Baseline of Period 1 (Baseline 1) to End of Period 1 on Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale (DSM-IV ADHD RS) Total Score by Treatment|"Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale (DSM-IV ADHD RS) total score consists of 18 items directly adapted from the ADHD symptom list according to the DSM-IV. The DSM-IV ADHD RS total score was calculated as the sum of the Inattentive and the Hyperactive-Impulsive subscores. The 18 items are rated from 0 (Never) to 4 (Very often). The total score ranges from 0(least symptomatic) to 72 (most symptomatic). Decrease in the DSM-IV ADHD RS total score indicates improvement, therefore a greater decrease (change at Final Visit compared to baseline) indicates a greater improvement in ADHD symptoms. 30% improvement: 100×(DSM-IV ADHD RS total score during Period 1 – DSM-IV ADHD RS total score at randomization(visit 2))/DSM-IV ADHD RS total score at randomization (visit 2) <= - 30%."|Baseline 1 to End of Period 1 (Week 9)|Full Analysis Set for Period 1 (FAS P1) – all randomized patients who take one dose of study medication in period 1. Patients will be assigned to their randomized fixed dose. Patients with both baseline and post-baseline (end of week 9) assessments were included.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832888|NCT01259596|Secondary|Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36) to Week 13|physical and emotional health related quality of life; The SF-36 is a self-report measure of health-related quality of life (HRQL) consisting of 36 items that form 8 subscales: physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health problems, role limitations due to emotional health problems, social functioning, freedom from pain, energy, emotional well-being, and general health perceptions. These 8 subscales are also combined into two domains: the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and the Mental Component Summary (MCS). All of these scales range from 0 (maximum impairment) to 100 (no impairment). A lower score represents worse outcome.|week 13||||||
832889|NCT01259596|Secondary|Pepper Center Tool for Disability (PCT-D)|self report measure of perceived difficulties with mobility and performing basic and advanced activities of daily living; the scale consists of 19 items; scores range from 19 to 114, with higher scores indicating more disability. Higher scores represent worse outcome.|week 13||||||
832890|NCT01259596|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) at 13 Weeks|self report measure of depressive symptoms; scores range from 0 to 63, with a higher score representing higher levels of depressive symptoms Higher scores represent worse outcome.|baseline to week 13|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832891|NCT01259596|Primary|Changes From Baseline in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) at Week 13|interviewer-rated severity of anxiety symptoms; the scores range from 0 to 56, with higher scores representing higher severity of anxiety. Higher scores represent worse outcome.|baseline to week 13|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832892|NCT01259596|Primary|Changes From Baseline in Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ-A) at Week 13|self-reported severity and frequency of worry the scores range from 8 to 40, with higher scores representing higher severity of worry. Higher scores represent worse outcome.|baseline to week 13|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
832893|NCT01259713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Remission at the End of Remission Induction|This endpoint was to evaluate the potential impact of IFI prevention on the efficacy of remission-induction chemotherapy for ALL.|During remission-induction chemotherapy (average 7 weeks)|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
832894|NCT01259713|Secondary|Time From Beginning of Remission-induction Chemotherapy Until the Beginning of Consolidation Therapy|This endpoint was to evaluate the potential impact of IFI prevention on the efficacy of remission-induction chemotherapy for ALL.|During remission-induction chemotherapy (average 7 weeks)|ITT Analysis Set||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832895|NCT01259713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died Due to Fungal Infection; Causality as Assessed by the Investigator.||During remission-induction chemotherapy (average 7 weeks)|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
832896|NCT01259713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died Due to Fungal Infection; Causality as Assessed by the IDRB.||During remission-induction chemotherapy (average 7 weeks)|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
832897|NCT01259713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Requiring Antifungal Treatment During Remission-Induction Chemotherapy||During remission-induction chemotherapy (average 7 weeks)|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
832898|NCT01259713|Secondary|Time to Diagnosis of Proven or Probable IFIs According to the EORTC/MSG Criteria, as Assessed by the IDRB.|Time to diagnosis of proven or probable IFIs is presented as the median (Q1,Q3) days to diagnosis of those participants who experienced a proven or probable IFI. Median was not reached if < 50% of participants had an event; Q1 was not reached if < 25% of participants had an event; Q3 was not reached if < 75% of participants had an event.|During remission-induction chemotherapy (average 7 weeks)|ITT Analysis Set||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832899|NCT01259713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Diagnosed With Proven or Probable IFIs According to the EORTC/MSG Criteria, as Assessed by the Investigator||During remission-induction chemotherapy (average 7 weeks)|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
832900|NCT01259713|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pulmonary Infiltrates According to the Central Image Reader||During remission-induction chemotherapy (average 7 weeks)|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
832901|NCT01259713|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Proven or Probable IFIs During Remission-induction Chemotherapy for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL)|"Diagnoses of proven or probable invasive fungal infections (IFI) were assessed according to European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) criteria by the independent data review board (IDRB) who were blinded to treatment assignment.
The duration of remission-induction chemotherapy was defined as the period from the initiation of remission-induction chemotherapy administration to the start of consolidation or salvage therapy."|During remission-induction chemotherapy (average 7 weeks)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Analysis Set: participants in the safety analysis set who had no major violations of entrance criteria.||percentage of participants|||Number
832902|NCT01259726|Secondary|Time to First CDI Recurrence|CDI recurrence was defined as at least 1 event characterized by ALL of the following: >=3 unformed (loose or watery) stools within 24 hours (data derived from Diarrhea CRF page which was to be completed for any clinical event of diarrhea or loose/watery stool occurring between Day 1 and Week 6); a positive C. difficile stool assay, or pseudomembranes on endoscopy/surgery; and no other likely cause of the diarrhea in the opinion of the investigator. Time of onset is from date of randomization to date of first CDI recurrence. Time to first CDI recurrence was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curve. Due to small number of subjects (<50%) with CDI recurrence, median time to event was not evaluable.|Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 6|ITT-S population||days||Full Range|Median
832903|NCT01259726|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Events of Diarrhea or Loose/Watery Stools|Data were derived from all AEs starting on or after Day 1 for which a Diarrhea CRF page was completed.|Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 6|ITT-S population.||Participants|||Number
832904|NCT01259726|Secondary|Number of Participants With Use of Antibacterial Treatment for CDI|Any antibacterial medication used after Day 1 for which the investigator selected the indication “antibacterial for C. difficile infection”.|Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 6|ITT-S population.||Participants|||Number
832931|NCT01260272|Secondary|Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure|Raisin versus snacks: change in diastolic blood pressure from baseline to week 12|12 weeks|Total # for analysis may not equal the randomized #. A last observation carried forward approach was utilized for those who did not complete the study, and who had at least 1 post treatment value. Subjects without at least 1 post treatment values were not included in the analysis. The analysis # was also adjusted by excluding defined outliers.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
832905|NCT01259726|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clostridium Difficile Infection (CDI) Recurrence|CDI recurrence was defined as at least 1 event characterized by ALL of the following: >=3 unformed (loose or watery) stools within 24 hours (data derived from Diarrhea case report form (CRF) page which was to be completed for any clinical event of diarrhea or loose/watery stool occurring between Day 1 and Week 6); a positive C. difficile stool assay, or pseudomembranes on endoscopy/surgery; and no other likely cause of the diarrhea in the opinion of the investigator.|Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 6|ITT-S population.||Participants|||Number
832906|NCT01259726|Primary|Number of Participants With Positive Clostridium Difficile Stool Cultures Demonstrating Non-Toxigenic Clostridium Difficile-Strain M3||After study drug administration period (14 days) through Week 6|ITT-S population.||Participants|||Number
832907|NCT01259726|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An adverse event (AE) is any untoward, undesired, unplanned clinical event in the form of signs, symptoms, disease, or laboratory or physiological observations occurring in a study participant, regardless of causal relationship. TEAEs were defined as all AEs that start during the study drug treatment period (and up to 7 days after the last dose of the study drug) and were not seen at baseline, or were seen at baseline but increased in frequency and/or severity during the study drug treatment period (and up to 7 days after the last dose of study drug). SAE was any AE that results in any of the following outcomes: death, a life-threatening event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of an existing hospitalization, a persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal life functions, a congenital anomaly/birth defect, other medically important events based upon appropriate medical judgement.|Baseline up to 7 days after the last dose of study drug (up to Week 3)|Intent-to-Treat-Safety (ITT-S) population was defined as all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
832908|NCT01260142|Secondary|Relative Bioavailability of Fospropofol and Propofol|The PK parameters for propofol from propofol injectable emulsion were used as the reference formulation. Because propofol is a metabolite of fospropofol, all calculations were conducted after correcting for the different molecular weights of these formulations. Molecular weights of 332.24 (288.24 for free base) and 178.27 were used for fospropofol disodium and propofol injectable emulsion, respectively. The propofol parameters were adjusted as appropriate as discussed above and natural log transformed prior to comparison. Relative bioavailability of propofol from fospropofol disodium (E2083) to propofol from propofol injectable emulsion is calculated as (AUC(FP) x Total Dose of Propofol/AUC(P) x Total Dose of E2083) x Molecular fraction, where AUC(FP) is AUC(0-t) or AUC(0-inf) of propofol from E2083, AUC(P) is AUC(0-t) or AUC(0-inf) of propofol from propofol injectable emulsion and molecular fraction is molecular weight of propofol (178.27)/E2083 (332.24).|Days 1, and 7-14 (Arterial Sample: Pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 8, 16, 30, 45, 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes post-dose. Venous Sample: Pre-dose, and 1, 4, and 30 minutes post-dose).|PK Analysis Set||ng x hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832909|NCT01260142|Secondary|Maximal Sedative Effect Using the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale|PD effects were determined from continuous BIS score recordings and from clinical assessment of sedation using the MOAA/S scale. The MOAA/S scale was used to rate the level of alertness/sedation from a score of 0 (does not respond to painful stimulus) to 5 (alert) in the category of responsiveness, with 5 being the MOAA/S value for a fully awake adult. Time to sedation was defined as the time from the first dose of study medication to the first two consecutive MOAA/S scores less than or equal to 4. Fully awake status was reached at the first of 3 consecutive MOAA/S scores of 5 measured every 2 minutes after study drug administration. The MOAA/S scale was described by the Emax model.|Days 1, and 7-14 (2 minutes prior to study drug administration and every 2 minutes thereafter for 20 minutes or until the subject reached Fully Alert status, whichever was later).|PD Analysis Set||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832910|NCT01260142|Secondary|Maximal Sedative Effect Using the Bispectral Index (BIS) Score|Pharmacodynamic (PD) effects were obtained from continuous BIS score recordings obtained throughout the study and from clinical assessment of sedation using the Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) scale. The BIS measurements continued until the participant was fully recovered in the opinion of the investigator or until the PD effect measure returned to baseline. The BIS score varied between 100 (associated with being fully awake) and 0 (associated with a flat line on the electroencephalogram (EEG)). The BIS Index was described by the maximal effect (Emax) model.|Days 1, and 7-14 (BIS measurements were to continue until the subject was fully recovered in the opinion of the investigator or until the PD effect measures returned to baseline measures)|PD analysis set included all participants who had sufficient PD data to derive at least one PD assessment.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832911|NCT01260142|Primary|Maximum Drug Plasma Concentration of Propofol|Arterial and venous blood samples were collected and analyzed for propofol concentrations as described previously. Cmax was the highest plasma drug concentration observed over the entire sampling period, and was obtained directly from the experimental plasma concentration time data without interpolation. The plasma concentrations from the venous sampling were descriptively compared head-to-head with the arterial sampling.|Days 1, and 7-14 (Arterial Sample: Pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 8, 16, 30, 45, 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes post-dose. Venous Sample: Pre-dose, and 1, 4, and 30 minutes post-dose).|PK Analysis Set||ug/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832912|NCT01260142|Primary|Maximum Drug Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Fospropofol|Arterial and venous blood samples were collected and analyzed for fospropofol concentrations as described previously. Cmax was the highest plasma drug concentration observed over the entire sampling period, and was obtained directly from the experimental plasma concentration time data without interpolation. The plasma concentrations from the venous sampling were descriptively compared head-to-head with the arterial sampling.|Days 1, and 7-14 (Arterial Sample: Pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 8, 16, 30, 45, 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes post-dose. Venous Sample: Pre-dose, and 1, 4, and 30 minutes post-dose).|PK Analysis Set||ug/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832932|NCT01260272|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure|Raisin versus snacks: change in systolic blood pressure from baseline to week 12|12 weeks|Total # for analysis may not equal the randomized #. A last observation carried forward approach was utilized for those who did not complete the study, and who had at least 1 post treatment value. Subjects without at least 1 post treatment values were not included in the analysis. The analysis # was also adjusted by excluding defined outliers.||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
832913|NCT01260142|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to Time t of Propofol|Arterial and venous blood samples were collected and analyzed for propofol concentrations as described previously. AUC(0-t) was calculated using the log-linear trapezoidal rule (linear trapezoidal rule up to Cmax, log trapezoidal rule following Cmax) from time of dosing to the last quantifiable concentration. The plasma concentrations from the venous sampling were descriptively compared head-to-head with the arterial sampling. In addition, the arterial plasma concentrations of fospropofol, propofol liberated from fospropofol, and propofol delivered from propofol injectable emulsion were used to refine the population PK model developed previously.|Days 1, and 7-14 (Arterial Sample: Pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 8, 16, 30, 45, 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes post-dose. Venous Sample: Pre-dose, and 1, 4, and 30 minutes post-dose).|PK Analysis Set||ug.h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832914|NCT01260142|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to Time t (AUC(0-t)) of Fospropofol|Arterial and venous blood samples were collected and analyzed for fospropofol concentrations as described previously. AUC(0-t) was calculated using the log-linear trapezoidal rule (linear trapezoidal rule up to maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax), log trapezoidal rule following Cmax) from time of dosing to the last quantifiable concentration. The plasma concentrations from the venous sampling were descriptively compared head-to-head with the arterial sampling.|Days 1, and 7-14 (Arterial Sample: Pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 8, 16, 30, 45, 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes post-dose. Venous Sample: Pre-dose, and 1, 4, and 30 minutes post-dose).|PK Analysis Set||ug.h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832915|NCT01260142|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity of Propofol|An A-line and V-line were placed prior to dosing during each treatment period and used to collect blood samples for plasma concentration measurements at specific time points. Plasma arterial and venous concentrations of propofol were quantified by high-performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric detection (LC-MS/MS). The AUC(0-inf) was calculated from the sum of AUC(0-t) and the residual area calculated as Ct/λz, where Ct was the observed concentration at last quantifiable concentration and λz was the terminal elimination rate constant. The plasma concentrations from the venous sampling were descriptively compared head-to-head with the arterial sampling. In addition, the arterial plasma concentrations of fospropofol, propofol liberated from fospropofol, and propofol delivered from propofol injectable emulsion were used to refine the population PK model developed previously.|Days 1, and 7-14 (Arterial Sample: Pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 8, 16, 30, 45, 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes post-dose. Venous Sample: Pre-dose, and 1, 4, and 30 minutes post-dose).|PK Analysis Set||ug.h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832916|NCT01260142|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity of Fospropofol (AUC(0-inf))|AUC(0-inf) is a measure of drug concentration equal to the area under the plasma concentration-time profile from time 0 to infinity. An arterial line (A-line) and venous line (V-line) were placed prior to dosing during each treatment period and used to collect blood samples for plasma concentration measurements at specific time points. Plasma arterial and venous concentrations of fospropofol were quantified by high-performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric detection (LC-MS/MS). The AUC(0-inf) was calculated from the sum of AUC from time 0 to time t (AUC(0-t)) and the residual area calculated as Ct/λz, where Ct was the observed concentration at last quantifiable concentration and λz was the terminal elimination rate constant. The plasma concentrations from the venous sampling were descriptively compared head-to-head with the arterial sampling.|Days 1, and 7-14 (Arterial Sample: Pre-dose, and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 8, 16, 30, 45, 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes post-dose. Venous Sample: Pre-dose, and 1, 4, and 30 minutes post-dose).|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set is the group of participants who have sufficient pharmacokinetic data to derive at least one PK parameter.||ug.h/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
832917|NCT01260194|Secondary|Number of Participants With Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) Positive Gastric Cancer|The HER2 status was determination by using immunohistochemistry (IHC) and confirmatory Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH) techniques. Only participants with HER2 positivity were allowed to receive study medication.|Baseline|Safety population.||participants|||Number
832918|NCT01260194|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)|The LVEF was measured using Multi Gated Acquisition (MUGA) or echocardiography (echocardiography was preferred), using the same technique throughout for consistency in an individual participant. Baseline LVEF assessments were done within 21 days prior to the start of treatment. Participants with clinically significant change from baseline (that is, absolute drop in LVEF of >=15%, and drop to a value <50%) have been reported.|Baseline, thereafter every 12 weeks (maximum up to 22 months)|Safety population.||participants|||Number
832919|NCT01260194|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Change From Baseline in Laboratory Parameters|Lab parameters assessed during the study were serum chemistry, biochemistry - serum electrolytes, hematology, 12 lead electrocardiogram, and urinalysis – protein, glucose, blood and other lab tests. Laboratory tests were graded according to the National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) version 3.|Baseline up to 6 month after last dose of study drug (maximum up to 22 months)|Safety population.||participants|||Number
832920|NCT01260194|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged in participant hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. AEs included both serious and non-serious AEs.|Baseline up to 6 month after last dose of study drug (maximum up to 22 months)|Safety population included all participants who had received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
832933|NCT01260272|Primary|Percent Change in Postprandial Glucose Levels|Raisins compared with snacks: percent change in postprandial glucose levels from baseline to week 12|12 weeks|Total # for analysis may not equal the randomized #. A last observation carried forward approach was utilized for those who did not complete the study, and who had at least 1 post treatment value. Subjects without at least 1 post treatment values were not included in the analysis. The analysis # was also adjusted by excluding defined outliers.||Percent change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
833985|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 16).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 16 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 16.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832921|NCT01260194|Secondary|Duration of Response (DR)|DR was based on RECIST criteria v1.1 and was defined as time from date the CR or PR was first recorded to the date on which PD was first noted. CR: complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease; all nodes, both target and non-target, must decrease to normal (short axis <10 mm); no new lesions. PR: >=30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions; no unequivocal progression of non-target disease; no new lesions. PD: at least 20% increase (including an absolute increase of at least 5 mm) in the sum of diameters of target lesions and/or appearance of 1 or more new lesions. For the participants with no documented progression after CR or PR, the censored date (the date of “death,” the “last tumor measurement,” “last date in drug log,” or “last follow-up”) was taken into consideration. The median duration of response with 95% CI was estimated using Kaplan Meier method.|Baseline up to PD or death (maximum up to 22 months)|ITT population. The number of participants analyzed signifies the number of participants analyzed for this outcome measure.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832922|NCT01260194|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Benefit Response (CBR)|CBR was defined as any response among stable disease (SD) for 6 weeks or longer, CR, or PR as determined by the RECIST v 1.1. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease; all nodes, both target and non-target, must decrease to normal (short axis <10 mm); no new lesions. PR was defined as >=30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions (the short axis was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions); no unequivocal progression of non-target disease; no new lesions. PD was defined as at least 20% increase (including an absolute increase of at least 5 mm) in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions and/or appearance of 1 or more new lesions. SD was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, or PD.|Baseline up to PD or death (maximum up to 22 months)|ITT population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832923|NCT01260194|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Tumor Response|Overall tumor response was defined as the occurrence of either a confirmed complete response (CR) or a partial response (PR) as best overall response as determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria version (v) 1.1 from confirmed radio-graphic evaluations of target and non-target lesions. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease; all nodes, both target and non-target, must decrease to normal (short axis less than [<]10 mm); no new lesions. PR was defined as greater than or equal to (>=) 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions (the short axis was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions); no unequivocal progression of non-target disease; no new lesions.|Baseline up to PD or death (maximum up to 22 months)|ITT population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832924|NCT01260194|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from the date of enrollment to the date of the death (from any cause). If no death was observed, censored observations were taken into account in the analysis. The censoring date was the last date of “last tumor measurement,” “last date in drug log,” or “last follow-up.” The median overall survival time with 95% CI was estimated using Kaplan Meier method.|Baseline up to death (maximum up to 22 months)|ITT population.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832925|NCT01260194|Primary|Median Progression Free Survival (PFS)|The PFS was defined as the median time between the day of enrollment and the first documentation of progressive disease (PD) or date of death, whichever occurred first. PD was defined as at least 20 percent (%) increase (including an absolute increase of at least 5 millimeters [mm]) in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions and/or appearance of 1 or more new lesions. The censoring date was the last date of “last tumor measurement,” “last date of study drug treatment,” or “last follow-up.” The median PFS time with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated using Kaplan Meier method.|Baseline up to PD or death (maximum up to 22 months)|ITT population.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832926|NCT01260272|Secondary|Change in High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels|Raisin versus snacks: percent change in high density lipoprotein cholesterol levels from baseline to week 12|12 weeks|Total # for analysis may not equal the randomized #. A last observation carried forward approach was utilized for those who did not complete the study, and who had at least 1 post treatment value. Subjects without at least 1 post treatment values were not included in the analysis. The analysis # was also adjusted by excluding defined outliers.||Percent change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
832927|NCT01260272|Secondary|Change in Waist Circumference|Raisin versus snacks: change in waist circumference from baseline to week 12|12 weeks|Total # for analysis may not equal the randomized #. A last observation carried forward approach was utilized for those who did not complete the study, and who had at least 1 post treatment value. Subjects without at least 1 post treatment values were not included in the analysis. The analysis # was also adjusted by excluding defined outliers.||cm||Standard Error|Mean
832928|NCT01260272|Primary|Percent Change in Body Weight|Raisin versus snacks: percent change in body weight from baseline to week 12|12 weeks|Total # for analysis may not equal the randomized #. A last observation carried forward approach was utilized for those who did not complete the study, and who had at least 1 post treatment value. Subjects without at least 1 post treatment values were not included in the analysis. The analysis # was also adjusted by excluding defined outliers.||Percent change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
832929|NCT01260272|Primary|Percent Change in Fasting Glucose Levels|Raisins versus snacks: percent change in fasting glucose levels from baseline to week 12|12 weeks|Total # for analysis may not equal the randomized #. A last observation carried forward approach was utilized for those who did not complete the study, and who had at least 1 post treatment value. Subjects without at least 1 post treatment values were not included in the analysis. The analysis # was also adjusted by excluding defined outliers.||Percent change from baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832930|NCT01260272|Secondary|Change in Hemoglobin A1c|Raisin versus snacks: change in hemoglobin A1c from baseline to week 12|12 weeks|Total # for analysis may not equal the randomized #. A last observation carried forward approach was utilized for those who did not complete the study, and who had at least 1 post treatment value. Subjects without at least 1 post treatment values were not included in the analysis. The analysis # was also adjusted by excluding defined outliers.||Percent change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
832934|NCT01260311|Other Pre-specified|Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) at Week 4 and Week 8|PPBC: a self-administered, single-item, questionnaire that asks participants to describe their perception of their bladder-related problems. The PPBC assessment is rated on a 6-point scale: 1=no problems at all, 2=some very minor problems, 3=some minor problems, 4=moderate problems, 5=severe problems, 6=many severe problems. Improvement is defined as negative change from baseline.|Week 4 and Week 8|This efficacy outcome measure was removed in Protocol Amendment 1 and thus data was not collected.|||||
832935|NCT01260311|Other Pre-specified|Number of UUI Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 4 and Week 8|UUI episodes were defined as those with USS rating of 5 in the diary. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 4 and Week 8|This efficacy outcome measure was removed in Protocol Amendment 1 and thus data was not collected.|||||
832936|NCT01260311|Other Pre-specified|Number of Urgency Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 4 and Week 8|Urgency episodes were defined as micturitions with USS rating of greater than or equal to (>=) 3. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 4 and Week 8|This efficacy outcome measure was removed in Protocol Amendment 1 and thus data was not collected.|||||
832937|NCT01260311|Other Pre-specified|Number of Micturitions Per 24 Hours at Week 4 and Week 8|Micturitions include episodes of voluntary micturition and episodes of Urgency Urinary Incontinence (UUI). UUI episodes were defined as those micturitions with Urinary Sensation Scale (USS) rating of 5 in the diary in participants with UUI at baseline. USS rating 5: Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 4 and Week 8|This efficacy outcome measure was removed in Protocol Amendment 1 and thus data was not collected.|||||
832938|NCT01260311|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) by Seriousness, Severity and Relationship to Treatment|Counts of participants who had treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs), defined as newly occurring or worsening after first dose. Relatedness to fesoterodine fumarate (Toviaz) was assessed by the investigator. Participants with multiple occurrences of an AE within a category were counted once within the category. Seriousness of an AE was assessed under the criteria of serious adverse event (SAE). AE was assessed according to severity; mild (not causing any significant problem, dose adjustment not required), moderate (caused problem that does not interfere significantly with usual activities or the clinical status, dose adjustment needed due to AE) and severe (caused problem that interferes significantly with usual activities or the clinical status, study drug stopped due to AE).|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Safety population defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
832939|NCT01260324|Primary|Incidence Rate Ratio Between NAION Risk Factors and Recurrence of Visual Symptoms of Non-arteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (NAION)|Categorized by risk factors of age (years) and sex (male or female). Incidence rate ratio and the 95% confidence interval adjusted for all the other covariates in the table.|01-January-2003 up to 31-December-2007|Participant population with definite and possible NAION cases identified by medical record review. N=number of participants with recurrence of visual symptoms; (n)=number of participants for variable (age or sex) for NAION cases and estimated person-years [(n=NAION cases) / person-years].||incidence rate ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832940|NCT01260324|Primary|Incidence Rate Ratio Between NAION Risk Factors and Resolution of Visual Symptoms of Non-arteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (NAION)|Categorized by risk factors of age (years) and sex (male or female). Incidence rate ratio and the 95% confidence interval adjusted for all the other covariates in the table.|01-January-2003 up to 31-December-2007|Participant population with definite and possible NAION cases identified by medical record review. N=number of participants with resolution of visual symptoms (each set of variables); (n)=number of participants for variable (age or sex) for NAION cases and estimated person-years [(n=NAION cases) / person-years].||incidence rate ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832941|NCT01260324|Primary|Number of Participants With NAION by Time Course of Visual Change Onset: Intermittent, Abrupt (Acute), or Chronic (Adjudicated by Medical Record Review)||01-January-2003 up to 31-December-2007|Participants from the NAION cases population adjudicated by medical record review.||participants|||Number
832942|NCT01260324|Primary|Crude Incidence Rate of Non-arteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (NAION) Per 1000 Person-years by PDE-5 Inhibitor Use|Person-years estimated by dividing the number of Controls by the derived sampling fraction (20,000 divided by total person-time at risk). PDE-5 inhibitor use categorized by frequency of use in the number of days specific preceding diagnosis for NAION Cases or preceding the index date for Controls: Recent use=any dispensing in the preceding 60 days; Any use=any PDE-5 inhibitors use; Chronic use=at least a total of 26 days supply or 5 dispensings in the preceding 183 days; Non-chronic use=any dispensing in the preceding 183 days that does not meet the criteria for chronic use; Never use=none.|01-January-2003 up to 31-December-2007|Combined NAION cases and Controls populations. N=number of participants according to frequency of PDE-5 inhibitor use for males 40 years or older; (n)=number of participants for NAION cases and Controls, respectively, per variable of frequency of use and estimated person-years [(n=NAION cases, Controls) / person-years].||incidence rate per 1000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832943|NCT01260324|Primary|Crude Incidence Rate of Non-arteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (NAION) Per 1000 Person-years by Comorbid Diagnoses|Person-years estimated by dividing the number of Controls participants by the derived sampling fraction (20,000 divided by the total person-time at risk). Comorbid diagnoses categorized according to the International Classification of Diseases ninth-edition (ICD-9) diagnoses. Categories include Occlusion and stenosis of precerebral arteries (Occlusion / Stenosis), Other disorders of bone and cartilage (Bone and Cartilage), Symptoms involving head and neck (Head and Neck), and Other ill defined and unknown causes of morbidity and mortality (Ill defined / Unknown causes).|01-January-2003 up to 31-December-2007|Combined population includes NAION cases and Controls population; (n)=number of participants for NAION cases and Controls, respectively, and estimated person-years [(n=NAION cases, Controls) / person-years].||incidence rate per 1000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832976|NCT01260662|Secondary|Procedural Recall|After patients returned to baseline mental status they were asked whether they were able to recall any of the procedure. Question was answered in a yes or no format.|Immediately after the end of the procedure, a single time point within 30 minutes of procedures conclusion.|100 subjects were randomized to each group, 90 subjects in the propofol arm completed the study, 85 in the 1:1 propofol/ketamine arm, and 96 in the 4:1 propofol/ketamine arm||percentage report recall of procedure|||Number
832944|NCT01260324|Primary|Crude Incidence Rate of Non-arteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (NAION) Per 1000 Person-years by Baseline Risk Factors|Person-years estimated by dividing number of Controls (20,000) by derived sampling fraction (total person-time at risk). Risk factors include diabetes, smoking, obesity, erectile dysfunction, hyperlipidemia, myocardial infarction, other coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, hypertension, use of beta or calcium channel blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, nitrates, anti-platelet agents, diuretics, and recent phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE-5) inhibitors use. Recent use=any dispensing in the 60 days preceding date of diagnosis for NAION cases or index date for Controls.|01-January-2003 up to 31-December-2007|Combined population; (n)=number of participants for NAION cases and Controls, respectively, and estimated person-years [(n=NAION cases, Controls) / person-years]. Only the covariates selected by the step wise regression procedure were summarized.||incidence rate per 1000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832945|NCT01260324|Primary|Crude Incidence Rate of Non-arteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (NAION) Per 1000 Person-years by Region|Person-years estimated by dividing the number of Controls participants by the derived sampling fraction (20,000 divided by the total person-time at risk). Region of the United States categorized as Northeast, Midwest, South, and West.|01-January-2003 up to 31-December-2007|Combined population includes NAION cases and Controls population; (n)=number of participants for NAION cases and Controls, respectively, and estimated person-years [(n=NAION cases, Controls) / person-years].||incidence rate per 1000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832946|NCT01260324|Primary|Crude Incidence Rate of Non-arteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (NAION) Per 1000 Person-years by Calendar Year|Person-years estimated by dividing the number of Controls participants by the derived sampling fraction (20,000 divided by the total person-time at risk). Calendar years include years 2003 to 2007.|01-January-2003 up to 31-December-2007|Combined population includes NAION cases and Controls population; (n)=number of participants for NAION cases and Controls, respectively, and estimated person-years [(n=NAION cases, Controls) / person-years].||incidence rate per 1000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832947|NCT01260324|Primary|Crude Incidence Rate of Non-arteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (NAION) Per 1000 Person-years by Sex|Person-years estimated by dividing the number of Controls participants by the derived sampling fraction (20,000 divided by the total person-time at risk). Sex categorized as Female or Male.|01-January-2003 up to 31-December-2007|Combined population includes NAION cases and Controls population; (n)=number of participants for NAION cases and Controls, respectively, and estimated person-years [(n=NAION cases, Controls) / person-years].||incidence rate per 1000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832948|NCT01260324|Primary|Crude Incidence Rate of Non-arteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (NAION) Per 1000 Person-years by Age|Person-years estimated by dividing the number of Controls participants by the derived sampling fraction (20,000 divided by the total person-time at risk). Age categorized by years.|01-January-2003 up to 31-December-2007|Combined NAION cases and Controls populations; (n)=number of participants for NAION cases and Controls, respectively, per estimated person-years [(NAION cases n, Controls n) / person-years].||incidence rate per 1000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832949|NCT01260350|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virologic Failure|"The percentage of participants with on-treatment virologic failure (viral breakthrough, rebound, or nonresponse) or following treatment (viral relapse) was summarized.
On-treatment virologic failure was defined as:
Viral breakthrough (confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LOD after having previously had HCV RNA < LOD while on treatment),
Viral rebound (confirmed > 1 log10 IU/mL increase in HCV RNA from nadir while on treatment, or
Nonresponse (HCV RNA persistently ≥ LOD through 6 weeks of treatment)
Viral relapse was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LOD during the posttreatment period having achieved HCV RNA < LOD at the last on-treatment visit."|Up to Posttreatment Week 24|Safety Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
832950|NCT01260350|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HCV RNA at Week 12|Data are not presented for Groups 6, 10, and 21 which ended treatment after Week 8 or Week 6. Data are not presented for Groups 16, 17, 18, and 20 because participants with detectable HCV RNA discontinued due to protocol-specified stopping rules.|Baseline to Week 12|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832951|NCT01260350|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HCV RNA at Week 8|Data are not presented for Group 21 which ended treatment after Week 6.|Baseline to Week 8|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832952|NCT01260350|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HCV RNA at Week 6||Baseline to Week 6|Safety Analysis Set||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832953|NCT01260350|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HCV RNA < LOD at Week 12|Data are not presented for Groups 6, 10, and 21 which ended treatment after Week 8 or Week 6.|Week 12|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
832954|NCT01260350|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HCV RNA < LOD at Week 8|Data are not presented for Group 21 which ended treatment after Week 6.|Week 8|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
832955|NCT01260350|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HCV RNA < LOD at Week 6||Week 6|Safety Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
832956|NCT01260350|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Following Completion of Treatment (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as HCV RNA < the limit of detection (LOD; < 15 IU/mL) 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug.|Posttreatment Week 12|Safety Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
832957|NCT01260350|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced Adverse Events|Adverse events (AEs) occurring from baseline (Day 1 for all groups) to 30 days following the last dose of study drug were summarized across the participant population. A participant was counted once if they had a qualifying event.|Up to 12 weeks plus 30 days|Safety Analysis Set: participants were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
832958|NCT01260454|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Used of Narcotics Following a Treprostinil Infusion Site Change|We counted the number of participants who used any amount of narcotic during the 14 day diary period.|14 days|One subject did not meet the inclusion criteria and was excluded from the efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
833986|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 12 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
832959|NCT01260454|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Greater Than 6 Pain Level Using the 10 Point Visual Analog Score|Qutenza has not previously been used in patients with normal, healthy skin. We will assess the reaction to capsaicin in these patients as compared to the patients with unhealthy skin (post-herpetic neuralgia) who were studied in the registration trials for Qutenza. Pain immediately following Qutenza application was measured on a 10 point visual analog score with the word 'none' above 0 and 'agonizing' above 10.|60 minute period of patch application and subsequent 3 days|||participants|||Number
832960|NCT01260454|Primary|Pain Score on a Visual Analogue Scale|"Patients will record the maximum intensity of pain (0-10) each day after placing an infusion site in a diary with which they are already comfortable. They will record the score each day for 14 days unless they have recorded 0 for two consecutive days.
The primary outcome measure will be the average of those 14 maximum intensity pain scores (the sum of the maximum for each day divided by the number of days, generally 14; range 0-10)."|14 days after a new infusion site|One subject did not meet the inclusion criteria and was excluded from the efficacy analysis.||Visual Analogue Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832961|NCT01260467|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|This study will look at the number of participants who develop adverse events or side effects thought to be related to the memantine.|24 months|||participants|||Number
832962|NCT01260467|Primary|6 Month Progression-free Survival||24 months|not evaluated due to poor patient accrual|||||
832963|NCT01260467|Primary|Overall Survival||30 months|not evaluated due to poor patient accrual|||||
832964|NCT01260493|Primary|Satisfaction With Health and Social Care||1 year||||||
832965|NCT01260493|Primary|Dependence in Activities of Daily Living|Changes in number of person dependent in one or more daily activity from baseline to follow-up.|1 year|||participants|||Number
832966|NCT01260493|Primary|Health Care Consumption|Number of hospital days and admission will be analysed|1 year||||||
832967|NCT01260584|Secondary|Characterization of the Pharmacokinetics (PK) Cmax of the Active Metabolite of Prasugrel and the Active Metabolite of Clopidogrel in Smokers and Non-smokers||After dose on Day 10 of Active Treatment Periods 1 and 2|1 clopidogrel smoker was not evaluable for this measure.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832968|NCT01260584|Secondary|Characterization of the Pharmacokinetics (PK) Area Under Curve (AUC)(0-Last) of the Active Metabolite of Prasugrel and the Active Metabolite of Clopidogrel in Smokers and Non-smokers|Blood samples for determination of plasma concentrations of the prasugrel active metabolite, clopidogrel active metabolite, and clopidogrel inactive metabolite will be collected following the administration of the 10th (last) maintenance dose of each of the 2 Active Treatment Periods at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 6 hours post-dose.|After dose on Day 10 of Active Treatment Periods 1 and 2|1 Clopidogrel smoker participant was not evaluable for this measure.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
832969|NCT01260584|Secondary|Responder Rate by Treatment and Smoking Status Based on Platelet Reactivity Index (PRI) <= 50%|Numerous studies have established an association between high on-treatment platelet reactivity with clopidogrel and an increased risk for post-PCI ischemic events. In this study, the percentages of “responders” and “poor responders” following treatment with prasugrel and clopidogrel were compared. Poor responders were defined based on an Accumetrics VerifyNow PRU >235 and a VASP PRI >50%, as assessed 24 hours after the 9th maintenance dose.|Day 10 for Active Treatment Periods 1 and 2|1 prasugrel smoker participant was not evaluable for this measure.||% participants with PRI <=50%|||Number
832970|NCT01260584|Secondary|Responder Rate by Treatment and Smoking Status Based on P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) <= 235||Day 10 for Active Treatment Periods 1 and 2|1 prasugrel smoker participant was not evaluable for this measure.||% participants with PRU <=235|||Number
832971|NCT01260584|Secondary|Assessment of Vasodilator Stimulated Phosphoprotein (VASP) by Treatment and Smoking Status|Day 10 occurs in each treatment period at which time data collections are made. Numerous studies have established an association between high on-treatment platelet reactivity with clopidogrel and an increased risk for post-PCI ischemic events. In this study, the percentages of “responders” and “poor responders” following treatment with prasugrel and clopidogrel were compared. Poor responders were defined based on an Accumetrics VerifyNow PRU >235 and a VASP PRI >50%, as assessed 24 hours after the 9th maintenance dose.|Day 10 for Active Treatment Periods 1 and 2|1 prasugrel smoker was unevaluable for this measure.||% vasodilator stimulated phosphoprotein||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832972|NCT01260584|Secondary|Assessment of P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) by Treatment and Smoking Status|"Day 10 occurs in each treatment period at which time data collections are made. 12.1.4. Responders and Poor Responders
Numerous studies have established an association between high on-treatment platelet reactivity with clopidogrel and an increased risk for post-PCI ischemic events. In this study, the percentages of “responders” and “poor responders” following treatment with prasugrel and clopidogrel were compared. Poor responders were defined based on an Accumetrics VerifyNow PRU >235 and a VASP PRI >50%, as assessed 24 hours after the 9th maintenance dose."|Day 10 for Active Treatment Periods 1 and 2|1 prasugrel smoker was unevaluable for this measure.||P2Y12 reaction unit||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832973|NCT01260584|Primary|Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation (IPA) in Prasugrel-treated and Clopidogrel-treated Smokers and Non-smokers Following 9 Days of Maintenance Therapy.|IPA will be measured by the Accumetrics P2Y12 Assay Device. Response will be assessed in P2Y12 Reaction Units and as Platelet Reactivity Index (vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein assay).|Baseline to day 10 for Active Treatment Periods 1 and 2|1 prasugrel smoker was unevaluable for this measure.||percentage of device derived inhibition||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
832974|NCT01260649|Secondary|Number of Participants With Cognitive Side Effects|will compare the incidence of participants with memory deficits between groups, as determined by incidents of clinician reported cognitive adverse events|3 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
832975|NCT01260649|Primary|Change in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale - 28|"HAMD will be administered at every ECT treatment.The HAM D 28 is a 28 item scale with scores ranging from 0 to 83, with 0 being no depression and 83 being high levels of depression symptoms.
The change in HAM S score was determined by the difference of the HAM D score at the last ECT administration and the baseline HAM D score. A negative change score reflects a decreased HAM D score between the first and last ECT administration and therefore a reduction in depressive symptoms."|baseline, one month|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
832977|NCT01260662|Secondary|Respiratory Depression|Continuous capnographic monitoring|From start of sedation procedure to end of sedation procedure, up to 24 hours|100 subjects were randomized to each group, 90 subjects in the propofol arm completed the study, 85 in the 1:1 propofol/ketamine arm, and 96 in the 4:1 propofol/ketamine arm||number of respiratory depression events|||Number
832978|NCT01260662|Primary|Hypoxia|Pulse oximetry|From start of sedation procedure to end of sedation procedure, up to 24 hours|100 subjects were randomized to each group, 90 subjects in the propofol arm completed the study, 85 in the 1:1 propofol/ketamine arm, and 96 in the 4:1 propofol/ketamine arm||Patients which experienced hypoxia|||Number
832979|NCT01260662|Primary|Clinical Interventions During Sedation|Add/increase in supplemental oxygen, stimulation to induce respiration, airway repositioning, assisted ventilations, endotracheal intubation|From start of sedation procedure to end of sedation procedure, up to 24 hours|100 subjects were randomized to each group, 90 subjects in the propofol arm completed the study, 85 in the 1:1 propofol/ketamine arm, and 96 in the 4:1 propofol/ketamine arm||Clinical interventions performed|||Number
832980|NCT01260688|Secondary|Symptom Assessment Using FACT-P Questionnaire and PPI Scale||Up to 12 weeks||||||
832981|NCT01260688|Secondary|Incidence of Toxicities Graded According to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE) v4.0||Up to 30 days after last dose of study drugs||||||
832982|NCT01260688|Primary|12-week Progression-free Survival as Per the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2)|Compared between the two arms using Z test.|3 months|Based on primary endpoint, 8 patients in Arm II had PFS equal than or greater than 12 weeks as opposed to Arm I where only 2 patients had PFS equal than or greater than 12 weeks.||participants|||Number
832983|NCT01260701|Secondary|Number of Patients With Grade 3 Through 5 Adverse Events That Are Related to Study Drug|Any CTCAE 4.0 event of Grade 3 (severe), Grade 4 (life threatening), or Grade 5 (fatal) which were possibly, probably or definitely related to protocol treatment are included.|Up to 2 years|Eligible patients who received any treatment and were assessed for adverse events are included in this summary.||Participants|||Number
832984|NCT01260701|Secondary|Response Rate (Complete and Partial, Confirmed and Unconfirmed)|Complete response (CR) is complete disappearance of all target and non-target lesions, no new lesions, and no disease related symptoms. Any lymph nodes must have reduction in short axis to < 1.0 cm. Partial response (PR) is >= 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of appropriate diameters of all target measurable lesions, no unequivocal progression of non-measurable disease, and no new lesions. Confirmed CR is two or more statuses of CR a minimum of four weeks apart documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration. Confirmed PR is two or more statuses of PR or better a minimum of four weeks apart documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration, but not qualifying as CR. Unconfirmed CR is one status of CR documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration but not qualifying as CR or PR. Unconfirmed PR is one status of PR documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration but not qualifying as CR, PR or unconfirmed CR.|Up to 2 years|Eligible patients who began protocol therapy and were assessed for response.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
832985|NCT01260701|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival is calculated from date of registration to date of death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive are censored at date of last contact.|Up to 2 years|Eligible patients who began protocol therapy.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832986|NCT01260701|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS is measured from date of registration to date of first documentation of progression or symptomatic deterioration, or death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive and without report of progression are censored at date of last contact. Progression is one or more of the following: 20% increase in the sum of appropriate diameters of target measurable lesions over smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease during therapy), as well as an absolute increase of at least 0.5 cm; unequivocal progression of non-measurable disease in the opinion of the treating physician; appearance of any new lesion/site; death due to disease without prior documentation of progression and without symptomatic deterioration. Symptomatic deterioration is global deterioration of health status requiring discontinuation of treatment without objective evidence of progression.|Up to 2 years|Eligible patients who began protocol therapy||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
832987|NCT01260883|Secondary|Oximetry Saturation Under 90% After Ketorolac or Placebo Infusion in 6-18 Month Old Infants|continuous oximetry monitoring for 12 hours after ketorolac or placebo intravenous infusion in 6-18 month old infants after surgery|24 hours after surgery|52 infants aged 6-18 months enrolled; 15 excluded. 25 received ketorolac, 12 received placebo||per cent time of 12 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
832988|NCT01260883|Secondary|Total Morphine Use in 6-18 Month Old Infants After Ketorolac or Placebo Intravenous Infusion After Surgery|total amount of morphine given for 12 hours after ketorolac or placebo infusion in 6-18 month old infants after surgery|24 hours after surgery|52 infants aged 6-18 months enrolled; 15 excluded. 25 received ketorolac and 12 received placebo infusion after surgery||mg/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832989|NCT01260883|Primary|Half-life of Ketorolac Stereo-isomers in 6-18 Month Old Infants After Surgery|noncompartmental pharmacokinetic analysis of ketorolac stereo-isomers after intravenous infusion in postoperative infants|24 hours after surgery|52 infants of the 77 total were aged 6-18 months. 15 were excluded for abnormal laboratory values at screening or for lack of access to draw blood samples. 25 received drug, 12 placebo.Doses 0.5 or 1 mg/kg reported together since no difference in analysis.||min||Standard Deviation|Mean
832990|NCT01260883|Primary|Ketorolac Stereo-isomer Volume of Distribution Peripheral in 6-18 Month Old Infants|population-based analysis of ketorolac stereo-isomers|24 hours after surgery|52 infants aged 6-18 months enrolled; 15 excluded. 25 received ketorolac, 12 received placebo. Drug handling not different at doses of 0.5 or 1 mg/kg so reported together.||ml||Standard Error|Mean
832991|NCT01260883|Primary|Volume of Distribution for Ketorolac Isomers in 6-18 Month Old Infants|population-based kinetic analysis of ketorolac isomers following intravenous infusion in infants after surgery|24 hours after surgery|of 52 enrolled infants aged 6-18 months, 37 completed the study. Of these, 25 received drug, 12 placebo.Doses of 0.5 or 1 mg/kg showed no difference in handling so reported together.||ml||Standard Error|Mean
833031|NCT01261325|Secondary|All Seizure Frequency (Type I + II + III) During the 12-week Treatment Period||12 week Treatment Period|Analysis population consists of the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population, which is all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication and have at least 1 post-Baseline seizure diary.||number of seizures/ 28-day||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
832992|NCT01260883|Primary|Clearance of S- and R+ Ketorolac in 6-18 Month Old Infants|stereo-specific ketorolac clearance by population-based analysis (NONMEM)|24 hours after surgery|52 infants aged 6-18 months enrolled; 15 excluded for abnormal laboratory results or intravenous sampling catheters that did not allow sampling. 25 infants aged 6-18 months received ketorolac, 12 received placebo. Doses of 0.5 or 1 mg/kg reported together since no difference found in handling.||ml/min||Standard Error|Mean
832993|NCT01260883|Secondary|Percent Time With Room Air Oximetry Saturations Under 90% in 2-6 Month Infants|continuous oximetry monitoring of room air saturation was collected for 12 hours after intravenous infusion of ketorolac or placebo|12 hours after ketorolac or placebo infusion|25 infants aged 2-6 months enrolled; 11 excluded. 8 received ketorolac, 6 placebo||percentage of time in 12 h after drug||Full Range|Median
832994|NCT01260883|Secondary|Morphine Use in 2-6 Month Old Infants Given Ketorolac or Placebo Following Surgery|total morphine given intravenously in the 12 hours following receiving intravenous ketorolac or placebo|first day after surgery|25 infants enrolled but 11 excluded. 8 received ketorolac, 6 placebo. total morphine given over 12 hours following infusion collected||mg/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
832995|NCT01260883|Primary|Half-life of S- and R+ Ketorolac in 2-6 Month Old Infants|half-life calculated from non-compartmental analysis of ketorolac isomers in 2-6 month old infants given intravenous ketorolac following surgery|24 hours after surgery|total infants enrolled was 77; 26 were excluded before study procedures began. Of 51 infants completing the study, 8 infants aged 2-6 months received drug.No difference in analysis at doses of 0.5 or 1 mg/kg so reported together.||min||Standard Error|Mean
832996|NCT01260883|Primary|Peripheral Volume of Distribution for S- and R+ Ketorolac in 2-6 Month Old Infants|peripheral volume of distribution for ketorolac stereo-isomers determined by population kinetic analysis (NONMEM)|24 hours post surgery|25 infants aged 2-6 months enrolled; 11 excluded for no sampling intravenous access. 8 infants received drug, 6 received placebo. No difference in analysis of doses of 0.5 or 1 mg/kg so reported together.||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
832997|NCT01260883|Primary|Central Volume of Distribution for S- and R+ Ketorolac in 2-6 Month Old Infants|stereo-specific ketorolac analysis using population-based analysis (NONMEM)for ketorolac given intravenously 24 hours after surgery in 2-6 month old infants|24 hours after surgery|infants enrolled but did not complete protocol if abnormal laboratory studies or intravenous catheters were not functioning prior to study drug infusion. Of 77 enrolled, 51 completed study; of the 33 given ketorolac,8 were aged 2-6 months. Doses of 0.5 or 1 mg/kg were handled similarly so reported together.||ml||Standard Error|Mean
832998|NCT01260883|Primary|Clearance of S-ketorolac and R+ Ketorolac in 2-6 Month Old Infants Following Surgery|stereo-isomer specific clearance determined by population-based pharmacokinetic analysis (NONMEM)|24 hours following surgery|of 25 infants aged 2-6 months enrolled, 11 were excluded. 8 received drug, 6 received placebo; this is a subset of the 77 enrolled infants (aged 2-18 months) of whom 51 completed the study. Infants receiving drug at 0.5 or 1 mg/kg were reported together, since no difference in drug handling was seen.||ml/min||Standard Error|Mean
832999|NCT01260896|Secondary|AUC0-inf of O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for the metabolite O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833000|NCT01260896|Secondary|AUC0-t of O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for the metabolite O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833001|NCT01260896|Secondary|Cmax of O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Informational comparison of Cmax values for the metabolite O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833002|NCT01260896|Primary|AUC0-inf of Venlafaxine.|Bioequivalence based on Venlafaxine AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833003|NCT01260896|Primary|AUC0-t of Venlafaxine.|Bioequivalence based on Venlafaxine AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833004|NCT01260896|Primary|Cmax of Venlafaxine.|Bioequivalence based on Venlafaxine Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833005|NCT01260922|Primary|AUC0-t of Donepezil.|Bioequivalence based on Donepezil AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833006|NCT01260922|Primary|Cmax of Donepezil.|Bioequivalence based on Donepezil Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833007|NCT01260948|Primary|AUC0-t of Donepezil.|Bioequivalence based on Donepezil AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833008|NCT01260948|Primary|Cmax of Donepezil.|Bioequivalence based on Donepezil Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 72 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833009|NCT01261000|Primary|Effect of Pegvisomant on Colon Tissue p53 Expression|Induction of colon tissue expression of p53, a tumor suppressor, using Western blot analysis, after GH receptor blockade with pegvisomant|8 weeks|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833010|NCT01261052|Secondary|Measurement of APD and FMPD/APD Interventions in Controlling Post-prandial Blood Glucose With Reduced Insulin Sensitivity.|Assessment of control of post prandial hyperglycemia with APD and FMPD/APD interventions using mean post-prandial glucose (3 hours after meals).|all 33 hour studies|The number of participants for analysis was determined by an intention to treat (ITT) analysis based on the initial treatment assignment||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
833011|NCT01261052|Primary|Measurement of the Effectiveness of APD and FMPD/APD Intervention in Adapting to Reduced Insulin Sensitivity|The effectiveness of the APD and FMPD/APD intervention in adapting to reduced insulin sensitivity was analyzed using mean glucose.|all 33 hour studies|The number of participants for analysis was determined by an intention to treat (ITT) analysis based on the initial treatment assignment||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
833012|NCT01253980|Primary|Treatment Failure|A treatment failure was a patient who at any time deteriorated necessitating a change to the treatment regimen. This was determined by assessing reported symptoms (cough, shortness of breath, wheeze and fever) and comparing clinical signs (respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, wheeze, flaring, grunting, recessions, crepitations, temperature, mental status) to signs at presentation.|At routine follow-up 3 and 5 days post-ingestion or earlier if necessary|per protocol||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833013|NCT01254045|Secondary|Salivary Cortisol|salivary cortisol level measured immediately before social challenge task and 20 minutes following social challenge task at each time point (i.e., baseline, week 2, and week 3)|baseline, week 2, and week 3|||nmol/L||Standard Error|Mean
833014|NCT01254045|Primary|Eye Contact/Gaze During 10 Minute Social Challenge Task|Number of times that eye gaze occurred (i.e., participant looked at female experimenter in the eyes) during 10 minute social challenge task (first 5 minutes social proximity, second 5 minutes social interaction). The social challenge task occurred 50 minutes after internasal dose (of placebo, placebo + oxytocin, or oxytocin) at baseline, week 2, and week 3 visits.|baseline, week 2, and week 3|||eye contact/gaze events per 10 minutes||Standard Error|Mean
833015|NCT01254188|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Failure-free Survival|Time to event (months) = (date of event or censoring – date of study entry + 1) / 30.4375. Date of event is the earliest date of the following events during treatment : discontinuation of nilotinib for nilotinib-related adverse events, death due to any cause, progression to AP or BC, loss of PCyR, loss of CCyR, loss of CHR. Time is censored at the date of last assessment in the trial for patients without event.|3,6,9,12,15,18,21,and 24 months|FAS||percentage probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833016|NCT01254188|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Progression-free Survival|PFS was defined as the time from the date of study entry to the date of event defined as the first documented disease progression to AP/BC or the date of death from any cause occurring on treatment.|3,6,9,12,15,18,21,and 24 months|FAS||percentage probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833017|NCT01254188|Secondary|Overall Survival|OS was defined as the time between date of study entry and date of death due to any cause at any time during the study, including the follow-up period after discontinuation of treatment.|3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 Months|||percentage probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833018|NCT01254188|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Estimated to Maintain Their First CCyR for 6, 12, 18, and 24 Months After the First CCyR Was Achieved as Determined by Kaplan Meier Estimatation.|"* CCyR = 0% Ph+ metaphases based on at least 20 metaphases from bone marrow cytogenetics.
Duration of first CCyR (months) = (date of CCyR loss or censoring – date of first CCyR +1) / 30.4375"|6,12,18 and 24 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833019|NCT01254188|Secondary|Complete Cytogenetic Response|Complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) is defined as a value of 0% Ph+ metaphases in bone marrow.|6 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833020|NCT01254188|Secondary|Duration of Major Molecular Response|Kaplan-Meier estimates of duration of first MMR among patients who achieved MMR (FAS) Duration of first MMR (months) = (Minimum date of (loss of first MMR , CML-related death, progression to AP/BC during study treatment, censoring) – date of first MMR + 1) / 30.4375|3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24 Months after MMR was detected|Full Analysis set, Number of events / censored 29/312.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833021|NCT01254188|Secondary|Time to Molecular Response at 24 Months|Estimated median time to first MMR by Kaplan-Meier method|24 months|Full analysis set||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833022|NCT01254188|Primary|The Percentage of Patients Achieving MMR by 12 Months|MMR is defined as BCR-ABL ratio (%) on IS <= 0.1% (corresponds to >=3 log reduction of BCR-ABL transcripts from standardized baseline value). Clopper-Pearson method|12 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833023|NCT01254214|Secondary|Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CESD)|The CES-D is a 20-item self-report scale to measure symptoms of depression in the past week with scores having a range of 0 to 60 and a score of 16 or higher indicating clinically relevant symptoms.|baseline, 8 weeks, 26 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833024|NCT01254214|Secondary|Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)|The PSQI is a 19-item self-reported sleep quality measure with scores that range from 0 to 21, where higher scores indicate worse sleep quality. Scores greater than 5 indicate poor sleep.|baseline, 8 weeks, 26 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833025|NCT01254214|Secondary|SF-12 PCS|Physical component summary score (PCS) of the SF-12 is a self-reported measure of physical health-related quality of life.Scores are reported as standardized T-scores, where an average (mean) score in the general population is 50 with a standard deviation of 10. Scores of 40 or less indicate impaired physical health quality or function.|baseline, 8 weeks, 26 weeks|||T scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
833026|NCT01254214|Secondary|Short Form -12 MCS|Mental component summary score (MCS) of the SF-12 is a self-reported measure of mental health-related quality of life. Scores are reported as standardized T-scores, where an average (mean) score in the general population is 50 with a standard deviation of 10. Scores of 40 or less indicate impaired mental health quality or function.|baseline, 8 and 26 weeks|||T-Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
833027|NCT01254214|Primary|State-Trait Anxiety Inventory|The STAI is a 20 item scale that measures current anxiety symptoms with scores that range from 20 to 80, with higher scores indicating greater levels of anxiety. The norm for working adults is a score of 34.|Baseline, 8 weeks, 26 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833028|NCT01261325|Secondary|Time to the Tenth Type I Seizure During the Treatment Period||12 week Treatment Period|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833029|NCT01261325|Secondary|Time to the Fifth Type I Seizure During the Treatment Period||12 week Treatment Period|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833030|NCT01261325|Secondary|Time to the First Type I Seizure During the Treatment Period||12 week Treatment Period|Analysis population consists of the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population, which is all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication and have at least 1 post-Baseline seizure diary.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833032|NCT01261325|Secondary|Seizure Freedom Rate (All Seizure Types) During the 12-week Treatment Period||12 week Treatment Period|Analysis population consists of the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population, which is all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication and have at least 1 post-Baseline seizure diary.||percentage of subjects|||Number
833033|NCT01261325|Secondary|Categorized Percent Reduction Form Baseline in Seizure Frequency for Partial Onset Seizure (Type I) Over the Treatment Period||Baseline to 12 week Treatment Period|Analysis population consists of the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population, which is all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication and have at least 1 post-Baseline seizure diary.||percentage of subjects|||Number
833034|NCT01261325|Secondary|Percent Change in Partial Onset Seizure (Type I) Frequency From the Baseline to the Treatment Period||Baseline to 12 week Treatment Period|Analysis population consists of the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population, which is all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication and have at least 1 post-Baseline seizure diary.||percentage of change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833035|NCT01261325|Primary|50% Responder Rate for Partial Onset Seizure (Type I) Frequency Over the Treatment Period Standardized to a 28-day Duration|Primary Endpoint: European Regulatory Authorities A responder is a participant who experienced a 50% or greater reduction in partial onset seizure (Type I) frequency over the Treatment Period standardized to a 28-day duration.|Baseline to 12 week Treatment Period|Analysis population consists of the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population, which is all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication and have at least 1 post-Baseline seizure diary.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
833036|NCT01261325|Primary|Percent Reduction Over Placebo for Partial Onset Seizure (Type I) Frequency Over the Treatment Period Standardized to a 28-day Duration|Primary endpoint: United States of America (FDA)|12 week Treatment Period|Analysis population consists of the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population, which is all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study medication and have at least 1 post-Baseline seizure diary.||Percentage of reduction|||Number
833037|NCT01261390|Secondary|Peak Tricuspid Regurgitation Velocity (4 Arm) - 12 Month|12 Month Peak Tricuspid Regurgitation Velocity measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
833038|NCT01261390|Secondary|E/Em Lateral Ratio (4 Arm) - 12 Month|Endpoint E/Em Lateral Ratio measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||mitral velocity ratio (absolute units)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833039|NCT01261390|Secondary|Pulmonary Vascular Resistance (4 Arm) - 12 Month|Endpoint Pulmonary Vascular Resistance measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||Wood units||Standard Deviation|Mean
833040|NCT01261390|Secondary|Tricuspid Annular Peak Systolic Myocardial Velocity (4 Arm) - 12 Month|Endpoint Tricuspid Annular Peak Systolic Myocardial Velocity measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
833041|NCT01261390|Secondary|Right Ventricular Fractional Area Change (4 Arm) - 12 Month|Endpoint Right Ventricular Fractional Area Change measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||percentage change in RV area||Standard Deviation|Mean
833042|NCT01261390|Secondary|Ejection Fraction (4 Arm) - 12 Month|Endpoint Ejection Fraction measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||percentage ejection fraction||Standard Deviation|Mean
833043|NCT01261390|Secondary|End-Diastolic Volume (4 Arm) - 12 Month|Endpoint End-Diastolic Volume measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
833044|NCT01261390|Secondary|Left Atrial Volume Index (4 Arm) - 12 Month|Endpoint Left Atrial Volume Index measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||m/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
833045|NCT01261390|Secondary|Left Ventricular Mass Index (4 Arm) - 12 Month|Endpoint Left Ventricular Mass Index measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||g/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
833143|NCT01265459|Secondary|Subject´s Global Assessment of the Status of the Study Knee (Change From Baseline)|"The subject will assess his/her global status how the study knee affects them by using a 11-point numerical rating scale, Subject global assessment scale, from very poor=0 to excellent=10."|26 weeks after treatment compared to baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833046|NCT01261390|Secondary|Peak Tricuspid Regurgitation Velocity (4 Arm) - Baseline|Baseline Peak Tricuspid Regurgitation Velocity measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
833047|NCT01261390|Secondary|E/Em Lateral Ratio (4 Arm) - Baseline|Baseline E/Em Lateral Ratio measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||mitral velocity ratio (absolute units)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833048|NCT01261390|Secondary|Pulmonary Vascular Resistance (4 Arm) - Baseline|Baseline Pulmonary Vascular Resistance measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||Wood units||Standard Deviation|Mean
833049|NCT01261390|Secondary|Tricuspid Annular Peak Systolic Myocardial Velocity (4 Arm) - Baseline|Baseline Tricuspid Annular Peak Systolic Myocardial Velocity measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
833050|NCT01261390|Secondary|Right Ventricular Fractional Area Change (4 Arm) - Baseline|Baseline RV Fractional Area Change measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||percentage change in RV area||Standard Deviation|Mean
833051|NCT01261390|Secondary|Ejection Fraction (4 Arm) - Baseline|Baseline Ejection Fraction measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||percent ejection fraction||Standard Deviation|Mean
833052|NCT01261390|Secondary|End-Diastolic Volume (4 Arm) - Baseline|Baseline End-Diastolic Volume measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
833053|NCT01261390|Secondary|Left Atrial (LA) Volume Index (4 Arm) - Baseline|Baseline Left Atrial Mass Index measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||m/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
833054|NCT01261390|Secondary|Left Ventricular (LV) Mass Index (4 Arm) - Baseline|Baseline Left Ventricular Mass Index measured via echocardiography.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Echocardiography measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||g/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
833055|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Augmentation Index at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arms)|Tonometry measurements of arterial stiffness were collected using a Sphygmacor. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Tonometry measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||percent of central pulse pressure||Standard Deviation|Mean
833056|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV) at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arms)|Tonometry measurements of arterial stiffness were collected using a Sphygmacor. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Tonometry measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||m/s||Standard Deviation|Mean
833057|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arm)|Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) was calculated from blood samples. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||AU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833058|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Urinary Albumin Creatinine Ratio at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arm)|Urinary Albumin Creatinine Ratio was calculated from urine samples. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||ug/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833059|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Urine Microalbumin at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arm)|Urine Microalbumin was calculated from urine samples. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||ug/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833060|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arm)|Glomerular Filtration Rate was calculated from blood samples collected through fasting phlebotomy. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
833061|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Interleukin 6 (IL-6) at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arm)|Interleukin 6 (IL-6) was calculated from blood samples collected through fasting phlebotomy. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||pg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833062|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Insulin at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arm)|Fasting Insulin was calculated from blood samples collected through fasting phlebotomy. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||uIU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833063|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c Percentage at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arm)|Hemoglobin A1c percentage was calculated from blood samples collected through fasting phlebotomy. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||percentage glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833064|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Glucose, Fibrinogen, Creatinine and BNP at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arm)|Glucose, Fibrinogen, Creatinine and BNP measurements were calculated from blood and urine samples collected through fasting phlebotomy and urine collection. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833065|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Lipid Panel at 6 and 12 Months (4 Arm)|Lipid panel measurements were calculated from blood samples collected through fasting phlebotomy. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Lipid measures were not able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833066|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in C-Reactive Protein at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arm)|C-Reactive Protein laboratory measurements were calculated from blood samples collected through fasting phlebotomy. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833067|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in the Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index (SAQLI) (4 Arm)|The Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index (SAQLI) is a scale intended to measure disease-specific quality of life. The SAQLI score ranges from 1 - 7, with higher scores indicating a higher quality of life. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833068|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ8) (4 Arm)|The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) is a scale intended to measure depression. The PHQ-8 score ranges from 0 24, with higher scores indicating increasing severity of depression. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833069|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) (4 Arm)|The Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) is a scale intended to measure daytime sleepiness. The ESS score ranges from 0 - 24, with higher scores indicating increasing possibility of specific sleep disorders. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833070|NCT01261390|Secondary|Change in 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) Measures (4 Arm)|The 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) is a patient-reported survey of patient health. The SF-36 scores range from 0-100, with lower scores indicating greater disability. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) with valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Not all measures were able to be collected from all participants. Not all participants completed 12 month visits (due to randomization date).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833071|NCT01261390|Primary|Change From Baseline in 24-hour Blood Pressure at Month 6 (4 Arms)|Blood pressure data was collected using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor. Outcome reported is mean change from baseline to 6-months.|6-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) who had valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and 6 Month follow-up. Number analyzed differs between rows due to individuals having insufficient readings during wake and/or sleep.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833072|NCT01261390|Primary|Change From Baseline in 24-hour Blood Pressure at Month 12 (4 Arms)|Blood pressure data was collected using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor. Outcome reported is mean change from baseline to 12-months.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) who had valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and 12 Month follow-up. Number analyzed differs between rows due to individuals having insufficient readings during wake and/or sleep.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833073|NCT01261390|Primary|Change From Baseline in 24-hour Blood Pressure at Month 6 by Pooled Arms|Blood pressure data was collected using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor. The 2 Active arms and 2 Control arms were pooled to create a 2-arm analysis. Outcome reported mean change from baseline to 6-months. Control arms and Active arms were pooled, respectively, for analysis.|6-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) who had valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and 6 Month follow-up. Number analyzed differs between rows due to individuals having insufficient readings during wake and/or sleep.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833074|NCT01261390|Primary|Change From Baseline in 24-hour Blood Pressure at Month 12 by Pooled Arms|Blood pressure data was collected using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor. The 2 Active arms and 2 Control arms were pooled to create a 2-arm analysis. Outcome reported is change from baseline to 12-months. Control arms and Active arms were pooled, respectively, for analysis.|12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) who had valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and 12 Month follow-up. Number analyzed differs between rows due to individuals having insufficient readings during wake and/or sleep.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833075|NCT01261390|Primary|Change From Baseline in 24-hour Blood Pressure at Months 6 and 12 (4 Arms)|Blood pressure data was collected using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor. Average of changes from baseline to 6 months and from baseline to 12 months.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) who had valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint. Number analyzed differs between rows due to individuals having insufficient readings during wake and/or sleep.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833076|NCT01261390|Primary|Difference in CPAP Adherence by Active Treatment Arm|Adherence to CPAP therapy was tracked remotely by modem transmission. Outcome reported is mean hours of PAP use per night at the 6-month timepoint. Comparison is between those with and without assignment to Motivational Enhancement as part of treatment randomization.|6-months|Intent to treat population for those assigned to Active PAP (all individuals who were randomized to one of the two PAP arms).||hours/night||Standard Deviation|Mean
833077|NCT01261390|Primary|Change From Baseline in 24-hour Blood Pressure at Months 6 and 12 by Pooled Arms|Blood pressure data was collected using a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor. The 2 Active arms and 2 Control arms were pooled to create a 2-arm analysis. Outcome reported is mean of change from baseline to 6-months and baseline to 12-months. Control arms and Active arms were pooled, respectively, for analysis.|Mean of 6- and 12-months|Intent to treat population (all individuals who were randomized to a treatment arm) who had valid measurements of ambulatory blood pressure for baseline and at least one follow-up timepoint.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833078|NCT01261507|Secondary|False Positive Decisions of Radiologists|This is a comparison of the radiologists working without and with the software. The false positive rate is the percentage of cases in which the radiologists identified a lesions/location suspected of being cancer at a location where cancer was not present. . A false positive represents a location selected on a chest image without cancer and, also, a mark on a chest image where cancer was present, but a different location, one without cancer, was marked.The radiologists could mark up to five locations on an image and had to provide a confidence rating for each. This analysis is of the single mark with the highest confidence level.|1 day|||percentage of marks not on cancers||Standard Error|Mean
833079|NCT01261507|Secondary|Sensitivity and Specificity|Sensitivity and specificity will be measured. If the radiologists using the new software have higher sensitivity, statistically significant at the p=< 0.05, the use of the new software will be considered to have resulted in improvement. A decrease in specificity is expected.|1 day|||Percentage of cases||Standard Error|Mean
833080|NCT01261507|Primary|Localized Receiver Operating Characteristic (LROC) Comparison|"The area under the LROC curve will be compared for the chest radiograph interpretations done without the new software and those done with the new software. Improvement will be demonstrated if the improvement with the new software is statistically significant at the p=<0.05. There were 422 cases in the total study. 20 of these were inserted as noise cases, not to be analyzed. Thus there were 402 cases to be analyzed. There were 120 cases with nodules and 282 without a nodule. LROC is a method for measuring the success or failure of a method where there is a tradeoff between the detection of lung nodules that are there (true positives) and the detection that the radiologist considers to be a nodule where no nodule is present (false positive). It yields a single number that done not have a unit of measurement."|1 day|All participants were included for calculation of A-LROC and Sensitivity-Specificity. All radiographs were interpreted both without and with software assistance||unitless|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
834042|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 20).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 20 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 20.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833081|NCT01261559|Primary|Relative Skin Entrance Radiation Dose in % During Computed Tomography (CT)|Relative skin entrance dose at the breast (group mean of patient's average skin entrance dose at TLDs 2-4) divided by skin entrance dose at the inframammary TLD (TLD 1) in %. For each patient, doses at TLDs 2-4 were averaged, and then the group mean of this was divided by the group mean at the inframammary TLD, then multiplied by 100 to get % dose. A relative dose of 20% means that the skin entrance dose at the breast was 20% of the skin entrance dose at the inframammary fold.|from time potential subject approached about possible enrollment to time device and TLDs were removed, on average 1 hour|||percentage of dose||Standard Deviation|Mean
833082|NCT01261559|Secondary|CT Image Noise and Image Quality|CT images acquired will be reviewed for the presence of artifacts and interrogated for image noise|two months||||||
833083|NCT01261559|Primary|Skin Entrance Radiation Dose During Computed Tomography (CT)|Skin entrance radiation doses will be measured with Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) affixed to the subject's chest and breast during CT of the abdomen. TLD #1 is at the inframammary fold, serving as internal control for each subject. Three additional TLDs (#2-4) are affixed to the subject's breast at 3 pre-ascribed locations. The same is done for the right and left breasts (8 TLDs total). TLDs will then be submitted to Landaeur for measurement.|from time potential subject approached about possible enrollment to time device and TLDs were removed, on average 1 hour|||mrad||Standard Deviation|Mean
833084|NCT01264380|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time, in months, from the date of the first study drug to the date of death, regardless of the cause of death.|From Baseline then Day 1 of Cycle 3 and 5 (21-day cycle) at Period C thereafter every 2 cycles until Cycle 12 followed by every 4 cycles from Cycle 13 until death (Up to Week 124)|Data for OS was not collected as there was a change in planned analysis, not to collect the data.|||||
833085|NCT01264380|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Best Objective Response (BOR) as Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|BOR was defined as the best objective response assessed by investigator during the treatment period according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. BOR was the best response recorded from the start of the study treatment until the end of treatment taking into account any requirement for confirmation. It is defined as the number of participants whose best objective response was complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) divided by the total number of efficacy evaluable participants. CR: disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. All lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) were non-pathological in size (less than [<] 10 millimeter [mm] short axis). PR: at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|From Baseline then Day 1 of Cycle 3 and 5 (21-day cycle) at Period C thereafter every 2 cycles until Cycle 12 followed by every 4 cycles from Cycle 13 until disease progression or death (Up to Week 124)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included participants with measurable disease who received at least 1 dose of vemurafenib. Here “number of participants analyzed”=participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833086|NCT01264380|Primary|Apparent First-order Terminal Elimination Rate Constant (Kel) in the Fasted and Fed States|Apparent first-order terminal elimination rate constant (kel), was calculated as the negative slope of the linear regression of the terminal phase in plasma vemurafenib concentration-time profile using specific appropriate time points. PK analyses was performed after the completion of Period A and Period B of this study for all participants.|Period A: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 1; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd and Period B: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 11; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd|"PK analysis population. Here number of participants analyzed=participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||1/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
833087|NCT01264380|Primary|Terminal Elimination Half-Life (t1/2) in the Fasted and Fed States|T1/2 is the time required for the concentration of the drug to reach half of its original value. PK analyses was performed after the completion of Period A and Period B of this study for all participants.|Period A: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 1; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd and Period B: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 11; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd|PK analysis population. Here “number of participants analyzed”=participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
833088|NCT01264380|Primary|Time to Reach Maximal Plasma Concentration (Tmax) in the Fasted and Fed States|PK analyses was performed after the completion of Period A and Period B of this study for all participants.|Period A: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 1; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd and Period B: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 11; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd|PK analysis population.||hour||Full Range|Median
833089|NCT01264380|Primary|Minimum Observed (Trough) Plasma Concentration (Cmin) in the Fasted and Fed States|Single dose Pre-dose concentration is referred as Cmin here. PK analyses was performed after the completion of Period A and Period B of this study for all participants.|Pre-dose on Periods A and B|PK analysis population.||µg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833090|NCT01264380|Primary|Maximal Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) in the Fasted and Fed States|PK analyses was performed after the completion of Period A and Period B of this study for all participants.|Period A: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 1; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd and Period B: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 11; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd|PK analysis population.||µg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833091|NCT01264380|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to the Time of the Sample With Last Measurable Concentration (AUC[0-last]) in the Fasted and Fed States|PK analyses was performed after the completion of Period A and Period B of this study for all participants.|Period A: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 1; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd and Period B: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 11; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd|PK analysis population. Here “number of participants analyzed”=participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||µg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833159|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Fasting Serum Glucose||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833092|NCT01264380|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC [0-inf]) in the Fasted and Fed States|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analyses was performed after the completion of Period A and Period B of this study for all participants.|Period A: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 hours (h) post-dose (pd) on Day 1; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd and Period B: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16 h pd on Day 11; 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, and 240 h pd|PK analysis population included participants who received both single doses of vemurafenib in Periods A and B without protocol violation and provided adequate PK assessments to calculate important PK parameters. Here “number of participants analyzed”=participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||micrograms*hour per milliliter (µg*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833093|NCT01264614|Primary|Neurophysiological Function Pre- & Post- Intervention|Resting EEG and ERP recordings before (T1) and after (T2) strengthening exercise intervention|Baseline and 3 months||||||
833094|NCT01264614|Primary|Figure Copy & Delayed Test Performance From Pre- to Post-intervention|Average raw cognitive scores before (T1) and after (T2) strengthening exercise intervention. Higher scores represent better performance (Figure Copy & Delayed possible score range is 0-36 points).|Baseline and 3 months|Two of 9 normative participants, had to be dropped from analyses due to limited participation in the exercise program (less than once per week on average; health problems and snowy weather were the main limiting factors) and one dementia exerciser was dropped because he did not complete any of the outcome measures.||Points||Standard Deviation|Mean
833095|NCT01264614|Primary|Fuld Test Performance From Pre- to Post-intervention|Average raw cognitive scores before (T1) and after (T2) strengthening exercise intervention. Higher scores represent better performance (Fuld Semantic Recall possible score range is 0-20 points; Fuld Immediate and Delayed Recall possible score range is 0-10).|Baseline and 3 months|Two of 9 normative participants, had to be dropped from analyses due to limited participation in the exercise program (less than once per week on average; health problems and snowy weather were the main limiting factors) and one dementia exerciser was dropped because he did not complete any of the outcome measures.||Points||Standard Deviation|Mean
833096|NCT01264614|Primary|Color Trails Test Performance From Pre- to Post-intervention|Average raw cognitive scores before (T1) and after (T2) strengthening exercise intervention. Higher scores represent better performance (Color Trails possible score range is 0-300 seconds).|Baseline and 3 months|Two of 9 normative participants, had to be dropped from analyses due to limited participation in the exercise program (less than once per week on average; health problems and snowy weather were the main limiting factors) and one dementia exerciser was dropped because he did not complete any of the outcome measures.||Time to complete (seconds)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833097|NCT01264614|Primary|Digits Backwards Test Performance From Pre- to Post-intervention|Average raw cognitive scores before (T1) and after (T2) strengthening exercise intervention. Higher scores represent better performance (Digits backwards possible score range is 0-14 points).|Baseline and 3 months|Two of 9 normative participants, had to be dropped from analyses due to limited participation in the exercise program (less than once per week on average; health problems and snowy weather were the main limiting factors) and one dementia exerciser was dropped because he did not complete any of the outcome measures.||Points||Standard Deviation|Mean
833098|NCT01264614|Primary|Stroop Test Performance From Pre- to Post-intervention|Average raw cognitive scores before (T1) and after (T2) strengthening exercise intervention. Lower scores on Stroop C (possible range 0-240 sec) represents better performance).|Baseline and 3 months|Two of 9 normative participants, had to be dropped from analyses due to limited participation in the exercise program (less than once per week on average; health problems and snowy weather were the main limiting factors) and one dementia exerciser was dropped because he did not complete any of the outcome measures.||Time to complete (seconds)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833099|NCT01264770|Secondary|SF-36 - Comparison of the Change in MCS From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Adalimumab at Week 24|SF-36: 36-item Short Form Health Survey, a measure of health-related QoL. Scores for 8 sub-domains (Physical Functioning, Role-Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Function, Role-Emotional & Mental Health) are derived & normalised to a scale of 0-100. Physical & Mental Component Scores (PCS & MCS) are derived by multiplying each of these 8 scores by a constant, summing them & standardising against a population with mean of 50, standard deviation of 10. Higher scores represent a better QoL. Mean changes from baseline score are presented at each visit as increases from baseline (defined as post-baseline minus baseline); larger changes indicate a better clinical condition. Non-responder imputation applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, LS = least squares, PO = orally, QD = once a day, QoL = quality of life, SC = subcutaneous.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with adalimumab (not placebo) at Week 24.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833100|NCT01264770|Secondary|SF-36 - Comparison of the Change in PCS From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Adalimumab at Week 24|SF-36: 36-item Short Form Health Survey, a measure of health-related QoL. Scores for 8 sub-domains (Physical Functioning, Role-Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Function, Role-Emotional & Mental Health) are derived & normalised to a scale of 0-100. Physical & Mental Component Scores (PCS & MCS) are derived by multiplying each of these 8 scores by a constant, summing them & standardising against a population with mean of 50, standard deviation of 10. Higher scores represent a better QoL. Mean changes from baseline score are presented at each visit as increases from baseline (defined as post-baseline minus baseline); larger changes indicate a better clinical condition. Non-responder imputation applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, LS = least squares, PO = orally, QD = once a day, QoL = quality of life, SC = subcutaneous.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with adalimumab (not placebo) at Week 24.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834043|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 16).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 16 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 16.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833101|NCT01264770|Secondary|HAQ-DI - Comparison of the Change From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Adalimumab at Week 24|HAQ-DI: Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index, a measure of physical function. The HAQ-DI score is calculated by summing the category scores from 8 sub-categories (ie, scores for patient ability in dressing and grooming, rising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and common daily activities) and dividing by the number of categories completed. The HAQ-DI score takes values between 0 and 3, with a higher score indicating greater disability. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, LS = least squares, n/a = not applicable, PO = orally, qd = once a day, SC = subcutaneous.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with adalimumab (not placebo) at Week 24.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833102|NCT01264770|Secondary|HAQ-DI - Comparison of the Change From Baseline Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 6|HAQ-DI: Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index, a measure of physical function. The HAQ-DI score is calculated by summing the category scores from 8 sub-categories (ie, scores for patient ability in dressing and grooming, rising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and common daily activities) and dividing by the number of categories completed. The HAQ-DI score takes values between 0 and 3, with a higher score indicating greater disability. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, LS = least squares, n/a = not applicable, PO = orally, qd = once a day, SC = subcutaneous.|Baseline and 6 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with placebo (not adalimumab) at Week 6.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833103|NCT01264770|Secondary|ACRn - Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Adalimumab at Week 24|ACRn: American College of Rheumatology Index of RA improvement, based on smallest percentage improvement in the count of swollen joints (out of 28 joints), count of tender joints (out of 28 joints) or in blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) or the physician and patient's own asessment of disease activity, pain and physical function. Scores are reported as a percentage improvement on a scale of -100 to +100, with larger values representing a better clinical outcome. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, n/a = not applicable, PO = orally, qd = once a day, SC = subcutaneous. Mean refers to change at Week 24. Treatment difference: difference between fostamatinib and adalimumab groups.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle.In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with adalimumab (not placebo) at Week 24.||Percentage improvement from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
833104|NCT01264770|Secondary|ACRn - Comparison Between Fostamatinib and Placebo at Week 6|ACRn: American College of Rheumatology Index of RA improvement, based on smallest percentage improvement in the count of swollen joints (out of 28 joints), count of tender joints (out of 28 joints) or in blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) or the physician and patient's own asessment of disease activity, pain and physical function. Scores are reported as a percentage improvement on a scale of -100 to +100, with larger values representing a better clinical outcome. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. BID = twice daily, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, n/a = not applicable, PO = orally, qd = once a day, SC = subcutaneous. Mean refers to change at Week 6. Treatment difference: difference between fostamatinib and placebo groups.|Baseline and 6 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with placebo (not adalimumab) at Week 6.||Percentage improvement from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
833105|NCT01264770|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR70 up to Week 24|ACR70: American College of Rheumatology 70% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, n/a = not applicable, PO = orally, qd = once a day, SC = subcutaneous.|6 and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with placebo (not adalimumab) at Week 6 and with adalimumab (not placebo) at Week 24.||Percentage of responders|||Number
833106|NCT01264770|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR50 up to Week 24|ACR50: American College of Rheumatology 50% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, n/a = not applicable, PO = orally, qd = once a day, SC = subcutaneous.|6 and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with placebo (not adalimumab) at Week 6 and with adalimumab (not placebo) at Week 24.||Percentage of responders|||Number
833160|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in International Normalised Ratio||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
833107|NCT01264770|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Achieving ACR20 up to Week 24|ACR20: American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria, based on count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (such as CRP) and the physician and patient's own assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, n/a = not applicable, PO = orally, qd = once a day, SC = subcutaneous.|6 and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with placebo (not adalimumab) at Week 6 and with adalimumab (not placebo) at Week 24.||Percentage of responders|||Number
833108|NCT01264770|Secondary|DAS28 EULAR Response at Week 24|Change in DAS28 was derived for each post baseline scheduled assessment and categorised using the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. bid = twice daily, DAS28 = Disease Activity Score based on a 28-joint count, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR = odds ratio, PO = orally, qd = once a day, SC = subcutaneous.|24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with adalimumab (not placebo) at Week 24.||Percentage of responders|||Number
833109|NCT01264770|Secondary|DAS28 EULAR Response at Week 6|Change in DAS28 was derived for each post baseline scheduled assessment and categorised using the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. bid = twice daily, DAS28 = Disease Activity Score based on a 28-joint count, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, OR = odds ratio, PO = orally, qd = once a day, SC = subcutaneous.|6 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with placebo (not adalimumab) at Week 6.||Percentage of responders|||Number
833110|NCT01264770|Primary|DAS28-CRP Score - Change From Baseline to Week 24 Compared to Adalimumab|DAS28-CRP: Disease Activity Score based on a count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (CRP) and the patient's own assessment. Scores can take any positive value with a lower value indicating a better clinical condition. Mean changes from baseline in DAS28-CRP score are shown at each visit and are presented as decreases from baseline (defined as baseline minus post-baseline) with larger changes indicative of a better clinical condition. Non-responder imputation has been applied by carrying the baseline observation forward. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, LS = least squares, n/a = not applicable, PO = orally, QD = once a day, SC = subcutaneous.|Baseline and 24 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with adalimumab (not placebo) at Week 24.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833111|NCT01264770|Primary|DAS28-CRP Score - Change From Baseline to Week 6 Compared to Placebo|DAS28-CRP: Disease Activity Score based on a count of swollen and tender joints (out of 28 joints), blood test measures of inflammation (CRP) and the patient's own assessment. Scores can take any positive value with a lower value indicating a better clinical condition. Mean changes from baseline in DAS28-CRP score are shown at each visit and are presented as decreases from baseline (defined as baseline minus post-baseline) with larger changes indicative of a better clinical condition. ANCOVA = analysis of covariance, BID = twice daily, CRP = C-reactive protein, DMARD = disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, IR = inadequate response, LS = least squares, n/a = not applicable, PO = orally, QD = once a day, SC = subcutaneous.|Baseline and 6 weeks|The full analysis set includes those patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Patients were analysed by randomised treatment in accordance with the intention to treat principle. In line with the study objectives, fostamatinib was compared with placebo (not adalimumab) at Week 6.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833112|NCT01264835|Primary|Procedure Duration (Surgery Time)|Procedure duration was defined as the length of time in minutes from first insertion of the slotted anoscope to final removal of the slotted anoscope.|Time of surgery|No analyses are being reported for this outcome measure as this trial was terminated early. The procedure was only performed with the slotted anoscope in 1 subject. No assessment or analysis of primary or secondary objectives was performed.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
833113|NCT01264887|Primary|Time Dependence of Adverse Events|The onset and duration of TEAEs was not evaluated for this trial.|Day 1; 144 weeks||||||
833114|NCT01264887|Secondary|Tapentadol Prolonged Release Exposure|The number of days that participants took tapentadol prolonged release. The extent of exposure was categorized into 2 periods, less than 90 days and more than 90 days (up to 144 weeks).|Day 1; up to 144 weeks|Safety Set.||participants|||Number
833115|NCT01264887|Other Pre-specified|Average Daily Total Tapentadol Prolonged Release Dose|The Total Daily Dose (TDD) on any given day is the sum of the morning and evening intake amounts. The average TDD is an individuals average over the trial period.|Day 1; up to 144 weeks|Safety Set.||mg per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
833116|NCT01264887|Other Pre-specified|Average Pain Intensity (Over a Twelve-week Period)|"The participant scored their pain intensity on an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) where a score of 0 indicated no pain and a score of 10 indicated pain as bad as you can imagine.
Average pain intensity score is the average of pain experienced for previous 24 hours as rated on an 11-point NRS at each visit. Calculations are based on 3 consecutive planned (at 4-weekly intervals) visits.
All available data of a participant was used; if a participant dropped-out or had incomplete data during a 12-week period no imputations were performed for the missing values."|Day 1; up to Week 144|Safety Set.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833117|NCT01264887|Primary|Countermeasures Taken Due to Treatment Emergent Adverse Events|Participant-based analysis of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) regarding countermeasure to the study drug (tapentadol). The TEAEs were reported by the participants or were captured by the investigator. The countermeasure taken by the investigator were reported.|Day 1; up to 144 weeks|Safety Set.||participants|||Number
833118|NCT01264887|Primary|Relatedness Assessment of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events|Participant-based analysis of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) regarding the relationship to the study drug (tapentadol). The TEAEs were reported by the participants or were captured by the investigator. The relationship was rated by the investigator. The categorization of relatedness into one of the two categories was based on the following: Related included “possible”, “probable/likely”, and “certain”; whilst unrelated treatment emergent adverse events include those rated by the investigator as “unlikely”, “conditional/unclassified”, “un-assessable/unclassifiable”, and “not related”.|Day 1; up to 144 weeks|Safety Set.||participants|||Number
833119|NCT01264887|Secondary|Assess Consumption of Tapentadol During Long Term Use|Summary of the modal total daily dose during the treatment period. The modal dose was based on assessment of the consecutive morning and evening intake amounts on each day and evaluation of the total daily dose.|Day 1; up to 144 weeks|"The modal dose is based on assessment of the consecutive morning and evening intake amounts on each day and evaluation of the total daily dose.
No participant received more than 500 mg per day."||participants|||Number
833120|NCT01264887|Primary|Severity of Adverse Events|"The severity of treatment emergent adverse events was any untoward medical occurrence in a patient administered tapentadol. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of the (investigational) medicinal product whether or not related to the use of tapentadol.
The clinical “intensity” of adverse event were classified as:
Mild: signs and symptoms which can be easily tolerated. Symptoms could be ignored and disappeared when the participant is distracted.
Moderate: symptoms caused discomfort but were tolerable, they could not be ignored and affect concentration.
Severe: symptoms affected the usual daily activity."|Day 1; up to 144 weeks|Safety Set.||participants|||Number
833121|NCT01264939|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events|The percentage of participants with serious adverse events and other adverse events is summarized by MedDRA preferred terms and organ classes in the Reported Adverse Events section below.|Baseline to the end of study (up to 40 weeks)|Safety population: All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833122|NCT01264939|Secondary|Percentage of Complete Responders (UAS7 = 0) at Week 12|A complete responder was defined as a participant with a UAS7 score = 0 at Week 12. The UAS7 is the sum of the daily urticarial activity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 42. The daily urticarial activity score is the average of the morning and evening urticarial activity scores and ranges from 0 to 6. The urticarial activity score is the sum of ratings on a scale of 0 to 3 (0=none to 3=intense/severe) for (1) the number of wheals (hives) and (2) itch intensity over the previous 12 hours, ranges from 0 to 6, and is measured twice daily (morning and evening). The Baseline score is the sum of the daily urticarial activity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher urticarial activity score indicates more urticaria activity.|Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833123|NCT01264939|Secondary|Percentage of Angioedema-free Days From Week 4 to Week 12|The percentage of angioedema-free days from Weeks 4 to 12 was defined as the number of days for which a patient responded “No” to the angioedema question in the daily diary divided by the total number of days with a non-missing diary entry, starting at the Week 4 visit and ending the day prior to the Week 12 visit.|Week 4 to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Patients who withdrew before the Week 4 visit or who had missing responses for more than 40% of the daily diary entries between the Week 4 visit and the Week 12 visit were not included in the analysis.||Percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
833124|NCT01264939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Overall Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score at Week 12|The DLQI is a 10-item dermatology-specific health-related quality of life measure. Patients rated their dermatology symptoms as well as the impact of their skin condition on various aspects of their lives on a scale of 0 (Not at all) to 3 (Very much). The overall DLQI is the sum of the responses to the 10 items and ranges from 0 to 30. A lower score indicates a better quality of life. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who had a DLQI score at Week 12.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833125|NCT01264939|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Weekly Size of the Largest Hive Score|The weekly size of the largest hive score is the sum of the daily size of the largest hive scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The daily size of the largest hive score is assessed twice daily (morning and evening) on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (> 2.5 cm). The daily size of the largest hive score is the average of the morning and evening scores. The Baseline weekly size of the largest hive score is calculated over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher score indicates larger hives. A negative change score indicates a reduction in hive size.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833126|NCT01264939|Secondary|Percentage of Weekly Itch Severity Score MID Responders at Week 12|The percentage of participants with an itch severity score at 12 Weeks at least 5 points lower than at Baseline. The weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The daily itch severity score is the average of the morning and evening scores on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe). The Baseline weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher itch severity score indicates more severe itching.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833127|NCT01264939|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a UAS7 Score ≤ 6 at Week 12|The UAS7 is the sum of the daily urticarial activity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 42. The daily urticarial activity score is the average of the morning and evening urticarial activity scores and ranges from 0 to 6. The urticarial activity score is the sum of ratings on a scale of 0 to 3 (0=none to 3=intense/severe) for (1) the number of wheals (hives) and (2) itch intensity over the previous 12 hours, ranges from 0 to 6, and is measured twice daily (morning and evening). The Baseline score is the sum of the daily urticarial activity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher urticarial activity score indicates more urticaria activity.|Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833128|NCT01264939|Secondary|Time to Minimally Important Difference (MID) Response in the Weekly Itch Severity Score by Week 12|The time to the MID response is the number of weeks from the start of treatment (Baseline) until the time point at which the first MID response occurs. The MID response is defined as a reduction ≥ 5 points from Baseline in the weekly itch severity score. The weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The daily itch severity score is the average of the morning and evening scores on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe). The Baseline weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher itch severity score indicates more severe itching.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Only patients with a MID response were included in the analysis.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833129|NCT01264939|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Weekly Number of Hives Score|The weekly hives score is the sum of the daily hives scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The number of hives is measured twice daily (morning and evening) on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (> 12 hives per 12 hours). The daily hives score is the average of the morning and evening scores. The Baseline score is the sum of the daily hives scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher score indicates more hives. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833130|NCT01264939|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Urticaria Activity Score Over 7 Days (UAS7)|The UAS7 is the sum of the daily urticarial activity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 42. The daily urticarial activity score is the average of the morning and evening urticarial activity scores and ranges from 0 to 6. The urticarial activity score is the sum of ratings on a scale of 0 to 3 (0=none to 3=intense/severe) for (1) the number of wheals (hives) and (2) itch intensity over the previous 12 hours, ranges from 0 to 6, and is measured twice daily (morning and evening). The Baseline score is the sum of the daily urticarial activity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher urticarial activity score indicates more urticaria activity. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833131|NCT01264939|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Weekly Itch Severity Score|The weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The daily itch severity score is the average of the morning and evening scores on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe). The Baseline weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher itch severity score indicates more severe itching. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833132|NCT01264952|Primary|Evaluation of Toxicity Related to Electrochemotherapy (Toxicity, Symptoms)||After operation on day 7|||Toxicity, symptoms|||Number
833133|NCT01264952|Secondary|Treatment Evaluation of Tumor Response - Measurements of Tumor Lesions by Contrast Enhanced Ultrasonography (US-Doppler), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Computed Tomography (CT), Histology||After operation or 1st day after operation, 7th day, 30th day, monthly|||complete response (CR)|Participants||Number
833134|NCT01264952|Secondary|Clinical Evaluation of the Patient (Pain Scale, Adverse Events, Concomitant Treatment)||After operation on tha days 2, 7, 30, monthly|||patients with non-severe adverse events|||Number
833135|NCT01265056|Secondary|To Determine the Impact of Psychological Functioning in Patients Following Admission for Their Burn Injury. This Will be Determined by Review of Two Forms (the Brief Symptom Inventory and the Sickness Impact Profile).||From time of enrollment to 2 weeks after being discharge||||||
833136|NCT01265056|Secondary|To Determine the Trends in Several Associated Clinical Effects of Opioid Administration Between the Treatment and the Control Groups. These Effects Include: 1. Fluid Resusitation 2. Insulin Resistance 3. Hospital Associated Infections||From time of enrollment to 2 weeks after being discharge||||||
833137|NCT01265056|Primary|To Determine the Trends in Opioid Consumption Between the Treatment and the Control Groups.||From time of enrollment to 2 weeks after being discharged|This was an intention to treate analysis. We measured the oral morphine equivalents both groups were administered.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833138|NCT01265394|Secondary|Measurement of Amyloid Content in Different Parts of the Brain|"Is the computerized measurement of amyloid content in different parts of the brain.
The Standard Uptake Value Ratio (SUVR) is defined as an average of frontal, anterior cingulate, pariteal, lateral-temporal and posterior cingulate / precuneous uptake following administration of Flutemetamol F18 Injection.
The Standard Uptake Value Ratio is calculated for two regions of the brain, the Cerebullum and the Pons regions.
The Standard Uptake Value Ratio is calculated for two regions of the brain, the Cerebullum and the Pons regions. Both regions of the brain will provide the SUVR measurements."|PET scans performed on patients 90 minutes post Flutemetmol Administration|The Standard Uptake Value Ratio is calculated for two regions of the brain, the Cerebullum and the Pons regions. Both regions of the brain will provide the SUVR measurements.||Standard Uptake Value Ratio ( SUVR)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833139|NCT01265394|Primary|Number of Brain Scans in Healthy Young Adults Subjects Which do Not Show Amyloid|"The visual assessment of Flutemetamol PET image was performed by independent readers trained in the evaluation of PET brain amyloid imaging.
The measure would consisted of the number of brain scans with amyloid (abnormal reading) or without amyloid (normal reading)."|PET scans performed on patients 90 minutes post Flutemetmol Administration|Healthy young adult subjects aged 18 to 40 are presumed to be amyloid negative||Brain Scans Read|||Number
833140|NCT01265420|Primary|Number Patients Obtaining Clinical Improvement (>50% Reduction in Contracture)||30 days after last injection|||participants|||Number
833141|NCT01265446|Secondary|Change From Baseline Sore Throat Pain Intensity up to 240 mn Post-dose|100 milimeter (mm) visual acuity score (left=no pain=0mm, right=worst possible pain=100mm). It measures the highest pain level felt by the patient.|Baseline and 240 mn post-dose|intent to treat||mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833142|NCT01265446|Primary|Change From Baseline Sore Throat Pain Intensity|100 milimeter (mm) visual acuity score (left=no pain=0mm, right=worst possible pain=100mm)|Baseline and 2 hours post-dose|Intent to treat||mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833144|NCT01265459|Secondary|WOMAC Physical Function Score (Change From Baseline)|"The study aims to compare the physical function for different volumes of study product over 26 weeks using WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) physical function score that consists of 17 questions.
It is a 5-graded Likert scale: None, Mild, Moderate, Severe or Extreme relating to performing daily physical activities the subject has experienced in the last 48 hours. The score of each dimension is calculated by simply adding the score (from 0 to 4) for each question."|26 weeks after treatment compared to baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833145|NCT01265459|Secondary|WOMAC Stiffness Score (Change From Baseline)|"The study aims to compare the change of stiffness for different volumes of study product over 26 weeks using WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) stiffness score that consists of 2 questions.
It is a 5-graded Likert scale: None, Mild, Moderate, Severe or Extreme relating to how much stiffness the subject has experienced in the last 48 hours. The score of each dimension is calculated by simply adding the score (from 0 to 4) for each question."|26 weeks after treatment compared to baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833146|NCT01265459|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability From Baseline to 26 Weeks After Treatment.|"Safety and tolerability will be assessed at each clinic visit (Baseline, 2, 6, 12, 18 and 26 weeks). Standard questions was used, Since your last clinical visit have you had any health problems?”."|From baseline to 26 weeks after treatment|||participants|||Number
833147|NCT01265459|Primary|Change of Pain Over 26 Weeks (Change From Baseline)|"The study aims to compare the change of pain for different volumes of study product over 26 weeks using WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) pain score that consists of 5 questions.
It is a 5-graded Likert scale: None, Mild, Moderate, Severe or Extreme relating to how much pain the subject has experienced during the last 48 hours. The score of each dimension is calculated by simply adding the score (from 0 to 4) for each question."|26 weeks after treatment compared to baseline|"The primary population for all efficacy evaluations was the ITT population (all subjects randomized and treated with study product).
No imputation of missing data was done. Analyses presented were based on observed cases."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833148|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in SF-36 Quality of Life Mental Component Summary|Short Form (36) Health Survey The SF-36 evaluates health-related quality of life in 8 domains consisting of two components: physical and mental. The score for each domain ranges from 0 to 100. Norm based scoring (based on the general US population) is used with a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10. Higher values represent a better outcome.|baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833149|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in SF-36 Quality of Life Physical Component Summary|Short Form (36) Health Survey The SF-36 evaluates health-related quality of life in 8 domains consisting of two components: physical and mental. The score for each domain ranges from 0 to 100. Norm based scoring (based on the general US population) is used with a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10. Higher values represent a better outcome.|baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833150|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833151|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833152|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Waist-to-hip Ratio||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
833153|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Waist Circumference||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
833154|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Body-mass Index||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||kg/m²||Standard Deviation|Mean
833155|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Weight||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833156|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Glycated Haemoglobin A1c||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mmol/mol||Standard Deviation|Mean
833157|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in HOMA-IR||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||glucose[mmol/L]× insulin[pmol/L] / 22.5||Standard Deviation|Mean
833158|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Insulin||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833161|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Prothrombin Time||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||s||Standard Deviation|Mean
833162|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Total Protein||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||gl/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833163|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Albumin||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||gl/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833164|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Uric Acid||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||μmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833165|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Creatinine||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||μmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833166|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Phosphate||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833167|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Calcium||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833168|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Bicarbonate||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833169|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Platelet Count||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||platelets *10^9 per L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833170|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in White Blood Cell Count||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||white blood cells *10^9 per L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833171|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Mean Corpuscular Volume||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||fL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833172|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Haematocrit||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||proportion of 1.0||Standard Deviation|Mean
833173|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Haemoglobin||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833174|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Triglycerides||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833175|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in LDL Cholesterol||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833176|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in HDL Cholesterol||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833177|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Total Cholesterol||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833178|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Total Bilirubin||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||μmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833179|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in γ-glutamyl Transpeptidase||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
834044|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 12 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833180|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Alkaline Phosphatase||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833181|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Asparate Aminotransferase||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833182|NCT01265498|Secondary|Change in Alanine Aminotransferase||baseline to 72 weeks|All patients who completed their final on-treatment study visit and the visit 24 weeks after stopping treatment (including those without a final biopsy due to early treatment termination) were included in the group comparisons of non-histological secondary outcomes.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833183|NCT01265498|Secondary|Portal Inflammation: Change in Score|Change in portal inflammation score. Portal inflammation was assessed on a scale of 0-3, with higher scores showing more severe portal inflammation.|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833184|NCT01265498|Secondary|Portal Inflammation: Patients With Improvement|Patients with improvement in portal inflammation score. Portal inflammation was assessed on a scale of 0–2, with higher scores showing more severe portal inflammation.|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||participants|||Number
833185|NCT01265498|Secondary|Lobular Inflammation: Change in Score|Change in lobular inflammation score. Lobular inflammation was assessed on a scale of 0-3, with higher scores showing more severe lobular inflammation.|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833186|NCT01265498|Secondary|Lobular Inflammation: Patients With Improvement|Patients with improvement in lobular inflammation score. Lobular inflammation was assessed on a scale of 0–3, with higher scores showing more severe lobular inflammation.|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||participants|||Number
833187|NCT01265498|Secondary|Steatosis: Change in Score|Change in steatosis score. Steatosis was assessed on a scale of 0-3, with higher scores showing more severe steatosis.|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833188|NCT01265498|Secondary|Steatosis: Patients With Improvement|Patients with improvement in steatosis score. Steatosis was assessed on a scale of 0–3, with higher scores showing more severe steatosis.|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||participants|||Number
833189|NCT01265498|Secondary|Hepatocellular Ballooning: Change in Score|Change in hepatocellular ballooning score. Hepatocellular ballooning was assessed on a scale of 0-2, with higher scores showing more severe ballooning.|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833190|NCT01265498|Secondary|Hepatocellular Ballooning: Patients With Improvement|Patients with improvement in hepatocellular ballooning score. Hepatocellular ballooning was assessed on a scale of 0–2, with higher scores showing more severe ballooning.|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||participants|||Number
833191|NCT01265498|Secondary|Total NAFLD Activity Score: Change in Score|NAFLD activity score was assessed on a scale of 0–8, with higher scores showing more severe disease (the components of this measure are steatosis [assessed on a scale of 0–3], lobular inflammation [assessed on a scale of 0–3], and hepatocellular ballooning [assessed on a scale of 0–2]).|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833192|NCT01265498|Secondary|Fibrosis: Change in Score|Change in fibrosis score. Fibrosis was assessed on a scale of 0–4, with higher scores showing more severe fibrosis.|baseline to 72 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833193|NCT01265498|Secondary|Fibrosis: Patient With Improvement|Patients with improvement in fibrosis score. Fibrosis was assessed on a scale of 0–4, with higher scores showing more severe fibrosis.|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||participants|||Number
833194|NCT01265498|Secondary|Resolution of NASH Diagnosis|Resolution of definite nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Resolution defined as either not NAFLD, or NAFLD but not non-alcoholic steatohepatitis on week 72 biopsy|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of patients with biopsy specimens at baseline and 72 weeks||participants|||Number
833195|NCT01265498|Primary|Hepatic Histological Improvement in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD) Activity Score (NAS)|"Centrally scored histological improvement in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) from baseline to the end of 72 weeks of treatment, where improvement is defined as:
No worsening in fibrosis; and
A decrease in NAFLD Activity Score (NAS) of at least 2 points"|baseline to 72 weeks|Number of randomly assigned patients with observed or expected week 72 visit before protocol modified on Jan 6, 2014, to eliminate week 72 biopsy. 11 patients in the placebo group and eight in the obeticholic acid group had missing histological data at week 72, and the results for these patients were imputed as a lack of improvement.||participants|||Number
833196|NCT01265511|Secondary|Undetectable HCV RNA||Week 24|Week 24 analysis does not include the 2 placebo subjects because they were discontinued for lack of efficacy before week 24.||participants|||Number
833197|NCT01265511|Secondary|Partial Early Virologic Response|Proportion of subjects with detectable HCV RNA that achieve a > or = 2 log reduction in HCV RNA from baseline to Week 12|Week 12|||participants|||Number
833198|NCT01265511|Secondary|Undetectable HCV RNA||Week 12|||participants|||Number
833199|NCT01265511|Primary|Undetectable HCV RNA||Week 4|||participants|||Number
833200|NCT01265524|Secondary|6MWT Distance at Week 8|Increase in the 6 minute walk test (6MWT) distance from baseline to Week 8. The test was performed according to the American Thoracic Society (ATS)Guidelines 2002.|Baseline and 8 weeks|The efficacy and the safety analyses were done using the ITT population with Week 8/EOS data for the patients who did not complete the 8-week treatment period excluded. The ITT population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||m||Standard Deviation|Mean
834045|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 8 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833201|NCT01265524|Secondary|Number of Patients Improving by at Least One NYHA Functional Class From Baseline to Week 8||Baseline and 8 weeks|The efficacy and the safety analyses were done using the ITT population with Week 8/EOS data for the patients who did not complete the 8-week treatment period excluded. The ITT population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
833202|NCT01265524|Secondary|Frequency of Marked or Disabling Exertional Dyspnea by Physician Assessment at Week 8|The frequency of marked or disabling exertional dyspnea was physician assessed based on physical exam at week 8.|8 weeks|||participants|||Number
833203|NCT01265524|Secondary|Frequency of Marked or Disabling Exertional Dyspnea by Physician Assessment at Week 4|The frequency of marked or disabling exertional dyspnea was physician assessed based on physical exam at week 4.|4 weeks|||participants|||Number
833204|NCT01265524|Secondary|Weight Loss at Week 2||Baseline and 2 weeks|The efficacy and the safety analyses were done using the ITT population with Week 8/EOS data for the patients who did not complete the 8-week treatment period excluded. The ITT population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833205|NCT01265524|Secondary|Weight Loss at Week 1||Baseline and 1 week|The efficacy and the safety analyses were done using the ITT population with Week 8/EOS data for the patients who did not complete the 8-week treatment period excluded. The ITT population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833206|NCT01265524|Primary|Change in Serum Potassium|Change in serum potassium from baseline to Week 8.|Baseline and 8 weeks|The efficacy and the safety analyses were done using the ITT population with Week 8/EOS data for the patients who did not complete the 8-week treatment period excluded. The ITT population included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
833207|NCT01265563|Secondary|Urinary Alpha-1 Microglobulin, Inflammatory Cytokines and C-C Chemokines|Urinary alpha-1 microglobulin, inflammatory cytokines and C-C chemokines were never measured and analysed.|Baseline and 3 months||||||
833208|NCT01265563|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin-A1c|Hemoglobin A1C was assessed at the end of the run in period and after 3 months of administration of study interventions. Here is delta HgA1C is reported between the two periods|Baseline and 3 months|||percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
833209|NCT01265563|Primary|Change From Baseline in Urinary Albumin Excretion|Urine albumin to creatinine ratio was assessed at the end of run in period and after 3 months administration of study intervention.|Baseline and 3 months|||mg/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
833210|NCT01265615|Secondary|Coronary Calcium Score|Bone mineral density assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) of the whole body, lumbar spine and hip was performed using Hologic scanners (QDR 1000W or QDR 2000). The total Agatston coronary calcium score (CCS) was measured as the sum of calcified plaque scores of all the coronary arteries. The amount of calcium present in the coronary arteries is scored according to the Agatson scale, as follows: 0 - no identifiable disease; 1 to 99 - mild disease; 100 to 399 - moderate disease; 400 or higher - severe disease.|on day 180|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833211|NCT01265615|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure|SBP measured by routine method|on day 180|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833212|NCT01265615|Secondary|VDR (Vitamin D Receptor) Expression in Kidney|VDR content was determined by using an ELISA developed in this laboratory. The protein concentration of the homogenates was determined by the method of Bradford (1976), using BSA as a standard.|on day 180|||fmol VDR/ mg protein||Standard Deviation|Mean
833213|NCT01265615|Secondary|VDR (Vitamin D Receptor) Expression in Myocardium|VDR content was determined by using an ELISA developed in this laboratory. The protein concentration of the homogenates was determined by the method of Bradford (1976), using BSA as a standard.|on day 180|||fmol VDR/ mg protein||Standard Deviation|Mean
833214|NCT01265615|Secondary|Number of Circulating SP (Side Population) Stem-Progenitor Cells|Renal cells and solid tissue were obtained from the normal portion of cortex obtained from surgically removed kidneys or by standart biopsy on day 180. Cytofluorimetric analysis and immunofluorescence were performed as described by Oliver J.A. (2004). Sorting and analysis of different cells was done on a FACS (fluorescent activated cell sorting) and by flow cytometry. Cells were analyzed with EPICS systems (Beckman Coulter). Quantification of mRNA expression was achieved using Assays-on-Demand gene expression kits and the ABI PRISM 7000 Sequence Detection System (Applied Biosystem).|on day 180|||per cent of SP cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
833215|NCT01265615|Secondary|Serum Creatinine|After an overnight fast, plasma concentrations of hemoglobin, creatinine, cholesterol, glucose, total calcium, and phosphate were measured using an autoanalyzer as described by Adorini L. (2005)|on day 180 after Tx|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833216|NCT01265615|Secondary|CAD (Chronic Allograft Dysfunction) Degree|"CAD degree measured by Banff score after routine renal biopsy (revised 2005/2007 criteria). We assessed antibody-mediated rejection, borderline changes, T-cell-mediated rejection, interstitial fibrosis and tubular atropthy, and other changes. Grades:
Grade I. Mild interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (<25% of cortical area) II. Moderate (26–50%) III. Severe (>50%) (may include non-specific vascular and glomerular sclerosis)"|on day 90|||Scores on a Banff scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833217|NCT01265615|Secondary|GFR (Glomerular Filtration Rate)|Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated using the abbreviated form of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) study equation: eGFR = exp (5.228 − 1.154 × ln (serum creatinine) − 0.203 × ln (age). Concerning of GFR with Tc99m DTPA renography was used for the complex analysis of renal function. Camera based GFR estimated from Tc99m DTPA renography was named Gates GFR.|on day 180|||ml/min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
833218|NCT01265615|Secondary|Heart Failure (HF)|"NYHA (New York Heart Association) functional class verified with veloergometry probe and by NYHA clinical classification NYHA Class Symptoms I No symptoms and no limitation in ordinary physical activity, e.g. shortness of breath when walking, climbing stairs etc.
II Mild symptoms and slight limitation during ordinary activity. III Marked limitation in activity due to symptoms, even during less-than-ordinary activity, e.g. walking short distances (20–100 m).
Comfortable only at rest. IV Severe limitations. Experiences symptoms even while at rest. Mostly bedbound patients."|on day 180 after Tx (transplantation)|A total of 120 patients (Russian and dutch caucasian, kidney recipients with vitamin D deficiency defined as 25(OH)D < 40 nmol/l) were assigned. Analysis was per protocol.||NYHA functional class of HF||Standard Deviation|Mean
833219|NCT01265615|Primary|CAD (Chronic Allograft Dysfunction) Degree|"Beyond 180 days, chronic allograft dysfunction (CAD) was characterized by mean Banff degree (revised 2005/2007 criteria) with the data of renal biopsy material. Renal tissue was recovered during routined biopsy. We assessed antibody-mediated rejection, borderline changes, T-cell-mediated rejection, interstitial fibrosis and tubular atropthy, and other changes. Grades:
Grade I. Mild interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (<25% of cortical area) II. Moderate (26–50%) III. Severe (>50%) (may include non-specific vascular and glomerular sclerosis)"|day 180 after Tx (transplantation)|||Scores on a Banff scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833220|NCT01265667|Secondary|Nature and Frequency of Adverse Events|Assessment of safety of CF101 in this patient population by gathering adverse event data based on history, vital signs, physical examination, and laboratory data|32 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
833221|NCT01265667|Secondary|Numberof Patients Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity (PASI) Score of 50 or 75|Achievement of PASI 50 or 75 indicates a 50% and 75% reduction respectively in the PASI score, which ranges from 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease)|16 weeks|Analysis performed of the ITT population||participants|||Number
833222|NCT01265667|Secondary|Number of Subjects Achieving PGA of 0 or 1|PGA is a physician's assessment of the severity of disease based on a 6-point scale (score of 0 = clear and 5 = very severe)|16 weeks|Analysis was performed on the ITT population||participants|||Number
833223|NCT01265667|Primary|Number of Subjects Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 at 12 Weeks|Achievement of PASI 75 indicates a 75% reduction in the PASI score, which ranges from 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease)|12 weeks|Analysis was performed on the Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
833224|NCT01265784|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics: Area Under the Concentration Time Curve From Time 0 to 12 Hours (AUC[0-12]) of TP-434||Prior to first infusion and 1, 3, 7, 12, 48, and 108 hours after start of first infusion|All randomized participants without significant protocol deviations who received at least 1 dose of TP-434 and had evaluable AUC(0-12) data.||nanogram*hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833225|NCT01265784|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics: Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of TP-434||Prior to first infusion and 1, 3, 7, 12, 48, and 108 hours after start of first infusion|All randomized participants without significant protocol deviations who received at least 1 dose of TP-434 and had evaluable Cmax data.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833226|NCT01265784|Secondary|Microbiologic Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the ME Population at the TOC Visit||TOC Visit (10-14 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, had a baseline pathogen identified, and had a microbiological response assessed.||participants|||Number
833227|NCT01265784|Secondary|Microbiologic Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the ME Population at the EOT Visit||EOT Visit (4-14 days after first dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, had a baseline pathogen identified, and had a microbiological response assessed.||participants|||Number
833228|NCT01265784|Secondary|Microbiologic Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the m-MITT Population at the TOC Visit||TOC Visit (10-14 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, and had a baseline pathogen identified. The minimal disease definition of cIAI included IAI that extended beyond the hollow viscus of origin into the peritoneal space and was associated with either abscess formation or peritonitis.||participants|||Number
833229|NCT01265784|Secondary|Microbiologic Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the m-MITT Population at the EOT Visit|Microbiological response was classified as favorable (eradication or presumed eradication), unfavorable (persistence, presumed persistence, superinfection, or new infection), or indeterminate (assessment not possible).|EOT Visit (4-14 days after first dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, and had a baseline pathogen identified. The minimal disease definition of cIAI included IAI that extended beyond the hollow viscus of origin into the peritoneal space and was associated with either abscess formation or peritonitis.||participants|||Number
833230|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population at the Follow-up Visit||Follow-up Visit (28-42 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, had a baseline pathogen identified, and had a microbiological response assessed.||participants|||Number
833231|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population at the EOT Visit||EOT Visit (4-14 days after first dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, had a baseline pathogen identified, and had a microbiological response assessed.||participants|||Number
833232|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population at the Follow-up Visit||Follow-up Visit (28-42 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, and for whom sufficient information was available to determine the participant’s outcome with no confounding factors present that interfered with the assessment of that outcome.||participants|||Number
833233|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population at the TOC Visit||TOC Visit (10-14 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, and for whom sufficient information was available to determine the participant’s outcome with no confounding factors present that interfered with the assessment of that outcome.||participants|||Number
833234|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population at the EOT Visit||EOT Visit (4-14 days after first dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, and for whom sufficient information was available to determine the participant’s outcome with no confounding factors present that interfered with the assessment of that outcome.||participants|||Number
834130|NCT01269918|Primary|Hemodynamics|Hemodynamics were defined as mean arterial pressure (MAP), measured in milimeters of mercury (mmHg). This outcome was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA approach. In the outcome measure data table, mean ± standard deviation MAP was reported as the aggregate mean across time points.|15, 30, 45, 60, and 90 minutes after extubation.|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833235|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Microbiologically Modified Intent-to-treat (m-MITT) Population at the Follow-up Visit||Follow-Up Visit (28-42 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, and had a baseline pathogen identified. The minimal disease definition of cIAI included IAI that extended beyond the hollow viscus of origin into the peritoneal space and was associated with either abscess formation or peritonitis.||participants|||Number
833236|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Microbiologically Modified Intent-to-treat (m-MITT) Population at the TOC Visit||TOC Visit (10-14 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, and had a baseline pathogen identified. The minimal disease definition of cIAI included IAI that extended beyond the hollow viscus of origin into the peritoneal space and was associated with either abscess formation or peritonitis.||participants|||Number
833237|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Microbiologically Modified Intent-to-treat (m-MITT) Population at the EOT Visit||EOT Visit (4-14 days after first dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, and had a baseline pathogen identified. The minimal disease definition of cIAI included IAI that extended beyond the hollow viscus of origin into the peritoneal space and was associated with either abscess formation or peritonitis.||participants|||Number
833238|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Clinically Modified Intent-to-treat (c-MITT) Population at the Follow-up Visit||Follow-up Visit (28-42 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and met the minimal disease definition of IAI. The minimal disease definition included all IAI, whether complicated or not. Identification of a baseline pathogen was not required for this population.||participants|||Number
833239|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Clinically Modified Intent-to-treat (c-MITT) Population at the TOC Visit||TOC Visit (10-14 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and met the minimal disease definition of IAI. The minimal disease definition included all IAI, whether complicated or not. Identification of a baseline pathogen was not required for this population.||participants|||Number
833240|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Clinically Modified Intent-to-treat (c-MITT) Population at the EOT Visit||EOT Visit (4-14 days after first dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and met the minimal disease definition of intra-abdominal infection (IAI). The minimal disease definition included all IAI, whether complicated or not. Identification of a baseline pathogen was not required for this population.||participants|||Number
833241|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Modified Intent-to-treat (MITT) Population at the Follow-up Visit||Follow-up Visit (28-42 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
833242|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Modified Intent-to-treat (MITT) Population at TOC Visit||TOC Visit (10-14 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
833243|NCT01265784|Secondary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Modified Intent-to-treat (MITT) Population at the End-of-Treatment (EOT) Visit||EOT Visit (4-14 days after first dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
833244|NCT01265784|Primary|Clinical Response to TP-434 and Ertapenem in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population at the Test-of-Cure Visit|Clinical response was classified as cure (complete resolution or significant improvement of signs and symptoms of the index infection), failure (death related to complicated intra-abdominal infection [cIAI], persisting or recurrent infection within the abdomen, postsurgical wound infection, or administration of effective concomitant antibacterial therapy), or indeterminate (Test-of-Cure [TOC] assessment was not available, death unrelated to cIAI, or some other reason).|TOC Visit (10-14 days after last dose of study drug)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, met the minimal disease definition of cIAI, had a baseline pathogen identified, and had a microbiological response assessed.||participants|||Number
833245|NCT01265797|Secondary|Epworth Sleepiness Scale Score|"Mean difference of Epworth Sleepiness Scale score between run-in month and open label month. The Epworth Sleepiness Scale is used to measure excessive daytime sleepiness. This is an 8 item questionnaire, recalling probability of falling asleep in recent times. The subjects are asked to rate probability of falling asleep in eight different situations. The score for each item ranges from 0 (would never doze) to 3 (high chance of dozing), with the overall score range of 0 to 24. Higher scores represent higher probability of falling asleep."|Score recorded at the end of run-in and open label month|||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833246|NCT01265797|Secondary|Epworth Sleepiness Scale Score|"Mean difference of Epworth Sleepiness Scale score between run-in month and blinded month. The Epworth Sleepiness Scale is used to measure excessive daytime sleepiness. This is an 8 item questionnaire, recalling probability of falling asleep in recent times. The subjects are asked to rate probability of falling asleep in eight different situations. The score for each item ranges from 0 (would never doze) to 3 (high chance of dozing), with the overall score range of 0 to 24. Higher scores represent higher probability of falling asleep."|recorded at the end of run-in month and blinded month|||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833247|NCT01265797|Secondary|Somatic Symptom Score (Patient Health Questionnaire-15)|"Mean difference in PHQ 15 score between run-in month and open label month. The PHQ-15 comprises 15 somatic symptoms experienced over the prior 4 weeks and their severity, each symptom scored from 0 (not bothered at all) to 2 (bothered a lot). The range for the overall score is between 0 and 30, with higher score representing more severe somatic symptoms."|28 day period in run-in month and open label month|||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833248|NCT01265797|Secondary|Somatic Symptom Severity (Patient Health Questionnaire 15)|"Mean difference in PHQ 15 score between run-in month and blinded month. The PHQ-15 comprises 15 somatic symptoms experienced over the prior 4 weeks and their severity, each symptom scored from 0 (not bothered at all) to 2 (bothered a lot). The range for the overall score is between 0 and 30, with higher score representing more severe somatic symptoms"|28 days recall; measured at end of run-in month and blinded month|||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833249|NCT01265797|Secondary|Generalized Anxiety Disorder Score (GAD 7)|Mean difference in GAD 7 score between run-in month and open label month. This is a screening tool and severity measure for generalized anxiety disorder addressing symptoms over the prior 2 weeks. It is a 7 item questionnaire with response scores for each item ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (every day). The range for the total score is 0 to 21, with higher scores representing greater symptoms of anxiety|14 day recall, recorded at the end of run-in and open label months|||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833250|NCT01265797|Secondary|Generalized Anxiety Disorder Score (GAD 7)|Mean difference in GAD 7 score between run-in month and blinded month. This is a screening tool and severity measure for generalized anxiety disorder addressing symptoms over the prior 2 weeks. It is a 7 item questionnaire with response scores for each item ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (every day). The range for the total score is 0 to 21, with higher scores representing greater symptoms of anxiety|14 days recall; measured at end of run-in month and blinded month|||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833251|NCT01265797|Secondary|Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) (Measure of Disability Due to Headaches)|Mean difference in HIT-6 score between run-in month and open label month. The HIT-6 is a tool for screening and monitoring change in headache disability. This disease-specific health survey is intended for adults 18 years of age and older, and is available with a standard four-week recall period. It is a 6 item questionnaire with scores for each item ranging from 6 (never) to 13 (always). The minimum overall score is 36 and the maximum is 78. Higher scores represent greater disability.|28 day period in run-in month and open label month|||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833252|NCT01265797|Secondary|Headache Impact Test-6|Mean difference in HIT-6 score between run-in month and blinded month. The HIT-6 is a tool for screening and monitoring change in headache disability. This disease-specific health survey is intended for adults 18 years of age and older, and is available with a standard four-week recall period. It is a 6 item questionnaire with scores for each item ranging from 6 (never) to 13 (always). The minimum overall score is 36 and the maximum is 78. Higher scores represent greater disability.|after run-in month, after blinded month|||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833253|NCT01265797|Primary|Depression Score (PATIENT HEALTH QUESTIONNAIRE [PHQ] 9)|Mean difference of PHQ-9 score between the run-in month and blinded month, i.e. PHQ-9 score from run-in month minus blinded month. The PHQ-9 is a tool for assisting in diagnosing depression (over the prior 2 week period) as well as selecting and monitoring treatment. There are nine items, with responses each ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day), for a total range of 0 to 27. The higher the total the more severe the depressive symptoms.|14 days recall; measured at end of run-in month and blinded month|The number of participants included the individuals who have completed the run-in period and the blinded period. The data was analyzed 'per protocol' based on the number of participants completing the blinded period.||depression score/14 day recall||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833254|NCT01265797|Secondary|Depression Score (Patient Health Questionnaire-9)|Mean difference of PHQ-9 score between the run-in month and open label month, i.e. PHQ-9 score from run-in month minus open label month. The PHQ-9 is a tool for assisting in diagnosing depression (over the prior 2 week period) as well as selecting and monitoring treatment. There are nine items, with responses each ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day), for a total range of 0 to 27. The higher the total the more severe the depressive symptoms.|14 day recall, recorded at the end of run-in and open label months|||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833255|NCT01265797|Secondary|Headache Days|Mean change in headache days between 28 day run-in month and 28 day open label month, i.e. run-in month mean minus open label month mean. A good response is >= 50% reduction in headache days (congruent with the Guidelines for Trial of Behavioral Treatments for Recurrent Headache).|28 day period in run-in month and open label month|||headache days/ 28 day period||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833256|NCT01265797|Primary|Mean Headache Days|Mean change in headache days between 28 day run-in month and 28 day blinded month, i.e. run-in month mean minus blinded month mean. A good response is >= 50% reduction in headache days (congruent with the Guidelines for Trial of Behavioral Treatments for Recurrent Headache).|28 day period during run-in month and blinded month|||headache days/ 28 day period||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833257|NCT01265823|Secondary|Serum Levels of Vitamin B12 at Baseline and Week 16|Normal values for vitamin B12 were 200-1100 pg/mL.|Baseline, Week 16|Participants with available data at given time points.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833258|NCT01265823|Secondary|Serum Levels of Vitamin B6 at Baseline and Week 16|Normal values for vitamin B6 were 18-175 nmol/L.|Baseline, Week 16|Participants with available data at given time points.||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833259|NCT01265823|Secondary|Serum Levels of Folic Acid at Baseline and Week 16|Normal values for folic acid were 3-15 ng/mL.|Baseline, Week 16|Participants with available data at given time point.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833260|NCT01265823|Secondary|Serum Levels of Vitamin B12 at Baseline and Week 4|Normal values for vitamin B12 were 200-1100 pg/mL.|Baseline, Week 4|Participants with available data at given time points.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833261|NCT01265823|Secondary|Serum Levels of Vitamin B6 at Baseline and Week 4|Normal values for vitamin B6 were 18-175 nmol/L.|Baseline, Week 4|Participants with available data at given time points.||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833262|NCT01265823|Secondary|Serum Levels of Folic Acid at Baseline and Week 4|Normal values for folic acid were 3-15 ng/mL.|Baseline, Week 4|Participants with available data at given time points.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833263|NCT01265823|Secondary|Percentage of Obese vs. Non-obese (Per Waist-Hip Ratio) Participants Achieving a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)-75 Response and a Total Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score of <6 at Week 16|The Waist-Hip Ratio was used to determine the groups of participants who were overweight and who were considered obese. Obesity was defined as a ratio of >1 for men and >0.8 for women. Response to treatment in participants with obesity (based on Waist-Hip Ratio) versus those without obesity was assessed via PASI-75 response (see Outcome Measure 1 for details) and DLQI score of <6 (see Outcome Measure 3 for details).|Week 16|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
833314|NCT01266070|Primary|Most Frequent & Most Serious Adverse Events: Safety of Dovitinib for 6 Months|Most frequent & Most Serious Adverse Events: Safety of treatment with Dovitinib for 6 months in participants with VHL who have a measurable hemangioblastoma undergoing surveillance evaluated by toxicity scored using Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) Version 4.0.|Every 2 cycles (approximately 8 weeks) for 6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
833264|NCT01265823|Secondary|Percentage of Obese vs. Non-obese (Per Body Mass Index [BMI]) Participants Achieving a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)-75 Response and a Total Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score of <6 at Week 16|The Body Mass Index (BMI) was used to determine the groups of participants who were overweight and who were considered obese. A BMI of 18.5 to 25 was considered normal range, 25 to 30 as overweight and 30 and above as obesity, in both men and women. Response to treatment in participants with obesity (based on Body Mass Index) versus those without obesity was assessed via PASI-75 response (see Outcome Measure 1 for details) and DLQI score of <6 (see Outcome Measure 3 for details).|Week 16|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
833265|NCT01265823|Secondary|Mean Homocysteine Levels at Baseline and Week 16|Normal values for homocysteine were 5-13.9 µmol/L.|Baseline, Week 16|Participants with available data at given time points.||µmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833266|NCT01265823|Secondary|Mean Lipid Profile, Triglycerides, and C-Reactive Protein (CRP) at Baseline and Week 16|Normal values: C-reactive protein (CRP) 0-0.79 mg/dL; cholesterol 30-199 mg/dL; high density lipoprotein (HDL) 40-100 mg/dL; very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) 0-34 mg/dL; low density lipoprotein (LDL) 20-99 mg/dL; triglycerides 50-149 mg/dL.|Baseline, Week 16|Participants with available data at given time points.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833267|NCT01265823|Secondary|Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) at Week 16|The PGA is a 7-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the physician's evaluation of the participant. Categories are as follows: Severe = very marked plaque elevation, scaling, and/or erythema; Moderate to severe = marked plaque elevation, scaling, and/or erythema; Moderate = moderate plaque elevation, scaling, and/or erythema; Mild to moderate = intermediate between moderate and mild; Mild = slight plaque elevation, scaling, and/or erythema; Almost clear = intermediate between mild and clear; Clear = no signs of psoriasis (post-inflammatory hypopigmentation or hyperpigmentation could be present). The number of participants who achieve a PGA of 'clear' or 'almost clear' at Week 16 was a secondary outcome measure in this study.|Week 16|ITT population. Participants with missing scores were considered nonresponders.||participants|||Number
833268|NCT01265823|Secondary|Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) at Week 4|The PGA is a 7-point scale used to measure the severity of disease at the time of the physician's evaluation of the participant. Categories are as follows: Severe = very marked plaque elevation, scaling, and/or erythema; Moderate to severe = marked plaque elevation, scaling, and/or erythema; Moderate = moderate plaque elevation, scaling, and/or erythema; Mild to moderate = intermediate between moderate and mild; Mild = slight plaque elevation, scaling, and/or erythema; Almost clear = intermediate between mild and clear; Clear = no signs of psoriasis (post-inflammatory hypopigmentation or hyperpigmentation could be present).|Week 4|ITT population. Participants with missing scores were considered nonresponders.||participants|||Number
833269|NCT01265823|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)-50, 90, 100 Responses at Week 16|PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). PASI-50, 90, and 100 responses are the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 50%, 90%, or 100% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at Week 4. 100% reduction was considered complete clearance of psoriasis.|Week 16|ITT population. Participants with missing scores were considered nonresponders.||percentage of participants|||Number
833270|NCT01265823|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)-50, 90, 100 Responses at Week 4|PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). PASI-50, 90, and 100 responses are the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 50%, 90%, or 100% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at Week 4. 100% reduction was considered complete clearance of psoriasis.|Week 4|ITT population. Participants with missing scores were considered nonresponders.||percentage of participants|||Number
833271|NCT01265823|Secondary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Categories at Week 16|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot, a little, or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired. The following scoring categories present the effect on participant’s life: 0-1 no effect at all; 2-5 small effect; 6-10 moderate effect; 11-20 very large effect; 21-30 extremely large effect.|Week 16|ITT population. Participants with missing scores were considered nonresponders.||participants|||Number
833272|NCT01265823|Secondary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Categories at Week 4|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot, a little, or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired. The following scoring categories present the effect on participant’s life: 0-1 no effect at all; 2-5 small effect; 6-10 moderate effect; 11-20 very large effect; 21-30 extremely large effect.|Week 4|ITT population. Participants with missing scores were considered nonresponders.||participants|||Number
833273|NCT01265823|Secondary|Mean Score of Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Baseline and Week 16|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot, a little, or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired.|Baseline, Week 16|Participants with evaluable data at given time points.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833315|NCT01266122|Secondary|Changes in Psychosocial Mediators|We will examine the degree to which hypothesized mediators change differentially across the experimental and control arms.|up to 6 months||||||
833316|NCT01266122|Secondary|Acquisition of STIs - Number of Participants That Acquired STIs|We will test for locally relevant STIs at baseline and 6 months.|6 months|||participants|||Number
833274|NCT01265823|Secondary|Mean Score of Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Baseline and Week 4|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot, a little, or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired.|Baseline, Week 4|Participants with evaluable data at given time points.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833275|NCT01265823|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score < 6 at Week 16|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot, a little, or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired. A score <6 indicates that psoriasis has small or no effect at all on participant's life.|Week 16|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Participants with missing scores were considered nonresponders.||percentage of participants|||Number
833276|NCT01265823|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score < 6 at Week 4|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score is a participant-reported outcome consisting of a set of 10 questions regarding the degree to which the participant's skin has affected certain behaviors and quality of life over the last week. Responses to each are: very much (score of 3), a lot, a little, or not at all (score of 0). The DLQI score ranges from 0 (best) to 30 (worst); the higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired. A score <6 indicates that psoriasis has small or no effect at all on participant’s life.|Week 4|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Participants with missing scores were considered nonresponders.||percentage of participants|||Number
833277|NCT01265823|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)-75 Response at Week 16|PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). PASI-75 response is the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at Week 16. The improvement in PASI score was used as a measure of efficacy.|Week 16|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Participants with missing scores were considered nonresponders.||percentage of participants|||Number
833278|NCT01265823|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)-75 Response at Week 4|PASI is a composite score based on the degree of effect on body surface area of psoriasis and the extension of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling) of the lesions and area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (very severe psoriasis). PASI-75 response is the percentage of participants who achieved at least a 75% reduction (improvement) from baseline in PASI score at Week 4. The improvement in PASI score was used as a measure of efficacy.|Week 4|Intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Participants with missing scores were considered nonresponders.||percentage of participants|||Number
833279|NCT01265875|Secondary|VAS Score at Each Administered Dose.|10 point scare from 0-10 with higher scores meaning higher levels of pain. VAS score assessed after each dose was summarized over Days 1, 2, and 3.|Days 1, 2, and 3.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833280|NCT01265875|Primary|Quality of Life at Baseline, Day 4 and Day 30.|Sf-36 ranges from 0 to 151. Higher scores indicating worse outcomes.|Baseline, Day 4, Day 30.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833281|NCT01265875|Primary|Opiate Use at Baseline, Days 4 and 30.|Daily opiate use (oral morphine equivalent).|Baseline, Day 4, Day 30.|||mg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
833282|NCT01265875|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events.||30 Days|||participants|||Number
833283|NCT01265875|Primary|VAS Score at Baseline, Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 30.|10 point visual analog scale. 0= no pain. 10= worst possible pain. Days 1, 2, 3 were infusion days that included 5 VAS scores each day.|Baseline, Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 30.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833284|NCT01265953|Primary|Expression of Histone Deacetylase 6 (HDAC6)|Immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis of HDAC6 expression using research-only prostate biopsy tissue collected post-intervention at the time of the clinically-indicated prostate biopsy. A modified Histo-score (H-score) was calculated, which involved semiquantitative assessment of both staining intensity (graded as 1-3 with 1 representing weak staining, 2 moderate, and 3 strong) and percentage of positive cells. H-score ranged from 0 to 300 with 300 the strongest expression.|minimum 4 to maximum 8 weeks; prostate biopsy were collected post-intervention when clinically-indicated|||H-score||Standard Error|Mean
833285|NCT01265953|Primary|Expression of Ki67|Ki67 is a biomarker of disease progression. Immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis of Ki67 was performed using research only prostate biopsy specimens collected post-intervention at the time of the clinically-indicated prostate biopsy.|minimum 4 to maximum 8 weeks; prostate biopsy were collected post-intervention when clinically-indicated|Some subjects did not have post-intervention prostate tissue that can be used for IHC analysis, therefore, the overall number of participants analyzed for IHC analysis is different from the total enrolled subjects.||% of positivity||Standard Error|Mean
833286|NCT01265953|Primary|Change of Total Plasma SFN (Sulforaphane) Metabolites Level|In subjects at risk for prostate cancer, presence of SFN was analyzed in plasma. Collection of blood specimens occurred at pre-intervention and post-intervention. The Change = post-intervention level minus pre-intervention level|minimum 4 to maximum 8 weeks|We missed blood samples from some subjects, therefore, total number of subjects analyzed for the plasma-based analysis is different from the number of total enrolled subjects.||micromolar (µM)||Standard Error|Mean
833287|NCT01265953|Primary|Change of Total Urine SFN (Sulforaphane) Metabolites|Collection of blood and urine specimens occurred at pre-intervention and post-intervention. Change = post-intervention level minus pre-intervention level|minimum 4 to maximum 8 weeks|Not all subjects had urine samples for analysis, therefore, the total number of subjects in this urine analysis is different from total number of enrolled subjects.||micromolar (µM) concentrations of urina||Standard Error|Mean
833317|NCT01266122|Primary|Changes in HIV Risk Taking Behavior - Number of Condomless Sex Acts Per Participant|We will examine sexual risk taking among the sample using self-report (interviewer administered) measures.|up to 6 months|||number of unprotected sex acts||Standard Deviation|Mean
833288|NCT01265966|Primary|Change From Baseline to Peak Salivary Cortisol Level|Salivary cortisol will be measured prior to the sedated procedure before any intravenous lines or other stress occurs, and then every 30 minutes into the sedated procedure while the patient is being routinely suctioned. Salivary cortisol will also be measured at the end of the procedure and 30 minutes post procedure (recovery). Because many different types of procedures are performed (imaging, endoscopy, surgical) the end times of the procedures will vary for each patient. The investigators will calculate a relative change from baseline for salivary cortisol levels by comparing the peak to baseline recorded level.|Baseline, then every 30 minutes, and at end of procedure|All patients with adequate samples for analysis.||Number (ratio of peak to baseline)||Standard Error|Mean
833289|NCT01265992|Secondary|Number of Participants Using Concomitant Medications at Baseline||Baseline|Full analysis set||participants|||Number
833290|NCT01265992|Secondary|Total Indirect Costs of Care Associated With Secondary Hyperparathyroidism|"Indirect costs were estimated by using the number of hours missed from work (absenteeism) multiplied by the average hourly labor cost, including wages and benefits, to calculate average lost productivity costs due to absenteeism during the preceding 7 days.
Hours missed from work were assessed using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: General Health (WPAI-GH) questionnaire, in which respondents answer 6 questions related to work productivity and impairment.
Unit costs were taken from official sources (Statistics Sweden, www.scb.se) and published literature."|6 months|Participants who were working for pay and with available data at both time points.||Swedish krona per participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
833291|NCT01265992|Secondary|Total Direct Costs of Care Associated With Secondary Hyperparathyroidism|Direct medical costs to be calculated included outpatient visits, hospitalizations, pharmaceuticals, etc. However the data collected in this observational study was not enough to support this calculation.|6 months||||||
833292|NCT01265992|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Assessed by the Kidney Disease Quality of Life-Short Form (KDQOL-SF)|"The KDQOL-SF is a self-report measure developed for individuals with kidney disease. It includes 43 end-stage renal disease (ESRD)-targeted items focused on particular areas of concern for individuals with kidney disease (Symptoms/problems, Effects of the disease on daily life, Burden of disease, Work status, Cognitive function, Quality of social interaction, Sexual function, Sleep, and Social support), 36 items (SF-36) that provide 8 measures of physical and mental health (Physical functioning, Role limitations caused by physical health limitations, Role limitations caused by emotional health problems, Social functioning, Emotional well-being, Pain, Energy/fatigue and General health perceptions), and 1 overall health rating item where respondents rate their health on a scale from 0 (worst possible health) to 10 (best possible health).
Scores are transformed and calculated such that each scale score ranges from 0 to 100 where higher scores reflect a better quality of life."|Baseline and 6 months|Per-protocol analysis set with available data at both time points.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833293|NCT01265992|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Reduction of Proteinuria of at Least 15% From Baseline||Baseline and 6 months|Per-protocol analysis set. Percentages are based on the total number of participants in the per-protocol analysis set.||percentage of participants|||Number
833294|NCT01265992|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Proteinuria|Proteinuria is the presence of excess serum proteins, or albumin, in the urine. Proteinuria was measured by the amount of albumin per liter of urine.|Baseline and Month 6|Per-protocol analysis set with available data at both time points.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833295|NCT01265992|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Elevated Serum-Calcium (s-Ca) Levels at Baseline and 6 Months|Elevated serum calcium is defined according to the 2003 Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) target definitions of s-Ca above 2.37 mmol/L.|Baseline and 6 months|Per-protocol analysis set. One participant had missing s-Ca data at Baseline and one participant had missing s-Ca data at month 6; percentages are based on the total number of participants in the per-protocol analysis set (40).||percentage of participants|||Number
833296|NCT01265992|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Elevated Serum-Phosphorus (s-P) Levels at Baseline and 6 Months|"Elevated serum phosphorus is defined according to the 2003 Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) target definitions as:
Stage 3 CKD: ≥ 1.49 mmol/L;
Stage 4 CKD: ≥ 1.49 mmol/L;
Stage 5 CKD: > 1.78 mmol/L."|Baseline and 6 months|Per-protocol analysis set. Two patients had missing s-P data at month 6; percentages are based on the total number of participants in the per-protocol analysis set (40).||percentage of participants|||Number
833297|NCT01265992|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Intact Parathyroid Hormone Within K/DOQI Target Range at Baseline and 6 Months|"Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) target intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) levels are:
Stage 3 CKD (estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate* [eGFR] 30 – 59 mL/min): 3.85 – 7.7 pmol/L;
Stage 4 CKD (eGFR 15 – 29 mL/min): 7.7 – 12.1 pmol/L;
Stage 5 CKD (eGFR < 15 mL/min): 16.5 – 33 pmol/L.
*Calculated using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula."|Baseline and 6 months|Per-protocol analysis set. Three participants had missing data at Baseline and one participant had missing data at the 6 month visit; percentages are based on the total number of participants in the per-protocol analysis set (40).||percentage of participants|||Number
833298|NCT01265992|Primary|Change From Baseline in Intact Parathyroid Hormone at 6 Months||Baseline and 6 months|Per-Protocol Analysis Set (PPAS), defined as all included participants who received at least 1 dose of paricalcitol capsules and had analyzable data for the primary endpoints, i.e., 5 - 8 months after inclusion, and with available iPTH data at both time points.||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833299|NCT01266018|Secondary|Assessment of Overall Survival|Overall survival was measured from the initial date of treatment to the recorded date of death. Because the study was terminated prematurely, no statistical analyses of overall survival data were performed.|Every 4 weeks for up to 16 months|Subjects who had survival status recorded during post-study follow-up.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833300|NCT01266018|Secondary|Assessment of Immunogenicity of ADI-PEG 20|Blood samples were collected for all subjects at enrollment, prior to each treatment, and at the end of study to evaluate changes in ADI-PEG 20 antibody titer in peripheral blood over time. Disease state (ie, relapsed sensitive vs refractory) was not considered relevant to this analysis and as such samples were collected without regard for cohort assignment.|Every 1 to 4 weeks for up to 16 weeks|The Pharmacodynamic Analysis Set comprises all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and provided plasma samples for pharmacodynamic analyses. A total of 121 plasma samples from 21 subjects were analyzed. Summary data are presented through Day 58, i.e., the last time point with at least 3 samples available for calculation of a mean.||log 10 IU/mL||Full Range|Mean
833301|NCT01266018|Secondary|Assessment of Pharmacodynamics of ADI-PEG 20|Blood samples were collected from all subjects at enrollment, prior to each treatment, and at the end of study to evaluate changes in plasma arginine and citrulline levels following administration of ADI-PEG 20. Disease state (ie, relapsed sensitive vs refractory) was not considered relevant to this analysis and as such samples were collected without regard for cohort assignment.|Every 1 to 4 weeks for up to 16 weeks|The Pharmacodynamic Analysis Set comprises all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and provided plasma samples for pharmacodynamic analyses. A total of 121 plasma samples from 21 subjects were analyzed. Summary data are presented through Day 58, i.e., the last time point with at least 3 samples available for calculation of a mean.||uM||Full Range|Mean
833302|NCT01266018|Secondary|Assessment of Safety of Arginine Deiminase Pegylated (ADI-PEG) 20|Analysis of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported from clinical laboratory tests, physical examinations, and vital signs.|Every 1 to 4 weeks for up to 16 weeks|The Safety Analysis Set comprises all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
833303|NCT01266018|Primary|Best Overall Response|"Tumor responses were evaluated using any appropriate imaging type and were categorized according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Per RECIST for target lesions and assessed by MRI:
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions [no evidence of disease]; Partial Response (PR): ≥ 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Progressive Disease (PD): ≥ 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD): small changes that do not meet above criteria."|Every 4 to 8 weeks for up to 16 weeks|Includes all patients who were evaluable for tumor response allocation.||participants|||Number
833304|NCT01266031|Secondary|Radiological Response|Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and contrast-enhanced (CE) MRI was used to evaluate tumor response. Response is defined by the Modified MacDonald criteria. Complete Response (CR) is complete disappearance of all measurable and evaluable disease. Partial response (PR) is greater than or equal to 50% decrease under baseline in the sum of products of perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions. Partial Response, Non-Measurable (PRNM) is not applicable. Stable/No Response does not qualify for CR, PR or progression. Progression is 25% increase in the sum of products, of all measurable lesions over smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease) using the same techniques as baseline, OR clear worsening of any evaluable disease, OR appearance of any lesion/site, OR failure to return for evaluation due to health or deteriorating condition (unless clearly unrelated to this cancer).|End of therapy||01/2018||||
833305|NCT01266031|Secondary|Mean Symptom Interference at the Time of Clinical Evaluation|"Proportion of patients rating their symptoms to be 7 or greater on a 0-10 scale using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT) Self Reporting Tool. Zero is not present and 10 is as bad as you can imagine. All patients with at least one valid questionnaire will be included in the anlyses. Differences of at least 2 points will be classified as the minimum clinically meaningful change in the symptom severity and symptom interference measures."|Baseline, week 4, week 8, and end of therapy||01/2018||||
833306|NCT01266031|Secondary|Mean Core Symptom Severity Using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT) Self Reporting Tool|"Proportion of patients rating their symptoms to be 7 or greater on a 0-10 scale using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT) Self Reporting Tool. Zero is not present and 10 is as bad as you can imagine. All patients with at least one valid questionnaire will be included in the anlyses. Differences of at least 2 points will be classified as the minimum clinically meaningful change in the symptom severity and symptom interference measures."|Baseline, week 4, week 8, and end of therapy||01/2018||||
833307|NCT01266031|Secondary|Mean Severity of the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor Module (MDSAI-BT)|"Proportion of patients rating their symptoms to be 7 or greater on a 0-10 scale using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT) Self Reporting Tool. Zero is not present and 10 is as bad as you can imagine. All patients with at least one valid questionnaire will be included in the anlyses. Differences of at least 2 points will be classified as the minimum clinically meaningful change in the symptom severity and symptom interference measures."|Baseline, week 4, week 8, and end of therapy||01/2018||||
833308|NCT01266031|Secondary|Effects of Bevacizumab With and Without Vorinostat Upon Biomarkers of Angiogenesis|About 5cc of blood was collected to measure plasma angiogenic proteins vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), placental growth factor (PIGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), stromal cell-derived factor α (SDF1α), angiopoietin 1 and 2 by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|Baseline before treatment, Cycle 1 Day 2, day 15 (pre-infusion and post-infusion), Cycle 2 (pre-infusion)||01/2018||||
833309|NCT01266031|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Time between the first day of treatment to the day of death.|Time between the first day of treatment to the day of death.||01/2018||||
833310|NCT01266031|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP)|Time between the first day of treatment to the day of disease progression.|Time between the first day of treatment to the day of disease progression.||01/2018||||
833311|NCT01266031|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Oral Vorinostat Used With Bevacizumab|MTD defined as the dose level at which 1/6 patients experience dose limiting toxicity (DLT), using conventional Phase I design where the MTD was selected using a 3+3 accrual design at each dose level until MTD was determined. Toxicities will be graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse events (CTCAE) Version 4.0.|28 day, cycle 1|||mg/day|||Number
833312|NCT01266031|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) at 6 Months|"PFS is time measured in months to disease progression as assessed at six months from participant registration. Assessments continue every 8 weeks up to 28 days after last dose (follow-up), anticipated trial length one year.
Participants must be assessed at least 4 weeks after surgery to begin treatment in the adaptive randomized Phase 2 portion of the trial. PFS in participants in the surgical arm determined from the date of randomization to the treatment arms and not from the date of registration in the trial.
Study outcome measure period ended June 2015."|Baseline until disease progression or death due to any cause, up to six months|Of the 90 participants (Bev+V: 49, Bev: 41) enrolled, 83 were evaluable for the primary endpoint (Bev+V: 46, Bev: 37).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833313|NCT01266070|Secondary|Number of VHL Participants With Response at 6 Months|Efficacy of treatment with dovitinib for 6 months in patients with VHL who have a measurable lesion evaluated by response using RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors): Complete Response, Partial Response, Progressive Disease or Stable Disease.|Every 2 cycles (approximately 8 weeks) for 6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
833318|NCT01266148|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life - Euro Quality of Life 5D (EQ-5D)|Change in Quality of Life was assessed via the EQ-5D questionnaire which consists of: EQ-5D-5L descriptive system and EQ Visual Analogue scale (EQ VAS). The EQ-5D-5L comprises 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression). Each dimension has 5 levels (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems, and extreme problems). The patient indicates his/her health state by checking the most appropriate statement. This decision results in a 1-digit number expressing the level selected for that dimension. The digits for 5 dimensions are combined in a 5-digit number describing the respondent’s health state. The possible score is 1 to 5 where a lower number indicates improvement. The EQ VAS records the patient’s self-rated health on a 20 cm vertical, visual analogue scale with endpoints labelled ‘the best health you can imagine’ and ‘the worst health you can imagine’. The score is 0 to 100 where a higher score represents improvement.|Pre transplant and 52 weeks|The intent to treat population includes the full analysis set patients with available data and without any major protocol deviations or criteria causing exclusion and for which data was available for analysis. Patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833319|NCT01266148|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life Assessed by SF-36 (Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire ([MLHF)]) From Pre-transplant to Week 52 of Treatment|Change in Quality of Life was assessed via the SF-36 (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire ([MLHF)]) before transplant surgery and at week 52 of treatment. The SF-36 is a validated, self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire, which includes 36 questions measures 8 dimensions of health: physical function, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social function, role-emotional, and mental health. Scores can be summarized in 2 summary components assessing physical and mental health. Items in each dimension are coded, aggregated, summed, and transformed into a scale ranging from 0 (worse health) to 100 (best health).|Pre transplant and 52 weeks|The intent to treat population includes the full analysis set patients with available data and without any major protocol deviations or criteria causing exclusion and for which data was available for analysis. Patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833320|NCT01266148|Secondary|Lipid Profile at 12 Months|Total Cholesterol, LDL-Chol, HDL-Chol and TG at week 52. Measurements were taken via participants blood samples.|52 weeks|The safety sert include all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had blood samples taken at week 52.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833321|NCT01266148|Secondary|Average Level of Protenuria at Week 52|Proteinuria is measured as the ratio of albumin/creatinine mg/mmol. Measurements were taken from participants urine samples.|52 weeks|The safety sert include all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and were able to provide urine samples at week 52.||mg/mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
833322|NCT01266148|Secondary|Occurrence of Treatment Failures up to 12 Months After Transplant|Treatment failure was defined as the number of participants who died or lost their graft at any timepoint througout the duration of the study.|52 weeks|The intent to treat population includes the full analysis set patients with available data and without any major protocol deviations or criteria causing exclusion and for which data was available for analysis. Patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized.||participants|||Number
833323|NCT01266148|Secondary|Number of Rejections Leading to Hemodynamic Compromise|Number of all rejections were recorded through the duration of the study with the intent to identify rejections leading to hemodynamic compromise.|52 weeks|The intent to treat population includes the full analysis set patients with available data and without any major protocol deviations or criteria causing exclusion and for which data was available for analysis. Patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized.||rejections|||Number
833324|NCT01266148|Secondary|Calculated Glomerular Filtration Rate From Pre-Transplantation to Week 52|Calculated Glomerular Filtration Rate from pre-transplantation to week 52 was calculated according to the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) method. Measurements were taken prior to transplant (day 1), between weeks 7 to 11 and end of week 52.|Day 1, weeks 7 to 11 and of week 52|The intent to treat population includes the full analysis set patients with available data and without any major protocol deviations or criteria causing exclusion and for which data was available for analysis. Patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized.||mGFR mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
833325|NCT01266148|Secondary|Change in Calculated Glomerular Filtration Rate From Pre-transplantation to Week 52|Change in calculated glomerular filtration rate from pre-transplantation to week 52 was calculated according to the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) method. Measurements were taken prior to transplant (day 1), between weeks 7 to 11 and end week 52.|Day 1, weeks 7 to 11(baseline) and of week 52|The intent to treat population includes the full analysis set patients with available data and without any major protocol deviations or criteria causing exclusion and for which data was available for analysis. Patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized.||mGFR mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
833326|NCT01266148|Secondary|Progression of Chronic Allograft Vasculopathy (CAV) Based on Incidence of Chronic Allograft Vasculopathy (CAV) From Baseline to Week 52|the progression of chronic allograft vasculopathy (CAV) assessed by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) examinations, measured the incidence of CAV (in percent of patients) at baseline and at week 52. Incidence of CAV represents percent of patients having a MIT (maximal intima thickness) > 0.5 mm.|Baseline and week 52|The intent to treat population includes the full analysis set patients with available data and without any major protocol deviations or criteria causing exclusion and for which data was available for analysis. Patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized.||Percentage of patients|||Number
833327|NCT01266148|Secondary|Progression of Chronic Allograft Vasculopathy (CAV) Based on Maximal Intimal Thickness (MIT) From Baseline to Week 52|The progression of chronic allograft vasculopathy (CAV) was assessed by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) examinations and measured Maximal Intimal Thickness (MIT)(in mm). A major coronary epicardial artery (preferentially the left-anterior descending coronary artery) was imaged, and the MIT parameters were recorded at baseline and at week 52.|Baseline and week 52|The intent to treat population includes the full analysis set patients with available data and without any major protocol deviations or criteria causing exclusion and for which data was available for analysis. Patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
833328|NCT01266148|Primary|Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (mGFR), 12 Months After Heart Transplantation|Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (mGFR) describes the flow rate of filtered fluid through the kidney. GFR is equal to the clearance rate when any solute is freely filtered and is neither reabsorbed nor secreted by the kidneys. The rate therefore measured is the quantity of the substance in the urine that originated from a calculable volume of blood. Participants’ urine was used for this assessment at week 52 after heart transplant.|Week 52|The intent to treat population includes the full analysis set patients with available data and without any major protocol deviations or criteria causing exclusion and for which data was available for analysis. Patients were analyzed according to the treatment to which they were randomized.||mGFR ml/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
833329|NCT01266265|Primary|Prevalence of Respiratory Tract-Related Adverse Events of Interest|Percentage of patients who experienced a respiratory tract-related adverse event (grouped by category of interest) during the study.|Follow-up every 3 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
833330|NCT01266291|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Become Seizure Free While Taking Sabril|"Seizure freedom
Responder rate (complex partial seizures only)"|Seizure freedom will be assessed for the two month treatment phase of the study (months 4 and 5)|One 30 year old female, Caucasian, non-Hispanic subject enrolled in the study. Due to adverse events, she did not complete the study, however, she completed all required follow-up.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833331|NCT01266291|Primary|Number of Participants Safely Tolerating Sabril|"Antiepileptic Drug (AED) levels in blood
Comprehensive panel (blood test)
Complete Blood Count with differential (blood test)
Visual field tests testing
Ophthalmology exam assessment
Frequency and severity of adverse events reported by subjects throughout their involvement with the study"|Outcome measures will be assessed at the initiation of Sabril (titration), and at three and five months after starting Sabril. After this time, the subjects will have completed the study.|One 30 year old female, Caucasian, non-Hispanic subject enrolled in the study. Due to adverse events, she did not complete the study, however, she completed all required follow-up.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833332|NCT01266447|Secondary|Duration of Objective Response|Duration of objective response is defined as the duration from the time measurement criteria is met for partial or complete response by RECIST 1.1, whichever is first recorded, until the first date the recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented. Per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria Complete Response (CR), disappearance of all target and non-target lesions without evidence of new lesion; Partial Response (PR), at least 30% decrease in the sum of the longest dimensions (LD) of all target measurable lesions taking as reference the baseline sum of LD with no unequivocal progression of non-target lesions and no evidence of new lesion. Complete or partial response requires confirmation at greater than or equal to 4 weeks from initial documentation.|Every other cycle for first 6 months; then every 3 months until disease progression confirmed; and at any other time if clinically indicated based on symptoms or signs suggestive of progressive disease.The average of study treatment time was 2.3 months.|Eligible and Treated Patients with objective response||Months||Full Range|Median
833333|NCT01266447|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the duration of time from study entry to time of death or the date of last contact.|From study entry to death or last contact, up to 5 years of follow-up.|Eligible and Treated Patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833334|NCT01266447|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival is the period of time from study entry to time of disease progression, death or date of last contact, whichever occurs first. Progression is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest dimensions (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since study entry, or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, or the appearance of one or more new lesions, or global deterioration in health status attributable to the disease requiring a change in therapy without objective evidence of progression, or death due to disease without prior objective documentation of progression.|From study entry to disease progression, death or date of last contact, whichever occurs first, up to 5 years of follow-up.|Eligible and Treated Patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833335|NCT01266447|Primary|Adverse Events (Grade 3 or Higher) During Treatment Period|Number of participants with a maximum grade of 3 or higher during treatment period. Adverse events are graded and categorized using CTCAE v4.0.|During treatment period and up to 30 days after stopping the study treatment.The average of study treatment time was 2.3 months.|Eligible and treated patients - No statistical analysis provided for adverse events (grade 3 or higher) during treatment period.||Participants|||Number
833336|NCT01266447|Primary|Number of Patients With Dose-limiting Toxicities (in Safety lead-in)|A dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) is assessed by NCI CTCAE v4, occurring during cycle 1 of therapy.: A dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) is defined as either hematologic or non-hematologic toxicity assessed by NCI CTCAE v4, occurring during cycle 1 of therapy, which cause any of the following: For hematologic toxicity - dose delay of greater than 2 weeks due to failure to recover counts, Treatment related febrile neutropenia, grade 4 neutropenia lasting >7 days, treatment related grade 4 thrombocytopenia or clinically significant bleeding with grade 3 thrombocytopenia. For non-hematologic toxicity; study treatment related grade 3 or 4 non-hematological toxicity (excluding anorexia, constipation, fatigue, hypersensitivity/allergic reaction to one of the study drugs, nausea & vomiting, and grade 3 dehydration), grade 4 nausea and vomiting for >48 hours despite maximum medical management, electrolyte imbalance of > or equal to grade 3 that can be replaced within 48 hours; any drug related death|Up to 21 days|The first 6 eligible and treated patients who completed the 1st cycle of study treatment or had a DLT prior to completing the first cycle of study treatment||participants|||Number
833337|NCT01266447|Primary|Tumor Response|Complete and Partial Tumor Response as Assessed by RECIST 1.1. Per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), Complete Response (CR), disappearance of all target and non-target lesions without evidence of new lesion; Partial Response (PR), at least 30% decrease in the sum of the longest dimensions (LD) of all target measurable lesions taking as reference the baseline sum of LD with no unequivocal progression of non-target lesions and no evidence of new lesion. Complete or partial response requires confirmation at greater than or equal to 4 weeks from initial documentation.|Every other cycle for first 6 months; then every 3 months thereafter until disease progression confirmed; and at any other time if clinically indicted based on symptoms or physical signs suggestive of progressive disease. The average time was 2.3 months|Eligible and Treated Patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
833338|NCT01257204|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Who Died During Follow-up Period|AE was defined as any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that does not has a causal relationship with treatment. SAE was defined as a medical event that at any dose resulted in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; was life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or required or prolonged hospitalization.|From end of treatment period up to Week 48 (follow-up period)|All follow-up participants.||participants|||Number
833339|NCT01257204|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Discontinuations Due to AEs, and Treatment-related AEs and Who Died During Treatment Period|AE was defined as any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that does not has a causal relationship with treatment. SAE was defined as a medical event that at any dose resulted in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; was life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or required or prolonged hospitalization. Treatment-related AE was defined as an AE that had certain, probable, possible, or unknown relationship to study drug. Mild (Grade 1): awareness of event but easily tolerated; Moderate (Grade 2): discomfort enough to cause some interference with usual activity; Severe (Grade 3): inability to carry out usual activity; Very severe (Grade 4): debilitating, significantly incapacitates participant despite symptomatic therapy. Only Grade 2-4 treatment-related AEs were reported.|Baseline (Day 1) up to 24 weeks (treatment period)|All treated participants.||participants|||Number
833340|NCT01257204|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Sustained Virologic Response at Follow-up Week 24 (SVR24) for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 3|SVR24 was defined as undetectable HCV RNA (HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at follow-up Week 24. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Follow-up Week 24|All treated participants with HCV genotype 3.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
833341|NCT01257204|Secondary|Number of Participants With Virologic Failure for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 3|"Virologic failure was defined as:
Virologic breakthrough: confirmed >1 log10 increase in HCV RNA over nadir or confirmed RNA ≥lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) after confirmed HCV RNA <LLOQ, target not detected (TND) while on treatment
<1 log10 decrease in HCV RNA from baseline at Week 4 of treatment
Failure to achieve early virologic response: <2 log10 decrease in HCV RNA from baseline and HCV RNA ≥LLOQ at Week 12 of treatment
HCV RNA ≥LLOQ or <LLOQ, target detected (TD) at the end of treatment (EOT) (including early discontinuation)
Relapse, defined as HCV RNA ≥LLOQ or <LLOQ, TD during follow-up, after HCV RNA <LLOQ, TND at EOT.
The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory."|Baseline up to Week 48|"All treated participants with HCV genotype 3. Here, n signifies the number of participants evaluable for the respective category."||participants|||Number
833342|NCT01257204|Secondary|Number of Participants With Virologic Failure for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 2|"Virologic failure was defined as:
Virologic breakthrough: confirmed >1 log10 increase in HCV RNA over nadir or confirmed RNA ≥lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) after confirmed HCV RNA <LLOQ, target not detected (TND) while on treatment
<1 log10 decrease in HCV RNA from baseline at Week 4 of treatment
Failure to achieve early virologic response: <2 log10 decrease in HCV RNA from baseline and HCV RNA ≥LLOQ at Week 12 of treatment
HCV RNA ≥LLOQ or <LLOQ, target detected (TD) at the end of treatment (EOT) (including early discontinuation)
Relapse, defined as HCV RNA ≥LLOQ or <LLOQ, TD during follow-up, after HCV RNA <LLOQ, TND at EOT.
The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory."|Baseline up to Week 48|"All treated participants with HCV genotype 2. Here, n signifies the number of participants evaluable for the respective category."||participants|||Number
833343|NCT01257204|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Sustained Virologic Response at Follow-up Week 12 (SVR12) for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 3|SVR12 was defined as undetectable HCV RNA (HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at follow-up Week 12. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Follow-up Week 12|All treated participants with HCV genotype 3.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
833344|NCT01257204|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Sustained Virologic Response at Follow-up Week 12 (SVR12) for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 2|SVR12 was defined as undetectable HCV RNA (HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at follow-up Week 12. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Follow-up Week 12|All treated participants with HCV genotype 2.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
833345|NCT01257204|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR) at Week 12 for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 3|cEVR was defined as undetectable HCV RNA (HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at Week 12. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Week 12|All treated participants with HCV genotype 3.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
833346|NCT01257204|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR) at Week 12 for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 2|cEVR was defined as undetectable HCV RNA (HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at Week 12. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Week 12|All treated participants with HCV genotype 2.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
833347|NCT01257204|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Rapid Virologic Response (RVR) at Week 4 for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 3|RVR was defined as undetectable HCV RNA (HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at Week 4. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Week 4|All treated participants with HCV genotype 3.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
833348|NCT01257204|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Rapid Virologic Response (RVR) at Week 4 for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 2|RVR was defined as undetectable HCV RNA (HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at Week 4. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Week 4|All treated participants with HCV genotype 2.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
833349|NCT01257204|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Sustained Virologic Response at Follow-up Week 24 (SVR24) for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 2|SVR24 was defined as undetectable HCV RNA (HCV RNA <lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ], target not detected [TND]) at follow-up Week 24. The LLOQ was 25 IU/mL, and <LLOQ, TND was 10 IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were measured by the Roche COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test version 2.0 from the central laboratory.|Follow-up Week 24|All treated participants with hepatitis C virus genotype 2.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
833350|NCT01257217|Secondary|Patient Reported Outcomes at Month 3|The Visual Task Difficulty Assessment (VISTAS) questionnaire was completed by the subject to assess difficulty in completing everyday tasks that depend on good vision. Tasks were rated using a 1 to 5 point scale, where 1 = no difficulty; 2 = minor difficulty; 3 = moderate difficulty; 4 = major difficulty; 5 = cannot accomplish. Individual scores for each task were averaged to obtain the overall score for each vision type/function. Near vision was defined as less than 50 cm; intermediate vision as 50 cm to 1 m; extended intermediate vision as 90 cm to 4 m; and distant vision as more than 4 m.|Month 3 from second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all subjects who received IOLs without major deviations and/or surgical complications.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833351|NCT01257217|Secondary|Mean Radner Reading Speed|Reading performance was measured using the Radner Reading Chart with no correction (without) and with best distance corrective aids (with). Reading speed was measured in words per minute.|Month 3 from second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all subjects who received IOLs without major deviations and/or surgical complications.||wpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
833352|NCT01257217|Secondary|Mean Refractive Spherical Equivalent at Month 3|A manifest refraction (vision check) was performed using a 100% contrast ETDRS chart under well-lit conditions. Results were documented for sphere, cylinder and axis readings. The refractive spherical equivalent was calculated according to the formula: sphere + ½ cylinder power. Both eyes contributed to the mean.|Month 3 from second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all subjects who received IOLs without major deviations and/or surgical complications.||diopter||Standard Deviation|Mean
833353|NCT01257217|Secondary|Uncorrected Visual Acuity Across a Range of Distances at Month 3|VA was tested binocularly unaided across a range of distances under well-lit conditions using Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts. VA was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.1 logMAR increment corresponding to 5 letters, or 1 line, on an ETDRS chart. A lower numeric value represents better visual acuity.|Month 3 from second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all subjects who received IOLs without major deviations and/or surgical complications.||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
833354|NCT01257217|Secondary|Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Across a Range of Distances at Month 3|Visual acuity (VA) was tested binocularly (both eyes together) with correction in place if needed across a range of distances under well-lit conditions using Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts. VA was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.1 logMAR increment corresponding to 5 letters, or 1 line, on an ETDRS chart. A lower numeric value represents better visual acuity.|Month 3 from second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all subjects who received IOLs without major deviations and/or surgical complications.||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
833355|NCT01257217|Primary|Mean Binocular Defocus VA at Month 3|Defocus VA (an indicator of the expected range of vision with a presbyopia-correcting IOL) was tested binocularly with the participant's best spectacle correction using a chart. Lenses of different spherical powers were placed in front of the eyes to produce varying levels of defocus. The VA at each spherical power was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.1 logMAR increment corresponding to 5 letters, or 1 line, on an ETDRS chart. A lower numeric value represents better visual acuity.|Month 3 from second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all subjects who received IOLs without major deviations and/or surgical complications.||logMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
833356|NCT01257230|Secondary|Time to First Asthma Exacerbation During the 48 Week Treatment Period|The median time to first asthma exacerbation was not calculable, so the number of patients who experienced an asthma exacerbation are presented for the measured values.|Week 48|FAS||Participants|||Number
833357|NCT01257230|Secondary|Time to First Severe Asthma Exacerbation During the 48 Week Treatment Period|The median time to first severe asthma exacerbation was not calculable, so the number of patients who experienced a severe asthma exacerbation are presented for the measured values. A severe asthma exacerbation was defined as a subgroup of all asthma exacerbations that required treatment with systemic corticosteroid for at least 3 days.|48 weeks|FAS||Participants|||Number
833358|NCT01257230|Secondary|ACQ6 Responders|"Responder rates based on the ACQ6 after 24 weeks of treatment. Analysis was performed using the following categories and definitions: responder (change from trial baseline ≤-0.5), no change (-0.5 <change from trial baseline <0.5) and worsening (change from trial baseline ≥0.5)
The ACQ6 score is calculated as the mean of the responses to the first 6 questions of the ACQ. The ACQ is a scale containing 7 questions, each question has a 7-point scale which ranges from 0 to 6; a score of 0 corresponds to no impairment and a score of 6 corresponds to maximum impairment."|Week 24|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
833359|NCT01257230|Secondary|Control of Asthma as Assessed by ACQ6|"Change from baseline in AQC6 score at week 24.
The ACQ6 score is calculated as the mean of the responses to the first 6 questions of the ACQ. The ACQ is a scale containing 7 questions, each question has a 7-point scale which ranges from 0 to 6; a score of 0 corresponds to no impairment and a score of 6 corresponds to maximum impairment.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and week 24|FAS||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833360|NCT01257230|Secondary|ACQ Total Score Responders|"Responder rates based on the ACQ total score after 24 weeks of treatment. Analysis was performed using the following categories and definitions: responder (change from trial baseline ≤-0.5), no change (-0.5 <change from trial baseline <0.5) and worsening (change from trial baseline ≥0.5)
The ACQ is a scale containing 7 questions, each question has a 7-point scale which ranges from 0 to 6; a score of 0 corresponds to no impairment and a score of 6 corresponds to maximum impairment."|Week 24|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
833361|NCT01257230|Secondary|Control of Asthma as Assessed by ACQ Total Score|"Change from baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) total score measured at week 24.
The ACQ is a scale containing 7 questions, each question has a 7-point scale which ranges from 0 to 6; a score of 0 corresponds to no impairment and a score of 6 corresponds to maximum impairment. ACQ total score was calculated as the mean of the responses to all 7 questions.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and week 24|FAS||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833362|NCT01257230|Secondary|Use of PRN Rescue Medication During the Day|"Change from baseline in the number of puffs of rescue medication (salbutamol/albuterol) used during the day (24 hour period) based on the weekly mean at week 24.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and week 24|FAS||Number of puffs of rescue medication||Standard Error|Mean
833363|NCT01257230|Secondary|Use of PRN Rescue Medication During the Night-time|"Change from baseline in the number of puffs of rescue medication (salbutamol/albuterol) used during the night-time based on the weekly mean at week 24.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and week 24|FAS||Number of puffs of rescue medication||Standard Error|Mean
833364|NCT01257230|Secondary|Use of PRN Rescue Medication During the Daytime|"Change from baseline in the number of puffs of rescue medication (salbutamol/albuterol) used during the daytime based on the weekly mean at week 24.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and Week 24|FAS||Number of puffs of rescue medication||Standard Error|Mean
833365|NCT01257230|Secondary|FEF25-75 Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in mean forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of the FVC (FEF25-75%), also known as maximum mid-expiratory flow, at individual time points after 24 weeks of treatment.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 10 mins before drug administration and 30 mins, 1 hour (h), 2h, 3h after drug administration at 24 weeks|Full analysis set. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit, completely missing visits were handled by the statistical model.||Litres per second||Standard Error|Mean
833366|NCT01257230|Secondary|FVC AUC (0-3h) Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline of area under the curve (AUC) from 0 to 3 h for FVC (FVC AUC0–3h) after 24 weeks of treatment. The AUC was calculated by using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (3h).
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 10 mins before drug administration and 30 mins, 1 hour (h), 2h, 3h after drug administration at 24 weeks|Full analysis set. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit, completely missing visits were handled by the statistical model.||Litres||Standard Error|Mean
833367|NCT01257230|Secondary|FEV1 AUC (0-3h) Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline of area under the curve (AUC) from 0 to 3 h for FEV1 (FEV1 AUC 0–3h) after 24 weeks of treatment. The AUC was calculated by using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (3h).
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 10 mins before drug administration and 30 mins, 1 hour (h), 2h, 3h after drug administration at 24 weeks|Full analysis set. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit, completely missing visits were handled by the statistical model.||Litres||Standard Error|Mean
833368|NCT01257230|Secondary|Trough FVC Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline of Trough (pre-dose) forced vital capacity (FVC) measured 10 min before the administration of trial medication after 24 weeks of treatment.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means.."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit, completely missing visits were handled by the statistical model.||Litres||Standard Error|Mean
833369|NCT01257230|Secondary|FVC peak0-3 Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in Maximum forced vital capacity (FVC) measured within the first 3 h after administration of trial medication (FVC peak0–3h) after 24 weeks of treatment.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit, completely missing visits were handled by the statistical model.||Litres||Standard Error|Mean
833370|NCT01257230|Secondary|Trough FEV1 Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in Trough (pre-dose) Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) measured at week 24.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit, completely missing visits were handled by the statistical model.||Litres||Standard Error|Mean
833371|NCT01257230|Primary|FEV1 peak0-3 Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in peak Forced expiratory volume in 1 second within the first 3 hours post dosing (FEV1 peak0-3) measured at week 24.
Note, the measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed trial medication and received at least one documents dose of trial medication. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit, completely missing visits were handled by the statistical model.||Litres||Standard Error|Mean
833372|NCT01257347|Secondary|Percentage of Visits With Hypertension Regimen Simplification, Non-adherent in Week Prior to Outcome Visit or Over Entire Monitoring Period|This will be determined by abstracting data from the electronic medical record after the 1-month visit using a standardized instrument. An outcome assessor who is blinded to clinician and patient group assignment will assess whether, during the 1-month visit, the provider simplified the regimen by switching from a short-acting, multi-day dosing medication to a long-acting, once per day medication or switched two medication to a single combination pill. All prescribing and test ordering at the recruitment clinic is recorded in the electronic medical record.|1 month clinic visit|patient-provider visits||percentage of patient-clinician visits|||Number
833373|NCT01257347|Secondary|Percentage of Visits With Counseling Performed During 1-month Visit, Non-adherent in Week Prior to Outcome Visit or Over Entire Monitoring Period|This will be determined based on interviewing patients immediately after the 1-month visit using a standardized questionnaire. A research assistant who is blinded to group assignment will ask patients questions that assess whether clinicians counseled them about taking their blood pressure medications during that most recent visit. These questions are adapted from a validated questionnaire that assesses provider communication about blood pressure medications.|1 month clinic visit|||percentage of patient-clinician visits|||Number
833374|NCT01257347|Secondary|Percentage of Visits With Regimen Intensification During 1-month Visit, Adherent in Week Prior to Outcome Visit, Only|This will be determined based on abstracting information from the electronic medical record after the 1-month visit using a standardized instrument. An outcome assessor who is blinded to clinician and patient group assignment will assess whether, during the 1-month visit, the provider intensified the blood pressure regimen (added or increased dose of medications). All prescribing and test ordering at the recruitment clinic is recorded in the electronic medical record.|1 month clinic visit|||percentage of patient-clinician visits|||Number
833375|NCT01257347|Primary|Percentage of Visits With Appropriate Hypertension Management|This is assessed using an algorithm in which patients are categorized as adherent or non-adherent based on electronic monitoring. If patients are adherent (summary measure of adherence to blood pressure medications in the week prior to visit is ≥ 80%), then hypertension management is appropriate if clinicians intensify the hypertension regimen or order testing for secondary hypertension. If patients are non-adherent (summary measure of adherence < 80%), then hypertension management is appropriate if clinicians take action to increase adherence through counseling or regimen simplification.|1 month clinic visit|||percentage of patient-clinician visits|||Number
833376|NCT01257425|Secondary|Time to Castration [Tcast] - Testosterone Level Less Than 0.5 ng/mL|tcast is the number of days between day of first administration of the study drug and the day the testosterone level reaches the limit of castration defined as testosterone level less than 0.5 ng/mL for the first time. Analysis of tcast was based on the Kaplan-Meier estimator.|12 weeks|Analysed for intent-to-treat (ITT) population comprised of 103 patients (IM: 51 and SC: 52 patients).||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833377|NCT01257425|Secondary|Time to Castration [Tcast] - Testosterone Level Less Than or Equal to 0.5 ng/mL|tcast is the number of days between day of first administration of the study drug and the day the testosterone level reaches the limit of castration defined as testosterone level less than or equal to 0.5 ng/mL for the first time. Analysis of tcast was based on the Kaplan-Meier estimator.|12 weeks|Analysed for intent-to-treat (ITT) population comprised of 103 patients (IM: 51 and SC: 52 patients).||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833378|NCT01257425|Secondary|Maximum Concentration of Serum Testosterone [Cmax] - Log-transformed Data|Cmax was assessed as the maximum testosterone serum concentration between the first administration of the study drug and Day 169.|1, 3, 5, 8, 15, 22, 29, 57, 85, 87, 113, 141 and 169 days post-dose|Analysed for intent-to-treat (ITT) population comprised of 103 patients (IM: 51 and SC: 52 patients).||log(ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833379|NCT01257425|Secondary|Maximum Concentration of Serum Testosterone [Cmax] - Raw Data|Cmax was assessed as the maximum testosterone serum concentration between the first administration of the study drug and Day 169.|1, 3, 5, 8, 15, 22, 29, 57, 85, 87, 113, 141 and 169 days post-dose|Analysed for intent-to-treat (ITT) population comprised of 103 patients (IM: 51 and SC: 52 patients).||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833380|NCT01257425|Secondary|Area Under the Curve of Testosterone Serum Concentration Between D85 and D169 (AUC85-169d)|Area under the curve calculated from serum testosterone concentration taken at intervals between Day 85 and Day 169 after dosing. From the curve describing serum testosterone concentration levels (ng/mL) over time, the AUC was calculated using numerical integration methods. This value was log-transformed to more closely meet the assumption of the statistical method.|85, 87, 113, 141 and 169 days post-dose|95 patients (IM: 47 patients, SC: 48 patients) received a second injection of the study drug.||log(ng*day/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833381|NCT01257425|Secondary|Area Under the Curve of Testosterone Serum Concentration Between D1 and D169 (AUC1-169d)|Area under the curve calculated from serum testosterone concentration taken at intervals between the first administration (Day 1) of the study drug and Day 169 after dosing. From the curve describing serum testosterone concentration levels (ng/mL) over time, the AUC was calculated using numerical integration methods. This value was log-transformed to more closely meet the assumption of the statistical method.|1, 3, 5, 8, 15, 22, 29, 57, 85, 87, 113, 141 and 169 days post-dose|||log(ng*day/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833382|NCT01257425|Primary|Area Under the Curve of Testosterone Serum Concentration Between D1 and D85 (AUC1-85d).|Area under the curve (AUC) calculated from serum testosterone concentration taken at intervals between the first administration (Day 1) of the study drug and Day 85 after dosing. From the curve describing serum testosterone concentration levels (ng/mL) over time, the AUC was calculated using numerical integration methods. This value was log-transformed to more closely meet the assumption of the statistical method.|1, 3, 5, 8, 15, 22, 29, 57, 85 days post-dose|Analysed from ITT population.||log(ng*day/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833383|NCT01257438|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Primary Lesion Patency (PLP) That is Superior for FLUENCY® PLUS Endovascular Stent Graft (Following PTA) Over PTA Alone Through Six Months in the Treatment of In-stent Restenotic Lesions.|Primary Lesion Patency (PLP) is defined as the interval after the index intervention until the next re-intervention at the original treatment site or until the extremity is abandoned for permanent access. Freedom from re-intervention is the criteria for success.|6 months|||% of subjects with successful PLP||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833384|NCT01257438|Primary|Non-inferiority of FLUENCY® PLUS Endovascular Stent Graft (Following PTA) Over PTA Alone Through 30 Days in the Treatment of In-stent Restenotic Lesions.|Safety rates measured for the randomized subjects population (both Arteriovenous (AV) Graft and Fistula subjects combined), the percentage of subjects free from safety events through 30 days.|30 days|Safety rates measured for the randomized subjects population (both AV Graft and Fistula subjects combined), the percentage of subjects free from safety events through 30 days.||% of subjects free from safety events||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833434|NCT01258049|Secondary|Early Treatment Failure|"Early treatment failure is indicated by one or more of the following:
Parasite count on Day 2 > Day 0, irrespective of temperature
Parasite count on Day 3 > 0 with tympanic temperature ≥ 38.0°C
Parasite count on Day 3 ≥ 25% of baseline
Administration of rescue antimalarial treatment"|Three days after the start of treatment|||participants|||Number
833385|NCT01257438|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Access Circuit Primary Patency (ACPP) That is Superior for FLUENCY® PLUS Endovascular Stent Graft (Following Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA)) Over PTA Alone Through Six Months.|Access Circuit Primary Patency (ACPP) is defined as the interval following the index intervention until the next access thrombosis or repeated intervention. ACPP ends with a reintervention anywhere within the access circuit, from the arterial inflow to the superior vena cava-right atrial junction. Venous rupture caused by PTA is not an ACPP failure unless achieving hemostasis also causes thrombosis. Freedom from access thrombosis or repeated intervention is the criteria for success.|6 months|Subjects at risk (at 6 months) is a calculation in Kaplan-Meier time-to-event analyses that refers to subjects who have not had ACPP failure through the 6 months (i.e., are event-free through 6 months).||% of subjects with successful ACPP||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833386|NCT01257503|Secondary|Overall Symptom Severity|Change in cold symptoms of child during the 7-10 days after the index visit for an upper respiratory tract infection. Parents assessed severity of runny nose, cough, sneeze and congestion in their child using a 0-3 scale for each symptom, 0=none to 3= severe. Cold score is sum of scores for each symptom. Parents assessed cold score twice daily on study days 1-3 and at the 7-10 day follow-up|10 days|Data analyzed on participant who completed 7-10 day follow-up and had valid cold scores. Data also analyzed twice daily on those participants who returned symptom diaries including: day 1 (153, 148), day 2 (146,138), and day 3 (136, 126). For category title, first n= homeopathic cold remedy, second n= placebo.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833387|NCT01257503|Secondary|Health Status|Change in health status of child during the 7-10 days after the index visit for an upper respiratory tract infection. Parents rated health status on 1-10 scale with 1 indicating perfect health and 10 indicating very sick. Health status rated on first 3 days of study and again at the 7-10 day follow-up|10 days|Health status on those with follow-up data and a valid score for health status. Health status also assessed in participants who returned symptom diaries including 152 on day 1, 142 on day 2 and 132 on day 3. For category title, first n= homeopathic cold remedy, second n= placebo.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833388|NCT01257503|Secondary|Functional Status|Change in functional status of child during the 7-10 days after the index visit for an upper respiratory tract infection. Parents rated 5 activities (vigorous activity, activities that require concentration, activities with family or friends, appetite and sleep) daily for 3 days in their child and again at the 7-10 day follow-up. Functional status scores range from 0 to 15, with higher scores indicative of better functional status.|10 days|Participants who completed follow-up and had valid data for functional outcome. Data on functional status analyzed on days 1-3 for participants who returned symptom diaries including 145 on day 1, 142 on day 2 and 130 on day 3. For category title, first n= homeopathic cold remedy, second n= placebo.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833389|NCT01257503|Secondary|Change in Non-specific Symptoms|Parents measured change in severity of irritability, lethargy, fussiness, and appetite one hour after administering a dose of study medication up to the first 10 doses of study medication. Change in symptom rated from 0 to 6, with 0 indicative of the symptom being much worse and 6 indicative of the symptom being much improved. The unit of analysis for each outcome was doses of medication. Each participant could contribute data on 0 - 10 doses.|Parents assessed change in symptom 1 hour after dose of study medication|Data are from logbooks returned by participants. For each participant, data on response to up to 10 doses were collected. Not every symptom was present at each dose. Change in irritability assessed after 510 doses, lethargy 414, fussiness 501, appetite 618. For category title, first n= homeopathic cold remedy, second n= placebo.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833390|NCT01257503|Primary|Change in Severity of Cold Symptoms|Parents measured change in runny nose, cough, nasal congestion and sneezing severity one hour after administering a dose of study medication up to the first 10 doses of study medication. Change in symptom rated from 0 to 6, with 0 indicative of the symptom being much worse and 6 indicative of the symptom being much improved. The unit of analysis for each outcome was doses of medication. Each participant could contribute data on 0 - 10 doses.|Parents assessed change in symptom 1 hour after a dose of study medication|Data are from logbooks returned by participants. For each participant, data on response to up to 10 doses were collected. Not every symptom was present at each dose. Change in runny nose assessed after 819 doses, sneeze 456 doses, cough 772 doses, congestion 845. For category title, first n= homeopathic cold remedy, second n= placebo.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833435|NCT01258049|Secondary|Complete Cure Rate|The complete resolution of clinical signs and symptoms, malaria-related laboratory abnormalities, and elimination of asexual parasites by Day 7, with no recurrence up to Day 28 (+/- 2 days), and the 48h parasite count to be < 25% of baseline with no clinical deterioration|28 days after the start of treatment|For some subjects, this endpoint was not evaluable and/or not all data was received.||participants|||Number
833398|NCT01257581|Secondary|ATLIS Upper Percentage of Predicted Normal (PPN)|The ATLIS PPN measures are percentages of predicted normal strength based on age, gender, height, and weight using normative data.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||percentages of predicted normal strength||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833399|NCT01257581|Secondary|Accurate Test of Limb Isometric Strength (ATLIS) Lower Percentage of Predicted Normal (PPN)|The ATLIS PPN measures are percentages of predicted normal strength based on age, gender, height, and weight using normative data.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||percentages of predicted normal strength||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833400|NCT01257581|Secondary|HHD Upper % Baseline|The HHD % baseline measures are mean percent change for shoulder flexion, elbow extension, elbow flexion, wrist extension, and first dorsal interosseous muscles from each participant's baseline.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833401|NCT01257581|Secondary|HHD Upper Z-score|The HHD upper z-scores are means of z-scores for right and left shoulder flexion, elbow extension, elbow flexion, write extension and first dorsal interosseous muscles with z-scores calculated relative to the baseline mean and standard deviation strength of each muscle group across all participants.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||Z-score||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833402|NCT01257581|Secondary|HHD Lower % Baseline|HHD % baseline measures are mean percent change for right and left knee extension, knee flexion, hip flexion, and ankle dorsiflexion from each participant's baseline.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833403|NCT01257581|Secondary|Hand Held Dynamometry (HHD) Lower Z-score|The HHD lower z-scores are means of z-scores for right and left knee extension, knee flexion, hip flexion, and ankle dorsiflexion with z-scores calculated relative to the baseline mean and standard deviation strength of each muscle group across all participants.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||Z-score||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833404|NCT01257581|Secondary|Lab Abnormal Reports by Treatment Assignment|The safety data is summarized according to treatment arm. Total number of Adverse Events (AEs), AEs that cause study drug withdrawal and abnormal laboratory tests are compared among treatment arms. A lab abnormality was a result that was out of range and considered clinically significant by the site investigator.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||Events|||Number
833405|NCT01257581|Secondary|Dose Adjustments|These events were due to a double-blinded study design.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||Number of Events due to Adverse Events|||Number
833406|NCT01257581|Secondary|Tracheostomy-free Survival|Secondary efficacy will be assessed by analyzing rate of tracheostomy-free survival at nine months.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833407|NCT01257581|Secondary|Vital Capacity/Pulmonary Function Testing|Secondary efficacy will be assessed by analyzing the change in the Slow Vital Capacity score over nine months. Vital Capacity is the maximum amount of air a person can expel from the lungs after a maximum inhalation. A subject's VC depends on their age, sex and height. The value is recorded as a percentage of predicted normal.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||Percentage of predicted max value||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833408|NCT01257581|Primary|Change in ALS Functional Rating Scale - Revised (ALSFRS-R)|Primary efficacy will be assessed by analyzing the mean rate of decline in the ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) score over nine months. The ALSFRS-R is a quickly administered (5 min) ordinal rating scale used to determine a subject's assessment of their capability and independence in 12 functional activities. There are 12 questions, graded by the subject 0-4 (4 is normal). Score of 0 (worst) to 48 (best). Reflects speech and swallowing, fine motor skills, large motor skills, and breathing.|38 weeks of treatment followed by a telephone interview at 42 weeks.|||scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833415|NCT01257802|Secondary|Mean Ovarian Volume.|Mean ovarian volume reflects the preservation of ovarian tissue despite exposure to cyclophosphamide; reduced ovarian size is documented in cyclophosphamide treated patients|baseline and 6 months|4 of the 7 subjects in the placebo arm dropped out of the study before reaching the 24 week (6 month) milestone, and 2 subjects of the 6 subjects receiving active drug did not have ultrasound performed at the 24 week (6 month) milestone||cubic centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
833416|NCT01257802|Secondary|Mean Antral Follicle Count (AFC)|Mean antral follicle count (AFC) is the average number of follicles counted in each of 2 ovaries|baseline and 6 months|4 of the 7 subjects in the placebo arm dropped out of the study before reaching the 24 week (6 month) milestone, and 2 subjects of the 6 subjects receiving active drug did not have ultrasound performed at the 24 week (6 month) milestone||# of ovarian follicles||Standard Deviation|Mean
833417|NCT01257802|Secondary|Number of Participants With Either an AMH Level of >1 ng/mL OR Antral Follicle Count of >4.|An AMH level of >1 ng/ml and/or an antral follicle count of >4 in either ovary is a strong predictor of residual ovarian function|baseline and 6 months|4 of the 7 subjects in the placebo arm dropped out of the study and 2 of the remaining subjects failed to have blood drawn at the 24 week (6 month) milestone, and 1 subject of the 6 subjects receiving active drug dropped out of the study before reaching the 24 week (6 month) milestone||Participants|||Count of Participants
833418|NCT01257802|Secondary|Count of Patients With AMH of ≤1.0 ng/mL vs >1 ng/mL,|AMH level ≤1.0 predicts onset of menopause within 5 years in normal women|baseline and 6 months|4 of the 7 subjects in the placebo arm dropped out of the study and 2 of the remaining subjects failed to have blood drawn at the 24 week (6 month) milestone, and 1 subject of the 6 subjects receiving active drug dropped out of the study before reaching the 24 week (6 month) milestone||Participants|||Count of Participants
833419|NCT01257802|Primary|Anti-mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measured as a Continuous Variable, Specifically Assessing the Intra-person Change From Study Entry (Day 0) to 6-month Post-intervention Visit|AMH was quantified in vitro a commercially available enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (Beckman Coulter; Marseille, France) was used for in vitro quantitative measurement of serum AMH.|Day 0 to 6-month post-intervention visit|8 subjects are listed in the breakdown of baseline characteristics. Samples were missing from one subject enrolled in the Placebo arm - therefore analysis throughout the majority of the reporting will include only 7 samples instead of 8 in the Placebo arm||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
833420|NCT01257880|Secondary|White Matter Lesions|Presence and severity of white matter lesions on magnetic resonance imaging, taken within 5 years prior to study enrollment. Subjects will not have magnetic resonance imaging performed as part of this study. Films will be requested and an independent neuroradiologist will assess presence of white matter lesions.|Within 5 years prior to enrollment||||||
833421|NCT01257880|Secondary|Oxygen Desaturation Index|Measurement of number of times per hour blood oxygen saturation decreases by at least 4% during home sleep study.|Baseline||||||
833422|NCT01257880|Primary|Cognitive Function|Cognitive function will be assessed by a battery of performance-based neuropsychological tests.|Baseline||||||
833423|NCT01257880|Primary|Sleep Apnea, Number of Participants|An apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) >10 per hour during a home sleep study, defined as at least 5 hours of recorded data on the portable sleep monitor instrument for either the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) or oxygen desaturation index (ODI) and at least 3 hours for the other index. The scale adopted for assessment of sleep apnea is as follows: AHI < 5, optimal; AHI 5-10, equivocal, participant may have sleep apnea; AHI >10, sleep apnea highly likely.|Following one night of a home sleep study|The analysis was based on per protocol.||participants|||Number
833424|NCT01257880|Primary|Platelet Activation|Platelet-poor plasma levels of sCD40L and P-selectin, and serum concentration of TXB2.|Baseline||||||
833425|NCT01257880|Primary|Cerebral Vasomotor Reactivity (VMR)|"The percentage change in basilar artery blood flow velocity from baseline between hypercapnia (increased blood CO2) and hypocapnia (decreased blood CO2), as measured by transcranial Doppler during a single testing period. This is calculated using the following equation:
VMR = 100 x (VelocityHYPERCAPNIA - VelocityHYPOCAPNIA) / VelocityBASELINE"|Baseline|||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
833426|NCT01257880|Primary|Embolic Tracks|Embolic tracks on transcranial Doppler at rest and following calibrated Valsalva maneuver|Baseline||||||
833427|NCT01258049|Secondary|Number of Deaths or Neurological Sequelae at Day 28||28 days after start of treatment|||participants|||Number
833428|NCT01258049|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events, of Possible, Probably and Definite Causalities||28 days after start of treatment|||participants|||Number
833429|NCT01258049|Secondary|Time to Return to Normal Per os Status|Time in hours to return to normal per os status. Normal per os was when the investigator considered the patient to be able to eat and drink normally.|28 days after start of treatment|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
833430|NCT01258049|Secondary|Time to Return to Full Consciousness|"Time in hours to return to full consciousness (Blantyre Coma Scale = 5), if level of consciousness is reduced (Blantyre Coma Scale <5) prior to dosing or within 24hours of first dosing.
For the Blantyre Coma Scale
Total - maximum 5, eye movement - maximum 1, best motor response - maximum 2, best verbal response - maximum 2"|28 days after start of treatment|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
833431|NCT01258049|Secondary|Late Parasitological Failure|o Parasitaemia on any day from Day 7 to Day 28 and tympanic temperature ≤ 38.0°C|28 days after the start of treatment|||participants|||Number
833432|NCT01258049|Primary|Parasitological Success (PP)|Parasitological success defined as a reduction in parasite count of ≥ 90% of baseline at 24 hours after the first dose|24 hours after start of treatment|The Per Protocol (PP) population included the subjects in the MITT population who had received at least 80% of doses up to the time of discharge from the hospital, had evaluable data up to and including Day 28 and had no major protocol violations.||participants|||Number
833433|NCT01258049|Secondary|Late Clinical Failure|"Signs of severe malaria on any day between Day 4 and Day 28 in the presence of parasitaemia, without previously meeting any of the criteria of early treatment failure
Presence of parasitaemia and tympanic temperature ≥ 38.0°C (or history of fever), on any day between Day 4 and Day 28, without previously meeting any of the criteria of early treatment failure"|28 days after the start of treatment|||participants|||Number
833436|NCT01258049|Secondary|Fever Clearance Time (FCT)|Time in hours from the initiation of therapy until the disappearance of fever (tympanic temperature < 38.0) that lasted at least 24 hours.|28 days after start of treatment|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
833442|NCT01258049|Primary|Parasitological Success (MITT)|Parasitological success defined as a reduction in parasite count of ≥ 90% of baseline at 24 hours after the first dose|24 hours after start of treatment|"The Modified Intention to Treat (MITT) population included all randomised subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had evaluable parasite counts at 24 hours after first dosing.
7 subjects for ArTiMist and 3 subjects for quinine were excluded due to no baseline or 24 h parasite count"||participants|||Number
833443|NCT01258101|Secondary|Time to Viral Response|Time to viral response was calculated as Date of first negative PCR result after screening – date of PCR screening sample + 1 [in days]. Mean of number of days to viral response for overall population were reported.|Up to Week 48|Standard analysis population includes all randomized participants.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
833444|NCT01258101|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory Mean Score for Participants Receiving an Opioid Maintenance Therapy At Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24 and 48|For the psychiatric assessment, the results of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) questionnaires were evaluated. BDI results were analyzed descriptively by visit, treatment group, genotype and opioid maintenance therapy status. BDI is 21 item participant rated inventory evaluates depression symptoms, cognition, and physical symptoms of fatigue, weight loss, lack of interest in sex. Individual items are scored on a 4 point scale (0 to 3), with 0=none/absent and 3=most severe. Total score: 0 to 63; higher score indicates more depression. Mean scores are presented by visit. Baseline is defined as Week 0.|At Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24 and 48|Standard analysis population includes all randomized participants.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833445|NCT01258101|Secondary|Mean Beschwerdeliste Score for Participants Receiving an Opioid Maintenance Therapy At Baseline and Weeks 16, 24 and 48|Psychiatric assessment were performed using Beschwerdeliste (BL) questionnaires. BL results were analyzed descriptively by visit, treatment group, genotype and opioid maintenance therapy status. The BL questionnaire items were scored by calculating the average response to all answered items. Items were graded 1=”stark” (affliction is strong) to 4=”gar nicht” (not present). The higher the BL score, the less afflictions were present for a participant. Baseline is defined as Week 0.|At Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 16, 24 and 48|Standard analysis population includes all randomized participants.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833446|NCT01258101|Secondary|Mean FSS Scores at Baseline and Weeks 16, 24 and 48|The Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) is a self-administered instrument that includes 9 items rated on a 7-point scale, measuring fatigue severity. The participants were asked to score each statement, based on how the statement applied to them over the preceding week. The fatigue severity score is the average of the scores on the 9 questions; scores range from 1-7, with lower scores indicating less fatigue. Baseline is defined as Week 0.|At Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 16, 24 and 48|Standard analysis population includes all randomized participants.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833447|NCT01258101|Secondary|Mean SF-36 Scores at Baseline and Weeks 16, 24 and 48|Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a 36-item questionnaire measuring eight domains (physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional, and mental health). Each domain score ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores reflecting better health-related functional status. Where Baseline (BS) is Week 0.|At Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 16, 24 and 48|Standard analysis population includes all randomized participants.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833448|NCT01258101|Secondary|Median Hemoglobin Levels at End of Treatment|Hemoglobin (Hb) levels at end of treatment (Week 16 and Week 24) were reported. The mean lowest Hb value after treatment starts with a median of 129 gram (g)/Litre (L). The far most frequent hemoglobin class was >=100 g/L. The purpose of assessing the Hb levels is associated with ribavirin dose. The primary toxicity of ribavirin dose (1000-1200 mg/day, maximum tolerated dose) is anemia with a reduction in hemoglobin levels generally occurring within the first 1-2 weeks of initiating therapy. Decreases in hemoglobin seen in the combination treatment of ribavirin and Interferon-alfa are managed with reduction in ribavirin dosage to 600 mg/day.|At Week 16 and Week 24|The Safety analysis population was defined to include only participant who received at least one dose of (either) study medication and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment.||g/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833449|NCT01258101|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events and Any Serious Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that occurred during the course of the trial after study treatment had started. An adverse event was therefore any unfavourable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of study drug, whether or not considered related to the study drug. A Serious adverse event (SAE) is any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in death, are life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or results in disability/incapacity, and congenital anomaly/birth defect.|Up to Week 48|The Safety analysis population was defined to include only participants who received at least one dose of (either) study medication and had at least one post-baseline assessment.||Number of Participants|||Number
833450|NCT01258101|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virologic Response Rates as Per Genotype at End of Treatment|Virologic Response was defined as undetectable HCV-RNA levels (determined by AMPLICOR HCV test) at Week 16 and Week 24. Virologic response rates based on genotype (G2 and G3) were reported. ETR is defined as Week 16 and Week 24.|At Week 16 and Week 24|Standard analysis population includes all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833451|NCT01258101|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virological Response at the End of the Treatment|Virological response at the end of the treatment (ETR) was defined as the percentage of participants with negative qualitative PCR in each group at completion of the treatment. ETR is defined as Week 16 and Week 24.|At Week 16 and Week 24|Standard analysis population includes all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833452|NCT01258101|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis C Virus-RNA Determined by AMPLICOR HCV Test At Week 24 and Week 48|Serum Hepatitis C Virus-RNA (HCV-RNA) was done by Polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Samples for a qualitative PCR (AMPLICOR® HCV Test v2.0) were obtained at Week 24 and Week 48. 'G2' and 'G3' indicates Genotype 2 and Genotype 3 respectively.|At Week 24 and Week 48|Standard analysis population includes all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834225|NCT01275625|Secondary|Immunological Response at Week 48: Percentage Change From Baseline in Absolute Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4)|Immunological Response was summarized using percentage change from Baseline to Week 48 in absolute CD4+ cell count|Week 48|FAS Population included those participants who had taken at least 1 dose of the study drug.||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
833453|NCT01258101|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve Sustained Virologic Response Rate At 24 Weeks Post Completion of the Treatment|Sustained virological response was defined as the percentage of participants in each group with undetectable Hepatitis C virus-Ribonucleic acid (HCV-RNA) measurement at 24 weeks post completion of the treatment.|Up to Week 48 (24 weeks post completion of the treatment)|Standard analysis population includes all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833454|NCT01258153|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability Will be Assessed in Terms of Frequency and Severity of AEs as Well as Frequency of Clinically Significant Changes in Physical Examination and Lab Test.|Safety and tolerability will be assessed for the Safety Population (all patients who received the study drug) in terms of frequency and severity of AEs as well as frequency of clinically significant changes in physical examination and lab test.|up to four weeks|All patients receiving the study drug (114)||Adverse events|||Number
833455|NCT01258153|Secondary|Absolute Change in the Overall Parental Judgment After Treatment Discontinuation Versus Baseline|"On a daily basis parents expressed an overall judgement on the study treatment effect based on a 6 rate categorical scale from 0 to 5 (where 0 is for Not at all and 5 is Extremely.
The question was How frustrating to you was your baby's crying today?)"|10 days|ITT - defined as the safety population randomised with at least 24h diary recording post 1st dose of study treatment||Score range 0-5|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833456|NCT01258153|Secondary|Absolute Change in the Overall Parental Judgment at the End of Treatment Versus Baseline|"On a daily basis parents expressed an overall judgement on the study treatment effect based on a 6 rate categorical scale from 0 to 5 (where 0 is for Not at all and 5 is Extremely.
The question was How frustrating to you was your baby's crying today?)"|1 week|ITT - defined as the safety population randomised with at least 24h diary recording post 1st dose of study treatment||Score range 0-5|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833457|NCT01258153|Secondary|Absolute Change in the Overall Parental Judgment After the First Dose of Treatment Versus Baseline|"On a daily basis parents expressed an overall judgement on the study treatment effect based on a 6 rate categorical scale from 0 to 5 (where 0 is for Not at all and 5 is Extremely.
The question was How frustrating to you was your baby's crying today?)"|1 day|ITT - defined as the safety population randomised with at least 24h diary recording post 1st dose of study treatment||Score range 0-5|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833458|NCT01258153|Secondary|Percentage of 'Responder' Babies at the End of Treatment Period.|Response is defined as a decrease of at least 50% of crying and fussing time during the last 3 days on treatment vs baseline.|baseline and one week|112 instead of 113, because 1 subject had no records at baseline and therefore the outcome could not be measured||Responders Rate (% of responders babies)|||Number
833459|NCT01258153|Primary|Absolute Change of the Mean Daily Crying and Fussing Time for Three Consecutive Days While on Treatment Versus Baseline.|Efficacy assessment to be measured through “baby’s day” diary recorded for three consecutive days while on treatment (i.e. starting from 6 pm on Day 4 and continued for 72 hours) vs baseline (i.e. starting from 6 pm on Day -4 until 1st treatment administration).|Baseline and one week|112 instead of 113, because 1 subject had no records at baseline and therefore the outcome could not be measured||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
833460|NCT01258387|Secondary|Change From Baseline of 2D-ECHO Measured by End-Systolic Volume (ESV)|"ESV is the volume of blood remaining in each ventricle at the end of systole.¹
¹http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/end-diastolic+volume"|Screening, day 8, day 14, day 28, and 3 months post-dose|Safety Population||Milliliter(s)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833461|NCT01258387|Secondary|Change From Baseline of 2D-ECHO Measured by End-Diastolic Volume (EDV)|"EDV is the amount of blood in the ventricle immediately before a cardiac contraction begins; used as a measurement of diastolic function.¹
¹http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/end-diastolic+volume"|Screening, day 8, day 14, day 28, and 3 months post-dose|Safety Population||Milliliter(s)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833462|NCT01258387|Secondary|Change From Baseline of Two-Dimensional Echocardiogram (2D-ECHO) Measured by Ejection Fraction (EF)|"An echocardiogram is a type of ultrasound test that uses high-pitched sound waves that are sent through a device called a transducer. The device picks up echoes of the sound waves as they bounce off the different parts of your heart. These echoes are turned into moving pictures of your heart that can be seen on a video screen.¹
Ejection fraction is a measurement of the percentage of blood leaving your heart each time it contracts.²
¹http://wakeinternalmedicine.com/services-and-procedures/services/radiology/2d-echo/
²http://www.mayoclinic.org/ejection-fraction/expert-answers/faq-20058286"|Screening, day 8, day 14, day 28, and 3 months post-dose|Safety Population||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
833463|NCT01258387|Primary|Safety of Single Ascending Doses of GGF2 Via an Assessment of the Toxicology Profile as Measured by Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|"Safety/ tolerability of single dose; cumulative safety over 6 months
TEAEs are defined as adverse events with date of onset (or worsening) on or after the start date of double-blind treatment and no more than 28 days from the start date of double-blind treatment."|6 months|Safety population||participants|||Number
833464|NCT01258504|Primary|Cmax of Bosentan||after first dose, at steady-state and during SJW|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833465|NCT01258504|Primary|AUC of Bosentan||0-infinity; during dosing interval|||h*ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833466|NCT01258582|Primary|Acceptability of the HIV Test|The primary outcome measure was HIV test acceptance rate defined by the proportion of participants whom accepted HIV testing among those randomized within each trial arm (fingerstick or oral fluid).|Assess on day subject enrolled into the study|Intent to treat analysis||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833467|NCT01258595|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection Site or Systemic Reactions After Vaccination With Either Fluzone® High-Dose or Fluzone® Vaccine|Solicited Injection Site Reactions: Pain, Erythema, Swelling, Ecchymosis, and Induration. Solicited Systemic Reactions: Fever, Headache, Malaise, Myalgia, and Shivering|Day 0 through Day 7 post-vaccination|Safety analysis was on all enrolled and vaccinated subjects with available reaction data, safety analysis set population.||Participants|||Number
833468|NCT01258595|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Seroprotection Before and After Vaccination With Either Fluzone® High-Dose or Fluzone® Vaccine|Seroprotection was defined as a titer ≥ 40 (1/dilution [1/dil]). Serum antibody titers were assessed by means of the hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay method.|Day 0 and Day 28 post vaccination|Seroprotection was assessed in the full analysis set population.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
833469|NCT01258595|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Seroconversion After Vaccination With Either Fluzone® High-Dose or Fluzone® Vaccine|"Seroconversion: For participants with a Day 0 (pre-vaccination) titer < 10 (1/dilution [1/dil]) a titer ≥ 40 (1/dil), and for participants with a Day 0 titer ≥ 10 (1/dil) a ≥ 4 fold increase of titer on Day 28.
Serum antibody titers were assessed by means of the hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay method."|Day 0 and Day 28 post-vaccination|Seroconversion to the vaccine antigens was assessed in the full analysis set population.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
833470|NCT01258595|Primary|Geometric Mean of Individual Titer Ratios (GMTRs) of Vaccine Antibodies Before and After Vaccination With Either Fluzone® High-Dose or Fluzone® Vaccine|Serum antibody titers to vaccine antigens were assessed by means of the hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay method.|Day 0 and Day 28 Post-vaccination|Serum antibody titers to vaccine antigens were assessed in the full analysis set population.||1/dilution (1/dil)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833471|NCT01258595|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) of Vaccine Antibodies Before and After Vaccination With Either Fluzone® High-Dose or Fluzone® Vaccine.|Serum antibody titers to vaccine antigens were assessed by means of the hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay method.|Day 0 and Day 28 post-vaccination|Serum antibody titers to vaccine antigens were assessed in the full analysis set population.||1/dilution (1/dil)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833472|NCT01258660|Secondary|Homocysteine Concentrations in Plasma at Baseline and at the End of Treatment (Week 24) With Folic Acid|Homocysteine concentrations in plasma at baseline (median of baseline concentrations) and at the end of treatment (week 24) with folic acid|baseline, and up to 24 weeks of treatment|||µmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833473|NCT01258660|Secondary|Homocysteine Concentrations in Plasma at Baseline and at the End of Treatment (Week 24) With Metafolin|Homocysteine concentrations in plasma at baseline (median of baseline concentrations) and at the end of treatment (week 24) with Metafolin|baseline and week 24|||µmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833474|NCT01258660|Secondary|Folate Metabolite Pattern in Plasma at Cycle 6|Folate metabolite pattern in plasma at cycle 6|week 24|||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833475|NCT01258660|Secondary|Folate Metabolite Pattern in Plasma at Cycle 3|Folate metabolite pattern in plasma at cycle 3|week 12|||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833476|NCT01258660|Secondary|Folate Metabolite Pattern in Plasma at Baseline|Folate metabolite pattern in plasma at baseline|pre-treatment|Note that not all samples were evaluable for each outcome measure. Therefore the number of participants analyzed not necessarily matches the number of completers.||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
833477|NCT01258660|Primary|Proportion of Participants With RBC Folate Below 906 Nmol/L in the Yasmin + Metafolin Group in the Folate Elimination Phase (Week 24 to 44)|Proportion of participants with RBC folate below 906 nmol/L in the Yasmin + Metafolin group in the folate elimination phase (week 24 to 44)|from week 24 to week 44|||proportion of participants|||Number
833478|NCT01258660|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time 0 to 24 Weeks [AUC(0-24weeks)] for Plasma Folate and RBC (Red Blood Cell) Folate (Baseline Corrected)|The AUC is a measure of systemic drug exposure, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample.|up to 24 weeks of treatment|||nmol·week/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833479|NCT01258660|Primary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) From Time 0 to 24 Weeks [AUC(0-24weeks)] for Plasma Folate and RBC (Red Blood Cell) Folate (Baseline Uncorrected)|The Area under the curve (AUC) is a measure of systemic drug exposure, which is obtained by collecting a series of blood samples and measuring the concentrations of drug in each sample.|up to 24 weeks of treatment|||nmol·week/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833480|NCT01258738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) at Time Points|PASS is defined as a symptom state that the participants consider acceptable.|Weeks 12 and 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833481|NCT01258738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Minimally Clinically Important Improvement (MCII) at Time Points|The MCII asks participants to rate the level of improvement they have experienced in the 48 hours compared to when they started the study. Response options are “Improved - less pain”, “No change”, and “Worse – more pain.” If the participant indicates that improvement has occurred, then they are asked to indicate how important that improvement is to them from “Not at all important” to “Very important’.|Weeks 12 and 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833482|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Scale Score From Baseline to Week 104|The MOS sleep scale consists of 12 items to measure 6 sleep dimensions: initiation (time to fall asleep), quantity (hours of sleep each night), maintenance, respiratory problems, perceived adequacy, somnolence (the last 4 items reported using a 6-item Likert scale ranging from 1 [all of the time] to 6 [none of the time]). The raw scores ranging from 1 to 6 are transformed to scores ranging from 0 to 100 before the indices are calculated. Therefore the reported scores, consisting of means of converted items, also range from 0 to 100. However, two indexes can be derived: Sleep problems index I (short form) and sleep problems index II (long form). Additional subscales can be derived: sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken shortness of breath or headache, sleep adequacy, sleep somnolence, sleep quantity, and optimal sleep. However, data for two indexes and additional subscales is not reported.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833499|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Score at Time Points|Each of the 10 fingers and 10 toes is evaluated for dactylitis. A score of 0, 1, 2 or 3 (where 0 = none, 1= mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe) is assigned to each. A total score which can range from 0 to 60 is obtained by adding the scores for the 20 digits|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833483|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) Score at Time Points|"The MFI is a 20-item questionnaire that evaluates several aspects of fatigue. The General Fatigue Item is disclosed here. The general fatigue item contains four items, two of which are indicative for fatigue and two items contra-indicative for fatigue. Indicative items (eg, I tire easily) are formulated in such a way that a high score suggests a high degree of fatigue. In case of contra-indicative items (eg, I feel fit) a high score indicates a low degree of fatigue. Each item is scored on a 5-point numeric rating scale anchored at each end by “Yes, that is true” (scored 1) to “No, that is not true” (scored 5). Scoring for the MFI is done in such a way that higher scores indicate greater fatigue. Therefore, the items indicative for fatigue need to be recoded (1=5, 2=4, 3=3, 4=2, 5=1). For each scale a total score is calculated by summation of the scores of the individual items. Scores can range from the minimum of 4 to the maximum of 20. MFI-20 scale is copyrighted."|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833484|NCT01258738|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in WPAI - Overall Work Impairment Due to Health Problems at Time Points|"The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated:
Percent overall work impairment due to health problem:
Q2/(Q2+Q4)+[(1-Q2/(Q2+Q4))*(Q5/10)]. The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity."|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833485|NCT01258738|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in WPAI - Activity Impairment Due to Health Problems at Time Points|"The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated:
Percent activity impairment due to health problem: Q6/10. The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity."|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833486|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in WPAI: Percent Impairment While Working Due to Health Problems at Time Points|"The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated:
Percent impairment while working due to health problem: Q5/10. The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity."|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833487|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI): Percent Work Time Missed Due to Health Problems at Time Points|"The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated:
Percent work time missed due to health problem: Q2/(Q2+Q4). The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity."|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833488|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ankylosing Spondylitis Work Instability Index (AS-WIS) Score at Time Points|The AS-WIS is a 20 item questionnaire to assess work disability and risk of unemployment due to AS. Higher scores indicate greater work impairment and instability that results from a mismatch between an individual’s ability levels given their AS and their job. Each question is assigned a score of 1 for a response of “True” and 0 for a response of “Not True”. All item scores are summed to give a total score that can range from 0 to 20. If a subject has ≥ 5 missing responses (ie more than 20%), then a total score is not calculated. For subjects with ≥ 1 but ≤ 4 missing responses, the total score is calculated as follows: T=20x/(20-m) where: T is the total score, x is the total score for the items answered and n is the number of non-missing items.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833489|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL) Score at Time Points|ASQoL is a questionnaire that assesses disease-specific quality of life (QoL). It consists of 18 statements that are relevant to the physical and mental conditions for a participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS): mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each statement is answered by the participant as a 'Yes' (scored as 1) or 'No' (scored as 0). All item scores are summed to give a total score. Total score can range from 0 (good QoL) to 18 (poor QoL).|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833490|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HADS Anxiety Score at Time Points|This outcome measure is describing the HADS subscale of anxiety. HADS is a participant rated questionnaire with 2 subscales. HADS-A assesses state of generalized anxiety (anxious mood, restlessness, anxious thoughts, panic attacks); HADS-D assesses state of lost interest and diminished pleasure response (lowering of hedonic tone). Each subscale comprised of 7 items with range 0 (no presence of anxiety or depression) to 3 (severe feeling of anxiety or depression). Total score 0 to 21 for each subscale; higher score indicates greater severity of anxiety and depression symptoms. There is no Total Score for HADS.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833491|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Depression Score at Time Points|This outcome measure is describing the HADS subscale of depression. HADS is a participant rated questionnaire with 2 subscales. HADS-A assesses state of generalized anxiety (anxious mood, restlessness, anxious thoughts, panic attacks); HADS-D assesses state of lost interest and diminished pleasure response (lowering of hedonic tone). Each subscale comprised of 7 items with range 0 (no presence of anxiety or depression) to 3 (severe feeling of anxiety or depression). Total score 0 to 21 for each subscale; higher score indicates greater severity of anxiety and depression symptoms. There is no Total Score for HADS.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833492|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS) at Time Points|SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning).|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833493|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form-36 (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) at Time Points|SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100 = highest level of functioning).|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833494|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Health State Profile Utility Score at Time Points|EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state. Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833495|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ)-5D VAS Score Time Points|EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 mm (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA.||mm||Standard Error|Mean
833496|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) at Time Points|ESR is a laboratory test that provides a non-specific measure of inflammation. The test assesses the rate at which red blood cells fall in a test tube. Normal range is 0-30 mm/hr. A higher rate is consistent with inflammation.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||mm/hr||Standard Error|Mean
833497|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-reactive Protein (CRP) Concentration Time Points|The test for CRP is a laboratory measurement for evaluation of an acute phase reactant of inflammation through the use of an ultrasensitive assay. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||mg/L||Standard Error|Mean
833498|NCT01258738|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesis Score (MASES) at Time Points|Assessment of enthesitis was performed in the following 7 domains: 1) 1st costochondral joint left and right, 2) 7th costochondral joint left and right, 3) posterior superior iliac spine left and right, 4) anterior superior iliac spine left and right, 5) iliac crest left and right, 6) 5th lumbar spinous process and 7) proximal insertion of Achilles tendon left and right. Each domain was graded for the presence (1) and absence (0) of tenderness yielding total MASES ranging from 0 (no tenderness) to 13 (worst possible score; severe tenderness).|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833569|NCT01266876|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Triglycerides at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Since the assumptions of normal distribution and equality of variances were not verified for the lipid parameter, percent changes were expressed as median (interquartile range)|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment fasting triglycerides value.||percent change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833500|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Tender Joints at Time Points|Forty-four (44) joints were assessed by the Investigator to determine the number of joints that were considered tender or painful. The response to pressure/motion on each joint was assessed using the following scale: Present/Absent/Not Done/Not Applicable (to be considered for artificial joints). The 44 joints to be assessed were:sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular, shoulder, elbow, wrist (includes radiocarpal, carpal and carpometacarpal considered as one unit), metacarpophalangeals (I, II, III, IV, V), thumb interphalangeal (IP), proximal IPs (II, III, IV, V), knee, ankle, metatarsophalangeals (I, II, III, IV, V).|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Number of joints||Standard Error|Mean
833501|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Number of Swollen Joints at Time Points|Forty-four (44) joints were assessed by the Investigator to determine the number of joints that were considered swollen (artificial joints were not assessed). The response to pressure/motion on each joint was assessed using the following scale: Present/Absent/Not Done. The 44 joints to be assessed were:sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular, shoulder, elbow, wrist (includes radiocarpal, carpal and carpometacarpal considered as one unit), metacarpophalangeals (I, II, III, IV, V), thumb interphalangeal (IP), proximal IPs (II, III, IV, V), knee, ankle, metatarsophalangeals (I, II, III, IV, V).|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Number of joints||Standard Error|Mean
833502|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Activity (ASspiMRI-a) Total Score|ASspiMRI-a measures acute lesion scores as determined by short-tau inversion recovery (STIR) and gadolinium-enhanced T1 (Gd-DTPA). All 23 disco-vertebral units (DVU) of the spine (from C2 to S1), defined as the region between 2 virtual lines through the middle of each vertebra, are scored in a single dimension, which is representing the highest level of inflammation in that particular DVU. Enhancement and bone marrow edema are graded (0-3) for each DVU, with 3 more grades (4-6) if, in addition to the signs of acute inflammation defined for grades 1-3, erosions are visualized, leading to a maximum score of 138 for the entire spine. Acute spinal changes were assessed by using STIR sagittal views of the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine. The total score ranges from 0 (no inflammation) to 138 (high inflammation).|Weeks 12 and 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through observed cases||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833503|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in SPARCC - Spine 6 Discovertebral Units (DVU) Total Score at Time Points|The change from baseline in the MRI score of spine was assessed using SPARCC method. The scores of the 6 most severely affected spinal levels (discovertebral units/DVUs) was selected. Each DVU was divided into 4 quadrants. Each quadrant was assigned a score of 0 = no lesion or 1 = increased signal. This was repeated for each of 3 consecutive sagittal slices resulting in a score of up to 12 per DVU. On each slice, the presence of a lesion exhibiting an intense signal in any quadrant was assigned an additional score of 1 for that slice. Additionally, on each slice the presence of a lesion exhibiting depth ≥ 1 cm in any quadrant was given an additional score of 1. The maximum score for 6 DVU Spine Total Score is 108.|Weeks 12 and 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through observed cases.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833504|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in SPARCC Score for the Sacroiliac Joint at Time Points|The change from baseline in the MRI score of sacroiliac joints was assessed using SPARCC method. Scoring was based on 6 consecutive coronal slices from posterior to anterior. Each joint was divided into 4 quadrants. Each quadrant was assigned a score of 0 = no lesion/1 = increased signal. For each slice, the score is increased by 1 for each joint that exhibits an intense signal in any quadrant. Also, for each slice, an additional score of 1 will be given for each joint that includes a lesion demonstrating continuous increased signal of a depth ≥1 cm from the articular surface. The maximum possible score is 72.|Weeks 12 and 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through observed cases.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833505|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) - Spine 6 Discovertebral Units (DVU) Total Score at 12 Weeks|The change from baseline in the MRI score of spine was assessed using SPARCC method. The scores of the 6 most severely affected spinal levels (discovertebral units/DVUs) was selected. Each DVU was divided into 4 quadrants. Each quadrant was assigned a score of 0 = no lesion or 1 = increased signal. This was repeated for each of 3 consecutive sagittal slices resulting in a score of up to 12 per DVU. On each slice, the presence of a lesion exhibiting an intense signal in any quadrant was assigned an additional score of 1 for that slice. Additionally, on each slice the presence of a lesion exhibiting depth ≥ 1 cm in any quadrant was given an additional score of 1. The maximum score for 6 DVU Spine Total Score is 108.|Week 12|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through observed cases.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833506|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Occiput-to-wall Test at Time Points|Occiput-to-wall distance: distance between the occiput (posterior or back portion of the head) and the wall when the participant stood with heels and shoulder against the wall and the back straight.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||cm||Standard Error|Mean
833570|NCT01266876|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in HDL-C at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline HDL-C value.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833507|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Chest Expansion at Time Points|Chest expansion, measured in cm, is defined as the difference in thoracic circumference during full expiration versus full inspiration, measured at the fourth intercostal space (nipple line). At maximal inspiration, the chest circumference was measured at nipple line or at the 4th intercostal space (in cm to the nearest 0.1 cm).|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||cm||Standard Error|Mean
833508|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASMI Tragus to Wall Score by Time Point|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score is composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833509|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASMI Intermalleolar Distance Score by Time Point|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score is composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833510|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASMI Modified Schobers Test Score by Time Point|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score is composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833511|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASMI Cervical Rotation Degree by Time Point|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score is composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833512|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASMI Lateral Side Flexion Score by Time Point|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score is composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833513|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) Total Score at Time Points|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score is composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833514|NCT01258738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Global Index (BAS-G) Total Score at Time Points|The BAS-G was a 2 question assessment evaluating the effect of AS on the participants well-being over the last week and last 6 months. The 2 questions were: How have you been over the last week? and How have you been over the last six months?. Each question is scored by the participant on a 100 mm scale ranging from 0 (Very Good) to 100 (Very Bad). The two values are averaged to obtain the BAS-G score.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833515|NCT01258738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With BASDAI 20 at Time Points|Response was defined as a 20% improvement of the Baseline BASDAI to 104 weeks of study treatment. The BASDAI score is obtained by computing the mean score for the 2 questions related to morning stiffness (questions 5 and 6) and then adding that value to the sum of the scores for the first 4 questions and then dividing the total by 5. This can be written as BASDAI=(Q1+Q2+Q3+Q4+(Q5+Q6)/2)/5.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833516|NCT01258738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With BASDAI 50 at Time Points|Response was defined as a 50% improvement of the Baseline BASDAI to 104 weeks of study treatment, respectively. The BASDAI score is obtained by computing the mean score for the 2 questions related to morning stiffness (questions 5 and 6) and then adding that value to the sum of the scores for the first 4 questions and then dividing the total by 5. This can be written as BASDAI=(Q1+Q2+Q3+Q4+(Q5+Q6)/2)/5.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Percentage of participants|||Number
834475|NCT01278927|Secondary|SF-36 Late Outcomes|The SF-36 PCS and MCS will be collected from participants at six months. Raw scores are converted to a standard metric (0-100), with higher scores being indicative of a better health state.|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833517|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASDAI Level of Neck/Back/Hip Pain at Time Points|BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = none and 10 = very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The BASDAI score is obtained by computing the mean score for the 2 questions related to morning stiffness (questions 5 and 6) and then adding that value to the sum of the scores for the first 4 questions and then dividing the total by 5. This can be written as BASDAI=(Q1+Q2+Q3+Q4+(Q5+Q6)/2)/5. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833518|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASDAI Level of Pain/Swelling at Time Points|BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = none and 10 = very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The BASDAI score is obtained by computing the mean score for the 2 questions related to morning stiffness (questions 5 and 6) and then adding that value to the sum of the scores for the first 4 questions and then dividing the total by 5. This can be written as BASDAI=(Q1+Q2+Q3+Q4+(Q5+Q6)/2)/5. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833519|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASDAI Level of How Long Stiffness Lasts at Time Points|BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = none and 10 = very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The BASDAI score is obtained by computing the mean score for the 2 questions related to morning stiffness (questions 5 and 6) and then adding that value to the sum of the scores for the first 4 questions and then dividing the total by 5. This can be written as BASDAI=(Q1+Q2+Q3+Q4+(Q5+Q6)/2)/5. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833520|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASDAI Level of Discomfort at Time Points|BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = none and 10 = very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The BASDAI score is obtained by computing the mean score for the 2 questions related to morning stiffness (questions 5 and 6) and then adding that value to the sum of the scores for the first 4 questions and then dividing the total by 5. This can be written as BASDAI=(Q1+Q2+Q3+Q4+(Q5+Q6)/2)/5. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833521|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASDAI Level of Fatigue/Tiredness at Time Points|BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = none and 10 = very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The BASDAI score is obtained by computing the mean score for the 2 questions related to morning stiffness (questions 5 and 6) and then adding that value to the sum of the scores for the first 4 questions and then dividing the total by 5. This can be written as BASDAI=(Q1+Q2+Q3+Q4+(Q5+Q6)/2)/5. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833522|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASDAI Level of Morning Stiffness at Time Points|BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = none and 10 = very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The BASDAI score is obtained by computing the mean score for the 2 questions related to morning stiffness (questions 5 and 6) and then adding that value to the sum of the scores for the first 4 questions and then dividing the total by 5. This can be written as BASDAI=(Q1+Q2+Q3+Q4+(Q5+Q6)/2)/5. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833523|NCT01258738|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) Total Score at Time Points|BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = none and 10 = very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The BASDAI score is obtained by computing the mean score for the 2 questions related to morning stiffness (questions 5 and 6) and then adding that value to the sum of the scores for the first 4 questions and then dividing the total by 5. This can be written as BASDAI=(Q1+Q2+Q3+Q4+(Q5+Q6)/2)/5. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833571|NCT01266876|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint..|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one on-treatment HDL-C value.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833524|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASFI Putting on Socks at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833525|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASFI Looking Over Shoulder at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833526|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASFI Standing Unsupported for 10 Minutes at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833527|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASFI Getting-up Off-floor From Back at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833528|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASFI Climbing Steps Without Aid at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833529|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASFI Reaching up High at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833530|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASFI Physically Demanding Activities at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833531|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASFI Getting Out of an Arm-less Chair at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833532|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASFI Bending Forward at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833533|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in BASFI Full Day Activities at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
834368|NCT01267175|Secondary|Usability of the Training Material Meets Expectations|Questionnaire completed at the end of the study, measuring usability of the device training manual. Results scored on a Likert scale of 1 - 7, 1 being the least user friendly and 7 being the most user friendly.|5 weeks|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833534|NCT01258738|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) Total Score at Time Points|BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a mean score of the 10 questions.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833535|NCT01258738|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in VAS Score for Total Back Pain at Time Points|The VAS scale was used to assess the level of total back pain during the past 48 hours. For this, participants marked their level of pain on a 100 mm VAS anchored by 0 for “No pain ” to 100 mm for “Most Severe Pain.”|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach. The values were converted to cm for analysis purposes.||cm||Standard Error|Mean
833536|NCT01258738|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in VAS Score for Nocturnal Back Pain at Time Points|The VAS scale was used to assess the level of nocturnal pain during the past 48 hours. For this, participants marked their level of pain on a 100 mm VAS anchored by 0 for “No pain ” to 100 mm for “Most Severe Pain.”|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach. The values were converted to cm for analysis purposes.||cm||Standard Error|Mean
833537|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in VAS Score for Subject Assessment of Disease Activity at Time Points|Participants to assess their overall disease activity over the last 48 hours using a pain scale between 0 mm (none) and 100 mm (severe), which corresponded to the magnitude of their pain.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach. The values were converted to cm for analysis purposes.||cm||Standard Error|Mean
833538|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Physician Global Assessments at Time Points|The Investigator estimated the participant’s overall disease activity over the previous 48 hours (this was independent of the Subject Assessment of Disease Activity) using a scale between 0 mm (none) and 100 mm (severe).|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach. The values were converted to cm for analysis purposes.||cm||Standard Error|Mean
833539|NCT01258738|Secondary|Time to ASAS Partial Remission|The median time to partial remission was not reached at Week 12. Hence, we report an estimate of the percentage of participants, estimated using Kaplan-Meier approach.|Week 12|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833540|NCT01258738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ASAS Partial Remission at Time Points|Partial remission defined as a score of 20 units or less (on a scale of 0-100, where 0 = no disease activity and 100 = high disease activity) in each of the 4 Assessment in ASAS domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, and inflammation. For scale, 100 = high disease activity.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833541|NCT01258738|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) High Sensitivity CRP (hsCRP) Score at Time Points|ASDAS includes CRP (mg/L) or ESR (mm/hr); Apart from the value of CRP or ESR, the four additional self-reported items (rated on 0-10cm VAS or 0-10 numerical rating scale [NRS]) included in this index are back pain, duration of morning stiffness, peripheral pain/swelling and patient global assessment of disease activity. The ASDAS scores are then calculated as follows: ASDAS_CRP = (0.121 x total back pain) + (0.110 x subject global) + (0.073 x peripheral pain/swelling) + (0.058 x duration of morning stiffness) + (0.579 x Ln(CRP+1)). And ASDAS_ESR: (0.079 x total back pain) + (0.113 x subject global) + (0.086 x peripheral pain/swelling) + (0.069 x duration of morning stiffness) + (0.293 x √ESR). In addition, the proportion of participants who achieve inactive disease based on the ASDAS will be determined for each group. Inactive disease is defined as an ASDAS score <1.3.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833542|NCT01258738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ASAS 5/6 Response at Time Points|ASAS 5/6 consists of 6 domains: the 4 used in ASAS 20 (participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation measured on a 0-100 scale, where 0 = no disease activity and 100 = high disease activity) plus spinal mobility and an acute phase reactant, C Reactive Protein (CRP). Achieving ASAS 5/6 requires a 20% improvement compared to baseline in ≥ 5 domains and no worsening in the remaining domain.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833543|NCT01258738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ASAS 20 Response at Time Points|ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in AS in 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 20 = 20% improvement from baseline and an absolute change ≥ 10 units on a 0-100 scale (0=no disease activity; 100 = high disease activity) for ≥ 3 domains, and no worsening in remaining domain.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Percentage of participants|||Number
834476|NCT01278927|Secondary|Days of Hospitalization|The number of hospital days within the first 100 days after graft infusion will be collected for patients surviving at least 100 days.|100 days|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
833544|NCT01258738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ASAS 40 Response at Time Points|ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in AS in 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 40 = 40% improvement from baseline and an absolute change ≥ 20 units on a 0-100 scale (0 = no disease activity, 100 = high disease activity) for ≥ 3 domains, and no worsening in remaining domain.|Baseline to Week 104|mITT population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for AxSpA. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833545|NCT01258738|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) 40 Response at Week 12|ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) in 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 40 = 40% improvement from baseline and an absolute change ≥ 20 units on a 0-100 scale (0 = no disease activity, 100 = high disease activity) for ≥ 3 domains, and no worsening in remaining domain.|Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population defined as all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had at least one on-therapy evaluation and met the ASAS classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA). Missing data were imputed through last observation carried forward (LOCF) approach.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833546|NCT01266824|Secondary|PIPP Score|PIPP score measure immediately following mydriatic drop administration|within 5 minutes after Mydriatic drop administration|Due to poor enrollment, this study was not completed and no patients were analyzed as a part of the randomized controlled trial.|||||
833547|NCT01266824|Secondary|Bradycardia/Desaturation|Number of episodes of bradycardia (HR 90) and significant desaturation (event requiring stimulation, per Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) protocol, to resolve) occurring after the administration of mydriatic and proparacaine eye drops|Within 5 minutes after Proparacaine/mydriatic drop administration until study monitor disconnected|Due to poor enrollment, this study was not completed and no patients were analyzed as a part of the randomized controlled trial.|||||
833548|NCT01266824|Secondary|PIPP Score|PIPP scores measure immediately after Proparacaine administration|within 5 minutes after Proparacaine administration|Due to poor enrollment, this study was not completed and no patients were analyzed as a part of the randomized controlled trial.|||||
833549|NCT01266824|Primary|Change in PIPP Score|Comparison of the change in Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) scores from baseline to the time immediately following mydriatic drop administration between the groups of infants who do and do not receive Proparacaine eye drops prior to mydriatic drops. The PIPP score is a scale to determined pain response that was designed for use in preterm and term infants. It is based on both physiologic and behavioral changes exhibited by infants during the study period of 30s (facial changes, HR, O2 saturation). There are correction factors for gestational age and baseline state at time of scoring. Scores can range from 0-21 with the maximum score dependent on the infant's gestational age. A score >7 typically indicates a pain response while a score >12 indicates more severe pain.|Change from baseline to time immediately following mydriatic drop administration|Due to poor enrollment, this study was not completed and no patients were analyzed as a part of the randomized controlled trial.|||||
833550|NCT01266850|Secondary|Number of Participants Developing Neutralizing Rotavirus Antibody to Rotavirus Serotypes G4P8|Blood was collected from all participants at the follow up visit 3-6 weeks after the last vaccination for testing in the ELISA assay to determine the antibody titers to rotavirus serotype G4P8. A participant met the threshold of a positive response if the post vaccination antibody titer was 10 or greater.|3-6 weeks after the last dose of vaccine.|The per protocol analysis population includes participants who met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, received all scheduled study vaccinations, and who contributed post-vaccination blood samples for testing for which valid results were reported.||participants|||Number
833551|NCT01266850|Secondary|Number of Participants Developing Neutralizing Rotavirus Antibody to Rotavirus Serotype G3|Blood was collected from all participants prior to vaccination and at the follow up visit 3-6 weeks after the last vaccination for testing in the ELISA assay to determine the antibody titers to rotavirus serotype G3. A participant met the threshold of a positive response if the post vaccination antibody titer was 10 or greater.|3-6 weeks after the last dose of vaccine.|The per protocol analysis population includes participants who met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, received all scheduled study vaccinations, and who contributed post-vaccination blood samples for testing for which valid results were reported.||participants|||Number
833552|NCT01266850|Secondary|Number of Participants Developing Neutralizing Rotavirus Antibody to Rotavirus Serotypes G1, G2, G4P6 and G9|Blood was collected from all participants at the follow up visit 3-6 weeks after the last vaccination for testing in the ELISA assay to determine the antibody titers to rotavirus serotypes G1, G2, G4P6 and G9. A participant met the threshold of a positive response if the post vaccination antigen-specific antibody titer was 10 or greater.|3-6 weeks after the last dose of vaccine.|The per protocol analysis population includes participants who met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, received all scheduled study vaccinations, and who contributed post-vaccination blood samples for testing for which valid results were reported.||participants|||Number
833553|NCT01266850|Primary|Geometric Mean Serum Anti-rotavirus IgA Titer|Blood was collected from all participants at the follow up visit 3-6 weeks after the last vaccination for testing in the ELISA assay to determine the anti-rotavirus IgA antibody titers. The geometric mean titers (GMT) for each group were calculated along with the 95% confidence intervals.|3-6 weeks after the last dose of vaccine|The per protocol analysis population includes participants who met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, received all scheduled study vaccinations, and who contributed post-vaccination blood samples for testing for which valid results were reported.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833554|NCT01266850|Secondary|Number of Participants Experiencing Hematochezia at Any Time During the Study|Hematochezia was defined as any stools that are black and tarry; maroon in color; or frank red blood. At each visit, signs of hematochezia were assessed and the participant's parent/guardian was instructed to contact the clinical site at any time if the participant had evidence of hematochezia.|Day 1 through 6 months after the last vaccination|All participants who were vaccinated are included in the analysis population.||participants|||Number
834226|NCT01275625|Secondary|Immunological Response at Week 48: Absolute Change From Baseline in Absolute Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4)|Immunological Response was summarized using absolute change from Baseline to Week 48 in absolute CD4+ cell count|Week 48|FAS Population included those participants who had taken at least 1 dose of the study drug.||cells/microliter (cells/mcL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833555|NCT01266850|Secondary|Number of Participants Experiencing Solicited Systemic Reactions in the 8 Days After Vaccination|The participants' parent/guardian was given a memory aid to record for 8 days the presence of solicited reactions of fever, diarrhea and vomiting. Fever was considered experienced if the participant was assessed with an axillary temperature of 100.4F or greater on any day in the 8-day period after any vaccination. Diarrhea was considered experienced if the participant had 3 or more looser than normal stools in a day. Vomiting was considered experienced if the participant vomited 2 or more times in a day.|Days 1-8 after each vaccination|All participants who were vaccinated and had reactogenicity data reported are included in the analysis population.||participants|||Number
833556|NCT01266850|Secondary|GMT of Neutralizing Rotavirus Antibody to the Most Common Rotavirus Serotypes (G1-G4 and G9)|Blood was collected from all participants at the follow up visit 3-6 weeks after the last vaccination for testing in the neutralizing antibody assay against the most common rotavirus serotypes, G1-G4 and G9. Antigen-specific geometric mean titers (GMT) for each group were calculated along with the 95% confidence intervals.|3-6 weeks after the last dose of vaccine.|The per protocol analysis population includes participants who met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, received all scheduled study vaccinations, and who contributed post-vaccination blood samples for testing for which valid results were reported.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833557|NCT01266850|Primary|Number of Participants Developing a Serum Anti-rotavirus Immunoglobulin (Ig) A Titer of 20 or Greater in the 89-12 IgA Assay|Blood was collected from all participants at the follow up visit 3-6 weeks after the last vaccination for testing in the ELISA 89-12 assay to determine the anti-rotavirus IgA antibody titer. A participant met the threshold of a positive response if the post vaccination anti-rotavirus IgA antibody titier was 20 or greater.|3-6 weeks after the last vaccination|The per protocol analysis population includes participants who met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, received all scheduled study vaccinations, and who contributed post-vaccination blood samples for testing for which valid results were reported.||participants|||Number
833558|NCT01266850|Primary|Number of Participants Developing a Serum Anti-rotavirus Immunoglobulin (Ig) A Titer of 20 or Greater in the WC3 IgA Assay|Blood was collected from all participants at the follow up visit 3-6 weeks after the last vaccination for testing in the ELISA assay to determine the anti-rotavirus IgA antibody titer. A participant met the threshold of a positive response if the post vaccination anti-rotavirus IgA antibody titer was 20 or greater.|3-6 weeks after the last vaccination|The per protocol analysis population includes participants who met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, received all scheduled study vaccinations, and who contributed post-vaccination blood samples for testing for which valid results were reported.||participants|||Number
833559|NCT01266876|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Lipoprotein(a) at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Since the assumptions of normal distribution and equality of variances were not verified for the lipid parameter, percent changes were expressed as median (interquartile range)|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment lipoprotein(a) value.||mg/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833560|NCT01266876|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Lipoprotein(a) at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Since the assumptions of normal distribution and equality of variances were not verified for the lipid parameters, percent changes were expressed as median (interquartile range)|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment lipoprotein(a) value.||percent change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833561|NCT01266876|Secondary|Absolute Change in the Ratio ApoB/ApoA-1 From Baseline to Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment Apo-B and ApoA-1 value.||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833562|NCT01266876|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Apo-A1 at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment Apo-A1 value.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833563|NCT01266876|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein - A1 (Apo-A1) at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment Apo-A1 value.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833564|NCT01266876|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Apo-B at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment Apo-B value.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833565|NCT01266876|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apo Lipoprotein B (Apo-B) at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment Apo-B value.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833566|NCT01266876|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Non-HDL-C at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment non-HDL-C value.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833567|NCT01266876|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Non-HDL-C at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment non-HDL-C value.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833568|NCT01266876|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Triglycerides at Week at 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Since the assumptions of normal distribution and equality of variances were not verified for the lipid parameters, percent changes were expressed as median (interquartile range)|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment fasting triglycerides value.||mg/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833572|NCT01266876|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment total cholesterol value.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833573|NCT01266876|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one on-treatment total cholesterol value.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833574|NCT01266876|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving LDL-C < 70 mg/dL (1.81 mmol/L) at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Calculated LDL-C value was obtained from Friedewald formula.|Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one on-treatment calculated LDL-C.||percentage of participants|||Number
833575|NCT01266876|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Calculated LDL-C <100 mg/dL (2.59 mmol/L) at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Calculated LDL-C value was obtained from Friedewald formula.|Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one on-treatment calculated LDL-C.||percentage of participants|||Number
833576|NCT01266876|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Calculated LDL-C at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Calculated LDL-C value was obtained from Friedewald formula. Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one on-treatment calculated LDL-C.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833577|NCT01266876|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Calculated LDL-C at Week 12 - On-treatment Analysis|Calculated LDL-C values were obtained using the Friedewald formula. Baseline adjusted least squares (LS) means and standard errors were estimated using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model including available post-baseline data on treatment from first investigational medicinal product (IMP) injection up to 21 days after last IMP injection (on-treatment analysis). Missing Week 12 data were imputed by last observation carried forward [LOCF] method.|From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|Modified Intent-To-Treat (mITT) population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment calculated LDL-C.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833578|NCT01266967|Secondary|Number of Response Genetics Incorporated (RGI) Investigational Use Only (IUO) Assay Mutation Positive Participants and THxID BRAF Assay Mutation Positive Participants With the Indicated Best Intracranial Response|The BRAF screening assay determines the specific BRAF mutational status (V600 E and K) in participants with metastatic melanoma who may benefit from treatment with GSK2118436. Per RECIST, version 1.1, CR is defined as the disappearance of all lesions. PR is defined as a >=30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline (BL) sum of the diameters (e.g., percent change from BL). Stable disease is defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease (PD). PD is defined as a >=20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir [smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start]). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 millimeters. Not evaluable: cannot be classified by a preceding definition.|Screening|V600EK and THIDEK Population: all enrolled participants who were V600E or V600K mutation positive by the RGI IUO assay||participants|||Number
833579|NCT01266967|Secondary|Composite of Pharmacokinetic Parameters of GSK2118436 in a Subset of Participants Receiving Dexamethasone|This outcome measure could not be analyzed because too few participants participated in the dexamethasone study.|Day 15||||||
833580|NCT01266967|Secondary|Median Concentrations of GSK2118436 and Its Metabolites Including GSK2285403, GSK2298683, and GSK2167542|Summary statistics were calculated for each time point by cohort. The population pharmacokinetics were determined using a non-linear mixed effects modeling approach after pooling the data with other studies. These results are reported separately.|Week 4 (pre-dose and 1-3 hours post-dose) and Weeks 8, 16, 24, and 32 (either pre-dose in the morning or in the afternoon at 4-8 hours post-dose)|PK Population: participants in the ATS population for whom a PK sample was obtained and analyzed. Only those participants whose samples were available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Full Range|Median
833581|NCT01266967|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Echocardiograms (ECHO) at Weeks 4 and 12|Echocardiograms (ECHO) were measured for all treated participants. An echocardiogram test gives information about the structure and function of the heart. LLN=lower limit of normal (determined by the institution).|Weeks (W) 4 and 12|ATS Population||participants|||Number
833582|NCT01266967|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Worst-case On-therapy Increase From Baseline in Bazett's QTc Reading in the 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG)|An increase in the QTc interval corrected using Bazett's formula (Bazett's QTc) was recorded for all treated participants. Grade 1 (450-480 milliseconds [msec]), Grade 2 (481-500 msec), Grade 3/4 (>=501 msec). An increase is defined as an increase in CTCAE grade relative to Baseline grade.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, 20, 28, 40, 52, and 64|ATS Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||participants|||Number
833583|NCT01266967|Secondary|Mean Blood Pressure at Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, and 36|Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were measured for all treated participants.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, and 36|ATS Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833584|NCT01266967|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Worst-case on Therapy Change to Grade 3 and Grade 4, or With Any Grade Increase (AGI), From Baseline Grade for Hematology Parameters|Hematology data were summarized at each scheduled assessment according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE, version 4.0). Grade refers to the severity of the toxicity. The CTCAE displays Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each toxicity based on this general guideline: Grade 1, mild; Grade 2, moderate; Grade 3, severe, Grade 4, life threatening, Grade 5, death related to toxicity. Blood sample was collected for the assessment of hemoglobin, white blood cells, and platelet count.|From Screening until the conclusion of the study (up to 103 weeks)|ATS Population. Only those participants with data available for the indicated parameters were analyzed.||participants|||Number
833585|NCT01266967|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Hepatobiliary Laboratory Abnormalities|Blood samples were collected for the assessment of hepatobiliary parameters. ALT=alanine aminotranserase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; ALP=alkaline phosphatase; BIL=total bilirubin; INR=international normalized ratio; ULN=upper limit of normal. Hepato-cellular injury is defined as (ALT/ULN)/(ALP/ULN) >=5.|From Screening until the conclusion of the study (up to 103 weeks)|ATS Population||participants|||Number
833586|NCT01266967|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Worst-case on Therapy Change to Grade 3 and Grade 4, or With Any Grade Increase (AGI), From Baseline Grade for Clinical Chemistry Parameters|Clinical chemistry data were summarized at each scheduled assessment according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE, version 4.0). Grade refers to the severity of the toxicity. The CTCAE displays Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each toxicity based on this general guideline: Grade (G) 1, mild; Grade 2, moderate; Grade 3, severe; Grade 4, life threatening; Grade 5, death related to toxicity. Blood sample was collected for the assessment of glucose, potassium, magnesium, sodium, phosphorus, potassium. aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), creatinine, total bilirubin, albumin, amylase, cholesterol, creatine kinase, gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT), lipase, blood pH, and triglycerides.|From Screening until the conclusion of the study (up to 103 weeks)|ATS Population. Only those participants with data available for the indicated parameters were analyzed.||participants|||Number
833587|NCT01266967|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury.|From Screening until the conclusion of the study (up to 103 weeks)|All Treated Subjects (ATS) Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment||participants|||Number
833588|NCT01266967|Secondary|Overall Survival in V600K Mutation-positive Participants|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the time from the first dose of study medication until death due to any cause. OS was censored using the date of last known contact for those participants who were alive at the time of analysis.|Time from the first dose of study medication until death due to any cause (average of 26 weeks)|V600K Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833589|NCT01266967|Secondary|Overall Survival of V600E Mutation-positive Participants|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the time from the first dose of study medication until death due to any cause. OS was censored using the date of last known contact for those participants who were alive at the time of analysis.|Time from the first dose of study medication until death due to any cause (average of 35 weeks)|V600E Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833590|NCT01266967|Secondary|Progression-free Survival in V600K Mutation-positive Participants|PFS is defined as the time from the first dose of study medication to the earliest of death or progression (at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 millimeters (mm). If a participant received subsequent anti-cancer therapy prior to the date of documented PD/death, the participant was censored at the last adequate assessment and the visit level response was CR (disappearance of all target lesions), PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]), or stable disease (SD: neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD.|Time from the first dose of study medication to the earliest of death or progression (average of 17 weeks)|V600K Population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833591|NCT01266967|Secondary|Progression-free Survival in V600E Mutation-positive Participants|PFS is defined as the time from the first dose of study medication to the earliest of death or progression (at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 millimeters (mm). If a participant received subsequent anti-cancer therapy prior to the date of documented PD/death, the participant was censored at the last adequate assessment and the visit level response was CR (disappearance of all target lesions), PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]), or stable disease (SD: neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD.|Time from the first dose of study medication to the earliest of death or progression (average of 23 weeks)|V600E Population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833592|NCT01266967|Secondary|Duration of Overall Response for the Subset of V600K Mutation-positive Participants|Duration of Overall Response is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of overall CR (disappearance of all target lesions) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) until the time of the first documented disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 millimeters (mm).|Time from the first documented evidence of CR or PR until the time of the first documented disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 31 weeks)|V600K Population. Only the subset of participants who had a complete or partial response was included in this analysis.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834369|NCT01267175|Primary|Usability of the X54 Insulin Pump Meets Expectations|Questionnaire completed at the end of the study measuring usability of the X54 insulin pump. Results scored on a Likert scale of 1 - 7, 1 being the least likely to use and 7 being the most likely to use.|5 weeks|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833593|NCT01266967|Secondary|Duration of Overall Response for the Subset of V600E Mutation-positive Participants|Duration of Overall Response is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of overall CR (disappearance of all target lesions) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) until the time of the first documented disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 millimeters (mm).|Time from the first documented evidence of CR or PR until the time of the first documented disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 28 weeks)|V600E Population. Only the subset of participants who had a complete or partial response was included in this analysis.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833594|NCT01266967|Secondary|Duration of Intracranial Response for the Subset of V600K Mutation-positive Participants|Duration of Intracranial Response is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of intracranial CR (disappearance of all target lesions) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) until the time of the first documented intracranial disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 millimeters (mm).|Time from the first documented evidence of intracranial CR or PR until the time of the first documented intracranial disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 31 weeks)|V600K Population. Only the subset of participants who had a complete or partial intracranial response was included in this analysis.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833595|NCT01266967|Secondary|Duration of Intracranial Response for the Subset of V600E Mutation-positive Participants|Duration of Intracranial Response is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of intracranial CR (disappearance of all target lesions) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) until the time of the first documented intracranial disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started (e.g., percent change from nadir, where nadir is defined as the smallest sum of diameters recorded since treatment start). In addition, the sum must have an absolute increase from nadir of 5 millimeters (mm).|Time from the first documented evidence of intracranial CR or PR until the time of the first documented intracranial disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 27 weeks)|V600E Population. Only the subset of participants who had a complete or partial intracranial response was included in this analysis.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833596|NCT01266967|Secondary|Number of Participants With V600K Mutation-positive Melanoma With OIR, as Assessed by the Investigator|OIR is defined as the number of participants whose intracranial response was a confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PF) assessed by investigators using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1. CR is defined as disappearance of all target lesions. PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters (e.g., percent change from Baseline). For the primary analysis, OIR was measured when all participants in both treatment arms had two post-Baseline disease assessments. Participants who had an intracranial response of not evaluable or a missing response were treated as non-responders. Confirmation assessments were to be performed no less than 4 weeks after the criteria for response were initially met and may have been performed at the next protocol scheduled assessment.|From the time of the Baseline assessment until disease progression or end of study treatment (average of 16 weeks)|V600K Population||participants|||Number
833597|NCT01266967|Secondary|Number of Participants With V600K Mutation-positive Melanoma With a Best Overall Response (OR) of CR or PR, as Assessed by the Investigator|OR is defined as the number of participants achieving either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) per modified RECIST, version 1.1. To determine the OR, the extracranial response was combined with the intracranial response. Confirmation assessments were to be performed no less than 4 weeks after the criteria for response were initially met and may have been performed at the next protocol-scheduled assessment. Participants who had an overall response of not evaluable or a missing response were treated as non-responders.|From the time of the Baseline assessment until disease progression or end of study treatment (average of 17 weeks)|V600K Population: all participants with BRAF V600K mutation-positive melanoma who received at least one dose of study treatment||participants|||Number
833598|NCT01266967|Secondary|Number of Participants With V600E Mutation-positive Melanoma With a Best Overall Response (OR) of CR or PR, as Assessed by the Investigator|OR is defined as the number of participants achieving either a CR (the disappearance of all target lesions) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters [e.g., percent change from Baseline]) per modified RECIST, version 1.1. To determine the OR, the extracranial response was combined with the intracranial response. Confirmation assessments were to be performed no less than 4 weeks after the criteria for response were initially met and may have been performed at the next protocol-scheduled assessment. Participants who had an overall response of not evaluable or a missing response were treated as non-responders.|From the time of the Baseline assessment until disease progression or end of study treatment (average of 24 weeks)|V600E Population||participants|||Number
833610|NCT01267045|Primary|Cognitive Failures Questionnaire|The Cognitive Failure Questionnaire is a 25-item self-report measure of cognitive difficulty during daily living in the past six months. Each item is a question indicating a situation involving a type of cognitive failure (e.g. “Do you find you forget why you went from one part of the house to another?”), and the subject indicates how often that happens to them, on a scale of 0 (never) to 4 (very often). Scores range from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 100; the higher the score, the worse the outcome.|8 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833599|NCT01266967|Primary|Number of Participants With BRAF V600E Mutation-positive Melanoma With Overall Intracranial Response (OIR), as Assessed by the Investigator|OIR is defined as the number of participants whose intracranial response was a confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) assessed by investigators using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1. CR is defined as disappearance of all lesions. PR is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the Baseline sum of the diameters (e.g., percent change from Baseline). For the primary analysis, OIR was measured when all participants in both treatment arms had two post-Baseline disease assessments. Participants who had an intracranial response of not evaluable or a missing response were treated as non-responders. Confirmation assessments were to be performed no less than 4 weeks after the criteria for response were initially met and may have been performed at the next protocol scheduled assessment.|From the time of the Baseline assessment until disease progression or end of study treatment (average of 18.3 weeks)|V600E Population: all participants with BRAF V600E mutation-positive melanoma who received at least one dose of study treatment||participants|||Number
833600|NCT01267019|Secondary|Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS)|"A measure of social perception. It is scored as number correct and higher is better. It ranges from 0 - 110.
Note: Two of the study arms (in vivo and social cognitive training) receive identical procedures and produce identical outcome numbers for the first 6 weeks of the study."|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and 3 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833601|NCT01267019|Secondary|The Awareness of Social Inference Test (TASIT)|"A measure of mentalizing (i.e., making inferences about other people). It is scored for accuracy in which higher is better. It ranges from 0 - 64.
Note: Two of the study arms (in vivo and social cognitive training) receive identical procedures and produce identical outcome numbers for the first 6 weeks of the study."|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and 3 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833602|NCT01267019|Primary|Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT)|"A standardized measure of emotion processing. It is scored as a standard score with a population mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15. It can range from 0 to 200. Higher is better.
Note: Two of the study arms (in vivo and social cognitive training) receive identical procedures and produce identical outcome numbers for the first 6 weeks of the study."|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and 3 months.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833603|NCT01267045|Secondary|Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire|The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) measures five aspects of mindfulness: Observing, Describing, Acting with Awareness, Non-judging, and Non-reacting. It is a 39-item self-report questionnaire. Subjects respond to each statement (e.g. “I disapprove of myself when I have irrational ideas”) by indicating how often they agree with the statement on a scale of 1 (“never or very rarely true”) to 5 (“very often or always true”). Scores range from a minimum of 39 to a maximum of 195. Higher scores indicate greater levels of mindfulness.|8 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833604|NCT01267045|Secondary|Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire|The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) measures five aspects of mindfulness: Observing, Describing, Acting with Awareness, Non-judging, and Non-reacting. It is a 39-item self-report questionnaire. Subjects respond to each statement (e.g. “I disapprove of myself when I have irrational ideas”) by indicating how often they agree with the statement on a scale of 1 (“never or very rarely true”) to 5 (“very often or always true”). Scores range from a minimum of 39 to a maximum of 195. Higher scores indicate greater levels of mindfulness.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833605|NCT01267045|Secondary|PROMIS Fatigue|"The self-report PROMIS Fatigue measure uses a maximum of 7 questions to assess fatigue symptoms over the past 7 days. Subjects respond to each question (e.g. “How often did you feel tired?) with the following scale:
= never
= rarely
= sometimes
= often
= always
Raw scores are converted to T-scores, which are standardized to a mean of 50. Scores above 50 indicate higher than average fatigue; scores below 50 indicate lower than average fatigue."|8 months|||T-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
833606|NCT01267045|Secondary|PROMIS Fatigue|"The self-report PROMIS Fatigue measure uses a maximum of 7 questions to assess fatigue symptoms over the past 7 days. Subjects respond to each question (e.g. “How often did you feel tired?) with the following scale:
= never
= rarely
= sometimes
= often
= always
Raw scores are converted to T-scores, which are standardized to a mean of 50. Scores above 50 indicate higher than average fatigue; scores below 50 indicate lower than average fatigue."|2 months|||T-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
833607|NCT01267045|Secondary|PTSD Symptom Severity Interview (PSSI)|The PTSD Symptom Severity Interview (PSSI) is a 17-question interview that measures the severity of PTSD symptoms in the past month. The interviewing researcher asks the subject to respond to each question (e.g. “Have you had recurrent or intrusive distressing thoughts or recollections about the trauma?”) by indicating how often per week he or she experiences that symptom. For each item, “not at all” is scored as 0; “once per week or less/a little” is scored as 1; “2 to 4 times per week/somewhat” is scored as 2; and “5 or more times per week/very much” is scored as 3. Total scores range from a minimum of 17 to a maximum of 51; the higher the score, the worse the outcome.|8 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833608|NCT01267045|Secondary|PTSD Symptom Severity Interview (PSSI)|The PTSD Symptom Severity Interview (PSSI) is a 17-question interview that measures the severity of PTSD symptoms in the past month. The interviewing researcher asks the subject to respond to each question (e.g. “Have you had recurrent or intrusive distressing thoughts or recollections about the trauma?”) by indicating how often per week he or she experiences that symptom. For each item, “not at all” is scored as 0; “once per week or less/a little” is scored as 1; “2 to 4 times per week/somewhat” is scored as 2; and “5 or more times per week/very much” is scored as 3. Total scores range from a minimum of 17 to a maximum of 51; the higher the score, the worse the outcome.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833609|NCT01267045|Secondary|Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9)|The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) is a 9-item (with an additional 10th item if any of the previous 9 are endorsed) self-report measure of depression. Subjects are instructed to indicate how often, over the last 2 weeks, they have been bothered by each problem (e.g. “feeling tired or having little energy”), from “not at all” (0), to “nearly every day” (3). Scores range from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 30; the higher the score, the worse the outcome.|8 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834477|NCT01278927|Secondary|Nausea|Two questions using a similar format as the SF-36 were added to measure nausea. The scale ranges from 1 - 5, where a higher score indicates worse nausea.|100 days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833611|NCT01267045|Primary|Cognitive Failures Questionnaire|The Cognitive Failure Questionnaire is a 25-item self-report measure of cognitive difficulty during daily living in the past six months. Each item is a question indicating a situation involving a type of cognitive failure (e.g. “Do you find you forget why you went from one part of the house to another?”), and the subject indicates how often that happens to them, on a scale of 0 (never) to 4 (very often). Scores range from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 100; the higher the score, the worse the outcome.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833612|NCT01267045|Primary|Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory - General Fatigue|"The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory is a 20-item self-report measure of various types of fatigue. Each item is a statement, and the subject indicates how much, on a scale of 1 (yes, that is true) to 5 (no, that is not true), he or she agrees with the statement (e.g. I feel very active.) Scores range from a minimum of 20 to a maximum of 100; the higher the score, the worse the outcome."|8 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833613|NCT01267045|Primary|Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory - General Fatigue|"The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory is a 20-item self-report measure of various types of fatigue. Each item is a statement, and the subject indicates how much, on a scale of 1 (yes, that is true) to 5 (no, that is not true), he or she agrees with the statement (e.g. I feel very active.) Scores range from a minimum of 20 to a maximum of 100; the higher the score, the worse the outcome."|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833614|NCT01267045|Primary|The Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire|The Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire is a self-report 22-item measure that assesses various types of pain on a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (worst possible) experienced during the past week. Score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 220; the higher the score, the worse the outcome.|8 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833615|NCT01267045|Secondary|Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9)|The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) is a 9-item (with an additional 10th item if any of the previous 9 are endorsed) self-report measure of depression. Subjects are instructed to indicate how often, over the last 2 weeks, they have been bothered by each problem (e.g. “feeling tired or having little energy”), from “not at all” (0), to “nearly every day” (3). Scores range from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 30; the higher the score, the worse the outcome.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833616|NCT01267045|Primary|The Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire|The Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire is a self-report 22-item measure that assesses various types of pain on a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (worst possible) experienced during the past week. Score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 220; the higher the score, the worse the outcome.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833617|NCT01267266|Secondary|Correlation of Molecular Profile With Clinical Outcomes|Study terminated after randomization of only 8 subjects. Correlative data not analyzed.|Up to 2 years||||||
833618|NCT01267266|Secondary|Toxicity and Incidence of Adverse Events.|Percentage of patients who discontinued therapy due to toxicity.|Up to 6 months.|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833619|NCT01267266|Secondary|Toxicity and Incidence of Adverse Events|Percentage of patients with grade 4 toxicity.|Up to 6 months.|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833620|NCT01267266|Primary|Duration of Stable Disease. (Time to Disease Progression by CT and/or Bone Scan or Clinical Progression.)|Time to progression will be assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups via Wilcoxon rank-sum test.|Up to 6 months.|Two patients in the placebo arm censored at 12 and 17 weeks, respectively.||weeks||Full Range|Median
833621|NCT01267292|Secondary|Reversal Learning as Assessed by Number of Perseverative Errors on the Reversal Learning Task|The task is a rapid-presentation, probablistic gain/loss design. Reversal learning is assessed by means of a simple computerized card game. The paradigm utilizes a visual discrimination task where subjects have to learn to respond to outcome contingencies between two stimuli (high probability gain/low probability loss vs. low probability gain/high probability loss). At an unsignaled time point halfway into testing, the contingencies are reversed; the losing card becomes the winning card and the winning card becomes the losing one. Visual feedback regarding win or loss ($0.20) is provided after each trial and the cumulative total gained/lost is also shown. Using trial-and-error feedback, subjects have to discover which of the two patterns is correct and are instructed to win as much money as possible. The duration of the task is approximately 10 minutes, consisting of 80 trials.|Monday of week 4|||number of perseverative errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
833622|NCT01267292|Secondary|Reversal Learning as Assessed by Number of Perseverative Errors on the Reversal Learning Task|The task is a rapid-presentation, probablistic gain/loss design. Reversal learning is assessed by means of a simple computerized card game. The paradigm utilizes a visual discrimination task where subjects have to learn to respond to outcome contingencies between two stimuli (high probability gain/low probability loss vs. low probability gain/high probability loss). At an unsignaled time point halfway into testing, the contingencies are reversed; the losing card becomes the winning card and the winning card becomes the losing one. Visual feedback regarding win or loss ($0.20) is provided after each trial and the cumulative total gained/lost is also shown. Using trial-and-error feedback, subjects have to discover which of the two patterns is correct and are instructed to win as much money as possible. The duration of the task is approximately 10 minutes, consisting of 80 trials.|Thursday of week 1|||number of perseverative errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
833623|NCT01267292|Secondary|Reversal Learning as Assessed by Number of Perseverative Errors on the Reversal Learning Task|The task is a rapid-presentation, probablistic gain/loss design. Reversal learning is assessed by means of a simple computerized card game. The paradigm utilizes a visual discrimination task where subjects have to learn to respond to outcome contingencies between two stimuli (high probability gain/low probability loss vs. low probability gain/high probability loss). At an unsignaled time point halfway into testing, the contingencies are reversed; the losing card becomes the winning card and the winning card becomes the losing one. Visual feedback regarding win or loss ($0.20) is provided after each trial and the cumulative total gained/lost is also shown. Using trial-and-error feedback, subjects have to discover which of the two patterns is correct and are instructed to win as much money as possible. The duration of the task is approximately 10 minutes, consisting of 80 trials.|baseline|||number of perseverative errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
834418|NCT01278030|Primary|Responder Rate|The responder rate is defined as the proportion of patients with reduction in end systolic volume greater than or equal to 15%. The primary endpoint is the responder rate.|At 6 month follow-up|Patients who completed the 6 month follow-up with implant 3D echo data.||percentage of participants|||Number
833624|NCT01267292|Secondary|Rapid Response Inhibition as Assessed by the Immediate Memory Task (IMT)|"Subjects are required to respond selectively to a series of stimuli (e.g., numbers) presented briefly for 500 ms with a 500 ms intertrial interval (ITI). Increases in false alarm rates are interpreted as failures in response inhibition. Five digit numbers are presented on a computer screen every 500 ms sec. Subjects are instructed to respond when the first number of a set was repeated. A hit response is scored when a subject correctly responds. Distracters consist of five-digit numbers that are completely different from the first, and numbers in which four of the five digits match the original, with the non-matching number occurring randomly across the five digit places. A response to the number with 4 of 5 digits correct is scored as a false alarm. The a-prime value reflects the ability of the participant to discriminate between signal (Go stimulus) and noise (No-Go stimulus) and ranges from 0.5 (chance level) to 1 (perfect discrimination)."|Monday of week 4|||a-prime||Standard Deviation|Mean
833625|NCT01267292|Secondary|Rapid Response Inhibition as Assessed by the Immediate Memory Task (IMT)|"Subjects are required to respond selectively to a series of stimuli (e.g., numbers) presented briefly for 500 ms with a 500 ms intertrial interval (ITI). Increases in false alarm rates are interpreted as failures in response inhibition. Five digit numbers are presented on a computer screen every 500 ms sec. Subjects are instructed to respond when the first number of a set was repeated. A hit response is scored when a subject correctly responds. Distracters consist of five-digit numbers that are completely different from the first, and numbers in which four of the five digits match the original, with the non-matching number occurring randomly across the five digit places. A response to the number with 4 of 5 digits correct is scored as a false alarm. The a-prime value reflects the ability of the participant to discriminate between signal (Go stimulus) and noise (No-Go stimulus) and ranges from 0.5 (chance level) to 1 (perfect discrimination)."|Thursday of week 1|||a-prime||Standard Deviation|Mean
833626|NCT01267292|Secondary|Rapid Response Inhibition as Assessed by the Immediate Memory Task (IMT)|"Subjects are required to respond selectively to a series of stimuli (e.g., numbers) presented briefly for 500 ms with a 500 ms intertrial interval (ITI). Increases in false alarm rates are interpreted as failures in response inhibition. Five digit numbers are presented on a computer screen every 500 ms sec. Subjects are instructed to respond when the first number of a set was repeated. A hit response is scored when a subject correctly responds. Distracters consist of five-digit numbers that are completely different from the first, and numbers in which four of the five digits match the original, with the non-matching number occurring randomly across the five digit places. A response to the number with 4 of 5 digits correct is scored as a false alarm. The a-prime value reflects the ability of the participant to discriminate between signal (Go stimulus) and noise (No-Go stimulus) and ranges from 0.5 (chance level) to 1 (perfect discrimination)."|baseline|||a-prime||Standard Deviation|Mean
833627|NCT01267292|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure|"The mean score over all 44 time points is reported in this outcome measure (i.e., the summary score is reported). Each subject contributed 11 data points for each dose level of Methylphenidate (15mg, 30mg, 60mg, or 0mg), resulting in a total of 220 data points per dose level per arm.
Diastolic blood pressure is the blood pressure when the heart muscle is between beats."|11 times a day on Wednesday and Friday of week 2; 11 times a day on Monday and Wednesday of week 3|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833628|NCT01267292|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure|"The mean score over all 44 time points is reported in this outcome measure (i.e., the summary score is reported). Each subject contributed 11 data points for each dose level of Methylphenidate (15mg, 30mg, 60mg, or 0mg), resulting in a total of 220 data points per dose level per arm.
Systolic blood pressure is the amount of pressure in the arteries during contraction of the heart muscle."|11 times a day on Wednesday and Friday of week 2; 11 times a day on Monday and Wednesday of week 3|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833629|NCT01267292|Secondary|Heart Rate|"The mean score over all 44 time points is reported in this outcome measure (i.e., the summary score is reported). Each subject contributed 11 data points for each dose level of Methylphenidate (15mg, 30mg, 60mg, or 0mg), resulting in a total of 220 data points per dose level per arm.
Heart rate is the measure of heart beats per minute."|11 times a day on Wednesday and Friday of week 2; 11 times a day on Monday and Wednesday of week 3|||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
833630|NCT01267292|Secondary|"Subjective Effects as Assessed by the Elated Subscale of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)"|"The mean score over all 44 time points is reported in this outcome measure (i.e., the summary score is reported). Each subject contributed 11 data points for each dose level of Methylphenidate (15mg, 30mg, 60mg, or 0mg), resulting in a total of 220 data points per dose level per arm.
The VAS presents 100-mm horizontal lines labeled with an adjective: “stimulated,” “high,” “anxious,” “elated,” “hungry,” and “nauseated.” The elated subscale is reported, and this sub scale is anchored by “not at all” (0) on the left and “extremely” (100) on the right, with a score range of 0-100. The higher the score, the worse the outcome."|11 times a day on Wednesday and Friday of week 2; 11 times a day on Monday and Wednesday of week 3|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833631|NCT01267292|Secondary|"Subjective Effects as Assessed by Score on the Feel High Subscale of the Drug Effects Questionnaire (DEQ)"|"The mean score over all 44 time points is reported in this outcome measure (i.e., the summary score is reported). Each subject contributed 11 data points for each dose level of Methylphenidate (15mg, 30mg, 60mg, or 0mg), resulting in a total of 220 data points per dose level per arm.
The DEQ is a visual analog scale questionnaire that assesses the extent to which subjects experience four subjective states: “Feel Drug,” “Feel High,” “Like Drug,” and “Want More.” The Feel High subscale is reported, and this subscale is scored on a visual analogue scale (scroll bar on computer screen) ranging from 0-100. 100 represents the highest score for that subjective state, and the higher the score, the worse the outcome."|11 times a day on Wednesday and Friday of week 2; 11 times a day on Monday and Wednesday of week 3|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833646|NCT01268098|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Who Met the Triple Efficacy Endpoint Criteria at Week 8.|The triple efficacy endpoint criteria were defined as at least a 50% reduction from the baseline in oral calcium dose and at least a 50% reduction from the baseline in active vitamin D dose and an albumin-corrected total serum calcium concentration that was maintained or normalized compared to the baseline value (≥ 7.5 mg/dL) and did not exceed the upper limit of the laboratory normal range. The analysis of primary efficacy endpoint was based on investigator prescribed data|8 Weeks|Intent to Treat (ITT) population, which includes all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833632|NCT01267292|Secondary|Subjective Effects as Assessed by Score on the Vigor Subscale of the Profile of Mood States (POMS)|"The mean score over all 44 time points is reported in this outcome measure (i.e., the summary score is reported). Each subject contributed 11 data points for each dose level of Methylphenidate (15mg, 30mg, 60mg, or 0mg), resulting in a total of 220 data points per dose level per arm.
The POMS is a self-rating measure of current mood, consisting of six subscales demonstrated to be sensitive to a range of acute drug effects, including amphetamine, cocaine, and caffeine. The six subscales are: depression, vigor, confusion, tension, anxiety, and fatigue. A 37-item short form of the POMS was used, which correlates highly with the full scale. The vigor subscale is reported, and the vigor subscale score ranges from 0 to 28, with 28 representing the highest score for that mood state. The higher the value, the worse the outcome."|11 times a day on Wednesday and Friday of week 2; 11 times a day on Monday and Wednesday of week 3|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833633|NCT01267292|Secondary|Subjective Effects as Assessed by the Addiction Research Center Inventory (ARCI)|The ARCI short form will be used. It is a 49-item true / false questionnaire that has been empirically-derived to assess five different factors, including euphoria, sedation, and dysphoria. The PCAG scale has proven to be a sensitive measure of subjective effects in many studies administering stimulant drugs.|11 times a day on Wednesday and Friday of week 2; 11 times a day on Monday and Wednesday of week 3|ARCI data were not collected.|||||
833634|NCT01267292|Primary|Risky Decision Making as Assessed by Score on the Risky Decision Making Task|"The mean score over all 4 time points is reported in this outcome measure (i.e., a summary score is reported). Each subject contributed 1 data point for each dose level of Methylphenidate (15mg, 30mg, 60mg, or 0mg), resulting in a total of 20 data points per dose level per arm.
The risky decision making task provides subjects with three choice options on each of 100 repeated trials. Options are low, moderate, and high risk, based on variance and probability in gain/loss amounts. The low risk option is more adaptive over many trials. The outcome measure is a risk index (ranging from 0.33 to 100) that factors in tolerance for variability and amount of gains and losses across the three options. 100 is highest risk. 0.33 is lowest risk."|1 time a day on Wednesday and Friday of week 2; 1 time a day on Monday and Wednesday of week 3|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833635|NCT01267292|Primary|Attentional Bias as Assessed by Score on the Stroop Task|"The mean score over all 4 time points is reported in this outcome measure (i.e., a summary score is reported). Each subject contributed 1 data point for each dose level of Methylphenidate (15mg, 30mg, 60mg, or 0mg), resulting in a total of 20 data points per dose level per arm.
The Stroop task assesses attentional biases to cocaine-related (drug-related) and rewarding (non-drug related) stimuli vs. neutral stimuli. Participants are instructed to respond to words shown in different colors on the screen, by pressing as quickly and accurately as possible on one of three colored buttons. Attentional bias is measured as the difference in reaction times on cocaine vs. neutral words. The reported score is a difference score in milliseconds (cocaine minus neutral), in which positive means slower to respond to cocaine and thus greater attentional bias, and negative means no attentional bias to cocaine words."|1 time a day on Wednesday and Friday of week 2; 1 time a day on Monday and Wednesday of week 3|||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
833636|NCT01267422|Secondary|Computerized Visual Field(VFI: Visual Field Index ,the Value Close to 100% Regarded Normal)|VFI: visual field index ,the value Close to 100% regarded normal. VFI/MD：The bigger one was more close to the normal value.|up to 3 years|Patient 2 refused the vision field test,there are VFI outcome measure of 8 patients.||Percentage of normal||Standard Deviation|Mean
833637|NCT01267422|Secondary|Computerized Visual Field(MD: Mean Deviation, the Value Close to 0 Regarded Normal)|MD: mean deviation, the value Close to 0 regarded normal.VFI/MD：The bigger one was more close to the normal value.|up to 3 years|Patient 2 refused the vision field test,there are MD outcome measure of 8 patients.||dB||Standard Deviation|Mean
833638|NCT01267422|Secondary|Average RNFL Thickness Througth Optical Coherence Tomography(OCT) Test|Average RNFL thickness of 8 patients througth Optical coherence tomography(OCT) test before and after treatment|Up to 3 years|RNFL thickness of 8 patients except Patient 1 because he once accepted the other eye's treatment||Micrometer||Standard Deviation|Mean
833639|NCT01267422|Secondary|Neutralizing Antibody Assay|The mean of Neutralizing antibody assay of 8 patients before and after treatment|up to 3 years|Neutralizing antibody assay of 8 patients except Patient 1 because he once accepted the other eye's treatment||titer||Standard Deviation|Mean
833640|NCT01267422|Secondary|Intraocular Pressure;||Up to 3 years|||mmHg||Full Range|Mean
833641|NCT01267422|Primary|Results of CD3/CD4/CD8 Test|The mean percentage of CD3+/CD4+/CD8+ test before and after treatment|up to 6 months|||Percentage of total cells||Full Range|Mean
833642|NCT01267422|Primary|The Best Corrected Visual Acuity(BCVA)||Up to 3 years|The data are expressed as mean±standard error. Comparisons before and after treatment of the BCVA were analyzed using the paired t-test.A probability (P) value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Lower logMAR represents a better outcome.||logMAR|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
833643|NCT01267929|Primary|The Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM-66) Score at Entry, the Second and the Sixth Month.|The mean total score of GMFM-66 of each group at entry, the second and the sixth month. The GMFM-66 contains five dimensions of motor measure including lying/rolling (4 items), sitting (15 items), crawling/kneeling (10 items), standing (13 items), and walking/running/jumping (24 items). The GMFM-66 are scored on a 4-point ordinal scale 0=does not initiate, 1=initiates < 10% of activity,2=partially completes 10% to < 100% of activity,3=completes activity). The scores were converted to a continuous scale by using the Winsteps Rasch Software.The GMFM-66 score is an interval-level measure of function where subjects are placed on an ability continuum ranging from 0 (low motor ability) to 100 (high motor ability). GMFM-66 score less than 30 that are considered low gross motor skills.|Base line, two months and six months|A total of 30 children with cerebral palsy was followed and completed the study.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833644|NCT01267994|Secondary|To Assess the Safety and Tolerability of a Three Month (84 Day) Course of Anakinra in Corticosteroid Resistant Patients With Autoimmune Inner Ear Disease.||84 days||||||
833645|NCT01267994|Primary|To Assess the Potential Efficacy of Anakinra in Improving Hearing Thresholds in Corticosteroid-resistant Patients With Autoimmune Inner Ear Disease|The primary endpoint is to determine whether those treated with anakinra for 84 days demonstrate an improved hearing threshold compared with their pre-anakinra-treatment threshold. Audiometric thresholds will be compared to those treated with a prolonged corticosteroid taper and those that elect for no further treatment. The durability of the response will be measured over a total of 180 days.|180 days|||responders|||Number
833647|NCT01268098|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Who Achieved the Primary Triple Endpoint at Week 8, Based on Investigator Prescribed Data.|The triple efficacy endpoint criteria were defined as a reduction from baseline in oral calcium to ≤ 500 mg/day, a reduction from baseline in calcitriol dose to ≤ 0.25 µg/day, and an albumin-corrected total serum calcium level between 7.5 mg/dL and the upper limit of the laboratory normal range. The analysis of primary endpoint was based on investigator prescribed data.|8 Weeks|Intent to Treat (ITT) population, which includes all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833648|NCT01268111|Primary|M Value (Insulin Stimulated Glucose Uptake)|Insulin stimulated glucose uptake will be measured by glucose clamp studies|Baseline and at 8 weeks|||mg/kg.min||Standard Deviation|Mean
833649|NCT01268150|Other Pre-specified|To Assess the Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) of Eribulin Mesylate|Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as AEs that emerged during treatment, having been absent at pretreatment, and occurring within 30 days of the last dose of study treatment, or if they were present prior to the first dose administration and increased in severity during the study. For each AE a participant with two or more TEAEs in that category were counted only once. TEAEs were considered related if the relationship of the event to study drug was possibly or probably related. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were defined as any untoward medical experience that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or was a congenital anomaly/birth defect. Safety information will be summarized with adverse events. AEs were graded on a five-point scale according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0.|Baseline until End of Treatment (within 21 days of last dose), assessed up to the data cutoff date (30 Aug 2013) up to 2.5 years|Safety Analysis Set population included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one postbaseline safety assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833650|NCT01268150|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from the date of the first dose of study drug until the date of first documentation of PD or date of death from any cause, whichever occurred first. Participants who died without reported PD were considered to have progressed on the day of their death. Participants who were lost to follow-up or alive and without reported PD at the end of study were censored on the date of their last tumor assessment. Participants without evidence of PD upon discontinuation of study drug during the Extension Phase returned to the clinic for disease evaluation and PFS calculation every 12 weeks until PD was documented. PFS was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimates. This statistical analysis method measures the effect of study drug on PFS.|Treatment Phase (Day 1 Cycle 1) to date of progressive disease or death, whichever occurred first, assessed up to the data cutoff date (30 Aug 2013) up to 2.5 years|Full analysis set included all participants who received at least one dose of eribulin mesylate.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833651|NCT01268150|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response was measured for participants who were responders only, had attained a BOR that was CR or PR. The duration of response was measured from time that response criteria for CR or PR (whichever was recorded first) were first met until the date that progressive disease (PD) or death from any cause was first objectively documented. Participants who did not have PD were censored on the day of their last tumor assessment. Duration of response was summarized for the responders using Kaplan-Meier estimation method. This statistical analysis method measures the effect of study drug on the length of response time.|First date of CR or PR to PD or Death from any cause, assessed up to the data cutoff date (30 Aug 2013) up to 2.5 years|Full analysis set included all participants who received at least one dose of eribulin mesylate and were determined to be responders (CR or PR) to study treatment.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833652|NCT01268150|Secondary|Time to First Response (CR or PR)|Time to first response was defined for participants whose BOR was a CR or PR. Analysis was based on the Kaplan-Meier estimated number of months to CR or PR. This statistical analysis method measures the effect of study drug on CR or PR.|Treatment Phase (Day 1 Cycle 1) to earliest date of confirmed objective response (CR or PR), assessed up to the data cutoff date (30 Aug 2013) up to 2.5 years|Full analysis set included all participants who received at least one dose of eribulin mesylate and were determined to be responders (CR or PR) to study treatment.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833653|NCT01268150|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|The ORR was defined as the percentage of participants with best overall response (BOR) of confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR), based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Targeted lesions were assessed by computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) which were then assessed by the investigator based on RECIST. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions. PR was defined as at least 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference baseline sum diameters. Possible CR and PR had to be confirmed no fewer than 4 weeks after the initial response assessment. A brain and bone scan was performed by CT/MRI within 1 week after confirmation of a response to ensure no new metastases. To be assigned a status of CR or PR, changes in tumor measurements had to be confirmed by repeat evaluations, to be performed not fewer than 4 weeks after the response criteria were first met. ORR = CR + PR|Cycle 1 (Day 1) until first evidence of disease progression, assessed up to the data cutoff date (30 Aug 2013) up to 2.5 years|Full analysis set included all participants who received at least one dose of eribulin mesylate.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833654|NCT01268189|Secondary|Patient Will be Asked to Rate Pain 0-10/10 at the Study Site and the Control Site||Post-Operative Day 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833655|NCT01268189|Secondary|Patient Will be Asked to Rate Pain 0-10/10 at the Study Site and the Control Site||Post-Operative Day 10|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833656|NCT01268189|Secondary|Patient Will be Asked to Rate Pain 0-10/10 at the Study Site and the Control Site||Post-Operative Day 8|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833657|NCT01268189|Secondary|Pain Perceived by Patient|Patient will be asked to rate pain 0-10 (0=no pain, 10=maximum pain) at the study site and the control site. Used Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for this purpose.|Post-Operative Day 4|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833658|NCT01268189|Primary|Healing Time for Donor Site Wounds|Wounds are inspected on postoperative days 4, 8, and then every two days until the wound is deemed to be healed.|number of days to healing|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
833659|NCT01268267|Secondary|Numbers of Forearm Blood Glucose (BG) Results Within +/- 5 to 20 mg/dL (<75 mg/dL) or Within +/- 5% to 20% (>=75 mg/dL) of Laboratory Glucose Method|Subjects with diabetes used an investigational blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) with subject capillary blood obtained from the forearm. BGM results were compared to a reference lab glucose method - Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) Analyzer. BG results were used to calculate the number of BG results within +/- 5 to 20 mg/dL (for reference BG results <75mg/dL) or +/- 5% to 20% (for reference BG results >=75mg/dL) of the reference method results.|2 hours|Since forearm testing by 5 hypoglycemic subjects (low blood glucose) was not allowed per the protocol, forearm data were not obtained/not evaluable for these subjects. Of the remaining 85 subjects, 83 tested 2 test strip lots(83x2) and 2 subjects tested 1 strip lot(2x1). A total of 168(166+2)test results were available.||Number of BG test results|Participants||Number
833660|NCT01268267|Secondary|Number of Subjects Rated as<=3 Performing Basic Meter Tasks (Labeling Comprehension)|Subjects reviewed the instructions for use (User Guide and Quick Reference Guide) to learn to use the system. Study staff then observed and rated the subjects (1 to 4) on their success at performing the tasks. Scale: 1.Success in performing tasks correctly without assistance. 2.Successful with additional review of User Guide. 3.Successful with additional review and study staff assist similar to review of a specific function during a Customer Service call. 4.Subject did not perform task correctly and study staff intervention was required.|2 hours|For alternate-site palm and forearm testing tasks, 3 subjects with nonevaluable blood glucose data were not included. Only 90 participants were rated for those particular tasks.||participants|||Number
833661|NCT01268267|Secondary|Numbers of Palm Blood Glucose (BG) Results Within +/- 5 to 20 mg/dL (<75 mg/dL) or Within +/- 5% to 20% (>=75 mg/dL) of Laboratory Glucose Method|Subjects with diabetes used an investigational blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) with subject capillary blood obtained from the palm. BGM results were compared to a reference lab glucose method - Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) Analyzer. BG results were used to calculate the number of BG results within +/- 5 to 20 mg/dL (for reference BG results <75mg/dL) or +/- 5% to 20% (for reference BG results >=75mg/dL) of the reference method results.|2 hours|Five subjects were hypoglycemic (low blood glucose value). Since alternate-site palm testing by these subjects was not allowed in the study, palm data from these five subjects were not obtained/ not evaluable. The remaining 85 subjects tested 2 test strip lots on the BGM system. 2x85(170)test results were available.||Number of BG test results|Participants||Number
833662|NCT01268267|Primary|Numbers of Fingerstick Blood Glucose (BG) Results Within +/- 5 to 20mg/dL (<75 mg/dL) or Within +/- 5% to 20% (>=75 mg/dL) of Laboratory Glucose Method|Subjects with diabetes tested subject fingerstick blood using an investigational blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS), which included an investigational meter and sensor. BGM results were compared to a reference lab glucose method - Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) Analyzer. BG results were used to calculate the number of BG results within +/- 5 to 20 mg/dL (for reference BG results <75mg/dL) or +/- 5 to 20% (for reference BG results >=75mg/dL) of the reference method results.|2 hours|One subject was withdrawn from the study. One subject YSI reference sample was misidentified. Two subjects were not in steady state, required for the study. Four subjects' blood test data were thus not evaluable. The remaining 90 subjects tested 2 test strip lots on the BGMsystem. 2x90(180) test results were available.||Number of BG test results|Participants||Number
833663|NCT01268293|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Treatment emergent adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were evaluated by determining the AE grade according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] version 4.0, laboratory tests, vital signs (blood pressure [mm Hg], heart rate [beats per minute], body temperature [degree C], and body weight [kg]), 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs; heart rate [bpm], QT [msec] and QTc [msec]) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS).|Until participants met discontinuation criteria such as disease progression, intolerable toxicity, and withdrawal of study consent or up to 19 cycles (1 cycle = 28 days).|The Safety Analysis Set consisted of subjects who had received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postdose safety assessment.||Participants|||Number
833664|NCT01268293|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT)||Up to 4 weeks|Subjects with less than 75% compliance in Cycle 1 for reasons other than the toxicity of the study drug and who discontinued prior to confirmation of tolerability in Cycle 1 were excluded from the analysis of DLT. All 9 participants completed Cycle 1 (DLT monitoring period) and were included in the analysis of DLT.||Participants|||Number
833665|NCT01268306|Primary|Number of Participants Wiith Corneal Staining|The number of participants who have disturbance of their corneal epithelium visualized by using applied sodium fluorescein solution (as a disclosing agent) evaluated by slit lamp biomicroscopy. Clinically significant staining is described as sufficiently diffuse and deep to pose potential risk of infection by the examiners assessment.|2-4 hours after contact lens insertion|Subjects who returned for examination post-challenge in the allotted time and who had observable corneal staining on slit lamp examination||participants|||Number
833666|NCT01268488|Secondary|Numbers of Forearm Blood Glucose (BG) Results Within +/- 5 to 15 mg/dL (<75 mg/dL) or Within +/- 5% to 20% (>=75 mg/dL) of Laboratory Glucose Method|Subjects with diabetes used an investigational blood glucose meter (BGM) with subject capillary blood obtained from the forearm. BGM results were compared to a reference lab glucose method - Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) Analyzer. BG results were used to calculate the number of BG results within +/- 5 to 15 mg/dL (for reference BG results <75mg/dL) or +/- 5% to 20% (for reference BG results >=75mg/dL) of the reference method results.|2 hours|158 BG results-78 subjects tested 2 strip lots;2 subjects tested 1 strip lot. 7 subjects-Low BG results disallowed forearm testing per protocol. 1 subject-Missing data. Remainder same as 'palm' analysis population description.||Number of BG Test Results|Participants||Number
833667|NCT01268488|Secondary|Number of Subjects Rated as<=3 Performing Basic Meter Tasks (Labeling Comprehension)|Subjects reviewed the instructions for use (User Guide and Quick Reference Guide) to learn to use the system. Study staff then observed and rated the subjects(1 to 4) on their success at performing the tasks. Scale: 1.Success in performing tasks correctly without assistance. 2.Successful with additional review of User Guide. 3.Successful with additional review and study staff assist similar to review of a specific function during a Customer Service call. 4.Subject did not perform task correctly and study staff intervention was required.|2 hours|97 participants analyzed: one subject was found not to meet inclusion/exclusion criteria so subject was withdrawn and no data from this subject was evaluated. For palm and forearm testing tasks, 2 additional subjects (with nonevaluable BG data) were not included. Only 95 participants were rated for those particular tasks.||participants|||Number
833668|NCT01268488|Secondary|Numbers of Palm Blood Glucose (BG) Results Within +/- 5 to 15 mg/dL (<75 mg/dL) or Within +/- 5% to 20% (>=75 mg/dL) of Laboratory Glucose Method|Subjects with diabetes used an investigational blood glucose meter (BGM) with subject capillary blood obtained from the palm. BGM results were compared to a reference lab glucose method - Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) Analyzer. BG results were used to calculate the number of BG results within +/- 5 to 15 mg/dL (for reference BG results <75mg/dL) or +/- 5% to 20% (for reference BG results >=75mg/dL) of the reference method results.|2 hours|161 BG results-80 subjects tested 2 strip lots;1 subject had 1 reading. Withdrawn by PI- 3 subject Adverse Events before performance testing;1 subject did not meet inclusion/exclusion. 6 subjects- Data not evaluable:exceeded time between meter testing and reference method. 7 subjects-Low bg results disallowed palm testing per protocol.||Number of BG Test Results|Participants||Number
833669|NCT01268488|Primary|Numbers of Fingerstick Blood Glucose (BG) Results Within +/- 5 to 15mg/dL (<75 mg/dL) or Within +/- 5% to 20% (>=75 mg/dL) of Laboratory Glucose Method|Subjects with diabetes tested subject fingerstick blood using an investigational blood glucose meter (BGM). BGM results were compared to a reference lab glucose method - Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) Analyzer. BG results were used to calculate the number of BG results within +/- 5 to 15 mg/dL (for reference BG results <75mg/dL) or +/- 5 to 20% (for reference BG results >=75mg/dL) of the reference method results.|2 hours|178 BG results possible-88 subjects tested 2 strip lots(88x2)/2 subjects had 1 reading(2x1). Withdrawn by Principal Investigator(PI)-3 subjects experienced Adverse Events before performance testing / one subject did not meet inclusion/exclusion. Data from 4 subjects were not evaluable since exceeded time between meter testing and reference method.||Number of BG Test Results|Participants||Number
833670|NCT01268501|Primary|Overall Convenience With Contact Lenses|"Overall convenience with contact lenses, as interpreted by the participant and reported on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 3 weeks of wear time. Overall convenience is measured on a 4-point scale: 1=very satisfied; 2=satisfied; 3=dissatisfied; 4=very dissatisfied. Results were reported as a percentage of participants who responded, very satisfied or satisfied."|3 weeks of wear|Per Protocol. Two participants were excluded from analysis due to major protocol deviations as determined by masked review.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833671|NCT01268553|Secondary|N-terminal Pro BNP Level|N-terminal pro BNP level|12 weeks|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833672|NCT01268553|Secondary|CAMPHOR: Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review; Construct = Quality of Life|The Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR) is a disease specific patient-reported outcome measure which assesses quality of life of patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH). QoL scores (total) range from 0-25, with higher scores indicating worse quality of life|12 q=weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833673|NCT01268553|Secondary|VE/VCO|Ventilatory efficiency measured with cardiopulmonary exercise testing|12 weeks|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
833674|NCT01268553|Secondary|Change in 6-minute Walk Distance|Change in 6-minute walk distance from baseline to 12 weeks.|12 weeks|Mean change in 6-minute walk distance||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
833675|NCT01268553|Secondary|Number of Participants Without Clinical Worsening|"Clinical worsening is defined as any of the following:
All-cause mortality
Nonelective hospital stay for PAH (with predefined criteria, usually for initiation of intravenous prostanoids, lung transplantation, or septostomy)
Disease progression defined as a reduction from baseline in the 6MW test by 15%, confirmed by 2 studies done within 2 weeks plus worsening functional class"|12 weeks|Patients weaned off of their parenteral prostanoids without Clinical Worsening||Participants|||Count of Participants
833676|NCT01268553|Primary|Number of Participants Without Adverse Events|The number of adverse events will be recorded at transition, 4 weeks, and 12 weeks.|12 Weeks|Number of patients weaned off of their parenteral prostanoids without adverse events||Participants|||Count of Participants
833677|NCT01268566|Secondary|Treatment-emergent Adverse Events Related to Vital Sign Parameters|Vital sign assessments were conducted throughout the study and included body temperature, blood pressure (seated), pulse rate and respiratory rate. The TEAEs related to vital signs in participants were reported. Participants were counted only once for each system organ class and preferred term, regardless of how many events the participants had.|Baseline to last record on study, up to 21 months|Safety population||Participants|||Number
833678|NCT01268566|Secondary|Treatment-emergent Adverse Events Related to Electrocardiogram Evaluations|All 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) performed during the study were obtained in triplicate (ie, 3 ECGs were obtained within a 5-minute time period) and analyzed. Number of participants with TEAEs related to ECG after the start of study drug administration were reported. Participants were counted only once for each system organ class and preferred term, regardless of how many events the participants had.|Baseline to last record on study, up to 21 months|Safety population||Participants|||Number
833679|NCT01268566|Secondary|Treatment-emergent Adverse Events Related to Laboratory Parameters|Laboratory evaluations of blood and urine samples were performed, including hematology (hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell count, platelet count, white blood cell count with differential); serum chemistry (calcium, chloride, magnesium, potassium, sodium, aspartate transaminase, alanine transaminase, alkaline phosphatase, gamma glutamyl transferase, lactic dehydrogenase, carbon dioxide/bicarbonate, blood urea nitrogen, uric acid, creatinine, total bilirubin, glucose, albumin, total protein, triglycerides, cholesterol, phosphorous); urinalysis (pH, protein, blood, glucose, ketones, bilirubin); and coagulation parameters. Abnormal laboratory finding that required an action or intervention by the investigator, or a finding judged by the investigator to represent a change beyond the range of normal physiologic fluctuation, was reported as an AE. Number of participants with TEAEs related to laboratory evaluations were reported.|Baseline to last record on study, up to 21 months|Safety population||Participants|||Number
833680|NCT01268566|Secondary|Number of Participants With Worst ECOG Performance Status On-study and Last Record On-study|Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status is a scale that measures how cancer affects the daily life of a participant on an ordinal scale from grade 0 (fully active ie, best) to 5 (dead ie, worst). Following are ECOG grades: 0: Fully active, perform all pre-disease activities without restriction. 1: Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory, carry out work of a light or sedentary nature. 2: Ambulatory, capable of selfcare, unable to carry out any work activities, up and about more than (>) 50% of waking hours. 3: Capable of limited selfcare, confined to bed or chair >50% of waking hours. 4: Completely disabled, not capable of any selfcare, totally confined to bed or chair. 5: Dead.|Baseline to last record on study, up to 21 months|Safety population||Participants|||Number
833681|NCT01268566|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) is any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of study drug, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) are AEs occurring or worsening after the administration of study drug until 90 days after the last dose of study drug or until the participant began another anticancer therapy, which ever came first. A serious AE (SAE) is any AE that results in death, is immediately life threatening, require (or prolong) inpatient hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly or birth defect, or is an important medical event that may jeopardize the participant or may require medical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above. The TEAEs and SAEs were summarized using MedDRA version 15.1. Participants were counted only once for each event, regardless of number of events the participant had.|Baseline to last record on study, up to 21 months|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of MEDI-575.||Participants|||Number
833682|NCT01268566|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Expression of PDGFR Alpha in the Tumor Samples|MEDI-575 (study drug) blocks platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) binding to PDGF receptor (PDGFR) alpha and inhibits signaling. The tissue samples which were collected prior to the study entry (archived tumor samples) were evaluated by immunohistochemistry staining for expression of PDGFR alpha signaling protein that are targets of MEDI-575. Expression of PDGFR alpha in tumor cells and tumor-associated stromal cells were evaluated for intensity and distribution of staining. The percentage of participants with positive PDGFR alpha staining in the tumor cells and tumor-associated stromal cells were reported.|Screening (Day-28 to Day -1)|ITT population with archived tumor samples were assessed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
833683|NCT01268566|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from the start of treatment with MEDI-575 until death. For the participants who were alive at the end of study or lost to follow-up, Overall survival was censored on the last date when participants were known to be alive. The Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Study entry to death, up to 16 months|ITT population. N= number of participants analyzed for this outcome measure||Months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
833684|NCT01268566|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|PFS was measured from the start of treatment with MEDI-575 until the documentation of disease progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Progression was defined as at least 25% increase in measurement of enhancing lesions compared with the smallest tumor measurement obtained during the study; or significant increase in T2/FLAIR nonenhancing lesion compared with baseline scan or best response; or any new lesion; or clear clinical deterioration; or failure to return for evaluation as a result of death or deteriorating condition; or clear progression of nonmeasurable disease. PFS was censored on the date of last tumor assessment documenting absence of tumor progression for participants who have no documented progression and were still alive prior to data cutoff, dropout, or the initiation of alternate anticancer treatment. Time to PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.|9 months|ITT population. N= number of participants analyzed for this outcome measure||Months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
833685|NCT01268566|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Rate at 3 Months and 9 Months|PFS rate at 3 and 9 months is defined as proportion of participants who neither progressed nor died due to any cause, whichever occurred first after first dose at 3 months and 9 months, respectively. Progression was defined as at least 25% increase in measurement of enhancing lesions compared with the smallest tumor measurement obtained during the study; or significant increase in T2/FLAIR nonenhancing lesion compared with baseline scan or best response; or any new lesion; or clear clinical deterioration; or failure to return for evaluation as a result of death or deteriorating condition; or clear progression of nonmeasurable disease. Proportion of participants with PFS at 3 and 9 months were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.|3 months and 9 months|ITT population||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
833686|NCT01268566|Secondary|Time to Progression|Time to progression (TTP) is defined as time from the start of treatment with MEDI-575 until the documentation of disease progression. Disease progression was defined by at least 25% increase in measurement of enhancing lesions compared with the smallest tumor measurement obtained during the study; or significant increase in T2/FLAIR nonenhancing lesion compared with baseline scan or best response; or any new lesion; or clear clinical deterioration; or failure to return for evaluation as a result of death or deteriorating condition; or clear progression of nonmeasurable disease. TTP was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.|Study entry until the first documented disease progression, up to 16 months|ITT population. N= number of participants analyzed for this outcome measure||Months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
833687|NCT01268566|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response is defined as the duration from the first documentation of objective disease response (ie, confirmed CR or confirmed PR) to the first documented disease progression. Duration of response was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and evaluated only for the participants of subgroup with an objective response.||ITT population with an objective response (ie, confirmed CR or PR) were assessed. Duration of response was not estimable as there were no participants with an objective response.|||||
833688|NCT01268566|Secondary|Time to Response|Time to response (TTR) is defined as the time from the study entry to the first documentation of confirmed CR or confirmed PR. Analysis was based on responses confirmed at a repeat assessment made at least 4 weeks after the initial response, with the TTR taken as the first time the response was observed, not the confirmation assessment. TTR was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.||ITT population with an objective response (ie, confirmed CR or PR) were assessed. TTR was not estimable as there were no participants with an objective response.|||||
833689|NCT01268566|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response|Objective response rate (ORR) is defined as the proportion of participants with confirmed CR or confirmed PR using RANO criteria. Confirmed CR and PR are those that persist on repeat imaging study for at least 4 weeks after the initial documentation of the response. CR is defined as complete disappearance of all enhancing measurable and nonmeasurable disease sustained for at least 4 weeks, no new lesions, stable or improved nonenhancing (T2/FLAIR) lesions, patient is off corticosteroids and stable or improved clinically. PR is defined as 50% decrease compared with baseline in the measurement of all measurable enhancing lesions sustained for at least 4 weeks, no progression of nonmeasurable disease, no new lesions, stable or improved nonenhancing (T2/FLAIR) lesions, no increase in the corticosteroid dose and stable or improved clinically.|Study entry through the end of the study, up to 21 months|ITT population||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
833690|NCT01268566|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Best Overall Response|Best overall response rate is calculated based upon the disease assessments recorded during the study visits using RANO criteria. Best overall response includes complete response (CR), CR with confirmation, partial response (PR), PR with confirmation, stable disease and progressive disease. Confirmed responses are those that persist on repeat imaging studies at least 4 weeks after the initial documentation of response.|Study entry through the end of the study, up to 21 months|ITT population||Percentage of participants|||Number
833691|NCT01268566|Primary|Progression-free Survival Rate at 6 Months|Progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months is defined as the proportion of participants who neither progressed nor died before 6 months after the first dose. Progression was determined using Updated Response Assessment Criteria of High Grade Gliomas: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group (RANO criteria). Progression was defined as at least 25% increase in measurement of enhancing lesions compared with the smallest tumor measurement obtained during the study; or significant increase in T2/fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) nonenhancing lesion compared with baseline scan or best response; or any new lesion; or clear clinical deterioration; or failure to return for evaluation as a result of death or deteriorating condition; or clear progression of nonmeasurable disease. PFS-6 was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.|6 months|Intent-to treat (ITT) population: All participants who entered into the study (ie, participants for whom investigator notified the interactive web response system [IWRS] that the participant met eligibility criteria and the IWRS assigned unblinded study drug to the participant).||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
833692|NCT01268683|Secondary|Clinical and MRI Outcome Data|The proportion of subjects with mRS <=4 expressed as a % (total number of patients with mRS <=4 divided by total number of patients enrolled).|90 days|||percentage of participants|||Number
833693|NCT01268683|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics|The number of patients with unanticipated PK or PD responses was assessed. An unanticipated PK or PD response would have been, for instance, a peak concentration inconsistent with prior PK assessments, or an unexpectedly low blood glucose level (< 40 mg/dL)|3 days|||participants|||Number
833694|NCT01268683|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability|"AE's of special interest (cardiac events, difficulty controlling blood sugar, liver problems, and blood disorders, including anemia) will be followed for 30 days and all SAE's will be followed for 90 days.
SAE's and AE's were reviewed, and the number of subjects with unanticipated adverse events, or drug-related SAE's were assessed."|90 days|||participants|||Number
833695|NCT01268683|Primary|Rate of Recruitment|The number of months it took to enroll the 10 patients|11 months|||months|||Number
833696|NCT01268891|Secondary|Change From Baseline in UPDRS Motor Score During ON Time|UPDRS is a 42-item rating scale designed to assess Parkinson’s Disease-related disability and impairment using a patient interview and a physical examination. It has 4 parts and 4 subsection scores. A higher score indicates a worst outcome. I: mentation, behaviour and mood symptoms - 0 to 16; II: ADL - 0 to 52; III: motor function - 0 to 108; IV: complications of dopaminergic therapy - 0 to 23. Subsection scores for I to III are used to calculate a total score that ranges from 0 (no disability) to 176 (total dependence).|Baseline and Week 18|FAS; LOCF||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833697|NCT01268891|Secondary|Change From Baseline in UPDRS-ADL Score During OFF Time|Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) is a 42-item rating scale designed to assess Parkinson's Disease-related disability and impairment using a patient interview and a physical examination. It has 4 parts and 4 subsection scores. A higher score indicates a worst outcome. I: mentation, behaviour and mood symptoms - 0 to 16; II: activities of daily living (ADL) - 0 to 52; III: motor function - 0 to 108; IV: complications of dopaminergic therapy - 0 to 23. Subsection scores for I to III are used to calculate a total score that ranges from 0 (no disability) to 176 (total dependence).|Baseline and Week 18|FAS; LOCF||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833698|NCT01268891|Secondary|Clinical Status Using CGI-I Score During ON Time|Clinical Global Impression - Global Improvement (CGI-I) is a single-item rating scale used to evaluate a patient's condition relative to baseline on a 7-point scale, regardless of whether the improvement is related to the investigational medicinal product (IMP). The scale ranges from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse).|Week 18|FAS; last observation carried forward (LOCF)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833699|NCT01268891|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Total Daily OFF Time Using Parkinson’s Disease Patient Diary|"Parkinson’s Disease Patient Diary is a self-administered diary designed to assess motor fluctuations throughout the day. It is divided into 30-minute intervals, and the patient selects one of four options for each interval: asleep; off; on with no dyskinesia or without troublesome dyskinesia; or on with troublesome dyskinesia.
The Change From Baseline in Mean Total Daily OFF Time is calculated by taking the difference between the average of the total daily OFF time at Weeks 6, 10, 14 and 18, and the Baseline Total Daily OFF Time."|Baseline and Weeks 6, 10, 14, and 18|Full-analysis set (FAS); observed cases (OC)||hours||Standard Error|Mean
833700|NCT01268943|Primary|Dose Related Toxicity|dose related toxicity is defined as follows:1. WBC damage >= grade 3; granular cell decrease >= grade 3; hemoglobin >= grade 2; platelet >= grade 2;SGPT/SGOT elevation >= grade 2; ALP >= grade 2; GGT >= grade 2; Tbil >= grade 2;renal function damage: BUN/Cr elevation >= grade 2;Non-gradular cell decreased fever >= grade 2;nausea/vomiting >= grade 2; fatigue >= grade 3; weight loss >= grade 3;gastritis >= grade 3; dairrea >= grade 3; abdominal pain >= grade 3; pancreatitis >= grade 2; upper gastrointestinal bleeding >= grade 2;other toxic reaction >= grade 3;KPS < 50 during the treatment|up to 9 weeks|||event|||Number
833701|NCT01269125|Primary|Clinical Pregnancy Rate|Clinical pregnancy rate was confirmed by observing fetal cardiac activity on transvaginal ultrasound four weeks after a positive pregnancy test.|4 weeks after a positive pregnancy test|In order to handle the problem of small sample size bootstrap techniques are used. Ader et al recommend bootstrap procedures(a) distribution is complicated or unknown, (b) a small sample is available. Finally, the bootstrap distribution has been used in order to calculate all the confidence intervals.||Percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833702|NCT01269125|Secondary|Follicular Fluid's TNF-a Concentration.|TNF-a was measured in the FF of all women (secondary outcome measures). To prevent any cytokine alterations, only blood-free samples were used.|June 2004-August 2010|||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
833703|NCT01269125|Primary|Fertilization Rate (Percentage of Fertilized Oocytes).|The fertilization rate was estimated for every woman 24 hours after oocyte retrieval|June 2004-August 2010|||percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833704|NCT01269125|Primary|Embryo Quality (the Percentage of Grade 1 Embryos Per Participant).|Embryo development was evaluated 2 days after oocyte pick-up. The number of blastomeres and the proportion of embryo volume occupied by fragments were used for the evaluation. Embryos with < 10%, < 10-20%, < 20-30% and >30% fragments were estimated as grade 1,2,3 and 4, respectively.|June 2004-August 2010|||Percentage of grade 1 embryos||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833705|NCT01269125|Primary|Clinical Pregnancy Rate|Clinical pregnancy was confirmed by observing fetal cardiac activity on transvaginal ultrasound four weeks after a positive pregnancy test.|June 2004-August 2010|The study period was seven years. Practical issues such as, no more funds for measuring cytokines, my transportation to different University stopped this study before reaching adequate power. The flow of the participants in our Department was low.||percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833706|NCT01269346|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease (SD)|Defined as the period from treatment start date to the date of PD or death, whichever occurred first. Participants who were alive without having PD as of the data cutoff date were censored as of their last tumor assessment. Calculated for participants who best response was SD.|Start of study treatment to date of PD or death, whichever occurred first, or date of data cutoff (12 Sep 2013), up to approximately 2 years 9 months|FAS included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833707|NCT01269346|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from the date of the first dose of study drug until the date of first documentation of PD or date of death from any cause, whichever occurred first. Participants who died without reported PD were considered to have progressed on the day of their death. Participants who were lost to follow-up or alive and without reported PD at the end of study were censored on the date of their last tumor assessment.|Date of first dose of study drug to date of PD or death (from any cause) whichever came first, or date of data cutoff (12 Sep 2013), up to approximately 2 years 9 months|FAS included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833708|NCT01269346|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR)|Duration of response was defined for participants whose best overall response was CR or PR. Participants who died without reported PD were considered to have progressed on the day of their death. Participants who were alive at the end of the study without reported PD were censored on the date of their last tumor assessment.|Date of a confirmed CR or PR was first documented to the date of PD or death (due to any cause and in the absence of PD), whichever occurred first, or date of data cutoff (12 Sep 2013), or up to approximately 2 years 9 months|FAS included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Analyzed for responders only (n = 37).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833709|NCT01269346|Secondary|Time to First Response|Time to first response was defined for participants whose best overall response was a CR or PR.|From date of first dose of study drug to the earliest date that CR or PR was objectively documented, assessed up to data cutoff (12 Sep 2013), up to approximately 2 years 9 months|FAS included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Analyzed for responders (CR or PR) only.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833710|NCT01269346|Primary|Objective Response Rate|The Objective Response Rate (Complete Response plus Partial Response, (CR + PR)) was defined as the proportion of participants who have a best overall response of confirmed CR or PR based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 as assessed by the Investigator. Tumor assessment was by computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). To assess best response (CR, PR, stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), or not estimable (NE)), the Investigator selected up to five measurable target lesions (2 per organ). All other lesions were identified as nontarget lesions. Each participant’s overall tumor burden at Baseline was compared with subsequent measurements of the target lesions. For participants with CR or PR, changes in tumor sizes had to be confirmed by repeat evaluations performed not fewer than four weeks after the initial response assessment.|Baseline (within 28 days of first infusion of study drug); Treatment Phase (every 6 weeks during the first 6 cycles); Extension Phase (every 12 weeks) to PR or CR|FAS included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833711|NCT01269710|Secondary|Change in LDL (mg/dL)|"Participants will be evaluated for biological and genetic risk factors for nutritional and metabolic adverse effects associated with second-generation antipsychotics (SGA's) during 4 visits over 12 weeks. Participants will also be evaluated at Month 6, 9, and 12 (Week 52).
Since only a single participant finished the study and had assessments through Week 52, we compiled the data from all subject endpoints (1 Week 12 visit, 2 Week 36 visits, and 1 Week 52 visit) and this is the data reported below."|Baseline and 52 Weeks|All four enrolled study participants were included in this analysis.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833712|NCT01269710|Secondary|Change in Triglycerides (mg/dL)|"Participants will be evaluated for biological and genetic risk factors for nutritional and metabolic adverse effects associated with second-generation antipsychotics (SGA's) during 4 visits over 12 weeks. Participants will also be evaluated at Month 6, 9, and 12 (Week 52).
Since only a single participant finished the study and had assessments through Week 52, we compiled the data from all subject endpoints (1 Week 12 visit, 2 Week 36 visits, and 1 Week 52 visit) and this is the data reported below."|Baseline and 52 Weeks|All four enrolled study participants were included in this analysis.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833713|NCT01269710|Secondary|Change in Total Cholesterol (mg/dL)|"Participants will be evaluated for biological and genetic risk factors for nutritional and metabolic adverse effects associated with second-generation antipsychotics (SGA's) during 4 visits over 12 weeks. Participants will also be evaluated at Month 6, 9, and 12 (Week 52).
Since only a single participant finished the study and had assessments through Week 52, we compiled the data from all subject endpoints (1 Week 12 visit, 2 Week 36 visits, and 1 Week 52 visit) and this is the data reported below."|Baseline and 52 Weeks|All four enrolled study participants were included in this analysis.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833714|NCT01269710|Secondary|Change in Glucose Levels (mg/dL)|"Participants will be evaluated for biological and genetic risk factors for nutritional and metabolic adverse effects associated with second-generation antipsychotics (SGA's) during 4 visits over 12 weeks. Participants will also be evaluated at Month 6, 9, and 12 (Week 52).
Since only a single participant finished the study and had assessments through Week 52, we compiled the data from all subject endpoints (1 Week 12 visit, 2 Week 36 visits, and 1 Week 52 visit) and this is the data reported below."|Baseline and 52 Weeks|All four enrolled study participants were included in this analysis.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833715|NCT01269710|Primary|Change in Weight (in Lbs.)|"Participants will be evaluated for biological and genetic risk factors for nutritional and metabolic adverse effects associated with second-generation antipsychotics (SGA's) during 4 visits over 12 weeks. Participants will also be evaluated at Month 6, 9, and 12 (Week 52).
Since only a single participant finished the study and had assessments through Week 52, we compiled the data from all subject endpoints (1 Week 12 visit, 2 Week 36 visits, and 1 Week 52 visit) and this is the data reported below."|Baseline and 52 Weeks|All four enrolled study participants were included in this analysis.||lbs.||Standard Deviation|Mean
833716|NCT01261975|Secondary|Surgically Induced Astigmatism (SIA)|Surgically induced astigmatism presented in dioptres at each visit.|Visits 4-8|Surgically Induced Astigmatism—FAS Population||Dioptres|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833717|NCT01261975|Secondary|Surgically Induced Astigmatism (SIA)|Surgically induced astigmatism was presented in dioptres at each visit.|Visits 1-3|Surgically Induced Astigmatism, FAS Population||Dioptres|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833718|NCT01261975|Secondary|Uncorrected Visual Acuity|Uncorrected visual acuity(UCVA) was assessed using logMAR charts. Change from baseline summarized by visit.|visit 5, visit 6, visit 7, visit 8|Uncorrected Visual Acuity (logMAR), change from baseline, FAS Population||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833719|NCT01261975|Secondary|Uncorrected Visual Acuity|Uncorrected visual acuity(UCVA) was assessed using logMAR charts. Change from baseline summarized by visit.|Visit 1, visit 2, visit 3, visit 4|Uncorrected Visual Acuity (logMAR), change from baseline, FAS Population||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833720|NCT01261975|Secondary|Best Corrected Visual Acuity|Best corrected distance visual acuity(BCVA) was assessed using logMAR charts. Change from baseline summarized by visit. A minus change represents an improvement of the visual acuity.|visit 5, visit 6, visit 7, visit 8|Best Corrected Distance Visual Acuity (logMAR), change from baseline, FAS Population||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833721|NCT01261975|Secondary|Best Corrected Visual Acuity|Best corrected distance visual acuity(BCVA) was assessed using logMAR charts. Change from preoperative visit summarized by visit. A minus change represents an improvement of the visual acuity|Visit 1, visit 2, visit 3, visit 4|Best Corrected Distance Visual Acuity (logMAR), Change from baseline, FAS Population||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
833722|NCT01261975|Primary|Refractive Stability|Cumulative portion of eyes achieving refractive stability within 0.5 D of the final value for the remainder of the trial by surgical procedure and visit.|12 weeks|Cumulative Proportion of Eyes Achieving Refractive Stability (within 0.5 D)— Full analysis Set (FAS) Population||Eyes|Participants||Number
833723|NCT01262027|Secondary|Safety Analysis of Dovitinib: Most Frequently Reported Treatment-related Adverse Event (AEs)|Safety analysis evaluated by grading each adverse event according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 and reporting the type, frequency and severity in a summary format. Full AE reporting can be found in the Adverse Event Section.|6 months|Evaluation included all participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
833724|NCT01262027|Primary|Overall Response (Complete Response [CR], Partial Response [PR] or Stable Disease [SD]) of Participants|Number of participants experiencing CR, PR or SD as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST). Response is anyone who experiences SD, CR or PR in first 6 months. CR: Disappearance clinical evidence active tumor by evaluation, mammogram & ultrasound. No symptoms or evidence of residual invasive tumor, including no residual tumor in axillary lymph nodes. PR: 50%/> decrease for minimum 4 weeks in measurable lesion determined by product of perpendicular diameters of lesion. Every lesion should not regress to qualify as PR; however, if lesion progresses or if new lesions appear, response cannot be classified as PR. Minor Response [MR]: Decreases in tumor masses insufficient to qualify as partial remission, i.e. <50%. SD: Between MR & PD. PD: Increase 25% measured lesion from baseline. New lesions constitutes increasing disease. Mixed responses consid|6 months|Three participants were not evaluable for response due to early departure from study.||participants|||Number
833725|NCT01262092|Primary|Illicit Opioid Use as Determine by Urine Dipsticks|urine data are from those obtained during the buprenorphine taper|3x weekly during wks 3 and 4|Those who started the bup detox (N=24) excluding 1 subjects' data in the gabapentin group due to evidence of noncompliance with medication procedures and diversion (N=1).||% of urines positive for opioids|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
833726|NCT01262105|Primary|Surgery Site CFU Density|CFU culture counts for samples taken in surgery.|Ten-minute intervals throughout procedure|||CFU/m3||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833727|NCT01262118|Secondary|Cholesterol Efflux Rate|Cholesterol efflux rate was measured using isotope dilution method in which rate of appearance of isotope 13C-free cholesterol in plasma representing whole body efflux from tissues was assessed. Isotope 13C in plasma was measured using GC-C-IRMS.|Baseline, Week 6|FAS included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||(mg/kg)/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
833728|NCT01262118|Secondary|High-density Lipoprotein Associated With Apolipoprotein A1 (HDL-apoA1) Fractional Catabolic Rate|Fractional catabolic rate for HDL-apoA1 were calculated using the 13C isotopic enrichment of VLDL as the limiting value. Isotope 13C in plasma was measured using GC-C-IRMS.|Baseline, Week 6|FAS included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||%/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
833729|NCT01262118|Secondary|High-density Lipoprotein Associated With Apolipoprotein A1 (HDL-apoA1) Production Rate|HDL-apoA1 production rate were calculated using a 3-pool model with a simulation, analysis and modeling (SAAM II) program.|Baseline, Week 6|FAS included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||mg/kg/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
833730|NCT01262118|Secondary|Low-density Lipoprotein Associated With Apolipoprotein B (LDL-apoB) Fractional Catabolic Rate|Fractional catabolic rate for LDL ApoB were calculated using the 13 carbon (13C) isotopic enrichment of very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) as the limiting value. Isotope 13C in plasma was measured using Gas Chromatography-Combustion-Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry (GC-C-IRMS).|Baseline, Week 6|FAS included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||%/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
833731|NCT01262118|Secondary|Low-density Lipoprotein Associated With Apolipoprotein B (LDL-apoB) Production Rate|LDL-apoB production rate were calculated using a 3-pool model with a simulation, analysis and modeling (SAAM II) program.|Baseline, Week 6|FAS included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||(mg/kg)/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
833732|NCT01262118|Secondary|Cholesterol Ester Fractional Catabolic Rate|Cholesterol ester fractional catabolic rate were calculated using a 3-pool model with a simulation, analysis and modeling (SAAM II) program. Fractional catabolic rate was the percentage of cholesterol ester which was replaced, transferred or lost per unit of time.|Baseline, Week 6|FAS included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage ester per hour (%/hr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833733|NCT01262118|Secondary|Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) and Total Cholesterol Concentration|Blood level of LDL-C and total cholesterol (TC) was measured following a 12-hours fasting.|Baseline, Week 6|FAS included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833734|NCT01262118|Primary|Cholesterol Ester Production Rate at Week 6|Cholesterol ester production rate was calculated using a 3-pool model with a simulation, analysis and modeling (SAAM II) program.|Week 6|FAS included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||(mg/kg)/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
833735|NCT01262118|Primary|Cholesterol Ester Production Rate at Baseline|Cholesterol ester production rate was calculated using a 3-pool model with a simulation, analysis and modeling (SAAM II) program.|Baseline|FAS included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||(mg per kilogram) per hour ([mg/kg]/hr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833736|NCT01262118|Primary|High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) Concentration at Week 6|Blood level of HDL-C was measured following a 12-hours fasting.|Week 6|FAS included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833737|NCT01262118|Primary|High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) Concentration at Baseline|Blood level of HDL-C was measured following a 12-hours fasting.|Baseline|Full analysis set (FAS) included all enrolled participants who had any measurement of cholesterol ester production rate available.||milligram per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833738|NCT01262131|Primary|Mean Change in 3-recording Average of the Subjects Daily Pain Rating on the 0-10 Numeric Pain Intensity Scale.|"Minimum scale value is '0' which represents 'no pain at all' and is the best outcome.
Maximum scale value is '10 which represents the 'worst pain imaginable' and is the worse outcome."|2 weeks (baseline to end of treatment)|Analysis was by intention to treat which included all enrolled subjects in this case to study completion.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833739|NCT01262287|Secondary|Change in Standard Drinks Per Week - Moderation by Genetic Variation|Moderation of primary outcome measure [change in standard drinks per week from baseline to end point (average weeks 7 and 8 of treatment)] by genetic variation rs12529 in neuroactive steroid biosynthetic enzyme gene AKR1C (AKR1C3*2 C-allele associated with alcohol use disorder)|Baseline (average weekly drinking for 90 day period prior to screening) vs. End Point (average weekly drinking weeks 7 and 8 of treatment)|||standard drinks per week||Standard Error|Mean
833740|NCT01262287|Primary|Change Number of Standard Drinks Per Week.|Change in Average Standard Drinks (14 gr ethanol) per week: last 2 weeks of treatment (wk 7-8) minus baseline average drinking average from baseline 90 day drinking history|Baseline (average weekly drinking for 90 day period prior to screening) vs. End Point (average weekly drinking weeks 7 and 8 of treatment)|||standard drinks per week||Standard Error|Mean
833741|NCT01262339|Primary|Evaluate the Efficacy of Botulinum Toxin A (BTX-A) in the Treatment of Primary Palmar Hyperhidrosis Delivered Via Iontophoresis.||26 weeks|Study was closed prematurely as principal investigator left the University of Wisconsin. Insufficient data for outcome measures analysis. Data was not entered into tabular format. Study closed and records archived.|||||
833742|NCT01262352|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CF Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) Score (Respiratory Domain Score, Pooled)|The CFQ-R is a health-related quality of life measure for subjects with cystic fibrosis. Each domain is scored from 0 (worst) to 100 (best). A difference of at least 4 points in the respiratory domain score of the CFQ-R is considered a minimal clinically important difference (MCID). The primary analytical focus was the respiratory health domain, which was analyzed by combining all self-response questionnaire versions from different age groups (e.g., Adult/Adolescent and Child versions).|Baseline through Day 29|All randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (placebo or ivacaftor) and had available assessments during the time frame.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833743|NCT01262352|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sweat Chloride|The sweat chloride (quantitative pilocarpine iontophoresis) test is a standard diagnostic tool for cystic fibrosis (CF), serving as an indicator of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) activity.|Baseline through Day 29|All randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (placebo or ivacaftor) and had available assessments during the time frame.||millimoles per liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833744|NCT01262352|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Percent Predicted FEV1|Spirometry (as measured by FEV1) is a standardized assessment to evaluate lung function that is the most widely used endpoint in cystic fibrosis studies.|Baseline through Day 29|All randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (placebo or ivacaftor) and had available assessments during the time frame.||percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833745|NCT01262352|Primary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Lung Clearance Index (LCI)|Lung clearance index (LCI) is a measure of ventilation inhomogeneity that is derived from a multiple-breath washout test. The LCI was calculated as the number of lung volume turnovers (cumulative expired volume divided by the functional residual capacity [FRC]) required to reduce end-tidal SF6 concentration to 1/40th of the starting value.|Baseline through Day 29|All randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug (placebo or ivacaftor) and had available assessments during the time frame.||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833746|NCT01262456|Secondary|Minimum Post-Treatment Serum Sodium Levels in the Open-Label Period|Serum sodium levels were monitored at each study visit since hyponatremia is a potential serious adverse event associated with daily doses of desmopressin. The serum sodium level must have been within the normal reference range at the Screening Visit for the participant to be eligible for enrollment. A participant was to be withdrawn from the trial if the serum sodium level was <=125 mmol/L at any time.|Month 1 of open-label period (Month 4 of treatment)|Safety analysis set (SAS) during open-label treatment period||participants|||Number
833747|NCT01262456|Secondary|Minimum Post-Treatment Serum Sodium Levels in the Double-Blind Period|Serum sodium levels were monitored at each study visit since hyponatremia is a potential serious adverse event associated with daily doses of desmopressin. The serum sodium level must have been within the normal reference range at the Screening Visit for the participant to be eligible for enrollment. A participant was to be withdrawn from the trial if the serum sodium level was <=125 mmol/L at any time.|Day 1 through Month 3 (double-blind period)|Safety analysis set (SAS)||participants|||Number
833748|NCT01262456|Secondary|Summary of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) in the Open-Label Period|A TEAE was any adverse event (AE) occurring after start of treatment and within the time of residual drug effect, i.e., within 1 day for desmopressin. An adverse drug reaction (ADR) was any AE assessed by the investigator as possibly or probably related to study drug.|Month 1 of open-label period (Month 4 of treatment)|Safety analysis set (SAS) for open label-treatment period||participants|||Number
833749|NCT01262456|Secondary|Summary of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) in the Double-Blind Period|A TEAE was any adverse event (AE) occurring after start of treatment and within the time of residual drug effect, i.e., within 1 day for desmopressin. An adverse drug reaction (ADR) was any AE assessed by the investigator as possibly or probably related to study drug.|From Day 1 through Month 3 (double-blind period)|Safety analysis set (SAS)||participants|||Number
833750|NCT01262456|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 24-Hour Urine Volume at Month 3|"Twenty-four hour urine volume was derived from the 3-day urine volume diary. Mean urine volumes were calculated as the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to the Month 3 visit.
The secondary efficacy outcomes (#3-7) used a hierarchical step-down approach in the order listed. The active treatment groups were compared to placebo using a step-down approach from highest dose (75 µg) to lowest dose (50 µg)."|Day 1 (Baseline), Month 3|FAS, including participants with complete data supporting this outcome in the participant diary.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833751|NCT01262456|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nocturnal Urine Volume at Month 3|"The nocturnal urine volume was derived from the 3-day urine volume diary. The nocturnal urine volume included the volume of the first morning void. Mean urine volumes were calculated as the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to the Month 3 visit.
The secondary efficacy outcomes (#3-7) used a hierarchical step-down approach in the order listed. The active treatment groups were compared to placebo using a step-down approach from highest dose (75 µg) to lowest dose (50 µg)."|Day 1 (Baseline), Month 3|FAS, including participants with complete data supporting this outcome in the participant diary.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833752|NCT01262456|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Time to First Nocturnal Void at Month 3|"The time to first void was defined as the time from going to bed with the intention of sleeping until first nocturnal void or until waking in the morning in the case where there was no nocturnal void. The first morning void was not counted as a nocturnal void. The time to first void was derived from the sleep and voiding diary. The mean time to first void was calculated as the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to the Month 3 visit.
The secondary efficacy outcomes (#3-7) used a hierarchical step-down approach in the order listed. The active treatment groups were compared to placebo using a step-down approach from highest dose (75 µg) to lowest dose (50 µg)."|Day 1 (Baseline), Month 3|FAS, including participants with complete data supporting this outcome in the participant diary.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
833753|NCT01262456|Secondary|Adjusted Probability of Participants Achieving a >33% Reduction From Baseline in Number of Nocturnal Voids at Month 3|"Probability of participants achieving 33% responder status at Month 3 employed a longitudinal analysis assessing nocturnal void information captured in the 3-day diary. A 33% responder was defined as a participant with a decrease of at least 33% in the mean number of nocturnal voids relative to baseline. The number of nocturnal voids was the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to Day 1 and prior to the Month 3 visit as recorded in participant diaries. The first morning void was not counted as a nocturnal void.
The secondary efficacy outcomes (#3-7) used a hierarchical step-down approach in the order listed. The active treatment groups were compared to placebo using a step-down approach from highest dose (75 µg) to lowest dose (50 µg)."|Day 1 (Baseline), Month 3|FAS, including participants with complete data supporting this outcome in the participant diary.||probability|||Number
833754|NCT01262456|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Nocturnal Voids at Month 3|"Comparison of the mean number of nocturnal voids at baseline and at the 3-month visit. The number of nocturnal voids was the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to the relevant visits as recorded in participant diaries. The first morning void was not counted as a nocturnal void.
The secondary efficacy outcomes (#3-7) used a hierarchical step-down approach in the order listed. The active treatment groups were compared to placebo using a step-down approach from highest dose (75 µg) to lowest dose (50 µg)."|Day 1 (Baseline), Month 3|Full Analysis Set (FAS), including participants with complete data supporting this outcome in the participant diary.||nocturnal voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
833755|NCT01262456|Primary|Adjusted Probability of Participants Achieving a >33% Reduction From Baseline in Number of Nocturnal Voids for All During-Treatment Visits up to Month 3|"Probability of participants achieving 33% responder status during 3 months of treatment employed a longitudinal analysis assessing nocturnal void information captured in the 3-day diary. A 33% responder was defined as a participant with a decrease of at least 33% in the mean number of nocturnal voids relative to baseline. The number of nocturnal voids was the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to Day 1 and prior to the during treatment visits (Week 1, Months 1, 2, 3) as recorded in participant diaries. The first morning void was not counted as a nocturnal void.
This was the second co-primary outcome. Superiority to placebo was to be simultaneously demonstrated on the 2 co-primary endpoints in a step-down approach from highest (75 μg) to lowest dose (50 μg), thereby controlling the family-wise error rate at the 5% nominal significance level."|Day 1 (Baseline), Week 1, Months 1, 2, 3 (3-month double-blind treatment period)|Full analysis set (FAS).||probability|||Number
833756|NCT01262456|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Nocturnal Voids Averaged Over a 3-Month Period|"The number of nocturnal voids was the average over 3 consecutive 24-hour periods prior to Day 1 and prior to the during-treatment visits (Week 1, Months 1, 2, 3) as recorded in participant diaries. The first morning void was not counted as a nocturnal void. Change from baseline values for Week 1, and Months 1, 2 and 3 are reported below.
Comparison of the mean number of nocturnal voids at baseline and over a 3-month treatment period (obtained by longitudinal analysis of Week 1, and Months 1, 2 and 3) are reported in the statistical analysis. This was the first co-primary outcome. Superiority to placebo was to be simultaneously demonstrated on the 2 co-primary outcomes in a step-down approach from highest (75 μg) to lowest dose (50 μg), thereby controlling the family-wise error rate at the 5% nominal significance level."|Day 1 (Baseline), Week 1, Months 1, 2, 3 (3-month double-blind treatment period)|Full analysis set (FAS).||nocturnal voids||Standard Deviation|Mean
833757|NCT01262547|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Effects, Including Increased Activity of Vitiligo||24 weeks|||participants reporting redness|||Number
833758|NCT01262547|Primary|Change in Target VASI Score From Baseline to Week 24.|Target Vitiligo Area Scoring Index (VASI) consists of a 7-point scale ranging from 0 (no change in depigmentation) to 6 (complete repigmentation).|24 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
833759|NCT01262560|Secondary|Patient Reported Difficulty in Swallowing Associated With Manuka Honey Using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE)|Change from baseline to four weeks in patient-reported difficulty in swallowing via the PRO-CTCAE. PRO-CTCAE is an item bank consisting of individual items to assess adverse symptom events from the patient perspective. There are 78 symptoms included in the survey but the primary item of interest assesses difficulty swallowing. For each AE in the PRO-CTCAE, between 1 and 3 items are included to assess the frequency, severity, and/or interference with activities related to that AE. Frequency questions have responses ranging from never, which is scored as a 0, to almost constantly, which is scored as a 4. Severity questions have responses ranging from none, which is scored as a 0, to very severe, which is scored as a 4. Interference questions have responses ranging from not at all, which is scored as a 0, to very much, which is scored as a 4. Difficulty in swallowing only has a severity question.|Baseline and 4 weeks from the start of treatment|Randomized eligible patients who started treatment with measure at both baseline and 4 weeks.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833760|NCT01262560|Secondary|Adverse Events Associated With Manuka Honey Using CTCAE v4.0|Adverse events are graded using CTCAE v4.0. Grade refers to the severity of the AE. The CTCAE v4.0 assigns Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each AE based on this general guideline: Grade 1 Mild AE, Grade 2 Moderate AE, Grade 3 Severe AE, Grade 4 Life-threatening or disabling AE, Grade 5 Death related to AE.|Until 12 weeks from the start of treatment|Randomized eligible patients who started protocol treatment.||percentage of patients|||Number
833761|NCT01262560|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Using Opioids|The percentage of patients using opioid analgesics is reported. Use of opioid analgesics was assessed for a 24-hour period before completing the assessment. Patients with at least one reported administration of opioid analgesic were considered to have received opioid analgesics.|Baseline, 4 weeks, end of radiation treatment, and 12 weeks from the start of treatment|Randomized eligible patients with opioid use information at at least one time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
833762|NCT01262560|Secondary|Nutritional Status (Change in Serum Prealbumin Levels From Baseline to 4 Weeks)||Baseline and 4 weeks from the start of treatment|Randomized eligible patients with serum prealbumin at baseline and 4 weeks.||mg/dl||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833763|NCT01262560|Secondary|Percent Change in Weight From Baseline to 4 Weeks||Baseline and 4 weeks from the start of treatment|Randomized eligible patients with weight at both baseline and 4 weeks.||percentage of baseline value||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
833764|NCT01262560|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Radiation Esophagitis Grade 3-4 (CTCAE v. 4)|Adverse events are graded using CTCAE v3.0. Grade refers to the severity of the AE. The CTCAE v3.0 assigns Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each AE based on this general guideline: Grade 1 Mild AE, Grade 2 Moderate AE, Grade 3 Severe AE, Grade 4 Life-threatening or disabling AE, Grade 5 Death related to AE. For esophagitis specifically, Grade 3 criteria includes severely altered eating/swallowing, tube feeding, total parenteral nutrition (TPN) or hospitalization indicated. Grade 4 criteria include life-threatening consequences, urgent operative intervention indicated.|Up to 12 weeks from the start of treatment|Randomized eligible patients who started protocol treatment||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833765|NCT01262560|Secondary|Quality of Life and Pain, as Measured by the EORTC QLQ-30 Global QOL Score and Pain Symptom Subscale at 4 and 12 Weeks|The pain symptom subscale (2 items) evaluated pain and the global score (30 items) evaluated quality of life. Each ranges from 0-100 with lower scores indicating lesser burden and improved symptoms or quality of life.|Baseline, 4 and 12 weeks from the start of treatment|Randomized eligible patients who received protocol treatment with at least 1 EORTC score completed across all time points.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833766|NCT01262560|Secondary|Dysphagia Via Daily Patient Log|"Dysphagia, as reported by the patient, was measured by the patient swallowing diary. Swallowing score has increasing severity 1-5, where 1 = none and 5 = cannot swallow liquids."|Weekly during treatment and 12 weeks from the start of treatment|Randomized eligible patients who received protocol treatment with at least one dysphagia score completed across all time points.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833767|NCT01262560|Secondary|Radiation Esophagitis-related Pain During Treatment as Measured During Treatment and 12 Weeks by the Numerical Rating Pain Scale (NRPS)|Esophagitis-related pain was measured using patient-reported pain on swallowing as assessed by the Numerical Rating Pain Scale (NRPS), an 11-point scale (0-10) in which 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates the worst pain imaginable. Generally, scores of 1-4 indicate mild pain, scores of 5-6 indicate moderate pain, and scores of 7-10 indicate severe pain. Change was calculated by subtracting the baseline value from values at the later time points. The experimental arms (honey) were compared to the standard arm (supportive care).|Baseline, weekly during treatment, and 12 weeks from the start of treatment|Eligible patients who started protocol treatment with at least 1 NRPS score completed across all time points||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834572|NCT01270555|Primary|Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) Score|Assesses 18 individual criteria symptoms using a severity grid (0 = not present, 3 = severe; overall minimum score = 0, maximum score = 54)|baseline and six weeks|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833768|NCT01262560|Primary|Change in Radiation Esophagitis-related Pain at 4 Weeks as Measured by the Numerical Rating Pain Scale for Pain on Swallowing (NRPS)|Esophagitis-related pain was measured using patient-reported pain on swallowing as assessed by the Numerical Rating Pain Scale (NRPS), an 11-point scale (0-10) in which 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates the worst pain imaginable. Generally, scores of 1-4 indicate mild pain, scores of 5-6 indicate moderate pain, and scores of 7-10 indicate severe pain. Change was calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the 4-week value. The experimental arms (honey) were compared to the standard arm (supportive care).|Baseline and 4 weeks from the start of treatment|Randomized eligible patients with NRPS score at both baseline and 4 weeks.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833769|NCT01262573|Secondary|Dyspareunia|Assessed preoperatively and up to 3 months postop|Postoperative|||participants|||Number
833770|NCT01262573|Primary|Vaginal Cuff Closure Time|Average time (measured in minutes)|During the surgical procedure|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
833771|NCT01262599|Secondary|Levels of Cytokines|Concentration of the cytokines IL1-beta in the wound bed. Exudates will be collected from standard Jackson-Pratt #10 drains until the patient is discharged. IL1-beta is an early central proinflammatory cytokine that induces cyclooxygenase, an enzyme responsible for prostaglandin synthesis. A decrease in IL1-beta correlates with a decrease in pain. Cytokines and growth factors may contribute to more rapid post-op pain reduction and healing.|4 days||||||
833772|NCT01262599|Secondary|Amount of Narcotic Pain Medications|We will record the amount of pain medication used at twelve hour intervals for the duration of the hospital stay. Pain medications will be converted to oxycodone/acetaminophen equivalents for statistical analysis|4 days||||||
833773|NCT01262599|Primary|Pain Score Measured by Visual Analog Scale|We will record postoperative pain, as reported by the patient and quantified by a standardized visual analog scale (VAS), with written descriptions at 12 hours post-op and assess that pain level in comparison with previous timepoint pain levels, such as 1 hour post-op. The VAS pain scale ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Higher scores indicate more pain and lower scores indicate less pain. The mean VAS score at 12 hours is reported for each group, active or placebo.|12 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833774|NCT01262755|Primary|Epidemiologic Factors Associated With Prevalent Reflux Disease.|Patients will complete a series of standardized questionnaires to determine the prevalence of reflux disease and risk factors for its development. We will query diet, depression, drug, tobacco, and alcohol use as well as a variety of other factors. We will study 450 African Americans living in North Philadelphia.|Two years|Patients successfully identified from targeted area.||percentage of participants with GERD||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833775|NCT01262820|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time of enrollment until death|Eight (8) months w additional time for response date to mature (up to 2 years per participant)|||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833776|NCT01262820|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|Progression free survival is defined as time of enrollment until disease progression or death Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) : Progression is defined as a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters (longest for non-nodal lesions, short axis for nodal lesions) of all target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. Target lesions are representative of all involved organs and measurable by radiographic imaging.|Eight (8) months w additional time for response data to mature (up to 2 years per participant)|||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833777|NCT01262820|Secondary|Combined Response Rate (CR + PR) of Pazopanib According to RECIST v1.1|Estimate of combined response rate (Complete Response (CR) + Partial Response (PR) per RECIST v1.1 Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) : Complete Response (CR) is defined as the disappearance of all target lesions and Partial Response (PR) as a >=30% decrease in the sum of the diameters (longest for non-nodal lesions, short axis for nodal lesions) of all target lesions.Target lesions are representative of all involved organs and measurable by radiographic imaging.|8 months with additional time for response to mature (up to 2 years per participant)|||participants|||Number
833778|NCT01262820|Primary|Disease Control Rate|Response (CR + PR + SD) as defined by RECIST v1.1 lasting equal to or greater than 12 weeks in patients treated with pazopanib alone for stage IIIB/IV non-squamous NSCLC after progression on first line therapy containing bevacizumab Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) : Complete Response (CR) is defined as Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), as a >=30% decrease in the sum of the diameters (longest for non-nodal lesions, short axis for nodal lesions) of all target lesions; Progression, as a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters (longest for non-nodal lesions, short axis for nodal lesions) of all target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions; Stable Disease (SD), neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for disease progression. Target lesions are representative of all involved organs and measurable by radiographic imaging.|Eight (8) months w additional time for response date to mature (up to 2 years per participant)|||% of participants with disease control||95% Confidence Interval|Number
833779|NCT01262846|Primary|Immunogenicity|To compare the immunogenicity of trivalent Fluzone® High-Dose vaccine vs the regular standard-dose (SD) in HIV infected individuals.|Baseline to 21 days|All participants except 5 participants with missing data at day 21||Geometric Mean antibody titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833780|NCT01262872|Other Pre-specified|Percentage (Median and Mean) of Protein Identity Relative to Amino Acid Sequence of PhtD Protein in the Vaccine for a Subset of Non-Vaccine-Type S.Pneumoniae Isolates From Nasopharyngeal Swabs – Cohort 2|Protein sequence identity was compared to vaccine sequence. Mean and median was calculated and expressed as percentage.|At Month 0 (Pre-vaccination), Month 3 (1 month [m] post-dose [P] III-3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule), Month 7 (5 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule) and Month 10 (8 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or 3 m post-booster–2+1 schedule)|The analysis was performed on vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented for which S. pneumoniae isolates samples were selected for ply and phtD gene sequencing.||Percentage of protein identity|||Number
833789|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Acquisition of Any New Streptococcus Pneumoniae in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833781|NCT01262872|Other Pre-specified|Number of Samples With PhtD Protein Variants in a Subset of Non-Vaccine-Type S.Pneumoniae Isolates From Nasopharyngeal Swabs – Cohort 2|"Because of high variants heterogeneity in each group (no major variant), the impact of vaccination on variant prevalence was not analysed.
PhtD sequences were detected in some samples but no consensus sequence could be obtained they were defined as mixed sequences (Mix).
The samples without gene detected were considered as negative for PhtD (PhtD negative)."|At Month 0 (Pre-vaccination), Month 3 (1 month [m] post-dose [P] III-3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule), Month 7 (5 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule) and Month 10 (8 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or 3 m post-booster–2+1 schedule)|The analysis was performed on vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented for which S. pneumoniae isolates samples were selected for ply and phtD gene sequencing.||Samples|||Number
833782|NCT01262872|Other Pre-specified|Percentage (Median and Mean) of Protein Identity Relative to Amino Acid Sequence of Ply Protein in the Vaccine for a Subset of Non-Vaccine-Type S.Pneumoniae Isolates From Nasopharyngeal Swabs – Cohort 2|Protein sequence identity was compared to vaccine sequence. Mean and median was calculated and expressed as percentage.|At Month 0 (Pre-vaccination), Month 3 (1 month [m] post-dose [P] III-3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule), Month 7 (5 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule) and Month 10 (8 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or 3 m post-booster–2+1 schedule)|The analysis was performed on vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented for which S. pneumoniae isolates samples were selected for ply and phtD gene sequencing.||Percentage of protein identity|||Number
833783|NCT01262872|Other Pre-specified|Number of Samples With Ply Protein Variants Classified by Number of Amino Acids (AA) Mutation Versus Vaccine Sequence in a Subset of Non-Vaccine-Type S.Pneumoniae Isolates From Nasopharyngeal Swabs – Cohort 2|"Overall, 18 different Ply protein sequences were identified: 5 protein variants previously described (e.g. variants 1, 2, 7, 11 and 15), plus 13 new protein variants which are referred to as variants GSK21 to GSK33. The number of Amino Acids (AA) mutation versus vaccine sequence has been specified for each Ply variant.
The samples without gene detected were considered as negative for Ply (Ply negative)."|At Month 0 (Pre-vaccination), Month 3 (1 month [m] post-dose [P] III-3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule), Month 7 (5 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule) and Month 10 (8 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or 3 m post-booster–2+1 schedule)|The analysis was performed on vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented for which S. pneumoniae isolates samples were selected for ply and phtD gene sequencing.||Samples|||Number
833784|NCT01262872|Other Pre-specified|Description of Non-Vaccine-Type S.Pneumoniae Samples Isolated From Nasopharyngeal Swabs Before and After Vaccination for the PhtD Gene – Cohort 2|Isolates from the Prev13_3D group were not selected. Samples were distributed evenly in the 5 groups and across time points: 10 isolates from pre-vaccination, 20 at Month 3, 20 at Month 7 and 20 at Month 10. Only samples displaying non-vaccine and non-vaccine related serotypes (all serotypes except serotypes 1, 4, 5 and 14 and serotypes belonging to the serogroups 6, 7, 9, 18, 19 and 23) were selected in systematic (equal number across groups) but non-random manner. Samples were described as follows: samples with gene detected (Positive isolates) with sequenced protein, number of protein Variants, number of isolates with Variant 1 (100% identity with vaccine sequence).|At Month 0 (Pre-vaccination), Month 3 (1 month [m] post-dose [P] III-3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule), Month 7 (5 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule) or at Month 10 (8 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or 3 m post-booster–2+1 schedule)|The analysis was performed on vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented for which S. pneumoniae isolates samples were selected for ply and phtD gene sequencing.||Samples|||Number
833785|NCT01262872|Other Pre-specified|Description of Non-Vaccine-Type S.Pneumoniae Samples Isolated From Nasopharyngeal Swabs Before and After Vaccination for the Ply Gene – Cohort 2|Isolates from the Prev13_3D group were not selected. Samples were distributed evenly in the 5 groups and across time points: 10 isolates from pre-vaccination, 20 at Month 3, 20 at Month 7 and 20 at Month 10. Only samples displaying non-vaccine and non-vaccine related serotypes (all serotypes except serotypes 1, 4, 5 and 14 and serotypes belonging to the serogroups 6, 7, 9, 18, 19 and 23) were selected in systematic (equal number across groups) but non-random manner. Samples were described as follows: samples with gene detected (Positive isolates) with sequenced protein, number of protein Variants, number of isolates with Variant 1 (100% identity with vaccine sequence).|At Month 0 (Pre-vaccination), Month 3 (1 month [m] post-dose [P] III-3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule), Month 7 (5 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or PII–2+1 schedule) or at Month 10 (8 m PIII - 3+0 schedule or 3 m post-booster–2+1 schedule)|The analysis was performed on vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented for which S. pneumoniae isolates samples were selected for ply and phtD gene sequencing.||Samples|||Number
833786|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Acquisition of Haemophilus Influenzae Strains Identified With Polymerase Chain Reaction Differentiation in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833787|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Acquisition of Haemophilus Influenzae Strains Identified With Polymerase Chain Reaction Differentiation in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833788|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Acquisition of Any New Streptococcus Pneumoniae in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834456|NCT01278615|Secondary|Duration of Response|The Kaplan-Meier procedure will be used to characterize the duration of response. Median time-to-event and the corresponding two-sided 95% confidence intervals will be provided.|From the documented beginning of response (CR or PR) to the time of relapse, assessed up to 3 years|Zero participants were analyzed due to no response.|||||
833790|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Acquisition of Non-vaccine Serotypes/Serogroups of Streptococcus Pneumoniae in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833791|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Acquisition of Non-vaccine Serotypes/Serogroups of Streptococcus Pneumoniae in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833792|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Staphylococcus Aureus in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|Positive cultures of other bacterial pathogens [such as S. aureus, Streptococcus pyogenes (Group A streptococci) and Moraxella catarrhalis] identified in the nasopharynx were analyzed. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833793|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Staphylococcus Aureus in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|Positive cultures of other bacterial pathogens [such as S. aureus, Streptococcus pyogenes (Group A streptococci) and Moraxella catarrhalis] identified in the nasopharynx were analyzed. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833794|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Group A Streptococcus in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|Positive cultures of other bacterial pathogens [such as S. aureus, Streptococcus pyogenes (Group A streptococci) and Moraxella catarrhalis] identified in the nasopharynx were analyzed. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833795|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Group A Streptococcus in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|Positive cultures of other bacterial pathogens [such as S. aureus, Streptococcus pyogenes (Group A streptococci) and Moraxella catarrhalis] identified in the nasopharynx were analyzed.This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833796|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Moraxella Catarrhalis in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|Positive cultures of other bacterial pathogens [such as S. aureus, Streptococcus pyogenes (Group A streptococci) and Moraxella catarrhalis] identified in the nasopharynx were analyzed. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833797|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Moraxella Catarrhalis in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|Positive cultures of other bacterial pathogens [such as S. aureus, Streptococcus pyogenes (Group A streptococci) and Moraxella catarrhalis] identified in the nasopharynx were analyzed. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833798|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Haemophilus Influenzae in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833799|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Haemophilus Influenzae in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833800|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Streptococcus Pneumoniae (Synflorix Related Serotypes) in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|Related serotype = any serotype belonging to the same serogroup as the Synflorix vaccine serotypes, but different from the vaccine serotypes, was considered for the analyses of carriage of S. pneumoniae cross-related serotypes. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833801|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Streptococcus Pneumoniae (Synflorix Related Serotypes) in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|Related serotype = any serotype belonging to the same serogroup as the Synflorix vaccine serotypes, but different from the vaccine serotypes, was considered for the analyses of carriage of S. pneumoniae cross-related serotypes. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833802|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Streptococcus Pneumoniae (10Pn-PD-DiT Vaccine Serotypes) in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|Numbers of subjects with positive nasopharyngeal sample were calculated per group, at each swab time point. A Streptococcus. Pneumoniae (S. pn). vaccine pneumococcal serotype was defined as any of the pneumococcal S. pn. vaccine serotypes, e. a. serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833803|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Streptococcus Pneumoniae (10Pn-PD-DiT Vaccine Serotypes) in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|Numbers of subjects with positive nasopharyngeal sample were calculated per group, at each swab time point. A Streptococcus. Pneumoniae (S. pn). vaccine pneumococcal serotype was defined as any of the pneumococcal S. pn. vaccine serotypes, e. a. serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833804|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Streptococcus Pneumoniae (Any) in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|Numbers of subjects with positive nasopharyngeal sample were calculated per group, at each swab time point. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833805|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Streptococcus Pneumoniae (Any) in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|Numbers of subjects with positive nasopharyngeal sample were calculated per group, at each swab time point. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833806|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) – For Step 2/Cohort 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity. These should also be considered serious: invasive or malignant cancers, intensive treatment in an emergency room or at home for allergic bronchospasm, blood dyscrasias or convulsions that do not result in hospitalisation. Any = Occurrence of an SAE, regardless of relationship to vaccination. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|From Day 0 to Month 10|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833807|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) – For Step 2/Cohort 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity. These should also be considered serious: invasive or malignant cancers, intensive treatment in an emergency room or at home for allergic bronchospasm, blood dyscrasias or convulsions that do not result in hospitalisation. Any = Occurrence of an SAE, regardless of relationship to vaccination. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|From Day 0 to Month 10|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833808|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs) – For Step 2/Cohort 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|An unsolicited AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. For marketed medicinal products, this also includes failure to produce expected benefits (i.e. lack of efficacy), abuse or misuse. Any = Occurrence of an unsolicited AE, regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. This outcome concerns Step 2/Cohort 2 subjects receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) period post vaccination with Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833825|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Polyribosyl Ribitol Phosphate (Anti-PRP) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-PRP antibody concentrations ≥ 0.15 µg/mL.|At 1 month post-Dose 2 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833809|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs) – For Step 2/Cohort 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|An unsolicited AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. For marketed medicinal products, this also includes failure to produce expected benefits (i.e. lack of efficacy), abuse or misuse. Any = Occurrence of an unsolicited AE, regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. This outcome concerns Step 2/Cohort 2 subjects receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) periods post vaccination with the first 2 doses of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™), across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833810|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs) – For Step 2/Cohort 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|An unsolicited AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. For marketed medicinal products, this also includes failure to produce expected benefits (i.e. lack of efficacy), abuse or misuse. Any = Occurrence of an unsolicited AE, regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. This outcome concerns Step 2/Cohort 2 subjects receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) periods post vaccination with 3 doses of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™), across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833811|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited General Symptoms and With Solicited General Symptoms With Relationship to Vaccination – For Step 2/Cohort 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|Assessed solicited general symptoms were Drowsiness, Fever (axillary temperature higher than [≥] 37.5 degrees Celsius [°C]), Irritability/Fussiness and Loss of appetite. Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom, regardless of intensity. Related = Occurrence of the specified symptom assessed by the investigators as causally related to vaccination. Grade 3 Drowsiness = Drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Fever = Axillary temperature higher than (>) 39.5°C. Grade 3 Irritability/fussiness = Crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Loss of appetite = Subject did not eat at all. This outcome concerns Step 2/Cohort 2 subjects receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|Within the 4-day (Days 0-3) period post vaccination with Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833812|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited General Symptoms and With Solicited General Symptoms With Relationship to Vaccination – For Step 2/Cohort 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|Assessed solicited general symptoms were Drowsiness, Fever (axillary temperature higher than [≥] 37.5 degrees Celsius [°C]), Irritability/Fussiness and Loss of appetite. Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom, regardless of intensity. Related = Occurrence of the specified symptom assessed by the investigators as causally related to vaccination. Grade 3 Drowsiness = Drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Fever = Axillary temperature higher than (>) 39.5°C. Grade 3 Irritability/fussiness = Crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Loss of appetite = Subject did not eat at all. This outcome concerns Step 2/Cohort 2 subjects receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|Within the 4-day (Days 0-3) periods post vaccination with the 2 first doses of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™), across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833813|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited General Symptoms and With Solicited General Symptoms With Relationship to Vaccination – For Step 2/Cohort 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|Assessed solicited general symptoms were Drowsiness, Fever (axillary temperature higher than [≥] 37.5 degrees Celsius [°C]), Irritability/Fussiness and Loss of appetite. Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom, regardless of intensity. Related = Occurrence of the specified symptom assessed by the investigators as causally related to vaccination. Grade 3 Drowsiness = Drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Fever = Axillary temperature higher than (>) 39.5°C. Grade 3 Irritability/fussiness = Crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Loss of appetite = Subject did not eat at all. This outcome concerns Step 2/Cohort 2 subjects receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|Within the 4-day (Days 0-3) periods post vaccination with 3 doses of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™), across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833814|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms – For Cohort2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|Assessed local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom, regardless of intensity. Grade 3 Pain = Crying when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 Redness/Swelling = Redness/swelling at injection site larger than (>) 30 millimeters (mm). This outcome concerns Cohort2/Step 2 subjects receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|Within the 4-day (Days 0-3) period post vaccination with Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833826|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Polyribosyl Ribitol Phosphate (Anti-PRP) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-PRP antibody concentrations ≥ 0.15 µg/mL.|At 1 month post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833815|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms – For Cohort2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|Assessed local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom, regardless of intensity. Grade 3 Pain = Crying when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 Redness/Swelling = Redness/swelling at injection site larger than (>) 30 millimeters (mm). This outcome concerns Cohort2/Step 2 subjects receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|Within the 4-day (Days 0-3) periods post vaccination with the 2 first doses of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™), across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833816|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms – For Cohort2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|Assessed local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom, regardless of intensity. Grade 3 Pain = Crying when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 Redness/Swelling = Redness/swelling at injection site larger than (>) 30 millimeters (mm). This outcome concerns Cohort2/Step 2 subjects receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|Within the 4-day (Days 0-3) periods post vaccination with 3 doses of pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™), across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833817|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers of Antibodies Against Yellow Fever (Anti-YF) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-yellow fever antibody titers ≥ 10.|At 3 months (Mth) post-vaccination with Stamaril™/M-Vac™|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833818|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers of Antibodies Against Yellow Fever (Anti-YF) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-yellow fever antibody titers ≥ 10.|At 3 months (Mth) post-vaccination with Stamaril™/M-Vac™|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833819|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Measles (Anti-Measles) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-Measles antibody concentrations ≥ 150 mIU/mL.|At 3 months (Mth) post-vaccination with Stamaril™/M-Vac™|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833820|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Measles (Anti-Measles) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-Measles antibody concentrations ≥ 150 mIU/mL.|At 3 months (Mth) post-vaccination with Stamaril™/M-Vac™|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833821|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Titers Against Poliovirus 1, 2 and 3 (Anti-Polio, Anti-Polio 2 and Anti-Polio 3) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-Polio titers ≥ 8.|At 1 month post-Dose 2 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833822|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Titers Against Poliovirus 1, 2 and 3 (Anti-Polio, Anti-Polio 2 and Anti-Polio 3) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-Polio titers ≥ 8.|At 1 month post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833823|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Hepatitis B Surface Antigens (Anti-HBs) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-HB antibody concentrations ≥ 10 mIU/mL.|At 1 month post-Dose 2 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833824|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Hepatitis B Surface Antigens (Anti-HBs) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-HB antibody concentrations ≥ 10 mIU/mL.|At 1 month post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
834133|NCT01274533|Secondary|Safety of Lenalidomide Monotherapy||28 days|The principal investigator has left the institution. Attempts to contact the PI have been unsuccessful. Columbia will never have access to the data. Thus, data will not be analyzed. The only information available is the number of participants who started and completed the study, which was last reported to and approved by the IRB in Aug. 2013.|||||
833827|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Bordetella Pertussis (Anti-BPT) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule. Seropositivity rate = Anti-BPT concentrations ≥ 15 EL.U/mL.|At 1 month post-Dose 2 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833828|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Bordetella Pertussis (Anti-BPT) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule. Seropositivity rate = Anti-BPT concentrations ≥ 15 EL.U/mL.|At 1 month post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833829|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Diphtheria (Anti-D) and Tetanus (Anti-T) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-D or anti-T antibody concentrations ≥ 0.1 IU/mL.|At 1 month post-Dose 2 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833830|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Diphtheria (Anti-D) and Tetanus (Anti-T) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule. Seroprotection rate = Anti-D or anti-T antibody concentrations ≥ 0.1 IU/mL.|At 1 month post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833831|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Inhibiting Pneumococcal Pneumolysin Toxoid (Ply) Haemolysis Activity, or Hem-Ply Antibodies – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|The results of analysis of the anti-Ply haemolysis activity inhibition for Cohort 2 are not presented as assay was no longer available. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.|||||
833832|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Inhibiting Pneumococcal Pneumolysin Toxoid (Ply) Haemolysis Activity, or Hem-Ply Antibodies – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|The results of analysis of the anti-Ply haemolysis activity inhibition for Cohort 2 are not presented as assay was no longer available. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.|||||
833833|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotype 6C – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|No analysis was performed on opsonophagocytic activity for Antibody titers against vaccine serotype 6C as no specific qualified/validated assay was available. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.|||||
833834|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotype 6C – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|No analysis was performed on opsonophagocytic activity for antibody titers against vaccine serotype 6C as no specific qualified/validated assay was available. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.|||||
833835|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotype 19A – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|The cut-off of the assay was a titer for opsonophagocytic activity higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)||12/2017||||
833836|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotype 19A – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|The cut-off of the assay was a titer for opsonophagocytic activity higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)||12/2017||||
833854|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotype 6C – For Cohort 1/Step 1 Subjects|No analysis was performed on opsonophagocytic activity for antibody titers against vaccine serotype 6C as no specific qualified/validated assay were available. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|At Month 1, or 1 month post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.|||||
833837|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotypes 3 and 6A – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|The cut-off of the assay was a titer for opsonophagocytic activity higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833838|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotypes 3 and 6A – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|The cut-off of the assay was a titer for opsonophagocytic activity higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833839|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|The cut-off of the assay was a titer for opsonophagocytic activity higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833840|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|The cut-off of the assay was a titer for opsonophagocytic activity higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 receiving the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833841|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotype 6C – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Who Received the 2+1 Schedule|No analysis was performed on Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA) testing for antibody concentrations against vaccine serotype 6C as no specific qualified/validated assay was available. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.|||||
833842|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotype 6C – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Who Received the 3+0 Schedule|No analysis was performed on Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA) testing for antibody concentrations against vaccine serotype 6C as no specific qualified/validated assay was available. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.|||||
833843|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotype 6A – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Who Received the 2+1 Schedule|Antibody concentrations were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.05 µg/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 who received the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)||12/2017||||
833844|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotype 6A – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Who Received the 3+0 Schedule|Antibody concentrations were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.05 µg/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 who received the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)||12/2017||||
833845|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotypes 3 and 19A – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Who Received the 2+1 Schedule|Antibody concentrations were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.05 µg/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 who received the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833855|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotypes 3, 6A and 19A – For Cohort 1/Step 1 Subjects|The cut-off of the assay was a titer for opsonophagocytic activity higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|At Month 1, or 1 month post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833846|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotypes 3 and 19A – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Who Received the 3+0 Schedule|Antibody concentrations were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.05 µg/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 who received the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833847|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Who Received the 2+1 Schedule|Antibody concentrations were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.05 µg/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 who received the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833848|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Who Received the 3+0 Schedule|Antibody concentrations were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.05 µg/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 who received the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833849|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Protein D (PD) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|Anti-PD antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) immunoassay, expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA Units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The cut-off of the assay was anti-PD antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 100 EL.U/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 who received the 2+1 Schedule.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833850|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Protein D (PD) – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|Anti-PD antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) immunoassay, expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA Units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The cut-off of the assay was anti-PD antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 100 EL.U/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 who received the 3+0 Schedule.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833851|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Pneumococcal Pneumolysin Toxoid (Ply) and Pneumococcal Histidine Triad Protein D (PhtD) Proteins – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|"Anti-Ply and anti-PhtD antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) immunoassay and expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA Units per milliliter (EL.U/mL).
Cut-off of the assay were concentrations higher than or equal to (≥) 12 EL.U/mL for anti-Ply antibodies and ≥ 17 EL.U/mL for anti-PhtD antibodies. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 who received the 2+1 Schedule."|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833852|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Pneumococcal Pneumolysin Toxoid (Ply) and Pneumococcal Histidine Triad Protein D (PhtD) Proteins – For Cohort 2/Step 2 Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|"Anti-Ply and anti-PhtD antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) immunoassay and expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA Units per milliliter (EL.U/mL).
Cut-off of the assay were concentrations higher than or equal to (≥) 12 EL.U/mL for anti-Ply antibodies and ≥ 17 EL.U/mL for anti-PhtD antibodies. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 2/Step 2 who received the 3+0 Schedule."|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine, Synflorix™ or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833853|NCT01262872|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Inhibiting Pneumococcal Pneumolysin Toxoid (Ply) Haemolysis Activity, or Hem-Ply Antibodies – For Cohort 1/Step 1 Subjects|Concentrations of Hem-Ply antibodies were expressed as geometric mean titers . The cut-off of the assay was an Hem-Ply antibody titer ≥ 140. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|At Month 1, or 1 month post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833856|NCT01262872|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F – For Cohort 1/Step 1 Subjects|The cut-off of the assay was a titer for opsonophagocytic activity higher than or equal to (≥) 8. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|At Month 1, or 1 month post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833857|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotype 6C – For Cohort 1/Step 1 Subjects|No analysis was performed on Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA) testing for antibody concentrations against vaccine serotype 6C as no specific qualified/validated assay were available. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|At Month 1, or 1 month post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.|||||
833858|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotypes 3, 6A and 19A – For Cohort 1/Step 1 Subjects|Antibody concentrations were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.05 µg/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|At Month 1, or 1 month post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833859|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Vaccine Serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F – For Cohort 1/Step 1 Subjects|Antibody concentrations were measured by 22F-inhibition Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The cut-off of the assay was an antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 0.05 µg/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|At Month 1, or 1 month post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833860|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Protein D (PD) – For Cohort 1/Step 1 Subjects|Anti-PD antibody concentrations were measured by Multiplex immunoassay, expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in Luminex Units per milliliter (LU/mL). The cut-off of the assay was an anti-PD antibody concentration higher than or equal to (≥) 112 LU/mL. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|At Month 1, or 1 month post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||LU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833861|NCT01262872|Secondary|Antibody Concentrations Against Pneumococcal Pneumolysin Toxoid (Ply) and Pneumococcal Histidine Triad Protein D (PhtD) Proteins – For Cohort 1/Step 1 Subjects|"Anti-Ply and anti-PhtD antibody concentrations were measured by Multiplex immunoassay and expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in Luminex Units per milliliter (LU/mL).
Cut-off of the assay were concentrations higher than or equal to (≥) 599 LU/mL for anti-Ply antibodies and ≥ 391 LU/mL for anti-PhtD antibodies. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1."|At Month 1, or 1 month post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom immunogenicity data were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||LU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
833862|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) – For Step 1/Cohort 1 Subjects|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity. These should also be considered serious: invasive or malignant cancers, intensive treatment in an emergency room or at home for allergic bronchospasm, blood dyscrasias or convulsions that do not result in hospitalisation. Any = Occurrence of an SAE, regardless of relationship to vaccination. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|From Day 0 to Month 6|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833863|NCT01262872|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Haematological or Biochemical Abnormalities With Respect to Normal Laboratory Ranges – For Cohort 1/Step 1 Subjects|Assessed biochemical and haematological parameters were: Haemoglobin (Hgb), White cell count (WBC), Platelet counts, Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and Creatinine (CREA). Per parameter, it was assessed whether subjects had laboratory values below normal, normal, or above normal range. Below = value below the laboratory reference range defined for the specified time point and laboratory parameter. Within = value within the laboratory reference range defined for the specified time point and laboratory parameter. Above = value above the laboratory reference range defined for the specified time point and laboratory parameter. Unknown = value unknown for the specified time point and laboratory parameter. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|At Month 1, or 1 month post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833879|NCT01263015|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Plasma HIV-1 RNA at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40,48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132 and 144|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of HIV-1 RNA in plasma. Changes from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Baseline and at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132 and 144|ITT-E Population||log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833864|NCT01262872|Primary|Number of Subjects With Non-vaccine Serotypes of Streptococcus Pneumoniae (S. pn.) in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2, Subjects Receiving the 2+1 Schedule|Any serotype belonging to the same serogroup as the serotypes of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™), but different from 10 vaccine pneumococcal serotypes, was considered for this analysis of carriage. Serotypes were identified through cultures and serotyping of isolates.|At 1 and 5 months (Mth) post-Dose 2, and at 3 months post-Dose 3 of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833865|NCT01262872|Primary|Number of Subjects With Non-vaccine Serotypes of Streptococcus Pneumoniae (S. pn.) in the Nasopharynx – For Cohort 2/Step 2, Subjects Receiving the 3+0 Schedule|Any serotype belonging to the same serogroup as the serotypes of the pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™), but different from 10 vaccine pneumococcal serotypes, was considered for this analysis of carriage. Serotypes were identified through cultures and serotyping of the isolates.|At 1, 5 and 8 months (Mth) post-Dose 3 of pneumococcal vaccine administered (10PP vaccine or Synflorix™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833866|NCT01262872|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and With SAE(s) With Relationship to Vaccination - In Step 1/Cohort 1 Subjects|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity. These should also be considered serious: invasive or malignant cancers, intensive treatment in an emergency room or at home for allergic bronchospasm, blood dyscrasias or convulsions that do not result in hospitalisation. Any = Occurrence of an SAE, regardless of relationship to vaccination. Related = Occurrence of an SAE assessed by the investigator as causally related to vaccination. Primary results correspond to results for occurrences of SAE(s) assessed as related to vaccination. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|From Day 0 to Month 1|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833867|NCT01262872|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs) With and Without Relationship to Vaccination - In Step 1/Cohort 1 Subjects|An unsolicited AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. For marketed medicinal products, this also includes failure to produce expected benefits (i.e. lack of efficacy), abuse or misuse. Any = Occurrence of AE, regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 = Occurrence of AE which prevented normal activities. Related = Occurrence of AE assessed by the investigator as causally related to vaccination. Primary results correspond to results for occurrences of Grade 3 unsolicited AE(s) assessed as related to vaccination. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) period post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833868|NCT01262872|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited General Symptoms With and Without Relationship to Vaccination – For Step 1/Cohort 1 Subjects|Assessed solicited general symptoms were Drowsiness, Fever (axillary temperature higher than [≥] 37.5 degrees Celsius [°C]), Irritability/Fussiness and Loss of appetite. Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom, regardless of intensity and relationship to vaccination. Related = Occurrence of the specified symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to vaccination. Grade 3 Drowsiness = Drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Fever = Axillary temperature higher than (>) 39.5°C. Grade 3 Irritability/fussiness = Crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Loss of appetite = Subject did not eat at all. Primary results correspond to results for occurrences of Grade 3 symptoms assessed as related to vaccination. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|Within the 4-day (Days 0-3) period post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833869|NCT01262872|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms With Relationship to Vaccination – For Step 1/Cohort 1 Subjects|Assessed local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = Occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom, regardless of intensity. Grade 3 Pain = Crying when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 Redness/Swelling = Redness/swelling at injection site larger than (>) 30 millimeters (mm). All solicited local symptoms were systematically considered by the investigators as causally related to vaccination. Primary results correspond to results for occurrences of Grade 3 symptoms. This outcome concerns subjects enrolled in Cohort 1/Step 1.|Within the 4-day (Days 0-3) period post vaccination with pneumococcal vaccine (10PP vaccine or Prevnar 13™)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
833870|NCT01262989|Primary|Cmax|Cmax is defined as the maximum or “peak” concentration of a drug observed after its administration. Cmax is one of the parameters of particular use in estimating bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the total amount of drug absorbed.|Days 1 to 3 (Period 1) and Days 9 to 11 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
833871|NCT01262989|Primary|AUC0-infinity|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC from time 0 (prior to administration of medication) to infinity (the time of complete elimination of the drug) was calculated using the trapezoidal method. This method consists of the sum of the trapezoids' areas, determined by the collection times and their concentrations. The AUC is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption.|Days 1 to 3 (Period 1) and Days 9 to 11 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng/h/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
834573|NCT01270581|Primary|Duration of Respiratory Support|Data not collected due to insufficient enrollment for any data analysis.|average of 7 days||||||
833872|NCT01262989|Primary|AUC0-t|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC from time 0 (prior to administration of medication) to time t (the time of the last quantifiable concentration) was calculated using the trapezoidal method. This method consists of the sum of the trapezoids' areas, determined by the collection times and their concentrations. The AUC is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption. ng, nanograms; ml, milliliter.|Days 1 to 3 (Period 1) and Days 9 to 11 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng per hour per ml (ng/h/ml)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833873|NCT01263015|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Symptom Bother Score (SBS) at Week 4 Through Week 48|"The Symptom Distress Module (SDM) is a 20-item, self-reported questionnaire measuring the presence/perceived distress linked to symptoms associated with HIV/its treatments. Developed with support from the AIDS Clinical Trials Group of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, it has demonstrated construct validity and has shown strong associations with physical/mental health summary scores and with disease severity. The SDM consists of 2 main scores: symptom count and the SBS, ranging from 0 (best) to 80 (worst) and based on the degree of bother that each symptom present posed. The SBS was calculated by adding the 20 individual bother item scores, which were calculated as: 0, “I do not have this symptom”; 1, It doesn’t bother me”; 2, “It bothers me a little”; 3, “It bothers me”; 4, It bothers me a lot. Estimates are calculated from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model adjusting for age, sex, race, Baseline (BL) viral load, BL CD4+ cell count, and BL SBS."|Baseline and Week 4 through 48|ITT-E Population. Participants with missing bother item scores at Week 4 had their last observation carried forward (LOCF). Only those participants contributing to the model (i.e., without missing response variables after LOCF or covariates) were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
833874|NCT01263015|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Genotypic Resistance With Virological Failure (VF) Through 144|Whole blood samples were collected from participants to provide plasma for storage samples for potential viral genotypic and phenotypic analyses. Participants with confirmed virological failure (confirmed HIV-1 RNA >=50 copies/mL throughout the study and/or confirmed HIV-1 RNA >=200 copies/mL at Week 144) had plasma samples tested for HIV-1 RT genotype and HIV-1 integrase genotype from Baseline samples and from samples collected at the time of virological failure. Genotype testing was conducted at Day 1 and at the time of suspected protocol-defined virological failure (PDVF). A genotyping assessment was made of change across all amino acids within the integrase (IN)-encoding region, with particular attention paid to specific amino acid changes associated with the development of resistance to RAL, ELV, or DTG.|Through Week 144|PDVF Genotypic Population: all participants in the ITT-E Population with available on-treatment genotypic resistance data at the time of PDVF||Participants|||Number
833875|NCT01263015|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Grade 1 to 4 Clinical and Hematology Toxicities at Week144|All Grade 1 to 4 post-Baseline-emergent chemistry toxicities included alanine aminotransferase (ALT), albumin, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), asparate aminotransferase (AST), carbon dioxide (CO2) content/bicarbonate, cholesterol, creatine kinase (CK), creatinine, hyperglycemia, hyperkalemia, hypernatremia, hypoglycemia, hypokalemia, hyponatremia, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol calculation, lipase, phosphorus inorganic, total bilirubin, and triglycerides. All Grade 1 to 4 post-Baseline-emergent hematology toxities included hemoglobin, platelet count, total neutrophils, and white blood cell count. The Division of AIDS (DAIDS) defined toxicity grades as follows: Grade 1, mild; Grade 2, moderate; Grade 3, severe; Grade 4, potentially life threatening; Grade 5, death.|From Baseline until Week 144|Safety Population: all participants who received at least one dose of investigational product||Participants|||Number
833876|NCT01263015|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Post-baseline HIV-associated Conditions and Progression, Excluding Recurrences at Week 144|Clinical disease progression (CDP) was assessed according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) HIV-1 classification system. Category (CAT) A: one or more of the following conditions (CON), without any CON listed in Categories B and C: asymptomatic HIV infection, persistent generalized lymphadenopathy, acute (primary) HIV infection with accompanying illness or history of acute HIV infection. CAT B: symptomatic CON that are attributed to HIV infection or are indicative of a defect in cell-mediated immunity; or that are considered by physicians to have a clinical course or to require management that is complicated by HIV infection; and not included among CON listed in clinical CAT C. CAT C: the clinical CON listed in the AIDS surveillance case definition. Indicators of CDP were defined as: CDC CAT A at Baseline (BS) to a CDC CAT C event (EV); CDC CAT B at BS to a CDC CAT C EV; CDC CAT C at BS to a new CDC CAT C EV; or CDC CAT A, B, or C at BS to death.|From Baseline until Week 144|ITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
833877|NCT01263015|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ Cell Counts at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132 and 144|CD4 lymphocyte cells (also called T-cells or T-helper cells) are the primary targets of HIV. The CD4 count and the CD4 percentage mark the degree of immunocompromise. The CD4 count is used to stage the patient's disease, determine the risk of opportunistic illnesses, assess prognosis, and guide decisions about when to start antiretroviral therapy. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Indicated visit minus the Baseline value. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Baseline and Week 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132 and 144|ITT-E Population||cells per millimeters cubed (cells/mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
833878|NCT01263015|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ Cell Counts at Week 144|Cluster of differentiation (CD4) lymphocyte cells (also called T-cells or T-helper cells) are the primary targets of HIV. The CD4 count and the CD4 percentage mark the degree of immunocompromise. The CD4 count is used to stage the patient's disease, determine the risk of opportunistic illnesses, assess prognosis, and guide decisions about when to start antiretroviral therapy. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 144 value minus the Baseline value. The least squares mean is the estimated mean change from Baseline in CD4+ cell counts at Week 144 calculated from a repeated measures model including the following covariates: treatment, visit, Baseline plasma HIV-1 RNA, Baseline CD4+ cell count, treatment*visit interaction, Baseline HIV-1 RNA*visit interaction, and Baseline CD4+ cell count*visit interaction. No assumptions were made about the correlations between a participant's readings of CD4+, i.e., the correlation matrix for within-participant errors is unstructured.|Baseline and Week 144|ITT-E Population||cells per millimeters cubed (cells/mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
834574|NCT01270620|Secondary|Amount of Intraoperative Fentanyl||From the anesthesia induction until extubation|||micrograms||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833880|NCT01263015|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Confirmed Plasma HIV-1 RNA Level >=1000 c/mL at or After Week 16 and Before Week 24, or a Confirmed Plasma HIV-1 RNA Level >=200 c/mL at or After Week 24|Data are presented as Kaplan Meier estimates of virologic failure (VF), defined as a confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA level >=1000 c/mL at or after Week 16 and before Week 24, or a confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA level >=200 c/mL at or after Week 24. A plasma HIV-1 RNA value was considered to be confirmed failure if a consecutive measurement satisfied the same failure criterion. The number of participants who experienced autoimmune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) VFs was measured. For participants who withdrew from the study/were not documented to have reached confirmed VF at the cut off date of the Week 48 analysis, time to VF was to be censored at the planned visit week of the last measured plasma HIV-1 RNA sample. Data for participants who missed three consecutive scheduled plasma HIV-1 RNA measurements were to be censored at the planned visit week of the last assessment prior to the 3 consecutive missed visits.|From Baseline until Week 144) (average of 877.4 days for DTG; average of 788.8 study days for EFV/TDF/FTC)|ITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
833881|NCT01263015|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus -1 (HIV-1) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <50 Copies/Milliliter (c/mL) at Week 96 and Week 144|The percentage of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL at Week 96 and Week 144 was assessed. Plasma samples were collected for the quantitative assessment of HIV-1 RNA based on the Missing, Switch, or Discontinuation equals Failure (MSDF) algorithm,as codified by the Food and Drug Administration's Snapshot algorithm. This algorithm treats all participants without HIV-1 RNA data at the visit of interest (due to missing data or discontinuation of investigationl product prior to the visit window) as non-responders, as well as participants who switched their concomitant antiretroviral therapy (ART) in certain scenarios. Since changes in ART were not permitted in this protocol, all such participants who changed ART were to be considered non-responders. Otherwise, virologic success or failure was to be determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the participant was on treatment within the visit of interest window.|Week 96 and Week 144|Intent-to-Treat-Exposed (ITT-E) Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Percentage of participants|||Number
833882|NCT01263015|Secondary|Time to Viral Suppression (<50 c/mL)|Viral suppression is defined as the first viral load value<50 c/mL. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate time to viral suppression, defined as the time from the first dose of study treatment until the first viral load value <50 c/mL was reached. Participants who withdrew for any reason without having suppressed prior to the analysis were censored.|From Baseline until Week 144) (average of 877.4 days for DTG; average of 788.8 study days for EFV/TDF/FTC)|ITT-E Population||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
833883|NCT01263015|Primary|Proportion of Subjects Responding Based on Plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL at Week 48|The percentage of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL at Week 48 was assessed. Plasma samples were collected for the quantitative assessment of HIV-1 RNA based on the Missing, Switch, or Discontinuation equals Failure (MSDF) algorithm,as codified by the Food and Drug Administration's Snapshot algorithm. This algorithm treats all participants without HIV-1 RNA data at the visit of interest (due to missing data or discontinuation of investigationl product prior to the visit window) as non-responders, as well as participants who switched their concomitant antiretroviral therapy (ART) in certain scenarios. Since changes in ART were not permitted in this protocol, all such participants who changed ART were to be considered non-responders. Otherwise, virologic success or failure was to be determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the participant was on treatment within the visit of interest window.|Week 48|Intent-to-Treat-Exposed (ITT-E) Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Percentage of participants|||Number
833884|NCT01263028|Secondary|Change in Erythropoietin Adjusted for Change in Inflammatory Markers, Vitamin D Levels and Clinical and Demographic Confounders||24 Weeks||||||
833885|NCT01263028|Secondary|Change in Iron Supplementation||24 Weeks||||||
833886|NCT01263028|Secondary|Change in Calcium, Phosphorous,Calcium x Phosphorous Product, and Parathyroid Hormone Levels||24 Weeks||||||
833887|NCT01263028|Secondary|Change in Inflammatory Markers||24 Weeks||||||
833888|NCT01263028|Primary|Evaluate if Ergocalciferol Supplementation to Achieve 25-hydroxy Vitamin D Levels > 40ng/ml Will Decrease Erythropoietin Requirements||24 Weeks||||||
833889|NCT01263054|Secondary|Mean Change in Score of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) Between Screening and 6 Month Follow up Visit|"ODI - score range = 0 - 100. 0 corresponds to no disability and 100 indicates the maximum disability possible. The means of these scores and their respective standard deviations are reported for each study group."|Baseline and 6 Months|Five subjects in the TransDiscal System study arm, and seven subjects in the Medical Management study arm did not provide follow-up data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833890|NCT01263054|Secondary|Mean Change in Score of Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Between Screening and 6 Month Follow up Visit|"PGIC - score range = 1 - 7. 1 corresponds to very much improved and 7 indicates very much worse pertaining to overall activity, symptoms, emotions, and quality of life. The means of these scores and their respective standard deviations are reported for each study group."|Baseline and 6 months|Six subjects in the TransDiscal System study arm, and seven subjects in the Medical Management study arm did not provide follow-up data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
833891|NCT01263054|Secondary|Mean Change in Score of Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI) Between Screening and 6 Month Follow up Visit|"BDI - score range = 0 - 63. 0 corresponds to minimal depression and 63 indicates severe depression. The means of these scores and their respective standard deviations are reported for each study group."|Baseline and 6 months|Five subjects in the TransDiscal System study arm, and eight subjects in the Medical Management study arm did not provide follow-up data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833892|NCT01263054|Secondary|Mean Change in Score of EuroQuol 5d Visual Analog Scale (EQ-5d VAS) Between Screening and 6 Month Follow up Visit|"EQ-5d VAS - score range = 0 - 100. 0 corresponds to the worst imaginable health state and 100 indicates the best imaginable health state. The means of these scores and their respective standard deviations are reported for each study group."|Baseline and 6 months|Five subjects in the TransDiscal System study arm, and seven subjects in the Medical Management study arm did not provide follow-up data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834575|NCT01270620|Secondary|Duration of Anesthesia||Time from induction to extubation|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834576|NCT01270620|Secondary|Duration of Surgery||Time from Incision to closure of surgery|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
833893|NCT01263054|Secondary|Mean Change in Score of Short Form 36-Physical Functioning (SF36-PF) From Screening to 6 Month Follow up Visit|"Short Form 36-PF - score range = 0 - 100. 0 corresponds to greatest disability and 100 indicates no disability. The means of these scores and their respective standard deviations are reported for each study group."|Baseline and 6 months|Five subjects in the TransDiscal System study arm, and seven subjects in the Medical Management study arm did not provide follow-up data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833894|NCT01263054|Secondary|Percentage of Study Group Subjects With Greater Than 2 Points Decrease or 30% Drop in Average Daily Pain Related Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score.|"Visual Analog Scale (NRS) - score range = 0 - 10. 0 corresponds to no pain and 10 indicates worst pain imaginable. The means of these scores and their respective standard deviations are reported for each study group."|Baseline and 6 months|||percentage of study group|||Number
833895|NCT01263054|Primary|Change in Average Daily Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score Between Screening and Follow up.|"Visual Analog Scale (NRS) - score range = 0 - 10. 0 corresponds to no pain and 10 indicates worst pain imaginable. The means of these scores and their respective standard deviations are reported for each study group."|Baseline and 6 months|Five subjects in the TransDiscal System study arm, and six subjects in the Medical Management study arm did not provide follow-up data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833896|NCT01263132|Primary|Mean Neuropathic Pain Score at Visit 6 (Week 4)|Neuropathic pain score included 10 pain descriptors (intensity, stinging, burning, dull pain, coldness, sensitivity, numbness, depth, superficial and unpleasant) quantified on a 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (worst symptoms imaginable). Questionnaire generated a score in each of the relevant dimensions and a total score of 0-100. Higher score indicated a greater intensity of pain.|Visit 6 (Week 4)|PP population included all participants who were randomized and took at least 1 dose of study medication. In this clinical study ITT and PP populations were the same.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833897|NCT01263132|Primary|Mean Neuropathic Pain Score at Visit 5 (Week 3)|Neuropathic pain score included 10 pain descriptors (intensity, stinging, burning, dull pain, coldness, sensitivity, numbness, depth, superficial and unpleasant) quantified on a 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (worst symptoms imaginable). Questionnaire generated a score in each of the relevant dimensions and a total score of 0-100. Higher score indicated a greater intensity of pain.|Visit 5 (Week 3)|PP population included all participants who were randomized and took at least 1 dose of study medication. In this clinical study ITT and PP populations were the same.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833898|NCT01263132|Primary|Mean Neuropathic Pain Score at Visit 4 (Week 2)|Neuropathic pain score included 10 pain descriptors (intensity, stinging, burning, dull pain, coldness, sensitivity, numbness, depth, superficial and unpleasant) quantified on a 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (worst symptoms imaginable). Questionnaire generated a score in each of the relevant dimensions and a total score of 0-100. Higher score indicated a greater intensity of pain.|Visit 4 (Week 2)|PP population included all participants who were randomized and took at least 1 dose of study medication. In this clinical study ITT and PP populations were the same.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833899|NCT01263132|Secondary|Quality of Life Survey Assessed Using Short Form 36 (SF-36) Questionnaire|SF-36 is a standardized health survey consisting of 36 questions to measure functional health status. Summary scores are calculated using the following 8 dimensions: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. The score for a component is obtained by SF-36 algorithm and it is represented as an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0 (not functioning) to 100 (highest functioning). Higher scores are indicative of a better health status.|Visit 2 (Baseline) to Visit 6 (Week 4)|PP population included all participants who were randomized and took at least 1 dose of study medication. In this clinical study ITT and PP populations were the same. Two participants in the MF0434 + Gabapentin group had missing values and hence are not included.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833900|NCT01263132|Primary|Mean Neuropathic Pain Score at Visit 3 (Week 1)|Neuropathic pain score included 10 pain descriptors (intensity, stinging, burning, dull pain, coldness, sensitivity, numbness, depth, superficial and unpleasant) quantified on a 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (worst symptoms imaginable). Questionnaire generated a score in each of the relevant dimensions and a total score of 0-100. Higher score indicated a greater intensity of pain.|Visit 3 (Week 1)|Per Protocol (PP) population included all participants who were randomized and took at least 1 dose of study medication. In this clinical study Intention to treat (ITT) and PP populations were the same.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
833901|NCT01263301|Primary|no Change of Vertebral Arterial Flow During Cuff Test|we used carotid duplex duplex to study the change of vertebral arterial flow during cuff test to see if there is any difference between normal participants and patients under hemodialysis. There are two patterns seen. One is that the vertebral arterial flow reversed to normal flow pattern during cuff test. The other is that there is no change of vertebral flow pattern when the flow is stopped in the arm by cuff test.|2 years|as above explained||participants|||Number
833902|NCT01263301|Primary|Change of Vertebral Flow to Normal Flow Pattern During Cuff Test|we used carotid duplex duplex to study the change of vertebral arterial flow during cuff test to see if there is any difference between normal participants and patients under hemodialysis. There are two patterns seen. One is that the vertebral arterial flow reversed to normal flow pattern during cuff test. The other is that there is no change of vertebral flow pattern when the flow is stopped in the arm by cuff test.|two year|determined as above explained||participants|||Number
833903|NCT01263301|Primary|no Change of Subclavian Arterial Flow During Cuff Test|we used carotid duplex duplex to study the change of subclavian arterial flow during cuff test to see if there is any difference between normal participants and patients under hemodialysis. There are two patterns seen. One is that the subclavian arterial flow reversed to normal flow pattern during cuff test. The other is that there is no change of subclavian flow pattern when the flow is stopped in the arm by cuff test.|one year|for there are not too many patients who have subclavian steal found by carotid duplex, we just collected all patients during the study period that have subclavian steal and all patients with vascular access that signed written consent for the examination.||participants|||Number
833958|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 12).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 12 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg·hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833904|NCT01263301|Primary|Change of Subclavian Flow to Normal Flow Pattern During Cuff Test|we used carotid duplex duplex to study the change of subclavian arterial flow during cuff test to see if there is any difference between normal participants and patients under hemodialysis. There are two patterns seen. One is that the subclavian arterial flow reversed to normal flow pattern during cuff test. The other is that there is no change of subclavian flow pattern when the flow is stopped in the arm by cuff test.|two years|for there are not too many patients who have subclavian steal found by carotid duplex, we just collected all patients during the study period that have subclavian steal and all patients with vascular access that signed written consent for the examination.||participants|||Number
833905|NCT01263444|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Reaching the Target IOP (≤ 18 mmHg)|IOP (fluid pressure inside the eye) was assessed using Goldmann applanation tonometry and measured in millimeters of mercury (mmHg). A higher IOP can be a greater risk factor for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage). Only one eye (study eye) was assessed.|Week 12|This analysis population includes all patients who received study medication and had at least one on-therapy study visit minus missing responses and/or visit attendance.||percentage of participants|||Number
833906|NCT01263444|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in IOP at Week 4|IOP (fluid pressure inside the eye) was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. A higher IOP can be a greater risk for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage). A more negative change indicates a greater amount of improvement. Only one eye (study eye) contributed to the mean.|Baseline, Week 4|This analysis population includes all patients who received study medication and had at least one on-therapy study visit minus missing responses and/or visit attendance.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833907|NCT01263444|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in IOP Per Prostaglandin Group at Week 12|IOP (fluid pressure inside the eye) was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. A higher IOP can be a greater risk for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage). A more negative change indicates a greater amount of improvement. Only prostaglandin subgroups with ≥ 15 patients were analyzed. Only one eye (study eye) contributed to the mean.|Baseline, Week 12|This analysis population includes all patients who received study medication and had at least one on-therapy study visit minus missing responses and/or visit attendance.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833908|NCT01263444|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Intraocular Pressure (IOP) at Week 12|IOP (fluid pressure inside the eye) was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. A higher IOP can be a greater risk for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage). A more negative change indicates a greater amount of improvement. Only one eye (study eye) contributed to the mean.|Baseline, Week 12|This analysis population includes all patients who received study medication and had at least one on-therapy study visit minus missing responses and/or visit attendance.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
833909|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)).|The change between the value of glucagons collected at week 12 or final visit and glucagons collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||pg·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833910|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-peptide Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2).|The change between the value of C-peptide collected at week 12 or final visit and C-peptide collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||ng·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833911|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing - Area Under the Curve at 2 Hours (AUC(0-2)).|The change between the value of insulin collected at week 12 or final visit and insulin collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||μU·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833912|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing - Area Under the Curve at 2 Hours (AUC (0-2)).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 12 or final visit and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg·hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833913|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (2-hr Postprandial Value).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 12 or final visit and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833914|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 12 or final visit and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833981|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 32).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 32 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 32.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833915|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 8 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833916|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 4).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 4 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833917|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 2).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 2 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 2.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833918|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 12 or final visit and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833919|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 8 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833920|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 4).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 4 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833921|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 2).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 2 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 2|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833922|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 8).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 8 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833923|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 4).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 4 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833924|NCT01263470|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 2).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 2 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 2.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833925|NCT01263470|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 12).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 12 or final visit and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833926|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)).|The change between the value of glucagons collected at week 12 or final visit and glucagons collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||pg·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833927|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-peptide Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2).|The change between the value of C-peptide collected at week 12 or final visit and C-peptide collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||ng·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833928|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2).|The change between the value of insulin collected at week 12 or final visit and insulin collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||μU·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833929|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 12 or final visit and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg·hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833930|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (2-hr Postprandial Value).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 12 or final visit and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833931|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 12 or final visit and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833932|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 8 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833933|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 4).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 4 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833934|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 2).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 2 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 2.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833935|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 12 or final visit and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833936|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 8 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833937|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 4).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 4 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833938|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 2).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 2 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 2|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833939|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 8).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 8 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833940|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 4).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 4 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833941|NCT01263483|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 2).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 2 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 2.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833942|NCT01263483|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 12).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 12 or final visit and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833943|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Final Visit).|The change between the value of glucagons collected at week 52 or final visit and glucagons collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||pg·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833944|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 52).|The change between the value of glucagons collected at week 52 and glucagons collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||pg·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833945|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 24).|The change between the value of glucagons collected at week 24 and glucagons collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||pg·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833946|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 12).|The change between the value of glucagons collected at week 12 and glucagons collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12|Values are Summary Statistics.||pg·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833947|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Final Visit).|The change between the value of insulin collected at week 52 or final visit and insulin collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||μU·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833948|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 52).|The change between the value of insulin collected at week 52 and insulin collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||μU·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833949|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 24).|The change between the value of insulin collected at week 24 and insulin collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||μU·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833950|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 12).|The change between the value of insulin collected at week 12 and insulin collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12|Values are Summary Statistics.||μU·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833951|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-peptide Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Final Visit).|The change between the value of C-peptide collected at week 52 or final visit and C-peptide collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833952|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-peptide Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 52).|The change between the value of C-peptide collected at week 52 and C-peptide collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833953|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-peptide Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 24).|The change between the value of C-peptide collected at week 24 and C-peptide collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833954|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-peptide Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 12).|The change between the value of C-peptide collected at week 12 and C-peptide collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng·hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833955|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Final Visit).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 52 or final visit and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg·hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833956|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 52).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 52 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg·hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833957|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 24).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 24 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg·hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833959|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (2-hr Postprandial Value) (Final Visit).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 52 or final visit and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833960|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (2-hr Postprandial Value) (Week 52).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 52 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833961|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (2-hr Postprandial Value) (Week 24).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 24 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833962|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (2-hr Postprandial Value) (Week 12).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 12 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833963|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Final Visit).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 52 or final visit and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833964|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 52).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 52 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833965|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 48).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 48 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 48.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833966|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 44).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 44 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 44.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833967|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 40).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 40 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 40.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833968|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 36).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 36 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 36.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833969|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 32).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 32 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 32.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833970|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 28).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 28 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 28.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833971|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 24).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 24 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833972|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 20).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 20 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 20.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833973|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 16).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 16 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 16.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833974|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 12 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833975|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Final Visit).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 52 or final visit and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833976|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 52).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 52 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833977|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 48).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 48 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 48.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833978|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 44).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 44 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 44.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833979|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 40).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 40 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 40.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833980|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 36).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 36 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 36.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
833987|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Final Visit).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 52 or final visit and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833988|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 52).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 52 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833989|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 48).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 48 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 48.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833990|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 44).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 44 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 44.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833991|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 40).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 40 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 40.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833992|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 36).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 36 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 36.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833993|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 32).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 32 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 32.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833994|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 28).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 28 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 28.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833995|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 24).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 24 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833996|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 20).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 20 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 20.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833997|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 16).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 16 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 16.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833998|NCT01263496|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 12).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 12 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
833999|NCT01263496|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events.|A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) is defined as an adverse event with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug and within 30 days after receiving the last dose of study drug. A TEAE may also be a pre-treatment adverse event or a concurrent medical condition diagnosed prior to the date of first dose of study drug, which increases in intensity after the start of dosing. Adverse events data with onset occurring more than 30 days after last dose of study drug (AE start date – last dose date >30) will be listed, but not included in the summary tables below.|52 Weeks.|Adverse Event Profile in the Safety Analysis Set||participants|||Number
834000|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Final Visit).|The change between the value of glucagons collected at week 52 or final visit and glucagons collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||pg•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834001|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 52).|The change between the value of glucagons collected at week 52 and glucagons collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||pg•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834002|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 24).|The change between the value of glucagons collected at week 24 and glucagons collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||pg•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834003|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glucagon Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 12).|The change between the value of glucagons collected at week 12 and glucagons collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||pg•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834004|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-peptide Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Final Visit).|The change between the value of C-peptide collected at week 52 or final visit and C-peptide collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834005|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-peptide Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 52).|The change between the value of C-peptide collected at week 52 and C-peptide collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834006|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-peptide Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 24).|The change between the value of C-peptide collected at week 24 and C-peptide collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834007|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C-peptide Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 12).|The change between the value of C-peptide collected at week 12 and C-peptide collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834008|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Final Visit).|The change between the value of insulin collected at week 52 or final visit and insulin collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||μU•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834009|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 52).|The change between the value of insulin collected at week 52 and insulin collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||μU•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834010|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 24).|The change between the value of insulin collected at week 24 and insulin collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||μU•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834011|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC(0-2)) (Week 12).|The change between the value of insulin collected at week 12 and insulin collected at baseline as measured by the meal tolerance test. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||μU•hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834012|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Final Visit).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 52 or final visit and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg•hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834013|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 52).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 52 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg•hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834014|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 24).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 24 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg•hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834015|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (AUC (0-2)) (Week 12).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 12 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg•hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834016|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (2-hr Postprandial Value) (Final Visit).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 52 or final visit and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834017|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (2-hr Postprandial Value) (Week 52).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 52 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834018|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (2-hr Postprandial Value) (Week 24).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 24 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834019|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by Meal Tolerance Testing (2-hr Postprandial Value) (Week 12).|The change between the value of blood glucose collected at week 12 and blood glucose collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834020|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Final Visit).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 52 or final visit and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834021|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 52).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 52 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834022|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 48).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 48 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 48.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834023|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 44).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 44 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 44.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834024|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 40).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 40 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 40.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834025|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 36).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 36 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 36.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834026|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 32).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 32 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 32.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834027|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 28).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 28 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 28.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834028|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 24).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 24 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834029|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 20).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 20 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 20.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834030|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 16).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 16 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 16.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834031|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 12 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834032|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting C-peptide (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting C-peptide collected at week 8 and fasting C-peptide collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Values are Summary Statistics.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834033|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Final Visit).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 52 or final visit and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834034|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 52).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 52 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834035|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 48).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 48 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 48.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834036|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 44).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 44 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 44.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834037|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 40).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 40 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 40.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834038|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 36).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 36 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 36.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834039|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 32).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 32 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 32.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834040|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 28).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 28 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 28.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834041|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 24).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 24 and fasting plasma glucose collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834046|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Final Visit).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 52 or final visit and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834047|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 52).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 52 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834048|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 48).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 48 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 48.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834049|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 44).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 44 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 44.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834050|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 40).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 40 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 40.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834051|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 36).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 36 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 36.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834052|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 32).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 32 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 32.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834053|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 28).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 28 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 28.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834054|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 24).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 24 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834055|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 20).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 20 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 20.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834056|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 16).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 16 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 16.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834057|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 12).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 12 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834058|NCT01263509|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 8).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 8 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Values are Summary Statistics.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834059|NCT01263509|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events.|A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) is defined as an adverse event with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug and within 30 days after receiving the last dose of study drug. A TEAE may also be a pre-treatment adverse event or a concurrent medical condition diagnosed prior to the date of first dose of study drug, which increases in intensity after the start of dosing. Adverse events data with onset occurring more than 30 days after last dose of study drug (AE start date - last dose date >30) will be listed, but not included in the summary tables below.|52 Weeks.|Adverse Event Profile in the Safety Analysis Set||participants|||Number
834060|NCT01263561|Secondary|Complications|Complications will be evaluated for the intra-operative, early post-operative (up until 1 month) and late post-operative (from 1 month to 1 year) periods. In addition complications will be evaluated as severe (defined as a permanent reduction in vision or complications requiring a surgical intervention) and not severe (complications which resolve with conservative management). As an individual subject may have more than one complication, the number of complications will be compared between the two surgical groups.|1 year post surgery|||participants|||Number
834061|NCT01263561|Primary|Success Rate (IOP Between 5-18 mmHg and 20% Reduction From Baseline) Without Glaucoma Medication||1 year post surgery|||percentage of participants|||Number
834062|NCT01263561|Primary|Intraocular Pressure||1 year post surgery|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834063|NCT01263639|Primary|"Patient Satisfaction as Measured by Giving an Excellent Score on a 5-point Rating"|Within 2 weeks of discharge from the hospital, but before the patient’s first clinic visit, each group will be called by the Professional Resource Group as part of regular quality improvement by the Vanderbilt Medical Center Department of Strategic Development. The patients will be asked a series of questions aimed at determining overall patient satisfaction based on interactions with the attending orthopaedic trauma surgeon.|within 2 weeks of discharge and before first clinic appointment|||participants|||Number
834064|NCT01263665|Primary|Device-related and Procedure-related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) Within 30 Days of the Index Procedure||30 Days post-procedure|||participants|||Number
834065|NCT01263665|Primary|Successful Completion of the Assigned Treatment|Successful completion of the assigned treatment and postdeployment > stent length (of the first deployed 25 cm GORE > VIABAHN Endoprosthesis with PROPATEN Bioactive Surface) > being within 10% of pre-deployment stent length.|Evaluated immediately after the index procedure|||percentage of subjects|||Number
834066|NCT01263691|Secondary|TNA NF50 GMTs Across Study Days After IM Administration of Investigational Product on Days 0 and 14.|Toxin neutralizing antibody (TNA) levels in blinded serum samples were measured using a validated anthrax lethal toxin neutralization assay. The primary assay endpoint was the 50% neutralization factor (TNA NF50). TNA NF50 is calculated as the ratio of the 50% effective dose (ED50) of the test sample to the ED50 of a reference serum. Values below the LLOQ of the assay (ED50 of 33) were replaced with one-half the LLOQ (ED50 of 16.5) for calculation of geometric mean titer (GMT) and statistical analysis. GMT is based on log transformation.|Day 0 (pre-dose), 7, 14 (pre-dose), 21, 28, 35, 42, 56, 70, and 84.|Participants 18 and 50 years of age who received two doses of saline placebo (0.5 mL) IM on Days 0 and 14 Antibody titers were assessed in the immunogenicity population, which included subjects who received both vaccinations, had immunogenicity data within the allowable window, and had no protocol violations that could affect TNA values (n=100).||geometric mean titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
834067|NCT01263691|Secondary|Median Time to Peak TNA NF50 GMT for All Subjects in the Immunogenicity Population and by Gender After IM Administration of Investigational Product on Days 0 and 14.|Toxin neutralizing antibody (TNA) levels in blinded serum samples were measured using a validated anthrax lethal toxin neutralization assay. The primary assay endpoint was the 50% neutralization factor (TNA NF50). TNA NF50 is calculated as the ratio of the 50% effective dose (ED50) of the test sample to the ED50 of a reference serum. Values below the LLOQ of the assay (ED50 of 33) were replaced with one-half the LLOQ (ED50 of 16.5) for calculation of geometric mean titer (GMT) and statistical analysis. GMT is based on log transformation.|Day 0 (pre-dose), 7, 14 (pre-dose), 21, 28, 35, 42, 56, 70, and 84.|Participants 18 and 50 years of age who received two doses of saline placebo (0.5 mL) IM on Days 0 and 14 Antibody titers were assessed in the immunogenicity population, which included subjects who received both vaccinations, had immunogenicity data within the allowable window, and had no protocol violations that could affect TNA values (n=100).||days||Full Range|Median
834068|NCT01263691|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Hematology, Serum Chemistry, and Urinalysis Abnormalities Reported as Adverse Events|"Hematology test included hemoglobin, hematocrit, white blood cell count, absolute lymphocyte count, absolute neutrophil count, absolute eosinophil count, and platelet count. Serum chemistry test included albumin, alkaline phosphatase, total bilirubin, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, glucose, calcium, potassium, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and lactate dehydrogenase. Urinalysis included appearance, color, pH, specific gravity, ketones, protein, glucose, bilirubin, nitrite, urobilinogen, and occult blood.
Hematology tests were done on Days 0, 1, 2, 7, 28, and 56. Serum chemistry tests and urinalysis were done on Days 0, 7, 28, and 56."|Days 0-56|||percentage of participants|||Number
834069|NCT01263691|Primary|Incidence of Hematology, Serum Chemistry, and Urinalysis Abnormalities Reported as Adverse Events|"Hematology test included hemoglobin, hematocrit, white blood cell count, absolute lymphocyte count, absolute neutrophil count, absolute eosinophil count, and platelet count. Serum chemistry test included albumin, alkaline phosphatase, total bilirubin, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, glucose, calcium, potassium, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and lactate dehydrogenase. Urinalysis included appearance, color, pH, specific gravity, ketones, protein, glucose, bilirubin, nitrite, urobilinogen, and occult blood.
Hematology tests were done on Days 0, 1, 2, 7, 28, and 56. Serum chemistry tests and urinalysis were done on Days 0, 7, 28, and 56."|Days 0-56|||participants|||Number
834070|NCT01263691|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Systemic Reactions From Subject Diary Cards by Injection and Severity (Mild, Moderate or Severe) Following the Second Injection (Day 14)|"Subjects recorded solicited systemic reactions (fever, fatigue, muscle aching, headache, nausea/GI upset) on diary cards for 7 days following each of two injections (Days 0 and 14) All systemic reactions collected by subjects on diary cards were recorded as adverse events.
Severity of systemic reactions was assessed using a grading scale based on FDA Guidance titled Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials.
Toxicity grades for fever were derived from body temperature using the following scale:
Grade 0: <100°F
Grade 1: 100.0 - 101.5°F
Grade 2: 101.6 - 102.9°F ;
Grade 3: 103.0 - 105.0°F
For all other systemic reactions, the following scale was used:
Grade 0: not present
Grade 1: present with no limitation of activity
Grade 2: interfering with daily activities or requiring non-narcotic treatment
Grade 3: preventing normal daily activities or requiring narcotic analgesia"|Days 14-20|||percentage of participants|||Number
834071|NCT01263691|Primary|Incidence of Systemic Reactions From Subject Diary Cards by Injection and Severity (Mild, Moderate or Severe) Following the Second Injection (Day 14)|"Subjects recorded solicited systemic reactions (fever, fatigue, muscle aching, headache, nausea/GI upset) on diary cards for 7 days following each of two injections (Days 0 and 14) All systemic reactions collected by subjects on diary cards were recorded as adverse events.
Severity of systemic reactions was assessed using a grading scale based on FDA Guidance titled Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials.
Toxicity grades for fever were derived from body temperature using the following scale:
Grade 0: <100°F
Grade 1: 100.0 - 101.5°F
Grade 2: 101.6 - 102.9°F ;
Grade 3: 103.0 - 105.0°F
For all other systemic reactions, the following scale was used:
Grade 0: not present
Grade 1: present with no limitation of activity
Grade 2: interfering with daily activities or requiring non-narcotic treatment
Grade 3: preventing normal daily activities or requiring narcotic analgesia"|Days 14-20|||participants|||Number
834072|NCT01263691|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Systemic Reactions From Subject Diary Cards by Injection and Severity (Mild, Moderate or Severe) Following the First Injection (Day 0)|"Subjects recorded solicited systemic reactions (fever, fatigue, muscle aching, headache, nausea/GI upset) on diary cards for 7 days following each of two injections (Days 0 and 14) All systemic reactions collected by subjects on diary cards were recorded as adverse events.
Severity of systemic reactions was assessed using a grading scale based on FDA Guidance titled Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials.
Toxicity grades for fever were derived from body temperature using the following scale:
Grade 0: <100°F
Grade 1: 100.0 - 101.5°F
Grade 2: 101.6 - 102.9°F ;
Grade 3: 103.0 - 105.0°F
For all other systemic reactions, the following scale was used:
Grade 0: not present
Grade 1: present with no limitation of activity
Grade 2: interfering with daily activities or requiring non-narcotic treatment
Grade 3: preventing normal daily activities or requiring narcotic analgesia"|Days 0-6|||percentage of participants|||Number
834073|NCT01263691|Primary|Incidence of Systemic Reactions From Subject Diary Cards by Injection and Severity (Mild, Moderate or Severe) Following the First Injection (Day 0)|"Subjects recorded solicited systemic reactions (fever, fatigue, muscle aching, headache, nausea/GI upset) on diary cards for 7 days following each of two injections (Days 0 and 14) All systemic reactions collected by subjects on diary cards were recorded as adverse events.
Severity of systemic reactions was assessed using a grading scale based on FDA Guidance titled “Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials.”
Toxicity grades for fever were derived from body temperature using the following scale:
Grade 0: <100°F
Grade 1: 100.0 – 101.5°F
Grade 2: 101.6 – 102.9°F ;
Grade 3: 103.0 – 105.0°F
For all other systemic reactions, the following scale was used:
Grade 0: not present
Grade 1: present with no limitation of activity
Grade 2: interfering with daily activities or requiring non-narcotic treatment
Grade 3: preventing normal daily activities or requiring narcotic analgesia"|Days 0-6|||Participants|||Number
834074|NCT01263691|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Injection Site Reactions From Subject Diary Cards by Injection and Severity (Mild, Moderate or Severe) Following the Second Vaccination (Day 14)|"Subjects recorded solicited injection site reactions (ISRs) (redness, swelling, tenderness, pain, itching, arm motion limitation) on diary cards for 7 days following the second injection (Day 14).
All local reactions collected by subjects on diary cards were recorded as adverse events.
Severity of ISR was assessed using a grading scale based on FDA Guidance Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials.
Swelling/edema and redness/erythema were graded by the greater of two perpendicular measurements of diameter rated as follows:
Grade 0: none
Grade 1: <3 cm
Grade 2: 3 to 10 cm
Grade 3: >10 cm
For all other ISRs, the following scale was used:
Grade 0: not present
Grade 1: present with no limitation of activity
Grade 2: interfering with daily activities or requiring non-narcotic treatment
Grade 3: preventing normal daily activities or requiring narcotic analgesia"|Days 14-20|||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834075|NCT01263691|Primary|Incidence of Injection Site Reactions From Subject Diary Cards by Injection and Severity (Mild, Moderate or Severe) Following the Second Vaccination (Day 14)|"Subjects recorded solicited injection site reactions (ISRs) (redness, swelling, tenderness, pain, itching, arm motion limitation) on diary cards for 7 days following the second injection (Day 14).
All local reactions collected by subjects on diary cards were recorded as adverse events.
Severity of ISR was assessed using a grading scale based on FDA Guidance Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials.
Swelling/edema and redness/erythema were graded by the greater of two perpendicular measurements of diameter rated as follows:
Grade 0: none
Grade 1: <3 cm
Grade 2: 3 to 10 cm
Grade 3: >10 cm
For all other ISRs, the following scale was used:
Grade 0: not present
Grade 1: present with no limitation of activity
Grade 2: interfering with daily activities or requiring non-narcotic treatment
Grade 3: preventing normal daily activities or requiring narcotic analgesia"|Days 14-20|||Participants|||Number
834076|NCT01263691|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Injection Site Reactions From Subject Diary Cards by Injection and Severity (Mild, Moderate or Severe) Following the First Vaccination (Day 0)|"Subjects recorded solicited injection site reactions (ISRs) (redness, swelling, tenderness, pain, itching, arm motion limitation) on diary cards for 7 days following the first injection (Day 0).
All local reactions collected by subjects on diary cards were recorded as adverse events.
Severity of ISR was assessed using a grading scale based on FDA Guidance Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials.
Swelling/edema and redness/erythema were graded by the greater of two perpendicular measurements of diameter rated as follows:
Grade 0: none
Grade 1: <3 cm
Grade 2: 3 to 10 cm
Grade 3: >10 cm
For all other ISRs, the following scale was used:
Grade 0: not present
Grade 1: present with no limitation of activity
Grade 2: interfering with daily activities or requiring non-narcotic treatment
Grade 3: preventing normal daily activities or requiring narcotic analgesia"|Days 0-6|||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834077|NCT01263691|Secondary|Peak TNA NF50 GMT for All Subjects in the Immunogenicity Population and by Gender After IM Administration of Investigational Product on Days 0 and 14.|Toxin neutralizing antibody (TNA) levels in blinded serum samples were measured using a validated anthrax lethal toxin neutralization assay. The primary assay endpoint was the 50% neutralization factor (TNA NF50). TNA NF50 is calculated as the ratio of the 50% effective dose (ED50) of the test sample to the ED50 of a reference serum. Values below the lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) of the assay (ED50 of 33) were replaced with one-half the LLOQ (ED50 of 16.5) for calculation of geometric mean titer (GMT) and statistical analysis. GMT is based on log transformation.|Day 0 (pre-dose), 7, 14 (pre-dose), 21, 28, 35, 42, 56, 70, and 84.|Participants 18 and 50 years of age who received two doses of saline placebo (0.5 mL) IM on Days 0 and 14 Antibody titers were assessed in the immunogenicity population, which included subjects who received both vaccinations, had immunogenicity data within the allowable window, and had no protocol violations that could affect TNA values (n=100).||geometric mean titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
834131|NCT01274429|Secondary|Determine the Effect That PNOIT Has on the Peanut-specific Cellular and Humoral Response in Peanut-allergic Subjects.|Measure changes over the course of treatment in serum specific IgE and IgG4, skin prick tests, TH1 and TH2 cytokines, and CD4+ CD25+ FoxP3+ regulatory T cells|2-3 years|No subjects reached the end of study prior to closure of the study and therefore no end of treatment mechanistic data was collected in order to compare against the baseline.|||||
834078|NCT01263691|Primary|Incidence of Injection Site Reactions From Subject Diary Cards by Injection and Severity (Mild, Moderate or Severe) Following the First Vaccination (Day 0)|"Subjects recorded solicited injection site reactions (ISRs) (redness, swelling, tenderness, pain, itching, arm motion limitation) on diary cards for 7 days following the first injection (Day 0).
All local reactions collected by subjects on diary cards were recorded as adverse events.
Severity of ISR was assessed using a grading scale based on FDA Guidance “Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials.”
Swelling/edema and redness/erythema were graded by the greater of two perpendicular measurements of diameter rated as follows:
Grade 0: none
Grade 1: <3 cm
Grade 2: 3 to 10 cm
Grade 3: >10 cm
For all other ISRs, the following scale was used:
Grade 0: not present
Grade 1: present with no limitation of activity
Grade 2: interfering with daily activities or requiring non-narcotic treatment
Grade 3: preventing normal daily activities or requiring narcotic analgesia"|Days 0-6|||Participants|||Number
834091|NCT01263873|Primary|Ease of Intubation, as Measured by an Ease of ETT Insertion Score.|To measure the ease of intubation, an ease of ETT insertion score was obtained by using a 100 millimeter visual analog scale done by the anesthesia provider doing the intubation. The score of 0 millimeters was the easiest intubation and a score of 100 millimeters was the hardest intubation done by that anesthesia provider.|Participants were followed for the duration of intubation, an average of 10 minutes|||Visual Analog Score in millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
834092|NCT01263873|Primary|Ease of Intubation, as Measured by Number of ETT Redirections|To measure the ease of intubation, once the airway structure was visualized with the GlideScope, the number of ETT redirections at the glottis to intubate the trachea was counted by video recordings by the PI.|Participants were followed for the duration of intubation, an average of 10 minutes|||Number of redirections to place ETT||Standard Deviation|Mean
834093|NCT01263873|Primary|Ease of Intubation, as Measured by Time in Seconds for ETT Insertion|To measure the ease of intubation by time in seconds for ETT insertion. Time was measured in seconds and started when the anesthesia provider asked for the ETT and stopped once the ETT was placed through the glottis. The time was obtained from video recordings during the intubation by the principal investigator (PI).|Participants were followed for the duration of intubation, an average of 10 minutes|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
834094|NCT01263925|Secondary|Changes in Quality of Life (as Measured With the PAVK 86 Questionnaire) From Baseline to the End of Period 3|"Scores for subscales were calculated by summing non-missing item scores ranging from 1 (not at all; best possible outcome) to 4 (extremely; worst possible outcome) divided by the number of non-missing items. Hence each subscale score ranges from 1 (best possible outcome) to 4 (worst possible outcome). For subscales 'Mood' and 'Treatment expectation' five items each had to be reversed in order. Additionally, subjects were asked to assess their general health and quality of life on an ordinal scale between 0 (very good) and 10 (very poor).
Negative changes show a decrease from Baseline."|From Baseline to the end of 6-months Follow-up (Period 3)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For each subscale of the questionnaire, Mean and SD are presented for non-missing values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834708|NCT01272635|Secondary|Urgent Care Visits, ED Visits and Hospitalizations|Number of participants who had urgent care visits, ED visits, and/or hospitalizations for respiratory symptoms.|14 days after initiation of therapy|All participants who initiated APRIL therapy||participants|||Number
834095|NCT01263925|Secondary|Changes in Quality of Life (as Measured With the PAVK 86 Questionnaire) From Baseline to the End of Period 1|"Scores for subscales were calculated by summing non-missing item scores ranging from 1 (not at all; best possible outcome) to 4 (extremely; worst possible outcome) divided by the number of non-missing items. Hence each subscale score ranges from 1 (best possible outcome) to 4 (worst possible outcome). For subscales 'Mood' and 'Treatment expectation' five items each had to be reversed in order. Additionally, subjects were asked to assess their general health and quality of life on an ordinal scale between 0 (very good) and 10 (very poor).
Negative changes show a decrease from Baseline."|From Baseline to the end of 4 weeks of Daily Treatment (Period 1)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). For each subscale of the questionnaire, Mean and SD are presented for non-missing values.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834096|NCT01263925|Secondary|Ratio of Maximum Walking Distance After Period 3 in Comparison With the Findings After Period 2|The ratio of maximum walking distance was calculated by the maximum walking distance after Period 3 divided by the maximum walking distance after Period 2 with determination of maximum walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From the end of 4 weeks of Interval Treatment (Period 2) to the end of 6-months Follow-up (Period 3)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834097|NCT01263925|Secondary|Ratio of Maximum Walking Distance After Period 3 in Comparison With the Findings After Period 1|The ratio of maximum walking distance was calculated by the maximum walking distance after Period 3 divided by the maximum walking distance after Period 1 with determination of maximum walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From the end of 4 weeks of Daily Treatment (Period 1) to the end of 6-months Follow-up (Period 3)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834098|NCT01263925|Secondary|Ratio of Maximum Walking Distance After Period 3 in Comparison With the Findings at Baseline|The ratio of maximum walking distance was calculated by the maximum walking distance after Period 3 divided by the maximum walking distance at Baseline with determination of maximum walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From Baseline to the end of 6-months Follow-up (Period 3)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834099|NCT01263925|Secondary|Ratio of Maximum Walking Distance After Period 2 in Comparison With the Findings After Period 1|The ratio of maximum walking distance was calculated by the maximum walking distance after Period 2 divided by the maximum walking distance after Period 1 with determination of maximum walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From the end of 4 weeks of Daily Treatment (Period 1) to the end of 4 weeks of Interval Treatment (Period 2)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834100|NCT01263925|Secondary|Ratio of Maximum Walking Distance After Period 2 in Comparison With the Findings at Baseline|The ratio of maximum walking distance was calculated by the maximum walking distance after Period 2 divided by the maximum walking distance at Baseline with determination of maximum walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From Baseline to the end of 4 weeks of Interval Treatment (Period 2)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834101|NCT01263925|Secondary|Ratio of Maximum Walking Distance After Period 1 in Comparison With the Findings at Baseline|The ratio of maximum walking distance was calculated by the maximum walking distance after Period 1 divided by the maximum walking distance at Baseline with determination of maximum walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From Baseline to the end of 4 weeks of Daily Treatment (Period 1)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834102|NCT01263925|Secondary|Ratio of Pain-free Walking Distance After Period 3 in Comparison With the Findings After Period 2|The ratio of pain-free walking distance was calculated by the pain-free walking distance after Period 3 divided by the pain-free walking distance after Period 2 with determination of pain-free walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From the end of 4 weeks of Interval Treatment (Period 2) to the end of 6-months Follow-up (Period 3)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834103|NCT01263925|Secondary|Ratio of Pain-free Walking Distance After Period 3 in Comparison With the Findings After Period 1|The ratio of pain-free walking distance was calculated by the pain-free walking distance after Period 3 divided by the pain-free walking distance after Period 1 with determination of pain-free walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From the end of 4 weeks of Daily Treatment (Period 1) to the end of 6-months Follow-up (Period 3)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834132|NCT01274429|Primary|Determine Whether This Peanut OIT Protocol Lowers Their Risk of Anaphylactic Reactions and Causes Long-term Tolerance.|Assess mg of peanut tolerated on double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge as a measure of desensitization and tolerance|2-3 years|No subjects reached the end of study food challenge prior to closure of the study and therefore no data was collected towards this endpoint.|||||
834104|NCT01263925|Secondary|Ratio of Pain-free Walking Distance After Period 2 in Comparison With the Findings After Period 1|The ratio of pain-free walking distance was calculated by the pain-free walking distance after Period 2 divided by the pain-free walking distance after Period 1 with determination of pain-free walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From the end of 4 weeks of Daily Treatment (Period 1) to the end of 4 weeks of Interval Treatment (Period 2)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834105|NCT01263925|Primary|Ratio of Pain-free Walking Distance After Period 1 in Comparison With the Findings at Baseline|The ratio of pain-free walking distance was calculated by the pain-free walking distance after Period 1 divided by the pain-free walking distance at Baseline with determination of pain-free walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From Baseline to the end of 4 weeks of Daily Treatment (Period 1)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834106|NCT01263925|Primary|Ratio of Pain-free Walking Distance After Period 3 in Comparison With the Findings at Baseline|The ratio of pain-free walking distance was calculated by the pain-free walking distance after Period 3 divided by the pain-free walking distance at Baseline with determination of pain-free walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From Baseline to the end of 6-months Follow-up (Period 3)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834107|NCT01263925|Primary|Ratio of Pain-free Walking Distance After Period 2 in Comparison With the Findings at Baseline|The ratio of pain-free walking distance was calculated by the pain-free walking distance after Period 2 divided by the pain-free walking distance at Baseline with determination of pain-free walking distances on the treadmill (12 % grade and 3 km/h). If a subject was not familiar with the treadmill, at least two test determinations were performed to accustom him/her to the treadmill. For all treadmill determinations the subject has been prevented from observing the treadmill display of the walking distance achieved.|From Baseline to the end of 4 weeks of Interval Treatment (Period 2)|Full Analysis Set (FAS).||meter/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834108|NCT01264016|Secondary|Number of Subjects Rated as<=3 Performing Basic Meter Tasks (Labeling Comprehension)|Subjects reviewed the instructions for use (User Guide and Quick Reference Guide) to learn to use the system. Study staff then observed and rated the subjects (1 to 4) on their success at performing five tasks. Scale: 1.Success in performing tasks correctly without assistance. 2.Successful with additional review of User Guide. 3.Successful with additional review and study staff assist similar to review of a specific function during a Customer Service call. 4.Subject did not perform task correctly and study staff intervention was required.|2 hours|Per protocol||participants|||Number
834109|NCT01264016|Primary|Percent of Venous Blood Glucose (BG) Results Within +/- 5 to 20 mg/dL (<75 mg/dL) or Within +/- 5% to 20% (>=75 mg/dL) of Laboratory Glucose Method|Healthcare professionals (study staff) used an investigational blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) with subject venous blood. BGM results were compared to a reference lab glucose method - Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) Analyzer. BG results were used to calculate the number of BG results within +/- 5 to 20 mg/dL (for reference BG results <75mg/dL) or +/- 5% to 20% (for reference BG results >=75mg/dL) of the reference method results.|2 hours|One subject's hematocrit measurement was missing, so this subject's blood test data was not evaluable. Since study staff tested each subject's venous blood using 2 lots of test strips, 2x93(or 186) test results were possible.||percentage of venous bg results|Participants||Number
834110|NCT01264016|Primary|Percent of Capillary Blood Glucose (BG) Results Within +/- 5 to 20mg/dL (<75 mg/dL) or Within +/- 5% to 20% (>=75 mg/dL) of Laboratory Glucose Method|Subjects with diabetes used an investigational blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) with subject capillary blood. BGM results were compared to a reference lab glucose method - Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) Analyzer. BG results were used to calculate the number of BG results within +/- 5 to 20 mg/dL (for reference BG results <75mg/dL) or +/- 5 to 20% (for reference BG results >=75mg/dL) of the reference method results.|2 hours|One subject did not complete capillary blood testing (low blood sugar) and one subject hematocrit measurement was missing. These subjects' blood test data was not evaluable. Since the remaining 92 subjects tested 2 test strip lots on the BGM system, 2x92(184) tests results were possible.||percentage of BG Results|Participants||Number
834111|NCT01264081|Secondary|Count of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|3 years|Three study participants were affected by the adverse events: 2 - who completed the study and 1 who did not complete cycle 1 due to death of progressive disease. The participant who withdrew from study didn't take Lapatinib and experience any adverse events.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834112|NCT01264081|Primary|Count of Participants With a Partial Response (PR) and Complete Response (CR) to Lapatinib Who Have Metastatic Melanoma Harboring ERBB4 Mutations.|The count of participants with a partial response and complete response is defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 criteria. Partial response is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Complete response is disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. Stable disease (SD) is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. Progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). The appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progressions.|3 years|Only two participants could be evaluated for response and they had SD (none with a PR or CR). Other participants did not reach the evaluation point (i.e. discontinued Lapatinib)as per study protocol, therefore not evaluable.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834709|NCT01272635|Secondary|Absence From School, Daycare, and/or Parental Work||14 days after initiation of therapy|Data were of insufficient quality to be analyzed.|||||
834113|NCT01269736|Secondary|Patient Outcomes|Mortality, in-hospital MI, and not surviving a cardiac arrest were obtained using administrative data and laboratory data (eg, troponin, CK-MB) for all patients. Mortality was defined as death that occurred on one of the participating units. To identify the occurrence of in-hospital MI, laboratory data, timing of procedures, and location of patient at the time of the first blood draw indicating the event were used. Cardiac arrest was defined as an event initiated by an arrhythmia that required immediate intervention and was initiated on a PULSE participating unit. For each qualifying cardiac arrest, it was determined whether the patient survived the event.|Baseline, 15 months, 30 months|The overall number of unique patients reviewed at any timepoint. The numbers presented at each time point reflect the number of people reviewed at that time point for that outcome.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834114|NCT01269736|Secondary|Quality of Patient Care Related to ECG Monitoring|Percentage of patients with accurate electrode placement, accurate rhythm interpretation, cardiac arrest, cardiac arrest initiated by arrhythmia, appropriate monitoring, telemetry units only, ST-segment monitoring when indicated, and QTc measurement when indicated|Baseline, 15 months, 30 months|The overall number of unique patients assessed at any timepoint. The numbers presented at each time point reflect the number of people assessed at that time point.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834115|NCT01269736|Primary|Nurses' Knowledge and Skills Related to ECG Monitoring|Participants took a 20-item online test on essentials of ECG monitoring, and arrhythmia, ischemia, and QT interval monitoring. Scores represent the percentage of correct answers. (Test scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing more correct answers)|Baseline, 15 months, 30 months|The overall number of unique nurses assessed at any timepoint. The numbers presented at each time point reflect the number of people assessed at that time point.||percentage of items correctly answered||Standard Deviation|Mean
834116|NCT01269801|Primary|Efficacy|"Assessments at Visits 3,5,6+7 (weeks 4,8,12,24) include:
-Physician Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (PGAIS). Ratings include no change, improved, much improved, very much improved.
Number of subjects with improvement score for the 5 point PGAIS from baseline to Visit 7.
-Objective Observer Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale Number of subjects with improvement score for the from baseline to Visit 7. Ratings include no change, some improvement, definite improvement, substantial improvement, and complete improvement."|Week 4, 8, 12, 24|Analysis is based on the randomization group to account for the order in which the products were administered.||participantes rated improved and higher|||Number
834117|NCT01269918|Secondary|Postoperative Shivering|Indicator of whether patients had postoperative shivering.|Whether patients had postoperative or not, from anesthesia stop time until hospital discharge.|||participants|||Number
834118|NCT01269918|Secondary|Postoperative Vomitting|Indicator of whether patients had postoperative vomiting.|Whether patients had vomiting or not, from anesthesia stop time until hospital discharge.|||participants|||Number
834119|NCT01269918|Secondary|Postoperative Nausea|Indicator of whether patients had nausea or not|Whether patients had nausea or not, from anesthesia stop time until hospital discharge.|||participants|||Number
834120|NCT01269918|Secondary|End Case to Post Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU) Discharge|Post Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU) Discharge time is the timing at which patients are discharged from the PACU. This outcome is the amount of time (minutes) from end case to PACU discharge.|End case to post anesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge. Time is measured continuously until PACU discharge, regardless of how long it takes.|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834121|NCT01269918|Secondary|Drug Stop Time to Fitness to Discharge||Anesthesia drug stop time to fitness to discharge. Time is measured continuously until fitness for discharge is reached, regardless of how long it takes.|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834122|NCT01269918|Secondary|Drug Stop Time to Recall|Time between extubation until patients could say their names.|Time between extubation until patients could say their names.|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834123|NCT01269918|Secondary|Drug Stop Time to Open Eyes|time until patient first opened their eyes, squeezed a hand, or wiggled their toes in response to verbal commands after surgery|Anesthesia drug stop time to open eyes. Time is measured continuously until patients eyes open, regardless of how long it takes.|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834124|NCT01269918|Secondary|Nursing Workload Comparison|To evaluate the nurses workload when either of the two drugs are given in terms Nursing Research Usage form's therapeutic index scoring system. This score ranges from 0 (minimal interventions and time spent by nurses on study patient) to 22 (maximum interventions and time spent by nurses on the study patient).|90 minutes after extubation|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834125|NCT01269918|Secondary|Aldrete Score|The Aldrete score measured level of sedation and fitness and is used to assess the appropriate departure time from the post anesthesia care unit. The score ranges from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates poor fitness (and such patients are transferred to the ICU), while 10 indicates good fitness. This outcome was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA approach.|15, 30, 45, 60, and 90 minutes after extubation.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834126|NCT01269918|Secondary|Modified Short Orientation Memory Concentration Test (SOMCT)|The Modified Short Orientation Memory Concentration Test (SOMCT) is a validated questionnaire that discriminates among mild, moderate, and severe cognitive deficits. SOMCT is based on 6 questions and produces a total score ranging from 0 (worst possible function) to 28 (best possible function). Scores > 20 are considered normal. This outcome was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA approach.|15, 30, 45, 60, and 90 minutes after extubation.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834127|NCT01269918|Secondary|Heart Rate|Heart rate was determined from the arterial catheter and measured as beats per minute. This outcome was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA approach.|15, 30, 45, 60, and 90 minutes after extubation.|||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
834128|NCT01269918|Primary|Total Opioid Consumption|Total opioid consumption was defined as the sum of all opioid doses given within the first 90 minutes after surgery, converted to milligram morphine equivalents.|Initial 90 minutes of recover after surgery|||mg morphine equivalents||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834129|NCT01269918|Primary|Postoperative Pain|Pain was measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS), where 0 is defined as no pain and 10 is defined as worst pain imaginable. This outcome was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA approach. In the outcome measure data table, mean ± standard deviation pain was reported as the aggregate mean across time points.|15, 30, 45, 60, and 90 minutes after extubation.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834134|NCT01274533|Primary|Response Rate (CR + Cru + PR)|Peripheral blood, CT or MRI|28 days|The principal investigator has left the institution. Attempts to contact the PI have been unsuccessful. Columbia will never have access to the data. Thus, data will not be analyzed. The only information available is the number of participants who started and completed the study, which was last reported to and approved by the IRB in Aug. 2013.|||||
834135|NCT01274559|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieve LDL-C Target Levels at Week 12 of Treatment|assessed as per National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) treatment guidelines|Baseline and 12 weeks|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834136|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in TC at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834137|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apo A-I at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834138|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Lp(a) at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834139|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in TC:HDL-C at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834140|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apo B:Apo A-I at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834141|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apo B at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834142|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Non-HDL-C at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834143|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in TG at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834144|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in HDL-C at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834145|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in LDL-C:HDL-C at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834146|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in LDL-C at Week 4||Baseline and Week 4|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834147|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in TC at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834148|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apo A-I at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834149|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Lipoprotein a [Lp(a)] at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834150|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol (TC):HDL-C at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834151|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apo B:Apolipoprotein A-I (Apo A-I) at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834152|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein B (Apo B) at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834153|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Non-HDL-C at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834154|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Triglyceride (TG) at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834155|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in HDL-C at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834156|NCT01274559|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in LDL-C:High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834157|NCT01274559|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline at Week 12 in Low Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (LDL-C)||Baseline and Week 12|Study was terminated. Efficacy endpoints were not summarized and no planned efficacy analyses were performed.|||||
834158|NCT01274585|Secondary|Change in Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life (FIQoL) Score||4 weeks||||||
834159|NCT01274585|Secondary|Change in Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI) Score||4 weeks||||||
834160|NCT01274585|Primary|Frequency of Fecal Incontinence|Patient kept 2 week bowel diary after completion of treatment. Bowel diary were collected to assess frequency of fecal incontinence in the two week span.|Diary kept for 14 days following treatment|||number of accidents||Full Range|Mean
834161|NCT01274611|Primary|Percentage Change of Sweat Rate (mg/Min) at Baseline Compared to 3 Months|"The primary outcome measure was the treatment associated unilateral axillary percentage change of sweat rate in milligrams per minute in the exercise-induced state measured at baseline compared with the sweat rate measured 3 months after treatment.
This process entails placing filter paper on the area of concern for a specific amount of time, after which the paper is weighed and sweat production is quantified in units of weight per time. The amount of sweat produced was recorded in milligrams per minute by subtracting the initial weight of the paper segment before exercise from the final, post-application weight, after exercise and dividing by 5 minutes.
Percentage sweat rate was calculated as [(sweat rate at baseline - sweat rate at 3 months)/sweat rate at baseline]*100 with a positive percent change indicating sweat rate reduction if the baseline had a higher sweat rate."|baseline and 3 months|||Percentage Change|Participants|Full Range|Mean
834162|NCT01274611|Secondary|The Change in Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scores From Baseline Compared to 3 Months After Treatment|"Change in mean score on the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale (HDSS) from baseline minus 3 months after treatment.
The HDSS iquestionnaire assigns a point value to the patient’s view:
My sweating is...
never noticeable and never interferes with my daily activities
tolerable but sometimes interferes with my daily activities
barely tolerable and frequently interferes with my daily activities
intolerable and always interferes with my daily activities
Lower point values are considered better and higher point values are considered worse.
A larger change in score between baseline and 3 months is considered a better outcome and a smaller change in score is considered a worse outcome for each treatment. Change scores were calculated (baseline minus 3 months). Positive change scores indicate that scores were better; negative change scores indicate their scores were worse after treatment."|Baseline and 3 months|||Scores on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
834163|NCT01274637|Secondary|Heparin Induced Thrombocytopenia|All subjects who develop thrombocytopenia (platelets less than 80 x 109/L and/or with >50% decrease from baseline) will be investigated for Heparin Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT) by having ELISA and serotonin release assays to confirm or refute a diagnosis of HIT. HIT will be diagnosed with a positive PF4 (platelet factor 4) HIT ELISA assay.|From Randomization to Day 90|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834164|NCT01274637|Secondary|Major Bleeding or Clinically Relevant Non-major Bleeding|"Major bleeding meets at least one of the following: Fatal bleeding; Symptomatic bleeding in a critical area or organ (intracranial, intraspinal, retroperitoneal, etc.); Bleeding causing a fall in hemoglobin level of 20 g L−1 (1.24 mmol L−1) or more, or leading to transfusion of two or more units of whole blood or red cells .
Clinically Relevant Non-major Bleeding does not meet the criteria for major bleeding but meets at least one of the following: Hospitalization; Medical intervention; Unscheduled contact with a physician; Discomfort (pain, or impairment of activities of daily life)."|From Randomization to Day 90|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834165|NCT01274637|Secondary|Death From Venous Thromboembolism|"If a subject dies between randomization and late postpartum follow up (Day 90 +/- 7 days) the death will be adjudicated as certain, highly probable, probable, or unlikely due to Pulmonary Embolism (PE) using the following criteria.
Certain: hypotension, hypoxia, cardiac arrest with no other explanation other than PE and autopsy or radiographic confirmation Highly probable: criteria for certain but another disease could have caused the death Probable: other cause suspected based on clinical evidence but 100% certainty not available Unlikely: all other cases."|From Randomization to Day 90|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834166|NCT01274637|Secondary|Late Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolism|This includes symptomatic Deep Vein Thrombosis or Pulmonary Embolism. Suspected outcomes will be adjudicated by a blinded adjudication committee.|From Day 10 to Day 90|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834167|NCT01274637|Secondary|Venous Thromboembolism in the Early Postpartum Period.|This includes symptomatic Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) in the interval between randomization and the last dose of study drug (10 days +/- 3 days) OR asymptomatic proximal DVT detected by compression ultrasound of both legs done within 24hrs of the last dose of study drug (10 days (+/- 3 days) postpartum). Compressed and non-compressed images will be obtained from the calf trifurcation to the inguinal ligament. All suspected outcomes will be adjudicated by a blinded expert adjudication committee.|From randomization to Day 10|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834168|NCT01274637|Primary|Feasibility of Recruitment and Trial Operations.|The average number of subjects that are recruited per site per month during a 4 month active recruitment phase at each site.|4 months|||participants per site per month|||Number
834169|NCT01274715|Primary|Change in Hemoglobin A1C|Value of Hemoglobin A1C reduction post-intervention. The coaching sessions take place over approximately 3 months -- outcomes are measured at baseline, 3 months and again at 6 months. Change from baseline to 3 months was calculated. Then change from baseline to 6 months was calculated.|baseline, 3 months, and 6 months|||percentage of glycated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834170|NCT01274715|Primary|Change in PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire-9)Scores|The full name of the measure is the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. This is a self-reported measure of depressive symptoms. This is a nine item measure with a response for each item between 0-3. Total scores on this measure range from 0-27, with 0 being a minimum indicating no depressive symptoms, and 27 being the maximum number and severity of depressive symptoms. The coaching sessions take place over approximately 3 months -- outcomes are measured at baseline, 3 months and again at 6 months. Change from baseline to 3 months was calculated. Then change from baseline to 6 months was calculated.|Baseline, 3 months, and 6 months|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834171|NCT01274897|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Reported Local and Systemic Reactogenicity During 7 Days After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination||during 7 days of vaccination|Analysis was done on safety population i.e. the subjects in the exposed population who provided post-baseline safety data.||Subjects|||Number
834172|NCT01274897|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titer ≥1:8, Directed Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W and Y After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination.|Immunogenicity was measured as the percentage of subjects with hSBA titer ≥1:8 and associated 95% CI, at baseline before vaccination (day 1) and at day 29 (28 days after MenACWY-CRM vaccination).|day 1 and day 29|Analysis was done on PP population.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834173|NCT01274897|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) of Subjects, Directed Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W and Y After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination.|Immunogenicity was assessed as hSBA GMTs and associated 95% CI, measured against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y, before the vaccination (baseline, day 1) and at day 29 (28 days after MenACWY-CRM vaccination).|day 1 and day 29|Analysis was done on PP population.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
834174|NCT01274897|Primary|Percentages of Subjects With Seroresponse, Directed Against Neisseria Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W and Y After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination.|"Immunogenicity was measured as the percentage of subjects with hSBA response and associated 95% Clopper-Pearson confidence interval (CI), directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y by serum bactericidal assay using human complement, human serum bactericidal assay (hSBA), at day 29 (28 days after MenACWY-CRM vaccination).
Seroresponse is defined as:
for subjects with a pre-vaccination hSBA titer < 1:4, a postvaccination hSBA titer ≥ 1:8.
for subjects with a pre-vaccination hSBA titer ≥ 1:4, an increase in hSBA titer of at least four times the pre-vaccination titer."|day 29|Analysis was done on per protocol (PP) population i.e. the subjects who received the vaccine correctly and provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834176|NCT01275066|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Urine Keratan Sulfate Normalized for Urine Creatinine||Baseline to Week 24|Intention to treat (all patients receiving at least one dose of study drug). Nine missing outcomes at Week 24 were imputed using method of multiple imputation.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
834177|NCT01275066|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Endurance as Measured by the 3-minute Stair Climb Test||Baseline to Week 24|Intention to treat (all patients receiving at least one dose of study drug). Two missing outcomes at Week 24 were imputed using method of multiple imputation.||stairs/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
834178|NCT01275066|Primary|Change From Baseline in Endurance as Measured by the 6-minute Walk Test||Baseline to Week 24|Intention to treat (all patients receiving at least one dose of study drug). Two missing outcomes at Week 24 were imputed using method of multiple imputation.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
834179|NCT01275092|Secondary|The Ratio Between the Radiation Exposure of the Primary Operator and the Radiation Exposure at the Table|Defined as the difference between the radiation exposure measured at the procedure table (the conventional site of the primary operator) and the radiation exposure measured at the primary operator's position during the procedure. The radiation unit that was used was in milligray, but the measure is being reported as the ratio.|1 day|||ratio||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834180|NCT01275092|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Device Technical Success|Defined as the successful advancement and retraction of PCI devices using the CorPath 200 System and without conversion to manual operation.|1 day|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834181|NCT01275092|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Procedural Success|Defined as <30% residual stenosis in CorPath 200 System treated lesions at the completion of the interventional procedure (including stent placement) in the absence of MACE, either within 48 hours of the procedure or prior to hospital discharge, whichever occurs first.|48-hrs or hospital discharge, whichever occurs first|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834182|NCT01275131|Secondary|Duration of Insulin Action (AUMC[0-360]/AUC[0-360]), Stage 3|Duration of insulin action was calculated by dividing the area under the first moment curve (AUMC[0-360]) by the area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC[0-360]) for Stage 3. Blood samples were collected 10 minutes predose and at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|10 minutes predose up to 360 minutes postdose on Days 2/7, 3/8, and 5/10|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable AUMC(0-360)/AUC(0-360) data.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
834183|NCT01275131|Secondary|Duration of Insulin Action (AUMC[0-360]/AUC[0-360]), Stage 1|Duration of insulin action was calculated by dividing the area under the first moment curve (AUMC[0-360]) by the area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC[0-360]) for Stage 1. Blood samples were collected 10 minutes predose and at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|10 minutes predose up to 360 minutes postdose on Day 2/6 and Day 4/8|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable AUMC(0-360)/AUC(0-360) data.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
834184|NCT01275131|Secondary|Area Under the Glucose Concentration Curve (AUC[0-360]), Stage 3|Area under the glucose concentration curve from 0 to 360 minutes (AUC[0-360]) for Stage 3 studies is presented. Blood samples were collected 30 and 10 minutes prior to insulin bolus and at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|30 minutes predose up to 360 minutes postdose Days 2/7, 3/8, and 5/10|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable AUC(0-360) data.||Picomoles*minutes/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834185|NCT01275131|Secondary|Area Under the Glucose Concentration Curve (AUC[0-360]), Stage 1|Area under the glucose concentration curve for 0 to 360 minutes (AUC[0-360]) from Stage 1 is presented. Blood samples were collected 30 and 10 minutes prior to insulin bolus and at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|30 minutes predose up to 360 minutes postdose on Day 2/6 and Day 4/8|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable AUC(0-360) data.||Picomoles*minutes/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834186|NCT01275131|Secondary|Time to 50% Total Glucose Infused (50%Gtot), Stage 3|Time to 50% of total glucose infused (50%Gtot) is presented for Stage 3. Blood samples were collected at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|0 up to 360 minutes postdose on Days 2/7, 3/8, and 5/10|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable 50%Gtot data.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834187|NCT01275131|Secondary|Time to 50% Total Glucose Infused (50%Gtot), Stage 1|Time to 50% total glucose infused (50%Gtot) is presented for Stage 1. Blood samples were collected at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|0 up to 360 minutes postdose on Day 2/6 and Day 4/8|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable 50%Gtot data.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834188|NCT01275131|Secondary|Time to 50% Maximum Glucose Infusion Rate (tGIR50%Max), Stage 3|Early and late time to 50% maximum glucose infusion rates (tGIR50%max) for Stage 3 studies are presented. Blood samples were collected at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|0 up to 360 minutes postdose on Days 2/7, 3/8, and 5/10|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable early and late tGIR50%max data.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834223|NCT01275625|Secondary|Immunological Response at Week 48: Percentage Change From Baseline in Absolute Cluster of Differentiation 8 (CD8)|Immunological Response was summarized using percentage change from Baseline to Week 48 in absolute CD8+ cell count.|Week 48|FAS Population included those participants who had taken at least 1 dose of the study drug.||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
834189|NCT01275131|Secondary|Time to 50% Maximum Glucose Infusion Rate (tGIR50%Max), Stage 1|Early and late times to 50% maximum glucose infusion rate (tGIR50%max) for Stage 1 are presented. Blood samples were collected at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|0 up to 360 minutes postdose on day 2/6 and Day 4/8|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable early or late tGIR50%max data.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834190|NCT01275131|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence of Maximum Glucose Infusion Rate (tGIRmax), Stage 3|Time to first occurrence of maximum glucose infusion rate (tGIRmax) for Stage 3 is presented. Blood samples were collected at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|0 up to 360 minutes postdose on Days 2/7, 3/8, and 5/10|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable tGIRmax data.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834191|NCT01275131|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence of Maximum Glucose Infusion Rate (tGIRmax), Stage 1|Time to first occurrence of maximum glucose infusion rate (tGIRmax) for Stage 1 is presented. Blood samples were collected at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|0 up to 360 minutes postdose on Day 2/6 and Day 4/8|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable tGIRmax data.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834192|NCT01275131|Secondary|Maximum Glucose Infusion Rate (GIRmax), Stage 3|Maximum glucose infusion rates (GIRmax) for Stage 3 are presented. Blood samples were collected at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|0 up to 360 minutes postdose on Days 2/7, 3/8, and 5/10|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable GIRmax data.||Milligrams/kilogram/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
834193|NCT01275131|Primary|Early Exposure to Insulin (%AUC[0-60]), Stage 3|Early insulin exposure, defined as the percentage of total insulin exposure (area under the insulin concentration curve [AUC{0-360}) that occurs within the first hour following bolus dose of insulin during the 2 euglycemic clamps is presented. Blood samples were collected 10 minutes predose and at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during the euglycemic clamp.|10 minutes predose up to 60 minutes postdose on Days 2/7, 3/8, and 5/10|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable %AUC(0-60) data.||Percentage of AUC(0-360)||Standard Deviation|Mean
834194|NCT01275131|Secondary|Maximum Glucose Infusion Rate (GIRmax), Stage 1|Maximum glucose infusion rates (GIRmax) for Stage1 are presented. Blood samples were collected at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during a euglycemic clamp.|0 up to 360 minutes postdose on Day 2/6 and Day 4/8|Participants who completed all periods of study within a given stage with evaluable GIRmax data.||Milligrams/kilogram/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
834195|NCT01275131|Primary|Early Insulin Exposure (%AUC[0-60]), Stage 1|Early insulin exposure, defined as the percentage of total insulin exposure (area under the insulin concentration curve [AUC{0-360}]) that occurs within the first hour following bolus dose of insulin during the 2 euglycemic clamps is presented. Blood samples were collected 10 minutes predose and at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 120, 150, 180, 240, 300, and 360 minutes postdose during the euglycemic clamp.|10 minutes predose up to 60 minutes postdose|Participants who completed all study periods within a given stage with evaluable early insulin exposure (%AUC[0-60]) data.||Percentage of AUC(0-360)||Standard Deviation|Mean
834196|NCT01275196|Secondary|Summary Statistics of Trough Imatinib and Major Metabolite CGP74588 of Imatinib and Nilotinib PK Concentration by Time Point|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set|12 Months|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834197|NCT01275196|Secondary|Actual Dose Intensity|Total dose/time on treatment (periods of zero dose were included).|End of Study (up to 40 months)|Safety set consisted of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study medication.||mg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
834198|NCT01275196|Secondary|Modified ELN2009 Criteria|Patients satisfying criteria for several “modified ELN 2009” categories are presented once under the worst category (Optimal> Suboptimal > Treatment failure). Patients in the “Discontinued” category are those who discontinued before the time point considered without satisfying any of the ELN 2009 criteria. Patients in the “Missing” category are those ongoing in the trial at the time point considered but with only missing or non evaluable data for ELN 2009 criteria.|End of Study (up to 40 months)|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834199|NCT01275196|Secondary|Best Complete Hematologic Response (CHR)|CHR was defined as having all of the following criteria present at any assessment, which was confirmed by another assessment at least after 4 weeks: • WBC count < 10 x 10E9 /L • Platelet count < 450 x 10E9 /L • Basophils < 5% • No blasts and promyelocytes in peripheral blood • Myelocytes + metamyelocytes < 5 % in peripheral blood • No evidence of extramedullary involvement. The assessment was not considered CHR, if there were any values indicative of CML in AP or BC (i.e. by blasts in bone marrow). For confirmation of CHR, both the initial CHR as well as the confirming assessment (at least 4 weeks after the initial assessment) had to satisfy all criteria mentioned above, without any assessment in between which indicated ‘No response’.|Months 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9,12, 15,18, 21, 24, 30, 36|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834200|NCT01275196|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Overall Survival (OS) on Treatment|Patients who discontinued study treatment early or completed the study protocol and did not enter into the extension protocol were to be followed for survival every 3 months for up to 2 calendar years from the date the last patient randomized received the first dose of study drug and every 6 months until Last Patient Last Visit. Overall survival (all deaths) was defined as the time between date of randomization and date of death due to any cause at any time during the study, including the follow-up period after discontinuation of treatment, i.e. overall survival on-study. The time was censored at the date of last assessment in the study for patients who are still being treated and at the date of last contact for patients who discontinued treatment.|End of Study (up to 40 months)|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834201|NCT01275196|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Progression-free Survival (PFS) on Treatment|"Progression-free survival was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of event defined as the first disease progression to AP/BC or the date of death from any cause, whichever is earlier. This variable was analyzed in 2 ways:
On-treatment: included progressions to AP/BC or deaths occurring only on-treatment in the study as events. The time was censored at the date of last on-treatment assessment (hematology, extramedullary disease or cytogenetic evaluation) in the study before the cut-off date of the analysis for patients without event.
On-study: included progressions to AP/BC or deaths occurring in the study or during the follow-up period after discontinuation of study treatment as events. The time was censored at the last assessment date in the study for patients who were still being treated and at the date of last contact for patients who discontinued treatment."|End of study (up to 40 months)|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834202|NCT01275196|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Event-free Survival (EFS) on Treatment|Event-free survival was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of first occurrence of any of the following:-Death due to any cause, - Progression to AP or BC, Loss of partial cytogenetic response (PCyR), - Loss of CCyR, - Loss of CHR|End of Study (up to 40 months)|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834203|NCT01275196|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Time to Progression to Accelerated Phase/Blast Crisis (AP/BC) on Treatment|"Time to progression to AP/BC was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of event defined as the first disease progression to AP/BC or the date of CML-related death, whichever is earlier. This variable was analyzed in 2 ways:
On-treatment: included progressions to AP/BC or CML-related deaths occurring on treatment in the study as events. The time was censored at the date of last on-treatment assessment (hematology, extramedullary disease, or cytogenetic evaluation) in the study for patients without event.
On-study: included progressions to AP/BC or CML-related deaths occurring in the study or during the follow-up period after discontinuation of treatment as events. The time was censored at the last assessment date in the study for patients who were still being treated and at the date of last contact for patients who discontinued treatment"|End of study (up to 40 months)|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834204|NCT01275196|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Duration of First CCyR Among Patients Who Achieved CCyR|Duration of CCyR (months) = (date of CCyR loss or censoring-date of first CCyR + 1)/30.4375|End of Study (up to 40 months)|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834205|NCT01275196|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Time to First CCYR|Time to first CCyR (months) = (date of first CCyR – date of randomization + 1) / 30.4375.|End of study (up to 40 months)|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834206|NCT01275196|Secondary|Best Complete Cytogenic Response (CCyR) Rate by Each Time Point|CCyR is defined as 0% Ph+ metaphases based on at least 20 metaphases from bone marrow cytogenetics.|Months 6, 12, 18, 30, 24, 36|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834207|NCT01275196|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Duration of First MMR Among Patients Who Achieved MMR|Duration of first MMR (months) = (date of loss of MMR or censoring-date of first MMR + 1)/30.4375.|End of Study (Up to 40 months)|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834208|NCT01275196|Secondary|Durable MMR Rate at 24 Months|The rate of durable MMR at 24 months, defined as the proportion of patients who have achieved MMR at 12 months, and also maintain continuous MMR until the 24 month time point (1 month = 28 days) without intervening loss of MMR in between 12 and 24 months|24 months|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Perentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834209|NCT01275196|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Time to First MMR|Time to first MMR (months) = (date of first MMR or censoring – date of randomization + 1) / 30.4375.|End of study (up to 40 months)|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834210|NCT01275196|Secondary|Best MMR by Each Timepoint|Best MMR rates by scheduled time point are cumulative response rates up to that time point. In this analysis, patients who had achieved MMR at or before the time point were counted as responders, no matter if they lost the response/discontinued or not. Therefore, this response rate represented the best observed response rate up to that specific time point.|Months 3,6,9,12,15, 18, 21, 24, 36|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834224|NCT01275625|Secondary|Immunological Response at Week 48: Absolute Change From Baseline in Absolute Cluster of Differentiation 8 (CD8)|Immunological Response was summarized using absolute change from Baseline to Week 48 in absolute CD8+ cell count.|Week 48|FAS Population included those participants who had taken at least 1 dose of the study drug.||cells/mcL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834783|NCT01272947|Primary|Pain on Movement|"Visual analog scale (VAS) assessed on a 100 mm scale with anchors at 0= No pain and 100= Extreme pain"|VAS Score at 24 hours|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834211|NCT01275196|Secondary|MMR Rate at Each Time Point|Major molecular response (MMR) was defined as a value of ≤ 0.1% of BCR-ABL ratio on the IS. The minimum number of control genes for a sample to be valid was 3000. For statistical comparison purpose, MMR was considered as a binary variable with patients achieving MMR grouped as ‘responders’ and patients not achieving MMR, patients with missing PCR evaluations or patients with atypical transcripts at baseline grouped as ‘non-responders’. These time points including the 12 month data were calculated based on the final analysis after the end of the study.|Months 3,6,9,12,15, 18, 21, 24, 36|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834212|NCT01275196|Primary|Major Molecular Response (MMR) at 12 Months - With Imputation.|Major molecular response (MMR) was defined as a value of ≤ 0.1% of BCR-ABL ratio on the IS. The minimum number of control genes for a sample to be valid was 3000. For statistical comparison purpose, MMR was considered as a binary variable with patients achieving MMR grouped as ‘responders’ and patients not achieving MMR, patients with missing PCR evaluations or patients with atypical transcripts at baseline grouped as ‘non-responders’. This endpoint was calculated based on the 12 month analysis.|12 months|Patients in the FAS consisted of all patients who were randomized into the study. Following the intent-to-treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment group to which they were assigned at randomization.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834213|NCT01275313|Primary|Incidence of a Sitting-induced Pressure Ulcer|Skin assessments for incidence of sitting-induced pressure ulcer will occur once per week until occurrence of a pressure ulcer or 180 days|182 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834214|NCT01275430|Secondary|Phase I: Amount of PICC Tip Movement When the Subject’s Arm is Adducted From a 90° Position to the Subject’s Side.|"Mean distance (mm) of PICC tip movement when the subject’s arm is adducted from a 90° position to the subject’s side, by directly measuring the distance from the catheter tips to the parts of the CAJ (upper, middle, and lower) with the subject's arm at 90°and compared to the PICC tip with the subject's arm at the side .
All subjects were assigned to Sherlock 3CG in Phase I. Randomization was to have occurred in Phase II, but Phase II was not initiated due to termination of the study."|Day 0|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834215|NCT01275430|Secondary|Phase I: Change in Distance (mm) Between the Location of the Cavoatrial Junction When Angiographic CT is Performed With the Arms Above the Head vs at the Subject’s Side.|"Measurements (mm) of the location of the cavoatrial junction on Angiographic CT to evaluate shift greater than 5mm in mediastinal structures between ACT acquisitions obtained with the arms above the head vs arms at side of body (90°).
All subjects were assigned to Sherlock 3CG in Phase I. Randomization was to have occurred in Phase II, but Phase II was not initiated due to termination of the study."|Day 0|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834216|NCT01275430|Secondary|Number of Participants With Acceptable Angiographic CT Visualization of the PICC Tip When Using Sherlock 3CG for PICC Placement|"Proportion of acceptable visualization of the PICC tip location when maximum p-wave amplitude is observed.
Note – this endpoint is to assess the diagnostic capability of Angiographic Computed Tomography (ACT). It is not designed to reflect on PICC tip location.
All subjects were assigned to Sherlock 3CG in Phase I. Randomization was to have occurred in Phase II, but Phase II was not initiated due to termination of the study."|Day 0|||participants|||Number
834217|NCT01275430|Secondary|Phase I: Distance Necessary for Repositioning of the PICC Tip Upon Observation of the Maximum P-wave Amplitude, if Necessary.|"Distance (mm), if any, that is required to move the PICC tip upon observation of the maximum p-wave amplitude in order to have the PICC tip at the upper cavoatrial junction. Direct measurement of distance from the catheter tips to the parts of the CAJ
All subjects were assigned to Sherlock 3CG in Phase I. Randomization was to have occurred in Phase II, but Phase II was not initiated due to termination of the study."|Day 0|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834218|NCT01275430|Primary|Phase I - Location of the PICC Tip Upon Observation of Maximum P-wave Amplitude Using Sherlock 3CG.|"Mean distance (mm) from the PICC tip to the upper cavoatrial junction (CAJ) upon observation of maximum p-wave amplitude when using Sherlock 3CG.
All subjects were assigned to Sherlock 3CG in Phase I. Randomization was to have occurred in Phase II, but Phase II was not initiated due to termination of the study."|Time of PICC placement (Day 0)|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834219|NCT01275586|Primary|Disease Response|To estimate the disease control rate (PD,SD, PR, CR) with Tasigna® in patients with neurofibromas (NF1) using standard RECIST criteria. Complete Response (CR) is defined as; disappearance of all target lesions. Partial Response (PR) is defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as a reference the baseline sum longest diameter. Stable Disease (SD) is defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter since the treatment started. Disease Progression (PD) is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.|6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834220|NCT01275625|Secondary|Number of Participants With HIV-1 RNA Tropism Status Using Genotyping Assay at Screening and at the Time of Virologic Failure.|Change in tropism were summarized at the time of treatment failure or Early Termination (note: this was performed for participants with viral load > 400 copies/mL only).|Screening to Week 48 or Time of treatment Failure|All participants who discontinued therapy early or who reached Week 48 with sufficient plasma HIV 1 RNA for analysis (500 copies/mL) were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
834221|NCT01275625|Secondary|Number of Participants With Genotypic Resistance.|The viral genotypes were captured at Baseline and at treatment failure or Early termination and any resistance-associated mutations summarized descriptively at Week 48 for the Nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), and non-NRTIs (NNRTIs)drug classes.|Screening to Week 48 or Time of treatment Failure|All participants who discontinued therapy early or who reached Week 48 with sufficient plasma HIV 1 RNA for analysis (500 copies/mL) were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
834222|NCT01275625|Secondary|Immunological Response at Week 48: Change From Baseline in Absolute Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4)/ Cluster of Differentiation 8 (CD8) Ratio.|Immunological Response was summarized using absolute change from Baseline to Week 48 in absolute CD4+/ CD8+ ratio.|Week 48|FAS Population included those participants who had taken at least 1 dose of the study drug.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
834227|NCT01275625|Secondary|Virologic Response: Rate of Virologic Failure at Week 48.|Virologic failure defined as: failure to achieve a reduction from baseline in HIV 1 RNA ≥ 0.5 log10 copies /mL by the second viral load determination (unless viral load was below the lower limit level of quantification [LLOQ]); or a ≥ 0.5 log10 increase from nadir in HIV 1 RNA after achieving a HIV 1 RNA reduction from BL >0.5 log10 copies/mL; or a HIV 1 RNA level of >1000 copies/mL after having achieved a HIV 1 RNA level below LLOQ. Participants with Time to loss of virologic response (defined by level of <50 copies/mL) failure were classified as rebounders or non-responders.|48 weeks|FAS Population included those participants who had taken at least 1 dose of the study drug.||Participants|||Number
834228|NCT01275625|Secondary|Virologic Response: Percentage of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA Load < 400 Copies/mL at Post-baseline Visits.|Participants’ responder status at Week 48 was assessed according to MDF algorithm. This algorithm treats all participants with HIV 1 RNA data missing at the time of interest or discontinuation of study drug as failures or non responders.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 20, Week 24, Week 36 and Week 48|FAS Population included those participants who had taken at least 1 dose of the study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
834229|NCT01275625|Secondary|Virologic Response: Percentage of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA Load <50 Copies/mL at Post-baseline Visits.|Participants’ responder status at Week 48 was assessed according to MDF algorithm. This algorithm treats all participants with HIV 1 RNA data missing at the time of interest or discontinuation of study drug as failures or non responders.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 20, Week 24, Week 36 and Week 48|FAS Population included those participants who had taken at least 1 dose of the study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
834230|NCT01275625|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Plasma Human Immuno Deficiency Virus-1 Ribonucleic Acid (HIV-1 RNA) Load <50 Copies/Milliliter (mL) at 48 Weeks.|Participants’ responder status at Week 48 was assessed according to Missing, discontinuation= Failure (MDF) algorithm. This algorithm treats all participants with HIV 1 RNA data missing at the time of interest or discontinuation of study drug as failures or non responders.|48 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) Population included those participants who had taken at least 1 dose of the study drug.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834231|NCT01275755|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Weekly Average of Spontaneous Bowel Movements (SBMs) During Treatment|An SBM was defined as a bowel movement (BM) with no laxative use in the previous 24 hours. Each weekly SBM average was calculated as follows: (7 × number of SBMs) / (number of days with nonmissing data). The overall SBM rate for the 4-week double-blind treatment period was calculated as follows: (the average of the first week + the average of the second week + the average of the third week + the average of the fourth week) / 4.|Baseline, Weeks 1 through 4 of treatment|All participants who were randomized to study treatment and had at least 1 evaluable SBM post-dose measurement during the Double-blind Treatment Period. Last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing postbaseline values.||Number of SBMs/week||Standard Error|Mean
834232|NCT01275833|Primary|Range Finding of Functional and Hemodynamic Changes Using Echocardiographic Determined Measures.|Echocardiographic measures will include, but not be limited to, left ventricular volumes, left ventricular diameters, and ejection fraction.|6 months|The study was terminated early: long PR intervals are relatively rare in this population, and it would take an inordinately long time to enroll sufficient patients. Because of the early termination of the study, no data was analyzed since the primary objective is underpowered.|||||
834233|NCT01276054|Primary|Whether or Not a Patient Has Developed Grade 1+ LE|LE is defined using the CTCAE v3 definition: a >5-10% increase in the inter-limb volume in the ipsilateral arm compared to the unaffected arm.|During the first year post-operatively|Unable to analyze due to early termination of the study|||||
834234|NCT01276106|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline|For efficacy analyses, the primary analysis was at Week 24 Endpoint, defined as the last valid post-baseline measurement taken at or before Week 24. Efficacy results for treatment groups were considered statistically significant if change from baseline relative to placebo had p<0.05.|24 weeks|The Full Analysis Set included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||percentage points||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834235|NCT01276171|Secondary|Total Success Rate||5 min|chi-squre test||Participants|||Count of Participants
834236|NCT01276171|Secondary|Time to Successful Cannulation||5 minutes|||min||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834237|NCT01276171|Primary|First Attempt Success Rate With 3 Different Technique|The primary objective of this study is to compare the first attempt success rate for radial artery cannulation between the palpation, Doppler and U/S guided technique when applied by anesthesia trainees. Secondary outcomes include: success rate within 5 minutes, time to successful cannulation compared with three different techniques.|5 minutes|||participants|||Number
834238|NCT01276197|Primary|Diastolic BP Measurement at Follow-up|Participants BP measurement at 6-month follow-up|6-month following intervention|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834239|NCT01276197|Primary|Systolic BP at Follow-up|Systolic Bp measurement at 6-month follow-up; we modeled the impact of Intervention assignment on SBP, adjusting for Baseline. Thus, baseline SBP was collected but not used as outcome; Baseline SBP us used as a covariate.|6 months after intervention|Our analyses was completed with those who completed follow-up visit and varies from participant flow as we are not able to include those lost to follow-up.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834240|NCT01276223|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline (Week 0) in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Global Ocular Discomfort Score Over 4 Weeks|A Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used by the subject to assess ocular discomfort, both frequency and severity, at baseline (pre-treatment) and weekly thereafter for 4 additional weeks. Each scale was 100 millimeters (mm) in length. The VAS score was calculated by measuring the length in mm from the start of the line to the intersection point of the vertical mark made by the subject. The Global Ocular Discomfort Score is a composite of the two VAS scores, ranging from 0 (very mildly) to 100 (very severely uncomfortable).|Baseline, up to 4 weeks|All subjects randomized to treatment and receiving at least 1 administration of study medication (ITT). Mixed model repeated measure (MMRM) approach was used to handle missing data during randomized treatment period.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834370|NCT01267201|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 16 and 24 hrs post-dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
834241|NCT01276288|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Clinical Relevant Abnormalities in Vital Signs, Clinical Laboratory Tests, 12-lead Resting Electrocardiogram (ECG), Physical Examination and Assessment of Tolerability by the Investigator|"Number of subjects with clinical relevant abnormalities in vital signs (blood pressure, pulse rate), 12-lead resting electrocardiogram (ECG), clinical laboratory tests (haematology, clinical chemistry, urinalysis, and monitoring of fasting plasma glucose), physical examination and assessment of tolerability by the investigator.
New abnormal findings were reported as Adverse Events (AE). Only Alanine aminotransferase normal under system organ class investigations was determined as an existing AE."|From first drug administration until up to 14 days after the last drug administration, up to 35 days|Treated set||participants|||Number
834242|NCT01276288|Primary|Urinary Sodium Excretion Over 24-hour run-in Periods|Urinary sodium excretion over 24-hour run-in periods to assess the harmonisation of electrolytes after intake of a standardised diet|Day 3, 2 and 1 before the first drug administration|PD analysis set completers||mmol/day||Standard Error|Mean
834243|NCT01276288|Secondary|Maximum Measured Concentration of TOR in Plasma (Cmax, ss)|Maximum measured concentration of Empa in plasma (Cmax, ss) at steady state|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 post-dose on Day 4 with TOR alone and on Day 9 with EMPA plus TOR. The Pre-dose values were averaged over Days 1 to 3 with TOR alone and on Days 7 & 8 with EMPA plus TOR|PK set||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834244|NCT01276288|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of TOR in Plasma (AUCτ,ss)|Area under the concentration-time curve of TOR in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ (AUCτ,ss).|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 post-dose on Day 4 with TOR alone and on Day 9 with EMPA plus TOR. The Pre-dose values were averaged over Days 1 to 3 with TOR alone and on Days 7 & 8 with EMPA plus TOR|PK set||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834245|NCT01276288|Secondary|Maximum Measured Concentration of HCT in Plasma (Cmax, ss)|Maximum measured concentration of HCT in plasma (Cmax, ss) at steady state|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 post-dose on Day 4 with HCT alone and on Day 9 with EMPA plus HCT. The Pre-dose values were averaged over Days 1 to 3 with HCT alone and on Days 7 & 8 with EMPA plus HCT|PK set||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834246|NCT01276288|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of HCT in Plasma (AUCτ,ss)|Area under the concentration-time curve of HCT in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ (AUCτ,ss).|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 post-dose on Day 4 with HCT alone and on Day 9 with EMPA plus HCT. The Pre-dose values were averaged over Days 1 to 3 with HCT alone and on Days 7 & 8 with EMPA plus HCT|PK set||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834247|NCT01276288|Secondary|Maximum Measured Concentration of Empa in Plasma (Cmax, ss)|Maximum measured concentration of Empa in plasma (Cmax, ss) at steady state|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 post-dose on Day 5 with EMPA alone and on Day 9 with EMPA plus diuretic. The Pre-dose values were averaged over Days 1 to 4 with EMPA alone and on Days 7 & 8 with EMPA plus diuretic|PK set||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834248|NCT01276288|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of Empa in Plasma (AUCτ,ss)|Area under the concentration-time curve of Empa in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval τ (AUCτ,ss).|Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 post-dose on Day 5 with EMPA alone and on Day 9 with EMPA plus diuretic. The Pre-dose values were averaged over Days 1 to 4 with EMPA alone and on Days 7 & 8 with EMPA plus diuretic|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set, including all patients of the treated set who provide at least one observation for at least one secondary PK endpoint of AUC τ,ss or C max,ss for any analyte under any treatment without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834249|NCT01276288|Primary|The Change in Total Muscle Sympathetic Nerve Activity (MSNA) From Off- Treatment|The change in total Muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) that represents an area under the curve of all C-fiber action potentials per minute. This endpoint was evaluated only for Empa. For this endpoint a baseline value was not defined. However, the parameters obtained at 2 measurements time points during the trial were compared.|One day before the drug administration, then day 4 after the first drug administration|PD analysis set completers||action potentials per min||Standard Error|Mean
834250|NCT01276288|Primary|The Change in Micturition Frequency From the Baseline|For this endpoint the change in total micturition frequency from the baseline was only examined for EMPA where baseline was defined as the day before the first drug administration.|Baseline and day 5|PD analysis set completers||voids per day||Standard Error|Mean
834251|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Urinary Weight From Baseline|"Change from baseline in urinary weight in a 24 hour (h)- collection period, where baseline is the last 24-h collection period before first trial drug administration in each treatment period.
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 5- baseline, HCT: day 4-baseline, TOR: day 4-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 9- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 9- baseline,
The mean for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|24 hour sampling interval at baseline and then day 5 for Empa, day 4 for TOR and HCT, day 9 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||g/day||Standard Error|Mean
834252|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Body Weight From Baseline|"Change in body weight from baseline , where baseline was defined as the last measurement before trial drug administration of each treatment period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The mean for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||kg||Standard Error|Mean
834253|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in pH in Capillary or Arterialised Blood From Baseline|"Change in pH in capillary or arterialised blood from baseline, where baseline was defined as the last measurement before trial drug administration of each treatment period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The mean for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||pH||Standard Error|Mean
834254|NCT01276288|Primary|Changes in Bicarbonate Concentrations of Calcium, Bicarbonate Ions and Base Excess in Capillary or Arterialised Blood From Baseline|"Changes in bicarbonate concentrations of calcium, bicarbonate ions and base excess in capillary or arterialised blood from baseline, where baseline was defined as the last measurement before trial drug administration of each treatment period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The means for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||mmol/ L||Standard Error|Mean
834255|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Urine Osmolality From Baseline|"Change in urine osmolality from baseline, where baseline was defined as the measurement obtained before first drug administration in the first period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The mean for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||mOsm/kg||Standard Error|Mean
834256|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Urine pH From Baseline|"Change in urine pH from baseline, where baseline was defined as the measurement obtained before first drug administration in the first period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The mean for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||pH||Standard Error|Mean
834257|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Urea Concentration in Urine|"Change in urea concentration in urine from baseline, where baseline was defined as the measurement obtained before first drug administration in the first period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The mean for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||mmol/L||Standard Error|Mean
834258|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Serum Concentration of Fibroblast Growth Factor-23 (FGF- 23) From Baseline|"Change in serum concentration of fibroblast growth factor-23 (FGF- 23) from baseline, where baseline was defined as the measurement obtained before first drug administration in the first period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline, The mean for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||RU/mL||Standard Error|Mean
834259|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Serum Concentration of Aldosterone From Baseline|"Change in serum concentration of Aldosterone from baseline , where baseline was defined as the measurement obtained before first drug administration in the first period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The mean for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||nmol/L||Standard Error|Mean
834260|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Serum Concentration of Renin, Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D From Baseline|"Change in serum concentration of Renin, intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D from baseline , where baseline was defined as the measurement obtained before first drug administration in the first period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The means for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
834261|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Serum Concentration of Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP) From Baseline|"Change in serum concentration of ALP from baseline, where baseline was defined as the measurement obtained before first drug administration in the first period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The mean for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||U/L||Standard Error|Mean
834262|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Serum Concentration of Creatinine and Uric Acid From Baseline|"Change in serum concentration of Creatinine and Uric acid from baseline, where baseline was defined as the measurement obtained before first drug administration in the first period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 5- baseline, HCT: day 4-baseline, TOR: day 4-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 9- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 9- baseline,
The means for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 5 for Empa, day 4 for TOR and HCT, day 9 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||umol/L||Standard Error|Mean
834273|NCT01276301|Secondary|Mean Residence Time in the Body After Administration (MRTpo)|"Mean residence time of empagliflozin (empa) in the body after oral administration.
Note: The numbers provide below for standard deviation are of Coefficient of Variation."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, who had provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834263|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Serum Concentration of Sodium, Potassium, Magnesium, Calcium, Chloride, Phosphate, Glucose and Urea From Baseline|"Change in serum concentration of sodium, potassium, magnesium, calcium, chloride, phosphate, glucose and urea from baseline, where baseline was defined as the measurement obtained before first drug administration in the first period
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The means for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||mmol/L||Standard Error|Mean
834264|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Serum Osmolality From Baseline|"Changes in serum osmolality from baseline based on a blood sample.
Baseline was defined as the measurement obtained before the first drug administration in the first period.
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 6- baseline, HCT: day 5-baseline, TOR: day 5-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 10- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 10- baseline,
The mean for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|baseline and then day 6 for Empa, day 5 for TOR and HCT, day 10 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||mOsm/Kg||Standard Error|Mean
834265|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Urinary Excretion in a 24-hour Period of N-terminal Telopeptide (NTx) From Baseline|"Change in urinary excretion in a 24-hour period of N-terminal telopeptide (NTx) from baseline, where baseline was defined as the value obtained from the last 24-hour (h) collection period before the first drug administration in the first treatment period.
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 5- baseline, HCT: day 4-baseline, TOR: day 4-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 9- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 9- baseline,
The means for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|24 hour sampling interval at baseline and then day 5 for Empa, day 4 for TOR and HCT, day 9 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||nM BCE/ mMC||Standard Error|Mean
834266|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Urinary Excretion in a 24-hour Period of Sodium, Potassium, Magnesium, Chloride, Calcium, Phosphate, Creatinine, Uric Acid, Glucose From Baseline|"Change in urinary excretion in a 24-hour period of sodium, potassium, magnesium, chloride, calcium, phosphate, creatinine, uric acid, glucose from baseline, where baseline was defined as the value obtained from the last 24-hour (h) collection period before the first drug administration in the first treatment period. This applies also to sodium excretion in urine, which is additionally obtained one day before the drug administration before the second period.
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 5- baseline, HCT: day 4-baseline, TOR: day 4-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 9- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 9- baseline,
The means for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|24 hour sampling interval at baseline and then day 5 for Empa, day 4 for TOR and HCT, day 9 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|PD analysis set completers||mmol/day||Standard Error|Mean
834267|NCT01276288|Primary|Change in Clearance of Sodium, Potassium, Creatinine, Magnesium, Chloride,Calcium, Phosphate and Uric Acid From Baseline|"Change in clearance of sodium, potassium, creatinine, magnesium, chloride,calcium, phosphate and uric acid from baseline, where baseline is defined as the value obtained from the last 24-h collection period before the first drug administration in the first treatment period.
The mean change from baseline was evaluated as:
Empa: day 5- baseline, HCT: day 4-baseline, TOR: day 4-baseline, Empa+ HCT: day 9- baseline, Empa+ TOR: day 9- baseline,
The means for the Empa arm represent combined adjusted means of all four sequences that is Empa administered before or after the administration of either TOR, HCT and their combination with Empa"|24 hour sampling interval at baseline and then day 5 for Empa, day 4 for TOR and HCT, day 9 for Empa+TOR and Empa+HCT|Pharmacodynamic (PD) analysis set completers includes all evaluable patients of the treated set who provide a baseline and at least one on-treatment observation for at least one primary (PD) endpoint under any treatment without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PD and who continued the trial as planned||ml/min||Standard Error|Mean
834268|NCT01276301|Secondary|Assessment of Tolerability by Investigator|Tolerability will be assessed by the investigator according to the categories good, satisfactory, not satisfactory , bad and not assessable.|Within Day 15 to Day 25|Treated set||percentage of participants|||Number
834269|NCT01276301|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, Vital Signs, Blood Chemistry and Electrocardiogram (ECG).|Clinically relevant abnormalities for physical examination, vital signs , blood chemistry and Electrocardiogram (ECG). New or abnormal findings were reported as adverse events.|Day1 to Day 11|Treated set (TS) included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication.||participants|||Number
834270|NCT01276301|Other Pre-specified|Verapamil Plasma Concentration|"Verapamil plasma concentration were measured in order to confirm exposure.
Note: No descriptive statistics was calculated for predose, 49.0 (h) and 73.0 (h), as most of the values were below the limit of quantification (BLQ)."|Predose and 1 hour (h), 25h, 49h and 73h after verapamil administration|Treated set (TS) included all subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834271|NCT01276301|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution Following an Extravascular Dose (Vz/F)|"Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase following an extravascular dose.
Note: The numbers provide below for standard deviation are of Coefficient of Variation."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, who had provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834272|NCT01276301|Secondary|Apparent Clearance in Plasma After Extravascular Administration (CL/F)|"Apparent clearance of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma after extravascular administration.
Note: The numbers provide below for standard deviation are of Coefficient of Variation."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, who had provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834274|NCT01276301|Secondary|Terminal Half-life in Plasma (t1/2)|"Terminal half-life of empagliflozin in plasma.
Note: The numbers provide below for standard deviation are of Coefficient of Variation."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, who had provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834275|NCT01276301|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Rate Constant (λz)|"Terminal elimination rate constant in plasma.
Note: The numbers provide below for standard deviation are of Coefficient of Variation."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, who had provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||1/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834276|NCT01276301|Secondary|Time From 0 to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|Time from last dosing to the maximum plasma concentration|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, who had provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||h||Full Range|Median
834277|NCT01276301|Secondary|Area Under the Curve 0 to Time of Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 to time of last quantifiable data point.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, who had provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834278|NCT01276301|Primary|Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|Maximum measured concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, who had provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||nmol||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834279|NCT01276301|Primary|Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who had taken at least one dose of trial medication, who had provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834280|NCT01276327|Secondary|Tmax for Pioglitazone|Time from dosing to the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma for pioglitazone|0-72 hours (measurements at baseline, 0.33, 0.67, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours)|PKS - The PKS included all evaluable subjects in the treated set who had no important PV relevant to the evaluation of bioequivalence and provided at least 1 evaluable observation for a pharmacokinetic endpoint in at least 1 treatment period.||hours||Full Range|Median
834281|NCT01276327|Secondary|Tmax for Linagliptin|Time from dosing to the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma for Linagliptin|0-72 hours (measurements at baseline, 0.33, 0.67, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours)|PKS - The PKS included all evaluable subjects in the treated set who had no important PV relevant to the evaluation of bioequivalence and provided at least 1 evaluable observation for a pharmacokinetic endpoint in at least 1 treatment period.||hours||Full Range|Median
834282|NCT01276327|Secondary|AUC0-∞ of Pioglitazone|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from 0 hours extrapolated to inf for pioglitazone|0-72 hours (measurements at baseline, 0.33, 0.67, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours)|PKS - The PKS included all evaluable subjects in the treated set who had no important PV relevant to the evaluation of bioequivalence and provided at least 1 evaluable observation for a pharmacokinetic endpoint in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834283|NCT01276327|Secondary|AUC0-∞ of Linagliptin|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from 0 hours extrapolated to infinity (inf) for linagliptin|0-72 hours (measurements at baseline, 0.33, 0.67, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours)|PKS - The PKS included all evaluable subjects in the treated set who had no important PV relevant to the evaluation of bioequivalence and provided at least 1 evaluable observation for a pharmacokinetic endpoint in at least 1 treatment period.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834284|NCT01276327|Secondary|AUC0-tz for Linagliptin|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point for Linagliptin|0-72 hours (measurements at baseline, 0.33, 0.67, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours)|PKS - The PKS included all evaluable subjects in the treated set who had no important PV relevant to the evaluation of bioequivalence and provided at least 1 evaluable observation for a pharmacokinetic endpoint in at least 1 treatment period.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834285|NCT01276327|Primary|Cmax of Pioglitazone|Maximum concentration of the analyte in plasma was measured. Adjusted by-treatment geometric mean and CV were calculated.|0-72 hours (measurements at baseline, 0.33, 0.67, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours)|PKS - The PKS included all evaluable subjects in the treated set who had no important PV relevant to the evaluation of bioequivalence and provided at least 1 evaluable observation for a pharmacokinetic endpoint in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834371|NCT01267201|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 16 and 24 hrs post-dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
834286|NCT01276327|Primary|AUC0-tz of Pioglitazone|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point|0-72 hours (measurements at baseline, 0.33, 0.67, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours)|PKS - The PKS included all evaluable subjects in the treated set who had no important PV relevant to the evaluation of bioequivalence and provided at least 1 evaluable observation for a pharmacokinetic endpoint in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834287|NCT01276327|Primary|Cmax of Linagliptin|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma was measured. Adjusted by-treatment geometric mean and CV were reported.|0-72 hours (measurements at baseline, 0.33, 0.67, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours)|PKS - The PKS included all evaluable subjects in the treated set who had no important PV relevant to the evaluation of bioequivalence and provided at least 1 evaluable observation for a pharmacokinetic endpoint in at least 1 treatment period.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834288|NCT01276327|Primary|AUC0-72 of Linagliptin|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from 0 to 72 hours|0-72 hours (measurements at baseline, 0.33, 0.67, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours)|PKS - The PKS included all evaluable subjects in the treated set who had no important PV relevant to the evaluation of bioequivalence and provided at least 1 evaluable observation for a pharmacokinetic endpoint in at least 1 treatment period.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834289|NCT01276353|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of E2020 on Visits 2 and 3||Visit 2 [Day1] and Visit 3 [Day 15]|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set: the group of subjects who had received at least one quantifiable E2020 concentration in plasma||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834290|NCT01276353|Secondary|Cmax of E2020 on Visits 2 and 3 According to Cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) Phenotype Status|All subjects were identified as Extensive Metabolizer [EM] or Intermediate Metabolizer [IM] predicted from their CYP2D6 phenotypes. Ultra-rapid Metabolizer (UM) and Poor Metabolizer (PM) were not identified in any subject. Since the analysis population i|Visit 2 [Day1] and Visit 3 [Day 15]|Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834291|NCT01276457|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE), Serious Adverse Events (SAE) or Deaths|Safety was assessed using reports of adverse events of all participants in this study. Serious adverse events are those events that resulted in death, were life threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or was a congenital anomaly/birth defect.|Baseline to end of study (Month 24)|Safety population: All randomized subjects who took at least one dose of study drug.||Partcipants|||Number
834292|NCT01276457|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Died, Number of Participants Who Lost Their Graft, and Number of Participants Who Died or Lost Their Graft|A participant lost his graft if he/she started dialysis and was not able to subsequently be removed from dialysis or underwent graft nephrectomy.|Baseline to end of study (Month 24)|Safety population: All randomized subjects who took at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
834293|NCT01276457|Primary|Renal Function Assessed by Creatinine Clearance|Renal function was assessed by measuring serum creatinine and by computing creatinine clearance using the formula of Cockcroft-Gault.|Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized subjects for whom at least one valid post-baseline efficacy measurement was obtained and used for efficacy analyses.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
834294|NCT01276457|Primary|Number of Participants With Biopsy-proven Acute Rejection|A graft core biopsy was performed on all suspected acute rejection episodes within 48 hours. Biopsies were read by the local pathologist according to the 1997 Banff criteria. A biopsy-proven acute rejection was be defined as a biopsy graded IA, IB, IIA, IIB, or III.|Baseline to end of study (Month 24)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized subjects for whom at least one valid post-baseline efficacy measurement was obtained and used for efficacy analyses.||Participants|||Number
834372|NCT01267201|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 16 and 24 hrs post-dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
834308|NCT01276535|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Non-Inflammatory Lesion Count at 6 Weeks|The number of open comedones and closed comedones are summed to attain the total non-inflammatory lesion count.|Baseline and 6 weeks|||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
834309|NCT01276535|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inflammatory Lesion Count at 6 Weeks|The number of pustules, papules and nodules are summed to attain a total inflammatory lesion count.|Baseline and 6 weeks|||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
834310|NCT01276535|Primary|Grade on the Burton et al. Acne Severity Grade Scale|The Burton et al. Acne Severity Grade Scale grades the type of acne lesion from Grade 0: no acne lesions through Grade 1: sub-clinical acne, Grade 2: mild acne, Grade 3: moderate acne; Grade 4: severe acne, to Grade 5: extremely severe acne. The number of participants whose entire face demonstrated an improvement of one or more grades on the Burton et al. Acne Severity Scale at week 6 relative to baseline was calculated.|baseline and 6 weeks|||participants|||Number
834839|NCT01280552|Primary|Overall Survival in HLA-A2 Patients|Overall survival in a predefined subpopulation. All randomized patients are included in intent to treat analysis.|2-3 years|Patients with HLA-A2 haplotype||months of survival||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834914|NCT01281306|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events and Death|Adverse event monitoring was conducted throughout the study.|8 weeks|Safety Analysis Set: The safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Number of participants|||Number
834972|NCT01281917|Secondary|Complete Response Rate|The complete response rate (CR) to therapy as defined by International Lymphoma Response Criteria.|Up to 60 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834364|NCT01261624|Secondary|ACR Pediatric Response Level (ACR 50, 70, 90 and 100) at Week 12|ACR Pediatric variables include: Physician's Global Assessment of disease activity on a 0- 100 mm visual analogue scale from 0 mm = no disease activity to 100 mm = very severe disease activity; Parent's or patient's Global Assessment of Patient's overall well-being on a 100 mm VAS from 0 mm = very well to 100 mm = very poor; Functional ability: Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire; Number of joints with active arthritis using the ACR definition (any joint with swelling, or in the absence of swelling, limitation of motion accompanied by pain/tenderness not due to bone deformity); Number of joints with limitation of motion; Laboratory measure of inflammation: C-reactive protein (mg/L) Patients were considered as responders if they achieve at least an ACR Pediatric Criteria level 50, 70, 90 and 100 of response, defined as a 50%, 70%, 90% and 100% improvement as compared to baseline in at least 3 of the 6 variables listed above, with no more than 1 variable worsening by > than 30%|at week12|||participants|||Number
834365|NCT01261624|Primary|ACR Pediatric Response Level (ACRPRL) 30 After 12 Weeks of Treatment|ACR Pediatric variables include: Physician’s Global Assessment of disease activity on a 0-100 mm visual analogue scale from 0 mm = no disease activity to 100 mm = very severe disease activity; Parent’s or patient’s Global Assessment of Patient’s overall well-being on a 100 mm VAS from 0 mm = very well to 100 mm = very poor; Functional ability: Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire; Number of joints with active arthritis using the ACR definition (any joint with swelling, or in the absence of swelling, limitation of motion accompanied by pain/tenderness not due to bone deformity); Number of joints with limitation of motion; Laboratory measure of inflammation: C-reactive protein (mg/L) Patients were considered as responders if they achieve at least an ACR Pediatric Criteria level 30 of response, defined as a 30% improvement as compared to baseline in at least 3 of the 6 variables listed above, with no more than 1 variable worsening by > than 30%|12 weeks of treatment|||participants|||Number
834366|NCT01267136|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Side Effects During the Post-tonsillectomy Recovery Period.|Parent-reported side effects entered in 10-day diary.|Side effects will be observed and recorded daily by caregivers for a total of 10 days in the take-home diary.|||participants|||Number
834367|NCT01267136|Primary|Efficacy of Two Different Liquid Pain Medications: Tramadol vs. Codeine/Acetaminophen During the Post-tonsillectomy Recovery Period.|Average number of post-operative days with pain score >4/10. Pain score assessments were administered once daily by parents using either the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) (with anchors 0=no pain and 10=highest pain imaginable) for children ages 8-15 (von Baeyer et al., 2009) or the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) (with anchors 0=no pain and 10=highest pain imaginable) for children ages 4-10 (Hicks et al., 2001).|Efficacy was assessed daily during the 10-day postoperative recovery period.|||days||Full Range|Median
834373|NCT01267201|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)]|AUC (0 - ∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 16 and 24 hours (hrs) post-dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all randomized participants who were treated and had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
834374|NCT01267227|Secondary|Subjective Adverse Effects|Number of participants with adverse effects as a measure of safety|Baseline and 6-8 weeks|||participants|||Number
834375|NCT01267227|Secondary|Blood Pressure|Change in baseline systolic blood pressure and/or diastolic blood pressure|6-8 weeks||||||
834376|NCT01267227|Primary|Triglycerides|Change in baseline triglycerides (TG)|Baseline and 6-8 weeks|||mg/dL||Full Range|Mean
834377|NCT01267240|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|"PFS is defined as the duration of time from start of treatment to time of progression, death, or completion of the 1-year follow-up, whichever occurs first.
Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions."|From time of treatment initiation to disease progression, death, or completion of the 1 year follow-up, whichever occurs first.|16 of 25 patients were evaluable for response.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834378|NCT01267240|Secondary|Survival|Overall survival is defined as the length of time from start of treatment to death from any cause. Estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Up to 1 year|16 patients of the 25 were eligible for response assessment.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834379|NCT01267240|Primary|Response Rate According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors|Per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT and MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 1 year|||participants|||Number
834380|NCT01267253|Other Pre-specified|Serum Expression Levels of Surrogate Markers of Brivanib Alaninate Effects Including Angiogenic Factors (VEGF and bFGF) and Markers of Endothelial Damage (E-selectin, VCAM-1, and ICAM-1)|Surrogate markers will be associated with response, PFS, and OS.|Up to 5 years||||||
834381|NCT01267253|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the duration of time from study entry to time of death or the date of last contact..|From study entry to time of death or the date of last contact, up to 5 years of follow-up.|Eligible and Treated Patients||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834382|NCT01267253|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival is the period of time from study entry to time of disease progression, death or date of last contact, whichever occurs first. Progression is assessed by RECIST 1.1|From study entry to time of progression or death, whichever occurs first, up to 5 years of follow-up|Eligible and Treated Participants||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834383|NCT01267253|Primary|Adverse Events (Grade 3 or Higher) During Treatment Period|Number of participants with a maximum grade of 3 or higher during treatment period. Adverse events are graded and categorized using CTCAE v.4.0|During treatment period and up to 30 days after stopping the study treatment.|Eligible and Treated Participants||Participants|||Number
834384|NCT01267253|Primary|PFS for at Least 6 Months Without Non-protocol Therapy From Study Entry.|Proportion of participants who survive progression-free for at least 6 months without non-protocol therapy from study entry. Progression is assessed by RECIST 1.1.|Every other cycle for first 6 months; then every 3 months therafter until disease progression confirmed; and at any other time if cliniclly indicated based on symptoms or physical signs suggestive of progressive disease|Eligible and treated participants||proportion||90% Confidence Interval|Number
834385|NCT01267253|Primary|Objective Tumor Response|Proportion of participants with objective tumor response. Objective tumor response is defined as complete or partial tumor response assessed by RECIST 1.1|Every other cycle for first 6 months; then every 3 months thereafter until disease progression confirmed; and at any other time if clinically indicated based on symptoms or physical signs suggestive of progressive disease.|Eligible and Treated participants||proportion||90% Confidence Interval|Number
834386|NCT01276652|Post-Hoc|Presence of Normal Spectral Edge Frequency 95% (SEF95) Activity|SEF95 is normally higher during wakefulness during sleep. The normal sleep SEF95 profile is rhythmic with an approximately 90 minute periodicity. We analyzed the number of subjects who exhibited this normal profile.|Average 4 days (patients followed to hospital discharge)|In one subject in the environmental modification group, the files were lost after acquisition and this analysis was unable to be performed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834387|NCT01276652|Post-Hoc|Presence of Normal Slow Wave Activity|Slow wave activity in health exhibits diurnal and ultradian periodicity and a homeostatic decline at night. The number of subjects exhibiting these characteristics was calculated for each group.|Average 4 days (patients followed to hospital discharge)|In one subject in the environmental modification group, the files were lost after acquisition and this analysis was unable to be performed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834388|NCT01276652|Other Pre-specified|Normal Timing of 6-sulfatoxymelatonin Excretion|The number of participants in each group who exhibit normal timing of 6-sulfatoxymelatonin excretion will be reported. The normal timing of peak melatonin excretion was considered to be between midnight and 05:00. Subjects in whom the melatonin onset occurred after midnight or the acrophase occurred after 05:00 were considered to be phase delayed, while patients whose acrophase occurred prior to midnight were considered to be phase advanced.|Average 4 days (patients followed to hospital discharge)|24-hour 6-sulfatoxymelatonin profiles were successfully collected in 16 subjects total. In one subject in the usual care (observational) group, there were insufficient data to determine melatonin timing.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834389|NCT01276652|Other Pre-specified|Occurrence of REM Sleep|Occurrence of identifiable rapid eye movement (REM) sleep in each subject.|Average 4 days (patients followed to hospital discharge)|In one subject in the environmental modification group, the files were lost after acquisition and this analysis was unable to be performed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834473|NCT01278797|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of Plasma Amlodipine From 0 to 72 Hours (AUC72)|Area under the analyte concentration versus time curve from time zero to 72 hours as calculated by the linear trapezoidal method|Day 1, Day 22|Analysis Set includes all randomized participants who completed the trial||nanograms*hour/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834390|NCT01276652|Secondary|Subject Tolerance of the Environmental Modification Protocol|This outcome measure will examine, in a preliminary fashion, subject tolerance of the environmental modification protocol. Tolerance will be assessed through qualitative interviews performed by the PI with the subjects.|Average 4 days (patients followed to hospital discharge)|Only subjects who received the intervention were assessed.||Subjects who tolerated the protocol|||Number
834391|NCT01276652|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Who Successfully Undergo Continuous Bedside Polysomnography for at Least 24 Hours.|This study assesses the feasibility of studying sleep and circadian rhythmicity in acutely ill, mechanically ventilated patients through the application of continuous bedside polysomnography. Feasibility will be assessed by determining the percentage of enrolled subjects who undergo at least 24 hours of continuous bedside polysomnography.|Average 4 days (patients followed to hospital discharge)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834392|NCT01276756|Secondary|Safety of Nitazoxanide (Number of Participants Experiencing Adverse Events)|The occurence of adverse events that could be linked temporally and reasonably to the administration of the tested drug.|throughout the period of treatment and up to 90 days after end of triple therapy|||participants|||Number
834393|NCT01276756|Secondary|End-of-treatment Response|An end-of-treatment response is defined as a negative HCV PCR at 48 weeks after the start of pegylated interferon and ribavirin|48 weeks +- 7 days after starting pegylated interferon and ribavirin|ITT. Any patient who received at least one dose of interferon was included in the analyses.||participants|||Number
834394|NCT01276756|Secondary|Early Virological Response|"A complete early virologic response is defined as a negative HCV PCR 90 days after the start of pegylated interferon.
A partial early virologic response is defined as a decrease of 2 or more log in HCV PCR at 90 days after the start of pegylated interferon"|90 ± 7 days from the start of pegylated interferon and ribavirin|ITT. Any patient who received at least one dose of interferon was included in the analyses.||participants|||Number
834395|NCT01276756|Secondary|Rapid Virological Response|A rapid virologic response is defined as a negative HCV PCR 4 weeks after treatment|28 - 33 days after start of Pegylated interferon and ribavirin|"Only 1 patient in standard of care arm and 3 patients in the triple therapy arm missed doing the PCR test at week 4. These patients were thus not included in this particular analysis."||participants|||Number
834396|NCT01276756|Primary|Sustained Virologic Response|sustained virological response is defined as a negative HCV PCR at 180 days after the end of treatment (End of treatment being at 48 weeks for Group A, 52 weeks for Group B). For any patient who stopped treatment prematurely (e.g. due to adverse events) SVR was defined as a negative HCV PCR (polymerase chain reaction) at 180 days after the last dose of all medications (interferon, ribavirin and nitazoxanide)|180 days (+- 7 days) after the end of treatment. (48 weeks for Group A, 52 weeks for Group B, or after the last dose of treatment for patients who stopped prematurely).|All was intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Any patient who received at least one dose of interferon was included in the analyses.The only 2 dropouts (lost to follow-up) were calculated as failures.||participants|||Number
834397|NCT01276821|Other Pre-specified|Average Duration of Crying (in Minutes) Among Babies Receiving Nebulisation Therapy.|The outcomes tries to compare the influence of duration of crying among babies receiving nebulization which interferes with drug delivery and henceforth might create a confounding bias while interpreting results.|2 hours|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834398|NCT01276821|Secondary|Persistence of Cough at the End of 1 Week|Number of patients in each intervention group whose parents reported the persistence of initial cough at the end of 1 week in their children.|7 days|||participants|||Number
834399|NCT01276821|Secondary|Missed Days of Work of Caregivers|Number of patients in each intervention group whose parents reported at least 1 day of missed work due to the illness of child within the week following the initial hospital visit on 7 day follow-up call.|7 days|||participants|||Number
834400|NCT01276821|Secondary|Need for Unscheduled Medical Visits, if Any, for Same Symptoms to Any Healthcare Facility Within 1 Week||7 days|||participants|||Number
834401|NCT01276821|Secondary|Relapse Rate|To study the number of patients in either group who need another unscheduled medical visit within the initial 24 hours of ER/ OPD visit|24 hours|||Participants|||Number
834402|NCT01276821|Secondary|Patients Meeting Eligibility Criteria for ER/ OPD Discharge at the End of 2 Hours of Observation||At the end of 2 hours|||participants|||Number
834403|NCT01276821|Primary|Mean Change in Clinical Severity Score|"Mean changes in the Clinical Severity Score after 2 sessions of nebulisation as compared to baseline.
Clinical Severity Score devised by Wang et al, is an objective scoring system that measures the degree of respiratory distress in young children.
The scoring system assesses respiratory rate, wheezing, retraction, and general condition,scores ranging from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating severe illness and vice versa.
The total scores range from 0 to 12, with increased severity receiving a higher score (Wang et al, 1992).
This scoring systems have previously been validated in a number of well designed randomized controlled trials(Anil 2010, Kuzik 2007, Sarrell 2002, and Mandelberg 2003). A 1 point improvement in the clinical severity score implies approximately 7% betterment of symptoms on the scale."|2 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834404|NCT01276847|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Gene Expression Score for Interleukin 17 (IL-17) in Psoriatic Lesions of Participants Treated With Etanercept|Participants had skin biopsies performed at baseline and after treatment with etanercept for 1,2,4 and 16 weeks. The expression of IL-17 mRNA was quantitated by qPCR, with the data normalized by the delta-delta Ct method. The expression score, showing the percentage difference from baseline, was calculated as follows : [(baseline - post baseline)/baseline] x 100.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 16|Pre-specified to be collected only in participants treated with Etanercept.||Gene expression score||90% Confidence Interval|Median
834414|NCT01277822|Primary|Change in Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (MSDBP) at Week 8|Diastolic blood pressure was assessed at baseline and after 8 weeks of treatment with the participant in a seated position using an auto sphygmomanometer. Three measurements were performed at 2-minute intervals and the average of the 3 values of was recorded.|Baseline and Week 8|Full Analysis Set defined as all participants who were randomized, took at least 1 dose of study drug, and had blood pressure measurements at baseline and at least 1 post-randomization blood pressure measurement.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834415|NCT01277861|Secondary|Coughing|Data include patients who coughed irrespective of the degree of coughing.|Intraoperative period|Per protocol||Participants, number|||Number
834416|NCT01277861|Secondary|Apnea|Apnea defined as no breathing for at least 30 s.|Induction of Anesthesia|Per protocol||Participants, number|||Number
834405|NCT01276847|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Composite Gene Expression Score Based on Interleukin 23 (IL-23) Pathway Related Genes in Psoriatic Lesions of Participants Treated With Ustekinumab|Skin biopsies were collected from participants at baseline and after treatment with ustekinumab for 1,2,4 and 16 weeks. The mRNA expression of eight pre-defined IL-23 pathway related genes, namely beta 4 defensin (DEFB4), CXC motif chemokine 8 (CXCL8), Interleukins 17A, 17F, 20, 22, 23A (IL-17, IL-17F, IL-20, IL-22, IL-23A) and cyclic AMP dependent protein kinase (CAMP) was quantitated by qPCR, with the data normalized by the delta-delta Ct method. The expression score for each gene, showing the percentage difference from baseline, was calculated as follows : [(baseline - post baseline)/baseline] x 100. Composite gene expression scores were derived for each individual by summing the expression scores of the individual genes. Positive composite scores denote a reduction from baseline in gene expression.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 16|Pre-specified to be collected only in participants treated with Ustekinumab. One participant treated with Ustekinumab with extreme outlying data, likely due to mislabeling of lesional and nonlesional tissues, was excluded from the analysis.||Gene expression score||90% Confidence Interval|Median
834406|NCT01276847|Primary|Change From Baseline in Composite Gene Expression Score Based on IL-12 Pathway Related Interferon Gamma (IFN-γ)-Modulated Genes in Psoriatic Lesions of Participants Treated With Ustekinumab|Skin biopsies were collected from participants at baseline and after treatment with ustekinumab for 1,2,4 and 16 weeks. The expression of messenger RNA (mRNA) from three pre-defined IL-12 pathway related genes, modulated by interferon gamma (IFN-γ), namely IFN-γ, inducible nitric oxide synthase(iNOS) and CXC motif chemokine 10(CXCL10) was quantitated by real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), with the data normalized by the delta-delta Ct method. The expression score for each gene, showing the percentage difference from baseline, was calculated as follows : [(baseline - post baseline)/baseline] x 100. Composite gene expression scores were derived for each individual by summing the expression scores of the individual genes. Positive composite scores denote a decrease from baseline in gene expression.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 16|Pre-specified to be collected only in participants treated with Ustekinumab. One participant treated with Ustekinumab with extreme outlying data, likely due to mislabeling of lesional and nonlesional tissues, was excluded from the analysis.||Gene expression score||90% Confidence Interval|Median
834407|NCT01277822|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Ankle Circumference at Week 8|Each ankle was marked with a semi-permanent marker at approximately 3 cm proximal to the midpoint of the medial malleolus to aid consistency in the performance of the measurements. Ankle circumference was measured in both ankles at baseline and Week 8 using a tension controlled tape to minimize error.|Baseline and Week 8|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had available data for ankle circumference.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834408|NCT01277822|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Had Peripheral Edema During the Study|A pitting assessment of edema on both legs was performed at baseline and throughout the study. Participants were assessed in a seated position with both feet extended and the right ankle in a neutral dorsiflexion position. The index finger was pressed firmly over the bony prominence approximately 3cm proximal to the midpoint of the medial malleolus of the right ankle and will be held for three seconds. Presence of a residual indentation in the area after releasing pressure on the index finger was considered positive for pitting edema.|up to 8 weeks|Safety Set defined as all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834409|NCT01277822|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve Target Blood Pressure at Week 4|Participants were evaluated at Week 4 to ascertain if target blood pressure had been obtained. Criteria for meeting target BP were: sitting diastolic BP (sitDBP) <90mmHg or sitting systolic BP (sitSBP) <140mmHg) or sitDBP change more than 10mmHg from baseline or sitSBP change more than 20mmHg from baseline.|Week 4|Full Analysis Set defined as all participants who were randomized, took at least 1 dose of study drug, and had blood pressure measurements at baseline and at least 1 post-randomization blood pressure measurement.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834410|NCT01277822|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve Target Blood Pressure at Week 8|Participants were evaluated at Week 8 to ascertain if target blood pressure had been obtained. Criteria for meeting target BP were: sitting diastolic BP (sitDBP) <90mmHg or sitting systolic BP (sitSBP) <140mmHg) or sitDBP change more than 10mmHg from baseline or sitSBP change more than 20mmHg from baseline.|Week 8|Full Analysis Set defined as all participants who were randomized, took at least 1 dose of study drug, and had blood pressure measurements at baseline and at least 1 post-randomization blood pressure measurement.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834411|NCT01277822|Secondary|Change in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (MSSBP) at Week 4|Systolic blood pressure was assessed at baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment with the participant in a seated position using an auto sphygmomanometer. Three measurements were performed at 2-minute intervals and the average of the 3 values of was recorded.|Baseline and Week 4|Full Analysis Set defined as all participants who were randomized, took at least 1 dose of study drug, and had blood pressure measurements at baseline and at least 1 post-randomization blood pressure measurement.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834412|NCT01277822|Secondary|Change in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (MSSBP) at Week 8|Systolic blood pressure was assessed at baseline and after 8 weeks of treatment with the participant in a seated position using an auto sphygmomanometer. Three measurements were performed at 2-minute intervals and the average of the 3 values of was recorded.|Baseline and Week 8|Full Analysis Set defined as all participants who were randomized, took at least 1 dose of study drug, and had blood pressure measurements at baseline and at least 1 post-randomization blood pressure measurement.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834413|NCT01277822|Secondary|Change in Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (MSDBP) at Week 4|Diastolic blood pressure was assessed at baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment with the participant in a seated position using an auto sphygmomanometer. Three measurements were performed at 2-minute intervals and the average of the 3 values of was recorded.|Baseline and Week 4|Full Analysis Set defined as all participants who were randomized, took at least 1 dose of study drug, and had blood pressure measurements at baseline and at least 1 post-randomization blood pressure measurement.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834417|NCT01277861|Primary|Movement|The data provided below include participants who moved (includes all grades of movement ie, mild, moderate and severe).|Induction of Anesthesia|Per protocol||Participants, number|||Number
834973|NCT01281917|Secondary|Safety of This Regimen|Safety of the regimen will be measured by frequency and severity of adverse events.|Up to 36 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834419|NCT01278160|Secondary|Number of Treatment Emergent Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Treatment emergent hypoglycaemic episodes (hypos): those that happened between treatment and one day after last drug day. Hypos summarised based on American Diabetes Association classification. Severe hypos: episodes requiring another person to actively administer resuscitative actions. Minor hypos: episodes with symptoms with plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L (56 mg/dL) handled by the subject, or any asymptomatic plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L (56 mg/dL). Diurnal period: between 06:00 and 23:59 (both included). Nocturnal period: between 00:00 and 05:59 a.m. (both included).|Weeks 0-16|Full analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) consists of all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of the trial product(s).||episodes|||Number
834420|NCT01278160|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving HbA1c Below or Equal to 6.5%|The percentage of subjects achieving the treatment target for glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) after 16 weeks of treatment|Week 16|Full analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) consists of all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of the trial product(s).||percentage of subjects|||Number
834421|NCT01278160|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving HbA1c Below 7.0%|The percentage of subjects achieving the treatment target for glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) after 16 weeks of treatment|Week 16|Full analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) consists of all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of the trial product(s).||percentage of subjects|||Number
834422|NCT01278160|Secondary|9-point SMPG (Self Measured Plasma Glucose) Profile|A 9-point SMPG profile included measurements before and 120 minutes after start of breakfast, lunch and main evening meal, measurements prior to bedtime and at 2:00 -4:00 a.m., and one before breakfast the following day|Week 16|Full analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) consists of all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of the trial product(s).||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834423|NCT01278160|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) From Baseline||Week 0, week 16|Full analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) consists of all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of the trial product(s). Six patients discontinued trial without any post randomisation HbA1c measurements.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
834424|NCT01278173|Primary|Change From Reference Value in Average RNFL (Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer) Thickness (µm) as Measured by SD-OCT (Spectral Domain-Optical Coherence Tomography)|Mean change from the reference value in average RNFL thickness (µm) as measured by SD-OCT. The reference value was defined as the average of the assessments performed at Visits 1 (baseline), 2 and 3 (first month of dosing). Thinning of the RNFL, that is, a negative change from the reference value, has been associated with ophthalmological disease.|Baseline (Month 0), Month 3, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12|All patients who had received at least one dose of IMP and who had a valid reference value assessment and at least one valid post-reference value assessment. The total number of patients included in the analysis set was 55. The actual number of patients analysed for each time point and eye is presented below (N = x).||µm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834425|NCT01278173|Primary|Mean Change From Reference Value in Field Width as Measured by 30-2 SITA Fast in Field Sensitivity (Mean Deviation - MD in dB)|Mean change from the reference value in 30-2 SITA mean deviation, which was generated using the University of Iowa Visual Field Reading Center (VFRC) normative database and the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) normative database. The reference value was defined as the average of the assessments performed at Visits 1 (baseline), 2 and 3 (first month of dosing). The mean change from the reference value are presented for Months 3, 6, 9 and 12. A negative change from the reference value indicates a decrease in the central visual field.|Baseline (Month 0), Month 3, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12|All patients who had received at least one dose of investigational medicinal product and who had a valid reference value assessment and at least one valid post-reference value assessment. The total number of patients included in the analysis set was 55. The actual number of patients analysed for each time point and eye is presented below (N = x).||dB||Standard Deviation|Mean
834426|NCT01278303|Secondary|Secondary Safety Outcomes - Adverse Events|"Secondary Safety Outcomes
The proportion of patients experiencing any serious or somewhat serious adverse event related to the stent or implant procedure by 24 months follow up, such as: new aortic wall injury within the region of covered CP Stent implantation, stent malposition, stent fracture, aortic wall aneurysms (early or late), or restenosis requiring reintervention, arterial access site injury, bleeding, etc."|2 years|||percentage of participants|||Number
834427|NCT01278303|Secondary|Secondary Efficacy Outcomes - 1 Year|"Secondary Efficacy Outcomes
At One Year: (A) Number of participants with arm-leg systolic blood pressure (SBP) differences <15 mmHg and (B) Number of participants with normal or only mildly elevated SBP, no more than mild arm-leg SBP, no clinically significant residual aortic wall injury AND no worsening in any of these three categories"|1 years|||participants|||Number
834428|NCT01278303|Primary|Study Participants With Grade 4 or 5 in Degree of Aortic Wall Injury (AWI) and/or Aortic Arch Obstruction Without Clinical Worsening|"Severity of Illness Scale (SIS) improvement increase of at least 1 grade from baseline to 12 month follow-up
SIS is divided into 3 conditions & 5 grades of severity: 1 = worst (reserved for AWI) , 5 = best) C1 Upper Extremity Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) 2- > 159 mmHg or any hpn on >2 medications 3- 140-159 mmHg or elevated SBP on >2 medications 4- 130-139 mmHg or normal SBP on >2 medications 5- <130 mmHg on 0-2 meds
C2 Upper Extremity to Lower Extremity SBP difference 2- >59 mmHg 3- 30-59 mmHg 4- 15-29 mmHg 5- <15 mmHg
C3
Aortic Wall Injury severity levels:
Uncontained rupture or large aneurysm
Contained rupture or stable large aneurysm
Small contained rupture or moderate aneurysm
Acute, but stable AWI or small aneurysm
No injury or minor aortic wall irregularity not in need of treatment.
Grades for conditions represent comparable degrees of illness (0 worst, 5 best) -Grade 0 denotes death related to coarctation or study therapy"|Baseline and 12 months|Participants available for analysis at one year||participants|||Number
834429|NCT01278342|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Partial Response (PR) at 8 Months|"Patients who met one of the following criteria at the end of 8 months of treatment were defined as Partial Responders, regardless of the treatment.
Mean 1 hour GH > 2.5 µg/L and < 5 µg/L and either a decrease in IGF-I of at least 50% compared to baseline or IGF-I within normal range.
Mean 1 hour GH < 2.5 µg/L and a decrease in IGF-I of at least 50% compared to baseline and IGF-I outside normal range."|From Baseline to 8 months|Intent-to-Treat population - all participants receiving at least one dose of Sandostatin LAR||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834430|NCT01278342|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) At 3 Months|"A patient was classified as CR if both biochemical parameters were controlled at the end of 3 months of treatment:
Mean 1 hour GH < 2.5µg/L (according to Central Laboratory); and
IGF-I within the Central Laboratory Normal Range (for age and gender)"|From Baseline to 3 months|Intent-to-Treat population - all participants receiving at least one dose of Sandostatin LAR||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834431|NCT01278342|Primary|The Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) at 8 Months|"A patient was classified as a Complete Responder (CR) if both biochemical parameters were controlled at the end of 8 months of treatment:
Mean 1 hour GH < 2.5µg/L (according to Central Laboratory); and
IGF-I within the Central Laboratory Normal Range (for age and gender)."|From Baseline to 8 months|Intent-to-Treat population - all participants receiving at least one dose of Sandostatin LAR||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834439|NCT01278407|Primary|Change From Baseline in Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI-2) Score|The NPI was a questionnaire that quantified psychiatric symptoms and behavioral disorders in dementia. A total of 12 items (the original NPI-10 consisting of 10 behavioral domains: delusions, hallucinations, agitation/aggression, dysphoria, anxiety, euphoria, apathy, disinhibition, irritability/lability, and aberrant motor behavior, supplemented by 2 dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB)-relevant domains of sleep, and cognitive fluctuation [reported as cognitive fluctuation inventory]) were assessed. The score of each item was calculated as frequency (scale: 1=occasionally to 4=very frequently) x Severity (scale: 1=Mild to 3=Severe). The NPI-2 was calculated as the sum of the scores for hallucinations and cognitive fluctuation, to yield a possible total score of 0 to 24. Lower score=less severity. A negative change score from baseline indicated improvement. Data are presented as change from baseline in mean NPI-2 +/- standard deviation.|Week 12 for Confirmatory Phase|Full Analysis Set: Efficacy was analyzed in the full analysis set, including the randomized participants who received the study drug at least once and had valid efficacy assessment data at more than one point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834440|NCT01278407|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) Score|The MMSE was used to measure cognitive impairment. The MMSE can evaluate overall cognitive function, and is widely used for the assessment of cognitive impairment in dementia patients. The questionnaire consists of 11 items, and each item aims to evaluate different cognitive domains such as orientation, memory, attention, and construction. The score ranged from 0 to 30, with a higher score indicating better function. A positive change score indicated improvement from baseline. Data are presented as change from baseline in mean MMSE +/- standard deviation.|Week 12 for Confirmatory Phase|Full Analysis Set: Efficacy was analyzed in the full analysis set, including the randomized participants who received the study drug at least once and had valid efficacy assessment data at more than one point.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834441|NCT01278485|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Body Weight Fears in the 12 Months Prior to Enrollment|On the day of enrollment, participants were asked to rate their fear of gaining weight in the 12 months prior to enrollment using a self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire elicited responses to 3 statements (I worry about gaining weight; I worry that my diabetic treatment makes me gain weight; and I worry about not being able to stabilize my weight) and relied on a scale of 0 to 4, where 0=never, 1=rarely, 2=sometimes, 3=often, and 4=almost always.|Up to 12 Months Prior to Enrollment|All enrolled participants that completed the fear of weight gain questionnaire.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834442|NCT01278485|Secondary|Number of Participants Experiencing a Change in Body Weight in the 12 Months Prior to Enrollment|Participants were asked to rate their weight change experience in the 12 months prior to enrollment as: weight increased, weight decreased, or weight remained stable.|Up to 12 Months Prior to Enrollment|All enrolled participants||Participants|||Number
834474|NCT01278927|Secondary|Survival|Both survival at 6 months and overall survival at last follow-up will be reported. Overall survival is defined as the interval between transplantation and death or last follow-up. Patients alive when the study closes or lost to follow up are censored at the date of last contact.|6 months and 1 year|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834443|NCT01278485|Secondary|Participant Mean Score on the Worry Scale of Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS II) At the Time of Enrollment|Fear about hypoglycemia during 6 months prior to enrollment was evaluated using the Worry Scale of the HFS II. Responses to the 18-item questionnaire were recorded on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0=never, 1=rarely, 2=sometimes, 3=often, 4=almost always. The total score ranges from 0 to 72, with higher scores indicating increasing fear of hypoglycemia.|Day of Enrollment|All enrolled participants that completed the worry scale of the HFS II.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834444|NCT01278485|Primary|Number of Participants With Hemoglobin A1c <7.0% at the Time of Enrollment|Participant serum samples were collected after an overnight fast to determine the hemoglobin A1c level. Hemoglobin A1c is a measure of the percentage of glycated hemoglobin in the blood and provides an indication of participant blood glucose control in the 2 to 3 months prior to the evaluation.|Day of Enrollment|All enrolled participants with a hemoglobin A1c measurement collected on the day of enrollment.||Participants|||Number
834445|NCT01278485|Secondary|Participant Mean Score on the Self-Reported Adherence and Barriers Questionnaire At the Time of Enrollment|The self-reported adherence and barriers questionnaire to measure treatment compliance asked participants to rate their responses to 5 questions: How often do you take your diabetes medicines exactly as your healthcare provider prescribes them?; During the past 4 weeks, how often were you unsure about some of the things your doctor suggested you do for your diabetes?; During the past 4 weeks, how often were you unable to do what was necessary to follow your doctor's treatment plans for your diabetes?; During the past 4 weeks, how often were you bothered by side effects from your medicines?; and During the past 4 weeks, how often did you have problems getting your prescriptions filled? Participants responded using a scale of 1 to 5, where 1=always, 2=usually, 3=sometimes, 4=rarely, and 5=never.|Day of Enrollment|All enrolled participants that completed a questionnaire on the day of enrollment.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834446|NCT01278485|Secondary|Participant Mean Score on the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) At the Time of Enrollment|The TSQM is a treatment satisfaction questionnaire containing 14 items covering the following dimensions: side effects, effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction. Participants were asked to respond in a yes or no fashion, or by using a 5- or 7-point Likert scale. The score for each dimension ranges from 0 to 100, with a higher score expressing a better quality of life.|Day of Enrollment|All enrolled participants that completed the TSQM on the day of enrollment.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834447|NCT01278485|Secondary|Participant Mean Score on the EuroQol Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS) Quality-of-Life Questionnaire At the Time of Enrollment|Participant health status was self-reported in 5 domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) and was analyzed by using visual analog scale (VAS) which records participant responses on a scale of 0 (poor health) to 100 (excellent health).|Day of Enrollment|All enrolled participants with a completed EQ-VAS questionnaire.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834448|NCT01278485|Secondary|Participant Mean Score on the EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) Quality-of-Life Questionnaire At the Time of Enrollment|The EQ-5D is a questionnaire that assesses participant quality of life in 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each domain has 3 levels: no problems, some problems, extreme problems for which participants are asked to self-rate their experience. The EQ-5D total score ranges from -0.171 (worst health state) to 1 (perfect health state) and 1 reflects the best outcome.|Day of Enrollment|All enrolled participants with a completed EQ-5D questionnaire.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834449|NCT01278485|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing Mild, Moderate, Severe, or Very Severe Hypoglycemic Episodes in the 6 Months Prior to Enrollment|At the time of enrollment, participants were asked to rate their hypoglycemic episodes in the last 6 months as mild, moderate, severe, or very severe. Participants were able to select more than one category.|Up to 6 Months Prior to Enrollment|All enrolled participants that experienced hypoglycemia in the prior 6 months.||Participants|||Number
834450|NCT01278485|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing Hypoglycemic Episodes in the 6 Months Prior to Enrollment|The participant experience of low blood sugar (hypoglycemia) questionnaire was used to evaluate participants' experience of hypoglycemia during the previous 6 months. Participants were asked to record whether they experienced hypoglycemia symptoms (yes/no) and to record the severity of those symptoms as mild, moderate, severe, or very severe.|Up to 6 Months Prior to Enrollment|All enrolled participants.||Participants|||Number
834451|NCT01278615|Primary|Disease Control Rate (Complete Response [CR], Partial Response [PR], and Stable Disease [SD]) in Patients Treated With Selumetinib|Estimates of the disease control rate with the exact two-sided 95% confidence intervals. Response was measured utilizing “Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma Response Criteria”. These criteria are based upon the criteria from the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma, (Cheson et al.), Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2007, Vol. 25:579-586. Using these criteria, ‘disease control rate’ encompassed patients who had either a CR, PR, and SD.|Up to 3 years|||percentage of disease control||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834452|NCT01278615|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure|The Kaplan-Meier procedure will be used to characterize the survivorship function. Median time-to-event and the corresponding two-sided 95% confidence intervals will be provided.|Time from study entry to treatment failure, defined as lymphoma progression or withdrawal from treatment due to adverse events, assessed up to 3 years. Patients who die without progression while still on therapy will be censored as of the time of death.|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834453|NCT01278615|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|The Kaplan-Meier procedure will be used to characterize the survivorship function. Median time-to-event and the corresponding two-sided 95% confidence intervals will be provided.|Time from entry onto study until lymphoma progression or death from any cause, assessed up to 3 years|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834454|NCT01278615|Secondary|Overall Survival|The Kaplan-Meier procedure will be used to characterize the survivorship function. Median time-to-death and the corresponding two-sided 95% confidence intervals will be provided.|Date of study entry to the date of death, assessed up to 3 years|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834455|NCT01278615|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events Graded Using the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0|Percentage of patients experiencing any grade 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly attributed to the study drug. (Additional adverse event reporting will appear in the AE outcomes module.)|Up to 3 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834457|NCT01278615|Primary|Response Rate (Complete Response [CR] and Partial Response [PR]) in Patients Treated With Selumetinib|Estimates of the response rate based on best response (CR and PR) with the exact two-sided 95% confidence intervals. Response for this lymphoma clinical study was measured utilizing “Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma Response Criteria”. These criteria are based upon the criteria from the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma, (Cheson et al.), Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2007, Vol. 25:579-586.|Up to 3 years|||percentage of response||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834458|NCT01278745|Secondary|Post-transplant Safety Outcomes Among Participants: Safety and Tolerability of Rituximab|Defined as participants that experienced at least one adverse event that was possibly, probably, or definitely related to the study drug (i.e., Rituximab or Placebo). Serious adverse events were used to evaluate this endpoint and the attribution was based on the DAIT Medical Monitor's assessment.|Transplantation through end of study, up to 1 year post transplantation|Randomized participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
834459|NCT01278745|Secondary|Number of Participants With Post-transplant Incidence of PTLD|The number of participants experiencing at least one post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) occurrence during this trial. Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder is an uncontrolled proliferation of B cell lymphocytes latently infected with Epstein-Barr virus.|Transplantation through end of study, up to 1 year post transplantation.|Randomized participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
834460|NCT01278745|Secondary|Number of Participants With Post-transplant Serious Infections Requiring Intravenous Antimicrobial Therapy|Number of participants experiencing at least one serious infection requiring intravenous antimicrobial therapy which is used to kill the growth of microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi, or protozoans.|Transplantation through end of study, up to 1 year post transplantation.|Randomized participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
834461|NCT01278745|Secondary|Number of Participants With Development of Angiographically Evident Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy|Cardiac allograft vasculopathy is an aggressive form of atherosclerosis that is characterized by the development of fibrosis affecting cardiac arteries that result in concentric narrowing of the arteries and, ultimately allograft failure. Development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy can be diagnosed via an angiograph which is an X-ray of the cardiac arteries by injecting a radiopaque substance such as iodine.|1 year|Randomized participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
834462|NCT01278745|Secondary|Number of Participants With Episodes of Rejection Associated With Hemodynamic Compromise (HDC)|The number of participants that experienced at least one episode of rejection associated with hemodynamic compromise (HDC). Rejection associated with HDC is when there is insufficient blood flow to the transplanted heart in association with acute rejection found in a biopsy. Local biopsies were used for this outcome measure.|6 to 12 months|Randomized participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
834463|NCT01278745|Secondary|Incidence of Any Treated Rejection|The number of participants who were treated by their local physician for any type of rejection including, but not limited to cellular rejection and antibody- mediated rejection (AMR) of the transplanted heart regardless of the presence of a biopsy.|6 to 12 months|Randomized participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
834464|NCT01278745|Secondary|Incidence of Cellular Rejection|Cellular Rejection refers to the organ recipient's immune system recognizing a transplanted organ as foreign and mounting a response to it via cellular mechanisms. Cellular rejection was defined as a biopsy which met The International Society for Heart & Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) criteria to be graded as 1R or greater rejection and was determined by a single, central pathology laboratory|6 to 12 months|Randomized participants with at least one centrally read heart biopsy||Participants|||Count of Participants
834465|NCT01278745|Secondary|Incidence of AMR|The number of participants who experienced antibody- mediated rejection (AMR). Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) occurs when the subject develops antibodies directed against the transplanted heart. This was assessed based on local pathology biopsy reads.|6 to 12 months|Randomized participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
834466|NCT01278745|Secondary|Incidence of BPAR (Any Grade)|The number of subjects who experienced any grade of biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR) within the clinical trial. Biopsy proven acute rejection is when an examination of tissue removed from the transplanted organ indicates that the subject’s immune system is trying to reject the graft. BPAR was defined as a biopsy which met The International Society for Heart & Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) criteria to be graded as 1R or greater rejection and was determined by a single, central pathology laboratory.|6 to 12 months|Randomized participants with at least one centrally read heart biopsy||Participants|||Count of Participants
834467|NCT01278745|Secondary|Number of Episodes of Biopsy Proven Acute Rejection (BPAR) of Any Grade Per Participant|The number of times a participant experienced biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR). Biopsy proven acute rejection is when an examination of tissue removed from the transplanted organ indicates that the subject’s immune system is trying to reject the graft. BPAR was defined as a biopsy that met the International Society for Heart & Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) criteria to be graded as 1R or greater rejection and was determined by a single, central pathology laboratory.|6 to 12 months|Randomized participants with at least one centrally read heart biopsy||Participants|||Count of Participants
834468|NCT01278745|Secondary|Re-transplantation or Re-listed for Transplantation|Re-transplantation is defined as the receipt of a subsequent heart transplant and re-listed for transplantation is being listed back on the heart transplant list to be re-transplanted.|6 to 12 months|Randomized participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
834469|NCT01278745|Secondary|Death|Participants who died within 12 months post-transplant|12 months|Randomized subjects||Participants|||Count of Participants
834470|NCT01278745|Primary|Change in Percent Atheroma Volume (PAV)|Nominal or noticeable change, bad or good, from baseline to 1 year in percent atheroma volume (PAV) which is a measure of the degree of coronary arterial obstruction due to host alloimmune processes measured by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in a target coronary artery. Thus a decrease in PAV would be an indicator of less obstruction and a better outcome.|Baseline, 1 year|Randomized participants with available data at year one||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
834471|NCT01278797|Secondary|Time of Maximum Concentration of Amlodipine (TMAX)|Time of maximum measured amlodipine concentration over the zero to 72 hour sampling period|Day 1, Day 22|Analysis Set includes all randomized participants who completed the trial||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
834472|NCT01278797|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Amlodipine||Day 1, Day 22|Analysis Set includes all randomized participants who completed the trial||nanograms/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834478|NCT01278927|Secondary|The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)|The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) is a widely used seven item self-report measure of sleep patterns and difficulties. A modified version will be used to obtain self-reports of the following for the past week: sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep efficiency, and use of sleeping medications. The scale ranges from 0 - 21, where a higher score reflects worse sleep quality.|100 days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834479|NCT01278927|Secondary|Cancer and Treatment Distress (CTXD)|Cancer and treatment distress will be measured by the acute version of the Cancer and Treatment Distress (CTXD) scale, a 27 item validated measure of distress with domains of Uncertainty, Health Burden, Family Strain, Identity and Managing the Medical System used extensively in HCT studies. The scale ranges from 0 - 3, where a higher score reflects more distress.|100 days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834480|NCT01278927|Primary|Functional Status|To determine whether exercise or stress management improves self-reported physical and mental functioning compared to standard care at 100 days post hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) using evaluated patients. The Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS) of the SF-36 will be the primary endpoint measures of functional status. Raw scores are converted to a standard metric (0-100), with higher scores being indicative of a better health state.|100 days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834481|NCT01278927|Secondary|Symptoms|Patients will complete the MOS 36-Item Short Form (SF-36), a widely used self-report measure designed to assess perceived health and functioning, contains eight scales: Physical Functioning (PF), Role-Physical (R-P); Bodily Pain (BP); General Health (GH); Vitality (VT); Social Functioning (SF); Mental Health (MH); and Role-Emotional (R-E). Scales are comprised of different numbers of items and use a variety of rating formats. Raw scores are converted to a standard metric (0-100), with higher scores being indicative of a better health state.|100 days|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834482|NCT01278953|Primary|Incidence of Device-related Early-onset Primary Serious Adverse Events|Includes serious adverse events occurring within 7 days of the index procedure or hospital discharge, whichever is later, and diagnosed at any time during the follow-up period.|12 months|||participants|||Number
834483|NCT01278953|Primary|Freedom From Recurrence of Symptomatic Atrial Fibrillation, Atrial Tachycardia or Atrial Flutter|Includes both acute success (successful electrical isolation of all pulmonary veins) and chronic success. Re-treatment for AF with ablation or the use of Class I or Class III antiarrhythmic drugs after a 3 month blanking period constitute a treatment failure.|12 months|||participants|||Number
834484|NCT01279044|Secondary|Number of Condom-protected Anal Intercourse Events|"The outcome measure data shows the rate of change in the mean value of the number of condom-protected anal intercourse (UAI) events. Behaviors were self-reported at each study visit using during the past 3 months as the recall period. Study visits took place at baseline, 3 month, and 6 month timepoints.
Serodiscordant defined as having partner of discordant or of unknown HIV serostatus."|Self-reported behavior during past 3 months|||Self reported behavior in past 3 months|||Number
834485|NCT01279044|Secondary|Number of Receptive UAI Events|"The outcome measure data shows the rate of change in the mean value of the number of receptive unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) events. Behaviors were self-reported at each study visit using during the past 3 months as the recall period. Study visits took place at baseline, 3 month, and 6 month timepoints."|Self-reported behavior during past 3 months|||Self reported behavior in past 3 months|||Number
834486|NCT01279044|Secondary|Number of Instertive UAI Events|"The outcome measure data shows the rate of change in the mean value of number of instertive unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) events. Behaviors were self-reported at each study visit using during the past 3 months as the recall period. Study visits took place at baseline, 3 month, and 6 month timepoints."|Self-reported behavior during past 3 months|||Self reported behavior in past 3 months|||Number
834487|NCT01279044|Secondary|Number of Serodiscordant Unprotected Anal Intercourse (SDUAI) Events|"The outcome measure data shows the rate of change in the mean value of number of serodiscordant unprotected anal intercourse events. Behaviors were self-reported at each study visit using during the past 3 months as the recall period. Study visits took place at baseline, 3 month, and 6 month timepoints.
Serodiscordant defined as having partner of discordant or of unknown HIV serostatus."|Self-reported behavior during past 3 months|||Events in past 3 months|||Number
834488|NCT01279044|Primary|Unprotected Anal Intercourse Episodes With Three Most Recent Sex Partners at Each Follow-up Visit, Exclusive of Primary HIV-negative Partners.|"The outcome measure data shows the rate of change in the mean value of total unprotected anal intercourse episodes with three most recent sex partners over time. Behaviors were self-reported at each study visit using during the past 3 months as the recall period. Study visits took place at baseline, 3 month, and 6 month timepoints."|Self-reported behavior during past 3 months|||Episodes in past 3 months|||Number
834489|NCT01279044|Primary|Total Unprotected Anal Intercourse Partners|"The outcome measure data shows the rate of change in the mean value of total unprotected anal intercourse partners over time. Behaviors were self-reported at each study visit using during the past 3 months as the recall period. Study visits took place at baseline, 3 month, and 6 month timepoints."|Self-reported behavior during past 3 months|||Partners in past 3 months|||Number
834490|NCT01279044|Primary|Total Unprotected Anal Intercourse Events (Exclusive of Those Events With a Primary HIV-negative Partner)|"The outcome measure data shows the rate of change in the mean value in the number of total unprotected anal intercourse events over time. Behaviors were self-reported at each study visit using during the past 3 months as the recall period. Study visits took place at baseline, 3 month, and 6 month timepoints."|Self-reported behavior during past 3 months|||Self reported events in past 3 months|||Number
834491|NCT01279070|Secondary|Psychiatric Symptoms|The Spanish validation of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) was used for measuring positive, negative and general symptomatology. Total raw scoring obtained through the sum of the raw scores for each subscale was considered (min. 30–max. 210) with a score of 30 representing an absence of psychiatric symptoms.|Change from baseline in psychiatric symptoms scales at 40 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834492|NCT01279070|Secondary|Psychiatric Symptoms|The Spanish validation of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) was used for measuring positive, negative and general symptomatology. Total raw scoring obtained through the sum of the raw scores for each subscale was considered (min. 30–max. 210) with a score of 30 representing an absence of psychiatric symptoms.|Change from baseline in psychiatric symptoms scales at 16 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834493|NCT01279070|Secondary|Psychosocial Functioning|"The Spanish validation of the Life Skills Profile (LSP)was used. This scale measures functionality in daily life activities such as self-care, social behavior and autonomy. Raw scoring was used for the various subscales which are summarized for the total (min. 39–max. 156) with a higher score indicating a better result.
The 5 subscales are: Self-care, Non-turbulence, Social contact, Communication and Responsibility. We used the Spanish validation of the Social Functioning Scale (SFS)for measuring social behavior and relationships, autonomy, employment-occupation and leisure. Raw scoring was used for each subscale and for total score (min. 0–max. 223) with a higher score indicating a better result. All 7 subscales were administered: social engagement/ withdrawal, interpersonal behavior, independence-competence, independence-performance, pro-social activities, recreation and employment/ occupation."|Change from baseline in social functioning scales at 40 weeks|The sample size required was calculated according to the main study objective which consisted of achieving an improvement in social functioning according to the Living Skills Profile (LSP) scale. It was estimated that a sample of 27 patients per group would have a power of 80% at a significance level of 5% to detect these differences.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834494|NCT01279070|Secondary|Psychosocial Functioning|"The Spanish validation of the Life Skills Profile (LSP)was used. This scale measures functionality in daily life activities such as self-care, social behavior and autonomy. Raw scoring was used for the various subscales which are summarized for the total (min. 39–max. 156) with a higher score indicating a better result.
The 5 subscales are: Self-care, Non-turbulence, Social contact, Communication and Responsibility. We used the Spanish validation of the Social Functioning Scale (SFS)for measuring social behavior and relationships, autonomy, employment-occupation and leisure. Raw scoring was used for each subscale and for total score (min. 0–max. 223) with a higher score indicating a better result. All 7 subscales were administered: social engagement/ withdrawal, interpersonal behavior, independence-competence, independence-performance, pro-social activities, recreation and employment/ occupation."|Change from baseline in social functioning scales at 16 weeks|The sample size required was calculated according to the main study objective which consisted of achieving an improvement in social functioning according to the Living Skills Profile (LSP) scale. It was estimated that a sample of 27 patients per group would have a power of 80% at a significance level of 5% to detect these differences.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834495|NCT01279070|Primary|Executive Function|"Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome (BADS) (Wilson et al., 1996). This scale evaluates cognitive flexibility, inhibition of impulsive responses, planning and organization, working memory and time-estimation capacity. All subscales (Rule shift cards, Action Program, Key search, Temporal judgement, Zoo map and Six elements) were administered. We used subscales raw scores which run from 0 to 4. The subscales' raw score is summarized and converted to standardized total score which run (min.
12–max. 129). A higher score indicates better performance."|Change from baseline in executive functioning at 40 weeks|The sample size required was calculated according to the main study objective which consisted of achieving an improvement in social functioning according to the Living Skills Profile (LSP) scale. It was estimated that a sample of 27 patients per group would have a power of 80% at a significance level of 5% to detect these differences.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834496|NCT01279070|Primary|Executive Function|"Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome (BADS). This scale evaluates cognitive flexibility, inhibition of impulsive responses, planning and organization, working memory and time-estimation capacity. All subscales (Rule shift cards, Action Program, Key search, Temporal judgment, Zoo map and Six elements) were administered. We used subscales raw scores which run from 0 to 4. The subscales' raw score is summarized and converted to standardized total score which run (min.
12–max. 129). A higher score indicates better performance."|Change from baseline in executive function at 16 weeks (post-treatment)|The sample size required was calculated according to the main study objective which consisted of achieving an improvement in social functioning according to the Living Skills Profile (LSP) scale. It was estimated that a sample of 27 patients per group would have a power of 80% at a significance level of 5% to detect these differences.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834497|NCT01279109|Secondary|Social Network|Number of discussion partners within the intervention group. Participants were asked to identify by name any program participants with whom they had spoken about their pregnancy or pregnancy-related health behaviors.|2 times over 12 weeks (Week 6, Week 12)|59 participants in the intervention group completed at least one wave of social network data collection. Control group participants did not have protocol-specified group sessions to evaluate.||number of discussion partner ties||Standard Deviation|Mean
834498|NCT01279109|Primary|Gestational Weight Gain|"Total weight gain during pregnancy extracted from medical record, relative to the 2009 Institute of Medicine (IOM) Weight Gain Recommendations for Pregnancy.
(Reference: Institute of Medicine (US). Weight gain during pregnancy: reexamining the guidelines. Washington, DC. National Academies Press; 2009. 2009 National Academy of Sciences.)"|Duration of pregnancy|Analysis is presented within baseline BMI categories and overall. The Overall Number of Participants Analyzed represents those study participants for whom medical records could be abstracted in the trial (87/135).||Participants|||Count of Participants
834499|NCT01279200|Primary|Pregnancy Success Rate|Percentage of women in each arm who became pregnant within the study time frame.|3 menstrual/treatment cycles (approximately 28-33 days each)|||percentage of participants|||Number
834500|NCT01279200|Secondary|Time to Conception, Measured in Cycles|Cycles means treatment/menstrual cycles, approximately 28-33 days.|3 menstrual/treatment cycles, or upon conception, whichever comes first|Numbers of participants analyzed changes from 8 with kits and 4 with ultrasound (enrolled) because time to conception can be measured only for those who conceived, so the 6 and 1 participants analyzed here are those who were successful in getting pregnant.||menstrual cycles||Full Range|Mean
834501|NCT01279265|Secondary|Fecal Calprotectin|Test intestinal inflammation in the infants. Calprotectin is made by white blood cells called neutrophils. The number of neutrophils in the intestine is reflected by the fecal calprotectin level.|90 days|||µg/g (feces)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834502|NCT01279265|Secondary|Fecal Microbiota|Analyze and identify bacteria in the stool of the subjects. We will use pyrosequencing to characterize the bacteria colonizing the stool. We will measure diversity by Shannon's diversity index in the two groups.|90 days|||Shannon's diversity index value||Standard Deviation|Mean
835074|NCT01282801|Secondary|Cmax of O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Informational comparison of Cmax values for the metabolite O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834503|NCT01279265|Primary|Daily Average Crying and Fussing Duration According to Barr Diary Records|The parent or guardian will complete a Barr diary to measure crying and fussing times of colicky infants . It is a daily timeline that records the number of minutes in five minute increments with fussiness and crying. The average colicky infant cries and fusses is more than 3 hours daily. If infants surpasses the 3 hours for more than three days (not consecutive) and are less than 3 months of age, they are considered to have colic.|90 days|||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834504|NCT01279317|Primary|Postprandial Glycemic Incremental Area Under the Curve|area under the plasma glucose concentration curve, above the baseline plasma glucose, measured over 2 hr following ingestion of a the intervention beverages|2 hr|all subjects completed study and are included in analysis||mmol/L / 2hr||Standard Error|Mean
834505|NCT01279447|Primary|Post op Pain Score|immediate postop pain score, Visual Analog Scale. Evaluates pain on scale from 0-10. 0=no pain. 10=maximum pain.|0 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834506|NCT01279564|Primary|Duration of Endotracheal Intubation|Time between introducing the laryngoscope and inflation of tube's cuff|The induction of general anesthesia, on the operating day (first day)|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
834507|NCT01279564|Primary|In the Present Study we Will Compare the Performance Parameters of Intubation Using Etview Tracheoscopic Ventilation Tube - TVT to the Standard Tube||1 year||||||
834508|NCT01280110|Secondary|Macular Thickness|Macular thickness will be measured with an Optical coherence tomography (OCT). Measures 5% under the normal population according to the OCT software will be considered break in the blood-retina barrier.|Baseline, 15 days and 30 days.|Statiscal power of 80%||μm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834509|NCT01280110|Primary|Aqueous Humor Flare|Aqueous humor flare indicates the degree of a break in the blood-aqueous barrier. It is objectively measured with a Laser flare meter.|Baseline, 15 days and 30 days.|Statiscal power of 80%.||photons/msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
834510|NCT01280123|Secondary|Change in the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15)From Baseline to 44 Weeks|The Geriatric Depression Scale - 15 is a short 15 yes or no question instrument for assessing depression in the elderly. It has been found to be particularly useful in assessing depression in Parkinson's Disease. A score of 0 to 5 is normal. A score greater than 5 suggests depression.|44 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834511|NCT01280123|Secondary|Change in the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (DRS-2)From Baseline to 44 Weeks|The Mattis dementia rating scale is a psychometric instrument designed to assess the extent and nature of dementia. Mattis Dementia Rating scale (DRS-2) raw score is the sum of 5 raw sub-scores (attention has possible 37 points, initiation/perseveration has possible 37 points, construction has possible 6 points, conceptualization has possible 39 points, memory has possible 25 points). Total range is 0-144. Higher scores are better.|44 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834512|NCT01280123|Secondary|Change in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) From Baseline to 44 Weeks|"The Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) is a short, 39 item measure of quality of life in subjects with Parkinson's disease. The questionnaire covers 8 aspects of quality of life: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognitions, communication and bodily discomfort.
The total score ranges from 0 (never have difficulty) to 100 (always have difficulty). Lower scores reflect better quality of life."|44 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834513|NCT01280123|Secondary|Change in Schwab and England Scale From Baseline to 44 Weeks|The modified Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living is a single question ranging from 0-100% with anchors for each 10% interval. Higher scores are better (100% completely independent- 0% vegetative).|44 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834514|NCT01280123|Secondary|Change in Ambulatory Capacity From Baseline to 44 Weeks|"This is the sum of the 5 UPDRS questions regarding ambulatory capacity: falling, freezing, walking, gait, postural stability.
Ambulatory Capacity is calculated as the sum of items 13-15, 29, 30 of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). It ranges from 0-20. Higher scores are worse. Change is 44 weeks - baseline."|44 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834515|NCT01280123|Primary|Change in Total Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Score From Baseline to 44 Weeks|"Change in total UPDRS score from baseline to 44 weeks (in subjects treated with rasagiline 1 mg/day or selegiline 10 mg/day).
The Total UPDRS is the sum of parts I, II, and III. The possible range of the total UPDRS is from 0-176. Higher values indicate worse outcomes.
The change is 44 weeks - baseline."|44 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
834516|NCT01280266|Secondary|Dorsal-digital-difference.|The temperature difference between finger tips and dorsum of same hand. range 0 - unlimited in degree celcius.|baseline and 4 weeks|||degree celcius.||Standard Deviation|Mean
834517|NCT01280266|Secondary|Time-averaged Peak Velocity (cm/Sec)|changes in the averaged blood flow (Time-averaged peak velocity) Blood flow in cm/sec 0 - unlimited.|baseline and 4 weeks|||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
834518|NCT01280266|Secondary|Change in Peak Systolic Flow (cm/Sec)|"Change in digital artery flow velocity in proper palmar digital artery in cm/sec.
0-unlimited"|baseline and 4 weeks|||cm/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
834519|NCT01280266|Secondary|Change in Digital Ulcer Number|0 - unlimited. Number of digital ulcers in all fingers are counted by the investigators and recorded at each visit. The number of ulcers in all fingers indirectly reflect the extent of critical ischemia. As such. the decrease in digital ulcer number reflects positive response to treatment (=better blood flow), whereas the increase ulcer numbers indicates worsening finger ischemia from baseline.|baseline and 4 weeks|||Digital ulcers||Standard Deviation|Mean
834520|NCT01280266|Secondary|Change in Physician's Global Assessment on Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)|"Physician's global assessment (PGA) on VAS assesses the overall condition of the patient. The scale ranges from 0 - 10, with 0 being good and 10 bad. As such, change in the GPA measures the change in the patient's condition from the baseline.
negative value (decrease in value) means improvement."|at 0 (baseline) and 4 weeks (after treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834521|NCT01280266|Secondary|Change in Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)|Ordinal scale 0-10 0 good 10 bad|0 and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834522|NCT01280266|Secondary|Change in the RP Duration|Change in the average RP duration in minutes (min) per attack. 0 -- unlimited|baseline and 4 weeks|||min per attack||Standard Deviation|Mean
835185|NCT01270958|Primary|Glucose Value at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Glucose is a simple sugar used as a source of energy for cellular metabolism. Normal range: 3.9-6.4 mmol/L.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
834523|NCT01280266|Secondary|Change in Raynaud's Condition Score (RCS)|"change in the RCS. RCS combines daily activty, frequency, duration and severity as well as impact of RP attack (Measuring disease activity and functional status in patients with scleroderma and Raynaud's phenomenon, Merkel et al,Arthritis Rheum. 2002 Sep;46(9):2410-20).
Range 0-10 ordinal scale 0..good 10.. bad"|baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834524|NCT01280266|Primary|RP Attacks Per Day|Change in RP frequency after amlodipine and udenafil number of RP attack per day 0 -- unlimited.|baselin and 4 weeks|14 patients in UA arm + 12 patients in AU arm||attacks per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
834525|NCT01270126|Secondary|Other Visual and EEG Parameters|Secondary outcome parameters included DA in static and kinetic perimetry, reaction time (RT) in HRP, visual acuity (VA), contrast vision, and EEG power spectra.|Nov 2006 - Dec 2010||||||
834526|NCT01270126|Primary|Detection Accuracy (DA) Change in Percent Over Baseline Within Defective Visual Field Sectors|Central visual fields were assessed with computer-based high-resolution perimetry (HRP). Based on such plots, areas of the visual field were characterized as intact, partially damaged or absolutely impaired (blind). Detection accuracy (DA) change in percent above baseline within defective visual field sectors was defined as the primary outcome criterion.|Initial diagnostics (baseline), Post diagnostics|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
834527|NCT01270139|Secondary|Mean Number of Membrane Defects on Membrane of Red Blood Cells|Mean number of membrane defects on membrane of red blood cells calculated with atomic force microscopy (AFM) in random patients. An amendment to the protocol was approved on August 29th 2012 with a decision to extend a 1-year study for another 4 years with the assessment of the 5-year clinical outcomes both retro- and prospectively.|at 60 months follow-up|The analysis was undergone in eligible random evaluable patients. Only one random patient with exposure of gold nanoparticles was selected for a trial-balloon analysis of cytotoxicity. The blood was collected and split blindly into two ex-vivo experiments with AFM microscopy (see description).||Mean number of membrane defects per cell|Area of blood sample per patient||Number
834528|NCT01270139|Secondary|TVR (Target Vessel Revascularization)|TVR (target vessel revascularization) reflects per cent of patients with TVR. An amendment to the protocol was approved on August 29th 2012 with a decision to extend a 1-year study for another 4 years with the assessment of the 5-year clinical outcomes both retro- and prospectively.|at 60 months follow-up|The per-treatment-evaluable analysis was performed at 60 months.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834529|NCT01270139|Secondary|TLR (Target Lesion Revascularization)|TLR (target lesion revascularization) reflects per cent of patients with TLR. An amendment to the protocol was approved on August 29th 2012 with a decision to extend a 1-year study for another 4 years with the assessment of the 5-year clinical outcomes both retro- and prospectively.|at 60 months follow-up|The per-treatment-evaluable analysis was performed at 60 months.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834530|NCT01270139|Secondary|Cardiac Death|Cardiac death includes per cent of patients passed away due to any cardiac death. An amendment to the protocol was approved on August 29th 2012 with a decision to extend a 1-year study for another 4 years with the assessment of the 5-year clinical outcomes both retro- and prospectively.|at 60 months follow-up|The per-treatment-evaluable analysis was performed at 60 months.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834531|NCT01270139|Secondary|MACE|MACE includes per cent of patients with cardiac death. STEMI (ST-elevation myocardial infarction), non-STEMI, and TLR (target lesion revascularization). An amendment to the protocol was approved on August 29th 2012 with a decision to extend a 1-year study for another 4 years with the assessment of the 5-year clinical outcomes both retro- and prospectively.|at 60 months follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis was performed at 60 months.||Percentage of participants with MACE|||Number
834532|NCT01270139|Secondary|Minimal Lumen Diameter|Minimal lumen diameter (MLD, mm)|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834533|NCT01270139|Secondary|Per Cent of Calcium|IVUS (intravascular ultrasound) and IVUS-VH (virtual histology) images were acquired simultaneously with a phased array 20 MHz intravascular ultrasound catheter EagleEye (Volcano Co., Rancho Cordova, CA, USA) with motorized pull-back at a constant speed of 0.5 mm/s. Four tissue components (necrotic core - red; dense calcium - white; fibrous - green; and fibro-fatty - light green or yellow) were identified with autoregressive classification systems. For each cross section stent struts were detected as areas of apparent dense calcium and necrotic core. All IVUS analysis was performed offline by a CoreLab of the Ural Institute of Cardiology.|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||Percentage of tissue||Standard Deviation|Mean
834534|NCT01270139|Secondary|Per Cent of Necrotic Core|IVUS (intravascular ultrasound) and IVUS-VH (virtual histology) images were acquired simultaneously with a phased array 20 MHz intravascular ultrasound catheter EagleEye (Volcano Co., Rancho Cordova, CA, USA) with motorized pull-back at a constant speed of 0.5 mm/s. Four tissue components (necrotic core - red; dense calcium - white; fibrous - green; and fibro-fatty - light green or yellow) were identified with autoregressive classification systems. For each cross section stent struts were detected as areas of apparent dense calcium and necrotic core. All IVUS analysis was performed offline by a CoreLab of the Ural Institute of Cardiology.|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||Percentage of tissue||Standard Deviation|Mean
834535|NCT01270139|Secondary|Per Cent of Fibrous Component|IVUS (intravascular ultrasound) and IVUS-VH (virtual histology) images were acquired simultaneously with a phased array 20 MHz intravascular ultrasound catheter EagleEye (Volcano Co., Rancho Cordova, CA, USA) with motorized pull-back at a constant speed of 0.5 mm/s. Four tissue components (necrotic core – red; dense calcium – white; fibrous – green; and fibro-fatty – light green or yellow) were identified with autoregressive classification systems. For each cross section stent struts were detected as areas of apparent dense calcium and necrotic core. All IVUS analysis was performed offline by a CoreLab of the Ural Institute of Cardiology.|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||Percentage of tissue||Standard Deviation|Mean
834536|NCT01270139|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization|Target lesion revascularization, per cent|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||Percentage of participants|||Number
834577|NCT01270620|Primary|Trail Making Part B|Trail Making Test is an executive measure of sequencing and cognitive flexibility. Trail B is a more difficult cognitive flexibility task requiring the subject to follow a sequential pattern while shifting cognitive sets and reflects executive functioning, although other cognitive abilities, such as psychomotor speed and visual scanning, are necessary for successful completion of the task. The scoring for this test is the time in seconds required for completion of the test|Change > 20% from baseline to 48 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
834537|NCT01270139|Secondary|Per Cent Atheroma Volume|Per cent atheroma volume (PAV, plaque burden, %). Quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and Intravascular Ultrasound (IVUS) were performed pre-, post-procedure and at 12-month follow-up after a bolus infusion of i.c. nitrate. QCA was undergone with the CAAS II analysis system (Pie Medical B.V., Maastricht, The Netherlands) with analysis of different QCA parameters such as minimal lumen diameter, maximum lumen diameter, reference diameter, diameter stenosis, lesion length, percent atheroma volume (PAV), total atheroma volume (TAV), and lumen volume.|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||Percentage of tissue||Standard Deviation|Mean
834538|NCT01270139|Secondary|Coronary Vasomotion - Mean Lumen Diameter After Infusion of Acetylcholine 10-6 M|Coronary vasomotion was assessed with QCA. End-diastolic images of coronary arteries were evaluated at baseline, after intravascular infusion of acetylcholine (through a microcatheter at increasing doses up to 10-8, 10-7, 10-6 M with a washout period of at least five minutes between each dose), and after nitroglycerine application following acetylcholine (100 µg orally). In all patients, measurements were performed in two segments on site of intervention while 960 seconds. The artery diameter was calibrated against the contrast-filled tip of the catheter. Vasoconstriction to acetylcholine was defined as a 3% change of the mean lumen diameter after infusion of the maximal dose of acetylcholine. An investigator blinded to treatment group performed all measurements.|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834539|NCT01270139|Secondary|Late Definite Thrombosis|Late definite thrombosis rate|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||Percentage of participants|||Number
834540|NCT01270139|Secondary|Restenosis Rate|Restenosis (stenosis>50%) rate|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||Percentage of patients|||Number
834541|NCT01270139|Secondary|Event Free Survival|The Kaplan-Meier analysis of the cardiac event-free survival (failure-free survival). The end point in this study was cardiac event-free survival during follow-up, starting at randomization. Cardiac events included cardiac death, myocardial infarction and unintended revascularization. Cardiac death was defined as sudden death, death after the onset of symptoms suggestive of cardiac ischemia and death due to heart failure. Noncardiac death was defined as death due to all other causes. Myocardial infarction was defined as an increase in cardiac enzymes or new pathologic Q-waves on the ECG, or both. Unintended revascularization was defined as PTCA or CABG performed due to worsening of the patient’s clinical condition, rather than the PTCA or CABG assigned by the revascularization team when patient management was determined.|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||Percentage of survived patients|||Number
834542|NCT01270139|Secondary|Per Cent of Fibro-fatty Component|IVUS (intravascular ultrasound) and IVUS-VH (virtual histology) images were acquired simultaneously with a phased array 20 MHz intravascular ultrasound catheter EagleEye (Volcano Co., Rancho Cordova, CA, USA) with motorized pull-back at a constant speed of 0.5 mm/s. Four tissue components (necrotic core - red; dense calcium - white; fibrous - green; and fibro-fatty - light green or yellow) were identified with autoregressive classification systems. For each cross section stent struts were detected as areas of apparent dense calcium and necrotic core. All IVUS analysis was performed offline by a CoreLab of the Ural Institute of Cardiology.|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat analysis||Percentage of tissue||Standard Deviation|Mean
834543|NCT01270139|Primary|MACE (Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events)-Free Survival|MACE (major adverse cardiovascular events)-free survival reflects per cent of survived patients without MACE. An amendment to the protocol was approved on August 29th 2012 with a decision to extend a 1-year study for another 4 years with the assessment of the 5-year clinical outcomes both retro- and prospectively.|at 60 months follow-up|Some patients were lost to follow-up at 5 years and were not included to the final analysis. The intention-to-treat analysis was performed at 60 months.||Percentage of survivors without MACE|||Number
834544|NCT01270139|Primary|Total Atheroma Volume|Total atheroma volume (TAV, plaque-media volume, mm3) at 12 months. Quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and Intravascular Ultrasound (IVUS) were performed pre-, post-procedure and at 12-month follow-up after a bolus infusion of i.c. nitrate. QCA was undergone with the CAAS II analysis system (Pie Medical B.V., Maastricht, The Netherlands) with analysis of different QCA parameters such as minimal lumen diameter, maximum lumen diameter, reference diameter, diameter stenosis, lesion length, percent atheroma volume (PAV), total atheroma volume (TAV), and lumen volume.|at 12-month follow-up|The intention-to-treat-population analysis||mm3||Standard Deviation|Mean
834545|NCT01270256|Primary|Change in Nasal Peak Inspiratory Flow (NPIF)|NPIF was measured objectively in liters per minute with an In-Check Peak & Inspiratory Flow Meter (Ferraris Medical Inc, Orchard Park, NY). Subjects obtained 3 readings every morning and every evening and the greatest of the 3 measures were recorded. Total daily NPIF was calculated by adding the morning and evening values each day and the average of the change from baseline in NPIF for all days of was calculated|Baseline and 26 days|||liters/min||Standard Error|Median
834546|NCT01270464|Secondary|Participants With a Positive Anti-Reslizumab Antibody Status at Baseline, Week 8, Week 16, Endpoint, and Overall|"Counts of participants with a positive anti-drug antibody (ADA) response during treatment is offered for the two experimental treatment arms. Blood samples were collected for determination of ADAs before study drug infusion at baseline, visit 4 (week 8), and at visit 6 (week 16: EOT or early withdrawal) from patients in all 3 treatment groups (ie, placebo, 0.3 mg/kg reslizumab, and 3.0 mg/kg reslizumab); however, only the blood samples drawn from patients treated with either 0.3 mg/kg reslizumab or 3.0 mg/kg reslizumab were analyzed. Serum samples from patients who were treated with reslizumab were analyzed for ADA by Teva (Teva Biopharmaceuticals USA, Rockville, MD) using a validated homogeneous solution-based bridging enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).
Endpoint =week 16 or early withdrawal."|Day 1 (pre-dose), week 8, 16 and endpoint|Pharmacokinetic analysis set. Anti-Reslizumab antibody status was not analyzed for patients in the Placebo treatment arm.||participants|||Number
834547|NCT01270464|Secondary|Shifts From Baseline to Endpoint in Electrocardiogram Findings|Participant counts in each category of shift from baseline to endpoint of ECG finding. Findings summarized as normal or abnormal.|Weeks -4 to -2 (Screening Visit), Week 16|Safety analysis set of participants with both baseline and endpoint values.||participants|||Number
834626|NCT01271803|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Cobimetinib on Day 1, Cycle 1||Cycle 1: predose (0 hours [hr]) on Days 1, 2; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 1|PK population included all participants who received study treatment and had at least one vemurafenib and cobimetinib plasma concentration available. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834548|NCT01270464|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Vital Signs Values|"Data represents participants with potentially clinically significant (PCS) vital sign values.
Significance criteria
Sitting pulse - high: >100 and increase of >= 30 beats/minute
Sitting pulse - low: <50 and decrease of >=30 beats/minute
Sitting diastolic blood pressure: >100 and increase of >=12 mmHg
Respiration rate: >24 and increase of >=10 breaths/minute
Body temperature: <96.5° Fahrenheit or <35.8° Celsius
The last postbaseline value for approximately 10 patients in each treatment group is the 90-day follow-up visit post end-of-treatment (approx. Week 29)."|Day 2 to Week 29|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
834549|NCT01270464|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Abnormal Lab Values|"Data represents participants with potentially clinically significant (PCS) abnormal serum chemistry, hematology (except for eosinophil values), and urinalysis values.
Significance criteria:
Blood urea nitrogen: >=10.71 mmol/L
Creatinine: >=177 μmol/L
Uric acid: M>=625, F>=506 μmol/L
GGT = gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase: >= 3*upper limit of normal. Normal range is 5-49 U/L.
Total bilirubin: >=34.2 μmol/L
White blood cells: <=3.0 10^9/L
Hemoglobin: M<=115, F<=95 g/dL
Hematocrit: M<0.37, F<0.32 %
Platelets: >=700 10^9/L
Absolute neutrophil count: <=1.0 10^9/L
Urinalysis: blood, glucose, ketones and total protein: >=2 unit increase from baseline
The last postbaseline value for approximately 10 patients in each treatment group is the 90-day follow-up visit post end-of-treatment (approx. Week 29)."|Day 2 to Week 29|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
834550|NCT01270464|Secondary|Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event was defined in the protocol as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Severity was rated by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate and severe, with severe= an inability to carry out usual activities. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator. Serious AEs include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, OR an important medical event that jeopardized the patient and required medical intervention to prevent the previously listed serious outcomes. The last postbaseline value for approximately 10 patients in each treatment group is the 90-day follow-up visit post end-of-treatment (approx. Week 29).|Day 1 (post-dose) to Week 29|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
834551|NCT01270464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Eosinophil Count Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"Blood eosinophil counts were measured using a standard complete blood count (CBC) with differential blood test at each scheduled visit, and from all patients experiencing a serious adverse event, an adverse event leading to withdrawal, or an exacerbation of asthma symptoms. The during treatment (weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average eosinophil counts were estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Negative change from baseline values correlate to reduced asthma severity."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Full analysis set, including patients who contributed at least once to the analysis.||10^9 blood eosinophil/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834552|NCT01270464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short-Acting Beta-Agonist (SABA) Use Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"SABA are used for quick relief of asthma symptoms. To measure SABA use, at each clinical visit patients were asked to recall their usage of SABA therapy within the last 3 days of the scheduled visit. If usage was confirmed, the number of puffs used was recorded. For the purpose of summaries, an average daily usage was evaluated by dividing the total number of puffs recorded over 3 days by 3.
The during treatment (weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average SABA use was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Negative change from baseline scores indicate improvement in asthma control."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Full analysis set, including patients who contributed at least once to the analysis.||SABA puffs per day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834553|NCT01270464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"The ASUI is an 11-item instrument designed to assess the frequency and severity of asthma symptoms and side effects, weighted by patient preferences (Revicki et al 1998). ASUI is a utility score that ranges from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating better asthma control. The during treatment (weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average ASUI was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Positive change from baseline values indicate improvement in asthma symptoms. Information was obtained from questionnaire about asthma symptoms."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Full analysis set, including patients who contributed at least once to the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834554|NCT01270464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) at Week 16 or at Last Observed Value|"The AQLQ is a 32-item instrument administered as a self-assessment (Juniper et al 1992). The questionnaire is divided into 4 domains: activity limitation, symptoms, emotional function, and environmental stimuli. Patients were asked to recall their experiences during the last 2 weeks and to respond to each question on a 7-point scale (1=severe impairment, 7=no impairment). The overall AQLQ score is the mean of all 32 responses. Five of the activity questions were “patient-specific,” which means that each patient identified and scored 5 activities in which the patient was limited by asthma; these 5 activities were identified at the first visit and retained for all subsequent follow-up visits.
Positive change from baseline scores indicate improvement in quality of life. The AQLQ score was only assessed once during the study at week 16 or at early withdrawal, i.e. last postbaseline assessment if within 3 to 5 weeks of the last dose of study drug."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Week 16 or last observed value|Full analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834641|NCT01271946|Primary|Major Adverse Events Reported as Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events.|Observation of any major access site-related complication (percentage of participants).|Procedure through 30 day follow-up.|||Percentage of participants|||Number
834642|NCT01271946|Primary|Observation of Any Site Related Complications Recorded as Either Major or Minor Adverse Events.||Procedure through 30 days follow-up.||||||
834555|NCT01270464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"The ACQ is a 7-item instrument that measures asthma control (Juniper et al 1999). Six questions are self-assessments; the seventh item, completed by a member of the study staff, is the result of the patient’s FEV1 measurement. Each item has 7 possible answers on a scale of 0 to 6, and the total score is the mean of all responses (the total scale is therefore 0-6). A higher score is an indication of poorer asthma control. The during treatment (weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average ACQ was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Negative change from baseline scores indicate improvement in asthma control."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Full analysis set, including participants who contributed at least once to the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834556|NCT01270464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in % Predicted Expiratory Volume In 1 Second (FEV1) at Week 16 and at Endpoint|The percent predicted FEV1 is the ratio of the volume of air expired in the first second of a forced expiration to the patient's predicted FEV based on a similar population without asthma. Endpoint =week 16 or early withdrawal.|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Week 16, endpoint|Full analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes.||percentage of predicted FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
834557|NCT01270464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Flow at 25% to 75% Forced Vital Capacity (FEF 25%-75%) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|The FEF 25%-75% is the force expiratory flow at 25% to 75% of the Forced Vital Capacity (FVC). The during treatment (weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average FEF 25%-75% was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed includes those who contributed at least once to the analysis.||liters/second||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834558|NCT01270464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|The FVC is the volume of air that can be forcibly blown out after full inspiration, measured in liters. The during treatment (weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average FVC was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed includes those who contributed at least once to the analysis.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834559|NCT01270464|Primary|Change From Baseline In Forced Expiratory Volume In 1 Second (FEV1) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"FEV1 is a standard measurement of air movement in the lungs of patients with asthma obtained from pulmonary function tests. It is the volume of air expired in the first second of a forced expiration using a spirometer. The during treatment (weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average FEV1 was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Positive change from baseline scores indicate improvement in asthma control."|Day 0 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|Full analysis set-all patients randomly assigned to treatment and treated with at least 1 dose of study drug. Number of participants analyzed includes those who contributed at least once to the analysis.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834560|NCT01270503|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Non-serious Related Adverse Events Not Listed in Prescribing Information (PI) Following Vaccination With Menactra®||Day 0 up to Day 30 post-vaccination|Post-vaccination safety were assessed in the Safety Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
834561|NCT01270503|Primary|Safety Overview Within 30 Days in Participants Vaccinated With Menactra®||Day 0 up to Day 30 post-vaccination|Post-vaccination safety were assessed in the Safety Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
834562|NCT01270529|Primary|Change in Physical Activity|Participants will measure physical activity in the form of daily steps using a pedometer|Baseline, 12 weeks|||change in steps per day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834563|NCT01270542|Secondary|Improvement of Visual Outcomes in Patients Given Pre-operative Adjunctive Bevacizumab in Eyes Undergoing PDR Surgery.|Measured by median logMAR change in the best corrected visual acuity (VA) from baseline to post operative month 3 (POM3)|3 months from last surgery|||logMAR|Eyes|Full Range|Median
834564|NCT01270542|Secondary|Whether Intra- and Post-operative Complications Are Decreased in Eyes Given Pre-operative Adjunctive Bevacizumab in Eyes Undergoing Proliferative Form of Diabetic Retinopathy (PDR) Surgery.||3 months after last surgery.|||Eyes|Eyes||Count of Units
834565|NCT01270542|Primary|The Effect of an Anti-VEGF (Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor) Agent, Bevacizumab, on Levels of Vitreous and Aqueous Growth Factor Levels (pg/mL) in Eyes With Traction Retinal Detachment Due to PDR|Comparison of vitreous VEGF levels (pg/mL) and aqueous VEGF (pg/mL) levels in bevacizumab and control groups.|3 months after last surgery|||pg/mL|Eyes|Full Range|Median
834566|NCT01270555|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)|minimum score (least severe depression) = 0, maximum score (most severe) = 63|baseline and six weeks|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834567|NCT01270555|Secondary|Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D)|minimum score (least severe depression) = 0, maximum score (most severe) = 84|baseline and six weeks|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834568|NCT01270555|Secondary|Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A)|minimum score (least severe anxiety) = 0, maximum (most severe) = 56|baseline and six weeks|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834569|NCT01270555|Primary|Self-reported Weekly Substance Use|Number of subjects who self-report using at least one of illegal drugs or alcohol, at least once in a week.|baseline and six weeks|||Participants|||Number
834570|NCT01270555|Secondary|Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Scale of ADHD Severity|Global Severity (CGI-S) 1=not ill, 7=extremely ill|baseline and six weeks|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834571|NCT01270555|Secondary|Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Scale of Substance Use Disorder (SUD) Severity|CGI-S 1=not ill, 7=extremely ill|baseline and six weeks|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834578|NCT01270620|Primary|Trail Making Part B|• Trail Making Test is an executive measure of sequencing and cognitive flexibility. Trail B is a more difficult cognitive flexibility task requiring the subject to follow a sequential pattern while shifting cognitive sets and reflects executive functioning, although other cognitive abilities, such as psychomotor speed and visual scanning, are necessary for successful completion of the task. The scoring for this test is the time in seconds required for completion of the test|Change > 20% from baseline to 6-8 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
834579|NCT01270620|Primary|Trail Making Part A|• Trail Making Test is an executive measure of sequencing and cognitive flexibility. Trail A requires the subject to rapidly sequence a straightforward series. The scoring for this test is the time in seconds required for completion of the test|Change > 20% from baseline to 48 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
834580|NCT01270620|Primary|Trail Making Part A|• Trail Making Test is an executive measure of sequencing and cognitive flexibility. Trail A requires the subject to rapidly sequence a straightforward series. The scoring for this test is the time in seconds required for completion of the test|Change > 20% from baseline to 6-8 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
834581|NCT01270620|Primary|Digit Symbol Substitution Test|• The Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) measures attention, working memory, sustained visual attention and psychomotor speed. Subjects are given a table that pairs digits and symbols, and asked to decipher a code using the table, completing as many as possible in 90 seconds. The DSST has been found to be more sensitive than other tests to changes in high-levels of cognition|Change > 20% from baseline to 48 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
834582|NCT01270620|Primary|Digit Symbol Substitution Test|• The Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) measures attention, working memory, sustained visual attention and psychomotor speed. Subjects are given a table that pairs digits and symbols, and asked to decipher a code using the table, completing as many as possible in 90 seconds. The DSST has been found to be more sensitive than other tests to changes in high-levels of cognition|Change > 20% from baseline to 6-8 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
834583|NCT01270620|Primary|Recall of Digit Span|• The Digit Span subtest of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised is a test that requires subjects to repeat a series of digits that have been verbally presented to them both forward and, in a later independent test, reverse order. It measures attention and working memory|Change > 20% from baseline to 48 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
834584|NCT01270620|Primary|Recall of Digit Span|• The Digit Span subtest of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised is a test that requires subjects to repeat a series of digits that have been verbally presented to them both forward and, in a later independent test, reverse order. It measures attention and working memory|Change > 20% from baseline to 6-8 hours after surgery|||participants|||Number
834585|NCT01270620|Secondary|ProBNP||Change from baseline to post-operative day 2|||ng/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834586|NCT01270620|Secondary|BNP||Change form baseline to post-operative day 2|||ng/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834587|NCT01270620|Secondary|Troponin I|Patients who had troponin level > 0.2 ng/mL|2 days|||participants|||Number
834588|NCT01270620|Secondary|N-terminal proBNP||Change from baseline to day one|||ng/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834589|NCT01270620|Secondary|B-type Natriuretic Peptide||Change from Baseline to day one|||ng/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834590|NCT01270620|Secondary|Recovery Room Time||first day|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834591|NCT01270620|Secondary|Nausea and Vomiting||48 hours|||participants|||Number
834592|NCT01270620|Secondary|- Time to Following Command After Desflurane/Propofol Discontinuation||first day|||seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834593|NCT01270620|Secondary|- Time to Tracheal Extubation After Desflurane/Propofol Discontinuation||first day|||seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834594|NCT01270620|Secondary|- Time to Eye Opening After Desflurane/Propofol Discontinuation||first day|||seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834595|NCT01270620|Secondary|- Time to Spontaneous Breathing After Desflurane/Propofol Discontinuation||first day|||seconds||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834596|NCT01270620|Primary|Assessment of Delirium|The primary end point was the incidence of postoperative delirium as measured by the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM).|48 hours|||participants|||Number
834597|NCT01271712|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR)|Duration of Response was defined as the time from date of first response (Complete Response [CR: disappearance of all clinical and radiological evidence of tumor (both target and non-target).] or Partial Response [PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum, no unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, and no appearance of new lesions.]) to the date when Progressive Disease (PD: at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum on study or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, or appearance of new lesions.) is first documented, or to the date of death, whichever occurs first, according to RECIST v1.1. Subjects still having CR or PR and have not died at the time of analysis were censored at their last date of tumor evaluation. Duration of response defined for responders only, i.e CR or PR. Results are based on central evaluation.|From randomization of the first subject until date of database cutoff (26 Jan 2012); study duration approximately 1 year|Full Analysis Set with response participants||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834598|NCT01271712|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|Disease Control Rate (DCR) was defined as the percentage of subjects whose best response was Complete Response (CR: disappearance of all clinical and radiological evidence of tumor (both target and non-target).), Partial Response (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum, no unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, and no appearance of new lesions.), or Stable Disease (SD: steady state of disease. Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, no unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, and no appearance of new lesions.) according to RECIST v1.1 criteria. SD had to be maintained for at least 12 weeks from the first demonstration of that rating. Results are based on central evaluation.|From randomization of the first subject until date of database cutoff (26 Jan 2012); study duration approximately 1 year|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834974|NCT01281917|Primary|Progression Free Survival|The primary objective of this study is to determine whether Velcade in combination with temsirolimus provides benefit to subjects with relapsed or refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma as assessed by progression-free survival (PFS).|Up to 60 months|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834599|NCT01271712|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|Objective response rate was defined as the percentage of subjects whose best response was Complete Response (CR: disappearance of all clinical and radiological evidence of tumor (both target and non-target).) or Partial Response (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum, no unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, and no appearance of new lesions.) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1). Results are based on central evaluation.|From randomization of the first subject until date of database cutoff (26 Jan 2012); study duration approximately 1 year.|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834600|NCT01271712|Secondary|Tumor Response|Tumor Response of a subject was defined as the best tumor response (Complete Response [CR: disappearance of all clinical and radiological evidence of tumor (both target and non-target).], Partial Response [PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum, no unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, and no appearance of new lesions.], Stable Disease [SD: steady state of disease. Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, no unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, and no appearance of new lesions.], or Progressive Disease [PD: at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum on study or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, or appearance of new lesions.]) observed during the trial period and assessed according to RECIST v1.1 criteria. Results are based on central evaluation.|From randomization of the first subject until date of database cutoff (26 Jan 2012); study duration approximately 1 year|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834601|NCT01271712|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP)|Time to progression (TTP) was defined as the time from date of randomization to disease progression (based on central radiological assessment using modified RECIST [Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors] v.1.1). Progression is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum on study; or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions; or appearance of new lesions. Subjects without progression at the time of analysis were censored at their last date of tumor evaluation. Results are based on central evaluation.|From randomization of the first subject until until date of database cutoff (26 Jan 2012); study duration approximately 1 year|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834602|NCT01271712|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall Survival (OS) was defined as the time from date of randomization to death due to any cause. Subjects still alive at the time of analysis were censored at their date of last contact. Median OS was not observed at the time of PFS analysis and first analysis of OS, therefore only the proportion of death events was reported in the results posting system. This approach was maintained for the subsequent updates in the results posting system.|From randomization of the first subject until date of database cutoff (08 Jun 2015)|Full Analysis Set (FAS). 58 (87.9%) patients in placebo group and 91 (68.4%) patients in regorafenib had started open-label treatment with regorafenib before time of final database cutoff 08 Jun 2015||Percentage of patients with death|||Number
834603|NCT01271712|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free Survival (PFS) was defined as the time from date of randomization to radiological disease progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurs first. PFS was based on central radiological assessment using modified RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) v.1.1. Progression is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum on study; or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions; or appearance of new lesions. Subjects without progression or death at the time of analysis were censored at their last date of tumor evaluation. Results are based on central evaluation.|From randomization of the first subject until approximately 144 progression-free survival events had occurred (study duration approximately one year)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) - defined as all randomized participants.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834604|NCT01271803|Secondary|Pharmacodynamics: Number of Participants With Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase (MAPK) Inhibition, as Assessed by Immunohistochemistry (IHC)|Changes in effector molecules of the MAPK pathway that are directly or indirectly affected by BRAF and MEK inhibition (including but not limited to ERK and phosphorylated ERK and MEK) by IHC using biopsies at baseline, between Days 10−14 of Cycle 1, and at disease progression. IHC is a staining process performed on fresh/frozen tumor tissue samples.|At baseline; Cycle 1: Day 14; at disease progression (Up to 32 months)|Number of participants analyzed=number of participants available for analysis of this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
834605|NCT01271803|Secondary|Average Percent Change From Baseline in Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron Emission Tomography (FDG-PET) at Cycle 1 and Cycle 2|The pharmacodynamic effect of cobimetinib in combination with vemurafenib was assessed by measuring changes in FDG uptake as characterized by the lean body mass corrected (LBM) maximum standardized uptake value (SUV max) measurement using FDG-PET. Post-baseline timepoint Cycle 1 was averaged between Days 10 to 14 and Cycle 2 for Days 14+7.|Cycle 1 (Days 10 to 14), Cycle 2 (Days 14+7)|Safety evaluable population who received combination study treatment (Cobimetinib + Vemurafenib) was included in the analysis of this outcome. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||Percent change in FDG-PET||Standard Deviation|Mean
834606|NCT01271803|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause. Participants were censored at the last date of tumor measurement, the last date in the study drug log, or the date of last follow-up. OS analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimate.|Screening to up to data cut-off (01 October 2013) (assessed at screening [within 28 days prior to initiation of Cycle 1], every 6 weeks thereafter until disease progression or death or data cut-off [01 October 2013]) up to 32 months|Safety evaluable population who received combination study treatment (Cobimetinib + Vemurafenib) was included in the analysis of this outcome.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834607|NCT01271803|Secondary|Median Duration of Response (DOR)|Duration of response, defined as the time from first occurrence of a documented objective response until the time of disease progression, as determined by investigator review of tumor assessments using RECIST v 1.1, or death from any cause during the study (that is within 30 days after the last dose of study treatment).|Screening to up to data cut-off (01 October 2013) (assessed at screening [within 28 days prior to initiation of Cycle 1], every 6 weeks thereafter until disease progression or death or data cut-off [01 October 2013]) up to 32 months|Safety evaluable population who received combination study treatment (Cobimetinib + Vemurafenib) and had an objective response (of CR or PR) was included in the analysis of this outcome.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834608|NCT01271803|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression According to RECIST V 1.1|Progressive disease (PD) according to RECIST V 1.1: at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (nadir), including baseline; in addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm; appearance of 1 or more lesions is also considered as progression.|Screening to up to data cut-off (01 October 2013) (assessed at screening [within 28 days prior to initiation of Cycle 1], every 6 weeks thereafter until disease progression or death or data cut-off [01 October 2013]) up to 32 months|Safety evaluable population who received combination study treatment (Cobimetinib + Vemurafenib) was included in the analysis of this outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
834609|NCT01271803|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Version (V) 1.1|Tumor response of CR or PR is considered as objective response. CR: disappearance of all target lesions, reduction in short axis <10 millimeters in pathological lymph nodes (target and non-target lesions); PR: at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum longest diameter. Responses were confirmed by repeat assessments ≥4 weeks after initial documentation.|Screening to up to data cut-off (01 October 2013) (assessed at screening [within 28 days prior to initiation of Cycle 1], every 6 weeks thereafter until disease progression or death or data cut-off [01 October 2013]) up to 32 months|Safety evaluable population who received combination study treatment (Cobimetinib + Vemurafenib) was included in the analysis of this outcome.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834610|NCT01271803|Primary|Tmax of Vemurafenib on Day 14, Cycle 1||Predose (0 hr) on Days 14, 15; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 hr postdose on Day 14|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||hours||Full Range|Median
834611|NCT01271803|Primary|Cmax of Vemurafenib on Day 14, Cycle 1||Predose (0 hr) on Days 14, 15; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 hr postdose on Day 14|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834612|NCT01271803|Primary|Tmax of Vemurafenib on Day 1, Cycle 1 in BRAFi-naïve Participants||Predose (0 hr) on Day 1, 2; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 1|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were BRAFi-naïve participants.||hours||Full Range|Median
834613|NCT01271803|Primary|Cmax of Vemurafenib on Day 1, Cycle 1 in Cohort 1A in BRAFi-naïve Participants||Predose (0 hr) on Day 1, 2; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 1|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were BRAFi-naïve participants.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834614|NCT01271803|Primary|Cmax of Vemurafenib on Day 1, Cycle 1 in BRAFi-naïve Participants||Predose (0 hr) on Day 1, 2; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 1|PK population.Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were BRAFi-naïve participants.||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834615|NCT01271803|Primary|Tmax of Vemurafenib on Day -1, Cycle 1 in Participants Previously Treated With Vemurafenib Prior to Enrollment Into This Study||Predose (0 hr) on Day -1, 1; 2, 4, 6, 8 hr postdose on Day -1|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were previously treated with vemurafenib prior to enrollment into this study.||hours||Full Range|Median
834616|NCT01271803|Primary|Cmax of Vemurafenib on Day -1, Cycle 1 of Cohorts 1C and 2A in Participants Previously Treated With Vemurafenib Prior to Enrollment Into This Study||Predose (0 hr) on Day -1, 1; 2, 4, 6, 8 hr postdose on Day -1|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were previously treated with vemurafenib prior to enrollment into this study.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834617|NCT01271803|Primary|Cmax of Vemurafenib on Day -1, Cycle 1 in Participants Previously Treated With Vemurafenib Prior to Enrollment Into This Study||Predose (0 hr) on Days -1, 1; 2, 4, 6, 8 hr postdose on Day -1|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were previously treated with vemurafenib prior to enrollment into this study.||micrograms per milliliter (mcg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834618|NCT01271803|Primary|Clearance (CL) of Cobimetinib on Day 14 (Steady State), Cycle 1|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes.|Cycle 1: predose (0 hr) on Days 8, 14; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 14|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||Liters per hour (L/h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834619|NCT01271803|Primary|AUC0-24 of Cobimetinib on Day 14, Cycle 1||Cycle 1: predose (0 hr) on Days 8, 14; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 14|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834620|NCT01271803|Primary|Tmax of Cobimetinib on Day 14 (Steady State), Cycle 1||Cycle 1: predose (0 hr) on Days 8, 14; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 14|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||hours||Full Range|Median
834621|NCT01271803|Primary|Cmax of Cobimetinib on Day 14 (Steady State), Cycle 1||Cycle 1: predose (0 hr) on Days 8, 14; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 14|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834622|NCT01271803|Primary|AUC0-24 of Cobimetinib on Day 1, Cycle 1 of Cohort 3||Cycle 1: predose (0 hr) on Days 1, 2; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 1|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834623|NCT01271803|Primary|Area Under Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC) Over a Period of 24 Hours (AUC0-24) of Cobimetinib on Day 1, Cycle 1||Cycle 1: predose (0 hr) on Days 1, 2; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 1|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||nanograms*hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834624|NCT01271803|Primary|Time Taken to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Cobimetinib on Day 1, Cycle 1||Cycle 1: predose (0 hr) on Days 1, 2; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 1|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||hours||Full Range|Median
834625|NCT01271803|Primary|Cmax of Cobimetinib on Day 1, Cycle 1 in Cohort 3||Cycle 1: predose (0 hr) on Days 1, 2; 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 hr postdose on Day 1|PK population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834627|NCT01271803|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Doses (MTD) of Vemurafenib and Cobimetinib When Administered in Combination in DES|The highest dose level(s) at which fewer than one-third of participants experienced a DLT was declared the MTD. DLT is defined as 1 of the following toxicities considered by the investigator to be related to study treatment: a) Grade 3 nausea, vomiting or diarrhea that resolved to Grade ≤1 within 7 days, b) Grade 3 rash/photosensitivity that resolved to Grade ≤2 within 7 days, c) Grade 3 cuSCC that was subsequently resected, d) Grade ≥3 fatigue/hyperuricemia that resolved to Grade ≤2 within 7 days, e) Grade 3 fever, f) Grade 3 or 4 elevation of serum CPK levels, which is asymptomatic, deemed to be clinically insignificant and returns to Grade ≤2 during the 14-day cobimetinib treatment holiday, g) Grade ≥3 febrile neutropenia, h) Grade ≥4 neutropenia (ANC <500/ μL), i) Grade ≥4 thrombocytopenia, j) Grade ≥4 anemia, k) Grade ≥3 elevation of total bilirubin, hepatic transaminase or alkaline phosphatase.|28 Days|Safety-evaluable population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||mg|||Number
834628|NCT01271803|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose-Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) During DES in Combination Cohorts|DLT is defined as 1 of the following toxicities considered by the investigator to be related to study treatment: a) Grade 3 nausea, vomiting or diarrhea that resolved to Grade less than or equal to (≤) 1 within 7 days, b) Grade 3 rash or photosensitivity that resolved to Grade ≤2 within 7 days, c) Grade 3 cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cuSCC) that was subsequently resected, d) Grade greater than or equal to (≥) 3 fatigue or hyperuricemia that resolved to Grade ≤2 within 7 days, e) Grade 3 fever, f) Grade 3 or 4 elevation of serum creatine phosphokinase (CPK) levels, which is asymptomatic, deemed by the investigator to be clinically insignificant and that returned to Grade ≤2 during the 14-day cobimetinib treatment holiday, g) Grade ≥3 febrile neutropenia, h) Grade ≥4 neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] less than <500/microliter [μL]), i) Grade ≥4 thrombocytopenia, j) Grade ≥4 anemia, k) Grade ≥3 elevation of total bilirubin, hepatic transaminase or alkaline phosphatase.|28 Days|Safety-evaluable population (SEP) included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. SEP participants who received combination study treatment (cobimetinib + Vemurafenib) were included in the analysis of this outcome. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||participants|||Number
834629|NCT01271907|Secondary|Investigate Low-dose Systemic Aldesleukin to Cell Efficacy|Low-dose systemic aldesleukin will be evaluated to determine cell activity in metastatic melanoma.|7 months|Zero participants were analyzed for this outcome measure. Greater than 10 participants were needed to evaluate this outcome measure. These were not explored in the small number of patients studied.|||||
834630|NCT01271907|Primary|Safety of Drosophila Generated PBL Administered in Combination With a Lymphodepleting Preparative Regimen and Supportive Systemic Aldesleukin|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events see the adverse event module.|7 months|Cohorts 1 and 2 did not enroll participants because the study was terminated due to poor accrual.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834631|NCT01271907|Primary|Clinical Response|Clinical response is assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. Complete response (CR) is a disappearance of all target lesions. Partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD. Progression disease (PD) is at least a 20 % increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more lesions. Stable disease (SD) is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD taking as references the smallest sum LD.|7 months|Cohorts 1 and 2 did not enroll participants because the study was terminated due to poor accrual.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834632|NCT01271946|Secondary|Time to Ambulation|Time to ambulation for the diagnostic cohort, compared to published literature rates of 4.75 hours for time to ambulation for standard manual compression.|Ambulation was evaluated at any time after 1, 2 and 4 hours post sheath removal, until the subject was successfully ambulated.|Per Protocol-Diagnostic Cohort.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
834633|NCT01271946|Secondary|Time to Hemostasis|Time to hemostasis for the diagnostic cohort, compared to published literature rates of 17 minutes for time to hemostasis for standard manual compression.|Hemostasis was evaluated immediately following procedural sheath removal.|Per protocol-Diagnostic Cohort.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834634|NCT01271946|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Bed Elevation Within 15 Minutes.|Successful bed elevation was defined as the ability to sit up at a 45 degree angle within 15 minutes (1-30 minutes window) following sheath removal and successful hemostasis, without re-bleeding. This outcome was evaluated in subjects in whom successful access with the Arstasis device was achieved. The outcome measurement is reported as percentage of subjects.|Post procedure|Per protocol.||Percentage of participants|||Number
834635|NCT01271946|Primary|Time to Ambulation|Time to ambulation was recorded as the difference between the time the procedural sheath is removed from the femoral artery and the time when the subject stands and walks at least 20 feet without re-bleeding.|Ambulation was evaluated at any time after 1, 2 and 4 hours post sheath removal, until the subject was successfully ambulated.|Per protocol.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
834636|NCT01271946|Primary|Time to Actual Discharge|The time from sheath removal to actual hospital discharge.|Actual discharge was evaluated following procedural sheath removal until actual discharge, an average time of 9.3 hours.|Per protocol.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
834637|NCT01271946|Primary|Time to Discharge Eligibility|The time from sheath removal to the time when the subject was medically able to be discharged based solely on the assessment of the access site.|Discharge Eligibility was evaluated following sheath removal and ambulation and physical examination of the access site demonstrating stable access site.|Per Protocol.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
834638|NCT01271946|Primary|Time to Hemostasis|The difference between the time the procedural sheath was removed from the femoral artery and the time when hemostasis was observed.|Hemostasis was evaluated immediately following procedural sheath removal until hemostasis was achieved.|Per protocol.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834639|NCT01271946|Primary|Minor Adverse Events|Observation of any minor access site-related complications.|Procedure through 30 day follow-up.|||Percentage of participants|||Number
834640|NCT01271946|Primary|Device Success|Achievement of femoral artery access using the Arstasis Access System followed by placement of the procedural sheath in the femoral artery.|Procedure|Intent to treat.||Percentage of participants|||Number
834643|NCT01272011|Secondary|Ventilatory Loading - Phase 3|Ventilatory load compensation was assessed in two ways. Mean slopes for (1) pressure vs. resistance (P vs R) and (2) airflow vs. resistance (AF vs R) were calculated for pre- and post-IH treatment.|Pre- versus Post-treatment|Data were collected from 3 participants. However, clinical observations revealed results of interest from only 1/3 of the participants. Therefore, data from only this 1 individual were analyzed for presentation as a case study. The data from the other 2 participants were not analyzed.||unitless||Standard Error|Mean
834644|NCT01272011|Primary|Minute Ventilation - Phase 2|Minute ventilation (Ve) is the volume of gas inhaled or exhaled from a person's lungs per minute. Minute ventilation during the end-recovery (ER) period at initial (i.e., Days 1 and 2, initial ER period) and final (i.e., Days 9 and 10, final ER period) days of the IH protocol were normalized to values from baseline with elevated carbon dioxide (B2) within each individual session to characterize daily effects of exposure to IH at the beginning and end of treatment. Values from baseline with elevated carbon dioxide and the ER period during the final days of the protocol (final B2 and final ER period, respectively) also were normalized to elevated carbon dioxide baseline during initial days of the protocol (initial B2) to describe the cumulative effects of repeated exposure to IH. Outcomes are reported as % increases in minute ventilation during initial and final treatment sessions for daily/acute effects and cumulative/chronic effects.|Pre- versus Post-treatment|||percentage of baseline||Standard Error|Mean
834645|NCT01272076|Primary|Difference in mm Squared of Cirrus HD-OCT Automated Measurements of the Illumination Areaa Under the RPE to Expert Manual Measurement of Areas of Hypofluorescence Typical of Geographic Atrophy (GA).|In retinal areas with atrophy, light emitted from the Cirrus penetrates the sclera and choroid which are more reflecting compared with the Retinal Pigment Epithelium (RPE). The areas with higher illumination are associated with areas of Geographic Atrophy (GA), and allow to quantify how big is the area of atrophy. The study will assess the difference between Cirrus HD-OCT measurements of areas of increased illumination under the RPE to hypofluorescence areas on fundus photos as assessed manually by retina specialists.|August 2011|Subjects with dry AMD and Geographic Atrophy. The required sample size was calculated based on previous experience with the device and its variability.||mm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
834646|NCT01272141|Primary|The Safety and Toxicity of the Combination Therapy of Lapatinib and Everolimus Will be Monitored Using the NCI Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Effects (CTCAE) v. 3.0. The Incidence of Any Grade 3 or 4 Toxicities Will be Analyzed.||Safety assessments will be performed every four weeks while the patient remains on study.|No data were collected due to early termination.|||||
834647|NCT01272141|Primary|Overall Response Rate Will Measured Using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Criteria. Tumor Assessment for All Lesions Must be Performed Every Eight Weeks While on Study by CT Scan.||Tumor assessment for all lesions must be performed by CT scan every 8 weeks while on study.|No data were collected due to early termination.|||||
834648|NCT01272180|Primary|Desirability Index for Each Vaccine Group, Based on Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity Parameters.|The overall desirability index (DI) used to identify the optimal formulation of the combination vaccine was based on immunogenicity and reactogenicity parameters (on a scale of 0 to 1, with 0 for an undesirable response and 1 for a highly desirable response) as follows: Between-group ratios of hSBA GMTs were calculated, adjusted for prevaccination titer and center, against serogroups A, C, W, and Y (ABCWY+OMV group or ABCWY+qOMV group vs. Placebo/ACWY group) and against the 4 serogroup B test strains (ABCWY+OMV group or ABCWY+qOMV group vs. rMenB+OMV group). Reactogenicity was measured by the percentage of doses associated with severe local and systemic solicited AEs within 3 days following vaccination. Each immunogenicity and reactogenicity endpoint was assigned its own DI based on predefined desirability functions. The overall DI was calculated using the weighted geometric mean of the DI values of each of the ten parameters to derive an overall DI for each formulation.|One month after the second vaccination (Day 91)|"Analysis was done on the Per Protocol Set - desirability, ie, all subjects who :
correctly received the vaccine at Visit 1 and Visit 2, provided evaluable serum samples pre- (Visit 1) and post-vaccination (Visit 3), provided post-vaccination solicited adverse event data an had no major protocol violation as defined prior to unblinding."||Desirability index|||Number
834649|NCT01272180|Secondary|The Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events After Receiving Any Vaccination in This Study.|The number of subjects reporting unsolicited AEs after vaccination with ABCWY+OMV, ABCWY+qOMV, rMenB+OMV or MenACWY.|Throughout the study ( Day 1 to Day 241)|Analysis was done on the unsolicited safety set, ie, all subjects in the all exposed set who provided postvaccination unsolicited AE data.||Participants|||Number
834650|NCT01272180|Secondary|The Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Adverse Events After Receiving Any Vaccination in This Study.|The number of subjects reporting solicited local and systemic adverse events and other indicators of reactogenicity after vaccination with ABCWY+OMV, ABCWY+qOMV or rMenB+OMV or MenACWY.|Day 1 through day 7 after any vaccination|Analysis was done on the solicited safety set, ie all subjects in the all exposed set who provided postvaccination solicited AE data from day 1 (6 hours) through day 7. The all exposed set is defined as all subjects in the all enrolled population who actually received a study vaccination.||Participants|||Number
834651|NCT01272180|Secondary|The Geometric Mean Ratio of Post vs Pre Vaccination GMTs Against N.Meningitidis Serogroup B, After Vaccination With Different Formulations of MenABCWY Combination Vaccine.|The geometric mean ratio (GMR) of post vaccination versus pre vaccination GMTs against N.meningitidis serogroup B after two doses of ABCWY+OMV, ABCWY+qOMV or rMenB+OMV vaccine.|One month after the second vaccination/prevaccination (Day 91/day 1)|Analysis was done on the per-protocol population||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
834652|NCT01272180|Secondary|The hSBA GMTs Against N.Meningitidis serogroupB, After Vaccination With Different Formulations of MenABCWY Combination Vaccine.|The hSBA GMTs against N.meningitidis serogroup B after two doses of ABCWY+OMV, ABCWY+qOMV or rMenB+OMV vaccine.|Day 1 and one month after the second vaccination (Day 91)|Analysis was done on the per-protocol population, immunogenicity.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
834653|NCT01272180|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With at Least 4-fold Increase in hSBA Titers Against N.Meningitidis Serogroup B, After Vaccination With Different Formulations of MenABCWY Combination Vaccine.|"The percentages of subjects with at least 4-fold increase in hSBA titers against four different strains of N.meningitidis serogroup B, after two doses of ABCWY+OMV, ABCWY+qOMV or rMenB+OMV vaccine.
4-fold increase is defined as follows;
for subjects with a prevaccination hSBA < 1:2, a postvaccination hSBA ≥ 1:8, for subjects with a prevaccination hSBA ≥ 1:2, at least a 4-fold increase."|One month after the second vaccination (Day 91)|Analysis was done on the per-protocol population, immunogenicity.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834654|NCT01272180|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 1:5 and ≥ 1:8 Against N.Meningitidis Serogroup B, After Vaccination With Different Formulations of MenABCWY Combination Vaccine.|The percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥ 1:5 and ≥ 1:8 against four different strains of N.meningitidis serogroup B, after two doses of ABCWY+OMV, ABCWY+qOMV or rMenB+OMV vaccine.|Day 1 and one month after the second vaccination (Day 91)|Analysis was done on the per-protocol population, immunogenicity||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834655|NCT01272180|Secondary|The hSBA GMTs Against N.Meningitidis Serogroups A,C,W-135 and Y, After Vaccination With Different Formulations of MenABCWY Combination Vaccine.|The hSBA GMTs against N.meningitidis serogroups A,C,W-135 and Y, after two doses of either ABCWY+OMV or ABCWY+qOMV combination vaccine, or one dose of MenACWY vaccine.|Day 1 and one month after the second vaccination (Day 91)|Analysis was done on the per protocol population, immunogenicity.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
834656|NCT01272180|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 1:8 Against N.Meningitidis Serogroups A,C,W-135 and Y, After Vaccination With Different Formulations of MenABCWY Combination Vaccine.|Percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥ 1:8 against N.meningitidis serogroups A,C,W-135 and Y, after two doses of either ABCWY+OMV or ABCWY+qOMV combination vaccine or one dose of MenACWY vaccine.|Day 1 and one month after second vaccination (Day 91)|Analysis was done on the per protocol population, immunogenicity.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834657|NCT01272180|Primary|Percentages of Subjects With a Seroresponse Against N.Meningitidis Serogroups A,C,W-135,Y, After Receiving Different Formulations of MenABCWY Combination Vaccine.|"Non-inferiority of immune response of two doses of two different formulations of MenABCWY vaccine to a single dose of MenACWY vaccine as measured by the percentage of subjects with hSBA seroresponse against N.meningitidis serogroups A,C,W and Y.
Seroresponse is defined as:
For subjects with a pre-vaccination hSBA titer < 1:4, a post-vaccination hSBA titer ≥ 1:8;
For subjects with a pre-vaccination hSBA titer ≥ 1:4, an increase in hSBA titer of at least four times the prevaccination titer.
Functional bactericidal antibodies directed against serogroups A,C,W,Y meningococci were measured with a serum bactericidal activity assay using human serum as the source of exogenous complement (hSBA)."|One month after the second vaccination (Day 91)|Analysis was done on the per protocol population, immunogenicity, i.e subjects who received correct vaccines in both the visits; provided evaluable serum sample pre and post vaccination with assay results available for at least one serogroup and/or strain and had no major protocol violations.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834658|NCT01272193|Secondary|Change in Body Weight|Observed change from baseline in body weight after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator. Missing data is imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834659|NCT01272193|Secondary|Rate of Nocturnal Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Observed rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes were defined as requiring assistance to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes were defined as able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L. Nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes were defined as occurring between 00:01 and 05:59 a.m.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|Safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
834660|NCT01272193|Secondary|Rate of Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Observed rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes were defined as requiring assistance to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes were defined as able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
834661|NCT01272193|Secondary|Rate of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|Corresponds to rate of AEs per 100 patient years of exposure. Severity assessed by investigator. Mild: no or transient symptoms, no interference with subject's daily activities. Moderate: marked symptoms, moderate interference with subject's daily activities. Severe: considerable interference with subject's daily activities, unacceptable. Serious AE: AE that at any dose results in any of the following: death, a life-threatening experience, in-subject hospitalization/prolongation of existing hospitalisation, persistent/significant disability/incapacity/congenital anomaly/birth defect.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|Safety analysis set includes all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product or its comparator.||Events/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
834662|NCT01272193|Secondary|Mean Increment of 9-point Self Measured Plasma Glucose Profile (SMPG) at the Main Evening Meal|Observed mean increment of the 9-point self-measured plasma glucose profile (SMPG) at the main evening meal|Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
834663|NCT01272193|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c)|Observed change from baseline in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment|Week 0, Week 26|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
834706|NCT01272583|Primary|Glucagon Response to Acute Hypoglycaemia|Change in glucagon concentration from the initialisation phase to 40 minutes after occurrence of the autonomic reaction to hypoglycaemia|Change from initialisation phase to 40 minutes after onset of hypoglycaemia|||pmol/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834707|NCT01272635|Secondary|Drug Related Side Effects|Parent-reported gastrointestinal symptoms during treated RTI.|14 days after initiation of therapy|||events|||Number
834688|NCT01272284|Secondary|"Percentage of Patients Responding Very Much Better or Much Better on PGI-I at 12 Months"|"Success defined as a response of Very Much Better or Much Better at 12 months, as measured by validated Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I)."|12 months|105 subjects were eligible for 12-month follow-up. 2 subjects either missed the visit or did not complete the PGI-I.||percentage of participants|||Number
834689|NCT01272284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 50% Improvement in IIQ-7 From Baseline to 12 Months|Success defined as at least a 50% improvement from baseline to 12 months, as measured by validated Incontinence Impact Questionnaire Short Form (IIQ-7)|12 months (compared to baseline)|105 subjects were eligible for 12-month follow-up. 2 subjects either missed the visit or did not complete the IIQ-7.||percentage of participants|||Number
834690|NCT01272284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 50% Improvement in UDI-6 Score From Baseline to 12 Months|Success defined as at least a 50% improvement from baseline to 12 months, as measured by validated Urinary Distress Inventory Short Form (UDI-6)|12 months (compared to baseline)|105 subjects were eligible for 12-month follow-up. 2 subjects either missed the visit or did not complete the UDI-6.||percentage of participants|||Number
834691|NCT01272284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Negative Cough Stress Test at 12 Months|"Success defined as a negative result at 12 months, as measured by the Cough Stress Test (CST).
The cough stress test was completed with the subject in the lithotomy and standing positions, filling bladder to maximum capacity with normal saline. The subject was then asked to cough 10 times and any leakage from the urethra was considered a positive test."|12 months (compared to baseline)|105 subjects were eligible for 12-month follow-up. 4 subjects missed either the visit or the cough stress test.||percentage of participants|||Number
834692|NCT01272284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 50% Reduction in 24-hour Pad Weight From Baseline to 12 Months|Success defined as at least a 50% reduction in 24-hour pad weight from baseline to 12 months.|12 months (compared to baseline)|105 subjects were eligible for 12-month follow-up. 4 subjects missed either the visit or the pad weight test.||percentage of participants|||Number
834693|NCT01272284|Secondary|"Percentage of Patients Responding Very Much Better or Much Better on PGI-I at 6 Months"|"Success defined as a response of Very Much Better or Much Better at 6 months, as measured by validated Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I)."|6 months|109 subjects were eligible for 6-month follow-up. 4 subjects either missed the visit or did not complete the PGI-I.||percentage of participants|||Number
834694|NCT01272284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 50% Improvement in IIQ-7 From Baseline to 6 Months|Endpoint defined as at least a 50% improvement from baseline to 6 months, as measured by validated Incontinence Impact Questionnaire Short Form (IIQ-7), in which the percent of subjects with at least a 50% improvement from baseline to 6 months is compared to a performance goal of 50%.|6 months (compared to baseline)|109 subjects were eligible for 6-month follow-up. 5 subjects either missed the visit or did not complete the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire.||percentage of participants|||Number
834695|NCT01272284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 50% Improvement in UDI-6 Score From Baseline to 6 Months|Endpoint defined as at least a 50% improvement from baseline to 6 months, as measured by validated Urinary Distress Inventory Short Form (UDI-6), in which the percent of subjects with at least a 50% improvement from baseline to 6 months is compared to a performance goal of 50%.|6 months (compared to baseline)|109 subjects were eligible for 6-month follow-up. 4 subjects either missed the visit or did not complete the Urinary Distress Inventory.||percentage of participants|||Number
834696|NCT01272284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 50% Improvement in Incontinence Via 3-Day Voiding Diary From Baseline to 6 Months|"Endpoint defined as at least a 50% improvement from baseline to 6-months, as measured by 3-Day Voiding Diary, in which the percent of subjects with at least a 50% improvement from baseline to 6 months is compared to a performance goal of 50%.
Subjects completed a 3-Day Voiding Diary of controlled urinations and the number and amount of leaks experienced."|6 months (compared to baseline)|109 subjects were eligible for 6-month follow-up. 17 subjects either missed the visit or did not complete the 3-Day Voiding Diary.||percentage of participants|||Number
834697|NCT01272284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Negative Cough Stress Test at 6 Months|"Endpoint defined as a negative result at 6 months, as measured by the Cough Stress Test (CST), in which the percent of subjects with a negative CST is compared to a performance goal of 66%.
The cough stress test was completed with the subject in the lithotomy and standing positions, filling bladder to maximum capacity with normal saline. The subject was then asked to cough 10 times and any leakage from the urethra was considered a positive test."|6 months|109 subjects were eligible for 6-month follow-up. 6 subjects missed either the visit or the cough stress test.||percentage of participants|||Number
834698|NCT01272284|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 50% Reduction in 24-hour Pad Weight From Baseline to 6 Months|Primary endpoint defined as at least a 50% reduction in 24-hour pad weight from baseline to 6 months (including dry as defined as a pad weight of less than 1.3 grams during the 6-month test), in which the percent of subjects with at least 50% reduction in 24-hour pad weight is compared to a performance goal of 50%.|6 months (compared to baseline)|Analysis was per protocol. 109 subjects were eligible for 6-month follow-up. 6 subjects missed either the visit or the pad weight test.||percentage of participants|||Number
834699|NCT01272583|Secondary|Symptomatic Hormone Responses to Acute Hypoglycaemia.|The symptomatic responses to hypoglycaemia were assessed using a standard validated symptom questionnaire adapted for experimental hypoglycaemia (McCrimmon et al (2003) Diabet.Med. 20: 507-509). A 7-point Likert scale (1=symptom absent; 7=symptom experienced with great intensity) was used to score presence and intensity of autonomic and neuroglycopenic symptoms of hypoglycaemia. Symptom scores were obtained during the initialisation phase, at occurrence of autonomic reaction and again 30 minutes later. For analyses the scale was considered as a continuous variable.|Change from baseline symptomatic response at hypoglycaemia and 30 minutes after hypoglycaemia|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834700|NCT01272583|Secondary|Cortisol Response to Acute Hypoglycaemia|Area under the curve (AUC) from onset of the autonomic response to hypoglycaemia to 40 minutes after onset of the autonomic response. AUC values were calculated by the trapezoid method.|0, 10, 20, 40 minutes|||mU*minutes/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834701|NCT01272583|Secondary|Growth Hormone Response to Acute Hypoglycaemia|Area under the curve (AUC) from onset of the autonomic response to hypoglycaemia to 40 minutes after onset of the autonomic response. AUC values were calculated by the trapezoid method.|0, 10, 20, 40 minutes|||mU*minutes/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834702|NCT01272583|Secondary|Norepinephrine Response to Acute Hypoglycaemia|Area under the curve (AUC) from onset of the autonomic response to hypoglycaemia to 40 minutes after onset of the autonomic response. AUC values were calculated by the trapezoid method.|0, 10, 20, 40 minutes|||nmol*minutes/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834703|NCT01272583|Primary|Glucagon Response to Acute Hypoglycaemia|Area under the curve (AUC) from onset of the autonomic response to hypoglycaemia to 40 minutes after onset of the autonomic response. AUC values were calculated by the trapezoid method.|0, 10, 20 and 40 minutes|||pmol*minutes/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834704|NCT01272583|Secondary|Epinephrine Response to Acute Hypoglycaemia|Area under the curve (AUC) from onset of the autonomic response to hypoglycaemia to 40 minutes after onset of the autonomic response. AUC values were calculated by the trapezoid method.|0, 10, 20, 40 minutes|||nmol*minutes/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834705|NCT01272583|Secondary|Intact and Total Glucagon Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1), Intact and Total Gastric Inhibitory Peptide (GIP) Response to Acute Hypoglycaemia|Area under the curve (AUC) from onset of the autonomic response to hypoglycaemia to 40 minutes after onset of the autonomic response. AUC values were calculated by the trapezoid method.|0, 10, 20, 40 minutes|||pmol*minutes/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834710|NCT01272635|Secondary|Asthma Related Symptoms Among RTI Progressing to Severe LRTI|Asthma related symptoms as measured by the parent-completed Pre-school Asthma Symptom Diary (PAD). The PAD was completed daily starting on the first day of an illness and continued until the participant was symptom-free for 2 days. It contains questions of frequency of respiratory symptoms, each scored on a scale of 1 through 7, with higher scores representing increasingly frequent symptoms, with daily scores ranging from 0 (asymptomatic) to a maximum of 102. The total PAD score is the sum of the daily individual symptom scores over the duration of the illness, with higher scores representing more frequent symptoms.|14 days after initiation of therapy|Respiratory Tract Infections (RTI) progressing to Severe Lower RTI||PAD score||Standard Deviation|Mean
834711|NCT01272635|Primary|OCELOT: Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure|The Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM) is a composite outcome with scores ranging from 0-12 with higher numbers representing worse symptoms. The score is calculated as the sum total of the follow five elements: (1) scalene retractions, (2) suprasternal retractions, (3) wheezing, (4) air entry, (5) oxygen saturation. A complete description can be found in: Ducharme FM, Chalut D, Plotnick L, et al. The Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure: a valid clinical score for assessing acute asthma severity from toddlers to teenagers. J Pediatr 2008;152:476-80.|36-72 hours after initiation of OCELOT therapy|Participants who developed severe lower respiratory tract infections and initiate blinded OCELOT therapy.||PRAM score||Standard Deviation|Mean
834712|NCT01272635|Primary|Progression to Clinically Significant Lower Respiratory Tract Symptoms|Progression to clinically significant lower respiratory tract symptoms defined by: (1) having symptoms that were more than mild after 3 albuterol administrations over 1 hour, or (2) requiring albuterol administrations more often than once every 4 hours, or (3) requiring more than 6 albuterol treatments over a 24-hour period, or (4) having moderate to severe cough or wheeze for 5 or more days since study medication was initiated.|14 days after initiation of APRIL therapy|All participants who initiated APRIL therapy||participants|||Number
834713|NCT01272661|Secondary|Breastfeeding Rate at 6 Months Postpartum|Measure breastfeeding rate (any and exclusive) at 6 months postpartum. Rate of any breastfeeding is presented.|Any and exclusive breastfeeding at 6 months, between 22-26 weeks postpartum|ITT analysis conducted on participants with available data||participants|||Number
834714|NCT01272661|Secondary|Breastfeeding Rate at 3 Months Postpartum|Measure rates of any and exclusive breastfeeding at 3 months postpartum. Rate of any breastfeeding is presented.|Any and exclusive breastfeeding at 3 months, between 10-14 weeks postpartum|ITT analysis conducted on participants with available data||participants|||Number
834715|NCT01272661|Secondary|Breastfeeding Rate at One Month Postpartum|Measure rate of breastfeeding (rate of any breastfeeding is main measure, also measure rate of exclusive breastfeeding) at one month postpartum. Will compare rate of any breastfeeding one month postpartum to historical data, and will compare rates of any breastfeeding at one month postpartum between intervention groups.|Any and exclusive breastfeeding at one month, between 21-38 days postpartum|ITT analysis conducted on participants with available data||participants|||Number
834716|NCT01272661|Secondary|Breastfeeding Rate|Measure rate of any breastfeeding (breastfeeding initiation) in the hospital. We will also compare this rate between the 3 intervention groups.|Any breastfeeding: participants were followed for the duration of hospital stay, an average of 48 hours|ITT analysis was conducted on participants with available data||participants|||Number
834717|NCT01272661|Primary|Program Feasibility - Curriculum Modules|Measure program feasibility by counting the number of Breastfeeding Curricular modules that were presented of total possible = 11|by 24 months from program start|||modules presented||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
834718|NCT01272661|Primary|Program Feasibility- Feeding Outcome Collected|Measure program feasibility by number of participants who were exposed to the intervention for whom there is any feeding outcome|by 24 months|Total number of eligible MomsFirst participants who agreed to data sharing. Outcome shows number w/ any feeding outcome (not lost to follow up, no live birth, case closed by MomsFirst). This is for a 24 month period since all data was de-identified and stripped of dates so unable to specify for 12 month period||participants|||Number
834719|NCT01272804|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Lactate Level at Day 6 and 14|Baseline value was collected at 0 hour on Day 1 for lactate.|Baseline (Day 1), Day 6 and 14|PD analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter. Here 'n' signifies participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834720|NCT01272804|Secondary|Change From Baseline in High Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (HDL-C) Level at Day 3, 6, 10, 14, 16 and Follow-up|Blood sample for lipid biomarker was taken following 12-hours fasting. Baseline value was collected on Day -2 for lipids.|Baseline (Day -2), Day 3, 6, 10, 14, 16 and Follow-up (7 to 14 days after last dose of study medication)|PD analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter. Here 'n' signifies participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834721|NCT01272804|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Low Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (LDL-C) Level at Day 3, 6, 10, 14, 16 and Follow-up|Blood sample for lipid biomarker was taken following 12-hours fasting. Baseline value was collected on Day -2 for lipids.|Baseline (Day -2), Day 3, 6, 10, 14, 16 and Follow-up (7 to 14 days after last dose of study medication)|PD analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter. Here 'n' signifies participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834722|NCT01272804|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol (TC) Level at Day 3, 6, 10, 14, 16 and Follow-up|Blood sample for lipid biomarker was taken following 12-hours fasting. Baseline value was collected on Day -2 for lipids.|Baseline (Day -2), Day 3, 6, 10, 14, 16 and Follow-up (7 to 14 days after last dose of study medication)|PD analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter. Here 'n' signifies participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834840|NCT01280552|Secondary|PFS|"Secondary Endpoints
PFS is defined as the time from randomization until the date of documented progressive disease (PD) or death, whichever occurs first, or last date known alive and progression free if progression or death is not observed.
Population is all randomized patients ITT."|2-3 years|Intent to treat includes all randomized patients||months of progression free survival||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834723|NCT01272804|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Triglyceride (TG) Level at Day 3, 6, 10, 14, 16 and Follow-up|Blood sample for lipid biomarker was taken following 12-hours fasting. Baseline value was collected on Day -2 for lipids.|Baseline (Day -2), Day 3, 6, 10, 14, 16 and Follow-up (7 to 14 days after last dose of study medication)|PD analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter. Here 'n' signifies participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834724|NCT01272804|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Day 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15||Baseline (Pre-dose on Day 1), Day 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15|PD analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter. Here 'n' signifies participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834725|NCT01272804|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average Plasma Glucose at Day 1, 6, 14|Glucometer testing performed by finger-stick at 8 time points per day to measure glucose levels. Average plasma glucose was calculated as area under the plasma glucose concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 hours (AUC [0-24]) divided by 24.|-46, -44, -42, -40, -38, -36, -30, -27 hrs pre-dose on Day -1; 2, 6, 8, 10, 12,18,21 hrs post-dose on Day 1, 6 and 14; additional 0 hr (pre-dose) on Day 6 and 4 hr post-dose on Day 1 and 14|PD analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter. Here 'n' signifies participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834726|NCT01272804|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in C-peptide Area Under the Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC [2-6]) After a Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT) at Day 1 and 14|Percent change from baseline in area under the plasma C-peptide concentration-time curve as determined by standardized MMTT. Linear trapezoidal method was used to compute AUC. Baseline value was the AUC (2-6) calculated on Day -1.|-46, -45.75, -45.5, -45, -44.5, -44, -43, -42 hrs pre-dose on Day -1; 2, 2.25, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 5, 6 hrs post-dose on Day 1 and 14 (fasted condition)|PD analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter. Here 'n' signifies participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
834727|NCT01272804|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Insulin Area Under the Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC [2-6]) After a Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT) at Day 1 and 14|Percent change from baseline in area under the plasma insulin concentration-time curve as determined by standardized MMTT. Linear trapezoidal method was used to compute AUC. Baseline value was the AUC (2-6) calculated on Day -1.|-46, -45.75, -45.5, -45, -44.5, -44, -43, -42 hrs pre-dose on Day -1; 2, 2.25, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 5, 6 hrs post-dose on Day 1 and 14 (fasted condition)|PD analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter. Here 'n' signifies participants evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
834728|NCT01272804|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Glucose Area Under the Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC [2-6]) After a Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT) at Day 14|Percent change from baseline in area under the plasma glucose concentration-time curve as determined by standardized MMTT. Linear trapezoidal method was used to compute AUC. Baseline value was the AUC (2-6) calculated on Day -1.|-46, -45.75, -45.5, -45, -44.5, -44, -43, -42 hrs pre-dose on Day -1; 2, 2.25, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 5, 6 hrs post-dose on Day 14 (fasted condition)|PD analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
834729|NCT01272804|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Glucose Area Under the Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC [2-6]) After a Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT) at Day 1|Percent change from baseline in area under the plasma glucose concentration-time curve as determined by standardized MMTT. Linear trapezoidal method was used to compute AUC. Baseline value was the AUC (2-6) calculated on Day -1.|-46, -45.75, -45.5, -45, -44.5, -44, -43, -42 hrs pre-dose on Day -1; 2, 2.25, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 5, 6 hrs post-dose on Day 1 (fasted condition)|Pharmacodynamic (PD) analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PD parameter.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
834730|NCT01272804|Primary|Observed Accumulation Ratio for Cmax (Rac, Cmax)|Accumulation ratio for Cmax (Rac, Cmax) was calculated as maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) on Day 14 divided by maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) on Day 1.|0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24 hours post morning dose on Day 1 and Day 14 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834731|NCT01272804|Primary|Observed Accumulation Ratio for AUCtau (Rac)|Accumulation ratio for AUCtau (Rac) was calculated as area under the curve from time zero to end of dosing interval (AUCtau) on Day 14 divided by area under the curve from time zero to end of dosing interval (AUCtau) on Day 1. Dosing interval = 24 hours.|0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24 hours post morning dose on Day 1 and Day 14 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834732|NCT01272804|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) on Day 14|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug.|0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24 hours post morning dose on Day 14 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834842|NCT01280591|Secondary|Global Assessment of Investigational Product as a Pain Reliever|The Global Assessment of Investigational Product as a Pain Reliever was a 5- point categorical scale which included the following possible responses: poor (0); fair (1); good (2); very good (3); excellent (4).|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
834733|NCT01272804|Primary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F) on Day 14|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood.|0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24 hours post morning dose on Day 14 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||liter per hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834734|NCT01272804|Primary|Percentage of Unchanged Drug Excreted in the Urine Over Dosing Interval (Ae[%]) on Day 14|Percentage of drug excreted unchanged in urine calculated as overall amount of unchanged drug excreted in the urine over the dosing interval (24 hours) divided by total daily dose multiplied by 100.|0 hour (pre-dose) through 24 hours post-dose on Day 14|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||percentage of dose||Standard Deviation|Mean
834735|NCT01272804|Primary|Minimum Observed Plasma Trough Concentration at Steady State (Cmin, ss) on Day 14||0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16 hours post morning dose on Day 14 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834736|NCT01272804|Primary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2) on Day 14|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 hours post morning dose on Day 14 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
834737|NCT01272804|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to End of Dosing Interval at Steady State (AUCtau, ss) on Day 14|AUCtau, ss = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the end of the dosing interval (tau) at steady state, here dosing interval is 24 hours.|0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24 hours post morning dose on Day 14 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||nanogram*hour per milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834738|NCT01272804|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Tmax, ss) on Day 14||0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24 hours post morning dose on Day 14 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||hour||Full Range|Median
834739|NCT01272804|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Cmax, ss) On Day 14||0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24 hours post morning dose on Day 14 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834740|NCT01272804|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to End of Dosing Interval (AUCtau) on Day 1|AUCtau is the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the end of the dosing interval (tau), here dosing interval is 24 hours.|0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24 hours post morning dose on Day 1 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||nanogram*hour per milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834741|NCT01272804|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) on Day 6||0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8 hours post-dose on Day 6 (fed condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here ‘N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||hour||Full Range|Median
834742|NCT01272804|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) on Day 1||0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24 hours post morning dose on Day 1 (fasted condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||hour||Full Range|Median
834743|NCT01272804|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) On Day 6||0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8 hours post-dose on Day 6 (fed condition)|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834744|NCT01272804|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) On Day 1||0 (pre-dose), 0.5, 1.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, 16, 24 hours (hrs) post morning dose on Day 1 (fasted condition)|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all enrolled participants treated with PF-04937319 who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
834745|NCT01272804|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 14 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pre-treatment state.|Baseline (Day 1) up to 14 days after last dose of study treatment (up to 28 days)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
834841|NCT01280552|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|The objective is to compare overall survival (OS) in patients when treated with ICT 107 versus Control. OS defined as the time from randomization until date of death or the last date patient known alive (if death is not observed) All randomized patients are included in Intent to Treat analysis|2 -3 years|Intent to treat include all randomized patients||months of survival||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834746|NCT01272869|Primary|Frequency of Ballooning in the Morfeus and the Sensura Filter Test Period.|Data will not be recorded at specific time points due to individual changing patterns (1-2 bags per day). Study subjects will fill out the Case Report Form (CRF) by themselves when changing bag. The subject is asked in the CRF among others the reason for changing bag (e.g. ballooning). Subjects will change bag according to their normal routine or when deemed appropriate. They are advised to change bag if it is filled with air and the air cannot be released through the filter within a specified time period.|Daily or at every change of bag in a period of a maximum of 28 days|Intention to treat (ITT)||percentage bags with ballooning|Participants||Number
834747|NCT01272882|Primary|Feasibility of EIT Monitoring in This Population of ARDS/ALI Patients|Feasibility for the purposes of our study was the ability to apply the device to a diverse population of ARDS/ALI patients and obtain EIT data from the device.|At the start of monitoring once the patient was consented and enrolled.|||Patients successfully monitored with EIT|||Number
834748|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in FACIT-F Total Score During the Re-Treatment Period|Participant fatigue was evaluated using the FACIT-F scale, a 13-item questionnaire in which the participants were requested to score each item on a 5-point scale. The FACIT-F scores ranged from 0 to 52, with higher scores representing less fatigue. Score changes of 4 points or more were considered clinically meaningful. The total score was a summation of all 13 items, where 2 of the positive items (I have energy; I am able to do my usual activities) were reversed for scoring.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834749|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) Total Score During the Initial Treatment Period|Participant fatigue was evaluated using the FACIT-F scale, a 13-item questionnaire in which the participants were requested to score each item on a 5-point scale. The FACIT-F scores ranged from 0 to 52, with higher scores representing less fatigue. Score changes of 4 points or more were considered clinically meaningful. The total score was a summation of all 13 items, where 2 of the positive items (I have energy; I am able to do my usual activities) were reversed for scoring.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834750|NCT01272908|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Remission According to DAS28 in the Re-Treatment Period|The DAS28 scoring used 4 core components: SJC, TJC, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity, and ESR. The DAS28 has a continuous scale ranging from 0 to 9.4. The level of disease activity was interpreted as low (DAS28 score ≤3.2), moderate (DAS28 score >3.2 but ≤5.1), or high (DAS28 score >5.1). A DAS28 score ≤2.6 corresponded to a state of remission according to American Rheumatism Association criteria.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
834751|NCT01272908|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Remission According to DAS28 in the Initial Treatment Period|The DAS28 scoring used 4 core components: SJC, TJC, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity, and ESR. The DAS28 has a continuous scale ranging from 0 to 9.4. The level of disease activity was interpreted as low (DAS28 score ≤3.2), moderate (DAS28 score >3.2 but ≤5.1), or high (DAS28 score >5.1). A DAS28 score ≤2.6 corresponded to a state of remission according to American Rheumatism Association criteria.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
834752|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline CRP During the Re-Treatment Period|CRP levels were measured in mg/L and were used to determine the acute phase response. A reduction in CRP levels is considered an improvement; normal reference range ≤10 mg/L.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
834753|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CRP During the Initial Treatment Period|CRP levels were measured in milligrams/liter (mg/L) and were used to determine the acute phase response. A reduction in CRP levels is considered an improvement; normal reference range ≤10 mg/L.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
834754|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ESR During the Re-Treatment Period|ESR was measured in mm/hour and was used to determine the acute phase response. Lower ESR values indicate reduction in disease activity; normal reference range: 0-20 mm/hr.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
834755|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ESR During the Initial Treatment Period|ESR was measured in mm/hour and was used to determine the acute phase response. Lower ESR values indicate reduction in disease activity; normal reference range: 0-20 mm/hr.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
834756|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline HAQ-DI Score During the Re-Treatment Period|HAQ-DI: 20 questions, 8 categories of functioning: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and common usual activities. Participants report amount of difficulty in performing 2-3 specific subcategory items. Difficulty score is from 0 to 3 (0 = without any difficulty; 1 = with some difficulty; 2 = with much difficulty; and 3 = unable to do). The highest component score in each of the 8 categories determines the score for that category, unless aids, devices, and/or help from another person were required which = a score of 2 (unless already 2 or 3). The 8 category scores were averaged into overall HAQ-DI score ranging from 0 to 3 (0 to 1 = mild to moderate difficulty; 1 to 2 = moderate to severe disability; and 2 to 3 = severe to very severe disability). HAQ-DI not computed if >2 categories were missing.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834784|NCT01273038|Primary|Frequency of Ballooning in the Morfeus and SenSura Test Period.|Data will not be recorded at specific time points due to individual changing patterns (1-3 bags per day). Study subjects will fill out the Case Report Form (CRF) by themselves when changing bag. The subject is asked in the CRF among others the reason for changing bag (e.g. ballooning). Subjects will change bag according to their normal routine or when deemed appropriate. They are advised to change bag if it is filled with air and the air cannot be released through the filter within a specified time period.|Daily or at every change of bag in a period of a maximum of 28 days|ITT||percentage of bags|Participants||Number
834757|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline HAQ-DI Score During the Initial Treatment Period|HAQ-DI: 20 questions, 8 categories of functioning: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and common usual activities. Participants report amount of difficulty in performing 2-3 specific subcategory items. Difficulty score is from 0 to 3 (0 = without any difficulty; 1 = with some difficulty; 2 = with much difficulty; and 3 = unable to do). The highest component score in each of the 8 categories determined the score for that category, unless aids, devices, and/or help from another person were required which = a score of 2 (unless already 2 or 3). The 8 category scores were averaged into overall HAQ-DI score ranging from 0 to 3 (0 to 1 = mild to moderate difficulty; 1 to 2 = moderate to severe disability; and 2 to 3 = severe to very severe disability). HAQ-DI not computed if > 2 categories were missing.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834758|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Pain During the Re-Treatment Period|Patient Global Assessment of Pain was measured using a 100-mm VAS where the extreme left end of the line was 0 = no pain and the extreme right end of the line was 100 = unbearable pain. The participant was asked to mark the line and the distance from the left edge was measured in mm.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834759|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Pain During the Initial Treatment Period|Patient Global Assessment of Pain was measured using a 100-mm VAS where the extreme left end of the line was 0 = no pain and the extreme right end of the line was 100 = unbearable pain. The participant was asked to mark the line and the distance from the left edge was measured in mm.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834760|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity During the Re-Treatment Period|Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured using a 100-mm VAS where the extreme left end of the line was 0 = no disease activity and the extreme right end of the line was 100 = maximum disease activity. The participant was asked to marked the line and the distance from the left edge was measured in mm.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period and Week 4 after last maintenance|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834761|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity Score During the Initial Treatment Period|Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured using a 100-mm VAS where the extreme left end of the line was 0 = no disease activity and the extreme right end of the line was 100 = maximum disease activity. The participant was asked to marked the line and the distance from the left edge was measured in mm.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834762|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity During the Re-Treatment Period|Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured using a 100-mm VAS where the extreme left end of the line was 0 = no disease activity and the extreme right end of the line was 100 = maximum disease activity. The physician marked the line and the distance from the left edge was measured in mm.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834763|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity During the Initial Treatment Period|Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) where the extreme left end of the line was 0 = no disease activity and the extreme right end of the line was 100 = maximum disease activity. The physician marked the line and the distance from the left edge was measured in mm.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834764|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in TJC During the Re-Treatment Period|Joints assessed for swelling consisted of shoulders, elbows, wrists, interphalangeal (digit 1), distal interphalangeal joints (digits 2-5), proximal interphalangeal joints (digits 2-5), metacarpophalangeal joints (digits 1-5), and knees.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||tender joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
834765|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in TJC During the Initial Treatment Period|Joints assessed for swelling consisted of shoulders, elbows, wrists, interphalangeal (digit 1), distal interphalangeal joints (digits 2-5), proximal interphalangeal joints (digits 2-5), metacarpophalangeal joints (digits 1-5), and knees.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specific parameter at a given visit.||tender joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
834766|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SJC During the Re-Treatment Period|Joints assessed for swelling consisted of shoulders, elbows, wrists, interphalangeal (digit 1), distal interphalangeal joints (digits 2-5), proximal interphalangeal joints (digits 2-5), metacarpophalangeal joints (digits 1-5), and knees.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given vist.||swollen joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
834767|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SJC During the Initial Treatment Period|Joints assessed for swelling consisted of shoulders, elbows, wrists, interphalangeal (digit 1), distal interphalangeal joints (digits 2-5), proximal interphalangeal joints (digits 2-5), metacarpophalangeal joints (digits 1-5), and knees.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||swollen joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
834768|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DAS28 During the Re-Treatment Period|The DAS28 scoring used 4 core components: SJC, TJC, Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity, and ESR. The DAS28 has a continuous scale ranging from 0 to 9.4. The level of disease activity was interpreted as low (DAS28 score ≤3.2), moderate (DAS28 score >3.2 but ≤5.1), or high (DAS28 score >5.1). A DAS28 score <2.6 corresponded to a state of remission according to American Rheumatism Association criteria. A change of 1.2 units in DAS28 in an individual participant was considered a significant change.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834769|NCT01272908|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DAS28 During the Initial Treatment Period|The DAS28 scoring used 4 core components: SJC, TJC, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity, and ESR. The DAS28 has a continuous scale ranging from 0 to 9.4. The level of disease activity was interpreted as low (DAS28 score ≤3.2), moderate (DAS28 score >3.2 but ≤5.1), or high (DAS28 score >5.1). A DAS28 score <2.6 corresponded to a state of remission according to American Rheumatism Association criteria. A change of 1.2 units in DAS28 in an individual participant was considered a significant change.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population; n (number) = number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834770|NCT01272908|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting EULAR Response Criteria During the Re-Treatment Period|The EULAR response criteria were based on the assessment of disease activity using the DAS28. The EULAR response criteria included not only change in disease activity but current disease activity. To be classified as responders, participants had to have a significant change in DAS28 and a low current disease activity. There were 4 categories of EULAR response rates: good, moderate, good/moderate, and none. The DAS28 scoring used 4 core components: SJC, TJC, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity, and ESR. The DAS28 has a continuous scale ranging from 0 to 9.4. The level of disease activity was interpreted as low (DAS28 score ≤3.2), moderate (DAS28 score >3.2 but ≤5.1), or high (DAS28 score >5.1). A DAS28 score <2.6 corresponded to a state of remission according to American Rheumatism Association criteria.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
834771|NCT01272908|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response Criteria During the Initial Treatment Period|The EULAR response criteria were based on the assessment of disease activity using the DAS28. The EULAR response criteria included not only change in disease activity but current disease activity. To be classified as responders, participants had to have a significant change in DAS28 and a low current disease activity. There were 4 categories of EULAR response rates: good, moderate, good/moderate, and none. The DAS28 scoring used 4 core components: SJC, TJC, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity, and ESR. The DAS28 has a continuous scale ranging from 0 to 9.4. The level of disease activity was interpreted as low (DAS28 score less than or equal to [≤]3.2), moderate (DAS28 score greater than [>]3.2 but ≤5.1), or high (DAS28 score >5.1). A DAS28 score <2.6 corresponded to a state of remission according to American Rheumatism Association criteria.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
834772|NCT01272908|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Clinical Response Per ACR Criteria During the Re-Treatment Period|Complete clinical response was defined as having an ACR70 for at least 13 weeks.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
834773|NCT01272908|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting ACR Response Criteria During the Re-treatment Period|ACR20/50/70, defined as ≥20%, 50%, or 70% improvement, respectively, compared to baseline in TJC and SJC, and 20%/50%/70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 additional ACR core set variables: Patient Assessment of Pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; HAQ-DI; and an acute phase reactant (ESR or CRP). If CRP was missing or not done, then ESR was used.|Weeks 12 and 24 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
834774|NCT01272908|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Clinical Response Per ACR Criteria During the Initial Treatment Period|Complete clinical response was defined as having an ACR70 for at least 13 weeks.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
834775|NCT01272908|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Response Criteria During the Initial Treatment Period|ACR20/50/70, defined as ≥20 percent (%), 50%, or 70% improvement, respectively, compared to baseline in tender joint count (TJC) and swollen joint count (SJC), and 20%/50%/70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 additional ACR core set variables: Patient Assessment of Pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity; Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI); and an acute phase reactant (erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR] or C-Reactive Protein [CRP]). If CRP was missing or not done, then ESR was used.|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
834776|NCT01272908|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events During the Re-Treatment Period - Overall Summary|Percentage of participants who reported an AE or SAE, a drug-related AE, who had an acute infusion reaction, an AE leading to study drug discontinuation, with an infection or serious infection, or who died.|Days 1, 2, 15, and 16 and Week 48 of Re-treatment period|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
834777|NCT01272908|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events During the Initial Treatment Period - Overall Summary|Percentage of participants who reported an AE or serious AE (SAE), a drug-related AE, who had an acute infusion reaction, an AE leading to study drug discontinuation, with an infection or serious infection, or who died.|Days 1, 2, 15, and 16 and Week 48 of Initial treatment period|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
834778|NCT01272921|Primary|Duration of Motor and Sensory Block of the Sciatic With 0.5% Bupivacaine and Ropivacaine After Ultrasound-guided Nerve-stimulator–Assisted Needle Positioning Beneath the CIEL|Subject reported and investigator measured motor and sensory blockade of the sciatic nerve with less than 10ml of 0.5% bupivacaine and ropivacaine after ultrasound-guided nerve-stimulator–assisted needle positioning beneath the common investing external layer (CIEL).|3 days|||Hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834779|NCT01272921|Secondary|Cumulative Probabilities for Needle Positioning Above and Below CIEL.|The cumulative probability distributions for the minimal current to evoke a motor response with the needle tip positioned external (above) to the common investing extraneural layer (CIEL) and the cumulative probability distribution for the needle tip postioned internal (below) to the CIEL were sought. The difference in the mean minimum threshold current (mA) for the external (above) and internal (below) CIEL positioning were calculated.|1 Day|||Amplitude (mA)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834780|NCT01272934|Secondary|Onset of Pain Relief|Onset of perceptible pain relief.|On day 1|||Hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834781|NCT01272934|Primary|Pain on Movement|"Pain on Movement at 72 hours assessed on a 100 mm visual analog scale with anchors at 0=No pain and 100= Extreme pain"|72 hours|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
834782|NCT01272947|Secondary|Onset of Pain Relief|Onset of perceptible pain relief.|From randomization to end of day 1|||Hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834785|NCT01273064|Secondary|Greater Than 2 Log Decline in HCV-RNA at Study Weeks 12, 24 and 48|"Percent of patients experiencing a drop in Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV-RNA, also known as viral load) levels in the blood equal to, or greater than, 2 log from before treatment (baseline) through 12, 24, and 48 weeks of treatment."|Baseline, and Study Weeks 12, 24, and 48|Due to the premature discontinuation of this study and termination of the entire CTS-1027 program, an efficacy analysis was not conducted. No patients completed the study.||Percent of participants|||Number
834786|NCT01273064|Primary|Sustained Virologic Response|Percent of patients that achieve a sustained virologic response (SVR) at Week 72 defined as HCV-RNA (Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid, also known as 'viral load') level below the quantification limit (BQL) at Week 72.|Baseline and 24 weeks after the end of treatment (Week 72)|Due to the premature discontinuation of this study and termination of the entire CTS-1027 program, an efficacy analysis was not conducted. No patients completed the study.||Percent of participants|||Number
834787|NCT01273181|Primary|Clinical Tumor Regression (Complete Response (CR) + Partial Response (PR)) in Patients With Metastatic Cancer|Tumor regression response is assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Complete response (CR) is a disappearance of all target lesions. Partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD.|2 years|||Participants|||Number
834788|NCT01273181|Primary|Toxicity Profile|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|2 years|||Participants|||Number
834789|NCT01273519|Primary|Participant Assessment of the Presence of Distress Caused by Pain in the Last 3 Months Recorded on a Likert Scale at Baseline and Month 12|Participants indicated their perception of average distress caused by pain in the past 3 months on a 5-point Likert scale, where; 0 = no pain, 1 = not distressed, 2 = slightly distressed, 3 = moderately distressed, 4 = greatly distressed by pains.|Baseline, Month 12|All participants with an assessment.||participants|||Number
834790|NCT01273519|Secondary|Mean C-reactive Protein (CRP) at Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|The CRP is an acute phase reactant plasma protein, normally produced by the liver, which is commonly used as an indirect measure of the extent and activity of an inflammation. The CRP normal reference range in the blood is, as a rule, from 0 to 1.0 mg/dL.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834791|NCT01273519|Secondary|Mean Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) at Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|The ESR is a practicable and sensitive but not specific parameter for measuring disease progression. By means of the ESR it can be generally distinguished between an active and nonactive rheumatic disease. The normal reference range is, as a rule, 0 to 10 mm/h for men and 0 to 15 mm/h for women. The higher the ESR value out of the normal range, the higher is the disease activity.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||mm/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
834792|NCT01273519|Secondary|Mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) for Participants With Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) at Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|The BASDAI is used for measuring and evaluating disease activity in AS. This index consists of 6 questions pertaining to the 5 major symptoms of AS: fatigue, spinal pain, joint pain/swelling, areas of localized tenderness (or enthesitis, defined as inflammation of tendons and ligaments), duration of morning stiffness, severity of morning stiffness. A visual analogue scale ranging from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe) is used to answer the questions. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10 (0 being no problem and 10 being the worst problem).|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834793|NCT01273519|Secondary|Mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) Scores at Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"The BASFI is a set of 10 questions designed to determine the degree of functional limitation in those with AS. The 10 questions were chosen with a major input from patients with AS. The first 8 questions consider activities related to functional anatomy. The final 2 questions assess the participants' ability to cope with everyday life. A visual analogue scale (with 0 being easy and 10 impossible”) is used to answer the questions on the test."|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12|Participants with AS or PsA and an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834794|NCT01273519|Secondary|Mean Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index (RADAI) at Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|The RADAI is a questionnaire for patients used for measuring disease activity. The index consists of 6 questions. The items ask the participants about (1) global disease activity in the last 6 months, (2) disease activity in terms of current swollen and tender joints, (3) arthritis pain, (4) the current status of health, (5) duration of morning stiffness and (6) tender joints to be rated in a joint list. The joint list asks about pain in the left and right shoulders, elbows, wrists, fingers, hips, knees, ankles and toes. The first 4 items are all rated on a numeric rating scale from 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate more disease activity. The scores on the last 2 items range from 0 to 6 and 0 to 48, respectively, but are transformed on the same scale of 0 to 10. The RADAI total score is the sum of individual items divided by 5 (range 0-10), with a higher score signifying more disease activity.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834795|NCT01273519|Secondary|Mean Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Scores at Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|The HAQ-DI is a participant-reported questionnaire. It consists of 20 questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where 0 represents no disability and 3 represents very severe, high-dependency disability. The minimal clinically important difference defined for the HAQ-DI is ≥0.22. HAQ remission, indicating normal physical function, is defined as HAQ-DI < 0.5.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834843|NCT01280591|Secondary|Cumulative Proportion of Subjects Taking Rescue Medication by Hour|If rescue medication was taken by a subject for pain, then the time of rescue medication administration was recorded|Up to 10 hours|Safety Population||participants|||Number
834796|NCT01273519|Secondary|Mean Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36) Summary of Scales at Baseline, and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|The SF-36 determines participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual role because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems; 7) limitations in usual role due to emotional problems; and 8) general mental health. Items 1 to 4 primarily contribute to the physical component summary score (PCS) of the SF-36. Items 5 to 8 primarily contribute to the mental component summary score (MCS) of the SF-36. Scores on each item are summed and averaged (range = 0 [worst] to 100 [best ]). The standard recall period is 4 weeks. Increases from Baseline indicate improvement.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834797|NCT01273519|Primary|Participant Assessment of the Presence of Nocturnal Pain Progression in the Past 3 Months at Baseline and Month 12|Participants assessed how often on average they noted the presence of nocturnal pain in the past 3 month according to the following descriptors: never; rarely (not exceeding once a week), every night (awake from sleep at least once a night), more than once a night per week.|Baseline, Month 12|All participants with an assessment.||participants|||Number
834798|NCT01273519|Primary|Participant Assessment of the Pattern of Pain Progression (Sudden/Creeping) in the Past 3 Months at Baseline and Month 12|Participants assessed the pattern of their pain progression in the past 3 months according to the following descriptors: the type of beginning of pain was mostly sudden; the type of beginning of pain was mostly creeping.|Baseline, Month 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||participants|||Number
834799|NCT01273519|Primary|Participant Assessment of the Pattern of Pain Progression (Daytime/Nocturnal) in the Past 3 Months at Baseline and Month 12|Participants assessed the pattern of their pain progression in the past 3 months according to the following descriptors: intermittent (daytime and/or nocturnal); mostly daytime; mostly nocturnal; continuous (daytime and nocturnal).|Baseline, Month 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||participants|||Number
834800|NCT01273519|Primary|Participant Assessment of Pain Intensity in the Past 3 Months Recorded on a Likert Scale at Baseline and Month 12|Participants measured their pain intensity in the past 3 months by specifying their level of pain in response to the question “How intensive was your pain on average in the past 3 months?” on a 4-point Likert scale, where 0 = no pain; 1 = mild pain, 2 = moderate pain, 3 = severe pain.|Baseline, Month 12|All participants with an assessment.||participants|||Number
834801|NCT01273519|Primary|Participant Assessment of Pain Intensity in the Past 3 Months Recorded on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|Participants measured their pain intensity in the past 3 months on a visual analogue scale (VAS), where the responses were on a continuous range from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst pain imaginable).|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834802|NCT01273519|Primary|Participant Assessment of Present Pain Intensity Recorded on a Likert Scale at Baseline and Month 12|Participants measured their present pain intensity by specifying their level of pain in response to the question “How intensive is your pain at present?” on a 4-point Likert scale, where 0 = no pain; 1 = mild pain, 2 = moderate pain, 3 = severe pain.|Baseline, Month 12|All participants with an assessment at time point.||participants|||Number
834803|NCT01273519|Primary|Physician Assessment of Present Pain Intensity Recorded on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|Physicians measured participants' present pain intensity on a visual analogue scale (VAS), where the responses were on a continuous range from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst pain imaginable).|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834804|NCT01273519|Primary|Participant Assessment of Present Pain Intensity Recorded on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|Participants measured their present pain intensity on a visual analogue scale (VAS), where the responses were on a continuous range from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst pain imaginable).|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12|All participants with an assessment. n=number of participants with an assessment at time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834805|NCT01273597|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hyperphosphataemia During 6 Months of Selective Vitamin D Receptor Activator (Paricalcitol) Treatment|Hyperphosphataemia (serum phosphorus > 1.78 mmol/L), based on laboratory data, was collected during the observed 6 months treatment with Zemplar (paricalcitol injection).|6 months|Participants with available retrospective data (cohort analyzed for Outcome Measure 8) were analyzed prospectively at Month 6 of treatment.||participants|||Number
834806|NCT01273597|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hyperphosphataemia During Preceding Conventional Vitamin D Therapy|Hyperphosphataemia (serum phosphorus >1.78 mmol/L) among participants during the preceding 6 months of conventional vitamin D therapy was derived from retrospective data collection in case report form, reported at baseline. Conventional vitamin D therapy included vitamin D supplement products from ATC group A11CC (vitamin D and analogues).|6 months prior to start of study through baseline|Participants with available retrospective data||participants|||Number
834807|NCT01273597|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hypercalcaemia During 6 Months of Selective Vitamin D Receptor Activator (Paricalcitol) Treatment|Hypercalcaemia (serum calcium > 2.6 mmol/L), based on laboratory data, was collected during the observed 6 months treatment with Zemplar (paricalcitol injection).|6 months|Participants with available retrospective data (cohort analyzed for Outcome Measure 6) were analyzed prospectively at Month 6 of treatment.||participants|||Number
834808|NCT01273597|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hypercalcaemia During Preceding 6 Months of Conventional Vitamin D Therapy|Hypercalcaemia (serum calcium > 2.6 mmol/L) among participants during the preceding 6 months of conventional vitamin D therapy was derived from retrospective data collection in case report form, reported at baseline. Conventional vitamin D therapy included vitamin D supplement products from ATC group A11CC (vitamin D and analogues).|6 months prior to start of study through baseline|Participants with available retrospective data||participants|||Number
834844|NCT01280591|Secondary|Time to Rescue Medication|If rescue medication was taken by a subject for pain, then the time of rescue medication administration was recorded|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834809|NCT01273597|Secondary|Country–Specific Data on the Usage of Medication Affecting Secondary Hyperparathyroidism|If available, data on the use of medication affecting secondary hyperparathyroidism (those who received calcimimetics and calcium supplementation) in the 6 months leading up to paricalcitol treatment and during 6 months of paricalcitol treatment were also collected.|6 months prior to start of study through 6 months of treatment|This outcome measure was not analyzed due to lack of data.|||||
834810|NCT01273597|Secondary|Country–Specific Data on the Usage of Medication Affecting Phosphorus (P) Balance|If available, data on the use of phosphate binders (those who received calcium-based phosphate binders or sevelamer/lanthanum) in the 6 months leading up to paricalcitol treatment and during 6 months of paricalcitol treatment were also collected.|6 months prior to start of study through 6 months of treatment|This outcome measure was not analyzed due to lack of data.|||||
834811|NCT01273597|Secondary|Country–Specific Data on the Usage of Medication Affecting Calcium (Ca) Balance|If available, data on vitamin D treatment (those who received vitamin D supplement products from Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical [ATC] group A11CC [vitamin D and analogues]) in the 6 months leading up to paricalcitol treatment and during 6 months of paricalcitol treatment were also collected.|6 months prior to start of study through 6 months of treatment|This outcome measure was not analyzed due to lack of data.|||||
834812|NCT01273597|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Target Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) Levels at Month 6|Target intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) values were within the target therapeutic range of 150 - 300 pg/mL, corresponding to 15.9 - 31.8 pmol/L.|6 months|All participants||participants|||Number
834813|NCT01273597|Primary|Time (in Weeks) From Treatment Initiation to Achieving Maintenance Dose of Zemplar (Paricalcitol Injection)|Maintenance dose is defined as weekly dose of paricalcitol that results in at least 2 consecutive intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) values within the target therapeutic range of 150 - 300 pg/mL, corresponding to 15.9 - 31.8 pmol/L.|6 months|Participants who achieved maintenance dose of Zemplar (paricalcitol injection)||weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
834814|NCT01273623|Secondary|Residual Diameter Stenosis|lumen diameter stenosis change post-atherectomy|Day 0|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
834815|NCT01273623|Secondary|Adjunctive Therapy Use||Day 0|||percentage of participants|||Number
834816|NCT01273623|Primary|Luminal Area Change|lumen area change as measured by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)|Day 0|||mm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
834817|NCT01273766|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Documented Bacterial, Fungal, and Viral Infections|Records will be assessed at baseline and prospectively while on study.|Baseline, up to 6 months||||||
834818|NCT01273766|Secondary|Need for Hospitalization, Ventilator Support, Exchange Transfusion/Apheresis or Treatment With Antifungals or Antibiotics|Records will be assessed at baseline and prospectively while on study.|Baseline, up to 6 months||||||
834819|NCT01273766|Primary|Changes in Mean Neutrophil Values (as Measured by Lab) for Arm 1 (Other Arms Were Used for Calibration Only)|Changes in Neutrophils between baseline and mean neutrophils values during treatment (measured after each dose)|Baseline, up to 6 months|||10^9 Neutrophils per Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834820|NCT01273805|Secondary|Grade 4-5 Treatment-Related Toxicity|All grade 4-5 adverse events with treatment attribution of possibly, probably or definite based on CTCAEv3 as reported on case report forms.|Adverse events were assessed each cycle throughout treatment. Participants were followed for the duration of treatment, an average of 34 days for this study population.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||Participants|||Count of Participants
834821|NCT01273805|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|Progression-free survival based on the Kaplan-Meier method is defined as the duration of time from study entry to time of objective progression on CT scan or the time of death for patients with clinical deterioration resulting in withdrawal from the trial. Per RECIST 1.0 criteria: progressive disease (PD) is at least a 20% increase in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. PD for the evaluation of non-target lesions is the appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of non-target lesions. Patients without an event were censored at date of last disease evaluation.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and every 2 months on treatment. Median PFS follow-up in this study cohort was 46.5 days (95% CI 33-61).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all enrolled patients.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834822|NCT01273805|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival estimated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) methods is defined as the time from study entry to death or date last known alive.|All patients were followed until death. Median survival follow-up in this study cohort was 60 days (95% CI: 40-184).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all enrolled patients.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834823|NCT01273805|Secondary|Tumor Response Rate|Tumor response rate is the percentage of patients achieving complete or partial response on treatment based on RECIST 1.0 criteria. For target lesions, complete response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions and partial response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference baseline sum LD. CR for the evaluation of non-target lesions is the disappearance of non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. Appearance of one or more new lesions is classified as progression of non-target lesions. CR or PR confirmation is required >/= 4 weeks.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and every 2 months on treatment. Median duration of treatment for this study cohort was 34 days.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all enrolled patients.||percentage of patients|||Number
834824|NCT01273805|Secondary|Biochemical Response Rate|Biochemical response rate was defined as the percentage of patients achieving on treatment a decrease in serum CA 19-9 by > 30% from baseline.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and every 2 months on treatment. Median duration of treatment for this study cohort was 34 days.|Biochemical response could not be estimated due to insufficient longitudinal CA 19-9 measurements. This was directly related to the observed lack of activity of the study drug and corresponding short duration of therapy.|||||
834838|NCT01280552|Secondary|Progression Free Survival in HLA- A2 Patients|"Progression Free Survival in a prespecified subpopulation of patients with HLA-A2 haplotype.
Intent to treat population includes all randomized patients. PFS is defined as the time from randomization until the date of documented progressive disease (PD) or death, whichever occurs first, or last date known alive and progression free if progression or death is not observed"|2-3 yers|HLA-A2 patients||months of progression free survival||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834825|NCT01273805|Primary|2-month Progression-Free Survival Rate|2-month progression-free survival rate was defined as the percentage of patients absent progression (PD) or death before 2 months. Patients were considered to have experienced PD if they demonstrated either clinical deterioration resulting in withdrawal or PD per RECIST 1.0 criteria: At least a 20% increase in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. PD for the evaluation of non-target lesions is the appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of non-target lesions.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and at the first restaging at 2 months.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all enrolled patients.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
834826|NCT01273818|Primary|Number of Infections in Each Study Arm|Patients were examined on postoperative 30 days for the presence of surgical site infection.|within the 30 days after surgery|||infections|||Number
834827|NCT01273818|Primary|Rate of Post-operative Infection||within the first 30 days after surgery||||||
834828|NCT01273857|Secondary|Serious Adverse Events|The incidence of hospitalization for heart failure, ventricular arrhythmia, general infection, and renal and hepatic dysfunction by CDC treatment.|3 months to 1 year after cell transplantation|||participants|||Number
834829|NCT01273857|Primary|Feasibility Evaluation and Major Cardiac Adverse Events Related to Transcoronary Infusion of Cardiac Progenitor Cells|"Feasibility was assessed by number of participants discontinued the study due to adverse events or number of participants received unsuccessful cell delivery by study physician. Unsuccessful was defined as failure of coronary selection of guiding catheter or direct cell infusion.
The primary end point is to monitor major adverse cardiac events include death, sustained/symptomatic ventricular tachycardia, aggravation of heart failure, new myocardial infarction, unplanned cardiovascular operation for cardiac tamponade and infection in the first month after injection, and serially afterwards."|3 months to 1 year after cell transplantation|||participants|||Number
834830|NCT01273883|Secondary|Comparison of Average Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) Across All Women|The Tinnitus Handicap Inventory measures the extent that tinnitus interferes with daily activities and sleep.The questionnaire consists of 25 questions, the score can range from 0 (slight problem) to 100 (catastrophic). The score can be converted to a categorical variable as follows: 0-16=Slight; 18-36=Mild; 38-56=Moderate; 58-76=Severe; 78-100=Catastrophic.|Pre-treatment, Post-treatment, up to four weeks|Not all the female subjects completed the THI questionnaire.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834831|NCT01273883|Secondary|Comparison of Average Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) Across All Men|The Tinnitus Handicap Inventory measures the extent that tinnitus interferes with daily activities and sleep.The questionnaire consists of 25 questions, the score can range from 0 (slight problem) to 100 (catastrophic). The score can be converted to a categorical variable as follows: 0-16=Slight; 18-36=Mild; 38-56=Moderate; 58-76=Severe; 78-100=Catastrophic.|Pre-treatment, Post-treatment, up to four weeks|Not all male subjects completed the THI questionnaire.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834832|NCT01273883|Secondary|Comparison of Average Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) Across All Subjects|The Tinnitus Handicap Inventory measures the extent that tinnitus interferes with daily activities and sleep.The questionnaire consists of 25 questions, the score can range from 0 (slight problem) to 100 (catastrophic). The score can be converted to a categorical variable as follows: 0-16=Slight; 18-36=Mild; 38-56=Moderate; 58-76=Severe; 78-100=Catastrophic.|Pre-treatment, Post-treatment, up to four weeks|Not all subjects completed the THI questionnaire.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834833|NCT01273883|Primary|Tinnitus Distress Rating|This is a single-item patient-reported distress rating on a 0-10 scale, with 0=no tinnitus to 10=worst possible tinnitus.|Pre-treatment, Post-treatment, up to four weeks|Not all subjects completed the distress rating scale.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834834|NCT01273896|Primary|Overall Response Rate|To determine the overall response rate using RECIST v 1.1 criteria, defined as PR +CR.using RECIST v 1.1 criteria, defined as Partial response + complete response|Radiological imaging studies to evaluate tumor status will be repeated during the rest week (Days 22 to 28) of every third cycle|||participants|||Number
834835|NCT01280357|Primary|The Mean Positive Percentage Agreement (PPA) for Maternal Heart Between Device 1 Monica AN24 & Device 2 Philips 50XM|During Labor & delivery, maternal heart rate was measured between the Monica AN24 & the Philips 50XM and the waveforms of the 2 devices were measured to see the percentage of time they were in agreement.|during labor and delivery the waveforms were measured for between 35 minutes and 15 hours during the first and second stage of labour|"Of the remaining 34 participants in the clinical trials.The data was collected in the following manner.
31 participants were used in a FDA 6 way trial for Fetal Heart Rate (FHR)and Uterine Activity (UA) 2 participants were uesd in a 3 way trial for FHR
1 participant was used in a 3 way trial for UA Equates to 33 files for FHR & 32 files for UA"||Positive percantage agreement (PPA)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834836|NCT01280357|Primary|The Mean Positive Percentage Agreement (PPA) for Fetal Heart Between Device 1 Monica AN24 & Device 2 Philips 50XM|During Labor & delivery, fetal heart rate was measured between the Monica AN24 & the Philips 50XM and the waveforms of the 2 devices were measured to see the percentage of time they were in agreement.|during labor and delivery the waveforms were measured for between 35 minutes and 15 hours during the first and second stage of labour|"Of the remaining 34 participants in the clinical trials.The data was collected in the following manner.
31 participants were used in a FDA 6 way trial for Fetal Heart Rate (FHR)and Uterine Activity (UA) 2 participants were uesd in a 3 way trial for FHR
1 participant was used in a 3 way trial for UA Equates to 33 files for FHR & 32 files for UA"||Positive percantage agreement (PPA)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834837|NCT01280357|Secondary|The Mean Positive Percentage Agreement for Uterine Contractions Between the Monica AN24 & The Philips 50XM|During labor and delivery uterine contractions were measured between the Monica AN24 & the philips 50XM, the waveforms of the two devices were measured to see the percentage of time they were in agreement|between 35 mins & 15hrs during first & second stage labor|"Of the remaining 34 participants in the clinical trials.The data was collected in the following manner.
31 participants were used in FDA 6 way trial for Fetal Heart Rate (FHR) and Uterine Activity (UA) 2 participants were used in a 3 way trial for FHR
1 participant was used in a 3 way trial for UA Equates to 33 files for FHR & 32 files for UA"||Positive Percentage Agreement (PPA)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
834864|NCT01280604|Secondary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST)|AST levels will be assessed in study participants 6-10 weeks after entry into study.|6-10 weeks|||international units/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834845|NCT01280591|Secondary|Overall Rating of Pain Relief|"The Pain Relief Rating Scale was a 5-point categorical scale which included the following possible responses to the request to finish statement Overall, the relief from my starting pain was: no relief (0); a little relief (1); some relief (2); a lot of relief (3); complete relief (4)."|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
834846|NCT01280591|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain Intensity|Pain Severity was collected on a 4-point categorical scale: 0=no pain, 1=mild pain, 2=moderate pain, 4=severe pain|Baseline and up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834847|NCT01280591|Secondary|Subjective Sleep Questionnaire - Number of Minutes You Think That You Were Awake From the Time You Fell Asleep Until the Time You Got Out of Bed|Subjects responded to Estimate of the amount of time the subject was awake from the time he or she fell asleep until the time he or she got out of bed (hours and minutes)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834848|NCT01280591|Secondary|Subjective Sleep Questionnaire - Time to Fall Asleep Last Night|Subjects responded to Estimate of how long it took to fall asleep (minutes)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834849|NCT01280591|Secondary|Subjective Sleep Questionnaire - Refreshing Nature of Your Sleep Last Night|Subjects responded to Refreshing nature of sleep (10-point scale, where 1 was not refreshing and 10 was very refreshing)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834850|NCT01280591|Secondary|Subjective Sleep Questionnaire - Quality of Your Sleep Last Night|Subjects responded to Quality of sleep (10-point scale, where 1 was poor and 10 was excellent)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834851|NCT01280591|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Sufficient Sleep|Subjects responded to the following question: Did you get enough (sufficient) sleep? no, definitely too little (1); no, much too little (2); no, somewhat too little (3); yes, almost enough (4); yes, definitely enough (5)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
834852|NCT01280591|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Well Rested|Subjects responded to the following question: Well Rested? not rested at all (1); somewhat unrested (2); completely rested (3)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
834853|NCT01280591|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Ease of Awakening|Subjects responded to the following question: Ease of awakening? (1) very difficult; (2) rather difficult; (3) neither difficult nor easy; (4) rather easy; very easy (5)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
834854|NCT01280591|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Premature Awakening|Subjects responded to the following question: Premature awakening? woke up much too early (1); woke up somewhat too early (2); no (3)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
834855|NCT01280591|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Easiness to Fall Asleep|Subjects responded to the following question: How easy was it to fall asleep? very difficult (1); rather difficult (2); neither difficult nor easy (3); rather easy (4); very easy (5)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
834856|NCT01280591|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Calmness of Sleep|Subjects responded to the following question: How calm was your sleep? very restless (1); rather restless (2); neither restless nor calm (3); rather calm (4); very calm (5)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
834857|NCT01280591|Secondary|Karolinska Sleep Diary - Sleep Quality|Subjects responded to the following question: How was your sleep? very poor (1); rather poor (2); neither poor nor good (3); rather good (4); very good (5)|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
834858|NCT01280591|Secondary|Global Assessment of Investigational Product as a Sleep Aid|The Global Assessment of Investigational Product as a Sleep-Aid was rated using a 5-point categorical scale for which the potential response was poor (0), fair, (1), good (2), very good (3), or excellent (4).|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population with available data (missing values were not imputed)||Participants|||Number
834859|NCT01280591|Secondary|Sleep Efficiency Measured by Actigraphy|Sleep efficiency was calculated as (total sleep time/total time in-bed time) × 100; total in-bed time was fixed at 10 hours. Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Percent of sleep time during in-bed time||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
834860|NCT01280591|Secondary|Total Sleep Time Measured by Actigraphy|Total time time was measured as total time spent sleeping (not to exceed 600 minutes) during the in-bed period as measured by actigraphy. Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
834861|NCT01280591|Primary|Sleep Latency Measured by Actigraphy|Sleep latency was defined as the time to sleep onset from the time of dosing as measured by actigraphy. Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834862|NCT01280591|Primary|Wake Time After Sleep Onset (WASO) Measured by Actigraphy|WASO was defined as Total wake time (in minutes) after sleep onset during the 10 hours in-bed period as measured by actigraphy. Actigraphy is a non-intrusive tool that measures an individual’s movement during sleep. Actigraphy was used to obtain data in discriminating between sleep and wake states in the subjects.|Up to 10 hours|ITT (Intent to Treat) Population||Minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
834863|NCT01280604|Secondary|Serum Creatinine(SCr)|SCr levels will be assessed in study participants 6-10 weeks after entry into study.|6-10 weeks|||milligram/deciliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834869|NCT01280955|Secondary|TNF-alpha at Day 14|TNF-alpha at day 14; Tumor necrosis factor is a cell signaling protein (cytokine) involved in systemic inflammation and is one of the cytokines that make up the acute phase reaction. The primary role of TNF is in the regulation of immune cells.|14 days|the population includes subject for which we have data at Day 14.||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
834870|NCT01280955|Secondary|TNF-alpha at Day 7|TNF-alpha at day 7; Tumor necrosis factor is a cell signaling protein (cytokine) involved in systemic inflammation and is one of the cytokines that make up the acute phase reaction. The primary role of TNF is in the regulation of immune cells.|7 days|the population includes subject for which we have data at Day 7.||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
834871|NCT01280955|Secondary|IFN Gamma at Day 14|IFN gamma at day 14; Interferon gamma (IFNγ) is a dimerized soluble cytokine that is the only member of the type II class of interferons which are important for immunity against infection.|14 days|the population includes subject for which we have data at Day 14.||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
834872|NCT01280955|Secondary|IFN Gamma at Day 7|IFN gamma at day 7; Interferon gamma (IFNγ) is a dimerized soluble cytokine that is the only member of the type II class of interferons which are important for immunity against infection.|7 days|the population includes subject for which we have data at Day 7.||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
834873|NCT01280955|Secondary|IL-12 at Day 14|IL-12 at day 14; Interleukin 12 (IL-12) is an interleukin that is naturally produced by dendritic cells, macrophages, neutrophils, and human B-lymphoblastoid cells (NC-37) in response to antigenic stimulation.|14 days|the population includes all participants for which we have data at day 14||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
834874|NCT01280955|Secondary|IL-12 at Day 7|IL-12 at day 7; Interleukin 12 (IL-12) is an interleukin that is naturally produced by dendritic cells, macrophages, neutrophils, and human B-lymphoblastoid cells (NC-37) in response to antigenic stimulation.|7 days|the population includes all participants for which we have data at day 7||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
834875|NCT01280955|Secondary|B Cell Count at Day 60|B cell count at Day 60; B cells, also known as B lymphocytes, are a type of white blood cell of the lymphocyte subtype and they function as part of the immune system.|60 days|the population includes subjects for which we have data at Day 60.||number of B cells||Full Range|Median
834876|NCT01280955|Secondary|B Cell Count at Day 30|B cell count at Day 30; B cells, also known as B lymphocytes, are a type of white blood cell of the lymphocyte subtype and they function as part of the immune system.|30 days|the population includes subjects for which we have data at Day 30.||number of B cells||Full Range|Median
834877|NCT01280955|Secondary|NK Cell Count at Day 60|NK cell count at Day 60;Natural killer cells or NK cells are a type of cytotoxic lymphocyte critical to the immune system.|60 days|the population includes subjects for which we have data at Day 60.||number of NK cells||Full Range|Median
834878|NCT01280955|Secondary|NK Cell Count at Day 30|NK cell count at Day 30;Natural killer cells or NK cells are a type of cytotoxic lymphocyte critical to the immune system.|30 days|the population includes subjects for which we have data at Day 30.||number of NK cells||Full Range|Median
834879|NCT01280955|Secondary|CD8 Cell Count at Day 60|CD8 cell count at Day 60; CD8 (cluster of differentiation 8) is a transmembrane glycoprotein that serves as a co-receptor for the T cell receptor (TCR).|60 days|the population includes subjects for which we have data at day 60||number of CD8 cells||Full Range|Median
834880|NCT01280955|Secondary|CD8 Cell Count at Day 30|CD8 cell count at Day 30; CD8 (cluster of differentiation 8) is a transmembrane glycoprotein that serves as a co-receptor for the T cell receptor (TCR).|30 days|the population includes subjects for which we have data at day 30||number of CD8 cells||Full Range|Median
834881|NCT01280955|Secondary|CD4 Cell Count at Day 60|CD4 cell count at Day 60; CD4+ T helper cells are white blood cells that are an essential part of the human immune system. They are often referred to as CD4 cells, T-helper cells or T4 cells.|60 days|The population includes subjects for which we have data at day 30.||number of CD4 cells||Full Range|Median
834882|NCT01280955|Secondary|CD4 Cell Count at Day 30|CD4 cell count at Day 30; CD4+ T helper cells are white blood cells that are an essential part of the human immune system. They are often referred to as CD4 cells, T-helper cells or T4 cells.|30 days|The population includes subjects for which we have data at day 30.||number of CD4 cells||Full Range|Median
834883|NCT01280955|Secondary|TNF-alpha at Day 30|TNF-alpha at day 30; Tumor necrosis factor is a cell signaling protein (cytokine) involved in systemic inflammation and is one of the cytokines that make up the acute phase reaction. The primary role of TNF is in the regulation of immune cells.|30 days|the population includes subject for which we have data at Day 30.||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
834884|NCT01280955|Secondary|IFN Gamma at Day 30|IFN gamma at day 30; Interferon gamma (IFNγ) is a dimerized soluble cytokine that is the only member of the type II class of interferons which are important for immunity against infection.|30 days|the population includes subject for which we have data at Day 30.||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
834885|NCT01280955|Secondary|B Cell Count at Day 90|B cell count at Day 90; B cells, also known as B lymphocytes, are a type of white blood cell of the lymphocyte subtype and they function as part of the immune system.|90 days|the population includes subjects for which we have data at Day 90.||number of B cells||Full Range|Median
834886|NCT01280955|Secondary|NK Cell Count at Day 90|NK cell count at Day 90;Natural killer cells or NK cells are a type of cytotoxic lymphocyte critical to the immune system.|90 days|the population includes subjects for which we have data at Day 90.||number of NK cells||Full Range|Median
834887|NCT01280955|Secondary|CD8 Cell Count at Day 90|CD8 cell count at Day 90; CD8 (cluster of differentiation 8) is a transmembrane glycoprotein that serves as a co-receptor for the T cell receptor (TCR).|90 days|the population includes subjects for which we have data at day 90||number of CD8 cells||Full Range|Median
834888|NCT01280955|Secondary|CD4 Cell Count at Day 90|CD4 cell count at Day 90; CD4+ T helper cells are white blood cells that are an essential part of the human immune system. They are often referred to as CD4 cells, T-helper cells or T4 cells.|90 days|The population includes subjects for which we have data at day 90.||number of CD4 cells||Full Range|Median
834889|NCT01280955|Secondary|CD3+ Cell Count at Day 90|Cell reconstitution - CD3+ cell count at day 90 post transplant. This is a marker for the function of your immune system.|90 Days|the population includes all participants for which we have data at day 90||number of CD3+ cells||Full Range|Median
837968|NCT01309893|Primary|Distance High Contrast logMAR Visual Acuity at 1 Week|Mean difference in distance high contrast logMAR over all lens VAs (visual acuity) from Baseline and 1 Week|Baseline & 1 week|All eligible, dispensed eyes||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
834890|NCT01280955|Secondary|Participants Experiencing Grade II-IV Acute Graft Versus Host Disease|We are reporting on the number of participants experiencing a grade II-IV acute graft versus host disease will be assessed weekly through Day 100 post transplant. Staging and grading of Acute GvHD is graded by pattern of organ involvement and clinical performance status using the Grading Index of Acute GvHD (Gluckman) and the Grading Index of Acute GVHD by the CIBMTR (Centers for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research)|100 days|||participants|||Number
834891|NCT01280955|Secondary|IL-12 at Day 30|IL-12 at day 30; Interleukin 12 (IL-12) is an interleukin that is naturally produced by dendritic cells, macrophages, neutrophils, and human B-lymphoblastoid cells (NC-37) in response to antigenic stimulation.|30 days|the population includes all participants for which we have data at day 30||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
834892|NCT01280955|Secondary|Absolute Lymphocyte Count at Day 90|Cell reconstitution - absolute lymphocyte count at day 90 post transplant.|90 days|the population includes all participants for which we have data at day 90||number of lymphocytes||Full Range|Median
834893|NCT01280955|Secondary|Transplant-related Mortality||100 Days Post Transplant|Out of the 30 transplant recipients, one participant withdrew and was therefore not analyzed||participants|||Number
834894|NCT01280955|Primary|Plerixafor-associated Adverse Events||100 Days Post Transplant|Out of the 30 transplant recipients, one participant withdrew and was therefore not analyzed||number of adverse events|||Number
834895|NCT01280955|Primary|Time to Platelet Recovery|platelet > 20,000/ul on 2 consecutive days|100 Days Post Transplant|Out of the 30 transplant recipients, one participant withdrew and was therefore not analyzed||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834896|NCT01280955|Primary|Time to Neutrophil Recovery|leukocytes > 500/ul on 2 consecutive days|100 Days post Transplant|Out of the 30 transplant recipients, one participant withdrew and was therefore not analyzed||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834897|NCT01280968|Primary|Vaccination-Induced Percent Change in Initial Slope of Brain Nicotine Accumulation After a Single Puff||measured at week 1 and week 16|||percentage of change||Standard Error|Mean
834898|NCT01280968|Primary|Vaccination-Induced Percent Change in T1/2 of Brain Nicotine Accumulation After Single or Multiple (7) Puffs|"There was a 2 hour washout period between the single puff and multiple puffs assessments."|measured at week 1 and week 16|||percentage of change||Standard Error|Mean
834899|NCT01280968|Primary|Vaccine-Induced Percent Change in Brain Nicotine Maximum Concentration After Single or Multiple (7) Puffs|"There was a 2 hour washout period between the single puff and multiple puffs assessments."|measured at week 1 and week 16|||percentage of change||Standard Error|Mean
834900|NCT01280968|Primary|Vaccine-Induced Percent Change in Brain Nicotine Area Under Curve (AUC) After Single or Multiple (7) Puffs|"There was a 2 hour washout period between the single puff and multiple puffs assessments."|measured at week 1 and week 16|||percentage of change||Standard Error|Mean
834901|NCT01280981|Secondary|Mean Fridericia-corrected QT Interval (QTcFRI) at Month 9|The QT interval is the period that extends from the beginning of ventricular depolarization until the end of ventricular repolarization|Month 9|Intent to treat participants who had an electrocardiogram (ECG) at month 9||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
834902|NCT01280981|Secondary|Mean Intraocular Pressure at Month 9|Mean intraocular pressure at month 9 or the early termination visit.|Day 1 up to Month 9|Intent to treat participants who had ophthalmic exams.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834903|NCT01280981|Secondary|Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Experiences (TEAE) of Laboratory Values Related to Treatment|Participants whose laboratory examinations (hematology, blood chemistry and urinalysis) were considered by the investigator to be treatment emergent adverse experiences (TEAE) and related to treatment. Also indicated is whether the TEAE lab parameter caused the participant to discontinue from the study.|Day 1 to up to Month 9|Intent to treat population||participants|||Number
834904|NCT01280981|Secondary|Mean Blood Pressure Measurements at Week 36|Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure measurements taken at week 36|approximately week 36|Intent to treat population of participants with week 36 blood pressure data.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834905|NCT01280981|Secondary|Participants With Abnormal Gynecological Examinations|Participants with abnormal gynecological examination findings based on endometrial biopsies and transvaginal ultraonogrphy (TVU) are summarized. Clinically significant results from the endometrial biopsies are results that are not benign. Abnormalities found during transvaginal ultrasonography (TVU) are detailed in the AE listings. Please refer to AE listings.|Day 1 to up to Month 9|Intent to treat population||participants|||Number
834906|NCT01280981|Primary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|Count of participants with treatment-emergent adverse events grouped in categories regarding relationship to study drug as assessed by the investigator, serious or life-threatening as assessed by the investigator, participants who died or their event led to withdrawal from study, and participants who experienced thrombotic or thromboembolic AEs.|Day 1 to up to Month 9|Intent to treat population (ITT)||participants|||Number
834907|NCT01281007|Secondary|Safety Will be Evaluated by the Adverse Events Occurence|Adverse events will be collected and followed in order to evaluate safety and tolerability|Day 5||||||
834908|NCT01281007|Primary|Efficacy Will be Evaluated by the Proportion of Subjects With Non Herpes Manifestation|Symptoms evaluated: erythema, papule, vesicle, ulcer, crust, or healed skin.|Day 5|||subjects|||Number
834909|NCT01281124|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Analyzed using a Kaplan-Meier methods.|From the day of initial treatment until documented disease progression (per PET) or death, assessed up to 12 weeks after completion of study treatment|Data analysis was not done due to low accrual for this trial.|||||
834910|NCT01281124|Secondary|Overall Survival|Analyzed using a Kaplan-Meier methods.|From the day of initial treatment until death (from any cause), assessed up to 12 weeks after completion of study treatment|Data analysis was not done due to low accrual for this trial.|||||
834911|NCT01281124|Primary|DNA Hypomethylation and Re-expression of Silenced Tumor Suppressor Genes When Stratified for Low or High Expression of mir29|The change in mean methylation of the genes between the patients with a low mir29 and a high mir29 expression will be evaluated by a two-sample t-test. Secondary analyses include a multivariate regression where all 5 changes in methylation will be regressed on mir29 expression (low vs. high) and adjusted for patient demographic and clinical attributes at baseline.|Up to 12 weeks after completion of study treatment|Data analysis was not done due to low accrual for this trial.|||||
834912|NCT01281202|Secondary|Number of Participants With Cocaine Use||Week 3 - 9|||participants|||Number
834915|NCT01281306|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved Blood Pressure Control and Blood Pressure Response|Sitting BP measurements were performed at trough (23-26 hours post-morning dose). Blood pressure control was defined as msSBP/MSDBP < 140/90 mmHg. Blood pressure response in msSBP was defined as <140 mmHg or a reduction >= 20mmHg from baseline. Blood pressure response in msDBP was defined as < 90 mmHg or a reduction >= 10 mmHg from baseline.|8 weeks|Only participants of the full analysuis set (FAS), who had week 8 measurements, were included in the analysis. The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of double-blind study medication.||Number of participants|||Number
834916|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in maSBP and maDBP in Participants >= 65 Years of Age|Twenty four hour ABPM was performed twice duirng the study at baseline and week 8. The second ABPM assessment was performed only in participants who had successfully completed the ABPM assessment at baseline. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|A subset of randomized participants, who were >= 65 years of age and had ABPM measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834917|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in maSBP and maDBP in Participants < 65 Years of Age|Twenty four hour ABPM was performed twice duirng the study at baseline and week 8. The second ABPM assessment was performed only in participants who had successfully completed the ABPM assessment at baseline. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|A subset of randomized participants, who were leass than 65 years of age and had ABPM measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834918|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in msSBP and msDBP in Participants >= 65 Years of Age|Sitting BP measurements were performed at trough (23-26 hours post-morning dose). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Only participants of the full analysuis set (FAS), who were >= 65 years of age and had measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis. The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of double-blind study medication.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834919|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in msSBP and msDBP in Participants < 65 Years of Age|Sitting BP measurements were performed at trough (23-26 hours post-morning dose). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Only participants of the full analysuis set (FAS), who were < 65 years of age and had measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis. The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of double-blind study medication.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834920|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in maSBP and maDBP in Non-dippers|Twenty four hour ABPM was performed twice duirng the study at baseline and week 8. The second ABPM assessment was performed only in participants who had successfully completed the ABPM assessment at baseline. Dippers were defined as participants who showed a decrease of at least 10% in maSBP during the night (10pm-6am) compared with the daytime level. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|A subset of randomized participants, who had ABPM measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834921|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in maSBP and maDBP in Dippers|Twenty four hour ABPM was performed twice during the study at baseline and week 8. The second ABPM assessment was performed only in participants who had successfully completed the ABPM assessment at baseline. Dippers were defined as participants who showed a decrease of at least 10% in maSBP during the night (10pm-6am) compared with the daytime level. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|A subset of randomized participants, who had ABPM measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834922|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Ambulatory Pulse Pressure|Pulse rate measurements were performed. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|A subset of randomized participants, who had ABPM measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834923|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Pulse Pressure|Pulse rate measurements were performed. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Only participants of the full analysis set (FAS), who had measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis. The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of double-blind study medication.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834924|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nighttime maSBP and maDBP|Twenty four hour ABPM was performed twice duirng the study at baseline and week 8. The second ABPM assessment was performed only in participants who had successfully completed the ABPM assessment at baseline. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and 8 weeks|A subset of randomized participants, who had ABPM measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834925|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daytime maSBP and maDBP|Twenty four hour ABPM was performed twice during the study at baseline and week 8. The second ABPM assessment was performed only in participants who had successfully completed the ABPM assessment at baseline. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|A subset of randomized participants, who had ABPM measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834926|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean 24 Hour Ambulatory SBP (maSBP) and Mean 24 Hour Ambulatory DBP (maDBP)|Twenty four hour ABPM was performed twice duirng the study at baseline and week 8. The second ABPM assessment was performed only in participants who had successfully completed the ABPM assessment at baseline. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|A subset of randomized participants, who had ABPM measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834927|NCT01281306|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP)|Sitting BP measurements were performed at trough (23-26 hours post-morning dose). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Only participants of the full analysuis set (FAS), who had measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis. The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of double-blind study medication.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837969|NCT01309919|Secondary|Insertion Time|Time of insertion of the IUD|immediate|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834928|NCT01281306|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP)|Sitting BP measurements were performed at trough (23-26 hours post-morning dose). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, 8 weeks|Only participants of the full analysuis set (FAS), who had measurements at both baseline and week 8, were included in the analysis. The FAS included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of double-blind study medication.||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
834929|NCT01281475|Secondary|Presence of Tremors||1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834930|NCT01281475|Primary|Bayley Cognitive Age Equivalent at 1 Year||12 months|||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
834931|NCT01281501|Secondary|Number of Participants That Have Overall Satisfaction on the Treatment|The satisfaction will be assessed by a simple, self-reported yes/no question.|1 hour after treatment|||participants|||Number
834932|NCT01281501|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Effect|The adverse effects include blurred vision, dry mouth, dizziness, headache, palpitation and diarrhea.|1 hour after treatment||||||
834933|NCT01281501|Secondary|"Number of Participants in the Predefined Non-responders"|“Non-responders” defined the participants who had < 50% decrease in post-treatment VAS compared with pre-treatment evaluation or post-treatment scores > 40 at the end of the study.|pretreatment and 1 hour after treatment|||participants|||Number
834934|NCT01281501|Secondary|"Number of Participants in the Predefined Responders"|"Responders define the participants who have ≥ 50% decrease in post-treatment pain scores compared with the pre-treatment evaluation and also have the post-treatment scores ≤ 40 at the end of the study."|pretreatment and 1 hour after treatment|||participants|||Number
834935|NCT01281501|Primary|Pain Scores on the 100-millimeter Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 1 Hour After Treatment|Post-treatment VAS will be consecutively measured every 15 minutes until 1 hour after treatment. Minimal and maximal VAS score of every measurement is 0 to 100 millimeters. VAS scores at 1 hour after treatment were the primary outcome measurement. The patients who had <50% decrement between pre- and 1-hour post-treatment VAS or post-treatment scores > 40 millimeters were defined as “Non-responders”(worse outcome). In the same way, those who had ≥ 50% decrement between pre- and 1-hour post-treatment VAS and post-treatment scores≤ 40 millimeters were defined as “Responders” (good outcome).|1 hour after treatment|All enrolled patients were analyzed with the intention-to-treat principles.||millimeter||Standard Deviation|Mean
834936|NCT01281644|Secondary|Patient Self-rated Severity|This outcome measure was the difference in disease severity total score, combining redness and roughness/bumpiness scales, between the treated site and the control site, as rated by the patient at 12 weeks post-initial visit. These scales were not validated, as no relevant validated scale was available. Each scale ranged from 0 to 3, with 0 being none and 3 being severe. The total score summed the redness and roughness/bumpiness scale scores for a range of 0 (none/better outcome) to 6 (severe/worse outcome).|12 weeks|||units on a scale|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834937|NCT01281644|Primary|Difference in Disease Severity Scores|The primary outcome measure was the difference in disease severity total score, combining redness and roughness/bumpiness scales, between the treated site and the control site, as rated by the blinded dermatologists at 12 weeks post-initial visit. These scales were not validated, as no relevant validated scale was available. However, raters were trained and calibrated on the use of the scale, and prior to review of study images, were asked to rate archival skin images on the same 4-point qualitative subscales used in the study. Each scale ranged from 0 to 3, with 0 being none and 3 being severe. The total score summed the redness and roughness/bumpiness scale scores for a range of 0 (none/better outcome) to 6 (severe/worse outcome).|12 weeks|||units on a scale|Participants|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
834938|NCT01281839|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of TMC435: Systemic Clearance (CL)|The table below shows mean (standard deviation) of CL values of TMC435. To calculate the mean CL for the study, CL values were derived for each participant at each visit and then the median of CL values across visits for each participant was used to calculate the mean CL for the study.|From the time of administration through Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
834939|NCT01281839|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of TMC435: Predose Plasma Concentration (C0h)|The table below shows mean (standard deviation) of C0h values of TMC435. To calculate the mean C0h for the study, C0h values were derived for each participant at each visit and then the median of C0h values across visits for each participant was used to calculate the mean C0h for the study.|Before administration of TMC435 through Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834940|NCT01281839|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of TMC435: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From the Time of Administration to 24 Hours After Dosing (AUC24h)|The table below shows mean (standard deviation) values of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time of administration to 24 hours (AUC 24hr) after dosing for TMC435. To calculate the mean AUC 24 for the study, AUC 24 hr values were derived for each participant at each visit and then the median of AUC value across visits for each participant was used to calculate the mean AUC 24 hr for the study.|From the time of administration up to 24 hours after dosing through Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
834941|NCT01281839|Secondary|Median Time to Normalization of Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels|The table below shows the median time to normalization of ALT levels.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834942|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Normalization of Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT)|The percentage of participants analyzed were those with baseline ALT values out of the normal range (ie, 156 of 260 participants in the TMC435 treatment group and 84 of 133 participants in the Placebo group had ALT values at baseline that were out of the normal range.). Normalization of ALT values means that ALT values out of the normal range returned to within the normal range.|Up to Week 48|Participants with baseline ALT values out of normal range were used for this analysis from intent-to treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834943|NCT01281839|Secondary|Time From End-of-treatment to Viral Relapse|The table below shows the mean number of days to viral relapse, defined as participants having confirmed detectable plasma level of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) during the follow-up period in participants with undetectable plasma HCV RNA (<25 IU/mL undetectable) at the end of treatment.|Up to Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||Standard Error|Mean
834944|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Viral Breakthrough at Different Time Points|The table below shows the percentage of participants at different time points with viral breakthrough, defined as a confirmed increase of greater than 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) level from the lowest level reached (ie, lowest value measured in between baseline and current value), or a confirmed plasma HCV RNA level of greater than 100 IU/mL in participants whose plasma HCV RNA had previously been below the limit of quantification (25 IU/mL detectable) or undetectable (<25 IU/mL undetectable).|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834945|NCT01281839|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <1000 IU/mL|The table below shows mean time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <1000 IU/mL.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834946|NCT01281839|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <100 IU/mL|The table below shows mean time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <100 IU/mL.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834947|NCT01281839|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <25 IU/mL Undetectable or Detectable|The table below shows mean time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <25 IU/mL undetectable or detectable.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834948|NCT01281839|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <25 IU/mL Undetectable|The table below shows mean time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <25 IU/mL undetectable or detectable.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834949|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Failure|The table below shows percentage of participants with on-treatment failure defined as confirmed detectable Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels at actual end of treatment.|Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834950|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Completed All Study Treatment at Week 24 Because of the Treatment Duration Rule|The table below shows the percentage of participants in the TMC435 treatment group who met the treatment duration rule (ie, having hepatitis C virus [HCV] ribonucleic acid [RNA] levels <25 IU/mL detectable or undetectable at Week 4 and undetectable HCV RNA levels at Week 12) and completed treatment with PegIFNα-2a and RBV for 24 weeks. Participants in the TMC435 treatment group not meeting RGT criteria and participants in the placebo group were treated with PegIFNα-2a and RBV treatment for 48 weeks.|Week 24|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834951|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Viral Relapse|The table below shows the percentage of participants with viral relapse, defined as having confirmed detectable plasma level of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) during the follow-up period in participants with undetectable plasma HCV RNA (less than 25 IU/mL undetectable) at the end of treatment.|Up to Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834952|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Viral Breakthrough|The table below shows the percentage of participants with viral breakthrough, defined as a confirmed increase of greater than 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) level from the lowest level reached (ie, lowest value measured in between baseline and current value), or a confirmed plasma HCV RNA level of greater than 100 IU/mL in participants whose plasma HCV RNA had previously been below the limit of quantification (25 IU/mL detectable) or undetectable (<25 IU/mL undetectable).|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834953|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Partial Response|The table below shows the percentage of participants with partial response, defined as =>2 log10 reduction in Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) at Week 12 compared to baseline, but not achieving undetectable HCV RNA while on treatment.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834954|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Null Response|The table below shows the percentage of participants with null response, defined as <2 log10 reduction in Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid at Week 12 compared to baseline.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834955|NCT01281839|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With in Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Levels >1000 IU/mL at Week 4|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group with HCV RNA levels >1000 IU/mL at Week 4.|Week 4|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
835002|NCT01282203|Secondary|Creatine Kinase Myocardial Isoenzyme (if Available)|Creatine kinase myocardial isoenzyme values measured within 24 hours of anesthesia were to be collected when available.|Within 24 hours after anesthesia|No data were available for the creatine kinase myocardial isoenzyme outcome measure.|||||
834956|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With <1 log10 Decrease in Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) From Baseline at Week 4|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group with <1 log10 HCV RNA decrease at Week 4.|Week 4|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834957|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Extended Rapid Virologic Response (eRVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who had a eRVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus ribonucleic acid levels at Week 4 and 12.|Week 4 and Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834958|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who had a cEVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus ribonucleic acid levels at Week 12.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834959|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Early Virologic Response (EVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants who achieved an EVR, defined as having a change from baseline in plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid of greater than or equal to 2 log10 at Week 12.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834960|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Rapid Virologic Response (RVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a RVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels after receiving 4 weeks of treatment.|Week 4|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834961|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Virologic Response at All Time Points|The table below shows the percentage of participants with HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA plasma levels below the limit of detection (ie, <25 IU/mL undetectable), the percentage of participants with a HCV RNA plasma level below the limit of quantification (ie, less than [<] 25 IU/mL detectable or undetectable), the percentage of participants with plasma levels of HCV RNA <100 IU/mL, the percentage of participants with virologic responses of a greater than or equal to 2 log10 change from baseline in plasma levels of HCV RNA.|Day 3, Week 1, Week 2, Week 8, Week 16, Week 20, Week 28, Week 36, and Week 42|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834962|NCT01281839|Secondary|Actual Values of log10 Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA)|The table below shows actual values of log10 HCV RNA levels. From Week 4 onwards, most participants in TMC 435 150mg 12Wks PR24/48 group had plasma HCV RNA levels below the limit of detection of the HCV RNA assay.|Day 3, Week 1, Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Error|Mean
834963|NCT01281839|Secondary|Change From Baseline in log10 Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA)|The table below shows change from baseline in log10 HCV RNA levels.|Day 3, Week 1, Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Error|Mean
834964|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Sustained Virologic Response 4 Weeks After the Planned End of Treatment (SVR4)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR4, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels 4 weeks after planned end of treatment.|Week 28 or Week 52|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834965|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks After the Planned End of Treatment (SVR24)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR24, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels 24 weeks after planned end of treatment.|Week 48 or Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834966|NCT01281839|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Sustained Virologic Response at Week 72 (SVRW72)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVRW72, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels at end of treatment (EOT) and at Week 72.|Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
834967|NCT01281839|Primary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks After the Planned End of Treatment (SVR12)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR12, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid 12 weeks after planned end of treatment.|Week 36 or Week 60|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
834968|NCT01281865|Primary|Response Rate (CR + PR) Assessed by RECIST 1.1 (Phase II)||At 8 weeks|||participants|||Number
834969|NCT01281917|Secondary|Overall Survival|Length of time from enrollment until death.|Up to 60 months|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834970|NCT01281917|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of Response is how long a response to therapy is held before a subject has progressive disease.|Up to 60 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834971|NCT01281917|Secondary|Tolerability of the Regimen|Tolerability of the regimen is measured by the number of subjects able to complete the therapy as planned.|Up to 36 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
834975|NCT01281917|Primary|Overall Response Rate|The primary objective of this study is to determine whether Velcade in combination with temsirolimus provides benefit to subjects with relapsed or refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma as assessed by overall response rate (ORR) to therapy. ORR is the sum of patients with a Complete Response and Partial Response to therapy. Per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete REsponse (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 60 months|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Median
834976|NCT01282086|Secondary|Correlation Between Anesthesiologists' Clinical Experience and Time to Extubation and Awakening|Anesthesiologists' length of clinical experience with general anesthesia and modern inhalation agents was collected. The influence of this clinical experience on anesthesia parameters was evaluated by calculating Spearman's correlation coefficient between the duration of clinical experience (exp) with inhalation (inh) anesthesia and Sevorane on the time to extubation and the time to awakening, respectively.|Every minute after anesthesia was stopped until the patient was extubated and until the patient responded to a verbal command.|All participants with available data at each time point were included in the analysis.||Spearman's correlation coefficient|||Number
834977|NCT01282086|Secondary|Correlation Between Anesthesiologists' Clinical Experience and Hemodynamic Parameters During Anesthesia|The anesthesiologists' length of clinical experience with Sevorane was collected. The influence of this experience on the changes in hemodynamic parameters during anesthesia with Sevorane was evaluated by calculating Spearman's correlation coefficient between the duration of clinical experience with Sevorane and the changes in blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, and heart rate between T0 (before anesthesia) and T1 (at the end of induction), T2 (at the end of surgical incision), T3 (at the end of extubation), T4 (1 hour after the operation), and the minimum and maximum values, respectively.|Before starting anesthesia to one hour after the operation|All participants with available data were included in the analysis. n=the number of participants with available data at given time point.||Spearman's correlation coefficient|||Number
834978|NCT01282086|Secondary|Creatine Kinase Myocardial Isoenzyme (if Available)|Creatine kinase myocardial isoenzyme (CK-MB) values measured within 24 hours of anesthesia were to be collected when available.|Within 24 hours after anesthesia|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
834979|NCT01282086|Secondary|Cardiac Troponin (Troponin T) (if Available)|Troponin T values measured within 24 hours of anesthesia were to be collected when available. No data were reported for this outcome measure during the study.|Within 24 hours after anesthesia|No data were available for the cardiac troponin outcome measure.|||||
834980|NCT01282086|Secondary|Presence of Deviations in Electrocardiogram Assessments During Anesthesia|Electrocardiogram (ECG) assessments performed during induction of the anesthesia and maintenance were analyzed with respect to the presence of the following deviations: blockades (problems with heart electrical activity), extrasystoles (extra abnormal heart beats), arrhythmia (abnormal heart rate or rhythm), and myocardial ischemia (decreased blood flow to the heart).|During induction and maintenance of anesthesia on Day 1|All participants with valid data were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
834981|NCT01282086|Secondary|Heart Rate|The heart rate of each patient was recorded at different time points from just before the start of anesthesia to one hour after the operation concluded.|Before starting anesthesia to one hour after the operation|All participants with available data were included in the analysis. n=the number of participants with available data at given time point.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
834982|NCT01282086|Secondary|Mean Arterial Pressure|The mean arterial pressure of each patient was recorded at different time points from just before the start of anesthesia to one hour after the operation concluded.|Before starting anesthesia to one hour after the operation|All participants with available data were included in the analysis. n=the number of participants with available data at given time point.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834983|NCT01282086|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure|The diastolic blood pressure of each patient was recorded at different time points from just before the start of anesthesia to one hour after the operation concluded.|Before starting anesthesia to one hour after the operation|All participants with available data were included in the analysis. n=the number of participants with available data at given time point.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834984|NCT01282086|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure|The systolic blood pressure of each patient was recorded at different time points from just before the start of anesthesia to one hour after the operation concluded.|Before starting anesthesia to one hour after the operation|All participants with available data were included in the analysis. n= the number of participants with available data at given time point.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
834985|NCT01282086|Primary|Patients' Overall Impression of the Anesthesia With Sevorane|After awakening from anesthesia, patients were surveyed regarding their overall impression of anesthesia with Sevorane. Patients selected one of the following answers: excellent, positive, indifferent, or other.|Day 1|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
834986|NCT01282086|Primary|Anesthesiologists' Satisfaction With Using Sevorane for Induction and Maintenance Anesthesia|The anesthesiologist's overall satisfaction with the inhalation anesthesia with Sevorane for each patient was assessed by means of a numerical rating scale ranging from 0 (dissatisfied) to 10 (very satisfied).|Day 1|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
834987|NCT01282086|Primary|Time to Extubation of Patients|Time to extubation was measured from the time anesthesia administration was stopped until tracheal extubation occurred.|Every minute after anesthesia was stopped until extubation occurred|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834988|NCT01282086|Primary|Time to Awakening of Patients|Measured from the time anesthesia administration was stopped until the patient responded to a verbal command.|Every minute after anesthesia was stopped until the patient responded to a verbal command|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834989|NCT01282086|Primary|Time to Loss of Consciousness of Patients Administered Anesthesia|Loss of consciousness was measured from the time the anesthetic was administered until loss of consciousness (loss of eyelash reflex) occurred.|Up to 16 minutes|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
834990|NCT01282138|Primary|Change From Baseline in Patient-Assessed Ocular Itching, Conjunctival Allergen Provocation Test (CAPT), at 3 Hours|As assessed by the participant after 3 hours of CAPT. Ocular itching was graded on a 0-4 scale, where 0=none, 1=tickling sensation involving one or more corners of the eye, 2=all over tickling sensation; 3=moderate continuous itching with desire to rub; 4=severe itching with irresistible urge to rub.|Baseline, 3 hours|All enrolled participants||Units on a scale|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
834991|NCT01282138|Primary|Change From Baseline in Patient-Assessed Ocular Itching, Environmental Exposure Chamber (EEC), at 3 Hours|As assessed by the participant after 3 hours in the EEC. Ocular itching was graded on a 0-4 scale, where 0=none, 1=tickling sensation involving one or more corners of the eye, 2=all over tickling sensation; 3=moderate continuous itching with desire to rub; 4=severe itching with irresistible urge to rub.|Baseline, 3 hours|All enrolled participants||Units on a scale|Participants|Standard Error|Mean
834992|NCT01282164|Primary|Peak Cortisol Level During Adrenocorticotropin Hormone (ACTH) Stimulation Test|The peak cortisol level during ACTH stimulation test in 3 patients with adult onset hypothalamic-pituitary disease who were older than 65 years of age and could not under go insulin tolerance test (ITT).|one year|Peak cortisol level during ACTH stimulation test in three patients with hypothalamic-pituitary disorders who were older than 65 and could not undergo ITT based on the study protocol||ug/dL||Full Range|Median
834993|NCT01282164|Primary|Peak Cortisol Level in Adult Patients With Hypothalamic-pituitary Disorders and Three or More Pituitary Hormone Deficiency (PHD).|The peak cortisol level during Insulin Tolerance Test (ITT), fixed- dose glucagon stimulation test (GST) and weight-based GST in patients with adult onset hypothalamic-pituitary disease and three or more pituitary hormone deficiency (PHD) other than growth hormone (GH) deficiency.|one year|Peak cortisol level during Insulin Tolerance test, fixed-dose GST and weight-based GST in Patients with hypothalamic-pituitary disorders with three or more pituitary hormone deficiency other than GH deficiency. Two patients older than 65 years of age underwent adrenocorticotropin hormone (ACTH) stimulation test instead of ITT.||ug/dL||Full Range|Median
834994|NCT01282164|Primary|Peak Cortisol Level in Healthy Volunteers.|The peak cortisol levels during Insulin Tolerance Test (ITT), fixed- dose glucagon stimulation test (GST) and weight-based GST in healthy volunteers.|one year|Peak cortisol levels during Insulin Tolerance test, fixed-dose GST and weight-based GST in healthy volunteers||ug/dL||Full Range|Median
834995|NCT01282164|Primary|Peak Cortisol Level in Adult Patients With Hypothalamic-pituitary Disorders and 1-2 Pituitary Hormone Deficiency (PHD).|The peak cortisol level during Insulin Tolerance Test (ITT), fixed- dose glucagon stimulation test (GST) and weight-based GST in patients with adult onset hypothalamic-pituitary disease and 1-2 pituitary hormone deficiency (PHD) other than growth hormone (GH) deficiency.|one year|Peak cortisol levels during Insulin Tolerance test, fixed-dose GST and weight-based GST in Patients with hypothalamic-pituitary disorders and 1-2 pituitary hormone deficiency other than GH deficiency. One patient older than 65 years of age underwent ACTH stimulation test instead of ITT||ug/dL||Full Range|Median
834996|NCT01282164|Primary|Peak GH Level in Adult Patients With Hypothalamic-pituitary Disorders and Three or More Pituitary Hormone Deficiency (PHD).|The peak growth hormone (GH) during Insulin Tolerance Test (ITT), fixed- dose glucagon stimulation test (GST) and weight-based GST in patients with adult onset hypothalamic-pituitary disease with three or more pituitary hormone deficiency (PHD) other than growth hormone (GH) deficiency.|one year|Peak GH levels during Insulin Tolerance test, fixed-dose GST and weight-based GST in Patients with hypothalamic-pituitary disorders with three or more pituitary hormone deficiency other than GH deficiency. Two patients older than 65 years underwent adrenocorticotropin hormone (ACTH) stimulation test instead of ITT.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
834997|NCT01282164|Primary|Peak Growth Hormone (GH) Level in Healthy Volunteers|The peak growth hormone (GH) during Insulin Tolerance Test (ITT), fixed- dose glucagon stimulation test (GST) and weight-based GST in healthy volunteers|one year|||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
834998|NCT01282164|Primary|Peak GH Level in Adult Patients With Hypothalamic-pituitary Disorders and 1-2 Pituitary Hormone Deficiency (PHD).|The peak growth hormone (GH) during Insulin Tolerance Test (ITT), fixed- dose glucagon stimulation test (GST) and weight-based GST in patients with adult onset hypothalamic-pituitary disease and 1-2 pituitary hormone deficiency (PHD) other than growth hormone (GH) deficiency.|one year|Peak GH levels during Insulin Tolerance test, fixed-dose GST and weight-based GST in Patients with hypothalamic-pituitary disorders and 1-2 pituitary hormone deficiency other than GH deficiency. One patient older than 65 years underwent adrenocorticotropin hormone (ACTH) stimulation test instead of ITT.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
834999|NCT01282203|Secondary|Anesthesiologists' Duration of Clinical Experience With Anesthesia|Mean number of years of participating anesthesiologists' clinical experience with general anesthesia, with modern inhalation agents, and with Sevorane. (See Outcome Measures 13 and 14 for correlated data.)|Baseline|Number of anesthesiologists participating in study.||years||Standard Deviation|Mean
835000|NCT01282203|Secondary|Correlation Between Anesthesiologists' Clinical Experience and Time to Extubation and Awakening|Anesthesiologists’ length of clinical experience with general anesthesia and modern inhalation agents was collected (see Outcome Measure 15). The influence of this clinical experience on anesthesia parameters was evaluated by calculating Spearman's correlation coefficient between the duration of clinical experience with inhalation anesthesia and Sevorane on the time to extubation and the time to awakening, respectively.|Every minute after anesthesia was stopped until the patient was extubated and until the patient responded to a verbal command|All participants with available data at each time point were included in the analysis.||Spearman's correlation coefficient|||Number
835001|NCT01282203|Secondary|Correlation Between Anesthesiologists' Clinical Experience and Hemodynamic Parameters During Anesthesia|The anesthesiologists' length of clinical experience with Sevorane was collected (see Outcome Measure 15). The influence of this experience on the changes in hemodynamic parameters during anesthesia with Sevorane was evaluated by calculating Spearman's correlation coefficient between the duration of clinical experience with Sevorane and the changes in blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, and heart rate between T0 (before anesthesia) and T1 (at the end of induction), T2 (at the end of surgical incision), T3 (at the end of extubation), T4 ( 1 hour after the surgery), and the minimum and maximum values, respectively.|Before starting anesthesia to one hour after the surgery|All participants with available data at each time point were included in the analysis.||Spearman's correlation coefficient|||Number
835004|NCT01282203|Secondary|Presence of Deviations in Electrocardiogram Assessments During Anesthesia|Electrocardiogram (ECG) assessments performed during induction of the anesthesia and maintenance were analyzed with respect to the presence of the following deviations: Blockades (problems with heart electrical activity), extrasystoles (extra abnormal heart beats), arrhythmia (abnormal heart rate or rhythm), and myocardial ischemia (decreased blood flow to the heart).|During induction and maintenance of anesthesia|All participants with valid data were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
835005|NCT01282203|Secondary|Heart Rate|The heart rate of each patient was recorded at different time points from just before the start of anesthesia to one hour after the surgery concluded.|Before starting anesthesia to one hour after the surgery|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
835006|NCT01282203|Secondary|Mean Arterial Pressure|The mean arterial pressure of each patient was recorded at different time points from just before the start of anesthesia to one hour after the surgery concluded.|Before starting anesthesia to one hour after the surgery|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835007|NCT01282203|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure|The diastolic blood pressure of each patient was recorded at different time points from just before the start of anesthesia to one hour after the surgery concluded.|Before starting anesthesia to one hour after the surgery|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835008|NCT01282203|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure|The systolic blood pressure of each patient was recorded at different time points from just before the start of anesthesia to one hour after the surgery concluded.|Before starting anesthesia to one hour after the surgery|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835009|NCT01282203|Primary|Patients' Overall Impression of Anesthesia With Sevorane|After awakening from anesthesia, patients were surveyed regarding their overall impression of anesthesia with Sevorane. Patients selected one of the following answers: Excellent, positive, indifferent, or other.|Day 1|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
835010|NCT01282203|Primary|Anesthesiologists' Satisfaction With Using Sevorane for Induction and Maintenance Anesthesia|The overall satisfaction of the anesthesiologist with the inhalation anesthesia with Sevorane for each patient was assessed by means of a numerical rating scale ranging from 0 (dissatisfied) to 10 (very satisfied).|Day 1|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835011|NCT01282203|Primary|Time to Extubation of Patients|Time to extubation was measured from the time anesthesia administration was stopped until tracheal extubation occurred.|Every minute after anesthesia was stopped until extubation occurred|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
835012|NCT01282203|Primary|Time to Awakening of Patients|Measured from the time anesthesia administration was stopped until the patient responded to a verbal command.|Every minute after anesthesia was stopped until the patient responded to a verbal command.|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
835013|NCT01282203|Primary|Time to Loss of Consciousness of Patients Administered Anesthesia|Loss of consciousness was measured from the time the anesthetic was administered until loss of consciousness (loss of eyelash reflex) occurred.|Up to 10 minutes|All participants with available data were included in the analysis.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
835014|NCT01282229|Secondary|Discomfort|Subjects recorded in a diary discomfort on a 10 point visual analog scale daily for the week following treatment. Subjects provided an estimate for each of the four treated quadrants. Zero (0) represents no pain or discomfort and ten (10) represents severe pain and/or discomfort. For each subject discomfort scores on each day from Day 1 to Day 7 were summed. Medians and ranges for each treatment are recorded. The total score could range from 0 to 70.|1-7 days|Subjects with missing data (e.g., missing diary entries) are not included in the analysis.||sum of units on a scale|Participants|Full Range|Median
835015|NCT01282229|Secondary|Change in Gingival Index|The gingival index is a 0-4 unit scale that the examiner uses to estimate the amount of edema and erythema at 2 locations (lingual and buccal) for every tooth in the quadrant. Zero (0) represents no redness and swelling and four (4) represents severe redness and swelling. Negative numbers are a decrease in in examiner estimate of erythema and edema and represent an improvement in clinical outcome.|Baseline, 6, 12 months|||units on a scale from 0-4|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835016|NCT01282229|Secondary|Change in Bleeding on Probing (BOP)|"Percent of pockets within a quadrant that changed from baseline to 6 or 12 months. Negative numbers are a decrease in bleeding on probing which represents clinical improvement.
Each quadrant within the patient represents one of four treatments, the unit of analysis. Pockets are replications within treatments and vary in number among quadrants."|Baseline, 6, 12 months|||percentage of pockets that bled|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835017|NCT01282229|Secondary|Change in Probing Depth (PD)|Positive numbers indicate average decrease in probing depth (improvement).|Baseline, 6, 12 months|||mm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835018|NCT01282229|Primary|Gain in Clinical Attachment Level of Periodontal Tissues|Periodontitis causes loss of attachment of the tooth root to the surrounding bone. Change in Clinical Attachment Level (CAL) estimates the number of mm's of reattachment gained as a result of the treatment.|Baseline, 6, 12 months|5-6 mm baseline PD partition had a different sample size than the 7+mm partition.||mm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835019|NCT01282242|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Symptomatic Cerebral Edema|Safety of IV rt-PA as evident by rates of symptomatic cerebral edema defined as brain edema with mass effect as the predominant cause of clinical deterioration.|Within 96 hours of tPA administration|||Participants|||Count of Participants
835020|NCT01282242|Primary|Number of Subjects With Symptomatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage|Safety of IV rt-PA as evident by rates of symptomatic ICH defined by an increase of 4 points or more on the NIHSS .|Within 7 days from tPA administration.|||Participants|||Count of Participants
835021|NCT01282294|Secondary|Time to Full Weight Bearing|The time from surgery to full weight bearing was assessed in days.|0 - 18 months|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8). 3 patients never reached full weight bearing, and 1 dropped out before 6 weeks.||days||Full Range|Median
835022|NCT01282294|Secondary|Patient's Perceived Satisfaction|Patient's perceived satisfaction was scored on a 100mm visual analog scale (VAS). A score of zero indicated no satisfaction, while a score of 100 indicated completely satisfied.|6 months|"Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).
Patient satisfaction was completed by 84 patients."||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835023|NCT01282294|Secondary|Pain by Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|Leg pain intensity was rated on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS). A score of zero indicated no pain at all, and 100 represented the worst possible pain.|6 weeks, 3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-operatively|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835024|NCT01282294|Secondary|Likelihood to Develop a Non-union Assessed by Surgeon|The likelihood to develop a non-union was assessed by the surgeon on a scale from 0 to 100 (0 = almost nil, 100 = absolutely sure).|6 weeks, 3 and 6 months post-operatively|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835025|NCT01282294|Secondary|Likelihood to Develop Wound Infection Assessed by Surgeon|The likelihood to develop a wound infection was assessed by the surgeon on a scale from 0 to 100 (0 = almost nil, 100 = absolutely sure).|6 weeks, 3 and 6 months post-operatively|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835026|NCT01282294|Primary|Infection Adverse Events|"Infections at the site of ETN PROtect implantation were classified according to Center for Disease Control (CDC) definition into:
superficial incisional surgical site infection (SSI), affecting skin and subcutaneous tissue
deep incisional SSI, affecting deep soft tissue
organ/ space SSI (Osteomyelitis), affecting joint or bursa"|0 - 18 months|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).||number of events|||Number
835027|NCT01282294|Primary|Functional Outcome: WOMAC|"The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire was administered at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-operatively to assess three dimensions: pain, disability and joint stiffness in the knee.
Each question is scored on a scale of 0-4, which correspond to: None (0), Mild (1), Moderate (2), Severe (3), and Extreme (4). The scores are summed up, with a possible score range of 0-96. A higher score on the WOMAC indicate more functional limitations."|3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-operatively|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835028|NCT01282294|Primary|Functional Outcome: IOWA Ankle Score|The Iowa Ankle Score was administered at baseline (retrospective assessment of pre-trauma condition) as well as at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-operatively to measures ankle function across four dimensions (function, freedom from pain, gait, range of motion) on a scale of 0-100, where 100 is assigned to full function.|Baseline, 3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-operatively|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835029|NCT01282294|Secondary|Surgeon's Perceived Satisfaction|Surgeons’ perceived satisfaction was assessed on a scale from 0 to 100 (0 = very satisfied, 100 = disappointed).|6 weeks, 3 and 6 months post-operatively|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835030|NCT01282294|Secondary|Evidence of Functional Bone Union According to Johnson Classification|"Functional bone union was assessed according to Johnson et al.*:
F0: motion at the fracture site; F1: level of pain is the same as before operation but able to perform all daily tasks of living; F2: occasional extremity pain and able to perform activities of daily living; F3: no pain and able to perform all activities except sports; F4: complete recovery, no recurrent episodes of pain, and unrestricted activity.
*Johnson EE, Urist MR, Finerman GA. Repair of segmental defects of the tibia with cancellous bone grafts augmented with human bone morphogenetic protein. A preliminary report. Clin.Orthop.Relat Res. 1988;249-57"|12 months|"Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).
For the anatomic bone union at 12 months, data of 78 patients is available."||participants|||Number
835031|NCT01282294|Secondary|Evidence of Economic Bone Union According to Johnson Classification|"Economic bone union was assessed according to Johnson et al.*:
E0: complete invalid; E1: no gainful employment; E2: able to work but did not return to previous occupation; E3: returned to previous occupation on a part-time or limited status; E4: returned to previous occupation without restrictions.
*Johnson EE, Urist MR, Finerman GA. Repair of segmental defects of the tibia with cancellous bone grafts augmented with human bone morphogenetic protein. A preliminary report. Clin.Orthop.Relat Res. 1988;249-57"|12 months|"Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).
For the anatomic bone union at 12 months, data of 78 patients is available."||participants|||Number
835075|NCT01282801|Primary|AUC0-inf of Venlafaxine.|Bioequivalence based on Venlafaxine AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835032|NCT01282294|Secondary|Evidence of Anatomic Bone Union According to Johnson Classification|"Anatomic bone union was assessed according to Johnson et al.*:
A0: pseudoarthrosis; A1: unilateral pseudoarthrosis; A2: insufficient unilateral bone mass; A3: contiguous union without hypertrophy; A4: solid union of the fracture site.
*Johnson EE, Urist MR, Finerman GA. Repair of segmental defects of the tibia with cancellous bone grafts augmented with human bone morphogenetic protein. A preliminary report. Clin.Orthop.Relat Res. 1988;249-57"|12 months|"Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).
For the anatomic bone union at 12 months, data of 78 patients is available."||participants|||Number
835033|NCT01282294|Primary|Quality of Life: EQ-5D|The Euroqol Health Survey (EQ-5D, 3-level) was completed on five dimensions (mobility, self care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression) to measure health-related quality of life on a scale from 0-1. A higher score indicates better quality of life.|3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-operatively|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835034|NCT01282294|Primary|Quality of Life: SF-12 Mental Component Summary (MCS)|"The SF-12 short form health survey comprises 12 questions related to health and wellbeing over the prior four weeks. The responses to these 12 questions are entered into a standardized algorithm to provide summaries of physical and mental health (i.e., physical composite score [PCS] and mental composite score [MCS]). The summary scores are standardized and normalized such that a score of 50 for either the PCS or MCS corresponds to that of an average, healthy person. A score lower than 50 indicates poorer physical and mental health compared to an average, healthy person.
It was administered at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-operatively."|3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-operatively|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835035|NCT01282294|Primary|Quality of Life: SF-12 Physical Component Summary (PCS)|"The Short Form (SF)-12 health survey comprises 12 questions related to health and wellbeing over the prior four weeks. The responses to these 12 questions are entered into a standardized algorithm to provide summaries of physical and mental health (i.e., physical composite score [PCS] and mental composite score [MCS]). The summary scores are standardized and normalized such that a score of 50 for either the PCS or MCS corresponds to that of an average, healthy person. A score lower than 50 indicates poorer physical and mental health compared to an average, healthy person.
It was administered at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-operatively."|3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-operatively|Efficacy is based on the number of patients that were treated with the ETN PROtect according to the protocol. Patients were excluded due to a failure to meet the in-/exclusion criteria (2) and a surgical procedure that was not according to the surgical technique (8).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835036|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Sleep Disturbance Subscale Score|The Medical Outcome Study (MOS) sleep scale was a 12-item, participant-reported, non-disease-specific measure related to sleep that yielded 7 subscales (4-item sleep disturbance, 2-item sleep adequacy, 1-item quantity of sleep, 3-item somnolence, 1-item snoring, 1-item shortness of breath, and 9-item overall sleep problems index). Only sleep disturbance subscale was assessed by calculating the average of the 4-items with total score ranging from 0 to 100 (higher scores indicating greater sleep disturbance). Data are presented as mean score on a scale +/- standard deviation.|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24|The analysis was performed using safety analysis set defined as all participants who received at least one dose of adalimumab.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835037|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score|The VAS score assessed by participants (pt) and physicians (ph) was used to determine the pain due to psoriatic arthritis in the past week. The level of pain was measured in millimeters (mm) on a 100 mm horizontal line. The score ranged from 0 (no pain) to 100 (severe pain). Data are presented as mean VAS score +/- standard deviation.|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available VAS score at the study time points.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835038|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Plasma Concentrations of C-Reactive Protein (CRP)|Plasma concentrations were assessed to evaluate CRP, a marker of systemic inflammation that provided insights into the overall anti-inflammatory effect of rheumatologic therapies. Data are presented as mean CRP value in milligrams per liter (mg/L) ± standard deviation.|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with evaluable data at the study time points.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835039|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)|Plasma concentrations were assessed to evaluate ESR, a marker of systemic inflammation that provided insights into the overall anti-inflammatory effect of rheumatologic therapies. Data are presented as mean ESR value in millimeters per hour (mm/hr) ± standard deviation.|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with evaluable data at the study time points.||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
835040|NCT01282372|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Tender Joint Count (TJC) and Swollen Joint Count (SJC) Greater Than Zero|"Joints (68 or 66) were assessed by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination for TJC or SJC, respectively. Both joint tenderness and swelling were classified as present (1), absent (0), replaced (9), or no assessment (NA). The total TJC or SJC was derived as the sum of the tender and swollen joints; the range for TJC and SJC were 0 - 68 and 0 - 66, respectively with higher scores indicated worse conditions. Data are presented as percentage of participants with TJC and SJC."|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with evaluable data at the study time points.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835076|NCT01282801|Primary|AUC0-t of Venlafaxine.|Bioequivalence based on Venlafaxine AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835041|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) Score|As the patient and physician global assessments were performed using a 0-100 VAS scale instead of the 5 point Likert scale, the PsARC score could not be calculated, although data on joint pain and swelling were collected. Hence, the psoriatic arthritis disease activity was evaluated by the percentage of patients with tender and swollen joints, acute phase reactants (ESR and CRP), and VAS Score (patient and physician). Data are reported under outcome measures 13 through 16.|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24|The PsARC score was not assessed in this study.|||||
835042|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) Score|The BASDAI was a six question, participant-reported measure of overall disease activity that probed the level of fatigue, neck/back/hip pain, peripheral joint swelling and pain, localized tenderness, as well as morning stiffness severity and duration. The mean measurement (score) of questions 5 and 6 is added to the scores from questions 1 to 4 and divided by 5 to calculate the total BASDAI score. It was scored on a numerical rating scale that ranged from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (severe symptoms), higher scores indicating severe disability due to AS disease. Data are presented as mean total BASDAI score +/- standard deviation.|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available BASDAI score at the study time points.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835043|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score|The HAQ-DI was a participant-reported questionnaire that measured quality of life in terms of physical function of participants with rheumatoid arthritis. It consisted of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past seven days using the following response categories (score): without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). The scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score from 0 to 3, where 0-1 represented mild disability and 2-3 represented severe disability. Data are presented as mean HAQ-DI score +/- standard deviation.|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available HAQ-DI score at the study time points.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835044|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)|The DAS28, a combined index that measured rheumatoid arthritis disease activity, was calculated based on: (1) the number of tender joints among 28 joints evaluated; (2) the number of swollen joints among 28 joints evaluated; (3) general health evaluated by a visual analog scale (VAS); (4) erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR); and (5) C-reactive protein (CRP). The DAS28 scores ranged from 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (maximal disease activity); decrease in DAS28 scores indicate improvement of disease. The DAS28 score less than or equal to 2.6 is defined as clinical remission. Data are presented as mean DAS28 score +/- standard deviation.|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available DAS28 score at the study time points.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835045|NCT01282372|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Overall Activity Impairment Due to Health Problem|The 'overall activity impairment due to health problem' was assessed using the WPAI-GHP questionnaire. WPAI-GHP is a six-item participant-assessed questionnaire used to assess work and activity impairment due to symptoms of rheumatoid diseases (RA, PsA, and AS). The 'overall activity impairment due to health problem' was calculated based on one item: (Q6) to what degree did the disease impair the ability to do regular activities in the past seven days from visit. The item was measured on a scale from 0 (no effect) to 10 (completely prevented from doing regular activities/working). The data was calculated using the formula Q6/10 and converted to percent. Data are presented as impairment percentage, with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available WPAI-GHP score at the study time points.||Impairment percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
835046|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Overall Activity Impairment Due to Health Problem by Disease Subgroups|The 'overall activity impairment due to health problem' was assessed using the WPAI-GHP questionnaire. WPAI-GHP is a six-item participant-assessed questionnaire used to assess work and activity impairment due to symptoms of rheumatoid diseases (RA, PsA, and AS). The 'overall activity impairment due to health problem' was calculated based on one item: (Q6) to what degree did the disease impair the ability to do regular activities in the past seven days from visit. The item was measured on a scale from 0 (no effect) to 10 (completely prevented from doing regular activities/working). The data was calculated using the formula Q6/10 and converted to percent. Data are presented as impairment percentage, with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available WPAI-GHP score at the study time points.||Impairment percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
835047|NCT01282372|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Overall Work Impairment Due to Health Problem|The 'overall work impairment due to health problem' was assessed using the WPAI-GHP questionnaire. WPAI-GHP is a six-item participant-assessed questionnaire used to assess work and activity impairment due to symptoms of rheumatoid diseases (RA, PsA, and AS). The 'overall work impairment due to health problem' was calculated based on three items: (Q2) the number of hours missed from work due to health problems in the past seven days from visit; (Q4) the number of actual work hours in the past seven days from visit; and (Q5) to what degree did the disease impair the productivity while working past seven days from visit). The data was calculated using the formula Q2/(Q2+Q4)+[(1-(Q2/(Q2+Q4))x(Q5/10)] and converted to percent. Data are presented as impairment percentage, with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available WPAI-GHP score at the study time points.||Impairment percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
835077|NCT01282801|Primary|Cmax of Venlafaxine.|Bioequivalence based on Venlafaxine Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835048|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Overall Work Impairment Due to Health Problem by Disease Subgroups|The 'overall work impairment due to health problem' was assessed using the WPAI-GHP questionnaire. WPAI-GHP is a six-item participant-assessed questionnaire used to assess work and activity impairment due to symptoms of rheumatoid diseases (RA, PsA, and AS). The 'overall work impairment due to health problem' was calculated based on three items: (Q2) the number of hours missed from work due to health problems in the past seven days from visit; (Q4) the number of actual work hours in the past seven days from visit; and (Q5) to what degree did the disease impair the productivity while working past seven days from visit). The data was calculated using the formula Q2/(Q2+Q4)+[(1-(Q2/(Q2+Q4))x(Q5/10)] and converted to percent. Data are presented as impairment percentage, with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available WPAI-GHP score at the study time points.||Impairment percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
835049|NCT01282372|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Impairment While Working Due to Health Problem|The 'impairment while working due to health problem' was assessed using the WPAI-GHP questionnaire. WPAI-GHP is a six-item participant-assessed questionnaire used to assess work and activity impairment due to symptoms of rheumatoid diseases (RA, PsA, and AS). The 'impairment while working due to health problem' was calculated based on one item: (Q5) to what degree did the disease impair the productivity while working in the past seven days from visit. The item was measured on a scale from 0 (no effect) to 10 (completely prevented from doing regular activities/ working). The data was calculated using the formula Q5/10 and converted to percent. Data are presented as impairment percentage, with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available WPAI-GHP score at the study time points.||Impairment percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
835050|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Impairment While Working Due to Health Problem by Disease Subgroups|The 'impairment while working due to health problem' was assessed using the WPAI-GHP questionnaire. WPAI-GHP is a six-item participant-assessed questionnaire used to assess work and activity impairment due to symptoms of rheumatoid diseases (RA, PsA, and AS). The 'impairment while working due to health problem' was calculated based on one item: (Q5) to what degree did the disease impair the productivity while working in the past seven days from visit. The item was measured on a scale from 0 (no effect) to 10 (completely prevented from doing regular activities/ working). The data was calculated using the formula Q5/10 and converted to percent. Data are presented as impairment percentage, with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available WPAI-GHP score at the study time points.||Impairment percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
835051|NCT01282372|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Work Time Missed Due to Health Problem|The 'work time missed due to health problem' was assessed using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-General Health Problem (WPAI-GHP) questionnaire. WPAI-GHP is a six-item participant-assessed questionnaire used to assess work and activity impairment due to symptoms of rheumatoid diseases (RA, PsA, and AS). The 'work time missed due to health problem' was calculated based on two items: (Q2) the number of hours missed from work due to health problems in the past seven days from visit and (Q4) the number of actual work hours in the past seven days from visit. The data was calculated using the formula Q2/(Q2+Q4) and converted to percent. Data are presented as impairment percentage, with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available WPAI-GHP score at the study time points.||Impairment percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
835052|NCT01282372|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Work Time Missed Due to Health Problem by Disease Subgroups|The 'work time missed due to health problem' was assessed using the WPAI-GHP questionnaire. WPAI-GHP is a six-item participant-assessed questionnaire used to assess work and activity impairment due to symptoms of rheumatoid diseases (RA, PsA, and AS). The 'work time missed due to health problem' was calculated based on two items: (Q2) the number of hours missed from work due to health problems in the past seven days from visit and (Q4) the number of actual work hours in the past seven days from visit. The data was calculated using the formula Q2/(Q2+Q4) and converted to percent. Data are presented as impairment percentage, with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.|Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24|The analysis was performed using efficacy analysis set defined as all participants in the enrolled population with an available WPAI-GHP score at the study time points.||Impairment percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
835053|NCT01282424|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: AUClast|AUClast at Days 1 and 29 was analyzed. AUClast is defined as the concentration of drug from time zero to the last observable concentration|Predose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours postdose on Days 1 and 29|PK Analysis Set: Participants enrolled in the PK substudy were analyzed.||hours x ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835054|NCT01282424|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Tmax|Tmax at Days 1 and 29 was analyzed. Tmax is defined as the time of Cmax (the maximum concentration of drug).|Predose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours postdose on Days 1 and 29|PK Analysis Set||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
835055|NCT01282424|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Cmax|Cmax at Days 1 and 29 was analyzed. Cmax is defined as the maximum concentration of drug.|Predose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours postdose on Days 1 and 29|PK Analysis Set: Participants enrolled in the PK substudy were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835056|NCT01282424|Secondary|Idelalisib Plasma Concentration||Predose and at 1.5 hours (± 5 minutes) postdose on Day 29|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835057|NCT01282424|Secondary|Study Drug Exposure|The average idelalisib exposure was summarized.|From enrollment until all subjects completed ≥ 24 weeks of evaluation (up to 24 months)|ITT Analysis Set||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
835058|NCT01282424|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability of Idelalisib Assessed as the Number of Participants Experiencing Adverse Events (AEs) or Abnormalities in Vital Signs, Laboratory Tests, or Electrocardiograms|"This composite endpoint measured the safety and tolerability profile of idelalisib. Clinically meaningful abnormalities in vital signs and electrocardiograms (ECG) were as determined by the investigator."|From enrollment until all subjects completed ≥ 24 weeks of evaluation (up to 24 months)|ITT Analysis Set||participants|||Number
835059|NCT01282424|Secondary|Change in Karnofsky Performance Status|The change in Karnofsky performance status was reported as the best (highest change score) and worst (lowest change score) change from baseline using the Karnofsky performance criteria. The Karnofsky score classifies patients according to their functional impairment. Scores are on a scale from 0-100, the lower the score, the worse the survival for most serious illnesses.|From enrollment until all subjects completed ≥ 24 weeks of evaluation (up to 24 months)|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835060|NCT01282424|Secondary|Change in Health-related Quality of Life|"Change in health-related quality of life events were reported by participants using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: Lymphoma Subscale (FACT-LymS) assessment tool. Results are presented as the mean (SD) best change from baseline. The best change from baseline was defined as the highest change score (improvement) after baseline.
The FACT-LymS is on a scale from 0-60, with higher scores associated with a better quality of life. It incorporates values from 15 questions, each rated 0-4, related to study indications."|From enrollment until all subjects completed ≥ 24 weeks of evaluation (up to 24 months)|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835061|NCT01282424|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time interval from the start of idelalisib treatment to death from any cause.|From enrollment until all subjects completed ≥ 24 weeks of evaluation (up to 24 months)|ITT Analysis Set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835062|NCT01282424|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the interval from the start of idelalisib treatment to the earlier of the first documentation of disease progression as assessed by the study IRC or death from any cause.|From enrollment until all subjects completed ≥ 24 weeks of evaluation (up to 24 months)|ITT Analysis Set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835063|NCT01282424|Secondary|Time to Response|Time to response (TTR) was defined as the interval from the start of idelalisib treatment to the first documentation of CR or PR (or MR for participants with WM) as assessed by the study IRC.|From enrollment until all subjects completed ≥ 24 weeks of evaluation (up to 24 months)|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set who achieved a CR or PR (or MR for subjects with WM) were analyzed.||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835064|NCT01282424|Secondary|Lymph Node Response Rate|Lymph node response (LNR) was defined as the percentage of participants who achieved a ≥ 50% decrease from baseline in the sum of the product of the perpendicular diameters (SPD) of measurable index lesions as assessed by the study IRC.|From enrollment until all subjects completed ≥ 24 weeks of evaluation (up to 24 months)|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835065|NCT01282424|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of Response (DOR) was defined as the interval from the first documentation of CR or PR (or MR for participants with WM) to the earlier of the first documentation of disease progression as assessed by the study IRC or death from any cause.|From enrollment until all subjects completed ≥ 24 weeks of evaluation (up to 24 months)|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set who achieved a CR or PR (or MR for subjects with WM) were analyzed.||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835066|NCT01282424|Primary|Overall Response Rate|"Overall response rate (ORR) was assessed based on the International Working Group Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma (Cheson, 2007), and was defined as the proportion of subjects achieving a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR; or minor response [MR] for subjects with Waldenström macroglobulinemia [WM]) as assessed by the study independent review committee (IRC).
CR was defined as the complete resolution of all disease-related radiological abnormalities and the disappearance of all signs and symptoms related to the disease.
PR was defined as a ≥ 50% reduction in the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all index lesions, with no new lesions.
For WM only, response was defined as a reduction in IgM of ≥ 50% decrease for PR, and ≥ 25% decrease for MR; plus any reduction in the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all index lesions, with no new lesions or signs and symptoms of active disease (Owen, 2013)"|From enrollment until all subjects completed ≥ 24 weeks of evaluation (up to 24 months)|ITT Analysis Set: Enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study medication||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835067|NCT01282476|Secondary|Toxicities|Evaluate safety of this combination in relapsed/refractory DLBCL patients Grade 1 = mild, Grade 2 = moderate, Grade 3 = severe, Grade 4 = life-threatening|1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
835068|NCT01282476|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Rate|Progression is defined by the Revised International Workshop Response Criteria (2007) (see reference in protocol section).|6 months|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
835069|NCT01282476|Primary|Overall Response Rate|"Overall response rate is defined by the Revised International Workshop Response Criteria (2007) (see reference in protocol section).
Overall response (OR) = Complete response (CR) + Partial response (PR)"|1 year|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
835070|NCT01282710|Primary|Comparison of SureCALL® and TOCO Detection of Contraction Events, as Compared to the IUPC|Contraction timing as measured by the SureCALL® and contraction timing as measured by the TOCO, both compared to the contraction timing as measured by the IUPC gold standard. The contraction timing values of SureCALL® and TOCO were then compared.|9 - 42 Minutes|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
835071|NCT01282723|Primary|Comparison of SureCALL® and TOCO Detection of Contraction Events, as Compared to the IUPC, as Identified by Readers|The presence of contractions measured by the SureCALL®, the presence of contractions measured by the TOCO, and the presence of contractions measured by the IUPC were determined by independent Readers. The Odds Ratio of SureCALL® contractions to IUPC contractions was calculated, and the Odd Ratio of TOCO contractions to IUPC contractions was calculated. Reader Correspondence was determined by a General Linear Mixed Model.|9 - 42 Minutes|||Odds Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835072|NCT01282801|Secondary|AUC0-inf of O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Informational comparison of AUC0-inf values for the metabolite O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835073|NCT01282801|Secondary|AUC0-t of O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Informational comparison of AUC0-t values for the metabolite O-Desmethylvenlafaxine.|Blood samples collected over a 36 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835078|NCT01282814|Primary|AUC0-inf of Venlafaxine.|Bioequivalence based on Venlafaxine AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835079|NCT01282814|Primary|AUC0-t of Venlafaxine.|Bioequivalence based on Venlafaxine AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835080|NCT01282814|Primary|Cmax of Venlafaxine.|Bioequivalence based on Venlafaxine Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 48 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835081|NCT01282866|Secondary|Hair Count|"The hair at the treatment area is counted at Baseline and 15 months following the last treatment.
Hair clearance is determined by the percentage of Hair left 15 months following the last treatment compared to the hair number at baseline."|15 month following last treatment|The number of participants who completed 15 months follow up was 23 out of 35.||percentage of hair clearance||Standard Deviation|Mean
835082|NCT01282866|Secondary|Level of Comfort Associated With Treatment||Each treatment||||||
835083|NCT01282866|Secondary|Treatment Time|The treatment time was measured for each participant on each and every visit. The result is presented as mean of all treatment time from all of the visits and all of the participants.|Each treatment|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
835084|NCT01282866|Primary|Hair Count|"The hair at the treatment area is counted at Baseline and 6 months following the last treatment.
Hair clearance is determined by the percentage of Hair left 6 months following the last treatment compared to the hair number at baseline."|6 month following last treatment|||percentage of hair clearance||Standard Deviation|Mean
835085|NCT01283022|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Misoprostol up to 1 Hour Post Study Drug Removal|The timepoints over which the pharmacokinetic measurements were assessed, and deemed as accurate and appropriate, were as follows: 0 hours (baseline), 0.5,1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 14 hours after insertion of the study drug, immediately prior to removal of the study drug and 0.5 and 1 hour after removal of the study drug. The 10 hour and 14 hour blood samples were obtained if the subject still had the study drug in place at those timepoints.|From study drug insertion up to 1 hour post study drug removal|The pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis included all 24 subjects from the Intention-to-Treat (ITT) population.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Median
835086|NCT01283022|Secondary|Rate of Adverse Events.|All adverse events were rated by the Investigator as mild, moderate or severe and classified as having no relationship, possible relationship or a probable relationship to the study drug. These assessments were deemed as accurate and appropriate for the reporting of all serious and non serious adverse events.|From study drug administration to hospital discharge (approximately 48-72 hours).|The percentage of subjects with adverse events are presented for the Intrapartum (before delivery), postpartum (maternal) and neonatal periods.||percentage of participants|||Number
835087|NCT01283022|Primary|Time of Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Misoprostol After Insertion|The timepoints over which the pharmacokinetic measurements were assessed, and deemed as accurate and appropriate, were as follows: 0 hours (baseline), 0.5,1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 14 hours after insertion of the study drug, immediately prior to removal of the study drug and 0.5 and 1 hour after removal of the study drug. The 10 hour and 14 hour blood samples were obtained if the subject still had the study drug in place at those timepoints.|From study drug insertion up to 1 hour post study drug removal.|The pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis included all 24 subjects from the Intention-to-Treat (ITT) population.||hours||Standard Deviation|Median
835088|NCT01283035|Secondary|Toxicities of Akt Inhibitor MK2206, as Assessed by the Active Version of the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v4.0)||Up to 3 years|Number of participants experiencing toxicities.||participants|||Number
835089|NCT01283035|Secondary|Duration of Progression-free Following Initiation of Therapy With Akt Inhibitor MK2206 in the Cohort of Patients Enrolled on This Study|Distributions will be estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.|Up to 3 years|Minimal activity was observed and patient accrual was slow. This analysis was not completed as the data was not collected.|||||
835090|NCT01283035|Secondary|Duration of Overall Survival Following Initiation of Therapy With Akt Inhibitor MK2206 in the Cohort of Patients Enrolled on This Study|Distributions will be estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.|Up to 3 years|Minimal activity was observed and patient accrual was slow. This analysis was not completed as the data was not collected.|||||
835091|NCT01283035|Secondary|Development of Feedback Loop Activation and Target Inhibition With Akt Inhibitor MK2206 Via Analysis of Pre-treatment and Post-treatment Biopsies in Select Patients Enrolled in the Trial||Up to 3 years|Minimal activity was observed and patient accrual was slow. This analysis was not completed as the data was not collected.|||||
835092|NCT01283035|Secondary|Association Between Select Biomarkers and Response to Akt Inhibitor MK2206 (as Assessed by Objective Tumor Response, Progression-free Survival, and Overall Survival)|The frequency of mutations in the PI3K/AKT and RAS pathways, copy number alterations, and PTEN loss and AKT expression as assessed by IHC will be tabulated. Associations between these markers with clinical outcome such as response rate and duration of PFS will be assessed.|Up to 3 years|Minimal activity was observed and patient accrual was slow. This analysis was not completed as the data was not collected.|||||
835093|NCT01283035|Primary|Efficacy (as Measured by Objective Response Rate) of Akt Inhibitor MK2206 in Patients With Recurrent High-grade Platinum-resistant Serous Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneal Cancer|"If 4 or more of the final set of 29 patients demonstrate a response, then the null hypothesis H0: =< 5% can be rejected in favor of the alternative hypothesis H1: >= 20% with an alpha of 0.05 and beta of 0.20 (i.e., 80% power).
Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Progression, as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions; Stable Disease (SD), neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for disease progression"|Up to 3 years|Five patients started study treatment.||participants|||Number
835094|NCT01283139|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings Reported as TEAEs|The 12-lead ECG data were summarized and evaluated. Number of participants with clinically significant abnormal ECG findings as assessed by cardiologist were recorded and reported as TEAEs.|Day 1 up to Week 56|The safety population included all participants who received any investigational product.||participants|||Number
835095|NCT01283139|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Vital Signs Reported as Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Vital sign assessments included blood pressure, pulse rate, temperature, weight and respiratory rate. Vital signs abnormalities recorded as TEAEs were reported.|Day 1 up to Week 61|The safety population included all participants who received any investigational product.||participants|||Number
835096|NCT01283139|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Clinical Laboratory Parameters Reported as Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Laboratory investigations included hematology, serum chemistries and urinalysis parameters. Participants with clinically significant abnormalities in these laboratory investigations recorded as TEAEs were reported.|Day 1 up to Week 61|The safety population included all participants who received any investigational product.||participants|||Number
835097|NCT01283139|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs)|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. A serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent defined as events present at baseline that worsened in intensity after administration of investigational product or events absent at baseline that emerged after administration of investigational product, for the period extending until the end of participant participation in the study.|Day 1 up to Week 74|The safety population included all participants who received any investigational product.||participants|||Number
835098|NCT01283139|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Greater Than 3-Point Improvement in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Scale|FACIT-F is a 13-item questionnaire. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Larger the participant’s response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), greater was the participant’s fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant’s response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score).|Day 365|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any investigational product and had a baseline primary efficacy measurement. Here, N signifies number of participants with a FACIT-fatigue score <49 at baseline."||percentage of participants|||Number
835099|NCT01283139|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity and Severity Index (CLASI) Activity Score Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 10 at Baseline Who Achieved a >= 4-point Reduction|The CLASI consists of two scores, the first summarizes the activity of the disease while the second is a measure of the damage done by the disease. Activity is scored on the basis of erythema, scale/hyperkeratosis, mucous membrane involvement, acute hair loss and non-scarring alopecia. Damage is scored in terms of dyspigmentation and scarring, including scarring alopecia. The percentage of participants with a CLASI activity score >=10 at baseline who achieved a clinically significant (>=4-point) reduction at Day 365 were reported.|Day 365|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any investigational product and had a baseline primary efficacy measurement. Here, N signifies number of participants with a CLASI activity score >=10 at baseline."||percentage of participants|||Number
835100|NCT01283139|Secondary|Percentage of Participants on Greater Than or Equal to 10 mg/Day Oral Prednisone (or Equivalent) at Baseline Who Were Able to Reduce to Less Than or Equal to (<=) 7.5 mg/Day|Percentage of participants on >=10 mg/day oral corticosteroids (OCS) at baseline who were able to taper it to <=7.5 mg/day by Day 365 were recorded.|Day 365|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any investigational product and had a baseline primary efficacy measurement. Here, N signifies number of participants on >=10 mg/day oral prednisone (or equivalent) at baseline."||percentage of participants|||Number
835101|NCT01283139|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Positive Response in SRI (4) in 4-Gene Interferon Test High Participants|SRI (4) responder is defined as: 1) a reduction in baseline SLEDAI-2K disease activity score of >=4 points (with increased DNA binding item of SLEDAI-2K score based on the ANA Multi−Lyte® ANA−II Plus Test System); 2) no worsening in Physician Global Assessment (MDGA) (worsening is defined as an increase of >=0.3 from baseline on a 0-3 visual analogue scale) and 3) no worsening in BILAG-2004 (worsening is defined as at least 1 new ‘A’ score or 2 new ‘B’ scores on the BILAG-2004 compared with baseline).|Day 365|"The mITT population included all randomized participants who received any investigational product and had a baseline primary efficacy measurement. Here, N signifies number of participants with positive diagnostic test."||percentage of participants|||Number
835102|NCT01283139|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Responder Index 4 (SRI [4])|SRI (4) responder is defined as: 1) a reduction in baseline Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) disease activity score of greater than or equal to (>=) 4 points (with increased deoxyribonucleic acid [DNA] binding item of SLEDAI-2K score based on the ANA Multi−Lyte® ANA−II Plus Test System); 2) no worsening in Physician Global Assessment (MDGA) (worsening is defined as an increase of >=0.3 from baseline on a 0-3 visual analogue scale) and 3) no worsening in British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG-2004) (worsening is defined as at least 1 new ‘A’ score or 2 new ‘B’ scores on the BILAG-2004 compared with baseline).|Day 365|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population included all randomized participants who received any investigational product and had a baseline primary efficacy measurement.||percentage of participants|||Number
835103|NCT01283152|Primary|Change in HE Grade at 24 Hours|Hepatic Encephalopathy Scoring Algorithm (HESA) at the 24 hour time point of when the subject was recruited. HESA ranges from 0 to 3, with higher numbers indicating a more severe grade of hepatic encephalopathy. Study will continue at every 24 hour time point until the subject achieves his or her baseline mental state and/or grade 0 based on the HESA|Baseline to 24 hours|All participants who completed the study||participants|||Number
835104|NCT01283152|Secondary|Hospital Duration/Length of Stay||From time of admission to time of discharge or death|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
835105|NCT01283152|Primary|Number of Participants With an Improvement of 1 or More in HE Grade at 24 Hours|Hepatic Encephalopathy Scoring Algorithm (HESA) at the 24 hour time point of when the subject was recruited (HESA improvement by at least 1 grade). HESA ranges from 0 to 3, with higher numbers indicating a more severe grade of hepatic encephalopathy. Study will continue at every 24 hour time point until the subject achieves his or her baseline mental state and/or grade 0 based on the HESA|Baseline to 24 hours|All participants who completed the study||participants|||Number
835106|NCT01283282|Secondary|Inflammatory Marker CD40 Ligand|CD40 ligand levels were measured. The level of CD40 ligand were measured using the Flurokine MultiAnalyte profiling (MAP) Human Base Kit B.|Week 12|||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
835107|NCT01283282|Secondary|Inflammatory Marker High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (hsCRP)|High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) was measured. The hsCRP levels were measured by Dade Behring nephelometry.|Week 12|||mg/L||Standard Error|Mean
835108|NCT01283282|Secondary|Oxidative Stress Markers|Oxidative stress was measured by using liquid chromatography to collect plasma cystine, cysteine, gluthione, and oxidized glutathione levels.|Week 12|||µM||Standard Error|Mean
835109|NCT01283282|Secondary|Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV)|PWV was measured between the carotid and femoral arteries using the SphygmoCor device. Pressure waveforms at the carotid and femoral arteries were acquired using EKG gating. Velocity (distance per time in seconds) was calculated using the foot-to-foot method and the distance between the sites was measured manually.|Week 12|||m/s||Standard Error|Mean
835110|NCT01283282|Primary|Endothelial Progenitor Cells (EPCs)|The circulating progenitor-enriched population of cells was measured by the expression of surface antigens using direct flow cytometry for CD34+, CD34+/CD133+, CD34+/ VEGF2R+ and CD34+/CD133+/VEGF2R+|Week 12|||cells/µL||Standard Error|Mean
835111|NCT01283282|Primary|Nitroglycerin-mediated Vasodilation|Nitroglycerin (NTG)-mediated vasodilation was measured after 0.4 mg of NTG was administered sublingually. Brachial artery images were obtained via ultrasound after three minutes of NTG administration. Measurements from the twelve frames will be averaged to calculate the percent change in diameter of the brachial artery from baseline to 12 weeks.|Baseline, Week 12|||percent change in diameter||Standard Error|Mean
835112|NCT01283282|Primary|Flow-mediated Dilation (FMD)|Flow-mediated dilation (FMD) collected by an ultrasound and is measured by the percent change in diameter of the brachial artery from baseline to 12 weeks.|Baseline, Week 12|||percent change in diameter||Standard Error|Mean
835113|NCT01283321|Secondary|Blood Loss||Operative period||||||
835114|NCT01283321|Secondary|Units of Platelets and Allogeneic Red Cells Transfused- During Surgery and up to 24 Hours After Surgery||Peri-operative period||||||
835115|NCT01283321|Secondary|Units of Fresh-frozen Plasma (FFP) Transfused-during Surgery and up to 24 Hours After Surgery||Peri-operative period||||||
835116|NCT01283321|Secondary|Proportion of Patients in the Fibrinogen Group in Whom Transfusion of Fresh Frozen Plasma or Platelet Concentrate is Required During or After Surgery||Operative period||||||
835117|NCT01283321|Primary|Bleeding Scores|Bleeding scores are scored on a four-point scale. A visual assessment of surgical field was performed by the senior surgical staff as follows: 0 = excellent hemostasis (dry field), 1 = mild bleeding (oozing), 2 = moderate bleeding (controllable with applied pressure), and 3 = severe bleeding (multiple diffuse bleeding sites). If the visual bleeding scale was 2 to 3, the subjects were randomly assigned to a study intervention using a closed envelope method.|intra-operatively and up to 24 hours postoperatively|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835118|NCT01283334|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Objective tumor responses were assessed every 2 cycles of chemotherapy with computed tomography or positron emission tomography/ computed tomography scans in accordance with Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria.|The time of PFS was calculated as the time from study enrollment to the disease progression date, death date, or last contact, whichever came first, up to 25 months|||months||Full Range|Median
835119|NCT01283334|Primary|To Measure the Safety and Clinical Effectiveness of the Combination of Carboplatin, Cetuximab and RAD001 in Patients With Advanced (Recurrent or Metastatic) Head and Neck Cancer|This phase 1 clinical trial used a standard 3 + 3 design. Four dose levels of everolimus were planned to be evaluated, and the standard 3 + 3 design with dose de-escalation was used in the trial. Namely, 3 patients were assigned to starting dose level 1. If no dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed, the trial proceeded to the next dose level, and another cohort of 3 patients was enrolled. If at least 2 of the 3 patients experienced at least 1 DLT, then the dose level decreased; otherwise, if only 1 patient experienced DLT, then 3 more patients were enrolled at the same dose level. If none of the 3 additional patients experienced DLT, the dose was escalated; otherwise, the dose level decreased. Dose reduction continued until a dose level was reached at which 6 patients had been treated and at most 1 DLT was observed.|Within the first 21 days of therapy|||participants|||Number
835120|NCT01270659|Secondary|Number of Participants Experiencing Any Adverse Events|Occurrence of any adverse event.|Full 2 hours of the study period|||Participants|||Count of Participants
835121|NCT01270659|Secondary|Nausea Level|"Subjects' nausea level was recorded to determine how fentanyl buccal tablet compares to standard therapy in causing nausea. Treatment induced nausea and severity of nausea level was assessed.
Nausea was assessed by a 10-point verbally administered scale. Patients rated their degree of nausea on a scale of 0 (no nausea) to 10 (worst nausea).
At the beginning of the study, literature review found relatively little evidence guiding objective means to rate nausea, but there was some precedent for this approach (Warden C. Prehospital use of ondansetron reduces nausea and episodes of vomiting in adults and children over 12 years old [abstract]. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2007;11:132)."|every 5 minutes for the first 60 minutes|||Participants|||Count of Participants
835122|NCT01270659|Primary|Median Time to Significant Analgesia (at Least 2 Units Decrease in Pain Level)|Median time (in minutes) to 2 units decrease in pain level after drug administration. Patients were asked to rate their pain at every 5 minutes intervals from 0 to 60 minutes post drug administration. The 10-point verbally administered numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) was used to have patients rate their level of pain on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain ever).|60 minutes|||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835186|NCT01270958|Primary|Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Value at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|ALT is a liver enzyme that plays a role in protein metabolism. Abnormally high blood levels of ALT are a sign of liver inflammation or damage from infection or drugs. Normal range: <=40 U/L.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835123|NCT01270711|Primary|Prevalence of Valvular Fibrosis|Prevalence of valvular fibrosis was calculated as number of participants with documented valvulopathy during cabergoline treatment divided by number of participants with at least 1 echocardiography examination. Percentage of participants with valvular fibrosis are reported.|Baseline (Week 1) up to Week 339|Study population included all participants who were recruited from specialized clinical centers in Italy and treated with cabergoline for Parkinson’s disease during the study period.||percentage of participants|||Number
835124|NCT01270711|Primary|Incidence of Valvular Fibrosis|Incidence of valvular fibrosis was calculated as number of participants with documented valvulopathy during cabergoline treatment and absence of any valve damage at baseline divided by number of participants without any valve damage at baseline and at least 1 additional echocardiography examination during follow-up while on cabergoline treatment. Percentage of participants with valvular fibrosis are reported.|Baseline (Week 1) up to Week 339|Study population:all participants recruited from specialized clinical centers in Italy and treated with cabergoline for Parkinson’s disease during study period.||percentage of participants|||Number
835125|NCT01270711|Primary|Total Number of Echocardiography Examinations in Cabergoline Users|The CHMP recommended that the prescribing information for cabergoline should be updated to include: a warning stating that participant must be monitored for signs of cardiac valve fibrosis with echocardiography before treatment is started and regularly (every 6 months) during treatment. To evaluate effectiveness with the new prescription guidelines, it was assessed whether cabergoline users were monitored by echocardiography.|Baseline (Week 1) up to Week 339|Study population included all participants who were recruited from specialized clinical centers in Italy and treated with cabergoline for Parkinson’s disease during the study period.||echocardiography examinations|||Number
835126|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Cabergoline Prescriptions for Dosages Greater Than 3 Milligram (mg) Per Day: Year 6|The Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) recommended that the prescribing information for cabergoline should be updated to include: a reduction of the maximum recommended dose to 3 mg per day. To evaluate compliance with the new prescription guidelines, it was assessed whether the dose exceeded 3 mg per day during the study period.|Year 6 (Year 2011)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835127|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Cabergoline Prescriptions for Dosages Greater Than 3 Milligram (mg) Per Day: Year 5|The Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) recommended that the prescribing information for cabergoline should be updated to include: a reduction of the maximum recommended dose to 3 mg per day. To evaluate compliance with the new prescription guidelines, it was assessed whether the dose exceeded 3 mg per day during the study period.|Year 5 (Year 2010)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835128|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Cabergoline Prescriptions for Dosages Greater Than 3 Milligram (mg) Per Day: Year 4|The Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) recommended that the prescribing information for cabergoline should be updated to include: a reduction of the maximum recommended dose to 3 mg per day. To evaluate compliance with the new prescription guidelines, it was assessed whether the dose exceeded 3 mg per day during the study period.|Year 4 (Year 2009)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835129|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Cabergoline Prescriptions for Dosages Greater Than 3 Milligram (mg) Per Day: Year 3|The Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) recommended that the prescribing information for cabergoline should be updated to include: a reduction of the maximum recommended dose to 3 mg per day. To evaluate compliance with the new prescription guidelines, it was assessed whether the dose exceeded 3 mg per day during the study period.|Year 3 (Year 2008)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835130|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Cabergoline Prescriptions for Dosages Greater Than 3 Milligram (mg) Per Day: Year 2|The Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) recommended that the prescribing information for cabergoline should be updated to include: a reduction of the maximum recommended dose to 3 mg per day. To evaluate compliance with the new prescription guidelines, it was assessed whether the dose exceeded 3 mg per day during the study period.|Year 2 (Year 2007)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835131|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Cabergoline Prescriptions for Dosages Greater Than 3 Milligram (mg) Per Day: Year 1|The Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) recommended that the prescribing information for cabergoline should be updated to include: a reduction of the maximum recommended dose to 3 mg per day. To evaluate compliance with the new prescription guidelines, it was assessed whether the dose exceeded 3 mg per day during the study period.|Year 1 (Year 2006)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835140|NCT01270711|Primary|Number of Cabergoline Prescriptions by Database and Indication: Year 4|Cabergoline prescriptions were stratified by indications per year. Indications were coded using Anatomical Therapeutic Code (ATC) which included G02CB03 for prolactin reduction indication and N04BC06 for neurological indication.|Year 4 (Year 2009)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||prescriptions|||Number
835245|NCT01277159|Primary|Time it Takes for Nerve Block to Wear Off|Does adding dexamethasone and / or buprenorphine prolong the analgesia provided by a popliteal fossa nerve block?|up to 72 hours|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
835132|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Second-line Prescriptions of Cabergoline for Parkinson’s Disease Indications: Year 6|Changes to the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) in April 2007 included that the cabergoline should be used for Parkinson’s disease only in participants who have already taken or cannot take other treatments, that is as second line therapy. Second-line use restriction did not apply to the hyperprolactinemia indication, for which cabergoline is considered a first-time therapy. Percentage of second-line prescriptions of a total number of prescriptions for cabergoline during a respective year for the neurological indication was reported.|Year 6 (Year 2011)|Study population: participants registered in one of databases and were treated with cabergoline during study period. Data not reported for IPCI and PHARMO databases because no information was retrieved for second-line prescriptions of cabergoline for Parkinson’s disease. ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed)=participants evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835133|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Second-line Prescriptions of Cabergoline for Parkinson’s Disease Indications: Year 5|Changes to the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) included that the cabergoline should be used for Parkinson’s disease only in participants who had already taken or cannot take other treatments, which was as second line therapy. Second-line use restriction did not apply to the hyperprolactinemia indication, for which cabergoline was considered a first-time therapy. Percentage of second-line prescriptions of a total number of prescriptions for cabergoline during a respective year for the neurological indication was reported.|Year 5 (Year 2010)|Study population: participants registered in one of databases and were treated with cabergoline during study period. Data not reported for IPCI and PHARMO databases because no information was retrieved for second-line prescriptions of cabergoline for Parkinson’s disease. ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed)=participants evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835134|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Second-line Prescriptions of Cabergoline for Parkinson’s Disease Indications: Year 4|Changes to the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) included that the cabergoline should be used for Parkinson’s disease only in participants who had already taken or cannot take other treatments, which was as second line therapy. Second-line use restriction did not apply to the hyperprolactinemia indication, for which cabergoline was considered a first-time therapy. Percentage of second-line prescriptions of a total number of prescriptions for cabergoline during a respective year for the neurological indication was reported.|Year 4 (Year 2009)|Study population: participants registered in one of databases and were treated with cabergoline during study period. Data not reported for IPCI and PHARMO databases because no information was retrieved for second-line prescriptions of cabergoline for Parkinson’s disease. ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed)=participants evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835135|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Second-line Prescriptions of Cabergoline for Parkinson’s Disease Indications: Year 3|Changes to the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) included that the cabergoline should be used for Parkinson’s disease only in participants who had already taken or cannot take other treatments, which was as second line therapy. Second-line use restriction did not apply to the hyperprolactinemia indication, for which cabergoline was considered a first-time therapy. Percentage of second-line prescriptions of a total number of prescriptions for cabergoline during a respective year for the neurological indication was reported.|Year 3 (Year 2008)|Study population: participants registered in one of databases and were treated with cabergoline during study period. Data not reported for IPCI and PHARMO databases because no information was retrieved for second-line prescriptions of cabergoline for Parkinson’s disease. ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed)=participants evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835136|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Second-line Prescriptions of Cabergoline for Parkinson’s Disease Indications: Year 2|Changes to the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) included that the cabergoline should be used for Parkinson’s disease only in participants who had already taken or cannot take other treatments, which was as second line therapy. Second-line use restriction did not apply to the hyperprolactinemia indication, for which cabergoline was considered a first-time therapy. Percentage of second-line prescriptions of a total number of prescriptions for cabergoline during a respective year for the neurological indication was reported.|Year 2 (Year 2007)|Study population: participants registered in one of databases and were treated with cabergoline during study period. Data not reported for IPCI and PHARMO databases because no information was retrieved for second-line prescriptions of cabergoline for Parkinson’s disease. ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed)=participants evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835137|NCT01270711|Primary|Percentage of Second-line Prescriptions of Cabergoline for Parkinson’s Disease Indications: Year 1|Changes to the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) included that the cabergoline should be used for Parkinson’s disease only in participants who had already taken or cannot take other treatments, which was as second line therapy. Second-line use restriction did not apply to the hyperprolactinemia indication, for which cabergoline was considered a first-time therapy. Percentage of second-line prescriptions of a total number of prescriptions for cabergoline during a respective year for the neurological indication was reported.|Year 1 (Year 2006)|Study population: participants registered in one of databases and were treated with cabergoline during study period. Data not reported for IPCI and PHARMO databases because no information was retrieved for second-line prescriptions of cabergoline for Parkinson’s disease. ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed)=participants evaluable for this measure.||percentage of prescriptions|||Number
835138|NCT01270711|Primary|Number of Cabergoline Prescriptions by Database and Indication: Year 6|Cabergoline prescriptions were stratified by indications per year. Indications were coded using Anatomical Therapeutic Code (ATC) which included G02CB03 for prolactin reduction indication and N04BC06 for neurological indication.|Year 6 (Year 2011)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||prescriptions|||Number
835139|NCT01270711|Primary|Number of Cabergoline Prescriptions by Database and Indication: Year 5|Cabergoline prescriptions were stratified by indications per year. Indications were coded using Anatomical Therapeutic Code (ATC) which included G02CB03 for prolactin reduction indication and N04BC06 for neurological indication.|Year 5 (Year 2010)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||prescriptions|||Number
835141|NCT01270711|Primary|Number of Cabergoline Prescriptions by Database and Indication: Year 3|Cabergoline prescriptions were stratified by indications per year. Indications were coded using Anatomical Therapeutic Code (ATC) which included G02CB03 for prolactin reduction indication and N04BC06 for neurological indication.|Year 3 (Year 2008)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||prescriptions|||Number
835142|NCT01270711|Primary|Number of Cabergoline Prescriptions by Database and Indication: Year 2|Cabergoline prescriptions were stratified by indications per year. Indications were coded using Anatomical Therapeutic Code (ATC) which included G02CB03 for prolactin reduction indication and N04BC06 for neurological indication.|Year 2 (Year 2007)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||prescriptions|||Number
835143|NCT01270711|Primary|Number of Cabergoline Prescriptions by Database and Indication: Year 1|Cabergoline prescriptions were stratified by indications per year. Indications were coded using Anatomical Therapeutic Code (ATC) which included G02CB03 for prolactin reduction indication and N04BC06 for neurological indication.|Year 1 (Year 2006)|Study population included all participants who were registered in one of the databases and were treated with cabergoline during the study period. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||prescriptions|||Number
835144|NCT01270802|Secondary|Change in Serum Levels of Vitamin D|Change in serum levels of 24-OH-vitamin D provide a measure of the amount of change in vitamin D in the body|Baseline and 24 weeks|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835145|NCT01270802|Primary|Change in Flow-mediated Dilation (FMD) of the Brachial Artery|Change in FMD is a measure of change in endothelial function|Baseline and 24 weeks|In the Switch to tenofovir/emtricitabine plus raltegravir arm, two FMD measurements at 24 weeks were removed from the analysis due to poor quality imaging.||% change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
835146|NCT01270828|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Suicidal Behaviour/Ideation|Percentage of participants with suicidal behavior/ideation were noted as Baseline, Weeks 6, 11, 15, 19 and 20.|Baseline, Weeks 6, 11, 15, 19 and 20|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835147|NCT01270828|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a product or medical device; the event need not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment or usage. A serious adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence at any dose that: Results in death; Is life-threatening (immediate risk of death); Requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; Results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity (substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal life functions); or Results in congenital anomaly/birth defect. The study physician used the adjective severe to those AEs that interfere significantly with participant's usual function."|Baseline to Week 20|"The SB Analysis Set (SBAS) consisted of all participants who were enrolled into the SB phase of the study and received at least 1 dose of study medication; The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study medication in the DB phase.
Both SBAS and FAS were included in this analysis."||Participants|||Number
835148|NCT01270828|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Benefit From Treatment, Satisfaction With Treatment and Willingness to Continue Treatement (BSW)|The BSW is administered by the study physician or designated site personnel and consists of three single item measures designed to capture the patient's perception of the effect of treatment in terms of the relative benefit, their satisfaction, and their intention or willingness to continue on therapy.|Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835149|NCT01270828|Secondary|Change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI-sf)|The BPI sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and the impact of pain on daily functions during a 24 hour period prior to evaluation. The BPI sf consists of 5 questions. Questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 measure pain on an 11 point scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain possible). Question 5 consists of 7 item subsets which measure the level of interference of pain on daily functions on an 11 point scale from 0 (Does not interfere) to 10 (Completely interferes).|Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835150|NCT01270828|Secondary|Change in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scales (HADS)|The HADS is a self administered questionnaire that was designed to screen for the presence of a mood disorder in medically ill patients. To distinguish psychiatric presentations from physical illness, the items focus on subjective disturbance of mood rather than physical signs. The HADS contains 14 items rated on 4 point Likert type scales. Two subscales assess depression and anxiety. Each subscale consists of 7 statements, rated on a scale of 0 to 3 (0 = No anxiety or depression, to 3 = Severe feelings of anxiety or depression). Separate scores are calculated for each subscale ranging from 0 to 21. Higher scores denote greater severity of depression or anxiety|Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835151|NCT01270828|Secondary|Change in Mean Daily Sleep Interference Scores|The pain related sleep interference item rating scale is scored on an 11 point numeric rating scale (NRS Sleep). It is self administered by the subject in order to rate how pain has interfered with their sleep during the past 24 hours, ranging from 0 (pain does not interfere with sleep) to 10 (completely interferes (unable to sleep due to pain)). Participants are to describe how their pain has interfered with their sleep during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number on the numeric rating scale.|Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835183|NCT01270958|Primary|Total Protein Value at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|A total protein assay measures the amount of proteins found in the plasma. Normal range: 65-82 g/L.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835152|NCT01270828|Secondary|Change in the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36)|The SF 36 is a self administered, validated questionnaire that measures each of the following 8 health aspects: Physical functioning, role limitations due to physical problems, social functioning, bodily pain, mental health, role limitations due to emotional problems, vitality, and general health perception over the past week. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning) where, higher scores indicate a better health related quality of life.|Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase. N in the below table refers to number of participants analyzed: 203 in Pregabalin DB CR group and 195 in Placebo DB group, unless otherwise specified.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835153|NCT01270828|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Change in the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Score|The PGIC is a participant-rated instrument that has been used in chronic pain and fibromyalgia studies to rate change in a patient's overall status. This single item instrument uses a 7 point Likert scale, anchored by (1) very much improved, to (7) very much worse.|Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835154|NCT01270828|Secondary|The MOS-SS-Optimal Sleep.|"The MOS-SS is a validated self administered questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assess key constructs of sleep. The scale has been found reliable and valid with good overall measurement properties. Instrument scoring yields 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9 item overall sleep problems index assessing sleep over the past week.
The optimal sleep score is a dichotomous 'Yes' or 'No' rating, where 'Yes' indicates optimal sleep (average 7-8 hours per night) and 'No' indicates not optimal sleep. The percentage of participants with optimal sleep is presented here."|Week 6 and Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835155|NCT01270828|Secondary|Change in the MOS-SS-Quantity of Sleep.|"The MOS-SS is a validated self administered questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assess key constructs of sleep. The scale has been found reliable and valid with good overall measurement properties. Instrument scoring yields 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9 item overall sleep problems index assessing sleep over the past week.
The item Quantity of sleep of MOS-SS is presented here."|SB Baseline (BL) (Enrollment) to Week 19 and DB Baseline (Week 6) to Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835156|NCT01270828|Secondary|Change in the Medical Outcomes Study-Sleep Scale (MOS-SS).|The MOS-SS is a validated self administered questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assess key constructs of sleep. The scale has been found reliable and valid with good overall measurement properties. Instrument scoring yields 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9 item overall sleep problems index assessing sleep over the past week. Scores are transformed (actual raw score minus lowest possible score divided by possible raw score range multiplied by 100); total score range = 0 to 100; higher score indicates greater intensity of attribute.|SB Baseline (BL) (Enrollment) to Week 19 and DB Baseline (Week 6) to Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase. N in the below table refers to number of participants analyzed: 203 in Pregabalin DB CR group and 195 in Placebo DB group, unless otherwise specified.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835157|NCT01270828|Secondary|Change in the Weekly NRS-Pain (1-Week Recall).|The pain numeric rating scale (NRS Pain) consists of an 11 point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). A rating of 1-3 is considered mild pain; 4-6, moderate pain; and 7-10, severe pain. Participants were asked to rate their pain over the past week.|SB Baseline (Enrollment) to Week 19 and DB Baseline (Week 6) to Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835158|NCT01270828|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Weekly Mean Pain Score.|The pain numeric rating scale (NRS Pain) consists of an 11 point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). A rating of 1-3 is considered mild pain; 4-6, moderate pain; and 7-10, severe pain|SB Baseline (Enrollment) to Week 19 and DB Baseline (Week 6) to Week 19|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835159|NCT01270828|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With 50% Reduction in the Mean Pain Score.|The 50% pain responders were defined as participants with at least a 50% reduction in the mean pain score from SB baseline to DB endpoint.|13 Weeks|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835160|NCT01270828|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With 30% Reduction in the Mean Pain Score.|The 30% pain responders were defined as participants with at least a 30% reduction in the mean pain score from SB baseline to DB endpoint.|13 Weeks|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835161|NCT01270828|Secondary|Participants With Secondary LTR Based on 5 Day Rolling Average Diary Results|"A secondary LTR endpoint (S-LTR) was defined as the 5 day rolling average pain score during DB, compared to the 5 day randomization baseline pain score. As a secondary endpoint, S-LTR was defined as:
At least a 30% increase in the 5 days rolling average pain score during DB relative to the 5 Day randomization baseline pain score
A 5 days rolling average pain score ≥4. Participants who discontinue due to lack of efficacy or adverse events in the DB phase of the study will also be counted as an LTR."|13 Weeks|The FAS consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase||Participants|||Number
835184|NCT01270958|Primary|Urea Nitrogen Value at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|The urea concentration of serum or plasma, conventionally specified in terms of nitrogen content and called blood urea nitrogen (BUN), is an important indicator of renal function. Normal range: 2.5-7.5 mmol/L.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835162|NCT01270828|Primary|Number of Participants With Loss of Therapeutic Response.|Loss of Therapeutic Response (LTR) is defined as <30% pain response relative to the single blind phase baseline or patient discontinuation due to lack of efficacy or adverse events in the double blind phase of the study. For the calculation of <30% pain response relative to baseline, baseline will be defined as the mean of the last 7 observations prior to the start of SB treatment, which will be compared with the 7 days rolling average of pain response in DB phase. Participants may be discontinued due to lack of efficacy in this study at the discretion of the study physician.|13 Weeks|The full analysis set (FAS) was the primary efficacy analysis set and consisted of all participants randomized to the DB phase who received at least 1 dose of study drug in the DB phase.||Participants|||Number
835163|NCT01270841|Secondary|Reproductive Safety|Change from baseline in sperm concentration|3 months|Subjects with end of study assessments||millions/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835164|NCT01270841|Secondary|Change in FSH After 3 Months of Treatment||3 months|ITT population||mIU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835165|NCT01270841|Secondary|Change in Luteinizing Hormone Levels|Changes in values from baseline in LH at month 3|3 months|ITT population||mIU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835166|NCT01270841|Primary|Change in Total Morning Testosterone|Changes in values from baseline in total morning testosterone levels at month 3 comparing Androxal 12.5 and 25 mg to placebo and Testim|3 months|Intent to treat subjects with an assessment after baseline||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835167|NCT01270867|Secondary|Secondary Endpoint|Incidence of asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhages (ICH) within 24 (-6/+12) hours post procedure|24 hours|||participants|||Number
835168|NCT01270867|Secondary|Secondary Endpoint|All cause mortality at 90 days|procedure through 90 days|||participants|||Number
835169|NCT01270867|Secondary|Secondary Endpoint|"Good clinical outcomes at 90 days, as assessed by mRS (a good clinical outcome is defined as mRS </= 2)
mRS 0-2 indicates functional independence 0 - No symptoms.
- No significant disability. Able to carry out all usual activities, despite some symptoms.
- Slight disability. Able to look after own affairs without assistance, but unable to carry out all previous activities.
- Moderate disability. Requires some help, but able to walk unassisted.
- Moderately severe disability. Unable to attend to own bodily needs without assistance, and unable to walk unassisted.
- Severe disability. Requires constant nursing care and attention, bedridden, incontinent.
- Dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Rankin_Sca"|90 days|||participants|||Number
835170|NCT01270867|Primary|Primary Safety Endpoint|Incidence of procedure-related serious adverse events (PRSAEs) through 24 hours post procedure (-6/+12 hours).|within 24 hours of procedure|||participants|||Number
835171|NCT01270867|Primary|Primary Efficacy Endpoint|"Revascularization of the occluded territory, defined as at least TICI 2 flow in the treated territory after use of the assigned device.
Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) grading system for perfusion (ie blood flow through a vessel) Grade 0:No Perfusion. No antegrade flow beyond the point of occlusion. Grade 1:Penetration With Minimal Perfusion. Grade 2:Partial Perfusion. Grade 2a:Only partial filling (<2/3) of the entire vascular territory is visualized.
Grade 2b:Complete filling of all of the expected vascular territory is visualized, but slower ...
Grade 3:Complete Perfusion. For complete info see Higashida RT, Furlan AJ, Roberts H, Tomsick T, Connors B et al. (2003) Trial design and reporting standards for intra-arterial cerebral thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 34: e109-e137.10.1161/01.STR.0000082721.62796.09 PubMed: 12869717[PubMed]"|acute/procedural|Intent to treat analysis was performed. The non-inferiority hypothesis was tested with Blackwelder's method, assuming a one-sided alpha=0.025 and a clinically relevant non-inferiority margin of 10%.||participants|||Number
835172|NCT01270880|Secondary|Potential Markers for Predicting Drug Response or Efficacy||At baseline, day 1 of course 3, and end of treatment||||||
835173|NCT01270880|Secondary|Association of PFS and PSA Response Rate With Primary and Secondary Target Markers||At 6 months||||||
835174|NCT01270880|Secondary|OS in Metastatic CRPC Who Have Received Prior Docetaxel Therapy||From first dose to death or the date last known alive||||||
835175|NCT01270880|Secondary|Overall Safety and Tolerability of STA-9090||Day 1, 8, and 15 of each course and at end of treatment||||||
835176|NCT01270880|Secondary|Percentage Change in PSA||From baseline to 12 weeks||||||
835177|NCT01270880|Primary|PFS Proportion Achieved With STA-9090 in Men With CRPC Who Have Received Prior Docetaxel Based Therapy|Defined as the time from first dose until the patient demonstrates disease progression based on PSA changes, discontinues STA-9090 therapy (for any reason), or expires (from any cause), whichever occurs first. Estimated with the standard Kaplan-Meier (K-M) method, from which summary statistics of interest (median, 1-year rate, etc.) will be derived.|At 6 months|||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
835178|NCT01270919|Secondary|To Evaluate the Change in Outcomes From the Preoperative Time Point to Postoperative Time Points in Cases Implanted With the BioDuct® Meniscal Repair Device Using the SF-12, VAS Pain, WOMET and IKDC Subjective Knee Evaluation.||Postoperative compared to preoperative||||||
835179|NCT01270919|Primary|To Demonstrate Repair of the Meniscus 6 Months Post-implantation of the BioDuct® Meniscal Repair Device, Utilizing MRI. To Evaluate Clinical Success Using Postoperative Qualitative Criteria, as Compared to Preoperative Findings.||2 years||||||
835180|NCT01270958|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Appearance of Nasal Polyps and Nasal Ulcers at Baseline and at Treatment Completion|Nasal polyps are non cancerous growths occurring in the nose or sinuses. Nasal ulcers are a break in skin or mucous membrane with loss of surface tissue, disintegration and necrosis of epithelial tissue.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
835181|NCT01270958|Primary|Number of Participants With Normal and Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Results at Baseline and at Treatment Completion|The electrocardiogram is a recording of the electrical activity of the heart as it undergoes excitation (depolarization) and recovery (polarization) to initiate each beat of the heart. Normal ECG readings show a slight flat-dip in between contractions and relaxations. An abnormal ECG is determined by comparing the results of an ECG graph with a standard or normal heart graph. If these flat-dips are not present, it may be an indication of a more serious problem.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||participants|||Number
835182|NCT01270958|Primary|Albumin Value at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Albumin is a simple water-soluble protein found in many tissues and liquids. Normal range: 35-50 g/L.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835187|NCT01270958|Primary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) Value at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|AST is a liver enzyme released into the blood when certain organs or tissues, particularly the liver and heart, are injured. Normal range: <=37 U/L.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835188|NCT01270958|Primary|Alkaline Phosphatase Value at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Alkaline phosphatase is an enzyme produced by the liver or bone. An elevated level of alkaline phosphatase in the blood may indicate a liver or bone problem. Normal range: 30-120 units per liter (U/L).|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835189|NCT01270958|Primary|Creatinine Value at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Creatinine is a metabolic waste product in urine that remains relatively constant in an individual and that may be used to establish baseline renal function. Normal range: 53-100 umol/L (female) and 62-120 umol/L (male).|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||umol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835190|NCT01270958|Primary|Total Bilirubin Value at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Total bilirubin is formed when hemoglobin breaks down. Bilirubin is excreted in bile and urine, and elevated levels may indicate certain diseases. Normal range: <=17 micromoles per liter (umol/L).|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||umol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835191|NCT01270958|Primary|Potassium Count at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Potassium is the major positive ion (cation) found inside of cells. The balance of the electrolytes in our bodies is essential for normal function of our cells and our organs. Normal range: 3.5-5.0 mmol/L.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835192|NCT01270958|Primary|Sodium Count at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Sodium is the major positive ion (cation) found outside of cells. The balance of the electrolytes in our bodies is essential for normal function of our cells and our organs. Normal range: 135-145 millimoles per liter (mmol/L).|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835193|NCT01270958|Primary|Platelet Count at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Platelets are cells found in the blood that play a role in blood clotting. Normal range: 150-400 Giga/L.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||Giga/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835194|NCT01270958|Primary|White Blood Cell Count at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|White blood cells are cells of the immune system that defend the body against both infectious disease and foreign materials. Normal range: 4-10 10^9 cells per liter (Giga/L).|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||Giga/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835195|NCT01270958|Primary|Red Blood Cell Count at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Red blood cells are cells in the blood that are used to transport oxygen throughout the body. Normal range: 3.9-5.8 10^12 cells per liter (Tetra/L).|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||Tetra/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835196|NCT01270958|Primary|Hematocrit Values at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Hematocrit is the proportion of blood volume that is occupied by red blood cells. The hematocrit (Hct) is expressed as liter of red blood cells in liters of blood. Normal range: 0.35-0.50 Liter/Liter.|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||Liter/Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
835197|NCT01270958|Primary|Hemoglobin Values at Baseline and After Treatment Completion|Hemoglobin functions primarily to transport oxygen from the lungs to the body tissues. Normal range: 125-160 grams per liter (g/L).|Baseline and treatment completion (up to Week 6)|ITT Population||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835198|NCT01270958|Primary|Heart Rate at Screening/Visit 1, Visit 2, and Visit 3|Heart rate is measured as the number of heart beats per unit time.|Screening/Visit 1 (3-5 days after Screening Visit), Visit 2 (14 [± 1] days after Visit 1, or Day 15), and Visit 3 (42 [± 1] days after Visit 1, or Day 43)|ITT Population||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
835199|NCT01270958|Primary|Diastolic Blood Pressure at Screening/Visit 1, Visit 2, and Visit 3|Blood pressure (BP) is the pressure exerted by circulating blood upon the walls of blood vessels. During each heartbeat, BP varies between a maximum (systolic) and a minimum (diastolic) pressure.|Screening/Visit 1 (3-5 days after Screening Visit), Visit 2 (14 [± 1] days after Visit 1, or Day 15), and Visit 3 (42 [± 1] days after Visit 1, or Day 43)|ITT Population: Some participants were lost to follow-up and may not have been dosed with study drug.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835200|NCT01270958|Primary|Systolic Blood Pressure at Screening/Visit 1, Visit 2, and Visit 3|Blood pressure (BP) is the pressure exerted by circulating blood upon the walls of blood vessels. During each heartbeat, BP varies between a maximum (systolic) and a minimum (diastolic) pressure.|Screening/Visit 1 (3-5 days after Screening Visit), Visit 2 (14 [± 1] days after Visit 1, or Day 15), and Visit 3 (42 [± 1] days after Visit 1, or Day 43)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Some participants were lost to follow-up and may not have been dosed with study drug.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
835201|NCT01270971|Secondary|Negative Mycology of Target Great Toenail at Week 52|Negative KOH and negative fungal culture.|Week 52|Efficacy analysis was performed using the ITT population. The LOCF was used in order to provide a value for efficacy parameters that were missing.||participants|||Number
835202|NCT01270971|Secondary|Treatment Success (Completely Clear or Almost Clear Nail and Negative Mycology) of Target Great Toenail at Week 52|No clinical evidence of onychomycosis as evidenced by normal toenail plate, no onycholysis, and no subungual hyperkeratosis, or no more than minimal evidence of onychomycosis as evidenced by toenail plate dystrophic or discolored over ≤ 10% of the distal aspect, with minimally evident onycholysis and subungual hyperkeratosis, and negative KOH wet mount and negative fungal culture.|Week 52|Efficacy analysis was performed using the ITT population. The LOCF was used in order to provide a value for efficacy parameters that were missing.||participants|||Number
835203|NCT01270971|Secondary|Completely Clear or Almost Clear Target Great Toenail at Week 52|No clinical evidence of onychomycosis as evidenced by normal toenail plate, no onycholysis, and no subungual hyperkeratosis, or no more than minimal evidence of onychomycosis as evidenced by toenail plate dystrophic or discolored over ≤ 10% of the distal aspect, with minimally evident onycholysis and subungual hyperkeratosis.|Week 52|Efficacy analysis was performed using the ITT population. The LOCF was used in order to provide a value for efficacy parameters that were missing.||participants|||Number
835204|NCT01270971|Primary|Complete Cure (Completely Clear Nail and Negative Mycology) of Target Great Toenail at Week 52|No clinical evidence of onychomycosis as evidenced by normal toenail plate, no onycholysis, and no subungual hyperkeratosis, and negative KOH wet mount and negative fungal culture.|Week 52|Efficacy analysis was performed using the ITT population. The last observation was carried forward (LOCF) in order to provide a value for efficacy parameters that were missing.||participants|||Number
835205|NCT01271036|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Subjective Irritation - Neck Application 2|Participants were asked to rate specific sensations they experienced during each application at each site (genital and neck) on a five-point categorical severity scale from mild to excruciating. The sensations included itching, burning, stinging, tingling, warming, and cooling. The number of participants with subjective irritation scores after one week was recorded.|One week|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
835206|NCT01271036|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Subjective Irritation - Neck Application 1|Participants were asked to rate specific sensations they experienced during each application at each site (genital and neck) on a five-point categorical severity scale from mild to excruciating. The sensations included itching, burning, stinging, tingling, warming, and cooling. The number of participants with subjective irritation scores after one week was recorded.|One week|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
835207|NCT01271036|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Subjective Irritation - Genital Application 2|Participants were asked to rate specific sensations they experienced during each application at each site (genital and neck) on a five-point categorical severity scale from mild to excruciating. The sensations included itching, burning, stinging, tingling, warming, and cooling. The number of participants with subjective irritation scores after one week was recorded.|One week|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
835208|NCT01271036|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Subjective Irritation - Genital Application 1|Participants were asked to rate specific sensations they experienced during each application at each site (genital and neck) on a five-point categorical severity scale from mild to excruciating. The sensations included itching, burning, stinging, tingling, warming, and cooling. The number of participants with subjective irritation scores after one week was recorded.|One week|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
835209|NCT01271036|Primary|Number of Participants With Physical Irritation Scores|Severity of physical irritation scored by the Investigator on a scale from 0 (no irritation) to 6 (presence of lesions). Since a score of 0 is required at baseline for inclusion in the study, this any score represents a change from baseline and the trial is considered baseline-controlled. The number of participants with physical irritation scores after one week was recorded (along with categorical severity).|One week|Full Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
835210|NCT01271244|Primary|To Investigate the Effects of Escitalopram on an Absolute or Relative Decrease in Cardiac Sympathetic Function and Serious Cardiac Side Effects as Measured by QT Interval Variability in OEF/OIF Veterans With PTSD.||12 weeks||||||
835211|NCT01271244|Primary|1.To Investigate the Effects of Escitalopram on Cardiac Vagal Function as Measured by R-R Interval Variability, Especially in the HF (0.15-0.5 Hz) Band in OEF/OIF Veterans With PTSD.||12 Weeks|||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
835212|NCT01271413|Secondary|Digit Symbol Substitution Test||baseline, 7 weeks||||||
835213|NCT01271413|Secondary|Delay Discounting||baseline, 7 weeks||||||
835214|NCT01271413|Secondary|Addiction Severity Index||baseline, 7 weeks||||||
835215|NCT01271413|Secondary|go/No-go||baseline, 7 weeks||||||
835216|NCT01271413|Secondary|Trail-making||baseline, 7 weeks||||||
835217|NCT01271413|Secondary|Episodic Memory||baseline, 7 weeks||||||
835218|NCT01271413|Primary|Working Memory|Change in maximum number of digits correctly recalled in Digit Span Backwards task, from baseline to 7 weeks|baseline, 7 weeks|||digits recalled||Standard Deviation|Mean
835219|NCT01271452|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Treatment Response at Day 112 Based on the Subject's Assessment of the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Contraction Using the FWS|Number of subjects with a treatment response at Day 112 based on the subject’s assessment of the severity of glabellar lines at maximum contraction using the FWS. The FWS measures wrinkles on a scale from 0=none (best) to 3=severe (worst). Treatment response was defined as a 1 point or greater reduction from Day 0 in the FWS score at maximum contraction.|Day 112|ITT: all randomized subjects.||Number of Subjects|||Number
835220|NCT01271452|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Treatment Response at Day 98 Based on the Subject's Assessment of the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Contraction Using the FWS|Number of subjects with a treatment response at Day 98 based on the subject’s assessment of the severity of glabellar lines at maximum contraction using the FWS. The FWS measures wrinkles on a scale from 0=none (best) to 3=severe (worst). Treatment response was defined as a 1 point or greater reduction from Day 0 in the FWS score at maximum contraction.|Day 98|ITT: all randomized subjects.||Number of Subjects|||Number
835221|NCT01271452|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Treatment Response at Day 84 Based on the Subject's Assessment of the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Contraction Using the FWS|Number of subjects with a treatment response at Day 84 based on the subject’s assessment of the severity of glabellar lines at maximum contraction using the FWS. The FWS measures wrinkles on a scale from 0=none (best) to 3=severe (worst). Treatment response was defined as a 1 point or greater reduction from Day 0 in the FWS score at maximum contraction.|Day 84|ITT: all randomized subjects.||Number of Subjects|||Number
835222|NCT01271452|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Treatment Response at Day 28 Based on the Subject's Assessment of the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Contraction Using the FWS|Number of subjects with a treatment response at Day 28 based on the subject’s assessment of the severity of glabellar lines at maximum contraction using the FWS. The FWS measures wrinkles on a scale from 0=none (best) to 3=severe (worst). Treatment response was defined as a 1 point or greater reduction from Day 0 in the FWS score at maximum contraction.|Day 28|ITT: all randomized subjects.||Number of Subjects|||Number
835223|NCT01271452|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Treatment Response at Day 112 Based on the Injector's Assessment of the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Contraction Using the FWS|Number of subjects with a treatment response at Day 112 based on the injector’s assessment of the severity of glabellar lines at maximum contraction using the FWS. The FWS measures wrinkles on a scale from 0=none (best) to 3=severe (worst). Treatment response was defined as a 1 point or greater reduction from Day 0 in the FWS score at maximum contraction.|Day 112|ITT: all randomized subjects.||Number of Subjects|||Number
835224|NCT01271452|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Treatment Response at Day 98 Based on the Injector's Assessment of the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Contraction Using the FWS|Number of subjects with a treatment response at Day 98 based on the injector’s assessment of the severity of glabellar lines at maximum contraction using the FWS. The FWS measures wrinkles on a scale from 0=none (best) to 3=severe (worst). Treatment response was defined as a 1 point or greater reduction from Day 0 in the FWS score at maximum contraction.|Day 98|ITT: all randomized subjects.||Number of Subjects|||Number
835225|NCT01271452|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Treatment Response at Day 84 Based on the Injector's Assessment of the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Contraction Using the FWS|Number of subjects with a treatment response at Day 84 based on the injector’s assessment of the severity of glabellar lines at maximum contraction using the FWS. The FWS measures wrinkles on a scale from 0=none (best) to 3=severe (worst). Treatment response was defined as a 1 point or greater reduction from Day 0 in the FWS score at maximum contraction.|Day 84|ITT: all randomized subjects.||Number of Subjects|||Number
835226|NCT01271452|Primary|Number of Subjects With a Treatment Response at Day 28 Based on the Injector's Assessment of the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Contraction Using the Facial Wrinkle Scale (FWS)|Number of subjects with a treatment response at Day 28 based on the injector’s assessment of the severity of glabellar lines at maximum contraction using the FWS. The FWS measures wrinkles on a scale from 0=none (best) to 3=severe (worst). Treatment response was defined as a 1 point or greater reduction from Day 0 in the FWS score at maximum contraction.|Day 28|Intent-to-treat (ITT): all randomized subjects.||Number of Subjects|||Number
835227|NCT01271543|Secondary|Time to Complete Laryngoscopy and Successful Intubation||Noninvasive blood pressure and heart rate will be recorded preinduction, preintubation, and every min for the first 5 min after successful intubation.|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
835228|NCT01271543|Primary|Heart Rate and Blood Pressure Double Product|The double product was measured. The double product is calculated by multiplying the heart rate with the systolic blood pressure. It is also known as the rate pressure product and it is used to measure hemodynamic response.The double product is calculated from the values obtained preinduction, during intubation and after intubation.(5 minutes after intubation)The double products from each time point are averaged to get one mean double product value.|Noninvasive blood pressure and heart rate will be recorded preinduction, preintubation, and every min for the first 5 min after successful intubation.|double product (DP) of systolic blood pressure multiplied by heart rate||(beats/minute)*mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835229|NCT01271686|Primary|Nocturnal Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Change|Nocturnal IOP means under bimatoprost 0.01% treatment were compared with baseline.|4 weeks|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835230|NCT01277042|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Outcome of Pregnancies|The sole pregnancy outcome reported was elective termination with no apparent congenital anomaly.|Throughout the study (from Month 0 up to Month 12)|The analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented, solely on subjects with outcome of pregnancies.||Subjects|||Number
835231|NCT01277042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Medically Significant Conditions (MSCs) Including Potential Immune Mediated Diseases (pIMDs)|MSCs were AEs prompting emergency room or physician visits that were not related to common diseases (upper respiratory infections, sinusitis, pharyngitis, gastroenteritis, urinary tract infections, cervicovaginal yeast infections, menstrual cycle abnormalities and injury), or not related to routine visits for physical examination or vaccination. It also included SAEs not related to common diseases. MSCs included pIMDs, a subset of MSCs that included autoimmune diseases and other inflammatory and/or neurological disorders of interest which might or might not have had an autoimmune etiology.|Throughout the study (from Month 0 up to Month 12)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
835232|NCT01277042|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects Against Human Papillomavirus-16 (HPV-16) and HPV-18|A seroconverted subject was defined as a subject seronegative at baseline whose concentration for anti-HPV-16/18 antibodies, as measured by Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent assay (ELISA) , was higher than or equal to (≥) cut-off value. A seronegative subject was defined as a subject whose antibody concentration was below (<) cut-off value. Cut-off values were 8 ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL) for anti-HPV-16 antibodies and 7 EL.U/mL for anti-HPV-18 antibodies.|One month after third vaccination (Month 7)|The analysis was based on the according-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
835233|NCT01277042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 was an event that prevented normal activities and related was defined as an unsolicited AE assessed by the investigator to be causally related to the study vaccination.|Within 30 days (Days 0 – 29) after any vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
835234|NCT01277042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject. Any was defined as occurrence of any symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination, grade 3 was a SAE that prevented normal activities, and related was defined as a SAE assessed by the investigator to be causally related to the study vaccination. and related was an event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|Throughout the study (from Month 0 up to Month 12)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
835246|NCT01277211|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Absence of Withdrawal Bleeding, by Cycle|Participants kept diaries to record vaginal bleeding events. They were asked to record, on a daily basis, whether vaginal bleeding was present. Absence of withdrawal bleeding was defined as no bleeding/spotting during the expected bleeding period.|Up to 1 year|ITT Group, which consisted of all randomized participants who used at least one ring/pill.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835235|NCT01277042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited symptoms were arthralgia, fatigue, gastrointestinal, headache, myalgia, rash, urticaria and temperature [axillary temperature above (>)37 degrees Celsius(°C)].Grade 3 temperature= temperature >39°C. Grade 3 utricaria= distributed on at least 4 body areas. Grade 3 symptom=prevented normal activity. Gastrointestinal symptoms=nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and/or abdominal pain. Arthralgia (joint pain): in joints distal from injection site. Any=incidence of a symptom regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Related = incidence of a symptom assessed by investigator as related to vaccination.|During the 7 days (Days 0 – 6) after any vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and symptom sheet completed.||Subjects|||Number
835236|NCT01277042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Grade 3 redness and swelling were redness and swelling above 50 millimeters (mm) and grade 3 pain was defined as pain that prevented normal activity. Any was defined as the incidence of a symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 7 days (Days 0 – 6) after any vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and symptom sheet completed.||Subjects|||Number
835237|NCT01277042|Secondary|Concentrations for Anti-HPV-16 and Anti-HPV-18 Antibodies|Concentrations are given as geometric mean titers (GMTs), expressed in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). Cut-off values were 8 EL.U/mL for anti-HPV-16 antibodies, and 7 EL.U/mL for anti-HPV-18 antibodies.|Before vaccination (Month 0) and one month after third vaccination (Month 7)|The analysis was based on the according-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
835238|NCT01277042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive Against HPV-16 and HPV-18|A seropositive subject was defined as a subject whose anti-HPV-16/18 antibody concentration, as measured by ELISA, was higher than or equal to (≥) cut-off value. Cut-off values were 8 ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL) for anti-HPV-16 antibodies, and 7 EL.U/mL for anti-HPV-18 antibodies.|Before vaccination (Month 0) and one month after third vaccination (Month 7)|The analysis was based on the according-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
835239|NCT01277081|Secondary|Overall Cold Symptoms Score|Overall cold symptom score was assessed by asking the question “my cold symptoms are improved” only post consuming the drink at baseline, 15 and 60 minutes . The response to the question was rated by participants on a 5 point (0-4) rating scale with ‘0’ being labeled as ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘4’ being labeled as ‘strongly agree’.|Baseline to 15 and 60 minutes|ITT population: all randomized participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy evaluation.||Score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835240|NCT01277081|Secondary|Soothing Attribute Scores|Soothing attribute of test treatment was assessed by asking the question “if the hot drink is soothing” at baseline, 15 and 60 minutes. The response to the question was rated by participants on a 5 point (0-4) rating scale with ‘0’ being labeled as ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘4’ being labeled as ‘strongly agree’.|Baseline to 15 and 60 minutes|ITT population: all randomized participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy evaluation.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835241|NCT01277081|Secondary|Cold Symptoms Score Post 60 Minutes|A mean Cold symptom score was calculated at baseline, 30 seconds, 2, 5, 15 and 60 minutes from participant responses to questions relating to cold symptoms i.e. “My head feels clear”, “I feel soothing in my throat” and “I feel my cough is being soothed”. The cold symptom scores were rated by the participants on a 5 point (0-4) rating scale with ‘0’ being labeled as ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘4’ being labeled as ‘strongly agree’. For each participant, a mean score was derived by summing the responses and dividing by the number of questions answered.|Baseline to 60 minutes|ITT population: all randomized participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy evaluation.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
835242|NCT01277081|Secondary|Cold Symptoms Score Post 15 Minutes|A mean Cold symptom score was calculated at baseline, 30 seconds, 2, 5 and 15 minutes from participant responses to questions relating to cold symptoms i.e. “My head feels clear”, “I feel soothing in my throat” and “I feel my cough is being soothed”. The cold symptom scores were rated by the participants on a 5 point (0-4) rating scale with ‘0’ being labeled as ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘4’ being labeled as ‘strongly agree’. For each participant, a mean score was derived by summing the responses and dividing by the number of questions answered.|Baseline to 15 minutes|ITT Population: all randomized participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy evaluation.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
835243|NCT01277081|Secondary|Breathing Score Post 60 Minutes|A mean breathing score was calculated at baseline, 30 seconds, 2, 5, 15 and 60 minutes, derived from participant responses to questions relating to breathing i.e. “my breathing feels easy”, “I feel airways are open”, “I feel a cooling sensation in my throat”, “I can feel the air flowing to my lungs easily”, “My nose feels less blocked” and “I feel my breathing is comfortable”. The breathing scores were rated by the participants on a 5 point (0-4) rating scale with ‘0’ being labeled as ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘4’ being labeled as ‘strongly agree’. For each participant, a mean score was derived by summing the responses and dividing by the number of questions answered.|Baseline to 60 minutes|ITT population: All randomized participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy evaluation.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
835244|NCT01277081|Primary|Breathing Scores Post 15 Minutes|A mean breathing score was calculated at baseline, 30 seconds, 2, 5 and 15 minutes, derived from participant responses to questions relating to breathing i.e. “my breathing feels easy”, “I feel airways are open”, “I feel a cooling sensation in my throat”, “I can feel the air flowing to my lungs easily”, “My nose feels less blocked” and “I feel my breathing is comfortable”. The breathing scores were rated by the participants on a 5 point (0-4) rating scale with ‘0’ being labeled as ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘4’ being labeled as ‘strongly agree’. For each participant, a mean score was derived by summing the responses and dividing by the number of questions answered.|Baseline to 15 minutes|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population: All randomized participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy evaluation.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
835247|NCT01277211|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Intermenstrual (Breakthrough) Bleeding/Spotting, by Cycle|"Participants kept diaries to record vaginal bleeding events. They were asked to record, on a daily basis, whether they experienced vaginal bleeding, which included BLEEDING or SPOTTING, at any time during a cycle other than normal menstruation while in the study. (This is also known as breakthough bleeding.) Vaginal bleeding that required >=2 pads/tampons per day was classified as BLEEDING. Vaginal bleeding that required <=1 pad/tampon per day was classified as SPOTTING."|Up to 1 year|ITT Group, which consisted of all randomized participants who used at least one ring/pill.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835248|NCT01277211|Primary|Pearl Index, by Treatment Group|Primary Efficacy Outcome measure for this study was contraceptive efficacy, or the prevention of in-treatment pregnancy. The total incidence of in-treatment pregnancies was expressed as the Pearl Index, which is defined as the number of in-treatment pregnancies per 100 woman-years of exposure (one woman-year defined as a period of 365.25 days).|Up to 1 year|Restricted Intent-to-Treat (R-ITT) Group, which consisted of all participants from the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Group who had at least one cycle at risk (no condom use and confirmed intercourse).||Pregnancies per 100 woman-years||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
835249|NCT01277302|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Intraretinal Edema|The presence of intraretinal edema was defined as the presence of subretinal fluid, cystoid spaces, or central retinal thickness ≥ 300 µm as evaluated in spectral-domain optical coherence tomography images by the Digital Angiography Reading Center, the central reading center. At baseline, all participants in the Monthly and PRN groups had presence of edema.|Month 7 to Month 15|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 ranibizumab injection in the study. The analysis was based on observed data without imputation for missing values.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835250|NCT01277302|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Central Foveal Thickness|Central foveal thickness was assessed monthly in the study eye using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. Central foveal thickness was computed using the automated Cirrus Review software (DOCTR CZM Cirrus OCT Grader Reading Manual, Version 1.02). All participants in the Monthly and PRN groups had a baseline central foveal thickness > 300 µm at baseline. A decrease in foveal thickness suggests a reduction in macular edema. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Month 1 to Month 15|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 ranibizumab injection in the study. The analysis was based on observed data without imputation for missing values.||µm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835251|NCT01277302|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Central Foveal Thickness of ≤ 300 µm|Central foveal thickness was assessed monthly in the study eye using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. Central foveal thickness was computed using the automated Cirrus Review software (DOCTR CZM Cirrus OCT Grader Reading Manual, Version 1.02). All participants in the Monthly and PRN groups had a baseline central foveal thickness > 300 µm at baseline.|Month 7 to Month 15|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 ranibizumab injection in the study. The analysis was based on observed data without imputation for missing values.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835252|NCT01277302|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Lost < 15 Letters in Their Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Score From Baseline|BCVA was measured in the study eye using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity (VA) chart starting at a test distance of 4 meters. The BCVA score is the number of letters read correctly by the patient. An increase in the BCVA score indicates an improvement of vision.|Month 7 to Month 15|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 ranibizumab injection in the study. The analysis was based on observed data without imputation for missing values.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835253|NCT01277302|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Score|BCVA was measured in the study eye using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity (VA) chart starting at a test distance of 4 meters. The BCVA score is the number of letters read correctly by the patient. An increase in the BCVA score indicates an improvement of vision. A positive change score indicates improvement.|Month 1 to Month 15|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 ranibizumab injection in the study. The analysis was based on observed data without imputation for missing values.||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
835254|NCT01277302|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Visual Acuity (VA) Snellen Equivalent of 20/40 or Better|VA was measured in the study eye using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity chart starting at a test distance of 4 meters. An increase in the number of lines read correctly by the patient in the ETDRS chart indicates an improvement of vision. The Snellen equivalent of 20/40 or better is 69 or more letters correctly read in the EDTRS chart.|Month 7 to Month 15|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 ranibizumab injection in the study. The analysis was based on observed data without imputation for missing values.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835255|NCT01277302|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Gained ≥ 15 Letters in Their Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Score From Baseline|BCVA was measured in the study eye using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity (VA) chart starting at a test distance of 4 meters. The BCVA score is the number of letters read correctly by the patient. An increase in the BCVA score indicates an improvement of vision.|Month 7 to Month 15|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 ranibizumab injection in the study. The analysis was based on observed data without imputation for missing values.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835256|NCT01277302|Secondary|Visual Acuity Change From Previous Month During the Alternate Dose Regimen Period in Subjects Who Met the VA-OCT Stability Criteria at the Previous Month|BCVA was measured in the study eye using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity (VA) chart starting at a test distance of 4 meters. The BCVA score is the number of letters read correctly by the patient. An increase in the BCVA score indicates an improvement of vision. A positive change score indicates improvement. This outcome measure is not relevant for subjects in the non-randomized group because they never met the VA-OCT stability criteria.|Month 7 through Month 15|Intent-to-treat population, randomized: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 ranibizumab injection in the study and were randomized into the monthly or PRN treatment groups. The analysis was based on observed data without imputation for missing values.||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
835257|NCT01277302|Primary|Trend of Change From Baseline in the Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Scores From Month 7 to Month 15|BCVA was measured in the study eye using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity (VA) chart starting at a test distance of 4 meters. The BCVA score is the number of letters read correctly by the patient. An increase in the BCVA score indicates an improvement of vision. A positive change score indicates improvement. The reported data are the observed changes from Baseline in BCVA at Months 7 and 15. For the statistical analysis, the interaction term of treatment by time in a longitudinal model was used to assess whether there was a difference in the trend of change from Baseline in the visual acuity scores from Month 7 to Month 15 between the 2 randomized treatment groups, Monthly and PRN.|Baseline to Month 15|Intent-to-treat population, randomized: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 ranibizumab injection in the study and were randomized into the Monthly or PRN treatment groups. The analysis was based on observed data without imputation for missing values.||Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
835258|NCT01277354|Primary|CPT Effectiveness as Determined by the Number of Participants With CAPS Score Decrease of 50% From Baseline to Week 6|The CAPS will be used in the diagnosis of PTSD, assessment of the impact of symptoms on function, assessment of the severity of symptoms at baseline, and weekly throughout the study. The CAPS in this particular study must decrease by 50% for CPT to be deemed effective.|6 weeks|Please note that there were only a total of 2 participants involved in this study. Funding was lost to continue and the study was terminated.||Participants|||Count of Participants
835259|NCT01277510|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Ionized Calcium During the Efficacy Assessment Phase|The efficacy assessment value is based on the scheduled assessment(s) taken during the efficacy assessment phase. When multiple assessments were available, the average of those was used. If an efficacy measurement during the EAP was missing, the mean of the last 2 available postbaseline values in the dose-titration phase was used. If only one post-baseline value was available, this single value was used.|From Baseline to the Efficacy Assessment Phase, Weeks 25-30.|Full analysis set; only participants with available data were included in the analysis.||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835260|NCT01277510|Secondary|Growth Velocity From End of Double-blind Phase to End of Open-label Phase|Linear growth velocity (cm/year) = 52 x change in height (cm) / number of weeks between the two assessments. End of open-label phase visit was at Week 60 by design but the last assessment in the open-label phase was used due to the early termination of the study.|End of double-blind phase (Week 30) until end of the open-label phase (Week 60)|Full analysis set. Only participants with available data were included in the anaysis.||cm/year||Standard Deviation|Mean
835261|NCT01277510|Secondary|Growth Velocity From Baseline to End of Double-blind Phase|Linear growth velocity (cm/year) = 52 x change in height (cm) / number of weeks between the two assessments. End of double-blind phase visit was at Week 30 by design but the last assessment in the double-blind phase was used due to the early termination of the study.|From Baseline to end of Efficacy Assessment at Week 30|Full analysis set; the last assessment in the double-blind phase was used due to the early termination of the study. Only participants with available data are included in the analysis.||cm/year||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835262|NCT01277510|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Phosphorous Product (Ca x P) During the Efficacy Assessment Phase|The efficacy assessment value is based on the scheduled assessment(s) taken during the efficacy assessment phase. When multiple assessments were available, the average of those was used. If an efficacy measurement during the EAP was missing, the mean of the last 2 available postbaseline values in the dose-titration phase was used. If only one post-baseline value was available, this single value was used.|From Baseline to end of Efficacy Assessment Period, assessed up to 30 weeks|Full analysis set||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835263|NCT01277510|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Serum Phosphorus During the Efficacy Assessment Phase|The efficacy assessment value is based on the scheduled assessment(s) taken during the efficacy assessment phase. When multiple assessments were available, the average of those was used. If an efficacy measurement during the EAP was missing, the mean of the last 2 available postbaseline values in the dose-titration phase was used. If only one post-baseline value was available, this single value was used.|From Baseline to the Efficacy Assessment Phase, Weeks 25-30.|Full analysis set; data for one participant in the Placebo group were not available.||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835264|NCT01277510|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Corrected Total Serum Calcium During the Efficacy Assessment Period|"Serum calcium was reported as a corrected value by the central laboratory based on calcium and albumin concentrations: Corrected total calcium (mg/dL) = measured total serum calcium (mg/dL) + 0.8 (4.0 – Serum albumin (g/dL)). The efficacy assessment value is based on the scheduled assessment(s) taken during the efficacy assessment phase. When multiple assessments were available, the average of those was used. If an efficacy measurement during the EAP was missing, the mean of the last 2 available postbaseline values in the dose-titration phase was used. If only one post-baseline value was available, this single value was used."|From Baseline to the Efficacy Assessment Phase, Weeks 25-30.|Full analysis set||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835265|NCT01277510|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Mean iPTH ≤ 300 pg/mL (31.8 Pmol/L) During the Efficacy Assessment Phase|The efficacy assessment value is based on the scheduled assessment(s) taken during the efficacy assessment phase. When multiple assessments were available, the average of those was used. If an efficacy measurement during the EAP was missing, the mean of the last 2 available postbaseline values in the dose-titration phase was used. If only one post-baseline value was available, this single value was used.|From Baseline to the Efficacy Assessment Phase (EAP), Weeks 25-30|Full analysis set||pecentage of participants|||Number
835266|NCT01277510|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥ 30% Reduction in Mean iPTH From Baseline to the Efficacy Assessment Phase|The efficacy assessment value is based on the scheduled assessment(s) taken during the efficacy assessment phase (EAP; Weeks 25 - 30). When multiple assessments were available, the average of those was used. If an efficacy measurement during the EAP was missing, the mean of the last 2 available post-baseline values in the dose-titration phase was used. If only one post-baseline value was available, this single value was used.|From Baseline to the Efficacy Assessment Phase, Weeks 25-30|Full analysis set, which includes all randomized participants with at least 1 post-baseline assessment.||percentage of participants|||Number
835267|NCT01277523|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, ECG, Vital Signs and Laboratory Tests|Clinically relevant abnormalities for physical examination, ECG, vital signs and laboratory tests. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as adverse events.|From first drug administration until 30 days after last drug intake, up to 142 days|Treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received, at least one documented dose of trial medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
835268|NCT01277523|Secondary|Analysis of Time to First Asthma Exacerbation During the 12 Week Treatment Period.|Time in days to first asthma exacerbation during the 12 week treatment period. The median time to first asthma exacerbation was not calculable, so the number of patients who experienced an asthma exacerbation are presented for the measured values.|12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication.||participants|||Number
835269|NCT01277523|Secondary|Time to First Severe Asthma Exacerbation During the 12-week Treatment Period.|"Time in days to first severe asthma exacerbation during the 12 week treatment period. The median time to first severe asthma exacerbation was not calculable, so the number of patients who experienced a severe asthma exacerbation are presented for the measured values.
A severe asthma exacerbation was defined as a subgroup of all asthma exacerbations that required an initiation of treatment with systemic corticosteroids for at least 3 days or, in case of ongoing and pre-existing systemic corticosteroid therapy, requiring at least doubling of previous daily doses of systemic corticosteroids for at least 3 days."|12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication.||participants|||Number
835270|NCT01277523|Secondary|Use of PRN Rescue Medication During the Night-time|"Change from baseline in the number of puffs of rescue medication (salbutamol/albuterol) used during the night-time based on the weekly mean at week 12.
Measured values presented are actually adjusted means"|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data was imputed by the available data from the patient. Completely missing data were handled by the statistical model.||Number of puffs of rescue medication||Standard Error|Mean
835271|NCT01277523|Secondary|Use of PRN Rescue Medication During the Daytime|"Change from baseline in the number of puffs of rescue medication (salbutamol/albuterol) used during the daytime based on the weekly mean at week 12.
Measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data was imputed by the available data from the patient. Completely missing data were handled by the statistical model.||Number of puffs of rescue medication||Standard Error|Mean
835272|NCT01277523|Secondary|Use of PRN Rescue Medication During the Day|"Change from baseline in the number of puffs of rescue medication (salbutamol/albuterol) used during the day (24 hour period) based on the weekly mean at week 12.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data was imputed by the available data from the patient. Completely missing data were handled by the statistical model.||Number of puffs of rescue medication||Standard Error|Mean
835273|NCT01277523|Secondary|ACQ Total Score Responders|"Responder rates based on the ACQ total score after 12 weeks of treatment. Analysis was performed using the following categories and definitions: responder (change from trial baseline ≤-0.5), no change (-0.5 <change from trial baseline <0.5) and worsening (change from trial baseline ≥0.5) No statistical testing was performed for ACQ total score responders.
The ACQ is a scale containing 7 questions, each question has a 7-point scale which ranges from 0 to 6; a score of 0 corresponds to no impairment and a score of 6 corresponds to maximum impairment."|12 weeks|Full Analysis Set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data for patients not withdrawn from the study were either categorised as no change or based on available data. Withdrawn patients were imputed based upon discontinuation reason.||percentage of participants|||Number
835274|NCT01277523|Secondary|Control of Asthma as Assessed by ACQ Total Score|"Change from baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) total score measured at week 12.
The ACQ is a scale containing 7 questions. Each question has a 7 point scale which ranges from 0 to 6. A score of 0 corresponds to no impairment and a score of 6 corresponds to maximum impairment. ACQ total score is calculated as the mean of the responses to all 7 questions.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit. Completely missing data were handled by the statistical model.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835275|NCT01277523|Secondary|ACQ6 Score Responders|"Responder rates based on the ACQ6 score after 12 weeks of treatment. Analysis was performed using the following categories and definitions: responder (change from trial baseline <= -0.5), no change (-0.5 < change from trial baseline <0.5) and worsening (change from trial baseline >= 0.5).
The ACQ is a scale containing 7 questions, each question has a 7- point scale which ranges from 0 to 6; a score of 0 corresponds to no impairment and a score of 6 corresponds to maximum impairment. ACQ6 is calculated as the mean of the responses to the first 6 questions of the ACQ6.
No statistical testing was performed on ACQ6 responders."|12 weeks|"Full Analysis Set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication.
Missing data for patients not withdrawn from the study were either categorised as no change or based on available data, withdrawn patients were imputed based upon discontinuation reason."||percentage of participants|||Number
835298|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HBsAg Seroconversion at Weeks 72, 96, and 120|"HBsAg seroconversion was defined as change of detectable antibody to HBsAg from negative to positive. Proportions are based on a Kaplan-Meier estimate.
The analysis visit window for Week 72 comprised Week 70 through Week 78, so results up to Week 78 are included in this analysis. The analysis visit window for Week 96 comprised Week 90 through Week 102, so results up to Week 102 are included in this analysis. The analysis visit window for Week 120 comprised Week 114 through Week 120."|Baseline; Weeks 72, 96, and 120|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
835276|NCT01277523|Secondary|Control of Asthma as Assessed by ACQ6 Score.|"Change from baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) 6 score measured at week 12
The ACQ is a scale containing 7 questions, each question has a 7 point scale which ranges from 0 to 6. A score of 0 corresponds to no impairment and a score of 6 corresponds to maximum impairment. ACQ6 score is calculated as the mean of the responses to the first 6 questions of the ACQ6.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit. Completely missing data were handled by the statistical model.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835277|NCT01277523|Secondary|FVC AUC (0-3h) Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline of area under the curve (AUC) from 0 to 3 hours for FVC (Forced vital capacity) (FVC AUC0–3h) after 12 weeks of treatment. The AUC was calculated by using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (3h).
Measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 10 mins before drug administration and 30 mins, 1 hour (h), 2h, 3h after drug administration at 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit. Completely missing data were handled by the statistical model.||litres||Standard Error|Mean
835278|NCT01277523|Secondary|FEV1 AUC (0-3h) Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline of area under the curve (AUC) from 0 to 3 hours for FEV1 (FEV1 AUC 0–3h) after 12 weeks of treatment. The AUC was calculated by using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (3h).
Measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 10 mins before drug administration and 30 mins, 1 hour (h), 2h, 3h after drug administration at 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit. Completely missing data were handled by the statistical model.||Litres||Standard Error|Mean
835279|NCT01277523|Secondary|FVC peak0-3 Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in Maximum forced vital capacity (FVC) measured within the first 3 hours after administration of trial medication (FVC peak0–3h) after 12 weeks of treatment.
The measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit. Completely missing data were handled by the statistical model.||Litres||Standard Error|Mean
835280|NCT01277523|Secondary|Trough FEV1 Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in Trough (pre-dose) Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) measured at week 12.
Measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit. Completely missing data were handled by the statistical model.||litres||Standard Error|Mean
835281|NCT01277523|Primary|FEV1 peak0-3 Change From Baseline|"Change from baseline in peak forced expiratory volume in 1 second within the first 3 hours post dosing (FEV1 peak0-3) measured at week 12.
Measured values presented are actually adjusted means."|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) was the same as the treated set which included all randomised patients who were dispensed and received at least one documented dose of trial medication. Missing data at a visit was imputed by the available data from the patient at that visit. Completely missing data were handled by the statistical model.||litres||Standard Error|Mean
835282|NCT01277549|Primary|CD34+ Cell Collection Efficiency|The collection efficiency for CD34+ cells is defined as the percent of processed CD34+ cells that were in fact collected.|one day|Results are given for all per protocol subjects.||% of processed CD34+ cells collected||Full Range|Median
835283|NCT01277549|Secondary|Viability of the Collected MNC Product|The viability of the collected white blood cells was assessed using the 7-AAD (7-amino actinomycin D) viability dye in a flow cytometric assay. Viability assessment is incorporated into the CD34 assay. This assay was only performed on G-CSF mobilized donors as nonmobilized donor have too few CD34+ cells to detect. Thus viability of the collected WBCs is reported only for the G-CSF mobilized arm.|One day|Per Protocol||percentage of total WBCs collected||Full Range|Median
835284|NCT01277549|Secondary|Granulocyte % of MNC Product|Granulocyte contamination of the MNC product was quantitated as the percent of total product WBC (white blood cell) that were segmented granulocytes or bands.|One day|Results given for all per protocol subjects.||percentage of WBCs collected||Full Range|Median
835285|NCT01277549|Secondary|Hematocrit of MNC Product|The hematocrit of the collected product was used to quantitate RBC (red blood cell) contamination.|One Day|Per protocol||RBC % of product volume||Full Range|Median
835286|NCT01277549|Secondary|Platelet Collection Efficiency|Platelet contamination of the cell product was measured as the platelet collection efficiency, that is, as the percent of platelets processed that were collected.|One Day|Per protocol||% of processed platelets collected||Full Range|Median
835287|NCT01277549|Primary|Mononuclear Cell Collection Efficiency|The collection efficiency for a given cell type is defined as the percent of processed cells of that cell type that are in fact collected.|One day|Results are given for all per protocol subjects.||% of processed MNCs that were collected||Full Range|Median
835288|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Required Retreatment|Participants in the TDF 120 week group were not eligible to enter the retreatment phase and are not presented.|Up to 120 weeks|Safety Analysis Set. Participants in the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 48 Weeks + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
835299|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HBsAg Loss at Weeks 96 and 120|"Loss of HBsAg was defined as change of detectable HBsAg from positive to negative. Proportions are based on a Kaplan-Meier estimate.
The analysis visit window for Week 96 comprised study Week 90 through Week 102, so results up to Week 102 are included in this analysis. The analysis visit window for Week 120 comprised study Week 114 through Week 126, so results up to Week 126 are included in this analysis."|Baseline; Weeks 96 and 120|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
835289|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Normal ALT at Week 120|"Normal ALT was ≤ 30 U/L for males and ≤ 19 U/L for females (based on the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) 2008 guidelines), and ≤ 41 U/L for males and ≤ 31 U/L for females (based on central laboratory upper limit of the normal range (ULN) for ALT).
For the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 48 Weeks + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups, data are presented in the Not Retreated column for participants who had not entered the retreatment phase by Week 120, and in the Retreated column for participants who did enter the retreatment phase by Week 120."|Week 120|Full Analysis Set. The missing = failure method was used in which participants on study with missing data were considered to have failed to achieve the endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
835290|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Normal ALT at Week 96|"Normal ALT was ≤ 30 U/L for males and ≤ 19 U/L for females (based on the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) 2008 guidelines), and ≤ 41 U/L for males and ≤ 31 U/L for females (based on central laboratory upper limit of the normal range (ULN) for ALT).
For the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 48 Weeks + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups, data are presented in the Not Retreated column for participants who had not entered the retreatment phase by Week 96, and in the Retreated column for participants who did enter the retreatment phase by Week 96."|Week 96|Full Analysis Set. The missing = failure method was used in which participants on study with missing data were considered to have failed to achieve the endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
835291|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Normal ALT at Week 72|"Normal ALT was ≤ 30 U/L for males and ≤ 19 U/L for females (based on the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) 2008 guidelines), and ≤ 41 U/L for males and ≤ 31 U/L for females (based on central laboratory upper limit of the normal range (ULN) for ALT).
For the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 48 Weeks + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups, data are presented in the Not Retreated column for participants who had not entered the retreatment phase by Week 72, and in the Retreated column for participants who did enter the retreatment phase by Week 72."|Week 72|Full Analysis Set. The missing = failure method was used in which participants on study with missing data were considered to have failed to achieve the endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
835292|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virological Response (HBV DNA < 117 IU/mL) at Week 120|"For the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 48 Weeks + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups, data are presented in the Not Retreated column for participants who had not entered the retreatment phase by Week 120, and in the Retreated column for participants who did enter the retreatment phase by Week 120."|Week 120|Full Analysis Set. The missing = failure method was used in which participants on study with missing data were considered to have failed to achieve the endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
835293|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virological Response (HBV DNA < 117 IU/mL) at Week 96|"For the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 48 Weeks + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups, data are presented in the Not Retreated column for participants who had not entered the retreatment phase by Week 96, and in the Retreated column for participants who did enter the retreatment phase by Week 96."|Week 96|Full Analysis Set. The missing = failure method was used in which participants on study with missing data were considered to have failed to achieve the endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
835294|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virological Response (HBV DNA < 117 IU/mL) at Week 72|"For the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 48 Weeks + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups, data are presented in the Not Retreated column for participants who had not entered the retreatment phase by Week 72, and in the Retreated column for participants who did enter the retreatment phase by Week 72."|Week 72|Full Analysis Set. The missing = failure method was used in which participants on study with missing data were considered to have failed to achieve the endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
835295|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HBeAg Loss and Seroconversion at Week 120|"Loss of HBeAg was defined as change of detectable HBeAg from positive to negative. HBeAg seroconversion was defined as change of detectable antibody to HBeAg from negative to positive. Percentages were based on the number of subjects with non-missing HBeAg results or missing HBeAg results imputed as failures at each visit.
For the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 48 Weeks + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups, data are presented in the Not Retreated column for participants who had not entered the retreatment phase by Week 120, and in the Retreated column for participants who did enter the retreatment phase by Week 120."|Baseline; Week 120|Participants in the Full Analysis Set who were HBeAg reactive or indeterminate at baseline were analyzed. The missing = failure method was used in which participants on study with missing data were considered to have failed to achieve the outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
835296|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HBeAg Loss and Seroconversion at Week 96|"Loss of HBeAg was defined as change of detectable HBeAg from positive to negative. HBeAg seroconversion was defined as change of detectable antibody to HBeAg from negative to positive. Percentages were based on the number of subjects with non-missing HBeAg results or missing HBeAg results imputed as failures at each visit.
For the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 48 Weeks + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups, data are presented in the Not Retreated column for participants who had not entered the retreatment phase by Week 96, and in the Retreated column for participants who did enter the retreatment phase by Week 96."|Baseline; Week 96|Participants in the Full Analysis Set who were HBeAg reactive or indeterminate at baseline were analyzed. The missing = failure method was used in which participants on study with missing data were considered to have failed to achieve the outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
835297|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HBeAg Loss and Seroconversion at Week 72|"Loss of HBeAg was defined as change of detectable HBeAg from positive to negative. HBeAg seroconversion was defined as change of detectable antibody to HBeAg from negative to positive. Percentages were based on the number of subjects with non-missing HBeAg results or missing HBeAg results imputed as failures at each visit.
For the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 48 Weeks + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups, data are presented in the Not Retreated column for participants who had not entered the retreatment phase by Week 72, and in the Retreated column for participants who did enter the retreatment phase by Week 72."|Baseline; Week 72|Participants in the Full Analysis Set who were HBeAg reactive or indeterminate at baseline were analyzed. The missing = failure method was used in which participants on study with missing data were considered to have failed to achieve the outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
835300|NCT01277601|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HBsAg Loss at Week 72 Following Treatment With TDF (48 Weeks) Plus Peg-IFN (16 Weeks) Combination Versus Peg-IFN Alone for 48 Weeks or TDF Alone|"Loss of HBsAg was defined as change of detectable HBsAg from positive to negative. Proportions are based on a Kaplan-Meier estimate.
The analysis visit window for Week 72 comprised Week 70 through Week 78, so results up to Week 78 are included in this analysis."|Baseline; Week 72|Full Analysis Set. Participants in the TDF 48 week + Peg-IFN 16 Weeks, TDF 120 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
835301|NCT01277601|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HBsAg Loss at Week 72 Following Treatment With 48 Weeks of TDF Plus Peg-IFN Combination Versus Peg-IFN Alone for 48 Weeks or TDF Alone|"Loss of HBsAg was defined as change of detectable HBsAg from positive to negative. Proportions are based on a Kaplan-Meier estimate.
The analysis visit window for Week 72 comprised Week 70 through Week 78, so results up to Week 78 are included in this analysis."|Baseline; Week 72|Full Analysis Set: participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug. Participants in the TDF+Peg-IFN 48 Weeks, TDF 120 Weeks, and Peg-IFN 48 Weeks groups were analyzed by randomized treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
835302|NCT01277666|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|Data for number of participants who presented one or more adverse events (serious or non serious) was reported. An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence (MO) in a participant temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product (MP), whether or not considered related to the MP and can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with its use. The SAE was any untoward MO that, at any dose, results in death, life threatening, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, results in or prolongs inpatient hospitalization, congenital abnormality or birth defect, that may not be immediately life-threatening or result in death or hospitalization but may jeopardize the participant or may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in this definition.|Up to Week 12|The Safety population comprised of all participants in the intent to treat population except those who did not take at least one dose of investigational product.||Participants|||Number
835303|NCT01277666|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) Total Score at Both Weeks 8 and 12|The IBDQ is a 32-item IBD-specific health related quality of life instrument evaluating general activities of daily living, intestinal function, social performance, personal interactions, and emotional status. Each item response was graded from 1 to 7 for each area evaluated. A higher score indicated better function in that area. Total IBDQ score was obtained by summing up scores for all 32 questions. Total IBDQ score ranged from 32 to 224. A higher score indicated better quality of life and lower score indicated worse quality of life. Day 1 assessment was considered as Baseline. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting value at Baseline from value at Weeks 8 and 12.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 8 and Week 12|Intent to treat population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Score on scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835304|NCT01277666|Secondary|Percentage of Participant Achieving Clinical Remission (CDAI <150 Points) at Week 8|Clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score < 150 points if baseline CDAI is >= 150. If baseline CDAI is <150, the participant was not considered in remission. participants with missing CDAI scores were considered not in remission according to the missing=no effect imputation. Percentage of participants achieving clinical remission with CDAI <150 points at Week 8 was presented.|Week 8|Intent to treat population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835305|NCT01277666|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Clinical Response (CDAI Decrease From Baseline of >=100 Points) at Week 8|CDAI is a recognized scoring system to categorize disease severity with scores of >= 220 to <= 450 describing the moderately-to-severely active population. The score was algorithmically derived from the sum of participant reported Crohn’s disease symptoms recorded over 7 days and investigator recorded assessments of the participant’s condition, laboratory parameters and use of anti-diarrhoeal medication. Both participants and investigators made their entries via IVRS each evening before going to bed. Percentage of Participants with a clinical response CDAI decrease from baseline of >=100 points at Week 8 was presented.|Week 8|Intent to treat population.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835306|NCT01277666|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Clinical Remission (CDAI <150 Points) at Both Week 8 and Week 12|Clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score < 150 points if baseline CDAI is >= 150. If baseline CDAI is <150, the participant was not considered in remission. participants with missing CDAI scores were considered not in remission according to the missing=no effect imputation. Percentage of participants in clinical remission defined as a CDAI score of less than 150 points at other time points was presented.|Week 8 and 12|Intent to treat population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835307|NCT01277666|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Clinical Response (CDAI Decrease From Baseline of >= 100 Points) at Both Week 8 and Week 12|Responders were defined as participants with CDAI decrease from baseline of >= 100 points. CDAI is a recognized scoring system to categorize disease severity with scores of >= 220 to <= 450 describing the moderately-to-severely active population. The score was algorithmically derived from the sum of participant reported Crohn’s disease symptoms recorded over 7 days and investigator recorded assessments of the participant’s condition, laboratory parameters and use of anti-diarrhoeal medication. Both participants and investigators made their entries via IVRS each evening before going to bed. Percentage of participants with CDAI decrease from baseline of >=100 points was presented.|At Week 8 and 12|Intent to treat population||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835308|NCT01277666|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CDAI Remission at Week 12|CDAI is a recognized scoring system to categorize disease severity with scores of >= 220 to <= 450 describing the moderately-to-severely active population. Clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score < 150 points if baseline CDAI is >= 150. If baseline CDAI is <150, the participant was not considered in remission. Participants with missing CDAI scores were considered not in remission according to the missing=no effect imputation. Percentage of participants in clinical remission at Week 12 was presented.|Week 12|Intent to treat population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835355|NCT01286805|Secondary|Requirement of Antiemetic Rescue|The number of participants who needed medication to treat their nausea and vomiting.|Day of surgery prior to discharge|||participants|||Number
835356|NCT01286805|Secondary|Incidence of Vomiting|The number of participants who vomited.|Day of surgery prior to discharge|||participants|||Number
835309|NCT01277666|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Response at Week 12|CDAI is a number which consists of information collected from a 7-day diary from the participants regarding symptoms. Remission is considered a score of 150 or less. Active disease is considered 200 or greater. A response to therapy is considered a decline in CDAI score of 70-points from baseline. The score was algorithmically derived from the sum of participant reported Crohn’s disease symptoms recorded over 7 days and investigator recorded assessments of the participant’s condition, laboratory parameters and use of anti-diarrhoeal medication. CDAI score was calculated based on the data collected in the diary card. The total CDAI score ranged from 0 to approximately 600, where higher scores indicate more severe disease. Both participants and investigators made their entries via IVRS each evening before going to bed. Percentage of participants with CDAI response at Week 12 was presented.|Week 12|The intent to treat population comprised of all participants randomized to double-blind treatment for 12 weeks.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835310|NCT01277718|Primary|Maximum Observed Concentration of Cobimetinib||Day 1 at 0 hour (predose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 hours postdose|Pharmacokinetic parameters populations included all enrolled participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835311|NCT01277718|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (AUCinf) of Cobimetinib|AUCinf = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - inf). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - inf).|Day 1 at 0 hour (predose), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 144, and 192 hours postdose|Pharmacokinetic parameters populations included all enrolled participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||nanograms*hours/milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835312|NCT01277757|Primary|Number of Participants With Objective Response|Only those participants who have measurable disease present at baseline, have received at least four doses of MK2206, and have had their disease re-evaluated will be considered evaluable for response. Response classified according the RECIST definitions, and re-evaluated for response every 12 weeks. (Note: Participants who exhibit objective disease progression prior to receiving four doses of therapy will also be considered evaluable.) In addition to a baseline scan, confirmatory scans should also be obtained 4-6 weeks following initial documentation of objective response, and then revert to scheduled repeat imaging.|4 weeks following beginning treatment, repeat confirmation 4-6 weeks following response, up to 1 year|Two participants were not treated therefore excluded from study population analysis, another was inevaluable and six others were not analyzable for response.||participants|||Number
835313|NCT01277757|Secondary|Apoptosis Assessed by Cleaved Caspase-3|Assessment of apoptosis by immunohistochemistry to active caspase-3.|Up to 30 days after completion of study treatment, up to 1 year||||||
835314|NCT01277757|Secondary|Cell Proliferation as Measured by the Change in Percent Ki-67 Positive Cells|Ki-67 will be scored as % positive cells to determine whether there is a change % Ki-67+ cells before treatment versus after 2 weeks of treatment.|Baseline to 2 weeks||||||
835315|NCT01277757|Secondary|Median Response Duration|"The duration of the response is from the time response is achieved until disease progression is detected. The duration of overall response is measured from the time measurement criteria are met for CR or PR (whichever is first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented (taking as reference for progressive disease the smallest measurements recorded since the treatment started). The duration of overall CR is measured from the time measurement criteria are first met for CR until the first date that progressive disease is objectively documented.
Response re-evaluated every 12 weeks. In addition to a baseline scan, confirmatory scans should also be obtained 4-6 weeks following initial documentation of objective response."|Response assessment 4 weeks from beginning of treatment, response recorded from the start of treatment until disease progression/recurrence, up to 1 year|Two participants were not treated, and one was inevaluable.||months||Full Range|Median
835316|NCT01277757|Secondary|6 Month Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Number of participants progression free at 6 months. PFS is defined as the duration of time from start of treatment, or time of progression or death, whichever occurs first. The PFS for this outcome was assessed at 6 months post treatment.|From start of treatment to time of progression or death or six months whichever occurs first, assessed at 6 months|||participants|||Number
835317|NCT01277757|Primary|Number of Participants With Response Defined Using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST)|Number of participants with response defined by RECIST version 1.1: Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Progressive Disease (PD): At least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progressions). Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.|Up to 3 weeks after completion of study treatment, for up to 1 year|Two participants were not treated therefore excluded from study population analysis, another was inevaluable and six others were not analyzable for response.||participants|||Number
835318|NCT01283464|Primary|Global Photodamage Severity|A photonumeric scale for the assessment of cutaneous photodamage (CE Griffiths, et al). Five photographic standards (en face and 45 degrees oblique) illustrating increasing severity of photodamage (min=0, max=8) where 0=no damamge; 2=mild damage; 4=moderate damage; 6=moderate/severe damage; and grade 8=severe damage.|Week 24|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835319|NCT01283516|Primary|Duration of Response (DOR) Based on Investigator Assessment|As per Kaplan-Meier estimate. Duration of response (DOR) is defined as the time from first documented response (partial response (PR) or complete response (CR)) to the date of first documented disease progression (PD) or death due to any cause, among patients with a confirmed PR or CR per RECIST 1.0.|33 months|Subset of Full Analysis Set including ALK-positive NSCLC patients who received at least one dose of LDK378 in the 750 mg dose group and received prior crizotinib and had a confirmed overall complete response or partial response after initiation of LDK378.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835320|NCT01283516|Primary|Overall Response Rate (ORR) Based on Investigator Assessment|Overall response rate (ORR) is defined as the percentage of participants with a best overall complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) per RECIST 1.0. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI, CR is the disappearance of all target lesions. PR is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of all target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of the longest diameters. Both CR and PR had to be confirmed by repeat assessments performed no less than 4 weeks after the criteria for response were first met. CR = at least two determinations of CR, at least 4 weeks apart before progression. PR = at least two determinations of PR or better at least 4 weeks apart before progression (and not qualifying for a CR).|33 months|Subset of Full Analysis Set including ALK-positive NSCLC patients who received at least one dose of LDK378 in the 750 mg dose group and received prior crizotinib||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835321|NCT01283516|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs)|The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined as the highest dose for a given schedule that was expected to cause DLTs in no more than 33% of patients during the first cycle of treatment. A patient with multiple occurrences of a DLT under one treatment is counted only once in the AE category for that treatment. MTD was determined at 750mg.|33 months|Dose-determining Set (DDS) consists of all patients (NSCLC and non-NSCLC) from the safety set who either meet the minimum exposure criterion and have sufficient safety evaluations or have experienced a dose limiting toxicity (DLT) during Cycle 1 (including the PK run-in period). This constitutes all evaluable patients for the determination of MTD.||Participants|||Number
835322|NCT01283516|Secondary|Absorption and Plasma Concentrations of LDK378||120 weeks||05/2017||||
835323|NCT01283516|Secondary|Type and Category of Study Drug Related Adverse Events||120 weeks||05/2017||||
835324|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting That They Would Recommend the User-filled Applicator for HIV Prevention|"Participants were asked if they would recommend the user-filled applicator to other women if it came with a gel that helped prevent HIV infection.
Response categories included yes, no, and in some circumstances."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835325|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting That They Would Not Want to Use the User-filled Applicator in the Future if it Came With a Gel for HIV Prevention|"Participants were asked if there were any reasons that they would not want to use this user-filled applicator in the future if it came with a gel that helped prevent HIV infection.
Response categories included yes, no, and in some circumstances."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835326|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting That They Would Use the User-filled Applicator in the Future if it Came With a Gel for HIV Prevention|"Participants were asked if they would use the user-filled applicator in the future if it came with a gel that helped prevent HIV infection.
Response categories included yes, no, and in some circumstances."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835327|NCT01283555|Primary|Number of Colposcopic Findings (Baseline and After One Week of Product Use)|Comparison of colposcopic findings between baseline visits and after one week of twice-daily application of Tenofovir 1% gel with either a user-filled or prefilled applicator|7 days|The number of participants for analysis was determined by counting the number of participants with colposcopic findings and baseline and after one week of product use.||colposcopic findings|Participants||Number
835328|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting That the Cost of the Applicator Would Influence Their Choice of Applicator|"Participants were asked if the cost of the applicator would influence their choice of applicator.
Response categories were yes, no, and maybe."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835329|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting That Both Applicators Were Acceptable|"Participants were asked if both applicators were acceptable to them. Responses were either yes or no."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835330|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting That the Instructions for Use Were Helpful|"For each applicator type, participants were asked if the instructions were helpful to you.
Response categories were yes and no."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835331|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Suggestions Regarding Ease of Use or Comfort|"Participants were asked if they could suggest ways that would make each applicator easier or more comfortable to use. Response categories were yes and no. If yes, participants were asked to describe how they would make the applicator easier and/or more comfortable to use."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835332|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting That Applicator Was Comfortable to Use|"Participants were asked to describe the comfort of use for each applicator type(user-filled and prefilled).
Response categories included comfortable, neutral, and uncomfortable."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835333|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Applicator Preference (User-filled or Prefilled) Across a Variety of Factors|"Participants were asked about their preference for either the user-filled or prefilled applicator with regard to several use factors as well as in relation to disposal, storage, and overall comfort and preference.
Response categories included user-filled, prefilled, and same."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||responses|||Number
835334|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting That the Gel Was Easy to Dispense|"Participants were asked to describe the dispensing of the gel into the vagina with each applicator (user-filled and prefilled).
Response categories included easy, moderately difficult, and difficult."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835335|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Applicator Easy to Insert|"Participants were asked to describe the insertion of the applicator into the vagina for each applicator (user-filled and prefilled).
Response categories included easy, moderately difficult, and difficult."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835336|NCT01283555|Secondary|Reasons Given by Participants for Knowing When the Applicator Was Filled Correctly|"Participants were asked how did they know when the applicator was filled correctly (that is, with the right amount of gel). More than one answer was allowed.
Response categories included plunger automatically stopped, the 'FULL' line was reached, and other.
Note: this question does not apply to the prefilled applicator."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis. Each participant could identify multiple reasons. As a result, the number of units analyzed is greater than the number of participants.||participants|Participants||Number
835337|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Respondents Reporting Confidence With Filling the User-filled Applicator|"Participants were asked when using the user-filled applicator, how confident did they feel that they at inserted the correct amount of gel into the applicator.
Response categories included very confident, confident, and not confident.
(Note: this question does not apply to the prefilled applicator.)"|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835338|NCT01283555|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Applicator Easy to Fill|"Participants were asked to describe the process of filling the user-filled applicator.
Response categories included easy, moderately difficult, and difficult.
Since ease of filling only applies to the user-filled applicator, this question was not applicable for the prefilled applicator."|Final study visit (after completing both study arms)|All participants were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
835339|NCT01283555|Secondary|Dosing Accuracy (% of Target Dose Delivered)|The target dose for Tenofovir gel in this study was 4.0ml, which is the volume of Tenofovir being used in current microbicide clinical trials. The average dose delivered for each applicator was compared with the intended target dose of 4.0ml.|3 dose delivery measurements during 1 week of product use|Per protocol all participants were included in the analysis.||percent of target dose delivered|Participants||Number
835340|NCT01283555|Secondary|Dosing Precision, 10% (Expressed Volume)|A 10% range was calculated around the average expressed volume of 3.83ml to determine how many applicators delivered a dose within this range (+/-10% of average volume)|3 dose delivery measurements during 1 week of product use|Per protocol all participants were included in the analysis.||doses|Participants||Number
835341|NCT01283555|Secondary|Dosing Precision, 5% (Expressed Volume)|A 5% range was calculated around the average expressed volume of 3.83ml to determine how many applicators delivered a dose within this range (+/-5% of average volume)|3 dose delivery measurements during 1 week of product use|Per protocol all participants were included in the analysis.||doses|Participants||Number
835342|NCT01283555|Secondary|Dosing Volume (Expressed Volume)|At each dose delivery visit, the applicator was weighed prior to vaginal insertion and after use. The volume of gel expressed was measured using the following data: weight of filled applicator, weight of emptied applicator, the average weight of an empty applicator, and gel density.|3 dose delivery measurements during 1 week of product use|Per protocol, all participants were included in the analysis.||ml|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835343|NCT01283555|Secondary|Filling Accuracy (% of Target Dose)|The target dose for Tenofovir gel in this study was 4.0ml, which is the volume of Tenofovir being used in current microbicide clinical trials. The filled volume for each applicator was compared with the intended target dose of 4.0ml.|3 dose delivery measurements during 1 week of product use|Per protocol all participants were included in the analysis.||% of target dose filled into applicator|Participants||Number
835344|NCT01283555|Secondary|Filling Precision (10% Range)|A 10% range was calculated around the average filled volumes to determine how many applicators were filled within this range (+/-10% of average volume)|3 dose delivery measurements during 1 week of product use|Per protocol all participants were included in the analysis.||doses|Participants||Number
835345|NCT01283555|Secondary|Filling Precision (5% Range)|A 5% range was calculated around the average filled volumes to determine how many applicators were filled within this range (+/-5% of average volume)|3 dose delivery measurements during 1 week of product use|Per protocol all participants were included in the analysis.||doses|Participants||Number
835346|NCT01283555|Secondary|Filled Volume|At each dose delivery visit, the applicator was weighed, prior to vaginal insertion. For the user-filled applicator, the participant handed the applicator to the investigator after filling with gel from the multidose tube. The applicator was then weighed and returned to the participant for insertion. For the prefilled applicator, the participant inserted the plunger into the barrel, and then handed the applicator to the investigator for weighing.|3 dose delivery measurements during 1 week of product use|Per protocol all participants were included in the analysis.||ml|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835347|NCT01283581|Secondary|Clinical Response Rate in Subjects With Infections Caused by MRSA||up to Late Follow-up||||||
835348|NCT01283581|Secondary|Microbiological Response Rate in All Subjects and in Subjects With Infections Caused by MRSA||up to Late Follow-up||||||
835349|NCT01283581|Secondary|The Levels of Biochemical Markers of Inflammation||on Days 1, 5, Follow-up, and late Follow-up||||||
835350|NCT01283581|Secondary|Steady State Pharmacokinetic Parameters in Subjects Administered Delafloxacin, Vancomycin, and Linezolid||Through Day 3 (± 1 day)||||||
835351|NCT01283581|Secondary|Erythema Clinical Success|The number of ITT subjects who had cessation of erythema within 48-72 hours, based on digital measurements, as well as resolution/absence of fever. Cessation was defined as a percentage change from baseline in total area of erythema/induration that is less than or equal to 0%.|48 - 72 hours|ITT (intent-to-treat) population, defined as all subjects who were randomized.||Participants|||Number
835352|NCT01283581|Primary|Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Response in the ITT (Intent-to-treat) Population at Follow-up and Late Follow-up.|The primary efficacy endpoint was the success rate, defined as (cure)/(cure + failure), and expressed as a percentage. Cure was defined as the complete resolution of all baseline signs and symptoms of ABSSSI and follow-up and late follow-up. If erythema was the only sign of infection present at follow-up and it was then absent at late follow-up, the case was classified as a Cure.|Follow-up (Day 14 ± 1) and late follow-up (Day 21-28)|ITT (intent-to-treat) population, defined as all subjects who were randomized.||Participants|||Number
835353|NCT01286805|Secondary|Quality of Recovery (QoR-40) Physical Comfort Dimension|Assessment of Physical Comfort (minimum score = 12, maximum score = 60). Higher values represent a better outcome|First 24 hours after surgery|||QoR-40 Physical Comfort score||Standard Deviation|Mean
835354|NCT01286805|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction|Patient Satisfaction (0-10; 0 = very dissatisfied, 10 = very satisfied)|First 24 hours after surgery|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835359|NCT01286805|Secondary|Readiness to Discharge From Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU)|Time to readiness for discharge from the PACU. Patients were considered ready for PACU discharge when they met the following criteria: a) Awake, alert, oriented and responsive b) Minimal pain, Numeric Rating Scale < 5/10 (0 = no pain, 10 = worst imaginable pain) (parenteral [injected] medications not required) c) Vital signs stable d) No active bleeding e) Minimal or no nausea f) Not vomiting, tolerating oral intake g) Oxygen saturation > 94% (or baseline) on room air h) Patient has urinated.|Day of surgery prior to discharge|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
835360|NCT01286805|Primary|Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Pain at Rest (0-10) on Day of Surgery Prior to Discharge|The Numeric Rating Scale was used to ask patients to rate their pain at rest on a scale of 0 to 10, 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable.|Day of surgery prior to discharge|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835361|NCT01286818|Secondary|Best Overall Response [Anti-Tumor Activity of FOLFIRI Plus Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B)]|Best overall response evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST, version 1.1) criteria. Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all non-nodal target lesions, with the short axes of any target lymph nodes reduced to <10 millimeters (mm). Partial Response (PR): at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions (including the short axes of any target lymph nodes), taking as reference the baseline sum diameter. Progressive Disease (PD): an increase of at least 20% in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (included baseline sum if that was the smallest on study). In addition, the sum must have demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 mm (the appearance of 1 or more new lesions was considered progression). Stable Disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify as PR nor sufficient increase to qualify as PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameter since treatment started.|Every 8 weeks until PD (up to 49 weeks)|Safety population: Participants who received any quantity of study medication.||participants|||Number
835362|NCT01286818|Secondary|Steady State Volume of Distribution (Vss) of Ramucirumab|Vss is the theoretical volume in which the total amount of study drug would need to be uniformly distributed during steady state to produce the same concentration as it is in plasma/serum.|Day 1, Cycle 1 and Day 1, Cycle 5 (1 cycle=14 days)|Participants who received any quantity of study medication and had evaluable Vss data at the specified time points.||Liters (L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835363|NCT01286818|Secondary|Clearance (CL) of Ramucirumab|The total body CL of ramucirumab on Day 1, Cycle 1 and on Day 1, Cycle 5, which was also considered CL at steady state (CLss), is reported.|Day 1, Cycle 1 and Day 1, Cycle 5 (1 cycle=14 days)|Participants who received any quantity of study medication and had evaluable CL data at the specified time points.||milliliters per hour (mL/hr)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835364|NCT01286818|Secondary|Half Life (t1/2) of Ramucirumab|t1/2 is the time required for the plasma/serum concentration to decrease 50%.|Day 1, Cycle 1 and Day 1, Cycle 5 (1 cycle=14 days)|Participants who received any quantity of study medication and had evaluable t1/2 data at the specified time points.||days||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835365|NCT01286818|Secondary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Ramucirumab|Reported for Day 1, Cycle 1 is AUC from time 0 extrapolated to infinity [AUC(0-inf)] and for Day 1, Cycle 5 is AUC over the dosing interval at steady state AUC(tau,ss).|Day 1, Cycle 1 and Day 1, Cycle 5 (1 cycle=14 days)|Participants who received any quantity of study medication and had evaluable AUC data at the specified time points.||micrograms*day/milliliter (mcg*day/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835366|NCT01286818|Secondary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Ramucirumab|The Cmax of ramucirumab in serum on Day 1, Cycle 1 and on Day 1, Cycle 5, which was also considered Cmax at steady state (Cmax,ss), is reported.|Day 1, Cycle 1 and Day 1, Cycle 5 (1 cycle=14 days)|Participants who received any quantity of study medication and had evaluable Cmax data at the specified time points.||micrograms per milliliter (mcg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835367|NCT01286818|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serum Anti-IMC-1121B Antibodies (Immunogenicity)||Day 1 of Cycle 5 (Week 9), Cycle 6 (Week 11), Cycle 7 (Week 13), and Cycle 9 (Week 17) [(1 cycle=14 days)]|Participants who received any quantity of study medication and had evaluable immunogenicity data at the specified time points.||participants|||Number
835368|NCT01286818|Primary|Number of Participants With Ramucirumab Drug-Related Adverse Events or Serious Adverse Events|Data are presented for the number of participants who experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), Grade ≥3 TEAEs, or adverse events (AEs) leading to discontinuation of treatment that were considered to be related to ramucirumab. Events related to Irinotecan, Levofolinate, and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) were reported separately. A summary of SAEs and other nonserious AEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events section.|Baseline to end of study (up to 49.3 weeks) plus 37 day follow-up|Safety population: Participants who received any quantity of study medication.||participants|||Number
835369|NCT01286818|Primary|Number of Participants That Experienced Any Dose-Limiting Toxicities (DLT) During the DLT Assessment Period|DLTs were adverse events (AEs) possibly related to study drug that met the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for AEs (NCI CTCAE, version 4.03): Grade 4 neutropenia ≥7 days or ≥Grade 3 with bacteremia or sepsis; Absolute neutrophil count <1.0x10^9/Liters with fever ≥38.3°Celsius requiring intravenous antibiotic therapy; Grade 4 thrombocytopenia or ≥Grade 3 with bleeding requiring platelet transfusion; ≥Grade 3 altered coagulation tests and no anticoagulation; ≥Grade 4 or uncontrolled hypertension; ≥Grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity (except non-clinically significant Grade 3 events like electrolyte abnormality, hypersensitivity, and arthralgia/myalgia); urine protein >3 grams/24 hours; study drug-related toxicity causing Cycle 3, Day 1 treatment delay until Day 44 or later. Grade 3 or Grade 4 infusion-related reaction (hypersensitivity) due to ramucirumab or FOLFIRI, not a DLT.|Day 1, Cycle 1 through Day 1, Cycle 3 (1 cycle=14 days)|DLT population: All enrolled participants who either completed the first 3 administrations of study medication or discontinued study medication due to a DLT during the DLT assessment period (Day 1, Cycle 1 through Day 1, Cycle 3).||participants|||Number
835370|NCT01287039|Secondary|Participants With a Positive Anti-Reslizumab Antibody Status During Study|The immunogenicity of reslizumab was assessed by measuring for the presence of anti-reslizumab antibodies at baseline, weeks 16, 32, 48, and 52 or early withdrawal. Blood samples for anti-reslizumab antibodies assessment were also obtained from all patients (inside or outside of the US) experiencing a serious adverse event, an adverse event leading to withdrawal, or an exacerbation of asthma symptoms.|Weeks 16, 32, 48 and 52|Safety analysis set. Immunogenicity for anti-reslizumab antibodies not reported for the placebo treatment arm.||participants|||Number
835371|NCT01287039|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Vital Signs Values|"Data represents participants with potentially clinically significant (PCS) vital sign values.
Significance criteria
Sitting pulse - high 12-17 yr: >100 and increase of >= 30 beats/minute (bpm)
Sitting pulse - low >=18 yr: <50 and decrease of >=30 bpm
Sitting pulse - high >=18 yr: >100 and increase of >=30 bpm
Sitting systolic blood pressure - low >=18 yr: <90 and decrease of >=30 mmHg
Sitting systolic blood pressure - high >=18 yr: >160 and increase of >=30 mmHg
Sitting diastolic blood pressure - low 12-17 yr: <55 and decrease of >=12 mmHg
Sitting diastolic blood pressure - low >=18 yr: <50 and decrease of >=12 mmHg
Sitting diastolic blood pressure - high >=18 yr: >100 and increase of >=12 mmHg
Respiratory rate >=18 yr: >24 and increase of >=10 breaths/minute
Body temperature - low 12-17 yr: <96.5° Fahrenheit or <35.8° Celsius
Body temp - low >=18 yr: <96.5° F or <35.8° C
Body temp - high >=18 yr: >100.5° Fahrenheit"|Week 4 to Week 65. The last postbaseline value for approximately 20 patients in each|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
835372|NCT01287039|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Abnormal Lab Values|"Data represents participants with potentially clinically significant (PCS) abnormal serum chemistry, hematology, and urinalysis values.
Significance criteria:
Blood urea nitrogen: >=10.71 mmol/L
Uric acid: M>=625, F>=506 μmol/L
Aspartate aminotransferase: >=3*upper limit of normal (ULN). Normal range is 10-43 U/L
Alanine aminotransferase: >=3*ULN. Normal range is 10-40 U/L
GGT = gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase: >= 3*ULN. Normal range is 5-49 U/L.
Bilirubin: >=34.2 μmol/L
White blood cells: <=3.0 or >20 10^9/L
Hemoglobin: M<=115, F<=95 g/dL
Hematocrit: M<0.37, F<0.32 L/L
Neutrophils: <=1.0 10^9/L
Eosinophils: >10.0 %
Platelets: <75 or >=700 10^9/L
Urinalysis: blood, glucose, ketones and total protein: >=2 unit increase from baseline"|Week 4 to Week 65. The last postbaseline value for approximately 20 patients in each|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
835373|NCT01287039|Primary|Frequency of Each of the Two Criteria for Clinical Asthma Exacerbations (CAEs)|"An exacerbation event was considered a CAE if the patient met either or both of the criteria listed below and this was corroborated with at least 1 other measurement to indicate the worsening of clinical signs and symptoms of asthma:
use of systemic, or an increase in the use of inhaled, corticosteroid treatment for 3 or more days; or an increased 2 or more fold for at least 3 or more days for patient's already on corticosteroids.
asthma-related emergency treatment, such as an unscheduled visit to the physician’s office or emergency room for nebulizer treatment or other urgent treatment to prevent worsening of asthma symptoms, or an asthma-related hospitalization.
CAEs were adjudicated by committee to assure consistency. Adjusted CAE rate and confidence intervals for the two criteria were based on Negative Binomial regression model adjusted for stratification factors.
Results are offered as adjusted means."|Day 1 to Week 52|Randomized set||CAEs in 52 weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
835374|NCT01287039|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events|An adverse event was defined in the protocol as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Severity was rated by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate and severe, with severe= an inability to carry out usual activities. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator. Serious AEs include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, OR an important medical event that jeopardized the patient and required medical intervention to prevent the previously listed serious outcomes.|Day 1 (post-dose) to Week 65. The last postbaseline value for approximately 20 patients in each|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
835375|NCT01287039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Eosinophil Count Over 16 Weeks and 52 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"Blood eosinophil counts were measured using a standard complete blood count (CBC) with differential blood test at each scheduled visit, and from all patients experiencing a serious adverse event, an adverse event leading to withdrawal, or an exacerbation of asthma symptoms.
The during treatment average eosinophil counts were estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Negative change from baseline values correlate to reduced asthma severity."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52 or early withdrawal|Randomized set of participants with assessments within timeframe||10^9 blood eosinophil/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835376|NCT01287039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short-Acting Beta-Agonist (SABA) Use Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"SABA are used for quick relief of asthma symptoms. To measure SABA use, at each clinical visit patients were asked to recall their usage of SABA therapy within the last 3 days of the scheduled visit. If usage was confirmed, the number of puffs used was recorded. For the purpose of summaries, an average daily usage was evaluated by dividing the total number of puffs recorded over 3 days by 3.
The during treatment (Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) SABA use was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Negative change from baseline scores indicate improvement in asthma control."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Randomized set of participants with assessments within the timeframe||puffs/day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835377|NCT01287039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"The ASUI is an 11-item instrument designed to assess the frequency and severity of asthma symptoms and side effects, weighted by patient preferences (Revicki et al 1998). ASUI is a utility score that ranges from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating better asthma control; info obtained from questionnaire about asthma symptoms.
The during treatment (Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average ASUI was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Positive change from baseline values indicate improvement in asthma symptoms. Information was obtained from questionnaire about asthma symptoms."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Randomized set, including participants who contributed at least once to the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835511|NCT01288443|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Calculated LDL-C (mg/dL) at Week 12 - On-Treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835378|NCT01287039|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Time to First Clinical Asthma Exacerbation (CAE)|"An exacerbation event was considered a CAE if the patient met either or both of the criteria listed below and this was corroborated with at least 1 other measurement to indicate the worsening of clinical signs and symptoms of asthma:
use of systemic, or an increase in the use of inhaled, corticosteroid treatment for 3 or more days; or an increased 2 or more fold for at least 3 or more days for patient's already on corticosteroids.
asthma-related emergency treatment, such as an unscheduled visit to the physician’s office or emergency room for nebulizer treatment or other urgent treatment to prevent worsening of asthma symptoms, or an asthma-related hospitalization.
CAEs were adjudicated by committee to assure consistency. The distributions were compared by a log rank test stratified by baseline usage of oral corticosteroid (yes or no) and geographical region (US or other)."|Day 1 to Day 478 (longest treatment time plus 2 weeks)|Randomized set||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835379|NCT01287039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"The ACQ is a 7-item instrument that measures asthma control (Juniper et al 1999). Six questions are self-assessments; the seventh item, completed by a member of the study staff, is the result of the patient's FEV1 measurement. Each item has 7 possible answers on a scale of 0 to 6, and the total score is the mean of all responses (the total scale is therefore 0-6). A higher score is an indication of poorer asthma control. The during treatment (Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average ACQ was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Negative change from baseline scores indicate improvement in asthma control."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Randomized set, including participants who contributed at least once to the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835380|NCT01287039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) to Week 16|"The AQLQ is a 32-item instrument administered as a self-assessment (Juniper et al 1992). The questionnaire is divided into 4 domains: activity limitation, symptoms, emotional function, and environmental stimuli. Patients were asked to recall their experiences during the last 2 weeks and to respond to each question on a 7-point scale (1=severe impairment, 7=no impairment). The overall AQLQ score is the mean of all 32 responses. Five of the activity questions were “patient-specific,” which means that each patient identified and scored 5 activities in which the patient was limited by asthma; these 5 activities were identified at the first visit and retained for all subsequent follow-up visits.
Positive change from baseline scores indicate improvement in quality of life."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Week 16|Randomized set of patients with assessments at both timepoints||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835381|NCT01287039|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"FEV1 is a standard measurement of air movement in the lungs of patients with asthma obtained from pulmonary function tests. It is the volume of air expired in the first second of a forced expiration using a spirometer. Positive change from baseline scores indicate improvement in asthma control.
The during treatment (Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average FEV1 was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|Randomized set, including participants who contributed at least once to the analysis.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835382|NCT01287039|Primary|Frequency of Clinical Asthma Exacerbations (CAEs) During 12 Months of Treatment|"An exacerbation event was considered a CAE if the patient met either or both of the criteria listed below and this was corroborated with at least 1 other measurement to indicate the worsening of clinical signs and symptoms of asthma:
use of systemic, or an increase in the use of inhaled, corticosteroid treatment for 3 or more days; or an increased 2 or more fold for at least 3 or more days for patient's already on corticosteroids.
asthma-related emergency treatment, such as an unscheduled visit to the physician’s office or emergency room for nebulizer treatment or other urgent treatment to prevent worsening of asthma symptoms, or an asthma-related hospitalization CAEs were adjudicated by committee to assure consistency.
Adjusted CAE rate and confidence intervals were based on Negative Binomial regression model adjusted for stratification factors.
Results are offered as adjusted means."|Day 1 to Week 52|Randomized set||CAEs in 52 weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
835383|NCT01287065|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) and Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, associated with liver injury and impaired liver function defined as alanine aminotransferase >=3 x upper limit of normal (ULN) and total bilirubin >=2 x ULN or international normalised ratio >1.5. Medical or scientific judgment was exercised in deciding whether reporting was appropriate in other situations. Refer to the general AE/SAE module for a list of AEs and SAEs.|From the first dose of the study medication until the Follow-up Visit (up to 18 weeks)|All Subjects Population: all participants who received at least one dose of the study medication.||Participants|||Number
835384|NCT01287065|Secondary|AM and PM Pre-treatment Trough FEV1 on Day 14|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. FEV1 was measured electronically by spirometry at Day 14. Trough FEV1 is defined as pre-dose (AM and PM) FEV1 measurement taken on Day 14. The analysis was performed using a mixed effects analysis of covariance model with fixed effect terms for treatment and period; and participant baseline, period baseline, gender and age fitted as covariates; and participant as a random effect. Participant 122 received FF/VI 100/25 PM in treatment periods 1 and 3 and contributed twice to the summary of FF/VI 100/25 PM (n=25). Participant 123 received Placebo in treatment periods 2 and 3 and contributed twice to the summary of Placebo (n=23).|Day 14|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835512|NCT01288443|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Calculated LDL-C (mmol/L) at Week 12 - On-Treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835385|NCT01287065|Secondary|Pre-treatment PEF (AM and PM) on Days 1-12.|PEF is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. PEF was measured by the participants daily in the morning and evening just prior to each dose, using an electronic peak flow meter, throughout the 14-day Treatment Period. Only the averaged daily AM and PM PEF over Days 2 to 12 was analyzed. The analysis was performed using a mixed effect analysis of covariance model with fixed effect terms for treatment and period; baseline PEF AM and PM, gender and age fitted as covariates; and participant as a random effect. Participant 122 received FF/VI 100/25 PM in treatment periods 1 and 3 and contributed twice to the summary of FF/VI 100/25 PM (n=26). Participant 123 received Placebo in treatment periods 2 and 3 and contributed twice to the summary of Placebo (n=24).|From Day 2 up to Day 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters per minute||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835386|NCT01287065|Primary|Weighted Mean Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) Over 0–24 Hours Post-dose on Day 14|Pulmonary function was measured by FEV1, defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. FEV1 was measured electronically by spirometry at Day 14. Weighted mean FEV1 was calculated using the Day 14 24-hour serial FEV1 measurements taken at the following time points: pre-dose (Day 14 evening dose), and 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21 and 24 hours post-dose (measured in the evening of Day 15). At each time point, the highest of 3 technically acceptable measurements was recorded. The analysis was performed using a mixed effects analysis of covariance model with fixed effect terms for treatment and period; and participant (par.) baseline, period baseline, gender and age fitted as covariates; and par. as a random effect. Par. 122 received FF/VI 100/25 PM in treatment periods 1 and 3 and contributed twice to the summary of FF/VI 100/25 PM (n=25). Par. 123 received Placebo in treatment periods 2 and 3 and contributed twice to the summary of Placebo (n=20).|Pre-dose on Day 14 to 24 hours post-dose|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication and provided at least one post-dose peak expiratory flow (PEF) or FEV1 measurement. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835387|NCT01287117|Secondary|Percentage of Complete Responders (UAS7 = 0) at Week 12|A complete responder was defined as a participant with a UAS7 score = 0 at Week 12.|Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835388|NCT01287117|Secondary|Percentage of Angioedema-free Days From Week 4 to Week 12|The percentage of angioedema-free days from Weeks 4 to 12 was defined as the number of days for which a patient responded “No” to the angioedema question in the daily diary divided by the total number of days with a non-missing diary entry, starting at the Week 4 visit and ending the day prior to the Week 12 visit.|Week 4 to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
835389|NCT01287117|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Overall Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score at Week 12|The DLQI is a 10-item dermatology-specific health-related quality of life measure. Patients rated their dermatology symptoms as well as the impact of their skin condition on various aspects of their lives on a scale of 0 (Not at all) to 3 (Very much). The overall DLQI is the sum of the responses to the 10 items and ranges from 0 to 30. A lower score indicates a better quality of life. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835390|NCT01287117|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Weekly Size of the Largest Hive Score|The weekly size of the largest hive score is the sum of the daily size of the largest hive scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The daily size of the largest hive score is assessed twice daily (morning and evening) on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (> 2.5 cm). The daily size of the largest hive score is the average of the morning and evening scores. The Baseline weekly size of the largest hive score is calculated over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher score indicates larger hives. A negative change score indicates a reduction in hive size.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835391|NCT01287117|Secondary|Percentage of Weekly Itch Severity Score MID Responders at Week 12|The percentage of participants with an itch severity score at 12 Weeks at least 5 points lower than at Baseline.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835392|NCT01287117|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a UAS7 Score ≤ 6 at Week 12|The UAS7 is the sum of the daily urticarial activity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 42. The daily urticarial activity score is the average of the morning and evening urticarial activity scores and ranges from 0 to 6. The urticarial activity score is the sum of ratings on a scale of 0 to 3 (0=none to 3=intense/severe) for (1) the number of wheals (hives) and (2) itch intensity over the previous 12 hours, ranges from 0 to 6, and is measured twice daily (morning and evening). The Baseline score is the sum of the daily urticarial activity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher urticarial activity score indicates more urticaria activity.|Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835393|NCT01287117|Secondary|Time to Minimally Important Difference (MID) Response in the Weekly Itch Severity Score by Week 12|The time to the MID response is the number of weeks from the start of treatment (Baseline) until the time point at which the first MID response occurs. The MID response is defined as a reduction ≥ 5 points from Baseline in the weekly itch severity score.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835394|NCT01287117|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Weekly Number of Hives Score|The weekly hives score is the sum of the daily hives scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The number of hives is measured twice daily (morning and evening) on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (> 12 hives per 12 hours). The daily hives score is the average of the morning and evening scores. The Baseline score is the sum of the daily hives scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher score indicates more hives. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835395|NCT01287117|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Urticaria Activity Score Over 7 Days (UAS7)|The UAS7 is the sum of the daily urticarial activity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 42. The daily urticarial activity score is the average of the morning and evening urticarial activity scores and ranges from 0 to 6. The urticarial activity score is the sum of ratings on a scale of 0 to 3 (0=none to 3=intense/severe) for (1) the number of wheals (hives) and (2) itch intensity over the previous 12 hours, ranges from 0 to 6, and is measured twice daily (morning and evening). The Baseline score is the sum of the daily urticarial activity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher urticarial activity score indicates more urticaria activity. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835396|NCT01287117|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Weekly Itch Severity Score|The weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The daily itch severity score is the average of the morning and evening scores on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe). The Baseline weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher itch severity score indicates more severe itching. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835397|NCT01287195|Secondary|Score in Histologic Evaluation of Flexible Sigmoidoscopy|Mucosal biopsies were obtained from the most inflamed area seen during flexible sigmoidoscopy and blindly scored by a single pathologist with scores ranging 0-3 with a higher score indicating a worse outcome.|Baseline, Week 5|All participants enrolled in the study for whom data were available at each time point.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835398|NCT01287195|Secondary|Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index (SCCAI) Score|SCCAI is a symptom based questionnaire addressing five assessments, including bowel frequency day, bowel frequency night, urgency of defecation, blood in stool and general well-being. Score ranges from 0-15 with one additional point added for each manifestation of extracolonic features. A higher score indicates a worse outcome.|Baseline, Week 5|All participants enrolled in the study for whom data were available at each time point.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835399|NCT01287195|Secondary|Mayo Score|The Mayo Score is determined by the investigator by assigning a score to the following four assessments: stool frequency, rectal bleeding, physician’s global assessment and endoscopy. Total range for Mayo score is 0-12 with a higher score indicating a worse outcome.|Baseline, Week 5|All participants enrolled in the study for whom data were available at each time point.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835400|NCT01287195|Primary|Cytokine Production by PBMCs in Cell Culture|Cytokine production was assessed in cell cultures of PBMCs obtained from participants at baseline, Weeks 1, 3 and 5. The following cytokines were detected and are reported here: interferon gamma (IFN-gamma), interleukin (IL)-17A, IL-6, IL-1 beta, tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and IL-10.|Baseline, Weeks 1, 3 and 5|All participants enrolled in the study for whom data were available at each time point.||picograms/milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
835401|NCT01287195|Primary|T Cell Proliferation of PBMCs in Cell Culture|PBMCs isolated from whole blood obtained from participants at baseline, Weeks 1, 3, and 5 were assessed for proliferation in cell culture using a radioactive thymidine incorporation assay. A higher number indicates a higher level of proliferation.|Baseline, Weeks 1, 3 and 5|All participants enrolled in the study for whom data were available at each time point.||radioactive counts of cells per minute||Standard Error|Mean
835402|NCT01287195|Primary|Percentage of Biomarker-positive Immune Cells|Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were (PBMCs) were isolated from blood samples taken from each participant at baseline and Week 5. PBMCs were stained with a panel of fluorochrome-conjugated antibodies against multiple surface and intracellular biomarkers, including Cluster of Differentiation (CD) 3, CD4, CD8, Forkhead box P3 protein (FOXP3) and latency-associated peptide (LAP). The percentage of T cells positive for each of these biomarkers was determined by fluorescence activated cell sorting (FACS) and the mean percentage of positive T cells for each biomarker for all analyzed participants is reported.|Baseline, Week 5|All participants enrolled in the study for whom data were available at both time points.||percentage of biomarker-positive T cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
835403|NCT01287195|Primary|Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies|Serum samples were obtained to measure anti-drug antibodies during the study.|From baseline to Week 10|All participants enrolled in the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
835404|NCT01287195|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with the treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a pharmaceutical product, whether or not considered related to the pharmaceutical product. Preexisting conditions which worsen during a study are also considered as adverse events.|From baseline to Week 10|All participants enrolled in the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
835405|NCT01287208|Secondary|Hours of Sleep Per Night|Number of hours slept per night as recorded on activity device|12 weeks||||||
835406|NCT01287208|Secondary|Weight||12 weeks||||||
835407|NCT01287208|Secondary|Calories Burned Per Day|Total calories burned per day recorded on activity device|12 weeks||||||
835408|NCT01287208|Secondary|Distance Per Day|Distance in miles recorded on activity device|12 weeks||||||
835409|NCT01287208|Primary|Steps Per Day|Steps will be recorded on the activity device|12 weeks|We excluded 4 participants who withdrew prior to randomization and 5 who withdrew after randomization.||steps per day||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835410|NCT01287221|Secondary|Change in the COMPASS-Select-Change Scale From Baseline to 12 Months|"The change in COMPASS is a derivative of COMPASS and evaluates the change in symptoms over time on selected domains of symptoms as a function of natural history or intervention therapy. The focus is on 7 selected domains. The version of the COMPASS-Change -Select Scale used (06-09-2009 Ver. 1) has 16 questions, with multiple parts, scores ranging from much worse to no such symptoms. The score could range from 0 (no such symptoms) to 94 (much worse)."|baseline, 12 months|Analysis was done using intention to treat principles. Not all patients reached the 12 month time point due to missed visits or the early termination of the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835411|NCT01287221|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12 Months in the COMPASS-Select Scale|"The composite autonomic symptoms score (COMPASS) provides a score of autonomic symptom severity with appropriate weighting. In the COMPASS_select, symptoms are confined to 6 select domains of symptoms. The version of the COMPASS-Select used (06-09-2009 v1) has 46 questions, with multiple parts, scores ranging from much worse to no such symptoms. Scores could range from 0 (no such symptoms) to 85 (much worse)."|baseline, 12 months|Analysis was done using intention to treat principles. Not all patients reached the 12 month time point due to missed visits or the early termination of the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835412|NCT01287221|Secondary|Rate of Change From Baseline to 12 Months in Total UMSARS (i.e., UMSARS Part I Minus Question 11 + UMSARS Part II) Using Slope Estimate|"UMSARS is a scale measuring disease progression that comprises 4 parts; only Parts I and II were used in this study. Part I scores symptoms of neurological and autonomic dysfunction. Part II is a motor examination. Part I has 12 questions with a rating scale ranging from 0 (normal) to 4 (extreme dysfunction). Part II has 14 items with a rating scale ranging from 0 (normal) to 4 (extreme dysfunction). Therefore the total score for total UMSARS Parts I minus Question 11 + Part II could range from 0 (normal) to 104 (extreme dysfunction).
Participant-specific rate of change in points per month was estimated using slope estimate from least square regression where for each participant, their total UMSARS scores were plotted over time measured in months."|baseline, 12 months|Analysis was done using intention to treat principles. Not all patients reached the 12 month time point due to missed visits or the early termination of the study.||units on a scale per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
835413|NCT01287221|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12 Months in Total UMSARS (i.e., UMSARS Part I Minus Question 11 + UMSARS Part II)|UMSARS is a scale measuring disease progression that comprises 4 parts; only Parts I and II were used in this study. Part I scores symptoms of neurological and autonomic dysfunction. Part II is a motor examination. Part I has 12 questions with a rating scale ranging from 0 (normal) to 4 (extreme dysfunction). Part II has 14 items with a rating scale ranging from 0 (normal) to 4 (extreme dysfunction). Therefore the total score for total UMSARS Parts I minus Question 11 + Part II could range from 0 (normal) to 104 (extreme dysfunction).|baseline, 12 months|Analysis was done using intention to treat principles. Not all patients reached the 12 month time point due to missed visits or the early termination of the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835414|NCT01287221|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12 Months in UMSARS Part II|UMSARS is a scale measuring disease progression that comprises 4 parts; only Parts I and II were used in this study. Part I scores symptoms of neurological and autonomic dysfunction. Part II is a motor examination. Part II has 14 items with a rating scale ranging from 0 (normal) to 4 (extreme dysfunction). Therefore the total score for Part II could range from 0 (normal) to 56 (extreme dysfunction).|baseline, 12 months|Analysis was done using intention to treat principles. Not all patients reached the 12 month time point due to missed visits or the early termination of the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835415|NCT01287221|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 12 Months in UMSARS Part I Score (Minus Question 11)|UMSARS is a scale measuring disease progression that comprises 4 parts, only Parts I and II were used in this study. Part I scores symptoms of neurological and autonomic dysfunction. Part II is a motor examination. Part I has 12 questions with a rating scale ranging from 0 (normal) to 4 (extreme dysfunction). Therefore the total score for Part I could range from 0 (normal) to 48 (extreme dysfunction).|baseline, 12 months|Analysis was done using intention to treat principles. Not all patients reached the 12 month time point due to missed visits or the early termination of the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835416|NCT01287221|Primary|Rate of Change From Baseline to 12 Months in the Total Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale (UMSARS) Part I Score (Minus Question 11)|"UMSARS is a scale measuring disease progression that comprises 4 parts; only Parts I and II were used in this study. Part I scores symptoms of neurological and autonomic dysfunction. Part II is a motor examination. Part I has 12 questions with a rating scale ranging from 0 (normal) to 4 (extreme dysfunction). Therefore the total score for Part I could range from 0 (normal) to 48 (extreme dysfunction).
Participant-specific rate of change in points per month was estimated using slope estimate from least square regression where for each participant, their UMSARS I scores were plotted over time measured in months."|baseline, 12 months|Analysis was done using intention to treat principles and no imputations were done for any missing values or slope estimates. All randomized participants who took at least two doses of the study drug were included in the principal efficacy analysis. One subject on the Rifampicin arm did not return after the baseline visit.||units on a scale per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
835417|NCT01287364|Primary|Principal Components Analysis (Treatment Process, Treatment Outcomes) Factor Loadings for Treatment Preference Scales|Principal components analysis was conducted with varimax rotation that revealed two factors. These two factors are the principal components of the preference scale: Treatment Process and Treatment Outcomes. Loadings represent the degree each of the variables “correlates” with each of the factors. The loadings range from -1 to 1. An inspection of the factor loadings, reveals the extent to which each of the variables contributes to the meaning of each of the factors. High loading number provide meaning and interpretation of factors.|Day 1 (Pre-treatment) through Day 29|Subjects from Treatment Sequence AB (ciclesonide nasal aerosol 74 mcg/mometasone nasal spray 200 mcg) and Treatment Sequence BA (mometasone nasal spray 200 mcg/ciclesonide nasal aerosol 74 mcg) were pooled. Validation was performed without regard to treatment, thus all observations were pooled.||factor loadings|||Number
835418|NCT01287364|Primary|Sensitivity Analyses of Treatment Satisfaction Subscales: Standard Effect Sizes (SES)|"Within-and between-responder group standardized effect sizes (SES) were calculated. The generally accepted guidelines for clinically important standard effect sizes are “small”(0.2), “medium” (0.5), and “large” (0.8).
Between group SES indicates the magnitude of “treatment” differences. In this case, the groups were responders according to the baseline rTNSS scores. All of the treatment satisfaction subscales and satisfaction scales were scored from 0 (low satisfaction) to 100 (high satisfaction)."|Day 1 (Pre-treatment) through Day 29|Baseline rTNSS was partitioned into tertiles and patients were assigned to Low, Medium, or High symptom groups.||standard effect sizes|||Number
835457|NCT01287741|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival in the overall study population was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. Reported is the percentage of participants with event.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
835419|NCT01287364|Primary|Responsiveness Statistical Analysis of Treatment Satisfaction Subscales for Treatment Period 2 Versus Change in rTNSS From Baseline Categories (Low Change, Medium Change, or High Change)|Analysis was conducted with one-sample t-tests on the treatment satisfaction subscale change scores for Treatment Period 2 against the test criterion of “no change” (ie, change score = 0)TNSS is the sum of individual symptoms of runny nose, sneezing, itchy nose, and nasal congestions. Subjects assess each individual symptom on a scale of 0-3: 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, and 3 = severe. TNSS values range from 0-12 (0 representing an absence of symptoms and higher scores reflecting more severe symptoms). Reflective TNSS measures these symptoms over the previous 12-hour time interval. All of the treatment satisfaction subscales and satisfaction scales were scored from 0 (low satisfaction) to 100 (high satisfaction).|Day 1 (pre-treatment) through Day 7 Treatment Period 2|The rTNSS total period 2 change scores were partitioned into tertile ranges to form three groups: Low Change (-0.70 – -1.85; n = 55), Medium Change (-2.08 – -1.74; n = 56), or High Change (-6.57 – -2.14; n = 55).||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835420|NCT01287364|Primary|Responsiveness Statistical Analysis of Treatment Satisfaction Subscales for Treatment Period 1 Versus Change in rTNSS From Baseline Categories (Low Change, Medium Change, or High Change)|Analysis was conducted with one-sample t-tests on the treatment satisfaction subscale change scores for Treatment Period 1 against the test criterion of “no change” (ie, change score = 0)TNSS is the sum of individual symptoms of runny nose, sneezing, itchy nose, and nasal congestions. Subjects assess each individual symptom on a scale of 0-3: 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, and 3 = severe. TNSS values range from 0-12 (0 representing an absence of symptoms and higher scores reflecting more severe symptoms). Reflective TNSS measures these symptoms over the previous 12-hour time interval. All of the treatment satisfaction subscales and satisfaction scales were scored from 0 (low satisfaction) to 100 (high satisfaction).|Day 1 (pre-treatment) through Day 7 Treatment Period 1|The rTNSS total period 1 change scores were partitioned into tertile ranges to form three groups: Low Change (-1.04 – -4.93; n = 60), Medium Change (-2.49 – -1.05; n = 62), and High Change (-7.57 – -2.50; n = 61).||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835421|NCT01287364|Primary|Discriminant Validity of Treatment Satisfaction Subscales Statistical Analyses Based on Baseline Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS) Categories (Low, Medium, High)|Discriminant validity tests whether the subscales differentiate among groups of respondents that differ on a pre-specified criterion, baseline rTNSS. Patients were assigned to baseline rTNSS categories of Low Symptoms(3.00 – 7.17; n = 62), Medium Symptoms (7.25 – 9.25; n = 61), or High Symptoms (9.33 – 12.00; n = 62). Reflective TNSS group served as the independent variable and the nine treatment satisfaction subscales were evaluated as dependent variables by analysis of variance models. Contrasts were tested between the Low and Medium Symptoms and the High and Low Symptom categories. Reflective TNSS group served as the independent variable and the nine treatment satisfaction subscales were evaluated as dependent variables by analysis of variance models. All of the treatment satisfaction subscales and satisfaction scales were scored from 0 (low satisfaction) to 100 (high satisfaction).|Day 1 (Pre-treatment) through Day 7 Treatment Period 1|Baseline rTNSS was partitioned into tertile ranges and patients were assigned to Low (3.00 – 7.17; n = 62), Medium (7.25 – 9.25; n = 61), or High (9.33 – 12.00; n = 62) symptom groups.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835422|NCT01287364|Primary|Treatment Satisfaction Subscales (Interference, Regimen Adaptation, Role Limitations, Sensory Impact, Regimen Difficulties, Burden, Hassle, Regimen Management, and Perceived Relief)Reliability Statistics|Reliability for the nine treatment satisfaction subscales was established through internal consistency statistical analyses [Cronbach’s alpha (raw and standardized) coefficients were calculated]. The correlation coefficients for these analyses ranged from 0.0 to 1.0, with higher coefficients indicating greater reliability. A coefficient of ≥ 0.7 was the standard for evidence of reliability.|Day 1 (Pre-treatment) through Day 7 Treatment Period 2|Subjects from Treatment Sequence AB (ciclesonide nasal aerosol 74 mcg/mometasone nasal spray 200 mcg) and Treatment Sequence BA (mometasone nasal spray 200 mcg/ciclesonide nasal aerosol 74 mcg) were pooled. Validation was performed without regard to treatment, thus all observations were pooled.||ratio of variance|||Number
835423|NCT01287403|Secondary|Phenolic Acids|Phenolic acids in plasma and urine|0-48 h post dose||||||
835424|NCT01287403|Secondary|Plasma and Urinary Betaine||From 0 to 48 hours post dose||||||
835425|NCT01287403|Primary|Plasma Alkylresorcinol Compounds|Area under the curve (AUC) over baseline of alkylresorcinol compounds are measured for the 6 interventional arms. Time points are: t = 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14, 24 and 48 h after product intake.|From 0 to 48 h post dose.|||nmol/L*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
835426|NCT01287416|Secondary|Gatekeeper Behaviours - Did Not Ask Person at Risk|Number of participants who did not ask someone about their suicidal thoughts even though they thought they were at risk, measured at 6 month follow-up assessment based on time since training.|January 28-31, 2011|The smaller number of participants per group reflects the number of individuals who responded to the baseline and 6 month follow up time point questionnaires.||participants|||Number
835427|NCT01287416|Secondary|Gatekeeper Behaviors - Asked Person at Risk About Suicidal Thoughts|Number of participants who have asked someone that they thought was at risk about suicidal thoughts since the training, measured at 6 month follow-up assessment.|January 28-31, 2011|The smaller number of participants per group reflects the number of individuals who responded to the baseline and 6 month follow up time point questionnaires.||participants|||Number
835428|NCT01287416|Secondary|Attempted Suicide Since Training at 6 mo Follow-up|Number of people who endorsed having made a suicide attempt since the training as measured at 6 month follow-up|January 28-31, 2011|The smaller number of participants per group reflects the number of individuals who responded to the 6 month follow up time point questionnaire.||participants|||Number
835429|NCT01287416|Secondary|Suicidal Ideation Since Training at 6 mo Follow-up|Number of people who endorsed having thought about suicide since the training as measured at 6 month follow-up (not at all vs a little to a lot)|January 28-31, 2011|The smaller number of participants per group reflects the number of individuals who responded to the 6 month follow up time point questionnaire.||participants|||Number
835430|NCT01287416|Secondary|Number of People With Suicidal Ideation in Past 2 Days Immediately Post Training|Number of people who endorsed having thought about suicide in the past 2 days as measured immediately post training (not at all vs a little to a lot)|July 22-23, 2010|The smaller number of participants per group reflects the number of individuals who responded to the post-training questionnaire.||participants|||Number
835434|NCT01287416|Secondary|Self-reported Resiliency Score|Assesses resiliency in the participant according to the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, 10-item. The CD-RISC 10 is comprised of ten questions scored from 0 (Not at all true) to 4 (True nearly all of the time). The sum of the scores from all ten questions was used to determine a total scale score which ranges from 0 (low resiliency) to 40 (highly resilient).|pre-training and 6 month follow-up|The smaller number of participants per group reflects the number of individuals who responded to the baseline and 6 month follow up time point questionnaires.||Scores on scale||Standard Error|Mean
835435|NCT01287416|Secondary|Self-reported Alcohol Use|Details participants' level of alcohol consumption and if it may be harmful according to the AUDIT. The AUDIT scale is comprised of ten questions with most questions being scored from 0 (never) to 4 (4 or more times per week). The sum of the scores from all ten questions was used to determine a total scale score which ranges from 0 (no risk related to alcohol) to 40 (high risk related to alcohol). Total scores of 8 or more are recommended as indicators of hazardous and harmful alcohol use, as well as possible alcohol dependence.|pre-training and 6 month follow-up|The smaller number of participants per group reflects the number of individuals who responded to the baseline and 6 month follow up time point questionnaires.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835436|NCT01287416|Secondary|Self-reported Distress|Measures the level of distress in the participant using the K6 distress scale. The scale is comprised of six questions which are scored from 0 (none of the time) to 4 (all of the time). The sum of the scores from all six questions was used to determine a total scale score which ranges from 0 (not at all distressed) to 24 (very distressed).|pre-training and 6 month follow-up|The smaller number of participants per group reflects the number of individuals who responded to the baseline and 6 month follow up time point questionnaires.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
835437|NCT01287416|Secondary|Self-perceived Preparedness|Measures the level of preparedness of the individual to help someone who is suicidal based on a 4 point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all prepared) to 4 (very prepared).|pre-training, post-training and 6 month follow-up|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835438|NCT01287416|Secondary|Self-perceived Knowledge About Suicide|Measures the level of knowledge about suicide that the individual believes they have based on a 4 point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all knowledgeable) to 4 (very knowledgeable).|pre-training, post-training and 6 month follow-up|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835439|NCT01287416|Secondary|Self-perceived Skill in Helping a Suicidal Individual|Measures the level of ability that the individual believes they have in helping a suicidal person based on a 4 point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all skilled) to 4 (very skilled).|pre-training, post-training and 6 month follow-up|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835440|NCT01287416|Secondary|Self-perceived Confidence in Helping a Suicidal Individual|Meaures the level of confidence that the individual believes they have in helping a suicidal person based on a 4 point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all confident) to 4 (very confident).|pre-training, post-training and 6 month follow-up|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835441|NCT01287416|Primary|SIRI Questionnaire Score|The Suicide Intervention Response Inventory (SIRI-2) will be used to detect enhancement of intervention skills in participants. The 25-item SIRI-2 is a self-administered test that was designed to measure competnce in choosing appropriate response to a series of clinical scenarios with suicidal individuals. Research on the SIRI-2 has shown its good psychometric properties, freedom from social desirabiity effects and responsiveness to training in suicide prevention.|pre-training, post-training and 6 mo follow up|||number of items correct||Standard Deviation|Mean
835442|NCT01287611|Secondary|Length of Uterine Incision After Suturing|Length of uterine incision after suturing will be examined and measured by ultrasonography, and two groups will be compared.|6 weeks after C/S|||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835443|NCT01287611|Primary|Cesarean Scar Defect in the Uterine Incisional Line|A wedge-shaped distortion in the integrity of the uterine incision scar during transvaginal ultrasonographic examination at 6 weeks after C/S was accepted as cesarean scar defect in the uterine incisional line and recorded as primary outcome measure, and two groups will be compared.|6 weeks after C/S|||participants|||Number
835444|NCT01287741|Secondary|Serum Concentrations of Obinutuzumab in Japanese Participants With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL)|Serum samples for assessment of obinutuzumab serum concentrations were collected only from a subset of Japanese participants following administration of 1000 mg obinutuzumab.|C1: D1 post-infusion and 20-28 and 66-80 hours after end of infusion, D8 and D15 pre-and post-infusion; C2: D1 pre- and post-infusion; C4: D1 pre- and post-infusion; C6: D1 pre- and post-infusion; C8: D1 pre- and post-infusion (cycle length = 21 days)|40 Japanese participants in the Obinutuzumab+Chemotherapy arm||micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835445|NCT01287741|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) Domain Scores|The EORTC QLQ-C30 is a health-related quality of life questionnaire. A higher score indicates better quality of life, with changes of 5 to 10 points considered to be a minimally important difference to participants.|Baseline (pre-dose [Hour 0] on C1D1), C3D1, end of treatment (up to Month 6), every 12 months thereafter up to data cut-off, up to approximately 4 years and 9 months, (cycle length = 21 days)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835446|NCT01287741|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) Subscale Score|The FACT-Lym subscale was developed to assess health-related quality of life in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The score range is 0-60, with higher scores indicating better outcomes. A positive change from baseline indicates an improvement.|Baseline (pre-dose [Hour 0] on C1D1), C3D1, end of treatment (up to Month 6), every 12 months thereafter up to data cut-off, up to approximately 4 years and 9 months, (cycle length = 21 days)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835447|NCT01287741|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Human Anti-Human Antibodies (HAHAs) to Obinutuzumab|The presence of HAHAs to obinutuzumab was assessed in the first 100 randomized participants.|Pre-dose (Hour 0) on Cycle (C) 1 Day (D) 1, C4D1, at end of treatment/early termination (up to Month 6), every 6 months thereafter for 30 months (cycle length = 21 days)|The safety analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
835448|NCT01287741|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with the treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a pharmaceutical product, whether or not considered related to the pharmaceutical product. Preexisting conditions which worsen during a study are also considered as adverse events.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The safety analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
835449|NCT01287741|Secondary|Time to Next Anti-Lymphoma Treatment (TTNALT)|Time to next anti-lymphoma treatment was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the start date of the next anti-lymphoma treatment or death from any cause.|Baseline up to start of next anti-lymphoma treatment or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first, to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835450|NCT01287741|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR), Investigator-Assessed|DOR: time from first occurrence of documented CR or PR to disease progression/relapse, or death from any cause for participants with a response of CR or PR. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI. CR: disappearance of all target lesions. PR: >/=50% decrease target lesions in up to six dominant lesions identified at baseline, no new lesions and no increase in the size of the liver, spleen, or other nodes. Splenic and hepatic nodule regression >/= 50%. Progression/relapse: at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 cm or >/= 50% increase in other target lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or any new bone marrow involvement and/or any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. A participant in the Rituximab+CHOP arm with the longest follow-up, 53 months, had an event. The criterion for median was the minimum time when survival went below 50%.|Baseline up to death or disease progression, whichever occurs first, to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants, of which evaluable participants were included in this analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835451|NCT01287741|Secondary|Disease-Free Survival (DFS), Investigator-Assessed|Disease-free survival was defined as the time from the date of the first occurrence of a documented CR to the date of disease progression/relapse or death from any cause on the basis of investigator assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions. Progression/relapse was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Reported is the percentage of participants with event.|Baseline up to death or disease progression, whichever occurred first, to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants, of which evaluable participants were included in this analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
835452|NCT01287741|Secondary|Event-Free Survival (EFS), Investigator-Assessed|Event-free survival was defined as the time from the date of randomization until the date of disease progression, relapse, initiation of a new non–protocol-specified anti-lymphoma treatment, or death from any cause on the basis of investigator assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Disease progression/relapse was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Tumor measurements were obtained by CT/MRI. Reported is the percentage of participants with event.|Baseline up to death or disease progression, or initiation of new anti-lymphoma treatment (NALT), whichever occurred first, to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
835453|NCT01287741|Secondary|Complete Response (CR) at the End of Treatment, IRC-Assessed|Percentage of participants with complete response was determined on the basis of IRC assessments according to the International Working Group (IWG) Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma, 2007. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without PET. Complete response was defined as the disappearance of all evidence of disease.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
835454|NCT01287741|Secondary|Complete Response (CR) at the End of Treatment, Investigator-Assessed|Percentage of participants with complete response was determined on the basis of investigator assessments according to the International Working Group (IWG) Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma, 2007. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without PET. Complete response was defined as the disappearance of all evidence of disease.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
835455|NCT01287741|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR), IRC-Assessed|Overall response was determined on the basis of IRC assessments according to the International Working Group (IWG) Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma, 2007. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without PET. Overall response was defined as the disappearance of all evidence of disease, regression of measurable disease, and no new sites.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
835456|NCT01287741|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR), Investigator-Assessed|Overall response was determined on the basis of investigator assessments according to the International Working Group (IWG) Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma, 2007. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without PET. Overall response was defined as the disappearance of all evidence of disease, regression of measurable disease, and no new sites.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
835458|NCT01287741|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS), Independent Review Committee (IRC)-Assessed|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from randomization until the first documented day of disease progression or relapse, using a modified version of the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma, or death from any cause, whichever occurred first, on the basis of IRC assessments. Progression was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Tumor measurements were obtained by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
835459|NCT01287741|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS), Investigator-Assessed|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from randomization until the first documented day of disease progression or relapse, using a modified version of the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma, or death from any cause, whichever occurred first, on the basis of investigator assessments. Progression was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Tumor measurements were obtained by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 9 months)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
835460|NCT01287754|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With EGFR Mutation at Screening|Participants were tested at Screening for the presence of activating mutations in the tyrosine kinase domain of EGFR. The percentage of participants with mutation was calculated as [number of mutation-positive participants divided by number tested] multiplied by 100.|Screening|All Participants Enrolled||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835461|NCT01287754|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Alive at 6 and 12 Months|Death from any cause was documented at 6 and 12 months from recorded diagnosis. The percentage of participants alive at each timepoint was calculated as [number of participants alive divided by number enrolled] multiplied by 100.|At 6 and 12 months|All Participants Enrolled||percentage of participants|||Number
835462|NCT01287754|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) Among Erlotinib-Treated and Untreated Participants|OS was defined as the time from recorded diagnosis to death from any cause or last patient last visit. OS was calculated in months as [death date or last-known alive date minus diagnosis date plus 1] divided by 30.44.|Per standard of care (every 3 months) until discontinuation for up to approximately 2 years|All Participants Enrolled: All erlotinib-treated participants who received at least one dose of erlotinib, in addition to all enrolled untreated participants, were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835463|NCT01287754|Secondary|Number of Erlotinib-Treated Participants With the EGFR Mutation With an Objective Response Per RECIST v1.1|Objective tumor response was assessed by the investigator using RECIST v1.1 and recorded as complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or unmeasurable. RECIST v1.1 defines CR as disappearance of all target lesions, with short-axis reduction to less than (<) 10 mm for any pathological lymph nodes, and PR as a 30% or greater reduction from baseline in the sum of diameters of target lesions.|Per standard of care (every 3 months) until discontinuation for up to approximately 2 years|All Participants Treated||participants|||Number
835464|NCT01287754|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Among Erlotinib-Treated Participants With the EGFR Mutation|PFS was defined as the time from the first dose of erlotinib to the first documentation of disease progression or death, whichever occurred first. Tumor progression was determined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1), which defines progression as a 20 percent (%) or greater increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 millimeters (mm), or the appearance of one or more new lesions. PFS was calculated in months as [first event date minus first dose date plus 1] divided by 30.44.|Per standard of care (every 3 months) until discontinuation for up to approximately 2 years|All Participants Treated: All participants who received at least one dose of erlotinib were included in the analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835465|NCT01287832|Secondary|Adverse Event Rate in Each Arm, Including the Nephrotoxicity and Skeletal Muscle Toxicity||30-42 days post-treatment||||||
835466|NCT01287832|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Success at Test of Cure Visit.|Clinical success is the absence of treatment failures. Treatment failures will include death, clinical failure, microbiologic failure, or an adverse event requiring a change in therapy or discontinuation in therapy.|30-42 days post-treatment|||participants|||Number
835467|NCT01287897|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Withdrew From the Study Due to Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence without regard to causality in a participant who received study drug. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of treatment and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.|Induction period: from Week 0 (Day 1) through Week 12; follow-up period: from Week 12 (or discontinuation from the induction period) through last subject visit (up to 28 weeks after completion of or discontinuation from the 12-week induction period)|"The SAS consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. n signifies number of participants with observed data at the time point of each arm. From Weeks 16 to 40, only participants who remained in the follow-up period of this study and did not enter NCT01405196 were analyzed."||participants|||Number
835468|NCT01287897|Secondary|Serum PF-04236921 Concentration Over Time||Day 1 (predose), and at Weeks 2, 4 (Day 28, predose), 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40|"The pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set was the subset of participants from the SAS who provided at least 1 PK concentration (2 participants [10 mg arm] excluded due to a quality issue). n is the number of participants with PK data at the visit. From Weeks 16 to 40, only participants who remained in the follow-up period of this study were analyzed."||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
835530|NCT01288612|Secondary|Rate of Acquisition of Biopsies From the Esophagus||Visit 1|The analysis population included all subjects who agreed to undergo the esophageal assessment (intent to treat).||percentage of participants|||Number
835469|NCT01287897|Secondary|Percentages of Participants With Confirmed Positive Neutralizing Antibodies (NAbs)|The percentage of participants with confirmed positive NAbs was summarized for each treatment arm. Only ADA positive samples were analyzed for Nab. A multi-tiered approach was utilized to detect NAbs. NAb serum samples were screened at tier one, and those found presumptively NAb positive was further tested with the confirmatory assay (tier two). The percentage of subjects with confirmed positive NAbs was summarized for each treatment.|At baseline (Day 1) and at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32 and 40|"The SAS consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. n signifies number of participants with observed data at the time point of each arm. From Weeks 16 to 40, only participants who remained in the follow-up period of this study and did not enter NCT01405196 were analyzed."||percentage of participants|||Number
835470|NCT01287897|Secondary|Percentages of Participants With Confirmed Positive Anti-drug Antibodies (ADAs)|The percentage of participants with confirmed positive ADA was summarized for each treatment arm. ADA positive was defined as ADA titer defined as ADA titer (ie, the reciprocal of the highest dilution that gives a value equivalent to the cut point of the assay) >= 4.32.|At baseline (Day 1) and at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32 and 40|"The SAS consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. n signifies number of participants with observed data at the time point of each arm. From Weeks 16 to 40, only participants who remained in the follow-up period of this study and did not enter NCT01405196 were analyzed."||percentage of participants|||Number
835471|NCT01287897|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CDAI Score Over Time in Participants Who Received Placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg|CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit, and higher score indicate more severe disease. The Outcome included a Linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference). Since the inputs in the model included different Analysis Population than in Outcome Measure 11, that will yield different estimates for placebo for the two different models.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12|"The analysis was performed on the FAS 200 mg vs placebo. The 200 mg arm was halted before reaching the planned sample size of approximately 60 participants. n signifies the number of subjects with observed data of each arm at each time point."||points on a scale||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835472|NCT01287897|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CDAI Score Over Time in Participants Who Received Placebo, PF-04236921 10 mg and PF-04236921 50 mg|CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit, and higher score indicate more severe disease. The Outcome included a Linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference).|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12|"The analysis was performed on the FAS excluding 200 mg arm (which was halted prematurely). n signifies the number of subjects with observed data of each arm at each time point."||points on a scale||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835473|NCT01287897|Secondary|The CDAI-100 Response Rate Over Time in Participants Who Received Placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg|CDAI-100 response was defined as a decrease in CDAI score of 100 or greater from baseline. The proportions of participants with CDAI-100 response at Week 12 were compared between placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg. CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's Disease. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit. Many clinical trials use the endpoint for response as a 70 or greater point decrease in CDAI and clinical remission is often defined as a CDAI score below 150. The Outcome included a Generalized linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference). Since the inputs in the model included different Analysis Population than in Outcome Measure 9, that will yield different estimates for placebo for the two different models.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12|"The analysis was performed on the FAS 200 mg vs placebo. The 200 mg arm was halted before reaching the planned sample size of approximately 60 participants. n signifies the number of subjects with observed data of each arm at each time point."||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835474|NCT01287897|Secondary|The CDAI-100 Response Rate Over Time in Participants Who Received Placebo, PF-04236921 10 mg and PF-04236921 50 mg|CDAI-100 response was defined as a decrease in CDAI score of 100 or greater from baseline. The proportions of participants with CDAI-100 response at Week 12 were compared between placebo and PF-04236921 10 mg/50 mg. CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's Disease. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit. Many clinical trials use the endpoint for response as a 70 or greater point decrease in CDAI and clinical remission is often defined as a CDAI score below 150. The Outcome included a Generalized linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference).|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12|"The analysis was performed on the FAS excluding 200 mg arm (which was halted prematurely). n signifies the number of subjects with observed data of each arm at each time point."||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835475|NCT01287897|Secondary|The CDAI Remission Rate Over Time in Participants Who Received Placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg|CDAI remission rate was defined as an absolute CDAI score <150. The proportions of participants with CDAI remission were compared between placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg. CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's Disease. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit. Many clinical trials use the endpoint for response as a 70 or greater point decrease in CDAI and clinical remission is often defined as a CDAI score below 150. The Outcome included a Generalized linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference). Since the inputs in the model included different Analysis Population than in Outcome Measure 7, that will yield different estimates for placebo for the two different models.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12|"The analysis was performed on the FAS 200 mg vs placebo. The 200 mg arm was halted before reaching the planned sample size of approximately 60 participants. n signifies the number of subjects with observed data of each arm at each time point."||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835476|NCT01287897|Secondary|The CDAI Remission Rate Over Time in Participants Who Received Placebo, PF-04236921 10 mg and PF-04236921 50 mg|CDAI remission rate was defined as an absolute CDAI score less than (<) 150. The proportions of participants with CDAI remission were compared between placebo and PF-04236921 10 mg/50 mg. CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's Disease. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit. Many clinical trials use the endpoint for response as a 70 or greater point decrease in CDAI and clinical remission is often defined as a CDAI score below 150. The Outcome included a Generalized linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference).|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12|"The analysis was performed on the FAS excluding 200 mg arm (which was halted prematurely). n signifies the number of subjects with observed data of each arm at each time point."||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835477|NCT01287897|Secondary|The CDAI-70 Response Rate Over Time in Participants Who Received Placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg|CDAI-70 response was defined as a decrease in CDAI score of 70 or greater from baseline. The proportions of participants with CDAI-70 response were compared between placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg. CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's Disease. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit. Many clinical trials use the endpoint for response as a 70 or greater point decrease in CDAI and clinical remission is often defined as a CDAI score below 150. The Outcome included a Generalized linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference). Since the inputs in the model included different Analysis Population than in Outcome Measure 5, that will yield different estimates for placebo for the two different models.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 6, and 10|"The analysis was performed on the FAS 200 mg vs placebo. The 200 mg arm was halted before reaching the planned sample size of approximately 60 participants. n signifies the number of subjects with observed data of each arm at each time point."||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835478|NCT01287897|Secondary|The CDAI-70 Response Rate Over Time in Participants Who Received Placebo, PF-04236921 10 mg and PF-04236921 50 mg|CDAI-70 response was defined as a decrease in CDAI score of 70 or greater from baseline. The proportions of participants with CDAI-70 response were compared between placebo and PF-04236921 10 mg/50 mg. CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's Disease. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit. Many clinical trials use the endpoint for response as a 70 or greater point decrease in CDAI and clinical remission is often defined as a CDAI score below 150. The Outcome included a Generalized linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference).|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 6, and 10|"The analysis was performed on the FAS excluding 200 mg arm (which was halted prematurely). n signifies the number of subjects with observed data of each arm at each time point."||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835479|NCT01287897|Primary|The CDAI-70 Response Rate at Week 12 in Participants Who Received Placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg|CDAI-70 response was defined as a decrease in CDAI score of 70 or greater from baseline. The proportions of participants with CDAI-70 response at Week 12 were compared between placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg. CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's Disease. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit. Many clinical trials use the endpoint for response as a 70 or greater point decrease in CDAI and clinical remission is often defined as a CDAI score below 150. The Outcome included a Generalized linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference). Since the inputs in the model included different Analysis Population than in Outcome Measure 3, that will yield different estimates for placebo for the two different models.|Baseline and Week 12|The analysis was performed on FAS 200 mg vs placebo. The 200 mg arm was halted before reaching the planned sample size of approximately 60 and was no longer powered at the planned level to test against placebo. Thus, the 200 mg vs placebo comparison is a sensitivity analysis.||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835480|NCT01287897|Primary|The CDAI-70 Response Rate at Week 12 in Participants Who Received Placebo, PF-04236921 10 mg and PF-04236921 50 mg|CDAI-70 response was defined as a decrease in CDAI score of 70 or greater from baseline. The proportions of participants with CDAI-70 response at Week 12 were compared between placebo and and PF-04236921 10 mg/50 mg. CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's Disease. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit. Many clinical trials use the endpoint for response as a 70 or greater point decrease in CDAI and clinical remission is often defined as a CDAI score below 150. The Outcome included a Generalized linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference).|Baseline and Week 12|Primary analysis: FAS excluding 200 mg arm (halted prematurely before reaching the planned sample size and thus no longer powered at the planned level to test against placebo).||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835491|NCT01288209|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 24 Hours (AUC24h) for TMC435|"The table below shows the median (range) AUC24h values for participants in each treatment group at Week 12, Week 24, and Overall (Weeks 4, 12, and 24). The time frame of “Overall” represents the median exposure estimate using all available data collected at Weeks 4, 12, and 24 for each participant in the study. The number of participants analyzed is listed at each time point in order of the treatment groups from left to right in the table (ie, Week x, n=x, x) if different from the “Number of Participants Analyzed."|Week 12, Week 24, and Overall (Weeks 4, 12, and 24)|Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed in the pharmacokinetic (PK) population, defined as all participants from whom sparse blood samples were drawn and who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||ng.h/mL||Full Range|Median
835644|NCT01289574|Secondary|Success on Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) at Week 12|"Overall acne rated as clear, almost clear, mild, moderate, severe, very severe.
Success = Week 12 rating of clear or almost clear and at least a 2-grade improvement from baseline"|12 weeks|All randomized subjects||Percentage of subjects|||Number
835481|NCT01287897|Primary|The CDAI-70 Response Rate at Week 8 in Participants Who Received Placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg|CDAI-70 response was defined as a decrease in CDAI score of 70 or greater from baseline. The proportions of participants with CDAI-70 response at Week 8 were compared between placebo and PF-04236921 200 mg. CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's Disease. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score >=0 and without an upper limit. Many clinical trials use the endpoint for response as a 70 or greater point decrease in CDAI and clinical remission is often defined as a CDAI score below 150. The Outcome included a Generalized linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference). Since the inputs in the model included different Analysis Population than in Outcome Measure 1, that will yield different estimates for placebo for the two different models.|Baseline and Week 8|The analysis was performed on FAS participants of the 200 mg and placebo arms, referred to as FAS 200 mg versus (vs) placebo. The 200 mg arm was halted before reaching the planned sample size of approximately 60 and was no longer powered at the planned level to test against placebo. Thus, the 200 mg vs placebo comparison is a sensitivity analysis.||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835482|NCT01287897|Primary|The Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI)-70 Response Rate at Week 8 in Participants Who Received Placebo, PF-04236921 10 mg and PF-04236921 50 mg|CDAI-70 response was defined as a decrease in CDAI score of 70 or greater from baseline. The proportions of participants with CDAI-70 response at Week 8 were compared between placebo and PF-04236921 10 mg/50 mg. CDAI is used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's Disease. CDAI evaluates 8 Crohn's disease-related variables during a 1-week assessment period, yielding a composite score greater than or equal to (>=) 0 and without an upper limit. Many clinical trials use the endpoint for response as a 70 or greater point decrease in CDAI and clinical remission is often defined as a CDAI score below 150. The Outcome included a Generalized linear mixed model analyses which incorporated longitudinal data for each subject, and the same model is used for estimate (least squares mean) and statistical analysis (mean difference).|Baseline and Week 8|Primary analysis: full analysis set (FAS, defined as all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment; 2 participants [10 mg arm] excluded due to a quality issue) excluding 200 mg (halted prematurely before reaching the planned sample size and thus no longer powered at the planned level to test against placebo).||Percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835483|NCT01288027|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Using T2 Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) at Week 26|Disease activity (inflammation and/or water content within muscles) was quantitatively assessed by T2 MRI values in a subset of participants. A T2 MRI value of greater than (>) 39 millisecond (ms) was defined as abnormal. T2 estimation normally requires an additional acquisition for computing the B1 spatial deviation however, can still be estimated if this acquisition is missing.|Baseline, Week 26|FAS population included all participants who received at least one complete infusion of alglucosidase alfa. Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants with both baseline and Week 26 assessment of disease activity.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
835484|NCT01288027|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Degree of Fatty Infiltration Using 3-Point 3-Dimensional (3D) Dixon at Week 26|Degree of Fatty Infiltration was assessed by 3-point 3D Dixon acquisition using skeletal muscle MRI in a subset of participants.|Baseline, Week 26|FAS population included all participants who received at least one complete infusion of alglucosidase alfa. Here, number of participants analyzed = number of participants with both Baseline and Week 26 assessment of degree of fatty infiltration.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
835485|NCT01288027|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Muscle Involvement Using Mercuri Scoring at Week 26|Muscle involvement was assessed by T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). T1-weighted MRI data was analyzed using the Mercuri scoring in both legs (Total score = 1-4; where 1=Normal appearance, 2=Mild involvement, 3=Moderate involvement, and 4=Severe involvement). For each participants, the average for each the upper (thigh) and lower leg was computed for Mercuri grading.|Baseline, Week 26|FAS population included all participants who received at least one complete infusion of alglucosidase alfa. Here, Number of participants analyzed= participants with both Baseline and Week 26 assessment of muscle involvement, n= number of participants with both Baseline and Week 26 assessment of muscle involvement for specified category.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
835486|NCT01288027|Secondary|Lysosomal Inclusions||Baseline, Week 26|No quantitative data could be reported for this outcome as the assessment was qualitative in nature.|||||
835487|NCT01288027|Secondary|Muscle Fiber Morphology||Baseline, Week 26|No quantitative data could be reported for this outcome as the assessment was qualitative in nature.|||||
835488|NCT01288027|Secondary|Glycogen Distribution||Baseline, Week 26|No quantitative data could be reported for this outcome as the assessment was qualitative in nature.|||||
835489|NCT01288027|Primary|Change From Baseline in Tissue Glycogen Content in Quadriceps Muscle Biopsy Samples at Week 26|Tissue glycogen content was measured by quadriceps biopsies as ‘percent area of tissue occupied by glycogen'.|Baseline, Week 26|FAS population included all participants who received at least one complete infusion of alglucosidase alfa. Here, n = number of participants with both Baseline and Week 26 assessment of tissue glycogen content.||percent area occupied by glycogen||Standard Deviation|Mean
835490|NCT01288079|Primary|Change in the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score From Randomization to End of Treatment|A 10-item scale for the evaluation of depressive symptoms. Each Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) item is rated on a 0 to 6 scale. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 10 individual item scores; the total score can range from 0 to 60. Higher MADRS scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms.|Randomization (Week 8) to end of treatment (Week 16)|Modified intent-to-treat analysis set including all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of investigational product (TC-5214, duloxetine or placebo) and who had a randomization and at least 1 post-randomization MADRS total score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835508|NCT01288443|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Fasting Triglycerides and Lipoprotein(a) at Week 12 - On-Treatment Analysis|Since the assumptions of normal distribution and equality of variances were not verified for the lipid parameters, percent changes were expressed as median (inter-quartile range).|Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|Participants of the mITT population with one baseline and at least one post-baseline on-treatment value for lipid parameters analyzed. Here, n signifies number of participants analysed for each lipid parameter.||percent change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835492|NCT01288209|Secondary|Plasma Concentrations of TMC435|"The table below shows median (range) TMC435 predose plasma concentration (C0h) values and TMC435 maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) values for participants in each treatment group at Week 12, Week 24, and Overall (Weeks 4, 12, and 24). The time frame of “Overall” representes the median exposure estimate using all available data collected at Weeks 4, 12, and 24 for each participant in the study. The number of participants analyzed is listed at each time point in order of the treatment groups from left to right in the table (ie, Week x, n=x, x) if different from the “Number of Participants Analyzed."|Week 12, Week 24, and Overall (Weeks 4, 12, and 24)|Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed in the pharmacokinetic (PK) population, defined as all participants from whom sparse blood samples were drawn and who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
835493|NCT01288209|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Met Response Guided Treatment (RGT) Criteria and Completed Treatment With Peginterferon Alpha-2a (PegIFNα-2a) and Ribavirin (RBV) at Week 24|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who met RGT criteria (ie, who had plasma levels of hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid [HCV RNA] <1.2 log10 IU/mL detectable/undetectable at Week 4 and <1.2 log 10 IU/mL undetectable at Week 12) and completed treatment with PegIFNα-2a and RBV at Week 24. Participants in the TMC435 treatment groups not meeting RGT criteria continued treatment with PegIFNα-2a and RBV to Week 48.|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835494|NCT01288209|Secondary|The Number Participants With Abnormal Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Baseline Who Achieved Normal ALT Levels at the End of Treatment (EOT)|The table below shows the number of participants in each treatment group with abnormal ALT levels at baseline (Day 1) who achieved normalization of ALT levels defined as having an ALT value less than or equal to the Upper Limit of Normality (ie, 40 IU/mL) at the EOT. At Baseline, 34/53 participants in the TMC435 100 mg 12 Wks PR 24/48 treatment group and 35/53 participants in the TMC435 100 mg 24 Wks PR 24/48 treatment group had abnormal ALT levels.|EOT (Week 24 or 48)|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Participants|||Number
835495|NCT01288209|Secondary|The Number of Participants Demonstrating Viral Relapse During the Study|The table below shows the number of participants in each treatment group who demonstrated viral relapse during the study. Viral relapse is defined as undetectable plasma hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) levels at EOT and detectable HCV RNA during follow-up or detectable HCV RNA at the time points for a sustained viral response (SVR) assessment. The incidence of viral relapse was only calculated for participants with undetectable HCV RNA levels at EOT and with at least one follow-up HCV RNA measurement.|Up to 72 weeks|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Participants|||Number
835496|NCT01288209|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Viral Breakthrough During the Study|The table below shows the number of all participants in each treatment group who experienced viral breakthrough during the treatment period in the study (Baseline to end of treatment [EOT], ie, Week 24 or 48). Viral breakthrough is defined as a confirmed increase of greater than (>) 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) level from the lowest level reached or a confirmed value of plasma HCV RNA of > 2.0 log10 IU/mL in all participants whose plasma HCV RNA level had previously been below 1.2 log10 IU/mL detectable or undetectable.|Up to EOT (Week 24 or 48)|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Participants|||Number
835497|NCT01288209|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Undetectable Plasma Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Levels During Treatment for Participants Who Did Not Achieve Undetectable Plasma HCV RNA Levels at Week 12|"The table below shows the percentage of participants with undetectable HCV RNA at Weeks 24, 48, end of treatment (EOT), at the time of assessment for a sustained virologic response (SVR) 12 weeks after the last planned dose (SVR12) (Week 36 or 60), and SVR24 (Week 48 or 72) who did not achieve undetectable HCV RNA levels at Week 12. The number of participants analyzed is listed at each time point in order of the treatment groups from left to right in the table (ie, Week x, n=x, x) if different from the “Number of Participants Analyzed. Results are not available for Weeks 24, 48, and EOT because there were no participants who met the criteria for a SVR at those time points."|Weeks 24, 48, EOT (Weeks 24 or 48), SVR12 (Weeks 36 or 60), and SVR24 (Weeks 48 or 72)|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835498|NCT01288209|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Undetectable Plasma Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) During Treatment and at the End of Treatment (EOT)|The table below shows the percentage of participants with undetectable HCV RNA (<1.2 log10 IU/mL) during treatment at Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, and at EOT (Week 24 or 48).|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, and at EOT|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835509|NCT01288443|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol, High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C), Non-HDL-C and Apolipoprotein B (Apo-B) at Week 12 - On-Treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|Participants of the mITT population with one baseline and at least one post-baseline on-treatment value for lipid parameters analyzed. Here, n signifies the number of participants analysed for each lipid parameter.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835645|NCT01289574|Primary|Percent Change in Inflammatory Acne Lesion Counts|Percent change from Baseline|12 weeks|All randomized patients||Percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
835499|NCT01288209|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Greater Than or Equal to 2 log10 IU/mL Drop From Baseline in Plasma Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) at Each Time Point During Treatment and Follow-up|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group with a greater than (>) or equal to (=) 2 log10 IU/mL drop from baseline in HCV RNA at each time point during treatment and post-treatment follow-up.|Day 3, Day 7, and Weeks 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, 48, 60, 72, EOT, and Follow-up (FU) Weeks 4, 12, and 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835500|NCT01288209|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With a Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks After the End of Treatment (EOT) and 24 Weeks After the Last Dose of Treatment (SVR24)|The table below shows the observed percentage of participants in each treatment group with a SVR24 defined as undetectable plasma hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) levels at the EOT (Week 24 or 48) and at 24 weeks after the last dose of treatment (Week 48 or 72).|EOT (Week 24 or 48) and Week 48 or 72|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835501|NCT01288209|Primary|The Percentage of Participants With a Sustained Virologic Response at the End of Treatment (EOT) and 12 Weeks After the Last Dose of Treatment (SVR12)|The table below shows the observed percentage of participants in each treatment group with a SVR12 defined as undetectable plasma hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) levels at the EOT (Week 24 or 48) and at 12 weeks after the last dose of treatment (Week 36 or 60).|EOT (Week 24 or 48) and Week 36 or 60|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835502|NCT01288287|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disease Index (HAQ-DI) Scores at 78 Weeks|HAQ-DI is a questionnaire which measures function and health-related quality of life. The final score range is 0-3, with higher scores denoting greater disability. A negative value in HAQ-DI change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline to 78 weeks.|Baseline (Week 0), 78 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all patients entered into the study who take at least one dose of Certolizumab Pegol and have a valid, non-missing complete DAS28(ESR) score at Baseline and Week 12 (+/- 2 weeks).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835503|NCT01288287|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index (RADAI) Scores at 78 Weeks|"RADAI is a five-item questionnaire administered to patients. The final score range is 0-10, with higher scores denoting a worse disease state.
A negative value in RADAI change from Baseline indicates an improvement from Baseline to 78 weeks."|Baseline (Week 0), 78 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all patients entered into the study who take at least one dose of Certolizumab Pegol and have a valid, non-missing complete DAS28(ESR) score at Baseline and Week 12 (+/- 2 weeks).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835504|NCT01288287|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Disease Activity Score (DAS)-Based European League Against Rheumatoid Arthritis (EULAR) Response at 78 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Percentage of patients achieving good, moderate, or no EULAR clinical response, where good response is defined as DAS28(ESR) ≤ 3.2 and decrease from baseline by > 1.2; moderate response is defined as achievement of one of the following:
DAS28(ESR) ≤ 3.2 and decrease from baseline > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2,
DAS28(ESR) > 3.2 and ≤ 5.1 and decrease from baseline > 0.6,
DAS28(ESR) > 5.1 and decrease from baseline > 1.2 Patients without a good or moderate response are considered to be non-responders."|Baseline (Week 0), 78 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all patients entered into the study who take at least one dose of Certolizumab Pegol and have a valid, non-missing complete DAS28(ESR) score at Baseline and Week 12 (+/- 2 weeks).||percentage of patients|||Number
835505|NCT01288287|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score 28-joint Count (Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) [DAS28(ESR)] Score at 78 Weeks|"DAS28(ESR) is calculated using the Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), ESR (mm/hour), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS in mm). 28 joints are examined using:
DAS28(ESR) = 0.56 * √(TJC) + 0.28* √(SJC) + 0.70* ln(ESR) + 0.014* PtGADA, with TJC=0 to 28, SJC=0 to 28, PtGADA=0 to 100 mm, ESR=0 to infinite mm/hour but ESR values of greater 250 mm/h are typically measurement errors.
DAS28(ESR) ranges from 0 to around 10 with lower scores indicating less disease activity."|Baseline (Week 0), 78 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all patients entered into the study who take at least one dose of Certolizumab Pegol and have a valid, non-missing complete DAS28(ESR) score at Baseline and Week 12 (+/- 2 weeks).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835506|NCT01288287|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Disease Activity Score (DAS) Response at 78 Weeks Where DAS Response is Defined as a Reduction From Baseline in DAS 28-joint Count (Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) [DAS28(ESR)] Score of Greater Than 1.2 Points|"DAS28(ESR) is calculated using the Tender Joint Count (TJC), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), ESR (mm/hour), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS in mm). 28 joints are examined using:
DAS28(ESR) = 0.56 * √(TJC) + 0.28* √(SJC) + 0.70* ln(ESR) + 0.014* PtGADA, with TJC=0 to 28, SJC=0 to 28, PtGADA=0 to 100 mm, ESR=0 to infinite mm/hour but ESR values of greater 250 mm/h are typically measurement errors.
DAS28(ESR) ranges from 0 to around 10 with lower scores indicating less disease activity."|Baseline (Week 0), 78 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all patients entered into the study who take at least one dose of Certolizumab Pegol and have a valid, non-missing complete DAS28(ESR) score at Baseline and Week 12 (+/- 2 weeks).||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835507|NCT01288443|Secondary|Absolute Change in the Ratio Apolipoprotein B/Apolipoprotein A-1 (ApoB/ApoA-1) From Baseline to Week 12 - On-Treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS mean and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA as for primary endpoint.|Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|Participants of the mITT population with one baseline and at least one post-baseline on-treatment value for ApoB/ApoA-1 ratio analyzed.||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835510|NCT01288443|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Calculated LDL-C <100 mg/dL (2.59 mmol/L) and <70 mg/dL (1.81 mmol/L) at Week 12 - On-Treatment Analysis||Week 12 (LOCF)|mITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
835513|NCT01288443|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Calculated LDL-C at Week 12 - On-Treatment Analysis|Calculated LDL-C values were obtained using the Friedewald formula. Baseline adjusted least squares (LS) means and standard errors were estimated using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model including available post-baseline data on treatment from first study drug injection up to 21 days after last study drug injection (on-treatment analysis). Missing Week 12 data were imputed by last observation carried forward [LOCF] method.|Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF)|Modified Intent-To-Treat (mITT) population included all randomized participants with one baseline and at least one post baseline on-treatment calculated LDL-C.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835514|NCT01288469|Secondary|Absolute Change in the Ratio Apolipoprotein B/Apolipoprotein A-1 (ApoB/ApoA-1) From Baseline to Week 8 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 8 (LOCF)|Participants of the mITT population with one baseline and at least one post-baseline on treatment value for lipid parameter analyzed||ratio||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835515|NCT01288469|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) at Week 8 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From Baseline to Week 8 (LOCF)|Participants of the mITT population with one baseline and at least one post-baseline on treatment HDL-C value.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835516|NCT01288469|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol, Fasting Triglycerides, Non-high-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (Non-HDL-C), Apolipoprotein B (Apo-B) and Lipoprotein(a) at Week 8 - On-treatment Analysis|Since the assumptions of normal distribution and equality of variances were not verified for the lipid parameters, percent changes were expressed as median (interquartile range).|From baseline to Week 8 (LOCF)|Participants of the mITT population with one baseline and at least one post-baseline on treatment value for lipid parameters analyzed. Here, n signifies number of participants analysed for each lipid parameter.||percent change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835517|NCT01288469|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Calculated LDL-C <100 mg/dL (2.59 mmol/L) and < 70 mg/dL (1.81 mmol/L) at Week 8 - On-treatment Analysis||Week 8 (LOCF)|mITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
835518|NCT01288469|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Calculated LDL-C (mg/dL) at Week 8 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From baseline to Week 8 (LOCF)|mITT population.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835519|NCT01288469|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Calculated LDL-C (mmol/L) at Week 8 - On-treatment Analysis|Adjusted LS means and standard errors were estimated using the same ANCOVA model as for primary endpoint.|From baseline to Week 8 (LOCF)|mITT population.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835520|NCT01288469|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Calculated LDL-C at Week 8 - On-treatment Analysis|Calculated LDL-C values were obtained using the Friedewald formula. Baseline adjusted least squares (LS) means and standard errors were estimated using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model including available post-baseline data on treatment from first investigational product (IP) injection up to 21 days after last IP injection (on-treatment analysis). Missing Week 8 data were imputed by last observation carried forward [LOCF] method.|From Baseline to Week 8 (LOCF)|Modified Intent-To-Treat (mITT) population: all randomized and treated participants with one baseline and at least one post-baseline calculated LDL-C value on-treatment.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835526|NCT01288612|Secondary|Acceptability|Acceptability was defined as the proportion of subjects willing to undergo the procedure again in the future.|Day 1 after the procedure|The analysis population included all subjects who agreed to undergo the esophageal assessment (intent to treat).||percentage of participants|||Number
835527|NCT01288612|Secondary|Mean Tolerability Scores|Validated pain scales (where 0 is none and 10 is severe) were used to assess the degree of pain, choking, gagging, and anxiety experienced during the procedure. Overall tolerance was rated on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is good, and 10 is poor tolerance.|Day 1 after the procedure|The analysis population included all subjects who agreed to undergo the esophageal assessment (intent to treat).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835528|NCT01288612|Secondary|Mean Time From Extubation to Discharge|This outcome measures the recovery time after the procedure.|Visit 1|The analysis population included all subjects who agreed to undergo the esophageal assessment (intent to treat).||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
835529|NCT01288612|Secondary|Mean Duration of Procedure|Duration of the procedure was defined as time from the beginning of the procedure (initiation of sedation or local anesthesia) to extubation.|Visit 1|The analysis population included all subjects who agreed to undergo the esophageal assessment (intent to treat).||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
835646|NCT01290224|Secondary|Analgesic Use Over Time||On days 1-11 and for 10 weeks after therapy|||participants|||Number
835531|NCT01288612|Secondary|Rate of Complete Evaluation|The rate of complete evaluation was defined as visualization of the whole esophagus and identification of landmarks: squamocolumnar junction, gastroesophageal junction (upper margin of gastric folds with stomach deflated), and the diaphragmatic hiatus. The categories of evaluation were classified as complete (all three landmarks identified), incomplete (some landmarks identified), or unsuccessful.|Visit 1|The analysis population included all subjects who agreed to undergo the esophageal assessment (intent to treat).||procedures|||Number
835532|NCT01288612|Secondary|Rate of Successful Intubation|The rate of successful intubation was defined as the ability to traverse the upper esophageal sphincter and visualize the esophageal mucosa and classified as successful or unsuccessful.|Visit 1|The analysis population included all subjects who agreed to undergo the esophageal assessment (intent to treat).||percentage of participants|||Number
835533|NCT01288612|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Who Agreed to Participated in the Esophageal Assessment|This outcome measure was defined as the proportion of subjects who agreed to undergo esophageal assessment in the three groups out of those who were eligible to be contacted for participation in screening.|Approximately 2 weeks after invitation letter was sent|The analysis population for this outcome measure was the number of subjects per group who were eligible to contact.||percentage of participants|||Number
835534|NCT01288729|Primary|Length of Wear of Infusion Site|Comparison of the length of wear (hours) of Sure-T Steel Infusion Set Catheter versus Quick-Set Teflon Catheter. Infusion sets are currently approved for wear 2-3 days (24-72 hours). Participants wore each set for up to 7 days twice. Outcome measure is presented according to the intervention (Steel or Teflon catheter).|5 weeks|Participants with available data were analyzed.||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835535|NCT01288781|Secondary|Change in Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter|Baseline is defined as the average of the 3 hour and 12 hour normoxia measurements. 36 hours is defined at the 36 hour hypoxia measurement.|Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter: baseline, 36 hours.|All participants were included. Analysis was intention to treat. There were no missing data.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835536|NCT01288781|Secondary|Change in Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter|Baseline is defined as the average of the 3 hour 12 hour normoxia measurements. 12 hours is defined at the 12 hour hypoxia measurement.|Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter: baseline, 12 hours.|All participants were included. Analysis was intention to treat. There were no missing data.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835537|NCT01288781|Secondary|Change in Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter|Baseline is defined as the average of the 3 hour 12 hour normoxia measurements. 3 hours is defined at the 3 hour hypoxia measurement.|Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter: baseline, 3 hours.|All participants were included. Analysis was intention to treat. There were no missing data.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835538|NCT01288781|Secondary|Change in Fluid Balance|"Baseline is defined as the average of the 3 hour and 12 hour normoxia measurement. 24 hours is defined at the 24 hour hypoxia measurement. Urine output was recorded by 24 hour urine collection and fluid intake by 24 hour food diaries. Fluid balance was calculated as:
(urine output (L) / fluid intake (L) ) * 100."|Fluid Balance: baseline, 24 hours.|All participants were included. Analysis was intention to treat. There were no missing data.||% of fluid intake||Standard Deviation|Mean
835539|NCT01288781|Secondary|Change in Blood Oxygen Saturation|Baseline is defined as the average of the 3 hour and 12 hour normoxia measurement. 24 hours is defined at the 24 hour hypoxia measurement.|Blood Oxygen Saturation: baseline, 24 hours.|All participants were included. Analysis was intention to treat. There were no missing data.||% oxygen saturation||Standard Deviation|Mean
835540|NCT01288781|Secondary|Change in High Altitude Headache by Visual Analogue Scale|Baseline is defined as the average of the 3 hour and 12 hour normoxia measurement. 24 hours is defined at the 24 hour hypoxia measurement. Outcome measured using visual analogue scale, where 0 mm is no headache and 100 mm is maximum headache.|High Altitude Headache: baseline, 24 hours.|All participants were included. Analysis was intention to treat. There were no missing data.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835541|NCT01288781|Primary|Change in Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter by Ultrasonography|"Baseline is defined as the average of the 3 hour and 12 hour normoxia measurement.
24 hours is defined at the 24 hour hypoxia measurement. Optic nerve sheath diameter obtained by ultrasonography of the eye. Increased optic nerve sheath diameter suggests greater intra cranial pressure."|Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter: baseline, 24 hours.|All participants were included. Analysis was intention to treat. There were no missing data.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835542|NCT01288859|Primary|Amount of Total Fecal Polyphenols|Amount of parent polyphenols and metabolites in feces was calculated by multiplying net concentrations by the amount of feces.|0 and 24 hours post‐dose.|||nmol||Standard Error|Mean
835543|NCT01288859|Primary|Urinary Excretion of Total Polyphenols|Area Under the Curve (AUC) from 0 to 24h of total polyphenols (sum of parent polyphenols and metabolites)was calculated using a trapezoidal rule applied to the urinary concentration-time curves of compounds.|Time intervals: 0-2, 2-4, 4-6, 6-8, 10-24 hours post‐dose.|Basing on power analysis calculation on a previous work||nmol•h/L||Standard Error|Mean
835544|NCT01288859|Primary|Serum Polyphenol Concentrations Over 24h From Food Consumption|Area Under the Curves (AUC) from 0 to 24h of parent polyphenols was calculated using a trapezoidal rule applied to the concentration-time curves of compounds.|0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post‐dose|The number of subjects was based on power calculations derived from our previous study. We calculated that, at α = 0.05 with a power of 80%, 8 subjects would allow us to detect a 20% difference in serum and urinary concentrations of parental compounds, glucuronides and phenolic acids.||nmol*h/L||Standard Error|Mean
835545|NCT01288911|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events|"A serious adverse event was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose:
Resulted in death
Was life threatening
Resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity
Resulted in congenital anomaly or birth defect
Required inpatient hospitalization or led to prolongation of hospitalization
Other medically important events.
Treatment-related indicates adverse events assessed by the Investigator as probably or possibly related to study treatment."|From initiation of study drug up to 30 days after the last dose of study drug or the 30-day safety follow-up visit, whichever occurred last. Median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Safety Analysis Set (all participants who had initiated at least 1 dose of study drug)||percentage of participants|||Number
835647|NCT01290224|Secondary|Toxicity (Other Than CIPN) Profile Associated With Scrambler Therapy as Measured by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) 4.0|CTCAE Grading: Grade 1=Mild, Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3=Severe, Grade 4=Life-threatening, Grade 5=Death.|Day 1 to Day 10|||participants|||Number
835546|NCT01288911|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response|"Response assessments were reported by ICR for target lesions in soft tissues and non-target lesions in soft tissues based on CT and/or MRI according to RECIST version 1.1.
Objective response was defined as the number of participants achieving either a complete response (CR) or a partial response (PR) based on participant’s best overall response assessed at the end of the treatment."|From randomization until the data cutoff date of 19 October 2014, median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Full analysis set||percentage of participants|||Number
835547|NCT01288911|Secondary|Radiographic PFS Based on ICR Assessment|"Radiographic PFS was calculated as the time interval from the date of randomization to the first date of radiographic disease progression.
Radiographic disease progression was defined as either a progression in soft tissue on CT/MRI scan according to RECIST 1.1, and/or a progression in bone lesions (a minimum of 2 new bone lesions as compared to previous scan) on bone scan and confirmed by the next bone scan."|From randomization until the data cutoff date of 19 October 2014, median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Full analysis set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835548|NCT01288911|Secondary|Time to ≥ 90% PSA Decline From Baseline|The time to ≥ 90% PSA decline from Baseline was defined as the time interval from the date of randomization to the first date a PSA decline from Baseline of at least 90% was recorded. In participants without ≥ 90% PSA decline from Baseline, the time to ≥ 90% PSA decline from Baseline was censored on the date of the last PSA sample taken. Participants who had no Baseline PSA and participants with no post-baseline PSA results were censored on the date of randomization|From randomization until the data cutoff date of 19 October 2014, median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Full analysis set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835549|NCT01288911|Secondary|Time to ≥ 50% PSA Decline From Baseline|The time to ≥ 50% PSA decline from Baseline was defined as the time interval from the date of randomization to the first date a PSA decline from Baseline of at least 50% was recorded. In participants without ≥ 50% PSA decline from Baseline, the time to ≥ 50% PSA decline from Baseline was censored on the date of the last PSA sample taken. Participants who had no Baseline PSA and participants with no post-baseline PSA results were censored on the date of randomization|From randomization until the data cutoff date of 19 October 2014, median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Full analysis set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835550|NCT01288911|Secondary|Time to ≥ 30% PSA Decline From Baseline|The time to ≥ 30% PSA decline from Baseline was defined as the time interval from the date of randomization to the first date a PSA decline from Baseline of at least 30% was recorded. In participants without ≥ 30% PSA decline from Baseline, the time to ≥ 30% PSA decline from Baseline was censored on the date of the last PSA sample taken. Participants who had no Baseline PSA and participants with no post-baseline PSA results were censored on the date of randomization|From randomization until the data cutoff date of 19 October 2014, median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Full analysis set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835551|NCT01288911|Secondary|Time to PSA ≤ 4 ng/mL|Time to PSA ≤ 4 ng/mL was defined as the time interval from the date of randomization to the first date a decline in PSA to a result of 4 ng/mL or below was recorded. In participants without PSA results ≤ 4 ng/mL, the time to PSA ≤ 4 ng/mL was censored on the date of the last PSA sample taken. Participants with a PSA result ≤ 4 ng/mL at Baseline, participants with no Baseline PSA and participants with no post-baseline PSA results were censored on the date of randomization|From randomization until the data cutoff date of 19 October 2014, median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Full analysis set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835552|NCT01288911|Secondary|Time to PSA Progression|Time to PSA progression was calculated as the time interval from the date of randomization to the date of first observation of PSA progression. PSA progression was defined as a ≥ 25% increase and an absolute increase of ≥ 2 ng/mL above the nadir (or above the baseline value for patients who did not have a decline in PSA post-baseline values), and confirmed by a second consecutive PSA assessment at least 3 weeks later. For participants with no documented PSA progression, the time to PSA progression was censored on the date the last PSA sample was taken.|From randomization until the data cutoff date of 19 October 2014, median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Full analysis set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835553|NCT01288911|Secondary|Best Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) Response|The best PSA response was defined as the percentage change from Baseline to the smallest PSA value after Baseline including PSA results from samples taken after the study drug was stopped. For participants with no decrease in PSA post-baseline, the best PSA response was the smallest increase in PSA. For participants with no post-baseline PSA values, the PSA response was set to missing. PSA was analyzed at a central laboratory.|Baseline to the data cutoff date of 19 October 2014, median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Full analysis set with available PSA data||percent change||Full Range|Median
835554|NCT01288911|Secondary|Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) Response by Week 13|The PSA response by Week 13 was defined as the percentage change from Baseline to the smallest PSA value after Baseline (i.e., a decrease of 100% represents the largest possible decrease to a value below the lower limit of quantification) and on or before day 99 (i.e., upper boundary of the Week 13 visit window). For participants with no decrease in PSA post-baseline by Week 13, the PSA response by Week 13 was the smallest increase in PSA up to day 99. For participants with no post-baseline PSA values up to day 99, the PSA response by Week 13 was set to missing. PSA was analyzed at a central laboratory.|Baseline to Week 13|Full analysis set with available PSA data||percent change||Full Range|Median
835568|NCT01289041|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) According to PI3K Activation Pathway Status|Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from start of treatment to the date of death due to any cause. If a patient is not known to have died, survival was censored at the last date of contact. OS was to be reported at extension and after 3-year follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier median was used to analyze the OS.|every 3 months|Full analysis set includes all patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836254|NCT01286740|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of RPV and EFV at Week 1|The mean (SD) plasma concentration (ng/mL) of RPV and EFV was measured at Week 1.|Week 1|Participants with evaluable measurements for plasma concentrations of RPV and EFV at Week 1 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835555|NCT01288911|Secondary|PFS Based on Investigator Assessment|"PFS was calculated as the time from randomization to the date of the first progression event detected. A progression event was defined as objective evidence of radiographic disease progression based on the assessments by investigators, skeletal-related event, initiation of new antineoplastic therapy or death by any cause, whichever occurred first.
Radiographic disease progression was defined as either a progression in soft tissue on CT/MRI scan according to RECIST 1.1, and/or a progression in bone lesions on bone scan (≥ 2 new bone lesions) confirmed by the next bone scan.
A skeletal-related event was defined as radiation therapy or surgery to bone, pathologic bone fracture, spinal cord compression or change in antineoplastic therapy to treat bone pain.
The initiation of new antineoplastic therapy included any new therapy for the treatment of disease progression after the study drug administration started."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 19 October 2014, median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Full analysis set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835556|NCT01288911|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) Based on Independent Central Review (ICR) Assessment|"PFS is the time from randomization to the date of the first progression event detected. A progression event was defined as objective evidence of radiographic disease progression based on the assessments by the ICR, skeletal-related event, initiation of new antineoplastic therapy or death by any cause, whichever occurred first.
Radiographic disease progression was defined as either a progression in soft tissue on computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1, and/or a progression in bone lesions on bone scan (≥ 2 new bone lesions) confirmed by the next bone scan.
A skeletal-related event was any radiation therapy or surgery to bone, pathologic bone fracture, spinal cord compression or change in antineoplastic therapy to treat bone pain.
The initiation of new antineoplastic therapy included any new therapy for the treatment of disease progression after the study drug administration started."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 19 October 2014, median duration of treatment was 11.6 months in the enzalutamide arm and 5.8 months in the bicalutamide arm.|Full analysis set (all randomized participants)||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835557|NCT01289015|Secondary|Effective Treatment and Mycological Cure of Interdigital Tinea Pedis at Week 6|"Effective treatment of interdigital tinea pedis which is defined as negative KOH and negative dermatophyte culture and erythema, scaling, and pruritus scores of 0 or 1 (corresponding to absent and mild respectively).
Mycological cure of interdigital tinea pedis which is defined as negative KOH and negative dermatophyte culture."|Visit 4/ Week 6.|Full Analysis Set (FAS) using a Modified Intent to Treat population.||percentage of subjects|||Number
835558|NCT01289015|Primary|Complete Cure of Interdigital Tinea Pedis|"The primary efficacy comparison between NAFT-600 gel and placebo will be based on the percentage of subjects at Week 6 with complete cure of interdigital tinea pedis.
Complete cure is defined as negative mycology results (dermatophyte culture and KOH) and the absence of erythema, scaling, and pruritus."|Visit 4/ Week 6|Full Analysis Set (FAS) defined as the subset of all subjects in the Safety Evaluation Set (SES) with a positive mycology culture at baseline and for whom the primary efficacy variable is available. This was a modified intent to treat principle because culture results were not available before the start of treatment.||percentage of subjects|||Number
835559|NCT01289028|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) of the Patients Who Were Included Due to an Intolerability of a Prior Treatment.|Progression-free survival (PFS) is defined as the time from first study drug administration to objective tumor progression or death from any cause. If a patient has not had an event, PFS is censored at the date of last adequate tumor assessment.|during 12 months|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835560|NCT01289028|Secondary|Overall Survival, Number of Events Related to Progression of the Disease|The OS rate could not be calculated due to the high number of censored cases. Number of censored, n (%) 108 (86.4). Only available data is number of events. OS was defined as the time from first study drug administration to death from any cause. If a patient was not known to have died, survival was censored at date of last contact.|during 12 months|||events|||Number
835561|NCT01289028|Secondary|Duration of Overall Response|The best overall response is the best response recorded from the start of the treatment until disease progression/recurrence|during 12 months|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835562|NCT01289028|Secondary|Time to Tumor Progression|Time to tumor progression defined as the time from start of treatment to observed tumor progression (censoring for death without progression) as stated in the original protocol was not evaluated as stated in section 9.8.3 of the clinical study report.|during the first 4 months|Time to tumor progression defined as the time from start of treatment to observed tumor progression (censoring for death without progression) as stated in the original protocol was not evaluated|||||
835563|NCT01289028|Secondary|Time to Overall Response (CR or PR): Per Protocol Population|Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions, and Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum longest diameter.|24 weeks and 52 weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
835564|NCT01289028|Secondary|Analysis of Time to Overall Response (CR or PR) According to RECIST Using Kaplan-Meier Method for ITT Population|Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions. and Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum longest diameter.|24 weeks and 52 weeks|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
835565|NCT01289028|Primary|Percent of Patients Achieving Complete Response (CR)|Complete response (CR) is the Disappearance of all target lesions.|during the first 4 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
835566|NCT01289028|Primary|Percent of Patients Achieving Partial Response (PR)|The primary efficacy variable was defined as the proportion of patients with a best overall response of CR by Week 16/Month 4 based on local assessment according to RECIST (Version 1.0). This is an at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum longest diameter.|during the first 4 months|ITT set, N=125||percentage of participants|||Number
835567|NCT01289028|Primary|Percent of Patients Achieving Stable Disease (SD)|Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for Partial Response nor sufficient increase to qualify for Progression Disease, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter since the treatment started.|During the first 4 months|||% participants|||Number
835641|NCT01289548|Secondary|Acute Rejection of Transplanted Kidney|biopsy-confirmed, clinically symptomatic|before discharge|All the patients completed the study and no dropout occured.||participants|||Number
835569|NCT01289041|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) According to PI3K Activation Pathway Status|PFS is defined as the time from start of treatment to the date of first documented progression or death due to any cause. If a patient has not had an event, PFS will be censored at the date of last adequate tumor assessment.|24 months|Full analysis set includes all patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835570|NCT01289041|Primary|Best Overall Response Rate (BORR) According to PI3K Activation Pathway Status|"BOR was determined based on investigator assessment of overall lesion response using RECIST criteria guidelines.
BOR = objective responses rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) or clinical benefit rate (CBR). ORR = (complete response (CR) or partial response(PR); DCR = (CR or PR or Stable disease (SD); CBR = (CR or PR od SD >= 24 weeks)"|24 months|Full analysis set includes all patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||number of participants|||Number
835571|NCT01289080|Secondary|The Abnormalities Found in Vital Signs, ECGs, and Clinical Laboratory Tests Are Reported as AEs Upon Study Physicians Discretion.|An adverse event (AE) was an exacerbation of an existing problem or any new problem, experienced by a participant when enrolled in a trial, whether or not it was considered drug related by the study physician.|AEs were recorded from Screening (ICF was signed) to Follow-up 31 (+ 2) days.|The dataset for all safety analyses consisted of the data from all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, regardless of any protocol deviation. All observed data for these subjects were included.||participants|||Number
835572|NCT01289080|Secondary|Fraction of the Systemically Available Brexpiprazole Metabolite (DM-3411) Excreted Into the Urine (fe,u).|Urine samples were collected at Predose and at intervals of 0 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, 72 to 96, 96 to 120, 120 to 144, and 144 to 168 hours postdose. Unbound fraction of drug in plasma was calculated as 100% - mean percent of brexpiprazole bound to plasma protein for each participant.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||% of unbound brexpiprazole in urine.||Standard Deviation|Mean
835573|NCT01289080|Secondary|Renal Clearance (CLr) of Brexipiprazole Metabolite (DM-3411).|Urine samples were collected at Predose at intervals of 0 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, 72 to 96, 96 to 120, 120 to 144, and 144 to 168 hours postdose. Unbound fraction of drug in plasma was calculated as 100% - mean percent of brexpiprazole bound to plasma protein for each participant.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||mL/h/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835574|NCT01289080|Secondary|Terminal-phase Elimination Half-life of Brexpiprazole (t1/2,z).|Blood samples were collected at Predose (within 15 minutes of dosing) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours or at ET. Unbound fraction of drug in plasma was calculated as 100% - mean percent of brexpiprazole bound to plasma protein for each participant.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations. The terminal phase elimination half-life was not determined for DM-3411 metabolite.||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
835575|NCT01289080|Secondary|Apparent Unbound Clearance From Plasma After Extravascular Administration of Brexpiprazole (CLu/F).|Blood samples were collected at Predose (within 15 minutes of dosing) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours or at ET. Unbound fraction of drug in plasma was calculated as 100% - mean percent of brexpiprazole bound to plasma protein for each participant.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||mL/h/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835576|NCT01289080|Secondary|Unbound Fraction of Brexpiprazole in Plasma (fu).|Blood samples were collected at Predose (within 15 minutes of dosing) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours or at ET. Unbound fraction of drug in plasma was calculated as 100% - mean percent of brexpiprazole bound to plasma protein for each participant.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||% of unbound brexpiprazole in plasma||Standard Deviation|Mean
835577|NCT01289080|Secondary|Apparent Clearance From Plasma After Extravascular Administration of Brexpiprazole (CL/F).|The value of CL/F was determined as Dose/AUC∞. Clearance of a drug was a measure of the rate at which a drug was metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) was influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Clearance was estimated from population PK modeling. Drug clearance was a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance was removed from the blood.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||mL/h/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835578|NCT01289080|Secondary|Time to Cmax of Brexiprazole Metabolite (DM-3411) (Tmax).|Blood samples were collected at Predose (within 15 minutes of dosing) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours or at ET. Tmax is the time taken to reach highest measured concentration of the drug during the dosing interval.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||h||Full Range|Median
835579|NCT01289080|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration of Brexpiprazole Metabolite (DM-3411) (Cmax).|Blood samples were collected at Predose (within 15 minutes of dosing) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours or at ET. Unbound fraction of drug in plasma was calculated as 100% - mean percent of brexpiprazole bound to plasma protein for each participant.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835580|NCT01289080|Secondary|AUC Time Curve of Brexpiprazole From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC∞).|Blood samples were collected at Predose (within 15 minutes of dosing) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours or at ET. The AUC∞ was estimated using the linear trapezoidal rule.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations. AUC-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC∞) was not determined for DM-3411 metabolite.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837970|NCT01309919|Secondary|Satisfaction|Participant satisfaction with the IUD at 12 weeks post-insertion|12 weeks post-partum|We assessed satisfaction with the IUD of all participants who completed the 12-week follow up call||% of participants who received an IUD|||Number
835581|NCT01289080|Secondary|AUC Time Curve of Brexpiprazole Metabolite (DM-3411) Calculated to the Last Observable Concentration at Time t (AUCt).|Blood samples were collected at Predose (within 15 minutes of dosing) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours or at ET. The AUCt was estimated using the linear trapezoidal rule.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835582|NCT01289080|Primary|Unbound Maximum (Peak) Plasma Concentration of Brexpiprazole (Cmax,u).|Blood samples were collected at Predose (within 15 minutes of dosing) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours or at ET. Unbound fraction of drug in plasma was calculated as 100% - mean percent of brexpiprazole bound to plasma protein for each participant.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835583|NCT01289080|Primary|Unbound Area Under AUC- Time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC∞,u).|Blood samples were collected at Predose (within 15 minutes of dosing) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours or at ET. Unbound fraction of drug in plasma was calculated as 100% - mean percent of brexpiprazole bound to plasma protein for each participant.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for PK analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835584|NCT01289080|Primary|Unbound Area Under the Concentration (AUC) Time Curve Calculated to the Last Observable Concentration Brexpiprazole (AUCt,u).|Blood samples were collected on Day 1 at Predose (within 15 minutes of dosing) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours Postdose or at Early Termination (ET). Unbound fraction of drug in plasma was calculated as 100% - mean percent of brexpiprazole bound to plasma protein for each participant.|Day 1 to Day 8|The dataset for pharmacokinetics (PK) analysis of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters consisted of enrolled participants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||nanograms*hours/mL (ng*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
835585|NCT01289119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Decrease in HbA1c ≥2.0%|Clinical response was assessed by the percentage of participants with a decrease from Baseline in HbA1c of greater than or equal to 2.0% at Week 16.|Baseline and Week 16.|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline HbA1c assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||percentage of participants|||Number
835586|NCT01289119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Decrease in HbA1c ≥1.5%|Clinical response was assessed by the percentage of participants with a decrease from Baseline in HbA1c of greater than or equal to 1.5% at Week 16.|Baseline and Week 16.|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline HbA1c assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||percentage of participants|||Number
835587|NCT01289119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Decrease in HbA1c ≥1.0%|Clinical response was assessed by the percentage of participants with a decrease from Baseline in HbA1c of greater than or equal to 1.0% at Week 16.|Baseline and Week 16|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline HbA1c assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||percentage of participants|||Number
835588|NCT01289119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Decrease in HbA1c ≥ 0.5%|Clinical response was assessed by the percentage of participants with a decrease from Baseline in HbA1c of greater than or equal to 0.5% at Week 16.|Baseline and Week 16|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline HbA1c assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||percentage of participants|||Number
835589|NCT01289119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HbA1c ≤7.5% at Week 16|Clinical response was assessed by the percentage of participants with HbA1c (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) less than or equal to 7.5% at Week 16.|Week 16|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline HbA1c assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||percentage of participants|||Number
835590|NCT01289119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HbA1c ≤7.0% at Week 16|Clinical response was assessed by the percentage of participants with HbA1c (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) less than or equal to 7.0% at Week 16.|Week 16|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline HbA1c assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||percentage of participants|||Number
835591|NCT01289119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HbA1c ≤6.5% at Week 16|Clinical response was assessed by the percentage of participants with HbA1c (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) less than or equal to 6.5% at Week 16.|Week 16|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline HbA1c assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||percentage of participants|||Number
835592|NCT01289119|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight|The change between body weight measured at Baseline and body weight measured at Weeks 8 and 16. The least squares means are derived from an ANCOVA model with treatment as a fixed effect, and baseline body weight as a covariate for the monotherapy, baseline body weight with baseline metformin dose as covariates for the add-on to metformin therapy, baseline body weight with baseline metformin therapy status and baseline pioglitazone dose as covariates for the add-on to pioglitazone therapy.|Baseline and Weeks 8 and 16.|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline weight assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835642|NCT01289548|Primary|Plasma Creatine Concentration of the Recipients|Plasma creatinine concentration before surgery, 1hour, 4hours, 24hours, 48hours and 72hours after the artery unclamping|within the first 3days after the operation|All patients completed the trial and no dropout occured.||μmol/l||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835593|NCT01289119|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Marked Hyperglycemia|Marked Hyperglycemia was defined as fasting plasma glucose greater than or equal to 200 mg/dL (11.1 mmol/L).|Randomization to Week 16.|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment.||percentage of participants|||Number
835594|NCT01289119|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose Over Time|The change from Baseline in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) at Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16. Least squares means are derived from an ANCOVA model with treatment as a fixed effect, and baseline FPG as a covariate for the monotherapy, baseline FPG with baseline metformin dose as covariates for the metformin therapy, baseline FPG with baseline metformin therapy status and baseline pioglitazone dose as covariates for the pioglitazone therapy.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16.|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline FPG assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835595|NCT01289119|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c Over Time|The change from Baseline in HbA1c (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) at Weeks 4, 8 and 12. Least squares means are derived from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment as a fixed effect, and baseline HbA1c as a covariate for the monotherapy, baseline HbA1c with baseline metformin dose as covariates for the metformin therapy, baseline HbA1c with baseline metformin therapy status and baseline pioglitazone dose as covariates for the pioglitazone therapy.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8 and 12.|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline HbA1c assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||percentage glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835596|NCT01289119|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)|The change from Baseline in HbA1c (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at Week 16. Least squares means are derived from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment as a fixed effect, and baseline HbA1c as a covariate for the monotherapy, baseline HbA1c with baseline metformin dose as covariates for the metformin therapy, baseline HbA1c with baseline metformin therapy status and baseline pioglitazone dose as covariates for the pioglitazone therapy.|Baseline and Week 16.|The full analysis set, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and who had a baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline HbA1c assessment. Last observation carried forward was utilized.||percentage glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835597|NCT01289210|Secondary|Assess the Safety and Feasibility of the Combination Regimen.||Safety assessed throughout study period.||||||
835598|NCT01289210|Primary|Number of Participants Whose Tumors Responded to Treatment With Intratumoral Injection of VTX-2337 in Combination With Low-Dose Local Radiation.|Tumor response was assessed via CT scans of the chest, abdomen, pelvis or other medically appropriate imaging modality to evaluate all areas of disease. Cheson Criteria were used for calculation of response.|Tumor assessment conducted at 12 weeks and every 3-6 months thereafter|Subjects who completed the first 4 weeks of treatment (radiation + 3 VTX-2337 injections) were evaluable for tumor response and immune response. The study was closed due to slow accrual. 2 subjects were enrolled; 1 was evaluable for the primary endpoint, the other discontinued prematurely and was evaluated for safety only (a secondary endpoint).||participants|||Number
835599|NCT01280656|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events and Any Serious Adverse Events|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An serious adverse event (SAE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is a significant medical event in the investigator's judgment or requires intervention to prevent one or other of these outcomes.|Up to Week 72|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria.||participants|||Number
835600|NCT01280656|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Treatment Due to Adverse Events|The percentage of participants with treatment discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AE) between conventional group, peginterferon alfa-2a and peginterferon alfa-2b is presented.|Up to Week 48|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria.||percentage of participants|||Number
835601|NCT01280656|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Null Response or No Responder at End of Treatment|Null response or no responders were defined as those participants presenting positive viral load at EOT (regardless of the treatment duration). EOT= Week 48.|At Week 48|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria.||percentage of participants|||Number
835602|NCT01280656|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virologic Relapse up to Week 72|Virologic relapse was defined as undetectable HCV-RNA at end of treatment and detectable HCV-RNA at the last follow-up assessment available. If the participant was a responder at end of treatment and was not submitted to any viral load assessment during the follow-up period, he was considered a relapser.|Up to Week 72|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria. The analysis was performed in participants with virologic response at EOT in each group (16, 126, and 101 respectively).||percentage of participants|||Number
835603|NCT01280656|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virologic Response at End of Treatment|Virologic response at EOT was defined as undetectable HCV-RNA at EOT (regardless in which week treatment was concluded). EOT = Week 48.|At Week 48|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria.||percentage of participants|||Number
835604|NCT01280656|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Rapid Virologic Response at Week 4|Rapid virologic response was defined as qualitative or quantitative HCV-RNA (viral load) undetectable (below the lower limit of detection) at Week 4 of treatment period.|At Week 4|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria.||percentage of participants|||Number
835643|NCT01289574|Secondary|Percent Change in Noninflammatory Acne Lesion Counts|Percent change from Baseline|12 weeks|All randomized subjects||Percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
835605|NCT01280656|Secondary|Mean Percentage Reduction of Hemoglobin in Treatment Responders and Treatment Non-Responders|The average percentage reduction of hemoglobin (Hb) in treatment responders and treatment non-responders between the conventional group, peginterferon alfa-2a plus and peginterferon alfa-2b is presented. Participants with undetectable HCV RNA at specified time points (Weeks 4/12/18/24/48) were considered as treatment responders. Participants with positive viral load (detectable HCV RNA) at end of treatment regardless of the treatment duration were considered as treatment non-responders.|Up to Week 72|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria. Treatment responders and non-responders for whom data was available were considered for this outcome measure.||mean percentage reduction of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
835606|NCT01280656|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Were Treated at Interferon Application Centers and at Home and Discontinued Treatment|The percentage of participants who were treated at interferon application centers and at home and who discontinued treatment is presented. Participants who did not have viral load assessment at Week 12 were considered treatment failures, except in the specific case where the lack of assessment was not due to treatment shortening in function of response guided therapy.|Up to Week 48|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria. The analysis excluded participants treated at an unknown location (7/62, 10/312, and 23/286 respectively)||percentage of participants|||Number
835607|NCT01280656|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response Treated at Interferon Application Centers and Treated at Home|The percentage of participants with SVR-12 and SVR-24 treated at interferon application centers (IAC) and treated at home are presented.|At Week 60 (SVR 12) and Week 72 (SVR 24)|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria. The analysis was performed in participants with virologic response at EOT in each group excluding participants treated at an unknown location (2/16, 5/126, and 9/101 respectively).||percentage of participants|||Number
835608|NCT01280656|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Early Virologic Response at Week 12|An early virologic response (EVR) was defined as a HCV-RNA decrease of at least two logarithmic scales (2 Log) or 100 times the pretreatment value or non-detection at Week 12 of treatment period.|At Week 12|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria.||percentage of participants|||Number
835609|NCT01280656|Secondary|Number of Participants With Interferon Dose Reduction Rates in Function of the Interferon Type Being Used|The number of participants with Interferon dose reduction rates in function of the interferon type being used are reported|At Week 24|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria. The analysis was performed in the participants who were available for interferon dose reduction rates in each group (56, 302, and 280 respectively).||participants|||Number
835610|NCT01280656|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response at 24 Weeks After End of Treatment|SVR was defined as virological response at 24 weeks after EOT, EOT= Week 48. Virologic response was either defined as having undetectable (that is, no hepatitis C virus Ribonucleic acid [HCV RNA] was detected in the participants' plasma samples) or less than 50 IU/mL HCV RNA (that is, the participants' plasma samples contained traces of HCV RNA at a concentration below the limit of quantification of the viral load assay or no HCV RNA was detected in the samples). Participants who did not have viral load assessment at Week 12 were considered treatment failures, except in the specific case where the lack of assessment was not due to treatment shortening in function of response guided therapy.|At Week 72|The ITT population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria. The analysis was performed in participants with virologic response at EOT in each group (16, 126, and 101 respectively).||percentage of participants|||Number
835611|NCT01280656|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response at 12 Weeks After End of Treatment|Sustained virological response (SVR) was defined as virological response at 12 weeks after end of treatment (EOT). Virologic response was either defined as having undetectable (that is, no hepatitis C virus Ribonucleic acid [HCV RNA] was detected in the participants’ plasma samples) or less than 50 international units/milliliter (IU/mL) HCV RNA (that is, the participants’ plasma samples contained traces of HCV RNA at a concentration below the limit of quantification of the viral load assay or no HCV RNA was detected in the samples). EOT= Week 48. Participants who did not have viral load assessment at Week 12 were considered treatment failures, except in the specific case where the lack of assessment was not due to treatment shortening in function of response guided therapy.|At Week 60|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consisted of participants who fulfilled all inclusion/ exclusion criteria. The analysis was performed in participants with virologic response at EOT in each group (16, 126, and 101 respectively).||percentage of participants|||Number
835612|NCT01280695|Secondary|Change From Baseline in High Molecular Weight Adiponectin|To evaluate the effects of three different doses of MSDC-0602 and pioglitazone as compared to placebo on biomarkers of inflammatory status (high molecular weight adiponectin) following once-daily dosing for 28 consecutive days in patients with Type 2 diabetes.|Baseline and 28 days|The Per-Protocol Population included all patients who completed the 4-week, double blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures.||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835613|NCT01280695|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Insulin|To characterize the effects of 3 different doses of MSDC-0602 and pioglitazone as compared to placebo on insulin following once-daily dosing for 28 consecutive days|Baseline and 28 days|The Per-Protocol population included all patients who completed the 4-week, double blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures.||µIU/mL||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
835614|NCT01280695|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hematocrit|To characterize the effects of three different doses of MSDC-0602 and pioglitazone as compared to placebo in hematocrit following once-daily dosing for 28 consecutive days in patients with Type 2 diabetes.|Baseline and 28 days|The Per-Protocol Population included all patients who completed the 4-week, double blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures.||Change from baseline||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835615|NCT01280695|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight|To characterize the effects of three different doses of MSDC-0602 and pioglitazone as compared to placebo on hematocrit, body weight, and edema following once-daily dosing for 28 consecutive days in patients with Type 2 diabetes.|Baseline and 28 days|The Per-Protocol Population included all patients who completed the 4-week, double blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures.||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835616|NCT01280695|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c|To explore the drug effect difference in the reduction in hemoglobin A1c in response to three different doses of MSDC-0602 and pioglitazone (45 mg Actos®) as compared to placebo following once-daily dosing for 28 consecutive days in patients with Type 2 diabetes.|Baseline and 28 days|The Per-Protocol Population included all patients who completed the 4-week, double blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures.||percentage of hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835617|NCT01280695|Primary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose|To characterize the reduction in fasting plasma glucose in response to three different doses of MSDC-0602 Tablets as compared to placebo following once-daily dosing for 28 consecutive days in patients with Type 2 diabetes.|Baseline and 28 days|Per-Protocol Population:Included all patients who completed the 4-week, double blind treatment period without any major deviations from the protocol procedures. The Per-Protocol Population was used for all efficacy measurements.||mg/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835618|NCT01289392|Primary|Sleep Apnea|Number of events per hour of sleep|6 months|||number of events||Standard Deviation|Mean
835619|NCT01289392|Secondary|Inflammatory Markers|Blood samples to test: tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), C-reactive protein (CRP), Interleukin-6 and Interleukin-8|6 months after the basal evaluation||||||
835620|NCT01289392|Primary|Objective Sleep Parameters|Polysomnographic date of sleep stages percentages, sleep efficiency, arousals, apnea-hypopnea index, oxyhemoglobin saturation|6 months after the basal evaluation||||||
835621|NCT01289418|Primary|the Occurrence of Serious Adverse Events (SAE)||6 months|||participants|||Number
835622|NCT01289418|Primary|Number of Participants Who Had Experienced a New Health Problem or the Worsening of an Existing Health Condition That Resulted in Work Absenteeism.||day 8, 15 and 29|||participants|||Number
835623|NCT01289418|Primary|Number of Participants Who Had Experienced a New Health Problem or the Worsening of an Existing Health Condition That Resulted in a Medical Consultation.||at day 8, 15 and 29|||participants|||Number
835624|NCT01289522|Secondary|Biomarkers||two years||||||
835625|NCT01289522|Secondary|Overall Survival||1 year||||||
835626|NCT01289522|Secondary|Progression-free Survival||1 year||||||
835627|NCT01289522|Secondary|Best Overall Response|Tumor response is evaluated every 6 weeks according to RECIST criteria. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, Stable Disease (SD); Best overall Response = CR + PR + SD.|12 weeks|2 patients not assessable for response at 12 weeks||percentage of Best overall ORR||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835628|NCT01289522|Secondary|Grade 1 to 5 Toxicity|All grade 1 to 5 toxicity are registered during treatment. Patients have weekly clinical and biological examination.|24 weeks (average)|||percentage of events|||Number
835629|NCT01289522|Primary|Objective Tumor Response Rate|"The objective tumor response rate is evaluated every 6 weeks according to RECIST criteria.
Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by CT-scan or MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Objective Response (OR) = CR + PR."|12 weeks (after completion of the 4th cycle of chemotherapy)|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835630|NCT01289548|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of MDA in the Recipients|Plasma concentration of malondialdehyde (MDA) before the operation, 1hour, 4hours and 24hours after the artery unclamping in the recipients|within the first 24hours after the operation|All patients completed the trial and no dropout occured.||nmol/ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835631|NCT01289548|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of SOD in the Recipients|Plasma concentration of superoxide dismutase (SOD) before the operation, 1hour, 4hours and 24hours after the artery unclamping in the recipients|within 24hours after the operation|All patients completed the trial and no dropout occured.||U/ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835632|NCT01289548|Secondary|Urine Concentration of RBP Postoperatively in the Recipients|Urine concentration of retinol binding protein (RBP) 1hour, 4hours and 24hours after the artery unclamping in the recipients|within the first 24hours after the artery unclamping|All patients completed the trial and no dropout occured.||mg/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835633|NCT01289548|Secondary|Urine Concentration of RBP Preoperatively in the Recipients|Urine concentration of retinol binding protein (RBP) before the operation in the recipients|before the operation|No urine could be obtained from the other 46 patients because of anuria.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835634|NCT01289548|Secondary|Urine Concentration of NAG Postoperatively in Recipients|Urine concentration of N-acetyl-D-glucosaminidase (NAG) 1hour, 4hours and 24hours after the artery unclamping in the recipients|within the first 24hours after the artery unclamping|All patients completed the trial and no dropout occured.||U/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835635|NCT01289548|Secondary|Urine Concentration of NAG Preoperatively in Recipients|Urine concentration of N-acetyl-D-glucosaminidase (NAG) before the operation|before operation|Urine could not be obtained from the other 46 patients because of anuria.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
835636|NCT01289548|Secondary|Total Costs During the Hospitalization|Total costs from the admission to the discharge of the recipients|from the admission to the discharge of the patients|All the patients completed the study and no dropout occured.||RMB yuan||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835637|NCT01289548|Primary|Plasma Concentration of NGAL in the Recipients|Plasma concentration of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) before the operation and 24hours after the artery unclamping|within the first 24hours after the operation|All patients completed the trial and no dropout occured.||ng/ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835638|NCT01289548|Primary|Urinary Output of the Recipients Postoperatively|Accumulated urinary output 1hour, 4hours and 24hours after the artery unclamping and the urinary output on the 2nd and 3rd day after the operation|within the first 3days after the operation|All patients completed the trial and no dropout occured.||ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835639|NCT01289548|Secondary|Length of Postoperative Hospital Stay|time from the day of operation to the day of discharge for the recipients|before discharge|All the patients completed the study and no dropout occured.||day||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835640|NCT01289548|Secondary|Delayed Graft Function|Delayed Graft Function according to the clinical symptoms|before discharge|All the patients completed the study and no dropout occured.||participants|||Number
835648|NCT01290224|Secondary|Percent Change From Day 1 at Week 10 in CIPN Symptom Bother as Measured by 8 CIPN Symptom Questions|The intensity of symptom was measured in a likert scale: none at all (0), a little bit (1), quite a bit (2) and very much (3). Percent change from day 1 at week 10 for each patient was calculated and average of percentage was reported.|Day 1 and Week 10|||percentage of a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835649|NCT01290224|Secondary|Percentage of Reduction at Weeks 10 From Week 1 in CIPN Symptoms as Measured by the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) Peripheral Neuropathy Question|The NCCTG peripheral neuropathy question range: 0 (No numbness or tingling or pain in fingers and/or toes) to 10 (Numbness, tingling or pain in fingers and/pr toes as bad as you can imagine). The question assessed the intensity of numbness, tingling or pain in toes or feet in the past week.|Week 1 and Week 10|||percentage of reduction in symptom||Standard Deviation|Mean
835650|NCT01290224|Secondary|Percentage of Reduction at Days 10 From Day 1 in Each of the 12 CIPN Measurement Questions in the Daily Therapy Questionnaire|The 12 CIPN symptoms individual question range: 0 (none) to 10 (as bad as can be). The questions assessed the intensity of numbness, tingling, or pain in toes or feet that patients have had right now (RN), at its worst over the past 24 hours (WP24H), and on average over the past 24 hours (AvgP24H).|Day 1 and Day 10|||percentage of reduction in symptom||Standard Deviation|Mean
835651|NCT01290224|Secondary|Average Change of CIPN Symptoms Between Sham Procedure and Scrambler Therapy as Measured by Each Individual Question|The 12 CIPN symptoms individual question range: 0 (none) to 10 (as bad as can be). The questions assessed the intensity of numbness, tingling, or pain in toes or feet that patients have had right now (RN), at its worst over the past 24 hours (WP24H), and on average over the past 24 hours (AvgP24H). Averaged change between day 1 and day 2 across 10 patients was calculated.|On days 1 and 2|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835652|NCT01290224|Primary|Percentage of Patients Who Have at Least a 50% Reduction (i.e., Success) in at Least 1 of the First 12 Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN) Measurement Questions in the Pre/Post Therapy Questionnaire|CIPN measurement items score range: 0 (none) to 10 (as bad as can be). The questions assessed the intensity of numbness, tingling, or pain in toes or feet that patients have had right now, at its worst over the past 24 hours, and on average over the past 24 hours.|On days 1 and 2|||Percentage of Participants|||Number
835653|NCT01290263|Primary|AMG 386 Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT) [Cohort B Phase I]|A DLT is defined as an adverse event that (a) is related to the AMG 386 and/or bevacizumab with an attribution of possible, probable, or definite, and (b) occurs during and/or begins during the first 28 days of the study treatment, and (c) meets any of the following criteria: >= grade 3 thrombocytopenia; grade 4 neutropenia lasting > 7 days; grade 4 anemia lasting > 7 days despite transfusion or growth factors; febrile neutropenia if ANC<0.5x10^9/L; clinically significant grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity despite maximal medical therapy lasting > 7 days, with the exception of grade 3 proteinuria which was considered a DLT if lasting > 14 days; grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity resulting in study drug discontinuation; grade 4 non-hematologic toxicity; >= grade 1 new CNS hemorrhage; >= grade 2 non-CNS hemorrhage.|Participants were assessed weekly while on study; the observation period for DLT evaluation was the first 28 days of study treatment.|All phase I Cohort B participants who completed 28 days on study treatment were evaluable. A participant was replaceable if they are taken off of study treatment due to progressive disease or withdrawal from study during before they completed the 28 day DLT period.||participants|||Number
835654|NCT01290263|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) [Cohort A and Cohort B]|PFS based on Kaplan-Meier is defined as the time from study entry to the earliest documentation of disease progression or death. Progressive disease was established based on Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria (Wen et al JCO 2010).|Disease was assessed radiographically to document clinical progression every cycle on treatment and post-treatment every 8 weeks. On Cohort A and B participants were followed for progression up to 36 days and 166 days.|All participants who received at least one dose of the study drug were evaluable for PFS.||days||Full Range|Median
835655|NCT01290263|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) [Cohort A and Cohort B]|OS based on Kaplan-Meier is defined as the time from study entry to death or date last known alive.|Participants were followed long-term for survival every 3 to 4 months from the end of treatment until death or lost to follow-up. On Cohort A and B participants were followed up to 554 days and 442 days.|All participants who received at least one dose of the study drug were followed for OS.||days||Full Range|Median
835656|NCT01290263|Secondary|Best Radiographic Response [Cohort A and Cohort B]|Radiographic response was established based on Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria (Wen et al JCO 2010) with 5 potential categories: Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), Stable Disease (SD), Progressive disease (PD) and Unknown status. CR: disappearance of all enhancing lesions, stable or improved non-enhancing lesions, and stable or improved clinically. PR: >= 50% decrease in sum of perpendicular diameters of all measurable enhancing lesions, no progression of non-measurable disease, stable or improved non- enhancing lesions, and stable or improved clinically. PD: > 25% increase in sum of perpendicular diameters of all measurable enhancing lesions, significant increase of non-enhancing lesions, any new lesions, clear clinical deterioration, failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition. SD: does not qualify for CR, PR or PD, stable non-enhancing lesions, and stable clinically.|Disease was assessed radiographically for response every 8 weeks.|All participants who received at least one dose of the study drug were evaluable for response.||participants|||Number
835657|NCT01290263|Primary|AMG 386 Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) [Cohort B Phase I]|The MTD of weekly AMG 386 intravenously (IV) in combination with bevacizumab 10 mg/kg intravenously (IV) on days 1 and 15 of each 28 day cycle is determined by the number of participants who experience a dose limiting toxicity (DLT). See subsequent primary outcome measure for the DLT definition. The MTD is defined as the highest dose at which fewer than one-third of patients experience a DLT. If no DLTs are observed, the MTD is not reached but the highest dose received may be the Recommended Phase II Dose (RP2D).|Participants were assessed weekly while on study; the observation period for MTD evaluation was the first 28 days of study treatment.|All phase I Cohort B participants who received at least one dose of the study drug were evaluable for MTD. A participant was replaceable if they are taken off of study treatment due to progressive disease or withdrawal from study during before they completed the 28 day DLT period.||mg/kg intravenously on days 1 and 15|||Number
836255|NCT01286740|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48 (FDA Snapshot Analysis)|The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 48 was analyzed using the FDA snapshot analysis.|Week 48|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
835658|NCT01290263|Primary|6-Month Progression-Free Survival (PFS6) [Cohort A and Cohort B]|PFS6 is the proportion of patients remaining alive and progression-free at 6-months from study entry. Progressive disease was established based on Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria (Wen et al JCO 2010). RANO criteria has 5 potential categories: Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), Stable Disease (SD), Progressive disease (PD) and Unknown status. CR: disappearance of all enhancing lesions, stable or improved non-enhancing lesions, and stable or improved clinically. PR: >= 50% decrease in sum of perpendicular diameters of all measurable enhancing lesions, no progression of non-measurable disease, stable or improved non- enhancing lesions, and stable or improved clinically. PD: > 25% increase in sum of perpendicular diameters of all measurable enhancing lesions, significant increase of non-enhancing lesions, any new lesions, clear clinical deterioration, failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition. SD: d|6 months|||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835659|NCT01290341|Secondary|Effective Treatment and Mycological Cure of Interdigital Tinea Pedis at Week 6|"Effective treatment of interdigital tinea pedis which is defined as negative KOH and negative dermatophyte culture and erythema, scaling, and pruritus scores of 0 or 1 (corresponding to absent and mild respectively).
Mycological cure of interdigital tinea pedis which is defined as negative KOH and negative dermatophyte culture."|Visit 4/ Week 6|Full Analysis Set (FAS) using a Modified Intent to Treat (MITT) population.||percentage of subjects|||Number
835660|NCT01290341|Primary|Complete Cure of Interdigital Tinea Pedis|"The primary efficacy comparison between NAFT-600 gel and placebo will be based on the percentage of subjects at Week 6 with complete cure of interdigital tinea pedis.
Complete cure is defined as negative mycology results (dermatophyte culture and KOH) and the absence of erythema, scaling, and pruritus."|Visit 4/ Week 6|Full Analysis Set (FAS) defined as the subset of all subjects in the Safety Evaluation Set (SES) with a positive mycology culture at baseline and for whom the primary efficacy variable is available. This was a modified intent to treat principle because the culture results were not available before the start of treatment.||percentage of subjects|||Number
835661|NCT01290484|Primary|Change in Volume of Lymphatic Malformation|Participants were given sildenafil for 20 weeks. Participants weighing more than 20 kg were given 20 mg 3 times daily (60 mg/day). Participants weighing between 8 kg and 20 kg were given 10 mg 3 times daily (30 mg/day).|Baseline, 20 weeks|||percentage of volume change|||Number
835662|NCT01290523|Secondary|Radiographic Response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Version 1.1||6 months|||participants|||Number
835663|NCT01290523|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Adverse events of treatment with TheraSphere Yttrium-90 glass microspheres will be assessed within 6 months of treatment administration. Anticipated adverse events may include liver dysfunction, gastrointestinal ulcer formation, cholecystitis, pneumonitis, fatigue, nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain|6 months|||participants|||Number
835664|NCT01290536|Secondary|Radiographic Response|Radiographic response of treated lesions on cross-sectional imaging (computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging) following treatment with Yttrium-90 glass microspheres (TheraSphere) was assessed based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1. Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD), no change in target lesions; Progressive Disease (PD), increase in target lesions.|6 months after treatment|Response data are presented by primary disease sites: Colorectal (mCRC), Neuroendocrine (NET), and all other tumors. One patient with mCRC did not have follow-up cross-sectional imaging. Therefore, radiographic response data was available for 20 of 21 patients with mCRC.||participants|||Number
835665|NCT01290536|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Adverse effects of treatment with Yttrium-90 glass microspheres (TheraSphere) were collected prospectively for 6 months after each treatment administration.|6 months|||participants|||Number
835666|NCT01290614|Secondary|Number of Participants With PTH Measurement During the Study Period|The primary process outcome was measurement of PTH during the study period.|one year|||participants|||Number
835667|NCT01290614|Primary|Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP)|Average SBP for those with a baseline BP > 130/80|one year|Baseline blood pressure >130/80 mmHg||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835668|NCT01290627|Primary|Normalized Lateral Patella Contact Point Translation|"full extension to maximum flexion. The position of the patellar contact point was determined by locating the closest point to the femur on the patella throughout flexion. There are 2 patello-femoral contact points: a point on the medial aspect of the patella and a point on the lateral aspect of the patella. Throughout flexion, the lateral contact point generally moves closer to the top of the patella (hence, the positive value for the results). The translation of this contact point is normalized to report a ratio between -1 and 1. In other words, the distance the point has traveled compared to the total height of the patella. For example, if the patella is 8 cm in height and the point travels approximately 2 cm upwards during flexion, the value would be reported as +2/8 = +0.25. Definition of normalized: multiply (a series, function, or item of data) by a factor that makes the norm or some associated quantity such as an integral equal to a desired value (usually 1)."|Average post-operative time for LCS-PS group was 56 months. Average post-operative time for PS RP group was 55.7 months.|||ratio of patella height|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835669|NCT01290627|Primary|Normalized Medial Patella Contact Point Translation|"full extension to maximum flexion. The position of the patellar contact point was determined by locating the closest point to the femur on the patella throughout flexion. There are 2 patello-femoral contact points: a point on the medial aspect of the patella and a point on the lateral aspect of the patella. Throughout flexion, the medial contact point generally moves closer to the top of the patella (hence the positive value for the results). The translation of this contact point is normalized to report a ratio between -1 and 1. In other words, the distance the point has traveled compared to the total height of the patella. For example, if the patella is 8 cm in height and the point travels approximately 2 cm upwards during flexion, the value would be reported as +2/8 = +0.25. Definition of normalized: multiply (a series, function, or item of data) by a factor that makes the norm or some associated quantity such as an integral equal to a desired value (usually 1)."|Average post-operative time for LCS-PS group was 56 months. Average post-operative time for PS RP group was 55.7 months.|||ratio of patella height|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835670|NCT01290627|Primary|Patella Tilt With Respect to Femur|full extension to maximum flexion|Average post-operative time for LCS-PS group was 56 months. Average post-operative time for PS RP group was 55.7 months.|||degrees|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835671|NCT01290627|Primary|Patella Rotation With Respect to Femur|Patellar rotation from full extension to maximum flexion. A positive measurement of patellar rotation refers to positive flexion of the patella about the medial-lateral axis, where the patella component rotates so that the top of the patella rotates toward the femur and the bottom rotates away. Conversely, a negative measurement refers to negative flexion of the patella about this axis, where the patellar component rotates so that the top of the patella moves away from the femur and the bottom moves towards.|Average post-operative time for LCS-PS group was 56 months. Average post-operative time for PS RP group was 55.7 months.|||degrees|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835672|NCT01290627|Primary|Patella Flexion With Respect to Femur|Full extension to maximum flexion.|Average post-operative time for LCS-PS group was 56 months. Average post-operative time for PS RP group was 55.7 months.|||degrees|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835673|NCT01290640|Primary|In Vivo Angular Kinematics for Fixed-bearing and Rotating Platform (RP) TKA System During 4 Weight-bearing Activities.|"Angular kinematics for fixed bearing and rotating platform TKA system - Axial Rotation
The values that were reported indicate the rotation of the femur atop the tibial tray from the start of the activity to the end of the activity. If the femur rotated externally (posterior rollback of the lateral condyle, generally pivoted about the medial condyle), the number was reported as positive. If the femur rotated internally (anterior slide of the lateral condyle, generally pivoted about the medial condyle), the number was reported as negative."|March 2013|||degrees|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835674|NCT01290640|Primary|In Vivo Linear Kinematics for Fixed-bearing and Rotating Platform (RP) TKA System During 4 Weight-bearing Activities.|The values that were reported indicate the motion of the contact point from the start of the activity to the end of the activity. If the point translated forward (anteriorly) atop the tibial tray, the number was reported as positive. If the point traveled backwards (posteriorly) atop the tibial tray, the number was reported as negative.|March 2013|Per protocol.||mm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835675|NCT01290666|Secondary|Duration of Drainage Post Procedure||Follow up out to 12 months post procedure||||||
835676|NCT01290666|Primary|Fistula Closure||12 months post procedure|||participants|||Number
835677|NCT01290679|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Baseline to Week 60 (AUC60) and Week 72 (AUC72) for Time Missed From Work Due to Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection and Its Treatment|Hours missed from work because of HCV infection or its treatment was assessed by measuring the change from baseline in the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI): Hepatitis C questionnaire Absenteeism score (time missed from work). The possible WPAI WPAI absenteeism score range from baseline to Week 60 was 0-6000 and to Week 72 was 0-7200, with the higher scores indicating more impairment in WPAI absenteeism. The average WPAI absenteeism score from baseline to Week 60/72 was calculated for each participant and then the average of those values calculated for each treatment group. The area under the curve (AUC60/AUC72) over time from baseline to Week 60/72 was derived from a piecewise-linear model allowing the slopes to change at Week 4, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60. The null hypothesis was there is no statistically significant difference between the treatment arms in the area under the curve (AUC) from baseline to Week 72 (AUC72) in WPAI absenteeism score.|Baseline to Week 60 and Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Scores on a scale*weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835678|NCT01290679|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Baseline to Week 60 (AUC60) and Week 72 (AUC72) for Impairment in Daily Activities Due to Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection and Its Treatment|Impairment in daily activity was measured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI): Hepatitis C questionnaire, Question 6. The possible impairment in WPAI daily activity score range from baseline to Week 60 was 0-6000 and to Week 72 was 0-7200, with the higher scores indicating more impairment in daily activities. The average WPAI impairment in daily activity score from baseline to Week 72 was calculated for each participant and then the average of those values were calculated to show the average WPAI impairment in daily activity score for each treatment group. The null hypothesis was there is no statistically significant difference between the treatment arms in the AUC for the change from baseline to Week 72 (AUC72) in WPAI impairment in daily activity scores. The Table below shows the WPAI Impairment in daily activity scores at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) and the statistical analysis between treatment groups.|Baseline to Week 60 and Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Scores on a scale*weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835679|NCT01290679|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Baseline to Week 60 (AUC60) and Week 72 (AUC72) for Impairment in Overall Work Productivity Due to Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection and Its Treatment|Impairment in overall work productivity was measured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI): Hepatitis C questionnaire completed by participants throughout the study. WPAI Overall Productivity Scores ranged from 0% to 100% (higher WPAI scores indicated greater impairment in productivity). The average WPAI score from baseline to Week 72 was calculated for each participant and then the average of those values were calculated to show the average WPAI score for each treatment group. The null hypothesis was there is no statistically significant difference between the treatment groups in the AUC for the change from baseline to Week 72 (AUC72) in WPAI Productivity Scores. The Table below shows WPAI Productivity Scores at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) from the model used to calculate the AUC and the statistical comparison between treatment groups.|Baseline to Week 60 and Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Scores on a scale*weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835692|NCT01290679|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Failure|The table below shows percentage of participants with on-treatment failure defined as confirmed detectable Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels at actual end of treatment.|Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835706|NCT01290679|Secondary|Change From Baseline in log10 Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA)|The table below shows changes from baseline in log10 HCV RNA.|Day 3, Week 1, Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Error|Mean
835680|NCT01290679|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Baseline to Week 60 (AUC60) and Week 72 (AUC72) for the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) Total Scores|Study participants completed FSS questionnaires during study visits before treatment and throughout follow-up to rate the severity and impact of fatigue experienced in the preceding 2 weeks. FSS total scores are the average of nine questions with a range from 1 [no fatigue] to 7 [worst fatigue]; the possible score range from baseline to Week 60 would be 60-420 and to Week 72 would be 72-504. The average FSS total score from baseline to Week 60 and to Week 72 was calculated for each participant and then the average of those values were calculated to show the average FSS total score for each treatment group. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between the treatment arms in the FSS total score. The Table below shows the lease squares (LS) mean estimates of the area under the curve (AUC) at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) and the statistical comparison between treatment groups.|Baseline to Week 60 and Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Scores on a scale*weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835681|NCT01290679|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of TMC435: Systemic Clearance (CL)|The table below shows the mean (standard deviation) of CL values of TMC435. NOTE: the pre-dose CL values taken at Weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12 were averaged and then the mean values from all participants were averaged to provide the final value reported below.|At protocol-specified time points at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
835682|NCT01290679|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of TMC435: Predose Plasma Concentration (C0h)|The table below shows the mean (standard deviation) of C0h values of TMC435. NOTE: the timing of collection of blood samples post-dose for analysis at Week 2, 4, 8, and 12 was not specifed; only the interval was between blood samples was specified (ie, 2 samples collected 2 hours apart at Week 2, 4, 8, and 12).|Blood samples tested were taken before administration of TMC435 and at 2 random time points after dosing (taken atleast 2 hours apart from each other) at Week 2, 4, 8, and 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835683|NCT01290679|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of TMC435: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From the Time of Administration to 24 Hours After Dosing (AUC24h)|The table below shows the mean (standard deviation) values of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time of administration to 24 hours after dosing for TMC435.|At protocol-specified time points from the time of administration up to 24 hours after dosing at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835684|NCT01290679|Secondary|Median Time to Normalization of Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels|The table below shows the median time in weeks to normalization of ALT levels.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835685|NCT01290679|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Normalization of Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT)|The percentage of participants analyzed were those with baseline ALT values out of the normal range (ie, 164 of 257 participants in the TMC435 treatment group and 79 of 134 participants in the Placebo group had ALT values at baseline that were out of the normal range.). Normalization of ALT values means that ALT values out of the normal range returned to within the normal range.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835686|NCT01290679|Secondary|Time From End-of-treatment to Viral Relapse|The table below shows the mean number of days to viral relapse, defined as participants having confirmed detectable plasma level of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) during the follow-up period in participants with undetectable plasma HCV RNA (<25 IU/mL undetectable) at the end of treatment.|Up to Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||Standard Error|Mean
835687|NCT01290679|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Viral Breakthrough at Different Time Points|The table below shows the percentage of participants at different time points with viral breakthrough, defined as a confirmed increase of greater than 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) level from the lowest level reached (ie, lowest value measured in between baseline and current value), or a confirmed plasma HCV RNA level of greater than 100 IU/mL in participants whose plasma HCV RNA had previously been below the limit of quantification (25 IU/mL detectable) or undetectable (<25 IU/mL undetectable).|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835688|NCT01290679|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <1000 IU/mL|The table below shows the median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <1000 IU/mL.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835689|NCT01290679|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <100 IU/mL|The table below shows the median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <100 IU/mL.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835690|NCT01290679|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <25 IU/mL Undetectable|The table below shows the median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <25 IU/mL undetectable.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835691|NCT01290679|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <25 IU/mL Undetectable or Detectable|The table below shows the median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <25 IU/mL undetectable or detectable.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835693|NCT01290679|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Completed All Study Treatment at Week 24 Because of the Treatment Duration Rule|The table below shows the percentage of participants in the TMC435 treatment group who met the treatment duration rule (ie, having hepatitis C virus [HCV] ribonucleic acid [RNA] levels <25 IU/mL detectable or undetectable at Week 4 and undetectable HCV RNA levels at Week 12) and completed treatment with PegIFNα-2a and RBV for 24 weeks. Participants in the TMC435 treatment group not meeting RGT criteria and participants in the placebo group were treated with PegIFNα-2a and RBV treatment for 48 weeks.|Week 24|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835694|NCT01290679|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Viral Relapse|The table below shows the percentage of participants with viral relapse, defined as having confirmed detectable plasma level of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) during the follow-up period in participants with undetectable plasma HCV RNA (<25 IU/mL undetectable) at the end of treatment.|Up to Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835695|NCT01290679|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Viral Breakthrough|The table below shows the percentage of participants with viral breakthrough, defined as a confirmed increase of greater than 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) level from the lowest level reached (ie, lowest value measured in between baseline and current value), or a confirmed plasma HCV RNA level of greater than 100 IU/mL in participants whose plasma HCV RNA had previously been below the limit of quantification (25 IU/mL detectable) or undetectable (<25 IU/mL undetectable).|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835696|NCT01290679|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Partial Response|The table below shows the percentage of participants with partial response, defined as =>2 log10 reduction in Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) at Week 12 compared to baseline, but not achieving undetectable HCV RNA while on treatment.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835697|NCT01290679|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Null Response|The table below shows the percentage of participants with null response, defined as <2 log10 reduction in Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid at Week 12 compared to baseline.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835698|NCT01290679|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With in Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Levels >1000 IU/mL at Week 4|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group with HCV RNA levels >1000 IU/mL at Week 4.|Week 4|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835699|NCT01290679|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With <1 log10 Decrease in Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) From Baseline at Week 4|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group with <1 log10 HCV RNA decrease at Week 4.|Week 4|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835700|NCT01290679|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Extended Rapid Virologic Response (eRVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who had a eRVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus ribonucleic acid levels at Week 4 and 12.|Weeks 4 and 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835701|NCT01290679|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who had a cEVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus ribonucleic acid levels at Week 12.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835702|NCT01290679|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Early Virologic Response (EVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants who achieved an EVR, defined as having a change from baseline in plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid of 2 log10 at Week 12.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835703|NCT01290679|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Rapid Virologic Response (RVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a RVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels after receiving 4 weeks of treatment.|Week 4|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835704|NCT01290679|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Virologic Response at All Time Points|The table below shows the percentage of participants with Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) plasma levels below the limit of detection (ie, <25 IU/mL undetectable), the percentage of participants with a HCV RNA plasma level below the limit of quantification (ie, less than [<] 25 IU/mL detectable or undetectable), the percentage of participants with plasma levels of HCV RNA <100 IU/mL, the percentage of HCV-Infected participants with virologic responses of a greater than or equal to 2 log10 change from baseline in plasma levels of HCV RNA.|Day 3, Week 1, Week 2, Week 8, Week 16, Week 20, Week 28, Week 36, and Week 42|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835705|NCT01290679|Secondary|Actual Values of log10 Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA)|The table below shows actual values of log10 HCV RNA levels.|Day 3, Week 1, Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Error|Mean
835707|NCT01290679|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Sustained Virologic Response 4 Weeks After the Planned End of Treatment (SVR4)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR4, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels 4 weeks after planned end of treatment.|Week 28 or Week 52|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835708|NCT01290679|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks After the Planned End of Treatment (SVR24)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR24, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels 24 weeks after planned end of treatment.|Week 48 or Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835709|NCT01290679|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Sustained Virologic Response at Week 72 (SVRW72)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVRW72, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels at end of treatment (EOT) and at Week 72.|Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835710|NCT01290679|Primary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks After the Planned End of Treatment (SVR12)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR12, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid 12 weeks after planned end of treatment.|Week 36 or Week 60|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835711|NCT01290718|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|Tumor response was evaluated according to RECIST criteria (version 1.1). Progressive Disease was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. Participants without progression were censored at the date of last tumor assessment when non progression was documented.|Baseline and Day 1 of Cycles 4 and 8 and every 3 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or Death|Data were not analyzed due to early termination of the study.|||||
835712|NCT01290718|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) is the time from the date of randomization to the date of death irrespective of the cause of death.|Baseline and Day 1 of Cycles 4 and 8 and every 3 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or Death|Data were not analyzed due to early termination of the study.|||||
835713|NCT01290718|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression|Tumor response was evaluated according to RECIST criteria (version 1.1). Progressive Disease was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. Time to progression is the time from the date of first dose of drug administration to the date when first disease progression is recorded.|Baseline and Day 1 of Cycles 4 and 8 and every 3 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or Death|Data were not analyzed due to early termination of the study.|||||
835714|NCT01290718|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Response|The tumor response was measured according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria (Version 1.1).|Baseline and Day 1 of Cycles 4 and 8 and every 3 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or Death|Data were not analyzed due to early termination of the study.|||||
835715|NCT01290731|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Abnormal Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Baseline Who Achieved Normal ALT Levels at the End of Treatment (EOT)|The table below shows the number of participants with abnormal ALT levels at baseline (Day 1) who achieved normalization of ALT levels (defined as an ALT value less than or equal to the Upper Limit of Normality [ie, 40 IU/mL] at EOT). At baseline, 15/49 participants had abnormal ALT levels.|EOT (Week 24 or 48)|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Participants|||Number
835716|NCT01290731|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 24 Hrs (AUC24h) for TMC435|The table below shows the median (range) AUC24h values for TMC435 for all participants who received TMC435 for up to 12 weeks. “Overall” is the median exposure estimate using all available data for each participant in the study. Sparse blood samples were collected during the study (blood sampling times were 3 and 5 hours post- dose at Week 2 and Week 8 and pre-dose and 2 hours post-dose at Week 4 and Week 12).|Overall (blood sampling times were 3 and 5 hours post- dose at Week 2 and Week 8 and pre-dose and 2 hours post-dose at Week 4 and Week 12)|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed in the PK population defined as all participants from whom sparse blood samples were drawn and who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||ng.h/mL||Full Range|Median
835717|NCT01290731|Secondary|Plasma Concentrations of TMC435|The table below shows median (range) TMC435 predose plasma concentration (C0h) values and the TMC435 maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) values for all participants who received TMC435 for up to 12 weeks. “Overall” is the median exposure estimate using all available data for each participant in the study.Sparse blood samples were collected during the study (blood sampling times were 3 and 5 hours post- dose at Week 2 and Week 8 and pre-dose and 2 hours post-dose at Week 4 and Week 12).|Overall (blood sampling times were 3 and 5 hours post- dose at Week 2 and Week 8 and pre-dose and 2 hours post-dose at Week 4 and Week 12)|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed in the PK population defined as all participants from whom sparse blood samples were drawn and who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
835730|NCT01290796|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Impression of Improvement With Procedure at 36 Months|"Patient satisfaction was assessed using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGII) questionnaire. Patients were considered to be satisfied if they felt that their urinary tract conditio0n was very much better or much better than how it felt before the surgery."|0-36 Months|Patients who completed 36 month evaulations||percentage of participants|||Number
837971|NCT01309919|Secondary|Expulsions|Incidence of spontaneous IUD expulsion in the six months after insertion|6 months|We assessed the number of expelled IUDs for all participants who had an IUD placed||participants|||Number
835718|NCT01290731|Secondary|The Number of Participants Demonstrating Viral Relapse|The table below shows the number of participants who demonstrated viral relapse, defined as undetectable Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) at end of treatment (EOT) and detectable HCV RNA during follow-up or detectable HCV RNA at the time points of sustained virologic response (SVR) assessment . The incidence of viral relapse was calculated for participants with undetectable HCV RNA levels at EOT and with at least one follow-up HCV RNA measurement.|Up to 72 weeks|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Participants|||Number
835719|NCT01290731|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Viral Breakthrough|Viral breakthrough was defined as a confirmed increase of greater than 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) levels from the lowest level reached or a confirmed value of plasma HCV RNA of > 2.0 log10 IU/mL in particpants whose plasma HCV RNA level had previously been below 1.2 log10 IU/mL detectable or undetectable during the treatment period. The table below shows that no viral breakthrough was noted in any participants during the treatment period of the study.|Day 1 until end of treatment (EOT [Week 24 or 48])|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Participants|||Number
835720|NCT01290731|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Undetectable Plasma Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) During Treatment and at the End of Treatment (EOT)|The table below shows the percentage of participants with undetectable HCV RNA (defined as less than 1.2 log10 IU/mL during treatment at Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, and at EOT [Week 24 or 48]).|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, and at EOT|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835721|NCT01290731|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Greater Than or Equal to 2 log10 IU/mL Drop From Baseline in Plasma Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) at Each Time Point During Treatment and Follow-up|The table below shows the percentage of participants with greater than or equal to 2 log10 IU/mL drop from baseline in plasma HCV RNA at each time point during treatment, at the end of treatment (Week 24 or 48), and post-treatment follow-up.|Days 3 and 7, Weeks 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, 48, 60, 72, EOT, and follow-up (FU) Weeks 4, 12, and 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835722|NCT01290731|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With a Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks After the Actual End of Treatment (SVR24)|The table below shows the percentage of participants with a SVR24 defined as participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) at the end of treatment (Week 24 or 48) and at 24 weeks after the last dose of treatment (Week 48 or 72).|Week 48 or 60|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835723|NCT01290731|Primary|The Percentage of Participants With a Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks After the Actual End of Treatment (SVR12)|The table below shows the percentage of participants with an SVR12 defined as participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) at the end of treatment (Week 24 or 48) who also had undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) 12 weeks after the last dose of treatment (Week 36 or 60).|Week 36 or 60|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835724|NCT01290757|Secondary|AUC0-∞ of Free Dabigatran.|Area under the concentration-time curve of free dabigatran in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity. Adjusted for treatment, period and sequence (all fixed effects), and random subject effect.|60 hours|PKS||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835725|NCT01290757|Secondary|Cmax of Free Dabigatran in Plasma.|Adjusted for treatment, period and sequence (all fixed effects), and random subject effect.|60 hours|PKS||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835726|NCT01290757|Secondary|AUC0-tz of Free Dabigatran.|Area under the concentration-time curve of free dabigatran in plasma from time 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point. Adjusted for treatment, period and sequence (all fixed effects), and random subject effect.|60 hours|PKS||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835727|NCT01290757|Secondary|Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞) of Total Dabigatran.|Area under the concentration-time curve of total dabigatran in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity. Adjusted for treatment, period and sequence (all fixed effects), and random subject effect.|60 hours|PKS||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835728|NCT01290757|Primary|Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax) of Total Dabigatran in Plasma|Adjusted for treatment, period and sequence (all fixed effects), and random subject effect.|60 hours|PKS||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835729|NCT01290757|Primary|Area Under the Curve 0 to tz (AUC0-tz) of Total Dabigatran|Area under the concentration-time curve of total dabigatran in plasma from time 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point, adjusted for treatment, period and sequence (all fixed effects), and random subject effect.|60 hours|This subject set, the pharmacokinetic set (PKS), includes all subjects of the treated set who provide at least one evaluable observation for at least one of the three PK endpoints of total dabigatran, which is obtained in a period without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of bioequivalence.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
836256|NCT01286740|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 24 (FDA Snapshot Analysis)|The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 24 was analyzed using the FDA snapshot analysis.|Week 24|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
835731|NCT01290796|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Impression of Improvement With Procedure at 12 Months|"Patient satisfaction was assessed using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGII) questionnaire. Patients were considered to be satisfied if they felt that their urinary tract condition was very much better or much better than how it felt before the surgery."|0-12 Months|Patients who completed 12 month evaulations||percentage of participants|||Number
835732|NCT01290796|Secondary|Change in Incontinent Impact Questionnaire at 36 Months|Mean change in overall IIQ-7 summary score (range 0 - 100). Scores on the IIQ-7 range from 0 (best outcome) to 100 (worst outcome). For this outcome measure, IIQ-7 at baseline was compared to that administered at 36-months post-surgery.|0-36 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835733|NCT01290796|Secondary|Change in Incontinent Impact Questionnaire at 12 Months|Mean change in overall IIQ-7 summary score (range 0 - 100). Scores on the IIQ-7 range from 0 (best outcome) to 100 (worst outcome). For this outcome measure, IIQ-7 at baseline was compared to that administered at 12-months post-surgery.|0-12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835734|NCT01290796|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Showed Improvement in Self-reported SUI Symptoms at 36 Months|Improvement was defined as a 25-point decrease (improvement) in Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI-6) score (Range: 0 - 100).|0-36 Months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835735|NCT01290796|Secondary|Change in Post-operative Pain|"Mean change in Overall McCarthy Surgical Pain Scale from Day 0 to Day 7. McCarthy Pain Scale is a 50 millimeter line with No Pain Sensation noted at the 0 mm mark and Most Intense Pain Imaginable noted at the 50 mm mark. Each day, subjects are asked to mark their level of pain somewhere along the line. Change in pain level is reported in millimeters."|0-7 days|||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
835736|NCT01290796|Secondary|Operative, Perioperative and Long-term Complications Through 36 Months|Percentage of Patients with Procedure and/or Device Related Adverse Events through 36 months|Day 15 through 36-months post procedure|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835737|NCT01290796|Secondary|Operative, Perioperative and Long-Term Complications Perioperatively|Percentage of Patients with Procedure and/or Device Related Adverse Events Perioperatively|1-15 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835738|NCT01290796|Secondary|Operative, Perioperative and Long-Term Complications During Operative Procedure|Percentage of Patients with Procedure and/or Device Related Adverse Events During the Operative Procedure|1 day|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835739|NCT01290796|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Who Showed Improvement in Self-reported SUI Symptoms at 12 Months|Improvement was defined as a 25-point decrease (improvement) in Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI-6) score (Range: 0 - 100).|12-months post procedure|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835740|NCT01290796|Primary|Percentage of Patients Free of Stress Urinary Incontinence|Percentage of patients who are free of stress urinary incontinence, as assessed by a negative (-) Cough Stress Test (CST) and no surgical retreatment, at the 12 month study visit.|12-months post surgical procedure|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835741|NCT01290822|Secondary|Interventricular Synchrony||13 minutes of testing; performed before CPB for allograft receipt|Results could not be analyzed due to poor enrollment and lack of data.|||||
835742|NCT01290822|Secondary|Peak RV dP/dt||13 minutes of testing; performed before CPB for allograft receipt|Results could not be analyzed due to poor enrollment and lack of data.|||||
835743|NCT01290822|Secondary|Peak LV dP/dt||13 minutes of testing; performed before CPB for allograft receipt|Results could not be analyzed due to poor enrollment and lack of data.|||||
835744|NCT01290822|Secondary|Interatrial Delay (Between Right Atrium and Left Atrium)|Results could not be analyzed due to poor enrollment and lack of data.|13 minutes of testing; performed before CPB for allograft receipt||||||
835745|NCT01290822|Secondary|Atrial Latency||13 minutes of testing; performed before CPB for allograft receipt|Results could not be analyzed due to poor enrollment and lack of data.|||||
835746|NCT01290822|Primary|Cardiac Output|The primary endpoint of this study compares cardiac output between AAI pacing and optimal BiVP for DCM and ICM groups separately.|13 minutes of testing; performed before CPB for allograft receipt|Results could not be analyzed due to poor enrollment and lack of data.|||||
835747|NCT01290887|Secondary|Participants With a Positive Anti-Reslizumab Antibody Status at Baseline, Weeks 24, 48, 72, 96, End of Study, Endpoint and Overall|"Blood samples were collected for the determination of anti-drug antibody (ADAs) before study drug infusion at baseline and every 24 weeks until end of treatment visit or early withdrawal. Serum samples were analyzed by Teva (Teva Biopharmaceuticals USA, Rockville, Maryland, USA) using a validated homogeneous solution based bridging enzyme linked immune sorbent assay (Mikulsis et al 2011, Qui et al 2010). The analysis of anti-reslizumab antibody in patient serum consists of 3 tiers of assays for screening, confirmation, and titer analysis. If a participant had a treatment-emergent ADA response (ie, ADA positive at any of the postdose time points but negative at the predose time point) or if there was a treatment-boosted ADA response (defined as a greater than 4-fold increase from a positive baseline ADA response (Shankar et at 2014), the participant was classified as overall ADA positive.
Predose samples for the reslizumab-experienced participants came from the previous studies."|Baseline, Weeks 24, 48, 72, 96, End of Study, Endpoint and Overall|Safety analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes||participants|||Number
835748|NCT01290887|Secondary|Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) Total Score at Weeks 24, 48, 72, 96, End of Study and Endpoint|"The AQLQ is a 32-item instrument administered as a self-assessment (Juniper et al 1992). The questionnaire is divided into 4 domains: activity limitation, symptoms, emotional function, and environmental stimuli. Patients were asked to recall their experiences during the last 2 weeks and to respond to each question on a 7-point scale (1=severe impairment, 7=no impairment). The overall AQLQ score is the mean of all 32 responses. Five of the activity questions were patient-specific, which means that each patient identified and scored 5 activities in which the patient was limited by asthma; these 5 activities were identified at the first visit and retained for all subsequent follow-up visits."|Weeks 24, 48, 72, 96, End of Study and Endpoint|Safety analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835759|NCT01290913|Secondary|Number of Participants That Tolerated Rapid Oral Peanut Desensitization to a Dose of 4,000 mg of Peanut Flour.|To tolerate refers to the ability of the patient to ingest the final challenge of 4000mg peanut flour, with either no or mild symptoms.|after 7-8 wks of desensitization|||participants|||Number
835749|NCT01290887|Secondary|Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, End of Study and Endpoint|The ACQ is a 7-item instrument that measures asthma control (Juniper et al 1999). Six questions are self-assessments; the seventh item, completed by a member of the study staff, is the result of the patient's FEV1 measurement. Each item has 7 possible answers on a scale of 0 to 6, and the total score is the mean of all responses (the total scale is therefore 0-6). A higher score is an indication of poorer asthma control.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, end of study and endpoint|Safety analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835750|NCT01290887|Secondary|Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, End of Study and Endpoint|The ASUI is an 11-item instrument designed to assess the frequency and severity of asthma symptoms and side effects, weighted by patient preferences (Revicki et al 1998). ASUI is a utility score that ranges from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating better asthma control.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, end of study and endpoint|Safety analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835751|NCT01290887|Primary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Vital Signs Values|"Data represents participants with PCS vital sign values during any of the during treatment visits or the follow-up visit.
Significance criteria
Sitting heart rate-high: >100 and increase of >= 30 beats/min (all ages)
Sitting heart rate-low: <50 and decrease of >=30 beats/min
Sitting systolic blood pressure (BP)-high: >130 and increase of >=30 mmHg (ages 12-17)
Systolic BP-low: <90 and decrease of >=30 mmHg (ages >=18)
Systolic BP-high: >160 and increase of >=30 mmHg (ages >=18)
Sitting diastolic BP-low: <55 and decrease of >=12 mmHg (ages 12-17)
Diastolic BP-high: >85 and increase of >=12 mmHg (ages 12-17)
Diastolic BP-low: <50 and decrease of >=12 mmHg (ages >=18)
Diastolic BP-high: >100 and increase of >=12 mmHg (ages >=18)
Respiration rate: >20 and increase of >=10 breaths/minute (ages 12-17)
Respiration rate: >24 and increase of >=10 breaths/minute (ages >=18)
Body temperature-low: <96.5° Fahrenheit (all ages)
Body temp-high: >100.5° F (all ages)"|Week 4 to Week 65|Safety analysis set, including participants who contributed to the analysis||participants|||Number
835752|NCT01290887|Secondary|Average Daily Use of Short-Acting Beta-Agonist (SABA)Therapy at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, End of Study and Endpoint|SABA are used for quick relief of asthma symptoms. To measure SABA use, at each clinical visit participants were asked to recall their usage of SABA therapy within the last 3 days of the scheduled visit. If usage was confirmed, the number of puffs used was recorded. For the purpose of summaries, an average daily usage was evaluated by dividing the total number of puffs recorded over 3 days by 3.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, end of study and endpoint|Safety analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes||# puffs/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
835753|NCT01290887|Secondary|Forced Expiratory Flow at 25% to 75% Forced Vital Capacity (FEF 25%-75%) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, End of Study and Endpoint|The FEF 25%-75% is the force expiratory flow at 25% to 75% of the Forced Vital Capacity (FVC), measured in liters/second|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, end of study and endpoint|Safety analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes||liters/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
835754|NCT01290887|Secondary|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, End of Study and Endpoint|The FVC is the volume of air that can be forcibly blown out after full inspiration, measured in liters.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, end of study and endpoint|Safety analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
835755|NCT01290887|Secondary|Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume In 1 Second (% Predicted FEV1) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, End of Study and Endpoint|The percent predicted FEV1 is the ratio of the volume of air expired in the first second of a forced expiration to the patient's predicted FEV based on a similar population without asthma. Percent predicted lung function values were transcribed directly from the lung function report to the CRF, without any calculation by Teva.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, end of study and endpoint|Safety analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes||percentage of predicted FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
835756|NCT01290887|Secondary|Forced Expiratory Volume In 1 Second (FEV1) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, End of Study and Endpoint|FEV1 is a standard measurement of air movement in the lungs of patients with asthma obtained from pulmonary function tests. It is the volume of air expired in the first second of a forced expiration using a spirometer.|Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, end of study and endpoint|Safety analysis set of participants with assessments at stated timeframes||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
835757|NCT01290887|Primary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Abnormal Lab Values|"Data represents participants with potentially clinically significant (PCS) abnormal serum chemistry, hematology, and urinalysis values on any of the during treatment lab analyses.
Significance criteria:
Blood urea nitrogen: >=10.71 mmol/L
Creatinine: >=177 μmol/L
Uric acid: M>=625, F>=506 μmol/L
Aspartate aminotransferase: >=3*upper limit of normal (ULN). Normal range is 10-43 U/L
Alanine aminotransferase: >=3*ULN. Normal range is 10-40 U/L
GGT = gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase: >= 3*upper limit of normal. Normal range is 5-49 U/L.
Total bilirubin: >=34.2 μmol/L
White blood cells- low: <=3.0*10^9/L
White blood cells-high: >=20*10^9/L
Hemoglobin: M<=115, F<=95 g/dL
Hematocrit: M<0.37, F<0.32 L/L
Platelets: >=700*10^9/L
Absolute neutrophil count: <=1.0*10^9/L
Eosinophils: >=10
Urinalysis: ketones, blood, glucose, and total protein: >=2 unit increase from baseline"|Weeks 4, 8, 24 and 48|Safety analysis set, including participants who contributed to the analysis||participants|||Number
835758|NCT01290887|Primary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events|An adverse event was defined in the protocol as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Severity was rated by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate and severe, with severe= an inability to carry out usual activities. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator. Serious AEs include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, OR an important medical event that jeopardized the patient and required medical intervention to prevent the previously listed serious outcomes.|Day 1 (post-dose) to Week 65. The endpoint for adverse events was the last postbaseline observation, which included the 90 day follow-up visit.|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
835760|NCT01290913|Primary|Number of Participants That Tolerated Rapid Oral Peanut Desensitization to a Dose of 500 mg Peanut Flour (Cumulative Dose, 1,000 mg)|To tolerate refers to the ability of the patient to ingest the challenge dose of 500 mg peanut flour (1000 mg cumulatively) with either no or mild symptoms.|First day of desensitization|||participants|||Number
835761|NCT01290952|Secondary|Number of Patients With Secondary Combined Endpoint (i.e. With One or More of the Following)|"Number of patients with one of more of the following:
Post-operative Atrial Fibrillation
IAPB (Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump) insertion and low cardiac output syndrome
Ventilation > 24h
Sternal wound infection or dehiscence"|30 days|||participants|||Number
835762|NCT01290952|Primary|Number of Patients With Post-operative Combined Endpoint (i.e. With One or More of the Following)|"Number of patients with one or more of the following:
Operative Mortality
Myocardial Infarction
Postoperative neurological complications
Renal failure
ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome)
Bleeding"|30 days|||participants|||Number
835763|NCT01290978|Secondary|Skin Assessment on Ioban, ActiGard, Steri-Drape 2 Application Sites Respectively|Visual assessment on skin after samples were removed. scale: 0 (no skin reaction), 4 (severe skin reaction)|30 minutes|The number of participants was determined to provide 80% power to detect a difference of 20% for the drape by prep comparisons||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835764|NCT01290978|Primary|Drape Adhesion|The peel force to remove the sample|30 minutes|Data analysis per protocol||grams-force||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
835765|NCT01291017|Secondary|Grade of Study Drug Toxicity|The number of all toxicities and grades 3 and 4 (per CTCAE v3.0) toxicities that occured during the administration of the drug and during the follow up period.|24 months|||Events|||Number
835766|NCT01291017|Secondary|Plasma Levels|Plasma levels of p16, phosphorylated RB and cyclin d1 in blood.|6 months|4 of the 16 samples were tested by protein immunoblot (Western blot), and due to the test not being sensitive enough to detect p16, phosphorylated RB or cyclin D1 protein bands in any of the samples, the decision was made not to purse this testing any further.||Arbitrary Units|||Number
835767|NCT01291017|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Median progression-free survival.|12 months|||Weeks||Standard Error|Median
835768|NCT01291017|Secondary|Overall Survival|Median overall survival|14 months|||weeks||Standard Error|Median
835769|NCT01291017|Primary|Tumor Response by Direct RECIST Measurement|Response is a decrease in the sum of the longest diameters of the target lesions by more than 30% compared to the baseline.|6 months|||participants|||Number
835770|NCT01291056|Primary|Luteal Cycle Total Physical Score for Calendar of Premenstrual Experiences (COPE) Self Assessment|To identify physical symptoms experienced by women taking clomiphene citrate versus placebo for superovulation in a prospective setting.|1 year|The scale incorporates physical, behavioral and mental symptoms. Each participant will rate the symptom(s) from zero to three based off severity. Symptoms with zero means that no symptoms are present. Symptoms with three means that the symptoms are severe. Physical symptoms were calculated to give the total score. Range 0 -75 per cycle day.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
835771|NCT01291056|Primary|Luteal Cycle Total Behavioral Score for Calendar of Premenstrual Experiences (COPE) Self Assessment|To identify behavioral symptoms experienced by women taking clomiphene citrate versus placebo for superovulation in a prospective setting.|1 year|The scale incorporates physical, behavioral and mental symptoms. Each participant will rate the symptom(s) from zero to three based off severity. Symptoms with zero means that no symptoms are present. Symptoms with three means that the symptoms are severe. Range 0 -75 per cycle day.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
835772|NCT01291056|Primary|Follicular Cycle Total Physical Score for Calendar of Premenstrual Experiences (COPE) Self Assessment|To identify physical symptoms experienced by women taking clomiphene citrate versus placebo for superovulation in a prospective setting.|1 Year|The scale incorporates physical, behavioral and mental symptoms. Each participant will rate the symptom(s) from zero to three based off severity. Symptoms with zero means that no symptoms are present. Symptoms with three means that the symptoms are severe. Range 0 -75 per cycle day.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
835773|NCT01291056|Primary|Follicular Cycle Total Behavioral Score for Calendar of Premenstrual Experiences (COPE) Self Assessment|To identify behavioral symptoms experienced by women taking clomiphene citrate versus placebo for superovulation in a prospective setting.|1 year|The scale incorporates physical, behavioral and mental symptoms. Each participant will rate the symptom(s) from zero to three based off severity. Symptoms with zero means that no symptoms are present. Symptoms with three means that the symptoms are severe. Range 0 -75 per cycle day.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
835774|NCT01291108|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Worse Eye IOP|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. The worse eye IOP refers to eye with the worse baseline IOP, which is determined as the eye with the higher mean diurnal IOP at baseline. If both eyes have the same mean diurnal IOP at baseline, the right eye is designated as the worse eye. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement) and a positive number change from baseline indicates an increase in IOP (worsening). Data are recorded at Hours 0, 4, 8, and 12.|Baseline, Day 57|Modified Intent to Treat: all randomized and treated patients who had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IOP measurement||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
835775|NCT01291108|Primary|Change From Baseline in Average Eye IOP|IOP is a measurement of the fluid pressure inside the eye. The average of the 2 eyes are used for the analyses. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in IOP (improvement) and a positive number change from baseline indicates an increase in IOP (worsening). Data are recorded at Hours 0, 4, 8, and 12.|Baseline, Day 57|Modified Intent to Treat: all randomized and treated patients who had a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline IOP measurement||Millimeters of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
835776|NCT01291160|Primary|Number of 100% Wound Closure||before or at week 12|Analyzed the per-protocol population||percentage of patients|||Number
835777|NCT01291173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Score at Week 11|The SF-12 is a 12-item self-report questionnaire that is a subset of the SF-36 Health Survey. The survey captures physical and mental health. There are 8 subscales. Four of the subscales has one-item each; the other 4 have two-items each. For each subscale, a mean value was first computed and transformed to a position on a scale ranging from 0-100 (Z-transformation). The aggregate total scores are then transformed into a mean value ranging from 0 (lowest level of health) to 100 (highest level of health).|Baseline and week 11|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835778|NCT01291173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) Total Score at Week 11|The BIS-11 is a self-reported 30-item questionnaire that measures impulsiveness using a 4-point Likert scale (rarely/never = 1, occasionally = 2, often = 3, almost always/always = 4). A Total Impulsivity score is calculated by summing the scores for each item. Possible scores range from 30 – 120. Higher scores indicate increased impulsiveness.|Baseline and week 11|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835779|NCT01291173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Binge Eating Scale (BES) Score at Week 11|The BES is a 16-item self-reported questionnaire that is designed to assess behavioral, affective, and attitudinal components of the subjective experience of binge eating. The items are summed, with possible scores ranging from 0 to 46. A score of 27 or higher indicates severe binge-eating problems, and a score of 17 or lower designates no binge-eating problems.|Baseline and week 11|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835780|NCT01291173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Eating Inventory Score at Week 11|The Eating Inventory also known as the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire is a 51-item self-reported questionnaire intended to assess 3 dimensions of eating behavior: cognitive restraint of eating, disinhibition, and hunger. Cognitive restraint of eating consists of 20 items, disinhibition consists of 16 items, and hunger consists of 15 items. Each item scores either 0 or 1 point for a total score of 0-20 for cognitive restraint of eating, 0-16 for disinhibition, and 0-15 for hunger. A higher score is better for cognitive restraint of eating and lower scores are better for disinhibition and hunger.|Baseline and week 11|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835781|NCT01291173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) Score at Week 11|The HAM-A is a rating scale developed to quantify the severity of anxiety symptomatology. It consists of 14 items, each defined by a series of symptoms. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale, ranging from 0 (not present) to 4 (severe) with a total score range of 0–56, where <17 indicates mild severity, 18–24 mild to moderate severity, and 25-30 moderate to severe, and 31-56 severe anxiety.|Baseline and week 11|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835782|NCT01291173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Montgomery-Ǻsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Score at Week 11|MADRS is a validated, 10-item rating scale with each item being scored on a scale from 0-6 with a total score ranging from 0-60. Lower scores indicate a decreased severity of depression.|Baseline and week 11|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835783|NCT01291173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale Modified for Binge Eating (YBOCS-BE) Total Score at Week 11|The YBOCS-BE measures the obsession of binge-eating thoughts and compulsiveness of binge-eating behaviors. The scale is a clinician-rated, 10-item scale, each item rated from 0 (no symptoms) to 4 (extreme symptoms). Total scores range from 0 to 40. A score of 0-7 is sub-clinical; 8-15 is mild; 16-23 is moderate; 24-31 is severe; and 32-40 is extreme.|Baseline and week 11|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835784|NCT01291173|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement on Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) at Up to 11 Weeks|Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) consists of a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Improvement is defined as a score of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) on the scale.|Up to 11 weeks|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment. (Not all subjects in the FAS had an assessment for this outcome.)||Percentage of participants|||Number
835785|NCT01291173|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Clinical Global Impression - Severity of Illness (CGI-S) at Up to 11 Weeks|CGI-S assesses the severity of the subject's condition on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill)|up to 11 weeks|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment. (Not all subjects in the FAS had an assessment for this outcome.)||Percentage of participants|||Number
835786|NCT01291173|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Clinical Global Impression - Severity of Illness (CGI-S) at Baseline|CGI-S assesses the severity of the subject's condition on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill)|Baseline|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment. (Not all subjects in the FAS had an assessment for this outcome.)||Percentage of participants|||Number
835787|NCT01291173|Secondary|4-Week Binge Response|Subjects are free from binge episodes for 4 weeks.|Last 28 days on study|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||Participants|||Number
835788|NCT01291173|Secondary|1-Week Binge Response, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|The 1-week binge response was defined as either a 1-week remission (a 100% reduction of binge episodes from baseline [ie, a cessation of binge eating behavior]), or a marked response (75 to <100% reduction in binge episodes from baseline), or a moderate response (50 to <75% reduction in binge episodes from baseline), or a negative/minimal response (<50% reduction in binge episodes from baseline). The 1-week response was determined at the end of the study utilizing a LOCF approach.|Last 7 days on study|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||Participants|||Number
835789|NCT01291173|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Number of Binge Episodes Per Week at Up to 11 Weeks|The number of binge episodes per week as assessed by clinical interview based on subject diary.|Baseline and up to 11 weeks|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||Binge Episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
835790|NCT01291173|Primary|Change From Baseline in Log Transformed Binge Days Per Week at Week 11|Binge day is defined as a day during which at least 1 binge episode occurs.|Baseline and week 11|Full Analysis Set defined as all subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of investigational product and who had 1 post-baseline primary efficacy assessment.||Log days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835791|NCT01291225|Secondary|Playground and Farm Safety Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices Composite Scores|The investigators hypothesize that the improvement in the playground safety Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) survey composite scores and farm audits from the baseline in year 1 to the follow-up in year 3 will be significantly greater for parents residing in Ross County than for parents in the non-intervention counties (Morrow and Pickaway).The playground safety KAP survey consisted of 7 items and individuals could receive a summed score of 0-7, with a score of 7 indicating mastery of the material.|Year 1 baseline to Year 3 follow-up|||composite score||Standard Deviation|Mean
835792|NCT01291225|Primary|Change in Playground Hazards|The investigators hypothesize that the decrease in the number of identified playground hazards (comparing each playground to itself from the year 1 baseline survey to the year 3 follow-up survey utilizing a playground hazards checklist) will be significantly greater for the intervention playgrounds compared with non-intervention playgrounds in Circleville, Pickaway Co. The percentage increase in the number of playgrounds with adequate safety surfacing will be used as a proxy for playground hazardousness.|Year 1 baseline to year 3 follow-up|||% increase playgrounds w/surfacing|||Number
835793|NCT01291264|Primary|Subject's Infected-status as Determined by the Nucleic Acid Amplification Assays Performed.|This is a single-point prevalence assessment done when subjects present at the STD clinic for routine STD screening. Subjects are not followed beyond the clinic visit.|1 day - (At clinic visit)|per protocol||Positive test result|||Number
835794|NCT01291277|Primary|Proportion of Patients With Eradication of Esophageal Varices||At 4 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
835795|NCT01291498|Secondary|Voice Morbidity|Voice Handicap Index. 30 questions rated on a five point scale from 'never' to 'always' and an overall score from 1 'normal' to 10 'severely impaired'|Up to one year post-treatment|||units on a scale|||Number
835796|NCT01291498|Secondary|Eucalcaemia|Ca in plasma|Six weeks post-treatment.Six month data were also intended to be reported, however, six month data were not analyzed because only one subject was entered and this subject was withdrawn from the study before six months after treatment.|Six month data were also intended to be reported, however, six month data were not analyzed because only one subject was entered and this subject was withdrawn from the study before six months after treatment.||mmol/L|||Number
835797|NCT01291498|Primary|Eucalcaemia|Calcium in the blood is measured from venepuncture|12 months post-treatment|The primary endpoint was not analysed because only one subject was entered and this subject was withdrawn from the study before 12 months after treatment.|||||
835798|NCT01291784|Secondary|JAK2V617F Allele Burden|Investigate exploratory markers, hematopoietic cells, for their ability to predict responsiveness to treatment with GC1008. Analysis of percentage of mutant alleles in hematopoietic stem cells.|6 months|||percentage of mutant alleles|||Number
835799|NCT01291784|Secondary|Peripheral Blood CD34+|Investigate exploratory markers for their ability to predict responsiveness to treatment with GC1008.|6 months|||percentage of hematopoietic stem cells|||Number
835800|NCT01291784|Secondary|European Consensus Fibrosis Grade|"To assess the clinical response to therapy with GC1008 by International Working Group (IWG) criteria and measure the change in degree of bone marrow fibrosis (BMF) assessed by European consensus grading system.
This scheme consists of a qualitative (reticulin or collagen) and quantitative evaluation of bone marrow fibrosis and distinguishes four increasing categories, ranging from MF-0, which corresponds to normal bone marrow, to MF-3, in which coarse bundles of collagen fibrosis are identifiable with significant osteosclerosis."|6 months|||units on a scale|||Number
835801|NCT01291784|Secondary|Bauermeister Scale|"To assess the clinical response to therapy with GC1008 by International Working Group (IWG) criteria and measure the change in degree of bone marrow fibrosis (BMF) assessed by Bauermeister scale.
Bauermeister scale: 0, no demonstrable reticulin fibers; 1, occasional fine individual fibers and foci of a fine-fiber network; 2, fine fiber network throughout most of the section, but no coarse fibers; 3, diffuse fiber network with scattered thick coarse fibers, but no mature collagen; and 4, diffuse, often coarse fiber network with areas of collagen."|6 months|||units on a scale|||Number
835802|NCT01291784|Primary|Safety and Tolerability|"To assess the safety and tolerability of GC1008 in patients with primary myelofibrosis (PMF) or post-polycythemia vera/essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis (Post-PV/ET MF).
A total of 9 AEs determined by the investigator to be at least possibly related to GC1008 occurred during the study."|28 days|||events|||Number
835803|NCT01292005|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Needed an Intensive Care Unit Stay||30 days, or until dismissal, whichever came first|||participants|||Number
835804|NCT01292005|Secondary|Length of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Stay||30 days or until dismissal date, whichever occurs earlier|||Days||Full Range|Median
835805|NCT01292005|Secondary|Length of Hospital Stay||30 days or until dismissal date, whichever occurs earlier|||days||Full Range|Median
835806|NCT01292005|Secondary|Number of Patients With Lengthy Hospital Stays|"Lengthy was defined as either greater than 4 days or greater than 10 days."|30 days or until dismissal date, whichever occurs earlier|||participants|||Number
835807|NCT01292005|Secondary|Number Of Subjects With New Onset Pancreatic Necrosis During Hospitalization||1 week or until dismissal date whichever occurs earlier|||participants|||Number
835808|NCT01292005|Secondary|Number Of Subjects With New Onset Organ Failure During Hospitalization||1 week or until dismissal date whichever occurs earlier.|||participants|||Number
835809|NCT01292005|Primary|Changes in Interleukin (IL) IL-8|Normal value range for IL-8 = 0 - 5 pg/ml.|baseline, Day 1, Day 3|||pg/ml||Full Range|Median
835810|NCT01292005|Primary|Change in Interleukin (IL) IL-6|Normal value range for IL-6 = 0 - 5 pg/ml.|baseline, Day 1, Day 3|||pg/ml||Full Range|Median
835811|NCT01292005|Primary|Change in Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF)-Alpha|Normal value range for TNF alpha = 0 - 22 pg/ml.|baseline, Day 1, Day 3|||pg/ml||Full Range|Median
835812|NCT01292005|Primary|Change in C-Reactive Protein (CRP)|C-reactive protein is produced by the liver. The level of CRP rises when there is inflammation throughout the body. The normal value range for CRP = 1-10 mg/L.|baseline, Day 1, Day 3|||mg/L||Full Range|Median
835813|NCT01292057|Primary|Total Number of Drinks Consumed in Bar Lab|"This measure refers to a bar lab paradigm in which individuals received an initial priming drink of alcohol, targeted to produce a breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) of 30 mg%, and could then choose to consume up to 8 additional drinks, each targeted to produce a BrAC of 15 mg%, during the subsequent 2 hours. Thus, the total number of drinks consumed could range between 0 and 8."|2 hours during the bar lab paradigm|||bar lab drinks||Standard Error|Mean
835814|NCT01292057|Primary|Total Number of Drinks Per Day During Natural (Usual Environment) Conditions|"Natural alcohol consumption period -- drinks per day consumed during the 6-day observation period"|6-day observation period|||standard drinks||Standard Error|Mean
835815|NCT01292070|Primary|Difference in the Doses of GFD and CAT Required to Elicit a Cutaneous Reaction Demonstrated by a Wheal Greater Than or Equal to 10 mm With Surrounding Erythema|Difference in the doses of human Fcgamma1-Fel d1 (cat allergen) fusion protein (GFD) and standardized cat hair allergenic extract (CAT) required to elicit a wheal ≥ 10 mm with surrounding erythema.|up to 3 hours after the last injection of GFD|The experimental protein (human Fcgamma1-Fel d1 fusion protein (GFD)) and the control protein (standardized cat hair allergenic extract (CAT)) elicited comparable reactivity in the first four participants dosed; thus, the trial was discontinued for futility and the primary endpoint was not evaluated|||||
835816|NCT01292135|Secondary|Progression Free Survival Rate at 12 Months|Criteria for progression are as outlined in the IWCLL 2008 criteria (Hallek 2008) and as assessed by investigator, e.g. progression defined as a 50% increase in lymph node size.|From first dose of any study medication to 12 months after first dose to progressive disease or death or the last clinical assessment before receiving new anticancer therapy or loss to follow-up, whichever occured the earliest.|||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835817|NCT01292135|Secondary|Sustained Hematologic Improvement in Subjects With Neutropenia, Anemia, or Thrombocytopenia at Baseline||From first response assessment to last response assessment. Participants were followed with a median follow-up time of 15.8 months.|No participants in the FCR group had neutropenia, anemia or thrombocytopenia at baseline.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835818|NCT01292135|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (Complete Response [CR] + Complete Response With Incomplete Marrow Recovery [CRi] + Nodular Partial Response [nPR] + Partial Response [PR])|Response criteria are as outlined in the IWCLL 2008 criteria (Hallek 2008) and as assessed by investigator, e.g. response requires 50% reduction in lymph node size. Assessment of response to treatment will be done every 2 cycles for the first 6 months and then every 3 months thereafter until disease progression or prior to the administration of a new anticancer therapy and at follow-up visits.|From first response assessment to last response assessment. Participants were followed with a median follow-up time of 15.8 months.|||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835819|NCT01292135|Secondary|Overall Incidence of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||From First day of dose to 30 days after last dose of any study medication. Participants were followed with a median follow-up time of 15.8 months.|||Percentage of Participants|||Number
835820|NCT01292135|Secondary|Overall Incidence of Grade ≥3 Adverse Events (AEs) Per NCI CTCAE V4.0||From First day of dose to 30 days after last dose of any study medication. Participants were followed with a median follow-up time of 15.8 months.|||Percentage of Participants|||Number
835821|NCT01292135|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events Requiring Dose Delay or Discontinuation of Ibrutinib||From First day of dose to 30 days after last dose of any study medication. Participants were followed with a median follow-up time of 15.8 months.|||Percentage of Participants|||Number
835822|NCT01292135|Primary|Incidence of Prolonged Hematologic Toxicity Started in Cycle 1||From First day of dose to 30 days after last dose of any study medication. Participants were followed with a median follow-up time of 15.8 months.|The FCR arm was discontinued due to very limited use of this chemo regimen in this setting, statistical analysis were limited due to the small numbers of subjects in this treatment arm.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
835823|NCT01292187|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline to Week 54 of Plasma CTx-1 Following rsCT Compared to Placebo.||Baseline, Week 54|MITT population||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835824|NCT01292187|Primary|Percentage Change From Baseline to Week 54 of Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density of Active Compared to Placebo.||Baseline, Week 54|MITT population||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
835825|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between MPA Levels and Risk of Gastrointestinal Toxicity|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population; n=number of samples||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835826|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between MPA Levels and Risk of Hematologic Toxicity|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population; n=number of samples||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835827|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between MPA Levels and Risk of Infection|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population; n=number of samples||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835828|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between IMPDH Expression and Risk of Gastrointestinal Toxicity|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835829|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between IMPDH Expression and Risk of Hematologic Toxicity|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835830|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between IMPDH Expression and Risk of Infection|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835831|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between IMPDH Inhibition and Risk of Acute Rejection|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835832|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between IMPDH II Expression and Free Fraction|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835833|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between IMPDH II Expression and MPA Levels|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835834|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between IMPDH I Expression and Free Fraction|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835835|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between IMPDH I Expression and MPA Levels|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835836|NCT01292226|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between MPA Levels and IMPDH Activity|The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed by ranking the data from 2 time points, 0 minutes and 120 minutes, and using the ranks in the Pearson product-moment correlation formula. In case of ties, the averaged ranks were used.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||correlation coefficient|Participants||Number
835837|NCT01292226|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hematologic Toxicity|Hematological toxicities graded according to WHO worst grade observed (Grade 1=mild, Grade 2=moderate).|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, 24, and 28 (Safety Follow-Up)|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
835838|NCT01292226|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Gastrointestinal Toxicities|Gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) according to WHO worst grade observed.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, 24, and 28 (Safety Follow-up Visit)|Safety population||percentage of participants|||Number
835839|NCT01292226|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Infection|Infections were graded according to the World Health Organization (WHO) worst grade observed.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, 24, and 28 (Safety Follow-Up)|Safety population: all enrolled participants||percentage of participants|||Number
835840|NCT01292226|Secondary|Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) Expression by Visit and Timepoint|TNF gene expression was measured by QRT-PCR based cytokine measurement of PBMCs at 2 timepoints per visit, 0 and 120 minutes and expressed as number of mRNA copies/cell.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24, and safety follow-up (Week 28) and any unscheduled visits|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||number of mRNA copies/cell|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835841|NCT01292226|Secondary|Interleukin 8 (IL-8) Expression by Visit and Timepoint|IL-8 gene expression was measured by QRT-PCR based cytokine measurement of PBMCs at 2 timepoints per visit, 0 and 120 minutes and expressed as number of mRNA copies/cell.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24, and safety follow-up (Week 28) and any unscheduled visits|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||number of mRNA copies/cell|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835842|NCT01292226|Secondary|IMPDH Expression II by Visit and Timepoint|IMPDH II gene expression was measured by QRT-PCR based cytokine measurement of PBMCs at 2 timepoints per visit, 0 and 120 minutes and expressed as number of mRNA copies/cell.|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24, and safety follow-up (Week 28) and any unscheduled visits|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||number of mRNA copies/cell|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835843|NCT01292226|Secondary|IMPDH Expression I by Visit and Timepoint|IMPDH I gene expression was measured by real time polymerase chain reaction (QRT-PCR) based cytokine measurement of PBMCs at 2 timepoints per visit, 0 and 120 minutes and expressed as number of messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) copies per cell (copies/cell).|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24, and safety follow-up (Week 28) and any unscheduled visits|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||number of mRNA copies/cell|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835844|NCT01292226|Secondary|Inosine MonoPhosphate DeHydrogenase (IMPDH) Activity by Visit and Timepoint|"IMPDH activity in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) was measured at 2 timepoints per visit, 0 and 120 minutes and presented in enzyme units. The unit of measure of enzyme activity is U. One U is defined as the amount of the enzyme that produces a certain amount of enzymatic activity that is, the amount that catalyzes the conversion of 1 micro mole of substrate per minute under pre-specified conditions (temperature, pH)."|BL and Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24, and safety follow-up (Week 28) and any unscheduled visits|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||enzyme units|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835845|NCT01292226|Secondary|MPA Area Under the Concentration - Time Curve From Time 0 to 12 Hours (AUC0-12) (mcg/mL) by Visit|The AUC0-12 of MPA was estimated on the validated limited sampling strategy, AUC (milligrams multiplied by height over liter [mg.h/L]) = 7.182 + 4.607 multiplied by (*) concentration at 0 minutes (C0)+ 0.998 * the concentration at 40 minutes (C0.67) + 2.149 * the concentration at 120 minutes (C2).|Predose and 40 minutes and 2 hours postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24, and at the Safety follow-up (Week 28)|ITT population; n=number of participants assessed for the specified parameter at a given visit.||mcg*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835846|NCT01292226|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Biopsy-Proven Acute Rejection (BPAR)|BPAR was defined according to 1997 Banff Criteria as a biopsy Banff grade of IA, IB, IIA, IIB, or III. Grade IA was defined as significant interstitial infiltration with greater than (>)25% of parenchyma affected, and foci of moderate tubulitis with >4 mononuclear cells per tubular cross section or group of 10 tubular cells. Grade IB was defined as significant interstitial infiltration with >25% parenchyma affected, and foci of severe tubulitis with >10% mononuclear cells per tubular cross section or group of 10 tubular cells. Grade IIA was defined as mild to moderate intimal arteritis. Grade IIB was defined as severe intimal arteritis comprising >25% of the luminal area. Grade III was defined as transmural arteritis and/or arterial fibrinoid changes and necrosis of medial smooth muscle cells.|Day 1, Weeks 2, 4, 12, 24, and 28|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
835847|NCT01292226|Secondary|Free MPA (mcg/mL) by Visit|Drug quantification of free MPA in the plasma was measured at T = 0, 40, and 120 mins.|Weeks 2, 4, 12, 24, safety follow-up (Week 28), and any unscheduled visits|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||mcg/mL|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835848|NCT01292226|Secondary|Total Mycophenolate Acid (MPA) by Visit and Timepoint|Drug quantification of total MPA (micrograms per milliliter [mcg/mL]) in the plasma was measured at time (T) = 0 minutes (min), 40 mins, and 120 mins.|Weeks 2, 4, 12, 24, and 28 (Safety Follow-Up Visit), and any unscheduled visits|ITT population; n=number of samples analyzed.||mcg/mL|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
835849|NCT01292226|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Surviving||Day 1, Weeks 2, 4, 12, 24, and 28|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
835850|NCT01292226|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Graft Loss|An allograft was presumed to be lost if a participant started dialysis and was not able to subsequently be removed from dialysis.|Day 1, Weeks 2, 4, 12, 24, and 28|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
835851|NCT01292226|Primary|Time to Rejection|The mean time, in days, from the date of enrollment to date of biopsy confirming acute rejection.|Day 1, Weeks 2, 4, 12, 24, and 28|ITT population; only participants with acute or biopsy-proven rejection were included in the analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
835852|NCT01292226|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Acute Rejection|Diagnosis of acute rejection was suspected in any participant with an increase in serum creatinine greater than or equal to (≥) 25 percent (%). All suspected acute rejections were confirmed by biopsy. The start date of acute rejection was identified as the date of biopsy.|Day 1, Weeks 2, 4, 12, 24, and 28|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: all eligible participants who had at least baseline (BL) and 1 assessment of pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). Acute rejection was analyzed in any participant with an increase in serum creatinine of 25%.||percentage of participants|||Number
835853|NCT01292239|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 24 Hours (AUC24h) for TMC435|The table below shows the median (range) AUC24h values for TMC435 for all participants in the TMC435 treatment group who received TMC435 for up to 12 weeks. The time frame of “Overall” (up to Week 12) represents the median exposure estimate using all available data for each participant in the study.|Overall (Up to Week 12)|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed in the PK population defined as all participants from whom sparse blood samples were drawn and who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||ng.h/mL||Full Range|Median
835854|NCT01292239|Secondary|Plasma Concentrations of TMC435|The table below shows median (range) predose plasma concentration (C0h) values and median (range) maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) values for TMC435 for all participants in the TMC435 treatment group. The time frame of “Overall” (up to Week 12) represents the median exposure estimate using all available data for each participant in the study.|Overall (ie, Up to Week 12)|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed in the PK population defined as all participants from whom sparse blood samples were drawn and who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
835855|NCT01292239|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants in the TMC435 Treatment Group Who Met Response Guided Treatment (RGT) Criteria and Completed Treatment With Peginterferon Alpha-2a (PegIFN Alpha-2a) and Ribavirin (RBV) at Week 24|The table below shows the percentage of participants in the TMC435 treatment group who met RGT criteria (ie, who had plasma levels of hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid [HCV RNA] <1.2 log10 IU/mL detectable/undetectable at Week 4 and <1.2 log 10 IU/mL undetectable at Week 12) and completed treatment with pegIFN alpha 2a and RBV at Week 24. Participants in the TMC435 treatment group not meeting RGT criteria and participants in the placebo group continued treatment with PegIFN alpha 2a and RBV to Week 48.|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835856|NCT01292239|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Abnormal Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels at Baseline Who Achieved Normal ALT Levels at the End of Treatment (EOT)|The table below shows the number of participants with abnormal ALT levels at Baseline (Day 1) who achieved normal ALT levels at the EOT (up to Week 24 or 48). At Baseline, 61/123 participants in the TMC435 treatment group and 25/60 participants in the Placebo treatment group had abnormal ALT levels. At the EOT, 47 (77.0%) participants in the TMC435 treatment group and 18 (72.0%) participants in the Placebo treatment group had ALT levels that returned to normal (or normalization of ALT levels defined as an ALT value less than or equal to the Upper Limit of Normality [ie, 40 IU/mL] at EOT.).|Baseline (Day 1) to EOT (up to Week 24 or 48)|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Participants|||Number
835857|NCT01292239|Secondary|The Number of Participants Demonstrating Viral Relapse|The table below shows the number of participants who demonstrated viral relapse, defined as undetectable plasma levels of hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) at the End of Treatment (EOT) (up to Week 24 or 48) and detectable HCV RNA during follow-up or detectable plasma levels of HCV RNA at the time points of sustained virologic response (SVR) assessment. The incidence of viral relapse was only calculated for participants with undetectable plasma levels of HCV RNA at the EOT and with at least one follow-up HCV RNA. measurement.|Up to Week 72|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Participants|||Number
835858|NCT01292239|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Viral Breakthrough|Viral breakthrough was defined as a confirmed increase of > 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma levels of hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA)l from the lowest level reached or a confirmed value of plasma HCV RNA of > 2.0 log10 IU/mL in participants whose plasma HCV RNA level had previously been below 1.2 log10 IU/mL detectable or undetectable during the treatment period (up to the end of treatment [EOT]).|Up to EOT (up to Week 24 or 48)|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Participants|||Number
835859|NCT01292239|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Undetectable Plasma Levels of Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) During Treatment and at the End of Treatment (EOT)|The table below shows the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma levels of HCV RNA <1.2 log10 IU/mL during treatment at Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, and at the EOT (up to Week 24 or 48).|Weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, and at EOT (up to Week 24 or 48)|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835860|NCT01292239|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Greater Than or Equal to 2 log10 IU/mL Drop From Baseline in Plasma Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA) at Each Time Point During Treatment and Follow-up|The table below shows the percentage of participants with greater than (>) or equal to (=) 2 log10 IU/mL drop from baseline in plasma levels of HCV RNA at each time point during treatment and post-treatment follow-up (FU).|Day 3, Day 7 and Weeks 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, 42, 48, 52, 60, 72, EOT (up to Week 24 or 48), FU Week 4, 12, and 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835861|NCT01292239|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With a Sustained Virologic Response at the End of Treatment (EOT) and 24 Weeks After the Last Dose of Treatment (SVR24)|The table below shows the observed percentage of participants with a SVR24 defined as undetectable plasma hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) at the end of treatment (EOT, defined as up to Week 24 or 48) and at 24 weeks after the last dose of treatment (up to Week 48 or 72).|EOT (up to Week 24 or 48) and 24 weeks after the after the last dose of treatment (up to Week 48 or 72)|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835862|NCT01292239|Primary|The Percentage of Participants With a Sustained Virologic Response at the End of Treatment (EOT) and 12 Weeks After the Last Dose of Treatment (SVR12)|The table below shows the observed percentage of participants with a SVR12 defined as undetectable plasma hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) at EOT (Week 24 or 48) and at 12 weeks after the last dose of treatment (Week 36 or 60).|EOT (up to Week 24 or 48) and 12 weeks after the EOT (up to Week 36 or 60)|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the study except for those who did not meet the major eligibility criteria for the study and participants who did not have efficacy data available after treatment with study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835863|NCT01292265|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) at Week 12||From Baseline (Week 0) to Week 12|Since only 3 subjects were enrolled in this study, the efficacy data is not interpretable and will not be presented.|||||
835864|NCT01292265|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in C-reactive Protein (CRP) at Week 12||From Baseline (Week 0) to Week 12|Since only 3 subjects were enrolled in this study, the efficacy data is not interpretable and will not be presented.|||||
835865|NCT01292265|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 12||From Baseline (Week 0) to Week 12|Since only 3 subjects were enrolled in this study, the efficacy data is not interpretable and will not be presented.|||||
835866|NCT01292265|Primary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in the Modified Ultrasound-7 Joint (mUS7) Sumscore at Week 12||From Baseline (Week 0) to Week 12|Since only 3 subjects were enrolled in this study, the efficacy data is not interpretable and will not be presented.|||||
835867|NCT01292304|Secondary|Time From Baseline to Worsening Ascites (Requiring 1 or More Therapeutic Paracentesis to Remove Ascites Fluid)|This outcome will describe the average time from baseline for subjects to require a therapeutic paracentesis to remove ascites fluid.|12 weeks of study drug|||Days||Full Range|Median
835868|NCT01292304|Primary|Number of Subjects With Worsening Ascites (Defined as Greater Than 2 kg Weight Gain)|This outcome will provide the number of subjects with a weight increase of > 2kg from baseline (worsening ascites)|12 weeks of study drug|||participants|||Number
835869|NCT01292304|Secondary|Number of Patients With Abnormally Low Levels of Sodium (Sodium Levels Between 130 mmol/L and 135 mmol/L)|Number of Patients with new episodes of hyponatremia (abnormally low levels of sodium) defined as sodium >130 mmol/L and <135 mmol/L|12 weeks|||participants|||Number
835870|NCT01292304|Secondary|Number of Patients With Reduction of Ascites (Weight Loss of 2 kg or More)|Number of patients with reduction of ascites is defined as reduction of weight by at least 2 kg during study drug dosing|12 weeks|||participants|||Number
835871|NCT01292304|Primary|Number of Participants With Worsening Ascites (Increase in Number of Paracentesis Procedures to Remove 2 Liters of Ascites Fluid)|Increase in number of therapeutic paracentesis (removal of > 2 litres of ascites fluid) during 12 weeks of study drug dosing versus 12 weeks before study drug dosing|Week 12|||participants|||Number
835872|NCT01292473|Secondary|Percentage of Angioedema-free Days From Week 4 to Week 12|The percentage of angioedema-free days from Weeks 4 to 12 was defined as the number of days a patient reported as angioedema-free in the daily diary divided by the total number of days with a non-missing diary entry, starting at the Week 4 visit and ending the day prior to the Week 12 visit.|Week 4 to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Patients who withdrew before the Week 4 visit or who had missing responses for more than 40% of the daily diary entries between the Week 4 visit and the Week 12 visit were not included in the analysis.||Percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
835873|NCT01292473|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Overall Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Week 12|The dermatology life quality index (DLQI) is a 10-item dermatology-specific health-related quality of life measure. Participants rate their dermatology symptoms as well as the impact of their skin condition on various aspects of their lives on a scale of 0 (Not at all) to 3 (Very much). The overall DLQI is the sum of the responses to the 10 items and ranges from 0 to 30. A lower score indicates a better quality of life. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and who had a DLQI score at Week 12.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835874|NCT01292473|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Weekly Size of the Largest Hive Score at Week 12|The size of the largest hive is assessed twice daily (morning and evening) on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (> 2.5 cm). The daily score is the average of the morning and evening scores. The weekly size of the largest hive score is the sum of the daily scores over 7 days, and ranges from 0 to 21. The Baseline weekly size of the largest hive score is the sum of daily scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher score indicates larger hives. A negative change score indicates a reduction in hive size.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835875|NCT01292473|Secondary|Percentage of Weekly Itch Severity Score MID Responders at Week 12|"The weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The daily itch severity score is the average of the morning and evening scores on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe). The Baseline weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher itch severity score indicates more severe itching. A negative change score indicates improvement.
The MID response for weekly itch severity score was defined as a reduction from baseline in weekly itch severity score of 5 points or more. This outcome measure shows the percentage of participants classified as MID Responders at Week 12, meaning their weekly itch severity scores at Week 12 were at least 5 points lower than at Baseline."|Baseline, Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835876|NCT01292473|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a UAS7 Less Than or Equal to 6 at Week 12|The urticaria activity score (UAS) is a composite of scores on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (intense/severe) for 1) the number of wheals (hives); and 2) the intensity of the itch, measured twice daily (morning and evening). Daily UAS is the average of morning and evening scores (ranging from 0-6) and the UAS7 is the sum of the daily UAS over 7 days (ranging from 0-42). Baseline UAS7 is calculated using data from the 7 days prior to the first treatment date. A higher UAS indicates more urticaria activity. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835877|NCT01292473|Secondary|Time to Minimally Important Difference (MID) Response in the Weekly Itch Severity Score by Week 12|"The weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The daily itch severity score is the average of the morning and evening scores on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe). The Baseline weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher itch severity score indicates more severe itching. A negative change score indicates improvement.
The MID response for weekly itch severity score was defined as a reduction from baseline in weekly itch severity score of 5 points or more. The time to weekly itch severity score MID response was defined as the time (in weeks) from Day 1 to the study week when weekly itch severity score MID response was first achieved."|by Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
835878|NCT01292473|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Weekly Number of Hives Score at Week 12|The weekly hives score is the sum of the daily hives scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The number of hives is measured twice daily (morning and evening) on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (> 12 hives per 12 hours). The daily hives score is the average of the morning and evening scores. The Baseline score is the sum of the daily hives scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher score indicates more hives. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835879|NCT01292473|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) at Week 12|The urticaria activity score (UAS) is a composite of scores on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (intense/severe) for 1) the number of wheals (hives); and 2) the intensity of the itch, measured twice daily (morning and evening). Daily UAS is the average of morning and evening scores (ranging from 0-6) and the UAS7 is the sum of the daily UAS over 7 days (ranging from 0-42). Baseline UAS7 is calculated using data from the 7 days prior to the first treatment date. A higher UAS indicates more urticaria activity. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835880|NCT01292473|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Weekly Itch Severity Score at Week 12|The weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over 7 days and ranges from 0 to 21. The daily itch severity score is the average of the morning and evening scores on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe). The Baseline weekly itch severity score is the sum of the daily itch severity scores over the 7 days prior to the first treatment. A higher itch severity score indicates more severe itching. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835881|NCT01292486|Secondary|Granulocyte % of MNC Product|Granulocyte contamination of the MNC product was quantitated as the percent of total product White Blood Cells (WBC) that were segmented granulocytes or bands.|7 days|Data to calculate the percent of product WBCs that were segmented granulocytes or bands was available for 38 MNC collections on 25 of the 26 per protocol patients.||percentage of product WBCs|Participants|Full Range|Median
835882|NCT01292486|Secondary|Hematocrit of MNC Product|The hematocrit of the collected product was used to quantitate Red Blood Cell (RBC) contamination.|7 days|Data was available from 38 MNC collections from 25 of the 26 per protocol patients.||hematocrit %|Participants|Full Range|Median
835883|NCT01292486|Secondary|Platelet Collection Efficiency|Platelet contamination of the cell product was measured as the platelet collection efficiency, that is, as the percent of platelets processed that were collected.|up to 7 days|Data to calculate platelet collection efficiency was available for 38 MNC collections on 24 of the 26 per protocol patients.||% of processed platelets collected|Participants|Full Range|Median
835884|NCT01292486|Secondary|Mononuclear Cel (MNC) Collection Efficiency|"Collection efficiency (CE) is defined as the percentage of any given cellular subset, processed by the system, that is collected from the subject.
Determination of collection efficiency depends on an estimate of the average concentration of target cells in the patient's blood. Because these cells are continuously being removed during the collection, and are undergoing variable replacement from the bone marrow, this estimate will not be completely accurate. Underestimation of the concentration of target cells processed can lead to collection efficiencies of greater than 100%."|up to 7 days|Data was available to calculate MNC collection efficiency on 35 collections performed on 22 of the 26 per protocol patients.||% of processed MNCs that were collected|Participants|Full Range|Median
835885|NCT01292486|Secondary|CD34+ Cell Collection Efficiency.|"Collection efficiency (CE) is defined as the percentage of any given cellular subset, processed by the system, that is collected from the subject.
CD34+ is a cell surface marker found on pluripotent hematopoeitic stem cells."|up to 7 days|Data to calculate CD34+ cell collection efficiency was available for 39 collections on 24 of 26 per protocol patients.||% of processed CD34+ cells collected|Participants|Full Range|Median
835886|NCT01292486|Secondary|Days Until Platelet Recovery|The time to platelet recovery is defined as the day following stem-cell transplant (Day 0) on which the platelet count exceeds 20,000/μL, for the first of three consecutive measurements obtained on different days, without platelet transfusion support within the preceding 7 days.|up to 28 days following transplant|All per protocol patients for whom platelet recovery data was available.||days||Full Range|Median
835887|NCT01292486|Primary|Days Until Neutrophil Recovery Following Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplant Minus the Historical Median Day Until Recovery.|"Neutrophil recovery is defined as the day on which the peripheral blood absolute neutrophil count exceeds 500/μL (ANC500)for the first of three consecutive measurements obtained on different days following transplant of peripheral blood stem cells in patients treated with myeloablative therapy for their underlying disease.
As this was a test of non-inferiority, the null hypothesis to be tested (H0) was that the difference between the observed day to neutrophil recovery and the historical median day of neutrophil recovery was greater than two days. At two of the enrolling sites, Duke and Emory Universities, the median day to ANC500 was 12, while at the other two sites, Indiana University and the University of Utah, it was 11 days. Consequently, in the equation below, site specific-historic medians were compared to the observed days to achieve ANC500. H0: D > |2|, where D = Observed median day of neutrophil recovery – Site specific historic median day of neutrophil recovery."|up to 28 days following transplant|Twenty-six patients were evaluable per protocol.||Days||Full Range|Median
835888|NCT01292538|Secondary|Body Weight (Pounds)||2 weeks||||||
835889|NCT01292538|Secondary|Subject Self-reported Satisfaction With Study Outcome||2 weeks||||||
835890|NCT01292538|Secondary|Body Mass Index (BMI)||2 weeks||||||
835891|NCT01292538|Primary|Combined Circumference in Inches of the Waist, Hips and Bilateral Thighs|Mean change in total combined circumference inches of the waist, hips and bilateral thighs from baseline to endpoint evaluation.|2 weeks|||inches||Standard Deviation|Mean
835892|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 2: Percentage of Participants With Total B-Cell Depletion by Visit|Total B-cell depletion (normal B-cell plus Malignant B-cell depletion) was defined for each individual participant when the sum of CD5-/CD19+ (normal B-cells) and CD5+/CD19+ (malignant B-cells) cell counts decreased below 80 cells/μL.|Cycle 1 Pre-dose, 60 minutes post-dose, Days 2 and 3 in Cycle 2, day 1 in Cycles 3, 4, 5 and 6, Follow-up Days 28 and 56, and Follow-up Visits at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 and Withdrawal Visit|Part 2 SAP; n= number of participants analyzed at the specified visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
835893|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 2: Total CD19+ B-Cell Counts by Visit|CD 19 is a surface antigen (protein) present on B-lymphocytes.|Cycle 1 pre-dose, 60 minutes post-dose, Days 2 and 3 in Cycle 2, day 1 pre-dose in Cycles 3, 4, 5 and 6, Follow-up Days 28 and 56, and Follow-up Visits at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 and Withdrawal Visit|Part 2 SAP; n = number of participants analyzed at the specified visit.||cells/μL||Full Range|Median
835894|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Total B-Cell Depletion by Visit|Total B-cell depletion (normal B-cell plus Malignant B-cell depletion) was defined for each individual participant when the sum of CD5-/CD19+ (normal B-cells) and CD5+/CD19+ (malignant B-cells) cell counts decreased below 80 cells/μL.|Day 1 pre-dose of Cycles 5 and 6 and Follow-up Days 28 and 56 and Follow-up Visits at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21 and 24|Part 1 SAP; n = number of participants analyzed at the specified visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
835895|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 1: Total Cluster Differentiation19 Positive (CD19+) B-Cell Counts by Visit|CD 19 is a surface antigen (protein) present on B-lymphocytes.|Day 1 of Cycles 5 and 6 and Follow-up Days 28 and 56 and Follow-up Visits at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 15,18, 21 and 24|Part 1 SAP; n = number of participants analyzed at the specified visit.||cells per microliter (cells/μL)||Full Range|Median
835896|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 2: Percentage of Participants With Anti-Rituximab Antibodies|In Part 2, samples for the HACA assay were collected at each treatment cycle prior to the administration of rituximab and at each follow-up visit until 24 months after the last dose of rituximab.|Day 0 of Cycle 1 and Day 1 of Cycles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 and at each follow-up visit until 24 months after the last dose of rituximab.|SAP; n = number of participants analyzed for the specific parameter.||percentage of participants|||Number
835897|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Anti-Rituximab Antibodies|Blood samples for the assessment of antibodies against rituximab (HACAs) were drawn pre-dose at Cycle 5 and Cycle 6 in Part 1 and at each follow up visit until 24 months after the last dose.|Predose at Cycles 5 and 6 and at each follow up visit until 24 months after the last dose|Safety Analysis Population (SAP): all participants who received at least one dose of study medication, whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not. This included 8 participants that did not receive SC rituximab. n = number of participants analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
836214|NCT01286324|Secondary|To Evaluate Any Changes From Baseline in the Safety and Tolerability of Chamomile|To evaluate any changes from baseline in the safety and tolerability of Chamomile High Grade Extract, three tablets (equivalent to 7.5g of dried herb) p.o. twice times daily versus placebo.|once per week during study and day 28||||||
835898|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 2: Physician/Nurse Opinion on Convenience of Rituximab SC Compared With Rituximab IV|"Physicians and nurses who administered rituximab were asked to answer the following question: Which formulation of rituximab (SC or IV) do you think is more convenient? with pre-specified responses as below. Percentage of participants with specified answers were reported.
A - Rituximab SC is much more convenient.
B - Rituximab SC is a little more convenient.
C - Both formulations are equally convenient.
D - Rituximab IV is a little more convenient.
E - Rituximab IV is much more convenient"|Days 4-5 in Cycle 6|All the physicians and nurses who responded to the questionnaire were included in the analysis. n = number of physicians or nurses that responded to the survey.||percentage of participants in the survey|||Number
835899|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 2: Physician/Nurse Opinion on Time Savings With Rituximab SC Compared With Rituximab IV|"Physicians and nurses who administered rituximab were asked to answer the following question:  If used in routine practice, on average, how much staff time could be saved with each administration of rituximab SC as compared to rituximab IV? (Please do not consider the time needed for the first IV administration, consider only the subsequent ones). Percentage of participants with specified answers were reported.
A- Less than 1 hour
B- At least 1 hour but less than 2 hours
C- At least 2 hours but less than 3 hours
D- At least 3 hours but less than 4 hours
E- 4 or more hours"|Days 4-5 in Cycle 6|All the physicians and nurses who responded to the questionnaire were included in the analysis. number (n) = number of physicians or nurses that responded to the survey.||percentage of participants in the survey|||Number
835900|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 1: Percentage of Participants and Nurses Recording a Preference For Either SC or IV Administration|In part 1 of the trial, upon completion of dosing in cycle 6, participants and their treating nurses were asked whether they have a preference of dosing route, IV vs SC|Days 4 to 5 in Cycle 6|All participants in Part 1 were included in this analysis including 8 participants that did not receive SC rituximab.||percentage of participants or nurses|||Number
835901|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 2: Terminal Half-Life of Rituximab at Cycle 6|The terminal half-life (t1/2) of rituximab is defined as the time required for the plasma concentration of rituximab to reach half of its original concentration.|Rituximab IV arm: pre-dose, post-dose and on Days 2, 3, 8 ,15, 29 of Cycle 6; Rituximab SC arm: pre-dose, and on Days 2, 3, 8 ,15, 29 of Cycle 6|Only participants who entered Part 2 of the study and had PK data available were included in the analysis.||days||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835902|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 2: Time to Cmax (Tmax) of Rituximab at Cycle 6|Multiple blood samples were obtained at pre-dose, post-dose and on Days 2, 3, 8 ,15, 29 of Cycle 6 in Rituximab IV arm, and at pre-dose, and on Days 2, 3, 8 ,15, 29 of Cycle 6 in Rituximab SC arm and time to peak plasma concentration of rituximab was determined.|Rituximab IV arm: pre-dose, post-dose and on Days 2, 3, 8 ,15, 29 of Cycle 6; Rituximab SC arm: pre-dose, and on Days 2, 3, 8 ,15, 29 of Cycle 6|Only participants who entered Part 2 of the study and had PK data available were included in the analysis.||days||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835903|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 2: Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) of Rituximab at Cycle 6|Cmax was obtained directly from the measured concentration-time curves. The concentration-time curve is the result of time points of blood sampling and its measured concentration of rituximab in the blood samplings.|Rituximab IV arm: pre-dose, post-dose and on Days 2, 3, 8 ,15, 29 of Cycle 6; Rituximab SC arm: pre-dose, and on Days 2, 3, 8 ,15, 29 of Cycle 6|Only participants who entered Part 2 of the study and had PK data available were included in the analysis.||μg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835904|NCT01292603|Secondary|Part 2: Observed Area Under the Serum Concentration-Curve (AUC) of Rituximab at Cycle 6|"AUC values were calculated by numerical integration using the linear trapezoidal rule. AUC levels were analyzed using the model below:
Ln(AUC) = μ + τi + BlTLij + εij wherein, Ln is the natural log, μ denotes the overall mean effect, τi the effect in each treatment group, BlTLij the tumor load at baseline for each patient and εij a random error variable with normal distribution and mean 0. The treatment effect therein was based on a contrast statement in the model to calculate 90 % confidence intervals for ln(AUC SC)– ln(AUC IV)."|Rituximab IV arm: pre-dose, post-dose and on Days 2, 3, 8 ,15, 29 of Cycle 6; Rituximab SC arm: pre-dose, and on Days 2, 3, 8 ,15, 29 of Cycle 6|Only participants who entered Part 2 of the study and had PK data available were included in the analysis.||μg*day/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835905|NCT01292603|Primary|Part 2: Rituximab C Trough Levels at Cycle 5|Ctrough is defined as the trough or minimum serum concentration in a given cycle of treatment. The objective of Part 2 was to demonstrate the comparability of the observed Ctrough of rituximab SC 1600 mg and rituximab IV 500 mg/m2 at Cycle 5, as assessed by a non-inferiority test with a lower boundary of at least 0.8 for the 90% CI.|+/- 25hours around the 28th day post the 5th Cycle of Rituximab administration|Only participants who entered Part 2 of the study and had pharmacokinetic (PK) data available were included in the analysis.||μg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835906|NCT01292603|Primary|Part 1: Subcutaneous Rituximab Dose Resulting in Trough Concentration (Ctrough) Levels Non-Inferior to Intravenous Rituximab|Ctrough is defined as the trough or minimum serum concentration. Pharmacokinetic parameters for rituximab were assessed during Cycles 5 (IV rituximab) and 6 (SC rituximab). Rituximab pharmacokinetic (PK) data from Part 1 were integrated into a population PK model using parametric, nonlinear, mixed-effects modelling. Rituximab IV 500 mg/m^2 administered once every 4 weeks was compared to fixed doses of rituximab SC between 1400 mg and 1870 mg. The dose selection was performed on Ctrough concentrations at Cycle 5 (pre-dose Cycle 6). A test of the probability of success was applied to each of the 100 replicates, and the percentage of replicates with a positive test corresponded to the probability of success of the trial.|Pre-dose and post-dose (15 minutes to end of infusion) on Day 1 and on Days 2, 5, 11 and 15 of Cycle 5 and Pre-dose, Post-dose on Days 2, 3, 5,11, 15 and 29 of Cycle 6; Pre-dose was taken 2 hours prior rituximab dose|Enrolled (non-randomized) Pharmacokinetic Evaluable Population (Part 1) included all participants from Part 1 who did not significantly violate the inclusion or exclusion criteria, deviate significantly from the protocol or have unavailable or incomplete data which could influence the pharmacokinetic analysis.||mg|||Number
835907|NCT01292629|Secondary|Complications and Adverse Events|Number of Participants with Complications or Adverse Events|4 to 6 months|||participants|||Number
835908|NCT01292629|Primary|Visual Acuity|BEST Spectacle-Correction (ETDRS) Distance Visual Acuity|4 to 6 months|125 subjects enrolled in the study, 121 were examined at the Form 4 and the remaining four (3.2%) subjects missed the Form 4 visit but were examined later. 121 subjects were evaluated for primary and secondary effectiveness and safety outcomes.||subjects|||Number
835909|NCT01292642|Secondary|Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8) at 10 Weeks|The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8) is a self-report instrument used to assess satisfaction with health services and it was used to assess participant satisfaction with the treatment during this 10 week study. Scores range from 8 - 32 with higher values indicating higher satisfaction.|10 weeks|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835910|NCT01292642|Primary|Cannabis Use|cannabis inhalations per day|Baseline and 10 weeks|||cannabis inhalations/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
835911|NCT01292642|Primary|Cigarette Use|cigarettes per day|Baseline and 10 weeks|||cigarettes/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
835912|NCT01284296|Primary|Categorical Groups Based on Magnitude of Differences Between Noninvasive (SpHb) and Laboratory Co-Oximeter (tHb) Hemoglobin in Patients With a Finger Regional Anesthetic Block.||A minimum of 2-4 differences recorded approximately hourly during surgery|||percentage of hemoglobin readings|Participants||Number
835913|NCT01284361|Secondary|Assessment of Ease of Use Characteristics|"Ease of insertion, removal, and control while catheterizing were assessed using a 5 point Likert scale. The numbers recorded are the percentage of the top two responses on a 5 point Likert scale. On one scale this includes 1) Very Easy or 2) Easy, on a scale ranging from 1) Very Easy to 5) Very Difficult. On the other scale this includes 1) Strongly Agree or 2) Agree on a scale ranging from 1) Strongly Agree to 5) Strongly Disagree."|1 week|82 self-catheterizing wheelchair-using men||percentage of participants|||Number
835914|NCT01284361|Primary|Percentage of Participants|Percentage of participants that preferred the 40 cm catheter|1 week|||percentage of participants|||Number
835915|NCT01284426|Primary|Duration of Urticaria Until Remission Since Chronic Urticaria Was Diagnosed.|"Remission rates at 1, 3 and 5 years after the onset of symptoms of chronic urticaria.
Description in details:
Actually, this study have been started in March 2003 and finally done in March 2009, which would be totally 6 years. We eventually decided to report the rate of CU remissions only at 1, 3 and 5 years after the onset of symptoms because this would be the common interval time of CU symptoms that patients needed to know how long they should have those CU symptoms or how many of them would go away their symptoms within 1, 3 or 5 years. Another reason is that the remission rate of CU between 5 and 6 years was not significantly different, so it might not need to be reported."|6 years|Children 4-15 years old with chronic urticaria||percentage of participants|||Number
835916|NCT01284491|Primary|Scar Quality|The primary endpoint will be the difference in scar quality (color, thickness, stiffness, pliability, etc.) between the scalpel and PlasmaBlade skin incisions.|0-18 months following breast reduction surgery|An integrity audit found that the data for this study could not be analyzed owing to unverifiable source documentation.|||||
835920|NCT01284517|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Endpoint (Week 6) in: Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score|SDS total score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 30. Lower values represent a better score, higher values represent a worse score. Similarly, greater negative change from baseline represents improvement, and positive changes from baseline represent worsening.|Baseline to week 6|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat population)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835921|NCT01284517|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Endpoint (Week 6) in: Clinical Global Impression Bipolar Version, Severity of Illness (CGI-BP-S) Score (Depression)|CGI-EP-S depression score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 7. Lower values represent a better score, higher values represent a worse score. Similarly, greater negative change from baseline represents improvement, and positive changes from baseline represent worsening.|Baseline to week 6|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat population)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835922|NCT01284517|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score at Endpoint (Week 6)|MADRS total score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 60. Lower values represent a better score, higher values represent a worse score. Similarly, greater negative change from baseline represents improvement, and positive changes from baseline represent worsening.|Baseline to week 6|Full analysis set (intent-to-treat population)||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
835923|NCT01284621|Secondary|Clinically Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, Vital Signs, ECG, Blood Chemistry and Tolerability|Clinically relevant abnormalities for physical examination, vital signs, ECG, blood chemistry and assessment tolerability by the investigator. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as adverse events.|From drug administration until end of washout period (36 days)|Treated set which included all subjects who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment.||participants|||Number
835924|NCT01284621|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase (Vz/Fss)|Apparent volume of distribution at steady-state during the terminal phase λz following an extravascular dose.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835925|NCT01284621|Secondary|Apparent Clearance After Extravascular Administration (CL/Fss)|Apparent clearance of the analyte in plasma after extravascular administration at steady-state.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835926|NCT01284621|Secondary|Mean Residence Time (MRTpo,ss)|Mean residence time of the analyte in the body after oral administration at steady-state.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835927|NCT01284621|Secondary|Terminal Half-life (T 1/2,ss)|Terminal half-life of the analyte in plasma at steady-state.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835928|NCT01284621|Secondary|Terminal Rate Constant (λz,ss)|Terminal rate constant in plasma at steady-state|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||1/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835929|NCT01284621|Secondary|Time From Last Dosing to the Maximum Measured Concentration (Tmax,ss)|Time from last dosing to the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady state.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||hours||Full Range|Median
835930|NCT01284621|Secondary|Ramiprilat: Predose Concentration Prior to Administration of the Nth Dose (Cpre,N)|"Predose concentration of the analyte in plasma prior to administration of the Nth dose, of ramiprilat.
Note, predose concentrations for ramipril were all below the limit of quantification (BLQ) and therefore the predose concentration of the analyte in plasma prior to administration of the Nth dose, of ramipril was not analysed."|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835931|NCT01284621|Secondary|Empa: Predose Concentration Prior to Administration of the Nth Dose (Cpre,N)|Predose concentration of the analyte in plasma prior to administration of the Nth dose, of empagliflozin.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835932|NCT01284621|Primary|Total Ramiprilat: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax,ss)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady-state over a uniform dosing interval, τ, of ramiprilat.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835933|NCT01284621|Primary|Total Ramiprilat: Area Under the Curve at Steady-state Over a Uniform Dosing Interval (AUCτ,ss).|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma at steady-state over a uniform dosing interval τ, of ramiprilat (active metabolite of ramipril).|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835934|NCT01284621|Primary|Total Ramipril: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax,ss)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady-state over a uniform dosing interval, τ, of ramipril.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835935|NCT01284621|Primary|Total Ramipril: Area Under the Curve at Steady-state Over a Uniform Dosing Interval (AUCτ,ss).|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma at steady-state over a uniform dosing interval τ, of ramipril.|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
836232|NCT01286558|Secondary|Seated Blood Pressure (BP) Normalisation at Trough|Seated blood pressure (BP) normalisation: The numbers of patients whose blood pressure was within normalisation criterion in terms of seated blood pressure after the 8-week double-blind period At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|8 weeks|FAS||participants|||Number
835936|NCT01284621|Primary|Total Empa: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax,ss)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at steady-state over a uniform dosing interval, τ, of empagliflozin (empa).|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835937|NCT01284621|Primary|Total Empa: Area Under the Curve at Steady-state Over a Uniform Dosing Interval (AUCτ,ss)|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma at steady-state over a uniform dosing interval τ, of empagliflozin (empa).|0 hours (h), 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 36h, 48h and 72h after drug administration on day 5. In addition pre-dose samples, 5 minutes predose, were collected on days 1 to 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: All subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
835938|NCT01284634|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) as a Measure of Patient Safety|All reported AEs were classified by system organ class (SOC), preferred term (PT) and low level term using version 13.1 of the MedDRA dictionary. The number of subjects who experienced an AE during the study is presented.|From 0 -10 weeks (study duration)|All randomised subjects were analysed.||participants|||Number
835939|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Fasting Serum Insulin|A fasting blood sample was obtained for the measurement of fasting serum insulin. An increase from baseline (i.e. a positive value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.||pmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
835940|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Total Fat as a Percentage of Body Weight|A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) in the amount of fat as a percentage of body weight indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||total fat as apercentage of body weight||Standard Deviation|Mean
835941|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Abdominal Adiposity|Abdominal adiposity = ratio of total abdominal to total non-abdominal fat. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
835942|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Total Fat|Total fat = total abdominal + total non-abdominal fat. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
835943|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Total Subcutaneous Fat|As measured by MRI/MRS scanning. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
835944|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Total Internal Fat|As measured by MRI/MRS scanning. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
835945|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Total Non-abdominal Fat|As measured by MRI/MRS scanning. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
835946|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Subcutaneous Non-abdominal Fat|As measured by MRI/MRS scanning. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
835947|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Internal Non-abdominal Fat|As measured by MRI/MRS scanning. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
835948|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Total Abdominal Fat|As measured by MRI/MRS scanning. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
835949|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Subcutaneous Abdominal Fat|As measured by MRI/MRS scanning. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
835950|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Visceral Abdominal Fat|As measured by MRI/MRS scanning. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
835951|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Total Skin-fold Thickness|Total skin fold thickness was based on the sum of the average values from the seven sites stated above. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835952|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Skin-fold Thickness (Thigh)|Skin fold thickness measurements were the mean of three measurements per site calculated for each subject. If one or more measurements were missing for a site, then the mean was calculated over the available measurement(s) for that site. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835953|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Skin-fold Thickness (Suprailiac)|Skin fold thickness measurements were the mean of three measurements per site calculated for each subject. If one or more measurements were missing for a site, then the mean was calculated over the available measurement(s) for that site. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835954|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Skin-fold Thickness (Abdomen)|Skin fold thickness measurements were the mean of three measurements per site calculated for each subject. If one or more measurements were missing for a site, then the mean was calculated over the available measurement(s) for that site. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835955|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Skin-fold Thickness (Subscapular)|Skin fold thickness measurements were the mean of three measurements per site calculated for each subject. If one or more measurements were missing for a site, then the mean was calculated over the available measurement(s) for that site. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835956|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Skin-fold Thickness (Triceps)|Skin fold thickness measurements were the mean of three measurements per site calculated for each subject. If one or more measurements were missing for a site, then the mean was calculated over the available measurement(s) for that site. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835957|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Skin-fold Thickness (Midaxillary)|Skin fold thickness measurements were the mean of three measurements per site calculated for each subject. If one or more measurements were missing for a site, then the mean was calculated over the available measurement(s) for that site. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835958|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Skin-fold Thickness (Chest/Pectoral)|Skin fold thickness measurements were the mean of three measurements per site calculated for each subject. If one or more measurements were missing for a site, then the mean was calculated over the available measurement(s) for that site. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835959|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Hip Measurement|Hip circumference was measured at baseline and the end of treatment. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835960|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Waist Measurement|Waist circumference was measured at baseline and the end of treatment. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835961|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Neck Measurement|The neck circumference was measured at baseline and the end of treatment. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
835962|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Waist-to-hip Ratio|The waist-to-hip ratio was calculated at baseline and the end of treatment. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
835963|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Body Weight|Body weight (kg) was measured at baseline and the end of treatment. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
835964|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Body Mass Index (BMI)|Individual subject's BMIs were calculated by dividing mass (kg) by height (m2). A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||kg/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
835965|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Fasting Plasma Glucose Levels|A fasting blood sample was obtained for the measurement of fasting plasma glucose. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
835966|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Serum Triglyceride Levels|A fasting blood sample was obtained for the measurement of serum triglycerides. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
835967|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment it the Mean Serum HDL:LDL Cholesterol Ratio|A fasting blood sample was obtained for the measurement of HDL-C and LDL-C, allowing the HDL:LDL cholesterol ratio to be calculated. An increase from baseline (i.e. a positive value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
835968|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Serum Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL)-Cholesterol(C) Levels|A fasting blood sample was obtained for the measurement of LDL-C. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
835969|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean Serum High Density Lipoprotein (HDL)-Cholesterol(C) Levels|A fasting blood sample was obtained for the measurement of HDL-C. An increase from baseline (i.e. a positive value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
835970|NCT01284634|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment it Mean Serum Total Cholesterol Levels|A fasting blood sample was taken for the measurement of serum total cholesterol. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||mmol/l||Standard Deviation|Mean
835971|NCT01284634|Primary|Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Mean % Liver Triglyceride Levels|Liver triglyceride levels (%) were measured by MRI/MRS scanning and the change from baseline to end of treatment in group mean levels were investigated. A reduction from baseline (i.e. a negative value) indicates an improvement in condition.|After 56 days of treatment|All subjects who were randomised and received treatment were included and analysed according to their randomised treatment group.||percentage of liver triglycerides||Standard Deviation|Mean
835972|NCT01284959|Secondary|Assessment of Cognitive Functioning-3|"CNT(Computerized Neuro-Cognitive Function Test System); The tests included Wisconsin Card-Sorting Test (WCST). All of the assessments except the CNT were conducted immediately prior to administration of the medication and at 2 (for risperidone and placebo) or 24 h (for paliperidone ER) after the first and third administrations of the study medications.
Minimum of Wisconsin card sorting test-Category completed is 0, Maximum is 6, the lower number is worse outcome.
Minimum of Wisconsin card sorting test-Perseverative response and Trials to complete is 0, Maximum is 128, the lower number is worse outcome.
Minimum of Wisconsin card sorting test-Trials to complete first category trials is 0, Maximum is 128 and minimum of Wisconsin card sorting test-Perseverative error is 0, Maximum is 128, the higher number is worse outcome.
The score ranges are for subscale score. This outcome measure is reporting a change between baseline and 50hr after th"|baseline and 50hr after third medication|||trials||Standard Deviation|Mean
835973|NCT01284959|Secondary|Assessment of Cognitive Functioning-2|"CNT(Computerized Neuro-Cognitive Function Test System); The tests included the Stroop test, Trail-Making Test B (TMT B). All of the assessments except the CNT were conducted immediately prior to administration of the medication and at 2 (for risperidone and placebo) or 24 h (for paliperidone ER) after the first and third administrations of the study medications Minimum of Stroop test is 0, no maximum limit, the higher number is worse outcome.
Minimum of Trail making test B is 0 and no maximum limit, the higher number is worse outcome.
The score ranges are for subscale score. This outcome measure is reporting a change between baseline and 50hr after third medication."|baseline and 50hr after third medication|||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
835974|NCT01284959|Secondary|Symptoms Assessment by Objective Rating Scales|SANS(Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms), NIDSS(Neuroleptic induced Deficit Syndrome Scale) Minimum of NIDSS is -3, maximum of NIDSS is +3. '+' is better outcome, '-' is worse outcome. Minimum of SNAS-Global score is 0, Maximum of SNAS-Global score is 5 The higher number is worse outcome. The zeros are measured and Calcuated value. The score ranges are for subscale score. This outcome measure is reporting a change between baseline and 50hr after third medication.|baseline and 50hr after third medication|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835975|NCT01284959|Secondary|Assessment of Cognitive Functioning-1|"CNT(Computerized Neuro-Cognitive Function Test System); The tests included a word fluency test. All of the assessments except the CNT were conducted immediately prior to administration of the medication and at 2 (for risperidone and placebo) or 24 h (for paliperidone ER) after the first and third administrations of the study medications.
Minimum of Wisconsin card sorting test-Category completed is 0, Maximum is 6, the lower number is worse outcome.
Minimum of Wisconsin card sorting test-Perseverative response and Trials to complete is 0, Maximum is 128, the lower number is worse outcome.
Minimum of Wisconsin card sorting test-Perseverative error is 0, Maximum is 128, the higher number is worse outcome.
Minimum of Word-fluency test is 0 and no maximum value, the higher number is better outcome.
The score ranges are for subscale score. This outcome measure is reporting a change between baseline and 50hr after third medication."|baseline and 50hr after third medication|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835976|NCT01284959|Secondary|Assessment of Adverse Events by Objective Rating Scales and Self Report Scales|DIEPSS(Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale), VAS(Visual analog scale);mental sedation (alert-drowsy, muzzy-clear headed, mentally slow-quick witted, attentive-dreamy), physical sedation (strong-feeble, well coordinated-clumsy, lethargic-energetic, incompetent-proficient), tranquilization (calm-excited, contented-discontented, troubled-tranquil, tense-relaxed), and other types of feelings (happy-sad, antagonistic-amicable, interested-bored, withdrawn-gregarious) Minimum of VAS is 0, Maximum is 10 Minimum of DIEPSS is 0, Maximum is 4 The higher number is worse outcome. The score ranges are for subscale score. This outcome measure is reporting a change between baseline and 50hr after third medication.|baseline and 50hr after third medication|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835977|NCT01284959|Secondary|Assessment of Adverse Events by Objective Rating Scales and Self Report Scales|"DIEPSS(Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale), VAS(Visual analog scale);mental sedation (alert–drowsy, muzzy–clear headed, mentally slow–quick witted, attentive–dreamy), physical sedation (strong–feeble, well coordinated–clumsy, lethargic–energetic, incompetent–proficient), tranquilization (calm–excited, contented–discontented, troubled–tranquil, tense–relaxed), and other types of feelings (happy–sad, antagonistic–amicable, interested–bored, withdrawn–gregarious) Minimum of VAS(Mental sedation score,Physical sedation score,Total score) is 0, Maximum is 10.
VAS-total score is average of all subscale scores. Minimum of DIEPSS is 0, Maximum is 4. The higher number is worse outcome. The score ranges are for subscale score. This outcome measure is reporting a change between baseline and 2hr after third medication."|baseline and 2hr after third medication|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835978|NCT01284959|Primary|Assessment of Negative Symptoms and Neuroleptic Induced Deficit Syndromes by Objective Rating Scales|"SANS(Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms), NIDSS(Neuroleptic induced Deficit Syndrome Scale) In NIDSS, the average of number 1 to 5 is blunted affect, the average of number 16 to 20 is avolition, the average of number 6 to 15 is cognition, the average of all score is total.
Minimum of NIDSS(avolition, blunted affect, cognition, total) is -3, maximum is +3.(subscale score and total) '+' is better outcome, '-' is worse outcome. Minimum of SANS-Global score for alogia and blunted affect is 0, Maximum of SANS-Global score for alogia and blunted affect is 5 The higher number is worse outcome. The zeros are measured and Calcuated value This outcome measure is reporting a change between baseline and 2hr after third medication."|baseline and 2hr after third medication|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835979|NCT01285024|Secondary|Total Hemoglobin Level Change|Total hemoglobin level change from preop to postoperative discharge.|day of surgery - 1 week postoperative|||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
835980|NCT01285024|Primary|Transfusion Requirement|Measure Title: Units of transfusion required|intraoperative - 1 week postoperative|||units||Standard Deviation|Mean
835981|NCT01285050|Primary|HCV RNA|HCV RNA determined by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and measured as log IU/ml 48 hours after a single dose of peginterferon alfa 2b 1.5 μg/kg.|48 hours after interferon administration|||log IU/ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
835982|NCT01285076|Secondary|Self-reported Barrier Questionnaire|The self-report barrier questionnaire contains 4 items: difficulty filling prescriptions, unsure about physician instructions, unable to follow plan for diabetes, and bothered by adverse effects during the prior month.|30 days (during the 30-day period prior to the encounter visit)|All enrolled participants.||Participants|||Number
835983|NCT01285076|Secondary|Fear of Weight Gain Questionnaire|Participants completed a questionnaire regarding their fear of wt gain during the previous year. The questionnaire contained 3 parts: worried about wt gain, worried that diabetic treatment causes wt gain (worried diab tx and wt gain), and worried about not being able to stabilize wt (worried not stabilize wt).|1 year (during the 12-month period prior to the encounter visit)|The population analyzed only includes participants with available data.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835984|NCT01285076|Secondary|Experience of Weight Gain Questionnaire|Participants completed a questionnaire regarding weight (wt) gain during the previous year (measured in kilograms[kg]). The questionnaire contained 4 parts: wt gain, subjective severity of wt gain, bothered by wt gain, and difficulty maintaining wt. Percentages presented below are rounded.|1 year (during the 12-month period prior to the encounter visit)|The population analyzed includes only participants with available data.||Percentage of participants|||Number
835985|NCT01285076|Secondary|Score on the Worry Scale of Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS) II|This questionnaire measures a diabetic participant’s fear of hypoglycemia. Items were answered using a 5-point Likert scale; range: 1 (never) to 5 (very often). Total possible scores ranged from 18 (least) to 90 (most).|6 months (during the 6-month period prior to the encounter visit)|The population analyzed includes only participants with available data.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835986|NCT01285076|Secondary|Experience of Low Blood Sugar (Hypoglycemia) Questionnaire|The experience of low blood sugar questionnaire was developed by the Sponsor to measure the participant's experience of hypoglycemia during the previous 6 months. The questionnaire contains 6 items answered by yes/no or by using a 5-point Likert scale.|6 months (during the 6-month period prior to the encounter visit)|All enrolled participants.||Participants|||Number
835987|NCT01285076|Secondary|Number of Adherence Days on the Self-reported Adherence Questionnaire|The self-report adherence questionnaire contains the following items: diabetic diet, exercise, and no missed medication doses during the past week. Total possible score ranges from 0 days (complete non-adherence) to 7 days (complete adherence).|7 days (during the 7-day period prior to the encounter visit)|All enrolled participants.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
835988|NCT01285076|Secondary|Score on the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM)|TSQM is a treatment satisfaction questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of the following dimensions: side effects (4 items), effectiveness (3 items), convenience (3 items) and global satisfaction scale (3 items). Each dimension was measured as a score on a scale. Total possible score ranges from 0 to 100 with a lower score representing a better quality of life.|1 day (the day of the encounter visit)|All enrolled participants.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835989|NCT01285076|Secondary|Score on the Quality of Life (EQ-5D) Questionnaire|The EQ-5D is a standardised instrument for use as a measure of general health outcome. The EQ-5D contains 5 items to be answered using a 3-point Likert scale plus a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The EQ-5D covers the following dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Total possible score ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best).|1 day (the day of the encounter visit)|The population analyzed includes only participants with available data.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
835990|NCT01285076|Primary|Number of Participants With Hypoglycemic Episodes|Participants self-reported hypoglycemic (low blood sugar) episodes.|6 months|All enrolled participants.||participants|||Number
835991|NCT01285076|Primary|Number of Participants Achieving Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) <7%|HbA1c is measured as a percent.|6 months|The population analyzed includes only participants with available data.||participants|||Number
836233|NCT01286558|Secondary|Seated SBP Response Rate at Trough|SBP response rate: The rate of patients who achieved an adequate response in seated SBP at trough (<140 mmHg and/or reduction from reference baseline >=20 mmHg) after the 8-week double-blind period At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|8 weeks|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
836090|NCT01285401|Secondary|Mean Number of Combined Unique Active (CUA) Lesions Per Subject Per Scan at Week 48|CUA lesions was defined as new T1 (Gd enhancing) lesions, new Relaxation time 2 (T2) lesions, or enlarging T2 lesions.|48 Weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||lesions per subject per scan||Standard Deviation|Mean
836091|NCT01285401|Secondary|Cumulative Number of Relaxation Time 1 (T1) Gadolinium Enhancing Lesions at Week 48||48 Weeks|"ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP. Here N signifies number of subject analyzed for respective outcome measure."||lesions per subject per scan||Standard Deviation|Mean
836065|NCT01285323|Secondary|Participants With a Positive Anti-Reslizumab Antibody Status During Study|Counts of participants with a positive anti-drug antibody (ADA) response during treatment is offered for the experimental treatment arm. Blood samples were collected for determination of ADAs before study drug infusion.|Baseline visit (prior to reslizumab exposure), Weeks 16, 32, 48 and 52|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
836066|NCT01285323|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Vital Signs Values|"Data represents participants with potentially clinically significant (PCS) vital sign values.
Significance criteria
Sitting pulse (high): >100 and increase of >= 30 beats/minute
Sitting systolic blood pressure (low): <90 and decrease of >= 30 mmHg
Sitting systolic blood pressure (high): >160 and increase of >= 30 mmHg
Sitting diastolic blood pressure (low): <50 and decrease of >=12 mmHg (if 12-17 years old: <55 and decrease of >=12 mmHg 0
Sitting diastolic blood pressure (high): >100 and increase of >=12 mmHg
Respiratory rate (low): <6 breaths/minute
Respiratory rate (high): >24 and increase of >=10 breaths/minute
Body temperature (low): <35.8° Celsius
Body temperature (high): >=38.1 and increase of >=1.1° Celsius"|Week 4 to Week 52|Safety analysis set including participants who contributed data to the analysis||participants|||Number
836067|NCT01285323|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Abnormal Lab Values|"Data represents participants with potentially clinically significant (PCS) abnormal serum chemistry, hematology (except for eosinophil values), and urinalysis values.
Significance criteria:
Blood urea nitrogen: >=10.71 mmol/L
Creatinine: >=177 μmol/L
Urate: M>=625, F>=506 μmol/L
Aspartate aminotransferase (AST): >=3*upper limit of normal (ULN)
Alanine aminotransferase (ALT): >=3*ULN
GGT = gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase: >= 3*ULN
Total bilirubin: >=34.2 μmol/L
White blood cells (low): <=3.0*10^9/L
White blood cells (high): >=20*10^9/L
Hemoglobin (age >=18 years): M<=115, F<=95 g/dL
Hematocrit (age >=18 years): M<0.37, F<0.32 L/L
Eosinophils/leukocytes: >=10.0%
Platelets: <=75*10^9/L
Neutrophils: <=1.0*10^9/L
Urinalysis: blood, ketones, glucose, and protein: >=2 unit increase from baseline"|Week 4 to Week 52|Safety analysis set, including participants who contributed to the analysis||participants|||Number
836068|NCT01285323|Primary|Frequency of Each of the Two Criteria for Clinical Asthma Exacerbations (CAEs)|"An exacerbation event was considered a CAE if the patient met either or both of the criteria listed below and this was corroborated with at least 1 other measurement to indicate the worsening of clinical signs and symptoms of asthma:
use of systemic, or an increase in the use of inhaled, corticosteroid treatment for 3 or more days; or an increased 2 or more fold for at least 3 or more days for patient's already on corticosteroids.
asthma-related emergency treatment, such as an unscheduled visit to the physician’s office or emergency room for nebulizer treatment or other urgent treatment to prevent worsening of asthma symptoms, or an asthma-related hospitalization CAEs were adjudicated by committee to assure consistency.
Adjusted CAE rate and confidence intervals for the two criteria were based on Negative Binomial regression model adjusted for stratification factors.
Results are offered as adjusted means."|Day 1 to Month 12|Randomized set includes all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group at enrollment, regardless of whether or not a patient took any study drug.||CAEs in 52 weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836069|NCT01285323|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events TEAE)|An adverse event (AE) was defined in the protocol as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Severity was rated by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate and severe, with severe= an inability to carry out usual activities. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator. Serious AEs include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, OR an important medical event that jeopardized the patient and required medical intervention to prevent the previously listed serious outcomes.|Day 1 (post-dose) to Week 65. The endpoint for adverse events was the last postbaseline observation, which included the 90 day follow-up visit.|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
836070|NCT01285323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Eosinophil Count Over 16 Weeks and 52 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"The blood eosinophil counts were measured using a standard complete blood count (CBC) with differential blood test. Results of all differential blood tests conducted after randomization were blinded.
The during treatment average eosinophil count was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements. The 'over 16 weeks' value used data from Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16. The 'over 52 weeks' value used all the during study time points listed in the Time Frame field.
Negative change from baseline values correlate to reduced asthma severity."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52 or early withdrawal|Randomized set including patients who contributed at least once to the analysis.||10^9 blood eosinophil/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836142|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs Abnormalities|Criteria for vital signs abnormalities: supine systolic blood pressure (SBP) <90 millimeter of mercury (mmHg), supine diastolic BP (DBP) <50 mmHg, supine pulse rate <40 beats per minute (bpm). Maximum increase or decrease from baseline in supine SBP >=30 mmHg and maximum increase or decrease from baseline in supine DBP >=20 mmHg.|Day 1 up to Day 15|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
836071|NCT01285323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short-Acting Beta-Agonist (SABA) Use Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"SABA are used for quick relief of asthma symptoms. To measure SABA use, at each clinical visit patients were asked to recall their usage of SABA therapy within the last 3 days of the scheduled visit. If usage was confirmed, the number of puffs used was recorded. For the purpose of summaries, an average daily usage was evaluated by dividing the total number of puffs recorded over 3 days by 3.
The during treatment (Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average SABA use was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Negative change from baseline scores indicate improvement in asthma control."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Randomized set including patients who contributed at least once to the analysis.||SABA puffs per day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836072|NCT01285323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"The ASUI is an 11-item instrument designed to assess the frequency and severity of asthma symptoms and side effects, weighted by patient preferences (Revicki et al 1998). ASUI is a utility score that ranges from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating better asthma control; info obtained from questionnaire about asthma symptoms.
The during treatment (Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average ASUI was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Positive change from baseline values indicate improvement in asthma symptoms. Information was obtained from questionnaire about asthma symptoms."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Randomized set, including participants who contributed at least once to the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836073|NCT01285323|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Time to First Clinical Asthma Exacerbation (CAE)|"An exacerbation event was considered a CAE if the patient met either or both of the criteria listed below and this was corroborated with at least 1 other measurement to indicate the worsening of clinical signs and symptoms of asthma:
use of systemic, or an increase in the use of inhaled, corticosteroid treatment for 3 or more days; or an increased 2 or more fold for at least 3 or more days for patient's already on corticosteroids.
asthma-related emergency treatment, such as an unscheduled visit to the physician's office or emergency room for nebulizer treatment or other urgent treatment to prevent worsening of asthma symptoms, or an asthma-related hospitalization.
CAEs were adjudicated by committee to assure consistency. The distributions were compared by a log rank test stratified by baseline usage of oral corticosteroid (yes or no) and geographical region (US or other)."|Day 1 to Day 526 (longest treatment time plus 2 weeks)|Randomized set||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836074|NCT01285323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"The ACQ is a 7-item instrument that measures asthma control (Juniper et al 1999). Six questions are self-assessments; the seventh item, completed by a member of the study staff, is the result of the patient's FEV1 measurement. Each item has 7 possible answers on a scale of 0 to 6, and the total score is the mean of all responses (the total scale is therefore 0-6). A higher score is an indication of poorer asthma control. The during treatment (Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average ACQ was estimated using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with fixed effects (treatment, stratification factors, sex, visit, interaction of treatment and visit), covariates (height, baseline value), and patient as the random effect for the repeated measurements.
Negative change from baseline scores indicate improvement in asthma control."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Randomized set, including participants who contributed at least once to the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836075|NCT01285323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) to Week 16|"The AQLQ is a 32-item instrument administered as a self-assessment (Juniper et al 1992). The questionnaire is divided into 4 domains: activity limitation, symptoms, emotional function, and environmental stimuli. Patients were asked to recall their experiences during the last 2 weeks and to respond to each question on a 7-point scale (1=severe impairment, 7=no impairment). The overall AQLQ score is the mean of all 32 responses. Five of the activity questions were patient-specific, which means that each patient identified and scored 5 activities in which the patient was limited by asthma; these 5 activities were identified at the first visit and retained for all subsequent follow-up visits.
Positive change from baseline scores indicate improvement in quality of life."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Week 16|Randomized set of participants with assessments at each timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836076|NCT01285323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Over 16 Weeks Using Mixed Model for Repeated Measures|"FEV1 is a standard measurement of air movement in the lungs of patients with asthma obtained from pulmonary function tests. It is the volume of air expired in the first second of a forced expiration using a spirometer. During study (Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16) average value used a mixed effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) with treatment group, visit, treatment and visit interaction, and stratification factors as fixed effects and participant as a random effect. Covariates for baseline values were also included in the model; for pulmonary function test analyses, covariates for height and sex were included as well.
Positive change from baseline scores indicate improvement in asthma control."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|Randomized set includes all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group at enrollment, regardless of whether or not a patient took any study drug. Includes participants who contributed at least once to the analysis.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836077|NCT01285323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) At Week 16|"FEV1 is a standard measurement of air movement in the lungs of patients with asthma obtained from pulmonary function tests. It is the volume of air expired in the first second of a forced expiration using a spirometer.
Positive change from baseline scores indicate improvement in asthma control."|Day 1 (baseline, pre-dose), Week 16|Randomized set includes all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group at enrollment, regardless of whether or not a patient took any study drug. Number analyzed reflects participants with both baseline and Week 16 assessments.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836194|NCT01286129|Secondary|Change in Nasal Lavage Eosinophils After Allergen Challenge|Change in nasal lavage eosinophil percentages in allergic asthmatic and allergic non asthmatic at baseline and at 7h post first and last challenge|At 7 hours post first and last challenge compared to baseline|||percentage of nasal lavage eosinophils||Standard Error|Mean
836078|NCT01285323|Primary|Frequency of Clinical Asthma Exacerbations (CAEs) During 12 Months of Treatment|"An exacerbation event was considered a CAE if the patient met either or both of the criteria listed below and this was corroborated with at least 1 other measurement to indicate the worsening of clinical signs and symptoms of asthma:
use of systemic, or an increase in the use of inhaled, corticosteroid treatment for 3 or more days; or an increased 2 or more fold for at least 3 or more days for patient's already on corticosteroids.
asthma-related emergency treatment, such as an unscheduled visit to the physician’s office or emergency room for nebulizer treatment or other urgent treatment to prevent worsening of asthma symptoms, or an asthma-related hospitalization.
CAEs were adjudicated by committee to assure consistency. Adjusted CAE rate and confidence intervals were based on Negative Binomial regression model adjusted for stratification factors.
Results are offered as adjusted means."|Day 1 to Month 12|Randomized set includes all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group at enrollment, regardless of whether or not a patient took any study drug.||CAEs in 52 weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836079|NCT01285401|Post-Hoc|Percentage of Subjects With Disease Activity Free Status (Alternate Definition) at Week 48|Disease activity free (DAF) status was defined as absence of any of the clinical and imaging parameters related to the assessment of disease activity; no relapses, no confirmed expanded disability status scale (EDSS) progression and no new gadolinium (Gd)-enhancing or relaxation time 2 (T2) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesions. Confirmed EDSS progression was defined as an EDSS progression confirmed after 24 weeks.|Week 48|ITT set included all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
836080|NCT01285401|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Total Volume of T1 Hypo Intense Lesions at Week 48||Baseline, 48 Weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||millimeter^3 (mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836081|NCT01285401|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Treated With Glucocorticoids Due to Relapses|Relapse was defined as neurological abnormality, either newly appearing or re-appearing, with abnormality specified by both as neurological abnormality separated by at least 30 days from onset of a preceding MS attack and Neurological abnormality lasting for at least 24 hours, absence of fever or known infection greater than 37.5 degree centigrade /99.5 degree fahrenheit , objective neurological impairment, correlating with the subject’s reported symptoms, defined as either increase in at least one of the functional systems of the EDSS or increase of the total EDSS score and occurrence of paraesthesia, fatigue, mental symptoms, and/or vegetative symptoms without any additional symptom will not be classified as an MS attack.|Baseline upto 48 weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
836082|NCT01285401|Secondary|Total Number of Reported Relapses at All Time Points up to 48 Weeks|Relapse was defined as neurological abnormality, either newly appearing or re-appearing, with abnormality specified by both as neurological abnormality separated by at least 30 days from onset of a preceding MS attack and Neurological abnormality lasting for at least 24 hours, absence of fever or known infection greater than 37.5 degree centigrade /99.5 degree fahrenheit , objective neurological impairment, correlating with the subject’s reported symptoms, defined as either increase in at least one of the functional systems of the EDSS or increase of the total EDSS score and occurrence of paraesthesia, fatigue, mental symptoms, and/or vegetative symptoms without any additional symptom will not be classified as an MS attack.|48 weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||number of relapse per subject||Standard Deviation|Mean
836083|NCT01285401|Secondary|Annualized Relapse Rate at Week 48|Relapse was defined as neurological abnormality, either newly appearing or re-appearing, with abnormality specified by both as neurological abnormality separated by at least 30 days from onset of a preceding MS attack and Neurological abnormality lasting for at least 24 hours, absence of fever or known infection greater than 37.5 degree centigrade /99.5 degree fahrenheit , objective neurological impairment, correlating with the subject’s reported symptoms, defined as either increase in at least one of the functional systems of the EDSS or increase of the total EDSS score and occurrence of paraesthesia, fatigue, mental symptoms, and/or vegetative symptoms without any additional symptom will not be classified as an MS attack.|48 weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||relapse per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
836084|NCT01285401|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Relapse|Relapse was defined as neurological abnormality, either newly appearing or re-appearing, with abnormality specified by both as neurological abnormality separated by at least 30 days from onset of a preceding MS attack and Neurological abnormality lasting for at least 24 hours, absence of fever or known infection greater than 37.5 degree centigrade /99.5 degree fahrenheit , objective neurological impairment, correlating with the subject’s reported symptoms, defined as either increase in at least one of the functional systems of the EDSS or increase of the total EDSS score and occurrence of paraesthesia, fatigue, mental symptoms, and/or vegetative symptoms without any additional symptom will not be classified as an MS attack.|Baseline upto 48 weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||subjects|||Number
836085|NCT01285401|Secondary|Percentage of New T1 Hypointense Lesions (Black Holes) at Week 48 Within the Subgroup of New or Enlarging Non-enhancing T2 Lesions||48 Weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP. Here “N” signifies number of subjects analyzed for respective outcome measure (here in the subgroup of subjects having new or enlarging T2 lesions).||percentage of new T1 hypointense lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
836086|NCT01285401|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Free From New T1 Hypointense Lesions (Black Holes) at Week 48||48 Weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
836087|NCT01285401|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Free From T1 Gadolinium Enhancing Lesions at Week 48||48 Weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
836088|NCT01285401|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Total Volume of T2 Lesions at Week 48 (T2 Burden of Disease)||Baseline, 48 Weeks|"ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP. Here N signifies number of subjects analyzed for respective outcome measure."||millimeter^3 (mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836089|NCT01285401|Secondary|Cumulative Number of New Combined Unique Active (CUA) Lesions at Week 48|CUA lesions was defined as new T1 (Gd enhancing) lesions, new T2 lesions, or enlarging T2 lesions.|48 Weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||lesions per subject per scan||Standard Deviation|Mean
836092|NCT01285401|Secondary|Number od Subjects With Confirmed EDSS Progression|EDSS assesses disability in 8 functional systems. An overall score ranging from 0 (normal) to 10 (death due to MS) was calculated. A confirmed EDSS progression was defined EDSS greater than or equal to 1.0 point confirmed during a visit performed 6 months later. An EDSS progression was defined as an increase of the EDSS score of at least 1.0 point compared to baseline (SD1) for subjects with a baseline EDSS ≤ 4.0. For subjects with an EDSS score of 0 at baseline (SD1), EDSS progression was defined as an increase of at least 1.5 points. A confirmed EDSS progression was defined as an EDSS progression confirmed after 24 weeks.|Baseline upto 48 Weeks|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||subjects|||Number
836093|NCT01285401|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Free From Any Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Progression at Week 48|EDSS assesses disability in 8 functional systems. An overall score ranging from 0 (normal) to 10 (death due to MS) was calculated. A confirmed EDSS progression was defined EDSS greater than or equal to 1.0 point confirmed during a visit performed 6 months later. An EDSS progression was defined as an increase of the EDSS score of at least 1.0 point compared to baseline (SD1) for subjects with a baseline EDSS ≤ 4.0. For subjects with an EDSS score of 0 at baseline (SD1), EDSS progression was defined as an increase of at least 1.5 points. A confirmed EDSS progression was defined as an EDSS progression confirmed after 24 weeks.|Week 48|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
836094|NCT01285401|Secondary|Percentage of Relapse-free Subjects at Week 48|A relapse was defined as the development of new or the exacerbation of existing neurological symptoms or signs, in the absence of fever, lasting for 24 hours and with a previous period for more than 30 days with a stable or an improving condition.|Week 48|ITT analysis set consisted of all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
836095|NCT01285401|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Disease Activity Free Status up to Week 48|Disease activity free status was defined as absence of any of the clinical and imaging parameters related to the assessment of disease activity; no relapses, no expanded disability status scale (EDSS) progression and no new gadolinium (Gd)-enhancing or relaxation time 2 (T2) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesions.|Up to Week 48|ITT set included all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of the IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
836096|NCT01285427|Primary|SeCore® Kit, DR Group Kit (DRB345 Loci), Primary Analysis of Concordance Rate Clopper-Pearson CI)|The concordance rate was calculated and the corresponding exact two-sided 90% confidence interval was calculated by the Clopper-Pearson method|10 weeks|||percentage of concordant alleles|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Number
836097|NCT01285427|Primary|SeCore® Kit, DR Group Kit (DRB1 Locus), Primary Analysis of Concordance Rate (CI)|The concordance rate was calculated and the corresponding exact two-sided 90% confidence interval was calculated by the Clopper-Pearson method|10 weeks|||percentage of concordant alleles|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Number
836098|NCT01285427|Primary|SeCore® Kit, DRB1 Locus, Primary Analysis of Concordance Rate (Clopper-Pearson CI)|The concordance rate was calculated and the corresponding exact two-sided 90% confidence interval was calculated by the Clopper-Pearson method|10 weeks|||percentage of concordant alleles|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Number
836099|NCT01285427|Primary|SeCore® Kit, DQB1 Locus, Primary Analysis of Concordance Rate (Clopper-Pearson CI)|the concordance rate was calculated and the corresponding exact two-sided 90% confidence interval was calculated by the Clopper-Pearson method|10 weeks|||percentage of concordant alleles|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Number
836100|NCT01285427|Primary|SeCore® Kit, DPB1 Locus, Primary Analysis of Concordance Rate (Clopper-Pearson CI)|SeCore® DPB1 Locus, the concordance rate was calculated and the corresponding exact two-sided 90% confidence interval was calculated by the Clopper-Pearson method|10 weeks|||percentage of concordant alleles|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Number
836101|NCT01285427|Primary|SeCore® Kit, C Locus, Primary Analysis of Concordance Rate (Clopper-Pearson CI)|SeCore® Kit, C Locus, the concordance rate was calculated and the corresponding exact two-sided 90% confidence interval was calculated by the Clopper-Pearson method.|10 weeks|||percentage of concordant alleles|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Number
836102|NCT01285427|Primary|SeCore® Kit, B Locus (Single Amp), Primary Analysis of Concordance Rate (Clopper-Pearson CI)|SeCore® Kit, B Locus (Single Amp), The concordance rate was calculated and the corresponding exact two-sided 90% confidence interval was calculated by the Clopper-Pearson method.|10 weeks|||percentage of concordant alleles|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Number
836103|NCT01285427|Primary|SeCore® Kit, A Locus, Primary Analysis of Concordance Rate (Clopper-Pearson CI)|SeCore Kit, A Locus,the concordance rate was calculated and the corresponding exact two-sided 90% confidence interval was calculated by the Clopper-Pearson method|10 weeks|||percentage of concordant alleles|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Number
836104|NCT01285427|Primary|All SeCore® Kits,Primary Analysis of Concordance Rate (Clopper-Pearson CI)|All kits,the concordance rate was calculated and the corresponding exact two-sided 90% confidence interval was calculated by the Clopper-Pearson method|10 weeks|||percentage of concordant alleles|Participants|90% Confidence Interval|Number
836105|NCT01285492|Secondary|Change in Pre-dose Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) From Baseline|Pre-dose FVC is defined as the average of the measurements at 45 and 15 min pre-dose. Baseline is defined as the pre-dose FVC value on Day 1 (Week 1).|Weeks 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
836106|NCT01285492|Secondary|Change in Pre-dose Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) From Baseline|Pre-dose FEV1 is defined as the average of the measurements at 45 and 15 min pre-dose. Baseline is defined as the pre-dose FEV1 value on Day 1 (Week 1).|Weeks 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 52|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
836107|NCT01285492|Secondary|Number of Patients With Newly Occurring or Worsening Clinically Notable Fridericia’s QTc Values at Any Time-point Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable change from baseline was an increase from baseline of 30 or greater milliseconds (ms).|52 weeks|The safety set included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
836234|NCT01286558|Secondary|Seated DBP Response Rate at Trough|DBP response rate: The rate of patients who achieved an adequate response in seated DBP at trough (<90 mmHg and/or reduction from reference baseline >=10 mmHg) after the 8-week double-blind period At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|8 weeks|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
836108|NCT01285492|Secondary|Number of Patients With Newly Occurring or Worsening Clinically Notable Vital Signs Values at Any Time-point Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable vital sign values were: pulse rate - low, <40 bpm or <=50 bpm and decrease from baseline >=15bpm; pulse rate high, >130 bpm or >=120bpm and increase from baseline >=15 bpm. Systolic blood pressure - low, <75 mmHg or <=90 mmHg and decrease from baseline >=20 mmHg; high, >200 mmHg or >=180 mmHg and increase from baseline >=20 mmHg. Diastolic blood pressure - low, <40 mmHg or <=50 mmHg and decrease from baseline >=15 mmHg; high, >115 mmHg or >=105 mmHg and increase from baseline >=15 mmHg.|52 weeks|The safety set included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
836109|NCT01285492|Secondary|Number of Patients With Newly Occurring or Worsening Clinically Notable Biochemistry Values at Any Time-point Over the Treatment Period|Clinically notable biochemistry values were: total protein - <4.0 g/dL or >9.5 g/dL; albumin <2.5 g/dL; bilirubin (total) >1.9 mg/dL; BUN >27 mg/dL; creatinine >1.99 mg/dL; AST >3 x ULN U/L; ALT >3 x ULN U/L; ALP >3 x ULN U/L; y-GTP >3 x ULN U/L; sodium <125 mEq/L or >160 mEq/L; potassium <3.0 mEq/L or >6.0 mEq/L; glucose <51.0 mg/dL or >180.0 mg/dL|52 weeks|The safety set included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
836110|NCT01285492|Secondary|Number of Patients With Newly Occurring or Worsening Clinically Notable Hematology Values at Any Timepoint Over the Whole Treatment Period|Clinically notable hematology values were: hemoglobin - male <11.5g/dL, female <9.5 g/dL; hematocrit - male <37%, female <32%; white cell count - <2800µL or >16000µL; platelets - <7.5 10*4/µL or >70.0 10*4/µL|52 weeks|The safety set included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
836111|NCT01285492|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) or Death|An AE was the appearance or worsening of any undesirable sign, symptom, or medical condition occurring after starting the study drug even if the event was not considered to be related to study drug. Study drug includes the investigational drug under evaluation and the comparator drug or placebo that was given during any phase of the study. Adverse events starting on or after the time of the first inhalation of study drug were classified as a treatment emergent adverse event.|52 weeks|The safety set included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
836112|NCT01285518|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss) of PF-05231023|Vss was calculated by dividing the area under the first moment curve from time zero to infinity [AUMC(0-∞)] with the product of area under the curve from time zero to extrapolated infinite time [AUC (0 - ∞)] and apparent clearance (CL). PF-05231023 with C-terminal and N-terminal Vss were reported.|Hour(H)-1(prior to start of infusion[In] or 1 H pre-dose to bolus[Bo]),H-0.5(0.5 H post start of In or 0.5 H pre-dose to Bo),H 0(end of In or prior to Bo),0.25,0.5,1,1.5,2,3,5,8,12 H post end of In or post-dose to Bo on Day 1;Day 2,3,4,5,6,8,15,22|PK parameter analysis set included all participants randomized and treated who have at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable for each specified parameter for each arm, respectively.||L||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
836113|NCT01285518|Secondary|Back-extrapolated Concentration at Time Zero (C0) of PF-05231023|C0 was estimated by back-extrapolating from the first 2 concentration values using the log-linear regression on the first 2 data points (where second concentration was less than [<] first concentration) to back-extrapolate C0. PF-05231023 with C-terminal and N-terminal C0 were reported.|0.25 H post-dose to Bo on Day 1|PK parameter analysis set included all participants randomized and treated who have at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest. C0 was calculated for cohort 1 (group: PF-05231023 0.5 mg) and 2 (group: PF-05231023 1.5 mg) only as per planned analysis, hence results for the same reported.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
836114|NCT01285518|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)] of PF-05231023|AUC (0 - ∞)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞). PF-05231023 with C-terminal and N-terminal AUC (0 - ∞) were reported.|Hour(H)-1(prior to start of infusion[In] or 1 H pre-dose to bolus[Bo]),H-0.5(0.5 H post start of In or 0.5 H pre-dose to Bo),H 0(end of In or prior to Bo),0.25,0.5,1,1.5,2,3,5,8,12 H post end of In or post-dose to Bo on Day 1;Day 2,3,4,5,6,8,15,22|PK parameter analysis set included all participants randomized and treated who have at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable for each specified parameter for each arm, respectively.||ng*hr/ml||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
836115|NCT01285518|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz) of PF-05231023|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug. PF-05231023 with C-terminal and N-terminal Vz were reported.|Hour(H)-1(prior to start of infusion[In] or 1 H pre-dose to bolus[Bo]),H-0.5(0.5 H post start of In or 0.5 H pre-dose to Bo),H 0(end of In or prior to Bo),0.25,0.5,1,1.5,2,3,5,8,12 H post end of In or post-dose to Bo on Day 1;Day 2,3,4,5,6,8,15,22|PK parameter analysis set included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable for each specified parameter for each arm, respectively.||Liter||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
836116|NCT01285518|Secondary|Apparent Clearance (CL) of PF-05231023 for Intravenous Bolus Dosing|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood.Participants who received PF-05231023 with C-terminal and N-terminal CL were reported.|Hour (H)-1 (1 H pre-dose to bolus [Bo]),H-0.5(0.5 H pre-dose to Bo),H 0 (prior to Bo),0.25,0.5,1,1.5,2,3,5,8,12 H post-dose to Bo on Day 1;Day 2,3,4,5,6,8,15,22|PK parameter analysis set included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable for each specified parameter for each arm, respectively.||liter per hour||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
836195|NCT01286129|Primary|Change in Sputum Eosinophils Following Allergen Challenge|Eosinophil is an inflammatory cell found in the lungs. Sputum is obtained from hypertonic inhalation. patients expectorate in a sterile dish and mucus plugs are selected and treated to obtain cells. cells are transferred on a slide and a differential count is obtained where eosinophils are counted.|At 7 hours post first and last challenge compared to baseline|||percentage of sputum eosinophils||Standard Error|Mean
836117|NCT01285518|Secondary|Plasma Terminal Half-Life (t1/2) of PF-05231023|Plasma terminal half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half at the terminal phase. Participants who received PF-05231023 with C-terminal and N-terminal t1/2 were reported.|Hour(H)-1(prior to start of infusion[In] or 1 H pre-dose to bolus[Bo]),H-0.5(0.5 H post start of In or 0.5 H pre-dose to Bo),H 0(end of In or prior to Bo),0.25,0.5,1,1.5,2,3,5,8,12 H post end of In or post-dose to Bo on Day 1;Day 2,3,4,5,6,8,15,22|PK parameter analysis set included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.'n' signifies participants who were evaluable for each specified parameter for each arm, respectively.||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
836118|NCT01285518|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of PF-05231023|Participants who received PF-05231023 with C-terminal and N-terminal Cmax were reported.|Hour(H)-1(prior to start of infusion[In] or 1 H pre-dose to bolus[Bo]),H-0.5(0.5 H post start of In or 0.5 H pre-dose to Bo),H 0(end of In or prior to Bo),0.25,0.5,1,1.5,2,3,5,8,12 H post end of In or post-dose to Bo on Day 1;Day 2,3,4,5,6,8,15,22|PK parameter analysis set included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
836119|NCT01285518|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of PF-05231023|Participants who received PF-05231023 with C-terminal and N-terminal Tmax were reported.|Hour(H)-1(prior to start of infusion[In] or 1 H pre-dose to bolus[Bo]),H-0.5(0.5 H post start of In or 0.5 H pre-dose to Bo),H 0(end of In or prior to Bo),0.25,0.5,1,1.5,2,3,5,8,12 H post end of In or post-dose to Bo on Day 1;Day 2,3,4,5,6,8,15,22|PK parameter analysis set included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||hour||Full Range|Median
836120|NCT01285518|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Quantifiable Plasma Concentration (AUClast) of PF-05231023|"Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero to the last measured concentration (AUClast).
Participants who received PF-05231023 with C-terminal and N-terminal AUClast were reported."|Hour(H)-1(prior to start of infusion[In] or 1 H pre-dose to bolus[Bo]),H-0.5(0.5 H post start of In or 0.5 H pre-dose to Bo),H 0(end of In or prior to Bo),0.25,0.5,1,1.5,2,3,5,8,12 H post end of In or post-dose to Bo on Day 1;Day 2,3,4,5,6,8,15,22|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis set included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest.||ng*hour[H]/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
836121|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Cardiac Rhythms Recorded by Telemetry|Criteria for abnormal cardiac rhythms was based on investigator’s discretion and were reported as adverse event (AE), as planned.|From 2 hours (H) pre-dose for intravenous bolus or 2 H prior to the start of infusion on Day 1 up to 8 H post-dose for bolus or 8 H following the end of the infusion on Day 1|Data was not collected since this outcome measure was not analyzed as per Sponsor’s discretion.|||||
836122|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 (IGFBP-3) Levels: Day 15|Plasma samples were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific ICMA fluorescence method.|Day 15|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836123|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 (IGFBP-3) Levels: Day 7|Plasma samples were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific ICMA fluorescence method.|Day 7|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836124|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 (IGFBP-3) Levels: Day 5|Plasma samples were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific ICMA fluorescence method.|Day 5|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836125|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 (IGFBP-3) Levels: Day 3|Plasma samples were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific ICMA fluorescence method.|Day 3|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836126|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 (IGFBP-3) Levels: Day 2|Plasma samples were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific ICMA fluorescence method.|Day 2|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint.||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836127|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 (IGFBP-3) Levels: Day 1|Plasma samples were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific ICMA fluorescence method.|Day 1|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||microgram per milliliter (mcg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836128|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor - 1 (IGF-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-1 (IGFBP-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-2 (IGFBP-2), Growth Hormone (GH) Levels: Day 15|Plasma samples for IGF-1, and GH were analyzed using a validated, sensitive, and specific immunochromatographic membrane assay (ICMA) fluorescence method. Plasma samples for IGFBP-1, IGFBP-2 were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific colorimetric sandwich ELISA method.|Day 15|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable for each specified parameter for each arm, respectively.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836129|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor - 1 (IGF-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-1 (IGFBP-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-2 (IGFBP-2), Growth Hormone (GH) Levels: Day 7|Plasma samples for IGF-1, and GH were analyzed using a validated, sensitive, and specific immunochromatographic membrane assay (ICMA) fluorescence method. Plasma samples for IGFBP-1, IGFBP-2 were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific colorimetric sandwich ELISA method.|Day 7|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint. Here,'n' signifies participants who were evaluable at each specified time point for each arm, respectively.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836130|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor - 1 (IGF-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-1 (IGFBP-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-2 (IGFBP-2), Growth Hormone (GH) Levels: Day 5|Plasma samples for IGF-1, and GH were analyzed using a validated, sensitive, and specific immunochromatographic membrane assay (ICMA) fluorescence method. Plasma samples for IGFBP-1, IGFBP-2 were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific colorimetric sandwich ELISA method.|Day 5|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint.||nanogram per millileter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836131|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor - 1 (IGF-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-1 (IGFBP-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-2 (IGFBP-2), Growth Hormone (GH) Levels: Day 3|Plasma samples for IGF-1, and GH were analyzed using a validated, sensitive, and specific immunochromatographic membrane assay (ICMA) fluorescence method. Plasma samples for IGFBP-1, IGFBP-2 were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific colorimetric sandwich ELISA method.|Day 3|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint.||nanogram per millileter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836132|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor - 1 (IGF-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-1 (IGFBP-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-2 (IGFBP-2), Growth Hormone (GH) Levels: Day 2|Plasma samples for IGF-1, and GH were analyzed using a validated, sensitive, and specific immunochromatographic membrane assay (ICMA) fluorescence method. Plasma samples for IGFBP-1, IGFBP-2 were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific colorimetric sandwich ELISA method.|Day 2|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836133|NCT01285518|Primary|Insulin-like Growth Factor - 1 (IGF-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-1 (IGFBP-1), Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-2 (IGFBP-2), Growth Hormone (GH) Levels: Day 1|Plasma samples for IGF-1, and GH were analyzed using a validated, sensitive, and specific immunochromatographic membrane assay (ICMA) fluorescence method. Plasma samples for IGFBP-1, IGFBP-2 were assayed using a validated, sensitive, and specific colorimetric sandwich (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) ELISA method.|Day 1|Pharmacodynamic analysis set included all participants treated with PF-05231023 or placebo who had at least 1 pharmacodynamic endpoint. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836134|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADA): Day 34|Assays for the determination of human anti-drug (Anti-PF-05231023) antibodies (ADA) was performed.|Day 34|Safety population. No participant was involved in groups: PF-05231023 0.5,1.5,5,15,50,100 mg and placebo for this time point of outcome measure, hence results were not reported for the same.'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
836135|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADA): Day 22|Assays for the determination of human anti-drug (Anti-PF-05231023) antibodies (ADA) was performed.|Day 22|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
836136|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADA): Day 15|Assays for the determination of human anti-drug (Anti-PF-05231023) antibodies (ADA) was performed.|Day 15|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. No participant in the placebo group was assessed for this time point of outcome measure, hence results were not reported for the same. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
836137|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADA): Day 8|Assays for the determination of human anti-drug (Anti-PF-05231023) antibodies (ADA) was performed.|Day 8|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. No participant in the placebo group was assessed for this time point of outcome measure, hence results were not reported for the same.||participants|||Number
836138|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADA): Day 1|Assays for the determination of human anti-drug (Anti-PF-05231023) antibodies (ADA) was performed.|Day 1|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. No participant in the placebo group was assessed for this time point of outcome measure, hence results were not reported for the same.||participants|||Number
836139|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Blood Glucose Abnormalities|Criteria for blood glucose abnormality: Blood glucose levels <0.6*lower limit of normal (LLN) or >1.5*upper limit of normal (ULN).|Day -1 up to Day 15|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
836140|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Hypoglycemic Adverse Event Based on Capillary Glucose Levels|Capillary blood glucose levels were collected to observe any hypoglycemic adverse events. Hypoglycemia was assessed as following categories; Severe hypoglycemia (1. Participant was unable to treat himself/herself, requiring assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon 2. Exhibited one of following neurological symptoms memory loss, uncontrollable behavior, irrational behavior, unusual difficulty in awakening, suspected seizure, seizure or loss of consciousness, 3. Glucose <50 mg/dL confirmed on repeat measure); Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (1. Symptoms of hypoglycaemia accompanied by a measured glucose concentration <=70 mg/dL); asymptomatic hypoglycemia (not accompanied by typical symptoms of hypoglycaemia but with a measured glucose concentration <=70 mg/dL), and probable hypoglycemia (typical symptoms of hypoglycaemia are not accompanied by a glucose determination, but was presumably caused by a plasma glucose concentration <=70 mg/dL).|Day 0 up to Day 22|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
836141|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities|Criteria for potential clinical concern in ECG parameters: maximum PR interval of greater than or equal to (>=) 300 milliseconds (msec), maximum QRS interval >=140 msec, maximum QTCF interval (Fridericia’s Correction) of 450 to <480 msec, 480 to <500 msec and >=500 msec, maximum increase of >=25 percent (%) for baseline value of >200 msec for PR interval and maximum increase of >=50% for baseline value of less than or equal to (<=) 200 msec for QRS interval, maximum increase from baseline of >=30 msec to <60 msec and maximum increase from baseline of >60 msec in QTCF interval (Fridericia’s Correction).|Screening up to Day 15|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
836143|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Values|Criteria for laboratory tests abnormalities included: hemoglobin, hematocrit and red blood cells (RBCs)(less than [<] 0.8*lower limit of normal[LLN]); leucocytes (<0.6/greater than [>]1.5*upper limit of normal [ULN]); platelets (<0.5*LLN/>1.75*ULN); neutrophils, lymphocytes (<0.8*LLN/>1.2*ULN); eosinophils, basophils, monocytes (>1.2*ULN); total bilirubin, direct bilirubin, indirect bilirubin (>1.5*ULN); aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (>3*ULN), total protein, albumin (<0.8*LLN/>1.2*ULN); creatinine, urea (>1.3*ULN); glucose (<0.6*LLN/>1.5*ULN); uric acid (>1.2*ULN); sodium, potassium, chloride, calcium, bicarbonate (<0.9*LLN/>1.1*ULN); urine RBCs, urine white blood cells (WBCs) (> or equal[=]20 high-powered field), urine bacteria >20 high-powered field. Total number of participants with any laboratory abnormalities was reported.|Day -1 up to Day 15|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
836144|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 22 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.|Day 1 up to Day 22|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
836145|NCT01285518|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Physical Examination Findings|Physical examination included assessment of height, weight, blood pressure and pulse rate. Criteria for abnormal physical findings was based on investigator’s discretion and were reported as adverse event (AE), as planned.|Day -1 up to Day 22|Data was not collected since this outcome measure was not analyzed as per Sponsor’s discretion.|||||
836146|NCT01285609|Secondary|Median Number of Months With Progression Free Survival (PFS) Per mWHO in Participants Who Have Received at Least One Dose of Blinded Study Therapy at Primary Endpoint|Progression-free survival (PFS) is defined as the time between the date of randomization and the date of tumor progression per Modified World Health Organization (mWHO) criteria or death, whichever occurs first. A participant who died without reported progression per mWHO criteria were considered to have progressed on the date of death. For participants who remain alive and have not progressed, PFS was censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment. For participants who remain alive and have no recorded post-baseline tumor assessment, PFS was censored on the day of randomization.|Randomization until 518 deaths, up to June 2015 (approximately 48 months post study start)|All treated participants who received at least one dose of blinded therapy||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836147|NCT01285609|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) in All Randomized Participants at Primary Endpoint|Overall Survival (OS) was defined as the time from randomization to the date of death. Participants that had not died were censored at last known date alive. Median OS time was calculated using Kaplan-Meier Estimates. Interim analysis for the Primary Endpoint occurred when the following 2 conditions were both met: (1) 518 deaths were observed in randomized participants treated with at least one dose of blinded study therapy and (2) 705 deaths were observed in all randomized participants.|Randomization until 705 deaths, up to June 2015 (approximately 48 months post study start)|All randomized participants||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836148|NCT01285609|Primary|Overall Survival (OS) in Participants Who Received at Least One Dose of Blinded Study Therapy at Primary Endpoint|Overall Survival (OS) was defined as the time from randomization to the date of death. Participants that had not died were censored at last known date alive. Median OS time was calculated using Kaplan-Meier Estimates. Interim analysis for the Primary Endpoint occurred when the following 2 conditions were both met: (1) 518 deaths were observed in randomized participants treated with at least one dose of blinded study therapy and (2) 705 deaths were observed in all randomized participants.|Randomization until 518 deaths, up to June 2015 (approximately 48 months post study start)|All treated participants who received at least one dose of blinded therapy||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836149|NCT01285635|Secondary|Median Progression Free Survival in Months|Progression is defined, by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors), as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions.|3 Years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836150|NCT01285635|Secondary|Median Overall Survival in Months||3 Years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836151|NCT01285635|Secondary|Incidence of Grade 3 and 4 Toxicities by Arm|Measure the grade III/IV toxicities experienced by patients with advanced, locally recurrent, or metastatic SCCHN|3 years|||participants|||Number
836152|NCT01285635|Secondary|Median Duration of Response For All Groups Combined||3 years|All patients on study||months||Full Range|Median
836153|NCT01285635|Primary|Number of Patients With a Complete Response (CR) and Partial Response (PR)|The primary objective is to estimate the proportion of patients with a complete response (CR) and partial response(PR) defined by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors). CR is defined as the disappearance of all target lesions and PR is defined as at least a 20% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions.|12 months|||Patients|||Number
836154|NCT01285713|Secondary|Dextrose Containing Intravenous Fluids (IVF) Affect Clinically Relevant Outcomes|Hypothesis 2: Admission rates, revisits to the emergency department (ED) or primary care physician, and length of illness will be decreased with the addition of dextrose to IVF. Physician and parental satisfaction will be increased with the addition of dextrose to IVF.|4 hours||||||
836155|NCT01285713|Primary|Measurement of Serum Ketones Before and After Administration of Intravenous Fluids for Acute Gastroenteritis|Measurement of serum ketones by bedside ketone meter before and after administration of IVF for both groups to determine a change in serum ketones. The hypothesis is that dextrose containing IVF will lead to a decrease in serum ketones in children with acute gastroenteritis who require IV rehydration.|4 hours|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
836156|NCT01285791|Secondary|Change in Glucose and Triglyceride Blood Level|finding correlation between sonographic outcome using ultrasound, as measured by the decrease in the level of visceral fat-by centimeters, weight loss and blood levels of triglycerides and glucose.|18 months||||||
836157|NCT01285791|Primary|Decrease in the Visceral Fat Layer Measured by Ultrasound a Day Before and a Year After Surgery.|morbid obese patients undergoing a type of bariatric surgery either a laparoscopic gastric banding, a laparoscopic sleeve astrectomy or a laparoscopic gastric bypass, in our department will be evaluated by ultrasound 1 day before surgery and one year after surgery to determine the amount of visceral fat layer-by centimeters- that was decreased .|18 months|||visceral fat reduction in centimeters||Standard Error|Mean
836158|NCT01285843|Secondary|Radiological Evaluation to Assess the Fixation and Stability of Femoral and Acetabular Components.|Stability and fixation of both, femoral and acetabular component will be assessed counted number of events of stem subsidence, femoral and cup loosening, cup migration and presence of radiolucencies occurred during the study at 6 months and 1 year time points.|6 months, 1 year|||participants|||Number
836159|NCT01285843|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Patient's Activity Level. Assessment Using the High Activity Arthroplasty Score.|The HAAS was designed to detect subtle variations in functional ability after lower limb arthroplasty, in a scale from 0 (minimum, the worst condition) to 18 points (maximum, the best condition) The HAAS values at each time points, 6 months and 1 year, and for each patient, will be reported as difference respect the preoperative value collected at preoperative.|6 months, 1 year|20 patients/group were enrolled at beginning but from 6 weeks to 1 year time point the score was counted for patients available. At 6 weeks the HAAS was calculated for n=20 (AMIStem) and n=19 (Quadra), at 6 months n=20 (AMIStem) and n=18 (Quadra) and at 1 year n=18 (AMistem) and n=18 (Quadra).||units on a scale (0-18)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836160|NCT01285843|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Patients' Function. Clinical Evaluation Using the Harris Hip Score|"The items in the Harris hip score (HHS) include an analysis of the operated hip according to pain, function, mobility and stability, and an analysis of deformities, in a scale form 0 point (the worst condition) to 100 points (the best condition). The Harris Hip Score will be used to assess the subjective and objective improvement in the patient. The usefulness of the score has been designed to estimate clinical outcomes after THA and demonstrated high reliability and validity.
The HHS values at each time points, 6 weeks, 6 months and 1 year, and for each patient, will be reported as difference respect the preoperative value collected at preoperative."|6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year|20 patients/group were enrolled at beginning but from 6 weeks to 1 year time point the score was counted for patients available. At 6 weeks the HHS was calculated for n=20 (AMIStem) and n=19 (Quadra), at 6 months n=20 (AMIStem) and n=18 (Quadra) and at 1 year n=18 (AMistem) and n=18 (Quadra).||units on a scale (0-100)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836161|NCT01285843|Primary|Compare Periprosthetic Bone Mineral Density (BMD), at 1y Postoperative, in Patients That Have Undergone a Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) Via the Direct Anterior Approach Receiving Either a Quadra or AMIStem Femoral Component.||0-12 months|||g/cm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
836162|NCT01285908|Secondary|Arterial Plasma Levels of Dihydroxyphenylglycol (DHPG)|Plasma levels of dihydroxyphenylglycol are obtained from blood samples via IV catheter.|2 experimental days|One subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 60 degrees following saline infusion and one subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 40 degrees following saline infusion; therefore the data for these subjects was not included in the saline condition.||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
836163|NCT01285908|Secondary|Arterial Plasma Levels of Norepinephrine|Plasma levels of norepinephrine are obtained from blood samples via IV catheter.|2 experimental days|One subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 60 degrees following saline infusion and one subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 40 degrees following saline infusion; therefore the data for these subjects was not included in the saline condition.||nmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
836164|NCT01285908|Secondary|Total Peripheral Resistance|The extent to which norepinephrine infusion affected total peripheral resistance, by comparison of total peripheral resistance at varying tilt angles during baseline and saline infusion.|2 experimental days|One subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 60 degrees following saline infusion and one subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 40 degrees following saline infusion; therefore the data for these subjects was not included in the saline condition.||mmHg/(min/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836165|NCT01285908|Secondary|Cardiac Output|The extent to which norepinephrine infusion affects cardiac output, by comparison of cardiac output at varying tilt angles during baseline and saline infusion.|2 experimental days|One subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 60 degrees following saline infusion and one subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 40 degrees following saline infusion; therefore the data for these subjects was not included in the saline condition.||L/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
836166|NCT01285908|Primary|Blood Pressure (Mean)|The extent to which norepinephrine infusion maintains average blood pressure, by comparison with the fractional changes in blood pressure at varying tilt angles during baseline and saline infusion.|2 experimental days|One subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 60 degrees following saline infusion and one subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 40 degrees following saline infusion; therefore the data for these subjects was not included in the saline condition.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
836167|NCT01285908|Secondary|Cardiac Stroke Volume|The extent to which norepinephrine infusion affects cardiac stroke volume, by comparison of cardiac stroke volume at varying tilt angles during baseline and saline infusion.|2 experimental days|One subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 60 degrees following saline infusion and one subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 40 degrees following saline infusion; therefore the data for these subjects was not included in the saline condition.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836168|NCT01285908|Secondary|Heart Rate|The extent to which norepinephrine infusion affects heart rate, by comparison of beat-to-beat heart rate at varying tilt angles during baseline and saline infusion.|2 experimental days|One subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 60 degrees following saline infusion and one subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 40 degrees following saline infusion; therefore the data for these subjects was not included in the saline condition.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
836169|NCT01285908|Primary|Blood Pressure (Diastolic)|The extent to which norepinephrine infusion maintains blood pressure, by comparison with the changes in diastolic pressure at varying tilt angles during baseline and saline infusion.|2 experimental days|One subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 60 degrees following saline infusion and one subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 40 degrees following saline infusion; therefore the data for these subjects was not included in the saline condition.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
836170|NCT01285908|Primary|Blood Pressure (Systolic)|The extent to which norepinephrine infusion maintains blood pressure, by comparison with the changes in systolic pressure at varying tilt angles during baseline and saline infusion.|2 experimental days|One subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 60 degrees following saline infusion and one subject was unable to tolerate tilting to 40 degrees following saline infusion; therefore the data for these subjects was not included in the saline condition.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
836171|NCT01285947|Primary|Pain Rated by Subjects|"The mean pain scores will be compared between naïve subjects and non-naïve subjects averaged over the anatomical sites: periocular (temple), midface/cheek, and abdomen and over all the different treatments.
Pain scores were recorded along a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) with 0 (no pain- better) to 10 (maximal pain-worst). This is a 10 cm long line in which the subject was asked to draw a line on the scale with 0 (no pain- better) at one end to 10 (maximal pain-worst) at the other end. The drawn line was measured on the 10 cm line using a ruler to obtain the score."|3 hours for all treatments in one visit|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836179|NCT01286077|Secondary|Tumor Response: Percentage of Participants With Partial Response (PR) Based on International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Response Criteria|Tumor response was assessed as PR based on IMWG response criteria as >=50% reduction of serum and reduction in 24-h urinary M protein by >=90% or to <200 mg/24 h; or serum/urine M protein unmeasurable:>=50% decrease in the difference between involved and uninvolved FLC levels; or serum/urine M protein and FLC assay unmeasurable: >=50% reduction in plasma cells provided baseline bone marrow plasma cell percentage was >=30%; or plus if present at baseline: >=50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmocytomas.|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|"FAS included all the randomized subjects who were eligible for efficacy analysis, that is, excluding subjects who did not have baseline and/or post-baseline data. N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the subjects evaluable this measure."||Percentage of participants|||Number
836180|NCT01286077|Secondary|Tumor Response: Percentage of Participants With Stable Disease (SD) or Progressive Disease (PD) Based on International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Response Criteria|Tumor response was assessed as SD based on IMWG response criteria as not meeting criteria for CR, VGPR, PR, or progressive disease; PD as Increase of >=25% from lowest response level in any one or more of the following: serum M protein (absolute increase >=0.5 g/dl)c or urine M protein (absolute increase >=200 mg/24 h); or serum/urine M protein unmeasurable: difference between involved and uninvolved free light chain (FLC) levels; absolute increase >10 mg/dL; or % bone marrow plasma cells: absolute value >=10% or definite development of new bone lesions or soft tissue plasmocytomas or definite increase in the size of existing bone lesions or soft tissue plasmocytomas; or development of hypercalcemia attributed solely to the plasma cell proliferative disorder.|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|"FAS included all the randomized subjects who were eligible for efficacy analysis, that is, excluding subjects who did not have baseline and/or post-baseline data. N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the subjects evaluable this measure."||Percentage of participants|||Number
836181|NCT01286077|Secondary|Tumor Response: Percentage of Participants With Very Good Partial Response (VGPR) or Stringent Complete Response (sCR) or Complete Response (CR) Based on International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Response Criteria|Tumor response was assessed as VGPR based on IMWG response criteria if, a) serum/urine M protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or; b) greater than or equal to 90% reduction in serum M protein plus urine M protein level less than 100 milligram/24 hour. CR=normal free light chain (FLC) ratio and absence of phenotypically aberrant plasma cells (PC) in bone marrow with a minimum of 3000 total PC analyzed by multiparametric flow cytometry; Complete response (CR) negative immunofixation on the serum and urine and, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmocytomas and <5% plasma cells in bone marrow.|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|"FAS included all the randomized subjects who were eligible for efficacy analysis, that is, excluding subjects who did not have baseline and/or post-baseline data. N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the subjects evaluable this measure."||Percentage of participants|||Number
836196|NCT01286168|Secondary|Per Drain Analysis: Drain Bulb Fluid Colonization at Removal||Approximately one month after surgery|Analysis was modified intent-to-treat (IIT). Reported here only in those subjects where drain removal was later than primary endpoint collection.||drains|Participants||Number
836182|NCT01286077|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Assessed by Euro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)|Subjects were asked to rate their general state of health on a Visual analog scale (in millimeter [mm]) ranging from 0 (worst state of health) to 100 (best conceivable state of health) mm.|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|FAS included all the randomized subjects who were eligible for efficacy analysis, that is, excluding subjects who did not have baseline and/or post-baseline data. Missing data was imputed by last observation carried forward (LOCF) method.||millimeter (mm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836183|NCT01286077|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival defined as time from first treatment of MMY, i.e. day of first dose of induction therapy for MMY to date of death|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|"FAS included all the randomized subjects who were eligible for efficacy analysis, that is, excluding subjects who did not have baseline and/or post-baseline data. N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the subjects evaluable this measure."||Months||Standard Error|Median
836184|NCT01286077|Secondary|Karnofsky Performance Status|"The Karnofsky performance status is a way to quantify cancer patients' general well-being and activities of daily life and runs from 100 to 0, where 100 is perfect health and 0 is death."|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|"FAS included all the randomized subjects who were eligible for efficacy analysis, that is, excluding subjects who did not have baseline and/or post-baseline data. N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the subjects evaluable this measure. Missing data was imputed by last observation carried forward (LOCF) method."||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836185|NCT01286077|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Spine T-score|T score is used to calculate bone mineral density (calcium and other types of minerals) in an area of the bone. T score is the number of standard deviations above or below the mean for a healthy 30 year old adult of the same sex and ethnicity as a participant. This score is calculated from participant's age, gender and race and skeletal site. T score has a mean of ‘50’ and a standard deviation of ‘10’. T score lower than its mean indicate low bone mineral density.|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|"FAS included all the randomized subjects who were eligible for efficacy analysis, that is, excluding subjects who did not have baseline and/or post-baseline data. N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the subjects evaluable this measure. Missing data was imputed by last observation carried forward (LOCF) method."||T score||Standard Deviation|Mean
836186|NCT01286077|Secondary|Appearance of New Bone Lesions Compared to Baseline|Appearance of new bone lesions assessed by skeletal survey compared to baseline|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|Data could not be summarised statistically due to insufficient data at End of treatment.||subjects|||Number
836187|NCT01286077|Secondary|Number of Patients With Skeletal Events|Number of patients with skeletal-related events (i.e. pathological fracture (vertebral, non-vertebral, combined), radiotherapy, spinal cord compression, orthopaedic surgery, hypercalcaemia) occurring over 24 months study period|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|"FAS included all the randomized subjects who were eligible for efficacy analysis, that is, excluding subjects who did not have baseline and/or post-baseline data. N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the subjects evaluable this measure."||patients|||Number
836188|NCT01286077|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Biochemical Bone Markers: Dickkopf Homolog 1 (DKK-1)|Bone markers Dickkopf homolog 1 (DKK-1) was measured on serum samples.|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|"FAS was used for analysis. N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the subjects evaluable this measure and n=number pf participants analysed for this outcome measure at specific time point. Missing data was imputed by last observation carried forward (LOCF) method."||Picomole per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836189|NCT01286077|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Biochemical Bone Markers: Carboxyterminal Collagen Crosslinks (CTX-I)|Change from Baseline in Biochemical Bone Markers: CTX-I was assessed|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|"FAS was used for analysis. N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the subjects evaluable this measure and n=number pf participants analysed for this outcome measure at specific time point. Missing data was imputed by last observation carried forward (LOCF) method."||Nanogram per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836190|NCT01286077|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Biochemical Bone Markers:Carboxyterminal Telopeptide of Type I Collagen (ICTP), Osteocalcin, Bone-specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BAP)|Bone markers (carboxyterminal telopeptide of type I collagen (ICTP), osteocalcin (Oc) and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP) was measured on serum samples.|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|"FAS was used for analysis. N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the subjects evaluable this measure and n=number pf participants analysed for this outcome measure at specific time point. Missing data was imputed by last observation carried forward (LOCF) method."||Microgram per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836191|NCT01286077|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|The Progression-Free Survival (PFS) was assessed as median number of months from baseline until the first documented sign of disease progression (increase in disease; radiographic, clinical, or both) or death due to any cause, whichever occurred earlier.|Baseline up to end of study (approximately 4 years 7 months)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the randomized subjects who were eligible for efficacy analysis, that is, excluding subjects who did not have baseline and/or post-baseline data.||Months||Standard Error|Mean
836192|NCT01286077|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density (BMD) in the Femur at End of Treatment|Change from baseline in bone mineral density (BMD) will be assessed by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scans at baseline and the end of treatment EOT visit|at screening (i.e. between 14 and 1 days prior to start of treatment) and at end of treatment (EOT), i.e. 24 weeks after randomization or until start of alternative MMY therapy, if earlier|ITT analysis:8 patients in the bortezomib group and 8 patients in the non-treated control group did not have values at the 2 timepoints to allow calculation of the parameter||g/mm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
836193|NCT01286077|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density (BMD) in the Spine at End of Treatment (EOT)|Change from baseline in bone mineral density (BMD) will be assessed by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scans at baseline and the EOT visit|at screening (i.e. between 14 and 1 days prior to start of treatment) and at end of treatment (EOT), i.e. 24 weeks after randomization or until start of alternative MMY therapy, if earlier|ITT analysis:13 patients in the bortezomib group and 14 patients in the non-treated control group did not have values at the 2 timepoints to allow calculation of the parameter||g/mm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
836197|NCT01286168|Secondary|Per Drain Analysis: Drain Tubing Colonization at Removal||Approximately one month after surgery|Analysis was modified intent-to-treat; subjects who withdrew or were screen failures before study intervention were excluded. All patients who completed were included in the analysis. 2 subjects missed endpoint due of protocol deviation or discontinuation, and 2 had the sterility of their drain tubing compromised by external exposures.||drains|Participants||Number
836198|NCT01286168|Primary|Per Drain Analysis: Drain Bulb Fluid Colonization at Approximately 1 Week||Approximately 1 week after surgery|Analysis was modified intent-to-treat (IIT); subjects who withdrew or were screen failures before study intervention were excluded. All patients who completed were included in the analysis.||drains|Participants||Number
836199|NCT01286168|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Surgical Site Infection Within 1 Year||Approximately one year after surgery|||participants|||Number
836200|NCT01286168|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Surgical Site Infection Within 30 Days||Approximately 30 days after surgery|Analysis was modified intent-to-treat (IIT); subjects who withdrew or were screen failures before study intervention were excluded. All patients who completed were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
836201|NCT01286168|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Drain Bulb Fluid Bacterial Colonization at Removal|Bacterial growth was defined as plate growth of 1+ or greater. Drains were removed a variable times across patients, per clinical indication. A second bulb culture was obtained later than 1 week ONLY in those drains that were not removed at 1 week.|Approximately 2 weeks after surgery|Analysis was modified intent-to-treat (IIT). Reported here only in those subjects where drain removal was later than primary endpoint collection.||participants|||Number
836202|NCT01286168|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Drain Tubing Colonization at Removal|Drain tubing colonization was defined as greater than 50 colony forming units. Drains were removed at variable timepoints based on the clinical situation.|Approximately two weeks after surgery|Analysis was modified intent-to-treat; subjects who withdrew or were screen failures before study intervention were excluded. All patients who completed were included in the analysis. 2 subjects missed endpoint due of protocol deviation or discontinuation, and 2 had the sterility of their drain tubing compromised by external exposures.||participants|||Number
836203|NCT01286168|Primary|Number of Subjects With Drain Bulb Fluid Bacterial Colonization at Approximately 1 Week|Bacterial growth was defined as plate growth of 1+ or greater. Drains were removed at variable times across patients, per clinical indication. When clinically indicated, some patients did have their drains removed at the one week visit, in which case they only had one bulb fluid culture.|Approximately 1 week after surgery|Analysis was modified intent-to-treat (IIT); subjects who withdrew or were screen failures before study intervention were excluded. All patients who completed were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
836204|NCT01286207|Primary|Number of Participants With Drug-related Lab Adverse Experiences|"Patients with drug-related (as assessed by an investigator who is a qualified physician according to his/her best clinical judgment) laboratory adverse experience (LAE).
A LAE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the SPONSOR'S product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product."|Up to 12 weeks|All patients who took study medication and had lab test(s)were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
836205|NCT01286207|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to Clinical Adverse Experiences||Up to 12 months|All patients who took study medication were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
836206|NCT01286207|Primary|Number of Participants With Drug-related Clinical Adverse Experiences|Patients with drug-related (as assessed by an investigator who is a qualified physician according to his/her best clinical judgment) CAEs.|Up to 12 months|All patients who took study medication were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
836207|NCT01286207|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Clinical Adverse Experiences|Serious clinical adverse experiences (CAEs) are any adverse events (AEs) occurring at any dose that; results in death; or is life threatening; or results in a persistent or significant disability/incapacity; or results in or prolongs an existing inpatient hospitalization; or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or is a cancer; or is an overdose.|Up to 12 months|All patients who took study medication were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
836208|NCT01286207|Primary|Percent of Patient's Headaches With Pain Relief at 2 Hours After the Initial Dose of Test Drug|Headache severity was rated on a 4-point scale (0 = no headache; 1 = mild pain; 2 = moderate pain; 3 = severe pain) immediately before initial dose and at 2 hours thereafter. Pain relief was defined as a reduction of headache severity from grades 2/3 at baseline to 0/1.|2 hours after initial dose of test drug|All patients who took study medication and filled out their diary cards were included in the analysis of efficacy. No data were imputed.||percent of headaches||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836209|NCT01286311|Secondary|Presence of an Aspirin Prescription|This will measure the presence of an aspirin prescriptions on the medication list in the electronic medical record.|9 months|38 patients in the intervention arm and 50 patients in the control arm had aspirin listed in their medication list in the electronic medical record as the start of the study therefore they were excluded from this analysis.||% patients w/aspirin now on med list|||Number
836210|NCT01286311|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Uncontrolled Hypertension Who Had an Increase in the Number of Antihypertensive Medication Drug Classes Prescribed|This will measure the percentage of participants who had uncontrolled hypertension at baseline who had an increase in the number of antihypertensive medication drug classes prescribed within 9 months.|9 months|Among patients with uncontrolled hypertension, 76 of the 218 in the intervention arm and 85 of 217 in the control arm were included.||percentage of participants|||Number
836211|NCT01286311|Secondary|Medication Prescriptions for Dyslipidemia|This will look at whether lipid lowering medications (LLM) were prescribed for dyslipidemia.|9 months|||% of patients with New Rx for LLM|||Number
836212|NCT01286311|Secondary|Frequency of Clinical Encounters|This will measure the difference in frequency of clinical encounters in the electronic medical record.|9 months|||% of patients with any office visit|||Number
836213|NCT01286311|Primary|Comparative Outcomes: Intervention Group LDL Reduction Compared to Control Group LDL Reduction|Significant LDL cholesterol reduction at 9 months Definition: Percentage of patients with LDL-C repeated and which is at least 30 mg/dl lower than baseline|9 months|||% of patients with major LDL reduction|||Number
836215|NCT01286324|Secondary|To Determine the Change From Baseline of Chamomile on Daytime Functioning Measures|"Change from baseline of chamomile extract, three tablets p.o. twice times daily versus placebo on daytime functioning measures at 28 days:
the change from baseline of measures of depression and anxiety evaluated respectively with the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and trait portrait of the State Trait Anxiety Index (STAI);
the change from baseline of fatigue as determined by the Fatigue Severity Scale of Sleep Disorders (FSS);
the change from baseline of global QOL (as determined by the 12 Item Short Form Health Survey Version 2 {SF-12 V2})"|baseline and day 28||||||
836216|NCT01286324|Primary|Change From Baseline of Chamomile Extract on Measures of Sleep at Day 28.|"Change from baseline of chamomile extract, three tablets (equivalent to 7.5 g of dried herb) p.o. twice times daily versus placebo on the following sleep measures at 28 days:
the change from baseline of daily self-report of sleep as assessed by a sleep diary that includes determination of: (i) sleep efficiency, which equals The total sleep time divided by time-in-bed, multiplied by 100. This measure is our primary aim (SE)."|baseline and day 28|||percentage of time asleep||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
836217|NCT01286402|Secondary|Perinatal/Neonatal Outcomes||at neonatal discharge from hospital following delivery||||||
836218|NCT01286402|Secondary|Maternal Side Effects||during treatment, end of treatment and at 2 week postpartum visit||||||
836219|NCT01286402|Secondary|Self-reported Reduction in Number of Cigarettes Smoked Per Day||at 1 week post treatment and at 2 week postpartum visit||||||
836220|NCT01286402|Secondary|Continuous Abstinence From Birth to 2nd Week Postpartum Followup||at 2nd week postpartum followup visit||||||
836221|NCT01286402|Secondary|Continuous Abstinence From End of Treatment Through the 2 Week Followup||at two week followup visit||||||
836222|NCT01286402|Secondary|Enrollment, Retention and Compliance Rates||1 year (estimated)||||||
836223|NCT01286402|Primary|7-day Point Prevalence Smoking Abstinence With Cotinine Validation at the End of Treatment||1 week post treatment|||participants|||Number
836224|NCT01286454|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half Life (t1/2) for Fesoterodine Metabolite (5-HMT)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 24, 30, 36 and 48 hrs post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. Here, the N (number of participants analyzed) is signifying the number of participants contributing to the mean.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
836225|NCT01286454|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for Fesoterodine Metabolite (5-HMT)||0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 24, 30, 36 and 48 hrs post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
836226|NCT01286454|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Fesoterodine Metabolite (5-HMT)||0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 24, 30, 36 and 48 hrs post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
836227|NCT01286454|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) for Fesoterodine Metabolite (5-HMT)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero to the last measured concentration (AUClast) of 5-HMT.|0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 24, 30, 36 and 48 hrs post dose|PK parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
836228|NCT01286454|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)] for Fesoterodine Metabolite (5-hydroxymethyltolterodine [5-HMT])|AUC (0 - ∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 24, 30, 36 and 48 hours (hrs) post dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all randomized and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. Here, the N (number of participants analyzed) is signifying the number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
836229|NCT01286480|Secondary|MyHeart Score|Change in patient knowledge of his/her CHD (MyHeart score), comparing baseline to 1 month and 6 months follow-up. The MyHeart scale was developed for this study and has a grade 4.6 reading level. It consists of seven short answer or multiple-choice questions. Given the heterogeneity of prior medical and surgical interventions and need for medications in adolescents with heart disease, the denominator for some questions varied from one participant to the next. Accordingly, each participant was assigned a percentage correct score (numerator/denominator×100) at each time point. Higher percentage correct score reflects better patient knowledge of his/her CHD|Baseline, 1 month and 6 months|||percentage of score||Standard Deviation|Mean
836230|NCT01286480|Primary|Transition Readiness Assessment Questionnaire (TRAQ) Score|The TRAQ is the most rigorously evaluated transition readiness questionnaire available and was developed in the USA. It has 29 items with two domains, self-management (16 items) and self-advocacy (13 ). The TRAQ is at a grade 5.7 reading level and uses a Likert scale. Each item is scored 1-5, with 1 being assigned for responses of “No, I do not know how” and a score of 5 assigned for responses of “Yes, I always do this when I need to.” The TRAQ scores produced include an overall score and a subscale score. The overall score and the subscale scores are calculated simply by taking the average score across the items in the questionnaire (or subscale). The higher the score, the greater the perceived self-management or self-advocacy skills of the participant. The lower scores indicate the participant has a lower perceived level of self-management or self-advocacy.|Baseline, 1 month and 6 months|The intervention involve a 60 minute interaction between the teen and an advanced practice nurse (APN) in the cardiology clinic. The youth in the usual care arm see a nurse for vitals. They rely on their cardiologist for information about their heart condition. The approach and amount of time taken by each cardiologist with a youth varies.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836231|NCT01286493|Primary|Rabies Neutralizing Antibody Titers|"Rabies Neutralizing Antibody titers(RNab)of HIV-infected patients who receive booster rabies vaccination would be measured by Rapid Fluorescent Focus Inhibition Test(RFFIT) method at day 0, 7, 14, 28, 90,180 and 360. RNab level above 0.5 IU/ml indicate acceptable protective antibody response.
for 7 times in 1 year."|Day 360|As preliminary study, the number of participants was estimated to be above 15 - 20 cases.||IU/ml||Full Range|Geometric Mean
836235|NCT01286558|Secondary|Seated SBP Control Rate at Trough|SBP control rate: The rate of patients with controlled seated DBP at trough of less than 140 mmHg after the 8-week double-blind period At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|8 weeks|Patients included in FAS and with seated SBP >=140 mmHg at reference baseline||percentage of participants|||Number
836236|NCT01286558|Secondary|Seated DBP Control Rate at Trough|DBP control rate: The rate of patients with controlled seated DBP at trough of less than 90 mmHg after the 8-week double-blind period At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|8 weeks|Patients included in FAS and with seated DBP >=90 mmHg at reference baseline||percentage of participants|||Number
836237|NCT01286558|Secondary|Changes From the Reference Baseline in SBP Hourly Mean Over the 24-hour Dosing Interval as Measured by ABPM|Reference baseline: Status of patients after the 12-week open-label run-in period with telmisartan monotherapy followed by 40 mg telmisartan and 5 mg amlodipine combination therapy, where patients' eligibility to enter the double-blind treatment period was examined|Reference baseline, 8 weeks|ABPM set, i.e., a subset of FAS and with patients who had available ABPM measurements||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
836238|NCT01286558|Secondary|Changes From the Reference Baseline in DBP Hourly Mean Over the 24-hour Dosing Interval as Measured by ABPM|Reference baseline: Status of patients after the 12-week open-label run-in period with telmisartan monotherapy followed by 40 mg telmisartan and 5 mg amlodipine combination therapy, where patients' eligibility to enter the double-blind treatment period was examined|Reference baseline, 8 weeks|ABPM set, i.e., a subset of FAS and with patients who had available ABPM measurements||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
836239|NCT01286558|Secondary|Changes From the Pseudo-baseline in the 24-hour ABPM Mean (Relative to Dose Time) for SBP|Pseudo-baseline: Status of patients after the 6-week open-label run-in period with telmisartan monotherapy, where patients' eligibility to enter the double-blind treatment period was examined|Pseudo-baseline, 14 weeks|ABPM set, i.e., a subset of FAS and with patients who had available ABPM measurements||mm Hg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836240|NCT01286558|Secondary|Changes From the Pseudo-baseline in the 24-hour ABPM Mean (Relative to Dose Time) for DBP|Pseudo-baseline: Status of patients after the 6-week open-label run-in period with telmisartan monotherapy, where patients' eligibility to enter the double-blind treatment period was examined|Pseudo-baseline, 14 weeks|ABPM set, i.e., a subset of FAS and with patients who had available ABPM measurements||mm Hg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836241|NCT01286558|Secondary|Changes From the Reference Baseline in the 24-hour ABPM Mean (Relative to Dose Time) for SBP|Reference baseline: Status of patients after the 12-week open-label run-in period with telmisartan monotherapy followed by 40 mg telmisartan and 5 mg amlodipine combination therapy, where patients' eligibility to enter the double-blind treatment period was examined|Reference baseline, 8 weeks|ABPM set, i.e., a subset of FAS and with patients who had available ABPM measurements||mm Hg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836242|NCT01286558|Secondary|Changes From the Reference Baseline in the 24-hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM) Mean (Relative to Dose Time) for DBP|Reference baseline: Status of patients after the 12-week open-label run-in period with telmisartan monotherapy followed by 40 mg telmisartan and 5 mg amlodipine combination therapy, where patients' eligibility to enter the double-blind treatment period was examined|Reference baseline, 8 weeks|ABPM set, i.e., a subset of FAS and with patients who had available ABPM measurements||mm Hg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836243|NCT01286558|Secondary|Reduction From the Reference Baseline in Mean Seated Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) at Trough|Reference baseline: Status of patients after the 12-week open-label run-in period with telmisartan monotherapy followed by 40 mg telmisartan and 5 mg amlodipine combination therapy, where patients' eligibility to enter the double-blind treatment period was examined At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|Reference baseline, 8 weeks|FAS||mm Hg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836244|NCT01286558|Primary|Reduction From the Reference Baseline in Mean Seated Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) at Trough|Reference baseline: Status of patients after the 12-week open-label run-in period with telmisartan monotherapy followed by 40 mg telmisartan and 5 mg amlodipine combination therapy, where patients' eligibility to enter the double-blind treatment period was examined At trough: 24-hour post-dosing|Reference baseline, 8 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS)||mm Hg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836245|NCT01286740|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of RPV at Week 48|The mean (SD) plasma concentration (ng/mL) of RPV was measured at Week 48.|Week 48|Participants with evaluable measurements for plasma concentration of RPV at Week 48 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836246|NCT01286740|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of RPV at Week 36|The mean (SD) plasma concentration (ng/mL) of RPV was measured at Week 36.|Week 36|Participants with evaluable measurements for plasma concentration of RPV at Week 36 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836247|NCT01286740|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of RPV at Week 24|The mean (SD) plasma concentration (ng/mL) of RPV was measured at Week 24.|Week 24|Participants with evaluable measurements for plasma concentration of RPV at Week 24 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836248|NCT01286740|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of EFV at Week 12|The mean (SD) plasma concentration (ng/mL) of EFV was measured at Week 12. No analyses of EFV plasma concentrations were conducted after Week 12|Week 12|Participants with evaluable measurements for plasma concentration of EFV at Week 12 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
836249|NCT01286740|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of RPV at Week 12|The mean (SD) plasma concentration (ng/mL) of RPV was measured at Week 12.|Week 12|Participants with measurements for plasma concentration of RPV at Week 12 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836250|NCT01286740|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of RPV and EFV at Week 8|The mean (SD) plasma concentration (ng/mL) of RPV and EFV was measured at Week 8.|Week 8|Participants with evaluable measurements for plasma concentration of RPV and EFV at Week 8 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836251|NCT01286740|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of RPV and EFV at Week 6|The mean (SD) plasma concentration (ng/mL) of RPV and EFV was measured at Week 6.|Week 6|Participants with evaluable measurements for plasma concentrations of RPV and EFV at Week 6 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836252|NCT01286740|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of RPV and EFV at Week 4|The mean (SD) plasma concentration (ng/mL) of RPV and EFV was measured at Week 4.|Week 4|Participants with evaluable measurements for plasma concentrations of RPV and EFV at Week 4 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836253|NCT01286740|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of RPV and EFV at Week 2|The mean (SD) plasma concentration (ng/mL) of RPV and EFV was measured at Week 2.|Week 2|Participants with evaluable measurements for plasma concentrations of RPV and EFV at Week 2 were analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836257|NCT01286740|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 12 (FDA Snapshot Analysis)|The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 12 was analyzed using the FDA snapshot analysis.|Week 12|Full Analysis Set: participants who were enrolled into the study, received at least one dose of study drug and had no major protocol violation||percentage of participants|||Number
836258|NCT01286753|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Vemurafenib: Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve (AUC)|AUC is a measure of the drug or biologic concentration in the body following administration.|Up to approximately 4 years|Data were not collected for this outcome.|||||
836259|NCT01286753|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event was defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product.|Baseline until 28 days after the last dose of study treatment or until initiation of another anti-cancer therapy, whichever occurred first (up to approximately 4 years)|Safety population, defined as enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
836260|NCT01286753|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival: the interval between the date of first treatment to the date of death, regardless of the cause of death; participants who were alive at the time of the analysis were censored at the date of the last known alive; participants with no post baseline information were censored at the time of enrollment.|From the date of first treatment to the date of death for any cause (up to approximately 4 years)|Intent-to-Treat population, defined as all enrolled participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836261|NCT01286753|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|Progression-free survival: the interval between the day of first treatment and the first documentation of PD or death; participants who were withdrawn from the study without documented progression were censored at the date of the last tumor assessment when the participant was known to be progression-free; participants without post baseline tumor assessments were censored at the time of enrollment. PD: ≥ 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, compared to the smallest sum on study.|From the day of first treatment until the first documented PD or death (up to approximately 4 years)|Efficacy population, defined as all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and excluding 3 participants in the TKI Experienced group who had previous BRAFi or MEKi treatment or withdrew consent.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836262|NCT01286753|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response (for participants with confirmed best response CR or PR): the interval between earliest qualifying response and date of progression of disease (PD) or death for any cause, whichever occurred first; participants with no documented progression after CR or PR were censored at the date of last known CR or PR, respectively. CR: disappearance of all target lesions with reduction in target/non-target pathological lymph nodes to < 10 mm. PR: ≥ 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, compared to the baseline sum diameters. PD: ≥ 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, compared to the smallest sum on study.|From the date of first qualifying response to the date of PD or death for any cause (up to approximately 4 years)|Efficacy population, defined as all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and excluding 3 participants in the TKI Experienced group who had previous BRAFi or MEKi treatment or withdrew consent.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836263|NCT01286753|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate|Clinical benefit rate: the percentage of participants with confirmed CR, PR, or stable disease (SD; maintained for at least 6 months) as assessed by investigators according to RECIST v1.1. CR: disappearance of all target lesions with reduction in target/non-target pathological lymph nodes to < 10 mm. PR: ≥ 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, compared to the baseline sum diameters. SD: neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, compared to the baseline sum diameters.|Up to approximately 4 years|Efficacy population, defined as all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and excluding 3 participants in the TKI Experienced group who had previous BRAFi or MEKi treatment or withdrew consent.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836264|NCT01286753|Secondary|Best Overall Response Rate in TKI-Experienced Participants|Best overall response rate was assessed by the investigators according to RECIST v1.1. Best overall response rate: the percentage of participants with best objective response of CR or PR (calculated as the number of participants with best response CR or PR divided by the total number of efficacy-evaluable participants). CR: disappearance of all target lesions with reduction in target/non-target pathological lymph nodes to < 10 mm. PR: ≥ 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, compared to the baseline sum diameters.|Up to approximately 4 years|Efficacy population (TKI Experienced group only), defined as all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and excluding 3 participants in the TKI Experienced group who had previous BRAFi or MEKi treatment or withdrew consent.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836265|NCT01286753|Primary|Best Overall Response Rate in TKI-Naive Participants|Best overall response rate was assessed by the investigators according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. Best overall response rate: the percentage of participants with best objective response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) (calculated as the number of participants with best response CR or PR divided by the total number of efficacy-evaluable participants). CR: disappearance of all target lesions with reduction in target/non-target pathological lymph nodes to < 10 millimeters (mm). PR: ≥ 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, compared to the baseline sum diameters.|Up to approximately 4 years|Efficacy population (TKI Naive group only), defined as all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and excluding 3 participants in the TKI Experienced group who had previous BRAFi or MEKi treatment or withdrew consent.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836266|NCT01292746|Primary|Change in Non-vellus Terminal Hair Count Across a 3 cm Diameter Scalp Area|Non-vellus terminal hair count was calculated across a tattooed 3 cm diameter scalp area from digital photographs of the area by independent blinded evaluator employing macroimage analysis software.|Baseline and 13 Weeks|||hairs/cm2||Standard Deviation|Mean
836267|NCT01292798|Secondary|Qualitative Assessment of Diabetic Macular Edema (DME)|To compare the percentage of subjects with compete or partial/no resolution of diabetic macular edema in response to the ranibizumab 0.5 and 2.0 mg doses.|Baeline and 6 months|At 6 months, 18 out of the 43 subjects (42%) showed complete resolution of DME. 25 out of the 43 subjects (58%) showed partial or no resolution of DME at 6 months.||percentage of participants|||Number
836268|NCT01292798|Secondary|Mean Change in 1-mm Central Subfield (CST) Thickness as Measured by OCT at Month 6 Compared to Baseline|To determine the mean change in central 1-mm subfield thickness as measured by spectral-domain OCT from baseline to 6 months .|baseline and 6 months|||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
836269|NCT01292798|Primary|Overall Mean Change in Visual Acuity Scores at Month 6 Compared to Baseline|To determine the mean change in the best-corrected visual acuity on an ETDRS visual acuity chart at a starting distance of 4 meters from baseline to 6 months.|baseline and 6 months|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
836270|NCT01292837|Secondary|Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizure Freedom Over the Evaluation Period|A subject with a generalized tonic-clonic seizure frequency of 0 per week throughout the Evaluation Period was considered a seizure-free subject for that period.|Evaluation Period (Week 4 to Week 24)|"The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The FAS was a subset of the Safety Set and included all subjects with Combined Baseline Period (Retrospective and Prospective) and post-Baseline Generalized Tonic-Clonic seizure counts as the primary efficacy analysis.
One subject discontinued the study during the Up-Titration Period."||participants|||Number
836271|NCT01292837|Secondary|Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizure Freedom Over the Treatment Period|A subject with a generalized tonic-clonic seizure frequency of 0 per week throughout the Treatment Period was considered a seizure-free subject for that period.|Treatment Period (Week 0 to Week 24)|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The FAS was a subset of the Safety Set and included all subjects with Combined Baseline Period (Retrospective and Prospective) and post-Baseline Generalized Tonic-Clonic seizure counts as the primary efficacy analysis.||participants|||Number
836272|NCT01292837|Secondary|Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizures 50 % Responder Rate During the Evaluation Period|The 50 % responder rate during the Evaluation Period was the proportion of subjects who reported a ≥50 % reduction in seizure frequency per week from Baseline during the Evaluation Period.|From Baseline (Week -8) to Evaluation Period (Week 4 to Week 24)|"The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The FAS was a subset of the Safety Set and included all subjects with Combined Baseline Period (Retrospective and Prospective) and post-Baseline Generalized Tonic-Clonic seizure counts as the primary efficacy analysis.
One subject discontinued the study during the Up-Titration Period."||percentage of participants|||Number
836273|NCT01292837|Secondary|Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizures 50 % Responder Rate (the Proportion of Subjects With 50 % or More Reduction From the Combined Baseline in the Frequency of Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizures) During the Treatment Period|The 50 % responder rate during the Treatment Period was the proportion of subjects who reported a ≥ 50 % reduction in seizure frequency per week from Baseline during the Treatment Period.|From Baseline (Week -8) to Treatment Period (Week 0 to Week 24)|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The FAS was a subset of the Safety Set and included all subjects with Combined Baseline Period (Retrospective and Prospective) and post-Baseline Generalized Tonic-Clonic seizure counts as the primary efficacy analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
836274|NCT01292837|Secondary|The Percent Change in Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizure Frequency Per Week From the Combined Baseline Period Over the Evaluation Period|"The percent change from Combined Baseline over Evaluation Period was calculated from the Generalized Tonic-Clonic (GTC) seizure frequency per week during the Evaluation Period (E) and during the Baseline Period (B, Combined Baseline, ie, Retrospective and Prospective Baseline Periods) using the equation below.
The percent change from Baseline = (B - E)/B x 100
The seizure frequency per week was calculated using the following formula:
Frequency per week of GTC seizures = total number of GTC seizures in the corresponding period / number of days for observation in the corresponding period x 7"|From Baseline (Week -8) to Evaluation Period (Week 4 to Week 24)|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The FAS was a subset of the Safety Set and included all subjects with combined Baseline Period and post-Baseline generalized tonic-clonic seizure counts. 12 of the 13 subjects in the FAS were included in the analysis excluding 1 subject discontinued before the Evaluation Period.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836275|NCT01292837|Primary|The Percent Change From the Combined Baseline (4-week Retrospective Baseline and 4-week Prospective Baseline) in the Generalized Tonic-clonic Seizure Frequency Per Week Over the 24-week Treatment Period (Up-Titration and Evaluation Periods)|"The percent change from Combined Baseline over Treatment Period was calculated from the Generalized Tonic-Clonic (GTC) seizure frequency per week during the Treatment Period (T) and during the Baseline Period (B, Combined Baseline, ie, Retrospective and Prospective Baseline Periods) using the equation below.
The percent change from Baseline = (B - T)/B x 100
The seizure frequency per week was calculated using the following formula:
Frequency per week of GTC seizures = total number of GTC seizures in the corresponding period / number of days for observation in the corresponding period x 7"|From Baseline (Week -8) to Treatment Period (Week 0 to Week 24)|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The FAS was a subset of the Safety Set and included all subjects with Combined Baseline Period (Retrospective and Prospective) and post-Baseline Generalized Tonic-Clonic seizure counts as the primary efficacy analysis.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836276|NCT01292876|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Remodeling Response Approximately 6 Months Post-operative|The secondary objective is to examine the cellular properties of the biopsy tissue material in each subject for future correlation with clinical outcomes. Seven biopsy samples were collected and stained with Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and Masson’s trichrome stain. Tissue was stained with antibodies against the progenitor cell markers CD146 and NG2 to show evidence of progenitor cell migration into the remodeling injury site.|Approximately 6 months post-operative|Demonstrated remodeling response; discrepancy from from those completed in the study (12 of 13) is result of 1 subject not undergoing pathological examination.||percentage of participants remodeling|||Number
836277|NCT01292876|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in the Rectified and Integrated EMG Signal of the Tibialis Anterior Muscle At 24 Weeks Post-Operative|The physical therapy program was designed to promote activation of the dorsiflexor muscles on the operated side, through manual feedback during volitional contractions.|approximately 24 weeks post-operative|||% change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836309|NCT01294046|Secondary|Pain Free at 2 Hours Post Stimulation|As noted above, we are using the FDA-approved categorical scale used for all migraine regulatory trials since 1992. This is a 4 point categorical scale where 0= no pain, 1= mild headache pain, 2= moderate pain, and 3= severe pain. Pain free is defined as the subject moving from pain intensity of 2 to 3 at baseine to 0 by 2 hours after stimulation.|8.5 months|No data were collected from this entire study, so no data were analyzed.|||||
836278|NCT01292928|Other Pre-specified|Quality of Life|Improved Quality of Life assessed by the SF-36 Health Survey. The validated SF-36 Survey, where scores are calibrated so that 50 is the average score or norm, was utilized (scores ranging from 0, worst possible health to 100, best possible health). The SF-36 is a multipurpose, proprietary health survey with 36 questions that yield eight health component scales that can be further summarized into two summary scores: mental and physical health scores. The eight health component scales that can be computed from the questionnaire are physical function, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, role-emotional, mental health and social functioning.|12 months|From the 275 subjects that were eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up, data for the Quality of Life Analysis were available for 265 subjects||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836279|NCT01292928|Other Pre-specified|Walking Improvement (Distance) Assessed by 6 Minute Hall Walk|Assessment of walking improvement (distance) by the administration of the 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Participants were asked to walk for as long as they could; up to 6 minutes.|12 months|From the 275 subjects that were eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up, data for the Walking Improvement Assessed by 6 minute Hall Walk Analysis were available for 246 subjects||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
836280|NCT01292928|Other Pre-specified|Walking Improvement (Time) Assessed by 6 Minute Hall Walk|Assessment of walking improvement (time) by the administration of the 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Participants were asked to walk for as long as they could; up to 6 minutes.|12 months|From the 275 subjects that were eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up, data for the Walking Improvement Assessed by 6 minute Hall Walk Analysis were available for 246 subjects||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
836281|NCT01292928|Other Pre-specified|Walking Improvement Assessed by the Walking Impairment Questionnaire|The Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ) is a validated functional assessment questionnaire that evaluates walking ability with regard to speed, distance and stair climbing ability as well as the reasons that walking ability might be limited. Range of scores is between 0% and 100% with 100% being the best and 0% being the worst score.|12 months|From the 275 subjects that were eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up, data for the Walking Improvement assessed by the Walking Impairment Questionnaire were available for 265 subjects||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836282|NCT01292928|Other Pre-specified|Rate of Hemodynamic Improvement|"The Ankle-Brachial Index (ABI) is the ratio between the systolic pressure measured at the ankle and the systolic pressure measured in the arm.
Hemodynamic Improvement: Increases in ABI of ≥ 0.10 or to an ABI ≥ 0.90 as compared to pre-procedure without the need for repeat TLR.
Hemodynamic Improvement (Including TLR): Increases in ABI of ≥0.10 or to an ABI ≥0.90 as compared to pre-procedure including TLR."|12 months|278 subjects were included in the Rate of Hemodynamic Improvement Analysis (275 subjects eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up + 3 subjects with TLR)||percentage of limbs|limbs||Number
836283|NCT01292928|Other Pre-specified|Rutherford Classification|"Class 0: Asymptomatic
Class 1: Mild claudication
Class 2: Moderate claudication
Class 3: Severe claudication
Class 4: Ischemic rest pain
Class 5: Minor tissue loss – nonhealing ulcer, focal gangrene with diffuse pedal edema
Class 6: Major tissue loss – extending above metatarsal (MT) level
Rate of Primary Sustained Clinical Improvement: an improvement in Rutherford classification of one or more categories as compared to pre-procedure without the need for repeat TLR.
Rate of Secondary Sustained Clinical Improvement: an improvement in Rutherford classification of one or more categories as compared to pre-procedure including those subjects with repeat TLR.
Rate of Clinical Deterioration: downgrade in Rutherford classification of one or more categories as compared to pre-procedure"|12 months|From the 275 subjects that were eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up, data for the Rutherford Classification Analysis was available for 263 subjects||percentage of participants|||Number
836284|NCT01292928|Other Pre-specified|Stent Fracture Rate|"Vascular InterVentional Advances (VIVA) definitions:
Grade 0: No strut fractures
Grade I: single strut fracture
Grade II: multiple strut fractures
Grade III: stent fracture(s) with preserved alignment of the components
Grade IV: stent fracture(s) with mal-alignment of the components
Grade V: stent fracture(s) in a trans-axial spiral configuration"|12 months|From the 276 subjects that were eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up, data for the Stent Fracture Analysis were available for 250 subjects||percentage of stents|stents||Number
836285|NCT01292928|Other Pre-specified|Assisted Primary Patency|Assisted primary patency is the percentage of lesions without TLR and those with TLR (not due to complete occlusion or bypass) that reach a time point without restenosis.|12 months|From the 275 subjects that were eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up, data for the Assisted Primary Patency Analysis was available for 256 subjects||percentage of lesions||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836286|NCT01292928|Other Pre-specified|Primary Patency|Primary patency is the percentage of lesions (target stented segments) that reach a time point without a hemodynamically significant stenosis assessed by Duplex Ultrasound (DUS) and without Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR) or bypass of the target lesion.|12 months|From the 275 subjects that were eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up, data for the Primary Patency Analysis was available for 268 subjects/lesions||percentage of lesions|Lesions|95% Confidence Interval|Number
836287|NCT01292928|Other Pre-specified|Technical and Procedural Success|"Technical success: ability to cross and dilate the lesion to achieve residual angiographic stenosis no greater than 30%
Procedural success: technical success with no MAEs within 24 hours of the procedure"|Up to 24 hours after the procedure|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836288|NCT01292928|Secondary|Secondary Safety Endpoint and Components|The secondary safety endpoint assesses the occurrence of Major Adverse Events (MAEs) through 30 days. MAEs will include all causes of death, target limb major amputation and/or target lesion revascularization through 1 month|1 month|From the 299 enrolled subjects, data for the Secondary Safety Endpoint was available for 297 subjects||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836289|NCT01292928|Primary|Co-Primary Efficacy Endpoints|"The co-primary efficacy endpoints assess vessel primary patency at 12 months post-procedure.
The co-primary efficacy analysis (1) will assess vessel primary patency in stented segments intended to be treated with core matrix stents (20 to 150 mm).
The co-primary efficacy analysis (2) will assess vessel primary patency in stented segments intended to be treated with the entire stent matrix (20 to 200 mm)."|12 months|From the 275 subjects that were eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up, data for the Co-Primary Efficacy Endpoints were available for 268 subjects||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836345|NCT01294397|Secondary|Time to Maximum Serum Concentration (Tmax) of Etanercept||Day 1 and day 22; at each time point samples were taken predose and 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 days postdose.|Participants with available Tmax data||days||Full Range|Median
836290|NCT01292928|Primary|Primary Safety Endpoint and Components|The safety endpoint assesses the occurrence of Major Adverse Events (MAEs) defined as all causes of death through 1 month, target limb major amputation through 12 months and/or target lesion revascularization through 12 months|1 month for death, 12 months for target limb major amputation , and target lesion revascularization|From the 275 subjects that were eligible for the 12-Month Follow-Up, data for the Primary Safety Endpoint were available for 268 subjects.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836291|NCT01293825|Secondary|Quality of Life Score as Measured by 12-item Short Form Health Survey|Scale Range: 1-99th percentile score. Higher scores indicate better outcomes.|Week 16|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836292|NCT01293825|Secondary|Body Weight||Week 16|||lbs||Standard Deviation|Mean
836293|NCT01293825|Secondary|Young Mania Rating Scale|Scale Range: 0-60. Lower scores indicate better outcomes.|Week 16|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836294|NCT01293825|Secondary|Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale|Scale Range: 0-60. Lower scores indicate better outcomes.|Week 16|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836295|NCT01293825|Secondary|Social and Occupational Functioning Scale|Life and Work Functional status will be evaluated using the Social and Occupational Functioning Scale (SOFAS), which is derived from the GAF (Global Assessment of Functioning). The GAF is a 100-point single-item scale which measures global functioning of psychiatric patients and is widely utilized in clinical studies involving Seriously Mentally Ill patients (Jones 1995). The reliability of the GAF ranges from 0.62-0.82. Higher scores indicate improved outcomes.|Week 16|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836296|NCT01293825|Secondary|Global Psychopathology Score as Measured by Clinical Global Impressions|Global psychopathology will be measured with the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) (Guy 1976) a widely used scale which evaluates illness severity on a 1 to 7 point continuum. Severity of illness ratings on the CGI have reported reliability scores ranging from 0.41-0.66 (Guy 1976). Lower scores indicate improved outcomes.|Week 16|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836297|NCT01293825|Secondary|Attitude Toward Medication Score as Measured by the Drug Attitude Inventory|Ten item inventory taken by the participant with a Scale Range: 0-10. Higher scores indicate improved outcomes.|Week 16|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836298|NCT01293825|Secondary|Treatment Adherence Score as Measured by the Morisky Rating Scale|Four item inventory taken by participant with Scale Range: 0-4. Lower scores indicate improved outcomes.|Week 16|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836299|NCT01293825|Primary|Treatment Non-adherence Percentage as Measured by the Tablet Routines Questionnaire (TRQ)|Scale Range: 0-100%. The score represents percentage of time that required medication doses were missed. Higher scores indicate lower medication adherence.|Week 16|||Percentage of doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
836300|NCT01293968|Secondary|The Effect of Ibuprofen, Diphenhydramine, Aluminium MgS and Diphenhydramine and Aluminium MgS in Decreasing the Pain Level and Burning Sensation|pain sensation was measured by VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) 4 days after the consumption of the solutions and the results of both drugs was analyzed|4 days after the solution consumption||||||
836301|NCT01293968|Primary|Effect of Ibuprofen, Diphenhydramine and Aluminium MgS Measured on Decrease in Pain Level and Burning Sensation|pain sensation was measured by VAS (Visual Analogue Scale, a scaled ruler which the zero point displays the zone of lack of pain and the 10th point was considered as the zone of maximum pain)) 4 days after the consumption of the solution|four days after the start of the study|The intention of the study is to study the effects of Ibuprofen, Diphenhydramine and Aluminium MgS in decreasing the signs of RAS||scores in Visual Analogue Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836302|NCT01294046|Secondary|Relief of Migraine-associated Symptoms, e.g. Nausea/Vomiting, Photophobia, Phonophobia|Presence or absence of nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and phonophobia will be assessed at baseline and after stimulation at 2 hours for each stimulation for each individual.|8.5 months|No data were collected from this entire study, so no data were analyzed.|||||
836303|NCT01294046|Secondary|Implantation and Stimulation Related Adverse Events|As noted above, we are using the FDA-approved categorical scale used for all migraine regulatory trials since 1992. This is a 4 point categorical scale where 0= no pain, 1= mild headache pain, 2= moderate pain, and 3= severe pain. Pain free is defined as the subject moving from pain intensity of 2 to 3 at baseine to 0 by 2 hours after stimulation.|8.5 months|No data were collected from this entire study, so no data were analyzed.|||||
836304|NCT01294046|Secondary|Average Per Subject Reduction in Migraine Days/Month|During the baseline period, subjects will record the number of migraine days (as defined by the FDA-approved International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2d Edition definition of migraine with and without aura) during the month. The primary endpoint for this phase is a reduction in the number of migraine days during the last month of the study as compared to the baseline month.|8.5 months|No data were collected from this entire study, so no data were analyzed.|||||
836305|NCT01294046|Secondary|Stimulation Related Adverse Events|Number of Participants with Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|8.5 months|No data were collected from this entire study, so no data were analyzed.|||||
836306|NCT01294046|Secondary|Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) at Study Conclusion Compared With Baseline|The Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) is a validated tool that assesses how many days in the last 3 months a patient had at least 50% disability at work, home, school, or recreational activities due to migraine. MIDAS will be assessed at baseline and after study conclusion.|8.5 months|No data were collected from this entire study, so no data were analyzed.|||||
836307|NCT01294046|Secondary|Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) Compared With Baseline|The Headache Impact Test -6 (HIT-6) is a validated tool for evaluating headache impact and disability across 6 domains, which will be recorded at baseline and at study conclusion.|8.5 months|No data were collected from this entire study, so no data were analyzed.|||||
836308|NCT01294046|Secondary|Acute Migraine Medication Use|During the baseline period, subjects will record their acute as-needed migraine relief medication use for each attack by drug, dose, route, and frequency. A secondary endpoint for this phase is a reduction in acute migraine medication usage for each attack for drug, dose, route, and frequency during the last month of the study as compared to the baseline month.|8.5 months|No data were collected from this entire study, so no data were analyzed.|||||
836346|NCT01294397|Primary|Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmax) of Etanercept||Day 1 and day 22; at each time point samples were taken predose and 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 days postdose.|Participants with available Cmax data||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836310|NCT01294046|Secondary|Migraine Free at 2 Hours|Each migraine will be categorized as meeting the endpoint of migraine free if there is a reduction in the migraine grade to 0 for pain with no nausea, photophobia and phonophobia at 2 hours after initiation of stimulation.|8.5 Months|No data were collected from this entire study, so no data were analyzed.|||||
836311|NCT01294046|Primary|Migraine Relief at 2 Hours Post Stimulation|Pain is rated at stimulation and 2 hours after stimulation initiated based on four point categorical scale, FDA-approved, where 0 = no headache pain, 1= mild pain, 2 = moderate pain, 3 = severe pain. This scale has been used since 1991 for all regulatory submission migraine protocols. Each migraine is categorized in a binary fashion as meeting the endpoint at 2 hours. Migraine relief or Pain relief is defined as moving from pain levels of 3 to 2 down to 1 or 0.|8.5 Months|No data were collected from this entire study, so no data were analyzed.|||||
836312|NCT01294150|Secondary|Sexual Function|Over the 12 month follow-up period, the proportion of UroLift patients who experience de novo sustained erectile dysfunction and retrograde ejaculation will be reported. Control subjects are not included in this analysis since controls could crossover option opened at 3 months.|12 Months|||% of Subjects|||Number
836313|NCT01294150|Primary|Mean UroLift Improvement in IPSS at 12 Months|The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) is a standardized 8 question (7 symptom questions + 1 quality of life question) written screening tool used to screen for, rapidly diagnose, track the symptoms of, and suggest management of the symptoms of the disease benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Those patients scoring 7 or below are generally considered mildly symptomatic, whereas 20 or above is considered severely symptomatic. To meet co-primary effectiveness endpoint, the lower bound of a one-sided 97.5% confidence interval of IPSS mean percent change from baseline at Month 12 in the UroLift group must be greater than or equal to 30%.|12 months|||% IPSS Score Improvement||97.5% Confidence Interval|Number
836314|NCT01294150|Primary|Comparison of IPSS for Efficacy|"The UroLift system will be considered superior to the Control if the mean International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) change (improvement) from baseline at 3 months demonstrates a minimum statistical margin of 25% compared to mean improvement from baseline for cystoscopy alone.
The IPSS is an 8 question (7 symptom questions + 1 quality of life question) written screening tool used to screen for, rapidly diagnose, track the symptoms of, and suggest management of the symptoms of the disease benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
SCORING:
0-7 Mildly symptomatic 8-19 Moderately symptomatic 20-35 Severely symptomatic"|3 month|||IPSS total score||Standard Deviation|Mean
836315|NCT01294150|Primary|Collection of Post-treatment Catheterization for Safety|The primary safety endpoint is an assessment of the rate of extended post-operative urinary catheterization in the subjects randomized to the UroLift group of the study in the ITT group. The extended post-operative urinary catheterization rate is defined as including those subjects who required catheterization within the first 3 days as part of post-operative management for inability to void, and required the catheter for more than 7 days. 2/140 met this endpoint.|Cath within first 3 days post-procedure which extended beyond 7 days, up to 12 days|||participants|||Number
836316|NCT01294163|Primary|Log-transformed Blood Level of Troponin I|Blood level of troponin I measured by a central laboratory|Sampling performed 24 hours after the end of the surgical procedure|The non-inferiority comparison between Xenon and Sevoflurane was repeated using log-transformed blood troponin levels on the PP Set.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836317|NCT01294163|Secondary|Presence of Absence of Adverse Events, Including Myocardial Infarction||7 days||||||
836318|NCT01294163|Secondary|Vital Signs||7 days||||||
836319|NCT01294163|Secondary|ECG Abnormalities||7 days||||||
836320|NCT01294163|Secondary|Clinical Laboratory Tests||7 days||||||
836321|NCT01294163|Secondary|Presence or Absence of Postoperative Delirium|Confusion Assessment Method|7 days||||||
836322|NCT01294163|Secondary|Haemodynamic Profile|Monitoring of heart rate, arterial blood pressure, central venous pressure.|4 hours||||||
836323|NCT01294163|Secondary|Arterial Oxygen Saturation|Arterial blood gases|4 hours||||||
836324|NCT01294163|Secondary|Depth of Anaesthesia|On-line monitoring of depth of anaesthesia from bi-spectral electroencephalogram analysis (BIS monitor)|4 hours||||||
836325|NCT01294163|Primary|Blood Level of Troponin I|Blood level of troponin I measured by a central laboratory|Sampling performed 24 hours after the end of the surgical procedure|The primary analysis was a non-inferiority comparison between Xenon and Sevoflurane and was performed on the Per Protocol (PP) Set composed of all randomised and treated patients with no major protocol deviations during the study.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836326|NCT01294228|Primary|The Efficacy of the Triage Neutraphil-Gelatinase Associated Lipocalin (NGAL) Test as an Aid in the Diagnosis of Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) in an All-comers ICU Setting.|The efficacy of the Triage Neutraphil-Gelatinase Associated Lipocalin (NGAL) Test as an aid in the diagnosis of acute kidney injury (AKI) in an all-comers ICU setting. Final AKI diagnoses were established by an adjudication committee.|Prior to or within 72 hours.|Study participants who had both an adjudicated AKI diagnosis and an evaluable T=0 (study enrollment) blood collection and associated test results.||Probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836327|NCT01294306|Secondary|Median Overall Survival|Estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan and Meier. Event defined as death due to any cause.|Up to 2 Years|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836328|NCT01294306|Secondary|Toxicity of Akt Inhibitor MK2206 Plus Erlotinib Hydrochloride|Toxicities of Grade 3 or higher Attributed to Akt inhibitor MK2206 plus erlotinib hydrochloride, graded according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0|Time Frame: Up to 2 years|||participants|||Number
836329|NCT01294306|Secondary|Median Progression-free Survival|Estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan and Meier. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|Up to 2 years|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836330|NCT01294306|Primary|Objective Response|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Objective Response = CR + PR|Up to 2 years|||percentage of subjects|||Number
836331|NCT01294306|Primary|Disease-control Rate|Disease-control rate defined as response rate + stable disease at 12 weeks. Stable disease must have been achieved for 12 weeks or longer. Response evaluated per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Progression, as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions; Stable Disease (SD), neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for disease progression.|At 12 weeks|||percentage of subjects|||Number
836332|NCT01294371|Secondary|Participants With Estrogen Deficiency Symptoms|"Estrogen deficiency symptoms include:
hot flashes,
headaches,
palpitations at rest,
insomnia,
fluctuation of mood."|6 months|Full Analysis Set||participants|||Number
836333|NCT01294371|Secondary|Percent Compliance to Treatment With Leuprorelin|Compliance to treatment was calculated as the number of leuprorelin doses administered / number of doses prescribed * 100.|6 months|Participants who received at least one dose of leuprorelin.||percent compliance||Standard Deviation|Mean
836334|NCT01294371|Primary|Percentage of Participants Administered Add-back Therapy During a 6-month Course of Leuprorelin Treatment|The percentage of participants who received hormone add-back therapy or non-hormone add-back therapy to reduce estrogen deficiency symptom, following local guidelines or therapeutic recommendations, during the 6-month treatment period with leuprorelin.|6 months|Full Analysis Set included all all patients who had signed the personal authorization form and who administered at least one dose of leuprorelin and who had attended at least one post-baseline visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
836335|NCT01294384|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Schirmer Test|The Schirmer Test measures the rate of the secretion of tears produced by the eye over 5 minutes. The results indicate the presence of dry eye where Normal=greater than or equal to 10 millimeters (mm) of tears and Dry Eye=less than 10 mm of tears). The smaller the number, the more severe the dry eye. A positive number change from baseline indicated an increase in tears (improvement).|Baseline, Day 90|Participants from the Intent-to-Treat population, that included all randomized participants.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
836336|NCT01294384|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Conjunctival Staining|The conjunctiva is the clear membrane covering the white surface of the eye. Conjunctival staining following ocular administration of lissamine green dye was graded using a 6-point scale where 0=no staining to 5=severe staining over 6 areas of the white part of the eye for a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 30. The higher the score, the worse the dry eye condition. A negative number change from baseline represented a decrease in the severity of conjunctival staining (improvement).|Baseline, Day 90|Participants from the Intent-to-Treat population, that included all randomized participants.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836337|NCT01294384|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Corneal Staining|The cornea is the transparent front part of the eye which covers the iris and pupil. Corneal staining following administration of fluorescein dye in the eye is graded using a 6-point scale where 0=no staining to 5=severe staining over 5 areas of the clear central part of the eye for a minimum score of 0 and maximum score of 25. The higher the grade score, the worse the dry eye condition. A negative number change from baseline represented a decrease in corneal staining (improvement).|Baseline, Day 90|Participants from the Intent-to-Treat population, that included all randomized participants.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836338|NCT01294384|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Tear Break-Up Time (TBUT)|TBUT is defined as the time (seconds) required for dry spots to appear on the surface of the eye after blinking. The longer it takes, the more stable the tear film. A positive number change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Day 90|Participants from the Intent-to-Treat population, that included all randomized participants.||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
836339|NCT01294384|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Much Better or Better in Near Visual Acuity (High Contrast)|Near Visual Acuity was determined using the number of letters read correctly on a high contrast eye chart (black letters on a white background). An increase in the number of letters read correctly indicated improvement. Much Better is defined as an increase of 10 or more letters read correctly at Day 90 compared to the worse eye at Baseline. Better is defined as an increase of 5 to 9 letters read correctly at Day 90 compared to the worse eye at Baseline.|Baseline, Day 90|Participants from the Intent-to-Treat population, that included all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836340|NCT01294384|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Much Better or Better in Near Visual Acuity (Low Contrast)|Near Visual Acuity was determined using the number of letters read correctly on a low contrast eye chart (gray letters on a white background). An increase in the number of letters read correctly indicated improvement. Much Better is defined as an increase of 10 or more letters read correctly at Day 90 compared to the worse eye at Baseline. Better is defined as an increase of 5 to 9 letters read correctly at Day 90 compared to the worse eye at Baseline.|Baseline, Day 90|Participants from the Intent-to-Treat population, that included all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836341|NCT01294384|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Visual Analog (VAS) Symptom Scale: Dryness|The participant rated the severity of their dry eye symptom: dryness using a VAS scale. Participants put a mark on a 100 millimeter line where 0 (far left on the line)=no symptoms to 100 (far right on the line)=most severe symptoms.|Baseline, Day 90|Participants from the Intent-to-Treat population, that included all randomized participants.||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
836342|NCT01294384|Primary|Change From Baseline in Ocular Surface Disease Index© (OSDI) Score|The OSDI is a questionnaire consisting of 12 questions assessing severity of dry eye using a 5-point scale where 0=none of the time to 4=all of the time. The total score is the sum of the individual scores normalized (standardized) to a severity scale of 0=no symptoms (best score) to 100=maximum severity (worst score). A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Day 90|Participants from the Intent-to-Treat population, that included all randomized participants.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836343|NCT01294397|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Serum C-telopeptide (sCTx) Concentrations||Baseline (Day 8) and Days 22, 29, 85, and 176|Participants with available data at baseline (19) and each time point (indicated by n)||percent change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836344|NCT01294397|Secondary|Serum Denosumab Concentration||Prior to etanercept and denosumab dose administrations, as applicable, on days 8, 22, and 29|Participants with available data||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836347|NCT01294397|Primary|Area Under the Serum Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 168 Hours (AUC0-168) for Etanercept|The AUC0-168 of etanercept was measured when administered alone (assessed from day 1) and after administration with denosumab (assessed from day 22, 14 days after denosumab dosing, close to the time of the maximum observed denosumab serum concentration and corresponding to a time approximately 1 week after maximal pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of denosumab are attained).|Day 1 and day 22; at each time point samples were taken predose and 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 days postdose.|Participants with available AUC data||day*μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836348|NCT01294423|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change in Body Weight|To compare the change from baseline in total body weight achieved with each dose of dapagliflozin versus placebo after 24 weeks double-blind treatment.|From Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and Week 24 (LOCF) values||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836349|NCT01294423|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)|To compare the change from baseline in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) achieved with each dose of dapagliflozin versus placebo after 24 weeks double-blind treatment.|From Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and Week 24 (LOCF) values||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836350|NCT01294423|Primary|Adjusted Mean Change in HbA1c Levels|To compare change from baseline in HbA1c achieved with each dose of dapagliflozin versus placebo after 24 weeks double-blind treatment.|From Baseline to Week 24|Full Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and Week 24 (LOCF) values||Percent||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836351|NCT01294436|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change in Body Weight|To evaluate the efficacy of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in body weight|Baseline to Week 52|Full Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 (LOCF) value||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836352|NCT01294436|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change in HbA1c Levels|To evaluate the efficacy of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in HbA1c|Baseline to Week 52|Full Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 (LOCF) value||Percent||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836353|NCT01294436|Primary|Mean Change in Seated Systolic Blood Pressure|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in blood pressure|Baseline to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 values||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
836354|NCT01294436|Primary|Mean Change in Seated Diastolic Blood Pressure|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in blood pressure|Baseline to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 values||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
836355|NCT01294436|Primary|Mean Change in Seated Heart Rate|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in pulse|Baseline to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 values||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836356|NCT01294436|Primary|Mean Change in Serum Uric Acid|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in serum uric acid|Baseline to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 values||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
836357|NCT01294436|Primary|Mean Change in Magnesium|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in magnesium (1 mEq/L equivalent to 0.50 mmol/L)|Baseline to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 values||mEq/L||Standard Error|Mean
836358|NCT01294436|Primary|Mean Change in Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN)|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in blood urea nitrogen|Baseline to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 values||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
836359|NCT01294436|Primary|Mean Change in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST)|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in aspartate aminotransferase|Baseline to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 values||U/L||Standard Error|Mean
836360|NCT01294436|Primary|Mean Change in Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT)|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in alanine aminotransferase|Baseline to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 values||U/L||Standard Error|Mean
836361|NCT01294436|Primary|Mean Change in Hematocrit|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to the change in hematocrit|Baseline to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set, participants with non-missing baseline and week 52 values||Percent||Standard Error|Mean
836362|NCT01294436|Primary|Proportion of Participants With At Least One Episode of Hypoglycemia|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to occurrence of hypoglycemia|Long-term treatment up to 52 weeks|Safety Analysis Set||Percentage of participants|||Number
836363|NCT01294436|Primary|Proportion of Participants With Serious Adverse Events|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to serious adverse events|Long-term treatment up to 52 weeks|Safety Analysis Set||Percentage of participants|||Number
836364|NCT01294436|Primary|Proportion of Participants With Adverse Events|To evaluate the safety and tolerability of long-term treatment up to 52 weeks with the dosing regimen of dapagliflozin, where it started with 5 mg and titrated up to 10 mg depending on participant's condition of glycemic control, in regard to adverse events|Long-term treatment up to 52 weeks|Safety Analysis Set||Percentage of participants|||Number
836365|NCT01294449|Primary|All-Cause Mortality|Outcome measured for total population. Not broken down by indication received.|5 years|||participants|||Number
836366|NCT01294462|Secondary|Composite of All-cause Mortality, MI or Stroke|Time to first occurrence of any event from the composite of death from any causes, Myocardial Infarction (MI) and stroke (adjudicated by an ICEC). 1-year event rate (%) estimated via Kaplan-Meier method.|Ongoing up to 12 months|Full Analysis set which includes all randomized patients with available post-randomization efficacy data||Percent probability|||Number
836367|NCT01294462|Secondary|Major and Minor Bleeding|Time to first occurrence of any major or minor bleeding event (adjudicated by an independent Clinical Endpoint Committee (ICEC)). 1-year event rate (%) estimated via Kaplan-Meier method.|Ongoing up to12 months|Safety analysis set which includes all patients who received randomized treatment with available post-treatment safety data||Percent probability|||Number
836368|NCT01294462|Primary|Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE)|Time to first occurrence of any event from the composite of death from vascular causes, Myocardial Infarction (MI) and stroke (adjudicated by an ICEC). 1-year event rate (%) estimated via Kaplan-Meier method.|Ongoing up to 12 months|Full Analysis set which includes all randomized patients with available post-randomization efficacy data||Percent probability|||Number
836369|NCT01294462|Primary|Major Bleeding|Time to first occurrence of any major bleeding event (adjudicated by an independent Clinical Endpoint Committee (ICEC)). 1-year event rate (%) estimated via Kaplan-Meier method.|Ongoing up to12 months|Safety analysis set which includes all patients who received randomized treatment with available post-treatment safety data||Percent probability|||Number
836370|NCT01294514|Post-Hoc|Calculate Covidien Respiration Rate Software Accuracy as Mean Error +/- Standard Deviation|The Covidien Nellcor Respiration Rate Software shall calculate respiration rate as mean error of +/- standard deviation.|Overall average|One participant was excluded from the data analysis based on cardiac arrhythmia||Breaths Per Minute (BrPM)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836371|NCT01294514|Secondary|The Covidien Nellcor Respiration Rate Software Shall Calculate Respiration Rate With a Root Mean Square Difference (RMSD) of < 3 Breaths Per Minute Compared With a End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide Waveforms, With 95% Confidence.|"The data used for analysis consisted of multiple simultaneous measures of RR_TTI, RR_V1.0 and RR_EtCO2 for each subject. Given N sets of simultaneous RR values for each of P patients, the simultaneous RR values were used to calculate a pair of RMSD values for each subject.
The two RMSD values, RMSDRR_V1.0_vs_EtCO2, and RMSDTTI_vs_EtCO2, quantify the mean absolute difference in simultaneous estimates of respiratory rate between RR_V1.0 compared with RR_EtCO2 and RR_TTI compared with RR_EtCO2, respectively for the subjects with 95% confidence of mean ± 3.38 BrPM. The Measure type is Number and represents the RMSD of Covidien Nellcor Respiration Rate Software"|Participants were monitored on average of 30 minute periods|One participant was excluded from the data analysis based on cardiac arrhythmia||Breaths Per Minute (BrPM)|||Number
836372|NCT01294514|Primary|The Covidien Nellcor Respiration Rate Software Shall Determine Respiration Rate Measured as Mean and Standard Deviation With Accuracy That is Non-inferior to Predicate Device.|Mean and standard deviations of respiration rates collected from healthy volunteers were compared between Covidien Respiration Rate Software, Transthoracic Impedance and Overscored End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide Waveforms. Each volunteer served as its own control.|Participants were monitorerd on average of 30 minute period|One participant was excluded from the analysis based on cardiac arrhythmia||Breaths Per Minute (BrPM)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836373|NCT01294553|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Unexpected Adverse Events|Unexpected adverse events are defined as those that were not described in the locally approved label by the Korean Food and Drug Administration (KFDA) at the time of surveillance completion.|41.4 weeks|ITT Population||participants|||Number
836374|NCT01294553|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Serious Adverse Event|"A serious adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or results in prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. For a list of all serious adverse events occurring during the course of the study, please see the table entitled Serious Adverse Events in the Adverse Event section of the results record."|41.4 weeks|ITT Population||participants|||Number
836375|NCT01294553|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event|"An adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. For a list of all adverse events occurring during the course of the study, please see the table entitled Other (non-serious) adverse events in the Adverse Event section of the results record."|41.4 weeks|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who had been administered the investigational drug at least once and had undergone all safety assessments||participants|||Number
836376|NCT01294592|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE) Starting Post-randomization|A post-randomization adverse event is defined as an event with an onset on or after the randomization date or with a missing onset date. An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. Medical or scientific judgment was exercised in deciding whether reporting was appropriate in other situations. Refer to the general non-serious AE/SAE module for a list of non-serious AEs (occurring at a frequency threshold of >=5%) and SAEs.|Up to 2 years|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
836377|NCT01294592|Secondary|Exposure to Study Drug|Study drug exposure (days) = treatment stop date - treatment start date + 1. Participants in the Watchful Waiting Escalated=Yes subgroup could have been escalated to study drug at any time during the study. Therefore, it is possible that participants were exposed to tamsulosin for a shorter length of time than participants in the dutasteride plus tamsulosin group.|Up to 2 years|Treated Subjects Population: all participants starting protocol pharmacological treatment, either dutasteride plus tamsulosin or (escalated to) tamsulosin, as indicated by a nonmissing electronic Case Report Form treatment start date||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
836378|NCT01294592|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Responses to Question 2 of the Patient Perception of Study Treatment (PPST) Questionnaire at Baseline and Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24 Using the LOCF Approach|"The PPST questionnaire consists of two questions (asked to determine how satisfied participants are with the treatment received) and was administered at Baseline and all post-Baseline visits. Question 2 was: Would you ask your doctor for the treatment you received in this study? There were three possible responses, including: Yes, No, and Not sure. Response categories included Yes and No or Not Sure, created by grouping together No and Not sure. The LOCF method involves bringing forward the last non-missing post-Baseline assessment for a participant with missing data and/or for a participant who discontinued from the study."|Baseline and Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24|ITT Population. Participants with data available at the specified time point or using LOCF (post-Baseline) were summarized.||Participants|||Number
836379|NCT01294592|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Responses to Question 1 of the Patient Perception of Study Treatment (PPST) Questionnaire at Baseline and Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24 Using the LOCF Approach|"The PPST questionnaire consists of two questions (asked to determine how satisfied participants are with the treatment received) and was administered at Baseline and all post-Baseline visits. Question 1 was: Overall, how satisfied are you with the treatment and its effect on your urinary problems? There were seven possible responses, including: very satisfied, satisfied, somewhat satisfied, neutral, somewhat dissatisfied, dissatisfied, and very dissatisfied. Response categories were created by grouping together very satisfied, satisfied, and somewhat satisfied responses into the category of Any Satisfaction (AS), and separately grouping neutral, somewhat dissatisfied, dissatisfied, and very dissatisfied responses into the category of Neutral or Any Dissatisfaction (N/AD). The LOCF method involves bringing forward the last non-missing post-Baseline assessment for a participant with missing data and/or for a participant who discontinued from the study."|Baseline and Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24|ITT Population. Participants with data available at the specified time point or using LOCF (post-Baseline) were summarized.||Participants|||Number
836380|NCT01294592|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had Any BPH-related Surgery, Who Had the Indicated Type of Surgery, Who Had 2 BPH-related Surgeries, and Who Had >=3 BPH-related Surgeries|BPH-related surgery was summarized for events occurring on or after the date of randomization. The number of participants who had any BPH-related surgery, the indicated type of surgery, and multiple surgeries was summarized by treatment. Type of surgery data (cystoscopy, transurethral resection of the prostate [TURP], and prostatectomy) are presented in terms of the first-occurring BPH-related surgery after randomization. It was possible for a single participant to have multiple surgeries.|Up to Month 24|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
836381|NCT01294592|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated First-occurring Component of Clinical Progression (CP) of BPH|"CP of BPH is a composite of five endpoints assessed through the end of the study, including: symptom progression (symptom deterioration by IPSS >=3 points from Baseline [Visit 2]); acute urinary retention (AUR) related to BPH; incontinence (overflow or urge) related to BPH; recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI) or urosepsis related to BPH; renal insufficiency related to BPH (a single >=50% rise from Baseline serum creatinine and a total value >=1.5 milligrams/deciliter). The number of participants with CP of BPH, the number of participants with the indicated first-occurring component of CP of BPH, the number of participants with two simultaneously first-occurring components (Tied for first component), and the number of participants with multiple first-occurring components were summarized by treatment group."|Up to Month 24|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
836382|NCT01294592|Secondary|Number of Events of Clinical Progression (CP) of BPH|The number of participants with the first occurrence of clinical progression (CP) of BPH occurring on or after the randomization date are summarized by treatment and year. Time is based on the date of the first-occurring CP event, and is relative to the randomization date. CP of BPH is a composite of five endpoints assessed through the end of the study, including: symptom deterioration by IPSS >=3 points from Baseline (Visit 2); acute urinary retention related to BPH; incontinence (overflow or urge) related to BPH; recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI) or urosepsis related to BPH; renal insufficiency related to BPH (a single >=50% rise from Baseline serum creatinine and a total value >=1.5 milligrams/deciliter). For components that required multiple episodes, the first of the multiple episodes was utilized in terms of timing.|Up to 2 years|ITT Population. Only those participants at risk for CP at the specified visit were analyzed.||Events|||Number
836383|NCT01294592|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the BPH-related Health Status (BHS) Score at Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24 Using the LOCF Approach|Each participant was asked the following question “If you were to spend the rest of your life with your urinary condition just the way it is now, how would you feel about that?”. This response was rated from 0 (“delighted”) to 6 (“terrible”). Change from Baseline in the BHS score was summarized by treatment group using the LOCF approach at each scheduled post-Baseline assessment. LOCF analysis involves bringing forward the last non-missing post-Baseline assessment for a participant with missing data and/or for a participant who discontinued from the study. Estimates are based on the adjusted means from the general linear model: Change from Baseline =Treatment + Cluster + Baseline Value. Baseline is defined as the Visit 2 value if it exists; otherwise, it is the latest of all Screening values. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24|ITT Population. Participants with data available at the specified time point or using LOCF (post-Baseline) were summarized.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836394|NCT01294644|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CR-SMFRS Score|"The CR-SMFRS score is based on the investigator's clinical evaluation of the participant, where submental fullness is scored on a 5-point ordinal scale (0-4) with 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, and 4 = extreme.
A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population with available data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836384|NCT01294592|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the BPH Impact Index (BII) Score at Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24 Using the LOCF Approach|The BII is a 4-item questionnaire covering physical discomfort, worry, bother, and impact on usual activities, with a minimum score of 0 (best) and a maximum score (worst) of 13 points. Individual missing questionnaire responses were imputed, as applicable. Change from Baseline in the BII score was summarized by treatment group using the LOCF approach at each scheduled post-Baseline assessment. LOCF analysis involves bringing forward the last non-missing post-Baseline assessment for a participant with missing data and/or for a participant who discontinued from the study. Estimates are based on the adjusted means from the general linear model: Change from Baseline =Treatment + Cluster + Baseline Value. Baseline is defined as the Visit 2 value if it exists; otherwise, it is the latest of all Screening values. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24|ITT Population. Participants with data available at the specified time point or using LOCF (post-Baseline) were summarized.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836385|NCT01294592|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in the Indicated Improvement Categories in the IPSS at Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24 Using the LOCF Approach|Symptom improvement was assessed using IPSS categorical changes from Baseline. Change from Baseline categories were summarized by treatment group using five improvement levels: >=1 point through >=5 points. IPSS percent change from Baseline was summarized using seven improvement levels: >0 percent, >=10 percent, >=20 percent, >=25 percent, >=30 percent, >=40 percent, and >=50 percent. Change in IPSS from Baseline was analysed using the LOCF method and is summarized for the following categories: >=2 points, >=3 points, and percent change >=25. The 7 items in the IPSS questionnaire quantitatively measure the level of urinary symptoms reported as a total IPSS. The total IPSS (sum of the first 7 items) can range from 0 to 35: mild (0 to 7), moderate (8 to 19), or severe (20 to 35).|Baseline and Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24|ITT Population. Participants with data available at the specified time point or using LOCF (post-Baseline) were summarized. LOCF analysis involves bringing forward the last non-missing post-Baseline assessment for a participant with missing data and/or for a participant who discontinued from the study.||Participants|||Number
836386|NCT01294592|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Total International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24 Using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) Approach|"The IPSS questionnaire is a 7-item self-administered questionnaire designed to quantify the following urinary symptoms: Question 1 (Q1), incomplete emptying; Q2, frequency; Q3, intermittency; Q4, urgency; Q5, weak stream; Q6, straining; Q7, nocturia. It has an additional, independent eighth question to assess change in BPH-related health status (BHS) and quality of life. BHS scores range from 0 to 6, where 0 indicates delighted and 6 indicates terrible. The 7 items in the IPSS questionnaire quantitatively measure the level of urinary symptoms reported as a total IPSS. The total IPSS (sum of the first 7 items) can range from 0 to 35: mild (0 to 7), moderate (8 to 19), or severe (20 to 35). Change from Baseline in IPSS total score was calculated as the Month 24 value minus the Baseline value. LOCF analysis involves bringing forward the last non-missing post-Baseline assessment for a participant with missing data and/or for a participant who discontinued from the study."|Baseline and Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants regardless of whether or not treatment was administered. Any participant who received a treatment randomization number was considered to have been randomized. Participants with data available at the specified time point or using LOCF (post-Baseline) were summarized.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836387|NCT01294644|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Image Quality of Life Inventory (BIQLI)||Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)||01/2016||||
836388|NCT01294644|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Derriford Appearance Scale 24 (DAS24)||Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)||01/2016||||
836389|NCT01294644|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Self-rating of Attractiveness|"Self-rating of attractiveness assesses aspects of appearance from the participant's perspective by a series of 6 questions:
How attractive do you think your overall appearance (chin/neck, eyes, nose, mouth, entire face) is/are? Each question was answered on a scale from 1 to 9 where 1 = Not at all attractive, 5 = Neither attractive nor unattractive and 9 = Extremely attractive.
A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population with available data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836390|NCT01294644|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-Reported Submental Fat Impact Scale (PR-SMFIS)|The PR-SMFIS assesses the impact of submental fat on self-perception of 6 characteristics related to the appearance of submental fullness as evaluated by the participant. Each item is rated on an 11-point numeric scale from 0 to 10.|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)||01/2016||||
836391|NCT01294644|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Submental Fat Rating Scale (PR-SMFRS)|"The PR-SMFRS is based on the participant's response to the question How much fat do you currently have under your chin? answered on a 5-point ordinal scale (0-4) with 0 = no chin fat at all, 1 = a slight amount of chin fat, 2 = a moderate amount of chin fat, 3 = a large amount of chin fat, and 4 = a very large amount of chin fat. Improvement is defined as any decrease in score and worsened as any increase in score."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
836392|NCT01294644|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Submental Fat Thickness|Submental thickness was measured using caliper devices.|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population with available data||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
836393|NCT01294644|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SSRS Scores|"The SSRS assesses participant's satisfaction with their appearance in association with the face and chin on a 7-point scale from 0 to 6: where 0 = Extremely dissatisfied, 1 = Dissatisfied, 2 = Slightly dissatisfied, 3 = Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, 4 = Slightly satisfied, 5 = Satisfied and 6 = Extremely satisfied.
A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population with available data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836431|NCT01294748|Secondary|Device Success|Achievement of a final in-stent residual diameter stenosis of <50% (by QCA), using the assigned device only.|8 hours|||percentage of participants|||Number
836395|NCT01294644|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Subject Self Rating Scale (SSRS) Response|"A SSRS response is defined as an SSRS score that is 4 or greater 12 weeks after the last treatment.
The SSRS assesses participant's satisfaction with their appearance in association with the face and chin on a 7-point scale from 0 to 6: where 0 = Extremely dissatisfied, 1 = Dissatisfied, 2 = Slightly dissatisfied, 3 = Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, 4 = Slightly satisfied, 5 = Satisfied and 6 = Extremely satisfied."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF method was used to impute missing data||percentage of participants|||Number
836396|NCT01294644|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a CR-SMFRS 2-grade Response|"A CR-SMFRS 2-grade response is defined as at least a 2-point improvement (i.e. 2-point reduction) from Baseline 12 weeks after the last treatment.
The CR-SMFRS score is based on the investigator's clinical evaluation of the participant, where submental fullness is scored on a 5-point ordinal scale (0-4) with 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, and 4 = extreme."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF method was used to impute missing data||percentage of participants|||Number
836397|NCT01294644|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Clinician-Reported Submental Fat Rating Scale (CR-SMFRS) 1-grade Response|"A CR-SMFRS response is defined as at least a 1-point improvement (i.e. 1-point reduction) from Baseline 12 weeks after the last treatment.
The CR-SMFRS score is based on the investigator's clinical evaluation of the participant, where submental fullness is scored on a 5-point ordinal scale (0-4) with 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, and 4 = extreme."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population which included all randomized participants who had at least one efficacy assessment (CR-SMFRS or Subject Self Rating Scale) at Baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data.||percentage of participants|||Number
836398|NCT01294683|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Were Discontinued From the Study Due to an AE|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. Participants who were discontinued from the study due to an AE were recorded.|up 22 weeks (12 weeks in Periods I/II and 10 weeks in Period III)|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Safety analysis was based on the experiences accumulated during Periods I/II combined (pre-crossover), where the study followed a parallel design. A separate safety analysis was performed for Period III (post-crossover).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836399|NCT01294683|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least 1 AE|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE.|up 22 weeks (12 weeks in Periods I/II and 10 weeks in Period III)|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Safety analysis was based on the experiences accumulated during Periods I/II combined (pre-crossover), where the study followed a parallel design. A separate safety analysis was performed for Period III (post-crossover).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836400|NCT01294683|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Confirmed Adjudicated Cardiovascular Event|Select serious adverse cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality that occurred during the treatment phase of the study were adjudicated by an expert committee external to the sponsor. Those events confirmed by the committee a cardiovascular events were recorded.|up 20 weeks (12 weeks in Periods I/II and 8 weeks in Period III)|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Safety analysis was based on the experiences accumulated during Periods I/II combined (pre-crossover), where the study followed a parallel design. A separate safety analysis was performed for Period III (post-crossover).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836401|NCT01294683|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With New Onset of Diabetes|Participants who with newly diagnosed of diabetes were recorded. A participant was classified as having new onset diabetes if they experienced an AE related to a diagnosis of diabetes (based on a pre-defined set of Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities [MedDRA] terms), or if they started taking an anti-diabetic medication during the course of the study. The MedDRA terms were as follows: diabetes mellitus, diabetes mellitus insulin-dependent, diabetes mellitus non-insulin dependent, insulin-requiring type II diabetes mellitus, insulin resistant diabetes, diabetes with hyperosmolarity, latent autoimmune diabetes in adults.|up 20 weeks (12 weeks in Periods I/II and 8 weeks in Period III)|All participants without diabetes at baseline and who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Safety analysis was based on the experiences accumulated during Periods I/II combined (pre-crossover), where the study followed a parallel design. A separate safety analysis was performed for Period III (post-crossover).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836402|NCT01294683|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least 1 Hepatitis-related Adverse Event (AE)|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. Hepatitis-related AEs were identified by a collective review using the following pre-specified set of preferred terms: cholestasis, hepatic necrosis, hepatocellular damage, cytolytic hepatitis, hepatitis, hepatomegaly, jaundice, hepatic failure, hepatitis cholestatic, jaundice cholestatic, hepatitis fulminant, hyperbilirubinaemia, jaundice hepatocellular, ocular icterus, yellow skin, hepatic function abnormal, acute hepatic failure, subacute hepatic failure, hepatitis acute, hepatitis toxic, hepatotoxicity, and mixed hepatocellular-cholestatic injury.|up 20 weeks (12 weeks in Periods I/II and 8 weeks in Period III)|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Safety analysis was based on the experiences accumulated during Periods I/II combined (pre-crossover), where the study followed a parallel design. A separate safety analysis was performed for Period III (post-crossover).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836432|NCT01294748|Primary|Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE)|Defined as death, MI (Qwave and non-Q-wave) and TVR at 9 months post-procedure. Assessed on all patients with adequate follow-up at 270 days.|9 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
836403|NCT01294683|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CK >=10 x ULN With Muscle Symptoms - Drug Related|Participants had CK levels assessed throughout the treatment periods. Participants who had any CK level that was >=10 x ULN and had associated muscle symptoms present within +/- 7 days that were reported as at least possibly related to study drug were recorded. The UNLs for males and females were 207 U/L and 169 U/L, respectively.|up 20 weeks (12 weeks in Periods I/II and 8 weeks in Period III)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postbaseline measurement within 14 days of the last dose of study drug. Analysis was based on the experiences accumulated during Periods I/II combined, where the study followed a parallel design. A separate safety analysis was performed for Period III.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836404|NCT01294683|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Creatine Kinase (CK) >=10 x ULN|Participants had CK levels assessed throughout the treatment periods. Participants who had any CK level that was >=10 x ULN were recorded. The UNLs for males and females were 207 U/L and 169 U/L, respectively.|up 20 weeks (12 weeks in Periods I/II and 8 weeks in Period III)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postbaseline measurement within 14 days of the last dose of study drug. Analysis was based on the experiences accumulated during Periods I/II combined, where the study followed a parallel design. A separate safety analysis was performed for Period III.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836405|NCT01294683|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Elevations in ALT and/or AST of >=10 x ULN|Participants had AST and ALT levels assessed during Period I (4 weeks ) throughout each 8 week treatment period (20 weeks total). Participants who had an assessment of either AST or ALT that was 10 x ULN or greater were recorded. The AST UNLs for males and females were 43 U/L and 36 U/L, respectively. The ALT UNLs for males and females were 40 U/L and 33 U/L, respectively.|up 20 weeks (12 weeks in Periods I/II and 8 weeks in Period III)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postbaseline measurement within 14 days of the last dose of study drug. Analysis was based on the experiences accumulated during Periods I/II combined, where the study followed a parallel design. A separate safety analysis was performed for Period III.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836406|NCT01294683|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Elevations in ALT and/or AST of >=5 x ULN|Participants had AST and ALT levels assessed during Period I (4 weeks ) throughout each 8 week treatment period (20 weeks total). Participants who had an assessment of either AST or ALT that was 5 x ULN or greater were recorded. The AST UNLs for males and females were 43 U/L and 36 U/L, respectively. The ALT UNLs for males and females were 40 U/L and 33 U/L, respectively.|up 20 weeks (12 weeks in Periods I/II and 8 weeks in Period III)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postbaseline measurement within 14 days of the last dose of study drug. Analysis was based on the experiences accumulated during Periods I/II combined, where the study followed a parallel design. A separate safety analysis was performed for Period III.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836407|NCT01294683|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Consecutive Elevations in Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) and/or Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) of >=3 x Upper Limit of Normal (ULN)|Participants had AST and ALT levels assessed during Period I (4 weeks ) and throughout each 8 week treatment period (20 weeks total). Participants who had an assessment of either AST or ALT that was 3 x ULN or greater were recorded. The AST UNLs for males and females were 43 U/L and 36 U/L, respectively. The ALT UNLs for males and females were 40 U/L and 33 U/L, respectively.|Up 20 weeks (12 weeks in Periods I/II and 8 weeks in Period III)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 postbaseline measurement within 14 days of the last dose of study drug. Analysis was based on the experiences accumulated during Periods I/II combined, where the study followed a parallel design. A separate safety analysis was performed for Period III.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836408|NCT01294683|Secondary|Change From Baseline in High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C)|"Blood samples were taken at baseline (Week 4 for Period II; Week 12 for Period III) and after 8 weeks of treatment (Week 12 for Period II and Week 20 for Period III) to determine the HDL-C levels. The change from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment was recorded.
Results from recent studies indicated that the combination tablet formulations used in the study did not meet the pre-specified pharmacokinetic bounds used to establish the equivalence of the combination tablet (MK-0524B; ERN/LRPT/SIM) to the coadministration of MK-0524A (ERN/LRPT) and SIM. Therefore, efficacy data were not analyzed, as the study was stopped early. Only safety data were evaluated."|Baseline (Week 4 for Period II; Week 12 for Period III) and after 8 weeks of treatment during each period (Week 12 for Period II and Week 20 for Period III)|Study was terminated by the Sponsor prior to completion. No planned efficacy summaries or analyses were completed.|||||
836409|NCT01294683|Primary|Change From Baseline in Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C)|"Blood samples were taken at baseline (Week 4 for Period II; Week 12 for Period III) and after 8 weeks of treatment (Week 12 for Period II and Week 20 for Period III) to determine the LDL-C levels. The change from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment was recorded.
Results from recent studies indicated that the combination tablet formulations used in the study did not meet the pre-specified pharmacokinetic bounds used to establish the equivalence of the combination tablet (MK-0524B; ERN/LRPT/SIM) to the coadministration of MK-0524A (ERN/LRPT) and SIM. Therefore, efficacy data were not analyzed, as the study was stopped early. Only safety data were evaluated."|Baseline (Week 4 for Period II; Week 12 for Period III) and after 8 weeks of treatment (Week 12 for Period II and Week 20 for Period III)|Study was terminated by the Sponsor prior to completion. No planned efficacy summaries or analyses were completed.|||||
836410|NCT01294696|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Reported Adequate Relief From Joint Stiffness or Limitation in Physical Function at Month 12|Joint stiffness or limitation in physical function was evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities (WOMAC) visual analog (VA)3.0 Index. The WOMAC VA 3.0 is a self-administered, tri-dimensional, disease-specific health status measure. It probes clinically important, subject-relevant symptoms in the areas of pain, joint stiffness and physical function in subjects with osteoarthritis of the knee. The index consists of 24 questions (5 pain, 2 stiffness and 17 physical function) and uses a VA scale of 0-500 mm for pain, 0-200 mm for stiffness, and 0-1700 for physical limitation with higher scores indicating poorer outcomes. Adequate pain was defined as participants reporting less than 4 on the BPI average pain scale.|Month 12|The population consisted of all participants for which WOMAC VA 3.0 data was available at Month 12.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836411|NCT01294696|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Reported Adequate Relief From Joint Stiffness or Limitation in Physical Function at Month 9|Joint stiffness or limitation in physical function was evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities (WOMAC) visual analog (VA)3.0 Index. The WOMAC VA 3.0 is a self-administered, tri-dimensional, disease-specific health status measure. It probes clinically important, subject-relevant symptoms in the areas of pain, joint stiffness and physical function in subjects with osteoarthritis of the knee. The index consists of 24 questions (5 pain, 2 stiffness and 17 physical function) and uses a VA scale of 0-500 mm for pain, 0-200 mm for stiffness, and 0-1700 for physical limitation with higher scores indicating poorer outcomes. Adequate pain was defined as participants reporting less than 4 on the BPI average pain scale.|Month 9|The population consistated of all participants for which WOMAC VA 3.0 data were available at Month 9.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836412|NCT01294696|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Reported Adequate Relief From Joint Stiffness or Limitation in Physical Function at Month 6|Joint stiffness or limitation in physical function was evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities (WOMAC) visual analog (VA)3.0 Index. The WOMAC VA 3.0 is a self-administered, tri-dimensional, disease-specific health status measure. It probes clinically important, subject-relevant symptoms in the areas of pain, joint stiffness and physical function in subjects with osteoarthritis of the knee. The index consists of 24 questions (5 pain, 2 stiffness and 17 physical function) and uses a VA scale of 0-500 mm for pain, 0-200 mm for stiffness, and 0-1700 for physical limitation with higher scores indicating poorer outcomes. Adequate pain was defined as participants reporting less than 4 on the BPI average pain scale.|Month 6|The population consisted of all participants for which WOMAC VA 3.0 data were available at Month 6.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836413|NCT01294696|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Reported Adequate Relief From Joint Stiffness or Limitation in Physical Function at Month 3|Joint stiffness or limitation in physical function was evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities (WOMAC) visual analog (VA)3.0 Index. The WOMAC VA 3.0 is a self-administered, tri-dimensional, disease-specific health status measure. It probes clinically important, subject-relevant symptoms in the areas of pain, joint stiffness and physical function in subjects with osteoarthritis of the knee. The index consists of 24 questions (5 pain, 2 stiffness and 17 physical function) and uses a VA scale of 0-500 mm for pain, 0-200 mm for stiffness, and 0-1700 for physical limitation with higher scores indicating poorer outcomes. Adequate pain was defined as participants reporting less than 4 on the BPI average pain scale.|Month 3|The population consisted of all participants for which WOMAC VA 3.0 data were available at Month 3.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836414|NCT01294696|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Reported Adequate Relief From Joint Stiffness or Limitation in Physical Function at Month 1|Joint stiffness or limitation in physical function was evaluated using the Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) visual analog (VA)3.0 Index. The WOMAC VA 3.0 is a self-administered, tri-dimensional, disease-specific health status measure. It probes clinically important, subject-relevant symptoms in the areas of pain, joint stiffness and physical function in subjects with osteoarthritis of the knee. The index consists of 24 questions (5 pain, 2 stiffness and 17 physical function) and uses a VA scale of 0-500 mm for pain, 0-200 mm for stiffness, and 0-1700 for physical limitation with higher scores indicating poorer outcomes. Adequate pain was defined as participants reporting less than 4 on the BPI average pain scale.|Month 1|The population consisted of all participants for which a WOMAC VA 3.0 measurement was available at Month 1.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836415|NCT01294696|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Reported Adequate Relief From Joint Stiffness or Limitation in Physical Function at Baseline (Day 1)|Joint stiffness or limitation in physical function was evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities (WOMAC) visual analog (VA)3.0 Index. The WOMAC VA 3.0 is a self-administered, tri-dimensional, disease-specific health status measure. It probes clinically important, subject-relevant symptoms in the areas of pain, joint stiffness and physical function in subjects with osteoarthritis of the knee. The index consists of 24 questions (5 pain, 2 stiffness and 17 physical function) and uses a VA scale of 0-500 mm for pain, 0-200 mm for stiffness, and 0-1700 for physical limitation with higher scores indicating poorer outcomes. Adequate pain was defined as participants reporting less than 4 on the BPI average pain scale.|Baseline (Day 1)|The population consisted of all participants for which WOMAC VA 3.0 data for joint stiffness and limiation in physical function were available at Baseline.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836416|NCT01294696|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Reported Adequate vs. Inadequate Pain Relief at Month 12|Participant pain at baseline was recorded using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). The BPI is an inventory of subject-reported questions, where for each pain severity item the response scale is 0 = No Pain and 10 = Worst Pain You Can Imagine. The questions refer to pain in the last week: at its worst, at its least, on the average, and right now. Adequate pain control was defined as a score of <=4 on question 5 of the BPI. Inadequate pain control was defined as a score >4 on question 5 of the BPI. Question 5 of the BPI asked participants to rate their pain by circling the number that best describes their pain on the average scale from 0 to 10 (with 0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable).|Month 12|The population consisted of all participants for which a BPI value was avaialble at Month 12.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836417|NCT01294696|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Reported Adequate vs. Inadequate Pain Relief at Baseline|Participant pain at baseline was recorded using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). The BPI is an inventory of subject-reported questions, where for each pain severity item the response scale is 0 = No Pain and 10 = Worst Pain You Can Imagine. The questions refer to pain due to osteoarthritis in the affected knee in the last week: at its worst, at its least, on the average, and right now. Adequate pain control was defined as a score of <=4 on question 5 of the BPI. Inadequate pain control was defined as a score >4 on question 5 of the BPI. Question 5 of the BPI asked participants to rate their pain by circling the number that best describes their pain on the average scale from 0 to 10 (with 0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable).|Baseline (Day 1)|The population consisted of all participants for which a BPI value was available at baseline.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
836433|NCT01294748|Primary|In-Stent Late Lumen Loss|Measured by the angiographic core laboratory as the difference between the post-procedure MLD in the treated segment (stented region) minus the MLD in the same region at follow-up|9 months|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
836684|NCT01296412|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reaching A1C Goal of <7.0%||Week 26|Per-protocol population defined as participants who had a measurement at baseline and a measurement after at least 24 weeks (i.e., 168 days) of treatment, and did not have any major protocol violations.||percentage of participants|||Number
836418|NCT01294709|Secondary|Time to 1 mm ST Segment Depression|Bruce (and Modified Bruce) Protocol was used to assess the exercise duration on a treadmill. This protocol consists of a standardized gradual incremental increase in external workload every 3 minutes while the participant’s ECG, symptoms, and arm blood pressure were continuously monitored. The ECG was reviewed and the time to the first ST segment depression of 1 mm was recorded.|2.5 to approximately 2.75 hours post dose of each treatment period|Enrolled participants with evaluable data for assessment of time to 1 mm ST segment depression available. Data from the 600 and 900 mg telcagepant treatments were grouped for comparsion to placebo.||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836419|NCT01294709|Secondary|ST Segment Depression at Peak Exercise|Bruce (and Modified Bruce) Protocol was used to assess the exercise duration on a treadmill. This protocol consists of a standardized gradual incremental increase in external workload every 3 minutes while the participant’s ECG, symptoms, and arm blood pressure were continuously monitored. The time of peak exercise was considered the time at which the participant reached at least one of the criteria for stopping the treadmill test (evidence of chest discomfort, severe shortness of breath, dizziness, fatigue, ST-segment depression of greater than 2 mm, a fall in systolic blood pressure exceeding 10 mmHg, or the development of a ventricular tachyarrhythmia). The ECG for that timepoint (time of peak exercise) was evaluated and the amount of ST segment depression was determined.|2.5 to approximately 2.75 hours post dose of each treatment period|Enrolled participants with evaluable data for assessment of ST segment depression at peak exercise available. Data from the 600 and 900 mg telcagepant treatments were grouped for comparsion to placebo.||mm||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836420|NCT01294709|Primary|Total Exercise Duration on the Treadmill Test|Bruce (and Modified Bruce) Protocol was used to assess the exercise duration on a treadmill. This protocol consists of a standardized gradual incremental increase in external workload every 3 minutes while the participant’s electrocardiogram (ECG), symptoms, and arm blood pressure were continuously monitored. Regardless of whether the participant believed he or she could continue, the test was discontinued upon evidence of chest discomfort, severe shortness of breath, dizziness, fatigue, ST-segment depression of greater than 2 mm, a fall in systolic blood pressure exceeding 10 mmHg, or the development of a ventricular tachyarrhythmia|2.5 to approximately 2.75 hours post dose of each treatment period|Enrolled participants with evaluable treadmill exercise duration data available. Data from the 600 and 900 mg telcagepant treatments were grouped for comparsion to placebo.||Seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836421|NCT01294709|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Adverse Events|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. A laboratory AE was an AE reported as a result of a laboratory assessment or test.|Up to 10 days post dose in Period 1 and up to 14 days post dose in Period 2|Safety Population which consisted of all enrolled participants who actually received assigned study drug in a particular period . Adverse events are reported by dose taken in a given treatment period and not by randomly assigned treatment sequence.||Participants|||Number
836422|NCT01294709|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. A clinical AE was an AE reported as a result of a clinical examination or reported by the participant.|Up to 10 days post dose in Period 1 and up to 14 days post dose in Period 2|Safety Population which consisted of all enrolled participants who actually received assigned study drug in a particular period . Adverse events are reported by dose taken in a given treatment period and not by randomly assigned treatment sequence.||Participants|||Number
836423|NCT01294748|Secondary|Stent Thrombosis (Definite/Probable)|The presence of an intracoronary thrombus that originates in the stent or in the segments 5 mm proximal or distal to the stent post-procedure|9-months|||percentage of patients|||Number
836424|NCT01294748|Secondary|Target Lesion Failure (TLF)|Composite endpoint of cardiac death, target-lesion myocardial infarction (Q wave or non-Q wave), and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization|9-months|||percentage of patients|||Number
836425|NCT01294748|Secondary|Target Vessel Failure (TVF)|Composite endpoint of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (Q wave or non-Q wave), and clinically indicated target vessel revascularization|9-months|||percentage of patients|||Number
836426|NCT01294748|Secondary|Clinically-driven Target Lesion Revascularization (TVR)|TVR is defined as any repeat percutaneous intervention or surgical bypass of any segment of the target vessel (main branch or side branch). The target vessel is defined as the entire major coronary vessel proximal and distal to the target lesion, which includes upstream and downstream branches, and the target lesion itself.|9-months|||percentage of patients|||Number
836427|NCT01294748|Secondary|Total Myocardial Infarct (MI)|"Q-wave MI (QWMI): requires one of the following criteria: development of new abnormal Q waves in ≥2 contiguous ECG leads not present on the patient's baseline (i.e., before intervention) in association with a >2x ULN elevation of CK levels; chest pain or other acute symptoms consistent with myocardial ischemia and new pathological Q waves in ≥2 contiguous ECG leads in the absence of timely cardiac enzyme data.
Non-Q-wave MI (NQWMI):the elevation of CK levels (≥2 times ULN) with elevated CK-MB enzyme levels (≥3 times ULN) in the absence of new pathologic Q waves.
Peri-Procedural MI post PCI:Q or non-Q-wave MI, as defined above, prior to hospital discharge, or CK-MB elevation >3xULN within 48 hours post –PCI, with a normal CK-MB at baseline."|9-months|||percentage of patients|||Number
836428|NCT01294748|Secondary|Total Mortality||9-months|||percentage of patients|||Number
836429|NCT01294748|Secondary|Procedural Success|Achievement of a final in-stent residual diameter stenosis of <50% (by QCA) using the assigned device (including any adjunctive devices) without cardiac death, MI or repeat revascularization of the target lesion pre-hospital discharge.|8 hours|||percentage of participants|||Number
836430|NCT01294748|Secondary|Lesion Success|Achievement of a final in-stent residual diameter stenosis of <50% (by QCA) using any percutaneous method.|8 hours|||percentage of participants|||Number
836478|NCT01295320|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Suspected Cases of HZ Episodes||Month 48 to Month 72|||Participants|||Count of Participants
836434|NCT01294787|Secondary|Exercise Endurance Time Comparison After a Single Dose of QVA149 Versus Placebo|The effect of a single dose of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured with respect to exercise endurance time during sub-maximal constant load cycle ergometry test ((SMETT)cycle exercise test).|Day 1|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Seconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836435|NCT01294787|Secondary|Exercise Endurance Comparison Between QVA149 and Tiotropium Groups|Effect of QVA149 110/50 µg o.d. compared with tiotropium 18 µg o.d. in patients with moderate to severe COPD with respect to exercise endurance was measured by a sub-maximal constant load cycle ergometry test ((SMETT)cycle exercise test) after three weeks of treatment.|3 weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Seconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836436|NCT01294787|Secondary|Leg Discomfort During Exercise Comparison Between QVA149 and Placebo Groups|The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo on leg discomfort was measured using Borg CR10 Scale® during sub-maximal constant load cycle ergometry test after three weeks treatment.|3 weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836437|NCT01294787|Secondary|Exertional Dyspnea Comparison Between QVA149 and Placebo Groups|"The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured using exertional dyspnea Borg CR10 Scale® (After 3 weeks of treatment, before, during and after exercise, patients were asked to rate the intensity of their breathing and leg discomfort using the Borg CR10 Scale®). This scale consists of 12-point score that the participants pointed to so as to indicate their level of dyspnea before and during exercise testing (where 0 indicates no breathlessness at all and 12 indicates maximum breathlessness).
A reduction in this score indicates an improvement."|3 weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836438|NCT01294787|Secondary|Spirometry After Three Weeks of Treatment on Patients Not Exercising|The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured using dynamic inspiratory capacity post-dose pre-exercise after three weeks of treatment.|3 weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836439|NCT01294787|Secondary|Pulmonary Function Test (FRC) Comparison Between QVA149 and Placebo Groups|The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured using the pulmonary function test for Functional Residual Capacity (FRC) on day 1 and day 21, at 5 min and 15 min post dose as determined by body plethysmography.|day 1 and day 21|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836440|NCT01294787|Secondary|Pulmonary Function Test (SGaw) Comparison Between QVA149 and Placebo Groups|The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured using the pulmonary function test for Specific Airway Conductance (SGaw) on day 1 and day 21, at 5 min and 15 min post dose as determined by body plethysmography.|day 1 and day 21|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Kilo Pascal per second||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836441|NCT01294787|Secondary|Pulmonary Function Test (RV) Comparison Between QVA149 and Placebo Groups|The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured using the pulmonary function test for Residual Volume (RV) on day 1 and day 21, at 5 min and 15 min post dose as determined by body plethysmography.|day 1 and day 21|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836442|NCT01294787|Secondary|Pulmonary Function Test Comparison Between QVA149 and Placebo Groups|The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured using the pulmonary function test for Slow Vital Capacity (SVC) on day 1 and day 21, at 5 min and 15 min post dose as determined by body plethysmography.|day 1 and day 21|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836443|NCT01294787|Secondary|Trough 24 Hour Post Dose Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second Comparison Between QVA149 and Placebo Groups|The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured using trough 24 hour post dose Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) after three weeks of treatment.|3 weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836444|NCT01294787|Secondary|Trough 24 Hour Post Dose Inspiratory Capacity Comparison Between QVA149 and Placebo Groups|The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured using trough 24 hour post dose inspiratory capacity after three weeks of treatment.|3 weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836445|NCT01294787|Secondary|Dynamic Inspiratory Capacity Comparison Between QVA149 and Placebo Groups|The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured using dynamic inspiratory capacity at isotime during sub-maximal constant load cycle ergometry test ((SMETT)a cycle exercise test), after three weeks of treatment.|3 weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836446|NCT01294787|Primary|Exercise Tolerance Comparison Between QVA149 and Placebo Groups|The effect of indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) compared to placebo was measured by exercise endurance time (in seconds) during a sub-maximal constant load cycle ergometry test ((SMETT)which is a cycle exercise test) after three weeks of treatment.|3 weeks|Participants from the Full Analysis Set, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||Seconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836447|NCT01294800|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Treatment Due to an AE|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to this medicinal product.|Up to 12 Weeks|All Participants as Treated population, which included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
836448|NCT01294800|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced an Adverse Event (AE)|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to this medicinal product.|Up to 14 weeks|All Participants as Treated population, which included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
836449|NCT01294800|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean “On” Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesias (Hours Per Day) at Week 12|"When a participant is on without dyskinesias, parkinsonian symptoms have dissipated and the participant is experiencing no uncontrollable extraneous movements. Study participants reported their parkinsonian symptoms at half-hour intervals as off, on without dyskinesia, on with non-troublesome dyskinesia, on with troublesome dyskinesia, or asleep on their daily diary for 3 days before randomization and for the 3 days immediately before their Week-12 visit. The mean change from baseline in on without troublesome dyskinesia time was based on a constrained longitudinal data analysis with treatment, time, and treatment-by-time interaction as fixed effects, and an unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the correlation among repeated measurements."|Baseline and Week 12|FAS population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment; had endpoint data subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment; and had baseline data for those analyses requiring baseline data.||Hours/Day||Standard Deviation|Mean
836450|NCT01294800|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ≥30% Reduction in “Off” Time at Week 12|The proportion of responders (≥30% Reduction in “Off” Time at Week 12) was analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model with baseline mean OFF time (hours/day) as a covariate and treatment-by-time interaction as a fixed effect, and an unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the correlation among repeated measurements. Responder rates for each treatment arm are presented as are differences from placebo with 95% confidence interval.|Up to 12 Weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment; had endpoint data subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment; and had baseline data for those analyses requiring baseline data.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836451|NCT01294800|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean “Off” Time (Hours Per Day) at Week 12|"The on state is defined as the period of time during which a participant's symptoms of PD improve or disappear following treatment with levodopa (L-dopa) or dopamine agonists. The off state is defined as the period of time characterized by the return of symptoms (i..e. tremor, slowness, and rigidity) following treatment with L-dopa or dopamine agonists. Study participants reported their symptoms at half-hour intervals as off, on, or asleep on their daily diary for 3 days before randomization (baseline) and for the 3 days immediately before their Week-12 visit. The mean change from baseline in off time was based on a constrained longitudinal data analysis with treatment, time, and treatment-by-time interaction as fixed effects, and an unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the correlation among repeated measurements."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment; had endpoint data subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment; and had baseline data for those analyses requiring baseline data.||Hours/Day||Standard Deviation|Mean
836452|NCT01294917|Secondary|Dryness|This will be assessed by the tear break-up time on the lens surface, measured in seconds.|4 weeks||||||
836453|NCT01294917|Secondary|Subjective Lens Wearing Comfort|This will be assessed by a questionnaire on patient-perceived lens comfort and any symptoms of discomfort on a 0 to 100 scale.|4 weeks||||||
836454|NCT01294917|Primary|Corneal Staining|Corneal staining will be assessed with sodium fluorescein dye on the ocular surface. The cornea is split into 5 sections, each section is evaluated by staining type, depth, and extent is graded on a 0 to 100 scale with higher scores indicating more staining. The possible total range for the total score per eye is 0 to 50,000 (100x100x100=10,000 per section) with values higher than 1200 being clinically relevant.|4 weeks|Only subjects that completed all three arms were included in analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836455|NCT01295034|Secondary|CD4+T Cell Count|The change in the CD4+T cell count between the two arms.|baseline and 12 months|Analysis only for participants who completed the study.||cell/μL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836456|NCT01295034|Primary|25(OH)D Levels|The difference in the percentage of subjects with 25(OH)D levels in the range of 30-60 ng/ml at 12 mo between the two arms.|baseline and 12 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
836457|NCT01295216|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Physical Activity at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|||MET/min/week||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836458|NCT01295216|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Waist Circumference at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|||cm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836459|NCT01295216|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|||kg/m2||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836460|NCT01295216|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836461|NCT01295216|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Food Intake at 12 Months||Baseline and 12 months|||Servings/day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836462|NCT01295216|Primary|Change From Baseline in Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure at 6, 12, and 18 Months|A reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure is expected as early as 6 months of intervention and it is expected that this reduction is maintained or even continue to decrease over time|Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months|||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836479|NCT01295320|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Fatal SAEs|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|Month 48 to Month 72|||Participants|||Count of Participants
836463|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of Discomfort Due to Other Causes|To compare subject’s tolerability with regards to perceived discomfort due to other causes, when using two different urinary catheters 2.0. Frequency of discomfort due to other causes (yes/ no) will be assessed in patient questionnaire. The frequency of discomfort due to other causes will be compared between the treatments. Discomfort due to other causes will be further specified using 5-graded scale (as for the other variables on the 5-graded scale the difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject).|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836464|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of Resistance|To evaluate subject perception related to the properties of the catheter’s coating/surface, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836465|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of Smoothness|To evaluate subject perception related to the properties of the catheter’s coating/surface, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836466|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of Slipperiness|To evaluate subject perception related to the properties of the catheter’s coating/surface, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836467|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of Catheter Tip|To evaluate subject perception related to the physical properties of the catheter, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836468|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of Catheter Adherence|To evaluate subject perception related to the physical properties of the catheter, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836469|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of Catheter Eyes|To evaluate subject perception related to the physical properties of the catheter, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836470|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of Stiffness/ Rigidity|To evaluate subject perception related to the physical properties of the catheter, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836471|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of “Other Discomfort”|To compare subject’s tolerability with regards to perceived “other discomfort”, when using two different urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Frequency of “other discomfort” (yes/ no) will be assessed in patient questionnaire. The frequency of “other discomfort” will be compared between the treatments. “Other discomfort” will be further specified using 5-graded scale (as for the other variables on the 5-graded scale the difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject).|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836472|NCT01295281|Secondary|Presence of Bleeding|To compare subject’s tolerability with regards to presence of bleeding, when using two different urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836473|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of Burning Sensation|To compare subject’s tolerability with regards to perceived burning sensation, when using two different urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836474|NCT01295281|Secondary|Perception of Pain|To compare subject’s tolerability with regards to perceived pain, when using two different urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively||||||
836475|NCT01295281|Primary|Number of Participants With Discomfort|The primary objective of this study is to compare the subject's tolerability, with regards to perceived discomfort, when using two different urinary catheters. Perception of discomfort (yes/ no) will be assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. The frequency of discomfort will be compared between the treatments.|At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively|"Since the study is cross-over, all (104) subjects evaluated both LoFric POBE 2.0 and LoFric PVC. To be able to group and describe the results the Arm/Group Titles are renamed in this section to LoFric POBE 2.0 and LoFric PVC respectively. Each Arm/Group describing the outcome for all 104 subjects (ITT analysis set)."||participants|||Number
836476|NCT01295320|Secondary|Number of Subjects and Relationship to Vaccination of Any Potential Immune Mediated Diseases (pIMDs) Following Participation in 108494 Study and Its Follow-ups (108516, 108518 and 108520) and Not Already Documented||Month 48 to Month 72|||Participants|||Count of Participants
836477|NCT01295320|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Suspected Cases of HZ Episodes Following Participation in 108494 Study and Its Follow-ups (108516, 108518 and 108520) and Not Already Documented||Month 48 to Month 72|||Participants|||Count of Participants
836480|NCT01295320|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any SAEs Related to Previous Vaccination and Not Already Documented|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|Month 0 to Month 72|||Participants|||Count of Participants
836481|NCT01295320|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) Related to the Study Participation|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|Month 48 to Month 72|||Participants|||Count of Participants
836482|NCT01295320|Primary|Antigen-specific Antibody (Ab) Concentrations|­Anti-Glicoprotein E (Anti-gE) and anti-VZV Ab concentrations as determined by Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA)|Month 72|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures defined in the protocol and with no elimination criteria during the study).||mIU/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836483|NCT01295320|Primary|Antigen-specific Antibody (Ab) Concentrations|­Anti-Glicoprotein E (Anti-gE) and anti-VZV Ab concentrations as determined by Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA)|Month 60|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures defined in the protocol and with no elimination criteria during the study).||mIU/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836484|NCT01295320|Primary|Antigen-specific Antibody (Ab) Concentrations|­Anti-Glicoprotein E (Anti-gE) and anti-VZV Ab concentrations as determined by Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA)|Month 48|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures defined in the protocol and with no elimination criteria during the study).||mIU/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836485|NCT01295320|Primary|Cell-Mediated Immunity (CMI) in Terms of Frequencies of Antigen-specific CD4 T Cells|Frequencies of CD4 T cells with antigen-specific Interferon gamma (IFN-γ) and/or Interleukin-2 (IL-2) and/or Tumour Necrosis Factor alpha (TNF-α) and/or CD40 Ligand (CD40L) secretion/expression to glycoprotein E (gE) and Varicella Zoster Virus (VZV) as determined by Intracellular Cytokine Staining (ICS)|Month 72|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures defined in the protocol and with no elimination criteria during the study).||cells/million T-cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
836486|NCT01295320|Primary|Cell-Mediated Immunity (CMI) in Terms of Frequencies of Antigen-specific CD4 T Cells|Frequencies of CD4 T cells with antigen-specific Interferon gamma (IFN-γ) and/or Interleukin-2 (IL-2) and/or Tumour Necrosis Factor alpha (TNF-α) and/or CD40 Ligand (CD40L) secretion/expression to glycoprotein E (gE) and Varicella Zoster Virus (VZV) as determined by Intracellular Cytokine Staining (ICS)|Month 60|The analysis was base don the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures defined in the protocol and with no elimination criteria during the study).||cells/million T-cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
836487|NCT01295320|Primary|Cell-Mediated Immunity (CMI) in Terms of Frequencies of Antigen-specific CD4 T Cells|­Frequencies of CD4 T cells with antigen-specific Interferon gamma (IFN-γ) and/or Interleukin-2 (IL-2) and/or Tumour Necrosis Factor alpha (TNF-α) and/or CD40 Ligand (CD40L) secretion/expression to glycoprotein E (gE) and Varicella Zoster Virus (VZV) as determined by Intracellular Cytokine Staining (ICS)|Month 48|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures defined in the protocol and with no elimination criteria during the study).||cells/million T-cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
836488|NCT01295814|Secondary|Global Response Assessment (GRA)|"Percent(%) of patients who reported 50% or greater overall improvement in their condition.
Score on a scale range (improvement 0%-100%)"|Measured at12 Weeks|||percentage of participants|||Number
836489|NCT01295814|Secondary|Pelvic Pain Urgency/Frequency (PUF) Score|Pelvic Pain, Urgency/Frequency Symptom Scale Total scores on a scale range: 0-35 (0, meaning no symptoms, to 35, meaning the most severe symptoms)|Baseline12 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836490|NCT01295814|Secondary|Interstitial Cystitis Problem Index (ICPI)|Improvement in O'Leary Sant Interstitial Cystitis Problem Index (ICPI) Total scores on a scale: 0-16 (0, meaning no symptoms, to 16, meaning the most severe symptoms)|Baseline/12 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836491|NCT01295814|Secondary|Interstitial Cystitis Symptom Index (ICSI)|Improvement in O'Leary Sant Interstitial Cystitis Symptom Index (ICSI) Total scores on a range scale: 0-20 (0, meaning no symptoms, to 20, meaning the most severe symptoms)|Baseline/ 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836492|NCT01295814|Primary|O'Leary-Santa Interstitial Cystitis Symptom Index and Problem Index (OSPI) Score|Improvement in the O'Leary Sant Symptom and Problem Index from baseline to week 12 Total scores on a scale range: 0-36 (0, meaning no symptoms to 36, meaning the most severe symptoms)|Baseline/12 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836493|NCT01295840|Secondary|Number of Patients With PNS in All Vectors, That Could be Avoided With a Non-traditional Vector|To calculate the number of patients, who exhibit PNS in all traditional vector, in which PNS could be avoided using a non-traditional vector|At 6 months|||participants|||Number
836494|NCT01295840|Secondary|Number of Patients With PNS in All Vectors|To calculate the number of patients that exhibit PNS in all traditional vector|At 6 months|||participants|||Number
836495|NCT01295840|Secondary|Number of Patients With PNS in All Vectors, That Could be Avoided With a Non-traditional Vector|To calculate the number of patients, who exhibit PNS in all traditional vector, in which PNS could be avoided using a non-traditional vector|At enrollment|||participants|||Number
836496|NCT01295840|Secondary|Number of Patients With PNS in All Vectors|To calculate the number of patients that exhibit PNS in all traditional vector|At enrollment|||participants|||Number
836497|NCT01295840|Secondary|Number of Vectors With Phrenic Nerve Stimulation (PNS)|"Capture and phrenic threshold data will be recorded for each of the stimulation vectors studied.
Attempts will also be made to avoid phrenic stimulation in those patients who suffer from it, whilst maintaining good capture thresholds, by changing between the new configurations offered by the Quartet® electrode."|At 6 months|||number of vectors|Participants||Number
836498|NCT01295840|Secondary|Number of Vectors With Phrenic Nerve Stimulation (PNS)|"Capture and phrenic threshold data will be recorded for each of the stimulation vectors studied.
Attempts will also be made to avoid phrenic stimulation in those patients who suffer from it, while maintaining good capture thresholds, by changing between the new configurations offered by the Quartet® electrode."|Enrollment visit (in the seven days after implantation of the device)|||number of vectors|Participants||Number
836499|NCT01295840|Secondary|Capture Threshold|"Capture and phrenic threshold data will be recorded for each of the stimulation vectors studied.
Attempts will also be made to avoid phrenic stimulation in those patients who suffer from it, whilst maintaining good capture thresholds, by changing between the new configurations offered by the Quartet® electrode."|6 months post-implant|||volts||Standard Deviation|Mean
836500|NCT01295840|Secondary|Capture Threshold|"Capture and phrenic threshold data will be recorded for each of the stimulation vectors studied.
Attempts will also be made to avoid phrenic stimulation in those patients who suffer from it, whilst maintaining good capture thresholds, by changing between the new configurations offered by the Quartet® electrode."|Enrollment visit (in the seven days after implantation of the device)|||volts||Standard Deviation|Mean
836501|NCT01295840|Secondary|Cardiac Output (CO) With Different Configurations at Enrollment|Means of baseline non-paced CO, best CO obtained from traditional configurations and best CO obtained from all quadripolar configurations at enrollment.|Enrollment visit (in the seven days after implantation of the device)|||L/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
836502|NCT01295840|Secondary|Percent Difference Between the Best CO From Non-traditional Vectors and Best CO From Traditional Vectors|"In patients with best CO obtained from Non-traditional, to calculate the percent difference between the best CO from Non-traditional vectors and best CO from Traditional vectors, vectors.This percentage was the CO from Non-traditional vectors minus CO from Traditional vectors then divided by CO from Traditional vectors.
The Quartet® lead has 4 poles: Distal (D1), Mid 2 (M2), Mid 3 (M3) and Proximal (P4). The 3 Traditional vectors are the traditional configurations available in a standard bipolar lead: D1-M2, D1-Right Ventricular Coil (RVC) and M2-RVC. The 7 Non-traditional vectors are the additional configurations available in a Quartet® lead: D1-P4, M2-P4, M3-M2, M3-RVC, M3-P4, P4-M2 and P4-RVC."|At enrollment|||percentage of difference of CO||Standard Deviation|Mean
836503|NCT01295840|Primary|Number of Patients Whose Cardiac Output (CO) Value in Acute, as Measured Echocardiographically, Improves With the Different Stimulation Vectors Offered by the Quartet® Left Ventricular Electrode.||Enrollment visit (in the seven days after implantation of the device)|||participants|||Number
836504|NCT01295879|Secondary|Recurrence of Kidney Stones||8 weeks|||# of stone recurrences|||Number
836505|NCT01295879|Secondary|Change in 24 Hour Urine Supersaturation of Calcium Oxalate|Elevated values of calcium oxalate supersaturation in the urine are a risk factor for recurrence of calcium kidney stones|8 weeks|||(unitless)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836506|NCT01295879|Primary|Change in 24 Hour Urine Calcium|Elevated values of urine calcium are a risk factor for recurrence of calcium kidney stones|8 weeks|||mg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
836507|NCT01295905|Secondary|Overall Handling|As interpreted by the participant and recorded on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 3 months of wear time. Overall handling was evaluated binocularly and rated on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|3 months of wear, lenses replaced daily|Per protocol.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836508|NCT01295905|Secondary|Overall Comfort|As interpreted by the participant and recorded on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 3 months of wear time. Overall comfort was evaluated binocularly and rated on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|3 months of wear, lenses replaced daily|Per protocol.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836509|NCT01295905|Secondary|Overall Vision|As interpreted by the participant and recorded on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 3 months of wear time. Overall vision was evaluated binocularly and rated on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|3 months of wear, lenses replaced daily|Per protocol.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836510|NCT01295905|Primary|Corrected Distance Monocular Visual Measurement in Normal Illumination Reported as Visual Acuity|Each eye tested individually while reading a chart distant to the participant in normal lighting. Visual acuity was measured using a Snellen chart, with 20/20 Snellen acuity considered normal distance-eyesight. Visual acuity is reported as the number of eyes achieving 20/20 Snellen acuity or better.|3 months of wear, lenses replaced daily|Per protocol.||eyes|Participants||Number
836511|NCT01296035|Secondary|Adverse Events, Measured by Active Version of the NCI Common Toxicity Criteria|Adverse events (AEs) will be recorded during the duration of the trial, whether or not the events are considered related to medication. All AEs considered to be related to trial therapy will be followed for resolution, including into the post-treatment period.|Every 4 weeks while on-study, up to 24 weeks|Please see results section. In short, there were 3 serious adverse events (1 thromboembolic, 1 hypomagnesemia, 1 bowel obstruction). Additional adverse events included (in decreasing order) rash, fatigue, anemia, edema, thrombocytopenia, abdominal pain, epistaxis, hypocalcemia, and calciphylaxis||participants|Participants||Number
836512|NCT01296035|Primary|Overall Response Rate, Measured by RECIST Criteria|Documentation of known measurable or evaluable disease parameters after every 2 cycles of treatment. If any patient is withdrawn for the study prior to completion of therapy a repeat evaluation will be done at that time.|Every 8 weeks while on-study|Due to the small number of participants, data were not collected as planned|||||
836513|NCT01296152|Secondary|Regulatory T Cells (Tregs) at Baseline, Week 4 and Week 12 Using Flow Cytometry in Freshly Thawed PBMCs.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on Tregs at baseline (Day 0), week 4 and week 12 using flow cytometry in freshly thawed PBMCs. A summary of CD4+ and cluster of differentiation 8 (CD8+) anchored T-cell subsets by study week, in percent that express the marker of interest, is presented here together to provide all results pertaining to this objective in a single data table.|Day 0, Weeks 4 and 12|All 24 participants included in the primary analyses were eligible for this secondary objective. 21 participants with available data were analyzed.||Percent CD4/CD8 cells expressing marker||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836527|NCT01296152|Secondary|LPV PK Parameter Cmax.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the secondary LPV PK parameter Cmax obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and four weeks after DMPA injection at study week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants who took DMPA with LPV/r and were eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
836514|NCT01296152|Secondary|CMI to HIV and the Common Opportunistic Agent VZV Using the Lymphocyte Proliferation Assay (LPA).|This evaluates the effect of MPA on CMI to HIV and VZV. This outcome was measured at Baseline Before DMPA (Day 0) and After DMPA (Weeks 4 and 12) using the Lymphocyte Proliferation Assay (LPA). The data table shows a summary of LPA assay results by study week with stimuli HIV and VZV. Proliferation results are reported as a stimulation index (SI) which represents the ratio of the stimulated counts per minute to unstimulated control counts per minute.|Day 0, Weeks 4 and 12|All 24 participants included in the primary analyses were eligible for this secondary objective. 22 participants with available data were analyzed.||SI Ratio||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836515|NCT01296152|Secondary|Cell Mediated Immunity (CMI) to HIV and the Common Opportunistic Agent Varicella-zoster Virus (VZV) Using the Enzyme-linked Immunospot (ELISPOT) Assay.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on CMI to HIV and VZV at baseline before DMPA (day 0) and after DMPA (weeks 4 and 12) . Cytokines are interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) and interleukin 2 (IL-2), and Stimuli are HIV and VZV. Summary of adjusted ELISPOT assay results is in spot forming cells (SFC)/10^6 peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) by study weeks 0, 4 and 12. The outcome measures of IFN-gamma and IL-2 measured for HIV and VZV are presented here together to provide all results pertaining to the same objective in a single data table.|Day 0, Weeks 4 and 12|All 24 participants included in the primary analyses were eligible for this secondary objective. 22 participants with available data were analyzed.||SFC/10^6 PBMC||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836516|NCT01296152|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA Levels <400 Copies/mL.|This evaluates the short-term impact of MPA on virologic suppression in participants taking LPV/r who have received a dose of DMPA by measuring percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA levels <400 copies/mL at day 0 (prior to DMPA injection) and at weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12 (after DMPA injection). An FDA-approved HIV-1 RNA assay with a lower limit of detection of 75 copies/mL or less was required and the same HIV-1 RNA assay was required to be performed for each participant across all study visits. The Roche COBAS AmpliPrep/TaqMan HIV-1 and Abbott RealTime HIV-1 tests were used.|Day 0, Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|All 24 participants included in the primary analyses were eligible for this secondary objective, however participants occasionally missed the HIV-1 RNA draw (see N for each week in table below).||Percent of Participants|||Number
836517|NCT01296152|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Menstrual Irregularities of Grade 1 and Higher Deemed Possibly, Probably or Definitely Related to Study Treatment.|This evaluates toxicity and safety of concomitant medication of DMPA and LPV/r, focusing specifically on the adverse event (AE) menstrual irregularities with abnormal vaginal bleeding. The AEs were graded by the clinicians according to the Division of AIDS (DAIDS) AE Grading Table (see references in the Protocol Section) as follows: Grade 1=Mild, Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3=Severe, Grade 4=Potentially Life-Threatening, Grade 5=Death. Relationship to study treatment was determined by the study's co-chairs.|From day 0 to week 12|This analysis focuses on the 24 participants eligible for the PK analyses.||Percent of Participants|||Number
836518|NCT01296152|Secondary|RTV PK Parameter T1/2.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the PK parameter T1/2 of RTV obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and after DMPA injection at study week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC. For one participant at day 0, T1/2 results were not estimated.||hour||Full Range|Median
836519|NCT01296152|Secondary|RTV PK Parameter CL/F.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the PK parameter CL/F of RTV obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and after DMPA injection at study week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC.||L/hour||Full Range|Median
836520|NCT01296152|Secondary|RTV PK Parameter Tmax.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the PK parameter Tmax of RTV obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and after DMPA injection at study week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC.||hour||Full Range|Median
836521|NCT01296152|Secondary|RTV PK Parameter Cmax.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the PK parameter Cmax of RTV obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and after DMPA injection at study week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
836522|NCT01296152|Secondary|RTV PK Parameter Cmin.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the PK parameter Cmin of RTV obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and after DMPA injection at study week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
836523|NCT01296152|Secondary|Ritonavir (RTV) PK Parameter AUC0-12h.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the PK parameter AUC0-12h of RTV obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and after DMPA injection at study week 4. Blood samples were drawn for RTV concentration levels at time zero (before LPV/r dosing) and at 30 minutes and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 10 hours after LPV/r dosing at day 0 and week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC.||ng*h/mL||Full Range|Median
836524|NCT01296152|Secondary|LPV PK Parameter T1/2.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the secondary LPV PK parameter T1/2 obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and four weeks after DMPA injection at study week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants who took DMPA with LPV/r and were eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC.||hour||Full Range|Median
836525|NCT01296152|Secondary|LPV PK Parameter CL/F.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the secondary LPV PK parameter CL/F obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and four weeks after DMPA injection at study week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants who took DMPA with LPV/r and were eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC.||L/hour||Full Range|Median
836526|NCT01296152|Secondary|LPV PK Parameter Tmax.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the secondary LPV PK parameter Tmax obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and four weeks after DMPA injection at study week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants who took DMPA with LPV/r and were eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC.||hour||Full Range|Median
836706|NCT01299896|Primary|Effectiveness of CTQ vs UC|We will measure abstinence of CTQ smokers vs those in Usual Care (UC). We will biochemically-validate (defined as salivary cotinine <10ng/ml) self reported abstinence (30 day point-prevalence) at the end of 2 years.|Two (2) year period|||percentage of participants per arm|||Number
836528|NCT01296152|Secondary|LPV PK Parameter Cmin.|This evaluates the effect of MPA on the secondary LPV PK parameter Cmin obtained from both sampling periods, before DMPA injection at study day 0 and four weeks after DMPA injection at study week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants who took DMPA with LPV/r and were eligible for the primary PK outcome of LPV AUC.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
836529|NCT01296152|Secondary|MPA PK Parameter Half-Life (T1/2) Determined Based on MPA Levels.|This evaluates the effect of LPV/r on the secondary MPA PK parameter T1/2 based on MPA levels measured at weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12.|0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 weeks|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants who took DMPA with LPV/r and were eligible for the primary PK outcome of MPA AUC. A minimum of three observations in the elimination phase was required to determine T1/2 and therefore results are presented for 22 participants.||week||Full Range|Median
836530|NCT01296152|Secondary|MPA PK Parameter Clearance (CL/F) Determined Based on MPA Levels.|This evaluates the effect of LPV/r on the secondary MPA PK parameter CL/F based on MPA levels measured at weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12.|0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 weeks|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants who took DMPA with LPV/r and were eligible for the primary PK outcome of MPA AUC.||L/week||Full Range|Median
836531|NCT01296152|Secondary|MPA PK Parameter Time to Cmax (Tmax) Determined Based on MPA Levels.|This evaluates the effect of LPV/r on the secondary MPA PK parameter Tmax based on MPA levels measured at weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12.|0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 weeks|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants who took DMPA with LPV/r and were eligible for the primary PK outcome of MPA AUC.||week||Full Range|Median
836532|NCT01296152|Secondary|MPA PK Parameter Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) Determined Based on MPA Levels.|This evaluates the effect of LPV/r on the secondary MPA PK parameter Cmax based on MPA levels measured at weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12.|0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 weeks|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants who took DMPA with LPV/r and were eligible for the primary PK outcome of MPA AUC.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
836533|NCT01296152|Secondary|MPA PK Parameter Minimum Plasma Concentration (Cmin) Determined Based on MPA Levels.|This evaluates the effect of LPV/r on the secondary MPA PK parameter Cmin based on MPA levels measured at weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12.|0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 weeks|The analysis population is the 24 A5283 participants who took DMPA with LPV/r and were eligible for the primary PK outcome of MPA AUC.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
836534|NCT01296152|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Progesterone Levels Less Than the Lower Limit of Quantification (LLQ).|This evaluates the suppression of ovulation due to the potential PK interaction between DMPA and LPV/r. The LLQ of progesterone is 0.5ng/mL. The threshold for suppression of ovulation is 5ng/mL.|0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 weeks|All 24 participants included in the primary analyses were eligible for this secondary objective, however participants occasionally missed the progesterone draw (see N for each week in table below).||Percent of Participants|||Number
836535|NCT01296152|Primary|AUC0-12hour for LPV at Baseline (Day 0) Before DMPA Administration and at Week 4 (Four Weeks After DMPA Administration)|This evaluates the effect of DMPA on LPV PK parameter AUC by comparing PK AUCs of LPV from 0 to 12 hours obtained at study Day 0 (before DMPA was administered) with PK AUCs of LPV from 0 to 12 hours at study Week 4 (4 weeks after DMPA was administered). Blood samples were drawn for LPV concentration levels at time zero (before LPV/r dosing) and at 30 minutes and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 10 hours after LPV/r dosing at day 0 and week 4.|Day 0 and Week 4|All participants eligible for the first primary PK outcome measure (MPA AUC0-12weeks) were included in this second primary outcome measure looking at LPV AUC0-12hours at Day 0 and week 4.||ng*h/mL||Full Range|Median
836536|NCT01296152|Primary|Medroxyprogesterone Acetate (MPA) Pharmacokinetic Parameter (PK) Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC0-12weeks)|This evaluates the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) on pharmacokinetic parameter AUC of MPA by looking at the MPA AUC from day 0 to week 12. AUC0-12weeks was calculated using single MPA concentrations sampled immediately prior to DMPA administration on day 0, and at 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 weeks after administration of the single DMPA dose.|Day 0, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|One participant was excluded from all PK analyses for taking a prohibited medication with potential to interfere with PK assessments. For another participant who missed week 10 and 12 visits, a modelling approach was used to estimate the week 12 MPA level.||ng*wk/mL||Full Range|Median
836537|NCT01283971|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Adverse Events (AEs), Discontinuation Due to AEs and Deaths|"An adverse event was considered any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease associated with the use of the study drug, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Preexisting conditions that worsened during the study were reported as adverse events.
A serious adverse event is any experience that suggests a significant hazard, contraindication, side effect or precaution that: results in death, is life-threatening, required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is medically significant."|32 weeks|Safety Population included all participants who received study drug and who had at least 1 post-dose safety assessment.||Participants|||Number
836538|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin at Week 24|Blood was collected at Baseline and Week 24. The samples were sent to a central laboratory for Hemoglobin analysis reported in gram/deciliter (g/dL). A positive number change from Baseline (a higher hemoglobin level compared to Baseline) indicated improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with hemoglobin data available at Baseline and Week 24.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836547|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Week 24|"The patient assessed their pain using a 0 to 100 millimeter (mm) horizontal visual analogue scale (VAS). The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as no pain and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm as unbearable pain. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836579|NCT01284114|Primary|The Change of Heart Function Confirmed by Echocardiograph|Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)were measured by echocardiogram at baseline and 6 month. Plasma BNP level were measured by the radioimmunoassay (RIA) method at baseline and 6month.|baseline and 6 month|We analyzed participants who copmleted this study||% of stroke vulume/enddiastolic volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
836539|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) Score at Week 24|RAPID3 is a patient self reported assessment that combines the HAQ-DI [20 questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities. Each domain has at least 2 component questions answered on a 4-point scale where 0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do} converted to a score of 0-10, the Patients Assessment of Pain [Over the previous 24 hours: using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) left end of the line 0=no pain to right end of the line 100=unbearable pain] converted to a score of 0-10 and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity [over the previous 24 hours using a VAS where left end of the line 0=no disease activity to right end of the line 100=maximum disease activity] converted to a score of 0-10. The 3 individual scales are summed for a raw score of 0-30 which is divided by 3 to achieve a total possible adjusted score of 0-10. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24 for this outcome measure.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836540|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Short Form (SF-36) Score at Week 24|The SF-36 is a questionnaire used to assess physical functioning and is made up of eight domains: Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role-Emotional and Mental Health. Transforming and standardizing these domains leads to the calculation of the Physical (PCS) and Mental (MCS) Component Summary measures. Scores ranging from 0 to 100, with 0=worst score (or quality of life) and 100=best score. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24 for this outcome measure.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836541|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue Scale (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 24|FACIT-F is a 13-item questionnaire. Patients scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the patient's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the patient's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the patient's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score). A higher score reflects an improvement in the patient's health status. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836542|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 24|The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) is a patient completed questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis, consisting of 20 questions in 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and common daily activities. There are 4 possible responses for each question: 0=without any difficulty, 1=with some difficulty, 2=with much difficulty and 3=unable to do. The score for each of the domains is the highest (worst) score in each domain. A patient must have a domain score for at least 6 of 8 domains to calculate a valid HAQ-DI score which is the sum of domain scores, divided by the number of domains that have a score for a total possible score minimum/maximum 0 (best) to 3 (worst). A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836543|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) at Week 24|Blood was collected for Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) (a test that assesses tissue inflammation) and was analyzed at a local laboratory. ESR was measured in millimeter/hour (mm/hr). A reduction in the level is considered an improvement.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24 for this outcome measure.||mm/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
836544|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in High Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hsCRP) at Week 24|Blood was collected for C-Reactive Protein (CRP) (a test for analysis of inflammatory and infectious disorders) and was analyzed at a central laboratory. The concentration of CRP was measured in milligram/liter (mg/L). A reduction in the level is considered an improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24 for this outcome measure.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
836545|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS at Week 24|"The physician global assessment of disease activity was assessed using a 0 to 100 mm horizontal visual analogue scale (VAS) by the physician. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as no disease activity (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm, as maximum disease activity (maximum arthritis disease activity). A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836546|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS at Week 24|"The patient's global assessment of disease activity is assessed on a 0 to 100 millimeter (mm) horizontal visual analogue scale (VAS) by the patient. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as no disease activity (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm, as maximum disease activity (maximum arthritis disease activity). A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement."|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836580|NCT01284114|Primary|The Change of Blood Pressure|The change of systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure|baseline and 6 month|We analyzed all patients who completed study.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
836548|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Tender Joint Count (TJC) at Week 24|68 joints are assessed for tenderness and joints are classified as tender/not tender giving a total possible tender joint count score of 0 to 68. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 24|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment. Last observation carried forward was used to impute missing tender joint counts.||Joint count||Standard Deviation|Mean
836549|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Count (SJC) at Week 24|66 joints were assessed for swelling and joints are classified as swollen/not swollen giving a total possible swollen joint count score of 0 to 66. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 24|Intent-to-treat population included all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment. Last observation was used to impute missing swollen joint counts.||Joint count||Standard Deviation|Mean
836550|NCT01283971|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DAS28 Score at Week 24|The DAS28 score is a measure of the patient's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity [visual analog scale: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity] and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 2 to 10. A higher value indicated higher disease activity. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24. Last observation carried forward was used to impute missing tender and swollen joint counts. All other DAS28 components were used as observed.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836551|NCT01283971|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DAS28 Low Disease Activity (LDAS) at Week 24|The DAS28 score is a measure of the patient's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity [visual analog scale: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity] and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 2 to 10. LDAS is defined as DAS28 ≤3.2.|Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24. Last observation carried forward was used to impute missing tender and swollen joint counts. All other DAS28 components were used as observed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836552|NCT01283971|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Good or Moderate European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) DAS28 Responses at Week 24|The DAS28 score is a measure of the subject's disease activity. It is based on the tender joint count (28 joints), swollen joint count (28 joints), patient's global assessment of disease activity (mm), and ESR. DAS28 total score ranges from 0 (best) to 10 (worst). A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement. European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good response: DAS28 ≤ 3.2 or a change from Baseline < -1.2. EULAR Moderate response: DAS28 >3.2 to ≤ 5.1 or a change from Baseline < -0.6 to ≥ -1.2.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Week 24. Last observation carried forward was used to impute missing tender and swollen joint counts. All other EULAR components were used as observed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836553|NCT01283971|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ACR70 Response at Week 24|ACR70 response is defined as a ≥ 70% improvement (reduction) compared with baseline for both total joint count-68 joints (TJC68) and swollen joint count-66 joints (SJC66), as well as for three of the additional five ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours: using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) left end of the line 0=no pain to right end of the line 100=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS where left end of the line 0=no disease activity to right end of the line 100=maximum disease activity; Health Assessment Questionnaire: 20 questions, 8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities, 0=without difficulty to 3=unable to do; and acute-phase reactant Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with ACR score data available. Last observation carried forward was used to impute missing tender and swollen joint counts. All other ACR components were used as observed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836554|NCT01283971|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ACR50 Response at Week 24|ACR50 response is defined as a ≥ 50% improvement (reduction) compared with baseline for both total joint count-68 joints (TJC68) and swollen joint count-66 joints (SJC66), as well as for three of the additional five ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours: using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) left end of the line 0=no pain to right end of the line 100=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS where left end of the line 0=no disease activity to right end of the line 100=maximum disease activity; Health Assessment Questionnaire: 20 questions, 8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities, 0=without difficulty to 3=unable to do; and acute-phase reactant Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with ACR score data available. Last observation carried forward was used to impute missing tender and swollen joint counts. All other ACR components were used as observed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836563|NCT01284062|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-drug Antibody (ADA) and Neutralizing Antibody|Neutralizing antibody was not analyzed as no participant had positive ADA samples.|Day 1, Week 4, 8, 12, 14, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32|mITT: all randomized participants who received >=1 dose study drug; DAO: all mITT participants with all data needed for calculation of specified endpoint. “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies participants in mITT population; “n” signifies participants in mITT DAO population for specified time point.||participants|||Number
836564|NCT01284062|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued From the Study Due to Adverse Events||Baseline up to Week 32|Safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||participants|||Number
836555|NCT01283971|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) Response at Week 24|ACR20 response is defined as a ≥ 20% improvement (reduction) compared with baseline for both total joint count-68 joints (TJC68) and swollen joint count-66 joints (SJC66), as well as for three of the additional five ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours: using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) left end of the line 0=no pain to right end of the line 100=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS where left end of the line 0=no disease activity to right end of the line 100=maximum disease activity; Health Assessment Questionnaire: 20 questions, 8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities, 0=without difficulty to 3=unable to do; and acute-phase reactant Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with ACR score data available. Last observation carried forward was used to impute missing tender and swollen joint counts. All other ACR components were used as observed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836556|NCT01283971|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score 28 Joints (DAS28) Remission at Week 24|The DAS28 score is a measure of the patient's disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC) [28 joints], swollen joint count (SJC) [28 joints], patient's global assessment of disease activity [visual analog scale: 0=no disease activity to 100=maximum disease activity] and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 2 to 10. DAS28 Remission is defined as a DAS28 score <2.6.|Week 24|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all randomized participants who received study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy assessment, with data available at Baseline and Week 24. Last observation carried forward was used to impute missing tender and swollen joint counts. All other ACR components were used as observed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836557|NCT01284062|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Endoscopic Subscore at Week 14|Mayo score is used to measure the disease activity of ulcerative colitis. Endoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy is a sub score of Mayo score. The score for endoscopic subscore ranges from 0 to 3, where higher score indicates more severe disease activity. Participant’s score for endoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy at Week 14 was specified as improved (decrease), no change and worsened (increase) compared to their baseline score.|Baseline, Week 14|mITT: all randomized participants who received >=1 dose study drug; DAO: all mITT participants with all data needed for calculation of specified endpoint. “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies participants in the mITT DAO population for specified endpoint.||participants|||Number
836558|NCT01284062|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Rectal Bleeding at Week 14|Mayo score is used to measure the disease activity of ulcerative colitis. Rectal bleeding is a sub score of Mayo score. The score for rectal bleeding ranges from 0 to 3, where higher score indicates more severe disease activity. Participant’s score for rectal bleeding at Week 14 was specified as improved (decrease), no change and worsened (increase) compared to their baseline score.|Baseline, Week 14|mITT: all randomized participants who received >=1 dose study drug; DAO: all mITT participants with all data needed for calculation of specified endpoint. “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies participants in the mITT DAO population for specified endpoint.||participants|||Number
836559|NCT01284062|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Stool Frequency at Week 14|Stool frequency is a sub score of Mayo score used to measure the disease activity of ulcerative colitis. The score for stool frequency ranges from 0 to 3, where higher score indicates more severe disease activity. Participant’s score for stool frequency at Week 14 was specified as improved (decrease), no change and worsened (increase) compared to their baseline score.|Baseline, Week 14|mITT: all randomized participants who received >=1 dose study drug; DAO: all mITT participants with all data needed for calculation of specified endpoint. “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies participants in the mITT DAO population for specified endpoint.||participants|||Number
836560|NCT01284062|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Total Mayo Score at Week 14|The Mayo score is a tool designed to measure disease activity for ulcerative colitis. The Mayo score ranges from 0 to 12 points and consists of 4 subscores (stool frequency, rectal bleeding, findings on flexible sigmoidoscopy [endoscopy] and physician’s global assessment), each subscore is graded from 0 to 3 with the higher score indicating more severe disease activity.|Baseline, Week 14|mITT: all randomized participants who received >=1 dose study drug; DAO: all mITT participants with all data needed for calculation of specified endpoint. “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies participants in the mITT DAO population for specified endpoint.||unit on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836561|NCT01284062|Other Pre-specified|Clinical Remission Rate at Week 14|Clinical remission rate is defined as percentage of participants with a total Mayo score less than or equal to 2, with no individual subscore greater than 1 at post baseline visit. The Mayo score is a tool designed to measure disease activity for ulcerative colitis. The Mayo score ranges from 0 to 12 points and consists of 4 subscores (stool frequency, rectal bleeding, findings on flexible sigmoidoscopy and physician’s global assessment), each subscore is graded from 0 to 3 with the higher score indicating more severe disease activity.|Week 14|mITT: all randomized participants who received >=1 dose study drug; DAO: all mITT participants with all data needed for calculation of specified endpoint. “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies participants in the mITT DAO population for specified endpoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836562|NCT01284062|Other Pre-specified|Clinical Response Rate at Week 14|Clinical response rate is defined as percentage of participants with at least 3 point decrease from baseline in total Mayo score with at least 30% change along with 1 point decrease from baseline or absolute score of 0 or 1 in rectal bleeding. The Mayo score is a tool designed to measure disease activity for ulcerative colitis. The Mayo score ranges from 0 to 12 points and consists of 4 subscores (stool frequency, rectal bleeding, findings on flexible sigmoidoscopy [endoscopy] and physician’s global assessment), each subscore is graded from 0 to 3 with the higher score indicating more severe disease activity.|Week 14|mITT: all randomized participants who received >=1 dose study drug; DAO: all mITT participants with all data needed for calculation of specified endpoint. “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies participants in the mITT DAO population for specified endpoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836578|NCT01284114|Primary|The Change of BNP|Plasma BNP level were measured by the radioimmunoassay (RIA) method at baseline and 6month.|baseline and 6month|We analyzed all patients who completed study.||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
836565|NCT01284062|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to Week 32 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. All causality AEs included SAEs as well as non-serious AEs, without regard to relationship to the study drug, which occurred during the trial.|Baseline up to Week 32|Safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||participants|||Number
836566|NCT01284062|Secondary|Total Interleukin-13 (IL-13) Level||Baseline, Day 2, 4, 7, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 14, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32|mITT: all randomized participants who received >=1 dose study drug; DAO: all mITT participants with all data needed for calculation of specified endpoint. “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies participants in mITT population; “n” signifies participants in mITT DAO population for specified time point.||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836567|NCT01284062|Secondary|Fold Change From Baseline in Fecal Calprotectin at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12|The fold change from baseline in fecal calprotectin at post-baseline visit, is the ratio of the measurement of fecal calprotectin at post-baseline visit to baseline measurement; this was calculated as the change from baseline in natural log transformed fecal calprotectin at post-baseline visit.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12|mITT: all randomized participants who received >=1 dose study drug; DAO: all mITT participants with all data needed for calculation of specified endpoint. “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies participants in mITT population; “n” signifies participants in mITT DAO population for specified time point.||fold change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836568|NCT01284062|Secondary|Volume of Distribution (Vz) for Anrukinzumab|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug.|Pre-dose, within 1 hour post-end of infusion on Week 12; Week 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32|"All participants with evaluable PK results were included in PK population. PK samples with time deviation >20% from nominal time were excluded from statistical summary and PK analysis. “Number of participants analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
836569|NCT01284062|Secondary|Systemic Clearance (CL) for Anrukinzumab|CL is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body.|Pre-dose, within 1 hour post-end of infusion on Week 12; Week 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32|"All participants with evaluable PK results were included in PK population. PK samples with time deviation >20% from nominal time were excluded from statistical summary and PK analysis. “Number of participants analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||liters/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
836570|NCT01284062|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2) for Anrukinzumab|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Within 1 hour post-end of infusion on Week 12; Week 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32|"All participants with evaluable PK results were included in PK population. PK samples with time deviation >20% from nominal time were excluded from statistical summary and PK analysis. “Number of participants analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
836571|NCT01284062|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to End of Dosing Interval (AUCtau) for Anrukinzumab|Area under the plasma concentration curve from time zero to end of dosing interval (2 weeks) was reported.|Pre-dose, within 1 hour post-end of infusion on Day 1; Day 2, 4, 7, pre-dose on Week 2|"All participants with evaluable PK results were included in PK population. PK samples with time deviation >20% from nominal time were excluded from statistical summary and PK analysis. Number of participants analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||nanogram*hour/milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836572|NCT01284062|Secondary|Minimum Observed Plasma Trough Concentration (Cmin) for Anrukinzumab|Lowest concentration observed during the dosing interval (2 weeks for day 1, 4 weeks for week 12).|Pre-dose to end of the dosing interval after Day 1, Week 12|"All participants with evaluable PK results were included in PK population. PK samples with time deviation >20% from nominal time were excluded from statistical summary and PK analysis. “Number of participants analyzed” signifies participants in PK population; n signifies evaluable participants at specified time point."||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836573|NCT01284062|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Anrukinzumab|Maximum concentration observed during the dosing interval (2 weeks for day 1, 4 weeks for week 12).|Pre-dose to end of the dosing interval after Day 1, Week 12|"All participants with evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) results were included in PK population. PK samples with time deviation greater than (>) 20 percent (%) from nominal time were excluded from statistical summary and PK analysis. “Number of participants analyzed” = participants in PK population; n = evaluable participants at specified time point."||nanogram/milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836574|NCT01284062|Primary|Fold Change From Baseline in Fecal Calprotectin at Week 14|The fold change from baseline in fecal calprotectin at Week 14, is the ratio of the measurement of fecal calprotectin at Week 14 to baseline measurement; this was calculated as the change from baseline in natural log transformed fecal calprotectin at Week 14.|Baseline, Week 14|Modified Intent to Treat (mITT: all randomized participants who received greater than or equal to [>=] 1 dose study drug); Data as Observed (DAO: all mITT participants with all data needed for calculation of specified endpoint). “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies participants in the mITT DAO population for specified endpoint.||fold change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836575|NCT01284114|Primary|The Change of Urine Albumin/ Creatinine Ratio (UACR).|The UACR was measured at baseline, Week12 and Week24|baseline and 6 months|We analyzed all patients who completed this study.||mg/g||Standard Deviation|Mean
836576|NCT01284114|Primary|The Change of eGFR|eGFR was calculated at baseline and at 6 month using a modified version of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula of the Japanese Society of Nephrology as follows: eGFR (ml/min/1.73 m2) = 194 × age-0.287 × serum creatinine-1.094 (multiplied by 0.739 for females).|baseline and 6 month|We analyzed all patients who completed study.||mL/min/1.73m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
836577|NCT01284114|Secondary|The Change of Oxidative Stress Markers Confirmed by Plasma Level of 8-OHdG and d-ROM||6 months||||||
836581|NCT01284244|Primary|A 50% Reduction in Pad Test Weight|"A pad test is an objective measure of urine loss. With a full bladder, while wearing a pad, the participant completes five repetitions of the following physical activities: coughing, step climbing, heel bounce, standing from a sitting position and walking 50 yards. The weight of the pad is then determined.
The primary outcome variable will be the achievement of a 50% reduction in the pad weight before and after device placement. This figure is obtained from the study by Farrell et al, where pad weight decreased from 20 grams to 9 grams with the use of the Uresta device."|Immediately after device placement (short term).|||Participants|||Count of Participants
836582|NCT01289639|Secondary|Change in Hepatic Insulin Sensitivity|Hepatic insulin sensitivity was determined using stable glucose isotope measurements during the low dose hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp to determine the rate of endogenous glucose production in the fasting state and in response to a low dose glucose infusion. The ability of insulin to suppress glucose, which is mainly produced by the liver, thus provides a measure of hepatic insulin sensitivity and is expressed as a percentage of the basal state. Change in the ability of low dose insulin to suppress endogenous glucose production during a labeled hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp.|0-6 months|||% change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
836583|NCT01289639|Secondary|Change in Intra-abdominal Fat Area by CT Scan||0-6 months|||mm2||Standard Error|Mean
836584|NCT01289639|Secondary|Change in Peripheral Insulin Sensitivity|Change in the rate of glucose disposal (Rd) during the low dose clamp. During a clamp procedure, insulin is infused at a dose based on body size and a glucose solution is infused and the rate adjusted every 5 minutes based on a blood glucose reading to maintain the blood glucose stable at 90 mg/dl (normal level). Using glucose isotopes and the rate of the glucose infusion, we are then able to calculate how much glucose the liver is producing and how much glucose is being taken up into tissues. This provides a measure of insulin sensitivity.|0-6 months|||mg/minute/kg lean mass||Standard Error|Mean
836585|NCT01289639|Secondary|Change in Liver/Spleen Ratio Measure by the Density Ratio in Hounsfield Units Between the Liver and the Spleen by CT||0-6 months|||ratio||Standard Error|Mean
836586|NCT01289639|Secondary|Change in Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels||0-6 months|||U/L||Standard Error|Mean
836587|NCT01289639|Primary|Liver/Spleen Ratio Measured as the Ratio in Hounsfield Units Between the Liver and the Spleen on Computed Tomography (CT) Scan||6 months|||ratio||Standard Error|Mean
836588|NCT01289782|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Baseline to Week 60 (AUC60) and Week 72 (AUC72) in Work Productivity and Activity (WPAI) Absenteeism Scores Due to Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection and Its Treatment|Time missed from work in hours because of HCV infection or its treatment was assessed by measuring the change from baseline in the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI): Hepatitis C questionnaire Absenteeism score (time missed from work, question #2). The number of hours missed from work because of HCV was divided by the total number of hours supposed to work, and expressed as a percentage. An area under the curve (AUC) analysis compared the WPAI absenteeism scores in each treatment group from Baseline to Week 72. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between the treatment arms WPAI absenteeism scores from Baseline to Week 72. The Table below shows the lease squares (LS) mean estimates of AUC at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) in WPAI absenteeism scores and the statistical comparison between treatment groups.|Baseline to Week 60 and Week 72|Analysis Population Description: The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||scores on a scale*weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836589|NCT01289782|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Baseline to Week 60 (AUC60) and Week 72 (AUC72) for Impairment in Daily Activity Scores Due to Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection and Its Treatment|Impairment in daily activity was measured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI): Hepatitis C questionnaire, Question 6. Scores ranged from 0 (no effect on activities) to 10 (completely prevented me from doing my daily activities). An area under the curve (AUC) analysis compared the impairment in daily activity scores in each treatment group from Baseline to Week 72. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between the treatment arms in impairment in daily activity scores from Baseline to Week 72. The Table below shows the lease squares (LS) mean estimates of AUC at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) in the impairment in daily activity scores and the statistical comparison between treatment groups.|Baseline to Week 60 and Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||scores on a scale*weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836590|NCT01289782|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Baseline to Week 60 (AUC60) and Week 72 (AUC72) for Impairment in Overall Work Productivity Scores Due to Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection and Its Treatment|Impairment in overall work productivity was measured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI): Hepatitis C questionnaire completed by participants during study visits throughout the study. WPAI Overall Productivity Scores ranged from 0% to 100% (higher WPAI scores indicated greater impairment in productivity). An area under the curve (AUC) analysis compared the overall WPAI Overall Work Productivity Scores in each treatment group from Baseline to Week 72. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between the treatment arms in the WPAI Overall Work Productivity Scores from Baseline to Week 72. The Table below shows the lease squares (LS) mean estimates of AUC at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) in WPAI Work Productivity Scores and the statistical comparison between treatment groups.|Baseline to Week 60 and Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||scores on a scale*weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836602|NCT01289782|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <25 IU/mL Undetectable or Detectable|The table below shows median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <25 IU/mL undetectable or detectable.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836603|NCT01289782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Failure|The table below shows percentage of participants with on-treatment failure defined as confirmed detectable Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels at actual end of treatment.|Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836591|NCT01289782|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Baseline to Week 60 (AUC60) and Week 72 (AUC72) for the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) Total Scores|Study participants completed FSS questionnaires during study visits before treatment began and throughout treatment and follow-up to rate the severity and impact of fatigue they experienced in the preceding 2 weeks on their daily lives. FSS total scores are the average of nine questions with a range from 1 [no fatigue] to 7 [worst possible fatigue]. An area under the curve (AUC) analysis compared the overall severity of fatigue in each treatment group from baseline to Week 72. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between the treatment arms in the amount of fatigue participants experienced throughout the study resulting in equal AUC from baseline to Week 72 (AUC72) for FSS total scores. The Table below shows the lease squares (LS) mean estimates of AUC at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) and the statistical comparison between treatment groups.|Baseline to Week 60 and Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||scores on a scale*weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836592|NCT01289782|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of TMC435: Systemic Clearance (CL)|The table below shows the mean (standard deviation) values for the CL of TMC435.To calculate the mean CL for all participants in the study, CL values were first derived for each participant at each visit and then a median CL value calculated across visits for each participant. The median CL value for each participant was used to calculate the mean CL for all participants in the study.|Across Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
836593|NCT01289782|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of TMC435: Predose Plasma Concentration (C0h)|The table below shows the mean (standard deviation) values for the C0h of TMC435.To calculate the mean C0h for the study, C0h values were derived for each participant at each visit and then a median C0H value calculated across visits for each participant. The median COh value for each participant across all visits was used to calculate the mean C0h for the study.|Before administration of TMC435 at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836594|NCT01289782|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of TMC435: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From the Time of Administration to 24 Hours After Dosing (AUC24h)|The table below shows mean (standard deviation) values of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time of administration to 24 hours after dosing for TMC435 for all participants. To calculate the mean AUC 24 for the study, AUC 24 hr values were derived for each participant at each visit and then a median AUC value calcuated across all visits for each participant. The median AUC value across all visits for each participant was used to calculate the mean AUC 24 hr all participants in the study.|Fom the time of administration up to 24 hours after dosing at Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836595|NCT01289782|Secondary|Median Time to Normalization of Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Levels|The table below shows the median time in weeks to normalization of ALT levels.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836596|NCT01289782|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Normalization of Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT)|The percentage of participants analyzed were those with baseline ALT values out of the normal range (ie, 158 of 264 participants in the TMC435 treatment group and 89 of 130 participants in the Placebo group had ALT values at baseline that were out of the normal range.). Normalization of ALT values means that ALT values out of the normal range returned to within the normal range.|Up to Week 48|Participants with baseline ALT values out of normal range were used for this analysis from intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication).||Percentage of participants|||Number
836597|NCT01289782|Secondary|Time From End-of-treatment to Viral Relapse|The table below shows the mean number of days to viral relapse, defined as participants having confirmed detectable plasma level of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) during the follow-up period in participants with undetectable plasma HCV RNA (<25 IU/mL undetectable) at the end of treatment.|Up to Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||Standard Error|Mean
836598|NCT01289782|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Viral Breakthrough at Different Time Points|The table below shows the percentage of participants at different time points with viral breakthrough, defined as a confirmed increase of greater than 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) level from the lowest level reached (ie, lowest value measured in between baseline and current value), or a confirmed plasma HCV RNA level of greater than 100 IU/mL in participants whose plasma HCV RNA had previously been below the limit of quantification (25 IU/mL detectable) or undetectable (<25 IU/mL undetectable).|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836599|NCT01289782|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <1000 IU/mL|The table below shows median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <1000 IU/mL.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836600|NCT01289782|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <100 IU/mL|The table below shows median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <100 IU/mL.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836601|NCT01289782|Secondary|Time to Reach Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <25 IU/mL Undetectable|The table below shows median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <25 IU/mL undetectable.|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836628|NCT01289847|Secondary|Therapeutic Efficacy|Number of days on therapeutic antibiotics|12 months|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
836629|NCT01289847|Secondary|Therapeutic Efficacy|Visits to physicians and/or emergency room|12 months|||visits||Standard Deviation|Mean
836604|NCT01289782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Completed All Study Treatment at Week 24 Because of the Treatment Duration Rule|The table below shows the percentage of participants in the TMC435 treatment group who met the treatment duration rule (ie, having hepatitis C virus [HCV] ribonucleic acid [RNA] levels <25 IU/mL detectable or undetectable at Week 4 and undetectable HCV RNA levels at Week 12) and completed treatment with PegIFNα-2a and RBV for 24 weeks. Participants in the TMC435 treatment group not meeting RGT criteria and participants in the placebo group were treated with PegIFNα-2a and RBV treatment for 48 weeks.|Week 24|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836605|NCT01289782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Viral Relapse|The table below shows the percentage of participants with viral relapse, defined as having confirmed detectable plasma level of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) during the follow-up period in participants with undetectable plasma HCV RNA (less than 25 IU/mL undetectable) at the end of treatment.|Up to Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836606|NCT01289782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Viral Breakthrough|The table below shows the percentage of participants with viral breakthrough, defined as a confirmed increase of greater than 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) level from the lowest level reached (ie, lowest value measured in between baseline and current value), or a confirmed plasma HCV RNA level of greater than 100 IU/mL in participants whose plasma HCV RNA had previously been below the limit of quantification (25 IU/mL detectable) or undetectable (<25 IU/mL undetectable).|Up to Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836607|NCT01289782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Partial Response|The table below shows the percentage of participants with partial response, defined as greater than or equal to 2 log10 reduction in Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid at Week 12 compared to baseline, but not achieving undetectable HCV RNA while on treatment.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836608|NCT01289782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Null Response|The table below shows the percentage of participants with null response, defined as <2 log10 reduction in Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid at Week 12 compared to baseline.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836609|NCT01289782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With in Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Levels >1000 IU/mL at Week 4|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group with HCV RNA levels >1000 IU/mL at Week 4.|Week 4|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836610|NCT01289782|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With <1 log10 Decrease in Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) From Baseline at Week 4|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group with <1 log10 HCV RNA decrease at Week 4.|Week 4|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836611|NCT01289782|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Extended Rapid Virologic Response (eRVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who had a eRVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus ribonucleic acid levels at Week 4 and 12.|Week 4 and 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836612|NCT01289782|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who had a cEVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus ribonucleic acid levels at Week 12.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836613|NCT01289782|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Early Virologic Response (EVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants who achieved an EVR, defined as having a change from baseline in plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid of greater than or equal to 2 log10 at Week 12.|Week 12|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836614|NCT01289782|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Rapid Virologic Response (RVR)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a RVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels after receiving 4 weeks of treatment.|Week 4|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836615|NCT01289782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Virologic Response at All Time Points|The table below shows the percentage of participants with Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) plasma levels below the limit of detection (ie, <25 IU/mL undetectable), the percentage of participants with a HCV RNA plasma level below the limit of quantification (ie, < 25 IU/mL detectable or undetectable), the percentage of participants with plasma levels of HCV RNA <100 IU/mL, the percentage of participants with virologic responses of a greater than or equal to 2 log10 change from baseline in plasma levels of HCV RNA.|Day 3, Week 1, Week 2, Week 8, Week 16, Week 20, Week 28, Week 36, and Week 42|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836616|NCT01289782|Secondary|Actual Values of log10 Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA)|The table below shows actual values of log10 HCV RNA levels.|Day 3, Week 1, Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Error|Mean
836617|NCT01289782|Secondary|Change From Baseline in log10 Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA)|The table below shows the change from baseline in log10 HCV RNA levels.|Day 3, Week 1, Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 48|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Error|Mean
836618|NCT01289782|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Sustained Virologic Response 4 Weeks After the Planned End of Treatment (SVR4)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR4, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels 4 weeks after planned end of treatment.|Week 28 or Week 52|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836619|NCT01289782|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks After the Planned End of Treatment (SVR24)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR24, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels 24 weeks after planned end of treatment.|Week 48 or Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836620|NCT01289782|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Sustained Virologic Response at Week 72 (SVRW72)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVRW72, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels at end of treatment (EOT) and at Week 72.|Week 72|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836621|NCT01289782|Primary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks After the Planned End of Treatment (SVR12)|The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR12, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid 12 weeks after planned end of treatment.|Week 36 or Week 60|The intent-to-treat population (defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication) was used for all analyses.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836622|NCT01289821|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease (DOSD)|DOSD was only evaluated in participants failing to achieve a best response of CR or PR, but who achieved SD. DOSR was defined as the time (in days) from date of start of study treatment to the date at which disease progression or death (if death occurred before progression was first documented). The date the tumor scan was performed was used for this calculation. DOSD for participants without disease progression or death before progression at the time of analysis were censored at the date of their last tumor assessment.|From start of treatment until 30 days after the last dose of study treatment, assessed by every 8 weeks|Per protocol set (PPS)||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836623|NCT01289821|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR)|DOR was defined as the time from the date of first documented objective response of PR or CR, whichever was noted earlier, to first subsequent disease progression or death (if death occurred before progression was documented). DOR was defined for responders only (that is, subjects with CR or PR). DOR for subjects without disease progression or death before progression was right censored at the date of their last tumor assessment.|From start of treatment until 30 days after the last dose of study treatment, assessed by every 8 weeks|Per protocol set (PPS)||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836624|NCT01289821|Secondary|Disease Control (DC)|DC was defined as the proportion of participants who had a best response rating of CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) according to RECIST criteria that was achieved during treatment or within 30 days after termination of study treatment. CR and PR were confirmed not earlier than 4 weeks following the initial detection of response. A minimum of 8 weeks (allowing a minus 7-day time window) between start of study treatment and the first follow-up tumor assessment with SD as response was required to assign SD as best overall response.|From start of treatment until 30 days after the last dose of study treatment, assessed by every 8 weeks|PAS||Proportion of participants|||Number
836625|NCT01289821|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as time from the date of start of study treatment to the date of first observed disease progression (radiological according to central assessment or clinical), or death due to any cause, if death occurred before progression was documented. PFS for participants without disease progression or death at the date of database cutoff were right-censored at the last date of tumor assessment. Participants who had no tumor evaluation after baseline and no clinical progression post baseline and who did not die were censored at Day 1 in the analysis. PD = At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Unequivocal progression of existing non target lesions or the appearance of one or more new lesions will also constitute PD.|From start of treatment until 30 days after the last dose of study treatment, assessed by every 8 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS)||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836626|NCT01289821|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was calculated as the time from first date of receiving study treatment to date of death due to any cause. Participants alive at the time of analysis were censored at their last date of follow-up.|From start of treatment until 30 days after the last dose of study treatment, assessed by every 8 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS, N=54) included all subjects who received treatment.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836627|NCT01289821|Primary|Objective Response (OR)|OR was defined as the best tumor response (confirmed complete response [CR] or partial response [PR]) observed by MRI or CT scan assessed according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria, version 1.1. CR and PR were confirmed not earlier than 4 weeks following the initial detection of response. CR = Disappearance of all clinical and radiological evidence of tumor (both target and no-target). Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non target) must have a reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. PR = At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum, no unequivocal progression of existing nontarget lesions and no appearance of new lesions.|From start of treatment until 30 days after termination of study medication, an average of 47 weeks. Assessed every 8 weeks.|Primary analysis set (PAS, N=41) was a subset of the PPS and included the first 41 subjects, who were assigned to treatment||Proportion of participants|||Number
836632|NCT01289847|Secondary|Therapeutic Efficacy|Number and proportion of subjects who maintain trough IgG levels at least as high as the average of the 2 previous trough levels before the first Gammaplex infusion|From week 15 onwards|Seven subjects (28.0%) maintained trough IgG levels at all visits that were at least as high as the average of the two previous levels before the first infusion||participants|||Number
836633|NCT01289847|Primary|Adverse Events|Number of subjects with serious, acute, bacterial infections as a measure of efficacy|12 months|Intent to Treat (ITT)||participants|||Number
836634|NCT01289990|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose Change From Baseline After 76 Weeks of Treatment|Fasting plasma glucose - change from baseline after 76 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 76 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline fasting plasma glucose assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial -LOCF||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836635|NCT01289990|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose Change From Baseline After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Fasting plasma glucose - change from baseline after 52 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 52 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline fasting plasma glucose assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial -LOCF||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836636|NCT01289990|Secondary|Waist Circumference (cm) Change From Baseline After 76 Weeks of Treatment|Waist circumference (cm) - change from baseline after 76 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 76 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline waist circumference assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial -LOCF||cm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836637|NCT01289990|Secondary|Waist Circumference (cm) Change From Baseline After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Waist circumference (cm) - change from baseline after 52 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 52 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline waist circumference assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial -LOCF||cm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836638|NCT01289990|Secondary|Body Weight (kg) Change From Baseline After 76 Weeks of Treatment|Body Weight (kg) - Change From Baseline After 76 Weeks of Treatment|Baseline and 76 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline body weight assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial -LOCF||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836639|NCT01289990|Secondary|Body Weight (kg) Change From Baseline After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Body Weight (kg) - Change From Baseline After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Baseline and 52 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline body weight assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial. - LOCF||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836640|NCT01289990|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure: Change From Baseline After 76 Weeks of Treatment|Diastolic blood pressure - change from baseline after 76 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 76 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline diastolic blood pressure assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial -LOCF||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836641|NCT01289990|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure: Change From Baseline After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Diastolic blood pressure - change from baseline after 52 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 52 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline diastolic blood pressure assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial -LOCF||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836642|NCT01289990|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure: Change From Baseline After 76 Weeks of Treatment|Systolic blood pressure - change from baseline after 76 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 76 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline systolic blood pressure assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial -LOCF||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836643|NCT01289990|Primary|Changes From Baseline in HbA1c (%) After 76 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 76 weeks|Baseline and 76 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline HbA1c assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial. (LOCF)||% of HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
836644|NCT01289990|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure: Change From Baseline After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Systolic blood pressure - change from baseline after 52 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 52 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline systolic blood pressure assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial. (LOCF)||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836645|NCT01289990|Secondary|HbA1c (%) Changes From Baseline After 76 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in HbA1c (%) after 76 weeks using MMRM approach|Baseline and 76 weeks|Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline HbA1c assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial. (OC: Observed cases)||% of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836646|NCT01289990|Primary|Changes From Baseline in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) (%) After 52 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 52 weeks|Baseline and 52 weeks|"Full Analysis Set (FAS) which contained all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a baseline HbA1c assessment, irrespective of participation in the extension trial.
(LOCF:Last observation carried forward)"||% of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836647|NCT01290029|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Ionized Calcium||Baseline (predose) and 2, 8, 12 and 48 hours post-dose.|"Due to the randomization to 1 of 2 sampling sequences not all participants had PD samples taken at every time point. n indicates participants with non-missing data at the time point of interest."||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836648|NCT01290029|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Albumin Corrected Calcium||Baseline (predose) and 2, 8, 12 and 48 hours post-dose.|"Due to the randomization to 1 of 2 sampling sequences not all participants had PD samples taken at every time point. n indicates participants with non-missing data at the time point of interest."||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836649|NCT01290029|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Calcium||Baseline (predose) and 2, 8, 12 and 48 hours post-dose.|"Due to the randomization to 1 of 2 sampling sequences not all participants had PD samples taken at every time point. n indicates participants with non-missing data at the time point of interest."||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836650|NCT01290029|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Intact Parathyroid Hormone||Baseline (predose) and at 2, 8, 12 and 48 hours post-dose.|"Due to the randomization to 1 of 2 sampling sequences not all participants had PD samples taken at every time point. n indicates participants with non-missing data at the time point of interest."||percent change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836651|NCT01290029|Secondary|Terminal Half-life of Cinacalcet|The terminal half-life (T1/2) of cinacalcet associated with the slope of the terminal phase.|Baseline (predose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetics analysis set; The T1/2 value for one participant was excluded based on the goodness-of-fit (R²) value exclusion criteria.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
836652|NCT01290029|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration of Cinacalcet (Tmax)||Baseline (predose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetics analysis set||hours||Full Range|Median
836653|NCT01290029|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Cinacalcet||Baseline (predose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetics analysis set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836654|NCT01290029|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUCinf) for Cinacalcet||Baseline (predose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetics analysis set; The AUCinf value for one participant was excluded based on the goodness-of-fit (R²) value exclusion criteria.||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836655|NCT01290029|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve From Time Zero to Time of Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) for Cinacalcet||Baseline (predose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post-dose|Pharmacokinetics analysis set||hr*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836656|NCT01290029|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|A serious adverse event is defined as an adverse event that meets at least 1 of the following serious criteria: • fatal • life threatening • requires in patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization • results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity • congenital anomaly/birth defect • other medically important serious event. Treatment-related adverse events are those the investigator assessed as being possibly related to any study mandated activity (eg, administration of investigational product, protocol-required therapies, device(s) and/or procedure). Events of interest included acute pancreatitis, convulsions, drug related hepatic disorders, fractures, hypersensitivity, hypocalcemia, ischaemic heart disease, ventricular tachyarrhythmias, cardiac failure, and hypotension.|Day 1 to day 30|All participants who received at least 1 dose of cinacalcet.||participants|||Number
836657|NCT01290068|Secondary|Median Total Spectacle Cost Prior to Any Reimbursement|Total spectacle cost includes the frame, lens, and any reimbursement from national health systems or private insurance. Costs collected in pounds sterling were converted to euros.|Month 6 after second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all randomized and implanted participants. If total cost was missing for a spectacle independent subject, €0 was imputed. If total cost was missing for a spectacle-dependent subject, mean cost for all spectacle dependent-subjects in that group with a known total cost for the same type of spectacles was imputed.||euros||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836658|NCT01290068|Primary|Mean Vision-Related Quality of Life as Reported on the NEI-RQL 42 (5 Dimensions)|Vision-related quality of life dimensions were evaluated using the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument (NEI-RQL 42), a self-administered questionnaire. Each dimension was scored between 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better vision-related Quality of Life. 5 of the dimensions were prespecified as primary.|Month 6 after second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all randomized participants to whom the randomized IOL was presented and/or implanted during the first eye surgery (from a try to a full success), as randomized.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836659|NCT01290068|Primary|Proportion of Participants Reporting Spectacle Independence at All Distances|Spectacle independence at all distances; ie, where type of spectacles used/prescribed equaled ‘No spectacles’, was evaluated. If for the 6-month visit, spectacle type information was missing for the spectacle independence endpoint, but the subject attended this 6-month visit, subject was assumed to be spectacle independent.|Month 6 after second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all randomized participants to whom the randomized IOL was presented and/or implanted during the first eye surgery (from a try to a full success), as randomized. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for missing data.||percentage of participants|||Number
836660|NCT01290068|Primary|Percentage of Participants Classified as Responders|Distance VA and near VA were measured binocularly (both eyes together) without visual correction using ETDRS (Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study) charts positioned at a consistent, manufactured distance. VA was measured in logMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution), with a lower logMAR value indicating better visual acuity. A responder was defined as a participant who achieved bilateral uncorrected distance visual acuity and bilateral uncorrected near visual acuity of ≤0.1 LogMAR at the Month 6 visit.|Month 6 after second eye implantation|This analysis population includes all randomized participants to whom the randomized IOL was presented and/or implanted during the first eye surgery (from a try to a full success), as randomized. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used for missing data.||percentage of participants|||Number
836661|NCT01290094|Secondary|Correlation Coefficient of Participant's Profile With Compliance|Participant's profile included age, year since menopause, fracture history, and BMD at baseline.|Baseline up to Month 12|ITT population.||correlation coefficient|||Number
836662|NCT01290094|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received All Planned Study Medication (Compliance)||Baseline up to Month 12|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
836682|NCT01296360|Primary|SCRs (Seroconversion Rate) as Defined by Percentage of Subjects With Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test Titers of>1:10 at 1 Month After the Booster Dose||1 month post booster|Intent-to-treat Population: primary analysis population for the immunogenicity analyses; defined as all subjects randomized||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836683|NCT01296412|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reaching A1C Goal of <6.5%||Week 26|Per-protocol population defined as participants who had a measurement at baseline and a measurement after at least 24 weeks (i.e., 168 days) of treatment, and did not have any major protocol violations.||percentage of participants|||Number
836663|NCT01290094|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Hip T-score at Month 12 and 24|"Percent change was calculated as [(measure at time t - measure at baseline)/measure at baseline]*100, where t=12 and 24 months. The baseline value is used as a reference to calculate the relative change from baseline. T-score is the number of standard deviations above or below the mean for a healthy 30 year old adult of the same sex and ethnicity as the participant. A T-score with above -1 is normal bone density level. A T-score between -1 and -2.5 means that the bone density is below normal and it might be a sign of an osteopenia and may also lead into osteoporosis. A T-score below -2.5 indicates osteoporosis. A T-score below -2.5 in combination with a prevalent fracture indicates serious osteoporosis."|Baseline, Month 12, Month 24|ITT population. Here “n” included participants who were evaluable at specified time point for the given arm.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836664|NCT01290094|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine T-score at Month 12 and 24|"Percent change was calculated as [(measure at time t - measure at baseline)/measure at baseline]*100, where t=12 and 24 months. The baseline value is used as a reference to calculate the relative change from baseline. T-score is the number of standard deviations above or below the mean for a healthy 30 year old adult of the same sex and ethnicity as the participant. A T-score with above -1 is normal bone density level. A T-score between -1 and -2.5 means that the bone density is below normal and it might be a sign of an osteopenia and may also lead into osteoporosis. A T-score below -2.5 indicates osteoporosis. A T-score below -2.5 in combination with a prevalent fracture indicates serious osteoporosis."|Baseline, Month 12, Month 24|ITT population. Here “n” included participants who were evaluable at specified time point for the given arm.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836665|NCT01290094|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Hip BMD at Month 24|"Percent change was calculated as [(measure at time t - measure at baseline)/measure at baseline]*100, where t=24 months. The baseline value is used as a reference to calculate the relative change from baseline."|Baseline, Month 24|ITT population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836666|NCT01290094|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Hip Bone BMD at Month 12|"Percent change was calculated as [(measure at time t - measure at baseline)/measure at baseline]*100, where t=12 months. The baseline value is used as a reference to calculate the relative change from baseline."|Baseline, Month 12|ITT population.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836667|NCT01290094|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Lumbar Spine BMD at Month 24|"Percent change was calculated as [(measure at time t - measure at baseline)/measure at baseline]*100, where t=24 months. The baseline value is used as a reference to calculate the relative change from baseline."|Baseline, Month 24|ITT population. Here “number of participants analyzed” included participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836668|NCT01290094|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Mean Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Month 12|"Percent change was calculated as [(measure at time t minus [-] measure at baseline) divided by (/) measure at baseline] multiplied by (*) 100, where t=12 months. The baseline value is used as a reference to calculate the relative change from baseline."|Baseline, Month 12|ITT population.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836669|NCT01296347|Secondary|Incidence of Pain|"Measures in pain include:
Numeric pain score of 0 to 10. Zero denotes 'no pain'; 10 denotes 'pain as bad as you can imagine' Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-LANSS)"|3, 6 and 12 months||||||
836670|NCT01296347|Secondary|Incidence of Side-effects|The presence of nausea, vomiting, itching, sedation, feeling lightheaded or vivid dreams will be recorded at the above time points|24 hours, 48 hours||||||
836671|NCT01296347|Secondary|Sensory Testing|"Hypoaesthesia: light touch of the blunt end of a paintbrush was felt less precisely, than in healthy tissue.
Hyperalgesia: the pain induced by a sterile neurotip, applied perpendicular to the skin is felt abnormally strongly, in comparison to the contralateral side.
Static allodynia: the application of a Von Frey hair number 14. (8g) was unpleasant, in comparison to the contralateral side.
Dynamic allodynia: three successive gentle strokes of an 8 mm-wide paintbrush over a 40 mm distance, is unpleasant, in comparison to the contralateral side."|6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months||||||
836672|NCT01296347|Secondary|Analgesic Consumption|Analgesia consumption will be measured post-operatively and at the time points stated above. The cumulative dose of opioid, measured in oral morphine equivalents, will be obtained from the time of the patient’s arrival in recovery (T0), to 24 hours post-operatively (T0 + 24) and to 48 hours post-operatively (T0 + 48). Analgesia consumption will also be measured at six weeks, three months, six months and one year. All analgesia will be converted to oral morphine equivalents (in mg) by multiplication by a factor depending on the analgesia taken (codeine 0.15, tramadol 0.17, oxycodone 2)|24 hours, 48 hours, 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months||||||
836673|NCT01296347|Primary|The Incidence of Pain|"Measures in pain include:
Numeric pain score of 0 to 10. Zero denotes 'no pain'; 10 denotes 'pain as bad as you can imagine'"|6 weeks after surgery|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836674|NCT01296360|Secondary|Rate of Subjects With Solicited AEs for up to 7 Days Following the Booster Dose. Severity and Duration.||7 days||||||
836675|NCT01296360|Secondary|Rate of Subjects With Unsolicited AEs Within 1 Month Following the Booster Dose. Severity, Duration and Relationship to Vaccinations.||1 month||||||
836676|NCT01296360|Secondary|Rate of Subjects With SAEs and Medically Attended AEs Within 1 Month Following the Booster Dose. Severity, Duration and Relationship to Vaccinations.||1 month||||||
836677|NCT01296360|Secondary|Rate of Subjects With Unsolicited AEs (Adverse Events) up to Months 12, 24 and 36 After the First IXIARO Vaccination in IC51 323 With and Without Booster Vaccination. Severity, Duration and Relationship to Vaccinations.||36 months||||||
836678|NCT01296360|Secondary|Rate of Subjects With SAEs (Serious Adverse Events) Following Immunization and Medically Attended AEs (Adverse Events) up to Months 12, 24 and 36 After the First IXIARO Vaccination in IC51 323 With and Without Booster Vaccination. Severity, Duration and||36 months||||||
836679|NCT01296360|Secondary|GMTs and Rate of Subjects With a PRNT Titer of >1:10 at Months 12, 24 and 36 After First IXIARO Vaccination in IC51-323 With and Without Booster Vaccination||36 months||||||
836680|NCT01296360|Secondary|GMTs (Geometric Mean Titre) for JEV Neutralizing Antibodies Measured Using a Validated PRNT (Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test) at 1 Month After the Booster Dose||1 month||||||
836681|NCT01296360|Secondary|Rate of Subjects Achieving a >4-fold Increase in JEV (Japanese Encephalitis Virus) Neutralizing Antibody Titers at 1 Month After the Booster Dose||1 month||||||
836685|NCT01296412|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)|Change from baseline at Week 26 is defined as Week 26 minus Week 0.|Baseline and Week 26|Per-protocol population defined as participants who had a measurement at baseline and a measurement after at least 24 weeks (i.e., 168 days) of treatment, and did not have any major protocol violations.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836686|NCT01296412|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (A1C)|A1C is measured as percent. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 26 A1C percent minus the Week 0 A1C percent.|Baseline and Week 26|Per-protocol population defined as participants who had a measurement at baseline and a measurement after at least 24 weeks (i.e., 168 days) of treatment, and did not have any major protocol violations.||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836687|NCT01299571|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Unexpected Adverse Events|An adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Unexpected adverse events include those not listed in the approved product information and not described as precautions or warnings.|6 months|ITT Population||participants|||Number
836688|NCT01299571|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Serious Adverse Event|"A serious adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or results in prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. For a list of all serious adverse events occurring during the course of the study, see the table entitled Serious Adverse Events in the Adverse Event section of the results record."|6 months|ITT Population||participants|||Number
836689|NCT01299571|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event|"An adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. For a list of all adverse events occurring during the course of the study, see the table entitled Other (Non-Serious) Adverse Events in the Adverse Event section of the results record."|6 months|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who had been administered the investigational drug at least once and had completed all safety assessments||participants|||Number
836690|NCT01299584|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Unexpected Adverse Event|An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Unexpected adverse events include those not listed in the approval product information and not described as precautions or warnings.|24 hours|ITT Population||participants|||Number
836691|NCT01299584|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Serious Adverse Event|"A serious adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or results in prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. For a list of all SAEs occurring during the course of the study, see the table entitled Serious Adverse Events in the Adverse Event section of the results record."|24 hours|ITT Population||participants|||Number
836692|NCT01299584|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event|"An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. For a list of all AEs occurring during the course of the study, see the table entitled Other (Non-Serious) Adverse Events in the Adverse Event section of the results record."|24 hours|ITT Population||participants|||Number
836693|NCT01299584|Primary|Number of Participants With an Unexpected Serious Adverse Event|A serious adverse event (SAE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening requires hospitalization or results in prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. An unexpected event is an event that is not listed in the approval product information and is not described as a precaution or warning.|24 hours|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who had been administered the investigational drug at least once and had undergone all safety assessments||participants|||Number
836694|NCT01299805|Primary|Time to Maximum Concentration of 5-HIAA in Cerebrospinal Fluid|The time to reach maximum pharmacodynamic effect (Emax) was assessed by the time to maximum concentration of 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) at Baseline, after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14).|Day -1, Day 1 and Day 14. CSF samples were taken prior to dose and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours postdose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
836695|NCT01299805|Primary|Maximum Concentration of 5-HIAA in Cerebrospinal Fluid|The maximum observed effect (Emax), assessed by the maximum observed concentration of 5-HIAA in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) measured at Baseline, after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14).|Day -1 (Baseline), Day 1 and Day 14. CSF samples were taken prior to dose and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours postdose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836696|NCT01299805|Primary|Area Under the Effect Curve From Time Zero to 24 Hours Postdose of 5-HIAA in Cerebrospinal Fluid|The area under the effect-time curve from time 0 to 24 hours postdose (AUEC[0-24]) of 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was measured at Baseline, after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14).|Day -1 (Baseline), Day 1 and Day 14. CSF samples were taken prior to dose and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours postdose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836707|NCT01299909|Primary|Smoking Abstinence|Self-reported 7-day point-prevalence smoking abstinence (i.e., no smoking in the past 7 days) biochemically confirmed by carbon monoxide breath testing in MTS vs ITS subjects at 24 weeks post quit day.|24 weeks post quit day|analysis was conducted on all randomized participants||participants|||Number
836697|NCT01299805|Primary|Time to Maximum Concentration of 5-HIAA in Plasma|The time to reach maximum pharmacodynamic effect (Emax) was assessed by the time to maximum concentration of 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA) in plasma after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14). Note: Plasma samples for 5-HIAA on Day -1 were lost in shipping. Therefore, no PD parameters were calculated for Day -1.|Day 1 and Day 14. Blood samples were taken predose and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
836698|NCT01299805|Primary|Maximum Concentration of 5-HIAA in Plasma|The maximum observed effect (Emax), assessed by the maximum observed concentration of 5-HIAA in plasma measured after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14). Note: Plasma samples for 5-HIAA on Day -1 were lost in shipping. Therefore, no PD parameters were calculated for Day -1|Day 1 and Day 14. Blood samples were taken predose (up to 15 minutes prior) and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836699|NCT01299805|Primary|Area Under the Effect Curve From Time Zero to 24 Hours Postdose of 5-hydroxyindoleacetic Acid (5-HIAA) in Plasma|Area under the effect-time curve from time 0 to 24 hours postdose (AUEC[0-24]) of 5-HIAA, a metabolite of the neurotransmitter serotonin, in plasma was measured after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14). Note: Plasma samples for 5-HIAA on Day -1 were lost in shipping. Therefore, no PD parameters were calculated for Day -1.|Day 1 and Day 14. Blood samples were taken predose and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836700|NCT01299805|Primary|Time to Maximum Concentration of 5-HT in Cerebrospinal Fluid|The time to reach maximum pharmacodynamic effect (Emax) was assessed by the time to maximum concentration of 5-HT in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) at Baseline, after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14).|Day -1, Day 1 and Day 14. CSF samples were taken predose and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours postdose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
836701|NCT01299805|Primary|Maximum Concentration of 5-HT in Cerobrospinal Fluid|The maximum observed effect (Emax), assessed by the maximum concentration of 5-HT in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) measured at Baseline, after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14).|Day -1 (Baseline), Day 1 and Day 14. CSF samples were taken prior to dose and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours postdose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836702|NCT01299805|Primary|Area Under the Effect Curve From Time Zero to 24 Hours Postdose of 5-HT in Cerebrospinal Fluid|The area under the effect-time curve from time 0 to 24 hours postdose (AUEC[0-24]) of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was measured at Baseline, after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14).|Day -1 (Baseline), Day 1 and Day 14. CSF samples were taken prior to dose and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours postdose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||pg*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836703|NCT01299805|Primary|Time to Maximum Concentration of 5-HT in Plasma|The time to reach maximum pharmacodynamic effect (Emax) was assessed by the time to maximum concentration of 5-HT in plasma at Baseline, after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14).|Day -1 (Baseline), Day 1 and Day 14. Blood samples were taken predose and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 hours postdose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
836704|NCT01299805|Primary|Maximum Concentration of 5-HT in Plasma|The maximum observed effect (Emax), assessed by the maximum observed concentration of 5-HT in plasma measured at Baseline, after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14).|Day -1 (Baseline), Day 1 and Day 14. Blood samples were taken predose (up to 15 minutes prior) and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836705|NCT01299805|Primary|Area Under the Effect Curve From Time Zero to 24 Hours Postdose of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) in Plasma|The area under the effect-time curve from time 0 to 24 hours postdose (AUEC[0-24]) of the neurotransmitter 5-HT (serotonin) in plasma was measured at Baseline, after a single dose (Day 1) and after multiple doses (Day 14).|Day -1 (Baseline), Day 1 and Day 14. Blood samples were taken predose (up to 15 minutes prior) and at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.|"The pharmacodynamic (PD) set consisted of all participants in the safety set with sufficient plasma or serum or CSF data for derivation of at least 1 PD parameter. If a patient's concentration profile contained ≤3 data points, the PD parameter results were not included. n indicates the number of patients with available data at each time point."||pg*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836710|NCT01299961|Primary|12 Month Change in 7-Joint Ultrasound (US) Inflammatory Score|The 7-joint US inflammatory score includes the addition of synovial hypertrophy scores and power doppler scores.|baseline, 12 months|Total of 19 patients completed 12 mos||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836711|NCT01300052|Secondary|Number of Participants With Local Tolerability Symptoms: Pruritus|Local tolerability was evaluated in participants in terms of presence and absence of pruritus symptom and its severity in the areas of body where medication was applied. Pruritus symptoms were graded on a 4-point scale of 0 - 3 where 0 =none (no pruritus), 1 =mild (occasional, slight itching/scratching), 2 = moderate (constant or intermittent itching/scratching which was not disturbing sleep), 3 = severe (bothersome itching/scratching which was disturbing sleep). Higher scores=Severe symptoms. In this outcome measure, number of participants with none, mild, moderate and severe pruritus symptoms were reported.|Baseline (Day 1) up to Day 84|Safety population included all randomized participants with confirmed usage of the study medication. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
836712|NCT01300052|Secondary|Number of Participants With Local Tolerability Symptoms: Burning/Stinging|Local tolerability in participants was evaluated in terms of presence and absence of burning/stinging symptom and its severity in the areas of body where medication was applied. Burning/stinging symptoms were graded on a 4-point scale of 0 - 3 where 0 =none (no stinging/ burning), 1 =mild (slight warm, tingling sensation), 2 = moderate (definite warm; tingling/stinging sensation), 3 = severe (hot, tingling/stinging sensation that caused definite discomfort). Higher scores=Severe symptoms. In this outcome measure, number of participants with none, mild, moderate and severe burning/stinging symptoms were reported.|Baseline (Day 1) up to Day 84|Safety population included all randomized participants with confirmed usage of the study medication. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
836713|NCT01300052|Secondary|Number of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) by Severity|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. AEs were classified according to the severity in 3 categories a) mild =AEs does not interfere with participant’s usual function b) moderate =AEs interfered to some extent with participant’s usual function c) severe =AEs interfered significantly with participant’s usual function and required systemic drug therapy. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study drug and up to Day 84 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. In this outcome measure, number of mild, moderate and severe TEAEs were reported.|Baseline (Day 1) up to Day 84|Safety population included all randomized participants with confirmed usage of the study medication.||adverse events|||Number
836714|NCT01300052|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to Day 84 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. AEs included both SAE and non-SAE.|Baseline (Day 1) up to Day 84|Safety population included all randomized participants with confirmed usage of the study medication.||participants|||Number
836715|NCT01300052|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage of Body Surface Area (%BSA) Involved With Psoriasis at Day 84|Percentage of the total body surface area (BSA) involved with psoriasis was measured. Change from Baseline (Day 1) in percentage of BSA at Day 84 was reported.|Baseline (Day 1), Day 84|ITT population included all randomized participants who received the study medication. Missing data was imputed using LOCF method.||percentage of body surface area||Standard Deviation|Mean
836716|NCT01300052|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Success in Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of Disease Severity at Days 14, 28, 42, 56, and 70|PGA assessed severity of overall disease activity in participants. It was performed using a 6-point scale graded from 0 - 5, in which 0 = clear (no plaque elevation above normal skin level), 1 = almost clear (essentially flat with possible trace elevation), 2 = mild (slight but definite elevation of plaque above normal skin level), 3 = moderate (moderate elevation with rounded or sloped edges to plaque), 4 = severe (marked elevation with hard, sharp edges to plaque), 5 = very severe (very marked elevation with very hard, sharp edges to plaque). The success in PGA of disease severity was defined as a PGA score of ‘0 = clear’ or ‘1 = almost clear’, with at least 2-grade improvement in PGA from Baseline to Day 14, 28, 42, 56 and 70.|Day 14, Day 28, Day 42, Day 56, Day 70|ITT population included all randomized participants who received the study medication.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836717|NCT01300052|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Success in Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of Disease Severity at Day 84|PGA assessed severity of overall disease activity in participants. It was performed using a 6-point scale graded from 0 - 5, in which 0 = clear (no plaque elevation above normal skin level), 1 = almost clear (essentially flat with possible trace elevation), 2 = mild (slight but definite elevation of plaque above normal skin level), 3 = moderate (moderate elevation with rounded or sloped edges to plaque), 4 = severe (marked elevation with hard, sharp edges to plaque), 5 = very severe (very marked elevation with very hard, sharp edges to plaque). The success in PGA of disease severity was defined as a PGA score of ‘0 = clear’ or ‘1 = almost clear’, with at least 2-grade improvement in PGA from Baseline to Day 84.|Day 84|ITT population included all randomized participants who received the study medication. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836718|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of Participants in the Indicated Category for Hepatic Laboratory Abnormalities|"The Gilead Grading Scale for Severity of Adverse Events and Laboratory Abnormalities, version 21, September 2011 was used for grading. Confirmed is defined as two consecutive visits. mg=milligrams. dL=deciliter."|Baseline; up to Week 48/Early Withdrawal|Safety Analysis Population||participants|||Number
836774|NCT01300546|Secondary|Doses of Study Medication|Total number of doses of study medication reported taken per participant in Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm.|Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121.|||doses of study medication||Standard Deviation|Mean
836719|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Treatment-emergent Laboratory Abnormalities for Serum Creatinine and Serum Phosphorus|The Gilead Grading Scale for Severity of Adverse Events and Laboratory Abnormalities, version 21, September 2011 was used for grading. Serum creatinine: Grade 1, >=133 to 177 micromoles per Liter (µmoles/Liter), Grade 2, >177 to 265 µmoles/Liter, Grade 3, >265 to 530 µmoles/Liter, Grade 4, >530 µmoles/Liter. Serum phosphorus: Grade 2, 0.63 to <0.80 millimoles per Liter (mmoles/L), Grade 3, 0.31 to <0.63 mmoles/L, Grade 4, <0.31 mmoles/L. The normal range for serum phosphorus was 0.8 to 1.45 mmol/L; the upper limit for a Grade 2 abnormality is 0.80 mmol/L. Therefore, no Grade 1 abnormalities could be attributed, as values were contained within the normal range.|up to Week 48/Early Withdrawal|Safety Analysis Population||participants|||Number
836720|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Grade 3 and Grade 4 Treatment-emergent (TE) Laboratory Abnormalities (LAs)|TE grade 3 or grade 4 LAs are defined as values that increase by >=1 grade from Baseline (Day 0) to Grade 3 (severe) or 4 (potentially life threatening) at any post-Baseline value. The Gilead Grading Scale for Severity of Adverse Events and Laboratory Abnormalities, version 21, September 2011 was used for grading. Sodium: hyponatremia, Grade (G) 3=121-<125 millimoles per Liter (mmol/L), G4=<121 mmol/L; hypernatremia, G3=>154-159 mmol/L, G4=>159 mmol/L. Phosphate: hypokalemia, G3=2.0-<2.5 mmol/L, G4=<2,0 mmol/L; hyperkalemia, G3=>6.5-7 mmol/L, G4=>7.0 mmol/L. Alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase: G3=>5.00-10.00 × upper limit of normal (ULN), G4=>10.0 × ULN. Bilirubin: G3=>2.5-5.0 × ULN, G4=>5.0 × ULN. Creatinine kinase: G3=10.0-<20.0 × ULN, G4=>=2.0 × ULN. Hemoglobin: 70-<90 grams per Liter (g/L), G4=<70 g/L. Platelets: G3=25-<50 GI (10^9)/L, G4=<25 GI/L. Neutrophils: G3, 0.50-<0.75 GI/L, G4=<0.50 GI/L. Prothrombin time: G3=>1.50-3.00 × ULN, G4=>3.00 × ULN.|Baseline; up to Week 48/Early Withdrawal|Safety Analysis Population||participants|||Number
836721|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE) and Any Adverse Event (AE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is Grade 4 (life threatening or disabling). Refer to the general AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs and SAEs.|up to Week 48|Safety Analysis Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-Baseline safety assessment||participants|||Number
836722|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of Participants With Virological Breakthrough at Week 48|The number of HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative participants who had virological breakthrough at Week 48 was assessed. Virological breakthrough is defined as an HBV DNA increase of >=1 log10 copies/mL above the treatment nadir, confirmed on two consecutive visits.|Week 48|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||participants|||Number
836723|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Durable HBsAg Loss From Weeks 24 to Week 48|Durable HBsAg loss is defined as the loss of HBsAg and no detectable HBV DNA and ALT normalization at any three consecutive visits at least 12 weeks apart. This report includes data up to and including Week 48. Long-term efficacy data (up to Week 240) will eventually be reported.|Week 24 to Week 48|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed. A non-completers equal failures approach was used for analysis. A non-completers equal failures approach was used for analysis.||participants|||Number
836724|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of HBeAg-negative Participants Achieving HBsAg Loss and HBsAg Seroconversion at Weeks 24 and 48|HBsAg loss is defined as a negative HBsAg result for those participants with who were HBsAg positive at Baseline. Seroconversion to anti-HBs is defined as HBsAg loss and a positive anti-HBs result. This report includes data up to and including Week 48. Long-term efficacy data (up to Week 240) will eventually be reported.|Weeks 24 and 48|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed. A non-completers equal failures approach was used for analysis.||participants|||Number
836725|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of HBeAg-positive Participants Achieving HBsAg Loss and HBsAg Seroconversion at Weeks 24 and 48|Hepatitis B surface Antigen (HBsAg) loss is defined as negative HBsAg results for those participants with who were HBsAg positive at Baseline. Seroconversion to anti-HBs is defined as HBsAg loss and a positive anti-HBs result. This report includes data up to and including Week 48. Long-term efficacy data (up to Week 240) will eventually be reported.|Weeks 24 and 48|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed. A non-completers equal failures approach was used for analysis.||participants|||Number
836726|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of HBeAg-positive Participants Achieving HBeAg Loss and HBeAg Seroconversion at Weeks 24 and 48|HBeAg loss is defined as a negative HBeAg result for those participants who were HBeAg positive at Baseline. Seroconversion to anti-HBe is defined as HBeAg loss and a positive anti-HBe result. This report includes data up to and including Week 48. Long-term efficacy data (up to Week 240) will eventually be reported.|Week 24 and 28|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed. A non-completers equal failures approach was used for analysis.||participants|||Number
836736|NCT01300247|Secondary|Duration of Objective Response (DOR), Assessed by the Investigator According to IWCLL Guidelines|DOR for participants with OR: time from first CR, CRi or PR to disease progression (DP), relapse, or death, assessed by the investigator. DP: >=50% increase in lymphocytes to at least 5x10^9/L;new palpable lymph nodes (>15 millimeters [mm] in longest diameter) or any new extra-nodal lesion; >=50% increase in the longest diameter of any previous site of lymphadenopathy; >=50% increase in the enlargement of the liver and/or spleen; transformation to a more aggressive histology. CR:peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) <4x10^9/L; no lymphadenopathy; no hepatomegaly or splenomegaly (below relevant costal margin); no symptoms; bone marrow at least normocellular for age, with <30% of nucleated cells being lymphocytes. PR: >=50% decrease in PBL, >=50% reduction in lymphadenopathy, >=50% reduction of liver and/or spleen enlargement, either neutrophil, platelet, or hemoglobin (Hb) recovery. CRi: met CR criteria, lymphocyte infiltration <30%; may not meet Hb, platelet or neutrophil count recovery.|From first documented objective response up to disease progression or relapse or death, whichever occurred first (up to approximately 6 months)|Safety evaluable population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836727|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of Participants With Histological Improvement at Week 48 Who Had a Baseline Knodell Necroinflammatory Score (KNS) >=2|Histological improvement is defined as a reduction of >=2 points in the KNS with no increase in fibrosis at Week 48 in participants with a Baseline KNS >=2, which was derived from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases Practice Guidelines for Management of Chronic Hepatitis B (2009) and the European Association for the Study of the Liver Clinical Practice Guidelines Management of chronic hepatitis B virus infection (2012). The Knodell scale consists of 5 domains: periportal+/-bridging necrosis (scored as 0 [best], 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, or 10 [worst]); and intralobular degeneration/focal necrosis, portal inflammation, and fibrosis (all scored as 0-4). The necroinflammatory score (0 [best] to 14 [worst]) is the combined score for necrosis (0-10) plus inflammation (0-4; the participant is scored for only one inflammatory condition). Liver biopsy was done at selected sites. Liver biopsy slides within 6 months prior to randomization could be accepted as the Baseline evaluation.|Baseline and Week 48|"ITT Population. Only those participants who had a Baseline Knodell necroinflammatory score >=2 were included in this analysis. The ns in the category titles represent the number of HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative participants. At least 60 participants in each treatment arm were planned to undergo liver biopsy."||participants|||Number
836728|NCT01300234|Secondary|Number of Participants With Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Normalization at Week 48 in Participants Who Had Abnormal ALT at Baseline|Participants who had abnormal ALT at Baseline and had normalized ALT at Week 48 were assessed. This report includes data up to and including Week 48. Long-term efficacy data (up to Week 240) will eventually be reported. An increased level of ALT is referred to as abnormal ALT (the normal range is 0 to 48 units per liter [U/L]). Week 96, 144, 192, and 240 data are not yet available, as this report includes data up to and including Week 48.|Baseline and Week 48|"ITT Population. Only those participants who had abnormal ALT at Baseline were included in this analysis. The ns in the category titles represent the number of HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative participants."||participants|||Number
836729|NCT01300234|Secondary|Log 10 Copies/mL Reduction From Baseline HBV DNA at Week 48|The log 10 copies/mL reduction from Baseline HBV DNA at Week 48 in the HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative population was assessed. This report includes data up to and including Week 48. Long-term efficacy data (up to Week 240) will eventually be reported. HBeAg is a viral protein that is secreted by hepatitis B-infected cells. It is associated with chronic hepatitis B infections and is used as a marker of active viral disease and a participant's degree of infectiousness. A positive result indicates that the participant has high levels of virus in the blood and greater infectiousness. Usually, a negative result indicates that the participant has lower levels of virus in the blood and is less infectious. Week 96, 144, 192, and 240 data are not yet available, as this report includes data up to and including Week 48.|Baseline and Week 48|"ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point were assessed. The ns in the category titles represent the number of HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative participants."||log 10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836730|NCT01300234|Secondary|Participants With HBV DNA <400 Copies/mL at Weeks 96, 144, 192, and 240|The number of participants with HBV DNA <400 copies/mL in the hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and HBeAg-negative population was assessed. HBeAg is a viral protein that is secreted by hepatitis B-infected cells. It is associated with chronic hepatitis B infections and is used as a marker of active viral disease and a participant's degree of infectiousness. A positive result indicates that the participant has high levels of virus in the blood and greater infectiousness. Usually, a negative result indicates that the participant has lower levels of virus in the blood and is less infectious. Week 96, 144, 192, and 240 data are not yet available, as this report includes data up to and including Week 48.|Weeks 96, 144, 192, and 240||12/2017||||
836731|NCT01300234|Primary|Participants With Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) DNA <400 Copies/Milliliter (mL) at Week 48|The number of participants with Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) <400 copies/milliliter (mL) at Week 48 in the hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and HBeAg-negative population was assessed. HBeAg is a viral protein that is secreted by hepatitis B-infected cells. It is associated with chronic hepatitis B infections and is used as a marker of active viral disease and a participant's degree of infectiousness. A positive result indicates that the participant has high levels of virus in the blood and greater infectiousness. Usually, a negative result indicates that the participant has lower levels of virus in the blood and is less infectious.|Week 48|"Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants (par.) who received at least one dose of study medication. Only those par. available at the indicated time point were assessed. The ns in the category titles represent the number of HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative par. A non-completers equal failures approach was used for analysis."||participants|||Number
836732|NCT01300247|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Had B-Cell Recovery|B-cell recovery was defined as CD19 >=0.07×10^9/L, where participants’ CD19 were previously depleted. B-cell recovery was only considered possible when the participant had received the last dose of study treatment.|Follow-up at 6 months, 6-12 months and after 12 months up to end of study (up to approximately 4 years)|Safety evaluable population||percentage of participants|||Number
836733|NCT01300247|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Had B-Cell Depletion|B-cell depletion was defined as cluster of differentiation 19 (CD19) <0.07×10^9/L and could occur only after at least one dose of study drug had been administered.|Up to the end of the treatment period, and follow-up at 6 months, 6-12 months and after 12 months up to end of study (up to approximately 4 years)|Safety evaluable population||percentage of participants|||Number
836734|NCT01300247|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Were Alive||Baseline up to relapse or progression or death from any cause, whichever occurred first, up to end of study (up to approximately 4 years)|Safety evaluable population.||percentage of participants|||Number
836735|NCT01300247|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Were Alive and Progression Free|Progressive disease assessed using IWCLL: >=50% increase in the absolute number of circulating lymphocytes to at least 5x10^9/L; Appearance of new palpable lymph nodes (>15 millimeters [mm] in longest diameter) or any new extra-nodal lesion; >=50% increase in the longest diameter of any previous site of lymphadenopathy; >=50% increase in the enlargement of the liver and/or spleen; transformation to a more aggressive histology.|Baseline up to relapse or progression or death from any cause, whichever occurred first, up to end of study (up to approximately 4 years)|Safety evaluable population.||percentage of participants|||Number
836789|NCT01300624|Primary|Trained Sentence Probe|Picture description task that include trained words.|pre-treatment, post-treatment and 3-months post-treatment (maintenance)|||percentage of correct sentences||Standard Deviation|Mean
836737|NCT01300247|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response, Assessed According to International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (IWCLL) Guidelines|Objective response was defined as a complete response (CR), CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) or partial response (PR), as determined by investigator. CR:required peripheral blood lymphocytes <4x10^9/L; absence of lymphadenopathy; no hepatomegaly or splenomegaly by physical examination as determined by measurement below relevant costal margin; absence of disease/constitutional symptoms; bone marrow at least normocellular for age, with <30% of nucleated cells being lymphocytes. PR:Greater than equal to (>=) 50% decrease in peripheral blood lymphocyte count, >=50% reduction in lymphadenopathy, >=50% reduction of liver and/or spleen enlargement, either neutrophil, platelet, or hemoglobin (Hb) recovery. CRi:met all CR criteria including confirmed lymphocyte infiltration <30%; may not meet Hb, platelet or neutrophil count recovery. The 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated by Clopper-Pearson method. The end of treatment response visit occurred 2-3 months after end of treatment.|Baseline up to relapse or progression or death from any cause, whichever occurred first up to end of treatment response visit (up to approximately 9 months)|Safety evaluable population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836738|NCT01300247|Secondary|Half-Life of Obinutuzumab|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Pre-dose on Cycle (C) 1 Day (D) 1, immediately after end of infusion (0.5 hour), 0.5 hour of split dose of C1D2, pre-dose and immediately after end of infusion on C1D3, 8, 15, C2D1, C4D1, C6D1 and at progression (up to 1.75 year overall)|The PK variables could not be calculated as the PK samples were not collected accurately.|||||
836739|NCT01300247|Secondary|Volume of Distribution of Obinutuzumab|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (Vz/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|Pre-dose on Cycle (C) 1 Day (D) 1, immediately after end of infusion (0.5 hour), 0.5 hour of split dose of C1D2, pre-dose and immediately after end of infusion on C1D3, 8, 15, C2D1, C4D1, C6D1 and at progression (up to 1.75 year overall)|The PK variables could not be calculated as the PK samples were not collected accurately.|||||
836740|NCT01300247|Secondary|Clearance of Obinutuzumab|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Clearance was estimated from population PK modeling. Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood.|Pre-dose on C1D1, immediately after end of infusion (0.5 hour), 0.5 hour of split dose of C1D2, pre-dose and immediately after end of infusion on C1D3, 8, 15, C2D1, C4D1, C6D1 and at progression (up to 1.75 year overall)|The PK variables could not be calculated as the PK samples were not collected accurately.|||||
836741|NCT01300247|Secondary|Trough Plasma Concentration (Ctrough) of Obinutuzumab||Pre-dose on C1D1, C1D3, 8, 15, C2D1, C4D1, C6D1|The PK variables could not be calculated as the PK samples were not collected accurately.|||||
836742|NCT01300247|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Obinutuzumab||Pre-dose on Cycle (C) 1 Day (D) 1, immediately after end of infusion (0.5 hour), 0.5 hour of split dose of C1D2, pre-dose and immediately after end of infusion on C1D3, 8, 15, C2D1, C4D1, C6D1 and at progression (up to 1.75 year overall)|The PK variables could not be calculated as the PK samples were not collected accurately.|||||
836743|NCT01300247|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve (AUC) of Obinutuzumab|AUC is a measure of the serum concentration of the drug over time. It is used to characterize drug absorption.|Pre-dose on Cycle (C) 1 Day (D) 1, immediately after end of infusion (0.5 hour), 0.5 hour of split dose of C1D2, pre-dose and immediately after end of infusion on C1D3, 8, 15, C2D1, C4D1, C6D1 and at progression (up to 1.75 year overall)|The pharmacokinetic (PK) variables could not be calculated as the PK samples were not collected accurately.|||||
836744|NCT01300247|Primary|Number of Participants With Human Anti-Human Antibodies (HAHAs)||Cycle 1 Day 1 (cycle length = 28 days) up to clinical data cutoff date 24 January 2013 (up to approximately 1.75 years)|Safety evaluable population||participants|||Number
836745|NCT01300260|Other Pre-specified|Area Under the Insulin Concentration-time Curve (AUC)|On Day 1 of each treatment period, all participants (healthy or with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) received a single subcutaneous dose of either LY2189265 or placebo. Area under the plasma insulin concentration-time curve from -2 to 20 minutes following the glucagon bolus (INSAUCG) is presented.|After glucagon bolus on Day 3 postdose|All participants (healthy or with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) who received at least 1 dose of study drug (LY2189265 or Placebo) with evaluable INSAUCG data.||picomole times hour per liter (pmol*h/L)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836746|NCT01300260|Secondary|Insulin Maximum Concentration (Cmax)|On Day 1 of each treatment period, all participants (healthy or with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) received a single subcutaneous dose of either LY2189265 or placebo. Maximum plasma insulin concentration from -2 to 20 minutes following the glucagon bolus (INSCmaxG) is presented.|After glucagon bolus on Day 3 postdose|All participants (healthy or with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) who received at least 1 dose of study drug (LY2189265 or Placebo) with evaluable INSCmaxG data.||picomole per liter (pmol/L)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836747|NCT01300260|Primary|Insulin Area Under the Curve (AUC) - Second Phase Response|On Day 1 of each treatment period, all participants (healthy or with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) received a single subcutaneous dose of either LY2189265 or placebo. On Day 3 of each treatment period, participants underwent a 6-hour insulin infusion, followed by an intravenous (IV) dextrose 50% bolus to stimulate insulin secretion. Three hours later, participants were administered a second dextrose bolus, followed by an infusion of 20% dextrose and, 15 minutes after the start of the 20% dextrose infusion, a 1-mg glucagon bolus was administered. Area under the plasma insulin concentration time curve from 10 to 180 minutes (INSAUC[10-180]) following the first dextrose bolus (the second phase response) was corrected for baseline, where baseline was the mean of the insulin concentrations obtained between -30 and 0 minutes relative to the first dextrose bolus.|10-180 minutes after dextrose bolus on Day 3 post dose|All participants (healthy and with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) who received at least 1 dose of study drug (LY2189265 or Placebo) with evaluable INSAUC(10-180) second response phase data.||picomole times hour per liter (pmol*h/L)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836790|NCT01300650|Secondary|Rate of Adverse Events and Hospitalizations||14 days||||||
836791|NCT01300650|Secondary|Correlation Between Interval Changes in Biomarkers, Peak VO2, and VE/VCO2||14 days||||||
836748|NCT01300260|Primary|Maximum Insulin Concentration (Cmax) - Second Phase Response|On Day 1 of each treatment period, all participants (healthy or with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) received a single subcutaneous dose of either LY2189265 or placebo. On Day 3 of each treatment period, participants underwent a 6-hour insulin infusion, followed by an intravenous (IV) dextrose 50% bolus to stimulate insulin secretion. Three hours later, participants were administered a second dextrose bolus, followed by an infusion of 20% dextrose and, 15 minutes after the start of the 20% dextrose infusion, a 1-mg glucagon bolus was administered. Maximum plasma insulin concentration from 10 to 180 minutes (INSCmax[10-180]) following the first dextrose bolus (the second phase response) was corrected for baseline, where baseline was the mean of the insulin concentrations obtained between -30 and 0 minutes relative to the first dextrose bolus.|10-180 minutes after dextrose bolus on Day 3 postdose|All participants (healthy and with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) who received at least 1 dose of study drug (LY2189265 or Placebo) with evaluable INSCmax(10-180) second response phase data.||picomole per liter (pmol/L)]||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836749|NCT01300260|Primary|Area Under the Insulin Concentration-time Curve (AUC) - First Phase Response|On Day 1 of each treatment period, all participants (healthy or with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) received a single subcutaneous dose of either LY2189265 or placebo. On Day 3 of each treatment period, participants underwent a 6-hour insulin infusion, followed by an intravenous (IV) dextrose 50% bolus to stimulate insulin secretion. Three hours later, participants were administered a second dextrose bolus, followed by an infusion of 20% dextrose and, 15 minutes after the start of the 20% dextrose infusion, a 1-mg glucagon bolus was administered. Area under the plasma insulin concentration time curve from 0 to 10 minutes (INSAUC[0-10]) following the first dextrose bolus (the first phase response) was corrected for baseline, where baseline was the mean of the insulin concentrations obtained between -30 and 0 minutes relative to the first dextrose bolus.|0-10 minutes after dextrose bolus on Day 3 postdose|All participants (healthy and with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) who received at least 1 dose of study drug (LY2189265 or Placebo) with evaluable INSAUC(0-10) first phase response data.||picomole times hour per liter (pmol*h/L)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836750|NCT01300260|Primary|Maximum Insulin Concentration (Cmax) - First Phase Response|On Day 1 of each treatment period, all participants (healthy or with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) received a single subcutaneous dose of either LY2189265 or placebo. On Day 3 of each treatment period, participants underwent a 6-hour insulin infusion, followed by an intravenous (IV) dextrose 50% bolus to stimulate insulin secretion. Three hours later, participants were administered a second dextrose bolus, followed by an infusion of 20% dextrose and, 15 minutes after the start of the 20% dextrose infusion, a 1-mg glucagon bolus was administered. Maximum plasma insulin concentration from 0 to 10 minutes (INSCmax[0-10]) following the first dextrose bolus (the first phase response) was corrected for baseline, where baseline was the mean of the insulin concentrations obtained between -30 and 0 minutes relative to the first dextrose bolus.|0-10 minutes after dextrose bolus on Day 3 postdose|All participants (healthy and with type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]) who received at least 1 dose of study drug (LY2189265 or Placebo) with evaluable INSCmax(0-10) first response phase data.||picomole per liter (pmol/L)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836751|NCT01300286|Secondary|Cryoprecipitate Transfusion||Anesthesia Induction (Baseline), after CPB, ICU Admission (est. 6 hours after baseline) to post op day 2 (est: 30- 54 hr after baseline)|||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836752|NCT01300286|Secondary|Platelet Transfusion||Anesthesia Induction (Baseline), after CPB, ICU Admission (est. 6 hours after baseline) to post op day 2 (est: 30- 54 hr after baseline)|||mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836753|NCT01300286|Secondary|Fresh Frozen Plasma Transfusion||Anesthesia Induction (Baseline), after CPB, ICU Admission (est. 6 hours after baseline) to post op day 2 (est: 30- 54 hr after baseline)|||mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836754|NCT01300286|Secondary|Packed Red Blood Cell Transfusion||Anesthesia Induction (Baseline), after CPB, ICU Admission (est. 6 hours after baseline) to post op day 2 (est: 30- 54 hr after baseline)|||units||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836755|NCT01300286|Primary|Fibrinogen Level Change|Fibrinogen levels will be assessed only at the timepoints listed in the timeframe and for a maximum of 24 hours.|Anesthesia Induction (Baseline), Pre RiaSTAP (est. 4 hr after baseline), Post RiaSTAP (est: 10 minutes after RiaSTAP administered), ICU Admission (est. 6 hours after baseline), 24 Hour post op (est: 24-30 hr after baseline)|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
836756|NCT01300338|Primary|Mean Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure|Average change in diastolic blood pressure (bottom number of blood pressure reading) from baseline to 6 months.|Baseline, 6 months|||Millimeters of Mercury||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836757|NCT01300338|Primary|Mean Change in Systolic Blood Pressure|Average change in systolic blood pressure (top number of blood pressure reading) from baseline to 6 months.|Baseline, 6 months|||Millimeters of Mercury||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836758|NCT01300351|Secondary|Duration of Clinical Benefit|"Duration of clinical benefit (DoCB) will be evaluated only for patients who have CB, and is defined as the time from the date of randomisation until the date of disease progression or death from any cause, whichever is earlier.
Any patient who has not progressed or died by the date of DCO or who has been lost to follow up will be right censored at the date of their last evaluable disease assessment."|36 months|FAS||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836759|NCT01300351|Secondary|Duration of Response|"Duration of response (DoR) will be evaluated only for patients who have an objective response, and is defined as the time from the date of first documentation of objective response (i.e., the initial visit at which CR or PR was recorded) until the date of disease progression or death due to any cause (whichever is earlier). The time of the initial response will be defined as the latest of the dates contributing towards the first visit response of PR or CR.
Any patient who has not progressed or died by the date of DCO, or who has been lost to follow up, will be right-censored at the date of their last disease assessment."|36 months|Evaluable for Response Set||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836760|NCT01300351|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate|A clinical benefit (CB) responder is defined as a patient having a best overall response of either CR, PR or SD for at least 24 weeks per RECIST v1.1. As tumour assessments can occur ± 2 weeks of the specified time point, the CBR is defined as the proportion of patients in the FAS who have CB ≥ 22 weeks (or 154 days).|36 months|FAS||patients|||Number
836761|NCT01300351|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|The ORR is defined as the proportion of all randomized patients with measurable disease at baseline who have a best objective tumour response of either CR or PR per RECIST v1.1.|36 months|Evaluable for Response Set, included all patients in the FAS with measurable disease at baseline.||patients|||Number
836762|NCT01300351|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study, or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, or the appearance of new lesions, or death (by any cause in the absence of progression). The primary analysis for PFS was the log rank test stratified by last endocrine therapy received prior to fulvestrant (AO vs. AI). The treatment effect was estimated using the HR of 500 mg fulvestrant to 250 mg fulvestrant together with the corresponding 95% CI and p value.|36 months|FAS: all randomised patients and compared the treatment groups on the basis of randomised treatment, regardless of treatment actually received.||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836763|NCT01300455|Secondary|Mean AHI|"Evaluation of the effect of multiple dose administration of suvorexant on
AHI as measured by polysomnography. The AHI is an overall index of OSA severity. The AHI is calculated by dividing the number of apneas and hypopneas by the number of hours of sleep. AHI values are categorized as mild OSA = 5 to <15/hr and moderate OSA = 15 to <30/hr."|Day 1|Twenty-four of 26 participants were included in the primary evaluation of Day 1 AHI/SaO2 data; 2 participants had no data due to either not receiving placebo or an equipment malfunction.||Events per hour||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836764|NCT01300455|Secondary|Mean Arterial SaO2 for Different Sleep Stages|Comparison of the mean SaO2 during different sleep stages (REM, Non-REM, and awake) following multiple dose administration of suvorexant and placebo. Sleep stages were determined by polysomnography.|Day 1 and Day 4|Twenty-four of 26 participants were included in the primary evaluation of Day 1 AHI/SaO2 data; 2 participants had no data due to either not receiving placebo or an equipment malfunction. Twenty-five of 26 participants had Day 4 data; one participant did not receive placebo.||Percentage of Oxygen Saturation||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836765|NCT01300455|Secondary|Percentage of Total Sleep Time That Arterial SaO2 is Less Than 90%, 85%, and 80%|"Evaluation of the percentage of the night in which SaO2 is less than 90%, less
than 85% and less than 80% following multiple dose administration of
suvorexant and placebo. Total sleep time is the total of all REM and non-REM sleep in a sleep episode."|Day 1 and Day 4|Twenty-four of 26 participants were included in the primary evaluation of Day 1 AHI/SaO2 data; 2 participants had no data due to either not receiving placebo or an equipment malfunction. Twenty-five of 26 participants had Day 4 data; one participant did not receive placebo.||Percentage of Total Sleep Time||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836766|NCT01300455|Secondary|Mean Arterial Oxygen Saturation (SaO2) During Total Sleep Time|Evaluation of the effect of multidose dose suvorexant on mean SaO2 during total sleep time as measured by pulse oximetry. Total sleep time is the total of all rapid eye movement (REM) and non-REM sleep in a sleep episode.|Day 1 and Day 4|Twenty-four of 26 participants were included in the primary evaluation of Day 1 AHI/SaO2 data; 2 participants had no data due to either not receiving placebo or an equipment malfunction. Twenty-five of 26 participants had Day 4 data; one participant did not receive placebo.||Percentage of Oxygen Saturation||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836767|NCT01300455|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an AE|An AE is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration whether or not considered related to the use of the product.|Up to 13 days|All participants were included in the Safety Population.||participants|||Number
836768|NCT01300455|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event|An adverse event (AE) is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration whether or not considered related to the use of the product.|Up to 14 days after last dose|All participants were included in the Safety Population.||participants|||Number
836769|NCT01300455|Primary|Mean Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI)|"Evaluation of the effect of multiple dose administration of suvorexant on
AHI as measured by polysomnography. The AHI is an overall index of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) severity. The AHI is calculated by dividing the number of apneas and hypopneas by the number of hours of sleep. AHI values are categorized as mild OSA = 5 to <15/hr and moderate OSA = 15 to <30/hr."|Day 4|Twenty-five of 26 participants had Day 4 data; one participant did not receive placebo.||Events per hour||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836770|NCT01300546|Secondary|Percent Change in Headache Days All Treatment Periods Compared to Baseline|Comparing the number of migraine headache days during Baseline Period Days 1-30 to number or migraine headache days reported in Treatment Period Month 1 (Days 31-60), Treatment Period Month 2 (Days 61-90), and Treatment Period Month 3 (Days 91-120) in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm. e.g., Percent change=[ (total headache days during Treatment Period Month 3 (Days 91-120)-total headache days during Baseline (Days 1-30)/total headache days during Baseline (Days 1-30)]*100%).|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121.|||percent change of migraine headache days||Standard Deviation|Mean
836771|NCT01300546|Secondary|Compliance With Lifestyle Changes|Self-assessed grade of compliance with lifestyle modification changes (where A=1, B=2, C=3, D=4, and F=5; lower scores represent better outcomes) in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm.|Day 121|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836772|NCT01300546|Secondary|Migraine Disability Assessment Test (MIDAS)|"Change in MIDAS total score from end of Baseline (Day 31) to end Treatment Period month 3 (Day 121) in the Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm.
Total score of disability ranges:
0 to 5, MIDAS Grade I, Little or no disability
6 to 10, MIDAS Grade II, Mild disability
11 to 20, MIDAS Grade III, Moderate disability
21+, MIDAS Grade IV, Severe disability No subscales are present."|Baseline MIDAS collected at Day 31, Post final dose study medication MIDAS collected at Day 121.|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836773|NCT01300546|Secondary|Percent Change of Doses of Study Medication|% change in number of doses during Baseline of triptans (Group A) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs(NSAIDs) (Group B) vs. doses during Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 of study medication in the Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm. e.g.,Percent change=[(number of doses during Treatment Period Month 3 (Days 91-120)- number of doses during Baseline (Days 1-30)/number of doses during Baseline (Days 1-30)]*100%). The total number of subjects used in this analysis is different than the total number of subjects as the analysis is only looking at those subjects that were taking one of the study medications during Baseline.|Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121.|12 Subjects did not take any triptans (Group A) or NSAIDs (Group B) during Baseline Period and were not included in Matched Pairs analysis of study medication taken.||percent change of study medication||Standard Deviation|Mean
836775|NCT01300546|Secondary|Migraine Attacks With 50% Reduction|Number of subjects with at least a 50% reduction in number of migraine attacks reported in Baseline versus Treatment period Months 1, 2, and 3 in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121.|||participants|||Number
836776|NCT01300546|Secondary|Headache Days With Greater Than 50% Reduction|Number of subjects with at least a 50% reduction in number of headache days reported in Baseline versus Treatment period Months 1, 2, and 3 in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm.|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121.|||participants|||Number
836777|NCT01300546|Secondary|Migraine Duration From Time of Treatment to Pain Free|"% change from Baseline in mean migraine duration from time of treatment to pain free reported in Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm.
Percent change=[(mean duration from treatment to painfree during Treatment Period Month 3 (Days 91-120)- mean duration from treatment to painfree during Baseline (Days 1-30)/mean duration from treatment to painfree during Baseline (Days 1-30)]*100%)."|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121.|||percent change of migraine duration||Standard Deviation|Mean
836778|NCT01300546|Secondary|Migraine Duration From Onset to Pain Free|Comparing mean migraine duration from onset to painfree from Baseline(Days 1-30) to each month: Treatment Period Months 1 (Days 31-60), 2(Days 61-90), and 3(Days 91-120) in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm. Percent change was calculated by determining percent change in each subject, from Treatment Period Month 3 and Baseline, then comparing the average change between each arm. The following formula was used for each treatment period calculation. e.g.,Percent change=[(mean duration from onset to painfree during Treatment Period Month 3 (Days 91-120)- mean duration from onset to painfree during Baseline (Days 1-30)/mean duration from onset to painfree during Baseline (Days 1-30)]*100%).|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121.|||percent change of migraine duration||Standard Deviation|Mean
836779|NCT01300546|Secondary|Migraine Severity|Comparing migraine severity 2 hours after treatment from Baseline(Days 1-30) to migraine severity reported 2 hours after treatment in Treatment Period Months 1 (Days 31-60), 2(Days 61-90), and 3(Days 91-120) in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm. Percent change was calculated by determining percent change in each subject, from Treatment Period Month 3 and Baseline, then comparing the average change between each arm. The following formula was used for each treatment period calculation. e.g.,Percent change=[ (mean migraine severity during Treatment Period Month 3 (Days 91-120)- mean migraine severity during Baseline (Days 1-30)/mean migraine severity during Baseline (Days 1-30)]*100%).|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121.|||percent change of migraine severity||Standard Deviation|Mean
836780|NCT01300546|Secondary|Migraine Attacks|Comparing the number of migraine attacks reported from Baseline to the number of migraine attacks reported in Treatment Period Months 1(Days 31-60), 2(Days 61-90), and 3(Days 91-120) in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm. Each treatment month percent change was individually compared to Baseline. The following formula was used for each treatment period calculation. e.g.,Percent change=[ (total migraine attacks days during Treatment Period Month 3 (Days 91-120)-total migraine attacks during Baseline (Days 1-30)/total migraine attacks during Baseline (Days 1-30)]*100%).|Baseline Period collected at Day 31, Treatment Period Months 1, 2, and 3 collected at Days 61, 91, and 121.|||percent change of migraine attacks||Standard Deviation|Mean
836781|NCT01300546|Primary|Percent Change of Headache Days Compared to Baseline|Comparing the number of migraine headache days during Baseline Period Days 1-30 to number or migraine headache days reported in Treatment Period Days 91-120 in Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium arm vs. Naproxen Sodium arm. Percent change=[ (total headache days during Treatment Period Month 3 (Days 91-120)-total headache days during Baseline (Days 1-30)/total headache days during Baseline (Days 1-30)]*100%).|Day 121 (following 30 day Baseline Period and Treatment Period Days 91-120)|||percent change of headache days||Standard Deviation|Mean
836782|NCT01300559|Primary|Hemoglobin Measurement g/dl|The primary hypothesis was that use of the Aquamantys coagulation system in addition to unipolar cautery results in less intraoperative Hb loss compared with unipolar cautery alone during multilevel spinal decompression and fusion surgery.Intraoperatively, shed blood will be collected into a Cell-saver device. Surgical sponges will be recovered in a container of citrated normal saline. Prior to processing the salvaged blood from the cell-saver device, hemoglobin concentration (g/dL) and volume (dL) of the salvaged blood will be measured, allowing calculation of hemoglobin loss in grams.|At the end of surgery|Based on pilot data, it was estimated that 29 patients per group would provide 90% power with = 0.01 to distinguish such a difference between groups. Therefore, the randomized study was planned for 60 patients.||hemoglobin g/dl||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
836783|NCT01300624|Secondary|Communicative Effectiveness Ratings|"This questionnaire (Lomas et al, 1989) was provided to persons who communicated with the treatment participant regularly (e.g., a spouse). They rated how well the participant was able to perform on 16 common communication tasks (e.g., participating in a conversation over coffee). They rated each scenario along a line that spanned between the two extremes of ability, from not at all able to as able as before the stroke. The line was 100 mm. To score responses, the place where they bisected the line was measured. An average of their responses across the 16 questions was calculated."|pre-treatment, post-treatment and 3-months post-treatment (maintenance)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836784|NCT01300624|Secondary|Western Aphasia Battery|Standardized measure of aphasia severity|pre-treatment and post-treatment|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836785|NCT01300624|Primary|Complete Utterances in Discourse|Sentence in discourse that were relevant to topic and syntactically correct|pre-treatment, post-treatment and 3-months post-treatment (maintenance)|||percentage of complete utterances||Standard Deviation|Mean
836786|NCT01300624|Secondary|Verb Naming|Confrontation of 100 action pictures|pre-treatment and post-treatment|||percentage of correct naming||Standard Deviation|Mean
836787|NCT01300624|Secondary|Noun Naming|Confrontation naming of 162 objects|pre-treatment and post-treatment|||percentage of correct naming||Standard Deviation|Mean
836788|NCT01300624|Primary|Untrained Sentence Probes|Picture description with sentences containing untrained words.|pre-treatment, post-treatment and 3-months post-treatment (maintenance)|||percentage of correct sentences||Standard Deviation|Mean
836792|NCT01300650|Secondary|Interval Change From Baseline in Heart Failure Symptoms as Measured by Duke Activity Status Index (DASI)|The Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) is a scale that quantifies patients' ability to perform various tasks. The scale ranges from 0 (unable to perform any tasks) to 58.20 (able to perform all tasks). Higher scores reflect improved activity or improved heart failure symptoms. Lower scores reflect worsened ability or worsened heart failure symptoms.|14 days|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836793|NCT01300650|Secondary|Interval Change From Baseline in Biomarkers (High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein, Whole Blood Assay, Brain Natriuretic Peptide)||14 days||||||
836794|NCT01300650|Primary|Median Interval Change From Baseline in the Minute Ventilation and Carbon Dioxide Production (VE/VCO2 Slope)|"The VE/VCO2 slope is calculated as the ratio of minute ventilation (VE) and carbon dioxide production (VCO2). Because these measurements share the same units, the resultant ratio is unitless.
Change in VE/VCO2 slope was calculated as the change in VE/VCO2 slope between baseline and 14 days. We therefore calculated the difference between VE/VCO2 slope measurements that occurred at baseline and at 14 days (change in VE/VCO2 slope = VE/VCO2 slope [day 14] - VE/VCO2 slope [baseline])"|14 days|||(unitless)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836795|NCT01300650|Primary|Median Interval Change From Baseline in Peak VO2|"Peak VO2 is a measurement of oxygen consumption rate during exercise (milliliters of oxygen per minute). It is calculated by continuous measurement of oxygen consumed during exercise while patients breath through a mask/tube. To account for variability in patient size, the oxygen consumption is divided by patient body weight.
The outcome measure time frame was 14 days. This means that change in peak VO2 was calculated as the difference between peak VO2 at baseline and 14 days. To calculate this change, we used the mathematical process of subtraction (change in peak VO2 = Peak VO2 [day 14] - Peak VO2 [baseline])"|14 days|||mL/kg/min||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836796|NCT01300728|Secondary|Mean Cognitive Performance at 24 Months|"24 month cognitive performance in treatment (IVIG/placebo) is measured by:
Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog)
Scale from 0 to 85 (0 is best cognitive performance)
Score is the sum of 12 sub-scales.
Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE)
Scale from 0 to 30 (30 is best cognitive performance)
Score is the sum of 11 sub-scales.
Clinical Dementia Rating - Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB)
Scale is 0 to 18 (0 is best cognitive performance)
Score is the sum of 6 sub-scales"|24 month|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836797|NCT01300728|Secondary|Mean Cognitive Performance at 12 Months|"12 month cognitive performance in treatment (IVIG/placebo) is measured by:
Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog)
Scale from 0 to 85 (0 is best cognitive performance)
Score is the sum of 12 sub-scales.
Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE)
Scale from 0 to 30 (30 is best cognitive performance)
Score is the sum of 11 sub-scales.
Clinical Dementia Rating - Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB)
Scale is 0 to 18 (0 is best cognitive performance)
Score is the sum of 6 sub-scales"|12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836798|NCT01300728|Secondary|Change in Ventricular Volume in Patients With Positive Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) Aβ1-42/CSF P-Tau181P Alzheimer Signature|Mean ventricular volume (cubic centimeters) in patients with positive cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ1-42/CSF P-Tau181P Alzheimer signature at 24 months following infusion|Baseline to 24 months following infusion|||cubic centimeters (cc)||Standard Deviation|Mean
836799|NCT01300728|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Converted From Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (a-MCI) to Alzheimer Disease (AD)|The National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke - Alzheimers Disease and Related Disorders Association (NINCDS-ADRDA) Alzheimer's Criteria were proposed in 1984 by NINCDS-ADRDA criteria for diagnosing Alzheimer Disease and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) will be used to determine conversion from a-MCI to AD.|Baseline to 24 months|||participants|||Number
836800|NCT01300728|Primary|Annualized Percent Change in Ventricular Volume (APCV) as Measured by MRI|"Change in ventricular volumetric as measured by MRI at baseline, 12, and 24 months following the first infusion of either 0.4 g/kg NewGam or 0.9% saline solution(placebo) every 14 days x 5.
Participants will also be classified as early MCI (EMCI) if baseline CDR-SB is less than 1.5, and late MCI (LMCI) if CDR-SB is greater than or equal to 1.5."|Baseline, 12, and 24 month MRI evaluation|"Annualized Percent Change in ventricular volume (APCV) at 12 and 24 months was computed as:
((12 or 24 month volume) - (Baseline volume))/(Baseline volume)/(Time (years) between Baseline and 12 or 24 month visit)"||percent change per participant year||Standard Deviation|Mean
836801|NCT01300741|Primary|Purchase Intent|"As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. The participant was asked, How likely would you be to purchase these lenses? Purchase intent was graded on a 5-point Likert scale: Definitely would purchase, probably would purchase, may or may not purchase, probably would not purchase, definitely would not purchase. The Top-2-box response (definitely would purchase, probably would purchase) was calculated and reported as a percentage of all responses."|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Percent likely to purchase|||Number
836802|NCT01300741|Primary|Overall Satisfaction|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Overall satisfaction was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836803|NCT01300741|Primary|Lens Awareness|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Lens awareness was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very aware and 10 being not aware.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836804|NCT01300741|Primary|Delivers a Healthy, Natural Feeling|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Delivers a healthy, natural feeling was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836823|NCT01300767|Primary|Comfort During the Day|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Comfort during the day was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836805|NCT01300741|Primary|Handling at Removal|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Handling at removal was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being difficult and 10 being easy.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836806|NCT01300741|Primary|Handling on Insertion|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Handling on insertion was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being difficult and 10 being easy.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836807|NCT01300741|Primary|Low Light Vision|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Low light vision was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836808|NCT01300741|Primary|Daytime Vision|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Daytime vision was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836809|NCT01300741|Primary|Overall Comfort|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Overall comfort was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836810|NCT01300741|Primary|Comfort at End of Day|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Comfort at end of day was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836811|NCT01300741|Primary|Comfort During the Day|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Comfort during the day was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836812|NCT01300741|Primary|Comfort on Insertion|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Comfort on insertion was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836813|NCT01300767|Primary|Purchase Intent|"As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. The participant was asked, How likely would you be to purchase these lenses? Purchase intent was graded on a 5-point Likert scale: Definitely would purchase, probably would purchase, may or may not purchase, probably would not purchase, definitely would not purchase. The Top-2-box response (definitely would purchase, probably would purchase) was calculated and reported as a percentage of all responses."|4 weeks|||Percent likely to purchase|||Number
836814|NCT01300767|Primary|Overall Satisfaction|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Overall satisfaction was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836815|NCT01300767|Primary|Lens Awareness|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Lens awareness was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very aware and 10 being not aware.|4 weeks|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836816|NCT01300767|Primary|Delivers a Healthy, Natural Feeling|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Delivers a healthy, natural feeling was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836817|NCT01300767|Primary|Handling at Removal|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Handling at removal was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being difficult and 10 being easy.|4 weeks|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836818|NCT01300767|Primary|Handling on Insertion|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Handling on insertion was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being difficult and 10 being easy.|4 weeks|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836819|NCT01300767|Primary|Low Light Vision|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Low light vision was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836820|NCT01300767|Primary|Daytime Vision|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Daytime vision was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836821|NCT01300767|Primary|Overall Comfort|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Overall comfort was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836822|NCT01300767|Primary|Comfort at End of Day|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Comfort at end of day was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836824|NCT01300767|Primary|Comfort on Insertion|As interpreted and recorded by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Comfort on insertion was graded on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as, major protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836825|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale Score: Subdomain Miscellaneous|"The Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) is a validated tool for rating frequency and severity of nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD). The severity and frequency of the subject's nonmotor symptoms is assessed by the investigator in 9 different domains. Severity (ranges: 0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) and frequency (ranges: 1 = Rarely (<1/wk), 2 = Often (1/wk), 3 = Frequent (several times per week), 4 = Very Frequent (daily or all the time) are rated using a 4-point scale.
The final score is derived from multiplying the severity score and the frequency score.
A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance indicates an improvement in NMSS.
The possible min/max final scores per subdomain are calculated as follows:
Range of final score per subdomain: 0 – 12 per question multiplied by the number of questions per subdomain:
Subdomain Miscellaneous (4 questions): range 0 – 48"|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836826|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale Score: Subdomain Sexual Function|"The Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) is a validated tool for rating frequency and severity of nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD). The severity and frequency of the subject's nonmotor symptoms is assessed by the investigator in 9 different domains. Severity (ranges: 0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) and frequency (ranges: 1 = Rarely (<1/wk), 2 = Often (1/wk), 3 = Frequent (several times per week), 4 = Very Frequent (daily or all the time) are rated using a 4-point scale.
The final score is derived from multiplying the severity score and the frequency score.
A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance indicates an improvement in NMSS.
The possible min/max final scores per subdomain are calculated as follows:
Range of final score per subdomain: 0 – 12 per question multiplied by the number of questions per subdomain:
Subdomain Sexual function (2 questions): range 0 – 24"|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836827|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale Score: Subdomain Urinary|"The Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) is a validated tool for rating frequency and severity of nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD). The severity and frequency of the subject's nonmotor symptoms is assessed by the investigator in 9 different domains. Severity (ranges: 0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) and frequency (ranges: 1 = Rarely (<1/wk), 2 = Often (1/wk), 3 = Frequent (several times per week), 4 = Very Frequent (daily or all the time) are rated using a 4-point scale.
The final score is derived from multiplying the severity score and the frequency score.
A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance indicates an improvement in NMSS.
The possible min/max final scores per subdomain are calculated as follows:
Range of final score per subdomain: 0 – 12 per question multiplied by the number of questions per subdomain:
Subdomain Urinary (3 questions): range 0 – 36"|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836828|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale Score: Subdomain Gastrointestinal Tract|"The Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) is a validated tool for rating frequency and severity of nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD). The severity and frequency of the subject's nonmotor symptoms is assessed by the investigator in 9 different domains. Severity (ranges: 0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) and frequency (ranges: 1 = Rarely (<1/wk), 2 = Often (1/wk), 3 = Frequent (several times per week), 4 = Very Frequent (daily or all the time) are rated using a 4-point scale.
The final score is derived from multiplying the severity score and the frequency score.
A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance indicates an improvement in NMSS.
The possible min/max final scores per subdomain are calculated as follows:
Range of final score per subdomain: 0 – 12 per question multiplied by the number of questions per subdomain:
Subdomain Gastrointestinal tract (3 questions): range 0 – 36"|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836829|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale Score: Subdomain Attention/Memory,|"The Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) is a validated tool for rating frequency and severity of nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD). The severity and frequency of the subject's nonmotor symptoms is assessed by the investigator in 9 different domains. Severity (ranges: 0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) and frequency (ranges: 1 = Rarely (<1/wk), 2 = Often (1/wk), 3 = Frequent (several times per week), 4 = Very Frequent (daily or all the time) are rated using a 4-point scale.
The final score is derived from multiplying the severity score and the frequency score.
A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance indicates an improvement in NMSS.
The possible min/max final scores per subdomain are calculated as follows:
Range of final score per subdomain: 0 – 12 per question multiplied by the number of questions per subdomain:
Subdomain Attention/Memory (3 questions): range 0 – 36"|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836866|NCT01301079|Secondary|Hyperalgesia in the Postoperative Period as Measured With Algometer in Thenar Eminence|The mechanical pain threshold was evaluated using an algometer. The pressure was increased by 0.1 kgf/second until the patient complained of pain. The mean of three determinations was calculated.|24 h after the procedure|||kilogram force/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
836830|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale Score: Subdomain Perception/Hallucinations|"The Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) is a validated tool for rating frequency and severity of nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD). The severity and frequency of the subject's nonmotor symptoms is assessed by the investigator in 9 different domains. Severity (ranges: 0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) and frequency (ranges: 1 = Rarely (<1/wk), 2 = Often (1/wk), 3 = Frequent (several times per week), 4 = Very Frequent (daily or all the time) are rated using a 4-point scale.
The final score is derived from multiplying the severity score and the frequency score.
A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance indicates an improvement in NMSS.
The possible min/max final scores per subdomain are calculated as follows:
Range of final score per subdomain: 0 – 12 per question multiplied by the number of questions per subdomain:
Subdomain Perception/Hallucinations (3 questions): range 0 – 36"|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836831|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale Score: Subdomain Mood/Cognition|"The Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) is a validated tool for rating frequency and severity of nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD). The severity and frequency of the subject's nonmotor symptoms is assessed by the investigator in 9 different domains. Severity (ranges: 0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) and frequency (ranges: 1 = Rarely (<1/wk), 2 = Often (1/wk), 3 = Frequent (several times per week), 4 = Very Frequent (daily or all the time) are rated using a 4-point scale.
The final score is derived from multiplying the severity score and the frequency score.
A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance indicates an improvement in NMSS.
The possible min/max final scores per subdomain are calculated as follows:
Range of final score per subdomain: 0 – 12 per question multiplied by the number of questions per subdomain:
Subdomain Mood/Cognition (6 questions): range 0 – 72"|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836832|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale Score: Subdomain Sleep/Fatigue|"The Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) is a validated tool for rating frequency and severity of nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD). The severity and frequency of the subject's nonmotor symptoms is assessed by the investigator in 9 different domains. Severity (ranges: 0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) and frequency (ranges: 1 = Rarely (<1/wk), 2 = Often (1/wk), 3 = Frequent (several times per week), 4 = Very Frequent (daily or all the time) are rated using a 4-point scale.
The final score is derived from multiplying the severity score and the frequency score.
A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance indicates an improvement in NMSS.
The possible min/max final scores per subdomain are calculated as follows:
Range of final score per subdomain: 0 – 12 per question multiplied by the number of questions per subdomain:
Subdomain Sleep/Fatigue (4 questions): range 0-48"|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836833|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale Score: Subdomain Cardiovascular|"The Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) is a validated tool for rating frequency and severity of nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD). The severity and frequency of the subject's nonmotor symptoms is assessed by the investigator in 9 different domains. Severity (ranges: 0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Severe) and frequency (ranges: 1 = Rarely (<1/wk), 2 = Often (1/wk), 3 = Frequent (several times per week), 4 = Very Frequent (daily or all the time) are rated using a 4-point scale.
The final score is derived from multiplying the severity score and the frequency score.
A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance indicates an improvement in NMSS.
The possible min/max final scores per subdomain are calculated as follows:
Range of final score per subdomain: 0 – 12 per question multiplied by the number of questions per subdomain:
Subdomain Cardiovascular (2 questions): range 0 – 24"|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836834|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in Health-related Quality of Life (HRQL) Measured by a 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39)|Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire - 39 (PDQ-39) is a self-administered questionnaire. It comprises of 39 questions, relating to eight key areas of health and daily activities, including both Motor and Non-motor symptoms. It is scored on a scale of zero to 100, with lower scores indicating better health and high scores more severe symptoms in change from Baseline to end of Maintenance.|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836835|NCT01300819|Secondary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in Total Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score|The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III is a scale for the assessment of function in Parkinson's Disease. UPDRS Part III measures Motor Function. It consists of 14 items with 27 questions, each ranging from 0 to 4. The sum score for the UPDRS Part III ranges from 0 to 108. A higher score indicates greater disability. A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance score indicates improvement.|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836847|NCT01301027|Primary|Change in High Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hsCRP) Concentration in Plasma From Baseline to 6 Months|The percent difference in hsCRP concentration geometric mean values from baseline to 6 months was calculated for each arm|Baseline and 6 months|1 participant in the Pioglitazone group and 2 participants in the Placebo group had blood samples collected after the 10 week visit and prior to their withdrawal. They did not complete the study, but their results were included in the 6-month analysis.||percent difference in geometric mean||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836836|NCT01300819|Primary|Change From Baseline to the End of Maintenance in Total Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) Score|The Nonmotor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) is a validated tool for rating frequency and severity of nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson’s Disease (PD). The severity and frequency of the subject’s nonmotor symptoms is assessed by the investigator in the following 9 domain categories: cardiovascular, including falls; sleep/fatigue; mood/cognition; perceptual problems/hallucinations; attention/memory; gastrointestinal tract; urinary; sexual function; miscellaneous. Severity and frequency are rated using a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (none) to 3 (severe; major source of distress or disturbance to subject) for severity and from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent [daily or all the time]) for frequency. The total NMSS score ranges from 0 to 350. A negative change from Baseline to end of Maintenance indicates an improvement in NMSS.|From Baseline (Day 1) to end of 12-week Maintenance (Day 84)|This analysis was performed according to the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which is defined as all treated subjects with a baseline and post-baseline NMSS measure, and follows the intention-to-treat principle.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836837|NCT01300923|Secondary|Brain-derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF)|BDNF is a protein that supports the survival of existing neurons and growth and differentiation of new neurons and synapses.|Screen and Week 10|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836838|NCT01300923|Secondary|Peabody Picture Vocabulary|The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test is one of the most commonly used assessment tests that measure verbal ability in standard American English vocabulary. This test has been nationally standardized using examinees from various age groups, from children to adults. Thus, the raw scores are equated to mental age, using the norms obtained from standardization. The total standard scores range from 40 (worse receptive vocabulary) to 160 (better receptive vocabulary). The scores can also be converted to percentile rank.|Week 10|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836839|NCT01300923|Secondary|Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-II (VABS-II) Communication Domain|The VABS-II is a semi-structured interview designed to assess adaptive functioning in communication, daily living, socialization and motor skills. Recognizing that language is a major area of impairment in the study population, the Communication Domain (99 Items from 0-198), in particular the Expressive Subdomain (54 Items from 0-108) are of interest in this study. Items arranged in a developmental sequence are rated on a 3-point scale. Each item is scored from 0 (never performs the behavior) to 3 (usually performs the behavior independently). Higher scores indicate higher adaptive functioning. Differences between Baseline and Week 10 are used as an indicator of change.|Week 10|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836840|NCT01300923|Secondary|ADHD Rating Scale 4th Edition|The ADHD Rating Scale is an 18-item scale directly derived from DSM-IV criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. The ADHD Rating Scale-IV is completed by the parent and scored by a clinician. The scale consists of 2 subscales: inattention (9 items) and hyperactivity-impulsivity (9 items). If 3 or more items are skipped, the clinician should use extreme caution in interpreting the scale. The total score can range from 0 to 54, with a higher score indicating greater severity.|Week 10|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836841|NCT01300923|Secondary|Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale Modified for PDD|The Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scales-Modified (CY-BOCS) is a 5-item, semi-structured clinician rating scale modified designed to rate the current severity of repetitive behavior in children and adolescents with PDD. Once the current repetitive behaviors are identified, they are separately rated on 5 items: Time Spent, Interference, Distress, Resistance, and Control. Each of these items is scored on a 5-point scale form 0 (least symptomatic) to 4 (most symptomatic). The CY-BOCS yields a Total Score from 0 to 20 and is sensitive to change.|Week 10|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836842|NCT01300923|Secondary|Social Responsiveness Scale|The 65-item SRS is a standardized measure of the core symptoms of autism. Each item is scored on a 4-point Likert scale. The score of each individual item is summed to create a total raw score. A total scores results are as follows: 0-62: Within normal limits 63-79: Mild range of impairment 80-108: Moderate range of impairment 109-149: Severe range of impairment|Week 10|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836843|NCT01300923|Secondary|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC)|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a 58-item rating scale used to assess maladaptive behaviors across five original subscales: Irritability (15 items from 0-45), Social Withdrawal (16 items from 0-48), Stereotypy (7 items from 0-21), Hyperactivity (16 items from 0-48), Inappropriate Speech (4 items from 0-12). Additionally, Social Avoidance, a newly developed four-item subscale (from 0-12) of the ABC that captures core social avoidance aspects of Fragile X Syndrome is reported. All items on the ABC are rated from 0 (not at all a problem) to 3 (the problem is severe in degree). Higher scores indicate greater maladaptive behaviors. Differences between Baseline and Week 10 are used as an indicator of change.|Week 10|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836844|NCT01300923|Primary|Clinical Global Impression- Severity Scale (CGI-S)|The Clinical Global Impression – Severity scale (CGI-S) is a 7-point scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment, relative to the clinician's past experience with patients who have the same diagnosis. Considering total clinical experience, a patient is assessed on severity of mental illness at the time of rating 1, normal, not at all ill; 2, borderline mentally ill; 3, mildly ill; 4, moderately ill; 5, markedly ill; 6, severely ill; or 7, extremely ill.|Week 10|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836845|NCT01301027|Secondary|Change in Interleukin-6 (IL-6) Concentration in Plasma From Baseline to 6 Months|The percent difference in IL-6 concentration geometric mean values from baseline to 6 months was calculated for each arm|Baseline and 6 months|1 participant in the Pioglitazone group and 2 participants in the Placebo group had blood samples collected after the 10 week visit and prior to their withdrawal. They did not complete the study, but their results were included in the 6-month analysis.||percent difference in geometric mean||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836846|NCT01301027|Secondary|Change in Tumor Necrosis Factor-α (TNF-α) Concentration in Plasma From Baseline to 6 Months|The percent difference in TNF-α concentration geometric mean values from baseline to 6 months was calculated for each arm|Baseline and 6 months|1 participant in the Pioglitazone group and 2 participants in the Placebo group had blood samples collected after the 10 week visit and prior to their withdrawal. They did not complete the study, but their results were included in the 6-month analysis.||percent difference in geometric mean||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836867|NCT01301079|Primary|Pain 24 Hours|The scale measure pain after 24 hours (0 - without pain and 10 worst pain possible). The individual can choose any number between 0 - 10.|24 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836848|NCT01301027|Primary|Change in High Molecular Weight Adiponectin (HMW-A) Concentration in Plasma From Baseline to 6 Months|The percent difference in HMW-A concentration geometric mean values from baseline to 6 months was calculated for each arm|Baseline and 6 months|1 participant in the Pioglitazone group and 2 participants in the Placebo group had blood samples collected after the 10 week visit prior to their withdrawal. They did not complete the study, but their results were included in the 6-month analysis.||percent difference in geometric mean||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836849|NCT01301066|Primary|Change of Fasting Serum Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) at 12 Weeks||12 weeks minus baseline|modified Intent To Treat (mITT) population included all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 on-treatment lipid assessment||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836850|NCT01301079|Secondary|Serum Level of Interleukin (IL)-10 24 h After the Procedure|Blood samples were drawn in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes 24 h after the surgery. The blood was centrifuged to separate the plasma and was stored at -70°C. IL-6 was analyzed using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methodology.|24 h after the procedure|||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836851|NCT01301079|Secondary|Serum Level of Interleukin (IL)-10 5h After the Procedure|Blood samples were drawn in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes 5 h after the surgery. The blood was centrifuged to separate the plasma and was stored at -70°C. IL-10 was analyzed using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methodology.|5h after the procedure|||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836852|NCT01301079|Secondary|Serum Level of Interleukin (IL)-10 Before the Procedure|Blood samples were drawn in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes before the surgery. The blood was centrifuged to separate the plasma and was stored at -70°C. IL-6 was analyzed using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methodology.|Baseline (Before the procedure)|||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836853|NCT01301079|Secondary|Serum Level of Interleukin (IL)-8 24 h After the Procedure|Blood samples were drawn in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes 24 h after the surgery. The blood was centrifuged to separate the plasma and was stored at -70°C. IL-8 was analyzed using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methodology.|24 h after the procedure|||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836854|NCT01301079|Secondary|Serum Level of Interleukin (IL)-8 5 h After the Procedure|Blood samples were drawn in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes 5 h after the surgery. The blood was centrifuged to separate the plasma and was stored at -70°C. IL-8 was analyzed using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methodology.|5 h after the procedure|||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836855|NCT01301079|Secondary|Serum Level of Interleukin (IL)-8 Before the Procedure|Blood samples were drawn in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes before the surgery. The blood was centrifuged to separate the plasma and was stored at -70°C. IL-8 was analyzed using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methodology.|Baseline (Before the procedure)|||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836856|NCT01301079|Secondary|Serum Level of Interleukin (IL)-6 24 h After the Procedure|Blood samples were drawn in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes 24 h after the surgery. The blood was centrifuged to separate the plasma and was stored at -70°C. IL-6 was analyzed using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methodology.|24 h after the procedure|||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836857|NCT01301079|Secondary|Serum Level of Interleukin (IL)-6 5 h After the Procedure|Blood samples were drawn in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes 5 h after the surgery. The blood was centrifuged to separate the plasma and was stored at -70°C. IL-6 was analyzed using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methodology.|5 h after the procedure|||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836858|NCT01301079|Secondary|Serum Level of Interleukin (IL)-6 Before the Procedure|Blood samples were drawn in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes before the surgery. The blood was centrifuged to separate the plasma and was stored at -70°C. IL-6 was analyzed using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methodology.|Baseline (Before the procedure)|||picogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836859|NCT01301079|Secondary|Allodynia as Detected With a Soft Brush in the Thenar Eminence 24 h After the Procedure|The evaluations using the soft brush were performed in the thenar eminence of the non dominant hand 24 h after the procedure|24 h after the procedure|||participants|||Number
836860|NCT01301079|Secondary|Allodynia as Detected With a Soft Brush in the Thenar Eminence Before the Procedure|The evaluations using the soft brush were performed in the thenar eminence of the nondominant hand before the procedure|Before the procedure (Baseline)|||participants|||Number
836861|NCT01301079|Secondary|Allodynia as Detected With a Soft Brush in the Periumbilical Region 24 h After the Procedure|The evaluations using the soft brush were performed 2–3 cm from the incision in the periumbilical region (where the large trocar was placed) 24 h after the procedure|24 h after the procedure|||participants|||Number
836862|NCT01301079|Secondary|Allodynia as Detected With a Soft Brush in the Periumbilical Region Before the Procedure|The evaluations using the soft brush were performed 2–3 cm from the incision in the periumbilical region (where the large trocar was placed) before the procedure|Before the procedure (Baseline)|||participants|||Number
836863|NCT01301079|Secondary|Extension of Hyperalgesia|The 300-g filament was used 24 hours after the operation to induce a stimulus and delineate the extent of hyperalgesia from the periumbilical region. The stimulus was started outside the periumbilical region, where no pain sensation was reported, and continued every 0.5 cm until the 4 points of the periumbilical scar were reached (top, right side, left side, and bottom). The first point where the patient complained of pain was marked. If no pain sensation was reported, the stimulus was terminated 0.5 cm from the incision. The distance of each point from the surgical incision was measured, and the sum of the distances of the points was determined.|24 hours after the procedure|||centimeter||Standard Deviation|Mean
836864|NCT01301079|Secondary|Hyperalgesia in the Postoperative Period as Measured With Algometer in the Periumbilical Region|The mechanical pain threshold was evaluated using an algometer. The pressure was increased by 0.1 kgf/second until the patient complained of pain. The mean of three determinations was calculated.|24 h after the procedure|||kilogram force/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
836865|NCT01301079|Secondary|Hyperalgesia in the Preoperative Period as Measured With Algometer in the Periumbilical Region|The mechanical pain threshold was evaluated using an algometer. The pressure was increased by 0.1 kgf/second until the patient complained of pain. The mean of three determinations was calculated.|Baseline (before the surgery)|||kilogram force/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
836879|NCT01301079|Secondary|Hyperalgesia in the Preoperative Period as Measured With Algometer in Thenar Eminence|The mechanical pain threshold was evaluated using an algometer. The pressure was increased by 0.1 kgf/second until the patient complained of pain. The mean of three determinations was calculated.|Baseline (before the procedure)|||kilogram force/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
836880|NCT01301079|Secondary|Hyperalgesia in the Postoperative Period as Measured With Monofilaments in the Periumbilical Region|The pain threshold was assessed using six von Frey monofilaments (0,05 g; 0,2 g; 2 g; 4 g; 10 g e 300 g) in the periumbilical region in the postoperative period (24h after the procedure). The use of different von Frey monofilaments, starting with the lightest and ending with the heaviest, was separated by at least 30 seconds to reduce any anticipated responses due to a new stimulation that was performed too soon after the preceding stimulation. Three assessments were made for each monofilament, and this was considered positive when the patient responded to two of the determinations for each monofilament.|24h after the procedure|||gram||Standard Deviation|Mean
836881|NCT01301079|Secondary|Hyperalgesia in the Preoperative Period as Measured With Monofilaments in the Periumbilical Region|The pain threshold was assessed using six von Frey monofilaments (0,05 g; 0,2 g; 2 g; 4 g; 10 g e 300 g) in the periumbilical region in the preoperative period. The use of different von Frey monofilaments, starting with the lightest and ending with the heaviest, was separated by at least 30 seconds to reduce any anticipated responses due to a new stimulation that was performed too soon after the preceding stimulation. Three assessments were made for each monofilament, and this was considered positive when the patient responded to two of the determinations for each monofilament.|Before the procedure (Baseline)|||gram||Standard Deviation|Mean
836882|NCT01301079|Secondary|Hyperalgesia in the Postoperative Period as Measured With Monofilaments in Thenar Eminence|The pain threshold was assessed using six von Frey monofilaments (0,05 g; 0,2 g; 2 g; 4 g; 10 g e 300 g) in thenar eminence in the postoperative period (24 hours after procedure). The use of different von Frey monofilaments, starting with the lightest and ending with the heaviest, was separated by at least 30 seconds to reduce any anticipated responses due to a new stimulation that was performed too soon after the preceding stimulation. Three assessments were made for each monofilament, and this was considered positive when the patient responded to two of the determinations for each monofilament.|24 hours after procedure|||gram||Standard Deviation|Mean
836883|NCT01301079|Secondary|Hyperalgesia in the Preoperative Period as Measured With Monofilaments in Thenar Eminence|The pain threshold was assessed using six von Frey monofilaments (0,05 g; 0,2 g; 2 g; 4 g; 10 g e 300 g) in thenar eminence in the preoperative period. The use of different von Frey monofilaments, starting with the lightest and ending with the heaviest, was separated by at least 30 seconds to reduce any anticipated responses due to a new stimulation that was performed too soon after the preceding stimulation. Three assessments were made for each monofilament, and this was considered positive when the patient responded to two of the determinations for each monofilament.|Before the procedure (Baseline)|||gram||Standard Deviation|Mean
836884|NCT01301079|Secondary|Morphine Consumption Within 24 h||24 hours|||milligram||Standard Deviation|Mean
836885|NCT01301079|Secondary|Time to First Morphine Supplementation||24 hours|||minutes||Full Range|Median
836886|NCT01301092|Secondary|)Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of LY2189265: Intramuscular (IM) to Subcutaneous (SC)|The results presented are Geometric Least Squares (LS) Mean. LS Mean values were controlled for participants, sequence, treatment, period and random error.|Predose up to 336 hours postdose|Participants in Part C who had pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanograms/milliliter (ng/mL)||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836887|NCT01301092|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration Time Curve (AUC) of LY2189265: Intramuscular (IM) to Subcutaneous (SC)|AUC is AUC from time zero to infinity. The results presented are Geometric Least Squares (LS) Mean. LS Mean values were controlled for participants, sequence, treatment, period and random error.|Predose up to 336 hours postdose|Participants in Part C who had pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanograms*hour/milliliter (ng*h/mL)||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836888|NCT01301092|Primary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of LY2189265: Subcutaneous (SC) to Intravenous (IV)|The results presented are Geometric Least Squares (LS) Mean. LS Mean values were controlled for participants, sequence, treatment, period and random error.|Predose up to 336 hours postdose|Participants in Part B who had pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanograms/milliliter (ng/mL)||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836889|NCT01301092|Primary|Dose Normalized Area Under the Concentration Time Curve (AUC) of LY2189265: Subcutaneous (SC) to Intravenous (IV)|AUC is AUC from time zero to infinity. The results presented are Geometric Least Squares (LS) Mean. LS Mean values were controlled for participants, sequence, treatment, period and random error.|Predose up to 336 hours postdose|Participants in Part B who had pharmacokinetic (PK) data.||nanograms*hour/milliliter/milligram||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
836890|NCT01301274|Secondary|ICU Length of Stay|ICU length of stay (in days)|180 days|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
836891|NCT01301274|Secondary|Mechanical Ventilation Free Days at 28 Day of Admission|mechanical ventilation free days at the first 28 day of starting mechanical ventilation, if the patient died the corresponding value is zero.|first 28 day after starting mechanical ventilation|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
836892|NCT01301274|Secondary|Mortality at 28 Days|Mortality in both groups will be compared 28 days after admission|28 days after admission|The analysis was per intention to treat||participants|||Number
836893|NCT01301274|Primary|Serum Sodium Levels in Both Groups|Mean serum sodium level of each group will be compared at baseline and in the first 48 hours of IV fluid infusion|first 48 hours|||mEq/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
836894|NCT01301508|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study treatment without regard to possibility of causal relationship. The SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death, initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying), persistent or significant disability or incapacity, congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study medication and up to the end of study treatment (Day 42) that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. AEs included both serious and non-serious adverse events.|Baseline (Day 1) up to Day 42|Safety analysis population included all randomized participants with confirmed usage of the study medication.||participants|||Number
836895|NCT01301508|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants With Decrease From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Severity Index (ADSI) Score at Day 14 and 42|ADSI score was used to measure the severity of participant’s AD affected lesion. It evaluated 5 signs of AD (erythema, pruritus, exudation, excoriation and lichenification) in each lesion. Each sign was rated by investigator on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition. Total ADSI score for each lesion was sum of scores of the 5 signs and ranged from 0 (none) to 15 (most severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition. Percentage of participants in whom the active lesion (ointment treated) achieved a greater decrease from baseline to Days 14, 42 in ADSI as compared to vehicle lesion (vehicle treated) and, in whom the vehicle lesion (vehicle treated) achieved a greater decrease from baseline to Days 14, 42 as compared to active lesion (ointment treated) were reported in this outcome measure.|Baseline (Day 1), Day 14, Day 42|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
836896|NCT01301508|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Decrease From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Severity Index (ADSI) Score at Day 28|ADSI score was used to measure the severity of participant’s AD affected lesion. It evaluated 5 signs of AD (erythema, pruritus, exudation, excoriation and lichenification) in each lesion. Each sign was rated by investigator on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition. Total ADSI score for each lesion was sum of scores of the 5 signs and ranged from 0 (none) to 15 (most severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition. Percentage of participants in whom the active lesion (ointment treated) achieved a greater decrease from baseline to Day 28 in ADSI as compared to vehicle lesion (vehicle treated) and, in whom the vehicle lesion (vehicle treated) achieved a greater decrease from baseline to Day 28 as compared to active lesion (ointment treated) were reported in this outcome measure.|Baseline (Day 1), Day 28|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
836897|NCT01301508|Primary|Atopic Dermatitis Severity Index (ADSI) Score at Day 42|ADSI score was used to measure the severity of participant’s AD affected lesion. It evaluated 5 signs of AD (erythema, pruritus, exudation, excoriation and lichenification) in each lesion. Each sign was rated by investigator on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition. Total ADSI score for each lesion was sum of scores of the 5 signs and ranged from 0 (none) to 15 (most severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition.|Day 42|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836898|NCT01301508|Primary|Atopic Dermatitis Severity Index (ADSI) Score at Day 28|ADSI score was used to measure the severity of participant’s AD affected lesion. It evaluated 5 signs of AD (erythema, pruritus, exudation, excoriation and lichenification) in each lesion. Each sign was rated by investigator on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition. Total ADSI score for each lesion was sum of scores of the 5 signs and ranged from 0 (none) to 15 (most severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition.|Day 28|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836899|NCT01301508|Primary|Atopic Dermatitis Severity Index (ADSI) Score at Day 14|ADSI score was used to measure the severity of participant’s AD affected lesion. It evaluated 5 signs of AD (erythema, pruritus, exudation, excoriation and lichenification) in each lesion. Each sign was rated by investigator on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition. Total ADSI score for each lesion was sum of scores of the 5 signs and ranged from 0 (none) to 15 (most severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition.|Day 14|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836900|NCT01301508|Primary|Atopic Dermatitis Severity Index (ADSI) Score at Baseline (Day 1)|ADSI score was used to measure the severity of participant’s atopic dermatitis (AD) affected lesion. It evaluated 5 signs of AD (erythema, pruritus, exudation, excoriation and lichenification) in each lesion. Each sign was rated by investigator on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition. Total ADSI score for each lesion was sum of scores of the 5 signs and ranged from 0 (none) to 15 (most severe), where higher score indicated more severe condition.|Baseline (Day 1)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who received study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836901|NCT01301729|Secondary|Time to Progression|Time to progression was defined as the time from the date of enrollment until the date of progressive disease.|From the date of enrollment until the date of progressive disease (up to 28 months)|ITT data set is defined as all the participants who are eligible through screening, register and enter the study.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836902|NCT01301729|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate|Clinical benefit rate was assessed according to RECIST 1.0 and defined as the percentage of participants who experienced a CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) for at least 6 months. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions. PR was defined as greater than or equal to (≥) 30 % decrease in the sum of appropriate diameters of all target measurable lesions, no progress in the non-measurable disease, and no new lesions. SD was defined as small changes that do not meet above criteria.|up to 28 months|ITT data set is defined as all the participants who are eligible through screening, register and enter the study.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836903|NCT01301729|Secondary|Determination of Biomarkers Indicative for Response (Serum and Tumour Tissue Analyses)||up to 28 months|Biomarker analysis was not performed as the eligible biomarker sample quantity was too limited for testing.|||||
836904|NCT01301729|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Adverse Event (AE)|An AE was defined as any adverse medical event that occurred after the participant used the investigational medicinal product (IMP) or other intervention behaviors specified by the protocol in the clinical trial regardless of relationship to the study treatment.|Up to 28 days after last infusion of the study drug (28 months)|Safety population is defined as all enrolled participants and have taken at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
836905|NCT01301729|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of enrollment to the date of death due to any cause.|Time from enrollment to the date of death (up to 28 months)|ITT data set is defined as all the participants who are eligible through screening, register and enter the study.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836906|NCT01301729|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response was defined as the time from when a PR or CR was first documented until the date of documented PD or death. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions. PR was defined as greater than or equal to (≥) 30 % decrease in the sum of appropriate diameters of all target measurable lesions, no progress in the non-measurable disease, and no new lesions. PD was defined as 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions.|From the time of PR or CR until the date of PD or death (up to 28 months)|ITT data set is defined as all the participants who are eligible through screening, register and enter the study. Here, number of participants are the participants who had response.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836907|NCT01301729|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|Overall response rate was assessed using RECIST 1.0 and defined as the percentage of participants that achieved a complete response (CR) or a partial response (PR). CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions. PR was defined as greater than or equal to (≥) 30 % decrease in the sum of appropriate diameters of all target measurable lesions, no progress in the non-measurable disease, and no new lesions.|up to 28 months|ITT data set is defined as all the participants who are eligible through screening, register and enter the study.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836908|NCT01301729|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.0 and was defined as the time from the date when the participant signed the informed consent form (ICF) until death or progressive disease (PD). PD was defined as 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions. PFS and associated confidence intervals were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From the date of informed consent to the date of death or progressive disease (up to 28 months)|Intention to treat (ITT) data set is defined as all the participants who are eligible through screening, register and enter the study.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
836909|NCT01301742|Secondary|Total Empa: Area Under the Curve 0 to Time of Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|"Area under the plasma concentration-time curve of the analyte from time 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point.
The standard deviation presented in the analyses is actually the intra-individual geometric standard deviation (gCV)."|0 minutes (min), 20 min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 23h, 36h, 47h, 71h after the first dose|PK set: All subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of trial medication who provided at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic (PK) endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
836910|NCT01301742|Primary|Total Empa: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of total Empagliflozin (Empa) in plasma, per period.
The standard deviation presented in the analysis is actually the intra-individual geometric standard deviation (gCV)."|0 minutes (min), 20min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 23h, 36h, 47h, 71h after the first dose|PK set: All subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of trial medication who provided at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic (PK) endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
836911|NCT01301742|Primary|Total Empa: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the plasma concentration-time curve of the analyte from time 0 extrapolated to infinity.
The standard deviation presented in the analysis is actually the intra-individual geometric standard deviation (gCV)."|0 minutes (min), 20 min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 23h, 36h, 47h, 71h after the first dose|PK set: All subjects who had taken at least 1 dose of trial medication who provided at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary pharmacokinetic (PK) endpoint without an important protocol violation with respect to the PK evaluation.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
836912|NCT01301833|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Immuno Reactive Insulin (IRI) at Week 52||Baseline and 52 weeks|The full analysis set, consisting of all type 2 diabetic patients, who received at least one dose of study drug and who had at least one efficacy data after the treatment of study drug. Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline observed value was carried forward and used for Week 52 where data was missing.||μU / mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836913|NCT01301833|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Glucagon at Week 52||Baseline and 52 weeks|The full analysis set, consisting of all type 2 diabetic patients, who received at least one dose of study drug and who had at least one efficacy data after the treatment of study drug. Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline observed value was carried forward and used for Week 52 where data was missing.||pg / mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836914|NCT01301833|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 52||Baseline and 52 weeks|The full analysis set, consisting of all type 2 diabetic patients, who received at least one dose of study drug and who had at least one efficacy data after the treatment of study drug. Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline observed value was carried forward and used for Week 52 where data was missing.||mg / dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836915|NCT01301833|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Week 52||Baseline and 52 weeks|The full analysis set, consisting of all type 2 diabetic patients, who received at least one dose of study drug and who had at least one efficacy data after the treatment of study drug. Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline observed value was carried forward and used for Week 52 where data was missing.||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
836916|NCT01301833|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) were defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product reported from first dose of study drug through 14 days after receiving the last dose of study drug.|52 Weeks|Safety set, consisting of all patients, who received at least one dose of study drug and who had at least one safety data after the treatment of study drug.||participants|||Number
836917|NCT01301950|Secondary|To Compare the Differences in Operating Room Efficiency as a Function of Institution Type and Geographical Location||Intraoperative|No operating room efficiency data was analyzed as a function of geography and institution, resulting in a sample size of 0.|||||
836918|NCT01301950|Secondary|Costs Associated With Conventional Versus TruMatch® Total Knee Arthroplasty Surgical Procedures|Compare costs associated with surgery using conventional surgical technique versus TruMatch® primary total knee replacements .|Intraoperative (Total duration of procedure)|No cost data were collected, resulting in a sample size of 0.|||||
836919|NCT01301950|Secondary|Turnover Time (Time to Clean Operating Room After Surgery is Completed)|Turnover Time for conventional versus TruMatch® primary total knee replacements as recorded by video time analysis [minutes].|Intraoperative (Time to clean Operating Room after surgery is completed)|1 site (9 subjects) was excluded from Turnover Time analysis as this substep could not be accurately assessed due to unexpected difficulties during video collection.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
836920|NCT01301950|Secondary|Operating Room Setup - Operating Room Cleaned up From Previous Case to Surgical Draping Complete|Operating Room setup time for conventional versus TruMatch® primary total knee replacements as recorded by video time analysis [minutes]|Intraoperative (Operating Room cleaned up from previous case to surgical draping complete)|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
836921|NCT01301950|Primary|Surgical Procedure Time to Compare Skin-to-Skin Time for Conventional Versus TruMatch® Primary Total Knee Replacements|Skin-to skin time for conventional versus TruMatch® primary total knee replacements (recorded by Investigator on Operative case report forms).|Intraoperative (Time from first incision to first stitch)|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
836922|NCT01301963|Secondary|Compare Need for Remobilization Between Mobilization Groups|Using the Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate.|Day 1||||||
836923|NCT01301963|Secondary|Compare Need for Hospitalization During Mobilization Between Mobilization Groups||Day 1||||||
836924|NCT01301963|Secondary|Compare Days of Apheresis Between Mobilization Groups|Using the Wilcoxon Rand Sum Test|Day 1||||||
836925|NCT01301963|Secondary|Compare Hematopoietic Stem Cells/kg Collections Between Different Mobilization Regimens in Those Patients Who Are Crossed Over From One Mobilization Regimen to the Other|Patients will be randomized to receive either G-CSF or Plerixafor with G-CSF. All patients will undergo at least 2 days of leukopheresis. Cells/kg between these 2 arms will be compared. For those patients that do not reach the target goal will undergo a wash-out period and cross over to the other study arm.|By day 1||||||
836926|NCT01301963|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving Target Goal CD34+ Cells Dose||In =< 5 days of leukaphereses|Due to low enrollment (10% of anticipated participants), no analysis is being done on data collected in this study|||||
836927|NCT01301963|Primary|Ability to Reach Target Collection of 5 x 10^6 CD34+ Cells/kg||In =< 2 days of leukaphereses|due to low enrollment (10% of anticipated participants), no analysis is being done on data collected in this study|||||
836928|NCT01302041|Secondary|PSA Doubling Time|PSA doubling time was to be calculated from the slope estimated from a linear regression of the natural log of PSA fitted on time, if the slope was positive. Since the slope was negative for all participants, PSA doubling time could not be calculated.|From Baseline to Week 25|Safety Analysis Set with a positive PSA versus time slope|||||
836929|NCT01302041|Secondary|Time to PSA Progression|Time to PSA progression is defined as the time interval from the first study drug dose to the first date of PSA progression. PSA progression is defined as a ≥ 25% increase in PSA with an absolute increase of ≥ 2 ng/mL above the nadir unless the PSA next measurement(s), if available, does not confirm the PSA progression.|From first dose until the data cut-off date of 28 December 2013; median duration of treatment was 754.0 days (range of 52-929 days).|Safety Analysis Set||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836930|NCT01302041|Secondary|Time to PSA ≤ 0.1 ng/ml|"Time to PSA ≤ 0.1 ng/ml is defined as the time interval from the first study drug dose to the first date a decline in PSA to a result of 0.1 ng/ml or below was recorded.
Time to PSA ≤ 0.1 ng/ml was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method."|From first dose until the data cut-off date of 28 December 2013; median duration of treatment was 754.0 days (range of 52-929 days).|Safety Analysis Set||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836931|NCT01302041|Secondary|Time to PSA ≤ 4 ng/ml|Time to PSA ≤ 4 ng/ml is defined as the time interval from the first study drug dose to the first date a decline in PSA to a result of 4 ng/ml or below was recorded. Time to PSA ≤ 4 ng/ml was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From first dose until the data cut-off date of 28 December 2013; median duration of treatment was 754.0 days (range of 52-929 days).|Safety Analysis Set||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836932|NCT01302041|Secondary|Time to PSA Decline ≥ 90%|Time to PSA decline ≥ 90% is defined as the time interval from the first study drug dose to the first date a decline from Baseline in PSA level of 90% or greater was recorded. Time to PSA decline ≥ 90% was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From first dose until the data cut-off date of 28 December 2013; median duration of treatment was 754.0 days (range of 52-929 days)|Safety Analysis Set||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836933|NCT01302041|Secondary|Time to PSA Response|Time to PSA response (PSA decline ≥ 80% from Baseline) is defined as the time interval from the first study drug dose to the first date a decline from Baseline in PSA level of 80% or greater was recorded. Time to response was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From first dose until the data cut-off date of 28 December 2013; median duration of treatment was 754.0 days (range of 52-929 days)|Safety Analysis Set||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836934|NCT01302041|Secondary|Maximum Decline From Baseline in PSA|The maximum decline from Baseline in PSA was calculated as the largest reduction from Baseline in PSA level that occurred at any point after treatment start up to Week 25 and up to and including the assessment made at the safety follow-up visit, divided by the PSA Baseline value and multiplied by 100, i.e., the maximum percent change from baseline.|Baseline to Week 25 and from Baseline up to the data cut-off date of 28 December 2013; median duration of treatment was 754.0 days (range of 52-929)|Safety Analysis Set||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836935|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PSA ≤ 0.1 ng/ml|"Participants with unknown or missing PSA results at Week 25 or who discontinued prior to Week 25 were considered non-responders at Week 25.
Participants with unknown or missing PSA results at Week 49 or Week 97 were considered non-responders."|Weeks 25, 49 and 97|Safety Analysis Set; Week 49 and 97 analyses include participants who were on study at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
836936|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PSA ≤ 4 ng/ml|"Participants with unknown or missing PSA results at Week 25 or who discontinued prior to Week 25 were considered non-responders at Week 25.
Participants with unknown or missing PSA results at Week 49 or Week 97 were considered non-responders."|Weeks 25, 49 and 97|Safety Analysis Set; Week 49 and 97 analyses include participants who were on study at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
837731|NCT01308476|Secondary|Physicians Recommendation of the SMS System|Only physicians of patients in the SMS reminder group were asked if they would recommend the SMS system (no, yes, don't know)|Visit 2 (12 weeks) and visit 3 (24 weeks)|FAS for SMS reminder group only||Percentage of participants|||Number
836937|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a 90% or Greater Reduction From Baseline in PSA Level|"Participants with unknown or missing PSA results at Week 25 or who discontinued prior to Week 25 were considered non-responders at Week 25.
Participants with unknown or missing PSA results at Week 49 or Week 97 were considered non-responders."|Baseline and Weeks 25, 49 and 97|Safety Analysis Set; Week 49 and 97 analyses include participants who were on study at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
836938|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PSA Response at Weeks 49 and 97|A PSA response was defined as a decline from baseline in PSA level of 80% or greater. Blood samples for PSA were collected and analyzed at a central laboratory. Participants with an unknown or missing response or who discontinued prior to Week 49 or Week 97 for any reason were treated as non-responders.|Baseline and Weeks 49 and 97|Safety Analysis Set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836939|NCT01302041|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of Enzalutamide Metabolite M2 at Pre-dose (Ctrough)||Pre-dose at Weeks 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 13, 21 and 25|"Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set with available data at each time point (indicated by N)."||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836940|NCT01302041|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of Enzalutamide at Pre-dose (Ctrough)||Pre-dose at Weeks 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 13, 21 and 25|"Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (participants who had taken at least 1 dose of study drug and who had at least 1 pharmacokinetic concentration value) with available data at each time point (indicated by N)."||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
836941|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Free Testosterone||Baseline and Weeks 25 and 49|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (Indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836942|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Testosterone||Baseline and Weeks 25 and 49|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836943|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Prolactin||Baseline and Weeks 25 and 49|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (Indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836944|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Luteinizing Hormone (LH)||Baseline and Weeks 25 and 49|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (Indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836945|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Follicle-stimulating Hormone (FSH)||Baseline and Weeks 25 and 49|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (Indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836946|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Estradiol||Baseline and Weeks 25 and 49|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836947|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Dihydrotestosterone (DHT)||Baseline and Week 25 and 49|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836948|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA)||Baseline and Weeks 25 and 49|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836949|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Androstenedione||Baseline and Weeks 25 and 49|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836950|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Sex Hormone-binding Globulin (SHBG)||Baseline and Weeks 25 and 49|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836951|NCT01302041|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in PSA||Baseline and Weeks 25, 49 and 97|"Safety Analysis Set with available data at each time point (indicated by N)"||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
836952|NCT01302041|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"Each adverse events (AE) was assessed by the investigator for causal relationship to the study drug; those deemed possibly or probably related to study drug are reported as drug regimen related AEs (DRRAEs).
A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose:
Resulted in death
Was life-threatening
Resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity
Resulted in congenital anomaly or birth defect
Required inpatient hospitalization or led to prolongation of hospitalization
Other medically important events."|From first dose of study drug until 30 days after last dose. Adverse events with an onset date occurring within 2 years (i.e., before or on Day 730), as of the cut-off date of 28 December 2013, are reported.|Safety Analysis Set||participants|||Number
836953|NCT01302041|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) Response at Week 25|"A PSA response was defined as a decline from Baseline in PSA level of 80% or greater. Blood samples for PSA were collected and analyzed at a central laboratory.
Participants with an unknown or missing response or who discontinued prior to Week 25 for any reason were treated as non-responders."|Baseline and Week 25|Safety Analysis Set (all participants who had taken at least 1 dose of study drug)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836954|NCT01293006|Secondary|Mean Arterial SaO2 During Total Sleep Time|Evaluation of the effect of multiple dose suvorexant on mean oxygen saturation (SaO2) during total sleep time as measured by pulse oximetry. Lower SaO2 values are associated with sleep impairment. Total sleep time is the total of all rapid eye movement (REM) and non-REM sleep in a sleep episode.|Day 1 of each period|Twenty-four of the 25 participants were included in the primary evaluation of SaO2 and AHI data; one participant was excluded due to a protocol violation.||Percentage of Oxygen Saturation||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836955|NCT01293006|Secondary|Mean Arterial SaO2 for Different Sleep Stages|Comparison of the mean SaO2 during different sleep stages (REM, Non-REM, and awake) following multiple dose administration of suvorexant and placebo. Lower SaO2 values are associated with sleep impairment. Sleep stages were determined by polysomnography.|Day 1 and Day 4 of each period|Twenty-four of the 25 participants were included in the primary evaluation of SaO2 and AHI data; one participant was excluded due to a protocol violation. During the Placebo periods, there were 22 evaluable participants at Day 4; 2 participants had either no data or missing data.||Percentage of Oxygen Saturation||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836969|NCT01293240|Primary|Visual Clarity|Visual clarity was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. Visual clarity was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|2 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836956|NCT01293006|Secondary|Mean Apnea/Hypopnea Index (AHI)|Evaluation of the effect of multiple dose administration of suvorexant on AHI as measured by polysomnography. The AHI is an overall index of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) severity. The AHI is calculated by dividing the number of apneas and hypopneas by the number of hours of sleep. AHI values are categorized as mild OSA = 5 to <15/hr and moderate OSA = 15 to <30/hr.|Day 1 and Day 4 of each period|Twenty-four of the 25 participants were included in the primary evaluation of SaO2 and AHI data; one participant was excluded due to a protocol violation. During the Placebo periods, there were 22 evaluable participants at Day 4; 2 participants had either no data or missing data.||Events per hour||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836957|NCT01293006|Secondary|Percentage of Total Sleep Time in Which SaO2 is Less Than 90%, 85% or 80%|Evaluation of the percentage of the night in which SaO2 is less than 90%, less than 85% and less than 80% following multiple dose administration of suvorexant and placebo. Lower SaO2 values are associated with sleep impairment.|Day 1 and Day 4 of each period|Twenty-four of the 25 participants were included in the primary evaluation of SaO2 and AHI data; one participant was excluded due to a protocol violation. During the Placebo periods, there were 22 evaluable participants at Day 4; 2 participants had either no data or missing data.||Percentage of Total Sleep Time||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836958|NCT01293006|Primary|Number of Participants Discontinued From Study Drug Due to an AE|An AE is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration whether or not considered related to the use of the product.|Up to 15 days|All participants were included in the Safety Population.||participants|||Number
836959|NCT01293006|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) is any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration whether or not considered related to the use of the product.|Up to 14 days after last dose|All participants were included in the Safety Population.||participants|||Number
836960|NCT01293006|Primary|Mean Arterial Oxygen Saturation (SaO2) During Total Sleep Time|Evaluation of the effect of multiple dose suvorexant (MK-4305) on SaO2 during total sleep time as measured by pulse oximetry. Lower SaO2 values are associated with sleep impairment. Total sleep time is the total of all rapid eye movement (REM) and non-REM sleep in a sleep episode.|Day 4 of each period|Twenty-four of the 25 participants were included in the primary evaluation of SaO2 and AHI data; one participant was excluded due to a protocol violation. During the Placebo periods, there were 22 evaluable participants at Day 4; 2 participants had either no data or missing data.||Percentage of Oxygen Saturation||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836961|NCT01293032|Primary|The Proportion of Patients With RS 11-25 Who Refused the Assigned Treatment|The primary purpose of this trial is to determine the feasibility of carrying out a large multi-center trial with a similar design. Feasibility, in terms of less than 1/3 of patients with intermediate (11-25) Recurrence Score (RS) who refused the assigned treatment (Group 2) or refused randomization between hormonal (Arm 1) or chemotherapy (Arm 2). The confidence interval will be 95%. The proportion (and 95% confidence interval) of patients with RS 11-25 who refuse the assigned treatment will be calculated.|Up to 2 years|Patients with an intermediate RS(11-25) assigned to Group 2, Arm 1, and Arm 2 were combined in the analysis.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
836962|NCT01293084|Secondary|Percent Mucociliary Clearance at 90 Minutes||90 minutes|Data for participants that completed and received both 7% saline and 0.12% saline.||percentage mucociliary clearance||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836963|NCT01293084|Primary|Percent Mucociliary Clearance at 60 Minutes||60 minutes|Participants that completed received both 7% saline and 0.12% saline over the duration of the study||percentage mucociliary clearance||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
836964|NCT01293240|Primary|Corrected Visual Acuity|Each eye was tested individually while the participant read distant charts in normal lighting. Corrected visual acuity was measured using a Snellen chart, which was converted into logMAR units (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution). A 20/20 Snellen acuity equates to a logMAR acuity of 0.0 and is considered normal distance eyesight. Positive logMAR values indicate poorer vision, and negative values denote better visual acuity.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
836965|NCT01293240|Primary|Corrected Visual Acuity|Each eye was tested individually while the participant read distant charts in normal lighting. Corrected visual acuity was measured using a Snellen chart, which was converted into logMAR units (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution). A 20/20 Snellen acuity equates to a logMAR acuity of 0.0 and is considered normal distance eyesight. Positive logMAR values indicate poorer vision, and negative values denote better visual acuity.|2 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
836966|NCT01293240|Primary|Lens Deposits|Protein and lipid deposits on the contact lens surface were assessed for each eye by the investigator using a biomicroscope, which magnifies the appearance of the contact lens on the wearer’s eye. Deposits were graded on a scale of 0 to 4, with 0 being none and 4 being severe.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
836967|NCT01293240|Primary|Lens Deposits|Protein and lipid deposits on the contact lens surface were assessed for each eye by the investigator using a biomicroscope, which magnifies the appearance of the contact lens on the wearer’s eye. Deposits were graded on a scale of 0 to 4, with 0 being none and 4 being severe.|2 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
836968|NCT01293240|Primary|Visual Clarity|Visual clarity was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Visual clarity was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836970|NCT01293240|Primary|Ocular Redness|Ocular redness was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Ocular redness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very red and 10 being not red.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836971|NCT01293240|Primary|Ocular Redness|Ocular redness was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. Ocular redness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very red and 10 being not red.|2 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836972|NCT01293240|Primary|End of Day Dryness|End of day dryness was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. End of day dryness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very dry and 10 being not dry.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836973|NCT01293240|Primary|End of Day Dryness|End of day dryness was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. End of day dryness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very dry and 10 being not dry.|2 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836974|NCT01293240|Primary|Overall Comfort|Overall comfort was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Overall comfort was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|4 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836975|NCT01293240|Primary|Overall Comfort|Overall comfort was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. Overall comfort was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.|2 weeks|Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836976|NCT01293539|Primary|Number of Patients Who Complete Therapy Without the Need for Additional Treatment Including Systemic Chemotherapy, External Beam Radiation, or Enucleation.|The primary objective of this study is to show that intra-arterial delivery of the chemotherapeutic agent is successful in treating intraocular retinoblastoma, defined as avoiding systemic chemotherapy, external beam radiation, and enucleation.|Within the first six months after the initial treatment.|||Participants|||Count of Participants
836977|NCT01293695|Primary|Hot Flash Related Daily Interference Scale (HFRDIS)|This questionnaire is used to measure the effects of hot flashes on women as they go about their daily activities. Answers on the scale can range 0 (Do Not Interfere) to 10 (Completely Interfere). The total score was computed by averaging the subjective ratings over the 10 items. A lower score indicates better outcome.|6 Weeks and 12 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836978|NCT01293695|Secondary|Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)|The Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) is a self-report inventory designed to measure sleep quality. The participants self rate their sleep quality over seven areas of sleep.The questions about sleep quality are answered on a 0-3 scale with higher scores indicating greater sleep pathology. The global score is determined by summing the raw scores of the seven sleep components. The global score can range from 0 - 21 and total scores above 5 are normally considered indicative of poor sleep quality.|6 Weeks and 12 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836979|NCT01293695|Secondary|Sternal Skin Conductance Monitor Used to Physiologically Measure Skin Moisture|As a secondary outcome, hot flashes were measured using a Biolog ambulatory recorder. Skin conductance was expressed in micro Siemens (0 to infinity) and the final value was obtained by averaging the recorded skin conductance for a period of 24 hours. Lower skin conductance measure indicates less sweating.|6 Weeks and 12 Weeks|Analysis was conducted on all available physiological data to determine hot flash frequency. Data was missing for 29 participants in the hypnosis group and 17 participants in the structured attention group.||Micro Siemens||Standard Deviation|Mean
836980|NCT01293695|Primary|Hot Flash Score|"Hot Flash Score is a product of frequency of hot flashes × severity of hot flashes, which could range from 0 (best possible outcome) to infinity (worst possible outcome).
Hot flash frequency and hot flash severity were obtained using the Hot Flash Symptoms Diary. Participants recorded their daily hot flashes marking each hot flash (frequency) and rating the severity of each as mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3), and very severe (4).
The values presented represent the average of daily hot flash scores."|6 Weeks and 12 Weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836981|NCT01293695|Primary|Hot Flash Frequency|The Hot Flash Symptoms Diary was used to measure hot flash frequency. Participants recorded their hot flashes over seven days by daily frequency and severity. This instrument provides a measure of hot flash frequency and hot flash score (product of frequency x severity).|6 Weeks and 12 Weeks|||hot flashes per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
836982|NCT01302054|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With No UUI Episodes (Diary Dry Rate)|UUI episodes were defined as those with the urinary sensation scale (USS) rating of 5 in the diary. USS range from 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 4, Week 12|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data were imputed by LOCF. N (number of participants analyzed): participants with baseline UUI episodes >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from baseline at Week 4 and 12 (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
837022|NCT01302691|Secondary|Change in Mean Trough Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (SiSBP)|Sitting systolic blood pressure was measured by automated sphygmomanometer pre-dose on Day 1 (baseline) and at 24 ± 2 hours after the last study drug administration at Week 8. The difference between the baseline and Week 8 assessments was calculated and summarized by treatment arm.|Baseline and Week 8|All participants that received at least one dose of study treatment, had at least 1 post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint, and had baseline data||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
836983|NCT01302054|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With More Than (>) 50 Percent (%) Reduction in UUI Episodes at Week 12 as Compared to Baseline|UUI episodes were defined as those with the urinary sensation scale (USS) rating of 5 in the diary. USS range from 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data were imputed by LOCF. N (number of participants analyzed): participants with baseline UUI episodes >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from baseline at Week 12 (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
836984|NCT01302054|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With More Than (>) 50 Percent (%) Reduction in UUI Episodes at Week 12 as Compared to Week -2|UUI episodes were defined as those with the urinary sensation scale (USS) rating of 5 in the diary. USS range from 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week -2, Week 12|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data were imputed by LOCF. N (number of participants analyzed): participants with Week -2 UUI episodes >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from baseline at Week 12 (LOCF).||percentage of participants|||Number
836985|NCT01302054|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) Domains and Total HRQL Score of Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) at Week 12|OAB-q: self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire, assesses how much participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Questions 9 to 33 constitute HRQL, includes domains: concern, coping, sleep, and social function. HRQL domain and total raw score derived as sum of scores. Transformed score range 0 to 100 (Total HRQL or domain) = [(Highest possible raw score-Actual total raw score)/Raw score range]*100. Higher transformed scores indicative of better HRQL.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed): participants with non-missing change from baseline value at Week 12.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836986|NCT01302054|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) Symptom Bother Score at Week 12|OAB-q: a self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire that assesses how much the participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated by participant on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Symptom bother score derived as sum of scores for questions 1-8; lowest possible raw score: 8; highest possible score: 48. Data analyzed based on transformation of the score to a 0 to 100 scale [(Actual total raw score – lowest possible value of raw score)/range]*100. Higher scores values indicative of greater symptom bother. Change=observation minus baseline.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed): participants with non-missing change from baseline value at Week 12.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
836987|NCT01302054|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Urgency Perception Scale (UPS) at Week 12|UPS: single-item, self-administered validated questionnaire. Participant answered: “Which of the following would typically describe your experience when you have a desire to urinate?” on a 3-point scale, 1=usually not able to hold urine; 2=usually able to hold urine (without leaking) until I reach a toilet if I go to the toilet immediately; 3= usually able to finish what I am doing before going to the toilet (without leaking). Change = observation minus baseline. Results categorized as Deterioration (Negative change); no change (Score change=0); improvement (Positive change).|Baseline, Week 12|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed): participants with non-missing change from baseline value at Week 12.||participants|||Number
836988|NCT01302054|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) at Week 12|"PPBC: single-item, self-administered validated questionnaire. Participant answered: “Which of the following statements describes your bladder condition best at the moment? on a 6-point scale, 1=no problems at all; 2=some very minor problems; 3=some minor problems; 4=some moderate problems; 5=severe problems; 6=many severe problems. Change=observation minus baseline. Results categorized as Deterioration (Positive change from baseline); No Change (scores change=0); Minor Improvement (negative score change in magnitude of 1); Major Improvement (negative score change in magnitude of >=2)."|Baseline, Week 12|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed): participants with non-missing change from baseline value at Week 12.||participants|||Number
836989|NCT01302054|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Micturition-Related Urgency Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 12|The mean number of micturition-related urgency episodes per 24 hours was calculated as the total number of micturitions with USS rating of greater than or equal to 3 divided by the total number of days that diary data was collected at that visit. USS range from 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data were imputed by LOCF. Here ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed): participants with baseline urgency episodes >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from baseline at Week 12 (LOCF).||episodes per 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
836990|NCT01302054|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Micturitions Per 24 Hours at Week 12|Micturitions include episodes of voluntary micturition and episodes of Urgency Urinary Incontinence (UUI). UUI episodes were defined as those micturitions with USS rating of 5 in the diary in participants with UUI at baseline. USS rating 5: Unable to hold; leak urine.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data were imputed by LOCF. Here ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed): participants with baseline micturitions >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from baseline at Week 12 (LOCF).||micturitions per 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
837732|NCT01308476|Secondary|Physicians Assessment of Usefulness of the SMS System|Only physicians of patients in the SMS reminder group were asked to assess the usefulness of the SMS system by the categories very helpful, helpful and not helpful.|Visit 2 (12 weeks) and visit 3 (24 weeks)|FAS for SMS reminder group only||Percentage of participants|||Number
836991|NCT01302054|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Urgency Urinary Incontinence (UUI) Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 12|UUI episodes were defined as those with the urinary sensation scale (USS) rating of 5 in the diary. USS range from 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Baseline, Week 12|Full Analysis set (FAS): all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data were imputed by LOCF. N (number of participants analyzed): participants with baseline UUI episodes >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from baseline at Week 12 (LOCF).||episodes per 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
836992|NCT01302054|Primary|Mean Number of Urgency Urinary Incontinence (UUI) Episodes Per 24 Hours|UUI episodes were defined as those with the urinary sensation scale (USS) rating of 5 in the diary. USS range from 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Baseline, Week 12|Full analysis set:all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study treatment, had baseline/post-baseline efficacy assessment. Last Observation Carried Forward(LOCF) was used. N(number of participants analyzed):participants with baseline UUI episodes >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from baseline at Week 12(LOCF).||episodes per 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
836993|NCT01302067|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Became Dry at Week 12.|Percentage of participants with no UUI episode for the three day diary, the numerator being the number of participants with no UUI at a visit and the denominator the total number of participants with UUI >0 at baseline. UUI episodes defined as those with USS rating of 5 (unable to hold; leak urine) in the diary.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. Number of participants with Baseline UUI >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from baseline to Week 12.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836994|NCT01302067|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Became Dry at Week 4.|Percentage of participants with no UUI episode for the three day diary, the numerator being the number of participants with no UUI at a visit and the denominator the total number of participants with UUI>0 at baseline. UUI episodes defined as those with USS rating of 5 (unable to hold; leak urine) in the diary|Week 4|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with baseline UUI >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from baseline to Week 4.||Percentage of participants|||Number
836995|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL)-Total Score of Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) at Week 12.|OAB-q: self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire, assesses how much participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Questions 9 to 33 constitute HRQL, includes domains: concern, coping, sleep, and social function. HRQL domain and total raw score derived as sum of scores. Transformed score range 0 to 100 (Total HRQL or domain) = [(Highest possible raw score-Actual total raw score)/Raw score range]*100. Higher transformed scores indicative of better HRQL.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with non-missing change from BL value at Week 12.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836996|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL)-Social Interaction Domain and Total Score of Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) at Week 12.|OAB-q: self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire, assesses how much participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Questions 9 to 33 constitute HRQL, includes domains: concern, coping, sleep, and social function. HRQL domain and total raw score derived as sum of scores. Transformed score range 0 to 100 (Total HRQL or domain) = [(Highest possible raw score-Actual total raw score)/Raw score range]*100. Higher transformed scores indicative of better HRQL.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with non-missing change from BL value at Week 12.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836997|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL)-Sleep Domain and Total Score of Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) at Week 12.|OAB-q: self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire, assesses how much participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Questions 9 to 33 constitute HRQL, includes domains: concern, coping, sleep, and social function. HRQL domain and total raw score derived as sum of scores. Transformed score range 0 to 100 (Total HRQL or domain) = [(Highest possible raw score-Actual total raw score)/Raw score range]*100. Higher transformed scores indicative of better HRQL.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with non-missing change from BL value at Week 12.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
836998|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL)-Concern Domain and Total Score of Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) at Week 12.|OAB-q: self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire, assesses how much participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Questions 9 to 33 constitute HRQL, includes domains: concern, coping, sleep, and social function. HRQL domain and total raw score derived as sum of scores. Transformed score range 0 to 100 (Total HRQL or domain) = [(Highest possible raw score-Actual total raw score)/Raw score range]*100. Higher transformed scores indicative of better HRQL.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with non-missing change from BL value at Week 12.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837007|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage of UUI Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 12.|UUI episodes were defined as those with the USS rating of 5 in the diary. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. LOCF was used to impute missing data at Week 12. The analysis included participants with BL UUI >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 12.||Episodes per 24 hours||Full Range|Median
836999|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL)-Coping Domain and Total Score of Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) at Week 12.|OAB-q: self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire, assesses how much participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Questions 9 to 33 constitute HRQL, includes domains: concern, coping, sleep, and social function. HRQL domain and total raw score derived as sum of scores. Transformed score range 0 to 100 (Total HRQL or domain) = [(Highest possible raw score-Actual total raw score)/Raw score range]*100. Higher transformed scores indicative of better HRQL.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with non-missing change from BL value at Week 12.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837000|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) Symptom Bother Score at Week 12.|OAB-q: a self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire that assesses how much the participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated by participant on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Symptom bother score derived as sum of scores for questions 1-8; lowest possible raw score: 8; highest possible score: 48. Data analyzed based on transformation of the score to a 0 to 100 scale [(Actual total raw score – lowest possible value of raw score)/range]*100. Higher scores values indicative of greater symptom bother.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with non-missing change from baseline value at Week 12.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837001|NCT01302067|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Urgency Perception Scale (UPS) at Week 12.|UPS: single-item, self-administered validated questionnaire. Participant answered: “Which of the following would typically describe your experience when you have a desire to urinate?” on a 3-point scale, 1=usually not able to hold urine; 2=usually able to hold urine (without leaking) until I reach a toilet if I go to the toilet immediately; 3= usually able to finish what I am doing before going to the toilet (without leaking). Change = observation minus baseline. Results categorized as Deterioration (Negative change); no change (Score change=0); improvement (Positive change).|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with non-missing change from baseline value at Week 12.||Participants|||Number
837002|NCT01302067|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) at Week 12.|PPBC: a self-administered, single-item, questionnaire that asks participants to describe their perception of their bladder-related problems. The PPBC assessment is rated on a 6-point scale: 1=no problems at all, 2=some very minor problems, 3=some minor problems, 4=moderate problems, 5=severe problems, 6=many severe problems. Improvement is defined as negative change from baseline.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with non-missing change from baseline value at Week 12.||Participants|||Number
837003|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage of Micturition-Related Urgency Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 12.|The mean number of micturition-related urgency episodes per 24 hours was calculated as the total number of micturitions with USS rating of greater than or equal to (>=) 3 divided by the total number of days that diary data was collected at that visit. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. LOCF was used to impute missing data at Week 12. The analysis included participants with BL Micturition-Related Urgency Episodes >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 12.||Participant||Full Range|Median
837004|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage of Micturition-Related Urgency Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 4.|The mean number of micturition-related urgency episodes per 24 hours was calculated as the total number of micturitions with USS rating of greater than or equal to (>=) 3 divided by the total number of days that diary data was collected at that visit. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 4|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with BL Micturition-Related Urgency Episodes >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 4.||Participant||Full Range|Median
837005|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Micturition-Related Urgency Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 12.|The mean number of micturition-related urgency episodes per 24 hours was calculated as the total number of micturitions with USS rating of greater than or equal to (>=) 3 divided by the total number of days that diary data was collected at that visit. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. LOCF was used to impute missing data at Week 12. The analysis included participants with BL Micturition-Related Urgency Episodes >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 12.||Episodes per 24 hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837006|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Micturition-Related Urgency Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 4.|The mean number of micturition-related urgency episodes per 24 hours was calculated as the total number of micturitions with USS rating of greater than or equal to (>=) 3 divided by the total number of days that diary data was collected at that visit. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 4|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with BL Micturition-related urgency episodes >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 4.||Episodes per 24 hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837100|NCT01303380|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Flared at Month 6, Month 24 and Month 36|A flare was defined as Physician Global Assessment of HIDS flare severity score of ≥ 2 and a CRP value > 10 mg/L.|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population.||Number of participants|||Number
837008|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage of UUI Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 4.|UUI episodes were defined as those with the USS rating of 5 in the diary. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 4|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with BL UUI >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 4.||Episodes per 24 hours||Full Range|Median
837009|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of UUI Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 4.|UUI episodes were defined as those with the USS rating of 5 in the diary. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 4|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with BL UUI >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 4.||Episodes per 24 hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837010|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage of Micturitions Per 24 Hours at Week 12.|Micturitions include episodes of voluntary micturition and episodes of UUI.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. LOCF was used to impute missing data at Week 12. The analysis included participants with BL Micturition Frequency >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 12.||Episodes per 24 hours||Full Range|Median
837011|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage of Micturitions Per 24 Hours at Week 4.|Micturitions include episodes of voluntary micturition and episodes of UUI.|Week 4|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with BL Micturition Frequency >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 4.||Episodes per 24 hours||Full Range|Median
837012|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Micturitions Per 24 Hours at Week 12.|Micturitions include episodes of voluntary micturition and episodes of UUI.|Week 12|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. LOCF was used to impute missing data at Week 12. The analysis included participants with BL Micturition Frequency >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 12.||Episodes per 24 hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837013|NCT01302067|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Micturitions Per 24 Hours at Week 4.|Micturitions include episodes of voluntary micturition and episodes of UUI.|Week 4|The FAS included all participants who took at least 1 dose of assigned study drug and had at least 1 BL or post-BL efficacy assessment. The analysis included participants with BL Micturition Frequency >0 per 24 hours and non-missing change from BL to Week 4.||Episodes per 24 hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837014|NCT01302067|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Urgency Urinary Incontinence (UUI) Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 12.|UUI episodes were defined as those with the Urinary Sensation Scale (USS) rating of 5 in the diary. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Week 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS)included participants receiving 1 dose of assigned study drug and with 1 baseline (BL) or post-BL efficacy assessment. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data at Week 12. Participants with baseline UUI >0 per 24 hours & non-missing change from BL to Week 12 were included.||Episodes per 24 hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837015|NCT01302119|Secondary|Negative Mycology of Target Great Toenail at Week 52|Negative KOH and negative fungal culture.|Week 52|Efficacy analysis was performed using the ITT population. The LOCF was used in order to provide a value for efficacy parameters that were missing.||participants|||Number
837016|NCT01302119|Secondary|Treatment Success (Completely Clear or Almost Clear Nail and Negative Mycology) of Target Great Toenail at Week 52|No clinical evidence of onychomycosis as evidenced by normal toenail plate, no onycholysis, and no subungual hyperkeratosis, or no more than minimal evidence of onychomycosis as evidenced by toenail plate dystrophic or discolored over ≤ 10% of the distal aspect, with minimally evident onycholysis and subungual hyperkeratosis, and negative KOH wet mount and negative fungal culture.|Week 52|Efficacy analysis was performed using the ITT population. The LOCF was used in order to provide a value for efficacy parameters that were missing.||participants|||Number
837017|NCT01302119|Secondary|Completely Clear or Almost Clear Target Great Toenail at Week 52|No clinical evidence of onychomycosis as evidenced by normal toenail plate, no onycholysis, and no subungual hyperkeratosis, or no more than minimal evidence of onychomycosis as evidenced by toenail plate dystrophic or discolored over ≤ 10% of the distal aspect, with minimally evident onycholysis and subungual hyperkeratosis.|Week 52|Efficacy analysis was performed using the ITT population. The LOCF was used in order to provide a value for efficacy parameters that were missing.||participants|||Number
837018|NCT01302119|Primary|Complete Cure (Completely Clear Nail and Negative Mycology) of Target Great Toenail at Week 52|No clinical evidence of onychomycosis as evidenced by normal toenail plate, no onycholysis, and no subungual hyperkeratosis, and negative KOH wet mount and negative fungal culture.|Week 52|Efficacy analysis was performed using the ITT population. The last observation was carried forward (LOCF) in order to provide a value for efficacy parameters that were missing.||participants|||Number
837019|NCT01302366|Primary|Duration of Response (Excluding Patient Choice and Non-compliance)|Response [complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and stable disease (SD)] was assessed after approximately 2 months, 6 months and then every 4 months, until progression of disease. Response and progression of disease evaluation is based on the criteria reported by Blade, et al. (1998).|up to 3 years|All patients or the patients excluding personal choice or non-compliance||months||Full Range|Median
837020|NCT01302366|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Have Responded to TBL12|Response to TBL12 is defined as SD or better after 2 cycles of TBL12. The evaluation of SD, PR, or CR is based on the report by Blade et al. (1998)|2 months|all patients||percentage of participants|||Number
837021|NCT01302366|Primary|Duration of Response (All Treated Patients)|Response [complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and stable disease (SD)] was assessed after approximately 2 months, 6 months and then every 4 months, until progression of disease. Response and progression of disease evaluation is based on the criteria reported by Blade, et al. (1998).|up to 3 years|||months||Full Range|Median
837023|NCT01302691|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Had Study Drug Stopped Due to an AE|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. The percentage of participants who had study drug stopped during the 8-week treatment period due to an AE regardless of whether or not they completed the study was summarized by treatment arm|up to 8 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837024|NCT01302691|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience ≥1 Drug-related SAE|An SAE is any AE occurring at any dose or during any use of Sponsor's product that does the following: results in death; is life threatening; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; results in or prolongs an existing inpatient hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; is a cancer; is associated with an overdose; is another important medical event. Percentage of participants that experienced at least 1 SAE that was reported as possibly, probably, or definitely related to the study drug by the investigator during the 10-week treatment and follow-up period were summarized by study drug received|up to 14 days after last dose of study drug (up to 10 weeks)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837025|NCT01302691|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience ≥1 Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An SAE is any AE occurring at any dose or during any use of Sponsor's product that does the following: results in death; is life threatening; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; results in or prolongs an existing inpatient hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; is a cancer; is associated with an overdose; is another important medical event. The percentage of participants who experienced at least 1 SAE during the 10-week treatment and follow-up period were summarized by study drug received.|up to 14 days after last dose of study drug (up to 10 weeks)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837026|NCT01302691|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience ≥1 Drug-related AE|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. Percentage of participants that experienced at least 1 AE that was reported as possibly, probably, or definitely related to the study drug by the investigator during the 10-week treatment and follow-up period were summarized by study drug received.|up to 14 days after last dose of study drug (up to 10 weeks)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837027|NCT01302691|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience ≥1 Adverse Event (AE)|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. The percentage of participants who experienced at least 1 AE during the 10-week treatment and follow-up period were summarized by study drug received.|up to 14 days after last dose of study drug (up to 10 weeks)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837028|NCT01302691|Primary|Change in Mean Trough Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (SiDBP)|Sitting diastolic blood pressure was measured by automated sphygmomanometer pre-dose on Day 1 (baseline) and at 24 ± 2 hours after the last study drug administration at Week 8. The difference between the baseline and Week 8 assessments was calculated and summarized by treatment arm.|Baseline and Week 8|All participants that received at least one dose of study treatment, had at least 1 post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint, and had baseline data||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837029|NCT01302743|Primary|Decrease in LDL Cholesterol|Subjects will have baseline blood levels to measure LDL Cholesterol. Subjects will then take either cinnamon bark powder, water-soluble cinnamon extract or metformin for 90 days then blood levels of HbA1c and lipid panel will be drawn again.|90 days|no data was analyzed as study was stopped early due to low recruitment|||||
837030|NCT01302743|Primary|Decrease in HbA1c|Subjects will have baseline blood levels to measure HbA1c. Subjects will then take either cinnamon bark powder, water-soluble cinnamon extract or metformin for 90 days then blood levels of HbA1c and lipid panel will be drawn again.|90 days|no data was analyzed as study was stopped early due to low recruitment|||||
837031|NCT01302860|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-canakinumab Antibodies at Week 56|Immunogenicity assessment included determination of anti-canakinumab (ACZ885) antibodies in serum samples using BIAcore system, with detection based on surface plasmon resonance technique.|Week 56 (End of study)|The analysis was performed in the safety set population. Here, ‘Number of participants analysed’ signifies participants who had immunogenicity samples taken and analyzed during the study.||participants|||Number
837032|NCT01302860|Secondary|Number of Vaccination Cases With Protective Antibody Levels Following Immunization With Inactivated Vaccines|Participants who received any inactivated vaccines during the study were assessed for their ability to attain protective antibody levels against the vaccine (antigen) post immunization. Participants vaccinations were not assessed for a response if the antibody titre was already sufficient at pre-dose and maintained during the study.|Day -14 (prior-vaccination), Day 0 (vaccination), Day 28, Day 57 (post-vaccination)|"The analysis was performed in the FAS population. Here, Number of participants analysed signifies evaluable participants who received a total of 31 vaccinations during the study."||vaccination cases|||Number
837033|NCT01302860|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Receiving a Concomitant Vaccination During the Study|Participants received any one of the following inactivated vaccines as per the immunization program: Corynebacterium diphtheria, Bordetella pertussis, Neisseria meningitidis, Clostridium tetani, Influenza type A, Influenza type B, Haemophilus influenza B, Streptococcus pneumoniae, or Hepatitis B were determined.|Day 1 (start of study treatment) to Week 56 (end of study)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837034|NCT01302860|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Adverse events (AEs) were defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptom, sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), syndrome or disease which either occurs during study, having been absent at baseline, or, if present at baseline, appears to worsen. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were defined as any untoward medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require (or prolong) hospitalization, cause persistent or significant disability/incapacity, result in congenital anomalies or birth defects, or are other conditions which in judgement of investigators represent significant hazards.|Day 1 (start of study treatment) up to Week 56 (end of study)|The analysis was performed in the safety set population defined as participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Here, ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||participants|||Number
837035|NCT01302860|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C­-Reactive Protein (CRP) and Serum Amyloid A (SAA) Concentrations at Week 56|The CRP and SAA were used as inflammatory markers. The target level concentrations for CRP and SAA was ≤15 mg/L and ≤10 mg/L, respectively. Negative change in concentration of inflammatory markers indicated improvement.|Baseline, Week 56|The analysis was performed in FAS population. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants with evaluable measurements at both baseline and the post-baseline visit.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
837036|NCT01302860|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Defined Grades in Physician Assessment of Skin Disease at Week 56|Participants were assessed by physician for skin disease (urticarial skin rash) measured on a 5-­point scale as: 0 = None/absent; 1 = Minimal; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Week 56|The analysis was performed in FAS population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837037|NCT01302860|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Defined Grades in Physician’s Global Assessment Score at Week 56|Participants were assessed based by physician on Physician's Global Assessment measured on a 5­-point scale for auto inflammatory disease activity as: 0 = None/absent; 1 = Minimal; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Week 56|The analysis was performed in FAS population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837038|NCT01302860|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Aged 2 Years or Younger With at Least One Complete Response at Week 56|Complete response was defined as clinical remission and serological remission. Clinical remission was defined as Physician global assessment of auto-inflammatory disease activity as absent or minimal (using a 5-point scale ranging from absent to severe) and assessment of skin disease as absent or minimal (using a 5-point scale ranging from absent to severe). Serological remission was defined as CRP or SAA to be <15 mg/L and <10 mg/L respectively.|Week 56|"The analysis was performed in FAS population. Here, Number of participants analysed signifies participants aged 2 years or younger."||Percentage of participants|||Number
837039|NCT01302860|Primary|Percentage of Participants Aged 4 Years or Younger With at Least One Complete Response at Week 56|Complete response was defined as clinical remission and serological remission. Clinical remission was defined as Physician global assessment of auto-inflammatory disease activity as absent or minimal (using a 5-point scale ranging from absent to severe) and assessment of skin disease as absent or minimal (using a 5-point scale ranging from absent to severe). Serological remission was defined as C reactive protein (CRP) or Serum amyloid A protein (SAA) to be less than (<) 15 milligram per liter (mg/L) and <10 mg/L respectively.|Week 56|The analysis was performed in Full analysis set (FAS), defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study drug under this study protocol.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837040|NCT01302899|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events and Death as Assessment of Safety and Tolerability of Aliskiren Added to Ramipril||26 weeks|The safety analysis set consisted of all patients who received at least one study drug and had no major protocol deviations that could have impacted safety data.||Participants|||Number
837041|NCT01302899|Secondary|Plasma Rennin Concentration (PRC)|Blood biomarkers were obtained from blood samples in all patients at the time points such as baseline, week 6, week 12, week 18 and week 26. PRC measures the concentration of immunoactive renin in the plasma.|Baseline to week 26|The study was terminated and consequentially was underpowered for adequate statistical analysis|||||
837042|NCT01302899|Secondary|Plasma Rennin Activity (PRA)|Blood biomarkers were obtained from blood samples in all patients at the time points such as baseline, week 6, week 12, week 18 and week 26. Plasma PRA is a direct measure of the formation of Ang I in the plasma.|Baseline to week 26|The study was terminated and consequentially was underpowered for adequate statistical analysis|||||
837043|NCT01302899|Secondary|Mean Extracellular Volume (ECV) as One of Hemodynamic Assessments||26 weeks|The study was terminated and consequentially was underpowered for adequate statistical analysis|||||
837044|NCT01302899|Secondary|Percentage of Renal Filtration Fraction (RFF) as One of Hemodynamic Assessments||26 weeks|The study was terminated and consequentially was underpowered for adequate statistical analysis|||||
837045|NCT01302899|Secondary|Mean Effective Renal Plasma Flow (ERPF) as One of Hemodynamic Assessments||26 weeks|The study was terminated and consequentially was underpowered for adequate statistical analysis|||||
837046|NCT01302899|Secondary|Mean Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) as Measurement of Renal Function|All patients had to visit the main center for renal function measurements. The measurements were performed using the constant infusion method with I-iothalamate (IOT) and I-hippuran. GFR was calculated as the urinary clearance of IOT.|26 weeks|The study was terminated and consequentially was underpowered for adequate statistical analysis|||||
837047|NCT01302899|Secondary|Mean Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (msDBP)|At study entry, blood pressure (BP) was measured in both arms. If there was a clinically relevant difference in readings between arms (≥ 10 mmHg in systolic BP and/or ≥ 5 mmHg in diastolic BP), the arm with higher BP reading was used. If there was no clinically significant difference between arms, the non-dominant arm was used through out study. Diastolic blood pressure were assessed after the patient rested quietly in the sitting position for at least 3 minutes. For each sitting assessment, blood pressure was assessed at least 3 times. From these assessments, msDBP was calculated. All BP measurements were to be performed on the same arm.|26 weeks|The study was terminated and consequentially was underpowered for adequate statistical analysis|||||
837101|NCT01303380|Secondary|Number of Flares Per Participant at During Treatment Period and 24 Month Extension Period|A flare was defined as Physician Global Assessment of HIDS flare severity score of ≥ 2 and a CRP value > 10 mg/L.|Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 36 (End of Long term treatment Period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population.||Number of flares||Full Range|Median
837048|NCT01302899|Secondary|Mean Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (msSBP)|At study entry, blood pressure (BP) was measured in both arms. If there was a clinically relevant difference in readings between arms (≥ 10 mmHg in systolic BP and/or ≥ 5 mmHg in diastolic BP), the arm with higher BP reading was used. If there was no clinically significant difference between arms, the non-dominant arm was used through out study. Systolic blood pressure were assessed after the patient rested quietly in the sitting position for at least 3 minutes. For each sitting assessment, blood pressure was assessed at least 3 times. From these assessments, msSBP was calculated. All BP measurements were to be performed on the same arm.|26 weeks|The study was terminated and consequentially was underpowered for adequate statistical analysis|||||
837049|NCT01302899|Primary|Effect of Aliskiren on Albuminuria as Measured by Creatinine Indexed Albumin|Two 24-hour collections of urine were to be made at each study visit. The arithmetic mean of the two collections were planned to be used in the calculation of summary statistics and the statistical analyses.|26 weeks|The study was terminated and consequentially was underpowered for adequate statistical analysis|||||
837050|NCT01302899|Primary|Effect of Aliskiren on Albuminuria as Measured by Urinary Albumin Excretion Rate (UAER)|Two 24-hour collections of urine were to be made at each study visit. The arithmetic mean of the two collections were planned to be used in the calculation of summary statistics and the statistical analyses.|26 weeks|The study was terminated and consequentially was underpowered for adequate statistical analysis|||||
837051|NCT01302938|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Laboratory Abnormalities|Criteria for potentially clinically significant (PCS) laboratory values: Hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell less than (<) 0.8 lower limit of normal(LLN); platelet <0.5 LLN, >1.75 upper LN (ULN);white blood cell <0.6 LLN, >1.5 ULN; lymphocyte, total neutrophil(absolute[AL]),Total protein, albumin, phosphate <0.8 LLN, >1.2 ULN; basophil, eosinophil, monocyte >1.2ULN; Total bilirubin >1.5ULN; aspartate, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase >3ULN; Blood urea nitrogen, creatinine >1.3ULN; sodium <0.95LLN, >1.05ULN; potassium, chloride, bicarbonate, calcium <0.9LLN, >1.1ULN.|Week 12|Safety set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
837052|NCT01302938|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Discontinued the Study Due to Adverse Events|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship.|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Safety set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837053|NCT01302938|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) by Relatedness and Severity|AE:any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study medication in participant who received study drug. Relatedness to study medication was assessed by the investigator. Severity of AEs assessed as: mild (does not interfere with participant's usual function), moderate (interferes to some extent with participant's usual function) and severe (interferes significantly with participant's usual function). Mild, moderate and severe are not mutually exclusive; hence same participant may be included in more than 1 type of severity of AEs.|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Safety set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837054|NCT01302938|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Safety set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837055|NCT01302938|Secondary|Participant Perception Regarding Recommending a Friend to Enter Similar Study|PEQ is a web-based self-administered, exploratory questionnaire that assesses the participant’s perception of trial method. Number of participants who responded to question 6, “How likely would you be to recommend a friend to enter a similar study?” are reported.|Week 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
837056|NCT01302938|Secondary|Participant Perception Regarding Received Treatment in the Study|PEQ is a web-based self-administered, exploratory questionnaire that assesses the participant’s perception of trial method. Number of participants who responded to question 5, “What treatment did you think you were on?” are reported.|Week 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
837057|NCT01302938|Secondary|Participant Perception Regarding Cell Phone Diary|PEQ:self-administered, assesses participants perception of trial method. Question4, “How satisfied were you with items?” on scale 1(very easy) to 5(very difficult)- a: teaching video explaining CP use; recording urinations using CP; size of text on CP; sending your urinary information(inf) using your CP, e: overall, suitability for capturing urinations as they happened.|Week 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
837058|NCT01302938|Secondary|Participant Perception Regarding Satisfaction Related to Study|PEQ:self-administered, to assess perception of trial method. Question3, “How satisfied were you with items?” on scale 1(very satisfied) to 5(very dissatisfied)- recruitment; questionnaires,surveys(Ques,Sur); identification verification(IV); informed consent(IC) process; website experience; phone call; laboratory(lab) kit delivery; lab location; lab staff service(Ser); physical exam(PE) scheduling,location (sch,loc); PE visit; medication(med) first batch delivery; med second batch delivery; cell phone(CP) received; CP use; call center(CC) ser; medical support(supp); technical supp; overall.|Week 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
837059|NCT01302938|Secondary|Number of Participants With Reason for Participation in the Study|PEQ is a web-based self-administered, exploratory questionnaire that assesses the participant’s perception of trial method. Number of participants who responded to question 2, “What led you to participate given the study drug is already available?” are reported.|Week 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
837060|NCT01302938|Secondary|Number of Participants With Response Regarding Source of First Information About Study|Participant experience questionnaire (PEQ) is a web-based self-administered, exploratory questionnaire that assesses the participant’s perception of trial method. Number of participants who responded to question 1, “Where did you hear first about the study?” are reported.|Week 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
837061|NCT01302938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) Social Domain Score at Week 12|OAB-q: self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire, assesses how much participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Questions 9 to 33 constitute HRQL, includes domains (range): concern(7-42), coping(8-48), sleep(5-30), and social function(5-30). Total HRQL score (25-125) derived as sum of HRQL domains. Transformed score range 0 to 100 (HRQL domain or total) = [(Highest possible raw score-Actual total raw score)/Raw score range]*100. Higher transformed scores indicate better HRQL.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837062|NCT01302938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) Domains and Total Score of Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) at Week 12|OAB-q: self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire, assesses how much participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Questions 9 to 33 constitute HRQL, includes domains (range): concern(7-42), coping(8-48), sleep(5-30), and social function(5-30). Total HRQL score (25-125) derived as sum of HRQL domains. Transformed score range 0 to 100 (HRQL domain or total) = [(Highest possible raw score-Actual total raw score)/Raw score range]*100. Higher transformed scores indicate better HRQL.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837063|NCT01302938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) Symptom Bother Score at Week 12|OAB-q: a self-administered, 33-item, questionnaire that assesses how much the participant has been bothered by selected bladder symptoms. Each item rated by participant on Likert scale 1 (not at all) to 6 (a very great deal). Symptom bother score derived as sum of scores for items 1 to 8; lowest possible raw score: 8; highest possible score: 48. Data analyzed based on transformation of the score to a 0 to 100 scale [(Actual total raw score - lowest possible value of raw score)/range]*100. Higher scores values indicative of greater symptom bother.|Baseline, Week 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837064|NCT01302938|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Patient Perception of Urgency Scale (PPUS) at Week 1, 4 and 12|PPUS: a self-administered, single-item, validated questionnaire that measures the participant’s perception of urinary urgency. It is sensitive to changes in perceptions of urinary urgency over time. Scale of 0 (usually not able to hold urine), 1 (usually able to hold urine [without leaking] until reaching toilet if go to toilet immediately), or 2 (usually able to finish what he/she is doing before going to toilet [without leaking]). Results categorized as SC from baseline on 3-point scale: improvement (positive SC), no change (SC 0), deterioration (negative SC).|Baseline (Bl), Week 1, 4, 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing values imputed using LOCF method. ‘n’ = number of participants who were evaluable at specific time points for each arm group, respectively.||participants|||Number
837065|NCT01302938|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) at Week 1, 4 and 12|PPBC: self-administered,single-item questionnaire to describe participant’s perception of bladder-related problems. PPBC assessed on 6-point scale:1=no problems at all,2=some very minor problems,3=some minor problems,4=some moderate problems,5=severe problems,6=many severe problems. Results categorized as score change (SC) from baseline on 2-point scale:improvement (negative SC),no improvement (SC 0 or more) and on 4-point scale:major improvement (SC is negative in magnitude of 2 or more), minor improvement (SC is negative in magnitude of 1), no change (SC= 0),deterioration (positive SC).|Baseline, Week 1, 4, 12|FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing values imputed using LOCF method. ‘n’ = number of participants who were evaluable at specific time points for each arm group, respectively.||participants|||Number
837066|NCT01302938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Micturition-Related Urgency Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 1, 4 and 12|The mean number of micturition-related urgency episodes per 24 hours was calculated as the total number of micturitions with USS rating of >= 3 divided by the total number of days that diary data was collected at that visit. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine. Baseline values for each time point were calculated separately considering only those participants who were evaluable at the given time point.|Baseline, Week 1, 4, 12|FAS population. Missing values imputed using LOCF method. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure. ‘n’ = number of participants who were evaluable at specific time points for each arm group, respectively.||episodes per 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
837259|NCT01297322|Primary|Time to Hemostasis (TTH)|Primary effectiveness endpoint - elapsed time between device (VASCADE) or sheath (manual compression) removal and first observed and confirmed arterial hemostasis.|Up to 1 hour|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
837067|NCT01302938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Nocturnal Micturition-Related Urgency Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 1, 4 and 12|The mean number of micturition-related nocturnal urgency episodes per 24 hours was calculated as the total number of micturitions with USS rating of greater than or equal to (>=) 3 that occurred between time participant went to bed and time participant arose to start next day divided by the total number of days that diary data was collected at that visit. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine.|Baseline, Week 1, 4, 12|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis, as per change in planned analysis.|||||
837068|NCT01302938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Nocturnal Micturitions Per 24 Hours at Week 1, 4 and 12|Nocturnal micturitions were defined as micturitions with USS rating 1-5 that occurred between the time the participant went to bed and the time he or she arose to start the next day. USS rating: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine. The mean number of nocturnal micturitions per 24 hours was calculated as the total number of nocturnal micturitions divided by the total number of diary days collected at that visit.|Baseline, Week 1, 4, 12|Data for this pre-specified outcome measure was collected and reported in individual participant listings but not statistically summarized for analysis, as per change in planned analysis.|||||
837069|NCT01302938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Micturitions Per 24 Hours at Week 1 and 4|Micturitions include episodes of voluntary micturition and episodes of UUI. UUI episodes were defined as those micturitions with USS rating of 5 in the diary in participants with UUI at baseline. USS rating 5: Unable to hold; leak urine. The mean number of micturitions per 24 hours was calculated as the total number of micturitions divided by the total number of diary days collected at that visit. Baseline values for each time point were calculated separately considering only those participants who were evaluable at the given time point.|Baseline, Week 1, 4|FAS population. Missing values imputed using LOCF method. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure. ‘n’ = number of participants who were evaluable at specific time points for each arm group, respectively.||micturitions per 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
837070|NCT01302938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Number of Urgency Urinary Incontinence (UUI) Episodes Per 24 Hours at Week 1, 4 and 12|UUI episodes were defined as those with the Urinary Sensation Scale (USS) rating of 5 in the diary. USS total range 1 to 5: 1. No feeling of urgency, 2. Mild feeling of urgency, 3. Moderate feeling of urgency, 4. Severe feeling of urgency, 5. Unable to hold; leak urine. Baseline values for each time point were calculated separately considering only those participants who were evaluable at the given time point.|Baseline, Week 1, 4, 12|FAS population. Missing values imputed using LOCF method. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure. ‘n’ = number of participants who were evaluable at specific time points for each arm group, respectively.||episodes per 24 hours||Full Range|Median
837071|NCT01302938|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Voided Volume Per Micturition at Week 1, 4 and 12|Mean voided volume per micturition was calculated as sum of voided volume divided by the total number of micturition episodes with a recorded voided volume greater than 0 at that visit. Baseline values for each time point were calculated separately considering only those participants who were evaluable at the given time point.|Baseline, Week 1, 4, 12|FAS population. Missing values imputed using LOCF method. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure. ‘n’ = number of participants who were evaluable at specific time points for each arm group, respectively.||milliliter (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
837072|NCT01302938|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Micturitions Per 24 Hours at Week 12|Micturitions include episodes of voluntary micturition and episodes of Urgency Urinary Incontinence (UUI). UUI episodes were defined as those micturitions with Urinary Sensation Scale (USS) rating of 5 in the diary in participants with UUI at baseline. USS rating 5: Unable to hold; leak urine. The mean number of micturitions per 24 hours was calculated as the total number of micturitions divided by the total number of diary days collected at that visit.|Baseline, Week 12|Full analysis set (FAS) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 baseline or post-baseline efficacy assessment. Missing values imputed using Last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.||micturitions per 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
837073|NCT01303159|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|To assess safety of an endoscopic bipolar radiofrequency catheter (EndoHPB) in the management of unresectable cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic cancer|2 years|Preliminary analyses because study was terminated before follow up data could be collected.||participants|||Number
837074|NCT01303159|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bile Duct Stricture Diameter|To assess effectiveness of an endoscopic bipolar radiofrequency catheter (EndoHPB) in the management of unresectable cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic cancer|2 years|Participants not analyzed has study was terminated before follow up data could be collected.|||||
837075|NCT01303224|Other Pre-specified|Subgroup Analysis: Response for Relief of Overall IBS Symptoms and of Abdominal Pain/Discomfort According to the 75% Rule in the Male ITT Population|"Weekly binary questions (yes/no) from IV/WRS diary records: Did you have satisfactory relief of your overall IBS symptoms during the last week? and Did you have satisfactory relief of your abdominal pain or discomfort during the last week?
Responder: Report of satisfactory overall IBS symptom relief =Yes and of satisfactory abdominal pain/discomfort relief = Yes 6/8 weeks (75% rule)"|Eight weeks|Intention-to-Treat in the male population (226)||participants|||Number
837076|NCT01303224|Other Pre-specified|Subgroup Analysis: Response for Relief of Overall IBS Symptoms and of Abdominal Pain/Discomfort According to the 75% Rule in the Female ITT Population|"Weekly binary questions (yes/no) from IV/WRS diary records: Did you have satisfactory relief of your overall IBS symptoms during the last week? and Did you have satisfactory relief of your abdominal pain or discomfort during the last week?
Responder: Report of satisfactory overall IBS symptom relief =Yes and of satisfactory abdominal pain/discomfort relief = Yes 6/8 weeks (75% rule)"|Eight weeks|Intention-to-Treat in the female population (333)||participants|||Number
837733|NCT01308476|Secondary|Patients Assessment of Usefulness of the SMS System|Only patients in the SMS reminder group were asked to assess the usefulness of the SMS system by the categories very helpful, helpful and not helpful.|Visit 2 (12 weeks) and visit 3 (24 weeks)|FAS for SMS reminder group only||Percentage of participants|||Number
837077|NCT01303224|Secondary|Quality of Life Changes (Using EuroQoL EQ-5D Questionnaire)|Change in EQ-5D Quality of Life (visual analogue scale) score at the end of 8 weeks of treatment versus baseline (at randomisation). EQ-5D quality of life visual analogue scale ranges from “0”= worst imaginable health state to “100”=best imaginable health state.|Eight weeks|Intention-to-treat; i.e. all ITT patients who provided EQ-5D data at Visit 2 (start of treatment) and Visit 4 (end of treatment).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837078|NCT01303224|Secondary|Response for Relief of Overall IBS Symptoms and of Abdominal Pain/Discomfort at the End of 8 Weeks of Treatment, Where the Response is Defined as at Least 4 Weeks With Satisfactory Relief During 8 Weeks of Treatment (50% Rule) in the ITT Population|"Weekly binary questions (yes/no) from IV/WRS diary records: Did you have satisfactory relief of your overall IBS symptoms during the last week? and Did you have satisfactory relief of your abdominal pain or discomfort during the last week?
Responder: Report of satisfactory overall IBS symptom relief =Yes and of satisfactory abdominal pain/discomfort relief = Yes 4/8 weeks with at least 2 consecutive weeks of satisfactory relief during Week 5 to Week 8(50% rule)"|Eight weeks|Intention-to-Treat (559)||participants|||Number
837079|NCT01303224|Primary|Response for Relief of Overall IBS Symptoms and of Abdominal Pain/Discomfort at the End of 8 Weeks of Treatment, Where the Response is Defined as at Least 6 Weeks With Satisfactory Relief During 8 Weeks of Treatment (75% Rule); Intention-to-treat (ITT).|"Weekly binary questions (yes/no) from Interactive Voice/Web Response (IV/WRS) diary records: Did you have satisfactory relief of your overall IBS symptoms during the last week? and Did you have satisfactory relief of your abdominal pain or discomfort during the last week?
Responder: Report of satisfactory overall IBS symptom relief =Yes and of satisfactory abdominal pain/discomfort relief = Yes 6/8 weeks (75% rule)"|Eight weeks|Intention-to-Treat (559)||participants|||Number
837080|NCT01303380|Secondary|Number of Participants Exhibiting Anti-canakinumab Antibodies at Any Visit|Immunogenicity assessment included determination of anti-canakinumab (ACZ885) antibodies in serum samples using bridging ECLIA assay.|Baseline up to Month 36 (End of study)|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Number of participants|||Number
837081|NCT01303380|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Total Interleukin-1β Antibody (IL-1β)|Pharmacodynamics of canakinumab was assessed by total IL-1β (sum of free and bound canakinumab) concentration, determined in serum by means of sandwich ELISA assay with limit of detection at 0.1 picogram/millilitre.|Day 1 (Pre-dose), Day 4, Day 15, Day 43, Day 85, Day 127, Day 169 (End of treatment period), Day 197, Day 225, Day 253, Day 281, Day 309, and Day 337 (End of follow-up period) (Post-dose)|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||picogram(s)/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
837082|NCT01303380|Secondary|Serum Concentration-time Profile of Canakinumab|Canakinumab concentrations in serum were assessed for evaluating pharmacokinetics (PK) of the drug.|Day 1 (Pre-dose), Day 4, Day 15, Day 43, Day 85, Day 127, Day 169 (End of treatment period), Day 197, Day 225, Day 253, Day 281, Day 309, and Day 337 (End of follow-up period) (Post-dose)|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||microgram(s)/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
837083|NCT01303380|Secondary|Participants Who Received Rescue Treatment|Participants who experienced flares were treated with corticosteroids and NSAIDs as rescue medication.|Baseline up to Month 36 (End of study)|The analysis was performed on the FAS population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837084|NCT01303380|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Adverse events (AEs) were defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptom, sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), syndrome or disease which either occurs during study, having been absent at baseline, or, if present at baseline, appears to worsen. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were defined as any untoward medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require (or prolong) hospitalisation, cause persistent or significant disability/incapacity, result in congenital anomalies or birth defects, or are other conditions which in judgement of investigators represent significant hazards.|Day 1 (Start of study treatment) up to Month 36 (End of study)|The analysis was performed on Safety Set (SAF) population defined as all participants who received at least one application of study treatment and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment.||Number of participants|||Number
837085|NCT01303380|Secondary|Time to Flare After the Last Dose of Canakinumab During the Follow-up Period|The median time to flare by the participants after administration of the last dose of canakinumab during the follow-up period was analysed using Kaplan-Meier method.|Last dose of canakinumab treatment in follow-up period to end of follow-up period (Day 337)|"The analysis was performed on the FAS population. Here Number of participants analysed signifies the participants assessed for time to flare after the last dose of canakinumab during follow-up period."||days||Full Range|Median
837086|NCT01303380|Secondary|Duration of Flares Experienced During the Study|Flare was defined as Physician Global Assessment of HIDS flare severity score of ≥ 2 and a CRP value > 10 mg/L. The change in post canakinumab treatment flare duration during the study were assessed as compared to historical period.|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group respectively.||Days||Full Range|Median
837087|NCT01303380|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received Dose Up-titration During 6-month Treatment Period|Participants who experienced a new HIDS flare between baseline and Week 4 and received an escalated dose of 450 mg of canakinumab every 6 weeks thereafter starting at Week 6 were determined.|Day 1 up to Month 6 (End of follow up)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837088|NCT01303380|Secondary|Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ) Global Score in Children Over Time|Participants or their parents (participants aged 6 to 17 years) were assessed for HRQoL based on Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ). CHAQ was an eight domain questionnaire representing functional capacity and independence, evaluated for previous week. Each domain was rated on a 4-point difficulty scale: 0 = any difficulty; 1 = some difficulty; 2 = much difficulty; 3 = unable to do.The total score is the mean from the 8 scores, and ranges from 0 (no disability) to 3 (completely disabled).|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|"The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group respectively. Here Number of participants analyzed signifies the participants assessed for CHAQ during study."||Score on a scale||Full Range|Median
837089|NCT01303380|Secondary|Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Global Score in Adults Over Time|Participants were assessed for health-related quality of life (HRQoL) based on Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). HAQ was an eight 8 categories questionnaire representing all activities related to physical function. Each category has various sub-categories, which were rated by the participants on a 4- point difficulty scale: 0 = any difficulty; 1 = some difficulty; 2 = much difficulty; 3 = unable to do. The total score was the mean of the 8 scores, and ranged from 0 (no disability) to 3 (completely disabled).|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|"The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group respectively. Here Number of participants analyzed signifies the participants assessed for HAQ during study."||Score on a scale||Full Range|Median
837090|NCT01303380|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inflammation Markers Over Time up to Month 24|The C-reactive Protein (CRP) and/or Serum amyloid A protein (SAA) were used as inflammatory markers. The normal range of CRP was 0-10 mg/L.|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group respectively.||milligram(s)/liter||Full Range|Median
837091|NCT01303380|Secondary|Time to Resolution of the Initial Flare After First Canakinumab Treatment|Time to resolution of the initial flare after first dose of canakinumab was determined.|Day 1 (Baseline), Day 28|The analysis was performed in the FAS population.||Days||Full Range|Median
837092|NCT01303380|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Abdominal Pain as Assessed by Physician's Global Assessment|Abdominal pain was assessed by physician after each flare using a 5-point scale: 0 =Absent signs/symptoms; 1 = Minimal signs/symptoms; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837093|NCT01303380|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Lymphadenopathy as Assessed by Physician's Global Assessment|Lymphadenopathy severity was assessed by physician after each flare using a 5-point scale: 0 =Absent signs/symptoms; 1 = Minimal signs/symptoms; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837094|NCT01303380|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Apthus Ulcers as Assessed by Physician's Global Assessment|Apthus ulcers were assessed by physician after each flare using a 5-point scale: 0 =Absent signs/symptoms; 1 = Minimal signs/symptoms; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837095|NCT01303380|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Fever as Assessed by Physician's Global Assessment|Fever severity was assessed by physician after each flare using a 5-point scale: 0 =Absent signs/symptoms; 1 = Minimal signs/symptoms; 2 = Mild; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837096|NCT01303380|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Defined Grades of Physician Assessed Symptom Control|Participants were assessed by physician for control of signs and symptoms associated with HIDS based on 5-point scale: 0 = No control; 1 = Poor control; 2 = Somewhat control; 3 = Good control; and 4= Excellent control.|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837097|NCT01303380|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Defined Grades of Participants Assessed Symptom Control|Participants were assessed by participants/parent (participants aged 6-18 years) for control of signs and symptoms associated with HIDS based on 5-point scale: 0 = No control; 1 = Poor control; 2 = Somewhat control; 3 = Good control; and 4= Excellent control.|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837098|NCT01303380|Secondary|Number of Participants With Flare Events Based on Participant Assessed HIDS Flare Severity Score|Participant's global assessment of severity of HIDS after each flare was based on HIDS flare severity score, a 5-point scale: 0 = Absent signs/symptoms; 1 = Minimal signs/symptoms; 2 = Mild; 3= Moderate; 4 = Severe. Same investigator assessed the same participant throughout the study to ensure consistency between assessments. Investigators reviewed every participant's diary at each visit after their own clinical assessment.|Baseline, Month 6 (End of treatment period), Month 12 (End of follow up period), Month 24 (End of Long term treatment period 1) and Month 36 (End of Long term treatment period 2)|The analysis was performed in the FAS population.||Number of participants|||Number
837099|NCT01303380|Secondary|Number of Participants With Flare Events Based on Physician Assessed HIDS Flare Severity Score|Physician global assessment of severity of HIDS after each flare was based on HIDS flare severity score, a 5­ point scale: 0 = Absent signs/symptoms; 1 = Minimal signs/symptoms; 2 = Mild; 3= Moderate; 4 = Severe.|Any flare event [Baseline up to Month 36 (End of long term treatment period 2)]|The analysis was performed in the FAS population. The 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each group, respectively.||Number of participants|||Number
837102|NCT01303380|Primary|Number of Flares Per Participant During Historical Period and Treatment Period|A flare was defined as Physician Global Assessment of HIDS flare severity score of ≥ 2 and a C­reactive protein (CRP) value > 10 mg/L. Flares during a historical period were defined as most recent 6-months in which the participant has not received treatment for their HIDS other than symptomatic treatment with NSAIDs and/or corticosteroids.|Historical period, Month 6 (End of treatment period)|The primary analysis was performed in the Full Analysis set (FAS) population defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and had at least one post baseline assessment.||Number of flares||Full Range|Median
837103|NCT01303406|Secondary|Comparison of the Percentage of Participants Randomised to Idebenone and Placebo Who Withdrew Early Due to Recurrence or Worsening of FRDA Symptoms|There was no Withdrawal due to recurrence or worsening of FRDA symptoms|Within 2 months (i.e. Early withdrawal visit)|||percentage of patients|||Number
837104|NCT01303406|Primary|Patient Assessment of Treatment Assignment: Comparison of the Proportions of Patients Randomised to Idebenone and Placebo Who Assessed That They Received Idebenone|The primary efficacy endpoint was the comparison of the number of patients randomized to idebenone and placebo, who assessed that they received idebenone treatment.|At 2 months after study start|||participants|||Number
837105|NCT01303445|Secondary|Percentage Peak-to-trough Fluctuation (%PTF)|PTF = 100*((Cmax-Cmin)/Cavg) where Cavg=(AUC0-12)/12.|7 days|The pharmacokinetic data set (PK set) and the pharmacodynamic data set (PD set) include all treated subjects with data that do not have a relevant protocol violation (relevant to PK or PD). No data collected for Omeprazole arm since no plasma dipyridamole was expected for this treatment.||percent of average hourly plasma conc.||Standard Deviation|Mean
837106|NCT01303445|Secondary|Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation at 12 Hours Post Dose (IPA12)|IPA12 equals the platelet aggregation measured 12 hours post dose divided by the platelet aggregation measured at baseline (multiplied by 100).|7 days|The pharmacokinetic data set (PK set) and the pharmacodynamic data set (PD set) include all treated subjects with data that do not have a relevant protocol violation (relevant to PK or PD). No data collected for Omeprazole arm since no platelet inhibition was expected for this treatment.||percent of baseline platelet aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
837107|NCT01303445|Secondary|Plasma Dipyridamole Minimum Concentration (Cmin)|Minimum measured concentration of dipyridamole in plasma|7 days|The pharmacokinetic data set (PK set) and the pharmacodynamic data set (PD set) include all treated subjects with data that do not have a relevant protocol violation (relevant to PK or PD). No data collected for Omeprazole arm since no plasma dipyridamole was expected for this treatment.||nanogram/milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837108|NCT01303445|Primary|Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation at 4 Hours Post Dose (IPA4)|IPA4 equals the platelet aggregation measured 4 hours post dose divided by the platelet aggregation measured at baseline (multiplied by 100).|7 days|The pharmacokinetic data set (PK set) and the pharmacodynamic data set (PD set) include all treated subjects with data that do not have a relevant protocol violation (relevant to PK or PD). No data collected for Omeprazole arm since no platelet inhibition was expected for this treatment.||percent of baseline platelet aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
837109|NCT01303445|Primary|Plasma Dipyridamole Area Under Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Zero to 12 Hours (AUC0-12)|Area under the concentration time curve of the analyte in plasma from 0 to 12 hours at steady state|7 days|The pharmacokinetic data set (PK set) and the pharmacodynamic data set (PD set) include all treated subjects with data that do not have a relevant protocol violation (relevant to PK or PD). No data collected for Omeprazole arm since no plasma dipyridamole was expected for this treatment.||(nanogram/milliliter)*hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837110|NCT01303445|Primary|Plasma Dipyridamole Maximum Concentration (Cmax)|Maximum measured concentration of dipyridamole in plasma|7 days|The pharmacokinetic data set (PK set) and the pharmacodynamic data set (PD set) include all treated subjects with data that do not have a relevant protocol violation (relevant to PK or PD). No data collected for Omeprazole arm since no plasma dipyridamole was expected for this treatment.||nanogram/milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837111|NCT01303510|Secondary|Incidence of Solicited Systemic Adverse Events|Safety assessments are made by the investigator at baseline and on Day 22 as well as by the subjects themselves (in a Subject Diary) for the 4-day period immediately following vaccination|Days 1 to 4 inclusive, and Day 22|Safety population||Subjects|||Number
837112|NCT01303510|Primary|Fold Increase in Geometric Mean Titer (GMT)|GMT-fold increase - calculated as the GMT on Day 22 divided by the baseline GMT value|Day 22/Day 1|ITT/ATP||Fold (ratio)|||Number
837113|NCT01303510|Primary|Seroprotection|Seroprotection rate, defined as the proportion of subjects with HI antibody titer ≥1:40|Day 22 ± 2 days|ITT/ATP||Subjects|||Number
837114|NCT01303510|Primary|Seroconversion|Seroconversion rate was defined as the proportion of subjects with ≥4-fold increase in haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titer and with a titer of ≥1:40|Day 22 ± 2 days|Intention-to-treat (ITT) and According-to-protocol (ATP) populations exclude one subject lost to follow up||Subjects|||Number
837115|NCT01303510|Secondary|Safety: Incidence of Solicited Local Adverse Events|Safety assessments are made by the investigator at baseline and on Day 22 as well as by the subjects themselves (in a Subject Diary) for the 4-day period immediately following vaccination|Days 1 to 4 inclusive, and Day 22|Safety population includes all subjects who received study vaccine||Subjects|||Number
837116|NCT01303627|Primary|Smooth cLMA Removal Condition (Score 1)|cLMA removal was accepted as successful (score 1) if none of the complications coughing, teeth clenching, gross purposeful movements, breath holding, laryngospasm, and desatura- tion to SpO2\90% was observed. If any of these compli- cations was observed it was regarded as unsuccessful (score 2)|At the end of the surgery|||percentage of participants|||Number
837117|NCT01303744|Secondary|Changes in Plasma ΔTNFα Concentrations||29 days|ITT||pg/ml||Standard Error|Mean
837118|NCT01303744|Secondary|Measurement of Trough CHF 5074 Plasma Levels|evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK) of CHF 5074 in patients with MCI.|Days 85|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
837119|NCT01303744|Primary|Differences in ∆sCD40L Levels Between CHF 5074 Doses and Placebo at Any Specific Time Point|To assess if there were differences in ΔsCD40L levels between CHF 5074 doses and placebo|up to 12 weeks|ITT||pg/ml||Standard Error|Mean
837972|NCT01309919|Primary|Bleeding Patterns|Number of bleeding and spotting days in the first six weeks and subsequent six weeks postpartum|12 weeks post-partum|We were able to analyze all returned bleeding diaries (25 participants in IUD Arm, 27 participants in Diary Arm)||days||Full Range|Median
837120|NCT01303835|Secondary|Effects of Low-dose Naltrexone Versus Placebo on Change in Neurocognitive Function From Baseline|Patients completed neurocognitive testing at each QoL measurement assessment. Neurocognitive function was measured via a computerized neurocognitive test battery called CNS Vital Signs. The battery consists of 7 tests that assess verbal and visual memory, finger tapping, symbol digit coding, the Stroop Test, a test of shifting attention, and continuous performance. The battery provides scores over 9 domains with higher scores indicating better performance. Scores were normalized to a standard score mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15 using a normative sample. The mean difference in score in each domain between the 3rd QoL measurement (approximately 16 weeks from initial assessment) and the initial baseline assessment are reported. A difference greater than 0 indicates an increase in mean score, while a difference less than 0 indicates a decrease in mean score.|Baseline and 16 weeks|This analysis only includes those patients who completed both the initial CNS Vital Signs assessments and the 16 week assessments, and thus number of participants may not match those reported in the participant flow module, which reports number of participants completing the trial at 24 weeks.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837121|NCT01303835|Secondary|Effects of Low-dose Naltrexone Versus Placebo on Change in Functional Capacity From Baseline|Patients completed the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) at each QoL measurement assessment. The 6 minute walk test is a measure of functional capacity in which the distance that a patient can quickly walk on a flat, hard surface in a period of 6 minutes is measured. The mean difference in distance traveled (in meters) between the 3rd QoL measurement (approximately 16 weeks from initial assessment) and the initial baseline assessment are reported. A difference greater than 0 indicates an increase in distance traveled, while a difference less than 0 indicates a decrease.|Baseline and 16 weeks|This analysis only includes those patients who completed both the initial 6MWT assessments and the 16 week assessments, and thus number of participants may not match those reported in the participant flow module, which reports number of participants completing the trial at 24 weeks.||Meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
837122|NCT01303835|Primary|Effects of Low-dose Naltrexone Versus Placebo on Change in Quality of Life (QoL) in High-grade Glioma Patients Undergoing Standard Chemoradiation From Baseline|"The difference in QoL scores between the 3rd QoL measurement (approximately 16 weeks from initial assessment) and the initial baseline assessment are reported. QoL instruments included are listed below. Higher scores indicate more favorable outcomes unless otherwise indicated.
Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain (FACT-Br) measures general QoL reflecting symptoms associated with brain malignancies (range 0-132)
Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT-F) measures level of fatigue during patients’ usual daily activities (range 0-52)
Epworth Sleepiness Scale measures level of daytime sleepiness. Note that higher scores indicate a greater level of sleepiness (range 0-24)
Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS) measures QoL including physical, mental and general health via 8 domains (range 0-100 for each domain)
Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale quantifies the depressed status of a patient. Lower scores indicate more favorable outcome (range 20-80) A difference"|Baseline and 16 weeks|This analysis only includes those patients who completed both the initial QOL assessments and the 16 week QoL assessments, and thus number of participants may not match those reported in the participant flow module, which reports number of participants completing the trial at 24 weeks.||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837123|NCT01303861|Secondary|Continuous Cigarette Abstinence From Quit Date|Secondary outcome will include continuous abstinence from quit date to end of treatment (week 11).|From Quit date to end of treatment (week 11)|1 subject from varenicline group excluded from analysis due to pregnancy. 1 subject from Nicotine Patches only group excluded due to meeting an exclusion criteria.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837124|NCT01303861|Secondary|Seven Day Point Abstinence From Cigarette Smoking|Secondary outcome will include point abstinence (no smoking in the previous 7-day) at 6 months post-quit.|Six months post quit date|1 subject from varenicline group excluded from analysis due to pregnancy. 1 subject from Nicotine Patches only group excluded due to meeting an exclusion criteria.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837125|NCT01303861|Primary|Four-week Continuous Abstinence From Cigarette Smoking|The primary dependent measures will be continuous four-week abstinence from weeks 8-11 post target quit date, defined as a self-report of no smoking confirmed by expired air carbon monoxide.|Study week 8 thru week 11|1 subject from varenicline group excluded from analysis due to pregnancy. 1 subject from Nicotine Patches only group excluded due to meeting an exclusion criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837126|NCT01304082|Secondary|Rank-transformed Pain Score Upon Needle Stick.|"Pain score upon needle stick:
The pain score is a validated 11-point numeric rating scale in which patients rate pain between 0 (no pain) and 10 (worst pain imaginable)."|1 minute after each injection|||rank||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837127|NCT01304082|Secondary|Rank-transformed Time (Seconds) Until Anesthesia|Rank-transformed time (seconds) until anesthesia will be assessed using a repeated sensory stimulus.|0-180 seconds after each injection|||rank||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837128|NCT01304082|Secondary|Rank-transformed Time (Seconds) Until Hypoesthesia|Rank-transformed time (seconds) until hypoesthesia will be assessed using a sensory stimulus|0-180 seconds after each injection.|||rank||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837129|NCT01304082|Primary|Rank-transformed Pain Score|"Pain score upon injection of local anesthetic:
the pain score is a validated 11-point numeric rating scale in which patients rate pain between 0 (no pain) and 10 (worst pain imaginable)."|immediate, upon injection of each solution|||rank||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837130|NCT01304147|Secondary|Systematic Assessment for Treatment Emergent Effects (SAFTEE)|This is a self-report measure for systematically assessing 48 possible adverse events. It documents their severity, relationship to study drug, and the action taken.|2 weeks|Number of events, more detailed in adverse event section||events|||Number
837131|NCT01304147|Primary|Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)|"Number of patients meeting response criteria of >=50% decrease in MADRS score from baseline , ie, difference in depressive symptoms using MADRS instrument, 24 hours following drug administration
10-item instrument used for the evaluation of depressive symptoms in adults and for the assessment of any changes to those symptoms. Each of the 10 items is rated on a scale of 0 to 6, with differing descriptors for each item. These individual item scores are added together to form a total score, which can range between 0 and 60 points."|24 hours|20 patients randomized and 18 completed both treatment periods||participants|||Number
837973|NCT01309997|Secondary|Percentage of CD27+ B Cells in Responders (SCR) and Non-responders|%CD27+ B cells|6 months|||percentage of CD27+ B cells||Full Range|Mean
837132|NCT01304238|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Skin Changes (Erythema and Necrosis) After the Occurrence of HIT II|Participants’ medical records were used to abstract data that were collected on standardized hard copy Case Report Forms (CRFs). Erythema is a redness of the skin caused by hyperemia. Necrosis is the premature death of cells or tissues.|19 January 2005 to 25 October 2009|All documented participants diagnosed with suspected acute HIT II and a 4T Score of ≥4 who had received at least one dose of argatroban, lepirudin, danaparoid, or fondaparinux. The 4T score (range: 0-8) was developed to predict the probability of HIT.||participants|||Number
837133|NCT01304238|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were Diagnosed With Thrombocytopenia (Recurrent of Persistent) After the Occurrence of HIT II|Participants’ medical records were used to abstract data that were collected on standardized hard copy Case Report Forms (CRFs). Thrombocytopenia after HIT-II was documented in the participant files.|19 January 2005 to 25 October 2009|All documented participants diagnosed with suspected acute HIT II and a 4T Score of ≥4 who had received at least one dose of argatroban, lepirudin, danaparoid, or fondaparinux. The 4T score (range: 0-8) was developed to predict the probability of HIT.||participants|||Number
837134|NCT01304238|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Underwent Amputation After the Occurrence of HIT II|Participants’ medical records were used to abstract data that were collected on standardized hard copy Case Report Forms (CRFs).|19 January 2005 to 25 October 2009|All documented participants diagnosed with suspected acute HIT II and a 4T Score of ≥4 who had received at least one dose of argatroban, lepirudin, danaparoid, or fondaparinux. The 4T score (range: 0-8) was developed to predict the probability of HIT.||participants|||Number
837135|NCT01304238|Secondary|Number of Participants With Fatal Complications After the Occurrence of HIT II|Participants’ medical records were used to abstract data that were collected on standardized hard copy Case Report Forms (CRFs). A fatal complication is defined as a complication resulting in death.|19 January 2005 to 25 October 2009|All documented participants diagnosed with suspected acute HIT II and a 4T Score of ≥4 who had received at least one dose of argatroban, lepirudin, danaparoid, or fondaparinux. The 4T score (range: 0-8) was developed to predict the probability of HIT.||participants|||Number
837136|NCT01304238|Secondary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Bleeding After the Occurrence of HIT II|Participants’ medical records were used to abstract data that were collected on standardized hard copy Case Report Forms (CRFs). Bleeding was documented in the participant files.|19 January 2005 to 25 October 2009|All documented participants diagnosed with suspected acute HIT II and a 4T Score of ≥4 who had received at least one dose of argatroban, lepirudin, danaparoid, or fondaparinux. The 4T score (range: 0-8) was developed to predict the probability of HIT.||participants|||Number
837137|NCT01304238|Primary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Thrombosis and/or Pulmonary Embolism After the Occurrence of HIT II|Thrombosis is a clotting in a blood vessel. Pulmonary embolism is a clot, usually from the deep veins of the legs, carried away with the venous bloodstream into the lungs, where it may block pulmonary vessels. Participants’ medical records were used to abstract data that were collected on standardized hard copy Case Report Forms (CRFs).|19 January 2005 to 25 October 2009|All documented participants diagnosed with suspected acute HIT II and a 4T Score of ≥4 who had received at least one dose of argatroban, lepirudin, danaparoid, or fondaparinux. The 4T score (range: 0-8) was developed to predict the probability of HIT.||participants|||Number
837138|NCT01304277|Secondary|Overall Summary of TEAEs by Treatment (Replagal RB and Replagal AF)|To Assess Safety and Tolerability by Anti-agalsidase Alfa Antibody Status, concomitant medication, vital signs and ECG.|Week 2 to EOS|||participants|||Number
837139|NCT01304277|Secondary|To Assess Safety and Tolerability by Anti-agalsidase Alfa Antibody Status (in Serum) at End of Study||EOS|||participants|||Number
837140|NCT01304277|Secondary|Dose-normalized Maximum Serum Concentration (Cmax/Dose)||Week 0 to Week 14|||Ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837141|NCT01304277|Secondary|Dose-normalized AUC Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC∞/Dose)||Week 0 to Week 14|||Ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837142|NCT01304277|Secondary|Dose-normalized Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Sample (AUClast/Dose)||Week 0 to Week 14|||Ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837143|NCT01304277|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 (EOS) in Plasma Gb3 Levels||Baseline to EOS|||(nmol/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
837144|NCT01304277|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 (EOS) in Urine Gb3 Levels||Baseline to EOS|||(nmol/g creatinine)||Standard Deviation|Mean
837145|NCT01304316|Secondary|Pulse Rate Maximum Change From Baseline||Baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 minutes|||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837146|NCT01304316|Secondary|Systolic BP Maximum Change From Baseline||Baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 minutes|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837147|NCT01304316|Secondary|Diastolic BP Maximum Change From Baseline||Baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 minutes|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837148|NCT01304316|Secondary|Pulse Oximetry Maximum Change From Baseline||Baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 minutes|||% oxygen||Standard Deviation|Mean
837149|NCT01304316|Primary|Half Life of PBBA|Extra-vascular, non-compartmental analysis is used to derive pharmacokinetic parameters; estimated from observed plasma concentration values, the dose administered, the AUCs, and the terminal elimination phase rate constant for each dose group|Baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 minutes|Only 8 subjects in the standard dose group and 11 subjects in the high dose group had sufficient concentration levels to calculate Cmax.||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
837150|NCT01304316|Primary|Half Life of Tetracaine|Extra-vascular, non-compartmental analysis is used to derive pharmacokinetic parameters; estimated from observed plasma concentration values, the dose administered, the AUCs, and the terminal elimination phase rate constant for each dose group|Baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 minutes|An insufficient number of tetracaine plasma concentrations existed in each subject to determine a half life for tetracaine|||||
837151|NCT01304316|Primary|Half Life of Oxymetazoline|Extra-vascular, non-compartmental analysis is used to derive pharmacokinetic parameters; estimated from observed plasma concentration values, the dose administered, the AUCs, and the terminal elimination phase rate constant for each dose group|Baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 minutes|Only 7 subjects in the 0.3 mg dose group and 0.6 mg dose group had sufficient concentration levels to calculate the half life.||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
837152|NCT01304316|Primary|Cmax of PBBA|Extra-vascular, non-compartmental analysis is used to derive pharmacokinetic parameters; estimated from observed plasma concentration values, the dose administered, the AUCs, and the terminal elimination phase rate constant for each dose group|Baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 minutes|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837153|NCT01304316|Primary|Cmax of Tetracaine|Extra-vascular, non-compartmental analysis is used to derive pharmacokinetic parameters; estimated from observed plasma concentration values, the dose administered, the AUCs, and the terminal elimination phase rate constant for each dose group|Baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 minutes|Only 4 subjects in the 18 mg dose group and 7 subjects in the 36 mg dose group had sufficient concentration levels to calculate Cmax.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837154|NCT01304316|Primary|Cmax of Oxymetazoline|Extra-vascular, non-compartmental analysis is used to derive pharmacokinetic parameters; estimated from observed plasma concentration values, the dose administered, the AUCs, and the terminal elimination phase rate constant for each dose group|Baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 minutes|Only 11 subjects in the 0.3 mg dose group had sufficient concentration levels to calculate Cmax.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837155|NCT01304329|Secondary|Simvastatin: Area Under the Curve 0 to the Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point.
The geometric mean and geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) are adjusted values."|0 hours (h), 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: PK set included all evaluable subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837156|NCT01304329|Secondary|Empa: Area Under the Curve 0 to the Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point.
The geometric mean and geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) are adjusted values."|0 hours (h), 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: PK set included all evaluable subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837157|NCT01304329|Primary|Simvastatin: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma, per period.
The geometric mean and geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) are adjusted values."|0 hours (h), 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: PK set included all evaluable subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837158|NCT01304329|Primary|Empa: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|"Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma, per period.
The geometric mean and geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) are adjusted values"|0 hours (h), 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: PK set included all evaluable subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837159|NCT01304329|Primary|Simvastatin: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity. Simvastatin acid is an active metabolite of simvastatin.
The geometric mean (gMean) and geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) are adjusted values."|0 hours (h), 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: PK set included all evaluable subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837160|NCT01304329|Primary|Empa: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.
The geometric mean (gMean) and geometric coefficient of variation (gCV) are adjusted values."|0 hours (h), 20minutes (min), 40min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 34h, 48h, 72h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: PK set included all evaluable subjects who took at least one dose of investigational treatment and provided at least one observation for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837161|NCT01304498|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Serious Adverse Events|A serious adverse event is an adverse event that results in death, is life threatening, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, results in or prolongs a hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly or birth defect, is a cancer, or may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention. The percentage of participants with one or more serious adverse events was assessed.|Up to Month 7|All participants who received at least one study vaccination and had safety follow-up data||Percentage of participants|||Number
837162|NCT01304498|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Maximum Oral Temperature ≥37.8°C|The percentage of participants with maximum oral temperature ≥37.8°C was assessed.|Up to 15 days after any vaccination|All participants who received at least one study vaccination and had safety follow-up data||Percentage of participants|||Number
837163|NCT01304498|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Systemic Adverse Events|The percentage of participants with one or more systemic adverse events was assessed.|Up to 15 days after any vaccination|All participants who received at least one study vaccination and had safety follow-up data||Percentage of participants|||Number
837164|NCT01304498|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Injection-site Adverse Reactions|The percentage of participants with one or more injection-site adverse reactions (solicited or unsolicited) was assessed.|Up to 5 days after any vaccination|All participants who received at least one study vaccination and had safety follow-up data||Percentage of participants|||Number
837165|NCT01304498|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With One or More Adverse Events|An adverse event is defined as any unfavourable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, is also an adverse event. The percentage of participants with one or more adverse events was assessed.|Up to Month 7|All participants who received at least one study vaccination and had safety follow-up data||Percentage of participants|||Number
837166|NCT01304498|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Are Seropositive for HPV Types 6/11/16/18|Serum antibodies to HPV types were measured with a Competitive Luminex Immunoassay. The serostatus cutoffs (milli Merck Units/mL) for HPV types were as follows: HPV Type 6: ≥30; HPV Type 11: ≥16; HPV Type 16: ≥20; HPV Type 18: ≥24. The percentage of participants who were seropositive according to these cutoffs was assessed.|4 weeks postdose 3 (Month 7)|All randomized participants. The n values are participants who received all 3 vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, had Month 7 serology to the HPV type within acceptable day ranges, were seronegative to the HPV type at Day 1, and had no protocol violations that interfered with evaluation of immune response.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837167|NCT01304498|Secondary|GMTs to HPV Types 6 and 11|Serum antibodies to HPV types 6 and 11 were measured with a Competitive Luminex Immunoassay.|4 weeks postdose 3 (Month 7)|All randomized participants. The n values are participants who received all 3 vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, had Month 7 serology to the HPV type within acceptable day ranges, were seronegative to the HPV type at Day 1, and had no protocol violations that interfered with evaluation of immune response.||milli Merck Units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837168|NCT01304498|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) to HPV Types 16 and 18|Serum antibodies to HPV types 16 and 18 were measured with a Competitive Luminex Immunoassay.|4 weeks postdose 3 (Month 7)|All randomized participants. The n values are participants who received all 3 vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, had Month 7 serology to the HPV type within acceptable day ranges, were seronegative to the HPV type at Day 1, and had no protocol violations that interfered with evaluation of immune response.||milli Merck Units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837169|NCT01304589|Secondary|24-hour Vulvar Pain|Measures average vulvar pain over 24-hours on daily diary|18 weeks|22 subjects were randomized to study medication with 18 of the 22 subjects completing all of the study visits. Analysis population includes all 18 eligible subjects who completed all of the study visits.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837170|NCT01304589|Secondary|Coital Pain|Intercourse pain is measured by completing a daily diary|18 weeks|22 subjects were assigned to study medication with 18 of the 22 subjects completing all of the study visits. Analysis population includes the 18 eligible subjects who completed all of the study visits.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837171|NCT01304589|Secondary|Tampon Pain|"Subjects completed a tampon insertion pain test once a week in their daily diary. The values were averaged and compared pre-treatment versus post-treatment."|18 weeks|22 subjects were eligible and received study medication. Analysis population includes all 22 eligible subjects.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837172|NCT01304589|Primary|Pain Rating Index|"The primary outcome measure will be pain ratings on the Pain Rating Index (PRI) of the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), which consists of 15 representative words from the sensory (n = 11) and affective (N = 4) categories of the standard, long-form (LF-MPQ). On the PRI, each descriptor is ranked by the patient on an intensity scale of 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe. Total score - 0 equals no pain to 45 equals severe pain. The paired t-test was used to compare the PRI score at baseline and at 18 weeks or to further clarify, pre-treatment versus post-treatment comparison."|18 weeks|22 subjects were eligible and received study medication. Analysis population included all 22 eligible subjects.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837173|NCT01304641|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Adhered to Index Therapy|Percentage of participants who adhered to index therapy was evaluated. Treatment adherence was defined as the number of days covered by index medication divided by the number of days in the post-index period, expressed as a percentage.|At least 3 months from the post-index date (baseline) or end of study (28 February 2009)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who met inclusion criteria.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837174|NCT01304641|Secondary|Length of Post-index Period|Post-index period included time during which participants were observed for a minimum of 3 months following index date (fill date on which first observed atorvastatin or simvastatin was filled during the participant identification period) until disenrollment or end of study treatment (28 February 2009).|Index date (baseline) up to end of study (28 February 2009)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who met inclusion criteria.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
837175|NCT01304641|Secondary|Number of Participants Per Dose|Index dose was categorized as low dose (atorvastatin 10 mg, simvastatin up to 20 mg), medium dose (atorvastatin 20 mg, simvastatin 40 mg), and high dose (atorvastatin 40 or 80 mg, simvastatin 80 mg).|At least 3 months from the post-index date (baseline) or end of study (28 February 2009)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who met inclusion criteria.||Participants|||Number
837176|NCT01304641|Secondary|Mean Dose|The first observed study medication fill during the participation identification period was defined as the index drug. The initial dose of the index drug was determined based on the pharmacy claims.|At least 3 months from the post-index date (baseline) or end of study (28 February 2009)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who met inclusion criteria.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837177|NCT01304641|Secondary|Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C)||At least 3 months from the post-index date (baseline) or end of study (28 February 2009)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who met inclusion criteria. Here, the 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||milligram/deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
837178|NCT01304641|Primary|Hazard Ratio for First Cardiovascular (CV) Event|Hazard ratio of atorvastatin versus simvastatin for first CV event. Hazard ratio of atorvastatin versus simvastatin was obtained from a Cox proportional hazards model.|At least 3 months from the post-index date (baseline) or end of study (28 February 2009)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who met inclusion criteria.||Participants|||Number
837179|NCT01304641|Primary|Number of Participants With Post-index Cardiovascular (CV) Events|CV events were defined as an inpatient or emergency department admission for heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI), ischemic heart disease (IHD), cerebrovascular disease, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), aortic aneurysm, and/or revascularization. CV events were identified using medical claims.|At least 3 months from the post-index date (baseline) or end of study (28 February 2009)|Evaluable analysis population included all participants who met inclusion criteria.||Participants|||Number
837180|NCT01304693|Secondary|Duration of Effect Measured by the Time From Randomization to Receipt of Standard of Care as Determined by the Investigator Based on Protocol Criteria|Standard of care (SOC) therapy for exudative AMD was implemented if any protocol-specified criteria relating to CSFT, best-corrected visual acuity, or clinically significant intraocular hemorrhages in the study eye were met, in the opinion of the Investigator.|Time to event, up to Month 6|ITT: All patients who were randomized, received study drug, and completed at least 1 scheduled on-therapy study visit.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
837181|NCT01304693|Primary|Change From Baseline at Month 1 in Central Subfield Thickness (CSFT) as Measured by Spectral Domain Ocular Coherence Tomography (SD-OCT)|CSFT is a retinal thickness measurement and was measured with SD-OCT. A thickening of the retina is characteristic of wet AMD, and a reduction in CSFT may indicate an improvement in ocular health. One eye (ie, study eye) contributed to the mean.|Baseline, Month 1|This analysis population includes all patients who were randomized, received study drug, and completed at least 1 scheduled on-therapy study visit (ITT). Efficacy data from visits occurring after standard of care (SoC) were censored and replaced based on LOCF,i.e. by the data observed at the time of the SoC decision.||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
837182|NCT01304706|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|This is a measurement of the number of subjects who experienced an adverse event and/or a serious adverse event during the trial.|12 months|||participants|||Number
837183|NCT01304966|Secondary|Cotreta-Derkay Score|"We compared disease severity(Cotreta-Derkay score) between groups of children with two different HPV genotypes
Coltera and Derkay have evolved a staging system to stage recurrent papillomatous lesions involving the respiratory tract.
Coltera-Derkay method of staging :
Clinical score:
Voice: Normal - 0, Abnormal - 1, Aphonia - 2
Stridor: Absent - 0, Present on activity - 1, Present at rest - 2
Respiratory distress - None - 0, Mild - 1, Moderate - 2, Severe - 3, Extreme - 4.
Anatomical score:
For each site - 0 = none, 1=surface lesion, 2= raised lesion, 3=bulky lesion.
Total score = Anatomical score + Total clinical score"|12 months|||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
837184|NCT01304966|Primary|Human Papillomavirus Genotypes|Distribution of Human papillomavirus(HPV) genotypes identified in the biopsy|12 months|We found positive HPV DNA in all children. HPV type 6 and HPV type 11 caused recurrent respiratory papillomatosis in 6 (40%) and 9(60%) of cases,respectively.||participants|||Number
837185|NCT01305044|Primary|Satisfaction With the Randomized Controlled Trial|The 12-week intervention assessed satisfaction with intervention(0=strongly agree to 4=strongly disagree).|13 weeks|Power calculations indicated that a sample size of 42 would be sufficient to detect 15 point change in SF-36, with 88% power at 5% significance level. Analysis were per protocol because the sample size was too small for imputation techniques and there was no follow-up data on withdrawn participants for intent-to-treat analysis.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
837186|NCT01305044|Secondary|Inflammatory Cytokines|Fasting blood samples were collected in the morning for inflammatory cytokines. Prior to blood draws, we ensured that participants did not experience illness or fever at the time of the blood draw. The assayed cytokines included pro-inflammatory cytokines interleukin(IL)-12, IL-6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and anti-inflammatory cytokines IL-10 and IL-4.|13-weeks|||pg/ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
837187|NCT01305044|Secondary|Cortisol Area-Under-Curve (AUC)|Five saliva samples (awakening, 30 minutes after awakening, noon, 5pm, & 10pm) were collected on a weekend day at one week after class completion. Cortisol was measured in nmol/L. Cortisol AUC was calculated using the five timepoints with the trapezoid rule. The groups were compared at post-intervention on their log transformed cortisol AUC controlling for baseline cortisol and reported as adjusted means. Four participants with high cortisol profiles across the five collection times (with suspected contamination from gum bleeding) and participants whose collection time was beyond a one hour window were excluded.|13-weeks|||nmol*hr/L||Standard Error|Mean
837188|NCT01305044|Secondary|Blood Pressure|Systolic and Diastolic blood pressure were assessed at the study's physical assessment sessions.|13-weeks|Please refer to power calculation detailed in Primary Outcome Measure.||mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
837189|NCT01305044|Secondary|Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire|The Five-Facet Mindfulness questionnaire produces a total score and five facet subscales (observing, describing, acting with awareness, nonjudging, & nonreactivity). These are summation scores, and the scores range from 8 to 40 (except for the nonreactivity facet which ranges from 7 to 35). Higher scores indicate more mindfulness. The Total Score ranges from 39-195, with higher scores indicating more mindfulness.|13-weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
837190|NCT01305044|Secondary|Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index|The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality produces a global score. The range is 0 to 21, higher scores indicate worse sleep quality.|13-weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
837191|NCT01305044|Secondary|Impact of Events Scale|The Impact of Event Scale assesses cancer-specific distress. Each item is scored 0 (not at all), 1 (rarely), 3 (sometimes)or 5 (often), with the higher scores reflecting more stressful impact. It has a total score and two subscales (avoidance & intrusion). The two subscales are scored by summing their corresponding items and the total score is the sum of two subscales. The scores for the intrusive subscale range from 0 to 35, and scores for the avoidance subscale range from 0 to 40. The Total Score ranges from 0-75, with higher scores reflecting more stressful impact.|13-weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
837192|NCT01305044|Secondary|Perceived Stress Scale|The 10-item perceived stress scale produces a summation score. Scores can range from 0 to 40, with higher scores indicating more stress.|13 weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
837193|NCT01305044|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (Short Form (SF)-36v1)|SF-36v1 Health Survey assesses quality of life and produces mental and physical component summary scores, with a score range of 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate better quality of life.|13 weeks|Please refer to power calculation detailed in Primary Outcome Measure.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
837194|NCT01305044|Primary|Retention Rates and Class Attendance|The 12-week intervention assessed retention in the study (percentage of how many participants remained enrolled the entire intervention), class attendance (percentage out of possible classes)|13 weeks|Power calculations indicated that a sample size of 42 would be sufficient to detect 15 point change in SF-36, with 88% power at 5% significance level. Analysis were per protocol because the sample size was too small for imputation techniques and there was no follow-up data on withdrawn participants for intent-to-treat analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
837195|NCT01296646|Secondary|Percent Days Abstinent|Percentage of abstinence days as derived from the Timeline Follow-Back (TLFB) for the entire medication period.|12 weeks|||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
837196|NCT01296646|Primary|Percent Heavy Drinking Days|Percentage of heavy drinking days as derived from the Timeline Follow-back (TLFB) for the entire medication period. A heavy drinking day is defined as 5 or more standard drinks for a man and 4 or more standard drinks for a woman. A standard drink is 12-14 grams of ethanol or the amount contained in a 12 oz beer, 5 oz of wine or 1 1/2 oz of hard liquor.|12 weeks|||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
837197|NCT01296672|Secondary|T2:ERG ( A Gene on Chromosome 21q22.2 That Encodes an Androgen-regulated Transmembrane Serine Protease Ratio to Estrogen Related Gene) Score AUC|Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (ROC-AUC) of the T2:ERG ( A Gene on Chromosome 21q22.2 That Encodes an Androgen-regulated Transmembrane Serine Protease Ratio to Estrogen Related Gene) Score to Predict the Risk of Prostate Cancer|Reported at 90 days: assessed at baseline, 30 days, 60 days, and 90 days|Receiving biopsy||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837198|NCT01296672|Secondary|PCA3 (Prostate Cancer Antigen 3)Score AUC|Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (ROC-AUC) of the PCA3 (Prostate Cancer Antigen 3) to detect difference in PSA decline between cases and controls (non-cases)|Reported at 90 days: assessed at baseline, 30 days, 60 days and 90-day|Receiving biopsy||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837199|NCT01296672|Primary|Pre/Post Ratio PSA Area Under the Curve (AUC)|Pre/Post Ratio prediction area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) for subjects taking finasteride 5mg every day for 3 months. Measurements of PSA are measured from Baseline until 3 months.|Reported at 90-days: assessment at baseline, 1 month, 2 months and 3 months|Patients with biopsy||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837200|NCT01296698|Secondary|Participant Score for Product Convenience|Participants are asked to rate how convenient the product is to use, on a scale of 1-5, where 1=not at all convenient and 5=extremely convenient.|through 12 Weeks|The study was terminated prematurely due to a technical issue (randomization error) and no data are available.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837201|NCT01296698|Secondary|Participant Score for Change in Perception|Participants are asked to rate how their opinion has changed since the first time they used it, on a score of 1-5, where 1=I like it much less now and 5=I like it much more now.|through 12 Weeks|The study was terminated prematurely due to a technical issue (randomization error) and no data are available.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837202|NCT01296698|Secondary|Participant Score for Speed of Action|Participants are asked to rate the product for speed of action, on a scale of 1-9, where 1=extremely slow and 9=extremely fast.|through 12 Weeks|The study was terminated prematurely due to a technical issue (randomization error) and no data are available.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837203|NCT01296698|Secondary|Participant Score for Product Effectiveness in Dealing With Cravings|Participants are asked to rate the product in its effectiveness for dealing with cravings, on a scale of 1-5, where 1=not at all effective, and 5=extremely effective.|through 12 Weeks|The study was terminated prematurely due to a technical issue (randomization error) and no data are available.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837204|NCT01296698|Secondary|Participant Score for General Perception of the Product|Participants are asked to rate their general perception of the investigational product on a scale of 1-10, where 1=very poor and 10=excellent.|through Week 12|The study was terminated prematurely due to a technical issue (randomization error) and no data are available.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837205|NCT01296698|Secondary|Highest Rating of Increased Appetite on a Categorical Scale|Participants are asked if during the last 24 hours they experienced Increased Appetite on a 5-grade categorical scale from Not at all to Extremely so.|within 12 Weeks|Analysis was limited to participants who used study medication at least once and who completed the questionnaire.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837206|NCT01296698|Secondary|Highest Rating of Insomnia on a Categorical Scale|Participants are asked if during the last 24 hours they experienced Insomnia on a 5-grade categorical scale from Not at all to Extremely so.|within 12 Weeks|Analysis was limited to participants who used study medication at least once and who completed the questionnaire.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837207|NCT01296698|Secondary|Highest Rating of Dysphoric or Depressed Mood on a Categorical Scale|Participants are asked if during the last 24 hours they experienced Dysphoric or Depressed Mood on a 5-grade categorical scale from Not at all to Extremely so.|within 12 Weeks|Analysis was limited to participants who used study medication at least once and who completed the questionnaire.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837208|NCT01296698|Secondary|Highest Rating of Anxiety on a Categorical Scale|Participants are asked if during the last 24 hours they experienced Anxiety on a 5-grade categorical scale from Not at all to Extremely so.|within 12 Weeks|Analysis was limited to participants who used study medication at least once and who completed the questionnaire.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837209|NCT01296698|Secondary|Highest Rating of Difficulty Concentrating on a Categorical Scale|Participants are asked if during the last 24 hours they experienced Difficulty Concentrating on a 5-grade categorical scale from Not at all to Extremely so.|within 12 Weeks|Analysis was limited to participants who used study medication at least once and completed the questionnaire.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837210|NCT01296698|Secondary|Highest Rating of Restlessness on a Categorical Scale|Participants are asked if during the last 24 hours they experienced Restlessness on a 5-grade categorical scale from Not at all to Extremely so.|within 12 Weeks|Analysis was limited to participants who used study medication at least once and who completed the questionnaire.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837211|NCT01296698|Secondary|Highest Rating of Irritability/Frustration/Anger on a Categorical Scale|Participants are asked if during the last 24 hours they experienced Irritability/Frustration/Anger on a 5-grade categorical scale from Not at all to Extremely so.|within 12 Weeks|Analysis was limited to participants who used study medication at least once and who completed the questionnaire.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837212|NCT01296698|Secondary|Highest Rating of Desire/Urge to Smoke on a Categorical Scale|Participants are asked if during the last 24 hours they experienced the Desire/Urge to Smoke on a 5-grade categorical scale from Not at all to Extremely so.|within 12 Weeks|Analysis was limited to participants who used study medication at least once and who completed the questionnaire.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837213|NCT01296698|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With High Usage|Percentage of participants who used more than four doses in any one-hour period.|within 12 Weeks|Analysis was limited to data collected from participants who had used study medication at least one day.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837214|NCT01296698|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With High Dosage|Percentage of participants who used more than 64 doses in any one-day period.|within 12 Weeks|Analysis was limited to data collected from participants who had used study medication at least one day.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837215|NCT01296698|Secondary|Mean Number of Daily Doses|Mean number of daily doses by study week.|Week 6|Analysis was limited to data collected from participants at Week 6. Analysis of data for the remainder of the study weeks was not possible because the trial terminated prematurely due to a technical issue (randomization error).||Daily Doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
837216|NCT01296698|Secondary|Mean Number of Daily Doses|Mean number of daily doses by study week.|Week 5|Analysis was limited to data collected from participants at Week 5.||Daily Doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
837217|NCT01296698|Secondary|Mean Number of Daily Doses|Mean number of daily doses by study week.|Week 4|Analysis was limited to data collected from participants at Week 4.||Daily Doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
837218|NCT01296698|Secondary|Mean Number of Daily Doses|Mean number of daily doses by study week.|Week 3|Analysis was limited to data collected from participants at Week 3.||Daily Doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
837219|NCT01296698|Secondary|Mean Number of Daily Doses|Mean number of daily doses by study week.|Week 2|Analysis was limited to data collected from participants at Week 2.||Daily Doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
837220|NCT01296698|Secondary|Mean Number of Daily Doses|Mean number of daily doses by study week.|Week 1|Analysis was limited to data collected from participants at Week 1.||Daily Doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
837221|NCT01296698|Secondary|Number of Participants With 7-day Point Prevalence Abstinence|Number of participants with carbon monoxide (CO)-verified self-reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence from smoking at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, and 26.|through Week 26|The study was terminated prematurely due to a technical issue (randomization error).||Participants|||Number
837222|NCT01296698|Secondary|Number of Participants With Continuous Smoking Abstinence|Number of participants with carbon monoxide (CO)-verified self report of continuous abstinence from smoking from Week 2 to Weeks 4, 6, 12, 16, and 26.|through Week 26|The study was terminated prematurely due to a technical issue (randomization error) and no data are available.||Participants|||Number
837223|NCT01296698|Primary|Number of Participants With Continuous Smoking Abstinence|Number of participants with carbon monoxide (CO)-verified self-report of continuous abstinence from smoking from Week 2 through Week 6.|through Week 6|The study was terminated prematurely due to a technical issue (randomization error) and no data are available.||Participants|||Number
837224|NCT01297062|Secondary|Plasma Exenatide Concentrations at Steady State on Day 1, 2 and 3|The plasma exenatide concentration at steady state was descriptively summarized by geometric mean, standard error, and its effect on placebo-adjusted change from baseline in QTcP was assessed.|Baseline, Day 1, 2, and 3|Evaluable Population. No imputation for missing value was used. Day 1, 2, and 3 exenatide concentration < LLOQ was set to missing.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Geometric Mean
837225|NCT01297062|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Increase of QTcP Interval From Baseline >30msec at Any Timepoint on Any Day in Exenatide and Placebo|Number of subjects with increase of QTcP interval from baseline >30 msec at any timepoint on any day was summarized by frequency for exenatide and placebo.|Baseline, Day 1, 2, or 3|Evaluable Population. No imputation for missing value was used.||particpants|||Number
837226|NCT01297062|Secondary|Number of Subjects With QTcP Interval >450msec at Any Timepoint on Any Day in Exenatide and Placebo|Number of subjects with QTcP > 450 msec at any timepoint on any day was summarized by frequency for exenatide and placebo.|Day 1, 2, or 3|Evaluable Population. No imputation for missing value was used.||participants|||Number
837227|NCT01297062|Secondary|Assay Sensitivity of Moxifloxacin at 1200h (3 Hour Post-administration of Moxifloxacin) on Day 2|Change from baseline in QTcP was analyzed by a MMRM between moxifloxacin and placebo.|Baseline, Day 2|Evaluable Population. No imputation for missing value was used.||msec||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837228|NCT01297062|Secondary|Assay Sensitivity of Moxifloxacin at 1100h (2 Hour Post-administration of Moxifloxacin) on Day 2|Change from baseline in QTcP was analyzed by a MMRM between moxifloxacin and placebo.|Baseline, Day 2|Evaluable Population. No imputation for missing value was used.||msec||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837229|NCT01297062|Secondary|Assay Sensitivity of Moxifloxacin at 1000h (1 Hour Post-administration of Moxifloxacin) on Day 2|Change from baseline in QTcP was analyzed by a MMRM between moxifloxacin and placebo.|Baseline, Day 2|Evaluable Population. No imputation for missing value was used.||msec||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837230|NCT01297062|Primary|Comparison of LS Mean Changes From Baseline in QTcP Intervals Between Exenatide and Placebo on Day 3 Averaged Over 1300h, 1400h, 1500h (Target Steady State Exenatide Concentration of 500 pg/mL)|Factors in QT correction formulas were first estimated using pre-therapy data. The most appropriate correction method (QTcP) minimized the mean squared individual QTc/RR regression slope with on-exenatide data. Adequacy of correction was validated with on-placebo data. Change from baseline in QTcP was analyzed by a MMRM between exenatide and placebo.|Baseline, Day 3|Evaluable Population. No imputation for missing value was used.||msec||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837231|NCT01297062|Primary|Comparison of LS Mean Changes From Baseline in QTcP Intervals Between Exenatide and Placebo on Day 2 Averaged Over 1300h, 1400h, 1500h (Target Steady State Exenatide Concentration of 300 pg/mL)|Factors in QT correction formulas were first estimated using pre-therapy data. The most appropriate correction method (QTcP) minimized the mean squared individual QTc/RR regression slope with on-exenatide data. Adequacy of correction was validated with on-placebo data. Change from baseline in QTcP was analyzed by a MMRM between exenatide and placebo.|Baseline, Day 2|Evaluable Population. No imputation for missing value was used.||msec||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837232|NCT01297062|Primary|Comparison of Least Squares (LS) Mean Changes From Baseline in Population-based Corrected QT Intervals (QTcP) Between Exenatide and Placebo on Day 1 Averaged Over 1300h, 1400h, 1500h (Target Steady State Exenatide Concentration of 200 pg/mL)|Factors in QT correction formulas were first estimated using pre-therapy data. The most appropriate correction method (QTcP) minimized the mean squared individual QTc/RR regression slope with on-exenatide data. Adequacy of correction was validated with on-placebo data. Change from baseline in QTcP was analyzed by a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) between exenatide and placebo.|Baseline, Day 1|Evaluable Population included all ITT subjects who completed all ECG assessment periods and have valid ECG measurements and no vomiting in any ECG data extraction window. No missing value was imputed.||msec||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837233|NCT01297257|Secondary|In-hospital MACE (Major Adverse Cardiac Event)||stent implantation until hospital discharge (average 1-3 days)|||Participants|||Number
837234|NCT01297257|Primary|Delivery Success|The primary endpoint for this study is delivery success defined as complete passage of the Resolute Integrity stent across the target lesion with full expansion of the stent to the desired diameter at the desired location.|stent implantation until hospital discharge (average 1-3 days)|||stents|Participants||Number
837235|NCT01297270|Secondary|AST Normalisation: AST in Normal Range 12 Weeks Post-treatment, When SVR12=NO|The number of participants with aspartate aminotransferase (AST) in normal range 12 weeks post-treatment when patients do not have sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837236|NCT01297270|Secondary|AST Normalisation: AST in Normal Range 12 Weeks Post-treatment, When SVR12=YES|The number of participants with aspartate aminotransferase (AST) in normal range 12 weeks post-treatment when patients have sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837237|NCT01297270|Secondary|AST Normalisation: AST in Normal Range at End of Treatment (EOT) When SVR12=NO|The number of participants with aspartate aminotransferase (AST) in normal range at the end of treatment when patients do not have sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837238|NCT01297270|Secondary|AST Normalisation: AST in Normal Range at End of Treatment (EOT) When SVR12=YES|The number of participants with aspartate aminotransferase (AST) in normal range at the end of treatment when patients have sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837239|NCT01297270|Secondary|ALT Normalisation: ALT in Normal Range 12 Weeks Post-treatment, When SVR12=NO|The number of participants with alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in normal range 12 weeks post-treatment when patients do not have sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837240|NCT01297270|Secondary|ALT Normalisation: ALT in Normal Range 12 Weeks Post-treatment, When SVR12=YES|The number of participants with alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in normal range 12 weeks post-treatment when patients have sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837241|NCT01297270|Secondary|ALT Normalisation: ALT in Normal Range at End of Treatment (EOT) When SVR12= NO|The number of participants with alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in normal range at end of treatment (EOT) when patients do not have sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837242|NCT01297270|Secondary|ALT Normalisation: ALT in Normal Range at End of Treatment (EOT) When SVR12=YES|The number of participants with alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in normal range at end of treatment (EOT) when patients have sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
837243|NCT01297270|Secondary|Early Treatment Success (ETS)|Percentage of participants with early treatment success (ETS), defined as a plasma HCV RNA level <25 IU/mL (detected or undetected) at week 4 and HCV RNA <25 IU/mL (undetected) at week 8.|Week 4 and week 8|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
837244|NCT01297270|Secondary|Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR24)|"Percentage of participants with sustained virologic response 24 weeks post-treatment (SVR24), defined as plasma HCV RNA level < 25 IU/mL (undetected) 24 weeks after the originally planned treatment duration.
Hepatitis C virus Ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA)"|24 weeks post treatment, up to 72 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication and had SVR data at week 24.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837245|NCT01297270|Primary|Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Post Treatment (SVR12)|Percentage of participants with sustained virologic response 12 weeks post treatment (SVR12) defined as plasma Hepatitis C virus Ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level<25 IU/mL (undetected) 12 weeks after the originally planned treatment duration.|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837246|NCT01297283|Secondary|Evaluation of Factors Such as Device Rotation, Device Fixation, Device Side Facing the Skin, Position of Lead Loops in the Pocket, Use of Antiseptic Solution, Skin Type, Body Mass Index on the Quality of Leadless ECG.|"The following factors will be evaluated to investigate whether they influence the LECG quality:
device position (subcutaneous, submuscular, etc)
device rotation
device fixation
device side facing the skin
position of lead loops in the pocket
use of antibiotics in the pocket
skin type (loose, normal, firm)
body mass index (BMI)
The endpoints will be:
describe R wave amplitude values
describe proportion of patients with P wave visible on intrinsic LECG strips recorded at 1-Month FU."|30 to 120 days||||||
837247|NCT01297283|Secondary|Effect of Posture Changes and Artifact-inducing Maneuvers on the LECG Quality.|"The intrinsic R wave amplitude and P waves visibility will be taken to evaluate the effect of posture changes and artifact-inducing maneuvers on the quality of LECG at the 1-Month Follow-Up visit (LECG vector with best combination of the highest R wave and most visible P wave).
The endpoints will be R wave amplitude and P wave visibility in different positions (meaning visible or not visible in both positions).
R wave changes and proportion of patients with stable P waves visibility at lying position versus other positions will be calculated by an independent reviewer."|30 to 120 days||||||
837248|NCT01297283|Secondary|Quality of LECG in New Devices Versus Device Replacements.|"The two following parameters will be used to compare the quality of LECG in new implants versus device replacements at PHD and 1-Month on the same LECG vector:
Intrinsic R wave amplitude
P waves visibility The LECG vector at PHD with best combination of the highest R wave and most visible P wave will be selected.
R wave amplitude measurements as well as P wave visibility assessment will be done by the independent reviewer.
The endpoints will be:
comparison of mean R wave values at PHD and 1-month
comparison of proportion of patients with P wave visible at PHD and 1-month."|30 to 120 days||||||
837249|NCT01297283|Secondary|Evaluation of the Stability of LECG Performance Over Time.|"Two parameters will be used to evaluate LECG changes between PHD and 1-Month on the same LECG vector: intrinsic R wave amplitude and P waves visibility (selection the LECG vector at PHD with best combination of the highest R wave and most visible P wave).
R wave amplitude measurements as well as P wave visibility assessment will be done by the independent reviewer.
The endpoints evaluated are:
mean R wave changes from PHD to 1-month
proportion of patients with stable P wave visibility at PHD and 1-Month (meaning both visits visible or both visits not visible)."|30 to 120 days||||||
837250|NCT01297283|Secondary|Evaluation of the Possibility to Determine Ventricle Capture by an Independent Reviewer.|"The investigator will simulate loss of capture (LOC) at 1-Month Follow-Up visit by printing strips of LOC in both ventricular leads, LOC in LV lead only, LOC in RV lead only, no LOC. One strip randomly selected among them by the study manager will be submitted to an independent reviewer. With help of the PHD template LECG strips (intrinsic, RV paced, LV paced, BiV paced) of this patient, he/she will determine which lead is capturing.
The endpoint is the proportion of correct classifications of ventricular capture done by then independent reviewer of LECG."|30 to 120 days|Proportion of Patients Correctly Classified||proportion||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837251|NCT01297283|Primary|Proportion of Patients With LECG Performing Clinically Equivalent to PECG During Standard Pacemaker Follow-up Procedure.|During CRT-P standard follow-up, ECG is used to determine atrial, left and right ventricular pacing thresholds. As primary endpoint, we will consider the proportion of patients for which for all leads LECG provides pacing threshold values that are clinically equivalent to those obtained with PECG taken as reference. The analysis will be performed on data collected at the 1-Month Follow-Up visit when the device pocket healing process is completed. Clinical equivalence will be defined as the LECG threshold values being no more than 0.5 volts different from the PECG threshold values.|30 to 120 days|||proportion||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837252|NCT01297322|Secondary|Rate of Combined Minor Access Site Complications|"Secondary safety endpoint
Access site-related bleeding requiring greater than 30 minutes to achieve hemostasis;
Access site-related hematoma > 6 cm;
Late access site-related bleeding (following hospital discharge);
Ipsilateral lower extremity arterial emboli;
Ipsilateral deep vein thrombosis;
Access site-related vessel laceration;
Access site wound dehiscence;
Localized access site infection treated with intramuscular or oral antibiotics;
Arteriovenous fistula not requiring treatment;
Pseudoaneurysm requiring thrombin injection or fibrin adhesive injection;
Pseudoaneurysm not requiring treatment;
New onset access site-related neuropathy in the ipsilateral lower extremity not requiring surgical repair;
Ipsilateral pedal pulse diminished by two grades or transiently lost."|30 days +/- 7 days|||participants|||Number
837253|NCT01297322|Secondary|Procedure Success|Secondary effectiveness endpoint - attainment of final hemostasis using any method and freedom from major vascular complications through 30 days|30 days +/- 7 days|||participants|||Number
837254|NCT01297322|Secondary|Device Success|Secondary effectiveness endpoint - ability to deploy the delivery system, deliver the collagen, and achieve hemostasis with VASCADE alone or with adjunctive compression|Up to 1 day|||participants|||Number
837255|NCT01297322|Secondary|Time to Hospital Discharge (TTHD)|Secondary effectiveness endpoint - elapsed time between device (VASCADE) or sheath (manual compression) removal and when subject is actually discharged from the hospital|Up to 2 days|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
837256|NCT01297322|Secondary|Time to Discharge Eligibility (TTDE)|Secondary effectiveness endpoint - elapsed time between device (VASCADE) or sheath (manual compression) removal and when subject is medically able to be discharged based solely on the assessment of the access site, as determined by the medical team|Up to 2 days|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
837257|NCT01297322|Secondary|Time to Ambulation (TTA)|Secondary effectiveness endpoint - elapsed time between device (VASCADE) or sheath (manual compression) removal and when subject stands and walks 20 feet without evidence of arterial re-bleeding|Up to 1 day|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
837258|NCT01297322|Primary|Rate of Combined Access Site-related Major Complications|"Primary safety endpoint
Access site-related bleeding requiring transfusion;
Vascular injury requiring repair (via surgery, ultrasound guided compression, transcatheter embolization or stent graft);
New ipsilateral lower extremity ischemia causing a threat to the viability of the limb and requiring surgical or additional percutaneous intervention. This compromised blood flow is documented by subject symptoms, physical exam and/or a decreased or absent blood flow on lower extremity angiogram.;
Access site-related infection requiring intravenous antibiotics and/or extended hospitalization;
New onset access site-related neuropathy in the ipsilateral lower extremity requiring surgical repair;
Permanent access site-related nerve injury. (> 30 days)"|30 days +/- 7 days|||participants|||Number
837260|NCT01297335|Secondary|Changes in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Ratings of Sedation and Sensation of Dry Mouth Reported by the Subjects, Pre and 1 Hour Post Injection|Subjects were asked to rate severity of two of the most common side effects of clonidine, sedation and sensation of dry mouth, at pre and post (1 hour after) intrathecal administration of clonidine. The mean changes between pre and post injection VAS ratings of sedation and sensation of dry mouth are reported below. The VAS scale ranges from 1 to 10 cm, with higher values indicating higher level of sedation and higher level of dry mouth.|Before clonidine injection (Baseline), and at 1 hour after clonidine injection.|All qualified subjects were given intrathecal clonidine and were asked to rate level of sedation and sensation of dry mouth before clonidine injection (baseline) and 1 hour post injection on VAS scale.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837261|NCT01297335|Secondary|Likert Scale Pain Rating|Likert scale is 11 point digital pain rating system that asks subjects to rate their pain from 0 to 10. Rating of 0 means no pain at all, and in increasing order, 10 would mean worst pain imaginable/ unbearable pain.|Pre-dose and 1 hour post injection.|All subjects met inclusion and exclusionary criteria, and received intrathecal injection of clonidine. Subjects were asked to rate their baseline pain on Likert scale prior to receiving intrathecal clonidine injection, and 1 hour post intrathecal clonidine injection.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837262|NCT01297335|Primary|Change in Blood Pressure After Intrathecal Injection of Clonidine.|"Subjects baseline blood pressure (systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP)), and blood pressures after clonidine injection was compared against baseline to assess efficacy of clonidine in refractory hypertensive subjects. Subject's blood pressure was monitored continuously after intrathecal injection of clonidine until subjects blood pressure nadir and return to pre clonidine injection level. The mean value reported below are the average changes in blood pressure from baseline (pre clonidine injection) in both SBP and DBP during post clonidine injection blood pressure monitoring for 4 hours.
Blood pressure measurements were collected every 10 minutes for first hour after injection, and every 15 minutes after the first hour, up to 4 hours were averaged to report the change from baseline."|Baseline, Every 10 Minutes for first hour after clonidine injection, and every 15 minutes after first hour, until 4 hours after clonidine injection|All subjects met inclusion and exclusionary criteria, and was given an intrathecal injection of clonidine. They were followed for changes in blood pressure for 4 hours.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837263|NCT01297348|Primary|Number of Idiopathic Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Cases and Matched Controls|Idiopathic VTE cases=new DVT, PE or CVST occurring in absence of known risk factors. Matched Control was defined as participants with no diagnosis of VTE matched for age, calendar time, exposure status and database. Current user=had claim for study OC prescription (Lybrel or other OCs containing ethinyl estradiol 20 mcg) whose filled use occurred within 30 days prior to or at index date. Past user=had claim for a study OC prescription whose filled use occurred between 90 to 31 days prior to index date. Index date=date of VTE diagnosis for case and corresponding date for matched control.|Index date (date of VTE diagnosis for case and corresponding date for matched control)|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who met the eligibility criteria.||participants|||Number
837264|NCT01297348|Primary|Incidence Rate of Idiopathic Venous Thromboembolism (VTE)|Idiopathic VTE=deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), or cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) occurring in absence of known risk factors. Incidence rate reported for current, past users. Current user=had claim for study OC prescription (Lybrel or other OCs containing ethinyl estradiol 20 mcg) whose filled use occurred within 30 days prior to or at index date. Past user=had claim for a study OC prescription whose filled use occurred between 90 to 31 days prior to index date. Index date=date of VTE diagnosis for case and corresponding date for matched control.|Index date (date of VTE diagnosis for case and corresponding date for matched control)|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who met the eligibility criteria.||incidence rate per 100000 person-years|||Number
837265|NCT01297465|Secondary|Heart Rate Assessments||Days 15-20 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|"Safety Population included all the randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of Pergoveris® or Gonal-f®. .N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
837266|NCT01297465|Secondary|Systolic and Diastolic Arterial Blood Pressure Assessments||Days 15-20 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|"Safety Population included all the randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of Pergoveris® or Gonal-f®. .N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||millimeter of mercury ( mm Hg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
837267|NCT01297465|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in the form of signs, symptoms, abnormal laboratory findings, or diseases that emerges or worsens relative to baseline during a clinical study with an Investigational Medicinal Product (IMP), regardless of causal relationship and even if no IMP has been administered.|Day 1 up to days 15-20 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|Safety Population included all the randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of Pergoveris® or Gonal-f®.||participants|||Number
837268|NCT01297465|Secondary|Number of Participants With Early and Late Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome (OHSS)|Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome (OHSS) is a syndrome which can manifest with enlarged ovaries, advanced ascites with increased vascular permeability, pleural fluid accumulation, hemoconcentration, and increased blood clotting. Early OHSS was defined as the onset of OHSS occurring within 9 days after oocyte retrieval and late OHSS was defined as the onset of OHSS occurring on or after day 10 from oocyte retrieval.|Days 15-20 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|Safety Population included all the randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of Pergoveris® or Gonal-f®.||participants|||Number
837269|NCT01297465|Secondary|Number of Participants With Multiple Pregnancies|Multiple pregnancy was defined as the existence of more than one fetal sac with fetal heart activity.|Days 35-42 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|"Mod-ITT population included all the randomized participants who had received at least one dose of GONAL-f® or Pergoveris®, and completed the primary efficacy assessment. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who had their embryo transfer in study treatment cycle."||participants|||Number
837270|NCT01297465|Secondary|Biochemical Pregnancies Rate|Biochemical pregnancy was defined as the pregnancy diagnosed only by the detection of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) in serum or urine and that does not develop into a clinical pregnancy. Participants with beta- hCG concentration greater than 10 international units per liter (IU/L) were considered as biochemical pregnant.|Days 15-20 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|"Mod-ITT population included all the randomized participants who had received at least one dose of GONAL-f® or Pergoveris®, and completed the primary efficacy assessment. . N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who had their embryo transfer in study treatment cycle."||participants|||Number
837271|NCT01297465|Secondary|Number of Participants With Cancelled Cycles Due to Excessive or Insufficient Ovarian Response to Treatment|An excessive ovarian response: greater than or equal to 25 oocytes which could put the participant at risk of OHSS; An insufficient ovarian response: defined as 3 or less follicles of greater than or equal to 12 millimeter developing following at least 7 days of treatment.|S1 until Day 15-20 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|Safety Population included all the randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of Pergoveris® or Gonal-f®.||participants|||Number
837272|NCT01297465|Secondary|Clinical Pregnancy Rate|Clinical pregnancy was defined as pregnancy diagnosed by ultrasonographic visualization of one or more gestational sacs or definitive clinical signs of pregnancy. It includes ectopic pregnancy. Clinical pregnancy rate was reported as total clinical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate per cycle started and per embryo transfer [ET]).|Days 35-42 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|"Mod-ITT population included all the randomized participants who had received at least one dose of GONAL-f® or Pergoveris®, and had completed the primary efficacy assessment. N signifies those participants who had their ET in study treatment cycle. n signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure in specified categories."||percentage of participants|||Number
837273|NCT01297465|Secondary|Number of Fetal Hearts With Activity|Number of fetal hearts with activity was evaluated by ultrasound scan|Days 35-42 post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 11 days}])|"Mod-ITT population included all the randomized participants who had received at least one dose of GONAL-f® or Pergoveris®, and completed the primary efficacy assessment.N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||fetal hearts||Standard Deviation|Mean
837274|NCT01297465|Secondary|Number of Fetal Sacs With Activity|Number of fetal sacs with activity was evaluated by ultrasound scan|Days 35-42 post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 11 days}])|"Mod-ITT population included all the randomized participants who had received at least one dose of GONAL-f® or Pergoveris®, and completed the primary efficacy assessment.N (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||fetal sacs||Standard Deviation|Mean
837275|NCT01297465|Secondary|Implantation Rate|Implantation rate per reporting group was measured as the number of fetal sacs observed, divided by the number of embryos transferred multiplied by 100.|Days 35-42 post r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|Mod-ITT population included all the randomized participants who had received at least one dose of GONAL-f® or Pergoveris®, and completed the primary efficacy assessment.||percent sacs per embryo||Standard Deviation|Mean
837276|NCT01297465|Secondary|Total Number of Stimulation Treatment Days||Day 1 up to r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|Safety Population included all the randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of Pergoveris® or Gonal-f®.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
837277|NCT01297465|Secondary|Total Dose and Mean Daily Dose of Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH)||Day 1 up to r-hCG day (end of stimulation cycle [approximately 11 days])|Safety Population included all the randomized participants who had received at least 1 dose of Pergoveris® or Gonal-f®.||IU||Standard Deviation|Mean
837278|NCT01297465|Primary|Total Number of Oocytes Retrieved|The total number of oocytes retrieved per reporting group on the day of ovum pick-up (OPU) (34-38 hours post r-hCG day) was calculated. Oocyte retrieval is a technique used in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) in order to remove oocytes from the ovary of the female participant, enabling fertilization outside the body.|OPU day (34-38 hours post r-hCG day [end of stimulation cycle {approximately 11 days}])|Modified intention-to-treat (Mod-ITT) population included all the randomized participants who had received at least one dose of GONAL-f® or Pergoveris®, and completed the primary efficacy assessment.||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
837279|NCT01297491|Secondary|Duration of Response (DoR)|DoR was defined as the elapsed time between the date of first documented CR or PR response (not the date of confirmed response) and the following date of event defined as the first documented progression or death due to underlying cancer.|Every 6 weeks up to 24 months|Analysis set Stage 1 includes all patients who were enrolled during Stage 1 after meeting eligibility criteria and who have received at least 1 dose of study drug. 1 partial response was observed as best overall response (BOR) for 1 patient in the squamous group. Also,1 patient experienced partial response as BOR in the non-squamous group.||Days|||Number
837280|NCT01297491|Secondary|Time to Response (TTR)|TTR for a participant was defined as the time from the first treatment date to the date of first documented confirmed CR or PR evaluation. The date of event was defined as the date of response that was first determined and not using the date the response was confirmed.|Every 6 weeks up to 24 months|Analysis set Stage 1 includes all patients who were enrolled during Stage 1 after meeting eligibility criteria and who have received at least 1 dose of study drug. 1 partial response was observed as best overall response (BOR) for 1 patient in the squamous group. Also,1 patient experienced partial response as BOR in the non-squamous group.||Days|||Number
837281|NCT01297491|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|"DCR defined as the percentage of participants with best overall response of CR or PR or stable disease (SD). Complete response was defined as disappearance of all non-nodal target lesions. In addition, any pathological lymph nodes assigned as target lesions must have a reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. Partial response was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameter of all target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters. Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR or CR nor an increase in lesions which would qualify for PD.
Analyses of response rates were performed based on investigators’ assessments (as per RECIST 1.1 criteria). DCR included all participants with and without measurable disease at baseline."|Every 6 weeks up tp 24 months|Analysis set Stage 1 includes all patients who were enrolled during Stage 1 after meeting eligibility criteria and who have received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837282|NCT01297491|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR) Based on Investigator Assessment|ORR was defined as the percentage of participants with best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). Complete response was defined as disappearance of all non-nodal target lesions. In addition, any pathological lymph nodes assigned as target lesions must have a reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. Partial response was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameter of all target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters. Analyses of response rates were performed based on investigators’ assessments (as per RECIST 1.1 criteria). ORR included all patients with and without measurable disease at baseline.|Every 6 weeks up to 24 months|Analysis set Stage 1 includes all patients who were enrolled during Stage 1 after meeting eligibility criteria and who have received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837283|NCT01297491|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) Using Kaplan-Meier Estimates|OS was defined as the time from start of study drug (Stage 1) until death from any cause. If a patient was not known to have died, survival was censored at the date of last contact.|Every 8 weeks up to 24 months|Analysis set Stage 1 includes all patients who were enrolled during Stage 1 after meeting eligibility criteria and who have received at least one dose of study drug.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837284|NCT01297491|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) Rate as Per Investigator Local Review Measured Using RECIST 1.1 of Patients at Week 12|"PFS rate was defined as the percentage of participants who were progression free at 12 weeks. Participants were considered as a success for PFS rate evaluated at 12 weeks if they presented an overall response at their 2nd post-baseline tumor assessment.The enrollment into the study in either histology group would stop for futility if a PFS rate <50% at 12 weeks was observed.
No statistical analysis was planned for this primary outcome. The results of the primary objective was based on the data from the interim analysis that took place at the cut off dates: 10-Apr-2013 for non-squamous and 08-Jan-2014 for squamous group."|Week 12|Analysis set Stage 1 includes all patients who were enrolled during Stage 1 after meeting eligibility criteria and who have received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837285|NCT01297504|Secondary|Mean Number of Doses of Palivizumab Administered||12 months|||doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
837286|NCT01297504|Primary|Distribution of Comorbidities in Study Participants|The percentage of participants with each and combinations of the three comorbidities for which palivizumab is indicated.|Baseline|||percentage of participants|||Number
837287|NCT01297504|Secondary|Compliance to Prescribed Palivizumab|Compliance to prescribed palivizumab was calculated based on the number of doses received versus the expected number of doses for each participant. The expected number of doses for each participant was estimated based on seasonality and current prescription guidelines for each country.|12 months|||Percentage of expected dose||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837288|NCT01297504|Secondary|Risk Factors for Hospitalization|Variables that could act as risk factors for hospitalization for lower respiratory tract infection were tested in univariate and multivariate Poisson regression models. Baseline characteristics, such as age, gender, birth weight and comorbidities were included as covariates in the Poisson regression model. Variables for multivariate analysis were added applying forward selection. Gestational age and birth weight were included as continuous variables, considering that the higher they were the better they could act as a protection factor for hospitalization due to respiratory infection.|Baseline and 12 months|||rate ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837289|NCT01297504|Secondary|Characterization of Hospitalization Episodes Due to Lower Respiratory Tract Infection and RSV||12 months|Participants with hospitalization due to LTRI and hospitalization due to LTRI and RSV.||hospitalization episodes|Participants||Number
837290|NCT01297504|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hospitalizations for Lower Respiratory Tract Infection and RSV|The number of participants with hospitalizations due to lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) and hospitalizations due to lower respiratory tract infection caused by RSV.|12 months|||participants|||Number
837291|NCT01297504|Primary|Characterization of Participants With Risk Factors for Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) Infection|Study participants were characterized at Baseline by history of bronchopulmonary dysplasia, history of prematurity (less than or equal to 35 weeks gestational age), children with hemodynamically significant congenital heart disease (CHD), the presence of cohabitants less than 6 years old, possible exposure to indoor tobacco smoke, day care attendance, asthmatic or atopic mother, smoking during pregnancy, breastfeeding, prenatal assistance (4 or more visits during pregnancy), neonatal hospitalization care, history of neonatal assisted ventilation, and mother education level (completed primary school).|Baseline|||participants|||Number
837292|NCT01297517|Primary|Mean IOP at Month 3 for Each Assessment Timepoint (8 AM, + 2 h, + 7 h, and + 9 h)|At the Month 3 (Exit) visit, the 8 am IOP measurement was taken before instillation of study drug. The study drug was instilled approximately 15 minutes after the 8 am measurement. An additional dose was given at 3 pm. Intraocular pressure was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. One eye from each patient was chosen as the study eye and only data for the study eye were used for the efficacy analysis. A higher IOP can be a greater risk factor for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage).|Month 3|Intent-to-treat (ITT): All patients who received study medication and completed at least 1 scheduled on-therapy study visit. Observed case analysis of the ITT dataset, per randomized treatment assignment.||millimeters mercury (mm Hg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837293|NCT01297595|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio of Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Infinite Time [MRAUC (0- ∞)]|Molar ratio of metabolite to parent area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0- ∞) [MRAUC (0- ∞)].|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. ‘N’ = Number of participants contributing to the mean.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837294|NCT01297595|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio of Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (MRAUClast)|Molar ratio of metabolite to parent area under the plasma concentration time-curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (MRAUClast).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837295|NCT01297595|Secondary|Metabolite to Parent Ratio of Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (MRCmax)|Metabolite (PF-06260182) to parent (crizotinib) molar ratio of maximum observed plasma concentration (MRCmax).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837296|NCT01297595|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
837297|NCT01297595|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837298|NCT01297595|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)] for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)|AUC (0 - ∞)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞) of crizotinib metabolite (PF-06260182).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period. ‘N’ = Number of participants contributing to the mean.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837299|NCT01297595|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast) for Crizotinib Metabolite (PF-06260182)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast) of Crizotinib metabolite (PF-06260182).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837300|NCT01297595|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug. Apparent volume of distribution after oral dose (Vz/F) is influenced by the fraction absorbed.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Liter||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837301|NCT01297595|Secondary|Apparent Oral Clearance (CL/F)|Drug clearance (CL) is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the plasma. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance [CL/F]) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed (F).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Liter/hour (L/hr)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837302|NCT01297595|Secondary|Plasma Terminal Half-Life (t1/2)|Plasma terminal half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
837303|NCT01297595|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837304|NCT01297595|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last measured concentration (AUClast).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837305|NCT01297595|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hrs post crizotinib dose|PK parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hr||Full Range|Median
837306|NCT01297595|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Infinite Time [AUC (0 - ∞)]|AUC (0 - ∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hours (hrs) post crizotinib dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all participants randomized and treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837307|NCT01297920|Primary|Mean Intraocular Pressure (IOP) at Each Assessment Timepoint (8 AM, +2 h, +7 h, and +9 h) at Month 3|The study drug was instilled at 8 AM and 3 PM (approximately 15 minutes after conducting the IOP measurements). Intraocular pressure was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. One eye from each patient was chosen as the study eye and only data for the study eye were used for the efficacy analysis. A higher IOP can be a greater risk factor for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage).|Month 3|Intent-to-Treat (ITT): All subjects who received study medication and completed at least 1 scheduled on-therapy study visit. Observed case analysis of the ITT dataset, per randomized treatment assignment.||millimeters mercury (mm HG)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837539|NCT01305239|Secondary|Duration of Treatment|Total duration of adjuvant hormonal therapy with exemestane.|Baseline, every 6 months until adjuvant hormonal therapy stopped or up to 5 years of therapy completed|Safety set; N = number of participants with analyzable (non-missing) data. For 2 participants lost to follow-up, the duration of exemestane was calculated until the date of lost to follow-up.||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
837308|NCT01298063|Secondary|Clinical Relevant Abnormalitites for Physical Examination, Vital Signs, 12-lead ECG, Clinical Laboratory Tests, Adverse Event, Investigator's Global Tolerability|Clinical relevant abnormalitites for physical examination, vital signs, 12-lead electrocardiogramm (ECG), clinical laboratory test (including hematology, clinical chemistry, coagulation, urinalysis), adverse event, investigator's global tolerability. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as Adverse Events.|First administration of trial medication until 28 days after last administration of trial medication|Treated set||participants|||Number
837309|NCT01298063|Secondary|Area Under Curve From 0 to tz (AUC0-tz)|AUC0-tz represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point|30 minutes (min) prior to first dosing and 30 min, 1 hour (h), 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 5 h, 6 h, 7 h, 8 h, 9 h, 12 h, 24 h, 36 h, 48 h, 72 h, 96 h, 120 h, 144 h, 168 h, 240 h after first dosing|PK analysis set. Group B1 was not included in the primary analysis set for comparison.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837310|NCT01298063|Primary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax)|Cmax represents the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma|30 minutes (min) prior to first dosing and 30 min, 1 hour (h), 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 5 h, 6 h, 7 h, 8 h, 9 h, 12 h, 24 h, 36 h, 48 h, 72 h, 96 h, 120 h, 144 h, 168 h, 240 h after first dosing|PK analysis set. Group B1 was not included in the primary analysis set for comparison.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837311|NCT01298063|Primary|Area Under Curve From 0 to Infinity (AUC0-infinity)|AUC0-infinity represents the area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity|30 minutes (min) prior to first dosing and 30 min, 1 hour (h), 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 5 h, 6 h, 7 h, 8 h, 9 h, 12 h, 24 h, 36 h, 48 h, 72 h, 96 h, 120 h, 144 h, 168 h, 240 h after first dosing|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set includes all evaluable matched subjects in the treated set providing at least 1 observation for at least 1 PK endpoint without important protocol violations. Group B1 was not included in the primary analysis set for comparison.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837312|NCT01298128|Primary|Incidence of Side Effects of Oral Contraceptives Such as Abnormal Bleeding, Headache, Breast Discomfort, Bloating and Mood Swings (See Description)|abnormal bleeding, intermittent bleeding, headache, breast discomfort, bloating, mood swings, nausea, vaginal discharge, vomitting, weight gain|patients were followed for the duration of an in-vitro fertilization cycle- 2 months|70 patients were recruited and randomized. 53 patients completed the study. 11 patients did not then undergo an ivf cycle after recruitment. 6 patients withdrew from the study after recruitment.||participants|||Number
837313|NCT01298167|Primary|Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"The Visual Analog or Analogue Scale (VAS)* is designed to present to the respondent a rating scale with minimum constraints. Respondents mark the location on the 10-centimeter line corresponding to their feeling. It also gives the maximum opportunity for each respondent to express a personal response style.
The scale is interpreted as the greater the scale score (as the score approaches 10), the greater the cosmetic and functional outcome of the healed wound.
Aitken, R. C. B. (1969). Measurement of feelings using visual analogue scales. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine. 62, 989 - 993
Freyd, M. (1923). The graphic rating scale. Journal of Educational Psychology, 43, 83 - 102
Hayes, M. H. S. & D. G. Patterson (1921). Experimental development of the graphic rating method. Psychological Bulletin, 18, 98-99"|3 months|Individuals' wounds were divided in half and then treated with both Cyanoacrylate and Fast Absorbing Gut Suture. Individuals were randomized as to which half of the wound (superior or inferior) would be treated by each of the methods.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837314|NCT01298323|Primary|Percentage of Time a Patient Experienced at Least 1 AE of CTCAE Grade >=2 in First 12 Months of Receiving Vandetanib in Patients Who Participated in Patient Outreach Program.|The primary endpoint is the percentage of time a patient experienced at least one AE of CTCAE grade 2 or higher in the first 12 months of treatment with vandetanib. If the patient discontinues treatment with vandetanib prior to the 12-month time point for any reason, this endpoint will be the time a patient experienced at least one AE of CTCAE grade 2 or higher as a percentage of the time the patient was receiving vandetanib.|12 months|Number of Months Analyzed is the cumulative sum of number of months that all the participants were present in the study.||Percentage of days|months|Standard Deviation|Mean
837315|NCT01298362|Secondary|Mean Percentage Change in Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density From AI Commencement to Month 12 of Therapy.||Month 1-6 (depending on duration of chemotherapy) and month 13-18|Patients with LS BMD measurements both at AI commencement and at 12 months of AI therapy.||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
837316|NCT01298362|Secondary|Mean Percentage Change in Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density From Baseline (Before Chemotherapy Commencement) to Chemotherapy Completion||Baseline and month 1-6 (depending on duration of chemotherapy)|Patients with LS BMD measurements both at baseline (before chemotherapy commencement) and at chemotherapy completion||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
837317|NCT01298362|Secondary|Bone Fracture Rate||During the 12 months of AI Therapy|All patients with available 12 month follow-up during AI treatment||participants|||Number
837318|NCT01298362|Secondary|Percentage Change in Total Hip Bone Mineral Density Before AI Commencement to Month 12 of Therapy for Patients Who Are Treated With AIs as First Line Therapy||From AI commencement to month 12 of AI therapy|Patients with HIP BMD measurements both at AI commencement and at 12 months of AI therapy.||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
837319|NCT01298362|Secondary|Percentage Change in Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density Before AI Commencement to Month 12 of Therapy for Patients Who Are Treated With AIs as First Line Therapy||From AI commencement to month 12 of AI therapy|Patients with LS BMD measurements both at AI commencement and at 12 months of AI therapy.||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
837320|NCT01298362|Secondary|Percentage Change in Total Hip Bone Mineral Density From Baseline to Month 12 of AI Therapy.||Baseline and month 13-18 (1-6 months of chemotherapy + 12 months of AI therapy)|Patients with HIP BMD measurements both at baseline and at 12 months of AI therapy.||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
837335|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Gastric Inhibitory Peptide (GIP) Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC 2-6) at Day 28|Change from baseline in GIP area under the plasma concentration time curve was computed by Linear trapezoidal method.|Baseline (Day -1); 2 to 6 hours post-dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 GIP area under the curve (AUC) value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||pg*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837321|NCT01298362|Primary|Mean Percentage Change in Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density From Baseline (Before Chemotherapy Commencement) to Month 12 of AI Therapy|"BMD was evaluated at lumbar spine (LS) and hip (HIP) with measurements taken before CT, before AI therapy and at the end of the 12 month followup period while on AI treatment. Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA scan) was used with all measurements performed with the Explorer absorptiometer produced by Hologic, Bedford, MA, USA in the same referral site in Athens, apart from two centres in other cities which used however the same absorptiometer model with identical software.
The primary outcome variable was the mean percentage change in LS BMD between the pre CT treatment measurement and the post 12 months AI measurements in the CT cohort. The HT cohort was included as a control group."|Baseline and month 13-18 (1-6 months of chemotherapy + 12 months of AI therapy)|Patients with LS BMd measurements both at baseline and at 12 months of AI therapy.||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
837322|NCT01298492|Secondary|Serum Trough Concentrations of PF-00547659 Versus Time|Serum trough concentrations of PF-00547659 were analyzed using population Pharmacokinetic (PK) methodology.|Week 4,8,12,16,20,24,28,32,36,40,44,48,52,56,60,64,68,72,76,80,84,88,92,96|PK population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and had data on at least 1 PK concentration.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
837323|NCT01298492|Secondary|Number of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug (PF-00547659) Antibodies|Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies result was defined as ADA titre value greater than or equal to (>=) 4.64 at at least one of the time points.|Baseline up to Week 96|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of investigational product.||Participants|||Count of Participants
837324|NCT01298492|Primary|Number of Participants With On-Treatment Adverse Events (AEs), AEs Led to Withdrawal, and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|AEs included adverse drug reactions, illnesses with onset during the study, exacerbation of previous illnesses, clinically significant changes in physical examination findings and abnormal objective test findings (ECG, laboratory). An SAE was defined as any AE at any dose that resulted in death; was life threatening (immediate risk of death); required in-subject hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in a persistent or significant disability/incapacity (substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal life functions); or resulted in congenital anomaly/birth defect.|From start of study treatment up to Week 72 (Treatment Period)|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of investigational product.||Participants|||Count of Participants
837325|NCT01298518|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve AUC (0-24) of PF-04620110|"Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 (pre-dose) to 24 hours.
AUC (0-24) was computed using the linear trapezoidal method."|24 hours post-morning dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 AUC(0-24) value.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837326|NCT01298518|Secondary|Time to Cmax (Tmax) of PF-04620110||24 hours post-morning dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 Tmax value.||hr||Full Range|Median
837327|NCT01298518|Secondary|Minimum Observed Plasma Trough Concentration (Cmin) of PF-04620110||24 hours post-morning dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 Cmin value.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837328|NCT01298518|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of PF-04620110||24 hours post-morning dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 Cmax value.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
837329|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-Dinner Glucose Excursions Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 12 to 16 Hours (AUC 12-16) Post-dose at Day 28|Change from baseline in post-dinner glucose excursion under the plasma concentration time curve was computed by Linear trapezoidal method.|Baseline (Day -1); 12 to 16 hours post-dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-dinner glucose excursion area under the curve (AUC) value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||mg*hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837330|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-Lunch Glucose Excursions Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 6 to 10 Hours (AUC 6-10) Post-dose at Day 28|Change from baseline in post-lunch glucose excursion under the plasma concentration time curve was computed by Linear trapezoidal method.|Baseline (Day -1); 6 to 10 hours post-dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-lunch glucose excursion area under the curve (AUC) value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||mg*hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837331|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Net Triglycerides at Day 28||0 hour (pre-dose) on Day -1, Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 fasting net triglycerides value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837332|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Insulin at Day 28||0 hour (pre-dose) on Day -1, Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 fasting insulin value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||micro-IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837333|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Glucose at Day 28||0 hour (pre-dose) on Day -1, Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 fasting glucose value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837334|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Peptide YY (PYY) Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC 2-6) at Day 28|Change from baseline in PYY area under the plasma concentration time curve was computed by Linear trapezoidal method.|Baseline (Day -1); 2 to 6 hours post-dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 PYY area under the curve (AUC) value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||pg*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837336|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Amide Glucagon Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) and Active Glucagon Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC 2-6) at Day 28|Change from baseline in total amide GLP-1 and active GLP-1 area under the plasma concentration time curve was computed by Linear trapezoidal method.|Baseline (Day -1); 2 to 6 hours post-dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 total amide GLP-1 and active GLP-1 area under the curve (AUC) value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||pmol*hr/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
837337|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-Prandial Net Triglyceride Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC 2-6) After a Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT) at Day 28|Change from baseline in post-prandial area under the plasma net triglyceride concentration time curve as determined by standardized MMTT. Linear trapezoidal method was used to compute AUC.|Baseline (Day -1); 2 to 6 hours post-dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-MMTT net triglyceride area under the curve (AUC) value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||mg*hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837338|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-Prandial C-Peptide Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC 2-6) After a Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT) at Day 28|Change from baseline in post-prandial area under the plasma C-peptide concentration time curve as determined by standardized MMTT. Linear trapezoidal method was used to compute AUC.|Baseline (Day -1); 2 to 6 hours post-dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-MMTT C-peptide area under the curve (AUC) value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837339|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-Prandial Insulin Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC 2-6) After a Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT) at Day 28|Change from baseline in post-prandial plasma insulin AUC under the plasma insulin concentration versus time curve as determined by standardized MMTT. Linear trapezoidal method was used to compute AUC.|Baseline (Day -1); 2 to 6 hours post-dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-MMTT insulin area under the curve (AUC) value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||micro-IU*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837340|NCT01298518|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 24-Hour Average Plasma Glucose (APG) Post-Dose at Day 28|APG= AUC (0-24)/24. AUC (0-24) was computed using Linear trapezoidal method.|Baseline (Day -1); 24 hours post-dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 APG value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837341|NCT01298518|Primary|Change From Baseline in Post-Prandial Glucose Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 2 to 6 Hours (AUC 2-6) After a Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT) at Day 28|Change from baseline in post-prandial area under the plasma glucose concentration time curve as determined by standardized MMTT. Linear trapezoidal method was used to compute AUC.|Baseline (Day -1); 2 to 6 hours post-dose on Day 28|Analysis population included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-MMTT glucose area under the curve (AUC) value. Here, 'n' is participants evaluable at specified time points for each group.||mg*hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837342|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Chest Expansion at Weeks 12 and 16|Chest expansion, measured in cm, is defined as the difference in thoracic circumference during full expiration versus full inspiration, measured at the fourth intercostal space (nipple line). Chest expansion was measured for both maximum and minimum inhalation and the data presented below combined both the values.|Weeks 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837343|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Chest Expansion at Week 8|Chest expansion, measured in cm, is defined as the difference in thoracic circumference during full expiration versus full inspiration, measured at the fourth intercostal space (nipple line). Chest expansion was measured for both maximum and minimum inhalation and the data presented below combined both the values.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||cm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837344|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Chest Expansion at Week 4|Chest expansion, measured in cm, is defined as the difference in thoracic circumference during full expiration versus full inspiration, measured at the fourth intercostal space (nipple line). Chest expansion was measured for both maximum and minimum inhalation and the data presented below combined both the values.|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||cm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837345|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BASMI Components at Week 16|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score was composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10. For each BASMI component, the best of the two tries was taken which corresponded to the highest value for cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober’s test and lateral flexion and the smallest value for tragus to wall distance. For cervical rotation, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance, a mean of the left and right measurements was taken.|Week 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837346|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BASMI Components at Week 12|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score was composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10. For each BASMI component, the best of the two tries was taken which corresponded to the highest value for cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober’s test and lateral flexion and the smallest value for tragus to wall distance. For cervical rotation, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance, a mean of the left and right measurements was taken.|Week 12|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837347|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BASMI Components at Week 8|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score was composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10. For each BASMI component, the best of the two tries was taken which corresponded to the highest value for cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober’s test and lateral flexion and the smallest value for tragus to wall distance. For cervical rotation, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance, a mean of the left and right measurements was taken.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837348|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BASMI Components at Week 4|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score was composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10. For each BASMI component, the best of the two tries was taken which corresponded to the highest value for cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober’s test and lateral flexion and the smallest value for tragus to wall distance. For cervical rotation, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance, a mean of the left and right measurements was taken.|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837349|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BASMI at Weeks 12 and 16|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score is composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10.|Weeks 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837350|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BASMI at Week 8|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score is composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837351|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) at Week 4|BASMI is an objective measure of spinal mobility. The BASMI score is composed of 5 measures: cervical rotation, intermalleolar distance, modified Schober's test, lateral flexion and tragus to wall distance. Each measure was scored 0-2 (0=normal mobility, 2=severe reduction) to give a final score ranging 0 to 10.|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837352|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With PASS at Weeks 4, 12 and 16|PASS is defined as a symptom state that the participants consider acceptable. The PASS was collected weekly in the diary card, but at each visit this was collected in the CRF. Participants assessed their health in the previous 48 hours and whether it would be acceptable to remain like that in the next few months.|Weeks 4, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Participants|||Number
837353|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) at Week 8|PASS is defined as a symptom state that the participants consider acceptable. PASS was collected weekly in the diary card, but at each visit this was collected in the CRF. Participants assessed their health in the previous 48 hours and whether it would be acceptable to remain like that in the next few months.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Participants|||Number
837372|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Nocturnal Back Pain at Weeks 12 and 16|Participants assessed the nocturnal back pain they had in the previous 48 hours on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (most severe pain).|Weeks 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837354|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Minimum Clinically Important Deterioration (MCID) at Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|MCID was completed at Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16 or Early Discontinuation and once weekly between visits. MCID was converted to binary scores as follows: 1 = ‘improved’/’very important’ and ‘improved’/’moderately important’ 2 = ‘improved’/’slightly important’, ‘improved’/’not at all important’, ‘no change’ and ‘worse-no pain. MCID was evaluated based on participant's opinion on the following three items for the question of how have they been during the last 48 hours compared to Screening visit: 'improved-less pain', 'no change', and 'worse-more pain'. Participants were further asked the importance of worsening i.e., very important, moderately important, slightly important and not at all important as MCID evaluation criteria.|Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Participants|||Number
837355|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With MCII at Weeks 4, 12 and 16|MCII was completed at Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16 or Early Discontinuation and once weekly between visits. MCII was converted to binary scores as follows: 1 = ‘improved’/’very important’ and ‘improved’/’moderately important’ 2 = ‘improved’/’slightly important’, ‘improved’/’not at all important’, ‘no change’ and ‘worse-no pain. MCII was determined based on participant's response on the following three items for the question of how have they been during the last 48 hours compared to when they started the study: improved or less pain, no change and worse-more pain. MCII was typically defined according to the patients perception of what was very important improvement, moderate important improvement, slightly important improvement or not at all improvement.|Weeks 4, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Participants|||Number
837356|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Minimum Clinically Important Improvement (MCII) at Week 8|MCII was completed at visit weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16 or Early Discontinuation and once weekly between visits. MCII was converted to binary scores as follows: 1 = ‘improved’/’very important’ and ‘improved’/’moderately important’ 2 = ‘improved’/’slightly important’, ‘improved’/’not at all important’, ‘no change’ and ‘worse-no pain'. MCII was determined based on participant's response on the following three items for the question of how have they been during the last 48 hours compared to when they started the study: improved or less pain, no change and worse-more pain. MCII was typically defined according to the patients perception of what was very important improvement, moderate important improvement, slightly important improvement or not at all improvement.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Participants|||Number
837357|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in MASES (Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|Assessment of enthesitis was performed in the following 7 domains: 1) 1st costochondral joint left and right, 2) 7th costochondral joint left and right, 3) posterior superior iliac spine left and right, 4) anterior superior iliac spine left and right, 5) iliac crest left and right, 6) 5th lumbar spinous process and 7) proximal insertion of Achilles tendon left and right. Each domain was graded for the presence (1) and absence (0) of tenderness yielding total MASES ranging from 0 (no tenderness) to 13 (worst possible score; severe tenderness).|Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837358|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Tenderness Joint Counts at Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|Tender joint count was performed at each visit to assess the peripheral joint involvement according to ASAS recommendation.|Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Tender joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
837359|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Counts at Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|Swollen joint count was performed at each visit to assess the peripheral joint involvement according to ASAS recommendation.|Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Swollen joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
837360|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Each BASFI Component at Week 16|BASFI is to assess the prticipant's level of ability to complete the activities on a scale from 0 (easy) to 10 (impossible). The total score was calculated as the average score of the 10 questions.|Week 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837361|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Each BASFI Component at Week 12|BASFI is to assess the prticipant's level of ability to complete the activities on a scale from 0 (easy) to 10 (impossible). The total score was calculated as the average score of the 10 questions.|Week 12|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837501|NCT01299454|Secondary|Renal Clearance (CLr) of Brexipiprazole|"Urine samples were taken at pre-dose and during the following increments: 0 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, 72 to 96, 96 to 120, 120 to 144, and 144 to 168 hours postdose.
The value of CLr was calculated as Ae,u/AUCt."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||mL/h/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837362|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Each BASFI Component at Week 8|BASFI is to assess the prticipant's level of ability to complete the activities on a scale from 0 (easy) to 10 (impossible). The total score was calculated as the average score of the 10 questions.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837363|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Each BASFI Component at Week 4|BASFI is to assess the prticipant's level of ability to complete the activities on a scale from 0 (easy) to 10 (impossible). The total score was calculated as the average score of the 10 questions.|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837364|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PGA at Weeks 12 and 16|Investigator assessed the overall disease activity using the scale of 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (severe disease activity).|Weeks 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837365|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PGA (Physician Global Assessment) at Week 8|Investigator assessed the overall disease activity using the scale of 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (severe disease activity).|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837366|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in PGA (Physician Global Assessment) at Week 4|The investigator assessed the overall disease activity using the scale of 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (severe disease activity).|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837367|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BASDAI Level of Morning Stiffness-related Scores at Weeks 12 and 16|Participants were requested to complete the BASDAI upon symptom return then every day for the first 15 days after first administration of test article and weekly thereafter. A numeric rating scale was used, for questions 1-5 (Fatigue, Spinal Pain, Joint pain or swelling, discomfort and morning stiffness severity respectively) it was on the scale from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe). For question 6 (morning stiffness duration) it was on the scale of 0 (0 or more hours) to 10 (2 hours). The analysis presented below is the change in morning stiffness severity.|Weeks 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837368|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in BASDAI Level of Morning Stiffness-related Scores at Week 8|Participants were requested to complete the BASDAI upon symptom return then every day for the first 15 days after first administration of test article and weekly thereafter. A numeric rating scale was used, for questions 1-5 (Fatigue, Spinal Pain, Joint pain or swelling, discomfort and morning stiffness severity respectively) it was on the scale from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe). For question 6 (morning stiffness duration) it was on the scale of 0 (0 or more hours) to 10 (2 hours). The analysis presented below is the change in morning stiffness severity.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837369|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BASDAI Level of Morning Stiffness-related Scores at Week 4|Participants were requested to complete the BASDAI upon symptom return then every day for the first 15 days after first administration of test article and weekly thereafter. A numeric rating scale was used, for questions 1-5 (Fatigue, Spinal Pain, Joint pain or swelling, discomfort and morning stiffness severity respectively) it was on the scale from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe). For question 6 (morning stiffness duration) it was on the scale of 0 (0 or more hours) to 10 (2 hours). The analysis presented below is the change in morning stiffness severity.|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837370|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BASFI at Week 8|Participants assessed their level of ability to complete activities on a scale from 0 (easy) to 10 (impossible). These scales were collected at each visit in the CRF. The total score was calculated as the average score of the 10 questions.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837371|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BASFI (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index ) at Week 4|Participants assessed their level of ability to complete activities on a scale from 0 (easy) to 10 (impossible). These scales were collected at each visit in the CRF. The total score was calculated as the average score of the 10 questions.|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837373|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Nocturnal Back Pain at Week 8|Participants assessed the nocturnal back pain they had in the previous 48 hours on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (most severe pain).|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837374|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Nocturnal Back Pain at Week 4|Participants assessed the nocturnal back pain they had in the previous 48 hours on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (most severe pain).|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837375|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Total Back Pain at Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|Participants assessed the total back pain they had in the previous 48 hours on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (most severe pain).|Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837376|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Total Back Pain at Week 8|Participants assessed the total back pain they had in the previous 48 hours on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (most severe pain).|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837377|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Total Back Pain at Week 4|Participants assessed the total back pain they had in the previous 48 hours on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (most severe pain).|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837378|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BAS-G Score at Weeks 12 and 16.|BAS-G was used to indicate the effect of disease has had on participant's well-being over the last 48 hours in a 0 (none) to 10 (very severe) point scale. Participants completed the BAS-G on a diary card following their Screening visit if they had a flare which required them to restart their NSAID. Participants were requested to complete the BAS-G upon symptom return (after stoppage of NSAIDs during screening phase) and weekly thereafter.|Weeks 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837379|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BAS-G Score at Week 8|BAS-G was used to indicate the effect of disease has had on participant's well-being over the last 48 hours in a 0 (none) to 10 (very severe) point scale. Participants completed the BAS-G on a diary card following their Screening visit if they had a flare which required them to restart their NSAID. Participants were requested to complete the BAS-G upon symptom return (after stoppage of NSAIDs during screening phase) and weekly thereafter.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837380|NCT01298531|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in BAS-G (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis-Global) Score at Week 4|BAS-G was used to indicate the effect of disease has had on participant's well-being over the last 48 hours in a 0 (none) to 10 (very severe) point scale. Participants completed the BAS-G on a diary card following their Screening visit if they had a flare which required them to restart their NSAID. Participants were requested to complete the BAS-G upon symptom return (after stoppage of NSAIDs during screening phase) and weekly thereafter.|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837381|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change in NSAID ASAS Score From Week 8 to Week 16 (Placebo Only)|"Diary data from the 7 days prior to respective visit were used to evaluate the endpoint, where the score was only calculated if at least 5 of the 7 days data were available. Score was calculated from NSAID usage completed on diary cards considering NSAID type, total daily dose and number of days consumed. The Daily diclofenac-equivalent dose score was derived by converting each daily dose of NSAID to a percentage dose equivalent of 150 mg diclofenac; e.g. 1000 mg naproxen is equivalent to 150 mg diclofenac. For each NSAID, the percentage diclofenac-equivalent score is then multiplied by daily dose frequency and proportion of the period where dose was taken.
Ie Score=M x F x n/N (M: Percentage dose equivalent to diclofenac; F=Daily Dose Frequency; n=number of days with NSAID; N=number of days in period). The NSAID ASAS score is the sum of all such scores for all NSAIDs taken during the period. The minimum value is 0 and a higher NSAID-ASAS value indicates greater NSAIDs consumption."|Week 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases with no imputation.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837419|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Second Six Minute Step Test Peripheral Oxygen Saturation"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the patient will step up and down one 20cm step during six minute. It will be evaluated by a pulse oxymeter ."|First day or second day of the protocol (random) ,30 minutes after the first 6MST|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||% of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
837382|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change in NSAID ASAS Score From Baseline to Week 16 (ETN Arm Only)|"Diary data from the 7 days prior to respective visit were used to evaluate the endpoint, where the score was only calculated if at least 5 of the 7 days data were available. Score was calculated from NSAID usage completed on diary cards considering NSAID type, total daily dose and number of days consumed. The Daily diclofenac-equivalent dose score was derived by converting each daily dose of NSAID to a percentage dose equivalent of 150 mg diclofenac; e.g. 1000 mg naproxen is equivalent to 150 mg diclofenac. For each NSAID, the percentage diclofenac-equivalent score is then multiplied by daily dose frequency and proportion of the period where dose was taken.
Ie Score=M x F x n/N (M: Percentage dose equivalent to diclofenac; F=Daily Dose Frequency; n=number of days with NSAID; N=number of days in period). The NSAID ASAS score is the sum of all such scores for all NSAIDs taken during the period. The minimum value is 0 and a higher NSAID-ASAS value indicates greater NSAIDs consumption."|Week 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases with no imputation.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837383|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ASDAS ESR Score at Weeks 12 and 16.|"The ASDAS-ESR was derived from back pain, duration of morning stiffness, patient global score and peripheral pain/swelling. The scores were categorized as follows : inactive disease (< 1.3), moderate (1.3 – < 2.1), high (2.1 – 3.5) and very high disease activity ( > 3.5). ASDAS ESR is calculated as follows:
ASDAS ESR=0.08*Total Back Pain+0.07*Duration of Morning Stiffness+0.11*Patient Global+0.09*Peripheral Pain/Swelling+0.29*√(ESR)."|Weeks 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837384|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ASDAS ESR Score at Week 8.|"The ASDAS-ESR was derived from back pain, duration of morning stiffness, patient global score and peripheral pain/swelling. The scores were categorized as follows : inactive disease (< 1.3), moderate (1.3 – < 2.1), high (2.1 – 3.5) and very high disease activity ( > 3.5). ASDAS ESR is calculated as follows:
ASDAS ESR=0.08*Total Back Pain+0.07*Duration of Morning Stiffness+0.11*Patient Global+0.09*Peripheral Pain/Swelling+0.29*√(ESR)."|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837385|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ASDAS ESR (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score-Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) Score at Week 4.|"The ASDAS-ESR was derived from back pain, duration of morning stiffness, patient global score and peripheral pain/swelling. The scores were categorized as follows : inactive disease (< 1.3), moderate (1.3 – < 2.1), high (2.1 – 3.5) and very high disease activity ( > 3.5). ASDAS ESR is calculated as follows:
ASDAS ESR=0.08*Total Back Pain+0.07*Duration of Morning Stiffness+0.11*Patient Global+0.09*Peripheral Pain/Swelling+0.29*√(ESR)."|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837386|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ASDAS CRP Score at Weeks 12 and 16.|"The ASDAS-CRP was derived from back pain, duration of morning stiffness, patient global score and peripheral pain/swelling. The scores were categorized as follows : inactive disease(< 1.3), moderate (1.3 – < 2.1), high (2.1 – 3.5) and very high disease activity ( > 3.5). ASDAS CRP is calculated as follows:
ASDAS CRP=0.12*Total Back Pain+0.06*Duration of Morning Stiffness+0.11*Patient Global+0.07*Peripheral Pain/Swelling+0.58*ln(CRP+1)."|Weeks 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Units on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837387|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ASDAS CRP Score at Week 8.|"The ASDAS-CRP was derived from back pain, duration of morning stiffness, patient global score and peripheral pain/swelling. The scores were categorized as follows : inactive disease(< 1.3), moderate (1.3 – < 2.1), high (2.1 – 3.5) and very high disease activity ( > 3.5). ASDAS CRP is calculated as follows:
ASDAS CRP=0.12*Total Back Pain+0.06*Duration of Morning Stiffness+0.11*Patient Global+0.07*Peripheral Pain/Swelling+0.58*ln(CRP+1)."|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837388|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ASDAS CRP (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score-C Reactive Protein) Score at Week 4.|"The ASDAS-CRP was derived from back pain, duration of morning stiffness, patient global score and peripheral pain/swelling. The scores were categorized as follows : inactive disease(< 1.3), moderate (1.3 – < 2.1), high (2.1 – 3.5) and very high disease activity ( > 3.5). ASDAS CRP is calculated as follows:
ASDAS CRP=0.12*Total Back Pain+0.06*Duration of Morning Stiffness+0.11*Patient Global+0.07*Peripheral Pain/Swelling+0.58*ln(CRP+1)."|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837389|NCT01298531|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving ASAS 70 at Week 8|ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) participants ASAS = 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 70 = 70% improvement from baseline and an absolute change ≥ 20 units on a 0-100 scale (0=no disease activity, 100=high disease activity)|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Participants|||Number
837390|NCT01298531|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving ASAS 70 at Weeks 4, 12 and 16.|ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) participants ASAS = 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 70 = 70% improvement from baseline and an absolute change ≥ 20 units on a 0-100 scale (0=no disease activity, 100=high disease activity) for ≥ 3 domains, and no worsening in remaining domain.|Weeks 4, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Participants|||Number
837391|NCT01298531|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving ASAS 40 at Week 8|ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) participants ASAS = 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 40 = 40% improvement from baseline and an absolute change ≥ 20 units on a 0-100 scale (0=no disease activity, 100=high disease activity) for ≥ 3 domains, and no worsening in remaining domain.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Participants|||Number
837392|NCT01298531|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving ASAS 40 at Weeks 4, 12 and 16.|ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) participants ASAS = 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 40 = 40% improvement from baseline and an absolute change ≥ 20 units on a 0-100 scale (0=no disease activity, 100=high disease activity) for ≥ 3 domains, and no worsening in remaining domain.|Weeks 4, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Participants|||Number
837393|NCT01298531|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving ASAS 20 at Week 8|ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) participants ASAS = 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 20 = 20% improvement from baseline and an absolute change ≥ 10 units on a 0-100 scale (0=no disease activity; 100=high disease activity) for ≥ 3 domains, and no worsening in remaining domain.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Participants|||Number
837394|NCT01298531|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving ASAS 20 (Assessment of the Spondylo Arthritis International Society 20) at Weeks 4, 12 and 16|ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) participants ASAS = 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 20 = 20% improvement from baseline and an absolute change ≥ 10 units on a 0-100 scale (0=no disease activity; 100=high disease activity) for ≥ 3 domains, and no worsening in remaining domain.|Weeks 4, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Participants|||Number
837395|NCT01298531|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieved BASDAI 50 at Weeks 4, 12 and 16.|Response was defined as a 50% improvement of the baseline BASDAI after 4, 12 and 16 Weeks.|Weeks 4, 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was performed with the observed cases.||Participants|||Number
837396|NCT01298531|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieved BASDAI 50 at Week 8.|Response was defined as a 50% improvement of the baseline BASDAI after 8 Weeks.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Participants|||Number
837397|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mini BASDAI at Week 8 (AUC).|A numeric rating scale was used, for questions 1-5 (Fatigue, Spinal Pain, Joint pain or Swelling, Discomfort and Morning stiffness severity respectively) on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe). Question 6 (morning stiffness duration) was recorded on a scale of 0 (0 or more hours) to 10 (2 hours). To give the five major AS symptoms equal weighting, the average of the two scores relating to morning stiffness was taken. This averaged morning stiffness score was then summed with the remaining 4 questions, resulting in a composite score on a scale of 0-50, which was then divided by 5 to give the final BASDAI score on a scale of 0-10.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. The efficacy analysis was based on the ITT population. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis.||Unit on a scale * days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837398|NCT01298531|Secondary|Number of Participants Using NSAIDs at Week 8.|Participants who received NSAIDs at Week 8 were reported.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was with the observed cases.||Participants|||Number
837399|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in BASDAI Score at Weeks 12 and 16.|A numeric rating scale was used, for questions 1-5 (Fatigue, Spinal Pain, Joint pain or Swelling, Discomfort and Morning stiffness severity respectively) on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe). Question 6 (morning stiffness duration) was recorded on a scale of 0 (0 or more hours) to 10 (2 hours). To give the five major AS symptoms equal weighting, the average of the two scores relating to morning stiffness was taken. This averaged morning stiffness score was then summed with the remaining 4 questions, resulting in a composite score on a scale of 0-50, which was then divided by 5 to give the final BASDAI score on a scale of 0-10.|Week 12 and 16|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. This analysis was with the observed cases.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837400|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in BASDAI at Week 8|A numeric rating scale was used, for questions 1-5 (Fatigue, Spinal Pain, Joint pain or Swelling, Discomfort and Morning stiffness severity respectively) on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe). Question 6 (morning stiffness duration) was recorded on a scale of 0 (0 or more hours) to 10 (2 hours). To give the five major AS symptoms equal weighting, the average of the two scores relating to morning stiffness was taken. This averaged morning stiffness score was then summed with the remaining 4 questions, resulting in a composite score on a scale of 0-50, which was then divided by 5 to give the final BASDAI score on a scale of 0-10.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837401|NCT01298531|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) at Week 4.|A numeric rating scale was used, for questions 1-5 (Fatigue, Spinal Pain, Joint pain or Swelling, Discomfort and Morning stiffness severity respectively) on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe). Question 6 (morning stiffness duration) was recorded on a scale of 0 (0 or more hours) to 10 (2 hours). To give the five major Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) symptoms equal weighting, the average of the two scores relating to morning stiffness was taken. This averaged morning stiffness score was then summed with the remaining 4 questions, resulting in a composite score on a scale of 0-50, which was then divided by 5 to give the final BASDAI score on a scale of 0-10.|Week 4|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837402|NCT01298531|Secondary|Total NSAID ASAS [Area Under Curve (AUC)] Score From Baseline to Week 8.|The total NSAID score for the first 8 weeks of randomized treatment was calculated as an AUC using the linear trapezoidal rule. LOCF will only be applied where the subject is still in the study and the NSAID score is missing.|Week 8|The ITT population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through LOCF approach.||Unit on a scale * days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837403|NCT01298531|Primary|Change From Baseline in Non Steroidal Anti Inflammatory Drug (NSAID) Assessment of the SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) Score at Week 8.|"Diary data from the 7 days prior to respective visit were used to evaluate the endpoint, where the score was only calculated if at least 5 of the 7 days data were available. Score was calculated from NSAID usage completed on diary cards considering NSAID type, total daily dose and number of days consumed. The Daily diclofenac-equivalent dose score was derived by converting each daily dose of NSAID to a percentage dose equivalent of 150 mg diclofenac; e.g. 1000 mg naproxen is equivalent to 150 mg diclofenac. For each NSAID, the percentage diclofenac-equivalent score is then multiplied by daily dose frequency and proportion of the period where dose was taken.
Ie Score=M x F x n/N (M: Percentage dose equivalent to diclofenac; F=Daily Dose Frequency; n=number of days with NSAID; N=number of days in period). The NSAID ASAS score is the sum of all such scores for all NSAIDs taken during the period. The minimum value is 0 and a higher NSAID-ASAS value indicates greater NSAIDs consumption."|Week 8|The Intent To Treat (ITT) population comprised all participants who received at least one dose of the randomized treatment. Participants were analyzed according to treatment randomized and any data recorded after entry into the escape arm were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed through last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837404|NCT01298544|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serotype-specific Pneumococcal IgG Antibody Level ≥0.35 Mcg/mL, 36 Months After the Toddler Dose|Percentage of participants achieving predefined antibody threshold ≥0.35 mcg/mL along with the corresponding 95% CI for the 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F). Exact 2-sided CI based on the observed proportion of participants.|Day 1 (36 months after toddler dose)|Evaluable Immunogenicity population||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837405|NCT01298544|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Serotype-specific Pneumococcal Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Antibody, 36 Months After the Toddler Dose|Antibody geometric mean concentration (GMC) as measured by mcg/mL for 7 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F). GMC (7vPnC, 7vPnC/DTaP, and DTap) and corresponding 2-sided 95% confidence intervals (CI) were evaluated. Geometric means (GMs) were calculated using all participants with available data for the specified blood draw.|Day 1 (36 months after toddler dose)|Evaluable Immunogenicity population: eligible participants who had blood drawn within required time frame, had at least 1 valid and determinate assay result for the proposed analysis, received no prohibited vaccines, and had no major protocol violations.||microgram per milliliter (mcg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837406|NCT01298648|Secondary|Remission Rate at Week 4, Week 8, and Week 24|The remission rate for each evaluation timepoint (Weeks 4, 8, and 24) was calculated as the number of participants that had CDAI < 150 divided by the number of participants at Baseline that had CDAI scores ≥ 150.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8, and Week 24|Participants with available data at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
837407|NCT01298648|Primary|Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Baseline and Week 24|The CDAI is used to evaluate the activity of Crohn's disease. The CDAI is calculated on the basis of a one-week evaluation of 8 items and ranges from 0 to about 600. The 8 items are frequency of liquid or very soft stool, abdominal pain, complications of Crohn's disease (e.g., uveitis, arthritis, fistula, and abscess), abdominal mass, hematocrit, body weight, use of antidiarrheals, and general condition. Low scores indicate low activity of Crohn's disease. In general, CDAI scores below 150 represent remission and scores over 450 represent very severe Crohn's disease.|Baseline, Week 24|Participants with available data at each time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837420|NCT01298661|Secondary|"First Six Minute Step Test Peripheral Oxygen Saturation"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the patient will step up and down one 20cm step during six minute. It will be evaluated by a pulse oxymeter."|First day or second day of the protocol (random)|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||% of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
837408|NCT01298648|Primary|Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Baseline and Week 8|The CDAI is used to evaluate the activity of Crohn's disease. The CDAI is calculated on the basis of a one-week evaluation of 8 items and ranges from 0 to about 600. The 8 items are frequency of liquid or very soft stool, abdominal pain, complications of Crohn's disease (e.g., uveitis, arthritis, fistula, and abscess), abdominal mass, hematocrit, body weight, use of antidiarrheals, and general condition. Low scores indicate low activity of Crohn's disease. In general, CDAI scores below 150 represent remission and scores over 450 represent very severe Crohn's disease.|Baseline, Week 8|Participants with available data at each time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837409|NCT01298648|Secondary|Improvement Rating by Investigator at Week 24|Overall response rating, according to investigator’s subjective clinical opinion. The level of improvement (markedly improved, improved, not improved, or not assessable) was categorized by comparing clinical condition at week 24 or at discontinuation with baseline condition.|Week 24|||percentage of participants|||Number
837410|NCT01298648|Primary|Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Baseline and Week 4|The CDAI is used to evaluate the activity of Crohn's disease. The CDAI is calculated on the basis of a one-week evaluation of 8 items and ranges from 0 to about 600. The 8 items are frequency of liquid or very soft stool, abdominal pain, complications of Crohn's disease (e.g., uveitis, arthritis, fistula, and abscess), abdominal mass, hematocrit, body weight, use of antidiarrheals, and general condition. Low scores indicate low activity of Crohn's disease. In general, CDAI scores below 150 represent remission and scores over 450 represent very severe Crohn's disease.|Baseline, Week 4|Participants with available data at each time point.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837411|NCT01298648|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. An Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) is any noxious and undesired reaction related to an experimental drug or experiment. A serious AE (SAE) is an AE that results in death, is life-threatening, results in or prolongs hospitalization, results in congenital anomaly, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, spontaneous or elective abortion, or requires intervention to prevent a serious outcome. AEs were rated for severity as either Mild: transient and easily tolerated; Moderate: causes discomfort and interrupts usual activities; or Severe: causes considerable interference with usual activities, may be incapacitating or life-threatening. AEs related to adalimumab were assessed as being either probably or possibly related by the investigator. An Unexpected ADR is an ADR for which the nature or gravity is not consistent with the applicable product information.|24 weeks|Safety analysis set: Excluding 21 patients who were transferred to other institutions during the surveillance period and 2 patients who made no visit after the first administration, 1693 patients were included in the safety analysis set.||participants|||Number
837412|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Third Six Minute Step Test Heart Rate"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 2, the patient will step up and down a 20cm step during six minute. It will be evaluated by a cardio monitor."|On the third day of evaluation, seven days after the first day of evaluation. Since it was performed in the same day of the third 6MWT, the choice of the first test was random, and there was a 30 minute interval between them.|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded from the study since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation. 3 COPD patient Analysis Population Description: s and 5 elderly subjects didn't show on the third day of evaluation, then, they were just excluded in the analysis of the variables collected in this day.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837413|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Second Six Minute Step Test Heart Rate"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the patient will step up and down a 20cm step during six minute. It will be evaluated by a cardio monitor."|First day or second day of the protocol (random), 30 minutes after the first 6MST|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837414|NCT01298661|Secondary|"First Six Minute Step Test Heart Rate"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the patient will step up and down a 20cm step during six minute. It will be evaluated by a cardio monitor."|First day or second day of the protocol (random)|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837415|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Third Six Minute Walk Test Heart Rate"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 2, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. It will be evaluated by a cardio monitor."|On the third day of evaluation, seven days after the first day of evaluation. Since it was performed in the same day of the third 6MST, the choice of the first test was random, and there was a 30 minute interval between them.|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded from the study since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation. 3 COPD patient Analysis Population Description: s and 5 elderly subjects didn't show on the third day of evaluation, then, they were just excluded in the analysis of the variables collected in this day.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837416|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Second Six Minute Walk Test Heart Rate"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. It will be evaluated by a cardio monitor at rest and every two minutes of the test."|First day or second day of the protocol (random), 30 minutes after the first 6MWT|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837417|NCT01298661|Secondary|"First Six Minute Walk Test Heart Rate"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. It will be evaluated by a cardio monitor."|First day or second day of the protocol (random)|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837418|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Third Six Minute Step Test Peripheral Oxygen Saturation"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 2, the patient will step up and down one 20cm step during six minute. It will be evaluated by a pulse oxymeter."|On the third day of evaluation, seven days after the first day of evaluation. Since it was performed in the same day of the third 6MWT, the choice of the first test was random, and there was a 30 minute interval between them.|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded from the study since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation. 3 COPD patient Analysis Population Description: s and 5 elderly subjects didn't show on the third day of evaluation, then, they were just excluded in the analysis of the variables collected in this day.||% of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
837421|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Third Six Minute Walk Test Peripheral Oxygen Saturation"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 2, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. It will be evaluated by a pulse oxymeter."|On the third day of evaluation, seven days after the first day of evaluation. Since it was performed in the same day of the third 6MST, the choice of the first test was random, and there was a 30 minute interval between them.|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded from the study since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation. 3 COPD patient Analysis Population Description: s and 5 elderly subjects didn't show on the third day of evaluation, then, they were just excluded in the analysis of the variables collected in this day.||% of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
837422|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Second Six Minute Walk Test Peripheral Oxygen Saturation"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. It will be evaluated by a pulse oxymeter."|,First day or second day of the protocol (random) 30 minutes after the first 6MWT|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||% of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
837423|NCT01298661|Secondary|"First Six Minute Walk Test Peripheral Oxygen Saturation"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. It will be evaluated by a pulse oxymeter."|First day or second day of the protocol (random)|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||% of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
837424|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Third Six Minute Step Test Exertion Perception"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 2, the patient will step up down one 20cm step during six minute. The Exertion Perception will be evaluated using BORG scale. This scale is a self-reported scale, which range from 0 to 10, where 0 means none exertion perception and 10 means very intense exertion perception (the highest the patient has ever felt). Lower values means that the patient feel less discomfort."|On the third day of evaluation, seven days after the first day of evaluation. Since it was performed in the same day of the third 6MWT, the choice of the first test was random, and there was a 30 minute interval between them.|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded from the study since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation. 3 COPD patient Analysis Population Description: s and 5 elderly subjects didn't show on the third day of evaluation, then, they were just excluded in the analysis of the variables collected in this day.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837425|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Second Six Minute Step Test Exertion Perception"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the patient will step up and down one 20cm step during six minute.The Exertion Perception will be evaluated using BORG scale. This scale is a self-reported scale, which range from 0 to 10, where 0 means none exertion perception and 10 means very intense exertion perception (the highest the patient has ever felt). Lower values means that the patient feel less discomfort."|First day or second day of the protocol (random), 30 minutes after the first 6MST|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837426|NCT01298661|Secondary|"First Six Minute Step Test Exertion Perception"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the patient will step up and down one 20cm step during six minute. The Exertion Perception will be evaluated using BORG scale. This scale is a self-reported scale, which range from 0 to 10, where 0 means none exertion perception and 10 means very intense exertion perception (the highest the patient has ever felt). Lower values means that the patient feel less discomfort."|First day or second day of the protocol (random)|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837427|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Third Six Minute Walk Test Exertion Perception"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 2, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. The Exertion Perception will be evaluated using BORG scale. This scale is a self-reported scale, which range from 0 to 10, where 0 means none exertion perception and 10 means very intense exertion perception (the highest the patient has ever felt). Lower values means that the patient feel less discomfort."|On the third day of evaluation, seven days after the first day of evaluation. Since it was performed in the same day of the third 6MST, the choice of the first test was random, and there was a 30 minute interval between them.|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded from the study since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation. 3 COPD patient Analysis Population Description: s and 5 elderly subjects didn't show on the third day of evaluation, then, they were just excluded in the analysis of the variables collected in this day.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837428|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Second Six Minute Walk Test Exertion Perception"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. The Exertion Perception will be evaluated using BORG scale. This scale is a self-reported scale, which range from 0 to 10, where 0 means none exertion perception and 10 means very intense exertion perception (the highest the patient has ever felt). Lower values means that the patient feel less discomfort."|First day or second day of the protocol (random), 30 minutes after the first 6MWT|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837429|NCT01298661|Secondary|"First Six Minute Walk Test Exertion Perception"|"This test was conducted by the Rater 1, the subject walked as far as it could in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. The Exertion Perception will be evaluated using BORG scale. This scale is a self-reported scale, which range from 0 to 10, where 0 means none exertion perception and 10 means very intense exertion perception (the highest the patient has ever felt). Lower values means that the patient feel less discomfort."|First day or second day of the protocol (random)|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837447|NCT01299025|Secondary|Change in Score on the Dynamic Gait Index From Day 1 to Day 42|The Dynamic Gait index consists of 8 items. Performance on each item is rated from 0 (severe impairment) to 3 (nomal performance). Minimum total score is 0 and maximum 24. Higher scores indicate better walking and balance performance.|Measured at day 1 (before training) and day 42 (after training)|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837448|NCT01299025|Primary|Change in Timed Up and Go Test From Day 1 to Day 42|Change in seconds on the Timed Up and Go test (TUG). In the TUG test time is taken from rising from a chair, walking 3 meters, turning,walking back and sitting down.|Measured at day 1 (before the training period) and at day 42 (after the training period)|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
837430|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Body-Mass Index, Airflow Obstruction, Dyspnea, Exercise Capacity Index (BODE Index)"|"It was evaluated only in the COPD patients. BODE index is a prognostic index used in COPD patients, it is a 0-10 scale, where lower values means better prognostic. It is composed by other commonly used evaluations tools in COPD, Forced Expiratory Volume in the First second (from spirometry); classification in the scale ranging from 0-3, Body-mass index, classification in the scale ranging from 0-1; Six-minute walk test distance, classification in the scale ranging from 0-3 and referred dyspnea, classification in the scale ranging from 0-3.
It was only used the total score (0-10)"|Second day|2 COPD were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation. The other two populations were not verified, since the measure is specific for COPD patients||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
837431|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Third Six Minute Walk Test Distance"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 2, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. The performance will be the distance (meters)that it walk."|On the third day of evaluation, seven days after the first day of evaluation. Since it was performed in the same day of the third 6MST, the choice of the first test was random, and there was a 30 minute interval between them.|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded from the study since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation. 3 COPD patient Analysis Population Description: s and 5 elderly subjects didn't show on the third day of evaluation, then, they were just excluded in the analysis of the variables collected in this day.||meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
837432|NCT01298661|Secondary|"Second Six Minute Walk Test Distance"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. The performance will be the distance (meters)that it walk."|On the first or second day of evaluation (random), 30 minutes after the first 6MWT.|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
837433|NCT01298661|Secondary|"First Six Minute Walk Test Distance"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the subject will walk as far as it can in a 30m corridor during 6 minutes. The performance will be the distance (meters)that it walk."|First day or second day of the protocol (random)|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
837434|NCT01298661|Primary|"Third Six Minute Step Test Performance"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 2, the patient will step up and down a 20cm step during six minutes. The performance will be evaluated by the number of the climbs."|On the third day of evaluation, seven days after the first day of evaluation. Since it was performed in the same day of the third 6MWT, the choice of the first test was random, and there was a 30 minute interval between them.|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded from the study since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation. 3 COPD patient Analysis Population Description: s and 5 elderly subjects didn't show on the third day of evaluation, then, they were just excluded in the analysis of the variables collected in this day.||steps||Standard Deviation|Mean
837435|NCT01298661|Primary|"Second Six Minute Step Test Performance"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the patient will step up and down a 20cm step during six minutes. The performance will be evaluated by the number of the climbs."|On the first or second day of evaluation (random), 30 minutes after the first 6MST.|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||steps||Standard Deviation|Mean
837436|NCT01298661|Primary|"First Six Minute Step Test Performance"|"This test will be conducted by the Rater 1, the patient will step up and down a 20cm step during six minute. The performance will be evaluated by the number of the steps."|First day or second day of the protocol (random)|2 COPD patients and 2 healthy young individuals were excluded since they did not appeared in the second day of evaluation.||steps||Standard Deviation|Mean
837437|NCT01298778|Other Pre-specified|Emetic Symptoms|side effect potential with the increased dose of duramorph-percentage experiencing such symptoms|24hours|percentage of patients reporting emetic symptoms requiring treatment||Participants|||Count of Participants
837438|NCT01298778|Other Pre-specified|Pruritus|side effects-percentage of subjects requiring treatment|24 hours|percentage of patients with pruritis requiring treatment.||Participants|||Count of Participants
837439|NCT01298778|Secondary|Average Pain Over 24 Hours||24 hours|VAS pain score of 0=no pain at all up to 100 being worst pain imaginable.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837440|NCT01298778|Secondary|Incidence of Depression|to determine whether an intervention in women predicted to experience severe pain after cesarean delivery reduces postpartum depression up to 2 months post delivery.|2 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
837441|NCT01298778|Secondary|Analgesic Consumption|total amount of analgesic consumption|24 hour|||mg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
837442|NCT01298778|Secondary|Pain|resting pain, worst pain|24 hour|||units on a scale, 0 -none, 100-worst||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
837443|NCT01298778|Secondary|Incidence of Persistent Pain|to determine whether an intervention in women predicted to experience severe pain after cesarean delivery reduces persistent pain up to 2 months post delivery.|2 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
837444|NCT01298778|Primary|Severity of Acute Pain|to determine whether an intervention in women predicted to experience severe pain after cesarean delivery reduces acute post-delivery pain (24 hour evoked pain post delivery). The scale utilized was a 100mm sliding VAS, where 0mm=no pain up to 100mm-worst pain imaginable.|24 hour|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837445|NCT01299025|Secondary|Change in the 12 Item Walking Scale From Day 1 to Day 42|The 12 item walking scale is a self-rating scale of walking limitations. The scale includes 12 items that each are scores from 1 to 5, where 5 is extremely limited. Scores are added and transformed to a scale from 0-100. 0 indicates no limitation and 100 extremely limited.|Measured at day 1 and day 42, before and after the training|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837446|NCT01299025|Secondary|Change in the Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scalefrom Day 1 to Day 42|The ABC scale is a self-rating scale of balance activities in everyday Life. It includes 16 items. The patient rates his/her performance from 0-100. Score on each item are summed an divided by 16. Minimum score is 0 and maximum score 100. A higher score indicate higher confidence in ones balance and walking capacity.|Measured at day 1 (before training) and day 42 (after training)|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837449|NCT01299077|Secondary|Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score|Each patient is Scored on VAS at baseline and two weeks. VAS is the abbreviation of visual analogue score. There is no subscale in VAS. The maximum value of vas is 10 and the minimum is 0. This is self-evaluation method to present the severity of patient pain. More score number, more pain.|Baseline and 2 weeks|The primary analysis will be on the Per-protocol (PP) population. PP population includes all subjects who received the dose of study drug without protocol deviation and had all the assessment per protocol.||Scores on VAS||Standard Deviation|Mean
837450|NCT01299077|Secondary|Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) Score|"Each patient is Scored on JOA at baseline and two weeks. JOA is short for Japanese Orthopedic Association, which consists of 12 items: low back pain, lower extremity pain and numbness, walking ability, straight leg raising, muscle strength, sensory and etc. The first 3 item’s scores are range from 0 to 3 and the others are from 0 to 2. Higher score means better condition.
All of these items scores are combined for a total overall JOA score, which is range from 0 to 27."|Baseline and 2 weeks|The primary analysis will be on the Per-protocol (PP) population. PP population includes all subjects who received the dose of study drug without protocol deviation and had all the assessment per protocol.||Scores on JOA||Standard Deviation|Mean
837451|NCT01299077|Secondary|Safety Data During Triple Therapy.|Percentage of participants with reported Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|2 weeks|The primary analysis will be on the Per-protocol (PP) population. PP population includes all subjects who received the dose of study drug without protocol deviation and had all the assessment per protocol.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837452|NCT01299077|Secondary|Onset Time of Symptom Relief.|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for the Average Onset Time of Symptom Relief. In this case the onset time of symptom relief was defined as the days between the end of triple therapy and the symptom improvement reported by patients.|2 weeks|The primary analysis will be on the Per-protocol (PP) population. PP population includes all subjects who received the dose of study drug without protocol deviation and had all the assessment per protocol.||Average Days of Onset Time||Standard Deviation|Mean
837453|NCT01299077|Primary|Overall Satisfaction Degree After 2 Weeks Treatment of Triple Therapy (MBL+MYO+NSAID).|The measurement of overall satisfaction degree was in three scales, that was satisfactory, just so so and dissatisfactory. The measurement was estimated by both the physicians and the patients respectively.|2 weeks|The primary analysis will be on the Per-protocol (PP) population. PP population includes all subjects who received the dose of study drug without protocol deviation and had all the assessment per protocol.||percentage of participants|||Number
837454|NCT01299090|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|The rate of adverse events will be assessed throughout the duration of the study|90 days post treatment|||participants|||Number
837455|NCT01299090|Primary|Change in Neck and Facial Wrinkles Using the Fitzpatrick Wrinkle Assessment|"Three independent investigators blinded to photography time points will perform retrospective evaluations of photography from all visits using the 9-point Fitzpatrick Wrinkle Assessment Scale for assessment of neck and facial wrinkles at the culmination of the study.
The measurement is for percentage of patients who showed improvement"|90 days post treatment|||percentage of participants|||Number
837456|NCT01299103|Primary|Adverse Events|The rate of adverse events occurring in treatment subjects will be assessed.|90 days post treatment|||number of adverse events reported|||Number
837457|NCT01299103|Primary|Fitzpatrick Wrinkle Assessment|Subject photos will be evaluated using the 9-point Fitzpatrick Wrinkle Assessment Scale at all follow up visits. An improvement is noted by a decrease in the numeric Fitzpatrick Wrinkle score. The Fitzpatrick Wrinkle Assessment ranges from 1-9. Wrinkle Score between baseline and 90 days post treatment assessment. Positive values indicates an increase in score, while negative values indicate a decrease|change in Fitzpatrick Wrinkle Score between baseline and 90 days post treatment assessment.|||units on a scale, change in Fitzpatrick||Standard Deviation|Mean
837458|NCT01299285|Secondary|Percentage of Total Radioactivity of LY3009104 and LY3009104 Metabolites in Plasma||Baseline up to 24 hours|Participants who took study drug.||percentage of total radioactivity|||Number
837459|NCT01299285|Secondary|Percentage of Dose of LY3009104 and LY3009104 Metabolites in Feces|Percentages of LY3009104 (parent) and LY3009104 metabolites that were excreted in the feces are reported. Only those metabolites that were detectable in the feces are included in the report.|Baseline up to 72 hours|Participants who took study drug.||percentage of dose|||Number
837460|NCT01299285|Secondary|Percentage of Dose of LY3009104 and LY3009104 Metabolites in Urine|Percentages of LY3009104 (parent) and LY3009104 metabolites that were excreted in the urine are reported. Only those metabolites that were detectable in the urine are included in the report.|Baseline up to 48 hours|Participants who took study drug.||percentage of dose|||Number
837461|NCT01299285|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics: LY3009104 and Radioactivity Time to Maximum Observed Concentration (Tmax)||Baseline up to 48 hours|Participants who took study drug.||hour||Full Range|Median
837462|NCT01299285|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics: Maximum Observed Radioactivity Concentration (Cmax)||Baseline up to 48 hours|Participants who took study drug.||nanomole-equivalents/milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837463|NCT01299285|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics: Maximum Observed LY3009104 Concentration (Cmax)||Baseline up to 48 hours|Participants who took study drug.||nanomoles/liter (nmol/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837464|NCT01299285|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics: Radioactivity Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity [AUC(0-∞)]||Baseline up to 48 hours|Participants who took study drug.||hour*nanomole-equivalents/kilogram||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837465|NCT01299285|Secondary|Plasma Pharmacokinetics: LY3009104 Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity [AUC(0-∞)]||Baseline up to 48 hours|Participants who took study drug.||hour*nanomoles/liter(h*nmol/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
837466|NCT01299285|Primary|Percentage of the Total Radioactive Dose Administered Excreted From Urine and Feces||Baseline up to 120 hours|Participants who took study drug.||percentage of total radioactivity||Standard Deviation|Mean
837499|NCT01299454|Secondary|Fraction of Systemically Available Brexpiprazole Excreted Into the Urine (fe,u)|"Urine samples were taken at pre-dose and during the following increments: 0 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, 72 to 96, 96 to 120, 120 to 144, and 144 to 168 hours postdose..
The value of fe,u was calculated as 100 × Ae,u/Dose."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||% of drug in urine||Standard Deviation|Mean
837467|NCT01299376|Secondary|Change in Trough Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (SiSBP)-Double-Blind Treatment Period|Sitting systolic blood pressure was measured by automated sphygmomanometer pre-dose on Day 1 (baseline) and at 24 ± 2 hours after the last study drug administration at Week 8.|Baseline and Week 8|All participants that received at least one dose of study treatment during double-blind treatment period , had at least 1 post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint, and had baseline data||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837468|NCT01299376|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Had Study Drug Discontinued From the Study Due to an AE- Long Term|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. The percentage of participants who had study drug discontinued during the 44 week extension due to an AE regardless of completion status were summarized.|Week 9 up to Week 52 for L50/H12.5→L50/H12.5/A5 arm; Week 1 to Week 52 for L50/H12.5/A5→L50/H12.5/A5|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during extension period.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837469|NCT01299376|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience 1 or More Drug-related SAEs- Long Term|An SAE is any AE occurring at any dose or during any use of Sponsor's product that does the following: results in death; is life threatening; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; results in or prolongs an existing inpatient hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; is a cancer; is associated with an overdose; is another important medical event. the percentage of participants that experienced an SAE that assessed as possibly, probably, or definitely related to the study drug by the investigator was summarized.|Week 9 up to Week 52 for L50/H12.5→L50/H12.5/A5 arm; Week 1 to Week 52 for L50/H12.5/A5→L50/H12.5/A5|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during long-term reporting period.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837470|NCT01299376|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience 1 or More SAEs- Long Term|An SAE is any AE occurring at any dose or during any use of Sponsor's product that does the following: results in death; is life threatening; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; results in or prolongs an existing inpatient hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; is a cancer; is associated with an overdose; is another important medical event. Those SAEs assessed as possibly, probably, or definitely related to the study drug during the long-term period were summarized.|Week 9 up to Week 52 for L50/H12.5→L50/H12.5/A5 arm; Week 1 to Week 52 for L50/H12.5/A5→L50/H12.5/A5|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during long-term reporting period.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837471|NCT01299376|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience 1 or More Drug-related AEs- Long Term|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. Percentage of participants that experienced at least 1 AE that was reported as possibly, probably, or definitely related to the study drug by the investigator during the long-term reporting period was summarized.|Week 9 up to Week 52 for L50/H12.5→L50/H12.5/A5 arm; Week 1 to Week 52 for L50/H12.5/A5→L50/H12.5/A5|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during long-term reporting period.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837472|NCT01299376|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience 1 or More Adverse Events (AEs)- Long Term|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. The percentage of participants that experienced at least 1 AE during long-term period was summarized.|Week 9 up to Week 52 for L50/H12.5→L50/H12.5/A5 arm; Week 1 to Week 52 for L50/H12.5/A5→L50/H12.5/A5|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during long-term reporting period.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837473|NCT01299376|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Had Study Drug Discontinued Due to an AE - Double Blind Treatment Period|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. The percentage of participants who had study drug stopped during the 8-week double-blind treatment period due to an AE regardless of whether or not they completed the study was summarized by treatment arm.|up to Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during double-blind treatment period.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837474|NCT01299376|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience 1 or More Drug-Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)- Double-Blind Treatment Period|An SAE is any AE occurring at any dose or during any use of Sponsor's product that does the following: results in death; is life threatening; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; results in or prolongs an existing inpatient hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; is a cancer; is associated with an overdose; is another important medical event. Percentage of participants that experienced at least 1 SAE that was reported as possibly, probably, or definitely related to the study drug by the investigator during the 8-week double-blind treatment period were summarized by study drug received.|up to Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during double-blind treatment period.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837475|NCT01299376|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience 1 or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)- Double-Blind Treatment Period|An SAE is any AE occurring at any dose or during any use of Sponsor's product that does the following: results in death; is life threatening; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; results in or prolongs an existing inpatient hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; is a cancer; is associated with an overdose; is another important medical event. The percentage of participants who experienced at least 1 SAE during the 8-week double-blind treatment period were summarized by study drug received.|up to Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during double-blind treatment period.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837476|NCT01299376|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience 1 or More Drug-Related AEs- Double-Blind Treatment Period|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. Percentage of participants that experienced at least 1 AE that was reported as possibly, probably, or definitely related to the study drug by the investigator during the 8-week double-blind treatment period were summarized by study drug received.|up to Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during double-blind treatment period.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837477|NCT01299376|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experience 1 or More Adverse Events (AEs)- Double-Blind Treatment Period|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the use of the product, was also an AE. The percentage of participants who experienced at least 1 AE during the 8-week double-blind treatment period were summarized by study drug received.|up to Week 8|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug during double-blind treatment period.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837478|NCT01299376|Primary|Change in Trough Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (SiDBP)-Double-Blind Treatment Period|Sitting diastolic blood pressure was measured by automated sphygmomanometer pre-dose on Day 1 (baseline) and at 24 ± 2 hours after the last study drug administration at Week 8. The difference between the baseline and Week 8 assessments was calculated and summarized by treatment arm.|Baseline and Week 8|All participants that received at least one dose of study treatment during double-blind treatment period , had at least 1 post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint, and had baseline data||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837479|NCT01299389|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS General Psychopathology Subscale Score at Week 13 or Early Discontinuation|General Psychopathology (range 16-112): Sum of scores for somatic concern, anxiety, guilt feelings, tension, mannerisms/posturing, depression, motor retardation, uncooperativeness, unusual thought content, disoriented, poor attention, lack of judgment/insight, disturbance of volition, poor impulse control, preoccupation, and active social avoidance, higher scores indicate worsening.|Baseline and Week 13 or early discontinuation|FAS population included all randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 injection of double-blind study drug and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PANSS total scores. LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837480|NCT01299389|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Positive Subscale Score at Week 13 or Early Discontinuation|Positive Syndrome Scale (range 7-49): Sum of scores for items 1-7 in positive subscale: delusions, conceptual disorganization, hallucinatory behavior, excitement, grandiosity, suspiciousness/persecution, and hostility, higher scores indicate worsening.|Baseline and Week 13 or early discontinuation|FAS population included all randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 injection of double-blind study drug and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PANSS total scores. LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837481|NCT01299389|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Negative Subscale Score at Week 13 or Early Discontinuation|Negative Syndrome Scale (range 7-49): Sum of scores for items 1-7 in negative subscale: blunted effect, emotional withdrawal, poor rapport, passive apathetic social withdrawal, difficulty in abstract thinking, lack of spontaneity and flow of conversation, and stereotyped thinking, higher scores indicate worsening.|Baseline and Week 13 or early discontinuation|FAS population included all randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 injection of double-blind study drug and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PANSS total scores. LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837482|NCT01299389|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Marder Subscale Scores at Week 13 or Early Discontinuation|The PANSS is a 30-item scale to assess the neuropsychiatric symptoms of schizophrenia. The symptoms are rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (absent) to 7 (extreme psychopathology). Positive symptoms subscale consists of 8 items with total score range of 8-56; negative symptoms subscale and disorganized thoughts subscale, each consists of 7 items with total score range of 7-49, uncontrolled hostility/excitement subscale and anxiety/depression subscale, each consists of 4 items with total score range of 4-28, higher score indicates greater severity.|Baseline and Week 13 or early discontinuation (ED)|FAS population included all randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 injection of double-blind study drug and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PANSS total scores. LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837483|NCT01299389|Secondary|Participants With Response to the Treatment as Per PANSS Total Score.|Participants with response were defined as those participants who shows 30 percent or more and 20 percent or more reduction in PANSS total score.|up to Week 13 or early discontinuation|FAS population included all randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 injection of double-blind study drug and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PANSS total scores. LOCF method was used.||participants|||Number
837484|NCT01299389|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) Score at Week 13 or Early Discontinuation|"The CGI-S rating scale is a 7 point global assessment that measures the clinician's impression of the severity of illness exhibited by a participant. A rating of 1 is equivalent to Normal, not at all ill and a rating of 7 is equivalent to Among the most extremely ill participants, higher scores indicate worsening."|Baseline and Week 13 or early discontinuation|FAS population included all randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 injection of double-blind study drug and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PANSS total scores. LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837500|NCT01299454|Secondary|Cumulative Amount of Brexpiprazole Excreted Into the Urine (Ae,u)|"Urine samples were taken at pre-dose and during the following increments: 0 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, 72 to 96, 96 to 120, 120 to 144, and 144 to 168 hours postdose.
The value of Ae,u was calculated as the summation of urine concentration × urine volume from each collection interval"|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng||Standard Deviation|Mean
837485|NCT01299389|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Total Score at Week 13 or Early Discontinuation|The PANSS is a 30-item scale designed to assess various symptoms of schizophrenia including delusions, grandiosity, blunted affect, poor attention, and poor impulse control. The 30 symptoms are rated on a 7-point scale that ranges from 1 (absent) to 7 (extreme psychopathology). The PANSS total score consists of the sum of all 30 PANSS items and ranges from 30 to 210, higher scores indicate worsening.|Baseline and Week 13 or early discontinuation|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population included all randomly assigned participants who received at least 1 injection of double-blind study drug and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PANSS total scores. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837486|NCT01299454|Secondary|Incidence of Suicidality, Suicidal Behaviour or Suicidal Ideation as Measured by the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|The Baseline version of the C-SSRS was administered at Screening. The Since Last Visit version of the C-SSRS was administered on Day 1 at predose and on Days 4 and 7.|Day 1, Day 4, Day 7|Suicidality, suicidal behaviour or suicidal ideation are captured as serious AEs/AEs and are reported in the SAE or other AE section of this results report.||Participants|||Number
837487|NCT01299454|Secondary|Number of Participants With Changes From Baseline in Serum Chemistry, Hematology and Urinalysis Parameters.|Hematology, serum chemistry, and urinalysis, including prothrombin time, international normalized ratio, partial thromboplastin time, and activated partial thromboplastin time, were completed at Screening, Day -1, Day 3 (48 hours postdose), and Day 8 (168 hours postdose)/ET.|Day -1 to Day 8|The abnormal values of laboratory values in participants are captured as serious AEs/AEs and are reported in the SAE or other AE section of this results report.||Participant|||Number
837488|NCT01299454|Secondary|Number of Participants With Changes From Baseline in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters.|Electrocardiograms were performed at Screening, Day -1, and Day 1 at predose (in triplicate; within 45 minutes prior to dosing), and 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 72, 120, and 168/ET hours postdose. Standard 12-lead ECGs were performed after the subject was supine and at rest for ≥ 10 minutes prior to the ECG.|Day-1 to Day 8|The abnormal values of ECG values in participants are captured as serious AEs/AEs and are reported in the SAE or other AE section of this results report.||Participants|||Number
837489|NCT01299454|Secondary|Number of Participants With Changes From Baseline in Vital Signs Parameters.|Vital signs (including blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, and respiratory rate) were assessed at Screening, Day -1, Day 1 at predose (within 45 minutes prior to dosing), and 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 72, 120, and 168/ET hours postdose. Blood pressure and heart rate were taken with the subject in the supine (performed first), sitting, and standing|Day -1 to Day 8|The abnormal values of vital signs values in participants are captured as serious AEs/AEs and are reported in the SAE or other AE section of this results report.||Participants|||Number
837490|NCT01299454|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs) Reported|AEs were captured for all participants from the time the ICF was signed until the end of the study|From the time the Informed Consent Form was signed, throughout the 8 day study up to 30 days after study drug administration.|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis.||Events|||Number
837491|NCT01299454|Secondary|CLr for DM-3411 Metabolite|"Urine samples were taken at pre-dose and during the following increments: 0 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, 72 to 96, 96 to 120, 120 to 144, and 144 to 168 hours postdose.
The value of CLr was calculated as Ae,u/AUCt."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||mL/h/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837492|NCT01299454|Secondary|fe,u for DM-3411 Metabolite|"Urine samples were taken at pre-dose and during the following increments: 0 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, 72 to 96, 96 to 120, 120 to 144, and 144 to 168 hours postdose.
The value of fe,u was calculated as 100 × Ae,u/Dose."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||% metabolite excreted in urine||Standard Deviation|Mean
837493|NCT01299454|Secondary|Ae,u for DM-3411 Metabolite|"Urine samples were taken at pre-dose and during the following increments: 0 to 24, 24 to 48, 48 to 72, 72 to 96, 96 to 120, 120 to 144, and 144 to 168 hours postdose.
The value of Ae,u was calculated as the summation of urine concentration × urine volume from each collection interval."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng||Standard Deviation|Mean
837494|NCT01299454|Secondary|t1/2,z for DM-3411 Metabolite|"Blood samples were taken at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
The t1/2,z was determined as (ln2)/λz."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
837495|NCT01299454|Secondary|Tmax for DM-3411 Metabolite|Blood samples were taken at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET. Tmax is the time taken to reach highest measured concentration of the metabolite during the dosing interval.|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||h||Full Range|Median
837496|NCT01299454|Secondary|Cmax for DM-3411 Metabolite|Blood samples were taken at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET. Cmax is the highest measured concentration of the metabolite during the dosing interval.|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837497|NCT01299454|Secondary|AUC∞ for DM-3411 Metabolite|"Blood samples were taken at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
The AUC∞ were estimated using the linear trapezoidal rule."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837498|NCT01299454|Secondary|AUCt for DM-3411 Metabolite|"Blood samples were taken at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
AUCt= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (0-t)
The AUCt was estimated using the linear trapezoidal rule."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837502|NCT01299454|Secondary|Terminal-phase Elimination Half-life of Brexpiprazole (t1/2,z)|"Blood samples were taken at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
The t1/2,z was determined as (ln2)/λz.
Terminal-phase elimination half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
837503|NCT01299454|Secondary|Apparent Unbound Clearance of Brexpiprazole From Plasma After Extravascular Administration (CLu/F)|"Blood samples were taken at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
The value of CLu/F (brexpiprazole only) was determined as dose normalized unbound area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (Dose/AUC∞,u)."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||mL/h/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837504|NCT01299454|Secondary|Unbound Fraction of Brexpiprazole in Plasma (fu)|Blood samples were taken at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||% unbound drug in the urine||Standard Deviation|Mean
837505|NCT01299454|Secondary|Apparent Clearance of Brexpiprazole From Plasma After Extravascular Administration (CL/F)|"The value of CL/F (brexpiprazole only) was determined as Dose/AUC∞.
Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. Clearance obtained after oral dose (apparent oral clearance) is influenced by the fraction of the dose absorbed. Clearance was estimated from population PK modeling. Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||mL/h/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837506|NCT01299454|Secondary|Time to Cmax of Brexiprazole (Tmax)|"Blood samples were taken at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
Tmax is the time taken to reach highest measured concentration of the drug during the dosing interval.
Actual blood sample times were used for PK calculations. Values for Cmax and tmax were determined directly from the observed data."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||h||Full Range|Median
837507|NCT01299454|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration of Brexpiprazole (Cmax)|"Blood samples were taken at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
Cmax is the highest measured concentration of the drug during the dosing interval.
Actual blood sample times were used for PK calculations. Values for Cmax and tmax were determined directly from the observed data."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837508|NCT01299454|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration Time Curve of Brexpiprazole From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC∞)|"Blood samples were taken at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
AUC (0 - ∞)= AUC from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞).
The AUC∞ was estimated using the linear trapezoidal rule"|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837509|NCT01299454|Secondary|Area Under the Curve of Brexpiprazole Calculated to the Last Observable Concentration at Time t (AUCt)|"Blood samples were taken at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
AUCt= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (0-t) The AUCt was estimated using the linear trapezoidal rule."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837510|NCT01299454|Primary|Unbound Maximum Plasma Concentration of Brexpiprazole (Cmax,u)|"Blood samples were taken at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
Cmax,u is the highest measured unbound plasma concentration during the dosing interval."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837511|NCT01299454|Primary|Unbound Brexpiprazole AUC Calculated From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC∞,u)|"Blood samples were taken at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/ET.
AUC (0 - ∞)= AUC from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0 - ∞). It is obtained from AUC (0 - t) plus AUC (t - ∞)."|Day 1 to Day 8|PK set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837512|NCT01299454|Primary|Unbound Brexpiprazole Area Under the Concentration Time Curve (AUC) Calculated to the Last Observable Concentration at Time t (AUCt,u)|Blood samples were taken at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 hours postdose/Early termination (ET).|Day 1 to Day 8|Pharmacokinetics (PK) set consisting of all evaluable brexpiprazole PK parameters from enrolled particpants who had evaluable plasma concentrations.||nanograms.hours/mL (ng*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
837513|NCT01299480|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Achieving At Least 4-fold Increase in hSBA Titer||1 month after Injection 2, 3, 4|Results were not reported because a decision was made a priori that, although the fold rise outcome measure will still be performed, it will not be performed as a secondary outcome measure. Therefore it was moved from a secondary outcome measure in an earlier protocol version to an exploratory outcome measure in the final protocol.|||||
837514|NCT01299480|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Serum Bactericidal Assay Using Human Complement (hSBA) Titer >= Prespecified Titer Level||Before Injection 1, 1 Month after Injection 2, 3, 4|||percentage of participants|||Number
837515|NCT01299480|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving hSBA Titer >=LLOQ||Before Injection 1, 1 Month after Injection 2, 3, 4|||percentage of participants|||Number
837516|NCT01299480|Secondary|Serum Bactericidal Assay Using Human Complement (hSBA) Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs)||Before Injection (Inj) 1, 1 Month (M) after (aft) Injection 2, 3, 4|||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837517|NCT01299480|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving hSBA Titer >=LLOQ: Group 3 Participants||1 month after Injection 4|||percentage of participants|||Number
837518|NCT01299480|Primary|Percentage of Participants Reporting At Least 1 Adverse Event (AE)||Injection 1 up to 1 month after Injection 4|Some participants randomized to receive vaccination as per Groups 1, 2 or 4 schedules actually received vaccination as per Group 3 schedule. One participant was not randomized but received Saline at Injection 1 and was included in Group 5. Participants have been presented as per actual administration schedule received.||percentage of participants|||Number
837519|NCT01299480|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serum Bactericidal Assay Using Human Complement (hSBA) Titer Greater Than or Equal to (>=) Lower Limit of Quantitation: Group 1 and 2 Participants||1 month after Injection 4|||percentage of participants|||Number
837520|NCT01305200|Other Pre-specified|Ancillary Validation Study of ChIMES||Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation.|Analysis is not performed at this time due to no available funding and no human resource allocated to this study.|||||
837521|NCT01305200|Secondary|Severity of Mucositis|Area Under the Curve of Severity of Mucositis. According to mouth pain categorical rating scale ranges 0-10 with higher scores reflecting more severe pain.|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation|Evaluable patients defined as patients with ≥11 daily WHO assessments.||units on a scale * day||Standard Deviation|Mean
837522|NCT01305200|Secondary|Incidence of Invasive Bacterial Infections|Invasive Bacterial Infection = yes|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation.|Total of 210 patients evaluable for this assessment (106 Arm I & 104 Arm II).||percentage of participants|||Number
837523|NCT01305200|Secondary|Incidence of Febrile Neutropenia|Fever and Neutropenia = yes|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation.|Total of 210 patients evaluable for this assessment (106 Arm I & 104 Arm II).||percentage of participants|||Number
837524|NCT01305200|Secondary|Duration of Total Parenteral Nutrition (TPN) Administration.|Mean days of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) administration.|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation.|Total of 210 patients evaluable for this assessment (106 Arm I & 104 Arm II).||Number of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
837525|NCT01305200|Secondary|Incidence of Total Parenteral Nutrition (TPN) Administration.|Total Parenteral Nutrition = yes|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation.|Total of 210 patients evaluable for this assessment (106 Arm I & 104 Arm II).||percentage of participants|||Number
837526|NCT01305200|Secondary|Total Dose of Parenteral Opioid Analgesic Used (Morphine Equivalents).|Morphine equivalent dose in mg/kg/day|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation.|Total of 210 patients evaluable for this assessment (106 Arm I & 104 Arm II).||mg/kg/day of opioid analgesics||Full Range|Median
837527|NCT01305200|Secondary|Duration of Parenteral Opioid Analgesic Use (Morphine Equivalents).|Mean days of parenteral opioid analgesic use.|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation.|Total of 210 patients evaluable for this assessment (106 Arm I & 104 Arm II).||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
837528|NCT01305200|Secondary|Incidence of Parenteral Opioid Analgesic Use (Morphine Equivalents).|Opioid Administration = yes|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation.|Total of 210 patients evaluable for this assessment (106 Arm I & 104 Arm II)||percentage of participants|||Number
837529|NCT01305200|Secondary|Oral Mucositis Daily Questionnaire (OMDQ)|Area under the curve (AUC) of the Oral Mucositis Daily Questionnaire (OMDQ) subscales|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation|Evaluable patients defined as patients with ≥11 daily WHO assessments.||units on a scale * day||Standard Deviation|Mean
837530|NCT01305200|Secondary|Incidence of Severe Oral Mucositis|Percentage of patients with Severe Oral Mucositis (WHO Grade 3 or 4) per arm.|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation.|Evaluable patients defined as patients with >= 11 daily WHO assessments.||percent of patients|||Number
837531|NCT01305200|Primary|Duration of Severe Oral Mucositis (WHO Grade 3 or 4)|Mean days of severe (WHO Grade 3 or 4) Mucositis.|Day -1 (day prior to stem cell infusion) to Day 20 following transplantation.|Evaluable patients defined as patients with >= 11 daily WHO assessments.||Number of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
837538|NCT01305239|Secondary|Event-free Survival|Event-free survival: time between first intake of exemestane and date of last follow-up or date of death for deceased participants (date of relapse or death or last follow-up minus first intake date) + 1 / 365.25 * 12.|Baseline, every 6 months until adjuvant hormonal therapy stopped or up to 5 years of therapy completed|ITT population = all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 follow-up questionnaire completed. N = number of participants with analyzable (non-missing) data.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
837540|NCT01305239|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Were Compliant With Treatment|Compliant with treatment = followed treatment regimen with exemestane according to initial prescription.|Baseline, every 6 months until adjuvant hormonal therapy stopped or up to 5 years of therapy completed|Safety set. Information on compliance was not available for subjects who did not have a follow-up visit. N = number of participants with analyzable data.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837541|NCT01305239|Secondary|Reasons for Discontinuation of Aromasin Therapy||Baseline, every 6 months until adjuvant hormonal therapy stopped or up to 5 years of therapy completed|Safety set. N = number of participants with follow-up visit(s) who discontinued treatment with exemestane.||participants|||Number
837542|NCT01305239|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Any untoward medical occurrence in a patient who received study drug was considered an adverse event without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An adverse event resulting in any of the following outcomes, or deemed to be significant for any other reason, was considered to be a serious adverse event: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; a life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|Baseline, every 6 months until adjuvant hormonal therapy stopped or up to 5 years of therapy completed|Safety set: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
837543|NCT01305252|Secondary|B-type Natriuretic Peptide (BNP)|B-type Natriuretic peptide measures the percent change from baseline.|Baseline and 24 weeks|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
837544|NCT01305252|Secondary|Change in NYHA/WHO Class|"At 48 week,WHO/NYHA functional class was assessed for change in WHO/NYHA functional class.Change NYHA is measured as decrease or increase in NYHA class in the subjects compared with baseline.
NYHA /WHO functional class is described below:
NYHA functional class I:no symptoms and no limitation in ordinary physical activity NYHA functional class II:Mild symptoms (mild shortness of breath and/or angina) and slight limitation during ordinary activity NYHA functional class III:Marked limitation in activity due to symptoms, even during less-than-ordinary activity NYHA functional class IV:Severe limitations. Experiences symptoms even while at rest A higher functional class represent worse symptoms."|Baseline and 48 week|||participants|||Number
837545|NCT01305252|Secondary|N-terminal Pro B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP)|Change from baseline in N-terminal Pro B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP)|Baseline and 24 weeks|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837546|NCT01305252|Secondary|6 Minute Walk Distance|Change in 6MWD during 24 week period compared between Tada and Tada+iTre.|Baseline and 24 weeks|||meters||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
837547|NCT01305252|Primary|Change in Right Ventricular Ejection Fraction|Effect of dual-upfront therapies versus mono-therapy on percent change of right ventricular function assesed by cardiac MRI (cMRI) at 24 weeks compared with the baseline.|Basline and 24 weeks|||percent change||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
837548|NCT01305265|Primary|Incidence of Tracheopharyngeal Symptoms||within 2 hours after extubation|||participants|||Number
837549|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Specific Plan and Intent Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Specific Plan and Intent question records whether the participant has active suicidal thoughts of killing oneself with details of plan fully or partially worked out and the participant has some intent to carry out the plan since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. This question is asked if the answer to the 'Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts' question was YES, or based on the judgment of the assessor. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837550|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Some Intent to Act Without a Specific Plan Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Some Intent to Act Without a Specific Plan question records whether the participant has active suicidal thoughts of killing oneself and reports having some intent to act on such thoughts since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. This question is asked if the answer to the 'Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts' question was YES, or based on the judgment of the assessor. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837551|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Any Methods (Not Plan) Without Intent to Act Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Any Methods (Not Plan) Without Intent to Act question records whether the participant endorses thoughts of suicide and has thought of at least one method but has no specific plan of action since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. This question is asked if the answer to the 'Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts' question was YES, or based on the judgment of the assessor. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837576|NCT01305473|Secondary|Procedural Time for Sepramesh Placement.|Procedure time will be defined as beginning when the Investigator made the initial incision and ending when the skin closure was completed (skin to skin).|Day 0|All enrolled subjects were included in the analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
837552|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts question records whether the participant shares general non-specific thoughts of wanting to end one's life/commit suicide since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837553|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Ideation - Wish to Be Dead Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Ideation - Wish to Be Dead question records whether the participant endorses thoughts about a wish to dead or not alive anymore, or a wish to fall asleep and not wake up since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837554|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Completed Suicide Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Completed Suicide question records whether the participant intentionally causing his/her's own death since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837555|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Preparatory Acts or Behavior Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Preparatory Acts or Behavior question records whether the participant exhibited acts or preparations towards imminently making a suicide attempt since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837556|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Suicidal Behavior Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Suicidal Behavior question records whether in the clinician's opinion, the participant exhibited suicidal behavior since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837557|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Aborted Attempt Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Aborted Attempt question records whether the participant began to take steps toward making a suicide attempt but stops themselves before starting the potentially self-injurious act since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837558|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Interrupted Attempt Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Interrupted Attempt question records whether the participant was interrupted by an outside circumstance from starting the potentially self-injurious act with at least some wish to die since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837734|NCT01308476|Secondary|Patients Compliance With SMS System|Compliance was defined as the percentage of patients answers to the IVR system as compared to the number of SMS automatically sent to the patients by the SMS/ IVR system asking for the number of Spiriva HandiHaler applications.|24 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants answers||Standard Deviation|Mean
837559|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Non-Suicidal Self-Injurious Behavior Question|"The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation.
The Suicidal Behavior - Non-Suicidal Self-Injurious Behavior question records whether the participant committed a potentially self-injurious act that was not associated with a wish to die since the last visit."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837560|NCT01305408|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale ‘Since Last Visit’ Version (C-SSRS-SLV) For Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Endpoint For the Suicidal Behavior - Actual Attempt Question|The C-SSRS is a clinician-rated scale that assesses suicidality from ideation to behaviors and monitors the potential emergence of suicidality in clinical studies. The C-SSRS-B (baseline) was performed at screening and the C-SSRS-SLV ('Since Last Visit') was performed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 or last postbaseline observation. The Suicidal Behavior - Actual Attempt question records whether the participant committed a potentially self-injurious act with at least some wish to die since the last visit.|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with treatment assessments at the indicated time period.||participants|||Number
837561|NCT01305408|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) Total Score|The ISI is a participant-rated, 7-item questionnaire designed to assess the severity of the participant's insomnia. Each item is ranked 0 (none) through 4 (very severe) and has a descriptor associated with each severity level. Total range is 0 (no insomnia) to 28 (very severe insomnia). Responses to each item are added to obtain a total score to determine the severity of insomnia. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of insomnia.|Day 0 (baseline), last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with both baseline and during treatment assessments.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837562|NCT01305408|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) Total Score|HAM-A measures the severity of anxiety symptoms. The scale consists of 14 items, each defined by a series of symptoms, and measures both psychic anxiety (mental agitation and psychological distress) and somatic anxiety (physical complaints related to anxiety). Each item is scored on a scale of 0 (not present) to 4 (severe), with a total score range of 0-56, where <17 indicates mild severity, 18-24 mild to moderate severity and 25-30 moderate to severe. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of anxiety.|Day 0 (baseline), last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with both baseline and during treatment assessments.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837563|NCT01305408|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) Total Score|The YMRS is a clinician-rated, 11-item checklist used to measure the severity of manic episodes. Information for assigning scores is gained from the participant's subjective reported symptoms over the previous 48 hours and from clinical observation during the interview. Seven items are ranked 0 through 4 and have descriptors associated with each severity level. Four items (irritability, speech, content, and disruptive-aggressive behavior) are scored 0 through 8 and have descriptors for every second increment. The total scale is 0-60. A score of ≤12 indicates remission of manic symptoms, and higher scores indicate greater severity of mania. Negative change from baseline scores indicate a decrease in severity of mania.|Day 0 (baseline), last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug. The number analyzed includes participants with both baseline and during treatment assessments.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837564|NCT01305408|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE)|"AEs were graded by the investigator for severity on a three-point scale: mild, moderate and severe. Causality is graded as either related or not related. A serious adverse event (SAE) is an AE resulting in death, a life-threatening adverse event, hospitalization, a persistent or significant disability/incapacity, a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or an important medical event that may require medical intervention to prevent any of the previous results.
Protocol-defined adverse events requiring expedited reporting included skin rash, hypersensitivity reaction, emergent suicidal ideation or suicide attempt, and psychosis."|Day 1 to Week 9|The safety analysis set includes randomized participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug.||participants|||Number
837565|NCT01305408|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 8 and Endpoint in the Global Assessment for Functioning (GAF) Scale|The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) is a numeric scale (1 through 100) used by mental health clinicians and physicians to rate subjectively the social, occupational, and psychological functioning of adults, e.g., how well or adaptively one is meeting various problems-in-living. Ratings of 1 - 10 mean the participant is in persistent danger of severely hurting self or others (e.g., recurrent violence) or persistent inability to maintain minimal personal hygiene or serious suicidal act with clear expectation of death. Ratings of 91 - 100 indicate no symptoms, and the participant exhibits superior functioning in a wide range of activities, life's problems never seem to get out of hand, is sought out by others because of his or her many positive qualities. Positive change from baseline values indicate improvement in functioning.|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 4, 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The number of participants is those with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837735|NCT01308476|Secondary|Response Rate Regarding Adherence|Adherence was dichotomised into yes and no at the end of study depending on whether the percentage of adherence was at least 80 percent or less than 80 percent, respectively. Patients who did not respond to the SMS/ IVR system to provide information about the actual number of inhalations were considered with 0 percent adherence.|24 weeks|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
837566|NCT01305408|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Different Treatment Weeks in the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) for Depression|The CGI-S is an observer-rated scale that measures illness severity on a 7-point scale, with the severity of illness scale using a range of responses from 1 (normal) through to 7 (amongst the most severely ill patients). Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression.|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The number of participants is those with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837567|NCT01305408|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Different Treatment Weeks in the Total Score From the 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (QIDS-C16)|The QIDS-C16 was derived from specified items in the IDS-C30, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Total scores range from 0-27, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 27 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression.|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The number of participants at each visit are those with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837568|NCT01305408|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Different Treatment Weeks in the Total Score From the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (IDS-C30)|"The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression."|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. Participants are included in the analysis at each timepoint if they have a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint for analyses was the last observed postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837569|NCT01305408|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Remission At Different Treatment Weeks According to the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated (IDS-C30) Total Score|"A participant in remission was defined as a participant with an IDS-C30 total score of 11 or less.
The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression."|Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The denominator for calculating the percentages at each visit is the number of participants with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||percentage of participants|||Number
837570|NCT01305408|Secondary|Percentage of Responders At Different Treatment Weeks According to the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated (IDS-C30) Total Score|"A responder is a participant with a ≥50% decrease or greater from baseline in the total score of the IDS-C30. The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression."|Day 0 (baseline), Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, and last postbaseline observation (up to 8 weeks)|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment. The denominator for calculating the percentages at each visit is the number of participants with a nonmissing value at that visit. Endpoint was the last observed postbaseline data.||percentage of participants|||Number
837571|NCT01305408|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 8 in the Total Score From the 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (IDS-C30)|"The IDS-C30 is a standardized 30-item, clinician-rated scale to assess the severity of a participant's depressive symptoms. Every effort was made to have the same rater evaluate a participant across all visits.
Total scores range from 0-84, with a score of 0 indicating no depression and a score of 84 indicating the most severe depression. Negative change from baseline values indicate improvement in the severity of depression."|Day 0 (baseline), Week 8|Full analysis set which includes participants who took 1 or more doses of study drug and who have at least 1 postbaseline IDS-C30 efficacy assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837572|NCT01305473|Post-Hoc|Hernia Recurrence Rate Post Repair With Sepramesh in Subjects With Both Incisional and Umbilical Hernias|A recurrent hernia is a hernia (either umbilical or incisional), confirmed by the Investigator at any point after surgery, in the same location as the hernia repaired in the index procedure.|12 months or greater|This analysis included the 5 subjects who underwent surgery to repair both incisional and umbilical hernias in the index procedure.||participants|||Number
837573|NCT01305473|Post-Hoc|Hernia Recurrence Rate of Umbilical Hernias Post Repair With Sepramesh.|A recurrent umbilical hernia is an umbilical hernia, confirmed by the Investigator at any point after the surgery, in the same location as the umbilical hernia that was repaired in the index procedure.|12 months or greater|The analysis population included the 43 subjects who underwent surgery to repair umbilical hernias in the index procedure.||participants|||Number
837574|NCT01305473|Post-Hoc|Hernia Recurrence Rate of Incisional Hernias Post Repair With Sepramesh.|A recurrent incisional hernia is an incisional hernia, confirmed by the Investigator at any point after the surgery, in the same location as the incisional hernia that was repaired in the index procedure.|12 months or greater|The analysis population included the 42 subjects who underwent surgery to repair incisional hernias in the index procedure.||participants|||Number
837575|NCT01305473|Secondary|Recovery Time Associated With Hernias Repaired With Sepramesh.|Recovery time will be defined as the time it took for the subject to return to work.|12 months or greater (average follow-up time of 3 years; range 13-65 months)|Data not available: none of the subject medical records reported return to work data. Secondary endpoint analysis could not be performed.|||||
837577|NCT01305473|Secondary|Complications in Subjects With Hernias Repaired With Sepramesh.|Complications will be assessed by evaluation of the procedural and device related adverse events (AEs) documented in the subject’s medical files from the time surgery was initiated until the day the subject had a postoperative visit (that is, the protocol specified postoperative visit for conducting a physical examination).|12 months or greater (average follow-up time of 3 years; range 13-65 months)|All enrolled subjects were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
837578|NCT01305473|Primary|Hernia Recurrence Rate of Hernias Post Repair With Sepramesh.|A recurrent hernia is a hernia, confirmed by the Investigator at any point after the surgery, in the same location as the hernia repaired in the index procedure.|12 months or greater (average follow-up time of 3 years; range 13-65 months)|All enrolled subjects were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
837579|NCT01306214|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c After 52 Weeks of Treatment|The secondary endpoint was the change from baseline in HbA1c after 52 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 52 weeks|Per Protocol Set (PPS) - completers at week 52 - using LOCF at week 52 (LOCF-52)||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837580|NCT01306214|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight After 52 Weeks of Treatment|The secondary endpoint was the change from baseline in body weight after 52 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 52 weeks|Per Protocol Set (PPS) - completers at week 52 - using LOCF at week 52 (LOCF-52)||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837581|NCT01306214|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Insulin Dose After 52 Weeks of Treatment|The secondary endpoint is change from baseline in insulin dose after 52 weeks of treatment|Baseline and 52 weeks|Per Protocol Set-patients in FAS without important protocol violations leading to exclusion, completed minimum treatment of 357 days and did not prematurely discontinue. Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy (week 52 definition) were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF-52) was used for imputation of missing values.||IU/day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837582|NCT01306214|Primary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c After 18 Weeks of Treatment|The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in HbA1c after 18 weeks of treatment.|Baseline and 18 weeks|The analysis was conducted on the full analysis set (FAS) of patients. Values after start of antidiabetic rescue therapy (week 18 definition) were set to missing and last observation carried forward (LOCF-18) was used for imputation of missing values.||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837583|NCT01306253|Secondary|Numbers of Subjects Reporting Solicited Systemic Adverse Events|Safety assessments are made by the investigator at baseline and on Day 22 as well as by the subjects themselves (in a Subject Diary) for the 4-day period immediately following vaccination|Days 1 to 4 inclusive, and Day 22|Safety population||Subjects|||Number
837584|NCT01306253|Primary|Fold Increase in Geometric Mean Titer (GMT)|GMT-fold increase - calculated as the GMT on Day 22 divided by the baseline GMT value|Day 22/Day 1|ITT/ATP||Fold (ratio)|||Number
837585|NCT01306253|Primary|Seroprotection|Seroprotection rate, defined as the number of subjects with HI antibody titer ≥1:40|Day 22 ± 2 days|ITT/ATP||Number of subjects|||Number
837586|NCT01306253|Secondary|Safety: Numbers of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local Adverse Events|Safety assessments are made by the investigator at baseline and on Day 22 as well as by the subjects themselves (in a Subject Diary) for the 4-day period immediately following vaccination|Days 1 to 4 inclusive, and Day 22|Safety population includes all subjects who received study vaccine||Subjects|||Number
837587|NCT01306253|Primary|Seroconversion|Seroconversion rate was defined as the number of subjects with ≥4-fold increase in haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titer and with a titer of ≥1:40|Day 22 ± 2 days|Intention-to-treat (ITT) and According-to-protocol (ATP) populations excludes one subject per group lost to follow up||Number of subjects|||Number
837588|NCT01306292|Primary|Effects of SonoVue and Placebo on Pulmonary Hemodynamics: Pulmonary Vascular Resistance (Dyne*Sec/cm^5) - Mean Change From Baseline|All subjects in this study were to have pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR; measured in dyne x seconds per centimeters to the 5th power) derived from mean PAP (measured in mmHg), pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP [mmHg]) and cardiac output (Qp [litres per minute]), each taken 5 minutes prior to the first investigational product administration, calculated using the following formula: [(mean PAP-PCWP) divided by Qp] x 80. Baseline is the last measurement prior to first investigational product administration, therefore, applying to both products. Mean PAP, PCWP and Qp were repeated at 1 and 10 minutes post dose; PVR was calculated.|Comparison to baseline to 2 post dose timepoints (1 and 10 minutes post dose)|36 total subjects: 18 subjects (8 assigned to placebo/SonoVue and 10 assigned to SonoVue/placebo) in the Baseline mean PAP >=25.0 mmHg group (Hypertension Group) and 18 subjects (10 assigned to placebo/SonoVue and 8 assigned to SonoVue/placebo) in the Baseline mean PAP <25.0 mmHg group (Normal Group).||dyne*sec/cm^5||Standard Deviation|Mean
837589|NCT01306292|Primary|Effects of SonoVue and Placebo on Pulmonary Hemodynamics: Diastolic Pulmonary Artery Pressure (mmHg) - Mean Change From Baseline|All subjects in this study were to have diastolic PAP recorded within 5 minutes before the first investigational product administration. This parameter was to be measured and recorded again at 1, 4, 7 and 10 minutes after the administration of each investigational product (SonoVue and Placebo). This outcome measure presents the mean change from baseline in diastolic PAP measured in mmHg. Baseline is the average of the 2 measurements within 5 minutes prior to first investigational product administration, therefore, applying to both products.|Comparison to baseline to 4 post dose timepoints (1, 4, 7 and 10 minutes post dose)|36 total subjects: 18 subjects (8 assigned to placebo/SonoVue and 10 assigned to SonoVue/placebo) in the Baseline mean PAP >=25.0 mmHg group (Hypertension Group) and 18 subjects (10 assigned to placebo/SonoVue and 8 assigned to SonoVue/placebo) in the Baseline mean PAP <25.0 mmHg group (Normal Group).||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837603|NCT01306617|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks (SVR24) Post-Treatment|Sustained virologic response 24 (SVR24) is defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) less than the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ; < 25 IU/mL) 24 weeks after the last dose of study drug.|Post-treatment Day 1 to Post-treatment Week 24|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT). Participants with missing data were imputed as failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
838095|NCT01311661|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Morning PEF (PEF a.m.)|PEF a.m. was measured by patients at home using the AM3 device (overall means obtained during each period of randomised treatment will be compared). Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|0-3 weeks|FAS||Liter/min||Standard Error|Mean
837590|NCT01306292|Primary|Effects of SonoVue and Placebo on Pulmonary Hemodynamics: Systolic Pulmonary Artery Pressure (mmHg) - Mean Change From Baseline|A total of 36 subjects were enrolled in this crossover study: 18 (8 randomized to placebo then SonoVue and 10 randomized to SonoVue then placebo) in the Hypertension Group (baseline mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) >=25.0 mmHg group) and 18 (10 randomized to placebo then SonoVue and 8 randomized to SonoVue then placebo) in the Normal group (baseline mean PAP <25.0 mmHg group). All subjects in this study were to have systolic PAP recorded within 5 minutes before the first investigational product administration. This parameter was to be measured and recorded again at 1, 4, 7 and 10 minutes after the administration of each investigational product (SonoVue and Placebo). This outcome measure presents the mean change from baseline in systolic PAP measured in mmHg. Baseline is the average of the 2 measurements within 5 minutes prior to first investigational product administration, therefore, applying to both products.|Comparison to baseline to 4 post dose timepoints (1, 4, 7 and 10 minutes post dose)|36 total subjects: 18 subjects (8 assigned to placebo/SonoVue and 10 assigned to SonoVue/placebo) in the Baseline mean PAP >=25.0 mmHg group (Hypertension Group) and 18 subjects (10 assigned to placebo/SonoVue and 8 assigned to SonoVue/placebo) in the Baseline mean PAP <25.0 mmHg group (Normal Group).||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837591|NCT01306305|Secondary|Numbers of Subjects Reporting Solicited Systemic Adverse Events|Safety assessments are made by the investigator at baseline and on Days 8, 15 and 22 as well as by the subjects themselves (in a Subject Diary) for the 4-day period immediately following vaccination.|Days 1 to 4 inclusive, and Days 8, 15 and 22|Safety population||Subjects|||Number
837592|NCT01306305|Primary|Fold Increase in Geometric Mean Titer (GMT)|GMT-fold increase - calculated as the GMT on Day 22 divided by the baseline GMT value|Day 22/Day 1|ITT/ATP||Fold (ratio)|||Number
837593|NCT01306305|Primary|Seroprotection|Seroprotection rate, defined as the number of subjects with HI antibody titer ≥1:40|Day 22 ± 2 days|ITT/ATP||Number of subjects|||Number
837594|NCT01306305|Secondary|Safety: Numbers of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local Adverse Events|Safety assessments are made by the investigator at baseline and on Days 8, 15 and 22 as well as by the subjects themselves (in a Subject Diary) for the 4-day period immediately following vaccination.|Days 1 to 4 inclusive, and Days 8, 15 and 22|Safety population includes all subjects who received study vaccine||Subjects|||Number
837595|NCT01306305|Primary|Seroconversion|Seroconversion rate was defined as the number of subjects with ≥4-fold increase in haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titer and with a titer of ≥1:40|Day 22 ± 2 days|Intention-to-treat (ITT) and According-to-protocol (ATP) populations excludes one subject lost to follow up and one subject who withdrew consent||Number of subjects|||Number
837596|NCT01306617|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (C Trough) of Ribavirin in HCV Infected Participants|Trough concentration (C trough) is the concentration 24 hours after once daily (QD) dose and 12 hours after twice daily (BID) dose.|Day 1 to Week 12|Pharmacokinetic analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (ITT) and for whom concentration data was available to characterize C trough.||nanograms (ng) per milliliter (mL)||Full Range|Geometric Mean
837597|NCT01306617|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (C Trough) of Ritonavir in HCV Infected Participants|Trough concentration (C trough) is the concentration 24 hours after once daily (QD) dose and 12 hours after twice daily (BID) dose.|Day 1 to Week 12|Pharmacokinetic analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (ITT) and for whom concentration data was available to characterize C trough.||nanograms (ng) per milliliter (mL)||Full Range|Geometric Mean
837598|NCT01306617|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (C Trough) of ABT-333 in HCV Infected Participants|Trough concentration (C trough) is the concentration 24 hours after once daily (QD) dose and 12 hours after twice daily (BID) dose.|Day 1 to Week 12|Pharmacokinetic analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (ITT) and for whom concentration data was available to characterize C trough.||nanograms (ng) per milliliter (mL)||Full Range|Geometric Mean
837599|NCT01306617|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (C Trough) of ABT 450 in HCV Infected Participants|Trough concentration (C trough) is the concentration 24 hours after once daily (QD) dose and 12 hours after twice daily (BID) dose.|Day 1 to Week 12|Pharmacokinetic analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study drug (ITT) and for whom concentration data was available to characterize C trough.||nanograms (ng) per milliliter (mL)||Full Range|Geometric Mean
837600|NCT01306617|Secondary|Resistance-Associated Variants and Phenotypic Resistance|Baseline samples were analyzed for resistance-associated amino acid variants using population sequencing. Phenotypic resistance to ABT-450 or ABT-333 at baseline was assessed by calculating the fold difference in the half maximal effective concentration (EC50) compared with the EC50 for the appropriate reference replicon (1a-H77 or 1b-Con1). Participants not achieving SVR12 were analyzed for resistance-associated variants at the time of failure using population sequencing and were compared with the baseline and appropriate reference sequences to assess amino acid changes. Phenotypic resistance to ABT-450 or ABT-333 at the time of failure was assessed by calculating the fold difference in the EC50 compared with the EC50 for the corresponding baseline sample. The number of participants with variants at resistance-associated amino acid positions and phenotypic resistance at baseline and at the time of failure are presented.|Day 1 to post-treatment week 48|Resistance analyses included all participants who receive at least one dose of study drug (intent-to-treat [ITT] population).||participants|||Number
837601|NCT01306617|Secondary|Time to Virologic Relapse Post-treatment|Time to the first of 2 consecutive measurements of confirmed HCV RNA ≥ lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) at any point in the post-treatment period among participants with HCV RNA < LLOQ at the end of treatment.|Post-treatment Day 1 to post-treatment week 48|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug with HCV RNA < LLOQ at the final treatment visit who completed treatment.||days||Standard Error|Mean
837602|NCT01306617|Secondary|Time to Failure to Suppress or Rebound During Treatment|Time to failure to achieve a 2 log10 IU/mL HCV RNA decrease at Week 1, failure to achieve HCV RNA < Lower Limit of Detection (LLOD) at Week 6, or a confirmed increase of at least 0.5 log10 IU/mL above nadir (local minimum value) or confirmed HCV RNA > lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) for participants who previously achieved HCV RNA < LLOQ.|Day 1 through Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT).||days||Standard Error|Mean
837632|NCT01307046|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event (AE)||8 weeks|All-Patients-as-Treated (APaT) Population: defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
837604|NCT01306617|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks (SVR12) Post-treatment|Sustained virologic response 12 (SVR12) is defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) less than the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ; < 25 IU/mL) 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug.|Post-treatment Day 1 to Post-treatment Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT). Participants with missing data were imputed as failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
837605|NCT01306617|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HCV RNA Below the Lower Limit of Quantitation (LLOQ; <25 IU/mL) at Week 4|Analysis of percentage of participants with hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid less than the lower limit of quantitation (< 25 IU/mL).|Week 4|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT). Participants with missing data were imputed as failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
837606|NCT01306617|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HCV RNA < 1000 International Units Per Milliliter (IU/mL)|Analysis of participants with HCV RNA levels below 1000 IU/mL at Week 2.|Week 2|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT). Participants with missing data were imputed as failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
837607|NCT01306617|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Suppressed Below the Lower Limit of Detection (LLOD) From Week 4 Through Week 12|Analysis of the percentage of participants with hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid less than the lower limit of detection (< 15 IU/mL).|Week 4 through Week 12|Efficacy analyses included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT). Participants with missing data were imputed as failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
837608|NCT01306643|Secondary|Changes in Liver Imaging as Assessed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Gadoxetic Acid (GD-EOB-DTPA) Contrast||Up to twelve 28-day cycles (maximum of 12 months)|Data are not available because the samples and analysis results (performed at the sites) could not be retrieved by Gilead.|||||
837609|NCT01306643|Secondary|Changes in Concentration of Peripheral Blood Chemokines and Cytokines||Up to twelve 28-day cycles (maximum of 12 months)|Data are not available because the samples and analysis results (performed at the sites) could not be retrieved by Gilead.|||||
837610|NCT01306643|Secondary|Flow Cytometric Measurement of Tumoral and Peripheral Blood T and NK Cells||Up to twelve 28-day cycles (maximum of 12 months)|Data are not available because the samples and analysis results (performed at the sites) could not be retrieved by Gilead.|||||
837611|NCT01306643|Secondary|Flow Cytometric Measurement of Constitutive or Inducible Phosphorylation of Akt (at S473) and S6 Within Tumor B Cells||Up to twelve 28-day cycles (maximum of 12 months)|Data are not available because the samples and analysis results (performed at the sites) could not be retrieved by Gilead.|||||
837612|NCT01306643|Primary|Clinical Response: Overall Response Rate|"Participants were assessed for clinical response by appropriate imaging at the end of cycles 3, 6, 9, and 12.
Overall response rate (ORR) was assessed based on standardized criteria (Cheson 2007), and was defined as the percentage of participants who achieved a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on investigator assessment after the start of idelalisib treatment until progression or the end of study drug treatment.
CR was defined as the disappearance of all evidence of disease.
PR was defined the regression of measurable disease and no new sites."|Up to twelve 28-day cycles (maximum of 12 months)|ITT Analysis Set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837613|NCT01306643|Primary|Overall Safety of Idelalisib|The overall safety of idelalisib was assessed as the percentage of participants experiencing treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs; Serious AEs, Grade ≥ 3 AEs, AEs related to idelalisib, and AEs leading to discontinuation of idelalisib).|30 days post last study treatment (up to 12 months)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Analysis Set: all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of idelalisib.||percentage of participants|||Number
837614|NCT01306877|Secondary|Operative Room (OR) Time|Time of insertion of anoscope to time of anoscope removal after stapleline evaluation|Day 0|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
837615|NCT01306877|Secondary|Length of Stay|Length of hospital stay is defined as time of anoscope insertion until discharge|Day 0 time of discharge minus time of admission|||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
837616|NCT01306877|Secondary|Location of the Staple Line|Distance of staple line to dentate line as measure by surgical ruler|Day 0|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
837617|NCT01306877|Secondary|Overall Quality of Life - General Health Score|Quality of life was measured by SF-12 questionnaire in change from baseline; the socring range is 0 - 100 with 0 = poor overall health and 100 = excellent overall health|Day 0 minus 60, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837618|NCT01306877|Secondary|Post-Operative Pain (Analgesic Intake)|post operative pain measured in pos-surgical consumption of strong opioids by the number of participants in the study. Participants are included if they consumed analgesics or strong opiod at anytime during the study.|Day 0, 1 week, 2 week, 1 month, 3 month, 6 month|||participants|||Number
837619|NCT01306877|Secondary|Post Operative Pain - (PI-NIRS)|"Post-operative pain as change from baseline pain score as measured by an 11-point Pain Intensity Numeric Rating Scale (PI-NRS). The range of the scale is 0-10 with 0 representing no pain and 10 representing the worst possible pain.
The data represented is the change in baseline score at the different timepoints."|Day 0 minus 60 (baseline), Day 0 (discharge), Day 0 plus 7, Day 0 plus 30, Day 0 plus 90, Day 0 plus 180|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837620|NCT01306877|Primary|Intraoperative Bleeding|Number of subjects who require intervention to stop intraoperative bleeding The analysis is based on the per protocol analysis set. Subjects who were misrandomized for excluded from this analysis therefore, the population here will differ from the participant flow.|Day 0 - time of surgery|||participants|||Number
837633|NCT01307046|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (SiSBP)|Sitting systolic blood pressure was measured by automated sphygmomanometer pre-dose on Day 1 (baseline) and at 24 ± 2 hours after the last study drug administration (Day 56 ± 7 days).|Baseline and Week 8|"Full Analysis Set (FAS) Population: defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint subsequent
to at least one dose of study treatment, and had baseline data for those analyses that required baseline data"||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838147|NCT01305577|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Image Quality of Life Inventory (BIQLI)||Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)||01/2016||||
837621|NCT01306968|Primary|Change in Post-concussion Symptom Scores Using RPQ - Per Protocol Population|The Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptom Questionnaire (RPQ)/RPQ-3 was created to measure the severity of post-concussion symptoms following traumatic brain injury. The scale compares any current symptoms to pre-injury levels to account for potential symptom exacerbation due to the TBI. The RPQ is the most commonly used clinical outcome measure for mild TBI research because it is simple and reflects psychosocial function. The RPQ is intended to measure the presence and severity of 16 of the most commonly reported post-concussion symptoms found in the literature.|Follow-up Visit 2; Day 56 (up to day 100) for groups not recieving HBO2, Day 70 for groups recieving HBO2|Per protocol population: Only those completing all 40 chamber sessions and outcomes testing are included in the per protocol population. The standard TBI care group remained the same as no champber sessions were use in this group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837622|NCT01306968|Primary|Post-Intervation Post-concussion Symptom Scores Using RPQ - Per Protocol Population|The Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptom Questionnaire (RPQ)/RPQ-3 was created to measure the severity of post-concussion symptoms following traumatic brain injury. The scale compares any current symptoms to pre-injury levels to account for potential symptom exacerbation due to the TBI. The RPQ is the most commonly used clinical outcome measure for mild TBI research because it is simple and reflects psychosocial function. The RPQ is intended to measure the presence and severity of 16 of the most commonly reported post-concussion symptoms found in the literature.|Follow-up Visit 2; Day 56 (up to day 100) for groups not recieving HBO2, Day 70 for groups recieving HBO2|Per protocol population: Only those completing all 40 chamber sessions and outcomes testing are included in the per protocol population. The standard TBI care group remained the same as no champber sessions were use in this group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837623|NCT01306968|Primary|Change in Post-concussion Symptom Scores Using RPQ - Intent to Treat|Means for the change from baseline to follow-up visit 2|Follow-up Visit 2; Day 56 (up to day 100) for groups not recieving HBO2, Day 70 for groups recieving HBO2|Intent to treat population: All randomized participants were included in the intention-to-treat analysis||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837624|NCT01306968|Primary|Post-Intervation Post-concussion Symptom Scores Using RPQ - Intent to Treat|The Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptom Questionnaire (RPQ)/RPQ-3 was created to measure the severity of post-concussion symptoms following traumatic brain injury. The scale compares any current symptoms to pre-injury levels to account for potential symptom exacerbation due to the TBI. The RPQ is the most commonly used clinical outcome measure for mild TBI research because it is simple and reflects psychosocial function. The RPQ is intended to measure the presence and severity of 16 of the most commonly reported post-concussion symptoms found in the literature.|Follow-up Visit 2; Day 56 (up to day 100) for groups not recieving HBO2, Day 70 for groups recieving HBO2|Intent to treat population: All randomized participants were included in the intention-to-treat analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837625|NCT01307007|Primary|Changes in Blood Markers|Changes in blood markers of phosphate|Day 35|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
837626|NCT01307020|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Using Rescue Medication at 6 Hours|Percentage of patients using rescue medication at 6 hours post-dosing.|Baseline to 6 hours|ITT (intention to treat) population which was defined as all patients who have taken the study treatment and have at least 1 post-dose assessment||percentage of patients|||Number
837627|NCT01307020|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving at Least 50 % of the Theoretical Maximum Total Pain Relief Score at 4, 8 and 12 Hours Post-dosing.|Pain relief is measured by a verbal rating scale (ranging from 0=none to 4=complete). Theoretical maximum TOTPAR at 6 hours is calculated by summing up the maximum score of analgesia which the patient can attribute at defined time points along 4, 8 and 12 hours(maxTOTPAR4h= 16, maxTOTPAR8h= 32 and maxTOTPAR12h= 48, respectively) Unit of measure is %|4, 8 and 12 hours|ITT (intention to treat) population which was defined as all patients who have taken the study treatment and have at least 1 post-dose assessment||percentage of patient|||Number
837628|NCT01307020|Primary|Percentage of Patients Achieving at Least 50 % of the Theoretical Maximum Total Pain Relief Score at 6 Hours Post-dosing.|Pain relief is measured by a verbal rating scale (ranging from 0=none to 4=complete). Theoretical maximum TOTPAR at 6 hours is calculated by summing up the maximum score of analgesia which the patient can attribute at defined time points along 6 hour (maxTOTPAR6h= 24). Unit of measure is %|6 hours|ITT (intention to treat) population which was defined as all patients who have taken the study treatment and have at least 1 post-dose assessment||percentage of patients|||Number
837629|NCT01307033|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced an Adverse Event When Receiving MK-0954A (L100/H12.5) During Study (8-week Double-blind and/or 44-week Open-label Extension)||Up to 52 weeks|All-Patients-as-Treated (APaT) Population, which consists of all randomized patients who received at least one dose of MK-0954A. The L100/H12.5 (L50/H12.5) arm only includes data from extension period (44 weeks); L100/H12.5→L100/H12.5 Open Label arm includes data from entire study period (52 weeks).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
837630|NCT01307033|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure (SiSBP) at Week 8|Blood pressure (BP) was measured with an automatic sphygmomanometer after participant has been resting in a sitting position for at least 10 minutes. BP was determined averaging 3 replicate measurements obtained at least a 1- to 2-minute interval between BP measurements. The recorded BP was the calculated average of the 3 readings.|Baseline and Week 8 (End of Double-blind Period)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population: defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment, and had baseline data for those analyses that required baseline data||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837631|NCT01307033|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (SiDBP) at Week 8|Blood pressure (BP) was measured with an automatic sphygmomanometer after participant has been resting in a sitting position for at least 10 minutes. BP was determined averaging 3 replicate measurements obtained at least a 1- to 2-minute interval between BP measurements. The recorded BP was the calculated average of the 3 readings.|Baseline and Week 8 (End of Double-blind Period)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population: defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment, and had baseline data for those analyses that required baseline data||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838148|NCT01305577|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Derriford Appearance Scale 24 (DAS24)||Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)||01/2016||||
837634|NCT01307046|Primary|Change From Baseline in Trough Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure (SiDBP)|Sitting diastolic blood pressure was measured by automated sphygmomanometer pre-dose on Day 1 (baseline) and at 24 ± 2 hours after the last study drug administration (Day 56 ± 7 days).|Baseline and Week 8|"Full Analysis Set (FAS) population: defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint subsequent
to at least one dose of study treatment, and had baseline data for those analyses that required baseline data"||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837635|NCT01307111|Primary|Patient Perceived Pain on a 100-point Visual Analogue Scale.|Perceived pain was registered on a 100-point visual analogue scale (0 = no pain, 100 = worst pain imaginable) at three time points: prior to IUD insertion, immediately after insertion, and prior to clinic discharge.|Prior to insertion, immediately after insertion, and prior to clinic discharge.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837636|NCT01307111|Secondary|Provider Perceived Ease of Insertion on a 100-point Visual Analogue Scale.|Perceived ease of IUD insertion registered on a visual analogue scale (0 = easy, 100 = extremely difficult).|Immediately post IUD insertion|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837637|NCT01307319|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Average Morning (AM) and Evening (PM) Subject-Reported Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS) During the Two Weeks of Treatment|"Reflective TNSS is an evaluation of symptom severity over the past 12 hours prior to the recording of the score. Participants (with assistance from parents/guardians/caregivers, as needed) assessed and recorded four nasal symptoms (runny nose, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing) twice daily (AM and PM) using the following scale:
0 = absent (no sign/symptom present)
1 = mild (sign/symptom clearly present, but minimal awareness; easily tolerated)
2 = moderate (definite awareness of sign/symptom that is bothersome but tolerable)
3 = severe (sign/symptom that is hard to tolerate; causes interference with activities of daily living and/or sleeping) The total TNSS scale was 0-12 with 0 representing an absence of symptoms and higher scores reflecting more severe symptoms.
Baseline was defined as the average AM and PM subject-reported rTNSS over the 4 days prior to randomization."|Baseline (Day -4 to Day 1 predose), Days 1 (postdose) to Day 15|The intent to treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of randomized study medication and had at least one post-baseline assessment. Two enrolled participants were excluded. One was randomized in error and did not receive test medication. The other provided no post-baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837638|NCT01307319|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Average Morning (AM) and Evening (PM) Subject-Reported Instantaneous Total Nasal Symptom Score (iTNSS) During the Two Weeks of Treatment|"Instantaneous TNSS is an evaluation of symptom severity over the last 10 minutes prior to the recording of the score. Participants (with assistance from parents/guardians/caregivers, as needed) assessed and recorded four nasal symptoms (runny nose, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing) twice daily (AM and PM) using the following scale:
0 = absent (no sign/symptom present)
1 = mild (sign/symptom clearly present, but minimal awareness; easily tolerated)
2 = moderate (definite awareness of sign/symptom that is bothersome but tolerable)
3 = severe (sign/symptom that is hard to tolerate; causes interference with activities of daily living and/or sleeping) The total TNSS scale was 0-12 with 0 representing an absence of symptoms and higher scores reflecting more severe symptoms.
Baseline was defined as the average AM and PM subject-reported iTNSS over the 4 days prior to randomization."|Baseline (Day -4 to Day 1 predose), Days 1 (postdose) to Day 15|The intent to treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of randomized study medication and had at least one post-baseline assessment. Two enrolled participants were excluded. One was randomized in error and did not receive test medication. The other provided no post-baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837639|NCT01307423|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events||Up to 5 years||06/2018||||
837640|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-existing Dactylitis Whose Dactylitis Severity Score Improves From Baseline to 0 at Week 52|Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 52 weeks. Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present. Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837641|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-existing Enthesopathy Whose MASES Improves From Baseline to 0 at Week 52|Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 24 weeks. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone): 1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Achilles tendon left/right. The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses. Two-sided 95% confidence interval was based on the Clopper-Pearson method.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837642|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 70 Response at Week 52|ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met: ≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count; ≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and ≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI)); C-Reactive Protein. Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837705|NCT01307618|Primary|Absolute Number of CD4+CD25+FoxP3+ Regulatory T Cells From Peripheral Blood|Descriptive statistics and paired t-tests will be generated to describe the frequency and absolute number of CD4+CD25+FoxP3+ cells before and after daclizumab, and also at subsequent time points. Repeated measures of analysis of variance and mixed effects models will be used to further evaluate change in numbers over time, and to compare these changes between cohorts.|Up to 4 years|Due to lack of clinical efficacy and lack of drug supply, trial was closed early and absolute number of CD4+CD25+FoxP3+Regulatory T Cells from peripheral blood was not measured.|||||
837643|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 52|Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met: ≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count; ≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and ≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: o Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI)); C-Reactive Protein. Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837644|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Good or Moderate EULAR Response at Week 52|The EULAR response criteria classify each subject as a good, moderate or non-responder to treatment based on the degree of improvement from baseline and the level of disease activity at the endpoint. EULAR response is derived using the individual subject’s DAS28 as the measure of severity of disease. A Good response is defined as follows: Good response: DAS28 at the time point ≤ 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2 A Moderate Response is defined as either: an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or, an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2. Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837645|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-existing Dactylitis Whose Dactylitis Severity Score Improves From Baseline by ≥ 1 at Week 52|Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 52 weeks. Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present. Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837646|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 52|Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 52 weeks. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone): 1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Achilles tendon left/right. The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses. Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837647|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the FACIT-Fatigue Scale Score at Week 52|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837648|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the DAS28 at Week 52|The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables: • 28 tender joint count • 28 swollen joint count, which do not include the DIP joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee; • C-reactive protein (CRP) • Patient's global assessment of disease activity. DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837649|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the CDAI Score at Week 52|The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the: 28 tender joint count (TJC), 28 swollen joint count (SJC), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest; Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest. The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI: Remission: ≤ 2.8 Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10 Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22 High Disease Activity: > 22.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837650|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 52|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837651|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 52|The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone): 1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Achilles tendon left/right. The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837652|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Participants Assessment of Pain Using the Visual Analog Scale at Week 52|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
838352|NCT01315158|Secondary|Compare Propofol Doses Between the Two Groups|The dose of propofol used between the two groups will be compared|One day (during procedure)|The data for this outcome measure was not collected and was not analyzed due to not having the necessary support to continue the study.|||||
837653|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified PsARC Response at Week 52|Measure Description: Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures: • 78 tender joint count, • 76 swollen joint count, • Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0=lowest disease activity and 100=highest; • Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0=lowest disease activity and 100=highest. Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS. Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837654|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the SF-36v2 Physical Functioning Scale Score at Week 52|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837655|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 52|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837656|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 20 Response at Week 52|Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met: ≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count; ≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and ≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI)); C-Reactive Protein. Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method.|Baseline and Week 52||06/2018||||
837657|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Dactylitis Score of Zero at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 24 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837658|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a MASES Score of Zero at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 24 weeks of treatment.
The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Achilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837659|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-existing Dactylitis Whose Dactylitis Severity Score Improves to 0 at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 16 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837674|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 24|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set. Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included. LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837660|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pre-existing Enthesopathy Whose Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score Improves to 0 at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 16 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Achilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837661|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 70 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI)); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837662|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 50 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI)); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837663|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 70 Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI)); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837664|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 50 Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI)); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||Percentage of participants|||Number
837665|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Good or Moderate EULAR Response at Week 24|"The EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on th DAS-28.
Good or moderate response is defined as follows:
Good response: DAS28 at the time point ≤ 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2 Moderate response: DAS28 at the time point > 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2, or DAS28 at the time point ≤ 5.1 and improvement from baseline > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2
A Moderate Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or,
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837666|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 24 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837667|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 24 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Achilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837668|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Good or Moderate European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response at Week 16|"The EULAR response criteria classify each subject as a good, moderate or non-responder to treatment based on the degree of improvement from baseline and the level of disease activity at the endpoint. EULAR response is derived using the individual subject’s DAS28 as the measure of severity of disease. Good or moderate response is defined as follows:
Good response: DAS28 at the time point ≤ 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2 Moderate response: DAS28 at the time point > 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2, or DAS28 at the time point ≤ 5.1 and improvement from baseline > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2"|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837669|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 16 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837670|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ≥ 20% Improvement in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 16 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Achilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837671|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 24|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837672|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change in Disease Activity Score (DAS 28) at Week 24|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the DIP joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837673|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 24|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10; Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: > 22."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837974|NCT01309997|Secondary|Patients With Any Percentage Decline in Any Grade of Sclerosis Without Increase in Percentage of Higher Grades of Sclerosis in Other Areas on the Vienna Skin Scale|Maximum of 10 body areas. Each area can be graded 0 (best) to 4 (worst). Each of those grades requires a percentage of involvement. Improvement is measured by reduction of involvement in any grade and any body area.|6 months|Only patients who were evaluable at 6mo are included.||participants|||Number
837675|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 24|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Achilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837676|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Participants Assessment of Pain at Week 24|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837677|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) Response at Week 24|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0=lowest disease activity and 100=highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0=lowest disease activity and 100=highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16, or who did not have sufficient data for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837678|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 24|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). SF-36 domain scores were first calculated to range from 0 to100 and then transformed to norm-based scores (the norm-based scores in the US general population have an average of 50 and a standard deviation of 10). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, with higher scores indicating a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837679|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 16|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837680|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change in Baseline in the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) After 16 Weeks of Treatment|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the DIP joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837681|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 16|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8 Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10 Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22 High Disease Activity: > 22"|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837682|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 16|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set. Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837683|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 16|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Achilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837684|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient’s Assessment of Pain at Week 16|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837685|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) Response at Week 16|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0=lowest disease activity and 100=highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0=lowest disease activity and 100=highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837686|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 16|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). SF-36 domain scores were first calculated to range from 0 to100 and then transformed to norm-based scores (the norm-based scores in the US general population have an average of 50 and a standard deviation of 10). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, with higher scores indicating a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837687|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire- Disability Index [HAQ-DI]) at Week 24|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837688|NCT01307423|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 20 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI)); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837689|NCT01307423|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire- Disability Index [HAQ-DI]) at Week 16|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative changes from baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837706|NCT01307618|Primary|Frequency of Vaccine-induced CD8+ T Cells Assessed by Enzyme-linked Immunospot (ELISPOT)|Data before treatment and after 3 vaccines will be assessed using paired t-tests within each cohort as well as a two-sample t-test of the mean post-treatment levels between cohorts. Repeated measures analysis of variance or mixed effects models will be utilized to further characterize changes in the levels of circulating T cells over time.|Up to 4 years|Due to lack of clinical efficacy and lack of drug supply, trial was closed early and frequency of vaccine-induced CD8+T cells was not measured.|||||
837690|NCT01307423|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Week 16|"A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set consisting of all participants randomized as specified in the protocol; one participant randomized in error and not receiving any dose of investigational product was excluded. Participants who withdrew early or did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
837691|NCT01307462|Secondary|Changes in Symptoms as Measured by Patient Self-report--Lee Chronic GVHD Symptom Scale|Lee symptom scale (LSS) has subscales with min=0, max=100; results are given as change in 6mo score compared to baseline score, not actual score, and a negative change is correlated with improvement in clinical outcome.|Baseline and 6 months|24 of 36 subjects were evaluable at 6mo due to missing patient survey data.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837692|NCT01307462|Secondary|Changes in Symptoms as Measured by Patient Self-report--Human Activities Profile (HAP)|"HAP subscales have min=0 and max=94; results are given as change in 6mo score compared to baseline score, not actual score, and a positive change is correlated with improvement in clinical outcome.
Maximum Activity Score (MAS) is highest item number answered still doing. Represents highest oxygen demanding activity that respondent still performs.
Adjusted Activity Score (AAS) is MAS minus total number of stopped doing responses below MAS. A measure of usual daily activities.
Modified AAS is MAS minus total number of stopped doing responses below MAS but not penalized for not doing activities not permitted post transplant. The following items are not counted against the score:11,15,19,20,22,25,34,41,42,47,49,50,52,53,54,57,72,73,77,78."|Baseline and 6 months|24 of 36 subjects were evaluable at 6mo due to missing patient survey data.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837693|NCT01307462|Secondary|Changes in Symptoms as Measured by Patient Self-report--Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACT)|"FACT-BMT subscales have various min/max, see below; results are given as change in 6mo score compared to baseline score, not actual score, and a positive change is correlated with improvement in clinical outcome.
FACT physical well-being (0-28) FACT social/family well-being (0-28) FACT emotional well-being (0-24) FACT functional well-being (0-28) FACT Bone Marrow Transplant (BMT) subscale (0-40) FACT trial outcome index (0-96) FACT-General (G) (0-108) FACT-BMT total (0-148)"|Baseline and 6 months|24 of 36 subjects were evaluable at 6mo due to missing patient survey data.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837694|NCT01307462|Secondary|Changes in Symptoms as Measured by Patient Self-report--Short Form-36 (SF-36)|SF-36 subscales have min=0 and max=100; results are given as change in 6mo score compared to baseline score, not actual score, and a positive change is correlated with improvement in clinical outcome.|Baseline and 6 months|24 of 36 subjects were evaluable at 6mo due to missing patient survey data.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837695|NCT01307462|Secondary|Number of Subjects Were Able to Reduce Their Systemic Steroid Exposure by >=50%||Baseline to 6 months|24 out of 36 subjects were evaluable at 6mo due to missing data.||Participants|||Count of Participants
837696|NCT01307462|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Improvements in Other Chronic GVHD Characteristics|Only includes subjects who had complete or partial response according to the National Institute of Health (NIH) consensus criteria.|Baseline and 3 months|33 of 36 participants were evaluable at 3 months due to missing provider survey data||Participants|||Count of Participants
837697|NCT01307462|Secondary|Changes in Blood Molecular Markers: IL8 (Azithromycin), Cysteinyl and LTB4 (Monteleukast), and IL1B, TNF, and IL6, as Well as Neutrophil Count (Fluticasone)||Baseline to 6 months|Data were not collected|||||
837698|NCT01307462|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Experienced Statistically Significant Changes in FVC, TLC, RV, DLCO||Baseline and 6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
837699|NCT01307462|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Experienced Grade 3-5 SAEs Attributable to FAM and Number of Subjects Who Stopped FAM as a Result|National Cancer Institute (NCI)-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) (v4.0)|From baseline to 6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
837700|NCT01307462|Primary|Number of Subjects Who Failed Treatment|Treatment failure is defined as sustained, absolute decrease (worsening) of the FEV1 by >= 10% predicted in comparison to the baseline FEV1. Must be confirmed by a second PFT 2 weeks after the first measurement.|Within 3 months after initiation of study medications|||Participants|||Count of Participants
837701|NCT01307618|Secondary|Gene Expression Profiles|Gene cluster analysis will be performed using deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)-Chip Analyzer (dCHIP) software and comparisons will be made before and after treatment in each individual patient, and between responders and non-responders. Attempts will be made to identify gene expression profiles that correlate with clinical outcome.|Up to 4 years|Due to lack of clinical efficacy and lack of drug supply, trial was closed early and gene expression profiles was not measured.|||||
837702|NCT01307618|Secondary|Overall Survival Assessed by Modified WHO Criteria|Median overall survival and the associated 95% confidence limits will be derived using the procedure described in Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Up to 4 years|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837703|NCT01307618|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Assessed by Modified World Health Organization (WHO) Criteria|"Median progression-free survival and the associated 95% confidence limits will be derived using the procedure described in Brookmeyer and Crowley.
The criteria for progressive disease are 1) appearance of new lesions, 2) 25% increase in the sum of the product of the largest perpendicular diameters of the indicator lesions, or 3) reappearance of any tumor."|Up to 4 years|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837704|NCT01307618|Primary|Type and Grade of Toxicity Incidents Assessed by Common Toxicity Criteria Version 4.0 (CTCAE v4.0)||Up to 4 years|Patients who experienced any adverse event were counted.||participants|||Number
837707|NCT01307631|Other Pre-specified|Incidence of Adverse Events as Assessed by NCI CTCAE Version 4.0 [Time Frame: Up to 3 Years] [Designated as Safety Issue: Yes]|Data is reported in the Adverse Event table.|3 years||||||
837708|NCT01307631|Other Pre-specified|Association Between Select Biomarkers and Response to Akt Inhibitor MK2206 Such as Progression-free Survival and Objective Tumor Response, Assessed by Immunohistochemistry (IHC)||Up to 3 years||||||
837711|NCT01307631|Primary|Progression-free Survival According to RECIST|Activity will be ascertained by the proportion of patients who survive progression-free for at least 6 months after initiating therapy or who have objective tumor response. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm; Partial Response (PR), at least 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR|From start of treatment to time of objective disease progression, assessed up to 6 months|Number of patients who had a PFS > 6 months.||Participants|||Count of Participants
837712|NCT01307631|Primary|Objective Tumor Response According to RECIST|Activity will be ascertained by the proportion of patients who survive progression-free for at least 6 months after initiating therapy or who have objective tumor response. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm; Partial Response (PR), at least 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR|Up to 6 months|Number of patients who had an objective response.||Participants|||Count of Participants
837713|NCT01307787|Secondary|Change in Health Status: Social Interaction|Self-reported health status was assessed using the Arthritis Impact-Measurement Scale-2, the Dutch version (Dutch-AIMS2).The questionnaire contains 77 items which represent 5 dimensions: physical functioning, psychological functioning, symptoms, social interaction and role functioning. Responses are recorded on a 5-point scale. All responses were recoded and calculated to a 0-10 scale. Scores were modified according to the number of co-morbidity complaints, as was recommended in the Dutch-AIMS2 manual. A low score indicates better health.|baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,|per protocol,2 subjects( n=2) in the intervention fitprogram withdrew from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837714|NCT01307787|Secondary|Change in Health Status: Psychological Health|Self-reported health status was assessed using the Arthritis Impact-Measurement Scale-2, the Dutch version (Dutch-AIMS2).The questionnaire contains 77 items which represent 5 dimensions: physical functioning, psychological functioning, symptoms, social interaction and role functioning. Responses are recorded on a 5-point scale. All responses were recoded and calculated to a 0-10 scale. Scores were modified according to the number of co-morbidity complaints, as was recommended in the Dutch-AIMS2 manual. A low score indicates better health.|baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,|analysis per protocol,2 subjects( n=2) in the intervention fitprogram withdrew from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837715|NCT01307787|Secondary|Change in Health Status: Physical Health|Self-reported health status was assessed using the Arthritis Impact-Measurement Scale-2, the Dutch version (Dutch-AIMS2).The questionnaire contains 77 items which represent 5 dimensions: physical functioning, psychological functioning, symptoms, social interaction and role functioning. Responses are recorded on a 5-point scale. All responses were recoded and calculated to a 0-10 scale. Scores were modified according to the number of co-morbidity complaints, as was recommended in the Dutch-AIMS2 manual. A low score indicates better health.|baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,|per protocol,2 subjects( n=2) in the intervention fitprogram withdrew from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837716|NCT01307787|Secondary|Change in Muscle Strength of the Lower Extremity|Muscle strength was assessed using a hand-held dynamometer (Microfet, Hoggan health Industries Inc.USA).Maximal voluntary isometric muscle strength of the knee-flexor and knee-extensors, was tested and recorded three times for each muscle group. All tests were performed bilaterally. The mean value of three measurements was computed. In addition a sum score of the mean values of the flexors and extensors on both sides for the lower extremity (LE)was computed and taken for analyses.|baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,|per protocol,Lower extremity(LE) muscle strength data for one participant(n=1) in the WLC group is missing because knee problems prevented testing.||newton||Standard Deviation|Mean
837717|NCT01307787|Secondary|Change in Muscle Strength of the Upper Extremity|Muscle strength was assessed using a hand-held dynamometer (Microfet, Hoggan health Industries Inc.USA).Maximal voluntary isometric muscle strength of the elbow-flexors, elbow-extensors, was tested and recorded three times for each muscle group. All tests were performed bilaterally. The mean value of three measurements was computed. In addition a sum score of the mean values of the flexors and extensors on both sides for the upper extremity (UE)was computed and taken for analyses.|baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,|per protocol, one subject (n=1) in the intervention fitprogram withdrew from the study.||newton||Standard Deviation|Mean
837718|NCT01307787|Secondary|Change in Self-efficacy Function|Self-efficacy function was assessed by the Arthritis-Self-efficacy Scale Dutch version The subscale self-efficacy function contains 8 items related to physical function. A five-point ordinal scale is used ranging from ‘totally disagree’ (1) to ‘totally agree’ (5). A mean score of 8 items was computed ranging from 1-5. A higher score refers to higher self-efficacy.|baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,|analysis per protocol, 2 subjects(n=2) in the intervention fitprogram withdrew from the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837719|NCT01307787|Secondary|Change in Self-efficacy Pain and Other Symptoms|Self-efficacy was assessed by the Arthritis-Self-efficacy Scale Dutch version. This arthritis self-efficacy scale contains two sub scales: self-efficacy pain (5 items related to coping with pain, and self-efficacy other symptoms (6 items related to coping with other symptoms, such as depression, fatigue and frustrations.A five-point ordinal scale is used ranging from ‘totally disagree’ (1) to ‘totally agree’ (5). We computed a mean score of 11 items ranging from 1-5. A higher score refers to higher self-efficacy.|baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,|per protocol 2 subjects( n=2) in the intervention fitprogram withdrew from the study||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837736|NCT01308476|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Adherence to Spiriva HandiHaler Over Time|Adherence was defined as percentage of documented applications of Spiriva HandiHaler as compared to the regularly planned seven applications during the week before questioning the patients. Patients in the SMS reminder group and in the control group were asked via SMS how often they had used Spiriva HandiHaler during the last week and were requested to call the IVR system to provide their response. Baseline was defined as week 4.|Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20 and Week 24|FAS. Only subjects who responded to the SMS/ IVR system were considered in this analysis.||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
837720|NCT01307787|Primary|Change in VO2 Max, Maximum Oxygen Uptake in ml/Min/kg is the Standard Index of Cardio-respiratory Fitness|maximum oxygen uptake(VO2max, in ml/min/kg)was determined using the Åstrand-Rhyming test.The workload on the cycle ergometer was increased every minute by 25 watts until a steady-state heart rate was achieved. Participants had to sustain cycling for about 6 minutes, the heart rate(HR) was taken every minute. Mean HR of the 5th and 6th minute was registered. With the given workload, observed HR and participants’weight, maximal oxygen uptake can be established using the Åstrand-Rhyming nomogram. Values vary from < 21( sedentary with disease) to > 57 ( very good physical condition).|baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks|Some VO2 max data (n=4 in the intervention group and n=2 in the WLC group)could not be collected because of specific participant conditions at different testing time points. 4 subjects did not reach the necessary heart rate to estimate the VO2 max. One subject had hypertension and one subject had knee problems.||ml/min/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837724|NCT01308424|Primary|Proportion of Subjects Who Experience a New Cold Sore Outbreak That Proceeds to the Lesion Stage. Of Those Subjects That Take Study Medication (Experience a New Emerging Cold Sore) Those That Proceed to Lesion Stage (Cold Sore Stage - 3 Vesicle or Above).|Subjects start a daily diary based on start of symptoms of a new emerging cold sore and start taking study medication. Subjects note the start time of study medication along with cold sore stage(s)for at least 7 days and up to 14 days. Subjects take study medication for 7 days. Cold Sore stages are 0=Dormant, 1=Prodrome, 2=Inflammation, 3=Vesicle, 4=Ulcer, 5=Crust, 6=Healed. If subjects do not experience a new cold sore outbreak within 7 days, they do not take study medication and are completed with the study.|7-14 days (depending on time of lesion outbreak - subjects had 7 days to experience a new emerging cold sore)|As randomized subjects waited until reoccurrence of cold sore lesions, 23/87 participants in the placebo treatment group and 9/84 in the BTL-TML-HSV group took study medication and were eligible for the primary outcome.||percentage of Participants|||Number
837725|NCT01308450|Primary|Well-screened, Non-ADHD Controls to Augment the Existing Adolescent and Adult Database Thus Expanding the Normative Reference Range of Performance of the Quotient® Adolescent and Adult Version Test.|"To increase the number of normal Adolescent and Adult tests to the existing Quotient System Database. To assure subjects are normal, participants will complete a standard battery of self assessment questionnaires to screen for the presence of mental health issues including: ADHD, Anxiety Disorder, Depressive Disorder or Bipolar Disorder using the following well established scales and their scoring guidelines:
ADHD Self Rating Scale (ASRS)
Zung Self-Rated Anxiety Scale (SAS)
Zung Self-Rated Depression Scale (SDS)
Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ)
Quotient® ADHD System Test, Adolescent and version Each subject and their individual assessment scores will be evaluated by a physician. Those participants evaluated as normal(without ADHD) will have the results of their Quotient test added to the existing Quotient normative database of Non ADHD subjects."|12 to 18 weeks|||participants|||Number
837726|NCT01308463|Secondary|Survivorship Will be Measured by the Incidence of Revision or Removals|The consented Patient will answer specific questions about their elbow replacement such as; if the elbow replacement has been removed|10 years Post-op|This analysis cannot be conducted due to the low number of cases available with 10 year data. There is not sufficient data to calculate survivorship. This study is being terminated since the product has been sold to another company.|||Elbows||
837727|NCT01308463|Primary|Patient Derived American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) Satisfaction|"This is the patient's perception of satisfaction with the elbow replacement surgery.
Maximum Score = 10 Minimum Score = 0 Maximum Score represents maximum satisfaction."|10 Years Post-op|The number of participants analyzed in this section is reflective of the number of participants/elbows with the complete data required to calculate this score. This is different than the number reflected in participant flow which is indicative of the number of participants/elbows with any data during the given interval.||units on a scale|Elbows|Standard Deviation|Mean
837728|NCT01308463|Primary|Patient Derived American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) Function|This is the patient's perception of function. The maximum score is 36 and the minimum score is 0. The maximum score represents maximum function.|10 Years Post-op|The number of participants analyzed in this section is reflective of the number of participants/elbows with the complete data required to calculate this score. This is different than the number reflected in participant flow which is indicative of the number of participants/elbows with any data during the given interval.||units on a scale|Elbows|Standard Deviation|Mean
837729|NCT01308463|Primary|Patient Derived American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) Pain Score|This is the patient's perception of pain related to the operative elbow. Maximum pain score = 50 (worst) Minimum pain score = 0 (best)|10 Years Post-op|The number of participants analyzed in this section is reflective of the number of participants/elbows with the complete data required to calculate this score. This is different than the number reflected in participant flow which is indicative of the number of participants/elbows with any data during the given interval.||units on a scale|Elbows|Standard Deviation|Median
837730|NCT01308476|Secondary|Patients Satisfaction With SMS System|Only patients in the SMS group were asked to assess their satisfaction with the SMS system by assigning German school grades 1=very good, 2=good, 3=satisfactory, 4=sufficient, 5=deficient, 6=insufficient.|Visit 2 (12 weeks) and visit 3 (24 weeks)|FAS for SMS reminder group only||Percantage of participants|||Number
837823|NCT01308788|Primary|2-year Change in OA PSV||Baseline and 24 month visits|one participant was unable to be measured for this outcome||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
837737|NCT01308476|Primary|Adherence to Spiriva HandiHaler Over Time|Adherence was defined as percentage of documented applications of Spiriva HandiHaler as compared to the regularly planned seven applications during the week before questioning the patients. Patients in the SMS reminder group and in the control group were asked via SMS how often they had used Spiriva HandiHaler during the last week and were requested to call the IVR system to provide their response. Baseline was defined as week 4.|Baseline, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20 and Week 24|"Full Analysis Set (FAS) is defined as all treated patients who additionally met the study diagnosis (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) requiring long-acting anticholinergics) and who had evaluable data in at least one effectiveness endpoint.
Only subjects who responded to the SMS/ IVR system were considered in this analysis."||Percentage of applications||Standard Deviation|Mean
837824|NCT01308788|Primary|6-month Change in Ocular Perfusion Pressures (OPP)||Baseline and 6 month visits|||mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
837825|NCT01308788|Primary|6-month Change in Central Retinal Artery (CRA) Vascular Resistance (RI)||Baseline and 6 month visits|||unitless||Standard Error|Mean
837826|NCT01308788|Primary|6-month Change in Central Retinal Artery (CRA) End Diastolic Velocity (EDV)||Baseline and 6 month visits|||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
837749|NCT01308580|Secondary|Plasma Steady State Volume of Distribution (Vss) for Cabazitaxel|Blood samples for PK analysis were obtained from a subset of the study participants (approximately 150 participants/group, by protocol) according to a sparse sampling strategy.|Day 1 of Cycle 1: 5 minutes before the EOI, 15 minutes, 1 to 4 hour, 6 to 24 hours, 48 to 168 hour after EOI|Analysis was performed on PK population. Number of participants analyzed= participants with PK assessment at specified time-points.||litre||Standard Deviation|Mean
837750|NCT01308580|Secondary|Plasma Clearance (CL) for Cabazitaxel|Blood samples for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis were obtained from a subset of the study participants (approximately 150 participants/group, by protocol) according to a sparse sampling strategy.|Day 1 of Cycle 1: 5 minutes before the end of infusion (EOI), 15 minutes, 1 to 4 hour, 6 to 24 hours, 48 to 168 hour after EOI|Analysis was performed on PK population that included participants who had evaluable PK data. Number of participants analyzed= participants with PK assessment at specified time-points.||Litre/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
837751|NCT01308580|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received investigational medicinal product (IMP) was considered an adverse event (AE) without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. TEAEs: AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period. On-treatment period: The time from the first dose of treatment to 30 days after the last dose of treatment (either Cabazitaxel or Prednisone). A serious adverse event: Any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria (NCI-CTCAE) version 4.03 (Grade 3 [severe] and Grade 4 [life-threatening]) was used in this study to grade clinical AEs.|From first administration of study treatment until 30 days after the last administration of study treatment (Maximum duration: 48 months)|Safety population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug during study treatment period.||percentage of participants|||Number
837752|NCT01308580|Secondary|Time to First Definitive Consumption of Narcotic Medication|Concomitant medications used were recorded for all participants, and time of first definitive consumption of narcotic medication (if it occurred) was determined. This measure summarizes the time from baseline to first definitive consumption of narcotic medication. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|From baseline until DP, start of another anti-cancer therapy, death or study cut-off date (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837753|NCT01308580|Secondary|Time to Definitive Weight Loss by 5% and 10% From Baseline|Time to definitive weight loss was defined as the time to first occurrence of ≥5% or ≥10% decrease in body weight from baseline. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|From baseline until death or study cut-off date (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837754|NCT01308580|Secondary|Time to Definitive Deterioration of ECOG PS Score From Baseline|The ECOG PS was used to evaluate participant’s DP and the effect of the disease on the participant’s activities of daily living. It ranges on the scale from 0-5 (0= normal activity; 1= symptoms but ambulatory; 2= in bed for < 50 % of the time; 3= in bed for > 50% of the time; 4= 100% bedridden; 5= dead). Time to definitive deterioration in ECOG PS score from baseline was defined as a change from 0, 1 to ≥2, or from 2 to ≥3. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|From baseline until death or study cut-off date (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837755|NCT01308580|Secondary|Time to Definitive Deterioration of Score by 10% From Baseline on FACT-P Sub-Scales|The time to definitive deterioration (10% decrease in score from baseline) was assessed for the individual sub-scales (Physical Well-Being; Social/Family Well-Being; Emotional Well-Being; Functional Well-Being; Prostate-Specific Concerns). Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|From baseline until DP, start of another anti-cancer therapy, death or study cut-off date (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on FACT-P population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837756|NCT01308580|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With FACT-P Total Score Response|FACT-P is a 39-item participant questionnaire that measures the concerns of participants with prostate cancer. It consists of 5 sub-scales assessing physical well-being (7 items), social/family well-being (7 items), emotional well-being (6 items), functional well-being (7 items), and prostate-specific concerns (12 items). FACT-P Total Score sums all 5 sub-scales to give a score in the range of 0 to 156, where higher values represent better HRQoL. Responder of FACT-P was defined as at least one occurrence of 7-point improvement from baseline in FACT-P total score during treatment period.|From baseline until DP, start of another anti-cancer therapy, death or study cut-off date (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on FACT-P population. Number of participants analyzed= participants with evaluable FACT-P total score for specified outcome measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837757|NCT01308580|Secondary|Change From Baseline in FACT-P:Total Score as a Measure of HRQoL|FACT-P is a 39-item participant questionnaire that measures the concerns of participants with prostate cancer. It consists of 5 sub-scales assessing physical well-being (7 items), social/family well-being (7 items), emotional well-being (6 items), functional well-being (7 items), and prostate-specific concerns (12 items). FACT-P Total Score sums all 5 sub-scales to give a score in the range of 0 to 156, where higher values represent better HRQoL.|Baseline, Day 1 of each Cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 (each cycle 21-day); post-treatment follow up 1 (up to 12 weeks)|Analysis was performed on FACT-P population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with evaluable FACT-P Total Score for specified outcome measure. Here, ‘n’ signifies number of participants with available data for specified category.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837758|NCT01308580|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P):Trial Outcome Index (TOI) as a Measure of Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)|FACT-P is a 39-item participant questionnaire that measures the concerns of participants with prostate cancer. It consists of 5 sub-scales assessing physical well-being (7 items), social/family well-being (7 items), emotional well-being (6 items), functional well-being (7 items), and prostate-specific concerns (12 items). FACT-P TOI combines physical well-being, functional well-being, and prostate-specific concerns sub-scales for a total possible score range of 0 to 104, where higher values represent better HRQoL.|Baseline, Day 1 of each Cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 (each cycle 21-day); post-treatment follow up 1 (up to 12 weeks)|FACT-P population included randomized participants who completed FACT-P questionnaire at baseline & in at least one post-baseline assessment. Number of participants analyzed=participants with evaluable FACT-P TOI for specified outcome measure. Here, ‘n’ signifies number of participants with available data for specified category.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
837759|NCT01308580|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pain Response|Pain response was defined as either a ≥2-point decrease from baseline median PPI score without increase in AS, or a ≥50% decrease from baseline mean AS without increase in the PPI score, maintained for 2 consecutive evaluations at least 3 weeks apart. Increases in pain during the first 12 weeks were ignored in determining pain response.|From baseline until DP, start of another anti-cancer therapy, death or study cut-off date (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population. Number of participants analyzed= participants evaluable for pain response with pain score with median PPI ≥2 and/or mean AS ≥10 points at baseline and at least one valid post-baseline value.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837760|NCT01308580|Secondary|Time to Pain Progression|Pain Progression was defined as an increase of ≥1 point in the median PPI from its nadir confirmed by a second assessment at least 3 weeks later or ≥25 % increase in the mean AS compared with the baseline score confirmed by a second assessment at least 3 weeks later or requirement for local palliative radiotherapy. PPI was rated by participant in a diary using a scale of 0=no pain, 1=mild, 2=discomforting, 3=distressing, 4=horrible 5=excruciating. Analgesic use was recorded by the participant in a diary. AS was calculated from the analgesic use data based on a table of analgesic medications, with non-narcotic medications assigned a value of 1 point and narcotic medications assigned a value of 4 points. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|From baseline until DP, start of another anti-cancer therapy, death or study cut-off date (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837761|NCT01308580|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PSA Response|PSA response was defined as ≥50% decrease from baseline in serum PSA levels, confirmed by a second PSA value at least 3 weeks later in participants with baseline PSA value ≥10 ng/mL.|From baseline up to PSA progression or death due to any cause or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population. Number of participants analyzed= participants evaluable for PSA response with PSA value ≥10 ng/mL at baseline and at least one valid post-baseline value.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837827|NCT01308788|Primary|6-month Change in Central Retinal Artery (CRA) Peak Systolic Velocity (PSV)||Baseline and 6 month visits|||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
837828|NCT01308788|Primary|6-month Change in Phthalmic Artery (OA) Vascular Resistance (RI)||Baseline and 6 month visits|||unitless||Standard Error|Mean
837829|NCT01308788|Primary|6-month Change in Phthalmic Artery (OA) End Diastolic Velocity (EDV)||Baseline and 6 month visits|||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
837830|NCT01308788|Primary|6-month Change in Ophthalmic Artery (OA) Peak Systolic Velocity (PSV)||Baseline and 6 month visits|||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
837762|NCT01308580|Secondary|Time to PSA Progression|Time to PSA progression was time interval between randomization & first occurrence of PSA progression. PSA progression defined as: 1) PSA responders (>50% decline from baseline PSA ≥10 ng/mL): increase of ≥25% (≥2 ng/mL) over nadir value, confirmed by second PSA ≥3 weeks later; 2) PSA non-responders (did not achieve >50% decline from baseline PSA ≥10 ng/mL): increase of ≥25% (≥2 ng/mL) over baseline value, confirmed by second PSA ≥3 weeks later; 3) In participants not eligible for PSA response (baseline PSA <10 ng/mL): (a) participants with baseline PSA >0 ng/mL & <10 ng/mL: increase in PSA by 25% (≥2 ng/mL) above baseline level, confirmed by second PSA value ≥3 weeks apart; (b) participants with baseline value=0 ng/mL: post-baseline PSA value ≥2 ng/mL. Note (for 1-3): Rise in PSA in first 12 weeks was progression only if met definition above and was associated with other sign of DP or if it continued beyond 12 weeks. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|From baseline up to PSA progression or death due to any cause or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837763|NCT01308580|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Objective Tumor Response|Overall objective tumor response was defined as either a partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) according to the RECIST 1.1 criteria, as assessed by the investigator. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must had reduction in short axis to <10 mm. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|From baseline up to DP or death due to any cause or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population. Number of participants analyzed= participants evaluable for tumor response with measurable disease at baseline and at least one valid post-baseline value.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837764|NCT01308580|Secondary|Time to Tumor Progression|Time to Tumor progression was defined as the first occurrence of radiological tumor progression according to RECIST 1.1. Radiological tumor progression was defined at least a 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions (sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of ≥5 mm) taking as reference the smallest sum while on study, appearance of one or more new lesions, or unequivocal progression of existing non target-lesions. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|From baseline up to tumor progression or death due to any cause or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837765|NCT01308580|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was evaluated from date of randomization to date of first documentation of any of the events: 1) Radiological tumor progression: as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1: at least a 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions (sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of ≥5 mm) taking as reference the smallest sum while on study, appearance of one or more new lesions, or unequivocal progression of existing non target lesions, 2) Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) progression: ≥25% increase over baseline/nadir value if baseline PSA ≥10 ng/mL; or 25% increase above the baseline level if baseline PSA >0 ng/mL & <10 ng/mL; or post-baseline value of >=2 ng/mL, if baseline PSA=0 ng/mL, 3) Pain progression: increase of ≥1 point in median Present Pain Intensity (PPI) from nadir or ≥25% increase in mean analgesic score (AS) from baseline score or requirement of local palliative radiotherapy, 4) Death. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|From baseline up to tumor progression, PSA progression, pain progression, death due to any cause or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837766|NCT01308580|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time interval from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause. In absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored at the earlier of the last date the participant was known to be alive or the study cut-off date. The cut-off date for the final analysis of OS was the date when the 988th death had been observed. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|From baseline up to death due to any cause or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier (maximum duration: 48 months)|Analysis was performed on Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population, which included all randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837767|NCT01308619|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinician's Erythema Assessment (CEA) Scores|Mean change in Clinician's Erythema Assessment (CEA) from baseline to week 12. Clinician's Erythema Assessment evaluates erythema on a scale from 0 - 4 (0 = None, 1 = Mild, 2 = Moderate, 3 = Significant and 4 = Severe) with 0 being best and 4 being worst.|baseline to week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837768|NCT01308619|Secondary|Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Scores at Week 12|Number of participants in each category of the Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) scores at week 12. Investigator's Global Assessment evaluates papules and pustules of rosacea on a scale from 0 - 4 (0 = Clear, 1 = Near Clear, 2 = Mild, 3 = Moderate and 4 = Severe) with 0 being best and 4 being worst.|Week 12|||participants|||Number
837769|NCT01308619|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Biochemical Markers of Rosacea From Tape Stripping and/or Skin Biopsy From Baseline to Week 12|Mean change from baseline to week 12 in biochemical markers of rosacea and expression in skin samples. A biological marker is a substance used as an indicator of a biological state such as rosacea. Biochemical markers are serine protease activity and expression, metalloprotease activity and expression, and production of leucine leucine-37 [LL-37] peptide.|baseline to week 12|Treatment success was defined as all subjects from either treatment group with a score of clear or near clear on the Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) scale. Treatment failure was defined as all subjects from either treatment group with a score of mild, moderate, or severe on the IGA scale.||micr grams protein||Standard Deviation|Mean
837770|NCT01308619|Primary|Change From Baseline in Inflammatory Lesion Counts|Mean change in inflammatory lesion counts from baseline to week 12|baseline to week 12|||inflammatory lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
837771|NCT01296763|Secondary|Number of Years From Cycle 1, Day 1 On-Study to Date of Death|The overall survival of subjects with locally advanced and/or metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with Irinotecan, Cisplatin, Olaparib, with escalation to the addition of Mitomycin-C. Survival from cycle 1, day 1 on-study to date of death was assessed.|5 years|||years (survival) from C1D1 to death||Full Range|Mean
837843|NCT01308918|Secondary|Correlation Between the Difficult Intubation Score and a Successful Intubation||1 hour (Post intubation)||||||
837844|NCT01308918|Secondary|Number of Attempt to Obtain a Successful Intubation||1 hour (Post intubation)|||Attempts|||Number
837772|NCT01296763|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced a Dose Limiting Toxicity to Determine the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)|"1.Phase I - Assess the safety and toxicities of IC with Olaparib escalating to ICM with Olaparib in patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer and determine the phase 2 dose. The number of subjects who experienced a dose limiting toxicity was assessed.Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) is defined as any of the following study drug-related events experienced during Cycle 1:
Thrombocytopenia with platelets <25,000 x106/l > 7 days. Grade 4 neutropenia lasting ≥7 days. Grade 3 or 4 febrile neutropenia. Grade 3 or greater non-haematological toxicities; excluding grade 3 diarrhoea, nausea or vomiting despite adequate treatment and grade 3 fatigue, lethargy and GGT elevation.
Delay of >2 weeks for next scheduled IC/ICM for reasons of toxicity."|2 years|Number of subjects who experienced a dose limiting toxicity, as defined in the protocol.||participants|||Number
837773|NCT01296815|Secondary|Safety|Adverse events will be assessed according to the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) I Working Group the Division of AIDS Table for Grading the Severity of Adult and Pediatric Adverse Events.|12 months||||||
837774|NCT01296815|Primary|Number of Participants With Complete Response|Complete response will be assessed according to RECIST criteria|12 months|||participants|||Number
837775|NCT01296841|Secondary|Clinic Appointment Wait Time|The investigators recorded clinic appointment wait time duration in minutes|Clinic Visit|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
837776|NCT01296841|Secondary|Clinic Appointment Duration|The investigators recorded appointment duration in minutes.|Clinic Visit|Pilot.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
837777|NCT01296841|Primary|Patient Clinical Experience|We used a validated Ware Specific Visit Questionnaire to assess patients’ satisfaction with their clinic-visit encounter. This is a 14-item questionnaire on doctor–patient interaction including factors such as attention to complaints, technical skills, and personal manner (courtesy,and ease of appointment scheduling and is based on a five-point Likert scale (1 excellent to 5 poor). Patients completed the questionnaire at the time of the visit. The 14 item scores were individually scored and then averaged to provide the final overall value.|Clinic Visit|per protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837778|NCT01302392|Secondary|Duration of Disease Control|Duration of Disease Control was calculated for subjects who achieved disease control. Duration of Disease Control was defined as the time in months from randomization to the earlier of documented progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause. Participants who had not progressed or died were censored according to the censoring rules defined previously for progression-free survival.|From time of achieving disease control through the final analysis data cutoff with longest follow-up time of approximately 31 months.|The intent to treat (ITT) population comprised randomized participants who achieved disease control.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837779|NCT01302392|Secondary|Disease Control|Number of participants who achieved confirmed stringent complete response (sCR), complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), partial response (PR), minimal response (MR), or stable disease (SD) lasting ≥ 8 weeks as their best response. Response was determined using the International Myeloma Working Group - Uniform Response Criteria (IMWG-URC). (MR was determined using European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria)|From randomization through the final analysis data cutoff with longest follow-up time of approximately 31 months. Median follow up times were 26.6 months and 23.1 months for Carfilzomib and Best Supportive Care groups, respectively.|The intent to treat (ITT) analysis set comprised all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
837780|NCT01302392|Secondary|Duration of Clinical Benefit|Duration of Clinical Benefit was calculated for subjects who achieved a best response of stringent complete response (sCR), complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), partial response (PR) or minimal response (MR). Duration of Clinical Benefit was defined as the time in months from the initial start of response (MR or better) to the earlier of documented progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause. Participants who had not progressed or died were censored according to the censoring rules defined previously for progression-free survival.|From time of achieving clinical benefit through the final analysis data cutoff with longest follow-up time of approximately 30 months.|The intent to treat (ITT) population comprised randomized participants who achieved a best overall response of MR or better only.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837781|NCT01302392|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Response|Number of participants who achieved confirmed stringent complete response (sCR), complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), partial response (PR), or minimal response (MR) as their best response. Response was determined using the International Myeloma Working Group - Uniform Response Criteria (IMWG-URC). (MR was determined using European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria)|From randomization through the final analysis data cutoff with longest follow-up time of approximately 31 months. Median follow up times were 26.6 months and 23.1 months for Carfilzomib and Best Supportive Care groups, respectively.|The intent to treat (ITT) analysis set comprised all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
837782|NCT01302392|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response (DOR) was calculated for subjects who achieved a best response of stringent complete response (sCR), complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), or partial response (PR). Duration of response was defined as the time in months from the initial start of response (PR or better) to the earlier of documented progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause. Participants who had not progressed or died were censored according to the censoring rules defined previously for progression-free survival.|From the time achieving response through the final analysis data cutoff with longest follow-up time of approximately 29 months.|The intent to treat (ITT) population comprised randomized participants who achieved a best overall response of PR or better only.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837783|NCT01302392|Secondary|Overall Response|Number of participants who achieved confirmed stringent complete response (sCR), complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), or partial response (PR) as their best response. Response was determined using the International Myeloma Working Group - Uniform Response Criteria (IMWG-URC).|From randomization through the final analysis data cutoff with longest follow-up time of approximately 31 months. Median follow up times were 26.6 months and 23.1 months for Carfilzomib and Best Supportive Care groups, respectively.|The intent to treat (ITT) analysis set comprised all randomized participants.||participants|||Number
838091|NCT01311661|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Evening FEV1 (FEV1 p.m.)|FEV1 p.m. was measured by patients at home using the AM3 device (overall means obtained during each period of randomised treatment will be compared). Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|0-3 weeks|FAS||mL||Standard Error|Mean
837784|NCT01302392|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Kaplan-Meier estimate of median time from randomization to progressive disease (PD) or all-cause death. PD was assessed using International Myeloma Working Group-Uniform Response Criteria (IMWG-URC). 1 or more conditions were required to meet PD: 2 consecutive rising serum or urine M-protein from central lab; documented new bone lesion(s) or soft tissue plasmacytoma(s) or increased size of existing bone lesion(s) or plasmacytoma(s); or confirmed hypercalcemia due solely to plasma cell proliferative disorder (local lab greater than 11.5 mg/dL on 2 separate occasions). Censoring conditions (censoring dates) were: no post-baseline disease assessment (DA) (randomization date); started non-protocol systemic anticancer treatment before PD or death (last DA date before such treatment); died or had PD after more than 1 missed DA (last DA date without PD before the first missed visit); or were alive and without documentation of PD, including lost to follow-up without PD (last DA date).|From randomization through the final analysis data cutoff with longest follow-up time of approximately 31 months. Median follow up times were 26.6 months and 23.1 months for Carfilzomib and Best Supportive Care groups, respectively.|The intent to treat (ITT) analysis set comprised all randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837785|NCT01302392|Primary|Overall Survival|Time elapsed between the randomization date and the date of death. Participants who were still alive were censored at date when the subject is last known alive or the data cutoff date, whichever occurs earlier.|From randomization through the final analysis data cutoff with longest follow-up time of approximately 45 months. Median follow up times were 27.8 months and 29.8 months for Carfilzomib and Best Supportive Care groups, respectively.|The intent to treat (ITT) analysis set comprised all randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837786|NCT01302418|Primary|Detection of Respiratory Viruses|The presence of Influenza A or Influenza B virus.|Specimens will be taken within 5 days of the appearance of symptoms.|All subjects meeting inclusion/ exclusion criteria and who had sufficient specimen volume.||participants|||Number
837787|NCT01302444|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pulmonary Arterial Systolic Pressure (PASP)as Assessed by Transthoracic Echocardiography Using Doppler Ultrasound||16 weeks|data not reported for one participant for anonymity|||||
837788|NCT01302444|Secondary|Plasma BNP (Brain Natriuretic Peptide)Level Change||16 weeks of therapy|data not reported for one participant for anonymity|||||
837789|NCT01302444|Secondary|Tei Index Change by Transthoracic Echocardiography||16 weeks of therapy|data not reported for one participant for anonymity|||||
837790|NCT01302444|Secondary|6 Minute Walking Distance Change Will Improve||16 weeks of therapy|data not reported for one participant for anonymity|||||
837791|NCT01302444|Primary|Hospitalizations||16 weeks|data not reported for one participant for anonymity|||||
837792|NCT01302444|Primary|WHO Functional Class Will Improve or Remain Stable||16 weeks|data not reported for one participant for anonymity|||||
837793|NCT01302444|Primary|Adverse Events Are no Greater Than With Treprostinil Infusion Alone||16 weeks|data not reported for one participant for anonymity|||||
837794|NCT01302444|Primary|All Cause Mortality||16 weeks|data not reported for one participant for anonymity|||||
837795|NCT01302483|Secondary|Maximum Change in Pulse Oximetry From Baseline|Maximum change from Baseline at any time point|Baseline, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 120 minutes|Intent to Treat||SpO2||Standard Deviation|Mean
837796|NCT01302483|Secondary|Maximum Change in Blood Pressure From Baseline|Maximum change from Baseline at any time point.|Baseline, 15, 20, 30, 40 50, 60, 120 minutes|Intention to treat||mmHG||Standard Deviation|Mean
837797|NCT01302483|Secondary|Maximum Change in Pulse From Baseline|Maximum change from Baseline at any time point.|Baseline, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 120 minutes|Intention to treat||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
837798|NCT01302483|Secondary|Soft Tissue Anesthesia Duration|"Assessment of pain using a Rotadent sensor probe, applying up to 20 grams/cm^2 at the tissue site. At each time point, participants were asked if they felt pain from the sensor probe at each site location in the mouth. The four sites were:
Site 1: Distal to the apex of the tooth in the position of the maxillary first premolar at the deepest point in the buccal vestibule
Site 2: Apical to the maxillary lateral incisor at the deepest point in the labial vestibule
Site 3: Incisive papilla
Site 4: At the confluence of the alveolar process and hard palate medial to the maxillary second premolar (near the greater palatine foramen)"|Baseline, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 80, 100, 120 minutes|Intention to treat||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
837799|NCT01302483|Primary|Pulpal Anesthesia|Number of participants who did not need rescue anesthesia to complete the study dental procedure, i.e. Kovacaine provided enough pulpal anesthesia to complete a dental procedure.|Continuous throughout dental treatment period (up to 60 minutes)|Intention to treat||participants|||Number
837800|NCT01302548|Secondary|Abscess Measurement Using a Abscess Measurement Scale in Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) Positive Patients.|"The Abscess Measurement Scale was measured using a centimeter ruler.
Scale 8cm – 10cm = Severe 6cm – 8cm = Moderate/severe 4cm – 6cm = Moderate 2cm – 4cm = Mild/moderate 0cm – 2cm = Mild"|48 hours|Only participants that were MRSA-positive, were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837801|NCT01302548|Secondary|Number of Patients Prescribed Oral Antibiotics|Number of patients prescribed oral antibiotics|48 hours|||participants|||Number
837802|NCT01302548|Primary|Abscess Healing Based on Abscess Measurement Scale|"The abscess healing process will use two methods: 1) usual method includes saline irrigation and/or incision & drainage, and 2) the use of IRRISEPT solution. The Abscess Measurement Scale was measured using a centimeter ruler.
Scale 8cm – 10cm = Severe 6cm – 8cm = Moderate/severe 4cm – 6cm = Moderate 2cm – 4cm = Mild/moderate 0cm – 2cm = Mild"|48 hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837803|NCT01308736|Primary|Cigarette Reduction|50% reduction in cigarettes per day as compared to baseline. Missing data are assumed to NOT have reduced.|At 6-month follow-up|||participants|||Number
837804|NCT01308749|Secondary|Mean Change in Temperature During Period 1|Temperature was collected on each participant via oral or temporal thermometer. The mean change in each group was assessed.|Week 0 to 8|||degrees fahrenheit||Standard Error|Mean
837805|NCT01308749|Secondary|Mean Change in Prolactin Levels Over Period 1|Serum prolactin levels were collected and analyzed in participants|Week 0 to 8|||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Error|Mean
837806|NCT01308749|Secondary|Change in Mean Systolic Blood Pressure During Period 1|Change in mean systolic blood pressure during double blind phase|Week 0 to 8|The one subject who discontinued at week 1 did not have follow up data to include in the analysis.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Mean
837807|NCT01308749|Secondary|Change in Mean Pervasive Developmental Disorder Behavior Inventory - Screening Version (PDDBI-SV) Total Score Over Both Periods|The PDDBI-SV examines both adaptive and maladaptive behaviors related to autism. It has normative scores for children between 2-11 years. For children 12 years and older, the norms (11 years, 11 months) will be used. Each item is scored on a scale from 0-3. For the first 9 items, the total of individual items is summed. For items 10-18, the scores are reversed and then summed (i.e.: 0=3, 1 =2, 2=2, 3 = 0). Then the total of 0-9 and then the reversed scored items 10-18 are summed for a final total score. Higher scores indicate more impairment. The range of total scores is 0-54. ASD/Social deficits unlikely: 0-6, More information needed/borderline: 7-10, autism spectrum disorder (ASD)/social deficits likely (mild):11-14, ASD/social deficits likely (moderate): 15-29, ASD/social deficits likely (severe): 30-37, ASD/social deficits likely (extreme): 38 or higher.|Baseline to 16 Weeks|used only subjects with all data points no data carried forward||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
837808|NCT01308749|Secondary|Change in Mean Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC)-Social Withdrawal Subscale Score Over Both Periods|Efficacy measures included the Aberrant Behavior Checklist -Social Withdrawal subscale scor. The ABC which focuses on problem behaviors in five subdomains, including irritability, attention, repetitive behaviors, unusual speech, and lethargy. A modified version of the lethargy subscale was used. Typically the Lethargy subscale includes 16 items, however, for our purposes 3 items that were specifically related to lethargy (i.e.: listlessness) were removed so that the focus could primarily be on aberrant social behavior. Differences in only the Social Withdrawal domain were assessed.The is the sum of items, each rated among 0 = Not at all; 1 = Slight in degree; 2 = Moderately serious; and 3 = Severe in degree. The ABC- Social Withdrawal total score ranges from 0 to 39. Higher values represent greater severity of illness.|Baseline to 16 Weeks|population of participants with all data available for mixed models analysis no data carried forward||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
837809|NCT01308749|Secondary|Change in Mean Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) Total Score|The ADOS is a semi-structured assessment used to assess and diagnose individuals suspected of having autism of varying ages, developmental levels, and language skills (from no speech to verbally fluent). The ADOS includes four modules, each requiring just 35-40 minutes to administer. The individual being evaluated is given just one of 4 modules, depending on his or her expressive language level and chronological age. The rater will observe social and communication behaviors during various activities in the appropriate module. A rater then uses a 0-3 scale to rate each type of behavior. A select number of individual items will be summed for a total score representing communication and reciprocal social interaction. In scoring all 3's are collapsed to a 2. A higher score indicates more severe impairment. Ranges of scores are as follows: Module 1: 0-24, Module 2: 0-24, Module 3: 0-22, Module 4: 0-22.|Baseline to 16 Weeks|1 patient without post baseline measures is not included||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
837810|NCT01308749|Secondary|Change in Mean Total Social Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) T-score|The 65-item SRS is a standardized measure of the core symptoms of autism. Each item is scored on a 4-point Likert scale. The raw score of each individual item is summed to create a total raw score. The total raw score is then translated into a total T-scores (which are the equivalent of standard scores). Total T-scores results are as follows: 59 and below: within normal limits, 60-65: Mild range of impairment 66-75: Moderate range of impairment 76 or higher: Severe range of impairment.|0-8 weeks, blinded treatment, period 1|All participants with at least one post baseline assessment, 1 person from sequence 1 discontinued due to no post baseline measures||T-scores||Standard Error|Mean
837811|NCT01308749|Secondary|Change in Mean Weight|changes during period 1|between weeks 0 and 8|The subject who discontinued after 2 days did not have repeat assessments and is excluded from these analyses||pounds||Standard Error|Mean
837812|NCT01308749|Secondary|Change in Mean Plasma Oxytocin Level During Period 1 - Double Blind Phase|Blood samples will be collected to obtain proof of concept data regarding changes in afternoon plasma oxytocin levels|Week 0 to week 8|participants with oxytocin plasma levels at baseline and week 8||picograms/mL (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
837813|NCT01308749|Primary|Number of Participants Who Could Tolerate Twice Daily Oxytocin|This study will help to determine tolerability of intranasal oxytocin treatment in children with autism by measuring the ability of at least 80% of the sample to tolerate twice daily intranasal administration of oxytocin.|Week 0 to week 16|all participants who recieved oxytocin at any time||Participants|||Count of Participants
837814|NCT01308749|Primary|Number of Participants Who Could Tolerate Twice Daily Oxytocin|This study will help to determine tolerability of intranasal oxytocin treatment in children with autism by measuring the ability of at least 80% of the sample to tolerate twice daily intranasal administration of oxytocin.|Week 0 to week 8|This is over period 1, the double blind phase (week 0 to week 8) only||Participants|||Count of Participants
837815|NCT01308762|Secondary|Administration Site Reactions|Local skin reactions are viewed as a normal and predicted reaction to exposure to a preparation of mycobacterial antigens. All patients experienced administration site reactions and all reactions were examined and characterised. However only those reported as adverse events are presented here.|Day -3 to Day 56|Safety population||Participants|||Number
837816|NCT01308762|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|"Safety and tolerability were measured with respect to:
Safety measurements
Local tolerability at the site of intradermal injection
Incidence of adverse events."|56 days|All analyses were based on the safety population, which comprised of all patients who received at least one dose of IMP. Safety measurements and nature and incidence of adverse events were reported for the Safety population||Participants|||Number
837817|NCT01308788|Primary|2-year Change in OPP||Baseline and 24 month visits|||mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
837818|NCT01308788|Primary|2-year Change in CRA RI||Baseline and 24 month visits|one participant was unable to be measured for this outcome||unitless||Standard Error|Mean
837819|NCT01308788|Primary|2-year Change in CRA EDV||Baseline and 24 month visits|one participant was unable to be measured for this outcome||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
837820|NCT01308788|Primary|2-year Change in CRA PSV||Baseline and 24 month visits|one participant was unable to be measured for this outcome||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
837821|NCT01308788|Primary|2-year Change in OA RI||Baseline and 24 month visits|one participant was unable to be measured for this outcome||unitless||Standard Error|Mean
837822|NCT01308788|Primary|2-year Change in OA EDV||Baseline and 24 month visits|one participant was unable to be measured for this outcome||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
837831|NCT01308814|Secondary|Change in Baroreceptor Sensitivity|"A finometer noninvasive blood pressure devise (FMS) was used to collect a 10 minute recording of beat-to-beat blood pressure and pulse rate during spontaneous breathing under quiet recumbent conditions. baroreflex sensitivity was computed from the most stable 5-minute segment of this 10-minute period. Cross-spectral analysis was used to estimate the average transfer function modulus (i.e., gain) between systemic blood pressure oscillations and R-R interval oscillations in the frequency range of 0.07-0.14 Hz, also known as the low frequency band. The units of this baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) were msec/mmHg.
The outcome presented here is the 12 month BRS minus baseline BRS."|Baseline, month 12|The data presented here are based on individuals who completed the study and provided useable data for this particular measure at the time point reported.||msec/mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
837832|NCT01308814|Secondary|Change in Percentage of Brachial Artery Diameter|Change (from Baseline-to-12 Month) in flow mediated dilatation (FMD) test of the brachial artery, dilatation occurs following an acute increase in blood flow, induced by via circulatory arrest in the arm for a period of time. Measured using high resolution ultrasound, yielding a measure of endothelial-dependent vasodilatation. The increase in brachial arterial diameter as a consequence of reactive hyperemia is compared to the baseline diameter of the artery and expressed as a percentage of the baseline diameter (% FMD). Flow-mediated vasodilatation at each time point was calculated as diameter of the brachial artery under reactive hyperemia minus baseline diameter of the brachial artery. The change presented here is calculated as 12 month %FMD minus baseline month %FMD.|Baseline, month 12|The data presented here are based on individuals who completed the study and provided useable data for this particular measure at the time point reported.||percent flow mediated dilatation||Standard Deviation|Mean
837833|NCT01308814|Secondary|Percentage Meeting Criteria for Metabolic Risk [Baseline and Month 12]|Subjects will be classified as having metabolic risk if they either meet standard criteria for the metabolic syndrome (based on 3 of 5 risk factors: elevated blood pressure, fasting triglycerides, fasting glucose, waist circumference and low HDL-cholesterol) or they exhibit insulin resistance based on the homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) to derive HOMA-IR based on fasting insulin and glucose levels using the equation: HOMA-IR = fasting glucose (mmol/L) × fasting insulin (μU/mL)/22.5|Baseline, month 12|The data presented here are based on individuals who completed the study and provided useable data for this particular measure at the time point reported.||Participants|||Count of Participants
837834|NCT01308814|Secondary|Change in Functional Well-being as Assessed by the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form (SF-36)|The Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form (SF-36) is a measure of functional well-being, including physical functioning, bodily pain, role limitations due to physical health problems, role limitations due to emotional health problems, emotional well-being, social functioning, energy/fatigue, and general health perceptions. The range of this scale is 0-100, where higher scores indicates a more favorable health state.|Baseline, month 12|The data presented here are based on individuals who completed the study and provided useable data for this particular measure at the time point reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837835|NCT01308814|Primary|Change in Stress Reactivity During Laboratory Session Including Trier Social Stress Test|Primary measures reflecting stress reactivity will consist of mean arterial pressure (MAP), vascular resistance index (VRI), plasma cortisol, and plasma IL-6. For each of these four measures, a delta score (change from rest to stress) will be calculated and then standardized as Z scores. The individual Z scores will then be averaged to yield a single Stress Reactivity profile measure (average z score) - a composite Z score reflecting magnitude of activation in the four primary stress-responsive pathways. This composite z score at baseline will be subtracted from the composite z score at 12 months to yield this outcome measure.|Baseline, month 12|The data presented here are based on individuals who completed the study and provided useable data for this particular measure at the time point reported.||composite Z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
837836|NCT01308814|Primary|Change in Psychiatric Diagnosis as Assessed by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM Disorders I/NP||Baseline and when prompted by CES-D score|These data were not collected because this measure is no longer the preferred method for characterizing change in depression risk. The preferred method is now to measure depressive symptoms continuously, which was done. These continuous results can be found for the CESD score in this record.|||||
837837|NCT01308814|Primary|Change in Depressive Symptoms as Indicated by The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D)|Change from pre-trial (baseline) to post-trial (month 12) in the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). The CES-D has a Range from 0-60, with higher scores indicating the presence of more symptomatology. A score of 16 or greater is indicative of clinically significant symptoms of depression.|Baseline, month 12|The data presented here are based on individuals who completed the study and provided useable data for this particular measure at the time point reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837838|NCT01308840|Secondary|The Number of Participants Who Experience an Adverse Event|Any adverse event continuing after the study completion and considered potentially related to study treatment will be followed until resolution, stabilization or initiation of treatment that confounds the ability to assess the event|baseline to study completion|||participants|||Number
837839|NCT01308840|Secondary|Median Overall Survival|Death from any cause was used.|enrollment until date of death|||months||Full Range|Median
837840|NCT01308840|Secondary|Median Progression Free Survival|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from study enrollment to date of cancer progression or death, whichever occurred first. Progression was assessed using CT scans and the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors criteria. Progression is defined as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|time to cancer progression or death|||months||Full Range|Median
837841|NCT01308840|Primary|The Number of Participants With Response to GEMOX-Panitumumab (GEMOX-P) in Chemotherapy naïve KRAS/ BRAF Wild Type Stage IV Biliary Tract Cancer Using the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) Criteria.|Tumor measurement - same imaging modality used in pre-treatment evaluation - include radiological examination of all areas with affected disease. For pretreatment and at the end of cycle 2 CT scans (chest/abdomen/pelvis) will be used. For all subsequent cycles, CT of chest/abdomen/pelvis will be used every 8 weeks.|end of cycle 2 of treatment|||participants|||Number
837842|NCT01308918|Secondary|Number of Complications Associated to the GlideRite DLT Stylet® Utilization|Complications defined either as oxygen desaturation below 95%, oxygen desaturation below 90%, minor bleeding, anatomic lesion.|1 hour (Post intubation)|||Participants|||Number
837845|NCT01308918|Secondary|Duration of the Intubating Process|The timer was started when the GLS blade was inserted between the lips and stopped when the proximal part of the tracheal cuff was passed through the vocal cords. When a patient had teeth at the superior jaw, the DLT was first inserted into the mouth prior to the insertion of the GLS blade in order to avoid rupturing the tracheal cuff. For these cases, the timer was started when the DLT was inserted between the lips.|1 hour (Post intubation)|||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
837846|NCT01308918|Primary|Number of Successfull Primary Placement of the Double Lumen Tube.|To evaluate the number of participants where GlideRite DLT Stylet® associated to the video laryngoscopy (GlideScope®)allowed the primary placement of the double lumen tube into their trachea.|1 hour (Post intubation)|||Participants|||Number
837847|NCT01309581|Secondary|Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Self Report (QIDS-SR)|The QIDS-SR is a 16-item self-rated instrument designed to assess the severity of depressive symptoms present in the past seven days (Rush et al 2003). The 16 items cover the nine symptom domains of major depression, and are rated on a scale of 0-3. Total score ranges from 0 to 27, with ranges of 0-5 (normal), 6-10 (mild), 11-15 (moderate), 16-20 (moderate to severe), and 21+ (severe).|Change from beginning of ECT treatment to end; on average 3 weeks||||||
837848|NCT01309581|Primary|Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-24 (HRSD24)|"The HDRS-24 is used to rate depressive symptoms. This instrument is considered one of the gold standard clinician-rated instruments for depressive symptoms. We have established procedures for the maintenance of inter-rater reliability."|Change from beginning of ECT treatment to end; on average 3 weeks||||||
837849|NCT01309646|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|During the entire study period (from Month 0 to Month 7)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
837850|NCT01309646|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any = any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) follow-up period after any vaccination with Infanrix™-IPV+Hib or Infanrix™ IPV + Hiberix™|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
837851|NCT01309646|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited General Symptoms.|Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness, irritability/fussiness, loss of appetite and fever [defined as tympanic temperature ≥ 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = incidence of a particular symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) follow-up period after any vaccination with Infanrix™-IPV+Hib or Infanrix™ IPV + Hiberix™|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and with the symptom sheet completed.||subjects|||Number
837852|NCT01309646|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Solicited Local Symptoms.|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site. Any = incidence of a particular symptom regardless of intensity grade.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) follow-up period after any vaccination with Infanrix™-IPV+Hib or Infanrix™ IPV + Hiberix™|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented and with the symptom sheet completed.||subjects|||Number
837853|NCT01309646|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Vaccine Response to Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN.|Vaccine response was defined as antibody concentration ≥ 5 EL.U/mL at post vaccination, for initially seronegative subjects, and at least maintenance of antibody concentration from pre to post-vaccination (i.e. antibody concentration at post vaccination ≥ 1 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration), for initially seropositive subjects.|At Month 5|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Subjects|||Number
837854|NCT01309646|Secondary|Concentrations of Anti-PRP Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was 0.15 µg/mL.|At Month 0 and Month 5|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837855|NCT01309646|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Anti-polyribosyl-ribitol-phosphate (Anti-PRP) Antibodies.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had an anti-PRP antibody concentration ≥ 0.15 micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL).|At Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||subjects|||Number
837856|NCT01309646|Secondary|Titres for Anti-polio Types 1, 2 and 3.|Titres were expressed as geometric mean titres (GMTs). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was 8.|At Month 0 and Month 5|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837857|NCT01309646|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Anti-poliovirus (Anti-polio) Types 1, 2 and 3.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had an anti-polio types 1, 2 and 3 antibody titres equal to or above (≥) 8, cut off corresponding to the effective dose for 50% of the vaccinated subjects.|At Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||subjects|||Number
837858|NCT01309646|Secondary|Concentrations for Anti-D and Anti-T Antibodies.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The seroprotection cut-off of the assay was 0.1 IU/mL.|At Month 0 and Month 5|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837859|NCT01309646|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Anti-diphtheria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus (Anti-T) Antibodies.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had an anti-D and anti-T antibody concentration equal to or above (≥) 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|At Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||subjects|||Number
837860|NCT01309646|Secondary|Anti-pertussis Toxoid (PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (FHA) and Anti-pertactin (PRN) Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) for the seropositivity cut-off of 5 EL.U/mL.|At Month 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837861|NCT01309646|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for Anti-pertussis Toxoid (PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (FHA) and Anti-pertactin (PRN).|A seropositive subjects was defined as a vaccinated subjects who had an anti-PRN, anti-PT and anti-FHA antibody concentration ≥ 5 ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL).|At Month 0 and Month 5|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Subjects|||Number
837862|NCT01309646|Primary|Anti-pertussis Toxoid (PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (FHA) and Anti-pertactin (PRN) Antibody Concentrations.|Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) for the seropositivity cut-off of 5 ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL).|At Month 5|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
837863|NCT01309646|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Anti-polyribosyl-ribitol-phosphate (Anti-PRP) Antibodies.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had an anti-PRP antibody concentration ≥ 0.15 micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL).|At Month 5|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Subjects|||Number
837864|NCT01309646|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Anti-poliovirus (Anti-polio) Types 1, 2 and 3.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had an anti-polio types 1, 2 and 3 antibody titres equal to or above (≥) 8, cut off corresponding to the effective dose for 50% of the vaccinated subjects.|At Month 5|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||subjects|||Number
837865|NCT01309646|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for Anti-diphtheria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus (Anti-T) Antibodies.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject who had an anti-D and anti-T antibody concentration equal to or above (≥) 0.1 international units per milliliter (IU/mL).|At Month 5|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects who received one dose of either study vaccine according to their random assignment, for whom administration site of study vaccine was known and for whom immunogenicity data were available.||Subjects|||Number
837866|NCT01309659|Secondary|Correlation Between Baseline Soluble Transferrin Receptor Index (Soluble Receptor/Log Ferritin) and the Change in the 6 Minute Walk Test Distance|Correlation between baseline soluble transferrin receptor index (soluble receptor/log ferritin) and the change in the 6 Minute Walk Test Distance from baseline to 12 weeks|baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. Four subjects were missing responses in the immediate intervention group and four subjects were missing responses in the wait list control group.||correlation coefficient|||Number
837867|NCT01309659|Secondary|Correlation Between Baseline Soluble Transferrin Receptor and the Change in the 6 Meter Walk Test Distance|Correlation between baseline soluble transferrin receptor and the change in the 6 Meter Walk Test distance from baseline to 12 weeks|baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. One subject was missing responses in the immediate intervention group and one subject was missing responses in the wait list control group.||correlation coefficient|||Number
837868|NCT01309659|Secondary|Correlation Between Baseline Serum Ferritin, Serum Iron, and Transferrin Saturation and the Change in 6 Minute Walk Test Distance|Correlation between baseline serum ferritin, serum iron, and transferrin saturation and the change in 6 Minute Walk Test distance from baseline to 12 weeks.|baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. One subject was missing responses from the wait list control group.||correlation coefficient|||Number
837869|NCT01309659|Secondary|Correlation Between Baseline Soluble Transferrin Receptor Index (Soluble Receptor/Log Ferritin) and the Change in Hemoglobin|Correlation between baseline soluble transferrin receptor index (soluble receptor/log ferritin) and the change in hemoglobin from baseline to 12 weeks.|baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. Four subjects were missing responses from both the immediate intervention group and the wait list control group.||correlation coefficient|||Number
837870|NCT01309659|Secondary|Correlation Between Baseline Soluble Transferrin Receptor and the Change in HB From Baseline to 12 Weeks|Correlation between baseline soluble transferrin receptor and the change in hemoglobin from the baseline to 12 weeks.|baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. One subject in both the immediate intervention and the wait list control groups were missing responses.||correlation coefficient|||Number
837871|NCT01309659|Secondary|Change in Frailty Component as Determined by the 4 Meter Walk Speed|"To quantify the impact of anemia treatment by IV iron sucrose on change in the speed of the 4 meter walk speed. Subjects are asked to walk as fast as they can for 4 meters. Frailty was determined by the subject's speed. (change from frail at baseline to not frail at week 12). 4 m walking speed is stratified by gender and height. For men, (height of <= 173 cm and a walking speed of <= 0.65 meter/sec) or a (height > 173, <= .76 meter/sec) were classified as frail. For women, (height of <= 159 cm and a walking speed of <=.65 meter/sec) or (height >159 cm <= 0.76 meter/sec) were classified as frail.The outcome is the number of participants who were classified as “frail” at baseline and changed to “not frail” at week 12."|Baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. Five subjects were missing responses in the immediate intervention group and four subjects were missing responses in the wait list control group.||participants|||Number
837872|NCT01309659|Secondary|Change in Frailty Component as Determined by Grip Strength|"To quantify the impact of anemia treatment by IV iron sucrose on change in the frailty as measured by change in grip strength. Subjects squeeze the grip strength machine 3 times with each hand. For the frailty outcome the maximum grip strength from the dominant hand is used. (change from frail at baseline to not frail at week 12). Grip strength is stratified by gender and BMI. For men with (BMI <= 24 and a grip strength (GS) <= 29) or (BMI 24.1-28 and grip strength <= 30) or (BMI >28 and a grip strength <= 32) were classified as frail. For women with (BMI <= 23 and a grip strength of <= 17) or (BMI 23.1-26 and a GS <= 17.3) or (BMI 26.1-29 and a GS <= 18) or (BMI > 29 and a GS <= 21) were classified as frail.The outcome is the number of participants who were classified as “frail” at baseline and changed to “not frail” at week 12."|Baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. Three subjects in both the immediate intervention group and the wait list control groups were missing responses.||participants|||Number
837873|NCT01309659|Secondary|Change in the Frailty Component as Determined by Self-reported Activity Level|To quantify the impact of anemia treatment by IV iron sucrose on change in the frailty as measured by change in self-reported activity level. Frailty for activity level is classified by subjects responses to 6physical activity questions on the short version of the Minnesota Leisure Time Activity Questionnaire , were related to walking for exercise, moderately strenuous outdoor chores, dancing, bowling, and regular exercise. The Women's Health And Aging Study (WHAS) scoring algorithm was used to define frailty for self-reported activity level. The answers to these questions were used to calculate kilocalories (Kcals) per week, using the WHAS algorithm, which is further satisfied by by gender. For men, Kcals < 128 per week is frail. For women, Kcals < 90 per week is frail. This is a categorical measurement of yes or no. The outcome is the number of participants who were classified as “frail” at baseline and changed to “not frail” at week 12.|Baseline, 12 week|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. Two subjects in the immediate intervention group and 5 subjects in the wait list group did not respond.||participants|||Number
837874|NCT01309659|Secondary|Change in Self Reported Outcomes Measures as Reported by FACIT-AN Total Score|To quantify the impact of anemia treatment by IV iron sucrose on self -reported outcomes measures by subjects answering 47 questions for patients with anemia and or fatigue. This test detects self-report functional changes and QoL. Change from baseline to 12 weeks. Scores range from 0-188 with higher scores indicating better function.|Baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random.The number of participants analyzed is correct as for each of the groups there was missing responses for subjects.||change in the total score||Standard Deviation|Mean
837875|NCT01309659|Secondary|Change in Cognitive Outcome Measures as Determined by Composite Learning and Memory|To quantify the impact of anemia treatment by IV iron sucrose on cognitive outcomes based on Learning and memory was derived using the z-scores of the following three tests: (1) CogState ISL immediate recall score (total score from three learning trials), (2) CogState ISL immediate recall score from the first learning trial, and (3) CogState ISL delayed recall scores. The composite score for a subject at each time point was defined as the mean of the Z-scores for the three tests at the time point. For each subject, the Z-score for each test at time point was derived by subtracting the overall baseline mean of the test from the subject's score at the time point and then dividing by the overall baseline standard deviation of the test. Higher numbers indicated a better response.There is no scale, as the results are normalized variables.|Baseline, 12 week|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random.The number of participants analyzed is correct as 2 subjects for each of the groups did not have a response for this data.||change in Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
837876|NCT01309659|Secondary|Change in Cognitive Outcome Measures as Determined by Composite Complex Attention/Executive Processing|To quantify the impact of anemia treatment by IV iron sucrose on cognitive outcomes based on Complex attention/executive processing was derived using the z-scores of the following three tests: (1) TMT Part B seconds per completed circle, (2) time score from the CogState One Back Task, and (3) accuracy score from the CogState One Back Task. The composite score for a subject at each time point was defined as the mean of the Z-scores for the three tests at the time point. For each subject, the Z-score for each test at time point was derived by subtracting the overall baseline mean of the test from the subject's score at the time point (accuracy score) or by subtracting the subject's score at the time point from the overall baseline mean of the test (TMT and time score) and then dividing by the overall baseline standard deviation of the test.|Baseline, 12 week|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random.The number of participants analyzed is correct as 1 subject for the Wait List Control did not respond to this during their clinic visit.||change in Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
837877|NCT01309659|Secondary|Change in Cognitive Outcome Measures as Determined by Speed of Processing|To quantify the impact of anemia treatment by IV iron sucrose on cognitive outcomes based on speed of processing was derived using the z-scores of the following three tests: (1) TMT Part A seconds per completed circle, (2) simple reaction time from the CogState Detection Task, and (3) choice reaction time from the CogState Identification Task. The composite score for a subject at each time point was defined as the mean of the Z-scores for the three tests at the time point. For each subject, the Z-score for each test at time point was derived by subtracting the subject's score at the time point from the overall baseline mean of the test and then dividing by the overall baseline standard deviation of the test. Positive z-scores indicate a better performance compared to the baseline average.|Baseline, 12 Week|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random.The number of participants analyzed is correct as 1 subject for the Immediate Intervention Group did not respond to this during their clinic visit.||change in Z-Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
837878|NCT01309659|Secondary|Change in Frailty Component Related to Fatigue/ Exhaustion|"Subjective fatigue/exhaustion: If any of the following three criteria are met, the patient will be classified as frail for fatigue/exhaustion:
“In the past month, on average, have you been feeling unusually tired during the day?” is answered “yes” and indicated as “all of the time” or “most of the time.”
“In the past month, on average, have you felt unusually weak?” is answered “yes” and indicated as “all of the time” or “most of the time.”
Energy level on a scale of 0 (no energy) to 10 (most energy) reported as ≤ 3. If the subject answers YES to any of the above noted 3 questions, then they are classified as FRAIL.
The change in frailty for fatigue/ exhaustion is defined as changing from frail at baseline to not frail at week 12 as reported by the subject."|baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. Results reported by number of participants reporting change from their baseline exhaustion, and low energy.||participants|||Number
837879|NCT01309659|Secondary|Correlation Between Baseline Serum Ferritin, Serum Iron, and Transferrin Saturation and the Change in Hemoglobin (HB)|Correlation between baseline serum ferritin, serum iron, and transferrin saturation and the change in HB from baseline to 12 weeks.|baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random.||correlation coefficient|||Number
837880|NCT01309659|Secondary|Change in Self Reported Outcomes Measures as Reported by Short Form-36 (SF-36) Physical Component Score (PCS)|To quantify the impact of anemia treatment by IV iron sucrose on self-reported outcomes measures by change in SF36 physical component score. The SF-36 form identifies self-report physical function and global measure of quality of life and is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey consisting of 36 questions. The Physical Component Summary (PCS) is a subscale of the SF-36 that correlates with physical health domains of the SF-36 ( Physical Function, Role-Physical, and Bodily Pain). The change is calculated and compared from baseline to week 12. The SF-36 PCS score is a norm based sore with a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 where results above and below 50 are above and below the average, respectively, in the 2009 general US population.|Baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. Number of participants analyzed is correct- 2 subjects for Waitlist Group did not respond.||t score||Standard Deviation|Mean
837881|NCT01309659|Secondary|Change in Cognitive Outcome Measures as Determined by Trail Making Test Part B|To quantify the impact of anemia treatment by IV iron sucrose on cognitive outcomes based on the Trail Making Test (TMT) Part B as measured by subjects drawing a line from 25 circled numbers to letters in 300 seconds. The change in seconds per completed circle from baseline to week 12.|Baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random. The number of participants analyzed is correct as 4 subjects for the wait list control group did not respond to this during their clinic visit.||change in seconds per completed circle||Standard Deviation|Mean
837882|NCT01309659|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had a Hemoglobin Increase >= 1g/dL|To assess the efficacy of IV iron sucrose in improving Hemoglobin by at least 1 g/dL; an increase from baseline to week 12.|baseline, 12 weeks|||participants|||Number
837883|NCT01309659|Primary|Change in 6 Minute Walk Test Results|Subjects were asked to walk for 6 minutes, unassisted. The distance walked was recorded in meters at baseline (time of randomization) and 12 weeks after baseline (time of randomization). The change from baseline to 12 weeks, related to distance, is compared and documented.|Baseline, 12 weeks|All intent-to-treat patients were included in the primary analysis with an assumption that any missing data were missing completely at random.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
837884|NCT01309672|Secondary|Number of Patients With Toxicity of Abiraterone Acetate|Only adverse events that are possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug are reported.|Up to 3 years|All participants receiving at least some protocol treatment||Participants|||Number
837885|NCT01309672|Secondary|Overall Survival||3 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837886|NCT01309672|Secondary|Objective Progression-free Survival|Progression defined as unequivocal progression of disease, progressive disease as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), progressive disease as defined by the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group bone scan progression criteria, or death due to disease.|3 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837887|NCT01309672|Secondary|Number of Patients With PSA Partial Response|PSA reduction to < 4 ng/ml, but >0.2 ng/ml|12 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
837888|NCT01309672|Primary|Number of Patients With Undetectable PSA|undetectable PSA defined as <= 0.2 ng/mL. Patients not responding in the first year were deemed non-responders.|12 months|All patients who received at least 1 dose of protocol treatment||Participants|||Count of Participants
837962|NCT01309841|Primary|Response (Responder/Non-responder) to Study Drug During Weeks 1 to 12|Responder was defined as having at least 3 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs)/week with at least 1 SBM/week increase over baseline for at least 9 out of the 12 treatment weeks and 3 out of the last 4 treatment weeks during the double-blind treatment period. An SBM is a bowel movement occurring 24 hours or more since the last use of rescue medication.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||Number of patients|||Number
837963|NCT01309880|Secondary|Comfort|At 1-Week Follow-up, participants rated lens comfort on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the most favorable score.|1 Weeks|||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
837964|NCT01309880|Secondary|Slit Lamp Findings|Measured on a scale of 0-4 where 0=none, 1=trace, 2=mild, 3=moderate, and 4=severe for edema, microcysts, corneal staining, limbal injection, bulbar injection, upper lid tarsal conjunctival abnormalities, corneal neovascularization and corneal infiltrates.|1 week|All Dispensed Eyes||eyes|Participants||Number
837965|NCT01309880|Primary|Visual Acuity|Distance high contrast logMAR lens visual acuity (VA) between the Air Optix Aqua lens and the Test Lens at Dispensing and at 1-Week Follow-up.|Dispensing & 1-week follow up|All Eligible, Dispensed Eyes||logMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
837966|NCT01309893|Secondary|Overall Comfort|Comfort measured by participant on a scale of 0-100 with 100 being the most favorable.|1 week|All eligible dispensed eyes||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
838092|NCT01311661|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Morning FEV1 (FEV1 a.m.)|FEV1 a.m. was measured by patients at home using the AM3 device (overall means obtained during each period of randomised treatment will be compared). Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|0-3 weeks|FAS||mL||Standard Error|Mean
838353|NCT01315158|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experience Other Sedation Related Complications|Compare the number of participants who experience other sedation related complications such as hypotension, hypoxemia and need for termination of the procedure between the two groups|One day (during procedure)|||participants|||Number
838354|NCT01315158|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experience Airway Maneuvers|In high risk patients (meeting at least of 1 of 3 criteria: ASA ≥ 3, BMI ≥ 30, those at risk for OSA) undergoing advanced endoscopy procedures, compare the number of participants who experience airway maneuvers (AMs) when sedated with propofol alone versus propofol in combination with benzodiazepines and opioids.|One day (during procedure)|||participants|||Number
837942|NCT01309802|Secondary|EQ-5D A Standardised Patient Reported Measure of Health Status for Clinical and Economic Appraisal|A combined reported score measuring 5 dimensions; mobility, self care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels; no problems, some problems, extreme problems|baseline to 28 days|not were not collected|||||
837943|NCT01309802|Secondary|Tissue Perfusion|Doppler perfusion imager and Periscan image analysis software|baseline to 28 days|Data were not collected|||||
837944|NCT01309802|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction|The Optum SF-12v2® Health Survey - A Short Patient Reported Survey Measuring Health Using Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair and Poor Indicators. On a scale from Excellent to Poor, Excellent being the maximum outcome. Good is scored as average. Patient satisfaction assessed as the percentage of participants who responded; Excellent, Very Good and Good on the health survey on average feeling between baseline and 28 days.|baseline to 28 days|||percentage of participants|||Number
837945|NCT01309802|Secondary|Hand Function|Quick-DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand) Outcome Measure|baseline to 28 days|Data were not collected|||||
837946|NCT01309802|Secondary|Quality of Life|SF-12v2® Health Survey - Pain Enhanced|change from baseline to 28 days|Data were not collected,|||||
837947|NCT01309802|Primary|Percentage of Patient Reported Pain-free Days|Subjective pain scales [visual analogue scale (VAS) and faces pain assessment]. Subjects reporting total number of pain free days within the time period of 0-28 days.|baseline to 28 days|||percentage of pain free days|||Number
837948|NCT01309828|Secondary|Percentage of Participants at Final Visit Who Achieved Both a Clinic Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure Response|Systolic/diastolic blood pressure is the arithmetic mean of the 3 serial sitting systolic/diastolic blood pressure measurements. Percentage of participants who achieved both a sitting clinic systolic and diastolic blood pressure response, defined as systolic blood pressure less than 130 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure less than 80 mm Hg at Week 52.|Week 52|Full analysis set participants (all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of open-label study drug) with both Baseline and a post-baseline value; last observation carried forward was used.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837949|NCT01309828|Secondary|Percentage of Participants at Final Visit Who Achieved Target Diastolic Blood Pressure <80 mm Hg|Diastolic blood pressure is the arithmetic mean of the 3 serial sitting diastolic blood pressure measurements. Percentage of participants at Week 52 who achieved a sitting clinic diastolic blood pressure response, defined as less than 80 mm Hg.|Week 52|Full analysis set participants (all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of open-label study drug) with both Baseline and a post-baseline value; last observation carried forward was used.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837950|NCT01309828|Secondary|Percentage of Participants at Final Visit Who Achieve Target Systolic Blood Pressure <130 mm Hg|Systolic blood pressure is the arithmetic mean of the 3 serial sitting systolic blood pressure measurements. Percentage of participants who achieve a sitting clinic systolic blood pressure response defined as less than 130 mm Hg at Week 52.|Week 52|Full analysis set participants (all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of open-label study drug) with both Baseline and a post-baseline value; last observation carried forward was used.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837951|NCT01309828|Primary|Number of Participants With at Least 1 Adverse Event (AE)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. A serious AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life threatening, required or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, led to a congenital anomaly/birth defect or was an important medical event that may have required intervention to prevent any of items above.|From the first dose of open-label study drug until 14 days (or 30 days for a serious adverse event) after the last dose of open- label study drug (up to 56 weeks).|Safety analysis set - All participants who received at least 1 dose of open-label study drug.||participants|||Number
837967|NCT01309893|Secondary|Slit Lamp Findings ≥ Grade 2|Slit lamp findings are measured on a scale of 0-4, where 0=none, and 4=severe. The slit lamp exam is a routine procedure done to evaluate eye health and determine eligibility for clinical trial. It provides view of the different parts of the eye. During the exam, a doctor can look at the front parts of the eye, including the cornea, the lens, the iris and other parts of the anterior segment of the eye. Fluorescein dye may be used during a slit lamp examination to make it easier to detect inflammation, infections, or injured area on the cornea.|1 week|All dispensed eyes||eyes|Participants||Number
837952|NCT01309841|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) Satisfaction Domain|The PAC-QOL scale is a 28-item self-report instrument designed to evaluate the burden of constipation on patients’ everyday functioning and well-being in the 2 weeks (14 days) prior to assessment. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). The instrument can be used to generate an overall score, but is also reported to assess 4 specific constipation-related domains including: 1) Worries and concerns (11 items), 2) Physical discomfort (4 items), 3) Psychosocial discomfort (8 items), and 4) Satisfaction (5 items). Each domain score is the mean of the non-missing items for that domain. The total score is the mean of all non-missing items. The range of the domain or total score is 0 (response is 'not at all' for each item) to 4 (response is 'extremely' for each item). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who randomized multiple times at different centers. MMRM analysis includes all patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline assessment, while the Ns at Week 12 reflect patients providing data at Week 12.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837953|NCT01309841|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms Questionnaire (PAC-SYM)|The PAC-SYM questionnaire is a 12-item questionnaire that evaluates the severity of symptoms of constipation in 3 domains (stool, rectal, and abdominal symptoms) on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (absent) to 4 (very severe) in the 2 weeks (14 days) prior to assessment. Each domain score is the mean of the non-missing items for that domain. The total score is the mean of all non-missing items (ie, symptoms). The range of the domain or total score is 0 (response is 'absent' for each item) to 4 (response is 'very severe' for each item). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who randomized multiple times at different centers. MMRM analysis includes all patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline assessment, while the Ns at Week 12 reflect patients providing data at Week 12.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837954|NCT01309841|Secondary|Time (in Hours) to First Post-dose Laxation Without the Use of Rescue Laxatives Within the Previous 24 Hours in the Laxative Inadequate Response (LIR) Subgroup|Time to first post-dose laxation without the use of rescue laxatives within the last 24 hours was calculated in hours as: Date/Time of first post-dose laxation without rescue – First dose date/time.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837955|NCT01309841|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Spontaneous Bowel Movements/Week|The number of spontaneous bowel movements/week was determined from the patient's eDiary.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||Number of SBMs/week||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837956|NCT01309841|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percent Numbers of Days With a CSBM (Complete Spontaneous Bowel Movement)|A single-item question on the completeness of evacuation, developed and validated through 1:1 interviews with OIC patients, was asked via the eDiary: “Did you feel like your bowels were completely empty after the bowel movement?” Patients provided a yes or a no response. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||Percent days/week||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837957|NCT01309841|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Stool Consistency (Bristol Stool Scale)|Patients rated stool consistency through completion of the BSS after each BM. The 7 stool types are: 1. Separate hard lumps, like nuts (hard to pass); 2. Sausage-shaped, but lumpy; 3. Like sausage, but with cracks on its surface; 4. Like a sausage or snake, smooth and soft; 5. Soft blobs with clear cut edges (passed easily); 6. Fluffy pieces with ragged edges, a mushy stool; 7. Watery, no solid pieces. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837958|NCT01309841|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Degree of Straining|A single-item straining question was asked via the eDiary: “How much did you strain during your bowel movement?” Patients responded on a 5 point Likert scale: 1=Not at all; 2=A little bit; 3=A moderate amount; 4=A great deal; 5=An extreme amount. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837959|NCT01309841|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Days Per Week With at Least 1 SBM During Weeks 1 to 12||12 weeks|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||Number of Days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
837960|NCT01309841|Secondary|Time (in Hours) to First Post-dose Laxation Without the Use of Rescue Laxatives Within the Previous 24 Hours||12 weeks|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||Hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
837961|NCT01309841|Secondary|Response (Responder/Non-responder) to Study Drug in the LIR Subgroup During Weeks 1 to 12|Responder is defined as having at least 3 SBMs/week, with at least 1 SBM/week increase over baseline for at least 9 out of 12 weeks and at least 3 out of the last 4 weeks.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers. The LIR subgroup used 1 or more laxative classes for at least 4 days in the 2 weeks prior to entry and reported moderate to very severe symptoms.||Number of patients|||Number
837975|NCT01309997|Secondary|Baseline Histopathologic Score in the Two Treatment Arms|"Instrument: Nash dermal fibrosis grade. Measures extent of sclerosis in skin biopsies by histologic examination. Scale ranges from grade 0-5. Nash grade 5 is most severe fibrosis (0 is better outcome, 5 is worse outcome). No subscales are used in Nash grade. Please see table 1 in the reference for grading of dermal fibrosis.
Nash RA, McSweeney PA, Crofford LJ, Abidi M, Chen CS, Godwin JD, et al. High-dose immunosuppressive therapy and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation for severe systemic sclerosis: long-term follow-up of the US multicenter pilot study. Blood 2007;110:1388-96."|Enrollment|Only patients with skin biopsies at enrollment are included.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
837976|NCT01309997|Secondary|Number of Patients Achieving Improvement in Cutaneous Sclerosis|Assessed by decrease of >= 0.2 units (where 0 is best and 3.0 is worst ) in the Scleroderma Health Assessment Questionnaire (SHAQ).|6 months|Only patients evaluable at 6 mo are included.||participants|||Number
837977|NCT01309997|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Treatment Failure|Defined as discontinuation of randomized treatment due to chronic GVHD progression or treatment intolerance or no significant clinical response in sclerosis.|6 months|Only patients who were evaluable for SCR are included.||participants|||Number
837978|NCT01309997|Secondary|Patients Who Were Able to Taper Corticosteroids|Patients who achieved a greater than or equal to 50% reduction in the daily corticosteroid dose at 6mo compared to baseline|6 months|Patients with no corticosteroid dose data missing from baseline or 6mo.||participants|||Number
837979|NCT01309997|Primary|Significant Clinical Response|Assessed by decline in an affected area’s skin score as measured with the Vienna Skin Scale (from 4 [worst] to 2, 3 to 1, or 2 to 0 [best]) without a concurrent increase of two or more points in another area OR by an increase in the range of motion of the shoulders, elbows or wrists by two points (in a 1-7 scale where 1 is worst and 7 is best) or of the ankles by one point (in a 1 to 4 scale where 1 is worst and 4 is best) without a concurrent worsening in another area.|6 months|Patients were not eligible for evaluation if they discontinued participation or had missing 6 mo data.||participants|||Number
837980|NCT01310127|Primary|Macular Volume|Stratus OCT by experienced technician. Reviewed by principal investigator for quality of foveal centration and signal strength|6 weeks|||mm cubed||Standard Deviation|Mean
837981|NCT01310127|Primary|OCT Retinal Thickness|Stratus OCT scan retinal thickness/volume tabular output report. An experienced ophthalmic technician obtained two scan patterns. The first was the fast macular thickness using 6 radial line scans through a common central axis (fovea) with a retinal thickness/volume tabular output and a retinal-thickness output report. Central retinal thickness was defined as the distance between the inner limiting membrane of the retina and the inner border of the choriocapillaris in the central 1 mm area of the minimum 7 mm posterior pole scan. All scans were reviewed by the principal investigator for quality of foveal centration and signal strength. Macular volume is an objective indicator of macualr swelling and can illustrate the amount of inflammation following surgery. Only the study eye was assessed.|Week 6|||micrometers cubed||Standard Deviation|Mean
837982|NCT01310127|Primary|Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS)|An assessment of the cells and flare, signs of inflammation in ocular tissue. SOIS (summed ocular inflammation) = cells in the anterior chamber/1mmx1mm high powered field+flare/1mmx1mm high powered field. The score of the number of cells in the anterior chamber per 1mmx1mm high powered field ranges from 0-4: 0=no cells, 1=1-5 cell, 2=6-15 cells, 3=16-30 cells, 4>=30 cells.Flare scores range from 0-3:(0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe). Cell+flare are added together (cell score + flare score=SOIS score) for a SOIS score (minimum score=0 and maximal score of 7). Higher numbers would indicate more inflammation.The SOIS scale could range from 0-7 with 0 indicating no cells, no flare and 7 reflecting maximal cell 4(>30 cell/high powered field +3 (severe flare).|Week 6|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
837983|NCT01310127|Primary|Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Visual Acuities|ETDRs visual acuities measured at week 6 following uncomplicated phacoemulsification (phaco). ETDRS charts are a standardized eye chart for visual acuity testing accepted by the National Eye Institute and the Food and Drug Administration. The scale is 30-90 letters with higher numbers signifying improved visual acuities.|Week 6|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
837984|NCT01310179|Secondary|Treatment Outcome and Percent Change in Tumor Volume|Measurement of tumor response to study drug, as measured by the percentage of change in tumor volume as measured by a physicial measurement using a ruler|Entry through Study Day 56|||participants|||Number
837985|NCT01310179|Primary|Number of Participants With Side Effects After Ad/PNP-F-araAMP Treatment|Number of participants who had the most frequently observed undesirable effects after exposure to study drug|Entry through Study Day 56|||participants|||Number
837986|NCT01310400|Secondary|Safety: Incidence of Solicited and Unsolicited Adverse Events|Safety assessements were made by the investigator at baseline and on Days 28 and 49, as well as by the subjects themselves (in Subjects Diaries) for the 4-day period following each vaccination.|Solicited AEs: Days 1-4 and 28-31, and Days 28 and 49; unsolicited AEs: until study end|||percentage of subjects with AEs|||Number
837987|NCT01310400|Secondary|Seroprotection|Seroprotection rate, defined as a post-vaccination HI titer of 1:40.|3 weeks after the 2nd vaccination|||percentage seroprotected subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837988|NCT01310400|Secondary|Fold Increase in Geometric Mean Titer (GMT)|GMT-fold increase - calculated as the GMT on Day 49 divided by the baseline GMT value|3 weeks after the 2nd vaccination|||Fold (ratio)|||Number
837989|NCT01310400|Primary|Immunogenicity, Assessed by the Haemagglutination (HI) Test|Seroconversion rate post-immunization. Seroconversion is defined as a post-vaccination titer of ≥1:40 for those with a pre-vaccination HI titer of <1:10 and as ≥ four-fold increase in HI titer for those with a pre-vaccination HI titer of ≥1:10.|3 weeks after the 2nd vaccination|According-to-protocol population: subjects who received both doses of influenza vaccine, with available pre- and post-vaccination titers and without major protocol violations||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
837990|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|A SAE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that: resulted in death, was life threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, resulted in disability/incapacity or was a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject. Any was defined as occurrence of any symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination and related was an event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|From Day U0 up to Day U385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
837991|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE was defined as any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. “Any” was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. As the study is still ongoing and data per age group are not available, results are presented for the groups pooled by vaccine/placebo administered. This outcome measure will be amended when data by age group become available.|During the 42-day (Days U0-U41) post-vaccination period following Dose 1 of Influenza A (H5N1) Virus monovalent vaccine|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
837992|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE was defined as any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. “Any” was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 21-day (Days U21-U41) post-vaccination period following Dose 2 of Influenza A (H5N1) Virus monovalent vaccine|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
837993|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE was defined as any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. “Any” was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 21-day (Days U0-U20) post-vaccination period following Dose 1 of Influenza A (H5N1) Virus monovalent vaccine|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
837994|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|A SAE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that: resulted in death, was life threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, resulted in disability/incapacity or was a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject. Any was defined as occurrence of any symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination and related was an event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
837995|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE was defined as any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. “Any” was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 42-day (Days 0-41) post-vaccination period following Dose 1 of vaccine/placebo|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
837996|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE was defined as any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. “Any” was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 21-day (Days 21-41) post-vaccination period following Dose 2 of vaccine/placebo|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
837997|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE was defined as any AE (i.e. any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. “Any” was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 21-day (Days 0-20) post-vaccination period following Dose 1 of vaccine/placebo|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
837998|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Normal and Abnormal Haematological Parameters Assessed With Respect to Red and White Blood Cells (RBC and WBC)|Subjects were categorized according to their results at pre-vaccination (PRE), Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 which were normal, above normal, below the normal ranges or unknown.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
837999|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Normal and Abnormal Haematological Parameters Assessed With Respect to Lymphocytes (LYM) and Monocytes (MON)|Subjects were categorized according to their results at pre-vaccination (PRE), Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 which were normal, above normal, below the normal ranges or unknown.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838355|NCT01315249|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|The assessment of safety was based on Adverse Events. A summary of adverse events is presented with this outcome, additional details are provided in Adverse Events Section.|26 weeks|Safety set includes all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
838000|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Normal and Abnormal Haematological Parameters Assessed With Respect to Neutrophils (NEU) and Platelets (PLA)|Subjects were categorized according to their results at pre-vaccination (PRE), Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 which were normal, above normal, below the normal ranges or unknown.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838001|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Normal and Abnormal Haematological Parameters Assessed With Respect to Haematocrit (Hcr) and Haemoglobin (Hgb)|Subjects were categorized according to their results at pre-vaccination (PRE), Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 which were normal, above normal, below the normal ranges or unknown.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838002|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Normal and Abnormal Haematological Parameters Assessed With Respect to Basophils (BAS) and Eosinophils (EOS)|Subjects were categorized according to their results at pre-vaccination (PRE), Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 which were normal, above normal, below the normal ranges or unknown.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838003|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Normal and Abnormal Biochemical Parameters Assessed With Respect to Creatinine (CREA) and Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN)|Subjects were categorized according to their results at pre-vaccination (PRE), Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 which were normal, above normal, below the normal ranges or unknown.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838004|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Normal and Abnormal Biochemical Parameters Assessed With Respect to Total Bilirubin (T-BIL) and Bilirubin Conjugated/Direct (BIL-C/D)|Subjects were categorized according to their results at pre-vaccination (PRE), Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 which were normal, above normal, below the normal ranges or unknown.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838005|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Normal and Abnormal Biochemical Parameters Assessed With Respect to Alanine Aminotransferase (ALAT) and Aspartate Aminotransferase (ASAT)|Subjects were categorized according to their results at pre-vaccination (PRE), Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 which were normal, above normal, below the normal ranges or unknown.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838006|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Pregnancies, and Outcomes of These Reported Pregnancies||From Day U0 to Day U385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838007|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Pregnancies, and Outcomes of These Reported Pregnancies||From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838008|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Potential Immune-Mediated Diseases (pIMDs)|Potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) were defined as a subset of adverse events that included both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which might or might not have an autoimmune aetiology. “Any pIMD” was defined as at least one pIMD experienced by the study subject.|From Day U0 to Day U385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838009|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Potential Immune-Mediated Diseases (pIMDs)|Potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) were defined as a subset of adverse events that included both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which might or might not have an autoimmune aetiology. “Any pIMD” was defined as at least one pIMD experienced by the study subject.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838010|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Medically-attended Adverse Events (MAEs)|MAEs were defined as adverse events with medically-attended visits that were not routine visits for physical examination or vaccination. Any MAE was defined as atleast 1 MAE experienced.|From Day U0 up to Day U385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838011|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Medically-attended Adverse Events (MAEs)|MAEs were defined as adverse events with medically-attended visits that were not routine visits for physical examination or vaccination. Any MAE was defined as atleast 1 MAE experienced.|From Day 0 up to Day 385|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838012|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects at Least 6 Years of Age Reporting Solicited General Symptoms.|Solicited general symptoms assessed in subjects of at least 6 years of age were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, joint pain at other location, muscle aches, shivering, sweating and fever [axillary temperature (T) >= 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Gastrointestinal symptoms included nausea, vomiting, diaorrhea and/or abdominal pain. “Any” was defined as any occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom reported, regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 was defined as a general symptom that prevented normal activity. Related was defined as a general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination. Grade 3 fever was axillary temperature >= 39.0°C.|During the 7-day (Days U0-U6) post-vaccination periods post Doses 1 and 2 of vaccine/placebo, across doses (Year 2)|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838093|NCT01311661|Secondary|PEF Daily Variability|PEF daily variability was assessed by patients at home using the AM3 device (overall means obtained during each period of randomised treatment will be compared). PEF daily variability is the absolute difference between the morning and the evening PEF value divided by the mean of these two values, expressed as a percent. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|0-3 weeks|FAS||Percentage||Standard Error|Mean
838013|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects at Least 6 Years of Age Reporting Solicited General Symptoms.|Solicited general symptoms assessed in subjects of at least 6 years of age were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, joint pain at other location, muscle aches, shivering, sweating and fever [axillary temperature (T) >= 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Gastrointestinal symptoms included nausea, vomiting, diaorrhea and/or abdominal pain. “Any” was defined as any occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom reported, regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 was defined as a general symptom that prevented normal activity. Related was defined as a general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination. Grade 3 fever was axillary temperature >= 39.0°C.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination periods post Doses 1 and 2 of vaccine/placebo, across doses (Year 1)|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838014|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects of Less Than 6 Years of Age Reporting Solicited General Symptoms.|Solicited general symptoms assessed in subjects of less than 6 years of age were drowsiness, irritability/fussiness, loss of appetite and fever [axillary temperature (T) higher than or equal to (>=) 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C)]. “Any” was defined as any occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom reported, regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 was defined as a general symptom that prevented normal activity. Related was defined as a general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination. Any fever was defined as axillary temperature above 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C). Grade 3 fever was axillary temperature >=39.0°C.|During the 7-day (Days U0-U6) post-vaccination periods post Doses 1 and 2 of vaccine/placebo, across doses (Year 2)|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838015|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects of Less Than 6 Years of Age Reporting Solicited General Symptoms.|Solicited general symptoms assessed in subjects of less than 6 years of age were drowsiness, irritability/fussiness, loss of appetite and fever [axillary temperature (T) higher than or equal to (>=) 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C)]. “Any” was defined as any occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom reported, regardless of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 was defined as a general symptom that prevented normal activity. Related was defined as a general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination. Any fever was defined as axillary temperature above 38.0 degrees Celsius (°C). Grade 3 fever was axillary temperature >= 39.0°C.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination periods post Doses 1 and 2 of vaccine/placebo, across doses (Year 1)|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838016|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local Symptoms.|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain and swelling. “Any” was defined as any occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom reported, regardless of intensity. Grade 3 pain was defined as pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness and swelling were defined as redness/swelling above 100 millimeter (mm).|During the 7-day (Days U0-U6) post-vaccination periods post Doses 1 and 2 of vaccine/placebo, across doses (Year 2)|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subject|||Number
838017|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local Symptoms.|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. “Any” was defined as any occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom reported, regardless of intensity. Grade 3 pain was defined as pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness and swelling were defined as redness/swelling above 100 millimeter (mm).|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination periods post Doses 1 and 2 of vaccine/placebo, across doses (Year 1)|Analysis was done on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented, solely on subjects with results available/accessible.||Subject|||Number
838018|NCT01310413|Secondary|Vaccine Response Rate (VRR) for Microneutralization (MN) Antibodies Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia and H5N1 A/Vietnam Virus Strains.|VRR for MN was defined as as the incidence rate of vaccinees with a 4-fold increase in post vaccination reciprocal titer relative to Day 0.|At Day 42|Analysis was done on the Day 42 According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, that is, all evaluable subjects with 2 doses of vaccine/placebo administered and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 haemagglutinin (HA) antigen were available for the Days 0 and 42 time points.||Subject|||Number
838019|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for Microneutralization (MN) Antibodies Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.||At Days 0 and 42|Analysis was done on the Day 42 According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, that is, all evaluable subjects with 2 doses of vaccine/placebo administered and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 haemagglutinin (HA) antigen were available for the Days 0 and 42 time points.||Subject|||Number
838020|NCT01310413|Secondary|Microneutralization (MN) Antibody Titers Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia and H5N1 A/Vietnam Virus Strains.|MN HI antibody titers against the H5N1 A/Indonesia (A/INDO) and H5N1 A/Vietnam (A/VIET) virus strains were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off of higher than or equal to (>=) 1:28.|At Days 0, 42, 182 and 385|Analysis was done on the Day 42, 182 and 385 ATP cohorts for immunogenicity, that is, 50 percent of the evaluable subjects with 2 doses of vaccine/placebo administered and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 haemagglutinin (HA) antigen were available for the Days 0, 42, 182 and 385 time points.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838021|NCT01310413|Secondary|Geometric Mean Increase (GMI) for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|GMI also known as the seroconversion factor (SCF) or geometric mean fold rise (GMFR) was defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titer to the pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer for the vaccine virus.|At Day 385.|The analyses were performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 385, which included 50% of evaluable subjects who received 2 doses of the study vaccine/placebo at Days 0 and 21 and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 HA antigen for the blood samples taken at Days 0 and 385 were available||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839994|NCT01330394|Secondary|Cognitive Tasks|Cognitive tests comprised by Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB), verbal n-back task, visuospatial n-back task, go-no-go task, counting Stroop, will be done at the beginning of the session 1 and session 6 (one week after the 5 sessions of sham or tDCS).|one year and a half||||||
838022|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|A subject seroconverted for HI antibodies against the H5N1 A/Indonesia virus strain (A/INDO) was defined as a vaccinee with either a pre-vaccination titer less than (<) 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer higher than or equal to (>=) 1:40, or with a pre-vaccination titer >= 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titer.|At Day 385|The analyses were performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 385, which included 50% of evaluable subjects who received 2 doses of the study vaccine/placebo at Days 0 and 21 and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 HA antigen for the blood samples taken at Days 0 and 385 were available||Subjects|||Number
838023|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|"A seroprotected subject against the a/Indonesia/5/2005 (A/INDO) virus strain was defined as a subject with H5N1 reciprocal haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titers greater than or equal to (>=) the seroprotection cut-off of 1:40.
As the analyses were performed and disclosed stepwise – i.e. as soon as a study phase was completed – several releases of the CTRS (result summaries) were published. To generate an integrated Clinical Study Report, one set of domain datasets covering all analyses was used and the Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity has been defined. As a consequence, some of the data previously disclosed and based on ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 have been replaced in this summary with data generated with the Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity."|At Day 0 and Day 385|Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for which Day 21 and Day 42 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42; Day 182 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, and Day 385 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 385.||Subjects|||Number
838024|NCT01310413|Secondary|Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|"HI antibody titers against the H5N1 A/Indonesia virus strain (A/INDO) were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off of higher than or equal to (>=) 1:10.
As the analyses were performed and disclosed stepwise – i.e. as soon as a study phase was completed – several releases of the CTRS (result summaries) were published. To generate an integrated Clinical Study Report, one set of domain datasets covering all analyses was used and the Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity has been defined. As a consequence, some of the data previously disclosed and based on ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 have been replaced in this summary with data generated with the Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity."|At Day 0 and Day 385|Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for which Day 21 and Day 42 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42; Day 182 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, and Day 385 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 385.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838025|NCT01310413|Secondary|Geometric Mean Increase (GMI) for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|GMI also known as the seroconversion factor (SCF) or geometric mean fold rise (GMFR) was defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titre to the pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titre for the vaccine virus.|At Day 182|The analyses were performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, which included 50% of evaluable subjects who received 2 doses of the study vaccine/placebo at Days 0 and 21 and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 HA antigen for the blood samples taken at Days 0 and 182 were available||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838026|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|A subject seroconverted for HI antibodies against the H5N1 A/Indonesia virus strain (A/INDO) was defined as a vaccinee with either a pre-vaccination titer less than (<) 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer higher than or equal to (>=) 1:40, or with a pre-vaccination titer >= 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titer.|At Day 182|The analyses were performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, which included 50% of evaluable subjects who received 2 doses of the study vaccine/placebo at Days 0 and 21 and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 HA antigen for the blood samples taken at Days 0 and 182 were available||Subject|||Number
838027|NCT01310413|Secondary|Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain|"HI antibody titers against the H5N1 A/Indonesia virus strain (A/INDO) were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off of higher than or equal to (>=) 1:10.
As the analyses were performed and disclosed stepwise – i.e. as soon as a study phase was completed – several releases of the CTRS (result summaries) were published. To generate an integrated Clinical Study Report, one set of domain datasets covering all analyses was used and the Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity has been defined. As a consequence, some of the data previously disclosed and based on ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 have been replaced in this summary with data generated with the Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity."|At Day 42.|The analyses were performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42, which included all evaluable subjects who received 2 doses of the study vaccine/placebo at Days 0 and 21 and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 HA antigen for the blood samples taken at Days 0 and 42 were available.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838028|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected as Regards Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|"A seroprotected subject against the a/Indonesia/5/2005 (A/INDO) virus strain was defined as a subject with H5N1 reciprocal haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titers greater than or equal to (>=) the seroprotection cut-off of 1:40.
As the analyses were performed and disclosed stepwise – i.e. as soon as a study phase was completed – several releases of the CTRS (result summaries) were published. To generate an integrated Clinical Study Report, one set of domain datasets covering all analyses was used and the Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity has been defined. As a consequence, some of the data previously disclosed and based on ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 have been replaced in this summary with data generated with the Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity."|At Day 0 and Day 182|Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for which Day 21 and Day 42 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42; Day 182 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, and Day 385 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 385.||Subject|||Number
838029|NCT01310413|Secondary|Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|"HI antibody titers against the H5N1 A/Indonesia virus strain (A/INDO) were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off of higher than or equal to (>=) 1:10.
Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for which Day 21 and Day 42 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42; Day 182 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, and Day 385 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 385."|At Day 0 and Day 182.|Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for which Day 21 and Day 42 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42; Day 182 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, and Day 385 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 385.||Titre||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838030|NCT01310413|Secondary|Geometric Mean Increase (GMI) for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|GMI also known as the seroconversion factor (SCF) or geometric mean fold rise (GMFR) was defined as the geometric mean of the within-subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titre to the pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titre for the vaccine virus.|At Days 21 and 42|The analyses were performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42, which included all evaluable subjects who received 2 doses of the study vaccine/placebo at Days 0 and 21 and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 HA antigen for the blood samples taken at Days 0 and 42 were available.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838031|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|"A subject seroconverted for HI antibodies against the H5N1 A/Indonesia virus strain (A/INDO) was defined as a vaccinee with either a pre-vaccination titer less than (<) 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer higher than or equal to (>=) 1:40, or with a pre-vaccination titer >= 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titer.
As the analyses were performed and disclosed stepwise – i.e. as soon as a study phase was completed – several releases of the CTRS (result summaries) were published. To generate an integrated Clinical Study Report, one set of domain datasets covering all analyses was used and the Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity has been defined. As a consequence, some of the data previously disclosed and based on ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42, Day 182 and Day 385 have been replaced in this summary with data generated with the Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity."|At Days 21 and 42|Adapted ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for which Day 21 and Day 42 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42; Day 182 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 182, and Day 385 data were obtained from the ATP cohort for immunogenicity at Day 385.||Subject|||Number
838032|NCT01310413|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|A seroprotected subject against the a/Indonesia/5/2005 (A/INDO) virus strain was defined as a subject with H5N1 reciprocal haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titers greater than or equal to (>=) the seroprotection cut-off of 1:40.|At Days 0 and 21|The analyses were performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42, which included all evaluable subjects who received 2 doses of the study vaccine/placebo at Days 0 and 21 and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 HA antigen for the blood samples taken at Days 0 and 42 were available.||Subject|||Number
838033|NCT01310413|Secondary|Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|HI antibody titers against the H5N1 A/Indonesia virus strain (A/INDO) were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off of higher than or equal to (>=) 1:10.|At Days 0 and 21|The analyses were performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42, which included all evaluable subjects who received 2 doses of the study vaccine/placebo at Days 0 and 21 and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 HA antigen for the blood samples taken at Days 0 and 42 were available.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838034|NCT01310413|Primary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers Against the H5N1 A/Indonesia Virus Strain.|A seroprotected subject against the a/Indonesia/5/2005 (A/INDO) virus strain was defined as a subject with H5N1 reciprocal haemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titers greater than or equal to (>=) the seroprotection cut-off of 1:40.|At Day 42.|The analyses were performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity at Day 42, which included all evaluable subjects who received 2 doses of the study vaccine/placebo at Days 0 and 21 and for whom assay results for antibodies against vaccine-homologous H5N1 HA antigen for the blood samples taken at Days 0 and 42 were available.||Subject|||Number
838035|NCT01310582|Secondary|Time to Discharge From PACU||At 30-45 minutes, following discontinuation of volatile anesthetic at the end of surgery and transfer to PACU|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
838036|NCT01310582|Primary|Time to Opening of Eyes||At 30-45 minutes, following discontinuation of volatile anesthetic at the end of surgery|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
838037|NCT01310699|Secondary|Percentage of Nonpolypoid (Flat) Missed Lesions|Compare the number of missed non-polypoid lesions on the index examination using the new high definition narrow band imaging colonoscopy to the conventional high definition white light mode colonoscopy.|One week (time of procedure plus time for pathology of polyp to be analyzed by histology)|Adenoma by shape (i.e. Flat)||percentage of adenomas|||Number
838038|NCT01310699|Secondary|Percentage of Missed Lesions on Index Colonoscopy.|Compare the number of missed lesions on the index examination using the new high definition narrow band imaging colonoscopy to the conventional high definition white light mode colonoscopy, based on the tandem colonoscopy findings.|One week (time of procedure plus time for pathology of polyp to be analyzed by histology)|||percentage of adenomas|||Number
838039|NCT01310699|Primary|Number of Participants With Nonpolypoid (Flat and Depressed) Colorectal Neoplasm|Compare the nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasm detection characteristics of the new high definition narrow band imaging colonoscopy to conventional high definition white light mode colonoscopy.|One week (time of procedure plus time for pathology of polyp to be analyzed by histology)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
838094|NCT01311661|Secondary|Mean Pre-dose Evening PEF (PEF p.m.)|PEF p.m. was measured by patients at home using the AM3 device (overall means obtained during each period of randomised treatment will be compared). Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|0-3 weeks|FAS||Liter/min||Standard Error|Mean
838040|NCT01310777|Primary|Mean Diurnal IOP Change From Baseline at Month 3|Mean Diurnal IOP Change from Baseline at Month 3 (ie, the subject IOP change from baseline averaged over the 9 AM, + 2 h, and + 7 h time points at Month 3) was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. The study drug was instilled approximately 15 minutes after conducting the 9AM IOP measurement. One eye from each subject was chosen as the study eye, and only data for the study eye were used for the efficacy analysis. A higher IOP can be a greater risk factor for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage).|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3|The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis set included all subjects who received study drug and completed at least 1 scheduled on-therapy study visit.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838041|NCT01310803|Secondary|To Evaluate the Safety and Tolerability of Maintenance Therapy With Valrubicin After Induction With Valrubicin, as Compared to Induction With Valrubicin Only in Subjects With CIS of the Bladder|The occurrence of serious adverse events (SAEs), occurrence of local adverse reactions (LARs), results of vital signs, physical exams and laboratory test, and study discontinuation due to inability to complete valrubicin instillations|2 years|No analysis completed due to limited enrollment (1 subject) prior to study termination.|||||
838042|NCT01310803|Primary|To Evaluate the Efficacy of Maintenance Therapy With Valrubicin After Induction With Valrubicin, as Compared to Induction With Valrubicin Only in Subjects With CIS of the Bladder.|time interval from randomization to an event. An event is defined as tumor recurrence (any stage or grade), tumor progression to muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), metastatic bladder cancer or death from any cause, whichever occurs first. Tumor recurrence or progression must be documented by biopsy/transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT).|2 years|No analysis completed due to limited enrollment (1 subject) prior to study termination.|||||
838043|NCT01310855|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability||from date of randomisation to death||||||
838044|NCT01310855|Secondary|Time to Deterioration of Neurological Status||from date of randomization to the date of first neurological status worsening in comparison to baseline (first of 2 confirmatory reports at 2 consecutive visits, 6 weeks apart) as assessed by the clinician, or until date of death, whichever is first.||||||
838045|NCT01310855|Secondary|Steroid Use||from randomization to first increase in dexamethasone dose||||||
838046|NCT01310855|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Rate at 6 Months||from the date of randomisation to 6 months||||||
838047|NCT01310855|Secondary|Radiographic Response Rate||from baseline scan to six week and 12 week scans||||||
838048|NCT01310855|Secondary|Overall Survival||from date of randomization to date of Death due to any cause.||||||
838049|NCT01310855|Primary|Progression-free Survival|"Progression free survival (PFS) defined as the time from the date of randomisation to the date of first progression or death due to any cause, whichever one comes first.
The progression definition will be based on modified RANO criteria (Wen 2010), such that progression will be defined as the earliest time that at least one of the following occurs:
Clinical deterioration
Failure to return for evaluation as a result of death or deteriorating condition
Or, by retrospective radiographic central review:
Any new lesion
Increase in ≥25% of sum of the products of perpendicular diameters of enhancing lesions compared with baseline scan, on stable or increasing doses of steroids (dexamethasone) compared to baseline (T1 post-contrast scan)
Clear progression of non-measureable disease
Significant increase in T2/FLAIR non-enhancing lesion – on stable or increasing steroids (dexamethasone) compared with baseline or best response not caused by co-morbid events."|from the date of randomisation to the date of first progression or death due to any cause, until 6 months from the date the last patient finished trial treatment (the day after the date that the last trial drug was taken)|||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
838050|NCT01310868|Secondary|Survival at 24 Months||from the date of surgery to 24 months|Patients receiving 5-ala and carmustine wafers during surgical resection for glioblastoma multiforme that was confirmed peri/post-operatively||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838051|NCT01310868|Secondary|Time to Clinical Progression||from the date of surgery to the date of the first MRI scan fitting the criteria for progression, or the date the clinical detrioration or death was first reported|Patients receiving 5-ala and carmustine wafers during surgical resection for glioblastoma multiforme that was confirmed peri/post-operatively||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838052|NCT01310868|Primary|Safety, Tolerability, and Feasibility of Combination Intra-operative 5-ALA and Gliadel Wafers Prior to Adjuvant Radiotherapy Plus Temozolomide|"Procedure compliance: Proportion of 5-ALA resected patients who received Carmustine wafer implants (e.g to take into account rates of patients who did not receive Carmustine wafer implants due to 1) ventricular breach, 2) inaccurate peri-operative diagnosis, 3) intra-operative surgical decision)
Post-operative complication rate: Proportion of patients with a new post-operative deficit or surgical complication (wound infection, CSF leakage, intracranial hypertension)
No. of patients with chemoRT delay (i.e number who do not begin chemoRT 6 weeks after surgery) due to surgical complications*
No. of patients failing to start chemoRT due to surgical complications rather than tumour progression
No. of patients failing to complete chemoRT without interruption (RT with concomitant chemotherapy, and RT with concomitant plus adjuvant chemotherapy)
Proportion of patients with a lower WHO performance status after surgery with Carmustine wafers (at first post-operative clinic visit)"|Date of surgery to end of temozolomide and radiotherapy treatment (up to 34 weeks)|of 72 patients recruited, 62 received 5-ALA and carmustine wafers. Of these 62 patients, 59 were found to be eligible and included in the final analysis||Participants|||Count of Participants
838060|NCT01311102|Primary|Pain During IUD Placement|"IUD was inserted following the manufacturer's instructions, and a pain score was immediately obtained. Pain was scored on 0-9 scale; with 0 being no pain and 9 being worst pain in life."|Immediately after IUD placement|||units on a scale of 0-9||Standard Deviation|Mean
838061|NCT01311102|Primary|Pain Measurement During Liquid Infusion/Sounding|"After liquid infused into three parts of the endometrial cavity: in the lower one third, the middle, and at the top of the cavity. Pain was scored on a 0-9 scale; with 0 being no pain and 9 being worst pain in life."|Recorded at the end of the infusion|||units on a scale of 0-9||Standard Deviation|Mean
838062|NCT01311102|Primary|Pain During Tenaculum Placement|"Pain score on 0-9 scale for tenaculum placement (without anesthesia); with 0 being no pain and 9 being worst pain in life. Taken to adjust for different pain thresholds among subjects"|Immediately following tenaculum placement|||units on a scale of 0-9||Standard Deviation|Mean
838063|NCT01311102|Primary|Pain Scores During Overall IUD Placement|"Pain score on 0-9 scale obtained just before the patient left the examination room; with 0 being no pain and 9 being worst pain in life."|Before patient left the examination room at conclusion of procedure|||units on a scale of 0-9||Standard Deviation|Mean
838064|NCT01311362|Primary|Cmax of Ambrisentan||after first dose, at steady-state and during St John's wort|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838065|NCT01311362|Primary|AUC of Ambrisentan||after first dose, at steady-state, during St John's wort|||h*ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838066|NCT01311505|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study treatment was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship.|Baseline (Day 0), Day 1 and Follow-up (1 week post-baseline)|Safety population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
838067|NCT01311505|Other Pre-specified|Clinically Significant Change From Baseline Respiratory Rate|Mean change: vital sign value at observation (Day 1 and follow-up) minus vital sign value at baseline.|Baseline (Day 0), Day 1 (Hour 10), and follow-up (1 week post-baseline)|Data was not summarized since respiratory rate remained within normal limits throughout the study and there were no significant deviations from baseline.||respirations/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
838068|NCT01311505|Other Pre-specified|Clinically Significant Change From Baseline Oral Temperature|Mean change: vital sign value at observation (Day 1 and follow-up) minus vital sign value at baseline.|Baseline (Day 0), Day 1 (Hour 10), and follow-up (1 week post-baseline)|Data was not summarized since oral temperature remained within normal limits throughout the study and there were no significant deviations from baseline.||Degrees Celsius||Standard Deviation|Mean
838069|NCT01311505|Other Pre-specified|Clinically Significant Change From Baseline Pulse Rate|Mean change: vital sign value at observation (Day 1 and follow-up) minus vital sign value at baseline.|Baseline (Day 0), Day 1 (Hour 10), and follow-up (1 week post-baseline)|Data was not summarized since pulse rate remained within normal limits throughout the study and there were no significant deviations from baseline.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
838070|NCT01311505|Other Pre-specified|Clinically Significant Change From Baseline Supine Blood Pressure (BP)|Mean change: vital sign value at observation (Day 1 and follow-up) minus vital sign value at baseline.|Baseline (Day 0), Day 1 (Hour 10), and follow-up (1 week post-baseline)|Data was not summarized since supine systolic and diastolic BP remained within normal limits throughout the study and there were no significant deviations from baseline.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838071|NCT01311505|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Abnormal Safety Laboratory Test Values|Participants were evaluated for following safety laboratory tests: Hematology, chemistry, urinalysis.|Screening and Follow-up (1 week post-baseline)|Safety population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
838072|NCT01311505|Secondary|Extrapolated Area Under the Curve (AUC Percent [%] Extrapolated)|AUC%extrapolated is the extrapolated area under the plasma concentration time profile following the last measured concentration. It is calculated as (AUC [0-∞] minus AUC[0-10])*100/ AUC (0-∞), where AUC (0-∞) = Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞) and AUC(0-10) = area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero (pre-dose) to the last quantifiable concentration.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 10 hrs post-dose|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||Percent AUC||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838073|NCT01311505|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 10 hrs post-dose|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hrs||Standard Deviation|Mean
838074|NCT01311505|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Extrapolated Infinite Time (AUC [0-∞])|AUC (0-∞)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time (0-∞). It is obtained from AUC (0-t) plus AUC (t-∞).|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 10 hrs post-dose|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||mcg*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838075|NCT01311505|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 10 hrs post-dose|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||hrs||Full Range|Median
838076|NCT01311505|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 10 hrs post-dose|PK parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838077|NCT01311505|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC [0-t])|AUC (0-t)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (0-t)|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 10 hours (hrs) post-dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 treatment period.||microgram*hour/milliliter (mcg*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838078|NCT01311557|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting a Solicited Injection-site or Systemic Reactions Following Injection With a Single Dose of Adacel Vaccine|Solicited injection-site: Pain, Erythema, and Swelling. Solicited systemic reactions: Fever, Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia. Grade 3 Solicited Injection-site reactions: Pain, Incapacitating, unable to perform usual activities; Erythema and Swelling, ≥50 mm. Grade 3 Solicited systemic reactions: Fever, ≥39.0˚C or ≥102.1˚F; Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia Significant, prevents daily activity.|Day 0 up to Day 7 post-vaccination|Solicited injection site and systemic reactions were assessed in the Safety Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838079|NCT01311557|Secondary|Summary of Anti-Pertussis Geometric Means of Titers Before and Post-Vaccination With a Single Dose of Adacel Vaccine|Anti-Pertussis titers (Pertussis toxoid [PT], Filamentous hemagglutinin [FHA], Pertactin [PRN], Fimbriae types 2 and 3 [FIM]) geometric mean titers were assessed by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 30 post-vaccination|Geometric mean titers were assessed in the Per Protocol Analysis Set.||Titers (1/dilutions)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838080|NCT01311557|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Seroprotection to Tetanus and Diphtheria Following a Single Dose of Adacel Vaccine|Anti-tetanus seroprotection rates were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Anti-diphtheria seroprotection was assessed by a toxin neutralization test. Seroprotection was defined as post-vaccination antibody titers ≥0.1 IU/mL.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and 30 days post-vaccination|Seroprotection rates were assessed in the Per Protocol Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838081|NCT01311557|Primary|Summary of Anti-Tetanus and Anti-Diphtheria Booster Response Following a Booster Dose of Adacel® Vaccine|Anti-tetanus booster responses were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Anti-diphtheria booster responses were assessed by a toxin neutralization test. Booster response rate was defined as a four-fold increase in pre- to post-vaccination for subjects with pre-vaccination titers ≤ 2.56 EU/mL for diphtheria and ≤ 2.7 EU/mL for tetanus. If the pre-vaccination titers were > 2.56 EU/mL for diphtheria or > 2.7 EU/mL for tetanus, then a two-fold increase in response rate was defined as a booster response.|30 days post-vaccination|Anti-Tetanus and anti-Diphtheria booster responses were assessed in the Per-protocol Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838082|NCT01311557|Primary|Summary of Anti-Pertussis Booster Response Following a Booster Dose of Adacel® Vaccine|Anti-Pertussis booster responses were assessed by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). For pertussis antigens (Pertussis toxoid [PT], filamentous hemagglutinin [FHA], pertactin [PRN], fimbriae types 2 and 3 [FIM]), a booster response rate was defined as a four-fold increase in pre- to post-vaccination titers for participants with pre vaccination titers ≤ 93 ELISA Unit (EU)/mL for PT, ≤ 170 EU/mL for FHA, ≤ 115 EU mL for PRN, and ≤ 285 EU/mL for FIM. If the pre-vaccination titers were > 93 EU/mL for PT, > 170 EU/mL for FHA, > 115 EU mL for PRN, or > 285 EU/mL for FIM then a two-fold increase in the antibody titer was defined as a booster response.|30 days post-vaccination|Anti-pertussis booster response were assessed in the Per-protocol Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838083|NCT01311557|Primary|Summary of Geometric Mean Titers of Anti-Pertussis Titers Following a Single Dose of Adacel® Vaccine|Anti-Pertussis titers (Pertussis toxoid [PT], Filamentous hemagglutinin [FHA], Pertactin [PRN], Fimbriae types 2 and 3 [FIM]) geometric mean titers were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|Day 30 post-vaccination|Geometric mean titers were assessed in the Per-protocol Analysis Set.||Titers (1/dilutions)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838084|NCT01311661|Secondary|Clinical Relevant Abnormalities for Vital Signs, Blood Chemistry, Haematology, Urinalysis and ECG|Clinical relevant abnormalities for Vital Signs, Blood Chemistry, Haematology, Urinalysis and ECG. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as Adverse Events. Time frame for adverse event reporting includes 12 days into the subsequent washout or post-treatment period.|3 weeks + 12 days|Treated set||Participants|||Number
838085|NCT01311661|Secondary|Total Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) Score|Control of asthma as assessed by the ACQ at the end of each 3-week treatment period.The ACQ contains 7 questions, each question has a 7 point scale from 0 (no symptoms) till 6 (highest intensity). Total score was defined as the sum of all items divided by the number of items.|3 weeks|FAS||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
838086|NCT01311661|Secondary|Number of Patients Categorized by Worst Asthma Nighttime Symptoms (Overall)|Assessed by patients at home using the AM3 device during each period of randomised treatment.|0-3 weeks|FAS||Number of patients|||Number
838087|NCT01311661|Secondary|Number of Patients Categorized by Worst Asthma Daytime Symptoms (Overall)|Assessed by patients at home using the AM3 device during each period of randomised treatment .|0-3 weeks|FAS||Number of patients|||Number
838088|NCT01311661|Secondary|Number of Patients Categorized by Highest Number of Night Time Awakenings (Overall)|Assessed by patients at home using the AM3 device during each period of randomised treatment.|0-3 weeks|FAS||Number of patients|||Number
838089|NCT01311661|Secondary|Percentage of Asthma Symptom Free Days|Percentage of asthma-symptom free days of each treatment period was calculated as the number of symptom-free days divided by the number of days on treatment multiplied by 100. A symptom-free day was defined as a day in which no asthma symptoms were recorded, no rescue medication was recorded, activities during the day were not at all limited due to asthma, no shortness of breath during the day was recorded, no wheezing or coughing during the day and no night-time awakenings due to asthma were recorded. Assessed by patients at home using the AM3 device.|0-3 weeks|FAS||Percentage of asthma symptom free days||Standard Error|Mean
838090|NCT01311661|Secondary|Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication During the Whole Day|Mean of daily use of salbutamol (albuterol) rescue medication as needed during the entire study period. Assessed by patients at home using the AM3 device (overall mean number obtained during each period of randomised treatment will be compared). Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|0-3 weeks|FAS||Puffs||Standard Error|Mean
838096|NCT01311661|Secondary|Trough PEF Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline PEF was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose PEF values at the randomisation visit. Trough values were defined as the mean of 2 PEF values performed at 23 h and 23 h 50 min after the last morning trial drug inhalation at the end of each 3 week period of randomised treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter/sec||Standard Error|Mean
838097|NCT01311661|Secondary|Peak PEF Within 24 Hours Post-dose Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline PEF was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose PEF values at the randomisation visit. Peak PEF within 24 hours post dose measured following the morning trial drug inhalation at the end of each 3 week period of randomised treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8h, 10 h, 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter/sec||Standard Error|Mean
838098|NCT01311661|Secondary|Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Area Under Curve 0-24 Hours (AUC 0-24h) Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline PEF was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose PEF values at the randomisation visit. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. PEF AUC 0-24h was calculated using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time to report in litres/seconds.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and -1 h, -10 mins, 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8h, 10 h, 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter/sec||Standard Error|Mean
838099|NCT01311661|Secondary|PEF Area Under Curve 12-24 Hours (AUC 12-24h) Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline PEF was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose PEF values at the randomisation visit. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. PEF AUC 12-24h was calculated using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time to report in litres/seconds.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter/sec||Standard Error|Mean
838100|NCT01311661|Secondary|Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Area Under Curve 0-12 Hours (AUC 0-12h) Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline PEF was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose PEF values at the randomisation visit. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. PEF AUC 0-12h was calculated using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time to report in litres/seconds.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and -1 h, -10 mins, 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8h, 10 h, 11 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter/sec||Standard Error|Mean
838101|NCT01311661|Secondary|Trough FVC Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline FVC was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose FVC values at the randomisation visit. Trough values were defined as the mean of 2 FVC values performed at 23 h and 23 h 50 min after the last morning trial drug inhalation at the end of each 3 week period of randomised treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838102|NCT01311661|Secondary|Peak FVC Within 24 Hours Post-dose Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline FVC was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose FVC values at the randomisation visit. Peak FVC within 24 hours post-dose measured following the morning trial drug inhalation at the end of each 3 week period of randomised treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8h, 10 h, 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838103|NCT01311661|Secondary|FVC Area Under Curve 0-24 Hours (AUC 0-24h) Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline FVC was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose FVC values at the randomisation visit. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. FVC AUC 0-24h was calculated using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time to report in litres.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and -1 h, -10 mins, 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8h, 10 h, 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838104|NCT01311661|Secondary|FVC Area Under Curve 12-24 Hours (AUC 12-24h) Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline FVC was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose FVC values at the randomisation visit. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. FVC AUC 12-24h was calculated using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time to report in litres.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838105|NCT01311661|Secondary|Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Area Under Curve 0-12 Hours (AUC 0-12h) Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline FVC was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose FVC values at the randomisation visit. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. FVC AUC 0-12h was calculated using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time to report in litres.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and -1 h, -10 mins, 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h, 11 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838106|NCT01311661|Secondary|Trough FEV1 Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline FEV1 was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose FEV1 values at the randomisation visit. Trough values were defined as the mean of 2 FEV1 values performed at 23 h and 23 h 50 min after the last morning trial drug inhalation at the end of each 3 week period of randomised treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838708|NCT01320683|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall Survival is calculated for all patients from the date of initial treatment to date of death due to any cause. Patients who were still alive were censored at the date of last follow-up. Survival rates were estimates using the Kaplan-Meier method, and 95% confidence limits calculated for these estimates.|Up to 5 years||||||
838107|NCT01311661|Secondary|Peak FEV1 Within 24 Hours Post-dose Response|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline FEV1 was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose FEV1 values at the randomisation visit. Peak FEV1 within 24 hours post dose measured following the morning trial drug inhalation at the end of each 3 week period of randomised treatment. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8h, 10 h, 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838108|NCT01311661|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under Curve 12-24 Hours (AUC 12-24h) Response at the End of Each Treatment Period|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline FEV1 was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose FEV1 values at the randomisation visit. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. FEV1 AUC 12-24h was calculated from 12-24 hours post-dose using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time (12h) to report in litres.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838109|NCT01311661|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under Curve 0-12 Hours (AUC 0-12h) Response at the End of Each Treatment Period|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline FEV1 was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose FEV1 values at the randomisation visit. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. FEV1 AUC 0-12h was calculated from 0-12 hours post-dose using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time (12h) to report in litres.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and -1 h, -10 mins, 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h, 11 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|FAS||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838110|NCT01311661|Primary|Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Area Under Curve 0-24 Hours (AUC 0-24h) Response at the End of Each Treatment Period|Response was defined as change from baseline. Study baseline FEV1 was defined as the mean of the available pre-dose FEV1 values at the randomisation visit. Means are adjusted for treatment, period, patient and study baseline. FEV1 AUC 0-24h was calculated from 0-24 hours post-dose using the trapezoidal rule, divided by the observation time (24h) to report in litres.|1 hour (h) prior and 10 minutes (min) prior to first dose (baseline) and -1 h, -10 mins, 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h, 11 h 50 min, 12 h 30 min, 13 h, 14 h, 22 h, 23 h, and 23 h 50 min related to morning dose after 3 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS). FAS is defined as all patients in the treated set for whom the baseline (pre-dose) value is available, and who have a value for the primary endpoint for at least one crossover period.||Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838134|NCT01312038|Primary|Fraction of Middle Ear (ME) Pressure Equilibrated (FGE)|The proportion of the pressure chamber-ME pressure gradient equilibrated with 1 swallow|After achieving the desired ME-pressure chamber gradient at baseline and 30 min post treatment|ears pre-treatment/ears post-treatment||ratio|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838135|NCT01305564|Secondary|Filter Penetration >3mm at Retrieval||Pre-retrieval|The denominator of 124 is equal to the number of subjects undergoing a retrieval procedure with imaging to confirm penetration.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838136|NCT01305564|Secondary|Filter Penetration >3mm at Placement||Post-placement|Penetration at Placement was measured immediately post-placement but prior to retrieval.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838137|NCT01305564|Secondary|Filter Tilt at Retrieval|Rate of filter indwell complications of: tilt >15°|Pre-retrieval imaging|All patients undergoing a retrieval procedure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838138|NCT01305564|Secondary|Filter Tilt at Placement|Rate of filter indwell complications of: tilt >15°|Post-placement imaging|Tilt was measured post-placement with vena cavagram.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838139|NCT01305564|Secondary|Filter Migration|Rate of filter indwell complications of: migration >2cm.|6 months|The denominator of 186 is equal to the number of subjects that completed a 6 month follow-up or had their filter retrieved, with imaging completed to confirm lack of migration.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838140|NCT01305564|Secondary|Filter Fracture|Rate of filter fracture|6 months|The denominator of 186 is equal to the number of subjects that completed a 6 month follow-up or had their filter retrieved, with imaging completed to confirm lack of fracture.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838141|NCT01305564|Secondary|Rate of New or Worsening Deep Vein Thrombosis|Rate of new or worsening Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) from placement to the six month follow-up. Worsening DVT is defined as an extension of existing DVT to a new venous segment on ultrasound in patients that had DVT at the baseline visit.|6 months|The denominator of 188 is equal to the number of subjects completing the 6 month visit or with a filter retrieval procedure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838142|NCT01305564|Secondary|Rate of Recurring Pulmonary Embolism|Rate of recurrent Pulmonary Embolism while the filter is indwelling or one month post-retrieval.|24 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838143|NCT01305564|Primary|Clinical Success of Retrieval|Clinical success for retrieval is defined as successful technical retrieval of the filter without retrieval complications requiring intervention. Only the 121 successful retrievals are counted here.|24 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838144|NCT01305564|Primary|Technical Success of Retrieval|Technical success for retrieval is defined as retrieval of the filter such that the entire filter is retrieved intact.|24 months|The denominator of 124 is equal to the number of subjects that had a filter retrieval procedure (successful and unsuccessful retrievals). Subjects were not required to have a retrieval procedure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838145|NCT01305564|Primary|Clinical Success of Placement|Is the one-sided lower limit of the 95% confidence interval for the observed clinical success rate at least 80%? Clinical success of filter placement is defined as freedom from subsequent Pulmonary Embolism (PE), filter embolization, caval occlusion, filter and procedure related death, insertion adverse events (AEs), and technical failure of placement.|6 months|The denominator of 189 is equal to all of the subjects that completed the 6 month visit, had their filter retrieved, or experienced a component of the clinical success of placement endpoint regardless of follow-up duration.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838146|NCT01305564|Primary|Technical Success of Placement|Technical success of filter placement is defined as the deployment of the filter such that the physician judges the location to be suitable to provide sufficient mechanical protection against Pulmonary Embolism.|6 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838149|NCT01305577|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Self-rating of Attractiveness|"Self-rating of attractiveness assesses aspects of appearance from the participant's perspective by a series of 6 questions:
How attractive do you think your overall appearance (chin/neck, eyes, nose, mouth, entire face) is/are?” Each question was answered on a scale from 1 to 9 where 1 = Not at all attractive, 5 = Neither attractive nor unattractive and 9 = Extremely attractive.
A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population with available data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838150|NCT01305577|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-Reported Submental Fat Impact Scale (PR-SMFIS)|The PR-SMFIS assesses the impact of submental fat on self-perception of 6 characteristics related to the appearance of submental fullness as evaluated by the participant. Each item is rated on an 11-point numeric scale from 0 to 10.|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)||01/2016||||
838151|NCT01305577|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Submental Fat Rating Scale (PR-SMFRS)|"The PR-SMFRS is based on the participant's response to the question How much fat do you currently have under your chin? answered on a 5-point ordinal scale (0-4) with 0 = no chin fat at all, 1 = a slight amount of chin fat, 2 = a moderate amount of chin fat, 3 = a large amount of chin fat, and 4 = a very large amount of chin fat. Improvement is defined as any decrease in score and worsened as any increase in score."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838152|NCT01305577|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Submental Fat Thickness|Submental thickness was measured using caliper devices.|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population with available data||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
838153|NCT01305577|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SSRS Scores|"The SSRS assesses participant's satisfaction with their appearance in association with the face and chin on a 7-point scale from 0 to 6: where 0 = Extremely dissatisfied, 1 = Dissatisfied, 2 = Slightly dissatisfied, 3 = Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, 4 = Slightly satisfied, 5 = Satisfied and 6 = Extremely satisfied.
A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population with available data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838154|NCT01305577|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CR-SMFRS Scores|"The CR-SMFRS score is based on the investigator's clinical evaluation of the participant, where submental fullness is scored on a 5-point ordinal scale (0-4) with 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, and 4 = extreme.
A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population with available data||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838155|NCT01305577|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Subject Self Rating Scale (SSRS) Response|"A SSRS response is defined as an SSRS score that is 4 or greater 12 weeks after the last treatment.
The SSRS assesses participant's satisfaction with their appearance in association with the face and chin on a 7-point scale from 0 to 6: where 0 = Extremely dissatisfied, 1 = Dissatisfied, 2 = Slightly dissatisfied, 3 = Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, 4 = Slightly satisfied, 5 = Satisfied and 6 = Extremely satisfied."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF method was used to impute missing data||percentage of participants|||Number
838156|NCT01305577|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a CR-SMFRS 2-grade Response|"A CR-SMFRS 2-grade response is defined as at least a 2-point improvement (i.e. 2-point reduction) from Baseline 12 weeks after the last treatment.
The CR-SMFRS score is based on the investigator's clinical evaluation of the participant, where submental fullness is scored on a 5-point ordinal scale (0-4) with 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, and 4 = extreme."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat population; LOCF method was used to impute missing data||percentage of participants|||Number
838157|NCT01305577|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Clinician-Reported Submental Fat Rating Scale (CR-SMFRS) 1-grade Response|"A CR-SMFRS response is defined as at least a 1-point improvement (i.e. 1-point reduction) from Baseline 12 weeks after the last treatment.
The CR-SMFRS score is based on the investigator's clinical evaluation of the participant, where submental fullness is scored on a 5-point ordinal scale (0-4) with 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, and 4 = extreme."|Baseline and 12 weeks after last treatment (up to 24 weeks after first dose)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who had at least one efficacy assessment (CR-SMFRS or Subject Self Rating Scale) at Baseline. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing data.||percentage of participants|||Number
838158|NCT01305655|Secondary|Evaluate Time at Hospital and Health Costs||6 years 6 months||01/2017||||
838159|NCT01305655|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Event to HD-MTX Treatment in NOPHO ALL-2008 as a Measure of Toxic Mtx Concentrations in Blood, Nephrotoxicity, Hepatotoxicity, Mucositis, MTX Elimination Time and Permanent Kidney Damage.|"Glucarpidase was used in case of predefined toxic MTX values at defined time points and/or in combination with decreased renal function.
A total of 47 patients of the 1286 ALL-patients included in the protocol (3.7 %) were treated with Glucarpidase."|6 years 6 months|||participants|||Number
838160|NCT01305772|Secondary|Nine (9) Month Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival (OS) was defined as from the time of enrollment to the date of death resulting from any cause. Time as censored at the date of the last follow-up visit for subjects who were still alive. The 9-month OS rate is a percentage, representing the fraction of treated subjects who, after 9 months, are alive.|9 months|||percentage of treated patients surviving||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838161|NCT01305772|Secondary|Nine (9) Month Progression Free Survival (PFS)|"Nine month progression-free survival (PFS) was defined from the time from enrollment to the first date of disease progression or death as a result of any cause. Progression was defined in the same manner as in RECIST 1.1: At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions and an absolute increase of at least 5mm (the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression).
Time was censored at the date of the last follow-up visit for subjects who were still alive and have not progressed. The 9 month PFS rate is a percentage, representing the fraction of treated subjects who, after 9 months, are disease free or alive."|9 months|||percentage of treated patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838735|NCT01320826|Secondary|Colonoscopy Procedure Time|Colonoscopic procedural time will be defined as the time from the first insertion of the colonoscope until it is removed from the anus.|At time of colonoscopy (DAY 1 of study)|||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838162|NCT01305772|Primary|Change in Tumor (Primary Tumor and Lymph Node) Response and Progression Between Pre- and Post- Panitumumab Therapy|"The aim of this outcome measure was to identify a gene expression signature that predicts response to panitumumab in untreated locally advanced squamous cell cancer of the head / neck (SCCHN). Response and progression were evaluated using the largest percentage change among the cases: 1) Pre-panitumumab PET scan activity, and/or; 2) Pre-panitumumab radiologic measurement compared to post-panitumumab measurement and/or; 3) Pre-panitumumab direct measurement of tumor / lymph node compared to post-panitumumab direct measurement of tumor / lymph node. Response and progression were evaluated in this single study using the criteria changes in only the largest diameter (unidimensional measurement) of the tumor lesions were defined in the same manner as in RECIST 1.1.
No results are reported as only 2 of the 6 subjects had fresh tissue collected after the first dose of panitumumab. The study was amended to remove the biopsy procedure due to the potential risk for the participants."|Baseline to 2 years|No results will be reported for the primary outcome measure as only 2 of the 6 subjects had tissue collected after the first dose of panitumumab due to safety risk to the subject.|||||
838163|NCT01305811|Other Pre-specified|SF-36P|Ten items addressing physical functioning which are part of a short-form health survey with 36 questions. Scores range between 0 and 100 with higher scores indicating better function.|2 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838164|NCT01305811|Primary|SF-36P|Ten items addressing physical functioning which are part of a short-form health survey with 36 questions. Scores range between 0 and 100 with higher scores indicating better function.|6 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838165|NCT01306032|Secondary|Number of Participants With Deleterious Mutations in DNA Repair Genes|Gene expression profiling was performed in archival tumor tissue for a panel of 211 genes using deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) array to determine deleterious mutations (i.e. nonsynonymous mutations at coding regions) of genes. Sequences were mapped to human genome reference hg19. Variants were identified with VarScan, annotated with AVIA, and masked to the exonic or exonic:splicing regions of the 211 interrogated DNA repair genes, with nonsynonymous/frameshift/stop-gain/stop-loss variants that have a population frequency of 1% or less in either 1000G (2014_04) or the ExomeSequencingProject (ESP6500si_all) with a minimum variant frequency of 10% and at least 20 reads. Lastly, variants were manually inspected for known platform and mapping errors.|Optional tumor biopsies were performed prior to start of treatment (baseline) and 6 months|Patients with sufficient tumor content in archival tissue (defined as ≥70% tumor after macrodissection) were analyzed for genetic alterations in DNA repair genes by whole-exome sequencing.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838166|NCT01306032|Secondary|Change in ϓH2AX- Positive Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs) in Whole Blood|Number of CTCs (evaluable defined as ≥ 6 CTCs) were measured in whole blood during the course of treatment to determine drug-induced deoxyribonucleic acid damage in tumor cells.|At baseline (t=0h) and 24h post drug administration (t=24h)|Patients with sufficient CTC counts (defined as ≥6 total CTCs) pre- and post-drug administration were analyzed.||ϓH2AX- Positive CTCs||Full Range|Mean
838167|NCT01306032|Secondary|Change in Poly-ADP Ribose (PAR) Concentration Levels From Baseline|PAR levels (in pg/μg protein) were assessed in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) by immunoassay to assess poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) activity. Significant inhibition of PARP activity is associated with 50% or greater reduction in PAR levels.|At baseline (t=0h) and 4h post drug administration (t=4h)|Patients with PBMCs data pre- and post-drug administration, and with PAR levels above the lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) of 23 pg/μg protein were analyzed.||pg/μg protein||Full Range|Mean
838168|NCT01306032|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|up to 30 days following the last dose of study drug.|||Participants|||Count of Participants
838169|NCT01306032|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Time to progression for each participant for the initial intervention.|Ovarian cancer patients stayed on study for an average of 126 days and triple-negative breast cancer patients for an average of 71 days.|Participants evaluable for response.||Cycles of therapy||Full Range|Median
838170|NCT01306032|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Overall Response Rate|Complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)) of the combination of ABT-888 with metronomic oral cyclophosphamide to the response rate (CR+PR) of metronomic oral cyclophosphamide in patients with deleterious BRCA mutations and refractory ovarian cancer or patients with primary peritoneal or ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma or fallopian tube cancer. CR + PR was determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). CR is disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm). Partial response is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|an average of 126 days for ovarian; 71 days for TNBC; for crossover intervention, pts stayed on study for an avg of 134 days for ovarian; 50 days for TNBC.|Participants evaluable for response.||percentage of participants|||Number
838171|NCT01306162|Secondary|Free Dabigatran: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|Maximum measured concentration of free dabigatran in plasma, per period.|1 h before drug administration and 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 3:00, 4:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|PK set.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838172|NCT01306162|Secondary|Free Dabigatran: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|Area under the concentration-time curve of free dabigatran in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.|1 h before drug administration and 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 3:00, 4:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|PK set.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838173|NCT01306162|Primary|Total Dabigatran: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|Maximum measured concentration of total dabigatran in plasma, per period.|1 h before drug administration and 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 3:00, 4:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|PK set.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838174|NCT01306162|Primary|Total Dabigatran: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|Area under the concentration-time curve of total dabigatran in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.|1 h before drug administration and 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 3:00, 4:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set defined as all subjects randomised, treated and who provided evaluable data for at least one observation for at least one primary endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838175|NCT01306175|Secondary|Digoxin: Area Under the Curve 0 to Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|Area under the concentration-time curve of digoxin in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to the time of the last quantifiable data point.|1.5 hours (h) prior to the first dose and 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 48h, 72h, 96h after the first dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set comprised all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of study medication with at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary PK endpoint without any important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation. One subject was excluded from the PK set because the pre-dose plasma concentration of digoxin was >5% of Cmax.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838176|NCT01306175|Primary|Digoxin: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|Maximum measured concentration of digoxin, per period.|1.5 hours (h) prior to the first dose and 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 48h, 72h, 96h after the first dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set comprised all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of study medication with at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary PK endpoint without any important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation. One subject was excluded from the PK set because the pre-dose plasma concentration of digoxin was >5% of Cmax.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838177|NCT01306175|Primary|Digoxin: Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|Area under the concentration-time curve of digoxin in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity.|1.5 hours (h) prior to the first dose and 20 minutes (min), 40 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, 24h, 48h, 72h, 96h after the first dose|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set comprised all evaluable subjects who took at least 1 dose of study medication with at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary PK endpoint without any important protocol violations relevant to the PK evaluation. One subject was excluded from the PK set because the pre-dose plasma concentration of digoxin was >5% of Cmax.||ng-h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838178|NCT01306201|Post-Hoc|Calculate Covidien Respiration Rate Software Accuracy as Mean Error +/- Standard Deviation.||Overall average|||Breaths Per Minute (BrPM)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838179|NCT01306201|Secondary|The Covidien Nellcor Respiration Rate Software Shall Calculate Respiration Rate With a Root Mean Square Difference (RMSD) of < 3 Breaths Per Minute Compared With a End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide Waveforms, With 95% Confidence.|"The data used for analysis consisted of multiple simultaneous measures of RR_TTI, RR_V1.0 and RR_EtCO2 for each subject. Given N sets of simultaneous RR values for each of P patients, the simultaneous RR values were used to calculate a pair of RMSD values for each subject.
The two RMSD values, RMSDRR_V1.0_vs_EtCO2, and RMSDTTI_vs_EtCO2, quantify the mean absolute difference in simultaneous estimates of respiratory rate between RR_V1.0 compared with RR_EtCO2 and RR_TTI compared with RR_EtCO2, respectively for the subjects with 95% confidence of mean ± 3.38 BrPM. The Measure type is Number and represents the RMSD of Covidien Nellcor Respiration Rate Software"|Participants were monitored on average for 30 minutes|||Breaths Per Minute (BrPM)|||Number
838180|NCT01306201|Primary|The Covidien Nellcor Respiration Rate Software Shall Determine Respiration Rate Measured as Mean and Standard Deviation With Accuracy That is Non-inferior to Predicate Device.|Mean and standard deviations of respiration rates collected from patients in the hospital settings were compared between Covidien Respiration Rate Software, Transthoracic Impedance and End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide Waveforms. Each patient served as its own control.|Participants were monitored for average of 30 minutes|10 participants were excluded from data analysis due to following reasons: unreadable files,arrhythmia,electronic data files coud not be processed||BrPM (Breaths Per Minute)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838181|NCT01312129|Primary|% BOLD Response Increase Above Baseline|Test whether Sulfasalazine, as compared to placebo, diminishes blood-oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) response to alcohol cues in the striatum and prefrontal cortex (PFC). BOLD response refers to brain activation in response to the presence of oxygen in a particular part of the brain. To test the hypothesis, we will compare Sulfasalazine treatment with placebo treatment. During the fMRI scan session, participants will be presented with the alcohol cue task. We will compare the difference in BOLD response during the presence of alcohol vs. a novel substance during the alcohol cue task. Outcome data collected during the alcohol cue task will provide us with BOLD response data for each intervention period. We will analyze the outcome data using FSL (Oxford Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain (FMRIB) Software – a collection of functional and structural brain image analysis tools).|Over two weeks|||% BOLD Response increase above baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
838182|NCT01312272|Secondary|Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) for Schizophrenia Total Score|"This is a frequently used instrument, initially developed by Kay, Opler, and Fiszbein, that assesses 30 different symptoms (categorized into positive, negative, and general psychopathology) on a scale from 1 to 7, based on clinical interview. It will be used to compare the psychopathology between the two treatment groups.
The maximum Total Score on the scale is 210 and the minimum score is 30, with higher values indicating more severe symptoms. The maximum scale of 210 is the sum of the scores from each symptom category (positive symptoms = range 7 to 49; negative symptoms = range 7 to 49; general psychopathology = range to 16 to 112).
Our outcome measure refers to the change in the PANSS Total Score. A greater decrease on the scale indicates greater improvement in symptoms (e.g., a participant with a change score of -20 improved more on the PANSS than a participant with a change score of -5)."|Visit 2 (baseline), Visit 3 (1 week following, post-treatment)|||change in units on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838183|NCT01312272|Secondary|Facial Affect Recognition (Low Level Social Cognition)|Participants are asked to identify facial expressions of emotion in still photographs from the standardized stimulus set developed by Ekman. The test includes digitized color photos of eight different posers displaying facial expressions of six basic emotions plus neutral expressions. On each trial, a photo and a list of the seven possible expressions are simultaneously presented on the screen. The participant verbally identifies the emotion he/she believes is correct and the experimenter enters the response. The dependent measure is the total number correct.|Visit 2 (baseline), Visit 3 (1 week following, post-treatment)|||Change in z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
838184|NCT01312272|Secondary|Social Perception Assessment (Low Level Social Cognition)|We will assess social perception using the Half-Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (Half-PONS). Brief scenes are shown that include facial expressions, voice intonations, and/or body gestures. Subjects select a label that best describes the situation. The dependent measure is the total number of correct labels.|Visit 2 (baseline), Visit 3 (1 week following, post-treatment)|||Change in z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
838185|NCT01312272|Secondary|Empathy|Empathy was assessed using the Emotional Perspective Taking Task (EPTT) (Derntl et al., 2009). In this task, subjects are presented with 60 digital images depicting two individuals in a social interaction, with one individual's face masked. Subjects are asked to infer the emotional expression of the masked face, selecting between two choices. Scenes portray 5 basic emotions as well as neutrality and each image is displayed for 4 s each.|Visit 2 (baseline), Visit 3 (1 week following, post-treatment)|||Change in z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
838186|NCT01312272|Secondary|Theory of Mind Assessment (High Level Social Cognition)|The Awareness of Social Inference Test (TASIT Part III: Social Inference – Enriched) will be administered to assess theory of mind.|Visit 2 (baseline), Visit 3 (1 week following, post-treatment)|||Change in z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
838187|NCT01312272|Primary|Social Cognition Composite Measure|"Our primary outcome measure will be a composite score created by calculating the mean of the four main social cognition measures assessed in this study (two high-level measures and two low-level measures). Because these measures are not on the same scale, we will first z-score (center and scale) each of the four measures at each time point using the baseline mean and standard deviation of the whole sample and then calculate the mean of the z-scores to create the composite social cognition score."|Visit 2 (baseline), Visit 3 (1 week following, post-treatment)|||Change in z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
838188|NCT01313624|Secondary|Time to Protocol-Defined Exacerbation (PDE)|"Protocol-defined exacerbation was defined as an acute worsening of respiratory disease that triggered the initiation of a non-study antibiotic meeting at least 3 major criteria, or 2 major and at least 2 minor criteria.
Major Criteria: increased sputum production; increased discoloration of sputum; increased dyspnea; increased cough
Minor Criteria: fever (> 38º C) measured during clinic visit; increased malaise or fatigue; forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) (L) or forced vital capacity (FVC) decreased > 10% from baseline; new or increased hemoptysis"|Baseline to Day 112|ITT Analysis Set||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838189|NCT01313624|Secondary|Change in QOL-B Respiratory Symptoms Score at Day 84|The mean (SD) change in the Respiratory Symptoms score on the QOL-B was measured from baseline to the end of Course 2 (Day 84). The QOL-B respiratory symptoms score was transformed onto a scale of 0-100, with higher scores representing a better quality of life.|Baseline to Day 84|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with scores at both baseline and Day 84 were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838190|NCT01313624|Primary|Change in QOL-B Respiratory Symptoms Score at Day 28|The mean (SD) change in the Respiratory Symptoms score on the Quality of Life Questionnaire-Bronchiectasis (QOL-B) was measured from baseline to the end of Course 1 (Day 28). The QOL-B respiratory symptoms score was transformed onto a scale of 0-100, with higher scores representing a better quality of life.|Baseline to Day 28|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with scores at both baseline and Day 28 were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838195|NCT01313650|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in the Mean Shortness of Breath With Daily Activities (SOBDA) Score for Week 24|The newly developed SOBDA questionnaire assesses dyspnea or shortness of breath (SOB) with daily activities. The SOBDA questionnaire is made up of 13 items completed by the participant (par.) each evening prior to bedtime, when the par. is instructed to reflect on the current day’s activities. The daily score is computed as the mean of the scores on the 13 items (>=7 items must have non-missing responses for this to be calculated). The par. is assigned a weekly mean SOBDA score ranging from 1 to 4 (greater scores indicate more severe breathlessness with daily activities) based on the mean of 7 days of data (>=4 of 7 days must be completed for a weekly mean to be calculated). Change from BL is the mean weekly SOBDA score minus BL. Analysis was performed using MMRM with covariates of treatment, BL (mean score in the week prior to treatment), smoking status, center group, week, week by BL and week by treatment interactions. This MMRM analysis only included Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24.|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to trt. who received at least one dose of randomized study drug. Par. represents those with data available at the time point being presented; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post BL measurement are included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838196|NCT01313650|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean (WM) 0-6 Hour FEV1 Obtained Post-dose at Day 168|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. The WM FEV1 was derived by calculating the area under the FEV1/time curve (AUC) using the trapezoidal rule, and then dividing the value by the time interval over which the AUC was calculated. The WM was calculated at Days 1, 28, 84, and 168 using the 0-6-hour post-dose FEV1 measurements collected on that day, which included pre-dose (Day 1: 30 minutes [min] and 5 min prior to dosing; other serial visits: 23 and 24 hours after the previous morning dose) and post-dose at 15 min, 30 min, 1 hour, 3 hours, and 6 hours. Change from Baseline at a particular visit was calculated as the WM at that visit minus Baseline. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, Baseline (mean of the two assessments made 30 min and 5 min pre-dose on Day 1), smoking status, center group, day, and day by Baseline and day by treatment interactions.|Baseline and Day 168|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to trt. who received at least one dose of randomized study drug. Par. represents those with data available at the time point being presented; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post BL measurement are included in the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838197|NCT01313650|Secondary|Mean Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) Focal Score at Day 168 (Week 24)|Considered an 'other' endpoint by the FDA. The TDI is an interviewer-administered instrument which measures the changes in the participant's dyspnea from Baseline. This questionnaire was collected on Days 28, 84 and 168. The scores in the TDI evaluate ratings for 3 different categories (functional impairment, magnitude of task in exertional capacity, and magnitude of effort). TDI scores ranged from -3 (major deterioration) to +3 (major improvement); total score = -9 to 9. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, Baseline dyspnea index (BDI) focal score,smoking status, center group, day, day by BDI focal score and day by treatment interactions.|Day 168 (Week 24)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to trt. who received at least one dose of randomized study drug. Par. represents those with data available at the time point being presented; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post BL measurement are included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838198|NCT01313650|Primary|Change From Baseline (BL) in Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) on Day 169 (Week 24)|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry on Days 2, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, and 169. Baseline is defined as the mean of the assessments made 30 minutes pre-dose and 5 minutes pre-dose on Treatment Day 1. Trough FEV1 is defined as the mean of the FEV1 values obtained at 23 and 24 hours after the previous morning's dosing (ie., trough FEV1 on Day 169 is the mean of the FEV1 values obtained 23 and 24 hours after the morning dosing on Day 168). Change from Baseline at a particular visit was calculated as the trough FEV1 at that visit minus Baseline. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, Baseline , smoking status, center group, day, and day by Baseline and day by treatment interactions. ITT=Intent-to-Treat; par.=participants.|Baseline and Day 169|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to trt. who received at least one dose of randomized study drug. Par. represents those with data available at the time point being presented; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post BL measurement are included in the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838199|NCT01313663|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Changes From Baseline Value in Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH)|"Change from Baseline in the laboratory parameter LDH was assessed as decrease to low, change to normal of no change, and increase to high. Participants with missing Baseline values were assumed to have a normal Baseline value. There is no standard normal range for LDH."|From the time of the first dose of study treatment until 28 days following discontinuation of study treatment (up to Study Week 55)|Safety Population||participants|||Number
838200|NCT01313663|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Grade Changes From Baseline Grade in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST), Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT), Alkaline Phosphatase (Alk. Phos.), and Total Bilirubin (TB)|The laboratory parameters AST, ALT, Alk. Phos., and TB were summarized according to NCI CTCAE grade, version 4.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3, Severe; Grade 4, Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for any grade increase, increase to Grade 3, and increase to Grade 4. Participants with missing Baseline grades were assumed to have a Baseline grade of 0. AST/ALT: Grade 1, >upper limit of normal (ULN) - 3.0x ULN; Grade 2, >3.0 to 5.0x ULN; Grade 3, >5.0 - 20.0x ULN; Grade 4, >20.0x ULN; Grade 5, not available (NA). Alk. Phos.: Grade 1, >ULN - 2.5x ULN; Grade 2, >2.5 - 5.0x ULN; Grade 3, >5.0 - 20.0x ULN; Grade 4, >20.0x ULN; Grade 5, NA. TB: Grade 1, >ULN - >1.5x ULN; Grade 2, >1.5 - 3.0x ULN; Grade 3, >3.0 - 10.0x ULN; Grade 4, >10.0x ULN; Grade 5, NA.|From the time of the first dose of study treatment until 28 days following discontinuation of study treatment (up to Study Week 55)|Safety Population||participants|||Number
838201|NCT01313663|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Change From Baseline Grade to Grade 3 and 4 for the Indicated Clinical Laboratory Parameters|Hematology and clinical chemistry data were summarized according to National Cancer Institutes (NCI) CTCAE grade, version 4.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3, Severe; Grade 4, Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to Grade 3 or Grade 4 occurred. Participants with missing Baseline grades were assumed to have a Baseline grade of 0. Lymphocyte count increased: Grade 3, <500 - 200/millimeters cubed (mm^3); <0.5 - 0.2x 10e9/Liters (L); Grade 4, <200/mm^3; <0.2x 10e9/L. Lymphocyte count decreased: Grade 3, >20000/mm^3; Grade 4, NA. Hyperglycemia; Grade 3, >250 - 500 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL); >13.9 - 27.8 millimoles per Liter (mmol/L); hospitalization indicated; Grade 4, >500 mg/dL; >27.8 mmol/L; life-threatening consequences. Hypophosphatemia (inorganic phosphorus): Grade 3, <2.0 - 1.0 mg/dL, <0.6 - 0.3 mmol/L; Grade 4, <1.0 mg/dL, <0.3 mmol/L, life-threatening consequences.|From the time of the first dose of study treatment until 28 days following discontinuation of study treatment (up to Study Week 55)|Safety Population||participants|||Number
838202|NCT01313663|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Increase From Baseline in Bazett's QTc at the Indicated Time Points|The QT interval is a measure of the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave in the heart's electrical cycle. In clinical studies with pazopanib, events of QT prolongation have occurred.|Baseline; Week 6; Week 15; every 9 weeks in the first 6 months; every 12 weeks in the next 6 months; and, after 1 year, every 6 months (up to Study Week 55)|Safety Population||participants|||Number
838203|NCT01313663|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Worst-case Change From Baseline in Blood Pressure|Systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) were measured. Categories correspond to the following Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grades: normal, <120/80 millimeters of mercury (mmHg); prehypertension, 120–139/80–89 mmHg, warranting intervention in participants with high risk; stage I hypertension, 140–159/90–99 mmHg, warranting intervention; and stage II hypertension >/=160/100, warranting immediate attentive intervention to prevent acute symptoms. An increase is defined as an increase in CTCAE grade relative to Baseline grade. Participants with a missing Baseline value were assumed to have a Baseline value of <120 for systolic BP (SBP) and <80 for diastolic BP (DBP).|From the time of the first dose of study treatment until 28 days following discontinuation of study treatment (up to Study Week 55)|Safety Population||participants|||Number
838204|NCT01313663|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any On-therapy AE (Serious or Non-serious) Leading to Dose Reductions (DRs) or Interruptions/Delays in the Study|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect. In addition, all Grade 4 laboratory abnormalities and other medically important events that require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed previously are considered to be SAEs. Refer to the general Adverse AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs/SAEs. Management of AEs may require DRs/interruptions in study treatment. If necessary, the pazopanib dose should be reduced stepwise by 200 mg at each step. DRs for pemetrexed were 50-75% of prior dose based on the toxicity leading to DR.|From the time the first dose of study treatment was administered until discontinuation of treatment (up to Study Week 55)|Safety Population||participants|||Number
838205|NCT01313663|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any AE (Serious or Non-serious) Leading to Withdrawal From Study Treatment|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a subject or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect. In addition, all Grade 4 laboratory abnormalities and other medically important events that require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed previously are considered to be SAEs. Refer to the general Adverse AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs and SAEs. A participant cold have been withdrawn fom study treatment due to an SAE or AE.|From the time the first dose of study treatment was administered until withdrawal from study treatment (up to Study Week 55)|Safety Population||participants|||Number
838206|NCT01313663|Secondary|Average Dose of Pemetrexed for All Cycles, as a Measure of Extent of Exposure|"The average dose of pemetrexed for all cycles, as a measure of extent of exposure, was assessed in all participants who received pemetrexed. The average dose was not measured in participants receiving pazopanib. For these participants, extent of exposure was measured as the time on study treatment and mean daily dose. See the outcome measures entitled Time on study treatment (pazopanib), as a measure of extent of exposure and Mean daily dose, as a measure of extent of exposure, respectively, for pazopanib data."|From the time the first dose of study treatment was administered until discontinuation of the study or death (average of 16 weeks)|Safety Population||milligrams per meters squared (m^2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838385|NCT01316055|Primary|The Steady State Area Under the Drug Concentration Time Curve From 0 to 12 Hours Post Dose AUC(0-12).|AUC(0-12) was based on blood samples taken at specified outcome measure time frame for dalfampridine-ER 7.5 mg tablets in healthy adult volunteers and people with mild or moderate renal impairment.|0 and 1,2,3,4,5,6,8, and 12 hours after the last dose|Intention to treat (ITT)||hour*nanogram/milliliter||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838207|NCT01313663|Secondary|Mean Number of Pemetrexed Dosing Cycles, as a Measure of Extent of Exposure|"Duration of therapy/time on study treatment, measured as the mean number of pemetrexed dosing cycles as a measure of extent of exposure, was assessed in all participants who received pemetrexed. The mean number of dosing cycles was not measured in participants receiving pazopanib. For these participants, extent of exposure was measured as the time on study treatment and mean daily dose. See the outcome measures entitled Time on study treatment (pazopanib), as a measure of extent of exposure and Mean daily dose, as a measure of extent of exposure, respectively, for pazopanib data."|From the time the first dose of study treatment was administered until discontinuation of the study or death (average of 16 weeks)|Safety Population||number of cycles||Standard Deviation|Mean
838208|NCT01313663|Secondary|Mean Daily Dose, as a Measure of Extent of Exposure|"Mean daily dose, as a measure of extent of exposure, was assessed in all participants who received pazopanib. Mean daily dose was not measured in participants receiving pemetrexed. For these participants, extent of exposure was measured as the mean number of dosing cycles and dose intensity. See the outcome measures entitled Mean number of dosing cycles, as a measure of extent of exposure and Average dose of pemetrexed for all cycles, as a measure of extent of exposure, respectively, for pemetrexed data."|From the first day to the last day of treatment (average of 8 weeks)|Safety Population||milligrams||Standard Deviation|Mean
838209|NCT01313663|Secondary|Time on Study Treatment (Pazopanib), as a Measure of Extent of Exposure|"Time on study treatment, as a measure of extent of exposure, was assessed in all participants who received pazopanib. Time on study treatment was not measured in participants receiving pemetrexed. For these participants, extent of exposure was measured as the mean number of dosing cycles and dose intensity. See the outcome measures entitled Mean number of dosing cycles, as a measure of extent of exposure and Average dose of pemetrexed for all cycles, as a measure of extent of exposure, respectively, for pemetrexed data."|From the first day to the last day of treatment (average of 8 weeks)|Safety Population||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
838210|NCT01313663|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Non-serious On-therapy Adverse Event (AE: Occurring in >=5% Participants in Any Treatment Arm) and Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered to be related to the medicinal product. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect. In addition, all Grade 4 laboratory abnormalities and other medically important events that require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed previously are considered to be SAEs. Refer to the general Adverse AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs and SAEs.|From the time the first dose of study treatment was administered until 28 days following discontinuation of study treatment regardless of initiation of a new cancer therapy or transfer to hospice (up to Study Week 55)|Safety Population: all participants who were randomized and took at least one dose of study medication. This population was based on the actual treatment received, if it differed from that to which the participant was randomized.||participants|||Number
838211|NCT01313663|Secondary|Number of Participants (Par.) With the Indicated Best Overall Response|A par. was defined as a responder if s/he sustained a CR (The disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 millimeters [mm] in the short axis) or PR (At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the baseline sum of the diameters) that was confirmed after >=28 days. Response was evaluated by an investigator per RECIST, version 1.1. A par. without a post-Baseline assessment was considered a non-responder. Stable disease (SD) is defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease (PD; at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started). To qualify as a best response of SD, a response of SD had to be observed >=12 weeks after randomization. A par. who was not evaluable had no scans at all or did not have a confirmatory scan.|From randomization until the time of the first documented evidence of a confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) (average of 10 weeks)|ITT Population||participants|||Number
838212|NCT01313663|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the interval between the date of randomization and the date of death from any cause.|From randomization until disease progression or death (up to Study Week 78)|The study size (20 participants) and follow up were not adequate to assess overall survival. Participants who had not died at the time of the cut-off for the analysis were to be censored at the date the particpant was last known to be alive.|||||
838213|NCT01313663|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS is defined as the interval between the date of randomization and the first documented sign of investigator-assessed (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST] version 1.1) disease progression (PD) or death, whichever occurs first. The date of documented PD is the date of lesion evaluation in the case of radiological PD and the date of symptomatic cancer progression in the case of symptomatic progression (radiological confirmation is required). PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference, the smallest sum of diameters recorded since the treatment started. If the participant received subsequent anti-cancer therapy prior to the date of documented progression or death, PFS was to be censored at the last adequate assessment (LAA) prior to the initiation of therapy. Otherwise, if the participant did not have a documented date of progression or death, PFS was to be censored at the date of the LAA.|From randomization until the first documented sign of investigator-assessed disease progression or death, whichever occurred first (average of 10 study weeks)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized to study treatment regardless of whether or not treatment was administered||weeks||90% Confidence Interval|Median
838237|NCT01313728|Primary|Expert Grader Assessment - Erythema|Ordinal erythema scores (on a scale of 0=none to 8=severe scaling and fissuring) were collected on weekdays for two weeks and the total daily score (for all subjects) was treated as a single interval measurement for comparative assessment between treatment regimens. Thus, for the total for the 25 Participants measured, minimum possible score reported below is 0 and maximum is 2000 (highest possible score of 8, times 10 days, times 25 subjects).|Baseline to 2 Weeks|Intention to Treat (ITT)||Scores on a Scale|||Number
838217|NCT01313689|Secondary|Mean Health Change Questionnaire (HCQ) Score|The HCQ consists of a single question in which the participant is asked if he/she has experienced any change in his/her health overall since beginning the study. For HCQ, values from 1 to 9 were assigned to the 9 responses in the HCQ questionnaire, ranging from 1 for ‘my health is a great deal better’ to 9 for ‘my health is a great deal worse’ since the beginning of the study. A score of 3 or less indicates improvement from Baseline. HCQ was assessed at Screening; Week (W) 12 (W4 of Cycle[C] 3), W24 (W4C6), W36 (W4C9), W48 (W4C13); during follow-up which was every month for Months 1-6, every 8 weeks for M7-12 and every 3 months up to M60; and then at PD..|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|ITT population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT population. .||Unit on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838218|NCT01313689|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia 16 Item Module (EORTC QLQ-CLL 16)|The EORTC QLQ-CLL16 is comprised of 16 questions that address 5 domains of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) important in CLL. There are 4 multi-item scales – fatigue (2 items), treatment side effects ([TSE], 4 items), disease symptoms (disease effects scale [DES], 4 items), and infection (4 items) – and single item scales (social activities [Social Problems (SP) Scale] and future health worries[Future Health (FH) Scale].). These are measured on a four point scale where 1 = not at all and 4 = very much. These scores are transformed to give a rating from 0 – 100, where 0 =no symptoms or problems and 100 = a severe symptoms or problems. EORTC QLQ-CLL16 was assessed at Screening; Week (W) 12 (W4 of Cycle[C] 3), W24 (W4C6), W36 (W4C9), W48 (W4C13); during Follow-up which was every month for Months (M) 1-6, every 8 weeks for M7-12 and every 3 months up to M60; and then at PD.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|ITT population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT population.||unit on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838219|NCT01313689|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were Positive or Negative for Human Anti-Human Antibodies (HAHA) Post-OFA Therapy|The presence of HAHA in human serum was determined using a validated electrochemiluminescent assay in a multi-tier assay format. All samples were first assessed in a screening (SCR) assay, and the potential positive (Pos) samples were further tested in the confirmation (CNF) assays. Confirmed positives were reported as HAHA positive and titer was determined for each positive sample. The drug tolerance of the HAHA assay is 200 microgram/milliliter (µg/mL); thus, samples that tested negative in the assay and had ofatumumab concentrations no more than 200 µg/mL were considered as conclusive negative (Neg) results.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|Safety Population. Only those participants with post-OFA treatment HAHA results were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
838238|NCT01313780|Secondary|Change in Bowel Habits.|The change of bowel habits from baseline (Visit 1) in bowel habits at Week 4 was investigated, and was categorized as ‘improved’, ‘unchanged’, and ‘worsened’.|4 weeks|FAS analysis, but Oxycodone/naloxone group was missed 15 patients data and Oxycodone group was missed 23 patients data.||participants|||Number
838239|NCT01313780|Primary|Change of Pain Intensity From Baseline(visit1) to 4weeks.(visit3)|Change of pain intensity from 0(No pain) to 10(worst pain imaginable) after 4 weeks treatment .|4weeks|Analysis of FAS: 117.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838220|NCT01313689|Secondary|Mean Immunoglobulin (Ig) Antibodies IgA, IgG, and IgM Over Time|Immunoglobulins or antibodies are large proteins used by the immune system to identify and neutralize foreign particles such as bacteria and viruses. Their normal blood levels indicate proper immune status. Low levels indicate immuno-suppression. IgA, IgG, and IgM were measured in the blood samples of the participants. Immunoglobulin testing was performed at Screening (SCR), Cycle 3 Week 4 (C3W4), Cycle 7 Week 4 (C3W4) ,Cycle 9 Week 4 (C3W4), 6 Month Follow-up Visit (6M FU), 9 Month Follow-up (9M FU), 12 Month Follow-up (12M FU), 18 Month Follow-up (18M FU), 24 Month Follow-up (24M FU), 30 Month Follow-up (30M FU). A cycle is defined as the time between one round of treatment until the start of the next round.|Screening and every 3 months during treatment, every 6 months after last treatment until PD or until 30 Month Follow-up Visit|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the safety population.||Gram per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
838221|NCT01313689|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) of Special Interest|AEs of special interest included cytopenias (neutropenia [decreased neutrophil count], anaemia [decreased hemoglobin], and thrombocytopenia [decreased platelet count]), autoimmune haematologic complications (autoimmune haemolytic anaemia and haemolytic anaemia), infusion reactions, infections, mucocutaneous reactions, Tumour Lysis Syndrome (TLS), cardiovascular events, and small bowel obstruction.|From the first dose of study medication to 60 days after the last dose of study medication and until follow-up for SAEs unless initiation of subsequent anti-CLL therapy (Median follow-up approximately 28.9 months)|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
838222|NCT01313689|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE), Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE), Any Fatal Serious Adverse Event (FSAE), or Deaths|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. A SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability or incapacity, is a congenital anomaly or birth defect.|From the first dose of study medication to 60 days after the last dose of study medication and until follow-up for SAEs unless initiation of subsequent anti-CLL therapy (Median follow-up approximately 28.9 months)|Safety Population: all participants who received at least one dose of any study treatment (OFA or PC) at the first randomization.||Participants|||Number
838223|NCT01313689|Secondary|Duration of Response as Assessed by the IRC|DOR is defined as the time from the initial response (CR, CRi, nPR, or PR) to the first documented sign of PD or death due to any cause. PD requires at least one of the following: lymphadenopathy, appearance of any new lesion such as enlarged lymph nodes (>1.5 cm) spleen or liver or other infiltrates or an increase by 50% or more in the greatest diameter of any previous site; an increase by 50% or more in the previously noted enlargement of the liver or spleen, an increase by 50% or more in the numbers of blood lymphocytes with at least 5000 lymphocytes per microliter, transformation to a more aggressive histology, or occurrence of cytopenia attributable to chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Par. who were alive and had not progressed at the time of analysis or if a progression event occurred after extensive lost-to-follow-up time (>= 12 weeks) were censored at the date of the last visit with adequate assessment. Par. with unknown or missing responses were considered as non-responders.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|ITT population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed. Only responders (CR, CRi, PR, nPR) were included in the analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838224|NCT01313689|Secondary|Time to Response as Assessed by the IRC|Time to response is defined as the time from randomization to the first response (Complete Remission[CR], Complete Remission with incomplete bone marrow recovery[CRi], partial response[PR], or nodular PR[nPR]). CR(all the criteria at least 2 months after last treatment): no lymphadenopathy(Ly) > 1.5 cm/ hepatomegaly/ splenomegaly/ constitutional symptoms; neutrophils >1500 per microliter(µL), platelets(PL) >100,000/µL, hemoglobin(Hb) >11 grams/deciliter(g/dL), lymphocytes(LC) <4000/µL, bone marrow(BM) sample must be normocellular for age, <30% LC, no lymphoid nodule. CRi: CR criteria, persistent anemia/thrombocytopenia/neutropenia unrelated to CLL but related to drug toxicity. PR: >=50% decrease in LC, Ly, size of liver and spleen and at least one of the following results: PL >100,000/µL or 50% improvement over Baseline(BL), Hb >11 g/dL or 50% improvement over BL. nPR: persistent nodules BM. Participants with unknown or missing responses were considered as non-responders.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|ITT population. Only responders (CR, CRi, PR, nPR) were included in the analysis. Response was measured using the International Workshop for CLL (IWCLL) updated National Cancer Institute-sponsored Working Group (NCI-WG) guidelines 2008.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838225|NCT01313689|Secondary|Time to Next Anti-cancer Therapy by Investigator|Time to next therapy is defined as the time from randomization until the start of the next line of treatment.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|ITT population. Only those participants with data available were analyzed.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838226|NCT01313689|Secondary|Time to Progression as Assessed by IRC|Time to progression is defined as the time from the date of randomization to disease progression (PD). PD requires at least one of the following: lymphadenopathy, appearance of any new lesion such as enlarged lymph nodes (>1.5 cm) spleen or liver or other infiltrates or an increase by 50% or more in the greatest diameter of any previous site; an increase by 50% or more in the previously noted enlargement of the liver or spleen, an increase by 50% or more in the numbers of blood lymphocytes with at least 5000 lymphocytes per microliter, transformation to a more aggressive histology, or occurrence of cytopenia attributable to chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Participants who were alive and had not progressed at the time of analysis or if a progression event occurred after extensive lost-to-follow-up time were censored at the date of the last visit with adequate assessment.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|ITT population. Only those participants with data available were analyzed.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838227|NCT01313689|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause. Kaplan-Meier plots were used to estimate the reported median OS time.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|ITT population. Only those participants with data available were analyzed, participants who had not died were censored at the date of last contact.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838228|NCT01313689|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR) as Assessed by the Investigator|ORR is defined as the number of participants achieving either complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). Overall response was measured using the IWCLL updated NCI-WG guidelines 2008. CR requires all of the following criteria: no lymphadenopathy(Ly)/ hepatomegaly, splenomegaly, constitutional symptoms; neutrophils >1500 per microliter(µL), platelets(PL) >100,000/µL, hemoglobin(Hb) >11 grams/deciliter(g/dL), lymphocytes(LC) <4000/µL, bone marrow(BM) sample must be normocellular for age, <30% LC and no lymphoid nodules. PR requires the following criteria for at least 2 months: >=50% decrease in LC, reduction in Ly (i.e., >=50% decrease in lymph node size or no increase or new lymph nodes), >=50% decrease in the size of liver and spleen and at least one of the following results: PL >100,000/µL or 50% improvement over Baseline(BL), Hb >11 g/dL or 50% improvement over BL, neutrophils>1500/μL. Nodular PR (nPR) indicates persistent nodules in the BM.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|ITT Population. Not evaluable is defined as insufficient data present to classify into one of the other categories.||Participants|||Number
838229|NCT01313689|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR) as Assessed by the IRC|ORR is defined as the number of participants achieving either complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). ORR was measured using the IWCLL updated NCI-WG guidelines 2008. CR requires all of the following criteria: no lymphadenopathy(Ly)/ hepatomegaly, splenomegaly, constitutional symptoms; neutrophils >1500 per microliter(µL), platelets(PL) >100,000/µL, hemoglobin(Hb) >11 grams/deciliter(g/dL), lymphocytes(LC) <4000/µL, bone marrow(BM) sample must be normocellular for age, <30% LC and no lymphoid nodules. PR requires the following criteria for at least 2 months: >=50% decrease in LC, reduction in Ly (i.e., >=50% decrease in lymph node size or no increase or new lymph nodes), >=50% decrease in the size of liver and spleen and at least one of the following results: PL >100,000/µL or 50% improvement over Baseline(BL), Hb >11 g/dL or 50% improvement over BL, neutrophils>1500/μL. Nodular PR (nPR) indicates persistent nodules in the BM.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|ITT Population. Not evaluable is defined as insufficient data present to classify into one of the other categories.||Participants|||Number
838230|NCT01313689|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by Investigator|PFS is the interval of time between the date of first randomization to the date of disease progression (PD) or death due to any reason, whichever occurred first. The date of PD was defined as the first occurrence of any criteria of progression. PD criteria requires at least one of the following: progression of lymphadenopathy, >=50% increase in liver or spleen size, >=50% increase in number of lymphocytes per microliter, more aggressive histology, occurence of cytopenia after treatment attributable to CLL. Disease progression was determined according to the 2008 International Workshop for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia (IWCLL) update of the National Cancer Institute-sponsored Working Group CLL Guidelines for Response (NCI-WG). PFS was censored at the time of the last follow up for participants who have neither progressed or died.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: all participants who were randomised to receive OFA or PC at the first randomisation.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838231|NCT01313689|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by Independent Review Committee (IRC)|PFS is the interval of time between the date of first randomization to the date of disease progression (PD) or death due to any reason, whichever occurred first. The date of PD was defined as the first occurrence of any criteria of progression. PD criteria requires at least one of the following: progression of lymphadenopathy, >=50% increase in liver or spleen size, >=50% increase in number of lymphocytes per microliter, more aggressive histology, occurence of cytopenia after treatment attributable to CLL. Disease progression was determined according to the 2008 International Workshop for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia (IWCLL) update of the National Cancer Institute-sponsored Working Group CLL Guidelines for Response (NCI-WG). PFS was censored at the time of the last follow up for participants who have neither progressed or died.|From the randomization date up to 60 months post the randomization date.|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: all participants who were randomised to receive OFA or PC at the first randomisation.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838232|NCT01313728|Secondary|Facial Tolerance|All interval measurements were combined for comparative assessment between treatment regimens. Facial tolerance is the sum of scores from Erythema, Dryness, Burning/Stinging, Itching, and Tightness assessments, reported in Outcome Measures 1-5. Thus, for the total for the 25 Participants measured, minimum possible score reported below is 0 and maximum is 6250 (highest possible combined score of 25, times 10 days, times 25 subjects).|Baseline to 2 Weeks|||Scores on a Scale|||Number
838233|NCT01313728|Secondary|Subject Assessment – Tightness|Ordinal tightness scores (on a scale of 0=none to 3=severe) were collected on weekdays for two weeks and the total daily score (for all subjects) was treated as a single interval measurement for comparative assessment between treatment regimens. Thus, for the total for the 25 Participants measured, minimum possible score reported below is 0 and maximum is 750 (highest possible score of 3, times 10 days, times 25 subjects).|Baseline to 2 Weeks|Intention to Treat (ITT)||Scores on a Scale|||Number
838234|NCT01313728|Secondary|Subject Assessment – Itching|Ordinal itching scores (on a scale of 0=none to 3=severe) were collected on weekdays for two weeks and the total daily score (for all subjects) was treated as a single interval measurement for comparative assessment between treatment regimens. Thus, for the total for the 25 Participants measured, minimum possible score reported below is 0 and maximum is 750 (highest possible score of 3, times 10 days, times 25 subjects).|Baseline to 2 Weeks|Intention to Treat (ITT)||Scores on a Scale|||Number
838235|NCT01313728|Secondary|Subject Assessment – Burning/Stinging|Ordinal burning/stinging scores (on a scale of 0=none to 3=severe) were collected on weekdays for two weeks and the total daily score (for all subjects) was treated as a single interval measurement for comparative assessment between treatment regimens. Thus, for the total for the 25 Participants measured, minimum possible score reported below is 0 and maximum is 750 (highest possible score of 3, times 10 days, times 25 subjects).|Baseline to 2 Weeks|Intention to Treat (ITT)||Scores on a Scale|||Number
838236|NCT01313728|Primary|Expert Grader Assessment - Dryness|Ordinal dryness scores (on a scale of 0=none to 8=deep) were collected on weekdays for two weeks and the total daily score (for all subjects) was treated as a single interval measurement for comparative assessment between treatment regimens. Thus, for the total for the 25 Participants measured, minimum possible score reported below is 0 and maximum is 2000 (highest possible score of 8, times 10 days, times 25 subjects).|Baseline to 2 Weeks|Intention to Treat (ITT)||Scores on a Scale|||Number
838253|NCT01313910|Primary|Number of Bowel Movements Per Day|self-reported bowel movement in diary|8 weeks (56 days)|||bowel movements/day||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838240|NCT01313858|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Serious Adverse Event|A serious adverse event is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease associated with the use of a medical treatment or procedure, regardless of whether it is considered related to the medical treatment or procedure that results in death, life-threatening adverse event, permanent or significant disability / unfitness for work, hospital treatment (i.e., admission to hospital) or prolongation of a patient's length of stay, or congenital deformity or birth defect.|Up to 24 months|The safety population consists of all participants with at least one injection of Simponi®.||Participants|||Number
838241|NCT01313858|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event|An adverse event is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease associated with the use of a medical treatment or procedure, regardless of whether it is considered related to the medical treatment or procedure.|Up to 24 months|The safety population consists of all participants with at least one injection of Simponi®.||Participants|||Number
838242|NCT01313858|Primary|Change From Baseline in EuroQol- 5 Dimension 3 Level Version (EQ-5D-3L) Questionnaire Score|"The EQ-5D-3L is a health profile questionnaire that assesses quality of life along 5 dimensions. Participants rate 5 aspects of health (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) by choosing from 3 answering options (1=no problems; 2=some problems; 3=extreme problems). The summed score ranges from 1-15 with 1 corresponding to no problems and 15 corresponding to severe problems in the 5 dimensions. Decrease from baseline in EQ-5D-3L signifies improvement."|Baseline and Months 6, 12, 18, 24|The mITT population consists of all participants who were treated with Simponi® and have a baseline assessment and at least one additional visit, regardless of any protocol violations during the study.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
838243|NCT01313858|Primary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) Score|The FACIT-F scale assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. 13 items consisting of fatigue, weakness, listlessness, tiredness, trouble with starting things, trouble with finishing things, energy, activity, sleep, eating, help doing activities, frustration, and social activities are scored on a scale of 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much), except energy and activity which are reversed scored. Individual item scores are then summed to provide the final FACIT-F score with range from 0 (lowest) to 52 (highest quality of life). Increase from baseline in FACIT-F score signifies improvement.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24|The mITT population consists of all participants who were treated with Simponi® and have a baseline assessment and at least one additional visit, regardless of any protocol violations during the study.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
838244|NCT01313858|Primary|Change From Baseline in FFbH (Funktionsfragebogen Hannover) Questionnaire Score|The FFbH is a participant questionnaire assessing disability/functional impairment. Ability to perform 18 activities of daily living are scored on a 3 point scale (2=Yes, 1=Yes but with effort, and 0=No or with assistance) and summed. Remaining functional capacity is calculated as the percent of the maximum number of score points (FFbH[%] = (Attained score*100)/(2*n) where n is the number of completed responses) with range from 0 = total loss of functional capacity to 100 = maximal functional capacity. Increase from baseline in FFbH score signifies improvement. The FFbH is similar to Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) but is more widely used in Germany.|Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24|The mITT population consists of all participants who were treated with Simponi® and have a baseline assessment and at least one additional visit, regardless of any protocol violations during the study.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
838245|NCT01313858|Primary|Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Disease Status|"The CGI is a non-disease-specific evaluation of participants' overall health status assessed on a 10 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (free of complaints) to 10 (strong discomfort). The closer the score to 0, the better the health status."|Baseline (BL; Month 0), Month 3, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12, Month 15, Month 18, Month 21, Month 24|The mITT population consists of all participants who were treated with Simponi® and have a baseline assessment and at least one additional visit, regardless of any protocol violations during the study.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
838246|NCT01313884|Secondary|Progression Free Survival||24 months||||||
838247|NCT01313884|Primary|Overall Response Rate (Partial and Complete Response)|"Response was evaluated every 12 weeks during treatment. Subjects who discontinue treatment for reasons other than disease progression or initiation of new anticancer therapy (excluding radiation therapy and surgery) response evaluated every 6 months following the last dose of study drug. Scans should be obtained every 6 months for 2 years or until progression of disease or initiation of new anticancer therapy.
Complete response (CR) Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm.
Partial response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as a reference the baseline sum diameters."|Up to 24 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
838248|NCT01313897|Primary|Therapeutic Efficacy|Number of participants with an objective response of Partial Response (PR) or better according to European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) criteria within 180 days post Expanded Natural Killer Cell Infusion. The minimum criteria to meet the EBMT definition of PR or better included: >= 50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas (if assessed); AND >= 50% reduction in plasma cells in bone marrow biopsy (if biopsy was performed and if >= 30% plasma cells at baseline); AND >=50% reduction in serum M protein and reduction in urine M protein >= 90% or to 200 mg/24hr OR >= 50% decrease in the difference between involved and uninvolved serum free light chain levels (if serum M protein < 1 g/dL, urine < 200 mg/24 hrs, and an involved serum free light chain level >= 10 mg/dL at baseline).|180 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
838249|NCT01313910|Secondary|Duodenal Immune Reconstitution|changes in duodenal lamina propria CD3+/CD4+ density by immunohistochemistry|8 weeks|||CD3+/CD4+ per mm^2 lamina propria||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838250|NCT01313910|Secondary|Systemic Immune Activation|CD8+ T-cells with an activated phenotype (HLA-DR/CD38+ coexpression)|8 weeks|||% CD8/HLA-DR/CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838251|NCT01313910|Secondary|Measures of Gut Permeability|five-hour disaccharide absorption test|8 weeks|||percentage absorption||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
838252|NCT01313910|Secondary|Frequency of Pro-inflammatory Bacterial Orders|16S rDNA sequencing for Bacteroidetes/Firmicutes ratio|8 weeks|||ratio of Bacteroidetes/Firmicutes %||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838254|NCT01313923|Secondary|Statistical Measures|"The statistical goal is to observe success, an improvement in disease control while up-titrating sirolimus dosage. As there will be no control group, the subject or progress at the end of the study will be compared to their baseline at the beginning of the study. The subject and disease severity at the beginning of the study will be compared to the disease severity at each visit and be correlated with the dosage of sirolimus and corticosteroid. However, since no patient completed the study, the outcome and any data collected was not assessed."|Study early termination by investigator - no participant completed any visits of the study - no measurements taken||||||
838255|NCT01313923|Primary|Improvement of ABSIS Score While Reducing Steroid Dosage|"Measurement of disease severity will be quantified using ABSIS (Autoimmune Bullous Skin Disorder Intensity Score). Improvement in disease control is quantified by the maintenance or improvement of ABSIS score while reducing steroid dosage.
No results as study has been terminated early by the investigator."|Expected time line 24 months|This outcome was not assessed because no participant completed any visits of the study|||||
838256|NCT01313936|Secondary|Changes in Standardized Uptake Values on FDG-PET Scans|To describe changes in standardized uptake values (SUVs) obtained by 18FDG-PET scan at study entry and in response to one cycle of protocol therapy.|One year||||||
838257|NCT01313936|Secondary|Changes in Diarrhea|To describe the rate of protocol associated diarrhea according to UGT1A1 genotype.|One year||||||
838258|NCT01313936|Secondary|Therapeutic Response Rate in Patients|To estimate the therapeutic response rate to this regimen according to the NANT modified-version of the International Neuroblastoma Response Criteria.|6 weeks|||Responses|||Number
838259|NCT01313936|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose-limiting Toxicity as a Measure of Tolerability|To determine whether doses of 15 mCi/kg and 18 mCi/kg of 131I-MIBG are tolerable when given with irinotecan/vincristine on a 5-day schedule to children and young adults with high-risk refractory/relapsed neuroblastoma.|6 weeks|||participants with DLT|||Number
838260|NCT01314001|Secondary|Total Side-Effect Severity Index at Week 4|"The mean side-effect severity score by treatment group (placebo vs. nicotine patch vs. varenicline) and by NMR group (slow metabolizers vs. normal metabolizers).
Side-effect severity was calculated using a Side Effects Checklists (SEC). 29 common side-effects associated with transdermal nicotine or varenicline treatment were rated by participants on a 0 (none) to 3 (severe) scale. For each participant at this timepoint, these scores were summed to calculate a total score, with a range of 0 to 87; a higher score indicated a higher severity of side-effects."|Week 4|Intent-to-treat population (all subjects who received at least one dose of intervention).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838261|NCT01314001|Secondary|Total Side-Effect Severity Index at Week 1|"The mean side-effect severity score by treatment group (placebo vs. nicotine patch vs. varenicline) and by NMR group (slow metabolizers vs. normal metabolizers).
Side-effect severity was calculated using a Side Effects Checklists (SEC). 29 common side-effects associated with transdermal nicotine or varenicline treatment were rated by participants on a 0 (none) to 3 (severe) scale. For each participant at this timepoint, these scores were summed to calculate a total score, with a range of 0 to 87; a higher score indicated a higher severity of side-effects."|Week 1|Intent-to-treat population (all subjects who received at least one dose of intervention).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838262|NCT01314001|Secondary|Total Side-Effect Severity Index at Target Quit Date|"The mean side-effect severity score by treatment group (placebo vs. nicotine patch vs. varenicline) and by NMR group (slow metabolizers vs. normal metabolizers).
Side-effect severity was calculated using a Side Effects Checklists (SEC). 29 common side-effects associated with transdermal nicotine or varenicline treatment were rated by participants on a 0 (none) to 3 (severe) scale. For each participant at this timepoint, these scores were summed to calculate a total score, with a range of 0 to 87; a higher score indicated a higher severity of side-effects."|Target Quit Date (Week 0)|Intent-to-treat population (all subjects who received at least one dose of intervention).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838263|NCT01314001|Secondary|Total Side-Effect Severity Index at Pre-Quit|"The mean side-effect severity score by treatment group (placebo vs. nicotine patch vs. varenicline) and by NMR group (slow metabolizers vs. normal metabolizers).
Side-effect severity was calculated using a Side Effects Checklists (SEC). 29 common side-effects associated with transdermal nicotine or varenicline treatment were rated by participants on a 0 (none) to 3 (severe) scale. For each participant at this timepoint, these scores were summed to calculate a total score, with a range of 0 to 87; a higher score indicated a higher severity of side-effects."|Pre-Quit (Week -1/Baseline)|Intent-to-treat population (all subjects who received at least one dose of intervention).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838264|NCT01314001|Secondary|7-day Point Prevalence Quit Rate at 6-month Follow up Survey|The percentage of ITT subjects who were verified as abstinent at the 6-month follow up survey. Abstinence was defined as no self-reported smoking (not even a puff) for at least 7 days before the telephone assessment, with in-person verification for those self-reporting abstinence. In-person verification consisted of breath carbon monoxide analysis, with a reading of 8 parts-per-million or less confirming abstinence. Subjects who were lost to follow-up were considered smokers.|Week 24|Intent-to-treat population (all subjects who received at least one dose of intervention).||percentage of ITT subjects|||Number
838265|NCT01314001|Primary|7-day Point Prevalence Quit Rate at End-of-Treatment (EOT)|The percentage of ITT subjects who were verified as abstinent. Abstinence was defined as no self-reported smoking (not even a puff) for at least 7 days before the telephone assessment, with in-person verification for those self-reporting abstinence. In-person verification consisted of breath carbon monoxide analysis, with a reading of 8 parts-per-million or less confirming abstinence. Subjects who were lost to follow-up were considered smokers.|Week 11|Intent-to-treat population (all subjects who received at least one dose of intervention).||percentage of ITT subjects|||Number
838266|NCT01314014|Secondary|Median Time to Progression Free Survival in Participants With Relapsed/Refractory Indolent and Aggressive Lymphomas|Measured from start of treatment until disease progression or death from any cause.|up to 25 months|20 subjects were evaluable for response, 2 subjects discontinued therapy during cycle 1 due to progressive disease and grade 5 sepsis respectively.||months||Full Range|Median
838386|NCT01309100|Secondary|Comfort Throughout the Day (Investigational vs Air Optix Aqua Lens)|The mean differences in comfort between the investigational lens(RD2117-01) and the Air Optix Aqua control lens. Comfort was measured on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the most favorable score.|1 week|All eligible, dispensed eyes||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
838267|NCT01314014|Primary|Overall Response Rate of of Participants to Imexon in the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Indolent and Aggressive Lymphomas|CT, PET, or MRI scans for the assessment of objective tumor responses were performed at baseline, after cycle 2, and every 3 cycles thereafter until disease progression. Standard response criteria from the International Harmonization Project on Lymphoma were used for classification of objective tumor responses. Response was defined as PR (Regression of measuable disease and no new sites) if >= 50% decrease in sum of the product of the diameters of up to 6 largest dominant masses; no increase in size of other nodes (a) [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-avid or PET prior to therapy; one or more (PET) positive at previously involved site (b) Variably FDG-avid or PET negative; regression on CT.|One year|20 subjects were evaluable for response, 2 subjects discontinued therapy during cycle 1 due to progressive disease and grade 5 sepsis respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838268|NCT01314105|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Safety Laboratory Parameters|"Change from baseline in safety laboratory parameters.
As the study is still ongoing, this endpoint has not yet been analysed."|From the first drug administration until 28 days after the last drug administration, up to 50 months|Treated set which included all patients who were administered at least one dose of any study medication|||||
838269|NCT01314105|Secondary|Frequency of All Adverse Events Graded by CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) Version 3.0|"Frequency of all adverse events graded by CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) version 3.0.
As the study is still ongoing, this endpoint has not yet been analysed."|From the first drug administration until 28 days after the last drug administration, up to 50 months|Treated set which included all patients who were administered at least one dose of any study medication|||||
838270|NCT01314105|Secondary|The Maximum Measured Plasma Concentration of Nintedanib|"The maximum measured plasma concentration (Cmax) of nintedanib.
As the study is still ongoing, this endpoint has not yet been analysed."|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 1 hour (h) 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 24h, 144h, 312h and 456h after drug administration|PK set|||||
838271|NCT01314105|Secondary|Area Under the Curve of Nintedanib|"Area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity (AUC 0-inf) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the time interval from zero to the time of the last quantifiable drug concentration (AUC0-tz) of nintedanib
As the study is still ongoing, this endpoint has not yet been analysed."|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 1 hour (h) 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 24h, 144h, 312h and 456h after drug administration|PK set|||||
838272|NCT01314105|Secondary|The Maximum Measured Plasma Concentration of Carboplatin|"The maximum measured plasma concentration of carboplatin (determined as ultrafiltrable and total platinum)
As the study is still ongoing, this endpoint has not yet been analysed."|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 30 min,59 min, 1 hour (h) 15 min, 1h 29min, 1h 45min, 2h 15min, 2h 45min, 4h, 6h, 7h 30min, 9h, 23h 55min, 25h, 26h, 27h, 28h, 30h, 32h, 34h, 48h, 168h, 336h and 480h after drug administration|PK set|||||
838273|NCT01314105|Secondary|Area Under the Curve of Carboplatin|"Area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity (AUC 0-inf) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the time interval from zero to the time of the last quantifiable drug concentration (AUC0-tz) of Carboplatin (determined as ultrafiltrable and total platinum)
As the study is still ongoing, this endpoint has not yet been analysed."|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 30 min,59 min, 1 hour (h) 15 min, 1h 29min, 1h 45min, 2h 15min, 2h 45min, 4h, 6h, 7h 30min, 9h, 23h 55min, 25h, 26h, 27h, 28h, 30h, 32h, 34h, 48h, 168h, 336h and 480h after drug administration|PK set|||||
838274|NCT01314105|Secondary|The Maximum Measured Plasma Concentration of PLD|"The maximum measured plasma concentration (Cmax) of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) (Total Plasma Doxorubicin and Doxorubicinol)
As the study is still ongoing, this endpoint has not yet been analysed."|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 30 min,59 min, 1 hour (h) 15 min, 1h 29min, 1h 45min, 2h 15min, 2h 45min, 4h, 6h, 7h 30min, 9h, 25h, 27h, 30h, 34h, 48h, 168h, 336h and 480h after drug administration|PK set|||||
838275|NCT01314105|Secondary|Area Under the Curve of PLD|"Area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the time interval from zero extrapolated to infinity (AUC 0-inf) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the time interval from zero to the time of the last quantifiable drug concentration (AUC0-tz) of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) (total plasma doxorubicin and doxorubicinol)
As the study is still ongoing, this endpoint has not yet been analysed."|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 30 min,59 min, 1 hour (h) 15 min, 1h 29min, 1h 45min, 2h 15min, 2h 45min, 4h, 6h, 7h 30min, 9h, 25h, 27h, 30h, 34h, 48h, 168h, 336h and 480h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic set (PK set) which included all patients who were administered at least one dose of any study medication and who were documented to have received at least one dose of Nintedanib and who have at least one valid drug plasma concentration available.|||||
838276|NCT01314105|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose of Nintedanib Based on the Occurrence of DLTs During Treatment Course 1|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Nintedanib in combination with carboplatin and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin based on the occurrence of dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) during treatment course 1. MTD will be determined among the first 6 evaluable patients in each dose level. MTD is the highest dose at which the incidence of DLT is less than 2/6.|28 days|MTD set which included patients in the dose escalation part of the trial who started treatment course 2 and/or took 1 dose of Carboplatin and PLD, started Nintedanib (Nin) and did not miss more than 13 doses of Nin and/or took 1 dose of Carboplatin and PLD, started Nin and discontinued treatment due to a dose limiting toxicity during the MTD period||participants|||Number
838387|NCT01309100|Primary|Visual Acuity (Investigational vs Acuvue Oasys Lens)|The mean difference in distance high contrast logMAR visual acuity(VA) between the investigational lens(RD2117-01) and the Acuvue Oasys control lens.|1 week|All eligible, dispensed eyes||LogMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
838281|NCT01314261|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Extended Rapid Virologic Response (eRVR)|Plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) levels (measured in IU/mL) were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. Extended RVR was defined as HCV RNA levels < the lower level of quantification (< 25 IU/mL) at Weeks 4 through 12. Data are reported as the percentage of participants with eRVR.|Week 4 through Week 12|All 37 participants enrolled in the study received at least 1 dose of study drug and were included in the intent-to-treat population for efficacy analyses.||percentage of participants|||Number
838282|NCT01314261|Primary|Serum Concentrations of Pegylated Interferon (pegIFN)|Blood samples were collected at each study visit from Week 1 to Week 12. The samples were analyzed for the concentration of pegIFN (measured in ng/mL) using validated analytical methods and pegIFN concentrations in serum were summarized at each visit. Data are reported as the median (range).|At each study visit from Week 1 to Week 12|Participants received at least 1 dose of study drug and had sufficient concentrations to characterize the pharmacokinetic parameters. When a different number of participants at a specific time point was used to analyze the data in the outcome measure, the n (number of participants) for each arm is denoted in the Category Title.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
838283|NCT01314261|Primary|Plasma Concentrations of Ribavirin (RBV)|Blood samples were collected at each study visit from Week 1 to Week 12. The samples were analyzed for the concentration of RBV (measured in ng/mL) using validated analytical methods and RBV concentrations in plasma were summarized at each visit. Data are reported as the median (range).|At each study visit from Week 1 to Week 12|Participants received at least 1 dose of study drug and had sufficient concentrations to characterize the pharmacokinetic parameters. When a different number of participants at a specific time point was used to analyze the data in the outcome measure, the n (number of participants) for each arm is denoted in the Category Title.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
838284|NCT01314261|Secondary|Median Time to Suppression of Hepatitis C Virus Ribonucleic Acid (HCV RNA)|Plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) levels (measured in IU/mL) were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. Time to suppression was defined as the time (measured in days) to HCV RNA levels < the lower limit of quantification (< 25 IU/mL). Data are reported as the median number of days.|Approximately 12 weeks|All 37 participants enrolled in the study received at least 1 dose of study drug and were included in the intent-to-treat population for efficacy analyses.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838285|NCT01314261|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks (SVR24) Post-pegylated Interferon/Ribavirin (pegIFN/RBV) Dosing|Plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) levels (measured in IU/mL) were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. Sustained virologic response was defined as HCV RNA levels < the lower limit of quantification (< 25 IU/mL) 24 weeks after the last dose of pegIFN/RBV. Data are reported as the percentage of participants with SVR24.|24 weeks after the last dose of pegIFN/RBV|All 37 participants enrolled in the study received at least 1 dose of study drug and were included in the intent-to-treat population for efficacy analyses.||percentage of participants|||Number
838286|NCT01314261|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks (SVR12) Post-pegylated Interferon/Ribavirin (pegIFN/RBV) Dosing|Plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) levels (measured in IU/mL) were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. Sustained virologic response was defined as HCV RNA levels < the lower limit of quantification (< 25 IU/mL) 12 weeks after the last dose of pegIFN/RBV. Data are reported as the percentage of participants with SVR12.|12 weeks after the last dose of pegIFN/RBV|All 37 participants enrolled in the study received at least 1 dose of study drug and were included in the intent-to-treat population for efficacy analyses.||percentage of participants|||Number
838287|NCT01314261|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR)|Plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) levels (measured in IU/mL) were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. Complete EVR was defined as HCV RNA < the lower limit of quantification (< 25 IU/mL) at Week 12. Data are reported as the percentage of participants with cEVR.|Week 12|All 37 participants enrolled in the study received at least 1 dose of study drug and were included in the intent-to-treat population for efficacy analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
838388|NCT01309100|Secondary|Comfort Throughout the Day (Investigational vs Acuvue Oasys Lens)|The mean differences in comfort between the investigational lens (RD2117-01) and the Acuvue Oasys control lens. Comfort was measured on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the most favorable score.|1 week|1-Week Follow-up, All Eligible, Dispensed Eyes||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
838288|NCT01314261|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 24 Hours (AUC24) Post-dose of ABT-267|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose); and at each subsequent study visit. The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-267 using validated analytical methods. The area under the plasma concentration -time curve (AUC; measured in ng*hr/mL) is a method of measurement of the total exposure of a drug in blood plasma. The AUC24 of ABT-267 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose); and at each subsequent study visit up to Week 12|Participants received at least 1 dose of study drug and had sufficient concentrations to characterize the pharmacokinetic parameters.||ng*hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838289|NCT01314261|Primary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of ABT-267|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-267 using validated analytical methods. The time to maximum plasma concentration (Tmax; measured in hours) is the time it takes for a drug to achieve Cmax. The Tmax of ABT-267 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|Participants received at least 1 dose of study drug and had sufficient concentrations to characterize the pharmacokinetic parameters.||Hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
838290|NCT01314261|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of ABT-267|Blood samples were collected immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose). The samples were analyzed for the concentration of ABT-267 using validated analytical methods. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax; measured in ng/mL) is the highest concentration that a drug achieves in the plasma after administration in a dosing interval. The Cmax of ABT-267 was estimated using non-compartmental methods and data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation.|Immediately prior to morning dose (time 0 hours); 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours after the morning dose on Day 1; and prior to dose on Day 2 (24 hours after Day 1 dose)|Participants received at least 1 dose of study drug and had sufficient concentrations to characterize the pharmacokinetic parameters.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838291|NCT01314261|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Partial Early Virologic Response (pEVR)|Plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) levels (measured in IU/mL) were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. Partial EVR was defined as HCV RNA levels that decreased > 2 log10 IU/mL at Week 12 as compared to baseline HCV RNA levels. Data are reported as the percentage of participants with pEVR.|Baseline and Week 12|All 37 participants enrolled in the study received at least 1 dose of study drug and were included in the intent-to-treat population for efficacy analyses.||percentage of participants|||Number
838292|NCT01314261|Primary|Percentage of Participants With 4-week Rapid Virologic Response (RVR)|Plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) levels (measured in IU/mL) were determined for each sample using a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. Rapid virologic response was defined as HCV RNA levels < the lower limit of detection (< 15 IU/mL) at Week 4. Data are reported as percentage of participants with RVR.|Week 4|All 37 participants enrolled in the study received at least 1 dose of study drug and were included in the intent-to-treat population for efficacy and safety analyses.||percentage of participants|||Number
838293|NCT01314417|Secondary|Cytokine Analysis on Aqueous Samples to Assess Whether Intravitreal Injection of Methotrexate Affects Aqueous Inflammatory Cytokine Levels||Baseline and Week 74||||||
838294|NCT01314417|Secondary|Observation of Dose Reduction of Systemic Immunosuppression or Steroids Over the Course of the Study Period||Baseline and Week 74||||||
838295|NCT01314417|Secondary|Number of Participants Experiencing a Complete Resolution of Fluid as Seen on OCT at Any Time During the Study Period||Baseline and Week 74|||participants|||Number
838296|NCT01314417|Secondary|Number of Participants Presenting the Same Autofluorescence Patterns in the Study Eye as Seen on Fundus Autofluorescence (FAF) Imaging at Week 24 as Observed at Baseline|"Fundus autofluorescence patterns were assessed using fundus autofluorescence (FAF) imaging, a non-invasive technique that uses a confocal scanning ophthalmoscope to detect naturally-fluorescing lipofuscin.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 24|||participants|||Number
838297|NCT01314417|Secondary|Number of Participants Presenting the Same Autofluorescence Patterns in the Study Eye as Seen on Fundus Autofluorescence (FAF) Imaging at Week 12 as Observed at Baseline|"Fundus autofluorescence patterns were assessed using fundus autofluorescence (FAF) imaging, a non-invasive technique that uses a confocal scanning ophthalmoscope to detect naturally-fluorescing lipofuscin.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 12|||participants|||Number
838298|NCT01314417|Secondary|Number of Participants Presenting No Change in the Area of Leakage in the Study Eye as Seen on Fluorescein Angiography (FA) Imaging at Week 24 as Compared to Baseline|"Fluorescein angiography (FA) images were obtained via a standard digital imaging system (OIS, Sacramento, CA). Three retinal specialists independently graded the area of late fluorescein leakage (at approximately 10 minutes) in each eye using a region-of-interest tool in an image analysis software package (NIH ImageJ, Bethesda, MD).
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 24|||participants|||Number
838389|NCT01309100|Primary|Visual Acuity (Investigational vs Air Optix Aqua Lens)|The mean difference in distance high contrast logMAR visual acuity(VA) between the investigational lens (RD2117-01) and the Air Optix Aqua control lens.|1 week|All eligible, dispensed eyes||LogMAR|Participants|Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
838299|NCT01314417|Secondary|Number of Participants Presenting No Change in the Area of Leakage in the Study Eye as Seen on Fluorescein Angiography (FA) Imaging at Week 12 as Compared to Baseline|"Fluorescein angiography (FA) images were obtained via a standard digital imaging system (OIS, Sacramento, CA). Three retinal specialists independently graded the area of late fluorescein leakage (at approximately 10 minutes) in each eye using a region-of-interest tool in an image analysis software package (NIH ImageJ, Bethesda, MD).
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 12|||participants|||Number
838300|NCT01314417|Secondary|Changes in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Study Eye at 20 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 20|||ETDRS Letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838301|NCT01314417|Secondary|Changes in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Study Eye at 24 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 24|||ETDRS Letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
838302|NCT01314417|Secondary|Changes in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Study Eye at 16 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 16|||ETDRS Letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838303|NCT01314417|Secondary|Changes in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Study Eye at 12 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 12|||ETDRS Letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838304|NCT01314417|Secondary|Changes in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Study Eye at 8 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 8|||ETDRS Letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838305|NCT01314417|Secondary|Changes in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Best-corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Study Eye at 4 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Visual acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol. Acuity is measured as letters read on an ETDRS eye chart and the letters read equate to Snellen measurements. For example, if a participant reads between 84 and 88 letters, the equivalent Snellen measurement is 20/20.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 4|||ETDRS Letters|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838306|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Central Macular Thickness in the Study Eye at 24 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Central-subfield macular thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 24|||µm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838307|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Central Macular Thickness in the Study Eye at 20 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Central-subfield macular thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 20|||µm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838308|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Central Macular Thickness in the Study Eye at 16 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Central-subfield macular thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 16|||µm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838309|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Central Macular Thickness in the Study Eye at 12 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Central-subfield macular thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 12|||µm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838310|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Central Macular Thickness in the Study Eye at 8 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Central-subfield macular thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 8|||µm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838311|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Central Macular Thickness in the Study Eye at 4 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Central-subfield macular thickness was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 4|||µm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838312|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Excess Retinal Thickening in the Study Eye at 24 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Excess retinal thickening was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 24|||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
838313|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Excess Retinal Thickening in the Study Eye at 20 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Excess retinal thickening was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 20|||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
838314|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Excess Retinal Thickening in the Study Eye at 16 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Excess retinal thickening was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 16|||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
838315|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Excess Retinal Thickening in the Study Eye at 12 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Excess retinal thickening was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 12|||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
838316|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Excess Retinal Thickening in the Study Eye at 8 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Excess retinal thickening was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 8|||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
838805|NCT01313182|Primary|Surgical Site Infections Occurring Within 12 Months of Surgical Procedure|Measure the rate (number and percent of patients) with deep and superficial surgical site infections after primary orthopedic surgery and primary spinal fusion surgery requiring implantation of prosthetic material.|12 months|||participants|||Number
838317|NCT01314417|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Excess Retinal Thickening in the Study Eye at 4 Weeks Compared to Baseline|"Excess retinal thickening was assessed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), a non-invasive imaging technique that uses long-wavelength light to capture micrometer-resolution cross-sectional images from biological tissue.
The participant's eye that met the study eye eligibility criteria was selected as the study eye. For cases in which both eyes met the study eye eligibility criteria, the study eye was selected according to the choice of study eye in cases of bilateral disease selection criteria outlined in the eligibility criteria."|Baseline and Week 4|||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
838318|NCT01314417|Primary|Number of Participants Who Meet the Definition of Treatment Success Within 12 Weeks From Baseline.|"Treatment success is defined as achieving at least a 1-step decrease in the LogScore scale for central macular thickness.
A decrease of at least 1-step on the logOCT scale, where Change in logOCT=log(follow-up thickness/200) - log(baseline thickness/200) is considered clinically significant. A 1-step decrease is equivalent to at least a 20% improvement of central macular thickness and represents greater than twice the variability of retinal thickness measurements (approximately 25-30 µ).
Examples of OCT measurements with their corresponding LogScore, where LogScore=10xlogOCT are as follows:
LogScore 0 = OCT 200 µm, LogScore 1 = OCT 250 µm, LogScore 2 = OCT 320 µm, LogScore 3 = OCT 400 µm, LogScore 4 = OCT 500 µm, LogScore 5 = OCT 640 µm, LogScore 6 = OCT 800 µm, LogScore 7 = OCT 1000 µm"|12 weeks|||Participants|||Number
838319|NCT01314443|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Plasma Malondialdehyde at Day 7 From Day 0.|Plasma measurements of malondialdehyde, a marker of lipid peroxidation was assessed in response to smoking cessation and in combination with gamma-tocopherol (vitamin E) supplementation|Day 0 and 7 of intervention|||microM||Standard Error|Mean
838320|NCT01314443|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Plasma Gamma-tocopherol (Vitamin E) at Day 7 From Day 0.|Plasma measurements of gamma-tocopherol was assessed in response to smoking cessation and in combination with gamma-tocopherol (vitamin E) supplementation.|Day 0 and 7 of intervention|||microM||Standard Error|Mean
838321|NCT01314443|Primary|Absolute Change in Brachial Artery Flow-mediated Dilation at Day 7 From Day 0|Flow-mediated dilation (FMD) of the brachial artery is measured to assess vascular endothelial function. FMD is obtained by monitoring change in vessel diameter before and after brachial artery occlusion with a blood pressure cuff. The unit of FMD is % and is calculated using the following equation: FMD = [(peak dilation at post occlusion - vessel diameter at preocclusion)/vessel diameter at preocclusion]*100.|Day 0 and 7 of intervention|Analysis was performed on all participants completing the 7 d intervention||% of preocclusion diameter||Standard Error|Mean
838322|NCT01314703|Primary|Antimicrobial Efficacy Will be Measured by the Change (+/-) in Bacterial Count on the Skin 10 Minutes After a Single Application of Test Material Relative to the Baseline Bacterial Count.|the measure of antimicrobial efficacy was calculated by subtracting the 10 minute post test material application bacterial recovery from the baseline bacterial recovery.|10 minutes after single application of test material|27 subjects were treated with ChloraPrep on the abdomen and groin treatment sites. 26 of the 27 abdomen sites met the qualifying bacterial baseline count and were included in the analysis. 25 of the groin sites met the qualifying bacterial baseline count and were included in the analysis.||log 10 colony forming units||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838323|NCT01314716|Secondary|Time to Protocol-Defined Exacerbation (PDE)|"Protocol-defined exacerbation was defined as an acute worsening of respiratory disease that triggered the initiation of a non-study antibiotic meeting at least 3 major criteria, or 2 major and at least 2 minor criteria.
Major Criteria: increased sputum production; increased discoloration of sputum; increased dyspnea; increased cough
Minor Criteria: fever (> 38º C) measured during clinic visit; increased malaise or fatigue; forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) (L) or forced vital capacity (FVC) decreased > 10% from baseline; new or increased hemoptysis"|Baseline to Day 112|ITT Analysis Set||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838324|NCT01314716|Secondary|Change in QOL-B Respiratory Symptoms Score at Day 84|The mean (SD) change in the Respiratory Symptoms score on the QOL-B was measured from baseline to the end of Course 2 (Day 84). The QOL-B respiratory symptoms score was transformed onto a scale of 0-100, with higher scores representing a better quality of life.|Baseline to Day 84|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with scores at both baseline and Day 84 were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838325|NCT01314716|Primary|Change in QOL-B Respiratory Symptoms Score at Day 28|The mean (SD) change in the Respiratory Symptoms score on the Quality of Life Questionnaire-Bronchiectasis (QOL-B) was measured from baseline to the end of Course 1 (Day 28). The QOL-B respiratory symptoms score was transformed onto a scale of 0-100, with higher scores representing a better quality of life.|Baseline to Day 28|Participants in the ITT Analysis Set with scores at both baseline and Day 28 were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838326|NCT01314742|Primary|Duration of Mechanical Ventilation|Time on invasive mechanical ventilation will be measured in days|3 days|||ventilator-days||Standard Deviation|Mean
838327|NCT01314742|Primary|Feasibility|percentage of participants with retention|duration of study, for up to 30 months|||percentage of participants retained|||Number
838328|NCT01314872|Secondary|Extension Study: Change From Baseline in Average Daily Number of Strong Urge Episodes at Week 52|Participants were required to keep a voiding diary, recording the occurrence of each strong urge episode. The average daily number of strong urge episodes was calculated as the total number of times a participant experienced such an episode during 52-week Extension Study, divided by the total number of days of voiding kept in the participant's diary. Baseline was defined as the value at Week 0 of the Base Study.|Baseline and Week 52 of Extension Study|Full analysis set population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and have either baseline data or at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint.||Strong urge episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838338|NCT01314872|Primary|Base Study/Part 1 + Part 2: Number of Participants Who Experienced an Adverse Event (AE)|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a study drug, whether or not it is considered related to the study drug.|Part 1: up to 8 weeks; Part 2: up to 4 weeks. The time frame was an additional 2 weeks for participants not continuing to the Extension Study.|All participants as treated population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received.||Participants|||Number
838329|NCT01314872|Secondary|Extension Study: Change From Baseline in Average Daily Number of Total Incontinence Episodes at Week 52|Participants were required to keep a voiding diary, recording the occurrence of each total incontinence episode. The average daily number of total incontinence episodes was calculated as the total number of times a participant experienced such an episode during 52-week Extension Study, divided by the total divided by the total number of days of voiding kept in the participant's diary. Baseline was defined as the value at Week 0 of the Base Study.|Baseline and Week 52 of Extension Study|Full analysis set population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and have either baseline data or at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint. This outcome measure included OAB Wet participants only.||Incontinence episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838330|NCT01314872|Secondary|Extension Study: Change From Baseline in Average Daily Number of Urge Incontinence Episodes at Week 52|Participants were required to keep a voiding diary, recording the occurrence of each urge incontinence episode. The average daily number of urge incontinence episodes was calculated as the total number of times a participant experienced such an episode during 52-week Extension Study, divided by the total number of days of voiding kept in the participant's diary. Baseline was defined as the value at Week 0 of the Base Study.|Baseline and Week 52 of Extension Study|Full analysis set population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and have either baseline data or at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint. This outcome measure included OAB Wet participants only.||Urge incontinence episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838331|NCT01314872|Secondary|Extension Study: Change From Baseline in Average Daily Micturitions at Week 52|Participants were required to keep a voiding diary, recording the daily occurrence of each micturition. The average daily number of micturitions was calculated as the total number of recorded micturitions that occurred during the 52-week Extension Study, divided by the total number of days of voiding kept in the participant's diary. Baseline was defined as the value at Week 0 of the Base Study.|Baseline and Week 52 of Extension Study|Full analysis set population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and have either baseline data or at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint.||Micturitions||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838332|NCT01314872|Secondary|Base Study/Part 1: Change From Baseline in Average Daily Number of Strong Urge Episodes at Week 8|Participants were required to keep a voiding diary, recording the occurrence of each strong urge episode. The average daily number of strong urge episodes was calculated as the total number of times a participant experienced such an episode over a week (4 to 10 days) during the Base Study, divided by the total number of days of voiding kept in the participant's diary. Baseline was defined as the average daily number of strong urge episodes that occurred during the week of placebo run-in prior to Week 0 visit.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and have either baseline data or at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint.||Strong urge episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838333|NCT01314872|Secondary|Base Study/Part 1: Change From Baseline in Average Daily Number of Total Incontinence Episodes at Week 8|Participants were required to keep a voiding diary, recording the occurrence of each total incontinence episode. The average daily number of total incontinence episodes was calculated as the total number of times a participant experienced such an episode over a week (4 to 10 days) during the Base Study, divided by the total number of days of voiding kept in the participant's diary. Baseline was defined as the average daily number of total incontinence episodes that occurred during the week of placebo run-in prior to Week 0 visit.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and have either baseline data or at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint. This outcome measure included OAB Wet participants only.||Incontinence episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838334|NCT01314872|Secondary|Base Study/Part 1: Change From Baseline in Number of Urge Incontinence Episodes at Week 8|Participants were required to keep a voiding diary, recording the occurrence of each total incontinence episode. The average daily number of total incontinence episodes was calculated as the total number of times a participant experienced such an episode over a week (4 to 10 days) during the Base Study, divided by the total number of days of voiding kept in the participant's diary. Baseline was defined as the average daily number of total incontinence episodes that occurred during the week of placebo run-in prior to Week 0 visit.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and have either baseline data or at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint. This outcome measure included OAB Wet participants only.||Urge incontinence episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838335|NCT01314872|Primary|Extension Study: Number of Participants Who Had Study Medication Withdrawn Due to an AE|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a study drug, whether or not it is considered related to the study drug.|Extension: up to 52 weeks|All participants as treated population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received.||Participants|||Number
838336|NCT01314872|Primary|Extension Study: Number of Participants Who Experienced an Adverse Event (AE)|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a study drug, whether or not it is considered related to the study drug.|Extension: up to 54 weeks (including 2-week follow-up)|All participants as treated population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received.||Participants|||Number
838337|NCT01314872|Primary|Base Study/Part 1 + Part 2: Number of Participants Who Had Study Medication Withdrawn Due to an AE|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a study drug, whether or not it is considered related to the study drug.|Part 1: up to 8 weeks; Part 2: up to 4 weeks|All participants as treated population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received.||Participants|||Number
838339|NCT01314872|Primary|Base Study/Part 1: Change From Baseline in Average Daily Micturitions at Week 8|Participants were required to keep a voiding diary, recording the occurrence of each micturition. The average daily number of micturitions was calculated as the total number of micturitions that occurred over a week (4 to 10 days) during the Base Study, divided by the total number of days of voiding kept in the participant's diary. Baseline was defined as the average daily number of daily micturitions that occurred during the week of placebo run-in prior to Week 0 visit.|Baseline and Week 8|Full analysis set population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and have either baseline data or at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint.||Micturitions||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838340|NCT01315002|Primary|Error Percentage in Antisaccade Task|Three hours after the application of a nicotine or a placebo patch, performance on the antisaccade task is assessed. In the antisaccade task participants visually fixate a central stimulus which is replaced by a sudden onset target that appears at some distance to the left or right. Participants are told to refrain from looking at the peripheral target, and direct their gaze instead in the opposite direction (i.e. they have to make an antisaccade). Participants typically fail to achieve this on a significant number of trials and instead make reflexive glances towards the target (i.e. making a so-called antisaccade error). Error percentage in the antisaccade task is the unit of measure in this task. Error percentage in the antisaccade task = number of antisaccade errors / total number of trials.|Three hours after patch application|||Error Percentage in Antisaccade Task||Standard Deviation|Mean
838341|NCT01315028|Secondary|Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF)|Participant functioning was assessed using the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) (APA, 1987). The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) is a numeric scale (0 through 100) used by mental health clinicians and physicians to rate subjectively the social, occupational, and psychological functioning of adults, e.g., how well or adaptively one is meeting various problems-in-living, with higher score indicating higher functioning. The score is often given as a range, from 1 - 10 Persistent danger of severely hurting self or others (e.g., recurrent violence) or persistent inability to maintain minimal personal hygiene or serious suicidal act with clear expectation of death, to 91 - 100 No symptoms. Superior functioning in a wide range of activities, life's problems never seem to get out of hand, is sought out by others because of his or her many positive qualities.|monthly until October 2011|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838342|NCT01315028|Secondary|The Internal State Scale (ISS) (Bauer et al, 1991)|"The Internal State Scale (ISS) (Bauer et al, 1991) is a 15 item self-report scale that utilizes 100 mm visual analogue scales to assess the presence and severity of symptoms, ranging from 'not at all / rarely' to 'very much so / much of the time' (score range per item 0 to 100). The ISS assesses depressive and hypomanic / manic symptoms across four factors: perceived conflict, activation, well-being and depression. Perceived Conflict is assessed across 5 items (score range 0 to 500), Activation across 5 items (score range 0 to 500), Well-being across 3 items (score range 0 to 300) and Depression across 2 items (score range 0 to 200).
The Well-being subscale is used in conjunction with the Activation subscale for mood state discrimination. The suggested scoring algorithm is as follows:
Mood State Activation Subscale Score Well-Being Subscale Score (Hypo)Mania >155 >125 Mixed State >155 <125 Euthymia <155 >125 Depression <155"|monthly until October 2011|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838343|NCT01315028|Primary|Bech-Rafaelsen Mania Rating Scale (BRMS) [Bech et al, 1979]|"The Bech-Rafaelsen Mania Rating Scale (BRMS) [Bech et al, 1979] provides a structured format for a clinician to assess the presence and severity of 11 core symptoms of hypomania or mania.Higher BRMS score indicates more severe symptoms of mania, and each item yields a score of 0 to 4. The overall score ranges from 0 to 44. Usual cutoff points are:
0 to 15 – normal /symptom absent 15 to 20 – mild 21 to 28 – moderate >34 – severe"|Baseline to End of Study|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838344|NCT01315028|Primary|Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) (Montogomery and Asberg, 1979)|"The Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) (Montgomery and Asberg, 1979) is a semi-structured interview designed to assess the presence and severity of 10 core symptoms of depression. Higher MADRS score indicates more severe depression, and each item yields a score of 0 to 6. The overall score ranges from 0 to 60.
The questionnaire includes questions on the following symptoms 1. Apparent sadness 2. Reported sadness 3. Inner tension 4. Reduced sleep 5. Reduced appetite 6. Concentration difficulties 7. Lassitude 8. Inability to feel 9. Pessimistic thoughts 10. Suicidal thoughts. Usual cutoff points are:
0 to 6 – normal /symptom absent 7 to 19 – mild depression 20 to 34 – moderate depression >34 – severe depression"|Baseline to End of Study.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838345|NCT01315145|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a 2-point Improvement in Visual Analogue Scale|The primary endpoint for evaluating effectiveness will be the proportion of subjects in each group achieving at least a 2-point improvement from baseline in the Visual Analog Scale.|16 weeks|All participants who reported 16 week outcomes are included in this analysis.||percentage of responders|||Number
838346|NCT01315158|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experience Symptoms of Nausea and Vomiting Will be Compared Between the Two Groups|The number of participants who experience symptoms of nausea and vomiting in the two groups of patients will be recorded. This will be recorded during the follow-up phone call made 24-48 hours after the procedure.|24-48 hours|||participants|||Number
838347|NCT01315158|Secondary|Patient Tolerance as Assessed by Endoscopists|The frequency of symptoms of nausea and vomiting in the two groups of patients will be recorded. Patient tolerance of the procedure will be assessed independently by the endoscopist using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS, 0=unmanageable, 100=excellent). The patient will also score the level of tolerance using the same VAS at a routine follow-up phone call made 24-48 hours after the procedure.|24-48 hours|The data for this outcome measure was not collected and was not analyzed due to not having the necessary support to continue the study.|||||
838348|NCT01315158|Secondary|Predictors of Sedation Related Complications as Measured by Early Procedure Termination for an Alternative Sedation Related Complication||One year|||incidences|||Number
838349|NCT01315158|Secondary|Predictors of Sedation Related Complications as Measured by the Incidences of Hypotension (Defined as Systolic Blood Pressure of Less Than 90mmHg or a Decrease of More Than 25% From Baseline)||One year|||incidences|||Number
838350|NCT01315158|Secondary|Predictors of Sedation Related Complications as Measured by Hypopnea/Apnea (Defined as Fewer Than 6 Breaths/Minute Based on Capnography)||One year|||incidences|||Number
838356|NCT01315249|Secondary|Inspiratory Capacity (IC) at All-time Points (26 Weeks)|After 26 weeks of treatment, Inspiratory Capacity (IC) was measured via spirometry, conducted according to internationally accepted standards. The mean of 3 acceptable measurements was calculated and reported in liters.|26 weeks|"Inspiratory capacity was measured for a subset of patients QVA149 group: (78 patients (30.2%)) at baseline and 49-73 patients contributing observations at post-baseline visits.
flut/salm group: (86 patients (32.6%)) at baseline and 60-79 patients contributing observations at post-baseline visits."||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838357|NCT01315249|Secondary|Inspiratory Capacity (IC) at All-time Points (12 Weeks)|After 12 weeks of treatment, Inspiratory Capacity (IC) was measured via spirometry, conducted according to internationally accepted standards. The mean of 3 acceptable measurements was calculated and reported in liters.|12 weeks|"Inspiratory capacity was measured for a subset of patients QVA149 group: (78 patients (30.2%)) at baseline and 49-73 patients contributing observations at post-baseline visits.
flut/salm group: (86 patients (32.6%)) at baseline and 60-79 patients contributing observations at post-baseline visits."||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838358|NCT01315249|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Symptom Scores Reported Using the Ediary|"Participants maintained an ediary to record daily symptom scores (AM and PM) over 12 weeks and 26 weeks of treatment. This analysis compares the mean symptom scores over 12 weeks and 26 weeks compared to baseline. The diary records morning and evening daily clinical symptoms including cough, wheezing, shortness of breath, sputum volume, sputum purulence, night time awakenings and rescue medication use.
Scale ranges: ranges are 0 to 3 with varying scale descriptions that pertain to the question being asked.
0 is the minimum score = “none” or “No symptoms” or “never” or “No”
= mild, a little
= moderate
= severe For the scale range provided, high values represent a worse outcome."|12 weeks and 26 weeks|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. FAS were used to analyze all efficacy endpoints, unless otherwise stated. Following the intention-to-treat principle, patients in the FAS were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838359|NCT01315249|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Daily Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication|Participants maintained a diary to record the daily number of puffs of rescue medication used to treat COPD symptoms.|Baseline, 12 weeks and 26 weeks|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. FAS were used to analyze all efficacy endpoints, unless otherwise stated. Following the intention-to-treat principle, patients in the FAS were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to.||puffs||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838360|NCT01315249|Secondary|Total Score of the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ-C)|The total score of the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ-C) is a health related quality of life questionnaire consisting of 51 items in three components: symptoms, activity, and impacts. The lowest possible value is zero and the highest 100. Higher values correspond to greater impairment in quality of life.|12 weeks and 26 weeks|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. FAS were used to analyze all efficacy endpoints, unless otherwise stated. Following the intention-to-treat principle, patients in the FAS were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838361|NCT01315249|Secondary|Focal Score of the Transitional Dyspnea Index (TDI)|Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) captures changes from baseline. The TDI score is based on three domains with each domain scored from -3 (major deterioration) to +3 (major improvement), to give an overall score of -9 to +9, a negative score indicating a deterioration from baseline. A TDI focal score of 1 is considered to be a clinically significant improvement.|12 weeks and 26 weeks|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. FAS were used to analyze all efficacy endpoints, unless otherwise stated. Following the intention-to-treat principle, patients in the FAS were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838362|NCT01315249|Secondary|Forced Vital Capacity at All-time Points (Week 26)|"Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. FVC was assessed via spirometry. A positive change from baseline in FVC indicates improvement in lung function.
This outcome measures absolute values at -45 min, -15 min predose; 5 min, 30 min, 1 hr, 2hr, 4 hr, 8 hr, 12 hr post-dose on week 26. Results are obtained from linear mixed model."|-45 min, -15 min predose; 5 min, 30 min, 1 hr, 2hr, 4 hr, 8 hr, 12 hr post-dose on week 26|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. FAS were used to analyze all efficacy endpoints, unless otherwise stated. Following the intention-to-treat principle, patients in the FAS were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838363|NCT01315249|Secondary|Forced Vital Capacity at All-time Points (Week 12)|"Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. FVC was assessed via spirometry. A positive change from baseline in FVC indicates improvement in lung function.
This outcome measures absolute values at -45 min, -15 min predose; 5 min, 30 min, 1 hr, 2hr, 4 hr, 8 hr, 12 hr post-dose week 12. Results are obtained from linear mixed model."|-45 min, -15 min predose; 5 min, 30 min, 1 hr, 2hr, 4 hr, 8 hr, 12 hr post-dose on week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. FAS were used to analyze all efficacy endpoints, unless otherwise stated. Following the intention-to-treat principle, patients in the FAS were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838364|NCT01315249|Secondary|Standardized Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second Area Under the Curve (FEV1 AUC) 0-12 Hours|Standardized Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) was measured with spirometry conducted according to internationally accepted standards. Measurements were made between 0 and 12 hours after treatment. FEV1 was normalized by 12 hours (divided by time). This outcome measures absolute values at week 12. Results are obtained from linear mixed model.|Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) includes all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. FAS were used to analyze all efficacy endpoints, unless otherwise stated. Following the intention-to-treat principle, patients in the FAS were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840534|NCT01336894|Primary|3-year Overall Survival (OS) Rate|Overall survival is defined as the time from randomization until death from any cause.|Up to 3 years post-randomization|Study terminated prematurely. Planned analyses was not performed due to the nature of the closure endpoint data is not available.|||||
838365|NCT01315249|Primary|Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second Area Under the Curve (FEV1 AUC) 0-12|Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) was calculated as the volume of air forcibly exhaled in one second as measured by a spirometer. FEV1 was normalized by 12 hours (divided by time). This outcome measures absolute values at week 26. Results are obtained from linear mixed model.|Week 26|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug. FAS were used to analyze all efficacy endpoints, unless otherwise stated. Following the intention-to-treat principle, patients in the FAS were analyzed according to the treatment they were randomized to.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838366|NCT01315574|Secondary|Tear Film Break-Up Time|Tear Film Break-Up Time (TBUT) is a clinical test used to quantify changes in dry eye symptoms. The Tear Film Break-Up time is the number of seconds between the subjects last blink and the detection of the first dry spot in the tear film.|At the 6 month follow-up time point|Two subjects in each arm/group did not complete 6-month follow up visit. Data was not collected and analysis not completed.||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
838367|NCT01315574|Secondary|Corneal Fluorescein Staining Score|Corneal Fluorescein Staining score was used in this study to quantify changes in dry eye symptoms. Corneal fluorescein staining scores range from 0 to 4 points: 0=non-staining to 4 =regional whole staining of the cornea. Higher scores indicate worse eye condition.|At the 6 month follow-up time point|Two subjects in each arm/group did not complete 6-month follow up visit. Data was not collected and analysis not completed.||units on a scale (1-4)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838368|NCT01315574|Primary|Effectiveness in Lowering Intraocular Pressure|Applanation tonometry will be used to measure patients' intraocular pressure|At the 6 month follow-up time point|Two subjects in each arm/group did not complete 6-month follow up visit. Data was not collected and analysis not completed.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
838369|NCT01315665|Secondary|Measure of Neutrophil Migration Into the Gingival Crevices|Change in gingival neutrophils measured after 5 days of study treatment (consuming broccoli sprouts). Patients will perform mouthwashes with normal saline. Neutrophil counts will be performed on fresh samples. Acridine orange will be added to the saline rinses and neutrophils will be counted under the microscope.|Baseline and end of 5 day treatment period|||Neutrophils/mL (Log10)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838370|NCT01315665|Secondary|Measures of Oxidative Stress in Urine|Change in urine bromotyrosine (measured by mass spectrometry) will be measured after 5 days of study treatment (consuming broccoli sprouts).|Baseline and end of 5 day treatment period|||ng/mg creatinine (Log10)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838371|NCT01315665|Secondary|Measures of Glutathione From Blood Lymphocytes|Change in lymphocyte glutathione measurements after 5 days of study treatment (consuming broccoli sprouts).|Baseline and end of 5 day treatment period|Not enough blood could be obtained from one of the healthy volunteers. Therefore, glutathione from blood lymphocytes could not be evaluated from that healthy volunteer. With respect to this outcome measure, only results from 9 healthy volunteers are reported.||Micro Molar||Standard Deviation|Mean
838372|NCT01315665|Secondary|Measures of Lipid Peroxidation in Nasal Epithelial Cells|Products of lipid peroxidation will be determined by western blot analysis on nasal epithelial cells obtained by curettage after 5 days of study treatment (consuming broccoli sprouts)|End of 5 day treatment period|Data not collected and will not be analyzed.|||||
838373|NCT01315665|Primary|Nrf2 Activation in Nasal Epithelial Cells|Number of subjects with activated Nrf-2 in the cytoplasm of nasal epithelial cells after 5 days of study treatment (consuming broccoli sprouts)|Baseline and of end of 5 day treatment period|||participants|||Number
838374|NCT01315847|Primary|Brain CGRP RO Post Telcagepant Obtained by PET Imaging Using [11C]MK-4232 Tracer at Baseline and After a Therapeutic Dose of Telcagepant (140 mg) in Participants With Migraine During Period When Migraine is Absent (Interictal Phase)(Part III, Period 2)|Brain CGRP RO post telcagepant was determined by change in [11C]MK-4232 PET tracer biokinetics at baseline and post telcagepant administration. Using PET brain images acquired over ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose, ROIs were drawn throughout the cerebral cortex and white matter, striatum, thalamus, cerebellum and pons. The ROIs were projected onto all frames of the dynamic PET scans in order to generate [11C]MK-4232 tissue TACs. Serial arterial blood samples for measurement of plasma radioactivity and [11C]MK-4232 concentrations were collected during the PET scans. These samples provided the arterial input function for a two-tissue compartmental model of [11C]MK-4232 tracer biokinetics. VT, an index of receptor density, was estimated by fitting the two-tissue compartmental model to the PET [11C]MK-4232 TACs. The change in VT between the baseline and post telcagepant PET studies was used to quantify the brain CGRP RO.|Part III, Period 2 Baseline, at ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose; and Part III, Period 2 post telcagepant, at ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose|Results could not be obtained for this measure. For Part III data, the curve fits were unsatisfactory (model curves did not pass through the TAC data points) precluding the quantification of the VT and RO|||||
838375|NCT01315847|Primary|Brain CGRP RO Post Telcagepant Obtained by PET Imaging Using [11C]MK-4232 Tracer at Baseline and After a Therapeutic Dose of Telcagepant (140 mg) in Participants With Migraine During a Migraine Attack (Ictal Phase)(Part III, Period 1)|Brain CGRP RO post telcagepant was determined by change in [11C]MK-4232 PET tracer biokinetics at baseline and post telcagepant administration. Using PET brain images acquired over ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose, ROIs were drawn throughout the cerebral cortex and white matter, striatum, thalamus, cerebellum and pons. The ROIs were projected onto all frames of the dynamic PET scans in order to generate [11C]MK-4232 tissue TACs. Serial arterial blood samples for measurement of plasma radioactivity and [11C]MK-4232 concentrations were collected during the PET scans. These samples provided the arterial input function for a two-tissue compartmental model of [11C]MK-4232 tracer biokinetics. VT, an index of receptor density, was estimated by fitting the two-tissue compartmental model to the PET [11C]MK-4232 TACs. The change in VT between the baseline and post telcagepant PET studies was used to quantify the brain CGRP RO.|Part III, Period 1 Baseline, at ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose; and Part III, Period 1 post telcagepant, at ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose|Results could not be obtained for this measure. For Part III data, the curve fits were unsatisfactory (model curves did not pass through the TAC data points) precluding the quantification of the VT and RO|||||
838439|NCT01316224|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Joint Symptoms|Joint symptoms were evaluated by presence or absence of peripheral arthritis, morning stiffness and participant reported joint symptoms.|At Baseline, Visit 3 (month 6) and Visit 4 (month 12)|Participants who completed the visits (visit 3 and visit 4) to the rheumatologist and for whom information was available.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838376|NCT01315847|Primary|Average Telcagepant Plasma Concentration During PET Imaging Using [11C]MK-4232 Tracer After a Therapeutic Dose of Telcagepant (140 mg) in Healthy Participants (Part I, Period 2)|In Part I, Period 2 blood samples for determination of plasma telcagepant concentrations were obtained prior to the telcagepant dose (time 0) and at 1, 2, 3 and 4 hours post telcagepant dose. The average plasma telcagepant concentration during the PET scan was determined, calculated as the area under the plasma telcagepant concentration versus time curve during the PET scanning interval divided by the duration of the PET scanning interval.|Part 1, Period 2 post telcagepant, at ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose|Participants who received both telcagepant and [11C]MK-4232 during Part I, Period 2 of study, had evaluable data and were compliant with the the study protocol||μM||Standard Deviation|Mean
838377|NCT01315847|Primary|Brain CGRP RO Post Telcagepant Obtained by PET Imaging Using [11C]MK-4232 Tracer at Baseline and After a Therapeutic Dose of Telcagepant (140 mg) in Healthy Participants (Part I, Period 2)|Brain CGRP RO post telcagepant was determined by change in [11C]MK-4232 PET tracer biokinetics at baseline and post telcagepant administration. Using PET brain images acquired over ~0-90 miniutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose, ROIs were drawn throughout the cerebral cortex and white matter, striatum, thalamus, cerebellum and pons. The ROIs were projected onto all frames of the dynamic PET scans in order to generate [11C]MK-4232 tissue TACs. Serial arterial blood samples for measurement of plasma radioactivity and [11C]MK-4232 concentrations were collected during the PET scans. These samples provided the arterial input function for a two-tissue compartmental model of [11C]MK-4232 tracer biokinetics. VT, an index of receptor density, was estimated by fitting the two-tissue compartmental model to the PET [11C]MK-4232 TACs. The change in VT between the baseline and post telcagepant PET studies was used to quantify the brain CGRP RO.|Part I Baseline, at ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose; and Part I, Period 2 post telcagepant, at ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose|Participants who received both telcagepant and [11C]MK-4232 during Part I, Period 2 of study, had evaluable data and were compliant with the the study protocol||percent CGRP RO|||Number
838378|NCT01315847|Primary|Average Telcagepant Plasma Concentration During PET Imaging Using [11C]MK-4232 Tracer After a Maximum Dose of Telcagepant (1120 mg) in Healthy Participants (Part I, Period 1)|In Part I, Period 1 blood samples for determination of plasma telcagepant concentrations were obtained prior to the telcagepant dose (time 0) and at 2, 3, 4 and 5 hours post telcagepant dose. The average plasma telcagepant concentration during the PET scan was determined, calculated as the area under the plasma telcagepant concentration versus time curve during the PET scanning interval divided by the duration of the PET scanning interval.|Part I, Period 1 post telcagepant, at ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose|Participants who received both telcagepant and [11C]MK-4232 during Part I, Period 1 of study, had evaluable data and were compliant with the the study protocol||μM||Standard Deviation|Mean
838379|NCT01315847|Primary|Brain Calcitonin Gene-related Peptide (CGRP) Receptor Occupancy (RO) Post Telcagepant Obtained by PET Imaging Using [11C]MK-4232 Tracer at Baseline and After a Maximum Dose of Telcagepant (1120 mg) in Healthy Participants (Part I, Period 1)|Brain CGRP RO post telcagepant was determined by change in [11C]MK-4232 PET tracer biokinetics at baseline and post telcagepant administration. Using PET brain images acquired over ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose, regions of interest (ROIs) were drawn throughout cerebral cortex and white matter, striatum, thalamus, cerebellum and pons. The ROIs were projected onto all frames of the dynamic PET scans in order to generate [11C]MK-4232 tissue time-activity curves (TACs). Serial arterial blood samples for measurement of plasma radioactivity and [11C]MK-4232 concentrations were collected during the PET scans. These samples provided the arterial input function for a two-tissue compartmental model of [11C]MK-4232 tracer biokinetics. Total volume of distribution (VT), an index of receptor density, was estimated by fitting the two-tissue compartmental model to the PET [11C]MK-4232 TACs. Change in VT between baseline and post telcagepant PET studies was used to quantify the brain CGRP RO.|Part I Baseline, at ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose; and Part I, Period 1 post telcagepant, at ~0-90 minutes after [11C]MK-4232 dose|Participants who received both telcagepant and [11C]MK-4232 during Part I, Period 1 of study, had evaluable data and were compliant with the the study protocol||percent CGRP RO|||Number
838380|NCT01315847|Primary|Number of Participants With AEs (Part III)|Any AEs occurring among participants (all were migraine patients) in Part III of study were recorded. An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the administration of the study drug, was also an AE.|Up 14 days after the last dose of telcagepant and/or [11C]MK-4232 in Part III of study (Up to approximately 6 months)|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication (telcagepant and/or [11C]MK-4232) in Part III of study.||participants|||Number
838381|NCT01315847|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) (Part I)|Any AEs occurring among participants (all were healthy subjects) in Part I of study were recorded. An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function or chemistry of the body temporally associated with study drug administration, whether or not considered related to the study drug. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition which was temporally associated with the administration of the study drug, was also an AE.|Up 14 days after the last dose of telcagepant and/or [11C]MK-4232 in Part I of study (Up to approximately 14 weeks)|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication (telcagepant and/or [11C]MK-4232) in Part I of study.||participants|||Number
838382|NCT01316042|Primary|Change in Serum DHEAS Levels|Change in DHEAS level was constructed per subject as the 1-year measurement minus the baseline measurement. Only descriptive statistics are provided, statistical tests were not conducted given the extremely small sample size per group.|1 year|||ug/dL||Full Range|Mean
838383|NCT01316055|Secondary|The Steady State Fractional Clearance, Calculated as the Dose / AUC(0-12) (CL/Fss) of Dalfampridine-ER 7.5 mg Tablets in Healthy Adult Volunteers and Those With Mild and Moderate Renal Impairment and Examine Between-group Differences.||7 days|ITT||liter/hour||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838384|NCT01316055|Secondary|The Maximum Measured Plasma Concentration (Cmax) at Steady State, of Dalfampridine-ER 7.5 mg Tablets in Healthy Adult Volunteers and Those With Mild and Moderate Renal Impairment and Examine Between-group Differences.||7 days|ITT||nanogram/milliliter||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
838390|NCT01309204|Primary|Mean Diurnal IOP Change From Baseline at Month 3|Mean Diurnal IOP Change from Baseline at Month 3 (ie, the subject IOP change from baseline averaged over the 9 AM and + 2 h time points at Month 3) was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. The study drug was instilled approximately 15 minutes after conducting the 9AM IOP measurement. One eye from each subject was chosen as the study eye, and only data for the study eye were used for the efficacy analysis. A higher IOP can be a greater risk factor for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage).|Baseline (Day 1), Month 3|Per Protocol (PP): All subjects who received study medication, satisfied prerandomization inclusion/exclusion criteria, and completed at least 1 scheduled on-therapy study visit. In addition, individual subject visits and data points that did not satisfy the protocol criteria may have been excluded.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838391|NCT01309243|Secondary|Development of HIV-1 Drug Resistance Through Week 96, Participants With Viral Resistance|Resistance Analysis Set: participants with either suboptimal virologic response or virologic rebound were considered to have virologic failure and were analyzed. Suboptimal virologic response was assessed at Week 8 and was defined as having HIV-1 RNA ≥ 50 copies/mL and < 1-log10 reduction from baseline at the Week 8 visit, which was confirmed at the subsequent visit. Virologic rebound was defined as having 2 consecutive visits with HIV-1 RNA ≥ 400 copies/mL after achieving HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL, or as having 2 consecutive visits with > 1 log10 increase in HIV-1 RNA from their nadir. In addition, subjects who were on study drugs, had not been analyzed previously, and who had HIV-1 RNA ≥ 400 copies/mL at Week 48, Week 96, or their last visit (at or after Week 8) were also analyzed for resistance at their last visit. Subsequent to the first resistance testing, subjects experiencing repeated confirmed virologic failure were assessed for resistance retesting on a case-by-case basis.|Baseline to Week 96|Resistance Analysis Set||participants|||Number
838392|NCT01309243|Secondary|Development of HIV-1 Drug Resistance Through Week 96, All Participants|Participants who experienced either suboptimal virologic response or virologic rebound were considered to have virologic failure and were analyzed for resistance. Suboptimal virologic response was assessed at Week 8 and was defined as having HIV-1 RNA ≥ 50 copies/mL and < 1-log10 reduction from baseline at the Week 8 visit, which was confirmed at the subsequent visit. Virologic rebound was defined as having 2 consecutive visits with HIV-1 RNA ≥ 400 copies/mL after achieving HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL, or as having 2 consecutive visits with > 1 log10 increase in HIV-1 RNA from their nadir. In addition, subjects who were on study drugs, had not been analyzed previously, and who had HIV-1 RNA ≥ 400 copies/mL at Week 48, Week 96, or their last visit (at or after Week 8) were also analyzed for resistance at their last visit. Subsequent to the first resistance testing, subjects experiencing repeated confirmed virologic failure were assessed for resistance retesting on a case-by-case basis.|Baseline to Week 96|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
838393|NCT01309243|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Triglycerides at Week 48||Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed using the missing = excluded method.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838394|NCT01309243|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Low-density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol at Week 48||Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed using the missing = excluded method.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838395|NCT01309243|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting High-density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol at Week 48||Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed using the missing = excluded method.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838396|NCT01309243|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Total Cholesterol at Week 48||Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed using the missing = excluded method.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838397|NCT01309243|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4 Cell Count at Week 96||Baseline to Week 96|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data were analyzed; the missing = excluded method was used in which all participants with missing data were excluded from analysis.||cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838398|NCT01309243|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4 Cell Count at Week 48||Baseline to Week 48|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data were analyzed; the missing = excluded method was used in which all participants with missing data were excluded from analysis.||cells/μL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838399|NCT01309243|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 96|The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 96 was analyzed using the US FDA snapshot algorithm.|Baseline to Week 96|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
838400|NCT01309243|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48|"The percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 48 was analyzed using the US FDA snapshot algorithm.
The snapshot algorithm defines a patient's virologic response status using only the viral load at the predefined time point within an allowed window of time."|Week 48|Full Analysis Set: participants who were randomized into the study and received at least 1 dose of study drug||percentage of participants|||Number
838401|NCT01309269|Primary|Average Methoxy Polyethylene Glycol-epoetin Beta Dose|Average methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta dose per application by study month. Mean values were taken when more than 1 application was documented for a participant during the time period considered.|Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24|Effectiveness Population I. N (number of participants analyzed) = participants evaluable for this measure. n = participants with methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta dose values during study period considered.||microgram (mcg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838402|NCT01309269|Primary|Percentage of Participants Within Pre-defined Range of Hemoglobin Values|Percentage of participants with hemoglobin values within the following pre-defined ranges is presented: 11-12 gram/deciliter (g/dL), 10–12 g/dL, 11-13 g/dL, and 10-13 g/dL.|Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24|Effectiveness Population I. N (number of participants analyzed) = participants evaluable for this measure. n = participants with hemoglobin values during study period considered.||percentage of participants|||Number
838464|NCT01316315|Secondary|Measurement of Change in Methacholine PC20 From Baseline Compared With Placebo 8 Hours After Dosing|These assessments will be recorded at various times over the study - Methacholine PC20 at screening, and at 8, 24, 48 hours postdose and Day 7; spirometry assessments will be recorded at screening, at 2, 4, 6, 8, 24, 48 hours postdose and Day 7.|8 hours|Any patient that received a dose of N6022 or Placebo||mg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
838403|NCT01309269|Primary|Hemoglobin Levels at Monthly Intervals|Hemoglobin levels were measured as grams/deciliter (g/dL).|Prior to Day 1, Months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24|Effectiveness Population I: all participants for whom at least 1 hemoglobin value was documented after the first application of methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta during the study course. N (number of participants analyzed) = participants evaluable for this measure. n = participants with hemoglobin values during study period considered.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838404|NCT01309282|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Any Adverse Events or Serious Adverse Events|An Adverse Events (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. A Serious Adverse Events (SAE) is any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in death, are life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or results in disability/incapacity, and congenital anomaly/birth defect|Up to Month 24|Safety population was used for the analysis which included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not and who complied with the criteria for inclusion.||Participants|||Number
838405|NCT01309282|Secondary|Number of Participants With Incidence of Infectious Events|Follow-up of the infectious events was done after Month 6 visit, Month 12 visit and Month 24 visit.|At Months 6, 12 and 24|Safety population was used for the analysis which included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not and who complied with the criteria for inclusion.||Participants|||Number
838406|NCT01309282|Secondary|Number of Participants With Incidence of Infusion Reactions or Injection Site Reactions|An infusion reaction or injection site reaction is an event that occurs after infusion or injection which may include hypersensitivity reactions or anaphylactic reactions.|At Months 6, 12 and 24|Safety population was used for the analysis which included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, whether prematurely withdrawn from the study or not and who complied with the criteria for inclusion.||Participants|||Number
838407|NCT01309282|Secondary|Number of Participants on Each Pattern of Re-treatment|"There are two patterns of re-treatment, namely treat-to-target and according to the clinic.
Treat-to-target: a new cycle every 6 months if not in remission, with the participant receiving no new course of treatment as long as he is in remission.
On demand (according to clinic): a new cycle when, in an assessment performed at least 16 weeks after the last treatment cycle, the participant shows moderate or high disease activity [DAS28 > 3.2 or difference in DAS28 (ΔDAS28) > 0.6]"|Up to Month 24|The analysis was conducted with all 9 participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining the full analysis set.||Participants|||Number
838408|NCT01309282|Secondary|Reason for Change From First TNF-inhibitor Therapy to Rituximab|Adverse event, primary and secondary insufficient responses and monoclonal gammopathy were the reasons for starting rituximab therapy.|At Screening|The analysis was conducted with all 9 participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining the full analysis set.||Participants|||Number
838409|NCT01309282|Secondary|Mean Change Form Baseline in Functional Capacity at Month 24|The functional capacity was analyzed using Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI). It is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 domains (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping and activities of daily living). Responses in each domain are scored from 0 to 3 (0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do). Overall score was computed as sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains. A total possible score ranged from 0 (best) to 3 (worst).|Baseline (Day 0) and Month 24|The analysis was conducted with all the participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining full analysis set (n=9). However, the results are presented only for the participants with available data and who completed Month 24 visit (n=7).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838410|NCT01309282|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Severity of Pain at Month 24|The patient's assessment of pain was performed using a 100 mm VAS ranging from no pain (0) to unbearable pain (100). The distance in mm from the left edge of the scale was measured. A negative change from Baseline score indicates improvement in pain intensity.|Baseline (Day 0) and Month 24|The analysis was conducted with all the participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining full analysis set (n=9). However, data is presented only for those participants who completed Month 24 visit (n=8).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838411|NCT01309282|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Month 24|The Patient’s Global Assessment of disease activity was assessed using VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as “no disease activity” (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm, as “maximum disease activity” (maximum arthritis disease activity).Change from Baseline = score at observation minus score at Baseline. An increase in score from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement.|Baseline (Day 0) and Month 24|The analysis was conducted with all the participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining full analysis set (n=9). However, data is presented only for those participants who completed Month 24 visit (n=8).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838412|NCT01309282|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity At Month 24|The Physician’s Global Assessment of disease activity was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The left-hand extreme of the line equals 0 mm, and is described as “no disease activity” (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right-hand extreme equals 100 mm, as “maximum disease activity” (maximum arthritis disease activity).Change from Baseline = score at observation minus score at Baseline. An increase in score from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement.|Baseline (Day 0) and Month 24|The analysis was conducted with all the participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining full analysis set (n=9). However, data is presented only for those participants who completed Month 24 visit (n=8).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838413|NCT01309282|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in C-reactive Protein at Month 24|The C-reactive protein is an inflammation marker. High levels of this protein indicate inflammation in diseases such as RA. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Day 0) and Month 24|The analysis was conducted with all the participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining full analysis set (n=9). However, data is presented only for those participants who completed Month 24 visit (n=8).||Milligrams/liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
838414|NCT01309282|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in ESR at Month 24|The ESR is an acute phase reactant and a measure of inflammation. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Day 0) and Month 24|The analysis was conducted with all the participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining full analysis set (n=9). However, data is presented only for those participants who completed Month 24 visit (n=8).||Millimeter (mm)/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
838415|NCT01309282|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in SJC at Month 24|A swollen joint count (SJC) is the most specific clinical method to quantify abnormalities in participants with RA. It reflects the amount of inflamed synovial tissue. Twenty-eight joints were assessed for swelling. Joints were classified as swollen (1)/ not swollen (0) giving a total possible SJC score of 0 to 28. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Day 0) and Month 24|The analysis was conducted with all the participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining full analysis set (n=9). However, data is presented only for those participants who completed Month 24 visit (n=8).||Swollen joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
838416|NCT01309282|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in TJC at Month 24|A tender joint count (TJC) is the most specific clinical method to quantify abnormalities in participants with RA. It is associated with the level of pain. Twenty-eight joints were assessed for tenderness. Joints were classified as tender (1)/not tender (0) giving a total possible TJC score of 0 to 28. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Day 0) and Month 24|The analysis was conducted with all the participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining full analysis set (n=9). However, data is presented only for those participants who completed Month 24 visit (n=8).||Tender joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
838417|NCT01309282|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Disease-activity Score 28-Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate at Month 24|The disease-activity score 28 (DAS28) score is a measure of validated instrument for the assessment of the overall severity of RA disease activity calculated using the tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), patient's global assessment of disease activity, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for a total possible score of 2 to 10. Higher values indicate higher disease activity. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Day 0) and Month 24|The analysis was conducted with all the participants who complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, thus defining full analysis set (n=9). However, data is presented only for those participants who completed Month 24 visit (n=8).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838418|NCT01309308|Secondary|The Duration of Latency Until Labor|The period (in days) from the last cervical measurement to the start of second phase of labor.|15 days|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
838419|NCT01309308|Primary|Cervical Shortening|Cervix 1 was measured at the sagittal plane of cervix from external to the internal os. Two days later cervix 2 was measured the same way. The cervical shortening was calculated from subtracting cervix 1 from cervix 2.|2days|analysis was per person who delivered||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
838420|NCT01309360|Secondary|Number of Participants With Subjective Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability.|In groups A, B and C was determined the rate of subjective clinical signs of increased Met-Hb-Levels : headaches or dizziness, when correlated with the peak-Met-Hb-Level.|Outpatients were followed for the duration of hospital stay, an average of six hours.|||participants|||Number
838421|NCT01309360|Primary|Onset Time.|Time from beginning of administration of the local anesthetic until complete sensoric block.|within 60 minutes after administration of the local anesthetic|In some cases the investigators were not able to exactly determine an onset time, so in cases of block failure (supplementation needed) or emergency situations outside this study (onset time not examined). Therefore the number of participants analyzed concerning onset time is lower then the total number of outpatients in each group.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
838422|NCT01309360|Primary|Number of Participants With Complete Motor Blocks|To examine the extent of the motor block the manual muscle function test after Vladimir Janda was used. As a complete motor block was defined, when no motion (grade zero after Janda) of muscles innervated by the four blocked nerves (musculocutaneous, median, radial and ulnar nerve) was observed within 60 minutes after administration of the local anesthetic.|Within 60 minutes after administration of the local anesthetic|The analysis was per protocol.||participants|||Number
838423|NCT01309360|Secondary|Number of Participants With Objective Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|In groups A, B and C was determined the rate of objective clinical signs of increased Met-Hb-levels : drops in oxygen saturation <93% using pulseoximetry or lip cyanosis.|Outpatients were followed for the duration of hospital stay, an average of six hours.|||participants|||Number
838424|NCT01309360|Secondary|Maximum Concentrations of Methemoglobin|Concentration of Methemoglobin (Met-Hb) was measured using spectrophotometry prior to the anesthesia (baseline value) and then hourly after performing the block until a clear decrease became apparent. The maximum amount was reached in every case two or three hours after administration of the local anesthetic.|0,1,2,3,4 hours post-dose|Methemoglobin (Met-Hb) levels were measured using spectrophotometry prior to the anesthesia (baseline value) and then hourly after performing the block until a clear decrease became apparent.The mean maximum Met-Hb was estimated in each group.||percentage of methemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
838425|NCT01309360|Primary|Number of Participants With Complete Sensory Block|The number of outpatients with complete sensory block of all 4 nerves (n.musculocutaneous, n.radialis, n.ulnaris,n.medianus) was registrated in each group.|60 minutes after administration of the local anesthetic|The analysis was per protocol.||participants|||Number
838465|NCT01316315|Primary|Measurement of Change in Methacholine PC20 From Baseline Compared With Placebo 24 Hours After Dosing|These assessments will be recorded at various times over the study - Methacholine PC20 at screening, and at 8, 24, 48 hours postdose and Day 7; spirometry assessments will be recorded at screening, at 2, 4, 6, 8, 24, 48 hours postdose and Day 7.|24 hours|Any patient that received a dose of N6022 or placebo.||mg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
838426|NCT01309386|Secondary|Average Change From Baseline in Amount of Rescue Medication Over Time|Rescue medications are medicines that are administered to the participants when the efficacy of the study drug is not satisfactory, or the effect of the study drug is too great and is likely to cause a hazard to the participant, or to manage an emergency situation. Supplemental analgesics (drug used to control pain) were used as rescue medication. Average amount was the averages of all doses recorded during the baseline period or during each week (Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8).|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8|Full analysis set (FAS) population included all participants who were randomly assigned, received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-baseline efficacy data.||Milligram (mg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838427|NCT01309386|Secondary|Number of Doses of Rescue Medication Over Time|Number of doses of rescue medication over time were assessed. Rescue medications are medicines that are administered to the participants when the efficacy of the study drug is not satisfactory, or the effect of the study drug is too great and is likely to cause a hazard to the participant, or to manage an emergency situation. Supplemental analgesics (drug used to control pain) were used as rescue medication.|Baseline up to Week 8|Full analysis set (FAS) population included all participants who were randomly assigned, received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-baseline efficacy data.||Morphine-equivalent doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
838428|NCT01309386|Secondary|Total Number of Days of Rescue Medication Over Time|Total number of days of rescue medication over time were assessed. Rescue medications are medicines that are administered to the participants when the efficacy of the study drug is not satisfactory, or the effect of the study drug is too great and is likely to cause a hazard to the participant, or to manage an emergency situation. Supplemental analgesics (drug used to control pain) were used as rescue medication.|Baseline up to Week 8|Full analysis set (FAS) population included all participants who were randomly assigned, received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-baseline efficacy data.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
838429|NCT01309386|Secondary|Number of Participants With Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)|"The PGIC is a single-item questionnaire designed to provide an overall assessment of treatment from the participant's perspective since the start of the study. It is measured on a 7-point scale, where 1=very much improved and 7=very much worse. A participant is considered a responder if they have a response of very much improved or much improved."|Week 1, 4 and 8|Full analysis set (FAS) population; here ‘N’ signifies those participants evaluable for this outcome measure and ‘n’ signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at the specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||Participants|||Number
838430|NCT01309386|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Treatment Due to Lack of Efficacy|Number of participants who discontinued the treatment due to lack of efficacy were assessed throughout the study.|Baseline up to Week 8|Full analysis set (FAS) population included all participants who were randomly assigned, received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-baseline efficacy data.||Participants|||Number
838431|NCT01309386|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8|Average pain intensity was assessed using an 11-point NRS to measure the pain level for the past 24-hours where 0=no pain to 10=pain as bad as you can imagine.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8|Full analysis set (FAS) population included all participants who were randomly assigned, received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-baseline efficacy data. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at the specified time point for each arm group, respectively.||Unit on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838432|NCT01309386|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Pain Control|Pain control was considered to be achieved for participants who met both of the following criteria for any consecutive 3 days during the first week of treatment period: a) Change from baseline of mean 24 hour numerical rating scale (NRS) (an 11-point NRS is used to measure the pain level where 0=no pain to 10=pain as bad as you can imagine) score less than +1.5, and b) when the frequency of rescue medication was twice or less per day.|Week 1|Full analysis set (FAS) population included all participants who were randomly assigned, received at least 1 dose of study drug and had post-baseline efficacy data.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838433|NCT01309451|Primary|OCT CST|change in optical coherence tomography central subfield thickness|change in OCT CST from baseline to twelve months|||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
838434|NCT01309451|Primary|Change in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Measured Using Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Methodology at Month 12 Compared to Baseline|Visual Acuity was measured with the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity test. Unit of measure is based on the ETDRS letter score scale, 0-97, where 0 = worst and 97 = best.|baseline to 12 month|The unit of measure is EYES rather than actual number of participants||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
838435|NCT01316224|Secondary|Change in the Subject Proportion That Achieved a PASI (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) Reduction of ≥50%|This outcome measure was not calculated.|At Baseline, Week 24, and Week 48||||||
838436|NCT01316224|Secondary|Incidence Rate of PsA Since Psoriasis Diagnosis|"The number of new PsA cases were determined by:
PsA defined by a rheumatologist; or
A participant with inflamed joints >0 and CASPAR score >=3; or
Participant meeting at least one of the two previous definitions occurring over person time (defined as the overall sum of Psoriasis disease duration without PsA)."|Baseline up to Visit 4 (month 12)|ITT population||new PsA cases per 100 person years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838437|NCT01316224|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Developed Signs or Symptoms of PsA|Signs or symptoms were defined as mentioning at the rheumatologist visit any joint symptoms prior to or during the visit or a total number of inflamed joints greater than 0.|At Baseline, Visit 3 (month 6) and Visit 4 (month 12)|Participants who completed the visits (visit 3 and visit 4) to the rheumatologist and for whom information was available.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838438|NCT01316224|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Developed Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA)|"A participant is said to have PsA if they meet the following criteria:
PsA defined by a rheumatologist; or
A participant with inflamed joints >0 and CASPAR score >=3; or
Participant meeting at least one of the two previous definitions."|At Baseline, Visit 3 (month 6) and Visit 4 (month 12)|Participants who completed the visits (visit 3 and visit 4) to the rheumatologist and for whom information was available.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839186|NCT01324622|Primary|Improvement in Modified Japanese Orthopaedic Assessment (mJOA) Recovery Rate|"Participants who have mJOA Recovery Rate ≥0%. mJOA Recovery Rate is defined as:
mJOA Recovery Rate = ((PostOp Score-PreOp Score)/(17 - Pre-Op Score))*100"|12 months|Number of subject with 12-month follow-up data.||participants|||Number
838440|NCT01316224|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Swollen Joint Count (SJC) and Tender Joint Count (TJC) Greater Than Zero|"Pressure and joint manipulation by physical examination on 68 or 66 joints or regions (34 or 32 per body side, hip joints excluded) were assessed for TJC or SJC, respectively. Both joint tenderness and swelling were classified as present (1), absent (0), replaced (9), or no assessment (NA). The total TJC or SJC was derived as the sum of the tender and swollen joints; the range for TJC and SJC was 0 - 68 and 0 - 66, respectively; with higher scores indicating worse conditions."|At Baseline, Visit 3 (month 6) and Visit 4 (month 12)|Participants who completed the visits (visit 3 and visit 4) to the rheumatologist and for whom information was available.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838441|NCT01316224|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a CASPAR Score Greater Than or Equal to 3 at Each Visit to the Rheumatologist|The CASPAR criteria permits the diagnosis of PsA in spite of low rheumatoid factor positivity. To be classified as having PsA, a participant must have inflammatory articular disease (joint, spine, entheseal) with greater than or equal to 3 of the following 5 points: evidence of psoriasis (current, history of, or family history of); psoriatic nail dystrophy; a negative RF test result; dactylitis (history of or current); and radiographic evidence of juxa-articular new bone formation. Only current psoriasis (2 points) was weighted more heavily than the other features (1 point).|At Baseline, Visit 3 (month 6) and Visit 4 (month 12)|Participants who completed the visits (visit 3 and visit 4) to the rheumatologist and for whom information was available.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838442|NCT01316224|Secondary|Mean Change in ClASsification Criteria for Psoriatic ARthritis (CASPAR) Score|The CASPAR criteria permits the diagnosis of PsA in spite of low rheumatoid factor positivity. To be classified as having PsA, a participant must have inflammatory articular disease (joint, spine, entheseal) with greater than or equal to 3 of the following 5 points: evidence of psoriasis (current, history of, or family history of); psoriatic nail dystrophy; a negative RF test result; dactylitis (history of or current); and radiographic evidence of juxa-articular new bone formation. Only current psoriasis (2 points) was weighted more heavily than the other features (1 point). CASPER scores range from 1 to 6, with 6 indicating a more definitive diagnosis of PsA.|At Baseline, Visit 3 (month 6) and Visit 4 (month 12)|Participants who completed the visits (visit 3 and visit 4) to the rheumatologist and for whom information was available.||CASPAR score||Standard Deviation|Mean
838443|NCT01316224|Secondary|Mean Change in Quality of Life (QoL)|The Short Form-36 was a self-reported questionnaire used to measure the QoL of participants in eight main health dimensions (physical functioning; bodily pain; role limitations due to physical health, personal, and emotional problems; emotional well-being; social functioning; vitality; and general health perception). The score from each health dimension was added together for a QoL score on a scale of 0 - 100; a higher score indicated a better QoL.|At Baseline, Visit 3 (month 6) and Visit 4 (month 12)|ITT population||Score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838444|NCT01316224|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Comorbidities Who Did or Did Not Develop PsA|Percentage of participants with comorbidities (metabolic syndrome, hypertension, diabetes, atherosclerosis, obesity, alcohol and other associated comorbidities) was assessed.|Baseline up to Visit 4 (month 12)|Participants who completed at least one of the follow up visits to the rheumatologist.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838445|NCT01316224|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score|The PASI score was used to measure the severity of psoriasis. It combined the assessment of the severity of lesions and the area affected into a single score ranging from 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease).|At Baseline, Visit 2 (month 2), Visit 3 (month 6) and Visit 4 (month 12)|ITT population||PASI score||Standard Deviation|Mean
838446|NCT01316224|Secondary|Mean Time to First Occurrence of PsA Signs or Symptoms|The measure of time from Psoriasis diagnosis to the appearance of PsA signs or symptoms.|Baseline up to Visit 4 (month 12)|Participants who completed at least one of the follow up visits to the rheumatologist.||Years||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838447|NCT01316263|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Human Anti-Olaratumab (IMC-3G3) Antibody Results|Participants with Treatment Emergent (TE) anti-olaratumab (IMC-3G3) antibodies were participants with a 4-fold increase (2 dilutions) increase over a positive baseline antibody titer or for a negative baseline titer, a participant with an increase from the baseline to a level of 1:20.|Day 1 of Cycles 1, 3, 6, 12 and 18 prior to infusion (14-day cycles)|All participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable baseline and evaluable post-baseline antibody data.||percentage of participants|||Number
838448|NCT01316263|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)||Day 1 of Cycles 1 and 3 (14-day cycles)|Zero participants were analyzed. Vss was not reported. Vss could not be calculated due to an insufficient number of olaratumab serum concentrations.|||||
838449|NCT01316263|Secondary|Clearance (CL)||Day 1 of Cycles 1 and 3 (14-day cycles)|Zero participants were analyzed. CL was not reported. CL could not be calculated due to an insufficient number of olaratumab serum concentrations.|||||
838450|NCT01316263|Secondary|Half Life (t½)||Day 1 of Cycles 1 and 3 (14-day cycles)|Zero participants were analyzed. t1/2 was not reported. t1/2 could not be calculated due to an insufficient number of olaratumab serum concentrations.|||||
838451|NCT01316263|Secondary|Area Under the Curve (AUC)||Day 1 of Cycles 1 and 3 (14-day cycles)|Zero participants were analyzed. AUC was not reported. AUC could not be calculated due to an insufficient number of olaratumab serum concentrations.|||||
838452|NCT01316263|Secondary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax)||Day 1 of Cycles 1 and 3 (14-day cycles)|All participants who had evaluable pharmacokinetic (PK) Cmax results at the specific time point. Due to the limited data, Cmax is not representative of the study population.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Full Range|Mean
838466|NCT01316341|Primary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Change From Baseline|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) change from baseline between day 1 and day 9.|Sampling intervals were 0-2 hours (h), 2-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h and 12-24h after drug administration|Pharmacodynamic analysis (PD) set included all patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who received at least one dose of empagliflozin or placebo and who provided at least one baseline and post-treatment observation for at least one PD endpoint.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838594|NCT01319383|Secondary|Number of Participants With Confirmed Non-hematologic Toxicity >/= Grade 3 and Related to VOR Per Division of AIDS (DAIDS) Grading Table|DAIDS Grading Table- Grade 1- mild, Grade 2- moderate; Grade 3- severe Grade 4- potentially life-threatening. Pre specified to combine all participants into one arm.|24 hrs following single dose and 1 week after last of multiple dose sequence|All participants receiving one or more doses of VOR 400 mg PO in any and all Arms of the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838453|NCT01316263|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CR, PR or SD [Disease Control Rate (DCR)]|DCR defined as CR, PR or SD using RECIST v1.1 criteria. CR was defined as the disappearance of all non-nodal target lesions, with the short axes of any target lymph nodes reduced to <10 mm. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions (including the short axes of any target lymph nodes), taking as reference the baseline sum diameter. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameter since the treatment started. PD defined as ≥20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). Sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of ≥5 mm, or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions was considered progression. Percentage of participants=(number of participants with CR+PR+SD/number of participants in group) * 100.|Baseline up to 35.9 weeks|All participants who received any study drug.||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
838454|NCT01316263|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE) and Participants Who Died|Clinically significant events were defined as serious AEs (SAEs) and other non-serious AEs, regardless of causality. A summary of SAEs and other non-serious AEs, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module. The number of participants who died due to an AE or disease progression are also reported.|Baseline up to 57.3 weeks and 30-day post study-discontinuation follow-up|All participants who received any study drug.||participants|||Number
838455|NCT01316263|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from the date of first dose of study drug to the date of death from any cause. Participants who were alive at the end of the post-study follow-up or were lost to follow-up were censored on the last date the participant was known to be alive.|Date of first dose of study drug to the date of death from any cause up to 57.3 weeks|All participants who received any study drug. Participants censored: PDGFRα Mutant=4, PDGFRα Wild-type=4.||weeks||90% Confidence Interval|Median
838456|NCT01316263|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CR or PR [Radiographic Objective Response Rate (ORR)]|The ORR was the best overall response of CR and PR using RECIST, v1.1 criteria. Participants who did not have a tumor response assessment for any reason were considered nonresponders and were included in the denominator that calculated the response rate. Percentage of participants = (number of participants achieving a response/total of participants treated) * 100.|Baseline up to 35.9 weeks and post study discontinuation 30-day follow-up|All participants who received any study drug.||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
838457|NCT01316263|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS defined as the duration from date of first dose of study drug until first radiographic documentation of PD using RECIST, v1.1 criteria or death from any cause. PD defined as ≥20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference smallest sum on study (included baseline sum if that was the smallest on study); sum must have demonstrated an absolute increase of ≥5 mm and the appearance of ≥1 new lesions was progression. Participants who died with no prior PD were considered to have progressed on day of death. Participants who did not progress or were lost to follow-up were censored at date of last radiographic tumor assessment; if no assessment was available censoring was at date of registration. If death or PD occurred after 2 consecutive missing radiographic visits censoring was date of last radiographic visit prior to missed visits. Use of new anticancer therapy prior to PD, censoring was date of last radiographic assessment prior to new therapy.|Baseline to the first date of objectively determined PD or death from any cause up to 35.9 weeks|All participants who received any study drug. Censored participants: PDGFRα Mutant=2, PDGFRα Wild-Type=0.||weeks||90% Confidence Interval|Median
838458|NCT01316263|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Tumor Response of Stable Disease (SD), Partial Response (PR) or Complete Response (CR) (Clinical Benefit Rate) at 12 Weeks|Clinical benefit was defined as CR, PR, or SD using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST, v1.1) criteria. CR: disappearance of all non-nodal target lesions, with the short axes of any target lymph nodes reduced to <10 millimeters (mm). PR: ≥30% decrease in sum of the diameters of target lesions (including the short axes of any target lymph nodes), taking as reference the baseline sum diameter. SD: neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify as PR nor sufficient increase to qualify as PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameter since treatment started. PD: increase ≥20% in sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (included baseline sum if that was the smallest on study). Sum must also have demonstrated an absolute increase of ≥5 mm, or appearance of 1 or more new lesions was considered progression. Percentage of participants=(participants with CR+PR+SD/participants in group) *100.|12 weeks|All participants who received any study drug.||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
838459|NCT01316302|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Change|Subject-rated global outcome scale. Subjects who rated themselves as 1 (Very Much Improved) or 2 (Much Improved) on the PGIC were considered self-rated responders.|Baseline to study endpoint (Week 12)|||percentage of self-rated responders|||Number
838460|NCT01316302|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression of Improvement Scale (CGI-I)|CGI-I: one item, measuring overall improvement of illness; possible scores range from 1-7, with lower scores representing greater improvement. CGI-I responders: defined as having a CGI-I scores of 1 or 2 at Week 12/study endpoint.|Baseline to Week 12|||% of subjects who were CGI-I responders|||Number
838461|NCT01316302|Primary|Change in the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) Total Score|Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale, measuring social anxiety symptoms; possible total scores ranging from 0-144, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms.|Baseline to study endpoint (Week 12)|The number of participants for analysis was 29 subjects per arm; data analyzed at Week 12 or Last Observation Carried Forward for the 16 subjects who dropped out before completion. Five other randomized subjects (1 on drug, 4 on placebo) were excluded from the ITT sample because of insufficient data (n = 4) or poor compliance (n = 1).||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838462|NCT01316315|Other Pre-specified|Measurement of Change in Methacholine PC20 From Baseline Compared With Placebo After 7 Days of Dosing||7 Days|Any patient that received a dose of N6022 or Placebo||mg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
838463|NCT01316315|Secondary|To Assess the Safety and Tolerability of Single Dose Administration of N6022 in Patients With Mild Asthma.|Adverse event (AE) reporting will begin upon signing of the consent and will continue until end-of-study (follow up phone call Day 28 +/- 2 days after dosing in the second treatment period). Number of patients with an adverse event will be documented and analyzed.|10 Weeks|Any patient that received a dose of N6022 or placebo||Adverse Events|||Number
838467|NCT01316341|Primary|Urinary Glucose Excretion (UGE) Change From Baseline|Change from day -1 in urinary glucose excretion in a 24 hour collection period per time point.|Sampling intervals were 0-2 hours (h), 2-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h and 12-24h after drug administration|Pharmacodynamic analysis (PD) set included all patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment, who received at least one dose of empagliflozin or placebo and who provided at least one baseline and post-treatment observation for at least one PD endpoint.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
838468|NCT01316341|Secondary|Clinical Relevant Abnormalities for Protocol-Specified Significant Adverse Events, Hypoglycaemic Events, Vital Signs, Blood Chemistry, Rescue Therapy, Body Weight and Waist Circumference|"Clinically relevant abnormalities for protocol-specified significant adverse events, hypoglycaemic events, vital signs, blood chemistry, use of rescue therapy, change in body weight and change in waist circumference.
Results shown are for hypoglycaemic events, as this was the only event that occurred for this endpoint."|Drug administration until end of trial, up to 21 days|Treated set (TS) includes all patients who were documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment.||participants|||Number
838469|NCT01316341|Primary|Predose Plasma Concentration Before Planned Dose x (Cpre,x)|"Predose plasma concentration of empagliflozin (empa) before planned dose by day.
This endpoint in steady state is identical to Cmin,ss."|5 minutes before drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838470|NCT01316341|Primary|Accumulation Ratio Based on Cmax (R A,Cmax)|Accumulation ratio of empagliflozin (empa) based on Cmax, after multiple dosing|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, and16h after drug administration between days 5 and 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838471|NCT01316341|Primary|Accumulation Ratio Based on AUC (R A,AUC)|Accumulation ratio of empagliflozin (empa) based on AUC, after multiple dosing|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, and16h after drug administration on days 1 and 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838472|NCT01316341|Primary|Renal Clearance at Steady State (CL R,ss)|Renal clearance of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma after extravascular administration, after multiple dosing.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h 48h, 60h, 72h and 96h after drug administration on day 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838473|NCT01316341|Primary|Fraction of Empagliflozin Excreted Unchanged in Urine at Steady State in the Time Interval 0 Hours to 24 Hours (fe 0-24,ss)|Fraction of empagliflozin (empa) excreted unchanged in urine at steady state in the time interval 0 hours to 24 hours, after multiple dosing.|Sampling intervals were 0-2 hours (h), 2-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h and 12-24h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||percentage of empa||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838474|NCT01316341|Primary|Amount of Analyte Eliminated in Urine at Steady State in Time Interval 0 Hours to 24 Hours (Ae 0-24,ss)|Amount of empagliflozin (empa) eliminated in urine at steady state in the time interval 0 hours to 24 hours, after multiple dosing.|Sampling intervals were 0-2 hours (h), 2-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h and 12-24h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||nmol||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838475|NCT01316341|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase λz (Vz/Fss)|Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase λz at steady state following oral administration after multiple dosing|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h 48h, 60h, 72h and 96h after drug administration on day 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838476|NCT01316341|Primary|Apparent Clearance of Empagliflozin After Extravascular Administration (CL/Fss)|Apparent clearance of empagliflozin (empa) in the plasma at steady state following multiple oral dose administration.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h 48h, 60h, 72h and 96h after drug administration on day 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838477|NCT01316341|Primary|Mean Residence Time at Steady State (MRTpo,ss)|Mean residence time of empagliflozin (empa) in the body at steady state after multiple oral administrations|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h 48h, 60h, 72h and 96h after drug administration on day 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838478|NCT01316341|Primary|Terminal Half-life in Plasma at Steady State (t1/2,ss)|Terminal half-life of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma at steady state, after multiple dosing.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h 48h, 60h, 72h and 96h after drug administration on day 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838479|NCT01316341|Primary|Terminal Rate Constant in Plasma at Steady State (λz,ss)|Terminal rate constant in plasma at steady state, after multiple dosing.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h 48h, 60h, 72h and 96h after drug administration on day 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||1/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838480|NCT01316341|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve in Plasma at Steady State Over a Uniform Dosing Interval (AUCτ,ss)|Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval, after multiple dosing|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h 48h, 60h, 72h and 96h after drug administration on day 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838481|NCT01316341|Primary|Time From Last Dosing to Maximum Measured Concentration Over a Uniform Dosing Interval at Steady State (Tmax,ss)|Time from last dosing to maximum measured concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over a uniform dosing interval at steady state, after multiple dosing.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h 48h, 60h, 72h and 96h after drug administration on day 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838482|NCT01316341|Primary|Maximum Measured Concentration Over a Uniform Dosing Interval (Cmax,ss)|Maximum measured concentration of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma at steady state over a uniform dosing interval.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h, 24h, 36h 48h, 60h, 72h and 96h after drug administration on day 9|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838483|NCT01316341|Primary|Renal Clearance After Extravascular Administration (CL R,0-48)|Renal clearance of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma after extravascular administration, after the first dose on day 1.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10 min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838484|NCT01316341|Primary|Fraction of Empagliflozin Excreted Unchanged in Urine in the Time Interval 0 Hours to 24 Hours (fe 0-24).|Fraction of empagliflozin (empa) excreted unchanged in urine in the time interval 0 hours to 24 hours, after the first dose on day 1.|Sampling intervals were 0-2 hours (h), 2-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h and 12-24h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||percentage of empa||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838485|NCT01316341|Primary|Amount of Empagliflozin Eliminated in Urine in the Time Interval 0 Hours to 24 Hours (Ae 0-24)|Amount of empagliflozin (empa) eliminated in urine in the time interval 0 hours to 24 hours, after the first dose on day 1.|Sampling intervals were 0-2 hours (h), 2-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h and 12-24h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||nmol||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838486|NCT01316341|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase λz (Vz/F)|Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase λz, after the first dose on day 1.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10 min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838487|NCT01316341|Primary|Apparent Clearance of Empagliflozin After Extravascular Administration (CL/F)|Apparent clearance of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma after extravascular administration, after the first dose on day 1.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10 min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838488|NCT01316341|Primary|Mean Residence Time (MRTpo)|Mean residence time of empagliflozin (empa) in the body after the first dose on day 1.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10 min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838489|NCT01316341|Primary|Terminal Half-life (t1/2)|Terminal half-life of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma after the first dose on day 1|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10 min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838490|NCT01316341|Primary|Terminal Rate Constant (λz)|Terminal Rate Constant in Plasma (λz), after the first dose on day 1|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10 min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||1/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838491|NCT01316341|Primary|Area Under the Curve 0 to the Last Quantifiable Data Point (AUC0-tz)|Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point, after the first dose on day 1.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10 min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838492|NCT01316341|Primary|Area Under the Curve 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞) After Single Dosing|Area under the concentration-time curve of empagliflozin (empa) in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity, after the first dose on day 1|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10 min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||nmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838493|NCT01316341|Primary|Time to Maximum Measured Concentration (Tmax)|Time from dosing to the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma, after the first dose on day 1.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10 min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838494|NCT01316341|Primary|Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma after the first dose on day 1.|5 minutes (min) before drug administration and 10 min, 20min, 30min, 40min, 1 hour (h), 1.5h, 2h, 2.5h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 16h after drug administration|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all evaluable patients documented to have taken at least one dose of investigational treatment and who provided at least one observation for at least one PK endpoint.||nmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
838495|NCT01316380|Secondary|Use of Rescue Medication During Nighttime|"Use of PRN (pro re nata, or as necessary) salbutamol/albuterol rescue medication (puffs during nighttime), determined as a weekly mean response from baseline for each week during the treatment period as well as for the last 7 days before treatment stop/Visit 5.
The mean was adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment*week and baseline*week."|Baseline and 12 weeks|All patients from FAS.||puffs of rescue medication||Standard Error|Mean
838496|NCT01316380|Secondary|Use of Rescue Medication During Daytime|"Use of PRN (pro re nata, or as necessary) salbutamol/albuterol rescue medication (puffs during daytime), determined as a weekly mean response from baseline for each week during the treatment period as well as for the last 7 days before treatment stop/Visit 5.
The mean was adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment*week and baseline*week."|Baseline and 12 weeks|All patients from FAS.||puffs of rescue medication||Standard Error|Mean
838497|NCT01316380|Secondary|Use of Rescue Medication During 24h Period|"Use of PRN (pro re nata, or as necessary) salbutamol/albuterol rescue medication (puffs during 24 h period), determined as a weekly mean response from baseline for each week during the treatment period as well as for the last 7 days before treatment stop/Visit 5.
The mean was adjusted for treatment, centre, week, baseline, treatment*week and baseline*week."|Baseline and 12 weeks|All patients from FAS.||puffs of rescue medication||Standard Error|Mean
838498|NCT01316380|Secondary|Time to First Asthma Exacerbation During the 12-week Treatment.|An asthma exacerbation was defined as an episode of progressive increase in 1 or more asthma symptom that were outside the patient's usual range of day-to-day asthma symptoms and lasted for at least 2 consecutive days or as a decrease in a patient's best morning PEF of 30% or more from a patient's mean morning PEF for at least 2 consecutive days that may or may not have been accompanied by symptoms.|12 weeks|All patients from FAS.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838499|NCT01316380|Secondary|Time to First Severe Asthma Exacerbation During the 12-week Treatment.|Severe asthma exacerbations are defined as all asthma exacerbations that required treatment with systemic (including oral) corticosteroids for at least 3 days.|12 weeks|All patients from FAS.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838500|NCT01316380|Secondary|Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) Responder After 12 Weeks of Treatment|For the ACQ, the total score was calculated as the mean of the responses to 6 self administered questions and one question which was completed by clinical staff based upon pre-bronchodilator FEV1. The score ranges from 0 (no impairment) to 6 (maximum impairment). Response was categorised as: responder (change from baseline <= -0.5), no change (-0.5 <change from baseline < 0.5) and worsening (change from baseline >= 0.5).|12 weeks|All patients from FAS.||Number of patients|||Number
838501|NCT01316380|Secondary|FVC (AUC0-3h) Response at the End of the 12-week Treatment Period.|The AUC0-3h was calculated as area under the curve from zero to 3 hours using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (3 hours) to report in litres. The trough value was assigned to zero time. Response was defined as change from baseline in FVC AUC0-3h after a treatment period of 12 weeks. MMRM results. Means are adjusted for treatment, pooled centre, visit, baseline, treatment*visit baseline*visit.|Baseline and 12 weeks|All patients from FAS.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838502|NCT01316380|Secondary|FEV1 Area Under the Curve (AUC0-3h) Response at the End of the 12-week Treatment Period.|The AUC0-3h was calculated as area under the curve from zero to 3 hours using the trapezoidal rule divided by the observation time (3 hours) to report in litres. The trough value was assigned to zero time. Response was defined as change from baseline in FEV1 AUC0-3h after a treatment period of 12 weeks. MMRM results. Means are adjusted for treatment, pooled centre, visit, baseline, treatment*visit baseline*visit.|Baseline and 12 weeks|All patients from FAS.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838503|NCT01316380|Secondary|Peak (Within 3 Hours Post-dosing) Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Response at the End of the 12-week Treatment Period.|Peak FVC 0-3h response was defined as the difference between the maximum FVC measured within the first 3 hours post dosing after a treatment period of 12 weeks and the FVC baseline measurement (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication). Mixed Model Repeated Measure (MMRM) results. Means are adjusted for treatment, pooled centre, visit, baseline, treatment*visit and baseline*visit.|Baseline and 12 weeks|All patients from FAS.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838504|NCT01316380|Secondary|Trough FEV1 Response Determined After a Treatment Period of 12 Weeks.|The trough FEV1 is defined as the pre-dose FEV1 measured 10 minutes before the last administration of randomised treatment. Trough FEV1 response was defined as the difference between the trough FEV1 measured after a treatment period of 12 weeks and the trough FEV1 baseline measurement. MMRM results. Means are adjusted for treatment, pooled centre, visit, baseline, treatment*visit and baseline*visit.|Baseline and 12 weeks|All patients from FAS.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838505|NCT01316380|Primary|Peak Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Response Within 3 Hours Post Dosing (0-3h) After a Treatment Period of 12 Weeks.|Peak FEV1 0-3h response was defined as the difference between the maximum FEV1 measured within the first 3 hours post dosing after a treatment period of 12 weeks and the FEV1 baseline measurement (10 minutes before the first dose of trial medication). Mixed Model Repeated Measure (MMRM) results. Means are adjusted for treatment, pooled centre, visit, baseline, treatment*visit and baseline*visit.|Baseline and 12 weeks|All patients from Full Analysis Set (FAS) FAS is defined as all patients in the treated set who received at least one dose of randomized trial medication.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838506|NCT01316419|Secondary|Incidence and Severity of Reported Adverse Events.|Incidence as per the severity of reported adverse events is presented.|24±2 weeks|Patients having received at least one dose of Twynsta tablets||participants|||Number
838507|NCT01316419|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Complied With Each Category of Lifestyle Modification Recommendations at 24±2 Weeks|Percentage of patients who complied with each category of lifestyle modification recommendations at 12±2 weeks|24±2 weeks|Patients with a baseline and an endpoint BMI together with evaluation record on recommendations for lifestyle modifications.||percentage of participants|||Number
838508|NCT01316419|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Complied With Each Category of Lifestyle Modification Recommendations at 12±2 Weeks|Percentage of patients who complied with each category of lifestyle modification recommendations at 12±2 weeks|12±2 weeks|Patients with a baseline and an endpoint BMI together with evaluation record on recommendations for lifestyle modifications.||percentage of participants|||Number
838509|NCT01316419|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving Normal Body Mass Index (BMI)|Percentage of patients achieving normal BMI (18.5 kg/sq.m to 24.9 kg/sq.m) are presented|24±2 weeks|Patients with a baseline and an endpoint BMI together with evaluation record on recommendations for lifestyle modifications.||percentage of participants|||Number
838510|NCT01316419|Secondary|Mean Blood Lipid Change - Total Cholesterol|Mean blood lipid change - Total Cholesterol|baseline and 24±2 weeks|Patients with medical history of hyperlipidemia and who have a baseline and an endpoint lipid profile measurement together with evaluation record on recommendations for lifestyle modifications.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
838511|NCT01316419|Secondary|Mean Blood Lipid Change - Triglyceride|Mean blood lipid change - Triglyceride|baseline and 24±2 weeks|Patients with medical history of hyperlipidemia and who have a baseline and an endpoint lipid profile measurement together with evaluation record on recommendations for lifestyle modifications.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
838512|NCT01316419|Secondary|Mean Blood Lipid Change - High Density Lipoprotein (HDL)-Cholesterol|Mean blood lipid change from baseline - high density lipoprotein (HDL)-Cholesterol|baseline and 24±2 weeks|Patients with medical history of hyperlipidemia and who have a baseline and an endpoint lipid profile measurement together with evaluation record on recommendations for lifestyle modifications.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
838513|NCT01316419|Secondary|Mean Blood Lipid Change - Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL)-Cholesterol|Mean blood lipid change from baseline - low density lipoprotein (LDL)-Cholesterol|baseline and 24±2 weeks|Patients with medical history of hyperlipidemia and who have a baseline and an endpoint lipid profile measurement together with evaluation record on recommendations for lifestyle modifications.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
838514|NCT01316419|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving SBP/DBP < 130/80 mmHg Among Patients With Diabetes or Kidney Disease|Percentage of patients achieving SBP/DBP < 130/80 mmHg among patients with diabetes or kidney disease|24±2 weeks|All patients with diabetes, kidney disease or both (diabetes + kidney disease)||percentage of participants|||Number
838515|NCT01316419|Secondary|EuroQol (EQ) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)|The EQ VAS records the respondent’s self-rated health on a vertical, visual analogue scale where the endpoints are labelled ‘best imaginable health state’ and ‘worst imaginable health state. The scale goes from 0 to 100, a low value shows better physical health.|baseline and 24±2 weeks|Patients with a baseline and an endpoint EQ VAS response||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838516|NCT01316419|Secondary|Change From Baseline of Quality of Life Assessment Data Measured by World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF)- Overall|"WHOQOL-BREF, an abbreviated 26 item version of the WHOQOL-100 was developed to enable a brief but accurate assessment of the quality of life.
The Korean version of WHOQOL-BREF is valid and reliable in the assessment of quality of life in Koreans. The WHOQOL-BREF is based on the four domain structure (physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment). It was designed to use 5-point scales for all questions (not at all, a little, moderately, mostly, and completely). The scale goes from 4 to 20 in each domain structure and 0 to 5 in overall score, a low value shows better physical health."|baseline and 24±2 weeks|Patients with a baseline and an endpoint WHOQOL-BREF response||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838517|NCT01316419|Secondary|Change From Baseline of Quality of Life Assessment Data Measured by World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF)- Environment Domain|"WHOQOL-BREF, an abbreviated 26 item version of the WHOQOL-100 was developed to enable a brief but accurate assessment of the quality of life.
The Korean version of WHOQOL-BREF is valid and reliable in the assessment of quality of life in Koreans. The WHOQOL-BREF is based on the four domain structure (physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment). It was designed to use 5-point scales for all questions (not at all, a little, moderately, mostly, and completely). The scale goes from 4 to 20 in each domain structure and 0 to 5 in overall score, a low value shows better physical health."|baseline and 24±2 weeks|Patients with a baseline and an endpoint WHOQOL-BREF response||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838570|NCT01318967|Secondary|Measurement of Regional Blood Oxygenation by MRI|Estimate of renal blood flow by using MRI scans before and after the administration of furosemide|One measure after furosemide (day 1)|||ml/min||Full Range|Mean
838571|NCT01318967|Primary|Measurement of Renal Blood Flow of the Kidney by the PAH Method|Renal blood flow is estimated by the PAH method.|Renal blood flow is estimated over 1 hour by PAH|||ml/min||Full Range|Mean
838518|NCT01316419|Secondary|Change From Baseline of Quality of Life Assessment Data Measured by World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF)- Social Relationships Domain|"WHOQOL-BREF, an abbreviated 26 item version of the WHOQOL-100 was developed to enable a brief but accurate assessment of the quality of life.
The Korean version of WHOQOL-BREF is valid and reliable in the assessment of quality of life in Koreans. The WHOQOL-BREF is based on the four domain structure (physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment). It was designed to use 5-point scales for all questions (not at all, a little, moderately, mostly, and completely). The scale goes from 4 to 20 in each domain structure and 0 to 5 in overall score, a low value shows better physical health."|baseline and 24±2 weeks|Patients with a baseline and an endpoint WHOQOL-BREF response||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838519|NCT01316419|Secondary|Change From Baseline of Quality of Life Assessment Data Measured by World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF)- Psychological Domain|"WHOQOL-BREF, an abbreviated 26 item version of the WHOQOL-100 was developed to enable a brief but accurate assessment of the quality of life.
The Korean version of WHOQOL-BREF is valid and reliable in the assessment of quality of life in Koreans. The WHOQOL-BREF is based on the four domain structure (physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment). It was designed to use 5-point scales for all questions (not at all, a little, moderately, mostly, and completely). The scale goes from 4 to 20 in each domain structure and 0 to 5 in overall score, a low value shows better physical health."|baseline and 24±2 weeks|All patients with a baseline and an endpoint blood pressure measurement.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838520|NCT01316419|Secondary|Change From Baseline of Quality of Life Assessment Data Measured by World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF)- Physical Health Domain|"WHOQOL-BREF, an abbreviated 26 item version of the WHOQOL-100 was developed to enable a brief but accurate assessment of the quality of life.
The Korean version of WHOQOL-BREF is valid and reliable in the assessment of quality of life in Koreans. The WHOQOL-BREF is based on the four domain structure (physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment). It was designed to use 5-point scales for all questions (not at all, a little, moderately, mostly, and completely). The scale goes from 4 to 20 in each domain structure and 0 to 5 in overall score, a low value shows better physical health."|baseline and 24±2 weeks|Patients with a baseline and an endpoint WHOQOL-BREF response||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838521|NCT01316419|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving SBP Response|Percentage of patients achieving SBP response (defined as mean seated SBP < 140 mmHg or a drop of ≥ 10 mmHg) is a key secondary endpoint.|24±2 weeks|All patients with a baseline and an endpoint blood pressure measurement.||percentage of participants|||Number
838522|NCT01316419|Primary|Mean Blood Pressure Change Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) From Baseline After 24±2 Weeks of Treatment or at the Last Observation in Case of Early Withdrawal.|"The primary endpoint is the mean blood pressure change DBP from baseline after 24±2 weeks of treatment or at the last observation in case of early withdrawal.
Baseline is defined as data collected on baseline visit."|baseline and 24±2 weeks|All patients with a baseline and an endpoint blood pressure measurement.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
838523|NCT01316419|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving DBP Response|Percentage of patients achieving DBP response (defined as mean seated DBP < 90 mmHg or a drop of ≥ 10 mmHg) is a key secondary endpoint.|24±2 weeks|All patients with a baseline and an endpoint blood pressure measurement.||percentage of participants|||Number
838524|NCT01316419|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving Target Blood Pressure SBP/DBP <140/90 mmHg.|Percentage of patients achieving target blood pressure SBP/DBP <140/90 mmHg is a key secondary endpoint.|24±2 weeks|All patients with a baseline and an endpoint blood pressure measurement.||percentage of participants|||Number
838525|NCT01316419|Primary|Mean Blood Pressure Change Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) From Baseline After 24±2 Weeks of Treatment or at the Last Observation in Case of Early Withdrawal.|"The primary endpoint is the mean blood pressure change SBP from baseline after 24±2 weeks of treatment or at the last observation in case of early withdrawal.
Baseline is defined as data collected on baseline visit."|baseline and 24±2 weeks|All patients with a baseline and an endpoint blood pressure measurement.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
838526|NCT01318499|Other Pre-specified|Cumulative Percentage of Patients Pain Free by Visit|Ocular pain was assessed by the patient on a 6-unit scale from 0 (none; absence of positive sensation), to 5 (severe; intense ocular, periocular or radiating pain requiring prescription analgesic). Pain free was defined as an ocular pain assessment score of 0. To be included in the cumulative summary at a visit, a patient must have been declared pain free at the visit and remained pain free at all subsequent visits.|Day 1, Day 3, Day 7, Day 14|All randomized patients with at least one postoperative assessment (intent-to-treat), last observation carried forward.||Percentage of patients|||Number
838527|NCT01318499|Other Pre-specified|Cumulative Percentage of Patients Cured by Visit|Ocular inflammation was assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination. Aqueous cells were scored on a 5-unit scale from 0 (none) to 4 (> 30 cells), and aqueous flare (protein escaping from dilated vessels) was scored on a 4-unit scale from 0 (no visible flare when compared with the normal eye) to 3 (severe - very dense flare). To be considered cured, the patient must have had a score of 0 for both aqueous cells and aqueous flare. To be included in the cumulative summary at a visit, a patient must have been declared cured at the visit and remained cured at all subsequent visits.|Day 1, Day 3, Day 7, Day 14|All randomized patients with at least one postoperative assessment (intent-to-treat), last observation carried forward.||Percentage of patients|||Number
838528|NCT01318499|Post-Hoc|Cumulative Percent Clinical Success by Visit|Ocular inflammation was assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination. Aqueous cells were scored on a 5-unit scale from 0 (none) to 4 (> 30 cells), and aqueous flare (protein escaping from dilated vessels) was scored on a 4-unit scale from 0 (no visible flare when compared with the normal eye) to 3 (severe - very dense flare). Clinical success occurred when the cell grade was ≤ 1 (0-5 cells) and flare grade was = 0. To be included in the cumulative summary at a visit, a patient must have been declared a clinical success at the visit and remained a clinical success at all subsequent visits.|Day 1, Day 3, Day 7, Day 14|All randomized patients with at least one post-operative assessment (intent-to-treat).||Percentage of patients|||Number
838595|NCT01319383|Secondary|Number of Participants With Measurable Changes in Plasma HIV-1 RNA|Assess for detectible HIV-1 RNA > 150 copies/mL, confirmed by repeat evaluation, following VOR dose. By standard assay and single copy assay. Pre specified to combine all participants into one arm.|1 week after last VOR dose|All participants receiving one or more doses of VOR in any and all Arms of the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838529|NCT01318499|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Cured at Day 7, Nepafenac 0.3% vs. Nepafenac 0.1%|Ocular inflammation was assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination. Aqueous cells were scored on a 5-unit scale from 0 (none) to 4 (> 30 cells), and aqueous flare (protein escaping from dilated vessels) was scored on a 4-unit scale from 0 (no visible flare when compared with the normal eye) to 3 (severe - very dense flare). To be considered cured, the patient must have had a score of 0 for both aqueous cells and aqueous flare.|Day 7 postoperative|All randomized patients with at least one postoperative assessment (intent-to-treat), last observation carried forward.||Percentage of patients|||Number
838530|NCT01318499|Primary|Percentage of Patients Cured at Day 14, Nepafenac 0.3% vs. Nepafenac Vehicle 0.3%|Ocular inflammation was assessed by the investigator during slit lamp examination. Aqueous cells were scored on a 5-unit scale from 0 (none) to 4 (> 30 cells), and aqueous flare (protein escaping from dilated vessels) was scored on a 4-unit scale from 0 (no visible flare when compared with the normal eye) to 3 (severe - very dense flare). To be considered cured, the patient must have had a score of 0 for both aqueous cells and aqueous flare.|Day 14 postoperative|All randomized patients with at least one postoperative assessment (intent-to-treat), last observation carried forward.||Percentage of patients|||Number
838531|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA During Maintenance Period Month 6|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in micrograms (µg) at each month interval during the maintenance period was reported.|Month 10 (Maintenance Period Month 6)|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during the maintenance period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838532|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA During Maintenance Period Month 5|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in micrograms (µg) at each month interval during the maintenance period was reported.|Month 9 (Maintenance Period Month 5)|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during the maintenance period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838533|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA During Maintenance Period Month 4|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in micrograms (µg) at each month interval during the maintenance period was reported.|Month 8 (Maintenance Period Month 4)|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during the maintenance period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838534|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA During Maintenance Period Month 3|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in micrograms (µg) at each month interval during the maintenance period was reported.|Month 7 (Maintenance Period Month 3)|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during the maintenance period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838535|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA During Maintenance Period Month 2|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in micrograms (µg) at each month interval during the maintenance period was reported.|Month 6 (Maintenance Period Month 2)|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during the maintenance period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838536|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA During Maintenance Period Month 1|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in micrograms (µg) at each month interval during the maintenance period was reported.|Month 5 (Maintenance Period Month 1)|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during the maintenance period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838537|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA During Titration Period Month 4|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in micrograms (µg) at each month interval during the titration period was reported.|Month 4|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during titration period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838538|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA During Titration Period Month 3|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in micrograms (µg) at each month interval during the titration period was reported.|Month 3|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during titration period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838539|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA During Titration Period Month 2|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in micrograms (µg) at each month interval during the titration period was reported.|Month 2|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during titration period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838540|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA During Titration Period Month 1|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in microgram (µg) at each month interval during the titration period was reported.|Month 1|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during titration period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838541|NCT01318512|Secondary|The Mean Hemoglobin (Hb) Level During Maintenance Period|The hemoglobin level was measured in grams per liter (g/L) after each month of treatment with MIRCERA. The study did not distinguish between erythropoiesis stimulating agent naive and erythropoiesis stimulating agent treated participants, and collected the overall data (Hb level) before/after administration of MIRCERA|Month 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during maintenance period.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
838542|NCT01318512|Secondary|The Mean Hemoglobin (Hb) Level During Titration Period|The hemoglobin level was measured in grams per liter (g/L) at entry level and after each month of treatment with MIRCERA. The study did not distinguish between erythropoiesis stimulating agent naive and erythropoiesis stimulating agent treated participants, and collected the overall data (Hb level) before/after administration of MIRCERA.|Baseline, Month 1, 2, 3, 4|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during titration period.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
838543|NCT01318512|Primary|Average Dose of MIRCERA at Entry Level|The average dose of MIRCERA, measured in micrograms (µg) at entry level was reported.|Baseline|All participants who received at least one dose of MIRCERA during the titration period.||microgram (µg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838544|NCT01318538|Secondary|Change in Mean Drinks Per Drinking Day for Women|This represents the change from baseline in the mean number of drinks per drinking day. Drinks per drinking day was assessed using the Timeline Follow-Back at baseline and then monthly for 9 months. The In-Treatment phase includes months 1-3, the 3 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 4-6, and the 6 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 7-9. The in-treatment and 2 post-treatment phases were compared to baseline data of mean drinks per drinking day. Outcomes were analyzed using loglinear (negative binomial) regression models with estimation via generalized estimating equations (GEE). The models included the effects of treatment group, phase (3 levels), and the treatment group by phase interaction.|In-treatment (months 1-3), 3 Month Post-treatment (months 4-6), 6 Month Post-Treatment (months 7-9)|Only women were included in this analysis.||change in mean drinks per drinking day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838545|NCT01318538|Secondary|Percent Change in Mean Heavy Drinking Days for Women|This represents the percent change from baseline in the mean number of heavy drinking days for women. Number of heavy drinking days was assessed using the Timeline Follow-Back at baseline and then monthly for 9 months. The In-Treatment phase includes months 1-3, the 3 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 4-6, and the 6 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 7-9. The in-treatment and 2 post-treatment phases were compared to baseline data of mean heavy drinking days. Outcomes were analyzed using loglinear (negative binomial) regression models with estimation via generalized estimating equations (GEE). The models included the effects of treatment group, phase (3 levels), and the treatment group by phase interaction.|In-treatment (months 1-3), 3 Month Post-treatment (months 4-6), 6 Month Post-Treatment (months 7-9)|Only women were included in this analysis.||% change in mean heavy drinking days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838546|NCT01318538|Secondary|Percent Change in Mean Drug Use Days for Women|This represents the percent change from baseline in the mean number of drug use days (excluding alcohol) for women. Days of drug use was assessed using the Timeline Follow-Back at baseline and then monthly for 9 months. The In-Treatment phase includes months 1-3, the 3 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 4-6, and the 6 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 7-9. The in-treatment and 2 post-treatment phases were compared to baseline data of mean drug use days. Outcomes were analyzed using loglinear (negative binomial) regression models with estimation via generalized estimating equations (GEE). The models included the effects of treatment group, phase (3 levels), and the treatment group by phase interaction.|In-treatment (months 1-3), 3 Month Post-treatment (months 4-6), 6 Month Post-Treatment (months 7-9)|Only women were included in this analysis.||% change in mean drug use days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838547|NCT01318538|Other Pre-specified|Group Stability|Treatment group stability was calculated using the Percentage of Group Change Index which captures change in group membership composition from session to session separately for each individual within each group (specific to the calendar period that each person was in the group). The value can range from 0 (i.e., the exact same membership from one session to the next) to 1 (i.e., complete turnover in membership). The average values across all sessions were taken to get an overall sense of the amount of turnover each person experienced in the group during the period in calendar time they were in treatment.|In treatment (weeks 1-12)|Only women were included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838548|NCT01318538|Other Pre-specified|Group Attendance|Treatment attendance was calculated by summing the number of treatment sessions attended. Therefore, numbers range from 0-12.|In treatment (weeks 1-12)|Only women were included in this analysis.||sessions attended||Standard Deviation|Mean
838549|NCT01318538|Other Pre-specified|Therapist Adherence|All therapists were female to eliminate any therapist-patient gender matching effects. There were eight therapists in total: 4 who led WRG groups and 4 who led GDC groups. All group sessions were videotaped each week so that we could measure therapist adherence to the treatment they were assigned to. Two independent raters completed adherence scales for a random selection of 20% of WRG and 10%of GDC sessions. For both groups, the extensiveness to which the therapist engaged in a behavior during the session was rated with a 5-point Likert scale (0 = not at all; 4 = extensively). Adherence scores were calculated by averaging all scores for each question (25 questions for WRG; 18 for GDC) on the measure. The scores reported here represent the average of all WRG therapists scores from all session, and all GDC therapist scores from all sessions. Scores range from 0 to 4.|In treatment (weeks 1-12)|||units on a 0-4 adherence scale|Sessions|Standard Deviation|Mean
838550|NCT01318538|Primary|Change in Mean ASI Drug Composite Score for Women|"This represents the change from baseline in mean ASI Drug composite scores. The ASI was administered at baseline, at months 1-6, and then at month 9. The In-Treatment phase includes months 1-3, the 3 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 4-6, and the 6 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 7-9. The in-treatment and 2 post-treatment phases were compared to baseline ASI data. Outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed effect models. These models included the effects of treatment group, phase (3 levels), and the treatment group by phase interaction.
The ASI is a multidimensional assessment of substance-related problems which yields composite scores for alcohol use, drug use, psychiatric status, medical status, legal status, family/social relationships, and employment status. Composite scores range from 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating more significant problems."|In-treatment (months 1-3), 3 Month Post-treatment (months 4-6), 6 Month Post-Treatment (months 7-9)|Only women were included in this analysis.||change in ASI Drug composite score||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838551|NCT01318538|Primary|Change in Mean ASI Alcohol Composite Score for Women|"This represents the change from baseline in mean ASI Alcohol composite scores. The ASI was administered at baseline, at months 1-6, and then at month 9. The In-Treatment phase includes months 1-3, the 3 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 4-6, and the 6 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 7-9. The in-treatment and 2 post-treatment phases were compared to baseline ASI data. Outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed effect models. These models included the effects of treatment group, phase (3 levels), and the treatment group by phase interaction.
The ASI is a multidimensional assessment of substance-related problems which yields composite scores for alcohol use, drug use, psychiatric status, medical status, legal status, family/social relationships, and employment status. Composite scores range from 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating more significant problems."|In-treatment (months 1-3), 3 Month Post-treatment (months 4-6), 6 Month Post-Treatment (months 7-9)|Only women were included in this analysis.||change in ASI Alcohol composite score||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838552|NCT01318538|Secondary|Percent Change in Mean Alcohol Use Days for Women|This represents the percent change from baseline in the mean number of alcohol use days. Days of alcohol use was assessed using the Timeline Follow-Back at baseline and then monthly for 9 months. The In-Treatment phase includes months 1-3, the 3 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 4-6, and the 6 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 7-9. The in-treatment and 2 post-treatment phases were compared to baseline alcohol use data. Outcomes were analyzed using loglinear (negative binomial) regression models with estimation via generalized estimating equations (GEE). The models included the effects of treatment group, phase (3 levels), and the treatment group by phase interaction.|In-treatment (months 1-3), 3 Month Post-treatment (months 4-6), 6 Month Post-Treatment (months 7-9)|Some participants did not complete this measure at the specified time points. Only women were included in this analysis.||percent change in Alcohol Use Days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839187|NCT01324687|Secondary|Cost of Care|Comparison of cost of care between intervention and control groups.|Up to 36 months|The cost data was not available from the Finance Office from Rochester General Hospital or Thompson Hospital so this analysis was not performed.|||||
838553|NCT01318538|Primary|Percent Change in Mean Days of Any Substance Use for Women|This represents the percent change from baseline in the mean number of days per month of any substance use (i.e. drug and/or alcohol) for women. Days of substance use was assessed using the Timeline Follow-Back at baseline and then monthly for 9 months. The In-Treatment phase includes months 1-3, the 3 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 4-6, and the 6 Month Post-Treatment phase includes months 7-9. The in-treatment and 2 post-treatment phases were compared to baseline data of mean days of any substance use. Outcomes were analyzed using loglinear (negative binomial) regression models with estimation via generalized estimating equations (GEE). The models included the effects of treatment group, phase (3 levels), and the treatment group by phase interaction.|In-treatment (months 1-3), 3 Month Post-treatment (months 4-6), 6 Month Post-Treatment (months 7-9)|Only women were included in this analysis.||% change in mean substance use days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838554|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Grade 3 or 4 Thrombocytopenia During Treatment Within 48 Weeks|Grading was according to the DMID Toxicity Tables (version 2.0). Participants with multiple abnormalities were counted only once in the worst category.|within 48 weeks|Participants in the Safety Set with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838555|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Grade 3 or 4 Neutropenia During Treatment Within 48 Weeks|Grading was according to the DMID Toxicity Tables (version 2.0). Participants with multiple abnormalities were counted only once in the worst category.|within 48 weeks|Participants in the Safety Set with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838556|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Grade 3 or 4 Anemia During Treatment Within 48 Weeks|"Grading was according to the Modified Division of Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (DMID) Toxicity Tables (version 2.0).
Participants with multiple abnormalities were counted only once in the worst category."|within 48 weeks|Participants in the Safety Set with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838557|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Abnormalities Within 48 Weeks|"ALT abnormalities were summarized as participants who had either:
ALT > 2 x upper limit of normal (ULN) during the study and > 2 x ULN at baseline
ALT > 3 x ULN during the study and > 2 x ULN at baseline"|within 48 weeks|Participants in the Safety Set, defined as having received at least one dose of study medication, with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838558|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With End of Treatment Response (ETR) at Treatment End Within 48 Weeks|ETR was defined as serum HCV RNA < LOQ at treatment end (completed or prematurely discontinued).|at treatment end within 48 weeks|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838559|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Extended Rapid Virologic Response (eRVR) From 4 to 12 Weeks of Treatment|eRVR was defined as achieving RVR4 and maintaining HCV RNA < LOQ until Week 12.|from 4 to 12 weeks of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838560|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Early Virologic Response (cEVR) After 12 Weeks of Treatment|cEVR was defined as serum HCV RNA < LOQ after 12 weeks of treatment.|after 12 weeks of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838561|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Partial Early Virologic Response (pEVR) After 12 Weeks of Treatment|pEVR was defined as a ≥ 2 log10 decrease in HCV RNA and still detectable (≥ LOQ) after 12 weeks of treatment.|after 12 weeks of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838562|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Early Virologic Response (EVR) After 12 Weeks of Treatment|EVR was defined as a ≥ 2 log10 decrease in HCV RNA or HCV RNA < LOQ after 12 weeks of treatment.|after 12 weeks of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838563|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Rapid Virologic Response (RVR) After 4 Weeks of Treatment (RVR4)|RVR4 was defined as serum HCV RNA < LOQ after 4 weeks of treatment.|after 4 weeks of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838564|NCT01318694|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved SVR 24 Weeks After the End of Treatment (SVR24)|SVR24 was defined as HCV RNA laboratory value < LOQ 24 weeks after the end of treatment.|24 weeks after the end of treatment|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data||percentage of participants|||Number
838565|NCT01318694|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Sustained Virologic Response (SVR) 12 Weeks After the End of Treatment (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA laboratory value below the level of quantification (< LOQ; i.e., 25 IU/ml) 12 weeks after the end of treatment.|12 weeks after the end of treatment|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
838566|NCT01318733|Primary|Long Term Safety & Efficacy of CD07805/47 Gel 0.5% in Subjects With Moderate to Severe Facial Erythema Associated With Rosacea.|"Static evaluation of erythema severity using the Clinician Erythema Assessment (CEA) - Grade/Description 0 / Clear Skin with no signs of erythema
/ Almost clear; slight redness
/ Mild erythema; definite redness
/ Moderate erythema; marked redness
/ Severe erythema; fiery redness
Change in CEA from Baseline CEA (T0 at Baseline visit Day 1) at T3 of each post-baseline visit, including Day 1."|Over 1 year|||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838567|NCT01318876|Primary|Number of Participants Who Had Experienced a New Health Problem or the Worsening of an Existing Health Condition That Resulted in Work Absenteeism.||day 8 and 29|||participants|||Number
838568|NCT01318876|Primary|Number of Participants Who Had Experienced a New Health Problem or the Worsening of an Existing Health Condition That Resulted in a Medical Consultation||at day 8 and 29|||participants|||Number
838569|NCT01318915|Primary|Percentage of Participants Successfully Withdrawn From Immunosuppression and Remain Off Immunosuppression for at Least 52 Weeks.|Participants are considered as successfully withdrawn from immunosuppression if they remain off immunosuppression for at least 52 weeks without evidence of rejection, as determined by a biopsy performed 52 weeks after completion of immunosuppression withdrawal. All participants who fail to complete immunosuppression withdrawal, regardless of reason, or fail to have a biopsy 52 weeks after completion of immunosuppression withdrawal will be considered to have failed. The endpoint will be summarized with a two-sided, 95% exact binomial confidence interval.|Transplantation through 52 weeks after stopping all immunosuppression.|Transplanted Participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838572|NCT01318993|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Version 2, EuroQol 5 Dimensional (EQ-5D), Work and Productivity Activity Impairment-Crohn's Disease (WPAI-CD) and Disability Over 112 Weeks|IBDQ, SF-36, EQ-5D, WPAI-CD, and disability scores were all health outcome related scores that were based on assessment of participants based on different questionnaire. Each scoring scale had different range and participants were planned to be rated separately based on each scale.|Baseline (Week 0) and up to 112 weeks|ITT population was planned to be analyzed for this study. However, this outcome measure was not analyzed due to termination of study and no data was collected for this outcome measure.|||||
838573|NCT01318993|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Response (CDAI Decrease of at Least 100 Points From Baseline ([Week 0] of Prior Induction Study) in the Sub-population of Non-responders at Study Entry Over 112 Weeks|The CDAI score was determined by interactive voice response relationship (IVRS) based on the combination of participant and investigator entries and standardized weight determination. Haematocrit values received from the central laboratory on the day of the visit were to be utilized for calculation of the CDAI scores. The Baseline (Week 0) CDAI score was defined as the last evaluation prior to or on the date the first dose of investigational product was taken. Remissions are defined as subjects with CDAI score of < 150 points. Percentages are based on the number of subjects with observed data. No imputation for missing data was performed.|Baseline (Week 0) and up to 112 weeks|ITT population was planned to be analyzed for this study.However, this outcome measure was not analyzed due to termination of study and no data was collected for this outcome measure.|||||
838574|NCT01318993|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission (CDAI Score Less Than 150) for All Participants, for Participants in Remission at Baseline (Week 0), and for Participants Not in Remission at Baseline Over 108 Weeks|The CDAI score was determined by interactive voice response relationship (IVRS) based on the combination of participant and investigator entries and standardized weight determination. Haematocrit values received from the central laboratory on the day of the visit were to be utilized for calculation of the CDAI scores. The Baseline (Week 0) CDAI score was defined as the last evaluation prior to or on the date the first dose of investigational product is taken. The CDAI score was measured over 108 weeks although it was planned to be measured till 112 weeks. Remissions are defined as subjects with CDAI score of < 150 points. Percentages are based on the number of subjects with observed data. No imputation for missing data was performed. Combined data for participants with remission at Baseline and without remission at Baseline has been presented.|Baseline (Week 0) and up to 108 weeks|Safety population. Only the participants available at the time of assessment were analyzed.||Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838575|NCT01318993|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Score Over 108 Weeks|The CDAI score was determined by interactive voice response relationship (IVRS) based on the combination of participant,investigator entries, standardized weight determination, and Hematocrit values received from the central laboratory. The Baseline CDAI score was recorded pre-dose on Week 0. Change from Baseline is the value at indicated time point minus the Baseline value. Remissions are defined as participants with CDAI score of < 150 points. No imputation for missing data was performed. The assessment was based on questionnaire like number of liquid stool in past 7 days, abdominal pain, other symptoms, antidiarrheal use, abdominal mass, anemia, and body weight. The total score is summation of all individual sub-scores. CDAI scoring scale ranges from 0-500 and a score of 150 or below indicates remission and a score above 450 indicates extremely severe disease. A decrease in CDAI over time indicates improvement in disease activity.|Baseline (Week 0) and up to 108 weeks|Safety population. Only the participants available at the time of assessment were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838576|NCT01318993|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Change From Baseline (Week 0) in Corrected QT Interval (QTc) Value|QTc is the corrected QT interval as measured by the electrocardiogram (ECG). ECG parameters including the change from Baseline in the QTc interval values QTcF and QTcB were summarised. The QTcF is Fridericia’s formula and defined as the QT interval/cubed root of the R-R interval. The QTcB is the Bazett’s formula defined as the QT/squared root of the R-R interval. The number of participants with change from Baseline in the QTcF and QTcB intervals of >30, 30 to <60 and >=60 milliseconds were assessed at Week 24, 48, 72, 108, and Week 112. The last value on or prior to the treatment start date was considered the Baseline value (Week 0). Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (week 0) and Weeks 24, 48, 72, 108, and 112 (4 weeks post treatment)|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838577|NCT01318993|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in Albumin|Change from Baseline in albumin was assessed to monitor liver function. Blood samples were taken at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, and 4 Weeks post treatment. The last value on or prior to the treatment start date (Week 0) was considered the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value at the time point indicated minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and up to Week 112|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Grams/Liter (G/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838578|NCT01318993|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in Total Bilirubin|Changes from Baseline (Week 0) in total bilirubin (TB) was assessed to monitor liver function. Blood samples were taken at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, and 4 Weeks post-treatment. The last value on or prior to the treatment start date was considered the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value at the time point indicated minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and up to Week 112|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||micromole/Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
838579|NCT01318993|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in ALT, AST, ALP, and GGT as a Function of Liver Function Test (LFT)|Changes in Baseline in ALP, ALT, AST, and GGT were assessed to monitor liver function. Blood samples were taken at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, and 4 Weeks post-treatment. The last value on or prior to the treatment start date was considered the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value at the time point indicated minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and up to Week 112|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||International Unit per Liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838580|NCT01318993|Secondary|Number of Participants With Shifts From Baseline (Week 0) for the Indicated Clinical Chemistry Parameters|Clinical chemistry parameters included platelets, total protein, phosphorous, albumin, sodium, potassium, chloride, calcium, glucose, gamma-glutamyl transferase, total bilirubin (TB), direct bilirubin (DB), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), blood urea nitrogen (BUN)/urea, creatinine, uric acid, bicarbonate, lactate dehydrogenase, cholesterol, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), gamma glutamyl transferases (GGT), and creatine kinase. The Baseline value is defined as the value obtained at Week 0. The number of participants with the indicated clinical chemistry parameters' data reference range shifts from Baseline (defined as shift to low, shift to normal or no change, or shift to high) until 4 weeks post-treatment are presented.|Baseline (Week 0) and up to Week 112|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838581|NCT01318993|Secondary|Number of Participants With Shifts From Baseline (Week 0) for the Indicated Hematology Parameters|Hematology parameters measured included platelets, neutrophils (NL), lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, basophils, hematocrit, band cells, red blood cell (RBC) count, hemoglobin, white blood cell (WBC) count, and segmented (seg) NL. The Baseline value is defined as the value obtained at Week 0. The number of participants with the indicated hematology parameters data reference range shifts from Baseline (defined as shift to low, shift to normal or no change, shift to high) until 4 weeks post treatment are presented.|Baseline (Week 0) and up to Week 112|Safety Population. Only the participants available at the time of analysis were included.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838582|NCT01318993|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in Heart Rate (HR) Over Period|The HR values were obtained as part of vital sign monitoring and measured after the participant was at rest in the supine position for at least 5 minutes. Change from Baseline in HR was assessed at Week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108 and 4 weeks post-treatment. The Baseline value is defined as the value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (week 0) and up to Week 112|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
838583|NCT01318993|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Week 0) in Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure (SBP and DBP) Over Period|The SBP and DBP values were obtained as part of vital sign monitoring and measured after the participant was at rest in the supine position for at least 5 minutes. Baseline value was recorded at Week 0. Change from Baseline measurements in SBP and DBP were assessed at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108 and 4 weeks post-treatment. The Baseline value is defined as the value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the value at Baseline.|Baseline (Week 0) and up to Week 112|Safety Population. Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838584|NCT01318993|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events (AE) and Any Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death; was life threatening; required hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in disability/incapacity; was a congenital anomaly/birth defect. The Safety population consisted of all participants who enrolled in the study except those who did not take >=1 dose of investigational product.|Up to Week 112|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
838585|NCT01319045|Secondary|Quality of Life|Change in quality of life as assessed by SF-36 QOL|3 months|unable to analyze because study was terminated prematurely and therefore follow up assessments were not obtained|||||
838586|NCT01319045|Secondary|Serum Brain Natriuretic Peptide (BNP)|Change in serum BNP level|3 months|unable to analyze because study was terminated prematurely and therefore follow up assessments were not obtained|||||
838587|NCT01319045|Secondary|Exercise Capacity|Change in exercise duration (modified Bruce protocol), maximal oxygen consumption (VO2 max), and/or VE/VCO2 ratio.|3 months|unable to analyze because study was terminated prematurely and therefore follow up assessments were not obtained|||||
838588|NCT01319045|Primary|Safety and Tolerability|Number of Participants with adverse events, specifically mortality and heart failure.|3 months|Number of adverse events.||participants|||Number
838589|NCT01319110|Secondary|Comparison of Serum CoQ10 Levels Randomized to Supplementation vs. Placebo|The secondary outcome will be to compare serum CoQ10 levels among those post-arrest patients randomized to CoQ10 supplementation vs placebo.|1 year|This data was not collected when the study was performed|||||
838590|NCT01319110|Primary|Prevalence of Low Serum CoQ10 Levels in Cardiac Arrest Patients|The primary outcome will be describing the prevalence of low serum CoQ10 levels compared to standard laboratory control values.|Baseline|||ug/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838591|NCT01319318|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Vitreous Cell Count of 0|The study eye was dilated and the investigator used an instrument to count the number of visible cells in the vitreous, the jelly-like fluid that fills the back of the eye, using the following scale: 0 (no cells) best, +1 (1-10 cells), +2 (11-30 cells), +3 (31-50 cells) and +4 (>50 cells) worst.|Week 4|Intent to treat population included all randomized participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838592|NCT01319383|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Developing Cancer Within 5 Years Following >/= 8 Vorinostat Dose Exposures|Development of a new cancer within the 5 years of taking their last dose of VOR 400 mg PO.All participants receiving one or more doses of VOR 400 mg PO in any and all Arms of the study. Pre-specified to be reported as one group.|From last dose Vorinostat to 5 years afterwards|At end of study, participants receiving >/= 8 doses of Vorinostat are enrolled in a 5-year cancer incidence database to be monitored for the occurrence of cancer.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838593|NCT01319383|Secondary|Number of Participants With Confirmed Hematologic Toxicity >/= Grade 2 and Related to VOR Per Division of AIDS (DAIDS) Grading Table|DAIDS Grading Table- Grade 1- mild, Grade 2- moderate; Grade 3- severe Grade 4- potentially life-threatening. Pre specified to combine all participants into one arm.|24 hrs following single dose and 1 week after last of multiple dose sequence|All participants receiving one or more doses of VOR 400 mg PO in any and all Arms of the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
839188|NCT01324687|Primary|Emergency Department Use|Use of emergency department by individuals with access to care via telemedicine as compared to those without such access to care.|Up to 42 months|||Emergency dept use rate per person-month|||Number
838596|NCT01319383|Primary|Number of Participants Exhibiting an in Vivo Resting CD4+ T-cell-associated HIV RNA (Rc-RNA) Increase Following Multiple (n = 10) Interval Doses|Participants in Arm 2, Step 4 were analyzed for an in vivo increase in the resting CD4+ T cell- associated HIV RNA (RCVL) after administration of 10 doses of VOR 400 mg PO, given 72 hours apart.|Baseline, Visit 9|Participants who demonstrated a significant in vivo response after taking 2 doses of VOR 400 mg PO, each dose taken 72 hours apart were administered 10 doses of VOR based on the optimal dosing of 72 hours.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838597|NCT01319383|Primary|Number of Participants With a Significant in Vivo Response in Resting Cell Infection (RCI) and HIV RNA After Paired Doses|Induction of significant in vivo RCI and RCLV response after 2 doses of VOR 400 mg PO administered 48 hours apart or 72 hours apart|Baseline, Visit 6|Participants showing an in vivo response in resting CD4+ T cell- associated HIV RNA (RCVL) after a single dose of VOR were administered 2 doses of VOR 400 mg separated by either 48 or 72 hours to determine the optimal interval/spacing to observe a significant in vivo response in the RCVL after the paired doses.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838598|NCT01319383|Primary|Number of Participants Exhibiting an in Vivo Resting CD4+ T-cell-associated HIV RNA (Rc-RNA) Increase Following Each of Two Multiple Dose Cycles (11 Doses/Cycle)|Participants in Arm 1, Step 3 were analyzed for an in vivo increase in the resting CD4+ T cell- associated HIV RNA (RCVL) after 11 doses of VOR 400 mg PO. This cycle was repeated after a 5 - 8 week rest period for a 2nd series and measurement.|Baseline, Visit 18, Visit 29|Participants with resting CD4+ T-cell-associated HIV RNA (rc-RNA) increases after receiving daily VOR Monday through Wednesday for 8 weekly cycles were enrolled.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838599|NCT01319383|Primary|Number of Participants Exhibiting an in Vivo Resting CD4+ T Cell- Associated HIV RNA (RCVL) Increase After Receiving a Single Dose of VOR 400 mg PO|Participants in Arm 1 and 2 were analyzed in Step 2 for an in vivo increase in resting CD4+ T cell- associated HIV RNA (RCVL) after administration of a single dose of VOR 400 mg PO|Arm1: Baseline, Visit 5 and Arm 2: Baseline and Visit 3|||Participants|||Count of Participants
838600|NCT01319396|Primary|Accuracy of Breathing Rate Measurement|accuracy of breathing rate indicated by the BiancaMed BM07 device, compared to that indicated by Somnoscreen to be +/- 5 breaths per minute (95% confidence)|2 minutes|Each participant gives 8 test points, thus with 22+ participants, there are >160 test points, which is sufficient to give a standard deviation.||breaths per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
838601|NCT01319422|Secondary|To Correlate Drug Induced Changes in F Actin With Cytokine Profile.|Correlation to be determined upon completion of study treatment|Research blood draw will be obtained at baseline, and at 2-4 hr (on day 1), 1 wk, and 4 wk after initiation of cycles 1 and 2.|The actin polymerization assay that was to be used for this outcome was not reproducible; hence, the cytokine profile of actin polymerized cells could not be pursued. Data were not analyzed.|||||
838602|NCT01319422|Secondary|To Correlate Drug Induced Changes in F Actin Polymerization With Adverse Effects and Clinical Responses.|Research bone marrow aspirate is obtained to assess response (optional, but recommended), and to document complete remission, if applicable. Correlation to be determined upon completion of study treatment|Research bone marrow aspirate is obtained at baseline and after completion of 2 cycles of therapy (approximately 56 days)|The actin polymerization assay that was to be used for this outcome was not reproducible and data were not analyzed.|||||
838603|NCT01319422|Secondary|To Compare the Effect of Continuous Versus Intermittent Regimens on F Actin Polymerization in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells and Activation of Tumor Antigen-specific T Cells, as Well as Innate Lymphocytes (Natural Killer or Natural Killer T Cells).|Correlation to be determined upon completion of study treatment|Research blood draw will be obtained at baseline, and at 2-4 hr (on day 1), 1 wk, and 4 wk after initiation of cycles 1 and 2.|N/A: data were not collected on this outcome; initial F actin polymerization assay was unreliable and not reproducible; hence, this outcome could not be pursued.|||||
838604|NCT01319422|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Response, Analyzed Per International Myeloma Working Group Response Criteria|All partial and complete responses must be confirmed with another efficacy assessment in no less than 4 weeks apart.|After the initial efficacy assessment at the completion of cycle 2 (at approximately 56 days), efficacy assessments will be made after every other cycle (approximately every 56 days).|||percentage of participants|||Number
838605|NCT01319422|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Response, Analyzed Per International Myeloma Working Group Response Criteria|All partial and complete responses must be confirmed with another efficacy assessment in no less than 4 weeks apart.|Efficacy assessments will be made after the first two cycles of therapy (approximately 56 days--each cycle is 28 days)|||percentage of participants|||Number
838606|NCT01319500|Primary|Reasons for OC Prescriptions by Gynecologists and Dermatologists||February 2009 - March 2009|||number of participants|||Number
838607|NCT01319500|Primary|Non-contraceptive Reasons for OC Prescriptions (Reported by Women Who Used OCs for Non-contraceptive Reasons Only)|"Exclusively non-contraceptive reasons for OC prescriptions (no contraception intended; category non-contraceptive reasons only"|February 2009 - March 2009|||number of participants|||Number
838608|NCT01319500|Primary|"Non-contraceptive Reasons for OC Prescriptions (Reported by Women Who Used OCs for Contraceptive and Non-contraceptive and Non-contraceptive Only Reasons"|"Non-contraceptive reasons for OC prescriptions (including both categories: contraception plus non-contraceptive reasons and non-contraceptive reasons only"|February 2009 - March 2009|||number of participants|||Number
838609|NCT01319500|Primary|Reasons for OC Prescriptions|The main reasons for OC prescription: contraception only; contraception combined with non-contraceptive reasons; non-contraceptive reasons only.|February 2009 - March 2009|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838610|NCT01319500|Primary|OC Prescriptions by Treatment Group and Prescribing Medical Specialists|Prescriptions of Yasmin and Other OCs by different physicians (private gynecologists, public gynecologists and dermatologists)|February 2009 - March 2009|||Prescribing physicians|||Number
838611|NCT01319539|Secondary|Change in Ki-67 Expression|This is designed to evaluate response to therapy - comparing changes within group (example: invasive pre-MK-2206-treated core versus post-MK-2206-treated surgical tissue).|Baseline, 2 weeks (Day 0 - surgery)|Of the 12 participants enrolled and received study treatment, there were 7 participants with evaluable matched core and surgical specimen tissue.||percentage of cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
839189|NCT01324882|Primary|Time to Intubate the Cecum|The time in seconds that it required to intubate the cecum as defined in our protocol.|This outcome was measured the day of the procedure.|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
838612|NCT01319539|Secondary|Change in pS6 Levels|This is designed to evaluate response to therapy - comparing changes within group (example: invasive pre-MK-2206-treated core versus post-MK-2206-treated surgical tissue).|Baseline, 2 weeks (Day 0 - surgery)|Of the 12 participants enrolled and received study treatment, there were 7 participants with evaluable matched core and surgical specimen tissue.||percentage of cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
838613|NCT01319539|Primary|Change in pAKT Levels|This is designed to evaluate response to therapy - comparing changes within group (example: invasive pre-MK-2206-treated core versus post-MK-2206-treated surgical tissue).|Baseline, 2 weeks (Day 0 - surgery)|Of the 12 participants enrolled and received study treatment, there were 7 participants with evaluable matched core and surgical specimen tissue.||percentage of cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
838614|NCT01319552|Primary|Measure of Non-transferrin-bound Iron|"Comparison of increase in non-transferrin-bound iron for each participant between his or her fresh and old blood transfusion four hours after transfusion."|four hours after transfusion|||μM||Standard Deviation|Mean
838615|NCT01319617|Primary|Ocular Discomfort|Ocular discomfort in the study eye is reported by patients on a 100-mm visual analog scale (left end 0 mm, no discomfort; right end 100 mm, very severe discomfort) as the distance from the left end to the patient's mark after wearing the device for 24 hours at two occasions separated by one week. Values for both sessions were averaged.|After 24 hours of device wear|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
838616|NCT01319721|Secondary|Postoperative Conjunctival Inflammation|The presence of conjunctival inflammation around the surgical site was assessed at 4 weeks post-operatively and graded as 0 (none), i (mild), ii (moderate), and iii (severe).|One month|||eyes|Participants||Number
838617|NCT01319721|Secondary|Eye Movement Amplitude (EMA)||One Year|||millimeter|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838618|NCT01319721|Secondary|Healing Time of Corneal Epithelial Defect||Four Weeks|||days|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
838619|NCT01319721|Secondary|Complications||One year|||eyes|Participants||Number
838620|NCT01319721|Primary|Recurrence|Recurrence was defined as the presence of fibrovascular tissue in the surgical area and invasion onto the cornea. The appearance of the surgical bed in successful cases was graded as follows: grade A was defined as the operated eye being indistinguishable from a normal eye, grade B was defined as the presence of fine episcleral vessels without fibrous tissue in the surgical area extending up to the limbus but not beyond, and grade C was defined as the presence of fibrovascular tissue in the surgical area but without invasion onto the cornea.|One Year|||eyes|Participants||Number
838621|NCT01319773|Secondary|Number of Eyes With Ocular Symptoms Post-Dose During the Paired-Eye Phase (PEP) at Day 1|Number of eyes with ocular symptoms of any severity, post-dose in the paired-eye phase (PEP) at Day 1. Subjects evaluated the presence and severity of ocular symptoms in each eye. The severity of each symptom (blurring, foreign body sensation, pain, burning/stinging, tearing, and itching) were recorded on a 5-point scale (0=none, +0.5=very mild, +1=mild, +2=moderate, and +3=severe).|Day 1|Per Protocol: All randomized subjects who received their assigned study medication and closely followed the protocol.||Number of Eyes|Participants||Number
838622|NCT01319773|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Reported Ocular Symptoms During the Parallel-Group Phase (PGP)|Number of subjects who reported ocular symptoms of any severity during the parallel-group phase (PGP) of the study. Subjects evaluated the presence and severity of ocular symptoms in each eye. The severity of each symptom (blurring, foreign body sensation, pain, burning/stinging, tearing, and itching) were recorded on a 5-point scale (0=none, +0.5=very mild,+1=mild, +2=moderate, and +3=severe).|3 Days|Per Protocol: All randomized subjects who received their assigned study medication and closely followed the protocol.||Number of Subjects|||Number
838623|NCT01319773|Primary|Concentration of Cyclosporine Measured in Blood at Day 1 in the Parallel-Group Phase (PGP)|Concentration of cyclosporine measured in blood at Day 1 of the parallel-group phase (PGP). Blood samples were collected up to 3 hours post-dose and concentrations of cyclosporine were measured.|Day 1|Safety Population: All randomized subjects who were treated with at least 1 dose of study medication.||Nanogram/milliliter (ng/mL)|||Number
838624|NCT01319799|Secondary|Cerebrospinal Fluid(CSF) Levels of S-100B(Microgram/Liter)|"Differences in preoperative vs postoperative CSF levels of S-100B in microgram/Liter
The assumption is that a cardiac open heart surgical procedure with cardiopulmonary bypass will influence the postoperative level of marker of neuronal cell damage in the central nerve system. An increase in the levels, compared to the preoperative values, indicates neuronal cell damage detectable in the CSF, namely the brains own extracellular fluid."|24 Hours after Surgery|||microgram/Liter||Standard Error|Mean
838625|NCT01319799|Primary|Transcranial Doppler(TCD) Microembolic Signals During Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Surgery|Transcranial Doppler measurement of microembolic signals will be measured during the surgical procedure.Microembolic signals are detected by offline analysis of the Dopplerspectral analysis of the blood flow in the medial cerebral artery. Different intensities (dB),flow direction and time frame appearances in the Doppler spectral envelope is distinguishable for a neurosonolgist according to predefined criteria for an embolic signal-defined in previous litterature.The total amount of signals during one surgical procedure is counted. The appearance of microembolic signals related to specific procedures performed during cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass is noted. The exact time range is not possible to estimate in advance,due to the fact that each surgical procedure varies in time.The range of values for each individual patient, based on pilos, will vary from 50 to approximately 1500 embolic counts for one surgical procedure. A high value is negative for the patient.|(day 1) TCD will be performed from start of surgery till end of surgery-exact time cannot be stated in advance|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
838626|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoint Results Between Standard and Long Lesions for the Pulsar Stent - 30-day Clinical Success|Compare the 30-day clinical success results between evaluable subjects treated with standard length lesions (between 20 mm and 140 mm) and evaluable subjects treated for long lesions (between 141 mm and 190 mm) for the Pulsar stent group.|30 days|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838627|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoint Results Between Standard and Long Lesions for the Pulsar Stent - Acute Procedure Success|Compare the acute procedure success results between evaluable subjects treated with standard length lesions (between 20 mm and 140 mm) and evaluable subjects treated for long lesions (between 141 mm and 190 mm) for the Pulsar stent group.|Acute / Date of Procedure|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838628|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoint Results Between Standard and Long Lesions for the Pulsar Stent - Secondary Patency Rate at 12 Months|Compare the secondary patency rate at 12 months between evaluable subjects treated with standard length lesions (between 20 mm and 140 mm) and evaluable subjects treated for long lesions (between 141 mm and 190 mm) for the Pulsar stent group.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838629|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoint Results Between Standard and Long Lesions for the Pulsar Stent - Primary Assisted Patency at 12 Months|Compare the primary assisted patency rate at 12 months between evaluable subjects treated with standard length lesions (between 20 mm and 140 mm) and evaluable subjects treated for long lesions (between 141 mm and 190 mm) for the Pulsar stent group.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838630|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoint Results Between Standard and Long Lesions for the Pulsar Stent - Stent Fracture Rate at 12 Months|Compare the stent fracture rate at 12 months between evaluable subjects treated with standard length lesions (between 20 mm and 140 mm) and evaluable subjects treated for long lesions (between 141 mm and 190 mm) for the Pulsar stent group.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838631|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoint Results Between Standard and Long Lesions for the Pulsar Stent - Primary Patency at 12 Months|Compare the primary patency rate at 12 months between evaluable subjects treated with standard length lesions (between 20 mm and 140 mm) and evaluable subjects treated for long lesions (between 141 mm and 190 mm) for the Pulsar stent group.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838632|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoint Results Between Standard and Long Lesions for the Pulsar Stent - MAE Rate|Compare the MAE rate results between evaluable subjects treated with standard length lesions (between 20 mm and 140 mm) and evaluable subjects treated for long lesions (between 141 mm and 190 mm) for the Pulsar stent group.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838633|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoints Results Between Occlusive and Non-occlusive Lesions for Astron and Pulsar Stent - 30-Day Clinical Success|Compare the 30-day clinical success results between evaluable subjects treated for occlusive lesions (100% stenosis) and evaluable subjects treated for non-occlusive lesions (70% - 99% stenosis) for the Astron stent and the Pulsar stent group.|30 days|Includes all participants who underwent implantation.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838634|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoints Results Between Occlusive and Non-occlusive Lesions for Astron and Pulsar Stent - Acute Procedure Success|Compare the acute procedure success results between evaluable subjects treated for occlusive lesions (100% stenosis) and evaluable subjects treated for non-occlusive lesions (70% - 99% stenosis) for the Astron stent and the Pulsar stent group.|Acute / Date of Procedure|Includes all participants who underwent implantation.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838635|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoints Results Between Occlusive and Non-occlusive Lesions for Astron and Pulsar Stent - Secondary Patency Rate at 12-Months|Compare the secondary patency (freedom from bypass and amputation of the target limb) at 12-months results between evaluable subjects treated for occlusive lesions (100% stenosis) and evaluable subjects treated for non-occlusive lesions (70% - 99% stenosis) for the Astron stent and the Pulsar stent group.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838636|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoints Results Between Occlusive and Non-occlusive Lesions for Astron and Pulsar Stent - Primary Assisted Patency at 12-Months|Compare the primary assisted patency (freedom from remote TVR) at 12-months results between evaluable subjects treated for occlusive lesions (100% stenosis) and evaluable subjects treated for non-occlusive lesions (70% - 99% stenosis) for the Astron stent and the Pulsar stent group.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838637|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoints Results Between Occlusive and Non-occlusive Lesions for Astron and Pulsar Stent - Primary Patency at 12-months|Compare the primary patency at 12-months results between evaluable subjects treated for occlusive lesions (100% stenosis) and evaluable subjects treated for non-occlusive lesions (70% - 99% stenosis) for the Astron stent and the Pulsar stent group.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and had a 12-month evaluable duplex ultrasound assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838638|NCT01319812|Secondary|Comparison of Endpoints Results Between Occlusive and Non-occlusive Lesions for Astron and Pulsar Stent - 30 Day MAE Rate|Compare the 30 day MAE rate results between evaluable subjects treated for occlusive lesions (100% stenosis) and evaluable subjects treated for non-occlusive lesions (70% - 99% stenosis) for the Astron stent and the Pulsar stent group.|30 days|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838639|NCT01319812|Secondary|Secondary Safety Assessment for Astron and Pulsar Stent: Adverse Event Rates|Evaluate the rates of all individual adverse event types that are not included in the primary endpoint analyses for the Astron stent and the Pulsar stent group. Please see the Serious Adverse Events and Other Adverse Events sections for event details.|12 month|Includes all participants who underwent implantation.||Participants with event|||Number
838640|NCT01319812|Secondary|Clinical Success|Evaluate the 30-day clinical success of the procedure. The 30-day clinical success is defined as completion of the assigned procedure, the stented lesion having less than 30% residual stenosis determined by angiography immediately after stent placement and no MAEs within 30 days of the index procedure.|30 days|The Astron stent group includes all participants who underwent implantation. The Pulsar stent group includes all participants who underwent implantation except for one, due to subject death occurring in the first 30 days.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838641|NCT01319812|Secondary|Acute Procedural Success for Astron and Pulsar Stent|Evaluate the acute procedural success of the Astron and Pulsar stent. Acute procedural success is defined as completion of the assigned procedure, the stented lesion having less than 30% residual stenosis determined by angiography immediately after stent placement and no MAEs before hospital discharge.|30 days|Includes all participants who underwent implantation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838642|NCT01319812|Secondary|Functional Assessments for Subjects With the Astron and Pulsar Stents - Walking Impairment Questionnaire Stair Climbing Score|"The purpose of this endpoint is to compare Walking Impairment Questionnaire Stair Climbing score between baseline and 12 months post-index procedure. The WIQ is a subjective questionnaire completed by participants at baseline and the 12 month visit which asks questions about mobility to assess walking impairment. Larger numbers indicate better outcomes, with a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 100. Please see the following publication for further information:
Hiatt WR, Hirsch AT, Regensteiner JG, et al. Clinical Trials for Claudication. Assessment of Exercise Performance, Functional Status, and Clinical Endpoints. Vascular Clinical Trialists. Circulation. 1995;92:614-621"|12 months|Analysis conducted on paired data. WIQ stair climbing scores were available for 142 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Astron stent group. WIQ stair climbing scores were available for 255 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Pulsar stent group.||Units on a scale (WIQ score)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838643|NCT01319812|Secondary|Functional Assessments for Subjects With the Astron and Pulsar Stents - Walking Impairment Questionnaire Walking Speed Score|"The purpose of this endpoint is to compare Walking Impairment Questionnaire Walking Speed score between baseline and 12 months post-index procedure. The WIQ is a subjective questionnaire completed by participants at baseline and the 12 month visit which asks questions about mobility to assess walking impairment. Larger numbers indicate better outcomes, with a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 100.. Please see the following publication for further information:
Hiatt WR, Hirsch AT, Regensteiner JG, et al. Clinical Trials for Claudication. Assessment of Exercise Performance, Functional Status, and Clinical Endpoints. Vascular Clinical Trialists. Circulation. 1995;92:614-621"|12 months|Analysis conducted on paired data. WIQ walking speed scores were available for 143 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Astron stent group. WIQ walking speed scores were available for 263 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Pulsar stent group.||Units on a scale (WIQ score)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838644|NCT01319812|Secondary|Functional Assessments for Subjects With the Astron and Pulsar Stents - Walking Impairment Questionnaire Walking Distance Score|"The purpose of this endpoint is to compare Walking Impairment Questionnaire Walking Distance score between baseline and 12 months post-index procedure. The WIQ is a subjective questionnaire completed by participants at baseline and the 12 month visit which asks questions about mobility to assess walking impairment. Larger numbers indicate better outcomes, with a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 100.. Please see the following publication for further information:
Hiatt WR, Hirsch AT, Regensteiner JG, et al. Clinical Trials for Claudication. Assessment of Exercise Performance, Functional Status, and Clinical Endpoints. Vascular Clinical Trialists. Circulation. 1995;92:614-621"|12 months|Analysis conducted on paired data. WIQ walking distance scores were available for 144 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Astron stent group. WIQ walking distance scores were available for 264 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Pulsar stent group.||Units on a scale (WIQ score)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838645|NCT01319812|Secondary|Functional Assessments for Subjects With the Astron and Pulsar Stents - Walking Impairment Questionnaire PAD Specific Score|"The purpose of this endpoint is to compare Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ) Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD) specific score between baseline and 12 months post-index procedure. The WIQ is a subjective questionnaire completed by participants at baseline and the 12 month visit which asks questions about mobility to assess walking impairment. Larger numbers indicate better outcomes, with a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 100. Please see the following publication for further information:
Hiatt WR, Hirsch AT, Regensteiner JG, et al. Clinical Trials for Claudication. Assessment of Exercise Performance, Functional Status, and Clinical Endpoints. Vascular Clinical Trialists. Circulation. 1995;92:614-621"|12 months|Analysis conducted on paired data. WIQ PAD responses were available for 143 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Astron stent group. WIQ PAD responses were available for 265 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Pulsar stent group.||Units on a scale (WIQ score)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838646|NCT01319812|Secondary|Functional Assessments for Subjects With the Astron and Pulsar Stents - Six-Minute Walk Test|The purpose of this endpoint is to compare the distance walked during the 6-minute walk test between baseline and 12 months post-index procedure.|12 months|Analysis conducted on paired data. Six-minute walk test results were available for 131 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Astron stent group. Six-minute walk test results were available for 247 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Pulsar stent group.||Feet||Standard Deviation|Mean
838647|NCT01319812|Secondary|Functional Assessments for Subjects With the Astron and Pulsar Stents - Ankle - Brachial Index (ABI) Measurement|The purpose of this endpoint is to compare the ABI measurements between baseline and 12 months post-index procedure. ABI is the ratio of systolic blood pressure of ankle relative to systolic blood pressure of arm.|12 months|Analysis conducted on paired data. ABI measurements were available for 141 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Astron stent group. ABI measurements were available for 266 participants from both baseline and the 12-month visit for the Pulsar stent group.||Ratio (ABI score)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838648|NCT01319812|Secondary|Secondary Effectiveness Assessment for the Astron and Pulsar Stents - Secondary Patency|Evaluate the secondary patency rate (freedom from bypass and amputation of the target limb) for the Astron and Pulsar stent at 12 months post-index procedure.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838649|NCT01319812|Secondary|Secondary Effectiveness Assessment for the Astron and Pulsar Stents - Primary Assisted Patency|Evaluate the primary assisted patency rate (freedom from remote Target Vessel Revascularization [TVR]) for the Astron and Pulsar stent at 12 months post-index procedure.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and were included in the 12-month ITT analysis population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838650|NCT01319812|Secondary|Secondary Effectiveness Assessment for the Astron Stent - Primary Patency Rate|Evaluate the primary patency of the Astron stent at 12 months post-index procedure as measured by duplex ultrasound. Primary patency is defined as freedom from more than 50% restenosis based on the duplex ultrasound peak systolic velocity ratio, comparing data within the treated segment to the proximal normal segment or based on a clinically-indicated TLR with angiographic evidence of > 50% stenosis.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and had a 12-month evaluable duplex ultrasound assessment.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838651|NCT01319812|Secondary|Secondary Safety Assessment for the Astron Stent - Distribution of MAE Rate|Evaluate the contribution of the individual rates of 30-day mortality and 12-month target lesion revascularization and index limb amputation rates to the primary endpoint for the Astron stent.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and either met the 30-day mortality categorization or completed a 12-month evaluation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838652|NCT01319812|Secondary|Stent Integrity Assessment for the Pulsar Stent: Stent Fracture Rate|Evaluate the Pulsar stent integrity as measured by x-ray at 12 months post-index procedure. An independent angiographic core laboratory reviewed x-ray imaging for presence or absence of a stent fracture. Fractures were assessed with Grade I indicating a single tine fracture, Grade II indicating multiple tine fracture, Grade III indicating stent fracture(s) with preserved alignment of the components, Grade IV indicating stent fracture(s) with mal-alignment of the components, and Grade V stent fracture(s) in a trans-axial spiral configuration. Generally, fractures of Grade I are least severe, increasing in severity to Grade V.|12 months|Participants with 12 month (395 day) diagnostic X-ray available for fracture evaluation.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838653|NCT01319812|Secondary|Long-Term Safety Assessment for the Pulsar Stent: Major Adverse Event Rate|Evaluate the long-term major adverse event rate of the Pulsar stent. Likewise, the endpoint will evaluate the contribution of the individual rates of 30-day mortality and 12-month target lesion revascularization and index limb amputation rates to this overall, long-term major adverse event rate.|12 months|Participants who reached at least 395 calendar days post procedure.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838654|NCT01319812|Secondary|Secondary Safety Assessment for the Pulsar Stent: Individual Rates of Mortality, TLR, and Index Limb Amputation|Evaluate the contribution of the individual rates of mortality, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and index limb amputation at 30 days post-index procedure to the primary safety endpoint for the Pulsar stent.|30 days|All participants implanted with an Astron Pulsar or Pulsar-18 stent.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838655|NCT01319812|Primary|Safety and Effectiveness Endpoint for the Astron Stent - Percentage of Participants With Major Adverse Events (MAE)|The primary endpoint for the Astron stent is a composite of the rate of procedure- or stent-related major adverse events at 12 months post-index procedure. The major adverse event rate includes 30-day mortality, along with 12-month rates of target lesion revascularization and index limb amputation. Success was measured against a performance goal of 15%, given a 7.5% expected 12-month MAE rate, with an assumed delta value of 7.5%.|12 months|Includes all participants who underwent successful implantation and either met the 30-day mortality categorization or completed a 12-month evaluation.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838656|NCT01319812|Primary|Safety Endpoint for the Pulsar Stent: Freedom From Procedure- or Stent-related Major Adverse Events|The primary safety endpoint for the Pulsar stent is the freedom from procedure- or stent-related major adverse events at 30 days post-index procedure. The major adverse event rate includes mortality, target lesion revascularization and index limb amputation.|30 days|All participants implanted with an Astron Pulsar or Pulsar-18 stent.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838657|NCT01319812|Primary|Effectiveness Endpoint for the Pulsar Stent: Primary Patency|The primary effectiveness endpoint for the Pulsar stent group is the primary patency rate at 12 months post-index procedure. Primary patency is defined as freedom from more than 50% restenosis based on the duplex ultrasound peak systolic velocity ratio, comparing data within the treated segment to the proximal normal segment or based on a clinically-indicated TLR with angiographic evidence of > 50% stenosis.|12 months|Participants for whom patency could be confirmed at 12 months.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838658|NCT01319851|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Chronic Graft-versus-host Disease (cGVHD), Measured by the NIH Criteria Consensus (NCC)|The severity criteria of chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) recommended by the NIH Criteria Consensus (NCC) was employed. The number of organs involved and the severity of the disease in these organs dictated the global summary score used to define the disease as mild, moderate, or severe. Mild disease indicates one or two organs involved each with a maximal score of 1. Moderate disease indicates three or more organs involved with a score of 2 in any individual organ, or lung involvement with a score of 1. Severe global GVHD is defined by a score of 3 in any organ, or a lung score of 2.|Day 100 post-transplant|||participants|||Number
838659|NCT01319851|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Acute Graft-versus-host Disease (aGVHD), Measured by NIH Consensus Criteria (NCC) Score: Grade II-IV|Cumulative Incidence of Grade II-IV aGVHD Score at 30 Days. The NIH Consensus grading and severity criteria includes physical assessments of skin, oral cavity, eyes, gynecological and laboratory data and patient reports. Each domain is scored from Grade 0 (no involvement) to Grade IV (severe involvement).|Day 30 post-transplant|||participants|||Number
838660|NCT01319851|Secondary|Incidence of 100% CD33 Donor Chimerism|CD33 chimerism was measured from peripheral blood lymphocytes 30 days post transplant. DNA chimerism analysis was performed by amplified fragment length polymorphism.|Day 30 post-transplant|||participants|||Number
838661|NCT01319851|Secondary|Incidence of Greater Than or Equal to 85% CD3 Donor Chimerism|CD3 chimerism was measured from peripheral blood lymphocytes 30 days post transplant. DNA chimerism analysis was performed by amplified fragment length polymorphism.|Day 30 post-transplant|||participants|||Number
838662|NCT01319851|Secondary|Number of Participants That Expressed Successful Neutrophil Engraftment|Neutrophil engraftment was assessed with absolute neutrophils >500*10^8/kg by 100 days post transplant. Neutrophils were counted by performing a complete blood cell count (CBC).|Day 100 post-transplant|||participants|||Number
839190|NCT01324882|Primary|Intubation of Cecum|The ability of endoscopist to intubate the cecum with enough control of the tip to abut the appendix or begin to retroflex in the cecum.|(day 1) Within time for performance of colonoscopy||||||
838663|NCT01319851|Secondary|Number of Participants That Expressed Grade 2 or 3 Regimen-Related Toxicity|Regimen-related toxicity was measured using the Bearman criteria. The Bearman criteria grades toxicity levels at Grade 1, Grade 2, Grade 3, and Grade 4. In this system, grade I toxicity is reversible without treatment and grade 2 is not life threatening, but requires treatment. Grade 3 requires life-support intervention and grade 4 is fatal. All regimen-related toxicities were determined to be unlikely attributable to the study drug.|Day 42 post-transplant|||participants|||Number
838664|NCT01319851|Primary|Feasibility of Alefacept Pre-conditioning, Measured by Number of Subjects With Full Donor Engraftment|All subjects received alefacept prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and were followed up to at least two years after transplantation to ensure successful engraftment.|Two years post-transplant|||participants|||Number
838665|NCT01319877|Secondary|Quality of Life: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 Questionnaire|Quality of life was assessed at baseline and every three months after treatment by the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. The possible score range was 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating better functioning.|Up to 36 Months|Evaluable participants.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838666|NCT01319877|Secondary|One-year Survival Rate by the Chemotherapy Regimen Subgroup||1 year|Participants with known prior chemotherapy regimens were evaluated||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838667|NCT01319877|Secondary|One-year Progression-free Survival Rate Per Chemotherapy Regimen Subgroup|One year progression-free survival rate was defined as the percentage of participants who were free of progression or death from the date when the participant signed the informed consent form to one year. Results are reported per participants' chemotherapy regimen subgroup.|1 year|Participants with known prior chemotherapy regimens were evaluated.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838668|NCT01319877|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Overall Response by the Chemotherapy Regimen Subgroup|Overall response was defined as complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) confirmed per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. CR: Disappearance of all target lesions, all non-target lesions, and no new lesions. PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. Results are reported per participants' chemotherapy regimen subgroup.|Up to 36 Months|Participants with known prior chemotherapy regimens were evaluated||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838669|NCT01319877|Secondary|One-year Survival Rate by the KRAS Subgroup||1 year|Participants with known KRAS status were evaluated||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838670|NCT01319877|Secondary|One-year Progression-free Survival Rate Per KRAS Subgroup|One year progression-free survival rate was defined as the percentage of participants who were free of progression or death from the date when the participant signed the informed consent form to one year. Results are reported per participants' Kirsten Rat Sarcoma Viral (KRAS) oncogene subgroup.|1 year|Participants with known KRAS status were evaluated.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838671|NCT01319877|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Overall Response Per Kirsten Rat Sarcoma Viral (KRAS) Oncogene Subgroup|Overall response was defined as complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) confirmed per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. CR: Disappearance of all target lesions, all non-target lesions, and no new lesions. PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. Results are reported per participants' Kirsten Rat Sarcoma Viral (KRAS) oncogene subgroup.|36 months|Participants with known KRAS status were evaluated.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838672|NCT01319877|Secondary|One-year Survival Rate||1 year|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838673|NCT01319877|Secondary|One-year Progression-free Survival Rate|One year progression-free survival rate was defined as the percentage of participants who were free of progression or death from the date when the participant signed the informed consent form to one year.|1 year|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838674|NCT01319877|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free-survival (PFS) was defined as the time from the date when the participant signed the informed consent form to the time of first documented disease progression or death, whichever occurred first.|36 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838675|NCT01319877|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Overall Response|Overall response was defined as complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) confirmed per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. CR: Disappearance of all target lesions, all non-target lesions, and no new lesions. PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions.|36 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838676|NCT01319877|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Bevacizumab-related Serious Adverse Events||36 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
838677|NCT01319877|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Bevacizumab-Related Adverse Events||36 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
838678|NCT01319877|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events of Special Interest||36 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
838679|NCT01319877|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Serious Adverse Events|A Serious Adverse Event (SAE) was any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose was fatal, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of an existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, was a congenital anomaly/birth defect, was medically significant, or required intervention to prevent one or other of the outcomes listed above.|36 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
838680|NCT01319877|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant after administration of a pharmaceutical product and which did not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment.|36 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
838684|NCT01320137|Secondary|Number of Subject Responders With Antigen-Th2 CD4+ T Cells Expressing IFN-γ - Amended Definition|Responders to a specific cytokine were defined as subjects with concentration for that respective cytokine after Bet v 1 stimulation above P95 of the concentration for that cytokine after medium only stimulation for all subjects (Total cohort), AND at least 5 times higher than their own respective concentration after medium only stimulation.|At Day 0|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort, Bet v 1 BrdU+ subjects included all subjects from the ATP cohort for which proliferation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with the birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 was observed after 96 hours.||Subjects|||Number
838685|NCT01320137|Secondary|Number of Subject Responders With Antigen-Th2 CD4+ T Cells Expressing Interferon-gamma (IFN-γ)|Responders are defined as subjects with a concentration after Bet v 1 stimulation above P95 (determined on Bet v 1 BrdU+ subjects) of all concentrations after medium only stimulation|At Day 0|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort, Bet v 1 BrdU+ subjects included all subjects from the ATP cohort for which proliferation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with the birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 was observed after 96 hours.||Subjects|||Number
838686|NCT01320137|Primary|Number of Subject Responders With Antigen Specific Th2 CD4+ T Cells Expressing Cytokines - Amended Definition|"Among cytokines expressed were IL-4, IL-5 and/or IL-13, as measured by flow cytometry and multiplex assays.
Responders to a specific cytokine were defined as subjects with concentration for that respective cytokine after Bet v 1 stimulation above P95 of the concentration for that cytokine after medium only stimulation for all subjects (Total cohort), AND at least 5 times higher than their own respective concentration after medium only stimulation."|At Day 0|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort, Bet v 1 BrdU+ subjects included all subjects from the ATP cohort for which proliferation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with the birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 was observed after 96 hours.||Subjects|||Number
838687|NCT01320137|Primary|Number of Subject Responders With Antigen Specific Lymphocytes T Helper 2 (Th2) Cluster of Differentiation 4+ (CD4+) T Cells Expressing Cytokines|"Among cytokines expressed were interleukin-4 (IL-4), interleukin-5 (IL-5) and/or interleukin-13 (IL-13), as measured by flow cytometry and multiplex assays.
Responders were defined as subjects with a concentration after Bet v 1 stimulation above Percentile 95 (P95) (determined on Betula verucossa 1[Bet v 1] Bromodeoxyuridine + [BrdU+] subjects) of all concentrations after medium only stimulation"|At Day 0|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort, Bet v 1 BrdU+ subjects included all subjects from the ATP cohort for which proliferation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with the birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 was observed after 96 hours.||Subjects|||Number
838688|NCT01320202|Primary|Change From Baseline Hemoglobin at End-of-Treatment: Mean Baseline and End-of-Treatment Hgb|Mean change from baseline Hgb (the average of the three most recent Hgb values preceding randomization) assessments during the last one-sixth of the treatment period for patients who prematurely withdraw from study treatment, but will include a minimum of at least the last two Hgb values. Values expressed are mean baseline and end-of-treatment Hgb, along with the mean difference (standard deviation).|Hgb measured weekly; up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||grams per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
838689|NCT01320202|Secondary|Variability of Hemoglobin Concentration: Residual Standard Deviation|The mean residual standard deviation of hemoglobin concentration value changes, as measured weekly from baseline until the end of participation in Stage 2.|Hgb measured weekly; up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified intent to treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||grams per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
838690|NCT01320202|Secondary|Variability of Hemoglobin Concentration: Temporal Trend|The mean temporal trend of hemoglobin concentration value changes, as measured weekly from baseline until the end of participation in Stage 2.|Hgb measured weekly; up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified intent to treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||grams per liter per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
838691|NCT01320202|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Transferrin Saturation (TSAT)|The Mean Change from Stage 2 Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Transferrin Saturation (TSAT) will be quantified.|Up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified Intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||percentage of saturation||Standard Deviation|Mean
838692|NCT01320202|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Transferrin|The Mean Change from Stage 2 Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Transferrin will be quantified.|Up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified Intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||grams per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
838693|NCT01320202|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Ferritin|The Mean Change from Stage 2 Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Ferritin will be quantified.|Up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified Intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||micrograms per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
838694|NCT01320202|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Reticulocyte Hemoglobin Content (CHr)|The Mean Change from Stage 2 Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Reticulocyte Hemoglobin Content (CHr) will be quantified.|Up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified Intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||picograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
838695|NCT01320202|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Unsaturated Iron-Binding Capacity (UIBC), Serum Iron, and Total Iron-Binding Capacity (TIBC)|The Mean Change from Stage 2 Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Unsaturated Iron-Binding Capacity (UIBC), Pre-Dialysis Serum Iron, and Pre-Dialysis Total Iron-Binding Capacity (TIBC) will be quantified.|Up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified Intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||micromoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
840304|NCT01334957|Primary|To Determine the Safety of a Single Dose of Intravenous Ibuprofen Over 5-10 Minutes for the Reduction of Pain.|The incidence of treatment-emergent serious adverse events occurring in the six hours following administration of the first dose of intravenous ibuprofen|6 hours|||Number of Serious Adverse Events|||Number
838696|NCT01320202|Secondary|Percentage of Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) for: Reticulocyte Hemoglobin Content (CHr), Ferritin, and Pre-Dialysis Serum Iron Panel|A comparison of the lab values at the end-of-treatment (EoT) to baseline was performed, and the percentage of change from baseline was calculated for the following lab parameters: reticulocyte hemoglobin content (CHr), Ferritin, pre-dialysis unbound iron-binding capacity (UIBC), pre-dialysis serum iron, pre-dialysis transferrin, pre-dialysis total iron-binding capacity TIBC), and transferrin saturation (TSAT).|Up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
838697|NCT01320202|Secondary|Red Blood Cell or Whole Blood Transfusion: Number of Units Transfused|The total number of units of red blood cells or whole blood that were received by patients while in the randomized treatment stage (Stage 2). This number is the total number of units received across all randomized patients in each treatment group (it is not the average number of units received per patient). Patients remained in Stage 2 until they met protocol-defined criteria for Stage 2 completion or until they had participated in Stage 2 for 48 weeks (whichever came sooner). If a patient was transfused, they were withdrawn from Stage 2.|up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|Intent-to-Treat (ITT): all patients randomized are included.||units of red blood cells or whole blood|||Number
838698|NCT01320202|Secondary|Red Blood Cell or Whole Blood Transfusion: Number of Patients Receiving Transfusion|The number of patients requiring red blood cell or whole blood transfusion while in the randomized treatment stage (Stage 2). Patients remained in Stage 2 until they met protocol-defined criteria for Stage 2 completion or until they had participated in Stage 2 for 48 weeks (whichever came sooner). If a patient was transfused, they were withdrawn from Stage 2.|up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|Intent-to-Treat (ITT): all patients randomized are included.||participants|||Number
838699|NCT01320202|Secondary|Mean Change in Unsaturated Iron Binding Capacity (UIBC) From Pre- to Post-dialysis.|The mean difference between the pre-dialysis and post-dialysis unsaturated iron binding capacity (UIBC) was calculated, using all post-baseline values obtained during Stage 2. Subjects could participate in Stage 2 for up to 48 weeks, provided that they did not complete Stage 2 early due to a protocol-mandated change in anemia management or withdraw from the study entirely for other reasons.|Up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||micromole per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
838700|NCT01320202|Secondary|Mean Change in TSAT (Transferrin) From Pre-dialysis to Post-dialysis.|The mean difference between the pre-dialysis and post-dialysis TSAT (transferrin) was calculated, using all post-baseline values obtained during Stage 2. Subjects could participate in Stage 2 for up to 48 weeks, provided that they did not complete Stage 2 early due to a protocol-mandated change in anemia management or withdraw from the study entirely for other reasons.|Up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified intent-to treat: all randomized subjects who had at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
838701|NCT01320202|Secondary|Mean Change in Serum Iron From Pre-dialysis to Post-dialysis.|The mean difference between the pre-dialysis and post-dialysis serum iron was calculated, using all post-baseline values obtained during Stage 2. Subjects could participate in Stage 2 for up to 48 weeks, provided that they did not complete Stage 2 early due to a protocol-mandated change in anemia management or withdraw from the study entirely for other reasons.|Up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat population: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||micromoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
838702|NCT01320202|Primary|Change From Baseline Hemoglobin at End-of-Treatment: Least-Squares Mean|Mean change from baseline Hgb (the average of the three most recent Hgb values preceding randomization) assessments during the last one-sixth of the treatment period for patients who prematurely withdraw from study treatment, but will include a minimum of at least the last two Hgb values. Value is expressed as least-squares mean with standard error.|Hgb measured weekly; up to 48 weeks from the date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat populations: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measurement obtained.||grams per liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838703|NCT01320293|Secondary|Changes in Adiponectin Profile Compared to Baseline|Adiponectin concentration in pg/ml measured at Baseline and end of treatment, 6 months.|24 weeks|17 of 18 participants completed these assessments at both time points due to one of them having an adverse event that required treatment and therefore end of treatment assessments could not be performed.||pg/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838704|NCT01320293|Secondary|Changes in IL-6 Profile Compared to Baseline|IL6 average concentration in pg/ml at Baseline compared to end of treatment, 6 months.|6 months|17 of 18 participants completed these assessments at both time points due to one of them having an adverse event that required treatment and therefore end of treatment assessments could not be performed.||pg/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838705|NCT01320293|Primary|Percentage Change in Endothelial Function Compared to Baseline.|Percentage change in endothelial function between baseline visit and end of treatment, 6 months. Endothelial function was measured by percent change in brachial artery diameter after flow mediated dilation (FMD%).|6 months|17 of 18 participants completed these assessments at both time points due to one of them having an adverse event that required treatment and therefore end of treatment assessments could not be performed.||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838706|NCT01320553|Secondary|Ciliary Redness Evaluated by the Investigator|Ciliary redness and episcleral redness were evaluated by the investigator at 7, 15, and 20 minutes post-CAC using a 4-point (0 indicating none and 4 indicating extremely severe i.e. large, numerous, dilated blood vessels characterized by unusually severe deep red color, regardless of grade of chemosis, which involves the entire vessel bed) scale with half-unit (1-step) increments allowed.|Up to 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838707|NCT01320553|Primary|Ocular Itching|Ocular itching evaluated by the subject at 3, 5, and 7 minutes post-challenge (0-4 scale, allowing half unit increments with 0 representing none and 4 representing Incapacitating itch with an irresistible urge to rub) at Visit 5.|Up to 28 days|"Of the 122 subjects enrolled in the study, a total of 8 subjects did not complete the study: 1 in the 1334H 0.15% group, 4 in the 1334H 0.3% group, 2 in the 1334H 0.45% group and 1 in the vehicle treated group.
The Per Protocol population, comprised of all subjects who completed the study with no protocol violations, totaled 107 subjects."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838709|NCT01320683|Primary|Progression-free Survival|"Estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan-Meier, and 95% confidence limits calculated for these estimates.
Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions."|Up to 24 months||||||
838710|NCT01320722|Secondary|Mean 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure (ABP) Nocturnal Dipping|A 24-hour mean ambulatory blood pressure was monitored using a 24 hour ABP device. The ABP device is a small box that is worn on the belt or pant/skirt line with a line that connect under the clothing to the cuff on the upper arm. Blood Pressure was recorded every 30 minutes during the day and every 60 minutes during the night for 24 hours. Nocturnal dipping is the percent change lower between the daytime and nighttime values.|Baseline and Week 8|All randomized enrolled participants with complete 24-hour ABP data available for analysis.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
838711|NCT01320722|Secondary|Mean 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure (ABP)|A 24-hour mean ambulatory blood pressure was monitored using a 24 hour ABP device. The ABP device is a small box that is worn on the belt or pant/skirt line with a line that connect under the clothing to the cuff on the upper arm. Blood Pressure was recorded every 30 minutes during the day and every 60 minutes during the night for 24 hours.|Baseline and Week 8|All randomized enrolled participants with complete 24-hour ABP data available for analysis.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
838712|NCT01320722|Secondary|Change in Endothelium-Dependent Vasodilation (EDV)|Endothelial function was assessed by EDV using brachial artery ultrasonography. Measurements of brachial artery diameter were made under basal conditions and reactive hyperemia following ischaemic stimulus. A blood pressure cuff on the forearm was pumped up for 5 minutes then released. Images were taken at baseline and after reactive hyperemia (increased blood flow). The maximum diameter was determined by the investigator. Change in EDV was expressed as a percent of brachial luminal diameter calculated as post-ischaemic brachial artery diameter - pre-ischaemic brachial artery diameter/pre-ischaemic brachial artery diameter * 100.|Baseline and Week 8 (pre and post ischaemic stimulus)|All randomized enrolled participants.||percent of brachial luminal diameter||Standard Deviation|Mean
838713|NCT01320722|Primary|Angiotensin II (ATII) Concentration [Uric Acid]|ATII concentration is a measure of systemic renin angiotensin system (RAS) activation. Blood was collected and plasma ATII was analyzed using a double-antibody radioimmunoassay (RIA) laboratory test.|Week 8|All randomized enrolled participants with data available for analysis.||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838714|NCT01320722|Primary|Plasma Renin Activity (PRA) [Uric Acid]|PRA is a measure of systemic renin angiotensin system (RAS) activation. Blood was collected and plasma PRA was analyzed using a competitive binding radioimmunoassay (RIA) laboratory test.|Week 8|All randomized enrolled participants with data available for analysis.||ng/mL per hour||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838715|NCT01320722|Primary|Change in Renal Plasma Flow (RPF) Response to Captopril in High Sodium Balance [Uric Acid]|RPF in response to captopril iis a measure of the vasodilator effect from inhibiting angiotensin II (AngII)- mediated vascular tone and therefore the degree of kidney specific Renin Angiotensin System (RAS) activity. Participants consumed a high sodium diet 3 days prior to the test. Following an 8 hour fast, participants remained in a supine (lying down) position and had an intravenous (IV) catheter inserted in each arm, one for infusion and one for blood collection. An 8 milligrams (mg)/kilogram(kg) loading dose of para-aminohippuric acid (PAH) was given, immediately followed by a continuous PAH infusion at 12 mg/minute. After 60 minutes a single dose of 25 mg of captopril was administered. Three pre-captopril measurements and three post-captopril measurements of RPF were made. RPF was normalized to body surface area of 1.73 meters squared (m^2). The change in RPF was calculated as post-captopril RPF- pre-captopril RPF.|Week 8 (pre and post captopril)|All randomized enrolled participants with data available for analysis.||mL/min per 1.73 m^2||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838716|NCT01320722|Primary|Angiotensin II (ATII) Concentration [Vitamin D]|ATII concentration is a measure of systemic renin angiotensin system (RAS) activation. Blood was collected and plasma ATII was analyzed using a double-antibody radioimmunoassay (RIA) laboratory test.|Week 8|All randomized enrolled participants included in the analysis.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838717|NCT01320722|Primary|Plasma Renin Activity (PRA) [Vitamin D]|PRA is a measure of systemic renin angiotensin system (RAS) activation. Blood was collected and plasma PRA was analyzed using a competitive binding radioimmunoassay (RIA) laboratory test.|Week 8|All randomized enrolled participants included in the analysis.||ng/mL per hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
838718|NCT01320722|Primary|Change in Renal Plasma Flow (RPF) in Response to Captopril in High Sodium Balance [Vitamin D]|Change in RPF in response to captopril is a measure of the vasodilator effect from inhibiting angiotensin II (AngII)- mediated vascular tone and therefore the degree of kidney specific Renin Angiotensin System (RAS) activity. Participants consumed a high sodium diet 3 days prior to the test. Following an 8 hour fast, participants remained in a supine (lying down) position and had an intravenous (IV) catheter inserted in each arm, one for infusion and one for blood collection. An 8 milligrams (mg)/kilogram(kg) loading dose of para-aminohippuric acid (PAH) was given, immediately followed by a continuous PAH infusion at 12 mg/minute. After 60 minutes a single dose of 25 mg of captopril was administered. Three pre-captopril measurements and three post-captopril measurements of RPF were made. RPF was normalized to body surface area of 1.73 meters squared (m^2). The change in RPF was calculated as post-captopril RPF- pre-captopril RPF.|Week 8 (pre and post captopril)|All randomized enrolled participants included in the analysis.||mL/min per 1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
838719|NCT01320735|Secondary|Median Percentage of Time Off-treatment During 2 Years IAD Regimen|The total duration of leuprorelin free period was calculated as the sum of all leuprorelin free periods. The data are reported as median percentage of time off-treatment with full range.|Baseline (enrollment), after 1 year, after 2 years, and 30 days from 2 year visit|Data are of measurements collected from participants who started IAD.||Percentage of time off-treatment||Full Range|Median
838720|NCT01320735|Primary|Number of Participants Who Switched to IAD Regimen by Visit|The data are reported as number of participants.|24 months|Data are of measurements collected from the safety analysis set, defined as all participants who signed an informed consent form and were administered at least one dose of leuprorelin.||Participants|||Number
839000|NCT01323010|Secondary|Changes in Respiratory Rate at at Discharge or Hospital Admission.|Changes in respiratory rate at discharge or hospital admission (up to 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|||breaths per minute||Standard Error|Mean
838721|NCT01320735|Secondary|Mean Duration of Treatment-off Time in IAD Regimen|Duration of each leuprorelin free period was calculated as (Date of first dose of leuprorelin [cycle N+1] minus last dose date [cycle N] minus 1)/30.4. If date of last dose of leuprorelin was before the date of study completion/discontinuation then the last leuprorelin free period was calculated as (Date of discontinuation/study completion minus last leuprorelin dose date)/30.4. The data are reported as mean months +/- standard deviation.|Baseline (enrollment), after 1 year, after 2 years, and 30 days from 2 year visit|Data are of measurements collected from participants who started IAD.||Months||Standard Deviation|Mean
838722|NCT01320735|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued From Leuprorelin Administration of IAD Regimen|The data are reported as percentage of participants.|24 months|Data are of measurements collected from the safety analysis set, defined as all participants who signed an informed consent form and were administered at least one dose of leuprorelin.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838723|NCT01320735|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Continued to Take Leuprorelin in IAD Regimen by the End of the Study|The data are reported as number of participants.|24 months|Data are of measurements collected from participants who started IAD.||Participants|||Number
838724|NCT01320735|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Received IAD Regimen During the Study|The data are reported as number of participants.|24 months|Data are of measurements collected from participants who started IAD.||Participants|||Number
838725|NCT01320735|Secondary|Median Survival Time|Time to survival was estimated as time from start of leuprorelin up to study completion/discontinuation from the study or date of death. The data are reported as median months with full range.|Baseline (enrollment), after 1 year, after 2 years, and 30 days from 2 year visit|Participants who died while on study were used for analysis.||Months||Full Range|Median
838726|NCT01320735|Secondary|Median Time to Progression of HRPC in Participants Not Started on IAD Regimen|Time to progression of HRPC was calculated as date of progression minus date of first dose of leuprorelin. A Kaplan-Meier estimate of median time to progression to HRPC and 25% and 75% quartiles along with the 95% confidence interval for median were assessed.|Baseline (enrollment), after 1 year, after 2 years, and 30 days from 2 year visit|Data are of measurements of participants who did not start on IAD regimen.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
838727|NCT01320735|Secondary|Median Time to Progression of HRPC|Time to progression of HRPC was calculated as date of progression minus date of first dose of leuprorelin. The data are reported as median (full range).|Baseline (enrollment), after 1 year, after 2 years, and 30 days from 2 year visit|Data are of measurements collected from the full analysis set, defined as all participants who received at least one dose of leuprorelin, signed informed consent, did not violate any inclusion/exclusion criteria and attended at least one post-baseline visit.||Months||Full Range|Median
838728|NCT01320735|Primary|Median Number of Leuprorelin Cycles|The Participants were on IAD regimen and the data are reported as number of cycles with full range.|24 months|Data are of measurements collected from the safety analysis set, defined as all participants who signed an informed consent form and were administered at least one dose of leuprorelin. However, one participant started continuous hormone therapy and was not included in the analysis.||Cycles||Full Range|Median
838729|NCT01320735|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Progressed to Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer (HRPC)|Progression to HRPC was defined as castrate serum testosterone less than 50 ng/dL or 1.7 nmol/L plus either; biochemical progression (three consecutive rises in prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels one week apart resulting in two 50 % increases over the nadir, with PSA greater than 2 ng/ml) or radiological progression (the appearance of two or more new bone lesions on bone scan or enlargement of a soft tissue lesion using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Data are reported as number of participants with HRPC.|Baseline (enrollment), after 1 year, after 2 years, and 30 days from 2 year visit|Data are of measurements collected from the full analysis set, defined as all participants who received at least one dose of leuprorelin, signed informed consent, did not violate any inclusion/exclusion criteria and attended at least one post-baseline visit.||Participants|||Number
838730|NCT01320735|Primary|Mean Duration of Each Leuprorelin Cycle|Duration of each cycle of leuprorelin IAD regimen was calculated as (Date of last dose of cycle of leuprorelin minus start date of cycle plus 1)/30.4. The data are reported as mean months +/- standard deviation.|24 months|Data are of measurements collected from the safety analysis set, defined as all participants who signed an informed consent form and were administered at least one dose of leuprorelin.||Months||Standard Deviation|Mean
838731|NCT01320735|Primary|Mean Duration of Leuprorelin Exposure|Total duration of leuprorelin Intermittent Androgen Deprivation (IAD) regimen was calculated as (Last dose date of Leuprorelin minus first dose date plus 1)/30.4. If the stop date of leuprorelin administration was missing then the date of last attended visit was used. Total duration may include gaps between the cycles. The data are reported as mean months +/- standard deviation.|24 months|Data are of measurements collected from the safety analysis set, defined as all participants who signed an informed consent form and were administered at least one dose of leuprorelin.||Months||Standard Deviation|Mean
838732|NCT01320735|Other Pre-specified|Duration of IAD Regimen Induction Phase|Time period between first injection of leuprorelin and stopping of treatment due to appropriate decrease of PSA as defined in the protocol. The data are reported as mean months +/- standard deviation.|At least 6-9 months after Baseline (enrollment)|Data are of measurements collected from participants who started IAD.||Months||Standard Deviation|Mean
838733|NCT01320826|Primary|Percentage of Females 50 Years and Older Undergoing First Time Colonoscopy With an Adenoma|"Percentage of patients with an adenoma = (number of patients who had at least one adenoma detected on colonoscopy / total number of colonoscopies attempted) x 100.
For this specific outcome: we explored this outcome for females 50 years and older undergoing first time colonoscopy."|[When pathology from colonoscopy available (on average 2-3 weeks after procedure)]|For this outcome, we only examined females ≥ 50 years old having their first colonoscopy||percentage of females||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838734|NCT01320826|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Referred to a Specialist.|The percentage of patients who are anticipated to be referred to specialists, for the gastrointestinal complaint for which the colonoscopy was performed will be determined and the reason for referral will be tabulated. The referral percentage will be determined both from the time of colonoscopy (physician reported) and from the patient satisfaction phone survey (patient reported).|Within four (4) weeks of colonoscopy|||percentage of patients|||Number
838736|NCT01320826|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction With Hospital Experience for Colonoscopy|"Patient satisfaction with their hospital experience during their colonoscopy will be recorded by using a 7 point Likert scale at the time of the patient satisfaction phone survey.
7 = extremely satisfied
1 = extremely dissatisfied
Minimum score = 1 Maximum score = 7"|At patient satisfaction phone survey (on average 4 weeks after colonoscopy)|443 patients consented to and completed the post procedural satisfaction survey.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838737|NCT01320826|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction With Endoscopy Wait Time|"Patient satisfaction with endoscopy wait time will be recorded using a 7 point Likert scale at the time of the patient phone survey. 7 is extremely satisfied and 1 is extremely dissatisfied
minimum score = 1 maximum score = 7"|At patient satisfaction phone survey (on average 4 weeks after colonoscopy)|443 patients completed the post procedural satisfaction survey.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838738|NCT01320826|Secondary|Patient Comfort During Colonoscopy|"To determine the patients' comfort level during the colonoscopy, a five-item question used by the Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in the United Kingdom will be used.
Patient discomfort on the 5 point scale:
0 is no discomfort;
is one or two episodes of discomfort, well tolerated;
is more than two episodes of discomfort adequately tolerated;
is significant discomfort experienced several times during the procedure;
is extreme discomfort experienced frequency throughout the procedure.
Minimum value = 0, maximum value = 4 with 4 being worse."|At time of colonoscopy (DAY 1 of study)|||units on the scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838739|NCT01320826|Secondary|Colonoscopy Withdraw Time in Cases Where no Lesions Found|Withdrawal time will be defined as the time from leaving the cecum until the colonoscope exits the anus. This will be calculated for cases in which no lesions were found.|At time of colonoscopy (DAY 1 of study)|Only examined patients in which no lesions were detected.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838740|NCT01320826|Secondary|Colonoscopy Complications: Bleeding, Perforation, Cardiopulmonary Complications Secondary to Conscious Sedation, and Death.|"Potential serious complications of colonoscopy include bleeding, perforation, cardiopulmonary complications secondary to conscious sedation and death.
Potential serious complications will be determined from the case report form (physician reported) and at patient satisfaction phone survey (on average four weeks after colonoscopy).
All potential serious complications of colonoscopy will be externally adjudicated."|Within four (4) weeks of colonoscopy|||patients undergoing colonoscopy|||Number
838741|NCT01320826|Primary|Percentage of Males 50 Years and Older Undergoing First Time Colonoscopy With an Adenoma|"Percentage of patients with an adenoma = (number of patients who had at least one adenoma detected on colonoscopy / total number of colonoscopies attempted) x 100.
For this specific outcome: we explored this outcome for males 50 years and older undergoing first time colonoscopy."|When pathology from colonoscopy available (on average 2-3 weeks after procedure)|We only examined this outcome for males 50 years and older having their first colonoscopy||percentage of males||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
838742|NCT01320826|Primary|Adenoma Detection Ratio|The adenoma detection ratio is the number of pathologically verified adenomas per number of colonoscopies performed. Adenoma detection ratio = total number of pathologically confirmed adenomas / number of colonoscopies attempted.|When pathology from colonoscopy available (on average 2-3 weeks after procedure)|Number of patients who underwent colonoscopy||adenomas / colonoscopy||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838743|NCT01320826|Primary|Percentage of Successful Cecal Intubations (Adjusted)|The percentage of successful cecal intubations (adjusted) = total number of colonoscopies performed where cecal intubation was achieved / (total number of colonoscopies attempted -incomplete colonoscopies due to poor bowel preparation, colonic stricture, equipment failure or severe endoscopic colitis)|At time of colonoscopy (DAY 1 of study)|||percentage of colonoscopies attempted||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838744|NCT01320826|Primary|Percentage of Successful Cecal Intubations (Crude)|The percentage of successful cecal intubations (crude) = (total # of colonoscopies performed where cecal intubation was achieved / total # of colonoscopies attempted) x 100|At time of colonoscopy (DAY 1 of study)|Prospective, observational study, all study participants were analyzed||percentage of colonoscopies performed||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838745|NCT01312428|Secondary|To Evaluate the Surgical Success of Achieving Preoperative Targets for Leg Length and Femoral Offset, or be Able to Document Changes to Pre-operative Leg Length and Offset, Using the PAL Compared to Surgeries Without Using the PAL Instrument.||6 week follow-up||||||
838746|NCT01312428|Primary|To Evaluate the Surgical Accuracy in Placing Acetabular Components at a Target of 45° Inclination and 20° Anteversion While Using the PAL Compared to Surgeries Without Using the PAL Instrument.||6 week follow-up|The study was terminated early, therefore, primary or secondary measures were not assessed.|||||
838747|NCT01312467|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability of Metformin Hydrochloride Treatment|"All participants will be evaluable for toxicity from the time of their first dose of metformin. Since toxicities in this study are measured as categorical data, primary analysis shall be by tests of binomial proportions (e.g., Mantel-Haenszel chi-squared statistic). This study will utilize the CTCAE (NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) Version 4.0 for toxicity and Serious Adverse Event reporting.
We are in the process of identifying and securing funding to complete the secondary and tertiary endpoints. Once the information is available, we will provide those results with any relevant post-hoc analyses."|Up to 16 weeks||||||
838748|NCT01312467|Secondary|Effects of Metformin Hydrochloride on Serum (Fasting and 2 Hour Postprandial Insulin and Glucose, Fasting IGF-1, IGFBP-1, IGFBP-3, Leptin, Adiponectin and Metformin Levels)|We are in the process of identifying and securing funding to complete the secondary and tertiary endpoints. Once the information is available, we will provide those results with any relevant post-hoc analyses.|Up to 16 weeks||||||
838749|NCT01312467|Secondary|Effects of Metformin Hydrochloride on Colorectal Mucosa Proliferation (Ki-67, Phosphorylated IGF-1 Receptor, Phosphorylated Insulin Receptor, Phosphorylated AKT, Phosphorylated mTOR, and Phosphorylated AMP Kinase)|We are in the process of identifying and securing funding to complete the secondary and tertiary endpoints. Once the information is available, we will provide those results with any relevant post-hoc analyses.|Up to 16 weeks||||||
838772|NCT01312844|Secondary|The Mean Levels of Physiological Measures of ECT (Heart Rate)|Heart rate was taken immediately post ECT administration at each ECT visit. We averaged heart rate for each participant at each ECT administration. The reported mean refers to the average among all participants in each group.|Duration of ECT treatment (usually 2 weeks)|Missing vitals forms for one participant in Scopolamine group (n=4), only reported data for 3 participants in Scopolamine group||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
838750|NCT01312467|Primary|Change in Activated S6serine235 (i.e., the Ratio of pS6serine235/S6serine235)|Tissue S6Ser235 immunostaining was analyzed by the study pathologist using Histo Score (HScore) analysis at baseline and post- metformin (Week 12). The Hscore is determined by estimation of the percentage of cells positively stained with mild, moderate, or strong staining intensity. The final score is determined by weighted estimate, as follows: Hscore = (# cell stained with High intensity/total # cells)x3 + (# cells stained with median intensity/total # cells)x2 + (# cells stained with low intensity/total # cells)x1. Mean and standard deviation of the change in the histo score (H score) of pS6serine235 from baseline were calcuated.|From baseline to 12 weeks|The analysis is based on 32 participants who have evaluable data.||weighted ratio of staining cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
838751|NCT01312519|Secondary|Time Necessary to Perform the Bone Marrow Procedure|The time necessary to perform the procedure was measured as follows: Time started once the needle and skin came into contact and time stopped once the sample was collected and the needle was removed from the patient.|Day 1 needle insertion through needle removal|Per protocol, 50 patients were enrolled in the study and randomized to the manual bone marrow sampling device or the battery powered device.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
838752|NCT01312519|Primary|Subject Reported Level of Pain During Procedure|Subjects were asked to rate the level of pain they experienced during the procedure for needle insertion, following penetration of the cortex. A 0 to 10 pain scale was used where 0=no pain and 10= worst possible pain.|Day 1 during the needle insertion|as per protocol, 50 patients were enrolled in the study and randomized to the manual bone marrow sampling device or the battery powered device.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838753|NCT01312766|Secondary|Live Birth Rate||9 months after treatment|||percentage of participants|||Number
838754|NCT01312766|Secondary|Number of Cleaved Embryos||two days after insemination|||embryos||Standard Deviation|Mean
838755|NCT01312766|Secondary|Total Number of Inseminated Oocytes (IVF and ICSI)|number of oocytes that were inseminated via IVF or injected via ICSI technique.|on the day of oocyte retrieval|||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
838756|NCT01312766|Secondary|Ratio Mature/Total Number of Oocytes Retrieved.|Percentage of retrieved oocytes considered to be mature.|at the end of the stimulation.|||percentage of total oocytes retrieved|||Number
838757|NCT01312766|Secondary|Number of Mature (Grade III Metaphase II) Oocytes Retrieved.||at the end of the stimulation.|||oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
838758|NCT01312766|Secondary|Clinical Pregnancy Rate,|defined as a pregnancy showing ultrasound embryonic heart activity at 10 – 11 weeks after embryo transfer;|10 – 11 weeks after embryo transfer|||percentage of participants|||Number
838759|NCT01312766|Secondary|Implantation Rate|defined as the mean of the total number of implanted embryos (presence of gestational sac assessed by ultrasound) divided by the total number of transferred embryos x 100;|10-11 weeks after embryo transfer|||percentage of embryos transferred||Standard Deviation|Mean
838760|NCT01312766|Secondary|17-β Estradiol (E2) Serum Concentration on the Monitoring Day Before hCG Injection;||up to 23 days after treatment start|||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
838761|NCT01312766|Secondary|Controlled Ovarian Stimulation Duration (Days)||up to 23 days after treatment start|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
838762|NCT01312766|Secondary|Positive b-hCG Test||up to 5 weeks after treatment start|||percentage of participants|||Number
838763|NCT01312766|Secondary|Embryo Quality (Percentage of Patients With at Least One Top Quality Embryo)|Assessed by counting the total number of embryos obtained, the number of embryos transferred, frozen and discarded.|up to 28 days after treatment start|The population analysed corresponds to the patients who had at least one embryo to be analysed (i.e 120 participants in the hMG-IBSA group and 123 in the Menopur group). Of this, 119 in the hMG-IBSA group and 121 in the Menopur group underwent embryo transfer.||percentage of participants|||Number
838764|NCT01312766|Secondary|Mean hMG Dose (Total);||up to 22 days after treatment start|||Internationa Units (IU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838765|NCT01312766|Primary|Total Number of Oocytes Retrieved||up to 24 days after treatment start|||number of oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
838766|NCT01312805|Primary|Diagnosis Rate of Asthma||one year|We excluded those participants who had a previous diagnosis of asthma in the 14 months before the start of the study. This left the numbers seen above.||Participants|||Count of Participants
838767|NCT01312818|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Activated Caspases and Other Regulators of Apoptosis|Activation of caspases and other regulators of apoptosis in treated blast cells will be determined by Western analysis (correlative lab analysis).|From Day 1 to 30 Days After Last Dose|The trial was terminated early with only 2 patients so caspase samples were not sent for analysis.|||||
838768|NCT01312818|Secondary|Number of Subjects Experiencing Drug Related Adverse Events|To characterize the toxicities of bortezomib, vorinostat and dexamethasone when used in combination. Toxicity will be graded using the NCI’s Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE 4.0).|Day 1 of Treatment to 30 Days Post Treatment|||participants|||Number
838769|NCT01312818|Primary|Number of Subjects Who Achieved Complete Remission of Their Disease|Complete Remission (CR): A CR requires that the following be recorded concurrently: an absolute neutrophil count (segs and bands) > 1000/μL, no circulating blasts, platelets > 100,000/μL; adequate bone marrow cellularity with trilineage hematopoiesis, and < 5% marrow leukemia blast cells. All previous extramedullary manifestations of disease must be absent. If patients continue on with treatment, there can be no evidence of recurrence of ALL for at least 4 weeks.|Day 30|||participants|||Number
838770|NCT01312844|Secondary|The Mean Levels of Physiological Measures of ECT (Energy Needed)|Mean energy needed to induce the seizure for each participant at each ECT administration they received. The reported mean refers to the average among all participants in each group.|Duration of ECT treatment (usually 2 weeks)|Missing ECT forms for one participant in Scopolamine group (n=4), only reported data for 3 participants in Scopolamine group||joules||Standard Deviation|Mean
838771|NCT01312844|Secondary|The Mean Levels of Physiological Measures of ECT (Seizure Duration)|Mean duration in seconds of the seizure induced by ECT for each participant at each ECT administration they received.The reported mean refers to the average among all participants in each group.|Duration of ECT treatment (usually 2 weeks)|Missing ECT forms for one participant in Scopolamine group (n=4), only reported data for 3 participants in Scopolamine group||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
838802|NCT01313182|Secondary|Measure Rate of Staphylococcus Aureus Resistance to Mupirocin.|Lab will culture isolates when time and money permit|Isolates collected and frozen||||||
838773|NCT01312844|Secondary|The Mean Levels of Physiological Measures of ECT (Blood Pressure)|Blood pressure was taken immediately post ECT administration at each ECT visit. We averaged Blood pressure for each participant at each ECT administration. The reported mean refers to the average among all participants in each group.|Duration of ECT treatment (usually 2 weeks)|Missing vitals forms for one participant in Scopolamine group (n=4), only reported data for 3 participants in Scopolamine group||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
838774|NCT01312844|Secondary|The Mean Number of Moderate to Severe Side Effects|The mean number of adverse events classified as moderate to severe.|Duration of ECT treatment (usually 2 weeks)|||number of side effects||Standard Deviation|Mean
838775|NCT01312844|Secondary|Number of ECT Treatments Withheld Due to Cognitive Impairment|The number of ECT treatments withheld during the course of the study due to cognitive impairment. In these cases, the participant would still be enrolled in the study but have a reduced # of ECTs. This outcome measure does not include patients who withdrew from the study.|Duration of ECT treatment (usually 2 weeks)|||ECT Treatments withheld||Standard Deviation|Mean
838776|NCT01312844|Primary|Number of ECT Treatments Received to Achieve Response/Remission|The number of ECT treatments needed to achieve response (defined as a HAM D score less than half of baseline) and remission (defined as a HAM D score of less than 8). If patients HAM D score rose above these markers at any point in the study, they were not considered as responding or remitting.The HAM D 17 measures severity of depression with 52 being most severe and 0 being no depression.|Duration of ECTtreatment (usually 2 weeks)|Only 3 (out of 4) Scopolamine patients and 2 (out of 3) placebo patients reached response and remission.||# of ECT administrations||Standard Deviation|Mean
838777|NCT01312844|Primary|Time to Response for Patients Receiving ECT|The number of days between baseline HAM D score and HAM D score showing response (defined as a HAM D score less than half of baseline). If patients HAM D score rose above this marker at any point in the study, they were not considered as responding.The HAM D 17 measures severity of depression with 52 being most severe and 0 being no depression. .|Duration of ECT treatment (usually 2 weeks)|Only 3 (out of 4) Scopolamine patients and 2 (out of 3) placebo patients reached response||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
838778|NCT01312844|Primary|Change in Ham D 17 Scores|Change in Ham D 17 scores measured by the difference between baseline HAM D score and HAM D score at last ECT administration. The HAM D 17 measures severity of depression with 52 being most severe and 0 being no depression. A negative change score refers to a decrease in HAM D score, while a positive change score would refer to an increase in HAM D score.|At the time of ECT completion (about 2 weeks)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838779|NCT01312948|Secondary|Equivalence of Apnea-hypopnea Index (AHI) on the New Pixi Mask Compared With the Child's Usual Mask|Apnea-Hypopnea index (AHI) is a measure of the severity of sleep disordered breathing (SDB). It describes how many events of compromised breathing occur each hour of sleep. The higher the AHI, the more severe the SDB (mild 5-15, moderate 15-30, severe >30). In clinical practice an AHI <5 demonstrates efficacy of treatment. AHI was recorded during a monitored sleep study on the new Pixi mask, and compared with the AHI from a monitored sleep study on the child's usual mask. The outcome hypothesis was that the Pixi mask AHI would be equivalent or reduced compared to the patients usual mask|>4 hours monitored sleep study|Analysis was as per protocol||apnea hypopnoea index||Standard Deviation|Mean
838780|NCT01312948|Primary|Usability Ratings of the Pixi Paediatric Mask Compared With the Child's Current Mask|"Before trialling the Pixi mask, parents rated the usability of their child's usual mask using a 0-10 Likert Scale where 0 = poor and 10 = excellent. After trialling the Pixi mask, parents then completed the same questionnarie for the Pixi mask.
Usability was defined as a single overall score of mask performance. Parents considered mask seal, comfort, stability and red marks when scoring each mask for usability."|8 nights use|Analysis was as per protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838781|NCT01312961|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Number of Inhalations Per Day of Albuterol or Levalbuterol to Week 12|Number of Albuterol or Levalbuterol inhalations were recorded daily by the participants in their electronic diary as Albuterol or Levalbuterol was to be used only as needed for symptoms, not on a regular basis or prophylactically.|Baseline, Week 12|mITT population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with at least one post-baseline assessment.||number of inhalations/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
838782|NCT01312961|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Number of Nocturnal Awakenings Per Day to Week 12|Participants recorded every morning on awakening the number of asthma-related nocturnal awakenings requiring use of rescue medication that occurred during the previous night.|Baseline, Week 12|mITT population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with at least one post-baseline assessment.||number of awakenings/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
838783|NCT01312961|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Evening Asthma Symptom Scores to Week 12|PM (post meridiem) symptom scoring system rates were participant’s overall asthma symptoms experienced during the day. It ranges from 0 to 4 as: 0=very well, no asthma symptoms, 1=one episode of wheezing, cough, or breathlessness, 2=more than one episode of wheezing, cough, or breathlessness without interference of normal activities, 3=wheezing, cough, or breathlessness most of the day, which interfered to some extent with normal activities, 4=asthma very bad, unable to carry out daily activities as usual.|Baseline, Week 12|mITT population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with at least one post-baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838784|NCT01312961|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Morning Asthma Symptom Scores to Week 12|AM (ante meridiem) symptom scoring system rates were participant’s overall asthma symptoms experienced during the night. It ranges from 0 to 4 as: 0 = No asthma symptoms, slept through the night, 1= Slept well, but some complaints in the morning. No nighttime awakenings,2= Woke up once because of asthma (including early awakening),3= Woke up several times because of asthma (including early awakening), 4= Bad night, awake most of the night because of asthma.|Baseline, Week 12|mITT population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with at least one post-baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838785|NCT01312961|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) Score to Week 12|The SNOT-22 is a validated measure of health related quality of life in sinonasal disease. It is a 22 item questionnaire with each item assigned a score ranging from 0-5. The total score may range from 0 (no disease) -110 (worst disease), lower scores represent better health related quality of life.|Baseline, Week 12|mITT population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with at least one post-baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838803|NCT01313182|Secondary|Measure Adverse Events Related to Mupirocin and Povidone-iodine.|Patients were given an adverse event log to complete after treatment|At time of treatment||||||
838786|NCT01312961|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (5-question Version [ACQ-5]) to Week 12|ACQ-5 questionnaire is a validated questionnaire comprising of 5 questions for asthma symptoms: woken at night by symptoms, wake in the mornings with symptoms, limitation of daily activities, shortness of breath, and wheeze. Participants were asked to rate their asthma symptoms during the previous week on a 7-point scale as 0=no impairment, 6=maximum impairment. ACQ-5 score is the mean of the 5 questions and range between 0 (disease totally controlled) and 6 (disease severely uncontrolled), a higher score indicated lower asthma control.|Baseline, Week 12|mITT population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with at least one post-baseline assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838787|NCT01312961|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) to Week 12|The PEF is a participant’s maximum speed of expiration, as measured with a peak flow meter. Peak flow testing for PEF was performed at home (morning and evening) while sitting or standing prior to using any medication (if needed) for asthma.|Baseline, Week 12|mITT population. Number analyzed = participants with at least one post-baseline assessment for each category.||liters/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
838788|NCT01312961|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Flow in One Second (FEV1) to Week 12|FEV1 is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs in the first second of a forced exhalation.|Baseline, Week 12|mITT population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with at least one post-baseline assessment.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
838789|NCT01312961|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Composite Asthma Events|Composite asthma event was defined as a 30% or greater reduction from baseline in morning PEF on 2 consecutive days together with 6 or more additional reliever puffs of albuterol or levalbuterol in a 24-hour period (compared to baseline) on 2 consecutive days.|Baseline up to Week 12|mITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
838790|NCT01312961|Secondary|Time to First Asthma Exacerbation: Kaplan-Meier Estimates at Week 4, Week 8 and Week 12|The time-to-asthma exacerbation was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the first asthma exacerbation event; for participants without asthma exacerbation, it was censored at the end of treatment visit date. The median time to first asthma exacerbation was not estimated because the number of asthma exacerbations was too low in the Dupilumab arm. Therefore, alternative Kaplan-Meier statistics, the probability of asthma exacerbation at Week 4, 8 and 12, are presented as the descriptive measure statistics.|Baseline up to Week 12|mITT population.||Probability of asthma exacerbation||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838791|NCT01312961|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Asthma Exacerbation|An asthma exacerbation was defined as the occurrence of any of the following: ≥30% reduction from baseline in morning PEF on 2 consecutive days; or ≥6 additional reliever puffs of albuterol or levalbuterol in a 24-hour period (compared to baseline) on 2 consecutive days; or deterioration of asthma, as determined by the investigator, requiring systemic steroid treatment, or an increase in inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) of ≥4 times the last dose received prior to discontinuation from the study, or hospitalization. The occurrence of asthma exacerbations by individual criteria are reported.|Baseline up to Week 12|Modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population that included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Participants were analysed in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||percentage of participants|||Number
838792|NCT01313039|Secondary|In Vitro Tamoxifen Response in Tumors|To assess for in vitro tamoxifen response in tumors following therapy with AZD6244.|2 years||||||
838793|NCT01313039|Secondary|Rate of ER Promoter Methylation in ER-negative/Low Breast Cancer|To determine the rate of ER promoter methylation in ER-negative/low breast cancer tumors that do not attain an ER response following AZD6244 therapy.|2 years||||||
838794|NCT01313039|Secondary|Changes in ER-regulated Gene Expression in E-negative/Low Breast Cancer|To assess for changes in ER-regulated gene expression in ER-negative/low breast tumors following AZD6244 therapy through assessment of protein expression by immunhistochemistry in paraffin embedded tissues.|2 Years||||||
838795|NCT01313039|Primary|Increase of ER Protein Expression in ER-Negative/Low Breast Cancer|"To evaluate in a clinical neoadjuvant model whether MEK inhibitor AZD6244 can increase ER protein expression in ER-negative/low breast cancer, as measured by the ER response rate by both standard immunohistochemistry and Allred Score."|2 years|Only 1 subject had evaluable study data||participants|||Number
838796|NCT01313078|Primary|Evaluation of Safety in Patients With Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and/or Primary Peritoneal Cancer.|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events see the adverse event module.|11 months, 25 days|||Participants|||Number
838797|NCT01313078|Primary|6 Month Progression Free Survival|Proportion of patients able to attain a 6 month progression free survival. Progressive disease is defined as >20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of all target lesions, or the unequivocal increase in size of non-measurable lesions agreed upon by two investigators, or the appearance of new lesions.|6 months|||Participants|||Number
838798|NCT01313117|Secondary|Total Neuropathy Score (TNS)|The Total Neuropathy score (TNS) is a validated score that combines signs, symptoms, and very limited nerve conduction studies (NCS). It was designed to assess peripheral nerve function and has been used as an endpoint in clinical trials of toxic neuropathy. The TNS is a composite scale with a range of values from 0 (normal) to 28 (severely affected). It includes data from 7 different categories. Patients are asked to assess the severity of sensory symptoms on a scale of 0 (no symptoms) to 4 (symptoms above knees or elbows, or functionally disabling). Next, 4 examination categories are assessed. These include pin sensation, vibration sensation, deep tendon reflexes, and strength. Signs are scored from 0 to 4 depending on severity. The nerve conduction portion of the scale consists of measurements of a motor (peroneal) and sensory (sural) nerve. Motor and sensory responses are graded on a scale of 0 to 4 depending on the severity of an abnormality.|4 months|Failure to reach the MTD precluded our ability to perform any meaningful analysis of the TNS.|||||
838799|NCT01313117|Secondary|Cumulative Rate of Adverse Events||4 months|||participants|||Number
838800|NCT01313117|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Who Complete the Proposed Regimen of Daily ALA||4 months|||participants|||Number
838801|NCT01313117|Primary|Identification of the Optimal Dose of ALA Based on Acceptable Adverse Event(AE) Profile|Based on acceptable adverse event (AE) profile and continual reassessment method dose escalation.|4 months|Although our dose finding analysis suggested a maximum tolerated dose of 500mg daily, it should be noted that we failed to fully complete the Continual Reassessment Method (CRM) dose finding portion of the study. As such, we can not make confident dose finding statements on the basis of this trial.||mg|||Number
838806|NCT01313208|Secondary|Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Problems Index II at Each Time Point|The MOS-Sleep comprises 12 items and measures key sleep structures across 6 domains. These domains are Sleep Disturbance (4 items), Sleep Adequacy (2 items), Sleep Quantity (1 item), Daytime Somnolence (3 items), Snoring (1 item), and Awakening short of breath or with a headache, (1 item). The scale also produces two indices. Index-II uses 9 items from four domains including Sleep Disturbance (4 items), Sleep Adequacy (2 items), Shortness of Breath (1 item), and Daytime Somnolence (2 items). In MOS Sleep norm-based scoring, all scales are scored on the same metric, where 50 is the mean for the general U.S. population and 10 is the standard deviation. Higher scores indicate more severe sleep problems. Least Squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838807|NCT01313208|Secondary|Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Problems Index I at Each Time Point|The MOS-Sleep comprises 12 items and measures key sleep structures across 6 domains. These domains are Sleep Disturbance (4 items), Sleep Adequacy (2 items), Sleep Quantity (1 item), Daytime Somnolence (3 items), Snoring (1 item), and Awakening short of breath or with a headache, (1 item). The scale also produces two indices. The Sleep Problems Index-I is drawn from 6 items in the four domains including Sleep Disturbance (2 items), Sleep Adequacy (2 items), Shortness of Breath (1 item), and Daytime Somnolence (1 item). In MOS Sleep norm-based scoring, all scales are scored on the same metric, where 50 is the mean for the general U.S. population and 10 is the standard deviation. Higher scores indicate more severe sleep problems. Least Squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838808|NCT01313208|Secondary|Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Daytime Somnolence Scale at Each Time Point|The MOS-Sleep comprises 12 items and measures key sleep structures across 6 domains. These domains are Sleep Disturbance (4 items), Sleep Adequacy (2 items), Sleep Quantity (1 item), Daytime Somnolence (3 items), Snoring (1 item), and Awakening short of breath or with a headache, (1 item). Daytime somnolence measures drowsiness or sleepiness during the day. In MOS Sleep norm-based scoring, all scales are scored on the same metric, where 50 is the mean for the general U.S. population and 10 is the standard deviation. Higher scores indicate more severe sleep problems. Least Squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838809|NCT01313208|Secondary|Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Adequacy Scale at Each Time Point|The MOS-Sleep comprises 12 items and measures key sleep structures across 6 domains. These domains are Sleep Disturbance (4 items), Sleep Adequacy (2 items), Sleep Quantity (1 item), Daytime Somnolence (3 items), Snoring (1 item), and Awakening short of breath or with a headache, (1 item). Sleep Adequacy measures sleep sufficiency in terms of whether the participant sleeps enough to provide restoration of wakefulness. In MOS Sleep norm-based scoring, all scales are scored on the same metric, where 50 is the mean for the general U.S. population and 10 is the standard deviation. For sleep adequacy a higher score indicates better sleep quality. Least Squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838810|NCT01313208|Secondary|Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Snoring Scale at Each Time Point|The MOS-Sleep comprises 12 items and measures key sleep structures across 6 domains. These domains are Sleep Disturbance (4 items), Sleep Adequacy (2 items), Sleep Quantity (1 item), Daytime Somnolence (3 items), Snoring (1 item), and Shortness of Breath (1 item). In MOS Sleep norm-based scoring, all scales are scored on the same metric, where 50 is the mean for the general U.S. population and 10 is the standard deviation. Higher scores indicate more severe sleep problems. Least Squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838811|NCT01313208|Secondary|Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Shortness of Breath or Headache Scale at Each Time Point|The MOS-Sleep comprises 12 items and measures key sleep structures across 6 domains. These domains are Sleep Disturbance (4 items), Sleep Adequacy (2 items), Sleep Quantity (1 item), Daytime Somnolence (3 items), Snoring (1 item), and Awakening short of breath or with a headache, (1 item). In MOS Sleep norm-based scoring, all scales are scored on the same metric, where 50 is the mean for the general U.S. population and 10 is the standard deviation. Higher scores indicate more severe sleep problems. Least Squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838812|NCT01313208|Secondary|Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Disturbance Scale at Each Time Point|The MOS-Sleep comprises 12 items and measures key sleep structures across 6 domains. These domains are Sleep Disturbance (4 items), Sleep Adequacy (2 items), Sleep Quantity (1 item), Daytime Somnolence (3 items), Snoring (1 item), and Shortness of Breath (1 item). Sleep Disturbance measures the ability to fall asleep and to maintain restful sleep. In MOS Sleep norm-based scoring, all scales are scored on the same metric, where 50 is the mean for the general U.S. population and 10 is the standard deviation. Higher scores indicate more severe sleep problems. Least Squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838813|NCT01313208|Secondary|Participant Assessment of Fatigue at Each Time Point|The participant's assessment of fatigue was collected using a single-item 100 mm visual analogue scale. The participant was asked to draw a vertical line through a horizontal line to indicate the degree of fatigue they experienced because of their condition over the past week. The horizontal line is 100 mm in length with ‘0’ and ‘no fatigue’ on the left end of the line and ‘100’ and ‘extreme fatigue’ on the right end of the line. Least squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838814|NCT01313208|Secondary|Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI): Percent Overall Work Impairment at Each Time Point|This self-administered questionnaire is designed to address impairment to the work productivity and activity of participants due to rheumatoid arthritis in the past 7 days. Percent overall work impairment takes into account both hours missed due to rheumatoid arthritis symptoms and the participant’s assessment of the degree to which rheumatoid arthritis affected their productivity while working. A higher percentage indicates greater impairment and less productivity. Least squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants employed and included in the analyses at each time point."||percent overall work impairment||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838815|NCT01313208|Secondary|Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI): Percent Activity Impairment at Each Time Point|This self-administered questionnaire is designed to address impairment to the work productivity and activity of participants due to rheumatoid arthritis. Percent activity impairment is derived from the patient’s assessment of the degree to which rheumatoid arthritis affected their regular daily activities. A higher percentage indicates greater impairment and less productivity. Least squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||percent activity impairment||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838816|NCT01313208|Secondary|Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI): Percent Impairment While Working (Presenteeism) at Each Time Point|This self-administered questionnaire is designed to address impairment to the work productivity and activity of participants due to rheumatoid arthritis in the past 7 days. Percent impairment while working was derived from the participant’s assessment of the degree to which rheumatoid arthritis affected their productivity while working. A higher percentage indicates greater impairment and less productivity. Least squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants employed and included in the analyses at each time point."||percent impairment while working||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838817|NCT01313208|Secondary|Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI): Percent Work Time Missed (Absenteeism) at Each Time Point|This self-administered questionnaire is designed to address impairment to the work productivity and activity of participants due to rheumatoid arthritis in the past 7 days. Percent of work time missed is derived from the number of hours of work missed due to rheumatoid arthritis symptoms as a percentage of total hours that should have been worked. A higher percentage indicates more hours missed. Least squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants employed and included in the analyses at each time point."||percent work time missed||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838818|NCT01313208|Secondary|Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Health Domain Score at Each Time Point|The SF-36 measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The individual domain scores are calculated and transformed to range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better quality of life. The mental health sub-score assesses general mental health (psychological distress and well-being). Least squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838819|NCT01313208|Secondary|Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) Role-Emotional Domain Score at Each Time Point|The SF-36 measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The individual domain scores are calculated and transformed to range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better quality of life. The role-emotional subscale assesses limitations in usual role activities because of emotional problems. Least squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838829|NCT01313208|Secondary|Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Each Time Point|The participant’s global assessment of their arthritis disease activity was assessed by the participant circling a number from 0 to 10 on a horizontal Likert scale ranging from “No Activity at All” (score = 0) to “Worst Activity Imaginable” (score = 10).|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838820|NCT01313208|Secondary|Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) Social Functioning Domain Score at Each Time Point|The SF-36 measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The individual domain scores are calculated and transformed to range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better level of functioning. The social functioning subscale assesses limitations in social activities because of physical or emotional problems. Least Squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838821|NCT01313208|Secondary|Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) General Health Perceptions Domain Score at Each Time Point|The SF-36 measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The individual domain scores are calculated and transformed to range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better quality of life. Least squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838822|NCT01313208|Secondary|Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) Bodily Pain Domain Score at Each Time Point|The SF-36 measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The individual domain scores are calculated and transformed to range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better level of functioning (less pain). Least squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838823|NCT01313208|Secondary|Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) Role-Physical Domain Score at Each Time Point|The SF-36 measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The individual domain scores are calculated and transformed to range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better level of functioning. The role-physical subscale assesses limitations in usual role activities because of physical health problems. Least squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838824|NCT01313208|Secondary|Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) Vitality Domain Score at Each Time Point|The SF-36 measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The individual domain scores are calculated and transformed to range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better level of functioning. The vitality sub-score assesses energy and fatigue. Least Squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838825|NCT01313208|Secondary|Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain Score at Each Time Point|The SF-36 measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The individual domain scores are calculated and transformed to range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better level of functioning. The physical functioning subscale assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. Least Squares means are from a mixed-effect model for repeated measurements (MMRM).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12 and 24|"Primary analysis set; Mixed-Effect Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis to account for post-baseline missing data with Likelihood-based approach was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838826|NCT01313208|Secondary|C-reactive Protein Levels at Each Time Point|C-Reactive Protein (CRP) was measured from blood samples by a central laboratory as a marker for inflammation.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
838827|NCT01313208|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI) at Each Time Point|The HAQ-DI asks about the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and errands and chores). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 indicating no difficulty to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area. The overall score is the average of each of the 8 category scores and ranges from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838828|NCT01313208|Secondary|Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Each Time Point|The global assessment of the participant’s arthritis was assessed by the physician circling a number from 0 to 10 on a horizontal Likert scale ranging from “No Activity at All” (score = 0) to “Worst Activity Imaginable” (score = 10).|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838830|NCT01313208|Secondary|Patient Global Assessment of Joint Pain at Each Time Point|"The severity of the participant’s joint pain was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS). The participant was asked to draw a mark through a 100 mm horizontal line to indicate how much pain they were experiencing “today, from ‘0’ (no pain at all) on the left end of the line to 100 (worst pain imaginable) on the right end of the line."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838831|NCT01313208|Secondary|Swollen 28-Joint Count (SJC28) at Each Time Point|Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||swollen joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
838832|NCT01313208|Secondary|Tender 28-Joint Count (TJC28) at Each Time Point|Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||tender joints||Standard Deviation|Mean
838833|NCT01313208|Secondary|Simplified Clinical Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Score at Each Time Point|"The simplified disease activity index (SDAI) is a composite measure that sums the total number of:
28 tender joint counts,
28 swollen joint counts,
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10, where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10, where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest, and
C-reactive protein (CRP) in mg/dL.
The SDAI score ranges from 0 to approximately 86 where lower scores indicate less disease activity."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838834|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving SDAI Low Disease Activity at Each Time Point|The simplified disease activity index (SDAI) is a composite measure that sums the total number of: - 28 tender joint counts, - 28 swollen joint counts, - Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10 where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest; - Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10 where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest, and - C-reactive protein (CRP) in mg/dL. The SDAI score ranges from 0 to approximately 86 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. SDAI low disease activity is defined as a score ≤ 11.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838835|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving SDAI Remission at Each Time Point|"The simplified disease activity index (SDAI) is a composite measure that sums the total number of:
28 tender joint counts,
28 swollen joint counts,
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10 where 0= lowest disease activity and 10 = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10, where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest, and
C-reactive protein (CRP) in mg/dL.
The SDAI score ranges from 0 to approximately 86 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. SDAI remission is defined as a score ≤ 3.3."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838836|NCT01313208|Secondary|Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Score at Each Time Point|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10 where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10 where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest).
The CDAI score ranges from 0 to 76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838837|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving CDAI Low Disease Activity at Each Time Point|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a Likert scale form 0 to 10, where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10, where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest. The CDAI score ranges from 0 to 76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. CDAI low disease activity is defined as a score ≤ 10."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838838|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving CDAI Remission at Each Time Point|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10, where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10, where 0 = lowest disease activity and 10 = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. CDAI remission is defined as a score ≤ 2.8."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838839|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Count Remission at Each Time Point|"Count remission is achieved when a participant satisfies all of the following at any given time point: - 68 tender joint count ≤ 1, - 66 swollen joint count ≤ 1, - C-reactive protein (CRP) (in mg/dL) ≤1, and - patient global assessment of disease activity ≤ 1 (measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10 ranging from no activity at all to worst activity imaginable)."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838840|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With RAPID3 Remission or Low Severity at Each Time Point|"The Multi-Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) is adapted from the standard HAQ and is used for the computation of the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3). The RAPID 3 includes the 3 Core Data Set measures of physical function, pain, and patient global estimate. The score for physical function ranges from 0 to 10 and is calculated by adding the ten activities of daily living, each scored from 0 to 3 by the patient (0=without any difficulty, 1=with some difficulty, 2=with much difficulty, and 3=unable to do) and dividing the total raw score by 3. Pain and global estimate of health are measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10, both scored 0 (best) to 10 (worst). The three 0-10 scores for physical function, pain, and global assesment of health are added together for a composite score of 0 to 30. The RAPID3 composite score includes 4 categories: High Severity > 12, Moderate Severity = 6.1 - 12, Low severity = 3.1 - 6, and Remission ≤ 3."|Baseline and Weeks 4, 12, and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838841|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 Response at Each Timepoint|"A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [HAQ-DI]);
C-reactive protein (CRP) level."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838842|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response at Each Timepoint|"A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [HAQ-DI]);
C-reactive protein (CRP) level."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838843|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Each Timepoint|A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met: • ≥ 20% improvement in tender joint count; • ≥ 20% improvement in swollen joint count; and • ≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: ◦ Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); ◦ Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10); ◦ Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a likert scale from 0 to 10); ◦ Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [HAQ-DI]); ◦ C-Reactive Protein level.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants with available data at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838844|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DAS28 Remission at All Other Timepoints|"Remission is defined by a DAS28 score less than 2.6. The DAS28 is a composite score to measure disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, derived from the following variables:
The number of swollen and tender joints assessed using the 28-joint count;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity measured on a likert scale from 0 (no activity at all) to 10 (worst activity).
The DAS28 score ranges from zero to ten. A DAS28 above 5.1 indicates high disease activity."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analyses at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838845|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DAS28 Low Disease Activity at All Other Timepoints|"Low disease activity is defined by a disease activity score (28 joint) calculated using the C-reactive protein formula (DAS28-CRP) of less than 3.2. The DAS28 is a composite score to measure disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, derived from the following variables:
The number of swollen and tender joints assessed using the 28-joint count;
C-Reactive Protein (CRP) level
Patient's global assessment of disease activity measured on a likert scale from 0 (no activity at all) to 10 (worst activity).
The DAS28 score ranges from zero up to approximately ten. DAS28 scores above 5.1 indicate high disease activity."|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 20 and 24|"Primary analysis set; LOCF was used. N indicates the number of participants included in the analysis at each time point."||percentage of participants|||Number
838846|NCT01313208|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DAS28 Remission at Week 12|"Remission is defined by a DAS28 score less than 2.6. The DAS28 is a composite score to measure disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, derived from the following variables:
The number of swollen and tender joints assessed using the 28-joint count;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity measured on a likert scale from 0 (no activity at all) to 10 (worst activity).
The DAS28 score ranges from zero to ten. DAS28 above 5.1 indicates high disease activity."|Week 12|Primary analysis set; LOCF was used||percentage of participants|||Number
838847|NCT01313208|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving DAS28 Low Disease Activity at Week 12|"Low disease activity is defined by a disease activity score (28 joint) calculated using the C-reactive protein formula (DAS28-CRP) of less than 3.2. The DAS28 is a composite score to measure disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, derived from the following variables: • The number of swollen and tender joints assessed using the 28-joint count; • C-Reactive Protein (CRP) level • Patient's global assessment of disease activity measured on a likert scale from 0 (no activity at all) to 10 (worst activity).
The DAS28 score ranges from zero up to approximately ten. DAS28 scores above 5.1 indicate high disease activity."|Week 12|Primary analysis set (all randomized participants); last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
838848|NCT01313221|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical trial participant. A serious adverse event is defined as an adverse event that meets at least 1 of the following serious criteria: • fatal, • life threatening, • requires in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, • results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, • congenital anomaly/birth defect, and/or • other significant medical hazard.|32 weeks|Safety analysis was based on treatment received, regardless of group assignment. 177 patients are included in group A, including 144 patients randomized to group A, 23 patients who were non-randomized and 10 patients randomized to group B but never received topical agents; Group B includes 133 patients who received etanercept plus ≥1 topical agent.||participants|||Number
838849|NCT01313221|Secondary|Health Resource Utilization: Ability to Perform Daily Activities|Participants were asked: How much did your psoriasis affect your ability to do your daily activities or household chores? Possible answers were: a) A great deal; b) Quite a bit; c) Somewhat; d) Minimally; e) Not at all.|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set; LOCF was used.||participants|||Number
838850|NCT01313221|Secondary|Health Resource Utilization: Number of Participants With Missed Hours From Work|Participants who were employed answered the following question regarding the past 4 weeks: How many hours per week did you miss from work because of your psoriasis? The number of participants with one or more missed hours of work per week is reported.|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set who were employed and with available data; LOCF was used.||participants|||Number
838851|NCT01313221|Secondary|Health Resource Utilization: Productivity While Working|Participants who were employed were asked: How much did your psoriasis affect your productivity while you were working? Possible responses were: a) A great deal; b) Quite a bit; c) Somewhat; d) Minimally; e) Not at all.|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set who were employed and with available data at each time point; LOCF was used. For the Etanercept 50 mg BIW group there were 106 and 100 participants with available data at Baseline and Week 24 respectively. For the Etanercept + Topical group there were 93 and 85 participants respectively.||participants|||Number
838852|NCT01313221|Secondary|Health Resource Utilization: Employment Status|Participants completed a questionnaire to assess their health resource utilization (HRU) related to psoriasis. Participants were asked their employment status at Baseline and at Week 24.|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set; LOCF was used.||participants|||Number
838853|NCT01313221|Secondary|Health Resource Utilization: Out of Pocket Expenses|Participants completed a questionnaire to assess their health resource utilization (HRU) related to psoriasis. To assess out of pocket expenses, participants answered the following question regarding the past 4 weeks: Not counting study mandated visits, what out-of-pocket expenses did you spend for the management of psoriasis (i.e. costs due to travelling to doctor appointment, hospital or clinic parking costs, alternative medications)?|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set with available data; LOCF was used.||Canadian dollars||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838854|NCT01313221|Secondary|Health Resource Utilization: Number of Participants Who Needed Friend or Family Care|Participants completed a questionnaire to assess their health resource utilization (HRU) related to psoriasis. Participants answered the following question regarding the past 4 weeks: How many hours have you had a friend or family member take time off work to provide care or transportation? The number of participants who had paid or non-paid help for one or more hours is reported.|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set with available data; LOCF was used.||participants|||Number
838855|NCT01313221|Secondary|Health Resource Utilization: Number of Participants Requiring Paid Help With Chores|Participants completed a questionnaire to assess their health resource utilization (HRU) related to psoriasis. To assess the number of participants who needed paid help with chores, participants answered the following question regarding the past 4 weeks: How many times have you paid someone to help you do chores around the house (cleaning, maintenance, lawn care)? The number of participants who paid for help one or more times is reported.|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set with available data; LOCF was used.||participants|||Number
838856|NCT01313221|Secondary|Health Resource Utilization: Number of Participants With Home Healthcare Visits|Participants completed a questionnaire to assess their health resource utilization (HRU) related to psoriasis. To assess the number of homecare visits, participants answered the following question regarding the past 4 weeks: How many times have you received care from a health professional in your home? The number of participants with one or more visits is reported.|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set with available data; LOCF was used.||participants|||Number
838857|NCT01313221|Secondary|Health Resource Utilization: Number of Participants With Visits to a Healthcare Provider|Participants completed a questionnaire to assess their health resource utilization (HRU) related to psoriasis. To assess the number of visits to a healthcare provider, participants answered the following questions regarding the past 4 weeks: How many times have you been to any physician’s office or urgent care clinic? How many times have you seen a nurse practitioner, a physician assistant, a psychologist, a naturopath, an acupuncturist, a chiropractor, or other healthcare professional (HCP)? The number of participants with one or more visits is reported.|Baseline and 24 weeks|Full Analysis Set with available data; LOCF was used.||participants|||Number
838858|NCT01313221|Secondary|Change in Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medications (TSQM) Scores From Baseline to Weeks 12 and 24|The TSQM is a validated questionnaire consisting of 14 questions regarding a participant's perception of the level of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the medication they are taking. Four scales are generated: side effects, effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction. Optional responses are: Extremely Dissatisfied, Very Dissatisfied, Dissatisfied, Somewhat Satisfied, Satisfied, Very Satisfied, and Extremely Satisfied. From the responses, a scale score from 0 - 100 is calculated, with a higher score indicating greater satisfaction. Change was calculated as postbaseline value - Baseline value so that a positive change indicates improvement.|Baseline and Weeks 12 and 24|Full analysis set; LOCF was used; n indicates the number of patients with available data for each scale at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838910|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in White Blood Cell (WBC) Count, Neutrophils, Lymphocytes and Platelets|Blood samples for WBC count with differentials (neutrophils, lymphocytes) and platelet count were taken at baseline, at post treatment follow up visit Week 4, and at end of study or early withdrawal.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Giga cells/L||Full Range|Mean
838859|NCT01313221|Secondary|Change in Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medications (TSQM) Scores From Week 12 to Week 24|TSQM is a validated questionnaire consisting of 14 questions regarding a participant's perception of the level of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the medication they are taking. Four scales are generated: side effects, effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction. Optional responses are: Extremely Dissatisfied, Very Dissatisfied, Dissatisfied, Somewhat Satisfied, Satisfied, Very Satisfied, and Extremely Satisfied. From the responses, a scale score from 0 - 100 is calculated, with a higher score indicating greater satisfaction. Change was calculated as Week 24 - Week 12 so that a positive change indicates improvement over time. Change was adjusted for treatment using a mixed model.|Week 12 and Week 24|Efficacy Evaluable with available data; n indicates the number of patients with available data for each scale.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838860|NCT01313221|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 12 and 24 in Dermatology Quality of Life Index (DQLI) Total Score|The DLQI questionnaire asks participants to evaluate the degree that psoriasis has affected their quality of life in the last week, and includes the following parameters: symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure activities, work or school activities, personal relationships and treatment related feelings. Participants answer 10 questions on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); the range of the total score is 0 to 30. A score of 21 to 30 means an extremely large effect on the participant's life whereas 0-1 means that the disease has no effect at all. Change from Baseline was calculated as Baseline value - postbaseline value so that a positive change indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 12 and Week 24|Full analysis set with available data; LOCF was used||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838861|NCT01313221|Secondary|Change From Week 12 to Week 24 in Dermatology Quality of Life Index (DQLI) Total Score|The DLQI questionnaire asks participants to evaluate the degree that psoriasis has affected their quality of life in the last week, and includes the following parameters: symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure activities, work or school activities, personal relationships and treatment related feelings. Participants answer 10 questions on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); the range of the total score is 0 to 30. A score of 21 to 30 means an extremely large effect on the participant's life whereas 0-1 means that the disease has no effect at all. Change from Week 12 to Week 24 is calculated as: Week 12 value - Week 24 value so that a positive change indicates improvement. Change was adjusted for treatment using a mixed model.|Week 12 and Week 24|Efficacy Evaluable set with available data||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838862|NCT01313221|Secondary|Percent Change in the Percentage of Body Surface Area (BSA) Involvement From Baseline to Weeks 12, 16, 20, and 24|"The percentage of body surface area involved with psoriasis was measured by the same blinded assessor performing the PASI assessments.
Change from Baseline \ is presented as a percentage of the Baseline value: Baseline value - postbaseline value / Baseline value * 100, so that a positive change indicates improvement."|Baseline and Weeks 12, 16, 20, and 24|Full analysis set with available data; LOCF was used||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
838863|NCT01313221|Secondary|Percent Change in the Percentage of Body Surface Area (BSA) Involvement From Week 12 to Weeks 16, 20, and 24|"The percentage of body surface area involved with psoriasis was measured by the same blinded assessor performing the PASI assessments. Change from Week 12 is presented as a percentage of the Week 12 value: Week 12 value - postbaseline value / Week 12 value * 100, so that a positive change indicates improvement.
Change was adjusted for treatment using a mixed model."|Weeks 12, 16, 20, and 24|Efficacy analysis set with available data||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838864|NCT01313221|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Static Physician’s Global Assessment (sPGA) of Psoriasis Score of 0 (Clear) or 1 (Almost Clear)|The sPGA scale is completed by the same blinded assessor performing the PASI assessments and is designed to evaluate the physician’s global assessment of the participant’s psoriasis based on severity of induration, scaling, and erythema. The sPGA is assessed on a scale of 0 to 5 (0 = clear, 5 = severe).|Weeks 12, 16, 20, and 24|Full Analysis Set, LOCF was used.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838865|NCT01313221|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI 90 Response|The percentage of participants with a 90% reduction (improvement) in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score from Baseline. PASI score is based on an assessment of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling), and the percent area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (best outcome) to 72 (worst outcome).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 16, 20 and 24|Full analysis set with a non-missing response; LOCF was used.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838866|NCT01313221|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI 75 Response|The percentage of participants with a 75% reduction (improvement) in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score from Baseline. PASI score is based on an assessment of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling), and the percent area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (best outcome) to 72 (worst outcome).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 16, 20 and 24|Full analysis set with a non-missing response; LOCF was used.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838867|NCT01313221|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a PASI 50 Response|The percentage of participants with a 50% reduction (improvement) in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score from Baseline. PASI score is based on an assessment of erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness), desquamation (scaling), and the percent area affected as observed on the day of examination. The score ranges from 0 (best outcome) to 72 (worst outcome).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 16, 20 and 24|Full analysis set with a non-missing response; LOCF was used.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838868|NCT01313221|Secondary|Percent Change in PASI From Baseline to Weeks 12, 16, 20, and 24|The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by the erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) on a scale from none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3) or very severe (4), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 to 6. PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease. Change from Baseline is presented as a percentage of the Baseline value: Baseline value - postbaseline value / Baseline value * 100, so that a positive change indicates improvement.|Baseline and Weeks 12, 16, 20, and 24|Full analysis set, (all enrolled participants who had taken at least 1 dose of study treatment and had at least 1 post-baseline efficacy evaluation) and with available data. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
838869|NCT01313221|Secondary|Percent Change in PASI From Week 12 to Weeks 16 and 20|The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by the erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) on a scale from none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3) or very severe (4), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 to 6. PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease. Change from Week 12 presented as a percentage of the Week 12 value: Week 12 value - postbaseline value / Week 12 value * 100, so that a positive change indicates improvement. Change was adjusted for treatment using a mixed model.|Week 12, Week 16 and Week 20|Efficacy Evaluable set with available data at each time point (indicated by n)||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838870|NCT01313221|Primary|Percent Change in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) From Week 12 to Week 24|The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by the erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) on a scale from none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3) or very severe (4), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 to 6. PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease. Change from Week 12 to Week 24 is presented as a percentage of the Week 12 value: Week 12 value - Week 24 value / Week 12 value * 100 so that a positive change indicates improvement. Change was adjusted for treatment using a mixed model.|Week 12 and Week 24|Efficacy Evaluable set, which included all randomized participants who had taken at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-randomization efficacy evaluation, and with available data at Week 12 and Week 24.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838871|NCT01313273|Secondary|Reduction in Chromogranin A Serum Levels||Baseline, Week 96|Study early terminated due to poor enrollment|||||
838872|NCT01313273|Secondary|Median Time to PSA Response||Week 96|Study early terminated due to poor enrollment|||||
838873|NCT01313273|Secondary|Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Response||Week 96|Study early terminated due to poor enrollment|||||
838874|NCT01313273|Primary|Progression-free Survival||Week 96|Study early terminated due to poor enrollment.|||||
838875|NCT01313299|Primary|Change From Baseline in MAS Score in the Primary Targeted Muscle Group (PTMG)|MAS scale is used to assess muscle tone using a 6-point scale where: 0=No increase in muscle tone, 1=Slight increase in muscle tone manifested by a catch and release or by minimal resistance at the end of the range of motion (ROM) when the part is flexed or extended, 1±Slight increase in muscle tone manifested by a catch followed by minimal resistance throughout the remainder of the ROM, 2=Marked increase in muscle tone through most of the ROM but affected part easily moved, 3=Considerable increase in muscle tone passive movement difficult or 4=Affected part(s) rigid in flexion or extension. The MAS has been derived for analyses as follows: 0=0 ; 1=1; 1+=2; 2=3; 3=4 and 4=5.|From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 4|Intention to treat (ITT) population included all randomized subjects who received at least one injection of study drug and had a MAS score at baseline (pretreatment) and at week 4. Total 5 subjects were excluded from ITT population as they did not have MAS score at baseline or/and at week 4.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838876|NCT01313299|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DAS Score for the Principal Target of Treatment (PTT)|"DAS is a 4-point scale used to determine the extent of functional impairment in 4 functional domains (dressing, hygiene, limb position and pain). DAS scale rating: 0=No disability, 1=Mild disability (noticeable but does not interfere significantly with normal activities), 2=Moderate disability (normal activities require increased effort and/or assistance) and 3=Severe disability (normal activities limited).
If subject chose 'Hygiene' as PTT the score collected will be between 0 and 3."|From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 4|ITT population. Two subjects each from Placebo and Dysport 1000 U had missed DAS assessment at baseline and week 4.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838877|NCT01313299|Secondary|Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of Treatment Response|PGA is a 9-point scale used to assess global overall treatment response by the investigator (-4: markedly worse, -3: much worse, -2: worse, -1: slightly worse, 0: no change, +1: slightly improved, +2: improved, +3: much improved and +4: markedly improved).|At Week 4|ITT population. Two subjects each from Placebo and Dysport 1000 U had missed PGA assessment at week 4||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838878|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in European 5 Dimensions, 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) QoL at End of Study/Early Withdrawal Visit|Subjects were asked to complete the EQ-5D-5L QoL questionnaires prior to the study treatment at baseline and at the end of study/early withdrawal visit. The EQ-5D-5L index is a generic preference based measure of health related QoL producing utility scores that represent subject preferences for particular health states. This instrument rated subject health state looking at 5 specific dimensions such as mobility, self-care, usual activity, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression and scored their general health state. Each dimension has 5 levels of severity (no problems, slight problems,moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems). In addition, a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 to 100 was also included for the patients to summarize their overall health status, where 0 is the worst and 100 the best possible health state. The mean values for each dimension and the VAS scores at baseline and at the end of-study /early withdrawal are reported.|Up to Week 52|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838891|NCT01313312|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least One Grade Reduction in DAS for Individual Domains at Week 4|The DAS is a 4-point scale. The extent of functional impairment in 4 functional domains (dressing, hygiene, limb position and pain) was rated as follows: 0=no disability, 1=mild disability (noticeable but does not interfere significantly with normal activities), 2=moderate disability (normal activities require increased effort and/or assistance) and 3=severe disability (normal activities limited). The percentage of subjects with at least one grade reduction in DAS for each of the individual domains at Week 4 is reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||percentage of subjects|||Number
838879|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36) Quality of Life (QoL) at End of Study/Early Withdrawal Visit|Subjects were asked to complete the SF-36 questionnaires prior to the study treatment at baseline and at the end of study/early withdrawal visit. The SF-36 is a generic non-preference based health status measure. This instrument assessed subject health across 8 variable dimensions, which are specific health domains such as physical functioning, social functioning and vitality. Each variable item score is coded and turned into a 0–100 scale where 0 indicates the worst and 100 indicates the best possible health state for both the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) of the questionnaire. Baseline results and the change from baseline to end of study/early withdrawal for the PCS and MCS are reported.|Up to Week 52|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838880|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Modified Frenchay Scale (MFS) at Week 4|The MFS was used to measure upper limb active function. Each subject was video taped while performing specific tasks. The videos were sent to a central provider and were read and scored by two independent readers blinded to the timing of the video and to treatment. These central assessments were used for the analysis of efficacy endpoints. The MFS consists of 10 tasks asking the subject to reach, grasp, carry and release different objects of different sizes which subjects are likely to use in their daily life. Each of these tasks was rated on a 10 point scale ranging from no movement to normal movement; for each task, the score 5 is used to rate a task barely accomplished. Mean change in MFS from baseline to Week 4 was reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838881|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline at Week 4 in Ease of Applying a Splint|The ease of applying a splint was evaluated on a 6-point scale (0= no splint needed, –1= splint needed and applied with no difficulty, –2= splint needed and applied with mild difficulty, –3= splint needed and applied with moderate difficulty, –4= splint needed and applied with severe difficulty, –5= splint needed,but unable to apply). Mean change in ease of applying a splint from baseline to Week 4 was reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838882|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Active Range of Motion (AROM) at Week 4 in the 3 Possible PTMGs|The AROM was assessed by the range of extension achieved by the subject moving each joint in the PTMGs (extrinsic finger flexors, elbow flexors and wrist flexors) without assistance. A goniometer was used for measurements in the elbow and wrist flexors but not for measurements in the extrinsic finger flexors. Mean changes in AROM in the 3 possible PTMGs from baseline to Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838883|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 for Spasticity Grade (Y) in Shoulder Extensors|The TS was used to measure spasticity in shoulder extensors. The TS is administered by applying passive stretch to a muscle group. The spasticity grade (Y) assesses quality of muscle reaction on a 5-point scale (measured at fast speed): 0 =No resistance throughout passive movement, 1=slight resistance throughout passive movement, 2=clear catch at precise angle, interrupting passive movement, followed by release, 3=fatigable clonus (less than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at a precise angle, followed by release. 4=unfatigable clonus (more than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at precise angle. Mean changes in spasticity grade (Y) from baseline to Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838884|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 for Angle of Arrest (XV1), Angle of Catch (XV3) and Angle of Spasticity (X) in Shoulder Extensors|The TS was used to measure spasticity in shoulder extensors. The TS is administered by applying passive stretch to a muscle group at two velocities. Slow speed of muscle stretch measures the range of passive motion. During a slow stretching movement, the examiner determines the angle of movement arrest, either due to subject discomfort or a mechanical resistance. The same movement is repeated at high velocity (as fast as possible) to determine the angle of catch and release. The angle of movement arrest at slow velocity (XV1) and the angle of catch at fast speed (XV3) were recorded. The spasticity angle (X) was calculated as the difference between XV1 and XV3. Mean changes in Angles XV1, XV3 and X from baseline to Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
838900|NCT01313312|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 or 2 Grade Reduction in MAS for Extrinsic Finger Flexors at Week 4|The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4 that can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The MAS was applied by the rater by stretching the joint through its full available range over 1 second. The percentage of subjects with at least a 1 grade reduction and at least a 2 grades reduction from baseline in mean MAS in the extrinsic finger flexors at Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||percentage of subjects|||Number
838885|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 for Spasticity Grade (Y) in Wrist Flexors as PTMG|The TS was used to measure spasticity in wrist flexors. The TS is administered by applying passive stretch to a muscle group. The spasticity grade (Y) assesses quality of muscle reaction on a 5-point scale (measured at fast speed): 0 =No resistance throughout passive movement, 1=slight resistance throughout passive movement, 2=clear catch at precise angle, interrupting passive movement, followed by release, 3=fatigable clonus (less than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at a precise angle, followed by release. 4=unfatigable clonus (more than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at precise angle. Mean changes in spasticity grade (Y) from baseline to Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838886|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 for Angle of Arrest (XV1), Angle of Catch (XV3) and Angle of Spasticity (X) in Wrist Flexors as PTMG|The TS was used to measure spasticity in wrist flexors. The TS is administered by applying passive stretch to a muscle group at two velocities. Slow speed of muscle stretch measures the range of passive motion. During a slow stretching movement, the examiner determines the angle of movement arrest, either due to subject discomfort or a mechanical resistance. The same movement is repeated at high velocity (as fast as possible) to determine the angle of catch and release. The angle of movement arrest at slow velocity (XV1) and the angle of catch at fast speed (XV3) were recorded. The spasticity angle (X) was calculated as the difference between XV1 and XV3. Mean changes in Angles XV1, XV3 and X from baseline to Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
838887|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 for Spasticity Grade (Y) in Elbow Flexors as PTMG|The TS was used to measure spasticity in elbow flexors.The TS is administered by applying passive stretch to a muscle group. The spasticity grade (Y) assesses quality of muscle reaction on a 5-point scale (measured at fast speed): 0 =No resistance throughout passive movement, 1=slight resistance throughout passive movement, 2=clear catch at precise angle, interrupting passive movement, followed by release, 3=fatigable clonus (less than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at a precise angle, followed by release. 4=unfatigable clonus (more than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at precise angle. Mean changes in spasticity grade (Y) from baseline to Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838888|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 for Angle of Arrest (XV1), Angle of Catch (XV3) and Angle of Spasticity (X) in Elbow Flexors as PTMG|The TS was used to measure spasticity in elbow flexors. The TS is administered by applying passive stretch to a muscle group at two velocities. Slow speed of muscle stretch measures the range of passive motion. During a slow stretching movement, the examiner determines the angle of movement arrest, either due to subject discomfort or a mechanical resistance. The same movement is repeated at high velocity (as fast as possible) to determine the angle of catch and release. The angle of movement arrest at slow velocity (XV1) and the angle of catch at fast speed (XV3) were recorded. The spasticity angle (X) was calculated as the difference between XV1 and XV3. Mean changes in Angles XV1, XV3 and X from baseline to Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
838889|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 for Spasticity Grade (Y) in Extrinsic Finger Flexors as PTMG|The TS was used to measure spasticity in extrinsic finger flexors. The TS is administered by applying passive stretch to a muscle group. The spasticity grade (Y) assesses quality of muscle reaction on a 5-point scale (measured at fast speed): 0 =No resistance throughout passive movement, 1=slight resistance throughout passive movement, 2=clear catch at precise angle, interrupting passive movement, followed by release, 3=fatigable clonus (less than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at a precise angle, followed by release. 4=unfatigable clonus (more than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at precise angle. Mean changes in spasticity grade (Y) from baseline to Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838890|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 for Angle of Arrest (XV1), Angle of Catch (XV3) and Angle of Spasticity (X) in Extrinsic Finger Flexors as PTMG|The Tardieu Scale (TS) was used to measure spasticity in extrinsic finger flexors. The TS is administered by applying passive stretch to a muscle group at two velocities. Slow speed of muscle stretch measures the range of passive motion. During a slow stretching movement, the examiner determines the angle of movement arrest, either due to subject discomfort or a mechanical resistance. The same movement is repeated at high velocity (as fast as possible) to determine the angle of catch and release. The angle of movement arrest at slow velocity (XV1) and the angle of catch at fast speed (XV3) were recorded. The spasticity angle (X) was calculated as the difference between XV1 and XV3. Mean changes in Angles XV1, XV3 and X from baseline to Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
840907|NCT01338636|Primary|Change From Baseline in Peak Exercise Pulmonary Vascular Resistance (PVR)|PVR is the resistance offered by the pulmonary circulatory system.|Baseline to Week 24|The analysis population included evaluable participants who completed the 24-week treatment period.||Woods units (WU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838892|NCT01313312|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 Grade Reduction in DAS for PTT at Week 4|At baseline the subject and investigator together selected one of the four DAS domains as the PTT. The selected domain was required to have a rating of moderate or severe (≥2) at baseline. The DAS is a 4-point scale, the extent of functional impairment in 4 functional domains (dressing, hygiene, limb position and pain) was rated as follows: 0=no disability, 1=mild disability (noticeable but does not interfere significantly with normal activities), 2=moderate disability (normal activities require increased effort and/or assistance) and 3=severe disability (normal activities limited). The percentage of subjects with at least 1 grade reduction from baseline in DAS for PTT at Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Percentage of Subjects|||Number
838893|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Disability Assessment Scale (DAS) Score for the Principal Target of Treatment (PTT) at Week 4|At baseline the subject and investigator together selected one of the four DAS domains as the PTT. The selected domain was required to have a rating of moderate or severe (≥2) at baseline. The DAS is a 4-point scale, the extent of functional impairment in 4 functional domains (dressing, hygiene, limb position and pain) was rated as follows: 0=no disability, 1=mild disability (noticeable but does not interfere significantly with normal activities), 2=moderate disability (normal activities require increased effort and/or assistance) and 3=severe disability (normal activities limited). The mean changes in DAS at Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838894|NCT01313312|Secondary|Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of Treatment Response at Week 4|The PGA is a 9-point rating scale: -4=markedly worse, -3=much worse, -2=worse, -1=slightly worse, 0=no change, +1=slightly improved, +2=improved, +3=much improved, +4=markedly improved. An assessment of overall treatment response was conducted by the investigator and the mean PGA scores during long-term open label treatment with Dysport were reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838895|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline MAS in the Shoulder Extensors at Week 4|The clinical assessment of muscle tone was performed using the MAS. The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4 that can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The MAS was applied by the rater by stretching the joint through its full available range over 1 second. The mean changes from baseline to Week 4 in MAS in the shoulder extensors are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838896|NCT01313312|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 or 2 Grade Reduction in MAS for Elbow Flexors at Week 4|The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4 that can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The MAS was applied by the rater by stretching the joint through its full available range over 1 second. The percentage of subjects at least a 1 grade reduction and at least a 2 grades reduction from baseline in mean MAS in the elbow flexors at Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||percentage of subjects|||Number
838897|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline MAS in the Elbow Flexors at Week 4|The clinical assessment of muscle tone was performed using the MAS. The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4 that can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The MAS was applied by the rater by stretching the joint through its full available range over 1 second. The mean changes from baseline to Week 4 in MAS in the elbow flexors are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838898|NCT01313312|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 or 2 Grade Reduction in MAS for Wrist Flexors at Week 4|The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4 that can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The MAS was applied by the rater by stretching the joint through its full available range over 1 second. The percentage of subjects with at least a 1 grade reduction and at least a 2 grades reduction in mean MAS in the wrist flexors at Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||percentage of subjects|||Number
838899|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline MAS in the Wrist Flexors at Week 4|The clinical assessment of muscle tone was performed using the MAS. The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4 that can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The MAS was applied by the rater by stretching the joint through its full available range over 1 second. The mean changes from baseline to Week 4 in MAS in the wrist flexors are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838901|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline MAS in the Extrinsic Finger Flexors at Week 4|The clinical assessment of muscle tone was performed using the MAS. The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4 that can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The MAS was applied by the rater by stretching the joint through its full available range over 1 second. The mean changes from baseline to Week 4 in MAS in the extrinsic finger flexors are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838902|NCT01313312|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 or 2 Grade Reduction in MAS for Overall PTMG|The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4 that can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The MAS was applied by the rater by stretching the joint through its full available range over 1 second. The percentage of subjects with at least a 1 grade reduction and at least a 2 grades reduction from baseline in mean MAS in the overall PTMG at Week 4 are reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population was defined as all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||percentage of participants|||Number
838903|NCT01313312|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) in the Overall Primary Targeted Muscle Group (PTMG) for Upper Limb at Week 4|The clinical assessment of muscle tone was performed using the MAS. The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4 that can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The MAS was applied by the rater by stretching the joint through its full available range over 1 second. The mean changes from baseline to Week 4 in MAS in the overall PTMG (finger, wrist or elbow flexors) are reported.|At Week 4|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population was all enrolled subjects who received at least one injection of study medication in this open label extension study. Too few subjects were treated in Cycle 5 to allow direct comparisons with other cycles and are not reported. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838904|NCT01313312|Primary|Number of Subjects With Botulinum Toxin A Binding and Neutralising Putative Antibodies|Blood samples were collected at baseline, Week 4 of each cycle, and at the end of study/early withdrawal to test for the presence of Botulinum Toxin A Binding antibodies. Samples positive for the presence of binding antibodies were then analysed for the presence of neutralising putative antibodies. The number of subjects who were either positive (+ve) or negative (-ve) at baseline and then positive post baseline for binding or neutralising antibodies were reported.|Up to Week 52|Binding and neutralising antibodies were evaluated at baseline for all 258 subjects (rollover and de novo) enrolled in Study 148. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Participants|||Number
838905|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in 12 Lead ECG - HR|HR was measured by 12-lead ECG tracing, performed at baseline, at post treatment follow up visit Week 4, and at the end of study or early withdrawal visit. The 12-lead ECG recordings were performed at a paper speed of 25 mm/s, recorded with the subject in a supine position after 5 minutes rest.|Up to Week 52|The ECG analysis was performed in the safety population among subjects who had at least one ECG measurement before injection and at least one ECG after injection. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||bpm||Standard Deviation|Mean
838906|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) and Fasting Blood Glucose|Blood samples for analysis of BUN and fasting blood glucose levels were taken at baseline, at post treatment follow up visit Week 4, and at end of study/early withdrawal.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||millimoles(mmol)/L||Full Range|Mean
838907|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in Total Bilirubin and Creatinine|Blood samples for clinical chemistry analysis of total bilirubin and creatinine were taken at baseline, at post treatment follow up visit Week 4, and at end of study/early withdrawal. Outcome measure is reported for number of subjects with data available for analysis.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Micromole/L (μmol/L)||Full Range|Mean
838908|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP), Gamma Glutamyl Transferase (GGT), Serum Glutamic Oxaloacetic Transaminase (SGOT) and Serum Glutamic Pyruvic Transaminase (SGPT)|Blood samples for analysis of the following clinical chemistry parameters: ALP, GGT, SGOT and SGPT were taken at baseline, at post treatment follow up visit Week 4, and at end of study/early withdrawal. Outcome measure is reported for number of subjects with data available for analysis.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||International Unit/L (IU/L)||Full Range|Mean
838909|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in 12-Lead Electrocardiogram (ECG)|12-lead ECG tracing was performed at baseline, post treatment at Week 4 and at the end of study/early withdrawal visit. The 12-lead ECG recordings were performed at a paper speed of 25 mm/s, recorded with the subject in a supine position after 5 minutes rest. The ECG parameters reported were QRS duration, PR duration, QT duration, QTcB (QT interval corrected for HR according to Bazett), and QTcF (QT interval corrected for HR according to Fridericia) at baseline and the change to end of study/early withdrawal visit (EOS).|Up to Week 52|The ECG analysis was performed in the safety population among subjects who had at least one ECG measurement before injection and at least one ECG after injection. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||milliseconds (ms)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838922|NCT01313494|Secondary|Mean Rate of Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbations Per Patient Per Year|The mean rate of COPD exacerbations per patient per year rate = (number of exacerbations per treatment group/time to study withdrawal per treatment group) * 365. COPD exacerbations were categorized as follows: - Severe: Requiring hospitalization and/or leading to death; - Moderate: Requiring oral or parenteral glucocorticosteroid therapy.|24 weeks|Intent-to-treat||exacerbations per patient per year|||Number
838911|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in Mean Corpuscular Volume (MCV)|Blood samples for MCV were taken at baseline, at post treatment follow up visit Week 4, and at end of study/early withdrawal. Outcome measure is reported for number of subjects with data available for analysis.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||femtoliters (fL)||Full Range|Mean
838912|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in Mean Corpuscular Haemoglobin (MCH)|Blood samples for MCH were taken at baseline, at post treatment follow up visit Week 4, and at end of study/early withdrawal. Outcome measure is reported for number of subjects with data available for analysis.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||picograms (pg)||Full Range|Mean
838913|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in Haematocrit|Blood samples for haematocrit were taken at baseline, at post treatment follow up visit Week 4, and at end of study/early withdrawal. Outcome measure is reported for number of subjects with data available for analysis.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||percentage of RBC in blood||Full Range|Mean
838914|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in Haemoglobin and Mean Corpuscular Haemoglobin Concentration (MCHC)|Blood samples for haemoglobin and MCHC were taken at baseline, at post treatment follow up visit Week 4, and at the end of study/early withdrawal. Outcome measure is reported for number of subjects with data available for analysis.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||grams(g)/L||Full Range|Mean
838915|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in Red Blood Cell (RBC) Count|Blood samples for RBC count were taken at baseline, at post treatment follow up visit Week 4, and at end of study/early withdrawal. Outcome measure is reported for number of subjects with data available for analysis.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Tera cells/Litre (L)||Full Range|Mean
838916|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in Heart Rate (HR)|HR was recorded at screening, baseline and at each post baseline visit. Vital signs were measured with the subject in a sitting position after resting for 3 minutes. Outcome measure is reported for number of subjects with data available for analysis.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Beats per minute (bpm)||Full Range|Mean
838917|NCT01313312|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to End of Study/Early Withdrawal in Diastolic and Systolic Blood Pressure (BP)|Systolic and diastolic BP were recorded at screening, baseline and at each post baseline visit. Vital signs were measured with the subject in a sitting position after resting for 3 minutes. Outcome measure is reported for number of subjects with data available for analysis.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Millimeters of Mercury (mm Hg)||Full Range|Mean
838918|NCT01313312|Primary|Assessment of the Long-term Safety of Dysport® Through the Collection of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|A TEAE was reported as emergent if it arose (i.e. started or worsened in severity) in the treatment phase after the subject received study medication. Adverse events of special interest (AESIs) were identified as those assessed as being due to remote spread of effect of Dysport®, or any adverse event (AE) that was assessed as a hypersensitivity reaction. TEAEs, AESIs, severe TEAEs, serious adverse events (SAEs), treatment related TEAEs, TEAEs leading to withdrawal and fatal SAEs are summarised by treatment cycle.|Up to Week 52|Subjects who entered the study and received at least one open label injection of Dysport® were evaluated for safety analysis. Only subjects with data available for analysis at the point of testing are reported.||Participants|||Number
838919|NCT01313494|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical trial participant regardless of causal relationship to study drug and regardless whether study drug has been administered. A serious adverse event (SAE) is any untoward medical occurrence or effect that at any dose results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability / incapacity, is a congenital anomaly / birth defect or is medically important due to other reasons than the above mentioned criteria. A non-serious AE is any AE that does not meet the criteria above. Each AE was assessed by the Investigator as either 'related' or 'not related' to study drug.|24 weeks|Safety population, all randomized patients who took at least 1 dose of the trial treatment after randomization.||participants|||Number
838920|NCT01313494|Secondary|Time to Onset of Second Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbation|Time to onset of a COPD exacerbation is defined as onset date of COPD exacerbation – date of first intake of study drug + 1 day. At least 10 days between the stop date of an exacerbation and the start date of the following exacerbation was required for these to be be considered as two separate COPD exacerbations. COPD exacerbations were categorized as follows: - Severe: Requiring hospitalization and/or leading to death; - Moderate: Requiring oral or parenteral glucocorticosteroid therapy.|24 weeks|Intent-to-treat population who experienced a second moderate to severe COPD exacerbation.||days||Full Range|Median
838921|NCT01313494|Secondary|Time to Onset of First Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbation|Time to onset of a COPD exacerbation is defined as onset date of COPD exacerbation – date of first intake of study drug + 1 day. COPD exacerbations were categorized as follows: - Severe: Requiring hospitalization and/or leading to death; - Moderate: Requiring oral or parenteral glucocorticosteroid therapy.|24 weeks|Intent-to-treat population with at least one moderate or severe exacerbation||days||Full Range|Median
838923|NCT01313494|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbations|A COPD exacerbation is an event characterised by a worsening in the patient’s baseline dyspnoea, or cough and/or sputum beyond day-to-day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management, and may be accompanied by increased wheeze, chest tightness, purulent sputum and symptoms of cold and/or fatigue. COPD exacerbations were categorized as follows: - Severe: Requiring hospitalization and/or leading to death; - Moderate: Requiring oral or parenteral glucocorticosteroid therapy.|24 weeks|Intent-to-treat||percentage of participants|||Number
838924|NCT01313494|Secondary|Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) Total Score at Week 24|"The TDI is a recognized questionnaire to measure dyspnoea (shortness of breath) in patients with COPD. Questions from the TDI were used to assess the 3 components: change in functional impairment, change in magnitude of task and change in magnitude of effort. Transitions or changes from baseline are rated from -3 (major deterioration) to +3 (major improvement), and summed to give a total score ranging from -9 to +9. Least squares means (LSM) are from a repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment, baseline value, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables."|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838925|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Use of Rescue Medication|Salbutamol (given by metered dose inhaler and spacer) was used as rescue medication according to the individual needs of a patient. Each use was documented in the patient’s paper diary. Least squares means (LSM) are from a repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment, baseline value, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||puffs/day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838926|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in COPD Symptom Scores|Symptoms of chronic bronchitis with respect to cough and sputum production were assessed daily by the patient and recorded in a diary. Symptoms were assessed on a 4-point scale as follows: Cough: 0: no cough; 1: mild cough (at some time during the day); 2: moderate cough (regularly during the day); 3: severe cough (never free of cough or feeling free of need to cough). Sputum production: 0: no sputum production (unnoticeable); 1: mild sputum production (noticeable as a problem); 2: moderate sputum production (frequent inconvenience); 3: severe sputum production (constant problem). Change from Baseline is reported for cough and sputum separately, and for the sum of the 2 scores (range 0 - 6). Least squares means (LSM) are from a repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment, baseline value, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838927|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-bronchodilator Ratio of Forced Expiratory Volume After 1 Second to Forced Expiratory Volume After 6 Seconds|The FEV1/FEV6 ratio represents the percentage of the volume of air expired in the first six seconds that is expelled from the lungs during the first second of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Post-bronchodilator measurements were taken 30 minutes after four inhalations of 100 μg salbutamol.|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data; last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used.||percentage of FEV1/FEV6||Full Range|Mean
838928|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pre-bronchodilator Ratio of Forced Expiratory Volume After 1 Second to Forced Expiratory Volume After 6 Seconds|The FEV1/FEV6 ratio represents the percentage of the volume of air expired in the first six seconds that is expelled from the lungs during the first second of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication.|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data; last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used.||percentage of FEV1/FEV6||Full Range|Median
838929|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-bronchodilator Ratio of Forced Expiratory Volume After 1 Second to Forced Vital Capacity|The FEV1/FVC ratio represents the percentage of vital capacity expelled from the lungs during the first second of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Post-bronchodilator measurements were taken 30 minutes after four inhalations of 100 μg salbutamol.|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data; last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used.||percent FEV1/FVC||Full Range|Median
838930|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pre-bronchodilator Ratio of Forced Expiratory Volume After 1 Second to Forced Vital Capacity|The FEV1/FVC ratio represents the percentage of vital capacity expelled from the lungs during the first second of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication.|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data; last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used.||percent FEV1/FVC||Full Range|Median
838931|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-bronchodilator Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEF)|PEF is the maximal flow (or speed) achieved during the maximally forced expiration initiated at full inspiration. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Post-bronchodilator measurements were taken 30 minutes after four inhalations of 100 μg salbutamol. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters/minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838932|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pre-bronchodilator Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEF)|PEF is the maximal flow (or speed) achieved during the maximally forced expiration initiated at full inspiration. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters/minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838943|NCT01313507|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least 1 Adverse Event Temporally Related to the Study Drug|An adverse event was considered to be temporally related to the study drug if it started during an infusion or within 72 hours after the end of an infusion.|Baseline (follow-up visit of study NGAM-01) to the end of the study (follow-up visit of study NGAM-05) (up to 4 months)|Safety analysis set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of NewGam.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838933|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Volume in First Six Seconds (FEV6)|FEV6 is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs in the first three seconds of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Post-bronchodilator measurements were taken 30 minutes after four inhalations of 100 μg salbutamol. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value of post-bronchodilator FEV6, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838934|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pre-bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Volume in First Six Seconds (FEV6)|FEV6 is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs in the first six seconds of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value of pre-bronchodilator FEV6, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838935|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Volume in First Three Seconds (FEV3)|FEV3 is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs in the first three seconds of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Post-bronchodilator measurements were taken 30 minutes after four inhalations of 100 μg salbutamol. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value of post-bronchodilator FEV3, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838936|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pre-bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Volume in First Three Seconds (FEV3)|FEV3 is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs in the first three seconds of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value of pre-bronchodilator FEV3, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838937|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Flow 25-75%|Forced expiratory flow 25-75% (FEF25-75%) is the flow (or speed) of air coming out of the lung during the middle half of a forced expiration. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Post-bronchodilator measurements were taken 30 minutes after four inhalations of 100 μg salbutamol. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters/second||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838938|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pre-bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Flow 25-75%|Forced expiratory flow 25-75% (FEF25-75%) is the flow (or speed) of air coming out of the lung during the middle half of a forced expiration. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters/second||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838939|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-bronchodilator Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|Vital capacity is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Post-bronchodilator measurements were taken 30 minutes after four inhalations of 100 μg salbutamol. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838940|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pre-bronchodilator Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|Vital capacity is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838941|NCT01313494|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-bronchodilator FEV1|FEV1 is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs in the first second of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Post-bronchodilator measurements were taken 30 minutes after four inhalations of 100 μg salbutamol. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value of post-bronchodilator FEV1, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population with available data.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838942|NCT01313494|Primary|Change From Baseline in Pre-bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Volume in First Second (FEV1)|FEV1 is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs in the first second of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry prior to taking study medication. Change from baseline over 24 weeks of treatment was calculated from a repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, baseline value of pre-bronchodilator FEV1, time and a treatment-by-time interaction as independent variables.|Baseline to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population included all randomly assigned patients who took at least 1 dose of trial treatment after randomization. Patients were assigned to the treatment group based on the treatment to which they were randomly assigned. Only patients with available data at Baseline and with at least 1 post-baseline measurement are included.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
838944|NCT01313507|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least 1 Adverse Event Causally Related to the Administration of the Study Drug|An adverse event was considered to be causally related to the administration of the study drug if it judged to be probably or possibly related to the study drug, as assessed by the investigator.|Baseline (follow-up visit of study NGAM-01) to the end of the study (follow-up visit of study NGAM-05) (up to 4 months)|Safety analysis set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of NewGam.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838945|NCT01313507|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Quality of Life (QoL) at the End of the Study|QoL was assessed with the Child Health Questionnaire-Parent Form (CHQ-PF50), completed by a parent or guardian, in participants < 14 years of age at the start of the previous study NGAM-01 and with the Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36-HS) in participants ≥ 14 years of age. The CHQ-PF50 consists of 50 items organized into 15 subscales.The 15 subscales could be combined into 2 summary scores, physical and psychosocial. The calculated scores were transformed so that each scale had a range of 0-100. A higher score indicates better health. The SF-36-HS is composed of 36 items. Responses to the 36 items were combined to create 8 scales. The 8 scales could be further combined into 2 scores: Physical component summary and mental component summary. The item and scale scores were transformed to a range of 0-100 with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 in the general US population. A higher score indicates better health. For both instruments, a positive change indicates improvement.|Baseline (follow-up visit of study NGAM-01) to the end of the study (follow-up visit of study NGAM-05) (up to 4 months)|Safety analysis set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of NewGam.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838946|NCT01313520|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Standardized Z-scores of Composite Endpoint Consisting of Clinical Disease Activity Measure DAS28 CRP + Rheumatoid Arthritis MRI Score (RAMRIS) Synovitis + RAMRIS Osteitis.|"DAS28 CRP is a composite index of the following: number of tender joints (28 joint count), number of swollen joints (28 joint count), GADP on a 100 mm VAS and concentration of CRP. RAMRIS Synovitis is an ordinal scoring system of hand synovitis that is scored from 0 to 3 in 8 locations, ranging from 0 to 24 total. RAMRIS Osteitis is an ordinal scoring system of hand osteitis that is scored from 0 to 3 in 25 locations, ranging from 0 to 75 total. The individual
endpoints are standardized using z-scores, then the z-scores are averaged to create a composite endpoint by use of O'Brien's global statistic."|Baseline and Week 14|Participants treated with Infliximab or placebo||Z-score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838947|NCT01313520|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Standardized Z-scores of Composite Endpoint Consisting of Clinical Disease Activity Measure DAS28 CRP + Ktrans.|Clinical disease activity score (DAS28 CRP) is a composite index of the following: number of tender joints (28 joint count), number of swollen joints (28 joint count), Patient Global Assessment of Disease Status (GADP) on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) and concentration of CRP. Ktrans is the volume transfer rate from the blood plasma to the enhancing synovium. The individual endpoints are standardized using z-scores, then the z-scores are averaged to create a composite endpoint by use of O'Brien's global statistic.|Baseline and Week 14|Participants treated with Infliximab or placebo||Z-score||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838948|NCT01313520|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in RAMRIS Osteitis.|RAMRIS Osteitis is an ordinal scoring system of hand osteitis that is scored from 0 to 3 in 25 locations. The scores can range from 0 to 75, with higher values corresponding to higher disease activity, and lower values to better outcomes.|Baseline and Week 14|Participants treated with infliximab or placebo. One participant in the placebo group missing a baseline value was not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838949|NCT01313520|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in RAMRIS Synovitis.|RAMRIS Synovitis is an ordinal scoring system of hand synovitis that is scored from 0 to 3 in 8 locations. The scores can range from 0 to 24, with higher values corresponding to higher disease activity, and lower values to better outcomes.|Baseline and Week 14|Participants treated with infliximab or placebo||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838950|NCT01313520|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in DAS28 CRP.|DAS28 CRP is a composite index of the following: number of tender joints (28 joint count), number of swollen joints (28 joint count), GADP on a 100 mm VAS and concentration of serum CRP. Scores can range from 2-10; with higher values corresponding to higher disease activity, and lower values to better outcomes.|Baseline and Week 14|Participants treated with infliximab or placebo||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838951|NCT01313520|Secondary|Percentage of Responders With a 50% Improvement From Baseline in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Responder Criteria for Tender and Swollen Joints (ACR50).|ACR50 requires that both tender and swollen joint counts improve by at least 50% from baseline, as well as a 50% improvement in at least 3 other core measures from the following: pain, patient's and physician's global assessment, physical disability and CRP.|Baseline and week 14|Participants treated with Infliximab or placebo||percentage of responders||90% Confidence Interval|Number
838952|NCT01313520|Secondary|Percentage of Responders With a 20% Improvement From Baseline in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Responder Criteria for Tender and Swollen Joints (ACR20).|ACR20 requires that both tender and swollen joint counts improve by at least 20% from baseline, as well as a 20% improvement in at least 3 other core measures from the following: pain, patient's and physician's global assessment, physical disability and C-reactive protein (CRP).|Baseline and week 14|Participants treated with Infliximab or Placebo||percentage of responders||90% Confidence Interval|Number
838953|NCT01313520|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Volume Transfer Rate From the Blood Plasma to the Enhancing Synovium (Ktrans)|Dynamic Contrast Enhanced (DCE) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was performed on one hand at baseline, and then at treatment week 14 to measure the rate constant of transfer of contrast (Ktrans).|Baseline and week 14|Participants treated with infliximab or placebo||min ^-1||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
838954|NCT01320943|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With HBsAg Loss at Week 96 in Both Study Arms|HBsAg loss is defined as qualitative HBsAg result changing from positive at baseline (BL) to negative at any post-baseline visit. Proportions are based on a Kaplan-Meier estimate.|Week 96|HBsAg Loss and Seroconversion Full Analysis Set||Proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838969|NCT01322594|Primary|Incidence of Clinically Significant Vital Signs Results|Number of participants experiencing clinically significant vital signs results. A clinically significant vital signs result is defined as an abnormal vital signs result that results in a treatment-emergent adverse event.|Days 1 - 92|All 31 participants entered into the study received MEDI2338 or placebo and were included in the analysis||Participants|||Number
838955|NCT01320943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) > Upper Limit of the Normal Range in the Stop TDF Arm (TDF-Free and Restart TDF)||Baseline to Week 144|Participants in the Full Analysis Set with available data were analyzed. Percentages are based on the number of participants with non-missing laboratory test results at each visit. One participant restarted TDF during Weeks 72 and 120 and thus was reported in both the Stop TDF and Re-Start TDF groups based on the date of TDF restart.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838956|NCT01320943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Viral Suppression in the Stop TDF Arm (TDF-Free and Re-Start TDF Groups)|Viral suppression is defined as 2 consecutive assessments of HBV DNA < 400 copies/mL (69 IU/mL) through Week 144.|Baseline to Week 144|Participants in the FAS with available data were analyzed. When participant randomized in the Stop TDF group restarted TDF therapy, that participant was considered part of the Restart TDF group from that point forward. 1 participant restarted TDF during Wk 72, thus was reported in both Stop TDF and Restart TDF arms based on the TDF restart date.||Percentage of participants|||Number
838957|NCT01320943|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Who Restart TDF Therapy in the Stop TDF Arm||Weeks 48, 96, and 144|Full Analysis Set (FAS): participants who were randomized to Stop TDF group and had a baseline visit or who were randomized to Continue TDF group and received at least 1 dose of study drug. Proportions are based on the Kaplan-Meier estimate.||Proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838958|NCT01320943|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quantitative HBsAg (IU/mL) in Both Study Arms|"The analyses were summarized by 3 treatment subgroups: Stop TDF (TDF-Free), Restart TDF, and Continue TDF
When participant randomized in the Stop TDF group restarted TDF therapy, that participant was considered part of the Restart TDF group from that point forward. For Restart TDF group, baseline is defined as the last available record on or prior to the restart date of TDF."|Baseline to Week 144|Participants in the Full Analysis Set ( participants who were randomized to Stop TDF arm and had a baseline visit or who were randomized to Continue TDF arm and received at least 1 dose of study drug) with available data were analyzed.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838959|NCT01320943|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With HBsAg Seroconversion in Both Study Arms at Weeks 96 and 144|HBsAg seroconversion is defined as qualitative HBsAb result changing from negative at baseline to positive at any postbaseline visit. Proportions are based on the Kaplan-Meier estimate.|Weeks 96 and 144|HBsAg Loss and Seroconversion Full Analysis Set: participants in the Full Analysis Set who had at least 1 post-baseline HBsAg value and with HBsAg positive and HBsAb negative or missing at baseline.||Proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838960|NCT01320943|Primary|Proportion of Participants With HBsAg Loss at Week 144 in Both Study Arms|HBsAg loss is defined as qualitative HBsAg result changing from positive at baseline (BL) to negative at any post-baseline visit. Proportions are based on a Kaplan-Meier estimate.|Week 144|HBsAg Loss and Seroconversion Full Analysis Set: participants in the Full Analysis Set who had at least one post-baseline HBsAg value and with HBsAg positive and HBsAb negative or missing at baseline.||Proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838961|NCT01321008|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression-free survival (PFS) defined as time from treatment initiation day to first documented progressive disease or death due to disease. Reviewed with each 21-day treatment cycle, followed every 3-4 months for first 2 years, annually thereafter.|Day 1 to disease progression or death (up to 5+ years)|Study terminated early, no analysis available.|||||
838962|NCT01322594|Secondary|Clearance (CL)|CL of MEDI2338|Pre-dose (Day 1) and post-dose (Days 1 [end of infusion, and 30 minutes and 1, 3, 8, and 24 hours postinfusion], 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 57, 71, and 92)|Of the 31 participants who entered into the study and received MEDI2338 or placebo, 25 participants received only MEDI2338 and were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis||L/Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
838963|NCT01322594|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Elimination Phase Half-life (t1/2)|t1/2 of MEDI2338|Pre-dose (Day 1) and post-dose (Days 1 [end of infusion, and 30 minutes and 1, 3, 8, and 24 hours postinfusion], 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 57, 71, and 92)|Of the 31 participants who entered into the study and received MEDI2338 or placebo, 25 participants received only MEDI2338 and were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
838964|NCT01322594|Secondary|Observed Maximum Concentration (Cmax)|Cmax of MEDI2338|Pre-dose (Day 1) and post-dose (Days 1 [end of infusion, and 30 minutes and 1, 3, 8, and 24 hours postinfusion], 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 57, 71, and 92)|Of the 31 participants who entered into the study and received MEDI2338 or placebo, 25 participants received only MEDI2338 and were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838965|NCT01322594|Secondary|Incidence of Anti-drug Antibodies (ADA) to MEDI2338|Number of participants with ADA to MEDI2338|Days 1, 57, and 92|Of the 31 participants who entered into the study and received MEDI2338 or placebo, 25 participants received only MEDI2338 and were included in the analysis of ADA||Participants|||Number
838966|NCT01322594|Secondary|Area Under the Serum Concentration-Time Profile From Time Zero to the Last Measurable Time Point|Area under the serum concentration-time profile from time zero to the last measurable time point of MEDI2338|Pre-dose (Day 1) and post-dose (Days 1 [end of infusion, and 30 minutes and 1, 3, 8, and 24 hours postinfusion], 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 57, 71, and 92)|Of the 31 participants who entered into the study and received MEDI2338 or placebo, 25 participants received only MEDI2338 and were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis||ng x day/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838967|NCT01322594|Secondary|Area Under the Serum Concentration-Time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity|Area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zerio to infinity of MEDI2338|Pre-dose (Day 1) and post-dose (Days 1 [end of infusion, and 30 minutes and 1, 3, 8, and 24 hours postinfusion], 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 15, 22, 29, 36, 43, 57, 71, and 92)|Of the 31 participants who entered into the study and received MEDI2338 or placebo, 25 participants received only MEDI2338 and were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis||ng x day/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
838968|NCT01322594|Primary|Incidence of Clinically Significant Serum Chemistry Laboratory Results|Number of participants experiencing clinically significant serum chemistry laboratory results. A clinically significant serum chemistry laboratory result is defined as an abnormal serum chemistry laboratory result that results in a treatment-emergent adverse event.|Days 1 - 92|All 31 participants entered into the study received MEDI2338 or placebo and were included in the analysis||Participants|||Number
838970|NCT01322594|Primary|Incidence of Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram Results|Number of participants experiencing clinically significant electrocardiogram results. A clinically significant electrocardiogram result is defined as an abnormal electrocardiogram result that results in a treatment-emergent adverse event.|Days 1 - 92|All 31 participants entered into the study received MEDI2338 or placebo and were included in the analysis||Participants|||Number
838971|NCT01322594|Primary|Incidence of Clinically Significant Hematology Laboratory Results|Number of participants experiencing clinically significant hematology laboratory results. A clinically significant hematology laboratory result is defined as an abnormal hematology laboratory result that results in a treatment-emergent adverse event.|Days 1 - 92|All 31 participants entered into the study received MEDI2338 or placebo and were included in the analysis||Participants|||Number
838972|NCT01322594|Primary|Incidence of Serious Adverse Events|Number of participants experiencing serious adverse events|Days 1 - 92|All 31 participants entered into the study received MEDI2338 or placebo and were included in the analysis||Participants|||Number
838973|NCT01322594|Primary|Incidence of Adverse Events|Number of participants experiencing adverse events (includes both adverse events and serious adverse events)|Days 1 - 92|All 31 participants entered into the study received MEDI2338 or placebo and were included in the analysis||Participants|||Number
838974|NCT01322607|Secondary|Balance|Dynamic Gait Index - another measure related to balance and general function. It includes items of walking while changing speed, turning the head, pivot turning, walking over and around obstacles, and stair climbing. This index ranges from 0 - 24, with 24 representing a high level of balance and general function (the higher the score the better the balance).|3 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838975|NCT01322607|Secondary|Muscular Endurance|Muscular endurance performed on Leg Press and assessed by a force transducer, while seated. The longer the amount of time participant can maintain a force the better their muscular endurance.|3 months|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
838976|NCT01322607|Secondary|Muscular Strength|Strength measured by torque of isokinetic maximal concentric knee extensor volitional contractions of paretic and non-paretic leg at multiple angular velocities (30, 90, and 120°/sec). The higher the number the higher the muscular strength. Also performed on resistance equipment for both the Leg Press and Leg Extension. The higher the number the stronger a person is.|3 months|||newtons (N)||Standard Deviation|Mean
838977|NCT01322607|Primary|Economy of Gait|Over-ground gait economy measured using a portable metabolic monitoring system, K4b2 during a 6 minute walk, with subjects walking at their comfortable self-selected walking speed while open circuit spirometry collects break-by-break data. The K4b2 consists of a small battery pack and portable gas analyser (weighing less than 1 kg) that participants wear on their chest. Attached to the portable system is a flexible rubber facemask with flowmeter used for breath-by-breath analysis. The mean rate of oxygen consumption (VO2) will be calculated based on the final 3 minutes of a 6-minute walk under steady state oxygen consumption conditions. A 6 minute walk is a distance most representative of community-based ambulatory capacity and is a sensitive outcome measure in exercise studies in chronic stroke subjects. The higher the VO2 used during the 6 minute walk, represents a less efficient economy of gait.|3 months|||ml/kg/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
838978|NCT01322633|Secondary|Incidence Rate of Overall Cancer|Incidence rate was expressed as cases per 100,000 person-years with 95 percent (%) confidence intervals. Incidence rates were estimated from 1 year after the index date and were censored at the earliest of following events: diagnosis of any type of cancer (excluding non-melanoma skin cancers), death, withdrawal from KPNC membership or end of the study, whichever occurred first for pantoprazole group. For other PPI group, data was also censored in case participants switched to pantoprazole group. Index date: the earliest date at which participant had achieved 240 days of study drug exposure within a 12 month time period before the study start date. Person-year was estimated by calculating all of the years that participants in a study were followed. Person-year calculations were adjusted for anticipated mortality based on United States (US) life tables.|1 year after index date up to diagnosis of any cancer, death, withdrawal from KPNC membership, date when other PPI participants switched to pantoprazole or end of the study (up to Year 7.5)|Analysis population included all participants who met the inclusion criteria.||incidence per 100000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838979|NCT01322633|Secondary|Incidence Rate of Composite Gastrointestinal Cancers|Incidence rate was expressed as cases per 100,000 person-years with 95 percent (%) confidence intervals. Incidence rates were estimated from 1 year after the index date and were censored at the earliest of following events: diagnosis of cancer of colon, pancreas, liver or small intestine, death, withdrawal from KPNC membership or end of the study, whichever occurred first for pantoprazole group. For other PPI group, data was also censored in case participants switched to pantoprazole group. Index date: the earliest date at which participant had achieved 240 days of study drug exposure within a 12 month time period before the study start date. Person-year was estimated by calculating all of the years that participants in a study were followed. Person-year calculations were adjusted for anticipated mortality based on United States (US) life tables.|1 year after index date up to diagnosis of gastrointestinal cancer, death, withdrawal from KPNC membership, date when other PPI participants switched to pantoprazole or end of the study (up to Year 7.5)|Analysis population included all participants who met the inclusion criteria.||incidence per 100000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838980|NCT01322633|Primary|Incidence Rate of Gastric Cancer|Incidence rate was expressed as cases per 100,000 person-years with 95 percent (%) confidence intervals. Incidence rates were estimated from 1 year after the index date and were censored at the earliest of following events: diagnosis of gastric cancer, death, withdrawal from KPNC membership or end of the study, whichever occurred first for pantoprazole group. For other PPI group, data was also censored in case participants switched to pantoprazole group. Index date: the earliest date at which participant had achieved 240 days of study drug exposure within a 12 month time period before the study start date. Person-year was estimated by calculating all of the years that participants in a study were followed. Person-year calculations were adjusted for anticipated mortality based on United States (US) life tables.|1 year after index date up to diagnosis of gastric cancer, death, withdrawal from KPNC membership, date when other PPI participants switched to pantoprazole or end of the study (up to Year 7.5)|Analysis population included all participants who met the inclusion criteria.||incidence per 100000 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
838981|NCT01322815|Primary|Number of Participants Alive and Free of Progression at 4 Months (Patients Who Have Undergone Prior Therapy) and 10 Months (Untreated Patients)|Clinical benefit rate is defined as the proportion of patients alive and free of progression at 4 Months (Patients Who Have Undergone Prior Therapy) and 10 Months (Untreated Patients), assessed from first treatment with GI-4000. Progression is defined as CR (complete response) = disappearance of all target lesions; PR (partial response) = 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of the target lesions; PD (progressive disease) = 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of the target lesions; or SD (stable disease) = small changes that do not meet the above criteria.|4 Months for patients who had undergone prior 1st-line therapy, and 10 months for previously untreated patients|Patients with RAS mutant positive metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), either newly diagnosed, or having completed first line therapy with an oxaliplatin or irinotecan plus fluoropyrimidine and bevacizumab containing regimen.||participants|||Number
838982|NCT01322841|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Diagnosed With One of the Disorders||six months|||percentage of participants|||Number
838983|NCT01322841|Primary|Percentage of Patients Screened Positive for One of the Disorders||six months|||percentage of participants|||Number
838984|NCT01322945|Secondary|Test-retest Reliability of the ASK Nasal Inventory|First 12 endonasal and 10 control patients enrolled in the study completed the ASK Nasal Inventory at 90 days and 120 days post surgery to measure reliablity of the survey (they scored the 9-item instrument similarly at both time frames)comparing 5-point Likert scale scores. Pearson correlation was used to determine a correlation between each patient's responses at 90 days post op and 120 days post op.|90 days and 120 days post surgery|||Correlation Coefficient|||Number
838985|NCT01322945|Primary|Change in Mean Survey Response From Baseline to 90 Days Post Surgery|Mean survey response at 90 days post surgery between the control patients and the endonasal surgery patients using the Anterior skull base nasal inventory (ASK Nasal Inventory. A 5-point Likert scale for each question on the ASK Nasal inventory measures frequency of nasal symptoms where 1=never, 2= a little of the time, 3=some of the time, 4=most of the time, 5= all of the time. Total mean Likert scores were compared in the endonasal group to the control group after surgery. Scores range from minimum of 9 to maximum of 45. The lower the score the fewer the nasal complaints.|Baseline, 90 days post surgery|Power analyses were conducted to determine a sample size large enough to significantly detect change with 90% power using a pre- post research methodology.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
838986|NCT01322971|Secondary|Infectious Morbidity (i.e. Chorioamnionitis, Neonatal Sepsis)||up to 2 years|No data were collected for this outcome|||||
838987|NCT01322971|Secondary|Miscarriage Rate (Loss of a Clinically Recognized Pregnancy)||up to 2 years|No data were collected for this outcome|||||
838988|NCT01322971|Secondary|Pregnancy Rate (Pregnancy Visible on Ultrasound)||up to 2 years|No data were collected for this outcome|||||
838989|NCT01322971|Primary|Biochemical Pregnancy Rate (Positive Pregnancy Test)|Biochemical pregnancy rate was defined as number of participants who had a positive pregnancy test|up to 2 years|No data were collected for this outcome|||||
838990|NCT01323010|Secondary|Admission Rates in Patients With the Arg16Gly Polymorphisms|Admission rates in patients with the Arg16Gly polymorphisms of the beta-2 adrenergic receptor (Arg16Gly, Arg16Arg and Gly16Gly genotypes).|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment)|The sequencing of the beta-2 adrenergic receptor gene was performed in a subset of 60 patients, in the other samples these analysis were not feasible due to hemolysis.||participants|||Number
838991|NCT01323010|Secondary|Admission Rates in Patients With and Without Rhinovirus Detect|Admission rates in patients with and without rhinovirus detected by PCR in nasal lavage samples.|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment)|We obtained nasal lavage samples from 117 individuals, in two patients it was not possible to collect nasal lavage samples.||percentage of participants|||Number
838992|NCT01323010|Secondary|Admission Rates in Patients With and Without Any Virus Detected|Admission rates in patients with and without any of the following viruses detected by PCR in nasal lavage samples: Adenovirus; Bocavirus; Coronavirus; Enterovirus (Echovirus); Influenza (A H3N2, A H1N1/2009, B and C); Metapneumovirus (subtypes A and B); Parainfluenza 1, 2, 3 and 4 (subtypes A and B); Rhinovirus; Respiratory Syncytial Virus type A and Respiratory Syncytial Virus type B.|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment)|We obtained nasal lavage samples from 117 individuals, in two patients it was not possible to collect nasal lavage samples.||percentage of participants|||Number
838993|NCT01323010|Secondary|Lengths of Stay in the Emergency Room|lengths of stay in the emergency room for discharged patients|one to four hours|||hours||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
838994|NCT01323010|Secondary|Electrocardiogram at Discharge or Hospital Admission|Electrocardiogram at discharge or hospital admission to identify possible rhythm disturbances.|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment)|No electrocardiographic abnormalities were detected in both groups.||participants with ECG abnormalities|||Number
838995|NCT01323010|Secondary|Electrocardiogram One Hour Post-treatment.|Electrocardiogram one hour post-treatment to identify possible rhythm disturbances.|One hour post-treatment|No electrocardiographic abnormalities were detected im both groups||participants with ECG abnormalities|||Number
838996|NCT01323010|Secondary|Changes in Heart Rate at Discharge or Hospital Admission|Changes in heart rate at discharge or hospital admission (up to 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment)|||beats per minute||Standard Error|Mean
838997|NCT01323010|Secondary|Changes in Heart Rate After One Hour|Change in heart rate one hour post-treatment in comparison with baseline.|One hour post-treatment in comparison with baseline|||beats per minute||Standard Error|Mean
838998|NCT01323010|Secondary|Changes in Pulse Oximetry at Discharge or Hospital Admission.|Changes in pulse oximetry at discharge or hospital admission (up to 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|||percentage of oxygen saturation||Standard Deviation|Mean
838999|NCT01323010|Secondary|Change in Pulse Oximetry One Hour Post-treatment|Change in pulse oximetry one hour post-treatment in comparison with baseline|One hour post-treatment in comparison with baseline|||percentage of oxygen saturation||Standard Error|Mean
839001|NCT01323010|Secondary|Changes in Bicarbonate Serum Levels|Changes in bicarbonate serum levels at discharge or hospital admission (up to 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|It was possible to obtain bicarbonate serum levels from 42 patients in the study group and 37 in the control group (in the other samples, this analysis was not feasible due to the long time to transport the samples to the laboratory in one of our centers).||mmol/L||Standard Error|Mean
839002|NCT01323010|Secondary|Changes in Potassium Serum Levels|Changes in potassium serum levels at discharge or hospital admission (up to 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|It was possible to obtain potassium serum levels from 54 patients in the study group and 56 in the control group (in the other samples, this analysis was not feasible due to hemolysis).||mEq/L||Standard Error|Mean
839003|NCT01323010|Secondary|Changes in PRAM Score at Discharge or Hospital Admission|"Change in the Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM) score at discharge or hospital admission (up to 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.
The PRAM score is used to assess the severity of asthma attacks, it ranges from 0 to 15, and the higher the score, the greater the severity of the attack.
We calculated the difference between the PRAM score measured at discharge or admission and the PRAM score at baseline (PRAM score discharge or admission - PRAM score baseline).
The larger the absolute value of the difference, the better the outcome (e.g., a difference of -4 indicates a better outcome that a difference of -2).
minimum value of the difference (Albuterol - Higher Dose, experimental group): -9 maximum value of the difference (Albuterol - Higher Dose, experimental group): 0
minimum value of the difference (Albuterol - Lower Dose, control group): -9 maximum value of the difference (Albuterol - Lower Dose, control group): 1"|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839004|NCT01323010|Secondary|Need for Additional Therapies|The need for additional therapies such as magnesium sulphate or intravenous albuterol were recorded|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment)|no patients received magnesium sulphate or intravenous albuterol in both groups||participants|||Number
839005|NCT01323010|Secondary|Changes in Respiratory Rate After One Hour|Change in respiratory rate one hour post-treatment in comparison with baseline.|One hour post-treatment in comparison with baseline|||breaths per minute||Standard Error|Mean
839006|NCT01323010|Secondary|Electrocardiogram at Baseline|Electrocardiogram performed at baseline|at baseline|no electrocardiopraphic abnormalities were detected in both groups||participants with ECG abnormalities|||Number
839007|NCT01323010|Secondary|Changes in Glucose Serum Levels|Changes in glucose serum levels at discharge or hospital admission (up to 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment) in comparison with baseline.|It was possible to obtain glucose serum levels from 57 patients in the study group and 55 in the control group (in the other samples, this analysis was not feasible due to hemolysis).||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
839008|NCT01323010|Secondary|Albuterol Determination in the Plasma|Albuterol determination in the plasma was carried out at at discharge or hospital admission (up to 4 hours post treatment), dosage was accomplished by High Performance Liquid Chromatography.|at discharge or admission (up to 4 hours post treatment, minimum 1 hour, maximum 4 hours post treatment)|It was possible to obtain albuterol plasma levels from 52 patients in the study group and 51 in the control group (in the other samples, this analysis was not feasible due to hemolysis).||ng/ml||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839009|NCT01323010|Secondary|Change in PRAM Score After One Hour|"Change in the Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM) score one hour post-treatment in comparison with baseline.
The PRAM score is used to assess the severity of asthma attacks, it ranges from 0 to 15, and the higher the score, the greater the severity of the attack.
We calculated the difference between the PRAM score measured one hour post treatment and the PRAM score at baseline (PRAM score 1 hour - PRAM score baseline).
The larger the absolute value of the difference, the better the outcome (e.g., a difference of -4 indicates a better outcome that a difference of -2).
minimum value of the difference (Albuterol - Higher Dose, experimental group): -8 maximum value of the difference (Albuterol - Higher Dose, experimental group): 0
minimum value of the difference (Albuterol - Lower Dose, control group): -8 maximum value of the difference (Albuterol - Lower Dose, control group): 0"|One hour post-treatment|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
839010|NCT01323010|Secondary|Forced Expiratory Volume in the First Second|Change in FEV1 one hour post-treatment in comparison with baseline. Spirometry was performed only in subjects older than 6 years and who could perform the maneuver properly.|One hour post-treatment in comparison with baseline|||percentage of predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
839011|NCT01323010|Primary|Hospital Admission|Hospital admission was defined as the need to stay in the emergency room for more than 4 hours, due to the failure to meet the discharge criteria (PRAM score ≤ 3 and pulse oximetry, ≥ 92%)|Starting at 4 hours post-treatment|||participants|||Number
839012|NCT01323140|Primary|Percent of Subjects With Testosterone Levels in the Normal Range.|Testosterone serum concentration was determined on Day 29/30 and pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters including Cavg and Cmax were calculated for efficacy assessment. Acceptance was defined as at least 75% of subjects with Cavg in the normal range (>= 300 ng/dL to <= 1030 ng/dL), at least 85% of subjects with Cmax <= 1500 ng/dL, no more than 5% of subjects with Cmax between 1800 and 2500 ng/dL, and no subject with Cmax >= 2500 ng/dL.|Day 29/30|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839013|NCT01323192|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire - Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) Total Scores|"Q-LES-Q-SF is a 16-item questionnaire in which each question is rated on a 5-point scale with scores ranging from 1 = very poor to 5 = very good. The total raw score is calculated by summing up the scores for the 16 items. The raw total score is transformed into a percentage maximum possible score using the following formula:(raw total score −minimum score) / (maximum possible raw score −minimum score). The minimum raw score on the Q-LES-Q-SF is 16 (worst), and the maximum score is 80 (best). A higher score indicates a better quality of life."|Baseline (Day 0) to Endpoint (Week 8)|Full analysis set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication; and had baseline and at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment. One participant in the placebo group was excluded from the full analysis set because no post-dose efficacy data was available.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839014|NCT01323192|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Conners' Adult Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) Rating Scales–Self Report: Screening Version (CAARS-S:SV) Score|CAARS-S:SV evaluates DSM-IV-oriented inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity as well as measures of self-concept. The CAARS-S:SV comprises 30 items to measure symptoms for ADHD in adults. Each item is scored from 0 (not at all, never) to 3 (very much, very frequently) with higher scores corresponding to worse symptoms. The total score can range from 0 (best) to 90 (worst). Lower score indicates improvement in ADHD symptoms.|Baseline (Day 0) to Endpoint (Week 8)|Full analysis set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication; and had baseline and at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment. One participant in the placebo group was excluded from the full analysis set because no post-dose efficacy data was available.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839015|NCT01323192|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) Scores|The CGI-C is a assessment of change in global clinical status, defined as a sense of well-being and ability to function in daily activities. CGI-C scores range from 1 (very much improved) through to 7 (very much worse). Higher scores indicate worsening.|Endpoint (Week 8)|Full analysis set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication; and had baseline and at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment. One participant in the placebo group was excluded from the full analysis set because no post-dose efficacy data was available.||Scores on a scale||Full Range|Median
839016|NCT01323192|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) Scores|The CGI-S rating scale is used to rate the severity of a patient's psychotic condition on a 7-point scale. It is rated as follows: 1=Normal, not at all ill, 2=Borderline mentally ill, 3=Mildly ill, 4=Moderately ill, 5=Markedly ill, 6=Severely ill, and 7=Among the most extremely ill. Higher scores indicate worsening.|Baseline (Day 0) to Endpoint (Week 8)|Full analysis set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication; and had baseline and at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment. One participant in the placebo group was excluded from the full analysis set because no post-dose efficacy data was available.||Scores on a scale||Full Range|Median
839017|NCT01323192|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale - Observer Screening Version (CAARS-O: SV) Total Score Other Than Total Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) Symptoms Score|CAARS-O: SV evaluates DSM-IV-oriented inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity as well as measures of self-concept. The CAARS-O: SV comprises 30 items to measure symptoms for ADHD in adults. Each item is scored from 0 (not at all, never) to 3 (very much, very frequently) with higher scores corresponding to worse symptoms. The total score can range from 0 (best) to 90 (worst). Lower score indicates improvement in ADHD symptoms.|Baseline (Day 0) to Endpoint (Week 8)|Full analysis set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication; and had baseline and at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839018|NCT01323192|Primary|Change From Baseline to Endpoint in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) Total Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) Symptoms Scores of Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale - Observer Screening Version (CAARS-O: SV)|CAARS-O: SV evaluates DSM-IV-oriented inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity as well as measures of self-concept. The CAARS-O:SV comprises 30 items to measure symptoms for ADHD in adults. Each item is scored from 0 (not at all, never) to 3 (very much, very frequently) with higher scores corresponding to worse symptoms. The total score can range from 0 (best) to 90 (worst). Lower score indicates improvement in ADHD symptoms.|Baseline (Day 0) to Endpoint (Week 8)|Full analysis set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication; and had baseline and at least 1 post-dose efficacy assessment. One participant in the placebo group was excluded from the full analysis set because no post-dose efficacy data was available.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839019|NCT01323270|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least One Adverse Event (AE)||Vaccination 1 up to 1 month after Vaccination 3|Summary was performed for participants as per vaccine administration.||percentage of participants|||Number
839020|NCT01323270|Other Pre-specified|Geometric Mean Fold-Rise (GMFR) for IgG||Before Vaccination 1, 1 month after Vaccination 2, 3|A decision was made, a priori, that the hSBA MnB immunogenicity assay will be used instead of the IgG assay originally planned . Therefore only hSBA assay results will be disclosed.|||||
839021|NCT01323270|Other Pre-specified|Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Measured by Geometric Mean Titer (GMT)||Before vaccination 1, 1 month after Vaccination 2, 3|A decision was made, a priori, that the hSBA MnB immunogenicity assay will be used instead of the IgG assay originally planned . Therefore only hSBA assay results will be disclosed.|||||
839022|NCT01323270|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Serum Bactericidal Assay Using Human Complement (hSBA) Titer Level Greater Than or Equal to (>=) Prespecified Titer Level||1 month after Vaccination 3|||percentage of participants|||Number
839023|NCT01323270|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) for Poliomyelitis Antigens||1 month after Vaccination 1|||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839024|NCT01323270|Secondary|GMC for Acellular Pertussis Antigens|Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units per milliliter (EU/mL)|1 month after Vaccination 1|||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839025|NCT01323270|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration (GMC) for Diphtheria and Tetanus Antigens||1 month after Vaccination 1|||International Units per milliliter||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839026|NCT01323270|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Prespecified Criteria for the Concomitant Antigen||1 month after Vaccination 1|||percentage of participants|||Number
839035|NCT01323478|Secondary|Risk of Suicidality Using C-SSRS Scores|The Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) was developed by researchers at Columbia University as a tool to systematically assess suicidal ideation and behaviour in patients during participation in a clinical study. The C-SSRS is composed of questions that address suicidal behaviour and questions that address suicidal ideation, with subquestions that assess severity. The tool was administered via an interview with the patient. Different versions of the C-SSRS are available. In this study, the Since Last Visit Version was used at all visits. In order to assess the potential relationship between Vortioxetine and suicidality more accurately and systematically, C-SSRS data were collected during the Entire Study Period.|Up to 52 weeks|Suicidal Ideation and Behaviour Based on C-SSRS Scores by Columbia Classification Algorithm for Suicide Assessment (C-CASA) - APTS||participants|||Number
839036|NCT01323478|Secondary|ASEX Total Score After 52 Weeks of Treatment|"The Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX) is a 5-item, patient selfrated scale that evaluates a patient's recent sexual experience. Patients are asked to assess their own experience over the last week (for example, How strong is your sex drive?, Are your orgasms satisfying?) and respond on a 6-point scale for each item. The ASEX is used to identify individuals with sexual dysfunction. Possible total score ranges from 5 to 30, with the higher score indicating more patient sexual dysfunction."|Week 52|APTS, OC||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
839037|NCT01323478|Secondary|SDS Total Score After 52 Weeks of Treatment|The Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) comprises self-rated items designed to measure impairment. The patient rates the extent to which his or her (1) work, (2) social life or leisure activities and (3) home life or family responsibilities are impaired on a 10-point visual analogue scales, on which 0 = normal functioning and 10 = severe functional impairment. The three items may be summed into a single dimensional measure of global functional impairment that ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired). The higher the score, the more severe.|Week 52|FAS, OC||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839038|NCT01323478|Secondary|Proportion of Remitters at Week 52 (Remission Defined as a MADRS Total Score <=10)||Baseline and Week 52|FAS, OC||percentage of patients|||Number
839039|NCT01323478|Secondary|Proportion of Responders at Week 52 (Response Defined as a >=50% Decrease in MADRS Total Score)||Baseline from lead-in study 13267A (NCT01140906) and Week 52|FAS, OC||percentage of patients|||Number
839040|NCT01323478|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HAM-A Total Score After 52 Weeks of Treatment|The Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) consists of 14 items that assess anxious mood, tension, fear, insomnia, intellectual (cognitive) symptoms, depressed mood, behaviour at interview, somatic (sensory), cardiovascular, respiratory, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, autonomic, and somatic (muscular) symptoms. Each symptom is rated from 0 (absent) to 4 (maximum severity). Total score from 0 to 56. The higher the score, the more severe.|Baseline and Week 52|FAS, OC||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839041|NCT01323478|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CGI-S Score After 52 Weeks of Treatment|The Clinical Global Impression - Severity of Illness (CGI-S) is a 7-point scale rated from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill patients). The investigator should use his/her total clinical experience with this patient population to judge how mentally ill the patient is at the time of rating.|Baseline and Week 52|FAS, OC||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839042|NCT01323478|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MADRS Total Score After 52 Weeks of Treatment|The Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). The 10 items represent the core symptoms of depressive illness. The rating should be based on a clinical interview with the patient, moving from broadly phrased questions about symptoms to more detailed ones, which allow a precise rating of severity, covering the last 7 days. Total score from 0 to 60. The higher the score, the more severe.|Baseline and Week 52|full-analysis set (FAS), observed cases (OC)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839043|NCT01323478|Primary|Percentage of Patients Who Withdrew Due to Intolerance to Treatment||Baseline to Week 52|APTS||percentage of patients|||Number
839044|NCT01323478|Primary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs)||Baseline to end of the 4-week safety follow-up period|all-patients-treated set (APTS)||participants|||Number
839045|NCT01323582|Secondary|Does GCSI Score Improve (Lower) on Treatment, Pooling the AZ Patients Over Their Treatment Periods? Endpoint is Difference in Post-test Less Baseline|"This is a Validated instrument for measuring symptom severity in patients with gastroparesis. This scoring is based on a Likert Scale from (0-5) with zero being no symptom and five being very severe symptoms on 9 subscales, making the overall score range from 0-45. The higher the score, the more severe patient’s symptoms are. The scale is reported in the references.
This is a calculation taken with GCSI score at end of treatment minus baseline. Negative value reflects this change."|Baseline and end of treatment period|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Median
839046|NCT01323582|Secondary|Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) Score Change From Baseline to Post Treatment|"This is a Validated instrument for measuring symptom severity in patients with gastroparesis. This scoring is based on a Likert Scale from (0-5) with zero being no symptom and five being very severe symptoms on 9 subscales, making the overall score range from 0-45. The higher the score, the more severe patient’s symptoms are. The scale is reported in the references. The change was calculated by measuring the end of treatment minus baseline GCSI score.
Negative value reflects this change."|Baseline and end of treatment period|One subject did not complete this part of analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839047|NCT01323582|Secondary|Change in Time to 50% Emptying: Post Test Less Baseline Pooled Over Orderings|Patients will be given a standardized meal enriched with a labeled material and the breath samples are then collected and analyzed. The estimated time to reaching 50% of the accumulated contents is recorded.|at baseline before initiation of the treatment and after completion of each treatment period.|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
839048|NCT01323582|Secondary|Change in Time to 50% Gastric Emptying: Post Test Less Baseline Pooled Over Orderings|Patients will be given a standardized meal enriched with a labeled material and the breath samples are then collected and analyzed. The estimated time to reaching 50% of the accumulated contents is recorded.|Baseline and end of treatment period|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
839049|NCT01323582|Secondary|TLAG (Time From Ingestion of Meal to Start of Gastric Emptying)|This is defined as the time from ingestion of the meal to the beginning of the emptying process in minutes. Because the difference is RX-B -RX A in one group and RX A -RX B in the other, the difference between these two estimates twice the effect size. Hence the Half is applied, as is standard in the two sample method for crossover studies.|Weeks 4 and 11 (end of periods)|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
839050|NCT01323582|Secondary|NDI Score|"Nepean Dyspepsia Index (NDI) is a measure of symptom status and quality of life in functional dyspepsia. This scale is scored using each subscale (Tension, interference with daily activities), Eating/drinking, Knowledge/control, work/study) and adding up the items for each of the five subscale score (2-10). Total score range would be 10-50).
For the NDI, a lower number is better meaning the symptom is not effecting quality of life and a higher score closer to 50 is worse meaning it is effecting patients quality of life.
Reference: Talley NJ, Verlinden M, Jones M. Quality of life in functional dyspepsia: responsiveness of the Nepean Dyspepsia Index and developement of a new 10-iten short form. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2001: 15: 207-216.
Because the difference is RX-B -RX A in one group and RX A -RX B in the other, the difference between these two estimates twice the effect size. Hence the Half is applied, as is standard in the two sample method for crossover studies."|Weeks 4 and 11 (end of periods)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Median
839051|NCT01323582|Primary|Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) Score|"This is a Validated instrument for measuring symptom severity in patients with gastroparesis. This scoring is based on a Likert Scale from (0-5) with zero being no symptoms and five being very severe symptoms on 9 subscales, making the overall score range from 0-45. The higher the score, the more severe patient’s symptoms.
Reference for GCSI: Revicki DA, REntz AM, Dubois D, et al. Development and validation of a patient-assessed gastroparesis symptoms severity measure: the Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index. Ailment Pharm Ther 2003; 18: 141:50.
Because the difference is RX-B -RX A in one group and RX A -RX B in the other, the difference between these two estimates twice the effect size. Hence the Half is applied, as is standard in the two sample method for crossover studies."|Weeks 4 and 11 (end of periods)|One subject did not complete this part of analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839052|NCT01323582|Primary|Time in Minutes for 50% of the Ingested Meal to Empty the Stomach With a Standardized Breath Test: Half the of the Week 11 Value (Period 2) Less Half the of the Week 4 Value (Period 1). This Estimates the Effect Size.|Patients will be given a standardized meal enriched with a labeled material and the breath samples are then collected and analyzed. The estimated time to empty 50% (t 1/2) of the accumulated contents is recorded. Because the difference is RX-B -RX A in one group and RX A -RX B in the other, the difference between these two estimates twice the effect size. Hence the Half is applied, as is standard in the two sample method for crossover studies.|Weeks 4 and 11 (end of periods)|||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
839053|NCT01323595|Secondary|Bleeding Complications|We will record whether there are any bleeding complications associated with treatment after surgery.|7 days after surgery||||||
839054|NCT01323595|Primary|Level of Pain|Patients will rate their pain for 7 days after surgery using an 11-point visual analog scale (0= no pain, 10=worst pain ever). Patients are asked to rate their pain up to four times a day during the post-operative period. Pain scores from each post-operative day each day will be averaged and reported as the pain score for that day.|1 week after surgery|||Analog pain scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839055|NCT01323621|Secondary|Time to Onset on Treatment Day 1|Time to onset on Treatment Day 1 is defined as the time to an increase of 100 milliliters (mL) from Baseline in FEV1. Time to onset was calculated over 0 to 4 hours (5 min, 15 min, 30 min, 60 min, 120 min, and 240 min) post-dose.|Baseline and Day 1|ITT Population||Minutes||Full Range|Median
839056|NCT01323621|Primary|Change From Baseline Trough in 24-Hour Weighted Mean FEV1 on Treatment Day 84|Pulmonary function was measured by forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. The weighted mean was calculated from the pre-dose FEV1 and the post-dose FEV1 measurements at 5, 15, 30, and 60 minutes (min) and 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 13, 14, 16, 20, and 24 hours post-dose on Treatment Day 84. Baseline trough FEV1 was calculated as the mean of the two assessments made 30 and 5 minutes pre-dose on Treatment Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the average of the Day 84 values minus the Baseline value. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted with covariates for country, smoking status, reversibility, and Baseline FEV1.|Baseline (Day 1) and Day 84|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839057|NCT01323634|Secondary|Time to Onset on Treatment Day 1|Time to onset on Treatment Day 1 is defined as the time to an increase of 100 milliliters (mL) from Baseline in FEV1. Time of onset was calculated over 0 to 4 hours (5 min, 30 min, 60 min, 120 min, and 240 min) post-dose.|Day 1|ITT Population. Only participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Minutes||Full Range|Median
839058|NCT01323634|Primary|Change From Baseline Trough in 24-hour Weighted-mean FEV1 on Treatment Day 84|Pulmonary function was measured by forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). The weighted mean was calculated from the pre-dose FEV1 and the post-dose FEV1 measurements at 5, 15, 30, and 60 minutes (min) and 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 13, 14, 16, 20, and 24 hours on Treatment Day 84. Baseline trough FEV1 was the mean of the two assessments made 30 and 5 minutes pre-dose on Treatment Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the average of the Day 84 values minus the Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1) and Day 84|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug. Only participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839059|NCT01323647|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that resulted in death, were life threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or resulted in disability/incapacity.|During the entire study period (Day 0 to Month 01).|The Total Cohort, including all subjects enrolled in the study.||Subjects|||Number
839060|NCT01323647|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Event (AE)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Any was defined as an adverse event (AE) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study. Any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms was reported as an unsolicited adverse event. This outcome measure concerns subjects in the Poliorix Group only.|Within the 31-day follow-up period after the Poliorix™ booster vaccination.|The Total Vaccinated cohort will include all subjects, with booster dose administration documented and for whom data are available.||Subjects|||Number
839061|NCT01323647|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms.|Solicited general symptoms assessed include drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever (defined as axillary temperature ≥37.0°C). Any was defined as incidence of the specified symptoms regardless of intensity or relationship to study vaccine. Grade 3 drowsiness was defined as drowsiness that prevents normal activities. Grade 3 fever was defined as fever (axillary temperature) >39.0°C. Grade 3 irritability was defined as crying more than usual/ interferes with normal activities. Grade 3 loss of appetite was defined as not eating at all. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination. This outcome measure concerns subjects only in the Poliorix Group.|Within 4-days (Days 0-3) post Poliorix™ booster vaccination.|The Total Vaccinated cohort will include all subjects, with booster dose administration documented and for whom data are available.||Subjects|||Number
839062|NCT01323647|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 pain = Cry when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 30 millimeters (mm) of injection site. This outcome measure concerns subjects in the Poliorix Group only.|Within 4-days (Days 0-3) post Poliorix™ booster vaccination.|The Total Vaccinated cohort will include all subjects, with booster dose administration documented and for whom data are available.||Subjects|||Number
839063|NCT01323647|Primary|Antibody Titres Against Poliovirus Type 1, 2 and 3.|Antibody titers were summarized by geometric mean titers (GMTs) with their 95% CIs.|Before booster vaccination.|The ATP cohort for antibody persistence included all subjects who completed their full 3-dose primary vaccination course in the primary study and who have not received an additional dose of IPV vaccine since the primary study.Those who had no history of poliovirus infection,and for whom serological results are available at the persistence timepoint||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839064|NCT01323647|Primary|Antibody Titres Against Poliovirus Type 1, 2 and 3|Antibody titers were summarized by geometric mean titers (GMTs) with their 95% CIs. This outcome measure concerns subjects in the Poliorix Group only.|One month after Poliorix™ booster vaccination.|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects who did not receive a product or present a medical condition leading to exclusion from an ATP analysis as listed in protocol and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available.||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839065|NCT01323647|Primary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected for Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3 Antibodies Above the Cut-off Value|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject whose antibody titer is greater than or equal to (≥) 8 ED50.|Before booster vaccination.|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects who did not receive a product or present a medical condition leading to exclusion from an ATP analysis as listed in protocol and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available.||Subjects|||Number
839066|NCT01323647|Primary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected for Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3 Antibodies Above the Cut-off Value|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject whose antibody titer is greater than or equal to (≥) 8 ED50. This outcome measure concerns subjects in the Poliorix Group only.|One month after Poliorix™ booster vaccination.|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects who did not receive a product or present a medical condition leading to exclusion from an ATP analysis as listed in protocol and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available.||Subjects|||Number
839067|NCT01323660|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 3-hours Post-dose FEV1 at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|FEVI is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Baseline is the FEV1 value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period, mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant, and period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Clinic visit post-dose FEV1 at Week 12 (Treatment Day 85) is defined as the FEV1 value obtained 3 hours after dosing on Treatment Day 85. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions 3 hour post-dose FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 30)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839068|NCT01323660|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Residual Volume (Trough and 3-hours Post-dose) at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|Residual Volume (RV) is defined as the air that remains in the lungs after breathing out as fully as possible. Baseline is the RV value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period, mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant, and period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Trough RV is measured pre-dose on Treatment Week 12. RV 3-hours post-dose is measured from the value obtained 3 hours after dosing on Treatment Week 12. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions. RV measurements were taken electronically by plethysmography on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 1.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 30)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839069|NCT01323660|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Residual Capacity (Trough and 3-hours Post-dose) at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|Functional Residual Capacity (FRC) is defined as the amount of air still left in the lungs after breathing out normally. Baseline is the FRC value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period, mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant, and period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Trough FRC is measured pre-dose on Treatment Week 12. FRC 3-hours post-dose is measured from the value obtained 3 hours after dosing on Treatment Week 12. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions. FRC measurements were taken electronically by plethysmography on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 30)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839070|NCT01323660|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inspiratory Capacity (Trough and 3-hours Post-dose) at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|Inspiratory capacity (IC) is defined as the maximum amount of air that can be inhaled into the lungs from the normal resting position after breathing out normally. Baseline is the IC value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period, mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant, and period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Trough IC is measured pre-dose on Treatment Week 12 of each treatment period. IC 3-hours post-dose is measured from the value obtained 3 hours after dosing on Treatment Week 12 of each treatment period. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions. IC measurements were taken electronically by plethysmography on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 30)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839071|NCT01323660|Primary|Change From Baseline in Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12. Baseline is the FEV1 value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period, mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant, and period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Clinic visit trough (pre-bronchodilator and pre-dose) FEV1 at Week 12 (Treatment Day 85) is defined as the FEV1 value obtained 24 hours after dosing on Treatment Day 84. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 30)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839072|NCT01323660|Primary|Change From Baseline in Exercise Endurance Time Post-dose at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|Exercise endurance time (EET) post-dose at Week 12 is defined as the EET obtained 3 hours after dosing at Week 12. EET was measured using the externally paced field walking test called the endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT). Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period walking speed, mean walking speed, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period walking speed, visit by mean walking speed and visit by treatment interactions. The model used all available 3-hour post-dose change from baseline EET values recorded on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12. Baseline was the EET assessment obtained prior to dosing on Day 1 of each period. The mean walking speed for each participant is the mean of the levels used for the ESWT in each of the two treatment periods. The period walking speed for each participant and treatment period is the difference between the level for that participant and period and the mean walking speed for that participant.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 30)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Seconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839091|NCT01323790|Secondary|Time (in Hours) to First Post-dose Laxation Without the Use of Rescue Laxatives Within the Previous 24 Hours||12 weeks|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||Hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839073|NCT01323673|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Pruritus, Stinging, Burning, and Pain Scores (Target Hand) at Days 3, 8, and 15|On Days 1, 3, 8, and 15, participants assessed the pruritis (itching), stinging (piercing pain), burning, and pain of the target hand. Participants were instructed to assess the level/severity of the indicated symptoms over the previous 24 hours using a scale ranging from 0 (none) to 10 (unbearable). Percent change from baseline was calculated as value at Days 3, 8, and 15 minus the value at Baseline divided by the Baseline value * 100.|Baseline (Day 1) and Days 3, 8, and 15|ITT Population. Only those participants contributing data at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Percent change in scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839074|NCT01323673|Secondary|Number of Participants With an SGA (Target Hand) Score of 0 or 1 at Days 3, 8, and 15|On Days 1, 3, 8, and 15 prior to the investigator assessment, participants rated chronic hand dermatitis of the target hand using the 5-point SGA: 0=skin is clear; 1=dermatitis in minimal, there may be a few light-pink areas; 2=dermatitis is mild, there may be occasional light-pink areas; 3=dermatitis is moderate, there may be easily noticeable pink-red areas; 4=dermatitis is severe, there may be deep or bright-red areas that may be warm to the touch.|Days 3, 8, and 15|ITT Population. Missing values were imputed using LOCF (i.e., the last available observation, including Baseline, for a participant was used to estimate subsequent missing data points).||participants|||Number
839075|NCT01323673|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Improvement of at Least 1 Grade in the Subject Global Assessment (SGA) (Target Hand) Score From Baseline to Days 3, 8, and 15|On Days 1, 3, 8, and 15 prior to the investigator assessment, participants rated chronic hand dermatitis of the target hand using the 5-point SGA: 0=skin is clear; 1=dermatitis in minimal, there may be a few light-pink areas; 2=dermatitis is mild, there may be occasional light-pink areas; 3=dermatitis is moderate, there may be easily noticeable pink-red areas; 4=dermatitis is severe, there may be deep or bright-red areas that may be warm to the touch.|Baseline (Day 1) and Days 3, 8, and 15|ITT Population. Missing values were imputed using LOCF (i.e., the last available observation, including Baseline, for a participant was used to estimate subsequent missing data points).||participants|||Number
839076|NCT01323673|Secondary|Number of Participants With an ISGA (Target Hand) Score of 0 or 1 at Days 3, 8, and 15|The investigator rated chronic hand dermatitis of the participants' target hand using the 5-point ISGA: 0=clear, minor residual discoloration, no erythema (redness of skin)/induration (skin hardening)/papulation (eruption of small, rounded solid bumps on skin), no oozing/crusting; 1=almost clear, trace faint pink erythema, no induration/papulation and no oozing/crusting; 2=mild, faint pink erythema, mild induration/papulation; 3=moderate, pink-red erythema, moderate induration/papulation, some oozing/crusting; 4=Severe, bright-red erythema, severe induration/papulation, oozing/crusting.|Days 3, 8, and 15|ITT Population. Missing values were imputed using LOCF (i.e., the last available observation, including Baseline, for a participant was used to estimate subsequent missing data points).||participants|||Number
839077|NCT01323673|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Improvement of at Least 1 Grade in the ISGA (Target Hand) Score From Baseline to Day 3 and and to Day 8|The investigator rated chronic hand dermatitis of the participants' target hand using the 5-point ISGA: 0=clear, minor residual discoloration, no erythema (redness of skin)/induration (skin hardening)/papulation (eruption of small, rounded solid bumps on skin), no oozing/crusting; 1=almost clear, trace faint pink erythema, no induration/papulation and no oozing/crusting; 2=mild, faint pink erythema, mild induration/papulation; 3=moderate, pink-red erythema, moderate induration/papulation, some oozing/crusting; 4=Severe, bright-red erythema, severe induration/papulation, oozing/crusting.|Baseline (Day 1), Day 3, and Day 8|ITT Population. Missing values were imputed using LOCF (i.e., the last available observation, including Baseline, for a participant was used to estimate subsequent missing data points).||participants|||Number
839078|NCT01323673|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Improvement of at Least 2 Grades in the ISGA (Target Hand) Score From Baseline to Day 3 and to Day 8|The investigator rated chronic hand dermatitis of the participants' target hand using the 5-point ISGA: 0=clear, minor residual discoloration, no erythema (redness of skin)/induration (skin hardening)/papulation (eruption of small, rounded solid bumps on skin), no oozing/crusting; 1=almost clear, trace faint pink erythema, no induration/papulation and no oozing/crusting; 2=mild, faint pink erythema, mild induration/papulation; 3=moderate, pink-red erythema, moderate induration/papulation, some oozing/crusting; 4=Severe, bright-red erythema, severe induration/papulation, oozing/crusting.|Baseline (Day 1), Day 3, and Day 8|ITT Population. Missing values were imputed using LOCF (i.e., the last available observation, including Baseline, for a participant was used to estimate subsequent missing data points).||participants|||Number
839079|NCT01323673|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Improvement of at Least 1 Grade in the ISGA (Target Hand) Score From Baseline to Day 15|The investigator rated chronic hand dermatitis of the participants' target hand using the 5-point ISGA: 0=clear, minor residual discoloration, no erythema (redness of skin)/induration (skin hardening)/papulation (eruption of small, rounded solid bumps on skin), no oozing/crusting; 1=almost clear, trace faint pink erythema, no induration/papulation and no oozing/crusting; 2=mild, faint pink erythema, mild induration/papulation; 3=moderate, pink-red erythema, moderate induration/papulation, some oozing/crusting; 4=Severe, bright-red erythema, severe induration/papulation, oozing/crusting.|Baseline (Day 1) and Day 15|ITT Population. Missing values were imputed using LOCF (i.e., the last available observation, including Baseline, for a participant was used to estimate subsequent missing data points).||participants|||Number
839080|NCT01323673|Primary|Number of Participants With Improvement of at Least 2 Grades in the Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA) (Target Hand) Score From Baseline to Day 15|The investigator rated chronic hand dermatitis of the participants' target hand using the 5-point ISGA: 0=clear, minor residual discoloration, no erythema (redness of skin)/induration (skin hardening)/papulation (eruption of small, rounded solid bumps on skin), no oozing/crusting; 1=almost clear, trace faint pink erythema, no induration/papulation and no oozing/crusting; 2=mild, faint pink erythema, mild induration/papulation; 3=moderate, pink-red erythema, moderate induration/papulation, some oozing/crusting; 4=Severe, bright-red erythema, severe induration/papulation, oozing/crusting.|Baseline (Day 1) and Day 15|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all randomized participants who were dispensed study product. Missing values were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF, i.e., the last available observation, including Baseline, for a participant was used to estimate subsequent missing data points).||participants|||Number
839081|NCT01323777|Primary|Monocular Uncorrected Near Decimal VA|VA was tested monocularly unaided at a distance of 40 centimeters (cm) using a chart. VA was measured in decimal, with 1.0 decimal corresponding to 20/20 Snellen. A higher numeric value represents better visual acuity.|Day 30-60, Day 120-180, Day 330-420|This analysis population includes all implanted subjects.||participants|||Number
839082|NCT01323777|Primary|Monocular Uncorrected Distance Decimal Visual Acuity|Visual acuity (VA) was tested monocularly (each eye separately) unaided at a distance of 5 meters (m) using a chart. VA was measured in decimal, with 1.0 decimal corresponding to 20/20 Snellen. A higher numeric value represents better visual acuity.|Day 1-2, Day 7-14, Day 30-60, Day 120-180, Day 330-420|This analysis population includes all implanted subjects.||participants|||Number
839083|NCT01323790|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) Satisfaction Domain|The PAC-QOL scale is a 28-item self-report instrument designed to evaluate the burden of constipation on patients’ everyday functioning and well-being in the 2 weeks (14 days) prior to assessment. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). The instrument can be used to generate an overall score, but is also reported to assess 4 specific constipation-related domains including: 1) Worries and concerns (11 items), 2) Physical discomfort (4 items), 3) Psychosocial discomfort (8 items), and 4) Satisfaction (5 items). Each domain score is the mean of the non-missing items for that domain. The total score is the mean of all non-missing items. The range of the domain or total score is 0 (response is 'not at all' for each item) to 4 (response is 'extremely' for each item). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who randomized multiple times at different centers. MMRM analysis includes all patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline assessment, while the Ns at Week 12 reflect patients providing data at Week 12.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839084|NCT01323790|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms Questionnaire (PAC-SYM)|The PAC-SYM questionnaire is a 12-item questionnaire that evaluates the severity of symptoms of constipation in 3 domains (stool, rectal, and abdominal symptoms) on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (absent) to 4 (very severe) in the 2 weeks (14 days) prior to assessment. Each domain score is the mean of the non-missing items for that domain. The total score is the mean of all non-missing items (ie, symptoms). The range of the domain or total score is 0 (response is 'absent' for each item) to 4 (response is 'very severe' for each item). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who randomized multiple times at different centers. MMRM analysis includes all patients with baseline and at least 1 post-baseline assessment, while the Ns at Week 12 reflect patients providing data at Week 12.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839085|NCT01323790|Secondary|Time (in Hours) to First Post-dose Laxation Without the Use of Rescue Laxatives Within the Previous 24 Hours in the Laxative Inadequate Response (LIR) Subgroup|Time to first post-dose laxation without the use of rescue laxatives within the last 24 hours was calculated in hours as: Date/Time of first post-dose laxation without rescue – First dose date/time.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839086|NCT01323790|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Spontaneous Bowel Movements/Week|The number of spontaneous bowel movements/week was determined from the patient's eDiary.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||Number of SBMs/week||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839087|NCT01323790|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percent Numbers of Days With a CSBM (Complete Spontaneous Bowel Movement)|A single-item question on the completeness of evacuation, developed and validated through 1:1 interviews with OIC patients, was asked via the eDiary: “Did you feel like your bowels were completely empty after the bowel movement?” Patients provided a yes or a no response. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||Percent days/week||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839088|NCT01323790|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Stool Consistency (Bristol Stool Scale)|Patients rated stool consistency through completion of the BSS after each BM. The 7 stool types are: 1. Separate hard lumps, like nuts (hard to pass); 2. Sausage-shaped, but lumpy; 3. Like sausage, but with cracks on its surface; 4. Like a sausage or snake, smooth and soft; 5. Soft blobs with clear cut edges (passed easily); 6. Fluffy pieces with ragged edges, a mushy stool; 7. Watery, no solid pieces. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839089|NCT01323790|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Degree of Straining|A single-item straining question was asked via the eDiary: “How much did you strain during your bowel movement?” Patients responded on a 5 point Likert scale: 1=Not at all; 2=A little bit; 3=A moderate amount; 4=A great deal; 5=An extreme amount. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839090|NCT01323790|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Days Per Week With at Least 1 SBM During Weeks 1 to 12||12 weeks|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients who had evaluable data at baseline and post-baseline, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||Number of Days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839092|NCT01323790|Secondary|Response (Responder/Non-responder) to Study Drug in the LIR Subgroup During Weeks 1 to 12|Responder is defined as having at least 3 SBMs/week, with at least 1 SBM/week increase over baseline for at least 9 out of 12 weeks and at least 3 out of the last 4 weeks.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers. The LIR subgroup used 1 or more laxative classes for at least 4 days in the 2 weeks prior to entry and reported moderate to very severe symptoms.||Number of patients|||Number
839093|NCT01323790|Primary|Response (Responder/Non-responder) to Study Drug During Weeks 1 to 12|Responder was defined as having at least 3 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs)/week with at least 1 SBM/week increase over baseline for at least 9 out of the 12 treatment weeks and 3 out of the last 4 treatment weeks during the double-blind treatment period. An SBM is a bowel movement occurring 24 hours or more since the last use of rescue medication.|Baseline (Week 1) to end of treatment (Week 12)|The ITT analysis set included all randomized patients, with the exception of patients who were found to have randomized multiple times within the program at different centers.||Number of patients|||Number
839094|NCT01323855|Primary|AUC0-∞ After Single Dosing With Preladenant for Participants With Mild CRI Versus Healthy Matched Controls|Blood samples were taken at the following timepoints: pre-dose, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, 24, 30, 36 and 48 hours postdose in order to determine the AUC0-∞ of preladenant|Pre-dose to 48 hours post-dose|One participant with mild CRI, and two matched healthy participants with insufficient terminal phase data to allow adequate characterization, were not analyzed. As only participants with mild CRI are presented, participants with severe or moderate CRI or their corresponding healthy matched controls were not analyzed in this outcome measure||ng.hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839095|NCT01323855|Primary|AUC0-∞ After Single Dosing With Preladenant for Participants With Moderate CRI Versus Healthy Matched Controls|Blood samples were taken at the following timepoints: pre-dose, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, 24, 30, 36 and 48 hours postdose in order to determine the AUC0-∞ of preladenant|Pre-dose to 48 hours post-dose|One participant with moderate CRI, and two matched healthy participants with insufficient terminal phase data to allow adequate characterization, were not analyzed. As only participants with moderate CRI are presented, participants with mild or severe CRI or their corresponding healthy matched controls were not analyzed in this outcome measure||ng.hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839096|NCT01323855|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞) After Single Dosing With Preladenant for Participants With Severe CRI Versus Healthy Matched Controls|Blood samples were taken at the following timepoints: pre-dose, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, 24, 30, 36 and 48 hours postdose in order to determine the AUC0-∞ of preladenant|Pre-dose to 48 hours post-dose|Four participants with severe CRI, and two matched healthy participants with insufficient terminal phase data to allow adequate characterization, were not analyzed. As only participants with severe CRI are presented, participants with mild or moderate CRI or their corresponding healthy matched controls were not analyzed in this outcome measure||ng.hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839097|NCT01323920|Secondary|The Cumulative Incidence of Chronic GVHD Requiring Systemic Immune Suppression up to 1 Year After Stem Cell Infusion||1 year|One participant signed consent and was enrolled onto study, however, was immediately taken off study because it became evident that the participant needed further therapy and was not ready to proceed to transplant.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839098|NCT01323920|Secondary|The Non-relapse Mortality, Progression-free and Overall Survival up to 1 Year After Stem Cell Infusion|Progression free and overall survival by 1 year after stem cell infusion will be assessed using the method of Kaplan and Meier. Progression-free survival will be defined as the time from stem cell infusion to the time of disease progression or death from any cause. Overall survival will be defined as the time from stem cell infusion to the time to death from any cause. Patients will be censored at the time last documented alive. Cumulative incidence and Kaplan-Meier curves will be constructed as appropriate. Progression is defined per clinical presentation, not protocol specified, and vary per disease, e.g. blasts in bone marrow or peripheral blood for AML/MDS; lymphoma + on PET/CT re-staging etc.|1 year|One participant signed consent and was enrolled onto study, however, was immediately taken off study because it became evident that the participant needed further therapy and was not ready to proceed to transplant.||Percent of participants|||Number
839099|NCT01323920|Secondary|The Percentage Donor Engraftment up to Day 30 Post Stem Cell Infusion|To assess the percentage donor engraftment up to day 30 post stem cell infusion, defined as the first of 3 consecutive days tested of documented absolute netrophil count (ANC) >/= 500 cells/u/L|Day 30|One participant signed consent and was enrolled onto study, however, was immediately taken off study because it became evident that the participant needed further therapy and was not ready to proceed to transplant.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839100|NCT01323920|Primary|The Cumulative Incidence of Grade II-IV Acute GVHD up to Day 100 After Stem Cell Infusion|The primary outcome of this study is the cumulative incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD up to Day 100 after stem cell infusion. Acute GHVD is graded according to the modified Glucksberg criteria (adapted from Thomas et al., NEJM ,1975, pp. 895-90), which is based on criteria by which the provider classifies acute GVHD per its objective organ staging. Acute GVHD is assessed in weekly standard of care visits post stem cell infusion and is captured in the protocol EDC upon evaluation of clinical notes up to Day 100. Data for acute GVHD organ staging and etiologies are collected in an acute GVHD separate case report form and do not include system organ class, expectedness or attribution.|Day 100|One participant signed consent and was enrolled onto study, however, was immediately taken off study because it became evident that the participant needed further therapy and was not ready to proceed to transplant.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839101|NCT01323959|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|Month 0 – Month 1|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of the study booster vaccine, for whom data was available.||Subjects|||Number
839747|NCT01321710|Primary|Maternal Sleep Quantity (Objective)|Maternal sleep quantity is defined as total night-time sleep in hours as measured by wrist actigraphy over 3 nights.|1-month postpartum (approximately)|ITT analysis. Because this was a repeated measures analysis at 1 and 3 months postpartum, subjects missing outcome data at either point were excluded from the analysis.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
839102|NCT01323959|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 31-day (Day 0–Day 30) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of the study booster vaccine, for whom data was available and the symptom sheet filled in.||Subjects|||Number
839103|NCT01323959|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms.|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue, fever [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above (≥) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)], headache and gastrointestinal symptoms. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = fever > 39.0 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|During the 4-day (Day 0–Day 3) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of the study booster vaccine, for whom data was available and the symptom sheet filled in.||Subjects|||Number
839104|NCT01323959|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 50 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|During the 4-day (Day 0–Day 3) follow-up period after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of the study booster vaccine, for whom data was available.||Subjects|||Number
839105|NCT01323959|Secondary|Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA), Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) Antibodies Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations are presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in expressed in ELISA units per millilitre (EL.U/mL)|At Month 1|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839106|NCT01323959|Secondary|Anti-polio 1, Anti-polio 2 and Anti-polio 3 Antibody Titers|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|At Month 1|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839107|NCT01323959|Secondary|Anti-diphteria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus (Anti-T) Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations are presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in international units per millilitre (IU/mL)|At Month 1|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839108|NCT01323959|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA), Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) Antibodies Above the Cut-off|Cut-off values assessed were greater than or equal to ≥ 5 Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) units per millilitre (EL.U/ml)|At Month 1|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
839109|NCT01323959|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Booster Response to Pertussis Toxoid (PT), Filamentous Haemagglutinin (FHA), Pertactin (PRN)|Booster response was defined as: for initially seronegative subjects: antibody concentration ≥ 20 EL.U/mL at post booster vaccination; for initially seropositive subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentration < 20 EL.U/mL: antibody concentration at post booster ≥ 4 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration; and for initially seropositive subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentration ≥ 20 EL.U/mL: antibody concentration at post booster ≥ 2 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration.|At Month 1|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
839110|NCT01323959|Primary|Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA), Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) Antibodies Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations are presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in expressed in ELISA units per millilitre (EL.U/mL)|At Day 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839111|NCT01323959|Primary|Anti-polio 1, Anti-polio 2 and Anti-polio 3 Antibody Titers|Titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|At Day 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839123|NCT01323972|Primary|Anti-Circumsporozoite (Anti-CS) Antibody Titers|Antibody titers are presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs) and are measured in titers.|One month post-dose 3 (Month 3)|The analyses were performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839112|NCT01323959|Primary|Anti-diphteria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus (Anti-T) Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations are presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), expressed in international units per millilitre (IU/mL)|At Day 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839113|NCT01323959|Primary|Number of Subjects With Anti-pertussis Toxoid (Anti-PT), Anti-filamentous Haemagglutinin (Anti-FHA), Anti-pertactin (Anti-PRN) Antibodies|Cut-off values assessed were greater than or equal to ≥ 5 Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) units per millilitre (EL.U/ml)|At Day 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
839114|NCT01323959|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3|A seroprotected subject is defined as a vaccinated subject with anti-poliovirus types 1, 2 and 3 antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) 8 Effective Dose 50 (ED50)|At Day 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
839115|NCT01323959|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Diphteria (D) and Tetanus (T) Antigens|A seroprotected subject is defined as a vaccinated subject with anti-D and anti-T antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) 0.1 international units per millilitre (IU/mL)|At Day 0|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
839116|NCT01323959|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Poliovirus Types 1, 2 and 3|A seroprotected subject is defined as a vaccinated subject with anti-poliovirus types 1, 2 and 3 antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) 8 Effective Dose 50 (ED50)|At Month 1|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
839117|NCT01323959|Primary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects Against Diphteria (D) and Tetanus (T) Antigens|A seroprotected subject is defined as a vaccinated subject with anti-D and anti-T antibody concentration greater than or equal to (≥) 0.1 international units per millilitre (IU/mL).|At Month 1|The analysis was performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included subjects who met all eligibility criteria, complied with the procedures defined in the protocol, who received the booster dose of Boostrix™ Polio vaccine and for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
839118|NCT01323972|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|Up to 8 months post-dose 1|The analyses were performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
839119|NCT01323972|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|Within the 30-day (Days 0-29) post-vaccination period|The analyses were performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
839120|NCT01323972|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite, fever [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above (≥) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 loss of appetite = not eating at all. Grade 3 irritability = crying that could not be comforted/prevented normal activity. Grade 3 drowsiness = drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = fever higher than (>) 39.0 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Over a 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period after each dose and across doses|The analyses were performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with their symptom sheets filled in, for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
839121|NCT01323972|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 20 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|Over a 7-day (Days 0-6)post-vaccination period after each dose and across doses|The analyses were performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with their symptom sheets filled in, for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
839122|NCT01323972|Secondary|Anti-hepatitis B (Anti-HB) Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations are presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) and expressed in milli-international units per milliliter (mIU/mL).|One month post-dose 3 (Month 3)|The analyses were performed on the According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839167|NCT01324440|Primary|Geometric Mean Antibody Concentrations (GMC)|Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were measured by a LUMINEX(TM) assay.|Day 14 postvaccination|The per-protocol analysis excluded patients who had missing baseline and/or postvaccination (Day 14) serology data and patients who developed a S. aureus infection during the 14 days postvaccination.||mcg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839124|NCT01323998|Primary|Number of Participants by Treatment Cohort With and Without a Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy (BPH) Diagnosis|The number of participants treated with alpha-blocker (AB) and 5a lpha reductase inhibitor (5ARI) as monotherapy or in combination reported by the presence or absence of a diagnosis code for BPH (International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes: 222.2 and 600.xx). Early combination therapy was defined as the addition of 5ARI to existing AB therapy within 30 days of the initial AB pharmacy claim. Delayed combination therapy was defined as the addition of 5ARI to AB therapy after 30 day but within one year of the initial AB pharmacy claim.|4 years|Males aged 50 and older with a new pharmacy claim for AB, 5ARI or a combination of both. Participants were excluded if they had a diagnosis of prostate or bladder cancer, a treatment history for male-pattern baldness with finasteride 1 milligram, or a procedure code for prostate surgery.||participants|||Number
839125|NCT01324024|Secondary|NYU Paragraph Recall Task|Subjects hear 2 brief narratives, each containing 19-21 informational bits, and are asked to recall as many details as possible immediately after hearing each paragraph (A and B) and again following a 30 minute delay. Subjects receive credit for each informational bit recalled verbatim. Different paragraphs were read at each assessment. The maximum number of correct responses for paragraph A is 19 and the maximum number of correct responses for paragraph B is 21.|Baseline, end of first Intervention (4 weeks) and end of second Intervention (4 weeks)|The numbers in the lisdexamphetamine and placebo arms reflect the fact that 32 subjects completed both arms; 16 participants in each arm. 35 total participant data was analyzed for the baseline arm.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839126|NCT01324024|Secondary|Penn Continuous Performance Test|The Penn Continuous Performance Test is a measure of visual attention and vigilance. In this task, a series of red vertical and horizontal lines flash in a digital numeric frame. The participant must press the spacebar whenever the lines form complete numbers or complete letters. The minimum to maximum score range for this task is 0-60 correct responses, with 60 being a perfect score. This data presented in the outcome measure table reflects the total number of correct responses.|Baseline, end of first Intervention (4 weeks) and end of second Intervention (4 weeks)|The numbers in the lisdexamphetamine and placebo arms reflect the fact that 32 subjects completed both arms; 16 participants in each arm. 35 total participant data was analyzed for the baseline arm.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839127|NCT01324024|Primary|Brown Attention Deficit Disorder Scale (BADDS)|The BADDS questionnaire is a clinician administered questionnaire that assesses the frequency and severity of five clusters of symptoms reflective of executive dysfunction reported by individuals with ADHD. Participants are asked to rate the frequency and severity of a symptom on a scale from 0 to 3, with 0 meaning that the problem described does not relate to them and 3 indicating that the problem is very true for them and occurs almost daily. The range of severity for the total BADDS score is 0 to 120, with scores of 55 and above being consistent with full-syndrome ADHD.|Baseline, end of first Intervention (4 weeks) and end of second Intervention (4 weeks)|Of the 55 participants who were consented for screening, 20 were excluded. Of the remaining 35 subjects, 32 completed both active and placebo treatment trials. The numbers in the lisdexamphetamine and placebo arms reflect the fact that 32 subjects completed both arms. 35 total participant data was analyzed for the baseline arm.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839128|NCT01324102|Primary|Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System Scale, a Scale Developed by the National Institute of Health to Assess Outcomes Across Different Trials.|The investigators will use the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System which can be found on the National Institutes of Health website. It measures changes in scale levels of Depression, Anxiety, Fatigue, Sleep Disturbance before and after the intervention. The measure is developed by National Institutes of Health to permit comparison across studies, and is reliable and valid. This is measured at baseline, and to assess for change, after the 8 week yoga intervention. There are six items in each subscale with four points each, with a range from 1-5. The full subscale range is 6-30. Anxiety was assessed by anxiety subscale, ranging from 6 ( no anxiety) to 30 (worst possible anxiety); Insomnia was assessed by the anxiety subscale, ranging from 6 ( no anxiety) to 30 (worst possible anxiety).|Primary outcome is measured at baseline and after the 8 week yoga intervention.|This is a small scale pilot study. Due to small sample size, we did pre-post analysis of the total groups, separated by those with and without initial impairment.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
839129|NCT01324128|Secondary|Change in Serum Phosphorus Levels From Baseline to Week 12|Change in serum phosphorus levels from baseline to Week 12 in the PA21 group versus the sevelamer group.|Week 12 post Baseline|For the Secondary Outcome, data from the Per Protocol Set (PPS) was used. The PPS consists of all subjects who had completed the analysis dose titration period (baseline to Week 12), had at least 1 evaluable serum phosphorus result at or after Week 12, and had no major protocol deviations.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839130|NCT01324128|Primary|Change in Serum Phosphorus Levels From Week 24 to Week 27|Change in serum phosphorus levels compared between PA21 Maintenance Dose (MD) and PA21-1 Low Dose (LD) in Stage 2 from Week 24 to Week 27|Week 24, Week 27|For the Primary Outcome, data from the Primary Efficacy Set (PES) was used. The PES consists of subjects who were randomized to Stage 2 and received at least 1 dose of study medication during Stage 2 and had at least 1 post-baseline (Stage 2) efficacy assessment in Stage 2.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
839131|NCT01324271|Secondary|Number of Retained (TTDS-placed) Tubes|Tube retention is the presence of a TT placed successfully by the TTDS device across the tympanic membrane at the two week follow-up visit. Tube retention was confirmed by physician investigator evaluation. N=74 tubes were successfully placed intraprocedurally. Analysis population includes office/clinical subjects only.|14 days|Total in-office (IO) subjects.||tubes|Participants||Number
839132|NCT01324271|Primary|Percentage of Tubes Successfully Placed Using a TTDS Device|"Device (TTDS) success is defined as the successful delivery of a pre-loaded TT tube across the tympanic membrane using the TTDS. Device success will be evaluated per device attempted. Office/clinical subjects only.
A Device (Type of Unit analyzed) is defined as a TDS attempt. This is not synonymous with “tube.” Tube is the outcome of the device use."|Day 0|All enrolled subjects for which a tympanostomy tube was attempted to be placed using a Tympanostomy Tube Delivery System (TTDS) under local anesthesia in office/clinical setting||percentage of devices|Participants|95% Confidence Interval|Number
839836|NCT01328548|Other Pre-specified|Assessment of Immune Parameters Compatible With Inflammaging: High CD8+CD28CD45RA+T Cells|Characterization of Tcell populations will be conducted on whole blood using multiparametric flow cytometry prior to immunization to characterize the immunological function of circulating Tcells in each participant.|Baseline|Data not collected.|||||
839133|NCT01324271|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With In-office Tube Placement Procedure Success|Procedure Success is defined as the successful placement of any tympanostomy tube in all enrolled ears in a given subject. Procedure Success is determined on a per subject basis: the rate was calculated based on the number of subjects achieving Procedure Success out of the total number of enrolled subjects. Only subjects for whom tubes were placed under local anesthesia were evaluated for Procedure Success.|Day 0|||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839134|NCT01324310|Secondary|Summary of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|All 15 subjects in the safety population received at least 1 dose of romidepsin. AEs were considered related if assessed by the Investigator as possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug. Serious AEs (SAEs) are those that resulted in death, were life-threatening, required or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly, or resulted in an important medical event that may have jeopardized the patient or required medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above.|Day 1 up to Day 36 (28 days after last treatment)|The safety population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. The Day 8 analysis population included 13 participants because two participants discontinued from the study prior to Day 8 (one due to an AE, the other due to disease progression).||participants|||Number
839135|NCT01324310|Primary|Apparent Total Volume of Distribution (Vz)|Vz: apparent total volume of distribution, calculated as [(CL)/λz].|Days 1 and 8, At 0 (predose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|Assess the influence of multiple doses of ketoconazole on the PK of romidepsin; the PK population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The reasons for study discontinuation: 1 subject withdrew due to an AE while another subject had disease progression.||Liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839136|NCT01324310|Primary|Apparent Total Plasma Clearance (CL)|Apparent total plasma clearance, (CL) calculated as [Dose/AUC 0-∞].|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|Assess the influence of multiple doses of ketoconazole on the PK of romidepsin; the PK population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The reasons for study discontinuation: 1 subject withdrew due to an AE while another subject had disease progression.||L/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839137|NCT01324310|Primary|Estimate of the Terminal Elimination Half-life in Plasma (t1/2)|Terminal elimination half-life (t1/2) in plasma, was calculated as [(ln 2)/λz]|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (pre-dose),1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|Assess the influence of multiple doses of ketoconazole on the PK of romidepsin; the PK population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The reasons for study discontinuation: 1 subject withdrew due to an AE while another subject had disease progression.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839138|NCT01324310|Primary|Time to Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|Tmax: time to maximum observed Tmax, obtained directly from the observed concentration versus time data|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|Assess the influence of multiple doses of ketoconazole on the PK of romidepsin; the PK population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The reasons for study discontinuation: 1 subject withdrew due to an AE while another subject had disease progression.||hours||90% Confidence Interval|Median
839139|NCT01324310|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|Cmax: maximum observed plasma concentration, obtained directly from the observed concentration versus time data; for Cmax, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) model was used to estimate the ratio of geometric means and its 90% confidence interval (CI) between romidepsin alone and romidepsin in the presence of ketoconazole|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|Assess the influence of multiple doses of ketoconazole on the PK of romidepsin. The PK population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The reasons for study discontinuation: 1 subject withdrew due to an AE while another subject had disease progression.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839140|NCT01324310|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time-curve From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|AUC0-∞: area under the plasma concentration time-curve from Time 0 extrapolated to infinity, calculated as [AUCt + Ct/λz].|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|Assess the influence of multiple doses of ketoconazole on the PK of romidepsin. The PK population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The reasons for study discontinuation: 1 subject withdrew due to an AE while another subject had disease progression.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839141|NCT01324310|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time-curve From Time 0 to 24-hour (AUC 0-24)|AUC 0-24: area under the plasma concentration time-curve from Time 0 to 24 hours, calculated by linear trapezoidal method when concentrations are increasing and the logarithmic trapezoidal method when concentrations are decreasing; for AUC 0-24 an analysis of variance (ANOVA) model was used to estimate the ratio of geometric means and its 90% confidence interval (CI) between romidepsin alone and romidepsin in the presence of ketoconazole|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (predose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion|Assess the influence of multiple doses of ketoconazole on the pharmacokinetic (PK) of romidepsin; the PK population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The reasons for study discontinuation: 1 subject withdrew due to an AE while another subject had disease progression.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839168|NCT01324440|Primary|Number of Participants With a Positive Immune Response, Defined as a Change in Antibody Level Greater Than or Equal to a 2-fold-rise at Day 14 Compared to Baseline|Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were measured by a LUMINEX(TM) assay.|Baseline and Day 14 postvaccination|The per-protocol analysis excluded patients who had missing baseline and/or postvaccination (Day 14) serology data and patients who developed a S. aureus infection during the 14 days postvaccination.||participants|||Number
839142|NCT01324310|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time-curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC0-t)of Romidepsin|AUC0-t: area under the plasma concentration time-curve from Time 0 to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (Ct), calculated by linear trapezoidal method when concentrations are increasing and the logarithmic trapezoidal method when concentrations are decreasing. For AUC0-t, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) model was used to estimate the ratio of geometric means and its 90% CI between romidepsin alone and romidepsin in the presence to ketoconazole.|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (pre-dose) 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|Assessment on the influence of multiple doses of ketoconazole on the Pharmacokinetic (PK) of romidepsin; the PK population included participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The reasons for study discontinuation: 1 subject withdrew due to an AE while another subject had disease progression.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839143|NCT01324323|Secondary|Summary of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|AEs were considered related if assessed by the Investigator as possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug. Serious AEs (SAEs) are those that resulted in death, were life-threatening, required or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly, or resulted in an important medical event that may have jeopardized the patient or required medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above.|Day 1 up to Day 36 (28 days after the last treatment)|The safety population included all subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
839144|NCT01324323|Primary|Apparent Total Volume of Distribution (Vz).|Apparent total volume of distribution (Vz) was calculated as [(CL)/λz] for Romidepsin and co-administered with Rifampin.|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (predose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|The PK population was to consist of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles.||Liters||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839145|NCT01324323|Primary|Clearance (CL): Apparent Total Plasma Clearance.|The apparent total plasma clearance (CL) was calculated as [Dose/AUC0-∞] for Romidepsin alone and co-administered with rifampin plasma concentrations.|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (predose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|The primary objective was to assess the influence of multiple doses of rifampin on the PK of romidepsin. The PK population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The primary reason for study discontinuation for the 1 participant was due to withdrawal of consent.||L/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839146|NCT01324323|Primary|Estimate of the Terminal Elimination Half-life in Plasma (t1/2)|The terminal elimination half-life (t1/2) in plasma, was calculated as [(ln 2)/λz]. This was only calculated when a reliable estimate for λz could be obtained.|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (predose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|The primary objective was to assess the influence of multiple doses of rifampin on the PK of romidepsin. The PK population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The primary reason for study discontinuation for the 1 participant was due to withdrawal of consent.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839147|NCT01324323|Primary|Time to Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|Time to maximum observed plasma concentration (Tmax) was obtained directly from the observed concentration versus time data.|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (predose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|The primary objective was to assess the influence of multiple doses of rifampin on the PK of romidepsin. The PK population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The primary reason for study discontinuation for the 1 participant was due to withdrawal of consent.||hours||Full Range|Median
839148|NCT01324323|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)of Romidepsin|Maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax)was obtained directly from the observed concentration versus time data.|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (predose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|The primary objective was to assess the influence of multiple doses of rifampin on the PK of romidepsin. The PK population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The primary reason for study discontinuation for the 1 participant was due to withdrawal of consent.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839149|NCT01324323|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time-curve From Time Zero Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC0-∞).|AUC0-∞: area under the plasma concentration time-curve from Time 0 extrapolated to infinity, calculated as [AUCt + Ct/λz]. λz is the apparent terminal rate constant. No AUC extrapolation was performed with unreliable λz. If the percentage of AUC extrapolated is ≥ 25%, AUC0–∞ will not be reported.|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (predose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|The primary objective was to assess the influence of multiple doses of rifampin on the PK of romidepsin. The PK population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The primary reason for study discontinuation for the 1 participant was due to withdrawal of consent.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839150|NCT01324323|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time-curve From Time 0 to 24-hour (AUC0-24) for Romidepsin|Individual and mean romidepsin plasma concentrations by treatment and scheduled time data were collected. AUC0-24: area under the plasma concentration time-curve from Time 0 to 24 hours, calculated by linear trapezoidal method when concentrations are increasing and the logarithmic trapezoidal method when concentrations are decreasing.|Day 1 and Day 8; at 0 (predose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|The PK population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The primary reason for study discontinuation for the 1 participant was due to withdrawal of consent.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839178|NCT01324622|Secondary|Sensory Deficit||up to 24 months|Due to the study’s early termination, no data were collected for this outcome|||||
839179|NCT01324622|Secondary|Reflex Evaluation||up to 24 months|Due to the study’s early termination, no data were collected for this outcome|||||
839151|NCT01324323|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time-curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC0-t)of Romidepsin|AUC0-t: area under the plasma concentration time-curve from Time 0 to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (Ct), calculated by linear trapezoidal method when concentrations are increasing and the logarithmic trapezoidal method when concentrations are decreasing.|Days 1 and 8; at 0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours (end of infusion) and at 4.25, 4.5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24 and 48 hours after the initiation of IV infusion.|The PK population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had evaluable PK profiles. The primary reason for study discontinuation for the 1 participant was due to withdrawal of consent.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839152|NCT01324349|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events||Up to 30 days post surgery.|All treated subjects are included in the Safety population.||Participants|||Number
839153|NCT01324349|Secondary|Number of Subjects to Achieve Hemostasis Within 3 Minutes of Study Treatment Application|Stopwatches will be provided to document time to hemostasis. Hemostasis will be assessed every 30 seconds until the 5-minute time point, at which point the visual inspection will continue at one-minute intervals up to 10 minutes or until hemostasis is achieved.|Intra-operative (day 1)|Per the study protocol, the ITT population will serve as the primary analysis population for effectiveness and will be discussed in this report. One randomized subject, Subject 1104, did not receive the assigned treatment (TachoSil).||Participants|||Number
839154|NCT01324349|Primary|Median Time to Achieve Hemostasis Following Application of Study Treatment.|Stopwatches will be provided to document time to hemostasis. Hemostasis will be assessed every 30 seconds until the 5-minute time point, at which point the visual inspection will continue at one-minute intervals up to 10 minutes or until hemostasis is achieved.|Intra-operative (day 1)|Per the study protocol, the ITT population will serve as the primary analysis population for effectiveness. One randomized subject, Subject 1104, did not receive the assigned treatment (TachoSil®).||Minutes||Full Range|Median
839155|NCT01324388|Primary|Mean, 24-hour Blood Pressure (Collected by Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring [ABPM]) in Response to Co-administration of LY2189265 and Metoprolol||Day -1, Day 4, Day 7 of Treatment 2 in Part 2|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265 or metoprolol) with evaluable Part 2 ABPM blood pressure data.||millimeter of mercury (mm Hg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839156|NCT01324388|Primary|Mean, 24-hour Heart Rate (Collected by Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring [ABPM]) in Response to Co-administration of LY2189265 and Metoprolol||Day -1, Day 4, Day 7 of Treatment 2 in Part 2|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265 or metoprolol) with evaluable Part 2 ABPM heart rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839157|NCT01324388|Primary|Pharmacokinetics, Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Lisinopril||Day -1, Day 3, Day 24 in Part 1|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265 or placebo) with evaluable lisinopril Cmax data.||(nanograms per milliliter) per milligram||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839158|NCT01324388|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics, Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Metoprolol When Administered With LY2189265||Day 4 and Day 7 of Treatment 2 in Part 2|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265 or metoprolol) with evaluable Part 2 metoprolol Cmax data.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839159|NCT01324388|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics, Area Under the Concentration Curve (AUC) of Metoprolol When Administered With LY2189265||Day 4 and Day 7 of Treatment 2 in Part 2|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265 or metoprolol) with evaluable Part 2 metoprolol AUC data.||nanograms*hour per milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839160|NCT01324388|Secondary|Mean, 24-hour Blood Pressure (Collected by Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring [ABPM]) in Response to Co-administration of LY2189265 and Lisinopril||Day -1, Day 3, Day 24 of Part 1|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265 or placebo) with evaluable Part 1 ABPM blood pressure data.||millimeter of mercury (mm Hg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839161|NCT01324388|Secondary|Mean, 24-hour Heart Rate (Collected by Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring [ABPM]) in Response to Co-administration of LY2189265 and Lisinopril||Day -1, Day 3, Day 24 of Part 1|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265 or placebo) with evaluable Part 1 ABPM heart rate data.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839162|NCT01324388|Primary|Pharmacokinetics, Area Under the Concentration Curve (AUC) of Lisinopril||Day -1, Day 3, Day 24 of Part 1|Participants who received at least one dose of study drug (LY2189265 or placebo) with evaluable lisinopril AUC data.||(nanograms*hours/milliliter)/milligram||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839163|NCT01324401|Secondary|Desensitization|The consumption of 5 grams of peanut protein during an open food challenge without objective symptoms immediately post treatment|at least 36 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839164|NCT01324401|Primary|Tolerance or Sustained Unresponsiveness|The consumption of 5 grams of peanut protein during a double-blind placebo controlled food challenge without objective symptoms after one month of post treatment avoidance|at least 36 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839165|NCT01324440|Primary|Number of Vaccine-related Serious Adverse Experiences|"Investigators were instructed to determine the seriousness and causality (relatedness to test vaccine) of each AE based on criteria defined in the protocol:
A serious adverse event (SAE) is any AE that:
results in death,
is life threatening,
results in a persistent or significant disability/incapacity,
results in or prolongs an existing inpatient hospitalization,
is a congenital anomaly/birth defect,
is a cancer,
is an overdose,
or is another important medical event that may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above."|Up to Day 360 postvaccination|Any subject who received clinical material and had at least 1 day of safety follow-up was included in the safety summary.||participants|||Number
839166|NCT01324440|Primary|Change in Antibody Concentration (Titer) at Day 14 Compared to Baseline, Expressed as the Geometric Mean Fold-rise (GMFR)|"Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were measured by a LUMINEX(TM) assay.
The GMFR is the ratio of the antibody concentration at Day 14 to the antibody concentration at baseline."|Baseline and Day 14 postvaccination|The per-protocol analysis excluded patients who had missing baseline and/or postvaccination (Day 14) serology data and patients who developed a S. aureus infection during the 14 days postvaccination.||ratio of IgG titer at Day 14 to baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839180|NCT01324622|Secondary|Motor Deficit||up to 24 months|Due to the study’s early termination, no data were collected for this outcome|||||
839169|NCT01324570|Primary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Buprenorphine Following Transdermal Administration: Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vc/F)|The population PK (PopPK) of BTDS buprenorphine in pediatric patients ages 7 to 16 years was described by a 2-compartment model with sequential zero- and first-order absorption from the patch. A fixed allometric relationship was used to describe the effects of changes in ideal body weight (IBW) across pediatric patients on all clearance and volume parameters. Given the sparse sample collections, small sample size, and complexity of the absorption process with the patch formulation, this PopPK model was fit to the pediatric data using nonlinear mixed effects modeling (NONMEM) Bayes method with selective use of priors from previous adult PopPK results. Estimates of fixed effects from the final model were used to calculate the Vc/F after patch dosing given the covariate distribution in the PopPK dataset and the typical weights from children in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) dataset.|Day 1, end of week 1, days 9/10, end of week 2, and end of week 4 or at discontinuation prior to end of study visit|The full analysis population (FAP) for PK consisted of patients who received study drug and had at least 1 valid quantifiable PK blood sample (N=41).Three patients had no quantifiable plasma buprenorphine concentration measurements and were not included in the PK analysis.The final buprenorphine pediatric PK analysis dataset comprised 38 patients.||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839170|NCT01324570|Secondary|Parent/Caregiver-assessed Global Impression of Change (PGIC)|The PGIC rating score variable was collected on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 to 7 (where 1 = very much improved; and 7 = very much worse). The PGIC is designed to assess overall satisfaction with the treatment. The PGIC score was summarized using the number and percent of patients in each of the 7 possible response categories overall and by age group. PGIC was assessed by the parent/caregiver at the end of treatment visit or early discontinuation visit.|End of treatment (week 24) or early discontinuation visit|The full analysis population (FAP) (N=40) was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of the study drug during the study; however data was provided for only 38 patients for this outcome measure.||Participants|||Count of Participants
839171|NCT01324570|Secondary|Pain Right Now Assessment by Patients Aged 12 to 16 Years, Inclusive|"Pain right now was assessed using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). The 100-mm VAS is a 100-mm line with 1 end marked as “no pain” and the other marked as “pain as bad as it could be.” The patient was asked to make a mark on that line indicating his or her level of pain. Pain right now score was defined as the distance (in mm) from the “no pain” end to the patient’s mark; 0=no pain and bigger numbers indicate more pain. For screening to week 4, pain right now was assessed 30 minutes before initial BTDS application on day 1; one hour after initial BTDS application on day 1; thereafter, once daily at approximately 8 PM for the first 4 weeks. Baseline was the last assessment prior to the first dose. For weeks 1-4, weekly averages of the pain right now scores were calculated using the sum of all available pain right now scores recorded daily during a given week divided by the number of available scores.
For weeks 6-24, pain right now was measured once a week at approximately 8 PM."|Up to 24 weeks|The FAP was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of the study drug during the study.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
839172|NCT01324570|Secondary|Pain Right Now Assessment by Patients Aged 7 to 11 Years, Inclusive|"Pain right now was assessed using the Faces of Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R). The FPS-R is a horizontal row of 6 faces representing pain intensity, with “no hurt” at the far left and “hurts worst” at the far right; the intensities are scored as 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, or 10. A score of 0=no pain, and 10=very much pain. For screening to week 4, pain right now was assessed at 30 minutes before initial BTDS application on day 1; one hour after initial BTDS application on day 1; thereafter, once daily at approximately 8 PM for the first 4 weeks. Baseline score was the last assessment prior to the first dose. For weeks 1-4, weekly averages of the pain right now scores were calculated using the sum of all available pain right now scores recorded daily during a given week divided by the number of available scores.
The study measured pain right now for weeks 6-24 once a week at approximately 8 PM while on treatment; however, no patients in this age group were treated beyond week 12."|Up to 24 weeks|The full analysis population (FAP) was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of the study drug during the study.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
839173|NCT01324570|Primary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Buprenorphine Following Transdermal Administration: Apparent Clearance (CL/F)|The population PK (PopPK) of BTDS buprenorphine in pediatric patients ages 7 to 16 years was described by a 2-compartment model with sequential zero- and first-order absorption from the patch. A fixed allometric relationship was used to describe the effects of changes in ideal body weight (IBW) across pediatric patients on all clearance and volume parameters. Given the sparse sample collections, small sample size, and complexity of the absorption process with the patch formulation, this PopPK model was fit to the pediatric data using nonlinear mixed effects modeling (NONMEM) Bayes method with selective use of priors from previous adult PopPK results. Estimates of fixed effects from the final model were used to calculate the CL/F after patch dosing given the covariate distribution in the PopPK dataset and the typical weights from children in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) dataset.|Day 1, end of week 1, days 9/10, end of week 2, and end of week 4 or at discontinuation prior to end of study visit|The full analysis population (FAP) for PK consisted of patients who received study drug and had at least 1 valid quantifiable PK blood sample (N=41).Three patients had no quantifiable plasma buprenorphine concentration measurements and were not included in the PK analysis.The final buprenorphine pediatric PK analysis dataset comprised 38 patients.||Liters/hour||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839174|NCT01324570|Primary|The Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety|Safety assessments consisted of reports of AEs, vital signs (blood pressure, pulse rate, respiratory rate, and temperature), weight, hemoglobin-oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry (SpO2), clinical laboratory tests, somnolence (assessed by the University of Michigan Sedation Scale [UMSS]), conventional 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs), and 24-hour digital 12-lead ECGs (Holter monitor). Safety variables were summarized descriptively within age group for the safety population.|Up to 28 weeks|The safety population (N=41) was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
839175|NCT01324622|Secondary|Extent of Spinal Canal/Cord Decompression||up to 24 months|Due to the study’s early termination, no data were collected for this outcome|||||
839176|NCT01324622|Secondary|Sagittal Canal Diameter||up to 24 months|Due to the study’s early termination, no data were collected for this outcome|||||
839177|NCT01324622|Secondary|Range of Motion||up to 24 months|Due to the study’s early termination, no data were collected for this outcome|||||
839191|NCT01324947|Secondary|Time to Response Based on IMWG and Assessed by the Investigator|Time to Response was calculated as the time from enrollment to the initial response (PR or better) based on IMWG and assessed by the investigator.|From randomization through the follow-up phase; up to the data-cut off of 31 July 2014; Maximum time to response was 23.1 weeks|Includes those who had at least a partial response or better; Intent to Treat||weeks||Full Range|Median
839192|NCT01324947|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate for Overall Survival|Overall survival was calculated as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Overall survival was censored at the last date that the participant was known to be alive for participants who were alive at the time of analysis and for participants who were lost to follow-up before death was documented.|From randomization through the follow-up phase; Maximum time on follow-up was 141.1 weeks.|Intent to Treat population included all participants enrolled into the study||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839193|NCT01324947|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate Duration of Response Based on Investigator Assessment Using IMWG Criteria|Duration of Response (calculated for responders only) is defined as the time from the initial documented response (partial response or better) to confirmed disease progression by the investigator based on IMWG criteria.|From randomization through the study follow-up phase; up to the data cut-off of 31 July 2014; Maximum duration of response follow-up was 90.3 weeks.|Includes those who had a partial response or better.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839194|NCT01324947|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate for Time to Progression (TTP) Based on Investigator Assessment Using IMWG Criteria|"Time to progression (TTP) was calculated as the time from randomization to the first documented progression confirmed by the investigator and based on the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria (IMWG).
Progressive disease requires 1 of the following:
Increase of ≥ 25% from nadir in:
Serum M-component (absolute increase ≥ 0.5 g/dl)
Urine M-component (absolute increase ≥ 200 mg/24 hours)
In patients without measurable serum and urine M-protein levels the difference between involved and uninvolved free light chain (FLC) levels (absolute increase > 100 mg/dl)
Bone marrow plasma cell percentage (absolute % ≥ 10%)
Development of new or increase in the size of existing bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytomas.
Development of hypercalcemia (corrected serum calcium > 11.5 mg/dl) attributed solely to plasma cell proliferative disease."|From randomization through the follow-up phase; up to the data-cut off of 31 July 2014; Maximum time to progression follow-up was 90.3 weeks.|Intent to Treat includes all participants enrolled||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839195|NCT01324947|Secondary|Kaplan Meier Estimates for Progression Free Survival (PFS) by Investigator Based on IMWG|"Progression-free survival was calculated as the time from randomization to disease progression as determined by the Investigator based on the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria (IMWG), or death on study, whichever occurred earlier.
Progressive disease requires 1 of the following:
Increase of ≥ 25% from nadir in:
Serum M-component (absolute increase ≥ 0.5 g/dl)
Urine M-component (absolute increase ≥ 200 mg/24 hours)
In patients without measurable serum and urine M-protein levels the difference between involved and uninvolved free light chain (FLC) levels (absolute increase > 100 mg/dl)
Bone marrow plasma cell percentage (absolute % ≥ 10%)
Development of new or increase in the size of existing bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytomas."|From randomization through the follow-up phase; Maximum duration of follow-up for PFS was 90.3 weeks.|Intent to Treat included all participants enrolled.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839196|NCT01324947|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events and Type of Adverse Events|"An adverse event is any noxious, unintended, or untoward medical occurrence that may appear or worsen in a participant during the course of a study. A serious AE is any AE occurring at any dose that:
Results in death;
Is life-threatening;
Requires or prolongs existing inpatient hospitalization;
Results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity;
Is a congenital anomaly/birth defect;
Constitutes an important medical event.
The Investigator assessed the relationship of each AE to study drug and graded the severity according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, Version 4.0):
Grade 1 = Mild (no limitation in activity or intervention required); Grade 2 = Moderate (some limitation in activity; no/minimal medical intervention required);-Grade 3 = Severe (marked limitation in activity; medical intervention required, hospitalization possible); Grade 4 = Life-threatening; Grade 5 = Death"|From first dose of study drug through to 30 days after the last dose, until the data cut-off date of 31 July 2014. Maximum time on treatment was 94.1 weeks.|Safety population includes all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
839197|NCT01324947|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) Criteria Based on Investigator Assessment|"Objective response defined as a best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on the CR and requires all of the following:
Absence of original monoclonal paraprotein in serum and urine by immunofixation maintained at least 42 days.
<5% plasma cell in bone marrow aspirate and on bone marrow biopsy, if performed.
No increase in size or number of lytic bone lesions.
Disappearance of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
PR requires all of the following:
≥50% reduction in level of serum monoclonal paraprotein, maintained at least 42 days.
Reduction in 24-hour urinary light chain extraction by ≥90% or to <200 mg, maintained at least 42 days.
For patients with non-secretory myeloma, ≥50% reduction in plasma cells in bone marrow aspirate and on biopsy, if performed, for at least 42 days."|From randomization through the study follow-up phase; up to the data cut-off of 31 July 2014; Maximum time on follow-up was 141.1 weeks.|Intent to treat population includes all participants enrolled.||percentage of participants|||Number
839225|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication (Salbutamol and/or Ipratropium Bromide) Per Day Over the Course of the 52-week Treatment Period|Participants recorded the number of puffs and/or the number of nebules of rescue albuterol/salbutamol and/or ipratropium bromide used in the past 24 hours for the relief of COPD symptoms in the daily diary. The total puffs of rescue medication for each day was calculated as follows: (number of salbutamol puffs + number of ipratropium puffs + [2 * number of salbutamol nebules] + [2 * number of ipratropium nebules]). Baseline is the mean during the week prior to Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the mean number of puffs/day over Weeks 1-52 minus the mean number of puffs/day at Baseline. Analysis was performed using an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model with covariates of treatment, Baseline (mean during the week prior to Day 1), smoking status, and center group.|Baseline; from the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|ITT Population. Only those participants who had rescue data available on at least 50% of the days in the 52-week treatment period were included in the analysis.||Number of puffs per day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839198|NCT01324947|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response According to International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Uniform Response Criteria Based on Investigator Assessment|"Objective response defined as a best overall response of stringent complete response (SCR), complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR) or partial response (PR) based on Investigator Assessment.
SCR: CR and normal free light chain (FLC) ratio and no clonal cells in bone marrow; CR: Negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and ≤5% plasma cells in bone marrow; VGPR: Serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or ≥90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; PR: ≥50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by ≥90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. A ≥50% decrease in the difference between involved and uninvolved FLC levels in place of the M-protein criteria or a ≥50% reduction in plasma cells in place of M-protein if baseline was ≥30%. If present at baseline a ≥50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas."|From randomization through the study follow-up phase; up to the data cut-off of 31 July 2014; Maximum time on follow-up was 141.1 weeks.|Intent to Treat Population was defined as all enrolled participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
839199|NCT01324999|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change in WHO Functional Class (WHO FC)|The WHO functional classification ranges from I (patient's disease does not affect daily activities) to IV (patient's disease causes severe impairment). Higher scores indicate more severe impairment.|Baseline, Week 24|||participants|||Number
839200|NCT01324999|Secondary|St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Score|The SGRQ ranges from 0 (no impairment of quality of life) to 100 (highest impairment of quality of life)|Baseline, Week 8, Week 16, Week 24|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839201|NCT01324999|Secondary|Short Form-36 Global Score|SF- 36 investigates the standard of quality of life through a general health assessment and not specific to a particular disease, age or treatment group. It is a 36-item questionnaire measuring 8 domains (physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional, and mental health). Each domain score ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores reflecting better health-related functional status. The global score is determined by taking an average of the individual domain scores. The global score range is from 0 (worst) to 100 (best).|Baseline, Week 8, Week 16, Week 24|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839202|NCT01324999|Secondary|Brain Natriuretic Peptide Level||Baseline, Week 8, Week 16, Week 24|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839203|NCT01324999|Secondary|Maximum Borg Dyspnea Score During 6 Minute Walk Test|The modified Borg scale consists of a vertical scale labelled 0 to10 with corresponding verbal expressions of progressively increasing sensation (shortness of breath) intensity. 0 represents no dyspnea, and 10 is the highest level of perceived dyspnea.|Baseline, Week 8, Week 16, Week 24|Only 6 of the 7 study completers performed 6 minute walk test through the end of the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839204|NCT01324999|Secondary|Oxygen Desaturation During 6 Minute Walk Test|Change (decrease) in oxygen saturation from start of 6 minute walk to nadir during the 6 minute walk test|Baseline, Week 24|Only 6 of the 7 study completers performed the 6 minute walk test through week 24||oxygen saturation percentage points||Standard Deviation|Mean
839205|NCT01324999|Secondary|Resting Oxygen Saturation|Percent oxygen saturation of hemoglobin as measured by pulse oximetry in the resting state.|Baseline, Week 24|only 6 of the 7 study completers performed the 6 minute walk test through week 24.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
839206|NCT01324999|Primary|6 Minute Walk Distance||Baseline, Week 8, Week 16, Week 24|Only 6 of the 7 study completers performed 6 minute walk test through week 24||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
839207|NCT01316575|Secondary|Length of Stay in Hospital||Up to 2 weeks|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
839208|NCT01316575|Secondary|Number of Participants Requiring Admission to ICU||Up to 2 weeks|||participants|||Number
839209|NCT01316575|Secondary|Number of Participants Requiring Reintubation||Up to 2 weeks|||participants|||Number
839210|NCT01316575|Primary|Alveolar - Arterial Gradient|Alveolar - arterial gradient|1 hour following admission to PACU|From the literature, a sample size of 19 subjects per group is required for a power >0.9 and alpha <0.05 assuming a normalised difference in A-a gradient between groups of 0.33 and a Standard Deviation (SD) of 0.33||torr||Standard Deviation|Mean
839211|NCT01316614|Secondary|Amount of Blood||At the time of EUS-FNA procedure (Day 1)|100 participants were analyzed. Each participant had an equal number of passes with a stylet and without a stylet. 275 passes were performed with a stylet and 275 passes were performed without a stylet. The actual passes are represented in the table.||passes|||Number
839212|NCT01316614|Secondary|Contamination|Percentage of area of slide that represents GI contamination|At the time of EUS-FNA procedure (Day 1)|100 participants were analyzed. Each participant had an equal number of passes with a stylet and without a stylet. 275 passes were performed with a stylet and 275 passes were performed without a stylet. The actual passes are represented in the table.||passes|||Number
839213|NCT01316614|Secondary|Adequacy of Specimen||At the time of EUS-FNA procedure (Day 1)|100 participants were analyzed. Each participant had an equal number of passes with a stylet and without a stylet. 275 passes were performed with a stylet and 275 passes were performed without a stylet. The actual passes are represented in the table.||passes|||Number
839214|NCT01316614|Secondary|Degree of Cellularity|Number of cells per slide|At the time of EUS-FNA procedure (Day 1)|100 participants were analyzed. Each participant had an equal number of passes with a stylet and without a stylet. 275 passes were performed with a stylet and 275 passes were performed without a stylet. The actual passes are represented in the table.||passes|||Number
839215|NCT01316614|Secondary|Degree of Cellularity|Percentage of area of slide that contains cells of the representative lesion|At the time of EUS-FNA procedure (Day 1)|100 participants were analyzed. Each participant had an equal number of passes with a stylet and without a stylet. 275 passes were performed with a stylet and 275 passes were performed without a stylet. The actual passes are represented in the table.||passes|||Number
839326|NCT01317797|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Physical Examination Findings|The physical examination included body system assessments: eyes, head and neck (including thyroid), ears, nose and throat, lymph nodes, cardiovascular, lungs, mammae, abdomen (liver, spleen), genitals, limbs, central and peripheral nervous system, musculoskeletal system, skin & nails, mucosae. The Investigator classified abnormal findings as either clinically significant or not clinically significant.|From Day 1 Up to Day 118|Safety population included all randomized participants who received study drug.||participants|||Number
839216|NCT01316614|Primary|Compare Adequacy of Diagnoses in Passes With and Without a Stylet|"The number of passes was determined by the lesion site and mirrored clinical practice (6 passes for pancreatic/other lesions and 4 passes for lymph nodes). The order of these passes was determined by a preprinted randomization sequence kept in an opaque sealed envelope that was opened by the research coordinator or EUS technologist after enrollment. Each participant had an equal number of passes with stylet and without stylet.
There was no communication between the endosonographer and the cytopathologist regarding the adequacy of the specimen or diagnosis until all passes had been completed. The on-site evaluation of smears was performed to assess cellular adequacy and to assess the need for any additional passes. Additional passes were made at the discretion of the endosonographer as clinically indicated but were not included in the final analysis. The cytology slides were evaluated by 3 experienced cytopathologists who were all blinded to the stylet status of the passes."|At the time of EUS-FNA procedure (Day 1)|100 participants were analyzed. Each participant had an equal number of passes with a stylet and without a stylet. 275 overall passes were performed with a stylet and 275 passes were performed without a stylet. The actual passes are represented in the table.||passes|||Number
839217|NCT01316692|Other Pre-specified|Correlation Between MLN8237-induced Selective Aurora Kinase A Inhibition in Post-treatment Tumor Sites and Clinical Benefit of MLN8237|In stage 2 patients: tumor biopsies are taken before initiation of treatment and on the 8th day of the first cycle of treatment. Post-treatment tumor tissue will be assayed for MLN8237-induced selective Aurora Kinase A inhibition and compared to pre-treatment tumor tissue and the results will be compared and contrasted with patients’ objective clinical responses, as determined by RECIST 1.1, after 18 weeks of treatment|At 24 weeks|unable to collected the required number of tumor samples|||||
839218|NCT01316692|Other Pre-specified|Characterize the de Novo Molecular Mutation Profile of the Melanomas for Association Between Objective Responses to MLN8237 in Patients With Pre-treatment Melanoma Tissue.|In stage 1 patients: tumor biopsies are taken before initiation of treatment and on the 8th day of the first cycle of treatment. Tissue will be assayed for mutations that are neither parent-possessed, nor able to be transmitted, in pre- and in post-treatment tissue and the results will be compared and contrasted with patients’ objective clinical responses, as determined by RECIST 1.1, after 18 weeks of treatment|At 24 weeks|Collected samples of tumors were very limited. It did not allow us to perform the described assays|||||
839219|NCT01316692|Secondary|Number of Grade 3 and 4 Study-related Toxicities|Event are graded using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria with grade 1 = mild, grade 2 = moderate, grade 3 = severe, grade 4 = life-threatening/disabling, 5 = death. toxicities measured on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Treatment continues to disease progression, toxicity, or withdrawal for other reasons.|at 18 weeks|total numbers of adverse events, patients experiencing grade 3 and 4 related to study treatment||toxicities|||Number
839220|NCT01316692|Secondary|Overall Survival|Estimated probable duration of life from on‐study date to date of death from any cause, using the Kaplan‐Meier method with censoring (see analysis population description for additional details) Evaluated every 3 months for 12 months, then every 6 months|On treatment date to last follow-up or death for any reason, up to 5 years|All patients are included in the analysis on intention‐to-treat basis. Analysis is by Kaplan‐Meier method, where death is an event, with censoring for non‐expired patients at greater of off‐study date or last known alive date.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839221|NCT01316692|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) is defined as the duration in time from start of therapy to last follow-up, disease progression, or death for any reason.measured every 6 weeks for 24 weeks, and then every 12 weeks or to last date known alive or death, determined every 6 months for up to 5 years. For those who are alive and without progression, they are censored at the last date known alive.|On treatment date to last follow-up, disease progression or death for any reason, up to 5 years|All patients are included in the analysis on intention‐to treat basis. Analysis is by Kaplan‐Meier method, where death is an event, with censoring for non‐expired patients at greater of off‐study date or last known alive date.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839222|NCT01316692|Primary|Overall Response Rate|If 2 or more of 23 pts show CR/PR in stage 1, then an additional 33 pts will be enrolled in stage 2. If 6 or more of the total 56 pts show CR/PR at 18 weeks, then further clinical trials will be warranted. Per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST)1.1: Complete response (CR): disappearance of all target lesions. Partial response (PR): >=30% decrease in sum of LD of target lesion(s), taking as reference baseline sum LD. Patients are categorized according to the best response achieved prior to occurrence of progressive disease, where best response hierarchy is CR>PR>SD>PD.|At 18 weeks|All patients with Objective Response, defined as a complete or partial response.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839223|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) at Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12|FEV1 and FVC are measures of lung function. FEV1 is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. FVC is defined as the amount of air that can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. Trough FEV1 and FVC were the values obtained approximately 24 hours after the previous morning’s dose of study medication. Baseline is the value recorded pre-dose on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, Baseline (assessment made immediately pre-dose on Day 1), smoking status, center group, month, and month by Baseline and month by treatment interactions.|Baseline; Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12|ITT Population. The overall number of participants reflects all participants who provided at least one post-treatment assessment. Participants who provided data the specified time points are represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839224|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Rescue-free Days Over the Course of the 52-week Treatment Period|Rescue-free days are defined as days on which albuterol/salbutamol and/or ipratropium bromide was not used. Baseline is the percentage during the week prior to Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the mean percentage of rescue-free days over Weeks 1-52 minus the mean percentage of rescue-free days at Baseline.|From the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|ITT Population. Only those participants who had rescue data available on at least 50% of the days in the 52-week treatment period were included in the summary.||Percentage of rescue-free days||Standard Deviation|Mean
839226|NCT01316887|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Change From Screening to Any Time Post-Baseline in Holter ECG Interpretation|"Twenty-four hour Holter monitor (12-lead) evaluations were obtained. Holter Baseline values were those recorded at Screening. An any time post-Baseline Holter evaluation was derived as the worst evaluation recorded at any scheduled, unscheduled, or early withdrawal visit made after the start of study treatment. Change from Screening was calculated as the post-Screening value minus the Screening value. The order of severity for change from Screening Holter evaluation from worst to best is: clinically significant change: unfavorable; no change or insignificant change; clinically significant change: favorable, unable to compare, based on the assessment of the independent cardiologists."|Screening; from the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|ITT Population. Only those participants providing at least one post-Baseline interpretation were summarized.||Participants|||Number
839227|NCT01316887|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated ECG Result Interpretations at Any Time Post-Baseline|Post-Baseline visits include scheduled, unscheduled, and Early Withdrawal visits. Only the worst-case interpretation was counted for each participant. Clinical significance and abnormal/normal findings are based on the assessment of the independent cardiologists.|From the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|ITT Population||participants|||Number
839228|NCT01316887|Secondary|Maximum Change From Baseline in the ECG Parameter of Heart Rate Over the Course of the 52-week Treatment Period|12-lead ECG measurements were obtained. Baseline is defined as the most recent recorded value before dosing on Day 1. The maximum post-Baseline value for heart rate was derived using any scheduled, unscheduled, or early withdrawal visit made after the start of study treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; from the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|ITT Population||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
839229|NCT01316887|Secondary|Maximum Change From Baseline in the Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters of QT Interval Corrected for Heart Rate by Bazett’s Formula (QTcB), QT Interval Corrected for Heart Rate by Fridericia’s Formula (QTcF), and PR Interval Over the Course of the 52-week|12-lead ECG measurements were obtained. Baseline is defined as the most recent recorded value before dosing on Day 1. The maximum post-Baseline values for QTcF, QTcB, and PR interval were derived using any scheduled, unscheduled, or early withdrawal visit made after the start of study treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; from the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|ITT Population||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
839230|NCT01316887|Secondary|Maximum Change From Baseline in Pulse Rate Over the Course of the 52-week Treatment Period|Baseline is defined as the most recent recorded value before dosing on Day 1. The maximum post-Baseline value for pulse rate was derived using any scheduled, unscheduled, or early withdrawal visit made after the start of study treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; from the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|ITT Population||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
839231|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Maximum Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Change From Baseline to Minimum Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) Over the Course of the 52-week Treatment Period|Baseline is defined as the most recent recorded value before dosing on Day 1. The maximum post-Baseline value for SBP and the minimum post-Basline value for DBP were derived using any scheduled, unscheduled, or early withdrawal visit made after the start of study treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; from the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|ITT Population||Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839232|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hematocrit at Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Blood samples were collected for the measurement of hematocrit at Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The value defined as the Baseline value is the most recent value collected prior to the start of treatment. For most participants, the Baseline value is the value collected at the Screening visit; however, for some participants, the Baseline value may have been collected at an unscheduled visit."|Baseline; Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were summarized (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been summarized at different time points, so the overall number of participants summarized reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Proportion of red blood cells in blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
839233|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Eosinophil Count, Platelet Count, and White Blood Cell (WBC) Count at Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Blood samples were collected for the measurement of eosinophils, platelets, and WBC count at Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The value defined as the Baseline value is the most recent value collected prior to the start of treatment. For most participants, the Baseline value is the value collected at the Screening visit; however, for some participants, the Baseline value may have been collected at an unscheduled visit."|Baseline; Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were summarized (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been summarized for different parameters/at different time points, so the overall number of participants summarized reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||10^9 cells per liter (GI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839234|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, and Segmented Neutrophils in Blood at Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Blood samples were collected for the measurement of the percentage of basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, and segmented neutrophils at Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The value defined as the Baseline value is the most recent value collected prior to the start of treatment. For most participants, the Baseline value is the value collected at the Screening visit; however, for some participants, the Baseline value may have been collected at an unscheduled visit."|Baseline; Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were summarized (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been summarized for different parameters/at different time points, so the overall number of participants summarized reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Percentage in blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
839327|NCT01317797|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Pulmonary Function Tests|Pulmonary function was determined by forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and peak flow.|From Day 1 Up to Day 118|Safety population included all randomized participants who received study drug.||participants|||Number
839235|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine, Direct Bilirubin, Indirect Bilirubin, Total Bilirubin, and Uric Acid at Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Blood samples were collected for the measurement of creatinine, direct bilirubin, indirect bilirubin, total bilirubin, and uric acid at Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The value defined as the Baseline value is the most recent value collected prior to the start of treatment. For most participants, the Baseline value is the value collected at the Screening visit; however, for some participants, the Baseline value may have been collected at an unscheduled visit."|Baseline; Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were summarized (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been summarized for different parameters/at different time points, so the overall number of participants summarized reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Micromoles per liter (µmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839236|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Calcium, Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Content/Bicarbonate, Chloride, Glucose, Inorganic Phosphorus (IP), Potassium, Sodium, and Urea/Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) at Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Blood samples were collected for the measurement of calcium, CO2 content/bicarbonate, chloride, glucose, IP, potassium, sodium, and urea/BUN at Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The value defined as the Baseline value is the most recent value collected prior to the start of treatment. For most participants, the Baseline value is the value collected at the Screening visit; however, for some participants, the Baseline value may have been collected at an unscheduled visit."|Baseline; Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were summarized (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been summarized for different parameters/at different time points, so the overall number of participants summarized reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839237|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Albumin, Total Protein, and Hemoglobin at Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Blood samples were collected for the measurement of albumin, total protein, and hemoglobin at Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The value defined as the Baseline value is the most recent value collected prior to the start of treatment. For most participants, the Baseline value is the value collected at the Screening visit; however, for some participants, the Baseline value may have been collected at an unscheduled visit."|Baseline; Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were summarized (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been summarized for different parameters/at different time points, so the overall number of participants summarized reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||Grams per liter (G/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839238|NCT01316887|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT), Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP), Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST), Creatine Kinase (CK), and Gamma Glutamyl Transferase (GGT) at Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|"Blood samples were collected for the measurement of ALT, ALP, AST, CK, and GGT at Baseline and Months 3, 6, 9, and 12. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The value defined as the Baseline value is the most recent value collected prior to the start of treatment. For most participants, the Baseline value is the value collected at the Screening visit; however, for some participants, the Baseline value may have been collected at an unscheduled visit."|Baseline; Months 3, 6, 9, and 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were summarized (represented by n=X, X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been summarized for different parameters/at different time points, so the overall number of participants summarized reflects everyone in the ITT Population.||International units per liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839239|NCT01316887|Secondary|Time to the First On-treatment COPD Exacerbation|An on-treatment COPD exacerbation is defined as worsening symptoms of COPD requiring a systemic corticosteroid, an antibiotic, and/or hospitalization at any time during the 52-week Treatment Period. The time to the first on-treatment exacerbation was calculated as the exacerbation onset date of the first on-treatment exacerbation minus the date of the start of treatment + 1. The median time to the first on-treatment exacerbation was derived from the Kaplan-Meier analysis. A participant who did not experience an exacerbation prior to completing the study or withdrawal is considered censored; a time to first COPD exacerbation cannot be calculated for these participants.|From the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|ITT Population||Days||Full Range|Median
839240|NCT01316887|Secondary|Number of Participants With at Least One Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbation Over the Course of the 52-week Treatment Period|A COPD exacerbation is defined as worsening symptoms of COPD requiring a systemic corticosteroid, an antibiotic, and/or hospitalization.|From the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
839241|NCT01316887|Primary|Number of Participants With Any On-treatment Adverse Event (AE) or Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury with hyperbilirubinaemia. Medical or scientific judgment was to have been exercised in other important medical events. AEs with an onset on or after the date of the first dose of study drug and up to 1 day after the date of the last recorded dose of study drug were considered to be on-treatment AEs, Refer to the general AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs and SAEs.|From the start of study drug up to 52 weeks|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of randomized study drug||Participants|||Number
839265|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Vital Sign Systolic Blood Pressure Systolic (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) Upto Week 56|Vital sign assessments included SBP and DBP collected in supine position following 5 minutes of rest. Assessments were carried out at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, 52 and Week 56. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, 52, 56|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Millimeters of mercury||Standard Deviation|Mean
839242|NCT01316900|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline (BL) in the Mean Shortness of Breath With Daily Activities (SOBDA) Score for Week 24|The newly developed SOBDA questionnaire assesses dyspnea or shortness of breath (SOB) with daily activities. The SOBDA questionnaire is made up of 13 items completed by the participant (par.) each evening prior to bedtime, when the par. is instructed to reflect on the current day’s activities. The daily score is computed as the mean of the scores on the 13 items (>=7 items must have non-missing responses for this to be calculated). The par. is assigned a weekly mean SOBDA score ranging from 1 to 4 (greater scores indicate more severe breathlessness with daily activities) based on the mean of 7 days of data (>=4 of 7 days must be completed for a weekly mean to be calculated). Change from BL is the mean weekly SOBDA score minus BL. Analysis was performed using MMRM with covariates of treatment, BL (mean score in the week prior to treatment), smoking status, center group, week, week by BL and week by treatment interactions. This MMRM analysis only included Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population excluding participants from Investigator 040688. Participants analyzed are those with data available at the presented time point; but, all participants without missing covariate information and with >=1 post-Baseline measurement were included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839243|NCT01316900|Secondary|Change From Baseline (BL) in Weighted Mean (WM) 0-6 Hour FEV1 Obtained Post-dose at Day 168|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. The WM FEV1 was derived by calculating the area under the FEV1/time curve (AUC) using the trapezoidal rule, and then dividing the value by the time interval over which the AUC was calculated. The WM was calculated at Days 1, 84, and Day 168 using the 0-6-hour post-dose FEV1 measurements collected on that day, which included pre-dose (Day 1: 30 minutes [min] and 5 min prior to dosing; other serial visits: 23 and 24 hours after the previous morning dose) and post-dose at 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3 hours, and 6 hours. Change from BL at a particular visit was calculated as WM at that visit minus BL. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, BL (mean of the two assessments made 30 minutes and 5 minutes pre-dose on Day 1), smoking status, center group, day, and day by BL and day by treatment interactions.|Baseline and Day 168|ITT Population excluding participants from Investigator 040688. Par. analyzed are those with data available at the presented time point; but, all par. without missing covariate information and with >=1 post-Baseline measurement were included in the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839244|NCT01316900|Primary|Change From Baseline (BL) in Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) on Day 169 (Week 24)|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry on Days 2, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, and 169. Baseline is defined as the mean of the assessments made 30 minutes pre-dose and 5 minutes pre-dose on Treatment Day 1. Trough FEV1 is defined as the mean of the FEV1 values obtained at 23 and 24 hours after the previous morning's dosing (ie., trough FEV1 on Day 169 is the mean of the FEV1 values obtained 23 and 24 hours after the morning dosing on Day 168). Change from Baseline at a particular visit was calculated as the trough FEV1 at that visit minus Baseline. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, Baseline , smoking status, center group, day, and day by Baseline and day by treatment interactions. ITT=Intent-to-Treat; par.=participants. .|Baseline and Day 169|ITT Population excluding par. from Investigator 040688: all randomized par. who received >=1 dose of study drug, except for those from Investigator 040688. Par. analyzed are those with data available at the presented time point; but, all par. without missing covariate information and with >=1 post-BL measurement were included in the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839245|NCT01316913|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline (BL) in the Mean Shortness of Breath With Daily Activities (SOBDA) Score for Week 24|The newly developed SOBDA questionnaire assesses dyspnea or shortness of breath (SOB) with daily activities. The SOBDA questionnaire is made up of 13 items completed by the participant (par.) each evening prior to bedtime, when the par. is instructed to reflect on the current day’s activities. The daily score is computed as the mean of the scores on the 13 items (>=7 items must have non-missing responses for this to be calculated). The par. is assigned a weekly mean SOBDA score ranging from 1 to 4 (greater scores indicate more severe breathlessness with daily activities) based on the mean of 7 days of data (>=4 of 7 days must be completed for a weekly mean to be calculated). Change from BL is the mean weekly SOBDA score minus BL. Analysis was performed using MMRM with covariates of treatment, BL (mean score in the week prior to treatment), smoking status, center group, week, week by BL and week by treatment interactions. This MMRM analysis only included Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT Population. Participants analyzed are those with data available at the presented time point; but, all participants without missing covariate information and with >=1 post-Baseline measurement were included in the analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839246|NCT01316913|Secondary|Change From Baseline (BL) in Weighted Mean (WM) 0-6 Hour FEV1 Obtained Post-dose at Day 168|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. The WM FEV1 was derived by calculating the area under the FEV1/time curve (AUC) using the trapezoidal rule, and then dividing the value by the time interval over which the AUC was calculated. The WM was calculated at Days 1, 84, and Day 168 using the 0-6-hour post-dose FEV1 measurements collected on that day, which included pre-dose (Day 1: 30 minutes [min] and 5 min prior to dosing; other serial visits: 23 and 24 hours after the previous morning dose) and post-dose at 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3 hours, and 6 hours. Change from BL at a particular visit was calculated as WM at that visit minus BL. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, BL (mean of the two assessments made 30 minutes and 5 minutes pre-dose on Day 1), smoking status, center group, day, and day by BL and day by treatment interactions.|Baseline and Day 168|ITT Population. Par. analyzed are those with data available at the presented time point; but, all par. without missing covariate information and with >=1 post-Baseline measurement were included in the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839311|NCT01317667|Secondary|Over Response Rates and Comparisons for ELISA and TNA Titers|Overall response is defined as a subject having a response at any time after vaccination. A response is defined as subjects who developed total ELISA IgG titers (≥ 1:500) and TNA anti-ricin toxin-neutralizing antibody titers (≥ 1:50) at each scheduled time point for which blood samples were taken for each group and over the entire study period to study completion.|Day 7, 14, 28, 35, 42, 56, 63, 70, 84, month 6, 9, and 12|Per-protocol population. Only observations or specimens collected according to the protocol were included in the immunogenicity analyses.||participants|||Number
839247|NCT01316913|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinic Visit Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at Day 169|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry on Days 2, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, and 169. Baseline is defined as the mean of the assessments made 30 minutes pre-dose and 5 minutes pre-dose on Treatment Day 1. Trough FEV1 is defined as the mean of the FEV1 values obtained at 23 and 24 hours after the previous morning's dosing (i.e., trough FEV1 on Day 169 is the mean of the FEV1 values obtained 23 and 24 hours after the morning dosing on Day 168). Change from Baseline at a particular visit was calculated as the trough FEV1 at that visit minus Baseline. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, Baseline, smoking status, center group, day, and day by Baseline and day by treatment interactions. ITT=Intent-to-Treat.|Baseline and Day 169|ITT Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of randomized study drug in the Treatment Period. Participants analyzed are those with data available at the presented time point; but, all participants without missing covariate information and with >=1 post-Baseline measurement were included in the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839248|NCT01316926|Primary|Cmax_steady-state|Cmax_steady-state (ss) is defined as the maximum or “peak” concentration of a drug observed after its administration, in steady-state. Cmax_ss is one of the parameters of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the total amount of drug absorbed.|Days 14 to 17 (Period 1) and Days 23 to 24 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
839249|NCT01316926|Primary|Cmin_steady-state|Cmin_steady-state (ss) is defined as the minimum concentration of a drug observed after its administration in steady-state. Cmin_ss is one of the parameters of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, for studies employing multiple doses.|Days 14 to 17 (Period 1) and Days 23 to 24 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
839250|NCT01316926|Primary|Area Under the Curve_steady-state|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC_steady-state (ss) is the area under the curve during the steady-state period. The AUC_ss is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption. ng, nanogram; h, hour; ml, milliliter. ng.h/ml, nanograms per hour per milliliter.|Days 14 to 17 (Period 1) and Days 23 to 24 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng/h/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
839251|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Faecal Calprotectin at Weeks 28 and 52|Stool sample for faecal calprotectin were to be collected at Weeks 28 and 52 visit if applicable. Data for Change from baseline in faecal calprotectin at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected following early termination of this study. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 28 and 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Change from Baseline in faecal calprotectin at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected.|||||
839252|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in C Reactive Protein (CRP) at Weeks 28 and 52|C-reactive protein (CRP) at was to be assessed at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, 52 visit if applicable. Data for Change from Baseline in C reactive protein (CRP) at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected following early termination of this study. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0 and Weeks 28 and 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Change from Baseline in C reactive protein (CRP) at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected.|||||
839253|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health-related Resource Utilization at Weeks 28 and 52|Healthcare related resource utilization was to include: Hospitalizations (all cause and Crohn’s disease related), Length of stay, Surgical procedures (all cause and Crohn’s disease related), Outpatient visits (all cause and Crohn’s disease related ). The frequency of hospitalizations, surgical procedures and hospital out-patient visits were to be recorded at Weeks 28 and 52. The number and percentage of participants reporting all cause and Crohn’s disease -related hospitalizations, surgeries, and hospital out-patient visits were to be summarized and compared between each GSK1605786A dose group and placebo using Fisher’s exact test. Data for Change from Baseline in health-related resource utilization at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected following early termination of this study. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 28 and 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Change from Baseline in health-related resource utilization at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected.|||||
839254|NCT01316939|Secondary|Receipt of Disability Benefits at Weeks 28 and 52|Receipt of disability benefits (Yes/No) was to be recorded at Weeks 0, 28 and 52 and Early Withdrawal visit if applicable. Change from baseline in receipt of disability benefits was to be compared between participants in remission versus participants not in remission using a Wilcoxon rank sum test. Data for Receipt of disability benefits at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected following early termination of this study.|Weeks 28 and 52|ITT population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Receipt of disability benefits at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected.|||||
839255|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Work Productivity & Activity Impairment – Crohn’s Disease (WPAI-CD) at Weeks 28 and 52|WPAI measures the effect of your CD on your ability to work and perform regular activities. 6-items assess impairment in work productivity and daily activity during the 7 days before the assessment. It measures the percentage of overall impairment in work productivity and daily activity due to CD. A WPAI score of 0% = no impairment and a score of 100% = total loss of work productivity or activity. An absolute change in WPAI score of 7% is considered the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Data for change from Baseline in WPAI-CD at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected following early termination of this study. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 28 and 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Change from Baseline in Work productivity & activity impairment – Crohn’s disease (WPAI-CD) at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected.|||||
839312|NCT01317667|Primary|Number of Vaccinated Subjects Any Averse Events and by Location and Severity||Days 1, 3, 7, 14, and 28 after each vaccination and at 6 and 9 months|Safety population: any subject receiving a vaccination||participants|||Number
839256|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life (EuroQol ) Five Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D) at Weeks 28 and 52|EQ-5D self-reported questionnaire is used to measure health-related quality of life by measuring 5 dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The EQ-5D questionnaire includes a visual analog scale (VAS) which records participants self-rated health status on a graduated (0–100) scale with higher scores indicating higher Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). Data for Change from Baseline in EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected following early termination of this study. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 28 and 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Change from Baseline in European Quality of Life (EuroQol ) five dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected.|||||
839257|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form – 36 Version 2 (SF-36 v2) at Weeks 28 and 52|The SF-36v2 health survey is a self-administered, generic, 36-item questionnaire designed to measure 8 domains of functional health status and well-being: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health perceptions, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Each domain is scored from 0 (poorer health) to 100 (better health). SF-36 v2 items are scored such that a higher score indicates a better health state and better functioning. Data for change from Baseline in SF-36 v2 at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected following early termination of this study. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 28 and 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for change from Baseline in SF-36 v2 at Weeks 28 and 52 was not collected.|||||
839258|NCT01316939|Secondary|Number of Participants With 12 Lead Electocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities at Week 28 and 52|A 12 lead ECG was collected at Weeks 28 and 52. ECG abnormalities were characterized as abnormal-not clinically significant (A-NCS) and abnormal-clinically significant (A-CS). A-NCS data for Week 28 and 52 have been presented.|Week 28 and 52|Safety population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
839259|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Liver Function Test Parameter Alanine Amino Transferase, Aspartate Amino Transferase, Alkaline Phosphatase and Gamma Glutamyl Transferase at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52 and 56|Liver function test parameters included alanine amino transferase, aspartate amino transferase, alkaline phosphatase and gamma glutamyl transferase. Assessments were carried out at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52 and 56. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52 and 56|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||units per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
839260|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Liver Function Test Parameter Albumin at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52 and 56|Liver function test parameter included albumin. Assessments were carried out at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52 and 56.Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52 and 56|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||grams per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
839261|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Liver Function Test Parameter Total Bilirubin at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 and 56.|Liver function test parameter included total bilirubin. Assessments were carried out at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 and 56. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 and 56.|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed||micromoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
839262|NCT01316939|Secondary|Number of Participants With Shift From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters|Clinical chemistry parameters included total protein, phosphorous, albumin, sodium, potassium, chloride, calcium, glucose, gamma glutamyl transferase, total bilirubin, direct bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, alanine amino transferase, aspartate amino transferase, blood urea nitrogen (BUN)/Urea, creatinine, uric acid, lactate dehydrogenase, bicarbonate, cholesterol and creatinine kinase. Assessments were carried out at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, 52 and 56. The consolidated data for number of participants with shift from Baseline (change from Baseline) in clinical chemistry parameters characterized as high and low have been presented.|Upto Week 56|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
839263|NCT01316939|Secondary|Number of Participants With Shift From Baseline in Hematology Parameters|Hematology parameters included platelets, neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, basophils, hematocrit, red blood cell count, hemoglobin, white blood cell count and segmented neutrophils . Assessments were carried out at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44 and 52 and 56. The consolidated data for number of participants with shift from Baseline (change from Baseline) in hematology parameters characterized as high and low have been presented.|Upto Week 56|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
839264|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Vital Sign Heart Rate Upto Week 56|Vital sign assessment included heart rate collected in supine position following 5 minutes of rest. Assessments were carried out at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, 52 and 56. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, 52 and 56|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
839370|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 28).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 28 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 28.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839266|NCT01316939|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the definition above, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury.|Upto 56 weeks|The Safety Population comprised of all participants in the ITT population except those who did not take at least one dose of investigational product.||Participants|||Count of Participants
839267|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) Total Score at Week 52|The IBDQ consists of a self-administered 32-item questionnaire that evaluates quality of life across 4 dimensional scores: Bowel, Systemic, Social and Emotional. The IBDQ questionnaire was to be completed by each participant at baseline and at Weeks 28, and 52. The response to each question can range from 1 to 7, with 1 indicating severe problem and 7 indicating normal health. The total IBDQ is computed as the sum of the responses to the individual IBDQ questions. The total score can range between 32 to 224 with higher scores indicating a better quality of life. The limited data resulting from early termination of Study CCX114157 did not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the efficacy of GSK1605786A in the maintenance of clinical remission in participants with Crohn’s disease. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Change from Baseline in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) total score at Week 52 was not collected.|||||
839268|NCT01316939|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CDAI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52|The CDAI score is used to quantify the symptoms of participants with Crohn's Disease. A score of 150 or below indicates remission and a score above 450 indicates extremely severe disease. A decrease in CDAI over time indicates improvement in disease activity. CDAI scores and changes in CDAI scores during the 52-week treatment period were to be summarized by treatment group at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52. The limited data resulting from early termination of Study CCX114157 did not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the efficacy of GSK1605786A in the maintenance of clinical remission in participants with Crohn’s disease. Baseline was defined as value at Week 0. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-randomization value at the time of assessment.|Baseline (Week 0) and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Change from Baseline in CDAI score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52 was not collected.|||||
839269|NCT01316939|Secondary|Time to Induction of Clinical Remission in Participants Who Had Achieved Clinical Response During Induction Therapy But Were Not in Clinical Remission at Baseline|The duration of time participants maintained clinical remission during the 52-week treatment period was to be defined as the time between Week 0 and the first visit where remission was not observed in those participants in remission at baseline. These time periods were to be summarized by treatment group using quartiles and their corresponding confidence intervals. Comparisons between each GSK1605786A dose group and placebo were to be made using log-rank tests. The limited data resulting from early termination of Study CCX114157 did not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the efficacy of GSK1605786A in the maintenance of clinical remission in participants with Crohn’s disease.|Upto Week 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Time to induction of clinical remission in participants who had achieved clinical response during induction therapy but were not in clinical remission at Baseline was not collected.|||||
839270|NCT01316939|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Clinical Response (CDAI Decrease >=100 Points) at Both Weeks 28 and 52 of the 52-week Treatment Period|Clinical response is defined as a reduction from the induction study baseline CDAI score of >=100 points. The percentage of participants with a clinical response at both Weeks 28 and 52 of the 52-week maintenance treatment period in the ITT population using the no effect imputation for missing data were to be compared between each GSK1605786A dose group and placebo using Fisher’s exact test. Participants with missing CDAI scores were to be considered non-responders according to the missing=no effect imputation. The limited data resulting from early termination of Study CCX114157 did not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the efficacy of GSK1605786A in the maintenance of clinical remission in participants with Crohn’s disease.|Week 28 and 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Percentage of participants with a clinical response (CDAI decrease >=100 points) at both Weeks 28 and 52 of the 52-week treatment period was not collected.|||||
839271|NCT01316939|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission at Week 52|The limited data resulting from early termination of Study CCX114157 did not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the efficacy of GSK1605786A in the maintenance of clinical remission in participants with Crohn’s disease.|Week 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Percentage of participants in clinical remission at Week 52 was not collected.|||||
839272|NCT01316939|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission at All Visits (Continuous Clinical Remission) During the 52-week Treatment Period Among Participants in Clinical Remission at Baseline|The percentage of participants with clinical remission at all visits during the 52-week treatment period were to be summarized by treatment group for the subset of participants in remission at baseline, using the no effect imputation for missing data. Participants with missing CDAI scores were to be considered not to be in remission according to the missing=no effect imputation. Comparisons between each GSK1605786A dose group and placebo were to be made using Fisher’s exact test.The limited data resulting from early termination of Study CCX114157 did not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the efficacy of GSK1605786A in the maintenance of clinical remission in participants with Crohn’s disease.|Upto Week 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Percentage of participants in clinical remission at all visits (continuous clinical remission) during the 52-week treatment period among participants in clinical remission at Baseline was not collected.|||||
839273|NCT01316939|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission at Both Weeks 28 and 52 of the 52-week Treatment Period Among Those Participants Who Were in Clinical Remission at Baseline|Clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score <150 points. Among participants in remission at baseline, the percentage of participants with clinical remission at both Weeks 28 and 52 of the treatment period using the no effect imputation for missing data were to be compared between each GSK1605786A dose group and placebo using Fisher’s exact test. Participants with missing CDAI scores were to be considered not to be in remission according to the missing=no effect imputation. The limited data resulting from early termination of Study CCX114157 did not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the efficacy of GSK1605786A in the maintenance of clinical remission in participants with Crohn’s disease.|Week 28 and 52|ITT Population. Following early termination of study CCX114157 data for Percentage of participants in clinical remission at both Weeks 28 and 52 of the 52-week treatment period among those participants who were in clinical remission at Baseline was not collected.|||||
839274|NCT01316939|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission (CDAI Score <150 Points) and Not Taking Corticosteroids at Both Weeks 28 and 52 of the 52-week Treatment Period|Clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score <150 points. A participant was considered to be not taking corticosteroids at Weeks 28 and 52 if the participant had not taken a corticosteroid for the 8 days prior to and the day of the CDAI assessment for each of Weeks 28 and 52. In the missing=no effect imputation, participants with missing CDAI scores was considered not to be in clinical remission. Data for percentage of participants in clinical remission and not taking corticosteroids at both Weeks 28 and 52 of the 52-week treatment period have been presented.|Week 28 and 52|ITT Population.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
839275|NCT01316939|Primary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission (Crohn’s Disease Activity Index , CDAI Score <150 Points) at Both Weeks 28 and 52 of the 52-week Treatment Period|Clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score <150 points. In the missing=no effect imputation, participants with missing CDAI scores was considered not to be in clinical remission. Data for percentage of participants in at both Weeks 28 and 52 of the 52-week treatment period have been presented.|Week 28 and 52|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population comprised of all participants randomized to treatment who achieved a clinical response (CDAI decrease from baseline of >=100 points) or achieved clinical remission (CDAI <150 points).||Percentage of Participants|||Number
839276|NCT01317004|Secondary|Physician-reported Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I)|The CGI-I is a rating scale allowing a physician-reported global evaluation of the subject's improvement over time. The Investigator assessed the subject's clinical change relative to the symptoms at baseline on the CGI-I, a seven-point scale, with rating as follows: 1=Very much improved, 2=Much improved, 3=Minimally improved, 4=No change, 5=Minimally worse, 6=Much worse, 7=Very much worse. A lower score and a negative change from baseline indicate improvement.|6 months|Participants from the safety set, who had values at month 6, were included in the analysis. The safety set included randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839277|NCT01317004|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Health Related Quality of Life (QOL)|The SF-36v2 is a validated health-related quality of life instrument used in numerous disease states, including MS. It is a self-administered survey that measures 8 domains of health including: physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, pain, general health, energy/fatigue, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems and emotional well-being. Additionally, two summary scale scores can be calculated: the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and the Mental Component Summary (MCS). If half or more questions within a domain were answered, then a score was calculated for that domain. Otherwise, the patient score for that domain was set to missing. If the patient was missing any 1 of the 8 scale scores, then the physical and mental component scores were set to missing. An algorithm was used to create a score from 0 to 100 for each domain score and component score. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|6 months|Participants from the safety set, who had values at both baseline and month 6, were included in the analysis. The safety set included randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839278|NCT01317004|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Depression|The Beck Depression Inventory Fast Screen (BDI-FS) is a brief, multiple choice, self reported inventory designed to evaluate depression in patients with medical illness. The BDI-FS score was calculated summing the 7 items of the questionnaire. Each item ranged from 0 (not present) to 3 (severe). The total score ranges from 0-3 (minimal depression), 4-8 (mild depression), 9-12 (moderate depression) and 13-21 (severe depression). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|6 months|Participants from the safety set, who had values at both baseline and month 6, were included in the analysis. The safety set included randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839279|NCT01317004|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient–Reported Effectiveness and Convenience|The Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-9) is a psychometric measure of a patient's satisfaction with medication. It consists of 3 subscales: effectiveness, convenience and global satisfaction. The scores were computed by adding items for each domain, i.e. 1 to 3 for effectiveness, 4 - 6 for convenience and 7 to 9 for global satisfaction. The lowest possible score (1 for each item and 3 for all 3 subscales) was subtracted from the composite score and divided by the greatest possible score range. The greatest range was (7-1) X 3 items = 18 for the effectiveness and convenience, and (5-1) x 3 items = 12 for global satisfaction. This provided a transformed score between 0 and 1 that was then multiplied by 100. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|6 months|Participants from the safety set, who had values at both baseline and month 6, were included in the analysis. The safety set included randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839280|NCT01317004|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Fatigue|The fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) is a 9-item scale used to assess fatigue. The FSS score was calculated summing the 9 items of the questionnaire and dividing by the number of non-missing items (each item is based on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree)). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|6 months|Participants from the safety set, who had values at both baseline and month 6, were included in the analysis. The safety set included randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839281|NCT01317004|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Activities of Daily Living (ADL)|The PRIMUS activity measure is a 15-item assessment used to evaluate patient-reported activities of daily living. The PRIMUS activities score was calculated summing the 15 items, after recoding the responses from 1 - 3 to 0 - 2. Therefore, the total score ranged from 0 - 3-, where high scores were indicative of greater function limitation. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|baseline, 6 months|Participants from the safety set, who had values at both baseline and month 6, were included in the analysis. The safety set included randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839282|NCT01317004|Primary|Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Treatment Satisfaction|The Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-9) is a psychometric measure of a patient's satisfaction with medication. It consists of 3 subscales: effectiveness, convenience and global satisfaction. The scores were computed by adding items for each domain, i.e. 1 to 3 for effectiveness, 4 - 6 for convenience and 7 to 9 for global satisfaction. The lowest possible score (1 for each item and 3 for all 3 subscales) was subtracted from the composite score and divided by the greatest possible score range. The greatest range was (7-1) X 3 items = 18 for the effectiveness and convenience, and (5-1) x 3 items = 12 for global satisfaction. This provided a transformed score between 0 and 1 that was then multiplied by 100. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|baseline, 6 months|Participants from the safety set, who had values at both baseline and month 6, were included in the analysis. The safety set included randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839283|NCT01317160|Secondary|Microdialysis|At 2 weeks postoperatively in-vivo microdialysis will be performed on as described by Greve et al 2012 (DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2012.01475.x). In the microdialysate different substances will be assessed, eg. markers of tendon callus production, procollagen type I (PINP) and type III (PIIINP) N-Terminal propeptide by enzymatic quantification.|2 weeks||||||
839284|NCT01317160|Secondary|Patient-reported Outcome and Physical Activity|The patients’ symptoms and physical activity levels were assessed using four reliable and valid scores; the Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS), Physical Activity scale (PAS), Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and EuroQol Group’s questionnaire (EQ-5D).|One year||||||
839285|NCT01317160|Secondary|Venous Thromboembolic Events (VTE)|"At 6 weeks postoperatively the number of participants with VTE events will be assessed by:
1) DVT detected by compression duplex ultrasound (CDU) , 2) isolated calf muscle vein thrombosis (ICMVT) detected by CDU, 3) symptomatic DVT or ICMVT detected by CDU, 4) symptomatic pulmonary embolism detected by computer tomography."|6 weeks|||participants|||Number
839286|NCT01317160|Secondary|Functional Outcome - Muscular Endurance Tests (Heel-rise)|The functional outcome will be assessed at 52 weeks post-operatively by validated muscular endurance test, i.e. heel rise test.|one year||||||
839287|NCT01317160|Primary|Venous Thromboembolic Events (VTE)|"At 2 weeks postoperatively the number of participants with VTE events will be assessed by:
1) DVT detected by compression duplex ultrasound (CDU) , 2) isolated calf muscle vein thrombosis (ICMVT) detected by CDU, 3) symptomatic DVT or ICMVT detected by CDU, 4) symptomatic pulmonary embolism detected by computer tomography."|2 weeks|Non-compliance was defined by exposure to less than ten hours of IPC. Therefore, two patients were withdrawn on this basis and the treatment group comprised 67 patients at final analysis.||participants|||Number
839288|NCT01317615|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from date of start of treatment to date of death due to any cause.|12 months|All participants were included in the analysis.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839289|NCT01317615|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from the date of start of treatment to date of event defined as the first documented progression or death due to any cause.|6 months|All participants were included in the analysis.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839290|NCT01317615|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control Rate (DCR)|DCR was defined as is the percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR or SD. Complete response (CR) is disappearance of all lesions (i.e. all evidence of disease, not just the target lesions) determined by 2 observations not less than 4 weeks apart; Partial response (PR) is > 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameters of target lesions compared to baseline, with response or stable disease observed in non-target lesions, and no new lesions; Stable disease (SD) is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for response or sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease in target lesions, with response or stable disease observed in non-target lesions, and no new lesions; and Progressive disease (PD is: > 20% increase in the sum of longest diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum longest diameter recorded. In addition, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5mm.|3 months|All participants were included in the analysis.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839291|NCT01317615|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Response Rate (ORR)|ORR was defined as is the proportion of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR. CR is disappearance of all lesions (i.e. all evidence of disease, not just the target lesions) determined by 2 observations not less than 4 weeks apart; Partial response. PR is > 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameters of target lesions compared to baseline, with response or stable disease observed in non-target lesions, and no new lesions.|3 months|All participants were included in the analysis.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839292|NCT01317615|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Progression-free|Tumors were assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid tumors (RECIST) to determine progression-free status. Complete response (CR) is disappearance of all lesions (i.e. all evidence of disease, not just the target lesions) determined by 2 observations not less than 4 weeks apart; Partial response (PR) is > 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameters of target lesions compared to baseline, with response or stable disease observed in non-target lesions, and no new lesions; Stable disease (SD) is neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for response or sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease in target lesions, with response or stable disease observed in non-target lesions, and no new lesions; and Progressive disease (PD is: > 20% increase in the sum of longest diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum longest diameter recorded. In addition, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5mm.|6 months|All participants were included in the analysis.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839371|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 24).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 24 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839293|NCT01317615|Primary|Percentage of Participants Progression-free|Tumors were assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid tumors (RECIST) to determine progression-free status. Complete response (CR): disappearance of all lesions (i.e. all evidence of disease, not just the target lesions) determined by 2 observations not less than 4 weeks apart; Partial response (PR): > 30% decrease in the sum of longest diameters of target lesions compared to baseline, with response or stable disease observed in non-target lesions, and no new lesions; Stable disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for response or sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease in target lesions, with response or stable disease observed in non-target lesions, and no new lesions; Progressive disease (PD): > 20% increase in the sum of longest diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum longest diameter recorded. In addition, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5mm.|3 months|All participants were included in the analysis.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839294|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1: Time to Reach the Maximum Observed Concentration (Tmax) of Major Metabolite ORM-15341 at Day 1||1 day|PK population (Day 1)||h||Standard Deviation|Median
839295|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1: Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Major Metabolite ORM-15341 at Steady-state||Day 8 predose 0 h and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 6 and 8 h postdose|PK population (Day 8)||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839296|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1: Area Under the Plasma-Concentration-time Curve (AUCt) of Major Metabolite ORM-15341 at Steady-state|AUC(0-8h)|Day 8 predose 0 h and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 6 and 8 h postdose|PK population (Day 8)||h*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839297|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1: Time to Reach the Maximum Observed Concentration (Tmax) of ODM-201 at Day 1||1 day|PK population (Day 1)||h||Standard Deviation|Median
839298|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1: Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of ODM-201 at Steady-state||Day 8 predose 0 h and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 6 and 8 h postdose|PK population (Day 8)||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839299|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1: Area Under the Plasma-Concentration-time Curve (AUCt) of ODM-201 at Steady-state|AUC(0-8h)|Day 8 predose 0 h and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 6 and 8 h postdose|PK population (Day 8)||h*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839300|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1 and 2: Participants With Stable Bone Disease in Post-CYP17i Group|Number of participants with stable bone disease (no change). Radiographic bone progression was defined by the appearance of two or more new lesions on bone scan|3 months|Evaluable post-CYP17i patients with bone metastasis at baseline||participants|||Number
839301|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1 and 2: Participants With Stable Bone Disease in Post-chemotherapy and CYP17i-naïve Group|Number of participants with stable bone disease (no change). Radiographic bone progression was defined by the appearance of two or more new lesions on bone scan|3 months|Evaluable Post-chemotherapy and CYP17i-naïve patients with bone metastasis at baseline||participants|||Number
839302|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1 and 2: Participants With Stable Bone Disease in Chemotherapy-naïve and CYP17i-naïve Group|Number of participants with stable bone disease (no change). Radiographic bone progression was defined by the appearance of two or more new lesions on bone scan|3 months|Evaluable chemotherapy-naïve and CYP17i-naïve patients with bone metastasis at baseline||participants|||Number
839303|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1 and 2: Participants With RECIST Responses in Soft Tissue in Post-CYP17i Group|Number of participants with overall complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable (SD) soft tissue disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) in chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT or MRI scans.|3 months|Evaluable Post-CYP17i patients||participants|||Number
839304|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1 and 2: Participants With RECIST Response in Soft Tissue in Post-chemotherapy and CYP17i-naive Group|Number of participants with overall complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable (SD) soft tissue disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) in chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT or MRI scans.|3 months|Evaluable Post-chemotherapy and CYP17i-naïve patients||participants|||Number
839305|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1 and 2: Participants With RECIST Response in Soft Tissue in Chemotherapy-naïve and CYP17i-naïve Group|Number of participants with overall complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable (SD) soft tissue disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) in chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT or MRI scans.|3 months|Evaluable Chemotherapy-naïve and CYP17i-naïve patients||participants|||Number
839306|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1 and 2: Participants With Decline of at Least 50% in Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) in Post-CYP17i Group|Number of participants with greater than or equal to 50% decrease in serum PSA from baseline at 12 weeks in group of participants previously treated with CYP17 inhibitor|3 months|Evaluable post-CYP17 inhibitor patients||participants|||Number
839307|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1 and 2: Participants With Decline of at Least 50% in Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) in Post-chemotherapy and CYP17i-naïve Group|Number of participants with greater than or equal to 50% decrease in serum PSA from baseline at 12 weeks in group of participants previously treated with chemotherapy but not CYP17 inhibitor|3 months|Evaluable post-chemotherapy and CYP17i-naïve patients||participants|||Number
839308|NCT01317641|Secondary|Phase 1 and 2: Participants With Decline of at Least 50% in Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) in Chemotherapy-naïve and CYP17i-naïve Group|Number of participants with greater than or equal to 50% decrease in serum PSA from baseline at 12 weeks in group of participants who were naïve to both chemotherapy and CYP17 inhibitor|3 months|Evaluable chemotherapy-naïve and CYP17i-naïve patients||participants|||Number
839309|NCT01317641|Primary|Phase 1: Number of Dose Limiting Toxicities Used to Determine the Maximum Tolerated Dose|The MTD is defined as dose level at which 2 or more out of 6 participants experience a dose limiting toxicity (DLT)|Up to 28 days for each cohort|Safety population included all participants in Phase 1 who received any study drug.||DLTs|||Number
839310|NCT01317641|Primary|Phase 1: Number of Participants Who Experienced Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT)|A DLT was any Grade 3 or more toxicity (by National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [NCI CTCAE version 4.03]) excluding less than Grade 4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia, hematological toxicity lasting less than 7 days, and nausea, vomiting, diarrhea controlled with antiemetic and/or anti-diarrheal treatment.|Up to 28 days for each cohort|Safety population included all participants in Phase 1 who received any study drug.||events|||Number
839372|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 20).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 20 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 20.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839313|NCT01317797|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Score 44-Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS44-ESR)|Ritchie articular index (RAI); a joint count that grades the tenderness of 26 joints on a scale of 0-3); the number of swollen joints from 44 joints (swollen44); ESR in mm/hour after 1 hour and the patient’s global disease activity on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) of 100 mm (0=no disease activity to right end of the line 100=maximum disease activity) were used to calculate DAS44-ESR using the following formula: DAS44-ESR = 0.54*sqrt(RAI) + 0.065*(swollen44) + 0.33*ln(ESR) + 0.0072*VAS. Lower numbers were better. A negative change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline and Days 13,27,43,56,71,99 and EOT Up to Day 118|All randomized participants with data available for analysis.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839314|NCT01317797|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR 20) Response|ACR20 response is defined as a ≥ 20% improvement (reduction) compared with baseline for both total joint count-68 joints (TJC68) and swollen joint count-66 joints (SJC66), as well as for three of the additional five ACR core set variables: Patient’s Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours: using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) left end of the line 0=no pain to right end of the line 100=unbearable pain; Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS where left end of the line 0=no disease activity to right end of the line 100=maximum disease activity; Health Assessment Questionnaire: 20 questions, 8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities, 0=without difficulty to 3=unable to do; and acute-phase reactant Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate.|Baseline and Days 13,27,43,56,71,99 and EOT Up to Day 118|All randomized participants with data available for analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
839315|NCT01317797|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-MT203 Antibodies|Serum samples were tested for the presence of anti-MT203 antibodies by a bridging Electro-chemi-luminescent assay (ECL-assay).|From Day 1 Up to Day 118|Safety population included all randomized participants who received study drug.||participants|||Number
839316|NCT01317797|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MT203/GM-CSF Complexes in Plasma|MT203/GM-CSF complexes were analysed using a procedure that quantified GM-CSF after dissociation from the complex. The determined concentrations corresponded to the amount of total (free and complexed) GM-CSF in the plasma sample. A positive change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline and Days 2, 4, 6, 8 15, 29, 30, 35, 43, 56, 71, 99, EOT Up to Day 118|All randomized participants with data available for analysis.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839317|NCT01317797|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor (GM-CSF) in Plasma|MT203/GM-CSF complexes were analysed using a procedure that quantified GM-CSF after dissociation from the complex. The determined concentrations corresponded to the amount of total (free and complexed) GM-CSF in the plasma sample. A positive change from Baseline indicated improvement.|Baseline and Days 2, 4, 6, 8 15, 29, 30, 35, 43, 56, 71, 99, End of trial (EOT) Up to Day 118|All randomized participants with data available for analysis.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839318|NCT01317797|Secondary|Ctrough: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration Pre-Dose||Days 1, 15 and 29 Pre-dose|PK Analysis set included all 15 participants who were exposed to study drug for whom any PK parameters could be calculated. Method of Dispersion is the 68% range.||μg/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
839319|NCT01317797|Secondary|Terminal Phase Elimination Half-life (T1/2) for MT203|Terminal phase elimination half-life (T1/2) is the time required for half of the drug to be eliminated from the plasma.|Day 29 (Pre-dose and 2 and 6 hours post-dose)|PK Analysis set included all 15 participants who were exposed to study drug for whom any PK parameters could be calculated.||days||Full Range|Mean
839320|NCT01317797|Secondary|AUC(0-tau): Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to Time Tau Over the Dosing Interval for MT203|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve during a dosing interval, where tau is the length of the dosing interval.|Day 29 (Pre-dose and 2 and 6 hours post-dose)|PK Analysis set included all 15 participants who were exposed to study drug for whom any PK parameters could be calculated. Method of Dispersion is the 68% range.||day*μg/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
839321|NCT01317797|Secondary|AUC(0-inf): Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity for MT203|AUC(0-inf) is measure of area under the curve over the dosing interval (tau) (AUC(0-tau]), where tau is the length of the dosing interval in this study).|Day 29 (Pre-dose and 2 and 6 hours post-dose)|PK Analysis set included all 15 participants who were exposed to study drug for whom any PK parameters could be calculated. Method of Dispersion is the 68% range.||day*μg/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
839322|NCT01317797|Secondary|AUC(0-tlqc): Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration for MT203|AUC(0-tlqc) is a measure of total plasma exposure to the drug from Time 0 to Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-tlqc]).|Day 1 and 29 (Pre-dose and 2 and 6 hours post-dose)|PK Analysis set included all 15 participants who were exposed to study drug for whom any PK parameters could be calculated. Method of Dispersion is the 68% range.||day*μg/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
839323|NCT01317797|Secondary|Cmax: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration for MT203|Maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) is the peak plasma concentration of a drug after administration, obtained directly from the plasma concentration-time curve.|Day 1 and 29 (Pre-dose and 2 and 6 hours post-dose)|PK Analysis set included all 15 participants who were exposed to study drug for whom any PK parameters could be calculated. Method of Dispersion is the 68% range.||μg/mL||Full Range|Geometric Mean
839324|NCT01317797|Secondary|Tmax: Time to Reach the Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for MT203|Tmax: Time to reach the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), equal to time (hours) to Cmax|Day 1 and 29 (Pre-dose and 2 and 6 hours post-dose)|||days||Full Range|Median
839325|NCT01317797|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting One or More Treatment Emergent Adverse Events|An Adverse Event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (eg, a clinically significant abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a drug, whether or not it is considered related to the drug. A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) is defined as an adverse event with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug.|From Day 1 Up to Day 118|Safety population included all randomized participants who received study drug.||participants|||Number
839373|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 16).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 6 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 16.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839328|NCT01317797|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Vital Signs|Vital signs included Systolic Blood Pressure (BP), Diastolic BP, body temperature, heart rate. Alert values were: BP systolic > 170 mmHg or < 85 mmHg, BP diastolic > 105 mmHg, Difference BP systolic vs. Baseline (pre-treatment) > 40 mmHg or Pulse rate < 35 bpm or > 120 beats per minute (bpm).|From Day 1 Up to Day 118|Safety population included all randomized participants who received study drug.||participants|||Number
839329|NCT01317797|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings|Alert values for ECG were: Heart rate < 35 bpm or > 120 bpm, QTc acc. to Bazett (absolute value)> 500 ms or QTc acc. to Bazett (increase versus Baseline (pre-treatment).|From Day 1 Up to Day 118|Safety population included all randomized participants who received study drug.||participants|||Number
839330|NCT01317797|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Clinical Laboratory Results|Blood was collected for Haematology, Chemistry and Coagulation. Urine was collected for Urinalysis. Alert values for laboratory results include the following: Aspartate aminotransferase (ASAT), alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), gamma-glutamyl-transpeptidase (GGT), alkaline phosphatase (AP), total bilirubin (TBil): > 3 times upper limit of normal (ULN). Creatinine and Glucose: > 2 times ULN. Potassium > 6.0 or < 3.0 mmol/L. Haemoglobin: Male < 8.0 ;Female < 7.0 g/dL. Erythrocytes :Male < 3.5 x 10^12/L or > 7 x 10^12/L;Female < 3.0 x 10^12/L or > 6.5 x 10^12/L. White Blood Cells (WBC): < 2.8 x10^9/L or > 16.0 x 10^9/L. Eosinophils > 20 % of cells in the WBC differential. Platelet Count < 75 x 10^9/L or 600 x 10^9/L. No alert values were identified for Coagulation or Urinalysis.|From Day 1 Up to Day 118|Safety population included all randomized participants who received study drug.||participants|||Number
839331|NCT01317901|Primary|Response|Response was assessed by the investigator on the basis of clinical, radiological, and pathological (i.e., bone marrow) criteria, using the IWG criteria (Cheson et al 2007). A CR is a complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present before therapy. A PR is at least a 50% decrease in sum of the product of the diameters (SPD) of up to 6 of the largest dominant nodes or nodal masses, no increase should be observed in the size of other nodes, liver or spleen, and no new sites of disease should be observed.|Day 15 and Day 28 of even-numbered cycles|All treated subjects||participants|||Number
839332|NCT01318070|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 12).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 12 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839333|NCT01318070|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Week 12).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at week 12 or final visit and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839334|NCT01318070|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 12 or final visit and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839335|NCT01318070|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 8 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839336|NCT01318070|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 4).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 4 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839337|NCT01318070|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 2).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 2 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 2.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839338|NCT01318070|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 8).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 8 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839339|NCT01318070|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 4).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 4 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839374|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 12 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839340|NCT01318070|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 2).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 2 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 2.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839341|NCT01318083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Week 12).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at week 12 or final visit and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839342|NCT01318083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 12 or final visit and baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839343|NCT01318083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 8 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839344|NCT01318083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 4).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 4 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839345|NCT01318083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 2).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 2 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 2.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839346|NCT01318083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 8).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 8 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839347|NCT01318083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 4).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 4 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839348|NCT01318083|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 2).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 2 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 2.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839349|NCT01318083|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 12).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 12 or final visit and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839350|NCT01318109|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Week 12).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at week 12 or final visit and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839351|NCT01318109|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 12 or final visit and baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839352|NCT01318109|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 8 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839353|NCT01318109|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 4).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 4 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839354|NCT01318109|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Week 2).|The change between the value of fasting plasma glucose collected at week 2 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 2.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839355|NCT01318109|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 8).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 8 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839356|NCT01318109|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 4).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 4 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 4.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839357|NCT01318109|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 2).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 2 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 2.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839358|NCT01318109|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 12).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 12 or final visit and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Analysis based on last observation carried forward, where the last postbaseline double-blind observed value is carried forward and used for all subsequent scheduled time points where data is missing. Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839359|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Final Visit).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at week 52 or end of study and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839360|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Week 52).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at week 52 or final visit and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839361|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Week 24).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at week 24 and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839362|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Week 12).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at week 12 and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839363|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Final Visit).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 52 or final visit and baseline.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839364|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 52).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 52 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839365|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 48).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 48 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 48.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839366|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 44).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 44 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 44.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839367|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 40).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 40 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 40.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839368|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 36).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 36 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 36.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839369|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 32).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 32 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 32.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839376|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Final Visit).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 52 or final visit and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839377|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 52).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 52 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839378|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 48).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 48 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 48.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839379|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 44).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 44 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 44.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839380|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 40).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 40 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 40.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839381|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 36).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 36 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 36.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839382|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 32).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 32 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 32.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839383|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 28).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 28 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 28.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839384|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 24).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 24 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839385|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 20).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 20 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 20.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839386|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 16).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 16 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 16.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839387|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 12).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 12 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839388|NCT01318122|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 8).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 8 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839389|NCT01318122|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events.|Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) are adverse events with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug and within 30 days after receiving the last dose of study drug. A TEAE may also be a pre-treatment adverse event or a concurrent medical condition diagnosed prior to the date of first dose of study drug that increases in severity after the start of dosing.|52 Weeks.|Full Analysis Set was defined as the population of participants randomized in the core phase 2/3 thiazolidine add on study (SYR-322/CCT-004 study; NCT01318070) and received at least 1 dose of the investigational products (SYR-322DB in combination with pioglitazone) for the treatment period.||participants|||Number
839390|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Final Visit).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at final visit and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839391|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Week 52).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at week 52 and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839392|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Week 24).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at week 24 and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839393|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Glucose Measured by the Meal Tolerance Test (Week 12).|The change between the value of blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at week 12 and blood glucose measured by the meal tolerance test collected at baseline. Meal tolerance test measures blood glucose through blood samples drawn before a meal and at 2 hours after the start of the meal.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839394|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Final Visit).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at final visit and baseline.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to Week 52).|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839395|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 52).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 52 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839396|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 48).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 48 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 48.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839397|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 44).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 44 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 44.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839398|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 40).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 40 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 40.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839399|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 36).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 36 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 36.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839400|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 32).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 32 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 32.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839401|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 28).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 28 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 28.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839402|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 24).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 24 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839403|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 20).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 20 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 20.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839404|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 16).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 6 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 16.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839405|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 12).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 12 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839406|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Blood Glucose (Week 8).|The change between the value of fasting blood glucose collected at week 8 and baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839407|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Final Visit).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at final visit and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Final Visit (up to 52).|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839408|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 52).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 52 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 52.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839409|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 48).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 48 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 48.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839410|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 44).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 44 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 44.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839411|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 40).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 40 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 40.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839412|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 36).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 36 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 36.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839413|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 32).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 32 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 32.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839414|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 28).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 28 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 28.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839415|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 24).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 24 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 24.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839416|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 20).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 20 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 20.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839417|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 16).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 16 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 16.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839418|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 12).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 12 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 12.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839419|NCT01318135|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (Week 8).|The change in the value of glycosylated hemoglobin (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound) collected at week 8 and glycosylated hemoglobin collected at baseline.|Baseline and Week 8.|Values are from the Full Analysis Set.||percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839420|NCT01318135|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events.|Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) are defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product reported from first dose of study drug through 30 days after receiving the last dose of study drug. A TEAE may also be a pretreatment adverse event or a concurrent medical condition diagnosed prior to the date of first dose of study drug that increases in severity after the start of dosing.|52 Weeks.|Full Analysis Set was defined as the population of participants randomized in the core phase 2/3 SYR-322/CCT-005 (NCT01318083) or SYR-322/CCT-006 (NCT01318109) add-on studies and received at least 1 dose of the investigational products (SYR-322DB in combination with glimepiride or metformin) for the treatment period were identified for analysis.||participants|||Number
839421|NCT01318278|Secondary|All Cause Mortality||admission to hospital discharge, up to 15 months|||participants|||Number
839422|NCT01318278|Secondary|Neurodevelopmental Outcomes||hospital discharge to follow up at 18-24 months of age||||||
839423|NCT01318278|Secondary|Presence of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia (BPD)|Infants were evaluated for oxygen need at 36 weeks postmenstrual age. If they required supplemental oxygen, they were diagnosed with BPD|36 weeks postmenstrual age|||participants|||Number
839424|NCT01318278|Secondary|Retinopathy of Prematurity Stage 3 or Higher|"All subjects were followed by an ophthalmologist with initial exam at 4-6 weeks of age. The Stages describe the ophthalmoscopic findings at the junction between the vascularized and avascular retina. Each subject is followed until cleared by ophthalmology. For this outcome measure, the most severe stage of disease was used in analysis.
Stage 1 is a faint demarcation line. Stage 2 is an elevated ridge. Stage 3 is extraretinal fibrovascular proliferation (neovascularization). Stage 4 is sub-total retinal detachment. Stage 5 is total retinal detachment. Stages 1 and 2 do not lead to blindness. However, they can progress to the more severe stages."|Until hospital discharge, up to 15 months|||participants|||Number
839425|NCT01318278|Secondary|Grade 3 Intraventricular Hemorrhage or Worse on Head Ultrasound||Until hospital discharge, up to 15 months|||participants|||Number
839426|NCT01318278|Secondary|Presence of Patent Ductus Arteriosus (PDA)||until hospital discharge, up to 12 weeks|||participants|||Number
839427|NCT01318278|Secondary|Ventilator Days||Until hospital discharge, up to 15 months|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839428|NCT01318278|Secondary|Necrotizing Enterocolitis||until hospital discharge, up to 12 weeks|||participants|||Number
839429|NCT01318278|Secondary|Evidence of Ischemic Changes|Physical examinations were done on at least a twice daily basis to evaluate for any ischemic lesions (especially on the limbs) of all subjects. The presence of any lesion considered to be due to ischemia would have been reported in this data.|96 hours or until medication completely stopped|||participants|||Number
839430|NCT01318278|Secondary|Urine Output||96 hours or until hypotension resolved and medication completely stopped|||ml/kg/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
839431|NCT01318278|Secondary|Hyponatremia||96 hours or until medication completely stopped|||participants|||Number
839432|NCT01318278|Secondary|Acid-base Status||96 hours or until hypotension resolved and medication completely stopped|Treatment groups during study drug administration. Comparison group during first 96 hours of life. For all- only arterial gases||pH||Standard Deviation|Mean
839433|NCT01318278|Secondary|Heart Rate Change From Baseline|Heart rate change from baseline during study drug administration|96 hours or until hypotension completely resolved and medications stopped|This outcome is only reportable in the two treatment groups as it evaluates the change in heart rate in those who received study drug. The comparison group infants were not hypotensive within the 24 hours and did not receive study drug, therefore, they are omitted from this outcome measure.||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
839434|NCT01318278|Primary|Number of Subjects in Each Group Who Have Achieved an Optimal Mean Blood Pressure Value at 24 Hours of Life|Optimal mean blood pressure (OMBP) will be defined as either a 10% increase in mean blood pressure value or a 2-3 mmHg rise in mean blood pressure value AND an improvement in tissue perfusion as demonstrated by a resolution in the specified clinical symptom (designated upon enrollment) within 4-6 hours of having reached OMBP|24 hours of life|This outcome is only reportable in the two treatment groups as it evaluates the response to treatment of hypotension in those who received study drug. The comparison group infants were not hypotensive within the 24 hours and did not receive study drug, therefore, they are omitted from this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
839435|NCT01318382|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Residual NMB at Various TOF Ratios (<0.6, ≥ 0.6 to <0.7, ≥ 0.7 to <0.8, ≥0.8 to <0.9) Upon Arrival to the PACU|Neuromuscular functioning was monitored at time of PACU arrival by applying three TOF electrical stimulations to the ulnar nerve and assessing twitch response at the adductor pollicis muscle. T1 and T4 refer to the magnitudes (height) of the first and fourth twitches, respectively, after TOF nerve stimulation. The T4/T1 Ratio (expressed as a decimal of up to 1.0) indicates the extent of recovery from NMB, with a higher ratio indicating greater recovery from NMB.|Up to 2 minutes prior to PACU arrival|The PACU Population was defined as all enrolled participants for whom TOF-Watch SX® measurements were collected and had an evaluable TOF Ratio at time of PACU arrival.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839436|NCT01318382|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Residual NMB at Various TOF Ratios (<0.6, ≥0.6 to <0.7, ≥0.7 to <0.8, ≥0.8 to <0.9) at Tracheal Extubation|Neuromuscular functioning was monitored at time of tracheal extubation by applying three TOF electrical stimulations to the ulnar nerve and assessing twitch response at the adductor pollicis muscle. T1 and T4 refer to the magnitudes (height) of the first and fourth twitches, respectively, after TOF nerve stimulation. The T4/T1 Ratio (expressed as a decimal of up to 1.0) indicates the extent of recovery from NMB, with a higher ratio indicating greater recovery from NMB.|Up to 1 minute prior to tracheal extubation|The Per-Protocol Population was defined as all enrolled participants for whom TOF-Watch SX® measurements were collected and had an evaluable TOF Ratio at time of tracheal extubation.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839437|NCT01318382|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Residual NMB (TOF Ratio <0.9) Upon Arrival to the Post-anesthesia Care Unit (PACU)|Neuromuscular functioning was monitored at time of PACU arrival by applying three TOF electrical stimulations to the ulnar nerve and assessing twitch response at the adductor pollicis muscle. T1 and T4 refer to the magnitudes (height) of the first and fourth twitches, respectively, after TOF nerve stimulation. The T4/T1 Ratio (expressed as a decimal of up to 1.0) indicates the extent of recovery from NMB, with a higher ratio indicating greater recovery from NMB. A T4/T1 Ratio of <0.9 is indicative of residual NMB.|Up to 2 minutes prior to PACU arrival|The PACU Population was defined as all enrolled participants for whom TOF-Watch SX® measurements were collected and had an evaluable TOF Ratio at time of PACU arrival.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839438|NCT01318382|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Residual Neuromuscular Blockade (NMB)(Train of Four [TOF] Ratio <0.9) at Time of Tracheal Extubation|Neuromuscular functioning was monitored at time of tracheal extubation by applying three TOF electrical stimulations to the ulnar nerve and assessing twitch response at the adductor pollicis muscle. T1 and T4 refer to the magnitudes (height) of the first and fourth twitches, respectively, after TOF nerve stimulation. The T4/T1 Ratio (expressed as a decimal of up to 1.0) indicates the extent of recovery from NMB, with a higher ratio indicating greater recovery from NMB. A T4/T1 Ratio of <0.9 is indicative of residual NMB.|Up to 1 minute prior to tracheal extubation|Per-Protocol Population was defined as all enrolled participants for whom TOF-Watch SX® measurements were collected and had an evaluable TOF Ratio at time of tracheal extubation.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839439|NCT01318408|Primary|ADAS-cog at Baseline and at 3 Months.|"ADAScog (Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale) consists of 11 tasks measuring the disturbances of memory, language, praxis, attention and other cognitive abilities which are often referred to as the core symptoms of AD. Score ranges from 0 - 70.
Lower scores (negative change) indicate improvements on the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive (ADAS-cog)."|Baseline and Three (3) months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839440|NCT01318408|Secondary|Several Ratings Such as Activities of Daily Living, Behavior and Motor Activity Will Also be Evaluated.||three months||||||
839441|NCT01318408|Primary|MMSE at Baseline and at Three (3) Months.|The MMSE (Folstein et al 1975) is a brief cognitive test assessing general cognitive function that has been employed in numerous clinical trials of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) products approved for the treatment of AD. The MMSE consists of five components; 1) orientation to time and place, 2) registration of three words, 3) attention and calculation, 4) recall of three words, and 5) language. The scores from each of the five components are summed to obtain the overall MMSE score. The score can range from 0 to 30, with lower scores indicating greater impairment in function.|Baseline and Three months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839442|NCT01325181|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Event|number of participants with adverse event throughout the follow-up period including procedure and drug-related adverse events|12 months||||||
839443|NCT01325181|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Underwent Rescue Treatment|number of participants who underwent rescue treatment: ranibizumab injections for the low-fluence PDT group and low-fluence PDT for the ranibizumab group|12 months||||||
839444|NCT01325181|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Choroidal Hyperpermeability on Indocyanine Green Angiography|change from baseline in the status of choroidal perfusion and hyperpermeability on indocyanine green angiography throughout the follow-up period|12 months||||||
839445|NCT01325181|Secondary|Number of Participants With Leakage on Fluorescein Angiography|number of participants who showed fluorescein leakage after primary or rescue treatment throughout the follow-up period|12 months||||||
839446|NCT01325181|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Central Foveal Thickness on OCT|the change from baseline in central foveal thickness measured by OCT throughout the follow-up period|12 months||||||
839447|NCT01325181|Primary|Number of Participants That Achieved Complete Resolution of Subretinal Fluid on OCT Without Rescue Treatment|number of participants who achieved complete resolution of subretinal fluid on OCT without rescue treatment until the end of the study|12 months|All study eyes were analyzed using intention to treat principle and the last observation forward method||participants|||Number
839450|NCT01325311|Secondary|Immunohistochemistry Measurements in Prostate Cancer Tissue (PCA)|"The Immunohistochemistry measurement for: AR (Nucleus), VDR (Cytoplasm), p21 (Nucleus), PGE2 (Cytoplasm), TUNEL Pos (Nucleus), Caspase 3 (Cytoplasm), PSMA (Cytoplasm), IGF-1 and IGF-2 (Cytoplasm), Akt (Nucleus and Cytoplasm), and pAkt (nucleus and Cytoplasm)
This is to serve as normalized case data to determine expression of protein.
The normalized optical densities were measured as optical density per unit area by densitometric scanning using Vectra imaging system (Perkin Elmer).
This Optical Density is based on fluorescence."|Up to day Day 35|Due to sample in Arm II one participants data was not analyzed.||Normalized Optical Density||Standard Deviation|Mean
839451|NCT01325311|Secondary|Immunohistochemistry Measurements in Benign Prostate Tissue (BPT)|"The Immunohistochemistry measurement for: AR (Nucleus), VDR (Cytoplasm), p21 (Nucleus), PGE2 (Cytoplasm), TUNEL Pos (Nucleus), Caspase 3 (Cytoplasm), PSMA (Cytoplasm), IGF-1 and IGF-2 (Cytoplasm), Akt (Nucleus and Cytoplasm), and pAkt (nucleus and Cytoplasm)
This is to serve as normalized control data to determine expression of protein.
The normalized optical densities were measured as optical density per unit area by densitometric scanning using Vectra imaging system (Perkin Elmer).
This Optical Density is based on fluorescence."|Up to Day 35|||Normalized Optical Density||Standard Deviation|Mean
839452|NCT01325311|Secondary|Total PTH in Serum at Baseline and Pre-Surgery|This is measuring the concentration of the Biomarker PTH in blood serum at Baseline and at the end of the study|Baseline and Up to Day 35|Due to sample one participant in Arm I was not analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839453|NCT01325311|Secondary|Total IGFBP-3 in Serum at Baseline and Pre-Surgery|This is measuring the concentration of the Biomarker IGFBP-3 in blood serum at Baseline and at the end of the study.|Baseline and Up to Day 35|Due to sample one participant from Arm 1 was not analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839454|NCT01325311|Secondary|Total IGF-2 in Serum at Baseline and Pre-Surgery|This is measuring the concentration of the Biomarker IGF-2 in blood serum at Baseline and at the end of the study|Baseline and Up to Day 35|Due to sample one participant in Arm 1 was not analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839455|NCT01325311|Secondary|Total IGF-1 in Serum at Baseline and Pre-Surgery|This is measuring the concentration of the Biomarker IGF-1 in blood serum at Baseline and at the end of the study.|Baseline and up to Day 35|Due to sample one participant in Arm I was not analyzed for this Outcome.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839456|NCT01325311|Secondary|Serum Calcium Levels at Baseline and Pre-Surgery|This is a measurement of calcium in the Blood serum at baseline and at the end of the study.|Baseline and Day 35|Due to sample one participant in Arm I was not analyzed for this Outcome.||ng/mL (absolute change)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839457|NCT01325311|Secondary|Total PSA in Serum|This is a measure of the concentration of PSA in the blood serum at baseline and at the end of study.|at Baseline and up to Day 35|Due to sample one participant in Arm I was not analyzed for this Outcome.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Median
839458|NCT01325311|Secondary|PBMC CYP mRNA Expression of CYP27B1|This is a measure of expression of CYP27B1 in comparing placebo to Cholecalciferol/genistein.|Up to Day 35|||Ratio to Baseline||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
839459|NCT01325311|Secondary|PBMC CYP mRNA Expression of CYP24|This is a measure of expression of CYP24 in comparing placebo to Cholecalciferol/genistein.|Baseline and Up to Day 35|Due to sample two participant in Arm I and 2 participants in Arm II were not analyzed for this Outcome.||Ratio to Baseline||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
839460|NCT01325311|Secondary|Levels of Calcitriol in Participants Serum|This is measuring the amount of Calcitriol that was found in the participants blood Serum at baseline and end of study.|baseline and Up to Day 35|Due to sample one participant in Arm 1 was not analyzed for this Outcome.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839461|NCT01325311|Primary|Detectability of Calcitriol Levels in Tissue Between the Placebo and Cholecalciferol/Genistein Arms|To identify the amount of Calcitriol that is found in the tissue comparing Placebo and Cholecalciferol/Genistein|up to 35 days|||participants|||Number
839462|NCT01325311|Secondary|Levels of Calcidiol in the Participants Serum|This is measuring the amount of Calcidiol that was found in the participants blood Serum at baseline and end of study|Baseline and up to day 35|Due to sample one participant in Arm 1 was not analyzed for this Outcome.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839463|NCT01325311|Primary|Tissue Levels of Calcitriol Between the Placebo and Cholecalciferol/Genistein Arms|This is a measure of calcitriol in prostate tissue comparing placebo and cholecalciferol/genistein|up to Day 35|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839464|NCT01325337|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Darkness (TAHD)|Digital imaging analysis was used to measure TAHD. The darkness of all terminal hairs (individual hairs ≥ 30 microns in width) in the target area were summed and divided by total number of terminal hairs in the same target area and was reported as intensity units. A positive change from Baseline indicated improvement (increase in the darkness of terminal hairs).|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||Intensity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
839465|NCT01325337|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Width (TAHW)|Digital imaging analysis was used to measure TAHW in millimeters/centimeters squared (mm/cm^2). The diameters of all terminal hairs (individual hairs ≥ 30 microns in width) in the target area were summed and reported together. A positive change from Baseline indicated improvement (increase in the diameter of terminal hairs).|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||mm/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
839466|NCT01325337|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Response Category of the Global Panel Review (GPR) Score|"At the completion of the study, 3 independent dermatologists using the 7-point GPR score compared photographs of the participant's scalp hair growth at Month 6 to Baseline and answered the question: Compared with the baseline image, the amount of the subject’s hair has?: Greatly Increased, Moderately Increased, Slightly Increased, Remained the Same, Slightly Decreased, Moderately Decreased or Greatly Decreased. The percentage of participants in each response category is presented."|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839467|NCT01325337|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Response Category of the Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) Score|"The investigator compared the participant's scalp hair growth at Month 6 to a photograph of the scalp taken at Baseline and using the 7-point IGA score, the investigator answered the question: Since the start of the study, the amount of the subject’s hair has?: Greatly Increased, Moderately Increased, Slightly Increased, Remained the Same, Slightly Decreased, Moderately Decreased or Greatly Decreased. The percentage of participants in each response category is presented."|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839468|NCT01325337|Primary|Percentage of Participants in Each Response Category of the Subject Self Assessment in Alopecia (SSA) Score|"The SSA score measured scalp hair growth. Using a 7-point scale, participants answered the Question: Since the start of the study, the amount of my hair has?: Greatly Increased, Moderately Increased, Slightly Increased, Remained the Same, Slightly Decreased, Moderately Decreased or Greatly Decreased. The percentage of participants in each response category is presented."|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839469|NCT01325337|Primary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Count (TAHC)|TAHC was measured using digital imaging analysis and was reported in terminal hairs/centimeters squared (cm^2). A positive change from Baseline indicated improvement (increase in the number of terminal hairs).|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||terminal hairs/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
839470|NCT01325350|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Darkness (TAHD)|Digital imaging analysis was used to measure TAHD. The darkness of all terminal hairs (individual hairs ≥ 30 microns) in the target area were summed and divided by total number of terminal hairs in the same target area and was reported as intensity units. A positive change from Baseline indicated improvement (increase in the darkness of terminal hairs).|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||Intensity units||Standard Deviation|Mean
839471|NCT01325350|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Width (TAHW)|Digital imaging analysis was used to measure TAHW in millimeters/centimeters squared (mm/cm^2). The diameters of all terminal hairs (individual hairs ≥ 30 microns) in the target area were summed and reported together. A positive change from Baseline indicated improvement (increase in the diameter of terminal hairs). A negative change from Baseline indicated worsening (decrease in the diameter of terminal hairs).|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||mm/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
839472|NCT01325350|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Response Category of the Global Panel Review (GPR) Score|"At the completion of the study, 3 independent dermatologists using the 7-point GPR score compared photographs of the participant's scalp hair growth at Month 6 to Baseline and answered the question: Compared with the baseline image, the amount of the subject’s hair has?: Greatly Increased, Moderately Increased, Slightly Increased, Remained the Same, Slightly Decreased, Moderately Decreased or Greatly Decreased. The percentage of participants in each response category is presented."|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839473|NCT01325350|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Response Category of the Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) Score|"The investigator compared the participant's scalp hair growth at Month 6 to a photograph of the scalp taken at Baseline and using the 7-point IGA score, the investigator answered the question: Since the start of the study, the amount of the subject’s hair has?: Greatly Increased, Moderately Increased, Slightly Increased, Remained the Same, Slightly Decreased, Moderately Decreased or Greatly Decreased. The percentage of participants in each response category is presented."|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839474|NCT01325350|Primary|Percentage of Participants in Each Response Category of the Subject Self Assessment in Alopecia (SSA) Score|"The SSA score measured scalp hair growth. Using a 7-point scale, participants answered the Question: Since the start of the study, the amount of my hair has?: Greatly Increased, Moderately Increased, Slightly Increased, Remained the Same, Slightly Decreased, Moderately Decreased or Greatly Decreased. The percentage of participants in each response category is presented."|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839475|NCT01325350|Primary|Change From Baseline in Target Area Hair Count (TAHC)|TAHC was measured using digital imaging analysis and was reported in terminal hairs/centimeters squared (cm^2). A positive change from Baseline indicated improvement (increase in the number of terminal hairs). A negative change from Baseline indicated worsening (decrease in the number of terminal hairs).|Baseline, Month 6|Participants from the Modified Intent-to-Treat Population (all randomized participants who received treatment and had both Baseline and post-Baseline measurements) who had data available for this outcome measure.||terminal hairs/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
839476|NCT01325714|Secondary|Caregiver-perceived Mutuality|"Caregiver-Perceived Total Mutuality (with patient), based on the Mutuality Scale.
Fifteen items about the caregivers' relationship with the patient with dementia were responded to on a 0-4 scale, where 0 = not at all, 1 = a little, 2 = some, 3 = quite a bit, and 4 = a great deal.
responses to all 15 items were averaged, so total scores range from 0-4, with higher values indicating greater mutuality."|Baseline, 3, 6, 12 months|Growth curve models were conducted (n = 203) to examine whether there were treatment group differences in change over time in caregiver-reported mutuality.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839477|NCT01325714|Secondary|Caregiver Burden|"Caregiver-reported burden, according to the Burden Inventory. 22 items are responded to on a 0-4 scale where 0 = never, 1 = rarely, 2 = sometimes, 3 = quite frequently, and 4 = nearly always.
Scores are then summed so that the total range is from 0 to 88. Higher scores indicate greater caregiver burden."|Baseline, 3, 6, 12 months|Growth curve models were conducted (n = 203) to examine whether there were treatment group differences in change over time in caregiver burden.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839478|NCT01325714|Secondary|Pleasant Events - Short Form - Alzheimer's Disease|"The frequency of engagement in pleasant events, according to the Pleasant Events Schedule - Alzheimer's Disease.
For each of 20 events, participants answered the frequency (0 = not at all, 1 = 1-6 times, 2 = 7+ times) they engaged in the event and whether they enjoyed the event (1 = yes, 0 = no).
For each item, frequency x enjoyment were multiplied. Then scores for each of the 20 items were added together.
The possible range of scores on the PES frequency of engagement in pleasant events is from 0 - 40, with higher scores indicating more frequent engagement in pleasant events."|Baseline, 0, 3, 6, 12 months|Growth curve models were conducted (n = 203) to examine whether there were treatment group differences in change over time in frequency of pleasant events.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839479|NCT01325714|Secondary|Depression|"Geriatric Depression Scale. 30 item scale with response options of yes = 1 and no = 0 to each item.
Total GDS scores range from 0 to 30, with greater scores indicating greater depression."|Baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months|Growth curve models were conducted (n = 203) to examine whether there were treatment group differences in change over time in caregiver-reported worst pain.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839480|NCT01325714|Secondary|Patient-reported Overall Pain Over the Last Several Weeks|"This is one item on the Philadelphia Pain Intensity Scale. One item on a 0-5 scale, where 0 = no pain, 1 = little pain, 2= moderate pain, 3 = quite bad pain, 4 = very bad pain, 5 = the pain is almost unbearable.
Higher scores = greater pain severity."|Baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months|Growth curve models were conducted (n = 203) to examine whether there were treatment group differences in change over time in caregiver-reported worst pain.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839481|NCT01325714|Secondary|Caregiver Reported Overall Pain Over the Last Several Weeks|"This is one item on the Philadelphia Pain Intensity Scale. One item on a 0-5 scale, where 0 = no pain, 1 = little pain, 2= moderate pain, 3 = quite bad pain, 4 = very bad pain, 5 = the pain is almost unbearable.
Higher scores = greater pain severity."|Baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months.|Growth curve models were conducted (n = 203) to examine whether there were treatment group differences in change over time in caregiver-reported worst pain.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839482|NCT01325714|Secondary|Patient-reported Worst Pain.|"This is one item on the Philadelphia Pain Intensity Scale. One item on a 0-5 scale, where 0 = no pain, 1 = little pain, 2= moderate pain, 3 = quite bad pain, 4 = very bad pain, 5 = the pain is almost unbearable.
Higher scores = greater pain severity."|Baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months|Growth curve models were conducted (n = 203) to examine whether there were treatment group differences in change over time in patient-reported worst pain.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839483|NCT01325714|Secondary|Caregiver-Reported Worst Pain|"This is one item on the Philadelphia Pain Intensity Scale. One item with scores from 0 to 5, where 0 = no pain, 1 = little pain, 2 = moderate pain, 3 = quite bad pain, 4 = very bad pain, 5 = the pain is almost unbearable.
Higher scores = greater pain severity"|Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|Growth curve models were conducted (n = 203) to examine whether there were treatment group differences in change over time in caregiver-reported worst pain.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839484|NCT01325714|Primary|Number of Participants With Aggression as Determined by the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (Aggression Subscale)|"The CMAI lists 13 behaviors (2 verbal and 11 nonverbal) and for each behavior the participant indicates how frequently the behavior occurs (1-5, higher values = greater frequency) and how disruptive the behavior is (1-5, higher values = greater disruptiveness). For any given behavior, if a participant scored a 2 or higher on BOTH frequency (i.e., it occurred less than once a week or more often) and disruptiveness (i.e., it was a little disruptive or more), he/she was considered aggressive.
Overall aggression takes into account all 13 behaviors, whereas verbal aggression only pertains to two behaviors and non-verbal aggression pertains to 11 behaviors.
One is considered verbally aggressive if he/she responds with a 2 or higher on both frequency and disruptiveness for either of the two verbal behaviors.
One is considered non-verbally aggressive if he/she responds with a 2 or higher on both frequency and disruptiveness for any of the 11 non-verbal behaviors."|Three Months, Six Months, Twelve Months Post Intervention|203 community-dwelling Veterans with pain and dementia and their caregivers||participants|||Number
839485|NCT01325792|Secondary|Early and Long-term Complication Rates|Surgical site abdominal wound event rate|after surgery (day 1) to 24 months|||% of subjects with events|||Number
839486|NCT01325792|Primary|Hernia Recurrence Rate|Investigator confirmed hernia recurrence by physical examination|at about 24 months|||% of subjects with recurrent hernia||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839487|NCT01325870|Secondary|Mean Intrathoracic Pressure (Airway Pressure)|Intrathoracic pressures are reported relative to atmospheric pressure|during CPR (day 1)|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
839488|NCT01325870|Primary|Serious Adverse Events|Serious adverse events include: death, internal thoracic and abdominal injuries, device malfunction preventing use during CPR|during the index CPR procedure (day 1), at hospital discharge, at 30 days, at three months, and at six months of follow-up|||events|||Number
839489|NCT01325870|Primary|Mean Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressures||during CPR (day 1)|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
839490|NCT01326026|Secondary|Rate of Nocturnal Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Observed rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as requiring assistance to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L. Nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as occurring between 00:01 and 05:59 a.m.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
841672|NCT01347255|Primary|Absolute Change in Total Clinical Score (TCS) of Clinical Signs (Sum of Erythema, Scaling and Infiltration) at End of Treatment Compared to Baseline|TCS range from 0 (all signs absent) to 9 (all signs severe).|Day 1 (Baseline)/Day 29|Intra-individual analysis population||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839491|NCT01326026|Secondary|Rate of Confirmed Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Observed rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes per 100 patient years of exposure (PYE). Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes consisted of severe hypoglycaemia as well as minor hypoglycaemic episodes. Severe hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as requiring assistance to administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions. Minor hypoglycaemic episodes are defined as able to treat her/himself and plasma glucose below 3.1 mmol/L.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
839492|NCT01326026|Secondary|Rate of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|Corresponds to rate of AEs per 100 patient years of exposure. Severity assessed by investigator. Mild: no or transient symptoms, no interference with subject's daily activities. Moderate: marked symptoms, moderate interference with subject's daily activities. Severe: considerable interference with subject's daily activities, unacceptable. Serious AE: AE that at any dose results in any of the following: death, a life-threatening experience, in-subject hospitalization/prolongation of existing hospitalisation, persistent/significant disability/incapacity/congenital anomaly/birth defect.|Week 0 to Week 26 + 7 days follow up|The safety analysis set included all subjects who received at least one dose of the investigational product.||Events/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
839493|NCT01326026|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)|Change from baseline in FPG after 26 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 26|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). For 7 subjects baseline values were missing.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
839494|NCT01326026|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c)|Change from baseline in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, Week 26|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
839495|NCT01326533|Secondary|Beta Cell Function|Change from baseline in the disposition index (DI)|13 weeks after baseline measurement|all randomized with last observation carried forward for missing data||arbitrary units||Standard Error|Mean
839496|NCT01326533|Primary|Insulin Sensitivity|Change from baseline in the insulin sensitivity index (Si)|13 weeks after baseline measurement|all randomized with last observation carried forward for missing data||10^-4/pmol*l/min||Standard Error|Mean
839497|NCT01326845|Secondary|Difference in Reducing Serum Ferritin After Each Month of Study Drug Administration Between the Two Groups|Study was prematurely terminated and not powered for efficacy.|3 months, 6 months||||||
839498|NCT01326845|Secondary|Difference in Severity of GI Symptoms, Bowel Habits and Level of Satisfaction From the Patient's Perspective Between the Two Treatment Groups||3 months, 6 months||||||
839499|NCT01326845|Secondary|the Difference Between the Time From Baseline to the First Occurrence of GI AEs Between the Two Treatment Groups|Study was prematurely terminated and not powered for efficacy.|3 months, 6 months||||||
839500|NCT01326845|Secondary|Difference in Frequency and Severity of All Non-GI AEs Between the Two Treatment Groups|Study was prematurely terminated and not powered for efficacy.|months 3 and 6||||||
839501|NCT01326845|Secondary|Difference in Severity of Specific Commonly Reported GI Symptoms Between the Two Treatment Groups|Study was prematurely terminated and not powered for efficacy.|months 3 and 6||||||
839502|NCT01326845|Secondary|Difference in Severity of Overall GI AEs Between the Two Treatment Groups|Study was prematurely terminated and not powered for efficacy.|months 3 and 6.||||||
839503|NCT01326845|Secondary|Difference in Frequency of Specific Commonly Reported GI AEs Between the Two Treatment Groups|Study was prematurely terminated and not powered for efficacy.|months 3 and 6.||||||
839504|NCT01326845|Secondary|Difference in Frequency of Overall Newly Occurring GI AEs Between the Two Treatment Groups at Month 6.|Study was prematurely terminated and not powered for efficacy.|6 months||||||
839505|NCT01326845|Primary|Difference in the Frequency of Overall Newly Occurring GI Adverse Events (AEs) in the Two Treatment Arms|Study was prematurely terminated and not powered for efficacy. Frequency of GI AEs during the overall study period is available in the AE tables reported in the safety section.|3 months||||||
839506|NCT01326910|Secondary|Investigator's Global Atopic Dermatitis Assessment (IGADA)|An assessment of Atopic Dermatitis based on a 4 point scale where 0 (none) and 3 (severe) are used to describe signs and symptoms in 4 designated body regions. Based on the presence or absence of the total number of signs and symptoms, the final rating will be 0-clear, 1-almost clear, 2-mild, 3-moderate, 4-severe, or 5-very severe.|through Week 3|Intention to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839507|NCT01326910|Secondary|Assessment of Itch|Subject’s or caregiver’s assessment of itch, on a 10-cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), where 0-no itch, 10-worst itch imaginable|through Week 3|Intention to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839508|NCT01326910|Secondary|Interim Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)|Number of subjects improved at Week 2 compared to Baseline in EASI. Improved is defined as post baseline EASI score smaller than baseline score.|Week 2|Intention to Treat||participants|||Number
839509|NCT01326910|Primary|Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)|A regional body surface area tabulation based on severity ranging from 0 (none) to 3 (severe), and severity of signs of disease, then multiplied by body area with final calculation ranging from 0-72|3 weeks|Intention to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839510|NCT01326962|Secondary|Number of Participants With Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate Abnormality|ESR is an acute phase reactant and is a measure of inflammation. It is measured in millimeter per hour (mm/hr).|Up to 1 year|ITT population consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, 'n' = number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||participants|||Number
839511|NCT01326962|Secondary|Number of Participants With C-Reactive Protein Abnormality|CRP is a biological marker of inflammation. A reduction in CRP indicates improvement. It is measured in milligram per liter (mg/L).|Up to 1 year|ITT population consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, 'n' = number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||mg/L|||Number
839837|NCT01328548|Other Pre-specified|Assessment of Immune Parameters Compatible With Inflammaging: TEMRA Cells|Characterization of Tcell populations will be conducted on whole blood using multiparametric flow cytometry prior to immunization to characterize the immunological function of circulating Tcells in each participant.|Baseline|Data not collected.|||||
839512|NCT01326962|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Achieved ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 Response|ACR20, ACR50, ACR70, and ACR90 are defined as greater than or equal to (≥)20 percent (%), ≥50%, ≥70%, or ≥90% improvement, respectively, in swollen joint count (SJC; 66 joints) and tender joint count (TJC; 68 joints). It also comprises ≥20%, ≥50%, ≥70%, or ≥90% improvement, respectively, in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Patient’s Global Assessment of Pain (VAS); Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity (VAS); Investigator/Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity (VAS); participant’s assessment of disability measured by the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI); or acute phase reactant (ESR or C-reactive protein [CRP]).|Up to 1 year|ITT population consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, 'n' = number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||participants|||Number
839513|NCT01326962|Secondary|Number of Participants With AE or SAE Related Discontinuation of Tocilizumab|It included participants who discontinued from the study due to occurrence of AE or SAE.|Up to 1 year|Safety population included all participants who had received at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
839514|NCT01326962|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event and Serious Adverse Event|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. A serious adverse event (SAE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is a significant medical event.|Up to 1 year|Safety population included all participants who had received at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
839515|NCT01326962|Primary|Change in Fatigue as Measured Using the Fatigue Visual Analog Scale|The VAS for Fatigue (VAS-F) consists of a 100 mm line, with 0 (No Fatigue) on one end, and 100 (Extreme Fatigue) on the other end, which a participant marks to indicate how much fatigue he or she feels. The marked point in mm is converted into a numeric value from 0 to 100, where 0=no fatigue and 100=maximum fatigue. Increasing numbers=increasing fatigue.|Up to 1 year|ITT population consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, 'n' = number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||units on a scale|||Number
839516|NCT01326962|Primary|Changes in Participant’s Fatigue Assessed Using the Mean FACIT-Fatigue Score|The FACIT-Fatigue score was calculated according to a 13-item questionnaire that assesses self-reported fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and function. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the participants fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score).|Up to 1 year|ITT population consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, ‘n’ = number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||Units on a scale|||Number
839517|NCT01326962|Primary|Number of Participants Who Achieved Clinically Meaningful Health Assessment Questionnaire Response|Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) is a self-completed participant questionnaire specific for Rheumatoid Arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities. Each domain has at least 2 component questions. There are 4 possible responses for each component 0=without any difficulty, 1=with some difficulty, 2=with much difficulty, and 3=unable to do. To calculate HAQ, the participant must have a domain score for at least 6 out of 8 domains. The HAQ is the sum of the scores, divided by the number of domains that have a score (in range 6-8) for a total possible score minimum/maximum 0 (best) to 3 (worst). A negative change from baseline indicated improvement. Clinically meaningful HAQ response was defined as an improvement of at least 0.22 units from baseline in the HAQ Disability Index.|Up to 1 year|ITT population consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, 'n' = number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||participants|||Number
839518|NCT01326962|Primary|Number of Participants Who Achieved Low Disease Activity (DAS28 < 3.2)|DAS28 low disease activity was defined as a DAS28 score reduction of at least 3.2 units from Baseline. The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen (range 0-28) and tender (range 0-28) joint counts, acute phase response (ESR in mm/hr), and general health status (participant global assessment of disease activity using VAS, range 1-100 mm). DAS28, which uses a 28-joint count, is derived from the original DAS, which includes a 44-swollen joint count. The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity.|Up to 1 year|ITT population consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, 'n' = number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||participants|||Number
839519|NCT01326962|Primary|Number of Participants Who Achieved a Clinically Meaningful Improvement in DAS28 (Reduction of At Least 1.2 Units)|DAS28 Clinically Significant Improvement was defined as a DAS28 score reduction of at least 1.2 units from Baseline. The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen (range 0-28) and tender (range 0-28) joint counts, acute phase response (ESR in mm/hr), and general health status (participant global assessment of disease activity using VAS, range 1-100 mm). DAS28, which uses a 28-joint count, is derived from the original DAS, which includes a 44-swollen joint count. The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity.|Up to 1 year|ITT population consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, 'n' = number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||participants|||Number
839536|NCT01327313|Secondary|Percentage Peak-Trough Fluctuation (PTF)|The peak trough fluctuation over one dosing interval at steady state, calculated as PTF (%) = ( [Cmax - Cmin] / Cav ) multiplied by 100.|Pre-dose, EOI, 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage fluctuation||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839520|NCT01326962|Primary|Time to Das28 Remission|Time to DAS28 Remission was the Time in days from the first infusion of study drug to the achievement of a DAS28 score < 2.6 units. The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen (range 0-28) and tender (range 0-28) joint counts, acute phase response (ESR in mm/hr), and general health status (participant global assessment of disease activity using VAS, range 1-100 mm). DAS28, which uses a 28-joint count, is derived from the original DAS, which includes a 44-swollen joint count. The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity.|Up to 1 year|The intent-to-treat population (ITT) consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, 'n' is equal to (=) number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||Day||Standard Error|Mean
839521|NCT01326962|Primary|Number of Participants Who Achieved Remission (DAS28 < 2.6)|The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in RA. The index includes swollen (range 0-28) and tender (range 0-28) joint counts, acute phase response (ESR in mm/hr), and general health status (participant global assessment of disease activity using VAS, range 1-100 mm). DAS28, which uses a 28-joint count, is derived from the original DAS, which includes a 44-swollen joint count. The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity.|Up to 1 year|ITT consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, 'n' = number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||participants|||Number
839522|NCT01326962|Primary|Disease Activity as Measured by Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)|The DAS28 is a combined index for measuring disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The index includes swollen (range 0-28) and tender (range 0-28) joint counts, acute phase response (erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR] in millimeters per hour [mm/hr]), and general health status (participant global assessment of disease activity using visual analog scale [VAS], range 1-100 mm). DAS28, which uses a 28-joint count, is derived from the original DAS, which includes a 44-swollen joint count. The DAS28 scale ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores represent higher disease activity.|Up to 1 year|The intent-to-treat population (ITT) consisted of all consented participants enrolled in the study, who had received any part of an infusion of study medication. Where, 'n' is equal to (=) number of participants analyzed at particular point of time.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839523|NCT01327053|Secondary|Complete Response Rate (CRR) Per Central Review - Per FAS|Rate of complete response is the proportion of patients with best overall response of complete response (CR) after starting LDE225 treatment. The rate of CR will be determined according to mRECIST for laBCC and RECIST 1.1 for mBCC. Patients with best overall response of ‘Unknown” will be treated as non responders|6 months|The full analysis set (FAS) comprised all patients who were assigned study treatment irrespective of receiving it (all randomized patients). Patients were classified according to the treatment they were assigned in accordance with the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839524|NCT01327053|Secondary|Complete Response Rate (CRR) Per Central Review - Per pEAS|Rate of complete response is the proportion of patients with best overall response of complete response (CR) after starting LDE225 treatment. The rate of CR will be determined according to mRECIST for laBCC and RECIST 1.1 for mBCC. Patients with best overall response of ‘Unknown” will be treated as non responders|6 months|The primary efficacy analysis set (pEAS) was a subset of the FAS including patients with laBCC with tumors that were adequately assessed by MRI or photography or both, and including all patients with mBCC included in the FAS.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839525|NCT01327053|Secondary|Duration of Response (DoR) Per Central Review Using mRECIST for laBCC and RECIST 1.1 for mBCC Per FAS|"Duration of response is the time from the first observed confirmed response (CR or PR) to disease progression or death due to any reason.
Median DoR for patients with laBCC was non-estimable for both treatment arms. Median DoR was non-estimable for patients with mBCC receiving treatment with sonidegib 200 mg.
Duration of response was for participants with ORR."|6 months|The full analysis set (FAS) comprised all patients who were assigned study treatment irrespective of receiving it (all randomized patients). Patients were classified according to the treatment they were assigned in accordance with the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839526|NCT01327053|Secondary|Duration of Response (DoR) Per Central Review Using mRECIST for laBCC and RECIST 1.1 for mBCC -Per pEAS|"Duration of response is the time from the first observed confirmed response (CR or PR) to disease progression or death due to any reason.
Median DoR for patients with laBCC was non-estimable for both treatment arms as limited numbers of progressive disease (PD) or deaths were observed as of the 28-Jun-2013 data cut-off date. Median DoR was non-estimable for patients with mBCC receiving treatment with sonidegib 200 mg.
Duration of response was for participants with ORR."|6 months|The primary efficacy analysis set (pEAS) was a subset of the FAS including patients with laBCC with tumors that were adequately assessed by MRI or photography or both, and including all patients with mBCC included in the FAS.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839527|NCT01327053|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) Based on Central Review According to mRECIST (for Locally Advanced Basal Cell Carcinoma (laBCC)) and RECIST 1.1 (Metastatic Basal Cell Carcinoma (mBCC)) Per Primary Efficacy Analysis Set (pEAS)|ORR is the proportion of patient’s objective response (ORR) by 6 months after starting LDE225 treatment. A responder will be defined as a subject with confirmed partial response (PR) or confirmed complete response (CR) 6 months after starting LDE225 treatment.Treatment with sonidegib was to be considered sufficiently efficacious if the observed ORR on any treatment arm at the end of the study was 30% or higher.|6 months|The primary efficacy analysis set (pEAS) was a subset of the FAS including patients with laBCC with tumors that were adequately assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or photography or both, and including all patients with mBCC included in the full analysis set (FAS).||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839546|NCT01327313|Secondary|Average Serum Concentration at Steady State (Cav)|The Cav was calculated by dividing the area under the serum concentration-time curve within one complete dosing interval (AUCtau) by the dosing interval (2 weeks or 336 hoursi.e. Cav =AUCtau/tau).|Pre-dose, EOI, 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841673|NCT01347554|Secondary|Any Bleeding||Two year|||participants|||Number
839528|NCT01327053|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) Based on Central Review According to mRECIST (for Locally Advanced Basal Cell Carcinoma (laBCC)) and RECIST 1.1 (Metastatic Basal Cell Carcinoma (mBCC)) Per Full Analysis Set (FAS).|ORR is the proportion of patient’s objective response (ORR) by 6 months after starting LDE225 treatment. A responder will be defined as a subject with confirmed partial response (PR) or confirmed complete response (CR) 6 months after starting LDE225 treatment.Treatment with sonidegib was to be considered sufficiently efficacious if the observed ORR on any treatment arm at the end of the study was 30% or higher.|6 months|The full analysis set (FAS) comprised all patients who were assigned study treatment irrespective of receiving it (all randomized patients). Patients were classified according to the treatment they were assigned in accordance with the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839529|NCT01327300|Secondary|Intestinal Permeability Testing|"Ability of test substances to permeate the intestinal mucosa. The Lactulose/Mannitol test (Genova Diagnostics®, Ashville, NC) directly measures the ability of mannitol and lactulose to permeate the intestinal mucosa. Patient ingests 5 grams of lactulose and 2 grams of mannitol dissolved in a 100 ml of water. Urine is then collected for 24 hours and the ratio of the urinary excretion of lactulose to mannitol is measured. This testing is performed only after completion of each treatment period , after 12 weeks of mesalamine and after 12 weeks of placebo.
Normal ratio of lactulose/mannitol is any value <0.7. An abnormal ratio is defined as >0.7 ratio. The lactulose is measured in the urine as g/kg and the urinary excretion of mannitol is also measures as g/kg."|At the completion of each 12-week treatment period, all of which are during the time period from 03/25/2010 to 02/01/2012 (up to 2 years)|||ratio||Full Range|Mean
839530|NCT01327300|Secondary|Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)|"A questionnaire is given to each patient with scoring done on a Likert scale ranking from 0-42 which combines anxiety and depression scales. Each of these are scored from 0-21 depending on anxiety versus the depression parameters. Comparison of change in HADs after 12 weeks of intervention with either mesalamine or placebo is provided here with only the total value provided-range is from 0-42.
Each item on the questionnaire is scored from 0-3 and this means that a person can score between 0 and 3 with zero being none at all or occasional and 3 as most of the time. The scale used is a Likert scale and therefore the data returned from the HADS is ordinal.
The best score for the HADS therefore is a 0 with the worst score a 42 for combined anxiety and depression scores.
For the subscales of depression and anxiety, the best score is a 0 and the worst is a 21. This data is not provided here.
Data below includes the change from baseline in the HADS scores."|at the time of recruitment and after completion of each 12-week treatment period, all of which are during the time period from 03/25/2010 to 02/01/2012 (up to 2 years)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839531|NCT01327300|Secondary|IBS - Quality of Life (IBS-QOL)Score.|A questionnaire is given to each patient and was completed at baseline then after 12 weeks of intervention with mesalamine and then placebo in the cross-over study. The IBS-QOL comprises 34 items with 5-point response scales (0 to 4) that cover eight dimensions of HRQL: dysphoria (8 items), interference with activity (7 items), body image (4 items), health worry (3 items),food avoidance (3 items), social reaction (4 items), sexual concerns (2 items) and relationships (3 items). Higher values indicate better HRQL after converting the raw score on the IBS-QOL into 0 to 100 points.|at the time of recruitment and after completion of each 12-week treatment period, all of which are during the time period from 03/25/2010 to 02/01/2012 (up to 2 years)|Data are the mean change in IBS-QOL between baseline and intervention||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839532|NCT01327300|Secondary|Functional Bowel Disorder Severity Index (FBDSI)|Subjects rate pain on a standardized scale. This is a standardized test used to evaluate patients with IBS. Baseline values are compared to 12 weeks after mesalamine and 12 weeks after placebo treatments. The FBDSI is score is interpreted as such: Severity of IBS is rated as none (0 points), mild (1-36 points), moderate as 37-110 points and severe as >110 points. Therefore patients can have a score higher than 110.|An FBDSI score is administered at the beginning of each 12-week treatment period (baseline) and at the end of each 12-week treatment period.|Change in Functional Bowel Disorder Severity Index (FBDSI)after 12 weeks of intervention.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839533|NCT01327300|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had Evidence of Increased Levels of Pathologic Indicators of Colonic Mucosal Inflammation at 12 Weeks Compared to Baseline.|"Colonoscopy/flexible sigmoidoscopy will be performed and mucosal biopsies will be obtained. Each biopsy was stained for activated t lymphocytes, mast cells and eosinophils .
CD117 staining was done for Mast cells. H and E staining was used to identify lymphocytes and eosinophils. Each path specimen was then noted to have increased versus normal number of these inflammatory cells."|For 2 times: First time: at the time of patient recruitment in the study Second time: after the completion of first 12-week treatment period, all of which are during the time period from 02/25/2010 to 02/01/2012 (up to 2 years)|||participants|||Number
839534|NCT01327300|Primary|Changes in GIS Scores Between Baseline and After a 12 Week Intervention With Mesalamine or Placebo|Patients rated the severity of their GI symptoms. The GIS scale goes from 1 to 7 with 1 being the worse and 7 as the best score showing improvement in symptoms. The GIS was performed at week one and at week 12 during each of the interventions. The comparisons below list the mean difference for each intervention from baseline (BL) with standard deviations then we list the p-value for the differences of baseline to intervention are reported using the Mann-Whitney test with a two-tailed p value provided.|Baseline and at 12 weeks post-intervention|The first part of the analysis compares the differences between baseline and mesalamine to baseline and placebo. The P value provided below list the comparison of baseline-placebo to baseline-mesalamine using the Mann-Whitney statistical analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839535|NCT01327313|Secondary|Accumulation Ratio (Rac)|Accumulation ratio for AUC, calculated as area under the serum concentration-time curve within one complete dosing interval at 3rd infusion divided by area under the serum concentration-time curve within one complete dosing interval at 1st infusion.|Pre-dose, end of infusion (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 1 and Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839584|NCT01327508|Primary|Radiation Exposure Measurement|"Radiation exposure measured in two ways:
Whole body badge TLD ring badge"|Intraoperative|Primary endpoint voided. Dosimeters did not capture radiation dose as expected.|||||
839537|NCT01327313|Secondary|Mean Residence Time at Steady State (MRTss)|MRTss = (AUMCtau + tau(AUCinf – AUCtau))/ AUCtau) - T/2, where AUMCtau was the area under the first moment curve within one complete dosing interval and T was the infusion duration. Area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity, calculated as AUC0-t + AUCextra. AUCextra represents an extrapolated value obtained by Clast / λz, where Clast is the calculated serum concentration at the last sampling time point at which the measured serum concentration is at or above LLQ and λz is the elimination rate constant.|Pre-dose, EOI, 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839538|NCT01327313|Secondary|Mean Residency Time (MRT0-inf)|MRT0-inf of drug in the body was calculated by dividing the area under the first moment curve from time zero to infinity with area under the first moment curve from time zero to infinity minus half of infusion of duration (MRT0-inf = AUMC0-inf/AUMC0-inf - T/2).|Pre-dose, end of infusion (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 1|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797.||hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839539|NCT01327313|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|Volume of distribution was defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Steady state volume of distribution (Vss) was the apparent volume of distribution at steady-state.|Pre-dose, EOI, 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839540|NCT01327313|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution: After Multiple Dose|Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase, calculated as Vz = Dose/(Area under the serum concentration-time curve within one complete dosing interval [AUCtau]* λz) following multiple dose.|Pre-dose, hour 1 (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839541|NCT01327313|Primary|Pharmacokinetics of EMD 525797 - Trough Values|The observed serum concentration immediately before next dosing determined directly from the serum concentration-time profile of each subject (= trough concentration).|Pre-dose, hour 1 (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839542|NCT01327313|Primary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz): After Single Dose|Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase, calculated as Vz = Dose/AUC0-inf multiplied by elimination rate constant [λz]) following single dose. Area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity, calculated (AUC0-inf) as AUC0-t + AUCextra. AUCextra represents an extrapolated value obtained by Clast / λz, where Clast is the calculated serum concentration at the last sampling time point at which the measured serum concentration is at or above LLQ and λz is the elimination rate constant. And the elimination rate constant obtained from linear regression of the terminal phase of the log transformed concentration-time data. A minimum of three points is required to calculate λz.|Pre-dose, hour 1 (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 1|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797.||liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839543|NCT01327313|Primary|Total Body Clearance at Steady State (CLss) of EMD 525797|Drug clearance is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the blood. CL of drug in serum was calculated as : CL= Dose/ AUC0-inf. Area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC0-inf), calculated as AUC0-t + AUCextra. AUCextra represents an extrapolated value obtained by Clast / λz, where Clast is the calculated serum concentration at the last sampling time point at which the measured serum concentration is at or above LLQ and λz is the elimination rate constant.|Pre-dose, hour 1 (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||liter per hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839544|NCT01327313|Secondary|Area Under the Serum Concentration-time Curve Within One Complete Dosing Interval( AUCtau): After Multiple Dose||Pre-dose, EOI, 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||hour*mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839545|NCT01327313|Secondary|Area Under the Serum Concentration-time Curve Within One Complete Dosing Interval( AUCtau): After Single Dose||Pre-dose, end of infusion (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 1|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797.||hour*mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839596|NCT01327547|Secondary|Time to Development of Grade 3 and Grade 4 ALT Abnormalities at Week 48 Associated With a Change From Baseline ALT >100 IU/L|Time to development of Grade 3 and Grade 4 ALT abnormalities associated with a change from baseline ALT >100 IU/L during the 48-week period. Baseline will be defined as the last measurement prior to Day 1 dosing.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||Days|||Number
839547|NCT01327313|Secondary|Observed Serum Concentration Immediately Before Next Dosing (Cpre)|The observed serum concentration immediately before next dosing determined directly from the serum concentration-time profile of each subject (= trough concentration)|Pre-dose, EOI, 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839548|NCT01327313|Secondary|Minimum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmin) After Multiple Doses|The observed minimum serum concentration determined directly from the serum concentration-time profile of each subject.|Pre-dose, EOI, 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839549|NCT01327313|Secondary|Elimination Rate Constant ( λ z): After Multiple Dose|The elimination rate constant obtained from linear regression of the terminal phase of the log transformed concentration-time data.|Pre-dose, EOI, 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||per hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839550|NCT01327313|Secondary|Elimination Rate Constant (λz): After Single Dose|The elimination rate constant obtained from linear regression of the terminal phase of the log transformed concentration-time data.|Pre-dose, end of infusion (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 1|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797.||per hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839551|NCT01327313|Secondary|Time to Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Tmax): After Multiple Dose||Pre-dose, EOI, 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||hour||Full Range|Median
839552|NCT01327313|Secondary|Time to Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Tmax): After Single Dose||Pre-dose, end of infusion (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 1|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797.||hour||Full Range|Median
839553|NCT01327313|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Half Life (t1/2): After Multiple Dose||Pre-dose, EOI, 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||hour||Full Range|Median
839554|NCT01327313|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Half Life (t1/2): After Single Dose||Pre-dose, end of infusion (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 1|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797.||hour||Full Range|Median
839555|NCT01327313|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS time was defined as the time (in months) from the first dosing date to the date of first documentation of disease progression as reported and documented by the Investigator (i.e. radiological progression per RECIST version 1.0) or death for any cause within 12 weeks after last tumor assessment. Subjects without event are censored on the date of last tumor assessment.|From first dosing date until disease progression or death, maximum up to Week 36|Full analysis set included all subjects who received at least one (non-zero) administration of the trial medication.||months||Full Range|Median
839556|NCT01327313|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Clinical Benefit|Clinical benefit was defined as presence of at least one confirmed CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) lasting at least 12 weeks according to RECIST v1.0. Per RECIST v1.0: CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of serum levels of tumor markers . PR was defined as >=30% decrease in sum of longest diameters of target lesions taking as reference baseline sum longest diameters associated to non-progressive disease response for non-target lesions. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease taking as reference smallest sum of longest dimensions since treatment started associated to non-progressive disease response for non-target lesions.|Baseline up to Week 36|Full analysis set included all subjects who received at least one (non-zero) administration of the trial medication.||subjects|||Number
839557|NCT01327313|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Overall Tumor Response|Overall tumor response was defined as the presence of at least one confirmed complete response (CR) or confirmed partial response (PR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Version 1.0. Complete response was defined as the disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of serum levels of tumor markers. PR is at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as a reference the baseline sum LD.|Baseline up to Week 36|Full analysis set included all subjects who received at least one (non-zero) administration of the trial medication.||subjects|||Number
839558|NCT01327313|Primary|Total Body Clearance (CL) of EMD 525797: After Single Dose|Total body clearance of drug in serum was calculated: as CL= Dose divided by Area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC0-inf).|Pre-dose, hour 1 (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 1|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797.||liter per hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839631|NCT01327703|Secondary|Total Weight of Stools|Mean total weight of stools was calculated for Day 12 to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods.|Day 12 up to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods|ITT population included all randomized participants. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who had 1 or more bowel movements over the 72-hour collection period.||gram||Standard Deviation|Mean
839559|NCT01327313|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration(AUC0-t) of EMD 525797: After Multiple Dose|Area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to the last sampling time at which the concentration is at or above LLQ.|Pre-dose, hour 1 (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||hour*mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839560|NCT01327313|Primary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration(AUC0-t) of EMD 525797: After Single Dose|Area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to the last sampling time at which the concentration is at or above Lower limit of quantification (LLQ).|Pre-dose, hour 1 (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 1|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797.||hour*mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839561|NCT01327313|Primary|Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmax) of EMD 525797:After Multiple Dose||Pre-dose, hour 1 (EOI), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 5|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797. Here N (number of subjects analyzed) signifies the total number of subjects evaluable for this outcome measure.||mcg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839562|NCT01327313|Primary|Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmax): After Single Dose||Pre-dose, hour 1(end of infusion [EOI]), 4, 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after start of infusion at Week 1|The pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set included all subjects who received at least the first dose of the study drug and who provided sufficient data for a concentration-time profile for EMD 525797.||microgram per milliliter (mcg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839563|NCT01327313|Primary|Number of Subjects With Dose-limiting Toxicities (DLTs)|DLT was defined as any Grade 3 or 4 haematological or non-haematological toxicity occurring at any dose level until the end of Week 4, and suspected to be reasonably related to the investigational medicinal product by the Investigator and/or Sponsor. Toxicities not considered to be DLTs are as follows- Allergic reactions or anaphylaxis; any Grade 3 or 4 out-of-range laboratory values without any clinical correlate, which were reversible within 7 days, unless the Investigator decided this event is clinically significant. For this reason Grade 3 or 4 out-of-range laboratory values must be re-assessed within 7 days. In case the Investigator provides the subject any treatment(s) due to the out-of-range laboratory values, the event was regarded as a DLT.|Baseline up to Week 4|Dose escalation analysis set/DLT analysis set included all subjects who experienced a DLT or subjects who did not experience a DLT and had a relative dose intensity of >= 75 percent (%) during the DLT observation period.||subjects|||Number
839564|NCT01327339|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Unexpected Adverse Events|An adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Unexpected adverse events include those not listed in the approved product information and not described as precautions or warnings.|one month|ITT Population||participants|||Number
839565|NCT01327339|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Serious Adverse Event|"A serious adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening , requires hospitalization or results in prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. For a list of all serious adverse events occurring during the course of the study, see the table entitled Serious Adverse Events in the Adverse Event section of the results record."|one month|ITT Population||participants|||Number
839566|NCT01327339|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event|An adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product.|one month|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who had been administered the investigational drug at least once and had completed all safety assessments.||participants|||Number
839567|NCT01327482|Secondary|Plasma Raltegravir Concentrations|Mean trough concentration from all 3 days|7, 14, 21 days|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839568|NCT01327482|Primary|Tissue Raltegravir Concentrations|Mean trough concentration from all three days. Tissue concentrations are measured from cervical biopsy homogenate using a mass-spectroscopy-based method.|7, 14, 21 days|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839569|NCT01327495|Other Pre-specified|Progesterone||12 weeks|||ng/g||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839570|NCT01327495|Other Pre-specified|Pregnenolone||12 weeks|||ng/g||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839571|NCT01327495|Other Pre-specified|DHEA||12 weeks|||ng/g||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839572|NCT01327495|Other Pre-specified|Androsterone||12 weeks|||ng/g||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839573|NCT01327495|Other Pre-specified|Androstenedione||12 weeks|||ng/g||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839574|NCT01327495|Other Pre-specified|17-OHP||12 weeks|||ng/g||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839575|NCT01327495|Other Pre-specified|17-OHPreg||12 weeks|||ng/g||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839576|NCT01327495|Secondary|International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS)|IPSS score: 0-7 mildly symptomatic, 8-19 moderately symptomatic, 20-35 severely symptomatic|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839577|NCT01327495|Secondary|Prostate Volume||12 weeks|||cm^3||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839578|NCT01327495|Secondary|Prostate Specific Antigen||12 weeks|||ng/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839579|NCT01327495|Primary|Prostate Tissue Testosterone Concentrations After Treatment|To measure intraprostatic testosterone levels|12 weeks|||ng/g||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839580|NCT01327495|Primary|Dihydrotestosterone (DHT)||12 weeks|||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839581|NCT01327495|Primary|Serum Testosterone||12 weeks|||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839582|NCT01327495|Primary|Prostate Tissue DHT Concentrations After Treatment|To measure intraprostatic dihydrotestosterone [DHT] levels|12 weeks|||ng/g||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839583|NCT01327508|Secondary|Distal Locking Time|Distal locking time is defined as the period between successful nail insertion without locking and the confirmation of accurate insertion of both distal screws.|Intraoperative|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
839585|NCT01327547|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Hepatic Elastography (FibroscanTM) at Week 48|Participants had transient hepatic elastography using FibroScan technology. It rapidly and non invasively measures hepatic tissue stiffness. Through a probe, a low frequency vibration of low amplitude is transmitted to the liver. The velocity of the wave that is generated during the procedure correlates directly with tissue stiffness as it passes through the liver; the harder or stiffer the liver, the faster the shear wave propagates. Results are reported in kilopascals (kPa). A negative change in the fibroscan values (i.e. decrease in liver stiffness) correlates with a decrease in fibrosis and thus improved outcome.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||kPa||Standard Deviation|Mean
839586|NCT01327547|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) Test at Week 48|"The markers of fibrosis assessed in this test comprised hyaluronic acid (CHA), tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (CTIMP1) and procollagen III N-terminal peptide (CP3NP); these are components of the extracellular matrix and basement sinusoidal membrane of the liver and are elevated during activation of the stellate cell. The ELF tests were performed on an ADVIA Centaur XP and the composite score was calculated as follows: ELF score = 2.278 + 0.851 ln(CHA) + 0.751 ln (CP3NP) + 0.394 ln(CTIMP1).
ELF score < 7.7: no to mild fibrosis; ≥ 7.7 — < 9.8: Moderate fibrosis; ≥ 9.8 — < 11.3: Severe fibrosis; ≥ 11.3: Cirrhosis."|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||ELF score||Standard Deviation|Mean
839587|NCT01327547|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Plasma Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) DNA at Week 48|Plasma samples were used to determine HBV DNA using the Roche COBAS Taqman HBV assay. Baseline value for HCV RNA/HBV DNA is defined as the pre-dose measurement taken at Day 1 visit.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
839588|NCT01327547|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Plasma Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) RNA at Week 48|Plasma samples were used to determine HCV RNA using the Roche COBAS Ampliprep/COBAS HCV Taqman assay, RUO version (LOD=15 IU/mL).Baseline value for HCV RNA/HBV DNA is defined as the pre-dose measurement taken at Day 1 visit.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
839589|NCT01327547|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Markers of Immune Activation: Transforming Growth Factor-beta (TGF Beta) - Week 48|Plasma samples were used to determine markers of immune activation namely TGF beta.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||ng/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
839590|NCT01327547|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Markers of Immune Activation: D Dimer - Week 48|Plasma samples were used to determine markers of immune activation namely D-Dimer.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839591|NCT01327547|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Markers of Immune Activation: C-reactive Protein (CRP) - Week 48|Plasma samples were used to determine markers of immune activation namely CRP.|48 weeks|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839592|NCT01327547|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Markers of Immune Activation: CD38 Expression on CD4 and CD8 Cells - Week 48|Plasma samples were used to determine markers of immune activation namely CD38 expression on CD4 and CD8 cells.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||cell/mm³||Standard Deviation|Mean
839593|NCT01327547|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ and CD8+ Cell Counts at Week 48|Immunologic response (magnitude of change in CD4+ and CD8+ cell counts from baseline) was measured. Baseline value for CD4 and CD8 is defined as the pre-dose measurement taken at Day 1 visit.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||Cells/µL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839594|NCT01327547|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-1 Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Concentration <40 Copies/mL at Week 48|The Food and Drug Administration (FDA’s) snapshot algorithm was used to derive the efficacy endpoint of the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA <40 copies/mL at Week 48. This algorithm included the missing data imputation method and used the plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration in the visit window only, followed the “virology-first principle” and considered a participant who had a missing plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration, or switched to a prohibited background anti-retroviral regimen or discontinues from the study or study drug as a failure (MSDF).|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839595|NCT01327547|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hy's Law Abnormalities at Week 48|Hy’s law was defined as a total bilirubin >2x ULN with a simultaneous ALT or aspartate transaminase (AST)>3x ULN, excluding participants with an alkaline phosphatase>3x ULN|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839748|NCT01321723|Secondary|% Change From Baseline in Bone Formation Marker (P1NP) at Week 24||24 weeks from baseline|mITT Population: all subjects who received at least one dose of treatment and at least one post-baseline BMD value. Missing data imputation for patients who completed Week 12 but not the full 24-week period, data was imputed using the LOCF. No data imputation was performed for Week 24, if the Week 12 data was missing.||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
839597|NCT01327547|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Grade 3 and Grade 4 ALT Abnormalities Associated With a Change From Baseline ALT >100 IU/L at Week 48|Percentage of participants who had Grade 3 and Grade 4 ALT abnormalities associated with a change from baseline ALT >100 IU/L during the 48-week period. Baseline will be defined as the last measurement prior to Day 1 dosing.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839598|NCT01327547|Secondary|Time to Development of Grade 3 and Grade 4 ALT Abnormalities at Week 48|Time taken in days to development of Grade 3 and Grade 4 ALT abnormalities defined as >5x ULN for subjects whose baseline ALT ≤ULN, or >3.5x baseline for subjects whose baseline ALT >ULN, at Week 48.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the FAS which included participant who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, LOCF was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839599|NCT01327547|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Grade 3 and Grade 4 Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Abnormalities at Week 48|Percentage of participants with Grade 3 or Grade 4 ALT abnormalities defined as >5x upper limit of normal (ULN) for participants whose baseline ALT ≤ULN, or >3.5x baseline for participants whose baseline ALT >ULN, at Week 48 in the maraviroc arm versus the placebo arm. The baseline was defined as the last measurement prior to Day 1 dosing.|48 weeks|The analysis was performed on the Full Analysis Set (FAS) which included participants who had received at least one dose of study drug. For calculating proportions at the analysis timepoint of interest, ie week 48, last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used if the value at that timepoint was missing.||Percentage of participants|||Number
839600|NCT01327599|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in IOP at Week 4 in Subjects Using Ganfort® at Baseline|IOP (fluid pressure in the eye) was measured with Goldmann applanation tonometry. A positive number change from baseline indicates an increase in intraocular pressure, which may be a risk factor for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage). One eye was chosen as the study eye, and only the study eye was used for analysis.|Week 4|All subjects using Ganfort at baseline who received study medication and attended Week 4 visit.||millimeters mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839601|NCT01327599|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Reach Target IOP of ≤ 18 mmHg in Subjects Using Ganfort® at Baseline|IOP (fluid pressure in the eye) was measured with Goldmann applanation tonometry. An increase in intraocular pressure may be a risk factor for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage). One eye was chosen as the study eye, and only the study eye was used for analysis.|Week 4, Week 12|ITT: All subjects using Ganfort at baseline who received study medication and had at least one on-therapy study visit, minus missing responses.||percentage of participants|||Number
839602|NCT01327599|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Ocular Hyperemia Score at Week 12 in Subjects Using Ganfort® at Baseline|Ocular hyperemia (visible eye redness) was assessed during slit lamp examination and graded on a 5-point scale (0=none, 4=severe). A positive number change from baseline indicates an increase in ocular redness. One eye was chosen as the study eye, and only the study eye was used for analysis.|Week 12|ITT: All subjects using Ganfort at baseline who received study medication and had at least one on-therapy study visit, minus missing responses.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839603|NCT01327599|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Score at Week 12 in Subjects Using Ganfort® at Baseline|The OSDI is a 12-item quality of life questionnaire designed to assess ocular surface symptoms, their severity, and their impact on the subject's ability to function. Each item was scored by the subject on a 0-4 Likert-type scale (0=None, 4=All of the Time), with a resultant overall score of 0-100 (0=no disability, 100=complete disability). A negative number change from baseline represents a perceived improvement in ocular health.|Week 12|ITT: All subjects using Ganfort at baseline who received study medication and had at least one on-therapy study visit, minus missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839604|NCT01327599|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in IOP at Week 12 in Subjects Using Ganfort® at Baseline|IOP (fluid pressure in the eye) was measured with Goldmann applanation tonometry. A positive number change from baseline indicates an increase in intraocular pressure, which may be a risk factor for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage). One eye was chosen as the study eye, and only the study eye was used for analysis.|Week 12|All subjects using Ganfort at baseline who received study medication and attended Week 12 visit.||millimeters mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839605|NCT01327651|Secondary|A Listing, by Arm, of Drug Resistance Test Results and Plasma HIV RNA Levels Among All Participants Who Seroconvert While on Study|Only the listing of drug resistance test by arm among all participants who seroconvert while on study are presented here. See outcome measure 11 for the listing of plasma HIV RNA levels|From Enrollment to week 30 (end of self-administered dosing)|Below, each seroconverted participants' drug resistance test availability was presented. If the number analyzed equal to 0 then it means the resistance test was not done. When the number analyzed equal to 1 and outcome value is 0 then it means no drug resistance was detected, but if the outcome value is 1 then it means drug resistance was detected.||viral load|||Number
839606|NCT01327651|Secondary|A Listing, by Arm, of Drug Resistance Test Results and Plasma HIV RNA Levels Among All Participants Who Seroconvert While on Study|Only the listing of plasma HIV RNA levels among all participants who seroconvert while on study are presented here. See outcome measure 12 for the listing of drug resistance test by arm.|From Enrollment to week 30 (end of self-administered dosing)|Below, each seroconverted participants' plasma HIV RNA levels at all visits with test results are presented||viral load|||Number
839607|NCT01327651|Secondary|A Listing of Adverse Events (AEs) by Grade, Relationship to Study Product, and Arm|Only the listing of AE related to study product are presented here. See outcome measure 6 for the listing of adverse events (AEs) by grade and arm.|From week 6 (randomization week) to week 30 (end of self-administered dosing)|"Below Number analyzed population only included the participants who had below adverse events, and the number next to it represent the number of participants had the corresponding AE that was related to the study product"||Participants|||Count of Participants
839608|NCT01327651|Secondary|The Proportion of Participants Who Discontinue All PrEP Use Based on Self-report Via CASI or Weekly Interviews||From Week 6 to Week 30|Number of participants had product hold or product discontinuation log||Participants|||Count of Participants
839609|NCT01327651|Secondary|The Percentage of Correctly Timed Adherence (Number of Pills Taken Within the Recommended Time Frame/Number of Pills Recommended) During 24 Weeks of Follow-up Based on Weekly Interviews and Adjusted EDM (Electronic Drug Monitoring) Data||From week 6 (randomization week) to week 30 (end of self-administered dosing)|For Cape Town daily dosing arm, there are originally 60 participants, but 1 participant was later found to be HIV infected on or before randomization visit, which should make this participant not eligible for the study analysis, so we removed this participant from this table. Given this, we left 59 participants in Cape Town daily dosing arm||% of Correctly Timed Adherence|||Number
839610|NCT01327651|Secondary|A Listing, by Arm, of Drug Resistance Test Results and Plasma HIV RNA Levels Among All Participants Who Seroconvert While on Study|Only the cross table between drug resistance by arm are presented here. See outcome measure 11 for the listing of plasma HIV RNA levels, and outcome measure 12 for the listing of drug resistance test by arm among all participants who seroconvert while on study.|From enrollment to week 30 (end of self-administered dosing)|Data is collected for plasma HIV RNA levels among all participants who seroconvert while on study, but this secondary analysis has not been carried out yet, so no outcome measure is presented here||Participants|||Count of Participants
839611|NCT01327651|Secondary|A Listing of Adverse Events (AEs) by Grade, Relationship to Study Product, and Arm|Only the listing of adverse events (AEs) by grade and arm are presented here. See outcome measure 10 for the listing of AE by relationship to study product|From week 6 (randomization week) to week 30 (end of self-administered dosing)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839612|NCT01327651|Secondary|Measurement of TFV-DP (Tenofovir Diphosphate) in PBMC (Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cell)|Below we presented the percentages of total cohort with TFV-DP concentrations consistent with >=2 pills/week in women who also report sex in the last 7 day for each arm. For Cape Town and Bangkok, TFV-DP in PBMC was analyzed, for Harlem site, the TFV-DP in DBS (dried blood spot) was analyzed. Note: PBMC >5.2 fmol/10^6 cells is considered as participants taken >=2 tablets per week; DBS >=326 fmol/punch is considered as participants taken >=2 tablets per week|week 10, 18 and 30, which is 4 weeks, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks after randomization|Note: Not all participants were available to be analyzed at each visits below, this could be due to missed visit, drug concentration was missing, or participants did not report to have any sex in the last 7 days||Participants|||Count of Participants
839613|NCT01327651|Primary|Self-reported Side Effect or Symptom Scores|The self-reported symptom/side effect scores for common symptoms/side effects including headache, dizziness, cramping, abdominal pain, and flatulence. Collected during clinic visits. All the presented numbers are the percent of visits with each side effects|From week 6 (randomization week) to week 30 (end of self-administered dosing)|For Cape Town daily dosing arm, there are originally 60 participants, but 1 participant was later found to be HIV infected on or before randomization visit, which should make this participant not eligible for the study analysis, so we removed this participant from this table. Given this, we left 59 participants in Cape Town daily dosing arm||percent of visits between week 6 to 30|||Number
839614|NCT01327651|Primary|The Total Pills Actually Used Over the Follow-up Period|The total pills actually used over the follow-up period was calculated based on the adjusted electronic and self-reported pill-use data. It could be more or less than required by study design|From week 6 (randomization week) to week 30 (end of self-administered dosing)|For Cape Town daily dosing arm, there are originally 60 participants, but 1 participant was later found to be HIV infected on or before randomization visit, which should make this participant not eligible for the study analysis, so we removed this participant from this table. Given this, we left 59 participants in Cape Town daily dosing arm||Number of pills actually used|||Number
839615|NCT01327651|Primary|The (Minimum) Total Number of Pills Needed for 100% Coverage Over the Follow-up Period (Based on Randomization Arm and Self-reported Sexual History in the Weekly Interviews)|Below I reported the number of sex acts as reported based on the adjusted electronic and self-reported sexual activity data, also the number of pills needed for 100% coverage. 100% coverage means all sex events (excluding oral sex) are “covered”; Note: sex act is considered as “covered” if at least one pill is taken 96 hours prior the sexual activity and at least one additional pill is taken within 24 hours after the sexual activity (same coverage definition for all three arms)|From week 6 (randomization week) to week 30 (end of self-administered dosing)|For Cape Town daily dosing arm, there are originally 60 participants, but 1 participant was later found to be HIV infected on or before randomization visit, which should make this participant not eligible for the study analysis, so we removed this participant from this table. Given this, we left 59 participants in Cape Town daily dosing arm||Number of pills needed for 100% coverage|sexual exposure||Number
839616|NCT01327651|Primary|Proportion of Sexual Exposures Covered by Pre- and Post-exposure Dosing|Coverage will be determined based on the adjusted electronic and self-reported pill-use data. Specifically, a sex act will be considered as “covered” if at least one pill is taken 96 hours prior the sexual activity and at least one additional pill is taken within 24 hours after the sexual activity. If participant only took pill before the sexual activity (within 96 hours), but no pill taken after sexual activity (within 24 hours), then we considered it as pre-exposure covered. likewise, if participant only took pill after sexual activity (within 24 hours), but did not taken pill before sexual activity (within 96 hours), then we considered it as post-exposure covered. If participant did not taken pill before and after sexual activity, then it was considered as not covered. Note that the same pill can be both pre-exposure dose and a post-exposure dose if events are closely spaced. At no time should a participant in the intermittent arm be taking more pills than the daily arm.|From week 6 (randomization week) to week 30 (end of self-administered dosing)|For Cape Town daily dosing arm, there are originally 60 participants, but 1 participant was later found to be HIV infected on or before randomization visit, which should make this participant not eligible for the study analysis, so we removed this participant from this table. Given this, we left 59 participants in Cape Town daily dosing arm||percentage of sexual exposures|sexual exposures||Number
839617|NCT01327677|Other Pre-specified|Mean Fentanyl Consumption|Amount of cumulative fentanyl consumed in mcg|up to 24 hours postoperatively|||micrograms/ hour||Standard Error|Mean
839618|NCT01327677|Secondary|Hypoxia|Defined by minimum oxygen saturation (SaO2)|up to 24 hours postoperatively|||Percent Oxygen Saturation||Standard Error|Mean
839619|NCT01327677|Primary|Respiratory Depression|Defined by maximal End Tidal CO2 (mmHg)|Up to 24 hours postoperatively.|||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
839620|NCT01327677|Primary|Respiratory Depression|Defined by minimum respiratory rate (breaths/minute).|up to 24 hours postoperatively|||breaths/minute||Standard Error|Mean
839621|NCT01327703|Secondary|Nutritional Status as Assessed by Hematocrit Level|Nutritional status of participants was assessed by determining their hematocrit level. Mean hematocrit level was calculated at end of treatment (within 3 days after Day 15 of first and second treatment periods).|Baseline, end of treatment (within 3 days after Day 15 of first and second treatment periods) or early discontinuation|Safety population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'N' specifies number of participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||proportion of hematocrit||Standard Deviation|Mean
839622|NCT01327703|Secondary|Nutritional Status as Assessed by Albumin, Serum Transferrin and Hemoglobin Level|Nutritional status of participants was assessed by determining their albumin, serum transferrin and hemoglobin level. Mean albumin, serum transferrin and hemoglobin level was calculated at end of treatment (within 3 days after Day 15 of first and second treatment periods).|Baseline, end of treatment (within 3 days after Day 15 of first and second treatment periods) or early discontinuation|Safety population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'N' specifies number of participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'n' specifies number of participants who were evaluable for specific categories at each time point for each arm group, respectively.||gram/L (g/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839623|NCT01327703|Secondary|Nutritional Status as Assessed by Electrolytes Level|Nutritional status of participants was assessed by determining their electrolytes (sodium, potassium and chloride) level. Mean electrolytes level was calculated at end of treatment (within 3 days after Day 15 of first and second treatment periods).|Baseline, end of treatment (within 3 days after Day 15 of first and second treatment periods) or early discontinuation|Safety population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'N' specifies number of participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'n' specifies number of participants who were evaluable for specific categories at each time point for each arm group, respectively.||millimole/L (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839624|NCT01327703|Secondary|Nutritional Status as Assessed by Body Mass Index (BMI)|Nutritional status of participants was assessed by determining their BMI. BMI was calculated by dividing body weight (kg) by square of height in meter (m). Mean BMI was calculated at end of treatment (within 3 days after Day 15 of first and second treatment periods).|Baseline, end of treatment (within 3 days after Day 15 of first and second treatment periods) or early discontinuation|Safety population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'N' specifies number of participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
839625|NCT01327703|Secondary|Nutritional Status as Assessed by Body Weight|Mean body weight was calculated at end of treatment (within 3 days after Day 15 of first and second treatment periods).|Baseline, end of treatment (within 3 days after Day 15 of first and second treatment periods) or early discontinuation|Safety population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here, 'N' specifies number of participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
839626|NCT01327703|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence regardless of its causal relationship to study drug. A TEAE was defined as any event not present prior to exposure to study drug or any event already present that worsens in either intensity or frequency following exposure to test drug. A SAE was defined as any event that results in death, is immediately life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is assessed as medically important.|Baseline up to 30 days after last dose|Safety population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) specifies number of participants who were evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
839627|NCT01327703|Secondary|Percent Coefficient of Fat Absorption (CFA) Based on Concomitant Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs)|Percent CFA was calculated as ([fat intake - fat excretion]/fat intake)*100, determined in the stools which were collected over a 3-day period (Day 12 to morning of Day 15) during each treatment period. Least squares mean percent (%) CFA was calculated for Day 12 to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods. Percent CFA was based on log transformed data. Percent CFA was calculated separately for participants who used and did not use acid suppressing therapy (PPIs) during the study.|Day 12 up to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods|Per protocol population. Here, 'n' specifies number of participants who were evaluable for specific categories for each arm group, respectively.||percent CFA||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839628|NCT01327703|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Abdominal Distension|Abdominal distension is a sense of increased abdominal pressure by the participant that involves an actual measurable change in the circumference of a participant’s abdomen on physical examination. Percentage of participants with abdominal distension was calculated for each treatment period (Day 1 to Day 15).|Day 1 up to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods|ITT population included all randomized participants. Here, ‘N’ specifies number of participants who had abdominal distension assessment at screening and end of specified treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
839629|NCT01327703|Secondary|Relative Frequency of Days With Abdominal Symptoms|Abdominal symptoms included abdominal pain and flatulence. Symptoms were classified by severity as mild (no impairment of daily activities), moderate (slight impairment of daily activities), or severe (unable to perform daily activities). For each type of abdominal symptom, the relative frequency of days with the symptom for each participant in a treatment period was calculated as the number of days in which the symptom was reported divided by the total number of days in which the abdominal symptom case report form (CRF) was completed. Mean relative frequency of days with abdominal symptoms was calculated during each treatment period (Day 1 to Day 15).|Day 1 up to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods|ITT population included all randomized participants. Here, ‘N’ specifies number of participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'n' specifies the number of participants with at least one report of the symptom at that severity level during a treatment period.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
839630|NCT01327703|Secondary|Mean Weight Per Stool Sample|Mean weight per stool sample was calculated for Day 12 to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods.|Day 12 up to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods|ITT population included all randomized participants. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who had 1 or more bowel movements over the 72-hour collection period.||gram||Standard Deviation|Mean
839632|NCT01327703|Secondary|Percentage of Stools With Normal Consistency|Normal consistency of stool was defined as formed hard, normal or soft stool and abnormal consistency was defined as loose and unformed, liquid stool and diarrhea. Percentage of stools with normal consistency of each participant was calculated as the number of stools with normal consistency relative to the total number of stools during the collection period. Mean percentage of stool with normal consistency during the collection period (Day 12 to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods) for total participants was summarized.|Day 12 up to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods|ITT population included all randomized participants. Here, ‘N’ (number of participants analyzed) specify signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of stools||Standard Deviation|Mean
839633|NCT01327703|Secondary|Mean Daily Number of Stools|Mean daily number of stools of each participant was calculated from frequency of stools by the participant per day. Mean daily number of stools during the collection period (Day 12 to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods) for total participants was summarized.|Day 12 up to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||stools per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
839634|NCT01327703|Primary|Percent Coefficient of Fat Absorption (CFA)|Percent CFA was calculated as ([fat intake - fat excretion]/fat intake)*100, determined in the stools which were collected over a 3-day period (Day 12 to morning of Day 15) during each treatment period. Least squares mean percent (%) CFA was calculated for Day 12 to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods. Percent CFA was based on log transformed data.|Day 12 up to Day 15 in first and second treatment periods|Per protocol population included all randomized participants who completed both treatment periods and had all bowel movements appropriately collected with no major protocol violations/deviations or other events considered to potentially bias the study evaluations.||percent CFA||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839635|NCT01327885|Secondary|Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR)|CBR was defined as the percentage of participants who have best overall response (BOR) of CR, or PR, or duration of stable disease (dSD) greater than or equal to 11 weeks, between Arm A and Arm B. CBR was estimated by treatment arm based on the tumor response evaluation performed by the PI or designee according to RECIST 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of the longest diameter.|From date of treatment start (Day 1) until disease progression, development of unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, participant's choice to stop study treatment, or up to data cutoff (02 Jan 2015), for up to approximately 3 years 11 months|FAS (ITT analysis set) included all participants who were randomized.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839636|NCT01327885|Secondary|Progression-Free Rate at 12 Weeks (PFR12wks)|The PFR12wks was defined as the percentage of participants who were still alive without disease progression at 12 weeks from the date of randomization. Tumor assessment by the investigator or designee was based on RECIST criteria 1.1.|From date of treatment start until Week 12|FAS (ITT analysis set) included all participants who were randomized.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839637|NCT01327885|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of first documentation of disease progression, or date of death (whichever occurred first). The date of disease progression was defined as the date of radiologic disease progression as assessed by the investigator or designee based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 criteria. Participants who did not have an event (i.e., participants who were lost to follow-up or who did not progress or die at the date of data cut-off), were censored. Participants who discontinued study treatment without disease progression were censored on the date of their last radiological assessment (scan date).|Randomization (day 1) to the date of first documentation of disease progression, or date of death (whichever occurred first)|FAS (ITT analysis set) included all participants who were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839638|NCT01327885|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time in months from the date of treatment start until death, regardless of cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, participants were censored either at the date that participant was last known to be alive or the date of study cut-off, whichever was earlier. Participants who died on the date of randomization had a survival time of 0.5 day. Allocation of randomization numbers were performed based upon the following stratification factors: (a) Histology (ADI or LMS), (b) Region (Region 1: USA and Canada; or Region 2: Western Europe, Australia, Israel; or Region 3: Eastern Europe, Latin America, and Asia), and (c) Number of prior regimens for advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) (2 or >2 prior regimens).|From date of treatment start until date of death from any cause, assessed up to data cutoff date (02 Jan 2015), for up to approximately 3 years 11 months|Full analysis set (FAS) (Intent-to-Treat (ITT) analysis set) included all participants who were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839639|NCT01327976|Primary|Percentage Responder Rate in the Treatment Arm.|The second co-primary effectiveness endpoint was based on responder rates with the following two requirements: (i) at least 55% of vBloc subjects would achieve a %EWL of at least 20%; and (ii) at least 45% of vBloc subjects would achieve a %EWL of at least 25%.|12 months|||percentage of subjects|||Number
839640|NCT01327976|Primary|Percentage of Excess Weight Loss (EWL) by Body Mass Index (BMI) Method.|Observe at least a 10% greater excess body weight loss (EWL) from randomization with the Maestro System after 12 months of vBloc Therapy compared to Sham by body mass index (BMI) method. (Body mass index is calculated by dividing body weight (kg) by body height (m) squared (BMI=kg/m2)).|12 months|||percentage of excess weight loss||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839641|NCT01327976|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Experiencing Implant/Revision Procedure, Device or Therapy Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|To demonstrate that the implant/revision procedure, device and therapy related serious adverse event rate in the vBloc group at 12 months post-implant is significantly lower than 15%.|12 months|An intent-to-treat analysis was performed in the vBloc group.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839642|NCT01327989|Primary|Incidence of Device-related and Procedure-related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|Device-related and procedure-related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs). A clinically significant procedure complication is defined as a decline in NIHSS of ≥4 or access vessel complication requiring surgery or blood transfusion.|90 Days|||percentage of events|||Number
839749|NCT01321723|Secondary|Systemic Absorption of PTH at Week 24|AUC: (PTH analog tablets timepoints - baseline to 5.75 hours) (Forsteo injection timepoints - baseline to 2 hours)|24 weeks|||pg* hr/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839643|NCT01327989|Secondary|Immediate Flow Reperfusion|"Immediate reperfusion observed when the Solitaire™ FR device is deployed within the thrombus – Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) score 2b or 3.
Grade 0- No perfusion Grade 1- Penetration with Minimal Perfusion Grade 2- Partial Perfusion Grade 2a- Only partial filling (<2/3) of the entire vascular territory is visualized Grade 2b - Complete filling of all of the expected vascular territory is visualized, but the filling is slower than normal Grade 3- Complete Perfusion"|procedure|Due to insufficient imaging, the Core Lab was able to evaluated data from 190 subjects.||percentage of participants|||Number
839644|NCT01327989|Secondary|Incidence of Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage|"Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, defined as any parenchymal hematoma 1 (PH1), parenchymal hematoma 2 (PH2), intraparenchymal hemorrhage remote from the ischemic field (RIH), intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH), and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) associated with a decline in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) ≥ 4 within 24 hrs.
PH1 – Hematoma within ischemic field with some mild space occupying effect but involving ≤ 30% PH2 – Hematoma within ischemic field with space-occupying effect involving > 30% of the infarcted area RIH – Any intraparenchymal hemorrhage remote from the ischemic field IVH – Intraventricular hemorrhage SAH – Subarachnoid hemorrhage"|24 hours|||percentage of particpants|||Number
839645|NCT01327989|Secondary|Rate of Mortality||90 Days|||percentage of particpants|||Number
839646|NCT01327989|Secondary|Rate of Morbidity||90 Days|||percentage of particpants|||Number
839647|NCT01327989|Secondary|Good Neurological Condition|Good neurological outcome (GNO), as defined in the protocol, is a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of less than or equal to 2, or National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score 0-1, or NIHSS score improvement of 10 points or more from the pre-procedure evaluation|90 Days|Unavailability of data contributed to fewer subjects analyzed compared to the cohort sample size.||percentage of particpants|||Number
839648|NCT01327989|Secondary|Time to Achieve Revascularization - After First Ipsilateral Angiogram to Final Solitaire™ FR Angiogram|"Time after first ipsilateral angiogram to final Solitaire™ FR angiogram with Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) score 2b or 3 flow
Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) score
Grade 0- No perfusion Grade 1- Penetration with Minimal Perfusion Grade 2- Partial Perfusion Grade 2a- Only partial filling (<2/3) of the entire vascular territory is visualized Grade 2b - Complete filling of all of the expected vascular territory is visualized, but the filling is slower than normal Grade 3- Complete Perfusion"|During Procedure|Unavailability of data contributed to fewer subjects analyzed compared to the cohort sample size.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
839649|NCT01327989|Secondary|Time to Achieve Revascularization - Groin Stick to Initial Angiogram and Final Solitaire™ FR Angiogram|"Time from groin stick to initial angiogram and final Solitaire™ FR angiogram with Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) score 2b or 3 flow
Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) score
Grade 0- No perfusion Grade 1- Penetration with Minimal Perfusion Grade 2- Partial Perfusion Grade 2a- Only partial filling (<2/3) of the entire vascular territory is visualized Grade 2b - Complete filling of all of the expected vascular territory is visualized, but the filling is slower than normal Grade 3- Complete Perfusion"|During procedure|Unavailability of data contributed to fewer subjects analyzed compared to the cohort sample size.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
839650|NCT01327989|Primary|Arterial Recanalization of the Occluded Target Vessel Measured by Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) Score Equal or Superior to 2b Following the Use of the Study Device.|"Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) score
Grade 0- No perfusion Grade 1- Penetration with Minimal Perfusion Grade 2- Partial Perfusion Grade 2a- Only partial filling (<2/3) of the entire vascular territory is visualized Grade 2b - Complete filling of all of the expected vascular territory is visualized, but the filling is slower than normal Grade 3- Complete Perfusion"|Immediately post procedure|Due to insufficient imaging, the Core Lab was able to evaluate data from 190 subjects.||percentage of particpants|||Number
839651|NCT01328041|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Fold Increase in DTG FC (Fold Change in IC50 Relative to Wild-type Virus) Between Baseline and the Time of PDVF, as a Measure of Post-Baseline Phenotypic Resistance|The FC in IC50 (50% inhibitory concentration) for DTG relative to wild-type virus was determined for virus isolated at Baseline and at the time of PDVF. The number of participants with the indicated change (ratio) in the two values at the time of PDVF is presented. PDVF is defined as a <0.5 log10 copies/mL decrease in plasma HIV-1 RNA at Day 8 unless the absolute value is <400 copies/mL. PDVF after Day 8 was defined for virological non-response (decrease in plasma HIV-1 RNA of less than 1 log10 copies/mL by Week 16, with subsequent confirmation, unless plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/mL and confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA levels >=400 copies/mL on or after Week 24) and virological rebound (confirmed rebound in plasma HIV-1 RNA levels to >=400 copies/mL after prior confirmed suppression to <400 copies/mL and confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA levels >1 log10 copies/mL above the nadir value, where nadir is >=400 copies/mL).|From the day of the first dose of study drug until end of treatment visit for each participant, up to Week 180 (median of 758 days)|PDVF Phenotypic Resistance Populations. Only participants with Baseline DTG IC50 with PDVF who had paired Baseline and time of virological failure samples were considered for analysis.||Participants|||Number
839652|NCT01328041|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Treatment-emergent Integrase (IN) Mutations Detected at the Time of Protocol-defined Virologic Failure (PDVF) as a Measure of Genotypic Resistance|An analysis of changes at specific amino acids in the IN coding region associated with resistance to raltegravir, elvitegravir, or DTG was performed at Day 1 and at the time of PDVF. PDVF is a <0.5 log10 copies(c)/mL decrease in plasma HIV-1 RNA at Day 8 unless the absolute value is <400 c/mL. PDVF after Day 8 is defined as virological non-respones (decrease in plasma HIV-1 RNA of <1 log10 c/mL by Week 16, with subsequent confirmation, unless plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 c/mL and confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA levels >=400 c/mL on or after Week 24) and virological rebound (confirmed rebound in plasma HIV-1 RNA levels to >=400 c/mL after prior confirmed suppression to <400 c/mL and confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA levels >1 log10 c/mL above the nadir value [nadir: >=400 c/mL]).|From the day of the first dose of study drug until end of treatment visit for each participant, up to Week 180 (median of 758 days)|PDVF Genotypic Resistance Populations: all participants in the ITT-E Population with available on-treatment genotypic resistance data at the time of PDVF. Only participants with Baseline IN mutations with PDVF who had paired Baseline and time of PDVF samples were considered for analysis.||participants|||Number
841674|NCT01347554|Secondary|Stent Thrombosis|Definite and probable stent thrombosis|Two years|||participants|||Number
839653|NCT01328041|Secondary|C0 Assessment of DTG|The plasma DTG concentration immediately prior to dosing at steady state (C0) was assessed at Day 8, Week 4, and Week 24. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessments were collected pre-dose and 1-3 hours post-dose on Day 8 and at Week 4 and 4-12 hours post-dose at Week 24. Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the Pharmacokinetic Parameter Population.|Day 8, Week 4, and Week 24|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter Population: all participants who received DTG, underwent PK sampling during the study, and provided an evaluable estimate of C0. Only participants with data available at the indicated time points were considered for analysis.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839654|NCT01328041|Secondary|AUC(0-tau) and AUC(0-24) of DTG|The area under the time concentration curve over the dosing interval (AUC[0-tau]) and from 0 to 24 hours (AUC[0-24]) of DTG was assessed by a population PK modeling approach using pooled DTG PK data from multiple studies. For this study, blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessments were collected pre-dose on Day 8 and at Weeks 4 and 24, at 1-3 hours post-dose on Day 8, and at 1-3 hours or 4-12 hours post-dose at Weeks 4 and 24.|Day 8, Week 4, and Week 24|The Pharmacokinetic (PK) Concentration Population: all subjects who received DTG, had undergone PK sampling during the study, and provided evaluable DTG plasma concentration data.||µg*hour/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839655|NCT01328041|Secondary|Cmax and Ctau of DTG|The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and the concentration at the end of a dosing interval (Ctau) of DTG were assessed by a population pharmacokinetic (PK) modeling approach using pooled DTG PK data from multiple studies. For this study, blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessments were collected pre-dose on Day 8 and at Weeks 4 and 24, at 1-3 hours post-dose on Day 8, and at 1-3 hours or 4-12 hours post-dose at Weeks 4 and 24.|Day 8, Week 4, and Week 24|The Pharmacokinetic (PK) Concentration Population: all subjects who received DTG, had undergone PK sampling during the study, and provided evaluable DTG plasma concentration data.||Micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
839656|NCT01328041|Secondary|Number of Participants With HIV-1 Disease Progression (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome [AIDS] or Death)|The number of participants with HIV-1 disease progression (AIDS or death) was assessed per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 1993 revised classification system for HIV infection and expanded surveillance case definition for AIDS among adolescents and adults. The CDC classifies HIV infection as Category A (participants with asymptomatic HIV infection, acute HIV infection with accompanying illness, or persistent generalized lymphadenopathy), Category B (participants with symptomatic non-AIDS condition, i.e., conditions that are attributed to HIV infection or are indicative of a defect in cell-mediated immunity; or conditions are considered by physicians to have a clinical course or to require management that is complicated by HIV infection), and Category C (includes AIDS indicator conditions as defined by diagnostic or presumptive measures).|From the day of the first dose of study drug until end of treatment visit for each participant, up to Week 180 (median of 758 days)|ITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
839657|NCT01328041|Secondary|Ratio of CD4+/CD8+ Cell Count at Baseline and Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 48|The ratio of CD4+/CD8+ cell count (measured in cells/mm^3) was assessed at Baseline and at Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 48. The ratio was calculated as the CD4+ cell count divided by CD8+ cell count.|Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 48|ITT-E Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were considered for analysis (represented by n=X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT-E Population.||ratio||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839658|NCT01328041|Secondary|Median Change From Baseline in CD4+ Cell Counts at Day 8 and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and From Week 48 Every 12 Weeks Until Study Completion|Median change from Baseline in CD4+ cell counts was assessed at Day 8 and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144, 156, 168, and 180. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; Day 8; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144, 156, 168 and 180. v|ITT-E Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were considered for analysis (represented by n=X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT-E Population.||Cells per millimeters cubed (cells/mm^3)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839659|NCT01328041|Secondary|Absolute Values for CD4+ Cell Counts at Baseline, Day 8 and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 48 and for CD8+ Cell Counts at Baseline and Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 48|Absolute values for CD4+ cell counts were assessed at Baseline, Day 8 and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24, and absolute values for CD8+ cell counts were assessed at Baseline and Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 48.|Baseline, Day 8 and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 48|ITT-E Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were considered for analysis (represented by n=X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT-E Population.||Cells per millimeters cubed (cells/mm^3)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839660|NCT01328041|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Plasma HIV-1 RNA at Day 8 and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and From Week 48 Every 12 Weeks up to Study Completion|Mean change from Baseline in plasma HIV-1 RNA was assesseed at Day 8 and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 , 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144, 156, 168, and 180 using data of the observed cases. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; Day 8; Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and From Week 48 Every 12 Weeks up to Study completion (Up to Week 180)|ITT-E Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were considered for analysis (represented by n=X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the ITT-E Population.||Log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839661|NCT01328041|Secondary|Number of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA Less Than 400 and 50 Copies/mL From Week 48 Every 12 Weeks up to Study Completion|The number of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 400 and 50 copies (c)/mL was assessed at Weeks 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144, 156, 168 and 180 using data of observed cases. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|From Week 48 every 12 weeks up to study completion.|ITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
839662|NCT01328041|Secondary|Number of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA Less Than 400 and 50 Copies/mL at Baseline; Day 8; and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 48|The number of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 400 and 50 copies (c)/mL at Baseline; Day 8; and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40 and 48 based on the Food and Drug Administration's Snapshot algorithm was assessed. This algorithm treats all participants without HIV-1 RNA data at the visit of interest (VOI [due to missing data/discontinuation of investigational product prior to the visit window]) as nonresponders, as well as participants who switched their concomitant antiretroviral (ART) prior to the VOI as follows: background ART substitutions not permitted per protocol; background ART substitutions permitted per protocol, however the decision to switch was not documented as being before or at the first on-treatment visit after switching to optimized background regimen (i.e., Week 4) where HIV-1 RNA was assessed. Otherwise, virologic success/failure was to be determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the par. was on treatment within the VOI analysis window|Baseline; Day 8; and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 48|ITT-E Population||participants|||Number
839663|NCT01328041|Primary|Number of Participants With the Maximum Post-Baseline-emergent Hematology Toxicities of the Indicated Grade|The severity of hematology toxicities was graded according to the DAIDS. The DAIDS displays events as Grades 1-5 based on this general guideline: Grade (G) 1, mild; G2, moderate; G3, severe; G4, life threatening; G5, death related to toxicity.|From the day of the first dose of study drug until end of treatment visit for each participant, up to Week 180 (median of 758 days)|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
839664|NCT01328041|Primary|Number of Participants With the Maximum Post-Baseline-emergent Clinical Chemistry Toxicities of the Indicated Grade|The severity of clinical chemistry toxicities was graded according to the DAIDS toxicity scale. The DAIDS displays events as Grades 1-5 based on this general guideline: Grade (G) 1, mild; G2, moderate; G3, severe; G4, life threatening; G5, death related to toxicity.|From the day of the first dose of study drug until end of treatment visit for each participant, up to Week 180 (median of 758 days)|Safety Population||participants|||Number
839665|NCT01328041|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events of the Indicated Severity, Per the Division of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (DAIDS) Grading Scale|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury. AE/SAE severity was graded according to the DAIDS grading scale. The DAIDS displays events as Grades 1-4 based on this general guideline: Grade (G) 1, mild; G2, moderate; G3, severe; G4, potentially life threatening.|From the day of the first dose of study drug until end of treatment visit for each participant, up to Week 180 (median of 758 days)|Safety Population||participants|||Number
839666|NCT01328041|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury.|From the day of the first dose of study drug until end of treatment visit for each participant, up to Week 180 (median of 758 days)|Safety Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study drug||participants|||Number
839667|NCT01328041|Primary|Number of Participants With HIV-1 RNA Less Than 50 Copies/mL at Week 48|The number of participants who had viral load <50 copies/mL at Week 48 based on the Food and Drug Administration's Snapshot algorithm was assessed. This algorithm treats all participants without HIV-1 RNA data at the visit of interest (VOI [due to missing data/discontinuation of investigational product prior to the visit window]) as nonresponders, as well as participants who switched their concomitant antiretroviral (ART) prior to the VOI as follows: background ART substitutions not permitted per protocol; background ART substitutions permitted per protocol, however the decision to switch was not documented as being before or at the first on-treatment visit after switching to optimized background regimen (i.e., Week 4) where HIV-1 RNA was assessed. Otherwise, virologic success/failure was to be determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the participant was on treatment within the VOI analysis window.|Week 48|ITT-E Population||participants|||Number
839668|NCT01328041|Primary|Number of Participants With HIV-1 RNA Less Than 50 Copies/mL at Week 24|The number of participants who had viral load <50 copies/mL at Week 24 based on the Food and Drug Administration's Snapshot algorithm was assessed. This algorithm treats all participants without HIV-1 RNA data at the visit of interest (VOI [due to missing data/discontinuation of investigational product prior to the visit window]) as nonresponders, as well as participants who switched their concomitant antiretroviral (ART) prior to the VOI as follows: background ART substitutions not permitted per protocol; background ART substitutions permitted per protocol, however the decision to switch was not documented as being before or at the first on-treatment visit after switching to optimized background regimen (i.e., Week 4) where HIV-1 RNA was assessed. Otherwise, virologic success/failure was to be determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the participant was on treatment within the VOI analysis window.|Week 24|ITT-E Population||participants|||Number
839669|NCT01328041|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Plasma HIV-1 RNA at Day 8|Mean change from Baseline in Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 (HIV-1) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) at Day 8 was calculated as the Day 8 value minus the Baseline value. The last observation was carried forward if a participant had missed the Day 8 visit. The Baseline observation was carried forward if a participant had discontinued the treatment before Day 8. Blood samples for assessment of HIV-1 RNA levels were collected at Baseline and Day 8.|Baseline and Day 8|Intent-to-Treat-Exposed (ITT-E) Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Only participants who had Day 8 observations were considered for analysis.||log10 copies/milliliter (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839670|NCT01328054|Secondary|Median Time to Cmax (Tmax) and the Time Prior to the First Quantifiable (Non-zero) Lapatinib Plasma Concentration (Tlag) Following the Last (3rd) Lapatinib Dose|For each participant, the time at which Cmax was observed (tmax) was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. For each participant, the time prior to the first quantifiable (non-zero) concentration (tlag) was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. Since all participants received 2 doses of study medication prior to the collection of the first (pre-dose) blood sample on Day 4, tlag was expected to be zero. For PK analysis, one blood sample was collected on Day 1 for placebo Baseline. The 24 hour blood sample on Day 2 also served for lapatinib Baseline. Pre-dose blood samples were collected 30 minutes prior to the administration of study medication on Day 2 (placebo) and Day 4 (lapatinib). Serial blood samples were collected on Day 2 (for placebo) and on Day 4 (for lapatinib) at the following post-last-dose time points 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours.|Day 1 pre-dose; on Day 2 (at pre-dose, then 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours post-dose), and on Day 4 (at pre-dose, then 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours post-dose)|PK Population||Hours||Full Range|Median
839671|NCT01328054|Secondary|Mean Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) and Observed Plasma Concentration at 24 Hours Post-dose (C24) of Lapatinib|The first occurrence of Cmax and C24 was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. For PK analysis, one blood sample was collected on Day 1 for placebo Baseline. The 24 hour blood sample on Day 2 also served for lapatinib Baseline. Pre-dose blood samples were collected 30 minutes prior to the administration of study medication on Day 2 (placebo) and Day 4 (lapatinib). Serial blood samples were collected on Day 2 (for placebo) and on Day 4 (for lapatinib) at the following post-last-dose time points 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours.|Day1 pre-dose; on Day 2 (at pre-dose, then 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours post-dose), and on Day 4 (at pre-dose, then 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours post-dose)|PK Population||Nanograms per mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839672|NCT01328054|Secondary|Mean Area Under the Plasma Drug Concentration-time Curve (AUC) From Time Zero (Pre-dose) to the Last Time of Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-t]) and From Time Zero (Pre-dose) to 24 Hours Post Dose (AUC[0-24]) for Lapatinib|AUC is defined as the area under the lapatinib concentration-time curve as a measure of drug exposure. AUC(0-t) and AUC(0-24) were determined from the plasma concentration-time data using the linear trapezoidal rule for increased concentrations and the logarithmic trapezoidal rule for decreased concentrations. For PK analysis, one blood sample was collected on Day 1 for placebo Baseline. The 24 hour blood sample on Day 2 also served for lapatinib Baseline. Pre-dose blood samples were collected 30 minutes prior to the administration of study medication on Day 2 (placebo) and Day 4 (lapatinib). Serial blood samples were collected on Day 2 (for placebo) and on Day 4 (for lapatinib) at the following post-last-dose time points 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours.|Day 1 pre-dose; on Day 2 (at pre-dose, then 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours post-last-dose), and on Day 4 (at pre-dose, then 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours post-last-dose)|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population: all participants in the ATS Population for whom at least one PK sample was obtained and analyzed. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X in the category title) were analyzed.||Nanograms hour per milliliter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839673|NCT01328054|Secondary|Number of Participants With 12-lead ECG Findings at Indicated Time Points|The number of participants with the 12-lead ECG findings normal (NL), abnormal not clinically significant (Abn NCS), and abnormal clinically significant (Abn CS) are reported. Clinical significance was based on the medical and scientific judgement of the investigator or qualified designee. A single safety 12-lead ECG was performed using a standard 12-lead ECG machine at Baseline; on Day 1 (at pre-dose); on Day 2 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post-last- dose); on Day 4 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post-last-dose); at the End of Study visit (Day 8-11); and at the post-treatment Follow-up visit (if applicable).|BL;Day 1 (at pre-dose);Day 2 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hr post dose);Day 4 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hr post dose);End of Study visit (Day 8-11); and Follow-up (within approx 28 days following last dose of study trt [up to end of Study Week 4])|ATS Population. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X in the category title) were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
839674|NCT01328054|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at the Indicated Time Points|Heart rate were measured at Baseline; on Day 2 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose), and on Day 4 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose. Baseline is defined as the most recent, non-missing value prior to or on the first study treatment dose date. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; on Day 2 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose), and on Day 4 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose|ATS Population. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X in the category title) were analyzed.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
839675|NCT01328054|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) at the Indicated Time Points|Blood pressure measurements included SBP and DBP and were obtained at Baseline; on Day 2 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose), and on Day 4 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post dose). Baseline is defined as the most recent, non-missing value prior to or on the first study treatment dose date. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline; on Day 2 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post-dose), and on Day 4 (at pre-dose, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours post-dose)|ATS Population. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X in the category title) were analyzed.||Millimeter of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839676|NCT01328054|Secondary|Mean Total Neutrophils (ANC [Absolute Neutrophil Count]), Platelets and Leukocyte Count at the Indicated Time Points|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of total neutrophils (ANC), platelets, and leukocyte count at Baseline; Days 5 and 8-11. Baseline was defined as the most recent, non-missing value from a central laboratory prior to or on the first study treatment dose date.|Baseline; Day 5 and end of study visit on Day 8-11|ATS Population. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X in the category title) were analyzed.||10^9 cells per liter (GI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839677|NCT01328054|Secondary|Mean Calcium, Chloride, Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Potassium, Sodium, Magnesium and Urea at the Indicated Time Points|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of calcium, chloride, CO2, potassium, sodium, magnesium and urea at Baseline; at Days 5 and 8-11. Baseline is defined as the most recent, non-missing value from a central laboratory prior to or on the first study treatment dose date.|Baseline; Day 5 and end of study visit on Day 8-11|ATS Population. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X in the category title) were analyzed.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839678|NCT01328054|Secondary|Mean Direct Bilirubin, Total Bilirubin, and Creatinine at the Indicated Time Points|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of direct bilirubin, total bilirubin, and creatinine at Baseline; Days 5 and 8-11; Baseline is defined as the most recent, non-missing value from a central laboratory prior to or on the first study treatment dose date.|Baseline; Day 5 and end of study visit on Day 8-11|ATS Population. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X in the category title) were analyzed.||Micromoles per liter (µmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839679|NCT01328054|Secondary|Mean Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP), Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT), and Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) at the Indicated Time Points|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of ALP, ALT, and AST at Baseline; Days 5 and 8-11. Baseline is defined as the most recent, non-missing value from a central laboratory prior to or on the first study treatment dose date.|Baseline; Day 5 and end of study visit on Day 8-11|ATS Population. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X in the category title) were analyzed.||International units per liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839680|NCT01328054|Secondary|Mean Albumin, and Hemoglobin at the Indicated Time Points|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of albumin and hemoglobin at Baseline; Days 5 and 8-11. Baseline is defined as the most recent, non-missing value from a central laboratory prior to or on the first study treatment dose date.|Baseline; Day 5 and end of study visit on Day 8-11|ATS Population. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X in the category title) were analyzed.||Grams per liter (g/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839681|NCT01328054|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an important medical eventsthat jeopardizes the participant or may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the above definition, new primary cancers, liver events, cardiac dysfunction, pneumonitis, and laboratory abnormalities.|From the start of study treatment until follow-up (within approximately 28 days following the last dose of study medication [up to end of Study Week 4])|ATS Population||Participants|||Number
839682|NCT01328054|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Worst-case Post-Baseline 12-lead Holter ECG Findings With Significant ST, T Wave, and U Wave Abnormalities|Abnormal ECG findings or change in ECG morphological patterns were based on the ECG interpretations provided by the ECG core lab. Three replicate Holter ECGs were collected at 30, 15, and 0 minutes prior to the administration of study treatment on Days 1 (Baseline for placebo) and 3 (Baseline for lapatinib) and pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours post dose on Days 2 and 4. The three readings at each time point were averaged prior to any analysis. Baseline is the pre-dose ECGs (triplicate) taken on Day 1 for placebo and Day 3 for lapatinib. The number of participants with the worst-case post-Baseline 12-lead Holter ECG findings with significant ST, T wave, and U wave abnormalities were analyzed.|Baseline (Day1) and pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24-hours post-dose on Day 2 for placebo. Baseline (Day 3) and pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24-hours post-dose on Day 4 for lapatinib.|Pharmacodynamic (PD) Population: all participants from the All Treated Subjects Population (ATS) who completed the ECG acquisition via Holter monitoring of at least one time point on Days 1, 2, 3 and 4.||Participants|||Number
839683|NCT01328054|Secondary|Number of Participants With 12-lead Holter ECG Findings at the Indicated Time Points|The number of participants with 12-lead Holter ECG findings of normal (NL), abnormal not clinically significant (Abn NCS), and abnormal clinically significant (Abn CS) are reported. Abnormal ECG findings or change in ECG morphological patterns were based on the ECG interpretations provided by the ECG core lab. Three replicate 12-lead Holter ECGs were collected at -30, -15, and 0 minutes prior to the administration of study treatment on Days 1 (Baseline for placebo) and 3 (Baseline for lapatinib) and pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10,12, and 24 hours post dose on Days 2 and 4. The three readings at each time point were averaged prior to any analysis. Baseline is the pre-dose ECGs (triplicate) taken on Day 1 for placebo and on Day 3 for lapatinib.|Baseline (Day1) and pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24-hours post-dose on Day 2 for placebo. Baseline (Day 3) and pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24-hours post-dose on Day 4 for lapatinib.|Evaluable Population. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X, X in the category title) were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
839684|NCT01328054|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Holter ECG Parameters of QT Interval, Corrected QT Interval (QTc), Bazett Corrected QTc Interval (QTcB), Individual-corrected QT Interval (QTcI), RR Interval, PR Interval, and QRS Duration at Indicated Time Points|A Holter monitor is an ambulatory portable device for continuously monitoring the cardiovascular system. Change from Baseline in QT interval, QTc interval, QTcB interval, QTcI interval, RR interval, PR interval, and QRS duration at each time point for lapatinib was assessed in comparison with time-matched placebo. Three replicate ECGs were collected at 30, 15, and 0 minutes prior to the administration of study treatment on Days 1 and 3 and pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours post dose on Days 2 and 4. The three readings at each time point were averaged prior to any analysis. Baseline is the average of the pre-dose ECGs (triplicate) taken on Day 1 for placebo and Day 3 for lapatinib. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from individual post-Baseline values for each time point.|Baseline (Day1) and pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24-hours post-dose on Day 2 for placebo. Baseline (Day 3) and pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24-hours post-dose on Day 4 for lapatinib.|Evaluable Population. Only participants available at the specified time point (represented as n=X, X in the category title) were analyzed.||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
839696|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Types of Concomitant Anti-HIV Drugs|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”. Abbreviations for the following terminologies are used to represent results in below table: NRTIs: Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors, NNRTIs: Non-Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839685|NCT01328054|Primary|Treatment Difference in Duration of Cardiac Ventricular Depolarization and Repolarization Interval (QT) in Fridericia-corrected QT Interval (QTcF) Values Between Placebo and Lapatinib 2000mg|A Holter monitor is an ambulatory portable device used for continuously monitoring the cardiovascular system. Three replicate electrocardiograms (ECGs) were collected at 30, 15, and 0 minutes prior to the administration of study treatment (trt) on Days 1 and 3 and pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hr post-dose on Days 2 and 4. The 3 readings at each time point (TP) were averaged prior to any analysis. BL is the average of the pre-dose QTcF values (triplicate) taken on Day 1 for PBO and on Day 3 for LAP. Mean change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from individual QTcF for each TP. BL adjusted mean difference in absolute QTcF between LAB and PBO (trt difference) with the corresponding 90% confidence interval (CI) was estimated for each TP (pre-dose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24-hr post-dose). Trt difference analysis was performed by a repeated measures analysis of variance adjusted for trt group, TP, and trt group*TP interaction.|Baseline (BL) (Day1) and pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24-hours (hr) post-dose on Day 2 for placebo (PBO). Baseline (Day 3) and pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24-hours post-dose on Day 4 for lapatinib (LAP).|Evaluable Population: all participants in the All-Treated Subjects (ATS) Population who met the criteria for dosing compliance, ECG acquisition, and Baseline ECG acquisition. The ATS Population is comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication (placebo or lapatinib).||Milliseconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839686|NCT01328080|Primary|Percentage Change in Total AKN Lesions From Baseline to Week 16.|To determine if treatment of AKN with targeted ultraviolet B radiation will improve the clinical appearance of lesions.|Baseline to Week 16|||percentage of lesion count reduction||Full Range|Mean
839687|NCT01328158|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA Levels Less Than 400 Copies/Milliliter [mL]) by Duration in Treatment-Experienced Participants|Participants whose number of plasma HIV-1 RNA copies was less than 400 copies/mL after the start of treatment were handled as responders. For subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA quantified as < 400 copies/mL, the result was recorded as 399 copies/mL.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 after first dosing of Lopinavir/Ritonavir|Participants who had both a baseline and at least one post-baseline HIV-1 RNA value were included in the effectiveness analysis set.||percentage of participants|||Number
839688|NCT01328158|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA Levels Less Than 400 Copies/Milliliter [mL]) by Duration in Treatment-Naive Participants|Participants whose number of plasma HIV-1 RNA copies was less than 400 copies/mL after the start of treatment were handled as responders. For subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA quantified as < 400 copies/mL, the result was recorded as 399 copies/mL.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 after first dosing of Lopinavir/Ritonavir|Participants who had both a baseline and at least one post-baseline HIV-1 RNA value were included in the effectiveness analysis set.||percentage of participants|||Number
839689|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants in Each CDC Classification Category of HIV-infection Over Time|CDC Categories include Category A: asymptomatic acute phase, Category B: symptomatic other than A or C, and Category C: having an AIDS-indicator disease.|Up to Month 60 after first dose of Lopinavir/Ritonavir|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839690|NCT01328158|Secondary|Mean HIV RNA Amount in Treatment-Experienced Participants at Each Time Point of Observation|For subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA quantified as < 400 copies/mL, the result was recorded as 399 copies/mL.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 after first dosing of Lopinavir/Ritonavir|Participants who had both a baseline and at least one post-baseline HIV RNA value were included in the effectiveness analysis set.||Log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839691|NCT01328158|Secondary|Mean HIV Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Amount in Treatment-Naive Participants at Each Time Point of Observation|For subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA quantified as < 400 copies/mL, the result was recorded as 399 copies/mL.|Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 after first dosing of Lopinavir/Ritonavir|Participants who had both a baseline and at least one post-baseline HIV RNA value were included in the effectiveness analysis set.||Log10 copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839692|NCT01328158|Secondary|Mean CD4 Cell Count in Treatment-Experienced Participants at Each Time Point of Observation||Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 after first dosing of Lopinavir/Ritonavir|Participants who had both a baseline and at least one post-baseline CD4 cell count value were included in the effectiveness analysis set.||cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
839693|NCT01328158|Secondary|Mean Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) Cell Count in Treatment-Naive Participants at Each Time Point of Observation||Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 after first dosing of Lopinavir/Ritonavir|Participants who had both a baseline and at least one post-baseline CD4 cell count value were included in the effectiveness analysis set.||cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
839694|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events|A serious adverse event is an adverse event that 1. requires in patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, 2. results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, 3. is life-threatening, 4. results in death, 5. is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or 6. is an important medical event other than the above.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839695|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Presence/Absence of Concomitant Drugs Other Than Anti-HIV Drugs|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839697|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Presence/Absence of Anti-HIV Concomitant Non-Drug Treatments|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839698|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Presence/Absence of Anti-HIV Concomitant Drugs|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839699|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Use Duration of Lopinavir/Ritonavir|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839700|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Mean Daily Dose of Lopinavir/Ritonavir|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839701|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Administration Method of Lopinavir/Ritonavir|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839702|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Center for Disease Control (CDC) Classification Category of Severity Before Treatment|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839703|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Haemophilia With/Without Hepatitis C|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839704|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Haemophilia|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839705|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Presence/Absence of Concomitant Liver Disorder|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839706|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Presence/Absence of Concomitant Renal Disorder|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839707|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Presence/Absence of Concomitant Diseases|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839708|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Presence/Absence of Allergy|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839709|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Presence/Absence of Past Medical History|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|||participants|||Number
839897|NCT01329939|Secondary|Spirometric Measures|Breathing maneuvers which help to measure obstruction of airways. We did not perform percent change from baseline since in a randomized clinical trial, where the groups are comparable at baseline, we can use only the post-treatment (week 24) data in the analysis.|24 weeks|||percent predicted||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839710|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Disease Duration|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839711|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Route of Infection|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839712|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Races|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839713|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Presence/Absence of Previous Treatment of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-Infection|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839714|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Inpatient/Outpatient|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839715|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Age|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839716|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Presence/Absence of Pregnancy|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All female participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839717|NCT01328158|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reaction by Patient Characteristic: Gender|Participants with adverse drug reactions were assessed in this study. Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||participants|||Number
839718|NCT01328158|Primary|Number of Adverse Drug Reactions|Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period..||number of adverse drug reaction|||Number
839719|NCT01328158|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Drug Reactions|Adverse Drug Reactions are adverse events for which relationship with Lopinavir/Ritonavir tablets is considered as “Related”, “Relationship cannot be ruled out”, and “Unknown”.|Up to 60 Months|All participants who received Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in institutions participating in the HRD Cooperative Survey during the registration period.||percentage of participants|||Number
839720|NCT01328184|Secondary|Assessment of Tolerability|Tolerability will be assessed by the investigator according to the categories good, satisfactory, not satisfactory, bad and not assessable.|Within Day 24 to Day 31|Treated set (TS) included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
839721|NCT01328184|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Relevant Abnormalities in Physical Examination, Vital Signs, ECG and Clinical Laboratory Tests.|Number of participants with clinically relevant abnormalities in physical examination, vital signs and clinical laboratory tests. Relevant findings or worsenings of baseline conditions were reported as adverse events.|Day 1 to day 17|Treated set (TS) included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
839722|NCT01328184|Secondary|Levonorgestrel: Mean Residence Time at Steady State (MRTpo,ss)|Mean residence time of levonorgestrel in the body at steady state after oral administration|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||hours(h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841675|NCT01347554|Secondary|Device-oriented Composite Outcome|defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, any MI (includes non-target vessel territory) and repeat revascularization (includes all target and non-target vessel)|Two years|||participants|||Number
839723|NCT01328184|Secondary|Ethinylestradiol: Mean Residence Time at Steady State (MRTpo,ss)|Mean residence time of ethinylestradiol in the body at steady state after oral administration|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||hours(h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839724|NCT01328184|Secondary|Levonorgestrel: Terminal Rate Constant at Steady State (λz,ss)|Terminal rate constant of levonorgestrel in plasma at steady state|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||1/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839725|NCT01328184|Secondary|Ethinylestradiol: Terminal Rate Constant at Steady State (λz,ss)|Terminal rate constant of ethinylestradiol in plasma at steady state|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||1/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839726|NCT01328184|Secondary|Levonorgestrel: Terminal Half-life at Steady State (t1/2,ss)|Terminal half-life of levonorgestrel in plasma at steady state|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||hours(h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839727|NCT01328184|Secondary|Ethinylestradiol: Terminal Half-life at Steady State (t1/2,ss)|Terminal half-life of ethinylestradiol in plasma at steady state|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||hours(h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839728|NCT01328184|Secondary|Levonorgestrel: Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase at Steady State (Vz/Fss)|Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase at steady state after oral administration|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839729|NCT01328184|Secondary|Ethinylestradiol: Apparent Volume of Distribution During the Terminal Phase at Steady State (Vz/Fss)|Apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase at steady state after oral administration|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839730|NCT01328184|Secondary|Levonorgestrel: Apparent Clearance at Steady State (CL/Fss)|Apparent clearance of levonorgestrel in the plasma at steady state after oral administration|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839731|NCT01328184|Secondary|Ethinylestradiol: Apparent Clearance at Steady State (CL/Fss)|Apparent clearance of ethinylestradiol in the plasma at steady state after oral administration|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839732|NCT01328184|Secondary|Levonorgestrel: Time From Last Dosing to Maximum Measured Concentration (Tmax,ss)|Time from last dosing to the maximum measured concentration of levonorgestrel in plasma at steady state|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||hours(h)||Full Range|Median
839733|NCT01328184|Secondary|Ethinylestradiol: Time From Last Dosing to Maximum Measured Concentration (Tmax,ss)|Time from last dosing to the maximum measured concentration of ethinylestradiol in plasma at steady state|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||hours(h)||Full Range|Median
839734|NCT01328184|Primary|Levonorgestrel: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax,ss)|Maximum measured concentration of levonorgestrel in plasma at steady state over the uniform dosing interval τ.|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839735|NCT01328184|Primary|Ethinylestradiol: Maximum Measured Concentration (Cmax,ss)|Maximum measured concentration of ethinylestradiol in plasma at steady state over the uniform dosing interval τ.|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839736|NCT01328184|Primary|Levonorgestrel: Area Under the Curve at Steady State Over the Uniform Dosing Interval τ (AUCτ,ss)|Area under the concentration-time curve of levonorgestrel in plasma at steady state over the uniform dosing interval τ.|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839737|NCT01328184|Primary|Ethinylestradiol: Area Under the Curve at Steady State Over the Uniform Dosing Interval τ (AUCτ,ss)|Area under the concentration-time curve of ethinylestradiol in plasma at steady state over the uniform dosing interval τ.|Pre-dose, 30 min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 10h, 12h, and 24h after administration of Microgynon on Days 14 and 21. In addition, pre-dose samples were collected on Days 12, 13, 19, and 20.|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set: Included all subjects who took at least one dose of study medication, who provided evaluable data for at least one primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations.||pg*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
839738|NCT01321554|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Profile of Lenvatinib: Area Under the Plasma Concentration Curve|AUC was used to determine the total exposure of lenvatinib in blood plasma. From each participant, a total of up to 12 blood samples were collected at the following specified time points: predose, 0.5 to 4 hours postdose, and 6 to 10 hours postdose on Cycle 1/Day 1 and Cycle 1/Day 15; predose and 2 to 12 hours postdose on Cycle 2/Day 1; and predose only on Day 1 of Cycles 3 to 6. The samples were analyzed for the concentration of lenvatinib using validated analytical methods. Population PK model and observed concentration data were used to derive model-predicted lenvatinib PK parameters and lenvatinib exposure (AUC) based on the 24 mg starting dose.|Cycle 1 Day 1 through Cycle 6 Day 1|PK Analysis Set - All the subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable PK data||ng*h/mL||Full Range|Median
839739|NCT01321554|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival measured from the date of randomization until date of death from any cause. Overall survival is adjusted with rank preserving structural failure time.|Date of randomization until date of death from any cause, assessed up to data cutoff date (15 Nov 2013) or up to approximately 2.5 years|Full Analysis Set||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839740|NCT01321554|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|ORR, defined as the proportion of participants who had best overall response (BOR) of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) as determined by blinded IIR using RECIST 1.1 for target lesions and assessed by MRI/CT scans (for double blind treatment period i.e. Randomization Phase). CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) had to have reduction in short axis to less than 10 mm. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. ORR = CR + PR.|Date of randomization to the date of disease progression or death (whichever occurred first), assessed up to data cutoff date (15 Nov 2013) or up to approximately 2.5 years|Full Analysis Set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839741|NCT01321554|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of first documentation of disease progression or death (whichever occurred first), as determined by blinded independent imaging review (IIR) using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 for the double-blind treatment period (Randomization Phase). Disease progression per RECIST v1.1 was defined as at least a 20% relative increase and 5 mm absolute increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the smallest sum on study), recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions.|Date of randomization to the date of disease progression or death (whichever occurred first), assessed up to data cutoff date (15 Nov 2013) or up to approximately 2.5 years|Full Analysis Set (Intent-to-Treat Analysis Set) included all randomized subjects.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839742|NCT01321697|Primary|Successful Identification of Vulvar Sentinel Lymph Nodes Via Gamma Probe.||at time of surgery|Data were not collected/analyzed due to study termination.|||||
839743|NCT01321710|Primary|Change in Infant Sleep Quantity (Objective)|Change in infant sleep quantity is defined as the difference between the number of hours slept in the 24 hours prior to immunization and the the number of hours slept after immunization (positive numbers indicate more sleep following immunization). Infant sleep was measured by ankle actigraphy.|24 hours before and 24 hours after immunizations at approximately 2 months of age|ITT analysis. Infants who were not immunized or did not have valid outcome data were excluded from the analysis.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
839744|NCT01321710|Secondary|Maternal Well-being|Maternal well-being was measured by the total score on the Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression Scale (CES-D). The CES-D measures depressive symptoms in the past week. CES-D scores can range 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating more symptoms of depression.|1 month postpartum (approximately)|ITT analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839745|NCT01321710|Secondary|Maternal Sleep Disturbance (Subjective)|Maternal sleep disturbance is measured by the total score on the General Sleep Disturbance Scale (GSDS). The GSDS is a self-report questionnaire that measures perceived sleep disturbance in the past week. GSDS scores range from 0 to 147, with higher scores indicating more sleep disturbance.|1 month postpartum (approximately)|ITT analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839746|NCT01321710|Primary|Maternal Sleep Quality (Objective)|Maternal sleep quality is defined as sleep efficiency (percent sleep per time in bed averaged across 3 nights) as measured by wrist actigraphy.|1 month postpartum (approximately)|ITT analysis. Because this was a repeated measures analysis at 1 and 3 months postpartum, subjects missing outcome data at either point were excluded from the analysis.||percentage of sleep per time in bed||Standard Deviation|Mean
841676|NCT01347554|Primary|Device-oriented Composite Outcome|defined as a composite of cardiac death, Myocardial infarction not clearly attributable to a nontarget vessel and target lesion revascularization|Two year|||participants|||Number
839750|NCT01321723|Secondary|% Change From Baseline in Bone Resorption Marker (CTx-1) at Week 24|Serum collagen type I (CTx-1) fragments generated during osteoclastic bone turnover are biomarkers for bone resorption. β-CrossLaps electrochemiluminescent sandwich immunoassay was used.|24 weeks from baseline|mITT Population: all subjects who received at least one dose of treatment and at least one post-baseline BMD value. Missing data imputation for patients who completed Week 12 but not the full 24-week period, data was imputed using the LOCF. No data imputation was performed for Week 24, if the Week 12 data was missing.||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
839751|NCT01321723|Post-Hoc|Number of Participants With AEs as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability||24 weeks|Overall Summary of Adverse Events - Each subject with an event is counted only once although they may have several events.||participants|||Number
839752|NCT01321723|Primary|% Change From Baseline BMD in L1-L4 Axial Lumbar Spine at Week 24||24 weeks from baseline|mITT Population: all subjects who received at least one dose of treatment and at least one post-baseline BMD value. Missing data imputation for patients who completed Week 12 but not the full 24-week period, data was imputed using the LOCF. No data imputation was performed for Week 24, if the Week 12 data was missing.||percentage of change||Standard Deviation|Mean
839753|NCT01321749|Secondary|Brain Perfusion Improvement Are Evaluated With SPECT and TCD|Brain perfusion status were evalvated by SPECT SPECT scanning was performed using a dual headed rotating gamma camera at 30 minutes after intravenous 99mTc-ECD (25mCi) bolus injection and at 40 minutes after 18F -FDG bolus injection.|300-day after treatment||||||
839754|NCT01321749|Secondary|The Time Point Until the First Stroke Recurrence,|These patients underwent MRI/DWI at the time of first recurrence; patients without symptoms recurrence underwent follow-up MRI/DWI at 300 days.|At the 300-day after the initial treatment||||||
839755|NCT01321749|Primary|Number of Patients Who Got New Brain Lesions|We compared the number of patients who got new lesions in the Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI-MRI)|300 days after treatment|||participants|||Number
839756|NCT01321749|Primary|Plasma Biomarkers of Coagulation and Fibrinolysis|blood samples were collected one hour after every times of BLIPC procedure ended, and assayed with the immuno-turbidimetry assay on the coagulation laboratory autoanalyzer|the time points of baseline and 1, 15 and 30 days after BLIPC treatment||||||
839757|NCT01321749|Primary|Blood Pressure and Heart Rates;||at the time points of baseline and 1, 15 and 30 days after BLIPC treatment||||||
839758|NCT01322009|Secondary|Antioxidant Reserve|Antioxidant reserves in CSF and serum will be calculated in both treatment arms and compared.|Within 5 days of injury|||reactive oxygen species scavenged||Standard Error|Mean
839759|NCT01322009|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Adverse Events|"The number of patients experiencing one or more of the following adverse events:
Acute renal failure Anaphylaxis Acute respiratory distress syndrome Intracranial infection/abscess Arrhythmia, atrial Arrhythmia, ventricular Bradycardia Cardiac arrest Catheter positive culture Cerebrospinal fluid leak Decubitis Deep vein thrombosis Diabetes Insipidus Emesis Extraaxial hematoma Gastrointestinal bleed Gastritis Hematuria Hemorrhage, other Hemoperitonium Hemothorax Hepatitis Hydrocephalus Hypotension Hypoxemia Infection, other Intraparenchymal hemorrhage Intraventricular hemorrhage Meningitis/ventriculitis Multiorgan dysfunction syndrome Myocardial ischemia Pancreatitis Pericarditis Peritonitis Pneumothorax Pulmonary edema Pulmonary embolism Respiratory arrest Seizures Sepsis Syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone Transtentorial herniation Withdrawal of Life Support Other SAE causing re-hospitalization Other SAE"|14 days after drug administration|||participants|||Number
839760|NCT01322022|Primary|Actigraphy - Sleep Latency|Measure of sleep latency defined by the time from lights off to sleep onset.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
839761|NCT01322022|Primary|Actigraphy - Sleep Efficiency|Measure of sleep efficiency defined as the percentage of time sleeping while in bed with lights off|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8|||Percentage of Time Sleeping||Standard Deviation|Mean
839762|NCT01322022|Secondary|Actigraphy - Total Sleep Time|Measure of total time spent asleep using Motionlogger model actigraph by Ambulatory Monitoring, Inc. (www.ambulatory-monitoring.com) and algorithms in associated software.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 8|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
839763|NCT01322022|Primary|Modified Simond & Parraga Sleep Questionnaire (MSPSQ) - Composite Sleep Index|The MSPSQ used by Wiggs and colleagues (Wiggs & Stores, 1996 ; Wiggs & Stores, 1999 : Wiggs & Stores, 2004) was used to assess the child's sleep quality. It was completed by the primary caregiver for both groups at baseline and at weeks 4 and 8. Using Wiggs & Stores earlier-described conventions for determining the Composite Sleep Index (CSI) score, the CSI was calculated by assigning a score to the frequency of the targeted sleep problems: bedtime resistance, night awakening, early awakening, and sleeping in places other than bed. In addition, scores were assigned for the duration of sleep latency and night awakenings. The total CSI score ranged from 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating more severe bedtime and sleep patterns.|Baseline, Week 4, and Week 8|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839764|NCT01322048|Secondary|Plasma Norepinephrine Levels||Post-treatment (t=Day 8)|Of those surviving treatment period||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839765|NCT01322048|Primary|Ventilator-free Days||Baseline to day 28|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
839766|NCT01322347|Primary|Change From Baseline Hemoglobin at End-of-Treatment: Mean Baseline and End-of-Treatment Hemoglobin|Mean change from baseline Hgb (the average of the three most recent Hgb values preceding randomization) assessments during the last one-sixth of the treatment period for patients who prematurely withdraw from study treatment, but will include a minimum of at least the last two Hgb values. Values expressed are mean baseline and end-of-treatment Hgb, along with the mean difference (standard deviation).|Hgb measured weekly; up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin value measured.||grams per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
839767|NCT01322347|Secondary|Variability of Hemoglobin Concentration: Residual Standard Deviation|The mean residual standard deviation of the hemoglobin concentration changes, as measured weekly from baseline until the end of participation in Stage 2.|up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post dose hemoglobin measured.||grams per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
839972|NCT01330355|Primary|Clinical Resolution|Clinical resolution defined as the absence of both conjunctival discharge and conjunctival hyperemia.|Visit 5 (Day 8+1)|The analysis population only includes those for whom the outcome was measured within the specified time frame.||participants|||Number
839768|NCT01322347|Secondary|Variability of Hemoglobin Concentration: Temporal Trend|The mean temporal trend of hemoglobin concentration value changes, as measured weekly from baseline until the end of participation in Stage 2.|up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post dose hemoglobin measured.||grams per liter per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
839769|NCT01322347|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Transferrin Saturation (TSAT)|The Mean Change from Stage 2 Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Transferrin Saturation (TSAT)|Up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
839770|NCT01322347|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Transferrin|The Mean Change from Stage 2 Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Transferrin|Up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||grams per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
839771|NCT01322347|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Ferritin|The Mean Change from Stage 2 Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Ferritin|Up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||micrograms per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
839772|NCT01322347|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Reticulocyte Hemoglobin (CHr)|The Mean Change from Stage 2 Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Reticulocyte Hemoglobin (CHr)|Up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||picograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
839773|NCT01322347|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Unsaturated Iron-Binding Capacity (UIBC), Pre-Dialysis Serum Iron, and Pre-Dialysis Total Iron-Binding Capacity (TIBC)|The Mean Change from Stage 2 Baseline to End-of-Treatment (EoT) in Pre-Dialysis Unsaturated Iron-Binding Capacity (UIBC), Pre-Dialysis Serum Iron, and Pre-Dialysis Total Iron-Binding Capacity (TIBC) will be quantified.|Up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||micromoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
839774|NCT01322347|Secondary|Percentage of Change From Baseline to End-of-Treatment for: Reticulocyte Hemoglobin Content (CHr), Ferritin, and the Pre-Dialysis Serum Iron Panel|A comparison of the lab values at the end-of-treatment (EoT) to baseline was performed, and the percentage of change from baseline was calculated for the following lab parameters: reticulocyte hemoglobin content (CHr), Ferritin, pre-dialysis unbound iron-binding capacity (UIBC), pre-dialysis serum iron, pre-dialysis transferrin, pre-dialysis total iron-binding capacity TIBC), and transferrin saturation (TSAT).|up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
839775|NCT01322347|Secondary|Red Blood Cell or Whole Blood Transfusion: Number of Units Transfused|The total number of units of red blood cells or whole blood that were received by patients while in the randomized treatment stage (Stage 2). This number is the total number of units received across all randomized patients in each treatment group (it is not the average number of units received per patient). Patients remained in Stage 2 until they met protocol-defined criteria for Stage 2 completion or until they had participated in Stage 2 for 48 weeks (whichever came sooner). If a patient was transfused, they were withdrawn from Stage 2.|Up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects||units of red blood cells or whole blood|||Number
839776|NCT01322347|Secondary|Red Blood Cell or Whole Blood Transfusion: Number of Patients Who Received a Transfusion|The number of patients requiring red blood cell or whole blood transfusion while in the randomized treatment stage (Stage 2). Patients remained in Stage 2 until they met protocol-defined criteria for Stage 2 completion or until they had participated in Stage 2 for 48 weeks (whichever came sooner). If a patient was transfused, they were withdrawn from Stage 2.|Up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects||participants|||Number
839777|NCT01322347|Secondary|Mean Change in Unsaturated Iron-Binding Capacity (UIBC) From Pre-Dialysis to Post-Dialysis|The mean difference between the pre-dialysis and post-dialysis unsaturated iron binding capacity (UIBC) was calculated, using all post-baseline values obtained during Stage 2. Subjects could participate in Stage 2 for up to 48 weeks, provided that they did not complete Stage 2 early due to a protocol-mandated change in anemia management or withdraw from the study entirely for other reasons.|Up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||micromole per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
839778|NCT01322347|Secondary|Mean Change in Transferrin Saturation From Pre-Dialysis to Post-Dialysis|The mean difference between the pre-dialysis and post-dialysis TSAT (transferrin) was calculated, using all post-baseline values obtained during Stage 2. Subjects could participate in Stage 2 for up to 48 weeks, provided that they did not complete Stage 2 early due to a protocol-mandated change in anemia management or withdraw from the study entirely for other reasons.|Up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin measured.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
839779|NCT01322347|Secondary|Mean Change in Serum Iron From Pre-Dialysis to Post-Dialysis|The mean difference between the pre-dialysis and post-dialysis serum iron was calculated, using all post-baseline values obtained during Stage 2. Subjects could participate in Stage 2 for up to 48 weeks, provided that they did not complete Stage 2 early due to a protocol-mandated change in anemia management or withdraw from the study entirely for other reasons.|Up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dialysis hemoglobin measured.||micromoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
839973|NCT01330381|Secondary|Convenience of Treatment for Final On Treatment Assessment in Open-Label Treatment Period||Over the 16 week open label treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||percentage of subjects|||Number
839780|NCT01322347|Primary|Change From Baseline Hemoglobin at End-of-Treatment: Least-Squares Mean|Mean change from baseline Hgb (the average of the three most recent Hgb values preceding randomization) assessments during the last one-sixth of the treatment period for patients who prematurely withdraw from study treatment, but will include a minimum of at least the last two Hgb values. Value is expressed as least-squares mean, along with standard error.|Hgb measured weekly; up to 48 weeks from date of randomization|modified intent-to-treat: all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-dose hemoglobin value measured.||grams per liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
839781|NCT01322360|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Experienced Adverse Events of Moderate to Severe Intensity / Grade|Subjects who experienced any AEs of special interest, which included sedation, respiratory depression, nausea, vomiting, and pruritus of moderate to severe intensity/grade|Up to 21 days|||participants|||Number
839782|NCT01322360|Primary|Number of Subjects Who Experienced Adverse Events That Led to Study Discontinuation|"The primary safety endpoints were the percentage of subjects who experienced any AEs that led to study discontinuation, percentage of subjects with SAEs and those with a sedation score of 4. Secondary safety endpoints included the percentage of subjects who experienced any AEs of special interest, which included sedation, respiratory depression, nausea, vomiting, and pruritus of moderate to severe intensity/grade.
Additional secondary endpoints were the incidence, type, relationship to study drug, and severity of AEs, and the percentage of subjects with clinically significant decreases in SpO2 and respiratory rate, as assessed by the investigator."|Up to 21 days|75 subjects were screened and 50 subjects took at least one dose of oral morphine sulfate.||participants|||Number
839783|NCT01322386|Primary|Determine the Benefit of Oral Vancomycin Therapy for Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis and Biliary Atresia|Determine the benefit of oral vancomycin therapy for Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis and Biliary Atresia through improvement of Liver function tests (LFTs) within 3 months of initiating therapy. In addition for PSC, we looked at 25% reduction of abnormal ALT & GGT, reduction in biliary strictures and beading, and reduction of inflammation in liver biopsies and colon biopsies.|Within 3 months of therapy|Ten BA participants had surgery (Kasai portoenterostomyprocedure) at 1 week before starting the Vancomycin so we could not determine if they benefited from the therapy. On oral vancomycin, 9 PSC patients had improvement of LFTs, 8 had improvement of liver biopsies and/or MRI, and colon biopsies,and 1 pt. refused to have these additional studies.||participants|||Number
839784|NCT01328366|Secondary|International Index of Erectile Function Score|The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) was a participant-reported questionnaire used to measure a male’s erection function. Scores range from 5-75, higher scores indicated better erection quality. Data are reported as the mean IIEF score ± standard deviation.|Baseline; 4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Male participants who completed the IIEF questionnaire at Baseline, 4 Week, 16 Week, or their 6 Month assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839785|NCT01328366|Secondary|Mean Change in Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) Score From Baseline|The Female Sexual Function Index was a participant-reported questionnaire used to measure a female’s sexual function. Scores range from 2-36, higher scores indicated better sexual function. Data are reported as the mean change in FSFI score ± standard deviation.|4 week, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Female participants who completed the FSFI questionnaire at baseline and at the 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment. Participants who did not complete a Baseline and 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment were not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839786|NCT01328366|Secondary|Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) Score|The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) was a participant-reported questionnaire used to measure a female’s sexual function. Scores range from 2-36, higher scores indicated better sexual function. Data are reported as the mean FSFI score ± standard deviation.|Baseline; 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Female participants who completed the FSFI questionnaire at Baseline, 4 Week, 16 Week, or their 6 Month assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839787|NCT01328366|Secondary|Change in 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Score From Baseline|The 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) was a participant-reported questionnaire use to measure the functional health and well-being of a participant to include both physical and mental health domains. Scores range from 0-100 for each domain, higher scores indicated better physical or mental health. Data are reported as the mean change SF-12 score physical or mental ± standard deviation.|4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the SF-12 questionnaire at baseline and at the 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment. Participants who did not complete a Baseline and 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment were not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839788|NCT01328366|Secondary|12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Score|The 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) was a participant-reported questionnaire use to measure the functional health and well-being of a participant to include both physical and mental health domains. Scores range from 0-100 for each domain, higher scores indicated better physical or mental health. Data are reported as the mean SF-12 score physical or mental ± standard deviation.|Baseline; 4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the SF-12 questionnaire at Baseline, 4 Week, 16 Week, or their 6 Month assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839789|NCT01328366|Secondary|Mean Change in Cutaneous Body Image (CBI) Scale Scores From Baseline|The Cutaneous Body Image (CBI) Scale was a participant-reported questionnaire used to measure a participant’s satisfaction with their hair, nails, and skin. Scores range from 0-9, higher scores indicated a higher level of satisfaction. Data are reported as the mean change in CBI score ± standard deviation.|4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the CBI questionnaire at baseline and at the 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment. Participants who did not complete a Baseline and 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment were not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839790|NCT01328366|Secondary|Cutaneous Body Image Scale (CBI) Scores|The Cutaneous Body Image (CBI) Scale was a participant-reported questionnaire used to measure a participant’s satisfaction with their hair, nails, and skin. Scores range from 0-9, higher scores indicated a higher level of satisfaction. Data are reported as the mean CBI score ± standard deviation.|Baseline; 4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the CBI questionnaire at Baseline, 4 Week, 16 Week, or their 6 Month assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841677|NCT01347580|Secondary|Minor and Major Bleeds After 48 Hours|non CABG related bleeds (PLATO definition)|after 48 hours post first dose|safety||patients|||Number
839791|NCT01328366|Secondary|Mean Change in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Scores From Baseline|The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was a patient-reported questionnaire used to assess the level of anxiety and depression in the setting of a hospital medical outpatient clinic. The anxiety and depression subscales each have a range from 0-21, higher scores indicated higher levels of anxiety and depression, respectively. Data are reported as the mean change in anxiety or depression score ± standard deviation.|4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the HADS questionnaire at baseline and at the 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment. Participants who did not complete a Baseline and 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment were not included in the analysis. HADS-A refers to the anxiety, while HADS-D refers to the depression portion of the survey.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839792|NCT01328366|Secondary|Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Scores|The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was a patient-reported questionnaire used to assess the level of anxiety and depression in the setting of a hospital medical outpatient clinic. The anxiety and depression subscales each have a range from 0-21, higher scores indicated higher levels of anxiety and depression, respectively. Data are reported as the mean anxiety or depression score ± standard deviation.|Baseline; 4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the HADS questionnaire at Baseline, 4 Week, 16 Week, or their 6 Month assessment. HADS-A refers to the anxiety, while HADS-D refers to the depression portion of the survey.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839793|NCT01328366|Secondary|Mean Change in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Scores From Baseline|The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) questionnaire was used by the clinical staff to measure the severity of a participant’s psoriasis, taking into account the area of psoriasis legions on the body and the characteristics of these legions (redness, thickness, scaliness). Scores range from 0-72, a higher score indicating more severe psoriasis. Data are reported as the mean change in PASI score ± standard deviation.|4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the PASI questionnaire at Baseline, 4 Weeks, 16 Weeks, or their 6 Month assessment. Participants who did not complete a Baseline and 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment were not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839794|NCT01328366|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Scores|The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) questionnaire was used by the clinical staff to measure the severity of a participant’s psoriasis, taking into account the area of psoriasis legions on the body and the characteristics of these legions (redness, thickness, scaliness). Scores ranged from 0-72, a higher score indicated more severe psoriasis. Data are reported as the mean PASI score ± standard deviation.|Baseline; 4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the PASI questionnaire at Baseline, 4 Weeks, 16 Weeks, or their 6 Month assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839795|NCT01328366|Secondary|Mean Change in Self-assessed Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (SAPASI) Scores From Baseline|The Self-assessed Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (SAPASI) questionnaire was used to objectively measure the severity of a participant’s psoriasis, taking into account the area of psoriasis legions on the body and the characteristics of these legions (redness, thickness, scaliness). Scores ranged from 0-72, a higher score indicated more severe psoriasis. Data are reported as the mean change in SAPASI score ± standard deviation.|4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months after adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the SAPASI questionnaire at Baseline, 4 Weeks, 16 Weeks, or their 6 Month assessment. Participants who did not complete a Baseline and 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment were not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839796|NCT01328366|Secondary|Self-assessed Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (SAPASI) Scores|The Self-assessed Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (SAPASI) questionnaire was used to objectively measure the severity of a participant’s psoriasis, taking into account the area of psoriasis legions on the body and the characteristics of these legions (redness, thickness, scaliness). Scores ranged from 0-72, a higher score indicated more severe psoriasis. Data are reported as the mean SAPASI score ± standard deviation.|Baseline; 4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the SAPASI questionnaire at Baseline, 4 Weeks, 16 Weeks, or their 6 Month assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839797|NCT01328366|Primary|Mean Change in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Scores From Baseline|The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was a participant-reported questionnaire used to measure the health-related quality of life (QOL) of adults suffering from a skin disease. Scores ranged from 0-30, a higher score indicated a greater impact on a participant’s QOL. “Responders” to adalimumab had a ≥5 point reduction in DLQI scores or DLQI score of 0. Data are reported as the mean DLQI score ± standard deviation.|4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the DLQI questionnaire at baseline and at the 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment. Participants who did not complete a Baseline and 4 Week, 16 Week, or 6 Month assessment were not included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839798|NCT01328366|Primary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Scores|The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was a participant-reported questionnaire used to measure the health-related quality of life (QOL) of adults suffering from a skin disease. Scores ranged from 0-30, a higher score indicating a greater impact on a participant’s QOL. Data are reported as the mean DLQI score ± standard deviation.|Baseline; 4 weeks, 16 weeks, and 6 months following adalimumab initiation|Participants who completed the DLQI questionnaire at Baseline, 4 Week, 16 Week, or their 6 Month assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839799|NCT01328379|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Visual Analogue Self-rating (VAS) Score at Visit 3.|The EQ-5D is a brief questionnaire that asks patients to rate general state of health. The VAS score rates the general state of health of a patient with 100 for the best imaginable health state and 0 for the worst imaginable health state.|Baseline Visit 1 (double-blind study day 1) and Visit 3 (end of double-blind week 4)|Full Analysis Population. The number of participants analyzed corresponds with number of subjects who completed the questionnaire in each treatment group.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
839811|NCT01328431|Secondary|Health Care Service Utilization|A version of the Treatment Services Review (TSR) will be used to assess health care utilization during follow-ups. The TSR is a self-report instrument that asks about hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and outpatient medical and psychiatric care. The version used in this study also asks about how often the subject called the CT Smoker's Quitline, use of NRT or other medications for smoking cessation, and participation in other smoking cessation treatments.|12 months post enrollment||||||
839800|NCT01328379|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQol Group 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Scores at Visit 3.|"Patients completed a brief, generic health status questionnaire: The five specific dimensional scores value patients’ health related to mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. Each question has 3 distinguishable choices that can be analyzed using a 3-point scale (i.e. 1 = no problem, 2=some problems and 3= extreme problems).
A response of 1 indicates that the patient has no problem with the dimension tested and a response of 3 indicates that the patient has extreme problems with the dimension tested. For each visit, the average score of 5 dimensions was calculated by averaging the scores of 5 dimensions. EQ-5D final score ranges from 1-3."|Baseline Visit 1 (double-blind study day 1) and Visit 3 (end of double-blind week 4)|Full Analysis Population||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
839801|NCT01328379|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Six-Minute Walk Distance at Visit 2|The Six-Minute Walk, a test of endurance, measures the distance that a patient can walk in a period of 6 minutes. Six-minute walk distance will be reported in feet.|Visit 1 (Baseline) and Visit 2 (start of third week double-blind treatment period )|Full Analysis Population||Feet||Standard Error|Mean
839802|NCT01328379|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MSWS-12 at Visit 2|"The MSWS-12 is a multi-item rating scale that asks patients to rate limitations of their mobility due to MS during the preceding two weeks on a 5-point scale (from 1= not at all to 5=extremely). The scale assesses a range of activities of daily life that rely on walking, such as climbing stairs, moving around the home and walking distances outdoors. The MSWS-12 also addresses the quality of walking, with questions on the smoothness, speed, distance, effort, and mental concentration involved in walking, as well as the need for assistive devices.
For each visit, the MSWS-12 score was calculated by summing the 12 components and transforming into a scale with a range of 0 to 100.
MSWS-12 Score = 100 * [(Sum of Items 1-12) – 12]/48"|Visit 1 (Baseline) and Visit 2 (start of third week double-blind treatment period )|Full Analysis Population||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
839803|NCT01328379|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 12-item MS Walking Scale (MSWS-12) at Visit 3|"The MSWS-12 is a multi-item rating scale that asks patients to rate limitations of their mobility due to MS during the preceding two weeks on a 5-point scale (from 1= not at all to 5=extremely). The scale assesses a range of activities of daily life that rely on walking, such as climbing stairs, moving around the home and walking distances outdoors. The MSWS-12 also addresses the quality of walking, with questions on the smoothness, speed, distance, effort, and mental concentration involved in walking, as well as the need for assistive devices.
For each visit, the MSWS-12 score was calculated by summing the 12 components and transforming into a scale with a range of 0 to 100.
MSWS-12 Score = 100 * [(Sum of Items 1-12) – 12]/48"|Baseline Visit 1 (double-blind study day 1) and Visit 3 (end of double-blind week 4)|Full Analysis Population||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
839804|NCT01328379|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Walking Speed Near Minimum Plasma Concentration at Steady State (CminSS) of Placebo, Dalfampridine-ER (5mg and 10mg), Using the Timed 25 Foot Walk (T25FW).|"The T25FW test is a quantitative measure of ambulatory function that is widely used by MS specialists to assess the global impact of the disease and its progression on the patient’s physical disability.
A patient will stand with the toes of his/her shoes on the starting line (identified by a taped mark on the floor) and timing will begin when any part of the patient’s foot crosses the tape. Timing will end when any part of the patient’s foot crosses the finish line (identified by a taped mark on the floor). Time will be recorded in seconds and rounded to the nearest tenth of a second using a stopwatch provided for this study."|Baseline Visit 1 (double-blind study day 1) and approximately 12 hours post dose at Visit 3 (end of double-blind week 4)|Full Analysis Population||feet per second||Standard Error|Mean
839805|NCT01328379|Primary|Change From Baseline in Walking Speed Near Maximum Plasma Concentration at Steady State (CmaxSS) of Placebo and Dalfampridine-ER (5mg and 10mg), Using the Timed 25 Foot Walk (T25FW).|"The T25FW test is a quantitative measure of ambulatory function that is widely used by MS specialists to assess the global impact of the disease and its progression on the patient’s physical disability.
A patient will stand with the toes of his/her shoes on the starting line (identified by a taped mark on the floor) and timing will begin when any part of the patient’s foot crosses the tape. Timing will end when any part of the patient’s foot crosses the finish line (identified by a taped mark on the floor). Time will be recorded in seconds and rounded to the nearest tenth of a second using a stopwatch provided for this study."|Baseline Visit 1 (double-blind study day 1) and approximately 3-4 hours post dose at Visit 3 (end of double-blind week 4)|Full Analysis Population (FAP): All randomized patients who took at least one dose of double-blind investigational medication and who have a baseline Timed 25 Foot Walk (T25FW) assessment and at least one post-baseline T25FW assessment.||feet per second||Standard Error|Mean
839806|NCT01328405|Secondary|Airway Pathology|The patient will be called 24 hours later by the data collector who will administer a standard oral questionnaire to the patient to determine if a sore throat is present.|Postoperative Day Two|||participants|||Number
839807|NCT01328405|Secondary|Airway Pathology|In the recovery area, once the patient is fully awake, as judged by the recovery staff, an observer will administer a standard oral questionnaire to the patient to determine if a sore throat is present.|Postoperative (day 1) in recovery room|||participants|||Number
839808|NCT01328405|Secondary|Glottic View|Once the LMA has been placed and secured and the patient is stable from an anesthetic point of view, a flexible fiberoptic camera will be place into the airway tube of the LMA and the view of the patient's vocal cords in relation to the cuff of the LMA will be assessed.|Intraoperative (day 1)|||participants with grade 1 glottic view|||Number
839809|NCT01328405|Secondary|Grossly Visible Blood or Bile on LMA|At the conclusion of the case, when the patient is breathing on their own and is awake enough, as judged by the anesthesia provider, the LMA will be removed, as would be otherwise done as standard of care. The study LMA will be examined by a data collector for the presence of grossly visible blood or bile, and its presence or absence will be recorded.|Upon LMA removal|||participants|||Number
839810|NCT01328405|Primary|Airway Seal Pressure|The airway seal pressure will then be assessed by closing the APL valve on the anesthesia machine with a fresh gas flow of 5 liters/minute until an audible leak is observed.|Intraoperative (day 1)|||cmH2O||Standard Deviation|Mean
839833|NCT01328496|Primary|Event Free Survival (EFS) for Research Participants|Estimate EFS for research participants at one-year post transplant by using single unit umbilical cord blood. The event is defined as relapse, graft failure, death due to any cause. The number of participants who did not experience any of those events (relapse, graft failure, death due to any cause) at year 1 post-transplant was given.|1 year post-transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839812|NCT01328431|Secondary|Health Care Service Utilization|A version of the Treatment Services Review (TSR) will be used to assess health care utilization during follow-ups. The TSR is a self-report instrument that asks about hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and outpatient medical and psychiatric care. The version used in this study also asks about how often the subject called the CT Smoker's Quitline, use of NRT or other medications for smoking cessation, and participation in other smoking cessation treatments.|3 months post enrollment||||||
839813|NCT01328431|Secondary|Self-reported Tobacco Reduction or Abstinence|self-report questionnaires are completed over the phone to assess reduction in cigarette use or abstinence from cigarette use.|12 months post enrollment||||||
839814|NCT01328431|Secondary|Health Care Service Utilization|A version of the Treatment Services Review (TSR) will be used to assess health care utilization during follow-ups. The TSR is a self-report instrument that asks about hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and outpatient medical and psychiatric care. The version used in this study also asks about how often the subject called the CT Smoker's Quitline, use of NRT or other medications for smoking cessation, and participation in other smoking cessation treatments.|1 month post enrollment||||||
839815|NCT01328431|Secondary|Self-reported Tobacco Reduction or Abstinence|self-report questionnaires are completed over the phone to assess reduction in cigarette use or abstinence from cigarette use.|1 month post enrollment||||||
839816|NCT01328431|Primary|Self-report of Tobacco Abstinence or Reduction|Questionnaires to assess self reported tobacco abstinence|3 months|This is the # of participants in each group.||participants|||Number
839817|NCT01328431|Primary|Biochemical Verification of Tobacco Abstinence|Biochemical verification means a breathalyzer reading for carbon monoxide.|3 months after enrollment|This is the # of participants in each group.||participants|||Number
839834|NCT01328548|Other Pre-specified|Assessment of Immune Parameters Compatible With Inflammaging: CD4 Cell Frequency|Characterization of T-cell populations will be conducted on whole blood using multi-parametric flow cytometry prior to immunization to characterize the immunological function of circulating T-cells in the nursing home vaccine group.|Baseline|Predictor variables were assessed only among the frail elderly, the community control group served as a control for immunogenicity only.||% of peripheral blood mononuclear cell||Standard Deviation|Mean
839835|NCT01328548|Other Pre-specified|Testing 150 Candidate Immune Response Genes for SNP Analysis|These will include Tolllike receptors, cytokines, chemokines, chemokine receptors, interferons and interferon receptors. Tolllike receptors: TLR1TLR9 Cytokines: ILI1A, ILI1B, IL1RN, IL4, IL5, IL12B, IL13, CSF2 Chemokines: CCL1CCL3, CCL3L1, CCL4CCL8, CCL11, CCL13, CCL15CCL28, CXCL1CXCL14, CXCL16, CX3CL1 Chemokine receptors: CCR1CCR10, CXCR1CXCR6, CX3CR1, XCR1XCR2 Interferons: IFNA1IFNA2, IFNA4IFNA8, IFNA10, IFNA13, IFNA14, IFNA16IFNA17, IFNA21, IFNB1, IFNB3, IFNG, IFNK, IFNW1 Interferon receptors: IFNAR1, IFNAR2, IFNGR1, IFNGR2|Baseline|Genotyping was not conducted because of insufficient resources.|||||
839824|NCT01328496|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Transplant-related Morbidity|Any patient who had adverse events listed either as probable or definite in the first 100 days post-transplant are counted as transplant related morbidity. The number of patients with transplant-related morbidity was given.|first 100 days post transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839825|NCT01328496|Secondary|Incidence of Transplant-related Mortality (TRM)|TRM is death occurring in patients in continuous complete remission. The numbers of patients with TRM was given.|first 100 days post transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839826|NCT01328496|Secondary|Time to Engraftment of Research Arm Participants|Platelet engraftment was defined as platelet count ≥20,000/mm^3 for 3 consecutive tests performed on different days with no platelet transfusions in the preceding 7 days. Neutrophil engraftment will be defined as achieving ANC ≥ 500/mm3 for 3 consecutive tests performed on different days with evidence of donor cell engraftment. Descriptive statistics are provided.|first 100 days post transplant|Those patients who did not reach engraftment are not included in the results provided below.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
839827|NCT01328496|Secondary|Number of Participants With Chronic GVHD|Due to the small sample size, cumulative incidence analysis was not done. The incidence of chronic GVHD was evaluated using NIH Consensus Global Severity Scoring. The number of patients with incidence of chronic GVHD by severity was provided.|1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839828|NCT01328496|Secondary|Number of Participants With Acute GVHD|The number of participants with incidence of acute GVHD by grade was given. Participants are graded on a scale from 1 to 4, with 1 being mild and 4 being severe.|1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839829|NCT01328496|Secondary|Number of Observational Arm Patients With Transplant-related Mortality (TRM)|The number of patients with TRM within the first 100 days post transplant was given.|First 100 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839830|NCT01328496|Secondary|Number of Deaths of Observational Arm Patients|The number of observational arm patients who died was given.|1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839831|NCT01328496|Secondary|Number of Observational Arm Patients Who Relapsed|The number of observational arm patients who relapsed was given.|1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
839832|NCT01328496|Secondary|Number of Observational Arm Participants Engrafted|For patients enrolled in the observational arm (undergoing a double unit UCBT), the number of patients engrafted was given.|1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
841678|NCT01347580|Secondary|Major Bleeds After 48 Hours|non CABG related bleeds (PLATO definition) include life threatening and other major bleedings|after 48hours post-first dose|safety||patients|||Number
839838|NCT01328548|Primary|Assessment of Immune Parameters Compatible With Inflammaging: High T Regulatory Cells|Characterization of T-cell populations will be conducted on whole blood using multi-parametric flow cytometry prior to immunization to characterize the immunological function of circulating T-cells in the nursing home vaccine group.|Baseline|Predictor variables were assessed only among the frail elderly, the community control group served as a control for immunogenicity only.||% of peripheral blood mononuclear cell||Standard Deviation|Mean
839839|NCT01328548|Primary|Assessment of Immune Parameters Compatible With Inflammaging: CD4+/CD8+ Ratio|Characterization of T-cell populations will be conducted on whole blood using multi-parametric flow cytometry prior to immunization to characterize the immunological function of circulating T-cells in the nursing home vaccine group.|Baseline|Predictor variables were assessed only among the frail elderly, the community control group served as a control for immunogenicity only.||T-cell ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
839840|NCT01328548|Primary|Change From Baseline in T-cell Response to the VZV Vaccine in the Frail Elderly|As the primary phenotype, we will compare change in Enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot (ELISPOT) from baseline (i.e., pre and post vaccination). A high baseline T cell response will be defined as ELISPOT = >50 spots and a low baseline response will be ELISPOT = <10 spots.|6 weeks|IFN-gamma T cell ELISpot assay (sfu) against VZV taken prior to vaccination and 6 weeks post vaccination||Spot Forming Units per 10^6 PBMC||Standard Deviation|Mean
839841|NCT01328574|Secondary|Incidence of TRC-105-Related Adverse Events|Adverse events by grade, (e.g. 1 is mild, 2 is moderate, 3 is severe and 4 is life threatening) related to TRC-105.|24 months|||participants|||Number
839842|NCT01328574|Secondary|Median Overall Survival|Date of on-study to the date of death from any cause or last follow up.|up to 25 months|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839843|NCT01328574|Secondary|Objective Response|Objective response is defined as the number of participants who meet the criteria for a complete response (CR) or a partial response (PR) per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. CR is disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. PR is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|up to 25 months|||participants|||Number
839844|NCT01328574|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|24 months|||participants|||Number
839845|NCT01328574|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Time interval from start of treatment to documented evidence of disease progression. Progressive disease is at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression).-|after 6 months on study|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839846|NCT01329185|Primary|Incidence of EBV or CMV Related Disease in Transplant Recipient|Incidence of EBV or CMV related disease in the transplant recipients of enrolled donors.|At least 1 year|||participants|||Number
839847|NCT01329198|Secondary|Correlation of Tics and Neural Physiology|Electrical recordings of electroencephalography activity were taken from each subject's implanted leads at each visit from baseline to 6 months. At baseline, the recordings were taken with the device in the off state (not stimulating), while at the 6 month visits the recordings were taken with the subject's device set to optimal parameters for tic control. Using Pearson's correlation coefficient, the variations in frequency and power which were observed were correlated with the Yale Global Tic Severity (YGTSS) scores obtained during primary outcome testing.|Baseline to 6 Months|||Pearson Correlation Coefficient|||Number
839848|NCT01329198|Primary|Mean Change in Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS) Scores From Baseline to 6 Months Across All Study Participants Presented|"The Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS) is a semistructured clinician-rated instrument that assesses the severity and frequency of motor and phonic tics over the previous week. Five index scores are obtained during the assessment, where higher scores indicate greater frequency or severity. These indices are:
Total Motor Tic Score (0-25)
Total Phonic Tic Score (0-25
Total Tic Score (0-50)
Overall Impairment Rating (0-50)
Global Severity Score (0-7)
The YGTSS Total Score is obtained by adding the Total Tic Score to the Overall Impairment Rating. The efficacy of the intervention will be assessed by comparing each subject's 6-month YGTSS Total Score to the pre-operative value for the same patient. Efficacy is considered 50% or greater reduction in this score."|Baseline to 6 Months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839849|NCT01329263|Primary|Subjective Rating of Cigarettes|Subjects completed a visual analog scale rating each cigarette smoked at each session. Subjects rated characteristics of the cigarette on a scale represented as a continuous horizontal line 10 cm long. Subjects drew an intersecting line to represent their rating. The rating reported is for the taste of the cigarette at the end of the period averaged across subjects in the group. A rating of 0 corresponds to Very Bad and a rating of 100 to Very Good for taste. There is no better or worse outcome for higher or lower ratings for taste.|Immediately after a cigarette smoked at the study session|Completed measure||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
839850|NCT01329263|Primary|Nicotine Levels|Urine nicotine levels will be measured to examine the effect of cigarette menthol on harm exposure measures. Participants provided samples on the final day of each period. NNK and 1-hop were not analyzed, total nicotine metabolites were assayed.|35 days|Those completing Day 5, returning sample for assay||micrograms/mL||Standard Error|Mean
839851|NCT01329263|Primary|Smoking Topography- Carbon Monoxide Boost|Carbon monoxide content in exhaled breath samples is measured before and after each cigarette smoked during study sessions. CO boost is the amount in parts per million that the subject's CO increases.|Measured before and after each cigarette smoked at study sessions|||parts per million||Standard Error|Mean
839852|NCT01329263|Primary|Smoking Topography- Puff Volume|The total puff volume for a single subject is the sum of puff volumes for a subject's cigarette smoked during the study session. The mean puff volume for the subjects will be used to examine the effect of cigarette menthol on smoking topography. The values provided are the average of subjects at study Day 5 (completion of baseline smoking own cigarettes), Day 20 and Day 35.|over 35 day study period|Those completing Study session 2 at Day 5.||mL||Standard Error|Mean
841679|NCT01347580|Secondary|Minor and Major Bleedings Within 48 Hours|non CABG related bleeds (PLATO definition)|within 48 hours of first dose|Safety||patients|||Number
839853|NCT01329419|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Unexpected Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Unexpected adverse events include those not listed in the approved product information and not described as precautions or warnings.|12 weeks|ITT Population||participants|||Number
839854|NCT01329419|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Serious Adverse Event|"A serious adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose: results in death /is life-threatening; requires hospitalization or prolongation of exixting hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or is another medically significant event. For a list of all serious adverse events occurring during the course of the study, please see the table entitled Serious Adverse Events in the Adverse Event section of the results record."|12 weeks|ITT Population||participants|||Number
839855|NCT01329419|Primary|Number of Participants With an Adverse Event|"An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. For a list of all adverse events occurring during the course of the study, please see the table entitled Other (non-serious) adverse events in the Adverse Event section of the results record."|12 weeks|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who had been administered the investigational drug at least once and had undergone all safety assessments||participants|||Number
839856|NCT01329549|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|"Vss was evaluated for doxorubicin, free platinum, total platinum. Descriptive statistics were not calculated in the study report.
total platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31, 46.917,166.917, 334.917, and 502.917 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
free platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
PLD: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.25, 2.75, 3.25, 4.5, 6.5, 8, 9.5, 25, 27, 30, 34, 47.917, 167.917, 335.917, and 503.917 hours after start of infusion of PLD in Cycle 1 and 2"|0.5h after the start of the infusion up to 56 days|Treated set|||||
839857|NCT01329549|Secondary|Total Plasma Clearance (CL)|"CL was evaluated for doxorubicin, free platinum, total platinum. Descriptive statistics were not calculated in the study report.
Detailed outcome measure time frame:
total platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31, 46.917,166.917, 334.917, and 502.917 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
free platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
PLD: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.25, 2.75, 3.25, 4.5, 6.5, 8, 9.5, 25, 27, 30, 34, 47.917, 167.917, 335.917, and 503.917 hours after start of infusion of PLD in Cycle 1 and 2"|0.5h after the start of the infusion up to 56 days|Treated set|||||
839858|NCT01329549|Secondary|Terminal Half-life (t1/2)|"t1/2 was evaluated for nintedanib (BIBF 1120 BS, BIBF 1202 ZW), PLD (doxorubicin), and carboplatin (free platinum, total platinum). Descriptive statistics were not calculated in the study report.
Detailed outcome measure time frame:
total platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31, 46.917,166.917, 334.917, and 502.917 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
free platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
PLD: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.25, 2.75, 3.25, 4.5, 6.5, 8, 9.5, 25, 27, 30, 34, 47.917, 167.917, 335.917, and 503.917 hours after start of infusion of PLD in Cycle 1 and 2
nintedanib and its metabolites: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 23.917 hours after first administration of nintedanib in Cycle 1 and 2"|0.5h after the start of the infusion up to 56 days|Treated set|||||
839859|NCT01329549|Secondary|Time From Dosing to the Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|"tmax was evaluated for nintedanib (BIBF 1120 BS, BIBF 1202 ZW, BIBF 1202 glucuronide), PLD (doxorubicin), and carboplatin (free platinum, total platinum). Descriptive statistics were not calculated in the study report.
Detailed outcome measure time frame:
total platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31, 46.917,166.917, 334.917, and 502.917 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
free platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
PLD: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.25, 2.75, 3.25, 4.5, 6.5, 8, 9.5, 25, 27, 30, 34, 47.917, 167.917, 335.917, and 503.917 hours after start of infusion of PLD in Cycle 1 and 2
nintedanib and its metabolites: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 23.917 hours after first administration of nintedanib in Cycle 1 and 2"|0.5h after the start of the infusion up to 56 days|Treated set|||||
839860|NCT01329549|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve Over the Time Interval From Zero Extrapolated to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|"AUC0-∞ was evaluated for nintedanib (BIBF 1120 BS, BIBF 1202 ZW), PLD (doxorubicin), and carboplatin (free platinum, total platinum). Descriptive statistics were not calculated in the study report.
Detailed outcome measure time frame
total platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31, 46.917,166.917, 334.917, and 502.917 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
free platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
PLD: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.25, 2.75, 3.25, 4.5, 6.5, 8, 9.5, 25, 27, 30, 34, 47.917, 167.917, 335.917, and 503.917 hours after start of infusion of PLD in Cycle 1 and 2
nintedanib and its metabolites: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 23.917 hours after first administration of nintedanib in Cycle 1 and 2"|0.5h after the start of the infusion up to 56 days|Treated set|||||
839861|NCT01329549|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve Over the Time Interval From Zero to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Drug Concentration (AUC0-tz)|"AUC0-tz was evaluated for nintedanib (BIBF 1120 BS, BIBF 1202 ZW, BIBF 1202 glucuronide), PLD (doxorubicin), and carboplatin (free platinum, total platinum). Descriptive statistics were not calculated in the study report.
Detailed outcome measure time frame:
total platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31, 46.917,166.917, 334.917, and 502.917 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
free platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
PLD: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.25, 2.75, 3.25, 4.5, 6.5, 8, 9.5, 25, 27, 30, 34, 47.917, 167.917, 335.917, and 503.917 hours after start of infusion of PLD in Cycle 1 and 2
nintedanib and its metabolites: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 23.917 hours after first administration of nintedanib in Cycle 1 and 2"|0.5h after the start of the infusion up to 56 days|Treated set|||||
839862|NCT01329549|Secondary|Maximum Measured Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|"Cmax was evaluated for nintedanib (BIBF 1120 BS, BIBF 1202 ZW, BIBF 1202 glucuronide), PLD (doxorubicin), and carboplatin (free platinum, total platinum). This endpoint has not been statistically analyzed in the study report.
Detailed outcome measure time frame:
total platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31, 46.917,166.917, 334.917, and 502.917 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
free platinum: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.25, 1.75, 2.25, 3.5, 5.5, 7, 8.5, 22.917, 25, 27, 31 hours after start of infusion of carboplatin in Cycle 1 and 2
PLD: pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.25, 2.75, 3.25, 4.5, 6.5, 8, 9.5, 25, 27, 30, 34, 47.917, 167.917, 335.917, and 503.917 hours after start of infusion of PLD in Cycle 1 and 2
nintedanib and its metabolites: pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 23.917 hours after first administration of nintedanib in Cycle 1 and 2"|0.5h after the start of the infusion up to 56 days|Treated set|||||
839863|NCT01329549|Primary|Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT) and Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Nintedanib|to determine the MTD of nintedanib in combination with carboplatin (AUC 5 mg/mL·min) and PLD (30 mg/m2) reflected by the number of DLTs per dose level. This endpoint has not been statistically analyzed in the study report.|28 days|Treated set|||||
839864|NCT01329562|Secondary|Correlation of Mean Estrogen Levels in Saliva and Urine Estradiol at Mid-Luteal and at Menstrual Migraine Headache Free in Responders vs Non-Responders|"Correlation of mean estrogen levels in saliva and urine estradiol at mid-luteal, menstrual migraine headache onset* and at migraine headache free following treatment in responders vs. non-responders**.
*Urine estradiol levels were not collected at migraine onset, therefore; correlations could not be completed for that time point.
***A responder is defined as those who at the time of two hours post treatment reported mild or no pain. Additionally, these subjects could not have taken a rescue medication or have a pain level increase within 24 hours post treatment.
A non-responder is one that fails to meet the responder criteria."|From mid luteal phase and for the duration of 1 menstrual migraine until headache free.|Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839865|NCT01329562|Secondary|α-Amylase Measured at Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free in Responders vs Non-Responders|"α-Amylase levels collected for 1 menstrual migraine at Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free in Responders vs Non-Responders**.
*This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same units of measure.
**A responder is defined as those who at the time of two hours post treatment reported mild or no pain. Additionally, these subjects could not have taken a rescue medication or have a pain level increase within 24 hours post treatment.
A non-responder is one that fails to meet the responder criteria."|From Baseline from 24 hours post migraine gone for 1 menstrual migraine.|Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
839866|NCT01329562|Secondary|CGRP Measured at Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free in Responders vs Non-Responders|"CGRP levels collected for 1 menstrual migraine headache at Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free in Responders vs Non-Responders**.
*This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same units of measure.
**A responder is defined as those who at the time of two hours post treatment reported mild or no pain. Additionally, these subjects could not have taken a rescue medication or have a pain level increase within 24 hours post treatment.
A non-responder is one that fails to meet the responder criteria."|From Baseline to 24 hours post headache gone for 1 menstrual migraine.|Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||pmol/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
839867|NCT01329562|Secondary|Biomarkers Measured at Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free in Responders vs Non-Responders|"VIP, PGE2, Cortisol, PGI2, Estradiol, and β-endorphin** levels collected for 1 menstrual migraine headache at Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free in Responders vs Non-Responders***.
*This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same units of measure. CGRP and α-amylase both have their own outcome measure reported individually.
**β-endorphin levels were not assayed due to limitations on saliva sample volumes.
***A responder is defined as those who at the time of two hours post treatment reported mild or no pain. Additionally, these subjects could not have taken a rescue medication or have a pain level increase within 24 hours post treatment. A non-responder is one that fails to meet the responder criteria."|From Baseline for the duration of 1 menstrual migraine headache, an estimated 7 days|Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839868|NCT01329562|Primary|Correlation of Mean Estrogen Levels in Saliva and Urine Estradiol at Mid Luteal and at Menstrual Migraine Headache Free.|"Correlation of mean estrogen levels in saliva and urine estradiol at mid luteal, menstrual migraine headache onset*, and at migraine headache free following treatment with Treximet vs. Placebo for 1 menstrual migraine headache
*Urine estradiol levels were not collected at migraine onset, therefore; correlations could not be completed for that time point."|From mid luteal phase and for the duration of 1 menstrual migraine headache and until headache free|Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839869|NCT01329562|Primary|α-Amylase Measured at Menstrual Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free.|"α-Amylase levels collected at Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free in Treximet vs. Placebo arm for 1 menstrual migraine headache
* This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same units of measure."|From baseline to 24 hours post headache gone for 1 menstrual migraine headache|In Group B, one subject's sample was unable to be analyzed by the laboratory, therefore Group B has one less subject in the placebo arm (N=10) for all biomarker data.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
839896|NCT01329939|Secondary|Serum Leptin Levels|Leptin levels, measured through blood, mediate appetite and are elaborated by adipose tissue. Levels correlate positively with body fat percentage. In addition, leptin plays a role in producing an inflammatory state. Adiponectin, which is also secreted by adipose tissue, regulates metabolism, however its levels are inversely correlated with body fat percentage.|24 weeks|||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839870|NCT01329562|Primary|CGRP Measured at Menstrual Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free.|"CGRP levels collected at Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free in Treximet vs. Placebo arm for 1 menstrual migraine headache.
* This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same units of measure."|From baseline to 24 hours post headache gone for 1 menstrual migraine headache|In Group B, one subject's sample was unable to be analyzed by the laboratory, therefore Group B has one less subject in the placebo arm (N=10) for all biomarker data.||pmol/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
839871|NCT01329562|Primary|Biomarkers Measured at Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free, and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free.|"VIP, PGE2, Cortisol, PGI2, Estradiol, and β-endorphin** levels collected at Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, Migraine Headache Free and 24 Hours Migraine Headache Free in Treximet vs. Placebo arm for 1 menstrual migraine headache.
* This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same units of measure. CGRP and α-amylase both have their own outcome measure reported individually.
**β-endorphin levels were not assayed due to limitations on saliva sample volumes."|From baseline to 24 hours post headache gone for 1 menstrual migraine headache.|In Group B, one subject's sample was unable to be analyzed by the laboratory, therefore Group B has one less subject in the placebo arm (N=10) for all biomarker data.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839872|NCT01329562|Secondary|α-Amylase Measured at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post Treatment in Responders vs Non-Responders|"α-Amylase levels collected at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post Treatment in Responders vs Non-Responders*.
*A responder is defined as those who at the time of two hours post treatment reported mild or no pain. Additionally, these subjects could not have taken a rescue medication or have a pain level increase within 24 hours post treatment.
A non-responder is one that fails to meet the responder criteria."|From Baseline until 2 hours post treatment of 1 menstrual migraine headache.|Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
839873|NCT01329562|Secondary|CGRP Measured at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post-Treatment in Responders vs Non-Responders|"CGRP levels collected for 1 menstrual migraine headache at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post-Treatment in Responders vs Non-Responders**.
*This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same units of measure.
**A responder is defined as those who at the time of two hours post treatment reported mild or no pain. Additionally, these subjects could not have taken a rescue medication or have a pain level increase within 24 hours post treatment.
A non-responder is one that fails to meet the responder criteria."|From Baseline until 2 Hours post menstrual migraine treatment for 1 menstrual migraine headache.|Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||pmol/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
839874|NCT01329562|Secondary|Biomarkers Measured at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Onset, and 2 Hours Post Treatment in Responders vs Non-Responders|"VIP, PGE2, Cortisol, PGI2, Estradiol, and β-endorphin** levels collected for 1 menstrual migraine headache at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post Treatment in Treximet vs. Placebo arms in responders vs. non-responders***.
*This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same unit of measure. CGRP and α-amylase both have their own outcome measure reported individually.
**β-endorphin levels were not assayed due to limitations on saliva sample volumes.
***A responder is defined as those who at the time of two hours post treatment reported mild or no pain. Additionally, these subjects could not have taken a rescue medication or have a pain level increase within 24 hours post treatment.
A non-responder is one that fails to meet the responder criteria."|From Baseline until 2 Hours post menstrual migraine treatment for 1 menstrual migraine headache.|Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839875|NCT01329562|Secondary|Time to Pain-Free in Responders vs Non-Responders|"Duration of time from treatment at menstrual migraine headache onset until pain-free in Treximet vs. Placebo arms in responders* vs. non-responders for 1 menstrual migraine.
0-3 Pain Scale, with 0=No Pain, 1=Mild, 2=Moderate, and 3=Severe.
*A responder is defined as those who at the time of two hours post treatment reported mild or no pain. Additionally, these subjects could not have taken a rescue medication or have a pain level increase within 24 hours post treatment.
A non-responder is one that fails to meet the responder criteria."|From the onset of 1 menstrual migraine headache until pain-free.|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
839876|NCT01329562|Secondary|Migraine Recurrence Responders vs Non-Responders|"Number of subjects either pain-free or mild at 2 hours then pain level increases within 24 hours following treatment in Treximet vs. Placebo arm for 1 menstrual migraine headache with Treximet vs. Placebo in responders* vs. non-responders.
0-3 Pain Scale with 0=No Pain, 1=Mild, 2=Moderate, and 3=Severe
*A responder is defined as those who at the time of two hours post treatment reported mild or no pain. Additionally, these subjects could not have taken a rescue medication or have a pain level increase within 24 hours post treatment.
A non-responder is one that fails to meet the responder criteria."|From the onset of 1 menstrual migraine until 24 hours post treatment.|||participants|||Number
839877|NCT01329562|Primary|α-Amylase Measured at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post Treatment|"α-Amylase levels collected at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post Treatment in Treximet vs. Placebo arm for 1 menstrual migraine headache
* This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same units of measure."|From Baseline until 2 hours post treatment for 1 menstrual migraine headache|In Group B, one subject's sample was unable to be analyzed by the laboratory, therefore Group B has one less subject in the placebo arm (N=10) for all biomarker data. Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
839895|NCT01329939|Secondary|Urinary Leukotriene E4 (LTE4) Levels|LTE4 levels, measured in the urine, reflect the degree of inflammation in the asthmatic airway. We did not perform percent change from baseline since in a randomized clinical trial, where the groups are comparable at baseline, we can use only the post-treatment (week 24) data in the analysis.|24 weeks|One subject in the normal weight atopic asthmatic group who was receiving placebo did not provide a urine sample at 24 weeks.||pg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839878|NCT01329562|Primary|CGRP Measured at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post Treatment|"CGRP levels collected at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post Treatment in Treximet vs. Placebo arms for 1 menstrual migraine headache
* This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same units of measure."|From Baseline until 2 hours post treatment for 1 menstrual migraine headache|In Group B, one subject's sample was unable to be analyzed by the laboratory, therefore Group B has one less subject in the placebo arm (N=10) for all biomarker data. Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||pmol/mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
839879|NCT01329562|Primary|Biomarkers Measured at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post Treatment|"Vasoactive Intestinal Peptide (VIP), Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), Cortisol, Prostaglandin I2 (PGI2), Estradiol, and β-endorphin** levels collected at Baseline, Menstrual Migraine Headache Onset, and 2 Hours Post Treatment in Treximet vs. Placebo arms for 1 menstrual migraine headache * This endpoint was separated into 3 outcome measures as all biomarkers were not reported in the same units of measure. Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) and α-amylase both have their own outcome measure reported individually.
**β-endorphin levels were not assayed due to limitations on saliva sample volumes."|From Baseline until 2 hours post treatment of 1 menstrual migraine headache|In Group B, one subject's sample was unable to be analyzed by the laboratory, therefore Group B has one less subject in the placebo arm (N=10) for all biomarker data. Sample size for each arm may vary at each time point and/or biomarker based on laboratory results obtained due to sample collection errors.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839880|NCT01329562|Primary|Time to Pain Free|"Duration of 1 menstrual migraine from time of treatment at menstrual migraine headache onset until pain free in Treximet vs. Placebo arms.
0-3 pain scale with 0=No Pain, 1=Mild, 2=Moderate, and 3=Severe."|From onset of 1 menstrual migraine headache until pain free.|In Group B, one subject did not report when their headache resolve, therefore a duration for this subject could not be calculated.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
839881|NCT01329562|Primary|Migraine Recurrence|"Number of subjects either pain free or mild at 2 hours then pain level increases within 24 hours following treatment with Treximet versus (vs.) Placebo for 1 menstrual migraine.
0-3 pain scale with 0=No Pain, 1=Mild, 2=Moderate,and 3=Severe."|From onset of a single menstrual migraine episode to 24 hours post menstrual migraine treatment.|||participants|||Number
839882|NCT01329679|Secondary|Max QTc Interval After a Single Energy Shot or Placebo Consumption After Day 1 and After Chronic Consumption After Day 7||At baseline and 7 days post energy drink and placebo consumption|||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
839883|NCT01329679|Secondary|Max QT Interval After a Single Energy Shot or Placebo Consumption After Day 1 and After Chronic Consumption After Day 7||At baseline and 7 days post energy drink and placebo consumption|||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
839884|NCT01329679|Secondary|Max QRS Duration After a Single Shot and After Chronic Consumption||At baseline and 7 days post energy drink and placebo consumption|||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
839885|NCT01329679|Secondary|Max PR-interval After a Single Shot and After Chronic Consumption||At baseline and 7 days post energy drink and placebo consumption|||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
839886|NCT01329679|Secondary|Max Heart Rate After a Single Shot and After Chronic Consumption||At baseline and 7 days post energy drink and placebo consumption|||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
839887|NCT01329679|Secondary|Office DBP After a Single Energy Shot and After Chronic Consumption|Office diastolic blood pressure (DBP)|At baseline and 7 days post energy drink and placebo consumption|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
839888|NCT01329679|Primary|Change in Office Systolic Blood Pressure|SBP = Systolic Blood Pressure measured at baseline (after a single energy shot or placebo consumption) and after chronic consumption for 7 days.|At baseline and 7 days post energy drink and placebo consumption|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
839889|NCT01329848|Secondary|Conlon Symptom Survey|Measures visual discomfort symptoms while doing near work. 23 item survey using a 4-point rating scale (never, occasionally, often, almost always). Total raw score reported on a range from 0 to 69 with higher scores indicating more frequent symptoms.|3 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839890|NCT01329848|Primary|Accommodation Lag 5D|Lag will be measured at different viewing distances and durations using autorefraction. Accommodation error refers to the difference between the distance where the target is located and where the eyes focus. Lag refers error that is under focussed; lead is error that is over focussed. This distance is measured in diopters, or 1/meter.|3 week period|||diopters||Standard Deviation|Mean
839891|NCT01329939|Secondary|Urinary Creatinine (Cr) Levels/Leukotriene E4 (LTE4) Ratio|The ratio of urinary LTE4 to Cr provides a standardization of the LTE4 level based on the patients weight and muscle mass, therefore normalizing it across the different subjects. We did not perform percent change from baseline since in a randomized clinical trial, where the groups are comparable at baseline, we can use only the post-treatment (week 24) data in the analysis.|24 weeks|One subject in the normal weight atopic asthmatic group who was receiving placebo did not provide a urine sample at 24 weeks.||pg/mg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839892|NCT01329939|Secondary|Urinary Creatinine (Cr) Levels|Creatinine, measured in the urine, reflects how well the kidneys are working, and provide a standard to which one can compare other metabolites in the urine. We did not perform percent change from baseline since in a randomized clinical trial, where the groups are comparable at baseline, we can use only the post-treatment (week 24) data in the analysis.|24 weeks|One subject in the normal weight atopic asthmatic group who was receiving placebo did not provide a urine sample at 24 weeks.||mg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839893|NCT01329939|Secondary|Beclomethasone Equivalents|The total daily dose of inhaled corticosteroids in beclomethasone equivalents. We did not perform percent change from baseline since in a randomized clinical trial, where the groups are comparable at baseline, we can use only the post-treatment (week 24) data in the analysis.|24 weeks|||micrograms||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839894|NCT01329939|Secondary|Exhaled Nitric Oxide Measurement|A non-invasive measure of eosinophilic airway inflammation. We did not perform percent change from baseline since in a randomized clinical trial, where the groups are comparable at baseline, we can use only the post-treatment (week 24) data in the analysis.|24 weeks|||ppb||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841680|NCT01347580|Secondary|Major Bleeds Within 48 Hours|non CABG related bleeds, (PLATO definition) include Life threatening and other major bleeds|within 48 hours of first dose|Safety||patients|||Number
839898|NCT01329939|Primary|Asthma Control Test (ACT) Scores|The ACT is a validated questionaire-based tool designed to assess asthma control. Scale range for 7-11 year olds is 0-27 and for 12 years and older 5-25, with lower scores indicating poorer asthma control for all ages. We did not perform percent change from baseline since in a randomized clinical trial, where the groups are comparable at baseline, we can use only the post-treatment (week 24) data in the analysis.|24 weeks|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
839899|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virologic Failure Following Treatment (Viral Relapse).|Viral relapse was defined as HCV RNA < 15 IU/mL at end of treatment, confirmed with 2 consecutive values or last available measurement.|End of treatment to Post-treatment Week 24|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
839900|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virologic Failure During Treatment|"Virologic failure was defined as either
HCV RNA ≥ 15 IU/mL after having previously had HCV RNA < 15 IU/mL while on treatment, confirmed with 2 consecutive values or last available measurement (ie, breakthrough);
> 1 log10 IU/mL increase in HCV RNA from nadir while on treatment, confirmed with 2 consecutive values or last available measurement (ie, rebound);or
HCV RNA persistently ≥ 15 IU/mL through 8 weeks of treatment (ie, nonresponse)
Baseline was Day 1 for all groups."|Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24|Safety Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
839901|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ALT Normalization at Post-treatment Week 4|ALT normalization was defined as ALT > ULN at baseline (Day 1 for all groups) and ALT ≤ ULN at Post-treatment Week 4.|Baseline (Day 1) to Post-treatment Week 4|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with ALT > ULN at baseline and with available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
839902|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ALT Normalization at Week 24|ALT normalization was defined as ALT > ULN at baseline (Day 1 for all groups) and ALT ≤ ULN at Week 24.|Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with ALT > ULN at baseline and with available data were analyzed. No participants in the SOF+PEG+RBV 12 weeks group were analyzed because they received only 12 weeks of treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
839903|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ALT Normalization at Week 12|ALT normalization was defined as ALT > ULN at baseline and ALT ≤ ULN at Week 12.|Baseline (Day 1) to Week 12|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with ALT > ULN at baseline and with available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
839904|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HCV RNA Below < LOD at Week 24||Week 24|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with Available data were analyzed. No participants in the SOF+PEG+RBV 12 weeks group were analyzed because they received only 12 weeks of treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
839905|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HCV RNA Below < LOD at Week 12||Week 12|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with Available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
839906|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HCV RNA Below < LOD at Week 8||Week 8|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with Available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
839907|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HCV RNA Below < LOD at Week 4||Week 4|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with Available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
839908|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HCV RNA < LOD at Week 2||Week 2|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with Available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
839909|NCT01329978|Secondary|Change in HCV RNA at Week 12||Baseline (Day 1) to Week 12|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839910|NCT01329978|Secondary|Change in HCV RNA at Week 8||Baseline (Day 1) to Week 8|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839911|NCT01329978|Secondary|Change in HCV RNA at Week 4||Baseline (Day 1) to Week 4|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839912|NCT01329978|Secondary|Change in HCV RNA at Week 2||Baseline (Day 1) to Week 2|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839913|NCT01329978|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Following Completion of Treatment (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as HCV RNA < LOD 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug.|Post-treatment Week 12|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839914|NCT01329978|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced Adverse Events|Adverse events (AEs) occurring from baseline (Day 1 for all groups) to 30 days following the last dose of study drug were summarized across the participant population. A participant was counted once if they had a qualifying event.|Baseline (Day 1) to post-treatment Day 30|Safety Analysis Set||percentage of participants|||Number
839915|NCT01329978|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks Following Completion of Treatment (SVR24)|SVR24 was defined as HCV RNA < the limit of detection (LOD; < 15 IU/mL) 24 weeks after the last dose of study drug.|Post-treatment Week 24|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set (participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug) with genotype 1 and who had available data were analyzed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839916|NCT01330017|Secondary|Change From Baseline for the Instantaneous Nasal Symptom Assessment Score at Day 7|The magnitude of effect was measured as the change from baseline for the instantaneous nasal symptom assessment score at Day 7. Instantaneous assessment of nasal symptoms was performed once daily before the morning dose. The instantaneous assessment was a composite score of four nasal symptoms: rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing and is rated on a 0-3 scale of severity with 0 = absent symptoms, 1 = mild symptoms, 2 = moderate symptoms, and 3 = severe symptoms.|Baseline, Day 7|The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839974|NCT01330381|Secondary|Efficacy of Treatment for Final On Treatment Assessment in Open-Label Treatment Period||Over the 16 week open label treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||percentage of subjects|||Number
839917|NCT01330017|Secondary|Time to Maximal Effect|Time to maximal effect is defined as the earliest time that the nasal congestion symptom score demonstrates the greatest numerical difference from the placebo in change from baseline. The mean change from baseline scores for a treatment arm and for the placebo arm at each day and timepoint of the treatment period (Day 1 morn, Day 1 eve, etc) were calculated. Then the difference between the placebo and treatment arm means at each day/timepoint of the treatment period was calculated and recorded the day/timepoint that the difference between the treatment arm and the placebo was highest.|Baseline up to Day 7|The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Days|||Number
839918|NCT01330017|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline for the Instantaneous Nasal Symptom Assessment Score By Study Day of the Treatment Period|"Instantaneous assessment of nasal symptoms was performed once daily before the
morning dose. The instantaneous assessment was a composite score of four nasal symptoms: rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing and is rated on a 0-3 scale of severity with 0 = absent symptoms, 1 = mild symptoms, 2 = moderate symptoms, and 3 = severe symptoms."|Baseline and Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7|The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839919|NCT01330017|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline for the Daily Reflective Nasal Symptom Assessment Score by Study Day of the Treatment Period|The reflective nasal congestion score was captured in participant diaries just before the 8:00 a.m. dose and 12 hours later just before the 8:00 p.m. dose. It is a composite score including four nasal symptoms: rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing and is rated on a 0-3 scale of severity with 0 = absent symptoms, 1 = mild symptoms, 2 = moderate symptoms, and 3 = severe symptoms. The daily reflective nasal congestion symptom score was defined as the average of the morning and evening reflective nasal congestion score for the entire treatment period.|Baseline and Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7|The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839920|NCT01330017|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the a.m. Symptom Score for the Instantaneous Nasal Symptom Assessment by Study Day of the Treatment Period|"Instantaneous assessment of nasal symptoms was performed once daily before the
morning dose. The instantaneous assessment was a composite score of four nasal symptoms: rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing and is rated on a 0-3 scale of severity with 0 = absent symptoms, 1 = mild symptoms, 2 = moderate symptoms, and 3 = severe symptoms."|Baseline and Day 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7|The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839921|NCT01330017|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Evening (p.m.) Symptom Score for the Nasal Reflective Symptom Assessment by Study Day of the Treatment Period|The evening reflective nasal congestion score was captured in participant diaries just before the 8;00 p.m. dose. It is a composite score including four nasal symptoms: rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing and is rated on a 0-3 scale of severity with 0 = absent, 1 = mild symptoms, 2 = moderate symptoms, and 3 = severe symptoms.|Baseline and Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7|The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839922|NCT01330017|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Morning (a.m.) Symptom Score for the Nasal Reflective Symptom Assessment by Study Day of the Treatment Period|The morning reflective nasal congestion score was captured in participant diaries just before the 8:00 am dose. It is a composite score including four nasal symptoms: rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing and it is rated on a 0-3 scale of severity with 0 = absent symptoms, 1 = mild symptoms, 2 = moderate symptoms, and 3 = severe symptoms.|Baseline and Days 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7|The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839923|NCT01330017|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline Over the Entire Treatment Period in the Daily Reflective Nasal Congestion Score|The reflective nasal congestion score was captured in participant diaries just before the 8:00 a.m. dose and 12 hours later just before the 8:00 p.m. dose. Participants rated congestion on a 4-point scale of severity from 0 (best) to 3 (worst), with 0 = absent symptoms, 1 = mild symptoms, 2 = moderate symptoms, and 3 = severe symptoms. The daily reflective nasal congestion symptom score was defined as the average of the morning and evening reflective nasal congestion score for the entire treatment period. Baseline was defined as the average of the daily scores over the 4 consecutive 24-hour periods before randomization.|Baseline, Day 7|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839924|NCT01330030|Primary|Expired-air Carbon Monoxide Confirmed Smoking Abstinence|expired-air carbon monoxide confirmed smoking abstinence at 52 weeks|52 weeks|intention to treat||participants not smoking|||Number
839925|NCT01330043|Secondary|Expired-air CO Verified Point-prevalence Abstinence|Self-reported no smoking in last 7 days verified by CO<10 ppm|104 weeks|||participants|||Number
839926|NCT01330043|Primary|Expired-air CO Verified Point-prevalence Abstinence|Self-reported no smoking in last 7 days verified by CO<10 ppm|52 weeks|||participants|||Number
839927|NCT01330108|Secondary|Mean Change in Distance for a Six Minute Walk at 12 Weeks Post Start of Ambrisentan|Evaluate the change in exercise tolerance. Measured the distance a subject was capable of walking in 6 minutes at basline compared to the distance at 12 weeks. The distance was measured in meters. A postive result reflects the distance increased at 12 weeks, a negative result reflects how much shorter the distance was.|baseline to 12 weeks|||meters||Full Range|Mean
839928|NCT01330108|Primary|Number of Subjects Not Able to Tolerate Ambrisentan|If a subject was not able tolerate ambrisentan, subject was returned to use of bosentan and ambrisentan was withdrawn within first 12 weeks of start. A subject was considered to not be able to tolerate ambrisentan if they experienced an adverse event or side effect that was not acceptable to the subject.|baseline to 12 weeks|||participants|||Number
839975|NCT01330381|Secondary|Efficacy of Treatment for Final On Treatment Assessment in Double-Blind Treatment Period||Over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||percentage of subjects|||Number
841681|NCT01347580|Secondary|Thrombotic Bail-out With GPIIb/IIIa Inhibitors at Initial PCI|Glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors are often used as a rescue or bailout therapy to manage complications arising during percutaneous coronary intervention.|during PCI|mITT||patients|||Number
839929|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Caregivers' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Care-giving Efforts|"This individual question from the caregivers' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each caregiver could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each caregiver were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the caregivers."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct caregiver was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839930|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Caregivers' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication With Regard to Sleeping Patients|"This individual question from the caregivers' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each caregiver could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each caregiver were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the caregivers."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct caregiver was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839931|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Caregivers' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication With Regard to Independency of Food Administration|"This individual question from the caregivers' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each caregiver could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each caregiver were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the caregivers."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct caregiver was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839932|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Caregivers' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Multiple Medication in Patients With Multiple Medication|"This individual question from the caregivers' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each caregiver could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each caregiver were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the caregivers."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct caregiver was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839933|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Caregivers' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Control of Compliance|"This individual question from the caregivers' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each caregiver could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each caregiver were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the caregivers."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct caregiver was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839934|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Caregivers' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Nausea and/or Vomiting in Patients With Nausea and/or Vomiting|"This individual question from the caregivers' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each caregiver could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each caregiver were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the caregivers."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct caregiver was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
841682|NCT01347580|Secondary|ST Segment Elevation Resolution Post-PCI >= 70%|ST segment elevation resolution post PCI >=70% is defined as complete resolution|Between baseline and ECG 60 mn post-PCI|mITT on patients with non missing ECG values||patients|||Number
839935|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Caregivers' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Dysphagia in Patients With Dysphagia|"This individual question from the caregivers' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each caregiver could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each caregiver were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the caregivers."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct caregiver was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839936|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Physicians' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Resorption|"This individual question from the physicians' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839937|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Physicians' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Risk of Interaction With Other Treatments|"This individual question from the physicians' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839938|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Physicians' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication With Regard to Sleeping Patients|"This individual question from the physicians' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839939|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Physicians' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication With Regard to Independency of Food Administration|"This individual question from the physicians' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839940|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Physicians' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Dose Adaption|"This individual question from the physicians' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
841683|NCT01347580|Secondary|TIMI Flow Grade 3 Post -PCI|TIMI) flow grade 3 is complete perfusion post-PCI.|at coroangiography post-PCI|mITT, on patients with non missing TIMI flow grade values||patients|||Number
839941|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Physicians' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Surgery Requiring General Anaesthesia|"This individual question from the physicians' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839942|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Physicians' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Multiple Medication in Patients With Multiple Medication|"This individual question from the physicians' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839943|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Physicians' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Control of Compliance|"This individual question from the physicians' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839944|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Physicians' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Nausea and/or Vomiting in Patients With Nausea and/or Vomiting.|"This individual question from the physicians' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839945|NCT01330290|Secondary|Score for the Physicians’ Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication in Relation to Dysphagia in Patients With Dysphagia|"This individual question from the caregivers' questionnaire was to be assessed from major disadvantages to major advantages, and the corresponding answer was to be evaluated according to a 5-point rating scale using a score from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839946|NCT01330290|Secondary|Assessment of the Physicians' Rationale for the Choice of Neupro® Due to Application Form in Idiopathic Parkinsons Disease Patients Requiring Caregiver Support|"The physician was asked if he / she prescribed Neupro® due to application form in idiopathic Parkinson's Disease patients requiring caregiver support. The possible answers were applicable and not applicable."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires.||participants|||Number
839976|NCT01330381|Secondary|Severity of Constipation Over the Past 2 Weeks for the Final On Treatment Assessment in the Open-Label Treatment Period||2 weeks|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||percentage of subjects|||Number
839947|NCT01330290|Secondary|Assessment of the Physicians' Rationale for the Choice of Neupro® Due to Substance in Idiopathic Parkinsons Disease Patients Requiring Caregiver Support|"The physician was asked if he / she prescribed Neupro® due to substance in idiopathic Parkinson's Disease patients requiring caregiver support. The possible answers were applicable and not applicable."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires.||participants|||Number
839948|NCT01330290|Primary|Mean Score of the Physicians' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication|"The physicians were asked to fill out a questionnaire composed of 10 questions covering medical and caregiving aspects. The mean score is calculated from the scores for the single responses which are rated from 'great disadvantages' to 'great advantages' and scored on a 5-point scale from -2 to +2.
Each physician could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each physician were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the physicians."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct physician was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839949|NCT01330290|Primary|Mean Score of the Caregivers' Rating of Neupro® Compared to Oral Anti-Parkinson Medication|"The caregivers were asked to fill out a questionnaire composed of 7 questions covering caregiving aspects. The mean score is calculated from the scores for the single responses which are rated from 'great disadvantages' to 'great advantages' and scored on a 5-point scale from -2 to +2.
Each caregiver could have assessed one or multiple participants. The scores from each caregiver were averaged over all participants they assessed, and the final mean score was calculated from the averaged assessments of the caregivers."|Questionnaire completed at a single time-point during the run of the cross-sectional study (16 months). Suitable patients suffer from idiopathic iPD treated with a combination of l-dopa or another oral iPD drug and Neupro® for at least one month.|The Analysis Population refers to the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprises all patients with at least 1 assessment in the physicians' or caregivers'/nurses' questionnaires. The average assessment of all patients assessed by a distinct caregiver was calculated and used for analysis.||units on a scale|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
839950|NCT01330303|Primary|Cmax|Cmax is defined as the maximum or “peak” concentration of a drug observed after its administration. Cmax is one of the parameters of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the total amount of drug absorbed.|Day 1 (day that blood collections started) to Day 4 (Period 1) and Days 8 to 11 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
839951|NCT01330303|Primary|AUC0-infinity|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC from time 0 (prior to administration of medication) to infinity (the time of complete elimination of the drug) was calculated using the trapezoidal method. This method consists of the sum of the trapezoids' areas, determined by the collection times and their concentrations. The AUC is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption.|Day 1 (day that blood collections started) to Day 4 (Period 1) and Days 8 to 11 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng.h/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
839952|NCT01330303|Primary|AUC 0-t|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC from time 0 (prior to administration of medication) to time t (the time of the last quantifiable concentration) was calculated using the trapezoidal method. This method consists of the sum of the trapezoids' areas, determined by the collection times and their concentrations. The AUC is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption. ng, nanograms; ml, milliliter.|Day 1 (day that blood collections started) to Day 4 (Period 1) and Days 8 to 11 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng per hour per ml (ng.h/ml)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839953|NCT01330316|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Laboratory Test Values Over Time [Bilirubin Total]|"This outcome measure will be presented as the mean value and the standard deviation at baseline, week 4, week 12, the minimum (min) value on treatment, maximum (max) value on treatment and last measured value on treatment. Analytes with particular relevance for patients with HCF have been selected: Haemoglobin, Alanine aminotransaminase (ALT), Aspartate aminotransaminase (AST) and Bilirubin total.
In this outcome measure Bilirubin total is presented."|baseline (the last observed measurement prior to administration of any randomised study medication), week 4, week 12 (after start of treatment)|FAS||milligram (mg)/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
839954|NCT01330316|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Laboratory Test Values Over Time [AST]|"This outcome measure will be presented as the mean value and the standard deviation at baseline, week 4, week 12, the minimum (min) value on treatment, maximum (max) value on treatment and last measured value on treatment. Analytes with particular relevance for patients with HCF have been selected: Haemoglobin, Alanine aminotransaminase (ALT), Aspartate aminotransaminase (AST) and Bilirubin total.
In this outcome measure AST is presented."|baseline (the last observed measurement prior to administration of any randomised study medication), week 4, week 12 (after start of treatment)|FAS||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
839955|NCT01330316|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Laboratory Test Values Over Time [ALT]|"This outcome measure will be presented as the mean value and the standard deviation at baseline, week 4, week 12, the minimum (min) value on treatment, maximum (max) value on treatment and last measured value on treatment. Analytes with particular relevance for patients with HCF have been selected: Haemoglobin, Alanine aminotransaminase (ALT), Aspartate aminotransaminase (AST) and Bilirubin total.
In this outcome measure ALT is presented."|baseline (the last observed measurement prior to administration of any randomised study medication), week 4, week 12 (after start of treatment)|FAS||Units (U)/Litre (L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839956|NCT01330316|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Laboratory Test Values Over Time [Haemoglobin]|"This outcome measure will be presented as the mean value and the standard deviation at baseline, week 4, week 12, the minimum (min) value on treatment, maximum (max) value on treatment and last measured value on treatment. Analytes with particular relevance for patients with HCF have been selected: Haemoglobin, Alanine aminotransaminase (ALT), Aspartate aminotransaminase (AST) and Bilirubin total.
In this outcome measure Haemoglobin is presented."|baseline (the last observed measurement prior to administration of any randomised study medication), week 4, week 12 (after start of treatment)|FAS||gram (g)/decilitre (dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
839957|NCT01330316|Secondary|Laboratory Test Abnormalities by DAIDS Grades|This Outcome measure will be presented as summary of the percentage of patients with worst on-treatment Division of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (DAIDS) grade laboratory abnormalities for selected analytes (Haemoglobin, Alanine aminotransaminase (ALT), Aspartate aminotransaminase (AST) and Bilirubin total) with particular relevance to patients with HCV.|baseline (day 1, after first dose of randomised treatment) up to 7 days after the last intake of study|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
839958|NCT01330316|Secondary|Occurrence of Drug-related AEs as Assessed by the Investigator|This outcome measure will be presented as the percentage of subjects with any drug-related AEs as assessed by the investigator. Percentages are calculated using total number of subjects per treatment cohort as the denominator.|from first intake of study medication until 30 days after discontinuing faldaprevir, up to a maximum of 213 days|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
839959|NCT01330316|Secondary|Occurrence of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|This outcome measure will be presented as the percentage of subjects with any serious adverse event (SAE). Percentages are calculated using total number of subjects per treatment cohort as the denominator.|from first intake of study medication until 30 days after discontinuing faldaprevir, up to a maximum of 213 days|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
839960|NCT01330316|Secondary|Occurrence of Adverse Events Leading to Treatment Discontinuation|This outcome measure will be presented as the percentage of subjects with adverse events leading to discontinuation of Faldaprevir and all study medication. Percentages are calculated using total number of subjects per treatment cohort as the denominator.|from first intake of study medication until 30 days after discontinuing faldaprevir, up to a maximum of 213 days|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
839961|NCT01330316|Secondary|Occurrence of Adverse Events (Overall and by DAIDS Grade)|"This outcome measure will be presented as the percentage of subjects with any adverse event (AE).
Percentages are calculated using total number of subjects per treatment cohort as the denominator.
The intensity of all AEs was evaluated according to the DAIDS (Division of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) grading scale with AEs of mild, moderate, or severe intensity receiving Grades 1, 2, or 3, respectively. Adverse events judged potentially life threatening received a Grade 4 assessment."|from first intake of study medication until 30 days after discontinuing faldaprevir, up to a maximum of 213 days|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
839962|NCT01330316|Secondary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) Normalisation: AST in Normal Range at 12 Weeks Post-treatment.|This will be presented as the number of patients in/not in normal range from baseline to 12 weeks post treatment. SVR12 is sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment.|Week 48 for relapsers with ETS; Week 48 for relapsers without ETS, and non-relapsers|FAS||participants|||Number
839963|NCT01330316|Secondary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) Normalisation: AST in Normal Range at End of Treatment (EoT)|This will be presented as the number of patients in/not in normal range from baseline to EoT. SVR12 is sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment.|Week 24 for relapsers with ETS; Week 48 for relapsers without ETS, and non-relapsers.|FAS||participants|||Number
839964|NCT01330316|Secondary|Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Normalisation: ALT in Normal Range at 12 Weeks Post-treatment.|This will be presented as the number of patients in/not in normal range from baseline to 12 weeks post treatment. SVR12 is sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment.|48 weeks for relapsers with ETS; 60 weeks for non-relapsers and relapsers without ETS|FAS||participants|||Number
839965|NCT01330316|Secondary|Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Normalisation: ALT in Normal Range at End of Treatment (EoT)|This will be presented as the number of patients in/not in normal range from baseline EoT. SVR12 is sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment.|Week 24 for relapsers with ETS; Week 48 for relapsers without ETS, and non-relapsers|FAS||participants|||Number
839966|NCT01330316|Secondary|Early Treatment Success (ETS)|ETS, defined as a plasma HCV RNA level <25 IU/mL (detected or undetected) at week 4 and HCV RNA <25 IU/mL (undetected) at week 8.|week 4 and week 8|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
839967|NCT01330316|Secondary|Sustained Virological Response After 24 Weeks of Treatment Discontinuation (SVR24)|Sustained virologic response 24 weeks, defined as a plasma HCV RNA level < 25 IU/mL (undetected) 24 weeks after the originally planned treatment duration.|24 weeks post treatment, up to 72 weeks|FAS||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839968|NCT01330316|Primary|Sustained Virological Response (SVR): Plasma HCV RNA Level < 25 IU/mL|The primary endpoint was SVR12, defined as a plasma Hepatitis C virus (HCV) Ribonucleic acid (RNA) level <25 IU/mL (undetected) 12 weeks after the originally planned treatment duration.|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|FAS||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
839969|NCT01330355|Secondary|Microbial Outcome|"Microbial outcome for the following groups of accepted ocular bacterial species that were present at or above threshold at baseline:
over all bacterial species
over all and individual gram-positive bacterial species
over all and individual gram-negative bacterial species"|Visit 3 (Day 3) and Visit 5 (Day 8+1)|The analysis population only includes those for whom the outcome was measured within the specified time frame. A subject may have tested positive for multiple bacterial species (up to 5 species).||events|||Number
839970|NCT01330355|Secondary|Microbial Eradication|Eradication defined as the absence of all accepted ocular bacterial species (as measured on the ordinal scale) that were present at or above threshold at baseline|Visit 5 (Day 8+1)|The analysis population only includes those for whom the outcome was measured within the specified time frame.||participants|||Number
839971|NCT01330355|Secondary|Clinical Resolution|Clinical resolution defined as the absence of both conjunctival discharge and conjunctival hyperemia.|Visit 3 (Day 3)|The analysis population only includes those for whom the outcome was measured within the specified time frame.||participants|||Number
841684|NCT01347580|Secondary|Definite Stent Thrombosis|Definite stent thrombosis is considered to have occurred by either angiographic or pathologic confirmation. It is an adjudicated endpoint|during 30 days of treatment|mITT||patients|||Number
839977|NCT01330381|Secondary|Severity of Constipation Over the Past 2 Weeks for the Final On Treatment Assessment in the Double-Blind Treatment Period||2 weeks|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||percentage of subjects|||Number
839978|NCT01330381|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Number of SBM Per Week Over the 8 Week Double Blind Treatment Period||Baseline and over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||SBM/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
839979|NCT01330381|Secondary|Number of SBM Per Week in the Double-Blind Treatment Period||Over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||SBM/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
839980|NCT01330381|Secondary|Time to First SBM in the Double-Blind Treatment Period|After intake of the trial medication on Day 1.|Day 1 onwards|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
839981|NCT01330381|Secondary|Number of Rescue Medications Taken in the Double-Blind Treatment Period||Over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||rescue medications/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
839982|NCT01330381|Secondary|Frequency of Toilet Training in the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Only for subjects after acquisition of toileting skills.|Over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||toilet trainings/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
839983|NCT01330381|Secondary|Abdominal Pain Score in Double-Blind Treatment Period|Pain was rated on a 6-point scale (0=no hurt, 1=hurts little bit, 2=hurts little more, 3=hurts even more, 4=hurts whole lot, 5=hurts worst) in subjects of 3 years and older. Lower scores represent less pain.|Over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839984|NCT01330381|Secondary|Large Diameter Stools in the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Large diameter stools make defecation more difficult. Small diameter stools are better.|Over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||large diameter stools/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
839985|NCT01330381|Secondary|Stool Consistency Per SBM Score in Children With Diapers in the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Measured on a 4-point scale where 1 is constipation, 2-3 is ideal, and 4 is diarrhea.|Over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839986|NCT01330381|Secondary|Stool Consistency Per SBM Score in Children Without Diapers in the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Measured using the 7-point Bristol scale where 1-2 indicate constipation, 3-4 are ideal stools, and 5-7 tending toward diarrhea.|Over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839987|NCT01330381|Secondary|Painful Bowel Movements Score in the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Pain was rated on a 6-point scale (0=no hurt, 1=hurts little bit, 2=hurts little more, 3=hurts even more, 4=hurts whole lot, 5=hurts worst) in subjects of 3 years and older. Lower scores represent less pain.|Over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839988|NCT01330381|Secondary|Number of Retentive Posturing or Excessive Volitional Stool Retention in the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Purposefully avoiding defecation.|Over the 8 week double blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||retentions/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
839989|NCT01330381|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With Fecal Incontinence Episodes of 1 or Less Per 2 Weeks in the Last Four Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Fecal incontinence is a lack of control over defecation, leading to involuntary loss of bowel contents (only for subjects after acquisition of toileting skills).|Last 4 weeks of double-blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. Not all subjects in the Full Analysis Set had data for this outcome.||percentage of subjects|||Number
839990|NCT01330381|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With Bowel Frequency of 3 or More Spontaneous Bowel Movements (SBM) Per Week in the Last Four Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Spontaneous Bowel Movements defined as a bowel movement that is not preceded within a period of 24 hours by the intake of a laxative agent or by the use of an enema.|Last 4 weeks of double-blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
839991|NCT01330381|Primary|Percent of Responders in the Last Four Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Responders are defined as subjects with an average spontaneous defecation frequency is ≥3 times per week AND the average number of fecal incontinence episodes per 2 weeks is ≤ 1 episode (only for subjects after acquisition of toileting skills).|Last 4 weeks of double-blind treatment period|Full Analysis Set includes all subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of investigational product.||percentage of subjects|||Number
839992|NCT01330394|Secondary|Effort to Control the Urge for Use Alcohol|Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale will be applied before and after ERP procedures|one year and a half||||||
839993|NCT01330394|Secondary|Quality of Life|Quality of life scale will be applied at the end of the protocol|one year and a half||||||
841685|NCT01347580|Secondary|2nd Composite Clinical Endpoint|Death/MI/urgent revascularization. Adjudicated events except death|within 30 days of study|mITT||patients|||Number
839995|NCT01330394|Secondary|Event-related Potentials|Event-related potential (ERPs) was recorded under the presentation of 120 sounds [60 of 3 types related to the use of alcoholic beverages (open a can of beer, fill a glass of beer, opening and fall of the lid of a bottle of beer), and 3 types of 60 neutral sounds (open a door, typing a keyboard, shower water)] lasted for 384 s for each period before and after transcranial Direct Current Stimulation|one year and a half||||||
839996|NCT01330394|Primary|Use of Alcohol|Relapse to the use of alcohol to a usual pattern observed before treatment (for example, if a patient was used to have 10 drinks/day before treatment and start to have about this amount of drinks/day with similar behavior seen before treatment, it would be considered a relapse).|6 months after treatment|||participants|||Number
839997|NCT01330420|Secondary|The Health Promoting Lifestyle Profile II (HPLP-II)|"The Health Promoting Lifestyle Profile II (HPLP-II) was used to assess health promoting behaviors. Based on the Health Promoting Model (Pender, 1982) this 52-item instrument measures self-initiated health behaviors that serve to maintain or enhance the level of self-actualization and wellness. Included are subscales for physical activity, spiritual growth, health responsibility, interpersonal relations, nutrition, and stress management. It is self-administered and uses a 4-point response format. Both English and Spanish versions are available.
A score for overall health-promoting lifestyle is obtained by calculating a mean of the individual's responses to all 52 items; six subscale scores are obtained similarly by calculating a mean of the responses to subscale items. Scores range from 1 = Never to 4 = Routinely, with a higher score corresponding to a more health promoting lifestyle."|comparison pre program initiation and post program completion time points (6 weeks)|24 patients met completer status, defined as patients who attended all or part of the six sessions. Not all 24 patients had complete pre-/post-intervention questionnaires sets. Therefore, patients may have missed some of the questionnaires, either pre- or post-intervention, and thus the number of patients analyzed maybe less than 24.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839998|NCT01330420|Primary|Satisfaction With Care (PSQ-18)|Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form (PSQ-18) takes approximately 3-4 minutes to complete, containing 18 items examining seven dimensions of satisfaction with medical care: general satisfaction (2 questions, Mean =3.58, SD =0.94), technical quality (3 questions, Mean = 3.68, SD = 0.76), interpersonal manner (2 questions, Mean = 4.09, SD = 0.69), communication (2 questions, Mean = 3.74, SD = 0.87), financial aspects (2 questions, Mean = 3.78, SD = 0.94), time spent with doctor (2 questions, Mean = 3.59, SD = 0.94), and accessibility and convenience (4 questions, Mean = 3.76, SD = 0.74). Responses to each item are given on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 - strongly agree to 5 - strong disagree, therefore higher scores correspond to less satisfaction. PSQ-18 subscale scores are substantially correlated with their full-scale counterparts and possess generally adequate internal consistency reliability.|comparison pre program initiation and post program completion time points (6 weeks)|24 patients met completer status, defined as patients who attended all or part of the six sessions. Not all 24 patients had complete pre-/post-intervention questionnaires sets. Therefore, patients may have missed some of the questionnaires, either pre- or post-intervention, and thus the number of patients analyzed maybe less than 24.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
839999|NCT01330420|Primary|Quality of Life (QOL-5)|The QOL-5 is a short, global, and generic quality of life (QoL) questionnaire for clinical databases. The QOL-5 item tool is used to compare various population groups using generic factors common to people everywhere irrespective of age, sex, culture, and state of health. Scores on the QOL-5 ranges from 0 = lowest quality to 100 = highest quality.|comparison pre program initiation and post program completion time points (6 weeks)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840000|NCT01330420|Primary|Health Status (SF-12)|The SF-12 was used to assess health status. It is the shortened version of the well-validated SF-36, directed at monitoring overall physical and mental health outcomes. It is available in both English and Spanish. Scoring algorithms involve weighted-item responses, all 8 scales to use the same standardization for easy comparison. All scores range from 0–100 where higher scores indicated better QOL. The mean = 50 and the SD = 10.|comparison pre program initiation and post program completion time points (6 weeks)|24 patients met completer status, defined as patients who attended all or part of the six sessions. Not all 24 patients had complete pre-/post-intervention questionnaires sets. Therefore, patients may have missed some of the questionnaires, either pre- or post-intervention, and thus the number of patients analyzed maybe less than 24.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840001|NCT01330420|Primary|Depression Severity (CEDS-10)|The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D 10) was used to assess depression severity pre-and post-intervention. This is the shorter 10-item, modified version of the 20-item CES-D. The total score is the sum of the 10 item weights, with the lowest possible score being 0 and the highest possible score being 30, and a higher score indicating more depressive symptoms. Developed from other well-validated depression scales, this instrument measures the experience of depressive symptoms over the past week. This instrument is shown to be better than the CES-D 20 in combining data from different ethnic and cultural groups, and is available in both English and Spanish. This scale has been reported to have good internal consistency and validity.|comparison pre program initiation and post program completion time points (6 weeks)|24 patients met completer status, defined as patients who attended all or part of the six sessions. Not all 24 patients had complete pre-/post-intervention questionnaires sets. Therefore, patients may have missed some of the questionnaires, either pre- or post-intervention, and thus the number of patients analyzed maybe less than 24.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840002|NCT01330433|Secondary|Hospital Stay|Number of days post surgery.|Length of stay after second surgery up to 1 month|The difference in the number of participants analyzed and the total number of participants is due to feeding issues unrelated to the surgery or the device that required the subject to remain hospitalized longer than anticipated.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
840003|NCT01330433|Primary|Adhesion Burden|Skin to bypass time as an indicator of adhesion burden.|Time it takes for patient to be put on bypass (an average time between 0 and 120 minutes)|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
840004|NCT01330433|Primary|Post-operative Bleeding|Post-operative bleeding through surgical site drainage output.|Post-operative bleeding data will be collected on average, during the first 36 hours after the surgery|The difference in the number of participants analyzed and the total number of participants is due to the information not being properly collected at the time of the surgery. Because there was a lack of confidence in the data, it was discarded.||cm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
840005|NCT01330433|Primary|Severity of Adhesions at the Right Lateral Site|Severity of adhesions at five predefined sites (retrosternal, diaphragmatic region, right lateral, left lateral, arterial base). Severity of adhesions is graded as 0 = no adhesions, 1 = filmy and avascular, 2 = requiring blunt dissection, 3 = requiring sharp dissection, 4 = requiring extensive sharp dissection. Adhesion scores for each patient will be derived from the sum of adhesion severity scores at each site, from 0 (no adhesions) to 28 (cohesive adhesions at all sites).|Severity of adhesions data will be collected during approximately the first 30-60 minutes of the second staged surgery|||percentage of participants|||Number
840006|NCT01330433|Primary|Severity of Adhesions at the Left Lateral Site|Severity of adhesions at five predefined sites (retrosternal, diaphragmatic region, right lateral, left lateral, arterial base). Severity of adhesions is graded as 0 = no adhesions, 1 = filmy and avascular, 2 = requiring blunt dissection, 3 = requiring sharp dissection, 4 = requiring extensive sharp dissection. Adhesion scores for each patient will be derived from the sum of adhesion severity scores at each site, from 0 (no adhesions) to 28 (cohesive adhesions at all sites).|Severity of adhesions data will be collected during approximately the first 30-60 minutes of the second staged surgery|||percentage of participants|||Number
840007|NCT01330433|Primary|Severity of Adhesions at the Diaphragm Site|Severity of adhesions at five predefined sites (retrosternal, diaphragmatic region, right lateral, left lateral, arterial base). Severity of adhesions is graded as 0 = no adhesions, 1 = filmy and avascular, 2 = requiring blunt dissection, 3 = requiring sharp dissection, 4 = requiring extensive sharp dissection. Adhesion scores for each patient will be derived from the sum of adhesion severity scores at each site, from 0 (no adhesions) to 28 (cohesive adhesions at all sites).|Severity of adhesions data will be collected during approximately the first 30-60 minutes of the second staged surgery|||percentage of participants|||Number
840008|NCT01330433|Primary|Severity of Adhesions at the Arterial Base Site.|Severity of adhesions at five predefined sites (retrosternal, diaphragmatic region, right lateral, left lateral, arterial base). Severity of adhesions is graded as 0 = no adhesions, 1 = filmy and avascular, 2 = requiring blunt dissection, 3 = requiring sharp dissection, 4 = requiring extensive sharp dissection. Adhesion scores for each patient will be derived from the sum of adhesion severity scores at each site, from 0 (no adhesions) to 28 (cohesive adhesions at all sites).|Severity of adhesions data will be collected during approximately the first 30-60 minutes of the second staged surgery|||percentage of participants|||Number
840009|NCT01330433|Primary|Severity of Adhesions at the Retrosternal Site|Severity of adhesions at seven predefined sites (pericardial or retrosternal, inferior or diaphragmatic region, right lateral or arterial region, region around great vessels). Severity of adhesions is graded as 0 = no adhesions, 1 = filmy and avascular, 2 = requiring blunt dissection, 3 = requiring sharp dissection, 4 = requiring extensive sharp dissection. Adhesion scores for each patient will be derived from the sum of adhesion severity scores at each site, from 0 (no adhesions) to 28 (cohesive adhesions at all sites).|Severity of adhesions data will be collected during approximately the first 30-60 minutes of the second staged surgery|||percentage of participants|||Number
840010|NCT01330628|Primary|Freedom From Major Adverse Events (MAE)|Number of participants free from Major Adverse Events (MAE) at 30 days. MAE are defined all cause death, major amputation in the target limb, or target lesion revascularization (TLR) from procedure to 30 days (±7 days).|30 days|The number of participants analyzed for this endpoint does not match with the Participant Flow 30 Day Follow-up population. If a subject did not complete a 30 Day Follow-up due to missing the visit or lost to follow-up, but had an MAE prior to this time point, they would still be included in this outcome analysis.||# of participants free from MAE|||Number
840011|NCT01330628|Primary|Freedom From Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR)|Number of participants free from Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR) through 6 months follow-up.|6 months|The number of participants analyzed for this endpoint does not match with the Participant Flow 6 Month Follow-up population. A subject may not complete a 6 Month Follow-up due to missing the visit, being lost to follow-up, etc., but if they had a TLR prior to this time point, they would still be included in this outcome analysis.||# of participants free from TLR|||Number
840012|NCT01330914|Secondary|Bone Structure|Trabecular and cortical bone microstructure by HR-pQCT|pre-operatively and 6 and 12 months post-operatively||||||
840013|NCT01330914|Secondary|Bone Mineral Density (BMD, Areal and Volumetric)|Areal BMD at the spine, proximal femur, and forearm by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA); volumetric BMD at the spine and hip by quantitative computed tomography (QCT); volumetric BMD at the ultradistal radius and ultradistal tibia by high-resolution peripheral QCT (HR-pQCT)|pre-operatively and 6 and 12 months post-operatively||||||
840014|NCT01330914|Primary|Change in Intestinal Calcium Absorption|"Change in fractional calcium absorption, determined by dual stable isotope method.
Fractional calcium absorption is the fraction of ingested calcium that is absorbed, which is expressed here as the percentage of ingested calcium that is absorbed. The 6-month change is the mean difference in percentage absorption between time points. For example, if fractional calcium absorption were to decrease from 30% preoperatively to 25% at the 6-month postoperative time point, the change in fractional calcium absorption would be -5%."|6 months|Participants from the cohort who underwent assessment of fractional calcium absorption preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively||% of ingested calcium that is absorbed||Standard Deviation|Mean
840015|NCT01331005|Secondary|Change in Level of Diabetic Retinopathy on Stereoscopic Fundus Photographs|95% CI will be obtained in each treatment group and compared between treatment groups at 1 year. For eyes that have received treatment for DME before 1 year, visual acuity and OCT measurements obtained at time of failure will be used instead of measurements at 1 year.|Baseline to 12 months||||||
840016|NCT01331005|Secondary|Change in Number of Thickened Subfields on OCT|95% CI will be obtained in each treatment group and compared between treatment groups at 1 year. For eyes that have received treatment for DME before 1 year, visual acuity and OCT measurements obtained at time of failure will be used instead of measurements at 1 year.|Baseline to 12 months||||||
840017|NCT01331005|Secondary|Change in OCT Central Subfield Thickness|95% CI will be obtained in each treatment group and compared between treatment groups at 1 year. For eyes that have received treatment for DME before 1 year, visual acuity and OCT measurements obtained at time of failure will be used instead of measurements at 1 year.|baseline to 12 months||||||
841686|NCT01347580|Secondary|1st Composite Clinical Endpoint|death/MI/stroke/urgent revascularization/stent thrombosis. Adjudicated events except death|during the 30 days of treatment|mITT||patients|||Number
840018|NCT01331005|Secondary|Mean Change in Visual Acuity|The 95% CI will be obtained in each treatment group and compared between treatment groups at 1 year. For eyes that have received treatment for diabetic macular edema(DME) before 1 year, visual acuity and optical coherence tomography (OCT) measurements obtained at time of failure will be used instead of measurements at 1 year.|baseline to 12 months||||||
840019|NCT01331005|Secondary|Irritation||Baseline to 12 months||||||
840020|NCT01331005|Secondary|Corneal Melting||Baseline to 12 months||||||
840021|NCT01331005|Secondary|Corneal Ulceration||Baseline to 12 months||||||
840022|NCT01331005|Primary|Mean Change in Optical Coherence Tomography Measure Retinal Volume, mm3||From Baseline to 12 months|||mm3||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840023|NCT01331109|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients Who Experienced Any Suicidal Behavior as Assessed by the Electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS)|"The electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS) is a validated, self-rated version of the C-SSRS designed to uniquely assess both suicidal behavior and ideation. Suicidal behaviors as defined by the eC-SSRS are:
Preparatory acts or behavior
Aborted attempt
Interrupted attempt
Actual attempt
Completed suicide attempt"|Baseline (Visit 1) to Week 53 (Visit 9)|57 patients who took at least 1 dose of open-label milnacipran were included in the safety population.||participants|||Number
840024|NCT01331109|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients Who Experienced Level 1 Suicidal Ideation, as Assessed by the Electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS).|"The electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS) is a validated, self-rated version of the C-SSRS designed to uniquely assess both suicidal behavior and ideation. Suicidal ideation is assessed at 5 distinct levels of increasing severity:
Level 1: Wish to be Dead
Level 2: Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts
Level 3: Active Suicidal Ideation with Any Methods (Not Plan) without Intent to Act
Level 4: Active Suicidal Ideation with Some Intent to Act, without Specific Plan
Level 5: Active Suicidal Ideation with Specific Plan and Intent"|Baseline (Visit 1) to Week 53 (Visit 9)|57 patients who took at least 1 dose of open-label milnacipran were included in the safety population.||participants|||Number
840025|NCT01331109|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients Who Experienced Level 2 Suicidal Ideation, as Assessed by the Electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS).|"The electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS) is a validated, self-rated version of the C-SSRS designed to uniquely assess both suicidal behavior and ideation. Suicidal ideation is assessed at 5 distinct levels of increasing severity:
Level 1: Wish to be Dead
Level 2: Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts
Level 3: Active Suicidal Ideation with Any Methods (Not Plan) without Intent to Act
Level 4: Active Suicidal Ideation with Some Intent to Act, without Specific Plan
Level 5: Active Suicidal Ideation with Specific Plan and Intent"|Baseline (Visit 1) to Week 53 (Visit 9)|57 patients who took at least 1 dose of open-label milnacipran were included in the safety population.||participants|||Number
840026|NCT01331109|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients Who Experienced Level 3 Suicidal Ideation, as Assessed by the Electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS).|"The electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS) is a validated, self-rated version of the C-SSRS designed to uniquely assess both suicidal behavior and ideation. Suicidal ideation is assessed at 5 distinct levels of increasing severity:
Level 1: Wish to be Dead
Level 2: Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts
Level 3: Active Suicidal Ideation with Any Methods (Not Plan) without Intent to Act
Level 4: Active Suicidal Ideation with Some Intent to Act, without Specific Plan
Level 5: Active Suicidal Ideation with Specific Plan and Intent"|Baseline (Visit 1) to Week 53 (Visit 9)|57 patients who took at least 1 dose of open-label milnacipran were included in the safety population.||participants|||Number
840027|NCT01331109|Primary|Adverse Events|Number of Patients who experience one or more treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE)|Baseline (Visit 1) to Week 53 (Visit 9)|57 patients who took at least 1 dose of open-label milnacipran were included in the safety population.||participants|||Number
840028|NCT01331109|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients Who Experienced Level 4 Suicidal Ideation, as Assessed by the Electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS).|"The electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS) is a validated, self-rated version of the C-SSRS designed to uniquely assess both suicidal behavior and ideation. Suicidal ideation is assessed at 5 distinct levels of increasing severity:
Level 1: Wish to be Dead
Level 2: Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts
Level 3: Active Suicidal Ideation with Any Methods (Not Plan) without Intent to Act
Level 4: Active Suicidal Ideation with Some Intent to Act, without Specific Plan
Level 5: Active Suicidal Ideation with Specific Plan and Intent"|Baseline (Visit 1) to Week 53 (Visit 9)|57 patients who took at least 1 dose of open-label milnacipran were included in the safety population.||participants|||Number
840029|NCT01331109|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients Who Experienced Level 5 Suicidal Ideation, as Assessed by the Electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS).|"The electronic Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (eC-SSRS) is a validated, self-rated version of the C-SSRS designed to uniquely assess both suicidal behavior and ideation. Suicidal ideation is assessed at 5 distinct levels of increasing severity:
Level 1: Wish to be Dead
Level 2: Non-Specific Active Suicidal Thoughts
Level 3: Active Suicidal Ideation with Any Methods (Not Plan) without Intent to Act
Level 4: Active Suicidal Ideation with Some Intent to Act, without Specific Plan
Level 5: Active Suicidal Ideation with Specific Plan and Intent"|Baseline (Visit 1) to Week 53 (Visit 9)|57 patients who took at least 1 dose of open-label milnacipran were included in the safety population.||participants|||Number
840069|NCT01325493|Secondary|Sedation Score|"Sedation scores 0 = completely awake
= sleepy but responds appropriately
= somnolent but arouses to light stimuli
= asleep but responsive to deeper physical stimuli
= asleep and not responsive to any stimuli Values are for each 24 hour time period and displayed as hours post surgery."|24, 48, 72, 96 hours post operatively|||Sedation Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
840032|NCT01331213|Secondary|Post-treatment Sensory Threshold for Gas|The sensory threshold for first perception of gas was measured by stepwise inflation of the balloon in increments of 4 mm Hg at 60 second intervals. The balloon was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon. During this assessment participants were asked to report when they had the first perception of gas. The investigator recorded the threshold pressure at which the participants reported this sensation.|Approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840033|NCT01331213|Secondary|Colonic Motility Index|The postprandial motility index (MI)=log_e[number of contractions * sum of amplitudes) + 1] A normal fasting average motility index (MI) would be about 12. An increase in MI means an increase in the phasic contractions (in contrast to tone) which is measured as a change in volume of the barostatically-controlled balloon. (Therefore, an increase in MI means that the meal is moving more quickly through the colon.)|Approximately 1 hour after meal|||log mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840034|NCT01331213|Secondary|Fasting Colonic Tone|Colonic tone is a measurement of the volume of the colon. Colonic tone was assessed by noting the changes in the balloon volume in the presence of a constant operating pressure in the balloon (in the barostat-manometric assembly placed in the colon.)|Approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840035|NCT01331213|Primary|Overall Sensory Ratings in Response to 16, 24, 30 and 36 mm Hg Distensions.|The mm Hg distensions refer to the barostat balloon, which was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon. Pain sensation was measured by a 100 mm long Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS does not have any pre-set marks between the extremes. For the pain VAS, 0 means no pain and 100 mm means extreme pain. The investigator measures the mark made by the participant in mm and records this for the value of pain.|Approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
840036|NCT01331213|Primary|Sensory Threshold for Pain|The sensory threshold for first perception of pain was measured by stepwise inflation of the balloon in increments of 4 mm Hg at 60 second intervals. The balloon was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon. During this assessment participants were asked to report when they had the first perception of pain. The investigator recorded the threshold pressure at which the participants reported this sensation.|approximately 60 minutes after drug administration|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840037|NCT01331213|Primary|Postprandial Colonic Tone [Reported as the Symmetric Percent [Change} in Baseline Colonic Barostat Balloon Volume|The symmetric percent reduction in baseline colonic barostat balloon volume during the first 30 minutes postprandially (PP) corrected for the preprandial (30 min) tone, (symmetric percent change= 100*log_e[fasting/PP]). A positive symmetric percent change reflects a decrease in barostat balloon volume indicating a reduction in colonic tone. (The balloon was placed in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon.)|The first 30 minutes postprandially, and preprandial (30 minutes)|||Symmetric percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
840038|NCT01331213|Primary|Colonic Compliance|"Colonic compliance is a measure of the stiffness of the colon, that is, what pressure was needed to reach half the maximum volume of the colon. After the barostat balloon catheter was inserted in the mid-descending or junction of the sigmoid and descending colon, the balloon was inflated. After an initial conditioning distension to 20 mm Hg, colonic compliance was measured by step-wise inflation with increments of 4 mm Hg. Colonic compliance was analyzed by a validated linear interpolation method. The pressure at half maximum volume serves as a summary of colonic compliance."|baseline (1 hour before drug administration), post-treatment (1 hour after drug administration)|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840039|NCT01331291|Secondary|Anti-tumor Response|Assess anti-tumor response in patients in Arm B using MacDonald criteria. There are four possible responses: complete response, partial response, stable disease, or progressive disease. Criteria are based on measurements of tumor dimension as visualized with a contrast-enhanced MRI.|2 years|Only Arm B participants were evaluable for this outcome measure||participants|||Number
840040|NCT01331291|Secondary|Safety Profile|Overall safety profile will be characterized by type, frequency, severity (as graded by NCI CTCAE), timing and relationship of study therapy of adverse events and laboratory abnormalities. Safety and tolerability will be measured by the proportion of patients who experience Grade 3 or higher Adverse Events that are possibly, probably or definitely related to bosutinib and the number of same Adverse Events per patient. Adverse Events will be summarized by treatment for each arm by the frequency of patients experiencing treatment emergent adverse events.|2 years|||participants|||Number
840041|NCT01331291|Secondary|Intratumoral Concentration|Assess the intratumoral concentration of bosutinib in recurrent glioblastoma patients who are candidates for surgical re-resection (ARM A).|2 years|Participants in Arm B were never eligible for this outcome measure. Because only two participants were enrolled to Arm A, this analysis was not done as there were not sufficient tumor samples to generate meaningful results.|||||
840042|NCT01331291|Primary|Progression-Free Survival|Assess progression-free survival at six months in patients with recurrent glioblastoma at first or second recurrence who are treated with continuous daily dosing of bosutinib (Arm B). Progression-free survival is measured from initiation of study treatment to date of progression.|2 years|This outcome was only applicable to participants enrolled on Arm B.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840043|NCT01331304|Primary|Necessary Clinical Adjustments|Necessary Clinical Adjustment (NCA): The Medication Recommendation Tracking Form was developed and successfully implemented in a previous study to capture recommended medication changes at each study visit 17. Clinicians record dosage changes, missed doses, new medications added or discontinued, and specify the reason for each change. Any change in psychotropic medications, or medications used to treat side effects, is coded along with the reason for the change. NCAs include those changes made for lack of effectiveness or intolerance, but not changes for planned dose titrations.|6 Months|||Mean NCAs per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
840044|NCT01331304|Secondary|Longitudinal Interval Follow up Evaluation Range of Impaired Functioning Tool (LIFE-RIFT)|The LIFE-RIFT asses the extent to which psychopathology has impacted current functioning in work, household chores, interpersonal relationships with partner, family, and friends, recreational activities, and life, satisfaction, leisure activities and social relationships.|6 months||||||
840045|NCT01331304|Secondary|Risk of Cardiovascular Disease - Framingham Risk Score|The Framingham risk score captures the classic risk factors for cardiovascular disease, including age, sex, systolic blood pressure, total and high density lipoprotein cholesterol, diabetes mellitus, and smoking. The Framingham risk score is used as a simple predictive tool to determine 10-year (short term) risk for developing cardiovascular disease (CHD).|6 months||||||
840046|NCT01331304|Primary|Clinical Global Impression-Efficacy Index (CGI-EI)|The CGI-EI integrates benefits and harms and yields a score that can be compared across interventions. It is made up of 2 subscales: therapeutic effects and side effects. Each rating is on a scale from 1 to 4. To combine these two subscales into the CGI-EI we report as our primary outcome, we subtracted the side effects subscale from the therapeutic effects subscale. Thus, the CGI-EI we report ranges the integers from -3 to +3 (i.e. possible scores are -3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3). A score of -3 is the most burdensome side effect score (4) and the least therapeutic effect score (1) and a score of +3 is the least burdensome side effect score (1) and the highest therapeutic effect score (4). Higher CGI-EI signifies better outcome (minimal side effects, maximal therapeutic effect). Lower CGI-EI signifies worse outcome (maximal side effects, minimal therapeutic effect).To compute CGI-EI score, we subtract the side effect score from the therapeutic effect score.|Average 6 month score minus Average baseline score|||Units on the scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840047|NCT01331681|Secondary|Change From Baseline in National Eye Institute 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) Distance Activities Subscale at Week 52 - LOCF|The NEI VFQ-25 total score ranges from 0-100 with a score of 0 being the worst outcome and 100 being the best outcome. The NEI VFQ questionnaire is organized as a collection of subscales that are all scored from 0-100. Distance activities are defined as reading street signs or names on stores, and going down stairs, steps, or curbs.|Baseline up to Week 52|Full-Analysis Set with assessment for this outcome measure.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840048|NCT01331681|Secondary|Change From Baseline in National Eye Institute 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) Near Activities Subscale at Week 52 - LOCF|The NEI VFQ-25 total score ranges from 0-100 with a score of 0 being the worst outcome and 100 being the best outcome. The NEI VFQ questionnaire is organized as a collection of subscales that are all scored from 0-100. Near activities are defined as reading ordinary print in newspapers, performing work or hobbies requiring near vision, or finding something on a crowded shelf.|Baseline up to Week 52|Full-Analysis Set with assessment for this outcome measure.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840049|NCT01331681|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Central Retinal Thickness (CRT) at Week 52 as Assessed on Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) - LOCF||Baseline up to Week 52|Full-Analysis Set with assessment for this outcome measure.||micrometer||Standard Deviation|Mean
840050|NCT01331681|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-step Improvement From Baseline in the ETDRS DRSS (Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Score) as Assessed by FP (Fundus Photography) at Week 52 - LOCF|Baseline ETDRS DRSS: None (level 10); Mild to moderate nonproliferative DR (levels 14, 15, 20, 35, and 43); Moderately severe/severe nonproliferative DR (levels 47 and 53); Mild/moderate/high-risk/advanced proliferative DR (levels 61, 65, 71,75, 81, and 85)|Baseline up to Week 52|Full-Analysis Set with assessment for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
840051|NCT01331681|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Gained at Least 15 Letters in BCVA as Measured by ETDRS Letter Score Compared With Baseline at Week 52 - LOCF|Visual function of the study eye was assessed using the ETDRS protocol. A higher score represents better functioning.|Baseline up to Week 52|FAS.||Percentage of participants|||Number
840052|NCT01331681|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Gained at Least 10 Letters in BCVA as Measured by ETDRS Letter Score Compared With Baseline at Week 52 - LOCF|Visual function of the study eye was assessed using the ETDRS protocol. A higher score represents better functioning.|Baseline up to Week 52|FAS.||Percentage of participants|||Number
840053|NCT01331681|Primary|Change From Baseline in BCVA (Best Corrected Visual Acuity) as Measured by Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Letter Score at Week 52 - Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|Visual function of the study eye was assessed using the ETDRS protocol. A higher score represents better functioning.|Baseline up to Week 52|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants who received any study treatment, had a baseline measurement of BCVA, and had at least 1 post-baseline assessment of BCVA.||Letters correctly read||Standard Deviation|Mean
840054|NCT01331694|Secondary|Average Annual Adjusted Post-Index COPD-Related Costs|Medical costs are associated with COPD-related medical care (claims submitted with a primary International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis of COPD) and pharmaceutical care (treatment arm medications, oral corticosteroids, oral antibiotics, short-acting beta-agonists, long-acting beta-agonists [LABA], inhaled corticosteroids [ICS], ICS/LABA combinations, etc.. Means are adjusted for age, sex, geographic region, pre-initial treatment comorbidities, and COPD-related utilization. Total costs are the sum of medical care and pharmacy costs.|Incurred over the 12 month period after initial treatment arm prescription|All participants from a large database comprised of information from enrollment files and facility, professional service, and outpatient pharmacy claims from a variety of private healthcare benefit plans covering over 40 million patients enrolled in over 70 health plans (providing data continuously) across the United States||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840055|NCT01331694|Primary|Time to First Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Event|The first COPD event occurring after 30 days from initial treatment arm prescription was measured. Four categories of COPD events were analyzed; either a hospitalization or emergency department visit; an emergency department visit; an outpatient visit followed by an oral corticosteroid prescription claim within 10 days; an outpatient visit followed by an oral antibiotic prescription claim within 10 days.|Anytime from 30 days to 12 months after initial treatment arm prescription|All participants from a large database comprised of information from enrollment files and facility, professional service, and outpatient pharmacy claims from a variety of private healthcare benefit plans covering over 40 million patients enrolled in over 70 health plans (providing data continuously) across the United States.||days||Standard Error|Mean
840056|NCT01325428|Secondary|Progression Free Survival Over the Whole Sudy.|PD was evaluated according to the RECIST version 1.1. Number of days from the start of monotherapy to the date of second PD.|From first drug administration until end of study, up to 700 days.|"TRT A Treated Set (Part A): All patients who were documented to have taken at least one dose of Afatinib in Part A.
TRT B Treated set (Part B): All patients who received at least one dose each of Afatinib and Vinorelbine in Part B."||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840070|NCT01325493|Primary|Morphine Equivalent Consumption (mg/kg)|Morphine consumption (mg/kg) was measured over time in the Ketamine group and compared to the Control (saline) group. Values are for each 24 hour time period and displayed as hours post surgery.|at 24, 48, 72, 96 hours post operatively|||mg/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840057|NCT01325428|Secondary|Part B: Progression Free Survival.|PD was evaluated according to the RECIST version 1.1. For patients with a known date of progression (or death), PFS was the earlier of date of progression or death - date of first administration + 1. The date of progression and date of first administration referred to the respective part of the study B.|From first drug administration until end of Part B, up to 230 days.|TRT B Treated set (Part B): All patients who received at least one dose each of Afatinib and Vinorelbine in Part B.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840058|NCT01325428|Secondary|Part A: Progression Free Survival.|PD was evaluated according to the RECIST version 1.1. For patients with a known date of progression (or death), PFS was the earlier of date of progression or death - date of first administration + 1. The date of progression and date of first administration referred to the respective part of the study A.|From first drug administration until end of Part A, up to 713 days.|TRT A Treated Set (Part A): All patients who were documented to have taken at least one dose of Afatinib in Part A.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840059|NCT01325428|Secondary|Part B: Duration of Unconfirmed Objective Response.|Objective response was defined on a patient level as a best response of CR or PR. Duration of objective response was measured from the time of first unconfirmed objective response to the time of progression or death (or date of censoring for PFS).|From first drug administration until end of Part B, up to 929 days.|TRT B Treated set (Part B): All patients who received at least one dose each of Afatinib and Vinorelbine in Part B.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840060|NCT01325428|Secondary|Part A: Duration of Unconfirmed Objective Response.|Objective Response (OR) was defined on a patient level as a best response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR). Duration of objective response was measured from the time of first unconfirmed objective response to the time of progression or death (or date of censoring for Progression Free Survival (PFS)).|From first drug administration until end of Part A, up to 929 days.|TRT A Treated Set (Part A): All patients who were documented to have taken at least one dose of Afatinib in Part A.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840061|NCT01325428|Secondary|Part B: Unconfirmed Objective Response (OR) Assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours Version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1 ).|Objective response was defined on a patient level as a best response of CR or PR.|This endpoint was recorded from first administration of trial medication in Part B and until the earliest of PD, death or start of new anti-cancer therapy up to 929 days.|TRT B Treated set (Part B): All patients who received at least one dose each of Afatinib and Vinorelbine in Part B.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840062|NCT01325428|Secondary|Part A: Unconfirmed Objective Response (OR) Assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours Version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1).|Objective response was defined on a patient level as a best response of CR or PR.|This endpoint was recorded from first administration of trial medication until the earliest of PD, death or start of next treatment (either Part B combination therapy or new anti-cancer therapy) up to 929 days.|TRT A Treated Set (Part A): All patients who were documented to have taken at least one dose of Afatinib in Part A.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840063|NCT01325428|Secondary|Part B: Confirmed Objective Response (OR) Assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours Version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1).|Objective response was defined on a patient level as a best response of CR or PR.|This endpoint was recorded from first administration of trial medication in Part B and until the earliest of disease progression, death or start of new anti-cancer therapy up to 929 days.|TRT B Treated set (Part B): All patients who received at least one dose each of Afatinib and Vinorelbine in Part B.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840064|NCT01325428|Secondary|Part A: Confirmed Objective Response (OR) Assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours Version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1).|Objective response was defined on a patient level as a best response of CR or PR.|This endpoint was recorded from first administration of trial medication until the earliest of disease progression, death or start of next treatment (either Part B combination therapy or new anti-cancer therapy) up to 929 days.|TRT A Treated Set (Part A): All patients who were documented to have taken at least one dose of Afatinib in Part A.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840065|NCT01325428|Primary|Part B: Clinical Benefit (CB) Assessed by Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) or Stable Disease (SD) for at Least 6 Months Using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST 1.1).|Tumour response was assessed separately for Part B according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. The primary endpoint of this study was confirmed clinical benefit, as assessed by Stable Disease (SD) for at least 6 months (defined as >182 days), Partial Response (PR), or Complete Response (CR) according to RECIST version 1.1 (only confirmed responses were considered).|This endpoint was recorded from first administration of trial medication in Part B until the earliest of PD, death or start of new anti-cancer therapy up to 929 days.|TRT B Treated set (Part B): All patients who received at least one dose each of Afatinib and Vinorelbine in Part B.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840066|NCT01325428|Primary|Part A: Clinical Benefit (CB) Assessed by Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) or Stable Disease (SD) for at Least 6 Months Using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST 1.1).|Tumour response was assessed separately for Part A and Part B according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. The primary endpoint of this study was confirmed clinical benefit, as assessed by Stable Disease (SD) for at least 6 months (defined as >182 days), Partial Response (PR), or Complete Response (CR) according to RECIST version 1.1 (only confirmed responses were considered).|This endpoint was assessed between the from first administration of trial medication in Part A and the earliest of PD, death or start of next treatment (either Part B combination therapy or new anti-cancer therapy) up to 929 days.|TRT A Treated Set (Part A): All patients who were documented to have taken at least one dose of Afatinib in Part A.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840067|NCT01325493|Secondary|Pain Score During Cough.|Patient volunteered response during a cough, 1-10 scale (where a higher score indicates more pain and a lower score indicates less pain). Values are for each 24 hour time period and displayed as hours post surgery.|24, 48, 72, 96 hours post operatively|||pain score at cough||Standard Deviation|Mean
840068|NCT01325493|Secondary|Pain Score at Rest|Patient volunteered response at rest, 1-10 scale (where a higher score indicates more pain and a lower score indicates less pain). Values are for each 24 hour time period and displayed as hours post surgery.|24, 48, 72, 96 hours post operatively|||pain score at rest||Standard Deviation|Mean
840071|NCT01325532|Secondary|Change in Global Sleep Scores on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) From Baseline to Week 3.|The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) is a patient-rated instrument to assess sleep quality and quantity and its changes throughout the study. Scoring is based on 7 individual components. Each component is scored from 0-3. Higher scores indicate worse sleep. Total global sleep score ranges from zero (0) to 21. We report here the overall change in global sleep score for each treatment arm, i.e. the change in overall score between baseline visit and week 3 visit. Change can occur in either direction (i.e. improvement or worsening). A score of greater than zero indicates a reduction of sleep disturbance (improvement), whereas a score of less than zero indicates an increase in sleep disturbance (worsening).|Baseline-Week 3|This is an intent to treat (ITT) analysis of all patients randomized.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840072|NCT01325532|Primary|Reported Side Effects Based on PRISE AE Scores|This measures the emergence of different adverse (side) effects from treatment during the study. This section will describe the most commonly reported adverse effects. The section on adverse events will describe and detail the full range of AEs reported.|Baseline-Week 3|Intent to treat sample with all subjects randomized.||number of subjects reporting|||Number
840073|NCT01325532|Primary|Change in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D 17) Score From Baseline to Week 3|The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D-17) used here is a 17-item scale that measures severity of depression. Items are individually scored from 0-4 or from 0-2 depending on the item, and the individual scores for each item are added to comprise one score. Higher scores indicate greater severity of depression. Possible scores on the scale range from a minimum of zero (0) to a maximum of 52. This section reports the improvement in depressive symptoms during the course of treatment, i.e. the change in overall score between baseline visit and week 3 visit. Change can occur in either direction (i.e. improvement or worsening). A score of greater than zero indicates a reduction of depressive symptoms (improvement), whereas a score of less than zero indicates an increase in depressive symptoms (worsening).|Baseline-Week 3|Intent to treat sample with last observation carried forward for all randomized subject.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840074|NCT01325623|Secondary|Post-stimulation Heart Rate Changes|During a 1 hour period during the EMU stay, the VNS Therapy device was programmed to normal mode stimulation ON time 30 seconds, OFF time 5 minutes. AutoStim and Magnet Mode were programmed OFF. In this hour, 10 to 11 normal mode stimulations can be expected. Around each of these stimulations, ECG data were collected to assess potential stimulation related heart rate changes (during stimulation, after stimulation and after black-out time). A black-out time is a period after stimulation during which no seizure detections can occur, to ensure that potential stimulation related heart rate changes were not seen as ictal tachycardia that would trigger false positive detection. During the trial, the black-out time was programmed to 30 seconds. The heart rate changes for all stimulations and all patients were averaged.|EMU stay|ITT population||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
840075|NCT01325623|Secondary|Overall Summary of Seizure Intensity by Subgroup|Quantitative evaluation of EEG was used to characterize the seizures that were treated with Automatic Stimulation. Intensity was evaluated by surveying the average power level from the 10-20 system EEG channel of maximum output during the course of the seizure. Intensity was only reported for seizures with intensity annotated and >= 20% Heart Rate Rise. The relative intensity was calculated by normalizing the power calculations to the pre-seizure state, and thus the reported changes are dimensionless. n= number of seizures|Historical Seizures and Seizures during Epilepsy Monitoing Unit Stay|Patients from the ITT population who had at least one seizure during EMU stay and who had at least one historical seizure recorded. n=total number of seizures||unitless||Standard Deviation|Mean
840076|NCT01325623|Secondary|Changes in Quality of Life on Patient Reported Questionnaire (QOLIE-31-P)|Quality of life data was collected using patient‐completed QOLIE‐31‐P surveys and compared between baseline and follow‐up visits. The MIC score for each subscale defines the threshold for Minimally Important Change. If a score exceeds the MIC Score, the improvement from baseline is considered clinically significant. The range for QOLIE-31-P (all sub-scores) is 0-100 with higher scores reflecting greater well-being.Subscale scores were averaged to compute the QOLIE Total Score.|up to 24 Months Visit|ITT Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840077|NCT01325623|Secondary|Summary of Post Ictal Duration (Seconds) for All Seizure Types (ITT Population) (Only Seizures With Post Ictal Duration (Seconds) Annotated)|Post-ictal duration was quantified by identifying the time at which the number of EEG channels within the 95% confidence interval of relative power reaches a number that is consistent with that during the pre-seizure period. This measure represents the amount of time required following a seizure until the EEG recovers to the pre-seizure state. It is used to objectively estimate patient recovery time. Historical seizures were baseline EEG recordings measured during monitoring prior to implantation. Post-ictal duration is only reported for seizures with Post Ictal Duration (seconds) annotated and >= 20% Heart Rate Rise|Historical Seizures and Seizures during Epilepsy Monitoring Unit Stay|Patients from the ITT population who had at least one seizure during the EMU stay and who had at least one historical seizure recorded (and duration was annotated). n=total number of seizures||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
840078|NCT01325623|Secondary|Summary of Seizure Duration (Seconds) for All Seizure Types by Subgroup(ITT Population) (Only Seizures With Post Ictal Duration (Seconds) Annotated)|Seizure duration was calculated using historical EEG data from patients enrolled in the trial and compared to the duration of seizures that occurred during the study EMU stay. The seizure start and end times were determined via clinical observation and/or through an adjudication process with qualified EEG reviewers.|Historical Seizures and Seizures during Epilepsy Monitoring Unit Stay|Patients from the ITT population who had at least one seizure during the EMU stay and who had at least one historical seizure recorded (and duration was annotated). n=total number of seizures||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
840079|NCT01325623|Secondary|Proportion of Seizures Ending During Stimulation by Type|Clinical outcomes including seizure duration and cessation were assessed with vEEG during EMU stay. Number of seizures treated with Automatic Stimulation during EMU were evaluated. Of these seizures, those ending during the 60 second course of Automatic Stimulation were assessed and tabulated by seizure type.|Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) Stay|ITT Population; All Treated Seizures n=total number of seizures||Percentage of Seizures Ending|||Number
840102|NCT01331837|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence of Individual Component of Primary Endpoint: Cardiovascular Death|Prospective comparison of time to first occurrence of Individual component of primary endpoint: cardiovascular death|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840080|NCT01325623|Secondary|Changes in Seizures Severity, Intensity & Post-Ictal Recovery Based on Patient Completed Seizure Severity Questionnaire (SSQ)|"Clinical outcomes such as seizure severity, intensity and post-ictal duration were also assessed during the long-term follow-up visits (3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months) with patient reported questionnaires (SSQ; Seizure Severity Questionnaire). The range for SSQ (all sub-scores) is 1-7 with 1 being the least severe and 7 being the most severe.
Mean SSQ scores at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months were compared to baseline. A change from baseline is calculated as baseline minus follow-up visit score to correspond to the Minimally Important Change (MIC) criteria as defined in the Scoring Scheme for SSQ v2. Questionnaire. Subscale scores were averaged to compute the SSQ Total Score"|Up to 24 Month visit|ITT Population||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840081|NCT01325623|Secondary|Changes in Seizure Severity Based on Physician Reported Questionnaire (NHS3)|"Investigators completed the National Hospital Seizure Severity Scale (NHS3) questionnaire at screening, at the end of the EMU stay (provided a seizure occurred during the EMU stay), and at follow‐up visits. Severity was evaluated by seizure type. The range of NHS3 scale is 1-27 with 1 being the least severe and 27 being the most severe.
Negative median value means improvement."|up to 24 Months Visit|ITT Population||Units on a scale||Full Range|Median
840082|NCT01325623|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Seizure Frequency|Seizure frequency was calculated at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 month follow-up visits based on seizure diary information and compared to baseline estimates. Response rate was computed and summarized for partial seizures (SPS, CPS and CPS with 2nd GTCs) and overall seizure types as the percentage of patients that achieved ≥50% seizure reduction per month from baseline by visit.|Up to 24 Month visit|ITT population||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840083|NCT01325623|Secondary|Human Factors and Usability of the AspireSR® VNS Therapy® System.|"Usability survey data were collected from all site personnel who used the handheld programmer to evaluate the usability of the AspireSR® VNS Therapy® System.The device usability survey contained 17 questions that measure usability on a five-point Likert scale ranging from Extremely Difficult (5) to Extremely Easy (1). Site personnel were asked to assess usability of the software features, instructions for use, training materials, and overall usability of the system at four different time points. The time points include implant/recovery and the end of EMU.
Usability was calculated as percentage of the users who found the usability of system to be easy-2 or extremely easy-1."|At implant/recovery up to EMU Discharge (2 to 4 weeks)|ITT Population||Percentage of participants rated 1 or 2|||Number
840084|NCT01325623|Secondary|Characterization of Latency Period: Analysis of Observed Latency for True Positive Detections by Randomized SDA Setting|Latency is defined as the time difference between SDA detection time and the annotated seizure onset time. The earliest SDA detection was considered for each seizure. Seizure onset times were compared with M106 device detections at the randomized SDA setting. Negative latencies indicate that the SDA detection preceded the seizure onset time. The median latency is presented for seizures which met the definition of ictal tachycardia as well as all seizure types and indicate the observed latency range.|Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) Stay|ITT Population n=total number of seizures in each category||seconds||Full Range|Median
840085|NCT01325623|Secondary|Validation of Cardiac R-Wave Detection|Cardiac R‐wave detection was evaluated against concurrent ECG data (i.e. detailed R‐wave test) collected during implant, the first titration visit, at the beginning of the EMU stay, and at the 12 month visit. R‐R intervals were calculated using detected R‐waves from the Implantable Pulse Generator (IPG) and from a standard ECG monitor during a pre‐specified time interval. A time series 10 seconds was recorded using the IPG SyncPulse feature. Simultaneously, a corresponding time series over the same interval was recorded using a standard ECG monitor. The total number of beats accurately detected in the entire study population is reported.|At Implant, First Titration Visit, Day 1 EMU and 12 Months|ITT population||percentage of beats accurately detected|||Number
840086|NCT01325623|Primary|Potential False Positives Based on Heart Rate Increase Associated With Seizures by Randomized SDA Setting|"Potential false positive rate is defined as the sum across all patients of the total number of potential false positive detections divided by the sum across all patients of the appropriate monitoring time during the EMU stay. Data used to support the potential false positive rate analyses included digital ECG/EEG files retrieved from the EMU evaluation, corresponding M106 device downloads, and triple review results of EEG recordings.
The evaluated EMU monitoring time includes a daily 3 minutes stepping exercise during which patients stepped up and down on a step stool at a submaximal effort leve."|Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) Stay|"ITT Population: all patients implanted with Model 106 VNS Therapy System Version 2 and who have any EMU record.
10 participants analyzed for >=60% setting, 12 participants analyzed for >=40% setting, 8 participants analyzed for >=20% setting."||Potential False Positive per Hour||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840087|NCT01325623|Primary|Modeled Sensitivity Based on Heart Rate Increase Associated With Seizures by SDA Setting Post-Processed Through Bench-top Device Simulant|"Sensitivity is defined as the total number of seizures detected divided by the total number of seizures during the EMU stay. Data used to support sensitivity analyses included digital ECG/EEG files, corresponding M106 device downloads, and CRF data. Seizure onset times were compared with modeled M106 device detections at the least sensitive setting capable of detecting the seizure based on the corresponding change in heart rate. The participants' surface ECG data collected during the trial and passed through DMSDAT, a validated bench‐top simulant of the Automatic Stimulation feature, was used to produce modeled results for each threshold for AutoStim setting (1;70%, 2;60%, 3;50%, 4;40%, 5;30% and 6;20%). Number of participants is total number of subjects who experienced seizures during the EMU stay.
Bootstrap confidence intervals using 3000 bootstrap samples."|Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) Stay|Patients from the ITT population who completed the EMU evaluation and that had at least one reported seizure during the EMU evaluation that was confirmed by triple review; (Investigator Reported Seizures + Triple Review).||percentage of True Positive Detections||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840103|NCT01331837|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Individual Component of Primary Endpoint: Non-fatal Myocardial Infarction|Percentage of patients reporting Individual component of primary endpoint: non-fatal Myocardial Infarction|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Anlysis was conducted on the ITT population||Percentage of patients|||Number
840104|NCT01331837|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence of Individual Component of Primary Endpoint: Non-fatal Myocardial Infarction|Prospective comparison of time to first occurrence of Individual component of primary endpoint: non-fatal Myocardial Infarction|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Anlysis was conducted on the ITT population.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840088|NCT01325623|Primary|Observed Sensitivity Based on Heart Rate Increase Associated With Seizures by Randomized SDA Setting|"Sensitivity is the total number of seizures detected divided by the total number of seizures during EMU stay.Data used to support sensitivity analyses included digital ECG/EEG files,corresponding M106 device downloads,and CRF data.Seizure and non-seizure EEG segments were provided to independent reviewers to confirm seizure occurrence and define EEG seizure onset times.Seizure onset times were then compared with observed M106 device detections at the detection threshold setting for AutoStim that the patient was randomized to(SDA 2;60%,SDA 4;40%,SDA 6;20%).Sensitivity is only reported if the heart rate surpassed the programmed detection threshold.Number of participants is total number of subjects who had seizures during the EMU stay.
An Ictal tachycardia Seizure is a seizure with Ictal Heart rate >= 100 bpm & at least 55% increase, or 35 bpm increase from baseline) Bootstrap confidence intervals using 3000 bootstrap samples. n=total number of seizures; N= number of participants"|Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) Stay|Patients from the ITT population who completed the EMU evaluation and that had at least one reported seizure during the EMU evaluation that was confirmed by triple review; (Investigator Reported Seizures + Triple Review).||percentage of True Positive Detections||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840089|NCT01325623|Primary|Summary of Seizures Reported by Investigators and Triple Review|"Subjects were admitted to the EMU and underwent standard continuous data collection of vEEG and ECG for 3 to 5 days. If a seizure occurred during the EMU stay, clinical investigators annotated the start and stop times, the type of seizure, the presumed seizure onset location, and the lobe of origin as applicable.
Following the EMU data collection phase of the trial, the de-identified, continuous electronic records (per patient) from the EMU period were provided to an independent and blinded triple review panel. This panel evaluated the EEG data and annotated seizure onset, seizure offset, and a description of seizure type. In the absence of video, seizure types could only be specified as: partial (particular type not denoted), generalized (non-absence), absence, or partial with secondary generalization."|Epilepsy Monitoring Unit Stay|ITT Population: consists of all patients implanted with the AspireSR VNS Therapy System version 2 and who have any EMU record.||Seizures|||Number
840090|NCT01325701|Secondary|Ibrutinib and Its Metabolite (PCI-45227) AUC0-24h After Repeat Dosing of PCI-32765|"Treatment Group 1 PK collection schedule:
Cycle 1 Day 1: Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 7, and 24 hours post-dose Cycle 1 Day 8: Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4, 7, and 24 hours post-dose Cycle 1 Day 15: Pre-dose and 2 hours post-dose Cycle 1 Day 22: Pre-dose and 2 hours post-dose
Treatment Group 2 PK collection schedule:
Cycle 1 Day 8: Pre-dose, 1, 2, 4 and 7 hours post-dose Cycle 1 Day 15: Pre-dose and 2 hours post-dose Cycle 1 Day 22: Pre-dose and 2 hours post-dose Cycle 3 Day 1: Pre-dose, 1, 2, and 4 hours post-dose"|Performed during the first month of receiving study drug.|PK samples were collected in all participants (n=70 and 8 in PCI-32765: 560 mg and 840 mg, respectively). Of these, 59 participants in PCI-32765: 560 mg and 7 in PCI-32765: 840 mg on Cycle 1 Day 8 were evaluable for PK.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840091|NCT01325701|Secondary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|Participants will be followed until progression of the disease or start of another anticancer treatment. The clinical database captured all AEs from baseline through end of treatment. Treatment Emergent AEs were collected pre-dose, at the beginning of each cycle and 30 days post last dose of study drug, unless related to study drug.|Adverse events determined to be related to study drug are collected from first dose until study exit (approximately 3 years).|||participants|||Number
840092|NCT01325701|Primary|Percentage of Patients With an Overall Response to Study Drug|The primary endpoint of the study was overall response rate (ORR), defined as the proportion of participants who achieved a best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR), according to the revised International Working Group Criteria for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (Cheson et al, 2007), as assessed by the investigator.|The median follow up time on the study for all treated participants is 1.7 months (range 0.1- 32.3 months)|||percentage of participants|||Number
840093|NCT01331824|Secondary|Safety as Measured by the Frequency and Type of Adverse Events as Per the Common Terminology for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0.||Day 1 of each treatment cycle; and 21 days after the last dose of amrubicin||||||
840094|NCT01331824|Secondary|Overall Survival|The median overall survival|1 year|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840095|NCT01331824|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|"The median progression-free survival
After the last dose of Amrubicin, patients will have follow-up every 3 months with a repeat CT scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis until the time of disease progression is documented."|Every 3 months post Amrubicin administration|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840096|NCT01331824|Primary|Objective Response Rate as Measured by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1)|"Response to treatment based on tumor measurements via CT chest, abdomen, and pelvis for restaging after every 2 cycles.
Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.
Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study."|6 weeks|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840097|NCT01331837|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Individual Component of Primary Endpoint: All-cause Mortality|Percentage of patients reporting Individual component of primary endpoint: All-cause mortality|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population.||Percentage of patients|||Number
840098|NCT01331837|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence of Individual Component of Primary Endpoint: All-cause Mortality|Prospective comparison of time to first occurrence of Individual component of primary endpoint: All-cause mortality|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840099|NCT01331837|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Individual Component of Primary Endpoint: Non-fatal Stroke||From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population||Percentage of patients|||Number
840100|NCT01331837|Secondary|Time to First Occurrence of Individual Component of Primary Endpoint: Non-fatal Stroke|Prospective comparison of time to first occurrence of Individual component of primary endpoint: non-fatal stroke|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840101|NCT01331837|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Individual Component of Primary Endpoint: Cardiovascular Death|Percentage of patients reporting Individual component of primary endpoint: cardiovascular death|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population||Percentage of patients|||Number
840105|NCT01331837|Secondary|Percentages of Participants With an Expanded CV Composite Endpoint|Percentages of participants with the expanded CV composite endpoint. The expanded composite endpoint is defined as the CV composite of the primary endpoint with the addition of non-elective coronary revascularization procedures and hospitalization for unstable angina.|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population.||Percentages of participants|||Number
840106|NCT01331837|Secondary|The Time to First Occurrence of an Expanded CV Composite Endpoint|Prospective comparison of the time to first ccurrence of the expanded composite endpoint. The expanded composite endpoint is defined as the CV composite of the primary endpoint with the addition of non-elective coronary revascularization procedures and hospitalization for unstable angina.|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840107|NCT01331837|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a CV-EAC Adjudicated Event Before Last Direct Contact Date|Percentage of participants with any component of the composite of CV death (including events adjudicated as 'Undetermined Cause of Death'), non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke before last direct contact date (i.e., latest date of visit, IVRS call, or site call).|From Baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population||Percentage of participants with event|||Number
840108|NCT01331837|Primary|Time to First CV-EAC Adjudicated Event Before Last Direct Contact Date|Prospective comparison of time to first occurrence of any component of the composite of CV death (including events adjudicated as 'Undetermined Cause of Death'), non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke before last direct contact date (i.e., latest date of visit, IVRS call, or site call).|From Baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840109|NCT01331837|Primary|Percentage of Patients With a CV-EAC Adjudicated Event Excluding Undetermined Cause of Death - Sensitivity Analysis|Percentage of patients with any component of the composite of CV death (excluding events adjudicated as 'Undetermined Cause of Death'), non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke - Sensitivity Analyses|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population||Percentage of patients with event|||Number
840110|NCT01331837|Primary|Time to First CV-EAC Adjudicated Event Excluding Undetermined Cause of Death - Sensitivity Analysis|Prospective comparison of time to first occurrence of any component of the composite of CV death (excluding events adjudicated as 'Undetermined Cause of Death'), non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke - Sensitivity Analyses|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the ITT population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840111|NCT01331837|Primary|Percentage of Patients With a CV-EAC Adjudicated Event - Sensitivity Analysis|Percentage of patients with any component of the composite of CV death (including events adjudicated as 'Undetermined Cause of Death'), non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke - Sensitivity Analysis|From Baseline up to 4.9 years|Analyses was conducted on the On-treatment (OT) population, i.e. patients who switched from randomized treatment were censored at the time of treatment switching.||Percentage of patients with event|||Number
840112|NCT01331837|Primary|Time to First CV-EAC Adjudicated Event - Sensitivity Analysis|Prospective comparison of time to first occurrence of any component of the composite of CV death (including events adjudicated as 'Undetermined Cause of Death'), non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke - Sensitivity Analysis|From Baseline up to 4.9 years|Analyses was conducted on the On-treatment (OT) population, i.e. patients who switched from randomized treatment were censored at the time of treatment switching.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840113|NCT01331837|Primary|Percentage of Patients Reporting a Cardiovascular (CV) Events Adjudication Committee (EAC) (CV-EAC) Adjudicated Event|Percentage of patients reporting any component of the composite of CV death (including events adjudicated as 'Undetermined Cause of Death'), non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the Intention to treat (ITT) population, i.e. all patients randomized who have taken at least one dose of study medication||Percentage of patients with event|||Number
840114|NCT01331837|Primary|Time to First Cardiovascular (CV) Events Adjudication Committee (EAC) (CV-EAC) Adjudicated Event|Prospective comparison of time to first occurrence of any component of the composite of CV death (including events adjudicated as 'Undetermined Cause of Death'), non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke.|From baseline up to 4.9 years|Analysis was conducted on the Intention to treat (ITT) population, i.e. all patients randomized who have taken at least one dose of study medication||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840115|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: Main Reason for Missed Injections|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the question Main reason for missed injections? answer choices were given as medication side effects, injection pain, forget to take medication, tired of taking injections, don't think medication is working, or other. Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment who missed at least 1 injection at given timepoint.||participants|||Number
840116|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: Over the Past 4 Weeks, Did You Miss Any of Your Injections?|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the question Over the past 4 weeks, did you miss any of your injections? answer choices were given as none missed, miss 1 injection, or miss 2 injections. Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||participants|||Number
840117|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: I Am Satisfied With the Dosing Frequency of This Medication.|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the statement I am satisfied with the dosing frequency (2 times per month) of this medication answers were numerically rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840118|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: This Medication Improves My Self-Confidence and Self-Reliance.|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the statement This medication improves my self-confidence and self-reliance, answers were numerically rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840119|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: The Twice a Month Dosing Enables Me to Be More Spontaneous and Flexible.|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the statement The twice a month dosing enables me to be more spontaneous and flexible, answers were numerically rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840120|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: The Twice a Month Dosing Makes It More Convenient for Me to Travel/Vacation.|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the statement The twice a month dosing makes it more convenient for me to travel/vacation, answers were numerically rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840121|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: This Medication Makes It Easy For Me to Carry Out My Daily Responsibilities.|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the statement This medication makes it easy for me to carry out my daily responsibilities (ie, going to work, doing household chores or caring for my family), answers were numerically rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840122|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: This Medication Enables Me to Focus More on Myself and My Family Rather Than My MS.|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the statement This Medication Enables Me to Focus More on Myself and My Family Rather Than My MS, answers were numerically rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840123|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: How Likely Would You Be to Continue to Use This Medication?|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the question How likely would you be to continue to use this medication? answers were numerically rated from 1 (extremely unlikely) to 10 (extremely likely). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840124|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: How Satisfied or Dissatisfied Are You With the Injection Frequency (Every 2 Weeks)?|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the question How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the injection frequency (every 2 weeks)? answers were numerically rated from 1 (extremely dissatisfied) to 10 (extremely satisfied). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840125|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: Overall, How Satisfied or Dissatisfied Are You With This Medication?|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the question Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with this medication? answers were numerically rated from 1 (extremely dissatisfied) to 10 (extremely satisfied). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840126|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: How Convenient or Inconvenient Is It to Take Your Medication Every 2 Weeks?|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the question How convenient or inconvenient is it to take your medication every 2 weeks? answers were numerically rated from 1 (extremely inconvenient) to 10 (extremely convenient). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840244|NCT01333956|Secondary|Self-assessed Sedation and Confusion|Self-assessed sedation and confusion (POD1). Confusion Assessment Method (CAM score) (pre-operative and on POD1)|1 day postoperatively|||percentage of patients|||Number
840127|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: How Convenient or Inconvenient Is It to Take Your Medication as Instructed?|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the question How convenient or inconvenient is it to take your medication as instructed? answers were numerically rated from 1 (extremely inconvenient) to 10 (extremely convenient). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840128|NCT01332019|Secondary|Summary of Participant-Reported Treatment Satisfaction: How Tolerable or Intolerable Do You Find the Medication?|"Participants completed a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire composed of a range of 14 questions regarding the participant’s perception of treatment satisfaction at the end of each year of treatment. For the question How tolerable or intolerable do you find the medication? answers were numerically rated from 1 (extremely intolerable) to 10 (extremely tolerable). Data after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded."|Year 1, Year 2, Year 3|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840129|NCT01332019|Secondary|Number of MS-Related Hospitalizations|Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|up to 4 years|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment||hospitalizations|||Number
840130|NCT01332019|Secondary|Number of Relapses Requiring IV Steroid Use|Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|up to 4 years|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment||relapses|||Number
840131|NCT01332019|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)|The EQ-5D VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where 100 is the 'best imaginable health state' and 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state.' The scale was normalized to a scale of 0 to 1, with higher values indicating a better health state. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Weeks 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840132|NCT01332019|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life (EQ-5D) Index Score|The EQ-5D is a participant-answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Scores of 1, 2, or 3 are possible responses for each of 5 questions (1=no problems, 2=some problems, 3=severe problems). A scoring formula developed by the EuroQol Group is then used to assign utility values for each participant’s Health State Profile. A summary index score (EQ-5D index score) is derived from the 5 questions by conversion with this scoring formula and a table of scores. EQ-5D Summary Index values ranged from -0.6 (worst health state) to 1.00 (perfect health state). Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Weeks 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840133|NCT01332019|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SF-12 Physical Component Score (PCS)|The SF-12 is a multipurpose short form survey with 12 questions, all selected from the SF-36 Health Survey. The questions were combined, scored, and weighted to create two scales that provide glimpses into mental and physical functioning and overall health-related-quality of life. PCS was computed using the scores of 12 questions and range from 0 to 100, where a 0 score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Weeks 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840134|NCT01332019|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) Mental Component Score (MCS)|The SF-12 is a multipurpose short form survey with 12 questions, all selected from the SF-36 Health Survey. The questions were combined, scored, and weighted to create two scales that provide glimpses into mental and physical functioning and overall health-related-quality of life. MCS computed using the scores of 12 questions and range from 0 to 100, where a 0 score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Weeks 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840135|NCT01332019|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS)-29 Physical Score|The 29-item MSIS-29 is a disease-specific participant-reported outcome measure that has been developed and validated to examine the physical and psychological impact of MS from a patient’s perspective; it measures 20 physical items and 9 psychological items. Responses use a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5. All questions are to be answered. The physical well being assessment portion of the MSIS-29 consists of 20 questions in which participants rate the impact of MS on their day-to-day life during the past two weeks from 1=no impact to 5=extreme impact for a total score of 20-100. A lower total score indicates less physically-related impact while a higher total score indicates greater physically-related impact on a participant's functioning. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Weeks 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840248|NCT01334125|Secondary|Baseline Adjusted Changes in Adiponectin/Leptin Ratio Over Time|Comparison of the baseline-adjusted differences in adiponectin/leptin ratio over time between the metformin and the placebo groups. The reported values represented mean adjusted for baseline values, age, gender, and BMI using repeated measures ANOVA (General Linear Model).|Baseline, 3mo, 6 mo, and 9 months|||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840136|NCT01332019|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT)|SDMT is a screening test for cognitive impairment. Participants are given 90 seconds in which to pair specific numbers with given geometric figures using a key. Scores range from 0 (worst) to 110 (best).|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Weeks 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840137|NCT01332019|Secondary|Time to Sustained Disability Progression|Estimated proportion of participants with progression and time to progression based on the Kaplan-Meier product limit method. Sustained disability progression is defined as: at least a 1.0 point increase on the EDSS from 105MS302 baseline EDSS ≥ 1.0 that is sustained for 24 weeks, or at least a 1.5 point increase on the EDSS from 105MS302 baseline EDSS = 0 that is sustained for 24 weeks. The EDSS measures the disability status of people with multiple sclerosis on a scale that ranges from 0 to 10. The range of main categories include (0) = normal neurologic exam; to (5) = ambulatory without aid or rest for 200 meters; disability severe enough to impair full daily activities; to (10) = death due to MS. Participants were censored at the time of withdrawal/switch/A3 effective date if they withdrew from study, switched to alternative MS medication, or Amendment 3 took effect without a progression.|Weeks 12, 24, 28, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168|Participants in the ITT population (all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment) with disability progression.||proportion of participants|||Number
840138|NCT01332019|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS)|Change from Baseline in disability as measured by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). The EDSS measures the disability status of people with multiple sclerosis on a scale that ranges from 0 to 10. The range of main categories include (0) = normal neurologic exam; to (5) = ambulatory without aid or rest for 200 meters; disability severe enough to impair full daily activities; to (10) = death due to MS. Data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Weeks 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=number of participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840139|NCT01332019|Secondary|Percentage Change of Whole Brain Volume|Percentage change of whole brain volume as assessed by MRI. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Week 48, Week 96|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=number of participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
840140|NCT01332019|Secondary|Volume of Gd-Enhancing Lesions|The volume of Gd-enhancing lesions as assessed by MRI. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Week 48, Week 96|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=number of participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||cm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
840141|NCT01332019|Secondary|Volume of T1 Hypointense Lesions|The volume of T1 hypointense lesions as assessed by MRI. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Week 48, Week 96|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=number of participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||cm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
840142|NCT01332019|Secondary|Volume of T2 Hyperintense Lesions|The volume of T2 hyperintense lesions as assessed by MRI. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Week 48, Week 96|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=number of participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||cm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
840143|NCT01332019|Secondary|Number of Gd-Enhancing Lesions|The number of Gd-enhancing lesions as assessed by MRI. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Baseline (start of 105MS302), Week 48, Week 96|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=number of participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
840144|NCT01332019|Secondary|Number of New T1 Hypointense Lesions|The total number of new T1 hypointense lesions as assessed by MRI.|Week 48, Week 96|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=number of participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
840145|NCT01332019|Secondary|Number of New Active Lesions|The number of new active lesions as assessed by MRI. Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Week 48, Week 96|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=number of participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
840146|NCT01332019|Secondary|Number of New or Newly Enlarging T2 Hyperintense Lesions|The total number of new or newly enlarging T2 hyperintense lesions (from Study 105MS302 Baseline) as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Observed data after participants switched to alternative MS medications or after Amendment 3 took effect are excluded.|Week 48, Week 96|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment; n=number of participants with an assessment at given timepoint.||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
840147|NCT01332019|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Relapsed|Relapses are defined as new or recurrent neurologic symptoms not associated with fever or infection, lasting at least 24 hours, and accompanied by new objective neurological findings upon examination by the examining neurologist. New or recurrent neurologic symptoms that occur less than 30 days following the onset of a relapse were considered part of the same relapse. Participants who did not experience a relapse prior to switching to alternative MS medications, withdrew from study, or Amendment 3 (A3) took effect were censored at the time of switch/withdrawal/A3 effective date.|Up to 4 years|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
840148|NCT01332019|Secondary|Annualized Relapse Rate (ARR)|Relapses are defined as new or recurrent neurologic symptoms not associated with fever or infection, lasting at least 24 hours, and accompanied by new objective neurological findings upon examination by the examining neurologist. The annualized relapse rate is calculated as the total number of relapses occurred during the period for all participants, divided by the total number of person-years followed in the period.|up to 4 years|ITT population: all participants who were assigned a treatment and received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||relapses per person-years|Relapses|95% Confidence Interval|Number
840149|NCT01332019|Primary|Number of Participants With Shifts From Baseline: Urinalysis|Shift to low includes normal to low, high to low, and unknown to low. Shift to high/positive includes normal to high/positive, low to high/positive, negative to high/positive, and unknown to high/positive. For participants who switched to alternative MS medications, data after switch and 14 days after last dose of study treatment are excluded. Data collected after Amendment 3 took effect were excluded for participants enrolled into study 105MS302 on every 4 week dosing, but not excluded for participants enrolled on every 2 week dosing. Pos=positive; RBC=red blood cells; WBC=white blood cells.|Baseline (BIIB017 Treatment Baseline from Study 105MS301) up to 4 years|Safety population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug; n=number of participants whose baseline value was not low or high/positive and who had at least 1 post-baseline value.||participants|||Number
840150|NCT01332019|Primary|Number of Participants With Shifts From Baseline: Kidney Function and Other Blood Chemistry|Shift to low includes normal to low, high to low, and unknown to low. Shift to high includes normal to high, low to high, and unknown to high. For participants who switched to alternative MS medications, data after switch and 14 days after last dose of study treatment are excluded. Data collected after Amendment 3 took effect were excluded for participants enrolled into study 105MS302 on every 4 week dosing, but not excluded for participants enrolled on every 2 week dosing. TSH=thyroid stimulating hormone.|Baseline (BIIB017 Treatment Baseline from Study 105MS301) up to 4 years|Safety population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug; n=number of participants whose baseline value was not low (or high) and who had at least 1 post-baseline value.||participants|||Number
840151|NCT01332019|Primary|Number of Participants With Shifts From Baseline: Liver Function Laboratory Values|Shift to low includes normal to low, high to low, and unknown to low. Shift to high includes normal to high, low to high, and unknown to high. For participants who switched to alternative MS medications, data after switch and 14 days after last dose of study treatment are excluded. Data collected after Amendment 3 took effect were excluded for participants enrolled into study 105MS302 on every 4 week dosing, but not excluded for participants enrolled on every 2 week dosing. ALT=alanine aminotransferase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; GGT=gamma-glutamyl transferase.|Baseline (BIIB017 Treatment Baseline from Study 105MS301) up to 4 years|Safety population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug; n=number of participants whose baseline value was not low (or high) and who had at least 1 post-baseline value.||participants|||Number
840152|NCT01332019|Primary|Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Hematology Laboratory Abnormalities|Data collected after Amendment 3 took effect were excluded for participants enrolled into study 105MS302 on every 4 week dosing, but not excluded for participants enrolled on every 2 week dosing.|up to 4 years|Safety population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and at least 1 post-baseline value for given parameter.||participants|||Number
840153|NCT01332019|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing Adverse Events (AEs) Serious AEs, and Discontinuations Due to AEs|AE: any untoward medical occurrence that did not necessarily have a causal relationship with study treatment. SAE: any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: resulted in death; in the view of the Investigator, placed the participant at immediate risk of death (a life threatening event); required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; resulted in a congenital anomaly/birth defect; any other medically important event that, in the opinion of the Investigator, could have jeopardized the participant or may have required intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the definition above. Data collected after Amendment 3 took effect were excluded for participants enrolled into study 105MS302 on every 4 week dosing, but not excluded for participants enrolled on every 2 week dosing.|up to 4 years|Safety population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. For participants who switched to alternative MS medications, data after switch and 14 days after last dose of study treatment are excluded.||participants|||Number
840154|NCT01333111|Secondary|Host Cell Proteins (HCP) Antibodies|Subjects who were positive for anti-HCP antibodies.|28 weeks after treatment start on on-demand treatment|Safety analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in on-demand arm were included for this analysis.||number of subjects|||Number
840155|NCT01333111|Secondary|Host Cell Proteins (HCP) Antibodies|Subjects who were positive for anti-Host Cell Protein (HCP) antibodies.|52 weeks after treatment start for patients on prophylaxis|Safety analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in prophylaxis arm were included for this analysis.||number of subjects|||Number
840156|NCT01333111|Secondary|Incidence of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAE was defined as an AE that resulted in any of the following: death, a life-threatening experience, in-subject hospitalization/prolongation of existing hospitalisation, persistent/significant disability/incapacity/congenital anomaly/birth defect. The incidence of SAEs were summarised by the rate of SAEs (number of SAEs per PYE). Number of SAEs per PYE is number of SAEs/total time in trial. All SAEs reported are treatment emergent (any serious adverse events which occurred after trial product administration).|at 32 weeks ±2 weeks for patients on on-demand treatment|Safety analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in on-demand arm were included for this analysis.||number of SAEs per PYE|||Number
840157|NCT01333111|Secondary|Incidence of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAE was defined as an AE that resulted in any of the following: death, a life-threatening experience, in-subject hospitalization/prolongation of existing hospitalisation, persistent/significant disability/incapacity/congenital anomaly/birth defect. The incidence of SAEs were summarised by the rate of SAEs (number of SAEs per PYE). Number of SAEs per PYE is number of SAEs/total time in trial. All SAEs reported are treatment emergent (any serious adverse events which occurred after trial product administration).|at 56 weeks ±2 weeks for patients on prophylaxis|Safety analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in prophylaxis arm were included for this analysis.||number of SAEs per PYE|||Number
840158|NCT01333111|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs)|The incidence of adverse events were summarised by the rate of AEs (number of AEs per PYE). Number of adverse events per PYE is number of adverse events /total time in trial. All adverse events reported are treatment emergent (any adverse events which occurred after trial product administration).|at 32 weeks ±2 weeks for patients on on-demand treatment|Safety analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol.Subjects in on-demand arm were included for this analysis.||number of AEs per PYE|||Number
840159|NCT01333111|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs)|The incidence of adverse events were summarised by the rate of AEs (number of AEs per patient years of exposure [PYE]). Number of adverse events per PYE is number of adverse events /total time in trial. All adverse events reported are treatment emergent (any adverse events which occurred after trial product administration).|at 56 weeks ±2 weeks for patients on prophylaxis|Safety analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in prophylaxis arm were included for this analysis.||number of AEs per PYE|||Number
840160|NCT01333111|Secondary|Factor IX Trough Levels|The mean pre-dose factor IX levels was measured with the one-stage clotting assay during the trial. Lowest factor IX activity recorded during single-dose and steady state, immediately before next dose was given. The analysis was based on a mixed model on the log-transformed plasma factor IX activity with subject as a random effect. The estimated mean factor IX trough level was presented back-transformed to the natural scale.|52 weeks after treatment start for patients on prophylaxis|Full analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in prophylaxis arm were included for this analysis.||U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840161|NCT01333111|Secondary|Number of Bleeding Episodes Per Patient During Routine Prophylaxis|The number of bleeding episodes per patient during routine prophylaxis was assessed using the individual annualised bleeding rates (spontaneous and traumatic bleeding episodes per patient per year).|52 weeks after treatment start for patients on prophylaxis|Full analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in prophylaxis arm were included for this analysis.||bleeds/patient/year||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840162|NCT01333111|Secondary|Haemostatic Effect of NNC-0156-0000-0009 When Used for Treatment of Bleeding Episodes, Assessed as Success/Failure Based on a Four-point Scale for Haemostatic Response|"Haemostatic response after treatment of a bleed with nonacog beta pegol was evaluated on a 4 point scale as excellent, good, moderate or poor. A success rate was calculated based on counting good or excellent as successes and poor and moderate as failures.
Excellent – abrupt pain relief and/or clear improvement in objective signs of bleeding within 8 hours after a single injection
Good – noticeable pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding within 8 hours after a single injection
Moderate – probable or slight beneficial effect within the first 8 hours after the first injection but requiring more than one injection within 8 hours
Poor – no improvement, or worsening of symptoms within 8 hours after two injections.
The success rate and 95% confidence interval (CI) are reported here."|28 weeks after treatment start on on-demand treatment|Full analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in on-demand arm were included for this analysis.||percentage of bleeding episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840163|NCT01333111|Secondary|Haemostatic Effect of NNC-0156-0000-0009 When Used for Prophylaxis of Bleeding Episodes, Assessed as Success/Failure Based on a Four-point Scale for Haemostatic Response|"Haemostatic response after treatment of a bleed with nonacog beta pegol was evaluated on a 4 point scale as excellent, good, moderate or poor. A success rate was calculated based on counting good or excellent as successes and poor and moderate as failures.
Excellent – abrupt pain relief and/or clear improvement in objective signs of bleeding within 8 hours after a single injection
Good – noticeable pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding within 8 hours after a single injection
Moderate – probable or slight beneficial effect within the first 8 hours after the first injection but requiring more than one injection within 8 hours
Poor – no improvement, or worsening of symptoms within 8 hours after two injections.
The success rate and 95% confidence interval (CI) are reported here."|52 weeks after treatment start for patients on prophylaxis|Full analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in prophylaxis arm were included for this analysis.||percentage of bleeding episodes||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840164|NCT01333111|Primary|Incidence of Inhibitory Antibodies Against Factor IX Defined as Titre Equal to or Above 0.6 BU (Bethesda Units)|Inhibitors were analysed with either the Nijmegen modified factor IX Bethesda assay or a heat/cold Nijmegen modified factor IX Bethesda assay. Number of subjects who developed inhibitory antibodies against factor IX are reported.|28 weeks after treatment start on on-demand treatment|Full analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in on-demand arm were included for this analysis.||number of subjects|||Number
840165|NCT01333111|Primary|Incidence of Inhibitory Antibodies Against Factor IX Defined as Titre Equal to or Above 0.6 BU (Bethesda Units)|Inhibitors were analysed with either the Nijmegen modified factor IX Bethesda assay or a heat/cold Nijmegen modified factor IX Bethesda assay. Number of subjects who developed inhibitory antibodies against factor IX are reported.|52 weeks after treatment start for patients on prophylaxis|Full analysis set included all subjects exposed to nonacog beta pegol. Subjects in prophylaxis arm were included for this analysis.||Number of subjects|||Number
840166|NCT01333189|Secondary|Hip, Knee, and Ankle Moments During Walking|Internal joint moments at the hip, knee, and ankle were calculated using an inverse dynamics approach from data collected using embedded force plates and a 6-camera motion analysis system to assess reflective marker positions placed at landmarks of the upper limbs, trunk, and lower limbs.|26 weeks post-operative|At the long-term follow up time point (26 weeks post-operative), a total of two patients from each group had dropped out of the study due to time constraints, transportation difficulties, late infection, or moving away from the area.||Newton-meters per kilogram (Nm/kg)||Standard Error|Mean
840167|NCT01333189|Secondary|Walking Speed|Self-selected walking speed was recorded for three passes across the middle 6 meter section of a walkway. The average of the 3 passes is reported.|26 weeks post-operative|At the long-term follow up time point (26 weeks post-operative), a total of two patients from each group had dropped out of the study due to time constraints, transportation difficulties, late infection, or moving away from the area.||meters/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
840249|NCT01334125|Secondary|Baseline Adjusted Changes in Lipid Profile Over Time|Comparison of the baseline-adjusted differences in total cholesterol/high density cholesterol index over time between the metformin and the placebo groups. The reported values represented means adjusted for baseline values, age, gender, and BMI using repeated measures ANOVA (General Linear Model).|Baseline, 3mo, 6mo, and 9 months|||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840168|NCT01333189|Secondary|Hip, Knee, and Ankle Joint Moments During Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test|Internal joint moments at the hip, knee, and ankle were calculated using an inverse dynamics approach from data collected using embedded force plates and a 6-camera motion analysis system to assess reflective marker positions placed at landmarks of the upper limbs, trunk, and lower limbs.|26 weeks post-operative|At the long-term follow up time point (26 weeks post-operative), a total of two patients from each group had dropped out of the study due to time constraints, transportation difficulties, late infection, or moving away from the area.||Newton-meters per kilogram (Nm/kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840169|NCT01333189|Secondary|Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test (FTSST)|The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test is quantified as the total time required for an individual to rise from and return to a chair five times in a row.|26 weeks post-operative|At the long-term follow up time point (26 weeks post-operative), a total of two patients from each group had dropped out of the study due to time constraints, transportation difficulties, late infection, or moving away from the area.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
840170|NCT01333189|Secondary|Weight-bearing Ratio During Walking|Weight-bearing ratio is measured during walking as the ratio between lower limbs in peak vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) during the loading response phase of the stance period of gait. Ratios reported are (vGRF of the Surgical Limb):(vGRF Non-Surgical Limb).|26 weeks post-operative|At the long-term follow up time point (26 weeks post-operative), a total of two patients from each group had dropped out of the study due to time constraints, transportation difficulties, late infection, or moving away from the area.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
840171|NCT01333189|Secondary|Weight-bearing Ratio During Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test (FTSST)|Weight-bearing ratio is measured during transitions between sitting and standing and is indicated by symmetry in vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) between lower limbs. Ratios reported are (vGRF of the Surgical Limb):(vGRF Non-Surgical Limb).|26 weeks post-operative|At the long-term follow up time point (26 weeks post-operative), a total of two patients from each group had dropped out of the study due to time constraints, transportation difficulties, late infection, or moving away from the area.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
840172|NCT01333189|Secondary|Hip, Knee, and Ankle Joint Moments During Walking|Internal joint moments at the hip, knee, and ankle were calculated using an inverse dynamics approach from data collected using embedded force plates and a 6-camera motion analysis system to assess reflective marker positions placed at landmarks of the upper limbs, trunk, and lower limbs.|6 weeks post-operative|At the completion of the intervention (6 weeks post-operative), one patient from each group had dropped out of the study due to either time constraints or transportation difficulties.||Newton-meters per kilogram (Nm/kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840173|NCT01333189|Secondary|Walking Speed|Self-selected walking speed was recorded for three passes across the middle 6 meter section of a walkway. The average of the 3 passes is reported.|6 weeks post-operative|At the completion of the intervention (6 weeks post-operative), one patient from each group had dropped out of the study due to either time constraints or transportation difficulties.||meters/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
840174|NCT01333189|Secondary|Hip, Knee, and Ankle Joint Moments During Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test|Internal joint moments at the hip, knee, and ankle were calculated using an inverse dynamics approach from data collected using embedded force plates and a 6-camera motion analysis system to assess reflective marker positions placed at landmarks of the upper limbs, trunk, and lower limbs.|6 weeks post-operative|At the completion of the intervention (6 weeks post-operative), one patient from each group had dropped out of the study due to either time constraints or transportation difficulties.||Newton-meters per kilogram (Nm/kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840175|NCT01333189|Secondary|Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test (FTSST)|The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test is quantified as the total time required for an individual to rise from and return to a chair five times in a row.|6 weeks post-operative|At the completion of the intervention (6 weeks post-operative), one patient from each group had dropped out of the study due to either time constraints or transportation difficulties.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
840176|NCT01333189|Secondary|Weight-bearing Ratio During Walking|Weight-bearing ratio is measured during walking as the ratio between lower limbs in peak vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) during the loading response phase of the stance period of gait. Ratios reported are (vGRF of the Surgical Limb):(vGRF Non-Surgical Limb).|6 weeks post-operative|At the completion of the intervention (6 weeks post-operative), one patient from each group had dropped out of the study due to either time constraints or transportation difficulties.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
840177|NCT01333189|Primary|Weight-bearing Ratio During Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test (FTSST)|Weight-bearing ratio is measured during transitions between sitting and standing and is indicated by symmetry in vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) between lower limbs. Ratios reported are (vGRF of the Surgical Limb):(vGRF Non-Surgical Limb).|6 weeks post-operative|At the completion of the intervention (6 weeks post-operative), one patient from each group had dropped out of the study due to either time constraints or transportation difficulties.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
840178|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects as Responders at Day 29 by the Investigator’s Live Assessment and by Subject’s Self Assessment of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Frown (Assay Sensitivity)||Day 29|ITT Population; N’=number of subjects with an assessment at Day 29||percentage of subjects|||Number
840179|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects as Responders, as Measured by the Investigator’s Live Assessment at Rest (Comparison With Dysport 50 U)||Days 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 113|ITT Population; N’=number of subjects with an Investigator's live assessment of glabellar lines at rest of moderate or severe at Baseline and with an assessment at the given post-Baseline visit||percentage of subjects|||Number
840180|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects as Responders, as Measured by the Subject’s Self Assessment at Maximum Frown (Comparison With Dysport 50 U)||Days 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 113|ITT Population; N’=number of subjects with assessment||percentage of subjects|||Number
840181|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects as Responders, as Measured by the Investigator’s Live Assessment at Maximum Frown (Comparison With Dysport 50 U)||Days 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 113|ITT Population; N’=number of subjects with assessment||percentage of subjects|||Number
840182|NCT01333397|Other Pre-specified|Number of Subjects Reporting at Least One Treatment Emergent Adverse Event During the Study|Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE)|Up to Day 113 (±3 days)|Safety Population: The safety population included all randomised subjects who received study treatment, regardless of the actual amount injected||participants|||Number
840183|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With a Reduction of Two or More Grades in the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Frown as Measured by the Subject's Self-assessment|A reduction of two or more grades in the severity of glabellar lines at maximum frown was a change from Visit 2 severity of glabellar lines from severe to mild/no wrinkles or from Visit 2 severity of moderate to no wrinkles after treatment as measured by the subjects self assessment.|Days 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 113|ITT Population; N’= number of subjects with a subject's self assessment of glabellar lines at maximum frown for the given post-Baseline visit||percentage of subjects|||Number
840184|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With a Reduction of Two or More Grades in the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Rest as Measured by the Investigator's Live Assessment|A reduction of two or more grades in the severity of glabellar lines at rest was a change from Visit 2 severity of glabellar lines from severe to mild or from Visit 2 severity of moderate to none after treatment as measured by the Investigator’s live assessment.|Days 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 113|ITT Population; N’= number of subjects with an Investigator's live assessment of glabellar lines at rest of moderate or severe at Baseline and with an assessment at the given post-Baseline visit||percentage of subjects|||Number
840185|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With a Reduction of Two or More Grades in the Severity of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Frown as Measured by the Investigator's Live Assessment|A reduction of two or more grades in the severity of glabellar lines at maximum frown was a change from Visit 2 severity of glabellar lines from severe to mild/none or from Visit 2 severity of moderate to none after treatment as measured by the Investigator’s live assessment|Days 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 113|ITT Population; N’= number of subjects with an Investigator's live assessment of glabellar lines at maximum frown for the given post-Baseline visit||percentage of subjects|||Number
840186|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects as Responders at Maximum Frown on Day 29 Who Remain Responders|A responder at maximum frown was defined as a subject having a severity grade of none or mild at maximum frown on the visit day and a severity grade of moderate or severe at maximum frown at Visit 2.|Day 113|ITT Population; N’=number of responders at Day 29||percentage of subjects|||Number
840187|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects as Responders at Rest as Measured by the Investigator's Live Assessment.|A responder at rest was defined as a subject having a severity grade of none or mild at rest on the visit day and a severity grade of moderate or severe at rest at Visit 2.|Days 8, 15, 29, 57, 85 and 113|ITT Population; N’= number of subjects with an Investigator's live assessment of glabellar lines at rest of moderate or severe at Baseline and with an assessment at the given post-Baseline visit;||percentage of subjects|||Number
840188|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Assessed as Responders, by Both the Investigator’s Live Assessment and the Subject’s Self-assessment at Maximum Frown.||Days 8, 15, 57, 85 and 113|ITT Population; N’= number of subjects with an Investigator's live assessment and a subject's self assessment of glabellar lines at maximum frown for the given post-Baseline visit||percentage of subjects|||Number
840189|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects as Responders at Maximum Frown as Measured by the Subject’s Self-assessment.||Days 8, 15, 57, 85 and 113|ITT Population; N’= number of subjects with a subject's self assessment of glabellar lines at maximum frown for the given post-Baseline visit||percentage of subjects|||Number
840190|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects as Responders at Maximum Frown as Measured by the Investigator’s Live Assessment.||Days 8, 15, 57, 85 and 113|ITT Population; N’=number of subjects with an Investigator's live assessment of glabellar lines at maximum frown for the given post-Baseline visit||percentage of subjects|||Number
840191|NCT01333397|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects as Assessed as Responders, by Both Investigator's Live Assessment and the Subject's Self-assessment at Maximum Frown.|A responder at maximum frown was defined as a subject having a severity grade of none or mild at maximum frown on the visit day and a severity grade of moderate or severe at maximum frown at Visit 2.|Day 29|ITT Population; Day 29 (N'=34,36,35,33,35); N’= number of subjects with an Investigator's live assessment and a subject's self assessment of glabellar lines at maximum frown for the given post-Baseline visit||percentage of subjects|||Number
840192|NCT01333397|Primary|Percentage of Subjects as Responders in the ILA (Using Validated 4-point Photographic Scale) and the SSA of Glabellar Lines at Maximum Frown|"Investigator’s live assessment (ILA), subject’s self assessment (SSA), Next Generation (NG)
4-point photographic scale: Investigator's live assessment: None - 0; Mild - 1; Moderate - 2; Severe - 3;
4-point photographic scale: Subject's Self assessment: No wrinkles - 0; Mild wrinkles - 1; Moderate wrinkles - 2; Severe wrinkles - 3;
A responder at maximum frown was defined as a subject having a severity grade of none or mild at maximum frown on Day 29 and a severity grade of moderate or severe at maximum frown at Visit 2."|Day 29|Intent-to-Treat Population: The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomised subjects who received study treatment, regardless of the actual amount injected. N’=number of subjects with assessment||percentage of subjects|||Number
840193|NCT01333436|Secondary|Fasting ApoB-48 Levels|ApoB-48 levels measured after at least a 12-hour fast and prior to administration of test meal (Hour 0).|Baseline (Hour 0)|Full-Analysis-Set (FAS) population defined as all participants who had valid postprandial ApoB-48 measurements for all specified time points to calculate iAUC.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840194|NCT01333436|Secondary|Postprandial Mean ApoB-48 Peak Levels|ApoB-48 levels measured at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 hours after the administration of test meal. Peak was the highest ApoB-48 level recorded during this timeframe.|up to 6 hours after Test Meal|Full-Analysis-Set (FAS) population defined as all participants who had valid postprandial ApoB-48 measurements for all specified time points to calculate iAUC.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840195|NCT01333436|Primary|Postprandial Incremental Area Under the Curve From 0-6 Hours (iAUC)[0-6] of Apolipoprotein B-48 (ApoB-48)|ApoB-48 levels were measured at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 hours after the administration of the test meal.|up to 6 hours after Test Meal|Full-Analysis-Set (FAS) population defined as all participants who had valid postprandial ApoB-48 measurements for all specified time points to calculate iAUC.||μg/mL x h||Standard Deviation|Mean
840196|NCT01333475|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For the detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|29 months, 23 days|||participants|||Number
840372|NCT01335477|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Over 52 Weeks|Means provided are the adjusted means and are based on all analysed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52).|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||mL||Standard Error|Mean
840197|NCT01333475|Primary|pERK and pAKT Levels in Tumor Biopsies on C1D1 and C1D22 Post-administration of the Combination of AZD6244 Hydrogen Sulfate and MK-2206 in Participants With Advanced Colorectal Cancer|A predetermined target inhibition reduction of 70% of both pERK and pAKT was deemed significant, thus tumor biopsies were performed at C1D1 or C1D22 post administration and evaluated using quantitative chemiluminescence immunoassay to measure pERK and pAKT levels in human tissue.|C1D1 and C1D22 post administration of the combination of AZD6244 hydrogen sulfate and MK-2206|||pg/ µg of protein||Full Range|Mean
840198|NCT01333488|Secondary|Vasospasm|as measured by TCD (Transcranial Doppler)|up to 3 months|||Percentage of participants|||Number
840199|NCT01333488|Secondary|GOS|GOS score|12 months after injury|||GOS score||Full Range|Mean
840200|NCT01333488|Primary|GOS (Glasgow Outcome Score)|"GOS=5 (Good Recovery) - Capacity to resume normal occupational and social activities, although some there may be some minor physical or mental deficits or symptoms.
GOS=4 (Moderate Disability) - Independent and can resume almost all activities of daily living.
GOS=3 (Severe Disability) - No longer capable of engaging in most previous personal, social or work activities. Typically are partially or totally dependent on assistance from others in daily living.
GOS=2 ( Persistent Vegetative State ) GOS=1 (Dead)"|Discharge from Hospital - Within 2 months from Injury|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
840201|NCT01333501|Secondary|Changes in the Environmental Status Scale Score (ESS)|The Environmental Status Scale (ESS) is used to quickly evaluate a patient for handicap. It was derived from a measure of socio-economic status. It consists of seven parameters: (1) actual work status, (2) financial and economic status, (3) personal residence or home, (4) personal assistance required, (5) transportation, (6) community services, (7) social activity. Each parameter has a single score from minimum 0 to maximum 5. ESS score is the sum of the points for all 7 parameters: minimum score: 0; maximum score: 35. The higher the score the greater the handicap|Baseline, 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
840202|NCT01333501|Secondary|Change From Screening in the Percentage of Brain Volume Change|Calculations of brain volume change were performed using the structural image evaluation of normalized atrophy (SIENA), software included in the Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain (FMRIB) software library. SIENA is a fully automated method for estimating temporal brain volume change.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||percentage of brain volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
840203|NCT01333501|Secondary|Change From Screening in the Number of T1 Gd+ Enhancing Lesions|Total number of post-baseline Gd-enhanced lesions is calculated as a sum of all Gd-enhanced lesions seen on post-baseline scans per visit. Real (not per slice) lesions are counted in this analysis|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Number of new lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
840204|NCT01333501|Secondary|Change From Screening in the Volume of Total T1 Hypointense Lesions|Volume of hypointense post-gadolinium T1 lesion component was measured by MRI scan. Means were estimated using a Mixed-effect model with repeated measures (MMRM) by-visit interaction.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
840205|NCT01333501|Secondary|Change From Screening in the Number of New T2 Lesions|New T2 lesions at a specific visit were assessed relative to the previous visit scan. The total number of lesions (visit 8 to 18 month) is calculated as the sum of the number of lesions.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Number of new lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
840206|NCT01333501|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Fatigue Impact Scale (mFIS, Total Score and Scores of the 3 Individual Domains).|Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (mFIS) questionnaire is described at each time point to evaluate fatigue by means of usual descriptive statistics. Three domains were also defined: Physical Subscale (sum of items 4, 6, 7, 10, 13, 14, 17, 20, 21 and therefore ranging from 0 to 36), Cognitive Subscale (sum of items 1, 2, 3, 5, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19 and therefore ranging from 0 to 40) and Psychosocial Subscale (sum of items 8, 9 and therefore ranging from 0 to 8). Finally, mFIS - overall score ranged from 0 to 80. The mFIS total score was computed as the sum of scores for each item. Lower values represent a better outcome.|Baseline, 18 months|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840207|NCT01333501|Secondary|Changes in Quality of Life, by Means of the Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life (MSQoL-54)|A 54 question measure covers 12 domains; assesses mental and physical health. The physical health composite score is a weighted average of the physical health scales, such as physical function, health perceptions, and energy. The mental health composite score is a weighted average of the mental health scales, such as overall quality of life, cognitive function, and health distress. Each domain has a range from 0 to 100 where higher means better.|Baseline, 18 months|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840245|NCT01333956|Secondary|Opioid-Related Symptom Distress Score|Opioid-Related Symptom Distress score (ORSDS) measured at POD1 and POD14. The ORSDS is a 4-point scale that evaluates 3 symptom distress dimensions (frequency, severity, bothersomeness) for 12 symptoms. The symptom-specific ORSDS is the average of the 3 symptom distress dimensions. The composite ORSDS is the average of 12 symptom-specific scores. (0=low; 4=high).|2 weeks postoperatively|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840208|NCT01333501|Secondary|Change From Screening in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)|MADRS measures the overall severity of depressive symptoms. The MADRS had a 10-item checklist. Items are rated on a scale of 0-6, for a total numeric range of scores from 0 (depressive symptoms absent) to 60 (numerically highest level of depressive symptoms).|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840209|NCT01333501|Secondary|Change From Screening in the Volume of Total T2 Lesions|Change in volume of total T2-weighted lesions by visit were summarized. Negative values indicate improvement (reduction in lesion volume) and positive values worsening (increase in lesion volume|Screening (-1 month), 18 months|||mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
840210|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in DKEFS Condition 2: Sort Recognition, Sort Recognition Description Score- Card Set 1+2|The Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System – Sorting Test is one of the nine tests presented in the DKEFS manual and explores the patient’s executive abilities. It has a standard form (version A, administered at screening and Month-18 visit) and an alternate form (version B, administered at Month-9 visit). The standard form consists of the practice card set, card set 1 and card set 2. The alternate form consists of the same practice card set, card set 3 and card set 4. Free sorting and sort recognition. In free sorting, six scores were obtained: Confirmed Correct sorts for card sets 1 and 2 (or 3 and 4 for version B), sum of confirmed Correct Sorts, Free Sorting Description score for card set 1 and 2 (or 3 and 4 for version B) and sum of Free Sorting Description scores. The total score ranged from 0 to 64. Higher values represent a better outcome.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840211|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in DKEFS Condition 1: Free Sorting, Free Sorting, Description Score, Card Set 1+2|The Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System – Sorting Test is one of the nine tests presented in the DKEFS manual and explores the patient’s executive abilities. It has a standard form (version A, administered at screening and Month-18 visit) and an alternate form (version B, administered at Month-9 visit). The standard form consists of the practice card set, card set 1 and card set 2. The alternate form consists of the same practice card set, card set 3 and card set 4. In free sorting, six scores were obtained: Confirmed Correct sorts for card sets 1 and 2 (or 3 and 4 for version B), sum of confirmed Correct Sorts, Free Sorting Description score for card set 1 and 2 (or 3 and 4 for version B) and sum of Free Sorting Description scores. In sort recognition, a description score for card set 1 and 2 (or 3 and 4 for version B) was obtained, as well as the sum of description scores of both sets. The total score ranged from 0 to 64. Higher values represent a better outcome|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840212|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (DKEFS) Condition 1: Free Sorting, Confirmed Correct Sort- Card Set 1+2|The Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System – Sorting Test is one of the nine tests presented in the DKEFS manual and explores the patient’s executive abilities. It has a standard form (version A, administered at screening and Month-18 visit) and an alternate form (version B, administered at Month-9 visit). The standard form consists of the practice card set, card set 1 and card set 2. The alternate form consists of the same practice card set, card set 3 and card set 4. The DKFES test consisted of two testing procedures: free sorting and sort recognition. In free sorting, six scores were obtained: Confirmed Correct sorts for card sets 1 and 2 (or 3 and 4 for version B), sum of confirmed Correct Sorts. In sort recognition, a description score for card set 1 and 2 (or 3 and 4 for version B) was obtained, as well as the sum of description scores of both sets. The total score ranged from 0 to 16. Higher values represent a better outcome|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840213|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in Word List Generation (WLG)|Word List Generation (COWAT/WLG): The COWAT assesses verbal fluency on semantic stimulus by asking the patient to produce as many words as possible belonging to a semantic category. The test assessed the verbal fluency, recorded all the possible correct word that a patients should give in 90 sec. No maximum range is available. Higher values represent a better outcome. The score was the number of correct words. The more words the patient pronounces, the better it is. We can imagine that the minimum value might be zero words, , but it is not a score scale.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840214|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in Spatial Recall Test – Delayed Recall (SPART-D)|Spatial Recall Test (SPART) for visuospatial learning and delayed recall.Spatial Recall Test (10/36): The spatial recall test assesses visuospatial learning and delayed recall (10/36-D). A checkerboard with ten checkers arranged in a pattern was shown to the subject for ten seconds. The subject was then asked to reproduce the same pattern with ten checkers on an empty checkerboard. The test includes three consecutive trials. The score was the total number of correct responses for the tree trials. The total score ranged from 0 to 10. Higher values represent a better outcome.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840246|NCT01333956|Primary|Postoperative Pain|Pain assessment scale (Numeric Rating Scale) (0=no pain; 10=worst pain imaginable).|2 weeks postoperatively|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840215|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in Selective Reminding Test – Delayed Recall (SRT-D) Raw Score|The tests SRT (Selective Reminding Test) for episodic memory (verbal learning and delayed recall). The Delayed SRT test is the total number of words recalled after a delayed period. The total score ranged from 0 to 12. Higher values represent a better outcome.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840216|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test – 2 (PASAT 2) Raw Score|Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT) for working memory (and sustained attention and information processing speed). The patient hears a series of numbers from recordings that are presented at the rate of one every 2 seconds in the second part of the test (PASAT-2). The patient was asked to add each consecutive digit to the one immediately preceding it. Sixty-one digits are presented for each part, and each part has a maximum of 60 correct answers. The total score ranged from 0 to 60. Higher values represent a better outcome.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840217|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test – 3 Seconds (PASAT 3) Raw Score|Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT) for working memory (and sustained attention and information processing speed). The patient hears a series of numbers from recordings that are presented at the rate of one every 3 seconds in the first part of the test (PASAT-3). The patient is asked to add each consecutive digit to the one immediately preceding it. Sixty-one digits are presented for each part, and each part has a maximum of 60 correct answers. The total score ranged from 0 to 60. Higher values represent a better outcome.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840218|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Raw Score|Symbol Digit Modality Test (SDMT) for sustained attention and information processing speed. It presents a series of nine symbols, each of which is paired with a single digit labeled 1-9 in a key at the top of the sheet. The reminder of the page has a pseudo-randomized sequence of symbols, and the patient must respond with the digit associated with each of these as quickly as possible. The score is the number of correct answers in 90 seconds. The total score ranged from 0 to 110. Higher values represent a better outcome.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840219|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in Spatial Recall Test (SPART) Raw Score|Spatial Recall Test (SPART) for visuospatial learning and delayed recall.Spatial Recall Test (10/36): The spatial recall test assesses visuospatial learning and delayed recall (10/36-D). A checkerboard with ten checkers arranged in a pattern is shown to the subject for ten seconds. The subject is then asked to reproduce the same pattern with ten checkers on an empty checkerboard. The test includes three consecutive trials. The score is the total number of correct responses for the tree trials. The total score ranged from 0 to 30. Higher values represent a better outcome.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840220|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in Selective Reminding Test – Consistent Long Term Retrieval (SRT-CLTR) Raw Score|Brief Repeatable Battery (BRB)- widely used as a clinical and research tool, with 68% sensitivity and 85% specificity. It consists of the serial administration of 5 tests. One of the tests is SRT (Selective Reminding Test) for episodic memory (verbal learning and delayed recall). A word recalled on two consecutive trials is considered to have entered long-term storage (LTS) on the first of these trials and scored as LTS on all following trials. The total of the words in LTS of all six trials is then summed. If a word in LTS is consistently recalled on all subsequent trials, it is then scored as Consistent Long Term Retrieval (CLTR). The total of the words in CLTR of all six trials is summed. The total score ranged from 0 to 72. Higher values represent a better outcome.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations.||Raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840221|NCT01333501|Primary|Change From Screening in Selective Reminding Test – Long-Term Storage (SRT-LTS) Raw Score|Brief Repeatable Battery (BRB)- widely used as a clinical and research tool, with 68% sensitivity and 85% specificity. It consists of the serial administration of 5 tests. One of the tests is SRT (Selective Reminding Test) for episodic memory (verbal learning and delayed recall). A word recalled on two consecutive trials is considered to have entered long-term storage (LTS) on the first of these trials and scored as LTS on all following trials. The total of the words in LTS of all six trials is then summed. The total score ranged from 0 to 72. Higher values represent a better outcome.|Screening (-1month), 18 month|Full analysis set (FAS) - all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment of both primary efficacy variables (i.e. non-missing information about the BRB and DKEFS – Sorting test) without any major protocol violations.||raw score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840222|NCT01333592|Primary|Incidences of Adverse Events||52 weeks|||Participants|||Number
840223|NCT01333592|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c at 52 Weeks||at week 0 and week 52|||percentage of HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
840224|NCT01333722|Secondary|Time to Perceptible and Meaningful Pain Relief|The median time (minutes) from first perceptible pain relief (onset of pain relief) and time until first meaningful pain relief.|From time of first study drug administration to 12 hours following first study drug administration|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840225|NCT01333722|Secondary|SPRID (Pain Relief and Pain Intensity Difference)|"SPRID was defined as the sum of Pain Relief score (TOTPAR, See Outcome Measure 2 for details*) plus the Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) Categorical score, where participants assessed pain intensity on a Categorical Pain Intensity Scale by answering the following question: My pain at this time is… with one of the following responses: no pain or none, mild pain, moderate pain, or severe pain). Higher mean SPRID scores indicated better pain control. The SPRID score is a measure of the cumulative pain intensity difference during treatment and the area under the curve was estimated using the linear trapezoidal rule."|From time of first study drug administration to 12 hours following first study drug administration|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840226|NCT01333722|Secondary|TOTPAR (Total Pain Relief)|TOTPAR was the time-interval weighted sum of pain relief. Pain relief was assessed by participants’ responses to how their pain relief was compared with the pain they had just before receiving the first dose of study drug: no relief, a little relief, some relief, a lot of relief, or complete relief. Higher mean TOTPAR scores indicate better pain relief. The TOTPAR score is a measure of the cumulative pain intensity difference during treatment and the area under the curve was estimated using the linear trapezoidal rule.|From time of first study drug administration to 12 hours following first study drug administration|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840227|NCT01333722|Primary|Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) Using the Pain Intensity Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"Participants assessed pain intensity on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) with 0 meaning no pain and 100 meaning the worst pain imaginable. The SPID VAS score for 0 to 12 hours following initial study drug dose measured the cumulative pain intensity difference during treatment with higher mean SPID VAS scores indicating greater improvement from Baseline. The SPID score is a measure of the cumulative pain intensity difference during treatment and the area under the curve was estimated using the linear trapezoidal rule."|From time of first study drug administration to 12 hours following first study drug administration|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840228|NCT01333813|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject. Any was defined as occurrence of any symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|After the challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine up to the study end (Day 0 to Month 1)|Analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects who received the challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine.||subjects|||Number
840229|NCT01333813|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited AEs|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 31-day (Day 0-30) follow-up period after the challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine|Analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects who received the challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine.||subjects|||Number
840230|NCT01333813|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General AEs|"Solicited general symptoms assessed were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache and temeperature.
Any temperature was defined as axillary temperature ≥ 37.5 degree centigrade (°C), grade 3 temperature was axillary temperature > 39.0°C. For other symptoms, any was defined as occurrence of any general symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination and grade 3 was defined as a general symptom that prevented normal activity. Related was a general symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination."|During the 4-day (Day 0-3) follow-up period after the challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine|Analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects who received the challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine.||subjects|||Number
840231|NCT01333813|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Adverse Events (AEs)|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any was occurrence of any local symptom regardless of their intensity grade. Grade 3 pain was considerable pain at rest that prevented normal everyday activities. Grade 3 redness and swelling was > 50 millimeter (mm).|During the 4-day (Day 0-3) follow-up period after the challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine|Analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects who received the challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine .||subjects|||Number
840232|NCT01333813|Secondary|Number of Subjects Demonstrating an Anamnestic Response to the Engerix-B Kinder Challenge Dose|The anamnestic response is defined as an antibody concentration ≥ 10 mIU/mL at post Engerix-B Kinder challenge dose time point for initially seronegative subjects ,and as an antibody concentration at post Engerix-B Kinder challenge dose time point ≥ 4 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration for initially seropositive subjects. A seropositive/seronegative subject was defined as subject with HBs antibody concentration below/greater than or equal to the seropositivity cut-off of 6.2 mIU/mL. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HBs ELISA had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis and the initial 3.3 mIU/mL seropositivity cut-off was revised into the new 6.2 mIU/mL cut-off.|After Engerix-B Kinder challenge dose (Month 1)|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who had received a challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine and for whom immunogenicity data were available at the post- Engerix-B Kinder challenge time point.||subjects|||Number
840247|NCT01334125|Secondary|Number of Participants With Minor, Major, and Nocturnal Hypoglycemia|Comparison of the occurrence of hypoglycemic event requiring a third party assistance (major hypoglycemia) per subject during the study, and minor hypoglycemia (plasma glucose of <60 mg/dL or no measurement), as well as nocturnal hypoglycemia (plasma glucose of ≤60 mg/dL between 11PM and 6AM).|12 months|||participants|||Number
840385|NCT01328756|Primary|Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI) at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)|BMI was calculated as (weight [kilogram] per height [square meter]).|Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Safety population with participants evaluable for this outcome||kilogram per square meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
840233|NCT01333813|Secondary|Anti-HBs Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations are expressed as Geometric mean antibody concentrations (GMCs) in mIU/mL. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HBs had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi-Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis.|One month (Month 1) after a challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who had received a challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine and for whom immunogenicity data were available at the post- Engerix-B Kinder challenge time point.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840234|NCT01333813|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-HBs Antibody Concentrations Equal to or Above Protocol Specified Cut-off Values|Anti-HBs antibody concentrations cut-off values assessed were ≥ 6.2 mIU/mL (previously 3.3 mIU/mL) and ≥ 10 mIU/mL. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HBs ELISA had been observed in some studies for low levels of anti-HBs antibodies (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi-Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis and the initial 3.3 mIU/mL seropositivity cut-off was revised into the new 6.2 mIU/mL cut-off.|One month (Month 1) after a challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who had received a challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine and for whom immunogenicity data were available at the post- Engerix-B Kinder challenge time point.||subjects|||Number
840235|NCT01333813|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-HBs Antibody Concentrations Equal to or Above the Protocol Specified Cut-off Values After Previous Vaccination With Infanrix Hexa Vaccine|Anti-HBs antibody concentrations cut-off values assessed were ≥ 6.2 mIU/mL (previously 3.3 mIU/mL), ≥ 10 mIU/mL, ≥ 10 mIU/mL to <100 mIU/mL and ≥ 100 mIU/mL. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HBs ELISA had been observed in some studies for low levels of anti-HBs antibodies (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi-Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis and the initial 3.3 mIU/mL seropositivity cut-off was revised into the new 6.2 mIU/mL cut-off.|Before (Day 0) a challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence which included all subjects previously primed and boosted with 4 doses of Infanrix hexa in the first 2 years of life; with no evidence of hepatitis B infection or disease and for whom serological results were available at the pre- Engerix-B Kinder challenge time point.||subjects|||Number
840236|NCT01333813|Secondary|Anti-HBs Antibody Concentrations After Previous Vaccination With Infanrix Hexa Vaccine.|"Antibody concentrations are expressed as Geometric mean antibody concentrations (GMCs) in mIU/mL.
A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HBs ELISA had been observed in some studies for low levels of anti-HBs antibodies (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi-Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis."|Before (Day 0) a challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for persistence which included all subjects previously primed and boosted with 4 doses of Infanrix hexa in the first 2 years of life; with no evidence of hepatitis B infection or disease and for whom serological results were available at the pre- Engerix-B Kinder challenge time point.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840237|NCT01333813|Primary|Number of Subjects With Anti-hepatitis B (Anti-HBs) Antibody Concentration Equal to or Above (≥) 100 Milli-International Units Per Milliliter (mIU/mL)|A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HBs enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) had been observed in some studies for low levels of anti-HBs antibodies (10-100 mIU/mL). All the available blood samples initially tested with ELISA were re-tested using the Chemi-Luminescence Immuno Assay (CLIA) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis.|One month (Month 1) after a challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine|Analysis was performed on According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who had received a challenge dose of Engerix-B Kinder vaccine and for whom immunogenicity data were available at the post- Engerix-B Kinder challenge time point.||subjects|||Number
840238|NCT01333865|Secondary|Number of Participants With Reduction in ASD Symptom Severity as Defined by the NIMH Clinical Global Impression for Pervasive Developmental Disorders (CGI-PDD) Improvement Score|Number of participants with reduction in ASD symptom severity defined as an NIMH Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) Improvement score less than or equal to 2. The CGI-Improvement is a clinician-rated measure of improvement. Scores range from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse) for PDD.|Pre-treatment - 12 weeks|19 participants were exposed to the medication, but 1 withdrew due to feeling mildly sedated which affected his driving. This occurred too early in the study for him to be analyzed.||participants|||Number
840239|NCT01333865|Primary|Number of Participants With Reduction in ASD Symptom Severity as Defined by the Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS)|"Number of participants with reduction in ASD symptom severity defined as a reduction in Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) score from baseline of greater than or equal to 30%.
The SRS is a 65-item rating scale completed by an informant to measure the severity of autism spectrum symptoms as they occur in natural settings."|Week 12|19 participants were exposed to the medication, but 1 withdrew due to feeling mildly sedated which affected his driving. This occurred too early in the study for him to be analyzed.||participants|||Number
840240|NCT01333956|Secondary|Satisfaction|Satisfaction with pain management (1-10 scale; 1 = very dissatisfied, 10 = very satisfied)|2 weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840241|NCT01333956|Secondary|Opioid Usage|Opioid Usage (POD1, POD 3, 2 weeks, 3 months)|3 months|||mg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840242|NCT01333956|Secondary|Neuropathic Pain|Neuropathic pain incidence: Leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs (LANSS) score (3 months). Scale of 0 to 24. Higher values represent worse outcomes.|3 months|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840243|NCT01333956|Secondary|Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)|NRS Pain (pre-operative, POD1, POD3, 2 weeks, 3 months, at orthopedic visits). Neuropathic pain incidence: Leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs (LANSS) score (3 months)|3 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840250|NCT01334125|Primary|Baseline Adjusted Hemoglobin A1c Over Time|Comparison of the baseline-adjusted differences in HbA1c between the metformin and placebo groups during the trial. Hemoglobin A1c is a marker of glycemic control. The reported values represented means adjusted for baseline values, age, gender, and BMI using repeated measures ANOVA (General Linear Model).|Baseline, 3mo, 6mo, and 9 months|||percentage of HbA1c||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840251|NCT01334216|Primary|Parental Smoking Quit Rate|This is the number of participants who quit smoking|one year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
840252|NCT01334229|Secondary|Measurement of Apolipoprotein B48 and Apolipoprotein B100 Fractional Catabolic Rates With Stable Isotope During Postprandial Period||6 weeks|||pools/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
840253|NCT01334229|Secondary|Measurement of Apolipoprotein B48 and Apolipoprotein B100 Pool Sizes With Stable Isotope During Postprandial Period||6 weeks|||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840254|NCT01334229|Secondary|Measurement of Insulin||6 weeks|||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
840255|NCT01334229|Secondary|Measurement of Glucose||6 weeks|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
840256|NCT01334229|Secondary|Measurement of Glucagon-like Peptide-1 by ELISA||6 weeks|||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
840257|NCT01334229|Primary|Measurement of Apolipoprotein B48 and Apolipoprotein B100 Production Rates With Stable Isotope During Postprandial Period||6 weeks|||mg/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
840258|NCT01334515|Secondary|Overall Response Evaluated in This Study Using the New International Criteria Proposed by the Revised Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)|Number of patients where best overall response is a complete response (CR)-[disappearance of all target lesions and disappearance of any other measureable disease], a very Good Partial Response (VGPR)- [>90% decrease of the disease measurement for CT/MRI lesions, taking as reference the disease measurement done to confirm measurable disease at study entry. Non-target CT/MRI lesions stable to smaller in size], or partial Response (PR)- [>= 30% decrease in the disease measurement, taking as reference the disease measurement done to confirm measurable disease at study entry. Non-target CT/MRI lesions stable to smaller in size], and maintains the response. It is possible that a subject’s response to therapy may not occur until after several months of treatment. In order to prevent bias, the maximum duration of time/treatment over which a subject’s response is to be assessed for determination of the best overall response is after the completion of up to 10 courses.|Every two cycles (each cycle lasts 28 days)|Patients will be evaluable for inclusion in the analysis of response if they have an event at any time on the study or if they complete at least 2 cycles of hu14.18-IL2 therapy. Patients who go off-protocol therapy prior to the completion of 2 cycles due to parent/family choice and/or due to toxicity will not be considered evaluable for response.||participants|||Number
840259|NCT01334515|Primary|Number of Patients With Unacceptable Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs)|Test for tolerability and monitor for the occurrence of too many unacceptable DLTs using a two-stage stopping rule: (Stage 1) Accrue 10 patients. If more than 1 experience at least one unacceptable DLT during the first treatment cycle, the regimen will be considered to have unacceptable toxicity, and accrual will be temporarily closed, to review all relevant data and consider modifying the regimen to improve safety. If 1 or no patients have an unacceptable DLT in the first treatment cycle, then continue. (Stage 2) Accrue 20 more patients. If 7 or more experience at least one unacceptable DLT in the first treatment cycle, temporarily close the study for possible dosing-safety modifications. If 6 or fewer have an unacceptable DLT in the first treatment cycle, it is reasonable to assume that the combination therapy is safe.|Up to 10 courses|This outcome measure evaluates the first 30 patients to enroll and who receive at least one dose of hu14.18-IL2.||participants|||Number
840260|NCT01334554|Secondary|Endothelial Function|Endothelial function was measured with flow mediated dilation, percent change|Difference between FMD at baseline and 4 weeks|We detected problems with the ultrasound images obtained to measure flow mediated dilation and therefore only data in 14 subjects in the sildenafil group and in 16 subjects in the placebo were analyzed.||percentage of brachial artery diameter|percent change of brachial artery diamet|Standard Deviation|Mean
840261|NCT01334554|Primary|Insulin Sensitivity|insulin sensitivity as measured by frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test|Insulin sensitivity measured at baseline and 4 weeks after the intervention|||min-1/pmol/mlx10-5||Standard Deviation|Median
840262|NCT01334606|Secondary|User Acceptability|"After using each pen needle for three weeks, subjects will be asked to respond Yes or No to the question Were the pen needles used for long acting insulin injections at doses greater than 40 units during this past study period acceptable to you? This outcome measure will be determined for the total subject population as well as for the subset of Lantus users."|End of Period 1 (three weeks) and Period 2 (six weeks)||||||
840263|NCT01334606|Secondary|Relative Injection Pain|"Subjects will complete a 150 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS is a measure of the pain perceived with the needle they are using at that point in the study relative to the needle they used the previous period. The VAS is anchored at the center (0mm) with as painful and at each extreme with much less painful (-75mm) and much more painful (+75mm). The sign of each VAS score will be adjusted for the order of pen needle (PN) use, such that the 8mm short PN is always considered the reference."|End of Period 2 (six weeks)||||||
840264|NCT01334606|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With at Least One Leakage Event|Leakage will be assessed by the subject after any injections of long-acting insulin of greater than 40 units. Subjects will record in their study diary if they observed insulin leakage from the injection site.|3 weeks per pen needle||||||
840265|NCT01334606|Secondary|Glycemic Control as Measured by Fasting Blood Glucose|The measure of glycemic control will be the percent difference in fasting blood glucose (FBG) assessed at the end of Period 1 and Period 2. The average percent difference in FBG between the Nano and Short pen needles, with the Short as a reference, must be shown to be no more than +/- 20% with 95% confidence. General linear models will be used, adjusted for baseline FBG. This outcome measure will be determined for the total subject population as well as for the subset of Lantus users.|3 weeks per pen needle||||||
840277|NCT01334866|Secondary|Composite Major Adverse Event Rate (Late)|"Characterize the composite major adverse event rate after 30 days post-procedure or hospital discharge, whichever is longer through the 6-Month evaluation. The major adverse events will include:
Major hemorrhage/bleeding requiring surgical intervention
Aortic complications
Graft vessel revision (GVR)
Transient ischemic attacks (TIA)
Cerebrovascular accidents (CVA)/stroke
Myocardial infarction (MI)
Death"|After 30 days post-procedure or hospital discharge, whichever is longer through the 6-Month evaluation|||percentage of subjects|||Number
840266|NCT01334606|Primary|Glycemic Control as Measured by Percent (%) Absolute Change in Fructosamine|The measure of glycemic control will be the percent difference in FRU assessed at the end of Period 1 compared to FRU assessed at the end of Period 2. The average percent difference in FRU between the Nano and Short pen needles, with the Short as a reference, must be shown to be no more than +/- 20% with 95% confidence. General linear models will be used, adjusting for baseline FRU. This outcome measure was to be determined for the total subject population as well as for the subset of Lantus users.|3 weeks per pen needle|No analysis was performed. The study was terminated due to slow enrollment. The same endpoint was studied and reported in a similar subject population, including Lantus users, in study DBC-11-SQUIR05(NCT01231984)which had a similar design.|||||
840267|NCT01334710|Secondary|Toxicity Assessment|Evaluate the proportion of participants treated with OSI-906 and sorafenib who develop serious adverse events.|28 days from study entry||||||
840268|NCT01334710|Primary|Comparison of MRI/CT Scans to Pre-treatment Scan|Efficacy will be measured by evaluating the number of patients who do not have disease progression (measured by CT or MRI scan) 5 months after starting treatment. Assessment of the endpoint of disease progression will be performed every 2 months using either CT or MRI scan. Participants will remain on the study until either evidence of disease progression or unacceptable side effects develop. This period is expected to be on the average 6 months long.|6 months||||||
840269|NCT01334723|Secondary|BPH-Related Costs for Every 30 Days of 5-ARI Therapy|In this analysis, we evaluated mean BPH-related costs for every 30 days of 5-ARI therapy. Mean costs were evaluated by month on therapy for BPH-related medical costs (defined as any claim with a primary ICD-9-CM code of 222.2 or 600.xx).|Up to one year following the first pharmacy claim for 5ARI therapy or medical encounter for AUR or prostate surgery in the 5 and a half year period from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2006|Enrolled Population||United States dollars per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
840270|NCT01334723|Secondary|Mean BPH-Related Costs for Participants With an MPR >=80% Versus <80%|In this analysis, we evaluated mean BPH-related costs per month for participants with an MPR of >=80% versus <80%. Mean costs were evaluated by month on therapy for BPH-related medical costs (defined as any claim with a primary ICD-9-CM code of 222.2 or 600.xx).|Up to one year following the first pharmacy claim for 5ARI therapy or medical encounter for AUR or prostate surgery in the 5 and a half year period from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2006|Enrolled Population||United States dollars per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
840271|NCT01334723|Secondary|Mean BPH-Related Costs for Participants With an MPR >=75% Versus <75%|In this analysis, we evaluated mean BPH-related costs per month for participants with an MPR of >=75% versus <75%. Mean costs were evaluated by month on therapy for BPH-related medical costs (defined as any claim with a primary ICD-9-CM code of 222.2 or 600.xx).|Up to one year following the first pharmacy claim for 5ARI therapy or medical encounter for AUR or prostate surgery in the 5 and a half year period from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2006|Enrolled Population||United States dollars per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
840272|NCT01334723|Secondary|Mean BPH-Related Costs for Participants With an MPR >=70% Versus <70%|In this analysis, we evaluated mean BPH-related costs per month for participants with an MPR of >=70% versus <70%. Mean costs were evaluated by month on therapy for BPH-related medical costs (defined as any claim with a primary ICD-9-CM code of 222.2 or 600.xx).|Up to one year following the first pharmacy claim for 5ARI therapy or medical encounter for AUR or prostate surgery in the 5 and a half year period from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2006|Enrolled Population||United States dollars per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
840273|NCT01334723|Secondary|Mean Length of 5-ARI Therapy|In this analysis, we evaluated the association between 5-ARI length of therapy and risk of acute urinary retention and prostate surgery.|Up to one year following the first pharmacy claim for 5ARI therapy or medical encounter for AUR or prostate surgery in the 5 and a half year period from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2006|Enrolled Population||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
840274|NCT01334723|Primary|Number of Participants With Risk of Acute Urinary Retention and Surgery Based on an MPR Threshold of 80%|Claims-based definition of AUR and surgery based on the presence of an ICD-9-CM code of 599.6x, 788.20, or 788.29 and CPT procedure codes, respectively. For this analysis, we evaluated the association between compliance with 5-ARI therapy (measured by medication possession ratio [MPR]) and risk of AUR and surgery. MPR was calculated as the number of days that 5-ARI therapy was taken divided by the total number of follow-up days. For this analysis, the threshold for compliance was set at MPR = 80%.|Up to one year following the first pharmacy claim for 5ARI therapy or medical encounter for AUR or prostate surgery in the 5 and a half year period from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2006|Enrolled Population||participants|||Number
840275|NCT01334723|Primary|Number of Participants With Risk of Acute Urinary Retention and Surgery Based on an MPR Threshold of 75%|Claims-based definition of AUR and surgery based on the presence of an ICD-9-CM code of 599.6x, 788.20, or 788.29 and CPT procedure codes, respectively. For this analysis, we evaluated the association between compliance with 5-ARI therapy (measured by medication possession ratio [MPR]) and risk of AUR and surgery. MPR was calculated as the number of days that 5-ARI therapy was taken divided by the total number of follow-up days. For this analysis, the threshold for compliance was set at MPR = 75%.|Up to one year following the first pharmacy claim for 5ARI therapy or medical encounter for AUR or prostate surgery in the 5 and a half year period from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2006|Enrolled Population||participants|||Number
840276|NCT01334723|Primary|Number of Participants With Risk of Acute Urinary Retention and Surgery Based on an MPR Threshold of 70%|Claims-based definition of acute urinary retention (AUR) and surgery based on the presence of an ICD-9-CM code of 599.6x, 788.20, or 788.29 and CPT procedure codes, respectively. For this analysis, we evaluated the association between compliance with 5-ARI therapy (measured by medication possession ratio [MPR]) and risk of AUR or surgery. MPR was calculated as the number of days that 5-ARI therapy was taken divided by the total number of follow-up days. For this analysis, the threshold for compliance was set at MPR = 70%.|The 5 and a half year period from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2006|Enrolled Population: participants in the IHCIS database with a diagnosis of benign prostate hyperplasia or enlarged prostate as indicated by ICD-9-CM code on claims (222.2x or 600.xx). Participants were included if they had at least 60 days of 5-ARI therapy during the enrollment period, 6 months of continuous enrollment, and no prior surgery.||participants|||Number
840303|NCT01334957|Primary|To Determine the Safety of a Single Dose of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Reduction of Post-operative Pain.|The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in the six hours following administration of the first dose of intravenous ibuprofen|6 hours|||Number of Adverse Events|||Number
840278|NCT01334866|Primary|Composite Major Adverse Event Rate (Early)|"During procedure and within 30 days post-procedure or hospital discharge, whichever is longer. The adverse events will include:
Major hemorrhage/bleeding requiring surgical intervention
Aortic complications
Graft vessel revision (GVR)
Transient ischemic attacks (TIA)
Cerebrovascular accidents (CVA)/stroke
Myocardial infarction (MI)
Death"|During procedure (day 1) and within 30 days post-procedure or hospital discharge, whichever is longer (throughout 6 month evaluation)|||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840279|NCT01334866|Primary|Patency of the Index Graft at 6 Months|"For each subject, the endpoint is the percent of stenosis collected on the subject's 6 month angiography form. This will be characterized for each graft using the FitzGibbon scoring system based on the 64-Slice CT Angiography results.
The FitzGibbon Scoring system is as follows:
A:Excellent graft with unimpaired runoff (< 50% stenosis) B:Stenosis reducing caliber of proximal or distal anastomoses or trunk to <50% of the grafted coronary artery.
O:Occluded (100% stenosed)"|6 months post-procedure|||percentage of grafts|Participants||Number
840280|NCT01334866|Primary|Procedural Success in a MICS Approach|A successful procedure can be defined as a procedures not requiring conversion (sternotomy). This will be characterized by whether the graft procedure can be completed through the minimally invasive thoracotomy without having to convert to a sternotomy in order to complete the grafting.|At time of procedure (day 1)|||percentage of subjects|||Number
840281|NCT01334866|Primary|Technical Success (Graft Patency) in a MICS Approach|For each subject, the endpoint for technical success (graft patency) in a MICS approach is defined as acceptable flow for graft size for an anastamosis. This will be characterized by the surgeon's assessment/angiography after the graft is complete.|At time of procedure (day 1)|||percentage of grafts|Participants||Number
840282|NCT01334918|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Two or More Ischemic Segments on SPECT, But Less on CT|Using SPECT as the reference standard, the false negative percentage was calculated as the percentage of participants with two or more ischemic segments on SPECT, but less on CT.|Day 1 and Day 2|Full analysis set participants with two or more reversible defects.||percentage of participants|||Number
840283|NCT01334918|Secondary|Number of Participants With Fixed Defects|"Using the 17-segment scoring system, a segment scored above 1 (i.e., 2 to 4) and equal at rest and stress was counted as having a fixed defect.
At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed:
0: normal perfusion
1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake."|Day 1 and Day 2|The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set.||participants|||Number
840284|NCT01334918|Secondary|Number of Participants With Reversible Defects in the Left Circumflex Coronary Artery (LCX)|"The number of reversible defects in the LCX categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0-1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT.
The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed:
0: normal perfusion
1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake.
The median score from 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of ≥ 2 segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17."|Day 1 and Day 2|The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set where scans were available.||participants|||Number
840285|NCT01334918|Secondary|Number of Participants With Reversible Defects in the Right Coronary Artery (RCA)|"The number of reversible defects in the RCA categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0-1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT.
The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed:
0: normal perfusion
1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake.
The median score from 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of ≥ 2 segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17."|Day 1 and Day 2|The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set where scans were available.||participants|||Number
840286|NCT01334918|Secondary|Number of Participants With Reversible Defects in the Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery (LAD)|"The number of reversible defects in the LAD categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0–1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT.
The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed:
0: normal perfusion
1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake.
The median score from 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of ≥ 2 segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17."|Day 1 and Day 2|The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set where scans were available.||participants|||Number
840287|NCT01334918|Secondary|Overall Image Quality of Scans by Modality and Reviewer|Overall image quality was assessed by three independent blinded readers for each modality (single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and multidetector computed tomography (MDCT)). Image quality was rated on a 4-point scale as either excellent, good, fair or poor at rest using SPECT and MDCT and under stress using regadenoson SPECT and regadenoson stress computed tomography perfusion (CTP).|Day 1 and Day 2|The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set.||participants|||Number
840386|NCT01328756|Primary|Change From Baseline in Height at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)||Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Safety population with participants evaluable for this outcome||centimeter(s)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840288|NCT01334918|Primary|Number of Participants With Reversible Defects|"The number of reversible defects categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0–1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT.
The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed:
0: normal perfusion
1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake
4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake.
The median score from the 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of 2 or more segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17."|Day 1 and Day 2|The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set, defined as all randomized patients with interpretable SPECT and CTP scans as determined by at least two of the three blinded readers.||participants|||Number
840289|NCT01334944|Secondary|To Determine the Safety of a Multiple Doses of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Fever or Pain|The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events occurring through extended dosing.|24 hours|||Number of Events|||Number
840290|NCT01334944|Secondary|To Determine the Safety of a Multiple Doses of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Fever or Pain|The incidence of treatment-emergent serious adverse events occurring through extended dosing.|24 hours|||Number of Serious Adverse Events|||Number
840291|NCT01334944|Secondary|To Determine the Efficacy of a Single Dose of 800 mg Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Pain (Mild to Moderate or Moderate to Severe).|"The change in patient self-assessment of pain utilizing the visual analog scale (VAS) from baseline over the 4 hours following intravenous ibuprofen administration. The VAS is a continuous scale compromised of a horizontal line, one hundred millimeters in length, anchored by 2 verbal descriptors (No Pain, Worst Possible Pain). The VAS is self-completed by the respondent. The respondent is asked to place a line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represents their pain intensity. Using a ruler, the score is determined by measuring the distance, in mm, on the 100 mm line between the No Pain anchor and the subject's mark. The score would be between o and 100."|4 hours|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840292|NCT01334944|Secondary|To Determine the Efficacy of a Single Dose of 400 mg Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Fever|The change in temperature from baseline over the 4 hours following intravenous ibuprofen administration|4 hours|||Degree Fahrenheit||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840293|NCT01334944|Primary|To Determine the Safety of a Single Dose of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Fever or Pain in the Hospital Setting.|The change from baseline to one hour post administration of intravenous ibuprofen in vital sign assessments (Diastolic Blood Pressure).|1 hour|||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840294|NCT01334944|Primary|To Determine the Safety of a Single Dose of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Fever or Pain in the Hospital Setting.|The change from baseline to one hour post administration of intravenous ibuprofen in vital sign assessments (Systolic Blood Pressure).|1 hour|||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840295|NCT01334944|Primary|To Determine the Safety of a Single Dose of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Fever or Pain in the Hospital Setting.|The change from baseline to one hour post administration of intravenous ibuprofen in vital sign assessments (Respiratory Rate).|1 hour|||Breaths Per Minute||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840296|NCT01334944|Primary|To Determine the Safety of a Single Dose of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Fever or Pain in the Hospital Setting.|The change from baseline to one hour post administration of intravenous ibuprofen in vital sign assessments (Heart Rate).|1 hour|||Beats Per Minute||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840297|NCT01334944|Primary|To Determine the Safety of a Single Dose of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Fever or Pain in the Hospital Setting|The change from baseline to one hour post administration of intravenous ibuprofen in vitals sign assessments (Temperature)|1 hour|||Degree Fahrenheit||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840298|NCT01334944|Primary|To Determine the Safety of a Single Dose of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Fever or Pain in the Hospital Setting.|The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in the six hours following administration of intravenous ibuprofen.|6 hours|This analysis was conducted on participants treated with a fever or pain indication that received only a single dose of intravenous ibuprofen||Number of Events|||Number
840299|NCT01334944|Primary|To Determine the Safety of a Single Dose of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Treatment of Fever or Pain in the Hospital Setting.|The incidence of treatment-emergent serious adverse events occurring in the six hours following administration of the last dose of intravenous ibuprofen|6 hours|||Number of Serious Adverse Events|||Number
840300|NCT01334957|Secondary|To Determine the Safety of a Multiple Doses of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Reduction of Post-operative Pain.|"Visual Analog Scale (VAS) assessments following surgery. The VAS is a continuous scale compromised of a horizontal line, one hundred millimeters in length, anchored by 2 verbal descriptors (No Pain, Worst Possible Pain). The VAS is self-completed by the respondent. The respondent is asked to place a line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represents their pain intensity. Using a ruler, the score is determined by measuring the distance, in mm, on the 100 mm line between the No Pain anchor and the subject's mark. The score would be between o and 100."|6 hours|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840301|NCT01334957|Secondary|To Determine the Safety of a Multiple Doses of Intravenous Ibuprofen Administered Over 5-10 Minutes for the Reduction of Post-operative Pain.|The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in the six hours following administration of the last dose of intravenous ibuprofen|6 hours|||Number of Adverse Events|||Number
840302|NCT01334957|Secondary|To Determine the Safety of a Multiple Doses of Intravenous Ibuprofen Over 5-10 Minutes for the Reduction of Pain.|The incidence of treatment-emergent serious adverse events occurring in the six hours following administration of the last dose of intravenous ibuprofen|6 hours|||Number of Serious Adverse Events|||Number
840305|NCT01335061|Secondary|Incidence of Less Than Expected Therapeutic Effect (LETE)|The following criteria are the definitions for LETE in this study: 1. LETE in the On-Demand Setting: LETE occurs in the on-demand setting if 2 successive “No Response” ratings are recorded after 2 successive BeneFIX drug infusions in the absence of confounding factors. 2. LETE in the Prophylaxis Setting: LETE occurs in the prophylaxis setting if there is a spontaneous bleed within 48 hours (≤ 48 hours) after a regularly scheduled prophylactic dose of BeneFIX in the absence of confounding factors. 3. LETE (Low Recovery): LETE can also be lower than expected recovery of FIX in the opinion of the investigator following infusion of BeneFIX in the absence of confounding factors. Each reported occurrence of low recovery LETE was listed.|2 years|The safety analysis set (SAS) was any participant who received at least one dose of BeneFIX, including the dose given during the enrollment visit (Visit 2) for the factor IX (FIX) recovery study.||Percentage of occurence|||Number
840306|NCT01335061|Secondary|Total Factor Consumption.|The total amount (IU) infused for each infusion recorded were summed to calculate the total factor consumption for each participant. For each infusion, IU/kg was calculated, using the most recently recorded weight measurement and the total factor consumption, divided by number of infusions, and was summarized similarly to average infusion dose (IU). Annualized TFC by weight was reported. Annualized TFC by weight = (Total IU/kg / treatment interval duration)*365.25.|2 years|The safety analysis set (SAS) was any participant who received at least one dose of BeneFIX, including the dose given during the enrollment visit (Visit 2) for the factor IX (FIX) recovery study.||IU/Kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840307|NCT01335061|Secondary|Average Infusion Dose.|The mean dose by per infusion by weight (IU/kg) was reported for both prophylaxis and on demand infusions|2 years|The safety analysis set (SAS) was any participant who received at least one dose of BeneFIX, including the dose given during the enrollment visit (Visit 2) for the factor IX (FIX) recovery study.||IU/Kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840308|NCT01335061|Secondary|Number of Breakthrough (Spontaneous/Non-Traumatic) Bleeds Within 48 Hours of a Prophylaxis Dose of BeneFIX.|The number of spontaneous, non-traumatic breakthrough bleeds within 48 hours following a prophylaxis dose of BeneFIX were summarized. If there was more than one bleed location (eg, ankle and joint) with identical bleed start date and time, it was treated as one bleed occurrence.|2 years|The safety analysis set (SAS) was any participant who received at least one dose of BeneFIX, including the dose given during the enrollment visit (Visit 2) for the factor IX (FIX) recovery study. Three participants experienced 1 spontaneous bleeding episode each within 48 hours of a previous prophylaxis infusion.||Number of breakthrough bleeds|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
840309|NCT01335061|Secondary|Number of Nonacog Alfa, Recombinant Factor IX (BeneFIX) Infusions Used to Treat Each Bleeding Episode.|The number of study drug infusions administered to treat a bleed will be calculated by adding the initial (on-demand) infusion to any subsequent (on-demand) infusions for the same bleed (same bleed start date/time). The number of infusions needed to treat a bleed will be classified into the following categories: 1, 2, 3, 4 and >4 infusions. If there were more than one bleed location (e.g., ankle and joint) with identical bleed start date and time, it was treated as one bleed occurrence.|2 years|The safety analysis set (SAS) was any participant who received at least one dose of BeneFIX, including the dose given during the enrollment visit (Visit 2) for the factor IX (FIX) recovery study.||Number of bleeds requiring infusion|Participants||Number
840310|NCT01335061|Secondary|Response to On-Demand Treatment for All Bleeding Episodes.|Assessment scores on a 4-point Response Scale for an on-demand bleeding episode, as assessed by participant/caregiver or investigator/qualified staff. The 4-point scale assessments are Excellent, Good, Moderate or No response. Responses to number of observations were noted.|2 years|The safety analysis set (SAS) was any participant who received at least one dose of BeneFIX, including the dose given during the enrollment visit (Visit 2) for the factor IX (FIX) recovery study. Follow-up infusion was only required for 18 participants.||Number of observations with response|Participants||Number
840311|NCT01335061|Primary|Annualized Number of Bleeding Episodes.|The annualized bleed rate (ABR) or the annualized number of bleeding episodes per year, will be derived for each participant for each treatment period by using the following formula: ABR = number of bleeds / (Days on treatment period / 365.25) The number of bleeds for the ABR calculation includes all bleeds requiring treatment with factor IX product during the time on treatment.|2 years|The efficacy analysis set (EAS) was used for the primary efficacy analyses with respect to ABR. It includes all participants who participated in at least one day of the routine prophylaxis period (ie, in the study through at least Visit 4).||Number of bleeds per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
840312|NCT01335191|Primary|Anti-Tat Antibody Titer|ELISA based chemiluminescent assay to determine the anti-Tat antibody response|54 weeks|all subjects enrolled||ng/mL||Full Range|Mean
840313|NCT01335230|Primary|Exploring the Role of Gut-associated Th17 in Microbial Translocation in HIV and HCV/HIV Coinfected Patients.|We measure gene transcription of the colon tissues (relative expression fold changes of gene transcription compared to control). No preselected criteria were used to assess the participants. Data were analyzed and compared among each group. Relative expression levels of LEAP-2 (Liver expressed anti-microbial peptide-2) in the four groups were shown in the table below. Detailed of other genes had been published in Shata MT, et al, J. Clin Pathology 2013, Nov 66(11):967-75. PMID 23940131, and Abdel-Hameed et al, J. Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2013 Jul 10 PMID: 23846566|One year|All the samples were analyzed for gene array transcriptions and cytokines profiles||relative expression levels||Standard Deviation|Mean
840314|NCT01335308|Secondary|Change in Physical Activity||2 years after enrollment|||Adjusted posttest hours per day||Standard Error|Mean
840315|NCT01335308|Secondary|Sweetened Beverage Consumption||2 years after enrollment|||Adjusted posted test servings per day||Standard Error|Mean
840316|NCT01335308|Secondary|Fruit/Vegetable Consumption||2 years after enrollment|||Post test adjuste, servings per day||Standard Error|Mean
840317|NCT01335308|Primary|Child BMI Percentile||2 years after recruitment|||BMI Percentile||Standard Error|Mean
840318|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Carbon Monoxide Diffusion Capacity (DLCO) at Rest Over 52 Weeks|Means provided are the adjusted means and are based on all analysed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52).|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||mmol/min/kPa||Standard Error|Mean
840387|NCT01328756|Primary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)||Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Safety population with participants evaluable for this outcome||kilogram(s)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840319|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SpO2 (Oxygen Saturation, Expressed in Percent) at Rest up Over 52 Weeks|Means presented are the adjusted means. Adjusted mean is based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52)|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percent of oxygen saturation||Standard Error|Mean
840320|NCT01335464|Secondary|Time to Death or Lung Transplant or Qualifying for Lung Transplant Over 52 Weeks.|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of participants who did or did not experienced death or lung transplant or qualifying for lung transplant over 52 weeks are reported. A patient was considered qualifying for lung transplant by the investigator if he or she fulfilled the following criteria:
FVC <45% predicted or Carbon monoxide diffusion capacity (DL(CO)) <30% pred or Oxygen saturation on pulse oximetry (SpO2) <88% at rest, at sea level (to be adapted for other heights).
These criteria were evaluated by investigators judgement. Failure is the proportion of patients who died or had lung transplant or qualified for lung transplant over 52 weeks (373 days time-period)."|52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants|||Number
840321|NCT01335464|Secondary|Time to Death or Lung Transplant Over 52 Weeks|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of participants who did or did not experience event (death or lung transplant) before or at 372 days after randomisation or last contact date (whichever occurs first) are reported.
Failure is the proportion of patients who died or had lung transplant over 52 weeks (373 days time-period)."|52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants|||Number
840322|NCT01335464|Secondary|Time to On-treatment Death|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of participants who did or did not die before or at last trial medication intake + 28 days were censored at last trial medication intake + 28 days and reported.
Failure is the the proportion of patients who died on-treatment."|52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants|||Number
840323|NCT01335464|Secondary|Time to Death Due to Respiratory Cause Over 52 Weeks (Adjudicated)|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of participants who did or did not experienced death due to respiratory causes before or at 372 days after randomisation or last contact date (whichever occurs first) are reported.
Failure is the the proportion of patients who died due to respiratory causes over 52 weeks (373 days time-period)."|52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants|||Number
840324|NCT01335464|Secondary|Time to Death Over 52 Weeks|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of patients who did or did not experienced death before or at 372 days after randomisation or last contact date (whichever occurs first) are reported.
Failure is the proportion of patients who died over 52 weeks (373 days time-period) ."|52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants|||Number
840325|NCT01335464|Secondary|Risk of an Acute IPF Exacerbation Over 52 Weeks|The incidence rate of exacerbations (calculated as the number of patients with at least 1 acute IPF exacerbation divided by the total number of years at risk in years*100)|52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||Participants/Year *100|||Number
840326|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQol 5-Dimensional Quality of Life Questionnaire (EQ-5D) Health State up to 52 Weeks : Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|The EuroQol 5-dimensional Health State is based on a visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) representing the general patient’s health state labelled from 100 (best imaginable health state) to 0 (worst imaginable health state). A higher score indicating a better health state. Change from baseline is calculated as the difference between health state at week 12, 24 and 52 respectively and health state at baseline as measured by the scale.|baseline, 12 weeks, 24 weeks and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840327|NCT01335464|Secondary|Proportion of Patient’s Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) Responders at 52 Weeks: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) responders are defined as 'Very much better'/ 'Much better'/ 'A little better'/ 'No change'.|52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840328|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cough Impact Score of the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASA-Q) Score at 52 Weeks : Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"The cough domains of the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASA-Q) assess the frequency and severity of cough and sputum and their impact on everyday life. It contains 4 domains cough/sputum symptom and impact with each scale ranging from 0 to 100 with lower scores indicating higher symptoms/impact levels (worst outcome).
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840329|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cough Symptoms Score of the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASA-Q) Score at 52 Weeks: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"The cough domains of the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASAQ(CD)) assess the frequency and severity of cough and sputum and their impact on everyday life. It contains 4 domains cough/sputum symptom and impact with each scale ranging from 0 to 100 with lower scores indicating higher symptoms/impact levels (worst outcome).
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840330|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Shortness of Breath Questionnaire (SOBQ) at 52 Weeks: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"Shortness of Breath Questionnaire measures the shortness of breath. It comprises of 24 items. Each item is scored on a scale between 0-5 where 5 represents maximal breathlessness. The responses to all items are summed up to provide the overall score that can range from 0 (best outcome) to 120 (worst outcome).
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840331|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) Specific Version of SGRQ (SGRQ-I) Total Score at 52 Weeks (Points): Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"SGRQ-I is the IPF specific version of SGRQ comprises of selected items from the SGRQ divided into three components, Symptoms, Activity and Impact. Each component is scored separately. The weights for all items with a positive responses are summed and the weights from missed items are deducted from the maximum possible weight for the total score.
The total score is calculated by dividing the summed weights from positive items in the questionnaire by maximum possible weight for all items in the questionnaire. The total score can range from 0 to 100 with a lower score denoting a better health-related quality of life. Change from baseline is calculated as the difference between total score at week 52 and total score at baseline as measured by the scale."|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840332|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SGRQ Activity Score at 52 Weeks (Points): Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"SGRQ Activity score is a sub-component of SGRQ total score and concerned with activities that cause or are limited by breathlessness. This score calculated as summed weights ranges from 0 to 100 with lower score denoting a better activity-related quality of life.
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on scale||Standard Error|Mean
840333|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SGRQ Impact Score at 52 Weeks (Points): Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"SGRQ Impact score is a sub-component of SGRQ total score and covers a range of aspects concerned with social functioning and psychological disturbances resulting from airway disease. This score calculated as summed weights ranges from 0 to 100 with lower score denoting a better impact-related quality of life.
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840334|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SGRQ Symptom Score at 52 Weeks: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"SGRQ Symptom score is a sub-component of SGRQ total score and is concerned with the effect of respiratory symptoms, their frequency and severity. This score calculated as summed weights ranges from 0 to 100 with lower score denoting a better symptom-related quality of life.
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840335|NCT01335464|Secondary|Proportion of SGRQ Responders at 52 Weeks: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"Proportion of SGRQ responders at 52 weeks
Responders defined as <= -4 points change in change from baseline in SGRQ total score at 52 weeks."|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840336|NCT01335464|Secondary|Proportion of FVC Responders Using 5% Threshold at 52 Weeks|Proportion of FVC responders using 5% threshold at 52 weeks, defined as patients with absolute decline in FVC% predicted no greater than 5% and with an FVC evaluation at 52 weeks.|52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840337|NCT01335464|Secondary|FVC Responders Using 10% Threshold at 52 Weeks|FVC responders using 10% threshold at 52 weeks, defined as patients with absolute decline in FVC% predicted no greater than 10% and with an FVC evaluation at 52 weeks.|52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840338|NCT01335464|Secondary|Absolute Categorical Change of FVC (% Predicted) by Categories Over 52 Weeks - 10% Threshold|Absolute categorical change of FVC (% predicted) by categories over 52 weeks - 10% threshold (decrease by 10%, increase by >10%, and change within ≤10%)|Baseline and 52 weeks|TS (for patients with change from baseline in FVC (%predicted) at Week 52)||percentage of participants|||Number
840339|NCT01335464|Secondary|Absolute Categorical Change of FVC (% Predicted) by Categories Over 52 Weeks - 5% Threshold|Absolute categorical change of FVC (% predicted) by categories over 52 weeks - 5% threshold (decrease by >5%, increase by >5%, and change within ≤5%).|Baseline and 52 weeks|TS (for patients with change from baseline in FVC (%predicted) at Week 52)||percentage of participants|||Number
840340|NCT01335464|Secondary|Relative Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) (% Predicted) Over 52 Weeks|Percentage change from baseline in FVC (% predicted) at 52 weeks. Means provided are the adjusted means and are based on all analysed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52).|Baseline and 52 weeks|TS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percent change||Standard Error|Mean
840341|NCT01335464|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) (% Predicted) Over 52 Weeks|Means provided are the adjusted means and are based on all analysed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52).|Baseline and 52 weeks|TS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||% predicted||Standard Error|Mean
840342|NCT01335464|Secondary|Relative Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Over 52 Weeks|Percentage change from baseline in FVC over 52 weeks. Means provided are the adjusted means and are based on all analysed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52).|Baseline and 52 weeks|TS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percent change||Standard Error|Mean
840343|NCT01335464|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Over 52 Weeks|Means provided are the adjusted means and are based on all analysed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52).|Baseline and 52 weeks|TS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||mL||Standard Error|Mean
840357|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cough Impact Score of the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASA-Q) Score at 52 Weeks: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"The cough domains of the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASA- Q) assess the frequency and severity of cough and sputum and their impact on everyday life. It contains 4 domains cough/sputum symptom and impact with each scale ranging from 0 to 100 with lower scores indicating higher symptoms/impact levels (worst outcome).
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840344|NCT01335464|Secondary|Time to First Acute Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) Exacerbation|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of patients with (IPF) exacerbation are reported and represented as a key secondary endpoint. An acute exacerbation (reported as an AE by the investigator) was defined as follows:
Otherwise unexplained clinical features including all of the following:
Unexplained worsening or development of dyspnoea within 30 days
New diffuse pulmonary infiltrates on chest X-ray, and/or new HRCT parenchymal abnormalities with no pneumothorax or pleural effusion (new ground-glass opacities) since the last visit
Exclusion of infection as per routine clinical practice and microbiological studies
Exclusion of alternative causes as per routine clinical practice including left heart failure, pulmonary embolism and identifiable cause of acute lung injury.
Failure is the proportion of patients with at least one acute IPF exacerbation over 52 weeks, based on all investigator-reported AEs ."|52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants|||Number
840345|NCT01335464|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Saint-George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total Score at 52 Weeks|"This is a key secondary endpoint.
SGRQ is a health-related quality of life questionnaire divided into 3 components : symptoms, activity and impact.
The total score (summed weights) can range from 0 to 100 with a lower score denoting a better health status.
Means provided are the adjusted means based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|baseline and 52 weeks|TS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840346|NCT01335464|Primary|Annual Rate of Decline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Over 52 Weeks|"Forced vital capacity (FVC) is the total amount of air exhaled during the lung function test.
For this endpoint reported means represent the adjusted rate"|52 weeks|TS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||mL/year||Standard Error|Mean
840347|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Carbon Monoxide Diffusion Capacity (DLCO) at Rest Over 52 Weeks|Means provided are the adjusted means and are based on all analysed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52).|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||mmol/min/kPa||Standard Error|Mean
840348|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SpO2 (Oxygen Saturation, Expressed in Percent) at Rest up Over 52 Weeks|Means presented are the adjusted means. Adjusted mean is based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52)|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percent of oxygen saturation||Standard Error|Mean
840349|NCT01335477|Secondary|Time to Death or Lung Transplant or Qualifying for Lung Transplant Over 52 Weeks.|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of participants who did or did not experienced death or lung transplant or qualifying for lung transplant over 52 weeks are reported. A patient was considered qualifying for lung transplant by the investigator if he or she fulfilled the following criteria:
FVC <45% predicted or Carbon monoxide diffusion capacity (DL(CO)) <30% pred or Oxygen saturation on pulse oximetry (SpO2) <88% at rest, at sea level (to be adapted for other heights).
These criteria were evaluated by investigators judgement. Failure is the proportion of patients who died or had lung transplant or qualified for lung transplant over 52 weeks (373 days time-period)."|52 weeks|Treated Set||percentage of participants|||Number
840350|NCT01335477|Secondary|Time to Death or Lung Transplant Over 52 Weeks|Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of participants who did or did not experience event (death or lung transplant) before or at 372 days after randomisation or last contact date (whichever occurs first) are reported. Failure is the proportion of patients who died or had lung transplant over 52 weeks (373 days time-period).|52 weeks|Treated Set||percentage of participants|||Number
840351|NCT01335477|Secondary|Time to On-treatment Death|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of participants who did or did not die before or at last trial medication intake + 28 days were censored at last trial medication intake + 28 days and reported.
Failure is the the proportion of patients who died on-treatment."|52 weeks|Treated Set||percentage of participants|||Number
840352|NCT01335477|Secondary|Time to Death Due to Respiratory Cause Over 52 Weeks (Adjudicated)|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of participants who did or did not experienced death due to respiratory causes before or at 372 days after randomisation or last contact date (whichever occurs first) are reported.
Failure is the the proportion of patients who died due to respiratory causes over 52 weeks (373 days time-period)."|52 weeks|Treated Set||percentage of participants|||Number
840353|NCT01335477|Secondary|Time to Death Over 52 Weeks|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of patients who did or did not experienced death before or at 372 days after randomisation or last contact date (whichever occurs first) are reported.
Failure is the proportion of patients who died over 52 weeks (373 days time-period)."|52 weeks|Treated Set||percentage of participants|||Number
840354|NCT01335477|Secondary|Risk of an Acute IPF Exacerbation Over 52 Weeks|The incidence rate of exacerbations (calculated as the number of patients with at least 1 acute IPF exacerbation divided by the total number of years at risk in years*100)|52 weeks|Treated Set||Participants/Year *100|||Number
840355|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQol 5-Dimensional Quality of Life Questionnaire (EQ-5D) Health State up to 52 Weeks : Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|The EuroQol 5-dimensional Health State is based on a visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) representing the general patient's health state labelled from 100 (best imaginable health state) to 0 (worst imaginable health state). A higher score indicating a better health state. Change from baseline is calculated as the difference between health state at week 12, 24 and 52 respectively and health state at baseline as measured by the scale.|baseline, 12 weeks, 24 weeks and 52 weeks|Treated Set||points on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840356|NCT01335477|Secondary|Proportion of Patient’s Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) Responders at 52 Weeks: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) responders are defined as 'Very much better'/ 'Much better'/ 'A little better'/ 'No change'.|52 weeks|Treated Set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840371|NCT01335477|Secondary|Relative Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Over 52 Weeks|Percentage change from baseline in FVC over 52 weeks. Means provided are the adjusted means and are based on all analysed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52).|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percent change||Standard Error|Mean
840358|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cough Symptom Score of the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASA-Q) Score at 52 Weeks: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"The cough domains of the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASAQ(CD)) assess the frequency and severity of cough and sputum and their impact on everyday life. It contains 4 domains cough/sputum symptom and impact with each scale ranging from 0 to 100 with lower scores indicating higher symptoms/impact levels (worst outcome).
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840359|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Shortness of Breath Questionnaire (SOBQ) at 52 Weeks: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"Shortness of Breath Questionnaire measures the shortness of breath. It comprises of 24 items. Each item is scored on a scale between 0-5 where 5 represents maximal breathlessness. The responses to all items are summed up to provide the overall score that can range from 0 (best outcome) to 120 (worst outcome).
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840360|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) Specific Version of SGRQ (SGRQ-I) Total Score at 52 Weeks (Points): Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"SGRQ-I is the IPF specific version of SGRQ comprises of selected items from the SGRQ divided into three components, Symptoms, Activity and Impact. Each component is scored separately. The weights for all items with a positive responses are summed and the weights from missed items are deducted from the maximum possible weight for the total score.
The total score is calculated by dividing the summed weights from positive items in the questionnaire by maximum possible weight for all items in the questionnaire. The total score can range from 0 to 100 with a lower score denoting a better health-related quality of life. Change from baseline is calculated as the difference between total score at week 52 and total score at baseline as measured by the scale."|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840361|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SGRQ Activity Score at 52 Weeks (Points): Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"SGRQ Activity score is a sub-component of SGRQ total score and concerned with activities that cause or are limited by breathlessness. This score calculated as summed weights ranges from 0 to 100 with lower score denoting a better activity-related quality of life.
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840362|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SGRQ Impact Score at 52 Weeks (Points): Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"SGRQ Impact score is a sub-component of SGRQ total score and covers a range of aspects concerned with social functioning and psychological disturbances resulting from airway disease. This score calculated as summed weights ranges from 0 to 100 with lower score denoting a better impact-related quality of life.
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840363|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SGRQ Symptom Score at 52 Weeks (Points): Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"SGRQ Symptom score is a sub-component of SGRQ total score and is concerned with the effect of respiratory symptoms, their frequency and severity. This score calculated as summed weights ranges from 0 to 100 with lower score denoting a better symptom-related quality of life.
Means presented are the adjusted means and are based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840364|NCT01335477|Secondary|Proportion of SGRQ Responders at 52 Weeks: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs)|"Proportion of SGRQ responders at 52 weeks.
Responders defined as <= -4 points change in change from baseline in SGRQ total score at 52 weeks."|baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840365|NCT01335477|Secondary|Proportion of FVC Responders Using 5% Threshold at 52 Weeks|Proportion of FVC responders using 5% threshold at 52 weeks, defined as patients with absolute decline in FVC% predicted no greater than 5% and with an FVC evaluation at 52 weeks.|52 weeks|Treated Set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840366|NCT01335477|Secondary|FVC Responders Using 10% Threshold at 52 Weeks|FVC responders using 10% threshold at 52 weeks, defined as patients with absolute decline in FVC% predicted no greater than 10% and with an FVC evaluation at 52 weeks.|52 weeks|Treated Set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840367|NCT01335477|Secondary|Absolute Categorical Change From Baseline of FVC (% Predicted) by Categories Over 52 Weeks - 10% Threshold|Absolute categorical change of FVC (% predicted) by categories over 52 weeks - 10% threshold (decrease by 10%, increase by >10%, and change within ≤10%)|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (for patients with change from baseline in FVC (% predicted) at Week 52)||percentage of participants|||Number
840368|NCT01335477|Secondary|Absolute Categorical Change From Baseline of FVC (% Predicted) by Categories Over 52 Weeks - 5% Threshold|Absolute categorical change of FVC (% predicted) by categories over 52 weeks - 5% threshold (decrease by >5%, increase by >5%, and change within ≤5%).|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (for patients with change from baseline in FVC (% predicted) at Week 52)||percentage of participants|||Number
840369|NCT01335477|Secondary|Relative Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) (% Predicted) Over 52 Weeks|Percentage change from baseline in FVC (% predicted) at 52 weeks. Means provided are the adjusted means and are based on all analysed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52).|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percent change||Standard Error|Mean
840370|NCT01335477|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) (% Predicted) Over 52 Weeks|Means provided are the adjusted means and are based on all analysed patients in the model (not only patients with a change from baseline to week 52).|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||%predicted||Standard Error|Mean
840373|NCT01335477|Secondary|Time to First Acute Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) Exacerbation|"Due to rare events, the median of time to event is not calculable, thus the percentages of patients with (IPF) exacerbation are reported and represented as a key secondary endpoint. An acute exacerbation (reported as an AE by the investigator) was defined as follows:
Otherwise unexplained clinical features including all of the following:
Unexplained worsening or development of dyspnoea within 30 days New diffuse pulmonary infiltrates on chest X-ray, and/or new HRCT parenchymal abnormalities with no pneumothorax or pleural effusion (new ground-glass opacities) since the last visit Exclusion of infection as per routine clinical practice and microbiological studies Exclusion of alternative causes as per routine clinical practice including left heart failure, pulmonary embolism and identifiable cause of acute lung injury.
Failure is the proportion of patients with at least one acute IPF exacerbation over 52 weeks, based on all investigator-reported AEs ."|52 weeks|Treated Set||percentage of participants|||Number
840374|NCT01335477|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Saint George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total Score at 52 Weeks|"This is a key secondary endpoint. SGRQ is a health-related quality of life questionnaire divided into 3 components : symptoms, activity and impact.
The total score (summed weights) can range from 0 to 100 with a lower score denoting a better health status.
Means provided are the adjusted means based on all analyzed patients in the model (not only patients with a baseline and measurement at week 52)."|Baseline and 52 weeks|Treated Set (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||points on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840375|NCT01335477|Primary|Annual Rate of Decline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) Over 52 Weeks.|"Forced vital capacity (FVC) is the total amount of air exhaled during the lung function test.
For this endpoint reported means represent the adjusted rate."|52 weeks|Treated Set||mL/year||Standard Error|Mean
840376|NCT01328717|Secondary|Number of Subjects Rated as<=3 Performing Basic Meter Tasks (Labeling Evaluation)|Subjects read User Guide(UG)to learn to use the system and performed meter tasks. Study staff observed, then rated subjects' success (1 to 4) at performing tasks. Scale: 1.Performed tasks correctly without assistance. 2.Performed tasks correctly, but was directed to a specific part of the UG by the study staff as in a Customer Service call. 3.Performed tasks correctly, but required additional review/assistance similar to review of a specific function during a Customer Service call. 4.Subject incorrectly performed part of the testing regimen and was unaware of the error.|1 hour|Per protocol||Number of Participants|||Number
840377|NCT01328717|Primary|Percent of Fingerstick Blood Glucose (BG) Results Within +/-20%(>=75 mg/dL) and Within +/- 15mg/dL (<75 mg/dL) of Laboratory Glucose Method|Subjects with diabetes and study staff tested subject fingerstick blood using an investigational blood glucose meter (BGM). BGM results were compared to a reference lab glucose method - Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) Analyzer. BG results were used to calculate the number of BG results within +/- 20% (for reference BG results >=75mg/dL) and within +/- 15mg/dL(for reference BG results <75mg/dL) of the reference method results.|1 hour|As a result of one subject's low blood sugar (and thus rapidly changing glucose values) during the study, one subject did not complete the study. The remaining 77 subjects tested 2 test strip lots on the system. 2x77(154) test results were available.||Percentage of BG test results|Participants||Number
840378|NCT01328756|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)|The Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Scale permits a global evaluation of the participants' severity and improvement over time. This assessment will help guide the clinician on dosing adjustments. The CGI has been used extensively in clinical studies of ADHD. CGI-S was a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (normal, not at all ill) to 7 (among the most extremely ill participants), evaluated by the Investigator.|LOTA (Week 104)|FAS population||participants|||Number
840379|NCT01328756|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Global Impression-Global Improvement (CGI-I) at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)|The Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Scale permits a global evaluation of the participants' severity and improvement over time. This assessment will help guide the clinician on dosing adjustments. The CGI has been used extensively in clinical studies of ADHD. CGI-I was a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse), evaluated by the Investigator.|LOTA (Week 104)|FAS population||participants|||Number
840380|NCT01328756|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV) Total Score at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)|ADHD-RS-IV consisted of 18 items designed to reflect current symptomatology of ADHD based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition - Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria, completed by the Investigator. Each item was scored from a range of 0 (reflecting no symptoms) to 3 (reflecting severe symptoms) with total scores ranging from 0-54. The 18 items were grouped into 2 sub-scales: hyperactivity/impulsivity (even number items 2-18 with score range of 0 to 27) and inattention (odd number items 1-17 with score range of 0 to 27). Higher scores depicted worse symptoms.|Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population included all participants who took at least 1 dose of SPD489 and had at least 1 on-treatment post baseline efficacy assessment.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840381|NCT01328756|Primary|Change From Baseline in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale for Children (BPRSC) Total Scores at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)|The BPRS-C that was designed to provide a characterization of the child and adolescent psychopathology, was used to monitor participant's safety. The BPRS-C assessed 7 independent factors (3 items each), for a total of 21 items that represented behavioural disorders, depression, thinking disturbance, psychomotor excitation, withdrawal retardation, anxiety, and organicity. Each item was rated using a 7-point scale including 0 (not present), 1 (very mild), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate), 4 (moderately severe), 5 (severe), and 6 (extremely severe). Total score is the sum of each item score; range from 0 to 126. Higher score indicated worse psychology.|Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Safety population with participants evaluable for this outcome||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840382|NCT01328756|Primary|Change From Baseline in QT Interval Corrected Using Fridericia's Formula (QTcF) at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)||Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Safety population with participants evaluable for this outcome||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
840383|NCT01328756|Primary|Change From Baseline in QT Interval at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)||Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Safety population with participants evaluable for this outcome||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
840384|NCT01328756|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Last On-treatment Assessment (LOTA)||Baseline (Week 0), LOTA (Week 104)|Safety population with participants evaluable for this outcome||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
840391|NCT01328756|Primary|Number of Participants With All Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious TEAEs|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. It included both serious and non-serious adverse event. A serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. AEs were defined as treatment-emergent if they started or worsened during the period between the day of a participant’s first dose of investigational product in this study and the 3 days following cessation of treatment.|Baseline up to 3 days after the last dose of study treatment (up to 2 years)|Safety population included all participants who took at least 1 dose of Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate during this study.||participants|||Number
840392|NCT01328769|Secondary|Change in Endothelial Function|Endothelial function was calculated by software from the manufacturer VENDYS. The measurement was taken by using the index of area under the curve of the finger temperature recovery curve just after releasing a blood pressure cuff. The blood pressure cuff occluded blood flow for 5 minutes as compared to the temperature curve in the non-occluded arm.|Baseline to 6 weeks|||ratio of finger temperature||Standard Deviation|Mean
840393|NCT01328769|Primary|Change in Renal Plasma Flow in Response to Infused Angiotensin II||Baseline to 6 weeks|||ml/minute||Standard Error|Mean
840394|NCT01328782|Secondary|Need for IV Morphine of Fentanyl|Indicates that number of subjects that were in severe pain and thus required IV morphine and/or fentanyl.|First 120 minutes after the end of surgery (surgery close time)|All subjects were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
840395|NCT01328782|Secondary|Total Dosage in Morphine Equivalents (mg/kg) of All Analgesics Received in Prior to Discharge||Analgesic data collected during first four hours following the end of surgery (surgery close)|All subjects were included in the analysis.||Morphine (po) equivalents [mg*kg-1]||Standard Deviation|Mean
840396|NCT01328782|Secondary|Time (in Minutes) to First Narcotic Administration||first 72 hours after surgery close time|All subjects were included in the analysis.||Minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840397|NCT01328782|Secondary|Total Quality Pain Management Survey (TQPM) Scores for Questions # 16: Child’s Current Level of Pain, Question # 17: Child’s Worst Level of Pain When Moving Around After Surgery and Question # 18: Child’s Worst Level of Pain While Resting|Total quality pain management survey is validated survey used to assess parents’ perceptions of their child’s pain. Pain is assessed on a dimensionless 10 pt likert scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (severe pain). Greater pain scores are indicative or more severe pain.|Will be obtained from parent(s) 120 minutes after arrival to the recovery room|Based on number of participants and their parents/legal guardians that completed the survey.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840398|NCT01328782|Primary|The Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FSP-R) Scores (Scored 0-10).|The Faces Pain Scale Revised is a dimensionless 10 point likert scale used to assess self-reported pain intensity on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (most pain you can imagine). Greater pain scores are indicative of more severe pain.|Will be obtained 30 - 60 minutes after arrival to the recovery room|Based on the number of participants that self-reported their pain score.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840399|NCT01328873|Secondary|Number of Participants With Positive Myocbacteria Results by Culture|To describe the microbiological findings in HSCT and leukemia patients with fever, respiratory symptoms, and pulmonary infiltrates|24-48 hours|||participants|||Number
840400|NCT01328873|Secondary|Number of Participants With Positive Viral Results by PCR|To describe the microbiological findings in HSCT and leukemia patients with fever, respiratory symptoms, and pulmonary infiltrates|24-48 hours|||participants|||Number
840401|NCT01328873|Secondary|Number of Patients With Positive Fungal Results by PCR|To describe the microbiological findings in HSCT and leukemia patients with fever, respiratory symptoms, and pulmonary infiltrates|24-48 hours|||participants|||Number
840402|NCT01328873|Secondary|Number of Participants With Positive Bacterial Results by PCR|To describe the microbiological findings in HSCT and leukemia patients with fever, respiratory symptoms, and pulmonary infiltrates|24-48 hours|||participants|||Number
840403|NCT01328873|Secondary|Number of Patients With Positive CT Result|"To correlate specific types of pulmonary infiltrates (focal, multifocal, or diffuse interstitial or alveolar infiltrates) with microbiological findings. Patients were evaluated by changes on the CT and categorized as follows:
Air space
ground glass/reticular nodular
nodular/cavitary
single patchy infiltrate"|30 days|||participants|||Number
840404|NCT01328873|Primary|Number of Patients With Positive Culture or Molecular Results After Brochoscopy|To determine the diagnostic yield related to fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) and leukemia patients with acute respiratory symptoms and pulmonary infiltrates utilizing both current standard of care microbiology testing and emerging molecular genetic laboratory assessments.|30 days|||participants|||Number
840405|NCT01328951|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CR, PR, or SD According to RECIST During Blinded Treatment|Tumor response was evaluated using RECIST version 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction to <10 mm of any pathological lymph nodes. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in the sum of target lesion diameters in reference to the Baseline sum. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage in target lesions to qualify for PR nor sufficient growth to qualify for disease progression. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR, PR, or SD (i.e., the disease control rate [DCR]) during the BP was calculated, and corresponding 95% CI was constructed using the Pearson-Clopper method.|Up to approximately 3.5 years (visits at Baseline and Weeks 6, 12, and 18 and every 12 weeks until/at disease progression during BP)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840428|NCT01329029|Secondary|Time to Mortality Due to COPD Exacerbation During the Treatment Period|Time to event will be calculated as date of onset of event — date of first intake of double-blind study drug + 1 day.|52 Weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized.||days||Full Range|Median
840504|NCT01336296|Secondary|Difference in Renal Function|"Difference in renal function between groups at listed time points assessed by mean serum creatinine. Increased serum creatinine could indicate worsening renal function. A normal serum creatinine range for the transplant population varies by patient, but a typical range for Scr would be 1-2 mg/dL."|Difference at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year|||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
840406|NCT01328951|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by Best Overall Response According to RECIST During Blinded Treatment|Tumor response was evaluated using RECIST version 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction to <10 mm of any pathological lymph nodes. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in the sum of target lesion diameters in reference to the Baseline sum. Stable disease (SD) was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage in target lesions to qualify for PR nor sufficient growth to qualify for disease progression. Disease progression (progressive disease/PD) was defined as a ≥20% and ≥5-mm increase in the sum of target lesion diameters in reference to the smallest sum on study and/or substantial worsening in non-target disease. The percentage of participants with each level of best tumor response during the BP was calculated, and corresponding 95% CI was constructed using the Pearson-Clopper method.|Up to approximately 3.5 years (visits at Baseline and Weeks 6, 12, and 18 and every 12 weeks until/at disease progression during BP)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840407|NCT01328951|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) According to RECIST During Blinded Treatment|Tumor response was evaluated using RECIST version 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and short-axis reduction to less than (<) 10 mm of any pathological lymph nodes. PR was defined as a ≥30% decrease in the sum of target lesion diameters in reference to the Baseline sum. The percentage of participants with a best overall response of either CR or PR (i.e., the objective response rate [ORR]) during the BP was calculated, and corresponding 95% CI was constructed using the Pearson-Clopper method.|Up to approximately 3.5 years (visits at Baseline and Weeks 6, 12, and 18 and every 12 weeks until/at disease progression during BP)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840408|NCT01328951|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Event-Free (Alive and No Disease Progression) at 6 Months During Blinded Treatment|Tumor response was evaluated using RECIST version 1.1. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and ≥5-mm increase in the sum of target lesion diameters in reference to the smallest sum on study and/or substantial worsening in non-target disease. The percentage of participants event-free (i.e., still alive and without disease progression) at 6 months during the BP was calculated.|At 6 months|ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840409|NCT01328951|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) as Median Time to Event During Blinded Treatment|Tumor response was evaluated using RECIST version 1.1. Disease progression was defined as a ≥20% and ≥5-mm increase in the sum of target lesion diameters in reference to the smallest sum on study and/or substantial worsening in non-target disease. PFS was defined as the interval between date of randomization and date of first documented death or disease progression. Median time to event during the BP was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and expressed in weeks.|Up to approximately 3.5 years (visits at Baseline and Weeks 6, 12, and 18 and every 12 weeks until/at disease progression during BP)|ITT Population.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840410|NCT01328951|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died or Experienced Disease Progression During Blinded Treatment|Tumor response was evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Disease progression was defined as a greater than or equal to (≥) 20 percent (%) and ≥5-millimeter (mm) increase in the sum of target lesion diameters in reference to the smallest sum on study and/or substantial worsening in non-target disease. The percentage of participants who died or experienced disease progression during the BP was calculated.|Up to approximately 3.5 years (visits at Baseline and Weeks 6, 12, and 18 and every 12 weeks until/at disease progression during BP)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
840411|NCT01328951|Primary|Percentage of Participants Event-Free (Alive) at 1 Year During the Overall Study|Participants were followed for survival until death or premature withdrawal. The percentage of participants event-free (i.e., still alive) at 1 year during the Overall Study was calculated.|At 1 year|ITT Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840412|NCT01328951|Primary|Overall Survival (OS) as Median Time to Event During the Overall Study|Participants were followed for survival until death or premature withdrawal. OS was defined as the interval between date of randomization and date of death from any cause. Median time to event during the Overall Study (BP, OLP, or SFU) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and expressed in months.|Up to approximately 3.5 years (visits at Baseline and Weeks 6, 12, and 18 and every 12 weeks until/at disease progression during BP; per local standards during OLP; then every 12 weeks during SFU until death)|ITT Population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840413|NCT01328951|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Died During the Overall Study|Participants were followed for survival until death or premature withdrawal. The percentage of participants who died during the Overall Study (BP, OLP, or SFU) was calculated.|Up to approximately 3.5 years (visits at Baseline and Weeks 6, 12, and 18 and every 12 weeks until/at disease progression during BP; per local standards during OLP; then every 12 weeks during SFU until death)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
840414|NCT01328964|Secondary|Mean Monthly Asthma-related Costs (Pharmacy and Medical) During the Post-index Period|The mean total asthma costs are a sum of pharmacy and medical costs. Costs were determined monthly from the pharmacy and medical encounters recorded in the managed care insurance database. All costs were summed for each participant over the 3-12 month follow-up period (post-index period), and a mean monthly cost was calculated by dividing by the follow-up for each participant.|12 months prior to January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2008|Members of the IMS Life Link Health Plans Claims Database (containing data from >=90 managed healthcare plans, encompassing >=60 million lives) who had >=1 pharmacy claim during the study period. FSC participants were matched 1:2 to budesonide and montelukast separately, leading to different numbers analyzed for FSC dependent on cohort of interest.||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840415|NCT01328964|Secondary|Number of Asthma-related Hospitalizations, Asthma-related Emergency Department (ED) Visits, and Combined Hospitalizations/ED Visits Represented Per 100 Person Years|The number of participants with an asthma-related event was computed during the follow-up period and was standardized by dividing by the total days of follow-up in each cohort since participants had different lengths of follow-up. Per 100 person years is equal to the percent of events that occurred during the observed time period of the study.|12 months prior to January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2008|Members of the IMS Life Link Health Plans Claims Database (containing data from >=90 managed healthcare plans, encompassing >=60 million lives) who had >=1 pharmacy claim during the study period. FSC participants were matched 1:2 to budesonide and montelukast separately, leading to different numbers analyzed for FSC dependent on cohort of interest.||Asthma related events per100 person year|||Number
840416|NCT01328964|Secondary|Mean Monthly Asthma-related Costs (Pharmacy and Medical) During the Post-index Period|The mean total asthma costs are a sum of pharmacy and medical costs. Costs were determined monthly from the pharmacy and medical encounters recorded in the managed care insurance database. All costs were summed for each participant over the 3-12 month follow-up period (post-index period), and a mean monthly cost was calculated by dividing by the follow-up for each participant.|12 months prior to January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2008|Members of the IMS Life Link Health Plans Claims Database (containing data from >=90 managed healthcare plans, encompassing >=60 million lives) who had >=1 pharmacy claim during the study period. FSC participants were matched 1:2 to budesonide and montelukast separately, leading to different numbers analyzed for FSC dependent on cohort of interest.||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840417|NCT01328964|Primary|Number of Asthma-related Hospitalizations, Asthma-related Emergency Department (ED) Visits, and Combined Hospitalizations/ED Visits Represented Per 100 Person Years|The number of participants with an asthma-related event was computed during the follow-up period and was standardized by dividing by the total days of follow-up in each cohort since participants had different lengths of follow-up. Per 100 person years is equal to the percent of events that occurred during the observed time period of the study.|January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2008|Members of the IMS Life Link Health Plans Claims Database (containing data from >=90 managed healthcare plans, encompassing >=60 million lives) who had >=1 pharmacy claim during the study period. FSC participants were matched 1:2 to budesonide and montelukast separately, leading to different numbers analyzed for FSC dependent on cohort of interest.||asthma events per 100 person years|||Number
840418|NCT01329029|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI)|Body mass index (BMI) is a measure of body fat based on height and weight. Least Square Means was from an ANCOVA model including LOCF.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants from the Safety Population, all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||kg/m^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840419|NCT01329029|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight|Least Square Means was from an ANCOVA model including Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF).|Baseline and Week 52|Participants from the Safety Population, all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, with data available for analysis.||kilogram (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840420|NCT01329029|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least 1 Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE)|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (eg, a clinically significant abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a drug, whether or not it is considered related to the drug. A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) is defined as an adverse event with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug.|52 Weeks|Safety Population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
840421|NCT01329029|Secondary|Time to Trial Withdrawal Due to an Adverse Event|Time to event will be calculated as date of onset of event — date of first intake of double-blind study drug + 1 day.|52 Weeks (some participants extended treatment beyond 52 Weeks and are included in the analysis)|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with events.||days||Full Range|Median
840422|NCT01329029|Secondary|Time to First Hospitalisation Due to Any Cause During the Treatment Period|Time to event will be calculated as date of onset of event — date of first intake of double-blind study drug + 1 day.|52 Weeks (some participants extended treatment beyond 52 Weeks and are included in the analysis)|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with events.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840423|NCT01329029|Secondary|Percentage of Participant With All-Cause Hospitalisation During the Treatment Period|Percentage of patients with at least one hospital admission due to any cause.|52 Weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
840424|NCT01329029|Secondary|Time to First Major Adverse Cardiovascular Event (MACE) During the Treatment Period|Composite MACE is a combined endpoint(cardiovascular death [including death due to undetermined cause], nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke). Time to event was calculated as date of onset of event — date of first intake of double-blind study drug + 1 day.|52 Weeks (some participants extended treatment beyond 52 Weeks and are included in the analysis)|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized.||days||Full Range|Median
840425|NCT01329029|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Major Adverse Cardiovascular Event (MACE) During the Treatment Period|Composite MACE is a combined endpoint (cardiovascular death [including death due to undetermined cause], nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke).|52 Weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
840426|NCT01329029|Secondary|Time to Withdrawal Due to COPD Exacerbation During the Treatment Period|Time to event will be calculated as date of onset of event — date of first intake of double-blind study drug + 1 day.|52 Weeks (some participants extended treatment beyond 52 Weeks and are included in the analysis)|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized.||days||Full Range|Median
840427|NCT01329029|Secondary|Time to Withdrawal During the Treatment Period|Time to event will be calculated as date of onset of event — date of first intake of double-blind study drug + 1 day.|52 Weeks (some participants extended treatment beyond 52 Weeks and are included in the analysis)|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized.||days||Full Range|Median
840460|NCT01335724|Secondary|Neck Disability Index|"Neck Disability Index total score. Minimum = 0 Best. Maximum = 50 Worst"|96h|||Total Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
840461|NCT01335724|Secondary|Pain at Rest|"Pain at Rest on a 100 mm visual analog scale. Minimum score =0 mm no pain. Maximum score =100 mm extreme pain."|96h|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
840429|NCT01329029|Secondary|Time to Mortality Due to Any Reason During the Treatment Period Score|Time to event will be calculated as date of onset of event — date of first intake of double-blind study drug + 1 day.|52 Weeks (some participants extended treatment beyond 52 Weeks and are included in the analysis)|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized.||days||Full Range|Median
840430|NCT01329029|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement in CAT|Participants completed the CAT questionnaire at Baseline and after 52 Weeks of treatment. The CAT questionnaire measures the impact of COPD on wellbeing and daily life. Participants answer 8 questions on a scale from 0 (best) to 5 (worst). The total score ranges from 0 to 40 with higher scores indicating more impact. Improvement was defined as a CAT Total Score reduction from Baseline > 1.6.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
840431|NCT01329029|Secondary|Change From Baseline in COPD Assessment Test (CAT) Total Score|Participants completed the CAT questionnaire at Baseline and after 52 Weeks of Treatment. The CAT questionnaire measures the impact of COPD on wellbeing and daily life. Participants answer 8 questions on a scale from 0 (best) to 5 (worst). The total score ranges from 0 to 40 with higher scores indicating more impact. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement. Least-squares means from ANCOVA including treatment by time interaction.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840432|NCT01329029|Secondary|Percentage of Rescue Medication-Free Days|Participants recorded their use of rescue medication in a daily diary. The percentage of days without rescue medication use.|52 Weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
840433|NCT01329029|Secondary|Percentage of Symptom-Free Days|Symptoms of COPD (cough, sputum) were recorded in a daily diary. The percentage of days without symptoms is reported.|52 Weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
840434|NCT01329029|Secondary|Change From Baseline in COPD Symptom Score From Daily Diary|Participants recorded COPD symptoms cough and sputum production in a daily diary. Cough was assessed using a 4-point scale where 0=No cough to 3=severe cough and sputum was assessed using a 4-point scale where 0=no sputum production to 3=severe sputum production. Least-squares means from ANCOVA including treatment by time interaction. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement. Total symptom score is the sum of cough and sputum scores, ranging from 0 (best possible outcome) to 6 (worst possible outcome).|52 weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840435|NCT01329029|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Use of Rescue Medication From Daily Diary|Salbutamol metered dose inhaler was available as rescue medication during the study. The participant recorded the use of rescue medication in a daily diary. A negative change from Baseline indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data included in the repeated measurements analysis.||puffs per day||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840436|NCT01329029|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-Bronchodilator FEV1/FVC|The FEV1/FVC ratio represents the percentage of vital capacity expelled from the lungs during the first second of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|52 weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
840437|NCT01329029|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-Bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Volume in the First 6 Seconds (FEV6)|FEV6 is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs in the first six seconds of a forced exhalation. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|52 weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840438|NCT01329029|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-Bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Flow at 25% to 75% of Vital Capacity (FEF25-75%)|Forced expiratory flow 25-75% (FEF25-75%) is the flow (or speed) of air coming out of the lung during the middle half of a forced expiration. Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralized spirometry. Least-squares means was from ANCOVA including treatment by time interaction. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|52 weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||liters/second||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840439|NCT01329029|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-Bronchodilator Forced Vital Capacity (FVC)|Forced vital capacity is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. Least-squares means was from ANCOVA including treatment by time interaction. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|52 weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840462|NCT01335724|Primary|Pain on Movement|"Pain on movement on a 100 mm visual analog scale. Minimum score =0 mm no pain. Maximum score =100 mm extreme pain."|48 h|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
840516|NCT01336712|Secondary|Disease Free Survival (DFS) Percentage||2 year|||percentage of patients analyzed|||Number
840517|NCT01336712|Secondary|Percentage of Participatns With Donor Chimerism Post-transplant|Characterize donor hematopoietic chimerism in peripheral blood at day 30 after HSCT.|Day 30|||percentage of patients|||Number
840440|NCT01329029|Secondary|Duration of Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbations Per Participant|A COPD exacerbation is an event in the natural course of the disease characterized by a worsening in the patient’s baseline dyspnoea, cough, and/or sputum production beyond day to day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management.|52 Weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis. n in each of the categories is the number of participants with exacerbations.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
840441|NCT01329029|Secondary|Number of Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbation Days|A COPD exacerbation is an event in the natural course of the disease characterized by a worsening in the patient’s baseline dyspnoea, cough, and/or sputum production beyond day to day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management. The number of exacerbation days per patient is the sum of durations (stop date of exacerbation — start date of exacerbation + 1) of all exacerbations within the category.|52 Weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
840442|NCT01329029|Secondary|Number of Patients Needed to Treat to Avoid 1 Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbation Derived From Exacerbation Per Patient Per Year|The number needed to treat (NNT) analysis is a simple, concise method to quantify directly the benefits that alternative treatment options have on disease outcomes in terms of the number of patients who need to be treated before a benefit is observed. Risk reduction: Rate(Placebo)— Rate (Roflumilast 500 μg), Number needed to treat for benefit (NNTB): 1/(Risk reduction). A COPD exacerbation is an event in the natural course of the disease characterized by a worsening in the patient's baseline dyspnoea, cough, and/or sputum production beyond day to day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management. COPD exacerbations were categorized as Severe: Requiring hospitalization and/or leading to death; Moderate: Requiring oral or parenteral glucocorticosteroid therapy.|52 Weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||participants|||Number
840443|NCT01329029|Secondary|Time to Third Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbation|Time to event was calculated as date of onset of event — date of first intake of double-blind study drug + 1 day for events: moderate or severe. A COPD exacerbation is an event in the natural course of the disease characterized by a worsening in the patient’s baseline dyspnoea, cough, and/or sputum production beyond day to day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management. COPD exacerbations were categorized as Severe: Requiring hospitalization and/or leading to death; Moderate: Requiring oral or parenteral glucocorticosteroid therapy.|52 Weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized.||days||Full Range|Median
840444|NCT01329029|Secondary|Time to Second Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbation|Time to event was calculated as date of onset of event — date of first intake of double-blind study drug + 1 day for events: moderate or severe. A COPD exacerbation is an event in the natural course of the disease characterized by a worsening in the patient’s baseline dyspnoea, cough, and/or sputum production beyond day to day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management. COPD exacerbations were categorized as Severe: Requiring hospitalization and/or leading to death; Moderate: Requiring oral or parenteral glucocorticosteroid therapy.|52 Weeks (some participants extended treatment beyond 52 Weeks and are included in the analysis)|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840445|NCT01329029|Secondary|Time to First COPD Exacerbation All Categories|Time to event was calculated as date of onset of event — date of first intake of double-blind study drug + 1 day for all events: mild, moderate or severe. A COPD exacerbation is an event in the natural course of the disease characterized by a worsening in the patient’s baseline dyspnoea, cough, and/or sputum production beyond day to day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management.|52 Weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840446|NCT01329029|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing at Least 1 COPD Exacerbation|A COPD exacerbation is an event in the natural course of the disease characterized by a worsening in the patient’s baseline dyspnoea, cough, and/or sputum production beyond day to day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management.|52 weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
840447|NCT01329029|Secondary|Rate of COPD Exacerbations Per Patient Per Year All Categories|A COPD exacerbation is an event in the natural course of the disease characterized by a worsening in the patient’s baseline dyspnoea, cough, and/or sputum production beyond day to day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management. COPD exacerbations were categorized as follows: Severe=Requiring hospitalization and/or leading to death; Moderate=Requiring oral or parenteral glucocorticosteroid therapy. The defined number of days a patient was in the trial was divided by 365.25, in order to express the duration as a fraction of 1 year.|52 weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||exacerbations per patient per year||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840448|NCT01329029|Secondary|Rate of Severe COPD Exacerbations Per Patient Per Year|A COPD exacerbation is an event in the natural course of the disease characterized by a worsening in the patient’s baseline dyspnoea, cough, and/or sputum production beyond day to day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management. Severe COPD exacerbations were categorized as requiring hospitalization and/or leading to death. The defined number of days a patient was in the trial was divided by 365.25, in order to express the duration as a fraction of 1 year.|52 weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||exacerbations per patient per year||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840518|NCT01336712|Secondary|Survival|To obtain estimate of overall survival (OS)|2 year|||percentage of patients analyzed|||Number
840449|NCT01329029|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post-Bronchodilator Forced Expiratory Volume in the First Second (FEV1)|Pulmonary function testing was performed using centralised spirometry. FEV1 is the maximum amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Least-squares means is from Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) including treatment by time interaction. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 52|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840450|NCT01329029|Primary|Rate of Moderate or Severe COPD Exacerbations Per Patient Per Year|A COPD exacerbation is an event in the natural course of the disease characterized by a worsening in the patient’s baseline dyspnoea, cough, and/or sputum production beyond day to day variability sufficient to warrant a change in management. COPD exacerbations were categorized as follows: Severe=Requiring hospitalization and/or leading to death; Moderate=Requiring oral or parenteral glucocorticosteroid therapy. The defined number of days a patient was in the trial was divided by 365.25, in order to express the duration as a fraction of 1 year.|52 weeks|Participants from the Intent-to treat population, all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug analyzed by the treatment for which they were randomized, with data available for analysis.||exacerbations per patient per year||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840451|NCT01335542|Primary|"The Primary Outcome is Time Until a Patient is Ready for Discharge."|"The primary outcome is time until a patient is ready for discharge. Discharge criteria are:
PCA (if present) has been discontinued
Not experiencing moderate or severe nausea (within last 4 hours).
Solid food diet
Able to urinate (Foley catheter removed)
Pain: NRS <4.
Surgical wound dry
No acute medical problems
Physical Therapy Criteria
Independently transfer from supine to sit, from sitting to standing
Ambulate 40 ft. without assistance
Extension range of motion (< 10 degrees)"|Participants will be followed for the duration of their hospital stay, an expected average of 3 days|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
840452|NCT01335698|Secondary|Number of Participants With Emergent Genotypic Substitutions|Newly emergent substitutions are on-treatment substitutions that were not detected at baseline.Viral rebound in the resistance analysis was defined as: Less than a 1 log10 drop from baseline in plasma HIV RNA level by Week 16, confirmed by a second plasma HIV RNA level redrawn within 2 and 4 weeks from original sample. Or, a plasma HIV RNA level >200 c/mL after Week 24, confirmed by a second plasma HIV RNA level redrawn within 2 and 4 weeks from original sample. Or, repeated plasma HIV RNA level ≥50 c/mL after Week 48. Viral rebound was defined as a plasma HIV RNA level ≥400 c/mL at any time in a patient who had previously achieved a plasma HIV RNA level <50 c/mL. Or, a plasma HIV RNA level ≥50 c/mL and <1,000 c/mL followed by a return to virologic suppression was considered a viral blip and not a viral rebound. NRTI=nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor|Baseline through Week 48|All participants with virologic failure.||Participants|||Number
840453|NCT01335698|Secondary|CD4 Cell Count Changes From Baseline|Last observation carried forward: missing values are replaced with the last on-treatment value in the previous visit window;if a patient does not have an on-treatment value, baseline value is carried forward. Baseline observation carried forward: missing values are replaced with the baseline value; if a patient does not have a baseline the first on-treatment value is carried forward.|Baseline to Weeks 24 and 48|All participants with both baseline and time point results||Cells/mm^3||Standard Error|Mean
840454|NCT01335698|Primary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Results Meeting the Criteria for Grade 3-4 Abnormality|Criteria of the Division of AIDS for grading the severity of adult and pediatric adverse events as follows: Grade (Gr) 1=mild; Gr 2=moderate; Gr 3=severe; Gr 4=potentially life-threatening. Neutrophils (absolute) (adult and infants >7 days): Gr 1=1.000-1300/mm^3; Gr 2=750-999 mm^3; Gr 3=500-749 mm^3; Gr 4= <500 mm^3. Alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase: Gr 1=1.25-2.5*upper limit of normal (ULN); Gr 2=2.6-5.0*ULN; Gr 3=5.1-10.0*ULN; Gr 4= >10.0*ULN. Bilirubin, total (adults and infants >14 days): Gr 1=1.1-1.5*ULN; Gr 2=1.6-2.5*ULN; Gr 3=2.6-5.0*ULN; Gr 4= >5.0*ULN. Lipase: Gr 1=1.1-1.5*ULN; Gr 2=1.6-3.0*ULN; Gr 3=3.1-5.0*ULN; Gr 4= >5.0*ULN. Bicarbonate, serum low: Gr 1=16.0 mEq/L-<lower limit of normal; Gr 2=11.0-15.9 mEq/L; Gr 3=8.0-10.9 mEq/L; Gr 4= <8 mEq/L. By criteria of the World Health Organization: Amylase: Gr 1=1.0-1.39*ULN; Gr 2=1.40-2.09*ULN; Gr 3.=2.10-5.0*ULN; Gr 4= >5.0*ULN.|Day 1 of treatment through Week 48|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. n=number of participants evaluable||Participants|||Number
840455|NCT01335698|Primary|Number of Participants With A Center of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Class C AIDS Event|The CDC disease staging system assesses the severity of HIV disease by CD4 cell counts and by the presence of specific HIV-related conditions. CD4 counts are classified as 1: ≥500 cells/µL, 2: 200-499 cells/µL, and 3: <200 cells/µL. Children with HIV infection are also classified in each of several categories. Category N: Not symptomatic. Category A: Mildly symptomatic. Category B: Moderately symptomatic. Category C: Severely symptomatic.|Day 1 of treatment through Week 48|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
840456|NCT01335698|Primary|Number of Participants Who Died and With Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation, Hyperbilirubinemia, Jaundice, First-degree Arterioventricular Block, Tachycardia, and Rash|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment.|Day 1 of treatment through Week 48|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
840457|NCT01335698|Secondary|CD4 Percent Changes From Baseline||Baseline to Weeks 24 and 48|All participants with both baseline and time point results; n=number of participants evaluable at time point||Percent change||Standard Error|Mean
840458|NCT01335698|Secondary|HIV RNA Changes From Baseline||Baseline to Weeks 24 and 48|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. n=participants with both baseline and time point results||Log copies per millileter||Standard Error|Mean
840459|NCT01335698|Secondary|Number of Participants With HIV RNA <50 Copies/mL and <400 Copies/mL in the Week 24 Atazanavir Powder Cohort and the Eligible Week 48 Atazanavir Powder Cohort|Virologic success includes patients with HIV RNA <50 copies/mL. Two cohorts were assess: The Atazanavir Powder Cohort=patients who received treatment and did not switch to capsule before analysis Week 24 or before their HIV RNA Week 24 assessment, and the Eligible Week 48 Atazanavir Powder Cohort=patients who initiated study treatment at least 48 weeks before last person last visit and did not switch to capsule before analysis Week 48 or before their HIV RNA Week 48 assessment.|Day 1 of treatment to Weeks 24 and 48|For efficacy of atazanavir powder to Week 24: Atazanavir Powder Cohort. For efficacy of atazanavir powder efficacy to Week 48 (n): Eligible Week 48 Atazanavir Powder Cohort||Participants|||Number
840463|NCT01335750|Primary|Corneal Staining Area|Analysis of staining area was performed by averaging the values from the five regions for each eye and then identifying the subject's worse eye at each visit. Mean total area was calculated from all identified eyes for each visit.|Baseline, 2 Hour Period, 4 Hour Period|Analysis of staining area was performed by averaging the values from the five regions for each eye and then identifying the subject's worse eye at each visit. Mean total area was calculated from all identified eyes for each visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840464|NCT01335750|Primary|Corneal Staining Severity|Severity of staining was recorded for each region using a scale of 0-none to 4-patch >/=1mm. Analysis of staining was performed by averaging the scores from the five regions for each eye, then identifying the subject's worse eye at each visit. Mean total severity was calcuated from all identified eyes for each visit.|Baseline, 2 Hour Period, 4 Hour Period|Severity of staining was recorded for each region using a scale of 0-none to 4-patch >/=1mm. Analysis of staining was performed by averaging the scores from the five regions for each eye, then identifying the subject's worse eye at each visit. Mean total severity was calcuated from all identified eyes for each visit.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
840465|NCT01335750|Secondary|Subjective Dryness|Subjective dryness ratings 0-100 (0=extremely dry, 100=extremely moist)|Visit 1: Baseline; Visit 2: 2 hours, Visit 3: 4 hours|Subjective dryness ratings 0-100 (0=extremely dry, 100=extremely moist)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840466|NCT01335750|Secondary|Subjective Comfort|Subjective comfort ratings 0-100 (0=causes pain, 100=excellent comfort)|Visit 1: Baseline; Visit 2: 2 hours, Visit 3: 4 hours|Subjective comfort ratings 0-100 (0=causes pain, 100=excellent comfort)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840467|NCT01335789|Primary|Stress (as Measured by Subjective Report)|Subjective report of stress was measured using a 0-10 Likert Scale (0=not at all, 10=extremely). Reported here is subjective stress level 5 minutes following exposure to the Trier Social Stress Task (approximately 60 minutes post study drug/placebo administration). Trier Social Stress Task is a psychosocial laboratory stress task in which subjects deliver a speech and perform a math problem in front of a stranger audience.|5 minutes following Trier Social Stress Task completion|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840468|NCT01335789|Secondary|Craving (as Measured by the Marijuana Craving Questionnaire)|The MCQ is intended to measure marijuana craving in adults. It measures symptoms on four subscales: expectancy, purposefulness, emotionality, and compulsivity. The scale rates individual items from 1–7 with a composite scoring range of 12-84 and possible subscale scoring range of 3-21. Reported here is MCQ composite score 5 minutes following Trier Social Stress Task exposure (approximately 60 minutes post study drug/placebo administration). Trier Social Stress Task is a psychosocial laboratory stress task in which subjects deliver a speech and perform a math problem in front of a stranger audience.|5 minutes following Trier Social Stress Task completion|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840469|NCT01335789|Primary|Stress (as Measured by Cortisol)|Salivary cortisol samples were collected via passive drool to provide empirical assessment of stress reactivity. Reported here is salivary cortisol level 5 minutes following Trier Social Stress Task exposure (approximately 60 minutes post study drug/placebo administration). Trier Social Stress Task is a psychosocial laboratory stress task in which subjects deliver a speech and perform a math problem in front of a stranger audience.|5 minutes following Trier Social Stress Task completion|||nmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840470|NCT01335932|Secondary|Functional Assessment|Patient survey|at 1 and 180 days post-randomization||||||
840471|NCT01335932|Secondary|Safety|"Number and severity of AEs and SAEs as defined in the Adverse Event section of the protocol
Time to neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] < 1000, <500 per mm3)
Use of G-CSF
Time to renal insufficiency (creatinine clearance < 60, < 30 ml/min)
Time to thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 50,000, < 20,000 per mm3)
Number of red cell and platelets products between randomization and day 35 after randomization"|by 35 days post-randomization||||||
840472|NCT01335932|Secondary|CMV Disease|Need to be biopsy-proven|by 180 days post-randomization||||||
840473|NCT01335932|Secondary|Length of Stay|"ICU (days alive and not in the ICU by day 28)
Hospital (days alive and not hospitalized by day 28 and 180)"|by 28 and 180 days post-randomization||||||
840474|NCT01335932|Secondary|Clinical Outcomes|"Organ system failure at 14 and 28 days
Duration of mechanical ventilation (as assessed by ventilator days and ventilator-free days alive)
Lung injury score
Bacteremia and/or fungemia
Mortality at 60 and 180 days after randomization
Composite of survival status, ventilation status, and IL-6 levels
Subset analysis of laboratory and clinical outcomes amongst subjects who survive at least 7 days after randomization
Subset analysis of laboratory and clinical outcomes amongst subjects who are mechanically ventilated for at least 7 through 14 days after randomization"|at 7, 14, 28, 60, and 180 days post-randomization||||||
840475|NCT01335932|Secondary|Additional Cytokine Levels|"Additional cytokines with proven association with ALI and CMV will be compared between the groups.
BAL levels of IL-6, IL-8, TNF-alpha & TGF-β
Plasma IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, TNF-alpha & soluble ICAM-1
Cytokines will be analyzed at each time point and over time (area under the curve), and peak levels will be compared between randomization and Day 28 (end of treatment)."|at 7 and 28 days post-randomization||||||
840476|NCT01335932|Secondary|Incidence of CMV Reactivation at 28 Days (Blood, Throat)|"The following virologic parameters will be compared between the groups:
Time to CMV reactivation at any level
Time to > 1,000 copies per mL
Time to > 10,000 copies per mL
Area under the curve
Peak viral load
Initial viral load"|at 28 days post-randomization||||||
840477|NCT01335932|Primary|Serum IL-6 Level|Change between baseline and 14 days post-randomization between placebo & ganciclovir groups|Baseline and Day 14|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840478|NCT01335971|Secondary|Fold-change in Plasma Inflammatory Marker Concentrations (Follow-up to Baseline)|Inflammatory markers were measured in plasma at baseline and 4 weeks. Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances were measured in nmol malondialdehyde (MDA)/mL.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed is based on number of participants that had plasma samples available. Samples were missing for one participant in the 25 micromole group.||fold change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840490|NCT01336023|Secondary|Mean Actual Daily Insulin Dose|Mean of the actual doses recorded at visit 28 (Week 26).|Week 26|The FAS included all randomised subjects. Missing data was imputed using LOCF. For 34 subjects, the dose values were missing hence did not contribute to the analysis. The comparison was made between the insulin products IDeg and IDeglira.||units||Standard Deviation|Mean
840479|NCT01335971|Secondary|Fold-change in Inflammatory Marker Concentrations in Bronchial Alveolar Lavage (Follow-up to Baseline) by Treatment Group|Inflammatory markers were measured in bronchial alveolar lavage samples at baseline and 4 weeks in the participants of this trial who had bronchoalveolar lavage samples obtained.Three participants - one from each treatment group - were unable to complete follow-up bronchoalveolar lavage.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed is based on number of participants that had bronchial alveolar lavage samples available. Samples were missing for two participants in the placebo group.||fold change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840480|NCT01335971|Secondary|Fold-change in Serum Inflammatory Marker Concentrations (Follow-up to Baseline)|Inflammatory markers were measured in serum samples derived from venipuncture at baseline and 4 weeks in the serum of the participants of the trial.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed is based on number of participants that had plasma samples available. Samples were missing for one participant in the 25 micromole group.||fold change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840481|NCT01335971|Secondary|Fold-change in Isoprostane Concentrations (Follow-up to Baseline)|Isoprostane, an oxidant stress indicator, was measured in expired breath condensate at baseline and 4 weeks.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed based on number of individuals with expired breath condensate samples in which testing could be successfully performed. Samples were missing for two participants in the 25 micromole group and one participant in the 150 micromole group.||fold change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840482|NCT01335971|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bronchial Epithelial Cell Expression of AKR1C3 at 4 Weeks|The sixth primary design variable is the change from baseline in expression of Aldo-Keto Reductase Family 1 Member C3 (AKR1C3) in bronchial epithelial cells (BEC) at 4 weeks. Three participants - one from each treatment group - were unable to complete follow-up bronchoalveolar lavage for primary outcome data.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed based on number of individuals with bronchial epithelial samples in which assays could be successfully performed. Assays failed for two participants in the placebo group, one participant in the 25 micromole group, and one participant in the 150 micromole group.||fold change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840483|NCT01335971|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bronchial Epithelial Cell Expression of AKR1C1 at 4 Weeks|The fifth primary design variable is the change from baseline in expression of Aldo-Keto Reductase Family 1 Member C1 (AKR1C1) in bronchial epithelial cells (BEC) at 4 weeks. Three participants - one from each treatment group - were unable to complete follow-up bronchoalveolar lavage for primary outcome data.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed based on number of individuals with alveolar macrophage samples in which assays could be successfully performed. Assays failed for two participants in the placebo group and two in the 150 micromole group.||fold change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840484|NCT01335971|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bronchial Epithelial Cell Expression of HO1 at 4 Weeks|The fourth primary design variable is the change from baseline in expression of Heme Oxygenase 1 (HO1) in bronchial epithelial cells (BEC) at 4 weeks. Three participants - one from each treatment group - were unable to complete follow-up bronchoalveolar lavage for primary outcome data.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed based on number of individuals with bronchial epithelial samples in which assays could be successfully performed. Assays failed for one participant in the placebo group.||fold change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840485|NCT01335971|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bronchial Epithelial Cell Expression of NQ01 and Keap1 at 4 Weeks|The third primary design variable is the change from baseline in NAD(P)H Quinone Dehydrogenase 1 (NQ01) and Kelch Like ECH Associated Protein 1 (Keap1) expression in bronchial epithelial cells (BEC) at 4 weeks. Three participants - one from each treatment group - were unable to complete follow-up bronchoalveolar lavage for primary outcome data.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed based on number of individuals with bronchial epithelial samples in which assays could be successfully performed. Assays failed for two participants in the placebo group and one in the 150 micromole group.||fold change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840486|NCT01335971|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bronchial Epithelial Cell Expression of Nrf2 at 4 Weeks|The second primary design variable is the change from baseline in nuclear factor erythroid 2 like 2 (Nrf2) expression in bronchial epithelial cells (BEC) at 4 weeks by analysing Nrf2 protein. Three participants - one from each treatment group - were unable to complete follow-up bronchoalveolar lavage for primary outcome data.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed based on number of individuals with bronchial epithelial samples in which assays could be successfully performed. Assays failed for one participant in the placebo group and one in the 25 micromole group..||fold change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840487|NCT01335971|Primary|Change From Baseline in Alveolar Macrophage Expression of Nrf2 and Associated Genes at 4 Weeks|The first primary design variable is the change from baseline in nuclear factor erythroid 2 like 2 (Nrf2) expression in alveolar macrophages (AM) at 4 weeks by analysing Nrf2 protein and expression of a panel of Nrf2 regulated genes.Three participants - one from each treatment group - were unable to complete follow-up bronchoalveolar lavage for primary outcome data.|Baseline and 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed based on number of individuals with alveolar macrophage samples in which assays could be successfully performed. Assays failed for two participants in the placebo group, one in the 25 micromole group, and one in the 150 micromole group.||fold change||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840488|NCT01335997|Secondary|Change From Baseline in High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) Blood Levels|Due to study termination caused by the decision to stop the development of the combination tablet, sufficient data were not available to perform the planned efficacy analysis, which is based on the cross-over data collected in period II and III.|Baseline and Week 12 and Week 20|Completers Population - participants that completed the study, have respective endpoint data available at baseline, end of period II and end of period III and were not off study drug more than 3 days prior to their period II and period III observations.|||||
840489|NCT01335997|Primary|Change From Baseline in Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) Blood Levels|Due to study termination caused by the decision to stop the development of the combination tablet, sufficient data were not available to perform the planned efficacy analysis, which is based on the cross-over data collected in period II and III.|Baseline and Week 12 and Week 20|Completers Population - participants that completed the study, have respective endpoint data available at baseline, end of period II and end of period III and were not off study drug more than 3 days prior to their period II and period III observations.|||||
840491|NCT01336023|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Incremental Area Under the Curve 0-4h (iAUC0-4h) Derived From the Glucose Concentration Profile During Meal Test|Values of mean change in normalised iAUC0-4h values based on LOCF data derived from the glucose concentration profiles during a meal test. The meal test was performed at selected sites at baseline and after 26 weeks of treatment in the main trial period. The incremental AUC was calculated using the trapezoidal method and the resulting area was divided length of the observation period to yield the (normalised) prandial increment in mmol/L using the available valid glucose observations and the associated actual elapsed time point.|Week 0, Week 26|The number of subjects analysed were equal to study population in which the meal test was perfomed at selected sites. The subjects in each arm were 63, 128 and 61 at week 26. Missing data was imputed using LOCF.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
840492|NCT01336023|Secondary|Number of Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Reported hypoglycemaic episodes are number of hypoglycemic events per 100 patient years of exposure.|Weeks 0-26|The Safety Analysis Set (SAS) included all subjects receiving at least one dose of the investigational product or comparators. The missing data was imputed using LOCF. Three subjects did not have their case book signed off due to discontinuation of an investigator’s participation in the trial; hence 1 subject from each arm was excluded from the SAS||Events per 100 patient years of exposure|||Number
840493|NCT01336023|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 26|Values of mean change in body weight.|Week 0, Week 26|The FAS included all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using LOCF. Three subjects did not have their case book signed off due to discontinuation of an investigator’s participation in the trial; hence 1 subject from each arm was excluded from the FAS.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840494|NCT01336023|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in HbA1c (Glycosylated Haemoglobin) at Week 26.|Values of mean change in HbA1c.|Week 0, week 26|The FAS included all randomised subjects and missing data was imputed using LOCF. Three subjects did not have their case book signed off due to discontinuation of an investigator’s participation in the trial; hence 1 subject from each arm was excluded from the FAS.||Percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
840495|NCT01336140|Secondary|Patients With Recorded Aminophylline Related Major Adverse Events|Aminophylline related adverse effects include: systemic hypotension (systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg), any thachyarrhythmia (ventricular or supraventricular) and seizure.|Within 24 hours from the intervention.|All patients.||participant|||Number
840496|NCT01336140|Secondary|Global Symptom Score (GSS) of Regadenoson Related Adverse-effects|"GSS is the sum of severity-weighted (0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe) regadenosnon-related adverse-effects of flushing, feeling hot, chest pain, chest discomfort, angina, headache, dizziness, abdominal cramps or discomfort, diarrhea, nausea.
GSS is calculated by weighting each side effect from 0 - 3 (as above) then add the severity weighted scores of all adverse effects (total of 10 as above).
The number of adverse effects contributing to the score is 10, each has a potential severity weight of 0 (absent) to 3 (severe). Thus:
Minimum possible Global Symptom Score (GSS) = 0 Maximum possible Global Symptom Score (GSS) = 30"|Within 2 hours from the intervention.|All patients.||Global Symptom Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
840497|NCT01336140|Secondary|Number of Patients With Any (One or More) Regadenoson-related Adverse-effect|"Regadenoson-related adverse-effects include: flushing, feeling hot, chest pain, chest discomfort, angina, headache, dizziness, abdominal cramps or discomfort, diarrhea, nausea.
When multiple adverse effects are reported, only one event is counted."|Within 2 hours from the intervention.|All patients.||Participants|||Number
840498|NCT01336140|Primary|Diarrhea (as Reported by the Patient)|"Number of patients who report any incident of diarrhea. Patients will be surveyed for incidents of diarrhea following to the completion of the cardiac stress testing procedure and prior to discharge from the laboratory (typically within 2 hours from stress completion).
The primary endpoint encompasses the number of patients with reported symptoms of diarrhea, not the number of bowel movements."|Within 2 hours from the intervention|All patients.||participants|||Number
840499|NCT01336205|Primary|Incidence of Patients Experiencing Severe Adverse Events (SAEs)|The incidence of patients experiencing SAEs during the randomized treatment and follow-up periods was calculated.|Baseline (Week 0) to end of the follow-up period|The Safety analysis set included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of IP and patients who received Usual Care, with the exception of patients who were randomized multiple times within the program at different centers or patients who were randomized at sites where data integrity issues were identified.||Participants|||Number
840500|NCT01336205|Primary|Incidence of Patients Experiencing AEs That Resulted in Discontinuation of Investigational Product (IP)|The incidence of patients experiencing AEs that resulted in discontinuation of IP during the randomized treatment or follow-up periods was calculated.|Baseline (Week 0) to end of the follow-up period|The Safety analysis set included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of IP and patients who received Usual Care, with the exception of patients who were randomized multiple times within the program at different centers or patients who were randomized at sites where data integrity issues were identified.||Participants|||Number
840501|NCT01336205|Primary|Incidence of Patients Experiencing at Least One Adverse Event (AE)|The incidence of patients experiencing at least one AE during the randomized treatment and follow-up periods was calculated.|Baseline (Week 0) to end of the follow-up period|The Safety analysis set included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of IP and patients who received Usual Care, with the exception of patients who were randomized multiple times within the program at different centers or patients who were randomized at sites where data integrity issues were identified.||Participants|||Number
840502|NCT01336296|Secondary|Number of Patients Requiring Anti-lymphocyte Therapy for Acute Rejection||1 year|||participants|||Number
840503|NCT01336296|Secondary|Incidence of Chronic Alloantibody Rejection or Chronic Allograft Arteriopathy by Banff ‘97|The Banff features suggestive of chronic rejection were: a) chronic transplant glomerulopathy: Glomerular basement membrane duplication and mesangial cell proliferation, and b) vasculopathy: Fibrous intimal thickening often with fragmentation of internal elastic lamina. Chronic changes in the interstitium (ci), tubules (ct), vessels (cv), and glomerulus (cg) were likewise graded into 0, 1, 2, and 3. The severity of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy, as also chronic transplant glomerulopathy and vasculopathy were used to grade chronic allograft changes.|1 year|||participants|||Number
840519|NCT01336712|Primary|Percentage of Patients Experiencing Hemorrhagic Cystitis Post Transplant|1.1 To estimate the incidence of BK virus-associated hemorrhagic cystitis following a TBI-based myeloablative haploidentical HSCT in patients with high risk hematologic malignancies.|6 months|||percentage of patients|||Number
840505|NCT01336296|Secondary|Severity of Acute Rejection by Banff '97 Criteria|"Severity of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection by Banff '97 Criteria (updated 2007) at 1 year. The acute form of T-cell mediated rejection is furthermore subclassified as follows. Since this is the most common form of rejection, it is useful to know:
As with humoral rejection, there are both acute & chronic forms:
The acute form of T-cell mediated rejection is furthermore subclassified as follows. Since this is the most common form of rejection, it is useful to know:
Class IA: there is at least 25% of parenchymal showing interstitial infiltration and foci of moderate tubulitis (defined as a certain number of immune cells present in tubular cross-sections).
Class IB: just like Class IA except there is more severe tubulitis.
Class IIA: there is mild-to-moderate intimal arteritis.
Class IIB: there is severe intimal arteritis comprising at least 25% of the lumenal area.
Class III: there is transmural (e.g. the full vessel wall thickness) arteritis."|Severity 1 year post transplant|||participants|||Number
840506|NCT01336296|Primary|Incidence of Biopsy-confirmed Acute Rejection by Banff '97 Criteria (Updated 2007) 3, 6 and 12 Months Post Transplant|"Incidence of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection by Banff '97 Criteria (updated 2007) post transplant. The acute form of T-cell mediated rejection is furthermore subclassified as follows. Since this is the most common form of rejection, it is useful to know:
As with humoral rejection, there are both acute & chronic forms:
The acute form of T-cell mediated rejection is furthermore subclassified as follows. Since this is the most common form of rejection, it is useful to know:
Class IA: there is at least 25% of parenchymal showing interstitial infiltration and foci of moderate tubulitis (defined as a certain number of immune cells present in tubular cross-sections).
Class IB: just like Class IA except there is more severe tubulitis.
Class IIA: there is mild-to-moderate intimal arteritis.
Class IIB: there is severe intimal arteritis comprising at least 25% of the lumenal area.
Class III: there is transmural (e.g. the full vessel wall thickness) arteritis."|3, 6 and 12 months post transplant|||participants|||Number
840507|NCT01336569|Primary|Mean Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Change at the Final Visit From Baseline (Prior Beta-blocker Monotherapy)|As measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. High IOP (outside the normal range) can be a risk factor for developing glaucoma or glaucoma progression (leading to optic nerve damage). A more negative change indicates a greater amount of improvement.|Baseline, up to 6 weeks|Intent-to-Treat (ITT): All participants who received study medication and had at least one on-therapy study visit.||millimeters mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840508|NCT01336608|Secondary|Mean Number of Occasions Rescue Medication [Albuterol (Salbutamol)] Used During a 24-hour Period Averaged Over the Entire 24-week Treatment Period|Participants were given daily record cards for daily completion from BL (Week -1) through Week 24 (Visit 6) each morning and prior to taking study medication (i.e., single-blind and double-blind study medication) supplemental medication (albuterol [salbutamol] if received) and ipratropium bromide (if received). Participants recorded number of occasions supplemental albuterol/salbutamol (MDI and/or nebules) used over the previous 24 hours and any medical problems that they had experienced and any medication used to treat these medical problems over the previous 24 hours. Analysis was performed using an analysis of covarience (ANCOVA) model with covariates of treatment, BL mean of occasions of rescue medication use (Week -1), history of exacerbation, and geographical region.|BL (Week -1), Week 1 to Week 24|ITT Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Only those participants with at least 1 on treatment rescue medication measurement during the treatment period and without missing covariate information were analyzed.||Occasions per 24 hours||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840509|NCT01336608|Secondary|Change From BL in Clinic Visit Trough (Pre-bronchodilator and Pre-dose) FEV1 at Day 168|Pulmonary function was measured by forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled from the lungs in one second. Trough FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry at Screening, Days 1, 28, 84, 126, and 168. BL FEV1 was defined as the mean of the assessments made 30 minutes pre-dose and 5 minutes pre-dose on Treatment Day 1. Trough FEV1 was defined as the mean of the FEV1 values obtained 24 hours after previous morning's dosing. Change from BL was calculated as the average at each visit minus the BL value. Analysis was preformed using a repeated measures model with covariates of visit, treatment, history of exacerbation strata, geographical region, BL FEV1 and interaction terms of BL by visit and treatment by visit.|BL to Day 168|ITT Population. Number of par. presented represent those with data available at the time point being presented; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post BL measurement are included in the analysis.||Liters (L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840510|NCT01336608|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline (BL) in Aortic Pulse Wave Velocity (aPWV) at the End of the 24-week Treatment Period (Day 168)|PWV is defined as the speed of travel of the pressure pulse along an arterial segment and can be obtained for any arterial segment accessible to palpation. aPWV is measured with tonometers positioned transcutaneously at the base of the common carotid artery and over the femoral artery. PWV increases with arterial stiffness and is defined by the Moens-Korteweg equation: PWV=square root of (Eh/2ρR), where E is Young’s modulus of the arterial wall, h is the wall thickness, R is the arterial radius at the end of diastole, and ρ is the blood density. Change from BL was calculated as the Day 168 value minus the BL value. The analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, visit, age, gender, smoking history, history of exacerbation strata, geographical region, BL aPWV and interaction terms of BL by visit and treatment by visit.|BL to Day 168|ITT Population: all randomized par. who received at least one dose of study medication. Number of par. presented represent those with data available at the time point being presented; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post BL measurement are included in the analysis.||meters per second (m/sec)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840511|NCT01336647|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability of Ha44 Gel|The number of subjects with Treatment emergent AEs (TEAEs) related to the study medication will be reported by treatment group.|From treatment to last visit of the study at 14 days|All subjects who participated||participants with treatment related AEs|||Number
840512|NCT01336647|Primary|Number of Participants Who Are Lice Free at All Follow-up Visits (Day 1, 7 and 14) Through the Day 14 Visit||Follow up visit at days 1, 7 and 14 days|Intent to Treat||participants|||Number
840513|NCT01336712|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Chronic Graft-versus-host Disease||2 year|||percentage of patients analyzed|||Number
840514|NCT01336712|Secondary|Relapse Rate||2 year|||percentage of patients analyzed|||Number
840515|NCT01336712|Secondary|Non-relapsed Mortality (NRM) Percentage||2 year|||percentage of patients|||Number
840520|NCT01336738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 1% or >= 2% Body Weight Loss From Baseline|The treatment of diabetes has been the recommendation to lose weight. As weight loss progresses and is maintained, an improvement of glycemia may be evidenced by a reduction in HbA1c. Participants with >= 1% or >= 2% body weight loss from baseline signifies an improvement of glycemia.|Week 12|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here, N (number of participants analyzed) signify those who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
840521|NCT01336738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 1% or >= 2% Body Weight Gain From Baseline|Overweight or obesity increases the risk for developing diabetes. Participants with >= 1% or >= 2% body weight gain from baseline signifies a higher risk of diabetes.|Week 12|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here, N (number of participants analyzed) signify those who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
840522|NCT01336738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12|Overweight or obesity increases the risk for developing diabetes. The treatment of diabetes has been the recommendation to lose weight. As weight loss progresses and is maintained, an improvement of glycemia may be evidenced by a reduction in HbA1c.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable at specific time point for each treatment arm, respectively.||kilogram (kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840523|NCT01336738|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Less Than (<) 6.5% or <7% Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Levels|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin which is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time. The normal range for the HbA1c test is between 4% and 5.6%. HbA1c levels between 5.7% and 6.4% indicate increased risk of diabetes and levels of 6.5% or higher indicate diabetes.|Week 12|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here, N (number of participants analyzed) signify those who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
840524|NCT01336738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin which is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time. The normal range for the HbA1c test is between 4% and 5.6%. HbA1c levels between 5.7% and 6.4% indicate increased risk of diabetes and levels of 6.5% or higher indicate diabetes.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable at specific time point for each treatment arm, respectively.||percentage of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
840525|NCT01336738|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12||Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable at specific time point for each treatment arm, respectively.||milligram/deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840526|NCT01336738|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 12|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin which is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time. The normal range for the HbA1c test is between 4 percent (%) and 5.6%. HbA1c levels between 5.7% and 6.4% indicate increased risk of diabetes and levels of 6.5% or higher indicate diabetes.|Baseline, Week 12|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable at specific time point for each treatment arm, respectively.||percentage of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
840527|NCT01336764|Primary|Reduced Heart Rate During Driving (Aggregated Over Sessions)|averaged over sessions|during 60-90 min driving intervention over the 3 intervention visits which were approximately one week apart|||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
840528|NCT01336894|Secondary|Pulmonary Function Test Values|Pulmonary function test values include forced expiratory volume 1 (FEV1), carbon monoxide diffusion (DLCO) and forced vital capacity (FVC).|Up to 12 months post-therapy|Study terminated prematurely. Planned analyses was not performed due to the nature of the closure endpoint data is not available.|||||
840529|NCT01336894|Secondary|Disease-free Survival|Disease free survival is defined as the time from randomization until documented disease recurrence or death, whichever occurs first. Patient who are disease free and alive at the time of analysis will be censored at the time of their last follow up.|Up to 5 years post-randomization|Study terminated prematurely. Planned analyses was not performed due to the nature of the closure endpoint data is not available.|||||
840530|NCT01336894|Secondary|Adverse Event Profiles at 12 Months Post-therapy|"Adverse events are described and graded using the terminology and grading categories defined in the NCI's Common Toxicity Criteria (CTCAE), Version 4.0.
Grading: Grade 1=Mild, Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3=Severe, Grade 4=Life-threatening, Grade 5=Death."|12 months post-therapy|Study terminated prematurely. Planned analyses was not performed due to the nature of the closure endpoint data is not available.|||||
840531|NCT01336894|Secondary|Adverse Event Profiles at 3 Months Post-therapy|"Adverse events are described and graded using the terminology and grading categories defined in the NCI's Common Toxicity Criteria (CTCAE), Version 4.0.
Grading: Grade 1=Mild, Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3=Severe, Grade 4=Life-threatening, Grade 5=Death."|3 months post-therapy|All enrolled participants who received protocol interventions and had adverse event reported at months 3 post-therapy.||Participants|||Count of Participants
840532|NCT01336894|Secondary|Adverse Event Profiles at 1 Month Post-therapy|"Adverse events are described and graded using the terminology and grading categories defined in the NCI's Common Toxicity Criteria (CTCAE), Version 4.0.
Grading: Grade 1=Mild, Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3=Severe, Grade 4=Life-threatening, Grade 5=Death."|1 month post-therapy|All enrolled participants who received protocol interventions and had adverse events reported at 1 month post-therapy.||Participants|||Count of Participants
840533|NCT01336894|Secondary|Loco-regional Recurrence-free Survival|Loco-regional recurrence is defined as recurrence within the same lobe or hilum (N1 nodes), or within 2 cm of the staple line or within 2 cm of the PTV after treatment effects such as scarring have subsided.|Up to 5 years post-randomization|Study terminated prematurely. Planned analyses was not performed due to the nature of the closure endpoint data is not available.|||||
840535|NCT01336972|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in 2 Hour Urine Volume After 3 Weeks Tolvaptan Treatment and at 3 Weeks Post Treatment.|The volume of urine from each 2-hour urine collection in the renal function tests at Baseline, Final Treatment, and Post Treatment was recorded. Individual voids in a collection interval were pooled before determination of total volume.|2 hours|All participants who took any trial medication and had a postbaseline renal function test.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840536|NCT01336972|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in 24 Hour Urine Volume After 3 Weeks Tolvaptan Treatment and at 3 Weeks Post Treatment.|A 24-hour split urine sample (approximate times: 0700 to 1700 hours, 1700 hours to bedtime, and bedtime to 0700 hours) was collected beginning the day before the Baseline, Final Treatment, and Post Treatment visits and ending at admission to the renal function ward. Individual voids in a collection interval were pooled and the total volume determined.|24 hours|All participants who took any trial medication and had a postbaseline renal function test.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840537|NCT01336972|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Total Kidney Volume (TKV) After 3 Weeks of Tolvaptan Treatment and at 3 Weeks Post Treatment.|TKV was measured using magnetic resonance imaging.|After 3 weeks of treatment and 3 weeks post treatment|All participants who took any trial medication and had a postbaseline renal function test.||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
840538|NCT01336972|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From 0 to 5 Hours (AUC0-5) After 3 Weeks of Tolvaptan Treatment.|"Blood sampling for determination of tolvaptan concentrations took place at the Baseline, Final Treatment, and the Post Treatment or Early Termination visits.
At the Final Treatment visit (Day 21 [+/- 1 day)]), blood samples were collected prior to the start of infusion of study treatment and at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours postdose.
At the Baseline (Day 0), and Post Treatment visit (3 weeks [+/-3 days] after last dose), a blood sample was collected prior to the start of infusion of study treatment."|Day 0: 0 hour, Day 21: (0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 hours postdose), 3 Weeks after last dose: 0 hour|All participants who took any trial medication and had a postbaseline renal function test.||ng.h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840539|NCT01336972|Secondary|Time to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax) After 3 Weeks of Tolvaptan Treatment.|"Blood sampling for determination of tolvaptan concentrations took place at the Baseline, Final Treatment, and the Post Treatment or Early Termination visits.
At the Final Treatment visit (Day 21 [+/- 1 day)]), blood samples were collected prior to the start of infusion of study treatment and at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours postdose.
At the Baseline (Day 0), and Post Treatment visit (3 weeks [+/-3 days] after last dose), a blood sample was collected prior to the start of infusion of study treatment."|Day 0: 0 hour, Day 21: (0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 hours postdose), 3 Weeks after last dose: 0 hour|All participants who took any trial medication and had a postbaseline renal function test.||hours||Full Range|Median
840540|NCT01336972|Secondary|Time to Peak Plasma Concentration (Cmax) After 3 Weeks of Tolvaptan Treatment.|"Blood sampling for determination of tolvaptan concentrations took place at the Baseline, Final Treatment, and the Post Treatment or Early Termination visits.
At the Final Treatment visit (Day 21 [+/- 1 day)]), blood samples were collected prior to the start of infusion of study treatment and at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours postdose.
At the Baseline (Day 0), and Post Treatment visit (3 weeks [+/-3 days] after last dose), a blood sample was collected prior to the start of infusion of study treatment."|Day 0: 0 hour, Day 21: (0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 hours postdose), 3 Weeks after last dose: 0 hour|All participants who took any trial medication and had a postbaseline renal function test.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840541|NCT01336972|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Free Water Clearance After 3 Weeks of Tolvaptan Treatment and at 3 Weeks Post Treatment|Renal function measurements were performed using the constant infusion method with 125I-iothalamate and 131I-hippuran. A priming solution containing 20 mL infusion solution (0.04 MBq of 125I-iothalamate and 0.03 MBq of 131I-hippuran) was given at 08:00 hours, followed by a constant infusion of 6 to 12 mL/h, with the lowest infusion rates in subjects with impaired renal function, based on previously known serum creatinine concentrations. Plasma concentrations of both tracers were allowed to stabilize during a 1.5-hour equilibration, which was followed by two 2-hour periods (09:30 to 11:30 hours and 11:30 to 13:30 hours) for simultaneous clearances of 125I-iothalamate and 131I-hippuran. Blood was drawn at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours post consumption of water/tolvaptan (08:30 hours).|After 3 weeks of treatment and 3 weeks post treatment|All participants who took any trial medication and had a postbaseline renal function test.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
840542|NCT01336972|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Filtration Fraction (GFR/ERFP) After 3 Weeks of Tolvaptan Treatment and at 3 Weeks Post Treatment.|Renal function measurements were performed using the constant infusion method with 125I-iothalamate and 131I-hippuran. A priming solution containing 20 mL infusion solution (0.04 MBq of 125I-iothalamate and 0.03 MBq of 131I-hippuran) was given at 08:00 hours, followed by a constant infusion of 6 to 12 mL/h, with the lowest infusion rates in subjects with impaired renal function, based on previously known serum creatinine concentrations. Plasma concentrations of both tracers were allowed to stabilize during a 1.5-hour equilibration, which was followed by two 2-hour periods (09:30 to 11:30 hours and 11:30 to 13:30 hours) for simultaneous clearances of 125I-iothalamate and 131I-hippuran. Blood was drawn at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours post consumption of water/tolvaptan (08:30 hours).|After 3 weeks of treatment and 3 weeks post treatment|All participants who took any trial medication and had a postbaseline renal function test.||Ratios||Standard Deviation|Mean
840543|NCT01336972|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Effective Renal Plasma Flow (ERPF) After 3 Weeks of Tolvaptan Treatment and at 3 Weeks Post Treatment.|Renal function measurements were performed using the constant infusion method with 125I-iothalamate and 131I-hippuran. A priming solution containing 20 mL infusion solution (0.04 MBq of 125I-iothalamate and 0.03 MBq of 131I-hippuran) was given at 08:00 hours, followed by a constant infusion of 6 to 12 mL/h, with the lowest infusion rates in subjects with impaired renal function, based on previously known serum creatinine concentrations. Plasma concentrations of both tracers were allowed to stabilize during a 1.5-hour equilibration, which was followed by two 2-hour periods (09:30 to 11:30 hours and 11:30 to 13:30 hours) for simultaneous clearances of 125I-iothalamate and 131I-hippuran. Blood was drawn at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours post consumption of water/tolvaptan (08:30 hours).|After 3 weeks of treatment and 3 weeks post treatment|All participants who took any trial medication and had a postbaseline renal function test.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
840610|NCT01337609|Secondary|Adequate Relief of IBS Pain (AR-IBS)|The AR-IBS is a self-administered measure of the adequacy of the relief of IBS pain.|Adminstered at each of 8 visits (every 10 days), Endpoint is Final Visit|Because the study sponsor chose to discontinue funding for this protocol following a change in leadership, the study was terminated early and this outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
840544|NCT01336972|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (mGFR) After 3 Weeks of Tolvaptan Treatment and at 3 Weeks Post Treatment.|Renal function measurements were performed using the constant infusion method with 125I-iothalamate and 131I-hippuran. A priming solution containing 20 mL infusion solution (0.04 MBq of 125I-iothalamate and 0.03 MBq of 131I-hippuran) was given at 08:00 hours, followed by a constant infusion of 6 to 12 mL/h, with the lowest infusion rates in subjects with impaired renal function, based on previously known serum creatinine concentrations. Plasma concentrations of both tracers were allowed to stabilize during a 1.5-hour equilibration, which was followed by two 2-hour periods (09:30 to 11:30 hours and 11:30 to 13:30 hours) for simultaneous clearances of 125I-iothalamate and 131I-hippuran. Blood was drawn at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours post consumption of water/tolvaptan (08:30 hours). The mGFR was corrected for voiding errors.|After 3 weeks of treatment and 3 weeks post treatment|All participants who took any trial medication and had a postbaseline renal function test.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
840545|NCT01337050|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from the first dose of study treatment to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. PFS calculated as (Months) = (first event date minus randomization or the first dose date plus 1) divided by 30.44). PFS was calculated using the median, and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) and Progressive disease (PD):>=20% (>= 5 mm increase) increase sum of LD of TL taking as a reference smallest sum of LD recorded since treatment start, appearance of >=1 new lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-TL, or appearance of >=1 new lesion.|Baseline, thereafter every 6 weeks up to end of treatment (up to Cycle 30)|Response evaluable population included all enrolled participants with measurable disease who received at least 1 dose of PF-03446962 and had an adequate baseline tumor assessment. Here “N” (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840546|NCT01337050|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Benefit Response (CBR)|Number of participant with clinical benefit response (CBR): CBR was defined as CR, PR, SD >12 weeks, SD<12weeks or PD according to RECIST criteria; Complete response (CR): disappearance of all lesions, Pathological lymph nodes’ reduction in short axis (SA) to <10 mm; Partial response (PR): >=30% decrease in sum of longest dimensions (LD) of Target Lesions (TL) taking reference baseline sum LD; Progressive disease (PD):>=20% (>= 5 mm increase) increase sum of LD of TL taking as a reference smallest sum of LD recorded since treatment start, appearance of >=1 new lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-TL, or appearance of >=1 new lesion; Stable disease (SD): insufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR, insufficient increase to qualify for PD taking reference smallest sum of the LD since treatment start.|Baseline, thereafter every 6 weeks up to end of treatment (up to Cycle 30)|Response evaluable population included all enrolled participants with measurable disease who received at least 1 dose of PF-03446962 and had an adequate baseline tumor assessment. Here “N” (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
840547|NCT01337050|Secondary|Number of Participants With Best Overall Response (BOR)|Number of participants with best overall response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST); Complete response (CR): disappearance of all lesions, Pathological lymph nodes’ reduction in short axis (SA) to less than (<)10 millimeter (mm); Partial response (PR): greater than equal to (>=) 30% decrease in sum of longest dimensions (LD) of Target Lesions (TL) taking reference baseline sum LD; Progressive disease (PD):>=20% (>= 5 mm increase) increase sum of LD of TL taking as a reference smallest sum of LD recorded since treatment start, appearance of >=1 new lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-TL, or appearance of >=1 new lesion; Stable disease (SD): insufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR, insufficient increase to qualify for PD taking reference smallest sum of the LD since treatment start. Confirmed response=that persist at least 4 weeks after initial documentation.|Baseline, thereafter every 6 weeks up to end of treatment (up to Cycle 30)|Response evaluable population included all enrolled participants with measurable disease who received at least 1 dose of PF-03446962 and had an adequate baseline tumor assessment. Here “N” (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||participants|||Number
840548|NCT01337050|Secondary|Number of Participants With Human Anti-Human Antibody (HAHA)|HAHA analysis was performed using validated, sensitive and specific chemiluminescence enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methodology.|Baseline, Post-dose (Day 1 of every Cycle up to 28 days after last dose) up to Cycle 30|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
840549|NCT01337050|Secondary|Soluble Proteins Level|Soluble proteins related to Activin Receptor-Like Kinase 1 (ALK-1) signaling and angiogenesis signaling including Vascular adhesion molecule (VAM), Monocyte chemotactic protein 1 (MCP-1), Angiopoietin 2, Tear intercellular adhesive molecule 1 (ICAM-1), Soluble intracellular adhesion molecule 1 (SIAM-1), Soluble vascular adhesion molecule 1 (SVAM-1), Vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A), Vascular endothelial growth factor C (VEGF-C), Vascular endothelial growth factor D (VEGF-D), Soluble vascular endothelial growth factor- Receptor 1 (REC 1) (SVEGF-REC 1), Soluble vascular endothelial growth factor- REC 2 (SVEGF-REC 2), Soluble vascular endothelial growth factor- REC 3 (SVEGF-REC 3), Bone morphogenetic protein-9 (BMP-9), Endoglin, Transforming growth factor- beta 1 (TGF- Beta 1), Placental growth factor (PGF) was evaluated.|Baseline, Day 1, 0 hour (H), 6 H Cycle 1 Day 1, Day 22 of Cycle 1, Day 1 Cycle 2, Day 1 Cycle 3 and end of treatment (up to cycle 30)|Biomarker analysis population included all enrolled and treated participants with baseline and on-treatment biomarker sample analyzed. Here “n”= participants who were evaluable for specified biomarker at given time point for each arm, respectively.||picogram per milliliter (pg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840550|NCT01337050|Secondary|Plasma Decay Half-Life (t1/2)|Plasma decay half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|0 (pre dose), 0.5, 1 (right before the end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 5, 8, 24 hours after the start of infusion of the first dose on Day 1; Day 3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 22 of Cycle 1|PK parameter analysis population included all participants treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here “N” (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
840611|NCT01337609|Secondary|Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|The VAS is a self-administered measure of abdominal pain, discomfort, and bloating. The change in total score from baseline to study endpoint will be assessed.|Administered at each of 8 study visits (every 10 days), Endpoint is Final Visit|Because the study sponsor chose to discontinue funding for this protocol following a change in leadership, the study was terminated early and this outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
840551|NCT01337050|Secondary|Volume of Distribution (Vd)|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug.|0 (pre dose), 0.5, 1 (right before the end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 5, 8, 24 hours after the start of infusion of the first dose on Day 1; Day 3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 22 of Cycle 1|PK parameter analysis population included all participants treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here “N” (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||liter (L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
840552|NCT01337050|Secondary|Systemic Clearance (CL)|CL is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body.|0 (pre dose), 0.5, 1 (right before the end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 5, 8, 24 hours after the start of infusion of the first dose on Day 1; Day 3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 22 of Cycle 1|PK parameter analysis population included all participants treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here “N” (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||liter per hour (L/hr)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
840553|NCT01337050|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUClast)|Area under the plasma concentration time-curve from zero to the last measured concentration (AUClast) for drug.|0 (pre dose), 0.5, 1 (right before the end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 5, 8, 24 hours after the start of infusion of the first dose on Day 1; Day 3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 22 of Cycle 1|PK parameter analysis population included all participants treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
840554|NCT01337050|Secondary|Area Under the Curve From Time Zero to 28 Days [AUC (0-28)]|AUC (0-28)= Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero (pre-dose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (0-28).|0 (pre dose), 0.5, 1 (right before the end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 5, 8, 24 hours after the start of infusion of the first dose on Day 1; Day 3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 22 of Cycle 1|PK parameter analysis population included all participants treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here “N” (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||nanogram*hour per milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
840555|NCT01337050|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||0 (pre dose), 0.5, 1 (right before the end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 5, 8, 24 hours after the start of infusion of the first dose on Day 1; Day 3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 22 of Cycle 1|PK parameter analysis population included all participants treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||hours (hr)||Full Range|Median
840556|NCT01337050|Secondary|Minimum Observed Serum Trough Concentration (Cmin)||0 (pre dose), 0.5, 1 (right before the end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 5, 8, 24 hours after the start of infusion of the first dose on Day 1; Day 3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 22 of Cycle 1|PK parameter analysis population included all participants treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest. Here “N” (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
840557|NCT01337050|Secondary|Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmax)||0 (pre dose), 0.5, 1 (right before the end of infusion), 1.5, 2, 5, 8, 24 hours after the start of infusion of the first dose on Day 1; Day 3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 22 of Cycle 1|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis population included all participants treated who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of interest.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
840558|NCT01337050|Secondary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Abnormalities|Laboratory abnormalities were segregated into hematology, chemistry, coagulation and urinalysis test. It had been graded according to National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) into Grade 1 (mild), Grade 2 (moderate), Grade 3 (severe) and Grade 4 (Life-threatening). Participants with abnormality of any of these grades are reported.|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
840559|NCT01337050|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Related Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. AEs included both SAEs and non-serious adverse events (non-SAEs). Relatedness to study drug was assessed based on investigator's discretion.|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
840560|NCT01337050|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) Based on Severity|Adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. AE was assessed according to severity; Grade 1 (Mild Adverse Event), Grade 2 (Moderate Adverse Event), Grade 3 (Severe Adverse Event), Grade 4 (Life- Threatening or Disabling Adverse Event), Grade 5 (Death Related to Adverse Event).|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
840561|NCT01337050|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pre-treatment state. AEs included both SAEs and non-serious adverse events (non-SAEs).|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
840562|NCT01337050|Primary|Recommended Phase-2 Dose (RP2D)|RP2D was determined by a comprehensive assessments based on all the safety data, efficacy data, pharmacokinetics profile and biomarker data using blood and tumor samples.|Baseline up to 28 days after last dose of study medication|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||mg/kg|||Number
840563|NCT01337050|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)|The MTD was defined as the highest dose of PF-03446962 associated with the occurrence of Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) in at most 1 of 6 participants with the next higher dose having at least 2/3 or 2/6 participants experiencing DLTs (that is (i.e.) Maximum Administrated Dose). DLT is defined if the participants meets the following criteria during the first 6 weeks of treatment, possibly attributable to PF-03446962. Neutropenia grade 4 (less than [< ])500/cubic millimeter [mm^ 3]) lasting for greater than equal to (>=) 8 days; Febrile Neutropenia >= Grade 3; Neutropenic Infection >= Grade 3; Grade 4 thrombocytopenia (<25,000/mm^3); Grade 3 thrombocytopenia (<50,000/mm^3) with active bleeding; Grade 3 or higher non-hematological toxicity.|Baseline up to Week 6|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here “N” (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this measure.||mg/kg|||Number
840564|NCT01337076|Primary|CNC Monosyllabic Word Score - Treated Ear|"The primary study endpoint was to test whether a statistically significant difference could be obtained between the mean, preoperative Consonant Nucleus Consonant (CNC) monosyllabic word score in the ear to be implanted compared to the postoperative CNC word score in the cochlear implant alone condition at 6 months postimplant activation for candidates who currently perform outside the approved Nucleus® cochlear implant candidacy requirements.
CNC Word Test is a validated test of open-set word recognition. The test consists of 10 lists with 50 monosyllabic words in each list. Subject responses are scored for both words and phonemes correct in the correct sequence. Subjects will be tested using a configuration of speech at 0º azimuth in quiet."|Six months|||percent correct||Full Range|Mean
840565|NCT01337115|Primary|VAS Results - Pain Scores Measured in mm (0-100)|"VAS pain scores are measured by blinded investigators 24h after surgery .
VAS scale:
0 - no pain 100 - worst possible pain"|24h after surgery|In the CFNB group 2 patients did not complete the protocol. Analysis was made in an ITT manner and Last Observational Carried Forward (LOCF) was the imputation technique used. In the SNB group, all 25 patients completed the protocol||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840566|NCT01337115|Primary|VAS Results - Pain Measured in mm (0-100)|"VAS pain scores are measured by blinded investigators 12h after surgery .
VAS scale:
0 - no pain 100 - worst possible pain"|12h after surgery|All 25 patients in each arm completed the protocol. Analysis was made in an ITT manner.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840567|NCT01337115|Secondary|Satisfaction With Anesthesia Technique in Each Arm of the Study|"Satisfaction with the anesthesia technique using a categorical scale with three levels:
Bad Reasonable Good/Very Good A Fisher's Exact test is made to asses any differences in the distribution of patients in each arm to each level of the categorical scale"|1 month after surgery|Analysis was performed on Participants available for telephone contact one month after surgery and was made per protocol.||participants|||Number
840568|NCT01337115|Primary|Visual Analogue Scores (VAS) - Pain Scores Measured in mm (0-100)|Pain scores measured by Visual Analogue Score (VAS) scale at 15-30min after Post anesthesia care unit (PACU) arrival VAS is a 100mm scale to measure pain. 0mm - no pain 100mm - worst possible pain|15-30 min after arrival on post anesthesia care unit (PACU)|Participants were analyzed in an Intention to treat (ITT) manner. All randomized subjects (25 in each arm) completed the protocol so all were included for analysis as planned.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840569|NCT01337167|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pyrexia, Febrile Convulsion, or Convulsion|The percentage of participants with one or more adverse events (AE), serious adverse events (SAE), and vaccine-related SAE (pyrexia, febrile convulsion, and convulsion) is reported.|Up to 181 days after any infant vaccination (up to 12 months)|Participants included in this analyses were All Subjects as Treated population and were defined as all vaccinated participants with safety follow up.||Percentage of participants|||Number
840570|NCT01337167|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pyrexia, Febrile Convulsion, or Convulsion|The percentage of participants with one or more adverse events (AE), serious adverse events (SAE), and vaccine-related SAE (pyrexia, febrile convulsion, and convulsion) is reported.|Up to 15 days after any infant vaccination (up to 6 months)|Participants included in this analyses were All Subjects as Treated population and were defined as all vaccinated participants with safety follow up.||Percentage of participants|||Number
840571|NCT01337167|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Elevated Temperature by Severity|Maximum temperature (all routes) was based on actual temperatures recorded with no adjustments to the measurement route. Maximum temperature (rectal) was required of all participants if the reading by another method was >=38.0°C.|Up to 5 days after any infant vaccination (up to 6 months)|Participants included in this analyses were All Subjects as Treated population and were defined as all vaccinated participants with safety follow up and temperature data.||Percentage of participants|||Number
840572|NCT01337167|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting One or More Solicited Adverse Events Related to Study Drug|Solicited systemic adverse events: pyrexia, vomiting, crying abnormal, somnolence, decreased appetite, and irritability. Adverse events deemed related to study drug were those judged to be definitely related, probably related, or possibly related by the investigator.|Up to 5 days after each infant vaccination (up to 6 months)|Participants included in this analyses were All Subjects as Treated population and were defined as all vaccinated participants with safety follow up.||Percentage of participants|||Number
840573|NCT01337167|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting One or More Solicited Adverse Events Related to Study Drug|Solicited systemic adverse events: pyrexia, vomiting, crying abnormal, somnolence, decreased appetite, and irritability. Adverse events deemed related to study drug were those judged to be definitely related, probably related, or possibly related by the investigator.|Up to 5 days after any infant vaccination (up to 6 months)|Participants included in this analyses were All Subjects as Treated population and were defined as all vaccinated participants with safety follow up.||Percentage of participants|||Number
840585|NCT01337167|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Fimbriae|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis fimbriae.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840684|NCT01332188|Secondary|Tearing at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Tearing was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of tearing score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840574|NCT01337167|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection-site or Systemic Reactions|Solicited injection-site reactions: Pain, Erythema, and Swelling. Solicited systemic reactions: Pyrexia, Vomiting, Crying abnormal, Somnolence, Decreased appetite, and Irritability. Grade 3 Solicited injection site reaction: Pain, Cries when injected limb is moved or the movement of the injected limb is reduced; Erythema and Swelling, >5 cm. Grade 3 Solicited systemic reactions: Pyrexia, >=39.5°C (>=103.1°F) rectal; Vomiting, >=6 episodes per 24 hours or requiring parenteral hydration; Crying abnormal, >3 hours; Somnolence, Sleeping most of the time or difficult to wake up; Decreased appetite, Refuses >=3 feeds or refuses most feeds; Irritability, Inconsolable.|Up to 5 days after any infant vaccination (up to 6 months)|Participants included in these analyses were All Subjects as Treated population and were defined as all vaccinated participants with safety follow up.||Percentage of participants|||Number
840575|NCT01337167|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Antibodies to Rotavirus|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent assay for IgA antibodies to rotavirus.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840576|NCT01337167|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Polyribosylribitol Phosphate Antigen|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a radioimmunoassay for antibodies to Haemophilus influenza type b capsular polysaccharide polyribosylribitol phosphate.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840577|NCT01337167|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Fimbriae|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis fimbriae.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840578|NCT01337167|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Pertactin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis pertactin.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840579|NCT01337167|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Filamentous Hemagglutinin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis filamentous hemagglutinin.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840580|NCT01337167|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis toxin.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840581|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Fimbriae|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis fimbriae. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4 times the lower limit of quantitation (4X LLOQ) then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840582|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Pertactin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis pertactin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4 times the lower limit of quantitation (4X LLOQ) then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840583|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Filamentous Hemagglutinin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis filamentous hemagglutinin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4 times the lower limit of quantitation (4X LLOQ) then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840584|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis toxin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4 times the lower limit of quantitation (4X LLOQ) then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840586|NCT01337167|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Pertactin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis pertactin.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840587|NCT01337167|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Filamentous Hemagglutinin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis filamentous hemagglutinin.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840588|NCT01337167|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis toxin. The unit of measure is ELISA units/mL (EU/mL).|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840589|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Poliovirus Type 3|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to Poliovirus Type 3. Response is defined as a titer >=8.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840590|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Poliovirus Type 2|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to Poliovirus Type 2. Response is defined as a titer >=8.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840591|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Poliovirus Type 1|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to Poliovirus Type 1. Response is defined as a titer >=8.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840592|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Fimbriae|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis fimbriae. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840593|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Pertactin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis pertactin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840594|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Filamentous Hemagglutinin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis filamentous hemagglutinin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840595|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) for antibodies to pertussis toxin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4 times the lower limit of quantitation (4X LLOQ) then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840596|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Tetanus Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for anti-tetanus antibodies. Response was defined as a titer >=0.1 IU/mL.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840597|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Diphtheria Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to diphtheria toxin. Response was defined as a titer >=0.1 International unit (IU)/mL.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840598|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Hepatitis B Surface Antigen|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an enhanced chemiluminescence assay for antibodies to Hepatitis B Surface Antigen. Response was defined as a titer >=10 milli International units (mIU)/mL.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840599|NCT01337167|Primary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Polyribosylribitol Phosphate Antigen|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a radioimmunoassay for antibodies to Haemophilus influenza type b capsular polysaccharide polyribosylribitol phosphate. Response was evaluated for titer >=0.15 μg/mL and >=1.0 μg/mL.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840600|NCT01337297|Secondary|State of Depression|It will be applied Hamilton Scale for Depression, a structured multiple choice questionnaire used to assess the severity of the symptoms of depression. It will be applied with cognitive tests.|Before the first experimental session, in the middle of the treatment and after the last experimental session.||||||
840601|NCT01337297|Secondary|Cognitive Tests|Cognitive tests are comprised by frontal assessment battery (FAB), Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE), verbal n-back task, visuospatial n-back task, go/no-go test.|Before the first experimental session, in the middle of the protocol and two days after the last experimental session||||||
840602|NCT01337297|Secondary|Event Related Potentials|Event Related Potentials (ERPs) elicited by random presentation of three related images and three non-related images to crack use every Monday and Friday over the two-weeks period of active-tDCS or sham-tDCS.|twice a week over two consecutive weeks during the treatment||||||
840603|NCT01337297|Secondary|Intensity of the Urge to the Use of Crack-cocaine|The intensity of craving will be examined by a short scale, the Brief Cocaine Craving Questionnaire.|before and after ERP in two weekly sessions over two weeks||||||
840604|NCT01337297|Primary|Abstinence|abstinence to the use of crack-cocaine up to 3 months after the completion of two-weeks of treatment sessions with active-tDCS or sham-tDCS.|Two days after the end of tDCS treatment (one session every other day, 5 sessions), that is, on the 12nd day from the beginning.|||percentage of participants|||Number
840605|NCT01337336|Secondary|Number of the Indicated COPD-related Exacerbations|The number of COPD-related exacerbations was identified during the follow-up period. Five types of COPD-related exacerbations were defined: -COPD-related hospitalization, ER visit, physician visit with a prescription (Rx) for oral corticosteroid or antibiotic within 5 days of the visit, combined occurrence of COPD-related hospitalization/ER visit, or combined occurrence of any COPD-related exacerbation. The index date is defined as the date of first chronologically occurring COPD maintenance medication of interest during an identification period spanning January 1, 2004 to June 30, 2008.|Maximum of 1 year after index date (January 1, 2004 through June 30, 2009)|Managed care enrollees (aged >=40 years) diagnosed with COPD (ICD code 491.xx, 492.xx, and 496.xx) and depression/anxiety before or within 60 days of the date of first prescription for a maintenance medication for COPD (index date).||number of exacerbations||Standard Deviation|Mean
840606|NCT01337336|Secondary|Mean Annual COPD-related Costs Per Participant|Cost categories included medical, pharmacy, and total (calculated as the sum of medical and pharmacy). COPD-related medical costs were computed using claims with a primary diagnosis of COPD, and COPD-related pharmacy costs were computed using the paid amounts of pharmacy claims for prescription medication used for COPD.The index date is defined as the date of first chronologically occurring COPD maintenance medication of interest during an identification period spanning January 1, 2004 to June 30, 2008.|Maximum of 1 year after index date (January 1, 2004 through June 30, 2009)|Managed care enrollees (aged >=40 years) diagnosed with COPD (ICD code 491.xx, 492.xx, and 496.xx) and depression/anxiety before or within 60 days of the date of first prescription for a maintenance medication for COPD (index date).||United States (US) dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840607|NCT01337336|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated COPD-related Exacerbations|The number of participants with a COPD-related exacerbation was identified during the follow-up period. Four types of COPD-related exacerbations were defined: COPD-related hospitalization, ER visit, physician visit with a prescription (Rx) for oral corticosteroid or antibiotic within 5 days of the visit, or combined occurrence of COPD-related hospitalization/ER visit. The index date is defined as the date of first chronologically occurring COPD maintenance medication of interest during an identification period spanning January 1, 2004 to June 30, 2008.|Maximum of 1 year after index date (January 1, 2004 through June 30, 2009)|Managed care enrollees (aged >=40 years) diagnosed with COPD (ICD code 491.xx, 492.xx, and 496.xx) and depression/anxiety before or within 60 days of the date of first prescription for a maintanance medication for COPD (index date).||participants|||Number
840608|NCT01337336|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)-Related Exacerbation|The number of participants with any of the following COPD-related exacerbations during the follow-up period was computed: COPD-related hospitalization, emergency room (ER) visit, or physician visit with a prescription (Rx) for oral corticosteroid (OCS) or antibiotic within 5 days of the visit. The index date is defined as the date of first chronologically occurring COPD maintenance medication of interest during an identification period spanning January 1, 2004 to June 30, 2008.|Maximum of 1 year after index date (January 1, 2004 to June 30, 2009)|Managed care enrollees (aged >=40 years) diagnosed with COPD (ICD code 491.xx, 492.xx, and 496.xx) and depression/anxiety before or within 60 days of the date of first prescription for a maintenance medication for COPD (index date).||participants|||Number
840609|NCT01337609|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) - IBS Symptoms|The PGI-C is a self-administered measure of the degree of improvement in IBS symptoms compared to the first study visit. Degree of improvement in IBS symptoms from first to final visit will be assessed using this scale.|Administered at each of 8 visits (every 10 days), Endpoint is Final Visit|Because the study sponsor chose to discontinue funding for this protocol following a change in leadership, the study was terminated early and this outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
840612|NCT01337609|Secondary|IBS Severity Scoring System (IBS-SSS)|The IBS-SSS is a validated instrument used to assess common IBS symptoms over the past 10 days including abdominal pain, distention, bowel habit, and global function. The IBS-SSS will be used to assess the absolute change in specific IBS symptoms at endpoint, namely the bloating/distension score.|Adminsitered at each of 8 study visits (every 10 days), Endpoint is Final Visit|Because the study sponsor chose to discontinue funding for this protocol following a change in leadership, the study was terminated early and this outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
840613|NCT01337609|Primary|Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self Report (QIDS-SR)|The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self Report (QIDS-SR)is a self report measure that addresses depressive symptoms. MDD responders will be defined as those exhibiting a 50% decrease in the QIDS SR at study endpoint.|Administered at each of 8 study visits (every 10 days), Endpoint is Final Visit|Because the study sponsor chose to discontinue funding for this protocol following a change in leadership, the study was terminated early and this outcome measure was not analyzed.|||||
840614|NCT01337635|Secondary|Time to Restart Topical Steroids|The time to restart topical steroids and the SCORAD score at time of restart will be secondary study endpoints.|2 years||||||
840615|NCT01337635|Primary|Atopic Dermatitis Severity at the Completion of Treatment|The SCORAD (Severity Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis) is a clinical measurement tool assessing the severity of atopic dermatitis. The range of SCORAD measurements is 0 (best possible outcome) - 103 (worst possible outcome). The primary study endpoint will be the SCORAD score at the end of the 6 week treatment period.|6 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
840616|NCT01337674|Secondary|Steady-state Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC0-24hr) for MK-4618|Blood samples were collected on Day 7 predose and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours postdose for the determination of plasma MK-4618 concentration. The hypothesis for this outcome is that the steady-state AUC0-24hr for MK-4618 is >=0.47 uM*hr.|Predose and up to 24 hours postdose on Day 7|The Per Protocol population included participants who complied with the protocol sufficiently to ensure that the data will likely exhibit the effects of treatment, according to the underlying scientific model.||uM*hr||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840617|NCT01337674|Primary|Maximum Change From Baseline in Semi-recumbent and Standing Systolic Blood Pressure: Panel B|Semi-recumbent and standing systolic blood pressure was measured predose and at intervals up to 24 hours postdose on Day 1 and Day 7. The baseline value is the average of measurements taken in the hour before dosing. Participants were to rest quietly in a semi-recumbent position for at least 10 minutes before each semi-recumbent measurement.|Baseline (predose) and up to 24 hours postdose on Day 1 and Day 7|The All Subjects as Treated population included all participants who received >=1 dose of study drug.||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840618|NCT01337674|Primary|Maximum Change From Baseline in Semi-recumbent and Standing Systolic Blood Pressure: Panel A|Semi-recumbent and standing systolic blood pressure was measured predose and at intervals up to 24 hours postdose on Day 1 and Day 7. The baseline value is the average of measurements taken in the hour before dosing. Participants were to rest quietly in a semi-recumbent position for at least 10 minutes before each semi-recumbent measurement.|Baseline (predose) and up to 24 hours postdose on Day 1 and Day 7|The All Subjects as Treated population included all participants who received >=1 dose of study drug.||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840619|NCT01337674|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Clinical or Laboratory Adverse Experience|An adverse experience was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the sponsor’s product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the sponsor’s product is also an adverse experience. The percentage of participants with a clinical or laboratory adverse experience was recorded.|Up to 42 days|The All Subjects as Treated population included all participants who received >=1 dose of study drug||Percentage of participants|||Number
840620|NCT01337739|Secondary|Time to Discharge|Time to discharge from the Post Anesthesia Care Unit or home or to hospital room.|24 Hours|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
840621|NCT01337739|Primary|The Primary Outcome Will be the Difference in Intraoperative Opioid (Fentanyl) Administration Between Patients Receiving Dexmedetomidine and Those Receiving Propofol.|The primary outcome will be the difference in intraoperative opioid (fentanyl) administration between patients receiving dexmedetomidine and those receiving propofol. As described by mean and standard deviation.|Interoperative period|||Total Morphine Equivalents mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840622|NCT01337960|Secondary|Anticipatory Postural Adjustments|During gait initiation two force plates measure ground reaction forces and impulses for the postural shifts made in preparation to begin walking.|Baseline, Post-test training at 6 weeks; Retention at 12 weeks (note TMO control has no retention period)|These data were not collected due to technical issues.|||||
840623|NCT01337960|Secondary|Dynamic Gait Index|The Dynamic Gait Index (DGI) assesses individual’s ability to modify balance while walking in the presence of external demands. Performed with a marked distance of 20 feet . The DGI can be performed with or without an assistive device. Scores are based on a 4-point scale: 3 = No gait dysfunction; 2 = Minimal impairment; 1 = Moderate impairment; 0 = Severe impairment. The highest possible score is 24 points. asks include: Steady state walking; Walking with changing speeds; Walking with head turns both horizontally and vertically; Walking while stepping over and around obstacles; Pivoting while walking; Stair climbing.|Baseline, Post-test training at 6 weeks; Retention at 12 weeks (note TMO control has no retention period)|Nonparametric Fisher's exact test was applied to compare between group changes at retention.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840624|NCT01337960|Secondary|Berg Balance Scale|14-item scale to assess balance function and fall risk, 56 is top score possible (0-56); higher scores indicate higher balance function. Items assess static and dynamic activities of varying difficulty; they are performed to evaluate global level of balance function. Item-level scores range from 0-4, determined by ability to perform the assessed activity; item scores are summed to create the overall score. Subscales are not analyzed.|Baseline, Post-test training at 6 weeks; Retention at 12 weeks (note TMO control has no retention period)|Nonparametric Fisher's exact test was applied to compare between group changes at retention.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
840685|NCT01332188|Secondary|Tearing at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Tearing was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of tearing score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840625|NCT01337960|Secondary|Gait Kinetics|Anterior-posterior and medio-lateral ground reaction forces during walking to assess propulsive impulses from paretic and nonparetic sides.|Baseline, Post-test training at 6 weeks; Retention at 12 weeks (note TMO control has no retention period)|Nonparametric Fisher's exact test was applied to compare between group changes at retention.||Newton-seconds||Standard Error|Mean
840626|NCT01337960|Primary|Self-selected Floor Walking Velocity Change From Baseline to Post-training and Retention|Velocity and associated spatio-temporal gait parameters from self-selected most comfortable and fastest floor walking over 10m.|Baseline, Post-test training at 6 weeks; Retention at 12 weeks (note TMO control has no retention period)|Nonparametric Fisher's exact test was applied to compare between group changes at retention.||cm/sec||Standard Error|Mean
840627|NCT01338012|Primary|Number of Study Participants Enrolled and Treated Prior to Study Termination|Number of study participants that were enrolled and treated in this trial following completion of study P-11 and prior to study termination.|Study duration: date of first subject registration Dec 2011 and date of last subject visit April 2015|This study was terminated early due to administrative reasons. Only eight subjects out of the ninety subjects planned were enrolled and treated. Given the small number of patients enrolled, results should be interpreted with caution.||Participants|||Count of Participants
840628|NCT01338025|Secondary|Number of Participants Non-adherent as Measured by 3-day Recall|Number of participants reporting a missed medication dose in the past 3 days.|28 Weeks|All eligible participants with adherence data available at week 28.||participants|||Number
840629|NCT01338025|Secondary|Change in HIV-1 RNA Levels|Change in HIV-1 RNA levels from Entry to Week 28|28 Weeks|All eligible participants with HIV-1 RNA results available at entry and at week 28.||copies/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840630|NCT01338025|Secondary|Change in CD4+ T Cell Count|Change in CD4+ T cell count from entry to Week 28 (CD4+ at entry - CD4+ at Week 28).|Entry to week 28|All eligible participants with CD4+ cell count results available at entry and at week 28.||CD4+ T cell count/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
840631|NCT01338025|Primary|Number of Participants With Immunologic Deterioration|"Immunologic deterioration was declared for a participant if any one of the following conditions is observed within the first 28 weeks:
greater than or equal to 30% decline in absolute CD4+ T cell count from entry, or
development of CDC class C events.
Results report number of participants with immunologic deterioration at week 28 calculated."|From entry to week 28|All eligible participants who entered the study were included in analyses. One participant on Arm A did not meet entry eligibility criteria; was taken off study after the entry visit, and is therefore excluded from all analyses.||participants|||Number
840632|NCT01338493|Secondary|Relief of Back Pain at 6 Months Versus Baseline Using the Back Pain Intensity Score Assessed on a 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)|"Back Pain was documented in a Visual Analogue Scale where the patients marked the location on the 10-centimeter line corresponding to the amount of pain they experienced.
0 = no pain, 10 = worst possible pain"|6 months|Reduction of disability was calculated for patients having available data at both baseline and 6 months.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840633|NCT01338493|Primary|Reduction of Disability at 6 Months Versus Baseline Using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)|The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) derives from the Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire, it is used to measure disability for low back pain. The index is scored from 0 to 100; 0 meaning 'no disability' and 100 meaning 'maximum disability'.|6 months|Reduction of disability was calculated for patients having available data at both baseline and 6 months.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840634|NCT01332071|Primary|Cmax of Metformin Hydrochloride|Cmax is defined as the maximum or “peak” concentration of a drug observed after its administration. Cmax is one of the parameters of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the total amount of drug absorbed.|Day 1 (day that blood collection started) and Day 2 (Period 1) and Days 8 and 9 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
840635|NCT01332071|Primary|AUC0-infinity of Metformin Hydrochloride|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC0-infinity is calculated from time 0 (prior to administration of medication) to infinity (the time of complete elimination of the drug). The AUC is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption.|Day 1 (day that blood collection started) and Day 2 (Period 1) and Days 8 and 9 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng.h/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
840636|NCT01332071|Primary|AUC0-t of Metformin Hydrochloride|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC0-t is calculated from time 0 (prior to administration of medication) to time t (the time of the last quantifiable concentration). The AUC is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption. ng, nanograms; ml, milliliter.|Day 1 (day that blood collection started) and Day 2 (Period 1) and Days 8 and 9 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng.h/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
840637|NCT01332071|Primary|AUC0-infinity of Rosiglitazone Maleate|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC0-infinity is calculated from time 0 (prior to administration of medication) to infinity (the time of complete elimination of the drug). The AUC is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption.|Day 1 (day that blood collection started) and Day 2 (Period 1) and Days 8 and 9 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng.h/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
840638|NCT01332071|Primary|Cmax of Rosiglitazone Maleate|Cmax is defined as the maximum or “peak” concentration of a drug observed after its administration. Cmax is one of the parameters of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the total amount of drug absorbed.|Day 1 (day that blood collection started) and Day 2 (Period 1) and Days 8 and 9 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
840639|NCT01332071|Primary|AUC0-t of Rosiglitazone Maleate|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC 0-t is calculated from time 0 (prior to administration of medication) to time t (the time of the last quantifiable concentration). The AUC is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption. ng, nanograms; ml, milliliter.|Day 1 (day that blood collection started) and Day 2 (Period 1) and Days 8 and 9 (Period 2)|Participants who completed the study||ng per hour per ml (ng.h/ml)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840640|NCT01332123|Secondary|Heart Rate Change|Subjects were wearing a wireless heart rate monitor. The respective readings were noted and assessed during and immediately following the trials to estimate individual exertion rates. Changes in heart rate between resting and exertion across the sample were investigated to be able to interpret the primary outcome measures and to discuss limitations of the protocol. Unequal exertion rates within the sample would cause uneven trends biomechanical changes that are related to exertion.|1 hour|||beats/minute||Full Range|Mean
840641|NCT01332123|Primary|Overall Asymmetry Index|"Gait data was continuously recorded and was post processed to determine symmetry between left and right legs. Symmetry was computed by dividing the difference between legs by the average of both legs. 0 marks perfect symmetry and greater values higher asymmetry. There is no maximum limit.
The overall asymmetry index was calculated as the mean of the following: max knee flex, dorsi flexion, plantar flexion (1st and 2nd peak), knee moment, dorsi-flexion moment, plantar-flexion moment, times of max in % of the gait cycle, Stance phase % of gait cycle and step length.
The kinematics asymmetry index was calculated as the mean of the following: maximal knee flex, dorsi flexion, plantar flexion (1st and 2nd peak), the times of max in % of the gait cycle, Stance phase % of gait cycle and step length.
The kinetics asymmetry index was calculated as the mean of the following variables: knee moment, dorsi-flexion moment, plantar-flexion moment, the times of max in % of the gait cycle."|1 hour|Two of the recruited participants were not included in the analysis, as they had bilateral amputations. Bilateral amputation was not posted as an exclusion criteria initially, but posted unanticipated limitations during data collection and analysis.||unit-less index (0 = perfect symmetry)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840642|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HADS Depression Total Score at Endpoint|The HADS was a self-administered questionnaire that consisted of 2 subscales, 1 measuring anxiety (HADS-A Scale) and the other measuring depression (HADS-D Scale). Each subscale was comprised of 7 items; participants assessed how each item applied to them on a scale of 0 (no presence of anxiety or depression) to 3 (severe feeling of anxiety or depression). Subscores from HADS-A (Anxiety) and HADS-D (Depression) were not to be combined. The interpretation of each HADS subscales was as follows: 0-7 normal, 8-10 mild, 11-14 moderate and 15-21 severe.|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840643|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HADS Anxiety Total Score at Endpoint|The HADS was a self-administered questionnaire that consisted of 2 subscales, 1 measuring anxiety (HADS-A Scale) and the other measuring depression (HADS-D Scale). Each subscale was comprised of 7 items; participants assessed how each item applied to them on a scale of 0 (no presence of anxiety or depression) to 3 (severe feeling of anxiety or depression). Subscores from HADS-A (Anxiety) and HADS-D (Depression) were not to be combined. The interpretation of each HADS subscales was as follows: 0-7 normal, 8-10 mild, 11-14 moderate and 15-21 severe.|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840644|NCT01332149|Secondary|Baseline Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Scores|The HADS was a self-administered questionnaire that consisted of 2 subscales, 1 measuring anxiety (HADS-A Scale) and the other measuring depression (HADS-D Scale). Each subscale comprised of 7 items; participants assessed how each item applied to them on a scale of 0 (no presence of anxiety or depression) to 3 (severe feeling of anxiety or depression). Subscores from HADS-A (Anxiety) and HADS-D (Depression) were not to be combined. The interpretation of each HADS subscales was as follows: 0-7 normal, 8-10 mild, 11-14 moderate and 15-21 severe.|Baseline|All participants in the FAS population, consisting of all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840645|NCT01332149|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Score at Endpoint|The PGIC was a participant-rated global measure that provided a clinically relevant and easy to interpret account of a participant’s perception of the clinical importance of their own improvement or worsening during their involvement in a clinical study. Participants rated their overall improvement on a 7-point scale where scores ranged from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse).|Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840646|NCT01332149|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) at Endpoint|The CGIC was a clinician-rated global measure that provided a clinically relevant and easy to interpret account of a clinician’s perception of the clinical importance of the participant's improvement or worsening during their involvement in a clinical study. Clinicians rated the participant's overall improvement on a 7-point scale where scores ranged from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse).|Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840647|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MOS-Sleep Scale, Sleep Problems Index Score at Endpoint|The MOS-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assessed key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yielded 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. The total score ranged from 0 to 100. The sleep problems index subscale score also ranged from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating fewer sleep problems.|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840656|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PPI Scale From the SF-MPQ at Endpoint|The PPI was part of the SF-MPQ scale and measured the participant's present pain intensity on a 6-point scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 5 (excruciating).|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840648|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MOS-Sleep Scale, Somnolence Score at Endpoint|The MOS-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assessed key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yielded 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. The total score ranged from 0 to 100. The somnolence subscale score also ranged from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating less somnolence.|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840649|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MOS-Sleep Scale, Sleep Adequacy Score at Endpoint|The MOS-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assessed key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yielded 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. The total score ranged from 0 to 100. The sleep adequacy subscale also ranged from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater sleep adequacy.|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840650|NCT01332149|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Had Optimal Sleep at Endpoint|The MOS-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assessed key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yielded 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. The total score ranged from 0 to 100. The MOS optimal sleep subscale was a binary outcome derived from the sleep quantity responses: the response was YES if sleep quantity was 7 or 8 hours per night.|Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
840651|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MOS-Sleep Scale, Quantity of Sleep Score at Endpoint|The MOS-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assessed key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yielded 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. The total score ranged from 0 to 100. The MOS Sleep Quantity sub-scale scores ranged from 0 to 24 (number of hours slept).|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840652|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MOS-Sleep Scale, Awaken Short of Breath Score at Endpoint|The MOS-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assessed key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yielded 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. The total score ranged from 0 to 100. The awaken short of breath subscale also ranged from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating less difficulty in breathing.|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840653|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MOS-Sleep Scale, Snoring Score at Endpoint|The MOS-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assessed key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yielded 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. The total score ranged from 0 to 100. The snoring subscale score also ranged from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating less snoring.|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840654|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in MOS-Sleep Scale, Sleep Disturbance Score at Endpoint|The MOS-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assessed key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yielded 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. The total score ranged from 0 to 100. For sleep disturbance, the subscale score also ranged from 0 to 100, with higher scores representing greater sleep disturbance.|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840655|NCT01332149|Secondary|Baseline Medical Outcomes Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale Scores|The MOS-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated instrument which assesses sleep quantity and quality with 12 items (7 subscale scores: sleep disturbance, snoring, awakening short of breath/with headache, sleep adequacy, somnolence, sleep quantity, optimal sleep; and a 9-item overall sleep problems index). Subscale scores total range: 0-100 (except sleep quantity [range 0-24 hours], optimal sleep [yes:1, no:0]). Higher scores=poorer sleep outcomes (except sleep quantity, adequacy, and optimal sleep).|Baseline|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. N=number of evaluable participants for each category||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840683|NCT01332188|Secondary|Tearing at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Tearing was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of tearing score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840657|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pain VAS From the SF-MPQ at Endpoint|The VAS was part of the SF-MPQ scale and reflected the overall pain intensity score. The pain VAS was a horizontal line; 100 mm in length, was self-administered by the participant in order to rate pain from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst possible pain).|Baseline and Day 63 (Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840658|NCT01332149|Secondary|Baseline Pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Present Pain Intensity (PPI) Scale|The VAS was part of the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) scale and reflected the overall pain intensity score, The pain VAS was a horizontal line; 100 millimeters (mm) in length, was self-administered by the participant in order to rate pain from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst possible pain). The PPI was part of the SF-MPQ scale and measured the participant's present pain intensity on a 6-point scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 5 (excruciating).|Baseline|All participants in the FAS population, consisting of all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840659|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) Score at Weeks 1, 5, and 9|SF-MPQ was assessed according to the participant’s answer to the SF-MPQ questionnaire. The score for each composite scale (sensory, affective, and total) was derived by summing the reported intensity value for each item within a particular scale where None=0, Mild=1, Moderate=2, and Severe=3. The sensory score was the sum of the scores of the first 11 pain descriptors (throbbing, shooting, stabbing, sharp, cramping, gnawing, hot-burning, aching, heavy, tender, and splitting) and could range from 0-33. The affective score was the sum of the scores of the last 4 pain descriptors (tiring-exhausting, sickening, fearful, and punishing-cruel) and could range from 0-12. The total score was the sum of the scores of all 15 pain descriptors and could range from 0 to 45. Higher scores indicated greater pain.|Baseline; Weeks 1, 5, and 9|The FAS population consisted of all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication. N=number of evaluable participants at the specified time point. No inferential analyses were performed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840660|NCT01332149|Secondary|Percentage of 30 Percent (%) Responders at Endpoint|The DPRS consists of an 11-point numeric scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Participants described their pain during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10. A 30% responder was a participant who had 30% reduction or more in mean pain score at the end of the fixed dose phase (Day 63/Week 9) (Study Endpoint) compared to baseline.|End of fixed dose phase (Day 63/Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
840661|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weekly Mean Sleep Interference Score at Weeks 1 to 9|Pain-related sleep interference was assessed on an 11-point numerical rating scale ranging from 0 (did not interfere with sleep) to 10 (completely interfered [unable to sleep due to pain]). Participants were to describe how their pain had interfered with their sleep during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10. The weekly mean score was the sum of the daily scores divided by the number of diary entries during that week. The overall change is the average change from Weeks 1 to 9.|Baseline and weekly from Weeks 1 to 9|The FAS population consisted of all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication. N=number of evaluable participants at the specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840662|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Sleep Interference Score at Endpoint|Pain-related sleep interference was assessed on an 11-point numerical rating scale ranging from 0 (did not interfere with sleep) to 10 (completely interfered [unable to sleep due to pain]). Participants were to describe how their pain had interfered with their sleep during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10. The mean endpoint score was obtained from the last 7 available scores of the daily diary while the participant was on study medication, up to and including the day after the last Week 9 (Day 63) dose.|Baseline and end of fixed dose phase (Day 63/Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the FAS population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The LOCF method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840663|NCT01332149|Secondary|Baseline Mean Sleep Interference Score|Pain-related sleep interference was assessed on an 11-point numerical rating scale ranging from 0 (did not interfere with sleep) to 10 (completely interfered [unable to sleep due to pain]). Participants were to describe how their pain had interfered with their sleep during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10.|Baseline|All participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) population, consisting of all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840664|NCT01332149|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weekly Mean Pain Score at Weeks 1 to 9|The DPRS consists of an 11-point numeric scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Participants described their pain during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10. The weekly mean pain score was the sum of the daily scores divided by the number of diary entries during that week. The overall change is the average change from Weeks 1 to 9.|Baseline and weekly from Weeks 1 to 9|The FAS population consisted of all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication. N=number of evaluable participants at the specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840665|NCT01332149|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Pain Score at Endpoint|The daily pain rating scale (DPRS) consists of an 11-point numeric scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Participants described their pain during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10. The mean endpoint pain score was obtained from the last 7 available DPRS scores of the daily pain diary while the participant was on study medication, up to and including the day after the last Week 8 (Day 57) dose.|Baseline and end of fixed dose phase (Day 63/Week 9)/Early Termination (Study Endpoint)|All participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) population (all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication) who had available data for this outcome measure. The Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840666|NCT01332149|Primary|Baseline Mean Pain Score|The daily pain rating scale (DPRS) consists of an 11-point numeric scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Participants described their pain during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10.|Baseline|All participants in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) population, consisting of all participants randomized to treatment that received at least 1 dose of study medication.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840667|NCT01332188|Secondary|Tolerability of Study Medication at Visit 3A|Subjects were asked to rate the comfort of the drop in each eye upon instillation, at 1 minute, and at 2 minutes after instillation of study medication. The assessment used a 10-point scale with 0 as very comfortable and 10 as very uncomfortable. Higher scores represent a worse outcome..|upon instillation, 1 minute and 2 minutes post instillation|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840668|NCT01332188|Secondary|Nasal Composite Score at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A nasal composite score was summed for each patient based on the presence of at least one of the following four nasal symptoms on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe): rhinorrhea; nasal pruritus; ear or palate pruritus; and nasal congestion. The percentage of subjects with at least one nasal symptom present was calculated for each time point.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||percentage of subjects|||Number
840669|NCT01332188|Secondary|Nasal Composite Score at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A nasal composite score was summed for each patient based on the presence of at least one of the following four nasal symptoms on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe): rhinorrhea; nasal pruritus; ear or palate pruritus; and nasal congestion. The percentage of subjects with at least one nasal symptom present was calculated for each time point.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||percentage of subjects|||Number
840670|NCT01332188|Secondary|Nasal Composite Score at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A nasal composite score was summed for each patient based on the presence of at least one of the following four nasal symptoms on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe): rhinorrhea; nasal pruritus; ear or palate pruritus; and nasal congestion. The percentage of subjects with at least one nasal symptom present was calculated for each time point.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||percentage of subjects|||Number
840671|NCT01332188|Secondary|Nasal Congestion at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Nasal Congestion was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Congestion score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840672|NCT01332188|Secondary|Nasal Congestion at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Nasal Congestion was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Congestion score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840673|NCT01332188|Secondary|Nasal Congestion at Onset of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Nasal Congestion was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Congestion score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840674|NCT01332188|Secondary|Ear or Palate Pruritus at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ear or Palate Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a single 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Ear or Palate Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840675|NCT01332188|Secondary|Ear or Palate Pruritus at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Ear or Palate Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a single 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Ear or Palate Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840676|NCT01332188|Secondary|Ear or Palate Pruritus at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Ear or Palate Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a single 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Ear or Palate Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840677|NCT01332188|Secondary|Nasal Pruritus at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Nasal Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840678|NCT01332188|Secondary|Nasal Pruritus at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Nasal Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840679|NCT01332188|Secondary|Nasal Pruritus at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Nasal Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840680|NCT01332188|Secondary|Rhinorrhea at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Rhinorrhea was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Rhinorrhea score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840681|NCT01332188|Secondary|Rhinorrhea at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Rhinorrhea was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Rhinorrhea score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840682|NCT01332188|Secondary|Rhinorrhea at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Rhinorrhea was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Rhinorrhea score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840686|NCT01332188|Secondary|Eyelid Swelling at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Eyelid swelling was assessed by the patient on a 0-3 scale (0=none to 3=severe). Average of eyelid swelling score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840687|NCT01332188|Secondary|Eyelid Swelling at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Eyelid swelling was assessed by the patient on a 0-3 scale (0=none to 3=severe). Average of eyelid swelling score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840688|NCT01332188|Secondary|Eyelid Swelling at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Eyelid swelling was assessed by the patient on a 0-3 scale (0=none to 3=severe). Average of eyelid swelling score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840689|NCT01332188|Secondary|Chemosis at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Chemosis was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of chemosis score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840690|NCT01332188|Secondary|Chemosis at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Chemosis was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of chemosis score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840691|NCT01332188|Secondary|Chemosis at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Chemosis was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of chemosis score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840692|NCT01332188|Secondary|Episcleral Redness at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Episcleral Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of episcleral redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840693|NCT01332188|Secondary|Episcleral Redness at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Episcleral Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of episcleral redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840694|NCT01332188|Secondary|Episcleral Redness at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Episcleral Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of episcleral redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840695|NCT01332188|Secondary|Ciliary Redness at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ciliary Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ciliary redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT). Number of analyzed subjects differ due to subject discontinuation during the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840696|NCT01332188|Secondary|Ciliary Redness at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Ciliary Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ciliary redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840697|NCT01332188|Secondary|Ciliary Redness at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Ciliary Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ciliary redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840698|NCT01332188|Primary|Conjunctival Redness at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Conjunctival Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of conjunctival redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840699|NCT01332188|Primary|Conjunctival Redness at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Conjunctival Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of conjunctival redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840700|NCT01332188|Primary|Conjunctival Redness at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Conjunctival Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of conjunctival redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840701|NCT01332188|Primary|Ocular Itching at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ocular itching was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ocular itching score over both eyes was analyzed.|3, 5, 7 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840702|NCT01332188|Primary|Ocular Itching at Duration of Action (24 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 24 hours after drop instillation. Ocular itching was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ocular itching score over both eyes was analyzed.|3, 5, 7 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840703|NCT01332188|Primary|Ocular Itching at Duration of Action (16 Hours Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 16 hours after drop instillation. Ocular itching was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ocular itching score over both eyes was analyzed.|3, 5, 7 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840704|NCT01332227|Secondary|Mean Changes in Fasting Lipid Levels From Baseline to Week 48|LD=low-density lipoprotein; HDL=high-density lipoprotein.|From Baseline to Week 48|All participants who received study drug||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
840705|NCT01332227|Secondary|Number of Patients With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Treatment-related SAEs, Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (AEs) Leading to Discontinuation, and Treatment-emergent AEs|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Related=having certain, probable, possible, or unknown relationship to study drug.|Day 1 to Week 48|All participants who received study drug||Particpants|||Number
840706|NCT01332227|Secondary|Number of Participants With Genotypable/Phenotypable Isolates, Emergent Genotypic Substitutions in Patients With Genotypable Isolates, and Phenotypic Resistance in Patients With Phenotypable Isolates at Week 48|Viral genotypic and phenotypic resistance profiles were assessed for virologic rebound (HIV-1 RNA level ≥40 c/mL). Only patients with HIV-1 RNA levels ≥500 c/mL met the criteria for resistance testing. Genotypic substitutions at baseline were summarized for virologic rebound. The genotypic resistance profile presented patients with genotypable isolates, those with protease inhibitor substitutions from genotypable isolates, those with integrase substitutions from genotypable isolates, and those with selected reverse transcriptase substitutions from genotypable isolates using the most current version of the International AIDS Society-USA list and Stanford HIV Drug Resistance Database. Newly emergent genotypic substitutions were summarized analogously for virologic rebound without baseline phenotypic resistance to atazanavir, ritonavir, or raltegravir, using all on-treatment isolates. pts=patients|Day 1 to Week 48|Participants with virologic rebound||Participants|||Number
840707|NCT01332227|Secondary|Number of Participants With Genotypable/Phenotypable Isolates, Emergent Genotypic Substitutions in Patients With Genotypable Isolates, and Phenotypic Resistance in Patients With Phenotypable Isolates at Week 24|Viral genotypic and phenotypic resistance profiles were assessed for virologic rebound (HIV-1 RNA level ≥40 c/mL). Only patients with HIV-1 RNA levels ≥500 c/mL met the criteria for resistance testing. Genotypic substitutions at baseline were summarized for virologic rebound. The genotypic resistance profile presented patients with genotypable isolates, those with protease inhibitor substitutions from genotypable isolates, those with integrase substitutions from genotypable isolates, and those with selected reverse transcriptase substitutions from genotypable isolates using the most current version of the International AIDS Society-USA list and Stanford HIV Drug Resistance Database. Newly emergent genotypic substitutions were summarized analogously for virologic rebound without baseline phenotypic resistance to atazanavir, ritonavir, or raltegravir, using all on-treatment isolates. pts=patients|Day 1 to Week 24|Patients who received study drug, who had an HIV-1 RNA measurement at the analysis week and who experienced virologic rebound.||Participants|||Number
840708|NCT01332227|Secondary|Number of Participants With Virologic Rebound at Weeks 24 and 48|Viral genotypic and phenotypic resistance profiles were assessed for virologic rebound (HIV-1 RNA level ≥40 c/mL). Only patients with HIV-1 RNA levels ≥500 c/mL met the criteria for resistance testing. Genotypic substitutions at baseline were summarized for virologic rebound. The genotypic resistance profile presented patients with genotypable isolates, those with protease inhibitor substitutions from genotypable isolates, those with integrase substitutions from genotypable isolates, and those with selected reverse transcriptase substitutions from genotypable isolates using the most current version of the International AIDS Society-USA list and Stanford HIV Drug Resistance Database. Newly emergent genotypic substitutions were summarized analogously for virologic rebound without baseline phenotypic resistance to atazanavir, ritonavir, or raltegravir, using all on-treatment isolates.|Day 1 to Weeks 28 and 48|All patients who received study drug and who had an HIV-1 RNA measurement at the analysis week.||Participants|||Number
840709|NCT01332227|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA Level <40 c/mL at Week 48|Percentages of patients with HIV-1 RNA levels <40 c/mL were summarized at each scheduled visit. Longitudinal plots were created to display proportion versus visit week through Weeks 24 and 48 with error bars representing 95% confidence intervals.|From Day 1 to Week 48|All patients who received study drug and who had an HIV-1 RNA measurement at the analysis week.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840710|NCT01332227|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA Level <40 c/mL at Week 24|HIV-1 RNA level was measured with the Abbott m2000rt® polymerase chain reaction assay. Response rates were assessed using an intent-to-treat algorithm, with numerator representing patients meeting the response criteria, and denominator representing all randomized patients. Randomized patients not meeting the criteria for treatment failure (eg, discontinuation of study therapy or virologic rebound at or before Week 24) were considered responders. Virologic rebound was defined as 2 consecutive on-treatment HIV-1 RNA levels ≥40 c/mL or the last on-treatment HIV-1 RNA level ≥40 c/mL followed by discontinuation. Patients who experienced treatment failure or had missing Week 24 HIV-1 RNA levels were considered failures. RNA=ribonucleic acid; HIV=human immunodeficiency virus.|From Day 1 to Week 24|All patients who received study drug and who had an HIV-1 RNA measurement at the analysis week.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840711|NCT01332253|Secondary|Blood Loss During Surgery|Amount of Blood Lost During Surgery in milliliters|End of Surgery|Blood loss during surgery in milliliters||milliliters||Standard Deviation|Mean
840712|NCT01332253|Secondary|Parental Satisfaction With Vomiting Control in the Post-Operative Period.|"To evaluate the secondary objective of pain, parental satisfaction during the post-operative period will be measured with regards to vomiting control. The Parental Satisfaction Survey asked the parent to base their response on their child's management from the time they arrive in the recovery room until they were discharged. Question 3 asked How satisfied were you with your child's vomiting management during the study?"|Discharge|Summary of Satisfaction Post-Procedure with Vomiting Control.||participants|||Number
840713|NCT01332253|Secondary|Parent Satisfaction With Regards to Nausea Management Post Procedure.|"To evaluate the secondary objective of pain, parental satisfaction during the post-operative period will be measured with regards to nausea management. The Parental Satisfaction Survey asked the parent to base their response on their child's management from the time they arrive in the recovery room until they were discharged. Question 2 asked How satisfied were you with your child's nausea management during the study?"|Discharge|Summary of Satisfaction Post-Procedure with nausea management during the study||participants|||Number
840714|NCT01332253|Secondary|Parent Satisfaction With Regards to Pain Management Post Procedure.|"To evaluate the secondary objective of pain, parental satisfaction during the post-operative period will be measured with regards to pain management. The Parental Satisfaction Survey asked the parent to base their response on their child's management from the time they arrive in the recovery room until they were discharged. Question 1 asked How satisfied were you with your child's pain management at the time of discharge?"|Discharge|Summary of Parent Satisfaction Post-Procedure with Pain Management at the time of discharge?||participants|||Number
840715|NCT01332253|Secondary|Time to Swallow Post Procedure.|Swallowing will be assessed every 15 minutes following arrival to the recovery room; the time to first swallow will be recorded.|every 15 minutes until able to swallow|||hours||Standard Error|Mean
840716|NCT01332253|Secondary|Time to Discharge Post Procedure.|To evaluate the secondary objective of pain, the time to participant discharge will be measured.|Discharge|||hours||Standard Error|Mean
840717|NCT01332253|Secondary|Postoperative Pain as Measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) 120 Minutes Post-procedure.|"To evaluate the secondary objective of pain, the patient's self-reported pain at 120 minutes post-procedure will be measured using a VAS scale. The VAS is a continuous scale made up of a horizontal line, 100 mm in length, anchored by 2 verbal descriptors (No Pain, Worst Possible Pain). The VAS is self-completed by the respondent. The subject is asked to place a line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represents their pain intensity. Using a ruler, the score is determined by measuring the distance, in mm, on the 100 mm line between the No Pain anchor and the subject's mark. The score would be between 0 and 100. A lower score represents less pain while a higher score represents more pain."|120 minutes post-procedure|Patient reported pain was evaluated utilizing a visual analog scale (VAS) 120 minutes post-procedure.||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
840718|NCT01332253|Secondary|Postoperative Pain as Measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) 90 Minutes Post-procedure.|"o evaluate the secondary objective of pain, the patient's self-reported pain at 90 minutes post-procedure will be measured using a VAS scale. The VAS is a continuous scale made up of a horizontal line, 100 mm in length, anchored by 2 verbal descriptors (No Pain, Worst Possible Pain). The VAS is self-completed by the respondent. The subject is asked to place a line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represents their pain intensity. Using a ruler, the score is determined by measuring the distance, in mm, on the 100 mm line between the No Pain anchor and the subject's mark. The score would be between 0 and 100. A lower score represents less pain while a higher score represents more pain."|90 minutes post-procedure|Patient reported pain was evaluated utilizing a visual analog scale (VAS) 90 minutes post-procedure.||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
840719|NCT01332253|Secondary|Postoperative Pain as Measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) 60 Minutes Post-procedure.|"To evaluate the secondary objective of pain, the patient's self-reported pain at 60 minutes post-procedure will be measured using a VAS scale. The VAS is a continuous scale made up of a horizontal line, 100 mm in length, anchored by 2 verbal descriptors (No Pain, Worst Possible Pain). The VAS is self-completed by the respondent. The subject is asked to place a line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represents their pain intensity. Using a ruler, the score is determined by measuring the distance, in mm, on the 100 mm line between the No Pain anchor and the subject's mark. The score would be between 0 and 100. A lower score represents less pain while a higher score represents more pain."|60 minutes post-procedure|Patient reported pain was evaluated utilizing a visual analog scale (VAS) 60 minutes post-procedure.||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
840720|NCT01332253|Secondary|Postoperative Pain as Measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) 30 Minutes Post-procedure.|"The patient's self-reported pain at 30 minutes post-procedure will be measured using a VAS scale. The VAS is a continuous scale made up of a horizontal line, 100 mm in length, anchored by 2 verbal descriptors (No Pain, Worst Possible Pain). The VAS is self-completed by the respondent. The subject is asked to place a line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represents their pain intensity. Using a ruler, the score is determined by measuring the distance, in mm, on the 100 mm line between the No Pain anchor and the subject's mark. The score would be between 0 and 100. A lower score represents less pain while a higher score represents more pain."|30 minutes post-procedure|Patient reported pain was evaluated utilizing a visual analog scale (VAS) 30 minutes post-procedure.||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
840721|NCT01332253|Primary|Number of Doses of Fentanyl Administered in the Postoperative Period Prior to Discharge.|To evaluate the primary objective of reduced fentanyl use in the post-operative period, the number of fentanyl doses (0.5 mcg/kg IV) administered in the post-operative period prior to discharge will be measured.|4 hours|||fentanyl doses||Standard Deviation|Mean
840722|NCT01332292|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Indicated Electrocardiographic (ECG) Parameters at the Indicated Time Points on Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|PR, QRS, QT, QTcB, QTcF, and RR were measured at Baseline and Day 14 of the respective treatment period. Baseline is defined as the pre-dose measurement at Day 1 for each period. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Day 14 minus the Baseline value. QTcB is the QT duration corrected for heart rate by Bazett’s formula. QTcF is the QT duration corrected for heart rate by Fridericia’s formula.|Baseline and Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||milliseconds (msec)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840723|NCT01332292|Secondary|Ex-throat Dose (ETD) and ETD <2 Microns on Days 1 and 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|The ex-throat dose (ETD) and the “nominal ETD” is the mass (micrograms) of active investigational material that passes beyond the throat, nominal being the mean.The recorded inhalation profiles of the participants and the mouth-throat (oropharyngeal) models of the sizes that approximated to pharyngometry measurements of the participants were used in conjunction with the electronic Lung (eLung) for in vitro assessment. The eLung is a breathing simulator that replicates the selected inhalation profile with an active inhaler placed at the lips end of the selected ororpharyngeal model. After the dose is emitted from the inhaler, the analysis and assay of throat deposition and material passing beyond the throat was used to derive the nominal, minimum, and maximum predicted ETD and ETD <2 microns.|Day 1 and Day 14 of the respective treatment period|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||micrograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
840724|NCT01332292|Secondary|Total Emitted Dose (TED) on Days 1 and 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|The total emitted dose (TED) is defined as the mass (micrograms) of the nominal dose that passes beyond the throat. The recorded inhalation profiles of the participants and the mouth-throat (oropharyngeal) models of the sizes that approximated to pharyngometry measurements of the participants were used in conjunction with the electronic Lung (eLung) for in vitro assessment. The eLung is a breathing simulator that replicates the selected inhalation profile with an active inhaler placed at the lips end of the selected ororpharyngeal model. After the dose is emitted from the inhaler, the analysis and assay of throat deposition and material passing beyond the throat was used to derive the nominal, minimum, and maximum predicted total emitted dose.|Day 1 and Day 14 of the respective treatment period|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||micrograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
840725|NCT01332292|Secondary|Peak Pressure Drop on Days 1 and 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|During the inhalation profile assessment, participants inhaled through a mouthpiece from a device with a similar resistance to the dry powder inhaler used for this study. Peak pressure drop is defined as the maximum pressure drop (kilopascal [kPa]) achieved during inhalation across the resistance of the inhaler. The pressure drop during the inhalation was measured, and the inhalation profiles (pressure drop versus time profile) of the participants were obtained. The mean of the two inhalation profile measurements was calculated for each day (Days 1 and 14 of the respective treatment period), and used for subsequent modeling and prediction of dose emission attributes.|Day 1 and Day 14 of the respective treatment period|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||Kilopascal (kpa)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840726|NCT01332292|Secondary|Inhaled Volume on Days 1 and 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|"During the inhalation profile assessment, participants inhaled through a mouthpiece from a device with a similar resistance to the dry powder inhaler used for this study. Inhaled volume is defined as the volume of air (Liters) inhaled during the inhalation across the resistance of the inhaler.
The pressure drop during the inhalation was measured, and the inhalation profiles (pressure drop versus time profile) of the participants were obtained. The mean of the two inhalation profile measurements was used for each day (Days 1 and 14 of the respective treatment period), and the inhalaled volume was determined."|Day 1 and Day 14 of the respective treatment period|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
840727|NCT01332292|Secondary|Inhalation Time on Days 1 and 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|During the inhalation profile assessment, participants inhaled through a mouthpiece from a device with a similar resistance to the dry powder inhaler used for this study. Inhalation time is defined as the duration of the inhalation(s) when inhaling across the resistance of the inhaler. The pressure drop during the inhalation was measured, and the inhalation profiles (pressure drop versus time profile) of the participants were obtained. The mean of the two inhalation profile measurements was used for each day (Days 1 and 14 of the respective treatment period), and the inhalation time was determined.|Day 1 and Day 14 of the respective treatment period|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
840728|NCT01332292|Secondary|Average Flow Rate and Peak Inspiratory Flow Rate (PIFR) on Days 1 and 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|During the inhalation profile assessment, participants inhaled through a mouthpiece from a device with a similar resistance to the dry powder inhaler used for this study. Average flow rate is defined as the average inspiratory flow rate (Liters [L]/min) across the inhalation profile when inhaling across the resistance of the inhaler. PIFR is defined as the Peak Inspiratory Flow Rate (L/min) of the inhalation profile when inhaling across the resistance of the inhaler.The pressure drop during the inhalation was measured, and the inhalation profiles (pressure drop versus time profile) of the participants were obtained. The mean of the two inhalation profile measurements was used for each day (Days 1 and 14 of the respective treatment period), and the average flow rate and PIFR were determined.|Day 1 and Day 14 of the respective treatment period|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||Liters per minute (L/min)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840729|NCT01332292|Secondary|Oropharyngeal Volume on Days 1 and 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|During the pharyngometry assessment, participants inhaled through a wavetube, which had a mouthpiece with the same dimensions as the mouthpiece on the dry powder inhaler used for this study. This technique was used to measure the size of the throat and mouth (oropharynx) in the form of pharyngograms. Oropharyngeal volume is defined as the volume (cm^3) of the mouth and throat estimated to be from the lips to the larynx. Pharyngometry data were recorded for each day (Days 1 and 14 of the respective treatment period) using the mean of four measurements (pharyngograms), and the average oropharyngeal cross-sectional area was calculated.|Days 1 and 14 of the respective treatment period|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||cubic centimeters (cm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840761|NCT01332318|Secondary|Number of Participants in Each Category of the Participant-Rated Clinician Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale at Day 14|"The participant-rated CGI-I scale is a self-rated assessment designed to allow participants to rate the change of their disease severity over time based on a seven-point scale, with a score of 1 being “very much improved” and a score of 7 being “very much worse."|Day 14|"Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the GEn placebo and DPH placebo and the GEn placebo and DPH 50 mg on Day 16 arms have been combined into the GEn placebo and DPH group."||participants|||Number
840730|NCT01332292|Secondary|Distance of Assessment on Days 1 and 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|During the pharyngometry assessment, participants inhaled through a wavetube, which had a mouthpiece with the same dimensions as the mouthpiece on the dry powder inhaler used for this study. This technique was used to measure the size of the throat and mouth (oropharynx) in the form of pharyngograms. Distance of assessment is defined as the distance (length measured in centimeters [cm]) estimated to be from the lips to the larynx. Pharyngometry data were recorded for each day (Days 1 and 14 of each treatment period) using the mean of four measurements (pharyngograms), and the average oropharyngeal cross-sectional area was calculated.|Days 1 and 14 of the respective treatment period|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||centimeters (cm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840731|NCT01332292|Secondary|Average Oropharyngeal Cross-sectional Area on Days 1 and 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|During the pharyngometry assessment, participants inhaled through a wavetube, which had a mouthpiece with the same dimensions as the mouthpiece on the dry powder inhaler used for this study. This technique was used to measure the size of the throat and mouth (oropharynx) in the form of pharyngograms. Pharyngometry data were recorded for each day (Days 1 and 14 of the respective treatment period) using the mean of four measurements (pharyngograms), and the average oropharyngeal cross-sectional area was calculated.|Days 1 and 14 of the respective treatment period|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||centimeters squared (cm^2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840732|NCT01332292|Secondary|Serum Cortisol Weighted Mean (0–12 Hours) on Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Serum cortisol weighted mean was determined for each participant over the time period 0-12 hours on Day 14 of the respective treatment period. Samples were collected at the following times: pre-dose; 30 minutes, 1, 2, 4, 7, and 12 hours post-dose on Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||nanomoles per Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840733|NCT01332292|Secondary|Tmax and t at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|tmax is defined as the time to reach the observed maximum concentration, and t is defined as the time of the last observed quantifiable concentration on Day 14 of the respective treatment period. Samples were collected at the following times: pre-dose; 30 minutes, 1, 2, 4, 7, and 12 hours post-dose on Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period|PK Population. Only those participant who had quantifiable FF concentrations were analyzed.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
840734|NCT01332292|Secondary|Cmax on Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Cmax is defined as the maximum observed concentration on Day 14 of the respective treatment period. Samples were collected at the following times: pre-dose; 30 minutes, 1, 2, 4, 7, and 12 hours post-dose on Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period|PK Population||picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840735|NCT01332292|Secondary|AUC(0-t) on Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Area under the concentration-time (AUC(0-t)) curve from time zero (pre-dose) to the last time of quantifiable concentration of FF on Day 14 of the respective treatment period was measured. Samples were collected at the following times: pre-dose; 30 minutes, 1, 2, 4, 7, and 12 hours post-dose on Day 14 of the respective treatment period. Due to non-quantifiable values, it was not possible to derive AUC(0-12).|Day 14 of the respective treatment period|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population: all participants in the All Subjects Population for whom a PK sample was obtained and analyzed||picograms*hour per milliliter (pg*hr/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840736|NCT01332292|Primary|Heart Rate at Baseline and Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Heart rate (HR) was measured at Baseline and Day 14 of the respective treatment period. Baseline is defined as the pre-dose measurement at Day 1 for each period.|Baseline and Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
840737|NCT01332292|Primary|Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) at Baseline and Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|SBP and DBP were measured at Baseline and Day 14 of the respective treatment period. Baseline is defined as the pre-dose measurement at Day 1 for each period.|Baseline and Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed at different time points, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840738|NCT01332292|Primary|Peak Expiratory Flow on Day 1 and Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) is defined as the maximum airflow during a forced expiration beginning with the lungs fully inflated. PEF is calculated as the maximum of three readings taken at each timepoint for each participant. Baseline is defined as the maximum pre-dose measurement at Day 1 for each period.|Day 1 and Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population, Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||liters/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
840739|NCT01332292|Primary|Total Bilirubin, Creatinine, and Uric Acid Values at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of total bilirubin, creatinine, and uric acid at Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||Micromoles per liter (µmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840740|NCT01332292|Primary|Calcium, Chloride, Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Content/Bicarbonate, Glucose, Potassium, Sodium, and Urea/Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) Values at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of calcium, chloride, carbon dioxide content/bicarbonate (CO2/BI), glucose, potassium, sodium, and urea/BUN at Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840741|NCT01332292|Primary|Albumin and Total Protein Values at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of albumin and total protein at Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||Grams per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
840742|NCT01332292|Primary|Alanine Amino Transferase (ALT), Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP), Aspartate Amino Transferase (AST), and Gamma Glutamyl Transferase (GGT) Values at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of ALT, ALP, AST, and GGT at Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||International units per liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840743|NCT01332292|Primary|Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin (MCH) Values at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of MCH at Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||10^12 picograms (pg) per cell||Standard Deviation|Mean
840744|NCT01332292|Primary|Mean Corpuscle Volume (MCV) Value at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of MCV at Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed .||10^15 femtoliters (fL) per cell||Standard Deviation|Mean
840745|NCT01332292|Primary|Hematocrit Values at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of hematocrit at Day 14 of the respective treatment period. Hematocrit is a measure of the percentage of the volume of the whole blood that is composed of red blood cells, as determined by separation of red blood cells from the plasma (usually by centrifugation).|Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||percentage of red blood cells in blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
840746|NCT01332292|Primary|Reticulocyte and Red Blood Cell (RBC) Values at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of reticulocyte and RBCs at Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||10^12 cells per liter (TI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840747|NCT01332292|Primary|Hemoglobin and Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin Concentration (MCHC) Values at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of hemoglobin and MCHC at Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||Grams per liter (g/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840748|NCT01332292|Primary|Basophil, Eosinophil, Lymphocyte, Monocyte, Total Neutrophil, Platelet, and White Blood Cell Count Values at Day 14 of the Respective Treatment Period|Blood samples were collected for the measurement of basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, total neutrophils, platelets, and white blood cell (WBC) count at Day 14 of the respective treatment period.|Day 14 of the respective treatment period (up to Study Day 44)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the All Subjects Population.||10^9 cells per liter (GI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840749|NCT01332292|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE) or Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE) During the Treatment Period|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. A serious adverse event (SAE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect. Medical or scientific judgment should be exercised in deciding whether reporting is appropriate in other situations. Refer to the General Adverse AE/SAE module for a complete list of AEs and SAEs.|From the start of study medication until Week 11 (Visit 6)/Early Withdrawal|All Subjects Population: all participants who received at least one dose of study medication||participants|||Number
840750|NCT01332305|Primary|Mean AUCss|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUCss is the area under the curve during the steady-state period. The AUCss is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption. AUCss used concentration data from 0 to 24 hours at steady-state for Weeks 4 and 12.|Weeks 4 and 12|Safety Population. Placebo participants were not included in the PK assessments, as they had no exposure to GEn. Of participants who completed the study, some were not included at Week 12 (sample not taken or below limit of quantitation).||ng*hour/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
840751|NCT01332305|Primary|Mean Tmax and T1/2|Tmax is defined as the time to the maximum or “peak” concentration of a drug observed after multiple administration. T1/2 is defined as the time to when half of the total amount of a particular substance is eliminated from the body.|Weeks 4 and 12|Safety Population. Placebo participants (par.) were not included in the PK assessments, as they had no exposure to GEn. At W4, there were two par. excluded from the T1/2, as a result of no sample taken or a PK profile not possible. Of par. who completed the study, some were not included at W12 (sample not taken or below limit of quantitation).||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
840752|NCT01332305|Primary|Mean Css, Max and Css, Min|Css, max is defined as the maximum or “peak” concentration of a drug observed after multiple administration, at steady state. Css, max is one of the parameters of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the total amount of drug absorbed. Css, min is defined as the minimum concentration of a drug observed after its administration, in steady state. ng, nanograms; PK, pharmacokinetic; W, week; BLQ, below limit of quantitation.|Weeks 4 and 12|Safety Population: all participants (par.) who were randomized and received at least one (or any portion of a) dose of study drug. Population was analyzed as randomized. Placebo par. had no exposure to GEn and were not included in the PK assessments. Of par. who completed the study, some were not included at W12 (sample not taken or BLQ).||nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840753|NCT01332318|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) in the Pittsburgh Sleep Diary (PghSD) Sleep Quality|"The PghSD assessed a participant's previous night's sleep. Sleep quality was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Participants indicated their sleep quality by marking a vertical line on a horizontal scale anchored by responses very bad and very good. VAS score was determined by measuring the distance in millimeters (mm) from the left hand end of the line to the point that the participant marked. Scores ranged from 0 to 100 mm with higher scores indicating better sleep quality and lower scores indicating worse sleep quality."|Baseline (Day -1and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|"Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the GEn placebo and DPH placebo and the GEn placebo and DPH 50 mg on Day 16 arms have been combined into the GEn placebo and DPH group. The number of participants assessed for each PghSD question at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data."||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
840754|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) in the Pittsburgh Sleep Diary (PghSD) Total Sleep Time Item|The PghSD assessed a participant's previous night's sleep. Change from baseline was calculated as the Day 14 (in the evening), 15 (in the morning after dose), and 16 (at Tmax)value minus the Baseline (Days -1 and 1) value. Total sleep time is expressed in hours.|Baseline (Days -1 and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|"Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the GEn placebo and DPH placebo and the GEn placebo and DPH 50 mg on Day 16 arms have been combined into the GEn placebo and DPH group. The number of participants assessed for each PghSD question at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data."||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
840755|NCT01332318|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) on the Pittsburgh Sleep Diary (PghSD) Sleep Onset Items|The PghSD assessed participant's previous night's sleep. Change from baseline was calculated as the Day 14 (in the evening), 15 (in the morning), and 16 (at Tmax of GEn and DPH) value minus the Baseline (Days -1 and 1) value. Latency to sleep onset (time to fall asleep) and wake time after sleep onset are expressed in minutes.|Baseline (Days -1and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|"Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the GEn placebo and DPH placebo and the GEn placebo and DPH 50 mg on Day 16 arms have been combined into the GEn placebo and DPH group. The number of participants assessed for each PghSD question at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data."||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
840756|NCT01332318|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Post Sleep Questionnaire (PSQ) Responses at Day 14|The PSQ is designed to evaluate sleep quality, ability to function, and the degree to which RLS symptoms interfere with sleep.|Day 14|"Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the GEn placebo and DPH placebo and the GEn placebo and DPH 50 mg on Day 16 arms have been combined into the GEn placebo and DPH group."||participants|||Number
840757|NCT01332318|Secondary|Number of Participants With no Reported RLS Symptoms During Each of the 4-hour Periods From the 24-hour RLS Record at Day 14|The 24-Hour RLS Record is a diary in which participants report the presence and severity of RLS symptoms (none, mild, moderate, or severe) for a 24-hour period, in 30-minute increments. The period was divided into 7 four-hour intervals (8 AM to 12 PM, 12 PM to 4 PM, 4 PM to 8 PM, 6 PM to 10 PM, 8 PM to 12 Midnight, Midnight to 4 AM, and 4 AM to 8 AM).|Day 14|"Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the GEn placebo and DPH placebo and the GEn placebo and DPH 50 mg on Day 16 arms have been combined into the GEn placebo and DPH group."||participants|||Number
840758|NCT01332318|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With no Reported RLS Symptoms During the 24-hour RLS Record at Day 14|The 24-Hour RLS Record is a diary in which participants report the presence and severity of RLS symptoms (none, mild, moderate, or severe) for a 24-hour period, in 30-min increments beginning at 8AM on the day prior to the visit.|Day 14|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the||percentage of participants|||Number
840759|NCT01332318|Secondary|Median Time to Onset of a Participant's First RLS Symptoms Using the 24-hour RLS Symptom Record at Day 14|The 24-Hour RLS Record is a diary in which participants report the presence and severity of RLS symptoms (none, mild, moderate, or severe) for a 24-hour period, in 30-min increments beginning at 8AM on the day prior to the visit. For Arms 2 and 3, upper limits of the confidence intervals are not available, as they are beyond the 24-hour time frame.|Day 14|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840760|NCT01332318|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Responded to Treatment Based on Scores on the Participant-Rated CGI-I at Day 14|"The participant-rated CGI-I is a self-rated assessment designed to allow participants to rate the change of their disease severity over time based on a seven-point scale, with a score of 1 being very much improved, and a score of 7 being very much worse. Response was defined as a rating of very much improved or much improved (score of 1 or 2 on the scale)."|Day 14|"Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the GEn placebo and DPH placebo and the GEn placebo and DPH 50 mg on Day 16 arms have been combined into the GEn placebo and DPH group."||participants|||Number
840762|NCT01332318|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Responded to Treatment Based on Scores on the Investigator-Rated CGI-I at Day 14|"The investigator-rated CGI-I is a clinician-rated assessment designed to allow clinicians to rate the change of their participant's disease severity over time based on a seven-point scale, with a score of 1 being very much improved, and a score of 7 being very much worse compared to baseline. For this endpoint, response was defined as a rating of very much improved or much improved (score of 1 or 2 on the scale) compared to baseline."|Day 14|"Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the GEn placebo and DPH placebo and the GEn placebo and DPH 50 mg on Day 16 arms have been combined into the GEn placebo and DPH group."||participants|||Number
840763|NCT01332318|Secondary|Number of Participants in Each Category of the Investigator-Rated Clinician Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale at Day 14|The CGI scale is a widely used tool designed to allow clinicians to rate the severity of illness and the change of the disease severity over time based on a seven-point rating scale, with a score of 1 being “very much improved” and a score of 7 being “very much worse” compared to baseline.|Day 14|"Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the GEn placebo and DPH placebo and the GEn placebo and DPH 50 mg on Day 16 arms have been combined into the GEn placebo and DPH group."||participants|||Number
840764|NCT01332318|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (Day -1) at Day 14 in the International Restless Legs Syndrome (IRLS) Rating Scale Total Score|The IRLS Rating scale is a measure of RLS disease severity and reflects the participant-reported assessment of primary sensory and motor features and associated sleep problems in RLS. Items are included that assess the impact of symptoms on participants’ mood, daily life, and activities. The total score ranges from 0-40 points, with 40 being the most severe. The scale assesses symptoms over the week prior to measurement.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 14|"Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Participants in the GEn placebo and DPH placebo and the GEn placebo and DPH 50 mg on Day 16 arms have been combined into the GEn placebo and DPH group."||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840765|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) on the Brief Assessment of Cognition (BAC) Scaled Tower of London (TOL) Score|Participants (par.) were asked to look at 2 pictures simultaneously; each picture showed 3 different colored balls arranged on 3 pegs. Par. were to estimate the number of times the balls in 1 picture would have to be moved to make the arrangement of balls identical to that of the second picture. Par. were allowed 20 seconds to respond to each pair of pictures. The number of correct items was the TOL Score (range: 0-22). The TOL scaled test score was calculated as indicated for the Verbal Memory Test. The scaled test score range is -7.53 to 2.76; higher scaled scores indicate better cognition.|Baseline (Days -1and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840766|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) on the Brief Assessment of Cognition (BAC) Scaled Symbol Coding Test Score|Participants were given a list of numbers (numerals 1-9) that were each associated with a unique symbol. Participants decoded a list of 110 symbols as quickly as possible in 90 seconds. The total number of symbols correctly decoded was the Symbol Coding Score (range: 0-110). The Symbol Coding scaled test score was calculated as indicated for the Verbal Memory Test. Change from baseline was calculated as the Day composite score minus the Baseline composite score. The scaled test score range is -7 to 10.08, with higher scaled scores indicating better cognition.|Baseline (Days -1and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840767|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) on the Brief Assessment of Cognition (BAC) Scaled Verbal Fluency Test Score|Verbal Fluency included one semantic fluency and two letter fluency tasks. Participants were given 60 seconds to name as many words as possible within a given semantic category (supermarket items), and in two separate trials, participants were given 60 seconds to generate as many words as possible that began with a given letter. The total number of words from all of the 3 trials was the Verbal Fluency score (range: 0-150). The scaled test score was calculated as indicated for the Verbal Memory Test. The scaled test score range is -5 to 10.83; higher scaled scores indicate better cognition.|Baseline (Days -1 and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840768|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) on the Brief Assessment of Cognition (BAC) Scaled Token Motor Task Test Score|Participants were given 100 plastic tokens and asked to place them in a container, 2 at a time, as quickly as possible for 60 seconds. The number of tokens correctly placed in the container was the Token Motor Task score (range: 0-100). The BAC was conducted prior to each simulated driving test. The Token Motor Task scaled test score was calculated as indicated for the Verbal Memory Test. Change from baseline was calculated as the Day composite score minus the Baseline composite score. The scaled test score range is -6.95 to 3.35, with higher scaled scores indicating better cognition.|Baseline (Days -1and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840769|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) on the Brief Assessment of Cognition (BAC) Scaled Digit Sequencing Score (DSS)|Participants (par.) were presented with sets of numbers of increasing length and asked to tell the experimenter the numbers in order from lowest to highest. The task has 7 levels; the first level had 2 digits in the set (e.g., 5, 2); the second level had 3 digits in the set, etc. The number of times the par. correctly arranged the numbers was recorded as the score for each level. The DSS is the sum of the 7 level scores (range: 0-28). The scaled test score was calculated as indicated for the Verbal Memory Test and ranges from -6.68 to 2.73; higher scaled scores indicate better cognition.|Baseline (Days -1and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840770|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) on the Brief Assessment of Cognition (BAC) Scaled Verbal Memory Test Score|Participants were presented with 15 words and asked to recall as many as possible; the procedure was repeated 5 times. The total number of words recalled correctly across the 5 administrations of the list was the participant’s Verbal Memory Recall score (range: 0-75). The scaled test score was calculated as ((BAC component raw test score - healthy control sample test mean)/healthy control sample test standard deviation); a healthy control sample was matched to the participant's sex and age category. The scaled test score range is -7.37 to 4.86; higher scaled scores indicate better cognition.|Baseline (Days -1and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840771|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) on the Brief Assessment of Cognition (BAC) Composite Score|The BAC was designed as a comprehensive measure of cognitive function, including 6 individual tests: Verbal Memory Recall, Digit Sequencing, Token Motor Task, Verbal Fluency, Symbol Coding, and Tower of London. The composite/total BAC score is calculated by scoring each individual test, comparing each score to a healthy control sample (matched for sex and age category) to create z-scores, summing the z-scores, and rescaling the sum. The composite score range is -2127.8 to 1878.8, with higher scores indicating better cognition.|Baseline (Days -1 and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840772|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) Total Score|"The Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) is a questionnaire designed to evaluate daytime sleepiness. Participants were asked to rate how likely they were to doze or fall asleep during 8 activities on a scale of 0 (would never do) to 3 (high chance of dozing). The total score ranges from 0-24, with a score greater than 10 representing excessive daytime sleepiness (an increased chance of dozing). Change from baseline was calculated as the Day 14 total score minus the Baseline total score."|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 14|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840773|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) in the Alertness Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score|"Alertness VAS was completed immediately before and after each simulated driving assessment. Participants indicated their alertness by marking a vertical line on a horizontal scale anchored by responses extremely sleepy and extremely alert. VAS score was determined by measuring the distance in millimeters (mm) from the left hand end of the line to the point the participant marked. Scores ranged from 0-100 mm, with higher scores indicating more alertness and lower scores indicating more sleepiness. Change score was calculated as the Day 14, 15, or 16 VAS score minus the Baseline VAS score."|Baseline (Days -1 and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. Varying numbers of participants did not complete either the pre- or post-drive VAS at either Baseline or the day of assessment; as such, the number of participants analyzed varies by day.||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
840774|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) in Brake Reaction Time|Brake reaction time was assessed as the time it took for each participant to move their foot off the accelerator and onto the brake pedal after the appearance of a stop sign on the simulation screen. Change from baseline was calculated as the Day 14, 15, or 16 mean reaction time minus the Baseline (Days -1 and 1) mean reaction time.|Baseline (Days -1 and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
840775|NCT01332318|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Number of Simulated Crashes on Days 14 (Evening), 15 (Morning After Dose), and 16 (Tmax)|A simulated crash was defined as a collision with an oncoming car or obstacle (e.g., tree) or when the distance to the center line was greater than 18 feet on either side of the road.|Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||participants|||Number
840776|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) in Overall Average Speed|Participants were instructed to maintain a speed of 55 miles per hour during the driving assessment. Change from baseline in overall average speed was calculated as the Day 14 (in the evening), 15 (in the morning), or 16 (at Tmax of GEn and DPH) mean speed over the 1-hour drive minus the Baseline (Days -1 and 1) mean speed over the 1-hour drive.|Baseline (Days -1 and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||miles per hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
840777|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) in Overall Speed Variability|Speed variability was defined as the standard deviation of the speed (measured in miles per hour). Participants were instructed to maintain a speed of 55 miles per hour during the test drive. Change from baseline in overall speed variability was calculated as the Day 14 (in the evening), 15 (in the morning), or 16 (at Tmax of GEn and DPH) mean speed variability over the 1-hour drive minus the Baseline (Days -1 and 1) mean speed variability over the 1-hour drive.|Baseline (Day -1) and Days 14 and 16; baseline (Day 1) and Day 15|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||miles per hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
840778|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Day 16 (at Tmax) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) in Overall Average Lane Position|Lane position was measured from the center line of the 26 foot wide 2-lane paved road to the center of the vehicle. Change from baseline in overall average lane position was calculated as the Day 14 (in the evening), 15 (in the morning after GEn dosed at 5 PM), or 16 (assessment at Tmax of GEn and DPH) mean lane position over the 1-hour drive minus the Baseline (Days -1 and 1) mean lane position over the 1-hour drive.|Baseline (Days -1 and 1) and Days 14, 15, and 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||feet||Standard Deviation|Mean
840779|NCT01332318|Secondary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) to Day 14 (Evening) and Change From Baseline (Day 1) to Day 15 (Morning After Dose) in Overall Lane Position Variability (LPV)|Lane position variability (LPV) was defined as the standard deviation of lane position, and was measured from the center line of the 26 foot wide 2-lane paved road to the center of the vehicle. Change from baseline in overall LPV was calculated as the Day 14 (in the evening) or Day 15 (in the morning after GEn dosed at 5 PM) mean LPV over the 1-hour drive minus the Baseline (Day -1 or Day 1) mean LPV over the 1-hour drive.|Baseline (Days -1 and 1) and Days 14 and 15|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||feet||Standard Deviation|Mean
840780|NCT01332318|Primary|Change From Baseline (Day -1) in Overall Lane Position Variability (LPV) on Day 16 (Tmax)|Lane position variability (LPV) was defined as the standard deviation of lane position, and was measured from the center line of the 26 foot wide 2-lane paved road to the center of the vehicle. Change from baseline in overall LPV was calculated as the Day 16 mean LPV over the 1-hour drive minus the Baseline mean LPV over the 1-hour drive. The Day 16 measurement is at the time of maximum concentration (Tmax) for both GEn and DPH.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 16|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population: all participants in the Safety Population who completed at least one Baseline and one End of Study (Days 14-16) simulated driving assessment. The number of participants assessed at each study day varies due to incomplete/missing data.||feet||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840781|NCT01332357|Primary|Number of Participants With an Asthma-related Event Occurring Between 1 and 6 Months Following the Index Event|A subsequent asthma-related inpatient (IP) visit or emergency department (ED) visit were defined as visits within 6 months of the index event. The index event was defined as an asthma-related hospitalization or ED visit occuring between 2004 and 2008.|Data were collected during a 4-year period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2008.|Adult and pediatric participants with persistent asthma were identified from commercially-insured and Medicaid health plan members with both medical and pharmacy benefits who had data in one of two healthcare claims databases.||participants|||Number
840782|NCT01332435|Secondary|BPH-related Pharmacy Costs|Pharmacy costs related to BPH were defined by claims costs associated with a ICD-9CM diagnosis code for BPH (222.2, 600.xx).|Day 1 of a 1-day study|Enrolled Population||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840783|NCT01332435|Secondary|BPH-related Medical Costs|Medical costs related to BPH were defined by claims costs associated with a ICD-9CM diagnosis code for BPH (222.2, 600.xx).|Day 1 of a 1-day study|Enrolled Population||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840784|NCT01332435|Secondary|Total BPH-related Costs|All costs related to BPH were defined by claims costs associated with a ICD-9CM diagnosis code for BPH (222.2, 600.xx).|Day 1 of a 1-day study|Enrolled Population||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840785|NCT01332435|Primary|Number of Participants Who Needed Prostate-Related Surgery|Prostate-related surgery was identified by relevant CPT procedure codes and ICD-9CM diagnosis codes.|Day 1 of a 1-day study|Enrolled Population||participants|||Number
840786|NCT01332435|Primary|Number of Participants With Acute Urinary Retention|Acute urinary retention was identified by relevant CPT procedure codes and ICD-9CM diagnosis codes.|Day 1 of a 1-day study|Enrolled Population||participants|||Number
840787|NCT01332435|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Progression|Clinical progression was identified as the occurrence of acute urinary retention and/or surgery as identified by relevant Common Procedure Terminology (CPT) procedure codes and International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9CM diagnosis codes.|Day 1 of a 1-day study|Enrolled Population: Men aged >=50 years old between 7/1/2000 and 12/31/2006 with a diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia and who were treated with an AB and concomitant 5-ARI therapy within 6 months of starting AB therapy||participants|||Number
840788|NCT01332461|Secondary|Mean Monthly COPD-related Costs Per Participant|Cost categories included medical, pharmacy, and total calculated as the sum of medical and pharmacy. Costs were computed during a variable follow-up period and were standardized on a per-month basis. COPD-related medical costs were computed using claims with a primary diagnosis of COPD, and COPD-related pharmacy costs were computed using the paid amounts of pharmacy claims for prescription medication used for COPD.|Maximum of 1 year after index date (Jan 1, 2004 through May 30, 2008)|Managed care enrollees with at least 1 inpatient hospitalization (IP) with primary or secondary diagnosis of COPD (International Classification of Disease (ICD) code 491.xx, 492.xx, and 496.xx) or at least one ER visit with primary diagnosis of COPD during the study period with maintenance medication within 60 days post-discharge||United States (US) dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840789|NCT01332461|Secondary|Number of Participants Having a COPD-related Event Related to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Represented Per 100 Person-years|The number of participants having a COPD-related event was computed during the follow-up and was standardized by dividing by the total days of follow-up in each cohort since patients had different lengths of follow-up. Four types of COPD events were defined: COPD-related hospitalization, emergency room (ER) visit, physician visit with a prescription (Rx) for oral corticosteroid or antibiotic within 3 days of the visit, or combined occurrence of any of the aforementioned three types.|Maximum of 1 year after index date (Jan 1, 2004 through May 30, 2008)|Managed care enrollees with at least 1 inpatient hospitalization (IP) with primary or secondary diagnosis of COPD (International Classification of Disease (ICD) code 491.xx, 492.xx, and 496.xx) or at least one ER visit with primary diagnosis of COPD during the study period with maintenance medication within 60 days post-discharge||participants per 100 person-years|||Number
840790|NCT01332461|Primary|Number of Participants Having a Hospitalization or Emergency Room (ER) Visit Related to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Represented Per 100 Person-years|The number of participants (par.) with a COPD-related hospitalization/ ER visit was computed during follow-up (FU) and was standardized by dividing by the total days of FU in each cohort since par. had different lengths of FU. The number of par. per 100 person-years was computed as: numerator = total number of par. with a COPD-related hospitalization/ER visit; denominator = sum of the time of FU in years across all par./100. The index date is defined as the date of discharge from a hospitalization/ER visit for COPD that had a maintenance medication dispensed within 60 days post-discharge.|Maximum of 1 year after index date (Jan 1, 2004 through May 30, 2008)|Managed care enrollees with at least 1 inpatient hospitalization (IP) with primary or secondary diagnosis of COPD (International Classification of Disease (ICD) code 491.xx, 492.xx, and 496.xx) or at least one ER visit with primary diagnosis of COPD during the study period with maintenance medication within 60 days post-discharge||participants per 100 person-years|||Number
840791|NCT01332487|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Time Between Acute Urinary Retention and Subsequent Surgery||6 months|Male participants age 50 years and older with a diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) or enlarged prostate (EP). Only those participants who were treated with surgery within 182 days of the first prescription of 5ARI were analyzed.||participants|||Number
840792|NCT01332487|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Progression of Disease|The number of participants in each study group with a treatment code for acute urinary retention, surgery, or emergency surgery (defined as surgery within 30 days following a diagnosis of acute urinary retention) was measured.|Up to 5 months|Male participants age 50 years and older with a diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) or enlarged prostate (EP)||participants|||Number
840793|NCT01332500|Primary|Mean Total Cost (Health Plan Plus Participant Copay Costs) Per Participant for Migraine-related Medications in 6-month Follow-up Period: Treatment-switch Analysis|Mean Total Cost was defined as the pharmacy cost plus the participant copay. Pharmacy costs were computed corresponding to the use of triptans, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and other migraine therapy tablets (ergots and others). .Pharmacy cost plus participant copay was calculated as the mean of the total costs (pharmacy cost plus participant copay) of the five drug categories.|6-months from the index date (from January 1, 2009 to May 31, 2009; index date was defined as the first switch date to oral triptan/sumatriptan-naproxen sodium prescription)|The SourceLx dataset from the family of Wolters Kluwer databases was used for this study. The database contains 30% of prescription claims filled in the United States, corresponding to approximately 160 million lives.||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840794|NCT01332500|Primary|Mean Health Plan Cost Per Participant for Migraine-related Medications in 6-month Follow-up Period: Treatment-switch Analysis|Health Pan Cost was defined as the pharmacy costs. Pharmacy costs were computed corresponding to the use of triptans, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and other migraine therapy tablets (ergots and others). Pharmacy costs were calculated as the mean of the total costs of the five drug categories.|6-months from the index date (from January 1, 2009 to May 31, 2009; index date was defined as the first switch date to oral triptan/sumatriptan-naproxen sodium prescription)|The SourceLx dataset from the family of Wolters Kluwer databases was used for this study. The database contains 30% of prescription claims filled in the United States, corresponding to approximately 160 million lives.||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840795|NCT01332500|Primary|Mean Number of Triptan Tablets Per Participant in 6-month Follow-up Period: Treatment-switch Analysis|"The mean number of tablets per participant was computed using prescription fills dispensed in the 6-month follow-up period. Other represents APAP/isometheptene/dichlorphenazone and APAP/isometheptene/caffeine, for example. The number of tablets dispensed was obtained from the quantity dispensed field in the claims data. Triptan tablets were classified as index and non-index medication (if a different oral triptan was filled from that of the index medication); only oral triptans were considered (i.e., excluded injectable triptans)."|6-months from the index date (from January 1, 2009 to May 31, 2009; index date was defined as the first switch date to oral triptan/sumatriptan-naproxen sodium prescription)|The SourceLx dataset from the family of Wolters Kluwer databases was used for this study. The database contains 30% of prescription claims filled in the United States, corresponding to approximately 160 million lives.||tablets per participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
840796|NCT01332500|Primary|Mean Total Cost (Health Plan Plus Participant Copay Costs) Per Participant for Migraine-related Medications in 6-month Follow-up Period: Treatment-naïve Analysis|Mean Total Cost was defined as the pharmacy cost plus the participant copay. Pharmacy costs were computed corresponding to the use of triptans, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and other migraine therapy tablets (ergots and others). Pharmacy cost plus participant copay was calculated as the mean of the total costs (pharmacy cost plus participant copay) of the five drug categories.|6-months from the index date (from January 1, 2009 to May 31, 2009; the index date was defined as the first date of oral triptan/sumatriptan-naproxen sodium prescription)|The SourceLx dataset from the family of Wolters Kluwer databases was used for this study. The database contains 30% of prescription claims filled in the United States, corresponding to approximately 160 million lives.||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840797|NCT01332500|Primary|Mean Health Plan Cost Per Participant for Migraine-related Medications in 6-month Follow-up Period: Treatment-naïve Analysis|Health plan cost was defined as the pharmacy costs. Pharmacy costs were computed corresponding to the use of triptans, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and other migraine therapy tablets (ergots and others). Pharmacy costs were calculated as the mean of the total costs of the five drug categories.|6-months from the index date (from January 1, 2009 to May 31, 2009; the index date was defined as the first date of oral triptan/sumatriptan-naproxen sodium prescription)|The SourceLx dataset from the family of Wolters Kluwer databases was used for this study. The database contains 30% of prescription claims filled in the United States, corresponding to approximately 160 million lives.||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
840798|NCT01332500|Primary|Mean Number of Triptan Tablets Per Participant in 6-month Follow-up Period: Treatment-naïve Analysis|"The mean number of tablets per participant was computed using prescription fills dispensed in the 6-month follow-up period. Other represents acetaminophen (APAP)/isometheptene/dichlorphenazone and APAP/isometheptene/caffeine, for example. The number of tablets dispensed was obtained from the quantity dispensed field in the claims data. Triptan tablets were classified as index and non-index medication (if a different oral triptan was filled from that of the index medication); only oral triptans were considered (i.e., excluded injectable triptans)."|6-months from the index date (from January 1, 2009 to May 31, 2009; the index date was defined as the first date of oral triptan/sumatriptan-naproxen sodium prescription)|The SourceLx dataset from the family of Wolters Kluwer databases was used for this study. The database contains 30% of prescription claims filled in the United States, corresponding to approximately 160 million lives.||tablets per participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
840799|NCT01332578|Secondary|Time to Onset and Completion of Disintegration of Reference Tablets|Qualitative onset and completion of tablet disintegration was determined using Gamma scintigraphy images and WebLink image analysis program.|Baseline to 10 hours post dose|Period Level MITT population: all randomized participants with any post baseline pharmacokinetic measurement or scintigraphic measurement, and had evaluable data in one of the two study periods. Tablet Disintegration endpoints were only measured in the first period for each participant.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
840800|NCT01332578|Secondary|Time to Completion of Gastric Emptying|Time to completion of gastric emptying of hot drink remedy and standard paracetamol tablets was assessed using Gamma Scintigraphy images and WebLink image analysis program. Completion of gastric emptying was confirmed by two consecutive images with negligible gastric activity.|Baseline to 10 hours|Period Level MITT population: all randomized participants with any post baseline pharmacokinetic measurement or scintigraphic measurement, and had evaluable data in one of the two study periods. Gastric emptying endpoints were only measured in the first period for each participant.||minutes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840801|NCT01332578|Secondary|Time to Onset of Gastric Emptying|The individual anterior and posterior images were assessed using Gamma Scintigraphy images and WebLink Image Analysis program to determine the time to onset of gastric emptying of hot drink remedy and standard paracetamol tablets.|Baseline to 10 hours|Period Level MITT population: all randomized participants with any post baseline pharmacokinetic measurement or scintigraphic measurement, and had evaluable data in one of the two study periods. Gastric emptying endpoints were only measured in the first period for each participant.||minutes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840802|NCT01332578|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|Time after administration when the maximum plasma concentration was reached.|Blood samples taken within 15-30 min prior to dosing and at 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 15, 20, 30, 45, 90, 120 and 180 minutes post-dose|MITT population: all randomized participants with any post baseline pharmacokinetic measurement or scintigraphic measurement, and had evaluable data in at least one of the two study periods.||hours||Full Range|Median
840803|NCT01332578|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|Cmax was determined using plasma paracetamol concentration time profile.|Blood samples taken within 15-30 min prior to dosing and at 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 15, 20, 30, 45, 90, 120 and 180 minutes post-dose|MITT population: all randomized participants with any post baseline pharmacokinetic measurement or scintigraphic measurement, and had evaluable data in at least one of the two study periods.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840804|NCT01332578|Secondary|AUC (0-60 Min)|AUC (0-60 min) was determined from paracetamol plasma concentration time profiles using trapezoidal method.|Blood samples taken within 15-30 min prior to dosing and at 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 15, 20, 30, 45, 90, 120 and 180 minutes post-dose|MITT population: all randomized participants with any post baseline pharmacokinetic measurement or scintigraphic measurement, and had evaluable data in at least one of the two study periods.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840805|NCT01332578|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration/Time Curve From 0 to 30 Minutes (Min) (AUC 0-30 Min)|AUC (0-30 min) was determined from paracetamol plasma concentration time profiles using trapezoidal rule.|Blood samples taken within 15-30 min prior to dosing and at 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 15, 20, 30, 45, 90, 120 and 180 minutes post-dose|MITT population: all randomized participants with any post baseline pharmacokinetic measurement or scintigraphic measurement, and had evaluable data in at least one of the two study periods.||nanograms (ng)*hours (h)/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840806|NCT01332578|Primary|Time to Reach Plasma Paracetamol Concentration of 0.25 μg/mL (Microgram Per Milliliter)|Time to reach plasma paracetamol concentration of 0.25 μg/mL was determined using plasma concentration time profiles.|Blood samples taken within 15-30 minutes prior to dosing and at 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 15, 20, 30, 45, 90, 120 and 180 minutes post-dose|Modified Intent-To-Treat (MITT) population: all randomized participants with any post baseline pharmacokinetic measurement or scintigraphic measurement, and had evaluable data in at least one of the two study periods.||minutes||Full Range|Median
840807|NCT01332721|Secondary|Objective Response According to RECIST 1.1|The best response according to RECIST 1.1 for each patient with measurable disease and who received at least one dose of study drug will be listed by cohort and tumor type|1.5 years|||participants|||Number
840808|NCT01332721|Secondary|Immune Response to TRC105|HAMA and HACA titers will be measured at specified time-points.|1.5 years|||participants|||Number
840809|NCT01332721|Secondary|TRC105 Pharmacokinetic Concentrations|Plasma TRC105 concentrations will be measured at specified timepoints.|1.5 years||||||
840810|NCT01332721|Primary|Determine Maximum Tolerated Dose of TRC105 in Combination With Bevacizumab|Safety and dose limiting toxicity will be assessed by dose cohort.|1.5 years|||mg/kg|||Number
840811|NCT01332968|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Euro-Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Questionnaire Summary Score (Follicular Lymphoma Population) During Follow Up Phase|The EQ-5D is a quality of life questionnaire with five questions, each with three categories (no problem, moderate problem, severe problems) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (worst possible health state) to 100 (best possible health state. Summary score ranges from 0 to 1. Higher scores indicate better outcomes. A positive change from baseline indicates an improvement. Maintenance/Observation is indicated as Maint/Obs in data categories. Completion includes completion visit and early termination visit.|Induction: Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), Cycle 3 Day 1, End of Induction (up to 7 months); Maintenance: 2, 12 after Day 1 of last induction cycle, Follow-up: every year for up to data cut-off (up to 4 years and 7 months)|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840812|NCT01332968|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Euro-Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Questionnaire Summary Score (Follicular Lymphoma Population) During Maintenance/Observation Phase|The EQ-5D is a quality of life questionnaire with five questions, each with three categories (no problem, moderate problem, severe problems) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (worst possible health state) to 100 (best possible health state. Summary score ranges from 0 to 1 Higher scores indicate better outcomes. A positive change from baseline indicates an improvement. Maintenance/Observation is indicated as Maint/Obs. Completion includes completion visit and early termination visit.|Induction: Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), Cycle 3 Day 1, End of Induction (up to 7 months); Maintenance: 2, 12 months after Day 1 of last induction cycle, Follow-up: every year up to data cut-off (up to 4 years and 7 months)|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840910|NCT01338649|Secondary|Actigraphy Measures Including Total Sleep Time, Sleep Efficiency, Sleep Fragmentation Index, Frequency of Naps, and Mean Activity Level (a Measurement of Daytime Function) Will be Collected.|Actigraphy measures including total sleep time, sleep efficiency, sleep fragmentation index, frequency of naps, and mean activity levelwill be completed for 3 - 2 week intervals by the subjects at home. Actigraphy measures will be collected at weeks 2, 4 and 6.|6 weeks||||||
840813|NCT01332968|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Euro-Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Questionnaire Summary Score (Follicular Lymphoma Population) During Induction Phase|The EQ-5D is a quality of life questionnaire with five questions, each with three categories (no problem, moderate problem, severe problems) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (worst possible health state) to 100 (best possible health state. Summary score ranges from 0 to 1. Higher scores indicate better outcomes. A positive change from baseline indicates an improvement. Completion (Compl) includes completion visit and early termination visit. Maintenance/Observation is indicated as Maint/Obs.|Induction: Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), Cycle 3 Day 1, End of Induction (up to 7 months); Maintenance: 2, 12 months after Day 1 of last induction cycle, Follow-up: every year up to data cut-off (up to 4 years and 7 months)|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840814|NCT01332968|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) Total Score (Follicular Population)|The FACT-Lym Total Score for the follicular lymphoma population was derived from the following 5 individual FACT-Lym questionnaire subscale scores: Physical Well-being (range: 0-28), Social/Family Well-being (range: 0-28), Emotional Well-being (range: 0-24),Functional Well-being (range: 0-28) and Lymphoma (range: 0-60). The FACT-Lym Total Score is the sum of all 5 individual subscales (range 0-168). Higher scores indicate better outcomes. A positive change from baseline indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Induction Cycle 1, Day 1), data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The FL ITT population was defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840815|NCT01332968|Secondary|Change From Baseline in FACT-Lym Individual Subscale Lymphoma Score (Follicular Population)|The FACT-Lym Individual Subscale Lymphoma Score for the follicular lymphoma population was derived from the Lymphoma subscale questionnaire (range: 0-60). Higher scores indicate better outcomes. A positive change from baseline indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Induction Cycle 1, Day 1), data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The FL ITT population was defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840816|NCT01332968|Secondary|Change From Baseline in FACT-Lym Total Outcome Index (TOI) Score (Follicular Lymphoma Population)|The FACT-Lym TOI Score for the follicular lymphoma population was derived from the following 3 individual FACT-Lym questionnaire subscale scores: Physical Well-being (range: 0-28), Functional Well-being (range: 0-28) and Lymphoma (range: 0-60). The FACT-Lym TOI Score is the sum of the 3 individual subscales (range 0-116). Higher scores indicate better outcomes. A positive change from baseline indicates an improvement.|Baseline (Induction Cycle 1, Day 1), data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The FL ITT population was defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840817|NCT01332968|Secondary|Change From Baseline in All Domains of FACT-G (Follicular Lymphoma Population)|FACT-G consists of the following 4 FACT-Lym sub-questionnaires: Physical Well-being (range: 0-28), Social/Family Well-being (range: 0-28), Emotional Well-being (range: 0-24) and Functional Well-being (range: 0-28). Higher scores indicate better outcomes. A positive change from baseline indicates improvement. Maint = Maintenance period.|Baseline (Induction Cycle 1, Day 1), data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The FL ITT population was defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840818|NCT01332968|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with the treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a pharmaceutical product, whether or not considered related to the pharmaceutical product. Preexisting conditions which worsen during a study are also considered as adverse events.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The safety analysis population included all participants who received any amount of any study drug and participants were analyzed according to the treatment received.||percentage of participants|||Number
840819|NCT01332968|Secondary|Time to Next Anti-Lymphoma Treatment (Overall Study Population)|Time to next anti-lymphoma treatment was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the start date of the next anti-lymphoma treatment or death from any cause. Reported is the percentage of participants with event.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The ITT population defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840820|NCT01332968|Secondary|Time to Next Anti-Lymphoma Treatment (Follicular Lymphoma Population)|Time to next anti-lymphoma treatment was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the start date of the next anti-lymphoma treatment or death from any cause. Reported is the percentage of participants with event.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840835|NCT01332968|Secondary|Overall Response (Overall Study Population), Investigator-Assessed|Overall response in the overall study population was defined as percentage of participants with partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) determined on the basis of investigator assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without positron emission tomography (PET). CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions; PR was defined as >=50% decrease target lesions in up to six dominant lesions identified at baseline, no new lesions and no increase in the size of the liver, spleen, or other nodes. Splenic and hepatic nodules must have regressed by >/= 50%; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Baseline up to end of induction period (up to approximately 7 months)|The ITT population defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840821|NCT01332968|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR) (Overall Study Population), Investigator-Assessed|DOR was defined as the time from first occurrence of a documented CR or PR to disease progression/relapse, or death from any cause for participants with a response of CR or PR any time prior to NALT based on RRCML. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions. PR was defined as >/=50% decrease target lesions in up to six dominant lesions identified at baseline, no new lesions and no increase in the size of the liver, spleen, or other nodes. Splenic and hepatic nodules must have regressed by >/= 50%. Progression/relapse was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm.|From first occurrence of documented CR or PR to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|Participants with CR or PR within the ITT population were included in the analysis. The ITT population defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840822|NCT01332968|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR) (Follicular Lymphoma Population), Investigator-Assessed|DOR was defined as the time from first occurrence of a documented CR or PR to disease progression/relapse, or death from any cause for participants with a response of CR or PR any time prior to NALT based on RRCML. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions. PR was defined as >/=50% decrease target lesions in up to six dominant lesions identified at baseline, no new lesions and no increase in the size of the liver, spleen, or other nodes. Splenic and hepatic nodules must have regressed by >/= 50%. Progression/relapse was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm.|From first occurrence of documented CR or PR to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months|Participants with CR or PR within the FL ITT population were included in the analysis.The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840823|NCT01332968|Secondary|Disease-Free Survival (Overall Study Population)|Disease-free survival in the overall study population was defined as the time from the date of the first occurrence of a documented CR to the date of disease progression/ relapse, or death from any cause for the subgroup of participants with a response of CR at any time prior to NALT on the basis of investigator assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions. Progression/relapse was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Reported is the percentage of participants with event.|From first occurrence of documented CR to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months|Participants with CR within the ITT population were included in the analysis.The ITT population was defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840824|NCT01332968|Secondary|Disease-Free Survival (Follicular Lymphoma Population)|Disease-free survival in the follicular lymphoma population was defined as the time from the date of the first occurrence of a documented CR to the date of disease progression/ relapse, or death from any cause for the subgroup of participants with a response of CR at any time prior to NALT on the basis of investigator assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma (RRCML). Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions. Progression/relapse was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Reported is the percentage of participants with event.|From first occurrence of documented CR to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|Participants with CR within the FL ITT population were included in the analysis.The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840825|NCT01332968|Secondary|Event-Free Survival (Overall Study Population)|Event-free survival in the overall study population was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date to disease progression/relapse, death from any cause, or initiation of a new anti-lymphoma treatment (NALT) on the basis of investigator assessment assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Disease progression/relapse was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Tumor measurements were obtained by CT/MRI. Reported is the percentage of participants with event.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months|The ITT population defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840876|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Blood samples for laboratory assessments, including hemoglobin level, were collected prior to each dose of study medication. The mean hemoglobin level was determined at Baseline and for assessment visits by averaging the observed hemoglobin level among all participants providing evaluable blood samples. Change from Baseline was calculated as [mean hemoglobin at the assessment visit minus mean hemoglobin at Baseline] and expressed in grams per liter (g/L).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
840826|NCT01332968|Secondary|Event-Free Survival (Follicular Lymphoma Population)|Event-free survival in the follicular lymphoma population was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date to disease progression/relapse, death from any cause, or initiation of a new anti-lymphoma treatment (NALT) on the basis of investigator assessment assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Disease progression/relapse was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Tumor measurements were obtained by CT/MRI. Reported is the percentage of participants with an event.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840827|NCT01332968|Secondary|Overall Survival (Overall Study Population)|Overall survival in the overall study population was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. Reported is the percentage of participants with event.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months|The ITT population defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840828|NCT01332968|Secondary|Overall Survival (Follicular Lymphoma Population)|Overall survival in the follicular lymphoma population was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. Reported is the percentage of participants with event.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840829|NCT01332968|Secondary|Complete Response (Overall Study Population), IRC-Assessed|Percentage of participants with complete response in the overall study population was determined on the basis of IRC assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without PET. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions.|Baseline up to end of induction period (up to approximately 7 months)]|The ITT population defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840830|NCT01332968|Secondary|Complete Response (Follicular Lymphoma Population), IRC-Assessed|Percentage of participants with complete response in the follicular lymphoma population was determined on the basis of IRC assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without PET. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions.|Baseline up to end of induction period (up to approximately 7 months)|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840831|NCT01332968|Secondary|Overall Response (Overall Study Population), IRC-Assessed|Overall response in the overall study population was defined as percentage of participants with PR or CR determined on the basis of IRC assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without PET. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions; PR was defined as >=50% decrease target lesions in up to six dominant lesions identified at baseline, no new lesions and no increase in the size of the liver, spleen, or other nodes. Splenic and hepatic nodules must have regressed by >/= 50%; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Baseline up to end of induction period (up to approximately 7 months)|The ITT population defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840832|NCT01332968|Secondary|Overall Response (Follicular Lymphoma Population), IRC-Assessed|Overall response in the follicular lymphoma population was defined as percentage of participants with PR or complete response CR determined on the basis of IRC assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without PET. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions; PR was defined as >=50% decrease target lesions in up to six dominant lesions identified at baseline, no new lesions and no increase in the size of the liver, spleen, or other nodes. Splenic and hepatic nodules must have regressed by >/= 50%. Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Baseline up to end of induction period (up to approximately 7 months)|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840833|NCT01332968|Secondary|Complete Response (Overall Study Population), Investigator-Assessed|Percentage of participants with complete response in the overall study population was determined on the basis of investigator assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without PET. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions.|Baseline up to end of induction period (up to approximately 7 months)|The ITT population defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840834|NCT01332968|Secondary|Complete Response (Follicular Lymphoma Population), Investigator-Assessed|Percentage of participants with complete response in the follicular lymphoma population was determined on the basis of investigator assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with or without PET. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions.|Baseline up to end of induction period (up to approximately 7 months)|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840911|NCT01338649|Secondary|The Global PSQI Score and PDSS Score Will be Compared.|The global PSQI and PDSS scores will be taken and compared at screening, week 4 and week 6 visits.|6 weeks||||||
840836|NCT01332968|Secondary|Overall Response (Follicular Lymphoma Population), Investigator-Assessed|Overall response in the follicular lymphoma population was defined as percentage of participants with PR or complete response CR determined on the basis of investigator assessments with the use of Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Tumor assessments were performed with CT/MRI with and without PET. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions; PR was defined as >=50% decrease target lesions in up to six dominant lesions identified at baseline, no new lesions and no increase in the size of the liver, spleen, or other nodes. Splenic and hepatic nodules must have regressed by >/= 50%. Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Baseline up to end of induction period (up to approximately 7 months)|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840837|NCT01332968|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (Overall Study Population), Assessed by Independent Review Committee (IRC)|Progression-free survival in the overall study population was defined as the time from randomization until the first documented day of disease progression or death from any cause, whichever occurred first, on the basis of IRC assessments according to the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Progression was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Tumor measurements were obtained by CT/MRI.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The ITT population defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840838|NCT01332968|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (Follicular Lymphoma Population), IRC-Assessed|Progression-free survival in the participants with follicular lymphoma was defined as the time from randomization until the first documented day of disease progression or death from any cause, whichever occurred first, on the basis of IRC assessments according to the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Progression was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Tumor measurements were obtained by CT/MRI. In the first 170 patients with follicular lymphoma, an FDG-PET was mandatory where a PET scanner was available.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The FL ITT population, defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840839|NCT01332968|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival in the Overall Study Population, Investigator-Assessed|Progression-free survival in the overall study population was defined as the time from randomization until the first documented day of disease progression or death from any cause, whichever occurred first, on the basis of investigator assessments according to the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Progression was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Tumor measurements were obtained by CT/MRI.|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The ITT population defined as all randomized participants grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840840|NCT01332968|Primary|Progression-Free Survival in the Follicular Lymphoma Population, Investigator-Assessed|Progression-free survival in participants with follicular lymphoma was defined as the time from randomization until the first documented day of disease progression or death from any cause, whichever occurred first, on the basis of investigator assessments according to the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Progression was defined as at least 50% increase in nodal lesions or >/=50% increase in any node > 1 centimeter (cm) or >/= 50% increase in other target measurable lesions (e.g., splenic or hepatic nodules) and/or appearance of any new bone marrow involvement and/or appearance of any new lesion > 1.5 cm or >/= 50% increase in any previously involved node with a diameter </= 1 cm such that it is now >1.5 cm. Tumor measurements were obtained by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).|Baseline up to data cut-off (up to approximately 4 years and 7 months)|The intent-to-treat follicular lymphoma population (FL ITT), defined as all randomized participants with follicular histology, where participants were grouped according to their randomized treatment arm regardless of what treatments were actually received.||percentage of participants with event|||Number
840841|NCT01332981|Secondary|Prognostic Factors For Time to Progression|Prognostic factors for TTP were searched by using Cox regression model. First, all parameters were analysed in univariate models, and the hypothesis of proportional risks was tested. Significant parameters at 15% level were retained for multivariate model. For multivariate analyses, 2 models were built for prognostic factor of TTP. In Model 1, stepwise selection method was used on all parameters that were significant in the univariate analyses, whatever the significance level of the associations between parameters. In Model 2, stepwise selection was used on the significant parameters that were not correlated. The significance level for entry was 10% and the significance level for exit was 5%. Six parameters remained in the Model 1 to search for prognostic factors of TTP. Once the correlated variables were removed, there were only 3 variables left in Model 2: the age was not kept by the stepwise selection. Results below are for Model 1 and similar results were obtained for Model 2|Up to 7 years|Participants with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer included in HERMINE study and treated with trastuzumab as first line therapy.||Hazard Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840912|NCT01338649|Primary|Change in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) Scores Comparing the Bright Light Exposure With Dim-red Light Exposure.|ESS score range is 0-24; lower ESS scores indicate less daytime sleepiness; higher ESS scores indicate more severe sleepiness ESS will be taken and compared at screening and week 4 visits between the bright light exposure and dim-red light exposure groups.|baseline and 4 weeks|||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
840842|NCT01332981|Secondary|Prognostic Factors for Overall Survival|Search for prognostic factors for OS was performed using Cox regression model. First, all parameters were analyzed in univariate models, and the hypothesis of proportional risks was tested. Significant parameters at 15%-level were retained for the multivariate model. For the multivariate analysis, two models were built for prognostic factors for OS. In the first one (Model 1), a stepwise selection method was used on all parameters that were significant in the univariate analyses, whatever the significance level of the associations between parameters. In the second one (Model 2), a stepwise selection was used on the significant parameters that were not correlated. The significance level for entry was 10% and the significance level for removal was 5%. The variables n°5 and n°6 were found to be significantly associated, thus only the variable n°6 was tested in the Model 2. This variable was not retained by the stepwise selection in the Model 1, contrary to the variable n°5.|Up to 7 years|Participants with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer included in HERMINE study and treated with trastuzumab as first line therapy.||Hazard Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840843|NCT01332981|Secondary|Median Treatment Duration and the Duration of Exposure to Trastuzumab|Treatment duration was defined as the time between the first and the last infusion of trastuzumab. Exposure duration was defined only for the participants who continued trastuzumab after HERMINE study, as the sum of treatment duration as part of HERMINE study and of the treatment durations as part of post-HERMINE study taking into account temporary treatment discontinuations. For analyses of treatment and exposure duration , dates of infusion of trastuzumab were missing for 18 participants, so treatment and exposure durations were calculated for only 202 participants.|Up to 7 years|Participants with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer included in HERMINE study and treated with trastuzumab as first line therapy.||Years||Full Range|Median
840844|NCT01332981|Secondary|Median Time to Progression|The Time to Progression (TTP) was defined as the time between the treatment start date (date of the first trastuzumab infusion) and the date of the first disease progression or disease-related death. Participants who had not progressed at the end of the post-HERMINE study were censored at the last date they were known to be alive. If the cause of death was unknown, the death was considered for this analysis as due to the disease. All participants who did not progress, the death was considered to be due to the disease.|Up to 7 years|Participants with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer included in HERMINE study and treated with trastuzumab as first line therapy.||Years||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840845|NCT01332981|Secondary|Median Time to Progression-Free Survival|The Progression-Free Survival (PFS) was defined as the time between the treatment start date (date of the first trastuzumab infusion) and the date of the first disease progression or disease-related death. Participants who had not progressed at the end of the post-HERMINE study were censored at the last date they were known to be alive. Progression-Free Survival was estimated by using Kaplan-Meier method.|Up to 7 years|Participants with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer included in HERMINE study and treated with trastuzumab as first line therapy.||Years||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840846|NCT01332981|Primary|Median Overall Survival|The time between the first infusion of trastuzumab and the date of death from any cause. Participants who were still alive at the end of the post-HERMINE study or lost to follow-up were censored at the last date they were known to be alive.|Up to 7 years|Participants with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer included in HERMINE study and treated with trastuzumab as first line therapy.||Years||95% Confidence Interval|Median
840847|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to 32 in Quality of Life as Assessed Using FACIT Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|The FACIT-F evaluates quality of life using 5 categories: PWB, SWB, EWB, FWB, and FS. Participants answer each item on a 5-point scale from 0 to 4. The total score is the sum of individual responses across all 5 categories and may range from 0 to 160. The FACIT-G (range 0 to 108) is the sum of scores for PWB, SWB, EWB, and FWB; the FACIT-F TOI (range 0 to 108) is the sum of scores for PWB, FWB, and FS; and the FACIT-F fatigue (range 0 to 52) is the sum of scores for the FS only. For derivations of the FACIT-F reported here, higher scores indicate better quality of life. The mean score at each timepoint was determined by averaging scores among all participants, and the change in score was calculated as [mean score at Week 32 minus mean score at Week 16].|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT3 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840848|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to 32 in Quality of Life as Assessed Using FACIT Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|The FACIT-F evaluates quality of life using 5 categories: PWB, SWB, EWB, FWB, and FS. Participants answer each item on a 5-point scale from 0 to 4. The total score is the sum of individual responses across all 5 categories and may range from 0 to 160. The FACIT-G (range 0 to 108) is the sum of scores for PWB, SWB, EWB, and FWB; the FACIT-F TOI (range 0 to 108) is the sum of scores for PWB, FWB, and FS; and the FACIT-F fatigue (range 0 to 52) is the sum of scores for the FS only. For derivations of the FACIT-F reported here, higher scores indicate better quality of life. The mean score at each timepoint was determined by averaging scores among all participants, and the change in score was calculated as [mean score at Week 32 minus mean score at Week 16].|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT2 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840849|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quality of Life as Assessed Using FACIT at Week 16|The FACIT-F evaluates quality of life using 5 categories: PWB, SWB, EWB, FWB, and FS. Participants answer each item on a 5-point scale from 0 to 4. The total score is the sum of individual responses across all 5 categories and may range from 0 to 160. The FACIT-G (range 0 to 108) is the sum of scores for PWB, SWB, EWB, and FWB; the FACIT-F TOI (range 0 to 108) is the sum of scores for PWB, FWB, and FS; and the FACIT-F fatigue (range 0 to 52) is the sum of scores for the FS only. For derivations of the FACIT-F reported here, higher scores indicate better quality of life. The mean score at each timepoint was determined by averaging scores among all participants, and the change in score was calculated as [mean score at Week 16 minus mean score at Baseline].|Baseline and Week 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840908|NCT01338636|Primary|Changes From Baseline in Peak Exercise Mean Pulmonary Artery Pressure (mPAP), Transpulmonary Pressure Gradient (TPG), and Pulmonary Capillary Wedge Pressure (PCWP)|mPAP is measure of the blood pressure found in the main artery of the lung. TPG is the difference between mean pulmonary arterial pressure and left atrial pressure. PCWP is the pressure measured by wedging a pulmonary catheter with an inflated balloon into a small pulmonary arterial branch.|Baseline to Week 24|The analysis population included evaluable participants who completed the 24-week treatment period.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840850|NCT01332994|Secondary|Quality of Life as Assessed Using Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)|The FACIT-F evaluates quality of life using 5 categories: physical well-being (PWB), social/family well-being (SWB), emotional well-being (EWB), functional well-being (FWB), and fatigue (FS). Participants answer each item on a 5-point scale from 0 to 4. The total score is the sum of individual responses across all 5 categories and may range from 0 to 160. The FACIT-General (FACIT-G; range 0 to 108) is the sum of scores for PWB, SWB, EWB, and FWB; the FACIT-Fatigue (FACIT-F) trial outcome index (TOI; range 0 to 108) is the sum of scores for PWB, FWB, and FS; and the FACIT-F fatigue (range 0 to 52) is the sum of scores for the FS only. For derivations of the FACIT-F reported here, higher scores indicate better quality of life. The mean score at each timepoint was determined by averaging scores among all participants.|Baseline and Week 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840851|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response According to HAQ-DI Criteria|The HAQ-DI evaluates participant-reported quality of life using 8 categories: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and other common activities such as running errands and performing household chores. Each category contains multiple questions, which are answered using a 4-point scale from 0 to 3. The overall index score is taken as an average of the individual item responses and may range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicate more difficulty in daily living activities. Response was defined as a change in index score >0.22 from Baseline to Week 16.|Baseline and Week 16|Main ITT Population||percentage of participants|||Number
840852|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to 32 in Quality of Life as Assessed Using HAQ-DI Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|The HAQ-DI evaluates participant-reported quality of life using 8 categories: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and other common activities such as running errands and performing household chores. Each category contains multiple questions, which are answered using a 4-point scale from 0 to 3. The overall index score is taken as an average of the individual item responses and may range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicate more difficulty in daily living activities. The mean index score at each timepoint was determined by averaging the scores among all participants, and the change in score was calculated as [mean score at Week 32 minus the mean score at Week 16].|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT3 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840853|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to 32 in Quality of Life as Assessed Using HAQ-DI Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|The HAQ-DI evaluates participant-reported quality of life using 8 categories: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and other common activities such as running errands and performing household chores. Each category contains multiple questions, which are answered using a 4-point scale from 0 to 3. The overall index score is taken as an average of the individual item responses and may range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicate more difficulty in daily living activities. The mean index score at each timepoint was determined by averaging the scores among all participants, and the change in score was calculated as [mean score at Week 32 minus the mean score at Week 16].|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT2 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840854|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quality of Life as Assessed Using HAQ-DI at Week 16|The HAQ-DI evaluates participant-reported quality of life using 8 categories: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and other common activities such as running errands and performing household chores. Each category contains multiple questions, which are answered using a 4-point scale from 0 to 3. The overall index score is taken as an average of the individual item responses and may range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicate more difficulty in daily living activities. The mean index score at each timepoint was determined by averaging the scores among all participants, and the change in score was calculated as [mean score at Week 16 minus mean score at Baseline].|Baseline and Week 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840855|NCT01332994|Secondary|Quality of Life as Assessed Using HAQ-DI|The HAQ-DI evaluates participant-reported quality of life using 8 categories: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and other common activities such as running errands and performing household chores. Each category contains multiple questions, which are answered using a 4-point scale from 0 to 3. The overall index score is taken as an average of the individual item responses and may range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicate more difficulty in daily living activities. The mean index score at each timepoint was determined by averaging the scores among all participants.|Baseline and Week 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840856|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to 32 in Quality of Life as Assessed Using SF-36 Scores Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|The SF-36 evaluates participant-rated quality of life using 8 domains: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, and mental health. The score for each section is the average of the individual question scores, which are scaled from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better functioning. The mean score at each timepoint was determined by averaging the scores among all participants, and the change in each domain score was calculated as [mean score at Week 32 minus mean score at Week 16].|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT3 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840857|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to 32 in Quality of Life as Assessed Using SF-36 Scores Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|The SF-36 evaluates participant-rated quality of life using 8 domains: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, and mental health. The score for each section is the average of the individual question scores, which are scaled from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better functioning. The mean score at each timepoint was determined by averaging the scores among all participants, and the change in each domain score was calculated as [mean score at Week 32 minus mean score at Week 16].|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT2 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840909|NCT01338649|Secondary|MSLT and Polysomnograph (PSG) Testing Will be Compared.|MSLT and PSG testing will take place prior to light intervention at screening 2 and post light intervention at week 4.|4 weeks||||||
840858|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quality of Life as Assessed Using SF-36 at Week 16|The SF-36 evaluates participant-rated quality of life using 8 domains: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, and mental health. The score for each section is the average of the individual question scores, which are scaled from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better functioning. The mean score at each timepoint was determined by averaging the scores among all participants, and the change in each domain score was calculated as [mean score at Week 16 minus mean score at Baseline].|Baseline and Week 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840859|NCT01332994|Secondary|Quality of Life as Assessed Using Short Form 36 (SF-36)|The SF-36 evaluates participant-rated quality of life using 8 domains: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, and mental health. The score for each section is the average of the individual question scores, which are scaled from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better functioning. The mean score at each timepoint was determined by averaging the scores among all participants.|Baseline and Week 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840860|NCT01332994|Secondary|Mean Number of Work Days Missed Per Week|Work days missed were documented by reason (either rheumatoid arthritis [RA] or other reasons) for each participant over the preceding 7-day period. The mean number of work days missed was calculated by averaging the number of days missed per week among all participants.|Baseline and Week 16|Main ITT Population. Employed participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
840861|NCT01332994|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between Percentage of B-Cells at Baseline and Difference in DAS28 Scores Between Baseline and Weeks 16, 32, 40, 48, and 66 Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|Blood samples were collected to analyze total B-cell panel via immunophenotyping. Subpopulations were as follows: transitional, naïve, pre-switch memory, post-switch memory, IgG-positive class-switched, IgA-positive class-switched, double-negative memory, and plasmablasts. Naive B-cell compartment was defined as the sum of transitional and naive B-cells. The sum of memory B-cell subsets with or without double-negative B-cells was also determined. Extent of disease response, using change from Baseline in DAS28 score, was correlated to the percentage of B-cells within each subpopulation at Baseline. Correlation is indicated by a correlation coefficient (r) >0.2, with greater values indicating a stronger correlation.|Baseline and Weeks 16, 32, 40, 48, and 66|ITT3 Population; n = number of data pairs included in the analysis.||coefficient|Participants||Number
840862|NCT01332994|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between Percentage of B-Cells at Baseline and Difference in DAS28 Scores Between Baseline and Weeks 16, 24, and 32 Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|Blood samples were collected to analyze total B-cell panel via immunophenotyping. Subpopulations were as follows: transitional, naïve, pre-switch memory, post-switch memory, IgG-positive class-switched, IgA-positive class-switched, double-negative memory, and plasmablasts. Naive B-cell compartment was defined as the sum of transitional and naive B-cells. The sum of memory B-cell subsets with or without double-negative B-cells was also determined. Extent of disease response, using change from Baseline in DAS28 score, was correlated to the percentage of B-cells within each subpopulation at Baseline. Correlation is indicated by a correlation coefficient (r) >0.2, with greater values indicating a stronger correlation.|Baseline and Weeks 16, 24, and 32|ITT2 Population; n = number of data pairs included in the analysis.||coefficient|Participants||Number
840863|NCT01332994|Secondary|Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Between Percentage of B-Cells at Baseline and Difference in DAS28 Scores Between Baseline and Week 16 Among Participants With Early Remission|Blood samples were collected to analyze total B-cell panel via immunophenotyping. Subpopulations were as follows: transitional, naïve, pre-switch memory, post-switch memory, IgG-positive class-switched, IgA-positive class-switched, double-negative memory, and plasmablasts. Naive B-cell compartment was defined as the sum of transitional and naive B-cells. The sum of memory B-cell subsets with or without double-negative B-cells was also determined. Extent of disease response, using change from Baseline to Week 16 in DAS28 score, was correlated to the percentage of B-cells within each subpopulation at Baseline. Correlation is indicated by a correlation coefficient (r) >0.2, with greater values indicating a stronger correlation.|Baseline and Week 16|ITT1 Population; n = number of data pairs included in the analysis.||coefficient|Participants||Number
840864|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of B-Cells at Baseline by B-Cell Subpopulation Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|Blood samples were collected to analyze total B-cell panel via immunophenotyping. Subpopulations were as follows: transitional (cluster of differentiation [CD] 19-positive, immunoglobulin (Ig) D-positive, CD38 medium, CD10-positive); naive (CD19-positive, IgD-positive, CD38 medium, CD27-negative); pre-switch memory (CD19-positive, CD27-positive, IgD-positive); post-switch memory (CD19-positive, CD27-positive, IgD-negative); IgG-positive class-switched (CD19-positive, IgG-positive); IgA-positive class-switched (CD19-positive, IgA-positive); double-negative memory (CD19-positive, IgD-negative, CD27-negative); and plasmablasts (CD19-positive, IgD-negative, CD38 high, CD27 high). Naive B-cell compartment was defined as the sum of transitional and naive B-cells. The sum of memory B-cell subsets with or without double-negative B-cells was also determined.|Baseline|ITT3 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||percentage of B-cells||Full Range|Median
840865|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of B-Cells at Baseline by B-Cell Subpopulation Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|Blood samples were collected to analyze total B-cell panel via immunophenotyping. Subpopulations were as follows: transitional (cluster of differentiation [CD] 19-positive, immunoglobulin (Ig) D-positive, CD38 medium, CD10-positive); naive (CD19-positive, IgD-positive, CD38 medium, CD27-negative); pre-switch memory (CD19-positive, CD27-positive, IgD-positive); post-switch memory (CD19-positive, CD27-positive, IgD-negative); IgG-positive class-switched (CD19-positive, IgG-positive); IgA-positive class-switched (CD19-positive, IgA-positive); double-negative memory (CD19-positive, IgD-negative, CD27-negative); and plasmablasts (CD19-positive, IgD-negative, CD38 high, CD27 high). Naive B-cell compartment was defined as the sum of transitional and naive B-cells. The sum of memory B-cell subsets with or without double-negative B-cells was also determined.|Baseline|ITT2 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||percentage of B-cells||Full Range|Median
840866|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of B-Cells at Baseline by B-Cell Subpopulation Among Participants With Early Remission|Blood samples were collected to analyze total B-cell panel via immunophenotyping. Subpopulations were as follows: transitional (cluster of differentiation [CD] 19-positive, immunoglobulin (Ig) D-positive, CD38 medium, CD10-positive); naive (CD19-positive, IgD-positive, CD38 medium, CD27-negative); pre-switch memory (CD19-positive, CD27-positive, IgD-positive); post-switch memory (CD19-positive, CD27-positive, IgD-negative); IgG-positive class-switched (CD19-positive, IgG-positive); IgA-positive class-switched (CD19-positive, IgA-positive); double-negative memory (CD19-positive, IgD-negative, CD27-negative); and plasmablasts (CD19-positive, IgD-negative, CD38 high, CD27 high). Naive B-cell compartment was defined as the sum of transitional and naive B-cells. The sum of memory B-cell subsets with or without double-negative B-cells was also determined.|Baseline|ITT1 Population: All participants who received at least one dose of TCZ in the first treatment period and who completed the study reaching remission at Week 16. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||percentage of B-cells||Full Range|Median
840867|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Withdrawing From the Study for Insufficient Therapeutic Response|Study discontinuation was documented by reason for each participant prematurely withdrawing from the study. The percentage of participants was calculated as the number withdrawing for insufficient therapeutic response divided by the total number of participants who began treatment.|Baseline to Week 16|Main ITT Population. Participants who withdrew for reasons other than insufficient therapeutic response were not included in the analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840868|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ESR at Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32 Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|Blood samples for laboratory assessments, including ESR, were collected prior to each dose of study medication. The mean ESR was determined at Baseline and for assessment visits by averaging the observed ESR among all participants providing evaluable blood samples. Change from Baseline was calculated as [mean ESR at the assessment visit minus mean ESR at Baseline] and expressed in mm/h.|Baseline and Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32|ITT2 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||mm/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
840869|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CRP at Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32 Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|Blood samples for laboratory assessments, including CRP level, were collected prior to each dose of study medication. The mean CRP level was determined at Baseline and for assessment visits by averaging the observed CRP level among all participants providing evaluable blood samples. Change from Baseline was calculated as [mean CRP at the assessment visit minus mean CRP at Baseline] and expressed in mg/dL.|Baseline and Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32|ITT2 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840870|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin at Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32 Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|Blood samples for laboratory assessments, including hemoglobin level, were collected prior to each dose of study medication. The mean hemoglobin level was determined at Baseline and for assessment visits by averaging the observed hemoglobin level among all participants providing evaluable blood samples. Change from Baseline was calculated as [mean hemoglobin at the assessment visit minus mean hemoglobin at Baseline] and expressed in g/L.|Baseline and Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32|ITT2 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
840871|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change in ESR From Week 16 to 32 Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|Blood samples for laboratory assessments, including ESR, were collected prior to each dose of study medication. The mean ESR was determined at Baseline and for assessment visits by averaging the observed ESR among all participants providing evaluable blood samples. Change was calculated as [mean ESR at Week 32 minus mean ESR at Week 16] and expressed in mm/h.|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT3 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit were included.||mm/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
840872|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change in CRP From Week 16 to 32 Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|Blood samples for laboratory assessments, including CRP level, were collected prior to each dose of study medication. The mean CRP level was determined at Baseline and for assessment visits by averaging the observed CRP level among all participants providing evaluable blood samples. Change was calculated as [mean CRP at Week 32 minus mean CRP at Week 16] and expressed in mg/dL.|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT3 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit were included.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840873|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change in Hemoglobin From Week 16 to 32 Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|Blood samples for laboratory assessments, including hemoglobin level, were collected prior to each dose of study medication. The mean hemoglobin level was determined at Baseline and for assessment visits by averaging the observed hemoglobin level among all participants providing evaluable blood samples. Change was calculated as [mean hemoglobin at Week 32 minus mean hemoglobin at Week 16] and expressed in g/L.|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT3 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit were included.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
840874|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ESR at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Blood samples for laboratory assessments, including ESR, were collected prior to each dose of study medication. The mean ESR was determined at Baseline and for assessment visits by averaging the observed ESR among all participants providing evaluable blood samples. Change from Baseline was calculated as [mean ESR at the assessment visit minus mean ESR at Baseline] and expressed in millimeters per hour (mm/h).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||mm/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
840875|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CRP at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Blood samples for laboratory assessments, including CRP level, were collected prior to each dose of study medication. The mean CRP level was determined at Baseline and for assessment visits by averaging the observed CRP level among all participants providing evaluable blood samples. Change from Baseline was calculated as [mean CRP at the assessment visit minus mean CRP at Baseline] and expressed in milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL).|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
840913|NCT01338792|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Safety evaluation according to the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 3.0.|Baseline, days 1 and 7 of each course, and at last evaluation, up to 1 year|All participants who started treatment were included.||Participants|||Number
840877|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CDAI and SDAI Scores at Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32 Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|The CDAI was calculated as [SJC + TJC + VAS patient global assessment of disease activity + VAS physician global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' CDAI scores ranged from 0 to 76, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. The SDAI was determined by adding CRP level to the CDAI score. Scores ranged from 0 to 86, with higher scores also indicating increased disease activity. A reduction in either score at the assessment visit reflects improvement in disease.|Baseline and Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32|ITT2 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840878|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to 32 in CDAI and SDAI Scores Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|The CDAI was calculated as [SJC + TJC + VAS patient global assessment of disease activity + VAS physician global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' CDAI scores ranged from 0 to 76, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. The SDAI was determined by adding CRP level to the CDAI score. Scores ranged from 0 to 86, with higher scores also indicating increased disease activity. A reduction in either score at the assessment visit reflects improvement in disease.|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT3 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840879|NCT01332994|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|The CDAI was calculated as [SJC + TJC + VAS patient global assessment of disease activity + VAS physician global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' CDAI scores ranged from 0 to 76, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. The SDAI was determined by adding CRP level to the CDAI score. Scores ranged from 0 to 86, with higher scores also indicating increased disease activity. A reduction in either score at the assessment visit reflects improvement in disease.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840880|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response According to ACR Criteria at Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32 Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|Response was determined using ACR criteria based upon assessment of 66 joints for swelling and 68 joints for tenderness; joints were classified dichotomously as swollen or not swollen and tender or not tender. Respectively, these assessments were used to generate an SJC ranging from 0 to 66 swollen joints and a TJC ranging from 0 to 68 tender joints. Response was defined as a reduction from Baseline of at least 20% for one of the following: VAS scores for patient-reported pain, patient global assessment of disease activity, or physician global assessment of disease activity, HAQ-DI, or CRP; plus a reduction in individual SJC and TJC of 20% (ACR20), 50% (ACR50), or 70% (ACR70). VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.'|Baseline and Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32|ITT2 Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840881|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response According to ACR Criteria at Week 32 Compared to Week 16 Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|Response was determined using ACR criteria based upon assessment of 66 joints for swelling and 68 joints for tenderness; joints were classified dichotomously as swollen or not swollen and tender or not tender. Respectively, these assessments were used to generate an SJC ranging from 0 to 66 swollen joints and a TJC ranging from 0 to 68 tender joints. Response was defined as a reduction from the reference visit (Week 16) of at least 20% for one of the following: VAS scores for patient-reported pain, patient global assessment of disease activity, or physician global assessment of disease activity, HAQ-DI, or CRP; plus a reduction in individual SJC and TJC of 20% (ACR20), 50% (ACR50), or 70% (ACR70). VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.'|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT3 Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840882|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response According to American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Criteria at Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Response was determined using ACR criteria based upon assessment of 66 joints for swelling and 68 joints for tenderness; joints were classified dichotomously as swollen or not swollen and tender or not tender. Respectively, these assessments were used to generate a swollen joint count (SJC) ranging from 0 to 66 swollen joints and a tender joint count (TJC) ranging from 0 to 68 tender joints. Response was defined as a reduction from Baseline of at least 20% for one of the following: VAS scores for patient-reported pain, patient global assessment of disease activity, or physician global assessment of disease activity, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), or C-reactive protein (CRP); plus a reduction in individual SJC and TJC of 20% (ACR20), 50% (ACR50), or 70% (ACR70). VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.'|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Main ITT Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840883|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response According to EULAR Criteria at Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32 Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|Response was determined using EULAR criteria based upon DAS28 absolute scores at the assessment visit and the DAS28 reduction from Baseline. Participants with a score ≤3.2 and reduction of >1.2 points were assessed as having a 'good' response. Participants with a score >3.2 with reduction of >1.2 points, or a score ≤5.1 with reduction of >0.6 to ≤1.2 points, were assessed as having a 'moderate' response. Participants with a score >5.1 with reduction of >0.6 to ≤1.2 points, or any score with reduction ≤0.6 points, were assessed as nonresponders with response recorded as 'none.'|Baseline and Weeks 20, 24, 28, and 32|ITT2 Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840893|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving LDAS According to DAS28 Among Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x the patient global assessment of disease activity using a VAS]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. LDAS was defined as a DAS28 score <3.2 at the assessment visit.|Week 32|ITT3 Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840884|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response According to EULAR Criteria at Week 32 Compared to Week 16 Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|Response was determined using EULAR criteria based upon DAS28 absolute scores at the assessment visit and the DAS28 reduction from the reference visit (Week 16). Participants with a score ≤3.2 and reduction of >1.2 points were assessed as having a 'good' response. Participants with a score >3.2 with reduction of >1.2 points, or a score ≤5.1 with reduction of >0.6 to ≤1.2 points, were assessed as having a 'moderate' response. Participants with a score >5.1 with reduction of >0.6 to ≤1.2 points, or any score with reduction ≤0.6 points, were assessed as nonresponders with response recorded as 'none.'|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT3 Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840885|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response According to European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Criteria at Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16|Response was determined using EULAR criteria based upon DAS28 absolute scores at the assessment visit and the DAS28 reduction from Baseline. Participants with a score ≤3.2 and reduction of >1.2 points were assessed as having a 'good' response. Participants with a score >3.2 with reduction of >1.2 points, or a score ≤5.1 with reduction of >0.6 to ≤1.2 points, were assessed as having a 'moderate' response. Participants with a score >5.1 with reduction of >0.6 to ≤1.2 points, or any score with reduction ≤0.6 points, were assessed as nonresponders with response recorded as 'none.'|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16|Main ITT Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840886|NCT01332994|Secondary|DAS28 Scores During Safety Follow-Up Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity.|Weeks 40, 48, 56, and 66|ITT3 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840887|NCT01332994|Secondary|DAS28 Scores During and After Treatment Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, and 32|ITT3 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840888|NCT01332994|Secondary|DAS28 Scores During and After Treatment Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, and 32|ITT2 Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840889|NCT01332994|Secondary|DAS28 Scores During and After Treatment|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16|Main ITT Population. Participants with evaluable data at the designated visit (number shown = n) were included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840890|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Clinically Relevant Reduction in DAS28 From Week 16 to Week 32 Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. Reductions >1.2 points from the reference visit (Week 16) to the assessment visit were considered clinically relevant.|Weeks 16 and 32|ITT3 Population: All participants who received at least one dose of TCZ in the first treatment period and at least one dose of RTX in the second treatment period with at least one efficacy measurement under RTX.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840891|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Clinically Relevant Reduction From Baseline in DAS28 at Weeks 4, 8, and 12|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. Reductions >1.2 points from Baseline to the assessment visit were considered clinically relevant.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, and 12|Main ITT Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840892|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Clinically Relevant Reduction From Baseline in DAS28 at Week 16|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. Reductions >1.2 points from Baseline to the assessment visit were considered clinically relevant.|Baseline and Week 16|Main ITT Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840906|NCT01338636|Primary|Change From Baseline in Peak Exercise Pulmonary Vascular Compliance (PVC )|PVC is a measure of a pulmonary vein's ability to expand.|Baseline to Week 24|The analysis population included evaluable participants who completed the 24-week treatment period.||mL/mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
840894|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Low Disease Activity Score (LDAS) According to DAS28|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x the patient global assessment of disease activity using a VAS]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. LDAS was defined as a DAS28 score <3.2 at the assessment visit.|Week 16|Main ITT Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840895|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission According to DAS28 at Week 32 Among Nonresponding Participants Treated With Rituximab|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. Remission was defined as a DAS28 score <2.6 at the assessment visit.|Week 32|ITT3 Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840896|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission According to DAS28 at Week 32 Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. Remission was defined as a DAS28 score <2.6 at the assessment visit.|Week 32|ITT2 Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840897|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission According to DAS28 at Weeks 16, 20, 24, and 28 Among Participants Treated With 8 Courses of Tocilizumab|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. Remission was defined as a DAS28 score <2.6 at the assessment visit.|Weeks 16, 20, 24, and 28|ITT2 Population: All participants who received at least one dose of TCZ in the first treatment period with at least one efficacy measurement under TCZ, receiving TCZ in the second treatment period.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840898|NCT01332994|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission According to DAS28 at Weeks 4, 8, and 12|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 x the square root of number of swollen joints] + [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of ESR] + [0.014 x VAS patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. Remission was defined as a DAS28 score <2.6 at the assessment visit.|Weeks 4, 8, and 12|Main ITT Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840899|NCT01332994|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission at Week 16 According to DAS28|The DAS28 was calculated as [0.28 times (x) the square root of number of swollen joints] plus (+) [0.56 x the square root of number of tender joints] + [0.7 x the natural log of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)] + [0.014 x Visual Analog Scale (VAS) patient global assessment of disease activity]. VAS assessments involved a 10-cm horizontal scale from 'no disease activity' to 'maximum disease activity.' DAS28 scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating increased disease activity. Remission was defined as a DAS28 score <2.6 at the assessment visit.|Week 16|Main ITT Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840900|NCT01338610|Primary|Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Global Ocular Discomfort Score, Area Under the Curve, Day 0 to Day 28|An electronic Visual Analog Scale (eVAS) was used by the subject to assess ocular discomfort, both frequency and severity, at Day 0 (pre-treatment) and daily thereafter for 28 days. Assessments were entered into a LogPad® (handheld electronic device). The VAS frequency score ranged from 0 (rarely) to 100 (all the time), and the VAS severity score ranged from 0 (very mildly uncomfortable) to 100 (very severely uncomfortable). The Global Ocular Discomfort Score is a composite of the frequency and severity VAS scores (0-100).|Up to 28 days|All subjects randomized to treatment and receiving at least 1 administration of study medication (intent-to-treat). Mixed model repeated measure (MMRM) approach was used to handle missing data during randomized treatment period.||Units on a scale x days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
840901|NCT01338636|Secondary|World Health Organization Functional Class (WHO FC)|The WHO FC categorizes cardiac disability using four classes, ranging from Class 1 (without limitation of physical activity) to Class 4 (inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort).|Baseline and Week 24|The analysis population included evaluable participants who completed the 24-week treatment period.||class||Standard Deviation|Mean
840902|NCT01338636|Secondary|Borg Dyspnea Scale Score|The Borg Dyspnea Scale measures how breathless the participant feels. Scores range from 0 (no shortness of breath) to 10+ (more short of breath than ever experienced). A score greater that 10 represents very extreme shortness of breath.|Baseline and Week 24|The analysis population included evaluable participants who completed the 24-week treatment period.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840903|NCT01338636|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 6-minute Walk Distance (6MWD)|6MWD is the distance walked by the participant in 6 minutes.|Baseline to Week 24|The analysis population included evaluable participants who completed the 24-week treatment period.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
840904|NCT01338636|Primary|Change From Baseline in Peak Exercise Maximum Oxygen Uptake (VO2max)|VO2max is the measurement of the maximum amount of oxygen that an individual can utilize during intense or maximal exercise.|Baseline to Week 24|The analysis population included evaluable participants who completed the 24-week treatment period.||percent predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
840905|NCT01338636|Primary|Change From Baseline in Peak Exercise Cardiac Output (CO)|CO is the amount of blood pumped by the heart per minute.|Baseline to Week 24|The analysis population included evaluable participants who completed the 24-week treatment period.||L/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
840914|NCT01338792|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression and Overall Survival|Progression-free survival was defined as the time from the first infusion of study treatment to the date of radiographic disease progression according to RECIST 1.0, or until two consecutive PSA rises occurred with an absolute increase of 5 ng/mL and a 50% relative increase over baseline. For patients without documented disease progression, the date of death or last follow-up without disease progression was used.|Baseline, after every 2 courses, and then every 6 months after off-study (RECIST) until progression; or baseline, day 1 of each course, at the final evaluation, and then every 6 months after off-study (PSA) until progression|Participants who received at least the first infusion of treatment were included.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
840915|NCT01338792|Primary|Best Overall Response|For patients with measurable disease, the RECIST 1.0 criteria was used to determine response. Complete Response = disappearance of all target lesions, Partial Response = greater or equal to 30% decrease in sum of longest diameter or target lesions, Stable Disease = <30% decrease or <20% increase, Progressive Disease = greater or equal to 20% increase in longest diameter of target lesions. For patients who do not have measurable disease by RECIST, the response was based on PSA response defined by Prostate Cancer Working Group criteria (1999) as 50% reduction in PSA confirmed on a second measurement at least 4 weeks later.|RECIST evaluation: Baseline, after every 2 courses, and then every 6 months after off-study, up to 1 year. PSA evaluation: baseline, day 1 of each course, final evaluation, and then every 6 months after off-study, up to 1 year|All participants who received at least 1 cycle of treatment were included.||Participants|||Number
840916|NCT01338818|Secondary|Change From Extension Baseline (Week 40) to End of Study (Week 66) on Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score|SDS,5-self-rated questionnaire to measure the extent a pt’s disability due to an illness/health problem interferes with work/school,social life/leisure,family life/home. First 3 items, pts are asked how their symptoms disrupted their regular activities over the past 7d in each using a scale from 0(not at all)-10(extremely) Each subscale(work disability, social life disability, family life disability)can be scored independently or combined into a total score(sum of the non-missing responses for items 1-3)from 0-30,higher scores indicate significant functional impairment. Subscale scores>5 suggest impairment in that subscale area. Final 2 items ask pts about the # of days their symptoms caused them to miss school/work and # of days their symptoms caused them to be underproductive at school/work.(These items were not included in the total score.) Before responding to SDS items 1-3, pts were verbally instructed to recall the past 7d, items 4-5 refer to the last week w/in the item wording.|week 40 - week 66|All Extension Patients(AEP) analysis set was used for all efficacy and safety analyses of the extension study. AEP was ALL patients who had entered the extension study & received at least 1 dose of Ritalin LA. Enrolment was 299, but 1 pt entered the extension but didn’t receive 1 dose of Ritalin LA and was excluded from AEP Population analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840917|NCT01338818|Secondary|Change From Extension Baseline (Week 40) to End of Study (Week 66) in on DSM-IV Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale (DSM-IV ADHD RS) Total Score.|"Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale (DSM-IV ADHD RS) total score consists of 18 items directly adapted from the ADHD symptom list according to the DSM-IV. The DSM-IV ADHD RS total score was calculated as the sum of the Inattentive and the Hyperactive-Impulsive subscores. The 18 items are rated from 0 (rarely or never) to 3 (Very often). The total score ranges from 0 to 54. Decrease in the DSM-IV ADHD RS total score indicates improvement, therefore a greater decrease (change at Final Visit compared to baseline) indicates a greater improvement in ADHD symptoms. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) applied for each patient with data in extension period. If no post-baseline is available, it is considered as missing."|week 40 - week 66|All Extension Patients(AEP) analysis set was used for all efficacy and safety analyses of the extension study. AEP was ALL patients who had entered the extension study & received at least 1 dose of Ritalin LA. Enrolment was 299, but 1 pt entered the extension but didn’t receive 1 dose of Ritalin LA and was excluded from AEP Population analysis.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840918|NCT01338818|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events and Deaths.|Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events and Deaths were monitored from week 40 to week 66.|Week 40 - Week 66|All Extension Patients(AEP) analysis set was used for all efficacy and safety analyses of the extension study. AEP was ALL patients who had entered the extension study & received at least 1 dose of Ritalin LA. Enrolment was 299, but 1 pt entered the extension but didn’t receive 1 dose of Ritalin LA and was excluded from AEP Population analysis.||participants|||Number
840919|NCT01338857|Primary|Objective Response Rates|Determination of tumor response (CR, PR, SD) will be defined based on the comparison of the baseline MRI performed at study entry to the subsequent MRI which demonstrated best response. PR will be defined by a >15% decrease in tumor volume, as measured by 3D volumetric analysis.|MRIs performed after every 3rd 28-day cycle and off-study|Study terminated and 1/12 participants completed and data was analyzed||participants|||Number
840920|NCT01338857|Primary|Response Rate to Sorafenib|To estimate the objective response rates to sorafenib in children and young adults with low-grade astrocytomas, including optic pathway gliomas.|one year|Study terminated and 1/12 participants completed and data was analyzed||participants|||Number
840921|NCT01338870|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 1% or >= 2% Loss in Body Weight From Baseline|The treatment of diabetes has been the recommendation to lose weight. As weight loss progresses and is maintained, an improvement of glycemia may be evidenced by a reduction in HbA1c. Participants with >= 1% or >= 2% loss in body weight from baseline signifies an improvement of glycemia.|Week 12|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here, N (number of participants analyzed) signify those who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
840922|NCT01338870|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 1% or >= 2% Gain in Body Weight From Baseline|Overweight or obesity increases the risk for developing diabetes. Participants with >= 1% or >= 2% gain in body weight from baseline signifies a higher risk of diabetes.|Week 12|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here, N (number of participants analyzed) signify those who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
840972|NCT01339923|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Reported Immediate Reactions Within 30 Minutes After Any Vaccination - Groups B_02_2_5 and B_02_6_10|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects with solicited local and systemic AEs after any vaccination in subjects aged 2 - 10 years who received 2 catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ, each at 0 and 2 months. Analysis was done on solicited safety set.|Within 30 minutes after any vaccination|Solicited safety set||Number of subjects|||Number
840923|NCT01338870|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12|Overweight or obesity increases the risk for developing diabetes. The treatment of diabetes has been the recommendation to lose weight. As weight loss progresses and is maintained, an improvement of glycemia may be evidenced by a reduction in HbA1c.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable at specific time point for each treatment arm respectively.||kilogram (kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840924|NCT01338870|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Less Than (<) 6.5% or <7% Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Levels|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin which is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time. The normal range for the HbA1c test is between 4% and 5.6%. HbA1c levels between 5.7% and 6.4% indicate increased risk of diabetes, and levels of 6.5% or higher indicate diabetes.|Week 12|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here, N (number of participants analyzed) signify those who were evaluable for this measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
840925|NCT01338870|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 1, 2, 4 and 8|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin which is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time. The normal range for the HbA1c test is between 4% and 5.6%. HbA1c levels between 5.7% and 6.4% indicate increased risk of diabetes and levels of 6.5% or higher indicate diabetes.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here, N (number of participants analyzed) signify those who were evaluable for this measure and ‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable at specific time point for each treatment arm respectively.||percentage of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
840926|NCT01338870|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12||Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable at specific time point for each treatment arm respectively.||milligram/deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
840927|NCT01338870|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 12|HbA1c is a form of hemoglobin which is measured primarily to identify the average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time. The normal range for the HbA1c test is between 4 percent (%) and 5.6%. HbA1c levels between 5.7% and 6.4% indicate increased risk of diabetes and levels of 6.5% or higher indicate diabetes.|Baseline, Week 12|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. Here ‘n’ signifies participants who were evaluable at specific time point for each treatment arm respectively.||percentage of hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
840928|NCT01339247|Primary|Cmax_ss|Cmax_ss is defined as the maximum or “peak” concentration of a drug observed after its administration, in steady-state. Cmax_ss is one of the parameters of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the total amount of drug absorbed.|Days 14 to 17 (period 1) and Days 23 to 24 (Period 2)|Entire study population||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
840929|NCT01339247|Primary|Cmin_ss|Cmin_ss is defined as the minimum concentration of a drug observed after its administration, in steady-state. Cmin_ss is one of the parameters of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, for studies employing multiple doses.|Days 14 to 17 (period 1) and Days 23 to 24 (Period 2)|Entire study population||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
840930|NCT01339247|Primary|AUC_ss|The area under the plot of plasma concentration of drug against time after drug administration is defined as the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC_ss is the area under the curve during the steady-state period. The AUC_ss is of particular use in estimating the bioavailability of drugs, by measuring the extent of absorption. ng, nanograms; h, hour; ml, milliliter; ng.h/ml, nanograms per hour per milliliter.|Days 14 to 17 (period 1) and Days 23 to 24 (Period 2)|Entire study population||ng.h/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
840931|NCT01339260|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Complete Response (CR) Defined as no Emesis, no Rescue Medication, at Cycle 1||0-120 hours|FAS||percentage of responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840932|NCT01339260|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Complete Response (CR) Defined as no Emesis, no Rescue Medication at Cycle 1||0-24 hours|FAS||percentage of responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840933|NCT01339260|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Complete Response (CR) Defined as no Emesis, no Rescue Medication, at Cycle 1||25-120 hours|FAS||percentage of responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840934|NCT01339299|Primary|The Oestradiol Concentration on the Day of Ovulation Induction||treatment day 10 to 14|||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
840935|NCT01339390|Primary|Change in Weight (From Baseline)|Weight as recorded in the medical record during a 6-month period around the follow-up point.|Measured at 12 and 24 months|For the analysis, we included those lost to follow up by using the last observation carried forward to impute missing values||Pounds||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
840936|NCT01339403|Primary|Incidence Rate of Viral Encephalitis|Incidence rate of viral encephalitis (VE) was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only the first diagnosis of each event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual who were KP member from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 1996 for KPNC and January 1, 2000 for KPSC if in care prior to this date. Incidence rate was computed as the number of events per 100,000 person-years. The participants with viral encephalitis were followed-up up to 31st December 2009 (730 Weeks).|Up to Week 730|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||VE per 100,000 person-years|||Number
840937|NCT01339403|Primary|Incidence Rate of All-Cause Mortality|Incidence rate of all-cause mortality was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only the first diagnosis of each event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual who were KP member from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 1996 for KPNC and January 1, 2000 for KPSC if in care prior to this date. Incidence rate was computed as the number of events per 100,000 person-years.|Up to Week 835|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||death per 100,000 person-years|||Number
841039|NCT01340209|Secondary|Weekly Mean Score of Asthma Symptoms During the Day (Response)|"Response of weekly mean score of asthma symptoms during the day at week 52. Response was defined as change from baseline.
5-point verbal rating scale, with answer 1 representing no impairment at all and answer 5 representing the greatest impairment."|baseline and week 52|Full analysis set||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840938|NCT01339403|Primary|Incidence Rate of Rhabdomyolysis|Incidence rate of Rhabdomyolysis was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only the first diagnosis of each event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual who were KP member from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 1996 for KPNC and January 1, 2000 for KPSC if in care prior to this date. Incidence rate was computed as the number of events per 100,000 person-years.|Up to Week 835|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||rhabdomyolysis per 100,000 person-years|||Number
840939|NCT01339403|Primary|Incidence Rate of Liver Related Death|Incidence rate of liver related death was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only the first diagnosis of each event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual who were KP member from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 1996 for KPNC and January 1, 2000 for KPSC if in care prior to this date. Incidence rate was computed as the number of events per 100,000 person-years.|Up to Week 835|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||death per 100,000 person-years|||Number
840940|NCT01339403|Primary|Incidence Rate of Liver Failure|Incidence rate of liver failure was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only the first diagnosis of each event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual who were KP member from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 1996 for KPNC and January 1, 2000 for KPSC if in care prior to this date. Incidence rate was computed as the number of events per 100,000 person-years.|Up to Week 835|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||liver failure per 100,000 person-years|||Number
840941|NCT01339403|Primary|Incidence Rate of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS)-Defining Opportunistic Infections|Incidence rate of AIDS-defining opportunistic infections (OI) was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time.Only the first diagnosis of each event per participant was included.Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual who were KP member from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1,1996 for KPNC and January 1,2000 for KPSC if in care prior to this date.OI were those that occurred on immune-compromised participants.AIDS-defining infections included:wasting syndrome;pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia;recurrent pneumonia;cytomegalovirus;HIV-related encephalopathy;esophageal candidiasis;mycobacterium avium complex;cryptococcosis;mycobacterium tuberculosis;progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy;lung candidiasis;toxoplasmosis of brain;coccidiomycosis;histoplasmosis;recurrent salmonella septicemia;chronic isosporiasis;cryptosporidiosis.Incidence rate was computed as the number of events per 100,000 person-years.|Up to Week 835|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||infections per 100,000 person-years|||Number
840942|NCT01339403|Primary|Incidence Rate of Myocardial Infarction and Ischemia|Incidence rate of cardiovascular (CVS)events including myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemia was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only the first diagnosis of each event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual who were KP member from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 1996 for KPNC and January 1, 2000 for KPSC if in care prior to this date. Incidence rate was computed as the number of events per 100,000 person-years.|Up to Week 835|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||CVS events per 100,000 person-years|||Number
840943|NCT01339403|Primary|Incidence Rate of Malignancies|Incidence rate of malignancies was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only the first diagnosis of each event per participant was included.Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual who were Kaiser Permanente (KP) member from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 1996 for KP Northern California(KPNC) and January 1, 2000 for KP Southern California(KPSC) if in care prior to this date. Malignancies included acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)-defining malignancies and non-AIDS defining malignancies.AIDS-defining malignancies included invasive cervical cancer,invasive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and kaposi's sarcoma;non-AIDS defining malignancies cancers ascertained from the KP cancer registries.Overall data for non-AIDS and AIDS defining malignancies, along with individual data for AIDS-defining malignancies was reported. Incidence rate was computed as the number of events per 100,000 person-years.|Up to Week 835|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||malignancies per 100,000 person-years|||Number
840944|NCT01339416|Secondary|Incidence Rate of Death|Incidence rate of death was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 2000 if in care prior to this date. All-cause mortality was used for the analyses.|Up to Week 626|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||death per 100 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840945|NCT01339416|Secondary|Incidence Rate of Rhabdomyolysis|Incidence rate of rhabdomyolysis was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only first diagnosis of the event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 2000 if in care prior to this date. Rhabdomyolysis was a condition of muscle fibers breakdown.|Up to Week 626|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||rhabdomylosis per 100 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840946|NCT01339416|Primary|Incidence Rate of Viral Encephalitis|Incidence rate of viral encephalitis was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only first diagnosis of the event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 2000 if in care prior to this date. Viral encephalitis was defined as inflammation of the brain due to virus.|Up to Week 626|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||viral encephalitis per 100 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840947|NCT01339416|Primary|Incidence Rate of Liver Failure|Incidence rate of liver failure was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only first diagnosis of the event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 2000 if in care prior to this date.|Up to Week 626|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||liver failure per 100 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840948|NCT01339416|Primary|Incidence Rate of Myocardial Infarction|Incidence rate of myocardial infarction (MI) was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only first diagnosis of the event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 2000 if in care prior to this date.|Up to Week 626|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||MI per 100 person-year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840949|NCT01339416|Primary|Incidence Rate of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS)-Defining Opportunistic Infections|Incidence rate of AIDS-defining opportunistic infections was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only the first diagnosis of each event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 2000 if in care prior to this date. Opportunistic infections were those that occurred on immune-compromised participants. AIDS-defining infections included: esophageal candidiasis; pneumocystes jiroveci; non-tuberculous mycobacterium infection; AIDS dementia complex; disseminated cryptococcosis; cytomegalovirus (all sites); wasting syndrome; toxoplasmosis; cytomegalovirus retinitis; mycobacterium tuberculosis; Progressive (Prog.) multifocal leukoencephalopathy; histoplasmosis; cryptosporidiosis; recurrent pneumonia; herpes simplex infection; extra-pulmonary coccidioidomycosis; salmonella septicemia; isosporiasis.|Up to Week 626|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study.||infections per 100 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840950|NCT01339416|Primary|Incidence Rate of Malignancies|Incidence rate of malignancies was calculated as the number of events divided by person-time. Only the first diagnosis of each event per participant was included. Person-time was calculated as the sum of all time contributed by each individual from the date of HIV care initiation at that institution or January 1, 2000 if in care prior to this date. Malignancies included acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)-defining malignancies and non-AIDS defining malignancies. AIDS-defining malignancies included invasive cervical cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and kaposis sarcoma; non-AIDS defining malignancies included but not limited to Hodgkin’s disease, lung cancer, liver cancer, anal cancer, melanoma of the skin, leukemia, renal cancer, and prostate cancer. Overall data for non-AIDS defining malignancies and individual data for AIDS-defining malignancies was reported. Incidence rate was computed as the number of events per 100 person-years.|Up to Week 626|Analysis population included all participants enrolled in the study. Here, n=participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.||malignancies per 100 person-years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840951|NCT01339429|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events|Any adverse events, including bleeding, wound complication, or change in patient condition during the trial period will be recorded.|3 days|||participants|Participants||Number
840952|NCT01339429|Primary|Maintenance of Negative Pressure|The negative pressure being delivered by the device was measured on a daily basis for three days. Maintenance of negative pressure was defined as negative pressure delivery within 75% of the starting negative pressure amount.|3 days|85 dressings were applied. 5 applications excluded due to a change in patient condition, unrelated to sNPWT. 9 dressings excluded due to occlusion of the drainage tube. 71 dressings were analyzed in total.||hours|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
840953|NCT01339832|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Event (AE) and Serious Adverse Event (SAE)|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is a significant medical event in the investigator's judgment or requires intervention to prevent one or other of these outcomes|Up to 5 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this study. This population includes participants who gave informed consent and also those who died or were lost to follow-up before start of ML21875 study.||participants|||Number
840954|NCT01339832|Secondary|Long Term Side Effects|Long term side effects for bowel and urinary function was assessed. Bowel function was assessed in terms of mean bowel frequency, regular use of constipating agents as well as fecal incontinence. Urinary function was evaluated according to the presence (YES or NO) of incontinence. Overall participant satisfaction was assessed in terms of satisfaction with bowel, stoma and urinary function on a 4-stage scale (very good, good, poor, and very poor). In case of different assessment(s) of bowel or urinary function within the same surveillance period, the assessment with worst grade was documented and reported.|Up to 5 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this study. This population includes participants who gave informed consent and also those who died or were lost to follow-up before start of ML21875 study.||participants|||Number
840955|NCT01339832|Secondary|Compliance to Diagnostic Procedures in Surveillance|The surveillance compliance was calculated per participant in percent and frequencies for methods of diagnostic procedure adhered to, taking into account all expected procedures in the time span the participant participated and was based on the Swiss Society of Gastroenterology (SGG) follow-up care recommendations|Up to 5 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this study. This population includes participants who gave informed consent and also those who died or were lost to follow-up before start of ML21875 study.||participants|||Number
840956|NCT01339832|Secondary|Length of Adjuvant Chemotherapy|The length of adjuvant chemotherapy was defined as time between first start date to last stop date of adjuvant chemotherapy regimen. Length of adjuvant chemotherapy was calculated as length [days] = last stop date - first start date + 1, missing day of start and stop date was replaced by 1.|Up to 5 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this study. This population includes participants who gave informed consent and also those who died or were lost to follow-up before start of ML21875 study.||days||Full Range|Median
840957|NCT01339832|Secondary|Type of Adjuvant Chemotherapy|The type of therapies administered after primary treatments (chemotherapy, surgery or radiation) was reported|Up to 5 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this study. This population includes participants who gave informed consent and also those who died or were lost to follow-up before start of ML21875 study.||participants|||Number
840958|NCT01339832|Secondary|Tumor Recurrence Rate (Local and Distant)|Participant with tumor recurrence were determined by the presence or absence of date of tumor recurrence detection. In case of absence of empty tumor recurrence date it was considered that the participant had not experienced tumor recurrence. Participants with local tumor recurrence (’Was it local to the primary tumor?’ answered ‘yes’.) compared to participants with distant tumor recurrence (specification for other tumor location given).|Up to 5 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this study. This population includes participants who gave informed consent and also those who died or were lost to follow-up before start of ML21875 study.||participants|||Number
840959|NCT01339832|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) was defined as time from date of first administration of the study medication in ML18280 study to date of death from any cause. Participants without documented date of death were assumed to be alive and were censored at the latest of the following dates: last date alive on survival status pages, last date known to be alive on survival status pages, and last date of tumor assessment (diagnostic procedures or markers) on surveillance pages. OS time in days was calculated as OS [days] =date of death date of first intake+ 1, for participants who died, OS [days]= censoring date date of first intake+ 1, for participants alive, and OS time in months was calculated as OS [months]= 12 *OS [days] /365.25|Up to 5 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this study. This population includes participants who gave informed consent and also those who died or were lost to follow-up before start of ML21875 study.||months||Full Range|Median
840960|NCT01339832|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Progression free survival (PFS) was measured from the date of first administration of study medication in ML18280 study to the date of progression or death, whatever the cause. In participants with measurable disease, progression was defined according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria version 1.0. Participants with neither tumor recurrence nor death were censored at the last tumor assessment date they were known to have not progressed (last date of diagnostic procedure or diagnostic marker reported in the surveillance). PFS time in days was calculated as PFS [days]= date of tumor recurrence/death date of first intake + 1, if participant had tumor recurrence confirmed by diagnostic imaging or participant died, then PFS [days] =last diagnostic procedure/marker date- date of first intake+ 1, and if participant survived without tumor recurrence PFS time in months was calculated as PFS [months]= 12 * PFS [days] /365.25|Up to 5 years|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all the participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this study. This population includes participants who gave informed consent and also those who died or were lost to follow-up before start of ML21875 study.||months||Full Range|Median
840961|NCT01339897|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of N6022 Cmax Values on Study Day 7|Pharmacokinetic Analysis of N6022 Cmax values on Study Day 7|Day 7, 24 hours|||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
840962|NCT01339897|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of N6022 on Study Day 1|Analysis of N6022 Cmax values on Study Day 1|Day 1, 24 hours|||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
840963|NCT01339897|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of N6022 Over 7 Days|Analysis of N6022 AUC0-tau values from Study Day 7|Day 7, 24 hours|N6022 AUC0-tau values from Study Day 7||h*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
840964|NCT01339897|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of N6022|N6022 AUC0-tau measurements from Day 1|Day 1, 24 hours|Any subject that completed N6022 or placebo PK sampling||h*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
840965|NCT01339897|Primary|Safety of Escalating Multiple Doses of N6022 in Healthy Subjects|Safety variables (adverse events, vital signs, physical examination, telemetry, 12-lead ECG, infusion site reactions, O2 saturation, and clinical laboratory assessments)|Over 7 days|Any subject that received any dose of N6022 or placebo.||participants|||Number
840966|NCT01339923|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited AEs Following Any Vaccination With rMenB+OMV NZ in Group BC_35_12 and C_35_12|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects reporting any unsolicited AEs (day 1-7 after any vaccination), serious adverse events (SAEs), medically attended AEs, AEs leading to premature withdrawal from the study (collected throughout the study period) following any vaccination with rMenB+OMV NZ or MenC-CRM. Analysis was done on unsolicited safety set.|Day 1 to Day 301 for BC_35_12 and C_35_12, Day 302 to Day 391 for C_35_12; Day 1 to day 7 (All AEs)|Unsolicited safety set||Number of subjects|||Number
840967|NCT01339923|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited AEs Following Any Vaccination With rMenB+OMV NZ in Groups B_02_2_5 and B_02_6_10|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects reporting any unsolicited AEs (day 1-7 after any vaccination), serious adverse events (SAEs), medically attended AEs, AEs leading to premature withdrawal from the study (collected throughout the study period) following any vaccination with rMenB+OMV NZ. Analysis was done on unsolicited safety set.|Day 1 to day 7 (All AEs). Throughout the study period (SAEs, medically attended or leading to premature withdrawal AEs)|Unsolicited safety set||Number of subjects|||Number
840968|NCT01339923|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited AEs Following Any Vaccination With rMenB+OMV NZ in Groups B_2h3h5_11, B_3h5_11 and B_68_11|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects reporting any unsolicited AEs (day 1-7 after any vaccination), serious adverse events (SAEs), medically attended AEs, AEs leading to premature withdrawal from the study (collected throughout the study period) following any vaccination with rMenB+OMV. Analysis was done on unsolicited safety set.|Until 12 months of age; Day 1 to day 7 (All AEs)|Unsolicited safety set||Number of subjects|||Number
840969|NCT01339923|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic AEs in Groups BC_35_12 and C_35_12 After Any rMenB+OMV NZ or MenC-CRM Vaccination|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects with solicited local and systemic AEs after any vaccination with rMenB+OMV NZ or MenC-CRM. Analysis was done on solicited safety set.|Day 1 to day 7 after any vaccination|Solicited safety set||Number of subjects|||Number
840970|NCT01339923|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Reported Immediate Reactions Within 30 Minutes After Any rMenB+OMV NZ or MenC-CRM Vaccination|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects with solicited local and systemic AEs after any vaccination with rMenB+OMV NZ or MenC-CRM. Analysis was done on solicited safety set.|Within 30 minutes after any vaccination|Solicited safety set||Number of subjects|||Number
840971|NCT01339923|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic AEs in Groups B_02_2_5 and B_02_6_10|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects with solicited local and systemic AEs after any vaccination in subjects aged 2- 10 years who received 2 catch-up doses of rMenB+OMV NZ, each at 0 and 2 months. Analysis was done on solicited safety set.|Day 1 to day 7 after any vaccination|Solicited safety set||Number of subjects|||Number
840973|NCT01339923|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic Adverse Events (AEs) Following a 3 or 4-dose Regimen of rMenB+OMV NZ|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects with solicited local and systemic AEs after any vaccination following a 4-dose regimen (2.5, 3.5, 5 and 11 months) or as a 3-dose regimen (3.5, 5 and 11 months or 6, 8 and 11 months) of rMenB+OMV NZ. Analysis was done on solicited safety set.|Day 1 to day 7 after any vaccination|Solicited safety set||Number of subjects|||Number
840974|NCT01339923|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Reported Immediate Reactions Within 30 Minutes After Any Vaccination With rMenB+OMV NZ|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects who reported immediate reactions within 30 minutes following a 4-dose regimen (2.5, 3.5, 5 and 11 months) or a 3-dose regimen (3.5, 5 and 11 months or 6, 8 and 11 months) of rMenB+OMV NZ. Analysis was done on solicited safety set.|Within 30 minutes after any vaccination|Solicited safety set.||Number of subjects|||Number
840975|NCT01339923|Secondary|Geometric Mean ELISA Concentrations Against Vaccine Antigen 287-953 Following Concomitant Administration of rMenB+OMV NZ With MenC-CRM - Persistence|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of GMTs against Geometric mean ELISA concentrations against N meningitidis serogroup B vaccine antigen 287-953, following co-administration of MenC-CRM and rMenB+OMV NZ at 3 and 5 months and booster dose at 12 months. Analysis was done on FAS-persistence.|Pre-booster vaccination (persistence; 12 months of age)|FAS-persistence||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840976|NCT01339923|Secondary|Geometric Mean ELISA Concentrations Against Vaccine Antigen 287-953 Following Concomitant Administration of rMenB+OMV NZ With MenC-CRM|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of Geometric mean ELISA concentrations against N meningitidis serogroup B vaccine antigen 287-953, following co-administration of MenC-CRM and rMenB+OMV NZ at 3 and 5 months and booster dose at 12 months. Analysis was done on FAS-primary and FAS-booster.|1 month after second vaccination, pre-booster vaccination and 1 month after booster vaccination|FAS-primary and FAS-booster||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840977|NCT01339923|Secondary|GMTs Against N. Meningitidis Serogroup B Strains Following Concomitant Administration of rMenB+OMV NZ With MenC-CRM|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of GMTs against N meningitidis serogroup C strain following co-administration of MenC-CRM and rMenB+OMV NZ at 3 and 5 months and booster dose at 12 months. Analysis was done on FAS-persistence and FAS-booster.|1 month after second vaccination, pre-booster vaccination and 1 month after booster vaccination|FAS-persistence and FAS-booster||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840978|NCT01339923|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 4 or hSBA Titers ≥ 5 (M10713) and hSBA ≥ 8 Following Concomitant Administration of rMenB+OMV NZ With MenC-CRM|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥ 4 against N meningitidis serogroup B strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254; hSBA titers ≥ 5 against strain M10713; hSBA titers ≥ 8 against strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254, M10713; following co-administration of MenC-CRM and rMenB+OMV NZ at 3 and 5 months and a booster at 12 months. Analysis was done on FAS-primary series and FAS-booster.|1 month after second vaccination and 1 month after booster vaccination|FAS-primary series and FAS-booster||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840979|NCT01339923|Secondary|GMTs Following Concomitant Administration of rMenB+OMV NZ With MenC-CRM or MenC-CRM Alone - Persistence|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of GMTs against N meningitidis serogroup C strain following co-administration of MenC-CRM and rMenB+OMV NZ or MenC-CRM alone at 3 and 5 months and booster dose at 12 months. Analysis was done on FAS-persistence.|Pre-booster vaccination (persistence; 12 months of age)|FAS-persistence||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840980|NCT01339923|Secondary|GMTs Following Concomitant Administration of rMenB+OMV NZ With MenC-CRM or MenC-CRM Alone|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of GMTs against N meningitidis serogroup C strain following co-administration of MenC-CRM and rMenB+OMV NZ or MenC-CRM alone at 3 and 5 months and booster dose at 12 months. Analysis was done on FAS-primary series and FAS-booster.|1 month after second vaccination, 1 month after booster vaccination|FAS-primary series and FAS-booster||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840981|NCT01339923|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 8 Against Serogroup C Following Concomitant Administration of rMenB+OMV NZ With MenC-CRM or MenC-CRM Alone|Non-inferiority of MenC-CRM was determined following co-administration of MenC-CRM and rMenB+OMV NZ or MenC-CRM alone at 3 and 5 months and booster dose at 12 months, as measured by the percentages of subjects achieving hSBA titers ≥ 8 against serogroup C. Analysis was done on PPS-primary series and PPS-booster.|Baseline, 1 month after second vaccination and 1 month after booster vaccination|PPS-primary series and PPS-booster.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840982|NCT01339923|Secondary|Geometric Mean ELISA Concentrations Against Vaccine Antigen 287-953 After a Two Dose Catch-up rMenB+OMV NZ Immunization Series in Children 2-10 Years of Age|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of Geometric mean ELISA concentrations (GMCs) against N meningitidis serogroup B vaccine antigen 287-953, after a two dose catch-up immunization series with rMenB+OMV NZ in children 2-10 years of age. Analysis was done on FAS-primary series.|1 month after second vaccination|FAS-primary series||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840983|NCT01339923|Secondary|Geometric Mean ELISA Concentrations Against Vaccine Antigen 287-953 Following 2 or 3-dose Primary Series and Booster Dose of Vaccination With rMenB+OMV NZ|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of Geometric mean ELISA concentrations (GMCs) against N meningitidis serogroup B vaccine antigen 287-953, following 2 or 3 dose primary series and booster dose of rMenB+OMV NZ. Analysis was done on FAS-persistence and FAS-booster.|1 month after primary vaccination, pre-booster vaccination (persistence) and 1 month after booster vaccination|FAS-persistence and FAS-booster||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840984|NCT01339923|Secondary|Antibody Persistence in Terms of Geometric Mean Titers Following 2 or 3-dose Primary Series of Vaccination With rMenB+OMV NZ|Persistence of bactericidal antibodies at 11 months of age was assessed in terms of GMTs against N meningitidis serogroup B indicator strains in subjects who previously received a primary series of 2 or 3-doses of rMenB+OMV NZ. Analysis was done on FAS-persistence.|11 months of age (persistence)|FAS-persistence||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841040|NCT01340209|Secondary|Weekly Mean Score of Asthma Symptoms in the Morning (Response)|"Response of weekly mean score of asthma symptoms in the morning at week 52. Response was defined as change from baseline.
5-point verbal rating scale, with answer 1 representing no impairment at all and answer 5 representing the greatest impairment."|baseline and week 52|Full analysis set||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840985|NCT01339923|Secondary|Antibody Persistence in Terms of Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 4 or hSBA Titers ≥ 5 (M10713) and hSBA ≥ 8 Following 2 or 3-dose Primary Series of Vaccination With rMenB+OMV NZ|Persistence of bactericidal antibodies at 11 months of age was assessed in terms of percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥ 4 against N meningitidis serogroup B strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254; hSBA titers ≥ 5 against strain M10713; hSBA titers ≥ 8 against strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254, M10713 in subjects who previously received a primary series of 2 or 3-doses of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccine. Analysis was done on FAS-persistence.|11 months of age (persistence)|FAS-persistence||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840986|NCT01339923|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 4 or hSBA Titers ≥ 5 and hSBA ≥ 8 Following a Booster Dose of rMenB+OMV Vaccination|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥ 4 against N meningitidis serogroup B strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254; hSBA titers ≥ 5 against strain M10713; hSBA titers ≥ 8 against strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254, M10713; following a booster dose of rMenB+OMV NZ given at 11 months of age (4th dose for B_2h3h5_11 and 3rd dose for B_3h5_11 and B_68_11). Analysis was done on FAS-booster.|1 month post-booster dose|FAS-booster||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840987|NCT01339923|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 4 or hSBA Titers ≥ 5 and hSBA ≥ 8 After First Infant Vaccination With rMenB+OMV|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥ 4 against N meningitidis serogroup B strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254, hSBA titers ≥ 5 against strain M10713 and hSBA titers ≥ 8 against strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254, M10713 after the first infant vaccination in groups B_2h3h5_11b, B_3h5_11b and B_68_11b (at 3.5, 5, and 8 months of age respectively). Analysis was done on FAS-post first dose.|Post- first dose (1 month for B_2h3h5_11b, 1.5 month for B_3h5_11b and 2 months for B_68_11b after 1st vaccination)|FAS-post first dose||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840988|NCT01339923|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers (GMTs) After First Infant Vaccination With rMenB+OMV.|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of Geometric mean hSBA titers (GMTs) against N meningitidis serogroup B indicator strains after the first infant vaccination in groups B_2h3h5_11b, B_3h5_11b and B_68_11b (after 1 month for group B_2h3h5_11b, 1.5 months for group B_2h3h5_11b and 2 months for group B_68_11b). Analysis was done on FAS-post first dose.|1, 1.5 or 2 months after first infant vaccination|FAS-post first dose||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840989|NCT01339923|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers (GMTs) Following 2 or 3 Dose Primary Series of Vaccination With rMenB+OMV|"Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of Geometric mean hSBA titers (GMTs) against N meningitidis serogroup B indicator strains following 2 or 3 dose primary series of vaccination rMenB+OMV NZ (1 month after 3rd infant vaccination in B_2h3h5_11 and 1 month after 2nd infant vaccination in B_3h5_11, B_68_11 and B_02).
Analysis was done on FAS-primary series."|1 month after primary series vaccination|FAS-primary series||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
840990|NCT01339923|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects Achieving Four-fold Rise Over Baseline hSBA Titers Following a 2-dose Catch-up Series of rMenB+OMV Vaccination|"Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of percentages of subjects achieving 4-fold increase in hSBA titers as compared to baseline against N meningitidis serogroup B strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254, M10713; following 2-dose catch-up series of vaccination with rMenB+OMV NZ in healthy children aged 2-10 years (0, 2 month schedule).
Analysis was done on FAS- primary series."|1 month after second vaccination|FAS- primary series||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840991|NCT01339923|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 4 or hSBA Titers ≥ 5 (Strain M10713) and hSBA ≥ 8 Following a 2-dose Catch-up Series of rMenB+OMV Vaccination|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥ 4 against N meningitidis serogroup B strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254; hSBA titers ≥ 5 against strain M10713 and hSBA titers ≥ 8 against strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254, M10713; following 2-dose catch-up series of vaccination with rMenB+OMV NZ in healthy children aged 2-10 years (0, 2 month schedule). Analysis was done on FAS-primary series.|1 month after second vaccination|FAS-primary series||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840992|NCT01339923|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥ 4, hSBA Titers ≥ 5 (Strain M10713) and hSBA ≥ 8 Following a 3-dose Primary Series of rMenB+OMV Vaccination|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥ 4 against N meningitidis serogroup B strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254; hSBA titers ≥ 5 against strain M10713 and hSBA titers ≥ 8 against strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254, M10713, following 3-dose primary series of vaccination with rMenB+OMV NZ at 2.5, 3.5 and 5 months of age. Analysis was done on FAS-primary series.|1 month after third vaccination|FAS-primary series||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
840993|NCT01339923|Primary|Percentages of Subjects With Serum Bactericidal Activity Using Human Serum (hSBA) Titers ≥ 4 or hSBA Titers ≥ 5 (Strain M10713) Following a 2-dose Primary Series of rMenB+OMV Vaccination.|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥ 4 against N meningitidis serogroup B strains H44/76, 5/99, NZ98/254 and hSBA titers ≥ 5 against strain M10713 following 2-dose primary series of vaccination with rMenB+OMV NZ at 3.5 and 5 months of age or at 6 and 8 months of age. Analysis was done on Full analysis set (FAS)-Primary series.|1 month after second vaccination|FAS-Primary series||Percentages of subjects||97.5% Confidence Interval|Number
840994|NCT01339936|Secondary|Ocular Surface Disease Index Score|"The OSDI is a 12-item patient-reported outcomes questionnaire designed to assess the range of ocular surface symptoms, their severity, and their impact on the patient’s ability to function.
The OSDI items are scored on a 0 to 4 Likert-type scale, where 0 = None of the time, 1 = Some of the time, 2 = Half of the time, 3 = Most of the time, and 4 = All of the time. Using individual item responses, an overall OSDI score is calculated. The overall OSDI score ranges from 0 to 100, where a score of 100 corresponds to complete disability while a score of 0 corresponds to no disability."|after 30 days of eye drop usage|||points||Standard Deviation|Mean
840995|NCT01339936|Secondary|Tear Break Up Time|The tear film break-up-time (BUT) is the time elapsed between eye opening after a blink, and the appearance of the first dark spot within the tear film when observed with a wide diffuse light source of the Tearscope. This measurement is indicative of the tear film stability. Three independent measurements were recorded in each case and the median value over the three measurements calculated. The latter value constituted the secondary endpoint used in the analysis.|after 30 days of eyedrop usage|The analysis was carried out on subjects having completed the study according to the protocol e.g. 35||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
840996|NCT01339936|Primary|Tear Film Evaporation Rate|The rate of evaporation of the tears from the ocular surface was measured. To do so the participant was required to wear a sealed goggle over the eye, which served to isolate the air surrounding the ocular surface. The temperature and humidity were measured within the sealed goggle during closed eye and open eye situations. The evaporation from the ocular surface was calculated by taking the difference between the evaporation rate of the skin taken during the closed eye measurement and the evaporation rate taken during the open eye measurement. The rate of evaporation was measured in 10^-7 g/cm^2 /s and recorded for relative humidity of 25% to 35%.|after 30 days of eyedrop usage|The analysis was carried out on subjects having completed the study according to the protocol e.g. 35||10^-7g/cm^2/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
840997|NCT01340014|Secondary|Ocular Discomfort|Ocular discomfort was assessed by the participant 1 minute after instillation of the study medication. Ocular discomfort was rated on a 10-point scale (0=no discomfort, 9=substantial discomfort).|Day 7 of each period|This reporting group includes all participants who completed both treatment periods and completed the preference questionnaire, as treated, minus any missing responses.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
840998|NCT01340014|Primary|Preferred Treatment|"The participant completed a questionnaire on the Day 15 visit (ie, after administration of both study medications) consisting of a single preference question: Thinking about the comfort of the two medications (1st and 2nd) that you took during this study, which medication do you prefer? Preferred treatment is presented as a percentage."|At the end of both periods, Day 15|This reporting group includes all participants who completed both treatment periods and completed the preference questionnaire, as treated.||Percentage of participants|||Number
840999|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Treatment Satisfaction on Visual Analog Scale (TS-VAS)|The TS-VAS is a visual analog scale (VAS) that asks patients to rate their satisfaction with treatment by placing a vertical mark on a 10 cm line where the endpoints are labeled 'No, not at all' on the left (=0) to 'Yes, completely satisfied' on the right (=10). A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841000|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI)|This 6-item assessment measures productivity losses during the past 7 days and includes measures on work time missed due to health, impairment while working due to health (the participant’s assessment of the degree to which health affected their productivity while working), overall work impairment due to health (takes into account both hours missed due to health and the participant’s assessment of the degree to which health affected their productivity while working) and activity impairment due to health (the degree in which health problems affected their ability to do regular daily activities). Scores for each measure are expressed from 0 to 100 with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity, i.e., worse outcomes. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841001|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|The EQ-5D is an international, standardized, generic instrument for describing and evaluating health status. Health status is assessed by patients evaluating their health on a vertical, visual analog scale from 0 to 100 where the endpoints are labeled 'Worst imaginable health state' (=0) and 'Best imaginable health state' (=100). On the EQ-5D VAS, a positive change from baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841002|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Anxiety/Depression Score|"The EQ-5D is an international, standardized, nondisease-specific (i.e., generic) instrument for describing and valuing health status. Participants were asked to indicate which of the following statements best describes their health state:
I am not anxious or depressed; I am moderately anxious or depressed; I am extremely anxious or depressed. In the table below, each row title lists Baseline health status first followed by End of Treatment health status and reports the number of patients in that category."|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||participants|||Number
841003|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Pain/Discomfort Score|"The EQ-5D is an international, standardized, nondisease-specific (i.e., generic) instrument for describing and valuing health status. Participants were asked to indicate which of the following statements best describes their health state:
I have no pain or discomfort; I have moderate pain or discomfort; I have extreme pain or discomfort. In the table below, each row title lists Baseline health status first followed by End of Treatment health status and reports the number of participants in that category."|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||participants|||Number
841004|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Usual Activities Score|"The EQ-5D is a standardized, nondisease-specific instrument for describing health status. Participants were asked which statement best describes their health state with regard to usual activities (work, study or leisure): I have no problems performing my usual activities; I have some problems performing my usual activities; I am unable to perform my usual activities.
In the table below, each row title lists Baseline health status first followed by End of Treatment health status and reports the number of patients in that category."|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||participants|||Number
841005|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Self-care Score|"The EQ-5D is an international, standardized, nondisease-specific (i.e., generic) instrument for describing and valuing health status. Participants were asked to indicate which of the following statements best describes their health state:
I have no problems with self-care; I have some problems washing or dressing myself; I am unable to wash or dress myself.
In the table below, each row title lists Baseline health status first followed by End of Treatment health status and reports the number of patients in that category."|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||participants|||Number
841006|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Mobility Score|"The EQ-5D is an international, standardized, nondisease-specific (i.e., generic) instrument for describing and valuing health status. Participants were asked to indicate which of the following statements best describes their health state:
I have no problems in walking about; I have some problems in walking about; I am confined to bed.
In the table below, each row title lists Baseline health status first followed by End of Treatment health status and reports the number of patients in that category."|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||participants|||Number
841007|NCT01340027|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Health-related Quality of Life Total Score Response|Health-related quality of life was assessed by the HRQL subscales (coping, concern, sleep and social interaction) of the overactive bladder questionnaire (OABq). The HRQL total score was calculated by adding the 4 HRQL subscale scores, and transforming to a scale from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life. HRQL response is defined as improvement (decrease) of at least 10 points from Baseline.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||percentage of participants|||Number
841008|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Health-related Quality of Life (HRQL) Total Score|Health-related quality of life was assessed by the HRQL subscales (coping, concern, sleep and social interaction) of the overactive bladder questionnaire (OABq). The HRQL total score was calculated by adding the 4 HRQL subscale scores, and transforming to a scale from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life. A positive change from Baseline in HRQL score indicates improvements.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841009|NCT01340027|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Symptom Bother Response|Overactive bladder symptoms were assessed using the symptom bother scale of the overactive bladder questionnaire. The symptom bother scale consists of 8 questions answered by the participant on a scale from 1-6. The total symptom bother score was calculated from the 8 answers and then transformed to range from 0 to 100, with 100 indicating worst severity. Symptom bother response is defined as improvement (decrease) of at least 10 points from Baseline.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||percentage of participants|||Number
841010|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Symptom Bother Score as Assessed by the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q)|Overactive bladder symptoms were assessed using the symptom bother scale of the overactive bladder questionnaire. The symptom bother scale consists of 8 questions answered by the participant on a scale from 1-6. The total symptom bother score was calculated from the 8 answers and then transformed to range from 0 to 100, with 100 indicating worst severity. A negative change from Baseline in symptom bother score indicates improvements.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841011|NCT01340027|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Deterioration in PPBC|The PPBC scale is a global assessment tool that asks patients to rate their impression of their current bladder condition on a 6-point scale from 1: 'Does not cause me any problems at all'; 2: 'Causes me some very minor problems'; 3: 'Causes me some minor problems'; 4: 'Causes me (some) moderate problems'; 5: 'Causes me severe problems' and 6: 'Causes me many severe problems'. Deterioration was defined as at least a 1 point increase from Baseline in PPBC score.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
841012|NCT01340027|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Major Improvement in PPBC|The PPBC scale is a global assessment tool that asks patients to rate their impression of their current bladder condition on a 6-point scale from 1: 'Does not cause me any problems at all'; 2: 'Causes me some very minor problems'; 3: 'Causes me some minor problems'; 4: 'Causes me (some) moderate problems'; 5: 'Causes me severe problems' and 6: 'Causes me many severe problems'. Major improvement was defined as at least a 2-point improvement (decrease) from Baseline in PPBC score.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
841013|NCT01340027|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement in PPBC|The PPBC scale is a global assessment tool that asks patients to rate their impression of their current bladder condition on a 6-point scale from 1: 'Does not cause me any problems at all'; 2: 'Causes me some very minor problems'; 3: 'Causes me some minor problems'; 4: 'Causes me (some) moderate problems'; 5: 'Causes me severe problems' and 6: 'Causes me many severe problems'. Improvement was defined as at least a 1-point improvement (decrease) from Baseline in PPBC score.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
841014|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC)|The PPBC scale is a global assessment tool that asks patients to rate their impression of their current bladder condition on a 6-point scale from 1: 'Does not cause me any problems at all'; 2: 'Causes me some very minor problems'; 3: 'Causes me some minor problems’; 4: 'Causes me (some) moderate problems'; 5: 'Causes me severe problems' and 6: 'Causes me many severe problems'. A negative change from Baseline score indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set participants with available Baseline and post-baseline data; LOCF imputation was used||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841015|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Each Visit in Mean Number of Nocturia Episodes Per 24-Hours|Nocturia is defined as waking at night one or more times to void. The average number of times a participant urinated (excluding incontinence only episodes) during sleeping time per day was derived from the 3-day micturition diary.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full analysis set participants who had at least one nocturia episode at baseline, and including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n). LOCF was used for the End of Treatment (EOT) analysis."||nocturia episodes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841016|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Each Visit in Mean Number of Pads Used Per 24 Hours|The average number of times a participant recorded a new pad used per day during the 3-day micturition diary period.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full analysis set participants who had at least one use of pad at baseline, and including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n). LOCF was used for the End of Treatment (EOT) analysis."||pads||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841017|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Each Visit in Mean Level of Urgency|Average of participants’ ratings on the degree of urgency associated with each micturition and/or incontinence episode recorded in the 3-day micturition diary according to the Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale: 0: No urgency; 1: Mild urgency; 2: Moderate urgency, could delay voiding a short while; 3: Severe urgency, could not delay voiding; 4: Urge incontinence, leaked before arriving to the toilet.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full analysis set including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n). LOCF was used for the End of Treatment (EOT) analysis."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841018|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Each Visit in Mean Number of Urgency Episodes (Grade 3 and/or 4) Per 24 Hours|The average number of urgency episodes (the sudden, compelling desire to pass urine, which is difficult to defer), derived from urgency episodes classified by the participant in the 3-day micturition diary as grade 3 or 4 on the Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale: 0: No urgency; 1: Mild urgency; 2: Moderate urgency, could delay voiding a short while; 3: Severe urgency, could not delay voiding; 4: Urge incontinence, leaked before arriving to the toilet.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full analysis set including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n). LOCF was used for the End of Treatment (EOT) analysis."||urgency episodes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841019|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Each Visit in Mean Number of Urgency Incontinence Episodes Per 24 Hours|Urgency incontinence is the involuntary leakage of urine accompanied by or immediately preceded by urgency, and was derived from the number of incontinence episodes classified by the participant in a 3-day micturition diary as Grade 3 or 4 on the Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale: 0 = No urgency; 1 = Mild urgency; 2 = Moderate urgency, could postpone voiding a short while; 3 = Severe urgency, could not postpone voiding; 4 = Urge incontinence, leaked before arriving to the toilet.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full Analysis Set-Incontinence participants who had at least 1 urgency (grade 3 or 4) incontinence episode at Baseline, including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n). LOCF was used for the End of Treatment (EOT) analysis."||urgency incontinence episodes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841020|NCT01340027|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With 50% Reduction in Incontinence Episodes|The percentage of participants with at least a 50% decrease from Baseline in mean number of incontinence episodes per 24 hours during the 3 days prior to each clinic visit derived from the participant's micturition diary.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full Analysis Set-Incontinence including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n); LOCF imputation was used for the End of Treatment (EOT) analysis."||percentage of participants|||Number
841021|NCT01340027|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Zero Incontinence Episodes Post-baseline|The percentage of participants with no incontinence episodes for the 3 days prior to each clinic visit derived from the micturition diary recorded by the participant.|Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full Analysis Set-Incontinence including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n); LOCF imputation was used for the End of Treatment (EOT) analysis."||percentage of participants|||Number
841022|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Each Visit in Mean Number of Incontinence Episodes Per 24 Hours|The average number of incontinence episodes (any involuntary leakage of urine) per day was derived from the number of incontinence episodes recorded by the participant in the micturition diary for 3-days before the Baseline and each post-baseline clinic visit.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full Analysis Set-Incontinence including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n)."||incontinence episodes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841023|NCT01340027|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Micturition Response|A responder is defined as a participant with at most 8 micturitions per 24 hours post-baseline and a negative change (i.e. an improvement) from Baseline.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full analysis set participants with at least 8 micturitions per 24 hours at Baseline and including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n); LOCF imputation was used for the End of Treatment (EOT) analysis."||percentage of participants|||Number
841024|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Each Visit in Mean Number of Micturitions Per 24 Hours|The average number of micturitions (urinations) per 24 hours was derived from the number of urinations (excluding incontinence only episodes) per day recorded by the participant in the micturition diary for 3-days before the Baseline and each post-baseline clinic visit.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full analysis set including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n)."||micturitions||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841025|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Each Visit in Mean Volume Voided Per Micturition|The average volume voided per micturition was calculated from the volume of each micturition measured by the participant and recorded in a micturition diary for 3 days before the Baseline and each post-baseline clinic visit.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12|"Full analysis set including participants with available data at Baseline and each post-baseline visit (indicated by n).."||mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841026|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Mean Number of Incontinence Episodes Per 24 Hours|The average number of incontinence episodes (any involuntary leakage of urine) per day was derived from the number of incontinence episodes recorded by the participant in the micturition diary for 3-days before the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits.|Baseline and Week 12|The Full Analysis Set-Incontinence comprised participants in the FAS who reported at least 1 incontinence episode in the baseline diary. LOCF was used.||incontinence episodes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841027|NCT01340027|Secondary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Mean Number of Micturitions Per 24 Hours|The average number of micturitions (urinations) per 24 hours was derived from the number of urinations (excluding incontinence only episodes) per day recorded by the participant in the micturition diary for 3-days before the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set; LOCF was used.||micturitions||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841041|NCT01340209|Secondary|Weekly Mean Number of Puffs of Rescue Medication During the Whole Day (Response)|Response of weekly mean number of puffs of rescue medication during the whole day at week 52. Response was defined as change from baseline.|baseline and week 52|Full analysis set||Puffs||Standard Deviation|Mean
841028|NCT01340027|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (EOT) in Mean Volume Voided Per Micturition|The average volume voided per micturition was calculated from the volume of each micturition measured by the participant and recorded in a micturition diary for 3 days before the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits.|Baseline and Week 12|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) comprised all participants took at least 1 dose of double-blind study medication after randomization and had primary efficacy data (mean volume voided) derived from the diary at Baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit. Last observation carried forward imputation (LOCF) was utilized.||mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841029|NCT01340066|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Decrease in Leakage Events of 30% or More.|Incontinence events were recorded on a daily diary. Leaks were scored and tabulated for a daily score. These values were utilized to come up with total of leakage events during the double-blind treatment period.|Change from baseline after 4 weeks of treatment.|||Percentage of participants|||Number
841030|NCT01340144|Primary|Evaluate for the Incidence of Patellar Crepitus Requiring Non-operative vs. Operative Treatment of Both the Study and Control Groups at a Minimum of 12 Months Following the TKA (Total Knee Arthroplasty) Procedure in Each Subject.|The incidence of patellar crepitus and clunk will be statistically compared between the study (PFC Sigma HP PS TKA) and control (PFC Sigma PS TKA groups). Based on a strength analysis to determine a theoretical reduction in the incidence of patellar crepitus from 5% to 2%, a study group of 625 subjects in both the control and study ggroups will be required. Each group will also be statistically analyzed using the following variables: overall crepitus incidence, incidence of crepitus requiring only non-operative treatment vs. those requiring operative treatment to manage this complication.|Two years after TKA (Total Knee Arthroplasty) procedure|||participants|||Number
841031|NCT01340196|Secondary|Clinical Relevant Abnormalities for Physical Examination, Vital Signs, Safety Laboratory Tests and 12-lead ECG|"Clinical relevant abnormalities for physical examination, vital signs, safety laboratory tests and 12-lead ECG. New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as Adverse Events.
Preferred term of relevant AE: Presyncope"|From drug administration up to 32 days.|All subjects who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety evaluation (treated set).||participants|||Number
841032|NCT01340196|Secondary|Number of Patients With Drug Related Adverse Events During the Trial|Outcome data are the numbers of subjects with investigator defined drug-related AEs|From drug administration up to 32 days.|All subjects who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety evaluation (treated set).||participants|||Number
841033|NCT01340196|Primary|Steady-state Pharmacokinetics of C12hr of Faldaprevir on Day 15 and on Day 22|Measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at 12 h (C12hr) after dosing, at steady state.|168:00, 168:30, 169:00, 169:30, 170:00, 172:00, 174:00, 176:00, 178:00, 180:00, 192:00 hours on day 15 and 144:00, 144:30, 145:00, 145:30, 146:00, 147:00, 148:00, 150:00, 152:00, 156:00 hours on day 22|All participants from the pharmacokinetic analysis set (PK set), including all subjects in the treated set who provided evaluable data for at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841034|NCT01340196|Primary|Steady-state Pharmacokinetics of Cmax of Faldaprevir on Day 15 and Day 22|Maximum measured concentration of analyte in plasma (Cmax), at steady state.|168:00, 168:30, 169:00, 169:30, 170:00, 172:00, 174:00, 176:00, 178:00, 180:00, 192:00 hours on day 15 and 144:00, 144:30, 145:00, 145:30, 146:00, 147:00, 148:00, 150:00, 152:00, 156:00 hours on day 22|All participants from the pharmacokinetic analysis set (PK set), including all subjects in the treated set who provided evaluable data for at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841035|NCT01340196|Primary|Steady-state Pharmacokinetics of AUC0-12 of Faldaprevir on Day 15 and on Day 22|Area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of the analyte in plasma over the time interval 0-12 hours, at steady state.|168:00, 168:30, 169:00, 169:30, 170:00, 172:00, 174:00, 176:00, 178:00, 180:00, 192:00 hours on day 15 and 144:00, 144:30, 145:00, 145:30, 146:00, 147:00, 148:00, 150:00, 152:00, 156:00 hours on day 22|All participants from the pharmacokinetic analysis set (PK set), including all subjects in the treated set who provided evaluable data for at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841036|NCT01340196|Primary|Steady-state Pharmacokinetics of C24hr of Tenofovir on Day 7 and on Day 15|Measured concentration of the analyte in plasma at 24 h (C24hr) after dosing, at steady state.|144:00, 144:30, 145:00, 145:30, 146:00, 147:00, 148:00, 150:00, 152:00, 156:00, 168:00 hours on day 7 and 168:00, 168:30, 169:00, 169:30, 170:00, 172:00, 174:00, 176:00, 178:00, 180:00, 192:00 hours on day 15|All participants from the pharmacokinetic analysis set (PK set), including all subjects in the treated set who provided evaluable data for at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841037|NCT01340196|Primary|Steady-state Pharmacokinetics of Cmax of Tenofovir on Day 7 and on Day 15|Maximum measured concentration of analyte in plasma (Cmax), at steady state.|144:00, 144:30, 145:00, 145:30, 146:00, 147:00, 148:00, 150:00, 152:00, 156:00, 168:00 hours on day 7 and 168:00, 168:30, 169:00, 169:30, 170:00, 172:00, 174:00, 176:00, 178:00, 180:00. 192:00 hours on day 15|All participants from the pharmacokinetic analysis set (PK set), including all subjects in the treated set who provided evaluable data for at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841038|NCT01340196|Primary|Steady-state Pharmacokinetics of AUC0-24 of Tenofovir on Day 7 and on Day 15|Area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of the analyte in plasma over the time interval 0-24 hours, at steady state.|144:00, 144:30, 145:00, 145:30, 146:00, 147:00, 148:00, 150:00, 152:00, 156:00, 168:00 hours on day 7 and 168:00, 168:30, 169:00, 169:30, 170:00, 172:00, 174:00, 176:00, 178:00, 180:00, 192:00 hours on day 15|All participants from the pharmacokinetic analysis set (PK set), including all subjects who were documented to have taken at least one dose of trial medication (treated set) who provided evaluable data for at least 1 observation for at least 1 primary PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841042|NCT01340209|Secondary|Weekly Mean PEF Variability Response|"Weekly mean PEF variability response was defined as change from baseline at week 52.
The PEF variability is the absolute difference between morning and evening PEF value, divided by their mean, expressed as a percent. Response was defined as change from baseline."|baseline and week 52|Full analysis set||percentage||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841043|NCT01340209|Secondary|Weekly Mean PEFpm Response|Weekly mean PEFpm response was defined as change from baseline at week 52|baseline and week 52|Full analysis set||L/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841044|NCT01340209|Secondary|Weekly Mean PEFam Response|Weekly mean PEFam response was defined as change from baseline at week 52|baseline and week 52|Full analysis set||L/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841045|NCT01340209|Secondary|Trough PEF Response|Trough PEF response was defined as change from baseline at week 52|baseline and week 52|Full analysis set||L/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841046|NCT01340209|Secondary|Trough FVC Response|Trough FVC response was defined as change from baseline at week 52|baseline and week 52|Full analysis set||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841047|NCT01340209|Secondary|Trough FEV1 Response|Trough FEV1 response was defined as change from baseline at week 52|baseline and week 52|Full analysis set: all patients of the treated set for which baseline and at least 1 post-baseline efficacy measurement were available||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841048|NCT01340209|Primary|Number of Patients With Drug-related Adverse Events|The primary endpoint is the number of patients with drug-related adverse events|after the first dose of trial medication and within 30 days after the last dose of trial medication, up to 409|Treated set: all randomised patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication||participants|||Number
841055|NCT01340573|Secondary|Participants' Overall Rating of Satisfaction and the Use of Training Materials for the Pegintron Pen, as Provided in a Study Questionnaire|Participants will complete a single questionnaire during the first follow-up visit (Week 12). The questionnaire will measure the participant's satisfaction and the use of training materials for the PegIntron Pen during the course of study therapy, as measured by the participant using a 1- 5 score system provided in the questionnaire.|Week 12|The study was terminated early due to low enrollment. This analysis was not performed.|||||
841056|NCT01340573|Secondary|Number of Genotype-1 Participants Who Have Achieved Sustained Virologic Response (SVR) at Week-24 Follow-up||Week-24 follow-up|The study was terminated early due to low enrollment. This analysis was not performed.|||||
841057|NCT01340573|Secondary|Number of Genotype-1 Participants Who Have Achieved Sustained Virologic Response (SVR) at Week-48 of Study Treatment||Week-48|The study was terminated early due to low enrollment. This analysis was not performed.|||||
841058|NCT01340573|Secondary|Number of Non-genotype-1 Participants Who Have Achieved Sustained Virologic Response (SVR) at Week-24 Follow-up||Week-24 follow-up|The study was terminated early due to low enrollment. This analysis was not performed.|||||
841059|NCT01340573|Secondary|Number of Non-genotype-1 Participants Who Have Achieved Sustained Virologic Response (SVR) at Week-24 of Study Treatment|Sustained virologic response (SVR) is the absence of detectable HCV RNA in serum after end of treatment.|Week-24|The study was terminated early due to low enrollment. This analysis was not performed.|||||
841060|NCT01340573|Primary|Number of Non-genotype 1 Participants Who Experienced Serious Adverse Events (SAE) on Week-24 Follow-up|Collection of all safety reports (serious adverse events) from Non-genotype-1 population at week-24 non-treatment follow-up, from participants on pegylated interferon (PegIntron) pen plus ribavirin.|Week-24 follow-up|The study was terminated early due to low enrollment. This analysis was not performed.|||||
841061|NCT01340573|Primary|Number of Non-genotype-1 Participants Who Experienced Serious Adverse Events (SAE) at Week-24 of Study Treatment|Collection of all safety reports (serious adverse events) from Non-genotype-1 population at week-24 of study treatment, from participants on pegylated interferon (PegIntron) pen plus ribavirin.|Week-24|The study was terminated early due to low enrollment. This analysis was not performed.|||||
841062|NCT01340573|Primary|Number of Genotype-1 Participants Who Experienced Serious Adverse Events (SAE) at Week-24 Follow-up|Collection of all safety reports (serious adverse events) from genotype-1 population at week-24 non-treatment follow-up, from participants on pegylated interferon (PegIntron) pen plus ribavirin.|Week-24 follow-up|The study was terminated early due to low enrollment. This analysis was not performed.|||||
841063|NCT01340573|Primary|Number of Genotype-1 Participants Who Experienced Serious Adverse Events (SAE) at Week-48 of Study Treatment|Collection of all safety reports (serious adverse events) from genotype-1 population at week-48 of treatment, from participants on pegylated interferon (PegIntron) pen plus ribavirin.|Week-48|The study was terminated early due to low enrollment. This analysis was not performed.|||||
841064|NCT01340586|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Who Died or Experienced Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) or Adverse Events Leading to Discontinuation|"The number of participants who died or experienced SAEs or AEs leading to discontinuation was reported for each arm.
AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Treatment-related=having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug. Grade (Gr) 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4= Potentially Life-threatening or disabling."|From Day 1 to 30 days post study discontinuation|All treated participants||participants|||Number
841065|NCT01340586|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Laboratory Marked Abnormalities|"ULN=Upper Limit of Normal, LLN=Lower Limit of Normal, Pre-Rx= Baseline value. BUN=Blood Urea Nitrogen (mmol/L=millimoles per Liter): High if BUN > 1.1*ULN (if Pre-Rx>ULN: >1.25*Pre-Rx).
Platelet count (*10^9 cell/L): Low if Platelet Count < 0.85*LLN (if Pre-Rx<LLN: <0.85*Pre-Rx).
Creatine (umol/L=micromoles per Liter): High if Creatine > 1.5*ULN (if Pre-Rx>ULN: >1.33*Pre-Rx).
Calcium, Total (mmol/L): High if Calcium > 1.5*ULN (if Pre-Rx>ULN: >1.33*Pre-Rx).
Potassium, serum (mmol/L): High if Potassium > 1.1*ULN (if Pre-Rx>ULN: >1.1*Pre-Rx; if Pre-Rx<LLN: >ULN).
Phosphorus, Inorganic (mmol/L): Low if Phosphate < 0.85*LLN (if Pre-Rx>ULN: <LLN).
Lactate dehydrogenase (U/L=Units per Liter): High if Lactate Dehydrogenase > 1.25*ULN (if Pre-Rx>ULN: >1.5*Pre-Rx)."|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||participants|||Number
841066|NCT01340586|Secondary|Mean Peak Anti-FXa Activity Following a Single Oral Dose of 5 mg Apixaban|Anti-FXa activity was assessed from an activity-time profile for doses both before and after hemodialysis. Maximal means were reported in International Units per milliliter (IU/mL).|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841067|NCT01340586|Secondary|Mean Maximum Percent Change From Baseline Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) Following a Single Oral Dose of 5 mg Apixaban|The mean maximum percent change in Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) from baseline was reported for all treated participants. Baseline measurements were assessed up to 24 hours prior to Day 1 dosing.|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||maximum percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
841068|NCT01340586|Secondary|Mean Maximum Percent Change From Baseline Prothrombin Time (PT) Following a Single 5 mg Oral Dose of Apixaban|The mean maximum percent change in Prothrombin Time (PT) from baseline was reported for all treated participants. Baseline measurements were assessed up to 24 hours prior to Day 1 dosing.|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||maximum percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
841069|NCT01340586|Secondary|Mean Maximum Percent Change From Baseline International Normalized Ratio (INR) Following a Single 5 mg Oral Dose of Apixaban|The mean maximum percent change in baseline for INR was reported for each arm. Baseline measurements were assessed up to 24 hours prior to Day 1 dosing.|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||maximum percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
841070|NCT01340586|Primary|Percentage of BMS-730823 Extracted During Hemodialysis|The percentage of BMS-730823 extracted during hemodialysis (extraction ratio) was calculated using the formula [plasma AUC(2-6)exiting - AUC(2-6)entering] / [AUC(2-6) entering] and converted to a percentage. The extraction ratio was measured in period 1 only, and was reported as a percentage.|2 to 6 hours post-dose|All treated participants with ESRD maintained with hemodialysis||percentage of BMS-730823 extracted||Standard Deviation|Mean
841071|NCT01340586|Primary|Percentage of Apixaban Extracted During Hemodialysis|The percentage of apixaban extracted during hemodialysis (extraction ratio) was calculated using the formula [plasma AUC(2-6) exiting - AUC(2-6) entering] / [AUC(2-6) entering] and converted to a percentage. The extraction ratio was measured in period 1 only, and was reported as a percentage.|2 to 6 hours post-dose|All treated participants with ESRD maintained with hemodialysis||percentage of apixaban extracted||Standard Deviation|Mean
841072|NCT01340586|Primary|Mean Hemodialysis Clearance (CLD) of BMS-730823|Hemodialysis clearance (CLD) was calculated by dividing the cumulative amount of BMS-730823 excreted in dialysate by the respective cumulative plasma AUC over the same dialysate collection interval (AUC(2-6) entering). CLD measurements occurred only in period 1. Geometric means were reported in milliliters per minute (mL/min).|2 to 6 hours post-dose|All participants with ESRD maintained with hemodialysis||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
841073|NCT01340586|Primary|Mean Hemodialysis Clearance (CLD) of Apixaban|Hemodialysis clearance (CLD) was calculated by dividing the cumulative amount of apixaban excreted in dialysate by the respective cumulative plasma AUC over the same dialysate collection interval (AUC(2-6) entering). CLD measurements occurred only in period 1. Geometric means were reported in milliliters per minute (mL/min).|2 to 6 hours post-dose|All treated participants with ESRD maintained with hemodialysis||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841074|NCT01340586|Primary|Mean Renal Clearance (CLR) of BMS-730823|Renal clearance (CLR) was calculated by dividing the cumulative amount of BMS-730823 excreted in urine by the respective cumulative plasma AUC over the same urine collection interval. Geometric means were reported in milliliters per minute (mL/min).|24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841075|NCT01340586|Primary|Mean Renal Clearance (CLR) of Apixaban|Renal clearance (CLR) was calculated by dividing the cumulative amount of apixaban excreted in urine by the respective cumulative plasma AUC over the same urine collection interval. Geometric means were reported in milliliters per minute (mL/min).|24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841076|NCT01340586|Primary|Mean Percent Dose of Apixaban Recovered in Dialysate (%DR)|Percent dose of Apixaban recovered in dialysate (%DR) was calculated by dividing the cumulative amount of apixaban excreted in each dialysate collection over 2-6 hours (DR(2-6)) by the apixaban dose. %DR was recorded only in period 1.|2 to 6 hours post-dose|All treated participants with ESRD maintained with hemodialysis||percent of dose recovered in dialysate||Standard Deviation|Mean
841077|NCT01340586|Primary|Mean Percent Dose of Apixaban Recovered in Urine (%UR)|The percent dose recovered in urine was calculated by dividing the cumulative amount of unchanged apixaban excreted in urine from the time of dose up to 72 hours post-dose by the apixaban dose administered.|24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||percent of dose recovered in urine||Standard Deviation|Mean
841078|NCT01340586|Primary|Geometric Mean of Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From 2 to 6 Hours (AUC(2-6)) for BMS-730823|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 2 hours to 6 hours (AUC(2-6) for BMS-730823 was measured in participants with ESRD during dialysis in Period 1 only. Geometric Means were reported in nanogram hours per milliliter (ng*hr/mL) and were determined from blood samples both entering and exiting the dialyzer.|2 to 6 hours post-dose|All participants with ESRD maintained with hemodialysis||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841079|NCT01340586|Primary|Geometric Mean of Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From 2 to 6 Hours (AUC(2-6)) for Apixaban|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 2 hours to 6 hours (AUC(2-6) for Apixaban was measured in participants with ESRD during dialysis in Period 1 only. Geometric Means were reported in nanogram hours per milliliter (ng*hr/mL) and were determined from blood samples both entering and exiting the dialyzer.|2 to 6 hours post-dose|All participants with ESRD maintained with hemodialysis||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841080|NCT01340586|Primary|Median Time of Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Metabolite BMS-730823|Time of maximum observed plasma concentration (Tmax) for BMS-730823 was derived from plasma concentrations versus time data. Medians were reported in hours.|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||hours||Full Range|Median
841081|NCT01340586|Primary|Median Time of Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of a Single 5 mg Oral Dose of Apixaban|Time of maximum observed plasma concentration (Tmax) for apixaban was derived from plasma concentrations versus time data. Medians were reported in hours.|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||hours||Full Range|Median
841082|NCT01340586|Primary|Mean Plasma Terminal Half-life (T-Half) of BMS-730823|Mean plasma terminal half-life (T-Half) for BMS-730823 was derived from plasma concentrations versus time data.|24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants with ESRD maintained with hemodialysis||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
841083|NCT01340586|Primary|Mean Plasma Terminal Half-life (T-Half) of Single 5mg Oral Dose of Apixaban|Plasma terminal half-life (T-Half) for apixaban was derived from plasma concentrations versus time data. Means were reported in hours.|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
841084|NCT01340586|Primary|Geometric Mean of Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUC(INF)) of BMS-730823|The area under the concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinite time (AUC(INF)) was measured by plasma concentration of BMS-730823 over time. The geometric means are reported in nanogram hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL).|24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841085|NCT01340586|Primary|Geometric Mean of Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUC(INF)) of Single 5mg Oral Dose of Apixaban|The area under the concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinite time (AUC(INF)) was measured by plasma concentration of apixaban over time. The geometric means are reported in nanogram hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL).|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841086|NCT01340586|Primary|Geometric Mean of Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC(0-T)) of Metabolite BMS-730823|Area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUC(0-T)) was measured by plasma concentration of BMS-730823 over time. The geometric means are reported in nanogram hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL).|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841087|NCT01340586|Primary|Geometric Mean of Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC(0-T)) of Single 5mg Oral Dose of Apixaban|Area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUC(0-T)) was measured by plasma concentration of apixaban over time. The geometric means are reported in nanogram hours per milliliter (ng*h/mL).|24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841088|NCT01340586|Primary|Geometric Mean of Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Metabolite BMS-730823|Maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) was measured by plasma concentration of BMS-730823 over time. The geometric means are reported in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL).|From 24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841089|NCT01340586|Primary|Geometric Mean of Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Single 5mg Oral Dose of Apixaban|Maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) was measured by plasma concentration of apixaban over time. The geometric means are reported in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL).|24 hours pre-dose to 72 hours post-dose|All treated participants||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841090|NCT01340625|Primary|AUC0-inf of Ethinyl Estradiol|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|34 out of 36 subjects completed the study. Subjects 13 & 35 were excluded from the statistical analysis for Ethinyl Estradiol due to pre-dose concentrations greater than 5% of Cmax; therefore analysis included 32 data sets.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841091|NCT01340625|Primary|AUC0-t of Ethinyl Estradiol|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|34 out of 36 subjects completed the study. Subjects 13 & 35 were excluded from the statistical analysis for Ethinyl Estradiol due to pre-dose concentrations greater than 5% of Cmax; therefore analysis included 32 data sets.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841092|NCT01340625|Primary|Cmax of Ethinyl Estradiol|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|34 out of 36 subjects completed the study. Subjects 13 & 35 were excluded from the statistical analysis for Ethinyl Estradiol due to pre-dose concentrations greater than 5% of Cmax; therefore analysis included 32 data sets.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841093|NCT01340625|Primary|AUC0-inf of Norethindrone|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841094|NCT01340625|Primary|AUC0-t of Norethindrone|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841095|NCT01340625|Primary|Cmax of Norethindrone|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841096|NCT01340651|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Ruxolitinib 25 mg SR on Day 1|Blood samples were collected prior to and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 9 hours after administration of ruxolitinib 25 mg SR on Day 1 of the study. The concentration of ruxolitinib was determined in plasma samples by a validated LC/MS/MS assay. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) was derived from the plasma concentrations using a non-compartmental method and computed using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the log-trapezoidal rule for decreasing concentrations with the software WinNonlin® version 6.0.0 (Pharsight Corporation, Mountain View, CA).|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic evaluable participants: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and provided at least 1 plasma sample.||nM*h||Standard Deviation|Mean
841097|NCT01340651|Secondary|Time to Reach the Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Ruxolitinib 25 mg SR on Day 1|Blood samples were collected prior to and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 9 hours after administration of ruxolitinib 25 mg SR on Day 1 of the study. The concentration of ruxolitinib was determined in plasma samples by a validated LC/MS/MS assay. Standard noncompartmental pharmacokinetic methods were used to analyze the ruxolitinib plasma concentration data using WinNonlin® version 6.0.0 (Pharsight Corporation, Mountain View, CA). Tmax was taken directly from the observed plasma concentration data.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic evaluable participants: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and provided at least 1 plasma sample.||h||Full Range|Median
841098|NCT01340651|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Ruxolitinib 25 mg SR on Day 1|Blood samples were collected prior to and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 9 hours after administration of ruxolitinib 25 mg SR on Day 1 of the study. The concentration of ruxolitinib was determined in plasma samples by a validated LC/MS/MS assay. Standard non-compartmental pharmacokinetic methods were used to analyze the ruxolitinib plasma concentration data using WinNonlin® version 6.0.0 (Pharsight Corporation, Mountain View, CA). Cmax was taken directly from the observed plasma concentration data.|Day 1|Pharmacokinetic evaluable participants: All enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and provided at least 1 plasma sample.||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
841099|NCT01340651|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 50% Reduction From Baseline in the Total Symptom Score at Week 16|Symptoms of myelofibrosis were assessed using the modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form v2.0 diary that was to be completed by participants each night. The 7 symptoms (night sweats, itchiness, abdominal pain, pain under the ribs on left side, feeling of fullness [early satiety], bone/muscle pain, inactivity) were each rated on a scale from 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable). The total symptom score was the sum of 6 of the 7 symptoms (inactivity was not included) and ranged from 0 to 60. A lower score indicated fewer symptoms.|Baseline to Week 16|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841100|NCT01340651|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Total Symptom Score at Week 16|Symptoms of myelofibrosis were assessed using the modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form v2.0 diary that was to be completed by participants each night. The 7 symptoms (night sweats, itchiness, abdominal pain, pain under the ribs on left side, feeling of fullness [early satiety], bone/muscle pain, inactivity) were each rated on a scale from 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable). The total symptom score was the sum of 6 of the 7 symptoms (inactivity was not included) and ranged from 0 to 60. A lower score indicated fewer symptoms. A negative change score indicated improvement.|Baseline to Week 16|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants.||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
841101|NCT01340651|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ≥ 35% Reduction in Spleen Volume at Week 16 From Baseline|Spleen volume was measured by magnetic resonance imaging (or by computed tomography [CT] in applicable participants). Scans were read by a central reader. Spleen volume was obtained by outlining the circumference of the organ and determining the volume using the validated technique of least squares.|Baseline to Week 16|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841102|NCT01340651|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Spleen Length at Week 16|Spleen length was measured in centimeters by palpation.|Baseline to Week 16|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants.||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
841103|NCT01340651|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Spleen Volume at Week 16|Spleen volume was measured by magnetic resonance imaging (or by computed tomography [CT] in applicable participants). Scans were read by a central reader. Spleen volume was obtained by outlining the circumference of the organ and determining the volume using the validated technique of least squares.|Baseline to Week 16|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants.||Percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
841114|NCT01340794|Secondary|Overall Survival Time|Overall survival time is defined as the time from registration to death due to any cause and will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|The time from registration to death due to any cause, assessed up to 5 years|One of the two patients that initiated treatment with no run-in was found to be ineligible for this endpoint, leaving one patient evaluable for this endpoint in this treatment group. For patient confidentiality, results are not entered for endpoints based on 1 patient measures. All 4 patients that initiated treatment with a run-in were evaluable||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841104|NCT01340651|Primary|Overall Response (OR) at Week 16|The investigator graded OR according to the International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Therapy criteria for treatment response. As bone marrow biopsies were not taken after baseline, the best achievable response was clinical improvement which required 1 of the following in the absence of progressive disease (PD): (1) A ≥ 2 g/dL increase in hemoglobin level or (2) either a palpable ≥ 50% reduction of splenomegaly of a spleen ≥ 10 cm at baseline or a spleen palpable at > 5 cm at baseline becoming not palpable. PD required 1 of the following: (1) Progressive splenomegaly defined by the appearance of previously absent splenomegaly that was palpable at > 5 cm below the left costal margin or a ≥ 100% increase in palpable distance for baseline splenomegaly of 5-10 cm or a ≥ 50% increase in palpable distance for baseline splenomegaly of > 10 cm or (2) an increase in peripheral blood blast percentage to ≥ 20% that lasted for ≥ 8 weeks. Stable disease: None of the above.|Baseline to Week 16|Intent-to-treat population: All enrolled participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841105|NCT01340651|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 1 Adverse Event From Baseline Through Week 16||Baseline to Week 16|Safety population: All enrolled participants who took at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841106|NCT01340664|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With HbA1c <7% at Week 18|The table below shows the percentage of patients with HbA1c <7% at Week 18 in each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the percentage.|Week 18|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when Week 18 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
841107|NCT01340664|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 18|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean percent change in body weight from Baseline to Week 18 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean percent change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 18|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when Week 18 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841108|NCT01340664|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) From Baseline to Week 18|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in FPG from Baseline to Week 18 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 18|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when Week 18 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841109|NCT01340664|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 18|The table below shows the least-squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from Baseline to Week 18 for each treatment group. The statistical analyses show the treatment differences (ie, each canagliflozin group minus placebo) in the LS mean change.|Day 1 (Baseline) and Week 18|This analysis used the modified intent-to-treat analysis set (all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group and received at least 1 dose of study drug). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied when Week 18 values were missing. The table includes only patients with both baseline and post baseline values.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841110|NCT01340768|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least One Symptomatic or Asymptomatic Hypoglycemic Event|Symptomatic hypoglycemic events were based on the participants own self-reported symptoms (for example but not limited to the following: faintness, headache, confusion, anxiety, sweating, tremor, palpitations, nausea, pallor, dizziness, hunger, sudden behavioral change). Asymptomatic hypoglycemic events were based on self-monitored finger-stick blood glucose level.|Up to 30 days (Day 1 through last day of Ramadan)|All participants as treated population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
841111|NCT01340768|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least One Symptomatic Hypoglycemic Event|Symptomatic hypoglycemic events were based on the participants own self-reported symptoms (for example, but not limited to the following: faintness, headache, confusion, anxiety, sweating, tremor, palpitations, nausea, pallor, dizziness, hunger, sudden behavioral change).|Up to 30 days (Day 1 through last day of Ramadan)|All participants as treated population defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
841112|NCT01340794|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure|The time from the date of registration to the date at which the patient is removed from treatment due to progression, toxicity, or refusal, assessed up to 5 years.|Up to 5 years from registration|One of the two patients that initiated treatment with no run-in was found to be ineligible for this endpoint, leaving one patient evaluable for this endpoint in this treatment group. For patient confidentiality, results are not entered for endpoints based on 1 patient measures. All 4 patients that initiated treatment with a run-in were evaluable.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841113|NCT01340794|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Time|Progression-free survival is defined as the time from registration to documentation of disease progression. If a patient dies without a documentation of disease progression, the patient will be considered to have had tumor progression at the time of their death unless there is sufficient documented evidence to conclude no progression occurred prior to death. Progression-free survival time will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|The time from registration to documentation of disease progression or death, whichever occurs first, assessed up to 5 years|One of the two patients that initiated treatment with no run-in was found to be ineligible for this endpoint, leaving one patient evaluable for this endpoint in this treatment group. For patient confidentiality, results are not entered for endpoints based on 1 patient measures. All 4 patients that initiated treatment with a run-in were evaluable||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841169|NCT01341782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Target Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH)|The target iPTH range was 60-180 pg/mL, based on the average of the last 3 weeks of treatment. iPTH was measured before the first dialysis session of each week and analyzed by the central laboratory.|The last three weeks of treatment (Weeks 11, 12, and 13)|Full analysis set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841115|NCT01340794|Secondary|Duration of Tumor Response|Defined for all patients whose tumor met the criteria of CR or PR (using the RECIST criteria) as the date at which the patient's objective status is first noted to be either a CR or PR to the date progression is documented.|Up to 5 years|One of the two patients that initiated treatment with no run-in was found to be ineligible for this endpoint, leaving one patient evaluable for this endpoint in this treatment group. For patient confidentiality, results are not entered for endpoints based on 1 patient measures. None of the 4 patients that initiated treatment with a run-in responded|||||
841116|NCT01340794|Primary|Response Rate (RR) (Complete Response [CR] or Partial Response [PR]) Using RECIST Version 1.1|"Response and progression are evaluated in this study using the international criteria proposed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines (version 1.1) Ninety-five percent confidence intervals for the true response proportion was calculated using the exact binomial test.
Complete Response (CR): All of the following must be true:
Disappearance of all target and non-target lesions.
Each lymph node must have reduction in short axis to <1.0 cm.
Partial Response (PR):
At least a 30% decrease in PBSD (sum of the longest diameter for all target lesions plus the sum of the short axis of all the target lymph nodes at current evaluation) taking baseline measures as reference.
Overall Response (OR) was calculated by summing the number of patients with a CR or PR."|Up to 5 years|One of the two patients that initiated treatment with no run-in was found to be ineligible for this endpoint, leaving one patient evaluable for this endpoint in this treatment group. For patient confidentiality, results are not entered for endpoints based on 1 patient measures. All 4 patients that initiated treatment with a run-in were evaluable||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841117|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Elevated Temperature by Severity|Maximum temperature (all routes) was based on actual temperatures recorded with no adjustments to the measurement route. Maximum temperature (rectal) was required of all participants if the reading by another method was >=38.0°C.|Up to 5 days after any infant vaccination (up to 6 months)|Participants included in this analyses were All Subjects as Treated population defined as all vaccinated participants with safety follow up and temperature data. This outcome applied only to V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined and Control; therefore, data for the individual V419 lots are not reported.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841118|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection-site or Systemic Reactions|Solicited injection site reactions: Pain, Erythema, and Swelling. Solicited systemic reactions: Fever, Vomiting, Crying abnormal, Drowsiness, Appetite lost, and Irritability. Grade 3 Solicited injection site reaction: Pain, Cries when injected limb is moved or the movement of the injected limb is reduced; Erythema and Swelling, >5 cm. Grade 3 Solicited systemic reactions: Fever (Pyrexia), >=39.5°C rectal; Vomiting, >=6 episodes per 24 hours or requiring parenteral hydration; Crying abnormal, >3 hours; Drowsiness (Somnolence), Sleeping most of the time or difficult to wake up; Appetite lost, Refuses >=3 feeds or refuses most feeds; Irritability, Inconsolable.|Up to 5 days after any infant vaccination (up to 6 months)|Participants included in these analyses were All Subjects as Treated population and were defined as all vaccinated participants with safety follow up. This outcome applied only to V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined and Control; therefore, data for the individual V419 lots are not reported.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841119|NCT01340937|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pneumococcal Serotypes|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a multiplex electrochemiluminescence-based detection assay for serotype-specific pneumococcal polysaccharide antibodies. Analysis for this outcome included only non-inferiority of V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined versus Control.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841120|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Fimbriae|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis fimbriae. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer. Analysis for this outcome included only non-inferiority of V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined versus Control.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841121|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Pertactin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis pertactin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer. Analysis for this outcome included only non-inferiority of V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined versus Control.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841122|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Filamentous Hemagglutinin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis filamentous hemagglutinin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer. Analysis for this outcome included only non-inferiority of V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined versus Control.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841147|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Hepatitis B Surface Antigen|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an enhanced chemiluminescence assay for antibodies to Hepatitis B Surface Antigen. The unit of measure is milli International Units/mL (mIU/mL).|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841123|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis toxin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer. Analysis for this outcome included only non-inferiority of V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined versus Control.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841124|NCT01340937|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Fimbriae|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis fimbriae. Analysis for this outcome included only non-inferiority of V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined versus Control.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841125|NCT01340937|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Pertactin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis pertactin. Analysis for this outcome included only non-inferiority of V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined versus Control.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841126|NCT01340937|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Filamentous Hemagglutinin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis filamentous hemagglutinin. Analysis for this outcome included only non-inferiority of V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined versus Control.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841127|NCT01340937|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis toxin. Analysis for this outcome included only non-inferiority of V419 Lots A, B, and C Combined versus Control.|Postdose 4 (Month 16)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 4.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841128|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Poliovirus Type 3|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to Poliovirus Type 3. Response is defined as a titer >=8.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841129|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Poliovirus Type 2|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to Poliovirus Type 2. Response is defined as a titer >=8.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841130|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Poliovirus Type 1|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to Poliovirus Type 1. Response is defined as a titer >=8.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841131|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Fimbriae|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis fimbriae. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841132|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Pertactin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis pertactin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841133|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Filamentous Hemagglutinin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis filamentous hemagglutinin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841134|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Pertussis Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis toxin. Response was defined as follows: 1) if the predose titer was <4 times the lower limit of quantitation (4X LLOQ) then the postdose titer was >=4X LLOQ; 2) if the predose titer was >=4X LLOQ then the postdose titer was >= the predose titer.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841135|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Tetanus Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for anti-tetanus antibodies. Response was defined as a titer >=0.1 IU/mL.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841136|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Diphtheria Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to diphtheria toxin. Response was defined as a titer >=0.1 IU/mL.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841137|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Hepatitis B Surface Antigen|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an enhanced chemiluminescence assay for antibodies to Hepatitis B Surface Antigen. Response was defined as a titer >=10 mIU/mL.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841138|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Titer for Antibodies to Poliovirus Type 3|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to Poliovirus Type 3.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841139|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Titer for Antibodies to Poliovirus Type 2|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to Poliovirus Type 2.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841140|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Titer for Antibodies to Poliovirus Type 1|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to Poliovirus Type 1. The unit of measure is titer (reciprocal of highest dilution with neutralizing activity).|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841141|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Fimbriae|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis fimbriae.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841142|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Pertactin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis pertactin.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841143|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Filamentous Hemagglutinin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis filamentous hemagglutinin.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841144|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Pertussis Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an ELISA for antibodies to pertussis toxin. The unit of measure is ELISA units/mL (EU/mL).|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841145|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Tetanus Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with an Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) for anti-tetanus antibodies.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841146|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Diphtheria Toxin|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a Micrometabolic Inhibition Test for neutralizing antibodies to diphtheria toxin. The unit of measure is International Units/mL (IU/mL).|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841148|NCT01340937|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Responding to Polyribosylribitol Phosphate Antigen|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a radioimmunoassay for antibodies to Haemophilus influenza type b capsular polysaccharide polyribosylribitol phosphate. Response was evaluated for a titer >=0.15 µg/mL and >=1.0 µg/mL.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had a vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841149|NCT01340937|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentration of Antibodies to Polyribosylribitol Phosphate Antigen|Participant serum samples were collected for testing with a radioimmunoassay for antibodies to Haemophilus influenza type b capsular polysaccharide polyribosylribitol phosphate.|Postdose 3 (Month 7)|The analysis population included participants who met the inclusion criteria, were not protocol violators, had an infant vaccination window of 42 to 84 days after the previous dose, and a blood draw sample window for the endpoint of 28 to 51 days after dose 3.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841150|NCT01341067|Secondary|Change in Basal Insulin Dose From Baseline Values||Assessed at baseline and 6 months|||units of insulin||Standard Deviation|Mean
841151|NCT01341067|Secondary|Change in Percentage of Time Spent at Glycemic Levels >180 mg/dl||Measured at baseline and 6 months|||percentage of time spent >180 mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
841152|NCT01341067|Secondary|Percentage of Time Spent at Glycemic Levels <65 mg/dl||Measured at baseline and at 6 months|||percentage of time spent < 65 mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
841153|NCT01341067|Primary|Change in HgbA1c||Measured at 6 months|||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
841154|NCT01341444|Primary|Number of Participants With Surgical Site Complications (SSCs)|The primary objective to compare short-term surgical incision-related clinical outcomes in Subjects undergoing open renal transplant surgery when treated with Prevena vs. the standard-of-care wound dressing. Clinical outcomes of interest are defined as Surgical Site Complications (SSCs) that include incisional fluid accumulation (i.e. seroma, hematoma, abscess), dehiscence, surgical site infection (SSI). These outcomes will be compared to a control group consisting of subjects screened for the same inclusion/exclusion criteria but treated with standard-of-care incision dressing.|62 Days|Analysis of this endpoint was based on the Full analysis Set (FAS population). The FAS population consists of participants who met all of the pre- and intra-operative eligibility criteria, were randomized and received treatment. Subjects without SSC must have received 5 days of Prevena or at least 3 days of SOC dressing and completed 30 day visit.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841155|NCT01341600|Primary|Change in Platelet Aggregation Following Therapy With Clopidogrel|ADP mediated platelet aggregation measured 4 hours post Day 8 clopidogrel dose|4 hours post Day 8 dose|||percentage of aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
841156|NCT01341600|Secondary|Level of Active Clopidogrel Metabolite|The level of the active clopidogrel metabolite will be measured at at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 hours after the Day One dose is administered for pharmacokinetic analysis. The analysis will measure the Area Under the Curve.|Baseline, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 hours|||ng h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841157|NCT01341600|Secondary|Change in Platelet Aggregation Following Therapy With Clopidogrel and Omeprazole|The change in maximum platelet aggregation in response to ADP 4-hours post dose on day 8 of therapy with clopidogrel and omeprazole will be compared to the baseline measure of platelet aggregation at day 1 prior to drug therapy|Baseline, Day 8|||percentage of aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
841158|NCT01341600|Primary|Change in Platelet Aggregation Following Therapy With Clopidogrel|Adenosine diphosphate (ADP) mediated platelet aggregation measured 4 hours post-dose of clopidogrel on Day 1.|Day 1, 4 hours post clopidogrel dose|||percentage of aggregation||Standard Deviation|Mean
841159|NCT01335867|Secondary|Depression and Anxiety|Measures of depression and anxiety will be assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale|8 weeks||||||
841160|NCT01335867|Secondary|Alcohol and Cocaine Withdrawal Severity|Measures of alcohol and cocaine withdrawal severity will include Clinical Institutes Withdrawal Scale for Alcohol and Cocaine Selective Severity Assessment|8 weeks||||||
841161|NCT01335867|Secondary|Disease Severity and Improvement|Measures of disease severity and improvement will include the Clinical Global Impression Scale|8 weeks||||||
841162|NCT01335867|Secondary|Addiction Severity|Measures of addiction severity will include the Addiction Severity Index (ASI)|8 weeks||||||
841163|NCT01335867|Secondary|Measures of Cocaine and Alcohol Craving|Measures of cocaine and alcohol craving will be measured using the Minnesota Cocaine Craving Scale and the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale|8 weeks||||||
841164|NCT01335867|Primary|More Alcohol Abstinent Days and Fewer Heavy Drinking Days|The primary outcome measure for reduction in alcohol use will be recorded using the Timeline Followback method.|8 weeks|||Days Heavy Drinking|||Number
841165|NCT01335867|Primary|Number of Participants With a Reduction in Cocaine Use|The primary outcome measure for reduction in cocaine use will be the number of benzoylecgonine (BE) negative urine samples.|3 weeks|||participants|||Number
841166|NCT01341782|Secondary|Number of Visits at Which Participants Achieved iPTH Control in the Target Range of 60 to 180 pg/mL|iPTH control was defined as being within the target range of 60 to 180 pg/mL. iPTH was measured before the first dialysis session of the week, once a week during the treatment phase and analyzed by the central laboratory.|Weeks 2 to 13|Full analysis set||visits||Standard Deviation|Mean
841167|NCT01341782|Secondary|Number of Visits at Which Participants Achieved iPTH Control With ≥ 50% Reduction in Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) From Baseline|iPTH control was defined as a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline. iPTH was measured before the first dialysis session of the week, each week during the treatment phase and analyzed by the central laboratory.|Weeks 2 to 13|Full analysis set||visits||Standard Deviation|Mean
841168|NCT01341782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ≥ 50% Reduction in Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) From Baseline|The percentage of participants with a greater than or equal to 50% reduction in intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) from baseline to the average of the last 3 weeks of treatment. iPTH was measured before the first dialysis session of each week and analyzed by the central laboratory.|Baseline to the last three weeks of treatment (Weeks 11, 12, and 13)|Full analysis set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841170|NCT01341782|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ≥ 50% Reduction in Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) From Baseline and With No Hypercalcemia|The percentage of participants with greater than or equal to 50% reduction in intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) from baseline to the average of the last 3 weeks of treatment and with no hypercalcemia during the treatment phase. iPTH was measured before the first dialysis session of each week and analyzed by the central laboratory. Hypercalcemia was defined as at least 1 corrected calcium value > 11.0 mg/dL or at least 2 corrected calcium values ≥ 10.5 mg/dL.|Baseline to the last three weeks of treatment (Weeks 11, 12, and 13) for iPTH. Calcium measured throughout the study (Weeks 1-13).|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consists of all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline iPTH measurement.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841171|NCT01341782|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Target Intact Parathyroid Hormone (iPTH) and Without Hypercalcemia|The target iPTH range was 60-180 pg/mL, based on the average of the last 3 weeks of treatment, and with no hypercalcemia during the treatment phase. Hypercalcemia was defined as at least 1 corrected calcium value > 11.0 mg/dL or at least 2 corrected calcium values ≥ 10.5 mg/dL. iPTH was measured before the first dialysis session of each week and analyzed by the central laboratory.|iPTH measured during the last three weeks of treatment (Weeks 11, 12, and 13). Calcium measured throughout the study (Weeks 1-13).|The per-protocol set (PPS) consists of all randomized patients who completed at least 8 weeks of treatment and met the conditions specified by the subject classification (i.e., no violation of inclusion/exclusion criteria) that occurred before the study blind was broken.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841172|NCT01341912|Secondary|To Determine Long-term Efficacy of Human-cl rhFVIII in the Treatment of Bleeding Episodes and in Surgical Prophylaxis|"The efficacy of human-cl rhFVIII will be determined using a 4 point efficacy assessment scale.
After each infusion of IMP and at the end of a BE, the following efficacy assessment is made by the subject (together with the Investigator in case of on-site treatment):
Excellent: Abrupt pain relief and/or unequivocal improvement in objective signs of bleeding within approximately 8 hours after a single infusion.
Good: Definite pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding within approximately 8 - 12 hours after an infusion requiring up to 2 infusions for complete resolution.
Moderate: Probable or slight beneficial effect within approximately 12 hours after the first infusion requiring more than two infusions for complete resolution.
None: No improvement within 12 hours, or worsening of symptoms, requiring more than 2 infusions for complete resolution.
The assessment was made at the end of a BE in case more than one infusion was needed."|up to 3 years|||percentage of bleeding episodes|Participants||Number
841173|NCT01341912|Primary|Long-term Immunogenicity|Patients will be monitored for inhibitors against FVIII every 3 months. Blood samples were drawn and inhibitor activity was determined by the modified Bethesda assay (Nijmegen modification) in the central lab.|up to 3 years|||occurrence of inhibitors|||Number
841174|NCT01341977|Primary|Subjective Acceptance|Lens Moisture Subject Rated Likert Item (1-Strongly Agree to 5-Strongly Disagree)|Day 90|||Subjective Rating||Standard Deviation|Mean
841175|NCT01341977|Primary|Subjective Acceptance|Lens Moisture Subject Rated Likert item|Day 90||||||
841176|NCT01342094|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Diurnal IOP (Intraocular Pressure) at End of Study|Mean diurnal IOP (intraocular pressure) was calculated as an average of IOP (intraocular pressure) at 9:30 (pre-dose), 11:30 and 17:30.|Week 0(Baseline) and Week 4(End of Study)|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
841177|NCT01342107|Primary|Lens Wettability|As assessed by the investigator during slit-lamp exam and rated on a 0-4 scale, with 0 = a smooth uniformly reflecting wettable surface; 1 = a coarse hazy wettable surface which seems resolved momentarily with each blink and becomes exacerbated with staring; 2 = one stable dry (non-wetting) area of some magnitude; 3 = more than one stable dry (non-wetting) area of some magnitude; 4 = non-wettable lens surface of severe magnitude. Lenses with a Grade 0 or 1 were rated as wettable and reported as a percentage of total lenses evaluated.|16 hours|Intent to treat. All subject-eyes that received contact lenses pre-soaked per treatment regimen and completed Visit 2 (Day 1 - Exit at 16 hours) were included in the ITT data set.||percentage of lenses||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841178|NCT01342172|Secondary|To Determine the Impact of Treatment on Circulating Tumor Cells|Circulating epithelial tumor cells (CTC) will be investigated as an experimental endpoint using immunofluorescence techniques and CTC identification by positive expression of epithelial markers and a viability marker and negative expression of hematopoietic markers. These analyses will only be done in the phase II portion of the protocol.|Day 1 of Cycles 0, 1 and 2 (each Cycle is 21 days)||||||
841179|NCT01342172|Secondary|To Determine the Impact of Treatment on Peripheral Blood Immune Cell Subsets|We plan to determine the changes in cellular immunity with lenalidomide in peripheral blood mononuclear cells including Tregs, NK, NKT cells (Berg et al JCO 2010), sIl-2R, TNF alpha (Bartlett et al BJC 2004) and markers indicative of activation, i.e. CD107a. These analyses will only be done in the phase II portion of the protocol.|Day 1 of Cycle 0 and Day 1 of Cycle 2 (each Cycle is 21 days)||||||
841180|NCT01342172|Secondary|To Evaluate Lenalidomide as Maintenance Treatment in Patients Achieving an Objective Response or Stable Disease Following Completion of 6 Cycles of Combination Therapy.||168 days||||||
841181|NCT01342172|Secondary|To Determine the Safety of Combination Therapy With Gemcitabine, Cisplatin, and Lenalidomide|The safety of combination therapy with gemcitabine, cisplatin plus lenalidomide as determined by the frequency and severity of adverse events as per the NCI Common Terminology for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0.|Day 1 and Day 8 of each treatment cycle; 21 days after the last dose of Lenalidomide||||||
841182|NCT01342172|Secondary|To Determine the Objective Response Rate to Treatment With Gemcitabine, Cisplatin, Plus Lenalidomide|The objective response rate as determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Restaging CT scans will be performed after every 2 cycles (after cycles 2, 4, and 6). Each cycle is 21 days.|After every 2 cycles (a cycle is 21 days)||||||
841183|NCT01342172|Primary|Phase II: Progression-free Survival at 1 Year||1 year||||||
841184|NCT01342172|Primary|Phase I: To Determine the Recommended Phase II Dose of the Combination of Gemcitabine, Cisplatin, Plus Lenalidomide|Safety as measured by the frequency and type of adverse event as per the NCI Common Terminology for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4 on Day 1 of each cycle (Cycle is 21 days).|Day 1 of each 21 day cycle|The dose of lenalidomide was not escalated beyond 10 mg because of cytopenias requiring repeated dose delays and reductions.|||||
841185|NCT01342341|Primary|Alcohol Consumption in Drinks/Week.|Each subject will record how many drinks/week they are consuming while on the study drug and placebo during the 45-day study. The primary outcome of this study is to determine the effect of chlorzoxazone on alcohol consumption. Reduction in alcohol consumption is measured utilizing behavioral inventories, electronic diaries, urine, and ethyl glucuronide.|45 days|||number of drinks||Standard Deviation|Mean
841186|NCT01342445|Primary|Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function - Adult (BRIEF-A)|BRIEF-A is a standardized self-report measure that captures adults’ views of their own self-regulation in their everyday environment. Metacognition Index T-scores (mean = 50; standard deviation = 10) were used as dependent measures with higher scores representing greater deficit in planning/organizational skills critical for college success.|after receiving Placebo or LDX for 1 week|||T score||Standard Deviation|Mean
841187|NCT01342445|Primary|Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scale - Short Version (CAARS)|CAARS ADHD Index, adult self-report measure of ADHD symptoms. T-scores (mean = 50; standard deviation = 10) for all subscales on the short version were used as dependent measures with higher scores representing greater ADHD symptomatology (and ultimately a worse outcome in this study).|after receiving Placebo or LDX for 1 week|||T score||Standard Deviation|Mean
841188|NCT01342458|Secondary|Paracetamol Intake|Paracetamol intake (500 mg), number of tablets per month.|6 month|||tablets per month||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
841189|NCT01342458|Secondary|First Peak of the Knee Adduction Moment (KAM) During Gait.|The first peak of the external knee moment was calculated by mean inverse dynamics approach. To this procedure, we used the kinematics data of the lower limbs assessed with six infrared cameras and the ground reaction force evaluated by mean a force platform. This is a continuous measure.|6 month|||% body weight x height in centimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
841190|NCT01342458|Secondary|Six-minute Walk Test|The six-minute walk test assesses distance in meters walked over 6 minutes.|6 month|||meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
841191|NCT01342458|Secondary|Global Score of the Lequesne´s Questionaire Algo-functional.|This questionaire consists of three sections (eleven questions): about pain or discomfort, the maximum distance that the patient can walk, and activities of daily living. Scores range from zero to twenty-four, meaning cases without involvement and with extremely severe impairment, respectively.|6 month|||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
841192|NCT01342458|Secondary|WOMAC Total Score|The WOMAC total score is the sum of all subscale (pain, function and stiffness) (Likert Scale) relating to the patient's physical activities, or skills to move out and take care of themselves. The Likert Scale version used for all WOMAC items are: none, mild, moderate, severe, and extreme. The sum of all items ranges from 0 to 96. Higher scores on the WOMAC total score indicate worse condition.|6 month|||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
841193|NCT01342458|Secondary|WOMAC Physical Function Subscale|The physical function subscale included in the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) index consists of seventeen questions (Likert Scale) relating to the patient's physical activities, or skills to move out and take care of themselves. The Likert Scale version used for all WOMAC items are: none, mild, moderate, severe, and extreme. The sum of all items of physical function subscale ranges from 0 to 68. Higher scores on the physical function WOMAC subscale indicate worse functional limitations.|6 month|||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
841194|NCT01342458|Secondary|WOMAC Stiffness Subscale|The stiffness subscale included in the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) index consists of two questions (Likert Scale) relating articular function of the patient. The Likert Scale version used for all WOMAC items are: none, mild, moderate, severe, and extreme. The sum of all items of the stiffness subscale ranges from 0 to 8. Higher scores on the stiffness WOMAC subscale indicate worse articular function.|6 month|||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
841195|NCT01342458|Primary|Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Pain Subscale|The WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) pain subscale consists of five questions (Likert Scale) relating to the patient's pain in everyday situations. The Likert Scale version used for all WOMAC items are: none, mild, moderate, severe, and extreme. The sum of all items of pain subscale ranges from 0 to 20. Higher scores indicate worse pain.|6 month|An intention-to-treat analysis was performed, and the missing data were treated as missing completely at random (MCAR) using the Mahalanobis imputation method (SOLAS software version 4.0; Statistical Solutions Ltd., Cork, Ireland).||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
841196|NCT01342471|Secondary|TV Viewing Time|Change in self-reported TV viewing time per day between 0 and 6 months|0 and 6 months|||hr/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
841197|NCT01342471|Secondary|Weight|Change in weight in kgs between 0 and 6 months|0 and 6 months|||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
841198|NCT01342471|Secondary|TV Related Energy Intake|Change in energy intake (kcals/day) while watching TV between 0 and 6 months|0 and 6 months|||kcals/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
841199|NCT01342471|Secondary|Total Energy Intake|Change in total energy intake(kcals/day) between 0 and 6 months|0 and 6 months|||kcals/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
841200|NCT01342471|Primary|Physical Activity (Steps/Day)|Change in pedometer measured steps per day between 0 and 6 months|0 and 6 months|||steps/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
841201|NCT01342484|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) After 12 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in FPG (mmol/L) after 12 weeks of treatment with double-blind trial medication. The number of participants analysed displays the number of participants with available data at the timepoint of interest.|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) including all randomised patients who were treated with at least one dose of study drug and had a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c assessment. Observed Case (OC): In the OC analysis, values after the use of rescue medication were set to missing.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841202|NCT01342484|Secondary|Dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 (DPP-4) Inhibition (%) at Trough at Steady State|DPP-4 inhibition (%) at trough at steady state is the relative change between the measurement of DPP-4 activity taken 0.5 hours before dosing at baseline and the first available on-treatment measurement of DPP-4 activity taken 0.5 hour before dosing at week 4, 8 or 12: DPP-4 inhibition (%) = 100 - (DPP-4 activity at week X / DPP-4 activity at baseline) x 100.|Baseline and 4 weeks or 8 weeks or 12 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) including all randomised patients who were treated with at least one dose of study drug and had a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c assessment. OR (Original Results). The analysis excludes placebo patients and 1 FAS patient from Linagliptin 1 mg group.||Percentage of DPP-4 inhibition||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
841203|NCT01342484|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) (%) After 12 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in Glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) [%] after 12 weeks of treatment with double-blind trial medication. Baseline was defined as the last observation before the first intake of any double-blind randomised trial medication. The number of participants analysed displays the number of participants with available data at the timepoint of interest.|Baseline and 12 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) including all randomised patients who were treated with at least one dose of study drug and had a baseline and at least one on-treatment HbA1c assessment. Observed Case (OC): In the OC analysis, values after the use of rescue medication were set to missing.||Percentage of HbA1c||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841204|NCT01342510|Primary|Number of Patients With Pain Associated With Injection of Propofol.|Ten seconds following injection of propofol, subjects were asked “Are you having pain at your IV site?” Any behavioral signs were noted. Injection pain was assessed using the following four point scale: 0 = no pain; 1 = mild pain (pain reported only in response to questioning and without behavioral signs); 2 = moderate pain (pain reported in response to questioning and accompanied by a behavioral sign, or pain reported spontaneously without questioning); and 3 = severe pain (strong vocal response or response accompanied by facial grimacing, arm withdrawal, or tears).|< 1 minute.|||participants|||Number
841205|NCT01342510|Primary|Pain With Injection of Propofol|Following injection of the study drug, 50 mg of propofol will be injected. Ten seconds after propofol, subjects will be asked a standard question about pain. Behavioral signs will be noted. Pain will be assessed using a four point scale: 0=no pain, 1=mild pain (pain reported only in response to questioning and without behavioral signs), 2=moderate pain (pain reported in response to questioning and a behavioral sign, or pain reported without questioning), 3=severe pain (strong vocal response or behavioral response).|Approximately one minute following administration of propofol.||||||
841206|NCT01342523|Secondary|Increased Quit Attempts|Quit attempts will be defined in two ways: self-report of a serious attempt to quit, and occurrence of at least a 24 hr period of abstinence that was for the purpose of cessation.|Measured at the 1 month, 3 month and 7 month follow up assessments.||||||
841207|NCT01342523|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction|We will measure how satisfied participants were with the resources they were given as well as what might have made their quit attempts easier or more successful.|Measured at the 1 month, 3 month and 7 month follow up assessments||||||
841208|NCT01342523|Secondary|Perceived Support|We will measure perceived support from both treatment and non-treatment resources.|Measured at the1 month, 3 month and 7 month follow up assessments.||||||
841209|NCT01342523|Secondary|Withdrawal Symptoms|We will measure the manifestation and severity of withdrawal symptoms of participants in each treatment group.|Measured at the1 week, 2 week, 3 week, 1 month, 3 month and 7 month follow up assessments.||||||
841210|NCT01342523|Secondary|Effectiveness of the Experimental Resources.|We will measure how these experimental resources (as well as combinations of resources) aid in quit attempts and abstinence outcomes.|Data collected at all assessments (Measured at the1 week, 2 week, 3 week, 1 month, 3 month and 7 month follow ups), during web use measurements (6 months), and counseling calls measurements (4 weeks). Analyzed after the study.||||||
841211|NCT01342523|Secondary|Resource Use/Engagement|We will measure participants' use the experimental resources compared to the non-experimental resources. Particularly with the study websites, we will be tracking how often and how long participants use the regular smokefree.gov website versus the placebo website as well as what parts of the websites they are using for 6 months.|Assessed at the 7 month follow up assessment. Furthermore, Website use will be collected as pages viewed, time viewed, use occasions, and composite measures. Counseling use will be measured by number of counseling calls.||||||
841212|NCT01342523|Secondary|Smoking Outcomes|Inclusive of smoking rate amongst those smoking, smoking cessation milestones: initial cessation, lapse latency, lapse-relapse latency; and setting a quit date.|Measured at the1 week, 2 week, 3 week, 1 month, 3 month and 7 month follow up assessments.||||||
841213|NCT01342523|Primary|7-Day Point-Prevalence Abstinence From Smoking|Abstinence will be defined as 7-day point prevalence.|Measured after the 3 month follow up assessment|"Intention to treat (ITT)"||percentage of participants not smoking|||Number
841214|NCT01342549|Primary|Time to Relapse to Heavy Drinking as Defined by Having 5 or More Drinks in a Sitting for Men and Will be Assessed Using the Time Line Follow Back for Recent Drinking Method. A Structured Questionnaire Will Review Alcohol Consumed on the Previous Week.||24 weeks|||Weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
841215|NCT01342640|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Hb Concentration at Week 28|PP Population: All participants in the safety population (all enrolled participants) except participants with less than 3 recorded Hb values in Weeks 20 to 28; who missed methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta dose in Weeks 20 to 28; who withdrew before efficacy evaluation period (Weeks 20 to 28); and participants with inadequate iron status (defined as mean serum ferritin ≤ 100 ng/mL or TSAT ≤20% or mean hypochromic RBCs ≥ 10% during efficacy evaluation period [Weeks 20 to 28]).|Baseline (Week 0), Week 28|PP Population. Here, number of participants analyzed (N) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome||gm/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841216|NCT01342640|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Hb Concentration at Week 24|PP Population: All participants in the safety population (all enrolled participants) except participants with less than 3 recorded Hb values in Weeks 20 to 28; who missed methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta dose in Weeks 20 to 28; who withdrew before efficacy evaluation period (Weeks 20 to 28); and participants with inadequate iron status (defined as mean serum ferritin ≤ 100 ng/mL or TSAT ≤20% or mean hypochromic RBCs ≥ 10% during efficacy evaluation period [Weeks 20 to 28]).|Baseline (Week 0), Week 24|PP Population. Here, number of participants analyzed (N) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome.||gm/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841231|NCT01342770|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Response, Based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors ( RECIST) Version 1.1|Clinical response rates will be summarized. Complete response (CR) is the disappearance of all non-nodal target lesions (TL) and each target lymph node (LN) must have reduction in short axis to <1.0cm. Partial Response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameters (LD) of the non-nodal TR and the short axis of the target LN with the baseline sum diameters (BSD) as reference. Progression (PD) is at least 1 new malignant lesion or LN whose short axis increased to >1.5 cm or at least a 20% increase in the sum of TL diameters with the minimum sum of diameters as reference.|Up to the time of surgery||||||
841217|NCT01342640|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Hb Concentration at Week 20|Per Protocol (PP) Population: All participants in the safety population (all enrolled participants) except participants with less than 3 recorded Hb values in Weeks 20 to 28; who missed methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta dose in Weeks 20 to 28; who withdrew before efficacy evaluation period (Weeks 20 to 28); and participants with inadequate iron status (defined as mean serum ferritin less than or equal to [≤] 100 nanogram per milliliter [ng/mL] or mean transferrin saturation [TSAT] ≤20% or mean hypochromic red blood cells [RBCs] greater than or equal to [≥] 10% during efficacy evaluation period [Weeks 20 to 28]).|Baseline (Week 0), Week 20|PP Population. Here, number of participants analyzed (N) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome and n signifies those participants who were evaluable for specified time-point.||Grams per deciliter (gm/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
841218|NCT01342666|Primary|High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-c)|To evaluate the effect of two daily tomatoes consumption on HDL-c levels.|Baseline and after one month|The sample size was calculated using the formula for means for two-tailed comparisons. According to a previous report, we expected a minimal change of 5 mg/dL in HDL-c after one month of consumption. Using a SD of 9 mg/dL with alfa of 0.05 and study power of 80%, a total of 48 subjects were calculated.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841219|NCT01342757|Primary|Measurable Change on Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Imaging After Vorinostat Administration|Changes in magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging signal and semiquantitative analysis of inositol, choline, lactate, and NAA signal are measured. The values for each of these metabolites are normalized to baseline at one and nine weeks. The values of all the metabolites at one week are added and this is the magnetic resonance spectroscopic index for one week. This is done again at nine weeks. The number is unitless and there is no range limit. Positive values represent normalization of tumor metabolism and negative values suggest no improvement or worsening of metabolic character.|9 weeks|Patients collected until measurable spectroscopic indexes were available in at least three cases with metabolic response and three without metabolic response||Spectroscopic index||Standard Deviation|Mean
841220|NCT01342757|Secondary|Mean (or Median) Change in Metabolite Levels||Baseline to 1 week||||||
841221|NCT01342757|Primary|Proportion of Patients Who Experience Metabolic Restoration Between the Responders and Non-responder Groups by MRS Scans||After 1 week||||||
841222|NCT01342757|Primary|Proportion of Patients With Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Response to Initial Vorinostat by MRI and MRS Scans as Determined by Spectroscopic Index|Changes in magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging signal and semiquantitative analysis of inositol, choline, lactate, and N-acetylaspartate signal are measured. The values for each of these metabolites are normalized to baseline at one and nine weeks. The values of all the metabolites at one week are added and this is the magnetic resonance spectroscopic index for one week. This is done again at nine weeks. The number is unitless and there is no range limit. Positive values represent normalization of tumor metabolism and negative values suggest no improvement or worsening of metabolic character.|9 weeks|||participants|||Number
841223|NCT01342770|Secondary|Post-intervention SUV of PET Scan|The pre- and post-intervention SUV will be summarized using descriptive statistics and simple graphical plots.|Time of surgery|Includes registered eligible participants with pre- and post-intervention PET/CT images obtained||SUV||Full Range|Median
841224|NCT01342770|Secondary|Pre-intervention SUV of PET Scan|The pre- and post-intervention SUV will be summarized using descriptive statistics and simple graphical plots.|Baseline|Includes registered eligible participants with pre- and post-intervention PET/CT images obtained||SUV||Full Range|Median
841225|NCT01342770|Secondary|Percent Change in SUVmax From the PET Scan|The percent change from pre to post-intervention in SUV max values will be summarized using descriptive statistics and simple graphical plots.|Baseline to the time of surgery|Includes registered eligible participants with pre- and post-intervention PET/CT images obtained||Percent change in tumor SUV max values||Full Range|Median
841226|NCT01342770|Secondary|Percent Change in PPARy|Changes in the expression levels from baseline (prior to intervention) to post intervention (resected tumor sample) will be plotted graphically as well as formally assessed using Wilcoxon signed rank tests.|Baseline to the time of surgery|Includes all registered participants with pre- and post-intervention tumor tissue samples except one participant who was deemed ineligible post-registration||Percent change in PPARy measurements||Full Range|Median
841227|NCT01342770|Secondary|Percent Change in p21|Changes in the expression levels from baseline (prior to intervention) to post intervention (resected tumor sample) will be plotted graphically as well as formally assessed using Wilcoxon signed rank tests.|Baseline to the time of surgery|Includes all registered participants with pre- and post-intervention tumor tissue samples except one participant who was deemed ineligible post-registration||Percent change in p21 measurements||Full Range|Median
841228|NCT01342770|Secondary|Percent Change in MUC1|Changes in the expression levels from baseline (prior to intervention) to post intervention (resected tumor sample) will be plotted graphically as well as formally assessed using Wilcoxon signed rank tests.|Baseline to the time of surgery|Includes all registered participants with pre- and post-intervention tumor tissue samples except one participant who was deemed ineligible post-registration||Percent change in MUC1 measurements||Full Range|Median
841229|NCT01342770|Secondary|Percent Change in Cyclin D1|Changes in the expression levels from baseline (prior to intervention) to post intervention (resected tumor sample) will be plotted graphically as well as formally assessed using Wilcoxon signed rank tests.|Baseline to the time of surgery|Includes all registered participants with pre- and post-intervention tumor tissue samples except one participant who was deemed ineligible post-registration||Percent change in Cyclin D1 measurements||Full Range|Median
841230|NCT01342770|Secondary|Number of Participants With Complete Pathologic Response|Complete pathologic response was defined as no viable residual tumor cells. Acellular residual mucin pools also considered a pathologic complete response.|Up to the time of surgery|Includes all registered participants||participants|||Number
841232|NCT01342770|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events Graded According to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0|To evaluate the adverse events profile, the maximum grade for each type of adverse event will be recorded for each participant and frequency tables will be reviewed to determine the overall patterns. The number and severity of adverse events (both regardless of attribution as well as those that are at least possibly, probably, or definitely related) will be tabulated and summarized.|Up to the time of surgery|Includes all registered eligible participants||participants|||Number
841233|NCT01342770|Secondary|Gene Expression Analysis of RNA From Bronchial Brush Cells|For the gene expression profiles obtained from the data from normal bronchial brush cells, each participant’s pre- and post gene expression will be graphically represented and the mean expression levels analyzed using a paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed rank test, if the assumptions of the t-test are not met.|Up to the time of surgery||||||
841234|NCT01342770|Secondary|Change in Levels of Serum CRP|Each participant’s pre- and post serum levels of CRP will be graphically represented and the mean levels analyzed using a paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed rank test, if the assumptions of the t-test are not met.|Baseline to the time of surgery||||||
841235|NCT01342770|Secondary|Change in Levels of Serum CA-153|Each participant’s pre- and post serum levels of CA-153 will be graphically represented and the mean levels analyzed using a paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed rank test, if the assumptions of the t-test are not met.|Baseline to the time of surgery||||||
841236|NCT01342770|Secondary|Change in Apoptosis Assessment (e.g., Caspase-3)|Changes in the expression levels (or grades) from baseline (prior to intervention) to post-intervention (resected tumor sample) will be plotted graphically as well as formally assessed using the McNemar’s tests (for categorical variables) or Wilcoxon signed rank tests (for continuous variables) respectively.|Baseline to the time of surgery||||||
841237|NCT01342770|Primary|Percent Change in Ki-67 by Immunohistochemistry (IHC)|Changes in the expression levels of Ki-67 will be plotted graphically, and percent change in expression levels will be formally assessed using the paired t-test or the Wilcoxon signed rank test, if the assumptions of the t-test (i.e. normality) are not met.|Baseline to the time of surgery|Includes all registered participants with pre- and post-intervention tumor tissue samples except one participant who was deemed ineligible post-registration||Percent change in Ki-67 measurements||Full Range|Median
841238|NCT01342887|Secondary|Frequency and Severity of Regimen-associated Toxicities|Estimate the frequency and severity of regimen-associated toxicities, along with 28-day mortality after start of study treatment|At 28 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
841239|NCT01342887|Secondary|Disease-free Survival of Patients That Achieve CR/CRi|Describe the disease-free survival of patients that achieve CR/CRi.|Up to 4.5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
841240|NCT01342887|Secondary|CR/CRi|"Describe the disease-free survival of patients that achieve Complete Remission (CR)/CR with inadequate recovery of peripheral blood cell counts (CRi).
Categorized according to criteria recommended by an International Working Group."|After completion of first 2 courses, up to 22 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
841241|NCT01342887|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Doses Mitoxantrone Hydrochloride and Etoposide When Combined With Cyclosporine and Pravastatin Sodium|"Determine the doses of mitoxantrone and etoposide that, when combined with CSA and pravastatin, meet minimum standards for both efficacy and toxicity and have the highest efficacy rate among several mitoxantrone and etoposide doses.
Assessed by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0."|After completion of first 2 courses, up to 22 weeks|||doses tolerated|||Number
841242|NCT01342913|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough FEV1 on Treatment Day 85|Pulmonary function was measured by forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). Trough FEV1 was defined as the 24-hour FEV1 assessment, which was obtained on Day 85. Baseline is defined as the mean of the two assessments made 30 minutes pre-dose and 5 minutes pre-dose on Treatment Day 1.Change from Baseline was calculated as the average of the Day 85 values minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 85|Only participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841243|NCT01342913|Secondary|Time to Onset on Treatment Day 1|Time to onset on Treatment Day 1 is defined as the time to an increase of 100 milliliters (mL) from Baseline in FEV1. Time of onset was calculated over 0 to 4 hours (5 min, 15 min, 30 min, 60 min, 120 min, and 240 min) post-dose.|Day 1|ITT Population. Only participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Minutes||Full Range|Median
841244|NCT01342913|Primary|Change From Baseline Trough in 24-hour Weighted-mean FEV1 on Treatment Day 84|Pulmonary function was measured by forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). The weighted mean was calculated from the pre-dose FEV1 and post-dose FEV1 measurements at 5, 15, 30, and 60 minutes (min) and 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 13, 14, 16, 20, and 24 hours on Treatment Day 84. Baseline trough FEV1 was the mean of the two assessments made 30 and 5 minutes pre-dose on Treatment Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated as the average of the Day 84 values minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Day 84|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least 1 dose of double-blind medication. Randomized participants were assumed to have received double-blind medication unless definitive evidence to the contrary existed. Only participants available at the indicated time point were assessed.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841245|NCT01342926|Secondary|The Pharmacodynamic Effects of GSK933776 Total (Bound and Unbound) Plasma Total Amyloid Beta (Abeta42), and Amyloid Beta Fragments (Abeta18-35), if Possible, Unbound Plasma Aβ Fragments (Abeta1-22)|Blood samples were collected at the indicated time points on Baseline, Month 3, Month 4, Month 5, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12, Month 15 and Month 18. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Baseline, Month 3, Month 4, Month 5, Month 6, Month 9, Month 12, Month 15 and Month 18|PD Concentration Population: all participants in the ITT Population with at least one PD sample||picogram (PG)/ML||Standard Deviation|Mean
841246|NCT01342926|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady-state (Vdss) of GSK933776 in Geographic Atrophy Participants Estimated From Population PK Modeling|Blood samples were collected at the indicated time points on Day 56, Day 63, 70 or 77, Day 84, Day 112, Day 140, Day 224, Day 308, Day 392 and Day 476.|Day 56, Day 63, 70 or 77, Day 84, Day 112, Day 140, Day 224, Day 308, Day 392 and Day 476|PK Parameter Population||mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841247|NCT01342926|Secondary|Estimation of Terminal Phase Half-life (T1/2) of GSK933776 in Geographic Atrophy Participants|Blood samples were collected at the indicated time points on Day 56, Day 63, 70 or 77, Day 84, Day 112, Day 140, Day 224, Day 308, Day 392 and Day 476.|Day 56, Day 63, 70 or 77, Day 84, Day 112, Day 140, Day 224, Day 308, Day 392 and Day 476|PK Parameter Population||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841248|NCT01342926|Secondary|Clearance (CL) of GSK933776 in Geographic Atrophy Participants|Blood samples were collected at the indicated time points on Day 56, Day 63, 70 or 77, Day 84, Day 112, Day 140, Day 224, Day 308, Day 392 and Day 476.|Day 56, Day 63, 70 or 77, Day 84, Day 112, Day 140, Day 224, Day 308, Day 392 and Day 476|PK Parameter Population||mL/h||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841249|NCT01342926|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) and Pre-dose (Trough) Concentration at the End of the Dosing Interval (Ctau) of GSK933776 in Geographic Atrophy Participants|Blood samples were collected at the indicated time points on Day 56, Day 63, 70 or 77, Day 84, Day 112, Day 140, Day 224, Day 308, Day 392 and Day 476|Day 56, Day 63, 70 or 77, Day 84, Day 112, Day 140, Day 224, Day 308, Day 392 and Day 476|PK Parameter Population||nanogram (ng)/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841250|NCT01342926|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to the End of Dosing Interval at Steady-state (AUC0-28d) of GSK933776 in Geographic Atrophy Participants|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to the end of dosing interval at steady-state; derived from dose and clearance parameters was evaluated. Blood samples were collected at the indicated time points on Day 56, Day 63, 70 or 77, Day 84, Day 112, Day 140, Day 224, Day 308, Day 392 and Day 476.|Day 56, Day 63, 70 or 77, Day 84, Day 112, Day 140, Day 224, Day 308, Day 392 and Day 476|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter Population: all participants in the ITT Population with derived PK parameters||microgram (mcg)*hours (h)/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841251|NCT01342926|Secondary|Mean Change in ETDRS-BCVA Score From Baseline at Every Month up to Month 18|Participants enrolled into the study were required to have a best-corrected ETDRS visual acuity score of at least 35 letters as determined by ETDRS-BCVA evaluation. ETDRS-BCVA score was assessed as change from baseline in the mean best-corrected ETDRS visual acuity score at 18 months. Change from Baseline is defined as post-dose visit value minus Baseline value. Note that screening occurs before baseline. Values were truncated to one decimal place and negative sign retained where value is negative and the truncated value is zero. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Baseline and every month up to Month 18|ITT Population||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841252|NCT01342926|Secondary|Number of Participants Losing Letters in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS)-Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Score at Month 12 and Month 18 for Each Eye|Participants enrolled into the study were required to have a best-corrected ETDRS visual acuity score of at least 35 letters as determined by ETDRS-BCVA evaluation. ETDRS-BCVA score was assessed at the indiated time points at: Month 12 and Month 18 with categorical changes in the number of participants losing >30, >=15, >=10, >=5 and <5 letters.|Month 12 and Month 18|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
841253|NCT01342926|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Area of Total hypoAF in Study Eye|Atrophic AMD also called as GA is characterized by thinning of the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) and underlying choriocapillaris, as well as overlying photoreceptors in the macula. GA was evaluated by fundus autofluorescence at the indicated time points: screening, 6 months, 12 months and at 18 months. Change from Baseline: (Month 6, 12, 18 value minus Baseline value, respectively. Note screening occurs before baseline). Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Baseline, 6 months, 12 months and 18 months|Efficacy Population||mm^2||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
841254|NCT01342926|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Area of GA Assessed by Fundus Autofluorescence Images (hypoAF) Corresponding to GA in Study Eye|Atrophic AMD also called as GA is characterized by thinning of the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) and underlying choriocapillaris, as well as overlying photoreceptors in the macula. GA was evaluated by fundus autofluorescence images in the study eye at the indicated time points: screening, 6 months, 12 months and at 18 months. Change from Baseline: (months 6, 12,18 value minus Baseline value, respectively. Note screening occurs before baseline). Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Baseline, 6 months, 12 months and 18 months|Efficacy Population||mm^2||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
841255|NCT01342926|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)|Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was used as a safety assessment to monitor for amyloid related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) events in the brain. MRIs were performed at Baseline and before dose 2, before dose 3, before dose 4, before dose 6, before dose 12, before dose 18 and at follow-up. ARIA-edema/effusions (ARIA-E) and ARIA hemosiderin deposition (ARIA-H) events at any visit are reported.|Month 2, Month 3, Month 4, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18 and at early withdrawal|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
841256|NCT01342926|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Parameter Values of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI)|The following laboratory parameters were assessed: Hematology: Platelet Count, Red Blood Cell Count, White Blood Cell (WBC) Count, Reticulocyte Count, Hemoglobin, Hematocrit, Prothrombin time-International Normalized Ratio, Activated partial thromboplastin time, Mean corpuscular volume, Mean corpuscular haemoglobin, Mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration, Neutrophils (ANC), Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Eosinophils, and Basophils. Clinical chemistry: Blood urea nitrogen, Potassium, Aspartate aminotransferase, Total and direct bilirubin Creatinine, Chloride, Alanine aminotransferase, Uric Acid, Glucose (fasting), Total Carbon dioxide , Gamma glutamyltransferase, Albumin, Sodium, Calcium, Alkaline phosphatase, Total Protein, and HbA1c. Urine: Specific gravity, pH, glucose, protein, blood and ketones and Microscopic examination. Only those with PCIs are displayed.|At any point from Baseline through follow-up visit.|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
841257|NCT01342926|Primary|Number of Participants With 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI)|12-lead ECG was obtained after 10 minutes rest in a supine position using an ECG machine that automatically calculates the heart rate and measures PR, QRS, QT, and QT interval corrected using the Fridericia's formula (QTcF). Abnormal-clinically significant (CS) ECG measurements are presented at indicated time points: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, early withdrawal and at follow-up visit. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, early withdrawal and at follow-up visit|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
841284|NCT01343082|Primary|Change From Baseline in IOP (Intraocular Pressure) at End of Study||Treatment period: Week 0 (Baseline) and Week 52 (End of Study)|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
841285|NCT01343251|Secondary|Hospitalization Rate (Percentage of Participants Who Were Hospitalized at Least Once While on Study)|Compare incidence of hospitalization (for any reason) between study arms. Reasons for hospitalizations included: infection, cardiac problems, bleeding, vascular access thrombosis, fall (injury), hematuria, fluid overload, peripheral neuropathy, pulmonary embolism, edema, and shortness of breath.|1 year|||Percentage of patients|||Number
841258|NCT01342926|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI) During the Treatment Period: Heart Rate (HR)|Vital signs included HR of CCR at the indicated time points: Baseline, Month 0, Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, Month 4, Month 5, Month 6, Month 7, Month 8, Month 9, Month 10, Month 11, Month 12, Month 13, Month 14, Month 15, Month 16, Month 17, Month 18, early withdrawal and at follow-up visit in sitting position. 'General' is an assessment time not relative to dosing. HR was defined as: low:< 40 beats per minute (bpm) and high: >100 bpm. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Only categories with at least one PCI value are presented.|Baseline, Month 0, Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, Month 4, Month 5, Month 6, Month 7, Month 8, Month 9, Month 10, Month 11, Month 12, Month 13, Month 14, Month 15, Month 16, Month 17, Month 18, early withdrawal and at follow-up visit|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
841259|NCT01342926|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI) During the Treatment Period: Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|Vital signs included SBP and DBP of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI) at the indicated time points: Baseline, month 0, month 1, month 2, month 3, month 4, month 5, month 6, month 7, month 8, month 9, month 10, month 11, month 12, month 13, month 14, month 15, month 16, month 17, month 18, early withdrawal and at follow-up visit in sitting position. 'General' is an assessment time not relative to dosing. SBP was defined as: low: <85 millimeter of mercury (mmHg) and high: >160 mmHg and DBP was defined as: low:<45 mmHg and high: >100 mmHg. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Only categories with at least one PCI value are presented.|Up to 21 months|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
841260|NCT01342926|Primary|Number of Participants With Ocular or Non-ocular Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) During the Treatment Period||Up to 21 months|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
841261|NCT01342926|Primary|Number of Participants With Ocular or Non-ocular Adverse Events (AEs) During the Treatment Period|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. It includes:1. Any abnormal laboratory test results or other safety assessments including those that worsen from Baseline, and felt to be clinically significant in the medical and scientific judgment of the Investigator 2.Exacerbation (increase in frequency/intensity) of a chronic or intermittent pre-existing condition 3. New conditions detected or diagnosed after screening visit 4. Signs, symptoms, or the clinical sequelae of a suspected interaction/suspected overdose of investigational product or a concomitant medication. AEs were presented as non-ocular and ocular AEs.|Up to 21 months|ITT Population: all participants that completed the observation period and Baseline visit, and were subsequently randomized to treatment and were administered at least one IV dose.||Participants|||Number
841262|NCT01342926|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Area of Geographic Atrophy (GA) Assessed by Color Fundus Photographs (FP) in the Study Eye|Atrophic age-related macular degeneration (AMD) also called GA is characterized by thinning of the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) and underlying choriocapillaris, as well as overlying photoreceptors in the macula. GA was evaluated by color FP at the indicated time points: screening, 6 months, 12 months and 18 months. Change from BL: (screening, month 6, 12 or 18 value minus BL value. Note screening occurs prior to BL). Only participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Efficacy Population: all participants in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population who met the protocol defined inclusion criterion for area of GA assessed by color FP in the study eye in at least one visit from screening visit through BL visit, inclusive and had data of area of GA assessed by fundus autofluorescence images in the study eye for at least 75% of the visits (>=14 visits) from post-BL treatment month 2 visit to treatment month 19 visit.|Baseline (BL), 6 months, 12 months and 18 months|Efficacy Population. Participants who developed CNV in the study eye during the treatment period are excluded from Efficacy Population per protocol.||square millimeter (m^2)||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
841263|NCT01342965|Secondary|Quality of Life: Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Lung (FACIT-L) Questionnaire||approximately 21 months||||||
841264|NCT01342965|Secondary|Safety: Incidence of Adverse Events||36 months||||||
841265|NCT01342965|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause.|Baseline to the end of the study (3 years, 1 month)|Full analysis set: All randomized participants.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841266|NCT01342965|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response was defined as the time from the first documented complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to the first documented disease progression (PD) or death, whichever occurs first. A CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions (TL). A PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (SLD) of TLs taking as reference the Baseline SLD. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the SLD of TLs, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded since treatment started or the unequivocal progression of existing non-TLs.|Baseline to the data cut-off date of 19 Nov 2012 (1 year, 8 months)|Full analysis set: All randomized participants. Only participants who had a complete response or partial response were included in the analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841267|NCT01342965|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control|A participant with disease control was defined as a participant with either a complete response (CR), a partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD), as determined using RECIST v1.1. A CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions (TL). A PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of TLs taking as reference the Baseline sum longest diameter (SLD). SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease (PD), taking as reference the smallest SLD since treatment started. For non-TLs, SD was defined as the persistence of 1 or more lesions. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the SLD of TLs, taking as reference the smallest SLD recorded since treatment started or the unequivocal progression of existing non-TLs. A SLD for all TLs will be calculated and reported as the Baseline SLD.|Baseline to the data cut-off date of 19 Nov 2012 (1 year, 8 months)|Full analysis set: All randomized participants.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841297|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Antimullerian Hormone (AMH) Levels After Transplant|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average AMH levels after receiving transplant.|Day Prior to Transplant|Six patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up AMH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
841268|NCT01342965|Secondary|Percentage of Responders as Assessed by the Investigator|A responder was defined as a participant with either a complete response (CR) or a partial response (PR), as determined using the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. A CR was defined as: (1) The disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have a reduction in the short axis to < 10 mm. (2) The disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker levels. All lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size (< 10 mm in the short axis). A PR was defined as: (1) At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters. (2) The persistence of 1 or more non-target lesion(s) and/or maintenance of tumor marker levels above normal limits.|Baseline to the data cut-off date of 19 Nov 2012 (1 year, 8 months)|Full analysis set: All randomized participants.||Percentage of responders|||Number
841269|NCT01342965|Primary|Investigator-assessed Duration of Progression-free Survival|The duration of progression-free survival was defined as the time from randomization to disease progression (PD) or death from any cause, whichever occurs first. PD was defined as: (1) At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this may include the baseline sum). The sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (2) An unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. When the patient has measurable disease, the overall tumor burden must have increased sufficiently to merit discontinuation of therapy. When the patient has only non-measurable disease, the increase in overall disease burden should be comparable in magnitude to the increase that would be required to declare PD for measurable disease. (3) The appearance of new malignant lesions.|Baseline to the data cut-off date of 20 Jul 2012 (1 year, 4 months)|Full analysis set: All randomized participants.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841270|NCT01343004|Secondary|Number of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Associated With Hypercalcemia at 18 Months||18 months|Safety population included all patients who received 1 or more doses of study medication||Hypercalcemic events|||Number
841271|NCT01343004|Secondary|Number of Participants With Non-vertebral Fractures at 18 Months||18 months|Intent-to-treat population included all patients who were randomized into the study by assigning the randomized study medication kit on Day 1.||Participants|||Number
841272|NCT01343004|Secondary|Percent Change in Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Femoral Neck From Baseline to Month 18||Baseline and 18 months|Intent-to-treat population included all patients who were randomized into the study by assigning the randomized study medication kit on Day 1. Baseline BMD data were missing for some patients; the method of last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
841273|NCT01343004|Secondary|Percent Change in Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Total Hip From Baseline to Month 18||Baseline and 18 months|Intent-to-treat population included all patients who were randomized into the study by assigning the randomized study medication kit on Day 1. Baseline BMD data were missing for some patients; the method of last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
841274|NCT01343004|Secondary|Percent Change in Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Lumbar Spine From Baseline to 18 Months||Basline and 18 months|Intent-to-treat population included all patients who were randomized into the study by assigning the randomized study medication kit on Day 1. Baseline BMD data were missing for some patients; the method of last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used to impute missing data.||percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
841275|NCT01343004|Primary|Number of Participants With New Vertebral Fractures at 18 Months||18 months|Modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included all patients with pre-treatment and end-of-treatment evaluable radiologic assessment (spine X-ray).||participants|||Number
841276|NCT01343056|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure|Systolic blood pressure is the pressure when the heart beats while pumping blood.|6 months|Number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants who completed a 6 month follow up visit and, therefore, differs from numbers reported in the Participant Flow Module.||mmHg||Full Range|Median
841277|NCT01343056|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure|Diastolic blood pressure is the pressure when the heart is at rest between beats.|6 months|Number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants who completed a 6 month follow up visit and, therefore, differs from numbers reported in the Participant Flow Module.||mmHg||Full Range|Median
841278|NCT01343056|Secondary|Body Mass Index|Body Mass Index is a weight-to-height ratio, calculated by dividing one's weight in kilograms by the square of one's height in meters and used as an indicator of obesity and underweight.|6 months|Number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants who completed a 6 month follow up visit and, therefore, differs from numbers reported in the Participant Flow Module.||kg/m^2||Full Range|Median
841279|NCT01343056|Secondary|Change in Diabetes Empowerment Scale- Short Form (DES-SF) Scores|"The DES-SF is a validated, 8 item scale that measures the self-efficacy of patients with diabetes. Responses are selected from a 5-point Likert scale (Strongly Disagree (1), Somewhat Disagree (2), Neutral (3), Somewhat Agree (4), Strongly Agree (5)). The scale is scored by averaging the scores of all completed items (sum of scores divided by 8).
A positive number represents an improvement in overall patient self-efficacy (empowerment) from the baseline score and 6 month follow up time point."|6 months|Number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants who completed a 6 month follow up visit and, therefore, differs from numbers reported in the Participant Flow Module.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841280|NCT01343056|Secondary|Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL, mg/dL)||6 months|Number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants who completed a 6 month follow up visit and, therefore, differs from numbers reported in the Participant Flow Module.||mg/dL||Full Range|Median
841281|NCT01343056|Secondary|High Density Lipoprotein (HDL, mg/dL)||6 months|Number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants who completed a 6 month follow up visit and, therefore, differs from numbers reported in the Participant Flow Module.||mg/dL||Full Range|Median
841282|NCT01343056|Secondary|Total Cholesterol (mg/dL)||6 months|Number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants who completed a 6 month follow up visit and, therefore, differs from numbers reported in the Participant Flow Module.||mg/dL||Full Range|Median
841283|NCT01343056|Primary|Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C, %)||6 months|Number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants who completed a 6 month follow up visit and, therefore, differs from numbers reported in the Participant Flow Module.||percentage of glycosolated hemoglobin||Full Range|Median
841286|NCT01343251|Secondary|Intervention Rate (Percentage of Participants Who Required at Least One Intervention While on Study)|Compare vascular intervention rates between study arms. The vascular interventions which were included were: Angioplasty, Thrombectomy, Arteriovenous (AV) Fistulogram/Diagnostic Angiogram, Banding, Access Removal, Access Exchange, Access Revision, Creation of New Access, and any combination of these interventions which were performed simultaneously.|1 year|||percentage of participants|||Number
841287|NCT01343251|Secondary|Quality of Life|Compare the RAND Short Form (SF)-36 Health Survey, Total Test Scores at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months between study arms. Total test scores range on a scale from 0-100, with the lower the score equating to more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.The eight sections are: vitality, physical functioning, bodily pain, general health perceptions, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, social role functioning, and mental health. The total score is calculated using a methodology described by the RAND Corporation, which assigns a recoded value to each survey item. Recoded items are averaged amongst scales and the total score is an average of the eight sections. (http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/www/external/health/surveys_tools/mos/mos_core_36item_scoring.pdf).|1 year|The number of completed tests varied by time point and study group. The number of completed tests for Test 1, Test 2, Test 3, and Test 4 was 14, 13, 10, and 8 for the HeRO Graft group and 17, 13, 7, and 4 for the Control group, respectively. Only completed tests were included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841288|NCT01343251|Secondary|Infection Rate (Percentage of Participants With at Least One Infection)|Compare incidence of infection between study arms|1 year|||Percentage of Patients|||Number
841289|NCT01343251|Primary|Mortality|Compare mortality rate between study arms|1 year|||percentage of participants who died|||Number
841290|NCT01343277|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|The OS is defined as the time from the date of first dose of study drug to date of death from any cause. If the participant is alive or the vital status is unknown, the participant will be censored at the date the participant will be last known to be alive.|approximately 3 years 8 months (From Study start date [27 May 2011] up to final analysis data cut-off [05 January 2015]|Analysis population included all the randomized participants up to up to final analysis cut-off date (05 January 2015).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841291|NCT01343277|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|approximately 3 years 8 months (From Study start date [27 May 2011] up to final analysis data cut-off [05 January 2015])|Safety population included all the treated participants.||Participants|||Number
841292|NCT01343277|Secondary|Duration of Response|"Duration of response is defined as the time from the date of initial documentation of a response (CR or PR) to the date of first documented evidence of progressive disease (or relapse for participants who experience CR during the study) or death.
Independent Data Monitoring Committee performed ongoing safety monitoring and conducted the interim analysis after 189 death events and 329 PFS events were observed."|approximately 2 years 4 months (From Study start date [27 May 2011] up to interim analysis data cut-off [16 September 2013])|"Analysis population included all the randomized participants up to interim analysis cut-off date (16 September 2013). N (number of participants analyzed) signifies the participants evaluable for this measure."||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841293|NCT01343277|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|The objective response rate (ORR) is defined as the percentage of participants who achieved a Complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) as best responses. according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, Version 1.1 (RECIST). CR defined as disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must have reduction in short axis to less than 10 millimeter (mm). PR defined as at least 30 percent (%) decrease in sum of the diameters of the target lesions taking as reference the Baseline sum diameters. Confirmed responses are those that persist on repeat imaging study for at least 4 weeks after initial documentation of response. Independent Data Monitoring Committee performed ongoing safety monitoring and conducted the interim analysis after 189 death events and 329 PFS events were observed.|approximately 2 years 4 months (From Study start date [27 May 2011] up to interim analysis data cut-off [16 September 2013])|"Analysis population included all the randomized participants up to interim analysis cut-off date (16 September 2013). N (number of participants analyzed) signifies the participants evaluable for this measure."||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841294|NCT01343277|Secondary|Time to Progression|"Time interval in months between the date of randomization and the date of disease progression or death due to progression, whichever occurred first.
Independent Data Monitoring Committee performed ongoing safety monitoring and conducted the interim analysis after 189 death events and 329 PFS events were observed."|approximately 2 years 4 months (From Study start date [27 May 2011] up to interim analysis data cut-off [16 September 2013])|"Analysis population included all the randomized participants up to interim analysis cut-off date (16 September 2013). N (number of participants analyzed) signifies the participants evaluable for this measure."||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841295|NCT01343277|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|The Progression-Free Survival (PFS) was assessed as median number of months from baseline until the first documented sign of disease progression (increase in disease; radiographic, clinical, or both) or death due to any cause, whichever occurred earlier. Independent Data Monitoring Committee performed ongoing safety monitoring and conducted the interim analysis after 189 death events and 329 PFS events were observed.|approximately 2 years 4 months (From Study start date [27 May 2011] up to interim analysis data cut-off [16 September 2013])|"Analysis population included all the randomized participants up to interim analysis cut-off date (16 September 2013). N (number of participants analyzed) signifies the participants evaluable for this measure."||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841296|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Antimullerian Hormone (AMH) Levels After Transplant|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average AMH levels after receiving transplant.|Day 180 after Transplant|Four patients on the Observational and 10 patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up AMH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
841298|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Leuprolide Hormone (LH) Levels|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average LH levels during study.|2 years|Four patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up FSH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis. All 7 patients on the Interventional arm and 8 patients on the Observational arm were lost to follow-up.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841299|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Luteinizing Hormone (LH) Levels|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average LH levels during study.|1 year|Four patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up LH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis. Three patients on the Interventional arm and 8 patients on the Observational arm were lost to follow-up.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841300|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Luteinizing Hormone (LH) Levels|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average LH levels during study.|Day 180|Four patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up LH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis. One patient on the Interventional arm and 7 on the Observational arm were lost to follow-up.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841301|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Luteinizing Hormone (LH) Levels|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average LH levels during study.|Day 100|Four patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up LH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis. One patient on the Interventional arm and 7 on the Observational arm were lost to follow-up.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841302|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Lutineizing Hormone (LH) Levels|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average LH levels during study.|Baseline|Four patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up LH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841303|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Number of Patients Who Resumed Menstrual Cycles|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational. Count of patients who resumed menses after hematopoietic cell transplant|Day 365 Post Transplant|Only 6 of the 10 patients that started on the Observational Arm were evaluable. The 2 patients were lost to follow-up.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841304|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) Levels|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average FSH levels.|2 years|Four patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up FSH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis. All 7 patients on the Interventional arm and 8 patients on the Observational arm were lost to follow-up.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841305|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) Levels|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average FSH levels.|1 year|Four patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up FSH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis. Three patients on the Interventional arm and 8 patients on the Observational arm were lost to follow-up.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841306|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) Levels|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average FSH levels.|Day 180|Four patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up FSH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis. One patient on the Interventional arm and 7 on the Observational arm were lost to follow-up.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841307|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) Levels|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average FSH levels.|Day 100|Four patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up FSH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis. One patient on the Interventional arm and 7 on the Observational arm were lost to follow-up.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841308|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) Levels|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational average FSH levels.|Baseline|Four patients on the Observational arm never had any follow-up FSH levels drawn and were removed from this analysis.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841309|NCT01343368|Secondary|Comparison of Number of Patients Who Stopped Menstrual Bleeding|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational. Count of patients who stopped menstrual bleeding; to determine how the effect of GnRH agonists are at suppressing menses during hematopoietic cell transplant|From Baseline Through Day 365|Five patients on the Interventional arm and 10 patients on the Observational arm were lost to follow-up by Day 365.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841310|NCT01343368|Primary|Comparison of Number of Patients With Ovarian Failure|Comparison of treatment arms; interventional versus observational. Ovarian failure rate is based on FSH measured at 180 days after HCT; to determine the effect of GnRH agonists on the incidence of ovarian failure (i.e. FSH >40 IU/L) after transplant.|Through Day 180 Post Transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
841311|NCT01343485|Primary|On-time Completion of the Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Series||32 weeks after receipt of initial vaccine|||participants|||Number
841312|NCT01343667|Primary|Major Adverse Events (MAE)|Major Adverse Events include death, stroke and myocardial infarction|Onset from start of index procedure to 30-day follow-up assessment|Enrolled subjects with successful procedure and sufficient follow-up||participants|||Number
841313|NCT01343823|Secondary|Time to Symptom Resolution Based on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"Compare the time to onset of symptom resolution between the ecallantide-treated and placebo-treated groups.
The patient assessed severity of the angioedema attack using a VAS at baseline and following study drug administration every 15 minutes for the first 2 hours and then every 30 minutes through 6 hours post dosing or until the time of discharge from the ER (whichever occurred first). The scale ranged from totally resolved to very severe."|6 hours|Time to Symptom Resolution Based on the VAS (Safety Population)||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841314|NCT01343823|Primary|Safety and Efficacy of Ecallantide|"Compare the proportion of patients meeting prespecified discharge criteria in the group receiving ecallantide with conventional therapy to patients receiving placebo with conventional therapy.
Patients were evaluated against 6 discharge eligibility criteria at 1,2,3,4,5, and 6 hours after study drug administration or until discharged from the ER.
A responder was defined as a patient meeting all six discharge eligibility criteria as below:
Improvement of edema to “a little better” or “a lot better” as assessed by health care provider using a five point scale
Stable vital signs (within an acceptable range)
Absence of stridor
Absence of dyspnea or use of accessory muscles during respiration
Absence of drooling
Able to drink without difficulty"|6 hours|Safety Population||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841332|NCT01343901|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died||Baseline until death; assessed up to 36 months|Efficacy population||Percentage of participants|||Number
841315|NCT01343888|Secondary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) Normalisation: AST in Normal Range at Sustained Virological Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12) Visit, When SVR12=NO|This will be presented as the number of patients. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
841316|NCT01343888|Secondary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) Normalisation: AST in Normal Range at Sustained Virological Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12) Visit, When SVR12=YES|This will be presented as the number of patients. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
841317|NCT01343888|Secondary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) Normalisation: AST in Normal Range at End of Treatment (EoT) When SVR12=NO|This will be presented as the number of patients. SVR12 means Sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
841318|NCT01343888|Secondary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) Normalisation: AST in Normal Range at End of Treatment (EoT) When SVR12=YES|This will be presented as the number of patients. SVR12 means Sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
841319|NCT01343888|Secondary|Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Normalisation: ALT in Normal Range at Sustained Virological Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12) Visit, When SVR12=NO|This will be presented as the number of patients. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
841320|NCT01343888|Secondary|Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Normalisation: ALT in Normal Range at Sustained Virological Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12) Visit, When SVR12=YES|This will be presented as the number of patients. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
841321|NCT01343888|Secondary|Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Normalisation: ALT in Normal Range at End of Treatment (EoT) When SVR12= NO|This will be presented as the number of patients. SVR12 means Sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
841322|NCT01343888|Secondary|Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) Normalisation: ALT in Normal Range at End of Treatment (EoT) When SVR12=YES|This will be presented as the number of patients. SVR12 means Sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment. BL = Baseline|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
841323|NCT01343888|Secondary|Early Treatment Success (ETS)|Early treatment success (ETS), defined as a plasma HCV RNA level <25 IU/mL (detected or undetected) at week 4 and HCV RNA <25 IU/mL (undetected) at week 8.|week 4 and week 8|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
841324|NCT01343888|Secondary|Sustained Virological Response 24 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR24)|Sustained Virological Response 24 weeks post-treatment (SVR24), defined as plasma HCV RNA level < 25 IU/mL (undetected) 24 weeks after the originally planned treatment duration.|24 weeks post treatment, up to 72 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841325|NCT01343888|Primary|Sustained Virological Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12)|Sustained Virological Response 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12), defined as plasma Hepatitis C virus (HCV) Ribonucleic acid (RNA) level < 25 IU/mL (undetected) 12 weeks after the originally planned treatment duration.|12 weeks post treatment, up to 60 weeks|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized patients who were dispensed study medication and were documented to have taken at least one dose of study medication.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841326|NCT01343901|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Unresectability Criteria||Day 0|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841327|NCT01343901|Secondary|Total Duration of First Line Bevacizumab Treatment at Day 0||Day 0|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||months||Full Range|Median
841328|NCT01343901|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Different Doses of First Line Bevacizumab at Day 0||Day 0|Efficacy population. Here, number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841329|NCT01343901|Secondary|Number of Cumulated Cycles of First Line Bevacizumab at Day 0||Day 0|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||cycles||Standard Deviation|Mean
841330|NCT01343901|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Histologically Viable Tumor Cells With Resected Non Detectable Hepatic and Pulmonary Metastases Post Surgery|For the non-detectable liver and lung metastases the categorization based on rate of viable cells were as follows (no viable cells =0%, minimum =1 to 49%, maximum =50 to 100%).|Baseline up to 36 months|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed represents the overall number of participants evaluable for this outcome and ‘n’ represents the number of participants available for assessment at a given category.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841331|NCT01343901|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS time is defined as time between start of therapy and date of death. Kaplan-Meier estimate was used for evaluation.|Baseline until death, assessed up to 36 months|Efficacy population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841333|NCT01343901|Secondary|Relapse-free Survival (RFS)|RFS was defined as the time elapsed between the last surgery removing all detectable metastases (A1 criterion [participants without DMD after secondary resection removing all detectable metastases at surgery {including participants with missing metastases}]) and the date of first PD or death. PD: At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, and the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or persistence of non-target lesions, or appearance of one or more new lesions.|Baseline until disease progression or death, whichever occurred first, assessed up to 36 months|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed signifies efficacy population with surgery removing all the detectable metastases.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841334|NCT01343901|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Relapse|Relapse was defined as the presence of metastases post last surgery removing all detectable metastases (A1 criterion [participants without detectable metastatic disease {DMD} after secondary resection removing all detectable metastases at surgery {including participants with missing metastases}]) and the date of first PD or death. PD: At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, and the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or persistence of non-target lesions, or appearance of one or more new lesions.|Baseline until disease progression or death, whichever occurred first, assessed up to 36 months|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed signifies efficacy population with surgery removing all the detectable metastases.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841335|NCT01343901|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression-free survival defined as the time elapsed between the Avastin start date and the date of first progressive disease (PD) or death. Kaplan-Meier estimate was used for evaluation. PD: At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, and the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or persistence of non-target lesions or appearance of one or more new lesions.|Baseline until disease progression or death, whichever occurred first, assessed up to 36 months|Efficacy population.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841336|NCT01343901|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression or Death|Disease progression is defined at least a 20 percent (%) increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, and the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 millimeter (mm) or persistence of non-target lesions, or appearance of one or more new lesions.|Baseline until disease progression or death, whichever occurred first, assessed up to 36 months|Efficacy population||Percentage of participants|||Number
841337|NCT01343901|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least One Comorbidity Post Bevacizumab Treatment|Percentage of participants who had any concurrent disease (comorbidity) was reported. Comorbidities included gastrointestinal disease, other cardiovascular disease, and other medical history and comorbidities (other than those which are specified above). Same participant may be counted in more than one category.|Baseline up to 36 months|Analysis population consisted of participants with disappeared metastasis left in place with or without surgery. Here number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome and ‘n’ represents the number of participants available for assessment at a given category.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841338|NCT01343901|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received at Least One Chemotherapy Over the Study Period||Baseline up to 36 months|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841339|NCT01343901|Secondary|Mean Number of Cumulated Cycles of Bevacizumab Over the Study Period||Baseline up to 36 months|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||Cycles||Standard Deviation|Mean
841340|NCT01343901|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Different Previous Therapies at Day 0|Previous therapies included neoadjuvant treatment (chemotherapy or chemotherapy + radiotherapy) and adjuvant treatment (FOLFOX [folinic acid+5-fluorouracil+oxaliplatin], LV5FU2 [leucovorin+5-Fluorouracil], capecitabine, or any other adjuvant treatment). Only participants who received neoadjuvant treatment and adjuvant treatment was reported.|Day 0|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analysed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841341|NCT01343901|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least One Disease and Comorbidity at Day 0|Percentage of participants who had any concurrent disease (comorbidity) at Day 0 was reported. Comorbidities included gastrointestinal disease, hypertension, other cardiovascular disease, and other medical history and comorbidities (other than those specified above). Same participant may be counted in more than one category.|Day 0|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome and ‘n’ represents the number of participants available for assessment at a given category.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841342|NCT01343901|Primary|Percentage of Participants Without Detectable Metastatic Disease After a Complete Response Without Surgery|The percentage of participants with no detectable metastatic disease after a complete response without surgery (missing metastasis) was reported.|Baseline up to 36 months|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841343|NCT01343901|Primary|Percentage of Participants Without Detectable Metastatic Disease After Secondary Resection Post Surgery|Secondary resection involves removal of all detectable metastases at surgery including participants with missing metastases left in place. Percentage of participants without detectable metastatic disease after secondary resection removing all detectable metastases at surgery (including participants with disappeared metastases left in place [missing metastases]) was reported. Metastases was detected using computed tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).|Baseline up to 36 months|Efficacy population. Here number of participants analyzed represents the number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841344|NCT01344057|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved SRH Area ≥25mm2 Against Each of the Three Vaccine Strains After One Vaccination of FLUAD|"Immunogenicity was measured as the percentage of participants achieving SRH area ≥25 mm2 against each of the three vaccine strains at baseline (day 1) and three weeks after FLUAD vaccination (day 22).
This criterion is met according to CHMP guideline if percentage of participants achieving SRH area ≥25 mm2 is 60% (≥65 years)."|day 22|Analysis was done using PP set.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841345|NCT01344057|Primary|Geometric Mean Ratio of Participants Against Each of the Three Vaccine Strains After One Vaccination of FLUAD|"Geometric mean ratio (GMR) of participants was calculated as the ratio of post-vaccination to pre-vaccination SRH geometric mean areas (GMAs), directed against each of the three vaccine strains, three weeks after FLUAD vaccination (day 22).
The CHMP criterion was met if the geometric mean increase (GMR, day 22/day 1) in SRH antibody area is >2.0 (≥65 years)."|day 22|Analysis was done using PP set.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841346|NCT01344057|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Reported Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions|Safety was assessed for participants who reported solicited local and systemic reactions from day 1 up to and including day 4 after the FLUAD vaccination.|1 to 4 days post-vaccination|Analysis was done using the safety dataset; participants who received study vaccination and who provided post-vaccination safety data.||Number of participants|||Number
841347|NCT01344057|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Seroconversion or Significant Increase in Single Radial Hemolysis (SRH) Area Against Each of Three Vaccine Strains After One Vaccination of FLUAD|"Immunogenicity was measured as the percentage of participants who achieved seroconversion or significant increase in single radial hemolysis (SRH) area, against each of the three vaccine strains, three weeks after vaccination (day 22), evaluated using SRH assay.
Seroconversion: proportion of participants with negative pre-vaccination serum and a post-vaccination serum area ≥ 25 mm2. Significant increase: proportion of participants with at least a 50% increase in area from positive pre-vaccination serum. Seroconversion or significant increase: proportion of participants with either seroconversion or significant increase.
The European (Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use [CHMP]) criterion is met, if percentage of participants achieving seroconversion or significant increase in SRH area is 30% (≥65 years)."|day 22|Per protocol (PP) analysis set included all enrolled participants who had correctly received the vaccine, provided evaluable serum samples before and after vaccination, and had no major protocol violations.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841348|NCT01344161|Primary|Change in Insulin Concentrations||3 months minus baseline|||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841349|NCT01344161|Primary|Change in Post Load Glucose Concentrations|It was performed 2 hours after 75g oral glucose tolerance test (75-OGTT).|3 months minus baseline|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841350|NCT01344161|Primary|Change in Glucose Concentrations||3 months minus baseline|||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841351|NCT01344161|Primary|Change in Body Fat Mass|Body composition was assessed by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (model 4000; Body Stat Quad Scan, Douglas Isle of Man, British Isles).The principle of measuring the flow of current through the body is dependent on the frequency applied. At low frequencies, the current cannot bridge the cellular membrane and will pass predominantly through the extra-cellular space. At higher frequencies penetration of the cell membrane occurs and the current is conducted by both the extra-cellular water (ECW) and intra-cellular water (ICW).FFM can be estimated because FFM is primarily composed of water.|3 months minus baseline|We assessed body composition by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (model 4000; Body Stat Quad Scan, Douglas Isle of Man, British Isles).||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
841352|NCT01344369|Primary|AUC0-inf of Ethinyl Estradiol|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841353|NCT01344369|Primary|AUC0-t of Ethinyl Estradiol|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841354|NCT01344369|Primary|Cmax of Ethinyl Estradiol|Bioequivalence based on Ethinyl Estradiol Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841355|NCT01344369|Primary|AUC0-inf of Norethindrone|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone AUC0-inf (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841356|NCT01344369|Primary|AUC0-t of Norethindrone|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone AUC0-t (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841357|NCT01344369|Primary|Cmax of Norethindrone|Bioequivalence based on Norethindrone Cmax (maximum observed concentration of drug substance in plasma).|Blood samples collected over a 60 hour period.|All participants that completed the study had their samples analyzed.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841358|NCT01344447|Secondary|Types of Additional Imaging Studies Recommended by the Clinical Investigator After Evaluation of the Unenhanced and Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA Images|An additional imaging study recommended was specified from the following list: Non-contrast MRA, Contrast-enhanced MRA, CTA, Ultrasound, Digital subtraction catheter angiogram (DSCA), and Nuclear medicine study.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Participants in FAS who were recommended for additional imaging studies.||participants|||Number
841359|NCT01344447|Secondary|Types of Additional Imaging Studies Recommended by the Blinded Readers After Evaluation of the Unenhanced and Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA Images – Blinded Reader 3|An additional imaging study recommended was specified from the following list: Non-contrast MRA, Contrast-enhanced MRA, CTA, Ultrasound, Digital subtraction catheter angiogram (DSCA), and Nuclear medicine study.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Participants in FAS who were recommended for additional imaging studies.||participants|||Number
841360|NCT01344447|Secondary|Types of Additional Imaging Studies Recommended by the Blinded Readers After Evaluation of the Unenhanced and Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA Images – Blinded Reader 2|An additional imaging study recommended was specified from the following list: Non-contrast MRA, Contrast-enhanced MRA, CTA, Ultrasound, Digital subtraction catheter angiogram (DSCA), and Nuclear medicine study.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Participants in FAS who were recommended for additional imaging studies.||participants|||Number
841361|NCT01344447|Secondary|Types of Additional Imaging Studies Recommended by the Blinded Readers After Evaluation of the Unenhanced and Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA Images – Blinded Reader 1|An additional imaging study recommended was specified from the following list: Non-contrast MRA, Contrast-enhanced MRA, CTA, Ultrasound, Digital subtraction catheter angiogram (DSCA), and Nuclear medicine study.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Participants in FAS who were recommended for additional imaging studies.||participants|||Number
841362|NCT01344447|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Additional Imaging Studies Recommended by the Blinded Readers and the Clinical Investigator After Evaluation of the Unenhanced and Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA Images|A measure of diagnostic value was the reduction in the number of additional diagnostic imaging studies recommended/ordered. The clinical investigators and the blinded readers were asked if they would have recommended an additional imaging study for each participant and was recorded.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
841363|NCT01344447|Secondary|Diagnostic Confidence by the Blinded Readers Using Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Diagnostic confidence was evaluated to determine the level of certainty that the blinded readers assigned to a diagnosis for each segment. This was defined as the degree of confidence that the information on the MRA images represented the true and complete clinical picture of a particular segment. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale: 1 = Not confident, 2 = Somewhat confident, 3 = Confident, and 4 = Very confident.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"Evaluable participants in FAS; this outcome measure was analyzed on a segment basis, in below table, n signifies number of segments that were evaluable for the specified category of each group."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841364|NCT01344447|Secondary|Type of Secondary Radiologic Indicators for Diagnosis of Clinically Relevant Disease|Each segment was assessed for secondary signs of stenosis for diagnosis of clinically significant disease. The following indicators were considered for the MRA studies: - post-stenotic dilation or ulceration (segmental), - post-stenotic signal dropout, narrowing and intensity reduction, and - thrombus. Each of the three parameters were assessed as present or absent in the region distal to the stenosis. If they were found in any segment distal to the stenosis then they were assessed as present. If there were tandem (serial) stenosis in a vessel then the secondary signs were assigned to the stenosis of >=70% that was proximal and closest in proximity to the secondary sign.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"Evaluable participants in FAS; this outcome measure was analyzed on a segment basis, in below table, n signifies number of segments with presence of secondary radiologic indicators for the specified category of each group."||percentage of segments|||Number
841365|NCT01344447|Secondary|The Percentage of Presence of Secondary Radiologic Indicators for Diagnosis of Clinically Relevant Disease|Each segment was assessed for secondary signs of stenosis for diagnosis of clinically significant disease. The following indicators were considered for the MRA studies: - post-stenotic dilation or ulceration (segmental), - post-stenotic signal dropout, narrowing and intensity reduction, and - thrombus. Each of the three parameters were assessed as present or absent in the region distal to the stenosis. If they were found in any segment distal to the stenosis then they were assessed as present.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"Evaluable participants in FAS; this outcome measure was analyzed on a segment basis, in below table, n signifies segments that were evaluable for the specified category of each group."||percentage of radiologic indicator|||Number
841366|NCT01344447|Secondary|Length of Stenosis (>=70%) in the Proximal Segments Assessed by Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|The length of stenosis was based on the most proximal (first point) in a segment where a stenosis exceeded 10% and the most distal point (last point) in the segment where a stenosis exceeded 10%. If a stenosis spanned more than one segment then the measurement was only included to the beginning or end (boundary) of the segment being evaluated. If there was no stenosis of >=70% in a segment then the length was designated as 0.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"Evaluable participants in FAS; this outcome measure was analyzed on a segment basis, in the below table, n signifies number of segments that were evaluable for the specified category of each group."||millimeter(s)||Standard Deviation|Mean
841367|NCT01344447|Secondary|The Percentage of Location of Stenosis (>=70%) in the Proximal Segments Assessed by Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Location within a segment was based on the point of greatest stenosis and was recorded for stenosis >=70% (including occlusions) as: - At the bifurcation or proximal origin of a segment (occlusion proximal to the origin of the segment); - Within 5 mm of the bifurcation or proximal origin of a segment; - Beyond 5 mm from the bifurcation or proximal origin of a segment.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"Evaluable participants in FAS; in the below table, n signifies number of locations that were evaluable for the specified category of each group."||pecentage of location|||Number
841368|NCT01344447|Secondary|Types of Artifacts on a Segment Basis by Blinded Reader 3|The following types of artifacts were considered: Motion artifact (including pulsatility, breathing, swallowing), venous opacification, saturation artifact (for example [eg], in-plane flow, turbulence, dephasing, saturation band), susceptibility artifacts (including devices, eg, stents), ringing artifact (eg, bands), bolus timing error, and other (artifact not specified above or no artifact).|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Participants in FAS with artifacts presence.||percentage of segments|Participants||Number
841369|NCT01344447|Secondary|Types of Artifacts on a Segment Basis by Blinded Reader 2|The following types of artifacts were considered: Motion artifact (including pulsatility, breathing, swallowing), venous opacification, saturation artifact (for example [eg], in-plane flow, turbulence, dephasing, saturation band), susceptibility artifacts (including devices, eg, stents), ringing artifact (eg, bands), bolus timing error, and other (artifact not specified above or no artifact).|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Participants in FAS with artifacts presence.||percentage of segments|Participants||Number
841370|NCT01344447|Secondary|Types of Artifacts on a Segment Basis by Blinded Reader 1|The following types of artifacts were considered: Motion artifact (including pulsatility, breathing, swallowing), venous opacification, saturation artifact (for example [eg], in-plane flow, turbulence, dephasing, saturation band), susceptibility artifacts (including devices, eg, stents), ringing artifact (eg, bands), bolus timing error, and other (artifact not specified above or no artifact).|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Participants in FAS with artifacts presence.||percentage of segments|Participants||Number
841371|NCT01344447|Secondary|The Percentage of Segments With Artifacts Presence|Artifacts were collected for the MRA images on a segmental basis.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Evaluable participants in FAS||percentage of segments|Participants||Number
841372|NCT01344447|Secondary|Vessel Diameter (Millimeter [mm]) at the Normal Point and the Narrowest Point in Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA, Unenhanced MRA and CTA Images|The segment reduction in diameter (DIA) of greater than 10% was considered abnormal and measured. The diameter of each of these abnormal segments was measured using electronic calipers (perpendicular to the long axis of the vessel) at the point of most severe stenosis within each segment. Mean of vessel diameters was calculated by segment separately for CTA and MRA readers. For ease of expression, the following abbreviations will be used: Diameter (DIA), Blinded Reader (BR), Clinical Investigator (CI).|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS; Number of participants/segments analyzed in below ordered categories (Normal-BRs; Narrowest-BRs; Normal-CIs; Narrowest-CIs) in Enhanced MRA group was 457/6182, 457/6182, 419/1361, 419/1352 respectively; in Unenhanced MRA group was 455/4776, 455/4776, 367/989, 367/980 respectively; in CTA was 442/3158, 442/3158, 419/1569, 419/1555 respectively.||millimeter(s) (mm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
841373|NCT01344447|Primary|Minimum Gadobutrol Performance for Specificity: Specificity > 50%|Clinically significant disease was defined as 70 to 99% stenosis of a segment, but not occluded as assessed by the SoR (CTA; blinded readers). For each segment, the most severe stenosis/narrowing was identified and considered for the evaluation of clinically significant disease. Gadobutrol minimum performance criteria was based on a stenosis of 50% calculated from the native vessel diameter.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"FAS; in below table, n/n signifies the number of participants/segments that were evaluable in specified category."||percentage of specificity|Participants||Number
841374|NCT01344447|Primary|Minimum Gadobutrol Performance for Sensitivity: Sensitivity > 50%|Clinically significant disease was defined as 70 to 99% stenosis of a segment, but not occluded as assessed by the SoR (CTA; blinded readers). For each segment, the most severe stenosis/narrowing was identified and considered for the evaluation of clinically significant disease. Gadobutrol minimum performance criteria was based on a stenosis of 50% calculated from the native vessel diameter.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"FAS; in below table, n/n signifies the number of participants/segments that were evaluable in specified category."||percentage of sensitivity|Participants||Number
841375|NCT01344447|Primary|Specificity for Exclusion of Clinically Significant Disease Using Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Clinically significant disease was defined as 70 to 99% stenosis of a segment, but not occluded, as assessed by the SoR (CTA; blinded readers). This was determined using the NASCET criteria. For each segment, the most severe stenosis/narrowing was identified and considered for the evaluation of clinically significant disease. In case of multiple stenosis in any one segment, the most severe stenosis in the segment was recorded.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"FAS; in below table, n/n signifies the number of participants/segments that were evaluable in specified category of each group if it varies from Number of participants/segments analyzed."||percentage of specificity|Participants||Number
841376|NCT01344447|Primary|Sensitivity for Detection of Clinically Significant Disease Using Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Clinically significant disease was defined as 70 to 99% stenosis of a segment, but not occluded, as assessed by the standard of reference (SoR) (computed tomographic angiography [CTA]; blinded readers). This was determined using the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) criteria. For each segment, the most severe stenosis/narrowing was identified and considered for the evaluation of clinically significant disease. In case of multiple stenosis in any one segment, the most severe stenosis in the segment was recorded.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"FAS; in below table, n/n signifies the number of participants/segments that were evaluable in specified category of each group."||percentage of sensitivity|Participants||Number
841377|NCT01344447|Primary|Percentage of Assessable Vascular Segments Using Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Each vascular segment was visualized using unenhanced MRA and gadobutrol-enhanced MRA, characterized by the on-site investigators, three independent blinded readers (BR) (BR 1, BR 2 and BR 3) and majority readers (the outcome determined by at least two of the blinded readers). A segment was assessable if it was visualized along its entire length and if any region of stenosis, was measured reliably. There were 21 segments of the supra-aortic arteries assessed per participant.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS||percentage of segments|Participants||Number
841378|NCT01344460|Secondary|Types of Additional Imaging Studies Recommended by the Clinical Investigator After Evaluation of the Unenhanced and Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA Images|An additional imaging study recommended was specified from the following list: Non-contrast MRA, Contrast-enhanced MRA, CTA, Ultrasound, Digital subtraction catheter angiogram (DSCA), and Nuclear medicine study.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS with participants who were recommended for additional imaging studies.||participants|||Number
841379|NCT01344460|Secondary|Types of Additional Imaging Studies Recommended by the Blinded Readers After Evaluation of the Gadobutrol-Enhanced and Unenhanced MRA Images – Blinded Reader 3|An additional imaging study recommended was specified from the following list: Non-contrast MRA, Contrast-enhanced MRA, CTA, Ultrasound, Digital subtraction catheter angiogram (DSCA), and Nuclear medicine study.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS with participants who were recommended for additional imaging studies.||participants|||Number
841380|NCT01344460|Secondary|Types of Additional Imaging Studies Recommended by the Blinded Readers After Evaluation of the Gadobutrol-Enhanced and Unenhanced MRA Images – Blinded Reader 2|An additional imaging study recommended was specified from the following list: Non-contrast MRA, Contrast-enhanced MRA, CTA, Ultrasound, Digital subtraction catheter angiogram (DSCA), and Nuclear medicine study.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS with participants who were recommended for additional imaging studies.||participants|||Number
841381|NCT01344460|Secondary|Types of Additional Imaging Studies Recommended by the Blinded Readers After Evaluation of the Gadobutrol-Enhanced and Unenhanced MRA Images – Blinded Reader 1|An additional imaging study recommended was specified from the following list: Non-contrast MRA, Contrast-enhanced MRA, CTA, Ultrasound, Digital subtraction catheter angiogram (DSCA), and Nuclear medicine study.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS with participants who were recommended for additional imaging studies.||participants|||Number
841407|NCT01339052|Secondary|Grade 3-5 Treatment-Related Toxicity Rate|The percentage of patients who experienced any grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse event based on CTCAEv4 as reported on case report forms.|Adverse events experienced by participants are collected and reported throughout treatment with study drug (from initiation of study medication until 30 days after the last dose of BKM120), maximum timeframe was 2 years.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||percentage of patients||90% Confidence Interval|Number
841382|NCT01344460|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Additional Imaging Studies Recommended by the Blinded Readers and the Clinical Investigator After Evaluation of the Gadobutrol-Enhanced and Unenhanced MRA Images|A measure of diagnostic value was the reduction in the number of additional diagnostic imaging studies recommended/ordered. The clinical investigators and the blinded readers were asked if they had recommended an additional imaging study for each participant, and the data were recorded.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
841383|NCT01344460|Secondary|Diagnostic Confidence by the Blinded Readers Using Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Diagnostic confidence was evaluated to determine the level of certainty that the blinded readers assigned to a diagnosis for each segment. This was defined as the degree of confidence that the information on the MRA images represented the true and complete clinical picture of a particular segment. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale: 1=Not confident; 2=Somewhat confident; 3=Confident; 4=Very confident.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"FAS; In the below table, n signifies the number of segments that were evaluable in specified category."||Units on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841384|NCT01344460|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With Diagnosis of Fibromuscular Dysplasia and Arteriosclerosis Assessed by Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Any focal dilatation (aneurysmal dilatation) of a segment was recorded. The diameter at the widest point was measured with the electronic calipers if a dilatation was present in any segment. The number of participants with an aneurysmal dilatation in each segment (proximal, mid- and distal) in the right and the left renal arteries assessed by gadobutrol-enhanced MRA and unenhanced MRA were reported.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
841385|NCT01344460|Secondary|The Presence of Any Aneurysmal Dilatation in Each Segment (Proximal, Mid- and Distal) in the Right and the Left Renal Arteries Assessed by Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Any focal dilatation (aneurysmal dilatation) of a segment was recorded. The diameter at the widest point was measured with the electronic calipers if a dilatation was present in any segment. The number of participants with an aneurysmal dilatation in each segment (proximal, mid- and distal) in the right and the left renal arteries assessed by gadobutrol-enhanced MRA and unenhanced MRA were reported.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
841386|NCT01344460|Secondary|The Percentage of Accessory (Non-dominant) Renal Artery Presence Assessed by Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|An accessory renal artery was defined as an additional, non-dominant, renal artery typically emanating from the aorta and anastomosing distal to the proximal third, segment of that renal artery. It was recorded only as present or absent on the right and left, regardless of how many accessory renal arteries were present.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|FAS||percentage of accessory|||Number
841387|NCT01344460|Secondary|Types of Artifacts Assessed by Gadobutrol-enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA by Blinded Reader 3|The following types of artifacts were considered: Motion artifact (including pulsatility, breathing, swallowing), venous opacification, saturation artifact (for example [eg], in-plane flow, turbulence, dephasing, saturation band), susceptibility artifacts (including devices, eg, stents), ringing artifact (eg, bands), bolus timing error, and other (artifact not specified above or no artifact).|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Participants in FAS with artifacts presence.||percentage of segments|||Number
841388|NCT01344460|Secondary|Types of Artifacts Assessed by Gadobutrol-enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA by Blinded Reader 2|The following types of artifacts were considered: Motion artifact (including pulsatility, breathing, swallowing), venous opacification, saturation artifact (for example [eg], in-plane flow, turbulence, dephasing, saturation band), susceptibility artifacts (including devices, eg, stents), ringing artifact (eg, bands), bolus timing error, and other (artifact not specified above or no artifact).|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Participants in FAS with artifacts presence.||percentage of segments|||Number
841389|NCT01344460|Secondary|Types of Artifacts Assessed by Gadobutrol-enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA by Blinded Reader 1|The following types of artifacts were considered: Motion artifact (including pulsatility, breathing, swallowing), venous opacification, saturation artifact (for example [eg], in-plane flow, turbulence, dephasing, saturation band), susceptibility artifacts (including devices, eg, stents), ringing artifact (eg, bands), bolus timing error, and other (artifact not specified above or no artifact).|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Participants in FAS with artifact presence.||percentage of segments|||Number
841390|NCT01344460|Secondary|The Percentage of Segments With Artifacts Presence|Artifacts were collected for the MRA images on a segmental basis.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Evaluable participants in FAS||percentage of segments|||Number
841391|NCT01344460|Secondary|The Percentage of Location of Stenosis >= 50% (Within and Beyond 5 Millimeter From the Aorta) in the Proximal Segments Assessed by Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Location within the right and left proximal segment was based on the point of greatest stenosis and was recorded for stenosis >=50% as: - Within 5 mm of the aorta (or occlusion proximal to the origin of the segment); - Beyond 5 mm from the aorta.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"Participants in FAS that were evaluable; in below table, n signifies the number of segments that were evaluable in specified category."||Percentage of location|||Number
841392|NCT01344460|Secondary|Vessel Diameter (Millimeter [mm]) at the Normal Point and the Narrowest Point in Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA, Unenhanced MRA and CTA Images|The segment reduction in diameter (DIA) of greater than 10% was considered abnormal and measured. The diameter of each of these abnormal segments was measured using electronic calipers (perpendicular to the long axis of the vessel) at the point of most severe stenosis within each segment. Mean of vessel diameters was calculated by segment separately for CTA and MRA readers. For the ease of expression, the following abbreviations will be used: Diameter (DIA), Blinded Reader (BR).|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Evaluable participants in FAS||mm|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
841393|NCT01344460|Secondary|Length of the Right and Left Renal Arteries Assessed by Computed Tomographic Angiography (CTA) - Blinded Reader|The length of the left and right renal arteries were measured from the origin at the aorta to the bifurcation into the upper and lower pole arteries or the most distal point of the renal artery which could be visualized. This distal margin was the point where the diameter was still assessable. If there were more than 2 distal branches then the first large branch that was the dominant supply to a renal pole was used as the distal point.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Evaluable participants in FAS||millimeter(s) (mm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
841394|NCT01344460|Secondary|Length of the Right and Left Renal Arteries Assessed by Gadobutrol-enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA - Blinded Reader|The length of the left and right renal arteries were measured from the origin at the aorta to the bifurcation into the upper and lower pole arteries or the most distal point of the renal artery which could be visualized. This distal margin was the point where the diameter was still assessable. If there were more than 2 distal branches then the first large branch that was the dominant supply to a renal pole was used as the distal point.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|Evaluable participants in FAS||millimeter(s) (mm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
841395|NCT01344460|Primary|Minimum Gadobutrol Performance for Specificity: Specificity > 50%|Clinically significant disease (stenosis) was defined as >50% stenosis of a segment, but not occluded as assessed by the SoR. For each segment, the most severe stenosis/narrowing was identified and considered for the evaluation of clinically significant disease. Gadobutrol minimum performance criteria was based on a stenosis of 50% calculated from the native vessel diameter.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"FAS; in below table, n/n signifies the number of participants/segments that were evaluable in specified category."||percentage of specificity|Participants||Number
841396|NCT01344460|Primary|Minimum Gadobutrol Performance for Sensitivity: Sensitivity More Than (>) 50%|Clinically significant disease was defined as >50% stenosis of a segment, but not occluded as assessed by the SoR. For each segment, the most severe stenosis/narrowing was identified and considered for the evaluation of clinically significant disease. Gadobutrol minimum performance criteria was based on a stenosis of 50% calculated from the native vessel diameter.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"FAS; in below table, n/n signifies the number of participants/segments that were evaluable in specified category."||percentage of sensitivity|Participants||Number
841397|NCT01344460|Primary|Specificity for Exclusion of Clinically Significant Disease Using Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Clinically significant disease (stenosis) was defined as 50 to 99 percent (%) stenosis of a segment, but not occluded as assessed by the SoR. For each segment, the most severe stenosis/narrowing was identified and considered for the evaluation of clinically significant disease. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modalities (unenhanced or gadobutrol-enhanced) in the detection and exclusion of clinically significant stenosis.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"FAS; in below table, n/n signifies the number of participants/segments that were evaluable in specified category."||percentage of specificity|Participants||Number
841398|NCT01344460|Primary|Sensitivity for Detection of Clinically Significant Disease Using Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Clinically significant disease was defined as 50 to 99 percent (%) stenosis of a segment, but not occluded as assessed by the SoR. For each segment, the most severe stenosis/narrowing was identified and considered for the evaluation of clinically significant disease.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"FAS; in below table, n/n signifies the number of participants/segments that were evaluable in specified category."||percentage of sensitivity|Participants||Number
841399|NCT01344460|Primary|Percentage of Assessable Vascular Segments Using Gadobutrol-Enhanced MRA and Unenhanced MRA|Each vascular segment was visualized using unenhanced MRA and gadobutrol-enhanced MRA, characterized by the on-site investigators, three independent blinded readers (reader 1, 2 and 3) and majority readers (the outcome determined by at least two of the blinded readers). The segments were predefined to standardize the blinded reader evaluations. A segment was assessable if it was visualized along its entire length and if any region of stenosis, was measured reliably. There were 6 segments assessed per participant (3 segments in the right renal artery and 3 segments in the left renal artery) and up to 9 segments in participants with renal transplant.|Images were taken pre-injection and post-injection|"FAS; in below table, n/n signifies the number of participants/segments that were evaluable in specified category for both groups."||Percentage of segments|Participants||Number
841400|NCT01344538|Primary|Evaluate Whether 2.0g of Ginger Taken Daily, Standardized to 5%-Gingerols for Four Weeks Will Result in Bioactive Levels in Colonic Tissue Sufficient to Reduce Mucosal Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), a Marker of Cyclooxygenase Function Versus Placebo.|% Change between baseline and day 28 in PGE2 levels standardized by protein|Baseline and day 28|||percentage of change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
841401|NCT01339000|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|12 months|||participants|||Number
841402|NCT01339000|Secondary|Based on the First Two Primary Objectives, Consider and Discuss the Need for Larger Studies to Evaluate the Potential Benefit of Interleukin-7 (CYT107) Administration in a Broad, Mass Protection Strategy for an Aging Population||1 year|Insufficient data was collected for any analysis to take place. The study was closed due to lack of drug supply.|||||
841403|NCT01339000|Secondary|Evaluate the Effects of Interleukin-7 (CYT107) Therapy on the Quality of T Cell Specific Responses by Multiparameter Flow Cytometry||8 weeks|Insufficient data was collected for any analysis to take place. The study was closed due to lack of drug supply.|||||
841404|NCT01339000|Secondary|Evaluate and Quantify the Impact of Interleukin-7 (CYT107) Therapy on the T Cell Receptor Diversity in Older Subjects Following Chemotherapy||10 weeks|Insufficient data was collected for any analysis to take place. The study was closed due to lack of drug supply.|||||
841405|NCT01339000|Primary|Evaluate and Quantify the Impact of Interleukin-7 (CYT107) Therapy on Specific Immune Responses to Vaccines (in Particular to Neo Antigens) in Older Subjects Following Chemotherapy||8 weeks|Insufficient data was collected for any analysis to take place. The study was closed due to lack of drug supply.|||||
841406|NCT01339013|Primary|Airway Dead Space With Devices for Heat and Moisture Exchange of Respiratory Gas.|A conventional heat and moisture exchanger used in a respiratory circuit during anasthesia was exchanged by an AnaConDa. The AnaConDa causes re-breathing of carbon dioxide which clinically is equivalent to an increased airway dead space. The total airway dead space effect of the AnaConDa, i.e. volume of the device plus rebreathing from the charcoal filter was measured using the Single Breath Test for carbon dioxide, as was airway deadspace of the conventional Heat and Moisture Exchanger. Airway dead space differences between devices was calculated by subtraction of volumes thus achieved. Difference= Airway dead space AnaConDa - Airway dead space conventional Heat and Moisture Exchanger.|1 hour|||mL||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841408|NCT01339052|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) [Cohort 2]|PFS is defined as the time from first dose to the earliest documentation of disease progression or death. Participants alive without evidence of PD were censored at the date of last disease assessment. Progressive disease was established based on Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria (Wen et al JCO 2010). See outcome measure #2.|Participants were assessed radiologically every other cycle on treatment and off-treatment via medical record review until death. Cohort 2 participants were followed for progression-free survival up to 12 months in this study cohort.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841409|NCT01339052|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) [Cohort 2]|Overall survival is defined as the time from date of first dose to death or date last known alive and estimated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) methods.|Participants were followed long-term for survival via medical record review. Cohort 2 participants were followed for survival up to 52 months in this study cohort.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841410|NCT01339052|Secondary|Time to Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of BKM120 Day 1 and Day 8 [Cohort 1]|Plasma concentrations of BKM120 were analyzed by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay developed by Novartis Pharma AG. Standard Pk parameters were determined using non-compartmental methods.|On days 1 and 8 (+/- 1 day) prior to surgery, 5 blood samples were collected at the following timepoints: pre-dose, and at 0.5, 1.5, 3, and 5 hours post-dose.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||hours||Full Range|Median
841411|NCT01339052|Secondary|AUC0-5h Accumulation Ratio of BKM120 Day 1 and Day 8 [Cohort 1]|"Plasma concentrations of BKM120 were analyzed by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay developed by Novartis Pharma AG. Standard Pk parameters were determined using non-compartmental methods.
The accumulation ratio is day 8/day 1."|On days 1 and 8 (+/- 1 day) prior to surgery, 5 blood samples were collected at the following timepoints: pre-dose, and at 0.5, 1.5, 3, and 5 hours post-dose.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||ratio day 8/day 1||Full Range|Mean
841412|NCT01339052|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration Curve From Time 0 to Last Concentration (AUC0-5h) of BKM120 Day 1 and Day 8 [Cohort 1]|"Plasma concentrations of BKM120 were analyzed by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay developed by Novartis Pharma AG. Standard Pk parameters were determined using non-compartmental methods.
NOTE: This outcome measure was previously titled: Investigate Pharmacokinetics of BKM120 in This Population by Comparing the Drug Exposure Area Under the Curve (AUC0-5h) From Day 1 to Day 8”"|On days 1 and 8 (+/- 1 day) prior to surgery, 5 blood samples were collected at the following timepoints: pre-dose, and at 0.5, 1.5, 3, and 5 hours post-dose.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||ug*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841413|NCT01339052|Secondary|Cmax Accumulation Ratio of BKM120 Day 1 and Day 8 Ratio [Cohort 1]|Plasma concentrations of BKM120 were analyzed by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay developed by Novartis Pharma AG. Standard Pk parameters were determined using non-compartmental methods. The accumulation ratio is day 8/day 1.|On days 1 and 8 (+/- 1 day) prior to surgery, 5 blood samples were collected at the following timepoints: pre-dose, and at 0.5, 1.5, 3, and 5 hours post-dose.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||ratio day 8/day 1||Full Range|Mean
841414|NCT01339052|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentrations (Cmax) of BKM120 Day 1 and Day 8 [Cohort 1]|"Plasma concentrations of BKM120 were analyzed by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay developed by Novartis Pharma AG. Standard Pk parameters were determined using non-compartmental methods.
NOTE: This outcome measure was previously titled: Investigate Pharmacokinetics of BKM120 in This Population by Comparing Maximum Plasma Concentrations (Cmax) From Day 1 to Day 8”"|On days 1 and 8 (+/- 1 day) prior to surgery, 5 blood samples were collected at the following timepoints: pre-dose, and at 0.5, 1.5, 3, and 5 hours post-dose.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841415|NCT01339052|Secondary|Radiographic Response [Cohort 2]|Radiographic response was based on RANO (Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology) criteria. Per RANO, complete response (CR): 1) Complete disappearance of all enhancing measurable and non-measurable disease sustained for at least 4 weeks, 2) No new lesions, 3) All lesions assessed using the same techniques as baseline, 4) No steroid use (or on physiologic replacement doses only), 5) Stable or improved non-enhancing (T2/FLAIR) lesions and 6) Stable or improved clinically; partial response (PR): 1) >/= 50% decrease compared to baseline in the sum of products of perpendicular diameters of all measurable enhancing lesions (sum LD) sustained for at least 4 weeks and 2) No progression; progressive disease (PD): 1) > 25% increase sum LD and/or 2) significant increase in T2/FLAIR, 3) any new lesion, 4) clear clinical deterioration; stable disease (SD): none of the above.|Participants were assessed radiologically every other cycle on treatment. Cohort 2 participants were on treatment up to 9.2 months.|Only those participants who had measurable disease present at baseline and received at least one dose of therapy are considered evaluable for radiographic response||Participants|||Count of Participants
841416|NCT01339052|Secondary|% Ki-67 Reduction Using Immunohistochemistry (IHC) [Cohort 1]|Tumor cell proliferation and tumor cell death was using immunohistochemistry for Ki-67 based on established methods. Percent reduction was based on Ki-67 levels at baseline and at surgery.|Samples were collected at baseline (archival tumor specimen) and at surgery (surgical tumor specimen) which occurred after up to 12 days of BTK120 treatment.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all participants with a resected surgical tumor specimen (evaluable).||% reduction||Full Range|Median
841417|NCT01339052|Primary|BKM120 Plasma Concentration at Time of Surgery [Cohort 1]|Levels of BKM120 were determined by liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry.|Samples were collected at surgery which occurred after up to 12 days of BKM120 treatment.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all participants with a plasma sample at surgery (evaluable).||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841418|NCT01339052|Primary|BKM120 Tumor Tissue Concentration at Time of Surgery [Cohort 1]|Levels of BKM120 were determined by liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry.|Samples were collected at surgery (resected surgical tumor specimen) which occurred after up to 12 days of BKM120 treatment.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all participants with a resected surgical tumor specimen (evaluable).||ng/gm||Full Range|Geometric Mean
841419|NCT01339052|Primary|BKM120 Brain-to-Plasma Ratio at Time of Surgery [Cohort 1]|Levels of BKM120 were determined by liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry. BKM120 tumor-to-plasma ratio at time of surgery was calculated based on these levels.|Samples were collected at surgery (surgical tumor specimen and plasma sample) which occurred after up to 12 days of BKM120 treatment.|The analysis dataset is comprised of participants with a paired plasma and brain tumor sample (evaluable). Participants missing a brain tumor sample (n=1) or plasma sample (n=2) are excluded from the calculation.||ratio tumor-to-plasma||Full Range|Geometric Mean
841420|NCT01339052|Primary|6-Month Progression-Free Survival (PFS6) [Cohort 2]|PFS6 is the proportion of participants remaining alive and progression-free at 6-months from cycle 1 day 1 of BKM120 treatment. Progressive disease is defined using RANO (Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology) criteria (Wen et al JCO 2010), which takes modified Macdonald Criteria and adds assessment of non-enhancing lesions. Per RANO, progressive disease (PD) is defined either as > 25% increase in sum of the products of perpendicular diameters of enhancing lesions on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids, or one or more of the of the following: 1) Significant increase in T2/FLAIR non-enhancing lesion on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids steroids not due to co-morbid events; 2) Any new lesion; 3) Clear clinical deterioration not attributable to other causes apart from the tumor; or 4) Failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition.|Participants were assessed radiologically every other cycle on treatment; Relevant for this outcome is up to month 6 evaluation.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated participants.||proportion of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
841421|NCT01339052|Primary|Change in pAKT (S473) Immunohistochemistry (IHC) Score From Baseline to Surgery [Cohort 1]|pAKT response was determined by pathologist-performed semi-quantitative IHC scoring for pAKT using previously established methods for glioblastoma (GBM) patients. Sample staining scored for intensity on a 0-2+ scale (0 none, 1+ weak positive, 2+ strong positive). Change in pAKT IHC score was the difference in score from baseline to surgery. Participants were classified into 3 groups: a reduction of staining score of one degree or more (considered a response), an increase in score and no change in score.|Samples were collected at baseline and at surgery (resected surgical tumor specimen) which occurred after up to 12 days of BKM120 treatment.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated participants.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841422|NCT01339091|Secondary|Clinical Status|Compare the clinical efficacy at the day 28 follow-up visit of dalbavancin to the comparator regimen based on lesion size, local signs, temperature and receipt of non-study antibiotics|Follow-Up Visit (day 28)|Clinical Evaluable Population based on certain inclusion/exclusion criteria, length of study therapy, concomitant antibacterials, concomitant surgical procedure and non-missing data.||participants|||Number
841423|NCT01339091|Secondary|Clinical Status|Compare the clinical efficacy at end of treatment visit of dalbavancin to the comparator regimen based on lesion size, local signs, temperature and receipt of non-study antibiotics|End of Treatment Visit (Day 14-15)|Clinical Evaluable Population based on certain inclusion/exclusion criteria, length of study therapy, concomitant antibacterials, concomitant surgical procedure and non-missing data.||participants|||Number
841424|NCT01339091|Secondary|>= 20% Reduction in Lesion Area|Clinical response at 48-72 hours post study drug initiation, based on measurements of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) lesion size|48-72 hours after the initiation of study therapy|The ITT population consisted of all randomly assigned patients regardless of whether or not they received study drug.||participants|||Number
841425|NCT01339091|Primary|Early Clinical Efficacy|Clinical response at 48-72 hours post study drug initiation, based on measurements of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) lesion size and temperature|48-72 hours after the initiation of study therapy|The ITT population consisted of all randomly assigned patients regardless of whether or not they received study drug.||participants|||Number
841426|NCT01344616|Secondary|Gestational Weight||9 months||||||
841427|NCT01344616|Primary|Birthweight|Birth weight < 2500 grams|9 months|One Set of twins in the lifestyle counseling arm and 4 sets of twins in the usual clinical care arm||participants|||Number
841428|NCT01344629|Secondary|MRTpo|mean residence time of Telmisartan in the body after oral administration|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on period 2 was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set. In analysis only used data which the parameter can be calculated.||hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841429|NCT01344629|Secondary|t1/2|terminal half-life of Telmisartan in plasma|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on period 2 was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set. In analysis only used data which the parameter can be calculated.||hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841430|NCT01344629|Secondary|λz|terminal rate constant of Telmisartan in plasma|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on period 2 was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set. In analysis only used data which the parameter can be calculated.||/hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841431|NCT01344629|Secondary|Tmax|time from dosing to the maximum concentration of Telmisartan in plasma|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on period 2 was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set. Therefore, the number of observed PK parameter were 32+32+31+31=126 in T80/A5 FDC tablet and T80 + A5, respectively.||hour||Full Range|Mean
841432|NCT01344629|Secondary|AUC0-∞|area under the concentration-time curve of Telmisartan in plasma over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on period 2 was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set. In analysis only used data which the parameter can be calculated.||ng*hour/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841433|NCT01344629|Primary|Cmax|maximum measured concentration of Telmisartan in plasma|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on period 2 was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set. Therefore, the number of observed PK parameter were 32+32+31+31=126 in T80/A5 FDC tablet and T80 + A5, respectively.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841434|NCT01344629|Primary|AUC0-tz|Area under the concentration-time curve of Telmisartan in plasma over the time interval from 0 to the time of the last quantifiable data point|Serial pharmacokinetic blood samples collected before drug administration, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours after drug administration|One subject who discontinued the study on period 2 was excluded from Pharmacokinetic data set. Therefore, the number of observed PK parameter were 32+32+31+31=126 in T80/A5 FDC tablet and T80 + A5, respectively.||ng*hour/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841435|NCT01344759|Secondary|Room Air SpO2|The patient's oxygen saturation on room air.|During MRI and until recovery room discharge - approximately 30-250 minutes|||percentage of SpO2||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
841436|NCT01344759|Secondary|Needed Artificial Airway|This is the count of the number of patients who needed an artificial airway.|During MRI and until recovery room discharge - approximately 30-250 minutes|||Number of artifical airway events|||Number
841437|NCT01344759|Secondary|Respiratory Disturbance Index|The respiratory disturbance index is a count of respiratory disturbance events per hour of sleep.|During MRI and until recovery room discharge - approximately 30-250 minutes|||respir.disturbance events/hr of sleep||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
841438|NCT01344759|Secondary|Obstructive Index Until Recovery Room Discharge|The Obstructive Index is a count of the obstructive apnea events per hour of sleep|During MRI and until recovery room discharge - approximately 30-250 minutes|||Apnea events/hour of sleep||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
841439|NCT01344759|Primary|Cross Sectional Area of the Pharyngeal Airway|The primary outcome measures will be the cross sectional area of the pharyngeal airway of the patients measured at two levels soft palate (nasopharyngeal) and base of the tongue (retroglossal). Magnetic resonance images of the airway were obtained during low (1 mcg/kg/hr) and high (3 mcg/kg/hr) doses of DEX or low (100 mcg/kg/m) and high (200 mcg/kg/m) doses of Propofol. All were administered through an intravenous (IV) catheter.|during MRI within first 10 minutes of scanning|||mm^2||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841443|NCT01344876|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Dose-Limiting Toxicities (DLTs)|DLT was defined as adverse events occurring during Cycle 1 and: (1) Grade 3 or higher nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea despite the use of anti-emetic or antidiarrheal drugs, (2) Grade 3 or higher non-hematologic toxicity, excluding alopecia, (3) AEs requiring interruption of the IMP for a total of 8 days or longer, (4) Grade 4 neutropenia lasting ≥ 8 days (not applicable for leukemia), (5) Grade 3 or higher febrile neutropenia or infection due to neutropenia (not applicable for leukemia), (6) Grade 4 thrombocytopenia or Grade 3 thrombocytopenia requiring platelet transfusion (not applicable for leukemia).|From first study medication to on Day 31 (after repeated 28 days medication from Day 4 to 31)|DLT evaluated subjects who had achieved ≧75% study drug compliance during a 4-week (28-day) treatment period starting from Day 4. No statistical analysis provided for Subjects With DLTs.||participants|||Number
841444|NCT01344876|Secondary|Treatment Response|"Assessment of the treatment response was evaluated according to internationally recognized response criteria for multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, acute myeloid leukemia, chronic myeloid leukemia.
“Response” was defined as at least partial response or partial remission (PR) according to the criteria for efficacy assessment."|From first dose of study medication to withdrawal examination|"Efficacy population included all treated subjects who had received at least 1 dose of study drug.
No statistical analysis provided for treatment response."||participants|||Number
841445|NCT01344876|Primary|Subjects With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events|Treatment emergent adverse events observed during outcome measure time frame. A Treatment Emergent Adverse Event was defined as an AE occurring after the start of IMP administration.|From first study medication to on Day 31 (after repeated 28 days medication from Day 4 to 31)|Safety population No statistical analysis provided for Subjects With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events.||participants|||Number
841446|NCT01345240|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Fatal Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in disability/incapacity or a reported adverse event of specific interest such as seizures occurring within a 30-day period of vaccination, immune-mediated disorders, and specific autoimmune diseases. A fatal SAE was defined as a SAE resulting in the death of the study subject.|Up to Study End at Month 51||12/2017||||
841447|NCT01345240|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Fatal Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in disability/incapacity or a reported adverse event of specific interest such as seizures occurring within a 30-day period of vaccination, immune-mediated disorders, and specific autoimmune diseases. A fatal SAE was defined as a SAE resulting in the death of the study subject.|From Day 0 to Month 26|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841613|NCT01346592|Secondary|The HI GMTs Against Heterologous Strains, by Vaccine Group (6 to <72 Months Age Group)|The HI antibody titers against the heterologous strains following vaccination with either aTIV, licensed comparator or TIV, at three weeks and at six months after vaccination are reported as GMTs.|Day 1, Day 50, Day 209|Analysis was done on the FAS Persistence||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841448|NCT01345240|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Fatal Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in disability/incapacity or a reported adverse event of specific interest such as seizures occurring within a 30-day period of vaccination, immune-mediated disorders, and specific autoimmune diseases. A fatal SAE was defined as a SAE resulting in the death of the study subject.|From Day 0 to Month 8|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841449|NCT01345240|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Fatal Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in disability/incapacity or a reported adverse event of specific interest such as seizures occurring within a 30-day period of vaccination, immune-mediated disorders, and specific autoimmune diseases. A fatal SAE was defined as a SAE resulting in the death of the study subject.|Within the 30-day follow-up periods (Days 0-29) after vaccination with RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841450|NCT01345240|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE was defined as an untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms.|Within the 30-day follow-up periods (Days 0-29) after vaccination with RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841451|NCT01345240|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Potential Immune Mediated Disorders (pIMDs)|A potential immune mediated disorder (pIMD) was defined as an event about which concerns arose that vaccination may have interfered with immunological self-tolerance of the subjects. IMDs assessed included among others neuroinflammatory disorders (such as optic neuritis, multiple sclerosis, or encephalitis), musculoskeletal disorders (such as cutaneous lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile arthritis, or psoriatic arthropathy), gastrointestinal disorders (ulcerative colitis and ulcerative proctitis, celiac disease), metabolic diseases (such as autoimmune thyroiditis, or diabetes Mellitus Type 1, Addison’s disease), skin disorders (such as psoriasis or vitiligo), and other disorders such as vasculitis, pernicious anemia, or, sarcoidosis.|Up to Study End at Month 51||12/2017||||
841452|NCT01345240|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Potential Immune Mediated Disorders (pIMDs)|A potential immune mediated disorder (pIMD) was defined as an event about which concerns arose that vaccination may have interfered with immunological self-tolerance of the subjects. IMDs assessed included among others neuroinflammatory disorders (such as optic neuritis, multiple sclerosis, or encephalitis), musculoskeletal disorders (such as cutaneous lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile arthritis, or psoriatic arthropathy), gastrointestinal disorders (ulcerative colitis and ulcerative proctitis, celiac disease), metabolic diseases (such as autoimmune thyroiditis, or diabetes Mellitus Type 1, Addison’s disease), skin disorders (such as psoriasis or vitiligo), and other disorders such as vasculitis, pernicious anemia, or, sarcoidosis.|From Day 0 to Month 26|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841453|NCT01345240|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Potential Immune Mediated Disorders (pIMDs)|A potential immune mediated disorder (pIMD) was defined as an event about which concerns arose that vaccination may have interfered with immunological self-tolerance of the subjects. IMDs assessed included among others neuroinflammatory disorders (such as optic neuritis, multiple sclerosis, or encephalitis), musculoskeletal disorders (such as cutaneous lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile arthritis, or psoriatic arthropathy), gastrointestinal disorders (ulcerative colitis and ulcerative proctitis, celiac disease), metabolic diseases (such as autoimmune thyroiditis, or diabetes Mellitus Type 1, Addison’s disease), skin disorders (such as psoriasis or vitiligo), and other disorders such as vasculitis, pernicious anemia, or, sarcoidosis.|From Day 0 to Month 8.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841454|NCT01345240|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fever, irritability/fussiness, drowsiness, and loss of appetite. Fever was defined as axillary temperature higher than (>) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C). Analysis for this outcome was performed solely for the 7-days follow-up periods following the primary vaccination with RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™ (at Day 0, and Months 1 and 2). Data presented are those for any occurrence of the assessed solicited general symptoms, that is, the occurrences of these symptoms regardless of their intensity grade or relationship to vaccination.|Within the 7-day follow-up period (Days 0-6) after administration of Dose (D) 1, 2 and 3, respectively, with RTS,S or Engerix-B™ vaccine|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841455|NCT01345240|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling at the site of injection. All solicited local symptoms assessed were considered by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination. Analysis for this outcome was performed solely for the 7-days follow-up periods following the primary vaccination with RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™ (at Day 0, and Months 1 and 2). Data presented are those for any occurrence of the assessed solicited local symptoms, that is, the occurrences of these symptoms regardless of their intensity grade.|Within the 7-day follow-up period (Days 0-6) after administration of Dose (D) 1, 2 and 3, respectively, with RTS,S or Engerix-B™ vaccine|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841527|NCT01345682|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival (OS) was a key secondary endpoint of this trial. OS was defined as the time from randomisation to death (irrespective of the cause of death). Patients for whom there was no evidence of death at the cut-off date (30 Jun 2014) were to be censored on the date that they were last known to be alive.|From randomization until death or data cut-off (30Jun2014); Up to 29 months|RS||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841456|NCT01345240|Secondary|Anti-Rotavirus (Anti-RV) Antibody Concentrations|Anti-Rotavirus (anti-RV) antibody concentrations were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositive cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 20 units per milliliter (U/mL). This outcome measure was assessed in subjects who were administered Rotarix™ as part of an EPI regimen, with and without RTS,S vaccine co-administration. This outcome concerns the subjects who received the RTS,S or Engerix-B™ vaccine co-administered with Rotarix™. Results presented are for the study groups pooled by RTS,S or Engerix-B™ vaccine co-administration, that is, for the RTS,S Regimen B and Engerix-B Regimen B groups.|At Month 3, aka one month post Dose 2 of Rotarix™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841457|NCT01345240|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Acellular B-pertussis (BPT)|The antibodies against BPT assessed were against pertussis toxoid (anti-PT), against filamentous haemagglutinin (anti-FHA), and against pertactin (anti-PRN). Concentrations were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 5 EL.U/mL.|At Day 0 and at Month 3 (one month post Dose 3 of Infanrix™-Hib)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841458|NCT01345240|Secondary|Anti-protein D (PD) Antibody Concentrations|Anti-PD antibody concentrations were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to 100 EL.U/mL. .|At Month 17, aka one month post the Month 16 booster dose of Synflorix™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841459|NCT01345240|Secondary|Anti-protein D (PD) Antibody Concentrations|Anti-PD antibody concentrations were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The cut-off of the assay was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to 100 EL.U/mL. This outcome concerns the subjects who received the RTS,S or Engerix-B™ vaccine co-administered with Synflorix™. Results presented are for the study groups pooled by co-administration, that is, for the RTS,S Regimen A and Engerix-B Regimen A groups.|At Month 3, aka at one month post Dose 3 of Synflorix™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841460|NCT01345240|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Synflorix™ Pneumococcal Vaccine Serotypes.|The pneumococcal vaccine serotypes assessed were the serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. Streptococcus pneumoniae opsonophagocytic activity was presented as the dilution of serum (opsonic titer) able to sustain 50 % killing of live pneumococci under the assay conditions, expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay was an opsonic dilution >= 8.|At Month 17, aka one month post the Month 16 booster dose of Synflorix™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841461|NCT01345240|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Synflorix™ Pneumococcal Vaccine Serotypes.|"The pneumococcal vaccine serotypes assessed were the serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. Streptococcus pneumoniae opsonophagocytic activity was presented as the dilution of serum (opsonic titer) able to sustain 50 % killing of live pneumococci under the assay conditions, expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs). The cut-off of the assay was an opsonic dilution >= 8.
This outcome concerns the subjects who received the RTS,S or Engerix-B™ vaccine co-administered with Synflorix™. Results presented are for the study groups pooled by co-administration, that is, for the RTS,S Regimen A and Engerix-B Regimen A groups."|At Month 3, aka at one month (1M) post Dose 3 of Synflorix™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841462|NCT01345240|Secondary|Pneumococcal Antibody Concentrations Against Synflorix™ Pneumococcal Vaccine Serotypes.|Antibody concentrations were measured by GSK assay, and expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The pneumococcal vaccine serotypes assessed were the serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. The cut-off of the assay, by GSK assay, was greater than or equal to (>=) 0.2 μg/mL. This corresponds to a cut-off value of 0.35μg/mL by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|At Month 17, aka one month post the Month 16 booster dose of Synflorix™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841640|NCT01347008|Primary|Digital Skin Microvascular Blood Flow Measured by Laser Doppler Imaging (LDI) Before Cold Stimulus|Finger blood flow of the four medial fingers, measured by laser Doppler imaging and expressed in arbitrary perfusion units (p.u.).|8 weeks|||perfusion units||Standard Deviation|Mean
841463|NCT01345240|Secondary|Pneumococcal Antibody Concentrations Against Synflorix™ Pneumococcal Vaccine Serotypes.|Antibody concentrations were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assa y (ELISA), and expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The pneumococcal vaccine serotypes assessed were the serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. The cut-off of the assay, by GSK assay, was greater than or equal to (>=) 0.2 µg/mL. This corresponds to a cut-off value of 0.35μg/mL. This outcome concerns the subjects who received the RTS,S or Engerix-B™ vaccine co-administered with Synflorix™. Results presented are for the study groups pooled by co-administration, that is, for the RTS,S Regimen A and Engerix-B Regimen A groups.|At Month 3, aka at one month post Dose 3 of Synflorix™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841464|NCT01345240|Secondary|Anti-circumsporozoite Protein (Anti-CS) Antibody Concentrations .|Anti-CS antibody concentrations were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) expressed in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The assay cut-off was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 0.5 EL.U/mL.|At Month 14, aka at 12 months post Dose 3 of RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™.|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841465|NCT01345240|Secondary|Anti-circumsporozoite Protein (Anti-CS) Antibody Concentrations|Anti-CS antibody concentrations were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) expressed in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The assay cut-off was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 0.5 EL.U/mL. The table shows results with study groups pooled by vaccination regimen received.|At Month 3, aka at one month post Dose 3 of RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841466|NCT01345240|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies to the Hepatitis B RF1 Surface Antigen (Anti-HBs RF1).|Anti-HBs RF1 antibody concentrations were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) expressed in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The assay cut-off was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 33 EL.U/mL. Results will be posted when they become available.|At Month 51, aka one month post the Month 50 booster dose of Engerix-B™||12/2017||||
841467|NCT01345240|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies to the Hepatitis B RF1 Surface Antigen (Anti-HBs RF1).|Anti-HBs RF1 antibody concentrations were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) expressed in ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). The assay cut-off was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 33 EL.U/mL.|At Month 3, aka at one month post Dose 3 of RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841468|NCT01345240|Secondary|Anti-Hepatitis B (HBs) Antibody Concentrations.|Concentrations, by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), and expressed in milli-international units per milliliter (mIU/mL). The assay cut-off was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 10 mIU/mL. Results will be posted when they become available.|At Months 38, 50 and 51, aka 36 and 48 months post Dose 3 of RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™ and one month post the Month 50 booster dose of Engerix-B™||12/2017||||
841469|NCT01345240|Secondary|Anti-Hepatitis B (HBs) Antibody Concentrations.|Concentrations, by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), and expressed in milli-international units per milliliter (mIU/mL). The assay cut-off was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 10 mIU/mL.|At Months 14 and 26, aka at 12 and 24 months post Dose 3 of RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841470|NCT01345240|Secondary|Anti-Hepatitis B (HBs) Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations, by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), and expressed in milli-international units per milliliter (mIU/mL). The assay cut-off was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 10 mIU/mL. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HBs ELISA assay had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis. Results presented are for the study groups receiving the RTS,S vaccine, pooled by vaccine lot, that is, for the RTS,S Lot 1, RTS,S Lot 2, and RTS,S Lot 3 groups, as defined below.|At Month 3, aka at one month post Dose 3 of RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841486|NCT01345318|Primary|Percentage of Participants Developing Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) and Neutralizing Antibodies (NAbs)|Samples were analyzed using the semi-quantitative electrochemiluminescent (ECL) immunoassay method, a validated analytical method in compliance with sponsor's standard operating procedures. ADA positive is defined as ADA titer greater than or equal to (>=) 4.32. Any positive ADA sample was further tested for NAbs.|At Baseline and Weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72 and 76.|The safety analysis set was defined as all participants who received at least one dose of PF-04236921during the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
841471|NCT01345240|Primary|Anti-Hepatitis B (HBs) Antibody Concentrations.|Concentrations, by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), and expressed in milli-international units per milliliter (mIU/mL). The assay cut-off was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 10 mIU/mL. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HBs ELISA assay had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis, with study groups pooled by RTS,S or Engerix-B™ vaccination regimen received.|At Month 3, aka at one month post Dose 3 of RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841472|NCT01345240|Primary|Anti-Hepatitis B (HBs) Antibody Concentrations|Concentrations, by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), and expressed in milli-international units per milliliter (mIU/mL). The assay cut-off was the seropositivity cut-off value of greater than or equal to (>=) 10 mIU/mL. A decrease in the specificity of the anti-HBs ELISA assay had been observed in some studies for low levels of antibody (10-100 mIU/mL). The table shows updated results following partial or complete retesting/reanalysis, with study groups pooled by primary vaccine administered (RTS,S vs Engerix-B™).|At Month 3, aka at one month post Dose 3 of RTS,S vaccine or Engerix-B™|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841478|NCT01345292|Secondary|Global Subjective VAS Score at Week 4|"At each visit, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced by marking a single vertical line on a VAS scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. Participants were instructed as follows: Please rate the intensity of the pain/discomfort you have experienced in the last two weeks when drinking cold/hot beverages and/or foods, eating sweet and sour foods, breathing cold air, brushing your teeth or performing any habits/behaviors that solicit your dentinal hypersensitivity pain/discomfort since you first started using the product. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm."|4 weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) analysis set, defined as all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841479|NCT01345292|Secondary|Global Subjective VAS Score at Week 2|"At each visit, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced by marking a single vertical line on a VAS scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. Participants were instructed as follows: Please rate the intensity of the pain/discomfort you have experienced in the last two weeks when drinking cold/hot beverages and/or foods, eating sweet and sour foods, breathing cold air, brushing your teeth or performing any habits/behaviors that solicit your dentinal hypersensitivity pain/discomfort since you first started using the product. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm."|2 weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) analysis set, defined as all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841480|NCT01345292|Secondary|Mean Cold Air Stimulus VAS Score at Week 4|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Cold Air Stimulus. When being assessed, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced when cold air was directed at the exposed root of each tooth by marking a single vertical line on a VAS scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|4 weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) analysis set, defined as all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841481|NCT01345292|Secondary|Mean Cold Air Stimulus VAS Score at Week 2|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Cold Air Stimulus. When being assessed, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced when cold air was directed at the exposed root of each tooth by marking a single vertical line on a VAS scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|2 weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) analysis set, defined as all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841482|NCT01345292|Secondary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity VAS Score at Week 4|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a VAS. At each visit, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced from the Yeaple probe by marking a single vertical line on a VAS scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The investigator recorded a VAS score of 0 mm for participants who did not experience discomfort at the maximum force of 80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|4 weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) analysis set, defined as all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841483|NCT01345292|Secondary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score at Week 2|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a VAS. At each visit, participants rated their perception of the pain/discomfort experienced from the Yeaple probe by marking a single vertical line on a VAS scale from 0 to 100 mm, where 0 = No Pain/Discomfort and 100 = Intense Pain/Discomfort. The dental recorder measured the length of the line from 0 to the participant's line and recorded the VAS score in mm. The investigator recorded a VAS score of 0 mm for participants who did not experience discomfort at the maximum force of 80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|2 weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) analysis set, defined as all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||units on a scale (mm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841484|NCT01345292|Primary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity Score at Week 2|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Yeaple probe. The force at which discomfort was felt by the participant was recorded on a scale of 10-80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|2 weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) analysis set, defined as all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||grams of force||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841485|NCT01345292|Primary|Mean Tactile Sensitivity Score at Week 4|Tooth sensitivity was measured using a Yeaple probe. The force at which discomfort was felt by the participant was recorded on a scale of 10-80 grams. The score for each participant was calculated by averaging the scores for all study teeth for that participant.|4 weeks|Analysis was based on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) analysis set, defined as all randomized participants who used at least one dose of the study product and had baseline and at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment.||grams of force||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841539|NCT01345786|Secondary|Volume of Distribution (Calculated for NOMAC Only)||blood samples were collected for NOMAC evaluation up to 144 hours postdose|"The # of plasma profiles analyzed is based on the # of single-dose administration periods actually completed (some participants discontinued without completing all 4 dosing periods).
Part 1 analyses also excluded certain data from participants who were misdosed, and Part 2 analyses excluded participants who did not receive drug."||L|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
841487|NCT01345318|Primary|Number of Participants With On-Treatment Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), and Discontinuations Due to AEs|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence without regard to causality in a participant who received study drug. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of death); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Lack of efficacy was reported as an AE when it was associated with a SAE. An AE was considered treatment emergent if it started for the first time in a participant on or after the first day of active treatment, or the event started before the first day of active treatment but increased in severity during active treatment. AEs included both SAEs and non-serious AEs.|Baseline up to Week 48|The safety analysis set was defined as all participants who received at least one dose of PF-04236921during the study.||participants|||Number
841488|NCT01345591|Secondary|SWAP, COPE and CSQ-8|three questionnaires were evaluated: 1) SWAP (satisfaction with appearance scale) is a psychological test for personality diagnosis and clinical case formulation; 14 questions are asked on a scale of 0-7 where 7 indicates descriptive of the subjects and 0 is irrelevant to the subject for a total score range of 0-98. 2) COPE scale assesses a broad range of coping responses over 28 questions scaled from 1-4 with a total score range of 28-112 where the higher score indicates higher frequency of coping mechanisms used by the subject. 3) CSQ-8 assesses patient satisfaction with the treatment through 8 questions ranked 1-4 on a total scale from 8-32 where higher scores indicate greater satisfaction.|as assessed at baseline, 7-21 days, 3 months and 9 months post op.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841489|NCT01345591|Primary|Volume|fat graft volume|3 months and 9 months post op.|||milliliters||Standard Deviation|Mean
841490|NCT01345630|Secondary|Change in Bone Turnover Markers From Baseline and at Week 48 - Type 1 Collagen Peptide (CTX-1)|Bone turnover marker, C-telopeptide of type 1 collagen (CTx), was collected in the subset of participants participating in the DEXA scan sub-study.|Week 48|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841491|NCT01345630|Secondary|Change in Bone Turnover Markers From Baseline and at Week 48 - Blood Osteocalcin|Bone turnover marker, osteocalcin, was collected in the subset of participants participating in the DEXA scan sub-study.|Week 48|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841492|NCT01345630|Secondary|Changes in Bone Mineral Density (Using DEXA Scan and Serum Markers) From Baseline and at Week 48 - AP Lumbar Spine (L1 - L4) BMD|Bone mineral density was evaluated by DEXA scan in a subset of participants who consented to these evaluations. The effects on BMD were addressed by providing LSMs of change from baseline bone mineral density of the lumbar spine (L1-L4) as measured by the DEXA scan.|Week 48|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach.||g/cm^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841493|NCT01345630|Secondary|Changes in Bone Mineral Density (Using DEXA Scan and Serum Markers) From Baseline and at Week 48 - Femoral Neck BMD|Bone mineral density was evaluated by DEXA scan in a subset of participants who consented to these evaluations. The effects on BMD were addressed by providing LSMs of change from Baseline bone mineral density femoral neck as measured by the DEXA scan.|Week 48|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach.||g/cm^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841494|NCT01345630|Secondary|Changes in Bone Mineral Density (Using DEXA Scan and Serum Markers) From Baseline and at Week 48 - Total Hip BMD|Bone mineral density was evaluated by DEXA scan in a subset of participants who consented to these evaluations. The effects on BMD were addressed by providing LSMs of change from baseline bone mineral density of the lumbar spine (L1-L4), left total hip and femoral neck as measured by the DEXA scan.|Week 48|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach.||g/cm^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841495|NCT01345630|Secondary|Changes in Trunk to Limb Fat Distribution Using DEXA Scan From Baseline and at Week 48|A sub-study was conducted in which the participants underwent whole-body DEXA scans to evaluate peripheral fat tissue estimates for left and right arms and legs and truncal fat mass and truncal lean mass. Truncal abdominal fat were estimated from the DEXA scan field set on the torso. The effects on estimates of fat mass and lean mass were addressed by providing LSMs of change from baseline.|Week 48|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach.||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841496|NCT01345630|Secondary|Changes in Peripheral Fat Distribution Using Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry [DEXA] Scan From Baseline and at Week 48.|A sub-study was conducted in which the participants underwent whole-body DEXA scans to evaluate peripheral fat tissue estimates for left and right arms and legs and truncal fat mass and truncal lean mass. Truncal abdominal fat were estimated from the DEXA scan field set on the torso. The effects on estimates of fat mass and lean mass were addressed by providing LSMs of change from baseline.|Week 48|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach.||gram||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841497|NCT01345630|Secondary|Absolute Change in CD4+/CD8+ Ratio From Baseline to Week 48|The differences in the magnitude of changes in CD4+/CD8+ ratio from Baseline through Weeks 48 for maraviroc versus emtricitabine/tenofovir were compared.|Baseline, Week 48|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach. Baseline was calculated as the average of all the pre-dose measurements excluding the screening value. If all pre-dose values were missing, screening value was considered as the baseline.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
841552|NCT01346059|Secondary|Mortality|Death within 30 days of enrollment, in or out of hospital|30 day|||Participants|||Count of Participants
841498|NCT01345630|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Immune Cell Function at Week 48: Lymphocyte Activation Marker CD8 (%)|The differences in the magnitude of changes in CD8+ cell counts from Baseline through Week 48 for maraviroc versus emtricitabine/tenofovir were compared.|Baseline, Week 48|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach. Baseline was calculated as the average of all the pre-dose measurements excluding the screening value. If all pre-dose values were missing, screening value was considered as the baseline.||Percentage of lymphocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
841499|NCT01345630|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Immune Cell Function at Week 48: Lymphocyte Marker Cluster of Differentiation 8 (CD8, Cell/mm^3)|The differences in the magnitude of changes in CD8+ cell counts from baseline through Week 48 for maraviroc versus emtricitabine/tenofovir were compared.|Baseline, Week 48|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach. Baseline was calculated as the average of all the pre-dose measurements excluding the screening value. If all pre-dose values were missing, screening value was considered as the baseline.||cell/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
841500|NCT01345630|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Immune Cell Function at Week 48: Lymphocyte Activation Marker CD4 (%)|The differences in the magnitude of changes in CD4+ from Baseline through Week 48 for maraviroc versus emtricitabine/tenofovir were compared.|Baseline, Week 48|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach. Baseline was calculated as the average of all the pre-dose measurements excluding the screening value. If all pre-dose values were missing, screening value was considered as the baseline.||Percentage of lymphocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
841501|NCT01345630|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Immune Cell Function at Week 48: Lymphocyte Marker Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4, Cell/mm^3)|The differences in the magnitude of changes in CD4+ at Baseline and at Week 48 for maraviroc versus emtricitabine/tenofovir were compared.|Baseline, Week 48|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. Missing values were imputed using LOCF approach. Baseline was calculated as the average of all the pre-dose measurements excluding the screening value. If all pre-dose values were missing, screening value was considered as the baseline.||cell/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
841502|NCT01345630|Secondary|Number of Participants With Resistance to Nucleoside/Nucleotide Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors (NRTI), Non-nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors (NNRTI), and Protease Inhibitors (PI) in Participants Meeting PDTF Criteria|For participants meeting the PDTF criteria, viral resistance (both genotypic and phenotypic) to NRTI, NNRTI, and PI’s were assessed at Baseline and on-treatment. The assessment was performed using the overall (i.e. net) susceptibility score provided using the PhenoSense GT assay. The number of participants with successful assessments were 15/17 for the MVC+DRV/r arm and 3/3 for the FTC/TDF+DRV/r arm.|Week 48|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. The assessment was performed using the overall (ie. net) susceptibility score provided using the PhenoSense GT assay. The number of participants with successful assessments were 15 for the MVC+DRV/r arm and 3 for the FTC/TDF+DRV/r arm.||participants|||Number
841503|NCT01345630|Secondary|Number of Participants With Viral Resistance to Maraviroc (Maraviroc Treated Participants Only) in Participants Meeting PDTF Criteria.|For participants meeting the PDTF criteria, viral resistance to maraviroc for maraviroc treated participants was assessed in patients with R5 virus at failure. The resistance level is calculated by reference to a laboratory strain of virus that is analyzed in parallel with the clinical isolate to identify 50% inhibitory concentrations (IC50). The maximal percent inhibition is the percent inhibition that is achieved in a titration of the drug at high concentrations when the addition of more drug does not result in increased inhibition. Maximal percent inhibition is obtained in the same way as the titration for IC50, but the key measure is of the plateau height of percent inhibition, where increased concentration of maraviroc does not result in additional inhibition. This is consistent with the virus developing some ability to use maraviroc-bound CCR5 for entry. A significant change in IC50 is not required for this mechanism.|Week 48|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.||participants|||Number
841504|NCT01345630|Secondary|Tropism Change Between Screening or Baseline and PDTF|For participants meeting the PDTF criteria, tropism was assessed using the original randomized and alternate assays (ie, both genotype testing and ESTA). Data reported here corresponds to the timepoint at or after PDTF.|Week 48|Number of Evaluable PDTF = Virology Analysis Population (VAP) 'Evaluability' is determined by the on-treatment viral load (≥400 copies/mL at sample time point).||participants|||Number
841505|NCT01345630|Secondary|Virologic Outcomes at Week 48 Using Protocol-Defined Treatment Failure (PDTF).|Per the protocol participants who meet the following criteria were regarded as PDTFs requiring a confirmatory plasma HIV-1 RNA determination: • Decrease in plasma HIV-1 RNA <1 log10 from baseline after Week 4 unless plasma HIV-1 RNA is <50 copies/mL, or • Plasma HIV-1 RNA >1.0 log10 above the nadir value after Week 4 where the nadir is the lowest plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration, or • Plasma HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL at any time after Week 24, or • Plasma HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL after suppression to <50 copies/mL on two consecutive visits, or • Decrease in plasma HIV-1 RNA ≤2 log10 from baseline on or after Week 12 unless plasma HIV-1 RNA is <400 copies/mL. Decrease in plasma HIV-1 RNA ≤2 log10 from baseline on or after Week 12 unless plasma HIV-1 RNA is <50 copies/mL (before August 30 2012) or <400 copies/mL (after August 30 2012).|Week 48|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. No imputation for missing values was performed for this endpoint. 'Evaluability' is determined by the on-treatment viral load (≥400 copies/mL at sample time point).||Number of participants|||Number
841519|NCT01345682|Secondary|Status Change in Swallowing Scale|Distribution of patients with improved, stable or worsened HRQOL: Improvement was defined as a score improved by at least 10 points from baseline (on the 0-100 point scale) at any time during the trial. If a patient had not improved, worsening was defined as a 10-point worsening at any time during the trial. Otherwise, a patient was considered as stable.|From randomization until one month after discontinuation of study medication, death or data cut-off (07May2014); Up to 28 months.|RS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants|||Number
841553|NCT01346059|Primary|Resolution of Diarrhea and White Blood Cell Count Elevation|If the patient has resolution of diarrhea, white blood cell count, and abdominal pain, the protocol will be stopped.|14 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
841506|NCT01345630|Secondary|The Relationship Between the Proportion of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 Copies/mL at the Week 48 and the Screening Tropism Test (Genotype Test or ESTA).|The relationship of the proportion of participants achieving HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at Week 48 with the screening tropism test for the MVC containing regimen was analyzed. Virologic response for a participant at Week 48 was derived using the FDA’s Snapshot MSDF algorithm. Difference in proportions of patients with plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 48 between the maraviroc and the emtricitabine/tenofovir treatment arms, with two-sided 95% confidence interval, among patients who are R5 by genotype (including some who were originally randomized to ESTA and are R5 by genotype upon retesting), were calculated via the Maximum Likelihood method. The estimate was adjusted for the screening plasma HIV RNA level (<100,000 vs. ≥100,000) copies/mL via the Mantel Haenszel (MH) method.|Week 48|The FAS consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.||proportion of participants|||Number
841507|NCT01345630|Secondary|Severity of Abnormal Laboratory Values|Number of participants who had clinically significant laboratory abnormalities of Grade 3 and Grade 4 according to DAIDS. Abnormality incidence of highest grade was reported for a labcode for each individual participant.|Week 96|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment.||participants|||Number
841508|NCT01345630|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Values|Number of participants with laboratory abnormalities are reported|Week 96|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment. One participant was not analyzed for laboratory data as the collection date for all lab data was less than the first active therapy date.||participants|||Number
841509|NCT01345630|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Serious Adverse Events|Total number of participants with treatment-emergent serious adverse events are reported|Week 96|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment.||participants|||Number
841510|NCT01345630|Secondary|Number of Treatment-related AEs|Number of treatment-related AEs are presented here.|Week 96|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment.||events|||Number
841511|NCT01345630|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to AEs|Number of participants who discontinued due to AEs are reported here. Three participants (two from the MVC+DRV/r arm and one from the FTC/TDF+DRV/r arm) were not considered as discontinued due to AE because other reasons for discontinuation were prioritized for these participants.|Week 96|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment.||participants|||Number
841512|NCT01345630|Secondary|Number of Participants With Grade 3 or 4 AEs|Number of participants with grade 3 or 4 AEs are presented here.|Week 96|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment.||participants|||Number
841513|NCT01345630|Secondary|Frequency of Adverse Events (AE).|Number of participants with treatment-emergent non serious AEs|Week 96|Safety Analysis Set was the same as the FAS consisting of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug but analyzed as realized for tropism assay and treatment.||participants|||Number
841514|NCT01345630|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 Copies/mL.|The proportion of participants who achieved HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 48 was assessed according to Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) Missing, Switch, Discontinuation’=Failure (MSDF) Snapshot algorithm. The algorithm used the plasma HIV-1 RNA in the Week 48 visit window, followed the “virology-first principle” and considers a participant who has a missing plasma HIV-1 RNA, or switches to prohibited ARV regimen or discontinues from the study or study drug for any reason, or dies, as a failure.|Week 48|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. The missing value was imputed per FDA’s MSDF Snapshot algorithm as described under “Outcome Measure Description” above.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841515|NCT01345682|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in Global Health Status|The time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score decreased (i.e. worsened) by at least 10 points from baseline (0-100 point scale). If score is missing, and patient died within 28 days after scheduled time for completion, the patient was considered deteriorated. In this case, time to deterioration is time to death.|From randomization until one month after discontinuation of study medication, death or data cut-off (07May2014); Up to 28 months.|RS||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841516|NCT01345682|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in Swallowing|The time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score increased (i.e. worsened) by at least 10 points from baseline (0-100 point scale). If score is missing, and patient died within 28 days after scheduled time for completion, the patient was considered deteriorated. In this case, time to deterioration is time to death.|From randomization until one month after discontinuation of study medication, death or data cut-off (07May2014); Up to 28 months.|RS||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841517|NCT01345682|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in Pain|The time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to a score increased (i.e. worsened) by at least 10 points from baseline (0-100 point scale). If score is missing, and patient died within 28 days after scheduled time for completion, the patient was considered deteriorated. In this case, time to deterioration is time to death.|From randomization until one month after discontinuation of study medication, death or data cut-off (07May2014); Up to 28 months.|RS||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841518|NCT01345682|Secondary|Status Change in Global Health Status Scale|Distribution of patients with improved, stable or worsened HRQOL: Improvement was defined as a score improved by at least 10 points from baseline (on the 0-100 point scale) at any time during the trial. If a patient had not improved, worsening was defined as a 10-point worsening at any time during the trial. Otherwise, a patient was considered as stable.|From randomization until one month after discontinuation of study medication, death or data cut-off (07May2014); Up to 28 months.|RS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants|||Number
841520|NCT01345682|Secondary|Status Change in Pain Scale|Distribution of patients with improved, stable or worsened HRQOL: Improvement was defined as a score improved by at least 10 points from baseline (on the 0-100 point scale) at any time during the trial. If a patient had not improved, worsening was defined as a 10-point worsening at any time during the trial. Otherwise, a patient was considered as stable.|From randomization until one month after discontinuation of study medication, death or data cut-off (07May2014); Up to 28 months.|RS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants|||Number
841521|NCT01345682|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL)- Change in Global Health Scores Over Time|"The HRQOL analyses focused on pain, swallowing, and global health status measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] quality of life questionnaires Core 30 [QLQ-C30], and head and neck cancer specific supplementary module EORTC QLQ-H&N35:
Pain scale from H&N35, Swallowing scale from H&N35 and Global health status/QoL scale from C30.
Pain scale includes items 31-34 from H&N 35; Swallowing scale includes items 35-38 from H&N35 and Global health status/QoL scale includes items 29-30 from C30.
The scores of these scales were averaged from the scores of the component items, transformed and analyzed on 0 - 100 scale. For pain and swallowing scales, higher scores represent worse outcome; for the global health/QoL scale, higher scores represent better outcome.
Changes in scores over time were assessed using longitudinal models.
The analyses of HRQOL are presented for the 07 May 2014 cut-off date."|From randomization until one month after discontinuation of study medication, death or data cut-off (07May2014); Up to 28 months.|RS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
841522|NCT01345682|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL)- Change in Swallowing Scores Over Time|"The HRQOL analyses focused on pain, swallowing, and global health status measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] quality of life questionnaires Core 30 [QLQ-C30], and head and neck cancer specific supplementary module EORTC QLQ-H&N35:
Pain scale from H&N35, Swallowing scale from H&N35 and Global health status/QoL scale from C30.
Pain scale includes items 31-34 from H&N 35; Swallowing scale includes items 35-38 from H&N35 and Global health status/QoL scale includes items 29-30 from C30.
The scores of these scales were averaged from the scores of the component items, transformed and analyzed on 0 - 100 scale. For pain and swallowing scales, higher scores represent worse outcome; for the global health/QoL scale, higher scores represent better outcome.
Changes in scores over time were assessed using longitudinal models.
The analyses of HRQOL are presented for the 07 May 2014 cut-off date."|From randomization until one month after discontinuation of study medication, death or data cut-off (07May2014); Up to 28 months.|RS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
841523|NCT01345682|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL)- Change in Pain Scores Over Time|"The HRQOL analyses focused on pain, swallowing, and global health status measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] quality of life questionnaires Core 30 [QLQ-C30], and head and neck cancer specific supplementary module EORTC QLQ-H&N35:
Pain scale from H&N35, Swallowing scale from H&N35 and Global health status/QoL scale from C30.
Pain scale includes items 31-34 from H&N 35; Swallowing scale includes items 35-38 from H&N35 and Global health status/QoL scale includes items 29-30 from C30.
The scores of these scales were averaged from the scores of the component items, transformed and analyzed on 0 - 100 scale. For pain and swallowing scales, higher scores represent worse outcome; for the global health/QoL scale, higher scores represent better outcome.
Changes in scores over time were assessed using longitudinal models.
The analyses of HRQOL are presented for the 07 May 2014 cut-off date."|From randomization until one month after discontinuation of study medication, death or data cut-off (07May2014); Up to 28 months.|RS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
841524|NCT01345682|Secondary|Tumour Shrinkage|"Tumour shrinkage, defined as the maximum decrease from baseline in the sum of diameters of the target lesions, as measured by central imaging. The longest diameter of target lesions was recorded, except for lymph nodes, which were measured by their short axis.
Negative values indicate a reduction in the sum of target lesion diameters and positive values an increase.
Percentage of Participants with Tumour shrinkage as per the categories (>=20% increase, >=0 − <20% increase, >0 − <30% decrease, >=30 − <50% decrease, >=50% decrease) are presented."|Tumour imaging was to be performed every 6 weeks during the first 24 weeks of treatment, and hereafter every 8 weeks (Up to 28 months)|RS (Only patients with observed cases (OC) values were analysed)||percentage of participants|||Number
841525|NCT01345682|Secondary|Disease Control (DC)|"DC is defined as the best overall response of CR, PR, stable disease (SD) and non-CR/non-PD.
CR for target lesions (TL): Disappearance of all target lesions. CR for non-target lesions (NTL): Disappearance of all non-target lesions . All lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size (<10mm short axis).
PR for TL: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.
Other factors which add to the overall response of an imaging timepoint as PR are as below:-
CR in TL, but non-CR/Non-PD in NTL leads to PR
CR in TL, but not evaluated NTL leads to PR
PR in TL, but non-PD NTL or not all evaluated NTL leads to PR;
SD for TL: change in the sum of diameters does not satisfy PR or PD.
SD in TL, non-PD in NTL lead to overall response of SD, provided there is no appearance of new lesions."|Tumour imaging was to be performed every 6 weeks during the first 24 weeks of treatment, and hereafter every 8 weeks (Up to 28 months)|RS||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841526|NCT01345682|Secondary|Objective Response (OR)|"OR is defined as the best overall response of complete response (CR) and partial response (PR) according to RECIST version 1.1, CR for target lesions (TL): Disappearance of all target lesions. CR for non-target lesions (NTL): Disappearance of all non-target lesions. All lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size (<10mm short axis).
PR for TL: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.
Other factors which add to the overall response of an imaging timepoint as PR are as below:-
CR in TL, but non-CR/Non-PD in NTL leads to PR
CR in TL, but not evaluated NTL leads to PR
PR in TL, but non-PD NTL or not all evaluated NTL leads to PR;
All the above scenarios should also satisfy 'No occurrence of new lesions'."|Tumour imaging was to be performed every 6 weeks during the first 24 weeks of treatment, and hereafter every 8 weeks (Up to 28 months)|RS||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841528|NCT01345682|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) Based on Central Independent Review|"PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomisation to disease progression or death, whichever occurred first. The primary analysis of PFS considered PFS events as assessed by central independent review, including all data collected until the cut-off date (7 May 2014).
The date of disease progression was recorded based on RECIST version 1.1. Unequivocal progression of disease was determined if at least one of the following criteria applied:
At least 20% increase in the SoD of target lesions taking as reference the smallest SoD recorded since the treatment started, together with an absolute increase in the SoD of at least 5 mm
Appearance of one or more new lesions
Unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions"|From randomization until disease progression, death or data cut-off (07May2014); Up to 28 months|RS||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841529|NCT01345721|Secondary|Number of Children Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|The safety of MenACWY-CRM vaccine in children (who had previously received either one or two doses of MenACWY-CRM vaccine or one dose of MenC vaccine in the parent study) is assessed in terms of number of subjects reporting any unsolicited AEs (day 1 to day 7); serious AEs and AEs necessitating medical attention/or premature withdrawal (day 1 to day 28) after MenACWY-CRM vaccine.|Day 1-28 after vaccination|The analysis was done on the safety dataset.||Participants|||Number
841530|NCT01345721|Secondary|Number of Children Reporting Solicited Local and Systemic Adverse Events (AEs) After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|The safety and tolerability of MenACWY-CRM vaccine in children (who had previously received either one or two doses of MenACWY-CRM vaccine or one dose of MenC vaccine in the parent study) is assessed in terms of number of subjects reporting solicited local and systemic AEs after MenACWY-CRM vaccine.|Day 1-7 after vaccination|The analysis was done on the safety dataset i.e all subjects who received the study vaccine and provided some post-vaccination safety data||Participants|||Number
841531|NCT01345721|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titers Following One Dose of MenACWY-CRM Vaccine in Children Who Previously Received 1 Primary Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM or Men C Vaccine|Comparison of serum antibody titers following a one dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine in children, who had previously received either one dose of the same vaccine or one dose of MenC vaccine in the parent study, are reported as GMTs against N. meningitidis serogroups A,C, W,Y|1 month post vaccination|The analysis was done on the per-protocol dataset||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841532|NCT01345721|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Serum Bactericidal Titers ≥1:8, Who Previously Received 1 Primary Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM or Men C Vaccine|Comparison of serum antibody responses following one dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine in children, who had previously received either one dose of the same vaccine or one dose of Men C vaccine in the parent study, is reported as percentage of subjects with hSBA titers ≥1:8 against N. meningitidis serogroups A,C,W,Y|1 month post vaccination|The analysis was done on the per-protocol dataset||Percentages||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841533|NCT01345721|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers in Children (Who Previously Received MenC Vaccine) One Month After One Dose of MenACWY-CRM Vaccine|The serum antibody titers following one dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine in children, who had previously received one dose of MenC vaccine in the parent study, are reported as GMTs against N. meningitidis serogroups A,C,W,Y|1 month post vaccination|The analysis was done on the per-protocol dataset.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841534|NCT01345721|Primary|Percentage of Subjects (Who Had Previously Received MenC Vaccine) With Serum Bactericidal Antibody Titers ≥ 1:8, After One Dose of MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|The serum antibody response following a dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine in children, who had previously received one dose of MenC vaccine in the parent study, is reported as percentage of subjects with hSBA titers ≥1:8 against N. meningitidis serogroups A,C, W,Y|1 month after vaccination|The analysis was done on the per-protocol dataset.||Percentages||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841535|NCT01345721|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers in Children,One Month After MenACWY-CRM Booster Vaccination|The serum antibody titers following a booster dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine in children, who had previously received either one or two doses of the same vaccine in the parent study, are reported as geometric mean titers (GMTs) against N. meningitidis serogroups A,C, W,Y.|1 month post booster vaccination|The analysis was done on the per-protocol dataset.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841536|NCT01345721|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Serum Bactericidal Antibody Titers ≥1:8, One Month After MenACWY-CRM Booster Vaccination|The serum antibody response following a booster dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine in children, who had previously received either one or two doses of the same vaccine in the parent study, is reported as percentage of subjects with hSBA titers ≥1:8 against N. meningitidis serogroups A,C,W,Y.|1 month post booster|The analysis was done on the per-protocol dataset i.e All enrolled subjects who correctly received the vaccine, provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points (Day 28),and had no major protocol violation as defined prior to the end of the study.||Percentages||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841537|NCT01345721|Secondary|Persisting Geometric Mean Titers in Children, 13-33 Months After Primary Vaccination With Either MenACWY-CRM or MenC Vaccine|The persisting serum bactericidal antibody titers in children, 13-33 months after receiving either one or two doses of MenACWY-CRM vaccine or one dose of Men C vaccine in the parent study, are reported as GMTs against N. meningitidis serogroups A,C, W,Y|13-33 months after primary vaccination|The analysis was done on the per-protocol persistence dataset.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841538|NCT01345721|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Persisting Serum Bactericidal Antibody Titers ≥1:8, Upto 13-33 Months After Primary Vaccination With Either MenACWY-CRM or MenC Vaccine|"The percentage of subjects with persisting serum bactericidal antibody (hSBA)titers ≥1:8 against Neisseria meningitidis serogroups A,C,W,Y, 13-33 months after receiving either one or two doses of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine or one dose of MenC vaccine in parent study, is reported.
The functional bactericidal antibodies response against N. meningitidis serogroups was measured with the serum bactericidal assay using human complement (hSBA)"|13-33 months post primary vaccination|The analysis was done on the per-protocol persistence dataset i.e all enrolled subjects who provided evaluable serum samples at day 1 of the study and had no major protocol violation as defined prior to the end of the study.||Percentages||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841687|NCT01347580|Primary|ST-segment Elevation Resolution Pre PCI ≥70% (Co-primary Endpoint)|ST segment elevation resolution is the mean ST elevation pre-hospital minus the mean STelevation pre-PCI divided by the mean ST elevation pre-hospital. It is expressed as a percentage and split in 2 categories , complete (≥70%) versus incomplete (<70%) resolution.|Between baseline and PCI|mITT, on patients with non missing values||patients|||Number
841540|NCT01345786|Secondary|Clearance (Calculated for NOMAC Only)||blood samples were collected for NOMAC evaluation up to 144 hours postdose|"The # of plasma profiles analyzed is based on the # of single-dose administration periods actually completed (some participants discontinued without completing all 4 dosing periods).
Part 1 analyses also excluded certain data from participants who were misdosed, and Part 2 analyses excluded participants who did not receive drug."||L/h|Participants|Standard Deviation|Mean
841541|NCT01345786|Secondary|t1/2 of E2||0 hours to t1/2 (blood samples were collected for E2 evaluation up to 96 hours postdose)|"The # of plasma profiles analyzed is based on the # of single-dose administration periods actually completed (some participants discontinued without completing all 4 dosing periods).
Part 1 analyses also excluded certain data from participants who were misdosed, and Part 2 analyses excluded participants who did not receive drug."||hours|Participants|Full Range|Mean
841542|NCT01345786|Secondary|Terminal Phase Half Life (t1/2) of NOMAC||0 hours to t1/2 (blood samples were collected for NOMAC evaluation up to 144 hours postdose)|"The # of plasma profiles analyzed is based on the # of single-dose administration periods actually completed (some participants discontinued without completing all 4 dosing periods).
Part 1 analyses also excluded certain data from participants who were misdosed, and Part 2 analyses excluded participants who did not receive drug."||hours|Participants|Full Range|Mean
841543|NCT01345786|Secondary|Tmax of E2||0 hours to tmax of E2 (blood samples were collected for E2 evaluation up to 96 hours postdose)|"The # of plasma profiles analyzed is based on the # of single-dose administration periods actually completed (some participants discontinued without completing all 4 dosing periods).
Part 1 analyses also excluded certain data from participants who were misdosed, and Part 2 analyses excluded participants who did not receive drug."||hours|Participants|Full Range|Median
841544|NCT01345786|Secondary|Tmax of NOMAC||0 hours to tmax of NOMAC (blood samples were collected for NOMAC evaluation up to 144 hours postdose)|"The # of plasma profiles analyzed is based on the # of single-dose administration periods actually completed (some participants discontinued without completing all 4 dosing periods).
Part 1 analyses also excluded certain data from participants who were misdosed, and Part 2 analyses excluded participants who did not receive drug."||hours|Participants|Full Range|Median
841545|NCT01345786|Primary|Baseline Corrected Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to 72 Hours (AUC72) for E2|"Bioequivalence for NOMAC and E2 were tested on the primary PK parameters: Cmax, AUC(infinity), and AUClast for NOMAC; and baseline adjusted AUC72 and Cmax for E2.
AUC72 is the AUC from time 0 to 72 hours.
Blood samples for PK evaluation of E2 were collected predose (-1, -0.5, and 0 hour) and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours postdose Day 1; multiple predose samples were needed to correct for endogenous levels."|0 hours to 72 hours|"The # of plasma profiles analyzed is based on the # of single-dose administration periods actually completed (some participants discontinued without completing all 4 dosing periods).
Part 1 analyses also excluded certain data from participants who were misdosed, and Part 2 analyses excluded participants who did not receive drug."||pg*h/mL|Participants|Full Range|Mean
841546|NCT01345786|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Measurable Sample (AUC Last) and Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity (AUC Infinity) for NOMAC|"Bioequivalence for NOMAC and E2 were tested on the primary PK parameters: Cmax, AUC(infinity), and AUClast for NOMAC; and baseline adjusted AUC72 and Cmax for E2.
AUClast is the AUC from time 0 to the time of the final quantifiable sample.
AUC infinity is the AUC from time 0 to infinity.
Blood samples for PK evaluation of NOMAC were collected at predose (0 hour) and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hours postdose Day 1."|0 hours to time of the last measurable sample (blood samples were collected for NOMAC evaluation up to 144 hours postdose)|"The # of plasma profiles analyzed is based on the # of single-dose administration periods actually completed (some participants discontinued without completing all 4 dosing periods).
Part 1 analyses also excluded certain data from participants who were misdosed, and Part 2 analyses excluded participants who did not receive drug."||ng*h/mL|Participants|Full Range|Mean
841547|NCT01345786|Primary|Baseline Corrected Maximum Observed Serum Concentration of E2 (Cmax of E2)|"Bioequivalence for NOMAC and E2 were tested on the primary PK parameters: Cmax, AUC(infinity), and AUClast for NOMAC; and baseline adjusted AUC72 and Cmax for E2.
Blood samples for PK evaluation of E2 were collected predose (-1, -0.5, and 0 hour) and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours postdose Day 1; multiple predose samples were needed to correct for endogenous levels."|0 hours to time of maximum observed serum concentration of E2 (tmax of E2) (blood samples were collected for E2 evaluation up to 96 hours postdose)|"The # of plasma profiles analyzed is based on the # of single-dose administration periods actually completed (some participants discontinued without completing all 4 dosing periods).
Part 1 analyses also excluded certain data from participants who were misdosed, and Part 2 analyses excluded participants who did not receive drug."||pg/mL|Participants|Full Range|Mean
841548|NCT01345786|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration of NOMAC (Cmax of NOMAC)|"Bioequivalence for NOMAC and E2 were tested on the primary PK parameters: Cmax, AUC(infinity), and AUClast for NOMAC; and baseline adjusted AUC72 and Cmax for E2.
Blood samples for pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluation of NOMAC were collected at predose (0 hour) and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, and 144 hours postdose Day 1."|0 hours to time of maximum observed plasma concentration of NOMAC (tmax of NOMAC) (blood samples were collected for NOMAC evaluation up to 144 hours postdose)|"The # of plasma profiles analyzed is based on the # of single-dose administration periods actually completed (some participants discontinued without completing all 4 dosing periods).
Part 1 analyses also excluded certain data from participants who were misdosed, and Part 2 analyses excluded participants who did not receive drug."||ng/mL|Participants|Full Range|Mean
841549|NCT01345929|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Who Have Both a Per-subject Microbiological Outcome of Eradication and a Clinical Outcome of Cure at the TOC Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population.||Test of Cure Visit (7 Days [± 2 days] after completion of study drug administration)|ME: Treated patients, with baseline pathogen, complied with protocol.||percentage of subjects|||Number
841550|NCT01345929|Primary|The Percentage of Subjects Who Have Both a Per-subject Microbiological Outcome of Eradication and a Clinical Outcome of Cure at the Test of Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiological Modified ITT (mMITT) Population||Test of Cure Visit (7 Days [± 2 days] after completion of study drug administration)|mMITT: Treated subjects, with baseline pathogen.||percentage of subjects|||Number
841551|NCT01346059|Secondary|Need for Colectomy|Partial or complete colectomy performed within 30 days of enrollment|30 day|||Participants|||Count of Participants
841554|NCT01346072|Primary|Body Weight|Change in body weight from baseline to 24 hours after tolvaptan administration|Change over 24 hours|All patients in the Low Copeptin group were included in the analysis. One patient in the High Copeptin group had reduced renal function at baseline versus screening and transient hypovolemia during hospitalization indicative of volume depletion. This patient was excluded prior to review of blinded copeptin results and study data analysis.||Kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
841555|NCT01346072|Primary|Urine Output|Total urine output for 24 hours following tolvaptan administration|24 hours|All patients in the Low Copeptin group were included in the analysis. One patient in the High Copeptin group had reduced renal function at baseline versus screening and transient hypovolemia during hospitalization indicative of volume depletion. This patient was excluded prior to review of blinded copeptin results and study data analysis.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841556|NCT01346085|Secondary|Any Adverse Event Throughout Follow-up|Among study participants there were no reports of death, post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disease, cancer, or opportunistic infections. There was no evidence of cytomegalovirus disease, infection or serological activation (CMV early antigens negative during the whole follow-up), nor of Epstein–Barr clinical and serological reactivation (all patients were antibodies anti EBV positive before transplant, as per the inclusion criteria).|up to 3 years||||||
841557|NCT01346085|Secondary|Severe Hypoglycemic Events Since Completion of Transplant||up to 3 years||||||
841558|NCT01346085|Secondary|the Reduction in Insulin Requirement Compared to Baseline||up to 3 years||||||
841559|NCT01346085|Secondary|Basal and Stimulated Blood C-peptide Levels in Response to Arginine Challenge Throughout Follow-up||up to 3 year||||||
841560|NCT01346085|Secondary|Glycated Hemoglobin Levels Throughout Follow-up||up to 3 years||||||
841561|NCT01346085|Secondary|Insulin Independence With Adequate Glycemic Control Throughout Follow-up||up to 3 years|||participants|||Number
841562|NCT01346085|Primary|The Proportion of Insulin Free Patients 3 Years After the Last Islet Infusion|Insulin independence is defined as no need for exogenous insulin, with adequate glycemic control [i.e., glycated hemoglobin <7% (normal range 3.5 - 6.0%), fasting glucose levels not exceeding 140 mg/dL (7.8 mmol/L) more than three times per week and 2-hour postprandial levels not exceeding 180 mg/dL (10 mmol/L) more than four times per week].|3 year|||participants|||Number
841563|NCT01346176|Secondary|Patient Satisfaction With Advance Care Planning.|Patients’ satisfaction with their advance care planning was assessed two months after they completed their ADs. One of two authors blinded to patients’ group assignments contacted patients by phone and administered a satisfaction survey based on the Canadian Healthcare Evaluation Project (CANHELP) questionnaire. This thirteen-item questionnaire has been validated for assessing satisfaction with end-of-life care planning. Patients were asked to indicate satisfaction with various parts of advance care planning (e.g. decisions about the use of life sustaining technologies including CPR or cardiopulmonary resuscitation, breathing machines, and dialysis) on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means not at all satisfied and 5 means completely satisfied. The overall average across the 13 item scale in each group is presented in the results below.|Two months after AD completion|These numbers reflect the number of patients who completed and returned and advance directive as well as completed a satisfaction interview and questionnaire with a research associate.||units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
841564|NCT01346176|Primary|Proportion of Subjects Who Select Palliative Care Options|The primary outcome variable will be the proportion of subjects that select palliative care options compared to the those who request aggressive treatment in each study arm. We will analyze the effects of manipulating default options and delays in alerting subjects to the presence of multiple default options on each selection in the ADs in order to see how default options influence decisions on general treatment goals and instructions for specific procedures.|6 months|This number was based on the number of participants who returned completed advance directive forms in each group||percentage who select palliative care||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841565|NCT01346293|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection-site and Systemic Reactions Following Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV or DAPTACEL® + IPOL® Vaccine|Solicited injection-site: Pain, Erythema, Swelling, Extensive Swelling of Vaccinated Limb, Change in Limb Circumference. Solicited systemic reactions: Fever (Temperature), Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia. Grade 3 injection-site: Pain, Incapacitating, unable to perform usual activities; Erythema, Swelling, ≥50 mm; Change in limb circumference >50 mm increase over pre-vaccination measurement; Extensive limb swelling (ELS) was considered severe. Grade 3 systemic reactions: Fever ≥39.0˚C; Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia Significant, prevents daily activity.|Day 0 up to Day 28 post-final vaccination|Solicited injection-site and systemic reactions were assessed in the Safety Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
841566|NCT01346293|Other Pre-specified|Summary of Anti-Polio Geometric Mean Titers in Participants That Received Inactivated Poliovirus (IPV) Vaccine as a 4th and 5th Dose|Anti-Poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 titers were measured by neutralization assay.|Day 0 (pre-booster vaccination) and Day 28 post-booster vaccination|Anti-Polio geometric mean titers were assessed in the Per-Protocol Analysis Set.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841567|NCT01346293|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Booster Response to the Polio Antigens Following Vaccination With Inactivated Poliovirus (IPV) Vaccine as a 4th or 5th Dose|Anti-Poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 titers were measured by neutralization assay. Four-fold rise in booster responses between groups was defined as post/pre-vaccination ≥4.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Booster responses to polio antigens following IPV vaccine as 4th or 5th dose were assessed in the Per-Protocol Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
841568|NCT01346293|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Seroprotection Against the Polio Antigens Before and Following Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV or DAPTACEL® + IPOL® Vaccine|Anti-Poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 titers were measured by neutralization assay. Seroprotection for anti-polio types was defined as antibody titers ≥1:8 dilution.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Seroprotection (antibody titers ≥1:8 dilution) against polio antigens was assessed in the Per-Protocol Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
841641|NCT01347034|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Adverse Events (AEs)|Evaluate the safety of intratumoral injections of DCs in combination with an intensified RT regimen patients with high-grade large STS. Toxicity assessments were performed weekly to include assessments for: constitutional symptoms, fever, fatigue; common radiation side effects; special attention was paid to DC injection and biopsy related toxicity. Only treatment related SAEs and AEs are reported for this measure.|11 weeks per participant|All participants||participants|||Number
841569|NCT01346293|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Seroprotection Against the Tetanus and Diphtheria Antigens Before and Following Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV or DAPTACEL® + IPOL® Vaccine|Anti-Tetanus antibodies were measured by ELISA. Anti diphtheria antibodies were measured by a toxin neutralization test. Seroprotection for anti-tetanus and anti-diphtheria was defined as antibody concentrations ≥0.1 IU/ml and ≥1.0 IU/ml.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Seroprotection against tetanus and diphtheria antigens was assessed in the Per-Protocol Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
841570|NCT01346293|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentrations of Polio Antibodies Before and Following Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV or DAPTACEL® + IPOL® Vaccine|Geometric mean concentrations to anti-polio were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Geometric mean concentrations of poliovirus antibodies were assessed in the Per-Protocol Analysis Set.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841571|NCT01346293|Primary|Number of Participants With Booster Response to Polio Antigens Following Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV or DAPTACEL® + IPOL® Vaccine|Anti-poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 titers were measured by neutralization assay. Booster responses were defined as participants with a pre-vaccination antibody concentration <1:8 dil, achieving a post-vaccination level ≥1:8 dil, or a pre-vaccination antibody concentration ≥1:8 dil, achieving a 4-fold response.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Anti-polio booster responses were assessed in the Per-Protocol Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
841572|NCT01346293|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentrations of the Tetanus and Diphtheria Antibodies Before and Following Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV or DAPTACEL® + IPOL® Vaccine|Geometric mean concentrations to anti-tetanus and anti-diphtheria were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Geometric mean concentrations of tetanus and diptheria antibodies were assessed in the Per Protocol Analysis Set.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841573|NCT01346293|Primary|Number of Participants With Booster Response to Tetanus and Diphtheria Antigens Following Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV or DAPTACEL® + IPOL® Vaccine|Anti-Tetanus antibodies were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Anti-Diphtheria antibodies were measured by a toxin neutralization test. Booster responses were defined as participants with a pre-vaccination antibody concentration <0.1 IU/ml, achieving a post-vaccination level ≥0.4 IU/ml, or a pre-vaccination antibody concentration ≥0.1 IU/ml but <2.0 IU/ml, achieving a 4-fold rise rate post-vaccination, or a pre-vaccination antibody concentration ≥2.0 IU/ml, achieving a 2-fold response.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Anti-Tetanus and anti-diphtheria booster responses were assessed in the Per-Protocol Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
841574|NCT01346293|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentrations of the Pertussis Antibodies Before and Following Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV or DAPTACEL® + IPOL® Vaccine|Geometric mean concentrations to pertussis antigens (pertussis toxoid [PT], filamentous hemagglutinin [FHA], pertactin [PRN], and fimbriae types 2 and 3 [FIM]) were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Geometric mean concentrations were assessed in the Per-Protocol Analysis Set.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841575|NCT01346293|Primary|Number of Participants With Booster Response to the Pertussis Antigens Following Vaccination With Either DTaP-IPV or DAPTACEL® + IPOL® Vaccine|Booster responses to pertussis antigens [pertussis toxoid (PT), filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA), pertactin (PRN), and fimbriae types 2 and 3 (FIM)] were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Booster responses were defined as participants with either a pre-vaccination antibody concentration less than lower limit of quantitation (<LLOQ), achieving a post-vaccination level ≥4X LLOQ, or pre-vaccination antibody concentrations ≥LLOQ but <4X LLOQ, achieving a 4-fold rise rate of post-vaccination, or a pre-vaccination antibody concentration ≥4X LLOQ, achieving a 2-fold response.|Day 0 (pre-vaccination) and Day 28 post-vaccination|Anti-pertussis booster responses were assessed in the Per-Protocol Analysis Set.||Participants|||Number
841576|NCT01346397|Primary|Graft Survival|in cyclosporine group 84.6 +/- 5.8%; in tacrolimus group 86.2 +/- 4.1%|5 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841577|NCT01346397|Primary|Patient Survival|in cyclosporine group 96.4 +/- 2.8%; in tacrolimus group 96.3 +/- 3.4%|5 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841578|NCT01346475|Secondary|Duration of Genital HSV Shedding Episodes|Median duration of HSV shedding episodes, in hours, among episodes of known duration|11 weeks|||Hours|Episodes|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
841579|NCT01346475|Secondary|Number of Genital HSV Shedding Episodes|The number of HSV shedding episodes. A shedding episode is defined as any number of positive swabs preceded and followed by 2 negative swabs.|11 weeks|||Episodes|||Number
841580|NCT01346475|Secondary|Quantity of HSV Detected, Median|Median quantity of HSV detected, among swabs with any HSV detected|11 weeks|||log 10 copies/ml|swabs|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
841581|NCT01346475|Primary|Frequency of HSV-2 Total Shedding From the Genital Tract as Measured by PCR, Calculated Using a Per-day Shedding Rate in Participants Treated With High-dose Valacyclovir as Compared to Once-daily Valacyclovir.||11 weeks|Participants who collected at least one swab on each arm of the cross-over were included in the analysis.||percentage of swabs with HSV detected|Swabs||Number
841582|NCT01346488|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Drug Reactions|Adverse drug reactions were defined as AEs of which a causal relationship with adalimumab could not be ruled out.|up to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set (all evaluable participants with validated CRFs)||Participants|||Count of Participants
841583|NCT01346488|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious AEs (SAEs), and Deaths|AEs, which were defined as any untoward medical occurrence observed in participants who received adalimumab in this study, were summarized.|up to Week 52|Safety Analysis Set (all evaluable participants with validated CRFs)||Participants|||Count of Participants
841609|NCT01346592|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events After Vaccination|The number of subjects reporting any unsolicited adverse events (AEs) between Day 1 to Day 50, serious adverse events (SAEs), AE leading to withdrawal (WD), new onset of chronic disease(NOCD), adverse events of special interest following vaccination with aTIV or licensed comparator or TIV throughout the study (Day 1 to Day 394).|Day 1 to Day 394|Analysis was done on the safety population i.e all subjects who had received at least one study vaccine and had postvaccination safety data||Participants|||Number
841584|NCT01346488|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D) Summary Index Score|The EQ-5D is a participant answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that essentially attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.594 to 1 (with higher scores indicating better health state). “Change” was calculated as the value at baseline minus the value at each subsequent time point.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable EQ-5D assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841585|NCT01346488|Secondary|Number of Participants Per Category of the CDAI|The CDAI is a validated measure of RA disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, global health assessed by the participant on a VAS from 0 to 10 (cm), and global health assessed by an investigator on a visual analogue scale from 0 to 10 (cm) were included in the CDAI score. Scores on the CDAI range from 0 (lowest disease activity) to 76 (highest disease activity). Categories were defined as: high (> 22.1), moderate (≤ 22.0 to > 10.0), low (≤ 10.0 to < 2.8), and remission (≤ 2.8).|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable CDAI assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841586|NCT01346488|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)|The CDAI is a validated measure of RA disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, global health assessed by the participant on a VAS from 0 to 10 (cm), and global health assessed by an investigator on a visual analogue scale from 0 to 10 (cm) were included in the CDAI score. Scores on the CDAI range from 0 (lowest disease activity) to 76 (highest disease activity). “Change” was calculated as the value at baseline minus the value at each subsequent time point.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable CDAI assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841587|NCT01346488|Secondary|Number of Participants Per Category of the DAS28-4 ESR|DAS28-4 ESR, a combined index that measures activity of RA, was calculated based on the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), general health evaluated by a VAS, and ESR. DAS28-4 ESR scores ranged from 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (maximal disease activity). Categories were defined as: high (> 5.1), moderate (≤ 5.1 to > 3.2), low (≤ 3.2 to ≥ 2.6), remission (< 2.6).|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable DAS28-4 CRP assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841588|NCT01346488|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DAS28-4 Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)|DAS28-4 ESR, a combined index that measures activity of RA, was calculated based on the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), general health evaluated by a VAS, and ESR. DAS28-4 ESR scores ranged from 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (maximal disease activity). A decrease from Baseline in scores indicates improvement of disease activity.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable DAS28-4 ESR assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841589|NCT01346488|Secondary|Number of Participants Per Category of the DAS28-4 CRP|DAS28-4 CRP was calculated using the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), CRP level, and the participant's global assessment of disease activity via a VAS. The calculated range of DAS28-4 is 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (maximal disease activity). Categories were defined as: high (> 5.1), moderate (≤ 5.1 to > 3.2), low (≤ 3.2 to ≥ 2.6), remission (< 2.6).|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable DAS28-4 CRP assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841590|NCT01346488|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score 28-4 C-Reactive Protein (DAS 28-4 CRP)|DAS28-4 CRP was calculated using the number of tender and swollen joints (out of 28 counted), CRP level, and the participant's global assessment of disease activity via a visual analog scale (VAS). The calculated range of DAS28-4 is 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (maximal disease activity). A decrease from Baseline in score indicates improvement of disease activity.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable HAQ-DI assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841591|NCT01346488|Primary|Number of Participants Per Category of the HAQ-DI|The HAQ-DI is a patient-reported questionnaire specific for RA. It consists of 20 questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 (no disability) to 3 (very severe, high-dependency disability). Categories were defined as: high (> 1.5), moderate (≤ 1.5 to > 1.0), low (≤ 1.0 to > 0.5), remission (≤ 0.5 to > 0), 0 (0).|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable HAQ-DI assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841610|NCT01346592|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Adverse Events After Vaccination|The number of subjects reporting any solicited local and systemic adverse events (AEs), following vaccination with aTIV or licensed comparator or TIV.|Day 1 through Day 7 after any vaccination|Analysis was done on solicited safety set i.e all subjects who had received at least one study vaccine and had provided data on post vaccination solicited AEs||Participants|||Number
841611|NCT01346592|Secondary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of aTIV With TIV and Comparator TIV in Terms of GMTs Against Homologous Strains, After One Vaccination|To demonstrate the GMTs at three weeks after one dose of aTIV are statistically significantly higher to the corresponding response's of comparator TIV and TIV.|Day 1, Day 29|Analysis was done on the FAS (Persistence).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841592|NCT01346488|Primary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score|The HAQ-DI is a patient-reported questionnaire specific for RA. It consists of 20 questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 (no disability) to 3 (very severe, high-dependency disability). A negative change from Baseline in the score indicates improvement.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable HAQ-DI assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841593|NCT01346488|Primary|Change From Baseline in WPAI Questionnaire: Mean Percentage of Activity Impairment Due to RA|Activity impairment due to RA (the extent to which RA affected the ability to perform usual daily activities) is presented as the mean percentage of activity impairment, calculated as 100*scale value of WPAI question 6 (between 0 and 10) / 10. WPAI is a questionnaire used to evaluate lost productivity; scores are presented as percentages (multiplying the scores by 100), with 0% representing no impact on productivity and 100% representing complete impact on productivity. “Change” was calculated as the value at baseline minus the value at each subsequent time point.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable WPAI-RA assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||percentage of activity impairment||Standard Deviation|Mean
841594|NCT01346488|Primary|Change From Baseline in WPAI Questionnaire: Mean Percentage of Overall Work Productivity Impairment (OWPI) Due to RA|The mean percentage of OWPI due to RA (based on the WPAI questionnaire) is presented, calculated as: Absenteeism (%) + extent to which RA decreased productivity (%)* [number of hours worked / (number of hours of work missed due to RA + number of hours worked)]. WPAI is a questionnaire used to evaluate lost productivity; scores are presented as percentages (multiplying the scores by 100), with 0% representing no impact on productivity and 100% representing complete impact on productivity. “Change” was calculated as the value at baseline minus the value at each subsequent time point.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and at final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable WPAI-RA assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||percentage of OWPI||Standard Deviation|Mean
841595|NCT01346488|Primary|Change From Baseline in WPAI Questionnaire: Mean Percentage of Impairment While Working Due to RA (Presenteeism)|Presenteeism (the extent to which RA decreased productivity) is presented as the mean percentage of impairment while working due to RA, and calculated as: 100*scale value of question 5 on the WPAI (between 0 and 10) / 10. WPAI is a questionnaire used to evaluate lost productivity; scores are presented as percentages (multiplying the scores by 100), with 0% representing no impact on productivity and 100% representing complete impact on productivity. “Change” was calculated as the value at baseline minus the value at each subsequent time point.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of ADA therapy, and at final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable WPAI-RA assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||percentage of impairment while working||Standard Deviation|Mean
841596|NCT01346488|Primary|Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-Rheumatoid Arthritis (WPAI-RA) Questionnaire: Mean Percentage of Work Time Missed (Absenteeism)|Absenteeism, presented as the mean percentage of work time missed due to RA (as reported on the WPAI-RA), and calculated as: 100*number of hours of work missed due to RA / (number of hours of work missed due to RA + number of hours worked). WPAI is a questionnaire used to evaluate lost productivity; scores are presented as percentages (multiplying the scores by 100), with 0% representing no impact on productivity and 100% representing complete impact on productivity. “Change” was calculated as the value at baseline minus the value at each subsequent time point.|Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36, Week 48, at discontinuation of adalimumab (ADA) therapy, and at final assessment (up to Week 48)|Participants with evaluable WPAI-RA assessments; number analyzed=participants with an evaluable assessment at given time point.||percentage of work time missed||Standard Deviation|Mean
841597|NCT01346501|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Drug Reactions and Serious Adverse Drug Reactions|Adverse drug reactions (serious and non-serious) are adverse events for which the causal relationship between adalimumab and the event could not be ruled out. Adverse event was defined as any untoward or unintended medical occurrences (including abnormal laboratory findings), signs/symptoms, or diseases of the participant receiving adalimumab, regardless of causality of adalimumab treatment. Data are presented as percentage of participants.|From signing of informed consent until withdrawal of participant or starting a new biologic agent or up to approximately 2 years|Safety was assessed in participants who received adalimumab in the observation period of studies P12-069 and P12-707, in routine clinical practice. Refer 'reporting group description' for the definition of safety analysis set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841598|NCT01346501|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) ≤ 0.5 and ≤ 1.5|The mTSS, a method of assessing radiographs, was used to evaluate the level of joint destruction by disease. Digitized X-rays of hands and feet were obtained and scored on a scale ranging from 0 [no damage] to 5 [complete collapse or total destruction of joint] for erosion and 0 [no damage] to 4 [complete luxation of joint] for joint space narrowing. The scores on each task were summed and averaged to derive the total mTSS score ranging from 0 [normal] to 380 [maximal disease]. Large positive change in mTSS indicated disease progression; small positive/no change indicated slowing/halting of disease progression. The mTSS score ≤ 0.5 was defined as minimal radiographic progression. Data are presented as the percentage of the participants with mTSS ≤ 0.5 and ≤ 1.5 at the end of third year of the observation period (at Week 104 of P12-707).|3 years|The effectiveness analysis set was defined as all participants who had evaluable mTSS score during studies P12-069 and P12-707.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841612|NCT01346592|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion or ≥4 Fold Increase in HI Titers, Against Heterologous Strains|The percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion or ≥4 fold increase in HI titers from baseline, against heterologous strains, at three weeks and six months after last vaccination with aTIV or licensed comparator or TIV.|Day 50, Day 209|Subjects aged 6 through <72 months of age - Full Analyses Set (FAS) Persistence||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841599|NCT01346501|Primary|Mean Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Score|The HAQ score was a participant-reported questionnaire that measured quality of life in terms of physical function of participants with rheumatoid arthritis. It consisted of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past seven days using the following response categories (score): without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). The scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score from 0 to 3, where 0-1 represented mild disability and 2-3 represented severe disability. Data are presented as mean HAQ score +/- standard deviation with negative scores indicating improvement.|At Week 0, Week 26, Week 52, Week 78, Week 104, Week 130, Week 156, Week 182, and Week 208|The effectiveness analysis set was defined as all participants who had evaluable HAQ score during studies P12-069 and P12-707.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841600|NCT01346501|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Positive Serum Level of Matrix Metalloprotease-3 (MMP-3)|MMP-3, a proteolytic enzyme that plays a pivotal role in joint destruction in RA was assessed during the study. MMP-3 serum level < 121 ng/mL in men and < 59.7 ng/mL in women was considered as the normal value. Data are presented as the percentage of participants with MMP-3 serum level greater than the normal value.|At Week 0, Week 26, Week 52, Week 78, Week 104, Week 130, Week 156, Week 182, and Week 208|The effectiveness analysis set was defined as all participants who had evaluable MMP-3 score during studies P12-069 and P12-707.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841601|NCT01346501|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score 28 - C-Reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP) Score < 3.2 After Discontinuation of Adalimumab Treatment|The DAS28-CRP, a combined index that measured Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) disease activity, was calculated based on the number of tender joint count (28 joints), the number of swollen joint count (28 joints), overall disease activity (using visual analog scale (VAS)), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-Reactive protein (CRP). The DAS28-CRP scores ranged from 0 (no disease activity) to 9 (maximal disease activity); decrease in DAS28-CRP score indicated improvement of disease. In participants who discontinued treatment with adalimumab after sustained low disease activity (defined as DAS28-CRP score <3.2) in study M06-859, the percentage of participants who maintained DAS28-CRP score < 3.2 without disease flare (defined as DAS28-CRP score ≥ 3.2) during studies P12-069 and P12-707 was calculated.|At Week 0, Week 26, Week 52, Week 78, Week 104, Week 130, and Week 156|The effectiveness analysis set was defined as all participants who had evaluable DAS28-CRP score during studies P12-069 and P12-707.||Percentage of participants|||Number
841602|NCT01346514|Secondary|Treatment Process Measures (Number of Treatment Sessions, Type of Housing Placement, and Change in Life Skills)|Analyses will explore whether treatment process variables mediate differences in outcomes between Addiction/Housing Case Management and time and attention conditions.|Baseline to 12 months|Due to the lack of differences seen in the primary housing outcomes between the AHCM and HSG conditions, tests of mediation were not completed.|||||
841603|NCT01346514|Secondary|Change in Mental Health Status in AHCM vs. HSG From Baseline to 12 Months|Determine if Addiction/Housing Case Management compared to a Housing Support Group control significantly improved mental health outcomes, as measured by the Psychiatric Composite Score (range 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating greater severity) on the Addiction Severity Index (ASI) and the Mental Component Summary (MCS, range 0 to 100 with lower scores indicating greater severity) of the SF-36, among homeless Veterans entering addiction specialty care over the 12-month study course. Negative change on the ASI Psychiatric Composite Score indicates improvement. Positive change on the SF-36 MCS indicates improvement.|Baseline to 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841604|NCT01346514|Secondary|Change in Percent of Participants Abstinent From Baseline to 12 Month Follow-up|Determine if Addiction/Housing Case Management compared to a Housing Support Group control significantly increase the percent of participants abstinent from alcohol and drugs over the past 30 days among homeless Veterans entering addiction specialty care over the 12-month study course. Positive change indicates improvement.|Baseline to 12 months|||precentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841605|NCT01346514|Secondary|Change in Alcohol and Drug Outcomes in AHCM vs. HSG From Baseline to 12 Months|Determine if Addiction/Housing Case Management compared to a Housing Support Group control significantly improved alcohol and drug outcomes, as measured by Alcohol and Drug Composite Scores (range 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating greater severity) on the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), among homeless Veterans entering addiction specialty care over the 12-month study course. Negative change on the ASI measures indicates improvement.|Baseline to 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841606|NCT01346514|Secondary|Change in Functional Status in AHCM vs. HSG From Baseline to 12 Months|Determine if Addiction/Housing Case Management compared to a Housing Support Group control significantly improved functional status outcomes among homeless Veterans entering addiction specialty care over the 12-month study course. Functional status was measured by Medical, Employment, Family/Social, and Legal Composite Scores (range 0 to 1 with higher scores indicating greater severity) on the Addiction Severity Index (ASI) and the Physical Component Summary (PCS, range 0 to 100 with lower scores indicating greater severity) on the SF-36. Negative change on the ASI measures indicates improvement. Positive change on the SF-36 PCS indicates improvement.|Baseline to 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841607|NCT01346514|Secondary|Costs and Cost-effectiveness of AHCM vs. HSG, Baseline to 12 Months|Costs and cost-effectiveness of Addiction/Housing Case Management to the Housing Support Group condition.|Baseline to 12 months|These analyses were not completed due to the lack of differences seen in the primary study outcomes (percent days housed) and quality of life measures (SF-36).|||||
841608|NCT01346514|Primary|Percent Days Housed in AHCM vs. HSG, Baseline to 12 Months.|The primary aim is to determine whether the Addiction/Housing Case Management intervention increases percent days in long-term housing (permanent or long-term transitional) during the year following treatment entry relative to a Housing Support Group.|12 months (18 to 24 month outcomes examined in secondary analyses)|The percent of days in long-term transitional housing and/or own home was calculated for all patients using self-report and VA Homeless Operations Management and Evaluation System (HOMES) data. Individuals with no self-report or HOMES data were coded as not housed.||percent days housed||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841654|NCT01347086|Secondary|Cmax of CD 6168 (Metabolite of Deleobuvir)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma (CD 6168).|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||µmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841614|NCT01346592|Secondary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of aTIV With TIV and Comparator TIV in Terms of GMTs Against Homologous Strains, at Risk/Not at Risk, by Age Sub Group-FAS|The superiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV and comparator TIV assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains, in subjects with a defined set of underlying medical conditions (at risk) and in healthy subjects (not at risk), by age sub group.|Day 50|Analysis was done on Full Analysis Set.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841615|NCT01346592|Secondary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of TIV Versus Comparator TIV in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion or ≥4-fold Increase in HI Titer Against Homologous Strains in Subjects at Risk/Not at Risk, by Age Sub Group-FAS|The superiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV and comparator TIV assessed in terms of of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion or ≥4-fold increase in HI Titer at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains in subjects with a defined set of underlying medical conditions (at risk) and healthy subjects (not at risk), by age sub group.|Day 50|Analysis was done on the Full Analysis Set.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841616|NCT01346592|Secondary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of aTIV Versus Comparator TIV and TIV in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion or ≥4-fold Increase in HI Titer Against Homologous Strains in Subjects at Risk/Not at Risk, by Age Subgroup|The non-inferiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV to that of the licensed comparator TIV and to investigational TIV was assessed in terms of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion or ≥4-fold increase in HI titers at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains in subjects with a defined set of underlying medical conditions (at risk) and in healthy subjects (not at risk) , by age sub group.|Day 50|Analysis was done on the Per Protocol Set.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841617|NCT01346592|Secondary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of aTIV With TIV and Comparator TIV in Terms of GMTs Against Homologous Strains, Subjects at Risk/Not at Risk, by Age Subgroup|The non-inferiority of Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV and comparator TIV assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains, in subjects with a defined set of underlying medical conditions (at risk) and healthy subjects (not at risk), by age sub group.|Day 50|Analysis was done on the PPS.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841618|NCT01346592|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion or ≥4 Fold Increase in HI Titers, Against Homologous Strains|The percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion ≥4 fold increase in HI titers from baseline, against homologous strains, at three weeks and six months after vaccination with ATIV or licensed comparator or TIV.|Day 29, Day 50, Day 209|Analysis was done on FAS (Persistence)||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841619|NCT01346592|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With HI Titers ≥40 Against Homologous Strains, by Vaccine Group|The percentage of subjects demonstrating HI titers ≥40,against homologous strains, at three weeks and six months after vaccination with aTIV or licensed comparator or TIV.|Day 1, Day 29, Day 50, Day 209|Analysis was done on FAS (Persistence)||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841620|NCT01346592|Secondary|Geometric Mean Ratio (GMR) of Post- Versus Pre-vaccination HI Titers Against Homologous Strains|The GMR of post-vaccination versus pre-vaccination HI titers against homologous strains, three weeks (day 29/day 1; day 50/day 1)and six months (day 209/day 1) after vaccination with either aTIV, licensed comparator or TIV.|Day 29, Day 50, Day 209|Analysis was done on FAS (Persistence)||Ratios||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841621|NCT01346592|Secondary|The HI GMTs Against Homologous Strains, by Vaccine Group|The HI antibody titers against the three homologous strains following vaccination with either aTIV, licensed comparator or TIV, at three weeks and at six months after vaccination are reported as GMTs.|Day 1, Day 29, Day 50, Day 209|Analysis was done on FAS (Persistence) i.e. all subjects in the enrolled population who actually received a study vaccination, and provided evaluable serum samples at all relevant timepoints and also at day 209.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841622|NCT01346592|Secondary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of aTIV With TIV and Comparator TIV in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion or ≥4 Fold Increase in HI Titers Against Homologous Strains (6 to <72 Months)-FAS|The superiority of HI antibody responses, in subjects 6 to <24 months of age, of aTIV compared to TIV and comparator TIV assessed in terms of number of subjects achieving seroconversion ≥4 fold increase in HI titers at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 50|Analysis was done on the FAS||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841623|NCT01346592|Secondary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of aTIV With TIV and Comparator TIV in Terms of GMTs Against Homologous Strains (6 to <72 Months)-FAS|The superiority of HI antibody responses, in subjects 6 to <72 months of age, of aTIV compared to TIV and comparator TIV assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 1, Day 50|Analysis was done on the FAS||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841624|NCT01346592|Secondary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of aTIV With TIV and Comparator TIV in Terms Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion or ≥4-fold Increase in HI Titer Against Homologous Strains (6 to <24 Months)|The superiority of HI antibody responses, in subjects 6 to <24 months of age, of aTIV compared to TIV and comparator TIV assessed in terms of number of subjects achieving seroconversion at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 50|Analysis was done on the FAS||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841625|NCT01346592|Secondary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of aTIV With TIV and Comparator TIV in Terms of GMTs Against Homologous Strains (6 to <24 Months)|The superiority of HI antibody responses, in subjects 6 to <24 months of age, of aTIV compared to TIV and comparator TIV assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 1, Day 50|Analysis was done on the Full Analysis Set (FAS) i.e all enrolled subjects who received study vaccination and provided serum samples.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841655|NCT01347086|Secondary|Tmax of CD 6168 (Metabolite of Deleobuvir)|Time from dosing to the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma (CD 6168).|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||h||Full Range|Median
841626|NCT01346592|Primary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of TIV Versus Comparator TIV in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion or ≥4-fold Increase in HI Titer Against Homologous Strains in Subjects 6 to <36 Months of Age|The non-inferiority of HI antibody responses of TIV to that of the licensed comparator TIV assessed in terms of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion or ≥4-fold increase in HI titers at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 50|Subjects aged 6 through <36 months of age - Per Protocol Set (PPS).||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841627|NCT01346592|Primary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of TIV Versus Comparator TIV in Terms of Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) Against Homologous Strains (6 to <36 Months)|The non-inferiority of HI antibody responses of TIV to that of comparator TIV, in subjects aged 6 to <36 Months, assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 1, Day 50|Analysis was done on the PPS.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841628|NCT01346592|Primary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of aTIV With TIV and Comparator TIV in Terms of Percentage of Subjects Achieving Seroconversion or ≥4-fold Increase in HI Titers Against Homologous Strains|"The non-inferiority of HI antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV and comparator TIV assessed in terms of percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion or ≥4-fold increase in HI titers at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.
Seroconversion defined as prevaccination HI titer <10 and postvaccination HI titer ≥40 or at least a 4-fold increase in HI titers from prevaccination HI titer ≥10."|Day 50|Analysis was done on the PPS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841629|NCT01346592|Primary|Comparison of Antibody Responses of aTIV With TIV and Comparator TIV in Terms of Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) Against Homologous Strains|The non-inferiority of Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) antibody responses of aTIV compared to TIV and comparator TIV assessed in terms of post vaccination GMTs at three weeks after last vaccination against the three homologous vaccine strains.|Day 1, Day 50|Analysis was done on the Per Protocol Set (PPS) i.e all subjects in the enrolled population who correctly received the study vaccine, provided evaluable serum samples at relevant time-points and had no major protocol violations as defined prior to unblinding.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841630|NCT01346774|Primary|Participants With Clinically-diagnosed and Treated UTI's.|The primary endpoint was the number of participants who were clinically-diagnosed and treated for UTI whether or not results from a urine culture were available. All UTI's were confirmed via medical records.|From surgery to post-op visit, approximately 6 weeks post surgery|Analysis was run on all 160 subjects that were ascribed to an arm of the study. Data were analyzed using an intent to treat protocol.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841631|NCT01346839|Secondary|Trigger Positive Predictive Value|Positive Predictive Values of each of the triggers in identifying patients with a true delay in diagnostic evaluation. Calculated as: percentage of patients identified as trigger positive that actually had a delay.|15 months|||Percentage of participants|||Number
841632|NCT01346839|Secondary|Number of Participants Diagnosed With Cancer After Delay in Diagnostic Evaluation|Subsequent diagnosis of nonmalignant neoplasia, cancer, or death, and treatments required as a result of new cancer diagnoses after a pre-specified interval.|15 months|||Number of patients diagnosed with cancer|||Number
841633|NCT01346839|Secondary|Percentage of Cases With no Documented Justification for no Follow-up|This is a descriptive sub-analysis looking only at cases with no follow-up at the end of the follow-up period. Specifically, out of the cases that never got follow-up, this represents the percent of that subsample that had no justification in the medical record for the lack of follow-up. This is based on manual chart reviews.|15 months|||percentage with no documentation|||Number
841634|NCT01346839|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Receiving Timely Follow-up of a Red Flag Suggestive of Cancer|The percentage of patients receiving timely follow-up care, as defined by action taken by provider within appropriate pre-defined time intervals for each diagnostic clue, in both intervention and control groups.|15 months|||percentage of follow-up|||Number
841635|NCT01346839|Primary|Differences in Time to Documented Follow-up of a Red Flag Suggestive of Cancer|Differences between the intervention and control groups (based on a Cox Proportional Hazards Survival Analysis) in median time to documented follow-up of a red flag (e.g., colonoscopy performance after positive FOBT) or of a deliberate decision by the treating provider not to take follow-up action. When less than 50% of patients in either group received diagnostic evaluation (ie, medians were not reached), the point at which 40% received diagnostic evaluation was compared instead.|15 months|||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
841636|NCT01346852|Secondary|Mean Number of Short-acting Beta-agonist (SABA) Canisters Used|The number of albuterol canisters dispensed is a marker that is well established in predicting future asthma events in an adult population.|January 1, 2004 to June 30, 2006: 3, 6, and 12 month follow-up periods|Ingenix Impact National Managed Care Database members who had >=1 ICD-9 code for asthma and had >= 1 controller medication or >=1 albuterol canister dispensed during the 12-month pre-index period.||canisters||Standard Deviation|Mean
841637|NCT01346852|Primary|Mean Ratio of Controller Medication to Total Asthma Medication|The ratio of controller medication (CM) to total asthma medication (AM), which is well established in predicting future asthma events in adults, was calculated as the ratio of the units of CMs used during the defined period divided by the sum of the units of CMs plus the units of inhaled short-acting beta-agonists used during the same period. A CM is defined as any inhaled corticosteroid containing medication, methylxanthines, leukotriene receptor antagonists, or cromolyn sodium. The ratio is calculated using all CM. Asthma controllers are medications used to treat asthma on a regular basis.|January 1, 2004 to June 30, 2006: 3, 6, and 12 month follow-up periods|Ingenix Impact National Managed Care Database members who had >=1 ICD-9 code for asthma and had >= 1 controller medication or >=5 albuterol canisters dispensed identified in the database during the 12-month identification period (pre-index). We tested 3 different capture/follow-up periods; thus, sample sizes varied depending capture period used.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
841638|NCT01347008|Secondary|Daily Frequency of Raynaud's Phenomenon Attacks|Daily frequency of RP attacks as self registered in a 1-week diary. Any episode of pallor or cyanosis of the hand/fingers was considered as a RP attack, and patients were supposed to register the daily amount of such episodes on a 1-week diary, previously to the medical visit.|8 weeks|||number of attacks per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
841639|NCT01347008|Primary|Digital Skin Microvascular Blood Flow Measured by Laser Doppler Imaging (LDI) After Cold Stimulus.||8 weeks|||perfusion units||Standard Deviation|Mean
841642|NCT01347034|Primary|Number of Participants With Enhanced T Lymphocyte Immune Response Specific for Soft Tissue Sarcoma Tumor Associated Antigens(STS-TAAs)|Investigate the ability of an intensified radiation therapy (RT) regimen (namely, conventional RT with a high-dose hypofractionated boost) and Dendritic Cell (DC) administration to induce an enhanced T lymphocyte immune response specific for STS-TAAs. Criteria for immune response evaluation: Individual patients were considered as responders to TAAs if at any time point the response in IFN-γ ELISPOT assay was found higher than 30 spots per 200,000 cells or in proliferation assay higher than 3000 counts/min (CPM) AND the response in IFN-γ ELISPOT or proliferation assays to tumor cell lysates (TCL) or Ad-Surv was found more than 2SD higher than the response to corresponding control lysate or Ad-c at the same time point AND 2SD higher than the response to the same stimuli at a base line (before start of the treatment).|11 weeks per participant|All participants||participants|||Number
841643|NCT01347060|Secondary|Mean Number of Albuterol (Short-acting β-Agonists) Canisters Dispensed Per Pharmacy Claim Per Participant|The number of albuterol canisters dispensed was used as a surrogate marker of asthma symptoms.|Up to 7 years from July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2008|Participants contributing to the PharMetrics database (a large, multiplan insurance encounter database) who were identified in the study as having at least one pharmacy claim for fluticasone propionate/salmeterol or inhaled corticosteroids, had an ICD-9 code of 493.xx for asthma, and were at least 65 years of age within the time frame of the study.||albuterol canisters||Standard Deviation|Mean
841644|NCT01347060|Secondary|Mean Asthma-related Costs in the Post-index Period|Asthma-related costs were calculated as pharmacy costs, medical costs, and total asthma (pharmacy plus medical) costs. Medical costs were made up of asthma-related visits, hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and medical office visits. Pharmacy costs were comprised of all asthma-related medications used during the follow-up period. Medical services were identified by place of service and PharMetrics-specific confinement codes. Prescriptions were counted by 30-day fills, with fills less than 30 days rounded up to indicate one fill.|Up to 7 years from July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2008|Participants contributing to the PharMetrics database (a large, multiplan insurance encounter database) who were identified in the study as having at least one pharmacy claim for fluticasone propionate/salmeterol or inhaled corticosteroids, had an ICD-9 code of 493.xx for asthma, and were at least 65 years of age within the time frame of the study.||United States dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
841645|NCT01347060|Primary|Mean Number of Post-index Asthma-related Events Measured Using Medical and Pharmacy Claims|Asthma-related events were defined as events with any primary ICD-9 code of 493.xx for hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and combined hospitalization/emergency department visits. The post-index period is defined as 3-12 months after either the first administration of fluticasone propionate and salmetrol or inhaled corticosteroids. Medical and pharmacy claims are recorded healthcare encounters in a large managed care administrative insurance database.|Up to 7 years from July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2008|Participants contributing to the PharMetrics database (a large, multiplan insurance encounter database) who were identified in the study as having at least one pharmacy claim for fluticasone propionate/salmeterol or inhaled corticosteroids, had an ICD-9 code of 493.xx for asthma, and were at least 65 years of age within the time frame of the study.||Asthma-related events||Standard Deviation|Mean
841646|NCT01347073|Primary|Adverse Events|Rate of adverse events during the Safety Extension portion of the protocol ( please note: HPN-100 treatment only during Safety Extension )|12 months|All patients that entered the Safety Extension were included in the analysis of adverse events||participants|||Number
841647|NCT01347073|Secondary|Hyperammonemic Crisis|Rate of HAC during pre-enrollment on NaPBA compared to HAC during HPN-100 treatment|1 year|||number of crises|||Number
841648|NCT01347073|Secondary|Frequency of Ammonia Levels Greater Than the Upper Limit of Normal (ULN) on HPN-100 Compared With NaPBA|Ammonia values were converted to SI units (umol/L) and normalized to a standard ULN of 35 umol/L prior to analysis|2 weeks|All patients who received any amount of both study medications (NaPBA and HPN-100) were included in this population, which is the primary population for analysis of efficacy and pharmacokinetic parameters.||Ammonia Values > ULN|Ammonia Values||Number
841649|NCT01347073|Secondary|Blood Ammonia|24-hour ammonia AUC of blood ammonia levels on Days 1 (NaPBA) and 10 (HPN-100) were compared. Ammonia was assessed at Hour 0 (pre-first dose, fasted), Hour 8 (~2-4 hours after lunch or the second main meal and dose of NaPBA), Hour 12 (~4 hours after the last main meal) and 24 hours post-first dose (pre-first dose on following day, fasted).|2 weeks|All patients who received any amount of both study medications (NaPBA and HPN-100) were included in this population, which is the primary population for analysis of efficacy and pharmacokinetic parameters.||umol/L*hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
841650|NCT01347073|Primary|Adverse Events|Rate of adverse events during the Switch-Over portion of the Protocol|2 weeks|All patients who received any amount of study medication were included in this population, which is the primary population for all baseline, accountability, demographic and safety analyses.||participants|||Number
841651|NCT01347086|Secondary|Cmax of CD 6168 Acylglucuronide (Metabolite of Deleobuvir)|"Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma (CD 6168 Acylglucuronide).
The descriptive statistics of the arm Chinese 400mg cannot be determined due to limitation of available data above the below limit of quantification (BLQ)."|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||µmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841652|NCT01347086|Secondary|Tmax of CD 6168 Acylglucuronide (Metabolite of Deleobuvir)|"Time from dosing to the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma (CD 6168 Acylglucuronide). The descriptive statistics of the arm Chinese 400mg cannot be determined due to limitation of available data above the below limit of quantification (BLQ)."|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||h||Full Range|Median
841653|NCT01347086|Secondary|AUC0-∞ of CD 6168 Acylglucuronide (Metabolite of Deleobuvir)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma (CD 6168 Acylglucuronide) over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity. The descriptive statistics of the arms Japanese 400mg, Japanese 800mg, Japanese 1200mg and Chinese 400mg cannot be determined. The reason was that there were too few data to derive a terminal elimination rate constant (slope) to calculate AUC0-∞."|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||µmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841656|NCT01347086|Secondary|AUC0-∞ of CD 6168 (Metabolite of Deleobuvir)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma (CD 6168) over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity. The descriptive statistics of the arms Japanese 1200mg and Chinese 400mg cannot be determined. The reason was that there were too few data to derive a terminal elimination rate constant (slope) to calculate AUC0-∞."|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||µmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841657|NCT01347086|Secondary|Cmax of BI 208333 (Metabolite of Deleobuvir)|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma (BI 208333).|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||µmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841658|NCT01347086|Secondary|Tmax of BI 208333 (Metabolite of Deleobuvir)|Time from dosing to the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma (BI 208333) .|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||h||Full Range|Median
841659|NCT01347086|Secondary|AUC0-∞ of BI 208333 (Metabolite of Deleobuvir)|"Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma (BI 208333) over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity. The descriptive statistics of the arms Japanese 400mg, Japanese 800mg and Chinese 400mg cannot be determined. The reason was that there were too few data to derive a terminal elimination rate constant (slope) to calculate AUC0-∞."|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||µmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841660|NCT01347086|Secondary|Cmax of Deleobuvir|Maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma (Deleobuvir).|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||µmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841661|NCT01347086|Secondary|Tmax of Deleobuvir|Time from dosing to the maximum measured concentration of the analyte in plasma (Deleobuvir).|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h after drug administration|The PK analysis set.||h||Full Range|Median
841662|NCT01347086|Secondary|AUC0-∞ of Deleobuvir|Area under the concentration-time curve of the analyte in plasma (Deleobuvir) over the time interval from 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞).|-2:00, 0:30, 1:00, 1:30, 2:00, 2:30, 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00, 8:00, 10:00, 12:00, 24:00, 36:00, 48:00 h (hours) after drug administration|The pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis set: all evaluable subjects of the treated set who provided at least 1 observation for at least 1 PK endpoint without important protocol violations relevant to the evaluation of PK.||µmol*h/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
841663|NCT01347086|Primary|Number of Subjects With Adverse Events as Determined by Clinical Relevant Abnormalities for Vital Signs, Blood Chemistry, Haematology, Urinanalysis and ECG|"Clinical relevant abnormalities for vital signs, blood chemistry, haematology, urinanalysis and ECG. Tolerability assessment endpoint.
New abnormal findings or worsening of baseline conditions were reported as adverse events. Adverse events were assessed through the entire trial, from signing the informed consent (within 21 days before drug administration) onwards through the observational phase until the end-of-trial-examination (within 14 days after last trial procedure)."|From signing the informed consent (within 21 days before drug administration) until 14 days after end of trial visit, upto 38 days.|The treated set.||participants|||Number
841664|NCT01347086|Primary|Number of Subjects With Drug Related Adverse Events|"Number of subjects with investigator-defined drug-related adverse events (AEs). Tolerability assessment endpoint.
The investigator assessed the possible causal relationship between all AEs and the investigational drug, considering all relevant factors, including pattern of reaction, temporal relationship, de-challenge or re-challenge, and confounding factors such as concomitant medication, concomitant diseases, and relevant history."|From first administration of study drug (drug related AEs) until 14 days after end of trial visit, upto 17 days.|Treated set (full analysis set according to the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) E9 guideline): all subjects who were dispensed trial medication and were documented to have taken at least 1 dose of investigational treatment.||Participants|||Number
841665|NCT01347112|Secondary|Heavy Drinking Days at End of Treatment|Heavy drinking is defined as 5 standard alcohol drinks or greater for men and 4 standard alcohol drinks or greater for women. The number of heavy drinking days per month was determined using the timeline follow-back method.|week 12|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
841666|NCT01347112|Secondary|Prolonged Abstinence at 24 Weeks|Prolonged abstinence is identified by a negative response to the question, “Since 2 weeks after your TQD, have you smoked any tobacco, even a puff, for 7 consecutive days or at least once each week on 2 consecutive weeks?”|week 24|||participants|||Number
841667|NCT01347112|Primary|Prolonged Smoking Abstinence at End of 12 Weeks of Varenicline Treatment|"Prolonged smoking abstinence will be identified by a negative response to the question, Since 2 weeks after your TQD, have you smoked any tobacco, even a puff, for 7 consecutive days or at least once each week on 2 consecutive weeks?”"|12 weeks|||participants|||Number
841668|NCT01347255|Secondary|Changes in Total Skin Thickness|Change in total skin thickness measured by ultrasound at end of treatment (Day 29) and individual visits (Days 8, 15, and 22) compared to baseline|Baseline and Days 8, 15, 22, and 29.|||millimetres||Standard Deviation|Mean
841669|NCT01347255|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Echo-poor Band Thickness at End of Treatment|Change in echo-poor band thickness from baseline to end of treatment, measured by ultrasound|Baseline and Day 29|||millimetres||Standard Deviation|Mean
841670|NCT01347255|Secondary|Changes in Total Clinical Score (TCS) by Visit|Change in Total Clinical Score (TCS; range from 0 (all signs absent) to 9 (all signs severe)) at individual visits (Days 4, 8, 11, 15, 22, and 25) compared to baseline.|Baseline and Days 4, 8, 11, 15, 18, 22, 25|||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841671|NCT01347255|Secondary|Change in Clinical Sign Scores|"Absolute change in score of each clinical sign (erythema, scaling, infiltration) at end of treatment (Day 29) and at individual visits (Days 4, 8, 11, 15, 18, 22, and 25) compared to Baseline.
The investigator assessed the severity of the clinical signs erythema, scaling, and infiltration for each test site by using a 7-point scale (range 0 (no evidence) to 3 (severe)).
Negative changes in mean score represent improvement."|Baseline and Days 4, 8, 11, 15, 18, 22, 25, and 29 (End of Treatment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841688|NCT01347580|Primary|Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Flow Grade 3 of MI Culprit Vessel at Initial Angiography (Co-primary Endpoint)|(TIMI) flow grade classification is used to assess coronary blood flow in acute coronary syndromes. grade 0:no reperfusion, grade 1: penetration without perfusion, grade 2: Partial reperfusion, grade 3: complete perfusion.|At initial angiography, pre PCI|mITT, on patients with non missing values||patients|||Number
841689|NCT01347632|Primary|p24 Antigen Concentration ng/mL|"The study will evaluate HIV infection and safety of cervico-vaginal tissue in women at 3 different time periods:
During a BV infection
Approximately 1 week after completing a 7-day course of metronidazole therapy
Approximately 1 month after completing the 7-day course of metronidazole therapy
You will not come in contact with HIV during this study - only your samples (after we have removed them from your vagina/cervix) come in contact with HIV."|6 weeks|||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841690|NCT01341990|Primary|Mean Ex-Vivo Advancing Contact Angle|Study lens was removed from the eye according to protocol-specified procedures. The OCA15 (Optical Contact Angle) Instrument was used to observe, record, and calculate contact angle measurements. The wetting angle measurement was recorded in degrees (0-180), and a lower wetting angle measurement indicates a more wettable lens.|Day 8, 16 hours|Intent to treat.||Degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
841691|NCT01341990|Primary|Mean Ex-Vivo Advancing Contact Angle|Study lens was removed from the eye according to protocol-specified procedures. The OCA15 (Optical Contact Angle) Instrument was used to observe, record, and calculate contact angle measurements. The wetting angle measurement was recorded in degrees (0-180), and a lower wetting angle measurement indicates a more wettable lens.|Day 1, 8 hours|Intent to Treat.||Degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
841692|NCT01342081|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Diurnal IOP(Intraocular Pressure) at End of Study|Mean diurnal IOP(intraocular pressure) was calculated as an average of IOP(intraocular pressure) at 9:30 (pre-dose), 11:30 and 17:30.|Week 0(Baseline) and Week 4(End of Study)|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
841693|NCT01347710|Secondary|Diagnostic Certainty in PET MPI and SPECT MPI|Overall summary of diagnostic certainty in flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI by majority rule|60 days|All safety evaluable patients who had rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data, and had evaluable invasive coronary angiography||proportion of patients|||Number
841694|NCT01347710|Secondary|Image Quality of Rest and Stress (PET vs SPECT).|Overall summary of rest and stress image quality for flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI by majority rule. Value represents the number of subject images evaluated as excellent/good and fair/poor|60 days|All safety evaluable patients who had rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data, and had evaluable invasive coronary angiography||percent of images|||Number
841695|NCT01347710|Secondary|Overall Summary of Specificity of PET MPI vs SPECT MPI; Image Quality of Excellent or Good|Overall summary of specificity of flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI (qualitative, image quality excellent or good) vs. SPECT MPI by majority rule vs truth standard (angio >/=50% stenosis and confirmed MI). Value represents the number of true negative, i.e. True Negative: Patients with normal MPI and disease negative by the truth standard|60 days|All safety evaluable patients who had rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data, and had evaluable invasive coronary angiography||proportion of true negatives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841696|NCT01347710|Primary|Diagnostic Efficacy of Flurpiridaz PET MPI Specificity Versus SPECT MPI Specificity|Diagnostic efficacy of flurpiridaz PET MPI specificity versus SPECT MPI specificity by majority rule in the detection of CAD using invasive coronary angiography as the truth standard|60 days|all safety evaluable patients who had rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data and had evaluable invasive coronary angiography||Proportion of true negatives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841697|NCT01347710|Secondary|Overall Summary of Sensitivity of PET MPI vs SPECT MPI; Image Quality Excellent or Good|Overall summary of sensitivity of flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI (qualitative image quality of excellent or good) vs. SPECT MPI by majority rule vs. truth standard(angio >/=50% stenosis and confirmed MI). Value reported is the number of true positives, i.e. True Positive: Patients with abnormal MPI and disease positive by the truth standard|60 days|All safety evaluable patients who had rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data, and had evaluable invasive coronary angiography||proportion of true positives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841698|NCT01347710|Secondary|Diagnositic Performance Evaluation of Multivessel Disease (PETvsSPECT).|Overall summary of specificity for identifying multi-vessel disease between flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI by majority rule vs. majority rule (angio >/=50% stenosis and confirmed MI). Value represents the number of true negative, i.e. True Negative: Patients with normal MPI and disease negative by the truth standard|60 days|All safety evaluable patients who had rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data, and had evaluable invasive coronary angiography||proportion of true negatives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841699|NCT01347710|Secondary|Diagnositic Performance Evaluation of Multivessel Disease (PETvsSPECT).|Overall summary of sensitivity for identifying multi-vessel disease between flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI by majority rule vs. truth standard (angio >/=50% stenosis and confirmed MI). Value reported is the number of true positives, i.e. True Positive: Patients with abnormal MPI and disease positive by the truth standard|60 days|All safety evaluable patients who had rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data, and had evaluable invasive coronary angiography||proportion of true positives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841700|NCT01347710|Secondary|Diagnostic Performance Evaluation of Localization of CAD for Specificity (PETVsSPECT).|Overall specificity of flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI in Coronary Territories (Qualitative Diagnosis) vs. SPECT MPI by majority rule vs. truth standard (angiographic stenosis greater than or equal to 50% stenosis and confirmed MI); left descending coronary artery (LAD), left circumflex artery (LCX), right coronary artery (RCA), and non - LAD. Value represents the number of true negative, i.e. True Negative: Patients with normal MPI and disease negative by the truth standard|60 days|All safety evaluable patients who had rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data, and had evaluable invasive coronary angiography||proportion of true negatives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841701|NCT01347710|Secondary|Diagnostic Performance Evaluation of Localization of CAD for Sensitivity (PETVsSPECT).|Overall sensitivity of flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI in coronary territories (Qualitative Diagnosis vs. SPECT MPI by majority rule vs. truth standard (angiographic stenosis greater than or equal to 50% stenosis and confirmed MI); left descending coronary artery (LAD), left circumflex artery (LCX), right coronary artery (RCA), and non - LAD. Value reported is the number of true positives, i.e. True Positive: Patients with abnormal MPI and disease positive by the truth standard|60 days|All safety evaluable patients who had rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 Flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data, and had evaluable invasive coronary angiography||Proportion of true positives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841702|NCT01347710|Secondary|Diagnostic Efficacy of Flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI Specificity Versus SPECT Specificity in Subgroups: Pharmacologic Stress, Females and BMI>/=30.|Diagnostic efficacy of flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI specificity versus SPECT specificity by majority rule in the detection of CAD using invasive coronary angiography as the truth standard, in subgroups: pharmacologic stress, females and BMI >/=30. Value represents the number of true negative, i.e. True Negative: Patients with normal MPI and disease negative by the truth standard|60 days|all safety evaluable patients who had a rest and stress flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data and evaluable invasive coronary angiography||proportion of true negatives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841703|NCT01347710|Secondary|Diagnostic Efficacy of Flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI Sensitivity Versus SPECT MPI Sensitivity in Subgroups: Pharmacologic Stress, Females and BMI>/=30.|"Diagnostic efficacy of flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI sensitivity versus SPECT MPI sensitivity by majority rule in the detection of CAD using invasive coronary angiography as the truth standard, , in subgroups: pharmacologic stress, females and BMI >/=30. Value reported is the number of true positives, i.e. True Positive: Patients with abnormal MPI and disease positive by the truth standard
I"|60 days|all safety evaluable patients who had a rest and stress flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data and evaluable invasive coronary angiography||proportion of true postives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841704|NCT01347710|Primary|Diagnostic Efficacy of Flurpiridaz F 18 PET Myocardial Perfusion Imaging (MPI) Sensitivity Versus SPECT Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Sensitivity|Diagnostic efficacy of one day rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 PET MPI sensitivity versus SPECT MPI sensitivity in the detection of coronary artery disease (CAD) by majority rule using invasive coronary angiography as the truth standard,|60 days|All safety evaluable patients who had rest and stress flurpiridaz F 18 PET MPI and SPECT MPI procedures resulting in evaluable data, and had evaluable invasive coronary angiography||Proportion of true positive cases||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841705|NCT01347788|Primary|Partial Response in Bone Scan From Baseline to Week 6|Bone scans will be centrally reviewed and categorized based on comparison of week 6 and baseline imaging. Partial response is defined as 30% or greater decrease in bone scan lesion area from baseline to week 6. An adaptive response design to determine the lowest effective cabozantinib dose among three dose levels (dose level +1, dose level 0 and dose level +1) will be employed.|Baseline and Week 6|||participants|||Number
841706|NCT01345058|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE)|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence (side effect) in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. A TEAE is defined as an adverse event that occurs after receiving the drug.|6 Months|All eligible participants. One participant in the Lacosamide + Low-Dose Levetiracetam arm did not receive study drug and is not included. One participant never confirmed taking the study medication, never followed up, and was not included in the analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841707|NCT01345058|Secondary|Retention Rate|Retention rate is defined as the percentage of participants who remained on the study drug after study completion.|6 Months|All eligible participants. One participant in the Lacosamide + Low-Dose Levetiracetam arm did not receive study drug and is not included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
841708|NCT01345058|Secondary|Time to First Seizure After Therapeutic Dose is Reached|Time in days until the first seizure after the therapeutic dose is reached occurs.|6 Months|All eligible participants. One participant in the Lacosamide + Low-Dose Levetiracetam arm did not receive study drug and is not included in the analysis.||days||Full Range|Median
841709|NCT01345058|Secondary|Number of Seizure-Free Days||6 Months|All eligible participants. One participant in the Lacosamide + Low-Dose Levetiracetam arm did not receive study drug and is not included in the analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
841710|NCT01345058|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Six Month Seizure Freedom|Seizure freedom is defined as having no seizures and was evaluated in the 6 month period after receiving the drug.|6 Months|All eligible participants. One participant in the Lacosamide + Low-Dose Levetiracetam arm did not receive study drug and is not included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
841711|NCT01345123|Primary|Total Medical Costs That Can be Impacted Per Member Per Month|"total medical cost paid for covered services for the subject for six months after initiation of the study. This total includes all places of service and types of covered services, including inpatient, outpatient and pharmacy.
Costs that cannot be impacted include: Costs related to Trauma and Accident, Psychiatric/Substance Abuse, Malignant Neoplasm, Maternity and Childbirth excluded"|6 months|Excluded: Subjects with claim for study-related surgery prior to intervention,claims evidence of symptomatic AIDS, organ transplant, on dialysis, Institutionalized >= 30days for psych. Subjects with less than 6 months of health plan eligible months. Spinal Stenosis not eligible for study.||Total dollars / member months||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841712|NCT01345123|Secondary|Decision Satisfaction|Self-reported measure of subject satisfaction with decision as measured retrospectively, including how subjects feel their decision worked out and whether or not they would make the same decision again.|6 months||||||
841713|NCT01345123|Secondary|Decision Conflict|Self-reported measure of the extent to which subjects feel comfortable, supported and confident in choosing one treatment approach over others. Score computed on a scale of 1-3, where 1 = 'No', 2='Yes, somewhat', 3='Yes, completely' (3 indicates less conflict, 1 indicates most conflict) on a 4 item survey question set- asks whether respondents feel sure, have enough support, know and are clear about benefits and risks of treatment options.|12 weeks|Decision Quality Survey administered to a random sample (N=2600) of all study participants in the second study wave (N=4208): 1177 survey-eligible respondents.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841714|NCT01345123|Secondary|Knowledge|Subject self-reported knowledge about the risks and benefits of surgical options and likely outcomes with and without surgical interventions.Knowledge score calculated (score of 0-5, counting number of correct answers) for every respondent who completes at least 3 of the 5 items.|12 weeks|Decision Quality Survey administered to a random sample (N=2600) of all study participants in the second study wave (N=4208): 1177 survey-eligible respondents, 1124 received a knowledge score.||number of correct answers||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841715|NCT01345123|Secondary|Quality of Decision Making Process|Self-reported measure of the extent to which subject interactions with providers involve discussions of the pros and cons of treatment options and provide an opportunity for subjects to have input into the decisions.|6 months||||||
841716|NCT01345123|Secondary|Concordance|Self-reported consistency of choices with goals and concerns--extent to which the treatment choices subjects make are or are not consistent with the issues they state are priorities including avoiding surgery, reducing pain and regaining function|6 months||||||
841717|NCT01345123|Secondary|Rate of Targeted Conditions Surgeries|rate of any one claims based instance of lumbar back, hip repair, hip replacement, knee repair, or knee replacement surgery|6 months|Excluded: Subjects with claim for study-related surgery prior to intervention,claims evidence of symptomatic AIDS, organ transplant, on dialysis, Institutionalized >= 30days for psych. Subjects with less than 6 months of health plan eligible months. Spinal Stenosis not eligible for study.||percentage of participants|||Number
841718|NCT01345123|Primary|Total Medical Costs Per Member Per Month|total medical cost paid for covered services for the subject for six months after initiation of the study. This total includes all places of service and types of covered services, including inpatient, outpatient and pharmacy.|6 months|Excluded: Subjects with claim for study-related surgery prior to intervention,claims evidence of symptomatic AIDS, organ transplant, on dialysis, Instituted >= 30days for psych. Subjects with less than 6 months of health plan eligible months. Spinal Stenosis not eligible for study.||Total dollars / member months||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841719|NCT01345162|Secondary|Development of Persistent Postoperative Pain|Assessment of pain prevalence and presentation of persistant postoperative pain. Evaluation of all the patients after 1 and 3 months by phone call and with clinical re-evaluation in all patients who referred pain.|Up to 3 months||||||
841720|NCT01345162|Secondary|Assessment of Any Connections Between the Two Therapeutical Strategies and the Recurrence of Surgical Complications|"Assessment of the recurrence of surgical complications. Evaluation of all the patients after 5 days by clinical evaluation. After 1 and 3 month in the patients who refer pain.
Assessment of any difference between the two groups."|4 days postherniotomy||||||
841721|NCT01345162|Secondary|Difference in Recovering Daily Activity|Assessment of the difference in recovering daily activity in terms of NRSm (Numeric Rate Scale at movement)|4 days after surgical procedure||||||
841722|NCT01345162|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|"All adverse events (eg: PONV (postoperative nausea and vomiting), itching, dizziness, epigastralgia) are recorded.
Assessment of any difference between the two groups."|4 days postherniotoy||||||
841723|NCT01345162|Primary|Analgesic Efficacy|"percentage of patients with NRS≥4. (NRS=numeric rating scale; o quantify pain from0=no pain to 10=worst pain possible).
NRS≥4 is cosidered as suboptimal pain control worth to be treated with adjunctive analgesics. We therefore condidered the difference in percentage of patients experiencing not optimal pain control in the two groups to understand, if any, the difference in analgesic efficacy between the two drugs."|4 days postherniotomy|||percentage of patients with NRS≥4|||Number
841725|NCT02800213|Primary|Received Tidal Volume|Mean received tidal volume for 30 breaths delivered by the subjects over three minutes as measured via the RespiTrainer Advance manikin model monitor output.|3 minutes|||milliliters||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
842489|NCT02162979|Primary|Change in Duration of Dyskinesia.||2 weeks||||||
841740|NCT02600767|Primary|Absence of Malaria Parasites in Blood.|Investigators will evaluate the percentage of patients who remain free of malaria parasites in the blood during the 28-day follow-up period.|28 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
841754|NCT02551224|Secondary|Comfort of the Mouth Pieces for Performing a Tight Seal With the Lips.|To measure in COPD patients naïve to DPIs, the comfort of the mouth pieces when performing a tight seal with the lips using the Breezhaler® and Ellipta® devices.The mean (SD) score on a scale of 1 – 5 (1 = not at all easy, 2= not very easy, 3=somewhat easy, 4=very easy, 5 = extremely easy)|6 hours|full analysis set||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841755|NCT02551224|Primary|Patient's Preference on the Feedback Mechanisms of Dose Delivery Confirmation Using the Breezhaler® and Ellipta® Devices|"This study will measure patient’s perceptions of dose delivery, using a preference questionnaire on use of the Breezhaler® & Ellipta® devices, in COPD patients naïve to DPI devices.The mean (SD) score on a scale of 1– 5 (1 = not at all confident/not at all; 5 = extremely confident/a very great deal) 1a. How confident were you that you received the full dose of medication from your inhaler?
1=Not At All Confident, 2=Not Very Confident, 3=Somewhat Confident, 4=Confident, 5=Extremely Confident
1b. How certain were you that there was no drug remaining in the device?
1=Not At All Certain,2=Not Very Certain, 3=Somewhat Certain,4=Certain, 5=Extremely Certain
1c. To what extent did the device help you to know that you have received all the medication?
1=Not At All, 2=A Little, 3=Somewhat, 4=Very Much, 5=A Very Great Deal"|6 hours|Full analysis set||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841756|NCT02524158|Secondary|EuroQOL 5D (EQ5D)|The EQ5D is a preference-based measure of health-related quality of life. The measure produces a single score ranging from 0 (death) to 1.00 (optimal health). Scores can be integrated with time to calculate Quality Adjusted Life Years.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841757|NCT02524158|Secondary|Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)|The PSQI is a validated measure of sleep quality. The global PSQI score has a range of 0-21, with higher scores indicating worse sleep quality.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841758|NCT02524158|Secondary|Lumbar Spine Stabilization Endurance|Prone and supine bridge maneuvers will be used to assess core stabilization. Research staff recorded the length of time in seconds each pose is held until fatigue or pain prevents its maintenance. If patients cannot get into either one of the positions, record the respective time as zero. Recorded values range from 0 - 90 seconds in each position, with more time indicating greater core strength.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841759|NCT02524158|Secondary|Lower Limb Strength and Balance|The Single Leg Stance (SLS) is a commonly used measure of both lower leg strength and balance. A total of four trials were conducted – left and right leg with both eyes open and eyes closed. Each trial will be timed from the moment the participant lifts one foot off the floor until the moment they need to place it on the floor again. If the participant is able to stand on one leg for 60 seconds the trial will be stopped and they will be asked to switch side. The average of time balanced with the left and right leg will be recorded separately for the open and closed eyes condition. Values range from 0 - 60 seconds with greater values indicating better balance.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841760|NCT02524158|Secondary|Grip Strength|Grip strength in both hands of each participant will be measured using an adjustable, hydraulic grip strength dynamometer (Jamar Hydraulic Hand Dynamometer). Three trials will be conducted for each hand. In cases of current pain flare-ups or recent procedures to a hand or wrist, the affected hand is not tested, and the result of the one other hand is used. If both hands are used the best performance of two trials will be selected for each side, and the average of the left and right hand will be used for analysis. The value measured is pounds of force exerted and typically ranges from 0 - 150 lbs, with higher numbers indicating greater grip strength.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841761|NCT02524158|Secondary|Range of Motion|Spinal Range of Motion (ROM) will be measured using a Saunders Digital Inclinometer, a portable device which isolates lumbar ROM (flexion and extension). The device is placed along the spine and uses a precise optical angular scanner. Forward bend angle measures how far forward and downward a person can bend at the waist, from a fully erect and/or normal standing position. The value typically ranges from 0-180 degrees, with higher values indicating greater flexibility.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841762|NCT02524158|Secondary|Attendance/ Home Practice|Two indicators of the amount of yoga practiced by each participant will be used. Actual attendance of yoga sessions will be assessed using VA medical record data. Attendance can range from 0-24 sessions attended for those participants randomized to yoga. Self-reported practice of yoga at home will be assessed using a weekly participant yoga log. The self-report yoga log assesses whether they practiced yoga each day, the amount of minutes practiced, the use of instructions, the difficulty of poses, and the estimated level of physical activity or exertion.|total # of sessions attended and minutes of home practice at end of 12 week intervention||11/2017||||
841763|NCT02524158|Secondary|Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS)|Fatigue (absence of energy) will be measured with the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). The FSS is a self-administered instrument developed to assess the impact and severity of fatigue. It consists of 9 items describing the functional impact of fatigue on daily life rated on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) with the total fatigue score ranging from 9-63 or an average score ranging from 1.0-7.0. Higher scores reflect greater fatigue severity and less energy.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841764|NCT02524158|Secondary|Self-efficacy for Managing Low Back Pain|Self-efficacy for controlling CLBP reflects levels of confidence in the ability to influence the intensity of back pain symptoms and the impact that CLBP has on daily life. The questions are based on self-efficacy items developed for the Medical Outcomes Study in mixed chronic diseases. The wording of the items has been adapted to be specific to CLBP. The measure consists of 6 items, rated on a 6-point Likert scale, with each item ranging from 0-10. The total score is the mean of the 6 items with higher scores indicating greater self-efficacy for managing CLBP.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841765|NCT02524158|Secondary|Short-form 12 (SF12)|Health-related quality of life will be measured using the Short-form 12 (SF12). Based on the longer SF-36, the SF-12 was developed with the objective of finding a short yet meaningful measure of generic HRQOL or global health status. The 12 items were selected from the SF-36 and tested through a series of stages. The PCS-12 and MCS-12 show similar levels of precision to the summary scores derived from the longer 36-item measure. PCS-12 and MCS-12 scores are transformed to a 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841766|NCT02524158|Secondary|Brief Anxiety Inventory (BAI)|The Brief Anxiety Inventory (BAI) measures the severity of anxiety symptoms, particularly those that distinguish anxiety from depression. The BAI consists of 21 items, is self-administered and can be completed in 5 to 10 minutes. Items are scored on a scale of 0 to 3 and are summed to generate a total score. Scores range from 0 to 63, and higher scores indicate greater depression.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841767|NCT02524158|Secondary|Center for Epidemiologic Studies Short Depression Scale (CES-D 10)|Depression will be assessed using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Short Depression Scale (CES-D 10). Derived from the full CES-D, there are 10 items that ask about the frequency of mood symptoms, rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (Never) to 3 (All of the Time). Scores range from 0 to 30, and higher scores indicate greater depression. A number of items are reverse-scored and a score of 10 or greater is considered depressed. Normative data on people with assorted chronic illnesses are available for comparisons.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841768|NCT02524158|Secondary|Pain Interference - Brief Pain Inventory|The short version of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) is a self-rated questionnaire designed to assess the severity of pain and the impact of pain on daily functions in the past day and week. The BPI takes about 5 minutes to complete and has been validated with low back pain patients. It has been shown to respond to both behavioral and pharmacological pain interventions. The BPI measures severity of pain, impact of pain on daily function, location of pain, pain medications, and amount of pain relief. Items are answered utilizing a scoring algorithm, with the mean of the 7 interference items used a as a measure of pain interference. Scores range from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more pain, and when considering the change from baseline to follow-up assessments, negative scores indicate improvement.|baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months||11/2017||||
841769|NCT02524158|Secondary|Pain Intensity - Brief Pain Inventory|The short version of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) is a self-rated questionnaire designed to assess the severity of pain and the impact of pain on daily functions in the past day and week. The BPI takes about 5 minutes to complete and has been validated with low back pain patients. It has been shown to respond to both behavioral and pharmacological pain interventions. The BPI measures severity of pain, impact of pain on daily function, location of pain, pain medications, and amount of pain relief. Items are answered utilizing a scoring algorithm, with the mean of the 4 severity items used as measures of pain severity. Scores range from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more pain, and when considering the change from baseline to follow-up assessments, negative scores indicate improvement.|baseline to 6 months|Of the 76 participants randomized to each group, 1 participants in each group requested withdrawal of all of their data from the study. Thus, baseline characteristics, outcomes analyses, and outcomes results are reported for 75 participants.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841770|NCT02524158|Secondary|Pain Intensity - Brief Pain Inventory|The short version of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) is a self-rated questionnaire designed to assess the severity of pain and the impact of pain on daily functions in the past day and week. The BPI takes about 5 minutes to complete and has been validated with low back pain patients. It has been shown to respond to both behavioral and pharmacological pain interventions. The BPI measures severity of pain, impact of pain on daily function, location of pain, pain medications, and amount of pain relief. Items are answered utilizing a scoring algorithm, with the mean of the 4 severity items used as measures of pain severity. Scores range from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more pain, and when considering the change from baseline to follow-up assessments, negative scores indicate improvement.|baseline to 12 weeks|Of the 76 participants randomized to each group, 1 participants in each group requested withdrawal of all of their data from the study. Thus, baseline characteristics, outcomes analyses, and outcomes results are reported for 75 participants.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841771|NCT02524158|Primary|Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire|The primary outcome is the change in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score between baseline, 12-weeks, and 6-months. The questionnaire consists of 24 questions that ask about back pain-related functional limitations experienced for a variety of daily activities . Scores can range from 0-24. Higher scores indicate more impairment, and when considering the change from baseline to follow-up assessments, negative scores indicate improvement. The scale has been shown to be reliable and is well validated. It has been used in another yoga RCT, allowing for comparisons.|baseline to 6-months|Of the 76 participants randomized to each group, 1 participants in each group requested withdrawal of all of their data from the study. Thus, baseline characteristics, outcomes analyses, and outcomes results are reported for 75 participants.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841772|NCT02524158|Primary|Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire|The primary outcomes is the change in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score between baseline and 12-weeks. The questionnaire consists of 24 questions that ask about back pain-related functional limitations experienced for a variety of daily activities . Scores can range from 0-24. Higher scores indicate more impairment, and when considering the change from baseline to follow-up assessments, negative scores indicate improvement. The scale has been shown to be reliable and is well validated. It has been used in another yoga RCT, allowing for comparisons.|baseline to 12 weeks|Of the 76 participants randomized to each group, 1 participants in each group requested withdrawal of all of their data from the study. Thus, baseline characteristics, outcomes analyses, and outcomes results are reported for 75 participants.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841788|NCT02374593|Secondary|Number of Adjustments Due to Overtreatment in Subjects With Athyreosis, Ectopic and Eutopic Thyroid Glands Compared With Controls|Whether the dose adjustment was made for overtreatment was noted as based on TSH and fT4/T4 results|6 months|||dose adjustments||Standard Error|Mean
841789|NCT02374593|Primary|Dose Adjustments|Thyroid labs (TSH and fT4/T4) will be monitored per standard care: 2 weeks after initiation of levothyroxine and once monthly during the first 6 months of treatment. The number of dose adjustments required per participant during the first 6 months of treatment were recorded.|6 months|||Number of dose adjustments||Standard Error|Mean
841790|NCT02369341|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|A serious adverse event was any untoward medical occurrence that: resulted in death, was life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in disability/incapacity or was a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject. Any was defined as occurrence of any symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination and related was an event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|During the entire study period (approximately 21 days for each subject)|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
841791|NCT02369341|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 was an event that prevented normal activities and related was defined as an unsolicited AE assessed by the investigator to be causally related to the study vaccination.|During the 21-day (Days 0-20) post-vaccination period.|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
841792|NCT02369341|Secondary|Duration of Solicited General Symptoms|Duration was defined as number of days with any grade of general symptoms.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||days||Full Range|Median
841793|NCT02369341|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Medically Attended Adverse Events (MAEs).|MAEs were defined as AEs with a medically-attended visit i.e. prompting emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations or physician visits and that were not routine visits for physical examination or vaccination. Any MAE was defined as at least one MAE experienced. Grade 3 was defined as MAEs that prevented normal activities and related was defined as MAEs assessed by the investigator to be causally related to the study vaccination.|During the entire study period (approximately 21 days for each subject).|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||subjects|||Number
841794|NCT02369341|Secondary|Duration of Solicited Local Symptoms|Duration was defined as number of days with any grade of local symptoms.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||days||Full Range|Median
841795|NCT02369341|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms.|Solicited general symptoms assessed were Arthralgia, Fatigue, Gastrointestinal symptoms, Headache, Myalgia, Shivering, Sweating and Temperature (Oral). Any was defined as any general symptom reported irrespective of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 was defined as symptoms that prevented normal activity. Related was defined as general symptom assessed by the investigator to have a causal relationship to vaccination.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
841796|NCT02369341|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms.|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any was defined as any solicited local symptom reported irrespective of intensity. Grade 3 pain was defined as pain that prevented normal everyday activities. Grade 3 redness and swelling was greater than 100 millimeters (mm) i.e. >100mm.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
841797|NCT02369341|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Seroprotection Power (SPP) for HI Antibody Titer Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains Above the Cut-off Value.|SPP was defined as the number of vaccinated subjects with a pre-vaccination titer < 1:40 and a post-vaccination titer ≥ 1:40. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Day 21|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
841798|NCT02369341|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Anti-HA Antibodies Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains.|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with either a pre-vaccination HI titer less than (<) 1:10 and a post-vaccination HI titer ≥1:40 or pre-vaccination HI titer ≥1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination HI titer. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Day 21.|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
841799|NCT02369341|Secondary|MGI for HI Antibody Titer Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains.|MGI also known as the seroconversion factor [SCF] was defined as the fold increase in serum HI GMTs post vaccination compared to pre-vaccination (Day 0). The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Day 21|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841809|NCT02343003|Other Pre-specified|Medication Usage|Reduction in pain medication usage from baseline as measured by subject self-reported average daily dosage.|6 months and 12 months|17 of the 76 originally-randomized study subjects in the Cooled radiofrequency group completed this 6 month outcome. 25 of the originally-randomized 75 study subjects in the Corticosteroid injection group completed this 6 month outcome. 12 months: 17/76 in Cooled radiofrequency group and 2/75 in Corticosteroid injection group completed.||milligrams||Standard Deviation|Mean
841800|NCT02369341|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Were Seroprotected for Anti-HI Antibodies Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with a serum HI titer ≥ 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection in adults. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Days 0 and 21|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
841801|NCT02369341|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for HI Antibodies Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Strains.|A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cutoff value of 1:10. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Days 0 and 21|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
841802|NCT02369341|Secondary|Humoral Immune Response for Each Vaccine Strain in Terms of HI Antibodies.|Antibody titers were expressed as GMTs. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Days 0 and 21|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841803|NCT02369341|Primary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) for HI Antibody Titer Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains.|MGI also known as the seroconversion factor [SCF] was defined as the fold increase in serum HI GMTs post vaccination compared to pre-vaccination (Day 0). The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Day 21|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
841804|NCT02369341|Primary|Number of Subjects With Seroprotection Power (SPP) for HI Antibody Titer Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains Above the Cut-off Value.|"SPP was defined as the number of vaccinated subjects with a pre-vaccination titer < 1:40 and a post-vaccination titer ≥ 1:40.
The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria)."|At Day 21|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
841805|NCT02369341|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Anti-HA Antibodies Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains.|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with either a pre-vaccination HI titer less than (<) 1:10 and a post-vaccination HI titer ≥1:40 or pre-vaccination HI titer ≥ 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination HI titer. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Day 21.|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
841806|NCT02369341|Primary|Number of Subjects Who Were Seroprotected for Anti-HI Antibodies Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with a serum HI titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection in adults. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Days 0 and 21|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
841807|NCT02369341|Primary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for HI Antibodies Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Strains.|A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cutoff value of 1:10. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Days 0 and 21|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
841808|NCT02369341|Primary|Humoral Immune Response for Each Vaccine Strain in Terms of Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers.|Antibody titers were expressed as Geometric mean titers (GMTs). The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), Flu B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata) and Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria).|At Days 0 and 21.|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available and subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
842318|NCT00575159|Secondary|Mean Total Urine Volume 0-24 H|Urine volume was recorded over intervals : 0-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h, 12-16h and 16- 24h on Day 1 for each dosing period. Mean total Urine volume over 24 hours was presented.|Day 1 of each treatment period|Safety Population||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841810|NCT02343003|Other Pre-specified|Subject Satisfaction - Number of Participants With a Global Perceived Effect Score of 5 or Greater|"Subject satisfaction as measured by the Global Perceived Effect Score at 6 months and 12 months. The study subjects’ perception of treatment effect was reflected by the Global Perceived Effect (GPE). The Global Perceived Effect is a 7-point scale: 1 point = worst ever, 2 points = much worse, 3 points = worse, 4 points = not improved but not worse, 5 points = improved, 6 points = much improved, 7 points = best ever."|6 months and 12 months|58 of the 76 originally-randomized study subjects in the Cooled radiofrequency group completed this 6 month outcome. 67 of the originally-randomized 75 study subjects in the Corticosteroid injection group completed this 6 month outcome. 12 months: 52/76 in Cooled radiofrequency group and 4/75 in Corticosteroid injection group completed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841811|NCT02343003|Secondary|Oxford Knee Score|"Improvement in global outcome from baseline as measured by the Oxford Knee Score at 6 months and 12 months. The Oxford Knee Score is determined by a 12-question survey that measures knee function, and is scored on a scale that ranges from 0 - 48 points, with scores of 0 - 19 = severe arthritis, 20 - 29 = moderate to severe arthritis, 30 - 39 = mild to moderate arthritis, and 40 - 48 = satisfactory joint function."|6 months and 12 months|58 of the 76 originally-randomized study subjects in the Cooled radiofrequency group completed this 6 month outcome. 67 of the originally-randomized 75 study subjects in the Corticosteroid injection group completed this 6 month outcome. 12 months: 52/76 in Cooled radiofrequency group and 3/75 in Corticosteroid injection group completed.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841812|NCT02343003|Secondary|Numeric Rating Scale|"The number of subjects whose knee pain is reduced from baseline by ≥ 50% based on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at 12 months. The NRS is an 11-point scale (0 points to 10 points), where 0 points equals no pain and 10 points equals the worst pain."|12 months|52 of the 76 originally-randomized study subjects in the Cooled radiofrequency group completed this 12 month outcome. 4 of the originally-randomized 75 study subjects in the Corticosteroid injection group completed this 12 month outcome.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841813|NCT02343003|Primary|Safety: Number of Subjects Experiencing Adverse Events Through Final Follow up.|Safety Endpoint: Number of subjects experiencing adverse events through final follow up.|6 months and 12 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
841814|NCT02343003|Primary|Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)|"The number of subjects whose knee pain is reduced by ≥ 50% based on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). The NRS is an 11-point scale (0 points to 10 points), where 0 points equals no pain and 10 points equals the worst pain."|6 months|58 of the 76 originally-randomized study subjects in the Cooled radiofrequency group completed this 6 month outcome. 68 of the originally-randomized 75 study subjects in the Corticosteroid injection group completed this 6 month outcome.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841863|NCT01908829|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 10-Point Improvement From Baseline in OAB-q Symptom Bother Score|The OAB-q was a self-reported questionnaire comprising 33-items each rated on a 6-point Likert scale. The questionnaire consisted of an 8-item symptom bother scale and 25 health-related QoL (HRQL) items comprising 4 HRQL subscales (Coping, Concern, Sleep, and Social Interaction). Symptom Bother score ranges from 0 (least severity) to 100 (worst severity).|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
841819|NCT02256436|Secondary|Response Duration Per RECIST 1.1 - Participants With PD-L1 Positive Tumors|For participants who demonstrated a confirmed response (CR or PR) per RECIST 1.1, response duration was defined as the time from first documented evidence of CR or PR until disease progression or death. Response duration for participants who had not progressed or died at the time of analysis was to be censored at the date of their last tumor assessment. Response duration was assessed in all participants who had PD-L1 positive tumors (CPS ≥1%) based on independent radiologist review and was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized PD-L1 positive participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Months||Full Range|Median
841820|NCT02256436|Secondary|Response Duration Per RECIST 1.1 - Participants With Strongly PD-L1 Positive Tumors|For participants who demonstrated a confirmed response (CR or PR) per RECIST 1.1, response duration was defined as the time from first documented evidence of CR or PR until disease progression or death. Response duration for participants who had not progressed or died at the time of analysis was to be censored at the date of their last tumor assessment. Response duration was assessed in all participants who had strongly PD-L1 positive tumors (CPS ≥10%) based on independent radiologist review and was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized strongly PD-L1 positive participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Months||Full Range|Median
841821|NCT02256436|Secondary|Response Duration Per RECIST 1.1 - All Participants|For participants who demonstrated a confirmed response (CR or PR) per RECIST 1.1, response duration was defined as the time from first documented evidence of CR or PR until disease progression or death. Response duration for participants who had not progressed or died at the time of analysis was to be censored at the date of their last tumor assessment. Response duration was assessed in all participants based on independent radiologist review and was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants who demonstrated a confirmed response (CR or PR) per RECIST 1.1, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Months||Full Range|Median
841822|NCT02256436|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Treatment Due to an AE|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study treatment, whether or not considered related to the use of study treatment. The number of participants who discontinued study treatment due to an AE was assessed.|Up to approximately 20 months|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received.||Participants|||Number
841823|NCT02256436|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced an Adverse Event (AE)|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study treatment, whether or not considered related to the use of study treatment. Participants were monitored for the occurrence nonserious AEs for up to 30 days after last dose of study treatment and for serious AEs for up to 90 days after last dose of study treatment. The number of participants who experienced an AE was assessed.|Up to approximately 23 months|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group corresponding to the study treatment they actually received.||Participants|||Number
841824|NCT02256436|Secondary|ORR Per Modified RECIST - All Participants|ORR per modified RECIST was defined as the percentage of participants in the analysis population who had a Complete Response (irCR: complete disappearance of all lesions [and no new lesions] confirmation by a repeat, consecutive assessment no less than 4 weeks from the date first documented) or a Partial Response (irPR: decrease in tumor burden ≥50% relative to baseline confirmed by a consecutive assessment at least 4 weeks after first documentation). ORR per modified RECIST was assessed by blinded independent radiologist review in all participants up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841864|NCT01908829|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Mean of at Least 8 Micturitions Per 24 Hours at Baseline and Less Than 8 Micturitions Per 24 Hours Postbaseline|Micturitions were defined as voluntary urinations (excluding incontinence only episodes).|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
841865|NCT01908829|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Zero Incontinence Episodes Postbaseline|Incontinence was defined as any involuntary leakage of urine.|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
841825|NCT02256436|Secondary|PFS Per Modified RECIST - All Participants|PFS was defined as the time from randomization to the first documented disease progression, or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Per modified (immune-related [ir]) RECIST, progressive disease (irPD) was defined as: increase in tumor burden ≥25% relative to minimum recorded tumor burden confirmation by a repeat, consecutive assessment no less than 4 weeks from the date first documented. PFS per modified RECIST was assessed by blinded independent radiologist review in all randomized participants up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841826|NCT02256436|Secondary|ORR Per RECIST 1.1 - Participants With PD-L1 Positive Tumors|ORR was defined as the percentage of participants in the analysis population who had a Complete Response (CR: Disappearance of all target lesions) or a Partial Response (PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1. ORR was assessed by blinded independent radiologist review in participants with PD-L1 positive tumors (CPS ≥1%) up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized PD-L1 positive participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841827|NCT02256436|Secondary|ORR Per RECIST 1.1 - Participants With Strongly PD-L1 Positive Tumors|ORR was defined as the percentage of participants in the analysis population who had a Complete Response (CR: Disappearance of all target lesions) or a Partial Response (PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1. ORR was assessed by blinded independent radiologist review in participants with strongly PD-L1 positive tumors (CPS ≥10%) up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized strongly PD-L1 positive participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841828|NCT02256436|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) Per RECIST 1.1 - All Participants|ORR was defined as the percentage of participants in the analysis population who had a Complete Response (CR: Disappearance of all target lesions) or a Partial Response (PR: At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions) per RECIST 1.1. ORR was assessed by blinded independent radiologist review in all participants up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841829|NCT02256436|Primary|PFS Per RECIST 1.1 - Participants With PD-L1 Positive Tumors|PFS was defined as the time from randomization to the first documented disease progression, or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Per RECIST 1.1, PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Note: The appearance of one or more new lesions was also considered PD. PFS per RECIST 1.1 was assessed by blinded independent radiologist review in all participants who had PD-L1 positive tumors (CPS ≥1%) up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized PD-L1 positive participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841830|NCT02256436|Primary|OS - Participants With PD-L1 Positive Tumors|OS was defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause. For the purposes of this study, participants with PD-L1 CPS ≥1% were considered to have a PD-L1 positive tumor status. OS was assessed in all participants who had PD-L1 positive tumors (CPS ≥1%) up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized PD-L1 positive participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841831|NCT02256436|Primary|PFS Per RECIST 1.1 - Participants With Strongly PD-L1 Positive Tumors|PFS was defined as the time from randomization to the first documented disease progression, or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Per RECIST 1.1, PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Note: The appearance of one or more new lesions was also considered PD. PFS per RECIST 1.1 was assessed by blinded independent radiologist review in all participants who had strongly PD-L1 positive tumors (CPS ≥10%) up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized strongly PD-L1 positive participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841832|NCT02256436|Primary|OS - Participants With Strongly PD-L1 Positive Tumors|OS was defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause. For the purposes of this study, participants with a programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined proportion score (CPS) ≥10% were considered to have a strongly PD-L1 positive tumor status. The OS was assessed in all participants who had strongly PD-L1 positive tumors (CPS ≥10%) up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized strongly PD-L1 positive participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841866|NCT01908829|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 50% Decrease From Baseline in Mean Number of Incontinence Episodes Per 24 Hours|Incontinence was defined as any involuntary leakage of urine.|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
841833|NCT02256436|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) - All Participants|PFS was defined as the time from randomization to the first documented disease progression, or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Per RECIST 1.1, progressive disease (PD) was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. Note: The appearance of one or more new lesions was also considered PD. The PFS per RECIST 1.1 was assessed by blinded independent radiologist review in all participants up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841834|NCT02256436|Primary|Overall Survival (OS) - All Participants|OS was defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause. The OS was assessed in all participants up through the database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016.|Through database cutoff date of 07-Sep-2016 (Up to approximately 20 months)|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants, regardless of whether or not they received study treatment. Participants were included in the treatment group to which they were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841867|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of Participants in Each Category of Patient and Clinician Global Impression of Change Scales (PGIC and CGIC)|The PGIC was a 2-part questionnaire, assessing both the change in the participant’s overall condition (Patient Impression in General Health (PIBS)) and change in bladder condition since the start of the study (Patient Impression in General Health (PIGH)) (from very much worse to very much improved). The CGIC was a single questionnaire assessing the participant’s change in bladder condition since the beginning of the study (Clinician Impression in Bladder Symptoms (CIBS)).|End of treatment (up to 12 weeks)|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS.||participants|||Number
841868|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Perception Bladder Control (PPBC) Score|The PPBC was a validated, global assessment tool using a 6-point Likert scale on which participants rated their subjective impression of their current bladder condition. PPBC score: 1-no problem, 2- some very minor problems, 3-some minor problems, 4-moderate problems, 5-severe problems, 6-many severe problems.|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841869|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Treatment Satisfaction - Visual Analogue Scale (TS-VAS) Score|The TS-VAS rated participant satisfaction with treatment on a scale from 0 (No, not at all) to 10 (Yes, completely).|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841858|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Post Void Residual (PVR) Volume|PVR Volume was assessed by bladder scan.|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|The analysis population consisted of the SAF with data available at each time point.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841859|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a study drug or has undergone study procedures & which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. Treatment-Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) referred to an adverse event which started or worsened in the period from first double-blind medication intake until 30 days after the last double-blind medication intake.|From first dose of double blind treatment until 30 days after last dose (up to 16 weeks)|The analysis population consisted of the Safety Analysis Set, the SAF comprised all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of double-blind treatment.||Participants|||Count of Participants
841860|NCT01908829|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Major (at Least 2-Point) Improvement From Baseline in PPBC|The PPBC was a validated, global assessment tool using a 6-point Likert scale on which participants rated their subjective impression of their current bladder condition.|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
841861|NCT01908829|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 1-Point Improvement From Baseline in PPBC|The PPBC was a validated, global assessment tool using a 6-point Likert scale on which participants rated their subjective impression of their current bladder condition.|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
841862|NCT01908829|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least a 10-Point Improvement From Baseline in HRQL Total Score|HRQL subscales (coping, concern, sleep and social) and total score range from 0 (worst quality of life) to 100 (best quality of life).|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||percentage of participants|||Number
841870|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in OAB-q HRQL Subscale Score: Social Interaction|The OAB-q was a self-reported questionnaire comprising 33-items each rated on a 6-point Likert scale. The questionnaire consisted of an 8-item symptom bother scale and 25 health-related QoL (HRQL) items comprising 4 HRQL subscales (Coping, Concern, Sleep, and Social Interaction). HRQL subscales (coping, concern, sleep and social) and total score range from 0 (worst quality of life) to 100 (best quality of life).|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841871|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in OAB-q HRQL Subscale Score: Sleep|The OAB-q was a self-reported questionnaire comprising 33-items each rated on a 6-point Likert scale. The questionnaire consisted of an 8-item symptom bother scale and 25 health-related QoL (HRQL) items comprising 4 HRQL subscales (Coping, Concern, Sleep, and Social Interaction). HRQL subscales (coping, concern, sleep and social) and total score range from 0 (worst quality of life) to 100 (best quality of life).|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841872|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in OAB-q HRQL Subscale Score: Concern|The OAB-q was a self-reported questionnaire comprising 33-items each rated on a 6-point Likert scale. The questionnaire consisted of an 8-item symptom bother scale and 25 health-related QoL (HRQL) items comprising 4 HRQL subscales (Coping, Concern, Sleep, and Social Interaction). HRQL subscales (coping, concern, sleep and social) and total score range from 0 (worst quality of life) to 100 (best quality of life).|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841873|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in OAB-q HRQL Subscale Score: Coping|The OAB-q was a self-reported questionnaire comprising 33-items each rated on a 6-point Likert scale. The questionnaire consisted of an 8-item symptom bother scale and 25 health-related QoL (HRQL) items comprising 4 HRQL subscales (Coping, Concern, Sleep, and Social Interaction). HRQL subscales (coping, concern, sleep and social) and total score range from 0 (worst quality of life) to 100 (best quality of life).|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841874|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in OAB-q Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQL) Total Score|The OAB-q was a self-reported questionnaire comprising 33-items each rated on a 6-point Likert scale. The questionnaire consisted of an 8-item symptom bother scale and 25 health-related QoL (HRQL) items comprising 4 HRQL subscales (Coping, Concern, Sleep, and Social Interaction). HRQL subscales (coping, concern, sleep and social) and total score range from 0 (worst quality of life) to 100 (best quality of life).|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841875|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Overactive Bladder Symptom (OAB-q) Symptom Bother Score|The OAB-q was a self-reported questionnaire comprising 33-items each rated on a 6-point Likert scale. The questionnaire consisted of an 8-item symptom bother scale and 25 health-related QoL (HRQL) items comprising 4 HRQL subscales (Coping, Concern, Sleep, and Social Interaction). Symptom Bother score ranges from 0 (least severity) to 100 (worst severity).|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841876|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline to EoT in EQ-5D Subscale Score: Anxiety/Depression|The EQ-5D is an international, standardized, nondisease specific instrument for describing and valuing health status. It has 5 dimensions: Mobility, Self-care, Usual Activities, Pain/Discomfort, and Anxiety/Depression. Each dimension has 5 response levels: level 1=no problem or none; level 2=slight problems; level 3=moderate problems; level 4=severe problems; level 5=unable to perform activity.|Baseline and EoT (up to 12 weeks)|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS.||participants|||Number
841877|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline to EoT in EQ-5D Subscale Score: Pain/Discomfort|The EQ-5D is an international, standardized, nondisease specific instrument for describing and valuing health status. It has 5 dimensions: Mobility, Self-care, Usual Activities, Pain/Discomfort, and Anxiety/Depression. Each dimension has 5 response levels: level 1=no problem or none; level 2=slight problems; level 3=moderate problems; level 4=severe problems; level 5=unable to perform activity.|Baseline and EoT (up to 12 weeks)|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS.||participants|||Number
841878|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline to EoT in EQ-5D Subscale Score: Usual Activities|The EQ-5D is an international, standardized, nondisease specific instrument for describing and valuing health status. It has 5 dimensions: Mobility, Self-care, Usual Activities, Pain/Discomfort, and Anxiety/Depression. Each dimension has 5 response levels: level 1=no problem or none; level 2=slight problems; level 3=moderate problems; level 4=severe problems; level 5=unable to perform activity.|Baseline and EoT (up to 12 weeks)|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS.||participants|||Number
841879|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline to EoT in EQ-5D Subscale Score: Self-care|The EQ-5D is an international, standardized, nondisease specific instrument for describing and valuing health status. It has 5 dimensions: Mobility, Self-care, Usual Activities, Pain/Discomfort, and Anxiety/Depression. Each dimension has 5 response levels: level 1=no problem or none; level 2=slight problems; level 3=moderate problems; level 4=severe problems; level 5=unable to perform activity.|Baseline and EoT (up to 12 weeks)|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS.||participants|||Number
841880|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline to EoT in Euroqol European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Subscale Score: Mobility|The EQ-5D is an international, standardized, nondisease specific instrument for describing and valuing health status. It has 5 dimensions: Mobility, Self-care, Usual Activities, Pain/Discomfort, and Anxiety/Depression. Each dimension has 5 response levels: level 1=no problem or none; level 2=slight problems; level 3=moderate problems; level 4=severe problems; level 5=unable to perform activity.|Baseline and EoT (up to 12 weeks)|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS.||participants|||Number
841881|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of Nocturia Episodes Reported Over 3-Day Diary|The number of nocturia episodes was defined as the number of times a participant urinated (excluding incontinence only episodes) during sleeping time during the 3-day micturition diary period. This was calculated using the sum of each nocturia episode recorded on valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period.|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point. Only participants with at least one nocturia episode reported in baseline diary were included.||nocturia episodes||Standard Error|Mean
841882|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Nocturia Episodes|Mean number of nocturia episodes was defined as the number of times a participant urinated (excluding incontinence only episodes) while sleeping during the 3-day diary period, divided by the number of valid diary days during the diary period. Night time episode of incontinence only was not considered a nocturia episode. Nocturia episodes were counted for each micturition record which occurred between the date/time of going to bed with intention to sleep and the date/time of getting up with intention to stay awake on a valid diary day & which was accompanied by a sleep interruption. Nocturia only determined for those who were not night-shift workers.|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point. Only participants with at least one nocturia episode reported in baseline diary were included.||nocturia episodes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841883|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of Pads Used During the 3-Day Diary|The number of pads used was defined as the number of times a participant recorded a new pad used during the 3-day micturition diary period. This was calculated using the sum of each record with new pad checked. Only records with new pad checked on a valid diary day were counted.|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point. Only participants who reported use of at least one pad in baseline diary were included.||pads||Standard Error|Mean
841884|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Pads Per 24 Hours|The mean number of pads per 24 hours was defined as the average number of times a participant recorded a new pad used per day during the 3-day micturition diary period. This was calculated using the number of new pads used during valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period divided by the number of valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period.|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point. Only participants with reported use of at least one pad reported in baseline diary were included.||pads||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841885|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Urgency Episodes (Grade 3 and/or 4) Per 24 Hours|An urgency episode was defined as the complaint of a sudden, compelling desire to pass urine, which is difficult to defer. The mean number of urgency episodes (severity of 3 or 4) per 24 hours was defined as the average number of times a participant recorded an urgency episode (severity of 3 or 4) with or without incontinence per day during the 3-day micturition diary period. Measured using the PPIUS scale. This was calculated using the sum of each record with an urgency episode (severity of 3 or 4) recorded on a valid diary day divided by the number of valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period.|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point. Only participants with at least one urgency episode reported in baseline diary were included.||urgency episodes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841886|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of UI Episodes Reported During the 3-Day Diary|Number of UI episodes was calculated using the number of UI episodes recorded on valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period. NOTE: Only urgency incontinence episodes recorded on a valid diary day were counted.|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point. Only participants with at least one UI episode reported in baseline diary were included.||UI episodes||Standard Error|Mean
841887|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Urgency Incontinence (UI) Episodes Per 24 Hours|UI was defined as the complaint of involuntary urine leakage accompanied by or immediately preceded by urgency. UI was measured using the Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale (PPIUS), a patient reported outcome validated 5-point categorical scale rating the degree of associated urinary urgency severity (0=No urgency, I felt no need to empty my bladder, but did so for other reasons. 1=Mild, I could postpone voiding as long as necessary, without fear of wetting myself. 2= Moderate, I could postpone voiding for a short while, without fear of wetting myself. 3=Severe, I could not postpone voiding, but had to rush to the toilet in order not to wet myself. 4=Urgency incontinence, I leaked before arriving to the toilet). One urgency incontinence episode was counted for each record of the diary in which the following occurred: incontinence episode or ‘both’ was recorded & severity of urinary urgency recorded was 3 or 4.|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point. Only participants with at least one UI episode reported in baseline diary were included.||UI episodes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841888|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline to EoT in Corrected Micturition Frequency (CMF)|CMF was defined as the mean number of micturitions per 24 hours that participants would have at EoT if their fluid intake had remained unchanged since baseline. This was calculated by the MVV per Micturition at baseline multiplied by the mean number of micturitions per 24 hours at baseline divided by the MVV per micturition at EoT.|Baseline and EoT (up to 12 weeks)|LOCF was used. The analysis population consisted of the FAS.||micturitions||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841889|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Volume Voided (MVV) Per Micturition|MVV per micturition was defined as MVV (mL) per micturition during last 3 days of the 3-day micturition diary period. MVV per micturition was calculated as the sum of each volume voided for each record with volume voided > 0 on valid diary days divided by the total number of records with a volume voided > 0 on valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period.|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841890|NCT01908829|Secondary|Number of Incontinence Episodes Reported During the 3-Day Diary|The number of incontinence episodes (complaint of any involuntary leakage of urine) per day was derived from total number of incontinence episodes on valid diary days recorded during the 3-day micturition diary period.|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||incontinence episodes||Standard Error|Mean
841891|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Micturitions Per 24 Hours|The average number of micturitions (voluntary urinations (excluding incontinence only episodes)) per 24 hours was derived from number of micturitions recorded on valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period divided by the number of valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period (excluding incontinence only episodes).|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|LOCF was used for EoT. The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||micturitions||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841892|NCT01908829|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 8 & 12 in Mean Number of Incontinence Episodes Per 24 Hours|The mean number of incontinence episodes (complaint of any involuntary leakage of urine) per day was derived from number of incontinence episodes recorded on valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period divided by the number of valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period.|Baseline and weeks 4, 8 & 12|The analysis population consisted of the FAS with data available at each time point.||incontinence episodes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841893|NCT01908829|Primary|Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (EoT) in Mean Number of Incontinence Episodes Per 24 Hours|The mean number of incontinence episodes (complaint of any involuntary leakage of urine) per day was derived from number of incontinence episodes recorded on valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period divided by the number of valid diary days during the 3-day micturition diary period. The analysis population consisted of the Full Analysis Set (FAS) which comprised of all the Randomized Analysis Set's (RAS) participants who met the following criteria: took at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug after randomization, reported at least 1 micturition in the baseline diary & at least 1 micturition postbaseline & reported at least 1 incontinence episode in the baseline diary. For participants who withdrew before EoT (week 12) and have no measurement available for that diary period, the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) value during the double-blind study period was used as EoT value to derive the primary variable.|Baseline and end of treatment (up to 12 weeks)|The analysis population consisted of the FAS. LOCF was used for EoT.||incontinence episodes||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
841894|NCT01884597|Secondary|Fundus Clinical Findings|Decrease in subretinal hemorrhage or exudates as measured by mean size as noted on fundus photography and clinic exam|Baseline, Months 6, 12, 24|||Participants with Fundus Findings|||Number
841895|NCT01884597|Secondary|PCV Anatomic Changes|"Decrease and/or resolution in the branching vascular network of the PCV complex as measured by mean size of the branched vascular network (BVN) on ICG and fluorescein angiography
Decrease and/or resolution of the polyps of the PCV complex as measured on ICG and fluorescein angiography"|Baseline, Months 6, 12, 24|||Participants with PCV Anatomic Changes|||Number
841896|NCT01884597|Secondary|Macular Edema|Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) central macular and peripapillary thickness|Baseline, Day 14, Month 1-24|Patient in Cohort 2 missed several visits.||microns||Standard Deviation|Mean
841897|NCT01884597|Secondary|BCVA|Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), as assessed by the number of letters read correctly on the ETDRS eye chart at a starting test distance of 4 meters, at Baseline, Day 14, Month 1, Month 3, Month 6, Month 9 , Month 12, Month 15, Month 18, Month 21 and Month 24|at Baseline, Day 14, Month 1, Month 3, Month 6, Month 9 , Month 12, Month 15, Month 18, Month 21 and Month 24|||number of letters read correctly||Standard Deviation|Mean
841898|NCT01884597|Secondary|Systemic AEs|Incidence and severity of other adverse events, as identified by physical examination, subject reporting, and changes in vital signs|Monthly|||Number of Participants with Systemic AEs|||Number
841899|NCT01884597|Secondary|Ocular Adverse Events (AE)|Incidence and severity of ocular adverse events, as identified by eye examination (including visual acuity testing)|Monthly|||Ocular adverse events|||Number
841900|NCT01884597|Primary|BCVA|Mean change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), as assessed by the number of letters read correctly on the ETDRS eye chart at a starting test distance of 4 meters from Baseline to Month 24|Baseline to M24|||number of letters read correctly||Standard Deviation|Mean
841901|NCT01884597|Primary|BCVA|Mean change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), as assessed by the number of letters read correctly on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) eye chart at a starting test distance of 4 meters from Baseline to Month 12.|From Baseline to Month 12|||number of letters read correctly||Standard Deviation|Mean
841902|NCT01811316|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Inflammatory Markers in Gingival Crevicular|Gingival Crevicular Fluid (GCF) samples will be analyzed for inflammatory cytokines/chemokines and matrix metalloproteases using multiplexing ELISA.|15 days, 4, 12 and 24 weeks||||||
841903|NCT01811316|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Probing Depth (PD)|Periodontal pocket depth (PD) was determined with a periodontal probe at six sites per tooth rounded to the next lower whole mm.|4, 12 and 24 weeks|One subject was lost to follow up between 4 and 12 weeks.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
841904|NCT01811316|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Plaque Index (PI)|"Plaque Index of Turesky Modification of Quigley-Hein (Turesky, Gilmore et al. 1970) (PI) was scored on all natural teeth (except third molars) after disclosing with erythrosine solution. Scores Criteria:
0 No plaque
Separate flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth
A thin continuous band of plaque (up to one mm) at the cervical margin of the tooth
A band of plaque wider than one mm but covering less than one-third of the crown of the tooth
Plaque covering at least one-third but less than two-thirds of the crown of the tooth
Plaque covering two-thirds or more of the crown of the tooth"|4, 12 and 24 weeks|One subject was lost to follow up between 4 and 12 weeks.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841905|NCT01811316|Primary|Change From Baseline in Bleeding on Probing (BOP)|Bleeding on probing was assessed 30 seconds after probin. A dichotomous scoring system was used at six sites per tooth using one (1) and zero (0) for presence or absence, respectively. BOP (%) is a percentage of sites BOP.|4, 12 and 24 weeks|One subject was lost to follow up between 4 and 12 weeks.||percentage of sites BOP||Standard Deviation|Mean
841921|NCT01740297|Secondary|Phase 2: Time to Response|Time to confirmed response (TTR) was defined as the time from randomization to the date of the first confirmed CR or PR per modified irRC criteria. Participants who did not have a confirmed CR or PR were censored at their last evaluable tumor assessment date.|Tumor response was assessed every 12 weeks until disease progression; median follow-up time was 57.7 weeks and 68.1 weeks in each treatment group respectively.|All participants randomized in phase 2||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841906|NCT01811316|Primary|Change From Baseline in Modified Gingival Index (MGI)|"Modified Gingival Index (MGI) (Lobene, Weatherford et al. 1986) was measured on six gingival areas of all scorable teeth, using a scale of 0-4 as follows: Scores Criteria 0 Normal (absence of inflammation)
Mild inflammation (slight change of color, little change in texture) of any portion of, but not the entire marginal or papillary gingival unit
Mild inflammation of the entire gingival unit
Moderate inflammation (moderate glazing, redness, edema and/or hypertrophy) of the marginal or papillary gingival unit
Severe inflammation (marked redness and edema/hyper-trophy, spontaneous bleeding or ulceration) of the marginal or papillary gingival unit.
Whole mouth MGI scores were calculated by summing all scores and dividing by the number of examined scorable sites."|4, 12 and 24 weeks|One subject was lost to follow up between 4 and 12 weeks.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
841912|NCT01767506|Secondary|The Mean of the Prevalence of Active Trachoma (TF) in Communities in Both Arms.|"Model the risk of active trachoma in intervention and control communities. We used the mean % and 95 % confidence interval as they present for a variable to describe the center of the population the sample represents and the precision of the estimate of that center.
If the variable is normally distributed in the population, the probability is 95% that the true mean falls in the 95% confidence interval."|Baseline only|The trial was conducted at the community level||community|community|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
841913|NCT01767506|Secondary|The Proportion of Communities With Clinical Trachoma Prevalence of 5% or Below||24 months|The trial was conducted at the community level||community|community||Count of Units
841914|NCT01767506|Primary|The Proportion of Communities With C. Trachomatis Infection Prevalence of 1% or Below|The proportion of communities with C. trachomatis infection prevalence at 1% or below in children ages 1 to 9 years at the 24-month survey, comparing the intervention arm to the usual practice arm|24 months|The trial was conducted at the community level||community|community||Count of Units
841915|NCT01740297|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 3.0, where grade 1 = mild AE, grade 2 = moderate AE, grade 3 = severe AE, grade 4 = life-threatening or disabling AE and grade 5 = death related to AE.
The investigator assessed whether each AE was possibly related to talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) and/or ipilimumab (Imab).
Note that one participant in the Phase 2 Ipilimumab Alone group was incorrectly noted as having an AE leading to discontinuation of T-VEC which was discovered and corrected after this analysis was conducted."|From first dose of study treatment until 30 days after the last dose; median duration of treatment was 14.7, 9.1, and 21.1 weeks in each treatment group respectively.|All participants who received ≥ 1 dose of investigational product (talimogene laherparepvec or ipilimumab).||participants|||Number
841916|NCT01740297|Secondary|Phase 2: Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Percentage of Participants Alive at Month 12 and 24|The overall survival estimates at month 24 data were not mature as most participants had not been followed for 24 months at the time of data cutoff.|Months 12 and 24; The median (Q1, Q3) follow-up time from randomization to the data cutoff date for the analysis was 80.6 (58.3, 106.3) weeks.|All participants randomized in phase 2||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841917|NCT01740297|Secondary|Phase 2: Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death from any cause. Participants without an event were censored at the last date they were known to be alive. Participants with a vital status obtained after the data cut-off were censored at the date cut-off date.|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 23 August 2016; median follow-up time was 57.7 weeks and 68.1 weeks in each treatment group respectively.|All participants randomized in phase 2||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841918|NCT01740297|Secondary|Phase 2: Resection Rate|Resection rate was defined as the percentage of participants who had surgical procedures for melanoma that resulted in a partial reduction or complete eradication of all previously unresectable cutaneous or visceral metastatic disease. Surgical procedures for melanoma with palliative intent (eg, for pain control) in the presence of disease progression were not considered resection.|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 23 August 2016; median follow-up time was 57.7 weeks and 68.1 weeks in each treatment group respectively.|All participants randomized in phase 2||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841919|NCT01740297|Secondary|Phase 2: Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival was measured from the date of randomization to the date of disease progression (as measured by modified irRC) or death on or before the data cutoff date, whichever occurred first. Participants who had no disease progression and did not die while on study were censored at the last disease assessment date.|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 23 August 2016; median follow-up time was 57.7 weeks and 68.1 weeks in each treatment group respectively.|All participants randomized in phase 2||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841920|NCT01740297|Secondary|Phase 2: Duration of Response|Duration of response was calculated only for participants with an objective response per modified irRC and was defined as the time from first confirmed objective response (CR or PR) to confirmed disease progression per the modified irRC or death, whichever was earlier. Responders who did not have an event of death or disease progression were censored at their last evaluable tumor assessment date.|Tumor response was assessed every 12 weeks until disease progression; median follow-up time was 57.7 weeks and 68.1 weeks in each treatment group respectively.|Participants randomized in phase 2 with a confirmed CR or PR.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
841922|NCT01740297|Secondary|Phase 2: Durable Response Rate|Durable response rate (DRR) was defined as the percentage of participants with a duration of response (best response of CR or PR) per modified irRC of at least 6 months. Duration of response is the time from the first confirmed CR or PR to confirmed disease progression per the modified irRC or death, whichever occurs earlier.|Tumor response was assessed every 12 weeks until disease progression; median follow-up time was 57.7 weeks and 68.1 weeks in each treatment group respectively.|All participants randomized in phase 2||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841923|NCT01740297|Secondary|Phase 2: Disease Control Rate|"Disease control rate (DCR) was defined as the percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR, PR or SD based on investigator assessment according to the modified irRC.
CR: Complete disappearance of all lesions and no new lesions; any pathological lymph nodes reduced in short axis to <10 mm.
PR: Decrease in tumor burden ≥ 50% relative to baseline. SD: Not meeting criteria for CR or PR, in absence of PD and no earlier than 77 days after the date of enrollment/randomization.
CR and PR must have been confirmed at 2 consecutive assessments ≥ 4 weeks apart."|Tumor response was assessed every 12 weeks until disease progression; median follow-up time was 57.7 weeks and 68.1 weeks in each treatment group respectively.|All participants randomized in phase 2||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841924|NCT01740297|Secondary|Phase 2: Best Overall Response|"Best overall response was categorized in descending order as a complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD) or unevaluable (UE) based on investigator assessment according to the modified irRC.
CR: Complete disappearance of all lesions and no new lesions; Any pathological lymph nodes reduced in short axis to <10 mm.
PR: Decrease in tumor burden ≥ 50% relative to baseline. PD: Increase in tumor burden ≥ 25% relative to nadir. SD: Not meeting criteria for CR or PR, in absence of PD and no earlier than 77 days after the date of enrollment/randomization.
CR, PR and PD must have been confirmed at 2 consecutive assessment ≥ 4 weeks apart.
Assessments occurring after the start of the first subsequent anticancer therapy or removal of a lesion were not included."|Tumor response was assessed every 12 weeks until disease progression; median follow-up time was 57.7 weeks and 68.1 weeks in each treatment group respectively.|All participants randomized in phase 2||participants|||Number
841925|NCT01740297|Secondary|Phase 1b: Objective Response Rate|"Objective response rate is defined as the percentage of participants with a best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the modified immune-related response criteria (irRC) assessed by the investigator. Tumors were examined clinically and by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
CR: Complete disappearance of all lesions and no new lesions; Any pathological lymph nodes reduced in short axis to <10 mm.
PR: Decrease in tumor burden ≥ 50% relative to baseline. Response must have been confirmed by a repeat, consecutive assessment ≥ 4 weeks from the date first documented. Participants who did not have any follow-up tumor assessments were regarded as non-responders."|Tumor response was assesed every 12 weeks until disease progression; median follow-up time was 148.4 weeks.|All phase 1b participants who received ≥ 1 dose of investigational product (talimogene laherparepvec or ipilimumab).||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841926|NCT01740297|Primary|Phase 2: Objective Response Rate|"Objective response rate is defined as the percentage of participants with a best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the modified immune-related response criteria (irRC) assessed by the investigator. Tumors were examined clinically and by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
CR: Complete disappearance of all lesions and no new lesions; Any pathological lymph nodes reduced in short axis to <10 mm.
PR: Decrease in tumor burden ≥ 50% relative to baseline. Response must have been confirmed by a repeat, consecutive assessment ≥ 4 weeks from the date first documented. Participants who did not have any follow-up tumor assessments were regarded as non-responders."|Tumor response was assessed every 12 weeks until disease progression; median follow-up time was 57.7 weeks and 68.1 weeks in each treatment group respectively.|All participants randomized in phase 2||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841927|NCT01740297|Primary|Phase 1b: Number of Participants With Dose-limiting Toxicities|"A DLT was defined as any toxicity related to study drug which met any of the following criteria based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0:
treatment-related non-laboratory adverse events (AE) ≥ grade 4
≥ grade 4 immune-mediated dermatitis
≥ grade 4 immune-mediated endocrinopathy (except autoimmune thyroiditis)
≥ grade 3 immune-mediated enterocolitis
≥ grade 3 immune-mediated hepatitis (except grade 3 that resolved to grade 1 or baseline within 28 days of onset)
≥ grade 3 immune-mediated neuropathy
≥ grade 3 other immune-mediated AEs including hemolytic anemia, angiopathy, myocarditis, pericarditis, temporal arteritis, or vasculitis, autoimmune thyroiditis (except grade 3 that resolved to grade 1 or baseline within 28 days of onset), blepharitis, conjunctivitis, episcleritis, iritis, scleritis, or uveitis, pancreatitis, meningitis, arthritis or polymyalgia rheumatic, nephritis, pneumonitis, psoriasis or leukocytoclastic vasculitis."|The DLT evaluation period was 6 weeks from the initial administration of ipilimumab (week 6 to 12).|All phase 1b participants who received ≥ 1 dose of investigational product (talimogene laherparepvec or ipilimumab).||participants|||Number
841928|NCT01717209|Secondary|Heart Rate|Heart Rate was measured as mean of Heart Rate for the initial 8 hours after admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Normal range for heart rate is generally 60 to 100 beats per minutes in adults, but this can vary.|8 hours (upon arrival at ICU, and after 4 successive 2 hour treatments with 1. iNO only, 2. iNO+iPGI2 (1st), 3. iPGI2 only, and 4. iNO+iPGI2 (2nd))|||beats/minute||Full Range|Mean
841929|NCT01717209|Secondary|Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP)|Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) was measured as mean of MAP for the initial 8 hours after admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Normal range for MAP is 70-110 mmHg.|8 hours (upon arrival at ICU, and after 4 successive 2 hour treatments with 1. iNO only, 2. iNO+iPGI2 (1st), 3. iPGI2 only, and 4. iNO+iPGI2 (2nd))|||mmHg||Full Range|Mean
841930|NCT01717209|Secondary|Central Venous Pressure (CVP)|Central Venous Pressure (CVP) was measured as mean of CVP for the initial 8 hours after admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Normal range for CVP is 3-8 mmHg.|8 hours (upon arrival at ICU, and after 4 successive 2 hour treatments with 1. iNO only, 2. iNO+iPGI2 (1st), 3. iPGI2 only, and 4. iNO+iPGI2 (2nd))|||mmHg||Full Range|Mean
841931|NCT01717209|Secondary|Systemic Vascular Resistance (SVR)|Systemic Vascular Resistance (SVR) was measured as mean of Systemic Vascular Resistance (SVR) for the initial 8 hours after admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Normal range for SVR is 800-1200 dynes/sec/cm5.|8 hours (upon arrival at ICU, and after 4 successive 2 hour treatments with 1. iNO only, 2. iNO+iPGI2 (1st), 3. iPGI2 only, and 4. iNO+iPGI2 (2nd))|||dynes/sec/cm^5||Full Range|Mean
841932|NCT01717209|Secondary|Right Heart Dysfunction|Right Heart Dysfunction was measured as mean of Right Ventricular Stroke Work Index (RVSWI) for the initial 8 hours after admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). RVSWI is measured as the difference in mean pulmonary artery pressure (MPAP) and central venous pressure (CVP), divided by the cardiac index (CI): [(MPAP-CVP) / CI]. Normal range for RVSWI is 5-10 g/m.|8 hours (upon arrival at ICU, and after 4 successive 2 hour treatments with 1. iNO only, 2. iNO+iPGI2 (1st), 3. iPGI2 only, and 4. iNO+iPGI2 (2nd))|||g/m||Full Range|Mean
841933|NCT01717209|Primary|Pulmonary Hypertension|Pulmonary hypertension was measured as mean of Mean Pulmonary Artery Pressure for initial 8 hours after admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). MPAP value ≥25 mmHg (resting) indicates pulmonary hypertension state.|8 hours (upon arrival at ICU, and after 4 successive 2 hour treatments with 1. iNO only, 2. iNO+iPGI2 (1st), 3. iPGI2 only, and 4. iNO+iPGI2 (2nd))|||mmHg||Full Range|Mean
841936|NCT01693653|Secondary|Safety|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this outcome measure.|9 moths||||||
841937|NCT01693653|Secondary|BDCAF|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this outcome measure.|9 months||||||
841938|NCT01693653|Secondary|MDHAQ|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this outcome measure.|9 months||||||
841939|NCT01693653|Secondary|BSAS|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this outcome measure.|9 months||||||
841940|NCT01693653|Secondary|Gential Ulcer Pain|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this outcome measure.|9 months||||||
841941|NCT01693653|Secondary|Oral Ulcer Pain|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this outcome measure.|9 months||||||
841942|NCT01693653|Secondary|Treatment Failures|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this outcome measure.|9 months||||||
841943|NCT01693653|Secondary|Oral Ulcers|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this outcome measure.|9 months||||||
841944|NCT01693653|Secondary|Genital Ulcers|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this outcome measure.|9 months||||||
841945|NCT01693653|Primary|Primary Outcome|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this Outcome Measure.|9 months|The study was terminated. No data were collected for this Outcome Measure.|||||
841946|NCT01688102|Other Pre-specified|Gene Expression Changes in Skin|Interferon response genesets (curated by GSEA)|baseline vs. 2 months|||GSEA Normalized Enrichment Score|||Number
841947|NCT01688102|Other Pre-specified|Gene Expression Changes in Peripheral Blood|Interferon response genesets (curated by GSEA)|baseline vs. 2 months|||GSEA Normalized Enrichment Score|||Number
841948|NCT01688102|Other Pre-specified|Correlation Between Change in LDL Cholesterol and Change in PTH||2 months|||Pearson correlation coefficient|||Number
841949|NCT01688102|Other Pre-specified|Correlation Between Change in LDL Cholesterol and Change in Calcium|The Correlation between change in LDL cholesterol and change in serum calcium|2 months|||Pearson correlation coefficient|||Number
841950|NCT01688102|Secondary|Change in Parathyroid Hormone (PTH)||baseline vs.6 months|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841951|NCT01688102|Secondary|Change in Serum Calcium||baseline vs. 6 months|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841952|NCT01688102|Secondary|Change in 25(OH)D||baseline vs. 6 months|Data only for those who completed 6 months of therapy||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
841953|NCT01688102|Secondary|Change in C Reactive Protein||baseline and 6 months|Data analyzed are only for those who completed 6 months of therapy||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
841954|NCT01688102|Secondary|Change in Triglycerides||baseline 6 months or last observation carried forward (minimum 2 months)|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841955|NCT01688102|Secondary|Change in HDL Cholesterol||baseline and 6 months or last observation carried forward (minimum 2 months)|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841956|NCT01688102|Secondary|Change in Total Cholesterol|Change in Total Cholesterol|baseline and 6 months or last observation carried forward (minimum 2 months)|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
841957|NCT01688102|Primary|Change in LDL Cholesterol Level||baseline and 6 months or last observation carried forward (minimum 2 months)|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
842389|NCT02681510|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Assess adverse event rates in relation to participant ability to continue use of all 3 medications throughout the treatment period|12 weeks|All study participants (N=36)||Participants|||Count of Participants
841983|NCT01682044|Secondary|Percent Change in Serum Levels of Free Radical Levels (MFI) From Baseline|Mean percent change in MFI level from baseline.|Baseline and weeks 1, 3, 5, 7, 15, 23, 31, and 39|All treated and eligible patients||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
841984|NCT01682044|Secondary|Percent Change in Serum Levels of Interferon Alpha (INF) From Baseline|Mean percent change in INF level from baseline.|Baseline and weeks 1, 3, 5, 7, 15, 23, 31, and 39|All treated and eligible patients||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
841985|NCT01682044|Secondary|Percent Change in Serum Levels of Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) From Baseline|Mean percent change in TNF level from baseline at each visit.|Baseline and weeks 1, 3, 5, 7, 15, 23, 31, and 39|All treated and eligible patients||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
841986|NCT01682044|Secondary|Percent Change in CD20 Antigen Expression and Density of Expression|Percent change in CD20 antigen expression and density of expression|At 4 years|Samples tissues were not large enough to perform analysis. No participants were analyze.|||||
841987|NCT01682044|Secondary|Percent Change in Functional and Phenotypic Characteristics of Host Neutrophils From Baseline|Mean percent change in CD11b level from baseline at each visit|Baseline and weeks 1, 3, 5, 7, 15, 23, 31, and 39|All treated and eligible patients||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
841988|NCT01682044|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|Overall Response is defined as Complete Response: During observation, no disease is apparent, including measurable and non-measurable disease, and no evidence of disease is observed for at least 28 days, as confirmed by a second assessment following the original observation of no disease; and Partial Response: A 50% or greater decrease from baseline in the sum of the products of the longest perpendicular diameters of all the measured lesions is noted for at least 28 days as confirmed by a second assessment following the observation of the 50% or greater decrease, and no appearance of new lesions is noted.|Up to 43 weeks|All treated and eligible patients||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
841989|NCT01682044|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Frequency of Adverse Events, Graded According to NCI CTCAE v3.0. Grade 1: Mild AE; Grade 2: Moderate AE; Grade 3: Severe AE; Grade 4: Life-threatening or disabling AE; Grade 5: Death related to AE|Up to 90 days after the last dose of study drugs|All treated and eligible patients||Participants|||Count of Participants
842004|NCT01646177|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Anti-Ixekizumab Antibodies|The percentage of participants with treatment-emergent positive anti-ixekizumab antibodies at any time post-baseline were summarized by treatment group. Percentage of participants with treatment-emergent positive anti-ixekizumab antibodies were calculated as: number of participants with an evaluable baseline sample and ≥1 evaluable post-baseline sample/number of participants in the analysis population * 100.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and had evaluable data.||Participants|||Number
842005|NCT01646177|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Palmoplantar PASI of 100% (PPASI 100) Improvement|Palmoplantar PASI is a composite score derived from the sum scores for erythema, induration, and desquamation multiplied by a score for the extent of palm and sole area involvement, ranging from 0 to 72. Participants achieving PPASI 100 were defined as having an improvement of 100% in the PPASI scores compared to baseline.|Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, or did not follow the protocol, and had a diagnosis of palmoplantar psoriasis at baseline. Participants who did not meet clinical response criteria or have missing data at Week 12 will be considered non-responders for the NRI analysis.||Participants|||Number
842006|NCT01646177|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Palmoplantar PASI of ≥75% (PPASI 75) Improvement|Palmoplantar PASI is a composite score derived from the sum scores for erythema, induration, and desquamation multiplied by a score for the extent of palm and sole area involvement, ranging from 0 to 72. Participants achieving PPASI 75 were defined as having an improvement of at least 75% in the PPASI scores compared to baseline.|Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, or did not follow the protocol, and had a diagnosis of palmoplantar psoriasis at baseline. Participants who did not meet clinical response criteria or have missing data at Week 12 will be considered non-responders for the NRI analysis.||Participants|||Number
842007|NCT01646177|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Palmoplantar PASI of ≥50% (PPASI 50) Improvement|Palmoplantar PASI is a composite score derived from the sum scores for erythema, induration, and desquamation multiplied by a score for the extent of palm and sole area involvement, ranging from 0 to 72. Participants achieving PPASI 50 were defined as having an improvement of at least 50% in the PPASI scores compared to baseline.|Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, or did not follow the protocol, and had a diagnosis of palmoplantar psoriasis at baseline. Participants who did not meet clinical response criteria or have missing data at Week 12 will be considered non-responders for the NRI analysis.||Participants|||Number
842008|NCT01646177|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Severity|"The Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Severity is a single-item participant-reported outcome measure on which participants are asked to rate the severity of their psoriasis today from 0 (Clear) = no psoriasis, to 5 (Severe) = the worst their psoriasis has ever been. LS Means in Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Severity score were calculated using MMRM with baseline score as covariate, treatment, pooled center, visit and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects."|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol, and had at least one post-dose measurement of Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Severity.||Units on a Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842009|NCT01646177|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) Health Survey, Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) Scores|The SF-36 is a participant-reported outcome measure evaluating participant's health status. It comprises 36 items covering 8 domains: physical functioning, role physical, role emotional, bodily pain, vitality, social functioning, mental health, and general health. Items are answered on Likert scales of varying lengths. The 8 domains are regrouped into the PCS and MCS scores. The summary scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better levels of function and/or better health. In this study, the SF-36 acute version was used, which has a 1 week recall period. LS Means in SF-36 score were calculated using the ANCOVA model with treatment, pooled center and baseline SF-36 score.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol, and had at least one post-dose measurement of SF-36. Participants with missing SF-36 data were imputed by Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.||Units on a Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842010|NCT01646177|Secondary|Change From Baseline in All Scores of the Work Productivity Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Psoriasis (WPAI-PSO)|The WPAI-PSO is a 6-item instrument used to assess the impact of psoriasis on productivity impairment within the past 7 days. It has four domains: absenteeism, presenteeism (reduced productivity while at work), an overall work impairment score, and impairment in daily activities performed outside of work. Four scores are derived as percentages: absenteeism, presenteeism, overall work impairment (absenteeism and presenteeism), and impairment in activities performed outside of work. Percentage is calculated as: each score * 100 and ranged from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate greater impairment in productivity. LS Means in each WPAI-PSO score were calculated using the ANCOVA model with treatment, pooled center and baseline WPAI-PSO score.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol, and had at least one post-dose measurement of WPAI-PSO. Participants with missing WPAI-PSO data were imputed by Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.||Units on a Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842011|NCT01646177|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report 16 Items (QIDS-SR16) Total Score [Quality of Life and Outcome Assessments. Measures: Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO)]|The QIDS-SR16 is a self-administered, 16-item instrument in which a participant is asked to consider each statement as it relates to the way they have felt for the past 7 days. There is a 4-point scale for each item ranging from 0 (best) to 3 (worst). The 16 items are scored to give 9 individual depression domains (sad mood, concentration, self-criticism, suicidal ideation, interest, energy/fatigue, sleep disturbance [initial, middle and late insomnia or hypersomnia], decrease/increase in appetite/weight, and psychomotor agitation/retardation), which are summed to give a single score ranging from 0 to 27, with higher scores denoting greater symptom severity. LS Means in total QIDS-SR16 score were calculated using the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, pooled center and baseline QIDS total score.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol, and had at least one post-dose measurement of QIDS-SR16. Participants with missing QIDS-SR16 data were imputed by Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.||Units on a Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842012|NCT01646177|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Scalp Severity Index (PSSI) Score|PSSI is a composite score ranging from 0 (best) to 72 (worst), derived from the sum scores for erythema, induration, and desquamation multiplied by a score for the extent of scalp area involved. LS Means in PSSI score were calculated using MMRM with baseline score as covariate, treatment, pooled center, visit and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol, who had scalp psoriasis at baseline and had at least one post-dose measurement of PSSI.||Units on a Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842013|NCT01646177|Secondary|Percent of Body Surface Area (BSA) Involvement of Psoriasis|Percentage involvement of psoriasis on each participants body surface area was assessed by the investigator on a continuous scale from 0% (no involvement) to 100% (full involvement), in which 1% corresponds to the size of the participant's hand (including palm, fingers and thumb). LS Means in BSA were calculated using MMRM with baseline BSA as covariate, treatment, pooled center, visit and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects.|Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol, and had at least one post-dose measurement of BSA.||Percent||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842014|NCT01646177|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score|The NAPSI is a numeric, reproducible, objective tool used to evaluate the severity of fingernail bed psoriasis and fingernail matrix psoriasis by area of involvement in the fingernail unit. The fingernail is divided with imaginary horizontal and longitudinal lines into quadrants. Each fingernail is given a score for fingernail bed psoriasis: 0 (none) to 4 (psoriasis in 4 quadrants of the nail) and fingernail matrix psoriasis (0 to 4) depending on the presence (score of 1) or absence (score of 0) of any of the features of fingernail bed and fingernail matrix psoriasis in each quadrant. The NAPSI score of a fingernail is the sum of scores in fingernail bed and fingernail matrix from each quadrant (maximum of 8). Each fingernail is evaluated, and the sum of all the fingernails is the total NAPSI score (range, 0 to 80). LS Means in NAPSI score were calculated using MMRM with baseline score as covariate, treatment, pooled center, visit and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol, who had fingernail involvement at baseline and had at least one post-dose measurement of NAPSI.||Units on a Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842015|NCT01646177|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Total Score|The DLQI is a simple, participant-administered, 10 question, validated, quality-of-life questionnaire that covers 6 domains: symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure, work and school, personal relationships, and treatment. Response categories include “not at all,” “a lot,” and “very much,” with corresponding scores of 1, 2, and 3, respectively, and unanswered (“not relevant”) responses scored as “0.” Totals range from 0 to 30 (less to more impairment), and a 5 point change from baseline is considered clinically relevant. Least Square (LS) Means in total DLQI score were calculated using Mixed Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) with baseline score as covariate, treatment, pooled center, visit and treatment-by-visit interaction as fixed effects.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol, and had at least one post-dose measurement of DLQI.||Units on a Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842016|NCT01646177|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving an Itch Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) ≥4 Point Reduction [Quality of Life and Outcome Assessments. Measures: Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO)]|The Itch NRS is a participant-administered single-item 11-point horizontal scale anchored at 0 and 10, with 0 representing “no itch” and 10 representing “worst itch imaginable.” Participants indicate their overall severity of itching from Psoriasis by circling the number that best describes the worst level of itching in the past 24 hours.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or did not follow the protocol, and had an Itch NRS score >=4 at baseline. Participants who did not meet clinical response criteria or have missing data at Week 12 will be considered non-responders for the NRI analysis.||Participants|||Number
842017|NCT01646177|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving 100% (PASI 100) Improvement (Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With Moderate to Severe Chronic Plaque Psoriasis. Measure: PASI)|The PASI combines assessments of the extent of body-surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs) and the severity of desquamation (scaling), erythema, and plaque induration/infiltration (thickness) in each region, yielding an overall score of 0 for no psoriasis to 72 for the most severe disease. Participants achieving PASI 100 were defined as having an improvement of at least 100% in the PASI scores compared to baseline.|Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol. Participants who did not meet clinical response criteria or have missing data at Week 12 will be considered non-responders for the Non-Responder Imputation (NRI) analysis.||Participants|||Number
842018|NCT01646177|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving ≥90% (PASI 90) Improvement (Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With Moderate to Severe Chronic Plaque Psoriasis. Measure: PASI)|The PASI combines assessments of the extent of body-surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs) and the severity of desquamation (scaling), erythema, and plaque induration/infiltration (thickness) in each region, yielding an overall score of 0 for no psoriasis to 72 for the most severe disease. Participants achieving PASI 90 were defined as having an improvement of at least 90% in the PASI scores compared to baseline.|Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol. Participants who did not meet clinical response criteria or have missing data at Week 12 will be considered non-responders for the Non-Responder Imputation (NRI) analysis.||Participants|||Number
842019|NCT01646177|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving an sPGA (0) (Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With Moderate to Severe Chronic Plaque Psoriasis. Measure: sPGA)|The sPGA is a physician’s determination of the participant’s psoriasis lesions overall at a given time point categorized by descriptions for induration, erythema, and scaling. For the analysis of responses, the participant’s psoriasis is assessed as clear (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), severe (4), or very severe (5). An sPGA (0) response was defined as a post-baseline sPGA score of 0.|Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol. Participants who did not meet clinical response criteria or have missing data at Week 12 will be considered non-responders for the Non-Responder Imputation (NRI) analysis.||Participants|||Number
842020|NCT01646177|Primary|Number of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index ≥75% (PASI 75) Improvement (Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With Moderate to Severe Chronic Plaque Psoriasis. Measure: PASI)|The PASI combines assessments of the extent of body-surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs) and the severity of desquamation (scaling), erythema, and plaque induration/infiltration (thickness) in each region, yielding an overall score of 0 for no psoriasis to 72 for the most severe disease. Participants achieving PASI 75 was defined as having an improvement of at least 75% in the PASI scores compared to baseline.|Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol. Participants who did not meet clinical response criteria or have missing data at Week 12 will be considered non-responders for the Non-Responder Imputation (NRI) analysis.||Participants|||Number
842021|NCT01646177|Primary|Number of Participants Achieving a Static Physician Global Assessment (sPGA) of (0, 1) (Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With Moderate to Severe Chronic Plaque Psoriasis. Measure: sPGA)|The sPGA is a physician’s determination of the participant’s psoriasis lesions overall at a given time point categorized by descriptions for induration, erythema, and scaling. For the analysis of responses, the participant’s psoriasis is assessed as clear (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), severe (4), or very severe (5). An sPGA (0,1) response was defined as a post-baseline sPGA score of 0 or 1.|Week 12|All randomized participants, even if the participant did not take the assigned treatment, did not receive the correct treatment, or otherwise did not follow the protocol. Participants who did not meet clinical response criteria or have missing data at Week 12 will be considered non-responders for the Non-Responder Imputation (NRI) analysis.||Participants|||Number
842238|NCT00878709|Primary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Invasive Disease-free Survival (iDFS) at Year 2 by Treatment Arms||From randomization until time of event up to 2 years|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they received any study treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842057|NCT01576055|Secondary|Number of Participants With Device Success|Successful delivery of stent to the intended site and successful stent deployment.|Immediately following initial device implant (usually within a few minutes to an hour).|Per Protocol Population||participants|||Number
842058|NCT01576055|Secondary|Number of Participants With Procedural Success|Successful device implantation with a residual stenosis <30% without acute (within 48 hours) serious adverse events.|Within 48 hours of initial device implant|Per Protocol Population||participants|||Number
842059|NCT01576055|Primary|Primary Efficacy Endpoint - Number of Participants With Primary Patency at 12 Months|Primary patency is defined by a Peak Systolic Velocity Ratio (PSVR) ≤2.5 without target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12 months after implantation.|12 Months|Per Protocol Population (Participants Available for 12-Month Follow-Up)||participants|||Number
842060|NCT01576055|Primary|Primary Safety Endpoint - Number of Participants Free From Major Adverse Events at 30 Days|Defined as any adverse event (occurring within 30 days of the initial procedure) that causes death, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and amputation above the metatarsals in the treated leg (index limb amputation).|30 Days|Per Protocol Population (Participants Available for 30-Day Follow-Up)||participants|||Number
842068|NCT01465997|Primary|Number of Subjects With at Least One Treatment-emergent Serious Adverse Event (SAE) During the Treatment Phase (Maximum of 3.5 Years)|A Serious Adverse Event is any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in death, is life threatening, requires in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.|Up to 3.5 Years (Duration of the Treatment Phase)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
842069|NCT01465997|Primary|Number of Subjects Who Withdrew From the Study Due to a Treatment-emergent Adverse Event (AE) During the Treatment Phase (Maximum 3.5 Years)|Treatment-emergent AEs were defined as those events which started on or after the date of first dose of SP0994 study medication, or events in which severity worsened on or after the date of first dose of SP0994 study medication. AEs which occurred within 30 days after last dose of study medication were considered treatment emergent.|Up to 3.5 Years (Duration of the Treatment Phase)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
842070|NCT01465997|Primary|Number of Subjects With at Least One Treatment-emergent Adverse Event (AE) During the Treatment Phase (Maximum of 3.5 Years)|Treatment-emergent AEs were defined as those events which started on or after the date of first dose of SP0994 study medication, or events in which severity worsened on or after the date of first dose of SP0994 study medication. AEs which occurred within 30 days after last dose of study medication were considered treatment emergent.|Up to 3.5 Years (Duration of the Treatment Phase)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
842071|NCT01463527|Secondary|Frequency of Hypoxia Defined as Pulse Oximetry Less Than 95%.||Every 30 seconds during sedation; this is on average 30 minutes (range 10-240 minutes)||||||
842072|NCT01463527|Primary|Frequency of Staff Interventions for Hypoventilation.|These include verbal or physical stimulation, administration of supplemental oxygen, bag-valve mask ventilation, or use invasive airway devices.|Every 30 seconds during sedation; this is on average 30 minutes (range 10-240 minutes)|||Events per patient minute of sedation||Full Range|Mean
842073|NCT01439165|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting a Solicited Injection Site or Systemic Reactions|Injection site reactions: Pain, Erythema, and Swelling. Systemic reactions: Fever (Temperature), Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia. Grade 3 Injection site reactions: Pain, Significant, prevents daily activity. Erythema and Swelling, >100 mm. Grade 3 Systemic reactions: Fever, ≥39°C or ≥102.1 F; Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia, Significant; prevents daily activity.|Day 0 up to Day 7 post-vaccination|Solicited injection site and systemic reactions were assessed in the Safety Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842074|NCT01439165|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Pertussis Antigen Booster Response|"Anti-Pertussis antibodies (Pertussis toxoid, Filamentous Hemagglutinin [FHA], Pertactin, Fimbriae (types 2 and 3) were assessed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Booster response is defined as a minimum rise in antibody concentration from pre- to post-vaccination. The minimum rise is at least 2 times if the pre-vaccination concentration is above the cutoff value, or at least 4 times if it is at or below the cutoff value.
Anti-pertussis toxoid booster response rates further to Adacel vaccination was compared to an expected booster rates based on study Td506 (PMID 15933223) since Td Adsorbed Vaccine does not contain any pertussis antigens."|1 month post-booster vaccination|Booster response rate was assessed in the Per protocol analysis set||Percentage of subjects|||Number
842075|NCT01439165|Primary|Geometric Mean Concentrations (GMC) of Anti Pertussis Antibodies|Anti-Pertussis antibodies (Pertussis toxoid, Filamentous Hemagglutinin (FHA), Pertactin, Fimbriae types 2 and 3) were assessed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Anti-pertussis GMCs further to Adacel vaccination was compared to an historical control group with Daptacel (NCT00255047 for pertussis toxoid and PMID 8538705 for FHA, Pertactin and Fimbriae) since Td Adsorbed Vaccine does not contain any pertussis antigens.|1 month post-booster vaccination|Geometric mean concentrations were assessed in the Per Protocol Analysis Set.||Concentrations (1/dil)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
842115|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 1: Tmax- Time to Reach the Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Ixazomib|Tmax: Time to reach the first maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), equal to time (hours) to Cmax of ixazomib after administration, obtained directly from the plasma concentration-time curve.|Cycle 1, Days 1 and 11|PK analysis population included all participants, who had sufficient dosing data and ixazomib concentration-time data to permit calculation of PK parameters where Days 1 and 11 assessments were available.||hours||Full Range|Median
842076|NCT01439165|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Diphtheria and Tetanus Booster Response|Anti-Diphtheria antibodies were assessed by a toxin neutralization test. Anti-Tetanus antibodies were assessed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. A booster response was defined as a 4-fold increase in pre- to post-vaccination antibody concentrations for subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentrations ≤2.56 IU/mL for diphtheria and ≤ 2.7 IU/mL for tetanus. If the pre vaccination antibody concentrations were > 2.56 IU/mL for diphtheria and > 2.7 IU/mL for tetanus, then a 2-fold increase in response rate was defined as a booster response.|1 month post-booster vaccination|Booster response rates were assessed in the Per Protocol Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842077|NCT01439165|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Diphtheria and Tetanus Seroprotection|Anti-Diphtheria antibodies were assessed by a toxin neutralization test. Anti-Tetanus antibodies were assessed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Seroprotection was defined as the following: Anti-Diphtheria and Anti-Tetanus ≥ 0.1 IU/mL.|1 month post-booster vaccination|Seroprotection was assessed in the Per Protocol Analysis Set.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842078|NCT01390948|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Adverse Event (AE)|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product.|From the time of randomization of the first participant to the date of clinical cutoff (approximately 52 months)|Safety population included all participants that received study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
842079|NCT01390948|Secondary|Number of Dose Administrations of Study Treatment in the Concurrent Phase|Number of doses were assessed for the concurrent phase, which is the treatment period after the initial treatment phase and including the subsequent treatment break of approximately 4 weeks.|Beginning of the concurrent phase to end of treatment break (10 weeks)|Safety population included all participants that received study drug.||number of dose administrations||Full Range|Median
842080|NCT01390948|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Treatment Delay or Discontinuation||From the time of randomization of the first participant to the date of clinical cutoff (approximately 52 months)|Randomized participant population included all randomized participants regardless of whether they received study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
842081|NCT01390948|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Completed >/= 90% of Planned Radiotherapy and TMZ Administrations||From the time of randomization of the first participant to the date of clinical cutoff (approximately 52 months)|Safety population included all participants that received study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
842082|NCT01390948|Secondary|Neurological Psychological Function as Measured by the Wechsler Scale|The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children version IV (WISC-IV) was used to generate a full scale intelligence quotient (IQ) which represents a child's general intellectual ability. The average IQ score is 100, with lower scores representing lower intellectual ability.|End of treatment (approximately 58 weeks post-baseline)|Randomized participant population included all randomized participants regardless of whether they received study treatment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842083|NCT01390948|Secondary|Health Status as Measured by the Health Utility Index (HUI)|HUI is a preference-based, multi-attitude, health-related instrument specifically developed for use with children. HUI consists of eight attributes of health status: vision, hearing, speech, ambulation, dexterity, emotion, cognition and pain. Each attribute had 5 or 6 levels varying from highly impaired to normal. Each of the eight health dimensions was tested separately and a composite score ranging between 1 (perfect health) and 0 (death) was obtained for participants aged 5 years or older.|Baseline, Cycle 6 of the adjuvant phase, end of treatment (approximately 58 weeks post-baseline), and yearly during the follow-up period (maximum 5 years in follow-up)|Randomized participant population aged 5 years or older with a measure at the specified time point. Here, 'n' represents the number of participants with a measure at the specified time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842084|NCT01390948|Secondary|Concordance Between Structural Versus Multimodal Imaging for CRRC-Assessed Event-Free Survival|Concordance is presented as the percentage of participants with concordance between assessments. EFS concordance was defined as event Structural assessment and Diffusion Perfusion assessment occurs within 28 days or no event Structural and no Diffusion Perfusion.|From the time of randomization of the first participant to the date of clinical cutoff (approximately 52 months)|Randomized participant population included all randomized participants regardless of whether they received study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
842085|NCT01390948|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|ORR was defined as the percentage of participants with a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) determined on two consecutive occasions >/= 4 weeks apart. Tumor assessments were conducted using MRI and reviewed by the site-independent CRRC using RANO criteria. The following were needed to qualify as CR: complete disappearance of all measurable enhancing lesions sustained for at least 4 weeks by MRI, no steroids above physiological levels, clinical status stable or improved compared to baseline. The following were needed to qualify as PR: ≥ 50% decrease from baseline in the sum of products of perpendicular diameters of all measurable enhancing lesions sustained for at least 4 weeks by MRI, steroid dose not increased compared to baseline, clinical status stable or improved compared to baseline.|From the time of randomization of the first participant to the date of clinical cutoff (approximately 52 months)|Randomized participant population with a measurable lesion at baseline.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842086|NCT01390948|Secondary|EFS as Assessed by the Investigator|EFS was defined as the time from diagnosis to the earliest occurrence of any of the following: tumor progression, tumor recurrence, second primary non-HGG malignancy or death attributable to any cause. Tumor assessments were conducted using MRI and reviewed by the investigator using RANO criteria. Tumor progression was defined as clear clinical progression or >/= 25% increase in the sum of the products of perpendicular diameters of the contrast enhancing lesions compared with the smallest tumor measurement obtained either at baseline (if no decrease was observed) or best response and with the participant on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids. Tumor recurrence was defined as recurrence after tumor was completely resected (no disease present at baseline). EFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From the time of randomization to the date of any defined event (up to approximately 52 months)|Randomized participant population included all randomized participants regardless of whether they received study treatment.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842087|NCT01390948|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With EFS as Determined by the CRRC at 1 Year|EFS was defined as the time from diagnosis to the earliest occurrence of any of the following: tumor progression, tumor recurrence, second primary non- HGG malignancy or death attributable to any cause. Tumor assessments were conducted using MRI and reviewed by the site-independent CRRC using RANO criteria. Tumor progression was defined as clear clinical progression or >/= 25% increase in the sum of the products of perpendicular diameters of the contrast enhancing lesions compared with the smallest tumor measurement obtained either at baseline (if no decrease was observed) or best response and with the participant on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids. Tumor recurrence was defined as recurrence after tumor was completely resected (no disease present at baseline). EFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|1 year|Randomized participant population included all randomized participants regardless of whether they received study treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842088|NCT01390948|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With EFS as Determined by the CRRC at 6 Months|EFS was defined as the time from diagnosis to the earliest occurrence of any of the following: tumor progression, tumor recurrence, second primary non- HGG malignancy or death attributable to any cause. Tumor assessments were conducted using MRI and reviewed by the site-independent CRRC using RANO criteria. Tumor progression was defined as clear clinical progression or >/= 25% increase in the sum of the products of perpendicular diameters of the contrast enhancing lesions compared with the smallest tumor measurement obtained either at baseline (if no decrease was observed) or best response and with the participant on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids. Tumor recurrence was defined as recurrence after tumor was completely resected (no disease present at baseline). EFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|6 months|Randomized participant population included all randomized participants regardless of whether they received study treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842089|NCT01390948|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With 1-Year Survival|1-year survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|1 year|Randomized participant population included all randomized participants regardless of whether they received study treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842090|NCT01390948|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall Survival was defined as the time of diagnosis to the date of death due to any cause. Overall Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From the time of randomization to the date of death (up to approximately 52 months)|Randomized participant population included all randomized participants regardless of whether they received study treatment.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842091|NCT01390948|Primary|Event-Free Survival (EFS) as Assessed by the Central Radiology Review Committee (CRRC)|EFS was defined as the time from diagnosis to the earliest occurrence of any of the following: tumor progression, tumor recurrence, second primary non-high-grade glioma (HGG) malignancy or death attributable to any cause. Tumor assessments were conducted using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and reviewed by the site-independent CRRC using Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria. Tumor progression was defined as clear clinical progression or a greater than or equal to (>/=) 25% increase in the sum of the products of perpendicular diameters of the contrast enhancing lesions compared with the smallest tumor measurement obtained either at baseline (if no decrease was observed) or best response and with the participant on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids. Tumor recurrence was defined as recurrence after tumor was completely resected (no disease present at baseline). EFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|From the time of randomization to the date of any defined event (up to approximately 52 months)|Randomized participant population included all randomized participants regardless of whether they received study treatment.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842092|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Overall Survival|Overall survival was measured as the time from the date of first dose of study treatment to the time of death plus 1 day. For participants who did not die, survival was censored at the date of last contact. Overall Survival was analyzed using standard survival analysis techniques based on Kaplan-Meier estimates.|Baseline up to treatment cycle 35|mITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug in Phase 2 or who received at least 1 dose of any study drug and were treated at the phase 2 dose level during Phase 1.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842093|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants Achieving Survival at Year 1||1 year after the first dose of study treatment|mITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug in Phase 2 or who received at least 1 dose of any study drug and were treated at the phase 2 dose level during Phase 1.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842094|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from the date of first dose of study treatment to the date of first documentation of progressive disease or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first plus 1. PD: >=25% increase from lowest value in:serum/urine M-component; difference between involved,uninvolved FLC levels; bone marrow plasma cell percent; new bone lesions/soft tissue plasmacytomas development/existing bone lesions/soft tissue plasmacytomas size rise; hypercalcaemia development. SD: not meeting criteria for CR, VGPR, PR, or PD. Participants who received ASCT or an alternate anticancer therapy were censored at the last response assessment that was SD or better before initiation of therapy. Participants without a response assessment were censored at the date of first dose. PFS was analyzed using standard survival analysis techniques based on Kaplan-Meier estimates.|Baseline until progressive disease (up to treatment cycle 35)|mITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug in Phase 2 or who received at least 1 dose of any study drug and were treated at the phase 2 dose level during Phase 1.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842106|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) and Very Good Partial Response (VGPR) After Cycles 4, 8, and 16|CR as per IMWG criteria is defined as negative immunofixation on the serum and urine and disappearance of soft tissue plasmacytomas and <5% plasma cells in bone marrow. VGPR as per IMWG criteria is defined as serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or 90% or greater reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein level <100 mg per 24 hours. VGPR were applicable only to participants who had measurable disease defined by at least 1 of the following 3 measurements: Serum M-protein; Urine M-protein; Serum FLC assay.|Cycles 4, 8, and 16|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least one 1 dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least one 1 post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842095|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Time to Disease Progression (TTP)|Time to progression was defined as the time from the date of first dose of study treatment to the date of first documentation of PD + 1 day. Participants that did not experience PD will be censored at the last response assessment that is SD or better. PD: >=25% increase from lowest value in:serum/urine M-component; difference between involved, uninvolved FLC levels; bone marrow plasma cell percent; new bone lesions/soft tissue plasmacytomas development/existing bone lesions/soft tissue plasmacytomas size rise; hypercalcaemia development. SD: not meeting criteria for CR, VGPR, PR, or PD. Participants that received Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) or an alternate cancer therapy were also be censored at the last response assessment that is, SD or better prior to initiation of therapy. Participants without response assessment will be censored at the date of first dose. TTP was analyzed using standard survival analysis techniques based on Kaplan-Meier estimates.|Baseline until progressive disease (up to treatment cycle 35)|modified-intent-to-treat (mITT) population included all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug in Phase 2 or who received at least 1 dose of any study drug and were treated at the phase 2 dose level during Phase 1.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842096|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Duration of Response (DOR)|DOR was measured as the time from the date of first documentation of a confirmed response to the date of first documented PD. PD is defined as >=25% increase from lowest value in: serum/urine M-component; difference between involved, uninvolved FLC levels; bone marrow plasma cell percent; development of new bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytomas development or increase in the size of existing bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytomas; hypercalcaemia development.|Baseline until end of study treatment (up to treatment cycle 35)|Included a subset of response-evaluable population who achieved response.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842097|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Time to Response|Time to first response is defined as the time from the date of first dose of study treatment to the date of the first documentation of a confirmed response (PR or better) in a participant who responded + 1 day. PR as per IMWG criteria is 50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction in 24-h urinary M-protein by 90% or to <200 mg per 24 hours.|Baseline until end of study treatment (up to treatment cycle 35)|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least 1 post-baseline response assessment.||months||Full Range|Median
842098|NCT01383928|Primary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Resulting in Study Drug Discontinuation|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (example, a clinically significant abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a drug, whether or not it is considered related to the drug. A TEAE is defined as an adverse event with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug.|Baseline up to 30 days after last dose of study drug|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
842099|NCT01383928|Primary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants Experiencing Serious Adverse Events|A SAE is an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; or congenital anomaly; or a medically important event.|Baseline up to 30 days after last dose of study drug|Safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
842100|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Minimal Response (MR)|MR as per IMWG criteria is 25%-49% reduction in serum paraprotein and 50%-89% reduction in urine light chain excretion for 6 weeks.|Baseline until end of study treatment (up to treatment cycle 35)|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least 1 post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842101|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Partial Response (PR)|PR as per IMWG criteria is 50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction in 24-hr urinary M-protein by 90% or to <200 mg per 24 hours.|Baseline until end of study treatment (up to treatment cycle 35)|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least 1 post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842102|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Near Complete Response (nCR)|nCR as per IMWG criteria is positive immunofixation analysis of serum or urine as the only evidence of disease; appearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and <=5% plasma cells in bone marrow.|Baseline until end of study treatment (up to treatment cycle 35)|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least 1 post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842103|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Very Good Partial Response (VGPR)|VGPR as per IMWG criteria is serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or >=90% reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein level <100 mg per 24 hours.|Baseline until end of study treatment (up to treatment cycle 35)|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least 1 post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842104|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Stringent Complete Response (sCR)|sCR as per IMWG criteria is CR plus normal FLC ratio and absence of clonal cells in bone marrow. CR is negative immunofixation on serum and urine and disappearance of soft tissue plasmacytomas and <5% plasma cells in bone marrow.|Baseline until end of study treatment (up to treatment cycle 35)|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least one 1 dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least one 1 post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842105|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Pecentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR)|CR as per IMWG criteria is negative immunofixation on serum and urine and disappearance of soft tissue plasmacytomas and <5% plasma cells in bone marrow.|Baseline until end of study treatment (up to treatment cycle 35)|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least 1 post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842107|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Objective Response|Objective response is defined as CR, VGPR or PR based on IMWG Response Criteria for malignant lymphoma. CR: disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present before therapy. VGPR: serum, urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or >=90% reduction in serum M-protein+urine M-protein level <100 mg/24h. Partial response (PR) is a minimum of 50% decrease in sum of the product of the diameters of up to 6 of the largest dominant nodes or nodal masses and no increase in the size of other nodes.|Baseline until end of study treatment (up to Cycle 35)|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least 1 post-baseline disease assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842108|NCT01383928|Primary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Grade 3 or Higher Adverse Events|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (example, a clinically significant abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a drug, whether or not it is considered related to the drug. As per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 (CTCAE), Grade 3 = AE with severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self-care activities of daily living. Grade 4 = AE with life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated and Grade 5 = Death related to AE.|Baseline up to 30 days after last dose of study drug|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
842109|NCT01383928|Primary|Phase 2: Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) + Very Good Partial Response (VGPR)|CR as per International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) uniform criteria is defined as negative immunofixation on the serum and urine and disappearance of soft tissue plasmacytomas and <5% plasma cells in bone marrow. VGPR as per IMWG criteria is defined as serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or 90% or greater reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein level <100 mg per 24 hours. VGPR was applicable only to participants who had measurable disease defined by at least 1 of the following 3 measurements: Serum M-protein greater than or equal to (>=)1 g/dL; Urine M-protein >=200 mg/24 hours; Serum FLC assay level >=10 mg/dL, provided serum FLC ratio was abnormal.|Baseline up to treatment cycle 35|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least 1 post-baseline response assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842110|NCT01383928|Primary|Phase 1: Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Change From Baseline in Vital Signs|Vital signs included body temperature, blood pressure and heart rate.|Baseline and Day 1 of each treatment cycle up to 35 treatment cycles|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
842111|NCT01383928|Primary|Phase 1: Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) Related to Neurotoxicity|TEAE related to neurotoxicity grading based on common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTACE) version 4.03 are reported. Grade 1= mild; Grade 2= moderate; within normal limits, Grade 3= severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; Grade 4= life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated; Grade 5= death.|Baseline up to 30 days after last dose of study drug|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug and reported baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value.||participants|||Number
842112|NCT01383928|Primary|Phase 1: Number of Participants With Change From Baseline Value in Clinical Laboratory Test Results to Worst Value|Number of participants with any markedly abnormal standard safety laboratory values collected throughout study. Hematology (white blood cell [WBC] count, lymphocytes, neutrophils, platelets, hemoglobin), clinical chemistry and urinalysis were performed. Number of participants with baseline laboratory values as per National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria (NCI CTC) grade (Grade 0= within normal limits, Grade 1=Mild, Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3= Severe, Grade 4= Life-threatening) and corresponding changes to the worst CTC grade were presented. Baseline value defined as value collected at time closest to, but prior to, first dose of study drug on Cycle 1 Day 1. Worst post-baseline value defined as worst value between first dose of any study drug and End of Study (EOS) visit. Shift to low refers to lower than Baseline value; shift to high refers to higher than baseline value for corrected calcium, glucose, magnesium, potassium and sodium irrespective of change in the CTC grade.|Baseline and Cycle 1 up to Cycle 35|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug and reported baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value.||participants|||Number
842113|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 1: Percentage of Participants With Best Overall Response|Best response observed during study.CR:no immunofixation on serum,urine;soft tissue plasmacytomas disappearance;<5% plasma cells in bone marrow.Stringent CR(sCR):CR as defined,normal free light chain ratio,absence of clonal cells in bone marrow.Partial response(PR):>=50% reduction of serum M-protein,urinary M-protein by >=90%/to <200 mg/24 hr reduction.Near CR(nCR):positive immunofixation of serum/urine;soft tissue plasmacytomas disappearance;<=5% plasma cells in bone marrow.VGPR:serum,urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis/>=90% reduction in serum M-protein+urine M-protein level <100 mg/24hr.Stable disease (SD):failure to attain CR,VGPR,PR/progressive disease (PD).PD:>=25% increase from lowest value in:serum/urine M-component;difference between involved,uninvolved FLC levels;bone marrow plasma cell percent;new bone lesions/soft tissue plasmacytomas development/existing bone lesions/soft tissue plasmacytomas size rise;hypercalcaemia development.|Baseline until end of study treatment (up to Cycle 35)|Response-evaluable population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of ixazomib, had measurable disease at baseline, and at least 1 post-baseline disease assessment. Results were summarized together for all Phase 1 participants, as per planned analysis. Participants may be represented in more than 1 category.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842114|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 1: Rac: Accumulation Ratio of Ixazomib|The accumulation ratio (Rac) was estimated as the ratio of AUC (0-72) on Day 11 to the AUC (0-72) on Day 1. AUC (0-72) is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to 72 hours post-dose for ixazomib.|Cycle 1, Days 1 and 11|PK analysis population included all participants, who had sufficient dosing data and ixazomib concentration-time data to permit calculation of PK parameters where Days 1 and 11 assessments were available.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
842116|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 1: AUC(0-72): Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to 72 Hours Postdose for Ixazomib|AUC(0-72) is a measure of the area under the plasma concentration time-curve from time zero to 72 hours post-dose for ixazomib.|Cycle 1, Days 1 and 11|PK analysis population included all participants, who had sufficient dosing data and ixazomib concentration-time data to permit calculation of PK parameters where Days 1 and 11 assessments were available.||hour*nanogram per milliliter (hr*ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
842117|NCT01383928|Secondary|Phase 1: Cmax: Maximum Plasma Concentration for Ixazomib|Maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) is the peak plasma concentration of ixazomib, obtained directly from the plasma concentration-time curve.|Cycle 1, Days 1 and 11|Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis population included all participants who had sufficient dosing data and ixazomib concentration-time data to permit calculation of PK parameters where Days 1 and 11 assessments were available.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
842118|NCT01383928|Primary|Phase 1: Percentage of Participants Experiencing 1 or More Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (example, a clinically significant abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a drug, whether or not it is considered related to the drug. A SAE is an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; or congenital anomaly; or a medically important event. A TEAE is defined as an adverse event with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug.|Baseline up to 30 days after last dose of study drug|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||percentage of participants|||Number
842119|NCT01383928|Primary|Phase 1: Recommended Phase 2 Dose (RP2D)|The RP2D of ixazomib was determined after the evaluation of the available data from the phase 1 portion of the trial which included, but was not limited to analyses of efficacy results, toxicity characterization, all grades peripheral neuropathy, and treatment discontinuation.|Cycle 1 up to Cycle 35|Safety population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any study drug.||mg|||Number
842120|NCT01383928|Primary|Phase 1: Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)|MTD was highest dose of ixazomib given with combination drugs, at which <=1 of 6 participants experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) during Cycle 1 of Phase 1. DLT defined as any of following considered possibly related to therapy: Grade 4 neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] <500 cell per cubic millimeter [cells/mm^3]) for >7 days; Grade 3 neutropenia with fever or infection; Grade 4 thrombocytopenia for >7 days; Grade 3 thrombocytopenia with clinically significant bleeding; platelet count <10,000/mm^3; Grade 2 peripheral neuropathy with pain or >=Grade 3 peripheral neuropathy; >=Grade 3 nausea/emesis, diarrhea controlled by supportive therapy; any >=Grade 3 nonhematologic toxicity except Grade 3 arthralgia/myalgia; or <1 week Grade 3 fatigue; delay in initiation of the subsequent therapy cycle by >14 days; <=80% lenalidomide doses administered due to other >=Grade 2 combination study drug-related nonhematologic toxicities requiring therapy discontinuation.|Cycle 1|DLT-evaluable population included all participants who received all Cycle 1 doses of MLN9708 and completed Cycle 1 procedures, or experienced a DLT in Cycle 1 in Phase 1.||mg|||Number
842169|NCT01252095|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) Based on DLT|The primary objective of this study is the determination of the MTD. Due to the premature termination of the study the MTD could not be determined. The outcome measure presented is the number of DLTs per cohort.|Following first 1 month cycle|Patients had to complete cycle 1 per protocol.||DLTs|||Number
842170|NCT01244477|Secondary|PTSD Checklist (PCL)|An instrument measuring a participants self-reported level of PTSD symptoms. PCL scores are the sum of 17 questions. Each is question is scored from 1 (best possible outcome) to 5 (worst possible outcome). The lowest possible PCL score is a 17, indicating no troublesome PTSD symptoms reported. The highest possible PCL score is a 85, indicating the worst degree of PTSD symptoms reported.|Administered each week at weekly group sessions or pre-post treatment as usual|Veterans under 50 years of age diagnosed with PTSD||PCL Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
842171|NCT01244477|Secondary|Behavioral Expression of Trust on the Trust Game|The Investment Ratio (IR) is the amount subjects were willing to invest in a social partner. It is considered a measure of interpersonal trust, and co-operation. It is a ratio ranging from 0 (indicating no willingness to trust a social partner) to 1.0 (willing to totally trust a social partner). It consists of the percentage of total points the subject was willing to invest in a social partner divided by the total points they received for all ten rounds of the trust game. Higher ratio's indicate more trust.|Pre & post a 12 week treatment group|Veterans with PTSD under 50 years of age||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
842210|NCT00953225|Secondary|Number of Positive Biopsy Cores (Out of Twelve) Compared to the Corresponding Values Assessed Before Enrollment|Change in the number of positive cores per subject from the pre-study prostate biopsy to the repeat prostate biopsy following study participation.|1 year|Each subject had 12 cores measured at each of the pre and post prostate biopsies. The variable summarized is the number of positive cores per subject.||cores per subject||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
842172|NCT01244477|Primary|The Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS)|The CAPS is considered the gold standard measure of PTSD symptoms. CAPS scores are the sum of 17 questions. Each is question is scored from 0 (best possible outcome) to 8 (worst possible outcome). The lowest possible CAPS score is a 0, indicating no PTSD symptoms reported. The highest possible CAPS score is a 136, indicating the most PTSD symptoms reported.|Pre & post a 12 week treatment group|We limited this arm to 18 subjects who completed 9+ out of 12 treatment sessions.||CAPS Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
842173|NCT01244477|Primary|Continuous Whole Brain Imaging With Standard Imaging Parameters for Each Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) Scan||Pre & post a 12 week treatment group||||||
842174|NCT01225887|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|the period of progression free survival for patients with persistent or recurrent endometrial cancer treated with study drug.|The duration of time from study entry to time of progression or death, whichever occurs first, assessed up to 5 years|The time in months that a patient survived progression-free.||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
842175|NCT01225887|Secondary|Overall Survival|The observed length of life from entry into the study to death or the date of last contact.|From study entry to death or last contact, up to 5 years|Eligible and treated patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842176|NCT01225887|Primary|Progression-free Survival > 6 Months|Whether or not the patient survived progression-free for at least 6 months.|for disease that can be evaluated by physical exam, progression was assessed prior to each cycle. CT scan or MRI if used to follow lesion for measurable disease every other cycle up to 5 years.|Eligible and Treated Patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
842177|NCT01225887|Primary|Objective Tumor Response|Complete and Partial Tumor Response by RECIST 1.1|For disease that can be evaluated by physical exam,response was assessed prior to each cycle CT scan or MRI if used to follow lesion for measurable disease every other cycle up to 5 years.|Eligible and Treated Patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
842178|NCT01225887|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|The incidence of adverse events (grade 3 or higher) as assessed by the National Cancer Institute CTCAE version 4.0|Up to 5 years|Patients on study who experienced adverse events (Grade 3 or higher)||Participants|||Count of Participants
842179|NCT01180049|Secondary|Quantify the Potential Effect of TEMSR on AUC and Cmax|"Potential TEMSR effects were investigated by calculating the ratio of AUCs with and without concomitant TEMSR from the model-estimated effect of TEMSR on apparent clearance (CL/F) values and using individual ratios of observed Cmax values with and without concomitant temsirolimus, for both parent and metabolite. The AUC mean ratio was calculated as 1 / mean shift on apparent clearance from TEMSR, and the 90% CI of the AUC ratios was calculated as 1 / 90% CI of the shift on apparent clearance from TEMSR.
AUC: Area under plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity Cmax: Characterization of maximum observed plasma concentration"|From one week predose (Day -7, -4hr, -8hr, -48hr) upto 2 weeks post dose (4hr, 8hr, 48hr and Day 8)|The analysis was done on ITT Population which included all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug dose from that to which they were randomized.||Ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
842180|NCT01180049|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Bleeding-related AEs|"To assess the safety through percentage of participants with treatment-emergent bleeding-related AEs (Grade 2 or Higher).
TEAE: Treatment start date ≤ adverse event start date or adverse event worsened with respect to grade after treatment started"|From screening (Day -28 to Day -1) until end of treatment (within 30 days of last TEMSR infusion)|Analysis was done on safety population which included any participant who received at least 1 dose of TEMSR was included in the evaluation for safety||Percentage of participants|||Number
842181|NCT01180049|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Infection- Related AEs|To assess the safety through percentages of participants with treatment-emergent infection- related AEs TEAE: Treatment start date ≤ adverse event start date or adverse event worsened with respect to grade after treatment started|From screening (Day -28 to Day -1) until end of treatment (within 30 days of last TEMSR infusion)|Analysis was done on safety population which included any participant who received at least 1 dose of TEMSR was included in the evaluation for safety||Percentage of participants|||Number
842182|NCT01180049|Secondary|Investigator Assessed PFS|"PFS is defined as the time from randomization to first documentation of disease progression by the independent assessor or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first.
PFS = (earliest date of progression or death due to any cause- randomization date+1)/30.4.
PFS assessment was done using EMA guidelines for sensitivity analysis censoring.
Participants who were alive and progression-free at the time of analysis were censored on the date of last assessment; participants without adequate baseline assessment or without post-baseline assessments were censored on the randomization date; participants who died or progressed after 2 or more missed visits were censored on the date of last tumor assessment prior to the missing visit; and participants who started new anti-cancer therapy prior to death or progression were censored on the date of last tumor assessment prior to the start of anti-tumor treatment."|From randomization date to the date of first documentation of progression or death (average follow up done for 15 months)|The analysis was done on ITT population which included all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug dose from that to which they were randomized.||Months||80% Confidence Interval|Median
842183|NCT01180049|Secondary|Investigator’s Assessment ORR (ORR = CR + PR)|"ORR is defined as the percentage of participants with confirmed CR or PR according to the Cheson Criteria relative to all randomized Participants. Tumor responses were determined using information from objective measurements from computed tomography information including B-symptom evaluation, physical examination, ECOG performance status, assessment of liver and spleen, laboratory assessments such as bone marrow biopsies and/or aspirates, biochemical markers of disease activity and hematology results.
Participants who did not have on-study radiographic tumor re-evaluation or who died, progressed or dropped out for any reason prior to reaching a CR or PR were counted as non-responders in the (CT) scans, as well as clinical assessment of ORR."|From randomization date until end of treatment (average follow up done for 15 months)|The analysis was done on ITT population which included all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug dose from that to which they were randomized.||Percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
842184|NCT01180049|Secondary|Independent Assessment - Objective Response Rate (ORR = CR + PR)|"ORR is defined as the percentage of participants with confirmed CR or PR according to the Cheson Criteria relative to all randomized Participants. Tumor responses were determined using information from objective measurements from computed tomography information including B-symptom evaluation, physical examination, ECOG performance status, assessment of liver and spleen, laboratory assessments such as bone marrow biopsies and/or aspirates, biochemical markers of disease activity and hematology results.
Participants who did not have on-study radiographic tumor re-evaluation or who died, progressed or dropped out for any reason prior to reaching a CR or PR were counted as non-responders in the (CT) scans, as well as clinical assessment of ORR."|From randomization date until end of treatment (average follow up done for 15 months)|The analysis was done on ITT population which included all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug dose from that to which they were randomized.||Percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
842185|NCT01180049|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause.|From randomization date until death (average follow up done for 18.6 months)|The analysis was done on ITT population which included all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug dose from that to which they were randomized.||Months||80% Confidence Interval|Median
842186|NCT01180049|Primary|Independently Assessed Progression-free Survival (PFS)|"PFS is defined as the time from randomization to first documentation of disease progression by the independent assessor or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first.
PFS = (earliest date of progression or death due to any cause- randomization date+1)/30.4.
PFS assessment was done using EMA guidelines for sensitivity analysis censoring.
Participants who were alive and progression-free at the time of analysis were censored on the date of last assessment; participants without adequate baseline assessment or without post-baseline assessments were censored on the randomization date; participants who died or progressed after 2 or more missed visits were censored on the date of last tumor assessment prior to the missing visit; and participants who started new anti-cancer therapy prior to death or progression were censored on the date of last tumor assessment prior to the start of anti-tumor treatment."|From randomization date to the date of first documentation of progression or death (average follow up done for 15 months)|The analysis was done on ITT population which included all participants who were randomized, with study drug assignment designated according to initial randomization, regardless of whether participants received study drug or received a different drug dose from that to which they were randomized.||Months||80% Confidence Interval|Median
842211|NCT00953225|Primary|PSA Slope (Trajectory) or the Change in PSA Level Over Time|Change in PSA (ng/mL) from baseline to 1 year visit, which include the baseline through 1 year follow-up.|1 year (visits # 1-8)|Linear regression was applied to each subject's data with Log(PSA +1) as the outcome. Based on the fitted model, the change in PSA from visit #1 (baseline) to visit #8 (1 year) was calculated. This derived change score is summarized by group.||ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
842207|NCT00966446|Secondary|Time to Clearance of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) Colonization|Surveillance cultures negative for two consecutive sampling periods; date of clearance determined as midpoint between date of last positive surveillance culture and first negative surveillance culture.|Within 6 months|Subjects who returned samples for at least the first two consecutive sampling periods were included in analysis, as this was necessary to determine clearance of MRSA colonization||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842208|NCT00966446|Primary|First Two Consecutive Sampling Periods Completed|Subjects who returned samples for at least the first two consecutive sampling periods were included in analysis|Within 2 months|These subjects sent in two consecutive swab samples starting with their first follow-up time point.||participants|||Number
842209|NCT00966446|Primary|Recurrent Infection|Confirmed new MRSA infections|Within 6 months|These study participants who self-reported re-infections of MRSA||participants|||Number
842237|NCT00878709|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival is defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause|From time of randomization to death||07/2019||||
842216|NCT00903409|Secondary|Median Percent Change of Lipid Measurements From LOV111858 End-of-Treatment Week 8 to LOV111818 Months 4, 12, and 24 of the Open-Label Extension Trial|Median percent change from LOV111858 End-of-Treatment (Week 8) to LOV111818 Months 4, 12, and 24 visits of the open-label extension trial|LOV111858 End-of-Treatment (Week 8) to LOV111818 Months 4, 12, and 24 of the open-label extension trial|ITT Population||Percentage change||Full Range|Median
842217|NCT00903409|Secondary|Median Percent Change of Lipid Measurements From LOV111858 End-of-Treatment Week 8 to Months 4, 12, and 24 of the Open-Label Extension Study (LOV111818) in “Switchers” vs. Non-switchers|Median percent change from LOV111858 Baseline to LOV111818 Months 4, 12, and 24 visits of the open-label extension trial|Months 4, 12, and 24 (LOV111818) of the open-label extension trial|ITT Population||Percent change||Full Range|Median
842218|NCT00903409|Primary|Median Percent Change of Non-HDL-C (High Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol) in Switchers vs. Non-Switchers Subjects From LOV111858 End-of-Treatment (Week 8) to Month 4 of Extension Study (LOV111818)|Median percent change from LOV111858 (NCT00903409) End-of-Treatment (double-blind study, Week 8) to the Month 4 visit of LOV111818 (open-label extension trial)|Month 4 (LOV111818)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: Comprised of data for all participants who were enrolled and received at least one dose of study medication||Percent change||Full Range|Median
842219|NCT00892775|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed included medical occurrences that resulted in death, were life threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in disability/ incapacity or is a congenital anomaly/ birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|From first study dose (Day 0) until study end (Week 18)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842220|NCT00892775|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Event (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Any was defined as an adverse event (AE) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study. Also any ‘solicited’ symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms was reported as an unsolicited adverse event. Grade 3 was defined as an event that prevented normal activity and Related was defined as an event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|Within 43 days (Days 86-128) after second vaccination dose|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842221|NCT00892775|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Event (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Any was defined as an adverse event (AE) reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study. Also any ‘solicited’ symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms was reported as an unsolicited adverse event. Grade 3 was defined as an event that prevented normal activity and Related was defined as an event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|Within 43 days (Days 0-42) after first vaccination dose|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842222|NCT00892775|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any (Local or General), Grade 3 and Related Rashes|Rash was defined as: 1) measles/ rubella rashes (macular or maculo-papular rashes): presence of macules, discolored small patches or spots of the skin, neither elevated nor depressed below the skin’s surface; 2) varicella rash (maculo-papulo-vesicular): simultaneous presence of macules, papules and vesicles raised above the skin’s surface; 3) other types of rash (heat rash, diaper rash etc.). Any rash = occurrence of rash regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination Grade 3 rash ≥ 150 lesions and Related = rash assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within 43 days (Days 0-42) after each vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, with the symptom sheet filled-in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842223|NCT00892775|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Fever|Any fever was defined as fever greater than or equal to (≥) 38.0 Celsius degrees (°C) and grade 3 fever greater than (>) 39.5°C after vaccination. Related fever was defined as fever assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within 43 days (Days 0-42) after each vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, with the symptom sheet filled-in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842606|NCT01797458|Primary|Failure Rate of the Three Treatment Arms Judged Clinically|Failure rate of the three treatment arms judged clinically after 2 years such as clear caries progression, secondary caries, loss of restoration, reversible pulpitis treated without requiring pulpotomy|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
842224|NCT00892775|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were meningism and parotid gland swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 meningism and parotid gland swelling = meningism/ parotid gland swelling which prevented normal everyday activities.|Within 43 days (Days 0-42) after each vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects,with the symptom sheet filled-in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842225|NCT00892775|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = cried when limb was moved/ spontaneously painful. Grade 3 redness/ swelling = redness/ swelling spreading beyond 20 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|Within 4 days after each vaccination (Days 0-3)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects, with the symptom sheet filled-in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842226|NCT00892775|Secondary|Antibody Titers Against Measles, Mumps, Rubella and Varicella Viruses|Antibody titers were summarized by geometric mean titers (GMTs) with their 95% confidence intervals.|At 42-56 days after the first and second dose of study vaccine(s).|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all eligible subjects who were seronegative at baseline to at least one vaccine antigen, who had received the comparator vaccine according to their random assignment, who had not received a vaccine not specified/ forbidden in the protocol and for whom pre/ post-vaccination serology results were available.||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
842227|NCT00892775|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroconverted for Measles, Mumps, Rubella and Varicella Antibodies ≥ the Cut-off Value.|Seroconversion was defined as the appearance of antibodies in the serum of subjects seronegative before vaccination. The cut-off values for seroconversion was 150 mIU/mL, 231 U/mL, 4 IU/mL and 1:4 dilution for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella, respectively.|At 42-56 days after the second dose of study vaccine (Week 18)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all eligible subjects who were seronegative at baseline to at least one vaccine antigen, who had received the comparator vaccine according to their random assignment, who had not received a vaccine not specified/ forbidden in the protocol and for whom pre/ post-vaccination serology results were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842228|NCT00892775|Primary|Number of Subjects Seroconverted for Measles, Mumps, Rubella and Varicella Antibodies Greater Than or Equal to (≥) the Cut-off Value.|Seroconversion was defined as the appearance of antibodies in the serum of subjects seronegative before vaccination. The cut-off values for seroconversion was 150 milli international units per milliliter (mIU/mL), 231 units per milliliter (U/mL), 4 international units per milliliter (IU/mL) and 1:4 dilution for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella, respectively.|At 42-56 days after the first dose of study vaccine (Week 6)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all eligible subjects who were seronegative at baseline to at least one vaccine antigen, who had received the comparator vaccine according to their random assignment, who had not received a vaccine not specified/ forbidden in the protocol and for whom pre/ post-vaccination serology results were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842229|NCT00878709|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Central Nervous System Recurrence (CNS) at Year 2|Cumulative incidence of Central Nervous System Recurrence (CNS) is estimated by Gray’s method (Gray,1988).|From randomization until time of event up to 2 years|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they received any study treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842230|NCT00878709|Secondary|Central Nervous System Recurrence in Neratinib Arm Compared to Placebo Arm|CNS recurrence is defined as the time from randomization to CNS as the first distant recurrence. Competing events include distant recurrence at other sites as the first distant recurrence and death from any cause prior to distant recurrence.|From randomization until time of event up to 2 years|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they received any study treatment.||percentage of participants with events|||Number
842231|NCT00878709|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Time to Distant Recurrence (TTDR) Survival at Year 2 by Treatment Arms||From randomization until time of event up to 2 years|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they received any study treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842232|NCT00878709|Secondary|Time to Distant Recurrence (TTDR) in Neratinib Arm Compared to Placebo Arm|Time to distant recurrence is defined as the time from date of randomization until the first occurrence of distant recurrence or death from breast cancer.|From randomization until time of event up to 2 years|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they received any study treatment.||percentage of participants with events|||Number
842233|NCT00878709|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Distant Disease-free Survival (DDFS) at Year 2 by Treatment Arms||From randomization until time of event up to 2 years|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they received any study treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842234|NCT00878709|Secondary|Distant Disease-free Survival (DDFS) in Neratinib Arm Compared to Placebo Arm|Distant disease-free survival time is defined as the time from date of randomization until the first occurrence of distant recurrence or death from any cause.|From randomization until time of event up to 2 years|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they received any study treatment.||percentage of participants with events|||Number
842235|NCT00878709|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Disease-free Survival Including Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DFS-DCIS) at Year 2 by Treatment Arms||From randomization until time of event up to 2 years|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they received any study treatment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842236|NCT00878709|Secondary|Disease-free Survival Including Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DFS-DCIS) in Neratinib Arm Compared to Placebo Arm|Disease-free survival including DCIS time is defined as the time from date of randomization until the first occurrence of DCIS or an iDFS event (an iDFS event including invasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence, invasive contralateral breast cancer, local/regional invasive recurrence, or distant recurrence and death from any.|From randomization until time of event up to 2 years|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they received any study treatment.||percentage of participants with events|||Number
842239|NCT00878709|Primary|Invasive Disease-free Survival (iDFS) in Neratinib Arm Compared to Placebo Arm|Invasive disease-free survival time is defined as the time from date of randomization until the first disease recurrence of the following events: invasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence, invasive contralateral breast cancer, local/regional invasive recurrence, distant recurrence and death from any cause.|From randomization until time of event up to 2 years|Intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized regardless of whether they received any study treatment.||percentage of participants with events|||Number
842243|NCT00848744|Secondary|The Subject's Medication Side Effect Profile Will be Assessed Using a Application Site Scale for Dryness, Scaling, Redness, and Stinging/Burning.||4 Weeks||||||
842244|NCT00848744|Primary|Physician Global Assessment|Difference in physician global assessment between two formulations. We remain blinded as to which formulation, both containing salicylic acid, worked better on patients. Measure is a scale (not an option below). Best was 0 (clear), worst was 4 (severe).|28 days; The visits include baseline, Day 2, Day 7 (+/- 1) and Day 28 (+/- 3).|Analysis was per protocol. Each subject received formulations A and B randomized to opposite sides of the face.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842245|NCT00842153|Secondary|Mean Percent Change From Baseline to Week 4 in Percent (%) of Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected|Percent change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 4 minus the value at Baseline (Week 0) divided by the Baseline (Week 0) value * 100. Data for this outcome measure were not collected; thus, no data were analyzed.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 4|ITT Population|||||
842246|NCT00842153|Secondary|Mean Percent Change From Baseline to Week 4 in Pruritus (Target Lesion)|Participants assessed their level of pruritus (itching) for the target lesion using a 10 centimeter (cm) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) with the left side anchored with “0=None” and the right side anchored with “10=Very Severe.” A target lesion (>2 cm squared [cm^2]) was considered to be one on the trunk or extremities (excluding palms/soles, elbows, or knees). Percent change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 4 minus the value at Baseline (Week 0) divided by the Baseline (Week 0) value * 100.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 4|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 4) and/or provided an assessment for pruritus were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||Percent change in scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842247|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Score of 0 or 1 for Subject Global Assessment at Baseline and Week 4|Participants assessed all treated areas using the Subject Global Assessment scale: 0=skin completely clear, possible residual hyperpigmentation; 1=psoriasis almost clear, patchy remnants of fine scaling present; 2=psoriasis mild, with small amount of psoriasis remaining (i.e., fine to coarse scales in some areas, definite redness, barely visible plaque thickness); 3=psoriasis moderate, between slight and definitely noticeable; 4=psoriasis very noticeable with redness, scaling, plaque thickness; 5=psoriasis severe with severe redness, thick scaling, and plaques.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 4|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 4) and/or provided an assessment for Subject Global Assessment were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842248|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Plaque Thickness Score of 0 or 1 at Baseline and Week 4|The investigator individually graded the severity of plaque thickness in participants as: 0=no elevation over normal skin; 1=possible but difficult to ascertain whether there is a slight elevation above normal skin; 2=slight but definite elevation, typically edges are indistinct or sloped; 3=moderate elevation with rough or sloped edges; 4=marked elevation typically with hard or sharp edges; and 5=very marked elevation typically with hard, sharp edges.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 4|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 4) and/or provided an assessment for plaque thickness were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842249|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Scaling Score of 0 or 1 at Baseline and Week 4|The investigator individually graded the severity of scaling in participants as: 0=no scaling; 1=no evidence of scaling; 2=minimal, occasional fine scale over less than 5% of the lesion; 3=mild, fine scales predominate; 4=moderate, coarse scales predominate; and 5=marked, thick nontenacious scales predominate.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 4|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 4) and/or provided an assessment for scaling were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842250|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Erythema Score of 0 or 1 at Baseline and Week 4|The investigator individually graded the severity of erythema (redness of skin) in participants as: 0=hyperpigmentation, pigmented macules (flat, distinct, colored area of skin), diffuse faint pink or red coloration; 1=no evidence of erythema, hyperpigmentation present; 2=faint erythema; 3=light red coloration; 4=moderate red coloration; and 5=bright red coloration.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 4|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 4) and/or provided an assessment for erythema were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842251|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Pruritus (Overall) Score of 0 or 1 at Baseline and Week 4|Participants assessed their level of pruritus (itching) over the previous 24-hour period using the following scale: 0=no itching; 1=minimal, very rarely aware of localized itching, present when relaxing and lasted for very short time; 2=mild, aware of itching at times, present when relaxing, not present when focused on other activities; 3=moderate, often aware of itching, annoying, sometimes disturbed sleep and daytime activities; and 4=severe, constant itching, distressing, frequent sleep disturbance, interfered with activities.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 4|ITT Population Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 4) and/or provided an assessment for pruritus were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842252|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With a TLGI Score of 0, 1, or 2 at Week 1 and Week 4|The investigator assessed the TLGI of participants relative to their initial Baseline condition based on a 7-point scale: 0=completely cleared, possible residual discoloration; 1=almost cleared, 90% improvement, very significant clearance with only traces of disease remaining; 2=marked improvement, approximately 75%, with some disease remaining; 3=moderate improvement, approximately 50%; 4=mild improvement, approximately 25%, significant disease remains; 5=no change, no detectable improvement; 6=excerbation, worsening of signs and symptoms of disease.|Week 1 and Week 4|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 1 and/or 4) and/or provided an assessment for pruritus were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842253|NCT00842153|Secondary|Mean Percent Change From Baseline to Week 2 in Percent (%) of Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected|Percent change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 2 minus the value at Baseline (Week 0) divided by the Baseline (Week 0) value * 100. Data for this outcome measure were not collected; thus, no data were analyzed.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 2|ITT Population|||||
842254|NCT00842153|Secondary|Mean Percent Change From Baseline to Week 2 in Pruritus (Target Lesion)|Participants assessed their level of pruritus (itching) for the target lesion using a 10 centimeter (cm) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) with the left side anchored with “0=None” and the right side anchored with “10=Very Severe.” A target lesion (>2 cm squared [cm^2]) was considered to be one on the trunk or extremities (excluding palms/soles, elbows, or knees). Percent change from Baseline was calculated as the value at Week 2 minus the value at Baseline (Week 0) divided by the Baseline (Week 0) value * 100.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 2|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 2) and/or provided an assessment of pruritis were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||Percent change in scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842255|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Score of 0 or 1 for Subject Global Assessment at Week 2|Participants assessed all treated areas using the Subject Global Assessment scale: 0=skin completely clear, possible residual hyperpigmentation; 1=psoriasis almost clear, patchy remnants of fine scaling present; 2=psoriasis mild, with small amount of psoriasis remaining (i.e., fine to coarse scales in some areas, definite redness, barely visible plaque thickness); 3=psoriasis moderate, between slight and definitely noticeable; 4=psoriasis very noticeable with redness, scaling, plaque thickness; 5=psoriasis severe with severe redness, thick scaling, and plaques.|Week 2|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 2) were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842256|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Plaque Thickness Score of 0 or 1 at Week 2|The investigator individually graded the severity of plaque thickness in participants as: 0=no elevation over normal skin; 1=possible but difficult to ascertain whether there is a slight elevation above normal skin; 2=slight but definite elevation, typically edges are indistinct or sloped; 3=moderate elevation with rough or sloped edges; 4=marked elevation typically with hard or sharp edges; and 5=very marked elevation typically with hard, sharp edges.|Week 2|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 2) were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842257|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Scaling Score of 0 or 1 at Week 2|The investigator individually graded the severity of scaling in participants as: 0=no scaling; 1=no evidence of scaling; 2=minimal, occasional fine scale over less than 5% of the lesion; 3=mild, fine scales predominate; 4=moderate, coarse scales predominate; and 5=marked, thick nontenacious scales predominate.|Week 2|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 2) were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842258|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Erythema Score of 0 or 1 at Week 2|The investigator individually graded the severity of erythema (redness of skin) in participants as: 0=hyperpigmentation, pigmented macules (flat, distinct, colored area of skin), diffuse faint pink or red coloration; 1=no evidence of erythema, hyperpigmentation present; 2=faint erythema; 3=light red coloration; 4=moderate red coloration; and 5=bright red coloration.|Week 2|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 2) were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842259|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Pruritus (Overall) Score of 0 or 1 at Week 2|Participants assessed their level of pruritus (itching) over the previous 24-hour period using the following scale: 0=no itching; 1=minimal, very rarely aware of localized itching, present when relaxing and lasted for very short time; 2=mild, aware of itching at times, present when relaxing, not present when focused on other activities; 3=moderate, often aware of itching, annoying, sometimes disturbed sleep and daytime activities; and 4=severe, constant itching, distressing, frequent sleep disturbance, interfered with activities.|Week 2|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 2) were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842260|NCT00842153|Secondary|Number of Participants With a TLGI Score of 0, 1, 2, or 3 at Weeks 1, 2, and 4|The investigator assessed the TLGI of participants relative to their initial Baseline condition based on a 7-point scale: 0=completely cleared, possible residual discoloration; 1=almost cleared, 90% improvement, very significant clearance with only traces of disease remaining; 2=marked improvement, approximately 75%, with some disease remaining; 3=moderate improvement, approximately 50%; 4=mild improvement, approximately 25%, significant disease remains; 5=no change, no detectable improvement; 6=excerbation, worsening of signs and symptoms of disease.|Weeks 1, 2, and 4|ITT Population. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 1, 2, and/or 4) were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842261|NCT00842153|Primary|Number of Participants With a Target Lesion Global Improvement (TLGI) Score of 0, 1, or 2 at Weeks 1, 2, and 4|The investigator assessed the TLGI of participants relative to their initial Baseline condition based on a 7-point scale: 0=completely cleared, possible residual discoloration; 1=almost cleared, 90% improvement, very significant clearance with only traces of disease remaining; 2=marked improvement, approximately 75%, with some disease remaining; 3=moderate improvement, approximately 50%; 4=mild improvement, approximately 25%, significant disease remains; 5=no change, no detectable improvement; 6=excerbation, worsening of signs and symptoms of disease.|Weeks 1, 2, and 4|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all enrolled participants. Participants who returned for the visit specified (Week 1, 2, and/or 4) were evaluated; not all participants returned for every study visit.||participants|||Number
842262|NCT00833859|Secondary|Number of Participants With Overall Survival|We intended to track the number of participants with overall survival at the projected end of the study period. The study was terminated prematurely.|6 months per patient|Data for this study was not collected because the study was abandoned after two enrollments due to funding being cancelled.|||||
842263|NCT00833859|Secondary|Number of Participants With Objective Response|Investigators planned to prospectively evaluate the ability of serum CA19-9 response and positron-emission tomography (PET) / computed tomography(CT) response to predict pathologic treatment response to GTX-SBRT and to determine the correlation of standardized uptake value (SUV) uptake on PET to fiducial marker placement.|6 months per patient|Data for this study was not collected because the study was abandoned after two enrollments due to funding being cancelled.|||||
842264|NCT00833859|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|Investigators planned to review the occurrences of AEs and SAEs according severity by NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v3.0, Acute GI toxicity by Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) Gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity scale.|6 months per patient|Data for this study was not collected because the study was abandoned after two enrollments due to funding being cancelled.|||||
842265|NCT00833859|Primary|Number of Participants With Resectability|The intent was to have 33 Evaluable Participants and measure the number of surgical resections with negative margins, ie. R0 resection rate. The new treatment would be of interest if the resectability rate was at least 30%. R0 resections were to be scored as those resections in which the common bile duct margin, pancreatic resection margin, retroperitoneal margin were negative for tumor involvement.|6 months per patient|Data for this study was not collected because the study was abandoned after two enrollments due to funding being cancelled.|||||
842266|NCT00793611|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Improvement|Outcome measure is only administered at follow-up and used following treatment in patients with urinary incontinence. Measure varies from 1 to 7 on a Likert scale. 1=very much better and 7=very much worse and 4=no change. Thus, lower numbers represent greater improvement.|6-12 weeks after study initiation (@ completion of intervention)|ITT||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842267|NCT00793611|Secondary|Change in Voiding Frequency Based on Voiding Diary|change in mean number of voids per 24 hours. Each participant recorded voiding frequency every 24 hours for 3 days at baseline and follow-up. A mean number of voids for every patient over 24 hours was calculated at baseline and follow-up.|baseline and 6-12 weeks after study initiation|ITT change in mean number of voids/24 hours||number of voids per 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
842268|NCT00793611|Primary|Change in Overactive Bladder Symptoms (Based on OABqSF)|Scale information; Score ranges for oab-qsf quality of life scores range from 13-78; 13=poor quality of life 78=good quality of life. We reported change scores, with larger negative numbers indicating greater improvement in quality of life scores.|baseline and approximately 6-12 weeks after study initiation|ITT||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842269|NCT00720096|Secondary|Response Rate|Determine response rate of array directed chemotherapy (as defined as the proportion of patients achieving complete or partial responses with a predictive score >/= 0.5 for either chemotherapy). As well as evaluate the accuracy of the chemosensitivity profiles for differentiating doxorubicin and topotecan responsive cancers. Due to the limited sample size the interpretation is limited. Results data for this outcome is not posted.|1 year, 2 months|Small sample size prevented planned interpretation.|||||
842270|NCT00720096|Primary|Interpret Genomic Array|Number of patients with biopsiable tumor in sufficient quantity and quality that will result in an interpretable genomic array.|1 year, 2 months|All patients enrolled 4/4 had biopsiable tumor and sufficient quantity and quality.||Participants|||Number
842271|NCT00720096|Primary|Assess Feasibility|Number of patients meeting 3 week feasibility window which was set as the benchmark.|1 year, 2 months|Patients whose information for treatment was available within the 3 week feasibility window which was set as the benchmark.||Participants|||Number
842272|NCT00718328|Primary|Perihematomal Edema|Solitary patient lost to follow up (out of state)|Days 7 and 14|||Relative perihematomal edema||Standard Deviation|Mean
842273|NCT00703092|Secondary|Quantify Enrollment Strategies, Retention, Compliance, Participant Characteristics, and Data Collection Challenges.||10 months|This study was terminated early due to lack of enrollment. No assays were run so there is no data to report.|||||
842274|NCT00703092|Primary|Generate Preliminary Data on the Range of Outcome Measures at Baseline and After 6 Months of Fiber Supplementation in Terms of: Ovulation Rates, Insulin Sensitivity, Concentrations of Circulating Androgens and Satiety.||10 months|This study was terminated early due to lack of enrollment. No assays were run so there is no data to report.|||||
842285|NCT00676052|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinic Visit Trough FVC on Day 29|The trough FVC is defined as the mean of the FVC values obtained 23 and 24 hours after dosing on Day 28. The Baseline FVC is the mean of the two assessments made 30 minutes pre-dose and immediately pre-dose [time 0] on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the post-baseline assessment value from the Baseline value.|Baseline (pre-dose Day 1) and Day 29|ITT Population. Participants with analyzable data on the indicated time point have been presented.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842286|NCT00676052|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean for 0 to 24 Hours Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) on Day 1 to 2 and 28 to 29|Weighted means serial FVC was derived by calculating the AUC, and then dividing by the time interval over which the AUC was calculated. Baseline was defined at pre-dose Day 1. The weighted mean change from Baseline is the weighted mean minus Baseline. The AUC was calculated using the trapezoidal rule. For all post-dose observations, actual times that the spirometry measurements were conducted was used for the calculation. Pre-dose observations were counted as 0 hr observations - that is they had their time set to the time of dosing. The pre-dose value used for the calculation of the AUC was the mean of the two pre-dose observations (-30 and 0 min for Day 1 or 28). If one of these observations was missing, the remaining single pre-dose observation was used.|Baseline (pre-dose Day 1) and Days 1 to 2, Days 28 to 29|ITT Population. Participants with analyzable data on the indicated time point have been presented.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842287|NCT00676052|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean for 0 to 24 Hours Serial FEV1 on Day 1 to 2 and 28 to 29|Weighted means serial FEV1 was derived by calculating the area under curve (AUC), and then dividing by the time interval over which the AUC was calculated. Baseline was defined at pre-dose Day 1. The weighted mean change from Baseline is the weighted mean minus Baseline. The AUC was calculated using the trapezoidal rule. For all post-dose observations, actual times that the spirometry measurements were conducted was used for the calculation. Pre-dose observations were counted as 0 hr observations - that is they had their time set to the time of dosing. The pre-dose value used for the calculation of the AUC was the mean of the two pre-dose observations (-30 and 0 min for Day 1 or 28). If one of these observations was missing, the remaining single pre-dose observation was used.|Baseline (pre-dose Day 1) and Days 1 to 2, Days 28 to 29|ITT Population. Participants with analyzable data on the indicated time point have been presented.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842288|NCT00676052|Primary|Change From Baseline in Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) at Day 29|The trough FEV1 is defined as the mean of the FEV1 values obtained 23 and 24 hours after dosing on Day 28. The Baseline FEV1 is the mean of the two assessments made 30 minutes pre-dose and immediately pre-dose [time 0] on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the post-baseline assessment value from the Baseline value.|Baseline (pre-dose Day 1) and Day 29|ITT Population. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) data has been presented.||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842304|NCT00598806|Secondary|Disease-Free Interval|The number of months from randomization to histologically confirmed progression of the patient’s bladder tumor or death from any cause|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||months||Standard Error|Mean
842300|NCT00619983|Primary|Visual Analog Scale for Pain|"The primary outcome measure is the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, a 10 cm line upon which the subject marks their intensity of pain. The line is anchored on the left as No pain at all and on the right as The worst pain imaginable. The score is the number of millimeters from the left origin of the line. The primary outcome measure for each period was the average value of all assessments for that period (2 weeks of measures for baseline, 6 weeks of measures for test drug alone, 6 weeks of measures for test drug plus gabapentin, and 2 weeks of measures for gabapentin alone)."|Study completion (16 weeks)|As noted in patient flow, data are available for only 14 of 22 subjects due to failure of the electronic daily diaries used to assess pain during the study and to study discontinuation in some cases||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
842302|NCT00598806|Secondary|Overall Survival|The number of months from randomization to death from any cause.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||months||Standard Error|Mean
842303|NCT00598806|Secondary|Disease-Free Survival|The number of months from randomization to histologically confirmed recurrence of the patient’s bladder tumor or death from any cause|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||months||Standard Error|Mean
842305|NCT00598806|Secondary|Number of Recurrences Per Patient|The number of histologically confirmed recurrences during the course of the study.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||times||Standard Deviation|Mean
842306|NCT00598806|Secondary|Time to Progression|The number of months from randomization to progression to either a higher stage or grade of the patient’s bladder tumor.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||months||Standard Error|Mean
842307|NCT00598806|Secondary|Progression Rate at 2 Years|The percentage of participants that progress to either a higher stage or grade from the histologically confirmed stage and grade at time of randomization.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842308|NCT00598806|Secondary|Time to Recurrence|The number of months from randomization to histologically confirmed recurrence of the patient’s bladder tumor.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||months||Standard Error|Mean
842309|NCT00598806|Primary|Recurrence Rate at 2 Years|The percentage of participants with histologically confirmed recurrence of the bladder tumor at any time after randomization and on or before year 2.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842310|NCT00575159|Secondary|The Metabolite to Parent AUC Ratio, AUCmetabolite/AUCparent Ratio for GSK279782 Over Period|Blood samples were collected on time points: Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period to obtain the metabolite to parent AUC ratio for GSK279782|Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter Population comprised of all participants for whom pharmacokinetic parameter estimates were derived during any treatment period||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
842311|NCT00575159|Secondary|The Metabolite to Parent AUC Ratio, AUCmetabolite/AUCparent Ratio for GSK189074 Over Period|Blood samples were collected on time points: Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period to obtain the metabolite to parent AUC ratio for GSK189074|Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period|Safety Population||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
842312|NCT00575159|Secondary|Oral Clearance (CL/F) Over Period|Oral clearance is a measure of the rate at which the drug is cleared from the body via metabolism. Blood samples were collected on time points: Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period|Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period|Safety Population||mL/min||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
842313|NCT00575159|Secondary|AUC From Time Zero to 4 Hours Post Dose, AUC(0-4) for GSK189074 Over Period|AUC(0-4) was defined as AUC from time zero to 4 hours post dose. Blood samples were collected on time points: Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period.|Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period|Safety Population||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
842314|NCT00575159|Secondary|Time to Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) and Terminal Half Life, (T1/2) of GSK189075 Over Period|Tmax was defined as the time to the maximum or “peak” concentration of a drug observed after multiple administration. T1/2 was defined as the time to when half of the total amount of a particular substance is eliminated from the body. Blood samples obtained during indicated time points. T1/2 was calculated as t1/2 = ln2/λz, with λz (the terminal elimination rate-constant) estimated from log-linear regression analysis of the terminal phase of the plasma concentration-time profile.Tmax and t1/2 values for GSK189075 were presented.|Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period|Safety Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||hour||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
842315|NCT00575159|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of GSK189075 Over Period|Plasma samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were drawn at indicated time points of each treatment period. Cmax was defined as maximal measured plasma concentration over the time span specified. Values were reported as Geometric Means with respective Geometric Coefficient of Variation (% CV).|Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period|Safety Population||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
842316|NCT00575159|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration vs. Time Curve (AUC) From Time Zero (Time of Dosing) to the Last Time Point With Measurable Analyte Concentration, AUC(0-last), AUC From Time Zero to Infinite Time, AUC(0-inf) of GSK189075 Over Period|AUC(0-last) was defined as area under the plasma concentration vs. time curve from time zero (time of dosing) to the last time point with measurable analyte concentration and AUC(0-inf) was defined as area under the plasma concentration vs. time curve from time zero to infinite time. Blood samples were collected on time points: Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period.|Pre-dose, 0.25 h, 0.5 h, 0.75 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 2.5 h, 3 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 16 h of each treatment period|Safety Population||hour*nanograms per milliliter (hr*ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
842317|NCT00575159|Secondary|Mean Creatinine Clearance 0-24 H|Urine samples for calculating creatinine clearance were obtained over the intervals: 0-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h, 12-16h and 16-24h. Mean creatinine clearance over 0-24 H was presented.|Day 1 of each treatment period|Safety Population||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
842319|NCT00575159|Secondary|Percent of Filtered Glucose in the Urine.|Filtered glucose in the urine was assessed at indicated time points and was presented as Percentage. The 0-12h and 0-24h amounts Percent of filtered glucose in the urine were calculated by adding the amounts collected during these time intervals.|Up to 24 hours post dose of each treatment period.|Safety Population||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
842320|NCT00575159|Secondary|Urinary Glucose Excretion (UGE) for Timed Subintervals up to 24 Hours Post Dose (0-24 H)|UGE was assessed for timed subintervals up to 24h post-dose. Urine samples were collected at intervals: 0-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h, 12-16h and 16-24h on study days. The 0-24h amounts excreted in urine were calculated by adding the amounts collected during these time intervals.|Up to 24 hours post dose of each treatment period|Safety Population||mmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
842321|NCT00575159|Secondary|Incremental Adjusted Weighted Means of Plasma Glucose AUC(0-4) and AUC(0-10) on Day 1|AUC(0-10) was the plasma glucose weighted mean AUC for 0 to 10 h post-dosing and AUC(0-4) was the plasma glucose weighted mean AUC for 0 to 4 h post-dosing. Incremental Adjusted Weighted Means were presented.|Up to 24 hours post dose of each treatment period.|Safety Population||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
842322|NCT00575159|Primary|Mean of Derived Plasma Glucose Parameters|The plasma measurements at specified time points on Day 1 were collected. Derived plasma glucose parameters were presented.|Up to 24 hours post dose of each treatment period.|Safety Population.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
842323|NCT00575159|Primary|Summary of Fluid Balance|On Day 1, fluid intake, urine volume and number of micturations were recorded over the intervals for each of the following dosing periods: 0-4h, 4-8h, 8-12h, 12-16h and 16-24h. From these measures, fluid balance was calculated over the 24-hour period. Fluid Balance=total fluid intake minus total urine volume. The 0-24h amounts of total Fluid Intake, total urine output, and fluid balance were calculated by adding the amounts collected during these time intervals.|Up to 24 hours post dose of each treatment period.|Safety Population.||Milliliters (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
842324|NCT00575159|Primary|Mean Creatinine Clearance|Creatinine clearance was calculated and reported in Milliliters per minute (mL/min) on Day 1 of each period for each collection interval 0-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-16 and 16-24 hour, as well as the combined intervals of 0-12 and 0-24 hour. For urine measurements, participants were instructed to void within 30 minutes before administration of study medication.|Up to 24 hours post dose of each treatment period.|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mL/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
842325|NCT00575159|Primary|Summary of Urine Osmolality|Urine sample was collected at screening, Day –2 (18:00h) and Day 1 (7:45h) for determination of urine osmolality which was measured in Millimole per kilogram (mmol/kg).|Day 1 (pre dose) of each treatment period|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mmol/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
842326|NCT00575159|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Hematology Data|Data for abnormal Hematology parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Hematocrit, Hemoglobin, Lymphocytes, Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin (MCH), Mean Corpuscle Volume (MCV), Monocytes, Platelet count, Red Blood Cell (RBC), Reticulocytes, Total Neutrophils, White Blood Cell (WBC) were reported. Data for number of participants with abnormal Hematology were reported.|Day 1 of each treatment period|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specific time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842327|NCT00575159|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Clinical Chemistry Data|Clinical Chemistry data for parameters: Alanine Amino Transferase (ALT), Albumin, Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP), Aspartate Amino Transferase (AST), Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Creatine Kinase, Creatinine, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase (GGT), Glucose, Lactate Dehydrogenase, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Potassium, Total Bilirubin, Sodium, Total protein, triglycerides and urea/BUN was reported. Data for number of participants with abnormal clinical Chemistry data was presented.|Day 1 of each treatment period|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specific time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842328|NCT00575159|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings|Standard semi-recumbent 12-lead ECG was obtained after the participant rested for a minimum of 10 minutes (If questionable abnormality was noted on the ECG, 2 more measurements were allowed to provide an average of 3 measurements). Number of participants with abnormal ECG were reported.|Day 1 of each treatment period|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
842329|NCT00575159|Primary|Change From Baseline Vital Signs: Heart Rate|Heart rate was obtained during each treatment period at indicated time points. Measurements were made with the participants lying semi-recumbent having rested in this position for at least 10 minutes before the initial reading.|Day 1 of each treatment period|Safety Population||beats/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
842330|NCT00575159|Primary|Change From Baseline Vital Signs: Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure (SBP and DBP)|SBP and DBP were obtained during each treatment period at the indicated time points. Measurements were made with the participant lying semi-recumbent having rested in this position for at least 10 minute before the initial reading.|Day 1 of each treatment period|Safety Population||Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
842331|NCT00575159|Primary|Number of Participants With Hypoglycemia Episodes/Events|A hypoglycemic event was defined as symptoms of hypoglycemia confirmed by a blood glucose value below normal limits [less than 3.89 millimoles per liter (mmol/L)] or 70 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL). Symptoms of hypoglycemia without confirmed blood glucose values were reported as AEs instead of hypoglycemic events. Number of participants with hypoglycemic events were reported.|Day 1 of each treatment period|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
842332|NCT00575159|Primary|Number of Participants With All Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|Data for number of participants who presented one or more adverse events (serious or non serious) was reported. An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence (MO) in a participant temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product (MP), whether or not considered related to the MP and can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with its use. The SAE was any untoward MO that, at any dose, results in death, life threatening, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, results in or prolongs inpatient hospitalization, congenital abnormality or birth defect, that may not be immediately life-threatening or result in death or hospitalization but may jeopardize the participant or may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in this definition.|Up to 6 months|Safety Population comprised of all enrolled participants who have received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842333|NCT00461591|Secondary|Overall Survival|The number of months from randomization to death from any cause.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||months||Standard Error|Mean
842334|NCT00461591|Secondary|Disease Free Survival|The number of months from randomization to histologically confirmed recurrence of the patient’s bladder tumor or death from any cause|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||months||Standard Error|Mean
842335|NCT00461591|Secondary|Disease Free Interval|The number of months from randomization to histologically confirmed progression of the patient’s bladder tumor or death from any cause|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||months||Standard Error|Mean
842336|NCT00461591|Secondary|Number of Recurrences Per Patient|The number of histologically confirmed recurrences during the course of the study.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||times||Standard Deviation|Mean
842337|NCT00461591|Secondary|Time to Progression|The number of months from randomization to progression to either a higher stage or grade of the patient’s bladder tumor.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||months||Standard Error|Mean
842338|NCT00461591|Secondary|Progression Rate at 2 Years|The percentage of participants that progress to either a higher stage or grade from the histologically confirmed stage and grade at time of randomization.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842339|NCT00461591|Secondary|Time to Recurrence|The number of months from randomization to histologically confirmed recurrence of the patient’s bladder tumor.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||months||Standard Error|Mean
842340|NCT00461591|Primary|Recurrence Rate at 2 Years|The percentage of participants with histologically confirmed recurrence of the bladder tumor at any time after randomization and on or before year 2.|2 years|Target Ta, G1-G2 Population: patients who had 4 or fewer tumors that were ≤ 3.5 cm each at the time of randomization and who had subsequent histological confirmation from the central pathology lab that the tumors resected at the time of randomization were Ta, Grade 1 or 2.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842378|NCT03054077|Primary|Change in Anxiety Scores With the Addition of the iPad Intervention-Comparing Group 1 to Group 2|"The Modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale- Short form (mYPAS-SF) Ratings produce 4 mYPAS scores (1 for each time point)
Areas scored:
Activity (1,2,3, or 4) Vocalizations (1,2,3,4,5,or 6) Emotional Expressivity (1,2,3, or 4) State of Apparent arousal (1,2,3, or 4) Scoring: Each score is calculated by dividing each item rating by the highest possible rating (i.e., 6 for the “vocalizations” item and 4 for all other items), adding all the produced values, dividing by 5, and multiplying by 100.
This calculation produces a score ranging from 23.33 to 100, with higher values indicating higher anxiety.
Comparison of scores between Group 1 and Group 2 to see if changes in anxiety scores occurred with the addition of the iPad.
All data will be gathered with review at the close of the study which is anticipated to occur in 5/20/2017."|Immediately following enrollment, immediately before anesthesia, and post-op assessed up to 10 minutes|All participants for whom 3 time points were collected at Baseline T1, T2, and T3||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
842379|NCT02786927|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Preferring the Inhaler Based on the Size of the Inhaler|Preference between ELLIPTA inhaler and HandiHaler based on the size of the inhaler was assessed by the inhaler preference questionnaire at Visit 3 or EW visit. The responses were analyzed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, adjusted for study inhaler use sequence and preference questionnaire version.|Up to 18 days|Modified ITT Population||Percentage of participants|||Number
842380|NCT02786927|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Preferring the Inhaler Based on How Easy it Was to Tell How Many Doses Were Left|Preference between ELLIPTA inhaler and Handihaler based on how easy it was to tell how many doses were left was assessed by the inhaler preference questionnaire at Visit 3 or EW visit. The responses were analyzed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, adjusted for study inhaler use sequence and preference questionnaire version.|Up to 18 days|Modified ITT Population||Percentage of participants|||Number
842381|NCT02786927|Primary|Percentage of Participants Preferring the Inhaler Based on the Number of Steps Needed to Take the COPD Medication|Preference between ELLIPTA inhaler and Handihaler based on the number of steps needed to take the medication was assessed by the inhaler preference questionnaire at Visit 3 or Early Withdrawal (EW) visit. The responses were analyzed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, adjusted for study inhaler use sequence and preference questionnaire version. The analysis was performed on the Modified Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population comprised of all participants in the ITT Population (comprised all randomized participants who received 1 dose of at least 1 study inhaler) who completed at least one question from the 5 preference questions.|Up to 18 days|Modified ITT Population||Percentage of participants|||Number
842382|NCT02736175|Primary|Absence of Ocular Pain|Absence of pain (i.e., score of ‘0’) in the study eye at Day 8|Day 8|ITT LOCF (last observation carried forward)||percentage of total participants|||Number
842383|NCT02736175|Primary|Absence of Anterior Chamber Inflammation|Absence of cells (i.e., score of ‘0’) in the anterior chamber of the study eye at Day 14|Day 14|ITT LOCF (last observation carried forward)||percentage of total participants|||Number
842384|NCT02686437|Primary|Penn Shoulder Score (PENN)|The PENN is a outcome measure designed to determine the amount of disability patients are experiencing doing day to day activities. The total score is out of 100, 100 being no disability and 0 being completely disabled.|4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
842385|NCT02686437|Primary|Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)|Rate the pain on a scale of 0 to 10, 0 being none and 10 being the worst imaginable pain|4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
842386|NCT02681510|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Reported Quitting at the End of Treatment|Self-reported Quit Rate at End of Treatment (12 Weeks); assessed as no smoking in the 7 days prior to the Week 12 follow-up call|Week 12|All study participants (N=36)||Participants|||Count of Participants
842387|NCT02681510|Secondary|Participant Satisfaction With Medications' Ability to Help Participant Quit Smoking|Participant Satisfaction with Medications' Ability to Help Participant Quit Smoking assessed on a 1-10 Likert Scale (higher value=greater satisfaction)|Week 12|All study participants (N=36)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842388|NCT02681510|Secondary|Participant Satisfaction With Medications' Ability to Control Withdrawal Symptoms|Satisfaction with Medications' Ability to Control Withdrawal Symptoms assessed on a 1-10 Likert Scale (higher value=greater satisfaction)|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842390|NCT02667821|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Blood Flow Through Vertebral Artery|Phase contrast MRI provides velocity measurements that can be used for analysis of the blood flow and tissue motion. At the level of C1-2, the contralateral and ipsilateral vertebral arteries (VA), defined to the direction of head motion, were assessed and anatomical images were established to localize the VA circulation. Mean and SDs were calculated for VA blood flow (mL/s) for each of the head conditions and VA side. Differences between task maneuvers and VA flow and velocity were evaluated using a repeated-measures analysis of variance with factors of head position and VA side, and a level of significance was set at .05|The series of fMRI sequences will be performed on each participant immediately after each procedure.|||mL/s||Standard Deviation|Mean
842391|NCT02667821|Secondary|Changes in Tissue Perfusion in the Posterior Cerebrum and Cerebellum Will be Assessed Using Arterial Spin Labeling (ASL) MRI Technique.|ASL allows one to separate the blood flow from the BOLD effect, thus giving clear measures of perfusion. More specifically ASL will be used to measure blood perfusion and allow extraction of metabolic difference from flow differences in BOLD imaging. It is a quantitative technique, yielding values with units of ml/(100g of tissue)·min-1.|The series of ASL sequences will be performed on each participant immediately after each condition. Through study completion, data will be presented after an average of 1 year.|||ml/100g of tissue/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
842392|NCT02667821|Primary|Changes in Blood Flow Through the Vertebral Artery and Posterior Cerebral and Cerebellar Circulation|Phase contrast MRI provides velocity measurements that can be used for analysis of the blood flow and tissue motion. At the level of C1-2, the contralateral and ipsilateral vertebral arteries (VA), defined to the direction of head motion, were assessed and anatomical images were established to localize the VA circulation. Mean and SDs were calculated for VA blood velocity (cm/s) for each of the head conditions and VA side. Differences between task maneuvers and VA flow and velocity were evaluated using a repeated-measures analysis of variance with factors of head position and VA side, and a level of significance was set at .05|The series of fMRI sequences will be performed on each participant immediately after each condition. Through study completion, data will be presented after an average of 1 year.|||cm/s||Standard Deviation|Mean
842393|NCT02586506|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Demonstrated Correct Use of the ELLIPTA Inhaler at the End of the Study|Participants’ ability to correctly use the ELLIPTA inhaler was assessed at Visit 2 using the Correct Use Checklist by an ELLIPTA trained health care professional. The percentage was reported overall for the single treatment group along with a 95% CI for the percentage calculated using the exact binomial distribution.|Day 28|mITT Population||Percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842394|NCT02586506|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Rated the Ability to Tell How Many Doses Were Remaining in the ELLIPTA Inhaler as Easy or Very Easy at the End of the Study|Participants rated how easy it was to determine how many doses were left in the ELLIPTA inhaler, using a four-point Likert scale (1-very easy, 2-easy, 3-difficult, 4-very difficult). “Easy to use” was defined as the combination of an “easy” or “very easy” rating choice. The percentage was reported overall for the single treatment group along with a 95% CI for the percentage calculated using the exact binomial distribution.|Day 28|mITT Population||Percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842395|NCT02586506|Primary|The Percentage of Participants With Asthma Who Rated the Use of the ELLIPTA Inhaler as Easy or Very Easy, Among Those Who Demonstrated Correct Use of the Inhaler at the End of the Study.|Participants rated how easy it was to use the ELLIPTA inhaler, using a four-point Likert scale (1-very easy, 2-easy, 3-difficult, 4-very difficult). “Easy to use” was defined as the combination of an “easy” or “very easy” rating choice. The percentage was reported overall for the single treatment group along with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for the percentage calculated using the exact binomial distribution.|Day 28|Modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Population: all participants who were screened and received at least one dose of study treatment (placebo) and were randomised to receive the ELLIPTA inhaler ease of use questionnaire version A or B at Visit 2.||Percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842396|NCT02570126|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed included medical occurrences that resulted in death, were life threatening, required hospitalisation or prolongation of hospitalisation or resulted in disability/incapacity. Any SAE = occurrence of SAE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination|From Day 0 through the end of study (Day 84)|||Subjects|||Number
842397|NCT02570126|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any = occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination|43-day post vaccination period following Dose 1 (Day 0) and Dose 2 (Day 42)|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort. Number of participants analysed corresponds to the subjects in the Total Vaccinated cohort with the administered dose 43 days following each vaccination and across doses for each of the 2 groups (VAR_HSA_F Group and VAR Group)||Subjects|||Number
842398|NCT02570126|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Febrile Convulsions|Any febrile convulsion = occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom regardless of its intensity. Grade 3 febrile convulsion = febrile convulsion which prevented normal, everyday activities. Related febrile convulsion = assessed by the investigator as causally related to study vaccination|43-day post vaccination period following Dose 1 (Day 0) and Dose 2 (Day 42)|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort. Number of participants analysed corresponds to the subjects in the Total Vaccinated cohort with at least one documented dose 43 days following each vaccination and across doses for each of the 2 groups (VAR_HSA_F Group and VAR Group)||Subjects|||Number
842399|NCT02570126|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Rash|Any rash = occurrence of the specified solicited general symptom regardless of its intensity. Grade 3 rash = rash which prevented normal, everyday activities. Related rash = assessed by the investigator as causally related to study vaccination|43-day post vaccination period following Dose 1 (Day 0) and Dose 2 (Day 42)|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort. Number of participants analysed corresponds to the subjects in the Total Vaccinated cohort with at least one documented dose 43 days following each vaccination and across doses for each of the 2 groups (VAR_HSA_F Group and VAR Group)||Subjects|||Number
842400|NCT02570126|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Fever|Any fever (≥ 38°C) = occurrence of any fever regardless of its intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 fever = temperature > 39.5°C. Related fever = assessed by the investigator as causally related to study vaccination|43-day post vaccination period following Dose 1 (Day 0) and Dose 2 (Day 42)|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort. Number of participants analysed corresponds to the subjects in the Total Vaccinated cohort with the documented dose 43 days following each vaccination and across doses for each of the 2 groups (VAR_HSA_F Group and VAR Group)||Subjects|||Number
842401|NCT02570126|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, injection site redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom regardless of its intensity. Grade 3 pain = subject crying when limb was moved or as spontaneously painful. Grade 3 redness and swelling = above (>) 20 mm|4-day post vaccination period following Dose 1 (Day 0) and Dose 2 (Day 42)|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort. Number of participants analysed corresponds to the subjects in the Total Vaccinated cohort with at least one documented dose 4 days following each vaccination and across doses for each of the 2 groups (VAR_HSA_F Group and VAR Group)||Subjects|||Number
842402|NCT02570126|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Seroresponse to VZV (Immuno Sub Cohort)|For VZV, seroresponse was defined as, post-vaccination anti-VZV antibody concentration ≥ 50 mIU/mL among subjects who were seronegative (antibody concentration below (< ) 25 mIU/mL) before vaccination|At Day 42 and Day 84 post vaccination|Immunogenicity analyses were performed on the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity. Seropositivity was assessed in sub cohort of the ATP cohort for immunogenicity for each group (immuno sub cohort) who had blood taken and tested for anti-varicella antibodies at Day 0, Day 42, and Day 84||Subjects|||Number
842403|NCT02570126|Secondary|Evaluation of Immune Response to Varicella Vaccine With Respect to Anti Varicella Zoster Virus (Anti-VZV) Antibody Concentrations (Immuno-sub Cohort)|Anti-VZY antibody concentrations were expressed in terms of Geometric Mean Concentrations (GMCs)|At Day 42 and Day 84 post vaccination|Immunogenicity analyses were performed on the According-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity. Immune response (in terms of GMC) was assessed in sub cohort of the ATP cohort for immunogenicity for each group (immuno sub cohort) who had blood taken and tested for anti-varicella antibodies at Day 0, Day 42, and Day 84||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
842404|NCT02570126|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Fever|Fever was defined as axillary temperature greater than or equal to (≥) 38.0°C (≥ 100.4°F)|15 days post each dose of varicella vaccination|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort. Number of participants analysed corresponds to the subjects in the Total Vaccinated cohort with documented dose 15-days post each dose of varicella vaccination for each of the 2 groups (VAR_HSA_F Group and VAR Group)||Subjects|||Number
842405|NCT02570126|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Fever|Fever was defined as axillary temperature above (>) 39.0 °C (> 102.2°F)|15-days (Days 0-14) post Dose 1 of varicella vaccination|Analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects with administration of either Varilrix HSA-free or Varilrix™vaccine documented. Number of participants analysed corresponds to the subjects in the Total Vaccinated cohort with documented dose 15-days (Days 0-14) post Dose 1 of varicella vaccination||Subjects|||Number
842406|NCT02401256|Primary|Efavirenz AUC0-inf (Single Dose) and AUC0-24(Multiple Dose)|After the samples collection, blood from phase 2 and phase 4 were used to perform the quantification of Efavirenz in plasma. The composite of the efavirenz concentration (blood collection between 0 to 120 hrs) were used to calculate the area under the plasma concentration time curve (AUC0-inf for single dose and AUC0-24 for multiple dose) of efavirenz.|Single dose pharmacokinetics (PK) versus multiple doses (after 17 day pretreatment) PK (total 38 days for each subject)|Just volunteers with Efavirenz quantification information (complete or partial) and CYP2B6 genotype were included in this data analysis (Total of 61)||h*uM||Standard Deviation|Mean
842407|NCT02387996|Secondary|ORR Per Investigator by PD-L1 Expression Level|Investigator-assessed ORR was defined as the number of subjects with a best overall response of confirmed CR or PR divided by the number of all treated subjects. PD-L1 expression level = Membranous staining in greater than or equal to 5% and greater than or equal to 1% tumor cells. n = Number of participants in each category|from the date of first dose to the date of objectively documented progression or the date of subsequent therapy, whichever occurs first (assessed up to 14 months)|All treated participants. Treated participants from Japan enrolled after main enrollment period were excluded from primary efficacy analysis.||Percent of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842408|NCT02387996|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) Per Investigator|Investigator-assessed ORR was defined as the number of subjects with a best overall response of confirmed CR or PR divided by the number of all treated subjects.|from the date of first dose to the date of objectively documented progression or the date of subsequent therapy, whichever occurs first (assessed up to 14 months)|All treated participants. Treated participants from Japan enrolled after main enrollment period were excluded from primary efficacy analysis.||Percent of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842409|NCT02387996|Secondary|OS by PD-L1 Expression Level|Overall Survival was defined as the time from first dosing date to the date of death. A subject who had not died was censored at last known date alive. PD-L1 expression level = membranous staining in greater than or equal to 5% and greater than or equal to 1% tumor cells. n = Number of participants in each category|From first dosing date to the date of death (approximately 14 months)|All treated participants. Treated participants from Japan enrolled after main enrollment period were excluded from primary efficacy analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842410|NCT02387996|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall Survival was defined as the time from first dosing date to the date of death. A subject who had not died was censored at last known date alive.|From first dosing date to the date of death (assessed up to 14 months)|All treated participants. Treated participants from Japan enrolled after main enrollment period were excluded from primary efficacy analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842411|NCT02387996|Secondary|PFS Per BIRC Assessment by PD-L1 Expression Level|PFS was defined as the time from first dosing date to the date of the first documented tumor progression, based on BIRC assessments (per RECIST 1.1), or death due to any cause. RECIST is the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors PD-L1 expression level is defined as membranous staining in greater than or equal to 5% and greater than or equal to 1% tumor cells. n = Number of participants in each category|from first dosing date to the date of the first documented tumor progression (assessed up to 14 months)|All treated participants. Treated participants from Japan enrolled after main enrollment period were excluded from primary efficacy analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842412|NCT02387996|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Per BIRC Assessment|PFS was defined as the time from first dosing date to the date of the first documented tumor progression, based on BIRC assessments (per RECIST 1.1), or death due to any cause. Progression was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. RECIST = Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors|from first dosing date to the date of the first documented tumor progression (assessed up to 14 months)|All treated participants. Treated participants from Japan enrolled after main enrollment period were excluded from primary efficacy analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842413|NCT02387996|Primary|ORR Per BIRC Assessment by PD-L1 Expression Level|Objective Response Rate (ORR) was defined as the number of participants with a best overall response of confirmed Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) (per RECIST 1.1 criteria) divided by the number of all treated participants. RECIST 1.1 = Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. CR= Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. PR= At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. BIRC= blinded independent review committee PD-L1 expression level= membranous staining in greater than or equal to 5% and greater than or equal to 1% tumor cells. n = Number of participants in each category|From the date of first dose to the date of objectively documented progression or the date of subsequent therapy, whichever occurs first (assessed up to 14 months)|All treated participants. Treated participants from Japan enrolled after main enrollment period were excluded from primary efficacy analysis.||Percent of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842414|NCT02387996|Primary|Objective Response Rate Per BIRC Assessment|Objective Response Rate (ORR) was defined as the number of participants with a best overall response of confirmed Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) (per RECIST 1.1 criteria) divided by the number of all treated participants. RECIST 1.1 = Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. CR= Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. PR= At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. BIRC= blinded independent review committee|From the date of first dose to the date of objectively documented progression or the date of subsequent therapy, whichever occurs first (assessed up to 14 months)|All treated participants. Treated participants from Japan enrolled after main enrollment period were excluded from primary efficacy analysis.||Percent of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842415|NCT02387749|Secondary|Change of Levels of Glycated Haemoglobin( HA1C) After Stem Cells Transfusion Measured in Percent %|Blood tests before and after stem cells(90 days) transfusion and comparing the values in percent % which is reflecting the patient blood sugar control in the previous 3 months|at base line (zero day) and 90 days after stem cells transfusion|||percent %||Standard Deviation|Mean
842416|NCT02387749|Secondary|Change of Levels of Fasting Blood Sugar and 2 Hours Post Prandial at Base Line ( Zero Day ) and After (90 Days) After Stem Cells Transfusion|fasting, 2 hours postprandial blood sugar measurement before at base line (zero day) and after (90 days) stem cells transfusion as a follow up and comparing the values.|base line (zero day) and 90 days after stem cells transfusion|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
842417|NCT02387749|Primary|Change of Nerve Conduction Amplitude of Nerves Affected Measured by Nerve Conduction Study.|"Measuring nerve conduction amplitudes in uv of upper and lower limbs nerves(sensory and motor).
lower limb nerves : tibial , common peroneal(CP) as motor and sural nerve as sensory .
upper limb nerves: ulnar nerve as motor and sensory. and compare at base line and 90 days after stem cells transfusion"|base line(zero dya), 90 days after stem cells transfusion|||uv||Standard Deviation|Mean
842418|NCT02387749|Primary|Change of Nerve Conduction Latency of Nerves Affected Measured by Nerve Conduction Study|Measuring nerve conduction latency in msec of upper and lower limbs nerves(sensory and motor) lower limb nerves : tibial , common peroneal(CP) as motor and sural nerve as sensory upper limb nerves: ulnar nerve as motor and sensory and compare at base line and 90 days after stem cells transfusion|base line(zero dya), 90 days after stem cells transfusion .|||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
842419|NCT02387749|Primary|Change of Nerve Conduction Velocities of Nerves Affected Measured by Nerve Conduction Study.|Measuring nerve conduction velocities(NCV) in m/sec upper and lower limbs nerves(sensory and motor) lower limb nerves : tibial , common peroneal(CP) as motor and sural nerve as sensory upper limb nerves: ulnar nerve as motor and sensory and compare at base line(zero day) and 90 days after stem cells transfusion|base line(zero dya), 90 days after stem cells transfusion.|||m/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
842420|NCT02387749|Primary|Measurement of b-FGF, v-EGF MEASURED BY ELISA|measurement of b-FGF and v-EGF MEASURED BY ELISA before (at zero), and after at (7 days, 90) days after stem cell transfusion to measure the effect of stem cell and its role in nerve regeneration|zero ( before) , 7 DAYS, 90 days|b-FGF, V-EGF (pg/ml) measured at zero, 7 days after stem cell transfusion measured by ELISA to measure the effectiveness of stem cells and as an indication for nerve regeneration||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
842437|NCT02275052|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inspiratory Capacity (IC) 3 Hours Post-dose at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|IC is defined as the maximum amount of air that can be inhaled into the lungs from the normal resting position after breathing out normally. Standard body plethysmography techniques were used for lung volumes. Baseline is the IC value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period. Mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each par. Period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each par. IC 3-hours post-dose was measured from the value obtained 3 hours after dosing on Day 2 and Week 12. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit (Day 2 or Week 12), smoking status, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions.|Baseline and at Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Week 30)|ITT Population including off-treatment data. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842438|NCT02275052|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Residual Capacity (FRC) 3 Hours Post-dose at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|FRC is defined as the amount of air still left in the lungs after breathing out normally. Standard body plethysmography techniques were used for lung volumes. Baseline is the assessment recorded before dosing on Day 1 of each period. Mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant. Period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. FRC 3 hours post-dose was measured from the value obtained 3 hours after dosing on Day 2 and Week 12. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model and the following covariates were included: period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions.|Baseline and at Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Week 30)|ITT Population including off-treatment data. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842439|NCT02275052|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|Trough FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the mean of FEV1 values obtained 23 and 24 hours after dosing on the previous day. Trough FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12. Baseline was the assessment recorded before dosing on Day 1 of each period. Mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant. Period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model and the following covariates were included: period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions.|Baseline and at Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Week 30)|ITT Population including off-treatment data. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842440|NCT02275052|Primary|Change From Baseline in Exercise Endurance Time (EET) Post-dose at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|EET post-dose at W12 is defined as the EET obtained 3 hours after dosing at W12. EET was measured using the externally paced field walking test called endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT). Change from BL in EET at W12 was analyzed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period walking speed, mean walking speed, period, trt, visit (Day 2, W6 and W12), smoking status, visit by period walking speed, visit by mean walking speed and visit by trt interactions. BL was the EET assessment obtained prior to dosing on Day 1 of each period. The mean walking speed for each par. is the mean of the levels used for the ESWT in each of the two trt periods. Period walking speed for each par. and trt period is the difference between the level for that par. and period and the mean walking speed for that par. Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population: all randomized par., excluding those who were randomized in error, and par. who discontinued trt (off-trt).|Baseline (BL) and at Week (W) 12 of each treatment (trt) period (up to Week 30)|ITT Population including off-treatment data. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Seconds (s)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842441|NCT02236611|Primary|Change From Baseline in Trough FEV1 on Day 85|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 on Day 85 is defined as the mean of the FEV1 values obtained 23 and 24 hours after dosing on Day 84 (Week 12). Trough FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry on Days 2, 28, 56, 84 and 85. Baseline trough FEV1 is the mean of the two assessments made -30 and -5 minutes (min) pre-dose on Day 1. Change from baseline was calculated as the trough FEV1 value on Day 85 minus the BL value. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, baseline FEV1, centre group, 24 hour subset flag, Day, Day by baseline and Day by treatment interactions. The least squares mean changes are presented here.|Baseline (BL) and Day 85|Per Protocol(PP) Population(pop): Participants(par) in the Intent-To-Treat pop who did not have a full protocol deviation considered to impact efficacy. Par represent those with data available at time point presented; however, all par. in the PP pop. without missing covariate information and >=1 post BL measurement are included in analysis||Liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842442|NCT02229487|Primary|GLP-1 Levels in Response to Oral Glucose Tolerance Test|Prediabetes patients with and without short sleep will undergo an oral glucose tolerance test with measurement of GLP-1 levels|2 weeks|||pmol/l.h||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
842487|NCT02162979|Secondary|Change in Dose of Anti-parkinsonian Medications||7 weeks||||||
842488|NCT02162979|Secondary|"Percent Change in on Time"|"on time is the period in which the subject is symptom free. We will track the amount of time the subject is considered symptom free before and after treatment. This value will be represented as a percent change."|4 weeks||||||
842478|NCT02164539|Secondary|Change in Clinic FEV1 Following 2 Puffs of Albuterol/Salbutamol Given 3 Hours Post-study Treatment Dose at Visit 5/Day 28|FEV1 is defined as forced expiratory volume in one second and measured in the morning at Visits 1 through 8 between 6:00 and 11:00 electronically by spirometry. Reversibility was measured at Visit 1 and Visit 2 for study eligibility by change in clinic FEV1 within 20 to 60 minutes following 4 inhalations of albuterol/salbutamol and again measured 3 hours after dosing at Visit 5 by change in clinic FEV1 30 minutes following 2 inhalations of albuterol/salbutamol. Baseline value of clinic FEV1 is the last acceptable/borderline acceptable (pre-dose) FEV1 value obtained prior to randomization (either from Visit 3 pre-dose or from Visit 2 pre-bronchodilator). Analysis performed using analysis of covariance with covariates of treatment, age, sex, baseline clinic trough FEV1, pre-albuterol/salbutamol FEV1 at Visit 5, pack years smoked per randomization stratification and age when first treated with an inhaler per randomization stratification.|Baseline and Day 28|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Liters (L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842479|NCT02164539|Secondary|Change From Trough in Clinic Forced Expiratory Volume (FEV1) at 3 Hours Post-study Treatment at Visit 5/Day 28|FEV1 was measured in the morning by spirometry. At Visit 5, after trough FEV1 is measured, subject received investigational product. 3 hours post-dose, spirometry was repeated and subject then received 2 puffs of albuterol/salbutamol. After 30 minutes,spirometry was repeated.. Change from Baseline in clinic trough (pre-dose) FEV1 is the difference in the trough value at 3 hours post-dose peak FEV1 and the Baseline value. If the trough value or the Baseline was missing, then change from Baseline was considered as missing. Baseline value of clinic FEV1 is the last acceptable/borderline acceptable (pre-dose) FEV1 value obtained prior to randomization (from Visit 3 pre-dose or from Visit 2 pre-bronchodilator). Analysis done using analysis of covariance with covariates of treatment, age, sex, baseline clinic trough FEV1, pre-dose trough FEV1 at Visit 5, pack years smoked per randomization stratification and age when first treated with an inhaler per randomization stratification.|Baseline and Day 28|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Liters (L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842480|NCT02164539|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Daily Morning (AM) PEF (Pre-dose and Pre-rescue Bronchodilator) Measured at Home and Averaged Over the Last 21 Days of Treatment Phase A|Peak expiratory flow (PEF) stability limit was calculated from AM PEF measurements on the 7 days preceding Visit 3 as mean AM PEF from the available 7 days preceding Visit 3 x 80%. PEF stability limit serves as a benchmark of the participants run-in COPD status and used for comparison during the treatment phase to assess subject safety. Change from Baseline over the last 21 days of Treatment Phase A is the difference between the last 21 days of Treatment Phase A and the appropriate Baseline week. The last 21 days of Treatment Phase A include the AM assessments on the date of Visit 6. AM assessments include the date of Visit 6 and the 20 consecutive days preceding the date of Visit. Analysis performed using analysis of covariance with covariates of treatment, age, sex, Baseline AM PEF, pack years smoked per randomization stratification and age when first treated with an inhaler per randomization stratification. Baseline is the last 7 days of the run-in period prior to randomization|Baseline and from Day 8 through Day 29|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Liters per minute (L/min)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842481|NCT02164539|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in E-RS Total Scores at the End of Treatment Phase A|A daily symptoms score for exacerbations of chronic pulmonary disease tool - Respiratory Symptoms (E-RS) is derived by summing the 11 item-level E-RS scores and has a theoretical range of 0-40, with higher values indicating more severe respiratory symptoms. The Baseline E-RS score is defined as the mean within-subject daily score over the 7 days prior to randomization, with data present for a minimum of 4 of the 7 days. Change from Baseline at the end of Treatment Phase is the difference between the end of Treatment Phase value and the appropriate Baseline week. Analysis performed using analysis of covariance with covariates of treatment, age, sex, baseline score, pack years smoked per randomization stratification and age when first treated with an inhaler per randomization stratification. Baseline is the last 7 days of the run-in period prior to randomization. All comparisons for statistical purposes are with the FF 100 µg arm.|Baseline and End of Treatment Phase A (The end of Treatment Phase A was defined as the last 7 days of Treatment Phase A, including the AM assessments on the date of Visit 6)|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Score on scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842482|NCT02164539|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Rescue Medication Use at the End of Treatment Phase A|All participants received the albuterol/salbutamol via MDI as a rescue medication on an as-needed basis. Total daily rescue medication use for a given day is the sum of daytime albuterol/salbutamol use recorded in PM and nighttime albuterol/salbutamol use recorded in AM the next day. The number of puffs of albuterol (salbutamol) MDI used in the last 12 hours for relief of symptoms were recorded morning and evening in the eDiary by the participants. End of Treatment Phase A is the last 7 days of Treatment Phase A. Change from Baseline at the end of Treatment Phase is the difference between the end of Treatment Phase value and the appropriate baseline week. Analysis performed using analysis of covariance with covariates of treatment, age, sex, baseline rescue medication use, pack years smoked per randomization stratification and age when first treated with an inhaler per randomization stratification. Baseline is the last 7 days of the run-in period prior to randomization|Baseline and End of Treatment Phase A (The end of Treatment Phase A was defined as the last 7 days of Treatment Phase A, including the AM assessments on the date of Visit 6)|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Puffs||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842483|NCT02164539|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinic Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at the End of Treatment Phase A (Visit 6/Day 29)|FEV1 is defined as forced expiratory volume in one second and measured in the morning at Visits 1 through 8 between 6:00 and 11:00 electronically by spirometry. Change from Baseline in trough FEV1 is defined as the difference in the value obtained at Visit 6 (24 hours post-dose on Visit 5) and the last acceptable/borderline acceptable value obtained prior to randomization (from Visit 2 pre-bronchodilator or Visit 3 pre-dose). Trough FEV1 is defined as the acceptable/borderline acceptable FEV1 value obtained at Visit 6, approximately 24 hours after morning dosing on Visit 5. ITT population is comprised of all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of randomized study medication in the treatment period. All comparisons for statistical purposes are with the FF 100 µg arm.|Baseline and Day 29|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
842490|NCT02091869|Other Pre-specified|Comparison of Participant Usage Rates Between Mobile and Paper Asthma Action Plans|We measured the participant usage rates by frequency of a mobile asthma action plan compared to usage rates of a paper asthma action plan. No mobile usage data was collected for the paper asthma plan group; and no paper usage data was collected for mobile phone group.|Six months|Mobile phone usage was not assessed in the paper asthma action plan group.||times per week||Full Range|Median
842491|NCT02091869|Other Pre-specified|Comparison of Participant Usage Rates Between Mobile and Paper Asthma Action Plans|We measured the participant usage rates by frequency of a mobile asthma action plan compared to usage rates of a paper asthma action plan. No mobile usage data was collected for the paper asthma plan group; and no paper usage data was collected for mobile phone group.|Six months|Our staff biostatistician used a random number generator using ANCOVA model to assign all participants into either the mobile app or paper app groups per protocol. Three participants did not use the mobile app per protocol.||days per week||Full Range|Median
842492|NCT02091869|Secondary|Change in Asthma Self-Efficacy Scores|"The Child Self-Efficacy instrument is a 14 item validated questionnaire designed to measure the child's self-efficacy with regard to attack prevention and attack management. The child will be required to select one of 5 responses ranging from “not at all sure” (1 point); a little bit sure (2 points); fairly sure (3 points); quite sure (4 points) to “completely sure” (5 points). Total score range from 14-70. The attack prevention scale range from 6-30 and attack management range from 8-40. The higher score represent a greater degree of self-efficacy. The Cronbach’s α reliability = 0.75. The child self-efficacy questionnaire will be administered at baseline (pre-intervention) and at the end of the intervention (post-intervention)."|Baseline and Six months|Our staff biostatistician used a random number generator using ANCOVA model to assign all participants into either the mobile app or paper app groups per protocol.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
842493|NCT02091869|Primary|Change in Asthma Control Test Scores|"The Asthma Control Test™ (ACT) is a 5 question health survey used to measure asthma control in individuals 12 years of age and older. The total sum scores range from 5-25. Higher scores mean that asthma is more controlled. The ACT is an efficient, reliable, and valid method of measuring asthma control, with or without, lung functioning measures such as spirometry. ACT helps identify and detect asthma patients who are not well controlled. ACT scores were examined pre- and post-intervention. A score total of 19 or less means asthma may not be well controlled. The timeframe is during the past 4 weeks. The scale range for Question 1 is all the time (1) to none of the time (5); Question 2 range: more than once a day (1) to not at all (5); Question 3 range: 4 or more nights a week (1) to not at all (5); Question 4 range: 3 or more times per day (1) to not at all (5); Question 5 range: not controlled at all (1) to completely controlled (5)."|Baseline and Six months|Our staff biostatistician used a random number generator using ANCOVA model to assign all participants into either the mobile app or paper app groups per protocol. The biostatistician was not be involved in testing or intervention procedures.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
842494|NCT02068157|Secondary|Serum Alkaline DNase (SADA) Activity|SADA activity will be correlated with tumor response according to the guidelines of the revised Response Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1.|Up to 12 months|The published assay could not be validated in murine samples. As such, no human samples were analyzed.|||||
842495|NCT02068157|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response or Partial Response According to RECIST v1.1|Tumor response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 12 months|All treated and eligible patients||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842534|NCT01980888|Secondary|Minimal Residual Disease Negativity Rate at Week 36|Minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity rate is defined as the proportion of participants with MRD < 10^-4 assessed by flow cytometry in bone marrow at Week 36 after therapy initiation or at least 12 weeks after the last dose of rituximab or bendamustine (whichever is later) for participants receiving the final dose of rituximab after the original scheduled date. MRD negativity rate was to be assessed by an IRC.|Up to 22 months|The study was terminated in agreement with the FDA due to urgent safety measures. Complete data were not collected for any participant.|||||
842535|NCT01980888|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the interval from randomization to death from any cause. Overall survival was to be assessed by an IRC.|Up to 22 months|The study was terminated in agreement with the FDA due to urgent safety measures. Complete data were not collected for any participant.|||||
842536|NCT01980888|Secondary|Complete Response Rate|Complete response rate is defined as the proportion of participants who achieve a confirmed complete response. Complete response rate was to be assessed by an IRC.|Up to 22 months|The study was terminated in agreement with the FDA due to urgent safety measures. Complete data were not collected for any participant.|||||
842537|NCT01980888|Secondary|Nodal Response Rate|Nodal response rate is defined as the proportion of participants who achieve a 50% decrease from baseline in the sum of the products of the greatest perpendicular diameters of index lesions. Nodal response rate was to be assessed by an IRC.|Up to 22 months|The study was terminated in agreement with the FDA due to urgent safety measures. Complete data were not collected for any participant.|||||
842538|NCT01980888|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|Overall response rate (ORR) is defined as the proportion of participants who achieve a confirmed complete or partial response. ORR was to be assessed by an IRC.|Up to 22 months|The study was terminated in agreement with the FDA due to urgent safety measures. Complete data were not collected for any participant.|||||
842539|NCT01980888|Primary|Progression-Free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) is defined as the interval from randomization to the first documentation of definitive disease progression or death from any cause. Definitive disease progression is CLL progression based on standard criteria, excluding lymphocytosis alone. PFS was to be assessed by an independent review committee (IRC).|Up to 22 months|"Intent to Treat (ITT) analysis set: all participants who are randomized in the study with treatment group designated according to initial randomization.
Due to early study termination, the prespecified efficacy analyses were not conducted. The PFS data presented are investigator assessments rather than IRC assessments."||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842605|NCT01797458|Secondary|Number of Children Experiencing Irreversible Pulpitis, Dental Abscess, or Extraction|Number of children experiencing irreversible pulpitis, dental abscess, or extraction judged clinically after 2 years|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
842602|NCT01797458|Other Pre-specified|Children Perception of Pain Intensity|Child's perception of pain intensity during treatment assessed with the Visual Analogue Scale of Faces|Baseline assessment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
842603|NCT01797458|Other Pre-specified|Children Behavior|Child's behavior as assessed by the Frankl Behavior Rating Scale|Baseline assessment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
842604|NCT01797458|Other Pre-specified|Oral Health Status|Child`s oral health status as assessed by the gingival status and bacterial plaque index judged clinically after 1 and 2 years|1 and 2 years||||||
842634|NCT01696942|Secondary|Endoscopic Recurrence of Crohn's Disease|To compare the endoscopic recurrence rates at one year following surgery between patients treated with certolizumab and mesalamine.|One year following enrollment|No analysis performed due to low enrollment in each arm.|||||
842635|NCT01696942|Primary|Clinical Recurrence Rates of Crohn's Disease|To evaluate the difference in clinical recurrence rates between certolizumab and mesalamine after 4 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months of use following ileocolectomy for Crohn’s disease using the Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI).|One year following enrollment|No analysis performed due to low enrollment in each arm.|||||
842636|NCT01685242|Secondary|Tolerability of Study Medication at Visit 3A|Tolerability was assessed upon instillation of study medication, at 1 minute and 2 minutes post study medication instillation. Drop comfort was assessed using a 0-to 10 scale where 0=very comfortable and 10=very uncomfortable.|upon instillation, 1 minute and 2 minutes post instillation|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842637|NCT01685242|Secondary|Nasal Composite Score at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. For Nasal Composite Score the Total Composite Score ranges from 0 to 16, higher scores represent greater severity. Patients needed to have at least one of the nasal symptoms present (Rhinorrhea + Nasal Pruritus + Ear or Palate Pruritus + Nasal Congestion) each symptom was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Composite score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||%participants with at least 1 nasal symp|||Number
842638|NCT01685242|Secondary|Nasal Composite Score at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. For Nasal Composite Score the Total Composite Score ranges from 0 to 16, higher scores represent greater severity. Patients needed to have at least one of the nasal symptoms present (Rhinorrhea + Nasal Pruritus + Ear or Palate Pruritus + Nasal Congestion) each symptom was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Composite score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||%participants with at least 1 nasal symp|||Number
842639|NCT01685242|Secondary|Nasal Congestion at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Nasal Congestion was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Congestion score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842640|NCT01685242|Secondary|Nasal Congestion at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Nasal Congestion was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Congestion score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842641|NCT01685242|Secondary|Ear or Palate Pruritus at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ear or Palate Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a single 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Ear or Palate Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842642|NCT01685242|Secondary|Ear or Palate Pruritus at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Ear or Palate Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a single 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Ear or Palate Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842643|NCT01685242|Secondary|Nasal Pruritus at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Nasal Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842644|NCT01685242|Secondary|Nasal Pruritus at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Nasal Pruritus was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Nasal Pruritus score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842645|NCT01685242|Secondary|Rhinorrhea at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Rhinorrhea was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Rhinorrhea score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842646|NCT01685242|Secondary|Rhinorrhea at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Rhinorrhea was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Rhinorrhea score for each time point was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842647|NCT01685242|Secondary|Tearing at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Tearing was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of tearing score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842648|NCT01685242|Secondary|Tearing at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Tearing was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of tearing score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842649|NCT01685242|Secondary|Eyelid Swelling at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Eyelid swelling was assessed by the patient on a 0-3 scale (0=none to 3=severe). Average of eyelid swelling score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842650|NCT01685242|Secondary|Eyelid Swelling at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Eyelid swelling was assessed by the patient on a 0-3 scale (0=none to 3=severe). Average of eyelid swelling score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842651|NCT01685242|Secondary|Chemosis at Onset of Action (15 Minutes)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Chemosis was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of chemosis score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842652|NCT01685242|Secondary|Chemosis at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Chemosis was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of chemosis score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842653|NCT01685242|Secondary|Episcleral Redness at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Episcleral Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of episcleral redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842654|NCT01685242|Secondary|Episcleral Redness at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Episcleral Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of episcleral redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842655|NCT01685242|Secondary|Ciliary Redness at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ciliary Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ciliary redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842656|NCT01685242|Secondary|Ciliary Redness at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Ciliary Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ciliary redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842657|NCT01685242|Primary|Conjunctival Redness at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Conjunctival Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of conjunctival redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842658|NCT01685242|Primary|Conjunctival Redness at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Conjunctival Redness was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of conjunctival redness score over both eyes was analyzed.|7, 15, 20 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842659|NCT01685242|Primary|Ocular Itching at Onset of Action (15 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 15 minutes after drop instillation. Ocular itching was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ocular itching score over both eyes was analyzed.|3, 5, 7 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842660|NCT01685242|Primary|Ocular Itching at Duration of Action (8 Hours + 30 Minutes Post-dose)|A treatment efficacy CAC was performed 8 hours + 30 minutes after drop instillation. Ocular itching was assessed by the patient on a 0-4 scale (0=none to 4=severe). Average of ocular itching score over both eyes was analyzed.|3, 5, 7 minutes post-CAC|Intent to Treat (ITT)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842696|NCT01649856|Secondary|Median Duration of Rituximab Administration for Each Treatment Cycle|Duration of rituximab administration was defined as the time from start to end of the SC injection or IV infusion. The median duration was reported.|Cycles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 (each cycle was 14 or 21 days)|Safety Population; n = number of participants in the analysis for the specified timepoint.||hours||Full Range|Median
842686|NCT01649856|Secondary|Duration of Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause.|Up to approximately 4.25 years|ITT Population.||months||Full Range|Median
842687|NCT01649856|Secondary|Number of Deaths||Up to approximately 4.25 years|ITT Population.||participants|||Number
842688|NCT01649856|Secondary|Duration of Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from randomization to first occurrence of disease progression, relapse, or death from any cause. Tumor response was assessed according to criteria published by Cheson et al (1999). Progression was defined as ≥50% increase in the sum of products of greatest diameters of any previously identified abnormal lymph node or the appearance of any new lesion. Relapse was defined as a new lesion or increase by ≥50% in size of previously involved sites, or ≥50% increase in greatest diameter of any previously identified node >1 cm, following an earlier assessment of CR or CRu.|Up to approximately 4.25 years|ITT Population.||months||Full Range|Median
842689|NCT01649856|Secondary|Number of Participants With Progression, Relapse, or Death|Tumor response was assessed according to criteria published by Cheson et al (1999). Progression was defined as ≥50% increase in the sum of products of greatest diameters of any previously identified abnormal lymph node or the appearance of any new lesion. Relapse was defined as a new lesion or increase by ≥50% in size of previously involved sites, or ≥50% increase in greatest diameter of any previously identified node >1 cm, following an earlier assessment of CR or CRu.|Up to approximately 4.25 years|ITT Population.||participants|||Number
842690|NCT01649856|Secondary|Duration of Disease-Free Survival (DFS)|DFS was defined as the time from date of initial CR/CRu to the date of relapse or death from any cause. Tumor response was assessed according to criteria published by Cheson et al (1999). Relapse was defined as a new lesion or increase by ≥50% in size of previously involved sites, or ≥50% increase in greatest diameter of any previously identified node >1 cm, following an earlier assessment of CR or CRu.|Up to approximately 4.25 years|ITT Population (Responder Subpopulation).||months||Full Range|Median
842691|NCT01649856|Secondary|Number of Participants With Relapse or Death at the Time of Primary Analysis|Tumor response was assessed according to criteria published by Cheson et al (1999). Relapse was defined as a new lesion or increase by ≥50% in size of previously involved sites, or ≥50% increase in greatest diameter of any previously identified node >1 cm, following an earlier assessment of CR or CRu. The number of participants who had experienced relapse or death prior to the clinical cut-off date (October 2014) was determined.|Up to approximately 2 years (assessed at Baseline, Day 1 of each cycle [maximum 8 cycles; each cycle was 14 or 21 days], every 3 months thereafter, and/or 4 weeks after early termination)|ITT Population (Responder Subpopulation): All participants who achieved CR or CRu after 4 cycles.||participants|||Number
842692|NCT01649856|Secondary|Duration of EFS|EFS was defined as the time from randomization to first occurrence of disease progression, relapse, initiation of other anti-lymphoma therapy, or death, whichever occurred first. Tumor response was assessed according to criteria published by Cheson et al (1999). Progression was defined as a ≥50% increase in the sum of products of greatest diameters of any previously identified abnormal lymph node or the appearance of any new lesion. Relapse was defined as a new lesion or increase by ≥50% in size of previously involved sites, or ≥50% increase in greatest diameter of any previously identified node >1 cm, following an earlier assessment of CR or CRu.|Up to approximately 4.25 years|ITT Population.||months||Full Range|Median
842693|NCT01649856|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Event-Free Survival (EFS) Event|EFS events included disease progression, relapse, initiation of other anti-lymphoma therapy, or death. Tumor response was assessed according to criteria published by Cheson et al (1999). Progression was defined as greater than or equal to (≥) 50% increase in the sum of products of greatest diameters of any previously identified abnormal lymph node or the appearance of any new lesion. Relapse was defined as a new lesion or increase by ≥50% in size of previously involved sites, or ≥50% increase in greatest diameter of any previously identified node >1 cm, following an earlier assessment of CR or CRu.|Up to approximately 4.25 years|ITT Population.||participants|||Number
842694|NCT01649856|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by Time Spent in the Hospital for Each Treatment Cycle|"Hospital time was defined as the amount of time the participant was in the hospital for the course of one cycle of rituximab + CHOP chemotherapy. Where the hospital time was not documented for a given cycle, it was reported as Missing."|Cycles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 (each cycle was 14 or 21 days)|Safety Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
842695|NCT01649856|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by Time Spent in the Infusion Chair/Bed for Each Treatment Cycle|"Chair time was defined as the amount of time the participant occupied an infusion chair/bed for a single treatment cycle of rituximab + CHOP chemotherapy. Where the chair time was not documented for a given cycle, it was reported as Missing."|Cycles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 (each cycle was 14 or 21 days)|Safety Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
842697|NCT01649856|Secondary|Rituximab Administration Satisfaction Questionnaire (RASQ) Domain Scores|The RASQ is a 20-item questionnaire that measures five domains related to the impact of treatment administration. These include physical impact, psychological impact, impact on activities of daily living (ADLs), convenience, and satisfaction. Each domain is scored on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores indicative of more positive feelings toward therapy. The score for each domain was averaged among all participants.|At Cycle 7 (each cycle was 14 or 21 days)|ITT Population (RASQ Subpopulation): All participants who completed the RASQ at Cycles 3 and 7; n = number of participants in the analysis for the specified domain.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842698|NCT01649856|Secondary|Cancer Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (CTSQ) Domain Scores|The CTSQ is a validated 16-item questionnaire that measures three domains related to satisfaction with cancer therapy. These include expectations of therapy, feelings about side effects, and satisfaction with therapy. Each domain is scored on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores indicative of more positive feelings toward therapy. The score for each domain was averaged among all participants.|At Cycle 7 (each cycle was 14 or 21 days)|ITT Population (CTSQ Subpopulation): All participants who completed the CTSQ at Cycles 3 and 7; number (n) = number of participants in the analysis for the specified domain.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842699|NCT01649856|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) or Complete Response Unconfirmed (CRu)|Tumor response was assessed per criteria published by Cheson et al (1999). According to consensus recommendations, CR was defined as complete disappearance of all clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms, regression of lymph nodes to normal size, absence of splenomegaly, and absence of bone marrow involvement. CRu was defined as disappearance of clinical and radiographic evidence of disease and absence of splenomegaly, with regression of lymph nodes by greater than (>) 75 percent (%) but still >1.5 centimeters (cm) in size, and indeterminate bone marrow assessment. The percentage of participants with either response at the end of induction (EOI) was determined with corresponding 95% Pearson-Clopper confidence interval (CI).|Up to approximately 4.25 years|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: All participants who completed Baseline and at least one on-treatment efficacy assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842700|NCT01639001|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent AEs (Treatment Related)|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study treatment in a participant who received study treatment. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. AEs were to be collected from first dose until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. SAEs could be collected after this timeframe if considered to be treatment related. Grade 3 and 4 AEs in the below table indicated severe AE and life-threatening consequences respectively; Grade 5 indicated death related to AE. Chemotherapy group in the below table, only includes data before crossover to crizotinib for those participants who crossed over to receive crizotinib treatment.|From the first dose of study medication until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. However all AEs entered in the database from the treatment start were included in AE analyses (assessed up to 33 months)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received during the first cycle.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842701|NCT01639001|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (AEs; All Causalities)|An AE was an untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study treatment without regard to possibility of causal relationship. Serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes: death, initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization, life-threatening experience, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent AEs were those with initial onset or that worsen in severity after the first dose of study medication. AEs were to be collected from first dose until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. SAEs could be collected after this timeframe if considered to be treatment related. Grade 3 and 4 AEs in below table indicated severe AE and life-threatening consequences respectively; Grade 5 indicated death due to AE. Chemotherapy group in the below table includes data before crossover to crizotinib for participants who crossed over to receive crizotinib.|From the first dose of study medication until 28 days after the last dose of study medication. However all AEs entered in the database from the treatment start were included in AE analyses (assessed up to 33 months)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received during the first cycle.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842702|NCT01639001|Secondary|Agreement Between Central Laboratory ALK FISH and ALK IHC Test Results - Molecular Profiling Evaluable|Agreement between central laboratory anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and ALK immunohistochemistry (IHC) test results is based on analysis of participants in the Molecular Profiling (MP) evaluable population that have an ALK IHC result and an ALK FISH result of either positive or negative only. This MP evaluable population included participants who screen failed, which their ALK test results were negative based on FISH test. Tumor tissue samples from these screen failure participants were consented and kept. These samples served as a part of negative sample set for evaluation of IHC test and/or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to determine ALK fusion events. Participants with FISH results of uninformative and assay not performed and IHC results of valid IHC status not available were excluded from the analysis of agreement between central laboratory ALK FISH and ALK IHC test results.|Screening, less than or equal to 28 days prior to dosing.|The MP evaluable population included 812 participants, of which there were 771 participants that had a test result (positive or negative) from both the FISH test and the IHC test.||Number of participants|||Number
842703|NCT01639001|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Visual Disturbance as Assessed by Visual Symptom Assessment Questionnaire (VSAQ-ALK)|"The participants who responded to the question: Have you experienced any visual disturbances? Only the participants who answered yes were instructed to complete the rest of the questionnaire. N was the number of participants who had completed the first question."|Cycle 1 Day 1 to end of treatment or withdrawal, no later than 4 weeks (+/- 1 week) from last dose of study medication or when the decision was taken to withdraw from the study (whichever was sooner, assessed up to 33 months)|Participants from the safety analysis population who completed a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PRO assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842704|NCT01639001|Secondary|Change From Baseline in General Health Status as Assessed by EQ-5D- Index|EQ-5D is a standardized, participant-administered measure of health outcome. It provides a descriptive profile for 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression), using 3 levels (no, moderate, or extreme problems) and a visual analog scale (VAS). EQ-5D summary index is obtained with a formula that weights each level of the 5 dimensions. The index-based score is interpreted along a continuum of 0 (death) to 1 (perfect health).|Cycle 1 Day 1 to end of treatment or withdrawal, no later than 4 weeks (+/- 1 week) from last dose of study medication or when the decision was taken to withdraw from the study (whichever was sooner, assessed up to 33 months)|Participants from the safety analysis population who completed a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PRO assessment.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
842705|NCT01639001|Secondary|Change From Baseline in General Health Status as Assessed by EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D)- Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|EQ-5D is a standardized, participant-administered measure of health outcome. It provides a descriptive profile for 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression), using 3 levels (no, moderate, or extreme problems) and a visual analog scale (VAS). The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.|Cycle 1 Day 1 to end of treatment or withdrawal, no later than 4 weeks (+/- 1 week) from last dose of study medication or when the decision was taken to withdraw from the study (whichever was sooner, assessed up to 33 months)|Participants from the safety analysis population who completed a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PRO assessment.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
842706|NCT01639001|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Lung Cancer Symptom Scores as Assessed by the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Lung Cancer 13 (QLQ- LC13)|The QLQ-LC13 consisted of 1 multi-item scale and 9 single items that assessed the specific symptoms (dyspnea, cough, hemoptysis, and site specific pain), side effects (sore mouth, dysphagia, neuropathy, and alopecia), and pain medication use of lung cancer participants receiving chemotherapy. The QLQ-LC13 Alopecia, Coughing, Dysphagia, Dyspnoea, Haemoptysis, Pain in arm or shoulder, Pain in chest, Pain in other parts, Peripheral neuropathy, and Sore mouth each ranged from 0-100 with higher scores indicating a high level of symptomatology/problems.|Cycle 1 Day 1 to end of treatment or withdrawal, no later than 4 weeks (+/- 1 week) from last dose of study medication or when the decision was taken to withdraw from the study (whichever was sooner, assessed up to 33 months)|Participants from the safety analysis population who completed a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PRO assessment.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
842707|NCT01639001|Secondary|Change From Baseline Scores in QLQ-C30 Symptoms as Assessed by the EORTC-QLQ-C30|EORTC QLQ-C30: included functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), global health status, symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting) and single items (dyspnoea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation/diarrhea and financial difficulties). The QLQ-C30 Appetite loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Dysponea, Fatigue, Financial difficulties, Insomnia, Nausea/vomiting, and Pain each ranged from 0-100 with higher scores indicating a high level of symptomatology/problems.|Cycle 1 Day 1 to end of treatment or withdrawal, no later than 4 weeks (+/- 1 week) from last dose of study medication or when the decision was taken to withdraw from the study (whichever was sooner, assessed up to 33 months)|Participants from the safety analysis population who completed a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PRO assessment.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
842708|NCT01639001|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functioning and Global Quality of Life (QOL) as Assessed by the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30)|EORTC QLQ-C30: included functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), global health status, symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting) and single items (dyspnoea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation/diarrhea and financial difficulties). The QLQ-C30 Global QOL, Physical Functioning, Role Functioning, Cognitive Functioning, Emotional Functioning, and Social Functioning each ranged from 0-100 with higher scores indicating a better level of functioning or better quality of life.|Cycle 1 Day 1 to end of treatment or withdrawal, no later than 4 weeks (+/- 1 week) from last dose of study medication or when the decision was taken to withdraw from the study (whichever was sooner, assessed up to 33 months)|Participants from the safety analysis population who completed a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PRO assessment.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
842709|NCT01639001|Secondary|Time to Deterioration (TTD) in Participant Reported Pain, Dyspnea, or Cough|TTD in pain in chest, dyspnea, or cough from the Quality of Life Questionnaire Supplement Module for Lung Cancer (QLQ-LC13) was a composite endpoint defined as the time from randomization to the earliest time the participant’s scale scores showed a 10 point or greater increase after baseline in any of the 3 symptoms.|From Baseline to deterioration while on study treatment. For participants with no deterioration, the data was censored at the last date when QLQ-LC13 assessment for pain, dyspnea, or cough was completed (assessed up to 33 months)|Participants from the safety analysis population who completed a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline PRO assessment.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842710|NCT01639001|Secondary|Extracranial Time To Progression (EC-TTP) Based on IRR|EC-TTP was defined similarly to TTP, but only considering extracranial disease (excluding intracranial disease) and the progression was determined based on either new extracranial lesions or progression of existing extracranial lesions.|Randomization to objective extracranial progression or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (whichever occurred first, assessed up to 33 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842711|NCT01639001|Secondary|Intracranial Time To Progression (IC-TTP) Based on IRR|IC-TTP was defined similarly to TTP, but only considering intracranial disease (excluding extracranial disease) and the progression was determined based on either new brain metastases or progression of existing brain metastases.|Randomization to objective intracranial progression or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (whichever occurred first, assessed up to 33 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842712|NCT01639001|Secondary|Time To Progression (TTP) Based on IRR|TTP was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the first documentation of objective tumor progression, as determined by IRR. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date was used. TTP (in months) was calculated as (first event date − randomization date +1)/30.44.|Randomization to objective progression, death or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (whichever occurred first, assessed up to 33 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842713|NCT01639001|Secondary|Time to Tumor Response (TTR) Based on IRR|TTR was defined as the time from randomization to first documentation of objective tumor response (CR or PR) as determined by the IRR. For participants proceeding from PR to CR, the onset of PR was taken as the onset of response. TTR was calculated for the subgroup of participants with objective tumor response.|Randomization to first documentation of objective tumor response (assessed up to 33 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization. N=Participants who had objective tumor response by IRR.||Weeks||Full Range|Median
842714|NCT01639001|Secondary|Duration of Response (DR) Based on IRR|DR was defined as the time from the first documentation of objective tumor response (CR or PR), as determined by the IRR, to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date was used. DR (in weeks) was calculated as (first date of PD or death − first date of CR or PR +1)/7. DR was only calculated for the subgroup of participants with an objective tumor response.|From objective response to date of progression, death or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (whichever occurred first, assessed up to 33 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization. N = Participants with objective tumor response by IRR.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842715|NCT01639001|Secondary|Estimate of the Percentage of Participants Surviving at 1 Year and at 18 Months|Probability of survival 1 year and 18 month after randomization. The probability of survival at 1 year was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method and a 2-sided 95% CI for the log [-log(1-year survival probability)] was calculated using a normal approximation and then back transformed to give a CI for the 1-year survival probability itself. The probability of survival at 18 months was estimated similarly.|From randomization to 18 months|The FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Percentage of paricipants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842716|NCT01639001|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control at 12 Weeks Based on IRR|Disease Control Rate (DCR) at 12 weeks is defined as the percent of participants with CR, PR or stable disease (SD) at 12 weeks according to RECIST version 1.1 as determined by the IRR. The best response of SD can be assigned if SD criteria were met at least once after randomization at a minimum interval of 6 weeks. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease. All nodes, both target and non-target, must decrease to normal (short axis <10 mm). No new lesions and disappearance of all non-target lesions. PR was defined as >=30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions. The short axis was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No unequivocal progression of non-target disease. No new lesions.|From randomization to Week 12|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842717|NCT01639001|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from randomization to the date of death due to any cause. OS (in months) was calculated as (date of death − date of randomization +1)/30.44.|From randomization to death or last date known alive for those not known to have died (whichever occurred first, assessed up to 33 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842718|NCT01639001|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) - Percentage of Participants With Objective Response Based on IRR|Percentage of participants with objective response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to RECIST version 1.1. CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease. All nodes, both target and non-target, must decrease to normal (short axis <10 mm). No new lesions and disappearance of all non-target lesions. PR was defined as >=30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions. The short axis was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No unequivocal progression of non-target disease. No new lesions.|Randomization to objective progression, death or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (assessed up to 33 months)|FA population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842719|NCT01639001|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Based on IRR by Treatment Arm|PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the first documentation of objective tumor progression (by IRR) or death on study due to any cause, whichever occured first. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date was used. PFS (in months) was calculated as (first event date − randomization date +1)/30.44. Progression is defined using RECIST v1.1, as at least a 20% increase (including an absolute increase of at least 5 millimeters) in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions and/or appearance of 1 or more new lesions.|Randomization to objective progression, death or last tumor assessment without progression before any additional anti-cancer therapy (whichever occurred first, assessed up to 33 months)|The Full Analysis (FA) population included all participants who were randomized with study treatment assignment designated according to the initial randomization.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
842746|NCT01612767|Secondary|Angina Pectoris Classification|"Evaluate the angina pectoris classification at each study visit.
Stable angina pectoris was classified according to the Canadian Cardiovascular Society's System: Stable Angina - Class I: normal activity does not cause angina; Stable Angina - Class II: slight limitation of normal activity, moderate exertion may cause angina; Stable Angina - Class III: marked limitation of ordinary physical activity; Stable Angina - Class IV: discomfort with any physical activity and pain may be present at rest
Unstable angina pectoris was classified according to the Braunwald System: Numeral I: newly onset severe or accelerated angina with no pain at rest; Numeral II: angina at rest within the preceding month but not the past 48 hours Numeral III: angina at rest within the preceding 48 hours; Letter A: develops in presence of conditions which intensify ischemia; Letter B: develops in the absence of extracardiac conditions; Letter C: develops within 2 weeks after an acute myocardial infarction"|Basline, Discharge, 1, 9, 12, 24 and 36 months post-index procedure|Long term follow-up data collection is ongoing for the 12, 24 and 36 month intervals.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842747|NCT01612767|Secondary|Lesion Success During the Index Procedure|Evaluate the lesion success associated with the implant of the PRO-Kinetic Energy stent. Lesion success is defined as the successful delivery and deployment of the investigational stent at the intended target lesion in combination with any adjunctive device (if applicable) to attain a final residual stenosis of < 30% by operator visual estimate.|Index procedure|||Percentage of participants|||Number
842748|NCT01612767|Secondary|Device Success During the Index Procedure|Evaluate the device success associated with the implant of the PRO-Kinetic Energy stent. Device success is defined as the successful delivery and deployment of the investigational stent at the intended target lesion in combination with standard post-dilation (if applicable) to attain a final residual stenosis of < 30% by operator visual estimate.|Index procedure|||Percentage of participants|||Number
842749|NCT01612767|Secondary|Index Procedure Success|Evaluate the index procedure success associated with the implant of the PR-Kinetic Energy stent. procedure success is defined as the successful delivery and deployment of the investiational stent at the intended target lesion in combination with any adjunctive device (if applicable) to attain a final residual stenosis of < 30% by operator visual estimate without the occurrence of cardiac death, any MI (target vessel or non-target vessel) or TLR prior to hospital discharge.|Index procedure|||Percentage of participants|||Number
842750|NCT01612767|Secondary|Stent Thrombosis Rate|Evaluate the stent thrombosis rate associated with the PRO-Kinetic Energy stent. Stent thrombosis was classified according to both timing and evidence as outlined by the ARC definition of stent thrombosis. Participants were included in the evaluations at visit intervals if they had a visit at the specified interval or a thrombosis was reported at or before the visit.|1, 9, 12, 24 and 36 months post-index procedure|Long term follow-up data collection is ongoing for the 12, 24 and 36 month intervals.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842751|NCT01612767|Secondary|All-cause Mortality and All-cause MI - Contribution of Individual Rates|Contribution of the individual rates of mortality and myocardial infarction to the overall composite safety rate.|1, 9, 12, 24, and 36 months post-index procedure|Long term follow-up data collection is ongoing for the 12, 24 and 36 month intervals.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842752|NCT01612767|Secondary|Composite of All-cause Mortality and All-cause MI|Characterize the overall safety of the PRO-Kinetic Energy stent by evaluating the composite rate of all-cause mortality and all-cause myocardial infarction.|1, 9, 12, 24, and 36 months post-index procedure|Long term follow-up data collection is ongoing for the 12, 24 and 36 month intervals.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842753|NCT01612767|Secondary|Overall Target Lesion Revascularization Rate|Evaluate the overall target lesion revascularization rate associated with the PRO-Kinetic Energy stent. The overall target lesion revascularization rate includes both ischemia-driven revascularization procedures of the target lesion, as well as revascularization procedures of the target lesion without prior clinical symptoms.|1, 9, 12, 24 and 36 months post-index procedure|Long term follow-up data collection is ongoing for the 12, 24 and 36 month intervals.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842754|NCT01612767|Secondary|Target Lesion Failure Rate - Contribution of Individual Event Types|The contribution of each individual event of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization to the overall rate of target lesion failure.|1, 9, 12, 24, and 36 months post-index procedure|Long term follow-up data collection is ongoing for the 12, 24 and 36 month intervals.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842755|NCT01612767|Secondary|Overall Target Lesion Failure Rate|Evaluate the target lesion failure rate of the PRO-Kinetic Energy stent. Target lesion failure includes cardiac death, MI, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization.|1, 9, 12, 24 and 36 months post-index procedure|Long term follow-up data collection is ongoing for the 12, 24 and 36 month intervals.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842756|NCT01612767|Secondary|Overall Target Vessel Revascularization Rate|Evaluate the overall target vessel revascularization rate of the PRO-Kinetic Energy stent. The rate includes both ischemia-driven revascularization procedures of the target vessel, as well as revascularization procedures of the target vessel without prior clinical symptoms.|1, 9, 12, 24 and 36 months post-index procedure|Long term follow-up data collection is ongoing for the 12, 24 and 36 month intervals.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842757|NCT01612767|Secondary|Target Vessel Failure Rate - Contribution of Individual Event Types|Contribution of each event type (cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization) to composite rate of target vessel failure.|1, 12, 24 and 36 months post-index procedure|Long term follow-up data collection is ongoing for the 12, 24 and 36 month intervals.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842758|NCT01612767|Secondary|Target Vessel Failure Rate|Evaluate the target vessel failure rate at 1, 12, 24, and 36 months post-index procedure. Target vessel failure is defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization.|1, 12, 24 and 36 months post-index procedure|Long term follow-up data collection is ongoing for the 12, 24 and 36 month intervals.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842759|NCT01612767|Primary|Target Vessel Failure Rate|The primary endpoint for the Pro-Kinetic Energy Stent is the target vessel failure rate at 9-months post-index procedure. Target vessel failure is defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization.|9 months post-index procedure|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
842765|NCT01597791|Primary|Rate of Positive Urine Culture (Bacteriuria)|This study will be assessed by collecting a twenty-four to forty-eight hour midstream urine sample and performing a urine culture. The clinical and laboratory criteria used to define a urinary tract infection in a woman immediately|48 Hours|||participants with positive urine culture|||Number
842775|NCT01550757|Primary|A Primary Outcome for This Study is the Number of Non-acute Emergency Department Visits.|A primary outcome for this study is non-acute emergency department visits.|Two years.|Veterans enrolled in the study based on the type of care they received at VA and then randomized to receive a peer or not.||number of visits||Standard Deviation|Mean
842811|NCT01514760|Secondary|Number of Participants That Utilized the Asthma Action Plan|The frequency of utilization of the Asthma Action Plan for acute symptoms among the study population will be measured and compared to responses of daily prompts that will ask participants to record whether they used rescue medication.|Eight weeks|||participants|||Number
842812|NCT01514760|Primary|Mobile Asthma Action Plan (AAP) Usage|Median number of days per week (range 0-7) the Asthma Action Plan was utilized to record routine (daily) symptoms or peak flow measurements.|Eight weeks|||days per week||Full Range|Median
842807|NCT01542541|Secondary|SUVavg in Each Colonic Segment||Day 2|||Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
842808|NCT01542541|Primary|SUVmax of FDG in Each Colonic Segment||Day 2|||SUV||Standard Deviation|Mean
842809|NCT01514760|Secondary|Asthma Control Test™ Scores|"The Asthma Control Test™ (ACT) is a 5 question health survey used to measure asthma control in individuals 12 years of age and older. The total sum scores range from 5-25. Higher scores mean that asthma is more controlled. The ACT is an efficient, reliable, and valid method of measuring asthma control, with or without, lung functioning measures such as spirometry. ACT helps identify and detect asthma patients who are not well controlled. ACT scores were examined pre- and post-intervention. A score total of 19 or less means asthma may not be well controlled. The timeframe is during the past 4 weeks. The scale range for Question 1 is all the time (1) to none of the time (5); Question 2 range: more than once a day (1) to not at all (5); Question 3 range: 4 or more nights a week (1) to not at all (5); Question 4 range: 3 or more times per day (1) to not at all (5); Question 5 range: not controlled at all (1) to completely controlled (5)."|Baseline and eight weeks|All participants and participants with uncontrolled asthma at baseline. The number of participant with uncontrolled asthma 10.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842810|NCT01514760|Secondary|Asthma Self-Efficacy for Adolescent Children|"The Child Self-Efficacy instrument is a 14 item validated questionnaire designed to measure the child's self-efficacy with regard to attack prevention and attack management. The child will be required to select one of 5 responses ranging from “not at all sure” (1 point); a little bit sure (2 points); fairly sure (3 points); quite sure (4 points) to “completely sure” (5 points). Total score range from 14-70. The higher score represent a greater degree of self-efficacy. The Cronbach’s α reliability = 0.75. The child self-efficacy questionnaire will be administered at baseline (pre-intervention) and at the end of the intervention (post-intervention)."|Baseline and eight weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
842913|NCT01376323|Secondary|Number of Participants With HbA1c < 7.0% and < 6.5%|Data has been presented for number of participants with their corresponding percentages with HbA1c <7.0% and <6.5%.|Up to Week 12|PD population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842914|NCT01376323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fructosamine at Week 6 and Week 12|Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the corresponding post-treatment values. Baseline was defined as mean of Day -1 visit. Statistics is provided for least square mean. It was assessed on Baseline (Day -1), Day 41 and Week 12.|Baseline (Day -1) and Week 12|PD population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Micromoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
842915|NCT01376323|Secondary|Summary of Homeostatic Model Assessment (HOMA) Index Calculated From Change From Baseline in Fasting Insulin and Fasting Glucose at Week 12|Mean of triplicate measurements at pre-dose time point was considered for the summary. HOMA was calculated by multiplying insulin concentration with glucose concentration divided by 22.5. Change from Baseline for insulin and glucose was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the corresponding post-treatment values. Baseline was defined as mean of Day 1 pre-dose visit. Statistics is provided for least square mean. It was assessed on Day 1 (pre-dose), 2 (pre-dose), Week 6 (pre-dose) and Week 12.|Baseline (Day 1) and up to Week 12|PD population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Index||Standard Deviation|Mean
842916|NCT01376323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Insulin at Week 12|Mean of triplicate measurements at pre-dose time point were considered for the summary. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the corresponding post-treatment values. Baseline was defined as mean of Day 1 pre-dose visit. Statistics is provided for least square mean at Week 12. It was assessed on Day 1 (pre-dose), 2 (pre-dose), Week 6 (pre-dose) and Week 12.|Baseline (Day 1) and up to Week 12|PD population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Picomoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
842917|NCT01376323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 12|Mean of triplicate measurements at pre-dose time point were considered for the summary. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the corresponding post-treatment values. Baseline was defined as mean of Day 1 pre-dose visit. Statistics is provided for least square mean at Week 12. It was assessed on Day 1 (pre-dose), 2 (pre-dose), Week 6 (pre-dose) and Week 12.|Baseline (Day 1) and up to Week 12|PD population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Millimoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
842918|NCT01376323|Secondary|GSK256073 AUC and HbA1c at Week 12 Was Evaluated to Establish the Exposure-response Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) Relationship|The relationships between drug exposure and HbA1c and relative PD endpoints of interest was planned to be plotted graphically. The data for this outcome measure was not collected.|Up to Week 12|PD population. The data for this outcome measure was not collected.|||||
842919|NCT01376323|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 12 Hour Non-esterified Fatty Acids (NEFA) and Glucose Weighted Mean Concentration Value at Day 2 and at Week 6|Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the corresponding post-treatment values. Baseline was defined as weighted mean value at Day 1 visit. Statistics is provided for least square mean at Week 6. It was assessed on Baseline (Day 1), Day 2 and Week 6.|Baseline (Day 1) and up to Week 6|PD population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Millimoles per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
842920|NCT01376323|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 12|Blood samples for analysis of HbA1c were collected at Baseline (Day -1), Day 41, Week 9 and Week 12. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the corresponding post-treatment values. Baseline was defined as Day -1 visit. Statistics is provided for least square mean at Week 12.|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Week 12|Pharmacodynamic (PD) population comprised of all participants who provide pharmacodynamic data. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage of Glycosylated Hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
842921|NCT01376323|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Urinalysis: Glucose, Protein, Blood and Ketones by Dipstick|Urinalysis parameters included glucose, protein, blood and ketones by dipstick. It was assessed on Baseline (Day -1) and 12. Urine glucose was measured as grams per deciliter (G/dL).|Up to Week 12|Safety population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842922|NCT01376323|Primary|Number of Participants With Hematology Abnormalities of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI)|Hematology parameters included platelet, red blood cell (RBC) count, mean corpuscular volume (MCV), neutrophils, white blood cell (WBC) count (absolute), mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH), lymphocytes, reticulocyte count, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC), monocytes, hemoglobin, eosinophils, hematocrit and basophils. It was assessed on Baseline (pre-dose Day 1) and 12. Data for parameters with high and low of PCI is provided.|Up to Week 12|Safety population||Participants|||Count of Participants
842923|NCT01376323|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Chemistry Abnormalities of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI)|Clinical chemistry parameters included blood urea nitrogen (BUN), potassium, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), total bilirubin, direct bilirubin, creatinine, chloride, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), uric acid, fasting glucose, total carbon dioxide, gamma glutamyltransferase (GGT), albumin, sodium, calcium, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), total protein, creatine phosphokinase (CPK) and fasting lipid panel including total cholesterol, triglycerides, high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. It was assessed on Baseline (pre-dose Day 1), Week 3 and 12. Data for parameters with high and low of PCI is provided.|Up to Week 12|Safety population||Participants|||Count of Participants
842924|NCT01376323|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECGs) Findings|Single 12-lead ECGs were obtained at each time point during the study using an ECG machine that automatically calculated the heart rate and measured PR, QRS, QT, and QTc intervals. It was assessed at Baseline (pre-dose Day 1), Day 2, Week 3, Week 6 and 12. Participants with normal, abnormal not clinically significant and abnormal clinically significant ECG were presented.|Up to Week 20|Safety population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842925|NCT01376323|Primary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate|Mean of triplicate measurements at each time point was considered for the summary. Baseline was defined as pre-dose of Day 1 visit. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the corresponding post-treatment values. It was assessed on Baseline (pre-dose Day 1), Day 1 (12 hours), Day 2, Week 3, 6, 9 and 12.|Baseline (pre-dose Day 1) and up to Week 12|Safety population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
842926|NCT01376323|Primary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|Mean of triplicate measurements at each time point was considered for the summary. Baseline was defined as pre-dose of Day 1 visit. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the corresponding post-treatment values. It was assessed on Baseline, Day 1 (12 hours), Day 2 (pre-dose and 12 hours), Week 3, 6 (pre-dose and 12 hours), 9 and 12.|Baseline (pre-dose Day 1) and up to Week 12|Safety population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Millimeters of mercury||Standard Deviation|Mean
842927|NCT01376323|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the definition above, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury.|Up to Week 12|Safety population was used which was defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Count of Participants
842976|NCT01342211|Secondary|Number of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) by Severity|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. Investigator assessed TEAEs as mild (did not interfere with participant’s usual function), moderate (interfered to some extent with participant’s usual function) or severe (interfered significantly with participant's usual function). TEAEs are events between first dose of study drug and up to Day 141 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.|Day 1 up to Day 141|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||adverse events|||Number
842966|NCT01345253|Secondary|Time to First Severe SLE Flare Index (SFI) Flare Over 52 Weeks.|Time to first severe SLE flare is defined as the number of days from first treatment until the participant had an event (event date-treatement start date +1). If a participant had a severe SFI flare and received protocol restricted medication then the event date was the earliest of the first severe SFI flare date, and the treatment failure date. Analysis of severe SFI flare was performed on the modified SELENA SLEDAI SLE flare index in which the modification excluded severe flares that were triggered only by an increase in SELENA SLEDAI score to >12. Analysis was from Cox proportional hazards model for the comparison between belimumab and placebo adjusting for country, Baseline SELENA SLEDAI score (<=9 vs. >=10) and complement levels (low C3 and/or C4 vs. no low C3 or C4).|52 weeks|MITT Population||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
842967|NCT01345253|Secondary|Number of Days of Daily Prednisone Dose <=7.5 mg/Day and/or Reduced by 50 Percent From Baseline Over 52 Weeks.|Number of days of daily prednisone dose <=7.5 mg/day and/or reduced by 50 percent over time through each scheduled visit during the blinded period were compaired between belimumab and placebo using Rank ANCOVA model which was used for comparing belimumab and placebo. The independent variables in the model included treatment group, Baseline prednisone dose level, country, Baseline SELENA SLEDAI score (<=9 vs. >=10) and complement levels (low C3 and/or C4 vs. no low C3 or C4). This analysis was perfomed on the participants who used prednisone >7.5 mg/day at Baseline.|Week 52|MITT Population||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
842968|NCT01345253|Secondary|Percent of Participants With SRI7 Response at Week 52.|SRI7 response is defined as the percent of participants with >=7 point reduction from Baseline in SELENA SLEDAI score and no worsening (increase of < 0.30 points from Baseline) in PGA and no new BILAG A organ domain score or 2 new BILAG B organ domain scores compared with Baseline at the time of assessment (at Week 52 of the blinded period). A SELENA SLEDAI score of 0 would suggest no lupus activity; while a score of 105 is the maximum calculable if all items were scored as being present from active lupus. PGA ranges from 0 (no activity) to 3 (severe activity). BILAG has no range. The higher thresholds of SELENA SLEDAI improvement (i.e., SRI5, SRI6, and SRI7) indicates a higher response (SRI5 is a 5 point SELENA SLEDAI reduction, SRI6 is a 6 point reduction, and SRI7 is a 7 point reduction).|Baseline (Day 0) and Week 52|MITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842969|NCT01345253|Secondary|Percent of Participants With >=4 Point Reduction From Baseline in SELENA SLEDAI Score at Week 52.|The SELENA SLEDAI score is a weighted index for assessing SLE disease activity in which signs and symptoms, laboratory tests and physician's assessment for each of 9 organ system were given a weighted score and summed if present at the time of the visit or in the preceding 10 days. A SELENA SLEDAI score of 0 would suggest no lupus activity; while a score of 105 is the maximum calculable if all items were scored as being present from active lupus. A decrease of 4 points or more equates to a clinically meaningful improvement. The Baseline value of a variable is defined as the value of the variable measured at Day 0 prior to dosing. In case of multiple results on Day 0 prior to dosing, the latest result was used. If a Day 0 value was not available, the last available value prior to Day 0 was used.|Baseline (Day 0) and Week 52|MITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842970|NCT01345253|Primary|Percent of Participants Achieving Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Responder Index (SRI) Response Rate at Week 52.|SRI response is a composite index, defined as the percent of participants with >=4 point reduction from Baseline in safety of estrogen in lupus national assessment (SELENA) systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index (SLEDAI) score and no worsening (increase of < 0.30 points from Baseline) in physicians global assessment (PGA) and no new British isles lupus assessment group (BILAG) A organ domain score or 2 new BILAG B organ domain scores compared with Baseline at the time of assessment (at Week 52 of the blinded period). A SELENA SLEDAI score of 0 would suggest no lupus activity; while a score of 105 is the maximum calculable if all items were scored as being present from active lupus. PGA ranges from 0 (no activity) to 3 (severe activity). BILAG has no range. The higher thresholds of SELENA SLEDAI improvement (i.e., SRI5, SRI6, and SRI7) indicates a higher response (SRI5 is a 5 point SELENA SLEDAI reduction, SRI6 is a 6 point reduction, and SRI7 is a 7 point reduction).|Week 52|Modified Intention-to-Treat (MITT) Population: all participants who were randomized and treated with at least one dose of study treatment, with exclusion of participants from the site 086485.||Percentage of participants|||Number
842971|NCT01342211|Other Pre-specified|Percent Change From Baseline in Lipoprotein (a) (Lp[a]) at Day 29, 57, 71, 85, 99, 127 and 141|Baseline value was calculated as the average of Day 7 and Day 1 measurements collected prior to study drug administration.|Baseline, Day 29, 57, 71, 85, 99, 127, 141|Efficacy analysis set. 'number analyzed' = participants who were evaluable for specified time points for each arm. Results for percent change at Day 85 in Lp(a) was not reported because data was not collected for Lp(a) at Day 85 due to an inadvertent omission in the protocol.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
842972|NCT01342211|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Lipoprotein (a) (Lp[a]) at Day 29, 57, 71, 85, 99, 127 and 141|Baseline value was calculated as the average of Day 7 and Day 1 measurements collected prior to study drug administration.|Baseline, Day 29, 57, 71, 85, 99, 127, 141|Efficacy analysis set. 'number analyzed' = participants who were evaluable for specified time points for each arm. Results for change at Day 85 in Lp(a) was not reported because data was not collected for Lp(a) at Day 85 due to an inadvertent omission in the protocol.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
842973|NCT01342211|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-drug Antibody (ADA)|Human serum ADA samples of participants who received PF-04950615 (RN316) were analyzed for the presence of anti-PF-04950615 (RN316) antibodies by using the semi quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Results with titer value >=4.32 nanogram per milliliter of anti-PF-04950615 antibodies were counted as positive. Number of participants with presence of anti-PF-04950615 antibodies were reported in this outcome measure.|Day 1 up to Day 141|Analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of PF-04950615 (RN316).||participants|||Number
842974|NCT01342211|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Vital Signs and Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters|Criteria for clinical significant vital signs: maximum increase or decrease from baseline in supine systolic blood pressure (BP) greater than or equal to (>=) 30 millimeter of mercury (mmHg), maximum increase or decrease from baseline in supine diastolic BP of >=20 mmHg. Criteria for clinically significant ECG parameters: maximum increase of >=25 percent (%) for baseline value of >200 millisecond (msec) and maximum increase of >=50% for baseline value of less than or equal to (<=) 200 msec for PR and QRS interval; maximum increase from baseline of >30 to <=60 msec and maximum increase from baseline of >60 msec for QT interval corrected using the Fridericia's formula (QTCF).|Day 1 up to Day 141|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
842975|NCT01342211|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Relevant Laboratory Abnormalities|Hematology (hemoglobin[hgb],hematocrit,red blood cell[RBC]<0.8*lower limit of normal[LLN],mean cell[MC] volume,MC hgb,MC hg concentration <0.9*LLN, greater than[>] 1.1*upper limit of normal[ULN], platelet <0.5*LLN,>1.75*ULN, white blood cell[WBC]<0.6*LLN,>1.5*ULN,neutrophil,lymphocyte <0.8*LLN,>1.2*ULN,eosinophil,basophil,monocyte >1.2*ULN);chemistry(total, direct, indirect bilirubin[BR]>1.5*ULN,aspartate aminotransferase[AT],alanine AT,alkaline phosphatase,gamma-glutyl transferase>3.0*ULN,protein,lactate dehydrogenase <0.8*LLN,>1.2*ULN,creatinine,blood urea nitrogen>1.3*ULN,uric acid >1.2*ULN,potassium,chloride,calcium,bicarbonate<0.9*LLN,>1.1*ULN, sodium<0.95*LLN,>1.05*ULN,glucose[GL]<0.6*LLN,>1.5*ULN,amylase,lipase >1.5*ULN,creatinine kinase>2.0*ULN);urinalysis(pH <4.5,>8,specific gravity<1.003 , >1.030, GL,ketone,protein,hgb,BR,nitrite,leukocyte greater than or equal to [>=]1, RBC, WBC >=20);coagulation(prothrombin[PT],PT international ratio,partial thromboplastin time>1.1*ULN).|Day 1 up to Day 141|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Here 'N' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
842977|NCT01342211|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. Serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. TEAEs are events between first dose of study drug and up to Day 141 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. Treatment related: a TEAE deemed related to the study drug by the investigator. TEAEs included SAEs (TESAEs) as well as non-serious AEs which occurred during the study. The participants with TEAEs, SAEs and treatment-related TEAEs were reported.|Day 1 up to Day 141|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
842978|NCT01342211|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Lipid Parameters at Day 29, 57 and 85|Lipid parameters included: high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), non-high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (non-HDL-C), triglyceride (TG), apolipoprotein B (ApoB) and apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1). Baseline value was calculated as the average of Day 7 and Day 1 measurements collected prior to study drug administration.|Baseline, Day 29, 57, 85|Efficacy analysis set. 'number analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm. Results for percent change at Day 85 for ApoB and ApoA1 were not reported because data was not collected for ApoB and ApoA1 at Day 85 due to an inadvertent omission in the protocol.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
842979|NCT01342211|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Lipid Parameters at Day 29, 57 and 85|Lipid parameters included: high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), non-high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (non-HDL-C), triglyceride (TG), apolipoprotein B (ApoB) and apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1). Baseline value was calculated as the average of Day 7 and Day 1 measurements collected prior to study drug administration.|Baseline, Day 29, 57, 85|Efficacy analysis set. 'number analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm. Results for change at Day 85 in lipid parameters ApoB and ApoA1 were not reported because data was not collected for ApoB and ApoA1 at Day 85 due to an inadvertent omission in the protocol.||milligram per deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
842980|NCT01342211|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving at Least 30 Percent Decrease in Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C)||Day 29, 57, 85|Efficacy analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and completed the Day 85 visit or dropped out prematurely, whichever was earlier. 'N' = participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'number analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm.||percentage of participants|||Number
842981|NCT01342211|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) Less Than (<) 70 and <100 Milligram Per Deciliter (mg/dL)||Day 29, 57, 85|Efficacy analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and completed the Day 85 visit or dropped out prematurely, whichever was earlier. 'N' = participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure and 'number analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at specified time points for each arm.||percentage of participants|||Number
842982|NCT01342211|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) at Day 85|Baseline value was calculated as the average of Day 7 and Day 1 measurements collected prior to study drug administration.|Baseline, Day 85|Efficacy analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and completed the Day 85 visit or dropped out prematurely, whichever was earlier. Here 'N' (Overall number of participants analyzed) signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
842991|NCT01328444|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 3-hours Post-dose FEV1 at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|FEVI is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Baseline is the FEV1 value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period, mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant, and period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Clinic visit post-dose FEV1 at Week 12 (Treatment Day 85) is defined as the FEV1 value obtained 3 hours after dosing on Treatment Day 85. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions 3 hour post-dose FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 29)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842992|NCT01328444|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Residual Volume (Trough and 3-hours Post-dose) at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|Residual Volume (RV) is defined as the air that remains in the lungs after breathing out as fully as possible. Baseline is the RV value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period, mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant, and period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Trough RV is measured pre-dose on Treatment Week 12. RV 3-hours post-dose is measured from the value obtained 3 hours after dosing on Treatment Week 12. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions. RV measurements were taken electronically by plethysmography on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 29)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842993|NCT01328444|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Residual Capacity (Trough and 3-hours Post-dose) at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|Functional Residual Capacity (FRC) is defined as the amount of air still left in the lungs after breathing out normally. Baseline is the FRC value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period, mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant, and period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Trough FRC is measured pre-dose on Treatment Week 12. FRC 3-hours post-dose is measured from the value obtained 3 hours after dosing on Treatment Week 12. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions. FRC measurements were taken electronically by plethysmography on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 29)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842994|NCT01328444|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Inspiratory Capacity (Trough and 3-hours Post-dose) at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|Inspiratory capacity (IC) is defined as the maximum amount of air that can be inhaled into the lungs from the normal resting position after breathing out normally. Baseline is the IC value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period, mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant, and period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Trough IC is measured pre-dose on Treatment Week 12 of each treatment period. IC 3-hours post-dose is measured from the value obtained 3 hours after dosing on Treatment Week 12 of each treatment period. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions. IC measurements were taken electronically by plethysmography on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 29)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842995|NCT01328444|Primary|Change From Baseline in Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12. Baseline is the FEV1 value recorded pre-dose on Day 1 of each treatment period, mean Baseline is the mean of the Baselines for each participant, and period Baseline is the difference between the Baseline and the mean Baseline in each treatment period for each participant. Clinic visit trough (pre-bronchodilator and pre-dose) FEV1 at Week 12 (Treatment Day 85) is defined as the FEV1 value obtained 24 hours after dosing on Treatment Day 84. Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period Baseline, mean Baseline, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period Baseline, visit by mean Baseline and visit by treatment interactions.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 29)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842996|NCT01328444|Primary|Change From Baseline in Exercise Endurance Time Post-dose at Week 12 of Each Treatment Period|Exercise endurance time (EET) post-dose at Week 12 is defined as the EET obtained 3 hours after dosing at Week 12. EET was measured using the externally paced field walking test called the endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT). Analysis performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of period walking speed, mean walking speed, period, treatment, visit, smoking status, center group, visit by period walking speed, visit by mean walking speed and visit by treatment interactions. The model used all available 3-hour post-dose change from baseline EET values recorded on Day 2, Week 6 and Week 12. Baseline was the EET assessment obtained prior to dosing on Day 1 of each period. The mean walking speed for each participant is the mean of the levels used for the ESWT in each of the two treatment periods. The period walking speed for each participant and treatment period is the difference between the level for that participant and period and the mean walking speed for that participant.|Week 12 of each treatment period (up to Study Week 29)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study drug in either treatment period. Number of par. represent those with data available at the time point; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post Baseline measurement are included.||Seconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842997|NCT01313637|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in the Mean Shortness of Breath With Daily Activities (SOBDA) Score for Week 24|The newly developed SOBDA questionnaire assesses dyspnea or shortness of breath (SOB) with daily activities. The SOBDA questionnaire is made up of 13 items completed by the participant (par.) each evening prior to bedtime, when the par. is instructed to reflect on the current day’s activities. The daily score is computed as the mean of the scores on the 13 items (>=7 items must have non-missing responses for this to be calculated). The par. is assigned a weekly mean SOBDA score ranging from 1 to 4 (greater scores indicate more severe breathlessness with daily activities) based on the mean of 7 days of data (>=4 of 7 days must be completed for a weekly mean to be calculated). Change from BL is the mean weekly SOBDA score minus BL. Analysis was performed using MMRM with covariates of treatment, BL (mean score in the week prior to treatment), smoking status, center group, week, week by BL and week by treatment interactions. This MMRM analysis only included Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24.|Baseline and Week 24|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to trt. who received at least one dose of randomized study drug. Par. represents those with data available at the time point being presented; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post BL measurement are included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842998|NCT01313637|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean (WM) 0-6 Hour FEV1 Obtained Post-dose at Day 168|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. The WM FEV1 was derived by calculating the area under the FEV1/time curve (AUC) using the trapezoidal rule, and then dividing the value by the time interval over which the AUC was calculated. The WM was calculated at Days 1, 28, 84, and 168 using the 0-6-hour post-dose FEV1 measurements collected on that day, which included pre-dose (Day 1: 30 minutes [min] and 5 min prior to dosing; other serial visits: 23 and 24 hours after the previous morning dose) and post-dose at 15 min, 30 min, 1 hour, 3 hours, and 6 hours. Change from Baseline at a particular visit was calculated as the WM at that visit minus Baseline. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, Baseline (mean of the two assessments made 30 min and 5 min pre-dose on Day 1), smoking status, center group, day, and day by Baseline and day by treatment interactions.|Baseline and Day 168|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to trt. who received at least one dose of randomized study drug. Par. represents those with data available at the time point being presented; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post BL measurement are included in the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
842999|NCT01313637|Secondary|Mean Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) Focal Score at Day 168 (Week 24)|Considered an 'other' endpoint by the FDA. The TDI is an interviewer-administered instrument which measures the changes in the participant's dyspnea from Baseline. This questionnaire was collected on Days 28, 84 and 168. The scores in the TDI evaluate ratings for 3 different categories (functional impairment, magnitude of task in exertional capacity, and magnitude of effort). TDI scores ranged from -3 (major deterioration) to +3 (major improvement); total score = -9 to 9. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, Baseline dyspnea index (BDI) focal score,smoking status, center group, day, day by BDI focal score and day by treatment interactions.|Day 168 (Week 24)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to trt. who received at least one dose of randomized study drug. Par. represents those with data available at the time point being presented; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post BL measurement are included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
843000|NCT01313637|Primary|Change From Baseline (BL) in Trough Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) on Day 169 (Week 24)|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. Trough FEV1 measurements were taken electronically by spirometry on Days 2, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, and 169. Baseline is defined as the mean of the assessments made 30 minutes pre-dose and 5 minutes pre-dose on Treatment Day 1. Trough FEV1 is defined as the mean of the FEV1 values obtained at 23 and 24 hours after the previous morning's dosing (ie., trough FEV1 on Day 169 is the mean of the FEV1 values obtained 23 and 24 hours after the morning dosing on Day 168). Change from Baseline at a particular visit was calculated as the trough FEV1 at that visit minus Baseline. Analysis was performed using a repeated measures model with covariates of treatment, Baseline , smoking status, center group, day, and day by Baseline and day by treatment interactions. ITT=Intent-to-Treat; par.=participants.|Baseline and Day 169|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all par. randomized to trt. who received at least one dose of randomized study drug. Par. represents those with data available at the time point being presented; however, all par. in the ITT population without missing covariate information and with at least one post BL measurement are included in the analysis.||Liters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
843287|NCT01086384|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Evening Pre-dose Trough FEV1 at Week 36|Evening pre-dose trough (lowest value) forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was measured using spirometry equipment that met or exceeded the minimal performance recommendations of the American Thoracic Society. FEV1 is a measure of the maximum amount of air forcefully exhaled in one second. Change from Baseline in evening pre-dose FEV1 was analyzed using an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model with effects due to Baseline FEV1, sex, age, region, and treatment. Change from Baseline was calculated as the Week 36 value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Week 36|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point (Week 36) were analyzed.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Least Squares Mean
843288|NCT01086384|Secondary|Number of Severe Asthma Exacerbations|A severe asthma exacerbation is defined as a deterioration of asthma requiring the use of systemic corticosteroids (tablets, suspension, or injection) for at least 3 days or an in-patient hospitalization or emergency department visit due to asthma that required systemic corticosteroids. A participant may have had one or more exacerbations.|Baseline to Follow-up (up to 76 weeks of treatment)|ITT Population||Severe asthma exacerbations|||Number
843289|NCT01086384|Primary|Number of Participants With 1 or More Severe Asthma Exacerbations|Asthma is a medical condition that causes narrowing of the small airways in the lungs. A severe asthma exacerbation is defined as a deterioration of asthma requiring the use of systemic corticosteroids (tablets, suspension, or injection) for at least 3 days or an in-patient hospitalization or emergency department visit due to asthma that required systemic corticosteroids. Only events deemed by the adjudication committee to be severe asthma exacerbations were used in the analysis of severe asthma exacerbations. The time to the first severe asthma exacerbation was analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards regression model, adjusting for Baseline disease severity (Baseline forced expiratory volume in one second [FEV1, maximum amount of air forcefully exhaled in one second]), sex, age, and region.|Baseline to Follow-up (up to 76 weeks of treatment)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study medication.||participants|||Number
843306|NCT01061671|Secondary|Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacoepigenetics of Statin Therapy in COPD||one time point within study period||||||
843307|NCT01061671|Secondary|The Effect of Current Smoking Status on Inflammatory Biomarker Levels and Response to Simvastatin Treatment||up to 37 months||||||
843308|NCT01061671|Secondary|Rate of Combined Cardiovascular Events||up to 37 months||||||
843309|NCT01061671|Secondary|Systemic and Lung-specific Biomarkers of Inflammation and Procoagulant Activity||up to 37 months||||||
843310|NCT01061671|Secondary|Acute Exacerbation COPD Hospitalization Rates (Events/Patient Year)||up to 37 months|Analysis excludes participants without any follow-up data.||events per patient year||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
843311|NCT01061671|Secondary|Change in FEV1 (% Pred) From Baseline to Last Measure||Baseline, last measure at up to 37 months|Analysis excludes participants without any follow-up data.||percent predicted||90% Confidence Interval|Median
843312|NCT01061671|Secondary|Time to First COPD Exacerbation||up to 37 months|Analysis excludes participants without any follow-up data.||Days to the first exacerbation||95% Confidence Interval|Median
843313|NCT01061671|Primary|Rates of COPD Exacerbations||up to 37 months|Analysis excludes participants without any follow-up data.||exacerbations/person-year||Standard Deviation|Mean
843335|NCT01015118|Secondary|Change in Global Health Status/ Quality of Life (QoL) Scale Over Time.|"Change in Global Health Status/ Quality of life (QoL) over time was calculated on Global Health Status/QoL scale (composite of items 29 and 30 of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) as a general measure.
As specified in the EORTC scoring manual, for each scale or item, a linear transformation was applied to standardize the raw score to a range from 0 to 100 (high scores represent a high/healthy level of functioning).
Mean presented is Adjusted mean. Adjusted for the stratification factors macroscopic residual postoperative tumour at baseline (yes vs. no), FIGO stage (IIB−III vs IV), and Carboplatin level (AUC5 vs. AUC6)."|First drug administration until final DBL 26September16, upto 62 months|Randomised Set (RS) for patients with global health status/QoL||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
843336|NCT01015118|Secondary|Change in Abdominal/Gastro-intestinal Symptoms Over Time|"Change in abdominal/gastro-intestinal over time was calculated on symptoms (scale composite of items 31 to 37 of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Module for Ovarian Cancer 28 (EORTC QLQ OV-28).
As specified in the EORTC scoring manual, for each scale or item, a linear transformation was applied to standardize the raw score to a range from 0 to 100 (high scores represent a high/severe level of symptomatology).
Mean presented is Adjusted mean. Adjusted for the stratification factors macroscopic residual postoperative tumour at baseline (yes vs. no), FIGO stage (IIB−III vs IV), and Carboplatin level (AUC5 vs. AUC6)."|First drug administration until final DBL 26September16, upto 62 months|Randomised Set (RS) for patients with abdominal/gastro-intestinal symptoms||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
843337|NCT01015118|Secondary|Objective Response Based on Investigator Assessment|Objective tumour response defined as either complete response [CR] or partial response [PR] in patients with at least 1 target lesion reported at baseline|First drug administration until final DBL 26September16, upto 62 months|Randomised Set (RS) for patients with at least 1 target lesion reported at baseline||percentage of participants|||Number
843338|NCT01015118|Secondary|Time to CA-125 Tumour Marker Progression|Time to tumour-marker progression was defined as the time from randomisation until the date when Carbohydrate (cancer) antigen (CA-125) values increased to higher than twice the nadir value. CA-125 >=2 x nadir in case nadir value > Upper limit of normal (ULN) or CA-125 >=2 x ULN in case nadir value <= ULN.|First drug administration until final DBL 26September16, upto 62 months|Randomised set (RS)||Months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
843339|NCT01015118|Secondary|Overall Survival|"Overall survival is defined as time from randomization to date of death (irrespective of reason).
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve for each treatment arm."|First drug administration to date of death until final DBL 26September16, upto 62 months|Randomised Set (RS)||Months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
843340|NCT01015118|Secondary|PFS Based on Investigator Assessment According to mRECIST Version 1.1 (Key Secondary Endpoint - Follow up Analysis).|Follow-up analysis was conducted at the time of overall survival analysis. Progression free survival is calculated as the time from randomisation to the date of disease progression, or to the date of death, whichever occurs first based on the Investigator assessment according to Modified Response Evaluation Criteria (mRECIST), version 1.1. Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve for each treatment arm.|First drug administration to date of disease progression or death whichever occurs first until final Data Base Lock (DBL) 26September16, upto 62 months|Randomised Set (RS)||Months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
843341|NCT01015118|Secondary|PFS Based on Investigator Assessment According to mRECIST Version 1.1 (Key Secondary Endpoint).|"Progression free survival is calculated as the time from randomisation to the date of disease progression, or to the date of death, whichever occurs first based on the Investigator assessment according to Modified Response Evaluation Criteria (mRECIST), version 1.1.
The primary PFS analysis of this trial was performed when approximately 753 patients had experienced a PFS event.
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve for each treatment arm."|First drug administration to date of disease progression or death whichever occurs first , upto 29 months|Randomised Set (RS)||Months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
843342|NCT01015118|Primary|PFS Based on Investigator Assessment According to Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, Version 1.1 (mRECIST), and Additional Clinical Criteria (Follow up Analysis).|"Follow-up analysis was conducted at the time of overall survival analysis. Progression free survival (PFS) is calculated as the time from randomisation to the date of disease progression, or to the date of death, whichever occurs first according to the Investigator assessment.
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve for each treatment arm."|First drug administration to date of disease progression or death whichever occurs first until final Data Base Lock (DBL) 26September16, upto 62 months|Randomised Set (RS)||Months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
843343|NCT01015118|Primary|PFS Based on Investigator Assessment According to Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, Version 1.1 (mRECIST), and Additional Clinical Criteria.|"Progression free survival (PFS) is calculated as the time from randomisation to the date of disease progression, or to the date of death, whichever occurs first according to the Investigator assessment.
The primary PFS analysis of this trial was performed when approximately 753 patients had experienced a PFS event
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve for each treatment arm."|First drug administration to date of disease progression or death whichever occurs first , upto 29 months|Randomised Set (RS)||Months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
843409|NCT00936910|Secondary|Number of Participants With Negative Cultures on Day 5 and Day 30 During the Test of Cure Period Post Antifungal Lock|Records the number of participants with 2 negative cultures who completed the trial and had (-) test of cure cultures on day 5 and 30|30 days|All children with long term venous access with fungal related central line infections were eligible for enrollment in the trial. No one was excluded because of age, sex, race or ethnicity.||participants|||Number
843410|NCT00936910|Secondary|The Development of Fungal-related Complications|Records the number of fungal related adverse complications that occurred|Usually 1-28 days|All children with long term central line access with fungal-related central line infections were eligible for enrollment. No one was excluded due to sex, age, race, or ethnicity||adverse complications|||Number
843411|NCT00936910|Secondary|The Number of Days Before the Infected Central Line Culture Becomes Negative|Records the mean number of days required for the cultures to become negative|5 days of antifungal lock treatment|All children with long term venous access with central line fungal related infections were eligible for enrollment in the trial. No one was excluded because of age, sex, or ethinicity||days||Full Range|Mean
843412|NCT00936910|Primary|Number of Patients With 2 Negative Fungal Cultures After 5 Days of Combined Systemic Antifungal and Antifungal Lock Therapy and the CVC Was Not Removed|Records the number of patients with 2 negative fungal cultures after 5 days of combined systemic antifungal and antifungal lock therapy and the CVC was not removed|5 days of antifungal lock treatment|13 children with long term central line venous access with positive central line fungal infections were enrolled in the trial.||Participants|||Count of Participants
843450|NCT00858702|Secondary|Percent of Patients With Drug-related Adverse Events (Laboratory Changes in Clinical Laboratory Values)|Drug-related, laboratory value change adverse events are adverse events(AEs) as determined by the Investigator that can not be denied to be related to the study drugs. The relationship between adverse events and drugs were determined by the Investigator based on his/her clinical judgement. Factors used in determining relatedness included, but are not limited to, the medical history of the participant, use of concomitant medication, and the time course from drug administration to AE occurence.|At week 8|Safety analysis (laboratory AEs:abnormal changes in clinical laboratory values) was conducted for Safety Population. It excluded the patients who were not administered study drugs, or had no clinical laboratory data.||Percent of participants|||Number
843451|NCT00858702|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Drug-related Adverse Events (Subjective Symptoms/Objective Findings)|Drug-related adverse events are adverse events(AEs) as determined by the Investigator that can not be denied to be related to the study drugs. The relationship between adverse events and drugs were determined by the Investigator based on his/her clinical judgement. Factors used in determining relatedness included, but are not limited to, the medical history of the participant, use of concomitant medication, and the time course from drug administration to AE occurence.|At week 8|Safety analysis (Clinical AEs:subjective symptoms / objective findings) was conducted for Safety Population. It excluded the patients who were not administrated study drugs.||Percent of participants|||Number
843452|NCT00858702|Primary|The Percentage of Patients Achieving Target Sitting Blood Pressure of Less Than 130/85||Baseline to week 8|Primary analysis was conducted for full analysis set. It excluded the patients who were not administrated study drugs, or did not satisfy entry criteria, or had no data after randomisation.||Percent of participants|||Number
843752|NCT00657709|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentrations After Three Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination (Against the 287-953 Antigen)|The immunogenicity was evaluated to characterize the immune response against vaccine antigen 287-953, as measured by ELISA at one month after third vaccination.|1 month after third vaccination|Analysis was done on PP dataset.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
843707|NCT00681109|Secondary|Occurrence of Adverse Events||16 Weeks||||||
843708|NCT00681109|Primary|Schirmer With Anesthesia||16 Weeks||||||
843709|NCT00681109|Primary|Schirmer Without Anesthesia||16 Weeks||||||
843710|NCT00681109|Primary|Meibomian Gland Occlusion||16 Weeks||||||
843711|NCT00681109|Primary|Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI)|"The Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) is a 12-item questionnaire designed to provide a rapid assessment of the symptoms of ocular irritation consistent with dry eye disease and their impact on vision-related functioning. The 12 items of the OSDI questionnaire are graded on a scale of 0 to 4, where 0 indicates none of the time; 1, some of the time; 2, half of the time; 3, most of the time; and 4, all of the time. The total OSDI score is then calculated on the basis of the following formula: OSDI=[(sum of scores for all questions answered) x 100]/[(total number of questions answered) x 4].
Thus, the OSDI is scored on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores representing greater disability. A negative change from baseline indicated an improvement in vision-related functioning.
OSDI was assessed on the Screening Visit, Week 2, Week 6, Week 12, Week 16. Change indicated represents change from Screening to Week 12."|16 Weeks|The OSDI analysis for this study is based on a standard intention-to-treat analysis with each study participant analyzed with respect to the randomized treatment assignment, regardless of eventual compliance.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
843712|NCT00681109|Primary|Conjunctival Staining Score||16 Weeks||||||
843713|NCT00681109|Primary|Cornea Staining Score||16 Weeks||||||
843714|NCT00681109|Primary|Tear Breakup Time (TBUT)||16 Weeks||||||
843715|NCT00681109|Primary|Meibomian Gland Secretion Quality||16 Weeks||||||
843751|NCT00657709|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentrations for Antigens (Pertussis Components) for the Routine Vaccinations|Immunogenicity of the pertussis components (PT, FHA, pertactin) of DTPa-HBV-IPV when given concomitantly with rMenB and PCV7 would be considered non-inferior to that of the routine vaccines given alone if the lower limit of the two-sided CI for the ratio of GMCs one month after third vaccination.|1 month after third vaccination|Analysis was done on Immunogenicity Routine PP (Pertussis Antigens)||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
843746|NCT00657709|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Adverse Events After Receiving Three Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccine|The safety and tolerability of three doses of rMenB+OMV NZ when given concomitantly with routine infant vaccines at 2, 4 and 6 months of age was assessed by the number of subjects reporting solicited local and systemic adverse events.|upto 7 days after any vaccination|The analysis was done on safety subset population - all subjects enrolled who received study vaccination and provided post-baseline safety data.||Participants|||Number
843747|NCT00657709|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥1:8|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of the percentages of subjects achieving hSBA titers ≥1:8 at one month after third vaccination with rMenB (lot 1 or lot 2 or lot 3) against the three vaccine strains.|1 month after third vaccination|Analysis was done on PP population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
843748|NCT00657709|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Fourfold Rise in hSBA Titers After Three Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of the percentages of subjects with fourfold rise in hSBA titers after the three doses of rMenB+OMV NZ (lot 1 or lot 2 or lot 3) vaccination at 2, 4 and 6 months of age.|1 Month after third vaccination|Analysis was done on PP dataset.||Percentages of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
843749|NCT00657709|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Fourfold Increase in Antibody Concentrations Against the Routine Antigens|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of the percentages of subjects with fourfold increase in antibody concentrations against the routine pertussis antigens FHA (Filamentous Hemagglutinin), Pertactin and PT (Pertussis Toxoid).|5 months|Analysis was done on PP dataset.||Percentages of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
843750|NCT00657709|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Antibody Response Against the Routine Antigens|"The immunogenicity of routine infant vaccines when given concomitantly with rMenB+OMV NZ at 2, 4, and 6 months of age and of the routine infant vaccines given without rMenB+OMV NZ at 1 month after third vaccination with B pertussis, diptheria and tetanus toxoid, H influenza type b, Hepatitis B antigens was measured by ELISA (Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) and for polio type 1, type 2 and type 3 by neutralization test (NT)(>=1:8). Diptheria and Tetanus: primary endpoint ELISA >=0.1 (international unit -IU) IU/mL and the secondary endpoint is ELISA>=1.0 IU/mL.
HepB (HBV):primary endpoint ELISA >=10 mU/mL. PRP-T: primary endpoint ≥ 0.15 mcg/mL and ≥ 1.00 mcg/mL.PNC >=0.35 mcg/ml"|1 Month after third vaccination|Analysis was done on PP population.||Percentages Of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
843753|NCT00657709|Secondary|Geometric Mean Human Serum Bactericidal Activity Titers After the Routine Vaccination Without rMenB OMV NZ|The immunogenicity was assessed in terms of prevalence of meningococcal B antibodies as measured by the hSBA, at baseline and at one month after the third vaccination, in the subjects that received routine infant vaccines without rMenB+OMV NZ.|1 Month after the third vaccination|Analysis was done on Per protocol (PP)population - All subjects who received all the relevant doses of vaccine correctly, and provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points, and had no major protocol violation as defined prior to analysis.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
843754|NCT00657709|Secondary|The Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titer ≥1:5 After Receiving Three Doses of rMenB+OMV Vaccination (From 3 Lots)|The immunogenicity was evaluated to assess the consistency of the immune response from three lots of rMenB+OMV NZ in terms of percentage of subjects as measured by hSBA titer ≥1:5 when given to healthy infants at 2, 4, and 6 months of age, at 1 month after the third vaccination.|1 month after the third vaccination|Analysis was done on Per protocol (PP)population - All subjects who received all the relevant doses of vaccine correctly, and provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points, and had no major protocol violation as defined prior to analysis.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
843755|NCT00657709|Primary|The Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titer ≥1:5 After Receiving Three Doses of rMenB+OMV Vaccination (3 Lots Combined)|The immunogenicity was assessed in terms of the percentages of subjects who had received the three doses of rMenB+OMV NZ (3 lots combined) given concomitantly with routine infant vaccinations and percentages of subjects who received only the routine infant vaccinations as measured by hSBA titer ≥1:5 following rMenB+OMV NZ vaccinations one month after the third vaccination is reported.|one month after the third vaccination|Analysis was done on PP population - All subjects who received all the relevant doses of vaccine correctly, and provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points, and had no major protocol violation as defined prior to analysis.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
843756|NCT00657709|Primary|The Geometric Mean Human Serum Bactericidal Activity (hSBA) Titers After Three Doses of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|The hSBA antibody titer responses, one month after receiving the third vaccination of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccination, are reported as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|one month after the third vaccination|Analysis was done on Per protocol (PP)population - All subjects who received all the relevant doses of vaccine correctly, and provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points, and had no major protocol violation as defined prior to analysis.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
843789|NCT00605839|Primary|Quality of Parent-child Relationship|The Cornell Parent Behavior Description Scale was used to measure the antecedents and consequences of children’s perceptions of the behavior of their parents towards them. Each of 14 subscales is scored from 0-10. The potential range of the total score is therefore 0 (fewest behaviors) to 140 (most behaviors). We used the total score, which is equivalent to the sums of the subscales, and calculated the change from baseline to 6 months. The range of the change is given as a 95% CI. A change of zero would indicate no change. A positive number is a worsening , and a negative number indicates an improvement.|Change from baseline to 6 months. Please see above for a description of how the change score should be interpreted.|Everyone who completed the study||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
844424|NCT00320424|Secondary|Rate of Symptomatic DVT|Rate (%) was defined as number of events divided by the number of participants evaluated multiplied by 100. Signs and symptoms suggestive of VTE included, but were not limited to lower extremity DVT: erythema, warmth, pain, swelling, tenderness. Intended treatment period started 24±2 hours after surgical closure. Venogram was obtained not later than 2 calendar days after the last study drug administration (between Day 11 and 17). These events were adjudicated by the CIACE. It was evaluated from the first study drug injection up to Day 17 or to first venogram, whichever occurred first.|Up to Day 17|Safety population used.||Percentage of events/participants evalua|||Number
844425|NCT00320424|Secondary|Summary of Units Transfused|Blood product transfusions consisted of packed red blood cells or fresh frozen plasma or both. This was done between Day 2 and 2 calendar days after the last injection.|From the first study drug injection up to 2 days after the last study drug injection (approximately up to Day 17)|Safety population used.||mL|||Number
844426|NCT00320424|Secondary|Number of Transfused Participants|Blood product transfusions consisted of packed red blood cells or fresh frozen plasma or both. This was done between Day 2 and 2 calendar days after the last injection.|From the first study drug injection up to 2 days after the last study drug injection (approximately up to Day 17)|Safety population used.||Participants|||Number
844427|NCT00320424|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE), Serious Adverse Events (SAE) and Death|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence (MO) in a participant temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product (MP), whether or not considered related to the MP and can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with its use. The SAE was any untoward MO that, at any dose, results in death, life threatening, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, results in or prolongs inpatient hospitalization, congenital abnormality or birth defect, that may not be immediately life-threatening or result in death or hospitalization but may jeopardize the participant or may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in this definition.|From the first study drug injection up to 2 days after the last study drug injection (approximately up to Day 17)|Safety population used.||Participants|||Number
844428|NCT00320424|Secondary|Number of Participants With Minor Bleeding and Any Bleeding (Major and/or Minor Bleeding)|Minor bleeding and any bleeding (major and/or minor bleeding) events were adjudicated by the CIACS. Minor bleeding was defined as clinically overt bleeding not meeting the criteria for major bleeding and considered more than expected in the clinical context. Any bleeding (major and/or minor bleeding) could be recorded may be major and/or minor.|From the first study drug injection up to 2 days after the last study drug injection (approximately up to Day 17)|Safety population used.||Participants|||Number
844429|NCT00320424|Secondary|Number of Participants With Major Bleeding During Treatment Period|Major bleeding events were defined as clinically unusual bleeding meeting any of the following criteria: fatal bleeding, bleeding including retroperitoneal and intracranial bleeding or bleeding into a critical organ (eye, adrenal gland, pericardium, spine), reoperation due to bleeding/hematoma at the operative site, bleeding leading to a hemoglobin (Hb) fall >=2 grams per deciliter (g/dL, 1.6 millimoles per liter [mmol/L]) within 48 hour of the bleed, bleeding that required a transfusion of red blood cell or whole blood derived from >=900 millilters (mL) of whole blood within 48 hours of the bleed (excluding the autologous transfusion except for the treatment of bleeding adverse event (AE) and bleeding leading to the bleeding index (BI) >=2. Major bleeding events were adjudicated by the Central Independent Adjudication Committee of Safety (CIACS).|From the first study drug injection up to 2 days after the last study drug injection (approximately up to Day 17)|Safety population used.||Participants|||Number
844430|NCT00320424|Secondary|Rate of Distal Only DVT During Treatment Period|Rate (%) was defined as number of events divided by the number of participants evaluated multiplied by 100. Signs and symptoms suggestive of VTE included, but were not limited to lower extremity DVT: erythema, warmth, pain, swelling, tenderness. Intended treatment period started 24±2 hours after surgical closure. Venogram was obtained not later than 2 calendar days after the last study drug administration (between Day 11 and 17). These events were adjudicated by the CIACE. It was evaluated from the first study drug injection up to Day 17 or to first venogram, whichever occurred first.|Up to Day 17|Efficacy evaluable participants used. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||% of events/participants evaluated|||Number
844431|NCT00320424|Secondary|Rate of Proximal DVT During Treatment Period|Rate (%) was defined as number of events divided by the number of participants evaluated multiplied by 100. Signs and symptoms suggestive of VTE included, but were not limited to lower extremity DVT: erythema, warmth, pain, swelling, tenderness. Intended treatment period started 24±2 hours after surgical closure. Venogram was obtained not later than 2 calendar days after the last study drug administration (between Day 11 and 17). These events were adjudicated by the CIACE. It was evaluated from the first study drug injection up to Day 17 or to first venogram, whichever occurred first.|Up to Day 17|Efficacy evaluable participants used. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||% of events/participants evaluated|||Number
844432|NCT00320424|Secondary|Rate of DVT During Treatment Period|Rate (%) was defined as number of events divided by the number of patients evaluated multiplied by 100. Signs and symptoms suggestive of VTE included, but were not limited to lower extremity DVT: erythema, warmth, pain, swelling, tenderness. Intended treatment period started 24±2 hours after surgical closure. Venogram was obtained not later than 2 calendar days after the last study drug administration (between Day 11 and 17). These events were adjudicated by the CIACE. It was evaluated from the first study drug injection up to Day 17 or to first venogram, whichever occurred first.|Up to Day 17|Efficacy evaluable participants used consisted of a subpopulation of safety population who were judged to be evaluable for all DVT and proximal DVT or distal only DVT by the site of occurrence (total/side of operation/opposite side of operation/both sides). Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||% of events/participants evaluated|||Number
844433|NCT00320424|Secondary|Rate of PE During Treatment Period|Rate (%) was defined as number of events divided by the number of participants evaluated multiplied by 100. Signs and symptoms suggestive of VTE included, but were not limited to lower extremity PE: pleuritic chest pain, dyspnea, cough, hemoptysis, syncope, light-headedness/dizziness, tachypnea, and tachycardia. Intended treatment period started 24±2 hours after surgical closure. Venogram was obtained not later than 2 calendar days after the last study drug administration (between Day 11 and 17). These events were adjudicated by the CIACE. It was evaluated from the first study drug injection up to Day 17 or to first venogram, whichever occurred first.|Up to Day 17|Safety population used which consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||% of events/participants evaluated||95% Confidence Interval|Number
844434|NCT00320424|Primary|Rate of Major Bleeding During Treatment Period|Rate (%) was defined as number of events divided by the number of participants evaluated multiplied by 100. Signs and symptoms suggestive of VTE included, but were not limited to lower extremity DVT: erythema, warmth, pain, swelling, tenderness and PE: pleuritic chest pain, dyspnea, cough, hemoptysis, syncope, light-headedness/dizziness, tachypnea, and tachycardia. Intended treatment period started 24±2 hours after surgical closure. Venogram was obtained not later than 2 calendar days after the last study drug administration (between Day 11 and 17). These events were adjudicated by the Central Independent Adjudication Committee of Efficacy (CIACE).|From the first study drug injection up to Day 17|Full analysis set used which consisted of all participants who were assigned to study drug with the exception of those who did not receive study drug at all and those with no valid efficacy data (example no evaluable venogram).||% of events/participants evaluated||95% Confidence Interval|Number
844494|NCT00250484|Secondary|Cognitive Assessment - Neuropsychological Battery|"Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for anxiety were assessed in subjects both as a baseline score before treatment was initiated as and upon conclusion of treatment.
BDI is a 0-63 scale increasing with depression severity. A score from 0-13 indicates minimal depression, 14-19 indicates mild depression, 20-28 indicates moderate depression, and 28-63 indicates severe depression. Higher values represent a worse outcome.
VAS is a pain assessment ranging from 0-10 increasing with pain severity. High values represent a worse outcome."|Baseline and end of treatment at approximately 1 year|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
844493|NCT00250484|Secondary|Medication Use (Medication Diary)|Data was not collected or recorded because this outcome measure was no longer considered useful or relevant in the study.|Baseline and end of treatment at approximately 1 year|Data was not collected. Data was not collected or recorded because this outcome measure was no longer considered useful or relevant in the study.|||||
844495|NCT00250484|Primary|Pain (Visual Analog Scale, CGI, PGA)|Pain intensity and therefore changes in pain intensity were assessed using a 0-10 Visual Analog Scale where 0 represents the least amount of pain and 10 is the most pain imaginable. The pain evaluation was carried out by a blinded rater based off 1) baseline evaluation: 3 week long pain logs and a diary of pain medication intake, 2) treatment evaluations: participants were also asked to fill out daily pain logs following each TMS session and to keep a diary of pain medications during the CRC stay for the TMS course and 3)follow-up evaluation: finally, there was a follow up measurement 3 weeks after treatment.|1 year|||number of participants w/ reduced pain|||Number
844739|NCT00083174|Secondary|Incidences of Other Malignancies|Other malignancies includes any other malignancy which is not in breast.|Over study (median follow-up 35 months)|Women who have received treatment||participants|||Number
844740|NCT00083174|Secondary|Incidence of Clinically Relevant Cardiac Events|Events including myocardial infarctions and angina requiring percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty or coronary artery bypass graft, fatal and nonfatal strokes and all vascular deaths|During protocol treatment (up to 5 years)|Women who received treatment||participants|||Number
844741|NCT00083174|Secondary|Incidence of All Clinical Fractures||During protocol treatment (up to 5 years)|Women who have received treatment||participants|||Number
844742|NCT00083174|Secondary|Number of Clinical Breast Biopsies||Over study (median follow-up 35 months)|Women who had at least one clinical breast biopsy||number of clinical breast biopsies||Full Range|Median
844743|NCT00083174|Secondary|Incidence of Lobular Carcinoma in Situ, Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Atypical Lobular Hyperplasia Events||Over study (median follow-up 35 months)|Intent-to-treat (ITT)||percentage of cases/follow-up person-yr||95% Confidence Interval|Number
844744|NCT00083174|Secondary|Total Incidence of Invasive and Non-invasive (DCIS) Breast Cancer|It was estimated from the Total Breast Cancer-Free Survival (TBCFS), which was calculated for women who developed invasive or non-invasive (DCIS) breast cancer as the time from the date of randomization to the earliest date of diagnosis for invasive or non-invasive (DCIS) breast cancer. Women who died from other causes were censored at the time of death. Women who had breast cancer before entry were censored at the time of randomization. If a woman did not develop an invasive or non-invasive (DCIS) breast cancer, or died, TBCFS will be censored on the date of last known alive.|Over study (median follow-up 35 months)|Intent-to-treat (ITT)||percentage of cases/follow-up person-yr||95% Confidence Interval|Number
844745|NCT00083174|Primary|Invasive Breast Cancer Incidence (Breast Cancer-Free Survival)|Invasive breast cancer incidence was estimated from the breast cancer-free survival (BCFS) which was calculated for all women from the day of the randomization to the earliest date of diagnosis for invasive breast cancer. Women who died from other causes were censored at the time of death. If a woman did not develop an invasive breast cancer, or died, BCFS was censored on the date of the last day the woman was known alive (LKA), which was the latest of the date of assessment. Women who had breast cancer before study entry were also censored at the time of randomization.|Over study (median follow-up 35 months)|intention to treat (ITT)||percentage of cases/follow-up person-yr||95% Confidence Interval|Number
844746|NCT00083174|Primary|Frequency of Serious Adverse Events|Frequency of serious adverse events for women who choose to receive 5 years of exemestane as preventative therapy.|5 years||||||
844760|NCT00066573|Secondary|Cardiovascular Morbidity and Mortality||8 years||||||
844761|NCT00066573|Secondary|Clinical Fracture Rate||8 years||||||
844762|NCT00066573|Secondary|New Primary Breast Cancer||8 years||||||
844763|NCT00066573|Secondary|Distant Disease-free Survival||8 years||||||
844764|NCT00066573|Secondary|Overall Survival||8 years||||||
844765|NCT00066573|Primary|Event-free Survival|Event free survival, the primary endpoint of this study, is defined as the time from randomization to the time of documented locoregional or distant recurrence, new primary breast cancer, or death from any cause.|5 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
845890|NCT03073798|Primary|Difference in Mucociliary Clearance (MCC) Between Visit 1B and Visit 2B|"Measurements of MCC (Mucociliary clearance) will be obtained using a large-field-of-view 2D gamma camera (Siemens Orbiter) following inhalation of a radioaerosol containing a gamma emitting isotope 99mtechnetium (99mTc)-sulfur-colloid. The total exposure to radiation from procedures associated with the MCC studies is similar to that of a chest x-ray and is much less than the 0.3 rem that the average person in the United States gets each year from natural sources like the sun, outer space, air, food, and soil.
After inhaling (0 time point) an aerosol generated from a saline solution containing the radioisotope 99mtechnetium (99mTc)-sulfur-colloid (radioaerosol), subjects will sit with their back to a gamma camera. The gamma camera will acquire an image of where the isotopic marker initially deposits in the right lung at time 0 and how much remains in the lungs at the specified time point and will be measured in change of %/min from 0 min time point."|Change from 0 min to 24 hours|Data was not collected for all participants in this outcome measure due to lack of follow-up, patient withdrawal from the study, and an adverse event.||percentage difference of MCC||Standard Deviation|Mean
845891|NCT03073798|Primary|Difference in Mucociliary Clearance (MCC) Between Visit 1A and Visit 2A|"Measurements of MCC (Mucociliary clearance) will be obtained using a large-field-of-view 2D gamma camera (Siemens Orbiter) following inhalation of a radioaerosol containing a gamma emitting isotope 99mtechnetium (99mTc)-sulfur-colloid. The total exposure to radiation from procedures associated with the MCC studies is similar to that of a chest x-ray and is much less than the 0.3 rem that the average person in the United States gets each year from natural sources like the sun, outer space, air, food, and soil.
After inhaling (0 time point) an aerosol generated from a saline solution containing the radioisotope 99mtechnetium (99mTc)-sulfur-colloid (radioaerosol), subjects will sit with their back to a gamma camera. The gamma camera will acquire an image of where the isotopic marker initially deposits in the right lung at time 0 and how much remains in the lungs at the specified time point and will be measured in change of %/min from 0 min time point."|Change from 0 to 90 minutes|Data was not collected for all participants in this outcome measure due to lack of follow-up, patient withdrawal from the study, and an adverse event.||percentage difference of MCC||Standard Deviation|Mean
845892|NCT03073798|Primary|Difference in Mucociliary Clearance (MCC) Between Visit 1A and Visit 2A|"Measurements of MCC (Mucociliary clearance) will be obtained using a large-field-of-view 2D gamma camera (Siemens Orbiter) following inhalation of a radioaerosol containing a gamma emitting isotope 99mtechnetium (99mTc)-sulfur-colloid. The total exposure to radiation from procedures associated with the MCC studies is similar to that of a chest x-ray and is much less than the 0.3 rem that the average person in the United States gets each year from natural sources like the sun, outer space, air, food, and soil.
After inhaling (0 time point) an aerosol generated from a saline solution containing the radioisotope 99mtechnetium (99mTc)-sulfur-colloid (radioaerosol), subjects will sit with their back to a gamma camera. The gamma camera will acquire an image of where the isotopic marker initially deposits in the right lung at time 0 and how much remains in the lungs at the specified time point and will be measured in change of %/min from 0 min time point."|Change from 0 to 60 minutes|Data was not collected for all participants in this outcome measure due to lack of follow-up, patient withdrawal from the study, and an adverse event.||percentage difference of MCC||Standard Deviation|Mean
845893|NCT03073798|Primary|Difference in Mucociliary Clearance (MCC) Between Visit 1A and Visit 2A|"Measurements of MCC (Mucociliary clearance) will be obtained using a large-field-of-view 2D gamma camera (Siemens Orbiter) following inhalation of a radioaerosol containing a gamma emitting isotope 99mtechnetium (99mTc)-sulfur-colloid. The total exposure to radiation from procedures associated with the MCC studies is similar to that of a chest x-ray and is much less than the 0.3 rem that the average person in the United States gets each year from natural sources like the sun, outer space, air, food, and soil.
After inhaling (0 time point) an aerosol generated from a saline solution containing the radioisotope 99mtechnetium (99mTc)-sulfur-colloid (radioaerosol), subjects will sit with their back to a gamma camera. The gamma camera will acquire an image of where the isotopic marker initially deposits in the right lung at time 0 and how much remains in the lungs at the specified time point and will be measured in change of %/min from 0 min time point."|Change from 0 to 30 minutes|Data was not collected for all participants in this outcome measure due to lack of follow-up, patient withdrawal from the study, and an adverse event.||percentage difference of MCC||Standard Deviation|Mean
845949|NCT02294461|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|The Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events are defined as AEs with a possible or probable relationship to study drug. If participant was still on study drug at the analysis data cutoff date, then the length of the treatment-emergent period was calculated through the cutoff date.|From first dose of study drug up to data cut off date of 20 Sept 2015|Safety Analysis Set consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
845950|NCT02294461|Secondary|AUC From the Time of Dosing to the Start of the Next Dosing Interval (AUCtau) Enzalutamide, M1,M2 and Enzalutamide Plus M2||From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Jan 2016; Multiple Dosing Day 85|The Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PKAS) population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who provided blood samples for drug concentrations at at least 1 time point.||μg·h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
845951|NCT02294461|Secondary|Peak-Trough Ratio (PTR) Enzalutamide, M1,M2 and Enzalutamide Plus M2||From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Jan 2016; Multiple Dosing Day 85|The Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PKAS) population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who provided blood samples for drug concentrations at at least 1 time point.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
845952|NCT02294461|Secondary|Apparent Total Systemic Clearance After Multiple Dosing (CL/F) Enzalutamide, M1,M2 and Enzalutamide Plus M2 (For Unchanged Enzalutamide Only)||From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Jan 2016; Multiple Dosing Day 85|The Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PKAS) population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who provided blood samples for drug concentrations at at least 1 time point.||L/h||Standard Error|Mean
845953|NCT02294461|Secondary|Observed Plasma Concentration in Predose Samples Obtained During Multiple-dose Administration of Minimum Concentration (Plasma Concentration at Pre Dose) (Cmin) Enzalutamide, M1,M2 and Enzalutamide Plus M2|N is the number of participants with available data at this time point.|From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Jan 2016; Day 2, 3, 8, 22, 29, 43, 57, 85, 86, 113, 141 and 169|The Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PKAS) population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who provided blood samples for drug concentrations at least 1 time point.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
845954|NCT02294461|Secondary|Concentration 24 h After Dosing (C24h) Enzalutamide, M1,M2 and Enzalutamide Plus M2|N is the number of participants with available data at this time point.|From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Jan 2016; Single Dosing Day 1 and Multiple Dosing Day 85|The Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PKAS) population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who provided blood samples for drug concentrations at at least 1 time point.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
845955|NCT02294461|Secondary|AUC From the Time of Dosing to 24 h After Dosing (AUC24h) Enzalutamide, M1,M2 and Enzalutamide Plus M2||From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Jan 2016; Single Dosing Day 1|The Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PKAS) population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who provided blood samples for drug concentrations at at least 1 time point. Number of participants analyzed is the number of participants with available data at this time point.||μg·h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
845956|NCT02294461|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration During the First 24 Hours After Dosing (Cmax) Enzalutamide, M1,M2 and Enzalutamide Plus M2||From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Jan 2016; Single Dosing Day 1 and Multiple Dosing Day 85|The Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PKAS) population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who provided blood samples for drug concentrations at at least 1 time point.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
845957|NCT02294461|Secondary|Time to Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of Enzalutamide, M1,M2 and Enzalutamide Plus M2||From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Jan 2016; Single Dosing Day 1 and Multiple Dosing Day 85|The Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PKAS) population consisted of all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who provided blood samples for drug concentrations at at least 1 time point.||(h)||Full Range|Median
845958|NCT02294461|Secondary|Best Overall Soft Tissue Response|Participants with measurable soft tissue disease at screening visit (i.e., at least one target lesion per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) who have an objective response (complete response (CR) or partial response (PR)) during the study were included in the best overall soft tissue response assessment. The best overall soft tissue response was based on the investigator assessment using RECIST 1.1.|From randomization up to data cut off date of 20 Sept 2015; median treatment duration is 6.60 months for enzalutamide and 3.70 months for placebo|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all randomized participants in the study.||Participants|||Number
845959|NCT02294461|Secondary|Number of Participants With Confirmed Best PSA Response (≥50% Decrease From Baseline)|Best PSA response was defined as as ≥50% reductions in PSA level from baseline to the lowest post-baseline PSA result as determined by the central laboratory, with a consecutive assessment conducted at least 3 weeks later to confirm the PSA response. Only participants who had both baseline and post-baseline assessments were included in the analysis.|Baseline up to data cut off date of 20 Sept 2015; median treatment duration is 6.60 months for enzalutamide and 3.70 months for placebo|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all randomized participants in the study.||Participants|||Number
845960|NCT02294461|Secondary|Time to Initiation of Cytotoxic Chemotherapy|Time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy was defined as the time from randomization to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy. It included only therapies for prostate cancer. When multiple cytotoxic chemotherapies were initiated, the first chemotherapy was used to determine the time to event. Participants who did not start cytotoxic chemotherapy at the time of analysis data cutoff were censored at the date of their last assessment indicating no evidence of cytotoxic chemotherapy usage.|From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Sept 2015; median follow-up time is 7.39 months for enzalutamide and 4.93 months for placebo|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all randomized participants in the study.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
845961|NCT02294461|Secondary|Time to First Skeletal-Related Event|Time to first skeletal-related event (SRE) was defined as the time from randomization to the first skeletal-related event, defined as radiation therapy or surgery to bone, pathologic bone fracture, spinal cord compression, or change of anti-neoplastic therapy to treat bone pain. Participants who have not had a SRE at the time of the analysis were censored at their last assessment indicating no evidence of SRE.|From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Sept 2015; median follow-up time is 7.39 months for enzalutamide and 5.29 months for placebo|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all randomized participants in the study.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
845962|NCT02294461|Secondary|Duration of Radiographic Progression-free Survival (rPFS) Based on Independent Central Review Facility Assessment|"Duration of Radiographic Progression-free Survival (rPFS) was defined as the time from randomization to the rPFS event (deaths from any cause and radiographic disease progression). Radiographic disease progression is defined by RECIST 1.1 for soft tissue disease, or PCWG2 for bone lesions.
If a participant met the criteria for more than 1 censoring rule, they were censored with the earliest censoring date. The radiographic progression date was the first date when progression definition was met, not confirmed."|From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Sept 2015; median follow-up time is 5.55 months for enzalutamide and 3.71 months for placebo|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all randomized participants in the study.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
845963|NCT02294461|Secondary|Duration of Overall Survival|Duration of overall survival was defined as the time from the randomization to deaths from any cause. For participants who were alive at the time of the data analysis, overall survival time was censored to the last know date the participants were known to be alive or data analysis cutoff date, whichever occurred first.|From randomization up to data cutoff date of 20 Sept 2015; median follow-up time is 8.02 months for enzalutamide and 5.55 months for placebo|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all randomized participants in the study.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
845964|NCT02294461|Primary|Time to Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) Progression|The time to Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) progression was defined as the time from randomization to the PSA progression. The PSA progression was defined according to the consensus guidelines of Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 2 (PCWG2).For participants with PSA decline at Week 13, the PSA progression date was defined as a ≥ 25% increase and an absolute increase of ≥ 2 ng/mL above the nadir, which would be confirmed by a second consecutive value obtained 3 or more weeks later. For participants with no PSA decline at Week 13, the PSA progression date was defined as the date when a ≥ 25% increase and an absolute increase of ≥ 2 ng/mL above the baseline was documented, which was confirmed by a second consecutive value 3 or more weeks later. PSA progression at the time of the data analysis cutoff date could only be declared on or after the week 13.Time to PSA progression was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Participants without confirmed PSA progression were censore|From randomization up to data cut off date of 20 Sept 2015; median follow-up time is 7.33 months for enzalutamide and 3.02 months for placebo|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all randomized participants in the study.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
845965|NCT02218697|Secondary|Number of Subjects Whose N Antibody Titers Were at Least 2 or 4-fold Higher Than Their Pre-vaccination Titer by Anti-pneumococcal Serotype Subjects.|"Fold antibody concentration increases post-vaccination/pre-vaccination ≥ 2 and ≥ 4.
The anti-pneumococcal serotypes assessed were 1, 3, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F and 23F."|At 28 days post-vaccination with Pneumovax™ 23|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who received the study vaccine according to their treatment assignment and for whom the assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination were available.||Subjects|||Number
845966|NCT02218697|Secondary|Pneumococcal Vaccine Response in Terms of Anti-pneumococcal Antibody Concentrations Against 12 Pneumococcal Serotypes (1, 3, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F and 23F)|"Anti-pneumococcal antibody concentrations were expressed as adjusted geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) PRE = Pre -vaccination i.e. at Day 0 for Co-Ad Group and at Day 28 for Control Group.
POST = Post-vaccination i.e. at Day 28 for Co-Ad Group and at Day 56 for Control Group."|At Days 0 (Co-Ad group only), 28 (both groups), and 56 (Control group only)|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who received the study vaccine according to their treatment assignment and for whom the assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
845967|NCT02218697|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-pneumococcal Antibody Concentrations for the Following Serotypes: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F and 23F|"The pneumococcal antigen testing was performed, as determined by ELISA cut-offs of ≥0.05 µg/mL and a seroprotection cut-off of ≥ 0.2 µg/ml.
PRE = Pre-vaccination i.e. at Day 0 for Co-Ad Group and at Day 28 for Control Group.
POST = Post-vaccination i.e. at Day 28 for Co-Ad Group and at Day 56 for Control Group."|At Days 0 (Co-Ad group only), 28 (both groups), and 56 (Control group only)|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who received the study vaccine according to their treatment assignment and for whom the assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination were available.||Subjects|||Number
845968|NCT02218697|Secondary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titer Against Each of the Four Vaccine Influenza Strains.|MGI was defined as the fold increase in serum haemagglutination inhibition (HI) GMTs post-vaccination compared to pre-vaccination (Day 0). The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Texas/50/2012 (H3N2), Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and Flu B/Massachusetts/02/2012 (Yamagata).|At Day 28|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who received the study vaccine according to their treatment assignment and for whom the assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination were available.||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
845969|NCT02218697|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for Anti-Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against Each of the Four Vaccine Influenza Strains.|A seroconverted subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with either a pre-vaccination titer less than (<) 1:10 and a post-vaccination titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:40, or a pre-vaccination titer ≥ 1:10 and at least a 4-fold increase in post-vaccination titer. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Texas/50/2012 (H3N2), Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and Flu B/Massachusetts/02/2012 (Yamagata).|At Day 28|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who received the study vaccine according to their treatment assignment and for whom the assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination were available.||Subjects|||Number
845970|NCT02218697|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Were Seroprotected for Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Against Each of the Four Vaccine Influenza Strains.|A seroprotected subject was defined as a vaccinated subject with a serum HI titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:40 that usually is accepted as indicating protection in adults. The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Texas/50/2012 (H3N2), Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and Flu B/Massachusetts/2/2012 (Yamagata).|At Day 0 and Day 28|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who received the study vaccine according to their treatment assignment and for whom the assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination were available.||Subjects|||Number
845971|NCT02218697|Secondary|Humoral Immune Response in Terms of Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies in Subjects by Calculating Serum Antihaemagglutination (HA) Antibody Titers Against the 4 Influenza Vaccine Strains|HI antibody titres were expressed as Geometric mean titers (GMTs). The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), Flu A/Texas/50/2012 (H3N2), Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and Flu B/Massachusetts/02/2012 (Yamagata).|At Day 0 and Day 28|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who received the study vaccine according to their treatment assignment and for whom the assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
845972|NCT02218697|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject. Any was defined as occurrence of any symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination and related was an event assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|Throughout the study period (Days 0-180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
845973|NCT02218697|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs).|An unsolicited AE was defined as an untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|Within the 28-day (Days 0-27) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
845974|NCT02218697|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting the Occurrence of Potential Immune Mediated Diseases (pIMDs)|"Potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) were defined as a subset of AEs that include autoimmune diseases and other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders of interest which may or may not have an autoimmune aetiology.
Any was defined as any occurrence of pIMD(s) regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Related was defined as pIMD assessed by the investigator to be causally related to the study vaccination."|During the entire study period (Days 0-180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
845975|NCT02218697|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting the Occurrence of Medically Attended Adverse Events (MAEs)|MAEs were defined as adverse events with medically-attended visits that were not routine visits for physical examination or vaccination, such as visits for hospitalization, an emergency room visit, or an otherwise unscheduled visit to or from medical personnel (medical doctor) for any reason. Any was defined as any occurrence of MAE(s) regardless of intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Related was defined as MAE assessed by the investigator to be causally related to the study vaccination.|Throughout the study period (Days 0-180)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
845976|NCT02218697|Secondary|Duration of Solicited General AEs.|Duration was defined as number of days with any grade of general symptoms.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Days||Full Range|Median
845977|NCT02218697|Secondary|Duration of Local Adverse Events|Duration was defined as number of days with any grade of local symptoms.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Days||Full Range|Median
845978|NCT02218697|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited General Adverse Events (AEs)|"Solicited general symptoms assessed were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms*, headache, joint pain, muscle aches, shivering, sweating and fever. Any was defined as any solicited general symptom reported irrespective of intensity and relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 was defined as symptoms that prevented normal everyday activities. Related was defined as symptoms assessed by the investigator to have a causal relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 fever was defined as temperature greater than (>)39.0°C.
*Gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms included nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and/or abdominal pain"|Within 7 days (Days 0 - 6) after each dose and across doses.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
845979|NCT02218697|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local Adverse Events (AEs)|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the specified solicited local symptom regardless of its intensity. Grade 3 pain = significant pain at rest and pain that prevented normal everyday activities. Grade 3 redness and swelling = greater than 50 millimeters (mm) i.e. > 100mm.|Within 7 days (Days 0 - 6) after each dose and across doses.|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort which included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
845980|NCT02218697|Primary|Pneumococcal Vaccine Response in Terms of Anti-pneumococcal Antibody Concentrations Against 6 Pneumococcal Serotypes (1, 3, 4, 7F, 14 and 19A).|Anti-pneumococcal antibody concentrations were expressed as adjusted geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) and adjusted GMC ratio (Control Group/Co-Ad Group).|At 28 days after Pneumovax™ 23 vaccination|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who received the study vaccine according to their treatment assignment and for whom the assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination were available.||ug per ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
845981|NCT02218697|Primary|Humoral Immune Response in Terms of Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibodies Titers Against the 4 Vaccine Strains.|HI antibody titres were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs) and adjusted GMT ratios (Control Group/Co-Ad Group). The vaccine strains assessed were Flu A/Christchurch/16/2010 (H1N1), FluA/Texas/50/2012 (H3N2), Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and Flu B/Massachusetts/2/2012 (Yamagata).|At Day 28 post Influsplit™ Tetra vaccination|Analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects who received the study vaccine according to their treatment assignment and for whom the assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846042|NCT02164929|Secondary|Time to First Ingestion of Solid Food||Participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an estimated 1 week|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
846007|NCT02189837|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Lipoprotein(a) Production Rate (PR)|The production rate of lipoprotein(a) was measured at Baseline and Day 50 over 5 consecutive days using the stable isotope tracer, D3-leucine. Lp(a) was isolated from plasma using an immunoprecipitation method employing immunomagnetic beads and polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Isotopic enrichment was determined using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Mathematical modelling of the protein enrichment data was used to estimate protein catabolism.|Baseline and Day 50|Efficacy Analysis Set with available data||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846008|NCT02189837|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Lipoprotein (a) Fractional Catabolic Rate (FCR)|The fractional catabolic rate (the percentage of lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) which is replaced, transferred or lost per unit of time) was measured at Baseline and Day 50 over 5 consecutive days using the stable isotope tracer, D3-leucine. Lp(a) was isolated from plasma using an immunoprecipitation method employing immunomagnetic beads and polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Isotopic enrichment was determined using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Mathematical modelling of the protein enrichment data was used to estimate protein catabolism.|Baseline (5 days prior to Day 1) and Day 50; plasma samples for fasting lipids were obtained at 0, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 60 min, as well as at 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10 hours, and 2, 3, 4 and 5 days after D3-leucine administration.|Efficacy Analysis Set with available data||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846009|NCT02189837|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in LDL Apolipoprotein B-100 Production Rate (PR)|The production rate of apolipoprotein B-100 in LDL was measured at Baseline and Day 50 over 5 consecutive days using the stable isotope tracer, D3-leucine. LDL particles were isolated from plasma by sequential ultracentrifugation and isotopic enrichment was determined using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Mathematical modelling of the protein enrichment data was used to estimate the production rate.|Baseline and Day 50|Efficacy Analysis Set||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846010|NCT02189837|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in LDL-C at Day 50|LDL-C was measured using ultrcentrifugation.|Baseline and Day 50|Efficacy Analysis Set with available data at both time points||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846011|NCT02189837|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Low-density Lipoprotein (LDL) Apolipoprotein B-100 Fractional Catabolic Rate (FCR)|The fractional catabolic rate (the percentage of apolipoprotein B-100 in LDL which is replaced, transferred or lost per unit of time) was measured at Baseline and Day 50 over 5 consecutive days using the stable isotope tracer, D3-leucine. LDL particles were isolated from plasma by sequential ultracentrifugation, and isotopic enrichment was determined using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Mathematical modelling of the protein enrichment data was used to estimate protein catabolism.|Baseline (5 days prior to Day 1) and Day 50; plasma samples for fasting lipids were obtained at 0, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 60 min, as well as at 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10 hours, and 2, 3, 4 and 5 days after D3-leucine administration.|Efficacy Analysis Set including all randomized and dosed participants who completed baseline and Day 50 measurements.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846043|NCT02164929|Secondary|Opioid Related Side Effects|Occurrence and duration of opioid related adverse events including postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV); pruritus, urinary retention, confusion, sedation and respiratory depression at the above time points.|Participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an estimated 1 week|||side effects|||Number
846044|NCT02164929|Secondary|Time to First Bowel Movement||Participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an estimated 1 week|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
846045|NCT02164929|Secondary|Complications as Measured by a Modified Postoperative Morbidity Survey (MPMS)|Complications using a Modified Postoperative Morbidity Survey (MPMS)|Participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an estimated 1 week|Data not collected|||||
846046|NCT02164929|Secondary|Quality of Recovery|Quality of Recovery Score (QoR-15) is measured on a scale of 0-150 (0=poor, 150 = excellent). Scores were collected daily for 72 hours and then averaged.|72 hours|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846036|NCT02179892|Secondary|Mean Time of First Opioid Use|The time of first opioid use after surgery will be recorded for up to 72 hours.|Post-surgery (Up to 72 Hours)|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
846037|NCT02179892|Secondary|Mean Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Pain Score With Movement|The VAS method of pain assessment (scale of 1-10) will be used to measure the patient's level of pain with movement each day during the 72 hour post surgical period. One represents the lowest level of pain and 10 represents the highest level of pain.|Post-Surgery 24 Hours, 48 Hours, 72 Hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846038|NCT02179892|Secondary|Mean Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Pain Score at Rest|The VAS method of pain assessment (scale of 1- 10) will be used to measure the participant's pain level at rest each day during the 72 hours post surgical period. One represents the lowest level of pain and 10 represents the highest level of pain.|Post-Surgery 24 Hours, 48 Hours, 72 Hours|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846039|NCT02179892|Primary|Mean Opioid Consumption|The investigators will collect the total amount of opioid consumption for the 72 hour post operative period in each group.|Post Surgery (Up to 72 Hours)|||milligrams||Standard Deviation|Mean
846040|NCT02164929|Secondary|Length of Stay||Participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an estimated 1 week|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
846041|NCT02164929|Secondary|Number of Epidural-related Side Effects||Participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an estimated 1 week|||Number of side effects|||Number
846047|NCT02164929|Secondary|Pain Scores|"Pain scores at rest and with activity using a verbal rating scales (VRS) of 0-10, where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents worst pain ever, at 30, 60, 90, 120 min and every 6 hours for 24 hours and every 12 hours for 48 hours and once a day thereafter until discharge. Data were collected at the indicated time points and an average pain score was calculated."|Participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an estimated 1 week|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846048|NCT02164929|Primary|Postoperative Opioid Consumption|If opioid other than fentanyl is used, the dose will be converted to morphine equivalent.|24 hours after surgery|||mcg||Standard Deviation|Mean
846049|NCT02164318|Secondary|Count of Participants Using Their AVF for Dialysis|Successful use of AVF at 12 months in dialysis dependent patients. Not relevant in participants that are predialysis or that discontinue dialysis prior to AVF use.|12 months post surgery|Only subjects who were on dialysis at 12 months are included in the analysis. Only 5 participants were on dialysis at this time.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846050|NCT02164318|Secondary|Count of Participants With a Patent Fistula|Determination that AVF is patent (has blood flow, no occlusion).|3 months post surgery|Two subjects withdrew from this study prior to their AVF surgery, therefore they were not included in the analysis population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846051|NCT02164318|Primary|Count of Participants With Mature Arteriovenous Fistula (AVF)|Use of AVF for dialysis for dialysis dependent participants, or fistula deemed mature based on physical exam in predialysis participants (diameter >6 mm, blood flow >600 ml by ultrasound or estimated by physical exam).|3 month post surgery to create AVF|Two subjects withdrew from this study prior to their AVF surgery, therefore they were not included in the analysis population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846082|NCT02046148|Secondary|Birth Length and Head Circumference of Infants (Mean - Standard Deviation)|Length and head circumference at birth were summarized by reporting the mean and standard deviation.|At Birth|Infants born to screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination.||Centimeter||Standard Deviation|Mean
847367|NCT00607126|Secondary|Distance|distance assessed by 6 minute walk test|baseline, mid point, end and 12 weeks after training|||feet||Standard Deviation|Mean
846077|NCT02046148|Secondary|Descriptive Statistics for the Score for the Long-term Developmental Outcome Assessed by Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development 3rd Edition Screening Test (PsychCorp) in Infants (Median, Minimum and Maximum)|"Long-term developmental outcome assessed by Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development 3rd edition Screening Test (PsychCorp). The screening test measured three domains: cognitive, language (receptive vs expressive communication), and motor (fine vs gross).
Scaled scores range from 1 to 19 with a mean of 10 and a standard deviation of 3. The scores were summarized by reporting the median, minimum and maximum."|At Day 180 of age|Infants born to screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination.||Sores on a scale||Full Range|Median
846078|NCT02046148|Secondary|Descriptive Statistics for the Score for the Long-term Developmental Outcome Assessed by Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development 3rd Edition Screening Test (PsychCorp) in Infants (Mean - Standard Deviation)|"Long-term developmental outcome assessed by Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development 3rd edition Screening Test (PsychCorp). The screening test measured three domains: cognitive, language (receptive vs expressive communication), and motor (fine vs gross).
Scaled scores range from 1 to 19 with a mean of 10 and a standard deviation of 3. The scores were summarized by reporting the mean and standard deviation."|At Day 180 of age|Infants born to screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846079|NCT02046148|Secondary|Infants Apgar Scores (Median, Minimum and Maximum)|Apgar (Appearance, Pulse, Grimace response, Activity and Respiration) test to evaluate the new-born's physical condition. Apgar scores between 0 and 10 (highest score possible). If 1 and 5 minutes Apgar score were normal, 10 minutes Apgar score might not be required.|At 1, 5 and 10 minutes|Infants born to screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination.||Scores on a scale||Full Range|Median
846080|NCT02046148|Secondary|Infants Apgar Scores (Mean - Standard Deviation)|Apgar (Appearance, Pulse, Grimace response, Activity and Respiration) test to evaluate the new-born's physical condition. Apgar score between 0 and 10 (highest score possible). If 1 and 5 minutes Apgar score were normal, 10 minutes Apgar score might not be required.|At 1, 5 and 10 minutes|Infants born to screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846081|NCT02046148|Secondary|Birth Length and Head Circumference of Infants (Median - Minimum and Maximum)|Length and head circumference at birth were summarized by reporting the median and minimum and maximum|At birth|Infants born to screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination.||Centimeter||Full Range|Median
857580|NCT00788697|Secondary|Inter-reader Agreement|Inter-reader agreement of assessment of malignant or benign by unenhanced and SonoVue-enhanced ultrasonography separately. Unit of analysis was the lesion, equivalent to the subject, since each subject had a single lesion that was to be characterized. Computation for the percentage agreement within two categories: “3 out of 3 readers agree” and “2 out of 3 readers agree”.|24 hours to 6 months|||Percent of total number of lesions|||Number
857581|NCT00788697|Secondary|Specific Diagnosis of Benign FLLs|"SonoVue-enhanced versus unenhanced ultrasound for specific diagnosis of benign FLLs, using the diagnosis provided by each of the 3 off-site assessors (blinded to patient data) for the ITD population. Unit of analysis was the lesion, equivalent to the subject, since each subject had a single lesion that was to be characterized.
Among the 116 ITD participants with benign lesions based on the truth standard, only 89 participants (lesions) were characterized as either hemangioma or focal nodular hyperplasia.
Truth standard: CE-CT and /or CE-MRI examination OR tissue pathology/histology from surgical resection/biopsy OR 6-month follow up. Calculated as (number of correctly characterized lesions/number of lesions per truth standard) x 100."|24 hours to 6 months|||Benign lesions|Benign lesions to be characterized||Number
846083|NCT02046148|Secondary|Birth Weight of Infants (Median, Minimum and Maximum)|Weight at birth was summarized by reporting the median and the minimum and maximum.|At Birth|Infants born to screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination.||Kilogram||Full Range|Median
846084|NCT02046148|Secondary|Birth Weight of Infants (Mean-Standard Deviation)|Weight at birth was summarized by reporting the mean and standard deviation,|At Birth|Infants born to screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination.||Kilogram||Standard Deviation|Mean
846085|NCT02046148|Secondary|Percentage of Infants With SAEs, Unsolicited MAEs and AEs Leading to Study Withdrawal|An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in one or more of the following: death; life-threatening; that does not refer to an event which hypothetically might have caused death if it were more severe; required or prolonged hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly/or birth defect; any important and significant medical event that may not be immediately life-threatening or resulting in death or hospitalization but, based upon appropriate medical judgement, may jeopardize the subject or may require intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed above. An MAE is defined as an adverse event that leads to an unscheduled visit to a healthcare practitioner.|From Birth through Day 180 of age|Infants born to screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination and who provided data on unsolicited adverse events.||Percentage of Infant Subjects|||Number
846086|NCT02046148|Secondary|Percentage of Maternal Subjects With SAEs, Unsolicited MAEs and Unsolicited AEs Leading to Study Withdrawal (AEs Lead. Wthwal)|An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in one or more of the following: death; life-threatening; that does not refer to an event which hypothetically might have caused death if it were more severe; required or prolonged hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly/or birth defect; any important and significant medical event that may not be immediately life-threatening or resulting in death or hospitalization but, based upon appropriate medical judgement, may jeopardize the subject or may require intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed above. An MAE is defined as an adverse event that leads to an unscheduled visit to a healthcare practitioner.|From Study Day 32 through Day 180 postpartum|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination and who provided data on unsolicited adverse events.||Percentage of Maternal Subjects|||Number
846087|NCT02046148|Secondary|Percentage of Maternal Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Unsolicited Medically Attended AEs (MAEs) and Unsolicited AEs Leading to Study Withdrawal (AEs Lead. Wthwal)|An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in one or more of the following: death; life-threatening; that does not refer to an event which hypothetically might have caused death if it were more severe; required or prolonged hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly/or birth defect; any important and significant medical event that may not be immediately life-threatening or resulting in death or hospitalization but, based upon appropriate medical judgement, may jeopardize the subject or may require intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed above. An MAE is defined as an adverse event that leads to an unscheduled visit to a healthcare practitioner.|From Study Day 1 through Study Day 31|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination and who provided data on unsolicited adverse events.||Percentage of Maternal Subjects|||Number
846088|NCT02046148|Secondary|Percentage of Maternal Subjects With Any Unsolicited AEs|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a subject or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product at any dose that does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. Therefore, an AE can be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of an investigational product, whether or not considered related to the investigational product. This definition includes inter-current illnesses or injuries and exacerbation of pre-existing conditions.|From Study Day 1 through Study Day 31|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination and who provided data on unsolicited adverse events.||Percentage of Maternal Subjects|||Number
846089|NCT02046148|Secondary|Percentage of Maternal Subjects With Solicited Local and Solicited Systemic AEs - Study Days 1-7|Percentage and frequency of maternal subjects with solicited local and solicited systemic adverse events up to Study Day 7 and calculated for four time intervals after vaccination: 30 minutes, Study Days 1-3 (without 30 min), Study Days 4-7, Study Days 1-7 (without 30 min). Threshold for Ecchymosis, Erythema, Swelling and Induration: Grade 0 (<25 mm), Any (≥ 25 mm). Systemic fever includes subjects with body temperature ≥ 38 °C irrespective of route of measurement.|During Study Days 1-7 (from 6 hours through Day 7 post-vaccination)|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination and who provided data on post-vaccination local or systemic adverse events.||Percentage of Maternal Subjects|||Number
846090|NCT02046148|Secondary|Percentage of Maternal Subjects With Solicited Local and Solicited Systemic AEs - Study Days 4-7|Percentage and frequency of maternal subjects with solicited local and solicited systemic AEs up to Study Day 7 and calculated for four time intervals after vaccination: 30 minutes, Study Days 1-3 (without 30 min), Study Days 4-7, Study Days 1-7 (without 30 min). Threshold for Ecchymosis, Erythema, Swelling and Induration: Grade 0 (<25 mm), Any (≥ 25 mm). Systemic fever includes subjects with body temperature ≥ 38 °C irrespective of route of measurement.|During Study Days 4-7|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination and who provided data on post-vaccination local or systemic adverse events.||Percentage of Maternal Subjects|||Number
846091|NCT02046148|Secondary|Percentage of Maternal Subjects With Solicited Local and Solicited Systemic AEs - Study Days 1-3|Percentage and frequency of maternal subjects with solicited local and solicited systemic AEs up to Study Day 7 and calculated for four time intervals after vaccination: 30 minutes, Study Days 1-3 (without 30 min), Study Days 4-7, Study Days 1-7 (without 30 min). Threshold for Ecchymosis, Erythema, Swelling and Induration: Grade 0 (<25 mm), Any (≥ 25 mm). Systemic fever includes subjects with body temperature ≥ 38 °C irrespective of route of measurement.|During Study Days 1-3 (from 6 hours through Day 3 post-vaccination)|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination and who provided data on post-vaccination local or systemic adverse events.||Percentage of Maternal Subjects|||Number
846092|NCT02046148|Secondary|Percentage of Maternal Subjects With Solicited Local and Solicited Systemic Adverse Events (AEs) up to 30 Minutes|Percentage and frequency of maternal subjects with solicited local and solicited systemic AEs up to Study Day 7 and calculated for four time intervals after vaccination: 30 minutes, Study Days 1-3 (without 30 min), Study Days 4-7, Study Days 1-7 (without 30 min). Threshold for Ecchymosis, Erythema, Swelling and Induration: Grade 0 (<25 mm), Any (≥ 25 mm). Systemic fever includes subjects with body temperature ≥ 38 °C irrespective of route of measurement.|Up to 30 minutes post-vaccination|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID and who received a study vaccination and who provided data on post-vaccination local or systemic adverse events.||Percentage of Maternal Subjects|||Number
846093|NCT02046148|Secondary|Ratio of GBS IgG Antibody Levels – Serotype III in Infant Serum Relative to Maternal Serum at the Time of Delivery|To evaluate the relationship of serotype-specific III GBS IgG antibody levels (anti-III) in the infant serum to the GBS IgG antibody levels in the maternal serum at the time of delivery/birth. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The data for serotype III were not available at the time of the posting (new assay currently in development and to be validated before the results release).|At Delivery||12/2019||||
846094|NCT02046148|Secondary|Ratio of GBS IgG Antibody Levels – Serotype Ib in Infant Serum Relative to Maternal Serum at the Time of Delivery|To evaluate the relationship of serotype-specific Ib GBS IgG antibody levels (anti-Ib) in the infant serum to the GBS IgG antibody levels in the maternal serum at the time of delivery/birth. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The data for serotype Ib were not available at the time of the posting (new assay currently in development and to be validated before the results release).|At Delivery||12/2019||||
846095|NCT02046148|Secondary|Ratio of GBS IgG Antibody Levels – Serotype Ia in Infant Serum Relative to Maternal Serum at the Time of Delivery|To evaluate the relationship of serotype-specific Ia GBS IgG antibody levels (anti-Ia) in the infant serum to the GBS IgG antibody levels in the maternal serum at the time of delivery/birth. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL).|At Delivery|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID, who correctly received the study vaccine, who had no major protocol deviation, and who provided at least one evaluable serum sample at the relevant time points.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846096|NCT02046148|Primary|Ratio Relative to Pre-vaccination Levels of Maternal Serum GBS IgG Antibody Levels – Serotype III, as Measured at Study Day 31, at Delivery and at Days 42 and 90 Postpartum|Geometric Mean Ratio relative to pre-vaccination (Day 1) of serotype-specific (III) GBS serum IgG antibody concentrations (anti-III) in maternal subjects. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The data for serotype III were not available at the time of the posting (new assay currently in development and to be validated before the results release).|At Day 31 (post-vaccination), Delivery, Days 42 and 90 (postpartum)||12/2019||||
846097|NCT02046148|Primary|Ratio Relative to Pre-vaccination Levels of Maternal Serum GBS IgG Antibody Levels – Serotype Ib, as Measured at Study Day 31, at Delivery and at Days 42 and 90 Postpartum|Geometric Mean Ratio relative to pre-vaccination (Day 1) of serotype-specific (Ib) GBS serum IgG antibody concentrations (anti-Ib) in maternal subjects. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The data for serotype Ib were not available at the time of the posting (new assay currently in development and to be validated before the results release).|At Day 31 (post-vaccination), Delivery, Days 42 and 90 (postpartum)||12/2019||||
846098|NCT02046148|Primary|Ratio Relative to Pre-vaccination Levels of Maternal Serum GBS IgG Antibody Levels – Serotype Ia, as Measured at Study Day 31, at Delivery and at Days 42 and 90 Postpartum|Geometric Mean Ratio relative to pre-vaccination (Day 1) of serotype-specific (Ia) GBS serum IgG antibody concentrations (anti-Ia) in maternal subjects. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL).|At Day 31 (post-vaccination), Delivery, Days 42 and 90 (postpartum)|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID, who correctly received the study vaccine, who had no major protocol deviation, and who provided at least one evaluable serum sample at the relevant time points.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846099|NCT02046148|Primary|Concentration of Serotype III GBS IgG Levels in Maternal Serum at Pre-vaccination, at Study Day 31, at Delivery and at Days 42 and 90 Postpartum|To evaluate serotype-specific (III) GBS serum IgG antibody levels (anti-III) in maternal subjects. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The data for serotype III were not available at the time of the posting (new assay currently in development and to be validated before the results release).|At Day 1 (pre-vaccination), Day 31 (post-vaccination), Delivery, Days 42 and 90 (postpartum)||12/2019||||
846345|NCT01547299|Secondary|Serum Testosterone: Baseline||Baseline|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline serum testosterone result.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
846100|NCT02046148|Primary|Concentration of Serotype Ib GBS IgG Levels in Maternal Serum at Pre-vaccination, at Study Day 31, at Delivery and at Days 42 and 90 Postpartum|To evaluate serotype-specific (Ib) GBS serum IgG antibody levels (anti-Ib) in maternal subjects. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The data for serotype Ib were not available at the time of the posting (new assay currently in development and to be validated before the results release).|At Day 1 (pre-vaccination), Day 31 (post-vaccination), Delivery, Days 42 and 90 (postpartum)||12/2019||||
846101|NCT02046148|Primary|Concentration of Serotype Ia GBS IgG Levels in Maternal Serum at Pre-vaccination, at Study Day 31, at Delivery and at Days 42 and 90 Postpartum|To evaluate serotype-specific (Ia) GBS serum IgG antibody levels (anti-Ia) in maternal subjects. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL).|At Day 1 (pre-vaccination), Day 31 (post-vaccination), Delivery, Days 42 and 90 (postpartum)|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID, who correctly received the study vaccine, who had no major protocol deviation, and who provided at least one evaluable serum sample at the relevant time points.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846102|NCT02046148|Primary|Concentration of Serotype III GBS IgG Levels in Infant Serum at Delivery and at Days 42 and 90 of Age|To evaluate serotype-specific III GBS serum IgG antibody levels (anti-III) in infants born to maternal subjects receiving the GBS trivalent vaccine, as measured at birth, Day 42 and Day 90 of age. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The data for seortype III were not available at the time of the posting (new assay currently in development and to be validated before the results release).|At Birth, Day 42 and Day 90||12/2019||||
846103|NCT02046148|Primary|Concentration of Serotype Ib GBS IgG Levels in Infant Serum at Delivery and at Days 42 and 90 of Age|To evaluate serotype-specific Ib GBS serum IgG antibody levels (anti-Ib) in infants born to maternal subjects receiving the GBS trivalent vaccine, as measured at birth, Day 42 and Day 90 of age. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). The data for serotype Ib were not available at the time of the posting (new assay currently in development and to be validated before the results release).|At Birth, Day 42 and Day 90||12/2019||||
846104|NCT02046148|Primary|Concentration of Serotype Ia GBS IgG Levels in Infant Serum at Delivery and at Days 42 and 90 of Age|To evaluate serotype-specific Ia GBS serum IgG antibody levels (anti-Ia) in infants born to maternal subjects receiving the GBS trivalent vaccine, as measured at birth, Day 42 and Day 90 of age. Antibody concentrations were measured by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), expressed as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL).|At Birth, Day 42 and Day 90|All screened subjects who signed informed consent form, provided demographic data and/or baseline screening assessments, were randomized and assigned a study subject ID, who correctly received the study vaccine, who had no major protocol deviation, and who provided at least one evaluable serum sample at the relevant time points.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846117|NCT01994629|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited (AEs) After Receiving One Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM Vaccine or MenACWY-TT Vaccine.|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects (12 to 15 months old) reporting unsolicited AEs (day 1 to day 29), SAEs, medically attended AEs, AEs leading to premature study withdrawal (Day 1 to Day 180) after vaccination with one dose of either MenACWY-CRM or comparator MenACWY-TT vaccine.|Day 1 to Day 29 or Day 1 to Day 180 post-vaccination|Analysis was done on unsolicited safety data set ie, all subjects in the exposed set who had post-vaccination unsolicited adverse event records.||Subjects|||Number
846118|NCT01994629|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Adverse Events (AEs) After Receiving One Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM Vaccine or MenACWY-TT Vaccine.|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects (12 to 15 months old) reporting any and each of solicited local and systemic AEs reported from Day 1 to 7 after vaccination with one dose of either MenACWY-CRM or comparator MenACWY-TT vaccine.|Day 1 (6 hours) to Day 7 post-vaccination|Analysis was done on solicited safety data set. MedDRA version v.3.0 was used for the analyses (in the AEs section, MedDRA version v.17.01 was used, leading to a different terminology to describe some of the events reported in this outcome).||Subjects|||Number
846119|NCT01994629|Secondary|rSBA GMT Against N. Meningitidis Against Serogroups A, C, W, and Y After Receiving One Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM Vaccine or MenACWY-TT Vaccine.|Immunogenicity of one dose of MenACWY-CRM and comparator MenACWY-TT vaccine was assessed in subjects (12 to 15 months old) as measured by rSBA GMTs directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W, and Y on Day 29 after vaccination. Persistence of immune responses was measured by rSBA GMTs on Day 180.|Day 1, Day 29 and Day 180 post-vaccination|Analysis at Day 29 was done on FAS set at Visit Day 29. Persistence of immune responses at Day 180 was analysed on FAS at Visit Day 180.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846822|NCT01106534|Secondary|ST for Treatment Population||12 through 30 months and 12 through 33 months|Participants enrolled in the study will be followed by Abbott Vascular but their data will not be independently analyzed; they will only be analyzed as part of the DAPT study (NCT00977938) which is sufficiently powered for the study outcomes.|||||
846120|NCT01994629|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Four-fold Increase in rSBA Titers Against Serogroups A, C, W, and Y After Receiving One Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM Vaccine or MenACWY-TT Vaccine.|Immunogenicity of one dose of MenACWY-CRM and comparator MenACWY-TT vaccine was assessed in subjects (12 to 15 months old) as measured by the percentages of subjects with four-fold increase in rSBA titer directed against N. meningitides serogroups A, C, W, and Y on Day 29 after vaccination. Persistence of immune response was measured by the percentages of subjects with four-fold increase in rSBA titer on Day 180 after vaccination.|Day 29 and Day 180 post-vaccination|Analysis at Day 29 was done on FAS set at Visit Day 29. Persistence of immune responses at Day 180 was analysed on FAS at Visit Day 180.||percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846121|NCT01994629|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With rSBA Titer ≥ 128 Against Serogroups A, C, W, and Y After Receiving One Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM Vaccine or MenACWY-TT Vaccine.|Immunogenicity of one dose of MenACWY-CRM and comparator MenACWY-TT vaccine was assessed in subjects (12 to 15 months old) as measured by the percentages of subjects with rSBA titer ≥ 128 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W, and Y on Day 29 after vaccination. Persistence of immune response was measured by percentages of subjects with rSBA titer ≥ 128 on Day 180 after vaccination.|Day 1, Day 29 and Day 180 post-vaccination|Analysis at Day 29 was done on FAS set at Visit Day 29. Persistence of immune responses at Day 180 was analysed on FAS at Visit Day 180.||percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846122|NCT01994629|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Rabbit Serum Bactericidal Assay (rSBA) Titer ≥ 8 Against Serogroups A, C, W, and Y After Receiving One Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM Vaccine or MenACWY-TT Vaccine.|Immunogenicity of one dose of MenACWY-CRM and comparator MenACWY-TT vaccine was assessed in subjects (12 to 15 months old) as measured by the percentages of subjects with rSBA titer ≥ 8 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W, and Y on Day 29 after vaccination. Persistence of immune response was measured by percentages of subjects with rSBA titer ≥ 8 on Day 180 after vaccination.|Day 1, Day 29 and Day 180 post-vaccination|Analysis at Day 29 was done on FAS set at Visit Day 29. Persistence of immune responses at Day 180 was analysed on FAS at Visit Day 180.||percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846123|NCT01994629|Secondary|hSBA Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W, and Y After Receiving One Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM Vaccine or MenACWY-TT Vaccine.|Immunogenicity of one dose of MenACWY-CRM and comparator MenACWY-TT vaccine was assessed in subjects (12 to 15 months old) as measured by hSBA GMTs directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W, and Y on Day 29 after vaccination. Persistence of immune response was measured by hSBA GMTs at Day 180 after vaccination.|Day 1, Day 29 and Day 180 post-vaccination|Analysis at Day 29 was done on FAS set at Visit Day 29. Persistence of immune responses at Day 180 was analysed on FAS at Visit Day 180.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846124|NCT01994629|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Seroresponse Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W, and Y After Receiving One Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM Vaccine or MenACWY-TT Vaccine.|Immunogenicity of one dose of MenACWY-CRM and comparator MenACWY-TT vaccine was assessed in subjects (12 to 15 months old) as measured by the percentages of subjects with seroresponse defined as for subjects with pre-vaccination hSBA titer < 4, post-vaccination hSBA titer ≥ 8; for subjects with pre-vaccination hSBA titer ≥ 4, an increase of at least four times the pre-vaccination hSBA directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W, and Y on Day 29 after vaccination. Persistence immune response was measured by the percentage of subjects with seroresponse at Day 180 after vaccination.|Day 29 and Day 180 post-vaccination|Analysis at Day 29 was done on FAS set at Visit Day 29. Persistence of immune responses at Day 180 was analysed on FAS at Visit Day 180.||percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846125|NCT01994629|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Human Serum Bactericidal Assay (hSBA) Titer ≥ 8 Against (N. Meningitidis) Serogroups A, C, W, and Y After Receiving One Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM Vaccine or MenACWY-TT Vaccine.|Immunogenicity of one dose of MenACWY-CRM and comparator MenACWY-TT vaccine was assessed in subjects (12 to 15 months old) as measured by the percentages of subjects with hSBA titer ≥ 8 directed against Neisseria meningitidis (N. meningitidis) serogroups A, C, W, and Y on Day 29 after vaccination. Persistence of immune responses was measured by the percentages of subjects with hSBA titer ≥ 8 on Day 180 post-vaccination.|Day 1, Day 29 and Day 180 post-vaccination|Analysis was done on Full Analysis Set (FAS) Day 29 (subjects who received the vaccine and provided immunogenicity data at Day 29: MenACWY-CRM 95; MenACWT-TT 97). Persistence of immune responses at Day 180 was analysed on FAS Day 180 (subjects who received the vaccine and provided immunogenicity data at Day 180: MenACWY-CRM 98; MenACWT-TT 97).||percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846126|NCT01994629|Primary|Number of Subjects With at Least One Severe Solicited Adverse Event (AE) After Receiving One Dose of Either MenACWY-CRM Vaccine or MenACWY-TT.|Reactogenicity of MenACWY-CRM and comparator MenACWY-TT vaccine was assessed in subjects (12 to 15 months old) as measured by number of subjects with at least one severe solicited AE within 7 days after vaccination. Solicited AEs included tenderness, erythema, induration, irritability, sleepiness, change in eating habits, vomiting, diarrhea and fever.|Day 1 to Day 7 post-vaccination|Analysis was done on the solicited safety data set (all subjects in the exposed set who provided post vaccination reactogenicity data: MenACWY-CRM 99; MenACWY-TT 101).||Number of Subjects|||Number
846127|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Potential Immune-mediated Diseases (pIMDs)|pIMDs are a subset of AEs that include autoimmune diseases and other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders of interest which may or may not have an autoimmune aetiology.|From first vaccination up to Month 18 (study end)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one study vaccine administered.||Subjects|||Number
846128|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|From first vaccination up to Month 18 (study end)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one study vaccine administered.||Subjects|||Number
846150|NCT01903720|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CRT at Each Visit|CRT was measured in the study eye using optical computed tomography (OCT), a laser based non-invasive diagnostic system providing high-resolution imaging sections of the retina. A negative change from Baseline indicates an improvement.|Baseline, Week 1, Months 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12|"ITT population included all enrolled participants. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point for analysis."||micrometers (μm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
846129|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 AE = an AE which prevented normal, everyday activities. Related = AE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|During 30 days (Days 0-29) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one study vaccine administered.||Subjects|||Number
846130|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were arthralgia, fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, myalgia, shivering and fever [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = fever > 39.0 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one study vaccine administered, on subjects with their symptom sheets completed.||Subjects|||Number
846131|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were arthralgia, fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, myalgia, shivering and fever [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = fever > 39.0 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after each vaccine dose|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one study vaccine administered, on subjects with their symptom sheets completed.||Subjects|||Number
846132|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were arthralgia, fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, myalgia, shivering and fever [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)]. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 fever = fever > 39.0 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after each vaccine dose|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one study vaccine administered, on subjects with their symptom sheets completed.||Subjects|||Number
846133|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 100 millimeters (mm) of injection site. Relationship analysis was not performed.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one study vaccine administered, on subjects with their symptom sheets completed.||Subjects|||Number
846134|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 (G3) pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 (G3) redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 100 millimeters (mm) of injection site. Relationship analysis was not performed.|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after each vaccine dose|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with at least one study vaccine administered, on subjects with their symptom sheets completed.||Subjects|||Number
846135|NCT01954251|Secondary|Geometric Mean Ratio for Flu HI Antibodies Post-vaccination Titer|The geometric mean ratio for Flu HI antibodies against the four influenza vaccine strains Flu A/California/7/2009, Flu A/Texas/50/2012, Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 Victoria and Flu B/Massachusetts/2/2012 Yamagata was defined as the geometric mean of the within subject ratios of the post-vaccination reciprocal HI titer to the Day 0 reciprocal HI titer.|At Day 21 post vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846136|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects in Terms of HI Antibodies|The number of seroconverted subjects was assessed in terms of HI antibodies against the four influenza vaccine strains Flu A/California/7/2009, Flu A/Texas/50/2012, Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 Victoria and Flu B/Massachusetts/2/2012 Yamagata.|At Day 21 post vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
846137|NCT01954251|Secondary|FLU Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers|HI antibody titres against the four influenza vaccine strains Flu A/California/7/2009, Flu A/Texas/50/2012, Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 Victoria (Vic) and Flu B/Massachusetts (Massach)/2/2012 Yamagata (Yamma) were expressed as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|At Day 0 (PRE) and Day 21 post vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846138|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects With HI Antibody Titers ≥ 1:40|Seroprotection rate is defined as the percentage of vaccines with a serum HI titer ≥1:40 that usually was accepted as indicating protection. FLU HI antibodies were assessed in four strains: Flu A/California/7/2009 H1N1, Flu A/Texas/50/2012 H3N2, Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 Victoria (Vic) and Flu B/Massachusetts(Massach)/2/2012 Yamagata (Yama).|At Day 0 (PRE) and at Day 21 post vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
846139|NCT01954251|Secondary|Number of Subjects With FLU HI Antibody Titers ≥1:10|FLU HI antibodies were assessed in four strains: Flu A/California/7/2009 H1N1, Flu A/Texas/50/2012 H3N2, Flu B/Brisbane/60/2008 Victoria and Flu B/Massachusetts (Massach)/2/2012 Yamagata (Yama). Cut-off titer for seropositivity was 1:10.|At Day 0 (PRE) and 21 post vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
846140|NCT01954251|Primary|FLU Haemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Antibody Titers|"For each strain included in the FLU-D-QIV vaccine, an ANOVA model was used to analyze post-vaccination log-transformed titers. The fixed-effect model included the minimization variable (age cohorts) and the treatment as fixed effect. The pre-vaccination log-transformed concentrations were included as continuous covariate. Geometric Means (GM) of post-vaccination titers (Day 21) were calculated conditionally to the means of the pre-vaccination log-transformed titers (Month 0) for each strain.
Adjusted GMTs (GMTs adjusted for baseline titers) and Adjusted GMT ratios were calculated together with 2-sided 95% CIs."|At Day 21 post vaccination|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846141|NCT01954251|Primary|Adjusted Geometric Mean ELISA Concentrations of Anti-gE Antibodies|Geometric means (GMs) of post-vaccination concentrations (Month 3 for GSK1437173A + GSK2321138A group and Month 5 for Control group) was calculated conditionally to the means of the pre-vaccination log-transformed concentrations for anti-gE (Month 0 for GSK1437173A + GSK2321138A group and Month 2 for Control group). Adjusted Least Squares (LS) means and difference of LS means between the groups were calculated together with 2-sided 95% CIs and back-transformed to the original units to provide GMCs.|At one month post-dose 2 (Month 3 for GSK1437173A + GSK2321138A group and Month 5 for Control group)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846142|NCT01954251|Primary|Vaccine Response for Anti-gE Humoral Immunogenicity|"The vaccine response(VRR) for anti-gE humoral immunogenicity, as determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA),was assessed only in subjects from the GSK1437173A + GSK2321138A Group. The VRR for anti-gE was defined as the percentage of subjects who had at least:
a 4-fold increase in the post-dose 2 anti-gE antibody concentration as compared to the pre-vaccination anti-gE antibody concentration, for subjects who were seropositive at baseline (cut-off ≥ 97 mIU/ml), or, a 4-fold increase in the post dose 2 anti-gE antibody concentrations as compared to the anti-gE antibodies cut-off value for seropositivity, for subjects who were seronegative at baseline (cut-off < 97 mIU/ml).Criterion used: the objective was met if the Lower Limit (LL) of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the VRR for anti-gE antibody concentrations was at least 60%."|At one month post-dose 2 (Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846143|NCT01954251|Primary|Number of Subjects With Vaccine Response to Anti-gE Antibodies|The vaccine response(VRR) for anti-gE humoral immunogenicity, as determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA),was assessed only in subjects from the GSK1437173A + GSK2321138A Group. The VRR for anti-gE was defined as the percentage of subjects who had at least: a 4-fold increase in the post-dose 2 anti-gE antibody concentration as compared to the pre-vaccination anti-gE antibody concentration, for subjects who were seropositive at baseline (cut-off ≥ 97 mIU/ml), or, a 4-fold increase in the post dose 2 anti-gE antibody concentrations as compared to the anti-gE antibodies cut-off value for seropositivity, for subjects who were seronegative at baseline (cut-off < 97 mIU/ml).|At one month post-dose 2 (Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects (i.e. those meeting all eligibility criteria, complying with the procedures and intervals defined in the protocol, with no elimination criteria during the study) for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available.||Subjects|||Number
846144|NCT01903720|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received Laser Treatments|Participants underwent laser photocoagulation therapy for all areas of foveal leakage and non-perfusion, as well as areas of extensive retinal hyperplasia if applicable for rescue therapy.|12 Months|ITT population included all enrolled participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
846145|NCT01903720|Secondary|Time to Third Injection|Time in weeks from the second injection to the third injection.|12 Months|ITT population included all enrolled participants.||weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
846146|NCT01903720|Secondary|Time to Second Injection|Time in weeks from the first injection to the second injection.|12 Months|ITT population included all enrolled participants.||weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
846147|NCT01903720|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Receiving a Third Injection||12 Months|ITT population included all enrolled participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
846148|NCT01903720|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Receiving a Second Injection||12 Months|ITT population included all enrolled participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
846149|NCT01903720|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Change From Baseline of 15 or More Letters in BCVA|BCVA is measured in the study eye using an eye chart and is reported as the number of letters read correctly ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 letters (best). An increase in the number of letters read correctly means that the vision improved and a decrease in the number of letters read correctly means that the vision has worsened.|Baseline, Months 6 and 12|"ITT population included all enrolled participants. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point for analysis."||percentage of participants|||Number
846151|NCT01903720|Secondary|Change From Baseline in BCVA at Each Visit|BCVA is measured in the study eye using an eye chart and is reported as the number of letters read correctly ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 letters (best). A positive number change in the number of letters read means that the vision improved and a negative number change in the number of letters read means that the vision has worsened.|Baseline, Week 1, Months 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12|"ITT population included all enrolled participants. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point for analysis."||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
846152|NCT01903720|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CRT at Month 12|CRT was measured in the study eye using optical computed tomography (OCT), a laser based non-invasive diagnostic system providing high-resolution imaging sections of the retina. A negative change from Baseline indicates an improvement.|Baseline, Month 12|"ITT population included all enrolled participants. n in the category is the number of participants with data available for analysis."||μm||Standard Deviation|Mean
846153|NCT01903720|Secondary|Change From Baseline in BCVA at Month 12|BCVA is measured in the study eye using an eye chart and is reported as the number of letters read correctly ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 letters (best). A positive number change in the number of letters read correctly means that the vision improved and a negative number change in the number of letters read correctly means that the vision has worsened.|Baseline, Month 12|"ITT population included all enrolled participants. n in the category is the number of participants with data available for analysis."||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
846154|NCT01903720|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Central Retinal Thickness (CRT) at Month 6|CRT was measured in the study eye using optical computed tomography (OCT), a laser based non-invasive diagnostic system providing high-resolution imaging sections of the retina. A negative change from Baseline indicates an improvement.|Baseline, Month 6|"ITT population included all enrolled participants. n in the category is the number of participants with data available for analysis."||micrometers (μm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
846155|NCT01903720|Primary|Change From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) at Month 6|BCVA is measured in the study eye using an eye chart and is reported as the number of letters read correctly ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 letters (best). A positive number change in the number of letters read correctly means that the vision improved and a negative number change in the number of letters read correctly means that the vision has worsened.|Baseline, Month 6|"Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all enrolled participants. n in the category is the number of participants with data available for analysis."||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
846156|NCT01867307|Primary|Change From Baseline of Renal Tubular Maximum Reabsorptive Capacity for Glucose (TmG) at End of Empagliflozin Treatment (Day 14)|"Change from baseline of renal tubular maximum reabsorptive capacity for glucose (TmG) at end of empagliflozin treatment (Day 14).
Per-protocol set (PPS): PPS consisted of all subjects and patients in the TS who completed the treatment day 14 clamping study without any relevant deviations either in their treatment regimen or in the performance and timing of the measurements."|Baseline and Day 14|Analysable set (AS): This data set is based on the PPS and excluded all primary endpoint and exploratory endpoint data for one healthy subject due to outlying values that were identified in the subject’s TmG and urine splay data.||(milligram / minute/ 1.73 square meters)||Standard Deviation|Mean
846157|NCT01867047|Post-Hoc|Length of Stay|Length of stay in days|Discharge from hospital (approximately 5 days)|||Days||Full Range|Median
846158|NCT01867047|Secondary|Number of Participants With Acute Kidney Injury|Number of participants with acute kidney injury will be recorded.|Discharge from hospital (approximately 5 days)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
846159|NCT01867047|Secondary|Number of Participants That Received Allogeneic Blood|The number of participants that received allogeneic blood will be recorded.|Discharge from hospital (approximately 5 days)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
846160|NCT01867047|Secondary|Number of Participants Transferred to Intensive Care Unit (ICU)|The number of participants transferred to Intensive Care Unit (ICU) will be recorded|Discharge from hospital (approximately 5 days)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
846161|NCT01867047|Primary|Number of Participants Given Vasopressors|The number of participants who received vasopressors.|Discharge from hospital (approximately 5 days)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
846162|NCT01867047|Primary|Number of Participants With Severe Hypotension|The number of participants with severe hypotension (Systolic Blood Pressure less than 65 mmHG) will be recorded.|From baseline to discharge from hospital (approximately 5 days)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
846163|NCT01867047|Primary|Number of Participants With Mild Hypotension|The number of participants with mild hypotension (Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) less than 85 mmHG) will be recorded.|From baseline to discharge from hospital (approximately 5 days)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
846164|NCT01816048|Primary|Change in Total NaF PET/CT Standardized Uptake Values|To measure changes in NaF PET/CT standardized uptake values (SUV total) from prior to dosing with Tak-700 to12 weeks after starting treatment with TAK-700|up to 3 months|The study closed early so only 8 of 20 planned were enrolled and of the 8, only 4 completed the week 12 scan so there was not sufficient data to make an analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846165|NCT01816048|Secondary|To Compare PSA Response Rate and Circulating Tumor Cell Counts of Subjects Receiving TAK700 to NaF PET/CT Imaging Results||Baseline, one month, 2 months, 3 months|Due to study closing early only 8 of planned 20 patients enrolled and only 4 of the subjects completed the week 12 scan and 5 of the 8 subjects came off study early. Data for PSA response rate and circulating tumor cell counts was not collected, and as a result there is no data to report or analyze for this endpoint.|||||
846166|NCT01816048|Secondary|To Document Change in the Number of Circulating Tumor Cells Using the Cell Search System (Veridex, LLC) Obtained Prior to Beginning Treatment With TAK 700, After Completing One Cycle and After Completing 3 Cycles.||Up to 14 months|Due to study closing early only 8 of planned 20 patients enrolled and only 4 of the subjects completed the week 12 scan and 5 of the 8 subjects came off study early. As a result there is not sufficient data to analyze this endpoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846167|NCT01816048|Secondary|To Document the Change in the Number of Circulating Tumor Cells Using One or More Methods (Epispot)|Baseline compared to 12 weeks|Up to 12 weeks|Due to study closing early only 8 of planned 20 patients enrolled and only 5 of the subjects obtained week 12 CTC test. Data was collected, but there is not sufficient data to analyze this endpoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848365|NCT00073073|Secondary|Absolute Change of Lipid Profiles on Exemestane From Baseline||1 year|Change in total cholesterol||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
846168|NCT01816048|Secondary|Compare Changes on NaF PET/CT After Treatment With TAK700 With Standard Clinical Outcomes Including PSA Doubling Time, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), and Radiographic Progression Free Survival.||Approximately 24 months|Due to study closing early only 8 of planned 20 patients enrolled and only 4 of the subjects completed the week 12 scan and 5 of the 8 subjects came off study early. Data for this endpoint was not collected. Radiographic progression free survival was not obtained.|||||
846169|NCT01816048|Secondary|Changes in NaF PET/CT Results in Response to TAK700|This is an exploratory endpoint as we are planning to identify other new parameters during the PET/CT scanning that may be more predictive of response (such as SUV volume, or dynamic changes during the scanning period). Changes in results at week 12 compared to baseline.|Up to 12 weeks|Due to study closing early only 8 of planned 20 patients enrolled and only 7 of the 8 subjects enrolled complete the week 6 scan so there is not sufficient data to analyze.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846170|NCT01816048|Secondary|Measure Change in PSA Kinetics With TAK700 From Baseline to Off Treatment|Stable: no change in PSA kinetics Decrease: less than baseline Increase: greater than baseline|Up to 14 months|Due to study closing early only 8 of planned 20 patients enrolled and 5 of the 8 subjects came off study early so PSA data is not complete and can't be analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846171|NCT01816048|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Experience Adverse Events While on Treatment With TAK 700|The number of subjects experiencing adverse events per CTCAE 4.0 while on treatment.|Up to 12 months|||participants|||Number
846172|NCT01816048|Primary|Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Response Rate|Measure prostate specific antigen (PSA) response rate in patients treated with TAK700, as measured by a decline in the PSA level from baseline to the month 3 assessment according to the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2), at least a 50% decrease from baseline.|Up to 3 months|Study closed early and only 8 of planned 20 enrolled. Five of the 8 subjects did not complete the study as planned. As a result, there was not sufficient data to make any analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846173|NCT01816048|Primary|Change in Maximum NaF PET/CT Standardized Uptake Values|To measure changes in NaF PET/CT standardized uptake values (SUVmax) from prior to dosing with Tak-700 to12 weeks after starting treatment with TAK-700|up to 3 months|The study closed early so only 8 of 20 planned were enrolled and of the 8, only 4 completed the week 12 scan so there was not sufficient data to make an analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846177|NCT01804842|Primary|Rmax (0-24) of Plasma Glucose|Rmax (0-24) = maximum response from the start time of the standardized dinner (0 h) to 24 hours after the standardized dinner. Study medication was administered at t = 0 hours for Treatments B and C and at t = 12 hours for Treatments A and C.|Times points to determine Rmax were: t = -0.08, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11.75, 11.92, 12.5, 13, 13.5, 14, 14.5, 15, 16, 17, 18, 18.5, 19, 19.5, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 hours relative to the start time of the standardized dinner.|Evaluable Population||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846178|NCT01804842|Primary|AUC (0-24) of Plasma Glucose|AUC (0-24) = Area under the curve from the start time of the standardized dinner (0 h) to 24 hours after the standardized dinner. Study medication was administered at t = 0 hours for Treatments B and C and at t = 12 hours for Treatments A and C.|Times points to create the AUC (0-24) were: t = -0.08, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11.75, 11.92, 12.5, 13, 13.5, 14, 14.5, 15, 16, 17, 18, 18.5, 19, 19.5, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 hours relative to the time of the standardized dinner.|Evaluable Population||mg*h/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846179|NCT01804842|Primary|Cmax of Plasma Metformin|Cmax = maximum response from the start time of the standardized dinner (0 h) to 24 hours after the standardized dinner. Study medication was administered at t = 0 hours for Treatments B and C and at t = 12 hours for Treatments A and C.|Times points to determine Cmax were: t = -0.08, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11.92, 12.5, 13, 13.5, 14, 14.5, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 hours relative to the start time of the standardized dinner.|Evaluable Population||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846180|NCT01804842|Primary|AUC (0-24) of Plasma Metformin|AUC (0-24) = Area under the curve from the start time of the standardized dinner (0 h) to 24 hours after the standardized dinner. Study medication was administered at t = 0 hours for Treatments B and C and at t = 12 hours for Treatments A and C.|Times points to create the AUC (0-24) were: t = -0.08, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11.92, 12.5, 13, 13.5, 14, 14.5, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 hours relative to the start time of the standardized dinner.|Evaluable Population||ng*h/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846181|NCT01797094|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Mostly or Very Satisfied With Their Crow’s Feet Lines on the Facial Line Satisfaction Questionnaire|Participants assessed their overall satisfaction at the present moment using a 5-point scale where -2=very dissatisfied, -1=mostly dissatisfied, 0=neither dissatisfied nor satisfied, 1=mostly satisfied and 2=very satisfied. The percentage of participants mostly or very satisfied is reported.|Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all enrolled participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
847232|NCT00734539|Secondary|Candidiasis|Definite or probable|prior to hospital discharge, up to 15 ½ months|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
846182|NCT01797094|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Rate Themselves in a Younger Self-Perception of Age Category Than at Baseline|"Participants were considered to judge themselves as looking younger if the category change was from look my current age at Baseline to look younger at Day 30 or from look older at Baseline to look my current age/younger at Day 30."|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all enrolled participants. Only those participants who rated themselves as looking their current age or older at Baseline were included in the analyses.||percentage of participants|||Number
846183|NCT01797094|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥3-Point Improvement From Baseline for Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire (FLO-11) Item 8 at Day 30|The FLO-11 questionnaire is comprised of 11 items that assess the subject's perceptions about specific aspects of their facial lines for the previous 7 days. Each question was scored on an 11-point scale (0=not at all, 5=somewhat, 10=very much) FLO-11 responders were defined as the percentage of participants with a ≥3-point improvement from Baseline in FLO-11 Item 8: “My facial lines make me look tired” score.|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all enrolled participants. Only participants with FLO-11 Item 8 scores ≥ 3 at Baseline were included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
846184|NCT01797094|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-point Improvement From Baseline for Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire (FLO-11) Item 5 at Day 30|The FLO-11 questionnaire is comprised of 11 items that assess the subject's perceptions about specific aspects of their facial lines for the previous 7 days. Each question was scored using an 11-point scale (0=not at all, 5=somewhat, 10=very much). FLO-11 responders were defined as the percentage of participants with a ≥2-point improvement from Baseline in FLO-11 Score Item 5: “My facial lines make me look less attractive than I want to look” score.|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all enrolled participants. Only participants with FLO-11 Item 5 scores ≥2 at Baseline are included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
846185|NCT01797094|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Point Improvement From Baseline for Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire (FLO-11) Item 2 at Day 30|The FLO-11 questionnaire is comprised of 11 items that assess the subject's perceptions about specific aspects of their facial lines for the previous 7 days. Each question was scored on an 11-point scale (0=not at all, 5=somewhat, 10=very much). FLO-11 responders were defined as the percentage of participants with a ≥2-point improvement from Baseline in FLO-11 Item 2 : “When I look in the mirror, my facial lines make me look older than I want to look” score.|Baseline, Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all enrolled participants. Only participants with FLO-11 Item 2 scores ≥2 at Baseline are included in the analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
846186|NCT01797094|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Much Improved or Very Much Improved in the Subject's Assessment of Appearance of CFL as Measured by the Global Assessment of Change in Crow’s Feet Lines (SGA-CFL)|Participants rated the change in their Crow's Feet Lines using the SGA-CFL 7-point scale where 1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved, 4=no change, 5=minimally worse, 6=much worse or 7=very much worse at Day 30. The percentage of participants who reported Much Improved or Very Much Improved at Day 30 is reported.|Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all enrolled participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
846187|NCT01797094|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving None or Mild on the Investigator's Assessment of the Severity of Crow's Feet Lines (CFL) at Maximum Smile Using the Facial Wrinkle Scale-Asian (FWS-A)|The Investigator assessed the severity of the participant's Crow's Feet lines at maximum smile using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale where 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe. The percentage of participants with a score of none or mild at Day 30 is reported.|Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all enrolled participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
846188|NCT01797081|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Rate Themselves in a Younger Self-Perception of Age Category Than at Baseline|"Participants were considered to judge themselves as looking younger if the category change was from look my current age at Baseline to look younger at Day 30 or from look older at Baseline to look my current age/younger at Day 30."|Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all enrolled participants. Only those participants who rated themselves as looking their current age or older at Baseline were included in the analyses.||percentage of participants|||Number
846189|NCT01797081|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Much Improved or Very Much Improved in the Subject's Assessment of Appearance of CFL as Measured by the Global Assessment of Change in Crow’s Feet Lines|Participants rated the change in their Crow's Feet Lines using the Subject’s Global Assessment of Change in Crow’s Feet Lines (SGA-CFL) 7-point scale where 1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved, 4=no change, 5=minimally worse, 6=much worse or 7=very much worse. The percentage of participants who reported Much Improved or Very Much Improved at Day 30 is reported.|Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all enrolled participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
846190|NCT01797081|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a ≥1-Grade Improvement From Baseline on the Investigator's Assessment of the Severity of CFL at Rest Using the FWS-A|The Investigator assessed the severity of the participant's Crow's Feet Lines at rest using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale where 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe. The percentage of participants with a ≥1-grade improvement from Baseline at Day 30 is reported.|Day 30|Participants from the Intent-to-treat population, all enrolled participants, with data available for analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
846191|NCT01797081|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving None or Mild on the Investigator's Assessment of the Severity of Crow's Feet Lines (CFL) at Maximum Smile Using the Facial Wrinkle Scale-Asian (FWS-A)|The Investigator assessed the severity of the patient's Crow's Feet lines at maximum smile using the 4-point Facial Wrinkle Scale where 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate or 3=severe. The percentage of participants with a score of none or mild at Day 30 is reported.|Day 30|Intent-to-treat population included all enrolled participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
846216|NCT01710046|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score by Visit|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score. Body was divided into 4 sections: head, arms, trunk, legs. For each section, percent area of skin involved was estimated: 0=0% to 6=90â€“100%. Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema, induration, desquamation; scale: 0= none to 4= maximum. Final PASI = sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weight of section (head: 0.1, arms: 0.2, body: 0.3, legs: 0.4) summed over all sections; total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|FAS; n (number) =number of participants with nonmissing observations at the specified visit.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
846192|NCT01721746|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL) Global Health Status Scores|Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL) was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, which is the most commonly used quality-of-life instrument in oncology trials. The instrument’s 30 items were divided among 5 functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), 9 symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting, dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, and financial difficulties), and a global health/quality of life scale. Raw scores for the EORTC QLQ-C30 were transformed to a 0-100 metric. Higher scores for all functional scales and Global Health Status=better HRQoL; an increase from baseline indicates improvement in HRQoL. Lower scores for symptom scales=better HRQoL; a decline from baseline for symptom scales =improvement in symptoms compared to baseline. A 10 point difference on a 100 point scale between treatments was considered clinically significant.|From Baseline (Day1) to second Follow-Up; up to 37 months|All randomized participants with a baseline measurement and at least one on-study assessment; n=number of participants evaluable||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846193|NCT01721746|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (OS) Time in Months by Baseline PD-L1 Expression|"PD-L1 expression evaluated as a predictive biomarker for OS by analyzing the interaction between PD-L1 expression and treatment arms. Randomized participants with an Indeterminate PD-L1 result per the verified assay were categorized as Subjects without Tumor Tissue Samples. Overall Survival (OS) was defined the time between the date of randomization to the date of death. For participants without documentation of death, OS was censored on the last date the participant was known to be alive. OS was followed continuously while participants were on the study drug and every 3 months via in-person or phone contact after participants discontinued the study drug. The interim OS analysis was performed on all randomized subjects when at least 169 events had been observed. Analysis made at Primary Endpoint; Study On-going."|From the date of randomization to the date of death; up to 37 months|All PD-L1 Evaluable Participants; Randomized participants among the OS population who had a tumor biopsy specimen assessed for PD-L1 expression with the validated assay and for which quantifiable tumor PD-L1 levels were discernible.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846194|NCT01721746|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) by Baseline PD-L1 Expression|PD-L1 expression evaluated as a predictive biomarker for ORR by analyzing the interaction between PD-L1 expression and treatment arms. Randomized participants with an Indeterminate PD-L1 result per the verified assay were categorized as “Subjects without Tumor Tissue Samples”. ORR=number of participants with a Best Overall Response (BOR) of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) divided by number of randomized participants and reported as a percentage. Analysis made at Primary Endpoint; Study On-going.|From date of randomization to the date of objectively documented progression or the date of subsequent therapy; approx. 16 months|All PD-L1 Evaluable Participants; Randomized participants among the ORR population who had a tumor biopsy specimen assessed for PD-L1 expression with the validated assay and for which quantifiable tumor PD-L1 levels were discernible.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846195|NCT01721746|Secondary|Median Months of Progression-free Survival (PFS) Per Independent Radiology Review Committee (IRC/IRRC)|PFS=time from randomization to the date of the first documented progression or death due to any cause, whichever first. Participants who (1) died without a reported progression were considered to have progressed on the date of their death, (2) did not progress or die were censored on the date of their last evaluable tumor assessment, (3) did not have any on study tumor assessments and did not die were censored on the date they were randomized, and (4) started any subsequent anti-cancer therapy (including tumor-directed radiotherapy or surgery) without a prior reported progression were censored at the last evaluable tumor assessment prior to or upon initiation of the subsequent anti-cancer therapy. Per RECIST 1.1, progression is >= 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study (includes baseline sum if smallest on study). The sum must demonstrate an absolute increase of >= 5 mm. Analysis made at Primary Endpoint; Study On-going|From the date of randomization to the date of the first documented progression or death; up to 37 months|All Randomized Participants: All participants randomized to any treatment group||months||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846196|NCT01721746|Primary|Median Overall Survival (OS) at Primary Endpoint|Overall Survival (OS) was defined the time between the date of randomization to the date of death. For participants without documentation of death, OS was censored on the last date the participant was known to be alive. OS was followed continuously while participants were on the study drug and every 3 months via in-person or phone contact after participants discontinued the study drug. This interim OS analysis was performed on all randomized subjects when at least 169 events had been observed. Analysis made at Primary Endpoint; Study On-going.|From the date of randomization to the date of death; up to 37 months|All Randomized Participants: All participants randomized to any treatment group||months||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846197|NCT01721746|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|ORR=number of participants with a Best Overall Response (BOR) of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) divided by the number of randomized participants and reported as a percentage. BOR was defined as the best response designation, as determined by the independent review committee (IRC), recorded between the date of randomization and the date of objectively documented progression per RECIST 1.1 or the date of subsequent therapy (including tumor-directed radiotherapy and tumor-directed surgery), whichever occurred first. For participants without documented progression or subsequent therapy, all available response designations contributed to the BOR assessment. CR=Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. PR=At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Analysis made at Primary Endpoint; Study On-going|From date of randomization to the date of objectively documented progression, date of death, or the date of subsequent therapy; approx. 16 months|All Randomized Participants: All participants randomized to any treatment group||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846217|NCT01710046|Primary|"Percentage of Participants Achieving a Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) Response of Clear or Almost Clear at Week 12"|PGA psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. PGA of Psoriasis scale ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 4 (severe disease). â€˜Clearâ€™ and â€œAlmost clearâ€™ includes all participants who were scored as a 0 or 1.|Week 12|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
847973|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) Who Experienced Relapse by 12 Months|Number of patients who experienced recurrence or progression of disease from the time of transplant.|1 Year Post Transplant|||Participants|||Number
846198|NCT01721759|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) as Assessed by Independent Radiology Review Committee (IRC)|"ORR is defined as the number of participants with best overall response (OR) of confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) divided by the number of participants who received treatment.
Participants were evaluated for tumor response per RECIST v1.1 for target lesions and assessed by CT or MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.
The IRC-assessed ORR (using RECIST v1.1, to confirm response and based on the IRC global radiology review after incorporation of on-study clinical data) was estimated using a binomial response rate and its corresponding 2-sided 95% exact confidence intervals using the Clopper-Pearson method."|Day 1 of treatment to approximately 16 months|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846199|NCT01721759|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) as Assessed by Investigator|"ORR is defined as the number of participants with best overall response (OR) of confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) divided by the total number of participants who received treatment.
Participants were evaluated for tumor response per RECIST v1.1 for target lesions and assessed by CT or MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.
Best overall response, ORR, duration of response, and time to response as assessed by investigator were summarized using RECIST v1.1, to confirm response."|Day 1 of treatment to approximately 16 months|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846200|NCT01721759|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) as Assessed by Independent Radiology Review Committee (IRC)|"ORR is defined as the number of participants with best overall response (OR) of confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) divided by the number of participants who received treatment.
Participants were evaluated for tumor response per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by Computerized Tomography (CT) or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI): Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.
The IRC-assessed ORR (using RECIST v1.1, to confirm response and based on the IRC global radiology review after incorporation of on-study clinical data) was estimated using a binomial response rate and its corresponding 2-sided 95% exact confidence intervals using the Clopper-Pearson method."|Day 1 of treatment to approximately 19 months|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846201|NCT01714024|Secondary|Group Based Differences (i.e. Healthy, Osteopenic and Diabetic) in Gene Expression Using Fold Changes Between Titanium and Trabecular at 4 Weeks.|Findings from expression arrays will be used to perform quantitative PCR analyses using SAB Superarrays (SuperArray GEArray), to enable a quantitativeassay of mRNA levels of specific inflammatory and growth factor molecules|4 weeks|||Fold Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
846202|NCT01714024|Primary|Fold Change in Gene Expression Comparing Trabecular Metal to Standard Titanium.|Samples were analyzed comparing the osteogenic potential associated with titanium and porous tantalum dental implants (cylinders) at 2 and 4 weeks using transcriptome analyses. The primary outcome data are displayed showing the Average Delta ∆ (Ct) for osteogenic genes relative to the housekeeping markers. The numerical value of the CT is inversely related to the amount of amplicon in the reaction (i.e., the lower the CT, the greater the amount of amplicon).|2 weeks & 4 weeks post placement|||Average Delta ∆ (Ct)||Standard Deviation|Mean
846203|NCT01710046|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in TPSS by Visit|Target lesions were selected at baseline and followed for the duration of the study. Each target lesion was scored by the investigator on severity of erythema, induration, and scaling according to a 5-point (0 to 4) severity scale with a maximum sum score for a plaque of 12. The TPSS was calculated as the sum of the scores for erythema, induration, and scaling; the score can vary in increments of 1 unit from 0 to 12. A negative value indicated improvment.|Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants with nonmissing observations at the specified visit.||percent change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
846204|NCT01710046|Secondary|Target Plaque Severity Score (TPSS) by Visit|Target lesions were selected at baseline and followed for the duration of the study. Each target lesion was scored by the investigator on severity of erythema, induration, and scaling according to a 5-point (0 to 4) severity scale with a maximum sum score for a plaque of 12. The TPSS was calculated as the sum of the scores for erythema, induration, and scaling; the score can vary in increments of 1 unit from 0 to 12.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants with nonmissing observations at the specified visit.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
846205|NCT01710046|Secondary|Change From Baseline in ISI by Visit|"ISI, a single-item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms No itching (0) and Worst possible itching (10) at the ends. The baseline is defined as the average of all available diary entries before Baseline/Day 1 and the in-clinic measurement on Baseline/Day 1. Week 1 is the mean of daily values of study days 2 to 8 and Week 2 is the mean of daily values of study days 9 to 15. A negative value indicates an improvement."|Weeks 1, 2, 4 and 12|FAS; n=number of participants with nonmissing observations at the specified visit.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
846206|NCT01710046|Secondary|Itch Severity Item (ISI) Score by Visit|"The severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis was assessed using the ISI, a single-item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms No itching (0) and Worst possible itching (10) at the ends. the baseline is defined as the average of all available diary entries before Baseline/Day 1 and the in-clinic measurement on Baseline/day 1. Week 1 is the mean of daily values of study days 2 to 8 and Week 2 is the mean of daily values of study days 9 to 15."|Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants with nonmissing observations at the specified visit.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
846236|NCT01662440|Secondary|Kinetics of JE Immune Response Measured as PRNT50 GMTs|To evaluate the kinetics of antibody response to JE vaccine, the immunogenicity was measured as the PRNT50 GMTs on days 1, 15, 22, 36, 57, 91, 181, and 366 (group that received JE vaccine as an accelerated schedule) and days 1, 36, 57, 181, and 366 (group that received JE vaccine as a conventional schedule).|Day 1, 15, 22, 36, 57, 91, 181, and 366 (accelerated schedule) and day 1, 36, 57, 181, and 366 (conventional schedule)|Analysis was done on the PP dataset.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846207|NCT01710046|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in BSA|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The percent surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (ie, the participant's fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represents approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region can be used to determine the extent (%) to which a body regions is involved with psoriasis. In each body region, the percent body region surface area with psoriasis is multiplied by the Body Region Weighting (head and neck=10%, upper limbs=5%, trunk [including axillae and groin]=3.33% and lower limbs [including buttocks]=2.5%). BSA (%)=0.1Sh + 0.2Sh+0.3St+0.4Sl, where S=body region suface area with psoriasis: h=head; u=upper limbs; t=trunk; l=lower limbs.|Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants with nonmissing observations at the specified visit.||percent change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
846208|NCT01710046|Secondary|Change From Baseline in BSA|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The percent surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (ie, the participant's fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represents approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region can be used to determine the extent (%) to which a body regions is involved with psoriasis. In each body region, the percent body region surface area with psoriasis is multiplied by the Body Region Weighting (head and neck=10%, upper limbs=5%, trunk [including axillae and groin]=3.33% and lower limbs [including buttocks]=2.5%). BSA (%)=0.1Sh + 0.2Sh+0.3St+0.4Sl, where S=body region suface area with psoriasis: h=head; u=upper limbs; t=trunk; l=lower limbs.|Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|Because Cohort 2 of the study was not conducted and Cohort 1 had a limited number of participants, the analyses were simplified and this analysis was not performed.|||||
846209|NCT01710046|Secondary|Body Surface Area (BSA)|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was performed separately for 4 body regions: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin), and lower limbs (including buttocks). The percent surface area with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (ie, the participant's fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represents approximately 1% of the total BSA. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region can be used to determine the extent (%) to which a body regions is involved with psoriasis. In each body region, the percent body region surface area with psoriasis is multiplied by the Body Region Weighting (head and neck=10%, upper limbs=5%, trunk [including axillae and groin]=3.33% and lower limbs [including buttocks]=2.5%). BSA (%)=0.1Sh + 0.2Sh+0.3St+0.4Sl, where S=body region suface area with psoriasis: h=head; u=upper limbs; t=trunk; l=lower limbs.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants with nonmissing observations at the specified visit.||% BSA||Standard Error|Mean
846210|NCT01710046|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by PGA Response Category and Timepoint|PGA psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. PGA of Psoriasis scale ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 4 (severe disease). Response category scores: 0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe. The severity scores of 3 components (erythema, induration, and scaling) are averaged and rounded to the nearest whole number to determine the PGA score.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants with nonmissing observations at the specified visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
846211|NCT01710046|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each PGA Category at Various Timepoints by Baseline Category||Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|Because Cohort 2 of the study was not conducted and Cohort 1 had a limited number of participants, the analyses were simplified and this analysis was not performed.|||||
846212|NCT01710046|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PGA Score by Visit|PGA psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. PGA of Psoriasis scale ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 4 (severe disease). The severity scores of 3 components (erythema, induration, and scaling) are averaged and rounded to the nearest whole number to determine the PGA score.|Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants with nonmissing observations at the specified visit.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
846213|NCT01710046|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a PASI75 Response at Weeks 1, 2, and 4|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range=0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated: 0 (0%) to 6 (90-100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4) summed over all sections.|Weeks 1, 2, and 4|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
846214|NCT01710046|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in PASI by Visit|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score. Body was divided into 4 sections: head, arms, trunk, legs. For each section, percent area of skin involved was estimated: 0= 0% to 6= 90â€“100%. Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema, induration, desquamation; scale: 0= none to 4= maximum. Final PASI = sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weight of section (head: 0.1, arms: 0.2, body: 0.3, legs: 0.4) summed over all sections; total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease.|Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12|FAS; n=number of participants with nonmissing observations at the specified visit.||percent change from baseline||Standard Error|Mean
846215|NCT01710046|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PASI by Visit|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score. Body was divided into 4 sections: head, arms, trunk, legs. For each section, percent area of skin involved was estimated: 0=0% to 6=90â€“100%. Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema, induration, desquamation; scale: 0= none to 4= maximum. Final PASI = sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weight of section (head: 0.1, arms: 0.2, body: 0.3, legs: 0.4) summed over all sections; total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease.|Weeks 1, 2, 4 and 12|Because Cohort 2 of the study was not conducted and Cohort 1 had a limited number of participants, the analyses were simplified and this analysis was not performed.|||||
847974|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) Who Died by 24 Months|Number of patients who died after receiving treatment within 24 months post transplant.|2 years post-transplant|||Participants|||Number
846218|NCT01710046|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a 75% Reduction in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75) at Week 12|Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score; range equals (=) 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease). Body divided into 4 sections=head, upper/lower limbs, trunk; each area scored by itself and scores combined for final PASI. For each section percent area of skin involved was estimated: 0 (0%) to 6 (90-100%) and severity estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration, scaling; ranged 0-4: 0=none, 1=slight, 2=moderate, 3=marked, 4=very marked. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each section*area score*weighing factor (head=0.1, upper limbs=0.2, trunk=0.3, lower limbs=0.4) summed over all sections.|Week 12|FAS||percentage of participants|||Number
846221|NCT01680783|Other Pre-specified|Improvement of Oxygenation|Improvement of oxygenation-defined as PaO2/FiO2 ≥ 200 or increase from baseline by 100|2 weeks||||||
846222|NCT01680783|Other Pre-specified|Discharge Location|Measure the location (ie home, rehabilitation center, nursing home) that patients are discharged to|6 weeks||||||
846223|NCT01680783|Other Pre-specified|Readmission to the Intensive Care Unit|Measure the need for readmission to the intensive care unit during initial hospitalization at time of enrollment|6 weeks||||||
846224|NCT01680783|Other Pre-specified|ICU Complications|ICU complications will include rates of Ventilator associated pneumonia, Barotrauma, Gastrointestinal hemorrhage, Pulmonary embolism, Sacral Decubitus ulcer, Delirium, ICU acquired weakness|6 weeks||||||
846225|NCT01680783|Secondary|Intensive Care Unit Length of Stay|Number of days admitted to a medical intensive care unit|4 weeks||||||
846226|NCT01680783|Secondary|Hospital Mortality|Death from any cause during hospitalization at time of enrollment|6 weeks||||||
846227|NCT01680783|Secondary|Ventilator Days|Duration of mechanical ventilation via endotracheal tube|number of days in the hospital||09/2017||||
846228|NCT01680783|Secondary|Functional Status After Discharge|Telephone survey of patients 1, 6, and 12 months after discharge to assess need for re-hospitalization, admission to nursing home, and functional status (ability to complete ADLs and IADLs independently)|Measured at 1, 6, and 12 months after hospital discharge (to span time frame of up to 80 weeks depending on length of hospitalization)||||||
846229|NCT01680783|Secondary|Hospital Length of Stay|Days spent in hospital at time of enrollment|Duration of hospital stay||09/2017||||
846230|NCT01680783|Primary|Need for Endotracheal Intubation|Number of patients requiring endotracheal intubation after application of helmet device|6 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
846231|NCT01662440|Secondary|Numbers of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited AEs After Any Vaccination From Day 1 Through Day 57|Safety was assessed as the number of subjects who reported unsolicited AEs after any vaccination given according to accelerated and conventional schedule.|Day 1 through Day 57|Analysis was done on the unsolicited safety set, ie, the subjects in the exposed population who provided postvaccination unsolicited safety data.||Number of subjects|||Number
846232|NCT01662440|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Reported Solicited Systemic AEs and Other Indicators of Reactogenicity After Each Vaccination|Safety was assessed as the number of subjects who reported solicited systemic AEs and other indicators of reactogenicity after each vaccination given according to accelerated and conventional schedule.|Day 1 through day 7 after each vaccination (day 1, 4, 8 and 29)|Analysis was done on the solicited safety set.||Number of Subjects|||Number
846233|NCT01662440|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Reported Solicited Local AEs After Each Placebo Injection|Safety was assessed as the number of subjects who reported solicited local AEs after each placebo injection given according to accelerated and conventional schedule as follow: from day 1 through day 7 (injection on day 1; R – Conv and JE – Conv groups), day 4 through day 10 (injection on day 4; in R/JE – Conv, R – Conv and JE - Conv groups), day 8 through day 14 (injection on day 8; in R/JE – Conv, R – Conv and JE - Conv groups), and day 29 through day 35 (injection on day 29; R/JE – Acc, R – Con and JE – Conv groups).|Day 1 through day 7 after each injection (day 1, 4, 8 and 29)|Analysis was done on the solicited safety set.||Number of Subjects|||Number
846234|NCT01662440|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Reported Solicited Local AEs After Each JE Vaccination|Safety was assessed as the number of subjects who reported solicited local AEs after each JE vaccination given according to accelerated or conventional schedule as follow: from day 1 through day 7 (vaccination on day 1; all JE groups), day 8 through day 14 (vaccination on day 8; R/JE – Acc group only), or day 29 through day 35 (vaccination on day 29; R/JE – Con and JE – Conv groups).|Day 1 through day 7 after each vaccination (on day 1, 8 and 29)|Analysis was done on the solicited safety set.||Number of subjects|||Number
846235|NCT01662440|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Reported Solicited Local Adverse Events After Each Rabies Vaccination|Safety was assessed as the number of subjects who reported solicited local adverse events (AEs) after each rabies vaccination given according to accelerated or conventional schedule as follows: from day 1 through day 7 (vaccination on day 1; all Rabies groups), day 4 through day 10 (vaccination on day 4; in R/JE – Acc group only), day 8 through day 14 (vaccination on day 8; all Rabies groups), or day 29 through day 35 (vaccination on day 29; R/JE – Conv and R – Conv groups).|Day 1 through day 7 after each vaccination (on day 1, 4, 8 and 29)|Analysis was done on the solicited safety set, i.e. the subjects in the exposed population who provided postvaccination solicited safety data.||Number of subjects|||Number
847119|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Bone Strength of Spine Whole Bone by Finite Element Analysis, N|Spine whole bone (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
846237|NCT01662440|Secondary|Kinetics of JE Immune Response Measured as Percentage of Subjects With PRNT50 Titers ≥1:10|To evaluate the kinetics of antibody response to JE vaccine, the immunogenicity was measured as the percentage of subjects with PRNT50 titer ≥1:10 on days 1, 15, 22, 36, 57, 91, 181, and 366 (group that received JE vaccine as an accelerated schedule) and days 1, 36, 57, 181, and 366 (group that received JE vaccine as a conventional schedule).|Days 1, 15, 22, 36, 57, 91, 181 and 366|Analysis was done on the PP dataset.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846238|NCT01662440|Secondary|Kinetics of Rabies Immune Response Measured as the RVNA GMCs|To evaluate the kinetics of antibody response to Rabies vaccine, the immunogenicity was measured as the RVNA GMCs on days 1, 8, 15, 36, 57, 91, 181, and 366.|Day 1, 8, 15, 36, 57, 91, 181, and 366|Analysis was done on the PP dataset.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846239|NCT01662440|Secondary|Kinetics of Rabies Immune Response Measured as Percentage of Subjects With RVNA Concentration ≥0.5 IU/mL|To evaluate the kinetics of antibody response to Rabies vaccine, the immunogenicity was measured as the percentage of subjects with RVNA concentrations ≥0.5 IU/mL on days 1, 8, 15, 36, 57, 91, 181, and 366.|Day 1, 8, 15, 36, 57, 91, 181 and Day 366|Analysis was done on the PP dataset.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846240|NCT01662440|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With PRNT50 Titer ≥1:10 At 7 Days After Last Active Vaccination|"Immune response was measured as the percentage of subjects with PRNT50 titer of ≥1:10 7 days after last active vaccination, ie, day 15 for the group that received the accelerated schedule and day 36 for the group that received the conventional schedule.
As per study design, this secondary immunogenicity outcome measure aimed to demonstrate non-inferiority of R/JE – Acc Vs JE – Conv."|Day 15 and day 36 (28 after last active vaccination)|Analysis was done on the PP dataset.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846241|NCT01662440|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With RVNA Concentrations ≥0.5 IU/mL At 28 Days After Last Active Vaccination|"Immune response was measured as the percentages of subjects with RVNA concentration ≥0.5 IU/mL 28 days after last active vaccination, ie, day 36 for the group that received the accelerated schedule and day 57 for the group that received the conventional schedule.
As per study design, this secondary immunogenicity outcome measure aimed to demonstrate non-inferiority of R/JE – Acc Vs R – Conv."|Day 36 and day 57 (28 days after last active vaccination)|Analysis was done on the PP set.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846242|NCT01662440|Secondary|PRNT50 Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) At 28 Days After Last Active Vaccination|"Immune response was measured as the PRNT50 GMTs 28 days after last active vaccination, ie, day 57 for all groups that received the conventional schedule.
Data were adjusted using ANOVA model, as per protocol specifications."|Day 57 (28 days after last active vaccination)|Analysis was done on the PP dataset.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846243|NCT01662440|Secondary|RVNA Geometric Mean Concentrations (GMCs) At 28 Days After Last Active Vaccination|"Immune response was measured as the RVNA GMCs 28 days after last active vaccination, ie, day 57 for all groups that received the conventional schedule.
Data were adjusted using ANOVA model, as per protocol specification."|Day 57 (28 days after last active vaccination)|Analysis was done on the PP dataset.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846244|NCT01662440|Primary|Percentages of Subjects With PRNT50 Titer ≥1:10 At 28 Days After Last Active Vaccination|"Immune response was measured as the percentages of subjects with a titer of ≥1:10 in a 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50) 28 days after last active vaccination, ie, the second out of three vaccinations given in the accelerated JE vaccine schedule and the third out of three vaccinations given in the conventional JE vaccine schedule.
As per study design, this primary immunogenicity outcome measure aimed to demonstrate non-inferiority of R/JE – Acc Vs JE – Conv."|Day 28 after last active vaccination (day 36 – group that received accelerated schedule, day 57 – group that received conventional schedule)|Analysis was done on the PP dataset.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846245|NCT01662440|Primary|Percentages of Subjects With RVNA Concentrations ≥0.5 IU/mL At 7 Days After Last Active Vaccination|"Immune response was measured as the percentage of subjects with rabies virus neutralizing antibody (RVNA) concentrations ≥0.5 IU/mL, evaluated using the rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test at day 7 after last active vaccination, i.e. the third out of four vaccinations given in the accelerated Rabies vaccine schedule and the fourth out of four vaccinations given in the conventional Rabies vaccine schedule.
As per study design, this primary immunogenicity outcome measure aimed to demonstrate non-inferiority of R/JE – Acc Vs R – Conv."|Day 7 after last active vaccination (day 15 – group that received accelerated schedule, day 36 – group that received conventional schedule)|Analysis was done on the per-protocol (PP) dataset, ie, the subjects who received the vaccine correctly, provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points, and had no major protocol violations as defined prior to unblinding.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847975|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) Who Died by 12 Months|Number of patients who died after receiving treatment within 12 months post transplant.|1 year Post Transplant|||Participants|||Number
846252|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed included medical occurrences that resulted in death, were life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or resulted in disability/incapacity. Any SAE = occurrence of SAE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the entire study period (from Day 0 up to Day 180)|This analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846253|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 43-day (Days 0-42) post-vaccination period|This analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846254|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Adverse Events Resulting in Emergency Room (ER) Visits|The number of subjects reporting adverse events resulting in Emergency Room (ER) visits is reported.|During the entire study period (from Day 0 up to Day 180)|This analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846255|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With New Onset Chronic Diseases (NOCDs)|NOCDs include autoimmune disorders, asthma, type I diabetes, allergies.|During the entire study period (from Day 0 up to Day 180)|This analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846256|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Investigator-confirmed Rash|Assessed any rash, varicella-like rash, measles/rubella-like rash, Grade 3, related. Any= occurrence of rash regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 measles/rubella/varicella-like rash = Rash with more than 150 lesions. Other Grade 3 Rash = Rash that prevented normal, everyday activities. Related= Rash assessed by the investigator as causally related to study vaccination.|During the 43-day (Days 0-42) post-vaccination period|This analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented. Analysis of the solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included only subjects/doses with documented safety data (i.e., symptom screen/sheet completed).||Participants|||Count of Participants
846277|NCT01621802|Primary|Number of Subjects With Anti-measles Virus Antibody Concentration Equal to or Above the Cut-off-value|Seroresponse was defined as post-vaccination anti-measles virus antibody concentration equal to or above (≥) 200 milli-international Units per milliliter (mIU/mL). Analysis was done in sub-cohorts 1 and 2 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on According to Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for measles vaccine component, did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846257|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting MMR Specific Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed MMR specific symptoms were parotid gland swelling and any suspected signs of meningism including febrile convulsions. Any = occurrence of any general symptoms regardless of their intensity grade or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 Parotid/salivary gland swelling = Swelling accompanied with general symptoms. Grade 3 Sign of meningism (any suspected signs including febrile convulsions) = An event which prevented normal, everyday activities. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to study vaccination.|During the 43-day (Days 0-42) post-vaccination period|This analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented. Analysis of the solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included only subjects/doses with documented safety data (i.e., symptom screen/sheet completed).||Participants|||Count of Participants
846258|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Fever|Any fever = fever ≥ 38°C; Grade 3 fever = fever > 39.5°C; Related = fever assessed by the investigator as causally related to study vaccination.|During the 43-day (Days 0-42) post-vaccination period|This analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented. Analysis of the solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included only subjects/doses with documented safety data (i.e., symptom screen/sheet completed).||Participants|||Count of Participants
846259|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited General Symptoms|"Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness and loss of appetite. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 Drowsiness = Drowsiness that prevented normal activity, Grade 3 Loss of appetite = Not eating at all. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to study vaccination.
Analysis was done for sub-cohort 1 only."|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|This analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented. Analysis of the solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included only subjects/doses with documented safety data (i.e., symptom screen/sheet completed).||Participants|||Count of Participants
846260|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 Pain = Cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 redness and swelling = greater than 50 millimeters (m m ) i.e . > 50mm.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|This analysis was performed on Total Vaccinated cohort which included all vaccinated subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented. Analysis of the solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included only subjects/doses with documented safety data (i.e., symptom screen/sheet completed).||Participants|||Count of Participants
846261|NCT01621802|Secondary|Evaluation of Immunogenicity in Terms of Anti-polio Virus Types 1, 2 and 3 Antibody Titers|Antibody titers were expressed as Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) in ED50. Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||ED50||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846262|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-D and Anti-T Antibody Concentrations ≥ 1.0 IU/mL|Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846263|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-D and Anti-T Antibody Concentrations ≥ 0.1 IU/mL|Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846264|NCT01621802|Secondary|Evaluation of Immunogenicity in Terms of Anti-PT, Anti-FHA and Anti-PRN Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were expressed as GMCs in EU/mL. Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846265|NCT01621802|Secondary|Evaluation of Immunogenicity in Terms of Anti-D and Anti-T Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were expressed as GMCs in IU/mL. Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846266|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Antibody Booster Response to Pertactin (PRN)|"Booster response was defined as:
For initially seronegative subjects, antibody concentration ≥ 8.748 IU/mL at Day 42.
For initially seropositive subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentration < 8.748 IU/mL: antibody concentration at Day 42 ≥ 4 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration.
For initially seropositive subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentration ≥ 8.748 IU/mL: antibody concentration at Day 42 ≥ 2 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration.
Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only."|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846267|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Antibody Booster Response to Filamentous Hemagglutinin (FHA)|"Booster response was defined as:
For initially seronegative subjects, antibody concentration ≥ 8.184 IU/ml at Day 42.
For initially seropositive subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentration < 8.184 IU/mL: antibody concentration at Day 42 ≥ 4 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration.
For initially seropositive subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentration ≥ 8.184 IU/mL: antibody concentration at Day 42 ≥ 2 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration.
Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only."|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846268|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Antibody Booster Response to Pertussis Toxin (PT)|"Booster response was defined as:
For initially seronegative subjects, antibody concentration ≥ 10.772 IU/mL at Day 42.
For initially seropositive subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentration < 10.772 IU/mL: antibody concentration at Day 42 ≥ 4 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration.
For initially seropositive subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentration ≥ 10.772 IU/mL: antibody concentration at Day 42 ≥ 2 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration.
Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only."|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846269|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Antibody Booster Response to Diphtheria Toxin (Anti-D) and Tetanus Toxin (Anti-T)|"Booster response was defined as:
For subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentration less than (<) 0.1 IU/mL, antibody concentration ≥ 0.4 IU/ml at Day 42.
For subjects with pre-vaccination antibody concentration ≥ 0.1 IU/mL: antibody concentration at Day 42 ≥ 4 fold the pre-vaccination antibody concentration.
Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only."|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846270|NCT01621802|Secondary|Evaluation of Immunogenicity in Terms of Anti-VZV Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were expressed as GMCs in mIU/mL. Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846271|NCT01621802|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-varicella Zoster Virus (VZV) Antibody Concentration Equal to or Above the Cut-off-value|Seroresponse was defined as post-vaccination anti-VZV antibody concentration ≥ 75 mIU/mL. Analysis was done in sub-cohort 1 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for at least one of the three vaccine components (measles, mumps, or rubella), did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846272|NCT01621802|Primary|Evaluation of Immunogenicity in Terms of Anti-rubella Virus Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were expressed as GMCs in IU/mL. Analysis was done in sub-cohorts 1 and 2 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for rubella vaccine component, did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846273|NCT01621802|Primary|Evaluation of Immunogenicity in Terms of Anti-mumps Virus Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were expressed as GMCs in EU/mL. Analysis was done in sub-cohorts 1 and 2 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for mumps vaccine component, did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846274|NCT01621802|Primary|Evaluation of Immunogenicity in Terms of Anti-measles Virus Antibody Concentrations|Antibody concentrations were expressed as Geometric Mean Concentrations (GMCs) in mIU/mL. Analysis was done in sub-cohorts 1 and 2 only.|42 days after vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for measles vaccine component, did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846275|NCT01621802|Primary|Number of Subjects With Anti-rubella Virus Antibody Concentration Equal to or Above the Cut-off-value|Seroresponse was defined as post-vaccination anti-rubella virus antibody concentration ≥ 10 International Units per milliliter (IU/mL). Analysis was done in sub-cohorts 1 and 2 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for rubella vaccine component, did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846276|NCT01621802|Primary|Number of Subjects With Anti-mumps Virus Antibody Concentration Equal to or Above the Cut-off-value|Seroresponse was defined as post-vaccination anti-mumps virus antibody concentration ≥ 10 ELISA Units per milliliter (EU/mL). Analysis was done in sub-cohorts 1 and 2 only.|42 days post vaccination (At Day 42)|This analysis was performed on ATP cohort for immunogenicity which included all evaluable subjects with post-vaccination serology results available for mumps vaccine component, did not meet any elimination criteria up to Visit 2 blood sample & complied with protocol procedures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
853455|NCT00818779|Secondary|Serum Level of Nitric Oxide|Surrogate biomarker of cardiovascular risk|6 week (change from baseline)|||mmmol/l||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
853456|NCT00818779|Secondary|Serum Level of C-reactive Protein|Surrogate biomarker of cardiovascular risk|6 week (change from baseline)|||mg/l||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
853457|NCT00818779|Secondary|Serum Level of Intracellular Cell Adhesion Molecule|Surrogate biomarker of cardiovascular risk|6 week (change from baseline)|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
853458|NCT00818779|Secondary|Serum Level of Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule|Surrogate biomarker cardiovascular risk|6 week (change from baseline)|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
853459|NCT00818779|Primary|Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor 1|Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor 1 is a biomarker found in serum that indirectly assesses blood clotting activity. Lower PAI-1 levels are thought to be better than higher levels. The primary outcome is mean change from baseline and can include negative numbers as a result.|6 weeks (change from baseline)|||ng/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848366|NCT00073073|Secondary|Effect of This Drug on Serum Hormones, Insulin-like Growth Factor Pathway Components, and Leptin at 3 Months and 1 Year||3 months and 1 year|Data were not collected|||||
846326|NCT01600716|Other Pre-specified|Duration of Treatment Effect Through Week 52|The duration of treatment effect is the time to patient request for retreatment.|Up to 52 Weeks|Intent-to-Treat Population: all randomized patients||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846327|NCT01600716|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Incontinence Quality of Life Instrument (I-QOL) Total Summary Score|The I-QOL is a validated, disease-specific quality of life (QOL) questionnaire containing 22 questions designed to measure impact of urinary incontinence on patients' lives. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale (1 = worst QOL, and 5 = best QOL). The scores are totaled over the 22 questions and normalized to a score of 0-100 (0=worst QOL and 100=best QOL). A positive change from baseline represents an improvement and a negative change from baseline represents a worsening.|Baseline, Week 6|Intent-to-Treat Population: all randomized patients with data at the time points||Scores on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846328|NCT01600716|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maximum Detrusor Pressure During the First Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (IDC)|Maximum detrusor pressure represents the maximum pressure (peak amplitude) in the bladder during the first involuntary contraction of the bladder muscle. A negative number change from baseline indicates an improvement in pressure and a positive number change from baseline indicates a worsening in pressure.|Baseline, Week 6|Intent-to-Treat Population: all randomized patients with data at the time points||Centimeters of Water (cm H2O)||Standard Deviation|Mean
846329|NCT01600716|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maximum Cystometric Capacity (MCC)|MCC represents the maximum volume of urine the bladder holds. A positive number change from baseline represents an improvement (increase) in the maximum volume of urine the bladder holds and a negative number change from baseline represents a worsening (decrease) in the maximum volume of urine the bladder holds.|Baseline, Week 6|Intent-to-Treat Population: all randomized patients with data at the time points||Milliliters (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
846330|NCT01600716|Primary|Change From Baseline in Daily Average Frequency of Urinary Incontinence Episodes|Incontinence is defined as involuntary loss of urine as recorded in a patient bladder diary. The number of episodes of urinary incontinence is recorded over a 3-day period the week of the study visit. A negative number change from baseline indicates a reduction in incontinence episodes (improvement) and a positive number change indicates an increase in incontinence episodes (worsening).|Baseline, Week 6|Intent-to-Treat Population: all randomized patients||Episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
846333|NCT01570192|Secondary|Mortality|Percentage of patients who died by efficacy endpoint, treatment group and population (n/N)|28 days|The ME population, 19 subjects were analyzed and the m-MITT population, 24 were analyzed. Not all subjects were evaluable for each endpoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846334|NCT01570192|Secondary|Mortality|Percentage of patients who died by efficacy endpoint, treatment group and population (n/N)|14 days|The ME population, 19 subjects were analyzed and the m-MITT population, 24 were analyzed. Not all subjects were evaluable for each endpoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846335|NCT01570192|Secondary|Occurrence of Repeat Negative Cultures|Percentage of patients with successful responses by efficacy endpoint, treatment group and population (n/N)|Day 5/Early Extubation|The ME population, 19 subjects were analyzed and the m-MITT population, 24 were analyzed. Not all subjects were evaluable for each endpoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846336|NCT01570192|Secondary|Suppression of the Emergence of Resistance in Other Gram-negative Pathogens|Percentage of patients with successful responses by efficacy endpoint, treatment group and population (n/N)|Day 5/Early Extubation|The ME population, 19 subjects were analyzed and the m-MITT population, 24 were analyzed. Not all subjects were evaluable for each endpoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846337|NCT01570192|Secondary|Pretreatment Pathogen Response|Percentage of patients with successful responses by efficacy endpoint, treatment group and population (n/N)|End of treatment - up to 28 days after enrollment|The ME population, 19 subjects were analyzed and the m-MITT population, 24 were analyzed. Not all subjects were evaluable for each endpoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846338|NCT01570192|Secondary|Overall Microbiologic Response|Percentage of patients with successful responses by efficacy endpoint, treatment group and population (n/N)|End of treatment - up to 28 days after enrollment|The ME population, 19 subjects were analyzed and the m-MITT population, 24 were analyzed. Not all subjects were evaluable for each endpoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846339|NCT01570192|Secondary|Clinical Response in Subjects Who Received Prior Antibiotics|Percentage of patients with successful responses by efficacy endpoint, treatment group and population (n/N)|End of treatment - up to 28 days after enrollment|The ME population, 19 subjects were analyzed and the m-MITT population, 24 were analyzed. Not all subjects were evaluable for each endpoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846340|NCT01570192|Secondary|Clinical Response|Percentage of patients with successful responses by efficacy endpoint, treatment group and population (n/N)|End of treatment - up to 28 days after enrollment|The ME population, 19 subjects were analyzed and the m-MITT population, 24 were analyzed. Not all subjects were evaluable for each endpoint.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846341|NCT01570192|Primary|Number of Participants With Suppression and Emergence of Resistance|The emergence of resistance is defined as a change of meropenem MIC or aminoglycoside MIC by two tube dilutions (fourfold) from baseline when assessed at the second BAL procedure on day 5/early extubation. Patients are evaluable for this endpoint IF they had baseline BAL and Day 5/early extubation and if they had positive cultures on baseline and Day/EE.|up to 28 days after enrollment|All patients in the ME population with BAL at baseline and at Day 5/EE and pathogens collected at baseline BAL and at Day 5/EE BAL.||participants|||Number
846342|NCT01547299|Secondary|Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) That Led to Dose Interruption, Dose Reduction, and Study Drug Discontinuation|To assess the number of patients with AEs that led to permanent discontinuation of enzalutamide, temporary interruption of enzalutamide, dose reduction of enzalutamide, or study drug (enzalutamide, leuprolide, or dutasteride) discontinuation.|6 months|All patients who received at least one partial dose of enzalutamide.||patients|||Number
846343|NCT01547299|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Testosterone|To determine serum hormone effects as measured by change in testosterone at baseline and at completion of therapy.|Baseline, 6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a serum testosterone result at baseline and 6 months postbaseline.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
846344|NCT01547299|Secondary|Serum Testosterone: 6 Months Postbaseline||6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a 6 month postbaseline serum testosterone result.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
846346|NCT01547299|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Dihydrotestosterone (DHT)|To determine serum hormone effects as measured by change in DHT values from baseline to the completion of therapy.|Baseline, 6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a serum DHT result at baseline and 6 months postbaseline.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
846347|NCT01547299|Secondary|Serum Dihydrotestosterone (DHT): 6 Months Postbaseline||6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a 6 month postbaseline serum DHT result.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
846348|NCT01547299|Secondary|Serum Dihydrotestosterone (DHT): Baseline||Baseline|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline serum DHT result.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
846349|NCT01547299|Secondary|Pharmacodynamic Effects: Assessment of Androgen Receptor Signaling|To determine the effects of triplet therapy and enzalutamide alone on androgen receptor signaling in prostatectomy specimens.|6 months||08/2015||||
846350|NCT01547299|Secondary|Pharmacodynamic Effects: Assessment of Mitotic Index|To determine the effects of triplet therapy and enzalutamide alone on mitotic index (rate of cell growth) in prostatectomy specimens.|6 months||08/2015||||
846351|NCT01547299|Secondary|Pharmacodynamic Effects: Assessment of Apoptosis|"To determine the effects of triplet therapy and enzalutamide alone on apoptosis in prostatectomy specimens.
Assessment of apoptosis was not performed due to limited amounts of tissue available."|6 months||||||
846352|NCT01547299|Secondary|Pharmacodynamic Effects: Tissue Testosterone|To determine pharmacodynamic effects as measured by tissue testosterone in prostatectomy specimens following radical prostatectomy.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a prostatectomy sample evaluated by the central pathologist.||pg/mg||Full Range|Median
846353|NCT01547299|Secondary|Pharmacodynamic Effects: Tissue Dihydrotestosterone (DHT)|To determine pharmacodynamic effects as measured by tissue DHT in prostatectomy specimens following radical prostatectomy.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a prostatectomy sample evaluated by the central pathologist.||pg/mg||Full Range|Median
846354|NCT01547299|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 Mental Component Summary|The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 is an HRQoL instrument that measures general health and well-being across physical and mental components. Best change from baseline category in mental component summary is summarized below. Categories are worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference is defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline and at least one postbaseline score.||patients|||Number
846355|NCT01547299|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 Role-Emotional Domain Score|The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 is an HRQoL instrument that measures general health and well-being across physical and mental components. Best change from baseline category in role-emotional domain score is summarized below. Categories are worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference is defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline and at least one postbaseline score.||patients|||Number
846356|NCT01547299|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 Physical Functioning Domain Score|The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 is an HRQoL instrument that measures general health and well-being across physical and mental components. Best change from baseline category in physical functioning domain score is summarized below. Categories are worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference is defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline and at least one postbaseline score.||patients|||Number
846357|NCT01547299|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 General Health Domain Score|The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 is an HRQoL instrument that measures general health and well-being across physical and mental components. Best change from baseline category in general health domain score is summarized below. Categories are worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference is defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline and at least one postbaseline score.||patients|||Number
846358|NCT01547299|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Hormonal Bother Subscale Score|EPIC Hormonal Domain is an HRQoL instrument that measures the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a patient's hormonal function. Best change from baseline category in EPIC hormonal bother subscale score is summarized below. Categories are worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference is defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline and at least one postbaseline score.||patients|||Number
846359|NCT01547299|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Hormonal Function Subscale Score|EPIC Hormonal Domain is an HRQoL instrument that measures the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a patient's hormonal function. Best change from baseline category in EPIC hormonal function subscale score is summarized below. Categories are worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference is defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline and at least one postbaseline score.||patients|||Number
846360|NCT01547299|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Hormonal Domain Summary Score|EPIC Hormonal Domain is an HRQoL instrument that measures the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a patient's hormonal function. Best change from baseline category in EPIC hormonal domain summary score is summarized below. Categories are worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference is defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline and at least one postbaseline score.||patients|||Number
846361|NCT01547299|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Sexual Bother Subscale Score|EPIC Sexual Domain is an HRQoL instrument that measures the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a patient's sexual function and sexual satisfaction. Best change from baseline category in EPIC sexual bother subscale score is summarized below. Categories are worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference is defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline and at least one postbaseline score.||patients|||Number
846362|NCT01547299|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Sexual Function Subscale Score|EPIC Sexual Domain is an HRQoL instrument that measures the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a patient's sexual function and sexual satisfaction. Best change from baseline category in EPIC sexual function subscale score is summarized below. Categories are worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference is defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline and at least one postbaseline score.||patients|||Number
846363|NCT01547299|Secondary|Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Sexual Domain Summary Score|EPIC Sexual Domain is an HRQoL instrument that measures the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a patient's sexual function and sexual satisfaction. Best change from baseline category in EPIC sexual domain summary score is summarized below. Categories are worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference is defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline and at least one postbaseline score.||patients|||Number
846364|NCT01547299|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Reduction in Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)|To determine the effects on PSA as measured by the percentage of patients with PSA < 0.2 ng/mL, and a 50% and 90% decrease in PSA value prior to prostatectomy.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline PSA and at least one postbaseline PSA.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846365|NCT01547299|Secondary|Time to Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Nadir|To determine the effects on PSA as measured by the time to the lowest postbaseline PSA value prior to prostatectomy.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline PSA and at least one postbaseline PSA.||months||Full Range|Median
846366|NCT01547299|Secondary|Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Nadir|To determine the effects on PSA as measured by the lowest postbaseline PSA value prior to prostatectomy.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a baseline PSA and at least one postbaseline PSA.||µg/L||Full Range|Median
846367|NCT01547299|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Positive Lymph Nodes|To determine the percentage of patients with positive lymph nodes at prostatectomy as assessed by the local and central pathologist.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a prostatectomy sample evaluated by the local and central pathologist.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846368|NCT01547299|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Positive Seminal Vesicles|To determine the percentage of patients with positive seminal vesicles at prostatectomy as assessed by the local and central pathologist.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a prostatectomy sample evaluated by the local and central pathologist.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846369|NCT01547299|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Extracapsular Extension: Central Review|To determine the percentage of patients with extracapsular extension at prostatectomy as assessed by the central pathologist.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a prostatectomy sample evaluated by the central pathologist. One patient in the Enzalutamide alone treatment arm was excluded from the analysis because the result reported by the central lab was indeterminate.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846370|NCT01547299|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Extracapsular Extension: Local Review|To determine the percentage of patients with extracapsular extension at prostatectomy as assessed by the local pathologist.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a prostatectomy sample evaluated by the local pathologist.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846371|NCT01547299|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Positive Surgical Margins|To determine the percentage of patients with positive surgical margins at prostatectomy as assessed by the local and central pathologist.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a prostatectomy sample evaluated by the local and central pathologist.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846393|NCT01453348|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|Safety was assessed in terms of percentage of all spontaneously reported AEs collected from the time the subject signed the informed consent form (day 1), until the subject stopped study participation (day 57).|Day 1 to day 57.|Analysis was done on safety set- subjects who provided any post-baseline safety data.||percentage of subjects|||Number
848367|NCT00073073|Secondary|Change in Breast Density at 2 Years||2 years|||percent change from baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
846372|NCT01547299|Primary|Pathologic Complete Response Rate|Pathologic complete response rate following triplet therapy (enzalutamide in combination with leuprolide and dutasteride) and enzalutamide alone when administered as neoadjuvant therapy for 6 months prior to prostatectomy in patients with localized prostate cancer. Pathologic complete response is defined as the absence of morphologically identifiable carcinoma in the prostatectomy specimen, as evaluated by the site pathologist using standard methods.|6 months|All patients randomly assigned to study treatment (intent-to-treat population) with a prostatectomy sample evaluated by the local and central pathologist.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846379|NCT01466387|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Adverse Events of Special Interest After Any Vaccination of Japanese Encephalitis and Rabies Virus Vaccines Given Concomitantly With MenACWY-CRM197 or Alone|In addition to the AEs and SAEs. Additional AESI were collected from day 1 to day 57 postvaccination in subjects after the vaccination of Japanese encephalitis and rabies virus vaccines given concomitantly with MenACWY-CRM197 or alone.|day 1 to day 57 post last vaccination|Analysis was done on the safety data set, i.e. the subjects in the exposed population who provided postvaccination safety data.||subjects|||Number
846380|NCT01466387|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Anti-rabies Virus Concentrations ≥ 0.5 IU/mL, 28 Days After the Last Vaccination of Rabies Virus Vaccine Concomitantly Either With Japanese Encephalitis or With Japanese Encephalitis and MenACWY-CRM197|"Immunogenicity was measured as the percentages of subjects who achieved seroprotection of anti-rabies virus antibody concentrations 28 days after vaccination of the third dose of rabies virus vaccine, when administered alone or concomitantly either with Japanese encephalitis or with Japanese encephalitis and MenACWY-CRM197 vaccines.
Seroprotection is defined as percentages of subjects who achieved anti-rabies virus antibody concentrations ≥ 0.5 IU/mL on day 57."|Baseline and 1 month post last vaccination (day 57).|The analysis was done on the MITT data set.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846381|NCT01466387|Secondary|Geometric Mean Rabies Virus Neutralizing Antibody Concentration 28 Days After the Last Vaccination Of Rabies Virus Vaccine Concomitantly Either With Japanese Encephalitis or With Japanese Encephalitis And MenACWY-CRM197|The immunogenicity was assessed in rabies virus vaccine as measured by geometric mean rabies virus neutralizing antibody concentration, 28 days after vaccination of the third dose, when administered alone or concomitantly either with Japanese encephalitis vaccine or with Japanese Encephalitis and MenACWY-CRM197 vaccines.|Baseline and 1 month post last vaccination (day 57).|The analysis was done on the MITT data set.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846382|NCT01466387|Secondary|Seroresponse Rate for Meningococcal Serogroups A,C,W,Y 28 Days After Vaccination of MenACWY-CRM197 Given Concomitantly With Japanese Encephalitis and Rabies Virus Vaccines or Alone|"Immunogenicity was assessed by seroresponse rates as measured by human serum bactericidal activity (hSBA) titers for meningococcal serogroups A,C,W,Y 28 days after administration of MenACWY-CRM197 given concomitantly with Japanese encephalitis and rabies virus vaccines or alone.
Seroresponse is defined as a subject with a baseline hSBA titer < 1:4, seroresponse was defined as a post-vaccination hSBA titer ≥ 1:8; for a subject with a baseline hSBA titer ≥ 1:4, seroresponse was defined as a postvaccination hSBA titer of at least 4 times the baseline."|1 month post last vaccination (day 29 or day 57)|The analysis was done on the MITT data set.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846383|NCT01466387|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers for Meningococcal Serogroups A,C,W,Y 28 Days After the Vaccination of MenACWY-CRM197 Given Concomitantly With Japanese Encephalitis and Rabies Virus Vaccines or Alone|Immunogenicity was measured by human serum bactericidal activity (hSBA) geometric mean titers (GMTs) for meningococcal serogroups A,C,W,Y 28 days after administration of MenACWY-CRM197 given concomitantly with Japanese encephalitis and rabies virus vaccines or alone.|Baseline and 1 month post last vaccination (day 29 or day 57).|The analysis was done on the MITT data set.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846394|NCT01453348|Secondary|hSBA GMTs Assay Titers Against N Meningitidis A, C, W and Y Serogroups at Day 29|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of geometric mean titers (GMTs) of antibodies to meningococcal serogroups A, C, W and Y on day 29 when given concomitantly with combined hepatitis A/B vaccine or given alone.|28 days post vaccination (day 29).|Analysis was done on modified intention-to-treat (MITT) population- subjects who provided evaluable serum samples whose assay results are available for at least one antigen on visit day 1 and a post baseline visit.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846384|NCT01466387|Secondary|Seroresponse Rate For Meningococcal Serogroups A,C,W,Y 28 Days After Vaccination of MenACWY-CRM197 Given Concomitantly With Typhoid Vi Polysaccharide and Yellow Fever Vaccines or Alone|"Immunogenicity was assessed by seroresponse rates as measured by human serum bactericidal activity (hSBA) titers for meningococcal serogroups A,C,W,Y 28 days after administration of MenACWY-CRM197 given concomitantly with typhoid Vi polysaccharide and yellow fever vaccines or alone.
Seroresponse is defined as a postvaccination hSBA titer ≥1:8; for a subject with a baseline hSBA titer ≥1:4, seroresponse is defined as a postvaccination hSBA titer of at least four times the baseline."|1 month postvaccination (day 29)|The analysis was done on the MITT data set.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846385|NCT01466387|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers For Meningococcal Serogroups A,C,W,Y 28 Days After The Vaccination Of MenACWY-CRM197 Given Concomitantly With Typhoid Vi Polysaccharide And Yellow Fever Vaccines Alone|Immunogenicity was assessed by Serum Bactericidal Assay using human complement (hSBA) geometric mean titers (GMTs) for meningococcal serogroups A,C,W,Y 28 days after administration of MenACWY-CRM197 given concomitantly with typhoid Vi polysaccharide and yellow fever vaccines or alone.|Baseline and 1 month postvaccination (day 29).|Analysis was done on the MITT data set.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846386|NCT01466387|Secondary|Percentages Of Subjects With Anti-Rabies Virus Antibody Concentrations ≥ 0.5 IU/mL 28 Days After the Vaccination Of The Last Doses Of Japanese Encephalitis And Rabies Virus, Given Concomitantly With MenACWY-CRM197 Or Alone|"Immunogenicity was assessed as the percentages of subjects who achieved seroprotection as measured by neutralization test for anti-rabies neutralizing antibody titers, 28 days after administration of the second dose of Japanese encephalitis virus vaccine and 28 days after the vaccination of third dose of rabies virus vaccine, given alone or concomitantly with MenACWY-CRM197.
Seroprotection is defined as a subject with a baseline hSBA titer < 1:4, seroresponse was defined as a post-vaccination hSBA titer ≥ 1:8; for a subject with a baseline hSBA titer ≥ 1:4, seroresponse was defined as a post-vaccination hSBA titer of at least 4 times the baseline."|Baseline and 1 month post last vaccination (day 57).|Analysis was done on the MITT data set.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846387|NCT01466387|Secondary|Percentages Of Subjects With Anti-JE Neutralizing Antibody Titers ≥ 1/10, 28 Days After The Vaccination Of The Last Doses Of Japanese Encephalitis And Rabies, Given Concomitantly With MenACWY-CRM197 Or Alone|"Immunogenicity was measured as the percentages of subjects who achieved seroprotection as measured by neutralization test for anti-Japanese encephalitis neutralizing antibody titers, 28 days after administration of the second dose of Japanese encephalitis virus vaccine and 28 days after the vaccination of third dose of rabies virus vaccine, given alone or concomitantly with MenACWY-CRM197.
Seroprotection is defined as percentages of subjects who achieved anti-JE neutralizing titers ≥ 1/10 on Day 57."|Baseline and 1 month post last vaccination (day 57).|The analysis was done on the MITT data set.||Percentages of subects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846388|NCT01466387|Secondary|Percentages Of Subjects With Anti-YF Neutralizing Antibody Titers ≥ 1/10, 28 Days After The Vaccination Of Typhoid Vi Polysaccharide And Yellow Fever, Concomitantly With MenACWY-CRM197 Or Given Alone|"Immunogenicity was assessed as the percentages of subjects who achieved seroprotection as measured by neutralization test for anti-YF neutralizing antibody titers after the vaccination of typhoid Vi polysaccharide and yellow fever, given alone or concomitantly with MenACWY-CRM197 on day 29.
Seroprotection is defined as percentages of subjects who achieved anti-YF neutralizing antibody titers ≥ 1/10 on day 29."|Baseline and 1 month postvaccination (day 29).|Analysis was done on the Modified-Intention to Treat (MITT) set, i.e. the subjects who provided evaluable serum samples whose assay results are available for at least one antigen on baseline and on at least one post-baseline visit.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846389|NCT01466387|Primary|Geometric Mean Anti-Rabies Virus Neutralizing Antibody Concentration|Assessment was made to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the geometric mean anti-rabies virus neutralizing antibody concentrations, 28 days after the vaccination of the second dose of Japanese encephalitis vaccine and third dose of rabies virus vaccine given concomitantly with MenACWY-CRM197 or alone in healthy adults aged ≥18 years to ≤60 years.|Baseline and 1 month post last vaccination (day 57).|Analysis was done on the per-protocol (PP) set, i.e. the subjects who received the vaccine correctly; provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points; and had no major protocol violations as defined prior to analysis.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846390|NCT01466387|Primary|Geometric Mean Anti-Japanese Encephalitis Neutralizing Antibody Titers|Assessment was made to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the geometric mean anti-Japanese encephalitis neutralizing antibody titers, 28 days after the vaccination of the second dose of Japanese Encephalitis vaccine and third dose of the rabies virus vaccine given concomitantly with MenACWY-CRM197 or alone in healthy adults aged ≥18 years to ≤60 years.|Baseline and 1 month post last vaccination (day 57).|Analysis was done on the PP set, i.e. the subjects who received the vaccine correctly; provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points; and had no major protocol violations as defined prior to analysis.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846391|NCT01466387|Primary|Geometric Mean Anti-Yellow Fever Antibody Titer|Assessment was made to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the geometric mean anti-yellow fever antibody titers, 28 days after the vaccination of typhoid Vi polysaccharide (TF) and yellow fever (YF) vaccines given concomitantly with MenACWY-CRM197 to typhoid Vi polysaccharide and yellow fever vaccines given alone in healthy adults aged ≥18 years to ≤60 years.|Baseline and 1 month postvaccination (day 29).|Analysis was done on the per-protocol (PP) set, ie, the subjects who received the vaccine correctly; provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points; and had no major protocol violations as defined prior to analysis.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846392|NCT01466387|Primary|Geometric Mean Anti-typhoid Vi Antibody Concentrations|Assessment was made to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the geometric mean anti-typhoid Vi antibody concentrations, 28 days after the vaccination of typhoid Vi polysaccharide (TF) and yellow fever (YF) vaccines given concomitantly with MenACWY-CRM197 to typhoid Vi polysaccharide and yellow fever vaccines given alone in healthy adults aged ≥18 years to ≤60 years.|Baseline and 1 month postvaccination (day 29).|Analysis was done on the per-protocol (PP) set, ie, the subjects who received the vaccine correctly; provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points; and had no major protocol violations as defined prior to analysis.||El.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848368|NCT00073073|Secondary|Effect of This Drug on Bone Mineral Density||1 year|||percent change from baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
846395|NCT01453348|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Seroresponse Against N Meningitidis A, C, W and Y Serogroups at Day 29|"Immunogenicity was assessed as the seroresponse rates for meningococcal serogroups A, C, W and Y elicited by MenACWY-CRM on day 29 when given concomitantly with combined hepatitis A/B vaccine or given alone.
For a subject with a baseline hSBA titer < 1:4, seroresponse is defined as a postvaccination hSBA titer ≥1:8; for a subject with a baseline hSBA titer ≥ 1:4, seroresponse is defined as a postvaccination hSBA titer of at least 4 times the baseline."|28 days postvaccination (day 29).|Analysis was done on modified intention-to-treat (MITT) population- subjects who provided evaluable serum samples whose assay results are available for at least one antigen on visit day 1 and a post baseline visit.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846396|NCT01453348|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With antiHAV and antiHBsAg Antibodies Concentrations Above Seroprotection Level 28 Days After Primary or Booster Vaccination|Immunogenicity was assessed as the percentages of subjects with anti-HAV concentration ≥20 mIU/mL and anti- HBsAg antibody concentration ≥10 mIU/mL, 28 days after primary or booster vaccination.|28 days post primary or booster vaccination.|Analysis was done on modified intention-to-treat (MITT) population- subjects who provided evaluable serum samples whose assay results are available for at least one antigen on visit day 1 and a post baseline visit.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846397|NCT01453348|Primary|Geometric Mean antiHAV and antiHBV Concentrations (GMCs), 28 Days After Primary and Booster Vaccination|Assessment was made to demonstrate the non-inferiority of hepatitis A/B vaccine with MenACWY-CRM as compared to hepatitis A/B vaccine without MenACWY-CRM, as measured by geometric mean concentrations on day 57 in previously unvaccinated subjects or on day 29 after a booster dose in previously vaccinated subjects.|Day 57 (previously unprimed subjects) day 29 (previously primed subjects) postvaccination.|Analysis was done on Per Protocol (PP) population who provided evaluable serum samples and whose assay results were available at the relevant time points, and had no major protocol deviations||Concentrations (mIU/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846398|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs).|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that results in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subjects. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|During the entire study period (approximately 6- 8 months per subject)|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
846399|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Potential Immune-mediated Diseases (pIMDs).|pIMDs are a subset of adverse events (AEs) that include both clearly autoimmune diseases and also other inflammatory and/or neurologic disorders which may or may not have an autoimmune etiology. Grade 3 = pIMDs that prevented normal activities. Related = symptom assed by the investigator as causally related to the study vaccination.|During the entire study period (approximately 6- 8 months per subject)|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
846400|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related AEs With Medically Attended Visits (MAVs)|MAVs were defined as AEs with a medically-attended visit i.e. prompting emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations or physician visits and that were not routine visits for physical examination or vaccination. Any MAV was defined as at least one MAV experienced. Grade 3 was defined as MAVs that prevented normal activities and related was defined as MAVs assessed by the investigator to be causally related to the study vaccination.|During the entire study period (approximately 6- 8 months per subject)|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
846401|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|Unsolicited AE covers any AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as occurrence of any unsolicited symptom regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 was an event that prevented normal activities and related was defined as an unsolicited AE assessed by the investigator to be causally related to the study vaccination.|During the 28-day (Days 0-27) post-vaccination period|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented.||Subjects|||Number
846402|NCT01439360|Secondary|Duration of Solicited General Symptoms|Duration was defined as number of days with any grade of general symptoms.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented. The analysis of solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included only subjects/doses with documented safety data (i.e. symptom screen/sheet completed).||Days||Full Range|Median
846403|NCT01439360|Secondary|Duration of Solicited Local Symptoms|Duration was defined as number of days with any grade of local symptoms.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented. The analysis of solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included only subjects/doses with documented safety data (i.e. symptom screen/sheet completed).||Days||Full Range|Median
846404|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms.|Solicited general symptoms assessed were Drowsiness, Irritability/fussiness, Loss of appetite and Temperature (Axillary). Any was defined as any general symptom reported irrespective of intensity or relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 was defined as symptoms that prevented normal activity. Related was defined as general symptom assessed by the investigator to have a causal relationship to vaccination.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented. The analysis of solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included only subjects/doses with documented safety data (i.e. symptom screen/sheet completed).||Subjects|||Number
846426|NCT01423253|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF) in MADRS Total Scores|Mean change from baseline to week 12 (LOCF) in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total scores The MADRS is a clinician-rated assessment of the subject’s level of depression and consists of 10 items. Each item is rated on a Likert scale, from 0=”Normal” to 6=”Most Severe”. The MADRS total score is calculated as the sum of the ten items and ranges from 0 to 60. Higher scores are associated with greater severity.|Baseline to12 Weeks|Safety population - only 47 subjects had the MADRS assessment at Week 12 (LOCF).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846405|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms.|Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain, redness and swelling. Any was defined as any solicited local symptom reported irrespective of intensity. Grade 3 pain was defined as pain that resulted crying when limb was moved/ spontaneously painful. Grade 3 redness and swelling was greater than 50 millimeters (mm) i.e. >50mm.|During the 7-day (Days 0-6) post-vaccination period|The Total Vaccinated cohort included all subjects with at least one vaccine administration documented. The analysis of solicited symptoms based on the Total Vaccinated cohort included only subjects/doses with documented safety data (i.e. symptom screen/sheet completed).||Subjects|||Number
846406|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Seroprotected Subjects for HI Antibodies Against Each of the 4 Influenza Strains Contained in the D-QIV Vaccine (in Immuno Subcohort of Subjects Only)|"Seroprotection rate (SPR) was defined as the number of subjects with H1N1 reciprocal HI titers ≥ 1:40 against the tested vaccine virus.The vaccine strains assessed were A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Brisbane/3/2007 (Yamagata).
PRE= Pre-vaccination at Day 0; POST = Post-vaccination 1 at Day 28 for primed subjects or post-vaccination 2 at Day 56 for unprimed subjects"|At Day 0 and Day 28/56|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. These included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
846407|NCT01439360|Secondary|Mean Geometric Increase (MGI) for HI Antibody Titer Against Each of the 4 Vaccine Influenza Strains Contained in the D-QIV Vaccine (in Immuno Subcohort of Subjects Only).|"MGI also known as the seroconversion factor [SCF] was defined as the fold increase in serum HI GMTs post vaccination compared to pre-vaccination (Day 0). The vaccine strains assessed were A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Brisbane/3/2007 (Yamagata).
POST = Post-vaccination 1 at Day 28 for primed subjects or post-vaccination 2 at Day 56 for unprimed subjects."|At Day 28/56 (POST)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. These included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination.||Fold increase||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846408|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for HI Antibodies Against Each of the 4 Influenza Strains Contained in the D-QIV Vaccine (in Immuno Subcohort of Subjects Only)|"Seroconversion rate (SCR) was defined as the number of subjects who have either a pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer < 1:10 and a post-vaccination reciprocal titer ≥ 1:40, or a pre-vaccination reciprocal HI titer ≥ 10 and at least a 4 fold increase in post vaccination reciprocal titer against the vaccine virus.
PRE= Pre-vaccination at Day 0; POST = Post-vaccination 1 at Day 28 for primed subjects or post-vaccination 2 at Day 56 for unprimed subjects"|At Day 28/56 (POST)|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. These included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
846409|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Seropositive Subjects for HI Antibodies Against Each of the 4 Influenza Strains Contained in the D-QIV Vaccine (in Immuno Subcohort of Subjects Only)|"A seropositive subject was a subject whose HI antibody titer was greater than or equal to the assay cut-off value of 1:10. The vaccine strains assessed were A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Brisbane/3/2007 (Yamagata).
PRE= Pre-vaccination at Day 0; POST = Post-vaccination 1 at Day 28 for primed subjects or post-vaccination 2 at Day 56 for unprimed subjects."|At Day 0 and Day 28/56|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. These included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination.||Subjects|||Number
846410|NCT01439360|Secondary|Humoral Immune Response in Terms of Haemagglutination-inhibition (HI) Antibody Titres Against Each of Four Vaccine Strains Contained in the D-QIV (in Immuno Subcohort of Subjects Only)|"Titers were expressed as geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs). The vaccine strains assessed were A/California/7/2009 (H1N1), A/Victoria/210/2009 (H3N2), B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Victoria) and B/Brisbane/3/2007 (Yamagata).
PRE= Pre-vaccination at Day 0; POST = Post-vaccination 1 at Day 28 for primed subjects or post-vaccination 2 at Day 56 for unprimed subjects"|At Days 0 and 28/56|The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures were available. These included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine strain after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846411|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects With First Occurrence of RT-PCR Confirmed Severe Influenza A and/or B Due to Any Seasonal Influenza Strain.|Attack rate (AR) was defined as the number/percentage of subjects with at least 1 RT-PCR confirmed influenza event.|During the surveillance period (approximately 6 to 8 months)|The ATP cohort for efficacy – Time to event included all eligible subjects who received study vaccine(s) according to their random assignment, for whom vaccine administration site was known, who had a swab collected during the window (0-7 days) of episode onset and who would be censored but not eliminated based on protocol criteria.||Subjects|||Number
846412|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects With First Occurrence of Acute Otitis Media (AOM) With RT-PCR Confirmed Influenza A and/or B Infection Due to Any Seasonal Influenza Strain.|Attack rate (AR) was defined as the number/percentage of subjects with at least 1 RT-PCR confirmed influenza event.|At any time starting 7 days before the onset of LRI and ending 7 days after end of LRI during the surveillance period (approximately 6 to 8 months)|The ATP cohort for efficacy – Time to event included all eligible subjects who received study vaccine(s) according to their random assignment, for whom vaccine administration site was known, who had a swab collected during the window (0-7 days) of episode onset and who would be censored but not eliminated based on protocol criteria.||Subjects|||Number
846413|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects With First Occurrence of Culture-confirmed Influenza A and/or B Disease of Any Severity Due to Any Seasonal Influenza Strain.|Attack rate (AR) was defined as the number/percentage of subjects with at least 1 RT-PCR confirmed influenza event.|During the surveillance period (approximately 6 to 8 months)|The ATP cohort for efficacy – Time to event included all eligible subjects who received study vaccine(s) according to their random assignment, for whom vaccine administration site was known, who had a swab collected during the window (0-7 days) of episode onset and who would be censored but not eliminated based on protocol criteria.||Subjects|||Number
846414|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects With First Occurrence of Culture-confirmed Moderate to Severe Influenza A and/or B Disease Due to Any Seasonal Influenza Strain.|Attack rate (AR) was defined as the number/percentage of subjects with at least 1 RT-PCR confirmed influenza event.|During the surveillance period (approximately 6 to 8 months)|The ATP cohort for efficacy – Time to event included all eligible subjects who received study vaccine(s) according to their random assignment, for whom vaccine administration site was known, who had a swab collected during the window (0-7 days) of episode onset and who would be censored but not eliminated based on protocol criteria.||Subjects|||Number
846415|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects With First Occurrence of Culture-confirmed Influenza A and/or B Disease of Any Severity Due to Antigenically-matching Influenza Strains|Attack rate (AR) was defined as the number/percentage of subjects with at least 1 RT-PCR confirmed influenza event.|During the surveillance period (approximately 6 to 8 months)|The ATP cohort for efficacy – Time to event included all eligible subjects who received study vaccine(s) according to their random assignment, for whom vaccine administration site was known, who had a swab collected during the window (0-7 days) of episode onset and who would be censored but not eliminated based on protocol criteria.||Subjects|||Number
846416|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects With First Occurrence of Culture-confirmed Moderate to Severe Influenza A and/or B Disease Due to Antigenically-matching Influenza Strains.|Attack rate (AR) was defined as the number/percentage of subjects with at least 1 RT-PCR confirmed influenza event.|During the surveillance period (approximately 6 to 8 months)|The ATP cohort for efficacy – Time to event included all eligible subjects who received study vaccine(s) according to their random assignment, for whom vaccine administration site was known, who had a swab collected during the window (0-7 days) of episode onset and who would be censored but not eliminated based on protocol criteria.||Subjects|||Number
846417|NCT01439360|Secondary|Number of Subjects With First Occurrence of Lower Respiratory Illness (LRI) With RT-PCR Confirmed Influenza.|Attack rate (AR) was defined as the number/percentage of subjects with at least 1 RT-PCR confirmed influenza event.|At any time starting 7 days before the onset of LRI and ending 7 days after end of LRI during the surveillance period (approximately 6 to 8 months)|The ATP cohort for efficacy – Time to event included all eligible subjects who received study vaccine(s) according to their random assignment, for whom vaccine administration site was known, who had a swab collected during the window (0-7 days) of episode onset and who would be censored but not eliminated based on protocol criteria.||Subjects|||Number
846418|NCT01439360|Primary|Number of Subjects With RT-PCR Confirmed Influenza of Any Severity.|Attack rate (AR) was defined as the number/percentage of subjects with at least 1 RT-PCR confirmed influenza event.|During the surveillance period (approximately 6 to 8 months)|The ATP cohort for efficacy – Time to event included all eligible subjects who received study vaccine(s) according to their random assignment, for whom vaccine administration site was known, who had a swab collected during the window (0-7 days) of episode onset and who would be censored but not eliminated based on protocol criteria.||Subjects|||Number
846419|NCT01439360|Primary|Number of Subjects With Moderate to Severe RT-PCR Confirmed Influenza.|Attack rate (AR) was defined as the number/percentage of subjects with at least 1 RT-PCR confirmed influenza event.|During the surveillance period (approximately 6 to 8 months)|The ATP cohort for efficacy – Time to event included all eligible subjects who received study vaccine(s) according to their random assignment, for whom vaccine administration site was known, who had a swab collected during the window (0-7 days) of episode onset and who would be censored but not eliminated based on protocol criteria.||Subjects|||Number
846420|NCT01423253|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF) in the SDS Total Score|The Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) is a composite of three self-rated items designed to measure the extent to which three major sectors (work/school, social life/leisure, and family life/home responsibility) in the patient’s life are impaired by depressive symptoms. These three items are responded to on a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging through 0 (no impairment), 1–3 (mild), 4–6 (moderate), 7–9 (marked) and 10 (extreme) disability. The SDS total score is calculated as the sum of the three items and ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired).|Baseline to week 12|Safety Population - 12 subjects did not have the SDS total score at week 12 (LOCF)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846421|NCT01423253|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF) in the HAM-A Total Score|The Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) is used to quantify the severity of anxiety symptomatology and consists of 14 items. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale, ranging from 0 (not present) to 4 (severe/disabling). The HAM-A total score is calculated as the sum of the 14 individual items and ranges from 0 to 56. Higher scores are associated with greater degree of anxiety.|Baseline to week 12|Safety Population - 4 subjects did not have the HAM-A assessment at week 12 (LOCF)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846422|NCT01423253|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF) in the YMRS Total Score|The Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) is an 11-item instrument used to assess the severity of mania. Seven items are rated on a 5-point scale, ranging from 0 to 4, and four items are rated on a 9-point scale, ranging from 0 to 8. The YMRS total score is calculated as the sum of the 11 items and ranges from 0 to 60. Higher scores are associated with greater severity of mania.|Baseline to week 12|Safety population - 2 subject did not have YMRS assessment at week 12 (LOCF)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846423|NCT01423253|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 (LOCF) in CGI-S Score|The Clinical Global Impression - Severity of illness (CGI-S) score is a single value, clinician-rated assessment of illness severity and ranges from 1= ‘Normal, not at all ill’ to 7= ‘Among the most extremely ill patients’. A higher score is associated with greater illness severity.|baseline to week 12|Safety population - 1 subject did not have the CGI-S assessment at week 12 (LOCF)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846424|NCT01423253|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Who Discontinued Due to Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Percentage of subjects who discontinued due to Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|12 Weeks|Safety Population||percentage of subjects|||Number
846425|NCT01423253|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs)|Percentage of subjects with Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs)|12 Weeks|Safety Population||percentage of subjects|||Number
846427|NCT01423253|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Percentage of subjects with treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs)|12 Weeks|Safety population||percentage of subjects|||Number
848369|NCT00073073|Primary|Percent Change in Mammographic Density at 1 Year on Exemestane||1 year|||percent change from baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
846428|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Itching Symptom Scores by Tube Weight Based Compliance Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with tube weight based compliance (Itching)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with compliance determined by % of tube used by weight.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms.
Groups are made by % of tube used by weight."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846429|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Dyspareunia Symptom Scores by Tube Weight Based Compliance Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with tube weight based compliance (Dyspareunia)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with compliance determined by % of tube used by weight.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms.
Groups are made by % of tube used by weight."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846430|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Dryness Symptom Scores by Tube Weight Based Compliance Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with tube weight based compliance (Dryness)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with compliance determined by % of tube used by weight.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms.
Groups are made by % of tube used by weight."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846431|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Itching Symptom Scores by Patient Reported Compliance Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with patient reported compliance (Itching)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with patient reported compliance.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms.
Groups are made by % of compliance reported by patients"|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846432|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Dyspareunia Symptom Scores by Patient Reported Compliance Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with patient reported compliance (Dyspareunia)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with patient reported compliance.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms.
Groups are made by % of compliance reported by patients"|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846433|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Dryness Symptom Scores by Patient Reported Compliance Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with patient reported compliance (Dryness)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with patient reported compliance.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms.
Groups are made by % of compliance reported by patients"|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846454|NCT01411852|Secondary|In-hospital Mortality|Number of patients who died prior to discharge.|From day of the 911 call through hospital discharge|All enrolled patients||participants|||Number
846434|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Itching Symptom Scores by Indication for Endocrine Therapy Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Itching and Indications)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846435|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Dyspareunia Symptom Scores by Indication for Endocrine Therapy Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Dyspareunia and Indications)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846436|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Dryness Symptom Scores by Indication for Endocrine Therapy Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Dryness and Indications)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846437|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Itching Symptom Scores by Prior Cytotoxic Therapy Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Itching and prior cytotoxic therapy)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846438|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Dyspareunia Symptom Scores by Prior Cytotoxic Therapy Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Dyspareunia and prior cytotoxic therapy)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846439|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Dryness Symptom Scores by Prior Cytotoxic Therapy Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Dryness and prior cytotoxic therapy)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846455|NCT01411852|Secondary|Penetrating Trauma 24 Hour Mortality|The 24 hour mortality endpoint for the total number of patients injured by penetrating mechanisms in each arm.|From time of hospital arrival through first 24 hours|Patients with traumatic shock due to penetrating traumatic mechanisms||participants|||Number
846440|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Itching Symptom Scores by Current Endocrine Therapy Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Itching and current endocrine therapy)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846441|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Dyspareunia Symptom Scores by Current Endocrine Therapy Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Dyspareunia and current endocrine therapy)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846442|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Dryness Symptom Scores by Current Endocrine Therapy Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Dryness and current endocrine therapy)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846443|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Itching Symptom Scores by Menopause Status Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Itching and Menopause status)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846444|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Dyspareunia Symptom Scores by Menopause Status Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Dyspareunia and Menopause status)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846445|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Dryness Symptom Scores by Menopause Status Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Dryness and Menopause status)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846486|NCT01369342|Secondary|Number of Participants in Clinical Remission at Week 8|Clinical remission at Week 8 was defined as a Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of <150 points.|Week 8|Efficacy analyses set included all the participants who were randomized after the study was restarted.||participants|||Number
846446|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Itching Symptom Scores by Age Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Itching and Age)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846447|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Dyspareunia Symptom Scores by Age Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Dyspareunia and Age)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846448|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Vaginal Dryness Symptom Scores by Age Characteristics|"Association of response in symptoms with characteristics of the subject population (Dryness and Age)
Determine if there is an association between response in symptoms of vaginal dryness, itching, and/or dyspareunia with characteristics of the subject population.
Response in symptoms is calculated as change in symptom score from baseline to week 4 (end of study). Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively).The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|The rows are sub-groups of the total number analyzed. The sum of the row counts matches the overall number.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846449|NCT01422408|Secondary|Number of Patients Experiencing Toxicities|Toxicity data will be reported as descriptive data as the percentage of patients experiencing reported side effects. Toxicity and safety analyses will be conducted using the safety analysis set.|Over 4 weeks|Toxicity and safety analyses will be conducted using the safety analysis set.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846450|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Total Vaginal Index Score.|"Change in total vaginal index score. The total vaginal index score is a numerical value ranging from zero to twelve, comprised of the three components of vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and dyspareunia graded on an ordinal scale of zero to four added together.
Outcome measures median change in score from baseline to end of study. Scale is explained above for the scoring of symptoms at each time point. The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -12 to +12; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms.
Analyzed using Wilcoxon signed rank test with 2.5% significance level to account for two co-secondary endpoints."|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846451|NCT01422408|Secondary|Change in Symptom Scores of Vaginal Itching|"Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively). Analyzed using Wilcoxon signed rank test with 2.5% significance level to account for two co-secondary endpoints.
Outcome measures median change in score from baseline to end of study. Scale is explained above for the scoring of symptoms at each time point. The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846452|NCT01422408|Primary|Change in Symptom Scores of Dyspareunia|"Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively). Analyzed using Wilcoxon signed rank test with 2.5% significance level to account for two co-primary endpoints.
Outcome measures median change in score from baseline to end of study. Scale is explained above for the scoring of symptoms at each time point. The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846453|NCT01422408|Primary|Change in Symptom Scores of Vaginal Dryness|"Change in symptom scores of vaginal dryness, itching, and dyspareunia will be evaluated by the Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) patient questionnaire which has patients grade how much vaginal dryness, vaginal itching, and vaginal discomfort during intercourse they are currently experiencing on an ordinal scale of zero to four (none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe, respectively). Analyzed using Wilcoxon signed rank test with 2.5% significance level to account for two co-primary endpoints.
Outcome measures median change in score from baseline to end of study. Scale is explained above for the scoring of symptoms at each time point. The median change (i.e. median difference) can range from -4 to +4; negative values indicate improved symptoms, zero no change, and positive values indicate worsened symptoms."|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846456|NCT01411852|Secondary|Blunt Trauma 24 Hour Mortality|The 24 hour mortality endpoint for the total number of patients injured by blunt mechanisms in each arm.|From time of hospital arrival through first 24 hours|Analyzed patients had traumatic shock due to blunt traumatic mechanisms. One patient randomized to the controlled resuscitation group was not analyzed because neither blunt force nor penetrating injury had occurred. It was determined that the source of bleeding was from a gastrointestinal lesion.||participants|||Number
846457|NCT01411852|Secondary|Days Alive Out of the Hospital Through Day 28|"The number of days beginning with the day of the 911 call counted as Day 0 through Day 28 during which the patient is alive and not being cared for in the hospital"|From day of the 911 call through Day 28|Patients with known discharge status||Days alive out of hospital thru day 28||Standard Deviation|Mean
846458|NCT01411852|Secondary|Days Alive Out of the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Through Day 28|"The number of days beginning with the day of the 911 call counted as Day 0 through Day 28 during which the patient is alive and not being cared for in the intensive care unit"|From day of the 911 call through Day 28|Patients with known discharge status||ICU-free days||Standard Deviation|Mean
846459|NCT01411852|Secondary|Ventilator Free Days Through Day 28|"The number of days beginning with the day of the 911 call counted as Day 0 through Day 28 during which the patient did not require mechanical ventilation. Deaths are assigned the worst score (0)."|From day of the 911 call through Day 28|Patients with known discharge status.||Ventilator-free days||Standard Deviation|Mean
846460|NCT01411852|Secondary|"Acute Renal Failure Classification Score of Failure Without Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR)"|Increased plasma creatinine > 3 x reference measure (ED admission) or acute plasma creatinine = 350 umol/L or acute rise = 44 umol/L or urine output < 0.3 mL/k/h x 24h. Only measured for patients with at least 2 days of ICU stay assessed.|From ED arrival through the first 24 hours|Patients with at least at 2 day stay in the ICU||participants|||Number
846461|NCT01411852|Secondary|"Acute Renal Failure Classification Score of Injury Without Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR)"|"Increased plasma creatinine > 2 x reference measure (ED admission) or urine output < 0.5 mL/kg/h x 24h. The RIFLE urine criterion for this level actually specifies a 12 hour period of assessment but study data are collected for 24-hr periods. This row includes patients who met the Failure criteria as well. Only measured for patients with at least 2 days of ICU stay assessed."|From ED arrival through Day 28|Patients with at least at 2 day stay in the ICU||participants|||Number
846462|NCT01411852|Secondary|"Acute Renal Failure Classification Score of Risk Without Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR)"|"Increased plasma creatinine > 1.5 x reference measure (ED admission). Urine criteria is based on 6-hour periods for this level of the RIFLE and cannot be assessed since study data are collected for 24-hour periods. This row includes patients who met the Injury and Failure criteria as well. Only measured for patients with at least 2 days of ICU stay assessed."|From ED arrival through Day 28|Patients with at least a 2 day ICU stay||participants|||Number
846463|NCT01411852|Secondary|Hemorrhage Control Procedure Within 2 Hours of ED Arrival|Hemorrhage control procedures include blood vessel ligated or embolized, organ packed or removed, laparotomy or thoracotomy|From ED arrival through the first 2 hours|All patients except for 1 patient who was enrolled while in police custody||participants|||Number
846464|NCT01411852|Secondary|International Normalized Ratio (INR) on Admission to the Emergency Department|The first International normalized ratio (INR) value reported from blood drawn within the first 24 hours from arrival|From final Emergency Department arrival time through first 24 hours|Patients who had a first INR value measured within the first 24 hours of ED arrival||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
846465|NCT01411852|Secondary|Platelet Value on Admission|First platelet value from blood drawn in the the first 24 hours after arrival|From final Emergency Department arrival time through first 24 hours|All patients with the first platelet value measured within the first 24 hours of ED arrival||10^9 Platelets/Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
846466|NCT01411852|Secondary|Hemoglobin on Admission to the Emergency Department|The first hemoglobin value reported from blood drawn in the final Emergency Department|From final Emergency Department arrival time through first 24 hours|All patients with a first hemoglobin measured within the first 24 hours of ED arrival||grams/deciliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
846467|NCT01411852|Secondary|Base Deficit on Admission to the Emergency Department (ED)|The first base deficit value reported from arterial blood lab work drawn after arrival in the final Emergency Department. This measure reflects the acid-base balance in the arterial blood. A negative number indicates that the blood is more acid that normal.|From final Emergency Department arrival time through first 24 hours|Patient with the first base deficit recorded in the first 24 hours of the ED arrival||mmol/Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
846468|NCT01411852|Secondary|Total Blood Product Requirements in First 24 Hours|Total amount of blood products required: packed red blood cells (PRBC), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), platelets (plts), cryoprecipitate (cryo)|From ED arrival through the first 24 hours|All patients except one who was enrolled while in police custody||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
846469|NCT01411852|Secondary|Total Fluid Requirement During First 24 Hours|Total volume of fluid administered during the first 24 hours inclusive of crystalloids, blood products, 3% saline, mannitol, and other colloids|From ED arrival through the first 24 hours|All patients except one who was enrolled while in police custody||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
846470|NCT01411852|Secondary|Number of Ineligible Patients Enrolled at the Time of Randomization|"Eligibility criteria:
Inclusion Criteria
Included will be those with:
Blunt or penetrating injury
Age ≥15yrs or weight ≥50kg if age is unknown
Prehospital SBP ≤ 90 mmHg 5.3 Exclusion Criteria
Excluded will be those with:
Ground level falls
Evidence of severe blunt or penetrating head injury with a Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) ≤ 8
Bilateral paralysis secondary to suspected spinal cord injury
Fluid greater than 250 ml was given prior to randomization
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) prior to randomization
Known prisoners
Known or suspected pregnancy
Drowning or asphyxia due to hanging
Burns Total Body Surface Area (TBSA) > 20%
Time of call received at dispatch to study intervention > 4 hours"|From the time the paramedic with study drug kit arrived at patient's side to the time kit was opened prior to ED arrival|All patients enrolled in the study.||participants|||Number
846471|NCT01411852|Primary|24 Hour Mortality|The 24 hour mortality endpoint for the total number of patients each arm|From time of hospital arrival through the first 24 hours|All patients except for one who was enrolled while in police custody||participants|||Number
846472|NCT01411852|Primary|Total Volume of All Crystalloid Given for Early Resuscitation (Feasibility)|The primary feasibility endpoint was early crystalloid volume (ECV) defined as crystalloid infused from Emergency Medical Services (EMS) arrival at the scene until the end of the study period|From time of first intravenous or intraosseous insertion through the first 2 hours after hospital arrival or hemorrhage control, which ever occurs first|Patients with traumatic shock due to blunt or penetrating mechanisms||liters||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
846473|NCT01409096|Secondary|Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HRSA)|"The scale consists of 14 items, each defined by a series of symptoms, and measures both psychic anxiety (mental agitation and psychological distress) and somatic anxiety (physical complaints related to anxiety).
Each item is scored on a scale of 0 (not present) to 4 (severe), with a total score range of 0–56, where less than 17 indicates mild severity, 18–24 mild to moderate severity and 25–30 moderate to severe."|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846474|NCT01409096|Secondary|Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS)|"This is an 11-item, observer rated measure of the severity of manic symptoms on a 5 point scale. The total score indicates overall severity of mania with a minimum of zero (indicating normalcy) and a maximum of 60 (indicating very severe).
Score:
Minimum: 0 Maximum: 60 Lower score associated with better outcome"|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846475|NCT01409096|Secondary|Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report (IDS-SR)|"IDS-SR is a self reported 30 item assessment to diagnose a major depressive episode.
Score:
Minimum: 0 Maximum: 84 Lower score associated with better outcome"|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846476|NCT01409096|Primary|The 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD17)|"The HRSD is an observer-rated measure of depressive symptomatology.
Minimum: 0; Maximum: 50; Better outcome: lower score; Normal score: 7 or less."|12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846477|NCT01406223|Secondary|Days to First Cigarette Following Quitting Smoking|Days to first cigarette (i.e. lapse) will be measured via self-report.|11 weeks post quit day.|Twenty-eight subjects dropped from the study prior to their scheduled quit day, so they were not included in these analyses.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
846478|NCT01406223|Primary|The Amygdala, Anterior Insula, and Medial Prefrontal Cortex Scans Will be Compared to Evaluate Significant Differences|Mean blood-oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) contrast sensitive functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) cue-reactivity signal following 2 week pre-quit treatment, controlling for baseline cue-reactivity.|change from baseline in whole brain blood-oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) contrast sensitive functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) images collected during a cue-reactivity task following 2 weeks of pre-quit treatment|Only participants who completed both scanning sessions and provided useable data were included in imaging analysis.||percent BOLD signal change||Standard Deviation|Mean
846479|NCT01375374|Secondary|Change in Total Cholesterol Level From Baseline to Treatment Period End (Comprised of a 4-week Titration Period and an 8-week Maintenance Period)|The change in total cholesterol levels from Baseline to the end of the Maintenance Period was summarized descriptively by visit. A negative value indicates an improvement.|From Day 1 (Baseline) to Day 84 (Treatment Period End)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consists of all subjects who received at least 1 dose of Lacosamide.||mmol/L||Full Range|Median
846480|NCT01375374|Secondary|Change in Serum Thyroid Hormone Free Thyroxine Level From Baseline to Treatment Period End (Comprised of a 4-week Titration Period and an 8-week Maintenance Period)|The change in the serum thyroid hormone free thyroxine level from Baseline to the end of the Maintenance Period was summarized descriptively by visit.|From Day 1 (Baseline) to Day 84 (Treatment Period End)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consists of all subjects who received at least 1 dose of Lacosamide.||pmol/L||Full Range|Median
846481|NCT01375374|Secondary|Change in Sex Hormone Calculated Free Androgen Index Levels From Baseline to Treatment Period End (Comprised of a 4-week Titration Period and an 8-week Maintenance Period)|The change in sex hormone calculated free androgen index (100 x Testosterone/sex hormone binding globulin) levels from Baseline to the end of Maintenance Period was summarized descriptively by visit. A negative value indicates an improvement.|From Day 1 (Baseline) to Day 84 (Treatment Period End)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consists of all subjects who received at least 1 dose of Lacosamide.||Free Androgen Index||Full Range|Median
846482|NCT01375374|Primary|Change in Serum Sex Hormone Binding Globulin (SHBG) From Baseline to Treatment Period End (Comprised of a 4-week Titration Period and an 8-week Maintenance Period)|Due to premature termination of enrollment prior to achieving the planned sample size (a total of 28 subjects), this primary safety variable was assessed for descriptive purposes only. A negative value indicates an improvement.|From Day 1 (Baseline) to Day 84 (Treatment Period End)|The Analysis Population refers to the Safety Set (SS). The SS consists of all subjects who received at least 1 dose of Lacosamide.||nmol/L||Full Range|Median
846483|NCT01369342|Secondary|Number of Participants With CDAI 70 Point Response at Week 3|70-point response is defined as at least 70 points reduction in CDAI score (in general, CDAI score ranges from 0 to approximately 600; higher score indicates higher disease activities). The CDAI score is used to quantify the symptoms of participants with Crohn's Disease. A decrease in CDAI over time indicates improvement in disease activity.|Week 3|Efficacy analyses set included all the participants who were randomized after the study was restarted.||participants|||Number
846484|NCT01369342|Secondary|Number of Participants With Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) 70 Point Response at Week 6|70-point response is defined as at least 70 points reduction in CDAI score (in general, CDAI score ranges from 0 to approximately 600; higher score indicates higher disease activities). The CDAI score is used to quantify the symptoms of participants with Crohn's Disease. A decrease in CDAI over time indicates improvement in disease activity.|Week 6|Efficacy analyses set included all the participants who were randomized after the study was restarted.||participants|||Number
846485|NCT01369342|Secondary|Number of Participants in Clinical Response at Week 8|Clinical response at Week 8 was defined as a reduction from baseline in the CDAI score of greater than or equal (>=) 100 points (in general, CDAI score ranges from 0 to approximately 600; higher score indicates higher disease activities). Participants with a baseline CDAI score of > = 220 to less than or equal (< =) 248 were considered to be in clinical response if a CDAI score of less than (<) 150 was attained. A decrease in CDAI score over time indicates improvement in disease activity.|Week 8|Efficacy analyses set included all the participants who were randomized after the study was restarted.||participants|||Number
846487|NCT01369342|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 6|Clinical response at Week 6 was defined as a reduction from baseline in the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of greater than or equal (>=) 100 points (in general, CDAI score ranges from 0 to approximately 600; higher score indicates higher disease activities). Participants with a baseline CDAI score of > = 220 to less than or equal (< =) 248 were considered to be in clinical response if a CDAI score of less than (<) 150 was attained. A decrease in CDAI score over time indicates improvement in disease activity.|Week 6|Efficacy analyses set included all the participants who were randomized after the study was restarted.||participants|||Number
846488|NCT01369329|Secondary|Number of Participants With CDAI 70-point Response at Week 3|70-point response is defined as at least 70 points reduction in CDAI score. The CDAI score is used to quantify the symptoms of participants with Crohn's Disease. A decrease in CDAI over time indicates improvement in disease activity.|Baseline and Week 3|Efficacy analyses set included all the participants who were randomized after the study was restarted.||participants|||Number
846489|NCT01369329|Secondary|Number of Participants With Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) 70-point Response at Week 6|70-point response is defined as at least 70 points reduction in CDAI score. The CDAI score is used to quantify the symptoms of participants with Crohn's Disease. A decrease in CDAI over time indicates improvement in disease activity.|Baseline and Week 6|Efficacy analyses set included all the participants who were randomized after the study was restarted.||participants|||Number
846490|NCT01369329|Secondary|Number of Participants in Clinical Response at Week 8|Clinical response at Week 8 was defined as a reduction from baseline in the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of greater than or equal (>=) 100 points. Participants with a baseline CDAI score of > = 220 to less than or equal (< =) 248 were considered to be in clinical response if a CDAI score of less than (<) 150 was attained. A CDAI score of less than 150 indicates clinical remission. A decrease in CDAI score over time indicates improvement in disease activity.|Baseline and Week 8|Efficacy analyses set included all the participants who were randomized after the study was restarted.||participants|||Number
846491|NCT01369329|Secondary|Number of Participants in Clinical Remission at Week 8|Clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score of less than (<) 150 points at Week 8.|Baseline and Week 8|Efficacy analyses set included all the participants who were randomized after the study was restarted.||participants|||Number
846492|NCT01369329|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 6|Clinical response at Week 6 was defined as a reduction from baseline in the Crohn's Disease Activity Index score of greater than or equal (>=) 100 points (in general, CDAI score ranges from 0 to approximately 600; higher score indicates higher disease activities). Participants with a baseline CDAI score of > = 220 to less than or equal (< =) 248 were considered to be in clinical response if a CDAI score of less than (<) 150 was attained. A CDAI score of less than 150 indicates clinical remission. A decrease in CDAI score over time indicates improvement in disease activity.|Baseline and Week 6|Efficacy analyses set included all the participants who were randomized after the study was restarted.||participants|||Number
846493|NCT01363479|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With no Rescue Medication||0-24 hours||||||
846494|NCT01363479|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With no Emesis||0-24 hours||||||
846495|NCT01363479|Primary|Proportion of Patients With Complete Response (CR) Defined as no Emesis, no Rescue Medication||0-24 hours|Full Analysis Set i.e. patients receiving study drugs and chemotherapy||percentage of responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846496|NCT01362140|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Meaningful Improvement in Fatigue|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale was a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
Clinically meaningful improvement in fatigue is defined as an increase of ≥ 3 points in the FACIT-Fatigue subscale score, from baseline to EOTP."|Baseline to week 24|FACIT-fatigue analysis set||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846497|NCT01362140|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"The EQ-5D visual analog scale (VAS) is a global evaluation of overall health state with scores ranging from 0 (worse health state a participant can imagine) to 100 (best health state a participant can imagine).
End of treatment period (EOTP) analysis includes last available values."|Baseline, and weeks 13 and 25|The EQ-5D visual analog analysis set includes all participants in the primary analysis set who completed both the baseline and at least 1 subsequent visual analog scale.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846498|NCT01362140|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy – Fatigue (FACIT-F)|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale was a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement. End of treatment period (EOTP) analysis includes last available values."|Baseline, and weeks 13 and 25|FACIT-Fatigue Analysis Set, includes all participants in the primary analysis set who completed or partially completed both the baseline and at least 1 subsequent FACIT-F questionnaire.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846499|NCT01362140|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Developed Neutralizing Antibodies to Darbepoetin Alfa|"Two validated assays were used to detect the presence of anti-darbepoetin alfa antibodies.
Samples were first tested in an immunoassay to detect antibodies capable of binding to darbepoetin alfa. Samples confirmed to be positive for binding antibodies were subsequently tested in a cell-based assay to determine neutralizing activity against darbepoetin alfa. If a sample was positive for binding antibodies and demonstrated neutralizing activity at the same time point, the sample was defined as positive for neutralizing antibodies.
The number of participants who developed antibodies to darbepoetin alfa is defined as participants who were neutralizing antibody positive post-baseline with a negative or no result at baseline."|Baseline and end of double-blind treatment period (24 weeks)|Safety analysis set participants with post-baseline antibody results||participants|||Number
846500|NCT01362140|Secondary|Number of Participants With Malignancies Other Than AML, Basal Cell Carcinoma, or Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Skin||Up to 24 weeks|Safety analysis set||participants|||Number
847233|NCT00734539|Secondary|Neurodevelopmental Impairment|Bayley-III cognition composite score of less than 70, blindness, deafness, or cerebral palsy|18-22 months corrected gestational age|Attended the follow-up visit and had complete data on composite endpoint||participants|||Number
846501|NCT01362140|Secondary|Number of Participants With Disease Progression to Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)|Transformation to AML was assessed according to WHO guidelines in the absence of IP and any haematopoietic growth factors (2 weeks off dosing). Bone marrow and/or cytogenetic report confirmation of AML was required (marrow or peripheral blast cells ≥ 20%, presence of pathognomic AML cytogenetic change, or evidence of marrow blast criteria for erythroleukemia). A pathology report confirming other leukemias such as chloroma (granulocytic sarcoma, myeloid sarcoma) or leukemia cutis also constituted transformation to AML.|24 weeks|Safety analysis set with available data||participants|||Number
846502|NCT01362140|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"The severity of each adverse event was graded using the the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 grading scale, where grade 1 = mild, grade 2 = moderate, grade 3 = severe, grade 4 = life-threatening and grade 5 = death.
Prespecified adverse events of interest for darbepoetin alfa, based on clinical data in anemic patients with cancer, included the following categories: hypersensitivity, cardiac failure, hypertension, malignancies, embolic and thrombolic events, venous thromboembolic events (VTEs), central nervous system vascular disorders, and ischemic heart disease."|From first dose of study drug until the end of the double-blind treatment period; 24 weeks.|Safety Analysis Set, including all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. One participant in the placebo arm inadvertently received a dose of darbepoetin alfa and is counted in the darbepoetin alfa group for safety analyses.||participants|||Number
846503|NCT01362140|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an Erythroid Response Based on International Working Group (IWG) 2006 Criteria in the Double-blind Treatment Period|"International Working Group 2006 erythroid response was defined as achieving an initial ≥ 1.5 g/dL increase in hemoglobin from baseline and sustaining an average rise of ≥ 1.5 g/dL in a rolling 56-consecutive day period in the absence of RBC transfusion.
Participants with no hemoglobin collected to the minimum time required to observe an IWG erythroid response (Week 13) were considered non-responders."|Up to 24 weeks|Primary analysis set participants with a central laboratory baseline hemoglobin value||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846504|NCT01362140|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least One Red Blood Cell (RBC) Transfusion During the Double-blind Treatment Period||Week 5 to Week 25|Transfusion Primary Analysis Set which includes all randomized and consented participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and who had an end of treatment period (EOTP) visit ≥ day 29 (ie, start of week 5).||percentage of participants|||Number
846505|NCT01354431|Secondary|Median Progression Free Survival (PFS) in Months at Interim Data Cut-off - Randomized Population|PFS: the time from randomization to the date of first disease progression (either clinical or radiographic progression, as assessed by the investigator) was measured in Months. Tumor assessments (radiographic scans) were done every 6 weeks from randomization for the first 12 months, then every 12 weeks until progression. PFS was calculated based on investigator's assessment of first date of progression (either clinical or radiographic progression) or date of death if progression did not occur. Participants were censored if they had not experienced disease progression (they were still on treatment or in follow-up) or had received subsequent cancer therapy. Disease Progression was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of the longest target lesions since screening (the sum must be an absolute increase of at least 5 mm), or measurable increase in non-target lesion or appearance of one or more new lesions.|From Randomization to approximately 4 years post randomization|All Randomized participants were summarized up to March 2015 data cut off. Study on-going.||Months||80% Confidence Interval|Median
846506|NCT01354431|Secondary|Median Overall Survival in Months at Interim Data Cut-off - Randomized Population|Median Overall Survival (OS), measured in months, was based on Kaplan Meier estimates.|From Randomization to approximately 4 years post randomization|All Randomized participants were summarized up to interim data cut off, March 2015. Study on-going.||Months||80% Confidence Interval|Median
846507|NCT01354431|Secondary|Number of Participants With Best Overall Response at Primary Endpoint - Randomized Population|Best response defined as the best response across all time points. Primary endpoint=116 events, approximately 2 years. Tumor response was evaluated by investigator according to RECIST version 1.1. Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm; partial response (PR): at least 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters; Disease Progression (PD) was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of the longest target lesions since screening (the sum must be an absolute increase of at least 5 mm), or measurable increase in non-target lesion or appearance of one or more new lesions; Stable disease: neither shrinkage to qualify for PR or increase to qualify for PD.|From randomization until after approximately 116 events (disease progression or death), approximately 2 years.|All Randomized participants were summarized up to Primary endpoint data cut off, approximately 2 years.||participants|||Number
846508|NCT01354431|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) at Primary Endpoint- Randomized Population|Tumor response was evaluated by investigator according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the number of responders divided by the number of randomized participants; Responders=complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). CR: disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm; PR: at least 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. ORR was estimated along with exact 80% Confidence Interval (CI) using the Clopper and Pearson method.|From randomization until after approximately 116 events (disease progression or death), approximately 2 years.|All randomized participants were analyzed up to Primary endpoint, approximately 2 years.||percentage of participants||80% Confidence Interval|Number
846521|NCT01340300|Secondary|Changes in Other Insulin-Related Biomarkers|Markers related to insulin and insulin-like growth factors (including insulin-like growth factor 1 [IGF-1], IGF binding protein-1 [IGFBP-1], IGF binding protein-3 [IGFBP-3], leptin) will be measured by a blood draw at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. Negative least square means indicate a decrease at 3 month comparing to baseline value.|0 and 3 months (change between 0 and 3 months)|11 patients are excluded for missing baseline blood samples.||ng/mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846823|NCT01106534|Secondary|MACE for Treatment Population||12 through 30 months and 12 through 33 months|Participants enrolled in the study will be followed by Abbott Vascular but their data will not be independently analyzed; they will only be analyzed as part of the DAPT study (NCT00977938) which is sufficiently powered for the study outcomes.|||||
846509|NCT01354431|Primary|Median Progression Free Survival (PFS) at Primary Endpoint - Randomized Population|PFS: time from randomization to date of first disease progression (either clinical or radiographic progression, as assessed by the investigator) and measured in Months. Tumor assessments (radiographic scans) were done every 6 weeks from randomization for the first 12 months, then every 12 weeks until progression. Survival was assessed every 3 months. The analysis of PFS was conducted after approximately 116 events (progression or death), approximately 2 years. PFS was calculated based on investigator’s assessment of first date of progression (either clinical or radiographic progression) or date of death if progression did not occur. Progression was at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of the longest target lesions since screening (the sum must be an absolute increase of at least 5 mm), or measurable increase in non-target lesion or appearance of one or more new lesions.|From randomization until after approximately 116 events (disease progression or death), approximately 2 years.|All participants who were randomized to a treatment arm.||Months||80% Confidence Interval|Median
846510|NCT01350934|Other Pre-specified|Extension Study: Percentage of Participants With Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin (OH) D <20 ng/mL at Month 12|"The term vitamin D insufficiency is used to describe vitamin D levels that are low enough to cause secondary hyperparathyroidism, bone loss, and increased risk of skeletal fracture. In this study, a threshold for vitamin D insufficiency was a level of serum 25(OH) D <20 ng/mL."|Baseline and Month 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment, and had baseline data for analyses that required baseline data.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
846511|NCT01350934|Secondary|Extension Study: Percentage Change From Baseline in s-CTx at Month 12|s-CTx is a biochemical marker for bone turnover that has been shown to detect increased bone resorption, a process by which bone is broken down within the body. s-CTx was measured at baseline and Month 12.|Baseline and Month 12|Per-Protocol Set (PPS) population, which consisted of participants who received one dose of study treatment, had baseline measurement and had a Month 12 observation for the analysis endpoint, but excluded participants with at least one major protocol deviation.||Percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
846512|NCT01350934|Secondary|Extension Study: Percentage Change From Baseline in s-P1NP at Month 12|s-P1NP is a biochemical marker of bone turnover that is particularly useful in monitoring bone resorption, a process by which bone is broken down within the body. s-P1NP was measured at baseline and Month 12.|Baseline and Month 12|Per-Protocol Set (PPS) population, which consisted of participants who received one dose of study treatment, had baseline measurement and had a Month 12 observation for the analysis endpoint, but excluded participants with at least one major protocol deviation.||Percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
846513|NCT01350934|Secondary|Base Study: Percentage Change From Baseline in Serum C-Telopeptides of Type 1 Collagen (s-CTx) at Month 6|s-CTx is a biochemical marker for bone turnover that has been shown to detect increased bone resorption, a process by which bone is broken down within the body. s-CTx was measured at baseline and Month 6.|Baseline and Month 6|Per-Protocol Set (PPS) population, which consisted of participants who received one dose of study treatment, had baseline measurement and had a Month 6 observation for the analysis endpoint, but excluded participants with at least one major protocol deviation.||Percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
846514|NCT01350934|Secondary|Base Study: Percentage Change From Baseline in Serum Procollagen Type 1 N-Terminal Propeptide (s-P1NP) at Month 6|s-P1NP is a biochemical marker of bone turnover that is particularly useful in monitoring bone resorption, a process by which bone is broken down within the body. s-P1NP was measured at baseline and Month 6.|Baseline and Month 6|Per-Protocol Set (PPS) population, which consisted of participants who received one dose of study treatment, had baseline measurement and had a Month 6 observation for the analysis endpoint, but excluded participants with at least one major protocol deviation.||Percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
846515|NCT01350934|Primary|Extension Study: Percentage Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine BMD at Month 12|BMD at the lumbar spine was assessed by DXA at baseline and Month 12.|Baseline and Month 12|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment, and had baseline data for analyses that required baseline data.||Percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
846516|NCT01350934|Primary|Base Study: Percentage Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Month 6|BMD at the lumbar spine was assessed by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at baseline and Month 6.|Baseline and Month 6|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had at least one post-randomization observation for the analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment, and had baseline data for analyses that required baseline data.||Percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
846517|NCT01340300|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Body Composition by Treatment Arm - Waist to Hip Ratio|Negative least square means indicate a decrease at 3 month comparing to baseline value.|0 and 3 months (change between 0 and 3 months)|2 patients are excluded for missing baseline measurements.||ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846518|NCT01340300|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Body Composition by Treatment Arm - BMI|Negative least square means indicate a decrease at 3 month comparing to baseline value.|0 and 3 months (change between 0 and 3 months)|2 patients are excluded for missing baseline measurements.||kg/m^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846519|NCT01340300|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Body Composition by Treatment Arm - Weight|Negative least square means indicate a decrease at 3 month comparing to baseline value.|0 and 3 months (change between 0 and 3 months)|2 patients are excluded for missing baseline measurements.||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846520|NCT01340300|Secondary|Change in Fasting Glucose Level|Determine whether supervised exercise training alone and metformin, either alone or in combination can decrease fasting Glucose level from baseline to 3 months in patients who completed standard therapy for stage I-III colorectal or breast cancer. Fasting Glucose levels in blood will be drawn at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. Negative least square means indicate a decrease at 3 month comparing to baseline value.|0 and 3 months (change between 0 and 3 months)|11 patients are excluded for missing baseline blood samples.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846522|NCT01340300|Primary|Change in Fasting Insulin Level|Determine whether supervised exercise training alone and metformin, either alone or in combination can decrease fasting insulin level from baseline to 3 months in patients who completed standard therapy for stage I-III colorectal or breast cancer. Fasting insulin levels in blood will be drawn at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. Negative least square means indicate a decrease at 3 month comparing to baseline value.|0 and 3 months (change between 0 and 3 months)|11 patients are excluded for missing baseline blood samples.||mU/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846523|NCT01331161|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Innate Immune Signatures That Correlate With the B and T Cells Adaptive Immunity Responses After ZOSTAVAX|The number of participants with innate immune signatures in the young and old groups that correlate with the B and T cells adaptive immunity responses after ZOSTAVAX|2 years|Participants with both T and B cell responses to vaccine||participants|||Number
846524|NCT01331161|Primary|Number of Participants With Innate Immunity Signatures That Correlate With the T Cell Adaptive Immunity Responses After ZOSTAVAX|The primary outcomes will identify the number of participants with innate immunity signatures in the young and older groups that correlate with the T cell adaptive immunity responses after ZOSTAVAX|2 years|participants with immunoglobulin gene responses that correlated with adaptive immune responses||participants|||Number
846525|NCT01309737|Secondary|Family Dermatology Life Quality Index (FDLQI) Score|The FDLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that examine the impact of health-related quality of life issues associated with living with a person with a skin condition (example, emotional distress, personal relationships, reactions of other people, social life, caregiving) over the last month. The FDLQI need to be completed by a family member (for example, spouse or partner, parent) who currently lives with the participant. Each question is scored on a scale from 0 (Not at all/ Not relevant) to 3 (Very much). Total score is calculated by summing the score of each item resulting in a maximum score of '30' and a minimum score of '0'. Higher scores indicate greater impairment to quality of life. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.|Baseline, Week 16, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. 'n' signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846526|NCT01309737|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Psoriasis Affecting Ability to Work|"The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work.The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use, and the second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work. Baseline is the latest pre-dose measurement. Participants rate how much psoriasis affected their ability to work by reporting a number from 0 to 10, where 0 means ability to work was not affected by psoriasis, and 10 means ability to work was completely affected by psoriasis. Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team's decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint."|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846527|NCT01309737|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Percent Absent Hours|The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use, and the second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work. Baseline is the latest pre-dose measurement. Participants reported hours scheduled to work and hours absent from work. Percent absent hours = (hours absent from work/hours scheduled to work) multiplied by 100. Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team's decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. 'n' signifies participants evaluable for specified timepoint for each arm, respectively.||percentage of scheduled hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
846528|NCT01309737|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Work Hours and Absent Hours|The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use, and the second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work. Baseline is the latest pre-dose measurement. Participants reported hours scheduled to work and hours absent from work. Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team's decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure for specified parameter for each arm, respectively.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
846536|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) Scale Response|The PtGA asks the participant to evaluate the overall cutaneous disease at that point in time on a single item, 5-point scale (0=clear [no psoriasis]; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; 4=severe).|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8,12,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||percentage of participants|||Number
846824|NCT01106534|Secondary|Major Bleeding for ITT Population||12 through 30 months|Participants enrolled in the study will be followed by Abbott Vascular but their data will not be independently analyzed; they will only be analyzed as part of the DAPT study (NCT00977938) which is sufficiently powered for the study outcomes.|||||
846529|NCT01309737|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Healthcare Resource Use Events and Employment Status|The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use, and the second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work. Percentage of participants reporting healthcare resource use events and employment status, work impacted events due to psoriasis, and absence or sick leave for work due to psoriasis at Week 16 are reported. Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team's decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint.|Week 16|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. 'n' signifies participants who were evaluable (answered respective question for this measure) for specified parameter for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
846530|NCT01309737|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Impact of Psoriasis on Work|"The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work. Participants (currently employed [Emp]) answered (Yes/No [Y/N]): Were you absent or on sick leave from work due to psoriasis today?, and participants (unemployed [UEmp]) answered (Yes/No): Are you unemployed due to your psoriasis? Baseline is the latest pre-dose measurement. Week 16 includes all reported log up to Week 16 (excluding Baseline). Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team's decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint."|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||participants|||Number
846531|NCT01309737|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Interaction With Healthcare Professional|The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use (interactions with healthcare providers such as general practitioners, Dermatologist and Rheumatologist. Baseline is the latest pre-dose measurement. Week 16 includes all reported log data to Week 16 (excluding Baseline). Participants may have response in more than 1 category. Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team's decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from a site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. 'n' signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||events|||Number
846532|NCT01309737|Secondary|Euro Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) - Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 millimeter (mm) (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.|Baseline,Week 16, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
846533|NCT01309737|Secondary|Euro Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility Score|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state."|Baseline, Week 16, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846534|NCT01309737|Secondary|Joint Pain Assessment (JPA) Score|"The JPA assesses severity of joint pain. The JPA is a horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to select the number that best describes any joint pain that participant may have experienced over the past 24 hours with response options ranging from 0-no joint pain to 10-worst possible joint pain."|Baseline, Week 8,16, 28, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846535|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Patient Satisfaction With Study Medication (PSSM) Score Response|"The PSSM is a single, 7 point item that evaluates overall participant satisfaction with the study treatment. Response options range from very dissatisfied to very satisfied with the study treatment."|Week 16, 28, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||percentage of Participants|||Number
846715|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of N. Meningitidis Serogroup Y at Different Time Points After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|Percentages of subjects with carriage of N. meningitidis serogroup Y in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of a single dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846537|NCT01309737|Secondary|Work Limitation Questionnaire (WLQ) Index Score|WLQ: participant-reported 25-item scale to evaluate degree to which health problems interfere with an ability to perform job roles along 4 dimensions: Time Management scale (5-items); Physical Demands scale (6-item); Mental-Interpersonal Demands Scale (9-items); Output Demands Scale (5-items). All the scales ranged from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time). The WLQ Index score is the weighted sum of the scores from the 4 WLQ scales (total score: 0 [no loss] to 100 [complete loss of work]).|Baseline, Week 8, 16, 28, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846538|NCT01309737|Secondary|Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Score|HADS: 14-item questionnaire that screens for the presence of anxiety and depression symptoms. There are 7 items comprising the anxiety subscale and 7 items comprising the depression subscale. Each item has response options ranging from 0 (no presence of anxiety or depression) to 3 (severe feeling of anxiety or depression). Total HADS score ranges from 0 to 21 for each subscale; higher score indicates greater severity of anxiety and depression symptoms.|Baseline, Week 8, 16, 28, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846539|NCT01309737|Secondary|36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Version 2, Acute (SF-36)|36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well-being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. These 8 aspects are summarized as physical and mental health summary scores. The score range for the physical and mental health scores is 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning).|Baseline, Week 16, 28, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846540|NCT01309737|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI item response options are rated by the participant from 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies the unique participants in the longitudinal model.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846541|NCT01309737|Secondary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score|The DLQI is a general dermatology questionnaire that consists of 10 items that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI item response options are rated by the participant from 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8,12,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846542|NCT01309737|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Itch Severity Item (ISI) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|"ISI assessed severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis. ISI is a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms No itching (0) and Worst possible itching (10) at the ends."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8,12,16, 20, 28 , 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies the unique participants in the longitudinal model."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846543|NCT01309737|Secondary|Itch Severity Item (ISI) Score|"ISI assessed severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis. ISI is a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms No itching (0) and Worst possible itching (10) at the ends for post baseline time points. Baseline ISI is average of scores on 7 days prior to start of study treatment."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8,12,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846550|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score of at Least 125% of Baseline PASI Score|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. Basic characteristics of psoriatic lesions: erythema, induration, and scaling (PASI components) are scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]) according to a 5-point scale: 0 (no involvement); 1 (slight); 2 (moderate); 3 (marked); 4 (very marked)."|Week 2, 4, 8,12,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846544|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Nail Psoriasis Severity Index 100 (NAPSI 100) Response|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis. NAPSI 100 response was defined as at least a 100% reduction in NAPSI relative to Baseline. Percentage of participants with NAPSI 100 response is reported. N(number of participants analyzed) signifies participants (with baseline nail psoriasis) who were evaluable for this measure.|Week 8,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846545|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Nail Psoriasis Severity Index 75 (NAPSI 75) Response|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis. NAPSI 75 response was defined as at least a 75% reduction in NAPSI relative to Baseline. Percentage of participants with NAPSI 75 response is reported. N(number of participants analyzed) signifies participants (with baseline nail psoriasis) who were evaluable for this measure.|Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846546|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score at Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants with baseline nail psoriasis and who were unique in longitudinal model.|Baseline,Week 8,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues."||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846547|NCT01309737|Secondary|Number of Affected Nails|Nail psoriasis is evaluated by the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Total number of psoriasis affected nails (presence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix / nail bed) were assessed and reported. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants (with baseline nail psoriasis) who were evaluable for this measure.|Baseline, Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP non-compliance. 'n' signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm."||nails||Standard Deviation|Mean
846548|NCT01309737|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score at Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis. 'n' signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm.|Baseline,Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP non-compliance. N(number of participants analyzed) signifies participants (with baseline nail psoriasis) who were evaluable for this measure."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846549|NCT01309737|Secondary|Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis.'n' signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm.|Baseline, Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP non-compliance. N(number of participants analyzed) signifies participants (with baseline nail psoriasis) who were evaluable for this measure."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846825|NCT01106534|Secondary|ST for ITT Population||12 through 30 months|Participants enrolled in the study will be followed by Abbott Vascular but their data will not be independently analyzed; they will only be analyzed as part of the DAPT study (NCT00977938) which is sufficiently powered for the study outcomes.|||||
846551|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 (PASI 90) Response|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 90 response was defined as at least a 90% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. Percentage of participants with PASI 90 response is reported."|Week 2, 4, 8,12,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846552|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 50 (PASI 50) Response|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of body surface area (BSA) affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 50 response was defined as at least a 50% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. Percentage of participants with PASI 50 response is reported."|Week 2, 4, 8,12,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846553|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Body Surface Area (BSA) With Psoriasis at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. Body regions are assigned specific number of handprints with percentage [Head and neck = 10% (10 handprints), upper extremities = 20% (20 handprints), Trunk (including axillae and groin) = 30% (30 handprints), lower extremities (including buttocks) = 40% (40 handprints)]. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis. The total BSA affected was the summation of individual regions affected.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'N'(number of participants analyzed) signifies the unique participants in the longitudinal model."||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846554|NCT01309737|Secondary|Total Body Surface Area (BSA) With Psoriasis|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. Body regions are assigned specific number of handprints with percentage [Head and neck = 10% (10 handprints), upper extremities = 20% (20 handprints), Trunk (including axillae and groin) = 30% (30 handprints), lower extremities (including buttocks) = 40% (40 handprints)]. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis. The total BSA affected was the summation of individual regions affected.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||percentage of BSA||Standard Deviation|Mean
846555|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies the unique participants in the longitudinal model."||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846556|NCT01309737|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Component Scores at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. Basic characteristics of psoriatic lesions: erythema, induration, and scaling (PASI components) are scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]) according to a 5-point scale: 0 (no involvement); 1 (slight); 2 (moderate); 3 (marked); 4 (very marked). PASI component score range from 0 to 4 where higher scores indicate greater severity of psoriatic lesions."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8,12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846826|NCT01106534|Secondary|MACE for ITT Population||12 through 30 months|Participants enrolled in the study will be followed by Abbott Vascular but their data will not be independently analyzed; they will only be analyzed as part of the DAPT study (NCT00977938) which is sufficiently powered for the study outcomes.|||||
846557|NCT01309737|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Component Scores|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. Basic characteristics of psoriatic lesions: erythema, induration, and scaling (PASI components) are scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]) according to a 5-point scale: 0 (no involvement); 1 (slight); 2 (moderate); 3 (marked); 4 (very marked). PASI component score range from 0 to 4 and where higher scores indicate greater severity of psoriatic lesions."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues.Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846558|NCT01309737|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8,12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. N (number of participants analyzed) signifies the unique participants in the longitudinal model."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846559|NCT01309737|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8,12,16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846560|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 75 response was defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. Percentage of participants with PASI 75 response is reported."|Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846561|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). Percentage of participants with each PGA score is reported.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues.Here 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively."||percentage of participants|||Number
846562|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score of ‘Clear’ or ‘Almost Clear’|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|"FAS. Analysis population for Placebo, CP-690,550 groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846601|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Patient Satisfaction With Study Medication (PSSM) Score Response|"The PSSM is a single, 7 point item that evaluates overall participant satisfaction with the study treatment. Response options range from very dissatisfied to very satisfied with the study treatment."|Week 16, 28, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
846563|NCT01309737|Secondary|Time to Achieve Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 50 (PASI 50) Response|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 50 response was defined as at least 50% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. The median time to event was estimated based on the probability of event-rate based on life table estimates (not the observed rate as in outcome measure 26). Median time to event is not estimable if the estimated probability of response by Week 16 is less than 50%."|Baseline up to Week 16|FAS participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'N' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846564|NCT01309737|Secondary|Time to Achieve Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 75 response was defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. The median time to event was estimated based on the probability of event-rate based on life table estimates (not the observed rate as in outcome measure 2). Median time to event is not estimable if the estimated probability of response by Week 16 is less than 50%."|Baseline up to Week 16|FAS participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'N' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846565|NCT01309737|Secondary|Time to Achieve a Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score of ‘Clear’ or ‘Almost Clear’|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). Median time to achieve a PGA response up to week 16 is reported. The median time to event was estimated based on the probability of event-rate based on life table estimates (not the observed rate as in outcome measure 1). Median time to event is not estimable if the estimated probability of response by Week 16 is less than 50%.|Baseline up to Week 16|FAS participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846566|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percent Probability of Participants Maintaining Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 (PASI 90) Response at Week 52|The PASI quantifies severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 90 response = at least 90% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. Maintenance of PASI 90 response at Week 52 among participants achieving PASI 90 response at Week 16 is reported. Percent probability and 95% CI were estimated based on the product limit estimator in survival analyses. Event is loss of response. Probability of maintaining response is (1-probability of loss of response).|Week 52|FAS participants who had PASI 90 response at Week 16. Data was not analyzed for participants initially randomized to placebo arm as they were re-randomized to active treatment group at Week 16 and thus maintaining response at Week 52 was not relevant. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) = participants with non-missing post-baseline response data.||percent probability of response||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846567|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percent Probability of Participants Maintaining Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response at Week 52|The PASI quantifies severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 75 response = at least 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. Maintenance of PASI 75 response at Week 52 among participants achieving PASI 75 response at Week 16 is reported. Percent probability and 95% CI were estimated based on the product limit estimator in survival analyses. Event is loss of response. Probability of maintaining response is (1-probability of loss of response).|Week 52|FAS participants who had PASI 75 response at Week 16. Data was not analyzed for participants initially randomized to placebo arm as they were re-randomized to active treatment group at Week 16 and thus maintaining response at Week 52 was not relevant. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) = participants with non-missing post-baseline response data.||percent probability of response||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846716|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of N. Meningitidis Genogroup Y at Different Time Points After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|Percentages of subjects with carriage of N. meningitidis genogroup Y in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of a single dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846568|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percent Probability of Participants Maintaining Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score of ‘Clear’ or ‘Almost Clear’ at Week 52|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). Maintenance of PGA response at Week 52 among participants achieving PGA response at Week 16 is reported. Percent probability and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated based on the product limit estimator in survival analyses. Event is loss of response. Probability of maintaining response is (1-probability of loss of response).|Week 52|FAS participants who had PGA response at Week 16. Data was not analyzed for participants initially randomized to placebo arm as they were re-randomized to active treatment group at Week 16 and thus maintaining response at Week 52 was not relevant. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) = participants with non-missing post-baseline response data.||percent probability of response||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846569|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) at Week 16|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included participants who were randomized to study, received at least 1 dose investigational drug. Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) were participants who were evaluable (had nail psoriasis at Baseline and had at least one measurement during follow up) for this measure.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846570|NCT01309737|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response at Week 16|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of body surface area (BSA) affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 75 response was defined as at least a 75 percent (%) reduction in PASI relative to Baseline."|Week 16|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
846571|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response at Week 4|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 75 response was defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline."|Week 4|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
846572|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score of ‘Clear’ or ‘Almost Clear’ at Week 4|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Week 4|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
846573|NCT01309737|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Total Score at Week 4 and 16|The DLQI is a 10-item general dermatology questionnaire that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI item response options are rated by the participant from 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Baseline, Week 4,16|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846602|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) Scale Response|The PtGA asks the participant to evaluate the overall cutaneous disease at that point in time on a single item, 5-point scale (0=clear [no psoriasis]; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; 4=severe).|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
846574|NCT01309737|Secondary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Total Score|The DLQI is a 10-item general dermatology questionnaire that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI item response options are rated by the participant from 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Baseline|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846575|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 (PASI 90) Response at Week 16|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 90 response was defined as at least a 90% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline."|Week 16|FAS included participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP compliance issues. NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
846576|NCT01309737|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Body Surface Area (BSA) With Psoriasis at Week 16|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. Body regions are assigned specific number of handprints with percentage [Head and neck = 10% (10 handprints), upper extremities = 20% (20 handprints), Trunk (including axillae and groin) = 30% (30 handprints), lower extremities (including buttocks) = 40% (40 handprints)]. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis. The total BSA affected was the summation of individual regions affected.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to GCP non-compliance. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846577|NCT01309737|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score of ‘Clear’ or ‘Almost Clear’ at Week 16|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS): participants who were randomized to study and received at least 1 dose investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Participants from 1 site were excluded due to good clinical practices(GCP) compliance issues. Non-Responder Imputation (NRI) method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
846578|NCT01276509|Secondary|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Total PF-00547659 - Apparent Clearance (CL/F)|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of total PF-00547659 was characterized using a population PK approach. PK parameters including but not limited to AUC, CL and half life were estimated using data pooled from both typical and additional PK groups. CL/F is apparent clearance.|Day 1, 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, 84, 112, 140, 168, 196, 224 and 252|All participants who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and had data for at least 1 PK concentration were included in the PK concentration analysis.||mL/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
846579|NCT01276509|Secondary|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Total PF-00547659 - Terminal Half Life (Thalf)|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of total PF-00547659 was characterized using a population PK approach. PK parameters including but not limited to AUC, CL and half life were estimated using data pooled from both typical and additional PK groups. Thalf is terminal half life.|Day 1, 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, 84, 112, 140, 168, 196, 224 and 252|All participants who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and had data for at least 1 PK concentration were included in the PK concentration analysis.||Day||Standard Deviation|Mean
846580|NCT01276509|Secondary|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Total PF-00547659 - Time for Cmax (Tmax)|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of total PF-00547659 was characterized using a population PK approach. PK parameters including but not limited to AUC, CL and half life were estimated using data pooled from both typical and additional PK groups. Tmax is time for Cmax.|Day 1, 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, 84, 112, 140, 168, 196, 224 and 252|All participants who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and had data for at least 1 PK concentration were included in the PK concentration analysis.||Hours||Full Range|Median
846581|NCT01276509|Secondary|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Total PF-00547659 - Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax)|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of total PF-00547659 was characterized using a population PK approach. PK parameters including but not limited to AUC, CL and half life were estimated using data pooled from both typical and additional PK groups. Cmax is maximum observed concentration.|Day 1, 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, 84, 112, 140, 168, 196, 224 and 252|All participants who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and had data for at least 1 PK concentration were included in the PK concentration analysis.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
846582|NCT01276509|Secondary|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Total PF-00547659 - Area Under the Concentration Time Profile From Time Zero to Time Tau (AUCtau)|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of total PF-00547659 was characterized using a population PK approach. PK parameters including but not limited to AUC, CL and half life were estimated using data pooled from both typical and additional PK groups. AUCtau is area under the concentration time profile from time zero to time tau, the dosing interval, where tau = 672 hours (4 weeks)|Day 1, 14, and 28|All participants who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and had data for at least 1 PK concentration were included in the PK concentration analysis.||µg•hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
846583|NCT01276509|Secondary|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Total PF-00547659 - Area Under the Concentration Time Profile From Time Zero Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUCinf)|The Pharmacokinetics (PK) of total PF-00547659 was characterized using a population PK approach. PK parameters including but not limited to area under the concentration-time profile (AUC), clearance (CL) and half life were estimated using data pooled from both typical and additional PK groups. AUCinf is area under the concentration time profile from time zero extrapolated to infinite time.|Day 1, 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, 84, 112, 140, 168, 196, 224 and 252|All participants who received at least 1 dose of investigational product and had data for at least 1 PK concentration were included in the PK concentration analysis.||µg•hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
846584|NCT01276509|Secondary|Immunogenicity Assessment of Anti-drug Antibodies (ADAs)|Confirmed cumulative incidence of anti-drug antibodies development to PF-00547659|Day 1, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 20, Week 28, Week 36|The safety analysis set included all participants who receive at least 1 dose of PF-00547659. Participants in placebo arm were not included in this analysis.||events|||Number
846585|NCT01276509|Secondary|Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) -100 Response Rates Over Timer|Percentage of participants with Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI)-100 response were reported.|Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|The full analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Percentage of Participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
846586|NCT01276509|Secondary|Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI)-70 Response Rates Over Time|Percentage of participants with Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI)-70 response were reported.|Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|The full analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Percentage of Participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
846587|NCT01276509|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Remission|Percentage of participants with a CDAI remission (defined as a CDAI reduction to <150 points).|Weeks 8 and week 12|The full analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
846588|NCT01276509|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs) - PF-00547659 Dose Levels Versus Placebo|Number of adverse events (all causalities and treatment related) was reported between the investigational product groups and the placebo group.|Week 0-12|The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||events|||Number
846589|NCT01276509|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability of PF‑00547659 Dose Levels Versus Placebo|Number of participants with adverse events (AEs), withdrawals due to AEs and Serious AEs (SAEs) were reported.|Week 0-12|The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||Number of participants|||Number
846590|NCT01276509|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) 70 Response Rate|Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a number which consists of information collected from a 7-day diary from the participants regarding symptoms. Remission is considered a score of 150 or less. Active disease is considered 200 or greater. A response to therapy is considered a decline in CDAI score of 70-points from baseline. CDAI response rate at week 8 and week 12 was measured between the investigational product group and the placebo group.|Week 8 and week 12|The full analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
846591|NCT01276639|Secondary|Family Dermatology Life Quality Index (FDLQI) Score|The FDLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that examine the impact of health-related quality of life issues associated with living with a person with a skin condition (example, emotional distress, personal relationships, reactions of other people, social life, caregiving) over the last month. The FDLQI need to be completed by a family member (for example, spouse or partner, parent) who currently lives with the participant. Each question is scored on a scale from 0 (Not at all/ Not relevant) to 3 (Very much). Total score is calculated by summing the score of each item resulting in a maximum score of '30' and a minimum score of '0'. Higher scores indicate greater impairment to quality of life.|Baseline, Week 16, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure and ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846592|NCT01276639|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Psoriasis Affecting Ability to Work|The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use, and the second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work. Baseline is the latest pre-dose measurement. Participants rate how much psoriasis affected their ability to work by reporting a number from 0 to 10, where 0 means “ability to work was not affected by psoriasis”, and 10 means “ability to work was completely affected by psoriasis”. Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team’s decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure and ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846593|NCT01276639|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Percent Absent Hours|The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use, and the second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work. Baseline is the latest pre-dose measurement. Participants reported hours scheduled to work and hours absent from work. Percent absent hours = (hours absent from work/hours scheduled to work) multiplied by 100. Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team’s decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure and ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of scheduled hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
846594|NCT01276639|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Work Hours and Absent Hours|The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use, and the second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work. Baseline is the latest pre-dose measurement. Participants reported hours scheduled to work and hours absent from work. Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team’s decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure and ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable for specified parameter for each arm, respectively.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
846595|NCT01276639|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Healthcare Resource Use Events and Employment Status|The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use, and the second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work. Percentage of participants reporting healthcare resource use events and employment status, work impacted events due to psoriasis, and absence or sick leave for work due to psoriasis at Week 16 are reported. Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team’s decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint.|Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable (answered respective question for this measure) for specified parameter for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
846596|NCT01276639|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Impact of Psoriasis on Work|"The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The second section assesses indirect costs associated with absenteeism due to psoriasis and the impact of psoriasis on productivity at work. Participants employed at the time of assessment answered (Yes/No [Y/N]): Were you absent or on sick leave from work due to psoriasis today?, and participants unemployed (UEmp) at the time of assessment answered (Yes/No): Are you unemployed due to your psoriasis? Baseline is the latest pre-dose measurement. Week 16 includes all reported log up to Week 16 (excluding Baseline). Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team’s decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint."|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||participants|||Number
846597|NCT01276639|Secondary|Psoriasis Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (Ps-HCRU) - Interaction With Healthcare Professional|The Psoriasis Health Care Resource Utilization (Ps-HCRU) questionnaire is a short questionnaire designed to assess healthcare resource use and the impact of psoriasis on work. The first section assesses direct costs associated with healthcare resource use (interactions with healthcare providers such as general practitioners, Dermatologist, Rheumatologist). Baseline is the latest pre-dose measurement. Week 16 includes all reported log data to Week 16 (excluding Baseline). Participants may have response in more than 1 category. Data was not analyzed beyond Week 16 as per study team’s decision because Week 0 - 16 period was considered sufficient to provide clear reflection of Ps-HCRU endpoint.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure and ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||events|||Number
846598|NCT01276639|Secondary|Euro Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) - Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 millimeter (mm) (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.|Baseline, Week 16, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
846599|NCT01276639|Secondary|Euro Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility Score|"EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state."|Baseline, Week 16, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846600|NCT01276639|Secondary|Joint Pain Assessment (JPA) Score|The JPA assesses severity of joint pain. The JPA is a horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to “select the number that best describes any joint pain that participant may have experienced over the past 24 hours” with response options ranging from “0-no joint pain” to “10-worst possible joint pain.”|Baseline, Week 4, 16, 28, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846603|NCT01276639|Secondary|Work Limitation Questionnaire (WLQ) Index Score|WLQ: participant-reported 25-item scale to evaluate degree to which health problems interfere with an ability to perform job roles along 4 dimensions: Time Management scale (5 items); Physical Demands scale (6 items); Mental-Interpersonal Demands Scale (9 items); Output Demands Scale (5 items). All the scales ranged from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time). The WLQ Index score is the weighted sum of the scores from the 4 WLQ scales (total score: 0 [no loss] to 100 [complete loss of work]).|Baseline, Week 4, 16, 28, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846604|NCT01276639|Secondary|Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Score|HADS: 14-item questionnaire that screens for the presence of anxiety and depression symptoms. There are 7 items comprising the anxiety subscale, and 7 items comprising the depression subscale. Each item has response option ranging from 0 (no presence of anxiety or depression) to 3 (severe feeling of anxiety or depression). Total score ranges from 0 to 21 for each subscale; higher score indicates greater severity of anxiety or depression symptoms.|Baseline, Week 4, 16, 28, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846605|NCT01276639|Secondary|36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Version 2, Acute (SF-36)|36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well-being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. These 8 aspects are summarized as physical and mental health summary scores. The score range for the physical and mental health scores is 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning).|Baseline, Week 16, 28, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846606|NCT01276639|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|The DLQI is a 10 item general dermatology questionnaire that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI item response options are rated by the participant from 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846607|NCT01276639|Secondary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score|The DLQI is a 10 item general dermatology questionnaire that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI item response options are rated by the participant from 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846608|NCT01276639|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Itch Severity Item (ISI) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|"ISI assessed severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis. ISI is a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms No itching (0) and Worst possible itching (10) at the ends."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846609|NCT01276639|Secondary|Itch Severity Item (ISI) Score|"ISI assessed severity of itch (pruritus) due to psoriasis. ISI is a single item, horizontal numeric rating scale. Participants were asked to rate your worst itching due to psoriasis over the past 24 hours on a numeric rating scale anchored by the terms No itching (0) and Worst possible itching (10) at the ends for post baseline time points. Baseline ISI is average of scores on 7 days prior to start of study treatment."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846610|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Nail Psoriasis Severity Index 100 (NAPSI 100) Response|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis. NAPSI 100 response was defined as at least a 100% reduction in NAPSI relative to Baseline. Percentage of participants with NAPSI 100 response is reported.|Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. NRI method was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846611|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Nail Psoriasis Severity Index 75 (NAPSI 75) Response|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis. NAPSI 75 response was defined as at least a 75% reduction in NAPSI relative to Baseline. Percentage of participants with NAPSI 75 response is reported.|Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. NRI method was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846612|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score at Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis.|Baseline, Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846613|NCT01276639|Secondary|Number of Affected Nails|Nail psoriasis is evaluated by the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Total number psoriasis affected nails (presence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix/nail bed) were assessed and reported.|Baseline, Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure and ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||nails||Standard Deviation|Mean
846614|NCT01276639|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score at Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis.|Baseline, Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure and ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846615|NCT01276639|Secondary|Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis.|Baseline, Week 8, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies participants evaluable for this measure and ‘n’ signifies participants evaluable at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846616|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score of at Least 125% of Baseline PASI Score|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. Percentage of participants with PASI score of at least 125% of baseline PASI score are reported."|Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846617|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 (PASI 90) Response|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 90 response was defined as at least 90% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. Percentage of participants with PASI 90 response up to Week 52 is reported."|Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. NRI method was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846618|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 50 (PASI 50) Response|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 50 response was defined as at least 50% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. Percentage of participants with PASI 50 response is reported."|Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. NRI method was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846619|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Body Surface Area (BSA) With Psoriasis at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. Body regions are assigned specific number of handprints with percentage [Head and neck = 10% (10 handprints), upper extremities = 20% (20 handprints), Trunk (including axillae and groin) = 30% (30 handprints), lower extremities (including buttocks) = 40% (40 handprints)]. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis. The total BSA affected was the summation of individual regions affected.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846620|NCT01276639|Secondary|Total Body Surface Area (BSA) With Psoriasis|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. Body regions are assigned specific number of handprints with percentage [Head and neck = 10% (10 handprints), upper extremities = 20% (20 handprints), Trunk (including axillae and groin) = 30% (30 handprints), lower extremities (including buttocks) = 40% (40 handprints)]. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis. The total BSA affected was the summation of individual regions affected.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of BSA||Standard Deviation|Mean
846621|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846622|NCT01276639|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Component Scores at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, “lesion severity” and the “percent of body surface area (BSA)” affected. Basic characteristics of psoriatic lesions: erythema, induration, and scaling (PASI components) are scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]) according to a 5-point scale: 0 (no involvement); 1 (slight); 2 (moderate); 3 (marked); 4 (very marked). PASI component score range from 0 to 4, where higher scores indicate greater severity of psoriatic lesions.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846623|NCT01276639|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Component Scores|The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, “lesion severity” and the “percent of BSA” affected. Basic characteristics of psoriatic lesions: erythema, induration, and scaling (PASI components) are scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]) according to a 5-point scale: 0 (no involvement); 1 (slight); 2 (moderate); 3 (marked); 4 (very marked). PASI component score range from 0 to 4, where higher scores indicate greater severity of psoriatic lesions.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846624|NCT01276639|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40 and 52|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846625|NCT01276639|Secondary|Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis."|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846626|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 75 response was defined as at least 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. Percentage of participants with PASI 75 response is reported."|Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. NRI method was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846627|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). Percentage of participants with each PGA score is reported.|Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS. Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. NRI method was used to impute missing values. Here ‘n’ signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at specified time point for each arm, respectively.||percentage of participants|||Number
846628|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score of ‘Clear’ or ‘Almost Clear’|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 40, 52|FAS: all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Analysis population for “Placebo, CP-690,550” groups included FAS participants who were re-randomized at Week 16 to receive CP-690,550 5 mg or 10 mg. NRI method was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846827|NCT01106534|Primary|Major Bleeding (GUSTO Classification, Severe and Moderate Bleeding Combined)||12-33 months post-stent|Participants enrolled in the study will be followed by Abbott Vascular but their data will not be independently analyzed; they will only be analyzed as part of the DAPT study (NCT00977938) which is sufficiently powered for the study outcomes.|||||
846629|NCT01276639|Secondary|Time to Achieve Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 50 (PASI 50) Response|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 50 response was defined as at least 50% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. The median time to event was estimated based on the probability of event-rate based on life table estimates (not the observed rate as in outcome measure 26). Median time to event is not estimable if the estimated probability of response by Week 16 is less than 50%."|Baseline up to Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846630|NCT01276639|Secondary|Time to Achieve Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 75 response was defined as at least 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. The median time to event was estimated based on the probability of event-rate based on life table estimates (not the observed rate as in outcome measure 2). Median time to event is not estimable if the estimated probability of response by Week 16 is less than 50%."|Baseline up to Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846631|NCT01276639|Secondary|Time to Achieve a Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score of ‘Clear’ or ‘Almost Clear’|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). Median time to achieve a PGA response up to week 16 is reported. The median time to event was estimated based on the probability of event-rate based on life table estimates (not the observed rate as in outcome measure 1). Median time to event is not estimable if the estimated probability of response by Week 16 is less than 50%.|Baseline up to Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846632|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percent Probability of Participants Maintaining Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 (PASI 90) Response at Week 52|The PASI quantifies severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 90 response = at least 90% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. Maintenance of PASI 90 response at Week 52 among participants achieving PASI 90 response at Week 16 is reported. Percent probability and 95% CI were estimated based on the product limit estimator in survival analyses. Event is loss of response. Probability of maintaining response is (1-probability of loss of response).|Week 52|FAS participants who had PASI 90 response at Week 16. Data was not analyzed for participants initially randomized to placebo arm as they were re-randomized to active treatment group at Week 16 and thus maintaining response at Week 52 was not relevant. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) = participants with non-missing post-baseline response data.||percent probability of response||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846633|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percent Probability of Participants Maintaining Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response at Week 52|The PASI quantifies severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 75 response = at least 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. Maintenance of PASI 75 response at Week 52 among participants achieving PASI 75 response at Week 16 is reported. Percent probability and 95% CI were estimated based on the product limit estimator in survival analyses. Event is loss of response. Probability of maintaining response is (1-probability of loss of response).|Week 52|FAS participants who had PASI 75 response at Week 16. Data was not analyzed for participants initially randomized to placebo arm as they were re-randomized to active treatment group at Week 16 and thus maintaining response at Week 52 was not relevant. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) = participants with non-missing post-baseline response data.||percent probability of response||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846701|NCT01214850|Secondary|The hSBA Geometric Mean Titers Against N. Meningitidis Serogroup B, After rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM Vaccination Compared to Control Group.|The hSBA Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) against the three strains of N. meningitidis serogroup B, after rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM vaccination at different time points of the study as compared to the control group are reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Immunogenicity subset)||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846634|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percent Probability of Participants Maintaining Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score of ‘Clear’ or ‘Almost Clear’ at Week 52|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). Maintenance of PGA response at Week 52 among participants achieving PGA response at Week 16 is reported. Percent probability and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated based on the product limit estimator in survival analyses. Event is loss of response. Probability of maintaining response is (1-probability of loss of response).|Week 52|FAS participants who had PGA response at Week 16. Data was not analyzed for participants initially randomized to placebo arm as they were re-randomized to active treatment group at Week 16 and thus maintaining response at Week 52 was not relevant. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) = participants with non-missing post-baseline response data.||percent probability of response||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846635|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) at Week 16|The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lulunea, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable (had nail psoriasis at Baseline and had at least one measurement during follow up) for this measure.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846636|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response at Week 4|The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 75 response was defined as at least 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline.|Week 4|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
846637|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score of ‘Clear’ or ‘Almost Clear’ at Week 4|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Week 4|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
846638|NCT01276639|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Total Score at Week 4 and 16|The DLQI is a 10 item general dermatology questionnaire that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI item response options are rated by the participant from 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Week 4, 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846639|NCT01276639|Secondary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Total Score|The DLQI is a 10 item general dermatology questionnaire that assess health related quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). The DLQI item response options are rated by the participant from 0 (not at all/not relevant) to 3 (very much) with a total score range of 0 (best) to 30 (worst); higher scores indicate poor quality of life.|Baseline|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846640|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 (PASI 90) Response at Week 16|The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of BSA affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 90 response was defined as at least a 90% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline.|Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
846641|NCT01276639|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Body Surface Area (BSA) With Psoriasis at Week 16|Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was estimated by means of the handprint method, where the full palmar hand of the participant (fully extended palm, fingers and thumb together) represented approximately 1% of the total BSA. Body regions are assigned specific number of handprints with percentage [Head and neck = 10% (10 handprints), upper extremities = 20% (20 handprints), Trunk (including axillae and groin) = 30% (30 handprints), lower extremities (including buttocks) = 40% (40 handprints)]. The number of handprints of psoriatic skin in a body region was used to determine the extent (%) to which a body region was involved with psoriasis. The total BSA affected was the summation of individual regions affected.|Baseline, Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846642|NCT01276639|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) Response at Week 16|"The PASI quantifies the severity of a participant's psoriasis based on both, lesion severity and the percent of body surface area (BSA) affected. PASI is a composite scoring by the investigator of degree of erythema, induration, and scaling (each scored separately) for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk [including axillae and groin], and lower limbs [including buttocks]), with adjustment for the percent of BSA involved for each body region and for the proportion of the body region to the whole body. The PASI score can vary in increments of 0.1 and range from 0.0 to 72.0, with higher scores representing greater severity of psoriasis. PASI 75 response was defined as at least a 75 percent (%) reduction in PASI relative to Baseline."|Week 16|FAS included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). NRI method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
846643|NCT01276639|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Psoriasis Score of ‘Clear’ or ‘Almost Clear’ at Week 16|The PGA of psoriasis is scored on a 5-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, induration, and scaling across all psoriatic lesions. Average erythema, induration, and scaling are scored separately over the whole body according to a 5-point severity scale (0 [no symptom] to 4 [severe symptom]). The total score was calculated as average of the 3 severity scores and rounded to the nearest whole number score to determine the PGA score and category (0=clear; 1=almost clear; 2=mild; 3=moderate; and 4=severe). PGA response was defined as 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all participants who were randomized to the study and received at least 1 dose of the randomized investigational drug (CP-690,550 or placebo). Non-Responder Imputation (NRI) method (participants with missing values considered as non-responders) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
846681|NCT01257542|Secondary|Participants' Global Assessment of Cough: Relief From Cough|Participant global assessment of cough with the assistance of parent or legal guardian was scored on a 5-point categorical scale based on response to the question “From when you woke up this morning until now, how much better is your cough?” where 0 = not at all better, 1 = a tiny bit better, 2 = a little better, 3 = better and 4 = a lot better.|Within 5 minutes after Hour 6|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication, provided baseline efficacy data and any post baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846682|NCT01257542|Secondary|Participants' Global Assessment of Cough: Cough Severity|"Participant global assessment of cough with the assistance of parent or legal guardian was scored on a 5-point categorical scale based on response to the question  How much have you coughed in the past 6 hours?” where 0 = not at all, 1 = a tiny bit, 2 = a little, 3 = some and 4 = a lot."|Within 5 minutes after Hour 6|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication, provided baseline efficacy data and any post baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846683|NCT01257542|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Numerical Cough Severity Scale at Hours 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|Numerical cough severity score was assessed on an 11-point categorical rating scale in accordance to the question “How much have you coughed in the last hour?”, wherein 0 = did not cough at all and 10 = cough a lot. The change from baseline was derived by subtracting the post baseline value from the baseline value and ranged from -10 to 10; higher score indicated a better improvement.|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication, provided baseline efficacy data and any post baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846684|NCT01257542|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Perceived Numerical Cough Severity Scale for 6 Hour Post-Dose Period|Perceived numerical cough severity score was assessed on an 11-point categorical rating scale in accordance to the question “How much have you coughed in the last hour?”, where 0 = did not cough at all and 10 = cough a lot. The change from baseline for the 6-hour post-dosing period was calculated as the average of change from baseline (i.e. baseline value minus the post baseline value) measurements of Hour 1 to Hour 6, thus the change from baseline values ranged from -10 to 10; higher score indicated a better improvement.|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hour post-dose|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication, provided baseline efficacy data and any post baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846685|NCT01257542|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Verbal Cough Severity Scale at Hours 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|Verbal cough severity score was assessed on a 5-point categorical rating scale in accordance to the question “How much have you coughed in the last hour?”, where 0 = not at all, 1 = a tiny bit, 2 = a little, 3 = some and 4 = a lot. The change from baseline values were derived by subtracting each post baseline value from the baseline value, and ranged from -4 to 4; higher score indicated a better improvement.|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication, provided baseline efficacy data and any post baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846686|NCT01257542|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Perceived Verbal Cough Severity Scale for 6 Hour Post-Dose Period|Perceived verbal cough severity score was assessed on a 5-point categorical rating scale in accordance to the question “How much have you coughed in the last hour?”, where 0 = not at all, 1 = a tiny bit, 2 = a little, 3 = some and 4 = a lot. The change from baseline over the 6-hour post-dosing period calculated as the average of change from baseline [that is (i.e.) baseline value minus the post baseline value] measurements of Hour 1 to Hour 6, thus the change from baseline ranged from -4 to 4; higher score indicated a better improvement.|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours post-dose|ITT population included all randomized participants who received study medication, provided baseline efficacy data and any post baseline assessment.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846687|NCT01257542|Primary|Total Cough Count|Total cough count was done by trained assessors using continuous digital video and audio recordings.|Up to 6 hours post-dose|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who received study medication, provided baseline efficacy data and any post baseline assessment.||Cough counts||Standard Deviation|Mean
846688|NCT01232868|Secondary|Number of Participants With Specific B Cell Responses That Correlate With the Innate Immune Signatures|The secondary outcomes will identify the number of participants with a positive B cell response to the flu shot particulary looking for antibody responses, presence of plasmablasts, antibody repertoire.|2 years|||participants|||Number
846689|NCT01232868|Primary|Efficacy, Measured by the Number of Subjects With a Change in Innate Immune Signatures|The number of subjects with a change in innate immunity signatures correlating with the level of antibodies was recorded. The innate immune signatures were assessed by Fluorescence Activated Cell Sorting (FACS)/Luminex assays. The levels of antibodies to the influenza virus prior to TIV (trivalent influenza vaccine) administration and on Day 180 after receiving TIV was assessed and the number of subjects who exhibited an increase in the antibodies and, therefore, a change in their innate immune signatures, was recorded.|Day 0 (prior to TIV administration), Day 180 (from the time of of TIV administration)|||participants|||Number
846690|NCT01228734|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Curative Surgery of Liver Metastases|The number of subjects who underwent liver metastatic surgery after start of treatment and the outcome of surgery with respect to residual tumor after surgery (R0, R1, R2, not evaluable) were summarized. In case of resection of more than one metastasis, the worst outcome of surgery defined the overall status of a subject. R0 = No residual tumor after resection (all lesions resected completely); R1 = Metastases not resected completely with microscopic residual lesions; and R2 = Metastases not resected completely with macroscopic residual lesions.|Baseline up to 209 weeks|"MITT population included all subjects with RAS wild-type tumor status who were randomized to study treatment and who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. Subjects were analyzed as randomized. Here Number Analyzed signifies those subjects who were evaluable for the specified categories."||subjects|||Number
846714|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With New Acquisition of Pharyngeal Carriage of All ST Types of N. Meningitidis Genogroup B at Different Time Points Following rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|The percentages of subjects with newly acquired pharyngeal carriage of all ST types of N. meningitidis genogroup B in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846691|NCT01228734|Secondary|Time to Treatment Failure (TTF)|TTF was defined as time from randomization to date of the first occurrence of radiologically confirmed PD as determined by IRC, Clinical PD according to the Investigator’s assessment (if radiological confirmation of PD by IRC was unavailable), discontinuation of treatment due to progression or adverse event, start of new anticancer therapy, withdrawal of consent, or death within 90 days of last tumor assessment or randomization. Subjects without event were censored on the date of last tumor assessment.|Baseline up to 277 weeks|MITT population included all subjects with RAS wild-type tumor status who were randomized to study treatment and who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. Subjects were analyzed as randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846692|NCT01228734|Secondary|Best Overall Response Rate (ORR)|The Best ORR was defined as the percentage of subjects having achieved complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to RECIST version 1.0 as determined by the IRC. CR: defined as disappearance of all target and all non-target lesions and no new lesions. PR: defined as at least a 30% decrease in sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters, no progression of non-target lesions and no new lesions.|Baseline up to 246 weeks|MITT population included all subjects with RAS wild-type tumor status who were randomized to study treatment and who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. Subjects were analyzed as randomized.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846693|NCT01228734|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) Time|OS was defined as the time (in months) from randomization to death. For subjects who were still alive at the analysis data cut-off date or who lost to follow-up, survival was censored at the last recorded date that the subject was known to be alive.|Baseline up to 277 weeks|MITT population included all subjects with RAS wild-type tumor status who were randomized to study treatment and who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. Subjects were analyzed as randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846694|NCT01228734|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) Time|PFS was defined as the duration (in months) from randomization until the first progressive disease (PD) observation as assessed by the Independent Review Committee (IRC) according to Response Evaluation Criteria for Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.0, or death due to any cause when death occurred within 90 days of randomization or the last tumor assessment, whichever was later. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of longest diameter (LD) of the target lesions, taking as references the smallest sum LD since the treatment started (including baseline), or appearance of one or more new lesions, and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Baseline up to 246 weeks|MITT population included all subjects with RAS wild-type tumor status who were randomized to study treatment and who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. Subjects were analyzed as randomized.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846695|NCT01214850|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local and Systemic Adverse Events After Vaccination With rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM Compared to Control Group|The safety and tolerability of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccine (Group rMenB+OMV) and one dose of MenACWY-CRM vaccine (Group MenACWY) was assessed in terms of number of subjects with solicited local and systemic adverse events and other adverse events, following vaccination and compared to that of the control group.|Day 1 through day 7 after any vaccination|Analysis was done on the Immunogenicity Subset, Safety Population i.e. all subjects in the exposed population who provided postvaccination safety data.||number of subjects|||Number
846696|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects (Who Have Received a Prior Dose of MenC Vaccine) With hSBA Titers ≥1:8 Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups C and Y After Vaccination With MenACWY-CRM in This Study Compared to Control Group.|"The percentages of subjects (who have received a prior dose of MenC vaccine) with hSBA titers ≥1:8 against N. meningitidis serogroups C and Y after receiving MenACWY-CRM vaccination in this study as compared to the control group are reported.
Analysis was not done for serogroups A and W."|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Immunogenicity subset)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846697|NCT01214850|Secondary|The hSBA Geometric Mean Titers Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups C and Y in Subjects (Who Have Received a Prior Dose of MenC Vaccine) After Vaccination With MenACWY-CRM in This Study Compared to Control Group|"The hSBA geometric mean titers against the N. meningitidis serogroups C and Y in subjects (who have received a prior dose of MenC vaccine) after MenACWY-CRM vaccination at different time points of the study as compared to the control group are reported.
Analysis was not done for serogroups A and W."|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Immunogenicity subset)||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846698|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Seroresponse Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups C and Y After Vaccination With rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM Compared to Control Group.|"The percentages of subjects with hSBA seroresponse against N. meningitidis serogroups C and Y, after rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM vaccination as compared to the control group are reported.
Seroresponse to N. meningitidis serogroups Cand Y is defined as :(1)for subjects with a pre-vaccination hSBA titer < 1:4 to a post-vaccination hSBA titer ≥ 1:8 or (2) for subjects with a pre-vaccination hSBA titer ≥ 1:4, an increase in hSBA titer of at least four times the pre-vaccination titer.
Analysis was not done for serogroups A and W."|61 days|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Immunogenicity subset)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846699|NCT01214850|Secondary|The hSBA Geometric Mean Titers Against N. Meningitidis Serogroup C and Y, After rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM Vaccination Compared to Control Group.|"The hSBA antibody titers against N. meningitidis serogroups C and Y after rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM vaccination at different time points of the study as compared to the control group, are reported as GMTs.
Serogroups A and W were not analysed."|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Immunogenicity subset)||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846700|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥1:8 Against N. Meningitidis Serogroup C and Y, After rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM Vaccination Compared to Control Group.|"The percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥1:8 against N. meningitidis serogroups C and Y, after rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM vaccination at different time points of the study as compared to the control group are reported.
As serogroup A and W strains were not detected in substantial proportion of subjects during pharyngeal carriage analysis, these serogroups were not tested."|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Immunogenicity subset)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848370|NCT00051363|Other Pre-specified|Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)||Measured at diagnostic visit (baseline) and 6 months post intervention|fMRI was dropped as a secondary outcome measure for analysis by our Core Team.|||||
846702|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With hSBA Titers ≥1:4 Against N. Meningitidis Serogroup B After rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM Vaccination Compared to Control Group|The percentages of subjects with hSBA titers ≥1:4 against the three strains of N. meningitidis B, after rMenB+OMV NZ or MenACWY-CRM vaccination at different time points of the study as compared to the control group are reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Immunogenicity subset) i.e all enrolled subjects who actually received a study vaccination, provided at least one evaluable serum sample after vaccination and whose assay result was available for at least one serogroup.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846703|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With N. Meningitidis Carriage of Serogroup Y After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination, Stratified by Pre-vaccination hSBA Titers|The prevalence of carriage of N. meningitidis serogroup Y, at different time points of the study, in subjects stratified by pre-vaccination hSBA (<8 and ≥8) titers, after administration of one dose of MenACWY-CRM vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 12 months after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846704|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With N. Meningitidis Carriage of Virulent ST of Group B, Stratified by Pre-vaccination hSBA Titer After rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|"The percentages of subjects with N. meningitidis Virulent ST of serogroup B, at different time points of the study, in subjects stratified by pre-vaccination hSBA (<4 and ≥4) titers after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.
The serum bactericidal antibodies directed against N.meningitides serogroups, are measured by Serum Bactericidal Assay using human complement (hSBA).
H44/76, 5/99 and NZ98/254 are strains in serogroup B."|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846705|NCT01214850|Secondary|The Duration of Carriage After New Acquisition N.Meningitidis Strains Following Vaccination With MenACWY Vaccine|The duration of carriage after new acquisition of N.meningitidis strains after receiving one dose of MenACWY-CRM vaccine compared to that in the control group is reported.|Any post vaccination timepoint (the date of first observation of the carriage and the date of the last observation of the carriage)|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Number of days||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
846706|NCT01214850|Secondary|The Duration of Carriage After New Acquisition N.Meningitidis Strains Following Vaccination With rMenB+OMV Vaccine|The duration of carriage after new acquisition of N.meningitidis strains after receiving two doses of rMenB+OMV vaccine compared to that in the control group is reported.|Any post vaccination timepoint (the date of first observation of the carriage and the date of the last observation of the carriage)|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Number of days||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
846707|NCT01214850|Secondary|The Duration of Carriage of Any N. Meningitidis Strain After Vaccination With MenACWY-CRM|The duration of carriage of any N meningitidis strain after receiving one dose MenACWY-CRM as compared to that in control group is reported.|Any time post vaccination (the date of first observation of the carriage and the date of the last observation of the carriage)|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Number of days||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
846708|NCT01214850|Secondary|The Duration of Any Carriage of N.Meningitidis Strains After Vaccination With rMenB+OMV|The duration of carriage of any N.meningitidis strains after receiving two doses of rMenB+OMV compared to that in the control group is reported.|Any post vaccination timepoint (the date of first observation of the carriage and the date of the last observation of the carriage)|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Number of days||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
846709|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With New Acquisition of Pharyngeal Carriage of N. Meningitidis Serogroup Y at Different Time-points After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|The percentages of subjects with newly acquired pharyngeal carriage of N.meningitidis serogroup Y at different time-points in the study after MenACWY-CRM vaccination as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846710|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With New Acquisition of Pharyngeal Carriage of N. Meningitidis Serogroups ACWY at Different Time-points After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|The percentages of subjects with newly acquired pharyngeal carriage of N.meningitidis serogroups A,C, W or Y at different time-points in the study after MenACWY-CRM vaccination as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846711|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With New Acquisition of Pharyngeal Carriage of N. Meningitidis Genogroups ABCWY at Different Time Points Following rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|The percentages of subjects with newly acquired pharyngeal carriage of N. meningitidis genogroups ABCWY in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846712|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With New Acquisition of Pharyngeal Carriage of All N. Meningitidis at Different Time Points Following rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|The percentages of subjects with newly acquired pharyngeal carriage of all N. meningitidis in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846713|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With New Acquisition of Pharyngeal Carriage of Virulent ST Types of N. Meningitidis Genogroup B at Different Time Points Following rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|The percentages of subjects with newly acquired pharyngeal carriage of virulent ST types of N. meningitidis genogroup B in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846828|NCT01106534|Primary|Incidence of ARC Definite or Probable ST||12-33 months post-stent|Participants enrolled in the study will be followed by Abbott Vascular but their data will not be independently analyzed; they will only be analyzed as part of the DAPT study (NCT00977938) which is sufficiently powered for the study outcomes.|||||
846717|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of N. Meningitidis Serogroups ACWY at Different Time Points After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|Percentages of subjects with carriage of N. meningitidis serogroups ACWY in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of a single dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846718|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subject With Carriage of N. Meningitidis Genogroups ACWY at Different Time Points After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|Percentages of subject with carriage of N. meningitidis genogroups ACWY in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of a single dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846719|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of N.Meningitidis Serogroup Y at Different Time Points After rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|Percentages of subjects with carriage of N.meningitidis serogroup Y in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846720|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of N.Meningitidis Genogroup Y at Different Time Points After rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|Percentages of subjects with carriage of N.meningitidis genogroup Y in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MIIT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846721|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of N.Meningitidis Serogroups A,C,W or Y at Different Time Points After rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|Percentages of subjects with carriage of N.meningitidis serogroups A,C,W or Y in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846722|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of N.Meningitidis ACWY Genogroups at Different Time Points After rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|Percentages of subjects with carriage of N.meningitidis ACWY genogroups in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccine as compared to the control group is reported|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846723|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of N.Meningitidis ABCWY Genogroups at Different Time Points After rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|Percentages of subjects with carriage of N.meningitidis ABCWY genogroups in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846724|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of All N.Meningitidis Strain at Different Time Points After rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|Percentage of subjects with carriage of all N.meningitidis strains combined in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846725|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of Nonvirulent ST Types of N. Meningitidis Group B at Any Time Point After rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|Percentage of subjects with carriage of nonvirulent ST types of N. meningitidis group B (genogroupable) in subjects at different time points of the study point after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846726|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of Virulent ST Types of N. Meningitidis Group B at Any Time Point After rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|Percentage of subjects with carriage of virulent ST types of N. meningitidis group B (genogroupable) in subjects at different time points of the study point after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846727|NCT01214850|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of All ST Types of N. Meningitidis B (Genogroupable) at Different Time Points Following rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|The percentage of subjects with carriage of all (virulent + non-virulent) ST types of N. meningitidis B (genogroupable) in subjects at different time points of the study after administration of two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|Up to 361 days after vaccination|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846728|NCT01214850|Primary|Percentages of Subjects With Combined Carriage of N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W and Y, One Month After MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|The percentage of subjects with combined carriage rate of N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y in subjects, one month after receiving a single dose of MenACWY-CRM conjugate vaccine as compared to the control group is reported.|31 days after MenACWY-CRM injection|Analysis was done on the MITT dataset (Pharyngeal carriage)||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846742|NCT01214837|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Serum Bactericidal Activity Using Human Complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:8 Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W and Y Following a 4-dose Schedule of Men ACWY Vaccination.|The immune response was assessed in terms of percentage of subjects with hSBA ≥ 1:8 against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y following 4 doses of Men ACWY vaccine given to infants at 2, 4, 6 and 12 months of age.|13 months of age|Analysis was done on the Toddler Per Protocol Population (PPS) - all subjects who received all doses of vaccine correctly, and provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points, and had no major protocol violation as defined prior to unblinding through 13 month timepoint.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846729|NCT01214850|Primary|Percentages of Subjects With Carriage of Virulent Sequence Types (ST) of Neisseria Meningitidis Group B, One Month After Completion of rMenB+OMV NZ Vaccination|"Percentages of subjects with carriage of virulent sequence types (ST) of Neisseria meningitidis group B, one month after completion of rMenB+OMV NZ vaccination. The carriage rate of virulent sequence types (ST) of N. meningitidis group B (genogroupable) in subjects, one month after receiving two doses of rMenB+OMV NZ, as compared to the control group, was reported.
Virulent ST types are defined as Clonal Complex multi locus sequence typing (MLST) or ST type being the same compared to history data (Clonal Complexes MLST or ST types found to be virulent and causing diseases) from the years 2006 to 2010."|61 days (31 days after receiving the second injection)|Analysis was done on the modified-intention to treat (MITT) dataset (Pharyngeal carriage), i.e subjects who actually received a study vaccination and provided at least one evaluable swab sample at baseline and after vaccination.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846730|NCT01214837|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events After Any Vaccination.||13 months of age|Analysis was done on the Unsolicited Safety Set - All subjects in the Exposed Set with unsolicited adverse event data.||Subjects|||Number
846731|NCT01214837|Secondary|Number Of Subjects Reporting Solicited Local or Systemic Adverse Events.|Safety was assessed as the number of subjects who reported solicited local or systemic adverse events between 6 hours and day 7 after administration of MenACWY with concomitant vaccines vs. concomitant vaccines alone.|Day 1 through Day 7|Analysis was done on Solicited Safety Set - All subjects in the Exposed Set with solicited adverse event data||Subjects|||Number
846732|NCT01214837|Secondary|Percentage Of Subjects Reporting at Least One Severe Systemic Solicited Adverse Event.|Safety was assessed as the percentages of subjects who reported severe solicited systemic adverse events within 30 minutes through day 7 of MenACWY administration with concomitant vaccines vs. concomitant vaccines alone.|Within 7 days|Analysis was done on the Solicited Safety Set - All subjects in the Exposed Set with solicited adverse event data||Percentage of subjects|||Number
846733|NCT01214837|Secondary|Effect of Concomitant Administration of 3 or 4 Doses of MenACWY on Immune Response to PCV-13 Antigens at 13 Months of Age.|Geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) of antibodies against PCV-13 vaccine antigens at 13 months of age following concomitant administration of a 3- or 4-dose series of MenACWY with PCV-13.|13 months of age.|Analysis was done on the Toddler PPS.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846734|NCT01214837|Secondary|Effect of Concomitant Administration of 2 or 3 Doses of MenACWY on Immune Response to PCV-13 Antigens at 7 Months of Age.|Percentage of subjects with IgG concentration ≥ 0.35 μg/mL against pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV-13) antigens at 7 Months of age following concomitant administration of 2 or 3 doses of MenACWY with PCV-13.|7 months of age.|Analysis was done on the Infant PPS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846735|NCT01214837|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With 4-fold Increase in hSBA Titers Against N Meningitis Serogroups A, C, W and Y Between 12 and 13 Months of Age.|The immune response was assessed in terms of percentage of subjects with 4-fold increase in hSBA titers between post and pre toddler dose against N meningitis serogroups A, C, W and Y, 1 month after completing a 3- or 4-dose series of MenACWY.|13 months of age|Analysis was done on the Toddler PPS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846736|NCT01214837|Secondary|GMTs at 13 Months of Age After Completion of 3- and 4-Dose Series of MenACWY.|Immune response was assessed in terms of GMTs against N meningitis serogroups A, C, W and Y at 1 month after completion of a 3- and 4- dose series of MenACWY.|13 months of age|Analysis was done on the Toddler PPS.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846737|NCT01214837|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers Following 2 and 3 Infant Doses of MenACWY.|The immune response was assessed in terms of GMTs against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y following 2 and 3 infant doses of MenACWY as measured prior to the toddler dose at 12 months of age.|12 months of age|Analysis was done on the Toddler PPS.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846738|NCT01214837|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA ≥1:8 Following 2 and 3 Infant Doses of MenACWY.|Percentage of subjects with hSBA ≥1:8 against N meningitis serogroups A, C, W and Y was assessed following 2 and 3 infant doses of MenACWY as measured prior to the toddler dose at 12 months of age.|12 months of age.|Analysis was done on the Toddler PPS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846739|NCT01214837|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers Against N Meningitis Serogroups A, C, W and Y at Baseline (2 Months of Age) and at 3, 4, 5, and 7 Months of Age.|Antibody levels were assessed in terms of geometric mean titers (GMTs) against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y at baseline (2 Months of Age) and at 3, 4, 5, and 7 Months of Age.|Baseline(2 months of age), 3 months, 4 months , 5 months and 7 months of age.|Analysis was done on the Infant PPS.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846740|NCT01214837|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA ≥1:8 Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W and Y at Baseline (2 Months of Age) and at 3, 4, 5, and 7 Months of Age.|Antibody levels were assessed in terms of percentage of subjects with hSBA ≥ 1:8 against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y at baseline (2 months of age) and at 3, 4, 5 and 7 months of age.|Baseline (2 months of age), 3 months, 4 months , 5 months and 7 months of age|Analysis was done on Infant PPS - all subjects who received all doses of vaccine correctly, and provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points, and had no major protocol violation as defined prior to unblinding, through the 7 month timepoint.||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846741|NCT01214837|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA ≥ 1:8 Against N. Meningitidis Serogroups A, C, W and Y Following 4-Dose and 3-Dose Schedule of Men ACWY Vaccination.|The immune response was assessed in terms of percentage of subjects with hSBA ≥ 1:8 against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y following 4 doses of Men ACWY vaccine given to infants at 2, 4,6 and 12 months of age and 3 doses of Men ACWY given to infants at 2, 4 and 12 months of age.|13 months of age|Analysis was done on Toddler PPS.||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847206|NCT00738972|Primary|Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Reduction With Statins in Hypertensive Patients|Left ventricular hypertrophy reduction was to be measured by echocardiography.|6 Month(s)|This study was terminated early and due to sample size it was not possible to perform further statistical analyses.|||||
846745|NCT01179191|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Greater Than or Equal to One Urine Drug Test Results Negative for Expected Opioid|Urine samples collected were screened using immunoassay techniques for the following types of drugs: opioids, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, amphetamines, ecstasy (3, 4-MDMA), cocaine, PCP and marijuana (THC). Quantitative, confirmatory urine drug testing was performed for positive results using gas chromatography or high-pressure liquid chromatography, for the following analytes: morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, fentanyl, methadone, benzodiazepines, amphetamines, cocaine, THC, PCP, and MDMA.|Baseline, Visit 3 (up to Week 6)|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA. Here, the ‘n’ is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure at the specified time point for this arm group.||Participants|||Number
846746|NCT01179191|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Urine Drug Test Results Positive for Illicit Substances|Urine samples collected were screened using immunoassay techniques for following types of drugs:opioids,barbiturates,benzodiazepines,amphetamines,ecstasy(3,4MDMA),cocaine,PCP,marijuana (THC).Quantitative, confirmatory urine drug testing performed for positive results using gas chromatography or high-pressure liquid chromatography for following analytes: morphine,oxycodone,oxymorphone,hydrocodone,hydromorphone,fentanyl,methadone,benzodiazepines,amphetamines,cocaine,THC,PCP,MDMA. Illicit substances were drugs of categories:marijuana (THC) metabolite,cocaine metabolite,PCP,amphetamine.|Baseline, Visit 3 (up to Week 6)|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA. Here, the ‘n’ is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure at the specified time point for this arm group.||Participants|||Number
846747|NCT01179191|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Urine Drug Test Results Positive for Unaccounted Opioids|Urine samples collected were screened using immunoassay techniques for the following types of drugs: opioids, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, amphetamines, ecstasy (3, 4-MDMA), cocaine, PCP and marijuana (THC). Quantitative, confirmatory urine drug testing was performed for positive results using gas chromatography or high-pressure liquid chromatography, for the following analytes: morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, fentanyl, methadone, benzodiazepines, amphetamines, cocaine, THC, PCP, and MDMA.|Visit 3 (up to Week 6)|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Participants|||Number
846748|NCT01179191|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Abnormal Urine Drug Test Results|Urine samples collected were screened using immunoassay techniques for the following types of drugs: opioids, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, amphetamines, ecstasy [3, 4-methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDMA)], cocaine, phencyclidine (PCP) and marijuana [tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)]. Quantitative, confirmatory urine drug testing was performed for positive results using gas chromatography or high-pressure liquid chromatography, for the following analytes: morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, fentanyl, methadone, benzodiazepines, amphetamines, cocaine, THC, PCP, and MDMA.|Baseline, Visit 3 (up to Week 6)|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA. Here, the ‘n’ is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure at the specified time point for this arm group.||Participants|||Number
846749|NCT01179191|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Aberrant Behaviors|Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) is a 17-item self-administered test used to monitor aberrant behavior in participants on opioid therapy. Aberrant behaviors assessed using a 5-point scale [0 = ‘never’ and 4 = ‘very often’]. Score range 0-68. Scores greater than or equal to 9 indicated the presence of aberrant behaviors.|Day 5|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA.||Participants|||Number
846750|NCT01179191|Secondary|Investigator's Level of Satisfaction With the EMBEDA Conversion Guide|The conversion assessment survey is a brief questionnaire using multiple choice options and numeric rating scale (NRS) with specified anchored responses ranging on a scale from 0-10 (0 = very dissatisfied, 5 = neutral, and 10=very satisfied) to assess the Investigator’s level of satisfaction with the EMBEDA Conversion Guide.|Week 6|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846751|NCT01179191|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) at Visit 3 (First Visit After Successful Titration)|BPI is an 11-item self-report questionnaire: consist of 4 questions that assess pain intensity (worst, least, average, relief) and 7 questions that assess impact of pain on daily functions (general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, enjoyment of life). Each question answered on a scale range:0-10 (0%-100% for relief), ‘0=No pain/no relief/no interference and 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine/complete relief/ complete interference’.Measure can be scored by item, with lower scores being indicative of less pain or pain interference.|Baseline, Visit 3 (up to Week 6)|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. The 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for the respective subscale.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846829|NCT01106534|Primary|Incidence of Composite of All Death, MI and Stroke (Defined as MACE)||12-33 months post-stent|Participants enrolled in the study will be followed by Abbott Vascular but their data will not be independently analyzed; they will only be analyzed as part of the DAPT study (NCT00977938) which is sufficiently powered for the study outcomes.|||||
859174|NCT01002742|Secondary|Overall GVHD-free Survival Post-randomization||Months 6 and 12|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859175|NCT01002742|Secondary|Incidence of Topical/Non-absorbable Therapy||Day 56|||participants|||Number
859176|NCT01002742|Secondary|Cumulative Steroid Dose|The cumulative steroid dose for each patient will be calculated by adding the doses (end of each week’s dose) for each of the first four weeks of treatment, divided by the number of days of survival during this interval. The cumulative steroid dose was calculated for all patients per treatment arm and compared.|Days 28 and 56|||mg/kg|||Number
859177|NCT01002742|Secondary|Incidence of Discontinuation of Immune Suppression Without Flare||Day 56, Day 180 and Day 360 post-treatment|No data collected|||||
846752|NCT01179191|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Rescue Medications Usage During Titration|Rescue pain medications were used for supplemental analgesia for breakthrough pain during titration phase. Morphine sulfate IR tablet (less than 20 percent of the total daily dose of EMBEDA per IR dose), ibuprofen (up to 400 milligram (mg)/dose; not to exceed 1200 mg/day), and acetaminophen (up to 1000 mg/dose, not to exceed 4000 mg/day) were used as rescue medications.|Baseline through Week 6|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
846753|NCT01179191|Secondary|Number of Titration Steps to Achieve Stable Dose Stratified by Prior Opioid Therapy|A dose was considered to be stable dose if it met all of the following criteria: dose was taken for at least 48 hours; investigator deemed the balance between an acceptable level of analgesia and/or function and tolerance of side effects had been achieved; and rescue medication use less than or equal to 2 doses per day.|Baseline through Week 6|Safety population. Participants were stratified based on prior opioid therapy. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure for each of the prior medication received.||titration steps||Standard Deviation|Mean
846754|NCT01179191|Secondary|Number of Titration Steps to Achieve Stable Dose|A dose was considered to be stable dose if it met all of the following criteria: dose was taken for at least 48 hours; investigator deemed the balance between an acceptable level of analgesia and/or function and tolerance of side effects had been achieved; and rescue medication use less than or equal to 2 doses per day.|Baseline through Week 6|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||titration steps||Standard Deviation|Mean
846755|NCT01179191|Secondary|Duration to Titrate Participants to Stable Dose Stratified by Prior Opioid Therapy|A dose was considered to be stable dose if it met all of the following criteria: dose was taken for at least 48 hours; investigator deemed the balance between an acceptable level of analgesia and/or function and tolerance of side effects had been achieved; and rescue medication use less than or equal to 2 doses per day.|Baseline through Week 6|Safety population. Participants were stratified based on prior opioid therapy. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'n' signifies those participants who were evaluated for this measure for each of the prior medication received.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
846756|NCT01179191|Secondary|Duration to Titrate Participants to Stable Dose|A dose was considered to be stable dose if it met all of the following criteria: dose was taken for at least 48 hours; investigator deemed the balance between an acceptable level of analgesia and/or function and tolerance of side effects had been achieved; and rescue medication use less than or equal to 2 doses per day.|Baseline through Week 6|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
846757|NCT01179191|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Stable Dose of EMBEDA Within 6 Weeks Titration Phase Stratified by Prior Opioid Therapy|A dose was considered to be stable dose if it met all of the following criteria: dose was taken for at least 48 hours; investigator deemed the balance between an acceptable level of analgesia and/or function and tolerance of side effects had been achieved; and rescue medication use less than or equal to 2 doses per day.|Baseline through Week 6|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA. Participants were stratified based on prior opioid therapy. The 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure for each of the prior medication received.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846758|NCT01179191|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Stable Dose of EMBEDA Within 6 Weeks Titration Phase|A dose was considered to be stable dose if it met all of the following criteria: dose was taken for at least 48 hours; investigator deemed the balance between an acceptable level of analgesia and/or function and tolerance of side effects had been achieved; and rescue medication use less than or equal to 2 doses per day.|Baseline through Week 6|Safety population included all participants who completed the first study visit and filled a prescription for EMBEDA.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846759|NCT01167452|Primary|Elimination Rate Constants for Sulfamethoxazole and Trimethoprim||24 hours|||hr-1||Full Range|Median
846760|NCT01165840|Primary|Serum Clearance|Serum clearance of dapsone|72 hours|||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
846778|NCT01152996|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) Total Score|The change between HAM-A score at each assessed visit and HAM-A score at baseline. HAM-A is a 14 item rating scale to quantify anxiety symptomatology severity (i.e., anxious mood, tension, fear, insomnia, etc.) rated on a 5-point scale from 0 (not present) to 4 (severe) with a total score range from 0 to 56. Higher scores indicate greater severity of symptoms.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 24, and 52|Safety set, observed cases (OC)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846909|NCT00996307|Secondary|Antibody Response Based on Baseline Seropositivity|Subgroup analysis based on Subjects with a pre-vaccination HI antibody titer < 1:10 and prevaccination HI antibody titer ≥ 1:10|Day 22 (three weeks after first vaccination); day 43 (three weeks after second vaccination)|The analysis was done on the subgroup of the per-protocol set (PPS).||Percentages of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846819|NCT01112059|Primary|Matrix Metalloprotease-9 (MMP-9) Protein Levels in Sputum|Mean sputum matrix metalloprotease-9 (MMP-9) levels measured at the end of therapy|8 days past baseline|||ng/mg total protein||Standard Deviation|Mean
846820|NCT01112059|Primary|Number of Adverse Events|Examines tolerability and safety with focus on adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs)|1 month from enrollment|||adverse events|||Number
846773|NCT01152996|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SDS Family Life/Home Responsibilities Subscale|The change between the Sheehan Disability family life/home responsibilities subscale score at each assessed visit and family life/home responsibilities subscale score collected at baseline. The SDS is a 3 item rating scale to assess functional impairment (panic, anxiety, phobic and depressive symptoms) over three inter-related domains (work/school, social life, and family life/home responsibilities) rated on an 11 point scale from 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely). Higher scores indicate greater severity of impairment.|Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, and 52|Safety set, observed cases (OC)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846774|NCT01152996|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SDS Social Life Subscale|The change between the Sheehan Disability social life subscale score at each assessed visit and social life subscale score collected at baseline. The SDS is a 3 item rating scale to assess functional impairment (panic, anxiety, phobic and depressive symptoms) over three inter-related domains (work/school, social life, and family life/home responsibilities) rated on an 11 point scale from 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely). Higher scores indicate greater severity of impairment.|Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, and 52|Safety set, observed cases (OC)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846775|NCT01152996|Secondary|Change From Baseline in SDS Work/School Subscale|The change between the Sheehan Disability work/school subscale score at each assessed visit and work/school subscale score collected at baseline. The SDS is a 3 item rating scale to assess functional impairment (panic, anxiety, phobic and depressive symptoms) over three inter-related domains (work/school, social life, and family life/home responsibilities) rated on an 11 point scale from 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely). Higher scores indicate greater severity of impairment.|Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, and 52|Safety set, observed cases (OC)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846776|NCT01152996|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Total Score|The change between the SDS total score at each assessed visit and the total score collected at baseline. The SDS is a 3 item rating scale to assess functional impairment (panic, anxiety, phobic and depressive symptoms) over three inter-related domains (work/school, social life, and family life/home responsibilities) rated on an 11 point scale from 0 (not at all) to 10 (extremely) with a total score range from 0 to 30. Higher scores indicate greater severity of impairment.|Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, and 52|Safety set, observed cases (OC)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846777|NCT01152996|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity of Illness (CGI-S)|"The change between CGI-S score at each assessed visit and CGI-S score at baseline. The CGI-S assesses the clinician’s impression of the subject’s current state of mental illness and consists of one question for the investigator: Considering your total clinical experience with this particular population, how mentally ill is the patient at this time? which is rated on a seven-point scale (1=normal, not ill at all; 2=borderline mentally ill; 3=mildly ill; 4=moderately ill; 5=markedly ill; 6=severely ill; 7=extremely ill). Higher scores indicate greater severity of illness."|Baseline and Weeks 4, 24, and 52|Safety set, observed cases (OC)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846821|NCT01106534|Secondary|Major Bleeding for Treatment Population||12 through 30 months and 12 through 33 months|Participants enrolled in the study will be followed by Abbott Vascular but their data will not be independently analyzed; they will only be analyzed as part of the DAPT study (NCT00977938) which is sufficiently powered for the study outcomes.|||||
846779|NCT01152996|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score|The change between MADRS total score at each assessed visit and MADRS score at baseline. MADRS is a 10-item clinician rated scale to measure overall severity of depressive symptoms (i.e., apparent sadness, reported sadness, inner tension, etc.) rated on a 7-point Likert scale from 0 (normal) to 6 (most abnormal) with a total score range from 0 to 60. Higher scores indicate greater severity of symptoms.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 36, 44, and 52|Safety set, observed cases (OC)||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846780|NCT01152996|Primary|Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Leading to Study Discontinuation|Treatment-emergent adverse events are adverse events with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug and within 30 days after receiving the last dose of study drug. A TEAE may also be a pre-treatment adverse event or a concurrent medical condition diagnosed prior to the date of first dose of study drug that increases in severity after the start of dosing.|Over the 52 week period|Safety set||participants|||Number
846781|NCT01152996|Primary|Number of Participants With Serious Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events|Serious treatment-emergent adverse events (serious-TEAE) are adverse events with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug and within 30 days after receiving the last dose of study drug. A serious-TEAE may also be a pretreatment adverse event or a concurrent medical condition diagnosed prior to the date of first dose of study drug that increases in severity after the start of dosing. Serious Adverse Events include adverse events that result in death, require either inpatient hospitalization or the prolongation of hospitalization, are life-threatening, result in a persistent or significant disability/incapacity or result in a congenital anomaly/birth defect. Other important medical events, based upon appropriate medical judgment, may also be considered serious adverse events if a trial participant's health is at risk and intervention is required to prevent an outcome mentioned.|Over the 52 week period|Safety set||participants|||Number
846782|NCT01152996|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events at a Frequency Threshold of ≥5%|Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) are adverse events with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug and within 30 days after receiving the last dose of study drug. A TEAE may also be a pretreatment adverse event or a concurrent medical condition diagnosed prior to the date of first dose of study drug that increases in severity after the start of dosing.|Over the 52 week period|Safety set||participants|||Number
846783|NCT01144416|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Cancelled the Cycle Due to a (Serious) Adverse Event|The number of participants who started stimulation but did not undergo embryo transfer due to (S)AEs will be compared between the treatment groups.|Up to time of embryo transfer (maximum of 24 days after start of study drug)|All-Subjects-Treated (AST) Group, defined as all participants who received 1 or more dose(s) of SCH 900962 or recFSH. Participants were grouped according to the active treatment they actually received.||participants|||Number
846784|NCT01144416|Secondary|Number of Participants With Moderate or Severe Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS)|"Grade II (moderate OHSS) is characterized by distinct ovarian cysts (ovary size 8-10 cm), accompanied by abdominal pain and tension, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea.
Grade III (severe OHSS) is characterized by enlarged cystic ovaries (ovary size >10 cm), accompanied by ascites and occasionally hydrothorax. Abdominal tension and pain may be severe. Pronounced hydrothorax together with an abdominal cavity filled with cysts and fluid elevating the diaphragm, may cause severe breathing difficulties. Large quantities of fluid inside the cysts and in the peritoneal and pleural cavities cause hemoconcentration and increased blood viscosity. In rare cases, the syndrome may further be complicated by the occurrence of thromboembolic phenomena."|Up to approximately 1 month after oocyte pick-up|All-Subjects-Treated (AST) Group, defined as all participants who received 1 or more dose(s) of SCH 900962 or recFSH. Participants were grouped according to the active treatment they actually received.||participants|||Number
846785|NCT01144416|Secondary|Live Birth Rate|The live-birth rate is the percentage of participants with at least 1 live born infant after an ongoing pregnancy in the controlled ovarian stimulation (COS)treatment cycle relative to the number of participants treated.|Approximately nine months after embryo transfer|Intent-To-Treat Group: all randomized participants who received 1 or more dose(s) of SCH 900962 or recFSH. Participants were grouped according to the treatment they were randomized to.||Percentage of participants|||Number
846786|NCT01144416|Secondary|Number of Oocytes Retrieved Per Attempt|The number of cumulus oocyte-complexes retrieved was summarized per treatment group and per attempt (= per started COS cycle).|Maximally 21 days after the start of study treatment.|Intent-To-Treat (ITT) Group, defined as all randomized participants who received one or more dose(s) of SCH 900962 or recFSH. Participants were grouped according to the treatment they were randomized to. The number of oocytes retrieved were set to zero for participants who did not have oocyte retrieval.||Number of oocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
846787|NCT01144416|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Vital Pregnancy|Vital pregnancy was defined as the presence of at least 1 fetus with heart activity at least 35 days (≥5 weeks) after embryo transfer in the controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) treatment cycle|Vital pregnancy will be assessed by ultrasound at least 35 days after embryo transfer (with a timeframe of 35-42 days). Time from start of study treatment to embryo transfer is maximally 24 days.|Intent-To-Treat Group: all randomized participants who received 1 or more dose(s) of SCH 900962 or recFSH. Participants were grouped according to the treatment they were randomized to. Participants who did not have embryo transfer or who were lost to follow-up before the ultrasound assessment to confirm vital pregnancy were counted as non-pregnant.||percentage of participants|||Number
846793|NCT01131182|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With at Least One Symptomatic or Asymptomatic Hypoglycemic Event|Hypoglycemic event was based on the participant's self-report and/or finger-stick blood glucose level. Symptomatic hypoglycemic symptoms included faintness, headache, confusion, anxiety, sweating, tremor, palpitation, nausea, pallor, dizziness, hunger, and sudden behavioral change.|30 days: first day of Ramadan (August 11) to last day of Ramadan (September 10)|All participants as treated population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and returned at least one completed diary card during the Ramadan period.||Proportion of participants|||Number
846794|NCT01131182|Primary|Proportion of Participants With at Least One Symptomatic Hypoglycemic Event|Symptomatic hypoglycemic event was determined based on the participant's self-reported symptoms including faintness, headache, confusion, anxiety, sweating, tremor, palpitation, nausea, pallor, dizziness, hunger, and sudden behavioral change.|30 days: first day of Ramadan (August 11) to last day of Ramadan (September 10)|All participants as treated population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment and returned at least one completed diary card during the Ramadan period.||proportion of participants|||Number
846795|NCT01126424|Primary|Change From Baseline in Cognitive Function Composite Score - Speed of Memory|Cognitive effects were assessed at the end of each treatment period using a computerized assessment system at time points close to the predicted time to attain maximum plasma concentration for solifenacin and oxybutynin. Speed of Memory was calculated from the sum of 4 cognitive function speed tests: numeric and spatial working memory and word and picture recognition. A low score reflects that a person is able to recall a name, a face or any other item fast from the episodic secondary memory; a positive change from baseline reflects impairment compared to baseline.|Assessed at each treatment period baseline visit (the day prior to the first dose of each treatment; Days -1, 42, 84) and at the end of each treatment period (Days 21, 63 and 105). At each visit, tests were performed at 2 and 6 hours post-dose.|The number of participants analyzed represents the Safety Analysis Subset 1 (SAF1), consisting of all randomized patients who took at least one dose of the study medication and who completed the cognitive function tests for at least two treatment periods. The number of participants per arm is consistent for all categories / rows of the data table.||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
846796|NCT01126424|Primary|Change From Baseline in Cognitive Function Composite Score - Quality of Episodic Secondary Memory|Cognitive effects were assessed at the end of each treatment period using a computerized assessment system at time points close to the predicted time of maximum plasma concentration for solifenacin and oxybutynin. Quality of episodic secondary memory is calculated from the sum of 4 tests: Immediate and delayed word recall, and word and picture recognition, and ranges from -200 to 400. A high score reflects a good ability to store, hold and retrieve information of an episodic nature (i.e. an event or a name) and a negative change from baseline reflects impairment compared to baseline.|Assessed at each treatment period baseline visit (the day prior to the first dose of each treatment; Days -1, 42, 84) and at the end of each treatment period (Days 21, 63 and 105). At each visit, tests were performed at 2 and 6 hours post-dose.|The number of participants analyzed represents the Safety Analysis Subset 1 (SAF1), consisting of all randomized patients who took at least one dose of the study medication and who completed the cognitive function tests for at least two treatment periods. The number of participants per arm is consistent for all categories / rows of the data table.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846797|NCT01126424|Primary|Change From Baseline in Cognitive Function Composite Score - Quality of Working Memory|Cognitive effects were assessed at the end of each treatment period using a computerized assessment system at time points close to the predicted time to attain maximum plasma concentration (Tmax) for solifenacin (6 hours) and oxybutynin (2 hours). Quality of working memory is calculated from the sum of two cognitive function sensitivity tests: Numeric Working Memory Sensitivity and Spatial Working Memory Sensitivity, and ranges from -2 to 2. A higher score reflects a good working memory and a negative change from baseline reflects impairment compared to the baseline assessment.|Assessed at each treatment period baseline visit (the day prior to the first dose of each treatment; Days -1, 42, 84) and at the end of each treatment period (Days 21, 63 and 105). At each visit, tests were performed at 2 and 6 hours post-dose.|The number of participants analyzed represents the Safety Analysis Subset 1 (SAF1), consisting of all randomized patients who took at least one dose of the study medication and who completed the cognitive function tests for at least two treatment periods. The number of participants per arm is consistent for all categories / rows of the data table.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846798|NCT01126424|Primary|Change From Baseline in Cognitive Function Composite Score – Continuity of Attention|Cognitive effects were assessed using a computerized assessment system at time points close to the predicted time of maximum plasma concentration for solifenacin and oxybutynin. For continuity of attention, the number of correct responses (out of 50) for choice reaction time was added to the total number of targets correctly identified (out of 45) digit vigilance minus the number of false alarms (total score of -45 to 95). A high score reflects someone able to keep his/her mind on a single task for a prolonged period. A negative change from baseline reflects impairment compared to baseline.|Assessed at each treatment period baseline visit (the day prior to the first dose of each treatment; Days -1, 42, 84) and at the end of each treatment period (Days 21, 63 and 105). At each visit, tests were performed at 2 and 6 hours post-dose.|The number of participants analyzed represents the Safety Analysis Subset 1 (SAF1), consisting of all randomized patients who took at least one dose of the study medication and who completed the cognitive function tests for at least two treatment periods. The number of participants per arm is consistent for all categories / rows of the data table.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846799|NCT01126424|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Postural Stability Test|"The postural stability test measures the ability to stand upright without moving, and was assessed at the end of each treatment period using a computerized assessment system at time points close to the predicted time to attain maximum plasma concentration for solifenacin and oxybutynin. Using apparatus modeled on the Wright Ataxia-meter, a cord from the meter is attached to the patient who is required to stand as still as possible with feet apart and eyes closed for 1 minute.
The amount of sway is expressed as the total angular movement, summed regardless of sign, in the antero-posterior plane and calibrated in units of one-third degree of angle of sway. Wright (1971) described a range of 20-30 units as a normal range for adults with eyes wide open, increasing by 50 to 100% with eyes shut."|Assessed at each treatment period baseline visit (the day prior to the first dose of each treatment; Days -1, 42, 84) and at the end of each treatment period (Days 21, 63 and 105). At each visit, tests were performed at 2 and 6 hours post-dose.|The number of participants analyzed represents the Safety Analysis Subset 1 (SAF1), consisting of all randomized patients who took at least one dose of the study medication and who completed the cognitive function tests for at least two treatment periods. The number of participants per arm is consistent for all categories / rows of the data table.||1/3 degree of angle of sway||Standard Deviation|Mean
846800|NCT01126424|Primary|Change From Baseline in Cognitive Function Composite Score - Power of Attention|Cognitive effects were assessed at the end of each treatment period using a computerized assessment system at time points close to the predicted time to attain maximum plasma concentration (Tmax) for solifenacin (6 hours) and oxybutynin (2 hours). Power of attention is calculated from the sum of three cognitive function speed tests: Simple Reaction Time, Choice Reaction Time and the Speed of Detections in Digit Vigilance task. A low score reflects a fast reaction time and a high intensity of concentration. A positive change from baseline reflects impairment compared to the baseline assessment.|Assessed at each treatment period baseline visit (the day prior to the first dose of each treatment; Days -1, 42, 84) and at the end of each treatment period (Days 21, 63 and 105). At each visit, tests were performed at 2 and 6 hours post-dose.|The number of participants analyzed represents the Safety Analysis Subset 1 (SAF1), consisting of all randomized patients who took at least one dose of the study medication and who completed the cognitive function tests for at least two treatment periods. The number of participants per arm is consistent for all categories / rows of the data table.||msec||Standard Deviation|Mean
846803|NCT01116427|Secondary|Mean Change in the MSFC in Extension Phase|The Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) is a three-part, standardized, quantitative assessment instrument to measure severity of multiple sclerosis. The MSFC combines three component measures to create a composite measure. The three component measures of the MSFC include the 1) Time 25-foot Walk (a measure of lower extremity function), 2) 9-hole Peg Test (a measure of upper extremity function), and 3) Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (a measure of cognitive function). Mean change in MSFC scores from Week 24 to Week 52 were assessed. Scores from all three components are combined then are converted into a Z-score for analyses, with a range from -1 to 1. A positive score indicates improvement in the severity of multiple sclerosis symptoms while negative scores indicate decline in multiple sclerosis symptoms.|Week 24 to Week 52|Intent-to-treat in Extension Phase who Completed the MSFC at Week 52||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846804|NCT01116427|Secondary|Annualized Relapse in Extension Phase|The rate of multiple sclerosis relapse by year. Annualized relapse rate is calculated by dividing the total number of relapse events in the extension and follow-up phases in each treatment group by the total number of days participants participated in the study during the extension and follow-up phases. This number is then multiplied by 365.25 to get an annualized rate.|Week 24 to Week 64|Intent-to-treat in Extension Phase||Relapse Rate by Year|||Number
846805|NCT01116427|Secondary|Number of Participants Progressing on the EDSS Scale by at Least 1 Point|The Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) is an assessment for severity of multiple sclerosis. The EDSS an ordinal clinical rating scale ranging from 0 (normal neurological examination) to 10 (death due to multiple sclerosis) in half-point increments. Extension baseline EDSS score was the most recent non-missing value on or before Week 28. Only participants who scored between a 0 and a 5 at baseline were analyzed for this outcome measure. EDSS progression is defined as an increase of at least 1 point on the EDSS compared to baseline if the baseline was greater than 1.0, or 1.5 points on EDSS if baseline was less than or equal to 1.0, which persisted for a minimum of 12 weeks or was found on three consecutive EDSS assessments starting at Visit 3 (Wk 8).|Week 24 to Week 64|Intent-to-treat in Extension Phase||participants|||Number
847207|NCT00737672|Secondary|Procedural Success|Participants were considered to have Procedural Success if they achieved both anatomic success and clinical success.|Following Index Procedure|||Participants|||Number
846806|NCT01116427|Secondary|Percent Brain Volume Change Between 24 Weeks and 52 Weeks|Percent Brain Volume Change is a measure of brain atrophy. Brain volume was calculated from a MRI scan at Week 24 and a MRI scan at Week 25 then the percent change from Week 24 to Week 52 was calculated. A negative change score means volume decreased. A decrease in volume indicates progression of multiple sclerosis severity.|Week 24 to Week 52|Intent-to-treat in Extension Phase who had an MRI at Week 52 with data to contribute to brain volume measurements||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
846807|NCT01116427|Secondary|Lesion Volume Accumulation on T2-Weighted MRI Scans Between 24 Weeks and 52 Weeks|Difference in total volume of all T2 lesions detected at Week 52 MRI scan compared to Week 24 MRI scan. A T2 lesion is defined as an abnormal, hyperintense white-matter area visible on T2 weighted images. A higher score indicates more severe multiple sclerosis.|Week 24 to Week 52|Intent-to-treat in Extension Phase who had an MRI at Week 52||cm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
846808|NCT01116427|Secondary|Mean Number of New Inflammatory MRI Lesions Per Scan During the Extension Phase|The mean number of new inflammatory MRI lesions obtained on scans at Weeks 36 and 52, adjusted for differences between subjects before treatment by subtracting the number of new inflammatory lesions observed from the week 24 MRI scan. An inflammatory lesion is defined as a gadolinium (Gd)-enhancing lesion that shows hyperintensity on postcontrast but no hyperintensity on noncontrast T1 images. A new inflammatory lesion is one that was not present on the previously scheduled MRI scan. If the previously scheduled MRI scan was missing, the scan was compared to the last available MRI.|Weeks 36 and 52|Intent-to-treat in Extension Phase||New Lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
846809|NCT01116427|Secondary|Mean Change in the MSFC Over 24 Weeks of Treatment|The Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) is a three-part, standardized, quantitative assessment instrument to measure severity of multiple sclerosis. The MSFC combines three component measures to create a composite measure. The three component measures of the MSFC include the 1) Time 25-foot Walk (a measure of lower extremity function), 2) 9-hole Peg Test (a measure of upper extremity function), and 3) Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (a measure of cognitive function). Mean change in MSFC scores from baseline to Week 24 were assessed. Scores from all three components are combined then are converted into a Z-score for analyses, with a range from -1 to 1. A positive score indicates improvement in the severity of multiple sclerosis symptoms while negative scores indicate decline in multiple sclerosis symptoms.|Week -1 to Week 24|Intent-to-treat||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846810|NCT01116427|Secondary|Annualized Relapse Rate|The rate of multiple sclerosis relapse by year. Annualized relapse rate is calculated by dividing the total number of relapse events in the core phase in each treatment group by the total number of days participants participated in the study during the core phase. This number is then multiplied by 365.25 to get an annualized rate.|Week -1 to Week 24|Intent-to-treat||Relapse Rate by Year|||Number
846811|NCT01116427|Secondary|Number of Participants Progressing on the EDSS Scale by at Least 1 Point|The Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) is an assessment for severity of multiple sclerosis. The EDSS an ordinal clinical rating scale ranging from 0 (normal neurological examination) to 10 (death due to multiple sclerosis) in half-point increments. Baseline EDSS score was the lowest score observed at either visit -2 (Wk -5) or visit -1 (Wk -1). EDSS progression is defined as an increase of at least 1 point on the EDSS compared to baseline if the baseline was greater than 1.0, or 1.5 points on EDSS if baseline was less than or equal to 1.0, which persisted for a minimum of 12 weeks or was found on three consecutive EDSS assessments starting at Visit 3 (Wk 8).|Week -1 to Week 24|Intent-to-treat||participants|||Number
846812|NCT01116427|Secondary|Mean Number of New Inflammatory Lesions in 8-week Intervals|The mean number of new inflammatory MRI lesions obtained on scans every 8 weeks from Week 8 to Week 24. An inflammatory lesion is defined as a gadolinium (Gd)-enhancing lesion that shows hyperintensity on postcontrast but no hyperintensity on noncontrast T1 images. A new inflammatory lesion is one that was not present on the previously scheduled MRI scan. If the previously scheduled MRI scan was missing, the scan was compared to the last available MRI.|Week 8 to Week 24|Intent-to-treat||New Lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
846813|NCT01116427|Secondary|Percent Brain Volume Change|Percent Brain Volume Change is a measure of brain atrophy. Brain volume was calculated from a MRI scan at Week -1 and a MRI scan at Week 24 then the percent change from Week -1 to Week 24 was calculated. A negative change score means volume decreased. A decrease in volume indicates progression of multiple sclerosis severity.|Week -1 to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population that did not terminate study prior to Week 24 and had MRI scans at both Week -1 and Week 24||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
846814|NCT01116427|Secondary|Lesion Volume Accumulation on T2-weighted MRI Scans Over 24 Weeks|Difference in total volume of all T2 lesions detected at Week 24 MRI scan compared to Week -1 MRI scan. A T2 lesion is defined as an abnormal, hyperintense white-matter area visible on T2 weighted images. A higher score indicates more severe multiple sclerosis.|Week -1 to Week 24|Intent-to-treat population that did not terminate study prior to Week 24||cm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
846815|NCT01116427|Secondary|Absolute Number of New Inflammatory MRI Lesions on Monthly Scans|The absolute number of new inflammatory MRI lesions obtained on scans every 4 weeks from Week 8 to Week 24. An inflammatory lesion is defined as a gadolinium (Gd)-enhancing lesion that shows hyperintensity on postcontrast but no hyperintensity on noncontrast T1 images. A new inflammatory lesion is one that was not present on the previously scheduled MRI scan. If the previously scheduled MRI scan was missing, the scan was compared to the last available MRI.|Weeks 4-24|Intent-to-treat||New Lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
846816|NCT01116427|Primary|Mean Number of New Inflammatory MRI Lesions Per Monthly Scans|The mean number of new inflammatory MRI lesions obtained on scans every 4 weeks from Week 8 to Week 24, adjusted for differences between subjects before treatment by subtracting the number of new inflammatory lesions observed from the week -1 MRI scan . An inflammatory lesion is defined as a gadolinium (Gd)-enhancing lesion that shows hyperintensity on postcontrast but no hyperintensity on noncontrast T1 images. A new inflammatory lesion is one that was not present on the previously scheduled MRI scan. If the previously scheduled MRI scan was missing, the scan was compared to the last available MRI.|Weeks 8-24|Intent-to-treat||New Lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
846817|NCT01112059|Secondary|Mean Change in Pulmonary Function Over Treatment Duration|Observe change in FEV1% predicted from beginning to end of study|Baseline to end of inpatient clinical exacerbation (average 14 days)|||Percentage of predicted FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
846818|NCT01112059|Secondary|Mean Sputum Matrix Metalloprotease-9 (MMP-9) Activity End of Treatment|Measurement of endogenous active matrix metalloprotease-9 (MMP-9) in the sputum|8 days|||ng/mg total protein||Standard Deviation|Mean
846830|NCT01093534|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement or Deterioration in Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC)|"The PPBC scale is a global assessment tool that asks patients to rate their impression of their current bladder condition on a 6-point scale from 1: 'Does not cause me any problems at all'; 2: 'Causes me some very minor problems'; 3: 'Causes me some minor problems'; 4: 'Causes me (some) moderate problems'; 5: 'Causes me severe problems' and 6: 'Causes me many severe problems'.
Improvement: ≥ 1 point improvement compared to Baseline; Major Improvement: ≥ 2 point improvement compared to Baseline; Deterioration: ≥ 1 point deterioration compared to Baseline."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
846831|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Total Urinary Nerve Growth Factor Normalized by Urine Creatinine|Total (acidified) urinary nerve growth factor (uNGF) and creatinine (Cr) were measured from urine samples by the central laboratories. Total uNGF/Cr was derived by dividing total uNGF concentrations [pg/mL] by the urine creatinine concentrations (µmol/mL) from the same participant.|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set urinary Nerve Growth Factor subset (FAS_uNGF0) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||pg/µmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
846832|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor Normalized by Urine Creatinine (uBDNF/Cr)|Brain derived neurotrophic factor (uBDNF) and creatinine (Cr) were measured from urine samples by the central laboratories. uBDNF/Cr was derived by dividing uBDNF concentrations [pg/mL] by the urine creatinine concentrations (µmol/mL) from the same participant.|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set urinary Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor (FAS_uBDNF); LOCF was used.||pg/µmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
846833|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQL)|"Health-related quality of life was assessed by the Overactive Bladder Symptom and Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire (OAB-q). The OAB-q is a patient-administered instrument comprising of an 8-item symptom bother scale (see previous outcome measure) and 25 HRQL items comprising 4 subscales (concern, coping, social interaction and sleep) and a total HRQL score. Participants were asked how their overall bladder symptoms had affected their life in the past 4 weeks. Each of the 25 HRQL questions has a 6-point Likert scale response ranging from ‘none of the time’ (1) to ‘all of the time’ (6).
The HRQL subscale scores were calculated by summing the responses of the items within each subscale.The HRQL total score was calculated by adding the 4 HRQL subscale scores,. All scores were transformed to a scale from 0 to 100 where higher scores indicate better quality of life. A positive change from Baseline in HRQL score indicates improvement."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846834|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Symptom Bother Score|"Overactive bladder symptoms were assessed using the symptom bother scale of the Overactive Bladder Symptom and Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire (OAB-q). The OAB-q is a patient-administered instrument comprising an 8-item symptom bother scale and 25 health-related quality of life items (see next outcome measure). In the symptom bother scale participants were asked how much they had been bothered by selected bladder symptoms during the past 4 weeks. Each question has a 6-point Likert scale response ranging from 'not at all' (1) to 'a very great deal' (6).
The total symptom bother score was calculated from the 8 answers and then transformed to range from 0 to 100, with 100 indicating worst severity. A negative change from Baseline in symptom bother score indicates improvement."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846835|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EuroQoL 5-Dimension Questionnaire Visual Analog Scale|"The participants’ quality of life was assessed using the EuroQoL 5 Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D) visual analog scale (VAS).
Health status is completed by the participant indicating their own health state today by drawing a line on a vertical scale from 0 to 100 where the endpoints are labeled 'Worst imaginable health state' (=0) and 'Best imaginable health state' (=100). On the EQ-5D VAS, a positive change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846836|NCT01093534|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement and Worsening on the 5 Dimensions of the EQ-5D|"The participants’ quality of life was assessed using the EuroQoL 5 Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D). The EQ-5D is a standardized instrument for use as a measure of health outcome and is based on the following 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. For each dimension participants were asked to select the statement which best described their health that day, from level 1 (indicating no problems) to 3 (indicating extreme problems/unable to perform).
Improvement was defined as a change from a state of being unable to perform or extreme problems at Baseline to no problems or to some or moderate problems at Week 12, and from some or moderate problems to no problems.
Worsening was defined as a change from no problems at Baseline to some or moderate problems or to a state of being unable to perform or extreme problems at Week 12, and from some or moderate problems to a state of being unable to perform or extreme problems."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data.||percentage of participants|||Number
846837|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Treatment Satisfaction|The treatment satisfaction visual analog scale (TS_VAS) asks patients to rate their satisfaction with treatment by placing a vertical mark on a 100 mm line where the endpoints are labeled ‘No, not at all’ on the left (score = 0) to ‘Yes, completely satisfied’ on the right (score = 100). A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846838|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Urgency Bother|"The participants’ perception and impression of bother associated with their condition were assessed using the Urgency Bother-Visual Analog Scale (UB-VAS). The participant was asked to place a vertical mark on a 100 mm line to indicate how much bother has urgency been for them in the past week, whereby ‘no bother at all’ is represented on the left end (score = 0) and ‘worst possible bother’ (score = 100) at the right end of the line.
A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847208|NCT00737672|Secondary|Anatomic Success|Less than 30 percent residual stenosis following study treatment (Index Procedure).|Index Procedure|||Participants|||Number
846839|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC)|The PPBC scale is a global assessment tool that asks patients to rate their impression of their current bladder condition on a 6-point scale from 1: 'Does not cause me any problems at all'; 2: 'Causes me some very minor problems'; 3: 'Causes me some minor problems’; 4: 'Causes me (some) moderate problems'; 5: 'Causes me severe problems' and 6: 'Causes me many severe problems'. A negative change from Baseline score indicates improvement.|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846840|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Total Urgency Score|"The intensity of urgency of each micturition (urination) and incontinence episode (any involuntary leakage of urine) was recorded by the participant in an electronic diary according to the Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale (PPIUS) as follows: 0 = No urgency; 1 = Mild urgency; 2 = Moderate urgency, could postpone voiding a short while; 3 = Severe urgency, could not postpone voiding; 4 = Urge incontinence, leaked before arriving to the toilet.
The total urgency score was calculated by adding all PPIUS scores over a 3-day period prior to the Baseline and Week 12 visits for each participant."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846841|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Mean Level of Urgency|"The intensity of urgency of each micturition (urination) and incontinence episode (any involuntary leakage of urine) was recorded by the participant in an electronic diary according to the Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale (PPIUS) as follows: 0 = No urgency; 1 = Mild urgency; 2 = Moderate urgency, could postpone voiding a short while; 3 = Severe urgency, could not postpone voiding; 4 = Urge incontinence, leaked before arriving to the toilet.
The mean level of urgency was calculated by adding the PPIUS grade for all events (micturition or incontinence) and dividing by the number of episodes recorded in the diary over 3 days prior to the Baseline and Week 12 visits."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846842|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Urgency Incontinence Episodes With PPIUS Grade 4 Per 24 Hours|"An urgency incontinence episode is defined as any incontinence episode classified by the participant as a grade 4 on the Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale (PPIUS) as follows: 0 = No urgency; 1 = Mild urgency; 2 = Moderate urgency, could postpone voiding a short while; 3 = Severe urgency, could not postpone voiding; 4 = Urge incontinence, leaked before arriving to the toilet.
The average number of grade 4 urgency incontinence episodes per 24 hours was calculated from the number of urgency incontinence episodes recorded by the participant in an electronic diary for 3 days before the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits."|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with grade 4 urgency incontinence events at Baseline and with available data; LOCF was used.||urgency incontinence episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
846843|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Number of Urgency Incontinence Episodes With PPIUS Grade 3 or 4 Per 24 Hours|"An urgency incontinence episode is defined as any incontinence episode classified by the participant as a grade 3 or 4 on the Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale (PPIUS) as follows: 0 = No urgency; 1 = Mild urgency; 2 = Moderate urgency, could postpone voiding a short while; 3 = Severe urgency, could not postpone voiding; 4 = Urge incontinence, leaked before arriving to the toilet.
The average number of grade 3 or 4 urgency incontinence episodes per 24 hours was calculated from the number of urgency incontinence episodes recorded by the participant in an electronic diary for 3 days before the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits."|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with grade 3 or 4 urgency incontinence events at Baseline and with available data; LOCF was used.||urgency incontinence episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
846844|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Mean Number of Incontinence Episodes Per 24 Hours|The average number of incontinence episodes (any involuntary leakage of urine) per 24 hours was calculated from the number of incontinence episodes recorded by the participant in an electronic diary for 3 days before the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits.|Baseline and Week 12|Full analysis set participants with incontinence events at Baseline and with available data; LOCF was used.||incontinence episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
846845|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Mean Number of Urgency Micturitions Per 24 Hours|"An urgency micturition is defined as any micturition classified by the participant as a grade 3 or 4 on the Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale (PPIUS) as follows: 0 = No urgency; 1 = Mild urgency; 2 = Moderate urgency, could postpone voiding a short while; 3 = Severe urgency, could not postpone voiding; 4 = Urge incontinence, leaked before arriving to the toilet.
The average number of urgency micturitions per 24 hours was derived from the number of urgency micturitions recorded by the participant in an electronic diary for 3 days before the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set participants with urgency micturitions at Baseline and with available data; LOCF was used.||urgency micturitions||Standard Deviation|Mean
846846|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Mean Number of Micturitions Per 24 Hours|The average number of micturitions (urinations) per 24 hours was derived from the number of micturitions recorded by the participant in an electronic diary for 3 days before the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits.|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||micturitions||Standard Deviation|Mean
846847|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Mean Number of Urgency Events Per 24 Hours|"The intensity of urgency of each micturition (urination) and incontinence episode (any involuntary leakage of urine) was recorded by the participant in an electronic diary according to the Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale (PPIUS) as follows: 0 = No urgency; 1 = Mild urgency; 2 = Moderate urgency, could postpone voiding a short while; 3 = Severe urgency, could not postpone voiding; 4 = Urge incontinence, leaked before arriving to the toilet.
An urgency event is defined as any micturition or incontinence episode classified by the participant as a grade 3 or 4 on the PPIUS scale. The average number of urgency events per day is derived from the diary data completed by participants on the 3 days prior to the Baseline and Week 12 visits."|12 weeks|Full analysis set participants with events at Baseline and with available data; LOCF was used.||urgency events||Standard Deviation|Mean
847120|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Volumetric Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Hip Whole Bone by Quantitative Computed Tomography (QCT)|Hip whole bone as measured by QCT, mg/cm3 (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
846848|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Mean Number of Events (Micturitions Plus Incontinence Episodes) Per 24 Hours|The average number of micturitions (urinations) and incontinence episodes (any involuntary leakage of urine) per day was derived from the number of events recorded by the participant in an electronic diary for 3 days before the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits.|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||events||Standard Deviation|Mean
846849|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 6 and Week 12 in Neutralized Urinary Nerve Growth Factor Normalized by Urine Creatinine|Free (neutralized) urinary nerve growth factor (uNGF) and creatinine (Cr) were measured from urine samples by the central laboratories. Free (neutralized) uNGF/Cr was derived by dividing free (neutralized) uNGF concentrations [pg/mL] by the urine creatinine concentrations (µmol/mL) from the same participant.|Baseline, Week 6 and Week 12|Full Analysis Set urinary Nerve Growth Factor subset (FAS_uNGF0) participants with available data at each time point (indicated by n).||pg/µmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
846850|NCT01093534|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 6 and Week 12 in Bladder Wall Thickness|Bladder wall thickness (BWT) measurements were obtained using transvaginal ultrasound. The BWT was derived as one mean value per image pooled over measurements of 3 locations (anterior wall, dome and trigone), and performed by 2 central readers and 1 adjudicator.|Baseline, Week 6 and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT) participants with available data at each time point (indicated by n).||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
846851|NCT01093534|Secondary|Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor Normalized by Urine Creatinine (uBDNF/Cr) at Week 12|Brain derived neurotrophic factor (uBDNF) and creatinine (Cr) were measured from urine samples by the central laboratories. uBDNF/Cr was derived by dividing uBDNF concentrations [pg/mL] by the urine creatinine concentrations (µmol/mL) from the same participant.|Week 12|Full Analysis Set urinary Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor (FAS_uBDNF): all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of randomized study medication, who had given consent for additional analysis and who had an uBDNF/Cr measurement at baseline and on at least 1 visit thereafter. LOCF was used.||pg/µmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
846852|NCT01093534|Secondary|Total Urinary Nerve Growth Factor Normalized by Urine Creatinine at Week 12|Total (acidified) urinary nerve growth factor (uNGF) and creatinine (Cr) were measured from urine samples by the central laboratories. Total uNGF/Cr was derived by dividing total uNGF concentrations [pg/mL] by the urine creatinine concentrations (µmol/mL) from the same participant.|Week 12|Full Analysis Set urinary Nerve Growth Factor subset (FAS_uNGF0) participants with available data; LOCF was used.||pg/µmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
846853|NCT01093534|Primary|Neutralized Urinary Nerve Growth Factor Normalized by Urine Creatinine at Week 12|Free (neutralized) urinary nerve growth factor (uNGF) and creatinine (Cr) were measured from urine samples by the central laboratories. Free (neutralized) uNGF/Cr was derived by dividing free (neutralized) uNGF concentrations [pg/mL] by the urine creatinine concentrations (µmol/mL) from the same participant.|Week 12|Full Analysis Set urinary Nerve Growth Factor subset (FAS_uNGF0): all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of randomized study medication and who had an uNGF/Cr measurement at Baseline and on at least 1 visit thereafter, excluding participants with Baseline uNGF below or equal to the laboratory quantification limit. LOCF was used.||pg/µmol||Standard Deviation|Mean
846854|NCT01093534|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Bladder Wall Thickness|Bladder wall thickness (BWT) measurements were obtained using transvaginal ultrasound. The BWT was derived as one mean value per image pooled over measurements of 3 locations (anterior wall, dome and trigone), and performed by 2 central readers and 1 adjudicator.|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set Bladder Wall Thickness (FAS_BWT): all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of randomized study medication and who had a mean BWT measurement at Baseline. Analysis includes participants with available data; Last observation carried forward (LOCF) of post-baseline data was used for imputation of missing values.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
846855|NCT01090427|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants With CDLQI Scores of 0 or 1 at Week 12 for Randomized Participants With a Baseline CDLQI Score > 1||Week 12|Efficacy evaluable subjects defined as the subset of all randomized participants with evaluable outcome measurements. In addition, this analysis was limited to participants with a CDLQI of 0 or 1 at baseline.||Percentage of participants|||Number
846856|NCT01090427|Secondary|The Change From Baseline in Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) Total Scale Score, Psychosocial Health Summary Score, and Physical Health Summary Score at Week 12|The PedsQL is a general health-related quality of life measure developed for use in children and adolescent populations. The Generic Core Scale contains 23 items and is comprised of 4 domains: physical, social, emotional, and school functioning. Each domain can be scored independently. Additionally, a Psychosocial Health and Physical Health Summary Score can be calculated as well as a total score. The measure distinguishes between healthy children and children with acute and chronic health conditions and disease severity within a chronic health condition. The measure is applicable for healthy school and community populations, as well as with pediatric populations with acute and chronic health conditions and has versions for both parent and teen report. Scores range from 0 to 100, and higher scores indicate better health related quality of life.|Week 12|Efficacy evaluable subjects defined as the subset of all randomized participants with evaluable outcome measurements available.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846857|NCT01090427|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Who Were PASI 50 Responders and the Percentage of Participants With a PASI Score of 0 at Week 12|The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. The PASI produces a numeric score that can range from 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease). The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who were PASI 50 responders at Week 12 defined as participants who achieved a greater than or equal to (>=) 50% improvement in PASI score from baseline as well as the percentage of participants with a PASI score of 0.|Week 12|Efficacy evaluable subjects defined as the subset of all randomized participants with evaluable outcome measurements.||Percentage of participants|||Number
846910|NCT00996307|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) With and Without Seasonal Influenza Vaccination for Year 2009 to 2010|Subgroup analysis based on receipt of recent seasonal vaccination. Comparison between subjects previously vaccinated versus not vaccinated with seasonal influenza vaccines.|Day 22 (three weeks after first vaccination); day 43 (three weeks after second vaccination)|The analysis was done on the subgroup on the per-protocol set (PPS).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846858|NCT01090427|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) Score of Cleared (0) and PGA Score of Mild or Better (<=2) at Week 12|The PGA documents the physician’s assessment of the participant’s psoriasis status according to the following categories: induration, scaling, and erythema. The participant's psoriasis is assessed as 5-point scale as follows: cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4); higher score indicates worse disease. The table below shows the percentage of participants who achieved a PGA score of 0 and the percentage of participants who achieved a PGA score of 0, 1, or 2 at Week 12 in each treatment group.|Week 12|Efficacy evaluable subjects defined as the subset of all randomized participants with evaluable outcome measurements.||Percentage of participants|||Number
846859|NCT01090427|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 Response at Week 12 Compared Between the Placebo Group and the Ustekinumab Treatment Groups|The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. The PASI produces a numeric score that can range from 0 to 72, with higher scores indicating worse disease. The table below shows the percentage of participants who achieved a PASI 90 response defined as achieving a greater than or equal to (≥) 90% improvement in PASI score from baseline.|Week 12|The analysis of the PASI 90 response at Week 12 was performed using the all randomized subjects analysis set defined as the population of all participants who were randomized to any treatment group.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
846860|NCT01090427|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) Score at Week 12 Compared Between the Placebo Group and the Ustekinumab Treatment Groups|The CDLQI is a dermatology-specific quality of life instrument designed to assess the impact of the disease on a child’s quality of life. The CDLQI, a 10-item questionnaire has 4 items response options and a recall period of 1 week. In addition to evaluating overall quality of life, the CDLQI can be used to assess 6 different aspects that may affect quality of life: symptoms and feelings, leisure, School or holidays, personal relationships, sleep, and treatment. The CDLQI is calculated by summing the score of each question resulting in a maximum of 30 and a minimum of 0; the higher the score, the greater impairment in quality of life. The table below shows the mean change in CDLQI score from baseline at Week 12 for each treatment group.|Baseline; Week 12|Evaluable participants for CDLQI are the subsets of all randomized participants with evaluable outcome measurements.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846861|NCT01090427|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 Response at Week 12|The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. The PASI produces a numeric score that can range from 0 to 72, with higher scores indicating worse disease. A PASI 75 response is defined as a equal to or greater than (=>) 75% improvement in PASI score from baseline. The table below shows the percentage of participants who achieved a PASI 75 response at Week 12 in each treatment group.|Week 12|The analysis of the PASI 75 response at Week 12 was performed using the all randomized subjects analysis set defined as the population of all participants who were randomized to any treatment group.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
846862|NCT01090427|Primary|The Percentage of Participants Achieving a Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) Score of Cleared (0) or Minimal (1) at Week 12|The PGA documents the physician’s assessment of the participant’s psoriasis status according to the following categories: induration, scaling, and erythema. The participant's psoriasis is assessed as 5-point scale as follows: cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4); higher score indicates worse disease. The table below shows the percentage of participants who achieved a PGA score of 0 or 1 at Week 12 in each treatment group.|Week 12|The primary efficacy analysis was performed using the all randomized subjects analysis set defined as the population of all participants who were randomized to any treatment group.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
846863|NCT01084278|Primary|Percentage of Colchicine Dose Recovered in Dialysate|The cumulative percentage of the colchicine dose recovered in dialysate.|Day 15, post-dose during dialysis|ESRD participants on dialysis, where data were available.||percent dose||Standard Deviation|Mean
846864|NCT01084278|Primary|Dialysis Clearance of Colchicine (CLD)|The dialysis clearance of colchicine, calculated as amount of colchicine recovered in dialysate / AUCt2-t1 where t1 and t2 are the times of the start and end of hemodialysis.|Day 15, post-dose during dialysis|ESRD participants on dialysis, where data were available.||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
846865|NCT01084278|Primary|Renal Clearance of Colchicine (CLR)|Renal clearance of colchicine, calculated as Ae(0 t)/AUC 0-t.|Pre-dose on Day 1 and up to 120 hours post dose.|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
846866|NCT01084278|Primary|Percentage of Colchicine Dose Excreted in Urine up to the Final Collection Time|The cumulative percentage of the colchicine dose excreted in urine up to the final collection time, calculated as Ae(0-t) × 100/dose|Pre-dose on Day 1 and up to 120 hours post dose.|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||percent of dose||Standard Deviation|Mean
846867|NCT01084278|Primary|Amount of Colchicine Excreted in Urine (Ae[0-t])|The amount of colchicine excreted in urine during the post-dose collection, calculated as the sum of the amounts in the individual collection intervals (Ae).|Pre-dose on Day 1 and up to 120 hours post dose.|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||mg||Standard Deviation|Mean
846868|NCT01084278|Primary|Weight-adjusted Apparent Total Body Clearance of Colchicine|The apparent total body clearance after administration of colchicine, calculated as Dose/AUC(0-∞) and normalized to body weight (in kilograms).|Day 1 and Day 15 (for ESRD patients only) pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post dose.|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||L/hr/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
846869|NCT01084278|Primary|Apparent Total Body Clearance of Colchicine|The apparent total body clearance after administration of colchicine, calculated as Dose/AUC(0-∞).|Day 1 and Day 15 (for ESRD patients only) pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post dose.|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
846870|NCT01084278|Primary|Weight-adjusted Apparent Total Volume of Distribution After Administration (V-area/F)|The apparent total volume of distribution after administration of colchicine, calculated as Dose / (AUC0-∞ × Kel), and normalized to body weight.|Day 1 and Day 15 (for ESRD patients only) pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post dose.|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||L/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
846871|NCT01084278|Primary|The Apparent Total Volume of Distribution After Administration (V-area/F)|The apparent total volume of distribution after administration of colchicine, calculated as Dose / (AUC0-∞ × Kel).|Day 1 and Day 15 (for ESRD patients only) pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post dose.|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
846872|NCT01084278|Primary|Apparent First-order Terminal Elimination Half-life (t½)|The apparent first-order terminal elimination half-life was calculated as 0.693/Kel.|Day 1 and Day 15 (for ESRD patients only) pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post dose.|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
846873|NCT01084278|Primary|Apparent First-order Terminal Elimination Rate Constant (Kel)|Apparent first-order terminal elimination rate constant calculated from a semi-log plot of the plasma concentration versus time curve for colchicine. The parameter was calculated by linear least-squares regression analysis using the maximum number of points in the terminal log-linear phase (e.g., three or more non-zero plasma concentrations).|Day 1 and Day 15 (for ESRD patients only) pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post dose.|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||1/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
846874|NCT01084278|Primary|Area Under the Concentration Time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC 0 - ∞)|The area under the plasma concentration versus time curve extrapolated to infinity. AUC 0 - ∞ is calculated as the sum of total AUC 0-t plus the ratio of the last measurable plasma concentration to the elimination rate constant.|Day 1 and Day 15 (for ESRD patients only) pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post dose.|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
846875|NCT01084278|Primary|Area Under the Concentration Time Curve From Time Zero to the Time of Last Measured Concentration (AUC 0-t)|The area under the plasma concentration versus time curve beginning from the first dose until the last quantifiable concentration, calculated by the linear trapezoidal method.|Day 1 and Day 15 (ESRD patients only), predose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 120 hours post dose|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
846876|NCT01084278|Primary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax)|The time to reach the maximum or peak concentration of colchicine in the plasma.|Day 1 and Day 15 (for ESRD patients only) at 0.5, 1, 1.5 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post dose|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
846877|NCT01084278|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|The maximum or peak concentration of colchicine in the plasma.|Day 1 and Day 15 (for ESRD patients only) pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post dose|Per Protocol Analysis Population - Participants renal function was characterized by CrCl using the Cockcroft-Gault equation as healthy (≥90 mL/min), and characterized by Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations as mild (60 - 89 mL/min), moderate (30 - 59 mL/min), severe (15 - 29 mL/min), and ESRD patients requiring dialysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
846878|NCT01076686|Primary|Number of Subjects With Breast Implant Rupture|Breast implant rupture and integrity were assessed by reviewing the results of history and physical focused on clinical sequelae of augmentation mammoplasty|12 to 24 months post surgery|||participants|||Number
846881|NCT01025336|Primary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 in Parent Study 6115A1-3005 (NCT00546572)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). Confidence intervals (CIs) for the GMTs are back transformations of a confidence interval based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the titers.|Month 1/Year 2 (Baseline) (Follow-up Study 6115A1-3018; NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with valid and determinate antibody titer for the specified serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846882|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence for 13vPnC 1 Year After Vaccination 1 Compared to 23vPS 1 Year After Vaccination 1 (Parent Study 6115A1-3005; NCT00546572)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 1 (Parent Study NCT00546572)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846883|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence for 13vPnC 1 Year After Vaccination 1 Compared to 23vPS 1 Year After Vaccination 1 (Parent Study 6115A1-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 1 (Parent Study NCT00574548)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846884|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence for 13vPnC/13vPnC 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Compared to 13vPnC/13vPnC After Vaccination 1 (Parent Study 6115A1-3005; NCT00546572)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 1 (Parent Study NCT00546572), Month 0/Year 2 (Baseline) (Follow-up Study 6115A1-3018; NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846885|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence for 23vPS/13vPnC 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Compared to 13vPnC/13vPnC 1 Year After Vaccination 1 (Parent Study 6115A1-3005; NCT00546572)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 1 (Parent Study NCT00546572), Month 1/Year 2 (Baseline; Follow-up Study NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846886|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence for 13vPnC/13vPnC 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Compared to 13vPnC/13vPnC Before Vaccination 2 (Parent Study 6115A1-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 1 (Parent Study NCT00574548), Month 0/Year 2 (Baseline) (Follow-up Study 6115A1-3018; NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846887|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence for 23vPS/13vPnC 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Compared to 13vPnC 1 Year After Vaccination 1 (Parent Study 6115A1-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 1 (Parent Study NCT00574548), Month 0/Year 2 (Baseline) (Follow-up Study 6115A1-3018; NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846888|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence for 13vPnC/23vPS 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Compared to 23vPS 1 Year After Vaccination 1 (Parent Study 6115A1-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 1 (Parent Study NCT00574548), Month 0/Year 2 (Baseline) (Follow-up Study 6115A1-3018; NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846911|NCT00996307|Secondary|Antibody Responses With and Without Seasonal Influenza Vaccination for Year 2009 to 2010|Subgroup analysis based on receipt of recent seasonal vaccination. Comparison between subjects previously vaccinated versus not vaccinated with seasonal influenza vaccines.|Day 22 (three weeks after first vaccination); day 43 (three weeks after second vaccination)|The analysis was done on the subgroup of the per-protocol set(PPS).||Percentages of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846889|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 for 13vPnC/13vPnC Compared to 23vPS/13vPnC (Parent Study 6115A1-3005; NCT00546572)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 2 (Baseline) (Follow-up Study 6115A1-3018; NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846890|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 for 13vPnC/13vPnC Compared to 13vPnC/23vPS (Parent Study 6115A1-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 2 (Baseline) (Follow-up Study 6115A1-3018; NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846891|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 for 13vPnC/13vPnC Compared to 23vPS/13vPnC (Parent Study 6115A1-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 2 (Baseline) (Follow-up Study 6115A1-3018; NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846892|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 for 13vPnC/23vPS Compared to 23vPS/13vPnC (Parent Study 6115A-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 2 (Baseline) (Follow-up Study 6115A1-3018; NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with a determinate OPA antibody titer to the given serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846893|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Relative to Before Vaccination 1 (Parent Study 6115A1-3005; NCT00546572)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 0 (Parent Study NCT00546572), Month 1/Year 2 (Follow-up Study NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with valid and determinate assay results for the specified serotype at both the Prevaccination 1 and 1 Year Postvaccination 2 blood draws.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846894|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Relative to Before Vaccination 1 (Parent Study 6115A1-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 0 (Parent Study NCT00574548), Month 1/Year 2 (Follow-up Study NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with valid and determinate assay results for the specified serotype at both the Prevaccination 1 and 1 Year Postvaccination 2 blood draws.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846895|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Relative to 1 Month After Vaccination 1 (Parent Study 6115A1-3005; NCT00546572)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 1/Year 0 (Parent Study NCT00546572), Month 1/Year 2 (Follow-up Study NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with valid and determinate assay results for the specified serotype at both the 1 Month Postvaccination 1 and 1 Year Postvaccination 2 blood draws.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846896|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Relative to 1 Month After Vaccination 1 (Parent Study 6115A1-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 1/Year 0 (Parent Study NCT00574548), Month 1/Year 2 (Follow-up Study NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with valid and determinate assay results for the specified serotype at both the 1 Month Postvaccination 1 and 1 Year Postvaccination 2 blood draws.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846897|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Relative to Before Vaccination 2 (Parent Study 6115A1-3005; NCT00546572)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 1 (Parent Study NCT00546572), Month 1/Year 2 (Follow-up Study NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population. N=number of participants with valid and determinate assay results for the specified serotype at both the Prevaccination 2 and 1 Year Postvaccination 2 blood draws.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846898|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Relative to Before Vaccination 2 (Parent Study 6115A1-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 0/Year 1 (Parent Study NCT00574548), Month 1/Year 2 (Follow-up Study NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population; N=number of participants with valid and determinate assay result for specified serotype at both the Prevaccination 2 and 1 Year Postvaccination 2 blood draws.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846899|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Relative to 1 Month After Vaccination 2 (Parent Study 6115A1-3005; NCT00546572)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 1/Year 1 (Parent study/NCT00546572), Month 1/Year 2 (Follow-up Study/NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population; N=number of participants with valid and determinate assay result for specified serotype at both 1 Month Postvaccination 2 and 1 Year Postvaccination 2 blood draws.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846900|NCT01025336|Secondary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal OPA GMT Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination 2 Relative to 1 Month After Vaccination 2 (Parent Study 6115A1-3010; NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). CI for the GMTs are back transformations of a CI based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the concentrations.|Month 1/Year 1 (Parent study/NCT00574548), Month 1/Year 2 (Follow-up Study/NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population; N=number of participants with valid and determinate assay result for specified serotype at both 1 Month Postvaccination 2 and 1 Year Postvaccination 2 blood draws.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846901|NCT01025336|Primary|Serotype-Specific Pneumococcal Opsonophagocytic Activity (OPA) Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) Antibody Persistence 1 Year After Vaccination (Vax) 2 in Parent Study 6115A1-3010 (NCT00574548)|Antibody GMTs as measured by OPA assay for 13 pneumococcal serotypes (serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, and 23F). Confidence intervals (CIs) for the GMTs are back transformations of a confidence interval based on the Student t distribution for the mean logarithm of the titers.|Month 1/Year 2 (Baseline) (Follow-up Study 6115A1-3018; NCT01025336)|All-Available Immunogenicity Population included all participants enrolled in 6115A1-3018 (NCT01025336) with a valid and determinate assay result who received both vaccinations in either parent study 6115A1-3010 (NCT00574548) or 6115A1-3005 (NCT00546572). N=number of participants with valid and determinate antibody titer for the specified serotype.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846902|NCT01005966|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Enamel Fluoride Uptake Potential|Enamel fluoride uptake was determined using the microdrill enamel biopsy technique. The amount of fluoride uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride (F) divided by the area of the enamel cores. The difference between treatments was calculated with respect to fluoride uptake by enamel.|Baseline to 14 days|PP population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study treatments or provided at least one significant measurement of fluoride uptake. Participants without any major protocol violations in given study treatment period were included in the PP population.||micrograms (μg)* F/centimeters(cm)^2||Standard Error|Mean
846903|NCT01005966|Secondary|Percent SMH Recovery of Enamel Specimens Exposed to NaF Toothpaste (1426ppmF), NaF Toothpaste (675ppmF), NaMFP/NaF Toothpaste (1400ppm F) and Placebo (0ppmF)|SMH test was used to assess the changes in mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents rehardening of enamel surface. Differences in percent SMH recovery due to study and reference toothpastes were calculated.|Baseline to 14 days|PP population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study treatments or provided at least one measurement SMH. Participants without any major protocol violations in given study treatment period were included in the PP population.||Percentage SMHR||Standard Error|Mean
846904|NCT01005966|Primary|Percent Surface Microhardness (SMH) Recovery of Enamel Specimens Exposed to NaF Toothpaste (1426ppmF) and AmF Toothpaste (1400ppmF)|SMH recovery test was used to assess the changes in mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents rehardening of enamel surface. Difference in percent SMH recovery was calculated by comparing study NaF toothpaste (1426ppmF) with reference AmF toothpaste (1400ppmF).|Baseline to 14 days|Per protocol (PP) population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study treatments and provided at least one measurement SMH. Participants without any major protocol violations in given study treatment period were included in the PP population.||Percentage SMHR||Standard Error|Mean
846905|NCT01001975|Primary|Determination of Ultraviolet A Protection Factor (PFA)|Test materials (V53-028 and V53-030) were applied to test area. Following a series of Ultraviolet radiation A (UVA) exposures, scores were recorded at 2 and 4 hours post-exposure, to determine the Minimal Persistent Pigment-Darkening Dose (MPPD) of protected and unprotected skin. PFA was calculated as the MPPD of protected skin divided by the MPPD of unprotected skin. Expected PFA is a score on a scale; range 6.40 (worst) to 15.62 (best).|2 to 4 hours post-exposure|Only subjects from the UVA Protection Testing group had V53-028 and V53-030 applied for the determination of PFA||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846906|NCT01001975|Primary|Determination of Sunscreen Protection Factor (SPF)|Test material (V53-028 and V53-030) and control test material (8% Homoslate SPF 4) were applied to test area. Following exposure to a series of Ultraviolet light exposures, SPF scores were recorded at 16 to 24 hours post-exposure, to determine the Minimal Erythema Dose (MED) of protected and unprotected skin. SPF was calculated as the MED of protected skin divided by the MED of unprotected skin. Expected SPF 15 is a score on a scale; range 11.34 (worst) to 19.83 (best).|16 to 24 hours post-exposure|Only subjects from the SPF Testing group had V53-028 and V53-030 applied for the determination of SPF||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846907|NCT00996307|Secondary|Antibody Persistence by Geometric Mean Titers (GMT)|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of Geometric Mean Titers (GMT at 6 months (Day 202)and 12 months (Day 387) after second vaccination.|6 months (Day 202) and 12 months (Day 387) after second vaccination|The analysis was done on the subgroup of the per-protocol set (PPS).||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846908|NCT00996307|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) Based on Baseline Seropositivity|Subgroup analysis based on Subjects with a pre-vaccination HI antibody titer < 1:10 and prevaccination HI antibody titer ≥ 1:10 Immunogenicity responses in subjects who are seropositive (A/H1N1 2009 HI titer ≥ 1:10) at Baseline (Day 1 (pre-vaccination)) as compared to those who are seronegative (HI titer < 1:10).|Day 22 (three weeks after first vaccination); day 43 (three weeks after second vaccination)|The analysis was done on the subgroup of the per-protocol set (PPS).||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846912|NCT00996307|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions After Second Vaccination|Safety was measured in terms of the number of participants reporting solicited local and systemic reactions after second vaccination.|Day 22 to 28|The analysis was done on the safety set. Almost all the subjects across the vaccine groups received their first and second vaccinations within the protocol-specified window. While all the enrolled subjects received their first vaccination, 3% to 7% of subjects across the vaccine groups did not receive their second vaccination.||Participants|||Number
846913|NCT00996307|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions After First Vaccination|Safety was measured in terms of the number of participants reporting solicited local and systemic reactions after first vaccination.|Day 1 to 7|The analysis was done on the safety set which included the five subjects who received wrong vaccination according to the randomization. These five subjects were excluded from PPS.||Participants|||Number
846914|NCT00996307|Secondary|Immunogenicity Measurement by Geometric Mean Titers (GMT)|Immunogenicity was measured in terms of the GMT at 21 days after each vaccination.|21 days after each vaccination|The analysis was done on the Full Analysis Set (FAS).||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
846915|NCT00996307|Primary|Antibody Responses After the First and Second Vaccinations|CBER guidance (<65 years of age): The lower bound of the two-sided 95% CI for the percent of subjects achieving seroconversion for HI antibody should be ≥ 40% AND the lower bound of the two sided 95% CI for the percent of subjects achieving an HI antibody titer ≥ 1:40 should be ≥ 70%.|21 days after each vaccination|The analysis was done on the per-protocol set (PPS).||Percentages of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846916|NCT00996281|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Serum Creatinine Elevations Greater Than 50% From Baseline and Greater Than the Upper Limit of Normal (ULN)|Serum creatinine was measured at every visit and evaluated as a laboratory parameter of special interest. The percentage of participants with creatinine increase ≥50% from Baseline and greater than ULN was summarized: - At any visit (includes transient and persistent elevations). - At the Final Visit (includes persistent elevations and participants whose first elevation may have been at the Final Visit). - At least 2 consecutive visits (includes only persistent elevations).|Baseline and Week 52|Safety analysis set.||percentage of participants|||Number
846917|NCT00996281|Primary|Percentage of Participants With at Least 1 Adverse Event|An adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product without regard to causality.|From Week 0 (Day 1) to Week 52.|Safety analysis set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication.||percentage of participants|||Number
846918|NCT00995722|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life as Measured by the 10-Item Neuro-ophthalmological Supplement to the NEI-VFQ-25||4 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
846919|NCT00995722|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life as Measured by the MG-QOL-15 Score||4 Months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
846920|NCT00995722|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life as Measured by the NEI-VFQ-25 Measures||4 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
846921|NCT00995722|Secondary|Change in Ocular Quantitative Myasthenia Score From Baseline to Week 16||4 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
846922|NCT00995722|Primary|Treatment Failure|Failure to achive sustatined minimal manifestation status by week 16|4 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846925|NCT00984659|Primary|SOBDA Threshold for Response Assessed as Mean Change From Baseline to Last Treatment Week in the SOBDA Score Based on Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) Change From Baseline of 50 Milliliters (mL) to <100 mL|FEV1 response was rated as 1=No change or worse (i.e., change of <50 mL); 2=Better (i.e., change of 50 to <100 mL); 3=Much better (i.e., change of >=100 mL). The threshold of response is a score change in the SOBDA questionnaire that is demonstrated to have a perceivable benefit for the participant. The threshold of response was evaluated as the change from Baseline in the SOBDA score based on study assessment (FEV1) scores pre-specified as “better” or demonstrating meaningful improvement.|Baseline and Week Prior to Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation. The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
846926|NCT00984659|Primary|SOBDA Threshold for Response as Assessed by Mean Change From Baseline to the Last Treatment Week in the SOBDA Score Based on a CRQ-SAS Dyspnea Domain (DD) Response Rated as “Better”|The threshold of response (TOR) is a score change in the SOBDA questionnaire that is demonstrated to have a perceivable benefit. The TOR was evaluated as the change from Baseline in the SOBDA score based on CRQ-SAS scores pre-specified as “better” or demonstrating meaningful improvement. The CRQ-SAS DD includes 5 questions (q.) scored 1 (maximum impairment) to 7 (no impairment). Individual q. were equally weighted, and domain scores (DSs) (range=1-7) were calculated as the mean across the non-missing items within each domain (DSs were calculated although an individual item score was missing).|Baseline and Week Prior to Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation. The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846970|NCT00952341|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With Complete Response in the Acute Phase of Cycle 1|"Acute phase was defined as 0 to 24 hours following initiation of chemotherapy.
Complete response was defined as no vomiting with no rescue therapy."|0 to 24 hours|Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as those who received chemotherapy, received a dose of study drug and had at least one post-treatment assessment. Any participant who did not have a response recorded for the assessment was excluded from the analysis.||Proportion of participants|||Number
846927|NCT00984659|Primary|SOBDA Threshold for Response as Assessed by Mean Change From Baseline to the Last Treatment Week in the SOBDA Score Based on a CGI-C Response Rated as “Better”|The threshold of response is a score change in the SOBDA questionnaire that is demonstrated to have a perceivable benefit for the participant. The threshold of response was evaluated as the change from Baseline in the SOBDA score based on CGI-C scores pre-specified as “better” or demonstrating meaningful improvement. The CGI-C is clinician completed on a 1 to 5 scale: 1, much worse, 2, worse; 3, no change; 4, better; 5, much better.|Baseline and Week Prior to Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation. The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846928|NCT00984659|Primary|SOBDA Threshold for Response Assessed as Mean Change From the Previous Week’s SOBDA Score Based on a Participant-completed PGAC Score Rated of “Better”|Changes from Baseline in the SOBDA score for responders (Rs) and non-responders (NRs) (using the PGAC assessment; 1 [much worse] to 5 [much better]), together with the cumulative proportions of Rs and NRs, was used to establish the threshold for defining SOBDA questionnaire Rs. The threshold of response is a score change in the SOBDA questionnaire that is demonstrated to have a perceivable benefit for the participant. The threshold of response was evaluated as the change from Baseline in the SOBDA score based on PGAC scores pre-specified as “better” or demonstrating meaningful improvement.|Baseline (last week of the 2-week Run-in Period) and Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (6-week Treatment Period)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation . The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846929|NCT00984659|Primary|Change From Baseline to Last Treatment Week in the SOBDA Score by Physician-completed mMRC and Participant-completed mMRC Responses at Visit 3/PD|The responsiveness of the SOBDA questionnaire was assessed by comparing score changes between responders and non-responders. The mMRC ranges from 0 (no breathlessness except with strenous exercise) to 4 (too breathless to leave the house; breathless when dressing/undressing) and is completed by the clinician or the participant as indicated. Changes in mean SOBDA scores during the last week of treatment in responders and non-responders using definitions based on the Physician-completed (Ph-C) and Participant-completed (Pa-C) mMRC conducted at Visit 3/Premature Discontinuation were assessed.|Baseline (2-week Run-in Period) and Week Prior to Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation. The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846930|NCT00984659|Primary|Change From Baseline to Last Treatment Week in the SOBDA Score by CRQ-SAS Dyspnea Domain (DD) Responses at Visit 3/PD|The responsiveness of the SOBDA questionnaire was assessed by comparing score changes of responders (Rs) versus non-responders (NRs). The CRQ-SAS DD includes 5 questions (q.) scored 1 (maximum impairment) to 7 (no impairment). Individual q. were equally weighted, and domain scores (DSs) (range=1-7) were calculated as the mean across the non-missing items within each domain (DSs were calculated although an individual item score was missing). Changes in mean SOBDA scores during the last treatment week in Rs and NRs using definitions based on the CRQ-SAS DD conducted at Visit 3/PD were assessed.|Baseline (2-week Run-in Period) and Week Prior to Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation. The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846931|NCT00984659|Primary|Change From Baseline to Last Treatment Week in the SOBDA Score by CGI-C Responses at Visit 3/PD|The responsiveness of the SOBDA questionnaire was assessed by comparing score changes between responders and non-responders. The CGI-C is clinician completed on a 1 to 5 scale: 1, much worse; 2, worse; 3, no change; 4, better; 5, much better. Changes in mean SOBDA scores during the last week of treatment in responders and non-responders using definitions based on the CGI-C conducted at Visit 3/Premature Discontinuation were assessed.|Baseline (2-week Run-in Period) and Week Prior to Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation. The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846932|NCT00984659|Primary|Number of Participants Classified as Responders and Non-responders by Physician-completed and Participant-completed mMRC Response at Visit 3/PD|A Physician-completed and Participant-completed mMRC responder was defined as a participant who had a score decrease of one unit or more between Visit 2 and Visit 3/Premature Discontinuation. A non-responder was defined as a participant who had the same score or an increase in score.|Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation. The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||participants|||Number
846933|NCT00984659|Primary|Number of Participants Classified as Responders and Non-responders by CRQ-SAS Dyspnea Domain Response at Visit 3/PD|A CRQ-SAS dyspnea domain responder was defined as a participant who had a score increase of 0.5 units or more for the dyspnea domain of the CRQ-SAS between Visit 2 and Visit 3/Premature Discontinuation. A non-responder was defined as a participant who had a decrease in the score, or an increase of less than 0.5 units.|Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation. The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||participants|||Number
847000|NCT00882557|Other Pre-specified|Half-life|Apparent terminal half-life.|Up to 68 hours post dose|||Hours||Full Range|Median
846934|NCT00984659|Primary|Number of Participants Classified as Responders and Non-responders by Clinician Global Impression of Change Question (CGI-C) Response at Visit 3/PD|"Clinicians were asked to provide their clinical impression regarding change in the participant’s shortness of breath by CGI-C. This was evaluated on a 1-5 Likert scale: 1 (much worse) to 5 (much better), with 3 being no change. A CGI-C responder was defined as a participant who had a response of better (4) or much better (5), and a non-responder was defined as a participant who had a response of much worse (1), worse (2), or no change (3)."|Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation. The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||participants|||Number
846935|NCT00984659|Primary|Change From the Previous Week to the Current Week’s SOBDA Score by Participant-completed PGAC Response at Days 8, 15, 22, 29, 36, and 43 and at Visit 3/PD (End of the 6-week Treatment Period or PD)|"Responsiveness reflects the ability of the SOBDA questionnaire to detect change under conditions of known change. Responders (Rs)=participants (par.) with a rating of better/much better (score of 4/5) on the PGAC (range; 1 [much worse] to 5 [much better]) at the relevant week; NRs=par. with a response of “much worse, worse, or no change (score of 3). Mean difference between Rs and NRs in the change from the previous week to the current week’s SOBDA score was calculated. For Visit 3/PD, the change from Baseline to the last treatment week's SOBDA score for Rs and NRs was calculated."|Baseline; Days 8, 15, 22, 29, 36, and 43 and Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|MITT Population. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation. The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846936|NCT00984659|Primary|Participants (Par.) Classified as Responders/Non-responders According to the Patient Global Assessment of Change (PGAC) Response at Days 8, 15, 22, 29, 36, and 43 and at Visit 3/Premature Discontinuation (PD) (the End of the 6-week Treatment Period or PD)|"The PGAC is par. completed on a 1-5 scale: 1, much worse; 2, worse; 3, no change; 4, better; 5, much better. Responders were defined as par. with a rating of better or much better (score of 4 or 5) on the PGAC at the relevant week; non-responders were defined as par. with a response of “much worse, worse, or no change on the PGAC. As pre-specified in the study protocol, results are presented independent of treatment allocation . The study objectives were to assess the measurement properties and validity of the SOBDA questionnaire independent of specific treatment effect."|Days 8, 15, 22, 29, 36, and 43 and Visit 3/PD (end of 6-week Treatment Period or earlier up to Week 8)|Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population: all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study medication. Analyses were conducted on data available for each specified time point.||participants|||Number
846937|NCT00984659|Primary|Known Group Validity (KGV) for the SOBDA Questionnaire Measured as the Comparison of the Baseline SOBDA Score in the Indicated Categories of CGI-S Scores at Visit 2|SOBDA KGV refers to the extent to which scores from the SOBDA questionnaire should differentiate participants with varying levels of dyspnea severity. It was assessed by comparing summary measures for the SOBDA score for each indicated level (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4) of the CGI-S score. Clinicians were asked to assess the severity of the participant’s dyspnea on the CGI-S scale. This was evaluated on a 1-4 Likert scale: 1 (mild) to 4 (very severe). KGV was confirmed if the SOBDA score increased with increasing values of CGI-S, both indicating increased levels of breathlessness.|Baseline (last week of the 2-week Run-in Period) and pre-treatement on Visit 2 (Day 1 of the 6-week Treatment Period)|Run-in Population. Participants with a SOBDA Baseline score and the CGI-S score at Visit 2 were analyzed.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846938|NCT00984659|Primary|Known Group Validity for the SOBDA Questionnaire Measured as the Comparison of the Baseline SOBDA Score in the Indicated Categories of the Participant-completed (ParC) mMRC Score at Visit 2|SOBDA known group validity refers to the extent to which scores from the SOBDA questionnaire should differentiate participants with varying levels of dyspnea severity. It was assessed by comparing summary measures for the SOBDA score for each indicated level (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4) of the ParC mMRC. The participant rated the degree of his/her dyspnea on the 5-point mMRC scale: 0 (none) to 4 (very severe). Known group validity was confirmed if the SOBDA score increased with increasing values of ParC mMRC, both indicating increased levels of breathlessness.|Baseline (last week of the 2-week Run-in Period) and pre-treatment on Visit 2 (Day 1 of the 6-week Treatment Period)|Run-in Population. Participants with a SOBDA Baseline score and the Participant-completed mMRC score at Visit 2 were analyzed.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846939|NCT00984659|Primary|Known Group Validity for the SOBDA Questionnaire Measured as the Comparison of the Baseline SOBDA Score in the Indicated Categories of the Physician-completed (PyC) mMRC Score at Visit 2|SOBDA known group validity refers to the extent to which scores from the SOBDA questionnaire should differentiate participants with varying levels of dyspnea severity. It was assessed by comparing summary measures for the SOBDA score for each indicated level (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4) of the PyC mMRC. The physician rated the degree of the participant's dyspnea on the 5-point mMRC scale: 0 (none) to 4 (very severe). Known group validity was confirmed if the SOBDA score increased with increasing values of PyC mMRC, both indicating increased levels of breathlessness.|Baseline (last week of the 2-week Run-in Period) and pre-treatment on Visit 2 (Day 1 of the 6-week Treatment Period)|Run-in Population. Participants with a SOBDA Baseline score and the Physician-completed mMRC score at Visit 2 were analyzed.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
846940|NCT00984659|Primary|Convergent Validity (CV) for the SOBDA Questionnaire Measured as the Correlation of the Baseline SOBDA Score With the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire-Self-Administered Standardized (CRQ-SAS) Dyspnea Domain Score at Visit 2|Convergent validity is defined as the ability of the SOBDA questionnaire to measure required information and was assessed by examining the relationship between the SOBDA score and the CRQ-SAS dyspnea domain score. Pearson's correlation coefficient is a measure of the linear dependence between 2 variables. A correlation of +1 or -1 will occur if the data from the 2 variables lie exactly on a line. The CRQ is a 20-item instrument measuring 4 domains (each measured on a scale of 1 [maximum impairment] to 7 [no impairment]) of functioning: mastery, fatigue, emotional function, and dyspnea.|Baseline (last week of the 2-week Run-in Period) and pre-treatment on Visit 2 (Day 1 of the 6-week Treatment Period)|Run-in Population. Participants with a SOBDA Baseline score and the indicated assessment at Visit 2 were analyzed.||Pearson's correlation coefficient|||Number
846941|NCT00984659|Primary|Convergent Validity for the SOBDA Questionnaire Measured as the Correlation of the Baseline SOBDA Score With the Clinician Global Assessment of Dyspnea Severity (CGI-S) Score at Visit 2|Convergent validity is defined as the ability of the SOBDA questionnaire to measure the required information and was assessed by examining the relationship between the SOBDA score with the CGI-S score. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient assesses if the relationship between two variables is monotone. A correlation of +1 or -1 will occur if one variable is a perfect monotone of the other. Clinicians were asked to assess the severity of the participant’s dyspnea on the CGI-S scale. This was evaluated on a 1-4 Likert scale: 1 (mild) to 4 (very severe).|Baseline (last week of the 2-week Run-in Period) and pre-treatment on Visit 2 (Day 1 of the 6-week Treatment Period)|Run-in Population. Participants with a SOBDA Baseline score and the indicated assessment at Visit 2 were analyzed.||Spearman rank correlation coefficient|||Number
846942|NCT00984659|Primary|Convergent Validity for the SOBDA Questionnaire Measured as Correlations of the Baseline SOBDA Score With Participant-completed Modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) and Physician-completed mMRC Scores at Visit 2|Convergent validity is defined as the ability of the SOBDA questionnaire to measure required information and was assessed by examining the relationship between the SOBDA score and the participant/physician-completed mMRC Dyspnea Scale assessments. The physician/participant rated the degree of the participant's dyspnea (trouble breathing) on the 5-point mMRC scale (0, none; 4, very severe). Spearman's rank correlation coefficient assesses if the relationship between two variables is monotone. A correlation of +1 or -1 will occur if one variable is a perfect monotone of the other.|Baseline (last week of the 2-week Run-in Period) and pre-treatment on Visit 2 (Day 1 of the 6-week Treatment Period)|Run-in Population. Participants with a SOBDA Baseline score and the indicated assessment at Visit 2 were analyzed. One participant who rated their own trouble breathing had missing data for the physician assessment.||Spearman rank correlation coefficient|||Number
846943|NCT00984659|Primary|Test-retest Reliability (T-RR) of SOBDA Scores Measured as the Difference in the SOBDA Weekly Score Between Week 1 and Week 2 of the 2-week Run-in Period|T-RR=stability during repeat measures over time in a stable population. SOBDA score was determined by the 13-item (it.) scoring algorithm, assigning a weekly mean score of 1-4 (higher scores=more severe breathlessness with daily activities) based on the mean of 7 days of data (or >=4 days). Daily total score is computed from the mean of the participant's (par.) scores on the 13 it. (>=7 it. must have non-missing responses). Only scores of stable par. (indicating no change [score=3] on the par.-completed Patient Global Assessment of Change [PGAC]; 1 [ much worse] to 5 [much better]) were used.|Week 1 and Week 2 of the 2-week Run-in Period|Run-in Population. Data from participants with weekly SOBDA scores at Week 1 and Week 2 of the 2-week Run-in Period and reporting no change on the second weekly PGAC were analyzed.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846944|NCT00984659|Primary|Internal Consistency (IC) of the Shortness of Breath With Daily Activities (SOBDA) Questionnaire in Participants With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Assessed as Cronbach's Alpha Value|Cronbach’s alpha (CA) is a measure of the IC of the 13-item SOBDA questionnaire (completed via electronic diary by a sample of participants). It is the ratio of the variance (var.) of the sum of the individual scores and the var. of the total score. The var. of the sum of a group of independent variables is the sum of their var.; thus, if the variables are positively correlated, the var. of the sum will be increased. If the items making up the score are identical and so perfectly correlated, CA=1. If the items are independent, CA=0. Higher scores indicate a more reliable (precise) instrument.|Day 1 of the 2-week Run-in Period|Run-in Population: all participants who completed Visit 2 (Day 1 of Treatment Period), including those who were not randomized, were randomized but did not receive a dose of study medication, and those who were randomized and received study medication. Participants with a score for each SOBDA item on Day 1 of the 2-week Run-in Period were analyzed.||ratio of variance|||Number
846945|NCT00976248|Primary|Time to Next Therapy With Single Agent RAD001 Therapy in Previously Untreated WM||End of follow-up, an average of 18 months|13 participants were censored due to follow-up ending prior to new therapy initiation.||Months||Full Range|Median
846946|NCT00976248|Primary|Time to Progression With Single Agent RAD001 Therapy in Previously Untreated WM.|Progression is defined as a 25% increase in serum IgM from the lowest attained response value or progression of clinically significant disease related symptoms.|End of Treatment, an average of 16 months|13 participants were excluded from this analysis due to treatment and follow-up ending prior to progression.||Months||Full Range|Median
846947|NCT00976248|Primary|Overall Response Rate of RAD001 in Patients With Previously Untreated WM|"Overall Response = Complete Response + Near Complete Response + Very Good Partial Response + Partial Response + Minor Response Complete Response: resolution of all symptoms, normalization of serum IgM levels with complete disappearance of IgM paraprotein by immunofixation, and resolution of any adenopathy or splenomegaly. A near CR (nCR) is defined as fulfilling all CR criteria in the presence of positive immunofixation test for an IgM paraprotein.
Very Good Partial Response: > 90% reduction in serum IgM levels. Partial Response: > 50% reduction in serum IgM levels. Minor Response: 25-49% reduction in serum IgM levels Progressive Disease: greater than 25% increase in serum IgM level occurs from the lowest attained response value or progression of clinically significant disease related symptom(s).
Stable Disease: < 25% change in serum IgM levels, in the absence of new or increasing adenopathy or splenomegaly and/or other progressive signs or symptoms of WM"|End of Treatment, an average of 16 months|||participants|||Number
846948|NCT00973479|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Van Der Heijde Modified Sharp (vdH-S) Score at Week 24.|Total vdH-S score is sum of joint erosion score and joint-space narrowing (JSN) score. Joint erosion score summarizes erosion severity in 32 joints of hands and 12 joints of feet. Each joint scored from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (extensive loss of bone from more than one half of the articulating bone). Maximal erosion score is 280. JSN score summarizes severity of JSN in 30 joints of hands and 12 joints of feet. Assessment of JSN, including subluxation, is scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (bony ankylosis or complete luxation). Maximal JSN score is 168. Thus, the worst possible vdH-S score is 448.|Week 24|Intent-to-treat: all patients analyzed according to the treatment for which they were randomized.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847001|NCT00882557|Other Pre-specified|Time to Maximum Concentration|Sampling time at which maximum plasma concentration occurred, obtained directly from the experimental plasma concentration time data, without interpolation.|Up to 68 hours post dose|||Hours||Full Range|Median
847209|NCT00737672|Secondary|Clinical Success|The resumption of normal dialysis for at least one session following study treatment (Index Procedure).|Following Index Procedure|||Participants|||Number
846949|NCT00973479|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response at Week 24|An ACR 50 response is defined as a greater than or equal to 50 percent improvement from baseline in: 1. Swollen (66 joints) and tender (68 joints) joint counts; 2. greater than or equal to 50 percentage improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: a. Participant's assessment of pain by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (0-10 cm) b. Participant's global assessment of disease activity by VAS (0-10 cm) c. Physician's global assessment of disease activity by VAS (0-10 cm) d. Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) e. C reactive protein.|Week 24|Intent-to-treat: all patients analyzed according to the treatment for which they were randomized.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
846950|NCT00973479|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Score at Week 14|The HAQ is 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 (no difficulty), to 3 (inability to perform a task in that area). HAQscore on a scale ranges from 0 (no disability) to 3 (completely disabled). Higher scores indicate worsening.|Week 14|Intent-to-treat: all patients analyzed according to the treatment for which they were randomized.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
846951|NCT00973479|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With Moderate or Good Response in Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) Using C-reactive Protein (CRP) at Week 14|"DAS28 using CRP is an index to measure the disease activity in participants with rheumatoid arthritis combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP, and participant’s global assessment of disease activity. The DAS28 score ranges from 0 (best) to 10 (worst). DAS28 score above 5.1 means high disease activity whereas a DAS28 below 3.2 indicates low disease activity. Higher scores indicate worsening. A decrease in DAS28 score >1.2 is being referred to as a good response and a decrease of 0.6-1.2 as a moderate response."|Week 14|Intent-to-treat: all patients analyzed according to the treatment for which they were randomized.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
846952|NCT00973479|Primary|Proportion of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 14|An ACR 20 response is defined as a greater than or equal to 20 percent improvement from baseline in: 1. Swollen (66 joints) and tender (68 joints) joint counts; 2. greater than or equal to 20 percentage improvement in at least 3 of the following 5 assessments: a. Participant's assessment of pain by Visual Analog Scale (VAS), (0 [no pain] to 10 [worst pain]) b. Participant's global assessment of disease activity by VAS c. Physician's global assessment of disease activity by VAS d. Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) e. C-reactive protein.|Week 14|Intent-to-treat: all patients analyzed according to the treatment for which they were randomized.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
846958|NCT00965458|Secondary|Hemoglobin A1c|Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is a measure of the average plasma concentration of blood sugar (glucose) over the previous three months and measures the level of optimal management of underlying disease. An HbA1c level of 5.6% or less is considered normal. HbA1c levels of 6.5% or higher is typical for individuals with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM). The closer HbA1c levels are to normal, the better controlled the disease is.|Baseline (Pre-treatment initiation), Week 52, and Week 104|Intent-to-treat||HgbA1c percent (%)||Standard Deviation|Mean
846959|NCT00965458|Secondary|Major Hypoglycemic Events Occurring From Randomization|Major hypoglycemic events are defined as a glucose concentration <55 mg/dL (grades 2-5, NCI-CTCAE version 3.0), or clinically: involving seizure(s) or involving loss of consciousness (coma), or requiring assistance from another individual in order to recover.|Baseline to Week 52 and Week 52 to Week 104|Intent-to-treat||Major Hypoglycemic Events|||Number
846960|NCT00965458|Secondary|Insulin Use in Units Per Kilogram Body Weight Per Day|The need to use insulin is an indication that the body is not producing enough endogenous insulin. Higher amounts of insulin use indicate higher disease activity.|Baseline (Pre-treatment initiation), Week 52, and Week 104|Intent-to-treat||Units per day divided by weight in kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
846961|NCT00965458|Secondary|2-Hour C-peptide Area Under the Curve (AUC) Result in Response to Standardized Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT)|C-peptide is a substance released by the pancreas into the bloodstream in equal amounts to insulin and reflects how much insulin pancreatic beta cells are making. The standardized MMTT evaluates whether beta cells are producing endogenous insulin. The MMTT was performed in the morning and blood samples for C-peptide collected at baseline (pre-meal) and 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 210,and 240 minutes post-meal. Results of the stimulated 2-hour (e.g., 120 minutes) post-meal C-peptide AUC are provided. Larger numbers are preferable (better) in these AUC results: more insulin being produced reflects less severe disease. C-peptide levels in the serum (e.g., AUC following a standardized MMTT) compared to control group at 1 year post treatment initiation for the evaluation of investigational products intended to preserve endogenous beta-cell function in T1DM trials is recognized by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) at the FDA as a valid efficacy primary endpoint.|Baseline (Pre-treatment initiation), Week 52, and Week 104|Intent-to-treat||pmol/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
846962|NCT00965458|Secondary|4-Hour C-peptide Area Under the Curve (AUC) Result in Response to Standardized Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT)|C-peptide is a substance released by the pancreas into the bloodstream in equal amounts to insulin and reflects how much insulin pancreatic beta cells are making. The standardized MMTT evaluates whether beta cells are producing endogenous insulin. The MMTT was performed in the morning and blood samples for C-peptide collected at baseline (pre-meal) and 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 210,and 240 minutes post-meal. Results of the stimulated 2-hour (e.g., 120 minutes) post-meal C-peptide AUC are provided. Larger numbers are preferable (better) in these AUC results: more insulin being produced reflects less severe disease. C-peptide levels in the serum (e.g., AUC following a standardized MMTT) compared to control group at 1 year post treatment initiation for the evaluation of investigational products intended to preserve endogenous beta-cell function in T1DM trials is recognized by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) at the FDA as a valid efficacy primary endpoint.|Baseline (Pre-treatment initiation), Week 52, and Week 104|Intent-to-treat||pmol/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
846963|NCT00965458|Primary|2-Hour C-peptide Area Under the Curve (AUC) Result in Response to Standardized Mixed Meal Tolerance Test (MMTT)|C-peptide is a substance released by the pancreas into the bloodstream in equal amounts to insulin and reflects how much insulin pancreatic beta cells are making. The standardized MMTT evaluates whether beta cells are producing endogenous insulin. The MMTT was performed in the morning and blood samples for C-peptide collected at baseline (pre-meal) and 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 210,and 240 minutes post-meal. Results of the stimulated 2-hour (e.g., 120 minutes) post-meal C-peptide AUC are provided. Larger numbers are preferable (better) in these AUC results: more insulin being produced reflects less severe disease. C-peptide levels in the serum (e.g., AUC following a standardized MMTT) compared to control group at 1 year post treatment initiation for the evaluation of investigational products intended to preserve endogenous beta-cell function in T1DM trials is recognized by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) at the FDA as a valid efficacy primary endpoint.|Baseline (pre-treatment initiation), Week 52|Intent-to-treat||pmol/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
846964|NCT00952341|Secondary|Time to First Vomiting Episode in Cycle 1|Time from administration of chemotherapy to first vomiting episode.|0 to 120 hours|Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as those who received chemotherapy, received a dose of study drug and had at least one post-treatment assessment. Any participant who did not have a response recorded for the assessment was excluded from the analysis.||Hours||Standard Error|Mean
846965|NCT00952341|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With No Impact on Daily Life in Cycle 1|"The Functional Living Index-Emesis is a self-administered, validated emesis & nausea-specific questionnaire. Participants completed the questionnaire 5 days post chemotherapy. It had 9 questions each on nausea and vomiting. No impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea & vomiting (CINV) on daily life was defined as an average item score of >6 on the 7-point scale (i.e., >108 total score). The scale was in the opposite direction for questions 3, 6, 11, 15 & 18. For each question: score ranged from 1 (worst) to 7 (best, i.e., no CINV). Total score range was 7 (worst) to 126 (best)."|0 to 120 hours|Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as those who received chemotherapy, received a dose of study drug and had at least one post-treatment assessment. Any participant who did not have a response recorded for the assessment was excluded from the analysis.||Proportion of participants|||Number
846966|NCT00952341|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With No Vomiting in the Delayed Phase of Cycle 1|Delayed Phase was defined as 25 to 120 hours following initiation of chemotherapy|25 to 120 hours|Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as those who received chemotherapy, received a dose of study drug and had at least one post-treatment assessment. Any participant who did not have a response recorded for the assessment was excluded from the analysis.||Proportion of participants|||Number
846967|NCT00952341|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With No Vomiting in the Acute Phase of Cycle 1|Acute Phase was defined as 0 to 24 hours following initiation of chemotherapy.|0 to 24 hours|Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as those who received chemotherapy, received a dose of study drug and had at least one post-treatment assessment. Any participant who did not have a response recorded for the assessment was excluded from the analysis.||Proportion of participants|||Number
846968|NCT00952341|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With No Vomiting in the Overall Phase of Cycle 1|"Overall Phase was defined as 0 to 120 hours following initiation of chemotherapy.
No vomiting was defined as no vomiting or retching or dry heaves (included participants who received rescue therapy)."|0 to 120 hours|Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as those who received chemotherapy, received a dose of study drug and had at least one post-treatment assessment. Any participant who did not have a response recorded for the assessment was excluded from the analysis.||Proportion of participants|||Number
846969|NCT00952341|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With Complete Response in the Delayed Phase of Cycle 1|"Delayed phase was defined as 25 to 120 hours following initiation of chemotherapy.
Complete response was defined as no vomiting with no rescue therapy."|25 to 120 hours|Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as those who received chemotherapy, received a dose of study drug and had at least one post-treatment assessment. Any participant who did not have a response recorded for the assessment was excluded from the analysis.||Proportion of participants|||Number
847070|NCT00819390|Secondary|HIV-1 RNA Copies/mL at Week 12 for On-ART Participants|Results reported are for HIV-1 RNA at week 12 for on-ART participants.|At week 12|Analysis is based on all on-ART participants with HIV-1 RNA data at week 12.||participants|||Number
847229|NCT00734539|Secondary|Chronic Lung Disease||36 weeks corrected gestational age|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
846971|NCT00952341|Primary|Proportion of Participants With Complete Response 120 Hours Following Initiation of High-dose Cisplatin Chemotherapy in the Overall Phase of Cycle 1|"Overall phase was defined as 0 to 120 hours following initiation of chemotherapy.
Complete response was defined as no vomiting with no rescue therapy."|0 to 120 hours|Full Analysis Set (FAS), defined as those who received chemotherapy, received a dose of study drug and had at least one post-treatment assessment. Any participant who did not have a response recorded for the assessment was excluded from the analysis.||Proportion of participants|||Number
846972|NCT00941330|Secondary|Response Rate by Imaging|"Arm A and recurrence score ≤10: Patients will have radiologic assessment of response to exemestane by clinical examination every 4 weeks and by radiologic assessment every 2 months. Once maximal response has been achieved (stable disease for 2 months after at least 4 months of treatment by radiologic assessment) or when 12 months of therapy has been given patients will proceed to surgery.
Arm B: Patients will be assessed for surgery after 6 cycles of docetaxel and cytoxan (TC) (18 weeks).
On arm A and recurrence score ≤10 patients will be reassessed for surgery once maximal radiologic response is achieved.
On arm B, patients will be reassessed for surgery after 6 cycles of TC (18 weeks).
Radiographic images were analyzed by a breast radiologist who looked at preoperative and postoperative breast mass imaging. If mass was smaller/less extensive, it was considered improved."|Every 2 months up to 3 years|Data were not available for 5 patients (4 withdrew and 1 did not have surgery).||Participants|||Count of Participants
846973|NCT00941330|Primary|Pathologic Complete Response|"Patients must have measurable disease by clinical examination.
Pathologic complete response (pCR): Absence of invasive breast cancer in the breast (mastectomy or lumpectomy) specimen at the time of definitive surgery. Presence of in situ cancer alone will be considered a pCR but may be recorded separately.
If pathologic stage was the same as clinical stage, it was called stable; if it was higher, upstaged (worse outcome); if lower, downstaged (better outcome). Pathologic stage was determined by Emory board-certified pathologists."|At time of definitive surgery|One patient in Arm B did not have surgery.||Participants|||Count of Participants
846978|NCT00909870|Other Pre-specified|Complete Healing by Week 16: Ulcers <= 12 Months Duration||16 weeks|Pre-specified Subgroup of the Intent-to-Treat Population||participants|||Number
846979|NCT00909870|Secondary|Time-to-Complete Healing|Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of the time to achieve median (50%) Complete Healing response in each treatment group.|From Week 0 visit to date subject's completely healed ulcer is 1st recorded as healed. If subject’s ulcer not healed at 16 weeks, the “time until CH” was censored at 112 days.|Intent-to-Treat population||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
846980|NCT00909870|Primary|Complete Healing of the Study Ulcer by Week 16.||16 weeks|Intent-to-Treat population||participants|||Number
846989|NCT00891839|Secondary|Shifts in Baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status|"The ECOG scale is:
Grade 0: Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease activities without restriction;
Grade 1: Restricted in physically strenuous activity, ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light nature;
Grade 2: Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to work. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours;
Grade 3: Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair > 50% of waking hours;
Grade 4: Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Confined to bed or Chair.
The shift table compares baseline ECOG scores to the ECOG scores as of the last treatment visit."|Day 0 (baseline) up to Month 8|Safety population. One participant dropped out prior to obtaining a post-treatment ECOG evaluation.||participants|||Number
846990|NCT00891839|Secondary|Shifts in Baseline to Post-Treatment in Positron Emission Tomography (PET)|Participants had a whole-body PET at baseline and at the end of cycle 6 or the end-of-treatment visit. Negative PET refers to PET results showing no abnormal lymph nodes; conversely, positive PET refers to PET results showing abnormal lymph nodes.|Baseline (Days -30 to 0), post treatment (up to Month 9, 30 days following completion of therapy)|Safety population of participants with PET data||participants|||Number
846991|NCT00891839|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate for Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from first exposure to study medication to death, or to last date from adverse events, concomitant medications, vital signs, lost to follow-up, or last known alive, for overall survival censoring date.|Day 1 up to Month 57|Safety population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846992|NCT00891839|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate for Progression-Free Survival|Progression-free survival is defined as the time from first exposure to study medication to disease progression or relapse, or death due to any cause. Progression is defined using the 2007 International Working Group criteria, as any new lesion or increase by at least 50% of previously involved sites from nadir.|Day 1 up to Month 45|Safety population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846993|NCT00891839|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate for Duration of Response|Duration of response is defined as the time between the date of the first response to date of progression or death. Response is determined on the basis of the 2007 IWG criteria. A complete response is a complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present before therapy. A partial response is at least a 50% decrease in sum of the product of the diameters (SPD) of up to 6 of the largest dominant nodes or nodal masses, no increase should be observed in the size of other nodes, liver or spleen, and no new sites of disease should be observed.|Day 1 up to Month 43|Safety population of participants who had a response.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
846994|NCT00891839|Primary|Overall Response Rate (Complete Response + Partial Response) at the End of Cycles 3 and 6 Using the 2007 International Working Group Criteria|"The International Working Group (IWG) criteria (Cheson et al 2007) for a complete response is a complete disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence of disease and disease-related symptoms if present before therapy. A partial response is at least a 50% decrease in sum of the product of the diameters (SPD) of up to 6 of the largest dominant nodes or nodal masses, no increase should be observed in the size of other nodes, liver or spleen, and no new sites of disease should be observed.
95% CIs are calculated using binomial exact method."|Month 3 (end of cycle 3), Month 6 (end of cycle 6)|Safety population consisting of all participants treated with at least 1 dose of bendamustine HCL.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
846995|NCT00887510|Secondary|Change in Total Adiponectin Level After Addition of Trandolapril to HCTZ Compared With Change in Adiponectin After Addition of HCTZ to Trandolapril|"Comparing the change in adiponectin: rand 1 visit4-visit 3 with rand 2 visit 3-2.
This allows for understanding the effects of addition of trandolapril to 12 weeks of HCTZ compared with addition of HCTZ to 12 weeks of trandolapril."|Over the course of 18 weeks|||mcg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
846996|NCT00887510|Primary|Change in Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT) Area Under Curve (AUC) After Addition of Trandolapril to Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) Compared With Change in OGTT AUC After Addition of HCTZ to Trandolapril|Comparing the change in OGTT AUC rand 1 visit4-visit 3 with rand 2 visit 3-2. This allows for understanding the effects of addition of trandolapril to 12 weeks of HCTZ compared with addition of HCTZ to 12 weeks of trandolapril. This is the primary outcome of the study.|OGTT AUC measured over 120 minutes after receiving study intervention for 18-24 weeks.|||minutes*mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
846997|NCT00882557|Secondary|Treatment-emergent Adverse Events|Safety was monitored throughout the study, including observation and reports of AEs as well as changes in physical findings, vital signs, ECGs, and laboratory tests.|Up to 9 days after the last dose of study drug administration (Day 13 to Day 17 for those dosed on Day 8 and Day 20 to Day 24 for those dosed on Day 15).|Safety population, defined as all subjects who received at least one dose of daptomycin||participants|||Number
846998|NCT00882557|Other Pre-specified|Volume of Distribution|Volume of distribution at steady state (mL) calculated as the product of clearance and mean residence time.|Up to 68 hours post dose|||mL/kg||Full Range|Median
846999|NCT00882557|Other Pre-specified|Clearance of Daptomycin|Plasma clearance is dose (µg) divided by area under the concentration versus time curve from time 0 to last quantifiable concentration time.|Up to 68 hours post dose|PK Population - defined as all subjects who received both doses of daptomycin||mL/hr/kg||Full Range|Median
847002|NCT00882557|Other Pre-specified|Maximum Plasma Concentration|Maximum plasma concentration over the entire sampling phase directly obtained from the experimental plasma concentration time data, without interpolation.|Within 30 minutes prior to the start of the infusion, mid-infusion, and end of the infusion; at 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 24, and 48 hours after the end of the infusion; and just prior to the next hemodialysis session (i.e., 68 hours post-infusion)|PK Population - defined as all subjects who received both doses of daptomycin||ug/mL||Full Range|Median
847003|NCT00882557|Primary|Evaluation of Area Under the Curve From Time 0 to Infinity|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to infinity for daptomycin doses|Within 30 minutes prior to the start of the infusion, mid-infusion, and end of the infusion; at 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 24, and 48 hours after the end of the infusion; and just prior to the next hemodialysis session (i.e., 68 hours post-infusion)|The primary endpoints are measured on the PK population, defined as all subjects who received both the 6 mg/kg dose and 9 mg/kg dose||hr*ug/mL||Full Range|Median
847004|NCT00880698|Secondary|Number of Participants Classified at Screening or Entry as HIV-1 Uninfected, and Acquiring HIV-1 Infection on Study|HIV tests were done at screening, entry and the last study visit after the third vaccination. Any participants classified as HIV-1 uninfected at screening or entry but HIV-1 infected at their last study visit would be classified as acquiring HIV-1 infection during the study|From study entry until at least 42 days after third vaccination|Includes HIV-1 uninfected participants 'as-randomized' with an HIV test at entry and either 2 or 6 weeks after the third vaccination (or after the time point at which they would have received the third vaccination if they did not receive all three doses)||participants|||Number
847005|NCT00880698|Secondary|Change in CD4 Count From Entry to Last Study Visit in HIV-1 Infected Participants|Change calculated as value at last study visit minus value closest to and before randomization date|At entry and 42 days after third vaccination or last study visit with CD4 measurement|Includes HIV-infected participants 'as randomized' with a CD4 count measurement prior to first vaccination and at their last study visit||cells/mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
847006|NCT00880698|Secondary|Change in CD4 Percent From Entry to Last Study Visit in HIV-1 Infected Participants|Change calculated as value at last study visit minus value closest to and before randomization date|At entry and 42 days after third vaccination or last study visit with CD4 measurement|Includes HIV-1 infected participants 'as-randomized' with a CD4 percent measurement prior to first vaccination and at last study visit||Percentage of lymphocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
847007|NCT00880698|Secondary|Percentage of HIV-1 Infected Participants With HIV-1 RNA <= 400 Copies/ml|Percentage of HIV-1 infected participants with HIV-1 RNA <= 400 copies/ml at last study visit|42 days after third vaccination or last study visit with an HIV-1 RNA measurement|Includes HIV-infected participants 'as-randomized' with an HIV-1 RNA measurement at their last study visit||Percentage of participants|||Number
847008|NCT00880698|Secondary|Number of Participants With Fecal Shedding of RotaTeq Strains After Each Vaccination|Number of participants with at least one positive enzyme immuno assay (EIA) rotavirus antigen test, positive fluorescent focal assay, and specific for rotavirus gene 6 which codes for the VP6 protein after each vaccination.|At entry, days 7, 14, 21 and 42 days after first dose, and at days 7 and 21 after the second and third doses|All participants 'as randomized'||participants|||Number
847009|NCT00880698|Primary|Percentage of Participants Classified as Responders as Measured by Serum Anti-rotavirus IgA ELISA (IgA) and Serum Neutralizing Antibodies (SNA) G1, G2, G3, G4 and P1.|Percentage of participants who experienced >=3-fold increases from prior to the first vaccination to at least 14 days after the third vaccination in Iga, SNA G1, SNA G2, SNA G3, SNA G4 and SNA P1.|Prior to first vaccination and at least 14 days after third vaccination|Only participants in the per-protocol population (received all 3 as-randomized vaccinations within recommended windows) and with measurements prior to the first vaccination and at least 11 days after the third vaccination and whose levels at the entry time point were less than one third of the upper limit of detection of the assay were included.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847010|NCT00880698|Primary|Percentage of Participants Developing New Grade >=3 Adverse Events|Percentage of participants developing new grade >=3 adverse events (abnormal laboratory values (hematology and chemistry), signs, symptoms and diagnoses) not present at the time of the first vaccination. Adverse events were graded using the Division of AIDS Table for Grading the Severity of Adult and Pediatric Adverse Events (Version 1.0, December 2004, Clarification August 2009).|From study entry until at least 42 days after third vaccination|Participants classified 'as'randomized'. Includes all follow-up on participants unblinded during the study and found to be on RotaTeq. Follow-up on participants unblinded during the study and found to be on placebo censored at the time of their last study vaccination.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856774|NCT00571324|Secondary|Mean Plasma Intact Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Area Under the Curve (AUC 0-6h)|To examine the effect of Exendin-(9-39) on plasma intact glucagon-like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) levels, samples were collected at various time points before and during the infusion [Exendin-(9-39) or vehicle] including: 60 minutes before the start of the infusion, again at the start of the infusion (Time 0), and then every 20 minutes until 6 hours after the start of the infusion. Using this information, the mean intact GLP-1 area under the curve (AUC) from the start of the infusion to the end of the infusion (360 minutes) was calculated for each both Exendin-(9-39) and vehicle and compared.|6 hours|Subjects served as their own control for comparison between effects of Exendin-(9-39) and the normal saline vehicle.||pmol*min/L||Standard Error|Mean
856775|NCT00571324|Secondary|Mean Plasma Glucagon Area Under the Curve (AUC 0-6h)|To examine the effect of Exendin-(9-39) on plasma glucagon levels, samples were collected at various time points before and during the infusion [Exendin-(9-39) or vehicle] including: 60 minutes before the start of the infusion, again at the start of the infusion (Time 0), and then every 20 minutes until 6 hours after the start of the infusion. Using this information, the mean plasma glucagon area under the curve (AUC) from the start of the infusion to the end of the infusion (360 minutes) was calculated for each both Exendin-(9-39) and vehicle and compared.|6 hours|Subjects served as their own control for comparison between effects of Exendin-(9-39) and the normal saline vehicle.||pg*min/dL||Standard Error|Mean
856952|NCT02542072|Secondary|Corneal Coverage|"Investigator assessment of corneal coverage for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenes.
Yes = coverage at all times or No = coverage incomplete"|Baseline Visit, 2 weeks follow-up, 4-weeks follow-up|||percentage of eyes|Eyes||Number
847071|NCT00819390|Secondary|HIV-1 RNA Copies/mL at Study Entry for On-ART Participants|Results reported are for HIV-1 RNA at study entry for on-ART participants.|At Entry|Analysis is based on all on-ART participants with HIV-1 RNA data at entry.||participants|||Number
847072|NCT00819390|Secondary|HIV-1 RNA Copies/mL at Weeks 12 and 24 for Off-ART Participants|Results reported are for HIV-1 RNA (copies/mL) at week 12 and week 24 for off-ART participants.|At weeks 12 and 24|Analysis is based on all off-ART participants with HIV-1 RNA data at week 12 and week 24.||log10 copies/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847028|NCT00874120|Primary|Average Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) Readings for a 5-hour Range Around the Time of Maximum Concentration (Tmax).|Five hour (hr) range around the Tmax was defined as approximately 2 hours before to approximately 2 hours after the Tmax, including Tmax. The parameters will be compared between active drug and placebo using analysis of variance (ANOVA). The 95% 2-sided Confidence Interval (CI) on the difference between treatments will also be presented.|24 hours after final dose of each 7-day treatment period.|The per-protocol population included 100 participants who completed both treatment periods and have 24-hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM) data for SBP measurements for each study drug, 46 participants who received phenylephrine followed by placebo and 54 participants who received placebo followed by phenylephrine.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847029|NCT00868140|Secondary|Matsuda Index|Whole body insulin sensitivity as determined by the Matsuda Index|6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847030|NCT00868140|Primary|Fasting Serum Insulin (uIU/ml)|Fasting serum insulin (uIU.min/ml) measured at 0, 60 and 120 minutes of a 2 hour OGTT following 6 months treatment with either pioglitazone or placebo|6 months|||uIU.min/ml||Standard Error|Mean
847031|NCT00868140|Primary|Fasting Serum Insulin|Fasting serum insulin (uIU.min/ml) measured at 0, 60 and 120 minutes of a 2 hour OGTT before treatment with either pioglitazone or placebo|baseline|||uIU.min/ml||Standard Error|Mean
847032|NCT00868140|Primary|AUC DCI-IPG (%/Min)|Change in the Area Under the Curve DCI-IPG measurements in blood samples taken at 15 minute intervals during the 2 hour OGTT following 6 months of treatment with pioglitazone or placebo. Values reported as a percentage of bioactivity measured at time 0. Negative values indicate a decrease relative to the time 0 measurement.|6 months|||% bioactivity at time 0 of OGTT||Standard Error|Mean
847033|NCT00868140|Secondary|Matsuda Index|"Whole body insulin sensitivity as determined by the Matsuda Index as calculated using the following formula:
10,000 divided by the square root of (FPI* FPG) * (xGPC* xIPC) Where FPI is fasting plasma insulin expressed as uU/ml, FPG is fasting plasma glucose expressed as mg/dL, xGPC is mean plasma glucose concentration after the load and xIPC is the mean insulin concentration after the load.
Values calculated on samples taken at 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes of a 2 hour OGTT. Values typically range from 0 to 12 units with higher scores indicating better insulin sensitivity. A value of 2.5 or less is indicative of insulin resistance."|Baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847034|NCT00868140|Primary|AUC DCI-IPG (%/Min)|Change in the Area Under the Curve DCI-IPG measurements in blood samples taken at 15 minute intervals during the 2 hour OGTT before treatment with pioglitazone or placebo. Values reported as a percentage of bioactivity measured at time 0. Negative values indicate a decrease relative to the time 0 measurement.|Baseline|||% bioactivity at time 0 of OGTT||Standard Error|Mean
847035|NCT00856284|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 104|The change from Baseline to Week 104 in HbA1c (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound). The least squares (LS) means are from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, study schedule, and geographic region as class variables, and Baseline metformin dose and Baseline HbA1c as covariates.|Baseline and Week 104|The Per-protocol set included all randomized patients who took at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug, with a Baseline assessment and at least 1 post-baseline assessment for that variable and who had no major protocol violations. Last observation carried forward was used (LOCF).||percentage glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847036|NCT00856284|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight Over Time|LS Means are from an ANCOVA model with treatment, study schedule and geographic region as class variables, and Baseline weight and Baseline metformin dose as covariates.|Baseline and Weeks 12, 26, 39, 52, 65, 78, 91, and 104.|Full analysis set, LOCF was used.||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847037|NCT00856284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Glycosylated Hemoglobin Less Than or Equal to 7.0%|Percentage of participants with HbA1c ≤ 7.0% at Weeks 26, 52, 78, and 104. Participants who did not complete the scheduled Week 104 visit were assessed based on their response at the time of discontinuation.|Weeks 26, 52, 78, and 104.|Full analysis set. Participants who did not complete the scheduled Week 26, Week 52, Week 78 or Week 104 visit were assessed based on their response at the time of discontinuation.||percentage of participants|||Number
847038|NCT00856284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Glycosylated Hemoglobin Less Than or Equal to 6.5%|The percentage of participants with HbA1c less than or equal to 6.5% at Weeks 26, 52, 78, and 104. Participants who did not complete the scheduled Week 104 visit were assessed based on their response at the time of discontinuation.|Weeks 26, 52, 78, and 104.|Full analysis set. Participants who did not complete the scheduled Week 26, Week 52, Week 78 or Week 104 visit were assessed based on their response at the time of discontinuation.||percentage of participants|||Number
847039|NCT00856284|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose Over Time|The change from Baseline in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was assessed at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 26, 39, 52, 65, 78, 91, and 104. LS means are from an ANCOVA model with treatment, study schedule, and geographic region as class variables, and Baseline FPG and Baseline metformin dose as covariates.|Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 26, 39, 52, 65, 78, 91, and 104.|Full analysis set, which included all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug who had a Baseline assessment and at least 1 post-baseline assessment for FPG. LOCF was used.||mg/dL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847040|NCT00856284|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin at Other Time Points|The change from Baseline over time in HbA1c (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound). LS means are from an ANCOVA model with treatment, study schedule, and geographic region as class variables, and Baseline metformin dose and Baseline HbA1c as covariates.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 26, 39, 65, 78, and 91.|Per-protocol set; LOCF was used.||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847041|NCT00856284|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 52|The change from Baseline to Week 52 in HbA1c (the concentration of glucose bound to hemoglobin as a percent of the absolute maximum that can be bound). The least squares (LS) means are from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with treatment, study schedule, and geographic region as class variables, and Baseline metformin dose and Baseline HbA1c as covariates.|Baseline and Week 52|The Per-protocol set included all randomized patients who took at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug, with a Baseline assessment and at least 1 post-baseline assessment for that variable and who had no major protocol violations. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used.||percentage glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847042|NCT00847912|Primary|Hazard Ratio for Surgically Treated KC||date of randomization to last visit before end of study follow up (6/30/2013), assessed up to four years|||participants|||Number
847043|NCT00847912|Primary|The Time to Diagnosis of the First Keratinocyte Carcinoma (KC) on the Face or Ears for Which Surgery is Performed|Diagnosis of the first Primary Basil Cell Carcinoma (BCC) or primary Squamous Cell Carcinoma (SCC) on the face or ears that was removed surgically.|From randomization to last visit prior to end of study date (6/30/2013), assessed up to four years|||years||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847044|NCT00837434|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting ACR50 Response Criteria at Week 24|"The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Responder Index is defined as someone who achieved at least 50% improvement in the tender and swollen 28-joint count, and 50% improvement in at least three of the following 5 measures:
Patient's pain assessment (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) 100 mm)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (VAS 100 mm)
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS 100 mm)
Patient self-assessed disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score)
Acute phase reactant (CRP).
Participants with measurements for designated time points were included in the analysis."|Week 24|The Modified Intent-to-Treat with available data population included all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of either etanercept or adalimumab. Data were not available for five participants who received Etanercept.||percentage of participants|||Number
847045|NCT00837434|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting ACR50 Response Criteria at Week 12|"The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Responder Index is defined as someone who achieved at least 50% improvement in the tender and swollen 28-joint count, and 50% improvement in at least three of the following 5 measures:
Patient's pain assessment (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) 100 mm)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (VAS 100 mm)
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS 100 mm)
Patient self-assessed disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score)
Acute phase reactant (CRP).
Participants with measurements for designated time points were included in the analysis."|Week 12|The Modified Intent-to-Treat with available data population included all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of either etanercept or adalimumab. Data were not available for two participants who received Etanercept.||percentage of participants|||Number
847046|NCT00837434|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting ACR20 Response Criteria at Week 24|"The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Responder Index is defined as someone who achieved at least 20% improvement in the tender and swollen 28-joint count, and 20% improvement in at least three of the following 5 measures:
Patient's pain assessment (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) 100 mm)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (VAS 100 mm)
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS 100 mm)
Patient self-assessed disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score)
Acute phase reactant (CRP).
Participants with measurements for designated time points were included in the analysis."|Week 24|The Modified Intent-to-Treat with available data population included all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of either etanercept or adalimumab. Data were not available for five participants who received Etanercept.||percentage of participants|||Number
847047|NCT00837434|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting ACR20 Response Criteria at Week 12|"The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Responder Index is defined as someone who achieved at least 20% improvement in the tender and swollen 28-joint count, and 20% improvement in at least three of the following 5 measures:
Patient's pain assessment (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) 100 mm)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (VAS 100 mm)
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS 100 mm)
Patient self-assessed disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score)
Acute phase reactant (CRP).
Participants with measurements for designated time points were included in the analysis."|Week 12|The Modified Intent-to-Treat with available data population included all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of either etanercept or adalimumab. Data were not available for two participants who received Etanercept.||percentage of participants|||Number
847048|NCT00837434|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants Fulfilling DAS-28-CRP Good or Moderate Response Criteria at Week 24"|Good responders had: change in DAS28-CRP (Baseline-Week 24) > 1.2 and the Week 24 DAS-CRP score was <= 3.2. If the conditions for non-response* or good response were not met then the DAS28-CRP response was considered moderate.[*Non-responders had any of the 4 conditions: change in DAS28-CRP (Baseline –Week 24) <0.6; 0.6 <\= change in DAS28-CRP ( Baseline-Week 24) < 1.2 with Week 24 DAS28-CRP score > 5.1 ; a flare that required prednisone > 10 mg/day (or equivalent) beyond Week 8 or the inability to taper prednisone to <= 10 mg/day by Week 8; or the participant required prednisone > 20 mg/day at any time point]. Participants with measurements for designated time points were included in the analysis.|Week 24|The Modified Intent-to-Treat with available data population included all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of either etanercept or adalimumab. Data were not available for five participants who received Etanercept.||percentage of participants|||Number
847073|NCT00819390|Secondary|HIV-1 RNA Copies/mL at Study Entry for Off-ART Participants|Results reported are for HIV-1 RNA (copies/mL) at study entry for off-ART participants.|At Entry|Analysis is based on all off-ART participants with HIV-1 RNA data at entry.||log10 copies/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847230|NCT00734539|Secondary|Focal Intestinal Perforation||prior to hospital discharge, up to 15 ½ months|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
847049|NCT00837434|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Fulfilling DAS-28-CRP “Good or Moderate Response” Criteria at Week 12|Good responders: change in DAS28-CRP (Baseline-Week12) > 1.2 and Week 12 DAS-CRP score was <\= 3.2. If the conditions for non-response* or good response were not met, the DAS28-CRP response was considered moderate. Participants with measurements for designated time points were included in the analysis. [*Non-responders had any of 4 conditions: change in DAS28-CRP (Baseline –Week 12) <0.6; 0.6 <\= change in DAS28-CRP ( Baseline-Week 12) < 1.2 with Week 12 DAS28-CRP score > 5.1; a flare that required prednisone > 10 mg/day (or equivalent) beyond Week 8 or the inability to taper prednisone to <\= 10 mg/day by Week 8; or the participant required prednisone > 20 mg/day at any time point].|Week 12|The Modified Intent-to-Treat with available data population included all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of either etanercept or adalimumab. Data were not available for two participants who received Etanercept.||percentage of participants|||Number
847050|NCT00837434|Primary|Percentage of CD27+ Switched Memory B Cells at Week 12|Analysis of the steady state composition of the B cell compartment were performed using ex-vivo multicolor flow cytometry on Ficoll isolated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). CD27+ switched memory B cells are a subset of B cells and are assessed by flow cytometry. CD27+ switched memory B cells are expressed as a percent of B cells. Lower CD27+ memory B cells indicate a decrease in the generation of B cell memory which may be caused by blocking lymphotoxin (LT) and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) signaling.|Week 12|The Per Protocol population includes subjects with a baseline and week 12 (plus or minus 1 week) assessment that received at least 75% of the planned doses of either etanercept or adalimumab prior to week 12 and who did not have any serious protocol deviations.||Percentage of B Cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
847051|NCT00819390|Secondary|Percent Activation Levels of Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cells (pDC) and Myeloid Dendritic Cells (mDC) at Week 24|Results reported are the week 24 percent activation levels of pDC and mDC.|At week 24|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 24.||percentage of cells||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847052|NCT00819390|Secondary|Percent Activation Levels of Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cells (pDC) and Myeloid Dendritic Cells (mDC) at Week 12|Results reported are the week 12 percent activation levels of pDC and mDC.|At week 12|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 12.||percentage of cells||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847053|NCT00819390|Secondary|Percent Activation Levels of Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cells (pDC) and Myeloid Dendritic Cells (mDC) at Baseline|Baseline percent activation levels of pDC were computed as the mean of pre-entry and entry percent activation levels of pDC. Similarly, baseline percent activation levels of mDC were computed as the mean of pre-entry and entry percent activation levels of mDC.|At pre-entry and entry|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at pre-entry or entry.||percentage of cells||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847054|NCT00819390|Secondary|Fasting Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) at Week 24|Results reported are the week 24 fasting LPS.|At week 24|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 24.||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847055|NCT00819390|Secondary|Fasting Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) at Week 12|Results reported are the week 12 fasting LPS.|At week 12|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 12.||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847056|NCT00819390|Secondary|Fasting Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) at Entry|Results reported are for entry fasting LPS.|At entry|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at entry.||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847057|NCT00819390|Secondary|Soluble CD14 (sCD14) at Week 24|Results reported are the week 24 sCD14.|At week 24|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 24.||million pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847058|NCT00819390|Secondary|Soluble CD14 (sCD14) at Week 12|Results reported are the week 12 sCD14.|At week 12|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 12.||million pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847059|NCT00819390|Secondary|Soluble CD14 (sCD14) at Baseline|Baseline sCD14 was computed as the mean of pre-entry and entry sCD14.|At pre-entry and entry|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at pre-entry or entry.||million pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847060|NCT00819390|Secondary|IL-6, Soluble TNF-rI (sTNF-rI) and D-dimer at Week 24|Results reported are the week 24 IL-6, sTNF-rI and D-dimer.|At week 24|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 24.||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847061|NCT00819390|Secondary|IL-6, Soluble TNF-rI (sTNF-rI) and D-dimer at Week 12|Results reported are the week 12 IL-6, sTNF-rI and D-dimer.|At week 12|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 12.||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847062|NCT00819390|Secondary|IL-6, Soluble TNF-rI (sTNF-rI) and D-dimer at Baseline|Baseline IL-6, sTNF-rI and D-dimer were computed as the mean of pre-entry and entry IL-6, sTNF-rI and D-dimer, respectively.|At pre-entry and entry|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at pre-entry or entry.||pg/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847063|NCT00819390|Secondary|Percent CD4 HLA-DR+/CD38+ at Week 24|Results reported are the week 24 percentage of CD4 expressing HLA-DR+/CD38+.|At Week 24|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 24.||percent of CD4 expressing HLA-DR+/CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847064|NCT00819390|Secondary|Percent CD4 HLA-DR+/CD38+ at Week 12|Results reported are the week 12 percentage of CD4 expressing HLA-DR+/CD38+.|At Week 12|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 12.||percent of CD4 expressing HLA-DR+/CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847065|NCT00819390|Secondary|Percent CD4 HLA-DR+/CD38+ at Baseline|Baseline CD4 HLA-DR+/CD38+ is computed as the mean of pre-entry and entry CD4 HLA-DR+/CD38+.|At pre-entry and entry|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at pre-entry or entry.||percent of CD4 expressing HLA-DR+/CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847066|NCT00819390|Secondary|Percent CD8 CD38+ at Week 24|Results reported are the week 24 percentage of CD8 expressing CD38+.|At Week 24|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 24.||percent of CD8 expressing CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847067|NCT00819390|Secondary|Percent CD8 CD38+ at Week 12|Results reported are the week 12 percentage of CD8 expressing CD38+.|At Week 12|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at week 12.||percent of CD8 expressing CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847068|NCT00819390|Secondary|Percent CD8 CD38+ at Baseline|Baseline CD8 CD38+ is computed as the mean of pre-entry and entry CD8 CD38+.|At pre-entry and entry|Analysis is based on all participants with assay data at pre-entry or entry.||percent of CD8 expressing CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847069|NCT00819390|Secondary|HIV-1 RNA Copies/mL at Week 24 for On-ART Participants|Results reported are for HIV-1 RNA at week 24 for on-ART participants.|At week 24|Analysis is based on all on-ART participants with HIV-1 RNA data at week 24.||participants|||Number
847074|NCT00819390|Secondary|Number of Participants With Events Grade 3 or Higher|Events included signs and symptoms, laboratory abnormalities and/or clinical events grade 3 or higher which were described by site clinician blinded to the treatment arm as definitely or possibly related to the study treatment.|From start of study treatment to study completion at week 28|Analysis is based on all enrolled participants, off-ART and on-ART, who received study treatment.||participants|||Number
847075|NCT00819390|Secondary|Change in Total CD4 T Cell Count From Baseline to Week 12|Baseline CD4 count (mean of pre-entry and entry CD4 count) is subtracted from the mean of week 10 and week 12 CD4 count|At pre-entry, entry, weeks 10 and 12|Analysis used a modified as-treated approach, limited to participants with assay data at baseline and weeks 10 or 12, and with no break in study treatment for >=14 days. Off-ART analysis excluded participants who started ART. On-ART analysis excluded participants who stopped ART or had virologic rebound (confirmed HIV-1 RNA>1000 copies/mL).||cells/mm^3||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847076|NCT00819390|Secondary|Change in Percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+ From Baseline to Week 24 in Arm A and Arm C|The baseline percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+ (mean of pre-entry and entry percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+) was subtracted from the mean of week 22 and week 24 percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+.|At Pre-entry, entry, Weeks 22 and 24|Analysis used a modified as-treated approach, limited to participants with assay data at baseline and weeks 22 or 24, and with no break in study treatment for >=14 days. Off-ART analysis excluded participants who started ART. On-ART analysis excluded participants who stopped ART or had virologic rebound (confirmed HIV-1 RNA>1000 copies/mL).||percent of CD8 expressing HLA-DR+/CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847077|NCT00819390|Secondary|Change in Percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+ From Week 12 to Week 24|The mean of week 10 and week 12 percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+ is subtracted from the mean of the week 22 and week 24 percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+|At Weeks 10, 12, 22 and 24|Analysis used a modified as-treated approach, limited to participants with assay data at weeks 10 or 12, and 22 or 24, and with no break in study treatment for >=14 days. Off-ART analysis excluded participants who started ART. On-ART analysis excluded participants who stopped ART or had virologic rebound (confirmed HIV-1 RNA>1000 copies/mL).||percent of CD8 expressing HLA-DR+/CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847078|NCT00819390|Secondary|Change in Percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+ From Start to End of the 12-week Chloroquine Treatment Period|For Arm A: Chloroquine then Placebo for off-ART participants and Arm C: Chloroquine then Placebo for on-ART participants, the baseline percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+ (mean of pre-entry and entry percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+) was subtracted from the mean of week 10 and week 12 percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+. For Arm B: Placebo then Chloroquine for off-ART participants and Arm D: Placebo then Chloroquine for on-ART participants, the mean of week 10 and week 12 percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+ was subtracted from the mean of week 22 and week 24 percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+.|For Arms A and C: Pre-entry, entry, weeks 10 and 12. For Arms B and D: Weeks 10, 12, 22 and 24|Analysis used a modified as-treated approach, limited to participants with assay data at the required time points, and with no break in study treatment for >=14 days. Off-ART analysis excluded participants who started ART. On-ART analysis excluded participants who stopped ART or had virologic rebound (confirmed HIV-1 RNA>1000 copies/mL).||percent of CD8 expressing HLA-DR+/CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847079|NCT00819390|Primary|Change in Percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+ From Baseline to Week 12|The baseline percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+ (mean of pre-entry and entry percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+) was subtracted from the mean of week 10 and week 12 percent CD8 HLA-DR+/CD38+.|At pre-entry, entry, weeks 10 and 12|Analysis used a modified as-treated approach, limited to participants with assay data at baseline and weeks 10 or 12, and with no break in study treatment for >=14 days. Off-ART analysis excluded participants who started ART. On-ART analysis excluded participants who stopped ART or had virologic rebound (confirmed HIV-1 RNA>1000 copies/mL).||percent of CD8 expressing HLA-DR+/CD38+||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847080|NCT00811928|Secondary|Number of Participants in Whom Mortality is Unlikely, Possibly, and Probably Related to Fungal Infection Occurred Within 100 Days From Randomization|"Exact Causes of Death and Their Relationship to IFI Episode Were As Follows:
Unlikely related: participant completed treatment and cause of death was due to primary disease or complication
Possibly related: IFI undergoing treatment without stabilization, or with failure to have a complete remission, where cause of death might have been due to IFI, including progression or relapse of primary disease
Probably related: autopsy or clinical signs suggested that progression of IFI was the probable cause of death"|From randomization date to Day 100|The full analysis set (FAS) included all of those randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one post-treatment follow-up data of primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
847081|NCT00811928|Secondary|Number of Participants in Whom All-cause Mortality Occurred Within 100 Days From Randomization|Death from any cause.|Randomization date to Day 100|The full analysis set (FAS) included all of those randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one post-treatment follow-up data of primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
847082|NCT00811928|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Failure During Treatment|"Clinical failure was defined as follows:
Presence of a proven or probable IFI
Systemic antifungal treatment (IV) for 4 consecutive days or more than 10 days total
Discontinuation due to adverse event (AE) possibly or probably related to study drug
Lost-to-follow-up or discontinuation from the study for any reason with loss to follow-up during the Treatment Phase"|Up to 12 weeks (84 days)|The full analysis set (FAS) included all of those randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one post-treatment follow-up data of primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
847083|NCT00811928|Secondary|Time From Randomization to Administration of First Systemic Antifungal Intravenous (IV) Therapy|The time measured in days from randomization to the administration of the first concomitant systemic anti-fungal therapy in the entire FAS population. Not all participants who accepted systemic anti-fungal therapy may have had a IFI clinical diagnosis. IFI diagnosis criteria for antifungal therapy administration may include: persistent fever, failure of appropriate broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment concomitant with lower respiratory tract infection symptoms, microbiological criteria with corresponding clinical signs and symptoms.|Up to 12 weeks (84 days)|The full analysis set (FAS) included all of those randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one post-treatment follow-up data of primary efficacy variable.||Days|||Number
847117|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Bone Strength of Spine Peripheral Bone by Finite Element Analysis, N|Spine peripheral bone (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847084|NCT00811928|Secondary|Time From Randomization to the First Onset of Proven or Probable IFI|The time measured in days to the first occurrence of proven/probable IFI diagnosis in the entire FAS population from randomization to Day 100 of follow-up visit. Participants may not have accepted immediate antifungal treatment and later received antifungal treatment based upon further investigator review of the participant's IFI condition. IFI diagnosis criteria may include: persistent fever, failure of appropriate broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment concomitant with lower respiratory tract infection symptoms, positive blood/biopsy cultures with corresponding clinical signs and symptoms.|From randomization date to Day 100|The full analysis set (FAS) included all of those randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one post-treatment follow-up data of primary efficacy variable.||Days|||Number
847085|NCT00811928|Secondary|Number of Participants With Proven or Probable Diagnosis of IFI Within 100 Days From Randomization|Number of participants who developed a proven or probable IFI from randomization date to Day 100 of follow-up visit. IFI diagnosis criteria may include: persistent fever, failure of appropriate broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment concomitant with lower respiratory tract infection symptoms, microbiological criteria with corresponding clinical signs and symptoms.|From randomization date to Day 100|The full analysis set (FAS) included all of those randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one post-treatment follow-up data of primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
847086|NCT00811928|Primary|Number of Participants With Proven or Probable Diagnosis of Invasive Fungal Infection (IFI) During the Treatment Period|Number of participants developing a proven or probable IFI from randomization to the last dosage date (up to 12 weeks [84 days]) plus 7 days. IFI diagnosis criteria may include: persistent fever, failure of appropriate broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment concomitant with lower respiratory tract infection symptoms, microbiological criteria with corresponding clinical signs and symptoms.|Up to 12 Weeks (84 days) plus 7 days|The full analysis set (FAS) included all of those randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one post-treatment follow-up data of primary efficacy variable.||participants|||Number
847087|NCT00808405|Secondary|Time to First Negative Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV) DNA PCR|To examine the time to first negative HSV DNA PCR among women who have a history of GUD and are HSV-2 seropositive and HIV-1 seronegative, and who are randomized to 400mg acyclovir or matching placebo|Days 1-5, 7, 9, 11, 13|Eligible women were 18-50 years of age, HIV-1 seronegative, HSV-2 seropositive and who presented to the study clinic with a new genital ulcer. Intention to treat analysis was used.||Days||Standard Error|Mean
847088|NCT00808405|Primary|Time to Healing of Genital Lesions|To examine time to healing of genital lesions among women who have a history of GUD and are HSV-2 seropositive and HIV-1 seronegative, and who are randomized to 400mg acyclovir or matching placebo|Days 1-5, 7, 9, 11, 13|Eligible women were 18-50 years of age, HIV-1 seronegative, HSV-2 seropositive and who presented to the study clinic with a new genital ulcer. Intention to treat analysis was used.||Days||Standard Error|Mean
847089|NCT00806351|Secondary|All-Cause Mortality|All-cause mortality during study therapy and at follow-up visits reported as unique deaths at EOIVT, end of oral treatment (EOT-oral), 2 Week Follow-Up and 6 Week Follow-Up|Baseline up to 6 weeks post treatment|Safety Population||participants|||Number
847090|NCT00806351|Secondary|Time to Death|Time to death defined as: date of death minus first treatment date plus 1.|Day 1 up to Day 98|Safety Population;subset of participants who died||days||Full Range|Median
847091|NCT00806351|Secondary|Time to First Negative Blood Culture for Candida Species|A participant had a negative blood culture, if having determined the day of the first negative blood culture, the subsequent blood culture was also negative, or if positive, the interval between the cultures was at least 2 days. For participants whose blood culture went from positive to negative, the time to negative blood culture defined as: date of first negative blood culture minus first treatment date plus 1.|Baseline up to Day 56|MITT Population; subset of participants who had a positive blood culture for Candida sp. on Day 1 of treatment. No participant in the Caspofungin treatment arm had a positive blood culture for Candida sp. on Day 1 of treatment.||days||Full Range|Median
847092|NCT00806351|Secondary|Number of Participants With New Infections|Participant counts of microbiologic response of new infection defined as clinical failure with emergence of new Candida sp not identified at baseline at the original site of infection or at a distant site of infection. Clinical failure defined as ≥3 doses study medication and no significant improvement of s/s or death due to Candida.|2 and 6 weeks post treatment|MITT Population||participants|||Number
847093|NCT00806351|Secondary|Number of Participants With Recurrence|Participant counts of microbiologic response of recurrence defined as any baseline Candida sp isolated following eradication, or culture data were not available for participants with a clinical response of failure after a previous response of success. Clinical failure defined as ≥3 doses study medication and no significant improvement of s/s or death due to Candida. Clinical success is resolution of s/s and no additional antifungal treatment needed.|2 and 6 weeks post treatment|MITT Population||participants|||Number
847094|NCT00806351|Secondary|Clinical Response at Day 10|Participant counts of clinical response categorized as success, failure, or indeterminate. Success: no s/s of Candida (cure) or significant but incomplete resolution of s/s of Candida; no additional systemic or oral antifungal treatment required (improvement). Failure: worsening of s/s of the Candida infection. Indeterminate: evaluation could not be made due to withdrawal from study prior to assessment of cure or failure. Participants who received fewer than 3 doses of study medication were assigned a clinical efficacy response of indeterminate.|Day 10|MITT Population; Number of participants analyzed (N): participants with evaluable data||participants|||Number
847095|NCT00806351|Secondary|Response Based on Clinical Cure and Microbiological Success at 6-Week Follow-Up Visit|Participant counts of clinical cure (no s/s of Candida) and microbiological success (eradication [f/u culture negative] or presumed eradication [f/u culture not available and a clinical response of cure]).|6 weeks post treatment|MITT Population; subset of participants with clinical cure or improvement and microbiological eradication or presumed eradication; Number of participants analyzed (N): participants with evaluable data a specified time point||participants|||Number
847118|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Bone Strength of Spine Trabecular Bone by Finite Element Analysis, N|Spine trabecular bone (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847096|NCT00806351|Secondary|Response Based on Clinical Cure and Microbiological Success at 2-Week Follow-Up Visit|Participant counts of clinical cure (no s/s of Candida) and microbiological success (eradication [f/u culture negative] or presumed eradication [f/u culture not available and a clinical response of cure]).|2 weeks post treatment|MITT Population; subset of participants with clinical cure or improvement and microbiological eradication or presumed eradication; Number of participants analyzed (N): participants with evaluable data a specified time point||participants|||Number
847097|NCT00806351|Secondary|Response Based on Clinical Cure and Microbiological Success at EOT|Participant counts of clinical cure (no s/s of Candida) and microbiological success (eradication [f/u culture negative] or presumed eradication [f/u culture not available and a clinical response of cure]).|Day 14 up to Day 56|MITT Population; subset of participants with clinical cure or improvement and microbiological eradication or presumed eradication. A global response of failure at EOT was carried forward programmatically to all subsequent visits.||participants|||Number
847098|NCT00806351|Secondary|Response Based on Clinical Cure and Microbiological Success at EOIVT|Participant counts of clinical cure (no s/s of Candida) and microbiological success (eradication [f/u culture negative] or presumed eradication [f/u culture not available and a clinical response of cure]).|Day 10 up to Day 42|MITT Population; subset of participants with clinical cure or improvement and microbiological eradication or presumed eradication. A global response of failure at EOIVT was carried forward programmatically to all subsequent visits.||participants|||Number
847099|NCT00806351|Secondary|Global Response at 6-Week Follow-Up Visit|Participant counts of global response of success, failure, or indeterminate. Success: clinical response of cure (no s/s of Candida) or improvement (significant, incomplete resolution of s/s) and microbiological response of eradication (f/u culture negative) or presumed eradication (f/u culture not available and clinical success). Failure: clinical response of failure (≥3 doses study medication and no significant improvement of s/s or death due to Candida) and/or unsuccessful microbiological response of persistent (positive culture any Candida sp), new infection or relapse at f/u. Indeterminate: clinical and/or microbiological response of indeterminate (evaluation could not be made due to withdrawal from study prior to assessment of cure or failure) and there was neither clinical response of failure nor unsuccessful microbiological response (persistence or new infection or relapse).|6 weeks post treatment|MITT Population; subset of participants who, according to the investigator, completed therapy and participants with global response of failure at EOIVT or EOT. A global response of failure at the 2-week and 6-week visits carried forward programmatically to all subsequent visits. Number of participants analyzed (N): participants with evaluable data.||participants|||Number
847100|NCT00806351|Secondary|Global Response at 2-Week Follow-Up Visit|Participant counts of global response of success, failure, or indeterminate. Success: clinical response of cure (no s/s of Candida) or improvement (significant, incomplete resolution of s/s) and microbiological response of eradication (f/u culture negative) or presumed eradication (f/u culture not available and clinical success). Failure: clinical response of failure (≥3 doses study medication and no significant improvement of s/s or death due to Candida) and/or unsuccessful microbiological response of persistent (positive culture any Candida sp), new infection or relapse at f/u. Indeterminate: clinical and/or microbiological response of indeterminate (evaluation could not be made due to withdrawal from study prior to assessment of cure or failure) and there was neither clinical response of failure nor unsuccessful microbiological response (persistence or new infection or relapse).|2 weeks post treatment|MITT Population; subset of participants who, according to the investigator, completed therapy and participants with global response of failure at EOIVT or EOT. A global response of failure at the 2-week and 6-week visits carried forward programmatically to all subsequent visits. Number of participants analyzed (N): participants with evaluable data.||participants|||Number
847101|NCT00806351|Secondary|Global Response at End of Treatment (EOT)|Participant counts of global response of success, failure, or indeterminate. Success: clinical response of cure (no s/s of Candida) or improvement (significant, incomplete resolution of s/s) and microbiological response of eradication (f/u culture negative) or presumed eradication (f/u culture not available and clinical success). Failure: clinical response of failure (≥3 doses study medication and no significant improvement of s/s or death due to Candida) and/or unsuccessful microbiological response of persistent (positive culture any Candida sp), new infection or relapse at f/u. Indeterminate: clinical and/or microbiological response of indeterminate (evaluation could not be made due to withdrawal from study prior to assessment of cure or failure) and there was neither clinical response of failure nor unsuccessful microbiological response (persistence or new infection or relapse).|Day 14 up to Day 56|MITT Population; A global response of failure at EOT was carried forward programmatically to all subsequent visits.||participants|||Number
847102|NCT00806351|Primary|Global Response at End of Intravenous Treatment (EOIVT)|Participant counts of global response of success, failure, or indeterminate. Success: clinical response of cure (no signs, symptoms [s/s] of Candida) or improvement (significant, incomplete resolution of s/s) and microbiological response of eradication (follow-up [f/u] culture negative) or presumed eradication (f/u culture not available and clinical success). Failure: clinical response of failure (greater than or equal to [≥3] doses study medication and no significant improvement of s/s or death due to Candida) and/or unsuccessful microbiological response of persistent(positive culture any Candida species [sp]), new infection or relapse at f/u. Indeterminate: clinical and/or microbiological response of indeterminate (evaluation could not be made due to withdrawal from study prior to assessment of cure or failure) and there was neither clinical response of failure nor unsuccessful microbiological response (persistence or new infection or relapse).|Day 10 up to Day 42|Modified Intent to Treat (MITT) Population: participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had positive culture for Candida sp isolated from cultures obtained from a normally sterile site within 96 hours prior to treatment initiation. A global response of failure at EOIVT was carried forward programmatically to subsequent visits.||participants|||Number
847103|NCT00804843|Primary|Total Cholesterol and Free Cholesterol Measured by Enzymatic Chromogenic Assay|Cholesterol ester was to be calculated by the following formula: Cholesterol Ester = Total Cholesterol – Free Cholesterol.|At time of carotid endarterectomy (after 4 to 12 weeks of dosing)|Only participants who completed the study, had evaluable plaque samples and were at least 80% compliant with dosing schedule were to be included in the analysis. This was not performed due to technical concerns. Instead, the cholesterol content determination, if performed, will use mass spectrometry approach and would be an exploratory objective.|||||
847104|NCT00804843|Primary|Plaque Instability Protein Composite Score|Each excised plaque was analyzed using an assay of 20 proteins that reflect plaque composition and inflammation. Each protein was assigned scaled signs, with a lower (negative) sign associated with plaque stability and a higher (positive) sign associated with plaque inflammation/instability. The Composite Score was the average amounts of all the 20 proteins with their associated signs. A higher Composite Score is associated with more plaque instability.|At time of carotid endarterectomy (after 4 to 12 weeks of dosing)|Only participants who completed the study, had evaluable plaque samples and were at least 80% compliant with dosing schedule were included in the analysis.||Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
847105|NCT00804843|Primary|Composite Score of Plaque Inflammation/Stability Gene Expression as Assayed by Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Taqman Analysis|"Excised carotid plaques were evaluated for the gene expression of 60 biomarkers associated with inflammation (Hot biomarkers) & 25 biomarkers associated with stability (Cold biomarkers). Each biomarker was assayed using a quantitative polymerase chain reaction method and results were reported as a Cycle Threshold, (Ct). A Composite Score was calculated by averaging the Ct for each of the 25 cold genes, and subtracting the average Ct for the 60 hot genes. A higher composite score was associated with greater inflammation and a lower score was associated with stability (non-inflamed)."|At time of carotid endarterectomy (after 4 to 12 weeks of dosing)|Only participants who completed the study, had evaluable plaque samples and were at least 80% compliant with dosing schedule were included in the analysis.||Cycle threshold (Ct)||Standard Deviation|Mean
847106|NCT00804609|Primary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Extended Release Epidural Morphine (EREM)|The primary end point was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic profiles of EREM after either no epidural lidocaine or after an epidural lidocaine top-up for cesarean delivery.|a plasma sample at 0, 5, 10, 15, and 30 minutes, and 1, 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours post-dose|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847107|NCT00799617|Secondary|Anemia Trial - Effect of Testosterone on Hemoglobin Levels - Unexplained Anemia - Hemoglobin (Continuous)|"Proportion of men age 65 years or older with unexplained anemia who increased their hemoglobin level by 1.0 gm/dL from baseline.
Values are means (SDs) for continuous outcomes."|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||proportion of participants||Standard Deviation|Mean
847108|NCT00799617|Secondary|Cognitive Function Trial - Executive Function - Trail Making Test B - A|"Baseline score and change in score in Executive Function as Measured by Trail-Making Test (TMT) B - A, at baseline, Month 6 and Month 12.
Change in performance on the Trail Making Test was analyzed using linear random effects models adjusting for baseline performance, balancing factors, education, and test version.
Participants are required to connect a set of numbers (Part A) or alternating letters and numbers (Part B) in sequential order. The score for each part is the total time (in seconds) to complete both parts. The outcome analyzed will be the total time for Trails B minus the total time for Trails A to provide a measure of working memory, adjusted for attention and processing speed. Higher scores reflect lower executive function."|1 year (baseline to month 6 to month 12)|||Score on the Trail Making Test scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847109|NCT00799617|Secondary|Cognitive Function Trial - Spatial Ability Card Rotation Test (CRT)|"Baseline score and change in score in the Spatial Ability Using the Card Rotation Test at baseline, Month 6 and Month 12.
Change in performance on the Card Rotations Test will be analyzed using linear random effects models adjusting for baseline performance, balancing factors, education, and test version. The test consists of a series of 10 primary figures, each of which has 8 corresponding secondary figures. Subjects are asked to determine which of the secondary figures is the same as the corresponding primary figure, and the score is taken as the number of figures answered correctly minus the number of figures answered incorrectly.
The maximum score is 80 for subjects who answer all items correctly."|1 year (baseline to month 6 to month 12)|||Score on the CRT test scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847110|NCT00799617|Secondary|Cognitive Function Trial - Visual Memory - Benton Visual Retention Test (BVRT)|"Baseline score and mean change in score in the Visual Memory Using the Benton Visual Retention Test (BVRT) from baseline, Month 6 and Month 12.
The BVRT measures short term visual memory and visuo-constructional abilities and was administered and scored according to standard procedures. Each of 10 designs was presented one at a time for 10 seconds, and immediately after the design was withdrawn, the participant was instructed to draw it from memory on a blank sheet of paper. The score was the total number of figures with errors and ranged from 0 to 26. Scores were inverted to 0 to -26 so that higher scores would reflect better performance.
Change in BVRT scores from baseline are treated as continuous and compared between AAMI Androgel and placebo subjects using linear random effects models adjusting for balancing factors as described in the primary analysis."|1 year (baseline to month 6 and month 12)|||Score on the BVRT test scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847111|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Area Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Femoral Neck by Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA)|Femoral neck as measured by DXA, g/cm2 (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847112|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Area Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Total Hip by Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA)|Total hip as measured by DXA, g/cm2 (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847113|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Area Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Lumbar Spine by Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA)|Lumbar spine as measured by DXA, g/cm2 (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847114|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Bone Strength of Hip Peripheral Bone by Finite Element Analysis, N|Hip peripheral bone (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847115|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Bone Strength of Hip Trabecular Bone by Finite Element Analysis, N|Hip trabecular bone (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847116|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Bone Strength of Hip Whole Bone by Finite Element Analysis, N|Hip whole bone (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847121|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Volumetric Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Hip Peripheral Bone by Quantitative Computed Tomography (QCT)|Hip peripheral bone as measured by QCT, mg/cm3 (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847122|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Volumetric Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Hip Trabecular Bone by Quantitative Computed Tomography (QCT)|Hip trabecular bone as measured by QCT, mg/cm3 (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847123|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Volumetric Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Spine Whole Bone by Quantitative Computed Tomography (QCT)|Spine whole bone as measured by QCT, mg/cm3 (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847124|NCT00799617|Secondary|Bone Trial - Volumetric Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Spine Peripheral Bone by Quantitative Computed Tomography (QCT)|Spine peripheral bone as measured by QCT, mg/cm3 (within-arm mean percent change between baseline and month 12 adjusted for balancing factors)|1 year (baseline to month 12)|||percentage of change||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847125|NCT00799617|Secondary|Cardiovascular Trial - Coronary Artery Calcium Score, Agatston Units Change From Baseline|Coronary artery calcium score in Agatston units (range of 0 to >400 Agatston units), with higher values indicating more severe atherosclerosis).|1 year (change from baseline to month 12)|All participants with measurements of both baseline and 12-month assessments were included in the analysis.||Agatston units||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
847126|NCT00799617|Secondary|Cardiovascular Trial - Total Plaque Volume Change From Baseline|Total plaque volume,mm3 measured by coronary computed tomographic angiography|1 year (change from baseline to month 12)|||mm^3||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847127|NCT00799617|Secondary|Vitality Trial - Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) Change in Overall Score|"Baseline score and change in score in the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) from baseline to Month 12.
Scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) depression scale range from 0 to 27, with higher scores indicating greater intensity of depressive symptoms."|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|||Score on the PHQ-9 test scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847128|NCT00799617|Secondary|Vitality Trial - Change in the Total Negative Affect Score of the Positive and Negative Affect Scales (PANAS) From Baseline to Month 12|"Baseline score and change in the total negative affect score of the Positive and Negative Affect Scales (PANAS) from baseline to Month 12.
Scores for positive affect and for negative affect on the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) scales range from 5 to 50, with higher scores indicating a greater intensity of the affect."|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|||Score on the PANAS test scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847129|NCT00799617|Secondary|Vitality Trial - Change in the Positive Affect Score of the Positive and Negative Affect Scales (PANAS) From Baseline to Month 12.|"Baseline score and change in the total positive affect score of the Positive and Negative Affect Scales (PANAS) from baseline to Month 12.
Scores for positive affect and for negative affect on the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) scales range from 5 to 50, with higher scores indicating a greater intensity of the affect."|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|||Score on the PANAS test scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847130|NCT00799617|Secondary|Vitality Trial - SF-36 Score|Baseline score and change in the SF-36 Vitality Score from baseline to Month 12 Scores on the vitality scale of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating less fatigue.|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|||Score on the SF-36 vitality scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847131|NCT00799617|Secondary|Vitality Trial - FACIT Fatigue Overall Score|Baseline score and change in the FACIT– Fatigue score from baseline to Month 12. Scores on the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) - Fatigue scale range from 0 to 52, with higher scores indicating less fatigue.|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|||Score on the FACIT- Fatigue test scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847132|NCT00799617|Secondary|Physical Function Trial - PF 10 Overall Score|"Baseline score and the change in score on the physical-function scale (PF-10) of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better function.
Scores were measured as the change from baseline to Month 12."|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|||Score on the PF-10 test scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847133|NCT00799617|Secondary|Physical Function Trial - The Physical Function Domain (PF-10) of the SF-36 - no./Total no. (%)|The number of participants whose score on the physical-function domain (PF-10; range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better function) of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) increased by at least 8 points from baseline to Month 12.|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|The number analyzed differs from the overall number due to participant withdrawal or test results that were incomplete.||Participants|||Count of Participants
847134|NCT00799617|Secondary|Physical Function Trial - 6 Minute Walk Test - Total Walking Distance in Meters|Baseline score and the change in distance walked in the 6-Minute Walking Test in meters from baseline to Month 12|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
847135|NCT00799617|Secondary|Sexual Function Trial - Erectile Function|"Baseline score and the change in score on the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) from baseline to Month 12.
Scores on the IIEF range from 0-30, with higher scores indicating better function."|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|||Score on the IIEF test scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847136|NCT00799617|Secondary|Sexual Function Trial - Sexual Desire Domain|"Baseline score and the changes in the score of the sexual-desire domain of the Derogatis Interview for Sexual Functioning in Men-II (DISF-M-II), from baseline to Month 12.
Scores on the (DISF-M-II) range from 0 to 33, with higher scores indicating greater sexual desire."|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|||Score on the DISF-M-II scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847152|NCT00783263|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Reached the LDL-C Level of <70 mg/dl|Participants across all strata who reached the LDL-C Level of <70 mg/dl after the addition of ezetimibe 10 mg to rosuvastatin (5 or 10 mg) daily for 6 weeks compared with doubling the baseline dose of rosuvastatin (10 or 20 mg) daily for 6 weeks.|6 weeks of treatment|||participants|||Number
847137|NCT00799617|Primary|Anemia Trial - Effect of Testosterone on Hemoglobin Levels - Unexplained Anemia|"Proportion of men age 65 years or older with unexplained anemia who increased their hemoglobin level by 1.0 g/dL from baseline.
Values are No. (%) for dichotomous outcomes. Dichotomous hemoglobin response is an increase of 1 g/dL or more from baseline."|1 year (change in hemoglobin g/dL from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|Unexplained anemia is anemia that is not due to the following causes: iron and vitamin B12 deficiency, chronic inflammation and disease, chronic renal insufficiency, myelodysplastic syndromes.||Participants|||Count of Participants
847138|NCT00799617|Primary|Cognitive Function Trial - Delayed Paragraph Recall Wechsler Memory Scale Revised Logical Memory II (WMS-R LMII)|"Baseline score and change in score of the Wechsler Memory Scale Revised Logical Memory II (WMS-R LMII) test of Delayed Paragraph Recall, at baseline, Month 6 and Month 12.
The WMS-R LM II involves a delayed paragraph recall activity scored in two components, each ranging from 0-25. The final score is the sum of each component, therefore falling in the range 0-50. WMS-R LM II scores were treated as continuous with change compared between treatment arms using linear random effects models adjusting for several factors: site, indicator variables of participation in each primary efficacy trial, baseline testosterone concentration (<200), age (≤ 75), use of anti-depressants, use of PDE-inhibitors, baseline WMSR, categorical education, and version of the WMSR."|1 year (change from baseline to month 6 and month 12)|Men, age 65 years or older with low testosterone and Age-Associated Memory Impairment (AAMI)||percentage of change in test score||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847139|NCT00799617|Primary|Bone Trial - Volumetric Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of Spine Trabecular Bone by Quantitative Computed Tomography (QCT) in Older Men With Low Testosterone|Volumetric Bone Mineral Density (BMD) of spine trabecular bone as measured by QCT, mg/cm3, the calculated change in measurement from baseline to Month 12|1 year (QCT measurement of BMD change between baseline and month 12)|||mg/cm^3||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847140|NCT00799617|Primary|Cardiovascular Trial - Assess Impact of Testosterone Treatment in Older Men on Noncalcified Plaque Volume|Non-calcified coronary artery plaque volume, mm3, as determined by coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA), mean difference in change from baseline to month 12|1 year (change in plaque volume measurement from baseline to month 12)|Men aged 65 years or > with an average of 2 serum testosterone levels lower than 275 ng/L and enrolled in the CV Trial of the Testosterone Trials between June 2010 and June 2014.||mm^3||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847141|NCT00799617|Primary|Vitality Trial - Increase in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) - Fatigue Score Greater Than or Equal to 4 - no./Total no. (%)|"The number of participants whose score on the FACIT–Fatigue scale increased by at least 4 points.
Scores on the FACIT- Fatigue scale range from 0 to 52, with higher scores indicating less fatigue."|1 year (Number of participants who increased FACIT-Fatigue score > or = to 4, change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|The number analyzed differs from the overall number due to participant withdrawal or test results that were incomplete.||Participants|||Count of Participants
847142|NCT00799617|Primary|Physical Function Trial - The 6-Minute Walk Test - no./Total no. (%)|The number and percentage of men who increased the distance walked in the 6-Minute Walk Test by at least 50 meters.|1 year (Number of participants who increased walk distance > or = 50 meters, change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|The number analyzed differs from the overall number due to participant withdrawal or test results that were incomplete.||Participants|||Count of Participants
847143|NCT00799617|Primary|Sexual Function Trial - Change in Psychosexual Daily Questionnaire Question 4 (PDQ-Q4) From Baseline to Month 12|"Baseline score and change in responses to Question 4 of the Psychosexual Daily Questionnaire (PDQ-Q4) from baseline to Month 12.
Question 4 asks 12 questions about sexual activity. Scores on the PDQ-Q4 range from 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating more activity.
The change is measured form the baseline value to Month 12."|1 year (change from baseline to month 3, 6, 9 and 12)|||units on the PDQ-Q4 scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847144|NCT00793780|Secondary|Change in Questionnaire on Craving for Sweet or Rich Foods Score|The Questionnaire on Craving for Sweet or Rich Foods (QCSRF) is a 2-factor, 9-item scale assessing the presence of cravings for rich and sweet foods and has been found to have good psychometric properties. The total score is the total of 2 sub scales. Total range is from 9 to 63, with a higher score indicative of a higher craving and reinforcement from sweet and/or rich foods.|baseline and week 8|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847145|NCT00793780|Secondary|LDL Cholesterol|Determined by standard enzymatic procedures|baseline and week 8|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847146|NCT00793780|Secondary|Insulin Levels|Determined with a double-antibody radioimmunoassay|baseline and week 8|||microIU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847147|NCT00793780|Secondary|PANSS- Positive and Negative Symptom Scale|The PANSS or the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale is a medical scale used for measuring symptom severity of patients with schizophrenia. The patient is rated from 1 to 7 on 30 different symptoms based on the interview as well as reports of family members or primary care hospital workers. Of the 30 items included in the PANSS, 7 constitute a Positive Scale, 7 a Negative Scale, and the remaining 16 a General Psychopathology Scale.The scores for these scales are arrived at by summation of ratings across component items. Total score ranges from a minimum of 30 to a maximum of 210. A higher score indicates more severe symptoms.|8 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847148|NCT00793780|Secondary|Fasting Serum Glucose Lab Values||baseline and 8 weeks|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847149|NCT00793780|Primary|Change in Body Weight From Baseline|Weight was measured with shoes off to the nearest 0.1 kg.|8 weeks|||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847150|NCT00783263|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Other Lipid, Lipoprotein, Apolipoprotein and High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP)Levels|Participants who were analyzed to assess the Total Cholesterol (TC), Triglycerides, High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol, Non High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol, LDL Cholesterol/HDL Cholesterol, Total Cholesterol/HDL Cholesterol, Non-HDL Cholesterol/HDL Cholesterol, Apolipoprotein B (Apo B), Apolipoprotein A-I (Apo A-I), Apolipoprotein B/Apo A-I, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP)levels after 6 weeks of treatment.|Baseline to 6 weeks|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
847151|NCT00783263|Secondary|Number of Participants in Each Stratum Who Reached the LDL-C Level of <70 mg/dl|Participants in stratum I and in stratum II who reached the LDL-C Level of <70 mg/dl after the addition of ezetimibe to rosuvastatin (5 or 10 mg)daily for 6 weeks compared with doubling the baseline dose of rosuvastatin (10 or 20 mg).|6 weeks of treatment|||participants|||Number
847153|NCT00783263|Secondary|Number of Participants in Each Stratum Who Reached Their Target LDL-C Level|Participants in stratum I were analyzed to evaluate the LDL-C lowering efficacy with the additional of ezetimibe 10 mg to rosuvastatin 5 mg daily for 6 weeks compared with doubling the baseline dose to rosuvastatin 10 mg daily for 6 weeks. Participants in stratum II were analyzed to evaluate the LDL-C lowering efficacy with the additional of ezetimibe 10 mg to rosuvastatin 10 mg daily for 6 weeks compared with doubling the baseline dose to rosuvastatin 20 mg daily for 6 weeks.|6 weeks of treatment|||participants|||Number
847154|NCT00783263|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Reached Their Target LDL-C Level|Participants were analyzed to evaluate the LDL-C (<100 mg/dL for moderately high risk patients and high risk patients without AVD and <70 mg/dL for high risk patients with AVD) lowering efficacy with the addition of ezetimibe 10 mg to (5 or 10 mg) compared with doubling the baseline rosuvastatin (10 or 20 mg), daily for 6 weeks of treatment.|6 weeks of treatment|||participants|||Number
847155|NCT00783263|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in LDL-Cholesterol (mg/dL) After 6 Weeks of Treatment in Each Stratum|The percent change from baseline in LDL-C (mg/dL) after 6 weeks of treatment by stratum I and stratum II in participants who were administered with ezetimibe 10 mg to rosuvastatin (5 or 10 mg) in comparison with the doubling of the baseline dose of rosuvastatin (10 or 20 mg) daily for 6 weeks.|Baseline to 6 weeks|||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
847156|NCT00783263|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in LDL-Cholesterol (mg/dL) After 6 Weeks of Treatment|The percent change from baseline in LDL-C (mg/dL) after 6 weeks of treatment in participants who were administered ezetimibe 10 mg to rosuvastatin (5 or 10 mg) in comparison with doubling the baseline dose of rosuvastatin (10 or 20 mg) daily for 6 weeks.|Baseline to 6 weeks|||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
847157|NCT00771667|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 22 (Among Responders From Week 6)|As measured by the CDAI. Clinical response was defined as a reduction from baseline of ≥ 100 points. Participants with a baseline CDAI of ≥ 220 to ≤ 248 were considered to be in clinical response if a CDAI score of < 150 was attained.|Baseline to Week 22|All participants who were randomized, regardless of whether they received study agent.||Participants|||Number
847158|NCT00771667|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Remission at Week 22 (Among Responders From Week 6)|As measured by a CDAI score of < 150 points.|Baseline to Week 22|All participants who were randomized, regardless of whether they received study agent.||Participants|||Number
847159|NCT00771667|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Remission at Week 8|As measured by a CDAI score of < 150 points.|Baseline to Week 8|All participants who were randomized, regardless of whether they received study agent.||Participants|||Number
847160|NCT00771667|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 8|As measured by the CDAI. Clinical response was defined as a reduction from baseline of ≥ 100 points. Participants with a baseline CDAI of ≥ 220 to ≤ 248 were considered to be in clinical response if a CDAI score of < 150 was attained.|Baseline to Week 8|All participants who were randomized, regardless of whether they received study agent.||Participants|||Number
847161|NCT00771667|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 4|As measured by the CDAI. Clinical response was defined as a reduction from baseline of ≥ 100 points. Participants with a baseline CDAI of ≥ 220 to ≤ 248 were considered to be in clinical response if a CDAI score of < 150 was attained.|Baseline to Week 4|All participants who were randomized, regardless of whether they received study agent.||Participants|||Number
847162|NCT00771667|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Remission at Week 6|As measured by a CDAI score of < 150 points.|Baseline to Week 6|All participants who were randomized, regardless of whether they received study agent.||Participants|||Number
847163|NCT00771667|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 6|As measured by the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI). CDAI scores range from 0 points (minimal disease activity) to over 600 points (severe disease activity). Clinical response was defined as a reduction from baseline of ≥ 100 points. Participants with a baseline CDAI of ≥ 220 to ≤ 248 were considered to be in clinical response if a CDAI score of < 150 was attained.|Baseline to Week 6|All participants who were randomized, regardless of whether they received study agent.||Participants|||Number
847164|NCT00770341|Secondary|Study Investigators' Assessment of Clinical Response at TOC|Clinical Success = Study investigator's Clinical Response confirmed by the EAC as either cured or improved at EOT.|7-14 days for SSTI, 14-42 days for septicemia and RIE|MITT-MRSA; One participant with possible MRSA RIE was enrolled into this study. This participant was excluded from the efficacy population.||Participants|||Number
847165|NCT00770341|Secondary|Study Investigators' Assessment of Clinical Response at EOT|Clinical Success = Study investigator's Clinical Response confirmed by the EAC as either cured or improved at EOT.|7-14 days for SSTI, 14-42 days for septicemia and RIE|MITT-MRSA; One participant with possible MRSA RIE was enrolled into this study. This participant was excluded from the efficacy population.||Participants|||Number
847166|NCT00770341|Secondary|EAC Assessment of Number of Participants With Microbiological Response at End of Treatment (EOT).|"Response = eradicated or presumed eradicated.
Eradicated was defined as absence of the admission pathogen in a culture obtained in the absence of potentially effective antibiotics for the pathogen.
Presumed eradicated was defined as no material for culture was available due to improvement of infection, but the admission pathogen was presumed to be eradicated because the participant was deemed Cured or Improved by the investigator and the participant did not receive potentially effective antibiotics for the pathogen."|7-14 days for SSTI, 14-42 days for septicemia and RIE|MITT-MRSA; one participant with possible MRSA RIE was enrolled into this study. This participant was excluded from the efficacy population.||Participants|||Number
847167|NCT00770341|Primary|Efficacy Adjudication Committee (EAC) Assessment of Number of Participants With Microbiological Response at TOC|"Response = eradicated or presumed eradicated.
Eradicated was defined as absence of the admission pathogen in a culture obtained in the absence of potentially effective antibiotics for the pathogen.
Presumed eradicated was defined as no material for culture was available due to improvement of infection, but the admission pathogen was presumed to be eradicated because the participant was deemed Cured or Improved by the investigator and the participant did not receive potentially effective antibiotics for the pathogen."|7-14 days for SSTI, 14-42 days for septicemia and RIE|MITT-MRSA; one participant with possible MRSA RIE was enrolled into this study. This participant was excluded from the efficacy population.||Participants|||Number
847168|NCT00770341|Secondary|EAC Assessment of Number of Participants With Clinical Success at End of Treatment (EOT).|Clinical Success = Study investigator's Clinical Response confirmed by the EAC as either cured or improved at EOT.|7-14 days for SSTI, 14-42 days for septicemia and RIE|MITT-MRSA; one participant with possible MRSA RIE was enrolled into this study. This participant was excluded from the efficacy population.||Participants|||Number
847169|NCT00770341|Primary|Efficacy Adjudication Committee (EAC) Assessment of Number of Participants With Clinical Success at Test of Cure (TOC)|"Clinical Success = Study investigator's Clinical Response confirmed by the EAC as either cured or improved at end of treatment (EOT).
MITT-MRSA (modified intent-to-treat - methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) was a subset of allocated participants with participants who were excluded for any of the following reasons: no MRSA isolated + any 1 of the following: failure to receive ≥1 dose of study drug, lack of all post-allocation primary and secondary endpoint data after ≥1 dose of study drug, no gram (+) coccus isolated at baseline."|7-14 days for SSTI, 14-42 days for septicemia and right-sided infective endocarditis (RIE)|MITT-MRSA; One participant with possible MRSA RIE was enrolled. This participant was excluded from the efficacy population.||Participants|||Number
847170|NCT00761280|Secondary|Median Time to Progression (Days) by Independent Review for the Intent-to-treat Population (Descriptive Analysis, Only)|Time to progression was calculated from the date of randomization to the date of the first documented tumor progression. Participants who did not progress or died were censored at the last tumor assessment date or the date of start of a new anti-tumor treatment or death.|Up to 24 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847171|NCT00761280|Secondary|Disease Progression Rate at 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 21, and 24 Months by Independent Review in the Intent-to-treat Population - Percentage of Participants (Descriptive Analysis, Only)|"Tumor response was classified based on the (neuro-)radiologist’s evaluation:
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all enhancing tumor on consecutive MRI scans at least 1 month apart, off steroids, neurologically stable or improved.
Partial Response (PR): ≥50% reduction in size of enhancing tumor on consecutive MRI scans at least 1 month apart, steroids stable or reduced, neurologically stable or improved.
Progressive Disease (PD): ≥25% increase in size of enhancing tumor or any new tumor on MRI scans, steroids stable or increased, neurologically worse.
Stable Disease (SD): all other situations.
Based on clinical and imaging data, an independent neuro-oncologist made the final assessment of Progressed versus Not Progressed. Participants who had MRI assessment results missing or unknown were UNK or missing, and were treated as Progressed for the purposes of the calculation."|10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 21 and 24 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847172|NCT00761280|Secondary|Disease Progression at 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 21, and 24 Months by Independent Review in the Intent-to-treat Population - Number of Participants|"Tumor response was classified based on the (neuro-)radiologist’s evaluation:
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all enhancing tumor on consecutive MRI scans at least 1 month apart, off steroids, neurologically stable or improved.
Partial Response (PR): ≥50% reduction in size of enhancing tumor on consecutive MRI scans at least 1 month apart, steroids stable or reduced, neurologically stable or improved.
Progressive Disease (PD): ≥25% increase in size of enhancing tumor or any new tumor on MRI scans, steroids stable or increased, neurologically worse.
Stable Disease (SD): all other situations.
Based on clinical and imaging data, an independent neuro-oncologist made the final assessment of Progressed versus Not Progressed. Participants who had MRI assessment results missing or unknown were UNK or missing, and were treated as Progressed for the purposes of the calculation."|10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 21, and 24 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized.||participants|||Number
847173|NCT00761280|Secondary|Median Duration of Response (Days) by Independent Review (Descriptive Analysis, Only)|"Duration of response was defined as the time from the first documentation of confirmed response (Complete Response, CR, or Partial Response, PR) to the first signs of Progressive Disease (PD), as assessed by the study neuro-oncologist. Median Duration of Response was calculated by Kaplan-Meier estimate.
Censoring rules were:
at the date of randomization -- participants without baseline assessments, or for those with no post-baseline timor assessments who were discontinued for other than progressive disease or death.
at the date of last tumor assessment -- discontinuation other than PD or death, or if a new treatment was started prior to disease progression
at the date of death or last tumor assessment -- death or PD after one missed tumor assessment
at the date of last tumor assessment -- death or PD after more than one missed tumor assessment
at the date of last tumor assessment -- participants on ongoing treatment at data cut-off"|Up to 24 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847174|NCT00761280|Primary|Survival at 24 Months in the Intent-to-treat Population - Number of Participants|"Survival status was assessed at 24 months from randomization. Participants with unknown or missing status were considered treatment failures, i.e., assumed to be dead. The category Lost to / insufficient follow-up includes participants who were alive at last data collection point but did not yet have enough follow-up time to reach the 24 month time point."|24 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized. Early study discontinuation with site closures led to a high proportion of participants being censored or lost to follow-up in the initial analysis. Additional survival data were collected in a post-hoc fashion under a protocol amendment. These data are presented.||participants|||Number
847175|NCT00761280|Secondary|Tumor Control Rate (CR+PR+SD) by Independent Review in the Intent-to-treat Population - Percentage of Participants (Descriptive Analysis, Only)|Tumor control rate was defined as the proportion of participants assessed as having Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), or Stable Disease (SD). Participants with unknown or missing response were treated as non-responders.|Up to 24 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847176|NCT00761280|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (CR+PR) by Independent Review in the Intent-to-treat Population - Percentage of Participants (Descriptive Analysis, Only)|Overall response rate was the proportion of participants with a best response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) observed from the start of treatment until disease progression.|Up to 24 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847205|NCT00745823|Primary|Number of Participants With HIV Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <50 Copies/mL at 48 Weeks||Week 48|Data were analyzed for all participants treated with study drug. Participants who did not complete the study were treated as treatment failures.||Participants|||Number
847177|NCT00761280|Secondary|Response Category by Independent Review in the Intent-to-treat Population - Number of Participants|"Tumor response was classified based on the (neuro-)radiologist’s evaluation according to the Macdonald Response Criteria for bidimensionally measurable disease as outlined below:
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all enhancing tumor on consecutive MRI scans at least 1 month apart, off steroids, neurologically stable or improved.
Partial Response (PR): ≥50% reduction in size of enhancing tumor on consecutive MRI scans at least 1 month apart, steroids stable or reduced, neurologically stable or improved.
Progressive Disease (PD): ≥25% increase in size of enhancing tumor or any new tumor on MRI scans, steroids stable or increased, neurologically worse.
Stable Disease (SD): all other situations.
Two qualified neuro-radiologists reviewed scans at each MRI time point, with adjudication of discrepancies by a third reviewer. Their findings and clinical information were independently reviewed by a neuro-oncologist, who made the assessment of overall response."|Up to 24 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized.||participants|||Number
847178|NCT00761280|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (Days) From Randomization in the Intent-to-treat Population (Descriptive Analysis, Only)|Median overall survival was defined as the date of randomization to the date of death. If a participant's status was unknown and there was no follow-up information available, they were categorized as 'Died' for the purposes of the analysis. Analysis was by Kaplan-Meier estimation.|Up to 24 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized. Early study discontinuation with site closures led to a high proportion of participants being censored or lost to follow-up in the initial analysis. Additional survival data were collected in a post-hoc fashion under a protocol amendment. These data are presented.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847179|NCT00761280|Secondary|Survival at 12, 18, and 21 Months in the Intent-to-treat Population - Number of Participants|"Survival status was assessed at each time-point from randomization. Participants with unknown or missing status were considered treatment failures, i.e., assumed to be dead. The category Lost to follow-up for each time-point includes participants who were alive at the last data collection point but did not yet have enough follow-up time to reach the time point."|12, 18, and 21 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized. Early study discontinuation with site closures led to a high proportion of participants being censored or lost to follow-up in the initial analysis. Additional survival data were collected in a post-hoc fashion under a protocol amendment. These data are presented.||participants|||Number
847180|NCT00761280|Secondary|Survival Rate at 12, 18, and 21 Months in the Intent-to-treat Population - Percentage of Participants (Descriptive Analysis, Only)|Survival rate was defined as the proportion of participants known to be alive at each time-point from randomization. Participants with unknown or missing status were considered treatment failures, i.e., assumed to be dead.|12, 18, and 21 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized. Early study discontinuation with site closures led to a high proportion of participants being censored or lost to follow-up in the initial analysis. Additional survival data were collected in a post-hoc fashion under a protocol amendment. These data are presented.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847181|NCT00761280|Primary|Survival Rate at 24 Months in the Intent-to-treat Population - Percentage of Participants (Descriptive Analysis, Only)|Survival rate was defined as the proportion of participants known to be alive at 24 months from randomization. If a participant's status was unknown and there was no follow-up information available, they were categorized as 'Died' for the purposes of the analysis.|24 months|The Intent-to-treat population includes all participants randomized. Early study discontinuation with site closures led to a high proportion of participants being censored or lost to follow-up in the initial analysis. Additional survival data were collected in a post-hoc fashion under a protocol amendment. These data are presented.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847182|NCT00759109|Other Pre-specified|Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen Labeling Index (PCNA-LI) at Baseline|Liver tissues obtained from biopsies were fixed and immunostained to detect PCNA. PCNA-LI is the percentage of immunohistochemically stained (PCNA positive) cells in 1,000 HCC cells counted. A higher PCNA-LI indicates a worse outcome.|Baseline|ITT population||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847183|NCT00759109|Secondary|Change in the Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen Labeling Index (PCNA-LI)|"PCNA-LI was measured at baseline and at 18 months of treatment, and the change in PCNA-LI was calculated.
To measure PCNA-LI, liver tissue samples obtained from biopsies were fixed and immunostained to detect PCNA. PCNA-LI is the percentage of immunohistochemically stained (PCNA positive) cells in 1,000 HCC cells counted. A higher PCNA-LI indicates a worse outcome."|Baseline and at 18 months of treatment|Participants with tissue biopsies at 18 months.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847184|NCT00759109|Secondary|Number of Patients With a Virological Response Rate|"Virological Response rate was measured by the disappearance of Hepatitis C Virus from serum. Serum samples from participants were analyzed for the
presence of HCV-RNA using a qualitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR)."|Baseline and every year during 3 years of treatment|ITT population||Participants|||Number
847185|NCT00759109|Secondary|Survival Time of Participants|Survival time was defined as time from screening visit to the death of the participant and was studied with Kaplan-Meier and Log-rank tests. If a participant did not die, he or she was censored with the last available date.|During 3 years of treatment and 2 years of follow-up|ITT population||Years||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847186|NCT00759109|Secondary|Number of Participants With Development of Hepatic Decompensation|The development of hepatic decompensation, defined as worsening of the hepatic function as measured by Child Pugh Score. The Child Pugh score was calculated based on biochemical changes (changes in serum albumin, serum bilirubin, prothrombin time) and clinical impairment (ascites, encephalopathies) or both. Each of the 5 parameters was scored from 1-3, and the Child Pugh Score represented the total score. The maximum score was 15, and a score of 10-15 represents the worst outcome and a life expectancy of 1-3 years.|Baseline, During 3 years of treatment and 2 years of follow-up|ITT population||Participants|||Number
847187|NCT00759109|Primary|Number of Participants With the Development of Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC)|"Participants were tested for focal lesions by liver ultrasound and for AFP levels every 6 months the during study (treatment and follow-up).
The development of hepatocellular carcinoma was determined by:
the appearance of a focal lesion detected by liver ultrasound with metastases confirmed by fine needle biopsy, or
the appearance of a focal lesion detected by ultrasound + alphafetoprotein (AFP) levels in blood >400 ng/mL."|During 3 years of treatment and 2 years of follow-up|ITT population||Participants|||Number
847188|NCT00756938|Primary|Number of Participants Who Were Discontinued From Study Due to a Clinical and/or Laboratory Adverse Event||up to 12 weeks (Base Study); up to 24 months (Extension)|All Patients as Treated Population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Adverse events for the base study were reported by the dose taken at the time of the event and not the study group to which they were randomly assigned. Adverse events for the study extension were reported as 1 arm.||Participants|||Number
847189|NCT00756938|Primary|Number of Participants Who Reported 1 or More Clinical and/or Laboratory Adverse Event(s)||up to 12 weeks (Base Study); up to 24 months (Extension)|All Patients as Treated Population, which consisted of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Adverse events for the base study were reported by the dose taken at the time of the event and not the study group to which they were randomly assigned. Adverse events for the study extension were reported as 1 arm.||Participants|||Number
847190|NCT00756938|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure|Sitting BP (or supine if child could not sit) was measured after the participant had been seated for 5 minutes with back supported, feet on the floor and right arm (or left arm if it was the customary side for BP measurement for the patient) supported at heart level. Diastolic BP was determined by averaging 3 replicate measurements obtained at least 1 minute apart.|Baseline and Day 21|Analysis performed using the Full Analysis Set defined as all randomized participants who had at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline data, and had a post-treatment endpoint observation||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847191|NCT00756938|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure|Sitting blood pressure ([BP] or supine if child could not sit) was measured after the participant had been seated for 5 minutes with back supported, feet on the floor and right arm (or left arm if it was the customary side for BP measurement for the patient) supported at heart level. Systolic BP was determined by averaging 3 replicate measurements obtained at least 1 minute apart.|Baseline and Day 21|Analysis performed using the Full Analysis Set defined as all randomized participants who had at least 1 dose of study drug, had baseline data, and had a post-treatment endpoint observation||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847192|NCT00755716|Secondary|MNWS|"Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawing Scale
Scale contains 9 items which are scored 0-4. The total range for the scale is 0-36, where higher scores indicate greater nicotine withdrawal symptoms."|Measured weekly during weeks 7-10 & the mean of weekly measurements is recorded.|Subjects only needed to have an MNWS at one of these time points (weeks 7-10) to be included in the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847193|NCT00755716|Primary|Primary Outcome is 4-week Continuous Quit Rate at the End of Treatment.|The primary efficacy endpoint was CO-confirmed cigarette abstinence during the last 4 weeks of treatment.|weeks 7-10|||Participants|||Count of Participants
847194|NCT00752089|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Enamel Fluoride Uptake|Enamel fluoride uptake was determined using the microdrill enamel biopsy technique. The amount of fluoride uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride (F) divided by the area of the enamel cores and expressed as ug*F/cm^3. The difference between treatments was calculated with respect to fluoride uptake by enamel.|Baseline to 14 days|"PP population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study product, had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessments and no major protocol deviations. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop-outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group."||ug*F/cm^3||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
847195|NCT00752089|Primary|Percentage Surface Micro-hardness Recovery (SMHR) of Enamel Specimens|SMH test was used to assess mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents re-hardening of enamel surface. Percent SMHR was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline (B), after intra-oral exposure (R) and after in-vitro demineralization (D) using formula: [(D-R)/ (D-B)]*100.|Baseline to 14 days|"Per-Protocol (PP) population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study product, had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessments and no major protocol deviations. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop-outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group."||% SMHR||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
847196|NCT00745823|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to an Adverse Event at 96 Weeks|As the study was terminated after the 48-week analysis, the planned secondary analyses for Week 96 were not performed.|Week 96||||||
847197|NCT00745823|Secondary|Number of Participants With One or More Adverse Events at 96 Weeks|As the study was terminated after the 48-week analysis, the planned secondary analyses for Week 96 were not performed.|Week 96||||||
847198|NCT00745823|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 96 in CD4 Cell Count|As the study was terminated after the 48-week analysis, the planned secondary analyses for Week 96 were not performed.|Baseline and Week 96|The Week 96 data analysis was not performed.|||||
847199|NCT00745823|Secondary|Number of Participants With HIV RNA <400 Copies/mL at 96 Weeks|As the study was terminated after the 48-week analysis, the planned secondary analyses for Week 96 were not performed.|Week 96|The Week 96 data analysis was not performed.|||||
847200|NCT00745823|Secondary|Number of Participants With HIV RNA <50 Copies/mL at 96 Weeks|As the study was terminated after the 48-week analysis, the planned secondary analyses for Week 96 were not performed.|Week 96|The Week 96 data analysis was not performed.|||||
847201|NCT00745823|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 48 in CD4 Cell Count||Baseline and Week 48|Data were analyzed for all participants treated with study drug. Baseline values were carried forward for participants who discontinued treatment due to lack of efficacy.||cells/mm^3||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847202|NCT00745823|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to an Adverse Event at 48 Weeks||Week 48|Data were analyzed for all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
847203|NCT00745823|Primary|Number of Participants With One or More Adverse Events at 48 Weeks||Week 48|Data were analyzed for all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
847204|NCT00745823|Secondary|Number of Participants With HIV Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <400 Copies/mL at 48 Weeks||48 weeks|Data were analyzed for all participants treated with study drug. Participants who did not complete the study were treated as treatment failures.||Participants|||Number
847231|NCT00734539|Secondary|Stage II or Higher Necrotizing Enterocolitis||prior to hospital discharge, up to 15 ½ months|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
847210|NCT00737672|Secondary|Circuit Primary Patency [24 Months] Units Percentage of Subjects|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval from initial study treatment to abandonment of the vascular access circuit.
Twelve-month estimate of secondary access secondary patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|24 months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847211|NCT00737672|Secondary|Circuit Primary Patency [12 Months] Units Percentage of Subjects|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval from initial study treatment to abandonment of the vascular access circuit.
Twelve-month estimate of secondary access secondary patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|12months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847212|NCT00737672|Secondary|Circuit Primary Patency|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval from initial study treatment to the next access thrombosis or intervention performed within the vascular access circuit.
P-Value calculated from 24-month data cohort. Six-month estimate of circuit primary patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|6 months|||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847213|NCT00737672|Primary|Freedom From Major Device, Procedure and Treatment Site-related Adverse Adverse Events Through 30 Days Post-procedure|The primary safety endpoint is freedom from major device, procedure and treatment site-related adverse events through 30 days.|30 days|||Participants|||Number
847214|NCT00737672|Primary|Target Lesion Primary Patency at 24 Months|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval of uninterrupted patency from initial study treatment to the next access thrombosis or intervention performed on the target lesion.
P-Value calculated from 24-month data cohort after study completion."|24 Months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847215|NCT00737672|Secondary|Access Secondary Patency [24 Months] Units Percentage of Subjects|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval from initial study treatment to abandonment of the vascular access circuit.
24-month estimate of secondary access secondary patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|24 months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847216|NCT00737672|Secondary|Access Secondary Patency [12 Months] Units Percentage of Subjects|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval from initial study treatment to abandonment of the vascular access circuit.
Twelve-month estimate of secondary access secondary patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|12 months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847217|NCT00737672|Secondary|Access Secondary Patency at 6 Months|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval from initial study treatment to abandonment of the vascular access circuit.
Six-month estimate of secondary access patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|6 months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847218|NCT00737672|Secondary|Assisted Primary Patency at 24 Months|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval from initial study treatment to occlusion (thrombosis) of the vascular access circuit.
Twenty-four-month estimate of assisted primary patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|24 months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847219|NCT00737672|Secondary|Assisted Primary Patency at 12 Months|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval from initial study treatment to occlusion (thrombosis) of the vascular access circuit.
Twelve-month estimate of assisted primary patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|12 months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847220|NCT00737672|Secondary|Assisted Primary Patency at 6 Months|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval from initial study treatment to occlusion (thrombosis) of the vascular access circuit.
Six-month estimate of assisted primary patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|6 months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847221|NCT00737672|Primary|Target Lesion Primary Patency at 12 Months|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval of uninterrupted patency from initial study treatment to the next access thrombosis or intervention performed on the target lesion.
Twelve-month estimate of target lesion primary patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|12 Months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847222|NCT00737672|Primary|Target Lesion Primary Patency at 6 Months|"Kaplan-Meier estimate of the time interval of uninterrupted patency from initial study treatment to the next access thrombosis or intervention performed on the target lesion.
Six-month estimate of target lesion primary patency derived from Kaplan-Meier curve."|6 months|Percent of subjects maintaining patency based on Kaplan-Meier estimate based on per-protocol (effectiveness) population.||Percentage of Subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847223|NCT00734539|Secondary|Intraventricular Hemorrhage|Grade 3 or 4|prior to hospital discharge, up to 15 ½ months|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
847224|NCT00734539|Secondary|Positive Bacterial Infection From a Sterile Site||prior to hospital discharge, up to 15 ½ months|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
847225|NCT00734539|Secondary|Length of Hospitalization||prior to hospital discharge, up to 15 ½ months|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847226|NCT00734539|Secondary|Retinopathy of Prematurity Requiring Laser Surgery||prior to hospital discharge, up to 15 ½ months|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
847227|NCT00734539|Secondary|Periventricular Leukomalacia||prior to hospital discharge, up to 15 ½ months|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
847228|NCT00734539|Secondary|Patent Ductus Arterious Requiring Surgical Ligation||prior to hospital discharge, up to 15 ½ months|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
847234|NCT00734539|Primary|Death or Candidiasis|"The primary endpoint for the study is death or candidiasis.
Death prior to study day 49.
Candidiasis prior to study day 49
Definite: isolation of Candida from normally sterile body fluid (blood, CSF, urine [obtained via sterile catheterization or suprapubic tap], peritoneal fluid).
Probable:
i. > 5 days of consecutive antifungal therapy
AND both:
ii. Thrombocytopenia <150,000/mm3 iii. Positive Candida culture from nonsterile site (ETS, bag urine)"|study day 49|Modified intent-to-treat; only subjects who received at least one dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
847235|NCT00716976|Secondary|Hearing Loss Among Patients Carrying/Not-carrying Two Key Gene Mutations (TPMT and COMT)||4 weeks after the last dose of cisplatin||01/2018||||
847236|NCT00716976|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Proportion of patients alive free at 4 years following enrollment. See OS outcome measure description.|4 Years after enrollment|61 eligible patients were enrolled on the STS arm; 64 eligible patients were enrolled on the observation arm.||Percentage probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847237|NCT00716976|Secondary|Event-Free Survival (EFS)|Proportion of patients event free at 4 years following enrollment. See EFS outcome measure description.|4 years after enrollment|61 eligible patients were enrolled on the STS arm; 64 eligible patients were enrolled on the observation arm.||Percentage probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847238|NCT00716976|Secondary|Change in Hearing Thresholds For Key Frequencies at 8000 hz|Mean change in hearing threshold (post-pre) at 8000 hz.|4 weeks after last dose of cisplatin|38 eligible patients in the STS arm had paired audiometry at 8000 hz; 42 patients in the observation arm had paired audiometry at 8000 hz.||Decibels||Standard Deviation|Mean
847239|NCT00716976|Secondary|Change in Hearing Thresholds For Key Frequencies at 4000 hz|Mean change in hearing threshold (post-pre) at 4000 hz.|4 weeks after last dose of cisplatin|38 eligible patients in the STS arm had paired audiometry at 4000 hz; 47 patients in the observation arm had paired audiometry at 4000 hz.||Decibels||Standard Deviation|Mean
847240|NCT00716976|Secondary|Change in Hearing Thresholds For Key Frequencies at 2000 hz|Mean change in hearing threshold (post-pre) at 2000 hz|4 weeks after last dose of cisplatin|38 eligible patients in the STS arm had paired audiometry at 2000 hz; 47 patients in the observation arm had paired audiometry at 2000 hz.||Decibels||Standard Deviation|Mean
847241|NCT00716976|Secondary|Change in Hearing Thresholds For Key Frequencies at 1000 hz|Mean change in hearing threshold (post-pre) at 1000 hz.|4 weeks after last dose of cisplatin|37 eligible patients in the STS arm had paired audiometry at 1000 hz; 47 patients in the observation arm had paired audiometry at 1000 hz.||Decibels||Standard Deviation|Mean
847242|NCT00716976|Secondary|Change in Hearing Thresholds For Key Frequencies at 500 hz|Mean change in hearing threshold (post-pre) at 500 hz.|4 weeks after last dose of cisplatin|38 eligible patients in the STS arm had paired audiometry at 500 hz; 45 patients in the observation arm had paired audiometry at 500 hz.||Decibels||Standard Deviation|Mean
847243|NCT00716976|Primary|Incidence of Hearing Loss|Hearing loss defined by comparing hearing sensitivity at follow up evaluation relative to baseline measurements using ASHA criteria.|4 weeks after last dose of cisplatin|55 eligible patients enrolled on the observation Arm had complete audiometry data for evaluation; 49 eligible patients enrolled on the STS arm had complete data audiometry for evaluation.||Patients|||Number
847244|NCT00708123|Secondary|Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline in Enamel Fluoride Uptake|Enamel fluoride uptake was determined using the microdrill enamel biopsy technique. The amount of fluoride uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride (F) divided by the area of the enamel cores and expressed as ug F/cm2. The difference between treatments was calculated with respect to fluoride uptake by enamel.|Baseline to 14 days|"ITT population: All randomized participants who had a least one post baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group."||µg*F/cm^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847245|NCT00708123|Secondary|Mean %SMHR of Enamel Specimens Exposed to NaF/Carbopol Toothpaste (1400 ppmF), NaF Toothpaste (1350ppmF), NaMFP/NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF), NaF Toothpaste (250ppmF) and Placebo Toothpaste (0ppmF)|%SMHR test was used to assess mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. %SMHR was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents rehardening of enamel surface. %SMHR was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline (B), after intra-oral exposure (R) and after in-vitro demineralization (D) using formula: [(D-R)/ (D-B)]*100.|Baseline to 14 days|"ITT population: All randomized participants who had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group."||%SMHR||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847246|NCT00708123|Primary|Mean Percentage Surface Microhardness Recovery (%SMHR) of Enamel Specimens Exposed to NaF/Carbopol Toothpaste (1400 ppmF), NaF Toothpaste (1350ppmF) Compared to NaMFP/NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF)|%SMHR test was used to assess mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. %SMHR was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents rehardening of enamel surface. %SMHR was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline (B), after intra-oral exposure (R) and after in-vitro demineralization (D) using formula: [(D-R)/ (D-B)]*100.|Baseline to 14 days|"Intent to treat population: All randomized participants who had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed. Due to subject drop outs, there are differences in the n per treatment group."||%SMHR||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847247|NCT00708097|Secondary|Enamel Fluoride Uptake (Demineralized Specimens)|Enamel fluoride uptake was determined using the microdrill enamel biopsy technique. The amount of fluoride uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride (F) divided by the area of the enamel cores. The difference between treatments was calculated with respect to fluoride uptake by enamel.|Baseline to 14 days|ITT population: All randomized participants with at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop out there are differences in the number of participants analyzed per treatment group.||μg*F/cm^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847368|NCT00607126|Primary|Walking Speed as Assessed by 25' Timed Walk|This is the time needed for participant to walk 25 feet. Participant walks on a level surface. the walk from start to finish is timed with a stop watch three measures are done and the average value is entered.|at beginning,mid point, end and 12 weeks after intervention|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
847248|NCT00708097|Secondary|Enamel Fluoride Uptake (Sound Enamel Specimens)|Enamel fluoride uptake was determined using the microdrill enamel biopsy technique. The amount of fluoride uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride (F) divided by the area of the enamel cores. The difference between treatments was calculated with respect to fluoride uptake by enamel.|Baseline to 14 days|ITT population:. All randomized participants who had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop out there are differences in the number of participants analyzed per treatment group.||micrograms (μg)*F/centimeters(cm)^2]||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847249|NCT00708097|Secondary|Percentage SMHR of Demineralized Enamel Specimens Exposed to NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF), NaF Toothpaste (1400ppmF), NaF Toothpaste (675ppmF), NaMFP/NaF Toothpaste(1450ppmF) and Placebo Toothpaste (0ppmF)|SMH test was used to assess mineral status of partially demineralized enamel specimens using Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening/demineralization while decrease in the indentation represents rehardening/ remineralization of enamel surface. Percent SMHR was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline(B); after intra-oral exposure(R) on Day 14; and after in-vitro demineralization(D) on Day 14 using formula [(D-R)/(D-B)]*100.|Baseline to 14 days|ITT population. All randomized participants who had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop out there were differences in the number of participants analyzed per treatment group.||Percentage SMHR||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847250|NCT00708097|Secondary|Percentage SMHR of Sound Enamel Specimens Exposed to NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF), NaF Toothpaste (1400ppmF), NaMFP/NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF), NaF Toothpaste (675ppmF) and Placebo Toothpaste (0ppmF)|SMH test was used to assess mineral status of partially demineralized enamel specimens using Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening/demineralization while decrease in the indentation represents rehardening/ remineralization of enamel surface. Percent SMHR was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline(B); after intra-oral exposure(R) on Day 14; and after in-vitro demineralization(D) on Day 14 using formula [(D-R)/(D-B)]*100.|Baseline to 14 days|ITT population: All randomized participants who had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop out there were differences in the number of participants analyzed per treatment group.||Percentage SMHR||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847251|NCT00708097|Primary|Percentage Surface Microhardness Recovery (%SMHR) of Sound Enamel Specimens Exposed to NaF Toothpaste (1450ppmF) and NaF Toothpaste (1400ppmF)|SMH test was used to assess mineral status of partially demineralized enamel specimens using Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening/demineralization while decrease in the indentation represents rehardening/ remineralization of enamel surface. Percent SMHR was calculated from indentation values of enamel specimens at baseline(B); after intra-oral exposure(R) on Day 14; and after in-vitro demineralization(D) on Day 14 using formula [(D-R)/(D-B)]*100.|Baseline to 14 days|Intent to Treat (ITT) population: All randomized participants who had at least one post baseline efficacy assessment. Missing data was not imputed. Due to drop outs there were differences in the number of participants (N) per treatment group.||Percentage SMHR||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847252|NCT00708305|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fluoride Concentration at 4 Hours Post Brushing With Study Treatments|Change from baseline at any time point for a treatment period was calculated as the median post brushing fluoride value at a time point minus the median baseline (pre-brushing) fluoride value for a treatment period.|Plaque samples were collected at baseline, 4 hours post single application of study treatment|"PP population: All participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment but did not have any major protocol deviations. Due to drop outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group. Missing data was not imputed."||μg*F/g||Full Range|Median
847253|NCT00708305|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fluoride Concentration at 2 Hours Post Brushing With Study Treatments|Change from baseline at any time point for a treatment period was calculated as the median post brushing fluoride value at a time point minus the median baseline (pre-brushing) fluoride value for a treatment period.|Plaque samples were collected at baseline, 2 hour post single application of study treatment|"PP population: All participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment but did not have any major protocol deviations. Due to drop outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group. Missing data was not imputed."||μg*F/g||Full Range|Median
847254|NCT00708305|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fluoride Concentration at 1 Hour Post Brushing With Study Treatments|Change from baseline at any time point for a treatment period was calculated as the median post brushing fluoride value at a time point minus the median baseline (pre-brushing) fluoride value for a treatment period.|Plaque samples were collected at baseline, 1 hour post single application of study treatment|"PP population: All participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment but did not have any major protocol deviations. Due to drop outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group. Missing data was not imputed."||μg*F/g||Full Range|Median
847255|NCT00708305|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fluoride Concentration at 30 Minutes Post Brushing With Study Treatments|Change from baseline at any time point for a treatment period was calculated as the median post brushing fluoride value at a time point minus the median baseline (pre-brushing) fluoride value for a treatment period.|Plaque samples were collected at baseline, 30 minutes post single application of study treatment|"PP population: All participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment but did not have any major protocol deviations. Due to drop outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group. Missing data was not imputed."||μg*F/g||Full Range|Median
847256|NCT00708305|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fluoride Concentration at 15 Minutes After Brushing With Study Treatments|Change from baseline at any time point for a treatment period was calculated as the median post brushing fluoride value at a time point minus the median baseline (pre-brushing) fluoride value for a treatment period.|Plaque samples were collected at baseline, 15 minutes post single application of study treatment|"PP population: All participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment but did not have any major protocol deviations. Due to drop outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group. Missing data was not imputed."||μg*F/g||Full Range|Median
847257|NCT00708305|Secondary|Natural Log Transformed AUC for Fluoride Concentration in Plaque Fluid Between 0-4 Hours|To evaluate fluoride content, plaque samples were collected from the interproximal surfaces of the posterior teeth of participants using a standardized approach. Plaque fluid fluoride were calculated using a micro analytical method and in comparison to a standard fluoride curve constructed on the same day of the analysis. AUC was determined from 0-4 hours using trapezoidal rule and natural log transformation was applied.due to failure of assumption of normal distribution of data.|Plaque samples collected at 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours and 4 hours post single application of treatment|"Per-Protocol (PP) population: All participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment but did not have any major protocol deviations. Due to drop outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group. Missing data was not imputed."||ln(μg*F*minutes/cm^2)||Standard Error|Log Mean
847258|NCT00708305|Primary|Natural Log Transformed Area Under the Fluoride Concentration in Plaque Fluid by Time Curve (AUC) Between 0-4 Hours|To evaluate fluoride content, plaque samples were collected from the interproximal surfaces of the posterior teeth of participants using a standardized approach. Plaque fluid fluoride were calculated using a micro analytical method and in comparison to a standard fluoride curve constructed on the same day of the analysis. AUC was determined from 0-4hours using trapezoidal rule and natural log transformation was applied due to failure of assumption of normal distribution of data.|Plaque samples collected at 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours and 4 hours post single application of treatment|"Per-Protocol (PP) population: All participants who had at least one post-baseline efficacy assessment but did not have any major protocol deviations. Due to drop outs, there were differences in the n per treatment group. Missing data was not imputed."||ln(μg*F*minutes/cm^2)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847259|NCT00706446|Secondary|Asthma-related Quality of Life||1 year|Data was not collected for secondary outcomes due to study termination.|||||
847260|NCT00706446|Secondary|Symptom-free Days||1 year|Data was not collected for secondary outcomes due to study termination.|||||
847261|NCT00706446|Secondary|Exhaled NO (Nitric Oxide)||1 year|Data was not collected for secondary outcomes due to study termination.|||||
847262|NCT00706446|Secondary|FEV1 (Forced Expiratory Volume)||1 year|Data was not collected for secondary outcomes due to study termination|||||
847263|NCT00706446|Primary|Number of Patients With Asthma Exacerbation||1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
847264|NCT00705783|Secondary|Time to Discontinuation|Time to discontinuation was defined as the date of randomization to the date of study discontinuation.|Baseline of the depot maintenance phase to the end of the study (Week 52)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847265|NCT00705783|Secondary|Mean Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Score|The efficacy of the study medication was rated for each patient using the CGI-I scale. The rater or investigator rated the patient’s total improvement whether or not it was due entirely to drug treatment. All responses were compared to the patient’s condition at Baseline. Response choices included: 0 = not assessed, 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, and 7 = very much worse. The CGI-I score ranged from 0-7 with a higher score indicating less improvement/worsening.|Baseline of the depot maintenance phase to the end of the study (Week 52)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who had CGI-I scores at both baseline and at least 1 post-baseline time point in Phase 4. Last observation carried forward was implemented to impute the missing data at post-baseline visits. Baseline was not carried forward in imputing the missing data at post-baseline visits.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847266|NCT00705783|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the PANSS Negative Subscale Score|The PANSS Negative Subscale consists of 7 symptom constructs (blunted affect, emotional withdrawal, poor rapport, passive pathetic withdrawal, difficulty in abstract thinking, lack of spontaneity and flow of conversation, stereotyped thinking). For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 indicating the absence of symptoms and a score of 7 indicating extremely severe symptoms. Scores on each subscale ranged from 7-49 with a higher score indicating more severe symptoms. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline of the depot maintenance phase to the end of the study (Week 52)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who had PANSS sub-scale scores at both baseline and at least 1 post-baseline time point in Phase 4. Last observation carried forward was implemented to impute the missing data at post-baseline visits. Baseline was not carried forward in imputing the missing data at post-baseline visits.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847267|NCT00705783|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the PANSS Positive Subscale Score|The PANSS Positive Subscale consists of 7 symptom constructs (delusions, conceptual disorganization, hallucinatory behavior, excitement, grandiosity, suspiciousness/persecution, and hostility). For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 indicating the absence of symptoms and a score of 7 indicating extremely severe symptoms. Scores on each subscale ranged from 7-49 with a higher score indicating more severe symptoms. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline of the depot maintenance phase to the end of the study (Week 52)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who had PANSS sub-scale scores at both baseline and at least 1 post-baseline time point in Phase 4. Last observation carried forward was implemented to impute the missing data at post-baseline visits. Baseline was not carried forward in imputing the missing data at post-baseline visits.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847268|NCT00705783|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) Score|The severity of illness for each patient was rated using the CGI-S. To assess CGI-S, the rater or investigator answered the following question: “Considering your total clinical experience with this particular population, how mentally ill is the patient at this time?” Response choices included: 0 = not assessed; 1 = normal, not ill at all; 2 = borderline mentally ill; 3 = mildly ill; 4 = moderately ill; 5 = markedly ill; 6 = severely ill; and 7 = among the most extremely ill patients. The CGI-S score ranged from 0-7 with a higher score indicating greater illness. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline of the depot maintenance phase to the end of the study (Week 52)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who had CGI-S scores at both baseline and at least 1 post-baseline time point in Phase 4. Last observation carried forward was implemented to impute the missing data at post-baseline visits. Baseline was not carried forward in imputing the missing data at post-baseline visits.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847269|NCT00705783|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in the PANSS Total Score|The PANSS consists of 3 subscales (Positive Subscale, 7 constructs, scores ranged from 7-49, Negative Subscale, 7 constructs, scores ranged from 7-49, General Psychopathology Subscale, 16 constructs, scores ranged from 16-112) containing a total of 30 symptom constructs. For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 indicating the absence of symptoms and a score of 7 indicating extremely severe symptoms. The PANSS total score ranged from 30-210 with a higher score indicating more severe symptoms. A negative change score indicates improvement.|Baseline of the depot maintenance phase to the end of the study (Week 52)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who had PANSS total scores at both baseline and at least 1 post-baseline time point in Phase 4. Last observation carried forward was implemented to impute the missing data at post-baseline visits. Baseline was not carried forward in imputing the missing data at post-baseline visits.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847270|NCT00705783|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving Remission|A patient was considered to have achieved remission if they had a score of ≤ 3 on each of the following PANSS items, maintained for a period of 6 months: Delusions (P1), unusual thought content (G9), hallucinatory behavior (P3), conceptual disorganization (P2), mannerisms/posturing (G5), blunted affect (N1), social withdrawal (N4), and lack of spontaneity (N6).|Baseline of the depot maintenance phase to the end of the study (Week 52)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients who stayed in Phase 4 for at least 6 months and had values for the specific PANSS items P1, G9, P3, P2,G5, N1, N4, and N6.||Percentage of patients|||Number
847271|NCT00705783|Secondary|Percentage of Responders|A patient was considered to be a responder if all of the following criteria were met. 1) Outpatient status, 2) PANSS total score ≤ 80, 3) Lack of specific psychotic symptoms on the PANSS as measured by a score of ≤ 4 on each of the following items (possible scores of 1 to 7 for each item): Conceptual disorganization, suspiciousness, hallucinatory behavior, unusual thought content, and 4) Clinical Global Impression of Severity of Illness (CGI-S) ≤ 4 (moderately ill) and 5) CGI-SS ≤ 2 (mildly suicidal) on Part 1 and ≤ 5 (minimally worsened) on Part 2.|Baseline of the depot maintenance phase to the end of the study (Week 52)|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: All randomized patients. Two of the 269 patients in the ITT population did not attend the Last Visit at which this Outcome Measure was assessed and were not included in the analysis.||Percentage of patients|||Number
847272|NCT00705783|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Meeting Exacerbation of Psychotic Symptoms/Impending Relapse Criteria|This is the key secondary Outcome Measure.|Baseline of the depot maintenance phase to the end of the study (Week 52)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients.||Percentage of patients|||Number
847273|NCT00705783|Primary|Time to Exacerbation of Psychotic Symptoms/Impending Relapse|A patient experienced an exacerbation of psychotic symptoms/impending relapse if they met any of the following 4 criteria. 1) Clinical Global Impression of Improvement score ≥ 5 and either an increase on any of the following Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) items (conceptual disorganization, hallucinatory behavior, suspiciousness, unusual thought content) to a score > 4 with an increase of ≥ 2 on that item since randomization or an increase on any of the same PANSS items to a score > 4 and an increase of ≥ 4 on the same combined PANSS items since randomization, 2) Hospitalization due to worsening of psychotic symptoms, 3) Clinical Global Impression of Severity of Suicide (CGI-SS) score of 4 or 5 on Part 1 and/or 6 or 7 on Part 2, or 4) Violent behavior resulting in clinically significant self-injury, injury to another person, or property damage.|Baseline of the depot maintenance phase to the end of the study (Week 52)|Intent-to-treat population: All randomized patients.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847274|NCT00700635|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection Site and Solicited Systemic Reactions After Dose 2 Vaccination|Solicited injection site reactions: Erythema, Swelling, Pain. Solicited systemic reactions: Fever (temperature), Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia.|7 days post-vaccination 2|Safety analysis was on all enrolled and vaccinated participants, intent-to-treat population.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
847275|NCT00700635|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection Site and Solicited Systemic Reactions After Dose 1 Vaccination|Solicited injection site reactions: Erythema, Swelling, Pain. Solicited systemic reactions: Fever (temperature), Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia.|7 days post-vaccination 1|Safety analysis was on all enrolled and vaccinated participants, intent-to-treat population.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
847276|NCT00700635|Secondary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) of Meningococcal Antibodies After Each Menactra® Vaccination.|Meningococcal serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 antibody titers were measured by serum bactericidal assay using human complement (SBA-HC)|30 days post-vaccination|Geometric mean titers (GMTs) of Serum Bactericidal Assay Human Complement (SBA-HC) for the vaccine Serogroups were analyzed in the per-protocol population.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847277|NCT00700635|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Meningococcal Antibody Titers at ≥ 4 After Each Vaccination|Meningococcal serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 antibody titers were measured by serum bactericidal assay using human complement (SBA-HC)|30 days post-vaccination|Serum bactericidal assay human complement antibody titers to each of the 4 meningococcal serogroups in the vaccine were evaluated in the per-protocol population.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
847278|NCT00700635|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Meningococcal Antibody Titers ≥ 8 After Each Vaccination|Meningococcal serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 antibody titers were measured by serum bactericidal assay using human complement (SBA-HC)|30 days post-vaccination|Serum bactericidal assay human complement antibody titers to each of the 4 meningococcal serogroups in the vaccine were evaluated in the per-protocol population.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
847279|NCT00686725|Secondary|Relationship Between MGMT Status and Therapy Response: PFS for the MGMT Negative Group|"MGMT was measured by IHC.
PFS: The length of time during and after treatment that a participant lived with the cancer but it does not get worse.
PFS was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method."|Up to 2 years|"Participants with enough tissue to perform MGMT analysis.
Only MGMT-negative participants are included in this outcome measure. MGMT-positive participants are reported in outcome measure 8."||months||Standard Deviation|Median
847280|NCT00686725|Secondary|Relationship Between MGMT Status and Therapy Response: PFS for the MGMT Positive Group|"MGMT was measured by IHC.
PFS: The length of time during and after treatment that a participant lived with the cancer but it does not get worse.
PFS was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method."|Up to 2 years|"Participants with enough tissue to perform MGMT analysis.
Only MGMT-positive participants are included in this outcome measure. MGMT-negative participants are reported in outcome measure 9."||months||Standard Deviation|Median
847281|NCT00686725|Secondary|Relationship Between MGMT Status and Therapy Response: Overall Survival Rate for the MGMT Negative Group|"MGMT was measured by IHC.
OS rate was defined as the percentage of participants who were still alive 6, 12, & 18 months after starting study treatment.
OS was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method."|6, 12, & 18 months|"Participants with enough tissue to perform MGMT analysis.
Only MGMT-negative participants are included in this outcome measure. MGMT-positive participants are reported in outcome measure 6."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847282|NCT00686725|Secondary|Relationship Between MGMT Status and Therapy Response: Overall Survival Rate for the MGMT Positive Group|"MGMT was measured by IHC.
OS rate was defined as the percentage of participants who were still alive 6, 12, & 18 months after starting study treatment.
OS was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method."|6, 12, & 18 months|"Participants with enough tissue to perform MGMT analysis.
Only MGMT-positive participants are included in this outcome measure. MGMT-negative participants are reported in outcome measure 7."||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847283|NCT00686725|Secondary|Relationship Between MGMT Status and Therapy Response: Overall Survival for the MGMT Negative Group|"MGMT was measured by IHC.
OS was defined as the length of time from the start of treatment that 1/2 of the participants were still alive.
OS was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method."|Up to 2 years|"Participants with enough tissue to perform MGMT analysis.
Only MGMT-negative participants are included in this outcome measure. MGMT-positive participants are reported in outcome measure 4."||months||Standard Deviation|Median
847284|NCT00686725|Secondary|Relationship Between O6-methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT) Status and Therapy Response: Overall Survival for the MGMT Positive Group|"MGMT was measured by immunohistochemistry (IHC).
OS was defined as the length of time from the start of treatment that 1/2 of the participants were still alive.
OS was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method."|Up to 2 years|"Participants with enough tissue to perform MGMT analysis.
Only MGMT-positive participants are included in this outcome measure. MGMT-negative participants are reported in outcome measure 5."||months||Standard Deviation|Median
847285|NCT00686725|Secondary|Objective Tumor Assessment After Surgery: Overall Response|"Overall response was based on neuroimaging (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]), clinical neurological examination, and steroid administration.
It was assessed as follows:
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all enhancing tumor (measurable
or non-measurable), no corticosteroid use, and neurologically stable or
improved.
Partial Response (PR): ≥50% reduction in size of enhancing tumor
(measurable or non-measurable) for any measurable lesions or definite
improvement for any non-measurable lesions, corticosteroid dosage stable or
reduced, and neurologically stable or improved.
Progressive Disease (PD): ≥25% increase in contrast enhancement for any
measurable lesions or definite worsening for any non-measurable lesions, or
any new tumor on MRI scans, at an increased dose of corticosteroid, with or without neurologic progression. Clinical or radiological worsening resulting from other than tumor factors were excluded.
Stable Disease (SD): All other situations."|Up to 2 years|||participants|||Number
847286|NCT00686725|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|"PFS was defined as the length of time from randomization to disease progression (the length of time during which the cancer did not get worse) or death.
PFS was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method."|Up to 2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847287|NCT00686725|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|"OS was defined as the time from randomization to death.
OS was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method."|Up to 2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847292|NCT00674362|Other Pre-specified|Association Between Disease Activity Score (DAS28-ESR) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Remission at Week 24|The number representing the association is the Kappa Correlation Coefficient for DAS28-ESR/SDAI remission.|Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) 142 (76 CZP, 66 Placebo) had measures for both DAS28-ESR and SDAI at Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||Kappa Correlation Coefficient||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847293|NCT00674362|Other Pre-specified|Association Between Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Disease Activity Score (DAS28-ESR) Remission at Week 24|The number representing the association is the Kappa Correlation Coefficient for CDAI/DAS28-ESR remission|Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) 148 (79 CZP, 69 Placebo) had measures for both CDAI and DAS28-ESR at Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||Kappa Correlation Coefficient||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847467|NCT00555321|Secondary|Summary Statistics for Lipid Parameters- Serum Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL): 12-month Treatment Phase||Baseline (pretransplant), 1, 6, 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n = participants who had both baseline and postbaseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847294|NCT00674362|Other Pre-specified|Association Between Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Remission at Week 24|The number representing the association is the Kappa Correlation Coefficient for CDAI/SDAI remission.|Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) 143 (76 CZP, 67 Placebo) had measures for both CDAI and SDAI at Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||Kappa Correlation Coefficient||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847295|NCT00674362|Other Pre-specified|Association Between Disease Activity Score (DAS28-ESR) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Activity States at Week 24|The number representing the association is the Kappa Correlation Coefficient for DAS28-ESR/SDAI for each category of activity (Low Disease Activity (LDA) vs. non-LDA, Medium Disease Activity (MDA) vs. non-MDA, and High Disease Activity (HDA) vs. non-HDA).|Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) 142 (76 CZP, 66 Placebo) had measures for both DAS28-ESR and SDAI at Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||Kappa Correlation Coefficient||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847296|NCT00674362|Other Pre-specified|Association Between Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Disease Activity Score (DAS28-ESR) Activity States at Week 24|The number representing the association is the Kappa Correlation Coefficient for CDAI/DAS28-ESR for each category of activity (Low Disease Activity (LDA) vs. non-LDA, Medium Disease Activity (MDA) vs. non-MDA, and High Disease Activity (HDA) vs. non-HDA).|Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) 148 (79 CZP, 69 Placebo) had measures for both CDAI and DAS28-ESR at Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||Kappa Correlation Coefficient||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847297|NCT00674362|Other Pre-specified|Association Between Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Activity States at Week 24|The number representing the association is the Kappa Correlation Coefficient for CDAI/SDAI for each category of activity (Low Disease Activity (LDA) vs. non-LDA, Medium Disease Activity (MDA) vs. non-MDA, and High Disease Activity (HDA) vs. non-HDA).|Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) 143 (76 CZP, 67 Placebo) had measures for both CDAI and SDAI at Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||Kappa Correlation Coefficient||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847298|NCT00674362|Other Pre-specified|Time From Stopping Treatment (Week 24) to First Flare (up to Week 52) Using Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at 2 Consecutive Visits|Subjects having a flare (CDAI ≥11) between Week 24 and Week 52 for two consecutive visits will be considered as having the event on the day of the visit where flare first appeared.|From Week 24 up to Week 52|"All 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) are included in this analysis.
An ad-hoc analysis has been performed on the Week 24 Responder Set (W24RS) which showed similar results."||days||Standard Error|Mean
847299|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fatigue Assessment Scale at Week 24|Change from Baseline in Fatigue Assessment scale (0 to 10, 0 is “No Fatigue” and 10 is “Fatigue as bad as you can imagine”) is computed as the value at Week 24 minus the Baseline value. A negative value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement. This analysis was carried out using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects, 180 (90 CZP, 90 Placebo) are included in this analysis using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847300|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS) at Week 24|Change from Baseline in Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity-VAS (0 to 100 mm visual analog scale, 0 being no symptoms and 100 being severe symptoms) is computed as the value at Week 24 minus the Baseline value. A negative value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement. This analysis was carried out using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects, 183 (92 CZP, 91 Placebo) are included in this analysis using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
847301|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient’s Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Week 24|Change from Baseline in Patient’s Assessment of Arthritis Pain-VAS (0 to 100 mm visual analog scale, 0 being no pain and 100 being most severe pain) is computed as the value at Week 24 minus the Baseline value. A negative value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement. This analysis was carried out using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects, 162 (81 CZP, 81 Placebo) are included in this analysis using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
847302|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form 36-items Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Health Domain at Week 24|There are 8 SF-36 domain scores: Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role Emotional and Mental Health, each ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. A larger positive value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 168 (83 CZP, 85 Placebo) had values at Baseline and Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847303|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form 36-items Health Survey (SF-36) Role Emotional Domain at Week 24|There are 8 SF-36 domain scores: Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role Emotional and Mental Health, each ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. A larger positive value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 166 (83 CZP, 83 Placebo) had values at Baseline and Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847304|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form 36-items Health Survey (SF-36) Social Functioning Domain at Week 24|There are 8 SF-36 domain scores: Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role Emotional and Mental Health, each ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. A larger positive value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 168 (83 CZP, 85 Placebo) had values at Baseline and Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847305|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form 36-items Health Survey (SF-36) Vitality Domain at Week 24|There are 8 SF-36 domain scores: Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role Emotional and Mental Health, each ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. A larger positive value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 168 (83 CZP, 85 Placebo) had values at Baseline and Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847306|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form 36-items Health Survey (SF-36) General Health Domain at Week 24|There are 8 SF-36 domain scores: Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role Emotional and Mental Health, each ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. A larger positive value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 166 (82 CZP, 84 Placebo) had values at Baseline and Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847307|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form 36-items Health Survey (SF-36) Bodily Pain Domain at Week 24|There are 8 SF-36 domain scores: Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role Emotional and Mental Health, each ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. A larger positive value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 167 (83 CZP, 84 Placebo) had values at Baseline and Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847308|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form 36-items Health Survey (SF-36) Role Physical Domain at Week 24|There are 8 SF-36 domain scores: Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role Emotional and Mental Health, each ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. A larger positive value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 167 (83 CZP, 84 Placebo) had values at Baseline and Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847309|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form 36-items Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 24|There are 8 SF-36 domain scores: Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role Emotional and Mental Health, each ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. A larger positive value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 168 (83 CZP, 85 Placebo) had values at Baseline and Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847310|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form 36-items Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary (MCS) Scores at Week 24|MCS norm-based scores are calculated based upon the following 8 domain scores, Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role Emotional and Mental Health, and range from -9 to 82, where 50 represents the normative value. A larger positive value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 164 (82 CZP, 82 Placebo) had values at Baseline and Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847311|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form 36-items Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Scores at Week 24|PCS norm-based scores are calculated based upon the following 8 domain scores, Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role Emotional and Mental Health, and range from 1 to 81, where 50 represents the normative value. A larger positive value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement.|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS), 164 (82 CZP, 82 Placebo) had values at Baseline and Week 24 and are included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847312|NCT00674362|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 24|HAQ-DI is derived based on the mean of individual scores in 8 categories of daily living actives (using 20 questions). Each question is scored 0-3 (0 = without any difficulty, 1 = with some difficulty, 2 = with much difficulty, and 3 = unable to do). Change from Baseline is computed as the value at Week 24 minus the Baseline value. A negative value in change from Baseline indicates an improvement. This analysis was carried out using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.|Baseline, Week 24|Of the 194 subjects, 182 (91 CZP, 91 Placebo) are included in this analysis using the Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847313|NCT00674362|Secondary|American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response at Week 24|ACR70 responders are subjects with at least 70% improvement from Baseline for tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale, 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale, 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale. Missing values were imputed using Non-Responder Imputation (NRI)|Baseline, Week 24|Since imputation was used, all 194 subjects are included in the analysis||percentage of subjects|||Number
847314|NCT00674362|Secondary|American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response at Week 24|ACR50 responders are subjects with at least 50% improvement from Baseline for tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale, 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale, 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale. Missing values were imputed using Non-Responder Imputation (NRI)|Baseline, Week 24|Since imputation was used, all 194 subjects are included in the analysis||percentage of subjects|||Number
847315|NCT00674362|Secondary|American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Week 24|ACR20 responders are subjects with at least 20% improvement from Baseline for tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), and at least 3 of the 5 remaining core set measures: 1) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 2) C-reactive Protein (CRP), 3) Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain-Visual Analog Scale, 4) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale, 5) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity-Visual Analog Scale. Missing values were imputed using Non-Responder Imputation (NRI)|Baseline, Week 24|Since imputation was used, all 194 subjects are included in the analysis||percentage of subjects|||Number
847363|NCT00611130|Post-Hoc|Medication Compliance|Using retained urine samples and prior to unblinding, up to 12 specimens/ subject were analyzed for vigabatrin levels. Compliance assessment based on > or = 70% of urines in subjects assigned to vigabatrin having quantitative levels of vigabatrin indicaticative of taking drug within the last 24 hours of clinic visit.|Week 2, 4, 6 & 9-11|Completers were defined as those who attended the scheduled Week 13 visit or the third visit of Week 12 and who also had provided urines during Weeks 11 & 12.||participants|||Number
847316|NCT00674362|Secondary|Time From Stopping Treatment (Week 24) to Loss of Remission (up to Week 52) Assessed Using DAS28-ESR Scores at 2 Consecutive Visits|DAS28-ESR is calculated using tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR mm/hour) and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS mm). 0.56x√(TJC) + 0.28x√(SJC) + 0.70xlognat(ESR) + 0.014xPtGADA-VAS. 28 joints are examined. Lower score indicates less disease activity. Patients losing remission (DAS28-ESR≥2.6) for two consecutive visits will be considered as having the event on the first of the two visits. Subjects discontinued/non-remitted by Week 24 are considered as having the event on day 1.|Week 24 up to Week 52|All 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) are included in this analysis.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
847317|NCT00674362|Secondary|Time From Stopping Treatment (Week 24) to Loss of Remission (up to Week 52) Assessed Using Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Scores at 2 Consecutive Visits|SDAI is calculated as the sum of tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), C-reactive protein (mg/dL), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS in cm) and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PhGADA-VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined. A lower score indicates less disease activity. Patients losing remission (SDAI >3.3) for two consecutive visits will be considered as having the event on the day of the visit where remission was first lost. Subjects discontinued/non-remitted by Week 24 are considered as having the event on day 1.|Week 24 up to Week 52|All 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) are included in this analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
847318|NCT00674362|Secondary|Time From Stopping Treatment (Week 24) to Loss of Remission (up to Week 52) Assessed Using Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Scores at 2 Consecutive Visits|CDAI is calculated as the sum of tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS in cm), and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PhGADA-VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined where a lower score indicates less disease activity. Patients losing remission (CDAI >2.8) for two consecutive visits will be considered as having the event on the day of the visit where remission was first lost. Subjects discontinued/non-remitted by Week 24 are considered as having the event on day 1.|Week 24 up to Week 52|All 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) are included in this analysis.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
847319|NCT00674362|Secondary|Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Remission (≤3.3) at Both Week 20 and Week 24|SDAI is calculated as the sum of tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), C-reactive protein (CRP in mg/dL), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS in cm), and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PhGADA-VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined where a lower score indicates less disease activity. Missing values were imputed using Non-Responder Imputation (NRI)|Week 20 and Week 24|Since imputation was used, all 194 subjects are included in the analysis||percentage of subjects|||Number
847320|NCT00674362|Secondary|28-joint Count Disease Activity Score (DAS28-ESR) Remission (<2.6) at Both Week 20 and Week 24|DAS28-ESR is calculated using the tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC) erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR in mm/hour), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS in mm) using the following formula: 0.56 x √(TJC) + 0.28 x √(SJC) + 0.70 x lognat (ESR) + 0.014 x Patient Global Assessment of Arthritis where 28 joints are examined and a lower score indicates less disease activity. Missing values were imputed using Non-Responder Imputation (NRI)|Week 20 and Week 24|Since imputation was used, all 194 subjects are included in the analysis||percentage of subjects|||Number
847321|NCT00674362|Primary|Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Remission (≤2.8) at Both Week 20 and Week 24|CDAI is calculated as the sum of tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PtGADA-VAS in cm), and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity - Visual Analog Scale (PhGADA-VAS in cm). 28 joints are examined where a lower score indicates less disease activity. Missing values were imputed using Non-Responder Imputation (NRI)|Week 20 and Week 24|All 194 subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) are included in this analysis.||percentage of subjects|||Number
847364|NCT00611130|Primary|Proportion of Subjects in Each Treatment Group Abstinent During the Last 2 Weeks of Treatment.|Number of subjects in the CPP-109 Vigabatrin Group vs. Number in Placebo Group abstinent from using cocaine during Weeks 11 and 12 of the Treatment Phase.|Week 13|intent-to-treat||participants|||Number
847330|NCT00646646|Primary|Dynamic Eye Movement Measures|Change in Eye Movements Parameters|baseline to Sedation State (approx. 1 hr)|||(degrees/second)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847331|NCT00645944|Primary|Change in Insomnia Severity Index From Baseline.|The Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) is a 7-item self-report questionnaire that provides a global measure of insomnia severity based on several indicators (e.g., difficulty falling or staying asleep, satisfaction with sleep, degree of impairment with daytime functioning). It has adequate internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha=0.91) and temporal stability (r=0.80), has been validated against sleep diary and polysomnography data and was sensitive to change in several insomnia treatment studies. The ISI scale range is: minimum = 0, maximum = 28. The interpretation is that lower is 'better sleep', while higher is considered 'worse sleep/more insomnia'.|8 Weeks|Of 39 eligible participants, 19 were randomized to placebo and 20 to eszopiclone 3mg. Two participants in the placebo arm and 1 participant in the eszopiclone arm withdrew before receiving study medication. 36 participants were included in the modified ITT analysis||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
847339|NCT00643565|Secondary|Clearance of Bevacizumab|CL is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body. CL is expressed in milliliters per day (mL/day).|Pre- and within 3 hours post-dose on Days 1, 8, and 15 of Cycle 1, Day 1 of Cycle 2-4 of induction phase (1 cycle = 3 weeks)|PK-evaluable population. Only participants who received bevacizumab were to be analyzed for PK assessment.||mL/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
847340|NCT00643565|Secondary|Half-Life of Bevacizumab|Half-life is the time measured for the plasma concentration to decrease by one half.|Pre- and within 3 hours post-dose on Days 1, 8, and 15 of Cycle 1, Day 1 of Cycle 2-4 of induction phase (1 cycle = 3 weeks)|PK-evaluable population. Only participants who received bevacizumab were to be analyzed for PK assessment.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
847341|NCT00643565|Secondary|Volume of Distribution of Bevacizumab|Volume of distribution is defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration of a drug. Steady state volume of distribution (Vss) is the apparent volume of distribution at steady-state.|Pre- and within 3 hours post-dose on Days 1, 8, and 15 of Cycle 1, Day 1 of Cycle 2-4 of induction phase (1 cycle = 3 weeks)|PK-evaluable population. Only participants who received bevacizumab were to be analyzed for PK assessment.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847342|NCT00643565|Secondary|Area Under the Curve at Steady State (AUCss) of Bevacizumab|AUC is a measure of the serum concentration of the drug over time. It is used to characterize drug absorption. AUCss is expressed in milligrams times days per milliliter (mg*day/mL).|Pre- and within 3 hours post-dose on Days 1, 8, and 15 of Cycle 1, Day 1 of Cycle 2-4 of induction phase|Pharmacokinetic (PK)-evaluable population included all randomized participants for whom at least one blood sample was taken for PK assessment following bevacizumab administration. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||mg*day/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848713|NCT00602836|Secondary|Number of Participants With ZAP-70 Testing at Baseline Who Also Had a Clinical Response (CR, nPR, or PR).|Response categories described in above outcome measures. ZAP-70 status describe in baseline characteristics section.|During treatment (up to 5 years)||||||
847343|NCT00643565|Secondary|Overall Survival Duration|Overall survival was defined as the time between randomization and death due to any cause. Participants without an event were censored at the last time they were known to be alive. Median overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier estimates and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Screening up to approximately 6.75 years (assessed at screening, Cycles 4, 7 of induction phase, Cycles 1, 4, 7, 10 of maintenance, then every 3 months for 1.5 years and thereafter every 6 months for 2.5 years up to data cut-off date 31 May 2015)|ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847344|NCT00643565|Primary|EFS Duration as Per IRC Assessment|EFS was defined as the time between randomization and occurrence of EFS event. EFS events are described in Outcome Measure 1. Median EFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Screening up to approximately 6.75 years (assessed at screening, Cycles 4, 7 of induction phase, Cycles 1, 4, 7, 10 of maintenance, then every 3 months for 1.5 years and thereafter every 6 months for 2.5 years up to data cut-off date 31 May 2015)|ITT population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847345|NCT00643565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died||Screening up to approximately 6.75 years (assessed at screening, Cycles 4, 7 of induction phase, Cycles 1, 4, 7, 10 of maintenance, then every 3 months for 1.5 years and thereafter every 6 months for 2.5 years up to data cut-off date 31 May 2015)|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
847346|NCT00643565|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of Response was defined as time between first objective response and the occurrence of an EFS event (described in Outcome Measure 1). Objective response was defined in Outcome Measure 3. Median duration of response was estimated using Kaplan-Meier estimates and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Screening up to approximately 6.75 years (data cut-off date 31 May 2015)|ITT population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847347|NCT00643565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced EFS Events Among Participants Who Had Objective Response|EFS events was described in Outcome Measure 1 and Outcome Measure 3.|Screening up to approximately 6.75 years (data cut-off date 31 May 2015)|ITT population. Here number of participants analyzed = participants available for the analysis of this outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
847348|NCT00643565|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response Prior to First Local Therapy Assessed by RECIST v1.0 Criteria|Objective response prior to first local therapy (surgery and/or radiotherapy) was defined as complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) determined on two consecutive occasions >/=4 weeks apart. Tumor response was assessed as per IRC using RECIST v1.0. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions. If immunocytology was available, no disease was to be detected by that methodology. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the disease measurement, taking as reference the disease measurement done to confirm measurable disease at study entry.|Screening up to approximately 6.75 years (data cut-off date 31 May 2015)|ITT population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847349|NCT00643565|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced Event-Free Survival (EFS) Events as Per Independent Review Committee (IRC) Assessment|EFS events included tumor progression (IRC assessed), no evidence of response after 3 cycles of induction (derived from IRC assessment), second primary cancer, or death due to any cause. Data for participants who had not experienced an event by the time of clinical cut-off were censored at the date of the last disease assessment prior to the clinical cut-off date. Data for participants who did not have any post-baseline disease assessments were censored at the time of randomization. Tumor progression was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.0 (RECIST v1.0) as at least a 20% increase in the disease measurement, taking as reference the smallest disease measurement recorded since the start of treatment, or the appearance of one or more new lesions, or evidence of clinical progression and unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Screening up to approximately 6.75 years (assessed at screening, Cycles 4, 7 of induction phase, Cycles 1, 4, 7, 10 of maintenance, then every 3 months for 1.5 years and thereafter every 6 months for 2.5 years up to data cut-off date 31 May 2015)|ITT population.||percentage of participants|||Number
847350|NCT00623766|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is defined as the time from date of first dose of study drug until the date of death. For those patients who did not die, OS was censored at the recorded last date of patient contact, and those missing a recorded last date of contact will be censored at the last date the patient was known to be alive.|From first dose to 24 months|All participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847351|NCT00623766|Secondary|Onset of Response by Modified World Health Organization (mWHO) Criteria and Immune-related Response Criteria (irRC)|Onset of response is defined as the time between the first dose of study therapy and the date when measurement criteria are first met for global best overall response of partial (PR) or complete (CR), whichever occurs first. CR=complete disappearance of all index lesions. PR=decrease, relative to baseline, of 50% or greater in the sum of the 2 largest perpendicular diameters of all index lesions.|From Day 1, first dose to a maximum of 4.2 months|All participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab. n=number of participants with a best overall response of CR or PR.||Months||Full Range|Median
847352|NCT00623766|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Died or Had a Treatment-related Adverse Event (AE), Immune-related AE, Immune-related Serious Adverse Event (SAE), Nervous System Disorder, Treatment-related Nervous System Disorder, SAE, and AE Leading to Discontinuation|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Treatment-related=having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug. Grade (Gr) 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4=Life-threatening or disabling, Gr 5=Death.|Continuously from Day 1, first dose, to 70 days following last dose of ipilimumab|All participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Participants|||Number
847365|NCT00607126|Secondary|PASAT|Cognitive measure of attention and information processing speed. Score goes from 0-60 with higher number indicating better performance. Scores are expressed as mean chamge rfom baseline; negative numbers indicate worse performance|baseline, mid, completion, 3 months post training|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847353|NCT00623766|Secondary|Number of Participants Surviving at 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 Months (Overall Survival [OS] Rate)|OS is defined as the time from the first dose of study drug until the date of death. Overall survival rate is the percentage of participants known to be alive at a timepoint. For those patients who did not die, OS was censored at the recorded last date of patient contact, and those with a missing recorded last date of contact will be censored at the last date the patient was known to be alive. The survival rate at a specified time-point is the probability that a patient is alive at that time following randomization. The rate is calculated for each treatment group using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method. A corresponding 2-sided 95% bootstrap confidence interval will be calculated.|From first dose to Months 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months|All participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Probability of being alive||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847354|NCT00623766|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) by Modified World Health Organization (mWHO) Criteria and by Immune-related Response Criteria (irRC)|PFS is defined as the time between the date of the first dose of study therapy and the date of progression or death, whichever occurs first. A patient who dies without reported prior progression will be considered to have progressed on the date of death. For those who remain alive and have not progressed, PFS will be censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment. Participants who have not died and have no recorded postbaseline tumor assessment will be censored on the date of first dose of study therapy. Those who die without any recorded postbaseline tumor assessment will be considered to have progressed on the date of death.|From Day 1, first dose to the date of progression or death, whichever occurred first up to 22 months|All participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847355|NCT00623766|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR) by Modified World Health Organization (mWHO) Criteria and by Immune-related Response Criteria (irRC)|DOR is defined in patients whose global best overall response is complete (CR) or partial response (PR) as the time between the date of response of confirmed CR or PR, whichever occurs first, and the date of progressive disease or death, whichever occurs first. For patients who remain alive and have not progressed following response, duration of response will be censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment.|From Day 1, first dose to last tumor assessment up to 18.2 months|All participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847356|NCT00623766|Secondary|Best Overall Response Rate (BORR) by Modified World Health Organization (mWHO) Criteria and by Immune-relate Response Criteria (irRC)|BORR is defined as the number of patients whose global best overall response (BOR) was complete (CR) or partial response (PR), divided by the total number of participants who received treatment. CR=complete disappearance of all index lesions. PR=decrease, relative to baseline, of 50% or greater in the sum of the products of the 2 largest perpendicular diameters of all index lesions. The global BOR is the best overall response (OR) designation over the study as a whole for an individual in the study based on overall tumor burden. Both central nervous system (CNS) (brain lesions) and non-CNS compartments (lesions outside the brain) are considered for the global BOR. For the analysis of global BOR of CR or PR (by both modified WHO criteria and immune-related response criteria [irRC]), the OR assessment must be confirmed by a second (confirmatory) evaluation meeting the criteria for response and must be performed no less than 4 weeks after the criteria for response are first met.|From Day 1, first dose until the last tumor assessment, Week 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847357|NCT00623766|Secondary|Disease Control Rate by Immune-related Response Criteria (irRC)|Disease control rate is defined as the number of patients with a best overall response of immune-related (ir) complete response (irCR), partial response (irPR), or stable disease (irSD) divided by the total number of patients who received treatment. By irRC definition: irCR=complete disappearance of all index lesions. irPR=decrease, relative to baseline, of 50% or greater in the sum of the products of the 2 largest perpendicular diameters of all index lesions. irSD=does not meet criteria for irCR or irPR, in the absence of ir progressive disease (irPD). irPD=at least 25% increase in the sum of the products of all index lesions (taking as reference the smallest sum recorded at or following baseline). CNS=central nervous system; non-CNS compartment=extracranial, or outside of the brain.|From Day 1, first dose to end of Week 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847358|NCT00623766|Primary|Disease Control Rate by Modified World Health Organization (mWHO) Tumor Assessment Criteria|Disease control rate is defined as the number of patients with a best overall response of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) (global, in brain, or outside of brain) based on mWHO criteria divided by the number of patients who received treatment. By mWHO criteria: CR=complete disappearance of all index lesions. PR=decrease, relative to baseline, of 50% or greater in the sum of the 2 largest perpendicular diameters of all index lesions. SD=does not meet criteria for CR or PR, in the absence of progressive disease (PD). Patients with PR or CR not confirmed after at least 4 weeks are scored as SD unless they have new primary lesions. PD=at least 25% increase in the sum of the diameters of all index lesions (taking as reference the smallest sum recorded at or following baseline) and/or the appearance of any new lesions. CNS=central nervous system.|From Day 1, first dose to end of Week 12|All participants who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847359|NCT00612560|Secondary|Growth Hormone Serum Levels IGF-1|Mean serum level IGF-1(pg/ml)|Biopsy/Week 1 and Surgical Resection/Week 2|All treated and eligible patients with a large enough of a sample for analysis||pg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
847360|NCT00612560|Primary|Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (Her2) Expression|Mean percentage of cells expressing human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (Her2)|Biopsy/Week 1 and Surgical Resection/Week 2|All treated and eligible patients with a large enough of a sample for analysis.||percentage of cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
847361|NCT00612560|Primary|Progesterone Receptor (PR) Expression|Mean percentage of cells expressing PR|Biopsy/Week 1 and Surgical Resection/Week 2|All treated and eligible patients with a large enough of a sample for analysis||percentage of cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
847362|NCT00612560|Primary|Expression of Estrogen Receptor (ER-beta)|Mean percentage of cells expressing estrogen receptor (ER-beta)|Biopsy/Week 1 and Surgical Resection/Week 2|All treated and eligible patients with a large enough of a sample for analysis||percentage of cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
847366|NCT00607126|Secondary|Fatigue|fatigue assessed by modified fatigue impact scale. This is a 21 item questionnaire which has a range from 0-84. Higher scores indicate more impact of fatigue on physical and cognitive functioning.|baseline, mid, completetion, 3 months post|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847369|NCT00604175|Secondary|Change in CD4 Cell Count From Baseline|A blood sample was drawn for local testing to determine the CD4 cell count. Change in CD4 cell count was calculated as CD4 cell count at a later time point (Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, 28, 52 and 72) minus CD4 cell count at baseline.|Weeks 0, 4, 8, 12, 24, 28, 52 and 72|N=315 eligible participants who initiated intervention and had data available at Week 0 and the respective follow-up week. Strata A; B; C. Week 4: n=122; 92; 88. Week 8: n=119; 92; 90. Week 12: n=115; 87; 90. Week 24: n=117; 85; 88. Week 28: n=114; 89; 87. Week 52: n=108; 85; 87. Week 72: 105; 85; 88.||Cells/mm^3||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847370|NCT00604175|Secondary|Change in Log10 HIV Viral Load (VL) From Baseline|A blood sample was drawn for local testing to determine the HIV VL. Change in log10 HIV VL was calculated as log10 HIV VL at a later time point (Weeks 4, 12, 28, 52 and 72) minus log10 HIV VL at baseline.|Weeks 0, 4, 12, 28, 52, and 72|N=315 eligible participants who initiated intervention and had HIV VL available at Week 0 and the respective follow-up week. Strata A; B; C. Week 4: n=123; 89; 88. Week 12: n=118; 89; 90. Week 28: n=118; 91; 87. Week 52: n=109; 85; 82. Week 72: n=105; 81; 83.||Log10 copies/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847371|NCT00604175|Secondary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Abnormalities of Grade 3 or Higher|Number of participants who experienced a laboratory abnormality of Grade 3 or higher at any time after baseline while on study. Grading of laboratory abnormalities was according to Division of AIDS Table for Grading the Severity of Adult and Pediatric Adverse Events, Version 1.0, December 2004.|From baseline to up to Week 72|All eligible participants who received at least one vaccine.||Participants|||Number
847372|NCT00604175|Secondary|Number of Participants With Signs and Symptoms of Grade 3 or Higher|Number of participants who experienced a sign or symptom of Grade 3 or higher at any time after baseline while on study. Grading of signs and symptoms was according to Division of AIDS Table for Grading the Severity of Adult and Pediatric Adverse Events, Version 1.0, December 2004.|From baseline to up to Week 72|All eligible participants who received at least one vaccine.||Participants|||Number
847373|NCT00604175|Secondary|Change in Log10 HPV18 Antibody Titers From Baseline Among Those Seropositive for HPV18 at Baseline|Change in log10 HPV18 antibody titers was calculated as log10 HPV18 antibody titers at a later timepoint (Week 28, Week 72) minus log10 HPV18 antibody titers at baseline among those seropositive for HPV18 (>=24 mMU/mL) at baseline. HPV antibody titers to type 18 were measured centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum. The results below the lower limit of detection (LLD) were assigned the values of half the LLD (10 mMU/mL for HPV18).|Weeks 0, 28, 72|All eligible participants who received at least one vaccine and were seropositive for HPV18 at baseline (the number of participants analyzed) and had HPV18 titer available at the respective follow-up week. Strata A; B; C. Week 28: n=27; 11; 19. Week 72: n=25; 11; 19.||Log10 mMU/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847374|NCT00604175|Secondary|Change in Log10 HPV16 Antibody Titers From Baseline Among Those Seropositive for HPV16 at Baseline|Change in log10 HPV16 antibody titers was calculated as log10 HPV16 antibody titers at a later timepoint (Week 28, Week 72) minus log10 HPV16 antibody titers at baseline among those seropositive for HPV16 (>=20 mMU/mL) at baseline. HPV antibody titers to type 16 were measured centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum. The results below the lower limit of detection (LLD) were assigned the values of half the LLD (11 mMU/mL for HPV16).|Weeks 0, 28, 72|All eligible participants who received at least one vaccine and were seropositive for HPV16 (HPV16+) at baseline (the number of participants analyzed) and had HPV16 titer available at the respective follow-up week. Strata A; B; C. Week 28: n=40; 28; 24. Week 72: n=37; 25; 24.||Log10 mMU/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847375|NCT00604175|Secondary|Change in Log10 HPV11 Antibody Titers From Baseline Among Those Seropositive for HPV11 at Baseline|Change in log10 HPV11 antibody titers was calculated as log10 HPV11 antibody titers at a later timepoint (Week 28, Week 72) minus log10 HPV11 antibody titers at baseline among those seropositive for HPV11 (>=16 mMU/mL) at baseline. HPV antibody titers to type 11 were measured centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum. The results below the lower limit of detection (LLD) were assigned the values of half the LLD (8 mMU/mL for HPV11).|Weeks 0, 28, 72|All eligible participants who received at least one vaccine and were seropositive for HPV11 (HPV11+) at baseline (the number of participants analyzed) and had HPV11 titer available at the respective follow-up week. Strata A; B; C. Week 28: n=20; 21; 17. Week 72: n=17; 18; 19.||Log10 mMU/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847376|NCT00604175|Secondary|Change in Log10 HPV6 Antibody Titers From Baseline Among Those Seropositive for HPV6 at Baseline|Change in log10 HPV6 antibody titers was calculated as log10 HPV6 antibody titers at a later timepoint (Week 28, Week 72) minus log10 HPV6 antibody titers at baseline among those seropositive for HPV6 (>=20 mMU/mL) at baseline. HPV antibody titers to type 6 were measured centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum. The results below the lower limit of detection (LLD) were assigned the values of half the LLD (7 mMU/mL, and after assay change in December 2012, 11 mMU/mL for HPV6).|Weeks 0, 28, 72|All eligible participants who received at least one vaccine and were seropositive for HPV6 (HPV6+) at baseline (the number of participants analyzed) and had HPV6 titer available at the respective follow-up week. Strata A; B; C. Week 28: n=52; n=33; n=36. Week 72: n=43; 31; 35.||Log10 mMU/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847377|NCT00604175|Secondary|HPV18 Antibody Titers Among Those Seronegative for HPV18 at Baseline|HPV antibody titers to type 18 were measured centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum. The results below the lower limit of detection (LLD) were assigned the values of half the LLD (10 mMU/mL for HPV18). Geometric mean HPV18 titers with 95% CIs were calculated among the subset of participants who were seronegative for HPV18 (<24 mMU/mL) at baseline.|Weeks 28, 72|All eligible participants who received at least one vaccine and were seronegative for HPV18 (HPV18-) at baseline (the number of participants analyzed) and had HPV18 titer available at the respective follow-up week. Strata A; B; C. Week 28: n=86; 80; 69. Week 72: n=75; 73; 69.||mMU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847378|NCT00604175|Secondary|HPV16 Antibody Titers Among Those Seronegative for HPV16 at Baseline|HPV antibody titers to type 16 were measured centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum. The results below the lower limit of detection (LLD) were assigned the values of half the LLD (11 mMU/mL for HPV16). Geometric mean HPV16 titers with 95% CIs were calculated among the subset of participants who were seronegative for HPV16 (<20 mMU/mL) at baseline.|Weeks 28, 72|All eligible participants who received at least one vaccine and were seronegative for HPV16 (HPV16-) at baseline (the number of participants analyzed) and had HPV16 titer available at the respective follow-up week. Strata A; B; C. Week 28: n=73; 63; 64. Week 72: n=63; 59; 64.||mMU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847379|NCT00604175|Secondary|HPV11 Antibody Titers Among Those Seronegative for HPV11 at Baseline|HPV antibody titers to type 11 were measured centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum. The results below the lower limit of detection (LLD) were assigned the values of half the LLD (8 mMU/mL for HPV11). Geometric mean HPV11 titers with 95% CIs were calculated among the subset of participants who were seronegative for HPV11 (<16 mMU/mL) at baseline.|Weeks 28, 72|All eligible participants who received at least one vaccine and were seronegative for HPV11 (HPV11-) at baseline (the number of participants analyzed) and had HPV11 titer available at the respective follow-up week. Strata A; B; C. Week 28: n=93; 70; 71. Week 72: n=83; 66; 69.||mMU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847380|NCT00604175|Secondary|HPV6 Antibody Titers Among Those Seronegative for HPV6 at Baseline|HPV antibody titers to type 6 were measured centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum. The results below the lower limit of detection (LLD) were assigned the values of half the LLD (7 mMU/mL, and after assay change in December 2012, 11 mMU/mL for HPV6). Geometric mean HPV6 titers with 95% CIs were calculated among the subset of participants who were seronegative for HPV6 (<20 mMU/mL) at baseline.|Weeks 28, 72|All eligible participants who received at least one vaccine and were seronegative for HPV6 (HPV6-) at baseline (the number of participants analyzed) and had HPV6 titer available at the respective follow-up week. Strata A; B; C. Week 28: n=60; 58; 52. Week 72: n=55; 53; 53.||mMU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847381|NCT00604175|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HPV18 Antibody Development From the Seronegative Status at Baseline to Seropositive Status a Month After Completion of HPV Vaccination Series|Percentage of participants with HPV18 antibody development from seronegative status (HPV18 antibody titers <24 mMU/mL) at baseline to seropositive (HPV18 antibody titers >=24 mMU/mL) status a month after the completion of HPV vaccination series. HPV serotyping was performed centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum.|Week 28|Per-protocol analysis including all participants seronegative to HPV18 at baseline who completed the vaccination series per protocol and had HPV18 titer available at Week 28.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847382|NCT00604175|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HPV16 Antibody Development From Seronegative Status at Baseline to Seropositive Status a Month After Completion of HPV Vaccination Series|Percentage of participants with HPV16 antibody development from seronegative status (HPV16 antibody titers <20 mMU/mL) at baseline to seropositive (HPV16 antibody titers >=20 mMU/mL) status a month after the completion of HPV vaccination series. HPV serotyping was performed centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum.|Week 28|Per-protocol analysis including all participants seronegative to HPV16 at baseline who completed the vaccination series per protocol and had HPV16 titer available at Week 28.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847383|NCT00604175|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HPV11 Antibody Development From Seronegative Status at Baseline to Seropositive Status a Month After Completion of HPV Vaccination Series|Percentage of participants with HPV11 antibody development from seronegative status (HPV11 antibody titers <16 mMU/mL) at baseline to seropositive (HPV11 antibody titers >=16 mMU/mL) status a month after the completion of HPV vaccination series. HPV serotyping was performed centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum.|Week 28|Per-protocol analysis including all participants seronegative to HPV11 at baseline who completed the vaccination series per protocol and had HPV11 titer available at Week 28.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847384|NCT00604175|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HPV6 Antibody Development From Seronegative Status at Baseline to Seropositive Status a Month After Completion of HPV Vaccination Series|Percentage of participants with HPV6 antibody development from seronegative status (HPV6 antibody titers <20 mMU/mL) at baseline to seropositive (HPV6 antibody titers >=20 mMU/mL) status a month after the completion of HPV vaccination series. HPV serotyping was performed centrally using the competitive Luminex ImmunoAssay (HPV-4, cLIA) on stored serum.|Week 28|Per-protocol analysis including all participants seronegative to HPV6 at baseline who completed the vaccination series per protocol and had HPV6 titer available at Week 28.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847385|NCT00603902|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 52|The % change in body weight (kg) from baseline to week 52.|52 weeks|MITT with LOCF||% change from baseline: body wt (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847386|NCT00603902|Primary|Co-primary Endpoint- Proportion (%) of Patients Achieving > or = 5% Weight Loss From Baseline to Week 52|"The proportion of patients with a reduction from baseline body weight of 5% or more after 52 weeks.
Other co-primary endpoints are change from baseline in body weight (kg) at year 1 and the proportion of patients achieving ≥ 10% reduction in body weight at year 1."|52 weeks|MITT with LOCF||percentage of participants|||Number
847387|NCT00603291|Secondary|Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 52|The % change in body weight (kg) from baseline to week 52.|52 weeks|MITT with LOCF||% change from baseline: body wt (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847388|NCT00603291|Primary|Co-primary Endpoint- Proportion (%) of Patients Achieving > or = 5% Weight Loss From Baseline to Week 52|"The proportion of patients with a reduction from baseline body weight of 5% or more after 52 weeks.
Other co-primary endpoints are change from baseline in body weight (kg) at year 1 and the proportion of patients achieving ≥ 10% reduction in body weight at year 1."|52 weeks|MITT with LOCF||percentage of participants|||Number
847400|NCT00582790|Secondary|Number of Participants With Immunologic Responses|Blood was collected to analyze T-cell populations from all patients prior to treatment on day 1 of cycles 1 and 2, and days 4 and 8 of cycles 1 and 2. Changes in gamma delta T-cell population and CD3 T-cell populations were reported.|baseline to cycle 2 day 8|One patient did not receive study treatment and so was not included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
847401|NCT00582790|Secondary|Number of Participants With Toxicities|Patients were observed for toxicities. The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria Version 2.0 was used to categorize and report adverse events.|Baseline to 30 days after last dose of study treatment|Patients who received at least one dose of study medication. One of the 12 patients never received study medication so only 11 were evaluable for toxicity||participants|||Number
847402|NCT00582790|Secondary|Number of Participants With Overall Survival and Progression-free Survival at 24 Weeks|All 12 patients were followed for survival until death. 8 participants who received more than one cycle of treatment and who were considered evaluable for response were followed until time to progression. Disease progression was determined by CT scans of the chest/abdomen/pelvis obtained every 2 cycles and based on RECIST version 1.0. Progression is defined using RECIST (V1.0) at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD)of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions|Time frame is from study entry until time to disease progression and time to death, up to 50 months|8 of the 12 participants who received more than 1 cycle of therapy and were considered evaluable for time to progression. All 12 were evaluated for survival||participants|||Number
847403|NCT00582790|Primary|Number of Subjects With Antitumor Response With Low-dose Interleukin-2 in Combination With Zoledronic Acid|Anti-tumor response was measured per RECIST criteria (V1.0) and assessed by chest/abdomen/pelvis CT: Complete Response (CR), disappearance of all target lessions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions; Stable Response (SD), Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started.|CT scans obtained at baseline, then every 2 cycles|Anti tumor response was measured in those patients who completed at least 1 cycle of study treatment 4 subjects did not complete 1 cycle of treatment.||participants|||Number
847404|NCT00582010|Primary|Number of Complications Related to Liver Function Recovery Post-transplantation (Total Complications) at 9 Months Post Surgery|Number of any complication reported by subjects at 9 months after surgery|baseline to 9 months post surgery|||complications|||Number
847405|NCT00582010|Primary|Change in Rate of Liver Function Recovery Post-transplantation (Decrease in Hepatobiliary Complications)|Number of complications due to hepatobiliary events.|baseline to 9 months after transplantation|||Complications|||Number
847406|NCT00582010|Secondary|Effect of iNO on SICU Stay|Number of minutes after surgery subject remained in SICU|baseline to discharge for SICU|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
847407|NCT00582010|Primary|Change in Rate of Liver Function Recovery Post-transplantation (Percent Change in Bilirubin Levels)|A positive percent reflects an decrease; a negative percentage reflects a increase.|baseline and 96 hours after baseline|||percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
847408|NCT00582010|Primary|Change in Rate of Liver Function Recovery Post-transplantation (Percent Change in Prothrombin Times (PT))|The faster the percent increase of PT reflect, the greater the treatment improved liver function post transplant. A positive percent reflects an decrease; a negative percentage reflects a increase.|baseline and 96 hours after baseline|||percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
847409|NCT00582010|Primary|Change in Rate of Liver Function Recovery Post-transplantation (Percent Change in Alkaline Phosphatase Levels)|The faster the percent increase of alkaline phosphatase reflect, the greater the treatment improved liver function post transplant. A positive percent reflects an increase; a negative percentage reflects a decrease.|baseline and 96 hours after baseline|||percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
847410|NCT00582010|Primary|Changed Rate of Liver Function Recovery Post-transplantation (Percent Change in ALT Levels)|The faster the percent decrease ALT reflect, the greater the treatment improved liver function post transplant. A positive percent reflects an decrease; a negative percentage reflects a increase. . (ALT levels were lower at 96 hours relative to baseline- positive values in data table indicate percent decrease of ALT relative to baseline).|baseline and 96 hours after baseline|||percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
847411|NCT00582010|Secondary|Effect of iNO on Hosptial Length of Stay|number of days subject in hospital after surgery until discharge|from surgery through discharge from hospital|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
847412|NCT00582010|Primary|Changed Rate of Liver Function Recovery Post-transplantation (Percent Change in AST Levels)|The faster the percent decrease of AST reflect the greater the treatment improved liver function post transplant. A positive percent reflects an decrease; a negative percentage reflects a increase. The rate was calculated by measuring AST levels at baseline and at 96 hours post baseline. (AST levels were lower at 96 hours relative to baseline- positive values in data table indicate percent decrease of AST relative to baseline).|baseline and 96 hours after baseline|||percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
847413|NCT00580606|Secondary|Percent of Participants Who Successfully Consumed 10,000 mg of Peanut Powder|Tolerance Assessment: Participants who successfully consumed without dose-limiting symptoms 10,000 mg of peanut powder during a double-blind placebo-controlled oral food challenge were then given an open feeding of peanut butter and those who successfully consumed the open feeding were counted as successes.|Approximately 8 weeks after discontinuing study therapy after 3 years on maintenance study therapy|All subjects randomized to the Low Dose Peanut SLIT group and all subjects randomized to the Placebo group who crossed over to open label high dose peanut sublingual immunotherapy were included.||percentage of participants|||Number
847414|NCT00580606|Secondary|Number of Crossover Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) During 44 Weeks of Open Label Peanut Protein Consumption|All subjects who were in the Placebo group during the double-blind phase of the study who initiated crossover peanut sublingual immunotherapy during the open label phase of the study will be included.|Initiation of open label peanut protein study therapy through Week 44 of open label peanut protein consumption|All subjects who were in the Placebo group during the double-blind phase of the study who initiated crossover peanut sublingual immunotherapy during the open label phase of the study will be included.||participants|||Number
847415|NCT00580606|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|This study graded the severity of Adverse Events experienced by participants according to the criteria set forth in the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 3.|Baseline through Week 44 (Double Blind Period)|The intention to treat (ITT) population was used which included all subjects randomized to double-blind treatment.||participants|||Number
847416|NCT00580606|Secondary|Percent of Crossover Participants Who Achieved an Open Label Peanut Protein Consumption Maintenance Dose of 3,696 mcg|During the build-up phase, escalation was to occur every 2 weeks until the 3,696 mcg maintenance dose was reached. The maximum time allowed for the build-up phase was 36 weeks; the dose achieved by 36 weeks was considered the maintenance dose.|Week 44 after initiating crossover open label peanut protein consumption|All subjects in the Placebo group during the double-blind period who crossed over to open label high dose peanut sublingual immunotherapy were included.||Percentage of participants|||Number
847417|NCT00580606|Secondary|Percent of Crossover Participants Who Successfully Consumed 5,000 mg of Peanut Powder or at Least a 10-fold Increase in the Amount of Peanut Powder Compared to Their Baseline Oral Food Challenge After 44 Weeks of Open Label Peanut Protein Consumption|Desensitization Assessment: Participants who successfully consumed without dose-limiting symptoms 5,000 mg of peanut powder or at least a 10-fold increase in the amount of peanut powder compared to their baseline oral food challenge during a double-blind placebo-controlled oral food challenge were counted as successes.|Week 44 after initiating crossover open label peanut protein consumption|Subjects in the Placebo group during the double-blind period who crossed over to open label high dose peanut sublingual immunotherapy were included except for 1 subject who refused the crossover Week 44 OFC and could not be evaluated. 4 subjects who discontinued dosing prior to the crossover Week 44 OFC were counted as failures.||Percentage of participants|||Number
847418|NCT00580606|Secondary|Percent of Participants Who Achieved a Maintenance Dose of 1,386 mcg|During the build-up phase, escalation was to occur every 2 weeks until the 1,386 mcg maintenance dose was reached. The maximum time allowed for the build-up phase was 36 weeks; the dose achieved by 36 weeks was considered the maintenance dose.|Week 44 (Double Blind Period)|The intention to treat (ITT) population was used which included all subjects randomized to double-blind treatment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
847419|NCT00580606|Primary|Percent of Participants Who Successfully Consumed 5,000 mg of Peanut Powder or at Least a 10-fold Increase in the Amount of Peanut Powder Compared to Their Baseline Oral Food Challenge|Desensitization Assessment: Participants who successfully consumed without dose-limiting symptoms 5,000 mg of peanut powder or at least a 10-fold increase in the amount of peanut powder compared to their baseline oral food challenge during a double-blind placebo-controlled oral food challenge were counted as successes.|Week 44 (Double Blind Period)|The intention to treat (ITT) population was used which included all subjects randomized to double-blind treatment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
847420|NCT00578448|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Days 5, 28, 112, 168, and 364 in Kynurenine - All Treated Participants|Indoleamine 2,3 dioxygenase (IDO) is a tryptophan catabolizing enzyme that can be induced in antigen-presenting cells by the engagement of B7 by CTLA-4. Tryptophan depletion in cellular microenvironments has an inhibitory effect on T cells and may be part of a broader immuno-regulatory effect of IDO induction. The IDO activity was determined by measuring the quantity of tryptophan and its metabolite, kynurenine, in serum samples using a validated high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method. Baseline is defined as pre-dose. Kynurenine was measured in micromoles (µM).|Day 1 to Day 364|Number analyzed for Baseline, Days 5, 28, 112, 168, 364 = 12, 11, 11, 10, 10, and 10, respectively.||µM||Standard Deviation|Mean
847468|NCT00555321|Secondary|Summary Statistics for Lipid Parameters; Serum HDL Cholesterol: 12-month Treatment Phase||Baseline (pretransplant), 1, 6, 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n = participants who had both baseline and postbaseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848719|NCT00602836|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Convert From a CR With MRD or nPR, PR, or Stable Disease With Residual Disease After PCR to a CR With MRD-negative Status After 6 Courses of Consolidation With Lenalidomide||12 months||||||
847421|NCT00578448|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Days 5, 28, 112, 168, and 364 in Tryptophan - All Treated Participants|Indoleamine 2,3 dioxygenase (IDO) is a tryptophan catabolizing enzyme that can be induced in antigen-presenting cells by the engagement of B7 by cytotoxic lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4). Tryptophan depletion in cellular microenvironments has an inhibitory effect on T cells and may be part of a broader immuno-regulatory effect of IDO induction. The IDO activity was determined by measuring the quantity of tryptophan and its metabolite, kynurenine, in serum samples using a validated high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method. Baseline is defined as pre-dose. Tryptophan was measured in micromoles (µM)|Baseline to Day 364|Number analyzed for Baseline, Days 5, 28, 112, 168, 364 = 12, 11, 11, 10, 10, and 10, respectively.||µM||Standard Deviation|Mean
847422|NCT00578448|Secondary|Acute Rejection, Graft Loss, and Death up to 3 Years Post Transplantation in Planned Study and 1 Year Long Term Extension - All Treated Participants|Acute rejection of transplant defined as a clinicopathological event requiring clinical evidence and biopsy confirmation by central pathologist. Graft loss was defined as either functional loss or physical loss. Day 1 is day of transplantation.|Day 1 up to 4 years post transplantation|All treated participants were analyzed during the planned 3 year study N=12. Only 9 participants entered the LTE so N=9 for LTE.||participants|||Number
847423|NCT00578448|Primary|Serum Half Life (T-HALF) Between Weeks 12 and 16 Following 10mg/kg IV Belatacept - Pharmacokinetic Population|At Day 84, blood samples obtained from pre-dose (0 hour) and ended at 672 hour (h) on Day 112. The samples were analyzed for belatacept by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using a validated method. Individual participant PK parameters were derived from serum concentration versus time data using a non-compartmental method, using a validated PK analysis program (KineticaTM 4.4.1 within the eToolbox [version 2.6.1]). Actual sampling times were used for PK calculations. T-HALF was calculated as ln2/Lz, where Lz is the absolute value of the slope of the terminal log-linear phase. T-HALF is measured in hours (h).|Day 84 to Day 112|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
847424|NCT00578448|Primary|Steady-state Volume Distribution (Vss) Following 10mg/kg IV Belatacept Between Weeks 12 and 16 - Pharmacokinetic Population|At Day 84, blood samples obtained from pre-dose (0 hour) and ended at 672 hour (h) on Day 112. The samples were analyzed for belatacept by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using a validated method. Individual participant PK parameters were derived from serum concentration versus time data using a non-compartmental method, using a validated PK analysis program (KineticaTM 4.4.1 within the eToolbox [version 2.6.1]). Actual sampling times were used for PK calculations. Vss was calculated by dividing the dose by AUC and multiply the mean residence time (MRT). Vss was adjusted to body weight and measured as liter per kilogram body weight (l/kg).|Day 84 to Day 112|||l/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847425|NCT00578448|Primary|Total Body Clearance (CLT) Between Weeks 12 and 16 Following 10mg/kg IV Belatacept - Pharmacokinetic Population|At Day 84, blood samples obtained from pre-dose (0 hour) and ended at 672 hour (h) on Day 112. The samples were analyzed for belatacept by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using a validated method. Individual participant PK parameters were derived from serum concentration versus time data using a non-compartmental method, using a validated PK analysis program (KineticaTM 4.4.1 within the eToolbox [version 2.6.1]). Actual sampling times were used for PK calculations. CLT was calculated by dividing the dose by AUC(TAU) and was adjusted to body weight. CLT was measured as milliliter per time per kg body weight (mL/h/kg).|Day 84 to Day 112|Participants who were treated and had PK data.||mL/h/kg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
847426|NCT00578448|Secondary|Summary of Trough Serum Concentration of Belatacept Prior to Dosing up to 3 Years Post Transplantation - Pharmacokinetic Population|Blood samples were obtained pre and post dose at designated time points up to Day 112 and thereafter, pre-dose samples were obtained at Days 168 and 364, and then once yearly up to end of Year 3. The samples were analyzed for belatacept by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using a validated method. Individual participant PK parameters were derived from serum concentration versus time data using a non-compartmental method, using a validated PK analysis program (KineticaTM 4.4.1 within the eToolbox [version 2.6.1]). Actual sampling times were used for PK calculations. The trough serum concentration (Cmin), was recorded directly from experimental observations. Using no weighting factor, the terminal log-linear phase of the concentration-time curve was identified by least-square linear regression of at least 3 data points that yielded a maximum G-criteria, which is also referred to as adjusted R-squared. Cmin was measured as micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL).|Day 1 to Day 1092|Number of participants (N) analyzed = 11 for Days 5, 14,and 28; and 12 for Day 56. Days 84, 112, 168, 364 N=10.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
847427|NCT00578448|Primary|Area Under the Concentration Time Curve Within a Dosing Interval (AUC) (TAU) Between Weeks 12 and 16 Following 10 mg/kg IV Belatacept - Pharmacokinetic Population|At Day 84, blood samples obtained from pre-dose (0 hour) and ended at 672 hour (h) on Day 112. The samples were analyzed for belatacept by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using a validated method. Individual participant PK parameters were derived from serum concentration versus time data using a non-compartmental method, using a validated PK analysis program (KineticaTM 4.4.1 within the eToolbox [version 2.6.1]). The area under the concentration-time curve in one dose interval [AUC(TAU), where TAU = 4 weeks] were calculated using the mixed log-linear trapezoidal algorithm in Kinetica. Actual sampling times were used for PK calculations. AUC (TAU) was measured as micrograms multiplied by time(h) per milliliter (µg*h/mL).|Day 82 to Day 112|||µg*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
847428|NCT00578448|Primary|Time of Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Tmax) Between Weeks 12 and 16 Following 10mg/kg IV Belatacept - Pharmacokinetic Population|Tmax measured in hours (h). At Day 84, blood samples obtained from pre-dose (0 hour) and ended at 672 (h) on Day 112 . The samples were analyzed for belatacept by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using a validated method. Individual participant PK parameters were derived from serum concentration versus time data using a non-compartmental method, using a validated PK analysis program (KineticaTM 4.4.1 within the eToolbox [version 2.6.1]). Actual sampling times were used for PK calculations.|Day 84 to Day 112|1 participant excluded from analysis of Cmax and Tmax due to a very high concentration value (it was considered an outlier) therefore, for Tmax, Number of participants analyzed (N)=9.||hours||Full Range|Median
847469|NCT00555321|Secondary|Summary Statistics for Lipid Parameters-Serum Total Non-High Density Lipoprotein (Non-HDL) Cholesterol: 12-month Treatment Phase||Baseline (pretransplant), 1, 6, 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n = participants who had both baseline and postbaseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847429|NCT00578448|Primary|Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmax) Between Weeks 12 and 16 Following 10mg/kg IV Belatacept and Trough Serum Concentration Prior to Dosing (Cmin) - Pharmacokinetic Population|Cmax, Cmin are measured in micrograms per milliliter (µg/mL). At Day 84, blood samples obtained from pre-dose (0 hour) and ended at 672 hour (h) on Day 112. Serum samples were analyzed for belatacept by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using a validated method. Individual participant PK parameters were derived from serum concentration versus time data using a non-compartmental method, using a validated PK analysis program (KineticaTM 4.4.1 within the eToolbox [version 2.6.1]). Actual sampling times were used for PK calculations. The Cmax, and the Cmin were recorded directly from experimental observations. Using no weighting factor, the terminal log-linear phase of the concentration-time curve was identified by least-square linear regression of at least 3 data points that yielded a maximum G-criteria, which is also referred to as adjusted R-squared. Values below lower limits of quantification (LLQ), 0.003 µg/mL, were set to 0.0015 for computation of summary statistics.|Day 84 to Day 112|One participant excluded from analysis of Cmax and Tmax due to a very high concentration value (it was considered an outlier) therefore, for Cmax, Number of participants analyzed (N)=9.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
847430|NCT00578448|Primary|Mean Belatacept Serum Concentrations Between Weeks 12 and 16 by Nominal Collection Time, Following 10mg/kg IV Belatacept - Pharmacokinetic Population|Pharmacokinetic (PK) sampling started from pre-dose (0 hour) on Day 84 and ended at 672 hour (h) on Day 112 (between Weeks 12 to 16). The samples were analyzed for belatacept by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using a validated method and measured as nanograms/milliliter (ng/mL). Less than the lower limit of quantification (LLQ), 3.000 ng/mL concentration value was treated as missing.|Day 84 to Day 112|Number (N) of participants analyzed for each collection time was 10, except for time 0.50 h, which was missing 1 participant. Therefore Number (N) for Time 0.50 h = 9.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847431|NCT00556374|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) determined by the time from randomization to death from any cause. OS will be analyzed after long-term follow-up is complete.|Participants will be followed for overall survival once every 12 months for 66 months after primary completion date.||10/2020||||
847432|NCT00556374|Secondary|Bone Metastases-free Survival|Bone metastasis-free survival (BMFS) determined by the time from randomization to the first observation of bone metastasis or death from any cause. BMFS will be analyzed after long-term follow-up is complete.|Participants will be followed for bone metastasis-free survival once every 12 months for 66 months after primary completion date.||10/2020||||
847433|NCT00556374|Secondary|Disease-free Survival|Disease-free survival (DFS) determined by the time from randomization to the first observation of disease recurrence or death from any cause. DFS will be analyzed after long-term follow-up is complete.|Participants will be followed for disease-free survival (DFS) once every 12 months for 66 months after primary completion date.||10/2020||||
847434|NCT00556374|Secondary|Number of Participants With New or Worsening Vertebral Fractures|Assessment of vertebral fractures was performed by an expert radiologist at the central imaging center using a semiquantitative grading scale: Grade 1, 20% to 25% reduction in vertebral height (anterior, middle, or posterior); Grade 2, 25% to 40% reduction in height; Grade 3, greater than 40% reduction in height. A new vertebral fracture is defined as a fracture in a previously undeformed vertebrae including new compression fractures, defined as those compression fractures having a decrease in total anterior or posterior height of at least 25% from baseline. New vertebral fractures includes morphometric vertebral fractures identified from on study x-rays and clinical vertebral fractures confirmed by x-rays. Worsening of pre-existing fractures is defined as an increase in fracture severity of at least 1 grade on the semiquantitative scale.|36 months|Vertebral Fracture Analysis Set with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline vertebral x-ray prior to or at Month 36.||participants|||Number
847435|NCT00556374|Secondary|Number of Participants With New Vertebral Fractures|"Assessment of vertebral fractures was performed by an expert radiologist at the central imaging center using a semiquantitative grading scale: Grade 1, 20% to 25% reduction in vertebral height (anterior, middle, or posterior); Grade 2, 25% to 40% reduction in height; Grade 3, greater than 40% reduction in height.
A new vertebral fracture is defined as a fracture in a previously undeformed vertebrae including new compression fractures, defined as those compression fractures having a decrease in total anterior or posterior height of at least 25% from baseline. New vertebral fractures includes morphometric vertebral fractures identified from on study x-rays and clinical vertebral fractures confirmed by x-rays."|36 months|Vertebral Fracture Analysis Set with a Baseline and at least one post-baseline vertebral x-ray prior to or at Month 36.||participants|||Number
847436|NCT00556374|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck BMD at Month 36 at Pre-selected Sites|Bone mineral density was assessed by dual x-ray absorptiometry.|Baseline and Month 36|BMD analysis set - femoral neck at Month 36 (participants with evaluable BMD values at Baseline and Month 36 for femoral neck)||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
847437|NCT00556374|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Hip BMD at Month 36 at Pre-selected Sites|Bone mineral density was assessed by dual x-ray absorptiometry.|Baseline and Month 36|BMD analysis set - total hip at Month 36 (participants with evaluable BMD values at Baseline and Month 36 for total hip)||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
847438|NCT00556374|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Month 36 at Pre-selected Sites|Bone mineral density was assessed by dual x-ray absorptiometry.|Baseline and Month 36|BMD analysis set - total lumbar spine at Month 36 (participants with evaluable BMD values at Baseline and Month 36 for total lumbar spine)||percent change||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
847439|NCT00556374|Primary|Time to First Clinical Fracture|The time to first on-study clinical fracture defined as the number of days from randomization to the date of the x-ray confirming the clinical fracture. A clinical fracture is any clinically evident fracture with associated symptoms and confirmed by x-ray. Participants who died or withdrew without experiencing a clinical fracture were censored at the date of last contact or study termination whichever was earlier.|From randomization until the primary analysis cut-off date of 26 March 2014; maximum time on study was 87 months.|Full analysis set (all randomized participants)||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847543|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Serum Chemistry Laboratory Abnormalities: Uric Acid|Incidence of potentially clinically significant uric acid levels post-baseline (normal range=4-8.5 mg/dL)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847440|NCT00555893|Secondary|Mean Influenza Well-being Score (Health, Ability to Perform Usual Activities and Sleep Quality)|Mean influenza wellbeing score will be calculated by first summing the daily scores for overall health (0-9 points), ability to perform usual activities (0-9 points), and sleep quality (0-9 points) from initial enrollment (randomization) up to (and including) the first day of symptom resolution. This will be divided by the number of reporting days to yield the mean daily influenza wellbeing score for each person.|Interval from randomization up to and including first day of symptom resolution (minimum 7 days, maximum 14 days)||||||
847441|NCT00555893|Secondary|Secondary Complications (New Clinical Diagnosis of Acute Otitis Media, Acute Sinusitis or Radiographically Confirmed Pneumonia)Documented in Medical Record, or Influenza-related Hospital Admission|Episodes of pneumonia will require a physician diagnosis of pneumonia, antimicrobial treatment for pneumonia, and an opacity or infiltrate on chest radiograph (or CT) that was not known to be chronic.|From 0 to 30 days after randomization||||||
847442|NCT00555893|Secondary|Duration of Viral Shedding||Interval (in days) from collection of the first sample yielding a positive influenza test to the last sample yielding a positive culture (maximum 14 days)||||||
847443|NCT00555893|Secondary|Mean Illness Severity Score|Mean severity score will be calculated by first summing the symptom severity scores for all reporting periods from initial enrollment (randomization) up to (and including) the first period of symptom resolution, as defined above. The summed total will be divided by the number of reporting periods to yield the mean severity score for each participant. For each reporting period, the possible symptom scores will range from 0 (all symptoms absent) to 24 (all symptoms severe). For children less than 2 years old, the possible scores will range from 0 to 15.|Calculated from initial enrollment (randomization) up to first period of symptom resolution (minimum of 7 days, maximum of 14 days)|All participants over 24 months of age (n=5 were excluded because <24 months)||mean severity score||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847444|NCT00555893|Primary|Duration of Influenza Illness|Resolution is defined as occurring at the start of the first 24-hour period in which the total symptom score was less than or equal to 2 with no symptom rated higher than mild. Time to resolution was calculated from the time of randomization to symptom resolution in 12 hour increments.|Interval (in 12 hour blocks) from time of randomization until resolution (minimum 7 days, maximum 14 days)|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847445|NCT00555321|Secondary|Change in Protein to Creatinine Ratio From Month 3 to Month 12.||Month 3 and 12|Protein creatinine ratio change was not analyzed|||||
847446|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had Abnormalities in Electrocardiograms: 12-month Treatment Phase||Baseline (pretransplant), Week 52|ECG data was not analyzed.|||||
847447|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Electrolytes, Protein and Metabolic Test Abnormalities: 12-month Treatment Phase|Low total calcium: <7 mg/dL; High total calcium: >12.5 mg/dL ; Low bicarbonate: <11 mEq/L; Low serum potassium: <3.0 mEq/L; High serum potassium:>6.0 mEq/L; High serum magnesium: >2.46 mEq/L; Low serum magnesium:<0.8 mEq/L; Low serum sodium: <130 mEq/L; High serum sodium: >155 mEq/L; Low inorganic phosphorus: <2.0 mg/dL; Low albumin: <2 g/dL; High uric acid: >10 mg/dL|Baseline (pretransplant), Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 52|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n= participants with all observations.||participants|||Number
847448|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Liver and Kidney Function Abnormalities: 12-month Treatment Phase|ULN= upper limit of normal; Normal ranges are provided by the central laboratory and may vary according to sex and age. High alkaline phosphatase (ALP): >5.0*ULN U/L; High alanine aminotransferase (ALT): >5.0*ULN U/L; High aspartate aminotransferase (AST): >5.0*ULN U/L; High direct bilirubin: >3.0 * ULN mg/dL; High g-glutamyl transferase (GGT): >5.0*ULN U/L; High total bilirubin: >3.0*ULN mg/dL; High creatinine: > 3.0*ULN mg/dL|Baseline (pretransplant), 4, 12, 24, 52 weeks|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n= participants with all observations.||participants|||Number
847449|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Marked Hematology Abnormalities: 12-month Treatment Phase|Low hemoglobin: <8 g/dL; Low platelet count: <50*10^9 C/L; Low leukocytes: <2.0 *10^3 c/µL; Low lymphocytes (absolute): <0.5*10^3 c/µL; Low neutrophils (absolute): <1.0*10^3 Cc/µL.|Baseline (pretransplant), 2, 4, 8, 12 weeks, and every 4 weeks for week 16 to 52|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n= participants with all observations.||participants|||Number
847450|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had Adverse Events of Special Interest During 12-month Treatment Phase|AE of of special interest included malignancies (including skin carcinomas), infections (viral, cytomegalovirus, herpes, fungal, and bacterial), serious infections|Day 1 (randomization) to 12 months or ≤ 56 days after discontinuation of study medication|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants.||participants|||Number
847451|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had AEs, Death, SAEs or Were Discontinued Due to AEs: 12-month Treatment Phase|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a pre-existing medical condition in a participant administered an investigational product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires or prolongs inpatient hospitalization (including elective surgery), results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an important medical event|Day 1 (randomization) to 12 m + 8 week follow-up or ≤ 56 days after discontinuation of study medication|ITT population: all randomized and transplanted participants||participants|||Number
847452|NCT00555321|Secondary|Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1C) Values: 12-month Treatment Phase|The HbA1c test is important in diabetes as a long-term measure of control over blood glucose, where the glucose bound to hemoglobin during the past 3-4 months is measured. A baseline diabetes participant was one who had a medical history of diabetes or being under anti-diabetic medication at the time of the transplantation. BL = baseline, DM = Diabetes mellitus.|6, 12 months (mth) posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n = Participants with both baseline and postbaseline values.||Percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
847481|NCT00555321|Secondary|Belatacept PK Parameter: Terminal Half-life|Terminal Half-life (T 1/2) is the time a drug takes for the concentration levels to fall to 50% of their value.|Samples were collected at Pre dose on Days 5, 14, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, 252, 336, 364; after end of infusion on Days 1, 5, 84, 112, 196, 336; and on Days 9, 85, 91, 98, 105.|All randomized participants who received belatacept, and had complete PK profile.||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
847453|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With New Onset Diabetes Mellitus (NODM): 12-month Treatment Phase|A participant who did not have diabetes prior to randomization was determined to have NODM if(i) the participant received an antidiabetic medication for a duration of at least 30 days or(ii) at least two fasting plasma glucose (FPG) tests indicate that FPG is>=126 mg/dL (7.0 mmol/L). For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation is used if N>=5. For 95% CI of difference, adjustment is made for randomization strata (HCV-Infection status at baseline) if N >= 5 in each treatment arm.|6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized participants without Diabetes Mellitus (pre-transplantation).||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847454|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Received Anti-hypertensive Therapy at Month 12||12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants.||participants|||Number
847455|NCT00555321|Primary|Number of Participants With Marked Electrolytes, Protein and Metabolic Test Abnormalities During the LTE|Low Serum Potassium: <3.0 meq/L; High serum potassium:>6.0 mEq/L; Low serum magnesium:<0.8 mEq/L; Low serum sodium: <130 mEq/L; High serum sodium: >155 mEq/L; Low inorganic phosphorus: <2.0 mg/dL; High uric acid: >10 mg/dL|Every 4 weeks from Week 53 to Week 104.|ITT-LTE population: All randomized and transplanted participants who entered long-term extension. n= participants who had a laboratory test reading after transplant for the specific analyte.||participants|||Number
847456|NCT00555321|Primary|Number of Participants With Marked Liver and Kidney Function Abnormalities During the LTE|ULN= upper limit of normal; Normal ranges are provided by the Central Laboratory and may vary according to sex and age. High alanine aminotransferase (ALT): >5.0*ULN U/L; High aspartate aminotransferase (AST): >5.0*ULN U/L; High direct bilirubin: >3.0*ULN mg/dL; High g-glutamyl transferase (GGT): >5.0*ULN U/L; High total bilirubin: >3.0*ULN mg/dL; High creatinine: > 3.0*ULN mg/dL|Every 4 weeks from Week 53 to Week 104.|ITT-LTE population: All randomized and transplanted participants who entered long-term extension. n= participants who had a laboratory test reading after transplant for the specific analyte.||participants|||Number
847457|NCT00555321|Primary|Number of Participants With Marked Hematology Abnormalities During the LTE|Low platelet count: <50*10^9 c/µl; Low leukocytes: <2.0*10^3 c/µl; Low lymphocytes (absolute): <0.5*10^3 c/µl; Low neutrophils (absolute): <1.0*10^3 c/µl.|Every 4 weeks from Week 53 to Week 104.|ITT-LTE population: All randomized and transplanted participants who entered long-term extension. n= participants who had a laboratory test reading after transplant for the specific analyte.||participants|||Number
847458|NCT00555321|Primary|Number of Participants Who Had AEs of Special Interest During the LTE|AE of special interest included malignancies (including skin carcinomas), infections (viral, cytomegalovirus, herpes, fungal, and bacterial).|Day 1 (randomization) through database lock (20-June-2011)|ITT-LTE population, all randomized and transplanted participants who entered long term extension||participants|||Number
847459|NCT00555321|Primary|Number of Participants Who Had Adverse Events (AEs), Death, Serious AEs (SAEs) or Were Discontinued Due to AEs (Includes Long Term Extension [LTE] Data)|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a pre-existing medical condition in a subject administered an investigational product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires or prolongs inpatient hospitalization (including elective surgery), results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is an important medical event.|Day 1 (randomization) to Week 104 + within 56 Days after the last infusion/dose, Deaths were monitored up to database lock (20-June-2011)|ITT-LTE population, (all randomized and transplanted participants who entered long term extension). Participants were grouped according to the treatment to which they were randomized initially.||participants|||Number
847460|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Have Hypertension at Any Given Time During the 12-month Treatment Phase|Percentage of participants at any given time who meet the definition of hypertension. Participants were considered to have hypertension when either of the following criteria were met: (1) SBP ≥ 130 mm Hg or DBP ≥ 80 mm Hg or (2) participant received an antihypertensive medication(s) for the indication of hypertension or due to medical history of hypertension.|6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847461|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Developed Hypertension in 12-month Treatment Phase|Percentage of participants who develop hypertension after randomization and transplantation. Transient post-operative increases in BP were not to be counted as new onset hypertension. Hypertension was to be assessed only at or after the Week 4 visit. Participants were considered to have hypertension when either of the following criteria were met: (1) SBP ≥ 130 mm Hg or DBP ≥ 80 mm Hg or (2) participant received an antihypertensive medication(s) for the indication of hypertension or due to medical history of hypertension.|6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847462|NCT00555321|Secondary|Summary Statistics for Mean Arterial Pressure: 12-month Treatment Phase||BL (pretransplant), 1, 3, 6, 9, 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n = participants who had both baseline and postbaseline values.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847463|NCT00555321|Secondary|Summary Statistics for Diastolic Blood Pressure: 12-month Treatment Phase|Participants were considered to have hypertension if they had Diastolic Blood Pressure (SBP) ≥ 80 mmHg.|BL (pretransplant), 1, 3, 6, 9, 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n = participants who had both baseline and postbaseline values.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847464|NCT00555321|Secondary|Summary Statistics for Systolic Blood Pressure: 12-month Treatment Phase||Baseline (pretransplant), 1, 3, 6, 9, 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n = participants who had both baseline and postbaseline values.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847465|NCT00555321|Secondary|Summary Statistics for Lipid Parameters - Serum Triglyceride: 12-month Treatment Phase||Baseline (pretransplant), 1, 6, 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n = participants who had both baseline and postbaseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847466|NCT00555321|Secondary|Summary Statistics for Lipid Parameters- Serum Cholesterol: 12-month Treatment Phase||Baseline (pretransplant), 1, 6, 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847470|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting the Definition of Dyslipidemia, Hypertriglyceridemia or Hypercholesterolemia at Any Given Time: 12-month Treatment Phase|Percentage of participants at any given time (at Month 6 and Month 12) who met the definition of dyslipidemia.Dyslipidemia is defined as hypertriglyceridemia (TGs ≥ 500 mg/dL [5.65 mmol/L]), hypercholesterolemia (LDL ≥ 100 mg/dL [2.59 mmol/L]), or elevated non-HDL (non-HDL ≥ 130 mg/dL [3.36 mmol/L]) in the presence of high TGs (TGs ≥ 200 mg/dL [2.26 mmol/L]).|6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847471|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Develop Dyslipidemia, Hypertriglyceridemia and Hypercholesterolemia After Randomization and Transplantation: 12-month Treatment Phase|Percentage of participants who develop dyslipidemia, defined as hypertriglyceridemia (triglycerides [TGs] ≥ 500 mg/dL [5.65 mmol/L]), hypercholesterolemia (Low density lipoprotein [LDL] ≥ 100 mg/dL [2.59 mmol/L]), or elevated non-high density lipoprotein (non- high density lipoprotein [HDL] ≥ 130 mg/dL [3.36 mmol/L]) in the presence of high TGs (TGs ≥ 200 mg/dL [2.26 mmol/L]).|6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants who did not have dyslipidemia at baseline||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847472|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants (Who Were HCV Positive at Baseline) With HCV RNA Levels >2.4 * 10^6 U/mL and >4.7 * 10^6 U/mL During the LTE|Recurrent hepatitis C infection of the allograft following liver transplantation can be detected by monitoring HCV RNA levels. In HCV positive participants, quantitative HCV RNA levels > 2.4 x 10^6 U/mL and > 4.7 x 10^6 U/mL were descriptively summarized by treatment group. BL = baseline|BL (pretransplant), 12, 18, 24, 30 months (mo) posttransplant|ITT-LTE population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n= participants with HCV RNA values.||participants|||Number
847473|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants (Who Were HCV Positive at Baseline) With HCV Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Levels >2.4*10^6 U/mL and >4.7*10^6 U/mL: 12-month Treatment Phase|Recurrent hepatitis C infection of the allograft following liver transplantation can be detected by monitoring HCV RNA levels. In HCV positive participants, quantitative HCV RNA levels > 2.4 * 10^6 U/mL and > 4.7 * 10^6 U/mL were descriptively summarized by treatment group. BL=baseline|Baseline (pretransplant), 6 and 12 months (mo) posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n= participants who were HCV positive at baseline.||participants|||Number
847474|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants (Who Were Hepatitis C Virus [HCV] Positive at Baseline) With HCV Recurrence (Assessed by Central Pathologist) During the LTE|HCV Recurrence is defined as Histological confirmation on liver biopsy by the Ishak (modified Knodell) system and required both a score >= 5 out of 18 on modified Histological Activity Index grading and a fibrosis Score >= 2 out of 6 on modified staging. All biopsies, including Week 52 biopsies, were considered. Only the first HCV recurrence episode for each participant was counted. For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation was used if N>=5, otherwise exact method was used. For 95% CI of difference, normal approximation was used if N>=5 in both arms, otherwise exact method was used.|12 months posttransplant, end of study (database lock, 20-June-2011)|ITT-LTE population, all randomized and transplanted participants who entered long-term extension.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847475|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants (Who Were Hepatitis C Virus [HCV] Positive at Baseline) With HCV Recurrence (Assessed by Central Pathologist) by 12 Months|HCV Recurrence is defined as Histological confirmation on liver biopsy by the Ishak (modified Knodell) system and required both a score >= 5 out of 18 on modified Histological Activity Index grading and a fibrosis Score >= 2 out of 6 on modified staging. All biopsies, including Week 52 biopsies, were considered. Only the first HCV recurrence episode for each participant was counted. For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation was used if N>=5, otherwise exact method was used. For 95% CI of difference, normal approximation was used if N>=5 in both arms, otherwise exact method was used.|6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847476|NCT00555321|Secondary|Belatacept Trough Concentration Before Each Infusion During the LTE|Minimum Plasma Concentration (Cmin) is the minimum observed serum drug concentration.|Samples were collected predose on Days 5, 14, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, 252, 336, 364; after end of infusion on Days 1, 5, 84, 112, 196, 336; and on Days 9, 85, 91, 98, 105, 532, 728.|All randomized participants who received Belatacept, and had complete PK profile. n= participants with values at all time points.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
847477|NCT00555321|Secondary|Belatacept PK Parameter: Clearance From Ascites Fluid|Clearance from ascites fluid was determined by amount excreted in ascites fluid (Ae, asc)[0-T] / AUC[0-T], where 0-T is the same duration relative to a belatacept infusion.|Days 1 to 14|Serum AUC was not available for the time interval corresponding to ascites fluid collection.|||||
847478|NCT00555321|Secondary|Belatacept PK Parameter: Amount Excreted in Ascites Fluid Over Days 1 to 14|Amount Excreted in Ascites (Ae,asc) was estimated from the ascites drug concentrations and volumes within a dosing interval.|Days 1 to 14|All randomized participants who received belatacept, and had complete PK profile.||µg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847479|NCT00555321|Secondary|Belatacept PK Parameter: Volume of Distribution|Volume of distribution (Vss) is the volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired blood concentration. . Vss was estimated from AUC (TAU) between Weeks 12 and 16, assuming steady state.|Samples were collected at Pre dose on Days 5, 14, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, 252, 336, 364; after end of infusion on Days 1, 5, 84, 112, 196, 336; and on Days 9, 85, 91, 98, 105.|All randomized participants who received belatacept, and had complete PK profile.||L/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847480|NCT00555321|Secondary|Belatacept PK Parameter: Total Body Clearance|Total body clearance is the rate and extent at which the drug is eliminated from the body. The clearance of a drug is used to understand the processes involved in drug elimination, distribution and metabolism. CLT was estimated from AUC (TAU) between Weeks 12 and 16, assuming steady state.|Samples were collected at Pre dose on Days 5, 14, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, 252, 336, 364; after end of infusion on Days 1, 5, 84, 112, 196, 336; and on Days 9, 85, 91, 98, 105.|All randomized participants who received belatacept, and had complete PK profile.||mL/h/kg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
847544|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Serum Chemistry Laboratory Abnormalities: Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN)|Incidence of potentially clinically significant BUN levels post-baseline (normal range=7-30 mg/dL)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847482|NCT00555321|Secondary|Belatacept PK Parameter: Minimum Plasma Concentration|Minimum Plasma Concentration (Cmin) is the minimum observed serum drug concentration.|Samples were collected at Pre dose on Days 5, 14, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, 252, 336, 364; after end of infusion on Days 1, 5, 84, 112, 196, 336; and on Days 9, 85, 91, 98, 105.|All randomized participants who received belatacept, and had complete PK profile.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
847483|NCT00555321|Secondary|Belatacept PK Parameter: Area Under the Serum Concentration-time Curve to the End of the Dosing Period (AUCtau)|Area under the plasma concentration-time curve for each dosing interval is determined using the linear trapezoidal rule. The AUC(TAU) of belatacept from the MI regimens and LI regimens were calculated over 2 and 4 weeks respectively.|Samples were collected at Pre dose on Days 5, 14, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, 252, 336, 364; after end of infusion on Days 1, 5, 84, 112, 196, 336; and on Days 9, 85, 91, 98, 105.|All randomized participants who received belatacept, and had complete PK profile.||µg*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
847484|NCT00555321|Secondary|Belatacept Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Time to Achieve the Maximum Plasma Concentration|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) is the time taken to reach the maximum observed plasma concentration.|Samples were collected at Pre dose on Days 5, 14, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, 252, 336, 364; after end of infusion on Days 1, 5, 84, 112, 196, 336; and on Days 9, 85, 91, 98, 105.|All randomized participants who received belatacept, and had complete PK profile.||hour||Full Range|Median
847485|NCT00555321|Secondary|Belatacept Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Maximum Serum Concentration|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) is the maximum observed serum drug concentration.|Samples were collected at Pre dose on Days 5, 14, 28, 56, 84, 112, 168, 252, 336, 364; after end of infusion on Days 1, 5, 84, 112, 196, 336; and on Days 9, 85, 91, 98, 105.|All randomized participants who received belatacept, and had complete PK profile.||µg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
847486|NCT00555321|Secondary|Mean Change in Baseline Values of Cystatin C at 2 and 12 Months|Cystatin C is a protein encoded by the CST3 gene, which is mainly used as a biomarker of kidney function. If kidney function and glomerular filtration rate decline, the blood levels of cystatin C rise.|Baseline (pretransplant), 2, and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population: all randomized and transplanted participants. n = participants who had both baseline and postbaseline values.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
847487|NCT00555321|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline Serum Creatinine at Months 1, 2, 3, 6 and 12|Measurement of SCr is commonly used as an indicator of renal function. High creatinine blood level is an indicator of deficient filtering by the kidney. SCr was determined at baseline and various post-baseline time points.|Baseline (pretransplant time point), 1, 2, 3, 6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n= participants who have both baseline and postbaseline values.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847488|NCT00555321|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Calculated GFR During the LTE|GFR is a measure of the rate at which blood is filtered by the kidney. MDRD is an equation (calculation) used to estimate GFR in participants with impaired renal function based on serum creatinine (ScR), age, race, gender, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and albumin (Alb). GFR (mL/min/1.73 m^2) = 170*(Scr)^-0.999*(Age)^-0.176*(0.762 if female)*(1.180 if African American)*(BUN)^-0.170*(Alb)^+0.318. ). BL= baseline, mL= milliliters; min= minute; m^2= meters squared.|Baseline (pretransplant time point), 1, 2, 3, 6,12, 18, 24, 30, 36 months posttransplant|ITT-LTE population, all randomized and transplanted participants who entered long term extension. n= participants who have both baseline and postbaseline values.||mL/min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
847489|NCT00555321|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Calculated GFR, by Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Equation: 12-month Treatment Phase|GFR is a measure of the rate at which blood is filtered by the kidney. MDRD is an equation (calculation) used to estimate GFR in participants with impaired renal function based on serum creatinine (ScR), age, race, gender, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and albumin (Alb). GFR (mL/min/1.73 m^2) = 170*(Scr)^-0.999*(Age)^-0.176*(0.762 if female)*(1.180 if African American)*(BUN)^-0.170*(Alb)^+0.318. ). BL= baseline, mL= milliliters; min= minute; m^2= meters squared.|Baseline [BL] (pretransplant time point), 1, 2, 3, 6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants. n = participants who had both baseline and postbaseline values.||mL/min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
847490|NCT00555321|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR): 12-month Treatment Phase|GFR was assessed using a true measure of glomerular filtration via iothalamate clearance test. The month 2 time point was selected as the “baseline” time point with respect to measured GFR due to logistical difficulty in obtaining measured GFR at the time of liver transplant and post-transplant renal function largely stabilizing by 2 months. All Measured GFR > 200 were truncated at 200.|Baseline (2 month), 12 months posttransplant|ITT population: all randomized and transplanted subjects. n = participants who had both baseline and postbaseline values.||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
847491|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants at Risk of First Acute Rejection as Determined by Kaplan-Meier Method by 12 Months|The time from transplantation to the first AR episode in each treatment arm was summarized using Kaplan-Meier curves. Acute Rejections were clinically suspected and biopsy proven by central pathologist.|3, 6, 9 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population, all randomized and transplanted participants.||participants|||Number
847492|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants Having Acute Rejection by Rejection Activity Index During the LTE|Acute Rejections were clinically suspected and biopsy proven by central pathologist. The Banff Rejection Activity Index (RAI) comprises 3 components scored from 0 to 3: venous endothelial inflammation; bile duct inflammation damage; and portal inflammation; the scores are combined to an overall score (the RAI). An overall score of 0-2 is considered indeterminate, score of 3-4 is mild, score of 5-6 is moderate, and score of 7-9 is severe. Only the episode with the highest total RAI score for each participant was counted.|Day 1 (randomization) through End of study (database lock of 20-June-2011)|ITT-LTE population, all randomized and transplanted participants who entered the long-term extension phase.||participants|||Number
847512|NCT00552032|Secondary|Rhinomanometry Results- Left and Right Nasal Fossa: Expiratory Flow at 75 Pa|"Rhinomanometry examination of the left & right Nasal Fossa was performed at baseline (visit 2) and each visit throughout treatment (visit 3 and visit 4) in participants ages 7-11 years.
Rhinomanometry is a test of nasal function that measures air pressure and the rate of airflow in the nasal airway during respiration by means of equipment. Expiratory flow was calculated at 75 Pa."|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|This analysis was only performed in a cohort of the ITT in participants ages 7-11 years old (MFSN=19, Placebo=20).||cm^3/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
847493|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Acute Rejections by Rejection Activity Index (RAI) by 12 Months|Acute Rejections were clinically suspected and biopsy proven by central pathologist. The Banff Rejection Activity Index (RAI) comprises 3 components scored from 0 to 3: venous endothelial inflammation; bile duct inflammation damage; and portal inflammation; the scores are combined to an overall score (the RAI). An overall score of 0-2 is considered indeterminate, score of 3-4 is mild, score of 5-6 is moderate, and score of 7-9 is severe. Only the episode with the highest total RAI score for each participant was counted.|3, 6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population: all randomized and transplanted participants||participants|||Number
847494|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had Acute Rejection by Banff Grade by 12 Months|Acute Rejections (AR) were clinically suspected and biopsy proven by central pathologist. The Banff grading is a classification of renal allograft pathology and AR. Grade I: AR requiring moderate (>25%) to severe mononuclear cell interstitial infiltrate and moderate tubulitis; Grade II: AR requiring severe tubulitis and/or intimal arteritis; Grade III: AR requiring transmural arteritis. Only the episode with highest Banff grade for each participant was counted.|3, 6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population: all randomized and transplanted participants||participants|||Number
847495|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Central Biopsy Proven Acute Rejection by Treatment Type During the LTE|Acute rejections were clinically suspected and biopsy proven by central pathologist. Corticosteroid-resistant rejection = Continued rejection, as documented by liver biopsy, after the completion of 2 days of corticosteroids and requiring use of T-cell depleting agent. Refractory rejection=Continued rejection, as documented by liver biopsy, after use of corticosteroids and T cell depletion therapy. Increase in the dose of TAC was monitored in participants who were assigned to one of the TAC-based regimens. DBL=database lock, TRT=treatment|Day 1 (randomization) through database lock (20-June-2011)|ITT-LTE population, all randomized and transplanted participants who entered long term extension.||participants|||Number
847496|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants With Central Biopsy Proven Acute Rejection by Treatment Type by 12 Months|Acute rejections were clinically suspected and biopsy proven by central pathologist. Corticosteroid-resistant rejection = Continued rejection, as documented by liver biopsy, after the completion of 2 days of corticosteroids and requiring use of T-cell depleting agent. Refractory rejection=Continued rejection, as documented by liver biopsy, after use of corticosteroids and T cell depletion therapy. Increase in the dose of TAC was monitored in participants who were assigned to one of the TAC-based regimens. TRT= treatment|3, 6 and 12 months posttransplant|ITT population: all randomized and transplanted participants||participants|||Number
847497|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants Having Acute Rejections During the LTE|Acute rejections were clinically suspected and biopsy proven by central pathologist. The number of episodes of AR was counted.|Day 1 (randomization) through database lock (20-June-2011)|ITT-LTE population, all randomized and transplanted participants who entered long-term extension||participants|||Number
847498|NCT00555321|Secondary|Number of Participants Having Acute Rejections: 12-month Treatment Phase|Acute rejections were clinically suspected and biopsy proven by central pathologist. The number of episodes of AR was counted.|3 , 6, and 12 months|ITT population: all randomized and transplanted participants||participants|||Number
847499|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Episode of Acute Rejection, Graft Loss, or Death by End of Study (Includes LTE Data)|Any AR that was clinically suspected and biopsy proven (by central pathologist) was included in this triple composite end point. All biopsies for suspected AR were assessed by a central histopathologist using Banff criteria. For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation was used if N>=5, otherwise exact method was used.|Day 1 (randomization) through database lock (20-June-2011)|ITT-LTE population: all randomized and transplanted participants who entered the Long term extension||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847500|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Episode of Acute Rejection, Graft Loss, or Death by 12 Months|Any AR that was clinically suspected and biopsy proven (by central pathologist) was included in this triple composite end point. All biopsies for suspected AR were assessed by a blinded central histopathologist using Banff grading. Graft loss was defined as impairment of liver function to such a degree that the participant died or underwent re-transplantation. For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation is used if N>=5. Otherwise exact method is used. For 95% CI of difference, adjustment is made for randomization strata if N >= 5 in each treatment arm.|At 12 months posttransplant|ITT population: all randomized and transplanted participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847501|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Surviving With Functional Graft by End of Study (Includes LTE Data)|For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation was used if N>=5, otherwise exact method was used.|Day 1 (randomization) through database lock (20-June-2011)|ITT-LTE population, all randomized and transplanted participants who entered long term extension.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847502|NCT00555321|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Surviving With Functional Graft: 12-month Treatment Phase|For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation was used if N>=5. Otherwise exact method was used.|At 6 and 12 months|ITT population: all randomized and transplanted participants.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847503|NCT00555321|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Episode of Acute Rejection (AR), Graft Loss, or Death by 6 Months Post-transplant|Any AR that was clinically suspected and biopsy proven (by central pathologist) was included in this triple composite end point. All biopsies for suspected AR were assessed by a blinded central histopathologist using Banff grading schema. Graft loss was defined as impairment of liver function to such a degree that the participant died or underwent re-transplantation. For 95% (confidence interval) CI within each group, normal approximation is used if N>=5, otherwise exact method is used.|At 6 months posttransplant|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all randomized and transplanted participants.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847513|NCT00552032|Secondary|Rhinomanometry Results- Left and Right Nasal Fossa: Inspiration Flow at 75 Pa|"Rhinomanometry examination of the left & right Nasal Fossa was performed at baseline (visit 2) and each visit throughout treatment (visit 3 and visit 4) in participants ages 7-11 years.
Rhinomanometry is a test of nasal function that measures air pressure and the rate of airflow in the nasal airway during respiration by means of equipment. Inspiration flow was calculated at 75 Pa."|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|This analysis was only performed in a cohort of the ITT in participants ages 7-11 years old (MFSN=19, Placebo=20).||cm^3/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
847504|NCT00552032|Secondary|Obstructive Sleep Apnea-18 (OSA-18) Questionnaire Total Score|"18 items of the survey were graded on a 7-point ordinal scale. Caregivers were asked to describe how often in the last 4 weeks had the child exhibited specific symptoms according to the following scale: 1: none of the time; 2: hardly any of the time; 3: a little of the time; 4: some of the time; 5: a good bit of the time; 6: most of the time; 7: all of the time. All scores were summed (total score: 18-126).
Grading was as follows:
Scores < 60 suggest a slight impact on health related quality of life (HRQL)
Scores 60-80 suggest a moderate impact
Scores over 80 suggest a great impact"|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|"A total of 132 subjects were included in the ITT population. The ITT population included all randomized participants who received >=1 dose after commencement of treatment. Data summarized in terms of the number of participants providing data at the relevant time point.
1 participant in Placebo group did not answer this questionnaire at baseline."||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847505|NCT00552032|Secondary|Quality of Life Questionnaire (PedsQL) Total Score (Ages 8-12)|The impact on quality of life (QOL) was measured by a general pediatric health questionnaire. Versions were self-administered & answered by participants' parents. This modular instrument consists of 23 items using a 5-point scale: from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, 4=0. 4 dimensions (physical, emotional, social, & school functioning) are scored. Total score is sum of all the items over the number of items answered on all the scales. Higher scores indicate a better health related QOL.|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|The ITT population included all randomized participants who received >= 1 dose after commencement of treatment. At baseline (visit 2), 28 randomized participants were between 8-12 years old, 15 participants in MFNS & 13 participants in Placebo group. Questionnaire was answered in accordance with the actual age of each participant at each visit.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847506|NCT00552032|Secondary|Quality of Life Questionnaire (PedsQL) Total Score (Ages 5-7)|The impact on quality of life (QOL) was measured by a general pediatric health questionnaire. Versions were self-administered & answered by participants' parents. Questionnaire consists of 23 items using a 3-point scale: from 0 (not at all), 2 (sometimes), 4 (a lot). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, 4=0. 4 dimensions (physical, emotional, social, & school functioning) are scored. Total score is sum of all the items over the number of items answered on all the scales. Higher scores indicate a better health related QOL.|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|The ITT population included all randomized participants who received >= 1 dose after commencement of treatment. At baseline (visit 2), 52 randomized participants were between 5 and 7 years old, 28 participants in MFNS & 24 subjects in Placebo group. Questionnaire was answered in accordance with the actual age of each participant at each visit.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847507|NCT00552032|Secondary|Quality of Life Questionnaire (PedsQL) Total Score (Ages 2-4)|The impact on quality of life (QOL) was measured by a general pediatric health questionnaire. Versions were self-administered & answered by participants' parents. This modular instrument consists of 21 items using a 5-point scale: from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, 4=0. 4 dimensions (physical, emotional, social, & school functioning) are scored. Total score is sum of all the items over the number of items answered on all the scales. Higher scores indicate a better health related QOL.|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|The ITT population included all randomized participants who received >= 1 dose after commencement of treatment. At baseline (visit 2), 52 randomized participants were between 2 and 4 years old, 23 participants in MFNS & 29 participants in Placebo group. Questionnaire was answered in accordance with the actual age of each participant at each visit.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847508|NCT00552032|Secondary|Number of Participants With Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire (PSQ)- Impact on Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQL) Results of: Mild, Moderate, or Severe|PSQ consists of 90 variables divided into 3 different factors:snoring, somnolence, and behavior. All positive Snoring and Somnolence answers scored with Yes=1 and No=0, and scores averaged to obtain a total score between 0.00 and 1.00. Behavior factor scored between 1-3, and scores averaged for total score of 1 to 3. Increased scores indicate increasing abnormality of sleep. Based on determined cut-offs, participants were categorized as having mild, moderate, or severe discomfort due to interference of sleep.|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|"A total of 132 participants were included in the ITT population. The ITT
population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose after commencement of treatment. Data summarized in terms of the number of participants providing data at the relevant time point."||Participants|||Number
847509|NCT00552032|Secondary|Acoustic Rhinometry Results- Nasopharyngeal Volume (NPV): Left and Right Nasal Fossa|Acoustic rhinometry examination of the left & right Nasal Fossa was performed by principal investigators at baseline & each visit throughout treatment in participants ages 7-11 years. Acoustic rhinometry is a technique intended for assessment of the geometry of the nasal cavity and nasopharynx and for evaluating nasal obstruction. The technique is based on an analysis of sound waves reflected from the nasal cavities.|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|This analysis was only performed in a cohort of the ITT in participants ages 7-11 years old (MFSN=19, Placebo=20).||cm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
847510|NCT00552032|Secondary|Acoustic Rhinometry Results- Minimal Cross-Sectional Area: Left and Right Nasal Fossa|"Acoustic rhinometry examination of the left & right Nasal Fossa was performed by principal investigators at baseline & each visit throughout treatment in participants ages 7-11 years. Acoustic rhinometry is a technique intended for assessment of the geometry of the nasal cavity and nasopharynx and for evaluating nasal obstruction. The technique is based on an analysis of sound waves reflected from the nasal cavities.
Measurements were taken for each side of the nose (nasopharyngeal minimum cross-sectional area) & were reported in cm^3."|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|This analysis was only performed in a cohort of the ITT in participants ages 7-11 years old (MFSN=19, Placebo=20).||cm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
847511|NCT00552032|Secondary|Number of Participants With Pure-Tone Audiometric Results of: Normal, Abnormal, or Not Done|Pure-tone audiometry was performed in children ages 7-11 by certified audiologists. Results were categorized based on audiologist's assessment as either being normal (within normal limits), abnormal (outside normal limits), or audiometry was not done (not performed). Results were assessed at baseline, Week 4 (Visit 3), and endpoint Week 8 (end of treatment).|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|This analysis was only performed in a cohort of the ITT in participants ages 7-11 years old (MFSN=19, Placebo=20).||Participants|||Number
847514|NCT00552032|Secondary|Rhinomanometry Results- Left and Right Nasal Fossa: Expiratory Resistance|"Rhinomanometry examination of the left & right Nasal Fossa was performed at baseline (visit 2) and each visit throughout treatment (visit 3 and visit 4) in participants ages 7-11 years.
Rhinomanometry is a test of nasal function that measures air pressure and the rate of airflow in the nasal airway during respiration by means of equipment. These findings were used to calculate expiratory nasal airway resistance reported in Pascal/centimeter^3/second (Pa/cm^3/sec)."|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|This analysis was only performed in a cohort of the ITT in participants ages 7-11 years old (MFSN=19, Placebo=20).||Pa/cm^3/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
847515|NCT00552032|Secondary|Rhinomanometry Results- Left and Right Nasal Fossa: Inspiratory Resistance|"Rhinomanometry examination of the left & right Nasal Fossa was performed at baseline (visit 2) and each visit throughout treatment (visit 3 and visit 4) in participants ages 7-11 years.
Rhinomanometry is a test of nasal function that measures air pressure and the rate of airflow in the nasal airway during respiration by means of equipment. These findings were used to calculate inspiratory nasal airway resistance reported in Pascal/centimeter^3/second (Pa/cm^3/sec)."|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|This analysis was only performed in a cohort of the ITT in participants aged 7-11 years old (MFSN=19, Placebo=20).||Pa/cm^3/sec||Standard Deviation|Mean
847516|NCT00552032|Secondary|Number of Participants With Rhinoscopic- Middle Meatus Results of: Patent, Partial Obstruction or Total Obstruction|Rhinoscopic examination of the middle meatus was performed at baseline (visit 2) and each visit throughout treatment (visit 3 and visit 4). Results were categorized based on investigator's assessment into 3 categories: patent (easily observed), partial obstruction (partially blocked from view), or total obstruction (completely blocked from view).|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|A total of 132 participants were included in the ITT population. The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose after commencement of treatment. Data summarized in terms of the number of participants providing data at the relevant time point.||Participants|||Number
847517|NCT00552032|Secondary|Number of Participants With Rhinoscopic-Inferior Turbinates Results of: Normal, Hypertrophic, and Hypotrophic|Rhinoscopic examination of the inferior turbinates was performed at baseline (visit 2) and each visit throughout treatment (visit 3 and visit 4). Results were categorized based on investigator's assessment as either being normal appearance (normal size) , hypertrophic (swollen/normal size increased), or hypotrophic (normal size diminished).|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|A total of 132 participants were included in the ITT population. The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose after commencement of treatment. Data summarized in terms of the number of participants providing data at the relevant time point.||Participants|||Number
847518|NCT00552032|Secondary|Number of Participants With Rhinoscopic- Septum Results of: Aligned, Non-Obstructive, or Obstructive Deviation|Rhinoscopic examination of the septum was performed at baseline (visit 2) and each visit throughout treatment (visit 3 and visit 4). Results were categorized based on investigator's assessment as either being aligned (septum is aligned), non-obstructive (septum is not aligned but the deviation is non-obstructive), or obstructive (septum is deviated and obstructive) deviation.|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|A total of 132 participants were included in the ITT population. The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose after commencement of treatment. Data summarized in terms of the number of participants providing data at the relevant time point.||Participants|||Number
847519|NCT00552032|Secondary|Number of Participants With Otoscopic Results of: Normal or Abnormal|Otoscopic examination was performed of the right and left ear canals at baseline (visit 2) and each visit throughout treatment (visit 3 and visit 4). Results were categorized based on audiologist's assessment as either being normal (ear canal structures appear normal) or abnormal (ear canal structures appear abnormal).|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|A total of 132 participants were included in the ITT population. The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose after commencement of treatment. Data summarized in terms of the number of participants providing data at the relevant time point.||Participants|||Number
847520|NCT00552032|Secondary|Number of Participants With Bilateral Tympanogram Results of: Normal, Abnormal, or Not Done|Tympanometry was performed in children ages 2-11 by certified audiologists. Results were categorized based on audiologist's assessment as either being normal (normal pressure in the middle ear with normal mobility of the eardrum and the conduction bones) , abnormal (abnormal pressure in the middle ear and/or abnormal mobility of the eardrum and the conduction bones), or tympanometry was not done (evaluation not completed). Results were assessed at baseline, Week 4 (Visit 3), and endpoint Week 8 (end of treatment).|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|"A total of 132 participants were included in the ITT
population. The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose after commencement of treatment. Data summarized in terms of the number of participants providing data at the relevant time point."||Participants|||Number
847521|NCT00552032|Secondary|Total Frequency Symptom Scores: AM & PM|Symptoms were assessed by whole-number linear scale to grade their frequency. Scores were recorded AM & PM (a difference of 12 hours) & were based on frequency within 12 hours of prior recording. The following signs/symptoms were evaluated: Snoring; Nasal obstruction; and nasal discharge; Breathing difficulty; Oral respiration; Ear pain. Frequency was graded according to the following scale: 0=absent; 1=intermittent; 2=persistent. The frequency of symptoms was scored individually and summed to obtain the Total Frequency Symptom Score. The maximum total score possible was 24 daily; 12 for both AM (6 symptoms times max frequency of 2) and PM.|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|A total of 132 participants were included in the ITT population. The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose after commencement of treatment. Data summarized in terms of the number of participants providing data at the relevant time point.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847541|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Serum Chemistry Laboratory Abnormalities: Glucose|Incidence of potentially clinically significant glucose levels post-baseline (normal range=70-125 mg/dL)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847542|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Serum Chemistry Laboratory Abnormalities: Cholesterol|Incidence of potentially clinically significant cholesterol levels post-baseline (normal range=0-199 mg/dL)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847522|NCT00552032|Secondary|Total Severity Symptom Scores: Morning and Evening (AM & PM)|Symptoms were assessed by whole-number linear scale to grade their severity. Scores were recorded AM & PM (a difference of 12 hours) & were based on severity within 12 hours of prior recording. The following symptoms were evaluated: Snoring; Nasal obstruction & discharge; Breathing difficulty; Oral respiration; Ear pain. Severity was graded according to the following scale: 0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe. Severity was scored individually and summed to obtain the Total Symptom Severity Score. The maximum total score possible was 36 daily; 18 for both AM (6 symptoms times max severity of 3)and PM.|Baseline (Visit 2), Week 4 (Visit 3), Week 8 (Visit 4)|A total of 132 participants were included in the ITT population. The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose after commencement of treatment. Data summarized in terms of the number of participants providing data at the relevant time point.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847523|NCT00552032|Primary|Change From Baseline in Adenoid/Choana (A/C) Index Grade|Changes in adenoid size were assessed by nasopharyngoscopic examination and were determined using the Adenoid/Choana (A/C) Index. Grades were assigned to intervals of A/C ratio percentages: grade I (0-25%), II (26-50%), III (51-75%) and IV (76-100%). Changes in adenoid size were expressed as the mean difference between grades at baseline and study visit. Positive values indicated a decrease in adenoid size, a 0 value indicated that size remained the same, and negative values indicated an increase in adenoid size.|Baseline (visit 2), Weeks 4 (visit 3), Week 8 (visit 4)|A total of 132 participants were included in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The ITT population included all randomized participants who received at least one dose after commencement of treatment. Data are summarized in terms of the number of participants providing data at the relevant time point.||Score on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847524|NCT00550589|Secondary|Changes in Gene Expression in Perianal HSIL After Exposure to Cidofovir as Assessed by RNA Microarray Analysis||Baseline, after cycle 1, and 6 weeks after treatment discontinuation|The gene expression analysis was not done|||||
847525|NCT00550589|Secondary|Distribution of Abnormally Methylated Genes Among HSIL, Low-grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions, and Normal Perianal Skin||Baseline, after cycle 1, and 6 weeks after treatment discontinuation|The gene analysis was not done|||||
847526|NCT00550589|Secondary|Identification of Abnormally Methylated Genes in Perianal Dysplasia|Identification of abnormally methylated genes in perianal dysplasia|Baseline, after cycle 1, and 6 weeks after treatment discontinuation|The lab analysis of genes was not performed|||||
847527|NCT00550589|Secondary|Identification of HPV-DNA Types Present in the Anus|Number of patients with HPV16 type present in the anus from anal swab or cytobrush at baseline|Baseline|Number of patients with anal swabs or cytobrush results at baseline||participants|||Number
847528|NCT00550589|Secondary|Correlation of Clinical Regression of Perianal HSIL With Clearance of HPV DNA|Number of patients who cleared HPV among those who had a complete or partial response|6 weeks after treatment discontinuation|Participants who had a partial or complete response and for whom pre and post-treatment HPV data were available||participants|||Number
847529|NCT00550589|Secondary|Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) DNA Type in Perianal HSIL and Normal Perianal Tissue|Number of patients with HPV16 at baseline in perianal HSIL and normal perianal tissue|Baseline|Number of patients with tissue samples available at baseline||participants|||Number
847530|NCT00550589|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of Topical Cidofovir as Assessed by NCI CTCAE v3.0|Number of study patients who had a serious adverse event|Every 2 weeks on study, 6 weeks after treatment discontinuation|All enrolled patients||participants|||Number
847531|NCT00550589|Primary|Proportion of Patients With Regression of Perianal High-grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions (HSIL)||6 weeks after treatment discontinuation|||proportion of participants|||Number
847532|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities: Arrhythmia|Incidence of potentially clinically significant ECG abnormalities: arrhythmia|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847533|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities: Right Bundle Branch Block (RBBB), Left Bundle Branch Block (LBBB), Myocardial Infarction (MI)|Incidence of potentially clinically significant ECG abnormalities: Right bundle branch block (RBBB), Left bundle branch block (LBBB), myocardial infarction (MI)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847534|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities: T Wave|Incidence of potentially clinically significant ECG abnormalities: T wave|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847535|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities: ST Segment|Incidence of potentially clinically significant ECG abnormalities: ST Segment|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847536|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities: QTcF Increase 30-60 Msec|Incidence of potentially clinically significant ECG abnormalities (QTcF increase 30-60 msec post-baseline)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847537|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities: QTcB Increase 30-60 Msec|Incidence of potentially clinically significant ECG abnormalities (QTcB increase 30-60 msec)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847538|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities: QRS Interval|Incidence of potentially clinically significant ECG abnormalities involving QRS interval (change > 100 msec)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847539|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Abnormalities: QT >500 Milliseconds (Msec)|Incidence of potentially clinically significant ECG abnormalities (QT>500 msec) post-baseline|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847540|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Serum Chemistry Laboratory Abnormalities: Magnesium|Incidence of potentially clinically significant magnesium levels post-baseline (normal range=1.2-2 mEq/L)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847545|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Hematology Laboratory Abnormalities: Neutrophils|Incidence of potentially clinically significant neutrophil count post-baseline (normal range=1.8-8 thousands/microliter)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847546|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Hematology Laboratory Abnormalities: Lymphocytes|Incidence of potentially clinically significant lymphocyte count post-baseline (normal range = 16-46%)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847547|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Hematology Laboratory Abnormalities: Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT)|Incidence of potentially clinically significant Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) levels post-baseline (normal range=22-34 seconds)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847548|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Hematology Laboratory Abnormalities: Hemoglobin|Incidence of clinically significant hemoglobin abnormalities post-baseline (normal range=11.8-16.8 g/dL)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847549|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Vital Sign Abnormalities: Body Temperature|Incidence of potentially clinically significant changes in body temperature post-baseline (defined as an increase of >=1.1 to >=38.3 degrees Celsius)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847550|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Vital Sign Abnormalities: Body Weight|Incidence of clinically significant body weight change post-baseline (defined as change upward or downward of >=7%)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847551|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Vital Sign Abnormalities: Pulse Rate|Incidence of abnormal pulse rate post-baseline [abnormal values: >=120 beats per minute (bpm) + increase of >=15 bpm; <=50 bpm + decrease of >=15 bpm]|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847552|NCT00550459|Secondary|Number of Patients With Vital Sign Abnormalities: Blood Pressure|Incidence of abnormal systolic & diastolic blood pressure values post-baseline (abnormal systolic values: >=180 mmHg + increase of >=20 mmHg, <= 90 mmHg + decrease >=20 mmHg; abnormal diastolic values: >=105 mmHg+increase of >=15 mmHg, <=50 mmHg + decrease of >= 15 mmHg)|28 days|Safety population defined as all randomized subjects who consumed at least 1 dose of trial medication||participants|||Number
847553|NCT00550459|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Sodium; ITT Population|Change from Baseline to Day 22 in Serum Sodium; ITT population|Baseline and Day 22|ITT population with OC||mEq/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
847554|NCT00550459|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Postural Stability Test|Change from baseline to Day 22 in Postural Stability Test Z-score (This test measures gross motor control. The ability to stand upright without moving is assessed using the SWAY meter that is modeled on the Wright Ataxiameter. A cord from the meter is attached to the subject who is required to stand as still as possible with feet apart and eyes closed for 1 minute. The test is then repeated with eyes open for 1 minute. The outcomes of these tests are combined and measured as a movement Z-score. Higher result=better postural stability); ITT population|baseline and Day 22|ITT population with LOCF (this group includes missing values)||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
847555|NCT00550459|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Gait Test (Timed Get-Up-and-Go Test)|Change from baseline to Day 22 in Gait Test (Timed Get-Up-and-Go Test=time it takes for a seated subject to rise from a chair, walk 3 meters, walk around an object and return to sit in chair. Values: under 10 sec (no difficulties), 10 to 20 sec (starting to have balance difficulty), over 30 sec (at high risk for falls and dependent in most activities of daily living and mobility); test assesses risk to elderly subjects of falling and higher scores in seconds indicate higher risk of falling; ITT population|baseline and Day 22|ITT population with OC||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
847556|NCT00550459|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Overall Neurocognitive Composite Score|Change from Baseline to Day 22 in the overall Neurocognitive Composite Score (NCS)comprising the sum of 7 neurocognitive domain Z-scores (Reaction Time, Psychomotor Speed, Processing Speed, Continuity of Attention, Working Memory/Executive Functions, Quality of Episodic Verbal Memory, and Postural Stability); ITT population|baseline and Day 22|ITT population with OC||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
847557|NCT00550459|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Individual Neurocognitive Domains Included in the Primary Endpoint: Processing Speed of Rapid Visual Information Processing Test, Numeric Working Memory Test, and Word Recognition Test|Change from baseline to Day 22 in the individual neurocognitive domains Z-score for Processing Speed of Rapid Visual Information Processing Test, Numeric Working Memory Test, and Word Recognition Test; ITT population|baseline and Day 22|ITT population with OC||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
847558|NCT00550459|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Individual Neurocognitive Domains Included in the Primary Endpoint: Psychomotor Speed Via Morse Tapping Test|Change from baseline to Day 22 in the individual neurocognitive domains Z-score for Psychomotor Speed (mean tap rate of Morse tapping test); ITT population|baseline and Day 22|ITT population with OC||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
847559|NCT00550459|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Day 22 in the Individual Neurocognitive Domains Included in the Primary Endpoint: Reaction Time in Computer Tests|Change from baseline in the individual neurocognitive domains Z-score for Reaction Time in Computer Tests (simple reaction time test, choice reaction time test, digit vigilance test); ITT population|baseline and Day 22|ITT population with OC||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
847560|NCT00550459|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Neurocognitive Composite Score of Speed Domains (NCS-SD; Sum of All Correct Speed Domain Z-Scores)|"Change from baseline to Day 22 in sum of all speed domain Z-scores:Reaction Time (Simple=recognize yes 50 times;Choice=recognize yes or no 50 times;Digit Vigilance=match 45 digits);Psychomotor Speed (Morse Tapping=tap button for 30 seconds with right & left hands);Processing Speed (Rapid Visual Information Processing=detect consecutive sequences of 3 odd or 3 even digits;Numeric Working Memory=recognize numbers from series of 5 digits among 30;Word Recognition=remember 15 prior learned words from 30 total;results age-matched to healthy controls from Cognitive Drug Research normative data"|baseline and Day 22|Analysis based upon observed cases (OC).||Z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
847613|NCT00526890|Primary|Incidence of Grade 3-4 Pneumonitis||During study treatment, up to 6 weeks|Patients treated with study therapy||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847561|NCT00545584|Secondary|Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Measurement|Generally FPG values of ~5.0–7.2 mmol/L would be considered goal (American Diabetes Association).|Baseline and Week 24|FAS population. Furthermore, only 350, 252, and 350 subjects had FPG evaluations in the Diet advice, Diet & physical activity advice, and Standard groups, respectively, at Baseline; and 303, 224, and 310 subjects had FPG evaluations in the Diet advice, Diet & physical activity advice, and Standard groups, respectively, at Week 24.||mmol/L glucose||Standard Deviation|Mean
847562|NCT00545584|Primary|Hemoglobin A1c Measurement|Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is a measure of glycated hemoglobin in the blood. HbA1c greater than 6.5% was considered inadequately controlled.|Baseline and Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) population included all selected patients with at least one measured HbA1c value after Visit 2 and having received at least one dose of sitagliptin. In the Standard of Care group, only 360 subjects had HbA1c Baseline evaluations.||percent HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
847563|NCT00537316|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With Mucosal Healing During Part 2 of the Study|Due to the early termination of this study, evaluations of efficacy were not conducted for Part 2 of the study|Weeks 38, 62 and 94 (Weeks 22, 46 and 78 for direct entry)||||||
847564|NCT00537316|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Who Are in Steroid-free Remission During Part 2 of the Study|Due to the early termination of this study, evaluations of efficacy were not conducted for Part 2 of the study.|Weeks 38, 62 & 94 (Weeks 22, 46 and 78 for direct entry)||||||
847565|NCT00537316|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With Mucosal Healing at Week 16|Mucosal healing was defined as a Mayo endoscopy score of 0 or 1.|16 weeks|Full Analysis Set (participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study treatment, and had data available for baseline and at least one post baseline evaluation).||Proportion of participants|||Number
847566|NCT00537316|Secondary|Proportion of Participants in Response at Weeks 8 and 16|Response at Week 8 is defined as a decrease in the partial Mayo score of ≥1 point. Response at Week 16 is defined as a decrease in total Mayo score of ≥3 points and at least 30% lower than baseline Mayo score. The partial Mayo score consists of the following 3 sub-scores: stool frequency, rectal bleeding, and physician’s global assessment. The total Mayo score consists of the following 4 sub-scores: stool frequency, rectal bleeding, findings of endoscopy (sigmoidoscopy), and physician’s global assessment.|Weeks 8 and 16|Full Analysis Set (participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study treatment, and had data available for baseline and at least one post baseline evaluation). Participants who dropped out prior to Week 16, had a missing Mayo score at Week 16, or were non-responders at Week 8 are considered failures (non-responders) at Week 16.||Proportion of participants|||Number
847567|NCT00537316|Primary|Average Remission Rate During Part 2 of the Study|Due to the early termination of this study, evaluations of efficacy were not conducted for Part 2 of the study (Week 38 through Week 94 [Week 22 through Week 78 for direct entry]).|up to Week 94 (Week 78 for direct entry)||||||
847568|NCT00537316|Primary|Proportion of Participants in Steroid-free Remission at Week 16|Steroid-free remission is defined as a total Mayo score of 2 points or lower, with no individual sub-score exceeding 1 point, without the use of corticosteroids. The total Mayo score consists of the following 4 sub-scores: stool frequency, rectal bleeding, findings of endoscopy (sigmoidoscopy), and physician’s global assessment.|16 weeks|Full Analysis Set (participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study treatment, and had data available for baseline and at least one post baseline evaluation). Participants who dropped out prior to Week 16, had a missing Mayo score at Week 16, or were non-responders at Week 8 are considered failures (non-remission) at Week 16.||Proportion of participants|||Number
847569|NCT00527735|Secondary|Overall Survival in Participants With SCLC|Overall Survival is defined as the time from the date of randomization until the date of death. For participants who have not died, Overall Survival was censored at the recorded last date of contact; participants with a missing recorded last date of contact were censored at the last date the participant was known to be alive.|Randomization date to date of death (of censored, maximum reached: 22 months)|All participants with SCLC who were randomized to a treatment group.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847570|NCT00527735|Secondary|Number of Participants With SCLC Who Have Positive HAHA Status Postbaseline|An electrochemilumiluminescent immunoassay was used to detect HAHA antibodies to ipilimumab in human serum. Baseline, either negative or positive, is the maximum of all measurements closest and prior to the first ipilimumab dose. Positive status postbaseline=participants with an increase in HAHA measurement from baseline.|Day 1; Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, and 24; and at end of treatment|Participants with SCLC who had at least 1 HAHA measurement prior to and at least 1 after the first ipilimumab dose and with an increase in HAHA measurement from baseline.||Participants|||Number
847571|NCT00527735|Secondary|Number of Participants With SCLC Who Had Abnormalities in Vital Sign Measurements and Physical Examination Findings|Vital signs measurements consisted of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, and respiratory rate. Physical examinations assessed weight, height, performance status, and body surface area.|Predose Day 1; Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, and 24; and every 12 weeks on maintenance until end of treatment|All participants with SCLC who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab/placebo and/or chemotherapy and had at least 1 on-study measurement available.||Participants|||Number
847572|NCT00527735|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) in Participants With SCLC Per mWHO Criteria|By mWHO criteria, PFS is defined as the time between the randomization date and the date of progression or death, whichever occurs first. For participants with no recorded postbaseline tumor assessment, PFS was censored at the day of randomization. A participant who died without reported prior progression was considered to have progressed on the date of death. For those who remain alive and have not progressed, PFS was censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment.|Randomization date to date of progression or death (of censored, maximum reached: 22 months)|All participants with SCLC who were randomized to a treatment group.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847573|NCT00527735|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With SCLC Who Have Abnormalities in Pancreatic Enzyme and Other Clinical Laboratory Test Results by Worst CTC Grade|ULN=upper limit of normal. Lipase (U/L) Grade (Gr) 1: 1.1 to 1.39*ULN; Gr 2: >1.5 to 2.0*ULN; Gr 3: 2.5 to 5; Gr 4: 5*ULN. Amylase (U/L) Gr 1: >ULN to 1.5*ULN; Gr 2 >1.5 to 2.0*ULN, Gr 3 >2.0 to 5.0*ULN, Gr 4 >5.0*ULN. Creatine (mg/dL) Gr 1: >ULN to 1.5*ULN, Gr 2: 1.5 to 3.0*ULN, Gr 3: >3.0 to 6.0*ULN, Gr 4: >6.0*ULN.|At screening, predose Day 1, and Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 24, and at end of treatment|All participants with SCLC who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab and/or chemotherapy and had at least 1 on-study pancreatic enzyme or other laboratory test measurement available.||Percentage of participants|||Number
847574|NCT00527735|Secondary|Number of Participants With SCLC Who Have Abnormalities in Liver Function Test Results by Worst CTC Grade|ALT=alanine aminotransferase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; ALK=alkaline phosphatase. ULN=Upper limit of normal among all laboratory ranges. CTC grade criteria: ALT Grade 1:>ULN to 2.5*ULN; Grade 2: >2.5 to 5.0*ULN; Grade 3: >5.0 to 20.0*ULN; Grade 4: >20.0*ULN. AST Grade 1: >ULN to 2.5*ULN; Grade 2: >2.5 to 5.0*ULN; Grade 3: >5.0 to 20.0*ULN; Grade 4: >20.0*ULN. Total bilirubin Grade 1: >ULN to 1.5*ULN; Grade 2: >1.5 to 3.0*ULN; Grade 3: >3.0 to 10.0*ULN; Grade 4: >10.0*ULN. ALK (U/L) G1:>ULN to 2.5*ULN, G2:>2.5 to 5.0*ULN, G3:>5.0 to 20.0*ULN, G4:>20.0*ULN.|At screening; predose Day 1; Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, and 24; and at end of treatment|All participants with SCLC who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab/placebo and/or chemotherapy and had at least 1 on-study liver function test result available.||Participants|||Number
847575|NCT00527735|Secondary|Number of Participants With SCLC Who Have Abnormalities in On-study Hematology Laboratory Test Results by Worst CTC Grade|CTC, Version 3 used to assess parameters. LLN=lower limit of normal. CTC criteria: ANC=absolute neutrophil count. White blood cells Gr 1:<LLN to 3.0*10^9/L, Gr 2:<3.0 to 2.0*10^9/L, Gr 3:<2.0 to 1.0*10^9/L, Gr 4:<1.0*10^9/L. ANC Gr 1:<LLN to 1.5*10^9/L, Gr 2:<1.5 to 1.0*10^9/L, Gr 3:<1.0 to 0.5*10^9/L, Gr 4:<0.5*10^9/L. Platelet count Gr 1:LLN to 75.0*10^9/L, Gr 2:<75.0 to 50.0*10^9/L, Gr 3:<50.0 to 25.0*10^9/L, Gr 4:<25.0 to 10^9/L. Hemoglobin Gr 1:<LLN to 10.0 g/dL, Gr 2:<10.0 to 8.0 g/dL, Gr 3:<8.0 to 6.5 g/dL, Gr 4:<6.5 g/dL.|At screening, predose Day 1, and Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 24, and at end of treatment|All participants with SCLC who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab and/or chemotherapy and had at least 1 on-study hematology test result available.||Participants|||Number
847576|NCT00527735|Secondary|Number of Participants With SCLC With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Drug-related SAEs, Adverse Events (AEs), AEs Leading to Discontinuation, Drug-related AEs by Worst CTC Grade|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Drug-related=possibly, probably, or certainly related to and of unknown relationship to study drug. Grade (Gr) 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4=Life-threatening or disabling, Gr 5=Death.|Weeks 4, 7, 10, 16, 19, and 24; at end of treatment; and at follow-up (70 days from last dose)|All participants with SCLC who received at least 1 dose of blinded active or placebo ipilimumab with or without paclitaxel/carboplatin.||Participants|||Number
847577|NCT00527735|Secondary|Number of Participants With NSCLC Who Have Positive Human Antihuman Antibody (HAHA) Status Postbaseline|An electrochemilumiluminescent immunoassay was used to detect HAHA antibodies to ipilimumab in human serum. Baseline, either negative or positive, is the maximum of all measurements closest and prior to the first ipilimumab dose. Positive status postbaseline=participants with an increase in HAHA measurement from baseline.|Day 1; Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, and 24; and at end of treatment|Participants with at least 1 HAHA measurement prior to and at least 1 after the first ipilimumab dose and with an increase in HAHA measurement from baseline.||Participants|||Number
847578|NCT00527735|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With NSCLC Who Have Abnormalities in Pancreatic Enzyme Clinical Laboratory Test Results by Worst CTC Grade|ULN=upper limit of normal. Lipase (U/L) Gr 1: 1.1 to 1.39*ULN; Gr 2: >1.5 to 2.0*ULN; Gr 3: 2.5 to 5; Gr 4: 5*ULN. Amylase (U/L) Gr 1: >ULN to 1.5*ULN; Grade 2 >1.5 to 2.0*ULN, Grade 3 >2.0 to 5.0*ULN, Grade 4 >5.0*ULN. Creatine (mg/dL) Grade 1: >ULN to 1.5*ULN, Gr 2: 1.5 to 3.0*ULN, Gr 3: >3.0 to 6.0*ULN, Gr 4: >6.0*ULN.|At screening; predose Day 1; Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, and 24; and at end of treatment|All participants with NSCLC who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab/placebo and/or chemotherapy and had at least 1 on-study pancreatic enzyme laboratory test measurement available. One NSCLC participant randomized to the sequential arm is included in the concurrent arm for safety evaulations.||Percentage of participants|||Number
847579|NCT00527735|Secondary|Number of Participants With NSCLC Who Had Abnormalities in Vital Sign Measurements and Physical Examination Findings|Vital signs measurements consisted of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, and respiratory rate. Physical examinations assessed weight, height, performance status, and body surface area.|At screening; Day 1; Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, and 24; and every 12 weeks on maintenance until disease progression, study closure, or withdrawal of consent|All participants with NSCLC who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab/placebo and/or chemotherapy and had at least 1 on-study measurement available.One NSCLC participant randomized to the sequential arm is included in the concurrent arm for safety evaulations.||Participants|||Number
847580|NCT00527735|Secondary|Number of Participants With NSCLC Who Have Abnormalities in On-Study Liver Function Test Results By Worst CTC Grade|ULN=Upper limit of normal among all laboratory ranges. ALT=alanine transaminase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; ALK=alkaline phosphatase. CTC grade criteria: ALT Grade 1:>ULN to 2.5*ULN; Grade 2: >2.5 to 5.0*ULN; Grade 3: >5.0 to 20.0*ULN; Grade 4: >20.0*ULN. AST Grade 1: >ULN to 2.5*ULN; Grade 2: >2.5 to 5.0*ULN; Grade 3: >5.0 to 20.0*ULN; Grade 4: >20.0*ULN. Total bilirubin Grade 1: >ULN to 1.5*ULN; Grade 2: >1.5 to 3.0*ULN; Grade 3: >3.0 to 10.0*ULN; Grade 4: >10.0*ULN. ALK (U/L) G1:>ULN to 2.5*ULN, G2:>2.5 to 5.0*ULN, G3:>5.0 to 20.0*ULN, G4:>20.0*ULN.|At screening; predose Day 1; Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, and 24; and every 12 weeks on maintenance until disease progression, study closure, or withdrawal of consent|All participants with NSCLC who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab and/or chemotherapy and had at least 1 on-study liver function measurement available. One NSCLC participant randomized to the sequential arm is included in the concurrent arm for safety evaulations.||Participants|||Number
847581|NCT00527735|Secondary|irPFS in Participants With SCLC Per irRC|IRC performed TA.|Randomization date to date of irPD or death (maximum reached: 22 months)|All participants with SCLC who were randomized to a treatment group.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847614|NCT00526890|Primary|Incidence of Grade 3-4 Esophagitis||During study treatment, up to 6 weeks|Treated with Study Therapy||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847615|NCT00524589|Secondary|Expression of VDR and CYP24 in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells as Assessed at Baseline and on Days 2 and 3||1 year||||||
847616|NCT00524589|Primary|Objective Response (Complete or Partial Response)|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|1 year|All treated and eligible patients||percentage of participants|||Number
847617|NCT00500682|Secondary|Vitamins and Folate Levels||approximately 42 months||||||
847582|NCT00527735|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With NSCLC Who Have Abnormalities in On-study Hematology Laboratory Test Results by Worst CTC Grade|CTC, Version 3 used to assess parameters. LLN=lower limit of normal. CTC criteria: ANC=absolute neutrophil count. White blood cells Grade (Gr) 1:<LLN to 3.0*10^9/L, Gr 2:<3.0 to 2.0*10^9/L, Gr 3:<2.0 to 1.0*10^9/L, Gr 4:<1.0*10^9/L. ANC Gr 1:<LLN to 1.5*10^9/L, Gr 2:<1.5 to 1.0*10^9/L, Gr 3:<1.0 to 0.5*10^9/L, Gr 4:<0.5*10^9/L. Platelet count Gr 1:LLN to 75.0*10^9/L, Gr 2:<75.0 to 50.0*10^9/L, Gr 3:<50.0 to 25.0*10^9/L, Gr 4:<25.0 to 10^9/L. Hemoglobin Gr 1:<LLN to 10.0 g/dL, Gr 2:<10.0 to 8.0 g/dL, Gr 3:<8.0 to 6.5 g/dL, Gr 4:<6.5 g/dL.|At screening; predose Day 1; and Weeks 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, and 24; and every 12 weeks on maintenance until disease progression, study closure, or withdrawal of consent|All participants with NSCLC who received at least 1 dose of ipilimumab/placebo and/or chemotherapy and had at least 1 on-study hematology test result available. One NSCLC participant randomized to the sequential arm is included in the concurrent arm for safety evaulations.||Percentage of participants|||Number
847583|NCT00527735|Secondary|Number of Participants With NSCLC Who Have Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Drug-related SAEs, Adverse Events (AEs), AEs Leading to Discontinuation, and Drug-related AEs by Worst Common Terminology Criteria (CTC) Grade|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Drug-related=possibly, probably, or certainly related to and of unknown relationship to study drug. Grade (Gr) 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4=Life-threatening or disabling, Gr 5=Death.|Weeks 4, 7, 10, 16, 19, and 24; at end of treatment; and at follow-up (70 days from last dose)|All participants with NSCLC who received at least 1 dose of blinded active or placebo ipilimumab with or without paclitaxel/carboplatin. One NSCLC participant randomized to the sequential arm is included in the concurrent arm for safety evaulations.||Participants|||Number
847584|NCT00527735|Secondary|Immune-related Duration of Response (irDoR) Per irRC and DoR Per mWHO Criteria in Participants With NSCLC and SCLC|irDoR is defined as the time between the date of response of confirmed irCR or irPR and the date of irPD or death, whichever occurs first. For those participants who remain alive and did progress following response, irDoR was censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment. By mWHO criteria, DoR is defined as the time between the date of response of confirmed CR or PR and the date of PD or death, whichever occurs first. For those who remain alive and did not progress following response, DoR was censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment.|Date of irCR or irPR to date of irPD or death (maximum reached: 14.2 months)|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847585|NCT00527735|Secondary|Immune-related Disease Control Rate (irDCR) Per irRC and Disease Control Rate (DCR) Per mWHO Criteria in Participants With NSCLC and SCLC|irDCR is defined as the proportion of participants whose immune-related best overall response is irPR, irCR, or immune-related Stable Disease (irSD) in the analysis data set. irSD=Does not meet criteria for irCR or irPR, in the absence of progressive disease. By mWHO criteria, DCR is defined as the proportion of participants whose best overall response is PR, CR, or SD in the analysis data set. SD=A decrease or tumor stabilization of 1 or more nonindex lesions. Independent review committee assessed response.|Tumor assessment at screening, every 6 weeks on treatment to Week 24, and every 12 weeks on maintenance until irPD, progressive disease, or death (maximum reached: 22 months)|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group.||Percent of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847586|NCT00527735|Secondary|Immune-related Best Overall Response Rate (irBORR) Per irRC in Participants With NSCLC and Small-cell Lung Cancer (SCLC)|irBORR=number of participants with irBORR of immune-related Complete Response (irCR) or immune-related Partial Response (irPR), divided by total participants in the data set. irCR=Complete disappearance of all index lesions. irPR=Decrease, relative to baseline, of 50% or greater in the sum of the products of the 2 largest perpendicular diameters of all index and of all new measurable lesions. Independent review committee performed the tumor assessments.|Tumor assessment at screening, every 6 weeks on treatment to Week 24, and every 12 weeks on maintenance|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847587|NCT00527735|Secondary|Best Overall Response Rate (BORR) Per mWHO Criteria in Participants With NSCLC and SCLC|mWHO criteria define BORR as the number of patients with best overall response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR), divided by the total number of participants in the data set (multiplied by 100 for percentage). CR=Complete disappearance of all index lesions; PR=decrease from baseline of >=50% in the sum of products of the 2 largest perpendicular diameters of all index lesions. Independent review committee performed tumor assessment.|Tumor assessment at screening, every 6 weeks on treatment to Week 24, and every 12 weeks on maintenance|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847588|NCT00527735|Secondary|Overall Survival in Participants With NSCLC|Overall Survival is defined as the time from the date of randomization until the date of death. For participants who have not died, Overall Survival was censored at the recorded last date of contact; participants with a missing recorded last date of contact were censored at the last date the participant was known to be alive.|Randomization date to date of death (of censored, maximum reached: 26.5 months)|All NSCLC participants who were randomized to a treatment group.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847589|NCT00527735|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) in Participants With NSCLC Per Modified World Health Organization (mWHO) Criteria|By mWHO criteria, PFS is defined as the time between the randomization date and the date of progression or death, whichever occurs first. For participants with no recorded postbaseline tumor assessment, PFS was censored at the day of randomization. A participant who died without reported prior progression was considered to have progressed on the date of death. For those who remain alive and have not progressed, PFS was censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment. Independent review committee performed tumor assessment.|Randomization date to date of progression or death (of censored, maximum reached: 13.6 months)|All NSCLC participants who were randomized to a treatment group.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847618|NCT00500682|Secondary|The Development of a Component of a Quadruple Composite Endpoint (Initiation of Dialysis, Kidney Transplant, Doubling of sCr, or Death), Other Measures of Renal Function||approximately 42 months||||||
847619|NCT00500682|Primary|Safety and Tolerability||approximately 42 months||||||
847590|NCT00527735|Primary|Immune-related Progression-free Survival (irPFS) in Participants With Nonsmall-cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Per Immune-related Response Criteria (irRC)|irPFS is defined as the time between the randomization date and date of immune-related Progressive Disease (irPD) (at least 25% increase percentage change in total tumor burden, including new lesions) or death, whichever occurs first. For patients with no recorded postbaseline tumor assessments, irPFS is censored at randomization. Participant who die without reported irPD are considered to have progressed on the date of death. For those who remain alive and have no irPD, irPFS is censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment. Independent review committee performed tumor assessment.|Tumor assessed at screening, every 6 weeks on treatment to Week 24, and every 12 weeks on maintenance until immune-related Progressive Disease (irPD) or death (of censored, maximum reached: 16.5 months)|All participants with NSCLC who were randomized to a treatment group.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847591|NCT00527488|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters of Degarelix: Tmax|The time for maximal concentration (tmax) was determined for data up to Day 42|Day 0-42|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
847592|NCT00527488|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters of Degarelix: Cmax|Cmax was determined for concentration measurements up to Day 42|Day 0-42|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847593|NCT00527488|Primary|Interntional Iindes of Erectile Function (IIEF) Score: Overall Satisfaction|The IIEF contains 15 items in 5 domains: Erectile Function (6 items), Orgasmic Function (2 items), Sexual Desire (2 items), Intercourse Satisfaction (3 items), and Overall Satisfaction (2 items). Item are scored on a scale from ‘No sexual activity’ to ‘Almost always to always’. For the Erectile Function domain, a score of 1-10 indicates severe erectile dysfunction and 26-30 no dysfunction, the minimum score being 1 and the maximum 30. For all other domains, a higher score indicates less dysfunction. The IIEF does not yield a total score.|Day 0-42|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847594|NCT00527488|Primary|IPSS Global Quality of Life|"Patients were asked about how they would feel if they were to spend the rest of their lives with their prostate symptoms just as they are now. The answers choices range from delighted to terrible or 0 to 6."|Day 0-42|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847595|NCT00527488|Primary|International Prostate Specific Symptom (IPSS) Score|The IPSS is a patient-administered questionnaire containing seven items to evaluate symptoms of urinary obstruction (incomplete emptying, frequency, hesitancy, urgency, weak stream, straining, nocturia) over the preceding week. Each urinary symptom question is assigned points from 0 to 5 indicating increasing severity of the particular symptom. The total score can therefore range from 0 to 35 (0-7: mildly symptomatic; 8-19: moderately symptomatic; 20-35: severely symptomatic).|Day 0-42|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847596|NCT00527488|Primary|Post-void Residual Urine Volume|The post-void residual urine volume in the bladder was evaluated by transabdominal ultrasound. The urine bladder was sonicated from two directions perpendicular to one another, and the volume calculated automatically.|Day 0-42|||mL||Full Range|Mean
847597|NCT00527488|Primary|Maximal Urinary Flow|Urinary flow was determined by flowmetry using a device that fulfils the International Continence Society standards for maximum urinary flow.|Day 0-42|||mL/s||Standard Deviation|Mean
847598|NCT00527488|Primary|Prostate Volume|The prostatic volume was measured by transrectal ultrasound. The prostatic gland was sonicated from two directions perpendicular to one another resulting in three cursor positions set by the urologist, and the volume automatically calculated.|Day 0-42|||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847599|NCT00527488|Primary|Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Concentration||Day 0-42|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847600|NCT00527488|Primary|Number of Subjects With Testosterone Concentration at or Above the Baseline Interval Concentration|The baseline interval concentration is 0.75 x baseline concentration|Day 0-42|||participants|||Number
847601|NCT00527488|Primary|Number of Subjects With Testosterone Concentration ≤0.5 ng/mL||Day 0-42|||participants|||Number
847602|NCT00527488|Primary|Duration of Testosterone Concentration Below 0.5 ng/mL|The time from when the testosterone concentration falls below 0.5 ng/mL until it returns above that level|Day 0-42|||Days||Full Range|Median
847603|NCT00527488|Primary|Time of Minimal Value of Testosterone (Tnadir)|The time point when the lowest testosterone concentration was measured|Day 0-42|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
847604|NCT00527488|Primary|Minimal Value of Testosterone (Cnadir)|The lowest concentration of testosterone measured within the time frame|Day 0-42|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847605|NCT00527488|Primary|Time of Testosterone Concentration Below Baseline Interval|The time from when the testosterone concentration falls below the baseline interval limit (i.e. 0.75 x baseline concentration) until it returns above this limit|Day 0-42|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
847606|NCT00527488|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters of Degarelix: AUCt|Area under the time-concentration curve (AUCt) was calculated by non-compartmental methods based on data up to Day 42|0-42 Days|||ng*day/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847607|NCT00527488|Primary|Testosterone Area Below Baseline Interval|The area of the testosterone concentration (ng/mL) vs. time (days) curve that is below the baseline interval concentration( i.e. 0.75 x baseline concentration)|0-42 Days|||ng*days/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847608|NCT00526890|Primary|Incidence of Grade 3-4 Myelosuppression||During study treatment, up to 6 weeks|Patients Treated with Study Therapy||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847609|NCT00526890|Secondary|Correlation of Selenium Levels With Degree of Observed Adverse Events|Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test was used to test the correlation between selenium levels and serious adverse events. There was no significant correlation between selenium levels and serious adverse events (P=0.3149)|Pre-treatment and every week for 6 weeks prior to chemotherapy.||||||
847610|NCT00526890|Secondary|Overall Survival||Post-treatment follow-up every 3 months x4, then per institute standard of practice every 6 months for 2 years, then yearly therafter|Patients treated with study therapy||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847611|NCT00526890|Secondary|Failure-free Survival||Post-treatment follow-up every 3 months x4, then per institute standard of practice every 6 months for 2 years, then yearly therafter.|Patients treated with study therapy||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847612|NCT00526890|Secondary|Response Rate|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|1 month post-treatment, then q 3 months x 4|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847620|NCT00500682|Primary|Composite of Dialysis Initiation, Kidney Transplantation, and Serum Creatinine Doubling. Number of Participants Meeting the Criteria Are Reported.||Beyond Week 48, a 12-week visit cycle continued until the end of the study or until individual patients reached an endpoint|ITT (censored at last contact)||participants|||Number
847621|NCT00501046|Secondary|Vitamins and Folate Levels||approximately 42 months||||||
847622|NCT00501046|Secondary|The Development of a Component of a Quadruple Composite Endpoint (Initiation of Dialysis, Kidney Transplant, Doubling of sCr, or Death), Other Measures of Renal Function and (QOL: Exploratory)||approximately 42 months||||||
847623|NCT00501046|Primary|Safety and Tolerability||approximately 42 months||||||
847624|NCT00501046|Primary|Composite of Dialysis Initiation, Kidney Transplantation, and Serum Creatinine Doubling. Number of Participants Meeting the Criteria Are Reported.||Beyond Week 48, a 12-week visit cycle continued until the end of the study or until individual patients reached an endpoint|ITT (censored at last contact)||participants|||Number
847625|NCT00498628|Secondary|Quality of Life Score|Quality of Life SF - 12|Week 12||||||
847626|NCT00498628|Secondary|Sleep Quality Score|Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index|Weeks 4, 8 and 12||||||
847627|NCT00498628|Secondary|Anxiety Score|HAM-A|Weeks 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12||||||
847628|NCT00498628|Secondary|Depression Score|MADRS|Week 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12||||||
847629|NCT00498628|Secondary|Craving Score|PACS|Week 4, 6, 8, 10, 12||||||
847630|NCT00498628|Secondary|Drinking Consequences Score|DrInc Score|Weeks 6 and 12||||||
847631|NCT00498628|Secondary|Percent Subjects With no Heavy Drinking Day||3-11||||||
847632|NCT00498628|Secondary|Percent Subjects Abstinent||3-11||||||
847633|NCT00498628|Secondary|Percent Very Heavy Drinking Day||3-11||||||
847634|NCT00498628|Secondary|Drinks Per Day||3-11||||||
847635|NCT00498628|Secondary|Drinks Per Drinking Day||3-11||||||
847636|NCT00498628|Secondary|Percent Days Abstinent||3-11||||||
847637|NCT00498628|Primary|Percent Heavy Drinking Days|A heavy drinking day is defined as 5 or more drinks for men and 4 or more drinks for women during a 24 hour period.|Weeks 3 - 11|Intention to Treat||percentage of heavy drinking days||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847638|NCT00496769|Secondary|Event Rate of All-cause Death; Net Clinical Benefit-Composite of Stroke, Systemic Embolism, Myocardial Infarction, Vascular Death, and Major Bleeding; and Vascular Death|Event rate=percent of participants with an event divided by the total participants in the arm.|Randomization to efficacy cutoff date of May 28, 2010 (date revised following cessation of study for superior efficacy)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of events per year|||Number
847639|NCT00496769|Secondary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Results Meeting the Criteria for Marked Abnormality (Continued)|ULN=upper limit of normal; LLN=lower limit ofnormal; BL=baseline. Creatine kinase (U/L), high:>5*ULN; protein, total(g/L):low if <0.90*BL when BL<LLN or <LLN when B >ULN or <0.90*LLN when BL is missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN, high if >1.10*BL if BL>ULN or >ULN when BL<LLN or >1.10*ULN if BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN.Protein,total(g/L): low if <0.90*BL if BL<LLN or <LLN if BL>ULN or <0.90*LLN if BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN, high if >1.10*BL if BL>ULN or >ULN if BL<LLN or >1.10*ULN if BL or LLN≤BL≤ULN; glucose, serum fasting (mg/dL): low if <0.8*BL if BL<LLN or <LLN when BL>ULN or <0.8*LLN when BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN, high if >2*BL when BL>ULN or >ULN when BL<LLN or >1.5*ULN if BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN; uric acid (mg/dL), high: >2*BL and BL>ULN or>1.5*ULN when BL missing or BL≤ULN; glucose, urine, high; protein, urine, high; blood, urine, high; leukocyte esterase, urine, high; RBC count, urine (Hpf), high; WBC count, urine (Hpf), high: ≥2 if BL=missing,=0 or =0.5 or if ≥3 if BL=1, or if ≥4 and BL≥2.|First dose of study drug (Day 1) to 30 days after last dose of blinded study drug|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. n=number evaluable||Participants|||Number
847640|NCT00496769|Secondary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Results Meeting the Criteria for Marked Abnormality (Continued)|LLN=lower limit of normal; ULN=upper limit of normal; BL=baseline. Sodium, serum (mEq/L):low if <0.95*BL and BL<LLN or <LLN and BL>ULN or <0.95*LLN when BL missing or LLN ≤BL≤ULN, high if >1.05*BL and BL>ULN or >ULN and BL<LLN or >1.05*ULN when BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN; potassium(mEq/L):low if <0.90*BL and BL<LLN or <LLN and BL>ULN or <0.90*LLN if BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN, high if >1.10*BL and BL>ULN or>ULN and BL<LLN or >1.10*ULN when BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN; chloride(mEq/L):low if <0.90*BL and BL<LLN or <LLN and BL>ULN or <0.90*LLN if BL missing or LLN≤BL ≤ULN, high if >1.10*BL and BL>ULN or >ULN and BL<LLN or >1.10* ULN if BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN; calcium(mg/dL):low if <0.75*BL and BL<LLN or <LLN and BL>ULN or <0.80*LLN if BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN, high if >1.25*BL and BL>ULN or >ULN if BL<LLN or >1.20*ULN if BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN ; bicarbonate(mEq/L):low if <0.75*BL when BL<LLN or <LLN when BL>ULN or <0.75*LLN if BL missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN, high if >1.25*BL when BL>ULN or >ULN|First dose of study drug (Day 1) to 30 days after last dose of blinded study drug|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. n=number evaluable||Participants|||Number
847641|NCT00496769|Secondary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Results Meeting the Criteria for Marked Abnormality|BL=baseline, LLN=lower limit of normal, ULN=upper limit of normal. Hemoglobin (g/dL), low: BL>2 or value ≤8; hematocrit(%), low: <0.75*BL; erythrocytes (*10^6 cells/μL), low: <0.75*BL; platelet count (*10^9 cells/L),low: <100*10^9 cells/L; leukocytes (*10^3 cells/μL), low if <0.8*BL and BL<LLN or <LLN and BL >ULN or <0.75*LLN when BL is missing or LLN ≤BL≤ ULN, high if >1.2*BL and BL>ULN or >ULN when BL and BL<LLN or >1.25*ULN when BL is missing or LLN≤BL≤ULN; neutrophils (absolute), low: <1.0*10^3 cells/μL; eosinophils (absolute), high: >0.750*10^3 cells/μL; basophils (absolute), high: >0.4*10^3 cells/μL; monocytes (absolute), high: 2*10^3 cells/μL; lymphocytes (absolute), low if <0.75*10^3 cells/μL, high if >7.50*10^3 cells/μL; ALP (U/L), high: 2*ULN; AST (U/L), high: 3*ULN; AST (U/L), high: 3*ULN; bilirubin, total (mg/dL), high: >2*ULN; bilirubin, direct (mg/dL), high: 1.5*ULN; BUN (mg/dL), high:>2*ULN; creatinine (mg/dL), high: >1.5*ULN.|First dose of study drug (Day 1) to 30 days after last dose of blinded study drug|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. n=number evaluable||Participants|||Number
847642|NCT00496769|Primary|Rate of Unrefuted Bleeding From First Dose of Double-blind Study Drug to First Occurence of Unrefuted Bleeding During the Double-blind Treatment Period|Event rate=percent of participants with an event divided by the total participants in the arm.|Day 1 to first bleeding event up to efficacy cutoff date of May 28, 2010 (date revised following cessation of study for superior efficacy)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of events per year|||Number
847643|NCT00496769|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Adverse Events (AEs), Bleeding AEs, Discontinuations Due to AEs, and Death as Outcome|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization.|First dose of study drug (Day 1) to 30 days after last dose of blinded study drug|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Participants|||Number
847644|NCT00496769|Secondary|Event Rates for Major Bleeding, Major or Clinically Relevant Nonmajor (CNRM) Bleeding, and All Bleeding in the Double-blind Period|Event rate=percent of participants with an event divided by the total participants in the arm.|First dose of study drug (Day 1) to the earlier of a patient's discontinuation of double-blind study drug or the attainment of at least 226 primary efficacy events up to May 28, 2010|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of events per year|||Number
847645|NCT00496769|Secondary|Event Rates of Major Vascular Events (Stroke/Systemic Embolism, Myocardial Infarction, Death) in the Intended-treatment Period|Event rate=percent of participants with an event divided by the total participants in the arm.|Randomization to efficacy cutoff date of May 28, 2010 (date revised following cessation of study for superior efficacy)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug||Percentage of events per year|||Number
847646|NCT00496769|Primary|Event Rate of Stroke/Systemic Embolism During the Intended-treatment Period|Event rate=percent of participants with an event divided by the total participants in the arm. Intended-treatment period=date of randomization to the efficacy cutoff date, which was to be the date on which at least 226 unrefuted original primary efficacy events occurred (date revised to May 28, 2010 following cessation of study for superior efficacy.)|Randomization to efficacy cutoff date of May 28, 2010 (date revised following cessation of study for superior efficacy)|Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Percentage of events|||Number
847647|NCT00488774|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Remission|Clinical remission is defined as a Mayo score of less than or equal to 2, with no individual sub-score greater than 1. The Mayo score is sum of 4 sub-scores (i.e., stool frequency, rectal bleeding, endoscopic findings, and a physician’s global assessment); each rated on a scale from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. The total Mayo score value ranges from 0 to 12.|Week 6|The efficay analysis population included all the participants who were randomly assigned to receive study medication. Here ‘N’ signifies participants who were evaluated for this outcome measure.||Participants|||Number
847648|NCT00488774|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Response|Clinical response is defined as decrease from baseline in Mayo score by greater than or equal to 30 percent and greater than or equal to 3, with either a decrease from baseline in rectal bleeding sub-score of greater than or equal to 1 or a rectal bleeding sub-score of 0 or 1. The Mayo score is sum of 4 sub-scores (i.e., stool frequency, rectal bleeding, endoscopic findings, and a physician’s global assessment); each rated on a scale from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. The total Mayo score value ranges from 0 to 12.|Week 6|The efficay analysis population included all the participants who were randomly assigned to receive study medication. Here ‘N’ signifies participants who were evaluated for this outcome measure.||Participants|||Number
847649|NCT00488683|Secondary|Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Specific IgG Concentrations After MenACWY-CRM Primary Vaccination|To assess the kinetics of serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific IgG concentrations, the geometric mean concentration was measured on day 0, 7, 14, 30, 49, 90, and 120 following vaccination with MenACWY-CRM vaccination at month 4 of the study.|Day 0, 7, 14, 30, 49, 90,120 after MenACWY-CRM vaccination at month 4|This outcome was assessed in Group 1 PP set population.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847650|NCT00488683|Secondary|Increase in Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Specific IgG Concentrations Before and 1 Month After MenACWY-CRM Booster Vaccination at 12 Months of Age Administered Concomitantly With Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine or Alone|Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific IgG concentrations were measured before and one month after MenACWY-CRM booster vaccination by ELISA.|Before and one month after booster vaccination|Analysis was performed on the PP dataset of booster vaccination.||µg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847651|NCT00488683|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Reported Solicited Systemic Reactions After MenACWY-CRM and PCV Vaccination at 12 Months of Age|Safety was assessed as the percentage of subjects who reported systemic reactions during 7-day follow-up period after MenACWY-CRM and PCV vaccination at 12 months of age.|7 days post 12 months vaccination|The analysis was performed on safety after booster population (safety population who received vaccination at 12 months of age).||Percentage of subjects|||Number
847652|NCT00488683|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Reported Injection Site Local Reactions After MenACWY-CRM and PCV Vaccinations at 12 Months of Age|Safety was assessed as the percentage of subjects who reported injection site local reactions during 7-day follow-up period after MenACWY-CRM and PCV vaccinations at 12 months of age.|7 days post 12 month vaccination|The analysis was performed on safety after booster population (safety population who received vaccination at 12 months of age).||Percentage of subjects|||Number
847653|NCT00488683|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Reported Solicited Systemic Reactions After MenACWY-CRM and Routine Infants Primary Vaccinations|Safety was assessed as the percentage of subjects who reported systemic reactions during 7-day follow-up period after MenACWY-CRM (2 and 4 months) and routine infant primary vaccinations (2, 3 and 4 months).|7 days post vaccination at 2, 3, and 4 months of age|The analysis was performed on the safety population.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
847654|NCT00488683|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Reported Injection Site Local Reactions After Each MenACWY-CRM and Routine Infant Vaccinations.|Safety was assessed as the percentage of subjects who reported injection site local reactions during 7-day follow-up period after each MenACWY-CRM and routine infant vaccination administered as a primary course of vaccination.|7 days post each MenACWY-CRM and routine infant vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Safety Population.||Percentage of subjects|||Number
847676|NCT00474526|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers at 1 Month After 1st (LA2) or 2nd (LA4) Toddler MenACWY Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by Serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) GMTs, directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|12 or 15 months of age (one month post 1st or 2nd toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847655|NCT00488683|Secondary|Linear Regression Coefficients (1) Between Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Memory B Cells at 5 Months and Rise in hSBA Titers, (2) Between Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Memory B Cells at 5 Months and Rise in IgG, After Third Dose of MenACWY-CRM at 12 Months|"The rise in serogroup-specific hSBA and IgG was calculated by pre/post third dose geometric mean ratios, calculated by the difference in the log10 of the concentrations/titers measured at 13 months to the log10 of the concentrations at 12 months: i.e. rise = log10(x) at 13 months minus log10(x) at 12 months where x is the serogroup specific IgG or SBA titers.
Linear regression analysis between memory B cells at 5 months of age and rise in hSBA titers or IgG at 12 months of age was performed with and without inclusion of demographic factors (subject's household smoking status, number of older children living in subject's household, attendance at daycare and total duration of breast feeding) in the model."|1 month post primary vaccination (B cells) and 12 months (hSBA titers and IgG)|Analysis was performed on the PP dataset after booster vaccination.|||||Number
847656|NCT00488683|Secondary|Linear Regression Coefficients (1) Between Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Memory B at 5 Months and hSBA Titers at 12 Months, (2) Between Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Memory B at 5 Months and IgG at 12 Months, After a 2-Dose Primary Course of MenACWY-CRM|Linear regression analysis between memory B cells at 5 months of age and hSBA titers and IgG at 12 months of age was performed with and without inclusion of demographic factors (subject's household smoking status, number of older children living in subject's household, attendance at daycare and total duration of breast feeding) in the model.|1 month post primary vaccination (B cells) and 12 months (hSBA titers and IgG)|Analysis was performed on the PP dataset of persistence population.|||||Number
847657|NCT00488683|Secondary|Correlation and Linear Regression Coefficients Between Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Specific Memory B Cells 1 Month After MenACWY-CRM Primary Vaccination and IgG Concentration at Day 1 in the Serum of Mothers of Infants|The serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific IgG concentrations were measured in the serum of mothers at the time of their enrollment into the study (Day 1) by ELISA.|Day 1 (IgG) and one month after primary vaccination (B cells)|Analysis was performed on the PP primary population.|||||Number
847658|NCT00488683|Secondary|Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Specific hSBA Titers After MenACWY-CRM Primary Vaccination|To assess the kinetics of serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific hSBA titers, the geometric mean titer was measured on day 0, 7, 14, 30, 49, 90, and 120 following vaccination with MenACWY-CRM vaccination at month 4 of the study.|Day 0, 7, 14, 30, 49, 90,120 after MenACWY-CRM vaccination at month 4|This outcome was assessed in Group 1 PP set population.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847659|NCT00488683|Secondary|Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Specific Memory B Cells and Plasma B Cells After MenACWY-CRM Primary Vaccination|"To assess the kinetics of serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific memory B cells, plasma B cells and IgG concentrations were measured on days 0, 7, 14, 49, 90, and 120 following vaccination with MenACWY-CRM vaccination at month 4 of the study.
The memory B cell response at different timepoint was defined as the mean number of meningococcal serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific memory B cells, measured in vitro by ELISpot assay per 2x100000 lymphocytes obtained from culture (LOC) of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) circulating in blood incubated for 5.5 days in the presence of polyclonal B cell activators in vitro.
The B plasma cell response at each time point was defined as the mean number of cells secreting antibodies specific for meningococcal serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y, measured by ELISpot assay, per 2x100000 PBMC."|Day 0, 7, 14, 49, 90, and 120 after MenACWY-CRM vaccination at month 4|This outcome was assessed in Group 1 PP set population.||per 2x100000 cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
847660|NCT00488683|Secondary|Serogroups A, C, W-135 and Y Specific Memory B Cell Response in Children Lacking a hSBA Titer of ≥1:8 One Month After MenACWY-CRM Primary Vaccination|The memory B cell response in children lacking a hSBA titer ≥1:8 one month after MenACWY-CRM primary vaccination was calculated as the mean number of meningococcal serogroup specific memory B cells, measured by ELISpot assay per 2x100000 LOC.|One month after primary vaccination|Analysis was performed on the PP primary population and PP persistence population, subjects lacking hSBA ≥1:8 one month after primary vaccination.||B cells per 2x100000 lymphocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
847661|NCT00488683|Secondary|Increase in Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Specific hSBA Titers Before and 1 Month After MenACWY-CRM Booster Vaccination at 12 Months of Age Administered Concomitantly With Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine or Alone|hSBA GMTs were measured before and one month after MenACWY-CRM booster vaccination at 12 months of age.|Before and one month after booster vaccination|Analysis was performed on the PP dataset of booster vaccination.||titers||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847662|NCT00488683|Secondary|Increase in Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y Specific Memory B Cells Before and 1 Month After MenACWY-CRM Booster Vaccination at 12 Months of Age Administered Concomitantly With Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine or Alone|Memory B cell response before and one month after MenACWY-CRM booster vaccination at 12 months of age was measured as mean number of meningococcal serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific memory B cells by ELISpot assay per 2x100000 LOC.|Before and one month after booster vaccination|Analysis was performed on the PP dataset of booster vaccination.||B cells per 2x100000 lymphocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
847663|NCT00488683|Secondary|CRM197 Specific Memory B Cells 1 Month After Primary Vaccination and at 12 Months of Age and One Month After MenACWY-CRM Third Vaccination|"CRM197 specific memory B cell response at each time point was measured as mean number of CRM197 specific memory B cells by ELISpot assay per 2x100000 LOC.
CRM197 specific IgG concentration was measured by ELISA at 12 months of age and one month after MenACWY-CRM booster vaccination."|5 months (B cells), 12 months and 13 months (B cells and IgG) of age|Analysis was done on the PP primary population and PP booster population.|||||Number
847664|NCT00488683|Secondary|Memory B Cells 1 Month After Primary Vaccination and 1 Week After Third Vaccination by Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y|"Memory B cell response at 1 month after primary vaccination and at 1 week after third vaccination was measured as mean number of meningococcal serogroup specific memory B cells by ELISpot assay per 2x100000 LOC.
Plasma B cell response at 1 week after vaccination was measured as the mean number of cells secreting antibodies specific for meningococcal serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y, measured by ELISpot assay, per 2x100000 PBMC.
Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific IgG were measured by ELISA and hSBA GMTs were measured at 1 week after third vaccination."|One month after primary vaccination and 1 week after third vaccination|This outcome was assessed in Group 3 subjects only as they provided a blood draw at 1 week following the MenACWY-CRM booster vaccination. Analysis was performed on PP booster population.|||||Number
847665|NCT00488683|Secondary|Memory B Cells 1 Month After Primary Vaccination and Rise From Pre-third Dose to 1 Month After Third Dose of MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|"Memory B cell response at 1 month after MenACWY-CRM primary and third (booster) vaccination was measured as mean number of meningococcal serogroup specific memory B cells by ELISpot assay per 2x100000 LOC.
The serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific IgG concentrations at 1 month after MenACWY-CRM booster were measured by ELISA.
hSBA GMTs were measured by hSBA assay one month after MenACWY-CRM booster vaccination.
The rise in serogroup specific IgG, memory B cells and hSBA was calculated by pre/post third dose geometric mean ratios, calculated by the difference in the log10 of the concentrations/titers measured at 13 months to the log10 of the concentrations at 12 months: i.e. rise = log10(x) at 13 months minus log10(x)at 12 months where x is the serogroup specific IgG or memory B cell concentrations or SBA titers."|1 month after primary and pre-third and 1 month after third vaccination|"Values from Group 1 were analyzed separately. Values from Groups 2 and 3 were combined for the analysis. Groups 2 and 3 received PCV at 12 months while Group 1 received PCV at 13 months.
Analysis was performed on PP booster population."|||||Number
847666|NCT00488683|Secondary|Memory B Cells Per 2x100000 by Serogroup A,C, W-135 and Y at One Month After Primary MenACWY-CRM Vaccination and Third MenACWY-CRM Vaccination|"Memory B cell response at 1 month after MenACWY-CRM primary and booster vaccinations was measured as mean number of meningococcal serogroup specific memory B cells by ELISpot assay per 2x100000 LOC.
hSBA GMTs for the serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y were measured one month after the third MenACWY-CRM vaccination.
The meningococcal serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific IgG concentrations one month after third MenACWY-CRM vaccination were measured by ELISA."|1 month after primary vaccination and 1 month after third vaccination|"Values from Group 1 were analyzed separately. Values from Groups 2 and 3 were combined for the analysis. Groups 2 and 3 received PCV at 12 months while Group 1 received PCV at 13 months.
Analysis was performed on PP booster population."|||||Number
847667|NCT00488683|Secondary|Memory B Cells by Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y|"Memory B cell response at 1 month after primary vaccination and immediately before third dose at 12 months of age was measured as mean number of meningococcal serogroup specific memory B cells by ELISpot assay per 2x100000 LOC.
The meningococcal serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific IgG concentrations immediately before third dose at 12 months of age were measured by ELISA."|1 month after primary vaccination and immediately before third dose|Analysis was performed on PP dataset of persistence population.|||||Number
847668|NCT00488683|Primary|Summary of Memory B Cells Per 2 x 105 LOC by Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y|"The memory B cell response at one month after primary vaccinations (5 months of age) was defined as the mean number of meningococcal serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y specific memory B cells, measured in vitro by ELISpot assay per 2x100000 lymphocytes obtained from culture (LOC) of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) circulating in blood incubated for 5.5 days in the presence of polyclonal B cell activators.
Serogroup A, C, W-135 and Y geometric mean titers (GMTs) were measured by serum bactericidal assay using human complement (hSBA) at 12 months of age (before third dose).
Correlation and linear regression coefficients were determined between memory B cells at 1 month after primary vaccinations with MenACWY-CRM (5 months of age) and hSBA titers at 12 months of age (before third dose) for the serogroups A, C, W-135 and Y."|1 month after primary vaccination and immediately before third dose at 12 months of age|Analysis was performed on per-protocol (PP) dataset of primary vaccination, i.e. subjects who received all the relevant doses of vaccine correctly; provided evaluable blood samples at the relevant time points; and had no major protocol violation as defined prior to analysis.||B cells per 2x100000 lymphocytes||Standard Deviation|Mean
847669|NCT00487539|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) Score at Week 6|The IBDQ is used to measure disease specific quality of life on a 32 Likert-scaled items questionnaire. The IBDQ scale contains 4 component subscales: bowel symptoms, systemic symptoms, emotional function and social function with scores ranging from 10 to 70, 5 to 35, 12 to 84 and 5 to 35 respectively and the total score ranges from 32 to 224. Higher scores indicate better health related quality of life.|Baseline to Week 6|Efficacy analysis population included all the participants who were randomly assigned to the study after the dose selection. 'N' (number of participants analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847670|NCT00487539|Secondary|Number of Participants With Mucosal Healing at Week 6|Mucosal healing is determined from the endoscopy sub-score of the Mayo score. Mucosal healing is defined as an endoscopy sub-score of 0 or 1. Higher score indicates higher severity of disease. Endoscopy sub-score ranges from 0 (normal or inactive disease) to 3 (severe disease; spontaneous bleeding and ulceration).|Week 6|Efficacy analysis population included all the participants who were randomly assigned to the study after the dose selection.||Participants|||Number
847671|NCT00487539|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Remission at Week 6|Clinical remission is defined as a Mayo score of less than or equal to 2, with no individual sub-score greater than 1. The Mayo score is sum of 4 sub-scores (i.e., stool frequency, rectal bleeding, endoscopic findings, and physician’s global assessment); each rated on a scale from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. The total Mayo score value ranges from 0 to 12.|Week 6|Efficacy analysis population included all the participants who were randomly assigned to the study after the dose selection.||Participants|||Number
847672|NCT00487539|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 6|Clinical response is defined as decrease from baseline in Mayo score by greater than or equal to 30 percent and greater than or equal to 3, with either a decrease from baseline in rectal bleeding sub-score of greater than or equal to 1 or a rectal bleeding sub-score of 0 or 1. The Mayo score is sum of 4 sub-scores (i.e., stool frequency, rectal bleeding, endoscopic findings, and physician’s global assessment); each rated on a scale from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. The total Mayo score value ranges from 0 to 12.|Baseline, Week 6|Efficacy analysis population included all the participants who were randomly assigned to the study after the dose selection.||Participants|||Number
847677|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA ≥1:8 at 1 Month After 1st (LA2) or 2nd (LA4) Toddler MenACWY Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:8, directed against N.meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|12 or 15 months of age (one month post 1st or 2nd toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847678|NCT00474526|Secondary|Seroresponse Rates to DTaP and Hib Antigens at 1 Month After Toddler Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by Percentage of Subjects with predefined seroprotective antibody titers against DTaP and Hib Antigens|17 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|Per Protocol||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847679|NCT00474526|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentrations or Titers of DTaP and Hib Antigens at 1 Month After Toddler Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by antibody GMCs/GMTs, directed against DTaP and Hib Antigens|17 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|Per Protocol||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847680|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Pneumococcal Antibody Concentration ≥1.0 μg/mL at 1 Month After Toddler Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by Percentage of Subjects with Pneumococcal Antibody GMCs ≥1.0 μg/mL directed against pneumococcal antigens PnC 4, PnC 6B, PnC 9V, PnC 14, PnC 18C, PnC 19F and PnC 23F|13 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|Per Protocol||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847681|NCT00474526|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentrations of Pneumococcal Antibodies at 1 Month After Toddler Vaccination – LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by antibody GMTs, directed against pneumococcal antigens PnC 4, PnC 6B, PnC 9V, PnC 14, PnC 18C, PnC 19F and PnC 23F.|13 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|Per Protocol||Concentrations (μg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847682|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Pneumococcal Antibody GMCs ≥1.0 μg/mL at 1 Month After Toddler Vaccination - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by Percentage of Subjects with Pneumococcal Antibody GMCs ≥1.0 μg/mL directed against pneumococcal antigens PnC 4, PnC 6B, PnC 9V, PnC 14, PnC 18C, PnC 19F and PnC 23F.|13 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|Per Protocol||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847683|NCT00474526|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentrations of Pneumococcal Antibodies at 1 Month After Toddler Vaccination - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by antibody GMTs, directed against pneumococcal antigens PnC 4, PnC 6B, PnC 9V, PnC 14, PnC 18C, PnC 19F and PnC 23F.|13 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|Per Protocol||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847684|NCT00474526|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers at 1 Month After Toddler MenACWY Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by Serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) GMTs, directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|13 or 17 Months of Age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847685|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA ≥ 1:16 at 1 Month After Toddler MenACWY Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:16, directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|13 or 17 Months of Age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847686|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects (95% CI) With hSBA ≥1:8 at 1 Month After Toddler MenACWY Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:8, directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|13 or 17 Months of Age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847687|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects (95% CI) With hSBA ≥1:4 at 1 Month After Toddler MenACWY Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:4, directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|13 or 17 Months of Age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847688|NCT00474526|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers at 1 Month After Toddler MenACWY Vaccination - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by Geometric Mean hSBA Titers directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y; comparison of four doses of MenACWY-CRM at 2, 4, and 6 and 12 months of age versus a single dose at 12 months of age.|13 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847689|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects (95% CI) With hSBA ≥ 1:16 at 1 Month After Toddler MenACWY Vaccination - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:16 , directed against N.meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|13 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847690|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects (95% CI) With hSBA ≥ 1:8 at 1 Month After Toddler MenACWY Vaccination - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:8 , directed against N.meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|13 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847691|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects (95% CI) With hSBA ≥ 1:4 at 1 Month After Toddler MenACWY Vaccination - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:4 , directed against N.meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|13 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847692|NCT00474526|Secondary|Persistence Antibodies Geometric Mean Titers - LA Subjects|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y was measured at 12 or 16 Months of Age.|12 or 16 Months of Age (one month pre-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847976|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) With Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease|The chronic form of graft-versus-host-disease (cGVHD) normally occurs after 100 days. The appearance of moderate to severe cases of cGVHD adversely influences long-term survival.|Day 100 through 1 Year Post Transplant|||Participants|||Number
847693|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Persistence Antibodies hSBA ≥1:8 at 12 or 16 Months of Age- LA Subject|Persistence of Antibodies as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:8, directed against N.meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|12 or 16 Months of Age (one month pre-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847694|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Persistence Antibodies hSBA ≥1:4 at 12 or 16 Months of Age- LA Subject|Persistence of Antibodies as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:4, directed against N.meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|12 or 16 Months of Age (one month pre-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847695|NCT00474526|Secondary|Persistence Antibodies Geometric Mean Titers – US Subject|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers directed against N. meningitides serogroups A, C, W and Y was measured at 12 Months of Age.|12 Months of Age (one month pre-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847696|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Persistence Antibodies hSBA ≥1:8 at 12 Months of Age- US Subject|Persistence of Antibodies as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:8, directed against N.meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|12 Months of Age (one month pre-toddler vaccination)|"The analysis was done on per protocol population
Per protocol was defined as subjects who:
received all the relevant doses of vaccine correctly
provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points
had no major protocol deviation as defined prior to database lock"||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847697|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Persistence Antibodies hSBA ≥1:4 at 12 Months of Age- US Subject|Persistence of Antibodies as measured by the percentage of subjects with serum bactericidal activity using human complement (hSBA) ≥ 1:4, directed against N.meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y.|12 Months of Age (one month pre-toddler vaccination)|"The analysis was done on per protocol population
Per protocol was defined as subjects who:
received all the relevant doses of vaccine correctly
provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points
had no major protocol deviation as defined prior to database lock"||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847698|NCT00474526|Secondary|Seroresponse Rates to DTaP, HBV, Hib, Pneumococcal and Polio Antigens at 1 Month After Infant Series Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by percentage of subjects with predefined seroprotective antibody titers against DTaP, HBV, Hib, pneumococcal and polio antigens.|7 months of age (one month post-infant series)|Per Protocol||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847699|NCT00474526|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentrations or Titers of DTaP, HBV, Hib, Pneumococcal and Polio Antigens at 1 Month After Infant Series Vaccination - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by antibody GMCs / GMTs directed against DTaP, HBV, Hib, pneumococcal and polio antigens.|7 months of age (one month post-infant series)|Per Protocol||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847700|NCT00474526|Secondary|Seroresponse Rates to DTaP, HBV, Hib, Pneumococcal and Polio Antigens at 1 Month After Infant Series Vaccination - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by percentage of subjects with predefined seroprotective antibody titers against DTaP, HBV, Hib, pneumococcal and polio antigens.|7 months of age (one month post-infant series)|Per Protocol||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847701|NCT00474526|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentrations or Titers of DTaP, HBV, Hib, Pneumococcal and Polio Antigens at 1 Month After Infant Series Vaccination - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by antibody GMCs / GMTs directed against DTaP, HBV, Hib, pneumococcal and polio antigens.|7 months of age (one month post-infant series)|Per Protocol||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847702|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA Titer >=1:4 - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by percentage of subjects with hSBA titer >=1:4 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y; after two doses of MenACWY at 2 and 6 months (LA1) versus three doses at 2, 4, and 6 months of age (LA3) .|7 months of age (one month post-infant series)|Per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847703|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA Titer >=1:8 - LA Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by percentage of subjects with hSBA titer >=1:8 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y; after two doses of MenACWY at 2 and 6 months (LA1) versus three doses at 2, 4, and 6 months of age (LA3) .|7 months of age (one month post-infant series)|Per protocol population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847704|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA Titer >=1:4 - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by percentage of subjects with hSBA titer >=1:4 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y; after three doses of MenACWY at 2, 4, and 6 months of age.|7 months of age (one month post-infant series)|Per Protocol Population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847705|NCT00474526|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA Titer >=1:8 - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by percentage of subjects with hSBA titer >=1:8 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y; after three doses of MenACWY at 2, 4, and 6 months of age.|7 months of age (one month post-infant series)|Per Protocol Population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847706|NCT00474526|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers Post-infant Series - LA Subjects|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y was measured after two doses of MenACWY at 2 and 6 months (LA1) versus three doses at 2, 4, and 6 (LA3) months of age.|7 months of age (one month post-infant series)|Per protocol population||Titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847707|NCT00474526|Secondary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers Post-infant Series - US Subjects|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y was measured after three doses at 2, 4, and 6 months of age.|7 months of age (one month post-infant series)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847708|NCT00474526|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions Post Third Vaccination – Infant Series|Solicited local and systemic reactions reported post third vaccination was compared in subjects receiving MenACWY versus Hib Vaccines.|7 days post-vaccination|The population used in analysis was the safety set: The total number of subjects analyzed was less than the safety set due to subject withdrawals. Only subjects who received the third dose in the infant series were included in this analysis.||Subjects|||Number
847709|NCT00474526|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions Post Second Vaccination – Infant Series|Solicited local and systemic reactions reported post second vaccination was compared in subjects receiving MenACWY versus Hib Vaccines.|7 days post-vaccination|The population used in analysis was the safety set: The total number of subjects analyzed was less than the safety set due to subject withdrawals. Only subjects who received the second dose of the infant series vaccination were included in the analysis.||Subjects|||Number
847710|NCT00474526|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions Post First Vaccination – Infant Series|Solicited local and systemic reactions reported post first vaccination was compared in subjects receiving MenACWY versus Hib Vaccines.|7 days post-vaccination|The population used in analysis was the safety set: The total number of subjects analyzed was less than the safety set due to subject withdrawals.||Subjects|||Number
847711|NCT00474526|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions Post Second Vaccination – Toddler Series|Solicited local and systemic reactions post second vaccination of toddler series at 15 months of age.|7 days post vaccination|The population used in analysis was the safety set: The total number of subjects analyzed was less than the safety set due to subject withdrawals. Only subjects who received the second dose at 15 months were included in this analysis.||Subjects|||Number
847712|NCT00474526|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions Post First Vaccination – Toddler Series|Solicited local and systemic reactions post first vaccination of toddler series were compared in subjects receiving Infant Vaccines only and subjects receiving MenACWY-CRM concomitantly with Infant Vaccines.|7 days post vaccination|The population used in analysis was the safety set: The total number of subjects analyzed was less than the safety set due to subject withdrawals.||Subjects|||Number
847713|NCT00474526|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions After Vaccination at 12 Months of Age|Solicited local and systemic reactions after receiving MenACWY-CRM vaccination at 12 months of age were compared in subjects receiving Infant Vaccines only and subjects receiving MenACWY-CRM concomitantly with Infant Vaccines.|7 days after vaccination|The population used in analysis was the safety set: The total number of subjects analyzed was less than the safety set due to subject withdrawals.||Subjects|||Number
847714|NCT00474526|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions Post Third Vaccination – Infant Series|Solicited local and systemic reactions post third vaccination of infant series were compared in subjects receiving Infant Vaccines only and subjects receiving MenACWY-CRM concomitantly with Infant Vaccines.|7 days after vaccination|The population used in analysis was the safety set: The total number of subjects analyzed was less than the safety set due to subject withdrawals.||Subjects|||Number
847715|NCT00474526|Primary|Geometric Mean hSBA Titers – US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by Geometric Mean hSBA Titers directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y; comparison of four doses of MenACWY-CRM at 2, 4, and 6 and 12 months of age versus a single dose at 12 months of age.|13 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|The analysis was done on per protocol population||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847716|NCT00474526|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions Post Second Vaccination – Infant Series|Solicited local and systemic reactions post second vaccination of infant series were compared in subjects receiving Infant Vaccines only and subjects receiving MenACWY-CRM concomitantly with Infant Vaccines.|7 days after vaccination|The population used in analysis was the safety set: The total number of subjects analyzed was less than the safety set due to subject withdrawals. LA1 and LA 2 groups are not included here as they did not receive MenACWY at 4 months of age.||Subjects|||Number
847717|NCT00474526|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions Post First Vaccination – Infant Series|Solicited local and systemic reactions post first vaccination of infant series were compared in subjects receiving Infant Vaccines only and subjects receiving MenACWY-CRM concomitantly with Infant Vaccines.|7 days after vaccination|The population used in analysis was the safety set Safety population was defined as: all subjects in the exposed population who provided post-baseline safety data. If a subject received an entirely wrong vaccine schedule (e.g., US3 instead of US4), the subject would be analyzed for safety according to the group the subject actually followed.||Subjects|||Number
847718|NCT00474526|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With hSBA Titer >=1:8 - US Subjects|Immunogenicity as measured by percentage of subjects with hSBA titer >=1:8 directed against N. meningitidis serogroups A, C, W and Y; after four doses of MenACWY-CRM at 2, 4, and 6 and 12 months of age|13 months of age (one month post-toddler vaccination)|"The analysis was done on per protocol population
Per protocol was defined as subjects who:
received all the relevant doses of vaccine correctly
provided evaluable serum samples at the relevant time points
had no major protocol deviation as defined prior to database lock"||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847719|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 24 Months of Life, Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Motor Composite Score).|Motor composite score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Composite Scores, the range of scores is between 40 (very poor motor skills) and 160 (excellent motor skills), with the average motor skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 100 with standard deviation of 15.|24 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 24 month Bayleys exam motor composite score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847720|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 24 Months of Life, Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Gross Motor Scaled Score).|Gross motor scaled score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring is between 1 (very poor gross motor skills) and 19 (excellent gross motor skills), with the average gross motor skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 10 with standard deviation of 3.|24 Months after enrollment.|only subjects that were randomized and had the 24 month Bayleys exam gross motor score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847721|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 24 Months, Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Fine Motor Scaled Score).|Fine motor scaled score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Scaled Scores, the range of scores is between 1 (very poor fine motor skills) and 19 (excellent fine motor skills), with the average fine motor skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 10 with standard deviation of 3.|24 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 24 month Bayleys exam fine motor were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847722|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurologic Impairment at 24 Months of Life Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Language Composite Score).|Language Composite Score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Composite Scores, the range of scores is between 40 (very poor language skills) and 160 (excellent language skills), with the average language skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 100 with standard deviation of 15.|24 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 24 month Bayleys exam language composite score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847723|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 24 Months of Life, Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Expressive Communication Scaled Score).|Expressive Communication Scaled Score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Scaled Scores, the range of scores is between 1 (very poor expressive communication skills) and 19 (excellent expressive communication skills), with the average expressive communication skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 10 with standard deviation of 3.|24 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 24 month Bayleys exam expressive communications scaled score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847724|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 24 Months of Life Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Cognitive Composite Score).|Cognitive Composite Score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Composite Scores, the range of scores are between 40 (very poor cognitive skills) and 160 (excellent cognitive skills), with the average cognitive skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 100 with standard deviation of 15.|24 months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 24 month Bayleys exam cognitive composite score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847725|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 24 Months Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Receptive Communication Scaled Score).|Receptive Communication Scaled score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Scaled Scores, the range of scores is between 1 (very poor receptive communication skills) and 19 (excellent receptive communication skills), with the average receptive communication skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 10 with standard deviation of 3.|24 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 24 month Bayleys exam receptive communication scaled were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847726|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 12 Months of Life Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Motor Composite Score).|Motor Composite Score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Composite Scores, the range of scores is between 40 (very poor motor skills) and 160 (excellent motor skills), with the average motor skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 100 with standard deviation of 15.|12 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 12 month Bayleys exam motor composite score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847727|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 12 Months of Life Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Gross Motor Scaled Score).|Gross Motor Scaled Score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Scaled Scores, the range of scores is between 1 (very poor gross motor skills) and 19 (excellent gross motor skills), with the average gross motor skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 10 with standard deviation of 3.|12 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 12 month Bayleys exam gross motor score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847728|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 12 Months of Life Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Fine Motor Scaled Score).|Fine Motor Scaled Score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Scaled Scores, the range of scores is between 1 (very poor fine motor skills) and 19 (excellent fine motor skills), with the average fine motor skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 10 with standard deviation of 3.|12 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 12 month Bayleys exam fine motor score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847729|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 12 Months of Life Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Language Composite Score).|Language Composite Score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Composite Scores, the range of scores is between 40 (very poor language skills) and 160 (excellent language skills), with the average language skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 100 with standard deviation of 15.|12 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 12 month Bayleys exam language composite score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847730|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 12 Months of Age Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Expressive Communication Scaled Score).|Expressive Communication Scaled Score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Scaled Scores, the range of scores is between 1 (very poor expressive communication skills) and 19 (excellent expressive communication skills), with the average expressive communication skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 10 with standard deviation of 3.|12 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 12 month Bayleys exam expressinve Communications scaled score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847731|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 12 Months of Age Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Receptive Communication Scaled Score).|Receptive Communication Scaled Score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Scaled Scores, the range of scores is between 1 (very poor receptive communication skills) and 19 (excellent receptive communication skills), with the average receptive communication skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 10 with standard deviation of 3.|12 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 12 month Bayleys exam Receptive Communications scorewere analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
848714|NCT00602836|Secondary|Number of Participants With CD38 Testing at Baseline Who Also Had a Clinical Response (CR, nPR, or PR).|Response categories described in above outcome measures. CD38 status described in baseline characteristics section.|During treatment (up to 5 years)||||||
847732|NCT00466817|Secondary|Neurological Impairment at 12 Months of Life Utilizing the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Cognitive Composite Score).|Cognitive Composite Score for infants and toddlers was measured by use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. For the Bayleys scoring of the Composite Scores, the range of scores is between 40 (very poor cognitive skills) and 160 (excellent cognitive skills), with the average cogonitive skills score for a child (age adjusted) is 100 with standard deviation of 15.|12 Months after enrollment|only subjects that were randomized and had the 12 month Bayleys exam Cognitive Composite Score were analyzed||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847733|NCT00466817|Secondary|Number of Ears With Hearing Deterioration Over Left and Right Ears at 24 Months.(Based on 58 Ears From 31 Placebo Subjects and 70 Ears From 37 Valganciclovir Subjects)|Hearing assessment was evaluated by an independent audiologist. At baseline, a brainstem evoked response (BSER) assessment and autoacoustic emissions (OAEs) hearing assessments were obtained. At 24 months, BSER and /or Visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) and OAEs were obtained. A single, independent study audiologist who was blinded to treatment assignment assessed the audiology test battery for each subject and assigned the classifications of normal hearing, mild hearing loss, moderate hearing loss, or severe hearing loss based upon their hearing thresholds (in decibels). The classifications were assigned by ear (one for the left ear and one for the right ear), giving “total ear” classifications. Following this, the study audiologist assigned the “best ear” classification for the subject at that study visit; for example, if a subject had mild hearing loss in their left ear and severe hearing loss in their right ear, then the “best ear” classification was mild hearing loss.|Between baseline and 24 months|Only subjects randomized and subjects that had both baseline and 24 month hearing exams were analyzed for the primary endpoint. Some subjects failed to have the one or both of the two hearing exams (baseline and/or 24 months). There were 31 placebo subjects and 37 active drug subjects reported results for both time periods.||ears|||Number
847734|NCT00466817|Secondary|Number of Ears With Hearing Deterioration Over Left and Right Ears at 12 Months.(Based on 77 Ears From 40 Placebo Subjects and 79 Ears From 41 Valganciclovir Subjects)|Hearing assessment was evaluated by an independent audiologist. At baseline, a brainstem evoked response (BSER) assessment and autoacoustic emissions (OAEs) hearing assessments were obtained. At 12 months, BSER and /or Visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) and OAEs were obtained. A single, independent study audiologist who was blinded to treatment assignment assessed the audiology test battery for each subject and assigned the classifications of normal hearing, mild hearing loss, moderate hearing loss, or severe hearing loss based upon their hearing thresholds (in decibels). The classifications were assigned by ear (one for the left ear and one for the right ear), giving “total ear” classifications. Following this, the study audiologist assigned the “best ear” classification for the subject at that study visit; for example, if a subject had mild hearing loss in their left ear and severe hearing loss in their right ear, then the “best ear” classification was mild hearing loss.|Between baseline and 12 months|Only subjects randomized and subjects that had both baseline and 12 month hearing exams were analyzed for the primary endpoint. Some subjects failed to have the one or both of the two hearing exams (baseline and/or 12 months). There were 40 placebo subjects and 41 active drug subjects reported results for both time periods||ears|||Number
847735|NCT00466817|Secondary|Number of Ears With Hearing Deterioration Over Left and Right Ears at 6 Months.(Based on 84 Ears From 43 Placebo Subjects and 82 Ears From 43 Valganciclovir Subjects)|Hearing assessment was evaluated by an independent audiologist. At baseline, a brainstem evoked response (BSER) assessment and autoacoustic emissions (OAEs) hearing assessments were obtained. At 6 months, BSER and /or Visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) and OAEs were obtained. A single, independent study audiologist who was blinded to treatment assignment assessed the audiology test battery for each subject and assigned the classifications of normal hearing, mild hearing loss, moderate hearing loss, or severe hearing loss based upon their hearing thresholds (in decibels). The classifications were assigned by ear (one for the left ear and one for the right ear), giving “total ear” classifications. Following this, the study audiologist assigned the “best ear” classification for the subject at that study visit; for example, if a subject had mild hearing loss in their left ear and severe hearing loss in their right ear, then the “best ear” classification was mild hearing loss.|Between baseline and 6 months|Only subjects randomized and subjects that had both baseline and 6 month hearing exams were analyzed for the primary endpoint. Some subjects failed to have the one or both of the two hearing exams (baseline and/or 6 months). There were 43 subject in each group (placebo and active) that had both hearing results reported||ears|||Number
847736|NCT00466817|Secondary|Number of Ears With Improvement or Protected Hearing Assessments Over Left and Right Ears at 24 Months.(Based on 58 Ears From 31 Placebo Subjects and 70 Ears From 37 Valganciclovir Subjects)|Hearing assessment was evaluated by an independent audiologist. At baseline, a brainstem evoked response (BSER) assessment and autoacoustic emissions (OAEs) hearing assessments were obtained. At 24 months, BSER and /or Visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) and OAEs were obtained. A single, independent study audiologist who was blinded to treatment assignment assessed the audiology test battery for each subject and assigned the classifications of normal hearing, mild hearing loss, moderate hearing loss, or severe hearing loss based upon their hearing thresholds (in decibels). The classifications were assigned by ear (one for the left ear and one for the right ear), giving “total ear” classifications. Following this, the study audiologist assigned the “best ear” classification for the subject at that study visit; for example, if a subject had mild hearing loss in their left ear and severe hearing loss in their right ear, then the “best ear” classification was mild hearing loss.|Between baseline and 24 months|Only subjects randomized and subjects that had both baseline and 24 month hearing exams were analyzed for the primary endpoint. Some subjects failed to have the one or both of the two hearing exams (baseline and/or 24 months). There were 31 placebo subjects and 37 active drug subjects reported results for both time periods.||ears|||Number
847743|NCT00465647|Secondary|Mean (SE) of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [Ages 12-16] Pain Scores on Hydromorphone Alone (Oral/Supplemental) Over Time|"The Visual Analog Scale (VAS), a 10-cm Color Analog Scale anchored by the descriptors of 0 = no pain and 10 = most pain, was used by children ≥ 12 years of age."|Immediately prior to first oral dose, up to 54 hours|The Full Analysis Population for Efficacy consisted of subjects who received at least 1 dose of oral hydromorphone HCl and had at least 1 subsequent efficacy evaluation (pain measurement or supplemental pain medication).||unit on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847737|NCT00466817|Secondary|Number of Ears With Improvement or Protected Hearing in Hearing Assessments Over Left and Right Ears at 12 Months.(Based on 77 Ears From 40 Placebo Subjects and 79 Ears From 41 Valganciclovir Subjects)|Hearing assessment was evaluated by an independent audiologist. At baseline, a brainstem evoked response (BSER) assessment and autoacoustic emissions (OAEs) hearing assessments were obtained. At 12 months, BSER and /or Visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) and OAEs were obtained. A single, independent study audiologist who was blinded to treatment assignment assessed the audiology test battery for each subject and assigned the classifications of normal hearing, mild hearing loss, moderate hearing loss, or severe hearing loss based upon their hearing thresholds (in decibels). The classifications were assigned by ear (one for the left ear and one for the right ear), giving “total ear” classifications. Following this, the study audiologist assigned the “best ear” classification for the subject at that study visit; for example, if a subject had mild hearing loss in their left ear and severe hearing loss in their right ear, then the “best ear” classification was mild hearing loss.|Between baseline and 12 months|Only subjects that were randomized and had baseline and 12 month hearing exams were analyzed.||ears|||Number
847738|NCT00466817|Secondary|Number of Ears With Improvement or Protected Hearing in Hearing Assessments Over Left and Right Ears at 6 Months.(Based on 84 Ears From 43 Placebo Subjects and 82 Ears From 43 Valganciclovir Subjects)|Hearing assessment was evaluated by an independent audiologist. At baseline, a brainstem evoked response (BSER) assessment and autoacoustic emissions (OAEs) hearing assessments were obtained. At 6 months, BSER and /or Visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) and OAEs were obtained. A single, independent study audiologist who was blinded to treatment assignment assessed the audiology test battery for each subject and assigned the classifications of normal hearing, mild hearing loss, moderate hearing loss, or severe hearing loss based upon their hearing thresholds (in decibels). The classifications were assigned by ear (one for the left ear and one for the right ear), giving “total ear” classifications. Following this, the study audiologist assigned the “best ear” classification for the subject at that study visit; for example, if a subject had mild hearing loss in their left ear and severe hearing loss in their right ear, then the “best ear” classification was mild hearing loss.|Between baseline and 6 months|Only subjects randomized and subjects that had both baseline and 6 month hearing exams were analyzed for the primary endpoint. Some subjects failed to have the one or both of the two hearing exams (baseline and/or 6 months). There were 43 subject in each group (placebo and active) that had both hearing results reported||ears|||Number
847739|NCT00466817|Secondary|Change in Best Ear Hearing Assessments at 24 Months.|Hearing assessment was evaluated by an independent audiologist. At baseline, a brainstem evoked response (BSER) assessment and autoacoustic emissions (OAEs) hearing assessments were obtained. At 24 months, BSER and /or Visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) and OAEs were obtained. A single, independent study audiologist who was blinded to treatment assignment assessed the audiology test battery for each subject and assigned the classifications of normal hearing, mild hearing loss, moderate hearing loss, or severe hearing loss based upon their hearing thresholds (in decibels). The classifications were assigned by ear (one for the left ear and one for the right ear), giving “total ear” classifications. Following this, the study audiologist assigned the “best ear” classification for the subject at that study visit; for example, if a subject had mild hearing loss in their left ear and severe hearing loss in their right ear, then the “best ear” classification was mild hearing loss.|Between baseline and 24 months|Only subjects randomized and subjects that had both baseline and 24 month hearing exams were analyzed for the primary endpoint. Some subjects failed to have the one or both of the two hearing exams (baseline and/or 24 months). There were 31 placebo subjects and 37 active drug subjects reported results for both time periods||participants|||Number
847740|NCT00466817|Secondary|Change in Best Ear Hearing Assessments at 12 Months.|Hearing assessment was evaluated by an independent audiologist. At baseline, a brainstem evoked response (BSER) assessment and autoacoustic emissions (OAEs) hearing assessments were obtained. At 12 months, BSER and /or Visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) and OAEs were obtained. A single, independent study audiologist who was blinded to treatment assignment assessed the audiology test battery for each subject and assigned the classifications of normal hearing, mild hearing loss, moderate hearing loss, or severe hearing loss based upon their hearing thresholds (in decibels). The classifications were assigned by ear (one for the left ear and one for the right ear), giving “total ear” classifications. Following this, the study audiologist assigned the “best ear” classification for the subject at that study visit; for example, if a subject had mild hearing loss in their left ear and severe hearing loss in their right ear, then the “best ear” classification was mild hearing loss.|Between baseline and 12 months|Only subjects randomized and subjects that had both baseline and 12 month hearing exams were analyzed for the primary endpoint. Some subjects failed to have the one or both of the two hearing exams (baseline and/or 12 months). There were 40 placebo subjects and 41 active drug subjects reported results for both time periods||participants|||Number
847741|NCT00466817|Secondary|Adverse Events Which Lead to Permanent Discontinuation of Valganciclovir Therapy or Lead to Irreversible Outcome of the Adverse Event.|Adverse events were assessed at each visit through month 7 of the study. No subject discontinued valganciclovir therapy due to permanent discontinuation of valganciclovir therapy or lead to irreversible outcome of any adverse event.|baseline through 7 months|||participants|||Number
847742|NCT00466817|Primary|Change in Best Ear Hearing Assessments at 6 Months.|Hearing assessment was evaluated by an independent audiologist. At baseline, a brainstem evoked response (BSER) assessment and autoacoustic emissions (OAEs) hearing assessments were obtained. At 6 months, BSER and /or Visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) and OAEs were obtained. A single, independent study audiologist who was blinded to treatment assignment assessed the audiology test battery for each subject and assigned the classifications of normal hearing, mild hearing loss, moderate hearing loss, or severe hearing loss based upon their hearing thresholds (in decibels). The classifications were assigned by ear (one for the left ear and one for the right ear), giving “total ear” classifications. Following this, the study audiologist assigned the “best ear” classification for the subject at that study visit; for example, if a subject had mild hearing loss in their left ear and severe hearing loss in their right ear, then the “best ear” classification was mild hearing loss.|Between baseline and 6 months|Only subjects randomized and subjects that had both baseline and 6 month hearing exams were analyzed for the primary endpoint. Some subjects failed to have the one or both of the two hearing exams (baseline and/or 6 months). There were 43 subject in each group (placebo and active) that had both hearing results reported||participants|||Number
847744|NCT00465647|Secondary|Mean (SE) of Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) [Ages >= 5 Years-< 12 Years] Pain Scores on Hydromorphone Alone (Oral/Supplemental)Over Time|Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) consists of 6 facial expressions. Each face is 25 x 35 mm with 13 mm between faces. Each subject was asked to point to the face that reflected his or her pain. The end points are 0 = no pain and 10 = very much pain. The FPS-R scale was used for children over the age of 5 up to 12 years who have appropriate verbal skills.|Immediately prior to first oral dose with potentially up to 54 hours duration.|The Full Analysis Population for Efficacy consisted of subjects who received at least 1 dose of oral hydromorphone HCl and had at least 1 subsequent efficacy evaluation (pain measurement or supplemental pain medication).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847745|NCT00465647|Secondary|Mean (SE) of Faces, Legs Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) Pain Scores on Hydromorphone Alone (Oral/Supplemental) Over Time [Ages >=28 Days to <5 Years]|There are 5 categories in this pediatric pain measurement: face, legs, activity, cry, and consolability. Responses in each category are scored between 0 and 2 (0 = normal, relaxed to 2 = upset, agitated), for a maximum total score of 10. The FLACC scale was used for children under the age of 3 years and older children who have limited verbal skills.|Immediately prior to first oral dose, up to 54 hours|The Full Analysis Population for Efficacy consisted of subjects who received at least 1 dose of oral hydromorphone HCl and had at least 1 subsequent efficacy evaluation (pain measurement or supplemental pain medication).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847746|NCT00465647|Primary|Population Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) Model for Hydromorphone: Clearance (Cl)|"Model was built using sparse blood samples: Sampling times: immediately predose, and between 0.25-0.75, 1-3, and 4-6 hours postdose for the first 2 doses of oral hydromorphone: predose for each dose of oral hydromorphone HCl thereafter; and at the end of study.
Efficacy was based on Oral treatment only."|A maximum of 9 oral hydromorphone doses with potentially up to 54 hours duration.|The full analysis population for Pharmacokinetics/ Pharmacodynamics consisted of subjects who received at least 1 dose of oral hydromorphone HCl, and had at least 1 valid quantifiable PK sample. To be a valid sample, the time of administration of each dose of oral hydromorphone HCl, the dose, and the time of sample collection must be recorded.||L/hour||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847747|NCT00462943|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from the initiation of treatment until death from any cause or the last day of participant contact or evaluation for participants that were lost to follow-up. Participants were censored t the last recorded contract or evaluation when a participant was alive at time of analysis. A quarterly phone survey was conducted to collect survival data for participants who discontinued from the study.|up to 4 years|Intent to treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847748|NCT00462943|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Time to Disease Progression|Time to disease progression is defined as the time from the initiation of treatment until the onset date of death, the development of CML accelerated phase or blast phase, or the loss of complete hematologic response or major cytogenetic response, whichever came first. Participants were censored only if they did not have progression or if they discontinued treatment for reasons other than AE, progression or death.|up to 4 years|Intent to treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847749|NCT00462943|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Duration of Best Cytogenetic Response|Duration of response is defined as the time from first reported date of cytogenetic response until the earliest date of objective evidence of disease progression, relapse or death. Data was censored at the last examination date for participants with ongoing response or participants who discontinued treatment for reasons other than adverse event, disease progression or death.|up to four years|Intent to treat population of participants who had a response||months||Full Range|Median
847750|NCT00462943|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Duration of Best Hematologic Response|Duration of response is defined as the time from first reported date of hematologic response until the earliest date of objective evidence of disease progression, relapse or death. Data was censored at the last examination date for participants with ongoing response or participants who discontinued treatment for reasons other than adverse event, disease progression or death.|up to four years|Intent to treat population of participants who had a response||months||Full Range|Median
847751|NCT00462943|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) by Subpopulation and Total|"TEAE are any untoward events that were newly occurring or worsening from Baseline.
Treatment related toxicity was considered by the investigator to be unrelated, possibly, probably or unknown related to study drug. Severity was graded according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v3.0 on the following scale: Grade 1 = mild, Grade 2 = moderate, Grade 3 = severe, Grade 4 = life-threatening, Grade 5 = death. A serious adverse event (SAE) is any untoward medical occurrence that is fatal or life-threatening; results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity; requires or prolongs in-patient hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a patient; and conditions not included in the above that may jeopardize the patient or may require intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above.
A participant is only counted once in each category (at worst severity or strongest relationship)."|up to 4 years|Intent to treat||participants|||Number
847752|NCT00462943|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Time to Onset of Best Cytogenetic Response|"Time to onset was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Participants who did not achieve a response are censored at their last visit day.
Major cytogenetic response includes complete or partial response. Both confirmed and unconfirmed major cytogenetic response is considered meaningful. Unconfirmed response is based on a single bone marrow cytogenetic evaluation for participants where a confirmatory evaluation is not available.
Complete response shows 0% Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) cells. A partial response shows >0% - 35% Ph+ cells."|Day 1 up to Month 9|Intent to treat population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847753|NCT00462943|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Time to Onset of Best Hematologic Response|"Time to onset was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Participants who did not achieve a response are censored at their last visit day.
Overall hematologic response for chronic phase participants includes confirmed complete hematologic response (CHR). Overall hematologic response for accelerated or blast phase participants includes confirmed complete hematologic response (CHR), no evidence of leukemia (NEL), or return to chronic phase (RCP). Hematologic response must last >= 8 weeks to be considered meaningful."|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat population.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847754|NCT00462943|Secondary|Number of Treatment Cycles Needed to Achieve Best Cytogenetic Response||Day 1 up to Month 9|Intent to treat population of participants who had a cytogenetic response||treatment cycles||Full Range|Median
847755|NCT00462943|Secondary|Number of Treatment Cycles Needed to Achieve Best Hematologic Response|Induction therapy was administered for 14 consecutive days for each 28 days cycle, for up to 6 cycles. All treatment arms were given omacetaxine mepesuccinate via subcutaneous (SC) administration at 1.25 mg/m^2 twice a day (BID) for the 14 consecutive days.|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat population of participants who had a response to treatment||treatment cycles||Full Range|Median
847756|NCT00462943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With the Largest Percentage Reduction From Baseline of T315I Mutated BCR-ABL|Summarization is based on the best of the individual response assessments. Not assessable indicates that the participant either had no baseline assessment or the % mutation could not be determined in the post-baseline assessment(s).|Day 1 up to Month 9|Intent to treat population of participants with post-baseline assessment of T315I mutated BCR ABL||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847757|NCT00462943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Extramedullary Disease (EMD) at Baseline Achieving a Clinical Response|"Clinical response was defined by disease phase and based on evaluations by the independent Data Monitoring Committee (DMC).
Chronic Phase subgroup: achieving a complete hematologic response and/or major cytogenetic response (complete cytogenetic response or partial cytogenetic response, confirmed or unconfirmed).
Accelerated Phase and Blast Phase subgroups: achieving complete hematologic response, no evidence of leukemia, return to chronic phase, and/or major cytogenetic response (complete cytogenetic response or partial cytogenetic response, confirmed or unconfirmed)."|Day 1 up to Month 9|Intent to treat population of study participants who had extramedullary disease at baseline||percentage of participants|||Number
847758|NCT00462943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Hematologic Response Category|"Complete Response (CHR)
Chronic phase must last at least 8 weeks: WBC <10*10^9/liter, platelets <450*10^9/liter, myelocytes + metamyelocytes <5% in blood, no blasts or promyelocytes in blood, <20% basophils in peripheral blood, no extramedullary involvement.
Accelerated and Blast phase must last at least 4 weeks: absolute neutrophil count 1.5*10^9/liter, platelets 100*10^9/liter, no blood blasts, bone marrow blasts <5%, no extramedullary disease.
Partial Response - CHR plus one or more of the following:
Persistence of splenomegaly with a reduction of ≥50% from pre-treatment
Platelets > 450*10^9/L
Presence of immature cells in the peripheral blood
5% to 25% blasts in the bone marrow
If extra-medullary disease pre-treatment, reduction by ≥50% Hematologic Improvement - CHR, except allowing persistent thrombocytopenia (<100*10^9/L), and a few immature cells No evidence of leukemia: Morphologic leukemia-free state, defined as <5% bone marrow blasts."|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat||percentage of participants|||Number
847759|NCT00462943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Major Molecular Response (MMR) Representing the Degree of Suppression of BCR-ABL Transcript Levels Using the Housekeeping Gene ABL|MMR is defined as a ratio of BCR-ABL/standard gene of less than 0.1% according to the international scale. BCR-ABL is a fusion gene of the breakpoint cluster region [BCR] gene and Abelson proto-oncogene [ABL] genes). This analysis used the standard gene ABL. Analysis was performed by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) of peripheral blood.|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat population of participants who had evaluable samples. Participants with no data for these analyses either had degraded samples or the samples were missing.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847760|NCT00462943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Major Molecular Response (MMR) Representing the Degree of Suppression of BCR-ABL Transcript Levels Using the Housekeeping Gene GUS|MMR is defined as a ratio of BCR-ABL/standard gene of less than 0.1% according to the international scale. BCR-ABL is a fusion gene of the breakpoint cluster region [BCR] gene and Abelson proto-oncogene [ABL] genes). This analysis used the standard gene GUS. Analysis was performed by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) of peripheral blood.|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat population of participants who had evaluable samples. Participants with no data for these analyses either had degraded samples or the samples were missing.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847761|NCT00462943|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Cytogenetic Response Category Representing the Degree of Suppression of the Philadelphia Chromosome (Ph+)|"Cytogenetic response categories:
Complete: 0% Ph+ cells
Partial: >0%-35% Ph+ cells
Minor: >35%-65% Ph+ cells
Minimal: >65%-95% Ph+ cells
No Response: >95% Ph+ cells
Unevaluable: <20 metaphases were examined and/or response could not be assigned"|Day 1 up to Month 9|Intent to treat||percentage of participants|||Number
847762|NCT00462943|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Major Cytogenetic Response by Subpopulation and Total Population|"Subpopulations reflect chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) phases at the time of enrollment: chronic, accelerated, and blast phase. Primary endpoints as adjudicated by the Data Monitoring Committee were used for the primary analyses.
Major cytogenetic response includes complete or partial response. Both confirmed and unconfirmed major cytogenetic response is considered meaningful. Unconfirmed response is based on a single bone marrow cytogenetic evaluation for participants where a confirmatory evaluation is not available.
Complete response shows 0% Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) cells. A partial response shows >0% - 35% Ph+ cells.
Response rates by disease phase were examined relative to an a priori value of 2.5% using a one-sided lower 95% exact binomial confidence limit. If the lower limit from the one-sided lower 95% confidence limit exceeds 2.5%, the observed response rate will have exceeded the minimum threshold required to demonstrate efficacy."|Day 1 up to 9 months|Intent to treat population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847763|NCT00462943|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Overall Hematologic Response by Subpopulation and Total Population|"Subpopulations reflect chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) phases at the time of enrollment: chronic, accelerated, and blast phase. Primary endpoints as adjudicated by the Data Monitoring Committee were used for the primary analyses.
Overall hematologic response for chronic phase participants includes confirmed complete hematologic response (CHR). Overall hematologic response for accelerated or blast phase participants includes confirmed complete hematologic response (CHR), no evidence of leukemia (NEL), or return to chronic phase (RCP). Hematologic response must last >= 8 weeks to be considered meaningful.
Response rates by disease phase were examined relative to an a priori value of 2.5% using a one-sided lower 95% exact binomial confidence limit. If the lower limit from the one-sided lower 95% confidence limit exceeds 2.5%, the observed response rate will have exceeded the minimum threshold required to demonstrate efficacy."|Day 1 up to 6 months|Intent to treat population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847764|NCT00457197|Secondary|Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS)|"The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing craving, frequency, intensity, and duration of thoughts about drinking are assessed along with ability to resist drinking
Score:
Minimum: 0 Maximum: 30 Lower score associated with better outcome."|12 weeks|Missing data for 1 participants in placebo group and 5 participants in the quetiapine group.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847765|NCT00457197|Secondary|Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS)|"This is an 11-item, observer rated measure of the severity of manic symptoms on a 5 point scale. The total score indicates overall severity of mania with a minimum of zero (indicating normalcy) and a maximum of 60 (indicating very severe).
Score:
Minimum: 0 Maximum: 60 Lower score associated with better outcome"|12 weeks|Missing data for 6 participants in placebo group and 1 participant in the quetiapine group.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847766|NCT00457197|Secondary|Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report (IDS-SR)|"IDS-SR is a self reported 30 item assessment to diagnose a major depressive episode.
Score:
Minimum: 0 Maximum: 84 Lower score associated with better outcome"|12 weeks|Missing data for 4 participants in placebo group and 2 participants in the quetiapine group.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847767|NCT00457197|Secondary|Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD)|"The assessment is a clinician administered rating of depression with 17 questions. The total score is indicates level of depression within the following ranges: none (0-5), mild (6-10), moderate (11-15), severe (16-20), and very severe (21+).
Scale:
Minimum: 0 Maximum: 50 Lower score associated with better outcome"|12 weeks|Missing data for 2 participants in placebo group and 3 participants in the quetiapine group.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847768|NCT00457197|Secondary|Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT)|ALT is a liver enzyme measurement (IU/I).|12 weeks|Missing data for 17 participants in placebo group and 13 participants in the quetiapine group.||IU/I||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847769|NCT00457197|Secondary|Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST)|AST is a liver enzyme measurement (IU/I)|12 weeks|Missing data for 19 participants in placebo group and 11 participants in the quetiapine group.||IU/I||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847770|NCT00457197|Secondary|Gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT)|GGT is a liver enzyme measurement (IU/I)|12 weeks|Missing data for 18 participants in placebo group and 11 participants in the quetiapine group.||IU/I||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847771|NCT00457197|Secondary|Percent of Heavy Drinking Days||12 weeks|||drinks||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847772|NCT00457197|Primary|The Number of Standard Drinks/Day Will Serve as the Primary Outcome Measure.||12 weeks|||drinks||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847773|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Switched Between MMF and Sirolimus During Long Term Extension up to Study Completion|Long Term extension was the period from the end of Month 12 to the end of Month 48 post transplantation and the completion of the study 31 July 2012. At any time in the study, participants who were unable to tolerate MMF in the Bela-MMF and Tac-MMF groups could discontinue (DC) MMF and switch to sirolimus and remain in the study and those in the Bela-Siro group who were unable to tolerate sirolimus could DC sirolimus and switch to MMF and remain in the study. Study completion=data base (DB) lock.|End of Month 12 to end of Study (Month 48)|N= All participants who completed the ST period, were eligible and accepted to enter the LTE by signing a new informed consent form||participants|||Number
847774|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were Both Calcineurin Inhibitor-free (CNI-free)and Corticosteroid-free at Months 24, 36, 48 Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population in Long Term Extension|Participants were considered corticosteroid-free at Months 24, 36, and 48 if they were not receiving corticosteroids for >7 consecutive days during Day 701 and Day 756, Day 1065 and Day 1120, as well as Day 1429 and Day 1484, respectively. Participants were considered CNI-free at Months 24, 36, and 48 if they were not receiving CNI during Day 701 and Day 756, Day 1065 and Day 1120, as well as Day 1429 and Day 1484, respectively. Participants in the tacrolimus arm were not relevant to this analysis because tacrolimus is a calcinurin inhibitor.|Months 24, 36, 48|N= All participants who completed the ST period, were eligible and accepted to enter the LTE by signing a new informed consent form, and had data available at the specific time point were analyzed.||participants|||Number
847775|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Corticosteroid-free Participants at Months 24, 36, 48 Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population in Long Term Extension|In the LTE, a participant was considered corticosteroid-free if they were not receiving corticosteroids for >7 consecutive days during Day 701 and Day 756, Day 1065 and Day 1120, as well as Day 1429 and Day 1484, respectively.|End of Month 12 to end of Long Term Extension (Year 4)|N= All participants who completed the ST period, were eligible and accepted to enter the LTE by signing a new informed consent form, and had data available at the specific time point were analyzed.||participants|||Number
847776|NCT00455013|Secondary|Mean (Standard Deviation) in Calculated Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) mL/Min/1.73m^2 at Months 24, 36 and 48 Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population in Long Term Extension|GFR was calculated based upon serum creatinine (SCr) using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula as suggested by Levey et al: MDRD GFR = 170 x [SCr/0.95]^(-0.999) x [Age]^(-0.176) x [0.762 if participant was female] x [1.180 if participant was black] x [BUN]^(-0.170) x [Alb]^(+0.318). Age in years, Alb = Albumin in g/dL; SCr = in mg/dL; BUN =Blood urea nitrogen in mg/dL. Intent to Treat population is defined as all participants randomized and transplanted.|Months 24, 36 and 48 post transplantation|N=All participants who were randomized, transplanted, in the LTE and had data available at the specific time point.||mL/Min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
847777|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants With Graft Loss or Death at Months 24, 36, 48 Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population in Long Term Extension|Graft loss was defined as either functional loss or physical loss. Functional loss was defined as either: sustained level of SCr greater than or equal to (>=) 6.0 mg/dL (530 micromoles/Liter; micromol/L) for >= 4 weeks as determined by the local laboratory; regularly scheduled dialysis treatments over a period of 56 days; impairment of renal function to such a degree that the participant undergoes re-transplant. Day 1 was day of transplantation. ITT population defined as all participants randomized and transplanted.|End of Month 12 to end of Long Term Extension (Year 4)|N=participants randomized and transplanted and in LTE.||participants|||Number
847909|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Alanine Transaminase (ALT) in Each Treatment Arm (Hepatic Function)|ALT values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode.|Day 14 of third subsequent malaria episode (Episode 3)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||International Units/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847778|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants With Acute Rejection of Transplant up to End of Month 48 Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population in Long Term Extension|AR defined as a clinicopathological event requiring clinical evidence and biopsy confirmation by central pathologist. One or more conditions were met and a renal biopsy revealed histologic evidence of rejection: unexplained rise of serum creatine (SCr) >= 25 % from baseline plus one or more of the following: unexplained decreased urine output; fever and graft tenderness; a SCr that remained elevated within 14 days after transplantation and clinical suspicion of AR; reason other than those listed and participant was treated for this episode. Day 1 was day of transplantation. Banff grade used Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology. ITT population was all randomized and transplanted participants.|End of Month 12 to end of Month 48 Post Transplantation|All participants who completed the short term (ST) period, were eligible and accepted to enter the LTE by signing a new informed consent form.||participants|||Number
847779|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were Corticosteroid-free at Months 6 and 12 and Number of Participants Who Were Both Calcineurin Inhibitor-free (CNI-free)and Corticosteroid-free at Months 6 and 12 Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population|Participants were said to be CNI-free at Month 6 or 12 if they were not receiving a CNI during Day 141 to Day 196, or Day 337 to Day 392. Participants in the tacrolimus arm were not relevant to this analysis because tacrolimus is a calcinurin inhibitor. Participants were corticosteroid-free (CS-free) at Month 6 if they were not receiving corticosteroids for > 7 consecutive days during Days 141 through Days 196, and at Month 12 if not receiving corticosteroids for > 7 days during Days 337 through 392. Day 1 was day of transplantation. Intent to treat population included all randomized and transplanted participants.|Day 1 to Month 12 post transplantation|Analysis on both CNI-free and CS-free participants based on all followed up at least 151 days for Month 6 or 347 days for Month 12. One participant in the tacrolimus arm was counted as CNI-free since he discontinued tacrolimus on Day 2 of transplant and no data were available regarding immunosuppressive therapy after discontinuation.||participants|||Number
847780|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Corticosteroid-free Participants at 6 and 12 Months Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population|Participants were said to be corticosteroid-free at Month 6 if they were not receiving corticosteroids for greater than (>) 7 consecutive days during Days 141 through Days 196, and at Month 12 if not receiving corticosteroids for > 7 days during Days 337 through 392. Intent to treat population included all randomized and transplanted participants.|Day 1 through Month 12|For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation was used if N greater than, equal to (>=)5. Otherwise, exact method was used. Numbers of participants analyzed at Month 6 in each arm were 33, 26, 30 and numbers of participants analyzed at Month 12 were 32, 26, 30, in belatacept/MMF, belatacept/sirolimus, and tacrolimus/MMF arms, respectively.||participants|||Number
847781|NCT00455013|Secondary|Mean (Standard Deviation) in Calculated Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) mL/Min/1.73m^2 at Month 3, Month 6 and Month 12 Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population|Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) in mg/dL; Albumin (Alb) in g/dL;Serum creatinine (SCr) in mg/dL; Age in years. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was calculated based upon serum creatinine (SCr) using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula as suggested by Levey et al: MDRD GFR = 170 x [SCr/0.95]^(-0.999) x [Age]^(-0.176) x [0.762 if participant was female] x [1.180 if participant was black] x [BUN]^(-0.170) x [Alb]^(+0.318). Intent to Treat (ITT) population is defined as all participants randomized and transplanted.|Months 3, 6 and 12 post transplantation|Month 12 n presented above. Calculated GFR, values >180 mL/min/1.73 m2 (beyond upper limit of biologic plausibility)were truncated at 180 mL/min/1.73 m^2. Based on median (SD) GFR of 83 (50).||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
847782|NCT00455013|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline (BL) to Month 12 Post Transplantation in Lipid Values - Intent to Treat Population|Baseline (BL) was value obtained day prior to transplantation. Lipid values measured in milligrams/deciliter (mg/dL) included: high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), non-HDL cholesterol (non-HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides. Intent to treat population included all participants randomized and transplanted.|Baseline to Month 12|33, 26, 30 participants were included in the ITT population. Number of participants analyzed for HDL-C = 26, 22, 26; non-HDL-C = 26, 22, 26; LDL-C = 20, 14, 21; TC = 26, 22, 26; triglycerides = 20, 14, 21, in belatacept/MMF, belatacept/sirolimus, and tacrolimus/MMF arms, respectively.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847783|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants Using Antihyperlipidemic Medications at Month 12 - Intent to Treat Population|Participants using > = 1 antihyperlipidemic medication at Month 12.|Month 12|Analysis based on all participants who were followed up at least 364 days.||participants|||Number
847784|NCT00455013|Secondary|Mean Systolic, Diastolic and Arterial Blood Pressure at Baseline and Month 12 - Intent to Treat Population|Systolic, diastolic and mean arterial blood pressures were measured in millimeters of mercury (mm Hg). Baseline was defined as value obtained before transplantation. Intent to treat population included all participants randomized and transplanted.|Baseline and 12 months post transplantation|Number analyzed at baseline presented above. Number analyzed at Month 12: 28, 22, 29 in belatacept/MMF, belatacept/sirolimus, and tacrolimus/MMF treatment arms,respectively. Measurements obtained immediately after drug infusion were excluded from analysis.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847785|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Used Anti-hypertension Medications at Baseline and at 12 Months Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population|Baseline was defined as day prior to transplantation. Number of anti-hypertension medications taken were categorized from 1 to 6 and greater than (>)6. Intent to treat population included all participants randomized and transplanted.|Baseline and Month 12|ITT population, 33, 26, 30 for each arm, respectively, was used for each time point (baseline and Month 12). At baseline, 2 participants in each arm were not using at least one medication. 8, 6, and 10 participants in each arm respectively, were not using at least one medication at Month 12.||participants|||Number
847795|NCT00453180|Secondary|Social Responsiveness Scale|The Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) is a 65-item scale that assesses social impairment in the aspects of social awareness, social cognition, social communication, social motivation and autistic mannerisms. Each item is scored from 0 (not true) to 3 (almost always true). The total SRS raw score may range from 0-195, where higher scores indicate greater severity.|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848282|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Changes From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure During the ST + LT Period||Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
847786|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants With New Onset Diabetes Mellitus From Baseline to Month 12 Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population|"Baseline defined as day before transplantation. A participant who did not have diabetes prior to randomization and received an antidiabetic medication for a duration of at least 30 days or a participant who meets the following criteria and did not have diabetes prior to randomization: Symptoms of diabetes plus casual plasma glucose (PG) concentration ≥ 200 mg/dL (11.1 mmol/L); or fasting plasma glucose ≥ 126 mg/dL (7.0 mmol/L); or 2-hour PG ≥ 200 mg/dL (11.1 mmol/L) during an oral glucose tolerance test and a confirmatory laboratory test based on measurements of venous PG must have been done on another day in the absence of unequivocal hyperglycemia accompanied by acute metabolic decompensation.
Intent to treat population included all participants randomized and transplanted."|Baseline to Month 12|||participants|||Number
847787|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants With Delayed Graft Function - Intent to Treat Population|Delayed graft function (DGF) is defined as participant requiring dialysis within the first week (Day 1-8) post transplantation. Participants losing their graft less than 48 hours post transplant and receiving chronic dialysis were not considered as having DGF. Day 1 was day of transplantation. Intent to treat population defined as all participants randomized and transplanted|From Day 1 up to and including Day 8 post transplantation|||participants|||Number
847788|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants With Composite of Death, Graft Loss and Acute Rejection up to Month 12 - Intent to Treat Population|Subjects with graft loss or death prior to Month 12 were considered having an event of AR, therefore, the incidence of AR was reported as a composite of AR, death, and graft loss.|Day 1 up to Month 12|||participants|||Number
847789|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants With Composite of Death, Graft Loss and Acute Rejection up to Month 6 - Intent to Treat Population|Participants with graft loss or death prior to Month 6 were considered having an event of AR, therefore, the incidence of AR was reported as a composite of AR, death, and graft loss.|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat population included all randomized and transplanted participants.||participants|||Number
847790|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants With Graft Loss or Death up to Month 6 and Month 12 Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population|Graft loss was defined as either functional loss or physical loss. Functional loss was defined as either: sustained level of SCr greater than or equal to (>=) 6.0 mg/dL (530 micromoles/Liter; micromol/L) for >= 4 weeks as determined by the local laboratory; regularly scheduled dialysis treatments over a period of 56 days; impairment of renal function to such a degree that the participant undergoes re-transplant. Day 1 was day of transplantation. ITT population defined as all participants randomized and transplanted.|Day 1 to Month 6 and Month 12 post transplantation|Participants surviving with a functioning graft were 30, 24, 30 in belatacept/MMF, belatacept/sirolimus, tacrolimus/MMF arms, respectively. Participant who died had functioning graft at time of death.||participants|||Number
847791|NCT00455013|Secondary|Number of Participants With Acute Rejection of Transplant up to Month 12 Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat Population|AR defined as a clinicopathological event requiring clinical evidence and biopsy confirmation by central pathologist. One or more conditions were met and a renal biopsy revealed histologic evidence of rejection: unexplained rise of serum creatine (SCr) >= 25 % from baseline plus one or more of the following: unexplained decreased urine output; fever and graft tenderness; a SCr that remained elevated within 14 days after transplantation and clinical suspicion of AR; reason other than those listed and participant was treated for this episode. Day 1 was day of transplantation. Banff grade used Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology. ITT population was all randomized and transplanted participants.|Day 1 to Month 12 post transplantation|For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation was used if N greater than, equal to 5. Otherwise, exact method was used.||participants|||Number
847792|NCT00455013|Primary|Number of Participants With Acute Rejection (AR) of Transplant up to 6 Months Post Transplantation - Intent to Treat (ITT) Population|AR is clinicopathological event requiring clinical evidence and biopsy confirmation by central pathologist. One or more conditions were met and a renal biopsy revealed histologic evidence of rejection: unexplained rise of serum creatine (SCr) greater than or equal to 25% from baseline plus one or more of the following: unexplained decreased urine output; fever, graft tenderness; SCr that remained elevated 14 days post-transplantation and clinical suspicion of AR; other reason and participant treated for episode. Day 1=transplantation. Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology: Type I=tubulointerstitial AR without arteritis (IA: interstitial infiltration with >25% of parenchyma affected and moderate tubulitis with >4 mononuclear cells/tubular cross section; IB: >10 mononuclear cells; Type II vascular AR with (IA) intimal arteritis (IIA=mild - moderate; IIB=severe; Type III=severe rejection with transmural arterial changes, necrosis of smooth muscle cells.|Day 1 to Month 6 post-transplantation|Participants with more than one episode of AR were counted once only and the episode with the worst grade was used. For 95% Confidence Interval (CI) within each group, normal approximation was used if N greater than, or equal to (>=) 5. Otherwise, exact method was used. ITT population defined as all randomized and transplanted participants.||participants|||Number
847793|NCT00453180|Secondary|Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-II (VABS-II)|The VABS-II is a semi-structured interview designed to assess adaptive functioning in the domains of communication, daily living skills and socialization. Items in each domain are rated as either 0 (does not), 1(sometimes) or 2(independently) performs a given behavior or skill. The communication domain has 99 items with scores ranging from 0-198. The daily living skills domain has 109 items with scores ranging from 0-218. The socialization domain has 99 items with scores ranging from 0-198. The domains scores are combined to form the adaptive composite score (ranging from 20-160). The raw scores from the communication, daily living skills and socialization domains along with the composite score were selected for use in this study. Higher scores indicate a higher level of adaptive functioning.|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847794|NCT00453180|Secondary|Pervasive Developmental Disorder Behavior Index|The PDD Behavior Inventory (PDDBI) is a rating scale filled out by caregivers or teachers that was designed to assess children having a Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD; autism, Asperger disorder, PDD-NOS, or childhood disintegrative disorder). Both adaptive and maladaptive behaviors are assessed in the scale, making it useful for treatment studies in which decreases in maladaptive behaviors and improvements in adaptive social and language skills relevant to PDD are expected.|Week 12|Less than 25% of participants in each group received a score on the PDDBI due to a significant floor effect. As a result, the data for these participants are not considered reliable given the significant floor effect.|||||
847796|NCT00453180|Secondary|Aberrant Behavior Checklist|The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a 58-item measure of maladaptive behaviors and is used as a measure of drug effects. Each of the 58 items are rated from 0 (not at all) to 3 (severe).The ABC has 5 subscales: Irritability (15 items) ranging from 0 (not at all) to 45 (severe), Lethargy (16 items) ranging from 0 (not at all) to 48 (severe), Stereotypy (7 items) ranging from 0 (not at all) to 21 (severe), Hyperactivity (16 items) ranging from 0 (not at all) to 48 (severe), and Inappropriate Speech (4 items) ranging from 0 (not at all) to 12 (severe). Higher scores indicate a higher level of maladaptive behavior.|Week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847797|NCT00453180|Primary|Clinical Global Impression - Improvement|"Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) is designed to take into account all factors to arrive at an assessment of response to treatment.
The CGI-I scale ranges from 1 to 7 (1=very much improved; 2=much improved, 3=minimally Improved, 4=no change, 5=minimally worse, 6= much worse and 7=very much worse). Participants with a CGI-I score of 1 or 2 were classified as improved. Participants with a CGI score of 3, 4 or 5 were classified as no response. No participants scored 6 or 7."|Week 12|||Participants|||Count of Participants
847798|NCT00453180|Primary|Clinical Global Impression - Severity|The Clinical Global Impression - Severity scale (CGI-S) is a 7-point scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment, relative to the clinician's past experience with patients who have the same diagnosis. Considering total clinical experience, a patient is assessed on severity of mental illness at the time of rating 1, normal, not at all ill; 2, borderline ill; 3, mildly ill; 4, moderately ill; 5, markedly ill; 6, severely ill; or 7, extremely ill.|Week 12|||Participants|||Count of Participants
847799|NCT00452335|Secondary|Treatment Effectiveness|Treatment effectiveness was assessed with the following scale: 0 = not at all effective, 1 = a little bit effective, 2 = moderately effective, 3 = quite a bit effective, and 4 = extremely effective.|Weekly, up to 4 weeks|ITT Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847800|NCT00452335|Secondary|Constipation Severity|Constipation severity was assessed based on the following scale 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, and 4 = very severe.|Weekly, up to 4 weeks|ITT Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847801|NCT00452335|Secondary|Pain Associated With SBMs|Pain associated with SBMs was assessed based on the following scale: 0 = no pain, 1 = mild pain, 2 = moderate pain, 3 = severe pain, and 4 = very severe pain.|Weekly, up to 4 weeks|ITT Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847802|NCT00452335|Secondary|Abdominal Discomfort|Abdominal discomfort was assessed based on the following scale: 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, and 4 = very severe.|Weekly, up to 4 weeks|ITT Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847803|NCT00452335|Secondary|Abdominal Bloating|Abdominal bloating was assessed based on the following scale: 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, and 4 = very severe.|Weekly, up to 4 weeks|ITT Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847804|NCT00452335|Secondary|Stool Consistency of SBMs|Stool consistency was captured using the Bristol Stool Form Scale: 1 = Separate hard lumps like nuts, 2 = Sausage shaped but lumpy, 3 = Like a sausage but with cracks on surface, 4 = Like a sausage or snake, smooth and soft, 5 = Soft blobs with clear-cut edges, 6 = Fluffy pieces with ragged edges, a mushy stool, and 7 = Watery, no solid pieces.|Weekly, up to 4 weeks|ITT Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847805|NCT00452335|Secondary|Straining Associated With SBMs|Bowel straining assessed based on the following scale: 0 = no straining, 1 = mild straining, 2 = moderate straining, 3 = severe straining, and 4 = very severe straining.|Weekly, up to 4 weeks|ITT Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847806|NCT00452335|Secondary|Frequency of Fecal Incontinence|As part of the daily diary, patients were asked to report the number of fecal incontinence episodes per day.|Weekly, up to 4 weeks|ITT Population||episodes of fecal incontinence per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
847807|NCT00452335|Secondary|Frequency of Spontaneous Bowel Movements|Gathered as part of the daily electronic diary questions.|Weeks 2, 3, and 4|ITT Population||spontaneous bowel movements per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
847808|NCT00452335|Primary|Frequency of Spontaneous Bowel Movements|Gathered as part of the daily electronic diary questions.|Week 1|ITT population||spontaneous bowel movements per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
847809|NCT00445003|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography Retinal Volume|Missing or un-gradable data as follows for the sham plus focal/grid/panretinal photocoagulation laser, triamcinolone plus focal/grid panretinal photocoagulation laser, and Ranibizumab groups were 49, 37, and 39, respectively|Baseline to 14 weeks|Participants with two study eyes enrolled each eye in a different treatment group. Therefore, each treatment group/arm includes no more than one study eye for a given participant, and thus the numbers of eyes is equal to the number of participants in each arm.||mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
847810|NCT00445003|Secondary|Number of Eyes With Additional Number of Treatments for Diabetic Macular Edema|Treatments include any type or combination of treatment for diabetic macular edema. Eyes were only counted once, when receiving a combination of treatments.|14 weeks to 56-weeks|Participants with two study eyes enrolled each eye in a different treatment group. Therefore, each treatment group/arm includes no more than one study eye for a given participant, and thus the numbers of eyes is equal to the number of participants in each arm.||Eyes|||Number
847811|NCT00445003|Secondary|Eyes With Anti-vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment for Diabetic Macular Edema||14 weeks to 56-weeks|Participants with two study eyes enrolled each eye in a different treatment group. Therefore, each treatment group/arm includes no more than one study eye for a given participant, and thus the numbers of eyes is equal to the number of participants in each arm.||Eyes|||Number
847812|NCT00445003|Secondary|Change in Visual Acuity From Baseline|Visual Acuity was measured with the Electronic Early Treatment Study (E-ETDRS) visual acuity test. Unit of measure is based on the E-ETDRS letter score scale, 0-97, where 0 = worst and 97 = best.|baseline to 56-weeks|Participants with two study eyes enrolled each eye in a different treatment group. Therefore, each treatment group/arm includes no more than one study eye for a given participant, and thus the numbers of eyes is equal to the number of participants in each arm.||Letter Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
847910|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Alanine Transaminase (ALT) in Each Treatment Arm (Hepatic Function)|ALT values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode.|Day 0 of third subsequent malaria episode (Episode 3)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||International Units/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847813|NCT00445003|Secondary|Total Optical Coherence Tomography Retinal Volume|Missing/ungradable as follows: Sham = 49, Ranibizumab = 37, Triamcinolone = 39. Visits occured between 70 days and 153 days from randomization adjusted for baseline optical coherence tomography (OCT) retinal volume, OCT retinal thickness and visual acuity, number of planned panretinal photocoagulation sittings, and correlation between 2 study eyes. Confidence intervals are adjusted for multiple comparisons.|Baseline to 14-weeks|Participants with 2 study eyes enrolled each eye in a different arm. Therefore, each arm includes no more than 1 eye for a given participant, and thus the numbers of eyes is equal to number of participants.||mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
847814|NCT00445003|Secondary|Change in Optical Coherence Tomography Central Subfield Thickness||Baseline to 14 weeks|Participants with two study eyes enrolled each eye in a different treatment group. Therefore, each treatment group/arm includes no more than one study eye for a given participant, and thus the numbers of eyes is equal to the number of participants in each arm.||Microns||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
847815|NCT00445003|Secondary|Additional Treatments for Diabetic Macular Edema|Each combination of treatment is only counted once per treatment eye. Participants could have 2 study eyes, with random assignments to different treatments.|14 weeks to 56-weeks|||Eyes|||Number
847816|NCT00445003|Primary|Change in Electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Visual Acuity Letter Score From Baseline to 14 Weeks|Visual Acuity was measured with the Electronic Early Treatment Study (E-ETDRS) visual acuity test. Unit of measure is based on the E-ETDRS letter score scale, 0-97, where 0 = worst and 97 = best.|baseline to 14 weeks|Participants with 2 study eyes enrolled each eye in a different arm. Each arm includes no more than 1 study eye for a given participant, and thus the numbers of eyes is equal to the number of participants in each arm. Analysis followed intention to treat principle; eyes without 14-week data, the Last Observation Carried Forward method was used.||Letter Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
847817|NCT00443781|Primary|Difference in Number of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Positive Discs Diagnosed Positive by Provocative Discography (PD) and Functional Anesthetic Discography (F.A.D.)|For provocative discography (PD), a positive response at an individual disc requires all of the following findings: pain intensity (>=7/10 on 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale, NRS) as rated by subjects on injecting contrast into a disc; concordancy (pain reproduces typical back pain exactly). For Functional Anesthetic Discography (F.A.D.), a positive test at an individual disc level is defined as improvement in self-rated pain of >=2 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) points AND >33% on 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale 10 minutes after injection of lidocaine.|Approximately 2 hours per subject|Subjects which underwent Provocative Discography (PD) and Functional Anesthetic Discography (F.A.D.) consist of 1 population (N=50). Subjects which underwent either PD, F.A.D. or neither diagnostic test consist of a second population (all subjects enrolled, N=62). This is a diagnostic study. No imputation technique was used.||discs|Participants||Number
847818|NCT00436969|Secondary|12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Mental Score Change From Baseline and 6 Months (As Treated)|"The difference in 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Mental score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The SF-12 is a generic measure and does not target a specific age or disease group. It has been developed to provide a shorter, yet valid alternative to the SF-36, which has been seen by many health researchers as too long to administer to studies with large samples. The SF-12 is weighted and summed to provide easily interpretable scales for physical and mental health.
Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health."|Baseline and 6 months|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847819|NCT00436969|Secondary|12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Mental Score Change From Baseline and 6 Months (Per Protocol)|"The difference in 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Mental score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The SF-12 is a generic measure and does not target a specific age or disease group. It has been developed to provide a shorter, yet valid alternative to the SF-36, which has been seen by many health researchers as too long to administer to studies with large samples. The SF-12 is weighted and summed to provide easily interpretable scales for physical and mental health.
Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health."|Baseline and 6 months|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847820|NCT00436969|Secondary|12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Mental Score Change From Baseline and 12 Weeks (As Treated)|"The difference in 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Mental score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The SF-12 is a generic measure and does not target a specific age or disease group. It has been developed to provide a shorter, yet valid alternative to the SF-36, which has been seen by many health researchers as too long to administer to studies with large samples. The SF-12 is weighted and summed to provide easily interpretable scales for physical and mental health.
Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health."|Baseline and 12 weeks|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847821|NCT00436969|Secondary|12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Mental Score Change From Baseline and 12 Weeks (Per Protocol)|"The difference in 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Mental score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The SF-12 is a generic measure and does not target a specific age or disease group. It has been developed to provide a shorter, yet valid alternative to the SF-36, which has been seen by many health researchers as too long to administer to studies with large samples. The SF-12 is weighted and summed to provide easily interpretable scales for physical and mental health.
Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health."|Baseline and 12 weeks|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation. Subjects were allowed to have missing interim visits (i.e. 12 weeks).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847822|NCT00436969|Secondary|12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Physical Score Change From Baseline and 6 Months (As Treated)|"The difference in 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Physical score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The SF-12 is a generic measure and does not target a specific age or disease group. It has been developed to provide a shorter, yet valid alternative to the SF-36, which has been seen by many health researchers as too long to administer to studies with large samples. The SF-12 is weighted and summed to provide easily interpretable scales for physical and mental health.
Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health."|Baseline and 6 months|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847823|NCT00436969|Secondary|12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Physical Score Change From Baseline and 6 Months (Per Protocol)|"The difference in 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Physical score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The SF-12 is a generic measure and does not target a specific age or disease group. It has been developed to provide a shorter, yet valid alternative to the SF-36, which has been seen by many health researchers as too long to administer to studies with large samples. The SF-12 is weighted and summed to provide easily interpretable scales for physical and mental health.
Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health."|Baseline and 6 months|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847824|NCT00436969|Secondary|12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Physical Score Change From Baseline and 12 Weeks (As Treated)|"The difference in 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Physical score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The SF-12 is a generic measure and does not target a specific age or disease group. It has been developed to provide a shorter, yet valid alternative to the SF-36, which has been seen by many health researchers as too long to administer to studies with large samples. The SF-12 is weighted and summed to provide easily interpretable scales for physical and mental health.
Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health."|Baseline and 12 weeks|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847825|NCT00436969|Secondary|12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Physical Score Change From Baseline and 12 Weeks (Per Protocol)|"The difference in 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) Physical score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The SF-12 is a generic measure and does not target a specific age or disease group. It has been developed to provide a shorter, yet valid alternative to the SF-36, which has been seen by many health researchers as too long to administer to studies with large samples. The SF-12 is weighted and summed to provide easily interpretable scales for physical and mental health.
Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health."|Baseline and 12 weeks|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation. Subjects were allowed to have missing interim visits (i.e. 12 weeks).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847826|NCT00436969|Secondary|Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) Total Disability Score Change From Baseline and 6 Months (As Treated)|"The difference in Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) Total Disability score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) is a self-administered questionnaire that consists of two dimensions, one for pain and the other for functional activities. The pain dimension consists of five questions regarding the severity of an individual's pain, where: 0 = no pain and 10 = the worst pain imaginable. Functional activities are assessed with eight questions designed to measure the degree of difficulty an individual has with various activities of daily living that require upper-extremity use, where: 0 = no difficulty and 10 = so difficult it requires help.
Scoring instructions: The scores from both dimensions are averaged to derive a total score."|Baseline and 6 months|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847827|NCT00436969|Secondary|Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) Total Disability Score Change From Baseline and 6 Months (Per Protocol)|"The difference in Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) Total Disability score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) is a self-administered questionnaire that consists of two dimensions, one for pain and the other for functional activities. The pain dimension consists of five questions regarding the severity of an individual's pain, where: 0 = no pain and 10 = the worst pain imaginable. Functional activities are assessed with eight questions designed to measure the degree of difficulty an individual has with various activities of daily living that require upper-extremity use, where: 0 = no difficulty and 10 = so difficult it requires help.
Scoring instructions: The scores from both dimensions are averaged to derive a total score."|Baseline and 6 months|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847828|NCT00436969|Primary|Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Pain Score (As Treated)|Scores are measured on a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS scale ranges from 0 to 100 mm with the lower score indicating less pain and the higher score indicating greater pain.|6 Months|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||mm on a 100 mm VAS scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847836|NCT00436969|Secondary|Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Pain Score Change From Baseline and 12 Weeks (Per Protocol)|The difference in pain was calculated as visit score - baseline score. Scores are measured on a 100 mm visual analogy scale.|Baseline and 12 weeks|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation. Subjects were allowed to have missing interim visits (i.e. 12 weeks).||mm on a 100 mm VAS scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847829|NCT00436969|Secondary|Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) Total Disability Score Change From Baseline and 12 Weeks (As Treated)|"The difference in Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) Total Disability score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) is a self-administered questionnaire that consists of two dimensions, one for pain and the other for functional activities. The pain dimension consists of five questions regarding the severity of an individual's pain, where: 0 = no pain and 10 = the worst pain imaginable. Functional activities are assessed with eight questions designed to measure the degree of difficulty an individual has with various activities of daily living that require upper-extremity use, where: 0 = no difficulty and 10 = so difficult it requires help.
Scoring instructions: The scores from both dimensions are averaged to derive a total score."|Baseline and 12 weeks|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847830|NCT00436969|Secondary|Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) Total Disability Score Change From Baseline and 12 Weeks (Per Protocol)|"The difference in Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) Total Disability score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) is a self-administered questionnaire that consists of two dimensions, one for pain and the other for functional activities. The pain dimension consists of five questions regarding the severity of an individual's pain, where: 0 = no pain and 10 = the worst pain imaginable. Functional activities are assessed with eight questions designed to measure the degree of difficulty an individual has with various activities of daily living that require upper-extremity use, where: 0 = no difficulty and 10 = so difficult it requires help.
Scoring instructions: The scores from both dimensions are averaged to derive a total score."|Baseline and 12 weeks|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation. Subjects were allowed to have missing interim visits (i.e. 12 weeks).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847831|NCT00436969|Secondary|American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Evaluation Form (ASES) Patient Score Change From Baseline and 6 Months (As Treated)|"The difference in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Evaluation Form (ASES) Patient score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The ASES was designed to provide a standard method for evaluation of the shoulder through assessment of pain and activities of daily living (ie, function). The ASES is derived from an equation that incorporates a visual analog pain scale and functional ability questions. Both components have a maximum score of 50. Pain is calculated by subtracting the visual analog score from 10 and then multiplying by 5 for a total of 50 points. The function component is calculated by adding the points and multiplying by five thirds for a maximum of 50 points. The subscores for pain and function are then added for the total score. The maximum possible total score is 100, representing less pain and greater function."|Baseline and 6 months|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847832|NCT00436969|Secondary|American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Evaluation Form (ASES) Patient Score Change From Baseline and 6 Months (Per Protocol)|"The difference in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Evaluation Form (ASES) Patient score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The ASES was designed to provide a standard method for evaluation of the shoulder through assessment of pain and activities of daily living (ie, function). The ASES is derived from an equation that incorporates a visual analog pain scale and functional ability questions. Both components have a maximum score of 50. Pain is calculated by subtracting the visual analog score from 10 and then multiplying by 5 for a total of 50 points. The function component is calculated by adding the points and multiplying by five thirds for a maximum of 50 points. The subscores for pain and function are then added for the total score. The maximum possible total score is 100, representing less pain and greater function."|Baseline and 6 months|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847833|NCT00436969|Secondary|American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Evaluation Form (ASES) Patient Score Change From Baseline and 12 Weeks (As Treated)|"The difference in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Evaluation Form (ASES) Patient score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The ASES was designed to provide a standard method for evaluation of the shoulder through assessment of pain and activities of daily living (ie, function). The ASES is derived from an equation that incorporates a visual analog pain scale and functional ability questions. Both components have a maximum score of 50. Pain is calculated by subtracting the visual analog score from 10 and then multiplying by 5 for a total of 50 points. The function component is calculated by adding the points and multiplying by five thirds for a maximum of 50 points. The subscores for pain and function are then added for the total score. The maximum possible total score is 100, representing less pain and greater function."|Baseline and 12 weeks|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847834|NCT00436969|Secondary|American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Evaluation Form (ASES) Patient Score Change From Baseline and 12 Weeks (Per Protocol)|"The difference in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Evaluation Form (ASES) Patient score calculated as visit score - baseline score.
The ASES was designed to provide a standard method for evaluation of the shoulder through assessment of pain and activities of daily living (ie, function). The ASES is derived from an equation that incorporates a visual analog pain scale and functional ability questions. Both components have a maximum score of 50. Pain is calculated by subtracting the visual analog score from 10 and then multiplying by 5 for a total of 50 points. The function component is calculated by adding the points and multiplying by five thirds for a maximum of 50 points. The subscores for pain and function are then added for the total score. The maximum possible total score is 100, representing less pain and greater function."|Baseline and 12 weeks|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation. Subjects were allowed to have missing interim visits (i.e. 12 weeks).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847835|NCT00436969|Secondary|Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Pain Score Change From Baseline and 12 Weeks (As Treated)|"Scores are measured on a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS scale ranges from 0 to 100 mm with the lower score indicating less pain and the higher score indicating greater pain.
The difference in pain was calculated as visit score - baseline score."|Baseline and 12 weeks|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||mm on a 100 mm VAS scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847837|NCT00436969|Secondary|Percentage of Responders Using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Pain Score (As Treated)|"Scores are measured on a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS scale ranges from 0 to 100 mm with the lower score indicating less pain and the higher score indicating greater pain.
A responder was defined as a 20 mm or greater reduction in VAS pain score from baseline to 6 months."|Baseline and 6 months|The As Treated analysis population included all subjects that received treatment and had outcome data.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847838|NCT00436969|Secondary|Percentage of Responders Using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Pain Score (Per Protocol)|"Scores are measured on a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS scale ranges from 0 to 100 mm with the lower score indicating less pain and the higher score indicating greater pain.
A responder was defined as a 20 mm or greater reduction in VAS pain score from baseline to 6 months."|Baseline and 6 months|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847839|NCT00436969|Primary|Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Pain Score (Per Protocol)|Scores are measured on a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS scale ranges from 0 to 100 mm with the lower score indicating less pain and the higher score indicating greater pain.|6 Months|The Per Protocol analysis population was defined as all subjects that received treatment and completed 6 months of follow-up without a major protocol deviation.||mm on a 100 mm VAS scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847840|NCT00430950|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving Blood Pressure Goal.||8 weeks|||participants|||Number
847841|NCT00430950|Secondary|Change in Daytime, Nighttime and 24-hour Blood Pressure Evaluated by Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring 8 Weeks After Baseline.|Change = Week 16 - Week 8 (baseline).|8 weeks|Exploratory analysis: ANCOVA was used to compare the differences in change from baseline (Visit 4, Week 8) to Week 16 (Visit 6) in daytime, nighttime and 24-hr ABPM dBP and sBP.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847842|NCT00430950|Secondary|Change in Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure 4 Weeks and 8 Weeks After Baseline.|4 weeks Change = Week 12 - Week 8 (baseline). 8 weeks Change = Week 16 - Week 8 (baseline).|8 weeks|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847843|NCT00430950|Secondary|Change in Mean Trough Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure From Week 8(Baseline) to Week 12|Change = Week 12 - Week 8 (baseline).|4 weeks|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847844|NCT00430950|Primary|Change in Mean Trough Sitting Diastolic Blood Pressure|"Change in mean trough sitting diastolic Blood Pressure between OM/HCTZ 20/25 mg vs. 40/25 mg, in those patients inadequately controlled on OM 40 mg monotherapy, after eight weeks of double blind treatment, as compared to baseline.
Change = Week 16 - Week 8 (baseline)."|8 weeks|The main analysis will be performed on the full analysis set last observation carried forward (LOCF). Pooling will be applied for small centres.||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847845|NCT00424554|Secondary|MGMT Activity in the Brain Tumor Tissues by Temozolomide Levels|No data available: at the time of tumor collection, the temozolomide levels were below the detection limits of the assay.|14 days||||||
847846|NCT00424554|Secondary|Concentrations of Temozolomide in the Serum, Cerebrospinal Fluid, and Brain Tumor|No data available: at the time of tumor collection, the temozolomide levels were below the detection limits of the assay.|14 days||||||
847847|NCT00424554|Secondary|Tolerability: Number of Participants Discontinuing Treatment Due to Adverse Events (AE)|An AE was defined as any event which was adverse, including what were commonly described as adverse or undesirable experiences, adverse events, adverse reactions, side effects, or death due to any cause associated with, or observed in conjunction with the use of a drug, biological product, or device in humans, whether or not considered related to the use of that product. Additionally, any event which was associated with, or observed in conjunction with product overdose whether accidental or intentional, or product abuse and/or withdrawal was also considered an AE.|12 months|||participants|||Number
847848|NCT00424554|Secondary|Safety: Number of Participants Who Experienced Grade 3 or 4 Toxicities|"Grade 3 was defined as severe per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE).
Grade 4 was defined as life-threatening per CTCAE."|12 months|||participants|||Number
847849|NCT00424554|Primary|MethylGuanine-DNA MethylTransferase [MGMT] Activity Measured From the Tumor Tissue During Surgery|An experimental assay was developed to measure MGMT levels.|14 days|"All participants for which a MGMT activity assay could be
performed"||fmol/mg of proteins||Standard Deviation|Mean
847850|NCT00409539|Secondary|To Assess the Safety and Tolerability of 20, 40, 80 and 120 mg SMP 986 (o.d) Following 8-weeks of Treatment in Patients With Over Active Bladder Syndrome|Treatment emergent adverse event summary|8 Weeks|||participants|||Number
847851|NCT00409539|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 8 in the Number of Voids/24 Hours||8 Weeks|||voids/24 hrs.||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847852|NCT00404547|Secondary|Assessment of Patient Treatment Satisfaction||12 weeks||||||
847853|NCT00404547|Secondary|Assessment of Patient Compliance During the Study||12 weeks||||||
847854|NCT00404547|Secondary|Change in Patient Assessment of Asthma Control|"Patient assessment of asthma control was assessed at baseline and at week 12 using the question How would you rate the control of your asthma symptoms?. The change in this assessment was categorized in Improvement and Non-Improvement."|At baseline and at week 12|Basis is the ITT population||participants|||Number
847855|NCT00404547|Primary|Change in Mean of Total Score of Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)|The score of the change from baseline ranges from –6 (=best possible outcome) to 6 (=worst possible outcome).|At the middle and end of the 12 week treatment period|Basis is the ITT population||points on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847856|NCT00402168|Secondary|Participants Who Switched to Belatacept in Long Term Period: Number of Participants With AEs and SAEs|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Day of Switch = the first belatacept infusion day.|Day of Switch (first dose of belatacept ) to last dose plus 56 days, up to Year 6 of the Study|All randomized and treated participants who switched from CNI to belatacept during the long-term period were summarized.||participants|||Number
848715|NCT00602836|Secondary|Number of Participants With IgVH Testing at Baseline Who Also Had a Clinical Response (CR, nPR, or PR).|Response categories described in above outcome measures. IgVH mutation status describe in baseline characteristics section.|During treatment (up to 5 years)||||||
847857|NCT00402168|Secondary|Participants Who Switched From CNI to Belatacept in Long Term Period : Mean Change in Calculated GFR Based on Imputed Values From Day of Switch to Week 96 Post Switch|Calculated GFR assessment used the MDRD formula. GFR was measured as mL/min/1.73 m^2. For death or graft loss participants, calculated GFR (cGFR) value 10 was used, for other participants who had a post baseline cGFR value missing, but had baseline value and at least 2 post baseline values available, which were at least 120 days apart, linear regression model was used to impute the cGFR value. Day of Switch = the first belatacept infusion day.|Day of Switch (first belatacept dose) to Week 96 Post Switch|All randomized and treated participants who switched from CNI to belatacept during the long-term period were summarized. n=number of participants with data available at specific time point||mL/min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
847858|NCT00402168|Secondary|Long Term Period: Mean Change From Baseline to Month 54 in Diastolic Blood Pressure|Blood pressure was measured while the participant was sitting quietly for 5 minutes and was measured in mmHg. Baseline was value at screening. Only those participants who entered long term period were evaluated.|Baseline, Months 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, were randomized to their original treatment arm, who entered the LT Period (ITT - LT), and had laboratory values were analyzed. Participants were grouped according to the treatment to which they were randomized (belatacept or CNI). n=entered LT Period with laboratory value available.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847859|NCT00402168|Secondary|Long Term Period: Mean Change From Baseline to Month 54 in Systolic Blood Pressure|Blood pressure was measured while the participant was sitting quietly for 5 minutes and was measured in millimeters of mercury (mmHg). Baseline was value at screening. Only those participants who entered long term period were evaluated.|Baseline, Months 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, were randomized to their original treatment arm, who entered the LT Period (ITT - LT), and had laboratory values were analyzed. Participants were grouped according to the treatment to which they were randomized (belatacept or CNI). n=entered LT Period with laboratory value available.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
847860|NCT00402168|Secondary|Long Term Period: Number of Participants Meeting Marked Laboratory Abnormality Criteria - All ITT Participants Who Entered the Long Term Period|Upper limits of normal (ULN). Hemoglobin: < 8 g/dL; Platelet count: < 50*10^9 c/L; Leukocytes: < 2.0*10^3 c/µL; Lymphocytes (absolute): < 0.5*10^3 c/µL; Neutrophils: < 1.0*10^3 c/µL; Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT): > 5.0*ULN Units per liter (U/L); bilirubin: > 3.0*ULN mg/dL; Creatinine: > 3.0*ULN mg/dL; Calcium: < 7 mg/dL; Bicarbonate: > 12.5 mg/dL; Potassium: < 3.0 meq/L or > 6.0 meq/L; Magnesium >2.6 meq/L; Sodium: < 130 meq/L; Phosphorus: < 2.0 mg/dL; Uric Acid: > 10 mg/dL.|Baseline (Screening), up to Year 6 of the Study|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, were randomized to their original treatment arm, who entered the LT Period (ITT - LT), and had laboratory values were analyzed. Participants were grouped according to the treatment to which they were randomized (belatacept or CNI). n=entered LT Period with laboratory value available.||participants|||Number
847861|NCT00402168|Secondary|Long Term Period: Mean Change From Baseline to Month 54 in Serum Creatinine- ITT Participants Who Entered LT Period|Baseline was value at screening. Serum creatinine was measured in mg/dL. Only participants who entered into Long Term Period were included in the analysis.|Baseline, Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, were randomized to their original treatment arm, who entered the LT Period (ITT - LT), and had laboratory values were analyzed. Participants were grouped according to the treatment to which they were randomized (belatacept or CNI). n=entered LT Period with laboratory value available.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847862|NCT00402168|Secondary|Long Term Period: Number of Participants With AEs of Special Interest - All Randomized Participants Who Entered the Long Term Period|Prospectively identified events of special interest which were a subset of all AEs, and were either SAEs or non-serious AEs, included the following categories: Serious Infections, Thrombolic/embolic events, Autoimmune Disease, Malignancy, Peri-infusional reactions (only belatacept treatment group was IV) , Acute Peri-infusional events occurring within 24 hours of injection, Pulmonary Edema and Congestive Heart Failure. AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization.|First dose after randomization (Day 1) to last dose, plus 56 days, up to Year 6 of the Study|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, were randomized to their original treatment arm, and who entered the LT Period (ITT - LT) were analyzed. Participants were grouped according to the treatment to which they were randomized (belatacept or CNI).||participants|||Number
847863|NCT00402168|Secondary|Long Term Period: Number of Participants With SAEs, Death, Discontinuation Due to AEs - All Randomized Participants Who Entered the Long Term Period|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Treatment-related=having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug.|First dose after randomization (Day 1) to 56 days post last dose, up to Year 6 of the Study|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, were randomized to their original treatment arm, and who entered the LT Period (ITT - LT) were analyzed. Participants were grouped according to the treatment to which they were randomized (belatacept or CNI).||participants|||Number
847864|NCT00402168|Secondary|Long Term Period: Percentage of Participants With New Onset Diabetes Mellitus Up to Month 36- All Randomized Participants Who Entered LT Period|A participant who did not have diabetes prior to randomization is determined to have new onset diabetes mellitus if they received an antidiabetic medication for a duration of at least 30 days or at least two fasting plasma glucose (FPG) tests indicated that FPG is >=126 mg/dL. Percentage was the number of participants with new onset of diabetes mellitus divided by the number of participants without pre-randomization diabetes.|Baseline (screening) up to Month 36 post randomization|Participants without pre-randomization diabetes, who were randomized and entered LT Period.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847865|NCT00402168|Secondary|Long Term Period: Number of Participants Who Survived With a Functioning Graft or Survived With Pure Graft Loss or Death With Functioning Graft - ITT Participants Who Entered the LT Period|Graft loss = either pure graft loss (participant survived to the end of the study period after graft loss) or death with functioning graft. Pure graft loss = either functional loss or physical loss. Functional loss = a sustained level of serum creatinine (SCr) ≥ 6.0 mg/dL (530 μmol/L) for ≥ 4 weeks or administration of a maintenance dialysis regimen for at least 56 days or impairment of renal function to such a degree that the participant undergoes re-transplantation. The table was designed with built-in redundancy to capture all possible combinations of death and/or graft loss, but not all lines can be summed to reach the total number surviving and the total number who die and/or lose grafts. If a participant experiences pure graft loss and dies at a later date independent of the graft loss event, they are counted only once in the cumulative tabulation of death or graft loss. Only the first event experienced by the participant counted toward the cumulative total.|Post Months 24, 36, 48, up to Year 6 of the Study|Participants, randomized to their original treatment arm, who entered the LT Period (ITT - LT) were analyzed. Participants were grouped according to the treatment to which they were randomized (belatacept or CNI).||participants|||Number
847866|NCT00402168|Secondary|Long Term Period: Number of Participants With Acute Rejection (AR) - All Randomized Participants in LT Period|AR was defined: if either a or b was satisfied: (a) the reason for clinical suspicion was reported to be an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; or an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness and the episode was a case of biopsy proven AR (AR of Banff histopathologic classification grade IA or higher as assessed by the blinded central pathologist); (b) the reason for clinical suspicion was reported to be something other than: an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; or an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; the episode was a case of biopsy proven AR, and the participant was treated for this episode. Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology was used to categorize the severity of the AR.|Post Month 12 up to Year 6 of the Study|Participants, randomized to their original treatment arm, who entered the LT Period (ITT - LT) were analyzed. Participants were grouped according to the treatment to which they were randomized (belatacept or CNI).||participants|||Number
847867|NCT00402168|Secondary|Long Term Period: Mean Change From Baseline to 54 Months Post Randomization in Calculated GFR on Imputed Values at Specified Timepoints - Intent to Treat (ITT) Participants Who Entered LT Period|ITT=participants randomized to their original treatment arm and who entered the LT period are presented. Baseline=value at screening. Calculated GFR assessment used the MDRD formula. GFR was measured as mL/min/1.73 m^2. For death or graft loss participants, calculated GFR (cGFR) value of 0 was imputed and carried forward after death or graft loss up to the end of the analysis period. Sponsor discontinued the CNI treatment arm in Year 3, and participants treated with CNI could elect to switch to belatacept. If a participant did not switch to belatacept, they were required to discontinue from the study. Therefore, efficacy results from Month 36 through Month 54 are difficult to interpret. No formal comparisons were planned between the belatacept and CNI treatment groups post Month 36, and the data up to the final database lock should be interpreted with caution.|Baseline, Month 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54|Participants randomized to their original treatment arm who entered the LT Period (ITT - LT) and had data at baseline and at specific timepoints . Participants were grouped according to the treatment to which they were randomized (belatacept or CNI).||mL/min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
847868|NCT00402168|Secondary|Number of Participants Meeting Marked Laboratory Abnormality Criteria From Baseline up to Month 12 - Randomized and Treated Participants|Upper limits of normal (ULL). Leukocytes: < 2.0*10^3 cells per microliter (c/µL); Lymphocytes (absolute): < 0.5*10^3 c/µL; bilirubin: > 3.0*ULN milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL); Potassium: < 3.0 milliequivalents per liter (meq/L) or > 6.0 meq/L; Magnesium >2.6 meq/L; Sodium: < 130 meq/L; Phosphorus: < 2.0 mg/dL; Uric Acid: > 10 mg/dL. Baseline = value at screening.|Baseline up to Month 12|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had a laboratory value available post randomization. N= number of participants analyzed in all categories||participants|||Number
847869|NCT00402168|Secondary|Ridit Score at Month 12 - All Randomized Participants|The Modified Transplant Symptom Occurrence and Symptom Distress Scale (MTSOSD-59R) was used to assess the occurrence (never, occasionally, regularly, almost always, always) and distress (0=no distress to 4=terrible distress) of symptoms associated with immunosuppressive therapies. Ridit (relative to an identified distribution) analysis (Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1991) was used. Ridit scores were calculated at 12 months for overall symptom occurrence score and overall symptom distress. The Ridit score reflects the probability that a score observed for an individual randomly selected from a group would be higher (worse symptom) than a score observed for a randomly selected individual from the reference group. The reference group was constituted by the frequency distribution of the responses of all participants on all items at baseline. The ridit of the reference group is by definition, 0.5.|Month 12|All randomized participants with MTSOSD-59R data were analyzed.||Ridit score|||Number
847870|NCT00402168|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 12 for Eight Domain Scores of Quality of Life (QoL) Instrument SF-36 - All Randomized Participants|"SF-36 was a Participant-Reported Quality of Life (QoL) Short Form (SF) questionnaire measuring health-related quality of life (HRQL) covering 8 domains of physical and mental component summaries: physical function, role limitations due to physical problems, pain, general health perception, and vitality, social function, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health.
All domains were scored using norm-based methods that standardized the scores to a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 in the general population. The scores range from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 100, with a higher score indicating better quality of life."|Baseline (screening) to Month 12|Randomized participants with available questionnaires were analyzed.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847897|NCT00395135|Primary|Year 1: Co-Primary Endpoint- Proportion (%) of Patients Achieving > or = 5% Weight Loss From Baseline to Week 52|"The proportion of patients with a reduction from baseline body weight of 5% or more at the end of year 1.
Other co-primary endpoints are change from baseline in body weight (kg) at year 1 and the proportion of patients achieving ≥ 10% reduction in body weight at year 1."|52 weeks|MITT with LOCF||percentage of participants|||Number
847871|NCT00402168|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in SF-36 Questionnaire Physical Component Score and in Mental Component Score at Month 12 - All Randomized Participants|SF-36 was a Participant-Reported Quality of Life (QoL) Short Form (SF) questionnaire. The subscale in the mental component (MCS) part of the instrument ranged from 1 to 6 with 1=all of the time and 6= none of the time. The subscale for physical component (PCS) ranged from 1 to 3 with 1=Yes, limited a lot and 3=No, not limited at all. The subscale for the extent that physical health or emotional problems interfered with normal activities ranged from 1 to 5 with 1=not at all and 5= extremely. Baseline was at randomization or prior to first dose. Baseline = value at screening. The subscale scores were transformed using norm-based methods that standardized the scores to a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 in the general population. The scores range from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 100, with a higher score indicating better quality of life.|Baseline, Month 12|All randomized participants who completed the questionnaire at baseline and at Month 12.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
847872|NCT00402168|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Deaths, and Discontinuation Due to Adverse Events (AEs) From First Dose up to Month 12|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Treatment-related=having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug.|First Dose (Day 1) to Month 12|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug were summarized.||participants|||Number
847873|NCT00402168|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Month 6 and to Month 12 in Serum Creatinine - All Randomized Participants|Baseline was value at screening or prior to first dose of study drug. Serum creatinine was measured in milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL). Baseline = value at screening.|Baseline to Month 6 and Month 12 Post Randomization|All randomized participants with baseline and laboratory value at specific time point were summarized.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
847874|NCT00402168|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-Donor Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) Positive Antibodies|Samples were obtained at Day 1 (first dose), Week 24, and Week 52 (or end of therapy). This was a cumulative summary in that once a participant was positive, that participant remained positive for later time points. Evaluation of anti-donor HLA antibodies was performed by an external laboratory (Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia).|Month 6 and Month 12 Post Randomization|Participants who had at least one test result or finding were summarized. n=number of participants analyzed at each specific time point.||participants|||Number
847875|NCT00402168|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With New Onset Diabetes Mellitus - All Randomized Participants|A participant who did not have diabetes prior to randomization is determined to have new onset diabetes mellitus if they received an antidiabetic medication for a duration of at least 30 days or at least two fasting plasma glucose (FPG) tests indicated that FPG is >=126 mg/dL. Percentage was the number of participants with new onset of diabetes mellitus divided by the number of participants without pre-randomization diabetes.|Month 12 post randomization|Participants without pre-randomization diabetes.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847876|NCT00402168|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Composite Endpoint of Death, Graft Loss and Acute Rejection at Month 12|Percentage=number with composite divided by number randomized. Graft loss was functional loss or physical loss. Functional loss = sustained level of serum creatinine (SCr) ≥ 6.0 mg/dL for ≥ 4 weeks or administration of a maintenance dialysis regimen for at least 56 days or impairment of renal function to such a degree that participant undergoes re-transplantation. AR: if either a or b: (a) the reason for clinical suspicion was reported to be an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline; or an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness and the episode was a case of biopsy-proven AR (grade IA or higher as assessed by the blinded central pathologist); (b) the reason for clinical suspicion was reported to be something other than: an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline; or an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; the episode was a case of biopsy-proven AR, and the participant was treated for it.|12 Months post randomization|All participants who were randomized were analyzed.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847877|NCT00402168|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Calculated Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) With Imputed Values to 12 Months Post Randomization - All Randomized Participants (Intent-to-Treat Population)|Calculated GFR assessment used the modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) formula. GFR was measured as mL/min/1.73 m^2. For death or graft loss participants, calculated GFR (cGFR) value 10 was used, for other participants who had a post baseline cGFR value missing, but had baseline value and at least 2 post baseline values available, which were at least 120 days apart, linear regression model was used to impute the cGFR value. Baseline = value at screening. Randomization/First Dose was on Day 1.|Baseline to 12 months post randomization|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all randomized participants with available data were analyzed.||mL/min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
847878|NCT00402168|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Had Any Study Drug Dose Alteration by Month 12 Due to Any Reason - Randomized and Treated Participants|Reasons for study drug dose modification included categories of decline in renal function (as determined by the investigator), treatment of acute rejection, and other reasons. More than 1 reason could be given for dose alteration.|Month 12|Participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
847879|NCT00402168|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Surviving With a Functioning Graft, Have Graft Loss or Death (Graft Loss, Death, Death With Functioning Graft) By Month 6 and Month 12 Post Randomization|Graft loss was defined as either functional loss or physical loss. Functional loss was defined as a sustained level of serum creatinine (SCr) ≥ 6.0 mg/dL (530 μmol/L) for ≥ 4 weeks or administration of a maintenance dialysis regimen for at least 56 days or impairment of renal function to such a degree that the participant undergoes re-transplantation.|At 6 and 12 months post randomization|All participants who were randomized were summarized.||percentage of participants|||Number
847908|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Alanine Transaminase (ALT) in Each Treatment Arm (Hepatic Function)|ALT values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode.|Day 0 of fourth subsequent malaria episode (Episode 4)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||International Units/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847880|NCT00402168|Secondary|Number of Participants With Acute Rejection (AR) by Months 6 and 12 Post Randomization - All Randomized Participants|AR defined: if either a or b was satisfied: a: the reason for clinical suspicion was reported to be an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; or an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness and the episode was a case of biopsy proven AR (AR of Banff histopathologic classification Grade IA or higher as assessed by the blinded central pathologist); b: the reason for clinical suspicion was reported to be something other than: an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; or an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; the episode was a case of biopsy proven AR, and the participant was treated for this episode. Banff 97 diagnostic category for renal allograft biopsies is an international standardized histopathological classification. AR is defined by a renal biopsy demonstrating a Banff 97 classification of Grade IA or greater, with higher scores indicating more severe rejection.|At 6 and 12 months post randomization|ITT population: All randomized participants were summarized. N=number analyzed for Months 6 and 12||participants|||Number
847881|NCT00402168|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Calculated Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) With Imputed Values to 6 Months Post Randomization - All Randomized Participants (Intent-to-Treat Population)|Calculated GFR assessment used the modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) formula. GFR was measured as mL/min/1.73 m^2. For death or graft loss participants, calculated GFR (cGFR) value 10 was used, for other participants who had a post baseline cGFR value missing, but had baseline value and at least 2 post baseline values available, which were at least 120 days apart, linear regression model was used to impute the cGFR value. Baseline = value at screening.|Baseline to 6 months post randomization|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population: all randomized participants with available data were analyzed.||mL/min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
847882|NCT00396006|Secondary|Clinically Significant Changes in Vital Signs From Pre- to Post-Infusion|"Clinically significant changes in vital signs from pre- to post-infusion are:
Heart rate: 25% increase above pre-infusion value
Blood pressure: ≥ 30 mm Hg change from pre-infusion blood pressure (systolic or diastolic)
Temperature: an increase in body temperature to >38°C (>100.4°F). If the pre-infusion body temperature was already >38°C (>100.4°F), then any further increase in body temperature by 1.1°C (1.98°F) or more was considered clinically significant.
Respiratory rate: 25% increase above pre-infusion value"|During 8 consecutive weeks of infusion|Intention to treat||# Clinically significant events|||Number
847883|NCT00396006|Primary|Number of Changes in the Rate of Infusion|Number of decreases in the rate or discontinuations of infusion at 0.2 mL/kg/min|During 8 consecutive weeks of treatment|||infusions|||Number
847884|NCT00396006|Other Pre-specified|Change in the BAL ELF Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha (TNF-α) From Baseline to Post-treatment|Median change in the BAL ELF TNF-α from baseline to post-treatment|BAL procedures were performed at baseline and after 8 consecutive weeks of treatment (minimum of 12 weeks)|Per protocol population with both pre- and post-treatment analytes available from BAL procedures|||||
847885|NCT00396006|Other Pre-specified|Ratio of Post- to Pre-treatment BAL ELF Interleukin 8 (IL-8) Level|Median ratio of post- to pre-treatment BAL ELF IL-8 Level|BAL procedures were performed at baseline and after 8 consecutive weeks of treatment (minimum of 12 weeks)|Per protocol||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
847886|NCT00396006|Other Pre-specified|Ratio of Post- to Pre-treatment BAL ELF Total Neutrophil Elastase Level|Median ratio of post- to pre-treatment BAL ELF Total Neutrophil Elastase Level|BAL procedures were performed at baseline and after 8 consecutive weeks of treatment (minimum of 12 weeks)|Per protocol||nM||Full Range|Median
847887|NCT00396006|Other Pre-specified|Change in the BAL ELF Free Neutrophil Elastase Level|Median change in the BAL ELF Free Neutrophil Elastase Level from baseline to post-treatment|BAL procedures were performed at baseline and after 8 consecutive weeks of treatment (minimum of 12 weeks)|Per protocol population with both pre- and post-treatment analytes available from BAL procedures||nM||Full Range|Median
847888|NCT00396006|Secondary|Change in the Plasma Antineutrophil Elastase Capacity (ANEC) Level|Mean change in the plasma ANEC level from baseline to post-treatment|Blood samples were collected at baseline and after 8 consecutive weeks of treatment|Per protocol||μM||Standard Deviation|Mean
847889|NCT00396006|Secondary|Change in the α1-PI Plasma Level|Mean change in the plasma level of α1-PI from baseline to post-treatment|Blood samples were collected at baseline and after 8 consecutive weeks of treatment|Per protocol||μM||Standard Deviation|Mean
847890|NCT00396006|Secondary|Change in in the Ratio of BAL ELF α1-PI to Human Neutrophil Elastase (HNE) Complex Concentration|Median change in the ratio of BAL ELF α1-PI to HNE complex concentration from baseline to post-treatment|BAL procedures were performed at baseline and after 8 consecutive weeks of treatment (minimum of 12 weeks)|No per protocol subject had both pre- and post-treatment analytes available, therefore no analysis could be performed on this outcome measure|||||
847891|NCT00396006|Secondary|Ratio of Post- to Pre-treatment BAL ELF Antineutrophil Elastase Capacity (ANEC) Levels|Median ratio of post- to pre-treatment BAL ELF ANEC levels|BAL procedures were performed at baseline and after 8 consecutive weeks of treatment (minimum of 12 weeks)|Per protocol||μM||Full Range|Median
847892|NCT00396006|Primary|The Number of Adverse Events (AEs) Related to the Infusion of ARALAST Fr. IV 1 Administered at a Rate of 0.2 mL/kg/Min||During 8 consecutive weeks of treatment|Intent to treat||adverse events|||Number
847893|NCT00396006|Primary|Change in Bronchoalveolar Lavage (BAL) Epithelial Lining Fluid (ELF) Alpha1-Proteinase Inhibitor (α1-PI) Level|Median change BAL ELF antigenic α1-PI level the from baseline to post-treatment|BAL procedures were performed at baseline and after 8 consecutive weeks of treatment (minimum of 12 weeks)|Per protocol||μM||Full Range|Median
847894|NCT00395135|Secondary|Year 2: Percent Change in Body Weight From Week 52 to Week 104|Year 2: The % change in body weight (kg) from week 52 to week 104.|52 weeks|MITT with LOCF||% change from baseline: body wt (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847895|NCT00395135|Secondary|Year 1: Percent Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 52|Year 1: The % change in body weight (kg) from baseline to week 52.|52 weeks|MITT with LOCF||% change from baseline: body wt (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
847896|NCT00395135|Primary|Year 2: Proportion (%) of Patients Maintaining > or = 5% Weight Loss at Week 104|The proportion of patients with a reduction from baseline body weight of 5% or more at the end of year 1 and who maintained this reduction during year 2.|104 weeks|MITT with LOCF||percentage of participants|||Number
847898|NCT00379821|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Chloroquine Represented by Maximum Concentration (Cmax)|1727 non-zero concentration measurements from 479 participants were pooled and used for population pharmacokinetic modeling in Monolix413s. Compartmental population pharmacokinetic modeling was used due to highly sparse data. The model was parameterized in terms of absorption rate constant for chloroquine (Ka), apparent clearance for chloroquine (CL/F, with F as the unknown oral bioavailability), apparent volume of distribution of the central and peripheral compartments for chloroquine (Vd/F), and the inter-compartmental clearance for chloroquine (Q/F). Only these primary population pharmacokinetic parameters could be estimated using the type of data collected. The best-fit population PK model was then used to estimate individual parameter estimates to derive Cmax in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL).|Day 0 - Day 28|All participants with non-zero concentration measures suitable for pharmacokinetic analysis were included.||ng/mL chloroquine||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847899|NCT00379821|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Chloroquine Represented by Time of Maximal Concentration (Tmax) and Chloroquine Half-life|1727 non-zero concentration measurements from 479 participants were pooled and used for population pharmacokinetic modeling in Monolix413s. Compartmental population pharmacokinetic modeling was used due to highly sparse data. The model was parameterized in terms of absorption rate constant for chloroquine (Ka), apparent clearance for chloroquine (CL/F, with F as the unknown oral bioavailability), apparent volume of distribution of the central and peripheral compartments for chloroquine (Vd/F), and the inter-compartmental clearance for chloroquine (Q/F). Only these primary population pharmacokinetic parameters could be estimated using the type of data collected. The best-fit population PK model was then used to estimate individual parameter estimates to derive Tmax and half-life.|Day 0 - Day 28|All participants with non-zero concentration measures suitable for pharmacokinetic analysis were included.||Hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847900|NCT00379821|Secondary|Nearest Neighbor Index as a Measure of Spatial Pattern of the Distribution of Malaria Cases in Ndirande|The Global Positioning System (GPS) was used to establish the coordinates of participants' homes. The distribution of these coordinates was analyzed for evidence of clustering, or occurring closer together than would be expected on the basis of chance. Nearest Neighbor Index is a ratio of the observed mean distance over the expected mean distance. If the index is less than 1, the pattern exhibits clustering. If the index is greater than 1, the trend is toward dispersion.|1 year|The analysis included all participants for whom the GPS coordinates of the home were established.||Index|||Number
847901|NCT00379821|Secondary|Time to First Malaria Episode in Participants Who Travelled and Slept Outside the City Versus Those Who Did Not Travel and Sleep Outside the City.|The cumulative hazard of having a malaria attack within one year for those participants who travelled and slept in rural areas (outside the city) versus those who did not was calculated and is presented as a life table to display the number of subjects at risk, the number with first clinical episode and the number censored at each time point. Participants are right-censored at the time of first malaria episode. Participants who did not develop malaria during follow-up or were lost to follow-up were censored at the time of their last visit.|Days 0 - 420|||participants|||Number
847902|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Participants With New and Recrudescent Infections After Subsequent New Episodes|Participants were enrolled at the time of initial malaria episode and treated. Subsequent to treatment, participants who subsequently suffered new malaria episodes were monitored for the additional occurrence of new and recrudescent malaria infections, which were distinguished by analysis of the infecting parasites using merozoite surface protein-2 polymorphic gene length variation.|Day 28 to 1 year|The analysis population is limited to participants who had new episodes of malaria during the follow-up period after treatment.||participants|||Number
847903|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Participants With New and Recrudescent Malaria Infections After Initial Treatment|Participants were enrolled at the time of initial malaria episode and treated. Subsequent to treatment, subjects were monitored for the occurrence of new and recrudescent malaria infections, which were distinguished by analysis of the infecting parasites using merozoite surface protein-2 polymorphic gene length variation.|28 days to 1 year|All subjects completing the initial treatment were included in the analysis population.||participants|||Number
847904|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Participants Infected With Parasites With the Mutation Pfcrt 76T at Recrudescent Episodes of Malaria|Participants were enrolled in the study at the time of the initial episode of malaria. If the participant presented with a subsequent episode of malaria at any time during the one year of follow-up, the presence of parasites with the mutation pfCRT 76T was measured with filter paper specimens collected at the time of enrollment and with successful parasite DNA amplification using pyrosequencing.|Recrudescent episodes of malaria within one year of enrollment|The analysis population is limited to participants who presented with subsequent episodes of malaria from whom samples were successfully collected and DNA successfully amplified.||participants|||Number
847905|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Participants Infected With Parasites With the Mutation Pfcrt 76T on Day 0 of the Initial Episode of Malaria|The presence of parasites with the mutation pfCRT 76T was measured with filter paper specimens collected at the time of enrollment and with successful parasite DNA amplification using pyrosequencing.|Day 0 of initial episode of malaria|All participants from whom samples were successfully collected and DNA successfully amplified were included.||participants|||Number
847906|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Participants in Each Treatment Arm Who Change From “Normal” to “Abnormal” on Any Questions of the Neurological Examination|"A basic age-appropriate neurological examination was conducted on Day 28 of each malaria illness episode and also at Days 112 and 224, and at 1 year. Subjects were were counted as a change from 'normal' to 'abnormal'  if they had the 'normal' (or not-applicable) response for the initial day 28 exam and an 'abnormal' response at their last exam. If a subject did not have an exam at 1 year then the last available exam that was not associated with an illness episode (either Day 112 or 224) was used."|1 Year|Subjects who did not have an initial exam, or who did not have a subsequent exam at a routine visit are excluded.||Participants|||Number
847907|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Alanine Transaminase (ALT) in Each Treatment Arm (Hepatic Function)|ALT values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode.|Day 14 of fourth subsequent malaria episode (Episode 4)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||International Units/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847911|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Alanine Transaminase (ALT) in Each Treatment Arm (Hepatic Function)|ALT values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode.|Day 14 of second subsequent malaria episode (Episode 2)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||International Units/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847912|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Alanine Transaminase (ALT) in Each Treatment Arm (Hepatic Function)|ALT values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode.|Day 0 of second subsequent malaria episode (Episode 2)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||International Units/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847913|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Alanine Transaminase (ALT) in Each Treatment Arm (Hepatic Function)|ALT values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode.|Day 14 of first subsequent malaria episode (Episode 1)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||International Units/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847914|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Alanine Transaminase (ALT) in Each Treatment Arm (Hepatic Function)|ALT values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode.|Day 0 of first subsequent malaria episode (Episode 1)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||International Units/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847915|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Alanine Transaminase (ALT) in Each Treatment Arm (Hepatic Function)|ALT values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode.|Day 14 of initial malaria episode (Episode 0)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||International Units/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847916|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Alanine Transaminase (ALT) in Each Treatment Arm (Hepatic Function)|ALT values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode.|Day 0 of initial malaria episode (Episode 0)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||International Units/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847917|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Creatinine in Each Treatment Arm (Renal Function)|Creatine values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode. Samples that were below the limit of detection were reported as 44.2 micromoles/liter, equivalent to the lower limit of detection.|Day 14 of fourth subsequent malaria episode (Episode 4)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||Micromole/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847918|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Creatinine in Each Treatment Arm (Renal Function)|Creatine values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode. Samples that were below the limit of detection were reported as 44.2 micromoles/liter, equivalent to the lower limit of detection.|Day 0 of fourth subsequent malaria episode (Episode 4)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||Micromole/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847919|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Creatinine in Each Treatment Arm (Renal Function)|Creatine values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode. Samples that were below the limit of detection were reported as 44.2 micromoles/liter, equivalent to the lower limit of detection.|Day 14 of third subsequent malaria episode (Episode 3)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||Micromole/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847920|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Creatinine in Each Treatment Arm (Renal Function)|Creatine values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode. Samples that were below the limit of detection were reported as 44.2 micromoles/liter, equivalent to the lower limit of detection.|Day 0 of third subsequent malaria episode (Episode 3)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||Micromole/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847921|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Creatinine in Each Treatment Arm (Renal Function)|Creatine values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode. Samples that were below the limit of detection were reported as 44.2 micromoles/liter, equivalent to the lower limit of detection.|Day 14 of second subsequent malaria episode (Episode 2)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||Micromole/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847922|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Creatinine in Each Treatment Arm (Renal Function)|Creatine values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode. Samples that were below the limit of detection were reported as 44.2 micromoles/liter, equivalent to the lower limit of detection.|Day 0 of second subsequent malaria episode (Episode 2)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||Micromole/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847923|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Creatinine in Each Treatment Arm (Renal Function)|Creatine values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode. Samples that were below the limit of detection were reported as 44.2 micromoles/liter, equivalent to the lower limit of detection.|Day 14 of first subsequent malaria episode (Episode 1)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||Micromole/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847924|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Creatinine in Each Treatment Arm (Renal Function)|Creatine values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode. Samples that were below the limit of detection were reported as 44.2 micromoles/liter, equivalent to the lower limit of detection.|Day 0 of first subsequent malaria episode (Episode 1)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||Micromole/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847925|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Creatinine in Each Treatment Arm (Renal Function)|Creatine values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode. Samples that were below the limit of detection were reported as 44.2 micromoles/liter, equivalent to the lower limit of detection.|Day 14 of initial malaria episode (Episode 0)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||Micromole/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847926|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Creatinine in Each Treatment Arm (Renal Function)|Creatine values were assessed from blood draws at Day 0 and Day 14 of each malaria episode. Samples that were below the limit of detection were reported as 44.2 micromoles/liter, equivalent to the lower limit of detection.|Day 0 of initial malaria episode (Episode 0)|The safety population includes all participants who have laboratory results reported at the time point for the episode.||Micromole/Liter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847927|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Hemoglobin at the Last Study Visit in Each Treatment Arm for the Age Group of Participants Greater Than 3 Years to 5 Years of Age.|Hemoglobin values were assessed from blood collected at the last study visit at one year after enrollment. Group means are stratified by participants 3 years of age and under, and over 3 to 5 years of age.|1 year|The safety population includes all participants. The number of participants is limited to those who attended the final 1-year visit.||Grams/Deciliter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847928|NCT00379821|Secondary|Mean Hemoglobin at the Last Study Visit in Each Treatment Arm for the Age Group of Participants 3 Years of Age or Younger.|Hemoglobin values were assessed from blood collected at the last study visit at one year after enrollment. Group means are stratified by participants 3 years of age and under, and over 3 to 5 years of age.|1 year|The safety population includes all participants. The number of participants is limited to those who attended the final 1-year visit.||Grams/Deciliter||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
847929|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Cases of Severe Malaria in Each Treatment Arm|A case of severe malaria included one or more of the following: Hemoglobin ≤5 g/dL; prostration; respiratory distress; bleeding; recent seizures, coma or obtundation (Blantyre coma score < 5); inability to drink, or persistent vomiting. All cases were then adjudicated by a panel of investigators prior to analysis.|1 Year|The safety cohort includes all participants.||Cases of severe malaria|||Number
847930|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Participants With Day 28 Adequate Clinical and Parasitologic Response in Each Treatment Arm|Adequate clinical and parasitologic response (ACPR) was defined as the absence of parasitemia at Day 28 and without previously meeting any of the criteria of early treatment or late clinical failure.|Day 28 of fourth subsequent malaria episode (Episode 4)|This analysis was per protocol, which includes participants who had 4 subsequent malaria episodes, but excludes participants if the fourth episode was not caused by p. falciparum or if the participant did not receive all 3 doses of treatment for the fourth episode.||Participants|||Number
847931|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Participants With Day 28 Adequate Clinical and Parasitologic Response in Each Treatment Arm|Adequate clinical and parasitologic response (ACPR) was defined as the absence of parasitemia at Day 28 and without previously meeting any of the criteria of early treatment or late clinical failure.|Day 28 of third subsequent malaria episode (Episode 3)|This analysis was per protocol, which includes participants who had at least 3 subsequent malaria episodes, but excludes participants if the third episode was not caused by p. falciparum or if the participant did not receive all 3 doses of treatment for the third episode.||Participants|||Number
847932|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Participants With Day 28 Adequate Clinical and Parasitologic Response in Each Treatment Arm|Adequate clinical and parasitologic response (ACPR) was defined as the absence of parasitemia at Day 28 and without previously meeting any of the criteria of early treatment or late clinical failure.|Day 28 of second subsequent malaria episode (Episode 2)|This analysis was per protocol, which which includes participants who had at least 2 subsequent malaria episodes, but excludes participants if the second episode was not caused by p. falciparum or if the participant did not receive all 3 doses of treatment for the second episode.||Participants|||Number
847933|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Participants With Day 28 Adequate Clinical and Parasitologic Response in Each Treatment Arm|Adequate clinical and parasitologic response (ACPR) was defined as the absence of parasitemia at Day 28 and without previously meeting any of the criteria of early treatment or late clinical failure.|Day 28 of first subsequent malaria episode (Episode 1)|This analysis was per protocol, which includes participants who had at least 1 subsequent malaria episode, but excludes participants who did if that episode was not caused by p. falciparum or if the participant did not receive all 3 doses of treatment for the first subsequent episode.||Participants|||Number
847934|NCT00379821|Secondary|Number of Participants With Day 28 Adequate Clinical and Parasitologic Response in Each Treatment Arm|Adequate clinical and parasitologic response (ACPR) was defined as the absence of parasitemia at Day 28 and without previously meeting any of the criteria of early treatment or late clinical failure.|Day 28 of initial malaria episode (Episode 0)|This analysis was per protocol, which excludes participants who did not have p. falciparum or who did not receive all 3 doses of treatment.||Participants|||Number
847935|NCT00379821|Primary|Number of Clinical Malaria Episodes Per Year of Follow-up|Clinical malaria episode was defined as at least one symptom of malaria and a positive malaria smear. The number of clinical malaria episodes (not including the initial malaria episode) reported by participants during follow up is presented as the number per Person Years at Risk (PYAR).|1 year|The intention to treat (ITT) population was used for the primary outcome.||Episodes per PYAR|||Number
847936|NCT00375752|Secondary|Mean Changes From Baseline in FACT-B Total Score at 6 Months (ITT, Data as Observed)|"The FACT-B total score is calculated by summing all five unweighted subscale scores, with total scores in the range of 0–144.To Derive a FACT-B total score: all sections added together The higher the score the better the QoL
+ __________ + __________ + __________ + __________ =________=FACT-B Total score (PWB score) (SWB score) (EWB score) (FWB score) (BCS score)"|baseline and 6 mos|ITT||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
847937|NCT00375752|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Tumor Size (Longest Diameter) at Month 6|Tumor size (sum of longest diameter)was analyzed based on the diameters values provided with the central review.|Baseline, Month 6|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population included all patients of the ITT population for whom at least one post-baseline assessment of tumor response according to modified RECIST made by central review was available.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
847938|NCT00375752|Secondary|Number of Patients With Breast Conserving Surgery at 6 Months||Every 6 months|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all patients of the safety population for whom at least one post-baseline assessment of tumor response according to the modified RECIST (local or central assessment) was available. During different time points, participants with observations at that timepoint were included in the analysis.||Participants|||Number
847939|NCT00375752|Secondary|Best RECIST Response Based on Central Review at 6 Mos|Best response is defined as the best response the patients has reached during the 6 months of treatment. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) has 4 response categories. CR (complete response) = disappearance of all target lesions, PR (partial response) = 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, PD (progressive disease) = 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions and SD (stable disease) = small changes that do not meet criteria.|6 Months|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population included all patients of the ITT population for whom at least one post-baseline assessment of tumor response according to modified RECIST made by central review was available.||Participants|||Number
847940|NCT00375752|Primary|Tumor Response Rate (Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)) Based on MRI- or Mammography and/or Sonography According to Modified RECIST Criteria at Month 6|Sum of longest diameter for all target lesions was reported as baseline sum LD. Baseline sum LD was used as reference to characterize objective tumor response. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors has 4 response categories. CR (complete response) = disappearance of all target lesions, PR (partial response)= 30% decrease in sum of longest diameter of target lesions, PD (progressive disease) = 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions and SD(stable disease)=small changes that do not meet criteria. Analysis was underpowered due to insufficient recruitment rate.|6 months|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population included all patients of the ITT population for whom at least one post-baseline assessment of tumor response according to modified RECIST made by central review was available.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847941|NCT00375219|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time from the initiation of treatment until death from any cause or the last day of participant contact or evaluation for participants that were lost to follow-up. Participants were censored t the last recorded contract or evaluation when a participant was alive at time of analysis. A quarterly phone survey was conducted to collect survival data for participants who discontinued from the study.|up to 4 years|Intent to treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847942|NCT00375219|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Time to Disease Progression|Time to disease progression is defined as the time from the initiation of treatment until the onset date of death, the development of CML accelerated phase or blast phase, or the loss of complete hematologic response or major cytogenetic response, whichever came first. Participants were censored only if they did not have progression or if they discontinued treatment for reasons other than AE, progression or death.|up to 4 years|Intent to treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847943|NCT00375219|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Duration of Best Cytogenetic Response|Duration of response is defined as the time from first reported date of cytogenetic response until the earliest date of objective evidence of disease progression, relapse or death. Data was censored at the last examination date for participants with ongoing response or participants who discontinued treatment for reasons other than adverse event, disease progression or death.|up to 4 years|Intent to treat population of participants who had a response||months||Full Range|Median
847944|NCT00375219|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Duration of Best Hematologic Response|Duration of response is defined as the time from first reported date of hematologic response until the earliest date of objective evidence of disease progression, relapse or death. Data was censored at the last examination date for participants with ongoing response or participants who discontinued treatment for reasons other than adverse event, disease progression or death.|up to 4 years|Intent to treat population of participants who had a response||months||Full Range|Median
847945|NCT00375219|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Time to Onset of Best Cytogenetic Response|"Time to onset was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Participants who did not achieve a response are censored at their last visit day.
Major cytogenetic response includes complete or partial response. Both confirmed and unconfirmed major cytogenetic response is considered meaningful.
Unconfirmed response is based on a single bone marrow cytogenetic evaluation for participants where a confirmatory evaluation is not available.
Complete response shows 0% Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) cells. A partial response shows >0% - 35% Ph+ cells."|up to 3 years|Intent to treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847946|NCT00375219|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates for Time to Onset of Best Hematologic Response|"Time to onset was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Participants who did not achieve a response are censored at their last visit day.
Overall hematologic response for chronic phase participants includes confirmed complete hematologic response (CHR). Overall hematologic response for accelerated or blast phase participants includes confirmed complete hematologic response (CHR), no evidence of leukemia (NEL), or return to chronic phase (RCP). Hematologic response must last >= 8 weeks to be considered meaningful."|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847947|NCT00375219|Secondary|Number of Treatment Cycles Needed to Achieve Best Cytogenetic Response||Day 1 up to 22 months|Intent to treat population of participants who had a cytogenetic response||treatment cycles||Full Range|Median
847948|NCT00375219|Secondary|Number of Treatment Cycles Needed to Achieve Best Hematologic Response|Induction therapy was administered for 14 consecutive days for each 28 days cycle, for up to 6 cycles. All treatment arms were given omacetaxine mepesuccinate via subcutaneous (SC) administration at 1.25 mg/m^2 twice a day (BID) for the 14 consecutive days.|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat population of participants who had a response to treatment||treatment cycles||Full Range|Median
847949|NCT00375219|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With the Largest Percentage Reduction From Baseline of T315I Mutated BCR-ABL|Summarization is based on the best of the individual response assessments. Not assessable indicates that the participant either had no baseline assessment or the % mutation could not be determined in the post-baseline assessment(s).|Day 1 up to Month 9|Intent to treat population of participants with post-baseline assessment of T315I mutated BCR ABL||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847969|NCT00355121|Primary|Number of Participants With Antibodies Against Diphtheria and Tetanus at ≥ 1.0 IU/mL After DAPTACEL Vaccination|Serum antibody titers were assessed for diphtheria by a seroneutralization assay and for tetanus by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay.|Day 30 post-vaccination (Visit 1)|Serum antibody titers were assessed in the per-protocol population. (Participants in Group 3 did not receive DAPTACEL vaccine at Visit 1)||Participants|||Number
847950|NCT00375219|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Extramedullary Disease (EMD) at Baseline Achieving a Clinical Response|"Clinical response was defined by disease phase and based on evaluations by the independent Data Monitoring Committee (DMC).
Chronic Phase subgroup: achieving a complete hematologic response and/or major cytogenetic response (complete cytogenetic response or partial cytogenetic response, confirmed or unconfirmed).
Accelerated Phase and Blast Phase subgroups: achieving complete hematologic response, no evidence of leukemia, return to chronic phase, and/or major cytogenetic response (complete cytogenetic response or partial cytogenetic response, confirmed or unconfirmed).
The percentage of participants achieving response with extramedullary disease at Baseline was to be summarized, if the sample size was sufficient. This analysis was not done as the sample was ultimately insufficient"|Day 1 up to Month 9|Intent to treat population of study participants who had extramedullary disease at baseline. Analysis not performed due to insufficient sample size.|||||
847951|NCT00375219|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Hematologic Response Category|"Complete Response (CHR)
Chronic phase must last at least 8 weeks: WBC <10*10^9/liter, platelets <450*10^9/liter, myelocytes + metamyelocytes <5% in blood, no blasts or promyelocytes in blood, <20% basophils in peripheral blood, no extramedullary involvement.
Accelerated and Blast phase must last at least 4 weeks: absolute neutrophil count 1.5*10^9/liter, platelets 100*10^9/liter, no blood blasts, bone marrow blasts <5%, no extramedullary disease.
Partial Response - CHR plus one or more of the following:
Persistence of splenomegaly with a reduction of ≥50% from pre-treatment
Platelets > 450*10^9/L
Presence of immature cells in the peripheral blood
5% to 25% blasts in the bone marrow
If extra-medullary disease pre-treatment, reduction by ≥50% Hematologic Improvement - CHR, except allowing persistent thrombocytopenia (<100*10^9/L), and a few immature cells No evidence of leukemia: Morphologic leukemia-free state, defined as <5% bone marrow blasts."|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat||percentage of participants|||Number
847952|NCT00375219|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Major Molecular Response (MMR) Representing the Degree of Suppression of BCR-ABL Transcript Levels Using the Housekeeping Gene ABL|MMR is defined as a ratio of BCR-ABL/standard gene of less than 0.1% according to the international scale. BCR-ABL is a fusion gene of the breakpoint cluster region [BCR] gene and Abelson proto-oncogene [ABL] genes). This analysis used the standard gene ABL. Analysis was performed by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) of peripheral blood.|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat population of participants who had evaluable samples. Participants with no data for these analyses either had degraded samples or the samples were missing.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847953|NCT00375219|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Major Molecular Response (MMR) Representing the Degree of Suppression of BCR-ABL Transcript Levels Using the Housekeeping Gene GUS|MMR is defined as a ratio of BCR-ABL/standard gene of less than 0.1% according to the international scale. BCR-ABL is a fusion gene of the breakpoint cluster region [BCR] gene and Abelson proto-oncogene [ABL] genes). This analysis used the standard gene GUS. Analysis was performed by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) of peripheral blood.|Day 1 up to Month 6|Intent to treat population of participants who had evaluable samples. Participants with no data for these analyses either had degraded samples or the samples were missing.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847954|NCT00375219|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Each Cytogenetic Response Category Representing the Degree of Suppression of the Philadelphia Chromosome (Ph+)|"Cytogenetic response categories:
Complete: 0% Ph+ cells
Partial: >0%-35% Ph+ cells
Minor: >35%-65% Ph+ cells
Minimal: >65%-95% Ph+ cells
No Response: >95% Ph+ cells
Unevaluable: <20 metaphases were examined and/or response could not be assigned"|Day 1 up to Month 9|Intent to treat||percentage of participants|||Number
847955|NCT00375219|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) by Subpopulation and Total|"TEAE are any untoward events that were newly occurring or worsening from Baseline.
Treatment related toxicity was considered by the investigator to be unrelated, possibly, probably or unknown related to study drug.
Severity was graded according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v3.0 on the following scale: Grade 1 = mild, Grade 2 = moderate, Grade 3 = severe, Grade 4 = life-threatening, Grade 5 = death.
A serious adverse event (SAE) is any untoward medical occurrence that is fatal or life-threatening; results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity; requires or prolongs in-patient hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a patient; and conditions not included in the above that may jeopardize the patient or may require intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above.
A participant is only counted once in each category (at worst severity or strongest relationship)."|up to 3 years|Intent to treat||participants|||Number
847956|NCT00375219|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Major Cytogenetic Response by Subpopulation and Total Population|"Subpopulations reflect chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) phases at the time of enrollment: chronic, accelerated, and blast phase. Primary endpoints as adjudicated by the Data Monitoring Committee were used for the primary analyses.
Major cytogenetic response includes complete or partial response. Both confirmed and unconfirmed major cytogenetic response is considered meaningful.
Unconfirmed response is based on a single bone marrow cytogenetic evaluation for participants where a confirmatory evaluation is not available.
Complete response shows 0% Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) cells. A partial response shows >0% - 35% Ph+ cells.
Response rates by disease phase were examined relative to an a priori value of 2.5% using a one-sided lower 95% exact binomial confidence limit. If the lower limit from the one-sided lower 95% confidence limit exceeds 2.5%, the observed response rate will have exceeded the minimum threshold required to demonstrate efficacy."|Day 1 up to 6 months|Intent to treat||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847970|NCT00354172|Secondary|Chimerism After Double Umbilical Cord Blood Transplant (UCBT)|Calculation of Median (range) of percentage of donor cells engrafted (present) in the recipient (patient).|Day 21, Day 100, 6 Months|1 Year and 2 Year Post Transplant data was not applicable; no patients reached this timeframe to evaluate.||Percentage of Engrafted Cells||Full Range|Median
847971|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) With Successful Natural Killer Cell Expansion|Defined by an absolute circulating donor-derived natural killer cell count of >100 cells/microliter 10-13 days after infusion with <5% donor T and B cells in the mononuclear population|10-13 Days Post Infusion|||Participants|||Number
847972|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) Who Experienced Relapse by 24 Months|Number of patients who experienced recurrence or progression of disease from the time of transplant.|2 Years Post transplant|||Participants|||Number
847957|NCT00375219|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving an Overall Hematologic Response by Subpopulation and Total Population|"Subpopulations reflect chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) phases at the time of enrollment: chronic, accelerated, and blast phase. Primary endpoints as adjudicated by the Data Monitoring Committee were used for the primary analyses.
Overall hematologic response for chronic phase participants includes confirmed complete hematologic response (CHR). Overall hematologic response for accelerated or blast phase participants includes confirmed complete hematologic response (CHR), no evidence of leukemia (NEL), or return to chronic phase (RCP). Hematologic response must last >= 8 weeks to be considered meaningful.
Response rates by disease phase were examined relative to an a priori value of 2.5% using a one-sided lower 95% exact binomial confidence limit. If the lower limit from the one-sided lower 95% confidence limit exceeds 2.5%, the observed response rate will have exceeded the minimum threshold required to demonstrate efficacy."|Day 1 up to 6 months|Intent to treat population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
847958|NCT00374907|Other Pre-specified|Marked Laboratory Abnormalities - During ST + LT Treatment Period|A laboratory value was considered a marked abnormality if it is outside the pre-defined criteria for marked abnormality and the on-treatment value was more extreme (farther from the limit) than the baseline value. Pre-Rx=pretreatment; ULN=upper limit of normal; ALP=alkaline phosphatase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; ALT=alanine aminotransferase; BUN=blood urea nitrogen; unspec.=unspecified; sodium serum low: <0.9 x Pre-Rx & <=130mEq/L / high: >1.1 x Pre-Rx & >=150mEq/L; potassium, serum low: <=0.8 x Pre-Rx & >=6.0mEq/L / high: 1.2 x Pre-Rx & >=6.0mEq/L; LLN=lower limit of normal.|116 weeks|Number of Participants Analyzed=Treated participants; n=number of treated subjects with baseline value and at least one value during the ST + LT treatment period.||participants|||Number
847959|NCT00374907|Other Pre-specified|Overall Summary of Adverse Events (AEs) Serious AEs (SAEs), Discontinuations, and Deaths During the ST + LT Treatment Period|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a pre-existing medical condition which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or causes prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, results in development of drug dependency or drug abuse, is an important medical event. Related events=relationship of certain, probable, possible, or missing.|116 weeks|Treated participants||participants|||Number
847960|NCT00374907|Secondary|Insulin Secretion Rate AUC During IV Hyperglycemic Clamp - Percent Change From Baseline at Week 12|Adjusted percent change in the insulin secretion rate AUC during an intravenous hyperglycemic clamp (120-180 minutes) at Week 12. The method used for calculating the insulin secretion rate was C-peptide deconvolution.|Baseline, Week 12|Randomized Participants with both a baseline and post-baseline value (up to Week 12).||Percent Change (Percentage of Baseline)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847961|NCT00374907|Primary|Insulin Secretion Rate Area Under the Curve (AUC) During Intravenous (IV)-Oral Hyperglycemic Clamp - Percent Change From Baseline at Week 12|Adjusted percent change in the insulin secretion rate AUC during a hyperglycemic clamp with an enteral glucose load [intravenous-oral hyperglycemic clamp (180-480 minutes)] at Week 12. The method used for calculating the insulin secretion rate was C-peptide deconvolution.|Baseline, Week 12|Randomized participants with both a baseline and post-baseline value (up to Week 12).||Percent Change (Percentage of Baseline)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847962|NCT00355121|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection Site or Systemic Reactions After Vaccination at Visit 2|Solicited Injection Site Reactions: Pain, Erythema, and Redness. Solicited Systemic Reactions: Fever (Temperature), Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia.|Day 0 through Day 7 post-vaccination|Safety analysis was on all enrolled and vaccinated participants with available reaction data, intent-to-treat population.||Participants|||Number
847963|NCT00355121|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Reporting Solicited Injection Site and Systemic Reactions After Vaccinations at Visit 1|Solicited Injection Site Reactions: Pain, Erythema, and Redness. Solicited Systemic Reactions: Fever (Temperature), Headache, Malaise, and Myalgia.|Day 0 through Day 7 post-vaccination|Safety analysis was on all enrolled and vaccinated subjects with available reaction data, intent-to-treat population.||Participants|||Number
847964|NCT00355121|Other Pre-specified|Geometric Mean Titers Against Poliovirus After IPOL Vaccination.|Serum antibodies were assessed for poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 by serum neutralization assay.|Day 30 post-vaccination|Serum antibody titers were assessed in the per-protocol population. (Participants received IPOL at Visit 1 in Group 1 and 3, and at Visit 2 for Group 2||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847965|NCT00355121|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting Fever When DAPTACEL and Menactra Vaccines Were Administered Concomitantly and Those Reporting When DAPTACEL Was Administered With IPOL Vaccine|Fever was defined as a maximum oral temperature of ≥ 100.4ºF.|Day 0 through Day 7 post-vaccination at Visit 1|Safety analysis was on enrolled and vaccinated participants with available reaction data, intent-to-treat population.||Participants|||Number
847966|NCT00355121|Secondary|Serum Bactericidal Assay Using Human Complement Geometric Mean Titers for Serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 After Menactra Vaccination|Serum antibody titers against meningococcal serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 were assessed by serum bactericidal assay using human complement (SBA HC)|Day 30 post-vaccination|Serum antibody titers were assessed in the per protocol population. Participants in Group 1 received Menactra vaccine at Visit 2, Group 3 at Visit 1.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847967|NCT00355121|Secondary|Geometric Mean Concentrations (GMCs) of Antibodies Against the Pertussis Antigens After DAPTACEL Vaccination at Visit 1|Serum antibody titers against pertussis were assessed for pertussis toxoid (PT), filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA), Fimbriae types 2 and 3 (FIM), and pertactin (RN) by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).|Day 30 post-vaccination 1|Serum antibody titers were assessed in the per-protocol population. (Participants in Group 3 did not receive DAPTACEL vaccine at Visit 1)||EU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847968|NCT00355121|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) of Antibodies Against Meningococcal Serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 After Menactra Vaccination at Visit 1.|Serum antibody titers against meningococcal serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 were assessed by serum bactericidal assay using human complement (SBA HC)|Day 30 post-vaccination (Visit 1)|Serum antibody titers were assessed in the per-protocol population. (Participants in Group 1 did not receive Menactra vaccine at Visit 1)||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
847977|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) With Acute Graft-versus-Host Disease at Grade III-IV|Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a common complication of transplantation in which functional immune cells in the transplanted marrow recognize the recipient as foreign and mount an immunologic attack. The acute or fulminant form of the disease (aGVHD) is normally observed within the first 100 days post-transplant, and is a major challenge to transplants owing to associated morbidity and mortality. Acute GVHD is staged as follows: overall grade (skin-liver-gut) with each organ staged individually from a low of I to a high of IV. Patients with grade IV GVHD usually have a poor prognosis.|Day 100 post transplant|||Participants|||Number
847978|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) With Acute Graft-versus-host Disease (GVHD) Grade II-IV|Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a common complication of transplantation in which functional immune cells in the transplanted marrow recognize the recipient as foreign and mount an immunologic attack. The acute or fulminant form of the disease (aGVHD) is normally observed within the first 100 days post-transplant, and is a major challenge to transplants owing to associated morbidity and mortality. Acute GVHD is staged as follows: overall grade (skin-liver-gut) with each organ staged individually from a low of I to a high of IV. Patients with grade IV GVHD usually have a poor prognosis.|Day 100 Post Transplant|||Participants|||Number
847979|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) Who Attained Platelet Engraftment|Platelet engraftment is defined as platelet counts > 50 x 10^9/Liter for 3 consecutive days.|1 Year Post Transplant|||Participants|||Number
847980|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) Who Attained Neutrophil Engraftment|"Defined as absolute neutrophils (ANC) > 5 x 10^8/Liter for 3 consecutive days.
ANC is the real number of white blood cells (WBCs) that are neutrophils. The absolute neutrophil count is commonly called the ANC. The ANC is not measured directly. It is derived by multiplying the WBC count times the percent of neutrophils in the differential WBC count. The percent of neutrophils consists of the segmented (fully mature) neutrophils) + the bands (almost mature neutrophils). The normal range for the ANC = 1.5 to 8.0 (1,500 to 8,000/mm3)."|Day 42 Post Transplant|||Participants|||Number
847981|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) Who Died Due to Transplant.|Patients who had transplant-related mortality (TRM). TRM = adverse event(s) that occur(s) after the patient has received a transplant, the principal investigator decides it is related to the procedure and the patient dies within 6 months.|6 Months Post Transplant|||Participants|||Number
847982|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Were Disease-free and Alive at 24 Months|Number of patients who were alive and free of disease (malignancy) at 24 months after transplant.|24 Months Post transplant|||Participants|||Number
847983|NCT00354172|Secondary|Number of Participants (Patients) Who Were Disease-free and Alive at 12 Months|Number of patients who were alive and free of disease (malignancy) at 12 months after transplant.|12 Months Post transplant|||Participants|||Number
847984|NCT00354172|Primary|Number of Participants (Patients) Who Were Disease-free and Alive at 6 Months|Number of patients who were alive and free of disease (malignancy) at 6 months after transplant.|6 Months Post Transplant|One patient did not receive umbilical cord transplant and was not included in this Evaluable patient group.||Participants|||Number
847993|NCT00324896|Secondary|WASO|Wake after sleep onset in minutes|6 weeks|intent to treat||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
847994|NCT00324896|Primary|TST|Total sleep time in hours|6 weeks|intent to treat approach||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
848037|NCT00289536|Secondary|Terminal Half-life|Computed from the regression slope in the terminal phase of the model (the slope is biphasic). Terminal half life is the time it takes for the plasma concentration or the amount of drug in the body to be reduced by 50%.|Pharmacokinetic evaluations: 30 minutes pre-infusion up to 48 hours post-infusion|Per protocol population: participants who were randomized, received all 3 doses of rAHF-PFM, and had pharmacokinetic assessments.||hour||Full Range|Median
847995|NCT00324155|Secondary|Time to Resolution of Grade 2-3, Grade 3-4 Immune-related Adverse Events (irAEs)|irAEs included the categories: gastrointestinal (GI), diarrhea, liver, endocrine, and skin. Grade 2=Moderate adverse events (AEs); minimal, local or noninvasive intervention indicated. Grade 3=severe AEs, medically significant but not immediately life-threatening. Grade 4=life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Time to resolution is defined as improvement to Grade 1 or less or to the Grade at baseline (prior to treatment).|Week 1 (first dose) to 70 days after last dose up to database lock for primary endpoint (approximately 5 years)|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had a specific event that resolved||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847996|NCT00324155|Secondary|Number of Participants With Grade 2-3 and Grade 3-4 Immune-related Adverse Events (irAEs) With Resolution Resolved|irAEs included the categories: gastrointestinal (GI), diarrhea, liver, endocrine, and skin. Grade 2=moderate adverse events (AEs); minimal, local, or noninvasive intervention indicated. Grade 3=severe AEs, medically significant but not immediately life-threatening. Grade 4=life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Resolution is defined as improvement to Grade 1 or less or to the Grade at baseline (prior to treatment).|Week 1 (first dose) to 70 days after last dose up to data cutoff for primary endpoint (approximately 5 years)|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had this specific event||Participants|||Number
847997|NCT00324155|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Drug-related AEs, AEs Leading to Discontinuation, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Drug-related SAEs, Drug-related Hypersensitivity, Immune-related AEs/SAEs, and Inflammatory AEs/SAEs|AE=any new undesirable symptom, sign, clinically significant laboratory abnormality, or medical condition occurring after starting study treatment, even if the event was not considered to be drug-related. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Treatment-related=having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug. Grade (Gr) 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4= Potentially Life-threatening or disabling. Randomization=Day 1; start of treatment (first dose)=Week 1. Summarization time frame is from first dose to 70 days after last dose of study at time of 414 deaths.|Week 1 (First Dose) to 70 days after last dose of study up to data cutoff for primary endpoint (approximately 5 years)|All participants who received at least 1 dose of randomized ipilimumab or placebo and/or dacarbazine||Participants|||Number
847998|NCT00324155|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization until the date of death. Analysis of OS was to be done once 416 deaths had occurred (primary endpoint). However, analysis occurred at 414 deaths (February 7, 2011), due to operational timing of the study. Median number of months of OS and associated confidence interval calculated using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Date of randomization to 37 months through 5-year follow-up and up to approximately 76 months|All randomized participants whose survival follow-up was current (defined as having died or last known alive date occurring on or after the data cutoff date, which was when a total of 414 deaths occurred).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
847999|NCT00324155|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Brain Metastasis-Free Survival at Time of Data Cutoff|Brain metastasis-free survival was defined as the time from randomization to the date of progression with a new lesion located in the brain. New brain lesions prior to Week 12 constituted a progression event (unlike main progression-free survival analysis). A participant who dies without documentation of a brain lesion was considered to have progressed with brain metastasis on the date of death. Participants who are free of brain metastasis were censored on the date of their last tumor assessment. An independent review committee evaluated images of participants with clinical symptoms to determine the number of those free of brain metastasis. The brain metastasis-free status was reported as a percent of participants (n/N), where n= participants with metastasis-free brains at data cutoff for the Primary Endpoint and N= randomized participants. A 2-sided Clopper and Pearson confidence interval was performed.|Date of randomization up to data cutoff for primary endpoint (approximately 5 years)|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848000|NCT00324155|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease (SD): Randomized Participants With Stable Disease|Duration of SD was defined in those whose Best Overall Response (BOR) was SD, per independent review committee (IRC) as the time between Week 12 and date of progressive disease (PD) or death , whichever occurs first. For those who underwent tumor resection following Week 12 but prior to PD, duration of SD was censored on date of last evaluable tumor assessment (TA) prior to resection. For those with BOR of SD at Week 12, date of PD was used in analysis of duration of SD. For those with BOR=SD who have not subsequently progressed and who remain alive, duration of SD censored on date of last evaluable TA. Modified criteria of the World Health Organization (mWHO): SD=insufficient decrease to qualify for partial response or sufficient increase to qualify for PD; PD=an increase of 25% or more in sum of products of longest diameter and greatest perpendicular diameter of index lesions compared with smallest recorded sum, or appearance of 1 or more new lesions.|Week 12 to date of disease progression or death up to data cutoff for primary endpoint (approximately 5 years)|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group and had SD||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848001|NCT00324155|Secondary|Time to Response: All Randomized Participants With Response to Treatment|Time to response was defined as the time between the first dose of study therapy and the date when measurement criteria were met for Best Overall Response (BOR) of partial response (PR) or complete response (CR), whichever occurred first, per independent review committee. Note that if an overall response of PR occurred before confirmation of CR, the time to response endpoint was not determined by the time that the BOR of CR was shown but rather by the earlier time point showing PR. Modified criteria of the World Health Organization: CR=disappearance of all lesions; no evidence of progressive disease (PD); PR=50% or more decrease in the sum of products of the longest and greatest perpendicular diameters (SPD) of all index lesions compared with baseline; PD=an increase of 25% or greater in the SPD of index lesions compared with the smallest recorded sum, or the appearance of 1 or more new lesions.|First dose to date of BOR up to data cutoff for primary endpoint (approximately 5 years)|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group and who had a response of CR or PR||Months||Full Range|Median
848283|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Absolute Eosinophil Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||x 10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848002|NCT00324155|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR): Randomized Participants With Response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|DOR defined in those with Best Overall Response (BOR)=CR or PR per independent review committee (IRC) as time between date of response of confirmed CR or PR, whichever occurred first, and date of PD or death. If PR assessed before CR, DOR confirmed at earlier time-point showing PR. Modified criteria of the World Health Organization (mWHO): CR=disappearance of all lesions;no evidence of PD; PR=50% or greater decrease in the sum of products of longest and greatest perpendicular diameters (SPD) of all index lesions compared with baseline. PD=an increase of 25% or greater in SPD of index lesions compared with the smallest recorded sum, or appearance of 1 or more new lesions. Immune-related response criteria (irRC): SD=50% decrease in total measurable tumor burden compared with peak cannot be established nor 25% increase compared with nadir, in absence of unequivocal progression of nonindex lesions. Unconfirmed immune-related (ir) CR, irPR, or irPD=irSD.|Day of CR or PR to day of PD or death up to data cutoff for primary endpoint (approximately 5 years)|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group and had a response of CR, PR, irCR, or irPR. n=number of participants who responded by mWHO criteria and irRC.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848003|NCT00324155|Secondary|Best Overall Response Rate (BORR)|BORR=number with Best Overall Response (BOR) of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR), divided by total number of randomized patients. BOR=date of first dose to the last tumor assessment prior to subsequent cancer therapy (including tumor resection surgery but excluding palliative local radiotherapy for bone lesions). Independent review committee assessment. Modified criteria of the World Health Organization (mWHO): CR=disappearance of all lesions; no evidence of progressive disease; PR=50% or greater decrease in the sum of products of the longest diameter and greatest perpendicular diameter of all index lesions compared with baseline. Immune-related (ir) response criteria (irRC) assess tumor response in patients on immunotherapy: irCR=disappearance of all lesions in 2 consecutive observations at least 4 weeks apart; irPR=50% or greater decrease in total measureable tumor burden compared with peak in 2 observations at least 4 weeks apart.|First dose to last tumor assessment at data cutoff for primary endpoint (approximately 5 years)|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848004|NCT00324155|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) Rate Truncated at Week 12|PFS rate=probability patient was progression-free at Day 78, calculated as total patients receiving treatment and with an overall response of stable disease (SD), partial response (PR), or complete response (CR) at Week 12, divided by total patients. For those alive and not progressed at or before Week 12, PFS censored on date of last evaluable tumor assessment (TA) at or before Week 12. Those with an assessment of PD prior to Week 12 and subsequent assessment of SD, PR, or CR at Week 12 were called progression-free at Week 12. Those with no recorded postbaseline TA dated on or before Day 109, and who had not died on or before Day 109, were censored at randomization. PD=at least 25% increase in sum of products of all index lesions or appearance of any new lesions. Both an investigator and independent review committee (IRC) assessed radiologic imaging studies, photographs of skin lesions, and clinical data. IRC assessment was considered primary over that of the investigators.|Day 78|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848005|NCT00324155|Secondary|Median Number of Months of Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS=time between randomization and date of progression or death, whichever occurs first. Participants who died without reported prior progression were considered to have progressed on date of death. For those alive and not progressed, PFS was censored on date of last evaluable tumor assessment (TA). Those who have not died and have no recorded postbaseline TA were censored at randomization. Those who died without any recorded postbaseline TA were considered to have progressed on date of death. Evaluation was conducted by both investigator and an independent review committee (IRC), who assessed radiologic imaging studies, photographs of skin lesions, and clinical data. Progressive disease defined using modified criteria of the World Health Organization: demonstration of at least a 25% increase in the sum of products of all index lesions or the appearance of any new lesions. For nonindex lesions: appearance of any new lesions or unequivocal progression of nonindex lesions.|Randomization to date of progression or death to approximately 5 years|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848006|NCT00324155|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|DCR=number whose best overall response (BOR) was partial response (PR), complete response (CR) or stable disease (SD), divided by all randomized participants (unevaluable participants included). Independent review committee assessment. BOR=date of first dose to last tumor assessment prior to subsequent cancer therapy (including tumor resection, excluding palliative local radiotherapy). Modified World Health Organization criteria: CR=disappearance of all lesions; no evidence of progressive disease (PD); PR=50% or more decrease in the sum of products of the longest diameter and greatest perpendicular diameter of all index lesions compared with baseline; SD=neither sufficient decrease to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD; PD=at least 25% increase in sum of products of all index lesions and/or appearance of any new lesions; nonindex lesions: appearance of any new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of nonindex lesions.|First dose to last tumor assessment prior to subsequent therapy at data cutoff for Primary Endpoint (approximately 5 years)|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group||Percentage of participants|||Number
848007|NCT00324155|Secondary|Survival Rate at 1 Year, 18 Months, 2 Years, and 3 Years|The survival rate (percentage of participants alive) was defined as the probability that a participant is alive at 1 year (or 18 months, 2 years, or 3 years) following randomization and was estimated via the Kaplan-Meier method.|Date of randomization to 3 years following randomization|All participants who were randomized to a treatment group||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848008|NCT00322465|Secondary|Specimens for Future Studies to Determine the Role of Unique and Novel Pathogens in the Etiology of Non-gonococcal Urethritis|Urethral swabs and urine specimens collected at each study visit for future studies to determine the role of unique and novel pathogens in the etiology of non-gonococcal urethritis|Baseline (enrollment); First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)||||||
848038|NCT00289536|Secondary|Area Under the Curve/Dose|Area under the plasma factor VIII concentration versus time curve (AUC) estimated by linear trapezoidal method per dose.|Pharmacokinetic evaluations: 30 minutes pre-infusion up to 48 hours post-infusion|Per protocol population: participants who were randomized, received all 3 doses of rAHF-PFM, and had pharmacokinetic assessments.||IU*hour/dL per IU/kg||Full Range|Median
848009|NCT00322465|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Clinical Cure of Non-gonococcal Urethritis (NGU) With Doxycycline Versus Doxycycline With Tinidazole; and Azithromycin Versus Azithromycin With Tinidazole|"Clinical Cure of NGU: Did not meet criteria for clinical failure at last evaluable follow-up visit.
Clinical Failure at first follow-up: [Persistent symptoms AND >= 5 polymorphonuclear leukocytes (PMNs) per 3-5 oil immersion fields (regardless of urethral discharge)] OR Persistent urethral discharge on exam (regardless of symptoms or number of PMNs).
Clinical Failure at second follow-up: >= 5 PMNs per 3-5 oil immersion fields (regardless of symptoms or presence of urethral discharge) OR Persistent urethral discharge on exam (regardless of symptoms or number of PMNs)"|First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)|Modified intent to treat: all subjects randomized who received at least one dose of study drug therapy or placebo||Percentage of participants|||Number
848010|NCT00322465|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of Doxycycline/Tinidazole and Azithromycin/Tinidazole: Number of Participants Reporting Diarrhea|At all study visits, unsolicited adverse events were recorded. Nausea, Vomiting, Abdominal pain, and Diarrhea were recorded using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (Version 3.0).|First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)|Modified intent-to-treat population was comprised of all subjects randomized who received at least one dose of study drug therapy or placebo||Participants|||Number
848011|NCT00322465|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of Doxycycline/Tinidazole and Azithromycin/Tinidazole: Number of Participants Reporting of Abdominal Pain|At all study visits, unsolicited adverse events were recorded. Nausea, Vomiting, Abdominal pain, and Diarrhea were recorded using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (Version 3.0).|First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)|Modified intent-to-treat population was comprised of all subjects randomized who received at least one dose of study drug therapy or placebo||Participants|||Number
848012|NCT00322465|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of Doxycycline/Tinidazole and Azithromycin/Tinidazole: Number of Participants Reporting Stomach Upset|At all study visits, unsolicited adverse events were recorded.|First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)|Modified intent-to-treat population was comprised of all subjects randomized who received at least one dose of study drug therapy or placebo||Participants|||Number
848013|NCT00322465|Secondary|Clinical, Behavioral, and Demographic Predictors of Mycoplasma Genitalium in Men With Non-gonococcal Urethritis|Logistic multiple regression with independent variable selection based on single variable models with p<0.10. Participants positive at enrollment for Mycoplasma genitalium from urine specimen. Potential variables: discharge amount and appearance; condom use last sex; new recent partner, number of partners and new partners in last 30 days and last 3 months; number of times vaginal sex, oral sex, or anal sex in last 30 days; always/almost always used condom last 3 months.|Baseline (enrollment visit)|All study participants who met major eligibility criteria (per protocol) with evaluable baseline results.||Participants|||Number
848014|NCT00322465|Secondary|Clinical, Behavioral, and Demographic Predictors of Trichomonas Vaginalis in Men With Non-gonococcal Urethritis|Trichomonas vaginalis was determined from urethral swab or urine specimen. Clinical, behavioral, and demographic predictors considered included discharge amount and appearance; condom use last sex; new recent partner; number of partners and new partners in last 30 days and last 3 months; number of times vaginal sex, oral sex, or anal sex in last 30 days; always/almost always used condom in last 3 months.|Baseline (enrollment visit)|All study participants who met major eligibility criteria (per protocol) with evaluable baseline results.||Participants|||Number
848015|NCT00322465|Secondary|Clinical, Behavioral, and Demographic Predictors of Chlamydia Trachomatis in Men With Non-gonococcal Urethritis|Clinical, behavioral, and demographic variables considered were discharge amount and appearance; condom use last sex; new recent partner; number of partners and new partners in last 30 days as well as last 3 months; number of times vaginal sex, oral sex, or anal sex in past 30 days; always/almost always used condom in last 3 months.|Baseline (enrollment visit)|All study participants who met major eligibility criteria (per protocol) with evaluable baseline measures.||Participants|||Number
848016|NCT00322465|Secondary|Prevalence of Mycoplasma Genitalium in Men With Non-gonococcal Urethritis|Percentage of men with non-gonococcal urethritis that had a positive result for Mycoplasma genitalium at baseline (enrollment)|Baseline (enrollment)|All study participants with evaluable baseline test results.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848017|NCT00322465|Secondary|Prevalence of Trichomonas Vaginalis (Swab or Urine Specimen) in Men With Non-gonococcal Urethritis|Percentage of men with non-gonococcal urethritis that had a positive result for Trichomonas vaginalis from a urethral swab or urine specimen at baseline (enrollment)|Baseline (enrollment visit)|All study participants with evaluable baseline test results.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848018|NCT00322465|Secondary|Prevalence of Chlamydia Trachomatis in Men With Non-gonococcal Urethritis|Percentage of men with non-gonococcal urethritis that had a positive result for Chlamydia trachomatis at baseline (enrollment)|Baseline (enrollment visit)|All study participants with evaluable baseline test results.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848019|NCT00322465|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Microbiological Cure of Mycoplasma Genitalium With Doxycycline Versus Doxycycline With Tinidazole; and Azithromycin Versus Azithromycin With Tinidazole|Microbiological Cure of Mycoplasma Genitalium refers to the percentage of men with NGU who were negative for Mycoplasma Genitalium at the last available result and had been positive for Mycoplasma Genitalium at baseline.|First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)|Participants who were positive at baseline, returned for follow-up, and had evaluable test results.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848020|NCT00322465|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Microbiological Cure of Trichomonas Vaginalis With Doxycycline Versus Doxycycline With Tinidazole; and Azithromycin Versus Azithromycin With Tinidazole|Microbiological cure of Trichomonas vaginalis refers to the percentage of men with NGU who were negative for Trichomonas vaginalis (swab and urine specimens) at the last available result and had been positive for Trichomonas vaginalis at baseline (swab or urine specimen).|First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)|Participants who were positive at baseline, returned for follow-up, and had evaluable test results.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848039|NCT00289536|Primary|Initial Recovery|Percent increase in factor VIII concentration per dose from pre- to post-infusion|Pharmacokinetic evaluations: 30 minutes pre-infusion to 30 minutes post-infusion|Per protocol population: participants who were randomized, received all 3 doses of rAHF-PFM, and had pharmacokinetic assessments.||IU/dL per IU/kg||Full Range|Median
848021|NCT00322465|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Microbiological Cure of Chlamydia Trachomatis With Doxycycline Versus Doxycycline With Tinidazole; and Azithromycin Versus Azithromycin With Tinidazole|Microbiological cure of Chlamydia trachomatis refers to the percentage of men with NGU who were negative for Chlamydia trachomatis at the last available result and had been positive for Chlamydia trachomatis at baseline.|First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)|Participants who were positive at baseline, returned for follow-up, and had evaluable test results.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848022|NCT00322465|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Clinical Cure of NGU With (Doxycycline Plus Doxycycline/Tinidazole) Versus (Azithromycin Plus Azithromycin/Tinidazole)|"Clinical Cure of NGU: Did not meet criteria for clinical failure at last evaluable follow-up visit.
Clinical Failure at first follow-up: [Persistent symptoms AND >= 5 PMNs per 3-5 oil immersion fields (regardless of urethral discharge)] OR Persistent urethral discharge on exam (regardless of symptoms or number of PMNs).
Clinical Failure at second follow-up: >= 5 PMNs per 3-5 oil immersion fields (regardless of symptoms or presence of urethral discharge) OR Persistent urethral discharge on exam (regardless of symptoms or number of PMNs)"|First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)|Modified intent-to-treat population was comprised of all subjects randomized who received at least one dose of study drug therapy or placebo||Percentage of participants|||Number
848023|NCT00322465|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of Doxycycline/Tinidazole and Azithromycin/Tinidazole: Number of Participants Reporting Vomiting|At all study visits, unsolicited adverse events were recorded. Nausea, Vomiting, Abdominal pain, and Diarrhea were recorded using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (Version 3.0).|First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)|Modified intent-to-treat population was comprised of all subjects randomized who received at least one dose of study drug therapy or placebo||Participants|||Number
848024|NCT00322465|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of Doxycycline/Tinidazole and Azithromycin/Tinidazole: Number of Participants Reporting Nausea|At all study visits, unsolicited adverse events were recorded. Nausea, Vomiting, Abdominal pain, and Diarrhea were recorded using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (Version 3.0).|First follow-up visit (Day 15-19), second follow-up visit (Day 35-45)|Modified intent-to-treat population was comprised of all subjects randomized who received at least one dose of study drug therapy or placebo||Participants|||Number
848025|NCT00306163|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability||5 weeks||||||
848026|NCT00306163|Secondary|Δ (FVC/SVC) at PC20 (AMP)|Change between baseline and post-treatment of the ratio of Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) and Slow Vital Capacity at PC20. Measured with either small or large partical size AMP.|Baseline and 5 weeks||||||
848027|NCT00306163|Primary|PC20 AMP (Post-treatment Compared to Baseline)|Mean change of Provocative concentration of Adenosine-5'-monophosphate (PC20 AMP) leading to a 20 percent decrease in Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) between post-treatment and baseline using two different particle sizes. - Small particles = Mass mean aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) of approximately 1.04-1.08 micron - Large particles = MMAD of approximately 9.9-10.6 micron|Baseline and 5 weeks|The analyses on treatment effects were performed on all subjects who reached a PC20<640mg/mL.||Logarithm (mg/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848028|NCT00289536|Secondary|Pre-infusion Von Willebrand Factor Antigen (VWF:Ag)|Percentage of VWF:Ag. Relationships between baseline VWF:Ag and pharmacokinetic parameters (initial recovery, total AUC/dose, and half-life) were evaluated statistically.|At baseline and before each pharmacokinetic evaluation|Intent to treat: participants who received at least 1 of the 3 infusions of rAHF-PFM and had pharmacokinetic evaluation(s).||U/dL||Full Range|Median
848029|NCT00289536|Secondary|Pre-infusion Von Willebrand Factor Ristocetin Cofactor Activity (VWF:Rco)|Percentage of normal VWF:Rco activity. Normal is a lab standard consisting of a non-hemophilic population. Relationships between baseline VWF:Rco and pharmacokinetic parameters (initial recovery, total AUC/dose, and half-life) were evaluated statistically.|At baseline and before each pharmacokinetic evaluation|Intent to treat: participants who received at least 1 of the 3 infusions of rAHF-PFM and had pharmacokinetic evaluation(s)||Percent of normal VWF:Rco activity||Full Range|Median
848030|NCT00289536|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration|Maximal factor VIII concentration after infusion|Pharmacokinetic evaluations: 30 minutes pre-infusion up to 48 hours post-infusion|Per protocol population: participants who were randomized, received all 3 doses of rAHF-PFM, and had pharmacokinetic assessments.||IU/dL||Full Range|Median
848031|NCT00289536|Secondary|Volume of Distribution at Steady State|Computed as weight-adjusted CL * Mean Residence Time|Pharmacokinetic evaluations: 30 minutes pre-infusion up to 48 hours post-infusion|Per protocol population: participants who were randomized, received all 3 doses of rAHF-PFM, and had pharmacokinetic assessments.||dL/kg||Full Range|Median
848032|NCT00289536|Secondary|Mean Residence Time|Computed as total AUMC divided by total AUC|Pharmacokinetic evaluations: 30 minutes pre-infusion up to 48 hours post-infusion|Per protocol population: participants who were randomized, received all 3 doses of rAHF-PFM, and had pharmacokinetic assessments.||hour||Full Range|Median
848033|NCT00289536|Secondary|Weight-adjusted Clearance|Computed as weight-adjusted dose divided by total AUC|Pharmacokinetic evaluations: 30 minutes pre-infusion up to 48 hours post-infusion|Per protocol population: participants who were randomized, received all 3 doses of rAHF-PFM, and had pharmacokinetic assessments.||mL/kg*hour||Full Range|Median
848034|NCT00289536|Secondary|Total Area Under the Moment Curve|Total area under the first moment curve (AUMC) estimated by linear trapezoidal methods|Pharmacokinetic evaluations: 30 minutes pre-infusion up to 48 hours post-infusion|Per protocol population: participants who were randomized, received all 3 doses of rAHF-PFM, and had pharmacokinetic assessments.||IU*hour^2/dL||Full Range|Median
848035|NCT00289536|Secondary|Total Area Under the Curve|Total AUC with extrapolation using the slope of the β-phase|Pharmacokinetic evaluations: 30 minutes pre-infusion up to 48 hours post-infusion|Per protocol population: participants who were randomized, received all 3 doses of rAHF-PFM, and had pharmacokinetic assessments.||IU*hour/dL||Full Range|Median
848036|NCT00289536|Secondary|Area Under the Curve|AUC estimated by linear trapezoidal method. The linear trapezoidal method is a numerical method used to approximate the area under a curve.|Pharmacokinetic evaluations: 30 minutes pre-infusion up to 48 hours post-infusion|Per protocol population: participants who were randomized, received all 3 doses of rAHF-PFM, and had pharmacokinetic assessments.||IU*hour/dL||Full Range|Median
848043|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Composite Endpoint or Death, Graft Loss or Acute Rejection by Month 36|Graft loss was defined as either functional loss or physical loss (nephrectomy). Functional loss was defined as a sustained level of serum creatinine (SCr) ≥ 6.0 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) or 530 micromoles per liter (μmol/L) as determined by the central laboratory for ≥ 4 weeks or ≥ 56 consecutive days of dialysis or impairment of renal function to such a degree that the participant underwent retransplant. Acute rejection was defined as central biopsy proven rejection that was either (1) clinically suspected by protocol defined reasons or (2) clinically suspected by other reasons and treated. Death and graft loss were not imputed.|Randomization to Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848044|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants Surviving With a Functioning Graft|Graft loss was defined as either functional loss or physical loss (nephrectomy). Functional loss was defined as a sustained level of serum creatinine (SCr) ≥ 6.0 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) or 530 micromoles per liter (μmol/L) as determined by the central laboratory for ≥ 4 weeks or ≥ 56 consecutive days of dialysis or impairment of renal function to such a degree that the participant underwent retransplant.|Months 24, 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population. For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation is used in N>=5. Otherwise exact method is used.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848045|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Change in the Value of the Eight Domain Scores Using SF-36 From Baseline Up To Months 6, 12, 24, and 36|SF-36 was a Participant-Reported Quality of Life (QoL) Short Form (SF) questionnaire measuring health-related quality of life (HRQL) covering 2 scale measures: physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). PCS represented by 4 domains: physical function, role limitations due to physical problems, pain, and general health perception. MCS represented by 4 domains: vitality, social function, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health. Their scores were computed based on weighted combinations of the 8 domain scores, which were transformed to a range from 0 to 100; 0= worst HRQL, 100=best HRQL. Higher scores reflect better health-related functional status. Scoring is standardized using the norm-based scoring method where data is scored in relation to the U.S. general population having a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. Scores below 50 are below the U.S. general population norm and above 50 are above the U.S. general population norm.|Baseline to Months 6, 12, 24, and 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
848046|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Changes in the Value of Physical and Mental Components Using SF-36 From Baseline Up To Months 6, 12, 24, and 36|SF-36 was a Participant-Reported Quality of Life (QoL) Short Form (SF) questionnaire measuring health-related quality of life (HRQL) covering 2 scale measures: physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). PCS represented by 4 domains: physical function, role limitations due to physical problems, pain, and general health perception. MCS represented by 4 domains: vitality, social function, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health. Their scores were computed based on weighted combinations of the 8 domain scores, which were transformed to a range from 0 to 100; 0= worst HRQL, 100=best HRQL. Higher scores reflect better health-related functional status. Scoring is standardized using the norm-based scoring method where data is scored in relation to the U.S. general population having a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. Scores below 50 are below the U.S. general population norm and above 50 are above the U.S. general population norm.|Baseline to Months 6, 12, 24,and 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848047|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Relative to an Identified Distribution (Ridit) Value of Symptom Occurrence and Symptom Distress Using Modified Transplant Symptom Occurrence and Symptom Distress Scale (MTSOSDS-59R)|The Modified Transplant Symptom Occurrence and Symptom Distress Scale (MTSOSD-59R) was used to assess the occurrence (never, occasionally, regularly, almost always, always) and distress (0=no distress to 4=terrible distress) of symptoms associated with immunosuppressive therapies. Ridit (relative to an identified distribution) analysis (Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1991) was used. Ridit scores were calculated at baseline and at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months for overall symptom occurrence score and overall symptom distress. The Ridit score reflects the probability that a score observed for an individual randomly selected from a group would be higher (worse symptom) than a score observed for a randomly selected individual from the reference group. The reference group was constituted by the frequency distribution of the responses of all participants on all items at baseline. The ridit of the reference group is by definition, 0.5.|Months 6, 12, 24, 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population.||Ridit score||Standard Error|Mean
848048|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Value of the Eight Domain Scores of Quality of Life Using SF-36 Questionnaire|SF-36 was a Participant-Reported Quality of Life (QoL) Short Form (SF) questionnaire measuring health-related quality of life (HRQL) covering 2 scale measures: physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). PCS represented by 4 domains: physical function, role limitations due to physical problems, pain, and general health perception. MCS represented by 4 domains: vitality, social function, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health. Their scores were computed based on weighted combinations of the 8 domain scores, which were transformed to a range from 0 to 100; 0= worst HRQL, 100=best HRQL. Higher scores reflect better health-related functional status. Scoring is standardized using the norm-based scoring method where data is scored in relation to the U.S. general population having a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. Scores below 50 are below the U.S. general population norm and above 50 are above the U.S. general population norm.|Months 6, 12, 24, 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848070|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Incidence of New Onset Diabetes Mellitus by Month 36|The incidence of new onset diabetes mellitus defined as participants who developed diabetes mellitus after randomization and transplantation. Participants that did not have diabetes prior to randomization were determined to have new onset diabetes mellitus if (i) the participant received an anti-diabetic medication for a duration of at least 30 days or (ii) at least two fasting plasma glucose (FPG) tests indicate that FPG is >=126 mg/dL (7.0 mmol/L). New onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) = post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM)|Week 4 post-transplantation to Month 36|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848049|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Value of Physical and Mental Components Using SF-36 Questionnaire|SF-36 was a Participant-Reported Quality of Life (QoL) Short Form (SF) questionnaire measuring health-related quality of life (HRQL) covering 2 scale measures: physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). PCS represented by 4 domains: physical function, role limitations due to physical problems, pain, and general health perception. MCS represented by 4 domains: vitality, social function, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health. Their scores were computed based on weighted combinations of the 8 domain scores, which were transformed to a range from 0 to 100; 0= worst HRQL, 100=best HRQL. Higher scores reflect better health-related functional status. Scoring is standardized using the norm-based scoring method where data is scored in relation to the U.S. general population having a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. Scores below 50 are below the U.S. general population norm and above 50 are above the U.S. general population norm.|Months 6, 12, 24, 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848050|NCT00256750|Secondary|Number of Participants Treated for Acute Rejection (AR) Regardless of Histological Findings by Month 36|Allograft rejection includes any episode of rejection including: clinically suspected rejection, treated rejection, any central biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), and acute rejection (AR: a subset of BPAR) defined as central biopsy-proven rejection that was either clinically suspected by protocol-defined reasons or by other reasons and was treated. Acute rejection (AR) defined as a clinico-pathological event requiring clinical evidence ( either an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine or an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; or a serum creatinine that remained elevated within 14 days post-transplantation and clinical suspicion of AR) and renal biopsy confirmation biopsy demonstrating a Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology classification of Grade IA or greater, with higher scores indicating more severe rejection. Only the highest Banff grade for each participant was counted.|Randomization to Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||participants|||Number
848051|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Subclinical Rejection at Month 12|Subclinical rejection defined as histological findings by the central pathologist consistent with acute rejection, but lacking its clinical correlate. Acute rejection defined as a clinico-pathological event requiring clinical evidence and renal biopsy confirmation demonstrating a Banff 97 classification of Grade IA or greater, with higher scores indicating more severe rejection. Only the episode with the highest Banff grade for each participant was counted. Clinical evidence defined if either a or b was satisfied: a) an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; b) an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; or a serum creatinine that remained elevated within 14 days post-transplantation and clinical suspicion of acute rejection existed. Allograft biopsies were evaluated by a blinded central independent pathologist using Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology.|Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848052|NCT00256750|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Recovered Completely From an Episode of Acute Rejection (AR) by Month 12|Acute rejection (AR) = a clinico-pathological event requiring clinical evidence and renal biopsy confirmation demonstrating a Banff 97 classification of Grade IA or greater. Clinical evidence = if either a or b was satisfied: a: an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; b: an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; or a serum creatinine that remains elevated within 14 days post-transplantation and clinical suspicion of acute rejection exists. Complete recovery following AR defined as serum creatinine [SCr] levels returned to baseline. Recovery calculated using 2 algorithms: Algorithm 1 = last laboratory measurement prior to onset of AR (baseline and first laboratory measurement after 84 days since onset of AR = resolution); Algorithm 2 = lowest laboratory measurement on or after transplantation and prior to onset day of AR (baseline and lowest laboratory measurement after onset on first AR up to Month 12 = resolution)|Randomization to Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with at least one episode of AR up to Month 12||participants|||Number
848053|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Corticosteroid Resistant Acute Rejection (AR) by Month 36|Steroid-resistant acute rejection (AR) defined as the use of lymphocyte-depletion therapy following treatment with corticosteroids. AR defined as a clinico-pathological event requiring clinical evidence and renal biopsy confirmation demonstrating a Banff 97 classification of Grade IA or greater, with higher scores indicating more severe rejection. Clinical evidence defined: either a or b was satisfied: a) an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; b) an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; or a serum creatinine that remained elevated within 14 days post-transplantation and clinical suspicion of acute rejection existed. Allograft biopsies were evaluated by a blinded central independent pathologist using Banff 97 international standardized histopathological working classification of kidney transplant pathology. Only the episode with the highest Banff grade for each participant was counted.|Randomization to Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||percentage of participants|||Number
848054|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants Using Lymphocyte Depleting Therapy (LDT) for the Initial Treatment of Acute Rejection (AR) by Month 36|The use of LDT (thymoglobulin or antithymocyte gamma globulin [ATGAM]) was permitted only for participants randomized to cyclosporine (CsA) who experienced impaired renal allograft function and anticipated delayed graft function following transplantation. Acute rejection (AR) defined as a clinico-pathological event requiring clinical evidence (an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine or an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; or a serum creatinine that remained elevated within 14 days post-transplantation and clinical suspicion of acute rejection existed) and biopsy confirmation. AR defined by a renal biopsy demonstrating a Banff 97 classification of Grade IA or greater, with higher scores indicating more severe rejection. Banff 97 diagnostic category for renal allograft biopsies is an international standardized histopathological classification. Only the episode with the highest Banff grade for each participant was counted.|Randomization to Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||percentage of participants|||Number
848284|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Absolute Basophil Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||x 10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848055|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants Using Polyclonal Antilymphocyte Preparations for Impaired Renal Function and Anticipated Delayed Graft Function by Month 12|A participant was considered to have delayed graft function (DGF), if treated with dialysis within the first week (Day 1 - 8) after transplantation. The use of polyclonal antilymphocyte preparations (LDT) was permitted only for participants randomized to cyclosporine (CsA) who experienced impaired renal allograft function and anticipated DGF following transplantation and were not permitted in belatacept-treated participants, except for the treatment of acute rejection. Participants treated with LDT began CsA at the discretion of the investigator by Day 7. LDT could also have been used in participants who met >= 1 of the following criteria, observed in the presence of a transplant artery and vein and no evidence of hydronephrosis by sonogram: Urine output < 250 mL/12 hours, no significant improvement (< 1 milligram per deciliter (mg/dL)) in serum creatinine from baseline value over the first 24 - 72 hours post-transplant, or dialysis treatment.|Randomization to Month 12|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848056|NCT00256750|Secondary|Number of Participants With Acute Rejection (AR) Post-transplant in Terms of Severity Using Banff Grades by Month 36|Acute rejection was defined as a clinico-pathological event requiring clinical evidence and renal biopsy confirmation demonstrating a Banff 97 classification of Grade IA or greater, with higher scores indicating more severe rejection. Clinical evidence defined: if either a or b was satisfied: a) an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; b) an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; or a serum creatinine that remains elevated within 14 days post-transplantation and clinical suspicion of acute rejection exists. Allograft biopsies were evaluated by a blinded central independent pathologist using Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology. Banff 97 diagnostic category for renal allograft biopsies is an international standardized histopathological classification. Only the episode with the highest Banff grade for each participant was counted.|Randomization to Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||participants|||Number
848057|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Prevalence of Acute Rejection (AR) by Month 36|Prevalence of AR = participants with the stated definition of AR at any given time. AR defined as a clinico-pathological event requiring clinical evidence and renal biopsy confirmation demonstrating a Banff 97 classification of Grade IA or greater, with higher scores indicating more severe rejection. Only the episode with the highest Banff grade for each participant was counted. Clinical evidence = if either a or b was satisfied: a: an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; b: an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; or a serum creatinine that remains elevated within 14 days post-transplantation and clinical suspicion of acute rejection exists. Allograft biopsies were evaluated by a blinded central independent pathologist using Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology. Banff 97 diagnostic category for renal allograft biopsies is an international standardized histopathological classification.|Randomization to Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent to treat (ITT) population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848058|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Value of Lipid Parameters|Lipid parameters included total cholesterol, high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, and triglycerides (TGs).|Months 12, 24, 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent-to-treat (ITT) population||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848059|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants Using At Least One Anti-Hyperlipidemic Medication|This analysis is based on all participants who were followed up at least 1092 days after transplantation.|Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent-to-treat (ITT) population; Completer analysis is based on all participants who have been followed up at least 1092 days after transplantation.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848060|NCT00256750|Secondary|Number of Participants With Antihyperlipidemic Medication by Intensity Level|An intensity level was associated with the dose level of the statin based anti-hyperlipidemic agent. Any other agent (i.e., non-statin therapy) used as an antihyperlipidemic were considered Level I treatment intensity. Multiple daily dose levels during a period were averaged to compute the daily dose during that period. Level I = 20 mg fluvastatin (flu), 10 mg lovastatin (lova), 10 mg pravastatin (prav), 5-10 mg simvastatin (sim); Level II = 10 mg atorvastatin (atorv), 40 mg flu, 20 mg lova, 20 mg prav, 5 mg rosuvastatin (rosu), 20 mg sim, 10/10 vytorin; Level III = 20 mg atorv, 80 mg flu, 40 mg lova, 40 mg prav, 10 mg rosu, 40 mg sim, 10/20 vytorin; Level IV = 40 mg atorv, 80 mg lova, 80 mg prav, 20 mg rosu, 80 mg sim, 10/40 vytorin; Level V = 80 mg atorv, 40 mg rosu, 10/80 vytorin. Concomitant use of a statin and an agent of another class elevated the intensity level of the statin therapy by 1 level; therefore, an intensity level of greater than V was possible.|Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants that received at least one hyperlipidemic medication; Completer analysis is based on all participants who have been followed up at least 1092 days after transplantation.||participants|||Number
848061|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Controlled Dyslipidemia at Month 12|Prevalence of controlled dyslipidemia = the proportion of participants at any given time who met the stated definition of dyslipidemia. Dyslipidemia defined in accordance with recent guidelines from the National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF-K/DOQI). Dyslipidemia defined as hypertriglyceridemia (TGs >= 500 milligrams/deciliter (mg/dL) [5.65 mmol/L]), hypercholesterolemia (LDL >= 100 mg/dL [2.59 mmol/L]), or elevated non-HDL (non-HDL >= 130 mg/dL [3.36 mmol/L]) in the presence of high TGs (TGs >= 200 mg/dL [2.26 mmol/L]). Controlled dyslipidemia defined as participants who received successful pharmacologic treatment for 1 of the above stated dyslipidemias, and their lipid values fell below the thresholds described. TG = triglyceride; LDL = low density lipoprotein; HDL = high density lipoprotein; millimole/Liter (mmol/L). For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation is used if N >=5. Otherwise exact method is used.|Month 12|All randomized and transplanted participants, intent-to-treat (ITT) population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848062|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Prevalence of Dyslipidemia at Month 12|The prevalence of dyslipidemia was defined as the proportion of participants at any given time who met the definition of dyslipidemia. Dyslipidemia defined in accordance with recent guidelines from the National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF-K/DOQI). Dyslipidemia defined as hypertriglyceridemia (TGs >= 500 milligrams/deciliter (mg/dL) [5.65 mmol/L]), hypercholesterolemia (LDL >= 100 mg/dL [2.59 mmol/L]), or elevated non-HDL (non-HDL >= 130 mg/dL [3.36 mmol/L]) in the presence of high TGs (TGs >= 200 mg/dL [2.26 mmol/L]). TG = triglyceride; LDL = low density lipoprotein; HDL = high density lipoprotein; millimole/Liter (mmol/L). For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation is used if N >=5. Otherwise exact method is used.|Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848063|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Non-dyslipidemic Participants With Incidence of Dyslipidemia Post-Transplantation by Month 12|Incidence of dyslipidemia was defined as the proportion of participants who developed dyslipidemia after randomization and transplantation. Dyslipidemia was defined in accordance with recent guidelines from the National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF-K/DOQI). Dyslipidemia = hypertriglyceridemia (TGs >= 500 milligrams/deciliter (mg/dL) [5.65 mmol/L]), hypercholesterolemia (LDL >= 100 mg/dL [2.59 mmol/L]), or elevated non-HDL (non-HDL >= 130 mg/dL [3.36 mmol/L]) in the presence of high TGs (TGs >= 200 mg/dL [2.26 mmol/L]). The TG = triglyceride; LDL = low density lipoprotein; HDL = high density lipoprotein; millimole/Liter (mmol/L). For 95% CI within each group, normal approximation is used if N >=5. Otherwise exact method is used.|Randomization to Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848064|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Prevalence of Controlled Hypertension at Month 12|The prevalence of controlled hypertension was defined as the proportion of participants at any given time who met the definition of controlled hypertension. Controlled hypertension was defined as a SBP < 130 mm Hg and a DBP < 80 mm Hg while receiving an antihypertensive medication for the indication of hypertension or receiving an antihypertensive medication for another indication with a medical history of hypertension. Participants with a SBP < 130 mm Hg and a DBP < 80 mm Hg who were prescribed an antihypertensive medication(s) for an indication(s) other than hypertension (eg, beta blockers for migraine prophylaxis) with no medical history of hypertension were not considered to have either hypertension or controlled hypertension. Systolic blood pressure = SBP; Diastolic blood pressure = DBP|Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848065|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants at Baseline With Controlled Hypertension Post Transplantation by Month 12|Controlled hypertension was defined as a SBP < 130 mm Hg and a DBP < 80 mm Hg while receiving an antihypertensive medication for the indication of hypertension or receiving an antihypertensive medication for another indication with a medical history of hypertension. Participants with a SBP < 130 mm Hg and a DBP < 80 mm Hg who were prescribed an antihypertensive medication(s) for an indication(s) other than hypertension (eg, beta blockers for migraine prophylaxis) with no medical history of hypertension were not considered to have either hypertension or controlled hypertension. Systolic blood pressure = SBP; Diastolic blood pressure = DBP|Day 1 to Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with baseline hypertension||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848066|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Systolic Blood Pressure and Diastolic Blood Pressure|Blood pressure was measured in millimeters of mercury (mmHg). Blood pressure was measured soon after the participant arrived and sat quietly at rest for 10 minutes. 3 consecutive seated blood pressure readings were made at least 1 minute apart.|Months 12, 24, 36|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
848067|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Prevalence of Hypertension Post-Transplantation at Month 12|The prevalence of hypertension was defined as the proportion of participants at any given time who meet the definition of hypertension. Hypertension defined according to the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure for participants with chronic kidney disease. This definition is based upon SBP ≥ 130 mm Hg or DBP ≥ 80 mm Hg. Systolic blood pressure = SBP; Diastolic blood pressure = DBP|Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848068|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Incidence of Hypertension Post-Transplantation at Month 12|The incidence of hypertension was defined as the proportion of participants who developed hypertension after randomization and transplantation. Specifically, the incidence of hypertension was assessed only after the Week 4 visit. This period allowed for adequate stabilization and resolution of transient changes. If participants received antihypertensive medication for the indication of hypertension at this (or later) time point, they were considered to have developed hypertension. Hypertension was defined according to the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure for subjects with chronic kidney disease. This definition was based upon SBP ≥ 130 mm Hg or DBP ≥ 80 mm Hg. Systolic blood pressure = SBP; Diastolic blood pressure = DBP|Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848069|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants Using At Least One Anti-Hypertensive Medication to Control Hypertension at Month 36|This analysis was based on all participants who had been followed up at least 1092 days after transplantation. Hypertension was defined in according to the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure for participants with chronic kidney disease. This definition was based upon SBP ≥ 130 mm Hg or DBP ≥ 80 mm Hg. In addition, all participants who had a SBP < 130 mm Hg and a DBP < 80 mm Hg who received an antihypertensive medication(s) for the indication of hypertension or with a medical history of hypertension were included in this definition. Systolic blood pressure = SBP; Diastolic blood pressure = DBP|Month 36|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848071|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Change in Calculated Glomerular Filtration Rate (cGFR) From Month 6 to Month 12|Calculated glomerular filtration rate (cGFR) was used to assess renal function (as measured by the estimated creatinine clearance) using the following modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) formula: MDRD: GFR = 170 x [SCr/0.95]^(-0.999) x [Age]^(-0.176) x [0.762 if participant is female] x [1.180 if participant is black] x [BUN]^(-0.170) x [Alb]^(+0.318); Age in years; Alb = Albumin in g/dL; SCr = Serum creatinine in mg/dL; BUN = Blood urea nitrogen in mg/dL; cGFR = mL/min/1.73m^2|Month 6 to Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||mL/Min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
848072|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Value of the Calculated Glomerular Filtration Rate (cGFR) With Imputation|Calculated glomerular filtration rate (cGFR) was used to assess renal function (as measured by the estimated creatinine clearance) using the following modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) formula: MDRD: GFR = 170 x [SCr/0.95]^(-0.999) x [Age]^(-0.176) x [0.762 if participant is female] x [1.180 if participant is black] x [BUN]^(-0.170) x [Alb]^(+0.318); Age in years; Alb = Albumin in g/dL; SCr = Serum creatinine in mg/dL; BUN = Blood urea nitrogen in mg/dL; cGFR = mL/min/1.73m2|Months 6, 12, 24, 36|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||mL/min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
848073|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With a Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (mGFR) Less Than 60 mL/Min/1.73 m^2 at Month 12|Measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) is the direct measurement of renal function and was assessed by measurement of the clearance of a true glomerular filtration marker (non-radiolabeled iothalamate) using a validated procedure. A GFR of 60 mL/min/1.73 m^2 was used as the approximate equal of the threshold values of serum creatinine (SCr) of 1.5 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL).|Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848074|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With a Decrease in Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (mGFR) Greater Than or Equal to 10mL/Min/1.73m^2 From Month 3 to Month 12|Measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) is the direct measurement of renal function and was assessed by measurement of the clearance of a true glomerular filtration marker (non-radiolabeled iothalamate) using a validated procedure. A change in GFR of at least 10 mL/min/1.73 m^2 was used as the approximate change in serum creatinine (SCr) of at least 0.3 mg/dL. The change component of the composite renal endpoint was assessed from Month 3 to Month 12, since post-transplant renal function is largely stable by Month 3. Month 3 = baseline|Month 3 to Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848075|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Change of the Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (mGFR) From Month 3 to Month 12 and From Month 3 to Month 24|Measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) is the direct measurement of renal function and was assessed by measurement of the clearance of a true glomerular filtration marker (non-radiolabeled iothalamate) using a validated procedure. Missing mGRF assessments were imputed to assess renal function. The overall imputation strategy involved a primary imputation method (linear extrapolation and quartile method) followed by 2 secondary imputation methods (regression method and graded quartile method) to assess the robustness of conclusions obtained from the application of the primary imputation method. All imputation methods entailed replacing a missing value with a value drawn from a plausible distribution incorporating theoretical and observed aspects of the data. GFR was measured as mL/min/1.73 m^2.|Month 3 to Month 12; Month 3 to Month 24|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
848076|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Development of Anti-Donor HLA Positive Antibodies by Month 84|Only participants who had non-missing test result for Class I or Class II anti-donor HLA antibodies were included in analysis and only participants who had at least one non-NA test result or finding were counted. This was a cumulative summary (excluding baseline) and once a participant was positive, that participant remained positive for the later time point. Acute rejection (AR) defined: a clinico-pathological event requiring clinical evidence and biopsy confirmation. Clinical evidence defined: if either a or b was satisfied: a: an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; b: an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; or a serum creatinine that remains elevated within 14 days post-transplantation and clinical suspicion of acute rejection exists. AR defined as allograft biopsies of Banff 97 classification Grade IA or greater (higher scores indicate more severe rejection). Evaluated by blinded central independent pathologist.|Randomization to Month 84|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848077|NCT00256750|Secondary|Number of Participants Meeting Marked Laboratory Abnormality Criteria Post-transplant by Month 36|"Upper limit of normal (ULN). Units per Liter (U/L). Cells per microliter (c/µL). Grams per deciliter (g/dL). Milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL).Cells per Liter (c/L). Milliequivalents/Liter (mEq/L).
Hemoglobin (low): <8.0 g/dL; Platelet count: <50*10^9 c/L; Leukocytes: <2*10^3 c/µL; Alkaline phosphatase (ALP): >5.0*ULN U/L; Alanine aminotransferase (ALT): >5.0*ULN U/L; Asparate aminotransferase (AST): >5.0*ULN U/L; Bilirubin Total: >3.0*ULN mg/dL; Creatinine: >3.0*ULN mg/dL; Calcium Total: low if <7.0 mg/dL or high if >12.5 mg/dL; Bicarbonate: <11.0 mEq/L; Potassium serum: low if <3.0 mEq/L or high if >6.0 mEq/L; Magnesium serum: low is <0.8 mEq/L or high if >2.46 mEq/L; Sodium serum: low if <130.0 mEq/L or high if >155.0 mEq/L; Phosphorus inorganic: <2.0 mg/dL; Albumin: <2 g/dL; Uric acid: >10 mg/dL; Protein urine: >=3+"|Baseline to Month 36|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants from the original intent-to-treat (ITT) population||participants|||Number
848078|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Blood Pressure at Month 84|Blood pressure was measured in millimeters of mercury (mmHg). Blood pressure was measured soon after the participant arrived and sat quietly at rest for 10 minutes. 3 consecutive seated blood pressure readings were made at least 1 minute apart.|Month 84|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants from the original intent-to-treat (ITT) population who continued on assigned therapy into the long-term extension phase (ITT-LTE).||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
848079|NCT00256750|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events of Special Interest by Month 84|Prospectively identified events of special interest which were a subset of all AEs, and were either SAEs or non-serious AEs, included the following categories: Serious Infections and Infestations, Thrombolic/embolic events, and Malignancy. AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/ abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Time frame is from randomization to the event date, or to the last dose date+56, or to Month 84 (Day 2548), whichever is the earliest.|Randomization to Month 84|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants from the original intent-to-treat (ITT) population who continued on assigned therapy into the long-term extension phase (ITT-LTE)||participants|||Number
848080|NCT00256750|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events, Death, Discontinuation Due to Adverse Events by Month 84|Adverse event (AE) defined: any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. Serious adverse event (SAE) defined: a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization.|Randomization to Month 84|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants from the original intent-to-treat (ITT) population who continued on assigned therapy into the long-term extension phase (ITT-LTE)||participants|||Number
848081|NCT00256750|Secondary|Percent of Participants With Prevalence of Chronic Allograft Nephropathy (CAN) at Month 12|Prevalence of CAN = if participant met any of the following conditions: a: CAN observed in a biopsy either prior to 12 months (including baseline biopsy) or first post 12 months biopsy; b: participant had graft loss during the first year post transplant; c: no biopsy was available post 12 months and CAN not observed in biopsies prior to 12 months, but the measured GFR from Month 3 to Month 12 decreased at least 10 mL/min/1.73m^2; d: no biopsy available either prior to or post 12 months, and the measured GFR (incorporated missing data imputation) from Month 3 to Month 12 decreased at least 10 mL/min/1.73m^2. CAN = All allograft biopsies evaluated for presence and severity of CAN by a blinded central independent pathologist using Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology. Onset of CAN determined by the biopsy date when it was observed.|Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component; Any participant not meeting CAN criteria and who has no biopsy either prior to or post 12 months and no GFR assessment (either measured or calculated) available were excluded from the analyses.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848082|NCT00256750|Secondary|Mean Value of the Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (mGFR)|Measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) is the direct measurement of renal function and was assessed by measurement of the clearance of a true glomerular filtration marker (non-radiolabeled iothalamate) using a validated procedure. Missing mGRF assessments were imputed to assess renal function. The overall imputation strategy involved a primary imputation method (linear extrapolation and quartile method) followed by 2 secondary imputation methods (regression method and graded quartile method) to assess the robustness of conclusions obtained from the application of the primary imputation method. All imputation methods entailed replacing a missing value with a value drawn from a plausible distribution incorporating theoretical and observed aspects of the data. GFR was measured as mL/min/1.73 m^2.|Months 3, 12, 24|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||mL/min/1.73m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
848083|NCT00256750|Primary|Percent of Participants Experiencing Acute Rejection (AR) Post-transplant by Month 12|Acute rejection was defined as a clinico-pathological event requiring clinical evidence and biopsy confirmation. Clinical evidence was defined if either a or b was satisfied: a: an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine; b: an unexplained decreased urine output; or fever and graft tenderness; or a serum creatinine that remains elevated within 14 days post-transplantation and clinical suspicion of acute rejection exists. Allograft biopsies were evaluated by a blinded central independent pathologist using Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology. Banff 97 diagnostic category for renal allograft biopsies is an international standardized histopathological classification. AR was defined by a renal biopsy demonstrating a Banff 97 classification of Grade IA or greater, with higher scores indicating more severe rejection. Only the episode with the highest Banff grade for each participant was counted.|Day 1 to Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848084|NCT00256750|Primary|Percent of Participants With a Composite of Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (mGFR) Less Than 60 mL/Min/1.73 m^2 at Month 12 or With a Decrease in mGFR Greater Than or Equal to 10 mL/Min/1.73m^2 From Month 3 to Month 12|Measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) is the direct measurement of renal function and was assessed by measurement of the clearance of a true glomerular filtration marker (non-radiolabeled iothalamate) using a validated procedure. A GFR of 60 mL/min/1.73 m^2 was used as the approximate equal of the threshold values of serum creatinine (SCr) of 1.5 mg/dL. A change in GFR of at least 10 mL/min/1.73 m^2 was used as the approximate change in SCr of at least 0.3 mg/dL. The change component of the composite renal endpoint was assessed from Month 3 to Month 12, since post-transplant renal function is largely stable by Month 3.|Month 12; Month 3 to Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population with measurable component||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848085|NCT00256750|Primary|Percent of Participants Surviving With a Functioning Graft by Month 12|Graft loss was defined as either functional loss or physical loss (nephrectomy). Functional loss was defined as a sustained level of serum creatinine (SCr) ≥ 6.0 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) or 530 micromolar per liter (μmol/L) as determined by the central laboratory for ≥ 4 weeks or ≥ 56 consecutive days of dialysis or impairment of renal function to such a degree that the participant underwent retransplant.|Day 1 to Month 12|All randomized, transplanted, and treated participants; intent to treat (ITT) population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848136|NCT00219349|Primary|Penn State Worry Questionnaire||week 14 to week 26||||||
848137|NCT00219349|Primary|GAD Severity Scale||week 14 to week 26||||||
848138|NCT00219349|Primary|Clinical Global Impressions-Severity Index||week 14 to week 26||||||
848139|NCT00219349|Primary|Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement Index||week 26||||||
848285|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Absolute Monocyte Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||x 10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848140|NCT00219349|Primary|Change in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale Score|The Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale is a clinician administered rating scale assessing severity of anxiety from 0 (low) to 64 (high). The greater the magnitude of decrease in score during treatment, the greater the improvement in anxiety.|week 14 to week 26|see above: Patients who completed the CBT phase and started escitalopram treatment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848303|NCT00121641|Secondary|Baseline and Change From Baseline at Week 24 in Postprandial Glucose (PPG) Area Under the Curve (AUC)||Baseline, Week 24|Randomized participants with measure at given time points, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF).||mg*min/dL||Standard Error|Mean
848119|NCT00245037|Secondary|Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease (cGVHD) Outcome|"Grading of Chronic GVHD:
Limited: Localized skin involvement and/or hepatic dysfunction due to chronic GVHD
Extensive:
One or more of the following:
Generalized skin involvement Liver histology showing chronic aggressive hepatitis, bridging necrosis or cirrhosis Involvement of the eye: Schirmer’s test with <5 mm wetting Involvement of minor salivary glands or oral mucosa demonstrated on labial biopsy Involvement of any other target organ
Chronic GVHD Severity:
Mild: Signs and symptoms of cGVHD do not interfere substantially with function and do not progress once appropriately treated with local therapy or standard systemic therapy.
Moderate: Signs and symptoms of cGVHD interfere somewhat with function despite appropriate therapy or are progressive through first line systemic therapy.
Severe: Signs and symptoms of cGVHD limit function substantially despite appropriate therapy or are progressive through second line systemic therapy"|Years 1, 2 and 3|This is a cumulative incidence of cGVHD at 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years. A total of 99 patients (out of 147) developed cGVHD, 86 patients (87%) with extensive stage cGVHD and 13 patients (13%) with limited stage cGVHD.||percentage of analyzed participants|||Number
848120|NCT00245037|Secondary|Acute Graft-Versus-Host Disease (aGVHD) Outcome|"Grading of Acute GVHD:
Severity of Individual Organ Involvement:
Skin
1 a maculopapular eruption involving less than 25% of the body surface
2 a maculopapular eruption involving 25-50% of the body surface
3 generalized erythroderma
4 generalized erythroderma with bullous formation and/or with desquamation Liver
1 bilirubin 2.0-3.0mg/100mL
2 bilirubin 3-5.9mg/100mL
3 bilirubin 6-14.9mg/100mL
4 bilirubin >15mg/100mL Gut Diarrhea is graded +1 to +4 in severity. Nausea/vomiting and/or anorexia caused by GVHD is assigned as +1 in severity Diarrhea
1 <1000mL of liquid stool/day
2 >1,000mL of stool/day
3 >1,500mL of stool/day
4 2,000mL of stool/day, severe abdominal pain, with or without ileus
Severity of GVHD:
Grade 1 +1 to +2 skin rash; No gut or liver involvement Grade 2 +1 to +3 skin rash;+1 GI involvement and/or +1 liver"|Day 100, Month 6|This is cumulative incidence of grades 2-4 aGVHD at 100 days and at 6 months. Out of the total number of participants, grades 2-4 aGVHD occurred in 79 patients.||percentage of analyzed participants|||Number
848121|NCT00245037|Secondary|Relapse Mortality|The percentage of patients (out of 147 participants) who relapsed at Years 1 and 2. Relapse is defined as the presence of >5% blasts by morphology on a post-transplant bone marrow aspirate.|Years 1 and 2|||percentage of analyzed participants|||Number
848122|NCT00245037|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|"The percentage of progression-free patients (out of 147 participants) at Years 1, 2, 3, and 5.
Definition of Disease Progression:
MM/Plasma Cell: Increasing bone pain or increase in serum/urine monoclonal protein by 25%.
CLL/NHL/HD: New sites of lymphadenopathy; ≥ 25% increase in lymph node size; Blood or bone marrow involvement with clonal B-cells; Increase of ≥ 25% bone marrow involvement; ≥ 25% increase in blood involvement with clonal B-cells.
AML/ALL: Any incidence of relapse (>5% blasts) by evaluation of the bone marrow aspirate.
CML: Inability to control platelet or granulocyte counts; Increase in baseline number of metaphases demonstrating the Ph+ chromosome by >25%; Any other new cytogenetic abnormality; Transformation to accelerated phase or blast crisis.
MDS/MPD: Any evidence by morphologic or flow cytometric evaluation of the bone marrow aspirate of new blasts (>5%) or worsening cytopenia or cytogenetic evidence of recurrence."|Years 1, 2, 3, and 5|||percentage of analyzed participants|||Number
848123|NCT00245037|Secondary|Overall Survival|The percentage of overall patient survival (out of 147 participants) for Years 1, 2, 3 and 5.|Years 1, 2, 3 and 5|||percentage of analyzed participants|||Number
848124|NCT00245037|Primary|Non-relapse Mortality|Percent of subjects with non-relapse mortality two years after conditioning with busulfan with fludarabine/200 cGy TBI in patients with hematologic malignancies at moderate to high risk for graft rejection and/or relapse of underlying disease.|Two years post-transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
848125|NCT00245037|Primary|Regimen-Related Toxicities|Non-hematologic toxicities and adverse experiences ≥ Grade 3 occurrences measured up to day +100 using the NCI Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 (CTCAE). Infections and GVHD will be assessed up to 5 years post transplant. The following data represents the number of regimen-related, grade 3 and 4 toxicities that occurred in each category.|5 years post-transplant|||Toxicities|||Number
848126|NCT00241839|Secondary|Change in Uric Acid (UA) Levels: Baseline Less End of Treatment|Subjects on allopurinol are expected to lower their uric acid levels relative to placebo.|Baseline UA levels compared to end of treatment levels (8-10 weeks on allopurinol / placebo)|Change in uric acid from baseline to end of treatment.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
848127|NCT00241839|Secondary|Change in Overall Mean BP From Those Obtained by 24 Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurements (ABPM) 8-10 Weeks Minus Baseline.|Subjects had 24 hr blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) at baseline and treatment end. The readings were averaged and the changes from baseline to treatment end were compared.|Baseline and end of treatment (8-10 weeks on allopurinol / placebo)|We obtained over 90% of those with cuff measures on the 24 hour BP measures (ABPM).||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
848128|NCT00241839|Primary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure by Cuff After 8-10 Weeks Minus Baseline|"The systolic BP was taken at Baseline and after 8-10 weeks of treatment on placebo, while on chlorthalidone and potassium chloride. The blood pressure was measured according to Shared Care protocol: 15 minutes of quiet, undisturbed rest with three BP measurements obtained subsequently at 5 minute intervals.
The mean of the second and third reading was the value used for analysis for both the Baseline measurement and the measurement after 8 - 10 weeks of treatment. The dependent variable is baseline value minus ending value.
Measures are in millimeters of mercury (mm hg)"|Measured at 8-10 weeks on allopurinol or placebo|Participants were individuals with essential hypertension (BP 140/90-160/100) on none or up 2 antihypertensive drugs without any other chronic condition or illness. For their data to be included in analysis they had to complete the study (includes baseline to last visit).||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
848129|NCT00241839|Primary|Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure by Cuff 8-10 Weeks Minus Baseline|"The Diastolic BP was taken at Baseline and after 8-10 weeks of treatment or placebo while on chlorthalidone and potassium chloride. The blood pressure was measured according to Shared Care protocol: 15 minutes of quiet, undisturbed rest with three BP measurements obtained subsequently at 5 minute intervals.
The mean of the second and third reading was the value used for analysis for both the Baseline measurement and the measurement after 8 - 10 weeks of treatment. The dependent variable is baseline value minus ending value.
Measures are in millimeters of mercury (mm hg)"|Measured at 8-10 weeks on allopurinol / placebo|Participants were individuals with essential hypertension (BP 140/90-160/100) on none or up 2 antihypertensive drugs without any other chronic condition or illness. For their data to be included in analysis they had to complete the study (includes baseline to last visit).||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
848130|NCT00238433|Primary|Therapy-Related Toxicities|The table presented below reflects how many participants (out of 36 total) presented an adverse event related to the treatment regimen within each toxicity category. To review specific adverse events, both related and unrelated to study treatment, please refer to Adverse Events Section.|Through 24 months post transplantation|||Participants|||Count of Participants
848131|NCT00238433|Primary|Disease-Free Survival|The data presented below represents the total number of subjects (out of 36) that reached disease-free survival status during Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 time points.|3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months post transplantation|||Participants|||Count of Participants
848132|NCT00219349|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory-II||week 14 to week 26||||||
848133|NCT00219349|Secondary|Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression||week 14 to week 26||||||
848134|NCT00219349|Primary|Change in Hamilton Anxiety Scale Score||week 14 to week 26||||||
848135|NCT00219349|Primary|State-Trait Anxiety Inventory||week 14 to week 26||||||
848141|NCT00211237|Secondary|Rate of Subsequent Vertebral Body Fractures|Based on patients with at least 7 analyzable vertebrae.|1 month and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||percentage of participants|||Number
848142|NCT00211237|Secondary|Rate of Subsequent Vertebral Body Fractures||1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||percentage of participants|||Number
848143|NCT00211237|Secondary|Rate of Study Treatment-related Adverse Events Till Study Completion|"The study treatment-related AEs were defined as follows:
Related defined as the AE had a direct relationship to a Sponsor medical device used in the study patient.
Possibly related defined as the AE may have had a relationship to a Sponsor medical device but an alternative cause may be equally or less likely associated.
Unrelated defined as the AE was due to the underlying indication or disease state or to concomitant medication or therapy not related to any Sponsor device.
Unknown defined as the relationship of the AE to a Sponsor device could not be determined."|12 months|All of randomized subjects were included in safety population analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
848144|NCT00211237|Secondary|Rate of Study Treatment-related Adverse Events Within 30 Days of Baseline|"The study treatment-related AEs were defined as follows:
Related defined as the AE had a direct relationship to a Sponsor medical device used in the study patient.
Possibly related defined as the AE may have had a relationship to a Sponsor medical device but an alternative cause may be equally or less likely associated.
Unrelated defined as the AE was due to the underlying indication or disease state or to concomitant medication or therapy not related to any Sponsor device.
Unknown defined as the relationship of the AE to a Sponsor device could not be determined."|1 month|All of the randomized subjects were included in safety population analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
848145|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Neurological Status From Baseline (Limb Strength)|The neurological examination included motor strength, sensory examination, reflexes below the level of the most cephalad index vertebral body fracture, and the presence of radicular pain. Radicular lower limb pain was assessed the presence of paresthesia, weakness, and/or painful straight leg raising (SLR).|1 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||percentage of participants|||Number
848146|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Neurological Status From Baseline (Limb Strength)|The neurological examination included motor strength, sensory examination, reflexes below the level of the most cephalad index vertebral body fracture, and the presence of radicular pain. Radicular lower limb pain was assessed the presence of paresthesia, weakness, and/or painful straight leg raising (SLR).|1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||percentage of participants|||Number
848147|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Neurological Status From Baseline (Reflex Strength)|"The neurological examination included motor strength, sensory examination, reflexes below the level of the most cephalad index vertebral body fracture, and the presence of radicular pain. Evaluation criteria of reflexes (scored 0-3) for patellar and Achilles reflexes as following:
absent = 0, hypoactive = 1, normal = 2, brisk or clonus = 3"|1 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||percentage of participants|||Number
848148|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Neurological Status From Baseline (Reflex Strength)|"The neurological examination included motor strength, sensory examination, reflexes below the level of the most cephalad index vertebral body fracture, and the presence of radicular pain. Evaluation criteria of reflexes (scored 0-3) for patellar and Achilles reflexes as following:
absent = 0, hypoactive = 1, normal = 2, brisk or clonus = 3"|1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||percentage of participants|||Number
848149|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Neurological Status From Baseline (Sensory Examination)|The neurological examination included motor strength, sensory examination, reflexes below the level of the most cephalad index vertebral body fracture, and the presence of radicular pain. For sensory examination, the Investigator assessed sensory status at baseline and a change from baseline beginning with the most cephalad index level treated through L5.|1 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||percentage of participants|||Number
848150|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Neurological Status From Baseline (Sensory Examination)|The neurological examination included motor strength, sensory examination, reflexes below the level of the most cephalad index vertebral body fracture, and the presence of radicular pain. For sensory examination, the Investigator assessed sensory status at baseline and a change from baseline beginning with the most cephalad index level treated through L5.|1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||percentage of participants|||Number
848162|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Activities of Daily Living - Number of Days in Bed Due to Back Pain in Previous 2 Weeks|The Activities of Daily Living assessment comprised three questions about the effects of back pain or back problems over the previous 2-week period. The patient was asked if they had cut down on usual activities, the number of days in which the patient had cut down on usual activities and the number of days that the patient had spent at least half a day in bed because of back pain or back problems.|Baseline and 1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
848151|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Neurology Status From Baseline (Motor Strength)-Per Protocol|"The neurological examination included motor strength, sensory examination, reflexes below the level of the most cephalad index vertebral body fracture, and the presence of radicular pain. Evaluation criteria of motor strength (scored 0-5) for rectus abdominis, hip extensors and flexors, knee extensors and flexors, and foot plantar and dorsiflexors as following:
absent voluntary contraction = 0, contractions unable to move joint = 1, movement with gravity eliminated = 2, movement against gravity = 3, movement against resistance = 4, full strength = 5"|1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||percentage of participants|||Number
848152|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Neurology Status From Baseline (Motor Strength)|"The neurological examination included motor strength, sensory examination, reflexes below the level of the most cephalad index vertebral body fracture, and the presence of radicular pain. Evaluation criteria of motor strength (scored 0-5) for rectus abdominis, hip extensors and flexors, knee extensors and flexors, and foot plantar and dorsiflexors as following:
absent voluntary contraction = 0, contractions unable to move joint = 1, movement with gravity eliminated = 2, movement against gravity = 3, movement against resistance = 4, full strength = 5"|1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||percentage of participants|||Number
848153|NCT00211237|Secondary|Back Pain Analgesics Used||Baseline, 7 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||percentage of participants|||Number
848154|NCT00211237|Secondary|Back Pain Analgesics Used||Baseline, 7 days, and 1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||percentage of participants|||Number
848155|NCT00211237|Secondary|Index Spinal Deformity Change Measured by Index Vertebral Body Height Ratio|Index spinal deformity was measured by Kyphotic angle, local Cobb angle, thoracic and lumbar Cobb angle, and anterior, middle and posterior vertebral body heights for each index VCF. Index Vertebral Body Height Ratio (VBHR) was defined as index vertebra height divided by the average of normal superior and inferior adjacent vertebrae.|Baseline, post-operation, 1 month, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
848156|NCT00211237|Secondary|Index Spinal Deformity Change Measured by Index Vertebral Body Height Ratio|Index spinal deformity was measured by Kyphotic angle, local Cobb angle, thoracic and lumbar Cobb angle, and anterior, middle and posterior vertebral body heights for each index VCF. Index Vertebral Body Height Ratio (VBHR) was defined as index vertebra height divided by the average of normal superior and inferior adjacent vertebrae.|Baseline and 1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
848157|NCT00211237|Secondary|Index Spinal Deformity Change Measured by Index Vertebral Body Angles|Index spinal deformity was measured by Kyphotic angle, local Cobb angle, thoracic and lumbar Cobb angle, and anterior, middle and posterior vertebral body heights for each index VCF.|Baseline, post-operation, 1 month, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
848158|NCT00211237|Secondary|Index Spinal Deformity Change Measured by Index Vertebral Body Angles From Baseline to 1 Month|Index spinal deformity was measured by Kyphotic angle, local Cobb angle, thoracic and lumbar Cobb angle, and anterior, middle and posterior vertebral body heights for each index VCF.|Baseline and 1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
848159|NCT00211237|Secondary|Ambulatory Status Change|Ambulatory status was assessed using a three-category system, fully ambulatory, ambulatory with assistance, or not ambulatory.|Baseline, 7 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||percentage of participants|||Number
848160|NCT00211237|Secondary|Ambulatory Status Change From Baseline to One Month|Ambulatory status was assessed using a three-category system, fully ambulatory, ambulatory with assistance, or not ambulatory.|1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||percentage of participants|||Number
848161|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Activities of Daily Living - Number of Days in Bed Due to Back Pain in Previous 2 Weeks|The Activities of Daily Living assessment comprised three questions about the effects of back pain or back problems over the previous 2-week period. The patient was asked if they had cut down on usual activities, the number of days in which the patient had cut down on usual activities and the number of days that the patient had spent at least half a day in bed because of back pain or back problems.|Baseline, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
848304|NCT00121641|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Therapeutic Glycemic Response (A1C < 7.0%) at Week 24||Week 24|Randomized Participants with measurement at time point, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||percentage of participants|||Number
848163|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Activities of Daily Living - Number of Days With Reduced Activities Due to Back Pain in Previous 2 Weeks|The Activities of Daily Living assessment comprised three questions about the effects of back pain or back problems over the previous 2-week period. The patient was asked if they had cut down on usual activities, the number of days in which the patient had cut down on usual activities and the number of days that the patient had spent at least half a day in bed because of back pain or back problems.|Baseline, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
848164|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Activities of Daily Living - Number of Days With Reduced Activities Due to Back Pain in Previous 2 Weeks|The Activities of Daily Living assessment comprised three questions about the effects of back pain or back problems over the previous 2-week period. The patient was asked if they had cut down on usual activities, the number of days in which the patient had cut down on usual activities and the number of days that the patient had spent at least half a day in bed because of back pain or back problems.|Baseline and 1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
848165|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Activities of Daily Living - Activities Reduced Due to Back Pain in Previous 2 Weeks|The Activities of Daily Living assessment comprised three questions about the effects of back pain or back problems over the previous 2-week period. The patient was asked if they had cut down on usual activities, the number of days in which the patient had cut down on usual activities and the number of days that the patient had spent at least half a day in bed because of back pain or back problems.|Baseline, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||percentage of participants|||Number
848166|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Activities of Daily Living - Activities Reduced Due to Back Pain in Previous 2 Weeks|The Activities of Daily Living assessment comprised three questions about the effects of back pain or back problems over the previous 2-week period. The patient was asked if they had cut down on usual activities, the number of days in which the patient had cut down on usual activities and the number of days that the patient had spent at least half a day in bed because of back pain or back problems.|Baseline and 1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||percentage of participants|||Number
848167|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life|The SF-36 were used to assess quality of life. The SF-36 results were summarized into two components, a physical component summary score (PCS) (0-100) and a mental component summary score (MCS) (0-100). The higher the score, the better the quality of life.|Baseline, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848168|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life.|The SF-36 was used to assess quality of life. The SF-36 results were summarized into two components, a physical component summary score (PCS) (0-100) and a mental component summary score (MCS) (0-100). The higher the score, the better the quality of life.|Baseline and 1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848169|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Back Pain|Back pain was assessed on a NRS from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain).|Baseline, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848170|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Back Pain|Back pain was assessed on a 10-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain).|Baseline and 1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848171|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Functional Status Assessed With the Karnofsky Performance Scale|The Karnofsky Performance Scale rates a patient on an 11-step scale from 0 (dead) to 100 (normal, no complaints, no evidence of disease).|Baseline, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848172|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Functional Status Assessed With the Karnofsky Performance Scale|The Karnofsky Performance Scale rates a patient on an 11-step scale from 0 (dead) to 100 (normal, no complaints, no evidence of disease).|Baseline and 1 month|Subjects were analyzed in modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population, based on their randomized treatment group (regardless of crossover). This analysis included all subjects in the mITT population who provided evaluable data at both baseline and 1 month.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848173|NCT00211237|Secondary|Change in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire Score|Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) was used to assess the physical disability due to back pain. The best score is 0 (no disability) and worst is 24 (maximum disability).|Baseline, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months|The analysis population was per-protocol analysis, which was based on the treatment that subjects received. Of 61 subjects randomized into NSM group, 38 subjects crossed over from NSM to Kyphoplasty after the 1-month visit, and 23 subjects remained in NSM group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848174|NCT00211237|Primary|The Functional Status, as Measured by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) at 1 Month|"The full scale name is the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire; it is a validated measure of physical disability due to back pain.
The best score is 0 (no disability) and worst is 24 (maximum disability)"|Baseline and 1 Month|The analyses of change from Baseline included only patients in the modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) population who provided evaluable data at both Baseline and at 1 month after receipt of the initially assigned study treatment.||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848175|NCT00205504|Secondary|Inflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women|These inflammatory markers are assessed through blood analysis of Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule (sICAM).|Baseline and 6 months|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848176|NCT00205504|Secondary|Changes in Waist Circumference Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women||Baseline and 6 months|||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
848177|NCT00205504|Secondary|Changes in Body Mass Index (BMI) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women|Body Mass Index is a calculation of height and weight: kg/m²|Baseline and 6 months|||kg/m²||Standard Deviation|Mean
848178|NCT00205504|Secondary|Changes in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women||Baseline and 6 months|||mm Hg||Standard Deviation|Mean
848179|NCT00205504|Secondary|Inflammatory Marker Changes (MCP-1) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women|Inflammatory marker is assessed through blood analysis for Monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1).|Baseline and 6 months|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848180|NCT00205504|Secondary|Changes in Waist-to-Hip Ratio Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women|Waist-to-hip ratio is assessed through calculated ratio of waist and hip circumference.|Baseline and 6 months|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
848181|NCT00205504|Secondary|Changes in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women||Baseline and 6 months|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848182|NCT00205504|Secondary|Inflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women|Inflammatory markers are assessed through blood analysis for C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and adiponectin.|Baseline and 6 months|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848183|NCT00205504|Secondary|Changes in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women|The lipid profile is assessed through blood sample analysis for low-density lipoprotein (LDL), Triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein (HDL).|Baseline and 6 months|||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848184|NCT00205504|Primary|Changes in Insulin Sensitivity Associated With Oral Contraceptive (OC) Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women|Insulin sensitivity was assessed by frequent sampling intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT).|Baseline and 6 months|||mIU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848185|NCT00187889|Secondary|Microvascular Coronary Flow Reserve(Adjusted) at Week 16 Adjusted for Baseline Coronary Flow Reserve Comparing the Eplerenone Group to the Placebo Group|Coronary flow reserve is a ratio of coronary blood flow velocity before and after adenosine. The outcome measure is the difference between the coronary flow reserve at 16 weeks adjusted for coronary flow reserve at baseline.|16 weeks|See Primary Outcome. The studied was only powered for the primary outcome. All completers are included per protocol analysis.||difference of ratios (unitless)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848186|NCT00187889|Primary|Epicardial Coronary Artery Endothelial Function (Adjusted) at Week 16 Comparing the Eplerenone Group to the Placebo Group|The primary measure was the relative change in coronary diameter to acetylcholinem (ACH) at 16 weeks adjusted for baseline reactivity to acetylcholine. Change in coronary artery diameter after ACH was measured in mm at baseline and 16 weeks. Percent change at 16 weeks - percent change at baseline was the outcome.|16 weeks|power analysis: Study planned to detect a 12% difference in change from baseline to 16 weeks between treatment groups (SD=14%), in the primary outcome leading to a planned sample size of 22 per group (44 total) for 80% power, P=0.05 2-sided. Study allowed for 6 dropouts, leading to a final N=50 planned (25 per group). Per protocol analysis used.||% change wk16-%change wk0- unitless||Standard Deviation|Mean
848187|NCT00163293|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. A SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in death, is life-threatening, requires in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, results in congenital anomaly/birth defect or any other important medical condition considered serious based on medical and scientific judgement.|Up to 12 months|Safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of trial medication.||participants|||Number
848188|NCT00163293|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Laboratory Values|Clinically significant laboratory values were hematology and chemistry tests determined by the investigator to be clinically significant based on the following criteria: Hemoglobin <9.5 g/dL; Erythrocytes <3.0 x 10^6/μL or >6.5 x 10^6/μL; White Blood Count <3000/mm^3 or >20000/mm^3; serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT), serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase (SGPT), gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT), Total Bilirubin and Glucose >2 times Upper limit of Normal Range (ULNR); Alkaline Phosphatase and Creatine Kinase >3 times ULNR; Creatinine >1.5 times ULN; Potassium >5.0 mmol/L or <3.0 mmol/L; and Sodium >150 mmol/L or 130 mmol/L.|Up to 12 months|Safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of trial medication.||participants|||Number
848189|NCT00163293|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Physical Examination Findings|A thorough physical examination was performed consisting of examinations of the following body systems: (1) eyes; (2) ears, nose, throat; (3) lungs/thorax; (4) heart/cardiovascular system; (5) abdomen; (6) skin and mucosae; (7) nervous system; (8) lymph nodes; (9) musculo-skeletal system; (10) physical examinations other than body systems described in (1) to (9). The investigator determined if any of the findings were clinically significant.|Up to 12 months|Safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of trial medication.||participants|||Number
848190|NCT00163293|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Vital Signs Findings|Vital signs included body temperature, systolic and diastolic blood pressure and heart rate in beats per minute (bpm). The investigator determined if the result was clinically significant based on the following criteria: Systolic Blood Pressure >130 mmHg or <80 mmHg or a >20 mmHg difference from Baseline; Diastolic Blood Pressure > 85 mmHg; and Resting Heart Rate >140 bpm or <60 bpm or a >30 bpm difference from Baseline.|Up to 12 months|Safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of trial medication.||participants|||Number
848191|NCT00163293|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessments as Per Paediatric Asthma Caregiver’s Quality of Life Questionnaire (PACQLQ)|The PACQLQ consists of 13 items divided into two domains: Activity limitations (items 2, 4, 6, 8) and Emotional function (items 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13). Caregivers answered each question using a seven-point scale (whereby “1” indicated maximum impairment and “7” indicated no impairment) and recalled their experiences during the previous week. Overall PACQLQ score is equal to the mean of all 13 items for a total possible score of 1 (worst) to 7 (best).|Months 2, 6 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848192|NCT00163293|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessments as Per Paediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, Standardized (PAQLQ[S])|The PAQLQ(S) consists of 23 items divided into three domains: Activity limitations (items 1-3, 19, 22); Symptoms (items 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23) and Emotional function (items 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 21). Participants were asked to answer each question using a seven-point scale (where “1” indicated maximum impairment and “7” indicated no impairment) and recall their experience during the previous week. Overall PAQLQ score is equal to the mean of all 23 items for a total possible score 1 (worst) to 7 (best).|Months 2, 6 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848193|NCT00163293|Secondary|Percentage of Asthma Symptom Free Days|Days without Asthma Symptom documented in the participant's diary were reported.|Months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
848194|NCT00163293|Secondary|Percentage of Rescue Medication Free Days|Days without use of rescue medication documented in the participant’s diary were reported.|Months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
848195|NCT00163293|Secondary|Rescue Medication Use Per Day|Salbutamol (100 μg/puff) was used as rescue medication according to the individual needs of the participant. Each use was documented in the participant’s diary.|Months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||puffs/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
848196|NCT00163293|Secondary|Percentage of Nights With Nocturnal Awakenings Due to Asthma Symptoms|Nocturnal awakenings due to asthma symptoms were recorded in the participant's diary.|Months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||percentage of nights||Standard Deviation|Mean
848197|NCT00163293|Secondary|Total Asthma Symptom Score by Diary Entries|Total Asthma Score = daytime asthma score + night-time asthma score, where higher score indicates worsening of disease. Night-time asthma score is assessed on a 5 point scale where 0=No symptoms, slept through the night, 1=Slept well but some complaints in the morning, 2=Woke up once because of asthma (including early wakening), 3=Woke up several times because of asthma (including early wakening) and 4=Bad night, awake most of the night because of asthma. Day-time asthma score is assessed on a 5 point scale where 0= Very well, no symptoms, 1= One episode of wheezing, cough or breathlessness, 2= More than one episode of wheezing, cough or breathlessness without interfering with normal activities, 3= Wheezing, cough or shortness of breath most of the day which interfered to some extent with normal activities and 4= Asthma very bad. Unable to carry out daily activities as usual.|Months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848198|NCT00163293|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Diurnal PEF Fluctuation|Diurnal PEF Fluctuation is equal to [(Higher PEF – Lower PEF)/0.5*(Higher PEF + Lower PEF)] * 100%. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||percent fluctuation||Standard Deviation|Mean
848199|NCT00163293|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PEF by Diary Entries|PEF is the maximum speed of expiration. Spirometry was used for assessment of PEF. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||liters/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
848305|NCT00121641|Secondary|Baseline and Change From Baseline at Week 24 in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)||Baseline, Week 24|Randomized participants with measure at given time points, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF).||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
848200|NCT00163293|Secondary|Morning and Evening Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Measurements by Diary Entries|PEF is the maximum speed of expiration. Spirometry was used for assessment of PEF.|Months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||liters/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
848201|NCT00163293|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) (Percent Predicted)|FEV1 is the maximal amount of air forcefully exhaled from the lungs in one second. Spirometry was used for assessment of FEV1. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||percent predicted FEV1||Standard Deviation|Mean
848202|NCT00163293|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) (Absolute Value)|FEV1 is the maximal amount of air forcefully exhaled from the lungs in one second. Spirometry was used for assessment of FEV1. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.|Baseline and Months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12|"ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome. n in the category is the number of participants with data available at the given time-point."||liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
848203|NCT00163293|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Dropped-out Due to Asthma Exacerbation||Up to 12 months|ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome.||percentage of participants|||Number
848204|NCT00163293|Secondary|Number of Exacerbations Per Participant|The mean number of asthma exacerbations per participant is reported.|Up to 12 months|ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome.||exacerbations||Standard Deviation|Mean
848205|NCT00163293|Secondary|Duration of Exacerbations|Duration of exacerbation was defined as the time in days when the criteria for an exacerbation were met to the time when peak flow measurements returned to baseline.|Up to 12 months|ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
848206|NCT00163293|Secondary|Mean Rate of Asthma Exacerbations Per Year|Rate of asthma exacerbations per year is equal to total number of asthma exacerbations during treatment/time on treatment (year).|Up to 12 months|ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome.||number of exacerbations per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
848207|NCT00163293|Secondary|Growth Velocity as Assessed by Stadiometric Height Measurement|Standing height measured in millimeters (mm) with a wall-mounted stadiometer.|Up to 12 months|Safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of trial medication.||mm/year||Standard Deviation|Mean
848208|NCT00163293|Primary|Exacerbations (Post-hoc Analysis of Annual Rates)|A model-based analysis of asthma exacerbation was performed to adjust to important covariables. The distribution of the data suggested a Poisson regression modeling (zero inflated) strategy. After a variable selection process considering also variable-by-treatment interactions, the variables centre, age [years] and race were identified to be important beside treatment. The parameters centre and age [years] were allocated to zero-model part and the variables treatment and race to the Poisson model part. The estimates of the per-treatment rates are based on a negative-binomial distribution.|Up to 12 months|ITT analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome.||number of events per year||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848209|NCT00163293|Primary|Time to First Asthma Exacerbation|Time to first asthma exacerbation is defined as the time in days until the first asthma exacerbation, or to the end of treatment visit. In the absence of an exacerbation, an early treatment discontinuation is treated as a censored observation on the day following the last use of study drug.|Up to 12 months|Intention to Treat (ITT) analysis set included all participants of the full analysis set who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline measurement of the primary efficacy outcome.||days||Standard Error|Mean
848210|NCT00162123|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time between the date of the baseline tumor assessment in this study and the date of progression or death, whichever occurred first.|From day of first reinduction in current study to date of progression or death, whichever occurred first.|All participants who received study drug as reinduction from 0.3, 3, or 10 mg/kg doses in parent study and 10 mg/kg in current study||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848211|NCT00162123|Secondary|Number of Participants With On-study Immune-related Adverse Events (irAEs)|irAEs were defined as adverse events characterized by a potential association with inflammation and considered by the investigator as drug related. These prespecified terms were grouped into the following organ-specific subcategories: gastrointestinal, hepatic, skin, endocrine, neurologic, and other (includes blood, eye, immune system, investigations, infections, renal, and respiratory systems). Patients may have 1 or more events.|From first dose of study drug during reinduction to the earliest of 70 days after last dose or day before second reinduction first dose date|All participants who received study drug as reinduction from 0.3, 3, or 10 mg/kg doses in parent study 10 mg/kg current study||Participants|||Number
848212|NCT00162123|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Surviving at 1, 1.5, and 2 Years|Survival rate was defined as the time from first dose of study drug to 1, 1.5, and 2 years.|From first dose of study drug in parent study to up to 2 years after reinduction|All participants who received study drug as reinduction or extended maintenance from 0.3, 3, or 10 mg/kg doses in parent study and 10 mg/kg in current study and those patients who were followed-up.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848213|NCT00162123|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was computed for all patients who entered this study and is defined as the time between the first dose of study therapy and death. If a patient has not died, OS was censored at the time of last contact.|From first dose of study drug in parent study to death or date of last censoring.|All participants who received study drug as reinduction from 0.3, 3, or 10 mg/kg doses in parent study and 10 mg/kg in current study||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848214|NCT00162123|Primary|Number of Participants With On-study Adverse Events (AEs), AEs Leading to Discontinuation, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Drug-related AEs, Immune-related AEs (irAEs), and Death as Outcome|An AE is any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. An SAE is a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Drug-related is defined as having certain, probable, possible, or missing relationship to study drug. An IrAE is an AE characterized by a potential association with inflammation and considered by the investigator to be drug related. Grade (Gr) 1=Mild, Gr 2=Moderate, Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4=Life-threatening or disabling, Gr 5=Death.|Continuously from first dose to 70 days after last dose of study drug. For deaths, Day 1 of enrollment to 70 days after last dose of study drug.|All participants who received study drug as reinduction from 0.3, 3, or 10 mg/kg doses in parent study and 10 mg/kg in current study||Participants|||Number
848215|NCT00157014|Secondary|Number of Patients With Treatment Failure and Crossover for Treatment Failure (Pediatric Population)|"Treatment failure was defined as death, re-transplantation, withdrawal due to an Adverse Event, or a switch of main immunosuppressant medication, whichever came first.
Crossover was defined as a switch from originally administered primary immunosuppressant (tacrolimus or cyclosporine) to the alternate primary immunosuppressant."|52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population - defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Patients|||Number
848216|NCT00157014|Secondary|Number of Patients With Successful Steroid Taper or Withdrawal at Weeks 26 and 52 (Pediatric Population)|A successful steroid taper or withdrawal was defined as steroids (prednisone) being discontinued or tapered to the suggested dose level after week 26.|26 Weeks and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population - defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Patients|||Number
848217|NCT00157014|Secondary|Mean Cases of Acute Rejection (MCAR) Per Patient (Pediatric Population)|"MCAR represents the average number of acute rejections among all patients in each treatment group. Results were based on rejection episodes with endomyocardial biopsies.
Acute rejection was defined as a rejection with ISHLT Grade ≥3A or by the presence of hemodynamic compromise.
ISHLT Grades ≥3A include: Multifocal Moderate Rejection; Diffuse, Borderline Severe Acute Rejection; and Severe Acute Rejection."|52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||MCAR per patient||Standard Deviation|Mean
848218|NCT00157014|Secondary|Number of Cardiac Rejection Episodes Requiring Treatment (Pediatric Population)|A summary of rejection episodes requiring treatment regardless of biopsy grade or presence of hemodynamic compromise.|52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Rejection Episodes|||Number
848219|NCT00157014|Secondary|Number of Patients Requiring Antilymphocyte Antibodies or Steroids for Treatment of Severe Acute Rejection (Pediatric Population)|Severe Acute Rejection was defined as rejection with ISHLT Grade 4.|52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Patients|||Number
848220|NCT00157014|Secondary|Time to First Acute Rejection Episode Following de Novo Cardiac Transplant (Pediatric Population)|"Acute Rejection was defined as a rejection with ISHLT Grade ≥3A or by the presence of hemodynamic compromise.
ISHLT Grades ≥3A include: Multifocal Moderate Rejection; Diffuse, Borderline Severe Acute Rejection; and Severe Acute Rejection.
Time to first acute rejection is defined as: date of onset - date of transplant."|52 Weeks|The population analyzed represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation. Only participants who experienced acute rejection were included in the analysis.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
848221|NCT00157014|Secondary|Number of Acute Rejection Episodes by International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) Criteria (Pediatric Population)|"Acute rejection was defined as a rejection with ISHLT Grade ≥3A or by the presence of hemodynamic compromise.
ISHLT Grades ≥3A include: Multifocal Moderate Rejection; Diffuse, Borderline Severe Acute Rejection; and Severe Acute Rejection.
Patients may report more than one rejection episode."|52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Rejection Episodes|||Number
848222|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation and Oxidation: Cystatin-C (Pediatric Population)|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population - defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848223|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation and Oxidation: hsCRP (Pediatric Population)|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population - defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848224|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation and Oxidation: Nitrotyrosine (Pediatric Population)|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population - defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
848225|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation and Oxidation: F2 Isoprostanes (Pediatric Population)|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population - defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848226|NCT00157014|Secondary|Number of Patients With Treatment Failure and Crossover for Treatment Failure|"Treatment failure was defined as death, re-transplantation, withdrawal due to an Adverse Event, or a switch of main immunosuppressant medication, whichever came first.
Crossover was defined as a switch from originally administered primary immunosuppressant (tacrolimus or cyclosporine) to the alternate primary immunosuppressant."|52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population - defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Patients|||Number
848227|NCT00157014|Secondary|Number of Patients With Successful Steroid Taper or Withdrawal at Weeks 26 and 52|A successful steroid taper or withdrawal was defined as steroids (prednisone) being discontinued or tapered to the suggested dose level after week 26.|26 Weeks and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population - defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Patients|||Number
848228|NCT00157014|Secondary|Mean Cases of Acute Rejection (MCAR) Per Patient|"MCAR represents the average number of acute rejections among all patients in each treatment group. Results were based on rejection episodes with endomyocardial biopsies.
Acute rejection was defined as a rejection with ISHLT Grade ≥3A or by the presence of hemodynamic compromise.
ISHLT Grades ≥3A include: Multifocal Moderate Rejection; Diffuse, Borderline Severe Acute Rejection; and Severe Acute Rejection."|52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population - defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||MCAR per patient||Standard Deviation|Mean
848229|NCT00157014|Secondary|Number of Cardiac Rejection Episodes Requiring Treatment|The number of rejection episodes requiring treatment (medications started/ stopped, non-medication treatment, or both) regardless of biopsy grade or presence of hemodynamic compromise.|52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population - defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Rejection Episodes|||Number
848230|NCT00157014|Secondary|Number of Patients Requiring Antilymphocyte Antibodies or Steroids for Treatment of Severe Acute Rejection|Severe Acute Rejection is defined as rejection with ISHLT Grade 4.|52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Patients|||Number
848231|NCT00157014|Secondary|Time to First Acute Rejection Episode Following de Novo Cardiac Transplant|"Acute Rejection was defined as a rejection with ISHLT Grade ≥3A or by the presence of hemodynamic compromise.
ISHLT Grades ≥3A include: Multifocal Moderate Rejection; Diffuse, Borderline Severe Acute Rejection; and Severe Acute Rejection.
Time to first acute rejection is defined as: date of onset - date of transplant."|52 Weeks|The population analyzed represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation. Only participants who experienced acute rejection were included in the analysis.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
848232|NCT00157014|Secondary|Number of Acute Rejection Episodes by International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) Criteria|"Acute rejection was defined as a rejection with ISHLT Grade ≥3A or by the presence of hemodynamic compromise.
ISHLT Grades ≥3A include: Multifocal Moderate Rejection; Diffuse, Borderline Severe Acute Rejection; and Severe Acute Rejection.
Patients may report more than one acute rejection."|52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Rejection Episodes|||Number
848233|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: Cystatin-C|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848234|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: IL-18|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848235|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: IL-6|"Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.
IL= Interleukin"|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848236|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: Fibrinogen|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848237|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: Osteopontin|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848238|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: Troponin T|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||ug/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848239|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: BNP|"Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.
BNP= Brain Natriuretic Peptide"|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||ng/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848240|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: GSH/GSSG|"Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.
GSH/GSSG= ratio of reduced to oxidised glutathione"|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
848241|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: Nitrotyrosine|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||nM||Standard Deviation|Mean
848242|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: T-bars|"Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.
T-bars = thiobarbituric acid reactive substances"|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||nmol/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848243|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: F2 Isoprostanes|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848244|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: hsCRP|"Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.
hsCRP= high-sensitivity C Reactive Protein"|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848245|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: Homocysteine|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||μmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848246|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: E-selectin|Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848247|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: s-ICAM|"Change is defined as Week 52 assessment - Pre-Transplant assessment.
s-ICAM= soluble-intracellular adhesion molecule"|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848248|NCT00157014|Secondary|Changes in Circulating Markers of Inflammation, Oxidation, Growth, Apoptosis, Differentiation and Survival: MCP-1|"Change is defined as Week 52 assessment – Pre-Transplant assessment.
MCP-1= monocyte chemoattractant protein-1"|Pre-Transplant and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848249|NCT00157014|Primary|The Change in the Markers of Growth, Apoptosis, Inflammation and Oxidation Measured in Endomyocardial Biopsies (Pediatric Population)|"The markers assessed were p-ERK ½, p-JNK and p-p38 MAPK.
The data for each biopsy marker were expressed as a ratio of its densitometry / densitometry of glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH).
Change is defined as Week 52 assessment- Week 2 assessment."|2 Weeks and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Densitometry / Densitometry of GAPDH||Standard Deviation|Mean
848266|NCT00138424|Secondary|Percentage Change of Viral Load in Urine and Plasma BK Virus by Quantitative PCR Between Baseline and Each Visit|The percent change in viral load from baseline to day 7, day 21 and day 49 as measured in the urine and measured in the blood. A drop is identified by use of '-', an increase in viral load has no sign in front of the number.|Baseline, and each visit: day 7, 21, 35 and 49.|||Percent Change||Full Range|Median
848250|NCT00157014|Primary|The Change in the Markers of Growth, Apoptosis, Inflammation and Oxidation Measured in Endomyocardial Biopsies|"The markers assessed were p-ERK ½ (phosphorylated extracellular signal-regulated kinase), p-JNK (phosphorylated jun N-terminal kinase) and p-p38 MAPK (phosphorylated mitogen-activated protein kinase).
The data for each biopsy marker were expressed as a ratio of its densitometry / densitometry of glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH).
Change is defined as Week 52 assessment- Week 2 assessment."|2 Weeks and 52 Weeks|The number of participants analyzed per arm represents Treatment Exposure Population- defined as all patients receiving at least 1 dose of study medication summarized according to treatment received regardless of randomization allocation.||Densitometry / Densitometry of GAPDH||Standard Deviation|Mean
848251|NCT00153816|Secondary|Advanced Colorectal Lesions|Includes: adenomas >=1 cm, adenomas with high grade dysplasia, adenomas with villous features, or cancer.|1 to 10 years|Subjects are included if they had a follow-up exam at least one year after randomization and sufficient histology available to ascertain the endpoint.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848252|NCT00153816|Primary|Colorectal Adenomas||1 to 10 years|Subjects are included if they had a follow-up exam at least one year after randomization and had sufficient histology available to ascertain the endpoint.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848253|NCT00138424|Secondary|The Pharmacodynamics of Cidofovir Will be Assessed by Correlating the Percent Change in BK Virus DNA in Urine and Plasma With Pharmacokinetic Changes Between Baseline and Day 35|PK parameter change from baseline to day 35 for AUC4 and AUC12|Baseline through day 35|||hr*mg/L||Full Range|Median
848254|NCT00138424|Secondary|The Pharmacodynamics of Cidofovir Will be Assessed by Correlating the Percent Change in BK Virus DNA in Urine and Plasma With Pharmacokinetic Changes Between Baseline Through Day 35|PK parameter change from baseline to day 35 for Cmax.|Baseline through day 35|||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
848255|NCT00138424|Primary|Number of Subjects Experiencing at Least One Laboratory Abnormality|The following lab values assessed during the 49 days of subject involvement were the following: hemoglobin, hematocrit, platelets, sodium, potassium, chloride, bicarbonate, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), serum creatinine, calcium, phosphorous, serum albumin, glucose, uric acid, magnesium, total protein, total bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), asparate aminotransferase (AST) and alkaline phosphate. The outcome measure is the number of subjects experiencing at least 1 grade 1 (mild) or higher event.|Baseline through day 49|||Participants|||Number
848256|NCT00138424|Primary|Changes Observed in the Physical Examination: Heart Rate (Per Minute)|The heart rate is the number of heart beats per minute. The outcome measure is the change from baseline heart rate to day 49 heart rate.|Baseline through day 49.|Subject's whose heart rate was measured at baseline and day 49 visit||Change in Beats per Minute||Full Range|Median
848257|NCT00138424|Primary|Changes Observed in the Physical Examination: Body Temperature (Fahrenheit)|The temperature is a measure of body temperature in fahrenheit (F). The measure is a change between baseline temperature and day 49 temperature.|Baseline through day 49.|Subject's last visit minus baseline visit||Temperature (F)||Full Range|Median
848258|NCT00138424|Secondary|Allograft Rejection.|Allograft rejection is the number of subjects that rejected their kidney by the end of the study.|Day 49.|Number of rejections||Participants|||Number
848259|NCT00138424|Secondary|Allograft Function at the Completion of the Study|"Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is a test used to check how well the kidneys are working. Specifically, it estimates how much blood passes through the tiny filters in the kidneys, called glomeruli, each minute. The normal health GFR is about 90 - 120 mL/min/1.73 m2. Older people will have lower normal GFR levels, because GFR decreases with age.
Abnormal Results are expected to be below 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 for 3 or more months are a sign of chronic kidney disease. A GFR result below 15 mL/min/1.73 m2 may be a sign of kidney failure."|Day 49.|subjects that had GFR at each visit last visit||mL/min/1.73 m2||Full Range|Median
848260|NCT00138424|Primary|Changes Observed in the Physical Examination: Blood Pressure (mm/hg)|"Blood pressure (BP) is the pressure exerted by circulating blood upon the walls of blood vessels. Blood pressure usually refers to the arterial pressure of the systemic circulation. During each heartbeat, blood pressure varies between a maximum (systolic) and a minimum (diastolic) pressure. The measure is the difference between the baseline systolic and baseline diastolic value with the day 49 systolic and day 49 diastolic value."|Baseline through day 49.|||mm Hg||Full Range|Median
848261|NCT00138424|Primary|Changes Observed in the Physical Examination : Respiratory Rate (Per Minute)|Respiratory rate is the number of breaths per minute.|Baseline through day 49.|subjects whose respiratory rate was measured at baseline visit and at day 49 visit.||Change in Breaths per Minute||Full Range|Median
848262|NCT00138424|Primary|Number of Related Adverse Events|"The investigator’s assessment of an AE's relationship to study drug is part of the documentation process. All adverse events had their relationship to study product assessed using the following terms: associated (related)or not associated (not related). To help assess, the following guidelines were used.
Associated – There was a known temporal relationship and/or, if re-challenge was done, the event abates with de-challenge and reappears with re-challenge and/or the event was known to occur in association study product or with a product in a similar class of study products
Not Associated -the AE was completely independent of study product administration; and/or evidence existed that the event was definitely related to another etiology."|Baseline through day 49.|Number of Related Events||Events|||Number
848263|NCT00138424|Primary|Number of Adverse Events by Grade of Event|"Adverse events are reported as grades:
Toxicity Grade I: a mild event (an event that requires minimal or no treatment and does not interfere with the subject's daily activities.
Toxicity Grade II: a moderate event (an event that results in a low level of inconvenience or concern with the therapeutic measures and may cause some interference with functioning.
Toxicity Grade III: a severe event (an event that interrupts a subject's usual daily activity and may require systemic drug therapy or other treatment and may be incapacitating.
Toxicity Grade IV: Life threatening (any adverse drug experience that places the patient or subject at immediate risk of death from the reaction as it occurred)"|Baseline through day 49.|||Events|||Number
848264|NCT00138424|Secondary|Number of Days to at Least 50% Reduction of Viral Load in Plasma and Urine||Baseline through day 49.|||Days||Full Range|Median
848265|NCT00138424|Secondary|Subjects Achieving 50% Reduction Viral Load in Plasma and Urine||Baseline through day 49.|||Participants|||Number
848267|NCT00138424|Secondary|The Effect of Cidofovir on BK Virus Determined by Percentage of Subjects Achieving an Undetectable BK Virus in Urine and Plasma PCR|The outcome measure is the percent of subjects that achieved non-detectable BK virus in the urine and plasma polymerase chain reaction (PCR) at day 35 after staring study drug. Undetectable is a PCR viral load of less than 200.|Day 35.|Percentage of subjects||percentage of subjects|||Number
848268|NCT00138424|Primary|Safety and Tolerability of Cidofovir Assessed by Enumeration of Adverse Events Per Subject|The measure is the number of adverse events (ie: events that are change from baseline)experienced by subjects. The median or average number of events and the range of events across all subjects is reported.|Baseline through day 49|||Event||Full Range|Median
848269|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Changes From Baseline in Heart Rate During the ST + LT Period - Open Label Cohort||Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||beats per minute||Standard Error|Mean
848270|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Changes From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure During the ST + LT Period - Open Label Cohort||Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
848271|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Changes From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure During the ST + LT Period - Open Label Cohort||Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
848272|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Electrocardiogram (ECG) Tracings - Shift Table From Baseline (BL) to Selected Visits During ST + LT Treatment Period - Open Label Cohort|The normality/abnormality of the ECG tracing was determined by the investigator.|Baseline, Weeks 12, 24, 76, 102, 154, 206|Treated participants; BL n=number of participants at baseline||participants|||Number
848273|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Confirmed Hypoglycemia During ST + LT Treatment Period - Open-Label Cohort|'Confirmed' = recorded on the hypoglycemia AE case report form page with a fingerstick glucose <= 50 mg/dL and associated symptoms|AEs: up to last treatment day + 1 day or last visit; SAEs: up to last treatment day + 30 days or last visit + 30 days. Mean duration of exposure was 34 weeks.|Treated participants||participants|||Number
848274|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|All Reported Hypoglycemic Adverse Events During ST + LT Treatment Period - Open-Label Cohort|Hypoglycemic Events are based upon the Saxagliptin Predefined List of Events, which included hypoglycemia, blood glucose decreased, and hypoglycemic unconsciousness.|AEs: up to last treatment day + 1 day or last visit; SAEs: up to last treatment day + 30 days or last visit + 30 days. Mean duration of exposure was 34 weeks.|Treated participants||participants|||Number
848275|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Confirmed Hypoglycemia During ST + LT Treatment Period|'Confirmed' = recorded on the hypoglycemia AE case report form page with a fingerstick glucose <= 50 mg/dL and associated symptoms|AEs: up to last treatment day + 1 day or last visit; SAEs: up to last treatment day + 30 days or last visit + 30 days. Mean duration of exposure was 109 weeks in 10 mg arm, 94.7 weeks in 2.5 mg arm, 103 weeks in 5 mg arm, and 98.4 weeks in placebo arm.|Treated participants||participants|||Number
848276|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|All Reported Hypoglycemic Adverse Events During ST + LT Treatment Period|Hypoglycemic Events are based upon the Saxagliptin Predefined List of Events, which included hypoglycemia, blood glucose decreased, and hypoglycemic unconsciousness.|AEs: up to last treatment day + 1 day or last visit; SAEs: up to last treatment day + 30 days or last visit + 30 days. Mean duration of exposure was 109 weeks in 10 mg arm, 94.7 weeks in 2.5 mg arm, 103 weeks in 5 mg arm, and 98.4 weeks in placebo arm.|Treated participants||participants|||Number
848277|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Marked Laboratory Abnormalities During ST + LT Treatment Period - Open-Label Cohort|A laboratory value was considered a marked abnormality if it is outside the pre-defined criteria for marked abnormality and the on-treatment value was more extreme (farther from the limit) than the baseline value. Pre-Rx=pretreatment; ULN=upper limit of normal; ALP=alkaline phosphatase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; ALT=alanine aminotransferase; unspec=unspecified; sodium serum low: <0.9 x Pre-Rx & <=130mEq/L / high: >1.1 x Pre-Rx & >=150mEq/L; potassium, serum low: <=0.8 x Pre-Rx & >=6.0mEq/L / high: 1.2 x Pre-Rx & >=6.0mEq/L; LLN=lower limit of normal.|Lab assessments taken during and up to 14 days after the last dose of study drug during the ST + LT Treatment Period. Mean duration of exposure was 34 weeks.|Number of Participants Analyzed=Treated participants; n=number of treated subjects with baseline value and at least one value during the ST + LT treatment period||participants|||Number
848278|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Overall Summary of Adverse Events During ST+LT Treatment Period - Open-Label Cohort|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a pre-existing medical condition which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or causes prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, results in development of drug dependency or drug abuse, is an important medical event. Related events=relationship of certain, probable, possible, or missing.|AEs: up to last treatment day + 1 day or last visit; SAEs: up to last treatment day + 30 days or last visit + 30 days. Mean duration of exposure was 34 weeks.|All treated participants||participants|||Number
848279|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Electrocardiogram (ECG) Tracings - Shift Table From Baseline (BL) to Selected Visits During ST + LT Treatment Period|The normality/abnormality of the ECG tracing was determined by the investigator.|Baseline, Weeks 12, 24, 76, 102, 154, 206|Treated participants; BL n=number of participants at baseline||participants|||Number
848280|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Changes From Baseline in Heart Rate During the ST + LT Period||Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||beats per minute||Standard Error|Mean
848281|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Changes From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure During the ST + LT Period||Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
848286|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Absolute Lymphocyte Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||x 10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848287|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Absolute Neutrophil Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||x 10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848288|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in White Blood Cell Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||x 10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848289|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Platelet Counts (x 10^9 c/L) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||x 10^9 c/L||Standard Error|Mean
848290|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Red Blood Cell Counts (x 10^6 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||x 10^6 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848291|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Hematocrit During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||percentage red blood cells||Standard Error|Mean
848292|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Hemoglobin During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||g/dL||Standard Error|Mean
848293|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Marked Laboratory Abnormalities - During ST + LT Treatment Period|A laboratory value was considered a marked abnormality if it is outside the pre-defined criteria for marked abnormality and the on-treatment value was more extreme (farther from the limit) than the baseline value. Pre-Rx=pretreatment; ULN=upper limit of normal; ALP=alkaline phosphatase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; ALT=alanine aminotransferase; unspec=unspecified; sodium serum low: <0.9 x Pre-Rx & <=130mEq/L / high: >1.1 x Pre-Rx & >=150mEq/L; potassium, serum low: <=0.8 x Pre-Rx & >=6.0mEq/L / high: 1.2 x Pre-Rx & >=6.0mEq/L; LLN=lower limit of normal.|Lab assessments taken during and up to 14 days after the last dose of study drug during the ST + LT Treatment Period. Mean duration of exposure was 109 weeks in 10 mg arm, 94.7 weeks in 2.5 mg arm, 103 weeks in 5 mg arm, and 98.4 weeks in placebo arm.|Number of Participants Analyzed=Treated participants; n=number of treated subjects with baseline value and at least one value during the ST + LT treatment period||participants|||Number
848294|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Overall Summary of Adverse Events During ST+LT Treatment Period|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a pre-existing medical condition which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or causes prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, results in development of drug dependency or drug abuse, is an important medical event. Related events=relationship of certain, probable, possible, or missing.|AEs: up to last treatment day + 1 day or last visit; SAEs: up to last treatment day + 30 days or last visit + 30 days. Mean duration of exposure was 109 weeks in 10 mg arm, 94.7 weeks in 2.5 mg arm, 103 weeks in 5 mg arm, and 98.4 weeks in placebo arm.|All treated participants||participants|||Number
848295|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline Demographic Characteristic (Body Mass Index) - Summary for ST + LT Treatment Period - Open-Label Cohort|This cohort represents a different population (screening A1C > 10.0% and ≤ 12.0%) than the double-blind cohort, and was presented separately in the study report.|Baseline|||kg/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
848296|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline Demographic Characteristic (Weight) - Summary for ST + LT Treatment Period - Open-Label Cohort|This cohort represents a different population (screening A1C > 10.0% and ≤ 12.0%) than the double-blind cohort, and was presented separately in the study report.|Baseline|||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
848297|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline Demographic Characteristics - Summary for ST + LT Treatment Period - Open-Label Cohort|This cohort represents a different population (screening A1C > 10.0% and ≤ 12.0%) than the double-blind cohort, and was presented separately in the study report.|Baseline|||participants|||Number
848298|NCT00121641|Other Pre-specified|Baseline Demographic Characteristic (Age, Continuous) - Summary for ST + LT Treatment Period - Open-Label Cohort|This cohort represents a different population (screening A1C > 10.0% and ≤ 12.0%) than the double-blind cohort, and was presented separately in the study report.|Baseline|||years||Standard Deviation|Mean
848299|NCT00121641|Secondary|Baseline and Change From Baseline at Week 24 in Postprandial Glucose (PPG) Area Under the Curve (AUC) - Open Label Cohort||Baseline, Week 24|Open Label participants with measure at given time points, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF).||mg*min/dL||Standard Error|Mean
848300|NCT00121641|Primary|A1C Changes From Baseline at Week 24 - Open Label Cohort|To compare the change from baseline in HbA1c achieved with each dose of saxagliptin versus placebo in treatment naive subjects with type 2 diabetes who have inadequate glycemic control defined as A1C ≥7.0% and ≤10.0%.|Baseline, Week 24|Open-label participants with both a baseline and a post-baseline (up to Week 24)||Percentage of glycosylated hemoglobins||Standard Error|Mean
848301|NCT00121641|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Therapeutic Glycemic Response (A1C < 7.0%) at Week 24 - Open Label Cohort||Week 24|Open Label Participants with measurement at time point, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||percentage of participants|||Number
848302|NCT00121641|Secondary|Baseline and Change From Baseline at Week 24 in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) - Open Label Cohort||Baseline, Week 24|Open Label Subjects with Measurement at Timepoint; Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
848306|NCT00121641|Primary|Hemoglobin A1c (A1C) Changes From Baseline at Week 24|To compare the change from baseline in HbA1c achieved with each dose of saxagliptin versus placebo in treatment naive subjects with type 2 diabetes who have inadequate glycemic control defined as A1C ≥7.0% and ≤10.0%.|Baseline, Week 24|Randomized participants with both a baseline and post-baseline value (up to Week 24).||Percentage of glycosylated hemoglobins||Standard Error|Mean
848307|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Confirmed Hypoglycemia During the ST + LT Treatment Period|'Confirmed' = recorded on the hypoglycemia AE case report form with a fingerstick glucose <= 50 mg/dL and associated symptoms.|AEs: up to last treatment day + 1 day or last visit day in the ST+LT period; SAEs: up to last treatment day + 30 days or last visit day + 30 days in the LT+ST period. Mean duration of exposure: 124, 118, 130, 95 wks respectively for 2.5mg, 5mg, 10 mg, pla|Treated participants||participants|||Number
848308|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|All Reported Hypoglycemic Adverse Events During the ST + LT Treatment Period|Hypoglycemic Events are based upon the Saxagliptin Predefined List of Events, which are hypoglycemia, blood glucose decreased, and hypoglycemic unconsciousness.|AEs: up to last treatment day + 1 day or last visit day in the ST+LT period; SAEs: up to last treatment day + 30 days or last visit day + 30 days in the LT+ST period. Mean duration of exposure: 124, 118, 130, 95 wks respectively for 2.5mg, 5mg, 10 mg, pla|Treated participants||participants|||Number
848309|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Electrocardiogram (ECG) Tracings - Shift Table From Baseline (BL) to Selected Visits During ST + LT Treatment Period|The normality/abnormality of the ECG tracing was determined by the investigator.|Baseline, Weeks 12, 24, 76, 102, 154, 206,|Number of Participants Analyzed=Treated Participants; BL n=normal or abnormal ECG status at baseline of the cohort of participants with measure at given time point||participants|||Number
848310|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Changes From Baseline in Heart Rate During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||beats/min||Standard Error|Mean
848311|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Changes From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
848312|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Changes From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||mmHg||Standard Error|Mean
848313|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Absolute Eosinophil Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848314|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Absolute Basophil Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848315|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Absolute Monocyte Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848316|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Absolute Lymphocyte Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848317|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Absolute Neutrophil Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848318|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in White Blood Cell Counts (x 10^3 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||10^3 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848319|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Platelet Counts (x 10^9 c/L) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||10^9 c/L||Standard Error|Mean
848320|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Red Blood Cell Counts (x 10^6 c/µL) During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||10^6 c/µL||Standard Error|Mean
848321|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Hematocrit During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||percentage red blood cells||Standard Error|Mean
848322|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Baseline and Changes From Baseline in Hemoglobin During the ST + LT Period||Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, 37, 50, 63, 76, 89, 102, 115, 128, 141, 154, 167, 180, 193, 206|Treated participants; n=number of treated participants with measurement at time point||g/dL||Standard Error|Mean
848347|NCT00114777|Secondary|Mean Framingham Risk Score From Baseline to Months 12, 24 and 36|The risk score was calculated based on the total points from six variables: Age, Level of LDL-cholesterol, Level of HDL-cholesterol, Presence and severity of systolic or diastolic hypertension, Presence or absence of a history of diabetes mellitus and Presence or absence of a history recent cigarette smoking. Total scores can range from <-3 to >14, which translate to a 1% to 56% risk of developing coronary heart disease in 10 years. Totals in the 4 to 6 point range translate to a 7 to 11% risk and 8 to 10 point range translate to a 18 to 27% risk.|Baseline and Months 12, 24 and 36|All randomized and transplanted participants||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848323|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Marked Laboratory Abnormalities - During ST + LT Treatment Period|A laboratory value was considered a marked abnormality if it is outside the pre-defined criteria for marked abnormality and the on-treatment value was more extreme (farther from the limit) than the baseline value. Pre-Rx=pretreatment; ULN=upper limit of normal; ALP=alkaline phosphatase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; ALT=alanine aminotransferase; unspec=unspecified; sodium serum low: <0.9 x Pre-Rx & <=130mEq/L / high: >1.1 x Pre-Rx & >=150mEq/L; potassium, serum low: <=0.8 x Pre-Rx & >=6.0mEq/L / high: 1.2 x Pre-Rx & >=6.0mEq/L; LLN=lower limit of normal.|Lab assessments taken during and up to 14 days after the last dose of study drug during the ST + LT Treatment Period. Mean duration of exposure: 124, 118, 130, 95 weeks, respectively, for 2.5mg, 5mg, 10 mg, placebo.|Number of Participants Analyzed=Treated participants; n=number of treated subjects with baseline value and at least one value during the ST + LT treatment period||participants|||Number
848324|NCT00121667|Other Pre-specified|Overall Summary of Adverse Events During ST+LT Treatment Period|AE=any new untoward medical occurrence or worsening of a pre-existing medical condition which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or causes prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, results in development of drug dependency or drug abuse, is an important medical event. Related events=relationship of certain, probable, possible, or missing.|AEs: up to last treatment day + 1 day or last visit day in the ST+LT period; SAEs: up to last treatment day + 30 days or last visit day + 30 days in the LT+ST period. Mean duration of exposure: 124, 118, 130, 95 wks respectively for 2.5mg, 5mg, 10 mg, pla|All treated participants||participants|||Number
848325|NCT00121667|Secondary|Baseline and Change From Baseline at Week 24 in Postprandial Glucose (PPG) Area Under the Curve (AUC)|Mean change from baseline is adjusted for baseline value.|Baseline, Week 24|Randomized Participants with measurement at timepoint. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF).||mg*min/dL||Standard Error|Mean
848326|NCT00121667|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Therapeutic Glycemic Response (A1C < 7.0%) at Week 24||Week 24|Randomized Participants with measurement at time point, Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)||percentage of participants|||Number
848327|NCT00121667|Secondary|Baseline and Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 24|Mean change from baseline is adjusted for baseline value.|Baseline, Week 24|Randomized Participants with measurement at timepoint. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF).||mg/dL||Standard Error|Mean
848328|NCT00121667|Primary|Baseline and Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (A1C) at Week 24|Mean change from baseline is adjusted for baseline value.|Baseline, Week 24|Randomized participants with both a baseline and post-baseline value (up to Week 24)||percentage of glycosylated hemoglobins||Standard Error|Mean
848329|NCT00117598|Other Pre-specified|Time to Tumor Progression (TTP)|TTP: time from randomization to first documentation of objective tumor progression (including recurrence); censored at last valid tumor assessment.|Baseline, every 8 weeks up to Year 1, then every 12 weeks up to Year 2, and then every 6 months until tumor progression or death (up to Year 5)|ITT||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848330|NCT00117598|Other Pre-specified|Time to Failure (TTF)|TTF is defined as the time from randomization to the date of the first documentation of Progressive Disease (PD), the date of treatment discontinuation except completion of treatment, or date of death (any cause).|Baseline, every 8 weeks up to Year 1, then every 12 weeks up to Year 2, and then every 6 months until tumor progression or death (up to Year 5)|ITT||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848331|NCT00117598|Other Pre-specified|Duration of Response|Time from the first documentation of objective tumor response to first date that recurrence or progressive disease (PD) was objectively documented; censored at last valid tumor assessment.|Baseline, every 8 weeks up to Year 1, then every 12 weeks up to Year 2, and then every 6 months until tumor progression or death (up to Year 5)|ITT subset of participants who had a response||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848332|NCT00117598|Other Pre-specified|Time to Response|Time between the date of randomization and the first date of objective response for participants with a confirmed objective response.|Baseline, every 8 weeks up to Year 1, then every 12 weeks up to Year 2, and then every 6 months until tumor progression or death (up to Year 5)|ITT subset of participants with a confirmed objective response||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848333|NCT00117598|Other Pre-specified|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival is the duration from randomization to death. For participants who are alive, overall survival is censored at the last contact.|Baseline up to 5 years|ITT||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848334|NCT00117598|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response|Assessment of complete or partial response (CR, PR) or uncomplete response (CRu) using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. CR: 1) No disease evident. 2) Lymph node, nodal mass regressed to normal size. 3) Previously enlarged organ ↓ size. 4) Bone marrow clear on repeat aspirate, biopsy. CRu: CR 1 and 3, at least 1 of following: Lymph node regressed >75%. Bone marrow ↑ number or aggregate size, no cytologic/architectural atypia. PR: ≥50% ↓ index lesion, no size ↑ in other nodes, liver, spleen. Splenic and hepatic nodule regressed ≥50%. No new disease.|Baseline, every 8 weeks up to Year 1, then every 12 weeks up to Year 2, and then every 6 months until tumor progression or death (up to Year 5)|ITT||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848335|NCT00117598|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|The period from randomization until disease progression, death or date of last contact.|Baseline, every 8 weeks up to Year 1, then every 12 weeks up to Year 2, and then every 6 months until tumor progression or death (up to Year 5)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: All randomized participants at time of primary analysis||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848336|NCT00114777|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Graft Loss or Death to Month 84|Participant and graft survival at 84 months was summarized within each treatment group.|Randomization to date of death, up to 84 months|All randomized and transplanted participants||percentage of participants|||Number
848348|NCT00114777|Secondary|Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure (BP) at 12, 24 and 36 Months|Participants were determined to have hypertension at a particular time point if standardized systolic blood pressure ≥ 130 mm Hg or standardized diastolic blood pressure ≥ 80 mm Hg or participant had received an anti-hypertensive medication(s) for hypertension. Here 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each arm, respectively.|Months 12, 24 and 36|All randomized and transplanted participants||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
848337|NCT00114777|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Related AEs and SAEs, AEs Leading to Discontinuation and Who Died up to Month 84|AEs are defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptom, sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), syndrome or disease which either occurs during study, having been absent at baseline, or, if present at baseline, appears to worsen. Serious adverse events are any untoward medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require (or prolong) hospitalization, cause persistent or significant disability/incapacity, result in congenital anomalies or birth defects, or are other conditions which in judgment of investigators represent significant hazards.|Day 1 to Month 84|All randomized and transplanted participants who completed 36 months of treatment and continued into long-term extension phase||participants|||Number
848338|NCT00114777|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Related AEs and SAEs, AEs Leading to Discontinuation and Who Died up to Month 36|AEs are defined as any unfavorable and unintended diagnosis, symptom, sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), syndrome or disease which either occurs during study, having been absent at baseline, or, if present at baseline, appears to worsen. Serious adverse events are any untoward medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require (or prolong) hospitalization, cause persistent or significant disability/incapacity, result in congenital anomalies or birth defects, or are other conditions which in judgment of investigators represent significant hazards.|Day 1 to Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants||participants|||Number
848339|NCT00114777|Secondary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Abnormalities up to 36 Months|Participants with laboratory values outside the defined normal range were graded as clinically significant laboratory abnormalities by the investigator. Subjects were analyzed for Alkaline phosphatase (ALP), Alanine aminotransferase (ALT), Aspartate aminotransferase(AST), Hemoglobin, Platelet Count, Leukocytes, Bilirubin, Creatinine, Calcium, Bicarbonate, Potassium, Magnesium, Sodium, Phosphorus, Albumin, Uric Acid and Protein. Laboratory abnormalities were assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 3. Here 'n' signifies those subjects evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each arm, respectively.|Day 1 to Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants.||participants|||Number
848340|NCT00114777|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Vital Signs up to 36 Months|Participants with abnormal blood pressure, body weight and body temperature outside the defined normal range were graded as clinically significant vital signs by the investigator.|Day 1 to Month 36|All randomized and transplanted participants||participants|||Number
848341|NCT00114777|Secondary|Mean Changes in Mental Component and Physical Component Health-Related Quality of Life (SF-36) From Baseline to Months 12, 24 and 36|The SF-36 is a 36-item self-administered questionnaire developed to assess health-related quality of life (QOL) and comprises 8 domains, including 4 physical (physical health, bodily pain, physical functioning and physical role limitations) and 4 mental (mental health, vitality, social functioning, and emotional role limitation) subscales. Responses are used to derive physical and mental component summary scores, ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better QOL (0=Poorest Health; 100=Best Health). Mean change from baseline = post-baseline value - baseline value; a higher value signifies improvement.|Baseline and Months 12, 24 and 36|Randomized and transplanted participants||units on SF-36 scale||Standard Error|Mean
848342|NCT00114777|Secondary|Number of Participants Based on Severity of Acute Rejection Based on Banff Grade Level by Months 6, 12, 24, 36 and 84|Acute rejection was defined as central biopsy proven rejection that was either clinically suspected by protocol defined reasons or clinically suspected by other reasons and treated. Clinically suspected acute rejection was defined as an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine or an unexplained decreased urine output or fever and graft tenderness or serum creatinine that remains elevated within 14 days post­-transplantation and clinical suspicion of acute rejection exists.|Months 6, 12, 24, 36 and 84|All randomized and transplanted participants||participants|||Number
848343|NCT00114777|Secondary|Number of Participants Using Lymphocyte Depleting Therapy and Steroid-Resistant for Acute Rejection by Months 6, 12, 24, and 36.|Acute rejection was defined as central biopsy proven rejection that was either clinically suspected by protocol defined reasons or clinically suspected by other reasons and treated. Lymphocyte ­depletion therapy for treatment of an episode of acute was defined as a participant treated with therapy and provided not treated with steroids earlier while steroid resistant acute rejection was defined as participants initially treated with steroids alone for suspected acute rejection for at least 2 days and then followed by the start of lymphocyte ­depletion therapy.|Months 6, 12, 24 and 36|All randomized and transplanted participants||participants|||Number
848344|NCT00114777|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Have an Acute Rejection by Months 6, 12, 24, 36 and 84|Acute rejection was defined as central biopsy proven rejection that was either clinically suspected by protocol defined reasons or clinically suspected by other reasons and treated. Clinically suspected acute rejection was defined as an unexplained rise of serum creatinine ≥ 25% from baseline creatinine or an unexplained decreased urine output or fever and graft tenderness or serum creatinine that remains elevated within 14 days post­-transplantation and clinical suspicion of acute rejection exists.|Months 6, 12, 24, 36 and 84|All randomized and transplanted participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848345|NCT00114777|Secondary|Change in Total Cholesterol (TC), Non-HDL, LDL and HDL Cholesterol and Triglycerides at 12, 24 and 36|Dyslipidemia was defined as triglyceride ≥ 500 mg/dL [5.65 mmol/L], low density lipoprotein (LDL) ≥ 100 mg/dL [2.59 mmol/L], and elevated non-high density lipoprotein (HDL) ≥ 130 mg/dL [3.36 mmol/L]. Here 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each arm, respectively.|Months 12, 24 and 36|All randomized and transplanted participants||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848346|NCT00114777|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Using Lipid-Lowering Therapy at 12, 24, and 36 Months|Dyslipidemia was defined as triglyceride ≥ 500 mg/dL [5.65 mmol/L], low density lipoprotein (LDL) ≥ 100 mg/dL [2.59 mmol/L], and non-elevated high density lipoprotein (HDL) ≥ 130 mg/dL [3.36 mmol/L]. Here 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each arm, respectively.|Months 12, 24 and 36|All randomized and transplanted participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848364|NCT00073073|Secondary|Effect of This Drug on Breast Tissue Trefoil Factor 1 and Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen Expression, Prolactin, and Breast Tissue Prolactin Receptor at 1 Year||1 year|Change in breast tissue trefoil factor 1||percent change from baseline||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848349|NCT00114777|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With New Onset Diabetes Mellitus (NODM) at 12, 24 and 36 Months.|NODM was defined as participant who did not have diabetes prior to randomization. Participants were determined for NODM if the participant received an antidiabetic medication for a duration of at least 30 days, or at least two fasting plasma glucose (FPG) tests indicate that FPG is ≥ 126 mg/dL (7.0 mmol/L).|Months 12, 24 and 36|All randomized and transplanted participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848350|NCT00114777|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Used Anti-Hypertensive Medications to Control Hypertension at Months 12, 24 and 36|Participants were determined to have hypertension at a particular time point if standardized systolic blood pressure ≥ 130 mm Hg or standardized diastolic blood pressure ≥ 80 mm Hg or subject had received an anti-hypertensive medication(s) for hypertension. Here 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each arm, respectively.|Months 12, 24 and 36|All randomized and transplanted participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848351|NCT00114777|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-Hypertensive Medications Used to Control Hypertension at 12, 24 and 36 Months|Participants were determined to have hypertension at a particular time point if standardized systolic blood pressure ≥ 130 mm Hg or standardized diastolic blood pressure ≥ 80 mm Hg or participant had received an antihypertensive medication(s) for hypertension. Here 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each arm, respectively.|Baseline and Months 12, 24 and 36|All randomized and transplanted participants||participants|||Number
848352|NCT00114777|Secondary|Change in Calculated GFR at Months 12, 24, 36 and 84|GFR was assessed using a true measure of glomerular filtration via nonradiolabeled iothalamate clearance test using a validated procedure. Missing measured GFR assessments were imputed. Here 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each arm, respectively.|Baseline and Months 12, 24, 36 and 84|All randomized and transplanted participants||mL/min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
848353|NCT00114777|Secondary|Calculated Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) at 6, 12, 24, 36 and 84 Months|GFR was assessed using a true measure of glomerular filtration via nonradiolabeled iothalamate clearance test using a validated procedure. Missing measured GFR assessments were imputed. Here 'n' signifies those participants evaluable for this measure at specified time points for each arm, respectively.|Months 6, 12, 24, 36 and 84|All randomized and transplanted participants||participants||Standard Deviation|Mean
848354|NCT00114777|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Survived With a Graft at 24 and 36 Months Post-Transplant|Participant and graft survival at 12 months was summarized within each treatment group. Graft loss was defined as either functional loss or physical loss (nephrectomy). Functional loss will be defined as a sustained level of serum creatinine ≥ 6.0 mg/dL (530 μmol/L) as determined by central laboratory for ≥ 4 weeks or 56 or more consecutive days of dialysis.|Month 24 and Month 36 post-transplant|All randomized and transplanted participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848355|NCT00114777|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Chronic Allograft Nephropathy (CAN) at Month 12|Biopsy-proven CAN was determined by a blinded central histopathologist using the Banff 97 working classification of kidney transplant pathology. Onset of CAN was determined by the biopsy date when it was observed. Participants were considered as having CAN at 12 months if: CAN observed in a biopsy either prior to 12 months (including baseline biopsy) or first post 12 months biopsy; Participant had graft loss during the first year post transplant; no biopsy available post 12 months and CAN not observed in biopsies prior to 12 months; no biopsy available either prior to or post 12 months; and the measured glomerular filtration rate from Month 3 to Month 12 decreases at least 10 mL/min/1.73m^2. All other participants with missing 12 month biopsy were considered having no CAN observed at 12 months.|At Month 12|All randomized and transplanted participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848356|NCT00114777|Secondary|Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) by Month 12 and 24|GFR was assessed using a true measure of glomerular filtration via nonradiolabeled iothalamate clearance test using a validated procedure. Missing measured GFR assessments were imputed. Here, ‘n’ signifies the number of evaluable participants for the reporting arm at the given time point. Missing measured GFR assessments were imputed to a GFR of zero.|At Month 12 and Month 24|All randomized and transplanted participants||mL/min/1.73 m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
848357|NCT00114777|Primary|Percentage of Participants With a Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) <60 mL/Min Per 1.73 m^2 at Month 12 or a Decrease in Measured GFR >=10 mL/Min Per 1.73 m^2 From Month 3 to Month 12|GFR was assessed using a true measure of glomerular filtration via non-radiolabeled iothalamate clearance test using a validated procedure.|From Month 3 to Month 12|All randomized and transplanted participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848358|NCT00114777|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Survived With a Graft at 12 Months Post-Transplant|Participant and graft survival at 12 months was summarized within each treatment group. Graft loss was defined as either functional loss or physical loss (nephrectomy). Functional loss was defined as a sustained level of serum creatinine ≥ 6.0 mg/dL (530 μmol/L) as determined by central laboratory for ≥4 weeks or 56 or more consecutive days of dialysis.|Month 12 post-transplant|All randomized and transplanted participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848359|NCT00100230|Other Pre-specified|Loss of Peripheral Visual Fields|Hypothesis: Elevation of red blood cell-docosahexaenoic acid levels will slow the progressive loss of peripheral visual fields in this 4-year trial.|4 years|Only participants completing at least one year of trial||decibels (dB)||Standard Error|Mean
848360|NCT00100230|Secondary|Rate of LOSS of Rod Electroretinographic Function|Hypothesis #1: Elevation of red blood cell-docosahexaenoic acid levels will slow the progressive loss of rod electroretinographic response in this 4-year trial.|4 years|Number of participants completing at least one year of trial (i.e., modified intent to treat cohort)||change in amplitude, log microvolts/year||Standard Error|Mean
848361|NCT00100230|Primary|Rate of LOSS of 31 Hertz Cone Electroretinographic Function|Hypothesis #1: Elevation of red blood cell-docosahexaenoic acid levels will slow the progressive loss of 31 hertz cone electroretinographic response in this 4-year trial.|4 years|Number of participants completing at least one year of trial (i.e., modified intent to treat cohort)||log microvolts/year||Standard Error|Mean
848362|NCT00073073|Secondary|Number of Serum and Breast Tissue Samples Collected for Exploratory Proteomic Profiles at One Year||1 year|Outcome not measured|||||
848363|NCT00073073|Secondary|Effect of Exemestane on Autocrine Prolactin and Breast Tissue Prolactin Receptor at One Year||1 year|Outcome not measured|||||
848371|NCT00051363|Secondary|Quality of Life: Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index- Total Score (SAQLI-TS)|Quality of life was measured using the Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index (SAQLI), which is an interview-administered instrument with high internal consistency and reliability. The SAQLI was designed to assess components identified as important to patients including daily functioning, social interactions, emotional functioning, symptoms experienced, and treatment-related symptoms. Items are scored on a seven-point scale, averaged (taking into account treatment-related symptoms), to yield a composite score between 1 and 7, where higher scores represent better quality of life.|diagnostic visit (baseline)|Analyses performed for group of participants with SAQLI data. Baseline demographics were generally similar (mean age, sex ratio, proportion of white participants, average body mass index), and participants in both groups had similar SAQLI scores at baseline, which are presented below.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848372|NCT00051363|Secondary|Mood||Measured at diagnostic visit (baseline) and 2 months and 6 months post intervention|Mood was dropped as a secondary outcome measure for analysis by our Core Team.|||||
848373|NCT00051363|Secondary|Subjective Sleepiness/Alertness: Epworth Sleepiness Scale- Total Score (ESS-TS)|"Subjective sleepiness/alertness was measured using the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS); the outcome variable was ESS Total Score (ESS-TS).
The ESS is a validated questionnaire (8 questions) that ask the chances of dozing off in specific situations. Summing the scores produces a scaled total score between 0 and 24, with higher numbers indicating more subjective sleepiness. The ESS was administered the evening before the polysomnogram (PSG), or overnight sleep study. Data reported here include questionnaires collected at the DX, 2M, and 6M visits."|Measured at diagnostic visit (baseline) and 2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Analyses performed by OSA severity level categorized by apnea hypopnea index (AHI: # of respiratory events/hr of sleep) obtained via baseline polysomnography. Categories are: Mild OSA (AHI = 10-14.9; exclusion if AHI <10), Moderate OSA (AHI = 15-29.9), Severe OSA (AHI >=30).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848374|NCT00051363|Secondary|Objective Sleepiness/Alertness: Maintenance of Wakefulness Test- Mean Sleep Latency (MWT-MSL)|"Objective sleepiness/alertness was measured using the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT); the outcome variable was MWT Mean Sleep Latency (MWT-MSL).
The MWT was administered using four twenty-minute trials where the participant was asked to sit in a chair, in a quiet and dimly lit room, with instructions to stay awake. Trials were performed at 10 AM, Noon, 2 PM and 4 PM. The mean sleep latency was calculated using the 4 trials from a given visit, and required that at least 3 of the 4 trials were performed and validated."|Measured at diagnostic visit (baseline) and 2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Analyses performed by OSA severity level categorized by apnea hypopnea index (AHI: # of respiratory events/hr of sleep) obtained via baseline polysomnography. Categories are: Mild OSA (AHI = 10-14.9; exclusion if AHI <10), Moderate OSA (AHI = 15-29.9), Severe OSA (AHI >=30).||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
848375|NCT00051363|Secondary|Executive and Frontal-Lobe (E/F) Function: Shifting Attention Test Discovery Condition- Number of Rule Changes (SAT-D-NumRuCh)|"The APPLES a priori Secondary Neurocognitive Analysis Plan specified a dimension reduction method to reduce twelve secondary neurocognitive variables from three neurocognitive domains to seven variables from three neurocognitive domains. Three of the selected variables came from the domain of Executive and Frontal-Lobe (E/F) Function: Sustained Working Memory Test- Mid-day Behavioral Index (SWMT-BehMD), SWMT- Mid-day Activation Index (SWMT-ActMD), and Shifting Attention Test Discovery Condition- Number of Rule Changes (SAT-D-NumRuCh).
These data are for variable #3: Shifting Attention Test Discovery Condition- Number of Rule Changes (SAT-D-NumRuCh)"|2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Analyses performed by OSA severity level categorized by apnea hypopnea index (AHI: # of respiratory events/hr of sleep) obtained via baseline polysomnography. Categories are: Mild OSA (AHI = 10-14.9; exclusion if AHI <10), Moderate OSA (AHI = 15-29.9), Severe OSA (AHI >=30).||number of rule changes (dichotomized)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848376|NCT00051363|Secondary|Executive and Frontal-Lobe (E/F) Function: SWMT- Mid-day Activation Index (SWMT-ActMD)|"The APPLES a priori Secondary Neurocognitive Analysis Plan specified a dimension reduction method to reduce twelve secondary neurocognitive variables from three neurocognitive domains to seven variables from three neurocognitive domains. Three of the selected variables came from the domain of Executive and Frontal-Lobe (E/F) Function: SWMT-BehMD, SWMT-ActMD, and SAT-D-NumRuCh.
These data are for variable #2: SWMT- Mid-day Activation Index (SWMT-ActMD)
SWMT-ActMD is a scaled score that indicates whether the participant scored lower or higher relative to baseline (BL) using standard deviation units. It is computed as the difference from BL relative to EEG power spectral variables (decibels) measured during the easier vs. more difficult working memory (WM) tasks. A positive activation sub-score indicates a larger cortical neuronal population was recruited to perform the more difficult WM task relative to BL, while a negative score indicates a smaller population was recruited."|2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Analyses performed by OSA severity level categorized by apnea hypopnea index (AHI: # of respiratory events/hr of sleep) obtained via baseline polysomnography. Categories are: Mild OSA (AHI = 10-14.9; exclusion if AHI <10), Moderate OSA (AHI = 15-29.9), Severe OSA (AHI >=30).||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848377|NCT00051363|Secondary|Executive and Frontal-Lobe (E/F) Function: Sustained Working Memory Test- Mid-day Behavioral Index (SWMT-BehMD)|"The APPLES a priori Secondary Neurocognitive Analysis Plan specified a dimension reduction method to reduce twelve secondary neurocognitive variables from three neurocognitive domains to seven variables from three neurocognitive domains. Three of the selected variables came from the domain of Executive and Frontal-Lobe (E/F) Function: SWMT-BehMD, SWMT-ActMD, and SAT-D-NumRuCh.
These data are for variable #1: Sustained Working Memory Test- Mid-day Behavioral Index (SWMT-BehMD)
SWMT-BehMD is a scaled score that indicates whether the participant scored lower or higher relative to baseline using standard deviation units. It is computed as the difference from baseline relative to measures of working memory (WM) task performance accuracy (percent correct) and mean and standard deviation of reaction time (milliseconds). High-load WM tasks receive twice the weight of the low-load WM tasks."|2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Analyses performed by OSA severity level categorized by apnea hypopnea index (AHI: # of respiratory events/hr of sleep) obtained via baseline polysomnography. Categories are: Mild OSA (AHI = 10-14.9; exclusion if AHI <10), Moderate OSA (AHI = 15-29.9), Severe OSA (AHI >=30).||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848378|NCT00051363|Secondary|Learning and Memory (L/M) Function: Buschke Selective Reminding Test Delayed Recall- Total Recall (BSRTDR-TotRec)|The APPLES a priori Secondary Neurocognitive Analysis Plan specified a dimension reduction method to reduce twelve secondary neurocognitive variables from three neurocognitive domains to seven variables from three neurocognitive domains. One of the selected variables came from the domain of Learning and Memory (L/M) Function: Buschke Selective Reminding Test Delayed Recall- Total Recall (BSRTDR-TotRec).|2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Analyses performed by OSA severity level categorized by apnea hypopnea index (AHI: # of respiratory events/hr of sleep) obtained via baseline polysomnography. Categories are: Mild OSA (AHI = 10-14.9; exclusion if AHI <10), Moderate OSA (AHI = 15-29.9), Severe OSA (AHI >=30).||number of words recalled||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848379|NCT00051363|Secondary|Attention and Psychomotor (A/P) Function: PVT- Mean Slowest 10% of Reaction Times (PVT-Slo10%RT)|"The APPLES a priori Secondary Neurocognitive Analysis Plan specified a dimension reduction method to reduce twelve secondary neurocognitive variables from three neurocognitive domains to seven variables from three neurocognitive domains. Three of the selected variables came from the domain of Attention and Psychomotor (A/P) Function: Pathfinder Number- Reaction Time (PN-RT), Psychomotor Vigilance Task- Median Reaction Time (PVT-MedRT), and PVT- Mean Slowest 10% of Reaction Times (PVT-Slo10%RT).
These data are for variable #3: PVT- Mean Slowest 10% of Reaction Times (PVT-Slo10%RT)"|2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Analyses performed by OSA severity level categorized by apnea hypopnea index (AHI: # of respiratory events/hr of sleep) obtained via baseline polysomnography. Categories are: Mild OSA (AHI = 10-14.9; exclusion if AHI <10), Moderate OSA (AHI = 15-29.9), Severe OSA (AHI >=30).||milliseconds||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848380|NCT00051363|Secondary|Attention and Psychomotor (A/P) Function: Psychomotor Vigilance Task- Median Reaction Time (PVT-MedRT)|"The APPLES a priori Secondary Neurocognitive Analysis Plan specified a dimension reduction method to reduce twelve secondary neurocognitive variables from three neurocognitive domains to seven variables from three neurocognitive domains. Three of the selected variables came from the domain of Attention and Psychomotor (A/P) Function: Pathfinder Number- Reaction Time (PN-RT), Psychomotor Vigilance Task- Median Reaction Time (PVT-MedRT), and PVT- Mean Slowest 10% of Reaction Times (PVT-Slo10%RT).
These data are for variable #2: Psychomotor Vigilance Task- Median Reaction Time (PVT-MedRT)"|2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Analyses performed by OSA severity level categorized by apnea hypopnea index (AHI: # of respiratory events/hr of sleep) obtained via baseline polysomnography. Categories are: Mild OSA (AHI = 10-14.9; exclusion if AHI <10), Moderate OSA (AHI = 15-29.9), Severe OSA (AHI >=30).||milliseconds||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848381|NCT00051363|Secondary|Attention and Psychomotor (A/P) Function: Pathfinder Number- Reaction Time (PN-RT)|"The APPLES a priori Secondary Neurocognitive Analysis Plan specified a dimension reduction method to reduce twelve secondary neurocognitive variables from three neurocognitive domains to seven variables from three neurocognitive domains. Three of the selected variables came from the domain of Attention and Psychomotor (A/P) Function: Pathfinder Number- Reaction Time (PN-RT), Psychomotor Vigilance Task- Median Reaction Time (PVT-MedRT), and PVT- Mean Slowest 10% of Reaction Times (PVT-Slo10%RT).
These data are for variable #1: Pathfinder Number- Reaction Time (PN-RT)"|2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Analyses performed by OSA severity level categorized by apnea hypopnea index (AHI: # of respiratory events/hr of sleep) obtained via baseline polysomnography. Categories are: Mild OSA (AHI = 10-14.9; exclusion if AHI <10), Moderate OSA (AHI = 15-29.9), Severe OSA (AHI >=30).||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848382|NCT00051363|Primary|Effect of CPAP on Neurocognitive Function: L/M Function- BSRT-SR|"There are three primary measures of neurocognitive function measured for APPLES, each representing a different domain: Executive and Frontal-lobe (E/F) Function- Sustained Working Memory Test Overall Mid-Day Index (SWMT-OMD), Attention and Psychomotor (A/P) Function- Pathfinder Number Test Total Time (PFN-TOTL), and Learning and Memory (L/M) Function- Buschke Selective Reminding Test Sum Recall (BSRT-SR).
This is domain #3: Learning and Memory (L/M) Function- Buschke Selective Reminding Test Sum Recall (BSRT-SR)"|Measured at diagnostic visit (baseline) and 2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle.||number of words recalled||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848383|NCT00051363|Primary|Effect of CPAP on Neurocognitive Function: A/P Function- PFN-TOTL|"There are three primary measures of neurocognitive function measured for APPLES, each representing a different domain: Executive and Frontal-lobe (E/F) Function- Sustained Working Memory Test Overall Mid-Day Index (SWMT-OMD), Attention and Psychomotor (A/P) Function- Pathfinder Number Test Total Time (PFN-TOTL), and Learning and Memory (L/M) Function- Buschke Selective Reminding Test Sum Recall (BSRT-SR).
This is domain #2: Attention and Psychomotor (A/P) Function- Pathfinder Number Test Total Time (PFN-TOTL)"|Measured at diagnostic visit (baseline) and 2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle.||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848384|NCT00051363|Primary|Effect of CPAP on Neurocognitive Function: E/F Function- SWMT-OMD|"There are three primary measures of neurocognitive function measured for APPLES, each representing a different domain: Executive and Frontal-lobe (E/F) Function- Sustained Working Memory Test Overall Mid-Day Index (SWMT-OMD), Attention and Psychomotor (A/P) Function- Pathfinder Number Test Total Time (PFN-TOTL), and Learning and Memory (L/M) Function- Buschke Selective Reminding Test Sum Recall (BSRT-SR).
This is domain #1: Executive and Frontal-lobe (E/F) Function- Sustained Working Memory Test Overall Mid-Day Index (SWMT-OMD)
SWMT-OMD is a scaled score that indicates whether the participant scored lower or higher relative to baseline using standard deviation units. It is computed as the mean of three sub-scores, one based on working memory (WM) task performance (behavioral WM sub-score: speed, accuracy), and the other two on electroencephalogram (EEG) (cortical activation sub-score: neural workload, attentional effort during WM task; alertness sub-score: resting alertness)."|2 months and 6 months post intervention|Analyses conducted in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle.||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848385|NCT00044213|Secondary|A Composite of Cardiovascular Death, Non-fatal Myocardial Infarction and Non-fatal Stroke.|Number of patients with events (composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke) Events were centrally adjudicated where available; otherwise site reported events were used.|Measured over a maximum 5-year follow-up period- 55 month median|||participants|||Number
848386|NCT00044213|Primary|A Composite of Total Mortality, Recurrent Myocardial Infarction, Stroke, Coronary Revascularization, and Hospitalization for Angina.|Number of patients with events (composite of death from any cause, MI, stroke, coronary revascularization or hospitalization for angina) Events were centrally adjudicated where available; otherwise site reported events were used.|Measured over a maximum 5-year follow-up period- 55 month median|||participants|||Number
848387|NCT00031486|Secondary|Survival With no or Mild Neuropsychological Impairment at 90 Days and at 6 and 12 Months, as Measured by the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS).|The assessment scoring for the Glasgow Coma Scale is as follows: 15: no neuropsychological impairment; 12 - 14: mild neuropsychological impairment; 9 - 11: moderate neuropsychological impairment; 6 to 8: severe neuropsychological impairment; and <6: very severe neuropsychological impairment.|90 days, 6 and 12 months|All subjects that survived and were assessed at 90 days, 6 and 12 months.||Participants|||Number
848388|NCT00031486|Secondary|Survival With no or Mild Neuropsychological Impairment at 90 Days, and at 6 and 12 Months, as Measured by the Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE).|The assessment score for the Mini-Mental Status Examination is as follows: 27 - 30: no neuropsychological impairment; 23 - 26: mild neuropsychological impairment; 16 - 22: moderate neuropsychological impairment; 11 - 15 severe neuropsychological impairment; and <=10: very severe neuropsychological impairment.|90 days, 6 and 12 months|All subjects that survived and were assessed at 90 days, 6 and 12 months.||Participants|||Number
848389|NCT00031486|Secondary|Survival With no or Mild Neuropsychological Impairment at 90 Days and at 6 and 12 Months, as Measured by the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (MDRS)|The assessment scoring for the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale is as follows: 139 - 144: no neuropsychological impairment; 121- 138: mild neuropsychological impairment; 114 - 120: moderate neuropsychological impairment; 87 - 113: severe neuropsychological impairment; and <=86: very severe neuropsychological impairment.|90 days, 6 and 12 months|All subjects that survived and were assessed at 90 days, 6 and 12 months.||Participants|||Number
848390|NCT00031486|Secondary|Median Number of Reported AEs Describing Safety and Tolerance of Valacyclovir (VACV), Evaluated by the Number Adverse Events, Administered at a Dose of 2.0 Grams Given Orally 3 Times a Day for 90 Days.|The measure is the number of adverse events per subject. Adverse events were recorded from time of first dose of study drug through 6 months post start of study drug.|6 months|||Events per participants||Full Range|Median
848391|NCT00031486|Secondary|Effect of Antiviral Therapy on Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV) Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) in Cerebral Spinal Fluid (CSF)|Few CSF specimens were collected on day 90, hence unable to calculate the difference in PCR at day 0 and day 90.[measured quantitatively by polymerase chain reaction (PCR)].|Day 0 and Day 90.|The number of participants analyzed is 0 because there specimens obtained were inadequate and insufficient to analyze.||viral load|||Number
848392|NCT00031486|Secondary|Effect of Study Medication on Quality of Life Measurements.|The SF-36 Questionnaire measures quality of life as reported by the subject. The questionnaire contains 36 questions, each questions can be assigned a maximum score of 100. For each subject, a perfect score would be 3600, hence the higher score is best. The calculated scores reported in the table below reflect the diffence between Day 0 (day study drug started) and Day 90, Day 0 (day study drug started) and Month 6, and Day 0 (day study drug started) and Month 12.|Day 0 and 90, Day 0 and Month 6 and Day 0 and Month 12|All subjects that were assessed at baseline and the following time points: 90 days, 6 and 12 months.||Scores on a scale Change in SF-36||Full Range|Median
848393|NCT00031486|Primary|Survival With no or Mild Neuropsychological Impairment at 12 Months After Initiation of Study Medication as Measured by the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (MDRS)|Number of subjects who were assessed to have no or mild neuropsychological impairment at 12 months using the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale. (A score of 121 or higher refects no or mild neuropsychological impairment.) Scale is: 139-144 normal; 121-139 mild; 114-120 moderate; 87-113 severe; and <=86 very severe.|One year post therapy.|All subjects that survived to 12 months and were assessed.||Participants|||Number
848394|NCT02943213|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Elimination Half-life (t1/2) - 7-Hydroxy-Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848395|NCT02943213|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Elimination Half-life (t1/2) - Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848396|NCT02943213|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Rate Constant (λz) - 7-Hydroxy-Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||1/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848397|NCT02943213|Secondary|Terminal Elimination Rate Constant (λz) - Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||1/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848398|NCT02943213|Secondary|Time to Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) - 7-Hydroxy-Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||hr||Full Range|Median
848399|NCT02943213|Secondary|Time to Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) - Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||hr||Full Range|Median
848400|NCT02943213|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve, With Extrapolation to Infinity (AUC(0-∞)) - 7-Hydroxy-Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times.|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||h*pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848401|NCT02943213|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve, With Extrapolation to Infinity (AUC(0-∞)) - Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times.|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||h*pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848402|NCT02943213|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve, From Time Zero to t, Where t is the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC(0-t)) - 7-Hydroxy-Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times.|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||h*pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848403|NCT02943213|Primary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve, From Time Zero to t, Where t is the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC(0-t)) - Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times.|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||h*pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848404|NCT02943213|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) - 7-Hydroxy-Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times.|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848405|NCT02943213|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) - Chlorpromazine|Time Frame = sampling times.|0, 0.5, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 hours|All subjects who completed the PK blood sampling for this study and for whom primary PK parameters were calculated for both treatment periods were included in the statistical PK analysis of the study.||pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848406|NCT02907268|Primary|Blinded Assessment: Overall Change in Facial Wrinkles From Baseline to Week 16 as Assessed by a Numeric Rating Scale Based on Pre- and Post-treatment Photographs|Blinded assessments of overall change in facial wrinkles from baseline to week 16 based on pre and post treatment photographs. Measured on a 5 point scale which is a static assessment of wrinkle severity. 0=wrinkles absent (minimum), 1=shallow but visible wrinkles, 2=fine lines slight indentation, 3=clear indentation 0-1mm deep, 4=moderate indentation 1-2mm deep, 5=deep indentation >2mm deep (maximum). A higher value = a worse outcome (more severe wrinkles). Includes 9 subscales measured on the same scale described above. Subscales measure wrinkle severity in the left and right forehead region, left and right cheek region, left and right crow's feet region, left and right upper lip region, and glabellar region. All scores were computed by averaging subscale ratings.|Baseline and 16 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848407|NCT02907268|Primary|Blinded Assessment: Overall Change in Facial Wrinkles From Baseline to Week 4 as Assessed by a Numeric Rating Scale Based on Pre- and Post-treatment Photographs|Blinded assessments of overall change in facial wrinkles from baseline to week 4 based on pre and post treatment photographs. Measured on a 5 point scale which is a static assessment of wrinkle severity. 0=wrinkles absent (minimum), 1=shallow but visible wrinkles, 2=fine lines slight indentation, 3=clear indentation 0-1mm deep, 4=moderate indentation 1-2mm deep, 5=deep indentation >2mm deep (maximum). A higher value = a worse outcome (more severe wrinkles). Includes 9 subscales measured on the same scale described above. Subscales measure wrinkle severity in the left and right forehead region, left and right cheek region, left and right crow's feet region, left and right upper lip region, and glabellar region. All scores were computed by averaging subscale ratings.|Baseline and 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848408|NCT02907268|Primary|Blinded Assessment: Overall Change in Facial Wrinkles From Baseline to Week 2 as Assessed by a Numeric Rating Scale Based on Pre- and Post-treatment Photographs|Blinded assessments of overall change in facial wrinkles from baseline to week 2 based on pre and post treatment photographs. Measured on a 5 point scale which is a static assessment of wrinkle severity. 0=wrinkles absent (minimum), 1=shallow but visible wrinkles, 2=fine lines slight indentation, 3=clear indentation 0-1mm deep, 4=moderate indentation 1-2mm deep, 5=deep indentation >2mm deep (maximum). A higher value = a worse outcome (more severe wrinkles). Includes 9 subscales measured on the same scale described above. Subscales measure wrinkle severity in the left and right forehead region, left and right cheek region, left and right crow's feet region, left and right upper lip region, and glabellar region. All scores were computed by averaging subscale ratings.|Baseline and 2 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848409|NCT02787564|Secondary|Amount of Fruits and Vegetables Among Non-Food Bank Users|The difference of fruit and vegetable amount consumed between baseline and after the 4-week intervention among non-food bank users.|8 weeks|||portions/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
848410|NCT02787564|Secondary|Variety of Fruits and Vegetables Among Non-Food Bank Users|The difference of fruit and vegetable variety consumed between baseline and after the 4-week intervention among non-food bank users.|8 weeks|||types/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
848411|NCT02787564|Secondary|Amount of Fruits and Vegetables Among Food Bank Users|The difference of fruit and vegetable amount consumed between baseline and after the 4-week intervention among food bank users.|8 weeks|||portions/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
848412|NCT02787564|Secondary|Variety of Fruits and Vegetables Among Food Bank Users|The difference of fruit and vegetable variety consumed between baseline and after the 4-week intervention among food bank users.|8 weeks|||types/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
848413|NCT02787564|Primary|Amount of Fruits and Vegetables|The difference of fruit and vegetable amount consumed between baseline and after the 4-week intervention.|8 weeks|||portions/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
848414|NCT02787564|Primary|Variety of Fruits and Vegetables|The difference of fruit and vegetable variety consumed between baseline and after the 4-week intervention.|8 weeks|||types/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
848415|NCT02751320|Secondary|Enamel Fluoride Uptake (EFU) of All Study Formulation Variables|The microdrill enamel biopsy technique was used to analyze the fluoride uptake by enamel. Each enamel specimen was mounted on the long axis of a drill attached to a microdrill and drilled to a depth of approximately 100 μm through the entire lesion (four cores per specimen). The enamel powder pooled from four drilling samples was then immediately analyzed for fluoride content using fluoride specific electrode and pH/ion meter. The amount of fluoride-uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride divided by the area of the enamel cores and expressed as μg/cm^2.|At Week 4|ITT population, all participants who were randomized, received the study products at least once and provided at least one post-baseline assessment of efficacy. Number of participants who missed enamel specimens were: Test product1-[1], Test product2-[2], Test product3-[3], Reference Product1-[1], Reference Product2-[1] and Reference Product3-[1].||μg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
848416|NCT02751320|Secondary|Enamel Fluoride Uptake (EFU) of All Study Formulation Variables|The microdrill enamel biopsy technique was used to analyze the fluoride uptake by enamel. Each enamel specimen was mounted on the long axis of a drill attached to a microdrill and drilled to a depth of approximately 100 μm through the entire lesion (four cores per specimen). The enamel powder pooled from four drilling samples was then immediately analyzed for fluoride content using fluoride specific electrode and pH/ion meter. The amount of fluoride-uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride divided by the area of the enamel cores and expressed as μg/cm^2.|At Week 2|ITT population, all participants who were randomized, received the study products at least once and provided at least one post-baseline assessment of efficacy. Number of participants who missed enamel specimens were: Test product1-[1], Test product2-[1], Test product3-[2], Reference Product1-[1], Reference Product2-[1] and Reference Product3-[1].||μg/cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
848417|NCT02751320|Secondary|TMR Δm Value of 0.85% Phytate Compared to 0% Phytate, in the Presence of 1150ppm F and 0.3% ZnCl2, 0.3% ZnCl2 Compared to 0% ZnCl2 in the Presence of 1150ppm F and 0.3% ZnCl2 Compared to 0% ZnCl2 in the Presence of 1150ppm F and 0.85% Phytate|TMR was used to assess changes in the mineral status of partially demineralized enamel specimens. Lesions were analyzed at baseline and Integrated Mineral Loss (∆Z): (∆Z =(lesion depth x 87) - area under the curve [Area under the curve which relates volume % mineral at distances from the specimen surface with respect to section thickness]). After treatment a further section was taken from each lesion specimen for radiography assessment; ∆Z was calculated. The change which occurred in mineral content (∆M) of the lesions as a result of treatment was calculated by: ∆M= (baseline ∆Z - Post-treatment ∆Z).|Baseline upto 4 weeks|ITT population, all participants who were randomized, received the study products at least once and provided at least one post-baseline assessment of efficacy. Number of participants who missed enamel specimens were: Test product 2 - [1], Test product 3 - [2], Reference Product 2 - [1] and Reference Product 3 [1].||[%vol mineral x µm||Standard Deviation|Mean
848418|NCT02751320|Secondary|Transverse Microradiography (TMR) Net Remineralization Change (ΔM) Value of Phytate (0% 0.452% and 0.85%) at 4 Weeks|TMR was used to assess changes in the mineral status of partially demineralized enamel specimens. Lesions were analyzed at baseline and Integrated Mineral Loss (∆Z): (∆Z =(lesion depth x 87) - area under the curve [Area under the curve which relates volume % mineral at distances from the specimen surface with respect to section thickness]). After treatment a further section was taken from each lesion specimen for radiography assessment; ∆Z was calculated. The change which occurred in mineral content (∆M) of the lesions as a result of treatment was calculated by: ∆M= (baseline ∆Z - Post-treatment ∆Z).|Baseline upto 4 weeks|ITT population, all participants who were randomized, received the study products at least once and provided at least one post-baseline assessment of efficacy. Number of participants who missed enamel specimens were: Test product 1- [1], Test product 2- [1], and Reference Product 2- [1].||[%vol mineral x µm||Standard Deviation|Mean
848419|NCT02751320|Secondary|% SMHR of 0.85% Phytate Compared to 0% Phytate, in Presence of 1150ppm Fluoride and 0.3% ZnCl2, 0.3% ZnCl2 Compared to 0% ZnCl2 in the Presence of 1150ppm Fluoride and 0.3% ZnCl2 Compared to 0% ZnCl2 in the Presence of 1150ppm Fluoride and 0.85% Phytate|SMHR test was used to assess the changes in mineralization status of partially demineralized enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. % SMHR was calculated from indentation length (μm) of sound enamel specimen at baseline (B), indentation length (μm) after in vitro demineralization(D), indentation length (μm) after intra-oral exposure (R): [D-R/D-B]*100.|Baseline upto 2 weeks|ITT population, all participants who were randomized, received the study products at least once and provided at least one post-baseline assessment of efficacy. Number of participants who missed enamel specimens were: Test product 2- [1], Test product 3- [2], Reference Product 2- [1], and Reference Product 3- [1].||% SMHR||Standard Deviation|Mean
848420|NCT02751320|Primary|Percentage Surface Microhardness Recovery (SMHR) of Phyte (0% 0.425% and 0.85%) at 2 Weeks|SMHR test was used to assess the changes in mineralization status of partially demineralized enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH was determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. % SMHR was calculated from indentation length (micrometer [μm]) of sound enamel specimen at baseline (B), indentation length (μm) after in vitro demineralization(D), indentation length (μm) after intra-oral exposure (R): [D-R/D-B]*100.|Baseline upto 2 weeks|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population, all participants who were randomized, received the study products at least once and provided at least one post-baseline assessment of efficacy. Number of participants who missed enamel specimens were: Test product 1- [1], Test product 2- [1], Reference Product 1- [1], and Reference Product 2- [1].||% SMHR||Standard Deviation|Mean
848421|NCT02730351|Secondary|Weighted Mean 0-60 Min for Percentage Decrease From Pre-exercise FEV1 Following Exercise Challenge at 12 Hrs and 23 Hrs Post Evening Dose.|The exercise challenge testing at the end of 2 week treatment period was performed on a treadmill at 12 hrs and 23 hrs after administration of the evening dose of double-blind treatment. Following exercise challenge testing, post-exercise FEV1 values were assessed serially at 5, 10, 15, 30, 45 and 60 min. Pre-exercise FEV1 was defined as the FEV1 value collected prior to the exercise challenge test at 23 hrs post-dose. Number of participants listed is the number in the ITT population. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|At Week 2 of treatment period 1 and 2|ITT Population. Participants with non-missing covariates and data specific to endpoint were analyzed||Percentage of FEV1||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848422|NCT02730351|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With a 30 Min Post-challenge FEV1 no More Than 5 Percent Lower Than Pre-exercise FEV1 Following the Exercise Challenge at 12 Hrs and 23 Hrs Post Evening Dose.|The blinded treatment exercise challenge test was performed at the end of 2-weeks of treatment period 1 and treatment period 2 on a treadmill at 12 hrs and 23 hrs after administration of the evening dose of study treatment. The challenge was followed immediately by serial assessments of FEV1 at 5, 10, 15, 30, 45 and 60 min post-exercise. Pre-exercise FEV1 was defined as the FEV1 value collected prior to the exercise challenge test at 23 hrs post-dose. Number of participants listed is the number in the ITT population. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|At Week 2 of treatment period 1 and 2|ITT Population. Participants with non-missing covariates and data specific to endpoint were analyzed||Participants|||Number
848423|NCT02730351|Secondary|Maximal Percent Decrease in FEV1 Following Exercise Challenge at 23 Hrs Post Evening Dose From Pre-exercise FEV1.|The exercise challenge test is a stepped challenge on a treadmill. It was performed at 23 hrs post evening dose at the end of the 2-week treatment period, wherein the participants exercised sufficiently to reach a heart rate between 80 to 95 percent of their predicted maximum within 4 min and maintained the heart rate with exercise for an additional 6 min followed immediately by serial assessments of FEV1 at 5, 10, 15, 30, 45 and 60 min post-exercise. Maximal percent decrease was calculated as pre-exercise FEV1 minus minimum post exercise FEV1 (smallest FEV1 value collected within one hr following exercise challenge) divided by pre-exercise FEV1 multiplied by 100. Pre-exercise FEV1 was defined as the FEV1 collected prior to the exercise challenge test at 23 hr post dose.|At Week 2 of treatment period 1 and 2|ITT Population. Participants with non-missing covariates and data specific to endpoint were analyzed||Percentage of FEV1||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848424|NCT02730351|Primary|Maximal Percent Decrease in Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) Following Exercise Challenge at 12 Hours (Hrs) Post Evening Dose From Pre-exercise FEV1.|The exercise challenge test is a stepped challenge on a treadmill. It was performed at 12 hrs post evening dose at the end of the 2-week treatment period, wherein the participants exercised sufficiently to reach a heart rate between 80 to 95 percent of their predicted maximum within 4 minutes (min) and maintained the heart rate with exercise for an additional 6 min followed immediately by serial assessments of FEV1 at 5, 10, 15, 30, 45 and 60 min post-exercise. Maximal percent decrease was calculated as pre-exercise FEV1 minus minimum post exercise FEV1 (smallest FEV1 value collected within one hr following exercise challenge) divided by pre-exercise FEV1 multiplied by 100. Pre-exercise FEV1 was defined as the FEV1 collected prior to the exercise challenge test at 12 hr post dose. ITT Population comprised of all participants randomized to treatment and who received at least one dose of study medication.|At Week 2 of treatment period 1 and 2|ITT Population. Participants with non-missing covariates and data specific to endpoint were analyzed||Percentage of FEV1||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848425|NCT02724111|Secondary|Adverse Events : The Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Occurrence in Subject|The occurrence of any adverse events was recorded in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and a ward during the postoperative 24 hours.|during the postoperative 24 hours|||Participants|||Count of Participants
848426|NCT02724111|Secondary|Recovery Time (Time to Reach Sedation Score 5 at Postanesthesia Care Unit (PACU).|the time to reach sedation score 5 (the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/ Sedation (OAA/S) score; awake, 5 to unresponsive, 1) at PACU|every 10 min for 1 hour at PACU.|||minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
848427|NCT02724111|Secondary|The Degree of Bleeding|2.The degree of bleeding of each patient scaled by surgeons (Intraoperative scale for assessment of operating condition of surgical field: 0 - No bleeding, 1 - Slight bleeding - no suctioning of blood required, 2 - Slight bleeding - occasional suctioning required but not threatened the operative field, 3 ‑ Slight‑bleeding - frequent suctioning of blood was required that threatens the operative field a few seconds after suctioning, 4 - Moderate bleeding - frequent suctioning of blood was required which threatens the operative field directly after suctioning, 5 - Severe bleeding - continuous suctioning of blood was required which severely threatened the operative field make the surgery not possible).|Continuously observed during the whole period of surgery, up to 3 hours|||Scores on a scale (NRS; 0-5)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848428|NCT02724111|Secondary|The Number of Body Movements|The number of body movements (including cough or any diaphragm movement) observed during the surgery.|At the occurrence of the event during surgery, up to 3 hours|||number of event||Standard Deviation|Mean
848429|NCT02724111|Secondary|The Muscle Tone|The muscle tone of each patient at the screw insertion through the pedicle of spine during surgery scaled by surgeons (1: muscle tone is good, suitable for surgery; 2: muscle tone is moderate, but do not affect the operation; 3: muscle tone is hard, making the operation difficult.).|at the screw insertion through the pedicle of spine during surgery|||Scores on a scale (NRS; 1-3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848430|NCT02724111|Secondary|Overall Satisfaction of Surgeons for the Surgical Condition|Overall satisfaction of surgeons for the surgical condition will be assessed by the surgeons who perform surgery using numerical rating scale (NRS; 1-10) after surgery (1, worst; 10, best).|After surgery|||Scores on a scale (NRS; 1-10)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848431|NCT02724111|Secondary|Mean Value of Pressure of Back Muscle Retractor|Mean value of pressure of back muscle retractor placed in the operating site (recorded every 15 minutes during the placement of the retractor): measured by the pressure probe placed between the retractor and the back muscle.|Every 15 minutes at the period of the retractor placement during surgery, up to 2 hours﻿|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
848432|NCT02724111|Primary|Mean Value of Peak Inspiratory Pressure|This outcome is the mean value of the peak inspiratory pressure measured at each 15 minute during the anesthesia, which can reflect the degree of the tone of respiratory muscles. As muscle tone increases, airway pressure usually increases due to increased tone of abdominal muscle and respiratory muscles including diaphragm. The longer the surgery goes, the higher the airway pressure gets. Also, as neurospinal surgeries are operated in the prone position, the potential for increased airway pressure is high. As airway pressure gets higher, intrathoracic pressure and intraabdominal pressure also become higher. These consequences may bring about similar results with detrimental effects derived from marked increase in intraabdominal pressure in laparoscopic abdominal surgeries|Every 15 minutes during anesthesia, up to 3 hours﻿|||cmH2O||Standard Deviation|Mean
848433|NCT02617901|Primary|Bone Age as Assessed by DXA|Interclass correlation (for observer agreement between radiographs and DXA)|18 months|Children presenting to Endocrine Clinic||Intraclass correlation|||Number
848434|NCT02524054|Secondary|Urine Output - mL|"Diuresis is an expected effect of furosemide. To the extent that aerosol furosemide is absorbed in the blood, diuresis is an expected 'side effect' of this treatment.
Following intervention, study team will measure urine output (mL). Study team will then rehydrate subject with an equal amount of liquid to their output."|Summation of total urine output (mL) at 1 hour following drug administration.|The 17 participants in 'Aerosol furosemide Study 2b' and 'Aerosol saline Study 2b' are the results from the same 17 subjects on two different test days.||ml of urine||Standard Deviation|Mean
848435|NCT02524054|Primary|Change in Subject Rating of Breathing Discomfort (Dyspnea) Before and After Treatment.|"Subjects will rate breathing discomfort (dyspnea) during a 15 min exercise test using a visual analog scale before and after drug (or placebo) intervention. The treatment effect was measured as the rating of breathing discomfort rating before treatment minus the rating of breathing discomfort after treatment at equivalent work intensities.
Outcome Measure Time Frame: subjects performed arm exercise to induce dyspnea for approximately 15 min before and after aerosol inhalation. the average number of minutes between end of drug administration and post-intervention breathing discomfort rating:
Aerosol furosemide Study 2a arm: 38.7 minutes; Aerosol furosemide Study 2b arm: 21.8 minutes; Aerosol saline Study 2b arm: 21.3 minutes"|15 min|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848436|NCT02336594|Secondary|Incidence of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events||7 weeks.|||Number of Participants|||Number
848437|NCT02336594|Secondary|Single Dose Pharmacodynamics (PD) Profile of RDEA3170 From Serum and Urine|PD profiles of uric acid from serum and urine. PD parameters were evaluated to assess whether any potential differences in PK for the 2 different tablets resulted in differences in uric acid excretion.|Day -1: -24, -23, -22, -21, -20, -18, -16, -14, and -12 hours predose. Days 1, 5, 9, and 13: predose (within 30 minutes prior to dosing) and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours postdose.|||Percent||Standard Error|Mean
848438|NCT02336594|Primary|AUC∞: Effect of Low Fat Meal on the PK of RDEA3170 Tablets|AUC∞ of RDEA3170 in low-fat fed state.|Days 1 to 9 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||ng·hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848439|NCT02336594|Primary|AUC Last: Effect of Low Fat Meal on the PK of RDEA3170 Tablets|AUC last of RDEA3170 in low-fat fed state.|Days 1 to 9 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||ng·hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848440|NCT02336594|Primary|Cmax: Effect of Low Fat Meal on the PK of RDEA3170 Tablets|Cmax of RDEA3170 in low-fat fed state.|Days 1 to 9 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848441|NCT02336594|Primary|AUC∞: Effect of High Fat Meal on the PK of RDEA3170 Tablets|AUC∞ of RDEA3170 in high-fat fed state.|Days 1 to 13 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||ng·hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848442|NCT02336594|Primary|AUC Last: Effect of High Fat Meal on the PK of RDEA3170 Tablets|AUC last of RDEA3170 in high-fat fed state.|Days 1 to 13 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||ng·hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848443|NCT02336594|Primary|Cmax: Effect of High Fat Meal on the PK of RDEA3170 Tablets|Cmax of RDEA3170 in high-fat fed state.|Days 1 to 13 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848444|NCT02336594|Primary|Apparent Terminal Half-life (t1/2)|t1/2 of RDEA3170 following various treatments.|Days 1 and 5 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||hr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848445|NCT02336594|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From 0 to Infinity (AUC∞)|AUC∞ of RDEA3170 the fasted condition.|Days 1 and 5 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||ng·hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848446|NCT02336594|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to the Quantifiable Last Sampling Timepoint (AUC Last)|AUC last of RDEA3170 in fasted condition.|Days 1 and 5 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||ng·hr/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848447|NCT02336594|Primary|Time of Occurrence of Maximum Observed Concentration (Tmax)|Tmax of RDEA3170 following various treatments.|Days 1 and 5 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||hr||Full Range|Median
848448|NCT02336594|Primary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|Cmax of RDEA3170 in fasted condition.|Days 1 and 5 at predose, 30 minutes postdose, and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postdose.|||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
848449|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the 6MWD (Completers Analysis Set Only)|Six-minute walk distance (6MWD) was conducted to test the physical limitations of the patient by assessing the patient’s exercise capacity. The distance walked by the patient in 6 minutes was measured.|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 57 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for 6MWD at week 24.||Meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
848450|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 16 and 24 in the 6MWD|"Six-minute walk distance (6MWD) was conducted to test the physical limitations of the patient by assessing the patient’s exercise capacity. The distance walked by the patient in 6 minutes was measured. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Week 16 to Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 67 patients were evaluable for 6MWD at week 24.||Meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
848451|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale (Completers Analysis Set Only)|The Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale assessed the intensity of the patient’s dyspnea from 0 (best) to 10 (worst).|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 57 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale at Week 24.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848452|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 16 and 24 in the Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale|"The Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale assessed the intensity of the patient’s dyspnea from 0 (best) to 10 (worst). In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Week 16 to Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 58 patients were evaluable for Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale at week 24.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848453|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WHO Functional Class (Completers Analysis Set Only)|"Functional class was determined by the WHO classification:
I: Patients with PH (pulmonary hypertension) but without resulting limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope.
II: Patients with PH resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope.
III: Patients with PH resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope.
IV: Patients with PH with inability to carry out any physical activity without symptoms. These patients manifest signs of right-heart failure. Dyspnea and/or fatigue may even be present at rest. Discomfort is increased by any physical activity."|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 57 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for WHO Function Class at Week 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848454|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional Class|"Functional class was determined by the WHO classification:
I: Patients with PH (pulmonary hypertension) but without resulting limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope.
II: Patients with PH resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope.
III: Patients with PH resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope.
IV: Patients with PH with inability to carry out any physical activity without symptoms. These patients manifest signs of right-heart failure. Dyspnea and/or fatigue may even be present at rest. Discomfort is increased by any physical activity.
In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 75 patients were evaluable for WHO Function Class at Week 16 or Last Before.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848455|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the SF-12 PCS Score and MCS Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)|SF-12v2® Health Survey is a 12-item questionnaire to measure functional health and well-being from the patient’s point of view. Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health.|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 58 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for PCS and MCS at Week 24.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848456|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score and Mental Component Summary (MCS) Score|"SF-12v2® Health Survey is a 12-item questionnaire to measure functional health and well-being from the patient’s point of view. Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 73 patients were evaluable for PCS and MCS at Week 4.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848457|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Percentage of Productivity Loss (Completers Analysis Set Only)|The WLQ is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Using an algorithm, WLQ scale scores can be converted into an estimate of productivity loss.|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 40 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for WLQ percentage of productivity loss at week 24.||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
848458|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands, and Output Demands Scores (Completers Analysis Set Only)|The Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Scale score range from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time) and represent the reported amount of time in the prior two weeks respondents were limited on-the-job.|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 40 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for WLQ at Week 24.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848480|NCT02187861|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the period from the date of treatment initiation (Safety Run-in and Arm A) or randomization date (Arms B and C) to death due to any cause. For participants who are alive, OS was censored at the last contact. OS was calculated using Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline until death due to any cause (assessed up to approximately 2.5 years [cut-off date 06 April 2017])|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848481|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died Due to Any Cause||Baseline until death due to any cause (assessed up to approximately 2.5 years [cut-off date 06 April 2017])|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
848459|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Percentage of Productivity Loss|"The WLQ is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Using an algorithm, WLQ scale scores can be converted into an estimate of productivity loss. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 37 patients were evaluable for WLQ percentage of productivity loss at week 4.||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
848460|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands Scores|"The Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Scale score range from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time) and represent the reported amount of time in the prior two weeks respondents were limited on-the-job. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 52 patients were evaluable for WLQ at week 4.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848461|NCT02191137|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in Emotional Dimension Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)|For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease.|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 58 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for LPH emotional dimension score at Week 24.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
848462|NCT02191137|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in Physical Dimension Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)|For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease.|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 57 patients were evaluable for LPH physical dimension score at week 24.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
848463|NCT02191137|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in LPH Total Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)|For LPH total score, the MCID was an 11-point decrease.|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 58 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for LPH total score at Week 24.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
848464|NCT02191137|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Emotional Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24|"For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 72 patients were evaluable for LPH emotional dimension score at week 4.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
848465|NCT02191137|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Physical Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24|"For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 72 patients were evaluable for LPH physical dimension score at week 4.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
848466|NCT02191137|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With a Minimal Clinically Significant Important Difference (MCID) From Baseline in LPH Total Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24|"For LPH total score, the MCID was an 11-point decrease from baseline. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 72 patients were evaluable for LPH total score at week 4.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848467|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Emotional Dimension Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)|The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No’ to 5 ’Very much’. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition.|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 58 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for LPH emotional dimension score at Week 24.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848468|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Emotional Dimension Score|"The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No’ to 5 ’Very much’. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 75 patients were evaluable for LPH emotional dimension score at week 16 or before.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848500|NCT02128997|Secondary|Pain Scores|On postoperative day 2, all patients were administered a pain scale: Rank sharp pain (0–10), 10 being worst possible sharp pain.|Postpartum day 2|||Unit on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
848469|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Physical Dimension Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)|The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No’ to 5 ’Very much’. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition.|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 57 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for LPH physical dimension score at Week 24.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848470|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Physical Dimension Score|"The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No’ to 5 ’Very much’. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 75 patients were evaluable for LPH physical dimension score at week 16 or before.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848471|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Total Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)|The Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) questionnaire with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 (best) to 105 (worst) is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions.|Week 16 to Week 24|The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 58 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for LPH total score at Week 24.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848472|NCT02191137|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Weeks 4 and 16 in the LPH Total Score|"The Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) questionnaire with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 (best) to 105 (worst) is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint."|Baseline to Week 4 and Week 16|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 72 patients were evaluable for LPH total score at Week 4.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848473|NCT02191137|Primary|Change From Baseline to Week 24 in the Living With Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) Questionnaire Total Score|The Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) questionnaire with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No’ to 5 ’Very much’. A total score ranging from 0 (best) to 105 (worst) is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions.|Baseline to Week 24|The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 66 patients were evaluable for LPH total score at Week 24.||Scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
848474|NCT02187861|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to 8 Hours Post Dose (AUC0-8h) of Venetoclax|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 (pre-dose) to 8 hours post dose (AUC0-8h).|Pre-dose (within 30 minutes), and 2, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 1; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) on Cycle 1 Days 8, 15, 22; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1 of Cycles 4 and 6 (Cycle length = 28 days)|Pharmacokinetic-evaluable population. ‘Overall number of participants analyzed’=those evaluable for this outcome measure.||hours*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848475|NCT02187861|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to Last Observed Concentration (AUClast) of Venetoclax|Area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from zero to the last measured concentration (AUClast).|Pre-dose (within 30 minutes), and 2, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 1; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) on Cycle 1 Days 8, 15, 22; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1 of Cycles 4 and 6 (Cycle length = 28 days)|Pharmacokinetic-evaluable population||hours*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848476|NCT02187861|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Venetoclax||Pre-dose (within 30 minutes), and 2, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 1; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) on Cycle 1 Days 8, 15, 22; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1 of Cycles 4 and 6 (Cycle length = 28 days)|Pharmacokinetic-evaluable population||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848477|NCT02187861|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Venetoclax||Pre-dose (within 30 minutes), and 2, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 1; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) on Cycle 1 Days 8, 15, 22; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1 of Cycles 4 and 6 (Cycle length = 28 days)|Pharmacokinetic-evaluable population included all enrolled participants with available pharmacokinetic data for venetoclax.||hours||Full Range|Median
848478|NCT02187861|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vd) of Venetoclax|Vd was defined as the theoretical volume in which the total amount of drug would need to be uniformly distributed to produce the desired plasma concentration of a drug.|Pre-dose (within 30 minutes), and 2, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 1; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) on Cycle 1 Days 8, 15, 22; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1 of Cycles 4 and 6 (Cycle length = 28 days)|The data could not be collected as the timepoints for pharmacokinetics collection and the daily dosing of venetoclax did not permit an assessment of Vd.|||||
848479|NCT02187861|Secondary|Apparent Clearance (CL) of Venetoclax|CL is a quantitative measure of the rate at which a drug substance is removed from the body.|Pre-dose (within 30 minutes), and 2, 4, 6, 8 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 1; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) on Cycle 1 Days 8, 15, 22; pre-dose (within 30 minutes) and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1 of Cycles 4 and 6 (Cycle length = 28 days)|The data could not be collected as the timepoints for pharmacokinetics collection and the daily dosing of venetoclax did not permit an assessment of CL.|||||
848501|NCT02128997|Primary|Number of Participants With Wound Complications|The primary outcome variable was a composite of wound morbidity at 4 weeks postpartum including SSI and/or wound opening|Four weeks after cesarean section|||Participants|||Count of Participants
848482|NCT02187861|Secondary|Event-Free Survival (EFS) According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using PET and/or CT Scan|EFS was defined as the period from the date of treatment initiation (Safety Run-in and Arm A) or randomization date (Arms B and C) to the date of disease progression, death, or start of a new anti-lymphoma therapy whichever occurred first. PD: a score 4 (uptake moderately >liver) or 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with increase in intensity of uptake from baseline on PET 5-PS for individual target nodes/nodal lesions; new FDG-avid foci for extranodal lesions; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma for new lesions; or new or recurrent FDG-avid foci for bone marrow. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using PET and/or CT scan. EFS was calculated using Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline until disease progression, death, or start of a new anti-lymphoma therapy whichever occurred first (assessed up to approximately 2.5 years [cut-off date 06 April 2017])|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848483|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression (According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using PET and/or CT Scan), Death, or Start of a New Anti-lymphoma Therapy|PD: a score 4 (uptake moderately >liver) or 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with increase in intensity of uptake from baseline on PET 5-PS for individual target nodes/nodal lesions; new FDG-avid foci for extranodal lesions; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma for new lesions; or new or recurrent FDG-avid foci for bone marrow. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using PET and/or CT scan.|Baseline until disease progression, death, or start of a new anti-lymphoma therapy whichever occurred first (assessed up to approximately 2.5 years [cut-off date 06 April 2017])|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
848484|NCT02187861|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using PET and/or CT Scan|PFS was defined as the period from the date of treatment initiation (Safety Run-in and Arm A) or randomization date (Arms B and C) until the date of disease progression, or death due to any cause. PD: a score 4 (uptake moderately >liver) or 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with increase in intensity of uptake from baseline on PET 5-PS for individual target nodes/nodal lesions; new FDG-avid foci for extranodal lesions; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma for new lesions; or new or recurrent FDG-avid foci for bone marrow. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using PET and/or CT scan. PFS was calculated using Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline until disease progression or death due to any cause (assessed up to approximately 2.5 years [cut-off date 06 April 2017])|ITT population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848485|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression (According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using PET and/or CT Scan) or Death|PD: a score 4 (uptake moderately >liver) or 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with increase in intensity of uptake from baseline on PET 5-PS for individual target nodes/nodal lesions; new FDG-avid foci for extranodal lesions; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma for new lesions; or new or recurrent FDG-avid foci for bone marrow. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using PET and/or CT scan.|Baseline until disease progression or death due to any cause (assessed up to approximately 2.5 years [cut-off date 06 April 2017])|ITT population||percentage of participants|||Number
848486|NCT02187861|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR) According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using PET and/or CT Scan|DOR was defined as time from CMR/CR or PMR/PR until progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause. CMR, CR, PMR, and PR have been defined in previous endpoints, and are not repeated here due to space constraint. PD: a score 4 (uptake moderately >liver) or 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with increase in intensity of uptake from baseline on PET 5-PS for individual target nodes/nodal lesions; new FDG-avid foci for extranodal lesions; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma for new lesions; or new or recurrent FDG-avid foci for bone marrow. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using PET and/or CT scan. DOR was calculated using Kaplan-Meier method.|From CMR or PMR until disease progression or death due to any cause (assessed up to approximately 2.5 years [cut-off date 06 April 2017])|ITT population. ‘Overall number of participants analyzed’=those evaluable for this outcome measure.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848487|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With OR According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using PET and/or CT Scan up to Data Cut-off (06 April 2017)|OR was defined as CMR/CR or PMR/PR. CMR, CR, PMR, and PR have been defined in previous endpoints, and are not repeated here due to space constraint. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using PET and/or CT scan.|Baseline until disease progression or death due to any cause (assessed up to approximately 2.5 years [cut-off date 06 April 2017])|ITT population. ‘Overall number of participants analyzed’=those evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants|||Number
848488|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With OR According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using CT Scan|OR was defined as CR or PR. CR: reduction of LDi of target nodes/nodal masses to <=1.5 cm, and no extralymphatic sites of disease; absence of non-measured lesions and new lesions; reduction of enlarged organs to normal; and normal/IHC-negative bone marrow morphology. PR: >=50% decrease in SPD of up to 6 target measurable nodes and extra-nodal sites; absence/reduction/no increase in size of non-measured lesions; reduction in length of spleen at least >50% beyond normal; and no new lesions. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using CT scan. 95% CI for percentage of responders was calculated using Clopper-Pearson method.|6−8 weeks after Cycle 6 Day 1 (Cycle length = 28 days), Year 1|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848489|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With OR According to IRC as Per Lugano Classification, Using CT Scan|OR was defined as CR or Partial Response (PR). CR: reduction of LDi of target nodes/nodal masses to <=1.5 cm, and no extralymphatic sites of disease; absence of non-measured lesions and new lesions; reduction of enlarged organs to normal; and normal/IHC-negative bone marrow morphology. If the bone marrow was involved by lymphoma prior to treatment, the infiltrate must have cleared on repeat bone marrow biopsy. PR: greater than or equal to (>=) 50 percent (%) decrease in sum of the product of the perpendicular diameters (SPD) of up to 6 target measurable nodes and extra-nodal sites; absence/reduction/no increase in size of non-measured lesions; reduction in length of spleen at least >50% beyond normal; and no new lesions. Assessment was performed by an IRC according to Lugano classification using CT scan. 95% CI for percentage of responders was calculated using Clopper-Pearson method.|6−8 weeks after Cycle 6 Day 1 (Cycle length = 28 days), Year 1|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848490|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With OR According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using PET Scan|OR was defined as CMR or PMR. CMR: a score 1 (no uptake above background), 2 (uptake <=mediastinum), or 3 (<mediastinum but <=liver) with or without a residual mass on PET 5-PS, for lymph nodes and extralymphatic sites with no new lesions and no evidence of FDG-avid disease in bone marrow. If the bone marrow was involved by lymphoma prior to treatment, the infiltrate must have cleared on repeat bone marrow biopsy. PMR: a score 4 (uptake moderately >liver) or 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with reduced uptake compared with baseline and residual mass(es) of any size on PET 5-PS for lymph nodes and extralymphatic sites with no new lesions and reduced residual uptake in bone marrow compared with baseline. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using PET scan. 95% CI for percentage of responders was calculated using Clopper-Pearson method.|6−8 weeks after Cycle 6 Day 1 (Cycle length = 28 days), Year 1|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848491|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) According to IRC as Per Modified Lugano Classification, Using PET Scan|OR was defined as CMR or Partial Metabolic Response (PMR). CMR: a score 1 (no uptake above background), 2 (uptake <=mediastinum), or 3 (<mediastinum but <=liver) with or without a residual mass on PET 5-PS, for lymph nodes and extralymphatic sites with no new lesions and no evidence of FDG-avid disease in bone marrow. If the bone marrow was involved by lymphoma prior to treatment, the infiltrate must have cleared on repeat bone marrow biopsy. PMR: a score 4 (uptake moderately greater than [>] liver) or 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with reduced uptake compared with baseline and residual mass(es) of any size on PET 5-PS for lymph nodes and extralymphatic sites with no new lesions and reduced residual uptake in bone marrow compared with baseline. Assessment was performed by an IRC according to Modified Lugano classification using PET scan. 95% CI for percentage of responders was calculated using Clopper-Pearson method.|6−8 weeks after Cycle 6 Day 1 (Cycle length = 28 days), Year 1|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848492|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CR According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using CT Scan|CR: defined as reduction of LDi of target nodes/nodal masses to <=1.5 cm, and no extralymphatic sites of disease; absence of non-measured lesions and new lesions; reduction of enlarged organs to normal; and normal/IHC-negative bone marrow morphology. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using CT scan. 95% CI for percentage of responders was calculated using Clopper-Pearson method.|6−8 weeks after Cycle 6 Day 1 (Cycle length = 28 days), Year 1|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848493|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) According to IRC as Per Lugano Classification, Using Computed Tomography (CT) Scan|CR: defined as reduction of longest transverse diameter of lesion (LDi) of target nodes/nodal masses to <=1.5 centimeters (cm), and no extralymphatic sites of disease; absence of non-measured lesions and new lesions; reduction of enlarged organs to normal; and normal/immunohistochemistry (IHC)-negative bone marrow morphology. If the bone marrow was involved by lymphoma prior to treatment, the infiltrate must have cleared on repeat bone marrow biopsy. Assessment was performed by an IRC according to Lugano classification using CT scan. 95% CI for percentage of responders was calculated using Clopper-Pearson method.|6−8 weeks after Cycle 6 Day 1 (Cycle length = 28 days), Year 1|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848494|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CMR According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using PET Scan at Year 1|CMR: a score 1 (no uptake above background), 2 (uptake <=mediastinum), or 3 (<mediastinum but <=liver) with or without a residual mass on PET 5-PS, for lymph nodes and extralymphatic sites with no new lesions and no evidence of FDG-avid disease in bone marrow. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using PET scan. 95% CI for percentage of responders was calculated using Clopper-Pearson method.|Year 1|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848495|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CMR According to IRC as Per Modified Lugano Classification, Using PET Scan at Year 1|CMR: a score 1 (no uptake above background), 2 (uptake <=mediastinum), or 3 (uptake <mediastinum but <=liver) with or without a residual mass on PET 5-PS, for lymph nodes and extralymphatic sites with no new lesions and no evidence of FDG-avid disease in bone marrow. If the bone marrow was involved by lymphoma prior to treatment, the infiltrate must have cleared on repeat bone marrow biopsy. Assessment was performed by an IRC according to Modified Lugano classification using PET scan. 95% CI for percentage of responders was calculated using Clopper-Pearson method.|Year 1|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848496|NCT02187861|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CMR According to Investigator as Per Lugano Classification, Using PET Scan at PRA|CMR: a score 1 (no uptake above background), 2 (uptake <=mediastinum), or 3 (<mediastinum but <=liver) with or without a residual mass on PET 5-PS, for lymph nodes and extralymphatic sites with no new lesions and no evidence of FDG-avid disease in bone marrow. Assessment was performed by Investigator according to Lugano classification using PET scan. 95% CI for percentage of responders was calculated using Clopper-Pearson method.|6-8 weeks after Cycle 6 Day 1 (Cycle length = 28 days)|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848497|NCT02187861|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Metabolic Response (CMR) According to Independent Review Committee (IRC) as Per Modified Lugano Classification, Using Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Scan at Primary Response Assessment (PRA)|CMR: a score 1 (no uptake above background), 2 (uptake less than or equal to [<=] mediastinum), or 3 (uptake less than [<] mediastinum but <=liver) with or without a residual mass on PET 5-point scale (5-PS), for lymph nodes and extralymphatic sites with no new lesions and no evidence of fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-avid disease in bone marrow. If the bone marrow was involved by lymphoma prior to treatment, the infiltrate must have cleared on repeat bone marrow biopsy. Assessment was performed by an IRC according to Modified Lugano classification using PET scan. 95% confidence interval (CI) for percentage of responders was calculated using Clopper-Pearson method.|6-8 weeks after Cycle 6 Day 1 (PRA) (Cycle length = 28 days)|ITT population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848498|NCT02128997|Secondary|Postpartum Length of Stay||Until hospital discharge and then for 4 weeks follow up|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
848499|NCT02128997|Secondary|Tingling Pain Scores|On postoperative day 2, all patients were administered a pain scale: Rank tingling pain (0–10), 10 being worst possible tingling pain|Postpartum day 2|||Unit on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
848502|NCT02092285|Primary|Percentage of Participants Meeting Partial Mayo Score Response Criteria Through Week 54|The Partial Mayo Score (Mayo Score without endoscopy) measures severity of ulcerative colitis. Three sub-scores for stool frequency, rectal bleeding, and physician’s global assessment are each graded from 0 to 3 with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Individual sub-scores are then summed to provide the total score ranging from 0 (normal or inactive disease) to 9 (severe disease). Clinical response is defined as a decrease in PMS of ≥2 points and ≥30% from baseline, plus either a decrease in rectal bleeding subscore of ≥1 point or an absolute rectal bleeding subscore of ≤1. In this outcome measure, the percentage of participants starting treatment at the start of the Induction Phase (Baseline) who obtained clinical response by the end of the Induction Phase (i.e., by Week 6) and maintained clinical response through Week 54 (i.e., had positive clinical responses at both Weeks 30 and 54) are estimated.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 6, Week 30, Week 54|The analysis population for the evaluation of efficacy during the maintenance period was the Full Analysis Set (FAS205) consisting of participants who received at least 1 dose of golimumab.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848503|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Subject's Satisfaction With Study Treatment (Exploratory Analysis)|Subject's satisfaction with study treatment as measured by a 5-point categorical scale where 0 = poor, 1 = fair, 2 = good, 3 = very good, and 4 = excellent|up to 72hrs|The efficacy analyses of Cohort 1 to 4 were considered for exploratory analyses.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848504|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Time to First Use of Opioid Analgesia (Exploratory Analysis)||up to 96hrs|The efficacy analyses of Cohort 1 to 4 were considered for exploratory analyses.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848505|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Total Use of Opioid Analgesia (Exploratory Analysis).||over 0 to 24hrs, 0 to 48hrs, 0 to 72hrs, and 0 to 96hrs|The efficacy analyses of Cohort 1 to 4 were considered for exploratory analyses.||morphine mg equivalent||Standard Deviation|Mean
848506|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Summed Pain Intensity Scores (Exploratory Analysis)|The theoretical range for SPI-24, SPI-48, SPI-72, and SPI-96 is 0 to 230, 0-470, 0-710, and 0-960, respectively, with lower scores indicative of less pain over this time period (i.e., lower scores are consistent with better analgesia). Summed pain intensity is calculated as area under the curve, using the trapezoidal rule to bridge adjacent time points. Specifically, NRS scores for two adjacent time points are averaged and then multiplied by the time span between points (in hours).|over 1 to 24hr, 1 to 48 hrs, 1 to 72hrs, and 1 to 96hrs|The efficacy analyses of Cohort 1 to 4 were considered for exploratory analyses.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848507|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameters of MDT-10013: Terminal Phase Rate Constant (λz)|Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic parameters of MDT-10013 determinations before surgery on Day 0; at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after Time 0 (96-hour sample for Cohort 4 only); and on Days 7 to 10 after Time 0. Time 0 was defined as the time the capsule was closed.|up to 10 days|PK analysis population consisted of all subjects who had PK samples analyzed.||/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
848508|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameters of MDT-10013: Terminal Plasma Half-life (t½)|Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic parameters of MDT-10013 determinations before surgery on Day 0; at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after Time 0 (96-hour sample for Cohort 4 only); and on Days 7 to 10 after Time 0. Time 0 was defined as the time the capsule was closed.|up to 10 days|PK analysis population consisted of all subjects who had PK samples analyzed.||hrs||Standard Deviation|Mean
848509|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameters of MDT-10013: Lag Time Before First Measurable Drug Concentration (Tlag)|Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic parameters of MDT-10013 determinations before surgery on Day 0; at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after Time 0 (96-hour sample for Cohort 4 only); and on Days 7 to 10 after Time 0. Time 0 was defined as the time the capsule was closed. Actual sampling times after T0 (to 1/1000th of an hour) were used to calculate PK parameters.|up to 10 days|PK analysis population consisted of all subjects who had PK samples analyzed.||hrs||Full Range|Median
848510|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameters of MDT-10013: Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration Observed (Tmax)|Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic parameters of MDT-10013 determinations before surgery on Day 0; at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after Time 0 (96-hour sample for Cohort 4 only); and on Days 7 to 10 after Time 0. Time 0 was defined as the time the capsule was closed. Actual sampling times after T0 (to 1/1000th of an hour) were used to calculate PK parameters.|up to 10 days|PK analysis population consisted of all subjects who had PK samples analyzed.||hrs||Full Range|Median
848511|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameters of MDT-10013: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)|Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic parameters of MDT-10013 determinations before surgery on Day 0; at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after Time 0 (96-hour sample for Cohort 4 only); and on Days 7 to 10 after Time 0. Time 0 was defined as the time the capsule was closed. Actual sampling times after T0 (to 1/1000th of an hour) were used to calculate PK parameters.|up to 10 days|PK analysis population consisted of all subjects who had PK samples analyzed.||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848512|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameters of MDT-10013: Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to Infinity (AUC0-∞)|Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic parameters of MDT-10013 determinations before surgery on Day 0; at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after Time 0 (96-hour sample for Cohort 4 only); and on Days 7 to 10 after Time 0. Time 0 was defined as the time the capsule was closed. Actual sampling times after T0 (to 1/1000th of an hour) were used to calculate PK parameters.|up to 10 days|PK analysis population consisted of all subjects who had PK samples analyzed.||h*pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848513|NCT02077140|Other Pre-specified|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameters of MDT-10013: Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to Time of Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC0-t)|Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic parameters of MDT-10013 determinations before surgery on Day 0; at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after Time 0 (96-hour sample for Cohort 4 only); and on Days 7 to 10 after Time 0. Time 0 was defined as the time the capsule was closed. Actual sampling times after T0 (to 1/1000th of an hour) were used to calculate PK parameters.|up to 10 days|PK analysis population consisted of all subjects who had PK samples analyzed.||h*pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848514|NCT02077140|Secondary|Subject's Satisfaction With Study Treatment|Subject's satisfaction with study treatment as measured by a 5-point categorical scale where 0 = poor, 1 = fair, 2 = good, 3 = very good, and 4 = excellent|up to 72hrs|The primary efficacy analysis was based on the Full Analysis dataset of Cohort 1 to 3. Full Analysis dataset included Safety population (i.e., all subjects who received at least 1 MDT-10013 strip or completed surgery in a standard-of-care group based on the actual treatment a subject received) having at least 1 postoperative pain assessment.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848515|NCT02077140|Secondary|Time to First Use of Opioid Analgesia||up to 96hrs|The primary efficacy analysis was based on the Full Analysis dataset of Cohort 1 to 3. Full Analysis dataset included Safety population (i.e., all subjects who received at least 1 MDT-10013 strip or completed surgery in a standard-of-care group based on the actual treatment a subject received) having at least 1 postoperative pain assessment.||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848516|NCT02077140|Secondary|Total Use of Opioid Analgesia Over 0 to 24hrs, 0 to 48hrs, 0 to 72hrs, and 0 to 96hrs.|Total use of opioid analgesia over 0 to 24hrs, 0 to 48hrs, 0 to 72hrs, and 0 to 96hrs. The analgesia administered was converted to a morphine equivalent by using a standard conversion table.|over 0 to 24hrs, 0 to 48hrs, 0 to 72hrs, and 0 to 96hrs|The primary efficacy analysis was based on the Full Analysis dataset of Cohort 1 to 3. Full Analysis dataset included Safety population (i.e., all subjects who received at least 1 MDT-10013 strip or completed surgery in a standard-of-care group based on the actual treatment a subject received) having at least 1 postoperative pain assessment.||morphine mg equivalent||Standard Deviation|Mean
848517|NCT02077140|Secondary|Summed Pain Intensity Scores Over 1- 24hrs (SPI-24), 1- 72hrs (SPI-72) and 1- 96hrs (SPI-96)|The theoretical range for SPI-24, SPI-72, and SPI-96 is 0 to 230, 0-710, and 0-960, respectively, with lower scores indicative of less pain over this time period (i.e., lower scores are consistent with better analgesia). Summed pain intensity is calculated as area under the curve, using the trapezoidal rule to bridge adjacent time points. Specifically, NRS scores for two adjacent time points are averaged and then multiplied by the time span between points (in hours).|over 1 to 24hrs, 1 to 72hrs, and 1 to 96hrs|The primary efficacy analysis was based on the Full Analysis dataset of Cohort 1 to 3. Full Analysis dataset included Safety population (i.e., all subjects who received at least 1 MDT-10013 strip or completed surgery in a standard-of-care group based on the actual treatment a subject received) having at least 1 postoperative pain assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848518|NCT02077140|Primary|Summed Pain Intensity Over 1- 48hrs (SPI-48)--Sensitivity Analysis Using Windowed Worst Observation Carried Forward (WOCF)|Similar to SPI-48, the theoretical range for this WOCF adjustment for rescue medication is 0-470, with lower scores indicative of less pain over this time period (i.e., lower scores are consistent with better analgesia). The calculation is identical in terms of area-under the curve using the trapezoidal rule. However, the NRS score at the final assessment prior to each instance of rescue medication is carried forward through for a window based on the approximate half-life of the drug, replacing the raw NRS scores post-rescue for each patient until the end of the pharmacological activity window, at which point calculations revert to raw NRS as applicable. Note that WOCF SPI-48 may include multiple adjustment windows for each patient, depending on the number or rescue events and the active life of the medication selected.|over 1 to 48hrs|The primary efficacy analysis was based on the Full Analysis dataset of Cohort 1 to 3. Full Analysis dataset included Safety population (i.e., all subjects who received at least 1 MDT-10013 strip or completed surgery in a standard-of-care group based on the actual treatment a subject received) having at least 1 postoperative pain assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848519|NCT02077140|Primary|Integrated Summed Pain Intensity Over 1- 48hrs (SPI-48) and Total Opioid Intake in First 48hrs --Sensitivity Analysis Using Silverman Method|This sensitivity analysis is an integrated assessment of summed pain intensity over 1 to 48hrs (SPI-48) and total opioid intake (ME0-48) in first 48hrs. Briefly, subjects were ranked according to SPI-48 regardless of the treatment received (including Standard of Care, SOC). The mean of all the ranks for this variable was calculated. Then, the percent difference for each individual rank from the pooled mean rank was computed. This process was repeated for total opioid intake in the first 48hrs (ME0-48). The integrated endpoint for each subject was the sum of the rank order percent differences for SPI-48 and ME0-48. The theoretical minimum and maximum on the integrated endpoint are -197% and +197% in this study. Lower scores are better, indicative of less pain and/or less opioid intake.|over 1 to 48hrs|The primary efficacy analysis was based on the Full Analysis dataset of Cohort 1 to 3. Full Analysis dataset included Safety population (i.e., all subjects who received at least 1 MDT-10013 strip or completed surgery in a standard-of-care group based on the actual treatment a subject received) having at least 1 postoperative pain assessment.||percent difference||Standard Deviation|Mean
848520|NCT02077140|Primary|Summed Pain Intensity Over 1- 48hrs (SPI-48)--Sensitivity Analysis Using Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|Similar to SPI-48, the theoretical range for this LOCF adjustment for rescue medication is 0-470, with lower scores indicative of less pain over this time period (i.e., lower scores are consistent with better analgesia). The calculation is identical to SPI-48 in terms of area-under the curve using the trapezoidal rule. However, the NRS score at the final assessment prior to rescue is carried forward through 48 hours, replacing the raw NRS scores post-rescue for each patient as applicable.|over 1 to 48hrs|The primary efficacy analysis was based on the Full Analysis dataset of Cohort 1 to 3. Full Analysis dataset included Safety population (i.e., all subjects who received at least 1 MDT-10013 strip or completed surgery in a standard-of-care group based on the actual treatment a subject received) having at least 1 postoperative pain assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848521|NCT02077140|Primary|Summed Pain Intensity Over 1- 48hrs (SPI-48) From Cohort 1 to 3|Summed pain intensity is a time-weighted average pain score in numeric rating scale (NRS) over 1 to 48hrs (SPI-48). Summed pain intensity is calculated as area under the curve, using the trapezoidal rule to bridge adjacent time points. Specifically, NRS scores for two adjacent time points are averaged and then multiplied by the time span between points (in hours). The theoretical range for SPI-48 is 0 to 470, with lower scores indicative of less pain over this time period (i.e., lower scores are consistent with better analgesia). Time 0 was defined as the time the capsule was closed.|over 1 to 48hrs|The primary efficacy analysis was based on the Full Analysis dataset of Cohort 1 to 3. Full Analysis dataset included Safety population (i.e., all subjects who received at least 1 MDT-10013 strip or completed surgery in a standard-of-care group based on the actual treatment a subject received) having at least 1 postoperative pain assessment.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848522|NCT02049385|Primary|MADRS Change at Day 7|Change in Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to 7 days post-treatment. The range of values is from 0 – 60, with a higher score indicating increased depressive symptoms. A score of 7-19 indicates mild depression; 20-34 indicates moderate depression; >34 indicates severe depression.|7 days|The analysis included those subjects who started treatment and completed treatment with Diazoxide or Placebo through at least 7 days.||percentage of change in units of scale||Full Range|Median
848523|NCT02035696|Secondary|Number of Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) Reporting Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs) After Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects (6 to <48 months old) reporting unsolicited reactions after Each /any Vaccination from Day 1 [Post Vaccination] to Day 29 [Pre Clinic Visit] and Day 29 [Post Vaccination] to Day 50 [Pre Clinic Visit] , Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), AEs leading to New Onset of Chronic Diseases (NOCD), AEs leading to withdrawal from the study and concomitant medications (day 1 to day 209) after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine (By Any Vaccination)|Unsolicited AEs after Each/any Vaccination from Day 1 to Day 29 and Day 29 to Day 50 , Day 1 to Day 209|Analyses was done on unsolicited safety data set i.e. all subjects in the exposed set who have post-vaccination unsolicited AE data||Subjects|||Number
848524|NCT02035696|Secondary|Number of Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) Reporting Solicited Local (Grading Type I) and Systemic Adverse Events (AEs) After Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|Safety was assessed in terms of number of subjects (6 to <48 months old) reporting solicited local and systemic reactions, day 1 to day 7 after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine (By Any Vaccination)|Day 1 to Day 7|Analyses was done on solicited safety data set. 4 subjects (3 subjects from the TIVe group, and 1 subject from the full dose TIVc group, were excluded from the solicited safety set analyses (6h –day3, day4-day7 and 6h – day 7) as these subjects did not provide any post vaccination solicited safety data||Subjects|||Number
848525|NCT02035696|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) Achieving MN Titer ≥1:40 After Receiving Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|"Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of number (%) of subjects (6 to <48 months old) achieving MN titer ≥1:40 as measured by MN assay, day 50 after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine
Post-vaccination MN titer ≥1:40 was defined as for subjects with baseline (day 1) MN titer <1:10, or a minimum 4-fold increase in titer on day 50 for subjects with baseline titer ≥1:10 and corresponding 95% CI"|Day 1 and Day 50 post vaccination|Analysis was done on PPS||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848526|NCT02035696|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) Achieving MN Titer ≥1:20 After Receiving Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|"Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of number (%) of subjects (6 to <48 months old) achieving MN titer ≥1:20 as measured by MN assay, day 50 after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine
Post-vaccination MN titer ≥1:20 was defined as for subjects with baseline (day 1) MN titer <1:10, or a minimum 2-fold increase in titer on day 50 for subjects with baseline titer ≥1:10 and corresponding 95% CI"|Day 1 and Day 50 post vaccination|Analysis was done on PPS||Percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848527|NCT02035696|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) With High Post Vaccination HI Titers (i.e. HI Titers ≥1:110, ≥1:150, ≥1:330 and ≥1:629) After Receiving Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of number (%) of subjects (6 to <48 months old) achieving post vaccination HI titers (i.e. HI titers ≥1:110, ≥1:150, ≥1:330 and ≥1:629) as measured by HI assay, day 50 after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine|Day 1 and Day 50 post vaccination|Analysis was done on PPS||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848528|NCT02035696|Secondary|Geometric Mean Ratios (GMR) in Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) After Receiving Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of GMR in subjects (6 to <48 months old) as measured by MN assay, day 50 after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine|Day 50 post vaccination over day 1|Analysis was done on PPS||Ratios||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848529|NCT02035696|Secondary|Geometric Mean Ratios (GMR) in Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) After Receiving Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|"Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of GMR in subjects (6 to <48 months old) as measured by HI assay, day 50 after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine
The CHMP criterion is mean geometric ratio (GMR) >2.5"|Day 50 post vaccination over day 1|Analysis was done on FAS||Ratios||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848530|NCT02035696|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) Achieving HI Titer ≥1:40 After Receiving Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|"Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of number (%) of subjects (6 to <48 months old) achieving HI titer ≥1:40 as measured by HI assay, day 50 after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine
The CBER criterion for pediatric population is that the lower bound of the two-sided 95% CI for the percentage of subjects achieving an HI antibody titer ≥1:40 should meet or exceed 70%
The CHMP criterion for pediatric population is that the percentage of subjects achieving HI antibody titers ≥1:40 should be >70%"|Day 1, Day 50 post vaccination|Analysis was done on FAS||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848531|NCT02035696|Secondary|Percentages of Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) Achieving Seroconversion or Significant Increase After Receiving Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|"Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of number (%) of subjects (6 to <48 months old) achieving seroconversion as measured by HI assay, day 50 after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine
Seroconversion was defined as subjects with either a pre-vaccination (baseline) HI titer < 1:10 and post-vaccination HI titer ≥ 1:40 or with a pre-vaccination HI titer ≥ 1:10 and a ≥ 4-fold increase in post-vaccination HI antibody titer
The Center for Biologics Evaluation, Research, and Review (CBER) criterion for pediatric population is that the lower bound of the two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion for HI antibody should meet or exceed 40%
The Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) criterion for pediatric population is that the percentage of subjects achieving seroconversion or significant increase in HI antibody titers >40%"|Day 50 post vaccination|Analysis was done on Full analysis set||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848601|NCT01506479|Primary|Percentage of Average Maximum Heart Rate During Exercise as a Measure of Adherence to Exercise|To test whether individuals with de novo Parkinson's disease (naïve to drug treatment) can achieve the randomly assigned levels of mean exercise intensity (60-65% average HRmax or 80-85% average HRmax) and adhere to the exercise protocol.|9 to 26 weeks|Only for participants who contributed heart rate monitor data.||percentage of maximum heart rate||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848532|NCT02035696|Primary|Desirability Index Score of Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) Reporting Severe Solicited Local and Systemic Reactions After Vaccination With Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|Differences in percentages of subjects (6 to <48 months old) with severe local solicited AEs and severe solicited systemic AEs, 3 days after vaccination with either TIVc or TIVe vaccine was assessed in terms of an individual desirability index score (High dose, Full dose, Half dose TIVc vs. TIVe vaccine). An individual desirability index score was assigned to each (non-transformed) safety value based on predefined functions. Each desirability index score is assigned a value between 0 and 1, wherein 0 is an undesirable response and 1 is a highly desirable response.|Day 1 to Day 3|Analysis was done on PPSd-All subjects in the FASd who:Correctly received the vaccine (i.e., received the vaccine to which the subjects is randomized and at the scheduled time points).||percentage of participants|||Number
848533|NCT02035696|Primary|Percentages of Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) Achieving Seroconversion or Significant Increase After Receiving Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms number (%) of subjects (6 to <48 months old) achieving seroconversion as measured by HI antibody titer, day 50 after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine Seroconversion was defined as subjects with either a pre-vaccination (baseline) HI titer < 1:10 and post-vaccination HI titer ≥ 1:40 or with a pre-vaccination HI titer ≥ 1:10 and a ≥ 4-fold increase in post-vaccination HI antibody titer|Day 50 post vaccination|Analysis was done on PP population||Percentages of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848534|NCT02035696|Primary|Ratios of Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) in Subjects (6 to <48 Months Old) After Receiving Two Doses of Either TIVc or TIVe Vaccine|Immunogenicity was assessed in terms of ratios of GMTs in subjects (6 to <48 months old), measured by hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay, day 1 to day 50 after vaccination with two doses of either TIVc or TIVe vaccine|Day 50/Day 1|Analysis was done on Per Protocol (PP) population i.e. all subjects in the FAS Efficacy/Immunogenicity Set who are not excluded due to reasons defined prior to unblinding or analysis||Ratios||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848535|NCT01807871|Secondary|Adverse Drug Effects|To test whether the incidence of adverse drug effects during the post-lapse use of nicotine patch is minimal.|Up to 12 weeks|All randomized participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
848536|NCT01807871|Secondary|Mediators of Effect of Post-lapse Nicotine Replacement Therapy Use on Abstinence|To test whether the amount of use of nicotine patch post-lapse, craving, withdrawal, cigs/day, motivation to quit, confidence in quitting, nicotine reinforcement from cigarettes, and self-efficacy mediate any effect of post-lapse patch use on abstinence.|4 months after the quit date|Because the results for the primary outcome were negative, this outcome was not analyzed (i.e., there was no effect to mediate).|||||
848537|NCT01807871|Primary|Point-prevalent Abstinence at 4 Months|"To test our hypothesis that among the subset of the 701 enrolled participants who quit smoking and then lapsed while using the nicotine patch, those randomized to continue the patch post-lapse will be more likely to be 7-day point-prevalent abstinent at 4 month follow-up than those randomized to discontinue the patch post-lapse. 7-day point prevalent abstinence was assessed by response to the question In the last 7 days, on how many days did you smoke on the 4 month follow-up survey. Respondents who replied 0 were classified as Yes for 7-day point-prevalent abstinence; all other responses (including missing) were classified as No."|4 months after the quit date|Participants who lapsed while using the nicotine patch||Participants|||Count of Participants
848538|NCT01683019|Secondary|Safety Profile of the Treatment|Describe the safety profile of the administration of low-emission sinusoidal magnetic fields above the subject's scalp. Safety criteria include adverse events, serious adverse events, and vital signs.|Outcome assessed at the end of the 4th week of treatment.||||||
848539|NCT01683019|Primary|Percent Change in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) at Baseline and the End of Week 4 of Treatment.|"Outcome measured using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) and calculated as percent change in severity score from baseline until the end of the 4th week of treatment.
The HAMD-17 scale ranges between 0-54, with higher numbers indicating more severe symptoms. 0-7 is generally accepted to be within the normal range (or in clinical remission), while a score of 20 or higher indicates moderate to severe depression."|Assessed at baseline and the end of Week 4 of treatment.|52 subjects were randomized into the study. Of those, 7 dropped in the first week due to difficulties driving to the study site. An intent-to-treat analysis was performed on the remaining 45 subjects.||% change in HAM-D score||Standard Error|Mean
848540|NCT01639040|Other Pre-specified|Percent Change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score From Day 1 (Baseline) to Day 29 (Week 4) - Censored LOCF|EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD) and measures erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. The efficacy data were set to missing after prohibited medication was used or after the participant was discontinued from the study. Then, all missing values were imputed by simple LOCF.|Baseline up to Day 29|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline assessment; it was based on the treatment allocated (as randomized).||percent Change||Standard Deviation|Mean
848541|NCT01639040|Other Pre-specified|Percent Change in Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score From Day 1 (Baseline) to Day 29 (Week 4) - Censored LOCF|IGA was an assessment scale used to determine severity of AD and clinical response to treatment on a 5-point scale (0 = clear; 1 = almost clear; 2 = mild; 3 = moderate; 4 = severe) based on erythema and papulation/infiltration. Therapeutic response was an IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). The efficacy data were set to missing after prohibited medication was used or after the participant was discontinued from the study. Then, all missing values were imputed by simple LOCF.|Baseline up to Day 29|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline assessment; it was based on the treatment allocated (as randomized).||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
848542|NCT01639040|Other Pre-specified|"Percentage of Participants Achieving an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score of 0 or 1 at Day 29"|IGA was an assessment scale used to determine severity of AD and clinical response to treatment on a 5-point scale (0 = clear; 1 = almost clear; 2 = mild; 3 = moderate; 4 = severe) based on erythema and papulation/infiltration. Therapeutic response was an IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear).|Day 29|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline assessment; it was based on the treatment allocated (as randomized).||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848543|NCT01639040|Other Pre-specified|Percent Change in Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) From Day 1 (Baseline) to Day 29 (Week 4)|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]).|Baseline up to Day 29|FAS included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline assessment; it was based on the treatment allocated (as randomized).||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
848544|NCT01639040|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score: Reduction of ≥50 at Day 29 - Censored Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)|The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD) and measures erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score range from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. The efficacy data were set to missing after prohibited medication was used or after the participant was discontinued from the study. Then, all missing values were imputed by simple LOCF.|Day 29|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline assessment; it was based on the treatment allocated (as randomized).||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848545|NCT01639040|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|Any untoward medical occurrence in a subject who received investigational medicinal product (IMP) was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (from start of administration of first dose of study drug to the end of study [up to Day 78]). A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs.|Baseline up to the end of study (up to Day 78)|Safety population included all randomized participants who received any study drug; based on the treatment received (as treated).||percentage of participants|||Number
848546|NCT01612351|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Experience Adverse Events|Toxicity will be graded using CTCAE criteria.|18 weeks||||||
848547|NCT01612351|Secondary|Voice and Swallowing Function|Assessed by Functional Outcome Swallowing Scale (FOSS) scores, the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), the dysphagia-specific quality of life tool (SWAL-QOL), and voice related quality of life tool (V-RQOL), and through videolaryngoscopy evaluation of the aerodigestive tract at screening and 3-5 weeks post induction chemotherapy.|11 weeks||||||
848548|NCT01612351|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|Progression-free survival associated with 3 part therapy consisting of induction chemotherapy, surgery and risk-adapted use of chemoradiation. Defined as per RECIST criteria. Physical examination, imaging of target lesions by CT scan or MRI and chest imaging (CT or Chest x-ray, if clinically indicated) every 3 months (+/- 30 days) for 18 months following end of treatment|15 years||||||
848549|NCT01612351|Secondary|Overall Survival|Will be defined as per RECIST criteria. Physical examination, imaging of target lesions by CT scan or MRI and chest imaging (CT or Chest x-ray, if clinically indicated) every 3 months (+/- 30 days) for 18 months following end of treatment. Overall survival is measured from the time the patient goes on treatment until death.|15 years||||||
848550|NCT01612351|Secondary|Post Induction Chemotherapy Changes in Risk Level|Risk level pre-induction will be based on physical examination and imaging, post-induction risk level will be determined based on pathologic evaluation or surgical specimen.|11 weeks||||||
848551|NCT01612351|Secondary|Feasibility of 3 Part Therapy|Percentage of patients successfully completing 3 part therapy will be used to assess the feasibility of 3 part therapy consisting of induction chemotherapy, surgery, and risk-adapted use of chemoradiation.|2 years||||||
848552|NCT01612351|Primary|Overall Response Rate|Evaluation of target lesions through tumor imaging (CT scan, MRI, and/or chest x-ray) at 3-5 weeks post induction chemotherapy. Overall response rate will be based on RECIST criteria. Overall response rate (ORR) is defined as the proportion of patients who have a partial or complete response to therapy.|11 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
848553|NCT01610492|Secondary|Urine BLys Levels as a Ratio to Creatinine|B lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS) normalized by creatinine as a ratio of BLyS: creatinine. Free BLyS protein is being analyzed using an ELISA. Urine samples are being collected before treatment and after belimumab washout at Week 0 and Week 116/16 week follow-up visit. Only raw BLyS values available and unable to be assessed due to lack of comparison to a creatinine as a urine concentration marker.|Baseline and Week 116/16 week follow-up visit|ITT Population|||||
848554|NCT01610492|Secondary|Serum BLys Levels|Free BLyS protein were analyzed using an ELISA. Serum samples were collected before treatment and after belimumab washout at Week 0 and Week 116/16 week follow-up visit.|Baseline and Week 116/16 week follow-up visit|ITT Population||pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848555|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cytokines/Chemokine|Cytokine/chemokine associated with T helper skewing or autoimmune pathology will be analyzed using Luminex, ELISA. Serum analyte quantification were used to confirm altered protein levels of any gene expression increases or decreases identified by transcriptomic analysis. Endpoint was moved to ‘Exploratory’ in Protocol amendment 5 as benefits of assessing cytokines was deemed low. Samples were not analyzed.|Baseline and up to Week 104/4 week post last dose|ITT Population|||||
848577|NCT01610492|Secondary|Serum Albumin Levels at Indicated Time Points|Serum albumin was assessed as a clinical chemistry laboratory parameter from Baseline up to Week 128/6 month follow-up visit. Baseline for serum albumin is defined as the mean of the Screening and Day 0 values. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow-up.|ITT Population||grams per liter (g/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848556|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in B Cell and T Cell Markers Concentration|B cell Facs panels were used to measure changes over the course of therapy in B cell subsets such as transitional, naïve, memory and plasma B cell compartments by percent of the B cell compartments and absolute numbers. T cell Facs panel were used to measure changes in T cell subsets, such as T regs and CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, in terms of numbers and expression of activation markers to establish if B cell targeting with belimumab affects the T cell compartment perhaps through limiting B cell antigen presentation or cytokine release. Baseline is defined as Day 0 value and change from Baseline was calculated as ratio of post-Baseline value divided by the Baseline value. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and up to Week 128/6 month post last dose|ITT Population||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848557|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Urine Membrane Attack Complex (MAC)|Urine membrane attack complex will be assayed quantitatively by ELISA method. Urine MAC samples are being collected at Day 0 and Weeks 8, 28, 52, 76 and 4 week post last dose. Results will be normalized using urine creatinine concentration to adjust for urine dilution, before calculation of the ratio as value at time point divided by value at Baseline (Day 0). Endpoint was changed to 'exploratory' as risk of availability of functioning assay for urine membrane attack complex was noted. No assay was subsequently found and samples were not analyzed.|Baseline and up to 4 week post last dose|ITT Population|||||
848558|NCT01610492|Secondary|Urine Membrane Attack Complex (MAC) Levels|Urine membrane attack complex was assayed quantitatively by ELISA method. Urine MAC samples were collected at Day 0 and Weeks 8, 28, 52, 76 and 4 week post last dose. Results were normalized using urine creatinine concentration to adjust for urine dilution. Endpoint was moved to ‘Exploratory’ in Protocol amendment 5 as risk of availability of functioning assay for urine membrane attack complex was noted. No assay was subsequently found and samples were not analyzed|Baseline and up to 4 week post last dose|ITT Population|||||
848559|NCT01610492|Secondary|Number of Participants With Positive Immunogenicity Findings|Blood samples of participants were collected pre-dose on Weeks 0, 12, 28, 40, 52, 76, 4 week post last dose and 16 week post last dose visit for belimumab immunogenicity assay. No participants showed positive immunogenicity findings.|Baseline and up to Week 116/16 week follow-up visit|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
848560|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Temperature|Temperature was measured from Baseline throughout the treatment period up to Week 116/ 16 week follow-up visit. The Baseline value was taken at Day 0 pre dose and change from Baseline was defined as post dose visit value minus Baseline value. Mean and standard deviation (SD) were measured and presented for Week 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 withdrawn visit, 4 Week post last dose and 16 week post last dose visits. Only those participants with data available at the specified data points were analyzed (represented by n= X in the category titles).|Baseline and up to Week 116/16 week follow-up visit|ITT Population||Celsius||Standard Deviation|Mean
848561|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pulse Rate|Pulse rate was measured from Baseline throughout the treatment period up to Week 116/ 16 week follow-up visit. The Baseline value was taken at Day 0 pre dose and change from Baseline was defined as post dose visit value minus Baseline value. Mean and standard deviation (SD) were measured and presented for Week 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 withdrawn visit, 4 Week post last dose and 16 Week post last dose visits. Only those participants with data available at the specified data points were analyzed (represented by n= X in the category titles).|Baseline and up to Week 116/16 week follow-up visit|ITT Population||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
848562|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|SBP and DBP were measured from Baseline throughout the treatment period up to Week 116/ 16 week follow-up visit. The Baseline value was taken at Day 0 pre dose and change from Baseline was defined as post dose visit value minus Baseline value. Mean and standard deviation (SD) were measured and presented for Week 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 withdrawn visit, 4 Week post last dose and 16 Week follow-up visit. Only those participants with data available at the specified data points were analyzed (represented by n= X in the category titles).|Baseline and up to week 116/16 week follow-up visit|ITT Population||millimeter of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848563|NCT01610492|Secondary|Number of Participants With Urinalysis Dipstick Findings|Urine samples were collected for urinalysis by dipstick method from Baseline up to Week 116/16 months follow up and number of participants with findings were presented for Baseline, Week 12, 28, 52, 76, 104/4 weeks post last-dose and Week 116/16 week follow up (WF). The urinalysis parameters included occult blood, glucose, ketones, protein. The findings were presented as trace or 1/10 g/100 milliliter (dL), trace, negative, 4+, 3+, 3+ or 1 g/dL, 2+ or 1/2 g/dL, 2+, 1+ or 1/4 g/dL and 1+. Only participants present at the specific time points were presented (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and up to Week 116/16 Week follow up|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
848564|NCT01610492|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Clinical Chemistry and Hematology Values|Blood samples were collected from participants for evaluation of clinical chemistry and hematology parameters. The clinical chemistry parameters included albumin, alkaline phosphatase (alk.phosph.), alanine amino transferase (ALT), aspartate amino transferase (AST), total and direct bilirubin, calcium, cholesterol, chloride, carbon dioxide, creatinine, gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT), glucose, potassium, lactate dehydrogenase (LD), magnesium, sodium, phosphorus, total protein, blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and uric acid. The hematology parameters included basophils, eosinophil, hemoglobin, hematocrit, lymphocytes, monocytes, total neutrophils, platelets, red blood cells (RBC) count and white blood cells (WBC) count. Participants were counted in the category that their value changes to (low or high) for the specific time points. Only those participants with data available at the specified data points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and up to Week 116/16 week follow-up visit|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
848565|NCT01610492|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. The analysis was performed on Safety Population which comprised of all participants who were randomized into the study. SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in death, is life-threatening, Requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, Results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may require medical or surgical intervention, is associated with liver injury and impaired liver function.|Baseline and up to Week 128/6 month follow up|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
848566|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form (SF)-36 v2 Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire Score|Health-related quality of life was assessed through participant self-completion of the short form health survey (SF-36 version [v2]), a general health related quality of life metrics. Norm-based Scores (NBS) for physical functioning, role emotional, role physical were assessed. The remaining SF-36 component scores require re-scaling and therefore will be added at a later date. SF-36 was administered prior to any procedures at Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76 and 104/4 week post last dose. Item score were recorded and higher score represented better health status. Baseline is defined as Day 0 pre dose value and change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in category titles).|Baseline and up to Week 104/4 week post last dose|ITT Population||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848567|NCT01610492|Secondary|Summary of Total Amount of Urine Excreted Ae(0-24)|PK parameters from the urine concentration data: urine Ae(0-24) were assessed. 24 h urine collections for PK analysis were collected after the Day 0 and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76 doses and at the 4 week post last dose visit. A population approach was undertaken to characterize the population PK parameters and associated variability of belimumab in nephrotic participants. The population approach could have provided derived clearance of belimumab for each participant after the first dose. The population PK analysis was conducted using nonlinear mixed-effect modeling (NONMEM) or appropriate nonlinear mixed-effect analysis software. Several samples were taken pre-dose at Day 0 and some at week 12 incorrectly which affects interpretation.|Baseline and Up to 4 week post last dose|PK Population||ng/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
848568|NCT01610492|Secondary|Summary of Area Under the Serum Concentration-time Curve to the Last Quantifiable Concentration (AUC[0-2])|The AUC(0-2) was determined using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the logarithmic trapezoidal rule for decreasing concentrations. Blood samples for PK analysis were collected at the following time points: pre-dose (on dosing days): Days 0, 1, 4, 7, 14 and Week 4, 8, 12, 28, 40, 52, 76 and 4 week post last dose. Post-dose (5 minutes after dosing complete): Days 0 and 28. The results will be posted at later date following post hoc analysis.|Baseline and up to 4 week post last dose|PK Population|||||
848569|NCT01610492|Secondary|Summary of Minimum Observed Concentration (Cmin) of Belimumab at the Indicated Time Points|Trough concentration (Cmin) samples collected on the specified days are being used to assess attainment whether there was sufficient belimumab despite it being lost in the urine from the proteinuria and to check if it improved as proteinuria resolved. Analysis was performed on pre-infusion samples at weeks 2,4,8,12,28,40,52,76 and the 4 week post last-dose.|Baseline and up to 4 week post last dose|PK Population||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848570|NCT01610492|Secondary|Summary of Maximum Observed Serum Concentration (Cmax) of Belimumab at the Indicated Time Points|The first occurrence of Cmax was determined directly from the serum concentration-time data. The pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis and all calculations of non-compartmental parameters are being based on actual sampling times.|Baseline and up to 4 week post last dose|PK Population: all participants in the ITT Population for whom a PK sample was obtained and analyzed.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848571|NCT01610492|Secondary|Number of Participants With Edema and Edema Extending Beyond Calf|Reduction of proteinuria lessens the risk of thromboembolic and cardiovascular effects and reduces the edema in participants. Investigators physically reviewed participants for clinical manifestations of idiopathic membranous glomerulonephropathy (IMGN) (e.g. edema extending beyond calf) during study and analysis was performed at Week 12, 28, 52, 76 Week 104. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, and 104|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
848572|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum IgG at the Indicated Time Points|Serum IgG was assessed as a clinical chemistry laboratory parameter from Baseline up to Week 128/6 month follow-up visit. Baseline for serum IgG is defined as the pre-dose Day 0 value and change from Baseline was calculated as ratio of post-Baseline value divided by the Baseline value. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow up|ITT Population||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
848573|NCT01610492|Secondary|Serum Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Levels at Indicated Time Points|Serum IgG was assessed as a clinical chemistry laboratory parameter from Baseline up to Week 128/6 month follow-up visit. Baseline for serum IgG is defined as the pre-dose Day 0 value. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow-up|ITT Population||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848574|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Cholesterol at the Indicated Time Points|Serum cholesterol was assessed as a clinical chemistry laboratory parameter from Baseline up to Week 128/6 month follow-up visit. Baseline for serum cholesterol is defined as the mean of the Screening and Day 0 values and change from Baseline was calculated as ratio of post-Baseline value divided by the Baseline value. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow-up|ITT Population||mmol/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848575|NCT01610492|Secondary|Serum Cholesterol Levels at Indicated Time Points|Serum cholesterol was assessed as a clinical chemistry laboratory parameter from Baseline up to Week 128/6 month follow-up visit. Baseline for serum cholesterol is defined as the mean of the Screening and Day 0 values. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow-up|ITT Population||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848576|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Levels of Serum Albumin at the Indicated Time Points|Serum albumin was assessed as a clinical chemistry laboratory parameter from Baseline up to Week 128/6 month follow-up visit. Baseline for serum albumin is defined as the mean of the Screening and Day 0 values and change from Baseline was calculated as ratio of post-Baseline value divided by the Baseline value. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow-up|ITT Population||ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854468|NCT00923351|Primary|Toxicity|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|49.5 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
848578|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Serum Creatinine Levels at the Indicated Time Points|Serum creatinine was assessed as a clinical chemistry laboratory parameter from Baseline up to Week 128/6 month follow-up visit. Baseline for serum creatinine is defined as the mean of the Screening and Day 0 values and change from Baseline was calculated as ratio of post-Baseline value divided by the Baseline value. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow-up|ITT Population||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848579|NCT01610492|Secondary|Serum Creatinine Levels at the Indicated Time Points|Serum creatinine was assessed as a clinical chemistry laboratory parameter from Baseline up to Week 128/6 month follow-up visit. Baseline for serum creatinine is defined as the mean of the Screening and Day 0 values. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow-up|ITT Population||micromoles/liter (µmol/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848580|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in eGFR Levels at the Indicated Time Points|eGFR was assessed from levels of creatinine using the 4 variable version of the modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) equation as recommended by national kidney foundation-chronic kidney disease (NKF-CKD) guidelines. Baseline for eGFR is defined as the mean of the Screening and Day 0 values and change from Baseline was calculated as ratio of post-Baseline value divided by the Baseline value. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and up to Week 128/6 month follow up|ITT Population||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848581|NCT01610492|Secondary|eGFR Levels at the Indicated Time Points|eGFR was assessed from levels of creatinine using the 4 variable version of the modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) equation as recommended by National Kidney Foundation-Chronic Kidney Disease (NKF-CKD) guidelines. Baseline for eGFR is defined as the mean of the screening and Day 0 values. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow-up.|ITT Population||milliliter/minute (mL/min/1.73meter^2)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848582|NCT01610492|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-PLA2R Autoantibody Relapse|Incidence of anti-PLA2R autoantibody relapse defined as antibody detectable after previously undetectable. Anti-PLA2R autoantibody blood samples were evaluated at Week 12, 28, 52, 76, 104/4 week post last dose, Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in category titles).|Baseline and up to Week 128/6 month follow up|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
848583|NCT01610492|Secondary|Time to Anti-PLA2R Autoantibody Remission|Time to anti-PLA2R autoantibody remission was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method for full response and partial response full response with antibody undetectable and partial response with reduction in titers by 50 percent.|Baseline and up to Week 128/6 month follow up|ITT Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848584|NCT01610492|Secondary|Number of Participants With PLA2R Autoantibody Remission|Incidence of anti-PLA2R autoantibody remission were evaluated by full response and partial response. Full response is defined as antibody undetectable, partial response is defined as reduction in titers by 50 percent. For anti PLA2R autoantibody data, log transformation was applied before the formal analyses. Anti-PLA2R autoantibody blood samples were evaluated at Week 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 week post last-dose. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
848585|NCT01610492|Secondary|Duration of Complete or Partial Remission|Complete remission is defined as PCR <30 mg/mmol (proteinuria <0.3g/24 h) with no worsening in renal function (eGFR reduction from Baseline <15percent). Partial remission is defined as PCR <350 mg/mmol (proteinuria <3.5 g/24 h) but >= 30 mg/mmol (proteinuria >= 0.3g/24h) and decrease of >50% from Day 0 Baseline, together with no consistent worsening in renal function (eGFR reduction from Baseline <15percent). Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in category titles). NA indicates that data was not available as only 1 participant reached complete remission. Hence, standard deviation for complete remission was not calculated.|Baseline and up to Week 128/6 month follow up|ITT Population||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
848586|NCT01610492|Secondary|Time to Complete or Partial Remission|Time to complete or partial remission was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Complete remission is defined as PCR <30 mg/mmol (proteinuria <0.3g/24 h) with no worsening in renal function (eGFR reduction from Baseline <15 percent ). Partial remission is defined as PCR <350 mg/mmol (proteinuria <3.5 g/24 h) but >= 30 mg/mmol (proteinuria >= 0.3g/24h) and decrease of >50 percent from Day 0 Baseline, together with no consistent worsening in renal function (eGFR reduction from Baseline <15 percent). Only 1 participant reached complete remission. Hence, statistical analysis for complete remission was not performed.|Baseline and up to Week 128/6 month follow up|ITT Population||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
848587|NCT01610492|Secondary|Number of Participants With Complete or Partial Remission|Complete remission is defined as PCR <30 mg/mmol (proteinuria <0.3grams [g]/24 h) with no worsening in renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] reduction from Baseline <15 percent). Partial remission is defined as PCR <350 mg/mmol (proteinuria <3.5 g/24 h) but >= 30 mg/mmol (proteinuria >= 0.3g/24h) and decrease of >50 percent from Day 0 Baseline, together with no consistent worsening in renal function (eGFR reduction from Baseline <15percent). Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
848588|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Anti-PLA2R Autoantibody Titers at the Indicated Time Points|Anti-PLA2R autoantibody titers in serum were analyzed by means of a validated anti- PLA2R enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) from Euroimmun. Baseline is defined as the Day 0 value and change from Baseline was calculated as ratio of post-Baseline value divided by the Baseline value. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Weeks 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128.|ITT Population||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848716|NCT00602836|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression (TTP)|Time to disease progression (TTP) was defined as the time from registration to the earliest date documentation of disease progression. Participants were followed for a maximum of 5 years from registration. The median TTP with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method.|time from registration to progression (up to 5 years)||||||
848589|NCT01610492|Secondary|Anti-phospholipase A2 Receptor (PLA2R) Autoantibody Levels at Indicated Time Points|Anti-PLA2R autoantibody titers in serum were analyzed by means of a validated anti-PLA2R enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) assay from Euroimmun. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Week 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow-up|ITT Population.||relative units per milliliter (RU/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848590|NCT01610492|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Proteinuria Levels at the Indicated Time Points|Proteinuria based on urinary protein creatinine ratio (PCR) measured from 2 consecutive 24h urine collections at Baseline and Week 28, from a pre-intervention spot urine sample and 24 hour urine collection after visit at Weeks 12, 52, 76 and 104, and from a spot urine sample at week 128. Mean PCR was calculated at each time point where there were 2 samples. Baseline is defined as Day 0 value and change from Baseline was calculated as ratio of post-Baseline value divided by the Baseline value. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Week 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and Week 128/6 month follow up|ITT Population.||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848591|NCT01610492|Secondary|Proteinuria Levels at the Indicated Time Points|Proteinuria based on urinary protein creatinine ratio (PCR) measured from 2 consecutive 24h urine collections at Baseline and Week 28, from a pre-intervention spot urine sample and 24 hour urine collection after visit at Weeks 12, 52, 76 and 104, and from a spot urine sample at week 128. Mean PCR was calculated at each time point where there were 2 samples. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline and Week 12, 28, 52, 76, 104 and 128/6 month follow-up|ITT Population||milligrams per millimole (mg/mmol)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848592|NCT01610492|Primary|Change From Baseline in Anti-phospholipase A2 Receptor (PLA2R) Autoantibody Titers at Week 28|PLA2R autoantibody titers in serum were analyzed at Baseline and Week 28 by means of a validated anti- PLA2R enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) from EuroImmun. Baseline is defined as the Day 0 value and change from Baseline was calculated as ratio to Baseline by dividing the Week 28 values with the Baseline values. Ratio to Baseline: Estimated value = 0.27, 2-sided 95% CI=0.12 to 0.58. The geometric mean method was used to calculate the CI.|Baseline and Week 28|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time point (Week 28) were analyzed.||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848593|NCT01610492|Primary|Change From Baseline in Proteinuria Levels at Week 28|Proteinuria based on urinary protein creatinine ratio (PCR) was measured from 2 consecutive 24 hour (h) urine collection pre and post dosing at Baseline and Week 28 and the mean PCR was determined at each time point. Baseline is defined as the mean of the pre and post dosing Day 0 values. The ratio is defined as the Week 28 value divided by the Baseline value. Ratio to Baseline: Estimated value = 0.76, 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.57 to 1.01. The geometric mean method was used to calculate the CI. The analysis was performed on Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population which comprised of all eligible participants who received at least one dose of investigational drug. Only those participants available at the indicated time point (Week 28) were analyzed.|Baseline and Week 28|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848594|NCT01575106|Primary|fMRI Signal Changes in the Dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex|We used fMRI to investigate the signal changes associated with administration of identical pain stimuli before (pre) and after the treatment (post) with different creams in session 3. It is important to note that the subjects had multiple weeks to complete the study, but this measure was only taken during one session. The change was calculated from two time points as the value at the later time point (post treatment) minus the value at the earlier time point (pre treatment).|Week 4|The neutral cream is omitted from the data table below because we were only concerned about the direct comparison between positive expectancy (“Lidocaine”) and negative expectancy (“Capsaicin”) conditions. Data were only collected for the Lidocaine and Capsaicin creams.||Post-Pre treatment peak beta||Standard Deviation|Mean
848595|NCT01575106|Primary|Subjective Response to Pain (0-20 Visual Analogue Scale)|Subjects received heat pain before and after the application of a neutral cream (told one application of neutral cream was lidocaine, one was capsaicin, and one was neutral) and rated pain intensity on a 0-20 Visual Analogue Scale (0-no pain, 20-intolerable pain). We only measure this outcome measure in session 3. The pain intensity for each cream was averaged amongst all participants for both the pre and post treatment in session 3. Subjects have up to 3 weeks to complete the 3 sessions.|Weeks 1-3|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
848596|NCT01539759|Secondary|Women's Satisfaction With IUDs||0-6 months postpartum|||percentage of participants satisfied|||Number
848597|NCT01539759|Secondary|IUD Expulsion||0-6 months postpartum|||participants|||Number
848598|NCT01539759|Primary|IUD Use|The use of an IUD at 6 months postpartum is the primary outcome measure|6 months postpartum|||participants|||Number
848599|NCT01506479|Other Pre-specified|Number of Days of Exercise Per Week|The number of days the participant exercised per week|9 to 26 weeks|Participants were analyzed in the group to which they were assigned. Participants were not included if they did not start the intervention.||Number of days per week||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848600|NCT01506479|Secondary|6 Month Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Motor Score|Participants were assessed at baseline and at 6 months on their UPDRS. If a participant initiated Parkinson disease medication prior to the 6 month assessment, the UPDRS score from the clinical visit assessment prior to this initiation was used as the score for the individual at 6 months. The change in the UPDRS motor score at 6 months was used as the measure for the futility component of the trial. The change at 6 months was measured as the 6 month value minus the baseline score. A positive change represents worsening of motor symptoms; 0 represents no change; negative values represent improvement. The minimum score on the UPDRS motor is 0 and the maximum is 108 at baseline and 6 months with higher scores representing worse motor symptoms.|Baseline and 6 months|Intention to treat; participants were analyzed in the group to which they were assigned. If a participant started medication, the UPDRS measure prior to initiating medication was used even if the 6 month data were not collected. Participants who did not start medications and were missing the 6 month assessment were not included.||units on the UPDRS Motor scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
848717|NCT00602836|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall Survival (OS) was defined as the time from registration to death of any cause. Participants were followed for a maximum of 5 years from registration. The median OS with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method.|time from registration to death (up to 5 years)||||||
848602|NCT01262898|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Whole Bowel Transit Time, 100 % Gastric Emptying Time (Truncated at 240 Minutes), Small Bowel Transit Time, Colonic Transit Time as Determined by Wireless Motility Capsule (WMC)|WMC is an ingestible telemetric capsule which measures pH, pressure and temperature to assess total gastric emptying time, small and large bowel transit time, colonic transit time, and whole gut transit time. The WMC was ingested immediately following the standard test meal for the oral breath test. Data was collected on a data logger, which was worn on a belt clip. The WMC passed naturally in the participant’s stools between 2 and 5 days after ingestion. The parameters Whole bowel transit time, 100 % gastric emptying time (truncated at 240 minutes), small bowel transit time, colonic transit time were analyzed. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline(Screening i.e., Day -30 to -1), Day 1 and 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
848603|NCT01262898|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Upper Gastrointestinal (GI) Symptoms as Assessed by Total Gastrointestinal Cardinal Symptom Index – Daily Diary (GCSI–DD)|GCSI–DD was measured on a 6-point scale. The Total GCSI-DD score was the mean of the following three subscales: Nausea/Vomiting Subscale = mean (nausea, retching, vomiting), Fullness/Early Satiety Subscale = mean (feeling excessively full after meals, not able to finish a normal-sized meal, stomach fullness, loss of appetite), Bloating Subscale = mean (bloating, stomach or belly visibly larger). Each subscale was scored on a severity scale of 0 (none) to 5 (very severe), with lower scores representing less symptom severity. The change from Baseline to each study week in average score was derived and if it improved by 1 point or more, that participant was defined as “responder” for that symptom and on that particular week. Baseline was Screening2/Baseline values (Day -30 to -1). Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Up to 14 days post last dose (Day 28)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848604|NCT01262898|Secondary|Daily Average Stool Consistency|Stool consistency was determined on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 = Very hard, 2 = Hard, 3 = Formed, 4 = Loose, 5 = Watery). Following dosing with study medication, stool monitoring was performed up to Day 28. Participants who entered their time of first instance of bowel movement before taking first dose were excluded from the summary statistics.|Up to Week 4 (Day 28)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Bowel Movements/ 24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
848605|NCT01262898|Secondary|Daily Bowel Movement Frequency|Daily bowel movement frequency analyzed number of times passed stools in 24 hours of duration. Following dosing with study medication, stool monitoring was performed up to Day 28. Seventeen participants who entered their time of first instance of bowel movement before taking first dose were excluded from the summary statistics.|Up to Week 4 (Day 28)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Bowel movements/24 hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
848606|NCT01262898|Secondary|Time to First Bowel Movement After First Dose|The time to first bowel movement was calculated as the time of the first bowel movement after the first dose in hours (floored) for each participant. If a participant had fewer than 5 days worth of data then the daily mean for that week was set to missing for the following two parameters: Bowel Movement Count and Stool Consistency. Seventeen participants who entered their time of first instance of bowel movement before taking first dose were excluded from the summary statistics of time to first bowel movement.|Up to Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
848607|NCT01262898|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Elimination Half-life (t1/2) at Specified Time Points|This outcome measure was not analyzed in results.|Pre-dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose on Day 1 and 28||||||
848608|NCT01262898|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (V/F) at Specified Time Points|The apparent volume of distribution V/F = CL/F × MRT, where MRT is the mean residence time. The parameter was planned to be analyzed using samples collected at Pre-dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose on Day 1 and 28. But, this outcome measure was not analyzed in results.|Pre-dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose on Day 1 and 28||||||
848609|NCT01262898|Secondary|Apparent Clearance Following Oral Dosing (CL/F) at Specified Time Points|CL/F was calculated as dose/AUC. The parameter was planned to be analyzed from samples collected at Pre -dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose on Day 1 and 28.This outcome measure was not analyzed in results.|Pre-dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose on Day 1 and 28||||||
848610|NCT01262898|Secondary|Pre-dose (Trough) Concentration at the End of the Dosing Interval (Ct) at Specified Time Points|Analysis of pre-dose (trough) concentration at the end of the dosing interval (Ct) was planned to be performed from the samples collected at Pre -dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose on Day 1 and 28.|Pre-dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose on Day 1 and 28|PK population.||Liters||Standard Deviation|Mean
848611|NCT01262898|Secondary|Time of Occurrence of Cmax (Tmax) at Specified Time Points|Tmax is defined as the time to reach the observed maximum concentration. Samples were collected at the following times: Tmax was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. Pre-dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose.|Pre-dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose on Day 1 and 28|PK population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
848612|NCT01262898|Secondary|Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) at Specified Time Points|Cmax is defined as the maximum observed drug concentration after administration. Cmax was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. Samples were collected at the following times: Pre-dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose.|Pre-dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose on Day 1 and 28|PK population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848625|NCT01262898|Secondary|Number of Participants Outside the Normal Range for Heart Rate|Heart rate measurements were taken at pre-dose and at 120 min (completion of meal) on Day 1 and Day 28. The CCR for heart rate was Increase or decrease by less than or equal to (>=) 15 and >= 30. Data for semi-supine position has been presented. Baseline was Screening2/Baseline values.|Screening2/Baseline (Day -30 to -1), Day 1 and 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
848718|NCT00602836|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Response (CR, nPR, PR)|Response criteria described in above outcomes|During treatment (up to 5 years)||||||
848613|NCT01262898|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero (Pre-dose) to Last Time of Quantifiable Concentration AUC(0-t) at Specified Time Points|AUC(0-t) was derived from GSK962040 plasma concentration-time data. AUC was determined using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the logarithmic trapezoidal rule for decreasing concentrations.Only participants who received GSK962040 drug were analyzed.|Pre-dose and 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 hours post dose on Day 1 and 28|The ‘PK Population' was defined as participants in the ‘All subjects’ population for whom a pharmacokinetic sample was obtained and analyzed. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Nanograms.hour/milliliter (ng.h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
848614|NCT01262898|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters : Red Blood Cell Count, Reticulocytes|Red Blood Cell count, Reticulocytes measurements were taken at Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Tera (10^12) cells per liter (TI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848615|NCT01262898|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters : Mean Corpuscle Volume|Mean Corpuscle Volume measurements were taken at Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Femtoliters (FL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848616|NCT01262898|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters : Hemoglobin, Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin Concentration|Hemoglobin, Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin concentration measurements were taken at Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
848617|NCT01262898|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters : Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin|Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin measurements were taken at Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Picograms (Pg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848618|NCT01262898|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters : Hematocrit|Hematocrit measurements were taken at Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
848619|NCT01262898|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters : Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Total Neutrophils (Total ANC - Total Absolute Neutrophil Count), Platelet Count, White Blood Cell Count|Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Total Neutrophils (Total ANC - Total Absolute Neutrophil Count), Platelet count, White Blood cell count measurements were taken at Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Giga (10^9) cells per liter (GI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848620|NCT01262898|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry : Calcium, Chloride, Glucose, Potassium, Sodium, Urea/BUN, Carbon Dioxide Content/Bicarbonate|Calcium, Chloride, Glucose, Potassium, Sodium, Urea/BUN, Carbon dioxide content/Bicarbonate measurements were taken at Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Millimoles per liter (MMOL/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848621|NCT01262898|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry : Albumin, Total Protein|Albumin, Total Protein measurements were taken at Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose), and Day 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose) and Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Grams per liter (g/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848622|NCT01262898|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry: Direct Bilirubin, Total Bilirubin, Creatinine, Uric Acid|Direct Bilirubin, Total Bilirubin, Creatinine, Uric acid measurements were taken at Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose), Day 5, 10, 14, 21 and 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose), Day 5, 10, 14, 21 and 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Unit moles per litre (UMOL/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848623|NCT01262898|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry: Alkaline Phosphatase, Alanine Amino Transferase, Aspartate Amino Transferase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Creatine Kinase, Lactate Dehydrogenase|Alkaline phosphatase, alanine amino transferase, aspartate amino transferase, gamma glutamyl transferase, creatine kinase, lactate dehydrogenase measurements were taken at Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose), Day 5, 10, 14, 21 and 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose), Day 5, 10, 14, 21 and 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||International units per liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848624|NCT01262898|Secondary|Number of Participants Outside the Normal Range for 12-lead ECG|ECG measurements were taken at pre-dose and 0 min (completion of meal) on Day 1 and Day 28. The CCR for ECG parameters were: PR interval (<110 and >220), QRS interval (<75 and >110), Absolute QTc interval (>450 to =< 480) respectively. Baseline was the pre-dose reading for Day 1. Data for abnormal- clinically significant (ACS) and abnormal- not clinically significant (ANCS) has been presented.|Baseline (Day 1 pre-dose), Day 1, Day 14 and Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
848626|NCT01262898|Secondary|Number of Participants Outside the Normal Range for SBP and DBP|Blood pressure measurements were taken at pre-dose and at 120 min (completion of meal) on Day 1 and Day 28. The clinical concern range (CCR) for SBP was greater than (<) 85 and less than (>) 160 and for DBP the range was <45 and >100. Data for semi-supine position has been presented. Baseline was Screening2/Baseline values.|Screening2/Baseline (Day -30 to -1), Day 1 and 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
848627|NCT01262898|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Electrocardiography Parameters (12-lead ECG)|ECG measurements were taken at pre-dose and 0 min (completion of meal) on Day 1 and Day 28. The Baseline value was the Day 1 pre-dose value. ECG parameters included PR interval, QRS duration, QT interval, QTcB, QTcF and RR interval.|Baseline, Day 1 and Day 28|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Milliseconds (msec)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848628|NCT01262898|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Specified Time Points in Semi-supine Position|Heart rate measurements were taken at pre-dose and 120 min (completion of meal) on Day 1 and Day 28. The Baseline value was Day 1 Pre-Dose values . Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline, Day 1, and Day 8|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Beats per minute (BPM)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848629|NCT01262898|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure(DBP) at Specified Time Points in Semi-supine Position|Blood pressure measurements were taken at pre-dose and at 120 min (completion of meal) on Day 1 and Day 28. The Baseline value was Day 1 Pre-Dose values. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline value.|Baseline, Day 1, and Day 8|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848630|NCT01262898|Secondary|Number of Participants With On-treatment Adverse Events (AES) and Serious Adverse Events(SAEs)|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that occurred during the course of the trial after study treatment had started. An adverse event was therefore any unfavourable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of study drug, whether or not considered related to the study drug. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in death, are life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or results in disability/incapacity, and congenital anomaly/birth defect. Data for on-treatment adverse events is reported.|Up to follow-up (5-10 days post last dose)|All Subjects population.||Participants|||Number
848631|NCT01262898|Primary|Gastric Half Emptying Time (GEt1/2)|Gastric half emptying time is the time taken for half the contents of the stomach to empty. Gastric emptying was measured using the 13C-oral breath test, which is a tracer method that utilizes 13C, a non-radioactive isotope. Basal breath samples were obtained after an overnight fast or otherwise after 4 hours of fasting following a light meal. On Day 1 and Day 28, participants were then dosed with GSK962040 and additional breath test samples were taken prior to administration of a 13C-labelled test meal. The test meal was consumed approximately 80 minutes(min) later. After consumption of the test meal, breath samples were collected at pre-specified time points over an approximately 4 hour period following the test meal. For the duration of the breath test, no food or drink were allowed. The 13C breath content was determined by isotope ratio mass spectrometry. GE t1/2 was determined by using the cumulative percentage of the administered dose of 13C excreted in breath over 4 hours.|Screening2/Baseline (Day -30 to -1) , Day 1, and Day 28|The ‘All Subjects Population’ compromised of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed.||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
848632|NCT01257750|Secondary|Corneal Vessel Length|Change in Vessel Length: defined as the mean measurement of the extent of vessels from end to end.|12 Weeks||||||
848633|NCT01257750|Secondary|Corneal Invasion Area|Change in invasion area: measuring the fraction of the total corneal area invaded by the vessels.|12 Weeks||||||
848634|NCT01257750|Secondary|Corneal Vessel Caliber|Change in vessel caliber: measuring the mean diameter of the corneal vessels.|12 Weeks||||||
848635|NCT01257750|Primary|Non-Ocular (Systemic) Adverse Events|Incidence and severity of other adverse events, as identified by physical examination, subject reporting, and changes in vital signs (blood pressure and heart rate) through week 12|12 Weeks|All enrolled patients were analyzed.||participants|||Number
848636|NCT01257750|Secondary|Corneal Neovascular Area|Changes in neovascular area: measuring the area of the corneal vessels.|Through 12 weeks of Follow-Up||||||
848637|NCT01257750|Primary|Ocular Adverse Events|Incidence and severity of ocular adverse events, as identified by eye examination and visual acuity testing through week 12|12 Weeks of follow-up|All enrolled patients were analyzed.||participants|||Number
848638|NCT01256840|Primary|Telomere Length|This study is not a clinical trial, but the UCSF Committee on Human Research requires registration with clinicaltrials.gov. It is a ONE TIME POINT study, where we get a simple blood draw from people from three groups - calorie restricting, normal eating, and obese. Therefore, there IS NO FOLLOW UP/time frame. The outcome measure is assessed on the day of the study. Telomere length is a marker of cellular aging and is used to understand how the cells are aging. We will investigate whether long-term caloric restriction is associated cross-sectionally with longer telomere length (less aging).|One day|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
848639|NCT01213329|Secondary|Identify Development of Donor-specific Hyperactivity|Identify, by studying recipients for development of donor specific hyperactivity and through immunopathologic analysis of renal allograft biopsies, immunologically stable renal transplant patients in whom immunosuppression can be safely minimized.|Pre-transplant, 6mo & 12mo post-transplant||||||
848640|NCT01213329|Primary|The Effect of T Cell Depletion on Phenotypic & Functional Profiles of Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells in Steroid-free Kidney Transplant Recipients.|Blood was collected to assess peripheral blood leukocytes prior to kidney transplant, 6 months & 12 months post-transplant as follows: to obtain absolute count of circulating CD4, CD8 positive T cells, B cells & NK cells, naive & memory cells (CD45RA, CD45RO), activated T cells (CD4/CD38, CD8/CD38), regulatory cells (CD4+ CD25+). To also obtain quantification of donor specific antibody cells for class I & class II donor HLA antigens, and measurement of C-reactive protein cells(marker of inflammation). 50cc of urine also obtained for measurement of urinary cytokines & markers of inflammation.|Pre-transplant, 6months & 12 months post-transplant|samples from 26 recipient/donor pairs were collected = 52 analyzed. Some samples were discarded due to processing inconsistencies.|||||
848641|NCT01154101|Secondary|Change From Baseline in High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (hsCRP) as an Indicator of the Pharmacodynamic Effects of SRT2104|The pharmacodynamic effects of SRT2104 was measured by biomarkers of psoriatic disease activity and/or sirtuin pathway activation (hsCRP and FGF21) in blood samples. Baseline was Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting Baseline values from post-Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) and Days 28, 56 and 84|EAS population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mg per Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
848642|NCT01154101|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fibroblast Growth Factor 21 (FGF21) as an Indicator of the Pharmacodynamic Effects of SRT2104|The pharmacodynamic effects of SRT2104 was measured by biomarkers of psoriatic disease activity and/or sirtuin pathway activation (hsCRP and FGF21) in blood samples. Baseline was Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting Baseline values from post-Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) and Days 28, 56 and 84|EAS population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Picogram per milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
848643|NCT01154101|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of 12 Weeks of Dosing With 250 Milligrams (mg), 500 mg and 1000 mg SRT2104 in the Fed State in Participants|A total of five blood samples (6 mL each) were obtained from each participant at any Visit 4 (Day 28 or Week 4), Visit 6 (Day 56 or Week 8) or Visit 8 (Day 84 or Week 12), for determination of SRT2104 plasma concentrations. No two samples were separated by less than an hour. One pre-dose sample was collected prior to taking study medication (30 minutes or less before dosing) at any Visit 4 (Day 28 or Week 4), Visit 6 (Day 56 or Week 8) or Visit 8 (Day 84 or Week 12). A single pharmacokinetic (PK) sample was collected in the time interval of 0.5 to 2 hours post-dose and also 3 to 6 hours post-dose at any Visit 4 (Day 28 or Week 4), Visit 6 (Day 56 or Week 8) or Visit 8 (Day 84 or Week 12). Two PK samples were collected in the time interval of 6 to 22 hours post dose at any Visit 4 (Day 28 or Week 4), Visit 6 (Day 56 or Week 8) or Visit 8 (Day 84 or Week 12).|One sample: Pre-dose (30 minutes or less before dosing), One sample: 0.5 to 2 hours post-dose and 3 to 6 hours post-dose and 2 samples 6 to 22 hours post dose, at any Visit 4 (Day 28 or Week 4), Visit 6 (Day 56 or Week 8) or Visit 8 (Day 84 or Week 12)|PK population.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848644|NCT01154101|Secondary|Area Under Curve (AUC) of 12 Weeks of Dosing With 0.25 g, 0.5 g and 1.0 g SRT2104 in the Fed State in Participants|A total of five blood samples (6 milliliter [mL] each) were obtained from each participant up to Week 12, for determination of SRT2104 plasma concentrations. No two samples were separated by less than an hour. One pre-dose sample was collected prior to taking study medication (30 minutes or less before dosing) at any Visit 4 (Week 4), Visit 6 (Week 8) or Visit 8 (Week 12). A single pharmacokinetic (PK) sample was collected in the time interval of 0.5 to 2 hours post-dose and also 3 to 6 hours post-dose at any Visit 4 (Week 4), Visit 6 (Week 8) or Visit 8 (Week 12). Two PK samples were collected in the time interval of 6 to 22 hours post dose at any Visit 4 (Week 4), Visit 6 (Week 8) or Visit 8 (Week 12).|Pre-dose (30 minutes or less before dosing: 1 sample), 0.5 to 2 hours and 3 to 6 hours post-dose (1 sample), 6 to 22 hours post-dose (2 samples) up to Week 12|PK population which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of SRT2104 for whom a PK sample was obtained and analyzed.||Nanogram x hour/milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848645|NCT01154101|Secondary|Summary of Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) Score After 4, 8 and 12 Weeks of Exposure|The severity of psoriatic lesions over the whole body were assessed by the investigator using the PGA scoring system. A 0 to 6 point rating scale was used, as follows: 0 = Clear (no signs of psoriasis), 1 = Almost clear (slight elevation, scale and/or erythema), 2 = Mild (mild plaque elevation, scale and/or erythema), 3 = Mild to moderate (mild plaque elevation with moderate erythema and/or scale), 4 = Moderate (moderate plaque elevation, scale and/or erythema), 5 = Moderate to severe (marked plaque elevation, scale and/or erythema), 6 = Severe (very marked plaque elevation, scale and/or erythema). Higher scores indicated worse psoriasis. Participants in the SRT2104 0.25 g dose group inadvertently used an incorrect version of the PGA scale and thus do not have PGA data available. Participants in the SRT2104 0.25 g dose group inadvertently used an incorrect version of the PGA scale and thus do not have PGA data available.|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|EAS Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848646|NCT01154101|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Activity in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score After 4, 8, and 12 Weeks of Exposure|PASI score was determined by evaluation of body surface area (BSA) covered by plaque psoriasis in 4 areas (head/neck, arms, trunk and legs with area score of 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 respectively). This test included combination of both degree of involvement (assessed as per the % of affected body area using a 7-point scale such that 0=0% involvement, 1=1-9%, 2=10-29%, 3=30-49%, 4=50-69%, 5=70-89% and 6=90-100%) and severity (evaluated individually using a 5-point scale that ranged as 0=No evidence of sign, 1=slight evidence, 2=moderate evidence, 3=marked evidence and 4=very marked, most severe evidence of sign) of erythema, induration and desquamation in each of the same 4 areas. PASI score ranges from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (worse psoriasis). Final PASI=(sum of severity score for each area)x(% body affected score x area score).|Weeks 4, 8 and 12|Efficacy Analysis Set (EAS) population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848647|NCT01154101|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs of Potential Clinical Importance|Vital sign assessments included measurements of resting heart rate and blood pressure. Potential clinical concern range for systolic blood pressure: <85 and >160 millimeter of mercury (mmHg), for diastolic: <45 and >100 mmHg and heart rate: <40 and >110 beats per minute. Number of participants with vital signs of potential clinical importance are presented.|Up to Follow-up (Day 114)|SAF Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848648|NCT01154101|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Values|12-lead ECG was performed in the rested state with the participant in the supine position with ECG leads on for at least 5 minutes prior to ECG recording. ECGs included PR (PQ), QRS, QT and QT corrected by Bazett's formula (QTcB), QT corrected by Fridericia's formula (QTcF) intervals. Identification of any conduction abnormalities were recorded in the eCRF. If a participant’s QTc intervals were prolonged, then the ECG was done in triplicate with results reported as an average of the three ECGs. Number of participants with abnormal electrocardiogram (ECG) values are presented.|Up to Follow-up (Day 114)|SAF Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848693|NCT00685516|Secondary|Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) After the Consumption of Green Tea (GT) and Black Tea (BT).||6 weeks|Pre and post blood samples unavailable for: 4 participants in Arm I (GT group), 3 participants in Arm II (control/water group) and 3 participants in Arm III (BT group).||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
848649|NCT01154101|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Chemistry Abnormalities of Potential Clinical Importance|The potential clinical concern range for clinical chemistry parameters were: Albumin:(low: <0.86 gram/Liter x LLN), Calcium:(low: <0.91 millimol/Liter [mmol/L] x LLN and high: >1.06 mmol/L x ULN), Creatinine: (high: >1.3 mmol /L x ULN), Glucose: (low: <0.71 mmol/L x LLN, high: >1.41 mmol/L x ULN), Magnesium: (low: <0.63 mmol/L x LLN, high: >1.03 mmol/L x ULN), Phosphorus: (low: <0.8 mmol/L x LLN, high: >1.14 mmol/L x ULN), Sodium: (low: <0.96 mmol/L x LLN, high: >1.03 mmol/L x ULN), Urea: (high: >1.5 mmol/L x ULN), Gamma glutamyl transferase: (high: >2 International units per L x ULN), Total bilirubin (high: 1.5 x ULN), both alanine amino transferase and aspartate amino transferase (high:≥ 2x ULN Units/L) and Bicarbonate: (low: <18 mmol/L and high: >32 mmol/L). Number of participants with clinical chemistry abnormalities of potential clinical importance are presented.|Up to Follow-up (Day 114)|SAF Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848650|NCT01154101|Primary|Number of Participants With Hematology and Coagulation Abnormalities of Potential Clinical Concern|Hematology parameters included hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell count, red cell distribution width, mean corpuscular volume, mean corpuscular hemoglobin, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration, platelets, white blood cell count and complete white blood cell count differential. Coagulation parameters included activated partial thromboplastin time and prothrombin time/international normalized ratio. The potential clinical concern range for hematology parameters were: white blood cell count (low: <0.67x10^9/Liter x lower limit of normal [LLN] and high: >1.82x10^9/L x upper limit of normal [ULN]), neutrophil count: (low: <0.83x10^9/Liter x LLN), hemoglobin (low: <0.85 gram/Liter x LLN and high: >1.03 gram/Liter x ULN for males and >1.13 gram/Liter x ULN for females), hematocrit with units ratio (high: >1.02 x ULN for males and >1.17 x ULN for females), platelet count (low: <0.67x10^9/Liter x LLN and high >1.57x10^9/Liter x ULN) and lymphocytes (low: <0.81x10^9/Liter x LLN).|Up to Follow-up (Day 114)|SAF Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848651|NCT01154101|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. For marketed medicinal products, this also includes failure to produce expected benefits (i.e., lack of efficacy), abuse or misuse. SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is medically significant. The AE category in the data table includes participants who experienced serious or non-serious adverse events or both.|Up to Follow-up (Day 114)|Safety Analysis Set (SAF) population which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848652|NCT01154101|Primary|Assessment of Clinical Activity by Improvement Score (Using Krueger Criteria): Number of Participants With Good or Excellent Improvement Score Based on Histological Assessments of Skin Biopsies After 12 Weeks of Exposure|According to the Krueger criteria, improvement score is classified as Good improvement defined as reduction in epidermal thickness by at least 30% normalized keratinocyte differentiation but most keratinocytes still express K16. Excellent improvement defined as reduction in epidermal thickness to normal or almost normal normalized keratinocyte differentiation and absent keratinocyte expression of K16. No improvement defined as no improvement in epidermal thickness keratinocyte differentiation or K16 expression on keratinocytes. A binomial response was defined for each participant according to whether the participant had an improvement score of “good or excellent improvement” (response=1) or not (response=0). Number of participants with good or excellent improvement score are presented.|12 weeks|The Efficacy Analysis Set (EAS) population comprised of all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study medication, had at least one activity measurement at Baseline, at least one post-Baseline study visit. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848653|NCT01130493|Secondary|Subject Preference|Subjects who completed both treatments were asked to indicate a preference for Treatment Period 1 or Treatment Period 2 or no preference. Preferences for a particular treatment period were mapped to the associated treatment and reported.|End of Study (week 11)|Participants who completed both treatment periods||Participants|||Count of Participants
848654|NCT01130493|Secondary|UPDRS Part II Plus Part III|"Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II (Activities of Daily Living) and Part III (Motor Examination). Part II consists of 14 questions, each ranges from 0 (Normal/None) - 4 (Worst) with a total score of 0 - 72. Part III consists of 27 questions, each ranges from 0 (Normal/None) - 4 (Worst) with a total score of 0 - 108.
The UPDRS Part II Plus Part III scores ranged from 0 (no problems with daily living or mobility) to 180 (severe problems with daily living and mobility."|End of each double-blind treatment period.|Participants who completed both treatment periods||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848655|NCT01130493|Secondary|"Total On With No Troublesome Dyskinesia"|"Using a Parkinson's disease diary, subjects recorded a state of “asleep”, ”OFF”, “ON without dyskinesia,” “ON with non-troublesome dyskinesia,” or “ON with troublesome dyskinesia” every 30 minutes over a 24-hour day for the last 3 days of each double-blind crossover treatment period.
Mean Total On with No Troublesome Dyskinesia was calculated. On Time is when medication is providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness, and stiffness."|3 days of data immediately prior to the end of each 2 week treatment period|Participants who completed both treatment periods and completed PD diary for both Period 1 and Period 2||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
848656|NCT01130493|Secondary|Total “OFF” Time During Waking Hours|"Using a Parkinson's disease diary, subjects recorded a state of “asleep”, ”OFF”, “ON without dyskinesia,” “ON with non-troublesome dyskinesia,” or “ON with troublesome dyskinesia” every 30 minutes over a 24-hour day for the last 3 days of each double-blind crossover treatment period.
Mean Total Off Time During Waking Hours was calculated. Off Time is Time when medication has worn off and is no longer providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness, and stiffness."|3 days of data immediately prior to the end of each 2 week treatment period|Participants who completed both treatment periods and completed PD diary for both Period 1 and Period 2||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
848657|NCT01130493|Primary|Percentage of “OFF” Time During Waking Hours|"Using a Parkinson's disease diary, subjects recorded a state of “asleep”, ”OFF”, “ON without dyskinesia,” “ON with non-troublesome dyskinesia,” or “ON with troublesome dyskinesia” every 30 minutes over a 24-hour day for the last 3 days of each double-blind crossover treatment period.
Mean percentage of “OFF” Time During Waking Hours was calculated. Off Time is Time when medication has worn off and is no longer providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness, and stiffness."|3 days of data immediately prior to the end of each 2 week treatment period|Participants who completed both treatment periods and completed PD diary for both Period 1 and Period 2||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
848658|NCT01118741|Secondary|Clinical Response|To assess the clinical response measured by prostate specific antigen (PSA) progression at 6 months after treatment with the defined dose of disulfiram in prostate cancer (PCa) patients with evidence of biochemical relapse after local therapy. Reported as number of participants with PSA progression by 6 months.|Up to 6 months|||participants|||Number
848659|NCT01118741|Primary|Proportion of Subjects With a Demethylation Response at Each Dose Level|For both of the doses explored (i.e. disulfiram 250 mg PO daily and 500 mg PO daily) the proportion of subjects with a demethylation response was computed. A demethylation response was defined as a >=10% decrease from baseline in global 5-methyl cytosine content as assessed from peripheral blood mononuclear cells.|24 months|||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848660|NCT01057862|Secondary|Gambling Symptom Assessment Scale (G-SAS)|The G-SAS is a 12-item self-rated scale designed to assess gambling symptom severity and change during treatment. Each item on the 12-item scale has a score ranging from 0 – 4. All items ask for an average symptom based on the past 7 days. Total score ranges from 0 – 48: extreme = 41 – 48, severe = 31 – 40, moderate = 21 – 30, mild = 8 – 20.|Weekly/bi-weekly visits|Enrollment was lower than expected and due to the low numbers of subjects completing the study (8 subjects completed all interventions) the numbers were not powerful enough to conduct a full analysis or provide any meaningful statistical analyses.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848661|NCT01057862|Primary|Yale Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale Modified for Pathological Gambling (YBOCS-PG)|The Yale Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale adapted for Pathological Gambling (PG-YBOCS) was developed to measure the severity and change in severity of pathological gambling symptoms.The PG-YBOCS is a 10-item clinician-administered questionnaire that measures the severity of PG over a specified time interval. Scores of 0 through 4 are assigned to each question according to the severity of the response (0 = least severe response, 4 = most severe response). The first five questions assess urges and thoughts associated with pathological gambling, whereas the last five questions assess the behavioral component of the disorder. Each set of questions is totaled separately as well as together for a total score. The total score can range from 0 (low) to 40 (most severe) with higher numbers representing a more severe form of pathological gambling.|Weekly/bi-weekly visits|Enrollment was lower than expected and due to the low numbers of subjects completing the study (7 subjects completed all interventions - 5 naltrexone and 2 placebo) the numbers were not powerful enough to conduct a full analysis or provide any meaningful statistical analyses.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848662|NCT00992264|Primary|Treatment Utilization for Smoking Cessation|confirmed use of pharmacotherapy or enrollment in health plan-sponsored counseling program|12 months|Twenty-seven participants were excluded for not being enrolled in the health plan during the study period and not having access to the provided adjunct treatment.||% of participants using adjunct treatmen|||Number
848663|NCT00992264|Primary|Smoking Abstinence|7 day point prevalent abstinence|12 months|Missing data imputed, so all enrolled participants were included in the final intent to treat analytic sample.||percentage of abstinent participants|||Number
848664|NCT00972478|Secondary|Toxicity of Vorinostat-R-CHOP in Patients With Newly Diagnosed DLBCL|Incidence of toxicity as assessed by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. For each patient, worst grade of each event type is reported. Grade 3 = Severe, Grade 4 = Life-threatening, Grade 5 = Fatal.|Up to week 26|Eligible patients who had received any treatment were included in the adverse event summaries. Any CTCAE 4.0 event of Grade 3 (severe), Grade 4 (life threatening), or Grade 5 (fatal) which deemed to be related to protocol treatment are included.||Participants|||Number
848665|NCT00972478|Secondary|Response Rate (Complete Response [CR]+Partial Response [PR]) (Phase II)|Objective disease status is evaluated according to the 2007 revised Cheson et al. criteria. Complete Response(CR) is a complete disappearance of all disease with the exception of nodes. No new lesions. previously enlarged organs must have regressed and not be palpable. Bone marrow (BM) must be negative if positive at baseline. Normalization of markers. Partial Response (PR) is a 50% decrease in the sum of products of greatest diameters (SPD) for up to 6 identified dominant lesions, including spleenic and hepatic nodules from baseline. No new lesions and no increase in the size of liver, spleen or other nodes.|Up to week 26|Eligible patients who received the protocol treatment in the Phase II portion of the study||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848666|NCT00972478|Secondary|Overall Survival (Phase II)|From date of registration to date of death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive are censored at date of last contact.|Up to 2 years|Eligible patients who received the protocol treatment in the Phase II portion of the study.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848667|NCT00972478|Primary|Progression-free Survival (Phase II)|From date of registration to date of first documentation of progressive disease, or death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive and progression free are censored at date of last contact.|Up to 2 years|Eligible patients who received the protocol treatment in the Phase II portion of the study.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
848668|NCT00972478|Primary|Safe Dose of Vorinostat to be Used in Combination With R-CHOP Assessed by CTCAE Version 4.0 (Phase I)|Safe dose of Vorinostat (in combination with R-CHOP) at which 3/10 or fewer patients have doselimiting toxicities (DLT). Toxicities graded according to the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0 (CTCAE 4.0). DLT apply only during cycle 1 and should be drug-related (possible, probable, or definite).|21 days|Phase I eligible patients receiving any amount of the assigned dose during Cycle 1 (1 Cycle = 21 days) or whom developed a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT).||mg PO Once daily Days 1-9|||Number
848708|NCT00644995|Primary|Minutes Per Week of Moderate Physical Activity|Mean change from baseline as assessed using International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)|6 months|||mean change in minutes per week of PA||Full Range|Mean
848709|NCT00644995|Primary|Days Walk Per Week|Mean change in days walk per week from baseline|6 months|||mean change in days walked per week||Full Range|Mean
848673|NCT00896441|Secondary|Hamilton Anxiety Scale|Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA) was utilized. Scores range from 0-56, with higher scores indicating more anxiety. The change score utilized baseline and Day 56 (week 8) scores. The change scores was HAMA day 1 less Ham A day 56 / HAMA Day 1. Thus, larger numbers equal a greater reduction in anxiety.|% change in anxiety from Day 1 to Day 56 (week 8)|Only participants completing the protocol are included in the analysis. Only participants in the Depressed group were analyzed for change in anxiety symptoms.||percentage of change in anxiety||Standard Deviation|Mean
848674|NCT00896441|Primary|Voxel-wise Changes in Resting State Functional Connectivity to the Posterior Cingulate Cortex|The dependent variable, measured in more than 30,000 voxels across the whole brain, was the functional connectivity between the posterior cingulate cortex seed region and each voxel. This is derived as the correlation coefficient between the blood-oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) signal timeseries in the seed region and the BOLD signal timeseries in each voxel.|baseline and week 8|Owing to the limited sample size, we first examined this measure in the depressed subjects using a paired-sample t-test at each of the 30,000+ voxels. No significant voxels were detected in this analysis and so subsequent analyses combining the depressed subjects and the healthy control subjects in a single model were not performed.||significant voxels|||Number
848675|NCT00896441|Primary|Hamilton Depression Rating Scale Percent Change From Day 0 to D56|Utilized the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM), 21-item version to assess depressive symptoms, with a range of 0-63. Higher scores indicate more depression. For the change score, it is Baseline less Day 56 HAM total / Baseline. Thus, larger values mean a greater decrease in the level of depression|% change from baseline to Day 56 ( week 8)|Only participants completing the protocol are included in the analysis; thus, the N = 12. Only participants in the Depressed group were analyzed for change in depressive symptoms.||percentage of change in depression||Standard Deviation|Mean
848676|NCT00880048|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the MSFQ Total Score in Females|MSFQ included five items with a score ranging from 1 to 6 (1 = greater than normal; 2 = normal; 3 = minimally diminished; 5 = markedly diminished; and 6 = totally absent). The following areas of sexual functioning were included: diminished/absent libido; arousal difficulties; orgasm difficulties/anorgasmia; erectile dysfunction (males only) and degree of sexual satisfaction. A total score was used as a global measure of sexual dysfunction. The Baseline MSFQ requested the participant reflect back over the past month. For the treatment period, the follow-up MSFQ requested the participant reflect back over the past week. Change from Baseline was the value at post-Baseline visit minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Week 6|All Subject Population (female). Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848677|NCT00880048|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Massachusetts Sexual Function Questionnaire (MSFQ) Total Score in Males|MSFQ included five items with a score ranging from 1 to 6 (1 = greater than normal; 2 = normal; 3 = minimally diminished; 5 = markedly diminished; and 6 = totally absent). The following areas of sexual functioning were included: diminished/absent libido; arousal difficulties; orgasm difficulties/anorgasmia; erectile dysfunction (males only) and degree of sexual satisfaction. A total score was used as a global measure of sexual dysfunction. The Baseline MSFQ requested the participant reflect back over the past month. For the treatment period, the follow-up MSFQ requested the participant reflect back over the past week. Change from Baseline was the value at post-Baseline visit minus Baseline value.|Baseline and up to Week 6|All subjects Population (males). Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848678|NCT00880048|Secondary|Number of Incidences of Discontinuation Emergent Signs and Symptoms Using the Discontinuation-Emergent Signs and Symptoms (DESS)|The DESS scale consisted of 43 signs and symptoms, scored as ‘new symptom’, ‘old symptom but worse’, ‘old symptom but improved’ or ‘symptom not present/old symptom but unchanged’. The total number of new signs and symptoms, old symptoms but worse, old symptoms but improved and the total number of new or old-but-worse signs and symptoms were calculated for each treatment and visit. n = number of subjects who had at least one of the 43 symptoms in the specified category. The summary for a specified category are of the number of symptoms the n subjects had in that category. Treatment period was up to Week 6.|Up to 17 days post-treatment|All subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Number of Incidences||Standard Deviation|Mean
848710|NCT00644995|Primary|Abstinent From Smoking|self-reported 7 day point prevalent abstinence with non-responders coded as smokers|6 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
848679|NCT00880048|Secondary|Number of Participants With Suicide-Related Events Based on the Columbia Suicidality Severity Rating Scale (CSSRS)|Assessment of suicidality were done through use of the CSSRS for suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior. For suicidal ideation ratings were 1 to 5, where 1. Wish to be dead, 2. Non-specific active suicidal thoughts, 3. Active suicidal ideation without intent to act, 4. Active suicidal ideation with any methods (not plan) without intent to act, 5. Active suicidal ideation with specific plan and intent and for suicidal behavior ratings were 6 to 12, Where 6. Actual attempt, 7. Engaged in non-suicidal self-injurious behavior, 8. Interrupted attempt, 9. Aborted attempt, 10. Preparatory acts or behavior, 11. Suicidal behavior, 12. Completed suicide. n= number participants with at least one CSSRS assessment after the first dose of study medication (i.e. on treatment or post treatment). Only those categories from CSSRS (1-12) are presented for which symptoms were actually observed in the participants. Categories with null values for all the arms have not been presented.|Up to 17 days post-treatment|The All Subjects Population was defined as all participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848680|NCT00880048|Secondary|Number of HAM-D Remitters|A HAMD remitter was defined as a participant who had a HAMD Total Score <=7. The HAMD total score was calculated for each participant at each time point. Those participants with no missing value for HAMD total score were categorized as having a HAMD total score of <=7 or >7.|Up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
848681|NCT00880048|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the MSQ Sleep Quality and Refreshing Value of Sleep|The MSQ was a self-rated scale designed to assess effects on sleep and effects on next day functioning. The following variables were assessed in order to determine effects on sleep: total sleep time, sleep onset latency, number of nocturnal awakenings, wake time after sleep onset and sleep quality (from poor, assigned a score of 1, to excellent, assigned a score of 10). The refreshing value of the sleep was also determined (poor assigned a score of 1, to excellent, assigned a score of 10). Value at randomization was the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated for each domain separately. Change from Baseline was the difference between score at the time point being analyzed to randomization. If no post- randomization scores were available, change from Baseline was set to missing.|Baseline and up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848682|NCT00880048|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the MSQ Number of Nocturnal Awakenings|The MSQ was a self-rated scale designed to assess effects on sleep and effects on next day functioning. The following variables were assessed in order to determine effects on sleep: total sleep time, sleep onset latency, number of nocturnal awakenings, wake time after sleep onset and sleep quality (from poor, assigned a score of 1, to excellent, assigned a score of 10). The refreshing value of the sleep was also determined (poor assigned a score of 1, to excellent, assigned a score of 10). Value at randomization was the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated for each domain separately. Change from Baseline was the difference between score at the time point being analyzed to randomization. If no post- randomization scores were available, change from Baseline was set to missing.|Baseline and upto Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Number of awakenings||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848683|NCT00880048|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Morning Sleep Questionnaire (MSQ) Total Sleep Time, Sleep Onset Latency and Wake Time After Sleep Onset|The MSQ was a self-rated scale designed to assess effects on sleep and effects on next day functioning. The following variables were assessed in order to determine effects on sleep: total sleep time, sleep onset latency, number of nocturnal awakenings, wake time after sleep onset and sleep quality (from poor, assigned a score of 1, to excellent, assigned a score of 10). The refreshing value of the sleep was also determined (poor assigned a score of 1, to excellent, assigned a score of 10). Value at randomization was the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated for each domain separately. Change from Baseline was the difference between score at the time point being analyzed to randomization. If no post- randomization scores were available, change from Baseline was set to missing.|Baseline and up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||minutes (min)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848684|NCT00880048|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Cognitive and Physical Function Questionnaire (CPFQ) Total Score|CPFQ was a brief self-report scale which was designed to measure cognitive and executive dysfunction in mood and anxiety disorders. The CPFQ comprised of 7 questions assessing each of the most common complaints of depressed participants reporting fatigue or cognitive/executive problems. Each question was rated on a scale of 1 to 6, with 1 indicating greater than normal functioning, 2, indicating normal functioning, and with higher numbers indicating poorer functioning. Two versions of the CPFQ were utilized during the study. The Baseline CPFQ requested the participant reflect back over the past month. For the treatment period, the CPFQ requested the participant reflect back over the past week. Value at randomization was the Baseline value. Change from Baseline in Total Score was the difference between CPFQ Score at the time point being analyzed to randomization. If no post- randomization scores were available, change from Baseline was set to missing.|Baseline and up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848685|NCT00880048|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) Score|The CGI-S assessed scores range from 1 – Very much Improved to 7 – Very much worse, with 0 representing a participant that was not assessed. For the CGI-S, remote, blinded MedAvante, raters assessed the participant’s severity of illness considering their total clinical experience with the particular population being studied and information obtained during the Baseline HAMD interview with the participant. Value at randomization was the Baseline value. Change from Baseline in total score was the difference between CGI-S Score at the time point being analyzed to randomization. If no post- randomization scores were available, change from Baseline was set to missing.|Baseline and up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848711|NCT00644995|Primary|Depression Score|% with significant change (50% reduction in SCL [Symptom Checklist] depression score)|6 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
848712|NCT00602836|Secondary|Number of Participants With FISH Testing at Baseline Who Also Had a Clinical Response (CR, nPR, or PR).|Response categories described in above outcome measures. FISH status describe in baseline characteristics section.|During treatment (up to 5 years)||||||
848686|NCT00880048|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Global Impression- Global Improvement (CGI-I) Score|The CGI-I assessed scores range from 1 – Very much Improved to 7 – Very much worse, with 0 representing a participant that was not assessed. The assessed scores were dichotomized. Scores of 1 or 2 was in the first category, scoring 1. All other scores (except zero which was regarded as missing) was in the second category, scoring 0. The percentage of participants in the first category was calculated for each assessment.|Up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848687|NCT00880048|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the HAM-D Anxiety Factor Score (Sum of Items 10, 11, 12, 13, 15 and 17)|The anxiety score was extracted from the HAM-D-17 and comprises of items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 15 from the HAM-D scale. The anxiety score was calculated by summing the individual response scores to these questions. It was a checklist of items that were ranked on a scale of 0-4 or 0-2. The lowest possible score was 0 (absence of depression) and the highest possible score was 18 (most severe measure of depression). Due to the small number of items, missing data was not imputed for the anxiety score. If either of the anxiety items was missing, the total score was not calculated at that visit. Value at randomization was the Baseline value. Change from Baseline in anxiety score was the difference between the anxiety score at the time point being analyzed to randomization. If no post- randomization scores were available, change from Baseline was set to missing.|Baseline and up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848688|NCT00880048|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR 16) Total Score|QIDS-SR assessed symptoms severity of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) diagnostic criterion for major depressive disorder. It consisted of 16 separate items, defining 9 DSM-IV symptom criterion domains. A total score was obtained by summing scores on each domain. The lowest possible score was 0, which represented an absence of depression; the highest possible score was 27, which represented the most severe measure of depression. Due to the small number of items, missing data was not imputed for the QIDS-SR total score. If any of the 9 domains above were missing, the total score was not calculated at that visit. Value at randomization was the Baseline value. Change from Baseline in total score was the difference between QIDS total score at the time point being analyzed to randomization. If no post- randomization scores were available, change from Baseline was set to missing.|Baseline and up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848689|NCT00880048|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Bech Melancholia Scale Total Score (Sum of Items 1, 2, 7, 8, 10, and 13 of the 17-item HAM-D Scale)|The BECH scale was extracted from the HAMD-17 and comprised the 6 items (sum of items 1, 2, 7, 8, 10, and 13 of the 17-item HAM-D scale): Depressed Mood, Feelings of Guilt, Work and Activities, Retardation, Anxiety Psychic and Somatic Symptoms General. The BECH Total Score was calculated by summing the individual response scores. It was a checklist of items that were ranked on a scale of 0-4 or 0-2. The lowest possible score was 0 (absence of depression) and the highest possible score was 22 (most severe measure of depression). Due to the small number of items , missing data was not imputed for the BECH Total Score. If any of the 6 items above were missing, the total score was not calculated at that visit. Value at randomization was the Baseline value. Change from Baseline in BECH Total Score was the difference between BECH Total Score at the time point being analyzed to randomization.|Baseline and up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848690|NCT00880048|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Maintained Clinical Response by Week 6|The start of the ‘maintained antidepressant response’ was the time at which a participant demonstrates a 50% reduction from randomization in their HAM-D total score and where this response was maintained until the end of the treatment phase (week 6). Participants who met the 50% reduction at week 6 without having met it at week 4 were considered to have reached a maintained response, and therefore were censored at week 6. Where a participant met the criteria for maintained antidepressant response, the “time (in days) to maintained antidepressant response” was calculated as: (Date of assessment at which the maintained response commences minus Date of randomization) plus 1. Where a participant did not met the criteria for maintained antidepressant response, their time to response was censored at the last on-treatment assessment they undertake, up to and including the week 6 assessment.|Up to Week 6|ITT Population.||Participants|||Number
848691|NCT00880048|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a >=50% Reduction From Baseline in HAM-D Total Score|"HAM-D was use to measure the severity of depressive symptoms in participants with primary depressive illness. It was a checklist of items that were ranked on a scale of 0-4 or 0-2. The HAM-D Total Score was calculated by summing the individual response scores. The lowest possible score was 0 (absence of depression) and the highest possible score was 52 (most severe measure of depression). For the last observation carried forward analyses, the most recent post randomization total score (as opposed to individual responses) was carried forward and used in the calculation of the change from randomization value. If the responses to more than 1 question were missing for a participant at a particular time point, the total score was not calculated. Data was presented as percent of HAM-D responders which was defined as participants who has a >=50% reduction from randomization in HAM-D total score."|Up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage of participants|||Number
848692|NCT00880048|Primary|Change From Baseline in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) Total Score|"HAM-D was use to measure the severity of depressive symptoms in participants with primary depressive illness. It was a checklist of items that were ranked on a scale of 0-4 or 0-2. Items with quantifiable severity were scored 0 (lowest severity) to 4 (greatest severity); The HAM-D total score was calculated by summing the individual response scores. The lowest possible score was 0 (absence of depression) and the highest possible score was 52 (most severe measure of depression). For the last observation carried forward analyses, the most recent post randomization total score (as opposed to individual responses) was carried forward and used in the calculation of the change from randomization (Baseline) value. If the responses to more than 1 question were missing for a participant at a particular time point, the total score was not calculated. Change from Baseline in total score was the difference between HAM-D total score at the time point being analyzed and randomization."|Baseline and up to Week 6|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
848694|NCT00685516|Secondary|Concentration of Tea Polyphenols and Methyl-metabolites in Urine After the Consumption of Green Tea (GT) and Black Tea (BT).|Concentration of tea polyphenols and methyl-metabolites in urine after the consumption of GT and BT. No polyphenols were found after water consumption|6 weeks|"Urine concentration of (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG), (-)-epicatechin-3-gallate (ECG), (-)-epigallocatechin (EGC) , (-)-epicatechin (EC), 4'-O-methylEGC (4'-MeEGC), 4-O-methylEGCG (4-OmethylEGCG)."||umol/g creatinine||Standard Deviation|Mean
848695|NCT00685516|Secondary|Concentration of Tea Polyphenols, Their Metabolites, and Colonic Metabolites in Prostate Tissue|Examine levels of tea polyphenols and methylated tea polyphenol metabolites in fresh frozen radical prostatectomy tissue and urine, urinary oxidative DNA damage (8OHdG) and serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels.|6 weeks|"Concentration of tea polyphenols and methyl-metabolites in prostate tissue after the consumption of GT and BT. No polyphenols were found after water consumption.
(-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG), (-)-epicatechin-3-gallate (ECG), (-)-epigallocatechin (EGC) , (-)-epicatechin (EC), 4'-O-methylEGC (4'-MeEGC), 4-O-methylEGCG (4-OmethylEGCG)."||(pmol/g tissue)||Standard Deviation|Mean
848696|NCT00685516|Primary|Effect of Green Tea (GT) and Black Tea (BT) Consumption on Percentage of Cells With Positive Staining for Apoptosis, Proliferation, Oxidation, and Inflammation in Malignant Radical Prostatectomy Tissue Compared to Water Control Using Immunohistochemistry.|To determine the effect of Green Tea and Black Tea consumption on Prostate cancer tissue by examining programmed cell death, cell proliferation, cell oxidation, and cellular inflammation in that malignant radical prostatectomy tissue compared to water control using immunohistochemistry.|6 weeks|subjects that completed study||percent positive of total cells||Standard Deviation|Mean
848697|NCT00659230|Secondary|Clinician Administered PTSD Scale Subscale C Score|The Clinician Administered PTSD Subscale C (CAPS-C) measures the Avoidance and emotional numbing cluster of PTSD symptoms. Higher scores indicate greater severity. Range for CAPS-C is zero to 56. The CAPS has acceptable test-retest reliability (0.98), sensitivity (0.84), specificity (0.95), internal consistency (0.76-0.88) and validity (κ=0.78).|Baseline, week 2, 4, and 6|Participants who returned for at least one post-randomization visit and had source documentation (in placebo group 2 did not return and the source documentation for 5 participants was lost; for nepicastat group 3 did not return and the source documentation for 4 participants was lost).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848698|NCT00659230|Secondary|Clinician Administered PTSD Scale Subscale B Score|The Clinician Administered PTSD Subscale B (CAPS-B) measures the re-experiencing cluster of PTSD symptoms. Higher scores indicate greater severity. Range for CAPS-B is zero to 40. The CAPS has acceptable test-retest reliability (0.98), sensitivity (0.84), specificity (0.95), internal consistency (0.76-0.88) and validity (κ=0.78). Blake, D.D., Weathers, F.W., Nagy, L.M., Kaloupek, D.G., Gusman, F.D., Charney, D.S., Kean, T.M., 1995, The development of a clinician-administered PTSD scale. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 8:75-90.|6 weeks|Participants who returned for at least one post-randomization visit and had source documentation (in placebo group 2 did not return and the source documentation for 5 participants was lost; for nepicastat group 3 did not return and the source documentation for 4 participants was lost).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848699|NCT00659230|Secondary|Clinician Administered PTSD Scale Total Score|The Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) measures the full spectrum of PTSD symptoms. Higher scores indicate greater severity. Range for CAPS is zero to 136. The CAPS has acceptable test-retest reliability (0.98), sensitivity (0.84), specificity (0.95), internal consistency (0.76-0.88) and validity (κ=0.78).|Baseline, week 2,4, and 6|Participants who returned for at least one post-randomization visit and had source documentation (in placebo group 2 did not return and the source documentation for 5 participants was lost; for nepicastat group 3 did not return and the source documentation for 4 participants was lost).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848700|NCT00659230|Primary|Clinician Administered PTSD Scale Subscore D (Hyperarousal)|The Clinician Administered PTSD Scale subscore D (CAPS-D) measures the hyperarousal cluster for PTSD symptoms (5 items). Higher scores indicate greater severity. Range for CAPS-D is zero to 40. The CAPS has acceptable test-retest reliability (0.98), sensitivity (0.84), specificity (0.95), internal consistency (0.76-0.88) and validity (κ=0.78).|Baseline, week 2, 4 and 6|Participants who returned for at least one post-randomization visit and had source documentation (in placebo group 2 did not return and the source documentation for 5 participants was lost; for nepicastat group 3 did not return and the source documentation for 4 participants was lost).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848705|NCT00644995|Secondary|Quit Attempt|% who made a quit attempt, defined as intentionally not smoking for at least 24 hours|6 months|||percent of participants|||Number
848706|NCT00644995|Secondary|Number of Cigarettes Smoked Per Day|Mean change in cigarettes smoked per day from baseline|4 months|||mean change in number of cigs/day smoked||Full Range|Mean
848707|NCT00644995|Primary|Minutes Per Week of Vigorous Physical Activity|Mean change from baseline assessed using IPAQ physical activity scale|6 months|||minutes per week||Full Range|Mean
848720|NCT00602836|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Convert From a CR With Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) Positive Status After PCR to a CR With MRD-negative Status After 6 Courses of Consolidation With Lenalidomide|MRD refers to small number of leukemic cells that remain in the participant during treatment or after treatment when the participant has achieved CR. For all participants who achieved CR, the follow-up bone marrow sample was tested for malignant B cells to determine if there was any MRD.|12 months||||||
848721|NCT00602836|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Convert From a Nodular Partial Response (nPR), Partial Response (PR), or Stable Disease (SD) After Pentostatin, Cyclophosphamide, and Rituximab (PCR) to a Complete Response (CR) After 6 Courses of Consolidation With Lenalidomide|"According to the NCIWG criteria, response is defined as follows:
nPR: Meets all criteria for CR, as described above, except the presence of residual clonal nodules in the bone marrow PR: 50% decrease in peripheral blood lymphocytes, lymphadenopathy, liver/spleen size, presence/absence of constitutional symptoms; plus ≥1 of the following: ≥1500/μL polymorphonuclear leukocytes, >100000/μL platelets, >11.0 g/dL hemoglobin or 50% improvement for these parameters without transfusions SD: participant who does not meet any of the criteria described above"|12 months||||||
848722|NCT00602836|Primary|Number of Participants With Complete Response (CR)|"A complete response, as defined by the National Cancer Institute Working Group (NCIWG), requires all of the following for a period of at least 2 months:
- CR: no lymphadenopathy, hepatomegaly, splenomegaly or constitutional symptoms; normal complete blood count; confirmed by bone marrow (BM) aspirate & biopsy"|12 months|||participants|||Number
848723|NCT00485953|Secondary|Markers of Bone Resorption and Bone Formation||at 24 months|||percentage change||Standard Error|Mean
848724|NCT00485953|Secondary|BMD by DXA at the Femoral Neck and Total Hip|BMD is the bone mineral density of the femoral neck and total hip measured using the dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan.|at 24 months|||percentage change||Standard Error|Mean
848725|NCT00485953|Primary|BMD of Spine by DXA|BMD is the bone mineral density of the lumbar spine measured using the dual-energy x-ray absorptometry (DXA) scan.|at 24 months|||percentage change||Standard Error|Mean
848726|NCT00325819|Secondary|Parent Time Lost From Work|Parents were asked to report whether they were scheduled to work on the day of the vaccination visit (but following that visit) or the next day and, if so, whether they had to miss work to care for their infant because of fever, fussiness, or possible vaccine reaction on those days.|Through the day after vaccination|Refers to the number of participants for whom parents reported that they were scheduled to work on the day of the vaccination visit or the day following the child's vaccination visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
848727|NCT00325819|Secondary|Infant Time Lost From Sleep|Parents were asked about their infant's sleep on the night following the vaccinations. They were asked to report whether their infant slept much less than usual, less than usual, about the usual amount, more than usual, or much more than usual on that night.|On the night following vaccinations|||percentage of participants|||Number
848728|NCT00325819|Secondary|Parent Time Lost From Sleep|Parents were asked about their sleep on the night following the vaccinations. They were asked to report whether they slept much less than usual, less than usual, about the usual amount, more than usual, or much more than usual on that night.|On the night following vaccinations|||percentage of participants|||Number
848729|NCT00325819|Secondary|Infant Fussiness|Parents were asked to record level of fussiness (compared with the child’s usual) within 32 hours of vaccination, using the categories much less than usual, less than usual, about usual, more than usual, and much more than usual.|Within 32 hours of vaccination|||percentage of participants|||Number
848730|NCT00325819|Secondary|Medical Utilization|Telephone calls to the consulting nurse or the child’s physician that were made due to concerns regarding an acute illness, fever, or possible vaccine reaction and outpatient, urgent care, and emergency room visits that were for evaluation of an acute illness, fever, or a possible vaccine reaction, within 32 hours of vaccination.|Within 32 hours of vaccination.|||percentage of participants|||Number
848731|NCT00325819|Secondary|Study Assignment Unblinded|The need for unblinding at any time during the study|At any time during participation in the study|||percentage of participants|||Number
848732|NCT00325819|Secondary|Fever >=39C Within 32 Hours of Vaccination.|Fever, defined as rectal temperature >=39C within 32 hours of vaccination.|Fever within 32 hours following vaccination|Temperature values were missing for one subject in the acetaminophen group and two subjects in the placebo group.||percentage of participants|||Number
848733|NCT00325819|Primary|Fever >=38C Within 32 Hours of Vaccination.|Fever, defined as rectal temperature >=38C within 32 hours of vaccination.|Fever within 32 hours following vaccination|Temperature values were missing for one subject in the acetaminophen group and two subjects in the placebo group.||percentage of participants|||Number
848734|NCT00287365|Secondary|% Decrease in FVC in Asthmatics Between Subjects With GSTM1 Null Genotype Compared to GSTM1 Sufficient Subjects||6 hours post exposure|||percentage of FVC predicted||Standard Error|Mean
848735|NCT00287365|Secondary|Secondary Endpoints Include Post Ozone Airway PMN Influx Between Subjects With GSTM1 Null Genotype Compared to GSTM1 Sufficient Subjects||6 hours post exposure|||percentage of cells||Standard Error|Mean
848736|NCT00287365|Primary|Post Ozone Change in Lung Function (FEV1) Between Subjects With GSTM1 Null Genotype Compared to GSTM1 Sufficient Subjects||6 hours post exposure|Mild asthmatics exposed to ozone||percentage of FEV1 predicted||Standard Error|Mean
848737|NCT00245518|Primary|Social Functioning Due to Emotional Role Functioning as Assessed by the Short Form 36 Questionnaire|The SF-36 has eight scaled scores; the scores are weighted sums of the questions in each section. Scores range from 0 - 100 Lower scores = more disability, higher scores = less disability Sections: Vitality, Physical functioning, Bodily pain, General health perception, Physical role functioning, Emotional role functioning, Social role functioning, Mental health|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848738|NCT00245518|Primary|Role Limitations Due to Emotional Role Functioning as Assessed by the Short Form 36 Questionnaire|The SF-36 has eight scaled scores; the scores are weighted sums of the questions in each section. Scores range from 0 - 100 Lower scores = more disability, higher scores = less disability Sections: Vitality, Physical functioning, Bodily pain, General health perception, Physical role functioning, Emotional role functioning, Social role functioning, Mental health|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848739|NCT00245518|Primary|Role Limitations Due to Physical Health as Assessed by the Short Form 36 Questionnaire|The SF-36 has eight scaled scores; the scores are weighted sums of the questions in each section. Scores range from 0 - 100 Lower scores = more disability, higher scores = less disability Sections: Vitality, Physical functioning, Bodily pain, General health perception, Physical role functioning, Emotional role functioning, Social role functioning, Mental health|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848740|NCT00245518|Primary|General Health Perceptions as Assessed by the Short Form 36 Questionnaire|The SF-36 has eight scaled scores; the scores are weighted sums of the questions in each section. Scores range from 0 - 100 Lower scores = more disability, higher scores = less disability Sections: Vitality, Physical functioning, Bodily pain, General health perception, Physical role functioning, Emotional role functioning, Social role functioning, Mental health|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848741|NCT00245518|Primary|Body Pain as Assessed by the Short Form 36 Questionnaire|The SF-36 has eight scaled scores; the scores are weighted sums of the questions in each section. Scores range from 0 - 100 Lower scores = more disability, higher scores = less disability Sections: Vitality, Physical functioning, Bodily pain, General health perception, Physical role functioning, Emotional role functioning, Social role functioning, Mental health|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848742|NCT00245518|Primary|Physical Functioning as Assessed by the Short Form 36 Questionnaire|The SF-36 has eight scaled scores; the scores are weighted sums of the questions in each section. Scores range from 0 - 100 Lower scores = more disability, higher scores = less disability Sections: Vitality, Physical functioning, Bodily pain, General health perception, Physical role functioning, Emotional role functioning, Social role functioning, Mental health|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848743|NCT00245518|Primary|Fatigue as Assessed by the Short Form 36 Questionnaire|The SF-36 has eight scaled scores; the scores are weighted sums of the questions in each section. Scores range from 0 - 100 Lower scores = more disability, higher scores = less disability Sections: Vitality, Physical functioning, Bodily pain, General health perception, Physical role functioning, Emotional role functioning, Social role functioning, Mental health|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848744|NCT00245518|Primary|Physical Health as Assessed by the Short Form 36 Questionnaire|The SF-36 has eight scaled scores; the scores are weighted sums of the questions in each section. Scores range from 0 - 100 Lower scores = more disability, higher scores = less disability Sections: Vitality, Physical functioning, Bodily pain, General health perception, Physical role functioning, Emotional role functioning, Social role functioning, Mental health|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848745|NCT00245518|Primary|Mental Health as Assessed by the Short Form 36 Questionnaire|The SF-36 has eight scaled scores; the scores are weighted sums of the questions in each section. Scores range from 0 - 100 Lower scores = more disability, higher scores = less disability Sections: Vitality, Physical functioning, Bodily pain, General health perception, Physical role functioning, Emotional role functioning, Social role functioning, Mental health|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848746|NCT00245518|Primary|Hot Flashes as Assessed by the Blatt-Kuppermann Index (Hot Flash Component)|Hot flashes were assessed using symptom severity 0= none, slight=1, moderate=2, and severe = 3. Hot flashes have a weighting factor of 4 on the overall Blatt-Kuppermann index, making score ranges 0-12, with 12 being the most severe hot flashes.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848747|NCT00245518|Primary|Daytime Sleepiness as Assessed by Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)|The ESS is a self-administered questionnaire with 8 questions. Respondents are asked to rate, on a 4-point scale (0-3), their usual chances of dozing off or falling asleep while engaged in eight different activities. Most people engage in those activities at least occasionally, although not necessarily every day. The ESS score (the sum of 8 item scores, 0-3) can range from 0 to 24. The higher the ESS score, the higher that person’s average sleep propensity in daily life (ASP), or their ‘daytime sleepiness’.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848748|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Questionnaire, Overall Sexual Satisfaction|IIEF Questionnaire is used for the clinical assessment of erectile dysfunction and treatment outcomes in clinical trials, one domain being sexual satisfaction. A score of 0-5 is awarded to each of the 2 questions which refer to the past 4 weeks only. The score rangers from 2-10, with a score of 2 indicating very dissatisfied and 10 being very satisfied.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848749|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Questionnaire, Sexual Desire|IIEF Questionnaire is used for the clinical assessment of erectile dysfunction and treatment outcomes in clinical trials, one domain being sexual desire. A score of 0-5 is awarded to each of the 2 questions which refer to the past 4 weeks only. The score rangers from 2-10, with a score of 2 indicating very low or none at all, and 10 representing almost always/very high.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848750|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Questionnaire, Orgasmic Function|IIEF Questionnaire is used for the clinical assessment of erectile dysfunction and treatment outcomes in clinical trials, one domain being satisfaction with orgasm. A score of 0-5 is awarded to each of the 2 questions which refer to the past 4 weeks only. The score rangers from 1-10, with a score of 0 indicating that no sexual stimulation or intercourse was attempted in the last 4 weeks, 1= almost never or never ejaculated, 10= almost always or always|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848751|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Questionnaire, Intercourse Satisfaction|IIEF Questionnaire is used for the clinical assessment of erectile dysfunction and treatment outcomes in clinical trials, one domain being satisfaction with intercourse. A score of 0-5 is awarded to each of the 3 questions which refer to the past 4 weeks only. The score rangers from 0-15, with a score of 0 indicating that no intercourse was attempted in the last 4 weeks, 1= almost or little to no sanctification, 15= very highly satisfied.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848752|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Questionnaire, Erectile Function|IIEF Questionnaire is used for the clinical assessment of erectile dysfunction and treatment outcomes in clinical trials. Erectile function is one domain, making up 6 out of 15 questions. The score ranges from 1-30, with the lowest score representing minimal erectile function.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848753|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Questionnaire, Total Score|IIEF Questionnaire is used for the clinical assessment of erectile dysfunction and treatment outcomes in clinical trials. A score of 0-5 is awarded to each of the 15 questions which refer to the past 4 weeks only. The questions are split into the 4 main domains of male sexual function: erectile function, orgasmic function, sexual desire and intercourse satisfaction. The total score ranges from 6-75 with 6 being minimal erectile function and 75 representing maximal erectile function.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848754|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the Watts Sexual Function Questionnaire (WSFQ), Sanctification|The domains of satisfaction (3 items), is assessed using a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from “always” to “never” to generate the score, ranging from 3-15. The higher the number, the higher the level of satisfaction with sexual function.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848755|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the Watts Sexual Function Questionnaire (WSFQ), Arousal|The domains of arousal (1 item subscale of the WSFQ), is assessed using a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from “always” to “never” to generate the score for arousal. The higher the number (range 1-5), the more the participant is able to experience arousal.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848756|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the Watts Sexual Function Questionnaire (WSFQ), Erectile Function|The domain of erectile function/orgasm consists of 7 items. A five-point Likert-type scale ranging from “always” to “never” is used to generate a score, ranging from 7-35. Higher scores indicate increased erectile function/achievement of orgasm.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848757|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the Watts Sexual Function Questionnaire (WSFQ), Libido|The domain of sexual desire/libido consists of 6 items. A five-point Likert-type scale ranging from “always” to “never” is used to generate a score, ranging from 6-30. Higher scores indicate increased libido/sexual desire.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848758|NCT00245518|Primary|Sexual Function as Assessed by the Watts Sexual Function Questionnaire (WSFQ), Total Score|The WSFQ contains 17 items that assess the domains of sexual desire/libido (6 items), arousal (1 item), orgasm/erectile function (7 items), and satisfaction(3 items). A five-point Likert-type scale ranging from “always” to “never” is used to generate a total score and four domain scores. The possible range of total sexual function scores is 17 to 85. Higher scores indicate better sexual function.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848759|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognition as Assessed by the Rex Complex Figure Test (RCFT), Delayed Recall|"The test measures recognition memory for the elements of the Rey complex figure, and assesses the respondent’s ability to use cues to retrieve information after 25-30 minutes. Scoring of drawings is based on the widely used 36-point scoring system. Each of the 18 scoring units is scored based on accuracy and placement criteria. Items of the figure can earn points:
Correct Image: placed properly (2 points), placed poorly (1 point)
Distorted or Incomplete Image, but recognizable: placed properly (1 point), placed poorly (1/2) point
Absent or not recognizable: 0 points
Scale ranges 0-36, with 36 representing maximum cognition ."|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848760|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognition as Assessed by the Rex Complex Figure Test (RCFT), Immediate Recall|"The test measures recognition memory for the elements of the Rey complex figure, and assesses the respondent’s ability to use cues to retrieve information. Scoring of drawings is based on the widely used 36-point scoring system. Each of the 18 scoring units is scored based on accuracy and placement criteria. Items of the figure can earn points:
Correct Image: placed properly (2 points), placed poorly (1 point)
Distorted or Incomplete Image, but recognizable: placed properly (1 point), placed poorly (1/2) point
Absent or not recognizable: 0 points
Scale ranges 0-36. with 36 being greatest cognitive function."|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848761|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognition as Assessed by the Grooved Pegboard Test (GPT) , Number of Non- Dominant Hand Drops|The GPT assesses eye–hand coordination and motor speed and thus requires sensory motor integration and a high level of motor processing. The test apparatus consists of a square metal surface (10.1 cm2) with a 5 × 5 matrix of keyhole shaped holes in various orientations. The task requires the examinee to pick up the keyhole shaped peg (3 mm in diameter) individually from the well just above the 5 × 5 matrix of holes from left to right and top to bottom as quickly as possible using the dominant hand. Because the holes are in various orientations, examinees must manipulate each peg in their hand (usually between the index finger and thumb) so that the peg aligns with the orientation of the hole.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||number of times peg dropped||Standard Deviation|Mean
848762|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognition as Assessed by the Grooved Pegboard Test (GPT) , Number of Dominant Hand Drops|The GPT assesses eye–hand coordination and motor speed and thus requires sensory motor integration and a high level of motor processing. The test apparatus consists of a square metal surface (10.1 cm2) with a 5 × 5 matrix of keyhole shaped holes in various orientations. The task requires the examinee to pick up the keyhole shaped peg (3 mm in diameter) individually from the well just above the 5 × 5 matrix of holes from left to right and top to bottom as quickly as possible using the dominant hand. Because the holes are in various orientations, examinees must manipulate each peg in their hand (usually between the index finger and thumb) so that the peg aligns with the orientation of the hole.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||number of times peg dropped||Standard Deviation|Mean
848763|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognition as Assessed by the Grooved Pegboard Test (GPT) , Non-dominant Hand Time (Seconds)|The GPT assesses eye–hand coordination and motor speed and thus requires sensory motor integration and a high level of motor processing. The test apparatus consists of a square metal surface (10.1 cm2) with a 5 × 5 matrix of keyhole shaped holes in various orientations. The task requires the examinee to pick up the keyhole shaped peg (3 mm in diameter) individually from the well just above the 5 × 5 matrix of holes from left to right and top to bottom as quickly as possible using the non-dominant hand. Because the holes are in various orientations, examinees must manipulate each peg in their hand (usually between the index finger and thumb) so that the peg aligns with the orientation of the hole.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||time in seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
848764|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognition as Assessed by the Grooved Pegboard Test (GPT) , Dominant Hand Time (Seconds)|The GPT assesses eye–hand coordination and motor speed and thus requires sensory motor integration and a high level of motor processing. The test apparatus consists of a square metal surface (10.1 cm2) with a 5 × 5 matrix of keyhole shaped holes in various orientations. The task requires the examinee to pick up the keyhole shaped peg (3 mm in diameter) individually from the well just above the 5 × 5 matrix of holes from left to right and top to bottom as quickly as possible using the dominant hand. Because the holes are in various orientations, examinees must manipulate each peg in their hand (usually between the index finger and thumb) so that the peg aligns with the orientation of the hole. A faster time, indicates greater cognitive functioning.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||time in seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
848765|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognitive Function as Assessed by the F-A-S Test|The F-A-S Test, a subtest of the Neurosensory Center Comprehensive Examination for Aphasia (NCCEA), is a measure of phonemic word fluency, which is a type of verbal fluency. It assesses phonemic fluency by requesting an individual to orally produce as many words as possible that begin with the letters F, A, and S within a prescribed time frame (1 minute)|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
848766|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognitive Function as Assessed by the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT), Percent Retained|The test consists 12 nouns, four words each from one of three semantic categories (e.g., precious gems, articles of clothing, vegetables, etc.), to be learned over the course of three learning trials. Approximately 20–25 min later, a delayed recall trial and a recognition trial are completed. The delayed recall requires free recall of any words remembered. The recognition trial is composed of 24 words, including the 12 target words and 12 false-positives, 6 semantically related, and 6 semantically unrelated. When scoring the HVLT, the three learning trials are combined to calculate a total recall score (0-36); the delayed recall trial creates the delayed recall score ( -12) ; the retention (%) score (0-100%) is calculated by dividing the delayed recall trial by the higher of learning trial 2 or 3; and the recognition discrimination index is comprised by subtracting the total number of false positives from the total number of true positives.A higher score= higher cognitive function.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848767|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognitive Function as Assessed by the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT), Recognition Discrimination Index|The test consists 12 nouns, four words each from one of three semantic categories (e.g., precious gems, articles of clothing, vegetables, etc.), to be learned over the course of three learning trials. Approximately 20–25 min later, a delayed recall trial and a recognition trial are completed. The delayed recall requires free recall of any words remembered. The recognition trial is composed of 24 words, including the 12 target words and 12 false-positives, 6 semantically related, & 6 semantically unrelated. When scoring the HVLT, the three learning trials are combined to calculate a total recall score (0-36); the delayed recall trial creates the delayed recall score ( -12) ; the retention (%) score (0-100%) is calculated by dividing the delayed recall trial by the higher of learning trial 2 or 3; and the recognition discrimination index is comprised by subtracting the total number of false positives from the total number of true positives. A higher score= higher cognitive function.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848768|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognitive Function as Assessed by the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT), Total Recall Score|The test consists 12 nouns, four words each from one of three semantic categories (e.g., precious gems, articles of clothing, vegetables, etc.), to be learned over the course of three learning trials. Approximately 20–25 min later, a delayed recall trial and a recognition trial are completed. The delayed recall requires free recall of any words remembered. The recognition trial is composed of 24 words, including the 12 target words and 12 false-positives, 6 semantically related, & 6 semantically unrelated. When scoring the HVLT, the three learning trials are combined to calculate a total recall score (0-36); the delayed recall trial creates the delayed recall score ( -12) ; the retention (%) score (0-100%) is calculated by dividing the delayed recall trial by the higher of learning trial 2 or 3; and the recognition discrimination index is comprised by subtracting the total number of false positives from the total number of true positives. A higher score = higher cognition.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
848769|NCT00245518|Primary|Cognitive Function as Assessed by the National Adult Reading Test (NART)|the NART estimates intelligence levels of English-speaking patients. It consists of 50 short words with irregular spelling or phonetic appearance which the participant must read and pronounce. The higher the score, the higher number of correct responses. Scores are 0-50.|baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857722|NCT00156013|Secondary|Toxicity|most common toxicity|5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
857723|NCT00156013|Primary|Phase II Overall Response||5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
857724|NCT00156013|Primary|Phase I Maximum Tolerated Dose|Maximum Tolerated Dose for Clofarabine. Cohorts of 3 patients each will receive doses of clofarabine increased in increments as follows: 4, 6, 8, 10, 12,…etc mg/m2/day for 5 days. The dose level immediately below the MTD will be used to treat patients in the Phase II part of the study. Starting dose of 4 mg/m2.|days 1 -28, maximum 6 cycles|Per protocol guidelines for accrual to the cohorts.||mg/m^2|||Number
857733|NCT00116428|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Responded to Each of the Four Health Status Categories.|At the 2 year follow-up visit, Atrial Fibrillation recurrence was assessed by subject interview without documentation.|During the two years of post procedure|Subjects who completed the two-year health survey.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
858607|NCT00742963|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) Measured of TH-302 When Used in Combination With Doxorubicin and Prophylactic Growth Factor Support in Subjects With Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcoma||Two years|||mg/m2|||Number
858608|NCT00742859|Secondary|Exposure-adjusted Incidence Rate of Any Bleeding (Major, Clinically Relevant Non-major, or Minimal)|The time to the first occurrence of any bleeding event. This was presented as the exposure adjusted incidence rate which was calculated as number of subjects experiencing the event divided by total person years across all subjects, where if a patient experiencing the event, year was from first dose date to the first occurrence of the event, and to last study date if not. The confidence interval was calculated via the exact Poisson distribution.|A maximum of 1 year|All randomized patients who took at least 1 dose of study medication after randomization.||Number of Patients per 100 Patient years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858609|NCT00742859|Primary|Exposure-adjusted Incidence Rate of Major or Clinically Relevant Non-major Bleeding Episode|The primary endpoint is the time to the first occurrence of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding. This was presented as the exposure adjusted incidence rate which was calculated as number of subjects experiencing the event divided by total person years across all subjects, where if a patient experiencing the event, year was from first dose date to the first occurrence of the event, and to last study date if not. The confidence interval was calculated via the exact Poisson distribution.|A maximum of 1 year|All randomized patients who took at least 1 dose of study medication after randomization.||Number of Patients per 100 Patient years||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858610|NCT00740870|Secondary|Functional Assessment (NYHA Classification)|Improvement in Functional Assessment (NYHA Classification) at 6 months post implant.|6 Months|The Implanted >24 hours cohort consists of all subjects who had a Melody TPV implanted which remained implanted for greater than 24 hours and had paired data from pre-implant to 6 months post-implant.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858611|NCT00740870|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Freedom From Death (All-cause, Procedural and Device-related)|Deaths (all-cause, procedural and device-related) at 5 years|5 years|The catheterized cohort consists of all subjects who underwent catheterization for possible implantation of the Melody TPV.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858612|NCT00740870|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Freedom From Surgical Replacement of the RVOT Conduit|Freedom From Surgical Replacement of the RVOT Conduit|5 years|The Implanted >24 hours cohort consists of all subjects who had a Melody TPV implanted which remained implanted for greater than 24 hours.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858613|NCT00740870|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Freedom From Catheter Re-intervention on TPV|All Catheter Re-intervention on TPV at 5 years|5 years|The Implanted >24 hours cohort consists of all subjects who had a Melody TPV implanted which remained implanted for greater than 24 hours.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858614|NCT00740870|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Freedom From Major Stent Fracture at 5 Years|Major stent fracture is defined as a stent fracture requiring intervention to prevent permanent impairment of a body function or permanent damage to a body structure.|5 years|The Implanted >24 hours cohort consists of all subjects who had a Melody TPV implanted which remained implanted for greater than 24 hours.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858615|NCT00740870|Secondary|Serious Device-related Adverse Event|A device-related event is defined as an event that is associated with the TPV by the chronology or physiology and was caused by the the TPV (e.g. embolization of the TPV and any adverse events which follow).|5 years|The implanted cohort consists of all subjects who underwent catheterization and a Melody TPV was implanted.||percentage of subjects|||Number
858616|NCT00740870|Secondary|Serious Procedural Adverse Event (AE)|A procedure-related event is defined as an event that is associated with the implant procedure by the chronology or physiology and was caused by the implant procedure (e.g. rupture of the conduit or damage to an intra-cardiac or intravascular structure by the delivery system).|5 years|The catheterized cohort consists of all subjects who underwent catheterization for possible implantation of the Melody TPV.||percentage of subjects|||Number
858617|NCT00740870|Secondary|Procedural Success|"Procedural success is a composite outcome defined as:
Melody TPV fixated within the desired location
Right Ventricle (RV) - Pulmonary Artery (PA) peak-to-peak gradient (measured in the catheterization lab) less than 35 mmHg post-implant
Less than mild pulmonary regurgitation by angiography post-implant
Free of explant at 24 hours post-implant"|Within 24 Hours post implant|The attempted implant cohort consists of all subjects who underwent catheterization and a Melody TPV implantation was attempted (Melody TPV valve opened).||percentage of subjects|||Number
858618|NCT00740870|Primary|Kaplan-Meier Freedom From TPV Dysfunction|"To assess whether long-term functionality of implantation of the Medtronic Melody TPV at 5 years is no worse than the historical control established through literature review. This study is designed to test the null hypothesis that the true freedom from TPV dysfunction at 5 years after Melody implantation (PMelody) is less than or equal to 36% (PControl). To reject the null hypothesis means that freedom from TPV dysfunction at 5 years after Melody implantation (PMelody) is greater than 36% (PControl). The null (H0) and alternative (HA) hypotheses are written as follows:H0: PMelody ≤ PControl and HA: PMelody > PControl. TPV dysfunction is a composite outcome defined as the following:
Hemodynamic dysfunction of the TPV
Moderate or greater pulmonary regurgitation, and/or
Mean Right Ventricular Outflow Tract (RVOT) gradient greater than 40 mmHg
RVOT reoperation for conduit dysfunction or device-related reasons
Catheter re-intervention on the TPV"|5 years|The Implanted >24 hours cohort consists of all subjects who had a Melody TPV implanted which remained implanted for greater than 24 hours.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858619|NCT00731731|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events, as Per NCI CTCAE Version 3.0 (Phase II)|"The maximum grade for each type of treatment-related adverse event will be recorded for each patient, and frequency tables for each arm will be reviewed to determine patterns. In addition, we will review all adverse event data that is graded as 3, 4, or 5 and classified as either unrelated or unlikely to be related to study treatment in the event of an actual relationship developing."|Up to 5 years|||participants evaluable for toxicity|||Number
858620|NCT00731731|Secondary|Time to Tumor Progression (Phase II)|Progression free survival time will be defined from date of registration to date of progression or death.|Up to 5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859148|NCT01141712|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Neutrophil Recovery|Neutrophil recovery is defined as two consecutive days of absolute neutrophil count (ANC) > 500 neutrophils/μL following the expected nadir.|Day 28|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850249|NCT01856686|Secondary|Frontal Midline Theta Activity- Frequency at 3 Months|Frontal midline theta activity- frequency during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||Hz||Standard Deviation|Mean
850250|NCT01856686|Secondary|Mu Wave Frequency at 3 Months|Mu wave frequency during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||Hz||Standard Deviation|Mean
850251|NCT01856686|Other Pre-specified|Weight at 3 Months|Weight after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
850252|NCT01856686|Secondary|Parietal Alpha Waves-frequency at 3 Months|Parietal alpha waves-frequency during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||Hz||Standard Deviation|Mean
849998|NCT02675634|Primary|Fit to Body|"Subjects will evaluate the fit to body for each product by answering the question how was the baseplates ability to fit the body contours in the area around the stoma? The question is answered using an ordinal 5 point scale ranging from very poor to very good. The result shown below shows the fraction of subject who answered 'Good' or' Very Good' to the question."|14 +/- 2 days|||percentage of good or very good|||Number
849999|NCT02651194|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Post-treatment Relapse|Post-treatment relapse was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ between the end of treatment and 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug among participants who completed treatment with HCV RNA levels < LLOQ at the end of treatment, excluding reinfection.|From the end of treatment through 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, completed treatment, and had HCV RNA <LLOQ at the final treatment visit.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850000|NCT02651194|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Virologic Failure|On-treatment virologic failure was defined as confirmed increase of > 1 log(subscript)10(subscript) IU/mL above the lowest value post-baseline HCV RNA during treatment; confirmed HCV RNA ≥ 100 IU/mL after HCV RNA < LLOQ during treatment, or HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ at end of treatment with at least 6 weeks of treatment.|up to 12 weeks|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT population).||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850001|NCT02651194|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level less than the lower limit of quantification [<LLOQ]) 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug|12 weeks after the last actual dose of study drug|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug; participants with missing data after backwards imputation were imputed as nonresponders.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850009|NCT02482805|Primary|Salivary Testosterone Levels|Saliva sample taken before posture manipulation and 20 minutes after. Outcome is the change from pre- to post-manipulation in testosterone levels.|Baseline and 20 minutes after posture manipulation|||pg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
850010|NCT02482805|Primary|Subjective Units of Distress Scale (SUDs)|"Peak (max) SUDS ratings (0 to 100 scale) during treatment exposure and 1 week post-treatment exposure.
Peak Subjective Units of Distress Scale (SUDS) is the maximum amount of fear experienced rated on a 0 to 100 point scale, where 0 indicates no anxiety and 100 indicates the maximum level of anxiety."|Change from baseline to 1 week|8 individuals did not complete the post-treatment exposure; accordingly the analyses were conducted with only 66 individuals (versus the total sample size of 73) who had complete data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850011|NCT02482805|Primary|LSAS-performance Subscale|"Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS)-Performance Subscale at pre- and 1-week post-treatment.
The Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) - Performance Subscale is a subscale of a common measure of social anxiety symptom severity. This subscale consists of only 13 (of the total 24) items related to performance situations. Participants rate both their fear (0 to 3) and avoidance (0 to 3) of these 13 situations, where higher scores indicate worse social anxiety severity. The minimum possible score on this subscale is 0 and the maximum possible score is 78."|Change from baseline to 1 week|4 individuals did not complete LSAS at post-treatment; accordingly the analyses were conducted with only 69 individuals (versus the total sample size of 73) who had complete data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850026|NCT02442284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Post-treatment Relapse|Post-treatment relapse was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ between the end of treatment and 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug among participants who completed treatment with HCV RNA levels < LLOQ at the end of treatment.|From the end of treatment through 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, completed treatment, and had HCV RNA <LLOQ at the final treatment visit.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850012|NCT02474901|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With PCR-diagnosed Influenza and Clinically-diagnosed Influenza Like Illness.|Compare numbers of participants with influenza diagnosed by PCR and with clinically-diagnosed influenza between the two groups. Data was taken from Influenza Infection Questionnaires #1 and #2. The last questionnaire (#2) was administered between May 15 and June 10, 2014 (after the vaccine). Data is reported as PCR-confirmed influenza and clinically-diagnosed influenza (subject told had influenza without confirmatory testing).|August 2014 through June 2014, 11 months|Number of participants analyzed reflects the number of subjects who participated in the end-of-season interview.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850013|NCT02474901|Secondary|Number of Participants Reaching Seroprotection (HAI ≥ 40) Within the HIV-positive and Control Groups.|The investigators will measure hemagglutinin inhibition (HAI) on blood samples #2 (14-21 days after vaccination) for all participants. The investigators will also compare the number of participants reaching HAI ≥ 40 for each virus sub-type contained in the vaccine.|14-21 days|The total number of participants analyzed reflect the number of subjects for whom there was a blood sample from the 4th visit at day 14-21.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850014|NCT02474901|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events Within 14 Days After Vaccination|The investigators will compare the number of adverse events (AE) reported by AE category within 14 days after vaccination as reported by each participant. Data will reflect whether a participant ever reported the AE, and not the number of times the AE was reported.|14 days after vaccination for AEs; up to 30 days for unscheduled visits|||Participants|||Count of Participants
850015|NCT02474901|Primary|Number of Participants With Shedding for at Least One of the Influenza Strains Included in the QLAIV Vaccine at Each of the 4 Study Visits, Days 0 (Baseline), 2-5, 7-10, and 14-21 in HIV-positive and Control Groups.|Measure PCR positivity for any of the influenza subtypes included in QLAIV at visit 1 (day 0), visit 2 (days 2-5), visit 3 (days 7-10) and visit 4 (days 14-21). Compare number of participants with shedding for any subtype in each patient group. (The study was powered based on the 7-10 day data.)|day 0-21 post-vaccine|Subjects with data for any of the visits||Participants|||Count of Participants
850016|NCT02474901|Primary|Number of Participants With Shedding for at Least One of the Influenza Strains Included in the QLAIV in the First 21 Days After Vaccine Administration Days in HIV-positive and Control Groups.|Measure PCR positivity for any of the influenza subtypes included in QLAIV between baseline (day 0) and the last study visit at 14-21 days after vaccine. Compare number of participants with PCR positivity for any of the vaccine-strain influenza virus strains in each patient group.|21 days|HIV-infected and uninfected recipients of QLAIV; one HIV-uninfected subject was lost-to-follow-up after the first follow-up visit following vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850025|NCT02442284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12) Among Participants With Ongoing Psychiatric Disorders|SVR12 was defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level less than the lower limit of quantification [<LLOQ]) 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug. Participants with missing data after backwards imputation were imputed as nonresponders.|12 weeks after the last actual dose of study drug|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT population) and with ongoing psychiatric disorders.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850027|NCT02442284|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Virologic Failure During Treatment|On-treatment virologic failure was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ after HCV RNA < LLOQ during treatment, or HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ at end of treatment.|up to 12 weeks (for 12-week treatment group) or up to 24 weeks (for 24-week treatment group|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850028|NCT02442284|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level less than the lower limit of quantification [<LLOQ]) 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug. Participants with missing data after backwards imputation were imputed as nonresponders.|12 weeks after the last actual dose of study drug|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850041|NCT02345642|Primary|Peak Venous Velocity|Ultrasound of the venous system just below the saphenofemoral junction to assess the venous velocity will be taken before and after application the VenaFlow and the ActiveCare+S.F.T pneumatic compression devices. Change from Baseline in Peak Venous Velocity 30 minutes after Device is applied is recorded.|Change from Baseline in Peak Venous Velocity 30 minutes after Device is Applied|||cm/s||Full Range|Mean
850042|NCT02279082|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events||6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
850043|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Leading to Treatment Discontinuation From Baseline Through Week 16|Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received investigational medicinal product (IMP) was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to the end of study [Week 28]). A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs.|Baseline up to Week 16|Safety analysis set (SAF) which included all randomized participants who received any study drug, and was analyzed as treated.||percentage of participants|||Number
850044|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs) From Baseline Through Week 16|Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received investigational medicinal product (IMP) was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to the end of study [Week 28]). A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs.|Baseline up to Week 16|Safety analysis set which included all randomized participants who received any study drug, and was analyzed based on the treatment received.||percentage of participants|||Number
850055|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score to Week 16|The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD.|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
850045|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Requiring Systemic Treatment|Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to the end of study [Week 28]). A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. Statistical significance in the hierarchical testing of secondary hypotheses was broken at this endpoint. Therefore, subsequent secondary efficacy endpoints were not tested for statistical significance.|Baseline up to Week 16|Safety analysis set (SAF) which included all randomized participants who received any study drug, and was analyzed as treated.||percentage of participants|||Number
850046|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus NRS Score to Week 2|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]).|Baseline to Week 2|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
850047|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Global Individual Signs Score (GISS) to Week 16|Individual components of the AD lesions (erythema, infiltration/ papulation, excoriations, and lichenification) were rated globally (each assessed for the whole body, not by anatomical region) on a 4-point scale (0= none, 1= mild, 2= moderate and 3= severe) using the EASI severity grading criteria. Total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 12 (severe disease).|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
850048|NCT02277769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) to Week 16|HADS is a fourteen item scale. Seven of the items relate to anxiety and seven items relate to depression. Each item on the questionnaire is scored from 0 (minimum score) - 3 (maximum score) and this means that a person can score between 0 (no symptoms) and 21 (severe symptoms) for either anxiety or depression. Cut-offs for identifying psychiatric distress has been reported as 7 to 8 for possible presence, 10 to 11 for probable presence, and 14 to 15 for severe anxiety or depression.|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850049|NCT02277769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) to Week 16|The POEM is a 7-item questionnaire that assesses disease symptoms (dryness, itching, flaking, cracking, sleep loss, bleeding and weeping) with a scoring system of 0 (absent disease) to 28 (severe disease) (high score indicative of poor quality of life [QOL]).|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850050|NCT02277769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) to Week 16|The DLQI is a 10-item, validated questionnaire used in clinical practice and clinical trials to assess the impact of AD disease symptoms and treatment on quality of life (QOL). The 10 questions assessed QOL over the past week, with an overall scoring of 0 (absent disease) to 30 (severe disease); a high score was indicative of a poor QOL.|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850051|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in the SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score to Week 16|SCORAD is a clinical tool for assessing the severity of AD developed by the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis (Severity scoring of atopic dermatitis: the SCORAD index). Consensus Report of the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis. Dermatology (Basel) 186 (1): 23–31. 1993. Extent and intensity of eczema as well as subjective signs (insomnia, etc.) are assessed and scored. Total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 103 (severe disease).|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
850052|NCT02277769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) to Week 16|BSA affected by AD was assessed for each section of the body (the possible highest score for each region was: head and neck [9%], anterior trunk [18%], back [18%], upper limbs [18%], lower limbs [36%], and genitals [1%]). It was reported as a percentage of all major body sections combined.|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percentage of body surface area||Standard Deviation|Mean
850053|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-90 (EASI-90) (≥90% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16|The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. EASI-90 responders were the participants who achieved ≥90% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI-90 scores at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.|Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants.||percentage of particpants|||Number
850054|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-50 (EASI-50) (≥50% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16|The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. EASI-50 responders were the participants who achieved ≥50% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI-50 scores at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.|Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
850056|NCT02277769|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score to Week 16|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]).|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850057|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 2|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥4 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 2 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing peak NRS at Week 2 were considered as non-responders.|Baseline to Week 2|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS ≥4.||percentage of participants|||Number
850058|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 4|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥4 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 4 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing peak NRS at Week 4 were considered as non-responders.|Baseline to Week 4|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS ≥4.||percentage of participants|||Number
850059|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score to Week 16|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]).|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
850060|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥3 Points) in Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 16|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥3 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 16 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing peak NRS at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS ≥3.||percentage of participants|||Number
850061|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 16|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥4 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 16 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing peak NRS at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.|Baseline to Week 16|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS ≥4.||percentage of participants|||Number
850062|NCT02277769|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16|The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. EASI-75 responders were the participants who achieved ≥75% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16. Values after first rescue treatment use were set to missing and participants with missing EASI score at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.|Week 16|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
850063|NCT02277769|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) Score of “0” or “1” and Reduction From Baseline of ≥2 Points at Week 16|IGA is an assessment scale used to determine severity of AD and clinical response to treatment on a 5-point scale (0 = clear; 1 = almost clear; 2 = mild; 3 = moderate; 4 = severe) based on erythema and papulation/infiltration. Therapeutic response is an IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). Participants with IGA score of “0” or “1” and a reduction from baseline of ≥2 points at Week 16 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing IGA scores at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.|Week 16|Full analysis set included all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
852153|NCT00855413|Secondary|Maximum Etravirine Exposure in Semen Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Collection of Semen||Weeks 0-4 and weeks 12, 48|Four participants consented to provide a semen sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
850253|NCT01856686|Primary|Occipital Alpha Brainwaves Amplitudes at 3 Months|occipital alpha waves amplitudes during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||microvolts||Standard Deviation|Mean
850115|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of Tss,Max for Rifampicin|Rate and extent of absorption of rifampicin by assessment of tss,max. AZD9291 dosing in combination with rifampicin (Period 2).|Samples collected on Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||h||Full Range|Median
850114|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of Css,Min for AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (Metabolites)|Rate and extent of absorption of AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (metabolites) by assessment of minimum plasma concentration at steady state (Css,min). AZD9291 dosing alone and in combination with rifampicin (all periods).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 (following AZD9291 alone) and Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nM||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850106|NCT02240654|Primary|The Proportion of Potential Off-label Use Estimated Among New Users of Dabigatran Etexilate in Each of the Data Sources.|"Definition of off-label use of oral dabigatran etexilate (DE) was based on use for a disease/medical condition other than labelled indications,asdescribed/documented in the data source used in the respective countries, taking into account the changes in the label within the study period. The prevalence of potential off-label use among new users of DE during the overall study period is calculated as the proportion of patients meeting the definition of off-label use by dividing the number of index prescriptions that represented off-label use by the total number of index prescriptions.
Two definitions were applied to estimate potential off-label use based on either recorded diagnoses or proxies: a broad definition of on-label prescribing using codes for disease indication e.g.atrial fibrillation(AF) and a restrictive definition excluding patients with conditions for which the drug is not indicated e.g.valvular AF.
SPAF:Stroke & systemic embolism in adult patients with non-valvular AF"|Time period since approval of the SPAF indication in, France: 01 August 2011 to 30 June 2014; Denmark: 01 August 2011 to 30 November 2013; UK: 01 August 2011 to 30 August 2015.|The study population included new users of dabigatran etexilate in the study period. New users were defined as those patients who initiated treatment with dabigatran etexilate during the study period and who had not used it during the previous year.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850109|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of the Metabolic Ratios of AUCtau for AZ5104 and AZ7550 (MRAUCtau)|Assessment of the metabolite to parent ratio (calculated as AZ5104 to AZD9291 and AZ7550 to AZD9291) for AUCtau (MRAUCtau). AZD9291 dosing alone and in combination with rifampicin (all periods).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 (following AZD9291 alone) and Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850110|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of the Metabolic Ratios of Css,Max for AZ5104 and AZ7550 (MRCss,Max)|Assessment of the metabolite to parent ratio (calculated as AZ5104 to AZD9291 and AZ7550 to AZD9291) for Css,max (MRCss,max). AZD9291 dosing alone and in combination with rifampicin (all periods).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 (following AZD9291 alone) and Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850111|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of CLss/F for Rifampicin|Rate and extent of absorption of rifampicin by assessment of CLss/F. AZD9291 dosing in combination with rifampicin (Period 2).|Samples collected on Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|||L/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850112|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of CLss/F for AZD9291|Rate and extent of absorption of AZD9291 by assessment of the apparent plasma clearance following oral administration and multiple dosing (CLss/F). AZD9291 dosing alone and in combination with rifampicin (all periods).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 (following AZD9291 alone) and Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|||Litre per hour (L/h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850113|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of Css,Min for Rifampicin|Rate and extent of absorption of rifampicin by assessment of minimum plasma concentration at steady state (Css,min). AZD9291 dosing in combination with rifampicin (Period 2).|Samples collected on Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850116|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of Tss,Max for AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (Metabolites)|Rate and extent of absorption of AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (metabolites) by assessment of time to reach maximum plasma concentration at steady state (tss,max). AZD9291 dosing alone and in combination with rifampicin (all periods).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 (following AZD9291 alone) and Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||h||Full Range|Median
850117|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of AUCtau for Rifampicin|Rate and extent of absorption of rifampicin by assessment of AUCtau. AZD9291 dosing in combination with rifampicin (Period 2).|Samples collected on Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850118|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of AUCtau for AZ7550 (Metabolite)|Rate and extent of absorption of AZ7550 (metabolite) by assessment of AUCtau. AZD9291 dosing alone and in combination with rifampicin (all periods).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 (following AZD9291 alone) and Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nM*h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850119|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of AUCtau for AZ5104 (Metabolite)|Rate and extent of absorption of AZ5104 (metabolite) by assessment of AUCtau. AZD9291 dosing alone and in combination with rifampicin (all periods).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 (following AZD9291 alone) and Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nM*h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850120|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of AUCtau for AZD9291 Before and After Rifampicin|Rate and extent of absorption of AZD9291 by assessment of AUCtau. AZD9291 alone before rifampicin (Period 1) and AZD9291 alone after rifampicin (Period 3).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 following AZD9291 alone at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nM*h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850121|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of Css,Max for Rifampicin|Rate and extent of absorption of rifampicin by assessment of Css,max. AZD9291 dosing in combination with rifampicin (Period 2).|Samples collected on Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nanogram per millilitre (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850122|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of Css,Max for AZ7550 (Metabolite)|Rate and extent of absorption of AZ7550 (metabolite) by assessment of Css,max. AZD9291 dosing alone and in combination with rifampicin (all periods).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 (following AZD9291 alone) and Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nM||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850123|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of Css,Max for AZ5104 (Metabolite)|Rate and extent of absorption of AZ5104 (metabolite) by assessment of Css,max. AZD9291 dosing alone and in combination with rifampicin (all periods).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 (following AZD9291 alone) and Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nM||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850124|NCT02197247|Secondary|Assessment of Css,Max for AZD9291 Before and After Rifampicin|Rate and extent of absorption of AZD9291 by assessment of Css,max. AZD9291 alone before rifampicin (Period 1) and AZD9291 alone after rifampicin (Period 3).|Samples collected on Day 28 and 77 following AZD9291 alone at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nM||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850125|NCT02197247|Primary|Assessment of Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve During the Dosing Interval for AZD9291 After Dosing Alone and in Combination With Rifampicin (AUCtau)|Rate and extent of absorption of AZD9291 by assessment of AUCtau. AZD9291 doses were first without, then with rifampicin (Periods 1 and 2, respectively).|Samples collected on Day 28 following AZD9291 alone and Day 49 following AZD9291 and rifampicin at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nM * hour (nM*h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850126|NCT02197247|Primary|Assessment of Maximum Plasma Concentration for AZD9291 After Dosing Alone and in Combination With Rifampicin (Css,Max)|Rate and extent of absorption of AZD9291 by assessment of maximum plasma concentration at steady state (Css,max). AZD9291 doses were first without, then with rifampicin (Periods 1 and 2, respectively).|Samples collected on Day 28 following AZD9291 alone and Day 49 (following AZD9291 and rifampicin) at pre-dose, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nanomolar (nM)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850132|NCT02105688|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks After the End of All Study Therapy (SVR24): Immediate Treatment Arm|Blood is drawn from each participant to assess HCV RNA plasma levels using the Roche COBAS® AmpliPrep/COBAS® Taqman HCV Test, v2.0, which has an LLOQ of 15 IU/mL. SVR24 is defined as HCV RNA <LLOQ at 24 weeks after the end of all study therapy. The Clopper-Pearson method is used to construct 95% confidence intervals for the SVR24 rate. As pre-specified in the protocol, the Deferred Treatment Arm will not be included in the secondary efficacy analysis.|24 weeks after end of all therapy (Study Week 36)||05/2019||||
850133|NCT02105688|Primary|Percentage of Participants Discontinued From Study Therapy Due to AEs During the DB Treatment Period|An adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product or protocol -specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product or protocol -specified procedure. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition that is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an adverse event. For this study, the primary safety analysis compared the safety data in the Immediate Treatment Arm during the double-blinded treatment period to those of the Deferred Treatment Arm during the double-blinded placebo treatment period.|DB Treatment period (up to 12 weeks)|APaT Population; all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
850134|NCT02105688|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing at Least One Adverse Event (AE) During the DB Treatment Period and First 14 Follow-up Days|An adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product or protocol -specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product or protocol -specified procedure. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a preexisting condition that is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an adverse event. For this study, the primary safety analysis compared the safety data in the Immediate Treatment Arm during the double-blinded treatment period to those of the Deferred Treatment Arm during the double-blinded placebo treatment period.|DB Treatment period plus first 14 follow-up days (up to 14 weeks)|All Participants as Treated (APaT) Population; all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
850135|NCT02105688|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks After the End of All Study Therapy (SVR12): Immediate Treatment Arm|Blood was drawn from each participant to assess Hepatitis C Virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) plasma levels using the Roche COBAS® AmpliPrep/COBAS® Taqman HCV Test, v2.0, which had a lower limit of quantification of 15 IU/mL. SVR12 was defined as HCV RNA below the lower limit of detection (<LLOQ) at 12 weeks after the end of all study therapy. The Clopper-Pearson method was used to construct 95% confidence intervals for the SVR12 rate. As pre-specified in the protocol, the Deferred Treatment Arm was not included in the primary efficacy analysis.|12 weeks after end of all therapy (Study Week 24)|Modified FAS (mFAS): All randomized participants in the Immediate Treatment Arm receiving ≥1 dose of study treatment and excluding participants for study discontinuation for reasons unrelated to treatment regimen, response to HCV treatment, or BL genotype (GT)2, GT3, or GT5. Deferred Treatment Arm was not included in primary efficacy analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850254|NCT01856686|Secondary|Occipital Alpha Waves-frequency at 3 Months|occipital alpha waves-frequency during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||Hz||Standard Deviation|Mean
850255|NCT01856686|Primary|Comission Errors at 3 Months|comission errors during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach.(Test duration: 22 minutes)|3 months|||errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
850180|NCT02004236|Secondary|P3b Wave Amplitude After tRNS|ERP and behaviour Changes in ASD children after tRNS|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||MicroVolts||Standard Deviation|Mean
850181|NCT02004236|Secondary|Commission Errors After tRNS|ERP and behaviour Changes in ASD children after tRNS|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||number of errors during ECPT task||Standard Deviation|Mean
850182|NCT02004236|Secondary|Ommision Errors After tRNS|ERP and behaviour Changes in ASD children after tRNS|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions||12/2017||||
850183|NCT02004236|Secondary|Reaction Time After tRNS|ERP and behaviour Changes in ASD children after tRNS|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
850184|NCT02004236|Secondary|P3b Wave Amplitude Before tRNS|ERP and behaviour Changes in ASD children before tRNS|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||MicroVolts||Standard Deviation|Mean
850185|NCT02004236|Secondary|Commission Errors Before tRNS|ERP and Behaviour changes in ASD children before tRNS|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||number of errors during ECPT task||Standard Deviation|Median
850186|NCT02004236|Secondary|Omission Errors Before tRNS|ERP and behaviour changes in ASD children before tRNS|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||number of errors during ECPT task||Standard Deviation|Mean
850187|NCT02004236|Secondary|Reaction Time in ECPT Before tRNS|ERP & Behaviour changes in ASD children after tRNS|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
850188|NCT02004236|Secondary|Theta Amplitude in T5 After tRNS|Evaluate QEEG (brainwave changes in frequency bandfs and amplitude) after tRNS intervention in ASD children between 5 and 12 years old|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||MicroVolts||Standard Deviation|Mean
850189|NCT02004236|Secondary|Ratio Theta/Beta After tRNS|The purpose of the present study was to determine if the theta/beta ratio, and theta and beta separately, correlate with behavioral parameters, and if these measures discriminate between children a with Autism Spectrum disorder (ASD) and normal gender- and age-matched controls before and after tRNS intervention in ASD children between 5 and 12 years old.|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||Ratio theta/beta after tRNS||Standard Deviation|Mean
850190|NCT02004236|Secondary|Theta Amplitude in T5 Before tRNS|The purpose of the present study was to determine if the theta/beta ratio, and theta and beta separately, correlate with behavioral parameters, and if these measures discriminate between children a with Autism Spectrum disorder (ASD) and normal gender- and age-matched controls before and after tRNS intervention in ASD children between 5 and 12 years old.|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||MicroVolts||Standard Deviation|Mean
850191|NCT02004236|Secondary|Ratio Theta/Beta Before tRNS|The purpose of the present study was to determine if the theta/beta ratio, and theta and beta separately, correlate with behavioral parameters, and if these measures discriminate between children a with Autism Spectrum disorder (ASD) and normal gender- and age-matched controls before and after tRNS intervention in ASD children between 5 and 12 years old.|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|||Ratio theta/beta before tRNS||Standard Deviation|Mean
850192|NCT02004236|Primary|Sociability|"Goal: Evaluate emphaty with CARS scale in autism spectrum disorder children between 5 and 12 years after tRNS sessions.
CARS (Childhood Autism Rating Scale) by Shopler & Reichler (1971) in Spanish version EVAI (Escala de Valoración de Autismo Infantil) by Leal-Soto, F.; Aguirre, L.P. y Williams, E.E.
Description: 15 items in the scale that evaluate: Relating to people, Imitative Behavior, Emotional Response, Body Use, Object Use, Adaptation to Change, Visual Response, Listening Response, Perceptive Response, Fear or Anxiety, Verbal Communication, Non-Verbal Communication, Activity level, Level and consistency of Intellective Relations and General Impressions.
Values: The CARS scores range from 15 to 60, with lower scores indicating better outcome. It classifies the child as not autistic (below 30), moderately autistic (30-36.5) or severely autistic (above 36.5)"|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|Time frame: Baseline Before treatment and after completing 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850256|NCT01856686|Primary|Omission Errors at 3 Months|Omission errors during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach. (Test duration: 22 minutes)|3 months|||errors||Standard Deviation|Mean
850257|NCT01856686|Primary|Reaction Time at 3 Months|Reaction time during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
850193|NCT02004236|Primary|Verbal Fluency|"Goal: Improve in verbal fluency in ASD children between 5 and 12 years. We use D-KEFS (Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System Delis Kaplan Sorting Test), Verbal Fluency Subtest - Category Condition.
Description: The verbal fluency Category test evaluates fluent productivity in the verbal domain by asking participants to generate exemplars belonging to the category animals, and subsequently, boys´ names. Participants were given 60 s to do it.
Values: Category scores were based on the average number of items generated in the two categories (animals and boys´names) during 60 s.
Time Frame: Baseline (Before treatment) and 1 day Post-treatment (after completing 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions)"|During 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions|Time frame: Baseline Before treatment and after completing 3 months of intensive speech therapy during tRNS sessions.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850194|NCT01995071|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Post-treatment Relapse|Post-treatment relapse was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ between the end of treatment and 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug among participants completing combination treatment with HCV RNA levels < LLOQ at the end of treatment.|From the end of treatment through 12 weeks after the last dose of combination study drug|Combination Treatment Analysis Set: all participants who receive at least 1 dose of the combination regimen of ABT-450/r/ABT-267 + ABT-333 + RBV, completed treatment, and had HCV RNA <LLOQ at the final treatment visit.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850195|NCT01995071|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Virologic Failure|On-treatment virologic failure was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ after HCV RNA < LLOQ during combination treatment; confirmed increase of > 1 log(subscript)10(subscript) IU/mL above the lowest value post-baseline in HCV RNA during combination treatment; or HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ at end of combination treatment with at least 6 weeks of combination treatment.|Up to 87 days|Combination Treatment Analysis Set: all participants who receive at least 1 dose of the combination regimen of ABT-450/r/ABT-267 + ABT-333 + RBV.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850196|NCT01995071|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level less than the lower limit of quantification [<LLOQ]) 12 weeks after the last dose of combination study drug.|12 weeks after last actual dose of combination study drug|Combination Treatment Analysis Set: all participants who receive at least 1 dose of the combination regimen of ABT-450/r/ABT-267 + ABT-333 + RBV; participants with missing data after backwards imputation were counted as nonresponders.||percentage of participants|||Number
850197|NCT01995071|Primary|Maximal Decrease From Baseline in log10 HCV RNA Levels During ABT-493 or ABT-530 Monotherapy Treatment|Maximal decrease from baseline in log10 HCV RNA levels during ABT-493 or ABT-530 monotherapy treatment. The baseline value was the last measurement before the first dose of monotherapy on Day 1.|Day 1 through prior to first dose of the combination regimen on Study Day 4|Monotherapy Analysis Sets for Substudy 1 (Arms 1-5, 11) and SubStudy 2 (Arms 6-10, 12) are defined as all participants who received at least 1 dose of monotherapy and have a baseline and at least 1 postbaseline measurement of HCV RNA during monotherapy. Data for subjects who received the same treatment (Arms 4+5; Arms 7+10) were analyzed together.||Log10 IU/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
850206|NCT01951963|Other Pre-specified|Pain Scale Rating Agreement Among Patient, Parent, and Research Staff|"FLACC scores were assessed on the patient using the FLACC scale (0-10) by the parent, treating RN/trained research assistant.
FLACC – Parents 30 Minutes Post dose
FLACC – Staff 30 Minutes Post dose
Wong-Baker Faces scale is a self-assessment of pain Scale of 1-10 pain."|Up to 3 hours post pain medication administration|Wong-Baker Faces scale is a self-assessment of pain Scale. FLACC Score (FLACC = Face, Legs, Activity, Crying and Consolability) is a behavioral observational pain rating scale that looks for specific behaviors and scores them. Both scales are scored 0-10 with 0 representing no pain. Lower scores are better outcomes.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850207|NCT01951963|Primary|Adverse Drug Reaction|Rate of pain medication related adverse events during their ED stay and at 24 hours post discharge from the ED. the research team will complete the Adverse Event case report form to determine any adverse events occurring during the study period. Family members will be contacted via telephone 24 hours (±8 hours) following their visit in the Emergency Department to complete the Discharge Adverse Event case report form.|3 hours post study drug administration|Rate of pain medication related adverse events during their ED stay and at 24 hours post discharge from the ED will be compared using unadjusted Fisher’s exact of a composite measure (≤ 1 events vs. > 1).||Participants|||Count of Participants
850208|NCT01951963|Primary|Cumulative Narcotic Consumption|All opioids administered were converted to morphine equivalents in milligrams (eq. mg) via standard equianalgesic calculations. Pre-study drug opioids information was also collected.The number of subjects who received a morphine dose after administration of the study drug, both within one hour or at all was included in the outcome measure results.|3 hours post study drug administration|The number of subjects in each group who received at least one dose of opioids post study drug.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850537|NCT01278394|Secondary|Mycological Evaluations (Negative KOH and Negative Fungal Culture) Compared to Baseline|Number of subjects with negative KOH, and number of subjects with negative fungal cultures.|Day 270|Efficacy data were analyzed for the ITT population. For efficacy variables, the LOCF was used to impute missing observations.||participants|||Number
850238|NCT01905423|Secondary|Filarial Antigenemia in Blood and Worm Parasite Eggs in Stool by Microscopy|Secondary outcomes for the study include prevalence of filarial antigenemia (detected with the Binax Filariasis Now card test) and prevalence of worm eggs in stool detected by the Kato-Katz test. Both of these prevalence outcomes are qualitative with no units of measure (positive or negative). Prevalence date are expressed as % positive. Other secondary outcome measures will be intensity of parasite infections (microfilariae per ml of blood and the number of worm eggs per gram of stool).|4 years|Not all participants were tested for antigen or provided stool to determine prevalence of worm eggs.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850239|NCT01905423|Primary|Microfilaria Prevalence in Blood by Microscopy|Microfilariae (filarial parasites) will be detected in blood smears by microscopy. Samples will be collected in annual community surveys. Microfilaremia is a categorical variable (positive or negative). Prevalence rates are expressed as % positive.|4 years|Analysis excludes participants from Pekalongan study site that were dropped after the first follow-up due to lower than expected filariasis prevalence.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850240|NCT01856686|Secondary|Inattention Score|Inattention assessed by clinical questionnaire after 3 months of nutritional approach. Range: minimum value: 0 and maximum value: 9. Higher values represent a worse outcome.|3 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850241|NCT01856686|Secondary|Impulsivity Score|Impulsivity assessed by clinical questionnaire after 3 months of nutritional approach. Range: minimum value: 0 and maximum value: 8. Higher values represent a worse outcome.|3 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850242|NCT01856686|Secondary|Hyperactivity Score|Hyperactivity assessed by clinical questionnaire after 3 months of nutritional approach. Range: minimum value: 0 and maximum value: 8. Higher values represent a worse outcome.|3 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850243|NCT01856686|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability|Number of Participants with Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability of Brain Proteins Supplements|Up to 8 months|||participants|||Number
850244|NCT01856686|Other Pre-specified|Body Mass Index at 3 Months|Body mass index after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||kg/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
850245|NCT01856686|Secondary|Behavior|"Behavior assessed by total score of clinical questionnaire (sum of Hyperactivity, Impulsivity and Inattention scores), after 3 months of nutritional approach.
Range: minimum value: 0 and maximum value: 25. Higher values represent a worse outcome."|3 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850246|NCT01856686|Primary|Frontal Midline Theta Activity- Amplitude at 3 Months|Frontal midline theta activity- amplitude during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||microvolts||Standard Deviation|Mean
850247|NCT01856686|Secondary|Monastra Ratio at 3 Months|Monastra ratio during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
850248|NCT01856686|Primary|Mu Waves-amplitude at 3 Months|Mu waves-amplitude during visual continuous performance task from 19 channels EEG recordings, after 3 months of dietary approach.|3 months|||microvolts||Standard Deviation|Mean
850265|NCT01847885|Post-Hoc|30% Reduction in Pain Interference From Baseline to End of Treatment (EOT)|The degree to which shoulder pain interferes with daily activities was assessed using Question 9 of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI-9) collected from the BPI Short Form administered during clinic visits. This question asks the subject to rate the degree to which their pain has interfered with general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is “does not interfere” and 10 is “completely interferes” within the last week. The mean of these seven scores was calculated to obtain the pain interference score. The score at End of Treatment (EOT) was compared to the baseline score to determine the percentage of subjects who had a clinically significant (30% or greater) reduction in pain interference.|4 weeks (from baseline visit to EOT visit)|Per protocol set (Subjects in the full analysis set who also were implanted with a Smartpatch Lead, had an adequate number of worst pain intensity (BPI3) scores in the End of Treatment subject diary period, and continued to meet all eligibility criteria throughout treatment)||Participants|||Count of Participants
850266|NCT01847885|Post-Hoc|Composite 30% Reduction in Pain Intensity or Pain Interference From Baseline to End of Treatment (EOT)|"Subjects who reported an reduction of at least 30% in either pain intensity or pain interference from baseline to End of Treatment (EOT) using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Short Form.
The pain intensity score is excerpted from BPI question 3, worst pain, taken from 7-day diaries. This scale ranges from 0 representing no pain to 10 representing worst pain. The median diary score at EOT was compared to the median baseline diary score to calculate the percentage of subjects who had at least a 30% reduction in pain intensity.
Pain interference was assessed using BPI question 9. Subjects rated the degree to which their pain interfered with seven facets of daily life on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is “does not interfere” and 10 is “completely interferes”. The mean of these 7 scores was calculated to obtain the pain interference score. The score at EOT was compared to the baseline score to determine the percentage of subjects who had at least a 30% reduction in pain interference."|4 weeks (from baseline visit to EOT visit)|Per protocol set (Subjects in the full analysis set who also were implanted with a Smartpatch Lead, had an adequate number of worst pain intensity (BPI3) scores in the End of Treatment subject diary period, and continued to meet all eligibility criteria throughout treatment)||Participants|||Count of Participants
850267|NCT01847885|Other Pre-specified|Performance of the Smartpatch System|A sponsor-developed Clinician Satisfaction Survey was administered to the Investigator(s) at each site performing lead placement and included questions pertaining to use of the Smartpatch device as well as the overall impression of the therapy.|At completion of study, approximately 2.5 years|"Count of participants represents Investigators responding to the survey rather than study participants."||Participants|||Count of Participants
850268|NCT01847885|Other Pre-specified|User Satisfaction With The Smartpatch System at 12-weeks Beyond Treatment|Subjects completed the sponsor-developed Subject Satisfaction Survey at the end of the 12-week post-treatment period. The results of these surveys demonstrate the usability of the Smartpatch System and subject satisfaction with treatment.|12-week post-treatment|Safety set (Subjects who were implanted with a Smartpatch Lead)||Participants|||Count of Participants
850269|NCT01847885|Other Pre-specified|User Satisfaction With The Smartpatch System at End of Treatment|Subjects completed the sponsor-developed Subject Satisfaction Survey at the End of Treatment (EOT) visit. The results of these surveys demonstrate the usability of the Smartpatch System and subject satisfaction with treatment.|End of Treatment (4-weeks of Treatment/Control)|Safety set (Subjects who were implanted with a Smartpatch Lead)||Participants|||Count of Participants
850270|NCT01847885|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression of Improvement at End of Treatment|The Blinded Evaluator rated each subject enrolled at their site using a question adapted from the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale, known as the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale (CGI-I). For the CGI-I, a Blinded Evaluator was asked to rate the subject’s total improvement compared to their condition at baseline. The CGI-I uses a 7-point scale (centered at 4) that ranges from “very much worse” to “very much improved”.|End of Treatment (4-weeks of Treatment/Control)|Per protocol set (Subjects in the full analysis set who also were implanted with a Smartpatch Lead, had an adequate number of worst pain intensity (BPI3) scores in the End of Treatment subject diary period, and continued to meet all eligibility criteria throughout treatment). The CGI-I was not completed for one subject in the treatment group.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850271|NCT01847885|Secondary|Change in Pain Medication Usage at End of Treatment|Subjects completed 7-day diaries, in which they listed all pain medications they took during the 7 days. A blinded third party medication committee reviewed medications collected for each 7-day diary period and scored medication changes, in comparison to the baseline diary medications as “no change” (no change in dosage or change is not clinically meaningful to impact pain outcomes), “increase” (clinically meaningful increase in medication that would impact pain outcomes), or “decrease” (clinically meaningful decrease in medication that would impact pain outcomes).|End of Treatment (4-weeks of Treatment/Control)|Per protocol set (Subjects in the full analysis set who also were implanted with a Smartpatch Lead, had an adequate number of worst pain intensity (BPI3) scores in the End of Treatment subject diary period, and continued to meet all eligibility criteria throughout treatment)||Participants|||Count of Participants
850272|NCT01847885|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Change at End of Treatment|The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale was administered at EOT to assess subject perception of overall improvement and patient preferences. The PGIC scale asks subjects to rate their improvement with treatment on a 7-point scale (centered at 4) that ranges from “very much worse” to “very much improved” relative to baseline.|End of Treatment (4-weeks of Treatment/Control)|Per protocol set (Subjects in the full analysis set who also were implanted with a Smartpatch Lead, had an adequate number of worst pain intensity (BPI3) scores in the End of Treatment subject diary period, and continued to meet all eligibility criteria throughout treatment)||Participants|||Count of Participants
850273|NCT01847885|Secondary|Change From Baseline Average Pain Intensity at End of Treatment|"A diary was used in the study to capture daily average shoulder pain intensity over a 7-day period. The diary included a pain intensity question asked each day to the subject. The pain intensity question is excerpted from the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 5 (BPI-5) and is stated as please rate your pain by circling the one number that best describes your pain on the average. BPI-5 is a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents worst pain. The mean scores were calculated for each diary period. The mean diary score at End of Treatment (EOT) was compared to the mean baseline diary score to calculate the change in pain intensity."|Baseline, End of Treatment (4-weeks of Treatment/Control)|Per protocol set (Subjects in the full analysis set who also were implanted with a Smartpatch Lead, had an adequate number of worst pain intensity (BPI3) scores in the End of Treatment subject diary period, and continued to meet all eligibility criteria throughout treatment)||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850274|NCT01847885|Secondary|Change From Baseline Quality of Life at End of Treatment|The Medical Outcomes Study Short Form (SF-36v2) was administered at clinic visits to assess the impact of peripheral nerve stimulation on the subject’s health-related quality of life. The SF-36v2 is a generic health survey designed to assess basic physical functioning and emotional well-being regardless of the disease or treatment. The 36 questions were grouped into two components: physical and mental. The survey was scored using norm-based scoring algorithm where a score of 0 indicates maximum disability and a score of 100 indicates no disability. Change in each component score was derived from End of Treatment score minus baseline score.|Baseline, End of Treatment (4-weeks of Treatment/Control)|Per protocol set (Subjects in the full analysis set who also were implanted with a Smartpatch Lead, had an adequate number of worst pain intensity (BPI3) scores in the End of Treatment subject diary period, and continued to meet all eligibility criteria throughout treatment)||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850275|NCT01847885|Secondary|Durability of Change From Baseline Shoulder Pain Intensity at 12-weeks Beyond Treatment|"A diary was used in the study to capture daily worst shoulder pain intensity over a 7-day period. The diary included a pain intensity question asked each day to the subject. The pain intensity question is excerpted from the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 3 (BPI-3) and is stated as please rate your pain by circling the one number that best describes your pain at its worst in the last 24 hours. BPI-3 is a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents worst pain. The median scores were calculated for each diary period. The median diary score at 12 weeks post-treatment was compared to the median baseline diary score to calculate the change in pain intensity. The group mean of the median scores for 12 weeks post-treatment was compared to the group mean of the median scores for the control group at baseline."|Baseline, 12-wks post-treatment|Full analysis set||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850276|NCT01847885|Secondary|Change From Baseline Shoulder Pain Interference at End of Treatment|The degree to which shoulder pain interferes with daily activities was assessed using Question 9 of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI-9) collected from the BPI Short Form administered during clinic visits. This question asks the subject to rate the degree to which their pain has interfered with general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is “does not interfere” and 10 is “completely interferes” within the last week. The mean of these seven scores will be calculated to obtain the pain interference score.|Baseline, End of Treatment (4-weeks of Treatment/Control)|Per protocol set (Subjects in the full analysis set who also were implanted with a Smartpatch Lead, had an adequate number of worst pain intensity (BPI3) scores in the End of Treatment subject diary period, and continued to meet all eligibility criteria throughout treatment).||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850277|NCT01847885|Primary|Number of Participants With Device Related Adverse Event Rates in Treatment and Control Groups|At each study visit following the baseline assessment, subjects were questioned if any changes in their medical status or condition had occurred. If the change was an adverse event, an adverse event form was completed by the site.|16 weeks total - 4 weeks from baseline visit to EOT visit, followed by 12 weeks post-treatment|Safety set||device related adverse events|||Number
850278|NCT01847885|Primary|Change From Baseline Shoulder Pain Intensity at End of Treatment (EOT)|A diary was used in the study to capture daily worst shoulder pain intensity over a 7-day period. The diary included a pain intensity question asked each day to the subject. The pain intensity question is excerpted from the Brief Pain Inventory – Short Form Question 3 (BPI-3) and is stated as “please rate your pain by circling the one number that best describes your pain at its worst in the last 24 hours”. BPI-3 is a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents worst pain. The median scores were calculated for each diary period. The median diary score at End of Treatment (EOT) was compared to the median baseline diary score to calculate the change in pain intensity. The group mean of the median scores for treatment was compared to the group mean of the medians scores for the control group at baseline and at EOT.|Baseline, End of Treatment (4-weeks of Treatment/Control)|Full analysis set||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850285|NCT01801449|Primary|Number of Subjects Who Maintained Inflammatory Remission With Rilonacept|Inflammatory remission criteria remission criteria were defined as meeting all of the following criteria: a diary score of <0.5 (reflecting no fever, skin rash or bone pain), normal acute phase reactants (C-reactive protein (CRP) <0.5 mg/dL), no objective skin rash or radiological evidence of active bone lesions on x-ray.|6 months|Analysis included all subjects||Participants|||Count of Participants
850286|NCT01801449|Secondary|Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL)|Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL)-assess functional impairment and change in treatment and health-related quality of life respectively. Responses on this scale are transformed into a 0-100 scale, with 0 being the worst value for health-related quality of life and 100 being the best possible value for health-related quality of life.|Baseline|Analysis included all subjects||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850287|NCT01801449|Secondary|Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL)|Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL)-assess functional impairment and change in treatment and health-related quality of life respectively. Responses on this scale are transformed into a 0-100 scale, with 0 being the worst value for health-related quality of life and 100 being the best possible value for health-related quality of life.|24 months after rilonacept initiation|Analysis included all subjects||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850288|NCT01801449|Secondary|Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) Scores|Mean z-scores of anteroposterior lumbar (AP) spine were used for comparisons|Baseline|Analysis included all subjects||z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
850289|NCT01801449|Secondary|Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) Scores|Mean z-scores of anteroposterior lumbar (AP) spine were used for comparisons|12 months after rilonacept initiation|Analysis included all subjects||z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
850290|NCT01801449|Secondary|Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ)|The Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ) is a patient self-assessment (or parent assessment) tool for how illness affects ability to function in daily life. Includes overall score, overall pain rating, overall global evaluation, subcategories for dressing and grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities. Measured on scale of 0-3 from 'Without any difficulty' (0) to 'Unable to do' (3). The scores are summed and divided by the number of total categories answered to arrive at a final value.|Baseline|Analysis included all subjects||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850759|NCT00984165|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For the detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|36 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
850291|NCT01801449|Secondary|Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ)|The Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ) is a patient self-assessment (or parent assessment) tool for how illness affects ability to function in daily life. Includes overall score, overall pain rating, overall global evaluation, subcategories for dressing and grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities. Measured on scale of 0-3 from 'Without any difficulty' (0) to 'Unable to do' (3). The scores are summed and divided by the number of total categories answered to arrive at a final value.|24 months after rilonacept initiation|Analysis included all subjects||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850292|NCT01801449|Secondary|Weight|Antropometric measurements - Weight z-score|Baseline|Analysis included all subjects||z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
850293|NCT01801449|Secondary|Weight|Antropometric measurements - Weight z-score|24 months after rilonacept initiation|Analysis included all subjects||z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
850294|NCT01801449|Secondary|Height|Antropometric measurements - Height z-score|Baseline|Analysis included all subjects||z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
850295|NCT01801449|Secondary|Height|Antropometric measurements - Height z-score|24 months after rilonacept initiation|Analysis included all subjects||z-score||Standard Deviation|Mean
850341|NCT01646762|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|"Overall response rate (percentage) is defined as the percentage of patients with a partial response (PR) or better. A PR or better will be considered synonymous with success and is defined to be a stringent complete response (sCR = complete response (CR) + Normal serum FLC ratio + Absence of clonal cells in bone marrow), CR (= Negative immunofixation of the serum and urine + <5%plasma cells in bone marrow + Disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas + normalization of FLC ratio), very good partial response (VGPR = PR + Serum and urine M-component detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis ), or PR (≥ 50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction in 24-h urinary M-protein by ≥ 90% or to <200 mg per 24 h) noted as the objective status. The percentage of successes (PR or better) will be estimated by the number of successes divided by the total number of evaluable patients times 100. PR or better will be evaluated using all cycles of treatment."|Up to 3 years|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850342|NCT01646762|Secondary|Incidence of Toxicity as Assessed by the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0|Toxicity is defined as a grade 3 or higher adverse events that is classified as either possibly, probably, or definitely related to study treatment. The assignment of attribution to study treatment and grade (or degree of severity) of the adverse event are classified using the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. The maximum grade for each type of adverse event will be recorded for each patient, and frequency tables will be reviewed to determine patterns. Additionally, the relationship of the adverse event(s) to the study treatment will be taken into consideration. The percentage of patients with a maximum grade 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly related to the study treatment are reported below.|Up to 3 years|||percentage of patients|||Number
850343|NCT01646762|Secondary|Duration of Response of All Evaluable Patients Who Have Achieved a Partial Response or Better|Duration of response is defined for all evaluable patients who have achieved a partial response or better (stringent complete response (sCR = complete response (CR) + Normal serum FLC ratio + Absence of clonal cells in bone marrow), CR (= Negative immunofixation of the serum and urine + <5%plasma cells in bone marrow + Disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas + normalization of FLC ratio), very good partial response (VGPR = partial response (PR) + Serum and urine M-component detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis ), or PR (≥ 50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction in 24-h urinary M-protein by ≥ 90% or to <200 mg per 24 h) ) as the date at which the patients earliest best objective status is first noted to be at least a partial response or better to the earliest date of progression is documented. The distribution of duration of response will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.|Date at which the patient’s earliest best objective status is first noted to be at least a partial response or better to the earliest date progression is documented, assessed up to 3 years|All evaluable patients who have achieved a (unconfirmed or confirmed) partial response or better at the earliest best objective status are included in this analysis||months||Full Range|Median
850344|NCT01646762|Secondary|Progression Free Survival at 3 Months|"The distribution of time to progression will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier and the 3 month progression-free rate (percentage) will be provided. Progression is defined as:
Any one or more of the following: Increase of 25% from lowest value in:
Serum M-component (absolute increase must be ≥ 0.5 g/dl
Serum M-component increase ≥ 1 g/dl, if lowest M component was ≥ 5 g/dl
Urine M-component (absolute increase must be ≥ 200 mg/24 h)
If at on study, the only measurable non-bone marrow parameter was free light chain (FLC), the difference between involved and uninvolved FLC levels (absolute increase must be >10 mg/dl)
Bone marrow plasma cell percentage (absolute % must be ≥10%) Or any one or more of the following felt related to the underlying clonal plasma cell proliferative disorder
Development of new soft tissue plasmacytomas or bone lesions
Hypercalcemia (≥11.5 mg/dl)
Decrease in hemoglobin of ≥2 g/dl
Serum creatinine level ≥2 mg/dl"|Time from registration to the earliest date of documentation of disease progression, assessed up to 3 years|||percentage of patients|||Number
850345|NCT01646762|Secondary|Survival Time|Survival time is defined as the time from registration to death due to any cause. The distribution of survival time will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.|Time from registration to death due to any cause, assessed up to 3 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850346|NCT01646762|Primary|Percentage of Patients Who Have a Confirmed Partial Response or Better|"A confirmed partial response or better will be considered synonymous with success and is defined to be a stringent complete response (sCR = complete response (CR) + Normal serum FLC ratio + Absence of clonal cells in bone marrow), CR (= Negative immunofixation of the serum and urine + <5%plasma cells in bone marrow + Disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas + normalization of FLC ratio), very good partial response (VGPR = partial response (PR) + Serum and urine M-component detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis ), or PR (≥ 50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction in 24-h urinary M-protein by ≥ 90% or to <200 mg per 24 h) noted as the objective status on two consecutive evaluations. The percentage of successes (confirmed PR or better) will be estimated by the number of successes divided by the total number of evaluable patients times 100. Confirmed PR or better will be evaluated using all cycles of treatment."|Up to 3 years|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850451|NCT01462565|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Hematology|Values for hemoglobin, hematocrit, and platelet count were analyzed. Participants with abnormal values have been reported. The low and high value concern were as follows: hemoglobin (Males < 98, >180.0) (females <91, >161.0)grams per litre (g/L); hematocrit (Males < 32.0, >54.0) (females <29.0, >50.6) fraction (1); platelet count (< 100, > 500) gram international units per litre (gI/L).|Up to 1 week after Week 4 (Follow-up)|ITT population. Only those participant available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850398|NCT01561976|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. A serious adverse event is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, medically significant or possible drug-induced liver injury.|Up to approximately 24 days (during treatment and washout) after initiation of study|PK Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850399|NCT01561976|Secondary|Terminal Phase Half Life (t1/2)|PK blood samples for estimation of t1/2 were collected at 0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5,1,2,2.5,3,3.5,4,4.5,5,6,7,8,10, 12, 16,24 and 30 hours after dosing. Point estimates and corresponding 90% confidence interval was constructed for the ratio of the geometric mean of the test treatment (fed condition) to the geometric mean of the reference treatment (fasting condition).|0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 and 30 hours after dosing|PK Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Hour||Full Range|Median
850400|NCT01561976|Secondary|Elimination Constant (Kel)|PK blood samples for estimation of Kel were collected at 0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5,1,2,2.5,3,3.5,4,4.5,5,6,7,8,10, 12, 16,24 and 30 hours after dosing. Point estimates and corresponding 90% confidence interval was constructed for the ratio of the geometric mean of the test treatment (fed condition) to the geometric mean of the reference treatment (fasting condition).|0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 and 30 hours after dosing|PK Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Fraction/hour||Full Range|Median
850401|NCT01561976|Secondary|PK Lag Time (Tlag)|PK blood samples for estimation of Tlag were collected at 0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5,1,2,2.5,3,3.5,4,4.5,5,6,7,8,10, 12, 16,24 and 30 hours after dosing. Point estimates and corresponding 90% confidence interval was constructed for the ratio of the geometric mean of the test treatment (fed condition) to the geometric mean of the reference treatment (fasting condition).|0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 and 30 hours after dosing|PK Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Hour||Full Range|Median
850402|NCT01561976|Secondary|Time of Occurrence of Cmax (Tmax)|PK blood samples for estimation of Tmax were collected at 0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5,1,2,2.5,3,3.5,4,4.5,5,6,7,8,10, 12, 16,24 and 30 hours after dosing. Point estimates and corresponding 90% confidence interval was constructed for the ratio of the geometric mean of the test treatment (fed condition) to the geometric mean of the reference treatment (fasting condition).|0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 and 30 hours after dosing|PK Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Hour||Full Range|Median
850403|NCT01561976|Secondary|AUC From Time Zero (Pre-dose) to Last Time of Quantifiable Concentration Within a Participant Across All Treatments [AUC (0-t)]|PK blood samples for estimation of AUC (0-t) were collected at 0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5,1,2,2.5,3,3.5,4,4.5,5,6,7,8,10, 12, 16,24 and 30 hours after dosing. Point estimates and corresponding 90% confidence interval was constructed for the ratio of the geometric mean of the test treatment (fed condition) to the geometric mean of the reference treatment (fasting condition).|0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 and 30 hours after dosing|PK Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||µ.hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850404|NCT01561976|Primary|Area Under Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero (Pre-dose) Extrapolated to Infinite Time [AUC (0-infinity)]|PK blood samples for estimation of AUC (0-infinity) were collected at 0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5,1,2,2.5,3,3.5,4,4.5,5,6,7,8,10, 12, 16,24 and 30 hours after dosing. Point estimates and corresponding 90% confidence interval was constructed for the ratio of the geometric mean of the test treatment (fed condition) to the geometric mean of the reference treatment (fasting condition).|0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 and 30 hours after dosing|PK Population. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Micrograms hour per milliliter (µ.hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850429|NCT01470599|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an IBDQ Total Score of Greater Than or Equal to (≥) 170 at Week 48/ET Visit|The IBDQ is a psychometrically validated PRO instrument for measuring disease-specific QoL in participants with IBD. IBDQ consists of 32 items, each item score ranged from 1 (worst possible response) to 7 (best possible response). Total score is the sum of each item score, and ranged from 32 to 224 with a higher score indicating a better QoL. A score ≥170 corresponds to clinical remission. 95% Clopper-Pearson exact confidence interval reported for the proportions.|Week 48/ET|Participants in the FAS who had non-missing data at Week 48/ET visit||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850405|NCT01561976|Primary|Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax)|Pharmacokinetic (PK) blood samples for estimation of Cmax were collected at 0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5,1,2,2.5,3,3.5,4,4.5,5,6,7,8,10, 12, 16,24 and 30 hours after dosing. Point estimates and corresponding 90% confidence interval was constructed for the ratio of the geometric mean of the test treatment (fed condition) to the geometric mean of the reference treatment (fasting condition).|0.0 (pre-dose) and 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 and 30 hours after dosing|PK Population included participants who received study medication. Only those participants available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850406|NCT01535001|Other Pre-specified|Exploratory Outcomes|"Pain intensities on a 100 mm VAS with terminal descriptors of 'no pain' and 'worst pain possible' in various situations.
Number of sites with pain in the previous 24 hours shaded on a region-divided body chart
Pain location and type assessed using the Knee Pain Map.
Maximum isometric muscle strength measured bilaterally in knee flexion and knee extension in a make test using a handheld dynamometer (Powertrack II TM Commander).
Pressure pain thresholds measured bilaterally using a handheld algometer (Algometer Type II) at five sites at the knee and the m. tibialis anterior muscle and the m. extensor carpi radialis longus.
Postural balance assessed using an instrumented force platform (Good Balance), measuring the centre of pressure excursion.
Self-efficacy in improving pain, function and QOL in various situations using a 100 mm VAS with terminal descriptors of 'very unsure' and 'very sure'."|Baseline, 3months, 6months, 12months and 24months|Since this is exploratory outcomes they will be analyzed in future publications.|||||
850407|NCT01535001|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Time From the Timed Up and Go||Primary: 12 months.|||sec||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850408|NCT01535001|Secondary|Number of Serious Adverse Events Reported at Index Knee|Adverse events (AE) and seriously adverse events (SAE) will be registered in three ways and divided into index knee or sites other than index knee. The project physiotherapist will record any adverse events that the participant experiences or tells them about. For the participants allocated to, or crossing over to, TKA, a project worker will look through hospital records to register if any pre-defined perioperative and postoperative adverse events occurred. At all follow-ups, the assessor will use open-probe questioning to assess adverse events in all participants.|Primary: 12months.|||Serious adverse events related to knee|||Number
850409|NCT01535001|Secondary|Proportion of Users of Pain Medication|With possible answers being yes and no|Baseline and 12months.|||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850410|NCT01535001|Secondary|Weight Change in kg From Baseline|Weight change in kg measured without shoes at the same time of day and on the same scale|Primary: 12months.|Only patients with a BMI equal to or >25 were included in this analysis.||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850411|NCT01535001|Secondary|Change in the Five KOOS Subscale Scores From Baseline|Range of all subscales are 0 to 100 (worst to best).|Primary: 12 months.|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850412|NCT01535001|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 20-meter Walk||Primary: 12months.|||sec||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850413|NCT01535001|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D|"Between groups comparisons of the change from baseline to the 1 year follow-up in all secondary endpoint will be handled similar to the primary endpoint. See statistical analysis plan for further description (available under Links).
Range of EQ-5D Descriptive Index is -0.59 to 1.00 (worst to best), while the EQ VAS goes from 0 to 100 (worst to best)."|Primary: 12months.|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850414|NCT01535001|Primary|Change From Baseline in KOOS4 (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score)|"The average score for four of the five KOOS subscales, covering pain, symptoms, difficulties in functions of daily living, and quality of life (KOOS4), with scores ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 (best).
Between group comparisons of treatment effect (change in KOOS4 from baseline to 1 year follow-up) will be dependent on data distribution. We expect the change to be normally distributed and analysis will be made using a mixed model ANOVA with subject being a random factor and visit (baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months), treatment arm (TKA + MEDIC, MEDIC) and site (Frederikshavn, Farsoe) being fixed factors. Baseline KOOS4 will be a covariate. Furthermore interactions between the fixed factors will be included in the model. P-values and 95% CI will be presented to assess superiority."|Primary: 12months.|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850415|NCT01528592|Primary|Correlation Coefficient Between UPDRS III Score and Independent Components Analysis Network Strength in Left Parietal Cortex.|Correlation coefficient between UPDRS III score and independent components analysis network strength in left parietal cortex. UPDRS III is the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale composite motor score.|1 hour|||unitless|||Number
850416|NCT01470599|Secondary|Length of Hospitalizations Due to Crohn’s Disease|The length of hospitalizations due to Crohn's disease were recorded at every study visit.|From baseline to Week 52/follow-up|SAS||Percentage of participnats|||Number
850417|NCT01470599|Primary|Adjudicated Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) Events|Pre-specified ILD events were adjudicated by committees of external experts who were blinded to treatment assignment. pEoI were identified by searches of the clinical, safety & laboratory databases (AEs coded to the MedDRA ILD SMQ and events nominated by the study clinician or clinical lead). The IRs determined if the pEoI met the criteria for EoI classification by assessment of the ILD event (probably ILD, possible ILD, alternative diagnosis likely, other or insufficient information to classify).|From baseline to Week 52|Participants in the SAS who had pEoI and were adjudicated by IRs|||||
850418|NCT01470599|Primary|Adjudicated Gastrointestinal (GI) Perforation Events|Pre-specified GI perforation events were adjudicated by committees of external experts who were blinded to treatment assignment. The pEoI were identified via search of AE/SAE listings using the MedDRA GI Perforation SMQ. The IRs determined if the pEoI met the criteria for EoI classification based on whether a GI perforation occurred and if yes, the location within the GI tract, possible contributing medical conditions and/or concomitant medications.|From baseline to Week 52|Participants in the SAS who had pEoI and were adjudicated by IRs||Number of events meeting criteria|||Number
850448|NCT01462565|Secondary|Breathlessness After 6MWD – Borg Dyspnoea Index (BDI)|The BDI was calculated by using a 10-point scale (0 = None, 10 = Maximum) and indicates the degree of breathlessness after completion of the 6-minute walk test. The BDI scale was assessed by each participant. Change from Baseline = score at observation minus score at Baseline. Baseline visit was Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 (+ or - 7 days).|Baseline (Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 [+ or - 7 days]) to Week 4|ITT population.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850419|NCT01470599|Primary|Adjudicated Opportunistic Infection Events|Pre-specified opportunistic infection events were adjudicated by blinded committees of external experts. pEoI were identified by investigator, sponsor & search of SAE listings for serious infections coded to MedDRA infections & infestations SOC &/or events meeting pre-specified criteria for IR pre-screening to determine if adjudication is required. IRs determined if the pEoI met the criteria for EoI classification according to definitions for opportunistic infections (invasive fungal infections per the European Organization for Research & Treatment of Cancer/Invasive Fungal Infections Cooperative Group & the National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group [EORTC/MSG] Consensus Group definitions, endemic fungal infections per the EORTC/MSG Consensus Group definitions, other fungal infections, viral, bacterial & parasitic infections & vaccine dissemination) & special interest infections (actinomycosis, Legionella & mononucleosis-like toxoplasmosis).|From baseline to Week 52|Participants in the SAS who had pEoI and were adjudicated by IRs||Number of events meeting criteria|||Number
850420|NCT01470599|Primary|Adjudicated Hepatic Injury Events|Pre-specified liver injury events were adjudicated by blinded committees of external experts. pEoI were identified by investigator, sponsor & search of clinical, safety & laboratory databases (potential Hy's law event, ALT/AST ≥5 x ULN, events meeting hepatic discontinuation criteria, SAEs coded to MedDRA hepatobiliary system organ class (SOC), AEs/SAEs coded to MedDRA liver infections or infectious biliary disorders SMQ, AEs coded to MedDRA drug-induced liver injury (DILI) preferred term or any death with ALT or AST ≥3xULN, bilirubin ≥2xULN or jaundice). IRs determined if the pEoI met the criteria for EoI classification by assessing DILI (definite, highly likely, probable, possible, unlikely, unrelated or undetermined), pattern (hepatocellular, mixed, cholestatic or undetermined), likely, competing or alternative cause(s), severity (mild, moderate, severe, fatal/transplantation or undetermined), Hy’s law case, recovery & liver failure (all yes, no or undetermined).|From baseline to Week 52|Participants in the SAS who had pEoI and were adjudicated by IRs||Number of events meeting criteria|||Number
850421|NCT01470599|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Hospitalized Due to Crohn’s Disease|The number of participants hospitalized due to Crohn's disease were recorded at every study visit.|From baseline to Week 52/follow-up|SAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
850422|NCT01470599|Secondary|Change From Baseline EQ-5D VAS Scores at Week 8/ET Visit|EQ5D is a participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related QoL in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 mm (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.|Baseline and Week 48/ET visit|Participants in the FAS who had non-missing data at Week 48/ET visit||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
850423|NCT01470599|Secondary|EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Baseline and Week 8/ET Visit|EQ5D is a participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related QoL in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 millimeters (mm) (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state. n = number of participants with non-missing data.|Baseline and Week 48/ET visit|FAS||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
850424|NCT01470599|Secondary|Change From Baseline EQ-5D Utility Scores at Week 48/ET Visit|"EQ5D is a participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related QoL in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, selfcare, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range from 0.594 to 1.000; a higher score indicates a better health state."|Baseline and Week 48/ET visit|Participants in the FAS who had non-missing data at Week 48/ET visit||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850425|NCT01470599|Secondary|EuroQoL 5 Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D) Utility Scores at Baseline and Week 48/ET Visit|"EQ5D is a participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related QoL in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, selfcare, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range from 0.594 to 1.000; a higher score indicates a better health state. n = number of participants with non-missing data."|Baseline and Week 48/ET visit|FAS||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850426|NCT01470599|Secondary|Change From Baseline SF-36 Component and Domain Scores at Week 48/ET Visit|The component and domain scores were scored using the US 1998 general population norms. The resulting norm-based T scores for both the SF36 version 2 and SF36 health domain scales and component summary measures have means of 50 and standard deviations of 10. Higher scores indicate better health-related QoL. n = number of participants with non-missing data.|Baseline and Week 48/ET visit|FAS||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850427|NCT01470599|Secondary|Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) Component and Domain Scores at Baseline and Week 48/ET Visit|The component and domain scores were scored using the United States (US) 1998 general population norms. The resulting norm-based T scores for both the SF36 version 2 and SF36 health domain scales and component summary measures have means of 50 and standard deviations of 10. Higher scores indicate better health-related QoL. n = number of participants with non-missing data.|Baseline and Week 48/ET visit|FAS||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850428|NCT01470599|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Response to the Patient-Reported Treatment Impact (PRTI) Assessment at Week 48/ET Visit by Category|The IBD PRTI modified questionnaire comprises 3 individual questions administered to the participant: participant satisfaction with study treatment; participant preference for study drug over prior treatment (this question on participant preference for study drug is prefaced by a simple question of previous treatment/s for IBD received in order to place the preference question into context) and participant willingness to reuse the study treatment again. Each of these questions (except the question on previous treatment, which is informational only) is scored on a 5 point Likert scale. PSA = Patient Satisfaction Assessment; PPTA = Patient Previous Treatment Assessment; PPA = Patient Preference Assessment; PWA = Patient Willingness Assessment.|Week 48/ET visit|Participants in the FAS who had a response to PRTI assessment at Week 48/ET visit||Percentage of participants|||Number
850430|NCT01470599|Secondary|Change From Baseline IBDQ Total Score and Domain Scores (Bowel Function, Emotional Status, Systemic Symptoms, and Social Function) at Week 48/ET Visit|The IBDQ is a psychometrically validated PRO instrument for measuring disease-specific QoL in participants with IBD. IBDQ consists of 32 items, each item score ranged from 1 (worst possible response) to 7 (best possible response). The 32 items are grouped into 4 domains: bowel function, emotional status, systemic symptoms and social function. The 4 domains are scored as follows: bowel symptoms 10 to 70; systemic symptoms 5 to 35; emotional function 12 to 84; social function 5 to 35. For each domain, a higher score indicates better QoL. Total score is the sum of each item score, and ranged from 32 to 224 with a higher score indicating a better QoL. Positive change in total score indicated improvement in QoL.|Baseline and Week 48/ET|Participants in the FAS who had non-missing data at Week 48/ET visit||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850431|NCT01470599|Secondary|Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) Total Score and Domain Scores (Bowel Function, Emotional Status, Systemic Symptoms, and Social Function) at Baseline and Week 48/ET Visit|The IBDQ is a psychometrically validated patient reported outcome (PRO) instrument for measuring disease-specific quality of life (QoL) in participants with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). IBDQ consists of 32 items, each item score ranged from 1 (worst possible response) to 7 (best possible response). The 32 items are grouped into 4 domains: bowel function, emotional status, systemic symptoms and social function. The 4 domains are scored as follows: bowel symptoms 10 to 70; systemic symptoms 5 to 35; emotional function 12 to 84; social function 5 to 35. For each domain, a higher score indicates better QoL. Total score is the sum of each item score, and ranged from 32 to 224 with a higher score indicating a better QoL. Positive change in total score indicated improvement in QoL. n = number of participants with non-missing data.|Baseline and Week 48/early termination (ET)|FAS||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850432|NCT01470599|Secondary|Observed Change From Baseline in High Sensitivity C-reactive Protein (CRP) by Week|The test for CRP is a laboratory measurement for evaluation of an acute phase reactant of inflammation through the use of an ultrasensitive assay. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement. n = number of participants with non-missing data.|Baseline and Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 52/follow-up|FAS||mg per liter (mg/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
850433|NCT01470599|Secondary|Observed Change From Baseline in Fecal Calprotectin by Week|Fecal calprotectin is an inflammatory marker for the gastrointestinal tract and considered as a measurement of neutrophil migration to the gastrointestinal tract. Higher values indicate more serious inflammation. n = number of participants with non-missing data.|Baseline and Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 52/follow-up|FAS||mg per kilogram (mg/kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
850434|NCT01470599|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Switching From 5 mg BID to 10 mg BID or 10 mg BID to 5 mg BID After Initial Assignment by Visit|There was a single study treatment dose adjustment allowed, at the discretion of the Investigator, from 5 mg BID to 10 mg BID or from 10 mg BID to 5 mg BID, after the initial 8 weeks of fixed open label treatment and for the remaining treatment period of 40 weeks. Percentage of participants whose study treatment were switched from 5 mg BID to 10 mg BID or 10 mg BID to 5 mg BID after initial assignment was reported.|From baseline to Week 48|FAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
850435|NCT01470599|Secondary|Corticosteroid Use Over Time|Use of corticosteroids (yes or no) was recorded at baseline and throughout the study. Percentage of participants taking corticosteriod at each visit was reported.|Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36 and 48|SAS||Percentage of participants|||Number
850436|NCT01470599|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Steroid-Free Clinical Remission at Week 48 - Among Subjects on Steroids at A3921086 Baseline|Steroid-free clinical remission at Week 48 was a CDAI <150 points in participants who were steroid-free at Week 48. CDAI is a composite index consisting of weighted scoring of 8 disease variables: number of liquid or very soft stools, intensity of abdominal pain, general well-being, occurrence of extraintestinal symptoms, need for antidiarrheal drugs, presence of abdominal masses, hematocrit, and body weight. CDAI scores range from 0 to approximately 600 points, higher score indicates higher disease activity.|Week 48|Participants in FAS who were on steroids at baseline of this study||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850437|NCT01470599|Secondary|Change From Baseline Observed CDAI Score by Week|CDAI is a composite index consisting of weighted scoring of 8 disease variables: number of liquid or very soft stools, intensity of abdominal pain, general well-being, occurrence of extraintestinal symptoms, need for antidiarrheal drugs, presence of abdominal masses, hematocrit, and body weight. CDAI scores range from 0 to approximately 600 points, higher score indicates higher disease activity. n = number of participants with non-missing data.|Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 52/follow-up|FAS||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850438|NCT01470599|Secondary|Observed CDAI Score by Week|CDAI is a composite index consisting of weighted scoring of 8 disease variables: number of liquid or very soft stools, intensity of abdominal pain, general well-being, occurrence of extraintestinal symptoms, need for antidiarrheal drugs, presence of abdominal masses, hematocrit, and body weight. CDAI scores range from 0 to approximately 600 points, higher score indicates higher disease activity. n = number of participants remaining at risk.|Baseline and Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 52/follow-up|FAS||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850439|NCT01470599|Secondary|Time to Relapse Among Participants in Clinical Remission at Baseline|"Relapse was defined as an increase in CDAI of more than (>) 100 points from the baseline and an absolute CDAI score of >220 points. CDAI is a composite index consisting of weighted scoring of 8 disease variables: number of liquid or very soft stools, intensity of abdominal pain, general well-being, occurrence of extraintestinal symptoms, need for antidiarrheal drugs, presence of abdominal masses, hematocrit, and body weight. CDAI scores range from 0 to approximately 600 points, higher score indicates higher disease activity. Data presented are rates estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves.
n = number of participants remaining at risk."|From baseline to Week 52|Participants in the FAS who met clinical remission criteria at baseline of this study||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850449|NCT01462565|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Six Minute Walk Distance Test (6MWD) After 4-weeks of Treatment|This assessment was a non-encouraged test that measures the distance walked for a duration of 6 minutes. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at observation minus value at Baseline. Baseline visit was Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 (+ or - 7 days).|Baseline (Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 [+ or - 7 days]) and Week 4|ITT population.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
850440|NCT01470599|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission and Sustained Clinical Remission Among Participants in Clinical Response (CDAI-100 Response) or Clinical Remission at Baseline of This Study|CDAI is a composite index consisting of weighted scoring of 8 disease variables: number of liquid or very soft stools, intensity of abdominal pain, general well-being, occurrence of extraintestinal symptoms, need for antidiarrheal drugs, presence of abdominal masses, hematocrit, and body weight. CDAI scores range from 0 to approximately 600 points, higher score indicates higher disease activity. Clinical remission was defined as a CDAI score of <150. Sustained clinical remission was defined as being in clinical remission (CDAI score <150) at both Week 24 and Week 48. Clinical response was defined as a CDAI score reduction of at least 100 points from the A3921083 study baseline value. 95% Clopper-Pearson exact confidence interval reported for the proportions. n = number of participants with non-missing data.|Baseline and Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 52/follow-up|Participants in the FAS who met clinical response or clinical remission criteria at baseline of this study||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850441|NCT01470599|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission and Sustained Clinical Remission Among Participants in Clinical Remission at Baseline of This Study|CDAI is a composite index consisting of weighted scoring of 8 disease variables: number of liquid or very soft stools, intensity of abdominal pain, general well-being, occurrence of extraintestinal symptoms, need for antidiarrheal drugs, presence of abdominal masses, hematocrit, and body weight. CDAI scores range from 0 to approximately 600 points, higher score indicates higher disease activity. Clinical remission was defined as a CDAI score of <150. Sustained clinical remission was defined as being in clinical remission (CDAI score <150) at both Week 24 and Week 48. 95% Clopper-Pearson exact confidence interval reported for the proportions. n = number of participants with non-missing data.|Baseline and Weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 52/follow-up|Participants in the FAS who met clinical remission criteria at baseline of this study||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850442|NCT01470599|Secondary|Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission and Sustained Clinical Remission at Week 48|CDAI is a composite index consisting of weighted scoring of 8 disease variables: number of liquid or very soft stools, intensity of abdominal pain, general well-being, occurrence of extraintestinal symptoms, need for antidiarrheal drugs, presence of abdominal masses, hematocrit, and body weight. CDAI scores range from 0 to approximately 600 points, higher score indicates higher disease activity. Clinical remission was defined as a CDAI score of less than (<) 150. Sustained clinical remission was defined as being in clinical remission (CDAI score <150) at both Week 24 and Week 48. 95 percent (%) Clopper-Pearson exact confidence interval reported for the proportions. n = number of participants with non-missing data.|Week 48|Full analysis set (FAS) - consisted of all participants enrolled in this OL extension study.||Percent||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850443|NCT01470599|Primary|Adjudicated Malignancy Events|Pre-specified malignancy events were adjudicated by committees of external experts who were blinded to treatment assignment. pEoI were identified by the investigator, sponsor, potential primary event notifications (i.e. malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancers) for a specific protocol, events submitted for histopathology review for potential malignancies which met the criteria for potential malignancies, and by search of AE/SAE listings for events coded to Malignant tumors Standard Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) Queries (SMQ) (20000194). IRs determined if the pEoI met the criteria for EoI classification according to the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, a ten-digit multi-axial classification of the site (4 characters), morphology (4 digits), behavior (1 digit), and grading (1 digit) of neoplasms.|From baseline to Week 52|Participants in the SAS who had pEoI and were adjudicated by IRs||Number of events meeting criteria|||Number
850444|NCT01470599|Primary|Adjudicated Potential Cardiovascular Events|Pre-specified cardiovascular events were adjudicated by committees of external experts who were blinded to treatment assignment. Potential events of interest (pEoI) were identified by the investigator, sponsor, review of alerts from central electrocardiogram assessments, and by search of adverse events (AE)/serious adverse event (SAE) listings for events coded to death (coronary and non-coronary), myocardial infarction (non-fatal), all coronary revascularization, unstable angina, stroke (fatal and non-fatal), transient ischemic attack, congestive heart failure, peripheral arterial vascular disease, dyspnoea, and chest pain. The independent reviewers (IRs) determined if the pEoI met the criteria for EoI classification according to the definitions summarized from the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium ‘Standardized Definitions for End Point Events in Cardiovascular Trials’ published October 2010.|From baseline to Week 52|Participants in the SAS who had pEoI and were adjudicated by IRs||Number of events meeting criteria|||Number
850445|NCT01462565|Secondary|Number of Participants With Urine Pregnancy Test Positive|Urine samples were collected for urine pregnancy test. Urine samples were collected at up to the treatment follow up (1 week after Visit 3 [Week 4]). Number of participants with urine pregnancy test positive has been reported.|up to the treatment follow up (1 week after Visit 3 [Week 4])|ITT population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time point were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850446|NCT01462565|Secondary|Mean Oxygen Saturation in Blood Over Time|Pulse oximetry (oxygen saturation) was analyzed. Data for Pulse oximetry (oxygen saturation) was analyzed up to the treatment follow up (1 week after Visit 3 [Week 4]).|up to the treatment follow up (1 week after Visit 3 [Week 4])|ITT population. Only those participant available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Percentage of oxygen in blood||Standard Deviation|Mean
850447|NCT01462565|Secondary|World Health Organization [WHO] Functional Class at Baseline and After 4- Weeks of Treatment|World Health Organization functional class was analyzed as class I, class II, class III and class IV. World Health Organization functional class was analyzed at Baseline (Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 [+ or - 7 days]) and Week 4. The classed were defined as Class I: No symptoms of pulmonary arterial hypertension with exercise or at rest, Class II: No symptoms at rest but uncomfortable and short of breath with normal activity, Class III: May not have symptoms at rest but activities greatly limited by shortness of breath, fatigue, or near fainting and Class IV: Symptoms at rest and severe symptoms with any activity. Hence the severity increased from class I (better) to Class IV (worse).|Baseline (Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 [+ or - 7 days]) and Week 4|ITT population. Only those participants with data available at the specified time point were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850450|NCT01462565|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Urinalysis|Dipstick method was used to measure blood, glucose and protein. Data was analyzed up to 1 week after Week 4 (Follow-up visit).|Up to 1 week after Week 4 (Follow-up)|ITT population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850452|NCT01462565|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Clinical Chemistry|Abnormal clinical chemistry was analyzed as follows: serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT/SGPT) >= 3 x upper limit of normal (ULN) , aspartate aminotransferase (AST/SGOT) >= 3 x ULN , total bilirubin >= 34.2, creatinine >= 176.8.|Up to 1 week after Week 4 (Follow-up)|ITT population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850453|NCT01462565|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Vital Signs at Week 4: Heart Rate|Summary mean change in heart rate measured in beats per minute (beats/min or BPM). Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the indicated time points minus the value at Baseline. Baseline was Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 (+ or - 7 days).|Baseline (Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 [+ or - 7 days]) to Week 4|ITT population.||beats/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
850454|NCT01462565|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Vital Signs at Week 4 : Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure|Systolic blood pressure is a measure of blood pressure while the heart is beating. Diastolic blood pressure is a measure of blood pressure while the heart is relaxed. Change from Baseline was calculated as the value at the indicated time points minus the value at Baseline. Baseline was Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 (+ or - 7 days).|Baseline (Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 [+ or - 7 days]) and Week 4(Visit 3)|ITT population.||Millimeter of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
850455|NCT01462565|Secondary|Number of Participants With Infusion Site Reactions During Treatment Period|Infusion site reactions were reported during the treatment period. Infusion site was inspected for erythema, excoriation, induration, skin necrosis or signs of local sepsis.|Baseline visit (Visit 2) to Week 4 (Visit 3)|ITT population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850456|NCT01462565|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Events(SAEs)|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that occurred during the course of the trial after study treatment had started. An adverse event was therefore any unfavourable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of study drug, whether or not considered related to the study drug. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose results in death, are life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or results in disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect and medically significant and all events of possible drug-induced liver injury with hyperbilirubinaemia. Only treatment emergent AEs and SAEs were reported in this outcome measure. Specifically, this study reported 2 SAEs, but only 1 was categorized as treatment emergent.|Up to visit 3 (Week 4)|ITT population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850457|NCT01462565|Primary|Change From Baseline in Dose of Thermo Stable Epoprostenol Sodium at Week 4|Dose titration requirement was assessed at the time of discharge. Change from Baseline was calculated as score at observation minus score at Baseline. Units- nanogram per kilogram per minute (ng/kg/min). Baseline was Visit 2 i.e . Day-14 (+ or - 7 days).|Baseline (Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 [+ or - 7 days]) and Week 4|ITT population.||ng/kg/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
850458|NCT01462565|Primary|Change From Baseline in Study Specific Participant Acceptance Survey|Study-specific questionnaire comprised the pre-defined15 questions which included activities of daily living assessment. Participants rated the question on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 was do not agree and 10 was strongly agree. Change from Baseline was calculated as score at observation minus score at Baseline. Changes from Baseline was assessed for Questions 2 to 12. Baseline was defined as Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 (+ or - 7 days).|Baseline (Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 [+ or - 7 days]) and Week 4 (Visit 3).|ITT population.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850459|NCT01462565|Primary|Change From Baseline in Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36)|Subject-rated measure of health status comprised of 36 items: 8 subscale scores (physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health problems, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health), 2 summary scores (physical component and mental component), and a self-evaluated change in health status. Subscale and summary scores range: 0-100. Higher subscale and summary scores was considered as better health status. Change from Baseline was calculated as score at observation minus score at baseline. Baseline was defined as Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 (+ or - 7 days).|Baseline (Visit 2 i.e. Day-14 [+ or - 7 days]) and Week 4 (Visit 3)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of epoprostenol sodium during the Run-in period (either currently marketed epoprostenol sodium or the study drug).||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850460|NCT01462292|Secondary|Assessment of Functional Outcome by : Physician Assessment of Daily Living|This was conducted by the physician, which helped to assess and document observed changes in the participant by the physician reported by the participant or his family or caregiver. This was reported as any worsening and any improvement up to week 24.|Week 24 and Week 48|ITT population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850461|NCT01462292|Secondary|Assessment of Functional Outcome by : Functional Outcomes Survey During Treatment Period|This was conducted by the family or caregiver. This helped to document the observed changes in the participant’s functional outcome like the day to day activities; general health, mobility, and other general daily activities. The data for Week 24 has been reported as improved, not improved and not applicable.|Up to Week 24|ITT population. Only those participants available at that particular time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850462|NCT01462292|Secondary|Number of Clinician Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Responders|Single item question designed to provide a brief, stand-alone assessment of the clinician’s view of the participant’s global functioning after initiating a study medication, compared to their global functioning just prior to initiating treatment. Evaluated by an expert physician or evaluator familiar with DMD and who could make an expert clinical global judgement about severity of illness across various time points within context of clinical experience. The CGI-I reflects the clinician’s judgment about the total picture of the participant : the illness severity, the level of distress and other aspects of impairment, and impact of illness on functioning. The CGI-I is rated without regard to clinician’s belief that any clinical changes are or are not due to medication and without consideration of etiology of symptoms. It is measured on 7-point Likert scale (1 = ‘very much improved’, 2 = ‘much improved’, 4 = ‘no change’, 5 = ‘minimally worse’, 6 = ‘much worse’, 7 = ‘very much worse’).|Week 24 and Week 48|ITT population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850463|NCT01462292|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Dystrophin Expression at Week 24 by Immunofluorescence Assay (IFA)|A muscle biopsy from the tibialis anterior muscle was taken to assess the expression of dystrophin. The muscle biopsy samples were collected by open biopsy or with the conchotome method according to standard hospital procedures for obtaining muscle biopsies from children. The minimum amount of muscle tissue required is a small piece of muscle of at least 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 centimeters. The muscle tissue was immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen-cooled 2-methylbutane and stored at -80°Celsius (C) or -70°C till shipment. In case of DMD participants , there is defect in the dystrophin producing gene or absence. Data for number of participants with change from baseline in dystrophin expression, was diagnosed using IFA and was categorized as strong increase, increase, and no change, decrease.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT population. Only those participants available at the specified timepoints were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850464|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sniff Pressure Test at Week 24|This was one of the pulmonary function test which was a non-invasive procedure. It measured the inspiratory muscle strength by transdiaphragmatic (Pdi) and esophageal pressures (Pes) generated during volitional and nonvolitional maneuvers. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed||Centimeter of water||Standard Deviation|Mean
850465|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Peak Expiratory Flow at Week 24|The peak expiratory flow is a measure of the amount of air that can be pushed through the airways in a single rapid exhalation. The peak expiratory flow was measured using spirometry. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed||Litres per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
850466|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Peak Cough Flow at Week 24|The peak cough flow was conducted using a spirometer. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the Baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT population. Only those participants available at the indicated timepoints were used for analysis||Litres per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
850467|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) at Week 24|FVC is defined as the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest breath possible. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT population. Only those participants available at the indicated timepoints were used for analysis.||Litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
850468|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in the First Second of Exhalation (FEV1) at Week 24|FEV1 is the amount of air which can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs in the first second of a forced exhalation. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the Baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the indicated timepoints were used for analysis||Litres||Standard Deviation|Mean
850469|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Creatinine Kinase Serum Concentrations|Creatine kinase (CK) is a muscle-specific enzyme; its level in plasma is considered to reflect the extent of muscle damage. In the blood samples drawn to this purpose, the plasma level of CK was measured. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 48|ITT population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||International units per liter||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
850470|NCT01462292|Secondary|Number of Participants With Accidental Falls During 6 Minute Walk Distance Test|The participants during the 6 minute walk distance were asked to walk, at their own preferred speed, up and down a fixed distance until they were told to stop after 6 minutes. The participants were warned of the time and were told to stop earlier if they feel unable to continue. The total distance walked within the duration of 6 minutes (or until the participant stopped in case of early termination of the test), was recorded in metersThe number of accident falls during the 6 minute walk distance were reported. Data is reported for the number of participants with accidental falls of 0, 1 and 2.|Baseline (Week 0), Week 24, Week 36 and Week 48|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified timepoints were analyzed||Participants|||Number
850471|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the North Star Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA) Total Score|The NSAA was a functional scale devised from Hammersmith Scale of Motor Ability specifically for use in ambulant children with DMD. It consists of 17 activities graded 0 (unable to perform), 1 (performs with modifications), 2 (normal movement). The scale assessed activities that required for ambulatory activity and included items that were rarely achieved in untreated DMD (jump, hop, raise head) as well as items that are known to progressively deteriorate over time (stand from a chair, walk). A standardized manual is available within the SPM with specific instructions for grading. Video snaps used in training program to ensure evaluator reliability. The total score ranged from 0-34 where the highest score of 34 implies absence of symptoms and lower score implies more severe symptoms. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baselie (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT Population||Scores on scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
850472|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Muscle Strength Tests For-Knee Extensor, Knee Flexor, Hip Flexor, Elbow Flexor, Elbow Extensor, Shoulder Abductor at Week 24|The muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry using a microFET2 myometer. Upper and lower limb proximal muscles were evaluated including knee flexors, knee extensors, elbow flexors, elbow extensors, shoulder abductors and hip flexors. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the Baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT population.||lbs||Standard Deviation|Mean
850502|NCT01314118|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 50 Percent (%) Reduction in Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Levels After 3 Cycles of Treatment|Percentage of participants with greater than or equal to 50 percent decrease in PSA levels was assessed. Decrease in PSA levels represented improvement.|End of Cycle 3 (Approximately Month 3)|Efficacy evaluable set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, completed at least 1 cycle of treatment and had at least 1 post-baseline PSA assessment.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850473|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Muscle Strength Total Score at Week 24|The muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry using a microFET2 myometer. Upper and lower limb proximal muscles were evaluated including knee flexors, knee extensors, elbow flexors, elbow extensors, shoulder abductors and hip flexors. Total score was calculated by summing up all individual scores. If data for any of the individual muscle strength tests was missing, the total score were set to missing for that visit. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the Baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified timepoints were analyzed||Pounds (lbs)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
850474|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 10 Meter Walk/Run at Week 24|The participants during this assessment were asked to traverse marked 10-meter measured walkway as quickly as he safely can. Time was recorded to one tenth of a second with a stop watch from when his first foot crossed the start line until when the second foot crossed the finish line. How often the participant , touched the wall was to be noted. Care was taken to ensure that the participants were safe when completing this test. The assessor was allowed to walk nearby to provide ‘emergency’ help if needed, but must not support or provide manual assistance for the participant in any way. If the participant was unable to complete the 10-meter walk, the total distance was recorded. The participants were to perform the test in bare feet. No aids or orthoses were allowed. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the Baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT population.||Seconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
850475|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 4 Stair Climb Ascent/Descent Time at Week 24|During this assessment, the participants were asked to ascend and descend four steps. The time for this was recorded with a stopwatch from the initiation of movement until the participant stands on the fourth step, (going up and going down separately). A flight of steps with handrail were used for this test. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the Baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT Population||seconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
850476|NCT01462292|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Rise From Floor Time at Week 24|The rise from floor was assessed, when the participants stood from a standardized supine position as quickly as possible when told to go. Time was recorded with a stopwatch from the initiation of movement until the assumption of upright standing. No aids or orthoses were allowed. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the Baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|ITT Population||Seconds||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
850477|NCT01462292|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Muscle Function Using the 6 Minute Walking Distance|The participants during this assessment were asked to walk, at their own preferred speed, up and down a fixed distance until they were told to stop after 6 minutes. The participants were warned of the time and were told to stop earlier if they feel unable to continue. The total distance walked within the duration of 6 minutes (or until the participant stopped in case of early termination of the test), was recorded in meters. Change from Baseline, was defined as the post-randomization value minus the Baseline value. Baseline was defined as Week 0.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 24|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population was defined as all participants who were randomized to the study, received at least one dose of study medication and have at least one post-Baseline efficacy assessment||Meters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
850478|NCT01435174|Primary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters of Ranolazine|Peak Plasma Concentration (Cmax) with a 500 mg dose of ranolazine|At hours post-dose: 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, 15, 18, 20, 22, 23, 26, 30, 65|||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
850479|NCT01410409|Other Pre-specified|Exploratory Outcomes|"Pain intensities on a 100 mm VAS with terminal descriptors of 'no pain' and 'worst pain possible' in various situations.
Number of sites with pain in the previous 24 hours shaded on a region-divided body chart
Pain location and type assessed using the Knee Pain Map.
Maximum isometric muscle strength (converted to Nm using the length of the lower leg) measured bilaterally in knee flexion and knee extension in a make test using a handheld dynamometer (Powertrack II TM Commander from JTech Medical Industries, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA)
Pressure pain thresholds measured bilaterally using a handheld algometer (Algometer Type II, Somedic AB, Hoerby, Sweden)) at five sites at the knee and the m. tibialis anterior muscle.
Self-efficacy in improving pain, function and QOL in various situations using a 100 mm VAS with terminal descriptors of 'very unsure' and 'very sure'.
Further exploratory objectives may be added later on."|Baseline, 3months, 6months, 12months and 24 months.|Will be reported in later publications, as it is exploratory outcomes|||||
850480|NCT01410409|Secondary|Serious Adverse Events Related to the Index Knee|Adverse events (AE) and seriously adverse events (SAE) will be registered in three ways and divided into index knee or sites other than index knee. The project physiotherapist will record any adverse events that the participant experiences or tells them about. For the participants allocated to, or crossing over to, TKA, a project worker will look through hospital records to register if any pre-defined perioperative and postoperative adverse events occurred. At all follow-ups, the assessor will use open-probe questioning to assess adverse events in all participants|Primary: 12months|||Serious adverse events related to knee|||Number
850481|NCT01410409|Secondary|Proportion of Users of Pain Medication|With possible answers being yes and no|Baseline and 12months.|||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850482|NCT01410409|Secondary|Weight Change in kg From Baseline|Weight change in kg measured without shoes at the same time of day and on the same scale|Primary: 12months.|Only patients with a BMI equal to or >25 were included in the analysis||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850483|NCT01410409|Secondary|Change in the Five Subscales of KOOS From Baseline|All subscales going from 0 to 100 (worst to best)|Primary: 12months.|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850484|NCT01410409|Secondary|Change in 20-meter Walk From Baseline||Primary: 12months.|||sec||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850485|NCT01410409|Secondary|Change in Timed Up & Go (TUG) From Baseline||Primary: 12months.|||sec||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850486|NCT01410409|Secondary|Change in EQ-5D From Baseline|"Between groups comparisons of the change from baseline to the 1 year follow-up in all secondary endpoint will be handled similar to the primary endpoint. See Statistical analysis plan for further description (Links)
Range of EQ-5D Descriptive Index is -0.59 to 1.00 (worst to best), while the EQ VAS goes from 0 to 100 (worst to best)."|Primary: 12months.|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850487|NCT01410409|Primary|Change in KOOS4 From Baseline (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score)|The average score for four of the five KOOS subscales, covering pain, symptoms, difficulties in functions of daily living, and quality of life (KOOS4), with scores ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 (best). Between group comparisons of treatment effect (change in KOOS4 from baseline to 1 year follow-up) will be dependent on data distribution. Between group comparisons of treatment effect (change in KOOS4 from baseline to 1 year follow-up) will be dependent on data distribution. We expect the change to be normally distributed and analysis will be made using a mixed model ANOVA with subject being a random factor and visit (baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months), treatment arm (TKA + MEDIC, MEDIC) and site (Frederikshavn, Farsoe) being fixed factors. Baseline KOOS4 will be a covariate. Furthermore interactions between the fixed factors will be included in the model. P-values and 95% CI will be presented to assess superiority.|Primary: 12months.|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850536|NCT01278394|Secondary|Mycological Evaluations (Negative KOH and Negative Fungal Culture) Compared to Baseline|Number of subjects with negative KOH, and number of subjects with negative fungal cultures.|Day 360|Efficacy data were analyzed for the ITT population. For efficacy variables, the LOCF was used to impute missing observations.||participants|||Number
850503|NCT01314118|Secondary|Time to Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Progression|Time to PSA progression is defined as the time interval from the date of enrollment (Day 1) to the date of first evidence of PSA progression. A participant was considered to have a PSA progression if the PSA level had a 25 percent (%) or greater increase and an absolute increase of 2 nanogram (ng)/milliliter (mL) or more, which is confirmed by a second value obtained in 3 or more weeks.|Maximum up to Month 30.5|All enrolled set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850504|NCT01314118|Secondary|Time to Radiographic Evidence of Disease Progression (TTRP)|Time to radiographic evidence of disease progression is defined as the time interval from the date of enrollment (Day 1) to the date of disease progression. A participant was considered as progressed by bone scan if: 1) The appearance of greater than or equal to (>=) 2 new lesions, and, following the first assessment, a confirmatory scan performed 6 or more weeks later that shows a minimum of 2 or more additional new lesions, 2) If >=2 new lesions are seen on scans following the first assessment, the confirmation is still required after 6 weeks; however, 2 addition lesions are not required to confirm progression, and 3) The date of progression is the date of the first scan that shows the changes.|Maximum up to Month 30.5|All enrolled set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850505|NCT01314118|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 50 Percent (%) Reduction in Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) During the Core Study|Percentage of participants with greater than or equal to 50 percent decrease in PSA levels was assessed.|End of core study visit (Approximately at Month 6)|Efficacy evaluable set included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, completed at least 1 cycle of treatment and had at least 1 post-baseline PSA assessment.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850506|NCT01311024|Secondary|Outpatient Antibiotic Treatment|Register follow-up up to 8 years after the vaccination of the younger sibling in the family|Up to 8 years||||||
850507|NCT01311024|Secondary|Tympanostomy Tube Surgery|Register follow-up up to 8 years after the vaccination of the younger sibling in the family|Up to 8 years||||||
850508|NCT01311024|Secondary|Hospital-diagnosed Pneumonia|Register follow-up up to 8 years after the vaccination of the younger sibling in the family|Up to 8 years||||||
850509|NCT01311024|Secondary|Invasive Pneumococcal Disease|Register follow-up up to 8 years after the vaccination of the younger sibling in the family|Up to 8 years||||||
850510|NCT01311024|Secondary|Carriage Due to Haemophilus Influenzae|Nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs taken once at 3 to 7 years of age when the vaccinated sibling is at least 12 months of age|one sampling at 3 to 7 years of age||||||
850511|NCT01311024|Secondary|Carriage Due to Any Pneumococcal Serotype|Nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs taken once at 3 to 7 years of age when the vaccinated sibling is at least 12 months of age|one sampling at 3 to 7 years of age||||||
850512|NCT01311024|Primary|Carriage Due to Any Pneumococcal Serotype Included in the Ten-valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV10) Vaccine in Older Siblings of Children Vaccinated With Infant Schedules|Carriage due to any pneumococcal serotype included in the ten-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV10) vaccine in older siblings of children vaccinated with infant schedules. Nasopharyngeal swabs taken once at 3 to 7 years of age when the vaccinated sibling is at least 12 months of age|one sampling at 3 to 7 years of age|||percentage of subjects|||Number
852907|NCT01596283|Secondary|Postoperative Length of Stay|Assess the impact of GDT compared to standard fluid therapy on net fluid balance for the total admission time|Postoperatively for the total admission time, up to 8 days|||days||Full Range|Median
852908|NCT01596283|Secondary|Total Volume of Fluid Used Postoperatively|Postoperative fluid volume|Postoperatively for the total admission time, up to 8 days|||liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
852909|NCT01596283|Secondary|Total Volume of Fluid Used Perioperatively|Assess the impact of GDT compared to standard fluid therapy on the total volume of fluid given intraoperatively|Up to the first 72 hours postoperatively|||liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
852910|NCT01596283|Secondary|Low Cardiac Output Time|Assess the impact of GDT compared to standard fluid therapy on the total time patients experience low cardiac output perioperatively|Up to the first 24 postoperative hours|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
852911|NCT01596283|Primary|Postoperative Complications|The incidence of overall 30-day postoperative complications will be recorded. These are defined in the MSKCC Adverse Events Program and organized by categories reflecting organ systems and further subdivided into specific complications within those and graded.|30 days post procedure|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852912|NCT01594385|Other Pre-specified|Would Complication|Tracking of wound infection, dehiscence, hernia, or any other would-related complication of complaint|Up to 1 year follow-up period|||Wound complication|||Number
852913|NCT01594385|Other Pre-specified|Patient Functional Outcomes|"Assessment of Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and the Functional Outcome Measures (FOM) during the available follow-up period.
FOM Source: [1] Ohio Dept of Public Safety. Ohio Trauma Registry Data Dictionary. Columbus: 2004.
FOM Scale range: 1 (worst) to 4 (best); GOS Scale: 1 (worst) to 5 (best)
FOM Feeding Subscale
Fully dependent
Partially dependent
Independent w/device
Fully independent
FOM Locomotion Subscale
Fully dependent
Partially dependent
Independent w/device
Fully independent
FOM Expression/Communication Subscale
Fully dependent
Partially dependent
Independent w/device
Fully independent"|Up to 1 year follow-up|Please see Outcome Measure Description [above] for exact measure(s) utilized, including measurement scale(s).||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852914|NCT01594385|Other Pre-specified|Bowel Obstruction|Determination of bowel obstruction during the entire available study follow-up period|Up to 1 year follow-up|||Bowel obstruction|||Number
852915|NCT01594385|Other Pre-specified|Infection / Abscess / Sepsis|Assessment of any infection, abscess, or sepsis during the initial and the follow-up periods|Up to 1 year|||Total events|||Number
852916|NCT01594385|Other Pre-specified|Ventral Hernia|Determination of ventral hernia presence during follow-up visits|Up to 1 year follow-up|||Hernia|||Number
852917|NCT01594385|Other Pre-specified|Enterocutaneous and Other Fistula|Determination of enterocutaneous/other fistula among study patients during the hospitalization and the follow-up interval|Up to 1 year post-injury|||Total events|||Number
852918|NCT01594385|Other Pre-specified|Patient Mortality|Assessment of patient mortality at 28 days, with subsequent determination of survival (i.e., patient status at last known follow-up)|28 days & end of follow-up|Note: Both mortalities in the Seprafilm group involved withdrawal of care as per previously stated patient wishes.||Mortalities|||Number
850522|NCT01299610|Secondary|Pharmacodynamics Endpoint: Skin Thickness and Other Markers of Atopic Dermatitis|A 4 millimeter (mm) punch skin biopsy was taken pre- and post-treatment (Day 1 and Day 21) from each of the 3 index lesions. The results were not analyzed for this outcome measure.|Day 1 and Day 22|Efficacy Population|||||
850523|NCT01299610|Secondary|Pharmacokintics Parameter: Area Under Curve (AUC) of GW870086|The area under the plasma concentration-time curve to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC[0-t]) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the dosing interval (AUC[0-tou]) was planned to be determined using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the logarithmic trapezoidal rule for decreasing concentrations. The pharmacokinetic parameters were planned to be calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis using Win-Nonlin Pro-Version 5.2 or higher. AUC was not analysed because the plasma concentrations were not quantifiable.|Day 7, 14 and 21|Pharmacokinetics population|||||
850524|NCT01299610|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter: Time of Occurrence of Cmax (Tmax) of GW870086|Tmax was planned to be determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. The pharmacokinetic parameters were planned to be calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis using Win-Nonlin Pro-Version 5.2 or higher. Tmax was not analysed because the plasma concentrations were not quantifiable.|Day 7, 14 and 21|Pharmacokinetics population|||||
850525|NCT01299610|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameters: Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) of GW870086X|Cmax was planned to be determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. The pharmacokinetic parameters were planned to be calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis using Win-Nonlin Pro-Version 5.2 or higher. Cmax was not analysed because the plasma concentrations were not quantifiable.|Day 7, 14 and 21|Pharmacokinetic population was defined as participants in the All Subjects population for whom a pharmacokinetic sample was obtained and analyzed.|||||
850526|NCT01299610|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Vital Signs (Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure and Pulse Rate) of PCI|The PCI ranges (low and high) of the vital sign parameters were for systolic blood pressure (<85 and >160 millimeter of mercury [mmHg]), diastolic blood pressure (<45 and >100 mmHg) and heart rate (<40 and >110 beats per minute). Only those parameters for which at least one value of PCI was reported are summarized. There were no values of PCI in vital signs parameters over the course of the study.|Up to Day 21|All subject population||Participants|||Number
850527|NCT01299610|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) of PCI|12-lead ECG was obtained. The standard ECG criteria of PCI were 1) absolute QTc Interval, > 450 milliseconds (msec), 2) increase from Baseline in QTc > 60 msec 3) absolute PR Interval, <110 and >220 msec, 4) absolute QRS Interval, < 75 and >110 msec. The number of participants with PCI ECG findings at any visit during the treatment and follow-up were reported.|Up to Day 21|All subject population||Participants|||Number
850528|NCT01299610|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Hematology and Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI)|Laboratory ranges of PCI represented as multiplier of lower limit of normal [LLN]; Multipliers of upper limit of normal (ULN). Laboratory ranges of PCI for white blood cell count (0.67×LLN; 1.82×ULN), neutrophil count (0.83×ULN), hemoglobin for male (1.03×ULN) and for female (1.13×ULN), hematocrit for male (1.02×ULN) for female (1.17×ULN), platelet count (0.67×LLN; 1.57), lymphocytes (0.81×LLN), albumin (0.86 ×LLN), calcium (0.91×LLN; 1.06×ULN), glucose (0.71×LLN; 1.41×ULN), potassium (0.86×LLN; 1.10×ULN), sodium (0.96×LLN; 1.03×ULN), aspartate amino transferase (>= 2x ULN), alanine transaminase (>=2x ULN), alkaline Phosphatase (>=2x ULN), total bilirubin (>=1.5x ULN). Only those parameters for which at least one value of PCI was reported are summarized. The number of participants with PCI hematology and clinical chemistry findings at any visit during the treatment and follow-up were reported.|Up to Day 21|All subject population||Participants|||Number
850529|NCT01299610|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. SAE include AEs those result in death, a life-threatening AE, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, a persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal functions, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect. Important medical events that may not result in death, be life-threatening, or require hospitalization may be considered serious when, based upon appropriate medical judgment, they may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed in this definition. No SAEs were reported in this study. Number of participants with AEs and SAEs were reported.|Upto Day 21|All Subjects Population was defined as all participants who had at least one application of placebo, GW870086X 0.2%, GW 870086X 2% or FP 0.05% cream.||Participants|||Number
850530|NCT01299610|Secondary|Number of Investigators Global Assessment (IGA) Responders on Days 2, 3, 7, 14 and 22|Three target lesions were selected and each of the 3 target lesions were assessed separately using the IGA. The IGA was carried out by a trained dermatologist and score ranged from 0 to 5. The detailed IGA scale is as: 0-Clear: No inflammatory signs of atopic dermatitis, 1- Almost clear: Just perceptible erythema and just perceptible apulation/infiltration, 2-Mild: Mild erythema and mild papulation/infiltration, 3-Moderate: Moderate erythema, and moderate papulation/infiltration, 4-Severe: Severe erythema and severe papulation/infiltration, 5-Very Severe: Very severe erythema, and very severe papulation/infiltration with oozing/crusting. The participant was considered as responder if each lesion at timepoint, IGA score reduced by 1 grade and improved from Baseline by 2 grades.|Days 2, 3, 7, 14 and 22|Efficacy population||Participants|||Number
850531|NCT01299610|Secondary|Change From Baseline TIS Scores Between GW870086X (0.2% and 2%) Versus Placebo on Days 2, 3, 7 and 14|Three target lesions were selected and each of the 3 target lesions were assessed separately using the TIS for erythema, oedema/papulation, and excoriation using a score of 0 - 3 as 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe. Each participant had at least 3 index lesions (=> 1square centimeter in size) with a sum score of =>4 and =< 6 for erythema, oedema/populations and excoriations using the TIS rating scale at screening. The index lesions represented common lesions i.e. not the most or least severe lesions. The total TIS score for a lesion was calculated as the sum of each of the component scores i.e. may range from 0 (no symptoms) to 9 (severe symptoms). The values of Day 1 assessments were considered as Baseline values. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline TIS score from Day 22 values TIS score.|Days 2, 3, 7, and 14 of each treat|Efficacy Population||Score on scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
850532|NCT01299610|Primary|Change From Baseline Three Item Severity (TIS) Scores Between GW870086 (0.2% and 2%) Versus Placebo at Day 22|Three target lesions were selected and each of the 3 target lesions were assessed separately using the TIS for erythema, oedema/papulation, and excoriation using a score of 0 - 3 as 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe. Each participant had at least 3 index lesions (=> 1square centimeter in size) with a sum score of =>4 and =< 6 for erythema, oedema/populations and excoriations using the TIS rating scale at screening. The index lesions represented common lesions i.e. not the most or least severe lesions. The total TIS score for a lesion was calculated as the sum of each of the component scores i.e. ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 9 (severe symptoms). The values of Day 1 assessments were considered as Baseline values. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline TIS score from Day 22 TIS score.|Baseline (Day 1) and Day 22|The Efficacy Population was defined as participants in the ‘All Subjects’ population with at least one post dose TIS assessment.||Score on scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
850535|NCT01278394|Secondary|Length of Time to Clinical Evaluation of Clear or at Least 5 mm of CNG|Length of time to clinical evaluation of clear or at least 5 mm of CNG.|Baseline to 360|Efficacy data were analyzed for the ITT population. For efficacy variables, the LOCF was used to impute missing observations.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850538|NCT01278394|Secondary|Mycological Evaluations (Negative KOH and Negative Fungal Culture) Compared to Baseline|Number of subjects with negative KOH, and number of subjects with negative fungal cultures.|Day 180|Efficacy data were analyzed for the ITT population. For efficacy variables, the LOCF was used to impute missing observations.||participants|||Number
850539|NCT01278394|Secondary|Mycological Evaluations (Negative Potassium Hydroxide (KOH) and Negative Fungal Culture) Compared to Baseline|Number of subjects with negative KOH, and number of subjects with negative fungal cultures.|Day 90|Efficacy data were analyzed for the ITT population. For efficacy variables, the LOCF was used to impute missing observations.||participants|||Number
850540|NCT01278394|Secondary|Clear Nail Growth of the Targeted Toenail|Clear nail was measured on digital images as the distance in millimeters from the proximal nail fold to the proximal limit of the disease as marked by the Investigator. New Clear Nail Growth (CNG) was calculated from the clear nail measurements.|Day 360|Efficacy data were analyzed for the ITT population. For efficacy variables, the LOCF was used to impute missing observations.||millimeters||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850541|NCT01278394|Primary|Clinical Evidence of Complete Clearance of the Treatment-targeted Great Toenail Plus a Negative Fungal Culture at Day 360|Proportion of subjects with a clinical assessment of a clear (completely normal) nail unit plus a negative fungal culture from the treatment-targeted toenail at Day 360.|Day 360|Efficacy data were analyzed for the ITT population. For efficacy variables, the last observation was carried forward (LOCF) to impute missing observations.||participants|||Number
850665|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Relationship Between GSK1292263 Drug Exposures and Pharmacodynamic Parameters (Part B)|Data was not collected for this outcome measure.|At pre-breakfast on Days -1 and 14, and then at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dose|PD Population. No data was collected for this outcome measure.|||||
853671|NCT00069238|Secondary|Clinical Response|Response was measured by the International Workshop to Standardize Response Criteria for Non-Hodgkin's Lymphomas. Complete remission (CR) is complete disappearance of all detectable clinical and radiographic evidence of disease. Complete response unconfirmed (Cru)is as per complete remission criterion except that if a residual node is greater than 1.5cm, it must have decreased by greater than 75% in the sum of the products of the perpendicular diameters (SPD). Partial response (PR) is ≥50% decrease in the SPD of 6 largest dominant nodes or nodal masses. Progressive disease (PD) is ≥50% increase from the nadir in the SPD of any previously identified abnormal node for PRS or non-responders. Stable disease (SD) is less than a PR but not progressive disease.|For patients with response:Restage sites of disease every (q) 3 months for the first year, then q4 months for the second year, and then q6 months for the next 3 years, and yearly thereafter. The timing for these visits may be adjusted + 2 months.|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853672|NCT00069238|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.|67 months and 9 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853673|NCT00069238|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of Alemtuzumab|MTD was achieved by increasing doses of Alemtuzumab on three cohorts. Cohort 1 received 30mg of Alemtuzumab, cohort 2 received 60mg of Alemtuzumab, and cohort 3 received 90mg of Alemtuzumab intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 6 cycles. The MTD reflects the highest dose of Alemtuzumab in which no more than 1 of 6 participants entered at a specific dose level experienced a dose limiting toxicity (DLT).|Evaluation of dose limiting toxicity was done at the end of each cycle or every 21 days.|||mg|||Number
853674|NCT00064753|Secondary|Renal Artery Revascularization|censored at 3 months after return to dialysis|Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|||participants|||Number
853675|NCT00064753|Secondary|Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair|censored at 3 months after return to dialysis|Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|||participants|||Number
853676|NCT00064753|Secondary|Carotid Endarterectomy or Angioplasty|censored at 3 months after return to dialysis|Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|||participants|||Number
853677|NCT00064753|Secondary|Lower Extremity Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD)|censored at 3 months after return to dialysis|Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|||participants|||Number
853678|NCT00064753|Secondary|Coronary Artery Revascularization|censored at 3 months after return to dialysis|Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|||participants|||Number
853679|NCT00064753|Secondary|CVD Death|censored at 3 months after return to dialysis|Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|P was calculated with stratified proportional hazards models stratified by country||participants|||Number
853680|NCT00064753|Secondary|Resuscitated Sudden Death (RSD)|censored at 3 months after return to dialysis|Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|||participants|||Number
853681|NCT00064753|Secondary|Fatal/Non-fatal Stroke|censored at 3 months after return to dialysis|Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|||participants|||Number
853682|NCT00064753|Secondary|Fatal/Non-fatal Myocardial Infarction (MI)|censored at 3 months after return to dialysis|Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|||participants|||Number
853683|NCT00064753|Secondary|Mortality (All-cause)|censored at 3 months after return to dialysis|Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|||participants|||Number
853684|NCT00064753|Secondary|Renal Graft Failure||Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|Intention-to-treat||participants|||Number
853685|NCT00064753|Primary|Recurrent or de Novo Arteriosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) Defined as the Occurrence of Non-fatal or Fatal Arteriosclerotic Outcomes Including Coronary Heart, Cerebrovascular, and Peripheral Vascular Disease Events||Up to 6 years (mean 4 years)|Censored at 3 months after return to dialysis||participants|||Number
853690|NCT00045708|Secondary|Percent of Subjects With 6M Progression Free Survival at the Phase 2 Arm of Study|subjects who are progression free at 6 month scan|6 months|19 patients treated at the MTD from during Phase 2 and 4 patients treated at the MTD during the Phase 1 nonP450 arm 2 were included in the response analysis.||percent of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853691|NCT00045708|Secondary|The Duration of Progression Free Survival (Phase 2)|only patients treated on the nonP450 MTD|1.5 years|19 patients treated at the MTD from during Phase 2 and 4 patients treated at the MTD during the Phase 1 nonP450 arm 2 were included in the response analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
853692|NCT00045708|Secondary|Duration of Overall Survival||1.5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
853693|NCT00045708|Primary|Grade 3 and 4 Toxicity (NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Associated With BMS-247550 Treatment in at Least 5% of Patients|Proportion of patients with serious or life threatening toxicities in at least 5% of patients|Up to 30 days post treatment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853766|NCT02287025|Primary|Proportion of Patients Who Discontinue Prior to Documented Progression of Disease (PD) or Death||Up to 1 year|The study was pre-maturely terminated. No data were collected from participants for this assessment.|||||
850686|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings (Part B)|ECGs were taken at Screening, pre-breakfast on Day -1 and at Follow-up. On Days 1, 7 and 14 ECGs were taken pre-breakfast (fasting) and at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24hours post-dose. Triplicate ECGs were taken at the pre-breakfast time point, and single assessments were taken at all other times. ECGs were taken in supine position. The data has been presented as abnormal- not clinically significant (NCS) and abnormal-clinically significant (CS).|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 15) in Part B|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850634|NCT01204255|Secondary|Side Effects||3 months|||Side effects|||Number
850635|NCT01204255|Primary|Lorazepam, Diphenyhydramine, Haloperidol Absorption|Level of lorazepam absorption measured by the serum concentration of the drug|4 hours|||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
850687|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings (Part A)|ECGs were taken at Screening, pre-breakfast on Day -1, on Day 1 (pre-breakfast, 1 hour, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24hours post-dose), and at follow-up. Assessments were made in triplicate on Day 1 at the pre-breakfast time point, and single assessments were made at all other times. ECGs were taken in supine position. The data has been presented as abnormal- not clinically significant (NCS) and abnormal-clinically significant (CS).|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 2) in Part A|Safety Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850653|NCT01177735|Secondary|Gene Expression Profiling (GEP) Changes Exerted Within 48 Hours of Initiation 3 Concurrent Days of Exposure to Lenalidomide.|Gene expression profiling at 48 hours after initiation of lenalidomide|48 hours||||||
850654|NCT01177735|Secondary|Gene Expression Profiling (GEP) Changes Exerted Within 48 Hours of Initiation of Daily Pomalidomide Dosing.|Gene expression profiling at baseline and at 48 hours after initiation of pomalidomide|48 hours||||||
850655|NCT01177735|Secondary|Response Rate (CR, n-CR, VGPR) and Duration of Response After Pomalidomide Therapy.|Response rate (CR, n-CR, VGPR) Duration of response rate after initiation of pomalidomide therapy|1 year following initiation of pomalidomide therapy||||||
850656|NCT01177735|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) After Initiation of Pomalidomide Therapy|Progression -free survival (PFS) after initiation of pomalidomide therapy. Progressive disease is defined as increase of > 25% from lowest response value in any one or more of the following: Serum M-component and/or (the absolute increase must be > 0.5 g/dL); Urine M-component and/or (the absolute increase must be > 200 mg/24 h); Only in patients without measurable serum and urine M-protein levels; the difference between involved and uninvolved FLC levels. The absolute increase must be > 10 mg/dL; Bone marrow plasma cell percentage; the absolute percentage must be > 10%; Definite development of new bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytomas or definite increase in the size of existing bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytomas; Development of hypercalcaemia (corrected serum calcium > 11.5 mg/dL or 2.65 mmol/L) that can be attributed solely to the plasma cell proliferative disorder.|1 year following initiation of pomalidomide therapy|||percentage of participants|||Number
850666|NCT01128621|Primary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean for Insulin Value (Part B)|Baseline was considered to be Day -1 pre-breakfast value. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline is set to missing as well. If measurements were taken in triplicate, then the mean of the triplicate measurements was used as the Baseline. AUC with respect to that time interval was calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule. The weighted mean was determined by dividing the AUC by the observed length of the collection interval (time of last assessment – time of first assessment in hours). In order for the AUC to be calculated, the first and last time points and at least one additional assessment falling between the two must be non-missing.|Baseline and at pre-breakfast on Days -1 and 14, and then at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dose.|PD Population||pmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850667|NCT01128621|Primary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean for Glucose Value (Part B)|Baseline was considered to be Day -1 pre-breakfast value. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline is set to missing as well. If measurements were taken in triplicate, then the mean of the triplicate measurements was used as the Baseline. Weighted mean were assessed for (0-12) and (0-24). AUC with respect to that time interval was calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule. The weighted mean was determined by dividing the AUC by the observed length of the collection interval (time of last assessment – time of first assessment in hours). In order for the AUC to be calculated, the first and last time points and at least one additional assessment falling between the two must be non-missing.|Baseline and at pre-breakfast on Days -1 and 14, and then at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dose.|PD Population.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850668|NCT01128621|Primary|Mean Post Meal Insulin Value (Part B)|Blood samples were collected on Days -1 and 14, post-breakfast at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dose. For lunch (approximately 4 hours post morning dose) samples were collected at the following times after starting each meal: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours. For the evening meal (approximately 10 hours post morning dose), samples were taken at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dinner.|At pre-breakfast on Days -1 and 14, and then at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dose.|PD Population.||pmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850669|NCT01128621|Primary|Mean Post Meal Glucose Value (Part B)|Blood samples were collected on Days -1 and 14, post-breakfast at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dose. For lunch (approximately 4 hours post morning dose) samples were collected at the following times after starting each meal: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours. For the evening meal (approximately 10 hours post morning dose), samples were taken at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dinner.|At pre-breakfast on Days -1 and 14, and then at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dose.|PD Population.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850670|NCT01128621|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Fasted Insulin Value (Part B)|Baseline was considered to be Day -1 pre-breakfast value. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline is set to missing as well. If measurements were taken in triplicate, then the mean of the triplicate measurements was used as the Baseline.|Baseline and at pre-breakfast on Days -1 and 14, and then at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dose.|PD Population.||pmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850671|NCT01128621|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Fasted Glucose Value (Part B)|Baseline was considered to be Day -1 pre-breakfast value. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline is set to missing as well. If measurements were taken in triplicate, then the mean of the triplicate measurements was used as the Baseline.|Baseline and at pre-breakfast on Days -1 and 14, and then at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 hours post dose.|PD Population.||mmol/L||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
850672|NCT01128621|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Fasted Insulin Value (Part A)|Baseline was considered to be Day 1 pre-breakfast. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline is set to missing as well. If measurements were taken in triplicate, then the mean of the triplicate measurements was used as the Baseline.|Baseline and at pre-breakfast on Day 1 and 24 hours post-dose.|PD Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||picomoles per liter (pmol/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850673|NCT01128621|Primary|Change From Baseline in Mean Fasted Glucose Value (Part A)|Baseline was considered to be Day 1 pre-breakfast. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline is set to missing as well. If measurements were taken in triplicate, then the mean of the triplicate measurements was used as the Baseline.|Baseline and at pre-breakfast on Day 1 and 24 h post-dose.|The Pharmacodynamic (PD) Population included participants from the Safety Population who had any PD parameter estimated. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850674|NCT01128621|Primary|Mean Accumulation Ratio by AUC (0-10), AUC (0-24) and Cmax for GSK1292263 (Part B)|Accumulation ratio (Ro) was derived as: Ro = Day 14 morning AUC(0-10)/Day 1 morning AUC(0-10) (for BID regimens only). Ro = Day 14 AUC(0-24)/Day 1 AUC(0-24) (for both BID and once daily regimens). Accumulation ratio (RCmax)= Day 14 Cmax/Day 1 Cmax. RCmax was not computed for each dosing period (morning and evening).|On Days 1 and 14, at immediately pre-morning dose, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 24 and 48 hours post-morning dose.|PK Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Mean
850675|NCT01128621|Primary|T1/2 Following Repeat Dose of GSK1292263 (Part B)|"Outcome measure was added with caveat as data permits. The data for T1/2 was not collected."|On Days 1 and 14, at immediately pre-morning dose, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 24 and 48 hours post-morning dose. On Day 7, at pre-dose (post-breakfast), 1, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 6 and 10 (immediately post-dinner, pre-dose for BID regimen).|PK population|||||
850676|NCT01128621|Primary|AUC From Time Zero (Pre-dose) to 10 Hours [AUC (0-10)] and AUC (0-24) Following Repeat Dose of GSK1292263 (Part B)|Serial blood samples for the determination of the PK of GSK1292263 were collected on Days 1, 7 and 14. Blood samples for PK were collected on Days 1 and 14, at immediately pre-morning dose, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 24 and 48 hours post-morning dose. On Day 7, blood samples for PK were collected at pre-dose (post-breakfast), 1, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 6 and 10 (immediately post-dinner, pre-dose for BID regimen). When planned PK sampling resulted in multiple samples at the same time point, only one sample was collected. The PK parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis. AUC (0-10) and AUC (0-24) were determined using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the logarithmic trapezoidal rule for decreasing concentrations.|On Days 1 and 14, at immediately pre-morning dose, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 24 and 48 hours post-morning dose. On Day 7, at pre-dose (post-breakfast), 1, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 6 and 10 (immediately post-dinner, pre-dose for BID regimen).|PK Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850677|NCT01128621|Primary|Tmax and Tlag Following Repeat Dose of GSK1292263 (Part B)|Serial blood samples for the determination of the PK of GSK1292263 were collected on Days 1, 7 and 14. Blood samples for PK were collected on Days 1 and 14, at immediately pre-morning dose, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 24 and 48 hours post-morning dose. On Day 7, blood samples for PK were collected at pre-dose (post-breakfast), 1, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 6 and 10 (immediately post-dinner, pre-dose for BID regimen). When planned PK sampling resulted in multiple samples at the same time point, only one sample was collected. The PK parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis. Tmax was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. Tlag was determined as the time of the sample preceding the first quantifiable concentration, on Day 1 only.|On Days 1 and 14, at immediately pre-morning dose, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 24 and 48 hours post-morning dose. On Day 7, at pre-dose (post-breakfast), 1, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 6 and 10 (immediately post-dinner, pre-dose for BID regimen).|PK Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||hour||Full Range|Median
850678|NCT01128621|Primary|Cmax Following Repeat Dose of GSK1292263 (Part B)|Serial blood samples for the determination of the PK of GSK1292263 were collected on Days 1, 7 and 14. Blood samples for PK were collected on Days 1 and 14, at immediately pre-morning dose, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 24 and 48 hours post-morning dose. On Day 7, blood samples for PK were collected at pre-dose (post-breakfast), 1, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 6 and 10 (immediately post-dinner, pre-dose for BID regimen). When planned PK sampling resulted in multiple samples at the same time point, only one sample was collected. The PK parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis. Cmax was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data.|On Days 1 and 14, at immediately pre-morning dose, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 24 and 48 hours post-morning dose. On Day 7, at pre-dose (post-breakfast), 1, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 6 and 10 (immediately post-dinner, pre-dose for BID regimen).|PK Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850679|NCT01128621|Primary|Terminal Phase Half-life (t1/2) Following a Single Dose of GSK1292263 (Part A)|"Outcome measure was added with caveat as data permits. The data for t1/2 was not collected."|On Day 1 Immediately pre-dose (time 0) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24 and 48 hours post-dose.|PK Population|||||
850680|NCT01128621|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero (Pre-dose) Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUC [0-inf]) Following a Single Dose of GSK1292263 (Part A)|"Outcome measure was added with caveat as data permits. The data for AUC (0-inf) was not collected."|On Day 1 Immediately pre-dose (time 0) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24 and 48 hours post-dose.|PK Population|||||
850681|NCT01128621|Primary|Volume of Distribution (V/F) (Part A)|"Outcome measure was added with caveat as data permits. The data for V/F was not collected."|On Day 1 Immediately pre-dose (time 0) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24 and 48 hours post-dose.|PK Population|||||
850682|NCT01128621|Primary|Apparent Clearance Following Oral Dosing (CL/F) of GSK1292263 (Part A)|"Outcome measure was added with caveat as data permits. The data for CL/F was not collected."|On Day 1 Immediately pre-dose (time 0) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24 and 48 hours post-dose.||||||
850683|NCT01128621|Primary|Lag Time Before Observation of Drug Concentrations in Sampled Matrix (Tlag) and Time of Occurrence of Cmax (Tmax) Following a Single Dose of GSK1292263 (Part A)|Blood samples for the determination of PK were collected on Day 1 Immediately pre-dose (time 0) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24 and 48 hours post-dose. PK samples for 2 participants were not analyzed. The PK parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis. Tmax was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. Tlag was determined as the time of the sample preceding the first quantifiable concentration, on Day 1 only.|On Day 1 Immediately pre-dose (time 0) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24 and 48 hours post-dose.|PK Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||hour||Full Range|Median
850684|NCT01128621|Primary|Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) Following a Single Dose of GSK1292263 (Part A)|Blood samples for the determination of PK were collected on Day 1 Immediately pre-dose (time 0) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24 and 48 hours post-dose. PK samples for participants were not analyzed. The PK parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis. Cmax was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data.|On Day 1 Immediately pre-dose (time 0) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24 and 48 hours post-dose.|PK Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850685|NCT01128621|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Zero (Pre-dose) to 24 Hours [AUC (0-24)] and AUC From Time Zero (Pre-dose) to Last Time of Quantifiable Concentration (AUC [0-last)] Following a Single Dose of GSK1292263 (Part A)|Blood samples for the determination of pharmacokinetics (PK) were collected on Day 1 Immediately pre-dose (time 0) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24 and 48 hours post-dose. PK samples for 2 participants were not analyzed. The PK parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis. AUC (0-last) and AUC (0-24) were determined using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the logarithmic trapezoidal rule for decreasing concentrations.|On Day 1 Immediately pre-dose (time 0) and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 24 and 48 hours post-dose.|The PK Population included participants from the Safety Population who had any PK parameter estimated. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||nanograms hour per milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
850688|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Vital Signs of PCI (Part B)|Assessment of vital signs (including systolic and diastolic blood pressure and heart rate) was performed at Screening, pre-breakfast on Days -1 to 14 in a fasting state early in the morning (prior to morning dosing on Days 1-14), and at Follow-up. On Days 1, 7 and 14, they were taken at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 24 hours after the morning dose. At each time point, assessment was performed after resting in a supine or semi-supine position for at least 10 minutes.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 15) in Part B|Safety Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850689|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Vital Signs of PCI (Part A)|Assessment of vital signs (including systolic, diastolic blood pressure and heart rate) was performed at one time point at Screening, at follow-up and pre-breakfast on Day -1. On Day 1, they were taken at pre-breakfast, 1 hour, 3, 4, 6, 10, 16 and 24 hours post-dose. Assessments were made in triplicate at the pre-breakfast time point, and single assessments were made at all other times. Assessments were performed after resting in a supine or semi-supine position for at least 10 minutes. PCI value of systolic blood pressure: <85 and >160 millimeter of mercury (mmHg). PCI value of diastolic blood pressure: <45 and >100 mmHg. PCI value of heart rate: <40 and >110 beats per minute.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 2) in Part A|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
850690|NCT01128621|Primary|Mean Value of Urine Specific Gravity (Part B)|Urine samples were collected at screening, on Day -2, and on Days 1, 7, 15 and at follow-up. Urinalysis parameter include urine specific gravity. Urinary specific gravity is a measure of the concentration of solutes in the urine . It measures the ratio of urine density compared with water density and provides information on the kidney's ability to concentrate urine .|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 15) in Part B|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
850691|NCT01128621|Primary|Mean Value of Urine Specific Gravity (Part A)|Urine samples were collected at screening, Day -1, at 24hr post- dose (Day 2), and at follow-up. Urinalysis parameter include urine specific gravity. Urinary specific gravity is a measure of the concentration of solutes in the urine . It measures the ratio of urine density compared with water density and provides information on the kidney's ability to concentrate urine .|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 2) in Part A|Safety Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
850692|NCT01128621|Primary|Mean Value of Urine pH (Part B)|Urine samples were collected at screening, on Day -2, and on Days 1, 7, 15 and at follow-up. Urinalysis parameters included urine pH assessed using dipstick analysis. pH is calculated on a scale of 0 to 14, such that, the lower the number, more acidic the urine and higher the number, more alkaline the urine with 7 being neutral.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 15) in Part B|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||pH||Standard Deviation|Mean
850693|NCT01128621|Primary|Mean Value of Urine pH (Part A)|Urine samples were collected at screening, Day -1, at 24hr post- dose (Day 2), and at follow-up. Urinalysis parameters included urine pH assessed using dipstick analysis. pH is calculated on a scale of 0 to 14, such that, the lower the number, more acidic the urine and higher the number, more alkaline the urine with 7 being neutral.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 2) in Part A|Safety Population||pH||Standard Deviation|Mean
850694|NCT01128621|Primary|Mean Value of Urine Albumin (Part B)|Urine samples were collected at screening, on Day -2, and on Days 1, 7, 15 and at follow-up. Urine albumin was assessed using quantitative analysis.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 15) in Part B|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
850695|NCT01128621|Primary|Mean Value of Urine Albumin at Follow up (Part A)|Urine samples were collected at screening, Day -1, at 24hr post- dose (Day 2), and at follow-up. Urine albumin was assessed using quantitative analysis.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 2) in Part A|Safety Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||milligrams per liter (mg/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
850696|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Urinalysis Data Values (Part B)|Urinalysis parameters: Urine occult blood, Urine glucose, Urine ketones, Urine protein, White blood cells were assessed for abnormal findings by dipstick analysis. The abnormal findings were presented as trace, 1+, 2+ and 3+. Trace indicates lowest concentration of the mentioned parameters in urine and 3+ indicates highest concentration. Concentration of 3+ indicates worse outcome.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 15) in Part B|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850697|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Urinalysis Data Values by Dipstick Method (Part A)|Urinalysis parameters: Urine occult blood, Urine Glucose, Urine ketones and Urine protein were assessed for abnormal findings by dipstick analysis. The abnormalities were presented as trace, 1+, 2+ and 3+. Trace indicates lowest concentration of the mentioned parameters in urine and 3+ indicates highest concentration. Concentration of 3+ indicates worse outcome.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 2) in Part A|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
850698|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Clinical Chemistry Values of PCI (Part B)|Blood samples for chemistry assessments were collected at screening, on Day -2 (non-fasting), and prior to breakfast (early in the morning, fasting) on Days 1, 7, and on Day 15 prior to checkout, (=24hrs post-dose), and at follow-up. Clinical chemistry parameters: Aspartate amino transferase (unit: international unit per liter [IU/L]) and Total bilirubin (unit: micromoles per liter (µmol/L) were assessed for abnormal values of PCI. For aspartate aminotransferase the PCI range was >=2 x ULN (high). For total bilirubin the PCI range was >=1.5 x ULN (high).|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 15) in Part B|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
850699|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Clinical Chemistry Values of PCI (Part A)|"Blood samples for chemistry assessments were collected at screening, fasting (Day -1), at 24hr post- dose (morning of Day 2), and at follow-up.
Clinical chemistry parameter: Glucose (unit: millimoles per liter [mmol/L]) was assessed for abnormal high value of PCI. The normal range was 3.6 to 5.5 mmol/L"|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 2) in Part A|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
850715|NCT01029691|Secondary|NICU Admission|Number of mothers who had one (or more) babies admitted to NICU|at delivery (within 6 months of enrollment)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
850716|NCT01029691|Secondary|Birth Weight||At delivery (within 6 months of enrollment)|There is one extra baby in each arm to represent the twins born in each group.||grams|babies|Standard Deviation|Mean
850700|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Hematology Values of PCI (Part B)|Blood samples for hematology assessments were collected at screening, on Day -2 (non-fasting), and prior to breakfast (early in the morning, fasting) on Days 1, 7, and on Day 15 prior to checkout, (=24hrs post-dose), and at follow-up. Hematology parameters: Hematocrit (unit: ratio) and hemoglobin (unit: grams per liter [g/L]), were assessed for abnormal values of PCI. The PCI range for hematocrit was: >0.075 decrease from Baseline (low), >1.02 x upper limit normal (ULN) (high-male), >1.17 x ULN (high-female). The PCI range for hemoglobin was: >25 decrease from Baseline (low), >1.03 x ULN (high-male), >1.13 x ULN (high-female). Data has been presented for the number of participants with hematology data values high from the PCI range in a consolidated format.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 15) in Part B|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
850701|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Hematology Values of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI) (Part A)|Blood samples for hematology assessments were collected at screening, fasting (Day -1), at 24hr post- dose (morning of Day 2), and at follow-up. Hematology parameter: Total Neutrophil count was assessed for abnormal value of PCI. The range of PCI value was: <0.83 x lower limit normal (LLN) with unit x10^9 per liter|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 2) in Part A|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
850702|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Any AEs and Serious Adverse Events SAEs (Part B)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the definition above, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 15) in Part B|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
850703|NCT01128621|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) (Part A)|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the definition above, or is an event of possible drug-induced liver injury.|Up to 10 days after discharge (Day 2) in Part A|Safety Population consisted of all participants enrolled in the study and who had received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850717|NCT01029691|Secondary|Gestational Age at Delivery||At delivery (within 6 months of enrollment).|||weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
850718|NCT01029691|Primary|Number of Participants With Sleep-disordered Breathing (SDB)|Presence or absence of SDB (defined as an apnea/hypopnea index; AHI>=5)|Baseline night 1|This reflects only the n=43 women who underwent baseline sleep study (n=7 of whom did not go on to receive APAP therapy) prior to assignment to PAP therapy. The standard of care group did not have a baseline sleep study and are therefore not represented here. Of these n=43 women, n=36 received PAP therapy (n=20 were adherent and n=16 were not).||Participants|||Count of Participants
850719|NCT01029691|Primary|Severity of Sleep Disordered Breathing|Severity of sleep disordered breathing, using the apnea/hypopnea index (number of respiratory evens per hour of sleep), among participants who have or do not have nocturnal hypertension. Obstructive sleep apnea is typically considered present if the AHI is at least 5.|at baseline|This reflects only the n=43 women who underwent baseline sleep study (n=7 of whom did not go on to receive APAP therapy) prior to assignment to PAP therapy. The standard of care group did not have a baseline sleep study and are therefore not represented here. Of these n=43 women, n=36 received PAP therapy (n=20 were adherent and n=16 were not).||apnea/hypopnea index||Standard Deviation|Mean
850720|NCT01029691|Primary|Number of Participants With Worsening of Hypertension|This outcome measure's purpose was to look at the impact of the APAP on blood pressure. This was done categorically by looking at worsening of hypertension with or without escalation of antihypertensive medications.|1-6 months after enrollment.|One woman in the standard of care group died during pregnancy and is therefore not included in this analysis.||participants|||Number
850721|NCT01029691|Primary|Nocturnal Blood Pressure|measured by a 24 hour cuff, averaged across the night;|baseline and 1 week after PAP treatment.|The standard of care group did not have nocturnal blood pressure monitoring as they were not assigned to use a positive airway pressure device||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
854668|NCT00374140|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|Number of patients for which response to treatment was observed / total number of patients.|From beginning of treatment up to 60 months|Evaluable for response included patient had completed at least one cycle of therapy with everolimus.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854669|NCT00374140|Secondary|Progression-free Survival||From entry into trial to up to 60 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854670|NCT00374140|Secondary|Overall Survival||From entry in trial to up to 60 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854671|NCT00374140|Primary|Determine the Proportion of Previously Treated Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) Patients Whose Disease Has Not Progressed Following 6-weeks (2 Cycles) of Treatment With RAD001.||Two cycles of treatment with RAD001 (~6 weeks)|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854688|NCT00056160|Primary|Time to Tumor Progression (TTP)|Time to progression (TTP) was calculated as the time from randomization to the first documentation of progressive disease based on the myeloma response determination criteria developed by Bladé et. al., Br J Haematol 1998; 102:1115-1123.|60 weeks (median Time To Progression of CC-5013/Dex treatment group)|Analysis conducted on the Intent-To-Treat (ITT) Population. The ITT Population was defined as all subjects randomized.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850760|NCT00984165|Primary|Response to Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD) Treatment|The following criteria is used to determine response to GVHD treatment. Complete response (CR) is complete resolution of all clinical signs and symptoms of acute GVHD. Partial response (PR) is 50% reduction in skin rash, stool volume or frequency, and/or total bilirubin. Failure to maintain adequate performance status (Karnofsky Score >/= 70%). Non-responder (NR) <50% reduction in skin rash, stool volume or frequency, and/or total bilirubin. Failure to maintain adequate performance status (Karnofsky Score </= 70%). Progressive disease (PD) is further progression of signs and symptoms of acute GVHD, and/or decline in performance status after the initiation of therapy.|Up to 100 days|"No results were collected on the Donor Lymphocyte Infusion-Donor Arm. This arm allowed for collection of the lymphocytes on healthy donors for infusion on the DLI/Radiation Arm or the DLI/Control Group."||participants|||Number
850761|NCT00957723|Primary|Implant Survivorship||10 years||||||
850762|NCT00957723|Secondary|Patient Outcome Long Term Follow-up Questionnaire Over Time||6,7,8,9,10 years||||||
850763|NCT00957723|Secondary|Patellar Subluxation, Dislocation and Fracture Rate|The incidence of patellar subluxation, dislocation or fracture is reported.|5 years|Participants with available data.||percentage of knees|knees||Number
850764|NCT00957723|Secondary|Change in Lower-Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS) Over Time|The LEAS is completed by the participant to assess activity level. Activity levels were ordered in terms of intensity from 1 to 18, with 18 indicating the highest activity level.|preoperative, 1,2,3,4,5 years|Participants with available data: A total of 439 knees had a preoperative LEAS evaluation, 380 had 1 year, 304 had 2 year, 273 had 3 year, 222 had 4 year, and 201 had 5 year LEAS evaluations.||units on a scale|knees|Standard Deviation|Mean
850765|NCT00957723|Secondary|Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Over Time|The WOMAC collects information specific to osteoarthritis outcomes. The questionnaire uses a visual analog scale for pain, measuring factors of general pain, stiffness, and physical findings. Pain is scored from 0 to 100 for each set of factors, with 0 indicating no pain and 100 indicating extreme pain. Total WOMAC scores range from 0 to 300. Lower values represent better outcomes.|preoperative,1,2,3,4 and 5 years|Participants with available data: Data for the WOMAC is only available at the 2,3,4 and 5 year intervals in limited numbers due to typographical errors noted on earlier interval forms rendering them invalid for comparison. One knee completed the validated WOMAC at 2 & 3 years, 51 at 4 years and 97 at 5 years.||units on a scale|knees|Standard Deviation|Mean
850766|NCT00957723|Secondary|Change in SF-36 Health Survey Over Time|The SF-36 Health Survey is a 36 item patient completed questionnaire to measure general health and well-being. It includes a physical and mental status component score; each ranging from 0-100. Low values represent a poor health state and high values represent a good health state.|preoperative, 1,2,3,4,5 years|Participants with available data: A total of 433 knees completed a preoperative SF-36 evaluation, 379 completed a 1 year, 303 completed a 2 year, 270 completed a 3 year, 223 completed a 4 year, and 195 completed a 5 year SF-36 evaluation.||units on a scale|knees|Standard Deviation|Mean
850767|NCT00957723|Secondary|Number of Knees With Radiographic Failure Assessed Via the Knee Society Total Knee Arthroplasty Roentgenographic Score|Parameters for radiographic failures will follow the guidelines that have been set by the Knee Society. The scoring system for each of the three components is determined by measuring the width of the radiolucent lines for each of the zones in millimeters for each of the three components. The total widths in millimeters are added for each zone for each of the three prostheses. The total produces a numerical score for each component. Failure is defined as a score of 10 or greater, regardless of symptoms.|1,2,5 years|Participants with available data: A total of 371 knees were assessed radiographically at 1 year, 313 at 2 years, and 199 at 5 years.||Total number of knees|knees||Number
850768|NCT00957723|Secondary|Active Flexion, Passive Flexion, Active Extension, and Passive Extension Range of Motion (ROM)|Knee range of motion is measured by the number of degrees flexion and extension observed. Active motion is the number of degrees that a participant can extend and flex their knee independently. Passive motion is the number of degrees that an examiner is able to extend and flex the knee without the assistance of the participant. The Knee Society Score range of motion utilized for this study defines the range from 0 degrees of extension to 125 degrees of flexion.|1,2,5 years|Participants with available data: A total of 386 knees had 1 year active flexion/extension measurements, 317 had 2 year, and 201 had 5 year active flexion/extension measurements.A total of 385 knees had 1 year passive flexion/extension measurements, 312 had 2 year, and 197 had 5 year passive flexion/extension measurements.||degrees|knees|Standard Deviation|Mean
850769|NCT00957723|Secondary|Change in Knee Society Score (KSS) Over Time|The Knee Society Clinical Rating System is comprised of two distinct sub-scores: one for pain, ROM and joint stability, and one for functional parameters. Sub-scores range from a potential minimum score of 0 to a maximum score of 100 points. Although the specific scores are not distinguished as “excellent,” “good,” “fair,” or “poor,” a higher value represents a better outcome.|preoperative, 1, 2, 5 years|Participants with available data: For the pain/motion sub-score 415 knees had a preoperative evaluation, 364 had a 1 year, 298 had a 2 year and 190 had a 5 year evaluation. For the function sub-score 440 knees had a preoperative evaluation, 385 had a 1 year, 309 had a 2 year and 203 had a 5 year evaluation.||units on a scale|knees|Standard Deviation|Mean
850770|NCT00957723|Primary|Active Range of Motion||2 Years|Per protocol||Degrees|Knee Implants|Standard Deviation|Mean
850771|NCT00943722|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Seroconvert to Each of the HPV Types Contained in the Vaccine (Lot Consistency Study)|Serum antibody titers for HPV virus-like particles (VLPs), Types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58 were determined 4 weeks post- vaccination 3 using cLIA. The serostatus cutoffs (milli Merck U/mL) for HPV types were as follows: HPV Type 6: ≥30, HPV Type 11: ≥16; HPV Type 16: ≥20, HPV Type 18: ≥24, HPV Type 31: ≥10, HPV Type 33: ≥8, HPV Type 45: ≥8, HPV Type 52: ≥8, and HPV Type 58: ≥8.|4 weeks post-vaccination 3 (Month 7)|9- to 15-year-old females who received 3 vaccinations from Lots 1, 2, and 3 and met following criteria for at least 1 of the 9 HPV types: no general protocol violations, received all 3 vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, seronegative at Day 1 for HPV type(s), and had a Month 7 serum sample collected within an acceptable day range||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850772|NCT00943722|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Seroconvert to Each of the HPV Types Contained in the Vaccine (9- to 15-Year-Old Males [Lot 1] Versus 16- to 26-Year-Old Females [Lot 1])|Serum antibody titers for HPV VLPs, Types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58 were determined 4 weeks post-vaccination 3 using cLIA. The serostatus cutoffs (milli Merck U/mL) for HPV types were as follows: HPV Type 6: ≥30, HPV Type 11: ≥16; HPV Type 16: ≥20, HPV Type 18: ≥24, HPV Type 31: ≥10, HPV Type 33: ≥8, HPV Type 45: ≥8, HPV Type 52: ≥8, and HPV Type 58: ≥8.|4 weeks post-vaccination 3 (Month 7)|9-15-year-old males and 16-26-year-old females who received 3 vaccinations from Lot 1 and met following criteria for at least 1 of the 9 HPV types: no general protocol violations, received all 3 vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, seronegative at Day 1 for HPV type(s), and had a Month 7 serum sample collected within an acceptable day range||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850773|NCT00943722|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Seroconvert to Each of the HPV Types Contained in the Vaccine (9- to 15-Year-Old Females [Lot 1] Versus 16- to 26-Year-Old Females [Lot 1])|Serum antibody titers for HPV virus-like particles (VLPs), Types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58 were determined 4 weeks post-vaccination 3 using cLIA. The serostatus cutoffs (milli Merck U/mL) for HPV types were as follows: HPV Type 6: ≥30, HPV Type 11: ≥16; HPV Type 16: ≥20, HPV Type 18: ≥24, HPV Type 31: ≥10, HPV Type 33: ≥8, HPV Type 45: ≥8, HPV Type 52: ≥8, and HPV Type 58: ≥8.|4 weeks post-vaccination 3 (Month 7)|9-15-year-old females and 16-26-year-old females who received 3 vaccinations from Lot 1 and met following criteria for at least 1 of the 9 HPV types: no general protocol violations, received all 3 vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, seronegative at Day 1 for HPV type(s), and had a Month 7 serum sample collected within an acceptable day range||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850774|NCT00943722|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Body Temperature ≥100.0°F (≥37.8ºC)|Participants collected their oral body temperature in the evening of their vaccination day and at the same time each day thereafter for 4 days. The maximum body temperature obtained within 5 days of any of the 3 vaccinations was recorded. The percentage of participants who had at least 1 oral body temperature reading that was ≥100.0°F (≥37.8ºC) was summarized.|up to 5 days after any vaccination|All participants who received at least one dose of 9vHPV vaccine and had available follow-up data. Data from 9- to 15-year-old females were pooled regardless of lot administered.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
850775|NCT00943722|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Systemic AEs|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the vaccine. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine is also an AE. Systemic AEs were those not categorized as injection-site AEs.|up to 15 days after any vaccination|All participants who received at least one dose of 9vHPV vaccine and had available follow-up data. Data from 9- to 15-year-old females were pooled regardless of lot administered.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
850776|NCT00943722|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Injection Site Adverse Experiences (AEs)|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine, whether or not considered related to the use of the vaccine. Any worsening of a preexisting condition which is temporally associated with the use of the study vaccine is also an AE. AEs such as redness, swelling, and pain/tenderness/soreness at the injection site were recorded.|up to 5 days after any vaccination|All participants who received at least one dose of 9vHPV vaccine and had available follow-up data. Data from 9- to 15-year-old females were pooled regardless of lot administered.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
850777|NCT00943722|Primary|GMTs for Each of the HPV Types Contained in the Vaccine (Lot Consistency Study)|Serum antibody titers for HPV VLPs, Types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58 were determined 4 weeks post-vaccination 3 using cLIA. Titers are reported in milli Merck Units/mL.|4 weeks post-vaccination 3 (Month 7)|9- to 15-year-old females who received 3 vaccinations from Lots 1, 2, and 3 and met following criteria for at least 1 of the 9 HPV types: no general protocol violations, received all 3 vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, seronegative at Day 1 for HPV type(s), and had a Month 7 serum sample collected within an acceptable day range||milli Merck Units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
850778|NCT00943722|Primary|GMTs for Each of the HPV Types Contained in the Vaccine (9- to 15-Year-Old Males [Lot 1] Versus 16- to 26-Year-Old Females [Lot 1])|Serum antibody titers for HPV VLPs, Types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58 were determined 4 weeks post-vaccination 3 using a competitive luminex immunoassay (cLIA). Titers are reported in milli Merck Units/mL.|4 weeks post-vaccination 3 (Month 7)|9-15-year-old males and 16-26-year-old females who received 3 vaccinations from Lot 1 and met following criteria for at least 1 of the 9 HPV types: no general protocol violations, received all 3 vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, seronegative at Day 1 for HPV type(s), and had a Month 7 serum sample collected within an acceptable day range||milli Merck Units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
850779|NCT00943722|Primary|Geometric Mean Titers (GMTs) for Each of the HPV Types Contained in the Vaccine (9- to 15-Year-Old Females [Lot 1] Versus 16- to 26-Year-Old Females [Lot 1])|Serum antibody titers for HPV virus-like particles (VLPs), Types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58 were determined 4 weeks post-vaccination 3 using a competitive luminex immunoassay (cLIA). Titers are reported in milli Merck Units/mL.|4 weeks post-vaccination 3 (Month 7)|9-15-year-old females and 16-26-year-old females who received 3 vaccinations from Lot 1 and met following criteria for at least 1 of the 9 HPV types: no general protocol violations, received all 3 vaccinations within acceptable day ranges, seronegative at Day 1 for HPV type(s), and had a Month 7 serum sample collected within an acceptable day range||milli Merck Units/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
850780|NCT00887458|Secondary|To Determine the Proportion of Men With ≥ 50% PSA Reduction From Baseline.|Will be reported as the percentage of men with ≥ 50% PSA reduction from baseline.|Baseline and approximately 2 years from open enrollment|One subject in the high dose arm was not evaluable on account of subject discontinuing study drug during cycle 1 due to clinical progression.||percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850781|NCT00887458|Primary|To Determine the Proportion of Patients With Metastatic CRPC Who do Not Have Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Progression After 24 Weeks of Therapy With One of Two Dose-levels of Itraconazole: 200 mg or 600 mg Daily.|"To Determine the Proportion of Patients With Metastatic CRPC Who do Not Have Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Progression After 24 Weeks of Therapy. PSA progression is defined as a 25% increase in PSA over baseline [or nadir (lowest)] and an increase in absolute PSA level by at least 2 ng/mL, both confirmed by a second value at least 4 weeks later."|Up to 24 weeks|Based on how many participants were evaluable for the study primary endpoint||percent of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850849|NCT00846651|Secondary|Incidence of Maternal Nausea and Vomiting||participants were assessed for an average of 20 min, after performing the spinal anesthetic till the delivery of the baby|||percentage of participants|||Number
850850|NCT00846651|Secondary|APGAR Scores|The Apgar score is determined by evaluating the newborn baby on five simple criteria on a scale from zero to two, then summing up the five values thus obtained. The resulting Apgar score ranges from zero to 10 with higher scores being better than lower scores. The five criteria are summarized using words chosen to form an acronym (Appearance, Pulse, Grimace, Activity, Respiration).|Apgar scores were assessed at 1 amd 5 min after delivery of the baby|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
850851|NCT00846651|Secondary|Fetal Cord Blood pH||delivery of the baby|Physician policy changes resulted in blood gas values not being ordered and thus data was not available for the outcome measure.|||||
850852|NCT00846651|Secondary|Incidence of Maternal Bradycardia||participants were assessed for an average of 20 min, after performing the spinal anesthetic till the delivery of the baby|||percentage of participants|||Number
850853|NCT00846651|Secondary|Dosage of Phenylephrine Used||participants were assessed for an average of 20 min, after performing the spinal anesthetic till the delivery of the baby|||mcg of phenylephrine||Standard Deviation|Mean
850854|NCT00846651|Primary|Incidence of Maternal Hypotension||participants were assessed for an average of 20 min, after performing the spinal anesthetic till the delivery of the baby|||percentage of participants|||Number
850855|NCT00833989|Secondary|Serum Levels of the S100β Protein|The serum sample for S100β collected on Day 1 (predose, 1, 6, 12 and 24 hour) and Day 5 and was analyzed for levels. Serum levels of S100β protein were recorded as log transformed values therefore the negative values are reported.|Day 1 (Pre-dose, Post dose 1, 6, 24 hour), Day 5|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||ug per litre||Standard Deviation|Mean
850856|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Change in Transcranial Magnetic Stimulations (TMS) Evaluated by Peak to Peak MEP by % Stimulation Level|TMS is an electrophysiological technique that was used to measure neurologic changes associated with recovery from stroke via alterations in the excitability of the motor system. Motor threshold measures reflect global excitability of the corticospinal pathway, including large pyramidal cells, excitatory/inhibitory interneurons, and spinal motorneurons. Motor threshold was recorded as the lowest stimulus intensity (in percent) eliciting motor evoked potentials (MEPs). Baseline assessments were recorded at Day 1 of the study. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post -randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to missing as well.|Baseline (Day 1), Day 30 and 112|All subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Percent change in stimulation||Standard Deviation|Mean
850857|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS)|The short form GDS is a measure of depression developed specifically for use in elderly population and is sensitive and valid in the stroke population. The GDS was a participant-completed, 15 item questionnaire where each question referenced how the participant felt over the past week. Each question was answered with either a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response. Of the 15 questions, 10 of them indicate depression when answered ‘yes’ (questions 2-4, 6, 8-10, 12, 14-15) and 5 indicate depression when answered ‘no’ (questions 1, 5, 7, 11, 13). Each question received a score of 1 point when the response was indicative of depression. Total score ranged from 0 to 15. the total score ranged from 0-15, where 0 implies no symptoms and higher score implies more severity of symptoms.|Day 5 and 90|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850874|NCT00833989|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Hematological Parameters|The clinical chemistry parameters analyzed were white blood cell count, neutrophil count, hemoglobin, platelet count, lymphocytes. Only those parameters for which at least one abnormal value was reported are summarized. The number of participants with abnormal hematology findings at specified visit were reported.|Up to Day 112|All Subjects population. Data for only those participants available at the indicated time points were collected and analyzed. Data points with null value for participants analyzed indicate data not collected for respective category and treatment arm.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850858|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Total Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) Score|MoCA was an examiner-administered, screening instrument with good validity, reliability, sensitivity and specificity for mild cognitive dysfunction. The MoCA had been studied in stroke participants and was recommended as a tool to monitor and measure cognitive changes post stroke as part of the 2006 National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke – Canadian Stroke Network Vascular Cognitive Impairment Harmonization Standards. The MoCA assesses eight cognitive domains of visuospatial skills, executive function, language, attention, concentration, working memory, memory, and orientation. Participants were asked to complete 14 activities which the examiner scored according to the standardized scoring instructions. While there was no set time limit imposed on a participant. The total MoCA score ranges from 0-30, where 0= worsening and 30 reflects normal cognitive function.|Day 5 and 90|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850859|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Barthel Total Score|The Barthel was a staff-assessed, 10 item activities of daily living index that evaluated feeding, grooming, dressing, excretion (bowels, bladder and toilet skills), bathing, and mobility (transfers, walking, stairs). The total Barthel score ranged from either 0-20 or 0-100 depending on which scoring algorithm was used where 0= unable or dependent and 20 or 100= independent to perform daily activities. For this study, the 100 point scoring algorithm was used. The Barthel takes approximately 5-10 minutes to complete with the participant.|Day 30 and 90|All subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850860|NCT00833989|Secondary|Change From Baseline of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS)|The NIHSS is a staff-assessed, 15 item, standardized, disease-specific, deficit scale which measures neurological impairment and is used to quantify participant status by measuring the severity of the stroke. The total NIHSS score ranged from 0 (No impairment) to 42 (severe impairment). Approximately 15 minutes were needed to complete the NIHSS. The NIHSS will be collected as part of the eligibility requirements to exclude participants who have a deficit that is either too mild or too severe. Only NIHSS certified study personnel recorded the NIHSS. Baseline assessments were recorded at Day 1 of the study. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to missing as well.|Baseline (Day 1), Day 10, 30 and 90|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850861|NCT00833989|Secondary|Number of Participants With Modified Rankin Scale (mRS)|The mRS was a 6 point scale that measured participant handicap by evaluating limitations in activity and changes in lifestyle. The mRS was staff-assessed and scored from 0=no symptoms at all, 1=no significant disability, 2=slight disability, 3=moderate disability, 4=moderate severe disability, 5=severe disability (severe disability, bedridden, incontinent and requiring constant nursing care and attention). The structured interview was used to administer the mRS. The mRS took approximately 15 minutes to complete when using the structured interview. Number of participants with mRS were reported as per the category of the score.|Day 30 and 90|All subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850862|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Change in Grip Strength on Affected Side|Grip strength is an objective measure of arm motor recovery in stroke participants and correlate with functional status and predict recovery. Grip strength was evaluated by a hand grip dynamometer. Three replicate trials was collected for both the impaired and normal hand, starting with the normal hand. Each trial was separated by a resting period of approximately 15-30 seconds. Participants was instructed to squeeze as hard as possible while using a standardized position of grip and the resulting dynamometer reading (in kg) was recorded. The grip strength measures was conducted within approximately 5 minutes. Baseline assessments were recorded at Day 1 of the study. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to missing as well.|Baseline (Day 1), Day 30, 60, 90 and 112|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
850863|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Change in Total Box and Blocks Transferred on Affected Side|The Box and Blocks test is an objective, gross manual dexterity test that is reliable and valid in individuals with upper limb impairments. Box and Blocks was a staff-assessed, participant completed test that required the participant to move small wooden blocks from one side of a partitioned box to the other. The score was determined by the number of blocks transferred within a 60 second time period. More number of blocks transferred as compared to Baseline indicated improvement. Both the impaired and normal limbs were tested, starting with the normal limb. The number of blocks transferred were recorded. Baseline assessments were recorded at Day 1 of the study. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to missing as well.|Baseline (Day 1), Day 30, 60, 90 and 112|All subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Blocks||Standard Deviation|Mean
850864|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Change in Total Fugl-Meyer Motor (FM) Assessment|The FM assessment is a staff-assessed, disease specific, quantitative measure of impairment that is used to assess recovery of sensorimotor function post stroke. The FM is designed to assess the domains of motor function, balance, sensation and joint function. For this study, only the motor function domain was assessed. The motor domain scale takes approximately 30 minutes to complete and evaluates both the upper and lower extremities by direct observation of the participant’s performance of 50 items that measure movement, coordination, and reflex action. Each item was scored from 0-2 for a minimum total score of 0 (hemiplegia) and a maximum total score of 100 (normal motor performance). Baseline assessments were recorded at Day 5 of the study. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to missing as well.|Baseline (Day 5), Day 30 and 112|All subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Score on Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850865|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Change in Berg Balance Scale (BBS) Total Score|BBS is a performance based measure of balance. It is reliable, valid and responsive to change in the stroke population. BBS is a staff-assessed measure that requires the participant to perform 14 activities that evaluate ability to maintain balance. The BBS typically takes 10-15minute to complete. Participants were not allowed to use assistive devices while performing the activities. Each activity was evaluated by direct observation of the participant’s performance and was scored on a 5-point ordinal scale (0-4) where a score of 0 represents inability to perform the activity and a score of 4 represents independence in the activity. The minimum total score on the BBS was 0 and maximum was 56. Baseline assessments were recorded at Day 5 of the study. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to missing as well.|Baseline (Day 5), Day 30, 60, 90 and 112|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Score on Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850866|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Change in Mean Gait Velocity|Gait velocity is an objective, quantitative, reliable, valid and sensitive measure of lower extremity motor recovery in the stroke population. Changes in gait velocity correlates with physical functioning and quality of life. Gait velocity was assessed over a level, indoor 10 meter distance. The time (in seconds) it takes the participant to travel the 10 meter distance was recorded. Participants was asked to walk at their usual or normal pace and may use their normal assistive devices. Baseline assessments were recorded at Day 5 of the study. The change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline values from the individual post-randomization values. If either the Baseline or post-randomization value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to missing as well.|Baseline (Day 5), Day 30, 60, 90, 112|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Meters/second||Standard Deviation|Mean
850867|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Clearance of GSK249320|The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis using Win Nonlin Pro 4.1. All calculations of non-compartmental parameters were based on actual sampling times. The clearance was calculated as Dose/ AUC(0-inf).|Day 1 (Pre-dose, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hour) and Day 10 (Pre-dose, 1, 3 hour)|Pharmacokinetics population. Only those participants with data available for analysis were analyzed.||mL/hour/killogram (kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
850868|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Terminal Phase Rate Constant ( Lambda-Z)|The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis using Win Nonlin Pro 4.1. All calculations of non-compartmental parameters were based on actual sampling times. Lambda-Z is the terminal phase rate constant estimated by linear regression analysis of the log transformed concentration-time data.|Day 1 (Pre-dose, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hour) and Day 10 (Pre-dose, 1, 3 hour)|Pharmacokinetics population. Only those participants with data available for analysis were analyzed.||1/ hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
850869|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Terminal Phase Half-life (t1/2)|The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis using Win Nonlin Pro 4.1. All calculations of non-compartmental parameters were based on actual sampling times. The apparent t1/2 obtained as the ratio of natural log (ln)^2/ lambda-Z, where lambda-Z is the terminal phase rate constant estimated by linear regression analysis of the log transformed concentration-time data.|Day 1 (Pre-dose, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hour) and Day 10 (Pre-dose, 1, 3 hour)|Pharmacokinetics population. Only those participants with data available for analysis were analyzed.||Day||Standard Deviation|Mean
850870|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Time of Occurrence of Cmax (Tmax) and Time of Last Observed Quantifiable Concentration (Tlast)|The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis using Win Nonlin Pro 4.1. All calculations of non-compartmental parameters were based on actual sampling times. Tmax and tlast were determined directly from the raw concentration-time data.|Day 1 (Pre-dose, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hour) and Day 10 (Pre-dose, 1, 3 hour)|Pharmacokinetics population. Only those participants with data available for analysis were analyzed.||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
850871|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) and Last Observed Quantifiable Concentration (Ct)|The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by standard non- compartmental analysis using Win Nonlin Pro 4.1. All calculations of non-compartmental parameters were based on actual sampling times. Cmax and Ct were determined directly from the raw concentration-time data.|Day 1 (Pre-dose, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hour) and Day 10 (Pre-dose, 1, 3 hour)|Pharmacokinetic population. Only those participants with data available for analysis were analyzed.||microgram (ug) per mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
850872|NCT00833989|Secondary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero (Pre-dose) Extrapolated to Infinite Time (AUC 0-inf) and Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero (Pre-dose) to Last Time of Quantifiable Concentration (AUC0-t)|The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by standard non-compartmental analysis using Win Nonlin Pro 4.1. All calculations of non-compartmental parameters were based on actual sampling times. AUC0-t was determined using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the logarithmic trapezoidal rule for decreasing concentrations. AUC(0-inf) were calculated, where data permit, as the sum of area under the concentration-time curve over the dosing interval from 0 to Day 10 ±1 day (AUC0-10d) and C10d/z, where C10d is the observed plasma concentration at day 10 and z is the terminal phase rate constant calculated after the second dose.|Day 1 (Pre-dose, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hour) and Day 10 (Pre-dose, 1, 3 hour)|Pharmacokinetic population comprised of participants from the ‘All Subjects’ population for whom a pharmacokinetic sample was obtained and analyzed. Only those participants with data available for analysis were analyzed.||Hour*mg/millilitre (mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
850873|NCT00833989|Secondary|Number of Participants With Positive Antibodies to GSK249320|Presence of antibodies to GSK249320 were assessed in serum samples of participants using immunoelectro-chemiluminescent assay. Number of participants with positive antibodies to GSK249320 were reported. Only visits where the true positive antibody detection was observed were reported.|Day 1, 5, 10, 30, 60, 90 and 112|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850875|NCT00833989|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Clinical Chemistry Parameters|The clinical chemistry parameters analyzed were albumin, calcium, creatinine, glucose, potassium, sodium, total CO2, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alkaline phosphatase, and total bilirubin. Only those parameters for which at least one abnormal value was reported are summarized. The number of participants with abnormal clinical chemistry findings at specified visit were reported.|Up to Day 112|All Subjects population. Data for only those participants available at the indicated time points were collected and analyzed. Data points with null value for participants analyzed indicate data not collected for respective category and treatment arm.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850876|NCT00833989|Primary|Number of Participants With White Matter Changes and Demyelination Assessed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)|Whole brain MRI scans were performed by appropriately qualified personnel at those specified visits (Day 1, 10 and 60 or at early withdrawal [if participant withdrew from study before Day 60 MRI]). Required pulse sequences of diffusion weighted imaging (DWI), T1, and T2 FLAIR was performed to measure lesion volume and to look for the presence of any new acute inflammatory lesions. The investigator or other medically qualified study team member evaluated the Day 10 and 60 scans for any new abnormalities or clinically significant worsening. Digital data for each MRI was sent to a central MRI laboratory for an over-read of the MRI scan and calculation of the lesion volume. Number of participants with change in white matter and demyelination on Day 10 compared to Day 1, Day 60 compared to Day 1 and Day 60 compared to Day 10 were reported.|Up to Day 60|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850877|NCT00833989|Primary|Number of Participants With Nerve Conduction Testing (NCT) Values|NCT (electrode placement technique) of sensory and motor function was performed on the unaffected side (i.e., side that is not affected by the stroke) by appropriately qualified personnel at specified visits (Day 5 and 30 and at early withdrawal). Qualified technician performed the testing; however the same neurologist interpreted the NCT data within a single participant. Both upper and lower extremity nerves were tested and the data was recorded. Number of participants with normal and abnormal NCT data were reported.|Day 5 and 30 and at early withdrawal|All Subject population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850878|NCT00833989|Primary|Number of Participants With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Values Outside Range of Potential Clinical Importance|Single 12-lead ECGs was obtained. The standard ECG criteria of potential clinical importance were uncorrected QT interval <300 and >600 milliseconds (msec), absolute QTc interval >500 msec, increase from Baseline QTc >60 msec, RR Interval <90 and >2000 msec, PR Interval <110 and >220 msec, QRS Interval <75 and >110 msec. The number of participants with potentially clinically significant ECG abnormality were reported.|Up to 112 days|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850879|NCT00833989|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs Changes of Potential Clinical Importance|The potential clinical importance ranges (low and high) of the vital sign parameters were for systolic blood pressure (SBP) (<85 and >200 millimeter of mercury [mmHg]), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (<45 and >110 mmHg) and heart rate (HR) (<40 and >110 beats per minute). Only those parameters for which at least one value of potential clinical importance was reported are summarized. The number of participants with potential clinical important vital parameter findings at any visit were reported.|Up to 112 days|All Subjects population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850880|NCT00833989|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. SAE include AEs those result in death, a life-threatening AE, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, a persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal functions, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect. Important medical events that may not result in death, be life-threatening, or require hospitalization may be considered serious when, based upon appropriate medical judgment, they may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed in this definition.|Up to 112 days|All Subjects population was defined as all participants who receive at least one dose of study medication.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850932|NCT00692770|Secondary|Time to Recurrence (TTR) by Independent Assessment|"TTR was defined as the time from randomization to the first documented disease recurrence by independent radiological assessment. For subjects who had not recurred at the time of analysis, TTR was censored at their last date of evaluable scan before withdrawal for any other reason than recurrence. NA in the reported data indicates values could not be estimated due to censored data."|From randomization up to 4 years or until disease recurrence whichever came first|FAS included participants who were randomized to study treatments.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850893|NCT00739752|Primary|Number of Participants Administered Hepatitis B Vaccine|Number of participants administered hepatitis B vaccine on the day of research visit.|Day of research visit|||Participants|||Count of Participants
850894|NCT00725764|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution|Blood samples were planned to be obtained during indicated time points: Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (approximately 15 minutes before dosing, and at 4 hours (±30 minutes) after dosing). Data for apparent volume of distribution was not derived as pharmacokinetic analysis was not completed. Data was not collected for PK analysis.|Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (pre-dose15 min) and 4 h (± 30 min) post-dose|Safety population. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|||||
850895|NCT00725764|Secondary|Apparent Oral Clearance|Blood samples were planned to be obtained during indicated time points: Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (approximately 15 minutes before dosing, and at 4 hours (±30 minutes) after dosing). Data for apparent oral clearance was not derived as pharmacokinetic analysis was not completed. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (pre-dose15 min) and 4 h (± 30 min) post-dose|Safety population. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|||||
850896|NCT00725764|Secondary|Elimination Half-life (t1/2) of Foretinib in Participants With SCCHN|t1/2 was defined as the time to when half of the total amount of a particular substance is eliminated from the body. Blood samples were planned to be obtained during indicated time points: Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (approximately 15 minutes before dosing, and at 4 hours (±30 minutes) after dosing). However these analyses were not completed. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (pre-dose15 min) and 4 h (± 30 min) post-dose|Safety population. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|||||
850897|NCT00725764|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Foretinib in Participants With SCCHN|AUC was defined as area under the plasma concentration vs. time curve. Blood samples were planned to be collected on time points: Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (approximately 15 minutes before dosing, and at 4 hours (±30 minutes) after dosing). However these analyses were not completed. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (pre-dose15 min) and 4 h (± 30 min) post-dose|Safety population. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|||||
850898|NCT00725764|Secondary|Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of Foretinib in Participants With SCCHN|tmax was defined as the time to the maximum or “peak” concentration of a drug observed after multiple administration. Blood samples were planned to be obtained during the time points: Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (approximately 15 minutes before dosing, and at 4 hours (±30 minutes) after dosing). However these analyses were not completed. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (pre-dose15 min) and 4 h (± 30 min) post-dose|Safety population. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|||||
850899|NCT00725764|Secondary|Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of Foretinib in Participants With Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (SCCHN)|Plasma samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were planned to be drawn at time points: Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (approximately 15 minutes before dosing, and at 4 hours (±30 minutes) after dosing) of each treatment cycle, however these analyses were not completed. Cmax was defined as maximal measured plasma concentration over the time span specified. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|Day 1, 5, 19, 33, 43, 47 (pre-dose15 min) and 4 h (± 30 min) post-dose|Safety population. Data was not collected for this endpoint.|||||
850900|NCT00725764|Secondary|Percentage Participants With Disease Stabilization Rate|Disease stabilization rate was defined as the proportion of participants for whom the best overall response was a PR, CR, or stable disease. percentage participants with disease stabilization rate were presented.|Approximately up to 1 year|Safety Population||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856953|NCT02542072|Secondary|Lens Centration|Lens centration will be recorded by degree and direction in the primary position. 0=Centered -optimal, 1=Decentered slightly, 2=Substantially decentered (>0.5mm)|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
856954|NCT02542072|Secondary|Visual Acuity (VA)|Visual acuity (VA) for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lens wear is assessed using Snellen.|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||LogMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
856955|NCT02542072|Secondary|White Spot Deposits|Number of white spot deposits for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenses.|2 weeks and 4 weeks|||number of white spots|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
856956|NCT02542072|Secondary|Film Deposits|Front surface film deposits for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenses. Scale 0-4, 0=No film, 1=Slight film visible only under magnification, 2=Moderate film only under magnification, 3=Moderate film visible to the naked eye, 4=Heavy film visible to the naked eye.|2 weeks and 4 weeks|||units on a scale|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
856957|NCT02542072|Secondary|Lens Surface Wetting|Lens surface wettability assessment for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenses. Scale 0-4 in 0.5 steps, 0=very poor, 4=excellent|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||units on a scale|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
856958|NCT02542072|Secondary|Biomicroscopy Scores|Biomicroscopy for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lens assessed. Scale 0-4 in 0.5 steps 0=none, 1=trace, 2=mild, 3=moderate, 4=severe|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||units on a scale|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
856959|NCT02542072|Secondary|Overall Lens Handling|Handling (ease of insertion and ease of removal) for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenses. Scale 0-10, 0=very difficult to handle, 10=very easy to handle.|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856960|NCT02542072|Secondary|Vision Quality|Vision quality of comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenses. Scale 0-10, 0=completely dissatisfied, 10=completely satisfied.|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed differ from participant flow due to protocol deviations.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856961|NCT02542072|Secondary|Deterioration in Comfort|Deterioration of comfortable wearing time for habitual, comfilcon A, samfilcon A lenses. Subjects answered 'yes' or 'no' to the following question 'does contact lens comfort deteriorate during wear?'. Yes=deterioration in comfort present, No=deterioration in comfort absent|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||participants|||Number
856962|NCT02542072|Secondary|Wearing Times|Average wear time and comfortable wearing times (WTs) in hours for habitual, comfilcon A, and samfilcon A lenses.|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
856963|NCT02542072|Secondary|Comfortable Wearing Time Via SMS (Short Message Service)|Comfortable wearing times (WTs) via SMS (Short Message Service) for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenses assessed at days 3, 12, and 26 at hours 8:00 am, 12:00 pm, 4:00 pm, and 8:00 pm. Scale of 0-10 (0=painful, 10=can't feel the lenses).|Days 3, 12, 26|Number of participants analyzed may differ from participant flow due to protocol deviations.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850901|NCT00725764|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease|Per RECIST v1.0 for target lesions and assessed by MRI: CR, Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response PR, >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; OR = CR + PR. Duration of stable disease was defined as the time between the date of first dose of study drug and the first occurrence of 1 of the events: Tumor progression per RECIST as assessed by the investigator, Termination of study drug because of disease progression, Death due to disease progression, Disease progression as documented on the participant follow-up status form, Initiation of subsequent anticancer therapy.|Approximately up to 1 year|Safety Population. Analysis set included only participants whose best overall response was not disease progression.||Months||Full Range|Median
850902|NCT00725764|Secondary|Duration of Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the duration from the date of the first dose to the date of death. The start of a confounding anticancer therapy was treated as a censoring event. Every effort made to follow participant’s until death. Time to death was censored at the date of the latest participant contact or at the analysis cutoff date, if earlier. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the overall survival distribution.|Approximately up to 1 year|Safety Population.||Months||Full Range|Median
850903|NCT00725764|Secondary|Duration of Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival was defined as the duration from the date of first dose to the date of disease progression or date of death without documented progression or date of study termination + 1. The start of confounding anticancer therapy was not treated as a censoring event. Time to progression or death was censored at the study termination date or at the analysis cutoff date, if earlier.|Approximately up to 1 year|Safety Population.||Months||Full Range|Median
850904|NCT00725764|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Urinalysis|Urinalysis parameters like appearance, color, pH, specific gravity, ketones, protein, glucose, bilirubin, nitrite, urobilinogen, and occult blood were performed. Number of participants with abnormalities are reported. In case of no abnormalities observed then it is reported as zero.|Week 5 [Day 29]|Safety population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850905|NCT00725764|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormalities of Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grade 3 in Laboratory Parameters (Clinical Chemistry and Hematology)|The National Cancer Institute -CTCAE displays Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each toxicity based on the following general guideline: Grade 1: Mild AE, Grade 2: Moderate AE, Grade 3: Severe AE, Grade 4: Life-threatening or disabling AE and Grade 5: Death related to AE. Number of participants with abnormalities of CTCAE grade 3 in clinical chemistry parameters: alanine aminotransferase (ALT), γ-glutamyl transferase (GGT), phosphate, low sodium and hematology parameters: Leukocyte and Lymphocytes were presented.|Up to 20 months|Safety Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850906|NCT00725764|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Data for number of participants who presented one or more adverse events (serious or non serious) was reported. An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence (MO) in a participant temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product (MP), whether or not considered related to the MP and can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with its use. The SAE was any untoward MO that, at any dose, results in death, life threatening, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, results in or prolongs inpatient hospitalization, congenital abnormality or birth defect, that may not be immediately life-threatening or result in death or hospitalization but may jeopardize the participant or may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in this definition.|Up to 20 months|Safety Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850907|NCT00725764|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response Rate (ORR)|ORR was defined as the proportion of participants achieving best overall response of confirmed CR or PR divided by the total number of participants who received treatment. Per RECIST v1.0 for target lesions and assessed by MRI: CR, Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response PR, >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; OR = CR + PR. Participants were evaluated for tumor response per RECIST. Percentage of participants with ORR were reported.|Approximately up to 1 year|Safety Population.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850908|NCT00725764|Primary|Number of Participants Achieving Best Overall Response|Best overall response was assessed by the investigator per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST). Per RECIST v1.0 for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR. Tumor size was recorded at Baseline, and tumor response were recorded approximately every 8 weeks. Tumor response were classified by the investigator using RECIST criteria participant’s best response whether observed in the study treatment period or the treatment extension period was considered. The best overall response was the best response recorded from the start of treatment until disease progression/recurrence. Number of participants who achieved best overall response were recorded.|Approximately up to 1 year|safety population comprised of all participants who passed the screening criteria, enrolled in the study, and received at least 1 dose of study drug.||Participants|||Count of Participants
850914|NCT00715520|Secondary|Aim 3: Mean Peak Acceleration of Wrist Extension Movements|Mean peak acceleration was measured across study drug conditions prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Increases in the mean peak acceleration of the trained wrist extension movements indicate motor learning. Acceleration was measured in g; a symbol for the average acceleration produced by gravity at the Earth's surface.|Baseline, Post-Training 1(Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)|No sufficient data collected.|||||
850915|NCT00715520|Secondary|Aim 3: Mean Parameter Estimate for Maximal Motor Evoked Potential (MEPmax) Derived From Stimulus Response Curves (SRC)|Motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2), and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3).The MEP is elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) at increased intensity. Its amplitude is measured from peak to peak and expressed in millivolts (mV). Measured MEP amplitudes were plotted against the intensity to create a stimulus response curve (SRC). SRCs were modeled by a 3- parameter sigmoid function and MEPmax was extracted. Long-lasting increases in MEP amplitude indicate increases in motor cortex excitability and are associated with motor learning.|Baseline, Post-Training 1(Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)|No sufficient data collected.|||||
850916|NCT00715520|Secondary|Aim 2: Mean Peak Acceleration for rTMS Treatment With Respect to Frequency|Mean peak acceleration for the different frequencies of rTMS treatment (placebo, 0.1 Hz, 0.25 Hz, 0.5 Hz) prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Increases in the mean peak acceleration of the trained wrist extension movements indicate motor learning. Acceleration was measured in g; a symbol for the average acceleration produced by gravity at the Earth's surface.|Baseline, Post-Training 1(Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)|Analysis was completed in Aim 2 participants per protocol.||g||Standard Deviation|Mean
850917|NCT00715520|Secondary|Aim 2: Mean Sum of Normalized Motor Evoked Potentials (MEPs) for rTMS Treatment With Respect to Frequency|Mean sum of normalized MEP for the different frequencies of rTMS treatment (placebo at 0.1 Hz, 0.1 Hz, 0.25 Hz, 0.5 Hz) prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Increases in the mean peak acceleration of the trained wrist extension movements indicate motor learning.|Baseline, Post-Training 1(Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)|Analysis was completed in Aim 2 participants per protocol.||millivolts||Standard Deviation|Mean
850918|NCT00715520|Secondary|Aim 2: Mean Peak Acceleration of Wrist Extension Movements With Respect to Pulse|Mean peak acceleration of wrist movements for repeated TMS (rTMS) conditions with respect of the TMS pulse (-100, +300, placebo, zero) prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Increases in the mean peak acceleration of the trained wrist extension movements indicate motor learning. Acceleration was measured in g; a symbol for the average acceleration produced by gravity at the Earth's surface.|Baseline, Post-Training 1(Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)|Analysis was completed in Aim 2 participants per protocol.||g||Standard Deviation|Mean
850919|NCT00715520|Secondary|Aim 2: Mean Sum of Normalized Motor Evoked Potentials (MEPs) With Respect to Pulse|Mean sum of normalized MEP for repeated TMS (rTMS) conditions with respect to the pulse (-100, +300, placebo, zero) prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Its amplitude is measured from peak to peak and expressed in mV. Long- lasting increases in MEP amplitude indicate increases in motor cortex excitability and are associated with motor learning.|Baseline, Post-Training 1(Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)|Analysis was completed in Aim 2 participants per protocol.||millivolts||Standard Deviation|Mean
850920|NCT00715520|Primary|Aim 1: Mean Peak Acceleration of Wrist Extension Movements|Mean peak acceleration was measured across study drug conditions prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Increases in the mean peak acceleration of the trained wrist extension movements indicate motor learning. Acceleration was measured in g; a symbol for the average acceleration produced by gravity at the Earth's surface.|Baseline, Post-Training 1 (Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)|Analysis was completed in Aim 1 participants per protocol. One subject was not included in the analysis due to corrupt data.||g||Standard Deviation|Mean
850921|NCT00715520|Primary|Aim 1: Mean Parameter Estimate for Maximal Motor Evoked Potential (MEPmax) Derived From Stimulus Response Curves (SRC)|Motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2), and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3).The MEP is elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) at increased intensity. Its amplitude is measured from peak to peak and expressed in millivolts (mV). Measured MEP amplitudes were plotted against the intensity to create a stimulus response curve (SRC). SRCs were modeled by a 3- parameter sigmoid function and MEPmax was extracted. Long-lasting increases in MEP amplitude indicate increases in motor cortex excitability and are associated with motor learning.|Baseline, Post-Training 1 (Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)|Analysis was completed in Aim 1 participants per protocol for the placebo condition. One subject was not included in the analysis due to corrupt data.||mV||Standard Error|Mean
850924|NCT00692770|Other Pre-specified|The Correlation Between Plasma Biomarker Levels at Baseline With RFS to Determine Prognostic Value of Biomarkers - MET|Biomarker was analyzed at baseline [i.e., before treatment] as a dichotomized variable based on median biomarker levels, and dichotomized into “high” and “low” groups using an optimal max chi cut-off approach - not per intervention. As such, results were analyzed according to this stratification. Max-chi square methodology was used to search for the optimal cut point for dichotomization of each plasma biomarker and Kaplan-Meier curves were generated using the optimal cut point for each possible association examined. These biomarker analyses were retrospective and exploratory and of signal generating nature only.|At Baseline|Plasma biomarker analysis was done in 858 (77%) of the all enrolled subjects.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850925|NCT00692770|Other Pre-specified|The Correlation Between Plasma Biomarker Levels at Baseline With RFS to Determine Prognostic Value of Biomarkers - AFP|Biomarker was analyzed at baseline [i.e., before treatment] as a dichotomized variable based on median biomarker levels, and dichotomized into “high” and “low” groups using an optimal max chi cut-off approach - not per intervention. As such, results were analyzed according to this stratification. Max-chi square methodology was used to search for the optimal cut point for dichotomization of each plasma biomarker and Kaplan-Meier curves were generated using the optimal cut point for each possible association examined. These biomarker analyses were retrospective and exploratory and of signal generating nature only.|At Baseline|Plasma biomarker analysis was done in 858 (77%) of the all enrolled subjects.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850926|NCT00692770|Other Pre-specified|The Correlation Between Plasma Biomarker Levels at Baseline With RFS to Determine Prognostic Value of Biomarkers - ANG-2|Biomarker was analyzed at baseline [i.e., before treatment] as a dichotomized variable based on median biomarker levels, and dichotomized into “high” and “low” groups using an optimal max chi cut-off approach - not per intervention. As such, results were analyzed according to this stratification. Max-chi square methodology was used to search for the optimal cut point for dichotomization of each plasma biomarker and Kaplan-Meier curves were generated using the optimal cut point for each possible association examined. These biomarker analyses were retrospective and exploratory and of signal generating nature only.|At Baseline|Plasma biomarker analysis was done in 858 (77%) of the all enrolled subjects.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850927|NCT00692770|Other Pre-specified|Patient Reported Outcomes: Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)- General (G) Total Score|The PWB, FWB, SWB and EWB were summed to form the FACT-G total score. Subjects responded to each item on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). FACT-G scores ranged from 0 to 108 and the higher scores represented a better quality of life. The MID for the FACT-G total score was in the range of 6 to 7. The results on the ANCOVA analysis of time-adjusted AUC for the FACT-G score were reported.|Cycle (C) Day (D)1, C2D1, C3D1 and subsequent cycles up to C18, end of intervention visit|FAS included participants who were randomized to study treatments.||Unit on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
850928|NCT00692770|Other Pre-specified|Patient Reported Outcomes: Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)- Hepatobiliary Subscale (HEP) Score|The FACT-HEP is a 45 item, self-administered, multi-dimensional, psychometrically sound questionnaire used extensively in oncology clinical trials. FACT-HEP consisted of five subscales: Physical Well-Being (PWB), Social Well-Being (SWB), Emotional Well-Being (EWB), Functional Well-Being (FWB), and Hepatobiliary Cancer Subscale (HCS). The PWB, FWB, SWB and EWB were summed to form the FACTGeneral (FACT-G) total score. The FACT-G and HCS scores were summed to form the FACT-HEP total score. FACT-HEP scores ranged from 0 to 180 and the higher scores represented a better quality of life. Subjects responded to each item on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). The minimally important difference (MID) for the FACT-Hep total score was in the range of 8 to 9. The results on the ANCOVA analysis of time-adjusted AUC for the FACT-HEP score were reported.|Cycle (C) Day (D)1, C2D1, C3D1 and subsequent cycles up to C18, end of intervention visit|FAS included participants who were randomized to study treatments.||Unit on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
850929|NCT00692770|Other Pre-specified|Patient Reported Outcomes: Euroqol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) - Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score|The EQ-5D is a generic quality of life preference based on a validated instrument used in cancer and in general population, with 2 parts: Index and Visual Analogue Scale. The EQ-5D VAS is a measure that represents health status as a single value. It is a 20-centimetre vertical graduated visual analogue scale with scores that ranged from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). The respondent rated his/her current health state by drawing a line from the box marked ‘your own health state today’ to the appropriate point on the EQ-5D VAS. A 3-digit number (including leading zeros) was read off the scale from the point where the respondent’s line crossed the scale, which was the EQ-5D VAS score. A change of at least 7 points on the VAS was considered as minimally important. The results on the ANCOVA analysis of time-adjusted AUC for the EQ-5D VAS score were reported.|Cycle (C) Day (D)1, C2D1, C3D1 and subsequent cycles up to C18, end of intervention visit|FAS included participants who were randomized to study treatments.||Unit on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
850930|NCT00692770|Other Pre-specified|Patient Reported Outcomes: Euroqol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) - Index Score|The EQ-5D is a generic quality of life preference based on a validated instrument used in cancer and in general population, with 2 parts: Index and Visual Analogue Scale. The EQ-5D Index is a descriptive system of the following health dimensions: mobility, selfcare, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Subjects were asked to choose any one of the 3 response levels for each dimension: no problems, some problems, and severe problems. The 5 health dimensions were summarized into a single score, the EQ-5D Index score which ranged from -0.59 to 1 with higher scores representing better health states (0=death, 1= perfect health, and -0.59=a health state worse than death). A change of at least 0.10 to 0.12 points was considered a minimally important difference using Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status as the anchor. The results on the Analysis of covariance of timeadjusted Area under curve for the EQ-5D index score were reported.|Cycle (C) Day (D)1, C2D1, C3D1 and subsequent cycles up to C18, end of intervention visit|FAS included participants who were randomized to study treatments.||Unit on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
850931|NCT00692770|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|"OS was defined as the time from randomization to date of death due to any cause. OS for subjects alive at the time of analysis was censored at their last date of contact. NA in the reported data indicates values could not be estimated due to censored data."|From randomization of the first subject until 4 years later.|FAS included participants who were randomized to study treatments.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850933|NCT00692770|Primary|Recurrence Free Survival (RFS) by Independent Assessment|Disease recurrence of HCC (intra or extra hepatic) was defined as the appearance of a new intrahepatic lesions fulfilling the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) criteria of diagnosis of HCC or a new extra-hepatic lesions according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria version 1.0. In addition to investigator assessment, all images were reviewed by an independent panel of radiologists. The calculation of the RFS was based on the independent evaluation of the scans. RFS was defined as the time from randomization to the first documented disease recurrence by independent radiological assessment or death due to any cause whichever occurred first. For subjects who had not recurred or died at the time of analysis, RFS was censored at their last date of evaluable scan before drop-out for any other reason than recurrence or death.|From randomization up to 4 years or until disease recurrence whichever came first|Full analysis set (FAS) included participants who were randomized to study treatments.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850934|NCT00657553|Secondary|Response Rate of Participants Given Bortezomib Alone|Fraction of participants on the pre-emptive institution of bortezomib (PIB) arm who convert from Partial Response(PR) to very good Partial Response (VGPR)or Complete Response (CR) and those in VGPR to CR|Three Years||||||
850935|NCT00657553|Primary|Effect of Maintenance Therapy With Bortezomib on the Length of Remission in Participants Currently Receiving Maintenance Therapy as Part of Total Therapy 2|"The number of patients on Bortezomib that have maintained event-free survival, compared to the patients on observation was not analyzed due to low attrition rates.
Event-free survival is a measure of the proportion of people who remain free of a particular complication of disease (called an event) after treatment that is designed to prevent or delay that particular complication."|three years||||||
850938|NCT00616200|Secondary|Sickness Impact Profile|Units of measurement on the Sickness Impact Profile were ordinal rated scored. Information on scoring use and interpretation of the Sickness Impact Profile, readers are encouraged to read Bergner et. al. 1981 - Bergner, M., Bobbit, R.A., Carter, W.B. et all (1981) the Sickness Impact Profile: Development and final revision of a health status measure. Medical Care, 19:787-805 The SIP measures sickness-related dysfunction based on behavior in order to provide a measure of health status that will aid in assessing the outcome of health care services.|At the end of four week VLCD|The scoring range is from no impairment with a score of 0, to significant impairment, with 5. Changes in score of 3.5 are considered clinically significant.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850939|NCT00616200|Secondary|Impact of Very Low Carbohydrate Diet on Stool Frequency|Stool Frequency was measured as number of stools per day|6 Weeks|Analysis was per protocol analysis||Stools Per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
850940|NCT00616200|Primary|"Number of Subjects Reporting Adequate Relief From IBS Symptoms for the Previous Week. Adequate Relief Was a True/False Item."|"Adequate relief was measured as the primary endpoint via a single item Adequate Relief Question asking Over the past week have you had adequate relief of your symptom experience. Higher scores represent greater levels of adequate relief over the week prior to the assessment. Participants completed this 1-item questionnaire at the end of each of weeks of the study, assessing whether they had adequate relief of their IBS symptoms for the week.
A responder was defined as reporting adequate relief in at least 2 of the 4 weeks on the VLCD."|At the end of each of 6 study weeks|||Participants|||Number
850941|NCT00612924|Primary|Freedom From Major Adverse Events|"The reported values represent the patients that did not experience a Major Adverse Event.
Participants did NOT experience:
All-Cause Mortality
Myocardial Infarction (MI)
Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA)
Renal Failure
Respiratory Failure
Paralysis or Paraplegia, or
Bowel Ischemia"|30 days|One Anaconda patient is not included in the analysis because their 30 day data was not reported.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850942|NCT00612924|Secondary|Secondary Effectiveness, Technical Success|Introduction and deployment of the Stent Graft in the absence of mortality, conversion to surgical repair, failed patency of both limbs, and evidence of a Type I or III endoleak through the first 24 hour post-operative period. The table below indicates the subjects who met the criteria for technical success based on Core Lab imaging evaluations.|24 hours|151 subjects (81 Anaconda and 70 ONE-LOK) had imaging available for core lab review and determination of technical success.||participants|||Number
850943|NCT00612924|Primary|Successful Aneurysm Treatment|"defined as a composite endpoint of subjects who have successful delivery and deployment of the Anaconda™ Stent Graft at the initial procedure and at ≤365 days post-procedure and absence of:
Aneurysm growth ≥ 5 mm as evaluated by the core laboratory
Post-operative interventions to correct type I or III endoleaks
Conversion to open surgical repair
Failed patency of both limbs
Migration requiring secondary procedure or intervention
Significant fracture
Aneurysm rupture"|365 days|In the ONE-LOK™ population, 85 subjects had efficacy endpoints and 9 subjects are missing due to withdrawal prior to 365-day follow-up. For the Anaconda population, 95 subjects had efficacy endpoints and 6 are missing data due to withdrawal prior to the 365-day follow-up.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850970|NCT00545844|Other Pre-specified|Patient Global Allergic Rhinitis Symptoms Assessment|At week 0 and week 8, patients were asked to complete one question describing their perception of their allergic rhinitis symptoms.|8 weeks (from Week 0 to Week 8)|319 patients advanced to the treatment phase and 313 patients qualified for inclusion in the intent to treat (ITT) analysis and completed the first visit. The following results are based on the 301 patients who completed week 8.||Participants|||Number
850971|NCT00545844|Other Pre-specified|Physician Global Satisfaction|At week 0 and week 8, physicians were asked to complete a single question describing how satisfied they were regarding their patient’s asthma controller medication.|8 weeks (from Week 0 to Week 8)|319 patients advanced to the treatment phase and 313 patients qualified for inclusion in the intent to treat (ITT) analysis and completed the first visit. The following results are based on the 301 patients who completed week 8.||Participants|||Number
850972|NCT00545844|Other Pre-specified|Patient Global Satisfaction|At week 0 and week 8, patients were asked to complete a single question describing how satisfied they were regarding their asthma controller medication.|8 weeks (from Week 0 to Week 8)|319 patients advanced to the treatment phase and 313 patients qualified for inclusion in the intent to treat (ITT) analysis and completed the first visit. The following results are based on the 301 patients who completed week 8.||Participants|||Number
850973|NCT00545844|Secondary|Effectiveness of Montelukast Therapy Used in Combination With Inhaled Corticosteroids or Inhaled Corticosteroids / Long-Acting Beta 2-Agonist in Improving the Symptoms of Asthma Using the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)|The Asthma Control Questionnaire consists of 7 specific questions that were used to assess patient asthma control at week 0 and week 8. The mean score per question is used to determine the level of control, with a final score ranging from 0 (well-controlled) to 6 (extremely poorly controlled) units on a scale.|8 weeks (from Week 0 to Week 8)|There were 313 patients who qualified for inclusion in the intent to treat (ITT) analysis and completed the first visit; of these, 300 patients completed the ACQ at week 8.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850974|NCT00545844|Secondary|The Mean Change in Mini Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (MiniRQLQ) Overall Score|Mini Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (MiniRQLQ) consists of 14 questions to assess patient's overall quality of life related to allergic rhinitis on a scale of 0 (least impairment) to 6 (greatest impairment). The score is the mean of the 14 questions, ranging from 0 to 6. Change is computed as Week 8 score – Week 0 score|8 weeks (from Week 0 to Week 8)|Based on ITT population; there were 286 patients with available data regarding the mean change in MiniRQLQ at week 8.||Units on a Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
850975|NCT00545844|Primary|Asthma Control|Asthma control was assessed by the Canadian Asthma Consensus Guidelines at week 0 and week 8. Patients were considered uncontrolled if they answered “yes” to at least 2 of the 8 asthma control parameters.|8 weeks (from Week 0 to Week 8)|319 patients advanced to the treatment phase and 313 patients qualified for inclusion in the intent to treat (ITT) analysis and completed the first visit. The following results are based on the 301 patients who completed week 8.||Participants|||Number
850976|NCT00534209|Secondary|Correlative Immunological Studies in Study Participants (Phase 2)|The time course of patients’ adaptive immune response to B7 vaccination as compared to control vaccine will be characterized by their CD8, CD4, and NK response (measured by ELI-spots for interferon-gamma (IFN-γ), interleukin 4 (IL-4), and granzyme B secretion) measured prior to vaccination (i.e. at baseline) and over two courses of vaccination (measurements at week 7 and 13).|Baseline, Week 7 and Week 13|This was an outcome measure for the Phase 2 portion of the study, which was never opened to accrual. No participants were enrolled in Phase 2 therefore no data were available.|||||
850977|NCT00534209|Secondary|Overall Survival (Phase 2)|The length of time from either the date of diagnosis or the start of treatment for a disease, such as cancer, that study participants are still alive.|Date of randomization to the recorded date of death|This was an outcome measure for the Phase 2 portion of the study, which was never opened to accrual. No participants were enrolled in Phase 2 therefore no data were available.|||||
850978|NCT00534209|Secondary|Response to Second-line Chemotherapy After Disease Progression (Phase 2)|The percentage of patients experiencing a clinical response (complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD)) on second-line chemotherapy will be characterized for B7-vaccinated patients and controls.|From Week 1 of Study Therapy until Death or Withdrawal of Consent|This was an outcome measure for the Phase 2 portion of the study, which was never opened to accrual. No participants were enrolled in Phase 2 therefore no data were available.|||||
850979|NCT00534209|Secondary|Safety Profile (Phase 2)|The rate of patients experiencing toxicity over the course of treatment will be characterized by type of toxicity and grade, and by the time of toxicity onset in relation to day of vaccination.|About 13 weeks|This was an outcome measure for the Phase 2 portion of the study, which was never opened to accrual. No participants were enrolled in Phase 2 therefore no data were available.|||||
850980|NCT00534209|Secondary|Relationship of CD8 Response in B7-vaccinated Patients to Their Progression-free Survival.(Phase 2)|Relationship of CD8 response in B7-vaccinated patients to their progression-free survival. Summarized by the median and range of follow up time for patients grouped according to disease status (progression/no progression) and vital status (died/alive at last contact).|From Week 1 of Study Therapy until Death or Withdrawal of Consent|This was an outcome measure for the Phase 2 portion of the study, which was never opened to accrual. No participants were enrolled in Phase 2 therefore no data were available.|||||
850981|NCT00534209|Secondary|Immune Response (CD8) in B7-vaccinated Participants as Compared to Controls. (Phase 2)|Rate of immune response (CD8) in B-7 vaccinated participants reported for measurements taken immediately prior to vaccination (week 0) and throughout the two courses.|About 13 weeks|This was an outcome measure for the Phase 2 portion of the study, which was never opened to accrual. No participants were enrolled in Phase 2 therefore no data were available.|||||
850982|NCT00534209|Primary|Progression-free Survival (Phase 2)||Date of randomization to the earliest date of documented progression.|This was an outcome measure for the Phase 2 portion of the study, which was never opened to accrual. No participants were enrolled in Phase 2 therefore no data were available.|||||
850983|NCT00534209|Primary|Preliminary Safety Profile (Phase 1)|This will include the number of patients experiencing toxicity over the course of treatment, characterized by type of toxicity and grade, and by the time of toxicity onset in relation to day of vaccination.|Up to 13 weeks|||participants|||Number
850992|NCT00494442|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) is defined as the time from first dose to the earlier date of radiologic progression (as per RECIST criteria) or death by any cause in the absence of objective progression.|End of study|||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
850993|NCT00494442|Secondary|Best Percentage Change in Tumour Size|The best % change (reduction) from baseline in tumour size (defined as the sum of the longest diameters as measured among all target lesions).|End of study|||Percentage||Full Range|Median
850994|NCT00494442|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response to olaparib|End of study|||Days||Full Range|Median
850995|NCT00494442|Secondary|Clinical Benefit (CB)|Clinical Benefit (CB) is defined as the percentage of patients with a RECIST tumour response of confirmed complete response, partial response or stable disease for ≥8 weeks)|End of study|||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
850996|NCT00494442|Primary|Confirmed Objective Tumour Response (According to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST)|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by CT/MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease from baseline in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Baseline, every 8 also at study termination or initiation of confounding anti-cancer therapy.|||Participants|||Number
850997|NCT00218296|Primary|Percent Prolonged Abstinence From Tobacco at Week 32|Continuous Abstinence from quit date through Week 32 (Assessed at Week 32 for Usual Care and Week 26 for Reduction Group, Reduction Group's quit date is 6 weeks later than Usual Care).|32 Weeks|||percentage of randomized|||Number
850998|NCT00218296|Primary|Percent Abstinent From Tobacco at Week 32 (7 Day Point Prevalence)|Abstinence from tobacco 7 days prior to Week 26 (Assessed at Week 32 for Usual Care and Week 26 for Reduction Group. Reduction Group's quit date is 6 weeks later than Usual Care).|32 Weeks|||percentage of randomized|||Number
850999|NCT00218296|Primary|Percent Prolonged Abstinence From Tobacco at Week 26|Continuous Abstinence from quit date through Week 26 (Assessed at Week 26 for Usual Care and Week 20 for Reduction Group, Reduction Group's quit date is 6 weeks later than Usual Care).|26 weeks|Intent to treat||percentage of randomized|||Number
851000|NCT00218296|Primary|Percent Abstinent From Tobacco at Week 26 (7 Day Point Prevalence)|Abstinence from tobacco 7 days prior to Week 26 (Assessed at 26 weeks for Usual Care and 20 weeks for Reduction Group post-quit date)|26 week|||percentage of randomized|||Number
851001|NCT00218296|Primary|Percent Prolonged Abstinence From Tobacco at Week 12|Continuous tobacco cessation from quit date through Week 12 verified by biomarkers (urine, cotinine and CO)|12 weeks|||percentage of randomized|||Number
851002|NCT00218296|Primary|Percent Abstinent From Tobacco at Week 12 (7 Day Point Prevalence)|No tobacco use 7 days prior to Week 12 verified by biomarkers (urine, cotinine and CO)|12 weeks|Intent to treat||percentage of randomized|||Number
851013|NCT00189540|Secondary|Change in Hemodynamic Measurements - Mean Change in Toe Brachial Index (TBI)||Baseline, Month 3, Month 6|Population is per protocol - Efficacy Evaluable (EE)||mm Hg / mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
851014|NCT00189540|Secondary|Change in Hemodynamic Measurements - Mean Change in Ankle Brachial Index (ABI)||Baseline, Month 3, Month 6|Population is per protocol - Efficacy Evaluable (EE)||mm Hg / mm Hg||Standard Error|Mean
851015|NCT00189540|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Undergo a Major Amputation||Month 3 and Month 6|||participants|||Number
851016|NCT00189540|Secondary|Change in Pain at Rest as Measured on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|The mean VAS score where 0 = no pain; 10 = worst possible pain.|Baseline, Month 3 and Month 6|"Per protocol population or Efficacy Evaluable EE"||cm||Standard Error|Mean
851017|NCT00189540|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Where All Ulcers Healed|This outcome is a percentage of participants where all of their baseline ulcers healed.|Month 3 and Month 6|"Per protocol population Efficacy Evaluable EE"||Percentage of Participants|||Number
851018|NCT00189540|Primary|Wound Healing (Change in Total Wound Area of All Ischemic Ulcers)|Wound healing measured by change in mean total wound area of all ischemic ulcers at Month 3 and Month 6|Baseline, Month 3, Month 6|Per protocol population - Efficacy Evaluable or EE||total wound area (cm^2)||Standard Error|Mean
851025|NCT00151411|Secondary|Change in Insulin Sensitivity Index After 6 Months of Treatment||baseline and 6 months|||indice||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851026|NCT00151411|Secondary|Ovulation Rate|Ovulation is defined as a binary outcome; ovulated at least once vs. did not ovulate during the treatment period.|6 months|A total of 76 patients with daily urine collections.||Participants|||Count of Participants
851027|NCT00151411|Primary|Change in Testosterone After 6 Months of Treatment||baseline and 6 months|||ng/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851028|NCT00130728|Secondary|Duration of Objective Response|Duration of objective response was defined as the period from the date of the initial partial or complete response until the date of disease progression or death on study treatment from any cause. For patients who had not died, data was censored at the date of last contact.|Period from Objective response until disease progression or death on study treatment. (Up to 29.5 months)|Patients with an objective response||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
851029|NCT00130728|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response|Objective response was defined as a complete or partial response determined by RECIST on two consecutive occasions >= 4 weeks apart.|The median duration of Objective response was up to 9.7 months|Only patients with measurable disease at baseline were included in the analysis of the objective response. Patients without a post-baseline tumor assessment were considered non-responder.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851030|NCT00130728|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS was defined as the time from randomization to documented disease progression, as determined by the investigator using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), or death on study treatment, whichever occurred first.|From randomization to documented disease progression or death on study treatment, whichever occurred first. (Up to 3.1 years)|Randomized patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
851031|NCT00130728|Primary|Overall Survival (OS) Among All Randomized Patients|Overall Survival was defined as the period from the date of randomization until the date of patient death from any cause. For patients who had not died, survival data was censored at the date of last contact.|From the date of randomization until the date of patient death from any cause, or the date of last contact. (Up to 3.1 years)|Randomized patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
851032|NCT00113919|Primary|Maximal Dose of Busulfex® Given in a 2, 3, or 4 Day Period With Acceptable Toxicity to Myeloma Patients|maximal dose of Busulfex® that can be given in a two, three, or four day period with acceptable toxicity to myeloma patients, who either are > or = 65 years of age or have renal insufficiency, defined as creatinine > 3g/dL or creatinine clearance < 30 ml/min|three years||||||
851033|NCT00105560|Secondary|Overall Survival|the percentage of participants surviving after five and seven years and at the end of follow-up in the overall population. Survival is shown by risk and histological group.|5 years, 7 years, 10 years|Follow-up for the 10 year follow-up is still ongoing and the data is not yet available.||percentage of participants surviving||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851034|NCT00105560|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|The percentage of participants with progression free survival after five, seven, and ten years in the overall population and by risk and histological group.|5 years, 7 years, 10 years|Follow-up is ongoing and data is not yet available for the 10 year follow-up time point.||percentage of participants surviving||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851035|NCT00105560|Secondary|Mean Change Per-Year in Neurocognitive Outcomes|The mean change per-year in neurocognitive outcomes as assessed by Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children version 4 (WISC-IV). The test measures the Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ) of children with the use of four indices; the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI), working memory test, and a processing speed test. FSIQ and the four indices are all assessed on a bell curve scale that has an average score of 100 and standard deviation of 15 points in the general population, meaning on average 68% of test takers would be within +/- 15 points of 100 and 95% within +/- 30 points. Higher scores represent higher intelligence and lower score represent reduced intelligence. Participants were assessed for changes in score with the use of repeated testing during a median follow-up time of 5.2 years. Repeated measures were taken at baseline, 1, 3, 5, and 7 years or until the participant was not available for evaluation (whichever comes first).|Baseline, 1, 3, 5, 7 years|The study participants that were evaluated for changes in neurocognitive outcomes||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
851036|NCT00105560|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Endocrine Dysfunction (Neuroendocrine and End Organ Defects) at 10 Years|percentage of participants who experienced endocrine dysfunction (neuroendocrine and end organ defects) by the end of study follow-up (as determined by CTCAE 3.0) by hormone type and risk group.|End of follow-up||12/2021||||
851037|NCT00105560|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Endocrine Dysfunction (Neuroendocrine and End Organ Defects) at 7 Years|Percentage of participants who experienced endocrine dysfunction (neuroendocrine and end organ defects) after 7 years of follow-up, as determined by CTCAE 3.0. Incidence is shown by hormone type and risk group|7 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851038|NCT00105560|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Endocrine Dysfunction (Neuroendocrine and End Organ Defects) at 5 Years|Percentage of participants who experienced endocrine dysfunction (neuroendocrine and end organ defects) after 5 years of follow-up (as determined by CTCAE 3.0). Incidence is shown by hormone type and risk group.|5 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851039|NCT00105560|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Endocrine Dysfunction (Neuroendocrine and End Organ Defects) at 3 Years|Percentage of participants who experienced endocrine dysfunction (neuroendocrine and end organ defects) after 3 years of follow-up (as determined by CTCAE 3.0). Incidence is grouped by hormone type and risk group|3 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851040|NCT00105560|Primary|Cumulative Incidence of Ototoxicity|Percentage participants who experienced ototoxicity as measured by Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v3.0 after the completion of radiation therapy in the overall participant population and by baseline measure subgroups. Incidence is shown after follow-up of 3 years, 5 years, 7 years, and 10 years.|3 Years, 5 years, 7 years, 10 years|The overall study population after the stated durations of follow-up. Follow-up is ongoing and data is not yet available for the 10 year time point.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851041|NCT00083915|Secondary|Side Effects With DT PACE-Melphalan vs Side Effects With Melphalan Alone|Compare side effects with the new regimen of DT PACE-Melphalan, compared to melphalan alone|3 years depending on start date||||||
851042|NCT00083915|Primary|Transplant With DT PACE-Melphalan Regimen of Chemotherapy vs. Transplant With Melphalan Alone.|Compare a new regimen of chemotherapy called DT PACE-Melphalan (new experimental therapy) is better than transplant with Melphalan alone (standard therapy)|3 years depending on start date|only 2 participants in high dose (HD) melphalan group completed the study and only 8 from the Mel-DT Pace group completed the study. No analysis done.|||||
851061|NCT00054353|Secondary|Response Rate|Number of subjects who achieved CR post-transplant. Response rate will be summarized using cumulative incidence estimates.|Up to 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851062|NCT00054353|Secondary|Relapse Rate|Number of subjects who relapsed after achieving CR post-transplant. Relapse rate will be summarized using cumulative incidence estimates.|Up to 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851063|NCT00054353|Secondary|Engraftment|Number of subjects who engrafted post-transplant. Engraftment will be monitored in a sequential fashion.|Up to 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851064|NCT00054353|Secondary|OS|Number of subjects surviving. OS will be estimated by the method of Kaplan and Meier. Confidence intervals will be estimated.|At 6 months and then every year thereafter, up to 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851065|NCT00054353|Primary|Incidence of Chronic (Extensive) GVHD|Number of subjects with chronic extensive GVHD post-transplant. Severe GVHD will be monitored in a sequential fashion.|Up to 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851066|NCT00054353|Primary|Incidence of Acute GVHD (Grades III-IV)|Number of patients with Grade III-IV acute GVHD post-transplant. Severe GVHD will be monitored in a sequential fashion.|Up to 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851067|NCT00054353|Primary|Non-relapse Mortality|Early NRM will be monitored in a sequential fashion.|At day 100|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851068|NCT00054353|Primary|PFS|PFS will be calculated for all patients from the date of transplant until the time of progression, relapse, death, or the date the patient was last known to be in remission. Progressive disease is defined as greater than 25% increase in serum or urine M proteins compared to best response status after autologous transplant and/or appearance of new lytic bone lesions or plasmocytomas.|At 1 year post-transplant|There were 4 patients who, although they did not have progression/relapse, died before the 1 year mark, and thus are not included in the 1 year PFS count.||Participants|||Count of Participants
851082|NCT00001596|Secondary|Change in 6 Minute Walk Test (12 Months)|Change from baseline of the 6 minute walk test (6MWT) at 12 months. The 6MWT measures the distance that a patient can quickly walk on a flat hard surface in a period of six minutes.|Measured at baseline and 12 months|Participants from the Intent to Treat population for whom data is available at baseline and 12 months.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
851083|NCT00001596|Secondary|Change in 6 Minute Walk Test (36 Months)|Change from baseline of the 6 minute walk test (6MWT) at 36 months. The 6MWT measures the distance that a patient can quickly walk on a flat hard surface in a period of six minutes.|Measured at baseline and 36 months|Participants from the Intent to Treat population for whom data is available at baseline and 36 months.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
851084|NCT00001596|Secondary|Change in Adjusted Diffusing Capacity of the Lung for Carbon Monoxide (12 Months)|Change from baseline in adjusted Diffusing Capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCOa) measured at 12 months. DLCOa measures gas uptake during a single inspiration in a standard time, adjusted for subject's hemoglobin levels.|Measured at baseline and 12 months|Participants from the Intent to Treat population for whom data is available at baseline and 12 months.||% of predicted volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
851085|NCT00001596|Secondary|Change in Adjusted Diffusing Capacity of the Lung for Carbon Monoxide (36 Months)|Change from baseline in adjusted Diffusing Capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCOa) measured at 36 months. DLCOa measures gas uptake during a single inspiration in a standard time, adjusted for subject's hemoglobin levels.|Measured at baseline and 36 months|Participants from the Intent to Treat population for whom data was available at baseline and 36 months.||% of predicted volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
851086|NCT00001596|Secondary|Change in Total Lung Capacity (12 Months)|Change from baseline in Total Lung Capacity (TLC) measured at 12 months. TLC is the volume in the lungs at maximal inflation. TLC is recorded as the percentage of predicted volume based on subject's height, age, sex, and weight.|Measured at baseline and 12 months|Participants from the Intent to Treat population for whom data was available at baseline and 12 months.||% of predicted volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
851087|NCT00001596|Secondary|Change in Total Lung Capacity (36 Months)|Change from baseline in Total Lung Capacity (TLC) measured at 36 months. TLC is the volume in the lungs at maximal inflation. TLC is recorded as the percentage of predicted volume based on subject's height, age, sex, and weight.|Measured at baseline and 36 months|Participants from the Intent to Treat population for whom data is available at baseline and 36 months.||% of predicted volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
851088|NCT00001596|Secondary|Change in Forced Vital Capacity (12 Months)|Change from baseline in the Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) measurement at 12 months. FVC is the volume of air that can be forcibly blown out from the lungs after full inspiration. FVC is recorded as the percentage of predicted volume (predicted FVC volume is calculated based on subject's height, age, sex, and weight).|Measured at baseline and 12 months|Participants from the Intent to Treat population for whom data was available at baseline and 12 months.||% of predicted volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
851089|NCT00001596|Primary|Change in Forced Vital Capacity (36 Months)|Change from baseline in the Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) measurement at 36 months. FVC is the volume of air that can be forcibly blown out from the lungs after full inspiration. FVC is recorded as the percentage of predicted volume (predicted FVC volume is calculated based on subject's height, age, sex, and weight).|Measured at baseline and 36 months|Participants from the Intent to Treat population for whom data was available at baseline and 36 months.||% of predicted volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
851090|NCT02847260|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in HemodynamicParameters: Pulmonary Vascular Resistance Index (PVRI) (mmHg*Min*m^2/L)|Pulmonary Vascular Resistance Index (PVRI) is calculated using Mean Pulmonary Arterial Pressure(PAPm), Pulmonary Capillary Wedge Pressure (PCWP) and Cardiac Index (CI ), to provide information about right ventricular load. The PVRI values and their respective changes from Baseline to Week 16 were measured by SwanGanz right heart catheterization.|Baseline to week 16|Only 29 of the 32 subjects that completed the 16 week treatment period completed these hemodynamic assessments.||mmHg*min*m^2/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
851091|NCT02847260|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in Hemodynamic Parameters: Cardiac Index (CI) (L/Min/m^2)|Cardiac Index (CI) relates the cardiac output (CO) to body surface area (BSA), thus relating heart performance to the size of the individual. The CI values and their respective changes from Baseline to Week 16 were measured by SwanGanz right heart catheterization and summarized.|Baseline to week 16|Only 29 of the 32 subjects that completed the 16 week treatment period completed these hemodynamic assessments.||L/min/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
851092|NCT02847260|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 16 in Hemodynamic Parameters: Mean Pulmonary Artery Pressure (PAPm), Mean Right Atrial Pressure (RAPm) and Mean Pulmonary Capillary Wedge Pressure (PCWPm).|Pulmonary hypertension, an increase in pressure in the pulmonary vasculature defined as a mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAPm) greater than 25 mmHg at rest or greater than 30 mmHg with exercise, as measured by Swan-Ganz right heart catheterization. The PAPm, RAPm and PCWPm values and their respective changes from Baseline to Week 16 were measured by SwanGanz right heart catheterization and summarized.|Baseline to week 16|Only 29 of the 32 subjects that completed the 16 week treatment period completed these hemodynamic assessments.||mmHG||Standard Deviation|Mean
851093|NCT02847260|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life (QoL) Assessment: Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR) From Baseline to Week 16.|The CAMPHOR is a health related quality of life instrument validated for pulmonary hypertension that assesses impairment (symptoms), disability (activities) and quality of life. The questionnaire is divided into three sections; Symptoms (Scores 0-25; high scores indicate more symptoms), Activity (Score 0-30; low score indicates good functioning) and Quality of Life (0-25; high scores indicate poor QoL). The sum of these scores equates to the Total score (0-80). In the CAMPHOR scores, negative change scores indicate improvements.|Baseline to week 16|Scores could not be tabulated for one subject due to missing responses to individual questions||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
851094|NCT02847260|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Change From Baseline World Health Organization (WHO) Functional Classification at Week 16.|The WHO Functional Class of pulmonary hypertension is a physical activity rating scale as follows: Class I: No limitation of physical activity. Class II: Slight limitation of physical activity. Class III: Marked limitation of physical activity. Class IV: Inability to carry out any physical activity without symptoms.|Baseline to week 16|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851095|NCT02847260|Secondary|Change in N-terminal Pro-B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) Concentrations From Baseline to Week 16.|The level of this biomarker of the (NT-proBNP) serum concentration was assessed to compare the severity of heart failure at Baseline and Week 16.|Baseline to week 16|||pg/mL||Full Range|Median
851096|NCT02847260|Secondary|Change in Borg Dyspnea Score (Following 6MWT) From Baseline to Week 16|The Borg dyspnea score is a 10 point scale rating the maximum level of dyspnea (difficulty in breathing) experienced during the 6MWT. The Borg dyspnea score was assessed immediately following the 6MWT. Scores range from 0 (for no shortness of breath) to 10 (for the greatest shortness of breath ever experienced).|Baseline to week 16|Two subjects that completed the treatment period did not complete the six minute walk test at week 16. As such, the evaluable data for the six minute walk test at Week 16 was summarized using an N of 30 subjects.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
851097|NCT02847260|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Six Minute Walk Distance at Week 16.|The purpose of the six minute walk test (6MWT) was to evaluate exercise capacity associated with carrying out activities of daily living. Patients were instructed to walk down a corridor at a comfortable speed as far as they could manage for six minutes, resting whenever they needed. Distance <500 meters suggests considerable exercise limitation; Distance 500 - 800 meters suggests moderate limitation; Distance >800 meters (with no rests) suggests mild or no limitation.|Baseline to week 16|Two subjects that completed the treatment period did not complete the six minute walk test at week 16. As such, the evaluable data for the six minute walk test at Week 16 was summarized using an N of 30 subjects.||meters||Full Range|Median
851098|NCT02847260|Primary|Number of Participants With Successful Completion of the 16 Week Treatment Period.|Successful completion was defined as completion of the 16 week treatment period of the study without experiencing any serious adverse events considered by the investigator to be possibly related to Remodulin.|Baseline to week 16|||participants|||Number
851099|NCT02829983|Secondary|Probing Depth|Distance from the bottom of sulcus/pocket to gingival margin|6 months|||milimeter||Standard Deviation|Mean
851100|NCT02829983|Primary|Clinical Attachment Level|Distance from bottom of pocket to the cement-enamel junction (CEJ).|6 months|||milimeter||Standard Deviation|Mean
851107|NCT02596022|Primary|Number of Choices to Self-administer Cocaine (Out of 5 Choices)|Participants provided 5 choices (cocaine 25 mg now vs. $11 later), with choices spaces 15 minutes apart over the course of the session.|24 hours post-infusion|||number of cocaine choices||Standard Deviation|Mean
851108|NCT02556333|Primary|HIV RNA Change From Baseline to Day 10|An HIV RNA decline of >=0.5 log by day 10 will be considered to be an adequate virologic response, to proceed to the second phase of the study.|10 days|One patient with multiple drug resistant HIV infection enrolled into this study.||log HIV RNA copies/mL|||Number
851126|NCT02461966|Primary|Serum Aflatoxin Level in Liver Cancer Patients|Serum aflatoxin level in liver cancer patients in comparison to liver cirrhosis and controls.|6 months|||ng\ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
851143|NCT02359890|Secondary|Rate of Acute Success|Acute success is defined as confirmation of entrance block in all Pulmonary veins (PV).|End of procedure|Safety Population (SP), which is defined as the enrolled subjects who had the study catheter inserted.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851144|NCT02359890|Secondary|Incidence of Non-Primary Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|This secondary safety endpoint includes non-primary serious adverse events (SAEs) within 7 days post-procedure and serious adverse events from 8 days to 30 days post-procedure|Up to 30 days post Procedure|Safety Population (SP), which is defined as the enrolled subjects who had the study catheter inserted.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
851145|NCT02359890|Primary|Incidence of Early Onset Primary Adverse Events|Early onset is defined as within 7 days of the atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation procedure. Primary adverse events (AE) include Death, Myocardial infarction (MI), Pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis, Diaphragmatic paralysis, Atrio-esophageal fistula, Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA), Stroke / Cerebrovascular accident (CVA), Thromboembolism, Pericarditis, Cardiac Tamponade / Perforation, Pneumothorax, Major Vascular Access Complications / Bleeding, Pulmonary edema (Respiratory Insufficiency), and Heart block.|Seven days post ablation procedure|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population was used, which consisted of enrolled subjects who met the eligibility criteria and had the study catheter inserted.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851191|NCT02260986|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 (ACQ-5) Score to Week 16|ACQ-5 questionnaire was a validated questionnaire comprising of 5 questions for asthma symptoms: woken at night by symptoms, wake in the mornings with symptoms, limitation of daily activities, shortness of breath, and wheeze. Participants were asked to rate their asthma symptoms during the previous week on a 7-point scale as 0=no impairment, 6=maximum impairment. ACQ-5 score was the mean of the 5 questions and range between 0 (totally controlled) and 6 (severely uncontrolled) (a higher score indicated lower asthma control). The ACQ-5 questionnaire was administered only to the participants with a medical history of asthma.|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with ACQ-5 value at baseline.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851192|NCT02260986|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) Score to Week 16|The SNOT 22 was a validated measure of health related quality of life in sinonasal disease. It was a 22 item questionnaire with each item assigned a score ranging from 0-5. The total score may range from 0 (no disease) -110 (worst disease) (lower scores represent better health related quality of life). The SNOT-22 was administered only to participants with chronic inflammatory conditions of the nasal mucosa and/or paranasal sinuses.|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851193|NCT02260986|Secondary|Number of Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) (Excluding Herpetic Infections) Requiring Systemic Treatment From Baseline Through Week 52|Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received IMP was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. TEAEs were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to end of treatment at Week 52). Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. Skin infection TEAEs were identified based on blinded adjudication of all reported TEAEs under the 2 primary System Organ Classes (SOC): SOC = “Infection and Infestations” or SOC = “Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders”. Blinded adjudication was performed and finalized by the study medical monitor before database lock.|Baseline up to Week 52|All safety analysis were performed on SAF that included all randomized participants who received any study drug, and was analyzed as-treated.||events|||Number
851194|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) (Excluding Herpetic Infections) Requiring Systemic Treatment From Baseline Through Week 52|Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received IMP was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. TEAEs were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to end of treatment at Week 52). Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. Skin infection TEAEs were identified based on blinded adjudication of all reported TEAEs under the 2 primary System Organ Classes (SOC): SOC = “Infection and Infestations” or SOC = “Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders”. Blinded adjudication was performed and finalized by the study medical monitor before database lock.|Baseline up to Week 52|All safety analysis were performed on SAF that included all randomized participants who received any study drug, and was analyzed as-treated.||percentage of participants|||Number
851195|NCT02260986|Secondary|Number of Skin Infection TEAEs (Excluding Herpetic Infections) From Baseline Through Week 52|Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received IMP was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. TEAEs were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to end of treatment at Week 52). Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. Skin infection TEAEs were identified based on blinded adjudication of all reported TEAEs under the 2 primary System Organ Classes (SOC): SOC = “Infection and Infestations” or SOC = “Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders”. Blinded adjudication was performed and finalized by the study medical monitor before database lock.|Baseline up to Week 52|All safety analysis were performed on SAF that included all randomized participants who received any study drug, and was analyzed as-treated.||events|||Number
851196|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) (Excluding Herpetic Infections) From Baseline Through Week 52|Any untoward medical occurrence in a participants who received IMP was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. TEAEs were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to end of treatment at Week 52). Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. Skin infection TEAEs were identified based on blinded adjudication of all reported TEAEs under the 2 primary System Organ Classes (SOC): SOC = “Infection and Infestations” or SOC = “Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders”. Blinded adjudication was performed and finalized by the study medical monitor before database lock.|Baseline up to Week 52|All safety analysis were performed on SAF that included all randomized participants who received any study drug, and was analyzed as-treated.||percentage of participants|||Number
851197|NCT02260986|Secondary|Number of Serious Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Leading to Study Drug Discontinuation Through Week 52|Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received investigational medicinal product (IMP) was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. A Serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs.|Baseline up to Week 52|All safety analysis were performed on SAF that included all randomized participants who received any study drug, and was analyzed as-treated.||events|||Number
851198|NCT02260986|Secondary|Number of Flares Through Week 52|Atopic dermatitis (AD) flares were defined as worsening of the disease that required escalation/intensification of AD treatment. Number of flares occurred in the participants starting from first dose through Week 52 were reported.|Baseline up to Week 52|All safety analysis were performed on safety analysis set (SAF) that included all randomized participants who received any study drug, and were analyzed as-treated.||flares|||Number
851199|NCT02260986|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) to Week 52|HADS is a fourteen item scale. Seven of the items relate to anxiety and seven items relate to depression. Each item on the questionnaire is scored from 0 (minimum score) - 3 (maximum score) and this means that a person can score between 0 (no symptoms) and 21 (severe symptoms) for either anxiety or depression. Cut-offs for identifying psychiatric distress has been reported as 7 to 8 for possible presence, 10 to 11 for probable presence, and 14 to 15 for severe anxiety or depression.|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851200|NCT02260986|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) to Week 52|The POEM was a 7-item questionnaire that assesses disease symptoms (dryness, itching, flaking, cracking, sleep loss, bleeding and weeping) with a scoring system of 0 (absent disease) to 28 (severe disease) (high score indicative of poor quality of life [QOL]).|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851201|NCT02260986|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) to Week 52|The DLQI was a 10-item, validated questionnaire used in clinical practice and clinical trials to assess the impact of AD disease symptoms and treatment on quality of life (QOL). The 10 questions assessed QOL over the past week, with an overall scoring of 0 (absent disease) to 30 (severe disease); a high score was indicative of a poor QOL.|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851202|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Global Individual Signs Score (GISS) to Week 52|Individual components of the AD lesions (erythema, infiltration/ papulation, excoriations, and lichenification) were rated globally (each assessed for the whole body, not by anatomical region) on a 4-point scale (0= none, 1= mild, 2= moderate and 3= severe) using the EASI severity grading criteria. Total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 12 (severe disease).|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851203|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in the SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score to Week 52|SCORAD was a clinical tool for assessing the severity of AD developed by the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis (Severity scoring of atopic dermatitis: the SCORAD index). Consensus Report of the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis. Dermatology (Basel) 186 (1): 23–31. 1993. Extent and intensity of eczema as well as subjective signs (insomnia, etc.) were assessed and scored. Total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 103 (severe disease).|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851204|NCT02260986|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected by Atopic Dermatitis to Week 52|BSA affected by AD was assessed for each section of the body (the possible highest score for each region was: head and neck [9%], anterior trunk [18%], back [18%], upper limbs [18%], lower limbs [36%], and genitals [1%]). It was reported as a percentage of all major body sections combined.|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||Percentage of BSA||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851205|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score to Week 52|The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD.|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851206|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score to Week 2|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]).|Baseline to Week 2|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851207|NCT02260986|Secondary|Proportion of Topical Atopic Dermatitis Medication-Free Days Through Week 52|Proportion of topical AD medication-free days through Week 52 was calculated as the number of days that a participant used neither topical corticosteroid (TCS)/ topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) nor system rescue therapy divided by the study days of each period.|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
851208|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Global Individual Signs Score (GISS) to Week 16|Individual components of the AD lesions (erythema, infiltration/ papulation, excoriations, and lichenification) were rated globally (each assessed for the whole body, not by anatomical region) on a 4-point scale (0= none, 1= mild, 2= moderate and 3= severe) using the EASI severity grading criteria. Total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 12 (severe disease).|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851209|NCT02260986|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) to Week 16|HADS is a fourteen item scale. Seven of the items relate to anxiety and seven items relate to depression. Each item on the questionnaire scored from 0 (minimum score) - 3 (maximum score) and this means that a person can score between 0 (no symptoms) and 21 (severe symptoms) for either anxiety or depression. Cut-offs for identifying psychiatric distress has been reported as 7 to 8 for possible presence, 10 to 11 for probable presence, and 14 to 15 for severe anxiety or depression.|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851210|NCT02260986|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) to Week 16|The POEM was a 7-item questionnaire that assessed disease symptoms (dryness, itching, flaking, cracking, sleep loss, bleeding and weeping) with a scoring system of 0 (absent disease) to 28 (severe disease) (high score indicative of poor quality of life [QOL]).|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851211|NCT02260986|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) to Week 16|The DLQI was a 10-item, validated questionnaire used in clinical practice and clinical trials to assess the impact of AD disease symptoms and treatment on quality of life (QOL). The 10 questions assessed QOL over the past week, with an overall scoring of 0 (absent disease) to 30 (severe disease); a high score was indicative of a poor QOL.|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851212|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in the SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score to Week 16|SCORAD was a clinical tool for assessing the severity of AD developed by the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis (Severity scoring of atopic dermatitis: the SCORAD index). Consensus Report of the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis. Dermatology (Basel) 186 (1): 23–31. 1993. Extent and intensity of eczema as well as subjective signs (insomnia, etc.) were assessed and scored. Total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 103 (severe disease).|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851213|NCT02260986|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected by Atopic Dermatitis to Week 16|BSA affected by AD was assessed for each section of the body (the possible highest score for each region was: head and neck [9%], anterior trunk [18%], back [18%], upper limbs [18%], lower limbs [36%], and genitals [1%]). It was reported as a percentage of all major body sections combined.|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||Percentage of BSA||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851214|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score to Week 16|The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD.|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851215|NCT02260986|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score to Week 16|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]).|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851216|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 2|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥4 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 2 were reported.|Baseline to Week 2|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS score ≥4.||percentage of participants|||Number
851217|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 4|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥4 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 4 were reported.|Baseline to Week 4|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS score ≥4.||percentage of participants|||Number
851218|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 24|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥4 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 24 were reported.|Baseline to Week 24|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS score ≥4.||percentage of participants|||Number
851219|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥3 Points) of Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 52|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥3 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 52 were reported.|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS score ≥3.||percentage of participants|||Number
851220|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 52|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥4 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 52 were reported.|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS score ≥4.||percentage of participants|||Number
851221|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score to Week 16|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]).|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
851222|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 52|The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. EASI-75 responders were the participants who achieved ≥75% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 52.|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
851223|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) Score of “0” or “1” and Reduction From Baseline of ≥2 Points at Week 52|IGA is an assessment scale used to determine severity of AD and clinical response to treatment on a 5-point scale (0 = clear; 1 = almost clear; 2 = mild; 3 = moderate; 4 = severe) based on erythema and papulation/infiltration. Therapeutic response is an IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). Participants with IGA score of “0” or “1” and a reduction from baseline of ≥2 points at Week 52 were reported.|Baseline to Week 52|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with available data for this endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
851224|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥3 Points) of Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 16|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥3 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 16 were reported.|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS score ≥3.||percentage of participants|||Number
851225|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 16|Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was used to report the intensity of a participant’s pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 – 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥4 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 16 were reported.|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized). Here, number of participants analyzed = participants with baseline peak pruritus NRS score ≥4.||percentage of participants|||Number
851226|NCT02260986|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16|The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD) and measures erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. EASI-75 responders were the participants who achieved ≥75% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16.|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the FAS, which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by the IVRS/IWRS at randomization (as randomized).||percentage of participants|||Number
851227|NCT02260986|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) Score of “0” or “1” and Reduction From Baseline of ≥2 Points at Week 16|"IGA is an assessment scale used to determine severity of AD and clinical response to treatment on a 5-point scale (0 = clear; 1 = almost clear; 2 = mild; 3 = moderate; 4 = severe) based on erythema and papulation/infiltration. Therapeutic response is an IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). Participants with IGA score 0 or 1 and a reduction from baseline of ≥2 points at Week 16 were reported."|Baseline to Week 16|All efficacy analyses were performed on the Full Analysis Set (FAS), which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated by interactive voice response system/ interactive web response system (IVRS/IWRS) at randomization (as randomized).||percentage of participants|||Number
851228|NCT02251990|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Achieving Sustained Virologic Response 4 Weeks After the End of All Study Therapy (SVR4)|Blood was drawn from each participant to assess HCV RNA plasma levels using the Roche COBAS® AmpliPrep/COBAS® Taqman HCV Test, v2.0, which had a LLOQ of 15 IU/mL. SVR4 was defined as HCV RNA <LLOQ at 4 weeks after the end of all study therapy. As pre-specified in the protocol, the Deferred Treatment Group was not included in this efficacy analysis.|4 weeks after end of all therapy (Study Week 16)|All randomized participants in the Immediate Treatment Group who received at least one dose of study treatment. The Deferred Treatment Group was not included in this efficacy analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851229|NCT02251990|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks After the End of All Study Therapy (SVR24)|Blood was drawn from each participant to assess HCV RNA plasma levels using the Roche COBAS® AmpliPrep/COBAS® Taqman HCV Test, v2.0, which had a LLOQ of 15 IU/mL. SVR24 was defined as HCV RNA <LLOQ at 24 weeks after the end of all study therapy. As pre-specified in the protocol, the Deferred Treatment Group was not included in the secondary efficacy analysis.|24 weeks after end of all therapy (Study Week 36)|All randomized participants in the Immediate Treatment Group who received at least one dose of study treatment. The Deferred Treatment Group was not included in the secondary efficacy analysis.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
851230|NCT02251990|Primary|Percentage of Participants That Discontinued From Study Therapy Due to AEs During the DB Treatment Period|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product or protocol-specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product or protocol-specified procedure. Any worsening of a pre-existing condition that is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an AE. A participant could discontinue from treatment but continue to participate in the study as long as consent was not withdrawn. The primary safety analysis compared the safety data of the Immediate Treatment Group during the active treatment period to those of the Deferred Treatment Group during the placebo treatment period.|DB Treatment period (up to 12 weeks)|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment during the double-blind treatment period.||percentage of participants|||Number
851231|NCT02251990|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing at Least One Adverse Event (AE) During the DB Treatment Period and First 14 Follow-up Days|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product or protocol-specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product or protocol-specified procedure. Any worsening of a pre-existing condition that is temporally associated with the use of the Sponsor’s product, is also an AE. The primary safety analysis compared the safety data of the Immediate Treatment Group during the active treatment period to those of the Deferred Treatment Group during the placebo treatment period.|DB Treatment period plus first 14 follow-up days (up to 14 weeks)|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment during the double-blind treatment period.||percentage of participants|||Number
851232|NCT02251990|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks After the End of All Study Therapy (SVR12)|Blood was drawn from each participant to assess Hepatitis C Virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) plasma levels using the Roche COBAS® AmpliPrep/COBAS® Taqman HCV Test, v2.0, which had a lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) of 15 IU/mL. SVR12 was defined as HCV RNA below the lower limit of detection (<LLOQ) at 12 weeks after the end of all study therapy. As pre-specified in the protocol, the Deferred Treatment Group was not included in the primary efficacy analysis.|12 weeks after end of all therapy (Study Week 24)|All randomized participants in the Immediate Treatment Group who received at least one dose of study treatment. The Deferred Treatment Group was not included in the primary efficacy analysis.||percentage of participants||97.5% Confidence Interval|Number
851280|NCT02119650|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)|A treatment-emergent AE was defined as an event occurring (or worsening of any pre-existing) after exposure to at least 1 dose of study drug. A treatment-related AE was defined as an event with a definite, probable, or possible causality to study medication. A serious AE is an event resulting in death, hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or is life threatening, a congenital anomaly/birth defect or requires medical or surgical intervention to prevent 1 of the outcomes above. The intensity of an AE was graded according to the National Cancer Institute common terminology criteria for adverse events (NCI-CTCAE) version 4.03: Grade 1 (Mild); Grade 2 (Moderate); Grade 3 (Severe); Grade 4 (life-threatening).|Baseline through approximately 30 days post treatment discontinuation; up to 16 months or to the data cutoff 11FEB2016.|The safety evaluable population consisted of all participants exposed to at least 1 dose of study drug.||Participants|||Count of Participants
851281|NCT02119650|Secondary|Duration of Response|For objective responders, the duration of response is defined as the difference of the end of response and the start of response. The start of a response was the first visit where the subject achieves PR or better based on RECIST v1.1 criteria. The end of response was the first visit after PD based on RECIST v1.1 criteria.|From the start of response to the end of response; up to 16 months or to the data cutoff 11FEB2016.|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consisted of participants that were randomized in the study.||weeks||80% Confidence Interval|Median
851282|NCT02119650|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|Objective response rate determined by radiographic disease assessments per RECIST (v1.1), by investigator assessment and was defined as the percentage of participants with Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) at any post baseline visit. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST) for target lesions and assessed by computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) : Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target and non-target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions with no worsening of non-target lesions and no new lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Baseline through end of study; up to 16 months or to the data cutoff 11FEB2016.|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consisted of participants that were randomized in the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
851283|NCT02119650|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS is defined as the time from randomization until the earliest date of disease progression determined by investigator assessment of objective radiographic disease assessments per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1, or death due to any cause if sooner. Progressive Disease (PD) is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum Longest Diameter (LD) recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions, unequivocal progression of non-target lesions or increase in disease burden for subjects with only nonmeasurable disease.|Randomization to disease progression, or death due to any cause if sooner; up to 16 months or to the data cutoff 11FEB2016.|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consisted of participants that were randomized in the study.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
851284|NCT02119650|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival is defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause. Participants without death observed at the time of the analysis were censored at last date known to be alive. The median overall survival time was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Overall survival was compared between treatment groups using log-rank test.|Randomization until death due to any cause; up to 16 months or data cutoff 11FEB2016.|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consisted of participants that were randomized in the study.||months||80% Confidence Interval|Median
851305|NCT02075255|Secondary|Inspiratory Capacity|Change from baseline in inspiratory capacity|From baseline to Week 28|Global Sputum Substudy||Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
851306|NCT02075255|Secondary|Functional Residual Capacity|Change from baseline in functional residual capacity|From baseline to Week 28|Global Sputum Substudy||Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
851307|NCT02075255|Secondary|Vital Capacity|Change from baseline in vital capacity|From baseline to Week 28|Global Sputum Substudy||Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
851308|NCT02075255|Secondary|Residual Volume|Change from baseline in residual volume|From baseline to Week 28|Global Sputum Substudy||Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
851309|NCT02075255|Secondary|Total Lung Capacity|Change from baseline in total lung capacity|From baseline to Week 28|Global Sputum Substudy||Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
851310|NCT02075255|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Blood Eosinophil Counts|Percent change from baseline in blood eosinophil counts at week 28|Change from baseline at Week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
851311|NCT02075255|Secondary|Anti-drug Antibody Response|Number and percentage of patients in different ADA response categories|From baseline to follow-up Week 36|Safety analysis set||Participants|||Count of Participants
851312|NCT02075255|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Benralizumab|Pre-dose serum concentrations at each visit|Pre-first dose to Week 36|PK analysis set||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
851313|NCT02075255|Secondary|Extent of Exposure|Duration of exposure from first dose date to last dose date.|From first dose to Week 24|Safety analysis set||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
851314|NCT02075255|Secondary|AQLQ(s)+12 Responders (Improvement) at Week 28|"AQLQ(S)+12 overall score is defined as the average of all 32 questions in the AQLQ(S)+12 questionnaire. Improvement is defined as AQLQ(S)+12 (End of treatment - baseline)>=0.5. No change is defined as AQLQ(S)+12 (End of treatment - baseline) >-0.5 and <0.5. Deterioration is defined as AQLQ(S)+12 (End of treatment - baseline) <= -0.5.
Baseline is defined as the last AQLQ(S)+12 score prior to randomisation. End of treatment is defined as week 28. Patients with missing or non-evaluable score at week 28 are considered as non-responder."|Week 28|Full analysis set||Participants|||Number
851315|NCT02075255|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Week 28 in AQLQ(S)+12 (Overall)|AQLQ(S)+12 overall score is defined as the average of all 32 questions in the AQLQ(S)+12 questionnaire. AQLQ(S)+12 is a 7-point scale questionnaire, ranging from 7 (no impairment) to 1 (severe impairment). Total or domain score change of >=0.5 are considered clinically meaningful.|Change from baseline at week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
851316|NCT02075255|Secondary|ACQ-6 Responders (Improvement) at Week 28|"Improvement is defined as ACQ-6 (End of treatment - baseline) <= -0.5. No change is defined as ACQ-6 (End of treatment - baseline) >-0.5 and <0.5. Deterioration is defined as ACQ-6 (End of treatment - baseline) >= 0.5. ACQ-6 score is defined as the average of the first 6 items of the ACQ questionnaire on symptoms, activity limitations and rescue medication.Scores range from 0 (totally controlled) to 6 (severely uncontrolled).
Baseline is defined as the last non-missing value prior to randomisation. End of treatment is defined as week 28. Patients with missing or non-evaluable ACQ-6 at week 28 are considered non-responder."|Week 28|Full analysis set||Participants|||Number
851317|NCT02075255|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in ACQ-6|ACQ-6 contains one bronchodilator question and 5 symptom questions. Questions are rated from 0 (totally controlled) to 6 (severely uncontrolled). Mean ACQ-6 score is the average of the responses. Mean scores of <=0.75 indicates well-controlled asthma, scores between 0.75 to <=1.5 indicate partly controlled asthma, and >1.5 indicates not well controlled asthma.|Change from baseline at week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
851318|NCT02075255|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in the Proportion of Nights With Awakening Due to Asthma Requiring Rescue Medication|Baseline is defined as the proportion of nights from the evening of study day -14 to the morning of study day 1.Each timepoint is calculated as bi-weekly proportions based on daily diary data. If more than 50% of data are missing in a 14 day period then this will be considered as missing.Proportion of nights with noctural awakenings is defined as the number of nights with awakenings due to asthma and requiring rescue medication divided by number of nights with data.|Change from baseline at week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||Proportion||Standard Deviation|Mean
851319|NCT02075255|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in Home Lung Function (Evening Peak Expiratory Flow)|Evening peak expiratory flow change from baseline to week 28. Baseline is defined as the average of data collected from the evening of study day -14 to the morning of study day 1. Each timepoint is calculated as bi-weekly means based on daily diary data|Change from baseline at week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||Liter/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
851320|NCT02075255|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in Home Lung Function (Morning Peak Expiratory Flow)|Morning peak expiratory flow change from baseline to week 28. Baseline is defined as the average of data collected from the evening of study day -14 to the morning of study day 1. Each timepoint is calculated as bi-weekly means based on daily diary data.|Change from baseline at week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||Liter/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
851321|NCT02075255|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in Rescue Medication Use|Baseline is defined as the average of data collected from the evening of study day -14 to the morning of study day 1. Each timepoint is calculated as bi-weekly means based on daily diary data. If more than 50% of scores are missing in a 14 day period then this will be considered as missing. The number of inhalations (puffs) per day will be calculated as follows: Number of night inhaler puffs + 2 x [number of night nebulizer times] + number of day inhaler puffs + 2 x [number of day nebulizer times].|Change from baseline at week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||number of puffs per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
851322|NCT02075255|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in Asthma Symptom Scores (Nighttime)|Asthma symptoms during night time are recorded by the patient in the asthma daily diary. Symptom score values are from 0 (No asthma symptom) to 3 (unable to sleep because of asthma, or unable to do normal activities due to asthma). Lower score (0) is indicating better asthma symptom, while higher score (3) is indicating worse asthma symptom. Baseline is defined as the average of data collected from the evening of study day -14 to the morning of study day 1. Each time point is calculated as bi-weekly means based on daily diary data. If more than 50% of scores are missing in a 14 day period then this is considered as missing. Symptom score lower is better.|Change from baseline at week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
851323|NCT02075255|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in Asthma Symptom Scores (Daytime)|Asthma symptoms during daytime are recorded by the patient in the asthma daily diary. Symptom score values are from 0 (No asthma symptom) to 3 (unable to sleep because of asthma, or unable to do normal activities due to asthma). Lower score (0) is indicating better asthma symptom, while higher score (3) is indicating worse asthma symptom. Baseline is defined as the average of data collected from the evening of study day -14 to the morning of study day 1. Each time point is calculated as bi-weekly means based on daily diary data. If more than 50% of scores are missing in a 14 day period then this is considered as missing. Symptom score lower is better.|Change from baseline at week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
851324|NCT02075255|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in Asthma Symptom Scores (Total)|Asthma symptoms during night time and daytime are recorded by the patient in the asthma daily diary. Symptom score values are from 0 (No asthma symptom) to 3 (unable to sleep because of asthma, or unable to do normal activities due to asthma), and total asthma symptom score is the sum of the daytime and night time score (0 to 6). Lower score (0) is indicating better asthma symptom, while higher score (6) is indicating worse asthma symptom. Baseline is defined as the average of data collected from the evening of study day -14 to the morning of study day 1. Each time point is calculated as bi-weekly means based on daily diary data. If more than 50% of scores are missing in a 14 day period then this is considered as missing. Symptom score lower is better.|Change from baseline at week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
851325|NCT02075255|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in Pre-bronchodilator FEV1|Baseline is defined as the last non-missing value prior to the first dose of study treatment. Change from baseline to Week 28 in two treatment groups is compared to placebo group.|Change from baseline at week 28|Full analysis set. Number of participants analyzed contains number of participants who had value at Week 28.||Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
851326|NCT02075255|Secondary|Number of Days in Hospital Due to Asthma|Number of days in hospital due to asthma, if none, 0 day is considered|The time from randomisation to the date of week 28 visit (end of treatment) or last contact if the patient is lost to follow up|Full analysis set||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
851327|NCT02075255|Secondary|The Annualized Rate of Asthma Exacerbations That Are Associated With an Emergency Room Visit or a Hospitalization|The annualized exacerbation rate is based on unadjudicated exacerbation reported by the investigator that are associated with an emergency room visit or a hospitalization adjusted by the time of follow-up.|The time from randomisation to the date of week 28 visit (end of treatment) or last contact if the patient is lost to follow up|Full analysis set||events/year||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851328|NCT02075255|Secondary|The Annualized Rate of Asthma Exacerbation|The annualized exacerbation rate is based on unadjudicated exacerbation reported by the investigator adjusted by the time of follow-up.|The time from randomisation to the date of week 28 visit (end of treatment) or last contact if the patient is lost to follow up|Full analysis set||events/year||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851329|NCT02075255|Secondary|Time to the First Asthma Exacerbation Requiring Hospitalization or ER Visit|Time to the first exacerbation requiring hospitalization or ER visit post randomisation|The time from randomisation to the date of first asthma exacerbation associated with hospitalization or ER over 28 weeks.|Full analysis set||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
851330|NCT02075255|Secondary|Time to the First Asthma Exacerbation|Time to the first occurrence of asthma exacerbation post randomisation|The time from randomisation to the date of first asthma exacerbation over 28 weeks|Full analysis set||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
851331|NCT02075255|Secondary|Number and Percentage of Patients With ≥1 Asthma Exacerbation|Number and percentage of patients with at least one post randomisation asthma exacerbation.|Immediately following the randomisation through Study Week 28|Full analysis set||Participants|||Count of Participants
851332|NCT02075255|Secondary|The Proportion of Patients With Average Final OCS Dose ≤5.0 mg Daily at Visit 14, While Maintaining Asthma Control|Final OCS dose is the dose at Week 28. If a patient discontinues from the study during a given dose reduction period, or the patient experiences an exacerbation between Weeks 24 and 28 or immediately before discontinuation, then the final OCS dose will be 1 dose level higher than that which directly preceded the event.|Week 28|Full analysis set||Participants|||Number
851333|NCT02075255|Secondary|The Proportion of Patients With ≤5.0 mg Reduction on Daily OCS Dose at Visit 14 Compared With Baseline Dose at Visit 6, While Maintaining Asthma Control.|Baseline OCS dose is the dose upon which the patient is stabilised at randomisation (Week 0). Final OCS dose is the dose at Week 28. If a patient discontinues from the study during a given dose reduction period, or the patient experiences an exacerbation between Weeks 24 and 28 or immediately before discontinuation, then the final OCS dose will be 1 dose level higher than that which directly preceded the event.|Week 28|Full analysis set||Participants|||Number
851334|NCT02075255|Secondary|The Proportion of Eligible Patients With ≥100% Reduction in Average Daily OCS Dose at Visit 14 Compared With Baseline Dose at Visit 6, While Maintaining Asthma Control|Baseline OCS dose is the dose upon which the patient is stabilised at randomisation (Week 0). Final OCS dose is the dose at Week 28. The percentage reduction from baseline is defined as: {(Baseline dose–final dose)/baseline dose}*100%. If a patient discontinues from the study during a given dose reduction period, or the patient experiences an exacerbation between Weeks 24 and 28 or immediately before discontinuation, then the final OCS dose will be 1 dose level higher than that which directly preceded the event.|Week 28|Full analysis set, eligible for 100% reduction (ie, patients with baseline OCS dose <= 12.5 mg)||Participants|||Number
851335|NCT02075255|Secondary|The Percentage of Patients With ≥50% Reduction in Average Daily OCS Dose at Visit 14 Compared With Baseline Dose at Visit 6, While Maintaining Asthma Control|Baseline OCS dose is the dose upon which the patient is stabilised at randomisation (Week 0). Final OCS dose is the dose at Week 28. The percentage reduction from baseline is defined as: {(Baseline dose–final dose)/baseline dose}*100%. If a patient discontinues from the study during a given dose reduction period, or the patient experiences an exacerbation between Weeks 24 and 28 or immediately before discontinuation, then the final OCS dose will be 1 dose level higher than that which directly preceded the event.|Week 28|Full analysis set||Participants|||Count of Participants
851336|NCT02075255|Secondary|Percentage Reduction in Final OCS Dose Compared With Baseline While Maintaining Asthma Control for Patients With Baseline Eosinophils >=300/uL|Baseline OCS dose is the dose upon which the patient is stabilised at randomisation (Week 0). Final OCS dose is the dose at Week 28. The percentage reduction from baseline is defined as: {(Baseline dose–final dose)/baseline dose}*100%. If a patient discontinues from the study during a given dose reduction period, or the patient experiences an exacerbation between Weeks 24 and 28 or immediately before discontinuation, then the final OCS dose will be 1 dose level higher than that which directly preceded the event.|Week 28|Full analysis set, baseline blood eosinophil >=300/uL||Percent||95% Confidence Interval|Median
851337|NCT02075255|Secondary|Number and Percentage of Patients in Different Categories of Percent Reduction From Baseline in Final OCS Dose While Maintaining Asthma Control|Number and percentage of patients in different categories of percent reduction from baseline in final OCS dose.|Week 28|Full analysis set||Participants|||Count of Participants
851338|NCT02075255|Primary|Percentage Reduction in Final OCS Dose Compared With Baseline While Maintaining Asthma Control|Baseline OCS dose is the dose upon which the patient is stabilised at randomisation (Week 0). Final OCS dose is the dose at Week 28. The percentage reduction from baseline is defined as: {(Baseline dose–final dose)/baseline dose}*100%. If a patient discontinues from the study during a given dose reduction period, or the patient experiences an exacerbation between Weeks 24 and 28 or immediately before discontinuation, then the final OCS dose will be 1 dose level higher than that which directly preceded the event.|Week 28|Full analysis set||Percent||95% Confidence Interval|Median
851341|NCT02015481|Secondary|SWAL-QOL, Swallowing Quality of Life Questionnaire|Summary of Quality of Life in Swallowing Disorders total symptom score results over time, change from baseline at weeks 12 and 24 This is a 100 point scale. The higher the number the better the quality of life.|28 weeks|||percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
851342|NCT02015481|Secondary|Videofluoroscopy (VFS) Score|Penetration aspiration score results assessed by VFS comparing baseline, prior to treatment, to week 24. This is an 8 point scale. The higher the number the greater the risk of aspiration. The result reported is the difference from the baseline scores.|24 Weeks|11 patients had valid baseline data and week 24 data||Points on an 8 point scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
851343|NCT02015481|Secondary|Drinking Test Score|Change from baseline in ice water drinking time, in seconds, at week 24. Times greater than 8 seconds to complete the drinking test are considered abnormal.|24 weeks|22 patients had data available for analysis at week 24||percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
851344|NCT02015481|Primary|Safety Lab Evaluations|Change from baseline in safety labs including hematology, coagulation, chemistry, renal function, and liver function tests at week 24 .|24 weeks|24 patients were available for analysis at week 24. Not all patients had all labs performed. Missing data accounts for the differing number of patients with specific lab values.||percentage change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
851433|NCT01916941|Primary|Number of Standard Alcoholic Drinks Consumed Per Week (Drinks Per Week)||from 2-4 weeks and from 4-6 weeks|||drinks per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
851603|NCT01602016|Secondary|Improved Stereotyped Behavior and Improved Social Skills|Stereotyped behavior (as measured by the OACIS (not at 6 weeks), ASQ, RBS-R, and ABC) and social skills (as measured by the Vineland (not at 6 weeks), ASQ, and SRS) will be the secondary outcomes.|(baseline, 6, and 12 weeks)|No data because no patients were analyzed.|||||
851465|NCT01762943|Secondary|Change in Inventory of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms (IDAS) Dysphoria Score|"The IDAS Dysphoria Scale consists of 10 items and uses a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 to 5 with 1 indicating not at all and 5 indicating extremely. As such, the range of possible scores is 10 to 50. The Dysphoria scale includes items assessing feelings of depression, inadequacy, psychomotor agitation, guilt, discouragement, anhedonia, poor concentration, difficulty with decision-making, psychomotor retardation, and worry. Higher scores indicate greater dysphoria."|Assessed at baseline and post-treatment|Of the 36 women who enrolled in the study, 6 (4 PPD, 2 controls) were withdrawn prior to the second fMRI session. For the purpose of this group x time analysis, their data have been excluded. All 30 subjects who completed the protocol were included in this analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
851466|NCT01762943|Primary|Blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) Response During Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) z Statistic|fMRI data collected during a Monetary Incentive Delay (MID) Task. For both tasks, the BOLD response was examined within the nucleus accumbens. The contrast of interest was win versus non-win outcomes in the MID Task. The z statistic reported represents the maximum contrast between win versus non-win outcomes during the MID task in the nucleus accumbens, averaged across the participants in each group. Individual z scores were generated using the Oxford Centre for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain (FMRIB) software library (FSL), which is a library of brain imaging analysis tools for fMRI.|baseline and hormone withdrawal|Of the 36 women who enrolled in the study, 6 were withdrawn prior to the second fMRI session. For the purpose of this group x time analysis, their data have been excluded. In addition, one participant had significant motion artifact (>4mm) during one run of the MID, and as such, her data were excluded from the analyses.||z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
851467|NCT01751412|Secondary|6-Month Progression-Free Survival|The number of participants surviving without disease progression six months after the start of treatment|6 Months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851468|NCT01751412|Secondary|6-Month Overall Survival|The number of participants surviving six months after starting treatment|6 Months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851469|NCT01751412|Secondary|Late Toxicities|Late toxicities including clinical and sub-clinical heart disease, pulmonary fibrosis, esophageal stricture, myelopathy, thyroid dysfunction and secondary cancers.|5 years|The trial was terminated before the study endpoint was met. The data is not available for analysis.|||||
851470|NCT01751412|Secondary|Acute Toxicities|Acute toxicities including pericarditis, pneumonitis, Lhermitte's, dermatitis, mucositis, esophagitis, leukopenia, xerostomia, and thrombocytopenia. Data is shown as the number of participants that experienced the given toxicities.|90 Days|||participants|||Number
851471|NCT01751412|Secondary|Local Control|The number of participants who maintained local control for the duration of their followup. Local control is defined as the lack of disease progression. Progression is the increased growth of cancer cells or the spread of the cancer cells to another location within the body.|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851472|NCT01751412|Primary|Radiation Dose to the Normal Tissue of the Lungs|The percentage of the lung volume which received radiation does of 20 Gray (Gy) or more. The lung volume percentages for the 12 participants were averaged and presented separately for the left and right lungs.|6 Weeks|||Percentage of Lung Volume||Full Range|Mean
851473|NCT01751412|Primary|Mean Radiation Dose to Normal Heart Tissue|The mean radiation dose to the heart in Gy RBE (Gray relative biological effectiveness).|6 weeks|||Gy(RBE)||Full Range|Mean
851554|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|FC-SRT||Week 0 Screening||||||
851555|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|WMS-R Logical Memory||Week 0 Screening||||||
851556|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|MRI Scan|Images will be obtained using a GE Signa 3 Tesla whole body scanner. T1-weighted sagittal fspgr and T2 FLAIR are the pulse sequences used in order to obtain the MRI images.|Within 1 month of Screen Visit (Week 0)||||||
851557|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT)|"The subject will scratch and sniff 40 common odorants embedded in microcapsules on a separate page. The subject will choose the answer from a 4-item multiple choice list. Scores will range from 0-40."|Screen (Week 0)||||||
851558|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|Apolipoprotein E Genotype|Using a standard protocol, DNA is amplified by the polymerase chase reaction (PCR). The genotypes are determined blind to subject status (patient or control) by the sizes of DNA fragments present.|Week 2||||||
851559|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|Boston Naming||Screen (Week 0), Week 16, Week 40, Week 64, Week 78||||||
851560|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|COWAT||Screen (Week 0), Week 16, Week 40, Week 64, Week 78||||||
851561|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|WAIS-III Block Design Subtest||Screen (Week 0), Week 16, Week 40, Week 64, Week 78||||||
851562|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|WAIS-III Digit Symbol Subtest||Screen (Week 0), Week 16, Week 40, Week 64, Week 78||||||
851563|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|Stroop||Screen (Week 0), Week 16, Week 40, Week 64, Week 78||||||
851564|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|Trails A and B|Parts A and B are composed of 25 circles. Patients are asked to scan the entire page and identify the next number or letter in a sequence.|Screen (Week 0), Week 16, Week 40, Week 64, Week 78||||||
851565|NCT01658228|Other Pre-specified|WMS-III Visual Reproduction Subtest||Screen (Week 0), Week 16, Week 40, Week 64, Week 78||||||
851566|NCT01658228|Secondary|Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - Cognitive (ADAS-Cog)|The modified ADAS-Cog is a cognitive battery that assesses learning, memory, language production, language comprehension, constructional praxis, ideational praxis, and orientation. Subjects' scores represent the total number of errors made throughout the various tasks. The total number of possible errors is between 0-85.|Week 16|||number of errors on a scale from 0-85||Standard Deviation|Mean
851567|NCT01658228|Primary|Selective Reminding Test (SRT) Delayed Recall|The 12-item, 6-trial SRT is a memory measure used to assess verbal list learning and memory. The total number of words learned over six trials (total immediate recall) and delayed recall (after a 15-minute delay) was obtained.|Week 16|||Words||Standard Deviation|Mean
851568|NCT01658228|Primary|Selective Reminding Test (SRT) Total Recall|The 12-item, 6-trial SRT is a memory measure used to assess verbal list learning and memory. The total number of words learned over six trials (total immediate recall) was obtained.|Week 16|||Words||Standard Deviation|Mean
851604|NCT01602016|Primary|Language Improvement|Language (measured by the receptive and expressive CELF language index, and preschool language scale (PLS), as needed) will be the primary outcome for the study. Both preliminary studies have suggested that the folinic acid intervention will be associated with receptive and expressive language improvements.|(baseline and 12 weeks )|The study sponsor (UAMS) was unable to completely monitor the study or resolve outstanding queries. The study data cannot be fully validated by the sponsor. The study was placed on Full Clinical Hold by the FDA and terminated by the sponsor as a result of investigator non-compliance.|||||
851619|NCT01590394|Primary|Large Plastic Biliary Stents Will Have a Longer Patency Time Than Conventionally Used 10 Fr Stents in Subjects as Compared to Well-known Published Historical Control Data.||6 months|Data were not analyzed, because there were too few subjects to make the outcome measure meaningful. Principal investigator retired before any analysis could be performed.|||||
851725|NCT01305941|Secondary|Functional Assessment Cancer Therapy- Breast (FACT-B) From Baseline to 9 Weeks of Treatment to Assess Impact of Everolimus in Combination With Trastuzumab and Vinorelbine on Quality of Life|The FACT-B is a 10-question self-report questionnaire subscale administered with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy- General (FACT-G) which contains concerns relevant to patients with breast cancer. Each question has a value 0-4. For some questions a higher indicates better outcome and others are the opposite. The former are summed as is, the latter are reversed in value before adding, such that each domain ranges from 0 to 4 times the number of questions in the domain, with 0 indicating worst and the highest possible value indicating best outcome. Total scores on the FACT-B subscale range from 0 to 40 with lower scores indicating declining quality of life. The change from baseline is the difference in scores between the baseline and 9 week assessments.|9 weeks|Quality of life was an optional assessment for patients, so results are only reported for subjects who completed questionnaires at each timepoint||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
851726|NCT01305941|Secondary|Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy- Brain (FACT-Br) Change From Baseline to Assess Impact of Everolimus in Combination With Trastuzumab and Vinorelbine on Quality of Life|The FACT-Br is a 23-question self-report questionnaire subscale administered with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy- General (FACT-G) which contains concerns relevant to patients with brain tumors . Each question has a value 0-4. For some questions a higher indicates better outcome and others are the opposite. The former are summed as is, the latter are reversed in value before adding, such that each domain ranges from 0 to 4 times the number of questions in the domain, with 0 indicating worst and the highest possible value indicating best outcome. Total scores on the FACT-Br subscale range from 0 to 92 with lower scores indicating declining quality of life. The change from baseline is the difference in scores between the baseline and 9 week assessments.|9 weeks|Quality of life was an optional assessment for patients, so results are only reported for subjects who completed questionnaires at each timepoint||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
851727|NCT01305941|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) after administration of everolimus in combination with trastuzumab and vinorelbine|3 years|||years||95% Confidence Interval|Median
851728|NCT01305941|Secondary|Extracranial Time to Progression|"To evaluate the extracranial time to progression as determined by RECIST 1.1 criteria after administration of everolimus in combination with trastuzumab and vinorelbine.
Progressive Disease (PD) - at least a 20% increase in the sum LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter recorded since the treatment started AND an absolute increase in size of at least 5 mm in at least one target lesion OR the appearance of one or more new lesions of at least 6 mm in size."|3 years|Seven subjects were not evaluable for extra-cranial response due to no follow-up disease assessments due to poor clinical status; 12 subjects were excluded since they did not have extra-cranial disease at baseline; 1 subject was non compliant for follow-up scans; and 1 subject was excluded due to intracranial progression prior to extracranial.||months||Full Range|Median
851729|NCT01305941|Secondary|Extracranial Response|"Extracranial response was measured using RECIST 1.1 criteria and defined as the number of subjects achieving CR or PR.
Complete Response (CR) - Disappearance of all target and nontarget lesions Partial Response (PR) - at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum longest diameter AND an absolute decrease of at least 5mm in at least one target lesion.
Stable Disease (SD) - neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for partial response nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter since the treatment started.
Progressive Disease (PD) - at least a 20% increase in the sum LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter recorded since the treatment started AND an absolute increase in size of at least 5 mm in at least one target lesion OR the appearance of one or more new lesions of at least 6 mm in size."|3 years|Seven subjects were not evaluable for extra-cranial response because there was no follow-up disease assessment done due to poor clinical status of subjects. An additional 12 subjects were excluded since they did not have extra-cranial disease at baseline and one additional subject was non compliant for follow-up scans.||Participants|||Count of Participants
851730|NCT01305941|Secondary|Time to Intracranial Progression.|"Time to intracranial progression after administration of everolimus in combination with trastuzumab and vinorelbine as defined via modified RECIST criteria.
Progressive Disease (PD) - at least a 20% increase in the sum LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter recorded since the treatment started AND an absolute increase in size of at least 5 mm in at least one target lesion OR the appearance of one or more new lesions of at least 6 mm in size."|3 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
851731|NCT01305941|Secondary|Toxicity|"Grade 3 or higher toxicities of interest are reported. Toxicity was assessed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE) v4.
The NCI CTCAE is a descriptive terminology which can be utilized for Adverse Event (AE) reporting. A grading (severity) scale is provided for each AE term. Grade 1 Mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated. Grade 2 Moderate; minimal, local or noninvasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental Activities of Daily Living (ADL). Grade 3 Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL. Grade 4 Life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Grade 5 Death related to AE."|24 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
851732|NCT01305941|Secondary|Intracranial Response Rate- MacDonald Criteria|"Intracranial tumor lesions were evaluated via gadolinium-enhanced brain MRI using the MacDonald criteria. Measurable disease is defined as at least 1 measurable brain lesion accurately measured in at least 2 dimensions (longest diameter) as ≥5.0 mm. Tumor size is the product of the 2 longest bi-dimensional lines.
Complete Response (CR)- Disappearance of all tumor on consecutive CT or MRI scans at least 1 month apart, off steroids for treatment of neurological symptoms, and neurologically stable or improved.
Partial Response (PR)- ≥50% reduction in size of tumor on consecutive CT or MRI scans at least 1 month part, steroids stable or reduced, and neurologically stable or improved.
Progressive Disease (PD)- ≥25% increase in size of tumor or any new tumor on CT or MRI scans, or neurologically worse, and steroids stable or increased due to neurologic symptoms.
Stable Disease (SD)- all other situations Overall Response Rate (ORR) is the sum of partial responses (PRs) and CRs."|3 years|Six subjects were not evaluable for response because there was no follow-up disease assessment done due to poor clinical status of subjects||Participants|||Count of Participants
851733|NCT01305941|Primary|Intracranial Objective Response Rate- Modified RECIST Criteria|"response will be evaluated via gadolinium-enhanced brain MRI using modified RECIST criteria.
Complete Response (CR) - Disappearance of all target and nontarget lesions
Partial Response (PR) - at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum longest diameter AND an absolute decrease of at least 5mm in at least one target lesion.
Stable Disease (SD) - neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for partial response nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter since the treatment started.
Progressive Disease (PD) – at least a 20% increase in the sum LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum of the longest diameter recorded since the treatment started AND an absolute increase in size of at least 5 mm in at least one target lesion OR the appearance of one or more new lesions of at least 6 mm in size."|3 years|Six subjects were not evaluable for response because there was no follow-up disease assessment done due to poor clinical status of subjects||Participants|||Count of Participants
852154|NCT00855413|Secondary|Minimum Ritonavir Exposure Range in Cerebrospinal Fluid Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Lumbar Puncture||Week 4 and week 48|Four participants consented to 7 optional lumbar puncture to provide CSF sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
851809|NCT01275053|Primary|Leptin Signaling|"Leptin signaling is assessed before and 30 minutes after in vivo metreleptin administration.
The primary outcome was p-STAT3/STAT3 in biopsies (fat tissue) before and 30 minutes after in vivo metreleptin administration.
The p-STAT3/STAT3 before metreleptin administration was given the value 1, and the p-STAT3/STAT3 30 minutes after in vivo metreleptin administration was given the value showing the fold change compared to p-STAT3/STAT3 before metreleptin administration."|Baseline and 30 minutes|All subjects received biopsies before and 30 min after leptin administration.||fold change||Full Range|Mean
852155|NCT00855413|Secondary|Maximum Ritonavir Exposure in Cerebrospinal Fluid Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Lumbar Puncture||Week 4 and Week 48|Four participants consented to 7 optional lumbar puncture to provide CSF sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
851818|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Lower Limb Pain at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The intensity of lower limb pain was evaluated using the Scale of Pain Intensity (SPIN) which provided a pictorial representation of pain in a 6-point graphic scale with the degree of red shading inside a circle representing the intensity of pain. The bottom and top of the scale are anchored by two extremes: ‘no pain’ (circle with no red shading and scored as 0) and ‘pain as bad as it could be’ (circle completely red and scored as 5), marked with either verbal or visual cues. The intervening points are represented by red circles increasing proportionally in size. The subject marks the circle that best indicates their pain intensity. The SPIN assessments were obtained prior to the study treatment at baseline, and then after injection at Weeks 1, 4 and 12, and at discretionary visits when needed at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851819|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in the Range of Active Dorsiflexion at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 (Knee Extended and Flexed)|Range of active dorsiflexion of the ankle joint, both with the knee flexed (90°) and extended (measured by goniometry) was used to assess treatment response. The measurements were made prior to the study treatment at baseline, and then after injection at Weeks 1, 4 and 12, and at discretionary visits when needed at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||Degrees||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851820|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in the Tardieu Scale in the Soleus (Knee Flexed) at Weeks 1, 4 and 12: Spasticity Grade (Y)|The Tardieu Scale in the soleus was used to assess spasticity with the knee flexed. The spasticity grade (Y) assesses quality of muscle reaction on a 5-point scale (measured at fast speed): 0 = no resistance throughout passive movement; 1 = slight resistance throughout passive movement; 2 = clear catch at precise angle, interrupting passive movement, followed by release; 3 = fatigable clonus (less than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at a precise angle, followed by release; 4 = unfatigable clonus (more than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at precise angle. The Tardieu Scale ratings were made prior to the study treatment at baseline, and then after injection at Weeks 1, 4 and 12, and at discretionary visits if required at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline for spasticity grade at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851821|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in the Tardieu Scale in the Soleus (Knee Flexed) at Weeks 1, 4 and 12: Angle of Arrest (XV1), Angle of Catch (XV3) and Spasticity Angle (X)|The Tardieu Scale in the soleus was used to assess spasticity with the knee flexed. Assessments were made at slow (V1) and fast (V3) speeds of stretch. Slow speed of muscle stretch measures the range of passive motion. During a slow stretching movement, the examiner determines the angle of movement arrest (XV1), either due to subject discomfort or a mechanical resistance. The same movement is repeated at a fast speed to determine the angle of catch and release (XV3). The spasticity angle (X) was calculated as the difference between XV1 and XV3. The Tardieu Scale ratings were made prior to the study treatment at baseline, and then after injection at Weeks 1, 4 and 12, and at discretionary visits if required at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||Degrees||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851822|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in the Tardieu Scale in the GSC (Knee Extended) at Weeks 1, 4 and 12: Spasticity Grade (Y)|The Tardieu Scale in the GSC was used to assess spasticity with the knee extended. The spasticity grade (Y) assesses quality of muscle reaction on a 5-point scale (measured at fast speed): 0 = no resistance throughout passive movement; 1 = slight resistance throughout passive movement; 2 = clear catch at precise angle, interrupting passive movement, followed by release; 3 = fatigable clonus (less than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at a precise angle, followed by release; 4 = unfatigable clonus (more than 10 seconds when maintaining pressure) occurring at precise angle. The Tardieu Scale ratings were made prior to the study treatment at baseline, and then after injection at Weeks 1, 4 and 12, and at discretionary visits if required at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline for spasticity grade at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851823|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in the Tardieu Scale in the GSC (Knee Extended) at Weeks 1, 4 and 12: Angle of Arrest (XV1), Angle of Catch (XV3) and Spasticity Angle (X)|The Tardieu Scale in the GSC was used to assess spasticity with the knee extended. Assessments were made at slow (V1) and fast (V3) speeds of stretch. Slow speed of muscle stretch measures the range of passive motion. During a slow stretching movement, the examiner determines the angle of movement arrest (XV1), either due to subject discomfort or a mechanical resistance. The same movement is repeated at a fast speed to determine the angle of catch and release (XV3). The spasticity angle (X) was calculated as the difference between XV1 and XV3. The Tardieu Scale ratings were made prior to the study treatment at baseline, and then after injection at Weeks 1, 4 and 12, and at discretionary visits if required at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||Degrees||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851824|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Average Step Length With Maximal Barefoot Walking Speed at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Average step length was assessed during the 10-metre walking speed test at maximal walking speed and barefoot. The evaluator walked beside the subject during the test and counted the number of steps taken during the 10-metre walk. The gait parameters were measured at baseline, Weeks 1, 4 and 12, discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||m/step||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851825|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Cadence With Maximal Barefoot Walking Speed at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Cadence was assessed during the 10-metre walking speed test at maximal walking speed and barefoot. The evaluator walked beside the subject during the test and counted the number of steps taken during the 10-metre walk. The gait parameters were measured at baseline, Weeks 1, 4 and 12, discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||steps/s||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851826|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Average Step Length With Maximal Walking Speed With Shoes at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Average step length was assessed during the 10-metre walking speed test at maximal walking speed and with shoes. The evaluator walked beside the subject during the test and counted the number of steps taken during the 10-metre walk. The gait parameters were measured at baseline, Weeks 1, 4 and 12, discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||m/step||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851835|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Comfortable Barefoot Walking Speed at Weeks 1 and 12|Comfortable walking speed was assessed as a measure of functional ability and gait over 10 metres. Evaluations were made barefoot, without walking aids, at baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12 and discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||m/s||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851827|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Cadence With Maximal Walking Speed With Shoes at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Cadence was assessed during the 10-metre walking speed test at maximal walking speed and with shoes. The evaluator walked beside the subject during the test and counted the number of steps taken during the 10-metre walk. The gait parameters were measured at baseline, Weeks 1, 4 and 12, discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||steps/s||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851828|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Average Step Length With Comfortable Barefoot Walking Speed at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Average step length was assessed during the 10-metre walking speed test at comfortable walking speed and barefoot. The evaluator walked beside the subject during the test and counted the number of steps taken during the 10-metre walk. The gait parameters were measured at baseline, Weeks 1, 4 and 12, discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||m/step||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851829|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Cadence With Comfortable Barefoot Walking Speed at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Cadence was assessed during the 10-metre walking speed test at comfortable walking speed and barefoot. The evaluator walked beside the subject during the test and counted the number of steps taken during the 10-metre walk. The gait parameters were measured at baseline, Weeks 1, 4 and 12, discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||steps/s||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851830|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Average Step Length With Comfortable Walking Speed With Shoes at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Average step length was assessed during the 10-metre walking speed test at comfortable walking speed and with shoes. The evaluator walked beside the subject during the test and counted the number of steps taken during the 10-metre walk. The gait parameters were measured at baseline, Weeks 1, 4 and 12, discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||m/step||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851831|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Cadence With Comfortable Walking Speed With Shoes at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Cadence was assessed during the 10-metre walking speed test at comfortable walking speed and with shoes. The evaluator walked beside the subject during the test and counted the number of steps taken during the 10-metre walk. The gait parameters were measured at baseline, Weeks 1, 4 and 12, discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||steps/s||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851832|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Maximal Walking Speed With Shoes at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Maximal walking speed was assessed as a measure of functional ability and gait over 10 metres. Evaluations were made with shoes, without walking aids, at baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12 and discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||m/s||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851833|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Maximal Barefoot Walking Speed at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Maximal walking speed was assessed as a measure of functional ability and gait over 10 metres. Evaluations were made barefoot, without walking aids, at baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12 and discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||m/s||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851834|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in Comfortable Walking Speed With Shoes at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Comfortable walking speed was assessed as a measure of functional ability and gait over 10 metres. Evaluations were made with shoes, without walking aids, at baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12 and discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||m/s||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851836|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|PGA of Treatment Response at Week 12|An assessment of overall treatment response was conducted at Weeks 4 and 12, and discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study by an investigator who had not assessed the MAS. The investigator rated the response to treatment in the subject's lower limb after injection of Dysport® relative to the status at the baseline. Answers were made on a 9 point rating scale: -4=markedly worse, -3=much worse, -2=worse, -1=slightly worse, 0=no change, +1=slightly improved, +2=improved, +3=much improved, +4=markedly improved. The mean PGA scores at Week 12 are reported.|At Week 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data at Week 12 are included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851837|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in MAS Score in the Soleus (Knee Flexed) at Weeks 1, 4 and 12|Muscle tone in the treated limb was assessed by MAS in the soleus (with the knee flexed) at baseline, at Weeks 1, 4 and 12, at discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24, and at end of study. The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0 (no increase in muscle tone), 1 (slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch and release or by minimal resistance at the end of the ROM), 1+ (slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch, followed by minimal resistance throughout the remainder (less than half) of the ROM), 2 (more marked increase in muscle tone), 3 (considerable increase in muscle tone) or 4 (affected part(s) rigid in flexion or extension), and can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1, 4 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851838|NCT01249404|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change From Baseline in MAS Score in the GSC (Knee Extended) at Weeks 1 and 12|Muscle tone in the treated limb was assessed by MAS in the GSC (with the knee extended) at baseline, at Weeks 1, 4 and 12, at discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24, and at end of study. The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0 (no increase in muscle tone), 1 (slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch and release or by minimal resistance at the end of the ROM), 1+ (slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch, followed by minimal resistance throughout the remainder (less than half) of the ROM), 2 (more marked increase in muscle tone), 3 (considerable increase in muscle tone) or 4 (affected part(s) rigid in flexion or extension), and can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The mean change from baseline at Weeks 1 and 12 are reported.|Baseline and Weeks 1 and 12|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data available at each timepoint presented are included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851839|NCT01249404|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 in Comfortable Barefoot Walking Speed|Comfortable walking speed was assessed as a measure of functional ability and gait over 10 metres. Evaluations were made barefoot, without walking aids, at baseline and Weeks 1, 4 and 12 and discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study. The mean change from baseline at Week 4 is reported.|Baseline and Week 4|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data at baseline and Week 4 are included in the analysis.||m/s||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851840|NCT01249404|Secondary|Physician's Global Assesment (PGA) of Treatment Response at Week 4|An assessment of overall treatment response was conducted at Weeks 4 and 12, and discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24 and at end of study by an investigator who had not assessed the MAS. The investigator rated the response to treatment in the subject's lower limb after injection of Dysport® relative to the status at the baseline. Answers were made on a 9 point rating scale: -4=markedly worse, -3=much worse, -2=worse, -1=slightly worse, 0=no change, +1=slightly improved, +2=improved, +3=much improved, +4=markedly improved. The mean PGA score at Week 4 is reported.|At Week 4|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4. Only subjects with data at Week 4 are included in the analysis.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
851841|NCT01249404|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 4 in the MAS Score in the Gastrocnemius-soleus Complex (GSC) (Knee Extended)|Muscle tone in the treated limb was assessed by MAS in the GSC (with the knee extended) at baseline, at Weeks 1, 4 and 12, at discretionary visits at Weeks 16, 20 and 24, and at end of study. The MAS consists of 6 grades: 0 (no increase in muscle tone), 1 (slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch and release or by minimal resistance at the end of the range of motion (ROM)), 1+ (slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch, followed by minimal resistance throughout the remainder (less than half) of the ROM), 2 (more marked increase in muscle tone), 3 (considerable increase in muscle tone) or 4 (affected part(s) rigid in flexion or extension), and can be applied to muscles of both the upper and lower limbs. The mean change from baseline at Week 4 is reported.|Baseline and Week 4|The ITT population included all randomised subjects who received at least 1 injection of study medication and who had a MAS score in the GSC assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and at Week 4.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852156|NCT00855413|Secondary|Minimum Darunavir Exposure in Cerebrospinal Fluid Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Lumbar Puncture||Week 4 and week 48|Four participants consented to 7 optional lumbar puncture to provide CSF sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
852157|NCT00855413|Secondary|Maximum Darunavir Exposure in Cerebrospinal Fluid Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Lumbar Puncture||Week 4 and week 48|Four participants consented to 7 optional lumbar puncture to provide CSF sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
852035|NCT01098071|Primary|Number of Participants Referred to Surgery (Adenoidectomy) Within 12 Weeks of Start of Therapy||Baseline to 12 weeks|Evaluable population (per protocol population, ie, those participants without protocol violation of inclusion or exclusion criteria)||Participants|||Number
852015|NCT01147172|Primary|Pigmentation Changes at Site of Injection|Percentage of subjects with pigmentation changes at site of injection at End of Study|24 Weeks|Safety Population||Percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
852016|NCT01147172|Primary|Pigmentation Changes at Site of Injection|Percentage of Subjects with pigmentation changes at site of injection|12 Weeks|Safety Population||Percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
852017|NCT01147172|Primary|Pigmentation Changes at Site of Injection|Percentage of Subjects with pigmentation changes at site of injection|6 Weeks|Safety Population||Percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
852018|NCT01147172|Primary|Pigmentation Changes at Site of Injection|Percentage of Subjects with pigmentation changes at site of injection|2 Weeks|Safety Population||Percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
852019|NCT01147172|Primary|Keloid Formation at Site of Injection|Percentage of subjects with keloid formation at the site of injection at End of Study|24 Weeks|Safety Population||Percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
852020|NCT01147172|Primary|Keloid Formation at Site of Injection|Percentage of Subjects with keloid formation at the site of injection|12 Weeks|Safety Population||Percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
852021|NCT01147172|Primary|Keloid Formation at Site of Injection|Percentage of Subjects with keloid formation at the site of injection|6 Weeks|Safety Population||Percentage (%) of subjects|||Number
852022|NCT01147172|Primary|Keloid Formation at Site of Injection|Percentage of Subjects with keloid formation at the site of injection|2 Weeks|Safety Population||percentage of participants|||Number
852030|NCT01098071|Secondary|Severity of Eye Symptoms at Baseline and Week 12|Eye symptoms are a symptom of allergic rhinitis. Eye symptoms were assessed using a 3-point scale (0 = no symptoms [best score] and 3 = symptom interferes with daily life activity [worst score]).|Baseline and Week 12|Participants suspected to have allergic rhinitis||Score on a scale||Full Range|Mean
852031|NCT01098071|Secondary|Severity of Sneezing at Baseline and Week 12|Sneezing is a symptom of allergic rhinitis. Sneezing was assessed using a 3-point scale (0 = no symptoms [best score] and 3 = symptom interferes with daily life activity [worst score]).|Baseline and Week 12|Participants suspected to have allergic rhinitis||Score on a scale||Full Range|Mean
852032|NCT01098071|Secondary|Severity of Nasal Itching at Baseline and Week 12|Nasal itching is a symptom of allergic rhinitis. Nasal itching was assessed using a 3-point scale (0 = no symptoms [best score] and 3 = symptom interferes with daily life activity [worst score]).|Baseline and Week 12|Participants suspected to have allergic rhinitis||Score on a scale||Full Range|Mean
852033|NCT01098071|Secondary|Severity of Nasal Congestion at Baseline and Week 12|Nasal congestion is a symptom of allergic rhinitis. Nasal congestion was assessed using a 3-point scale (0 = no symptoms [best score] and 3 = symptom interferes with daily life activity [worst score]).|Baseline and Week 12|Participants suspected to have allergic rhinitis||Score on a scale||Full Range|Mean
852034|NCT01098071|Secondary|Severity of Rhinorrhea at Baseline and Week 12|Rhinorrhea is a symptom of allergic rhinitis. Rhinorrhea was assessed using a 3-point scale (0 = no symptoms [best score] and 3 = symptom interferes with daily life activity [worst score]).|Baseline and Week 12|Participants suspected to have allergic rhinitis||Score on a scale||Full Range|Mean
852036|NCT01098071|Primary|Degree of Posterior Choana Obstruction at Baseline and Week 12|The degree of obstruction of the posterior choana was assessed by endoscopy. Endoscopy grading consisted of Grade I (minimum), Grade II and Grade III (maximum). Grade I was defined as <50% obstruction, Grade II was defined as 50-75% obstruction, and Grade III was defined as >75% obstruction.|Baseline and Week 12|Only participants that completed the study are included.||Percent obstruction||Full Range|Mean
852037|NCT01098071|Primary|Severity of Nasal Obstruction Symptoms at Baseline and Week 12 as Measured by the Total Clinical Score|Clinical score (based on a 5 point grading system) was assessed for each of 5 nasal obstruction symptoms (oral/mouth breathing, snoring, restless sleep, frequent waking-ups during the night, and obstructive breathing during sleep). Each nasal obstruction symptom was estimated by the parent/guardian of the participant and scored on a scale of 0 (best) to 1 (worst). Total clinical score is a score on a scale (0 = no symptoms [best score] and 5 = worst symptoms [worst score]).|Baseline and Week 12|||Score on a scale||Full Range|Mean
852050|NCT01033227|Secondary|Secondary End Point|a) reduced the duration and intensity of pain; b) reduced total narcotic analgesic consumption; and c) reduced length of hospitalization.|48 hours|Data were *not collected* and the Outcome was never analyzed, study terminated|||||
852051|NCT01033227|Primary|48 Hour Sodium Nitrite Infusion Safety as Determined by Number of Participants With No Adverse Events|The primary end points will be to determine if a) a 48-hour sodium nitrite infusion is tolerated without a decrease in mean arterial blood pressure by 15mmHg for greater than 2 hours or development of methemoglobin greater than 5% and b) a 48-hour sodium nitrite infusion is safe as determined by monitoring for adverse events|48 hours from start of infusion|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852158|NCT00855413|Secondary|Minimum Etravirine Exposure in Cerebrospinal Fluid Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Lumbar Puncture||Week 4 and week 48|4 participants consented to 7 optional lumbar puncture to provide CSF sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
852084|NCT00989781|Other Pre-specified|Follicle Count on 3-D Ultrasound in PCOS Women and Normal Controls|3-D ultrasound was not assessed; instead 2-D ultrasound was performed|baseline|||Antral Follicle Count||Standard Error|Mean
852085|NCT00989781|Secondary|Anti-Mullerian Hormone (AMH)||Baseline|||ng/ml||Standard Error|Mean
852086|NCT00989781|Secondary|17-hydroxyprogesterone Response to hCG in the Setting of Reduced Insulin Secretion in PCOS Women|We were unable to recruit sufficient numbers of subjects for this study. Therefore, none of the subjects had data for analysis as no hormone measurements were performed.|Baseline and 24 after hCG||||||
852087|NCT00989781|Secondary|Adrenal 17-hydroxyprogesterone Response to ACTH in PCOS Women and Normal Controls|17-hydroxyprogesterone response to ACTH infusion in women with PCOS and normal women. Response is reported as a single value generated by summing the data at end time frame.|Baseline and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 hours after ACTH|||ng/ml||Standard Error|Mean
852088|NCT00989781|Primary|17-hydroxyprogesterone Responses to hCG in PCOS Women and Normal Controls|Change from baseline in 17-hydroxyprogesterone at 24 hours after hCG injection|Baseline and 24 hours after hCG|||ng/ml||Standard Error|Mean
852134|NCT00855413|Secondary|Change in Overall Neurocognitive Impairment From Baseline to Week 24 or 48|Change in overall z score from baseline to week 24 or 48. A negative z score denotes below-average performance relative to a US normative comparison population. A higher z score is a better outcome.|Baseline to Week 24 or 48|Participants who underwent neurocognitive assessment at baseline and Week 24 and/or 48.||z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
852126|NCT00859573|Secondary|Vital Signs||thrice weekly||||||
852127|NCT00859573|Secondary|Attentional Neurophysiological Measures||week 0, 2, 10||||||
852128|NCT00859573|Secondary|Pre-attentional Neurophysiological Measures||week 0, week 2, week 10||||||
852129|NCT00859573|Primary|Withdrawal Symptoms||thrice weekly||||||
852130|NCT00859573|Primary|Mean Treatment Effectiveness Scores|Number of negative drug screens for methamphetamine during the study (every negative drug screen obtained is counted as 1 negative drug screen)divided by the total possible number of drug screens during the 6 week post residential phase of trial(participants provided 3 drug screens per week so the expected number of drug screens total is 18.This does include week 8. Missing drug screens are counted as positive.# negative drug screens/18. Minimum score is 0 and maximum score is 1. The higher the score the better the outcome. The mean of the individual treatment effectiveness scores is reported.|thrice weekly from week 3 through week 8|Participants that completed the 2 week residential treatment and entered the outpatient phase with intent to treat and missing urines treated as positive urines.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852131|NCT00855413|Secondary|HIV RNA Detection in Ileal Biopsy Specimens|Average HIV RNA detected in the ileal biopsy specimens per participant over weeks 4 and 48.|Weeks 4 and 48|Study stopped prior to target enrollment by sponsor. Given insufficient ileal biopsy samples, correlation of HIV viremia in ileal biopsies with time to suppression was not performed due to inadequate power to analyze the outcome.||copies/mL||Full Range|Mean
852132|NCT00855413|Secondary|Correlation of Time to HIV RNA Levels <200 Copies/mL With Improvement in Neurocognitive Functioning From Baseline to Week 24 and 48||Baseline to Week 24 and 48|Participants who consented to optional neurocognitive assessments at baseline and week 24 or 48||r value|||Number
852133|NCT00855413|Secondary|Correlation of HIV RNA Levels in CSF and Drug Levels With Neurocognitive Functioning||From enrollment through Week 48|Participants who consented to neurocognitive assessments at baseline and week 24 or 48. Sponsor stopped study prior to target enrollment.||r value|||Number
852135|NCT00855413|Secondary|Overall Neurocognitive Impairment at Week 48|Neuropsychological performance was assessed at baseline (week 2 or 4), week 24 and week 48 in the following domain (measures): Premorbid/language (Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT) 4 - Reading Subtest), Learning (HVLT-R, Hopkins Verbal Learning Test – Revised), Memory (HVLT-R), Speed of Processing (Trailmaking A (Army Individual Test Battery, 1944), 1974, Stroop color, Attention (WAIS-III Symbol Search; Stroop word, Fine motor, Executive (Trailmaking B, Stroop interference, Letter, Category Fluency. An overall summary score of neurocognitive functioning was created by averaging all tests. Participants also completed the self-reported functional status Patient's Assessment of Own Functioning Inventory (PAOFI) and the Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADLS). Best available demographically corrected normative data were utilized to create z scores. A negative z score denotes below-average performance relative to a US normative comparison population. A higher z score is a better outcome.|Week 48|participants who underwent neurocognitive assessment at baseline and week 48||z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
852136|NCT00855413|Secondary|Overall Neurocognitive Impairment at Week 24|Neuropsychological performance was assessed at week 2 or 4, week 24 and week 48 in the following measures: Premorbid/language (Wide Range Achievement Test 4 -Reading Subtest), Learning (Hopkins Verbal Learning Test – Revised), Memory (HVLT-R), Speed of Processing (Trailmaking A (Army Individual Test Battery, 1944), 1974, Stroop color, Attention (WAIS-III Symbol Search; Stroop word, Fine motor, Executive (Trailmaking B, Stroop interference, Letter, Category Fluency. An overall summary score of neurocognitive functioning was created by averaging all tests. Participants also completed Patient's Assessment of Own Functioning Inventory (PAOFI) and the Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADLS). Best available demographically corrected normative data were utilized to create z scores. A negative z score denotes below-average performance relative to a US normative comparison population. A higher z score is a better outcome.|Week 24|participants who underwent neurocognitive assessment at baseline and week 24||z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
852137|NCT00855413|Secondary|Overall Neurocognitive Impairment Score at Week 2 or 4|Neuropsychological performance was assessed at Week 2 or 4, Week 24 and Week 48 in the following measures: Premorbid/language (Wide Range Achievement Test 4 -Reading Subtest), Learning (HVLT-R, Hopkins Verbal Learning Test–Revised), Memory (HVLT-R), Speed of Processing (Trailmaking A (Army Individual Test Battery, 1944), 1974, Stroop color, Attention (WAIS-III Symbol Search; Stroop word, Fine motor, Executive (Trailmaking B, Stroop interference, Letter, Category Fluency. An overall summary score was created by averaging all tests. Participants also completed the self-reported functional status Patient's Assessment of Own Functioning Inventory (PAOFI) and the Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADLS). Best available demographically corrected normative data were utilized to create z scores. A negative z score denotes below-average performance relative to a US normative comparison population. A higher z score is a better outcome.|Week 2 or 4|participants who underwent neurocognitive assessment at week 2 or 4||z score||Standard Deviation|Mean
852138|NCT00855413|Secondary|Number of Participants With Neurocognitive Impairment at Week 48||Week 48|Participants who consented to optional procedure of neurocognitive assessment at week 48||Participants|||Count of Participants
852139|NCT00855413|Secondary|Number of Participants With Neurocognitive Impairment at Week 24||Week 24|Participants who consented to optional procedure of neurocognitive assessment at week 24||Participants|||Count of Participants
852140|NCT00855413|Secondary|Number of Participants With Neurocognitive Impairment at Baseline||Week 2 or 4|Participants who consented to optional procedure of neurocognitive assessment at baseline||Participants|||Count of Participants
852141|NCT00855413|Secondary|Number of Participants With HIV RNA Measurement Above the Limits of Detection in Cerebrospinal Fluid||Week 4 and Week 48|Four participants provided 7 CSF samples for measurement of HIV RNA level||participants|||Number
852142|NCT00855413|Secondary|Minimum Ritonavir Exposure Range in Ileal Tissue Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Gut Biopsy Procedure||between week 4-12 and between weeks 36-48|Six participants consented to ileal biopsy for measurement of drug levels||ng/g|||Number
852143|NCT00855413|Secondary|Maximum Ritonavir Exposure Range in Ileal Tissue Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Gut Biopsy Procedure||between week 4-12 and between Weeks 36-48|Six participants consented to ileal biopsy for measurement of drug levels||ng/g|||Number
852144|NCT00855413|Secondary|Minimum Darunavir Exposure Range in Ileal Tissue Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Gut Biopsy Procedure||between week 4-12 and between weeks 36-48|Six participants consented to ileal biopsy for measurement of drug levels||ng/g|||Number
852145|NCT00855413|Secondary|Maximum Darunavir Exposure Range in Ileal Tissue Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Gut Biopsy Procedure||between Week 4-12 and between Weeks 36-48|Six participants consented to ileal biopsy for measurement of drug levels||ng/g|||Number
852146|NCT00855413|Secondary|Minimum Etravirine Exposure Range in Ileal Tissue Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Gut Biopsy Procedure||between Week 4-12 and between Weeks 36-48|Six participants consented to ileal biopsy for measurement of drug levels||ng/g|||Number
852147|NCT00855413|Secondary|Maximum Etravirine Exposure in Ileal Tissue Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Gut Biopsy Procedure||between Week 4-12 and between Weeks 36-48|Six participants consented to ileal biopsy for measurement of drug levels||ng/g|||Number
852148|NCT00855413|Secondary|Minimum Ritonavir Exposure in Semen Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Collection of Semen||Weeks 0-4 and Weeks 12, 48|Four participants consented to provide a semen sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
852149|NCT00855413|Secondary|Maximum Ritonavir Exposure in Semen Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Collection of Semen||Weeks 0-4 and Weeks 12, 48|Four participants consented to provide a semen sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
852150|NCT00855413|Secondary|Minimum Darunavir Exposure Range in Semen Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Collection of Semen||Weeks 0-4 and weeks 12, 48|Four participants consented to provide a semen sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
852151|NCT00855413|Secondary|Maximum Darunavir Exposure in Semen Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Collection of Semen||Weeks 0-4 and weeks 12, 48|Four participants consented to provide a semen sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
852152|NCT00855413|Secondary|Minimum Etravirine Exposure in Semen Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Collection of Semen||Weeks 0-4 and weeks 12, 48|Four participants consented to provide a semen sample for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
852159|NCT00855413|Secondary|Maximum Etravirine Exposure in Cerebrospinal Fluid Among Participants Who Consented to an Optional Lumbar Puncture||Week 4 and week 48|4 participants consented to 7 optional lumbar punctures to provide CSF samples for measurement of drug levels.||ng/mL|||Number
852160|NCT00855413|Secondary|Adverse Events Possibly or Definitely Related to Study Treatment Through Week 48|Total number of adverse events observed that were possibly or definitely related to study treatment through week 48|Enrollment to week 48|||adverse events|||Number
852161|NCT00855413|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Stopped Study Treatment Due to Adverse Event or Intolerance||Enrollment to Week 48|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852162|NCT00855413|Secondary|HIV RNA Detection in Semen|Total cumulative levels of HIV RNA detected in the semen of participants from enrollment through week 48.|From enrollment through 48 weeks|Study stopped prior to target enrollment by sponsor. Given insufficient semen samples, correlation of HIV viremia in semen with time to suppression was not performed due to inadequate power to analyze the outcome.||copies/mL||Full Range|Mean
852163|NCT00855413|Secondary|Median Time to HIV RNA Suppression to <200 Copies/mL||From enrollment to the date of HIV RNA suppression, assessed up to Week 48|||days||Full Range|Median
852164|NCT00855413|Secondary|HIV RNA Levels Immediately Prior to Initiating Study Treatment.||HIV RNA level at enrollment|||copies/mL||Full Range|Median
852165|NCT00855413|Secondary|Median Change in CD4 Cell Count From Week 0 to Week 48.||48 weeks from enrollment|12 participants with a week 48 study visit were included in analysis||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
852166|NCT00855413|Secondary|Median Change in CD4 Cell Count From Week 0 to Week 24.||week 0, week 24|All participants enrolled were included in this analysis||cells/mm^3||Full Range|Median
852167|NCT00855413|Secondary|Number of Participants With Virologic Response|Virologic response to study treatment defined as plasma HIV RNA measurement <50 copies/mL at week 48|48 weeks from enrollment|All participants retained on study through week 48 were included in the analysis of virologic efficacy at week 48||Participants|||Count of Participants
852168|NCT00855413|Primary|Number of Participants With Virologic Response|Virologic response defined as plasma HIV RNA measurement <200 copies/mL at week 24|24 weeks|All participants enrolled were included in analysis of virologic response||Participants|||Count of Participants
852250|NCT00577512|Secondary|Duration of Response||12 months||||||
852251|NCT00577512|Primary|Number of Subjects Treated With (HD DTPACE Obtain a Complete Response or Near Complete Response That Lasts for 6 Months or Longer.|"Complete Response (CR) defined as all of the following for a minimum of 2 months: a) absence of urine and serum M-components by immunofixation; b) bone marrow should be adequately cellular (>20%); c) normal serum calcium; d) no new bone lesions or enlargement of existing lesions.
Near Complete Response included all elements of CR except immunofixation studies remained positive."|12 months|||participant response|||Number
852252|NCT00574080|Secondary|Side Effects With Both Transplant Regimens|side effects from adding three drugs, bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTD) to the high dose chemotherapy regimen immediately before transplant (DPACE/Melphalan)vs. side effects of treatment with high-dose chemotherapy not containing these drug|24 months||||||
852253|NCT00574080|Primary|Event Free Survival|Time from study registration until disease progression or death.|Up to 3 years 8 months|no analysis, participants either died or were withdrawn by PI. study terminated with <10% of target accrual enrolled.|||||
852254|NCT00568178|Primary|Open Label Extension: Change From Baseline in Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) at Month 36|"The outcome measure of glomerular filtration rate was based on mL/min/1.73m^2, as determined by the Schwartz formula:
GFR = _____0.55 x height (cm)_______ divided by serum creatinine (mg/dL)
GFR values were compared to the baseline GFR measure.
[Note: For male participants, ages 13 to 17 years, 0.70 was used as
the multiplier in place of 0.55]
Baseline in regard to the extension is defined as the last value obtained in the double-blind treatment phase."|Baseline and Month 36|Data for analysis was obtained only from participants who had: 1) Baseline measure of Pr/Cr, 2) At least one dose of study drug, and 3) Post randomization measure of Pr/Cr. The number of participants was determined by including only individuals who satisfied the criteria.||Change in GFR mL/min1.73m^2||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852255|NCT00568178|Primary|Open Label Extension: Percent Change From Baseline of Urinary Pr/Cr Ratio (gm/gm) at Month 36|"Change in urinary protein excretion, determined as urinary Pr/Cr ratio compared to baseline*, after approximately three years of treatment.
*The baseline for efficacy data in the extension was defined as the last value obtained in the double-blind treatment phase."|Baseline and Month 36|Data for analysis was obtained only from participants who had: 1) Baseline measure of Pr/Cr, 2) At least one dose of study drug, and 3) Post randomization measure of Pr/Cr. The number of participants was determined by including only the individuals who satisfied the criteria.||Percent Change in Pr/Cr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
852256|NCT00568178|Secondary|Double-Blind Treatment Phase: Change From Baseline in Diastolic Blood Pressure in Hypertensive Participants at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|All-Participants-As-Treated population which included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study therapy, and each participant was counted in the treatment group of the drug they actually received||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852257|NCT00568178|Secondary|Double-Blind Treatment Phase: Change From Baseline in Systolic Blood Pressure in Hypertensive Participants at Week 12||Baseline and Week 12|All-Participants-As-Treated population which included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study therapy, and each participant was counted in the treatment group of the drug they actually received.||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852258|NCT00568178|Primary|Double-Blind Treatment Phase: Percent Change From Baseline in Urinary Protein/Creatinine (Pr/Cr) Ratio (gm/gm) at Week 12|"Change in urinary protein excretion, determined as urinary Pr/Cr ratio compared to baseline*, after approximately twelve weeks of treatment.
Baseline is defined as values obtained at Visit 3, Week (-1) during the Single Blind Run-in period."|Baseline and Week 12|Full Analysis Set included all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug and had baseline and post randomization measurements available||Percent Change in Pr/Cr||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
852259|NCT00560755|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Systemic AE After ProQuad® Dose 1|Systemic AEs were monitored for up to 28 days after the first ProQuad® injection.|Up to Day 28 (28 days after ProQuad® Dose 1)|All participants who received the first ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852260|NCT00560755|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ≥ 1 Rectal Temperature Reading ≥ 38.0° C After ProQuad® Dose 1|The percentage of participants with at least 1 rectal temperature reading ≥ 38.0° C was determined.|Up to Day 28 (28 days after ProQuad® Dose 1)|All participants who received the first ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
852261|NCT00560755|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Unsolicited Injection-site AE After ProQuad® Dose 1|Unsolicited injection-site AEs were monitored for up to 28 days after the first ProQuad® injection.|Up to Day 28 (28 days after ProQuad® Dose 1)|All participants who received the first ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852262|NCT00560755|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Solicited Injection-site AE After ProQuad® Dose 1|The solicited injection-site AEs erythema, swelling, and pain were monitored for 4 days after administration of ProQuad® Dose 1.|From Day 1 to Day 4 (for 4 days following ProQuad® Dose 1)|All participants who received the first ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852263|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Vaccine-related SAE After ProQuad® Dose 2|Vaccine-related SAEs were defined as any untoward consequence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongs existing hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is any other medically important event.|Up to Day 84 (up to 42 days after ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the first ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852264|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Serious AE (SAE) After ProQuad® Dose 2|Serious AEs ere defined as any untoward consequence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongs existing hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or is any other medically important event.|Up to Day 84 (up to 42 days after ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the first ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852265|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Mumps-like Illness After ProQuad® Dose 2|The percentage of participants experiencing a mumps-like illness for up to 28 days after the second ProQuad® injection was determined.|Up to Day 70 (up to 28 days after ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the second ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852266|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Non-injection-site Rash of Interest AE After ProQuad® Dose 2|Non-injection-site rashes of interest, including measles-like, rubella-like, varicella-like, and zoster-like rashes, were monitored for up to 28 days after the second ProQuad® injection.|Up to Day 70 (up to 28 days after ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the second ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852267|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Vaccine-related Systemic AE After ProQuad® Dose 2|Vaccine-related systemic AEs were monitored for up to 28 days after the second ProQuad® injection.|Up to Day 70 (up to 28 days after ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the second ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852268|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Systemic AE After ProQuad® Dose 2|Systemic AEs were monitored for up to 28 days after the second ProQuad® injection.|Up to Day 70 (up to 28 days after ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the second ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852269|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Injection-site Rash of Interest AE After ProQuad® Dose 2|Injection-site rashes of interest, including measles-like, rubella-like, and vesicular, were monitored for up to 28 days after the second ProQuad® injection.|Up to Day 70 (up to 28 days after ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the second ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852270|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Unsolicited Injection-site AE After ProQuad® Dose 2|The percentage of participants experiencing a unsolicited injection-site AE(s) were monitored for up to 28 days after the second ProQuad® injection.|Up to Day 70 (up to 28 days after ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the second ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852271|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Solicited Injection-site AE After ProQuad® Dose 2|The solicited injection-site AEs erythema, swelling, and pain were monitored for 4 days after administration of ProQuad® Dose 2.|Up to Day 46 (for 4 days following ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the second ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852272|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing a Vaccine-related AE After ProQuad® Dose 2|The percentage of participants experiencing a vaccine-related AEs for up to 28 days after the second ProQuad® injection was determined.|Up to Day 70 (up to 28 days after ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the second ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852273|NCT00560755|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing an Adverse Event (AE) After ProQuad® Dose 2|The percentage of participants experiencing an AE(s) for up to 28 days after the second ProQuad® injection was determined.|Up to Day 70 (up to 28 days after ProQuad® Dose 2)|All participants who received the second ProQuad® dose and had safety follow-up data available are included.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852274|NCT00499746|Secondary|Peak Change From Baseline Stimulant Effects Assessed by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) measures subjective ratings of stimulant effects. The scale on this measure ranges from 0 being Not at all to 100 being Extremely. On this scale, higher scores indicate a stronger drug effect. The outcome measure illustrates a difference from peak (120 min) to baseline measure."|Measure at 120 min after drug administration|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
852275|NCT00499746|Secondary|Peak Change From Baseline Opioid Agonist Effects Assessed by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|"The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) measures subjective ratings of opioid agonist effects. The scale on this measure ranges from 0 being Not at all to 100 being Extremely. On this scale, higher scores indicate a stronger drug effect. The outcome measure illustrates a difference from peak (120 min) to baseline measure on VAS."|Measure at 120 min after drug administration|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
852276|NCT00499746|Secondary|Physiological Effects Assessed by Peak Change From Baseline Pupil Diameter|Change in pupil diameter (mm) at peak (120 min) compared to baseline measure of pupil diameter|Measure at 120 min after drug administration|||mm||Standard Error|Mean
852277|NCT00499746|Secondary|Physiologic Effects Assessed by the Pharmacological Class Questionnaire|"During the peak (assessed at 120 min) of each drug administration, participants were asked to complete the pharmacological class questionnaire. The pharmacological class questionnaire had volunteers indicate which drug class was most similar to the drug condition they received. Ten drug classes were listed with descriptive labels and examples of each: placebo, opiates (or opioid agonist), phenothiazines, barbiturates, antidepressants, opiate antagonists, hallucinogens, benzodiazepines, stimulants, and other. Of these choices, participants chose 3: placebo, opioid agonist, and stimulant.
The outcome measure represents the percentage of participants who chose either placebo, opioid agonist, or stimulant across each drug condition."|Measure at 120 min after drug administration|||percentage of drug identification|||Number
852278|NCT00499746|Primary|Discrimination Effects Assessed by Discrete Choice|"During discrete choice, volunteers were given three choices (placebo, hydromorphone, methylphenidate) and were asked to choose which of the training drugs they thought they received. The outcome measure illustrates the percentage of participants who chose either placebo, hydromorphone, or methylphenidate during each drug condition (i.e., Placebo, Hydromorphone 8 mg, Tramadol 50 mg, etc.), ranging from 0-100.
The outcome measure represents the percentage of participants who chose either placebo, opioid agonist, or stimulant across each drug condition."|1 day|||percentage of drug identification|||Number
852279|NCT00499746|Primary|Discrimination Effects Assessed by Point Distribution|In point distribution, volunteers distributed 50 points among three training drug letters depending on how certain they were of the identity of the administrated drug. Maximum total is 50 points.|1day|||Points distributed||Standard Error|Mean
852280|NCT00499746|Primary|Discrimination Effects Assessed by Operant Responses|Volunteers emitted operant responses on computer keys that corresponded to the training letter, on a fixed interval 1 second schedule for 8.5 minutes. The range is from 0 to 500 operant responses.|1 day|||Responses||Standard Error|Mean
852281|NCT00499746|Primary|Acquisition of Discrimination Assessed by Accuracy of the Discrimination Test|The acquisition of discrimination was to test whether volunteers could identify each training drug condition by the correct letter code. Results are the percentage of correct responses with a range of 0% to 100%.|1 day|||percent of correct response||Full Range|Mean
852323|NCT00081939|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Progression-Free Survival (PFS) at 3 Years From Initiation of Study Treatment|In patients with no confirmed Partial Response, Near Complete Response, or Complete Response, progression was defined as a >25% increase from baseline in myeloma protein production or other signs of disease progression such as hypercalcemia, etc.|3 years|||percentage of participants|||Number
852327|NCT00068406|Primary|Treatment-Related Adverse Effects (Grade 3 or Higher) During Study Treatment Period|Number of participants with a maximum grade of 3 or higher during the treatment period. Adverse events are graded and categorized using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 2.0|Assessed every cycle while on treatment, 30 days after the last cycle of treatment. Up to eleven weeks from the start of study treatment|Eligible and treated patients||Participants|||Number
852328|NCT00068406|Primary|Complete Clinical and Pathologic Response|Complete clinical and pathologic response is defined as the disappearance of all gross tumor during chemoradiation with no residual tumor present in the surgical specimen.|Seven weeks after initiating treatment for clinical response and up to fifteen weeks for assessment of pathologic response.|Eligible and treated patients||Percentage of Participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
852355|NCT00016718|Primary|Proportion of Participants With Suppression of HIV Viral Load to Less Than 50 Copies/ml at Week 16|Proportion was calculated as number of participants with HIV-1 RNA <= 50 copies/ml relative to the number of participants with HIV-1 RNA measured at that time point.|At week 16|All Participant who enrolled in the study and with available HIV-RNA at week 16||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852356|NCT00016718|Primary|Proportion of Participants With Suppression of HIV Viral Load to Less Than 400 Copies/ml at Week 16|Proportion was calculated as number of participants with HIV-1 RNA <= 400 copies/ml relative to the number of participants with HIV-1 RNA measured at that time point.|At week 16|All Participant who enrolled in the study and with available HIV-RNA at week 16||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852357|NCT00016718|Primary|Proportion of Participants Who Developed Grade 3 or 4 Adverse Events Attributed to the Study Treatment.|"Adverse events were graded using the Division of AIDS (DAIDS) Table for Grading the Severity of Adult and Pediatric Adverse Events (DAIDS AE Grading Table), Version 1.0, December 2004, Clarification August 2009, which is available on the RCC website at (http://rcc.tech-res.com/). Adverse Events of Grade 3 or 4 laboratory abnormalities or signs and symptoms that were judged by the study team to be possibly or probably related to the study treatment.
Comparisons between age groups were not required as per protocol."|At study entry, weeks 2 and 4, every 4 weeks up to week 96 and every 6 weeks thereafter for Group 1 participants and at study entry, weeks 2 and 4, every 4 weeks up to week 144 and every 12 weeks thereafter for Groups 2 and 3|All Participant who enrolled in the study||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852362|NCT02609659|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Post-treatment Relapse|Post-treatment relapse was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ between the end of treatment and 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug, excluding reinfection, among participants who completed treatment with HCV RNA levels < LLOQ at the end of treatment.|From the end of treatment through 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, completed treatment, and had HCV RNA <LLOQ at the final treatment visit.||percentage of participants|||Number
852363|NCT02609659|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Virologic Failure|On-treatment virologic failure was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ after HCV RNA < LLOQ during treatment; confirmed increase of > 1 log(subscript)10(subscript) IU/mL above the lowest value post-baseline in HCV RNA during treatment; or all on-treatment values of HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ with at least 6 weeks of treatment.|Up to 12 weeks|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT population).||percentage of participants|||Number
852364|NCT02609659|Primary|Mean Change in Hemoglobin Values From Baseline to End of Treatment|The mean change in hemoglobin (g/L) from baseline to each study visit and to the final treatment visit (up to 12 weeks) is provided.|Baseline (Day 1) to Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12, and the Final Treatment Visit (up to 12 weeks)|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT population) with a hemoglobin value at baseline and at given timepoint.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
852365|NCT02609659|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Hemoglobin < 10 g/dL During Treatment|The percentage of participants with hemoglobin <10 g/dL during treatment is provided.|up to 12 weeks|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT population) with at least one post-baseline hemoglobin value through the final treatment value.||percentage of participants|||Number
852366|NCT02609659|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level less than the lower limit of quantification [<LLOQ]) 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug. The primary efficacy endpoint was noninferiority of the percentage of participants who achieved SVR12 in participants in the treatment arm 3-DAA + RBV 600 mg) for 12 weeks compared with the historical control rate for subjects treated with 3-DAA + weight-based RBV for 12 weeks.|12 weeks after the last actual dose of study drug|Intent-to-treat population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug; participants with missing data after flanking imputation were counted as nonresponders.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852390|NCT02475395|Secondary|Number of Accurate and Inaccurate Results Obtained by Healthcare Professionals Performing Trak Assays on Subjects' Samples.|Healthcare professions obtained a categorical sperm concentration result by performing assay on aliquot obtained from Lay User's sample. Positive (for subfertility) results are less than or equal to 15 M/mL threshold. Reference result using gold standard (CASA) was measured and compared to Trak. True positive and true negative matched Reference category result and false negative, false positive did not match reference category result.|Participants will be followed for one visit for up to 2 hours|One fewer was analyzed in this population because a sample did not have enough sample to allow the HCP to run the test.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852391|NCT02475395|Secondary|Number of Accurate and Inaccurate Subfertility Results as Obtained by Healthcare Professionals Observing Assays Result Performed by Untrained Lay Users.|Healthcare professions obtained a categorical sperm concentration result by observing completed assay outputs as performed by Lay Users. Positive (for subfertility) results are less than or equal to 15 M/mL threshold. Reference result using gold standard (CASA) was measured and compared to Trak. True positive and true negative matched Reference category result and false negative, false positive did not match reference category result.|Participants will be followed for one visit for up to 2 hours|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852392|NCT02475395|Primary|Number of Untrained Lay Users That Obtained Accurate and Inaccurate Subfertility Results From the TRAK Device When Compared to Results Obtained From the Gold Standard|Lay users obtained categorical sperm concentration result. Positive (for subfertility) results are less than or equal to 15 M/mL threshold. Gold standard reference (analysis by Computer-aided Semen Analysis [CASA]) result was measured and compared to Trak. True positive and true negative matched Reference category result and false negative, false positive did not match gold standard reference category result.|Participants will be followed for one visit for up to 2 hours|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852393|NCT02450383|Secondary|Wound Healing, Measured Using a Standardized Visual Wound Healing Index|Wound healing status was evaluated by the same calibrated clinician using a standardized visual wound healing index at different time points A simple wound healing scoring system including 3 categories was used: 1- uneventful wound healing, 2- slight gingival edema, erythema or discomfort, 3- poor wound healing|2 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852394|NCT02450383|Secondary|Patient-perceived Discomfort, Measured by VAS|Patient-reported outcome measures of perceived discomfort using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 (no pain) to 100 (maximum pain) were recorded|2 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852395|NCT02450383|Secondary|Changes in Peri-implant Keratinized Mucosa Width (Apico-coronal) at 16 Weeks After Surgery||Baseline to 16 weeks after baseline|||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
852396|NCT02450383|Primary|Change in Buccal Peri-implant Mucosa Thickness Between Baseline and 16 Weeks After Surgery|Buccal mucosa thickness measurements were obtained by a calibrated, masked examiner using a custom-made stent and an endo file for precision and reproducibility between different time points|Baseline and 16 weeks after baseline|||millimeters||Standard Deviation|Mean
852400|NCT02419521|Secondary|Cardiac Death and TVMI||8 Months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852401|NCT02419521|Secondary|Stent Thrombosis (ST)||8 Months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852402|NCT02419521|Secondary|Target Vessel Failure (TVF)||8 Months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852403|NCT02419521|Secondary|Target Lesion Failure (TLF)||8 Months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852404|NCT02419521|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE)|Defined as death, myocardial infarction (Q wave and non-Q wave), emergent coronary bypass surgery, or clinically-driven repeat target lesion revascularization by percutaneous or surgical methods|8 Months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852405|NCT02419521|Secondary|Target Lesion Revascularization (TLR)||8 Months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852406|NCT02419521|Secondary|Target Vessel Myocardial Infarction (TVMI)||8 Months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852407|NCT02419521|Secondary|Cardiac Death||8 Months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852408|NCT02419521|Primary|In-stent Late Lumen Loss as Measured by Quantitative Coronary Angiography|In-stent late lumen loss at 8-months post-procedure as measured by quantitative coronary angiography|8 Months|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
852530|NCT02207803|Primary|Zarit Burden Interview|22-item measure of caregiver self-reported burden. Response options for each item range from 0-4, and total scores range from 0-88, with higher scores indicating greater self-reported burden. Only total scores are reported here.|2 months post-hospital discharge|Data are from caregivers only, hence not the full sample.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852529|NCT02207803|Secondary|Exemplary Care Scale-Provide Subscale|4-item measure of the patient's report of the quality of care they receive from their caregiver. Response options for each item range from 1-4, and total scores range from 4-16, with higher scores indicating a higher quality of informal care received. Only Provide subscale scores of the Exemplary Care Scale are reported here.|2 months post-hospital discharge|This is patient-report only at post-test, hence it does not use the full sample.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852601|NCT02102464|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change in Comfortable Contact Lens Wear Time From Baseline at 1 Month|Subjects reported how long they wore their contact lenses per day (total contact lens wear time) and how long the contact lenses were comfortable (comfortable contact lens wear time). The mean change in comfortable contact lens wear time from Baseline was also evaluated at 1 Month post-LipiFlow treatment for the LipiFlow and Crossover LipiFlow Groups. The LipiFlow Group was assessed at the 1-Month visit. The Crossover LipiFlow Group was assessed at the 4-Month visit (one month after receiving cossover LipiFlow treatment). There was no planned statistical analysis comparison between the LipiFlow and Crossover LipiFlow groups at 1 Month.|1 Month|Intent to Treat (all randomized subjects)||hours per day|Eyes|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
852602|NCT02102464|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change in Dry Eye Questionnaire From Baseline at 1 Month|The mean change in dry eye symptoms from Baseline based on the SPEED questionnaire score was also evaluated at 1 Month post-LipiFlow treatment for the LipiFlow and Crossover LipiFlow Groups. The LipiFlow Group was assessed at the 1-Month visit. The Crossover LipiFlow Group was assessed at the 4-Month visit (one month after receiving cossover LipiFlow treatment). There was no planned statistical analysis comparison between the LipiFlow and Crossover LipiFlow groups at 1 Month. Dry eye symptoms evaluated were dryness, grittiness or scratchiness; soreness or irritation; burning or watering; and eye fatigue. Symptom frequency and severity were assessed. The SPEED score is the sum of frequency and severity scores with a range from 0 to 28. A lower SPEED score represents less frequent and/or less severe symptoms.|1 Month|Intent to Treat (All randomized subjects)||units on a scale|Eyes|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
852603|NCT02102464|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change in Meibomian Gland Score From Baseline at 1 Month|The mean change in meibomian gland score from Baseline was also evaluated at 1 Month post-LipiFlow treatment for the LipiFlow and Crossover LipiFlow Groups. The LipiFlow Group was assessed at the 1-Month visit. The Crossover LipiFlow Group was assessed at the 4-Month visit (one month after receiving crossover LipiFlow treatment). There was no planned statistical analysis comparison between the LipiFlow and Crossover LipiFlow groups at 1 Month. To determine the meibomian gland score, secretion characteristics of 15 meibomian glands along the lower eyelid were evaluated including five glands each in the temporal, central and nasal regions of the lower eyelid. For each gland, secretion characteristics were graded as 3 (clear liquid), 2 (cloudy liquid), 1 (inspissated/ toothpaste consistency) and 0 (no secretion). The total meibomian gland score is the sum of the grades for all 15 glands with a range between 0 and 45. A higher score reflects less meibomian gland dysfunction.|1 Month|Intent to Treat (All randomized subjects)||units on a scale|Eyes|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
852604|NCT02102464|Other Pre-specified|Mean Change in Comfortable Contact Lens Wear Time From Baseline at 3 Months|Subjects reported how long they wore their contact lenses per day (total contact lens wear time) and how long the contact lenses were comfortable (comfortable contact lens wear time). A pre-specified exploratory analysis was to compare the mean change in comfortable contact lens wear time between Baseline and 3 Months for the LipiFlow group vs. untreated control.|3 Months|Intent to Treat (ITT) of all randomized subjects||hours per day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
852605|NCT02102464|Secondary|Mean Change in Dry Eye Questionnaire Score From Baseline at 3 Months|The Secondary Endpoint was intended to assess for reduction in dry eye symptoms in symptomatic contact lens after LipiFlow treatment in comparison to an untreated control using the Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness (SPEED) questionnaire. The Secondary Endpoint was defined as the mean change in SPEED score in the LipiFlow Treatment group compared to Untreated Control group from Baseline to 3 Months. Dry eye symptoms evaluated were dryness, grittiness or scratchiness; soreness or irritation; burning or watering; and eye fatigue. Symptom frequency and severity were assessed. The SPEED score is the sum of frequency and severity scores with a range from 0 to 28. A lower SPEED score represents less frequent and/or less severe symptoms.|3 Months|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population of all randomized subjects.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
852606|NCT02102464|Primary|Mean Change in Meibomian Gland Score From Baseline at 3 Months|The Primary Endpoint was intended to assess for improvement in meibomian gland function in symptomatic contact lens wearers after LipiFlow treatment in comparison to an untreated control.The Primary Endpoint was defined as the mean change in meibomian gland score in the LipiFlow Treatment group compared to Untreated Control group from Baseline to 3 Months. To determine the meibomian gland score, secretion characteristics of 15 meibomian glands along the lower eyelid were evaluated including five glands each in the temporal, central and nasal regions of the lower eyelid. For each gland, secretion characteristics were graded as 3 (clear liquid), 2 (cloudy liquid), 1 (inspissated/ toothpaste consistency) and 0 (no secretion). The total meibomian gland score is the sum of the grades for all 15 glands with a range between 0 and 45. A higher score reflects less meibomian gland dysfunction.|3 Months|Intent to Treat (ITT) Population of all randomized subjects.||units on a scale|Eyes|95% Confidence Interval|Mean
852723|NCT01916967|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Rash Score Assessed by Investigator at Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2|The Investigator assessed the severity of participant rash (erythema: 0=no symptom to 3=intensive redness, and wheal: 0=no symptom to 3=significant ridge). The sum score for erythema plus wheal could range from 0 to 6, with a higher score indicating greater severity. The changes from Baseline in the sum score for erythema plus wheal at the Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2 clinic visits were calculated.|Baseline Visit and Day 3 Visit, Week 1 Visit, Week 2 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had a Baseline assessment and at least one post-Baseline assessment for this outcome measure.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852694|NCT01986686|Secondary|Recurrence and Treatment|Data will be collected on recurrence and treatment for recurrent diverticulitis|2 years||||||
852695|NCT01986686|Secondary|Post Operative Complications|Data will be collected on percent and type of complications for the surgery arm.|30 days||||||
852696|NCT01986686|Secondary|Readmission|Data will be collected on percent of patients who are readmitted for recurrence or postoperative complications during the follow-up period after enrollment.|30 days||||||
852697|NCT01986686|Secondary|Mortality|Data will be collected on percent of patients who die during the follow-up period after enrollment.|4 years||||||
852698|NCT01986686|Secondary|Measure Length of Hospital Stay for Surgery vs Non Surgery Patients|Data collected will include length of hospital stay from the date of admission to discharge day for nonoperative management of the first episode of Hinchey II diverticulitis.|4 years||||||
852699|NCT01986686|Primary|Primary Study Endpoint|The primary outcome measure is recurrent diverticulitis of the colon defined as an acute episode confirmed at CT scan and requiring hospitalization with IV antibiotics.|Minimum of 1 year after enrollment|||Participants|||Count of Participants
852706|NCT01956435|Secondary|Subject Self-reported Assessment of Re-pigmentation for Treated Lesions|"Subject reported level of re-pigmentation for treated lesions was assessed by improvement from baseline using the following scale:
1 = Worsening of the light spots that were treated (the light spots seem to have gotten lighter or I have more light spots in the areas that were treated); 2 = No Improvement of the light spots (light spots have not changed since starting this study); 3 = Mild improvement of the light spots (there is some darkening of the light spots, but not in more than half of them); 4 = Moderate improvement (there is some darkening of the light spots in more than half of the light spots, but not more than 75% of them)."|12 weeks|healthy adult patients with bilateral IGH lesions on lower extremities||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852707|NCT01956435|Primary|Efficacy Outcome|Effectiveness will be graded by the blinded observer scal via photographic comparisons at the end of the study. Efficacy was assessed by improvement from baseline using the following scale: -1 = Worsening of IGH; 0 = No Improvement (IGH remained stable); 1 = Mild improvement of IGH (some re-pigmentation on <50% IGH); 2 = Moderate improvement (some re-pigmentation on >50% or full re-pigmentation on <75% IGH); 3 = Full re-pigmentation on >75% IGH.|12 weeks|healthy adult patients with bilateral IGH lesions on lower extremities||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
852718|NCT01916967|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Total Score Reported by Participants at Week 1 and Week 2|The DLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures how much participant skin problems have affected their life. Responses to questions about the effect of participant skin problems on life ranged from 0=Not at all to 3=Very much. The DLQI is broken down into 6 subscales: Symptoms and feelings (range 0-6), Daily activities (range 0-6), Leisure (range 0-6), Work and school (range 0-3), Personal relationships (range 0-6), and Treatment (range 0-3). DLQI subscales were summed to yield the DLQI total score, which could range from 0 to 30. For both DLQI subscales and DLQI total score, a higher score indicated a greater negative impact on life. Participants >=16 years of age completed the DLQI questionnaire about the condition of their skin over the previous week. The changes from Baseline in the DLQI total score at the Week 1 and Week 2 clinic visits were calculated.|Baseline Visit and Week 1 Visit, Week 2 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had a Baseline assessment and at least one post-Baseline assessment for DLQI||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852719|NCT01916967|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Rash Score Reported in Participant Diaries at Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2|Participants assessed the severity of their rash (erythema: 0=no symptom to 3=intensive redness, and wheal: 0=no symptom to 3=significant ridge). The sum score for erythema plus wheal could range from 0 to 6, with a higher score indicating greater severity. The changes from Baseline in the sum score for erythema plus wheal at the Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2 clinic visits were calculated.|Baseline Visit and Day 3 Visit, Week 1 Visit, Week 2 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had a Baseline assessment and at least one post-Baseline assessment for this outcome measure.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852720|NCT01916967|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pruritus/Itch on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Reported by Participants at Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2|Participants assessed the degree of their pruritus/itching using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) (0 mm=No itch to 100 mm=Worst imaginable itch), with a higher score indicating more severe itching. The changes from Baseline in participant-assessed pruritus/itch at the Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2 clinic visits were calculated.|Baseline Visit and Day 3 Visit, Week 1 Visit, Week 2 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had a Baseline assessment and at least one post-Baseline assessment for this outcome measure.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852721|NCT01916967|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Pruritus/Itch Score Reported in Participant Diaries at Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2|Participants assessed the severity of their pruritus/itch during the daytime and nighttime (0=asymptomatic to 4=severe). The sum of the daytime and nighttime pruritus/itch scores could range from 0 to 8, with a higher score indicating greater severity. The changes from Baseline in the sum of the daytime and nighttime scores at the Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2 clinic visits were calculated.|Baseline Visit and Day 3 Visit, Week 1 Visit, Week 2 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had a Baseline assessment and at least one post-Baseline assessment for this outcome measure.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852722|NCT01916967|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Moderate or Remarkable Improvement in the Global Improvement Rate of Both Pruritus/Itch and Rash (Erythema and Wheal) Assessed by the Investigator at Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2|The global improvement judgment criteria were used to assess overall improvement in pruritus/itch and rash. The Investigator assessed participant global improvement according to 5 grades (Grade 1=Remarkable improvement to Grade 5=Aggravated). The number of participants with moderate or remarkable improvements was calculated. Remarkable improvement (Grade 1) was defined as both pruritus/itch and rash (erythema and wheal) disappeared, or pruritus/itch disappeared and rash (erythema and wheal) was apparently improved. Moderate improvement (Grade 2) was defined as both pruritus/itch and rash (erythema and wheal) were greatly improved.|Baseline Visit and Day 3 Visit, Week 1 Visit, Week 2 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had a Baseline assessment and at least one post-Baseline assessment for this outcome measure.||Participants|||Number
852724|NCT01916967|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Pruritus/Itch Score Assessed by Investigator at Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2|The Investigator assessed the severity of participant pruritus/itch during the daytime and nighttime (0=Asymptomatic to 4=Severe). The sum of the daytime and nighttime pruritus/itch scores could range from 0 to 8, with a higher score indicating greater severity. The changes from Baseline in the sum of the daytime and nighttime scores at the Day 3, Week 1 and Week 2 clinic visits were calculated.|Baseline Visit and Day 3 Visit, Week 1 Visit, Week 2 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had a Baseline assessment and at least one post-Baseline assessment for this outcome measure.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852725|NCT01916967|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Sum Score of Pruritus/Itch and Rash Assessed by Investigator at Day 3 and Week 1|The Investigator assessed the severity of participant pruritus/itch during the daytime (0=Virtually no itching to 4=Cannot relax because of constant itching) and nighttime (0=Virtually no itching to 4=Cannot sleep because of itching). The score used for pruritus/itch was the higher of the day or night scores (0=Asymptomatic to 4=Severe). The Investigator also assessed the severity of participant rash using the overall rash score (0=No rash to 3=Looks very bad). The sum of the pruritus/itch score (0-4) and rash score (0-3) could range from 0 to 7, with a higher sum score indicating greater severity. The changes from Baseline in the sum of the pruritus/itch and overall rash scores at the Day 3 and Week 1 clinic visits were calculated.|Baseline Visit and Day 3 Visit, Week 1 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had a Baseline assessment and at least one post-Baseline assessment for this outcome measure.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852726|NCT01916967|Primary|Number of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an AE|An AE is any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a study drug or protocol-specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the study drug or protocol-specified procedure. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a pre-existing condition that is temporally associated with the use of the study drug, is also an AE.|Up to 2 weeks|The Safety Population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. One Placebo group participant took the wrong study drug. This participant was analyzed separately.||Participants|||Number
852727|NCT01916967|Primary|Number of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event (AE)|An AE is any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a study drug or protocol-specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the study drug or protocol-specified procedure. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a pre-existing condition that is temporally associated with the use of the study drug, is also an AE.|Up to 4 weeks (Up to 2 weeks after last dose of study drug)|The Safety Population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. One Placebo group participant took the wrong study drug. This participant was analyzed separately.||Participants|||Number
852728|NCT01916967|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Sum Score of Pruritus/Itch and Rash Assessed by Investigator at Week 2|The Investigator assessed the severity of participant pruritus/itch during the daytime (0=Virtually no itching to 4=Cannot relax because of constant itching) and nighttime (0=Virtually no itching to 4=Cannot sleep because of itching). The score used for pruritus/itch was the higher of the day or night scores (0=Asymptomatic to 4=Severe). The Investigator also assessed the severity of participant rash using the overall rash score (0=No rash to 3=Looks very bad). The sum of the pruritus/itch score (0-4) and rash score (0-3) could range from 0 to 7, with a higher sum score indicating greater severity. The change from Baseline in the sum of the pruritus/itch and overall rash scores at the Week 2 clinic visit was calculated.|Baseline Visit and Week 2 Visit|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) population consisted of all randomized participants who took at least one dose of study drug, had a Baseline assessment and a Week 2 assessment for this outcome measure.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852729|NCT01916980|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Pruritus/Itch Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score Recorded by Participants at Day 3, Week 1, Week 2, Week 4, Week 6, Week 8 and Week 12|Participants assessed the degree of their pruritus using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS; 0mm=No itch, 100mm=Worst imaginable itch) at Baseline and subsequent clinic visits. Pruritus/itch VAS scores could range from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating more severe pruritus/itching. The changes from Baseline in the VAS scores for pruritus/itch at the Day 3, Week 1, Week 2, Week 4, Week 6, Week 8 and Week 12 clinic visits were calculated.|Baseline Visit and Day 3 Visit, Week 1 Visit, Week 2 Visit, Week 4 Visit, Week 6 Visit, Week 8 Visit, Week 12 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had a Baseline or at least one post-Baseline observation for participant-assessed pruritus/itch VAS score.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852730|NCT01916980|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Moderate or Remarkable Improvement in the Global Improvement Rate of Pruritus/Itch Assessed by the Investigator at Day 3, Week 1, Week 2, Week 4, Week 6, Week 8 and Week 12|The global improvement judgment criteria were used to assess overall improvement in pruritus/itch. The Investigator assessed the degree of severity of pruritus/itch based on 5 grades (1=Remarkably improved to 5=Aggravated) at Baseline and subsequent clinic visits. The percentages of participants who were remarkably improved (Grade 1=Pruritus/itch disappeared) or moderately improved (Grade 2=Pruritus/itch was greatly improved) at the Day 3, Week 1, Week 2, Week 4, Week 6, Week 8 and Week 12 clinic visits were calculated.|Baseline Visit and Day 3 Visit, Week 1 Visit, Week 2 Visit, Week 4 Visit, Week 6 Visit, Week 8 Visit, Week 12 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had a Baseline or at least one post-Baseline observation for Investigator-assessed Global Improvement.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
852742|NCT01854710|Primary|Maximum Effect of ADASUVE on Cardiac Repolarization (QTc Interval Duration) at the Maximum Clinical Dose Compared to Placebo|Time-matched differences in QTcI values between the maximum of the mean difference from baseline of the QTcI interval after time-matched placebo subtraction for ADASUVE treatment at 12 post-inhalation times.|Predose, 2 min, 1, 1.5 hr, 2 hr 2 min, 2 hr 5 min, 2.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 24 hr|QT population -- LSM and CI statistics were based on the individual (within subject) corrected differences between Adasuve and placebo exposures per ICH Guideline E14 for a thorough QT study.||msec||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852731|NCT01916980|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pruritus/Itch Score (Sum of Daytime and Nighttime Scores) Assessed by the Investigator at Day 3, Week 1, Week 4, Week 6, Week 8 and Week 12|The Investigator assessed the severity of participant pruritus/itch during the daytime (0=Virtually no itching to 4=Cannot relax because of constant itching) and nighttime (0=Virtually no itching to 4=Cannot sleep because of itching). The sum of the daytime and nighttime pruritus/itch scores could range from 0 to 8, with a higher sum score indicating greater severity. The changes from Baseline in the sum of the daytime and nighttime pruritus/itch scores at the Day 3, Week 1, Week 4, Week 6, Week 8 and Week 12 clinic visits were calculated.|Baseline Visit and Day 3 Visit, Week 1 Visit, Week 4 Visit, Week 6 Visit, Week 8 Visit, Week 12 Visit|The FAS population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had a Baseline or at least one post-Baseline observation for Investigator-assessed pruritus/itch score.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852732|NCT01916980|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an AE|An AE is any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a study drug or protocol-specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the study drug or protocol-specified procedure. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a pre-existing condition that is temporally associated with the use of the study drug is also an AE.|Up to 12 weeks|The APaT population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
852733|NCT01916980|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event (AE)|An AE is any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a study drug or protocol-specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the study drug or protocol-specified procedure. Any worsening (i.e., any clinically significant adverse change in frequency and/or intensity) of a pre-existing condition that is temporally associated with the use of the study drug is also an AE.|Up to 14 weeks (Up to 2 weeks after last dose dose of study drug)|The All-Participants-as-Treated (APaT) population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
852734|NCT01916980|Primary|Change From Baseline in Pruritus/Itch Score (Sum of Daytime and Nighttime Scores) Assessed by the Investigator at Week 2|The Investigator assessed the severity of participant pruritus/itch during the daytime (0=Virtually no itching to 4=Cannot relax because of constant itching) and nighttime (0=Virtually no itching to 4=Cannot sleep because of itching). The sum of the daytime and nighttime pruritus/itch scores could range from 0 to 8, with a higher sum score indicating greater severity. The change from Baseline in the sum of the daytime and nighttime pruritus/itch scores at Week 2 clinic visit was calculated.|Baseline Visit and Week 2 Visit|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had a Baseline or at least one post-Baseline observation for Investigator-assessed pruritus/itch score.||Score on a Scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852736|NCT01854710|Other Pre-specified|Maximum Effect of Moxifloxacin on Cardiac Repolarization (QTc Interval Duration) Compared to Placebo (Study Assay Sensitivity)|A thorough QT/QTc study may be considered to have demonstrated assay sensitivity if 1 or more of the lower 95% CI values exceeds 5 msec|Predose, 2 min, 1, 1.5 hr, 2 hr 2 min, 2 hr 5 min, 2.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 24 hr|QT population -- LSM and CI statistics were based on the individual (within subject) corrected differences between moxifloxacin and placebo exposures per ICH Guideline E14 for a thorough QT study.||msec||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852737|NCT01854710|Secondary|Subjects With QTcI Increase > 60 ms From Baseline|Numbers of Subjects with QTcI Increase > 60 ms From Baseline at any time point|Predose, 2 min, 1, 1.5 hr, 2 hr 2 min, 2 hr 5 min, 2.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 24 hr|QT population -- Comparisons were based on corrected differences between Adasuve and placebo (excluding moxifloxacin) exposure per ICH Guideline E14 for a thorough QT study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852738|NCT01854710|Secondary|Subjects With QTcI Increase > 30 ms From Baseline|Numbers of Subjects with QTcI Increase > 30 ms from Baseline at any time point|Predose, 2 min, 1, 1.5 hr, 2 hr 2 min, 2 hr 5 min, 2.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 24 hr|QT population -- Comparisons were based on corrected differences between Adasuve and placebo (excluding moxifloxacin) exposure per ICH Guideline E14 for a thorough QT study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852739|NCT01854710|Secondary|Subjects With QTcI > 480 ms|Numbers of Subjects with QTcI > 480 ms (or 500 ms) at any time point|Predose, 2 min, 1, 1.5 hr, 2 hr 2 min, 2 hr 5 min, 2.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 24 hr|QT population -- Comparisons were based on corrected differences between Adasuve and placebo (excluding moxifloxacin) exposure per ICH Guideline E14 for a thorough QT study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852740|NCT01854710|Secondary|Subjects With QTcI > 450 ms|Numbers of Subjects with QTcI > 450 ms at any time point|Predose, 2 min, 1, 1.5 hr, 2 hr 2 min, 2 hr 5 min, 2.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 24 hr|QT population -- Comparisons were based on corrected differences between Adasuve and placebo (excluding moxifloxacin) exposure per ICH Guideline E14 for a thorough QT study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852741|NCT01854710|Secondary|QTc Versus Loxapine Concentration|QTc @ Cmax based on linear and nonlinear regression of QTcI versus time matched serum loxapine concentrations|Predose, 2 min, 1, 1.5 hr, 2 hr 2 min, 2 hr 5 min, 2.5, 3, 5, 8, 12, and 24 hr|QT population -- LSM and CI statistics were based on the individual (within subject) corrected differences between Adasuve and placebo exposures per ICH Guideline E14 for a thorough QT study.||msec||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
852756|NCT01819311|Secondary|Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders - Child Version|The Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders - Child Version (SCARED-C) assesses anxiety symptom severity in youth ages 6-17 years. The child rates his or her anxiety symptoms on 41 items; each item is rated from 0 to 2. Total scores range from 0 to 82, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety severity.|8-week follow-up|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852757|NCT01819311|Secondary|Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders - Parent Version|The Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders - Parent Version (SCARED-P) assesses anxiety symptom severity in youth ages 6-17 years. The parent rates youth anxiety symptoms on 41 items; each item is rated from 0 to 2. Total scores range from 0 to 82, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety severity.|8-week follow-up|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852758|NCT01819311|Secondary|Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders - Child Version|The Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders - Child Version (SCARED-C) assesses anxiety symptom severity in youth ages 6-17 years. The child rates his or her anxiety symptoms on 41 items; each item is rated from 0 to 2. Total scores range from 0 to 82, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety severity.|post-treatment (within one week of completing the final of 8 semi-weekly sessions of Attention Bias Modification)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852759|NCT01819311|Secondary|Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders - Parent Version|The Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders - Parent Version (SCARED-P) assesses anxiety symptom severity in youth ages 6-17 years. The parent rates youth anxiety symptoms on 41 items; each item is rated from 0 to 2. Total scores range from 0 to 82, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety severity.|post-treatment (within one week of completing the final of 8 semi-weekly sessions of Attention Bias Modification)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852760|NCT01819311|Primary|Clinician Rating on the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale|The Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) assesses global anxiety severity across social anxiety disorder, separation anxiety disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder in youth ages 6-17 years. An independent evaluator rates anxiety symptoms on 7 dimensions (i.e., number of symptoms, severity of distress, severity of physical symptoms, frequency, avoidance, interference at home, and interference out of home). Each dimension is rated from 0 to 5. Total scores range from 0 to 35, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety severity.|8-week follow-up|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852761|NCT01819311|Primary|Clinician Rating on the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale|The Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) assesses global anxiety severity across social anxiety disorder, separation anxiety disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder in youth ages 6-17 years. An independent evaluator rates anxiety symptoms on 7 dimensions (i.e., number of symptoms, severity of distress, severity of physical symptoms, frequency, avoidance, interference at home, and interference out of home). Each dimension is rated from 0 to 5. Total scores range from 0 to 35, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety severity.|post-treatment (within one week of completing the final of 8 semi-weekly sessions of Attention Bias Modification)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852765|NCT01765530|Secondary|ETT Microbiology|For each patient a quantitative culture will be obtained from the ETT after extubation. Secretions will be retrieved from the ETT after CT scan and quantitative standard cultures will be performed. Microbial molecular diversity analysis and antibacterial resistance patterns will also be studied.|At extubation (An expected average of 5 days)|||Log colony form unit (CFU)/ mL||Standard Error|Mean
852766|NCT01765530|Primary|Percentage of Occlusion Assessed Using a High Definition Computed Tomography Imaging of the Extubated ETTs|The investigators will measure percentage of occlusion determined by the accumulation of secretion within the lumen of each ETT using a high definition Computed Tomography (CT) imaging of the extubated ETTs. The whole ETT will be analyzed through high-definition CT slices. 100% of occlusion means total occlusion of the lumen of the ETT and 0% means absence of any occlusion.|At extubation (An expected average of 5 days)|||percentage of occlusion||Standard Deviation|Mean
852845|NCT01732445|Primary|Best Overall Response Rate as Determined by International Working Group Criteria|Best overall response rate as determined by International Working Group criteria: An evaluable patient will be classified as a responder for the primary endpoint if the patient’s best overall response is CR, PR or CI (Clinical Improvement) as determined by International Working Group Criteria over all cycles of study treatment. The percentage of successes will be estimated by the number of successes (defined as complete response, partial response, or clinical improvement) divided by the total number of evaluable patients times 100. Confidence intervals for the true success proportion will be calculated according to the approach of Duffy and Santner.|Up to 2 years|||percentage of patients with CR, PR or CI||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852842|NCT01732445|Other Pre-specified|Patient-reported Symptoms Assessed Using the MPN-SAF, as Measured by the Percentage of Patients With a Decrease in MPN-SAF TSS Greater Than 50% From Baseline|Patient-reported symptoms will be described at each time point using the mean, confidence interval, median, and range. The Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF) will be analyzed using published scoring algorithms. MPN-SAF includes 27 items scored on a scale of 0 to 10. The MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score (TSS) (range 0-100) was computed according to the published scoring algorithm. Higher scores represent worse symptom burden. The percentage of patients with a decrease in MPN-SAF TSS greater than 50% from baseline and 95% confidence interval are reported below.|Baseline to up to 2 years|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
852843|NCT01732445|Secondary|Toxicity, Assessed Using National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0 (v4)|"The maximum grade for each type of toxicity will be recorded for each patient, and frequency tables will be reviewed to determine toxicity patterns within patient groups. In addition, we will review all adverse event data that is graded as 3, 4, or 5 and classified as either unrelated or unlikely to be related to study treatment in the event of an actual relationship developing. The overall toxicity rates (percentages) for grade 3 or higher adverse events considered at least possibly related to treatment are reported below."|Up to 2 years|||percentage of patients|||Number
852844|NCT01732445|Secondary|Survival Time|Survival time is defined as the time from registration to death due to any cause. The distribution of survival time will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier. The median and 95% confidence interval are reported below.|From registration to death due to any cause, assessed up to 2 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
852851|NCT01687712|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Detectable Specific Serum Binding to FSH by Surface Plasmon Resonance - Cycle 3|Measurement of the number of subjects with detectable specific serum binding to FSH by surface Plasmon resonance during Cycle 3.|Immunogenicity samples were taken at baseline, Visit 5 (8 days after start of treatment), Visit 9 (5 days after the end of FSH treatment), Visit 10 (18 +/- 1 days after oocyte retrieval), and Visit 11 (42 +/- 1 days after embryo transfer).|Safety population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization. Percentages are based on the number of subjects in the safety population with data at the respective visit.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852852|NCT01687712|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Detectable Specific Serum Binding to FSH by Surface Plasmon Resonance - Cycle 2|Measurement of the number of subjects with detectable specific serum binding to FSH by surface Plasmon resonance during Cycle 2.|Immunogenicity samples were taken at baseline, Visit 5 (8 days after start of treatment), Visit 9 (5 days after the end of FSH treatment), Visit 10 (18 +/- 1 days after oocyte retrieval), and Visit 11 (42 +/- 1 days after embryo transfer).|Safety population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization. Percentages are based on the number of subjects in the safety population with data at the respective visit.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852853|NCT01687712|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Detectable Specific Serum Binding to FSH by Surface Plasmon Resonance - Cycle 1|Measurement of the number of subjects with detectable specific serum binding to FSH by surface Plasmon resonance during Cycle 1.|Immunogenicity samples were taken at baseline, Visit 5 (8 days after start of treatment), Visit 9 (5 days after the end of FSH treatment), Visit 10 (18 +/- 1 days after oocyte retrieval), and Visit 11 (42 +/- 1 days after embryo transfer).|Safety population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization. Percentages are based on the number of subjects in the safety population with data at the respective visit.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852854|NCT01687712|Secondary|Adverse Events of Special Interest: Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS) - Cycle 3|Summary of the number of subjects with mild, moderate and severe OHSS. The total number of subjects with OHSS is also included.|Measured either 3 days after ooctye pick up (Visit 9) or 18 +/- 1 days after oocyte pick up (Visit 10).|Safety population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852855|NCT01687712|Secondary|Adverse Events of Special Interest: Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS) - Cycle 2|Summary of the number of subjects with mild, moderate and severe OHSS. The total number of subjects with OHSS is also included.|Measured either 3 days after ooctye pick up (Visit 9) or 18 +/- 1 days after oocyte pick up (Visit 10).|Safety population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852856|NCT01687712|Secondary|Adverse Events of Special Interest: Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS) - Cycle 1|Summary of the number of subjects with mild, moderate and severe OHSS. The total number of subjects with OHSS is also included.|Measured either 3 days after ooctye pick up (Visit 9) or 18 +/- 1 days after oocyte pick up (Visit 10).|Safety population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852857|NCT01687712|Secondary|Overall Summary of Adverse Events (AEs) - Cycle 1|"Summary of AEs, including the number of subjects experiencing to following during Cycle 1:
At least one AE At least one treatment related AE At least one serious AE At least one AE leading to discontinuation of study drug At least one AE due to pregnancy complication"|Measured from the start of r-hFSH treatment to either end of r-hFSH treament +30 days or end of pregnancy if applicable|Safety population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852858|NCT01687712|Secondary|Local and Systemic Adverse Events: Dermal Response to Injection by Severity - Cycle 1|Dermal response to r-hFSH injection as assessed by the investigator and categorized according to severity of reaction|Measure recorded in the Patient Diary which is maintained through entire FSH treatment|Safety population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852859|NCT01687712|Secondary|Local and Systemic Adverse Events: Dermal Response to Injection - Cycle 1|Number of subjects reporting at least one dermal response to r-hFSH injection and number of subjects reporting no dermal responses.|Measure recorded in the Patient Diary which is maintained through entire FSH treatment|Safety population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852860|NCT01687712|Secondary|Number of Oocytes Retrieved - Cycle 1|The number of oocytes retrieved per subject, following hCG administration in Cycle 1.|Visit 8, 34-36 hours after hCG administration|Intention to treat population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||Oocytes retrieved||Standard Deviation|Mean
852861|NCT01687712|Secondary|Exposure to r-hFSH Injections: Daily Dose of r-hFSH (IU) - Cycle 1|The mean dose of r-hFSH that subjects received in a day during Cycle 1.|Measured at discretionary visits between Days 9 and 15 after FSH starts.|Intention to treat population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||international unit (IU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
852862|NCT01687712|Secondary|Exposure to r-hFSH Injections: Total Dose of r-hFSH (IU) - Cycle 1|The total dose of r-hFSH that subjects received during Cycle 1.|Measured at discretionary visits between Days 9 and 15 after FSH starts.|Intention to treat population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||international unit (IU)||Standard Deviation|Mean
852863|NCT01687712|Secondary|Exposure to r-hFSH Injections: Days of r-hFSH Stimulation - Cycle 1|The number of days of r-hFSH stimulation a subject received during Cycle 1.|Measured at discretionary visits between Days 9 and 15 after FSH starts|Intention to treat population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
852864|NCT01687712|Primary|Clinical Pregnancy Rate After One Cycle of Treatment - PP Population|Clinical pregnancy was defined as presence of at least one intrauterine gestational sac and fetal heart activity as demonstrated by vaginal ultrasound at six weeks (42 +/- 1 day) post ET (Visit 11). The clinical pregnancy rate is the proportion of subjects who achieve clinical pregnancy, relative to the number of patients in the PP population of the respective treatment arm.|Six weeks post embryo transfer|Per-protocol population, defined as a subset of the ITT population composed of all patients without any major protocol deviation (i.e. one which would affect the primary efficacy endpoint assessment).||Participants|||Count of Participants
852905|NCT01611792|Primary|Change From Baseline to 6 Months in Oswestry Disability Scale (0-100%)|Disability; Sacle 0-100% Lower score is considered better/improved; Negative value indicates improvement|Baseline and 6 Months|Based on data reported and available||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852865|NCT01687712|Primary|Clinical Pregnancy Rate After One Cycle of Treatment - ITT Population|Clinical pregnancy was defined as presence of at least one intrauterine gestational sac and fetal heart activity as demonstrated by vaginal ultrasound at six weeks (42 +/- 1 day) post ET (Visit 11). The clinical pregnancy rate is the proportion of subjects who achieve clinical pregnancy, relative to the number of patients in the ITT population of the respective treatment arm.|Six weeks post embryo transfer|Intention to treat population, defined as all randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment, based on their randomization.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852866|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|From Month 0 until the end of the ESFU (at Month 8)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852867|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited AEs|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical subject investigation temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Any was defined as an AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study. Also any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms was reported as an unsolicited AE.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) post second vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852868|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited adverse event (AE) covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical subject investigation temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Any was defined as an AE reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study. Also any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms was reported as an unsolicited AE.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) post first vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852869|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting New Onset of Chronic Illnesses (NOCIs)|NOCIs include autoimmune disorders, asthma, type 1 diabetes and allergies.|From Month 0 until the end of the Extended Safety Follow-Up [ESFU] (at Month 8)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852870|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms at Age Stratum 6-17 Years|Assessed solicited general symptoms were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, headache and fever. Gastrointestinal symptoms include nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and/or abdominal pain. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 symptoms = symptoms which prevented normal everyday activities. Grade 3 fever = oral temperature >39.5 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period following each dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented and with their symptom sheet filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852871|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms at Age Stratum 1-5 Years|Assessed solicited general symptoms were drowsiness, irritability, loss of appetite and fever. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 symptoms = symptoms which prevented normal everyday activities. Grade 3 fever = oral temperature >39.5 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period following each dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented and with their symptom sheet filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852872|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms at Age Stratum 6-17 Years|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any was defined as occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain was defined as cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 redness/swelling was defined as redness/swelling spreading beyond 30 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period following each dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented and with their symptom sheet filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852873|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms at Age Stratum 1-5 Years|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of the symptom regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 30 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period following each dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all subjects with the vaccine administration documented and with their symptom sheet filled in.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852874|NCT01641042|Secondary|Antibody Titers for hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBA-MenW-135 and hSBA-MenY Meningococcal Antigens|Antibody titers were measured in geometric mean concentrations (GMCs), calculated on all subjects.|Pre-primary vaccinarion (Month 0), post first vaccine dose (Month 1) and post second vaccine dose (Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
852875|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-PSA, Anti-PSC, Anti-PSW-135 and Anti-PSY Antibody Concentration ≥ the Cut-off Values|The cut-off value for the assay was ≥ 2.0 μg/mL.|Pre-primary vaccinarion (Month 0), post first vaccine dose (Month 1) and post second vaccine dose (Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852876|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Anti-PSA, Anti-PSC, Anti-PSW-135 and Anti-PSY Antibody Concentrations ≥ the Cut-off Values|The cut-off value for the assay was ≥ 0.3 micrograms per milliliter (μg/m).|Pre-primary vaccinarion (Month 0), post first vaccine dose (Month 1) and post second vaccine dose (Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852877|NCT01641042|Secondary|Antibody Titers for hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBA-MenW-135 and hSBA-MenY Meningococcal Antigens|Antibody titers were measured in Geometric mean titers (GMTs), calculated on all subjects.|Pre-primary vaccination at Month 0, post first vaccine dose at Month 1 and post second vaccine dose at Month 3|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
852878|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects With hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBAMenW-135 and hSBA-MenY Titers ≥ the Cut-off Values|The cut-off value for the assay ≥ 1:8.|Pre-primary vaccinarion (Month 0), post first vaccine dose (Month 1) and post second vaccine dose (Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852879|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects With hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBAMenW-135 and hSBA-MenY Titers ≥ the Cut-off Values|The cut-off value for the assay was ≥ 1:4.|Pre-primary vaccinarion (Month 0), post first vaccine dose (Month 1) and post second vaccine dose (Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852880|NCT01641042|Secondary|Antibody Titers for rSBA-MenA, rSBA-MenC, rSBA-MenW-135, rSBA-MenY Meningococcal Antigens|Antibody titers were measured in geometric mean titers (GMTs), calculated on all subjects.|At pre-primary vaccination (Month 0), post first vaccine dose (Month 1) and post second vaccine dose (Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
852881|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects With rSBA-MenA, rSBA-MenC, rSBA-MenW-135, rSBA-MenY Titers ≥ the Cut-off Values|The cut-off value for the assay was ≥ 1:128.|Pre-primary vaccination at Month 0, post first vaccine dose at Month 1 and post second vaccine dose at Month 3|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852882|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects With rSBA-MenA, rSBA-MenC, rSBA-MenW-135, rSBA-MenY Titers ≥ the Cut-off Values|The cut-off value for the assay was ≥ 1:8.|At pre-primary vaccination (Month 0), at post first vaccine dose (Month 1) and post second vaccine dose (Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852883|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Vaccine Response to hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBA-MenW-135 and hSBA-MenY Antibodies|Vaccine response was defined as: hSBA antibody titers ≥ 1:8, for initially seronegative subjects (i.e. pre-vaccination rSBA antibody titers < 1:4) and at least a 4-fold increase in hSBA antibody titers from pre to post-vaccination, for initially seropositive subjects (i.e. pre-vaccination rSBA antibody titers ≥ 1:4).|One month after the second vaccine dose (At Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852884|NCT01641042|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Vaccine Response for rSBA-MenA, rSBA-MenC, rSBA-MenW-135 and rSBA-MenY Antibodies|Vaccine response was defined as: rSBA antibody titers ≥ 1:32, for initially seronegative subjects (i.e. pre-vaccination rSBA antibody titers < 1:8) and at least a 4-fold increase in rSBA antibody titers from pre to post-vaccination, for initially seropositive subjects (i.e. pre-vaccination rSBA antibody titers ≥ 1:8).|One month after the second vaccine dose (At Month 3)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852885|NCT01641042|Primary|Number of Subjects With a Vaccine Response for Serum Bactericidal Assay Using Human Complement Against N. Meningitides Serogroups A, C, W-135 and Y (hSBA-MenA, hSBA-MenC, hSBA-MenW-135, hSBA-MenY) Antibodies|Vaccine response was defined as: hSBA antibody titers ≥ 1:8, for initially seronegative subjects (i.e. pre-vaccination rSBA antibody titers < 1:4) and at least a 4-fold increase in hSBA antibody titers from pre to post-vaccination, for initially seropositive subjects (i.e. pre-vaccination rSBA antibody titers ≥ 1:4).|One month after the first vaccine dose (at Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852906|NCT01611792|Primary|Change From Baseline to 11 Weeks in Oswestry Disability Scale (0-100%)|Disability; Scale 0-100% Lower score is considered better/improved Negative value indicates improvement|Baseline and 11 weeks|Based on data reported and available||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852886|NCT01641042|Primary|Number of Subjects With a Vaccine Response for Serum Bactericidal Assay Using Rabbit Complement Against Neisseria Meningitides Serogroups A, C, W-135 and Y (rSBA-MenA, rSBA-MenC, rSBA-MenW-135, rSBA-MenY) Antibodies|Vaccine response was defined as: rSBA antibody titers greater than or equal to (≥) 1:32, for initially seronegative subjects [i.e. pre-vaccination rSBA antibody titers below (<) 1:8] and at least a 4-fold increase in rSBA antibody titers from pre to post-vaccination, for initially seropositive subjects (i.e. pre-vaccination rSBA antibody titers ≥ 1:8).|One month after the first vaccine dose (at Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all eligible subjects who complied with the blood sample schedule for Visit 2 (Month 1) and Visit 4 (Month 3), for whom data concerning immunogenicity endpoint measures were available for at least one antigen component of the vaccine.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852887|NCT01626352|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Defined as the time from first treatment until objective tumor progression, relapse from complete response, or death from any cause|after cycles 3 and 6 of each 21-day cycle, and every 3 months thereafter until progression|All enrolled patients who have received study treatment.||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
852888|NCT01626352|Secondary|Number of Patients With Treatment-Related Adverse Events (AEs) as a Measure of Safety|A treatment-related adverse event was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant which was considered to have a relationship with the study drug (suspected to be possibly or probably related to the study drug per the Investigator’s assessment). Adverse events were evaluated using the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0.|after cycles 3 and 6 of each 21-day cycle, and up to 30 days after last dose, projected 24 weeks|All enrolled patients who received the study treatment.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852889|NCT01626352|Secondary|Overall Response (OR)|Overall response is the number of patients with observed complete or partial response (CR or PR) as assessed using the International Working Group (IMW) revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. Complete response requires disappearance of all evidence of disease. Partial response requires regression of measurable disease and no new sites.|after cycles 3 and 6 of each 21-day cycle, and every 3 months thereafter, projected 18 months|All patients treated with study drugs and having a post baseline response assessment.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852890|NCT01626352|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Defined as the time from Day 1 of study drug administration to date of death from any cause.|every 3 cycles during treatment and every 3 months thereafter until progression or death from any cause, projected 18 months|All enrolled patients who have received study treatment.||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
852891|NCT01626352|Secondary|Time to Progression (TTP)|Defined as the time from date of first treatment to the date of first documented disease progression or relapse from complete response.|after cycles 3 and 6 of each 21-day cycle, and every 3 months thereafter until progression|All enrolled patients who have received study treatment.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
852892|NCT01626352|Secondary|Duration of Response|Defined as the time from date of first documented confirmed response to date of disease progression or relapse from complete response. Patients who are alive and free from disease progression will be censored at the date of last tumor assessment. Patients who begin further anticancer therapy prior to disease progression will be censored at the date of last tumor assessment prior to the start date of the anticancer therapy.|after cycles 3 and 6 of each 21-day cycle and every 3 months thereafter|All patients treated with study drugs and having a post baseline response assessment.||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
852893|NCT01626352|Primary|Number of Patients With a Complete Response|Disease response assessments will be performed using the International Working Group (IMW)-revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. Complete response requires a disappearance of all evidence of disease.|18 months|All patients treated with study drugs and having a post baseline response assessment.||Participants|||Count of Participants
852901|NCT01611792|Primary|Change From 11 Weeks to 6 Months in Numeric Pain Rating Scale (0-10 Points)|Current Pain Scale 0-10 Lower score is better/improved; Negative value indicates improvement|11 weeks and 6 months|Based on data reported and available||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852902|NCT01611792|Primary|Change From Baseline to 6 Months in Numeric Pain Rating Scale (0-10 Points)|Current Pain Scale 0-10 Lower score is better/improved; Negative value indicates improvement|Baseline and 6 months|Based on data reported and available||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852903|NCT01611792|Primary|Change From Baseline to 11 Weeks in Numeric Pain Rating Scale (0-10 Points)|Current Pain Scale 0-10 Lower score is better/improved; Negative value indicates improvement|Baseline and 11 weeks|Based on data reported and available||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852904|NCT01611792|Primary|Change From 11 Weeks to 6 Months in Oswestry Disability Scale (0-100%)|Disability; Sacle 0-100% Lower score is considered better/improved; Negative value indicates improvement|11 Weeks and 6 Months|Based on data reported and available||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
852919|NCT01594385|Secondary|Wound Healing Characteristics|There will not be a fixed duration of outpatient follow-up (fixed follow-up in trauma patients is not practical due to the unpredictable nature of trauma population), an average (mean) follow-up will be determined for the entire cohort of patients for the purposes of the study, up to a maximum of 1 year (if available) following hospital discharge.|Participants will be followed until their open abdomen is closed. Depending on the nature and severity of the wound, this period may last as long as 1 year after the patient has been discharged.|"Wound areas for Seprafilm and No Seprafilm groups were obtained serially, by measuring each wound horizontally and vertically and multiplying measurements (in centimeters) to determine the estimated area in cm squared."||Square Centimeters (cm2)||Standard Deviation|Mean
852920|NCT01594385|Primary|Adhesion Characteristics|"Zuhlke adhesion score (1 - minimum to 4 - maximum)
= filmy adhesions, easy to separate by blunt dissection
= stronger adhesions; blunt dissection possible, partly sharp dissection necessary; beginning of vascularization
= strong adhesions; lysis possible by sharp dissection only; clear vascularization
= very strong adhesions; lysis possible by sharp dissection only; organs strongly attached with severe adhesions; damage to organs hardly preventable"|Up to 1 year|||Scores on a scale|Zuhlke Adhesion Score|Standard Error|Mean
853022|NCT01369641|Primary|Efficacy of Intratympanic Sodium Thiosulfate (STS)|"To assess the efficacy of intratympanic sodium thiosulfate (STS) on reducing the degree or incidence of hearing loss in patients receiving systemic cisplatin therapy using puretone and speech audiometry, and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE).
Pure tone and speech audiometry: hearing will be assessed prior to any initiation of cisplatin therapy, again at three weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and every 6 months thereafter for up to one year."|Through 1 year post-treatment||||||
853023|NCT01364090|Secondary|Behavioral and Quality of Life|Evaluate changes in illicit drug use, opiate substitution therapy, depression, suicidal ideations and health-related quality of life in participants treated with PEG-IFN alfa-2b in combination with self-administered ribavirin for 12 weeks in participants with non-quantifiable HCV RNA or undetectable HCV RNA on qualitative assay at week 4 of therapy and for 24 weeks in participants with quantifiable HCV RNA or detectable HCV RNA at week 4 of therapy.|48 weeks||||||
853024|NCT01364090|Secondary|Treatment Response (ETR & SVR24)|Evaluate the percentage with undetectable HCV RNA at end of treatment (ETR) and 24 weeks post end of treatment (SVR24) in participants treated with PEG-IFN alfa-2b in combination with self-administered ribavirin for 12 weeks in participants with non quantifiable HCV RNA or undetectable HCV RNA at week 4 of therapy and for 24 weeks in participants with quantifiable HCV RNA or detectable HCV RNA at week 4 of therapy.|48 weeks||||||
853025|NCT01364090|Secondary|Treatment Adherence|Evaluate the adherence (>80 of PEG-IFN, >80% of RBV, >80% of time) to directly observed PEG-IFN alfa-2b in combination with self-administered ribavirin for 12 weeks in participants with non-quantifiable HCV RNA or undetectable HCV RNA on qualitative assay at week 4 of therapy and for 24 weeks in participants with quantifiable HCV RNA or detectable HCV RNA on qualitative assay at week 4 of therapy.|48 weeks||||||
853026|NCT01364090|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability|Evaluate the safety and tolerability of directly observed PEG-IFN alfa-2b in combination with self-administered ribavirin for 12 weeks in participants with non-quantifiable HCV RNA or undetectable HCV RNA on qualitative assay at week 4 of therapy and for 24 weeks in participants with quantifiable HCV RNA or detectable HCV RNA on qualitative assay at week 4 of therapy.|48 weeks||||||
853027|NCT01364090|Primary|Treatment Efficacy|The primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients with undetectable HCV RNA at 12 weeks post end of treatment (SVR12) following directly observed PEG-IFN alfa-2b in combination with self-administered ribavirin for 12 weeks in participants with non-quantifiable (<15 IU/ml detected and <15 IU/ml undetected) HCV RNA or undetectable HCV RNA on qualitative assay at week 4 of therapy and for 24 weeks in participants with quantifiable (≥15 IU/ml) HCV RNA or detectable HCV RNA on qualitative assay at week 4 of therapy.|36 weeks|||participants|||Number
853037|NCT01323387|Secondary|Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) Summary|The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is an index derived from the Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire used by clinicians and researchers to quantify disability for low back pain. The scores can range from 0 to 100 with 0 equating to No Disability and 100 equating to the Maximum Disability Possible|Baseline and 24 Months|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853038|NCT01323387|Secondary|SF-12 Mental Composite Score (MCS) Summary|The MCS (Mental Component Score) is a measurement of health status with a range of 0 to 100. A higher score indicates less disability.|Baseline and 24 Months|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853039|NCT01323387|Secondary|SF-12 Physical Composite Score (PCS) Summary|The PCS (Physical Component Score) is a measurement of health status with a range of 0 to 100. A higher score indicates less disability.|Baseline and 24 Months|||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853040|NCT01323387|Secondary|Quality of Life Using SF-12 Scale (MCS): Number of Subjects Who Achieved 15% Improvement in MCS Compared to Baseline|The outcome measure is the number of subjects who achieved a 15% improvement in MCS compared to baseline. The MCS (Mental Component Score) is a measurement of health status with a range of 0 to 100. A higher score indicates less disability.|Baseline and 24 Months|||Count of subjects|||Number
853041|NCT01323387|Secondary|Oswestry Disability Index (ODI): Number of Subjects Who Achieved a 15% Improvement in ODI Compared to Baseline|The outcome measure is the number of subjects who achieved a 15% improvement in ODI compared to baseline. The ODI is an index derived from the Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire used by clinicians and researchers to quantify disability for low back pain. ODI scores range from 0 to 100 with 0 equating to No Disability and 100 equating to the Maximum Disability Possible|24 Months|||Count of subjects|||Number
853042|NCT01323387|Secondary|Pain Scores on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)|The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) is a measurement of pain from a value of 0 (no pain) to a value of 10 (worst pain)|Baseline and 24 Months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853043|NCT01323387|Secondary|Quality of Life Using the SF-12 Scale Physical Health Component Score (PCS). Number of Subjects Who Achieved 15% Improvement in PCS Compared to Baseline.|Quality of Life using the SF-12 Scale Physical Health Component Score (PCS). The PCS is a measurement of health status with a range of 0-100. A higher score indicates less disability.|24 Months|||Count of subjects|||Number
853044|NCT01323387|Primary|Number of Subjects With Successful Radiographic Fusion|CT Scans and plain film x-rays will be evaluated. Demonstration of bridging trabecular bone through or external to the allograft spacer will be the measure of success.|24 Months|||Count of subjects|||Number
853045|NCT01295112|Secondary|The Secondary Efficacy Endpoint is the Visual Acuity Score Based on Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) at Week 24|Change in BCVA at Week 24 from baseline|24 weeks|||letters||Standard Deviation|Mean
853046|NCT01295112|Primary|The Primary Efficacy Endpoint is the Total Number of PRN Bevacizumab Intravitreal Injections Through 24 Weeks||24 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853246|NCT01196416|Secondary|Change in Protein Levels by Immunohistochemistry (Phase Ib)|"Pre and post-treatment protein levels will be compared by Wilcoxon signed-rank test (for paired samples).
Data is not yet available, as it's currently being analyzed."|Baseline up to 2 weeks||||||
853127|NCT01256671|Primary|Long-term Safety of Intravaginal Prasterone (DHEA): Endometrium|The long-term safety of intravaginal prasterone has been evaluated on different parameters including the endometrium. For this purpose, endometrial biopsies were performed at screening and at the end of the study (52 weeks) or at discontinuation visit for women who were exposed to intravaginal DHEA (prasterone) for at least 12 weeks. At screening, the endometrium had to be atrophic/inactive for women to be enrolled in the study. Only the end-of-study data are presented.|Baseline and Week 52 (or discontinuation)|Only subjects in the Safety Population who had an end-of-study endometrial biopsy are included in the analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
853120|NCT01256671|Primary|Long-term Safety of Intravaginal Prasterone (DHEA): Serum Steroid Levels|The long-term safety of intravaginal prasterone has been evaluated on different parameters including the serum levels of DHEA and its metabolites. For this purpose, blood samples were collected at Baseline and different post-Baseline timepoints for the determination of serum steroid levels by a central laboratory using validated liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) methods. The serum levels of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), estradiol (E2) and testosterone (TESTO) obtained at Baseline and Week 52 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 52 are presented.|Baseline and Week 52|Data are presented for subjects in the Safety Population who have steroid data at both baseline and Week 52.||pg/mL||Standard Error|Mean
853121|NCT01256671|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 52 of Self-assessment of VVA Symptom Irritation/Itching|The severity of irritation/itching was evaluated by a questionnaire. The severity of irritation/itching recorded as none, mild, moderate or severe was analyzed using the score values of 0, 1, 2 or 3, respectively. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 52 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 52 are presented.|Baseline and Week 52|"Overall, 476 subjects met vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) criteria by having moderate/severe (MS) dyspareunia, dryness and/or irritation/itching. The analysis MS only includes subjects having MS irritation/itching (being or not most bothersome (MBS)) (n=86); the analysis MBS/MS only includes subjects with MS irritation/itching being MBS (n=23)."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
853122|NCT01256671|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 52 of Self-assessment of VVA Symptom Vaginal Dryness|The severity of vaginal dryness was evaluated by a questionnaire. The severity of vaginal dryness recorded as none, mild, moderate or severe was analyzed using the score values of 0, 1, 2 or 3, respectively. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 52 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 52 are presented.|Baseline and Week 52|"Overall, 476 subjects met vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) criteria by having moderate/severe (MS) dyspareunia, dryness and/or irritation/itching. The analysis MS only includes subjects having MS dryness (being or not most bothersome (MBS)) (n=251); the analysis MBS/MS only includes subjects with MS dryness being MBS (n=81)."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
853123|NCT01256671|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 52 of Self-assessment of VVA Symptom Dyspareunia|The severity of dyspareunia was evaluated by a questionnaire. The severity of dyspareunia recorded as none, mild, moderate or severe was analyzed using the score values of 0, 1, 2 or 3, respectively. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 52 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 52 are presented.|Baseline and Week 52|"Overall, 476 subjects met vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) criteria by having moderate/severe (MS) dyspareunia, dryness and/or irritation/itching. The analysis MS dyspareunia only includes subjects having MS dyspareunia (being or not most bothersome (MBS)) (n=240); the analysis MBS/MS only includes subjects with MS dyspareunia being MBS (n=183)."||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
853124|NCT01256671|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 52 of Vaginal pH.|A pH strip fixed on an Ayre spatula (or equivalent) was applied directly to the lateral wall of the vagina. The change in color of the pH indicator strip was compared to the color chart for pH evaluation. The corresponding pH value (with one decimal) was recorded. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 52 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 52 are presented.|Baseline and Week 52|"Subgroups of the Safety Population were used for analysis. The subgroup identified ALL includes subjects meeting or not the vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) criteria at Baseline while the subgroup VVA only includes subjects meeting VVA criteria (pH ˃5, superficial cells ≤ 5% and moderate/severe VVA symptom being most bothersome (MBS))."||pH||Standard Error|Mean
853125|NCT01256671|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 52 of Vaginal Cell Maturation (Percentage of Superficial Cells).|The percentage of superficial cells was determined from the vaginal smears collected during the study. A 100-cell count was performed by a central laboratory to classify cells as parabasal (P) (including basal), intermediate (I), and superficial (S) squamous cell types. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 52 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 52 are presented.|Baseline and Week 52|"Subgroups of the Safety Population were used for analysis. The subgroup identified ALL includes subjects meeting or not the vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) criteria at Baseline while the subgroup VVA only includes subjects meeting VVA criteria (pH ˃5, superficial cells ≤ 5% and moderate/severe VVA symptom being most bothersome (MBS))."||percentage of superficial cells||Standard Error|Mean
853126|NCT01256671|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 52 of Vaginal Cell Maturation (Percentage of Parabasal Cells).|The percentage of parabasal cells was determined from the vaginal smears collected during the study. A 100-cell count was performed by a central laboratory to classify cells as parabasal (P) (including basal), intermediate (I), and superficial (S) squamous cell types. Data obtained at Baseline and Week 52 as well as the change from Baseline to Week 52 are presented.|Baseline and Week 52|"Subgroups of the Safety Population were used for analysis. The subgroup identified ALL includes subjects meeting or not the vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) criteria at Baseline while the subgroup VVA only includes subjects meeting VVA criteria (pH ˃5, superficial cells ≤ 5% and moderate/severe VVA symptom being most bothersome (MBS))."||percentage of parabasal cells||Standard Error|Mean
853128|NCT01239394|Secondary|Toxicity: Infusion Reactions, Grade 3-4 Infections, and Neutropenia|Evaluate safety of ofatumumab monotherapy in this patient population Toxicities are graded 1 (mild), 2 (moderate), 3 (severe), and 4 (life-threatening)|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853129|NCT01239394|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Percentage of patients with progression-free survival during 12 months post-treatment progression-free survival: patients live with the disease, but it does not get worse|12 months|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853130|NCT01239394|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|"Evaluate clinical efficacy of ofatumumab in previously untreated indolent B-cell lymphomas, as measured by overall response rate (ORR).
Overall response = Complete response (CR) + Partial response (PR) CR = all previously enlarged fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-avid or positron emission tomography (PET)-positive lymph nodes regressed to normal size (<=1.5cm in greatest diameter) PR = >=50% decrease in SPD of up to six largest dominant masses, no increase in size of other nodes; FDG avid or PET positive before therapy, one or more nodes PET positive at previously involved site, or variably FDG avid or PET negative with regression at CT"|1-month post-treatment|||percentage of patients|||Number
853131|NCT01239394|Primary|Efficacy: Complete Response Rate (CRR)|"Evaluate clinical efficacy of ofatumumab in previously untreated indolent B-cell lymphomas, as measured by complete response rate (CRR).
Complete response = all previously enlarged fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-avid or positron emission tomography (PET)-positive lymph nodes regressed to normal size (<=1.5 cm in greatest diameter)"|1-month post-treatment|||percentage of patients|||Number
853247|NCT01196416|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose for RO4929097|based on the incidence of dose-limiting toxicity as assessed the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 (Phase IB)|21 days|||mg/day|||Number
853187|NCT01212770|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events||Up to 5 years||12/2017||||
853188|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Dactylitis Score of Zero at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 52 weeks.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853189|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a MASES Score of Zero at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 24 weeks. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants with a baseline value > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853190|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 70 Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853191|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853248|NCT01196416|Primary|Overall Survival (Phase II)|Overall response rate (complete [CR] or partial response [PR]) according to RECIST version 1.1|Up to 2 years|||participants|||Number
853192|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Good or Moderate EULAR Response at Week 52|"A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score.
A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.
A Moderate Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or,
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants|||Number
853193|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 52 weeks.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853194|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 52 weeks. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853195|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the FACIT-Fatigue Scale Score at Week 52|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853196|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the DAS28 at Week 52|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the DIP joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853197|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the CDAI Score at Week 52|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI: Remission: ≤ 2.8 Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10 Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22 High Disease Activity: > 22."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853198|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 52|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a baseline value > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853199|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 52|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a baseline value > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853200|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Patient Assessment of Pain at Week 52|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
853201|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a ≥ 75% Improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index Score (PASI75) at Week 52|"The percentage of participants with Baseline psoriasis body surface area (BSA) involvement ≥ 3% who achieved 75% or greater improvement from Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score after 52 weeks.
The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) scored on a scale from 0 (none) to 4 (very severe), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement). PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with Baseline Psoriasis Body Surface Area ≥ 3% and a Week 52 value are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853202|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified PsARC Response at Week 52|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853203|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the SF-36 Physical Functioning Scale Score at Week 52|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853204|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 52|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853205|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 20 Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein.
Two-sided 95% confidence interval is based on the Clopper-Pearson method."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Subjects as Randomized/Re-randomized (AAR) Population consists of all participants who were randomized or re-randomized to apremilast at any time during the study. Only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
853206|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Dactylitis Score of Zero at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 24 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853249|NCT01196416|Primary|Maximum-tolerated Dose for Cisplatin, Vinblastine and TMZ|"based on the incidence of dose-limiting toxicity as assessed the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 (Phase IB)
Data is not yet available, as it's currently being analyzed."|21 days|||mg/m2|||Number
853207|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a MASES Score of Zero at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 24 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853208|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Dactylitis Score of Zero at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improves to zero after 16 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853209|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a MASES Score of Zero at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improves to 0 after 16 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853210|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 70 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853211|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853212|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 70 Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853213|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a ACR 50 Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853214|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Good or Moderate EULAR Response at Week 24|"EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score.
A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.
A Moderate Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or,
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853215|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 24 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853216|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 24 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853217|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Good or Moderate European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response at Week 16|"A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score.
A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.
A Moderate Response is defined as either:
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of greater than 0.6 and less than or equal to 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of less than or equal to 5.1 or,
an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 and attainment of a DAS28 score of greater than 3.2."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853218|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis Improvement ≥ 1 Point at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing dactylitis whose dactylitis severity score improved by ≥ 1 after 16 weeks of treatment.
Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853219|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With MASES Improvement ≥ 20% at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with pre-existing enthesopathy whose MASES improved by ≥ 20% from Baseline after 16 weeks of treatment. The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853220|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 24|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853221|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) at Week 24|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the DIP joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853222|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 24|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI: Remission: ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10; Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: > 22."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853223|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 24|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet will be rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set. Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included. LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853224|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 24|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853225|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient’s Assessment of Pain at Week 24|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853226|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a ≥ 75% Improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index Score (PASI75) at Week 24|"The percentage of participants with Baseline psoriasis body surface area (BSA) involvement ≥ 3% who achieved 75% or greater improvement from Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score after 24 weeks of treatment.
The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) scored on a scale from 0 (none) to 4 (very severe), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement). PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with baseline psoriasis involvement ≥ 3% of BSA are included; LOCF was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853227|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) Response at Week 24|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853228|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 24|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853229|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 16|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853230|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) at Week 16|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Patient's global assessment of disease activity.
DAS28(CRP) scores range from 0 to approximately 10, with the upper bound dependent on the highest possible level of CRP. A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853231|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 16|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 cm VAS, where 0 cm = lowest disease activity and 10 cm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.
The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI: Remission: ≤ 2.8 Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10 Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22 High Disease Activity: > 22."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853232|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score at Week 16|Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. Each digit on the hands and feet was rated as zero for no dactylitis or 1 for dactylitis present. The dactylitis severity score is the sum of the individual scores for each digit. The dactylitis severity score, ranging from 0 to 20, is the number of digits on the hands and feet with dactylitis present.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set. Participants with a baseline dactylitis severity score > 0 (i.e., pre-existing dactylitis) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853233|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Entheses Score (MASES) at Week 16|"The Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score quantitates inflammation of the entheses (enthesitis) by assessing pain at the following entheses (sites where tendons or ligaments insert into the bone):
1st costochondral joints left/right; 7th costochondral joints left/right; posterior superior iliac spine left/right; anterior superior iliac spine left/right; iliac crest left/right; 5th lumbar spinous process; and the proximal insertion of the Archilles tendon left/right.
The MASES, ranging from 0 to 13, is the number of painful entheses out of 13 entheses."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline MASES > 0 (i.e., pre-existing enthesopathy) and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853234|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Patient’s Assessment of Pain at Week 16|"The participant was asked to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||mm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853235|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a ≥ 75% Improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index Score (PASI75) at Week 16|"The percentage of participants with Baseline psoriasis body surface area (BSA) involvement ≥ 3% who achieved 75% or greater improvement from Baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score after 16 weeks of treatment.
The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score is a combination of the intensity of psoriasis, assessed by erythema (reddening), induration (plaque thickness) and desquamation (scaling) scored on a scale from 0 (none) to 4 (very severe), together with the percentage of the area affected, rated on a scale from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement). PASI scoring is performed at four body areas, the head, arms, trunk, and legs. The total PASI score ranges from 0 to 72. The higher the total score, the more severe the disease."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline psoriasis involvement ≥ 3% of BSA are included; LOCF was used. Participants who did not have sufficient data (observed or imputed) for a determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853236|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Modified Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) Response at Week 16|"Modified PsARC response is defined as improvement in at least 2 of the 4 measures, at least one of which must be tender joint count or swollen joint count, and no worsening in any of the 4 measures:
78 tender joint count,
76 swollen joint count,
Patient global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm visual Analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician global assessment of disease activity, measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
Improvement or worsening in joint counts is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 30%, and improvement or worsening in global assessments is defined as decrease or increase, respectively, from baseline by ≥ 20 mm VAS."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853237|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 16|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853238|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire- Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 24|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853239|NCT01212770|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an ACR 20 Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853240|NCT01212770|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire- Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 16|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 postbaseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853241|NCT01212770|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 78 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 76 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Patient's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]);
Patient's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS);
Patient's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI));
C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set consisting of all participants randomized as specified in the protocol. Participants who withdrew early or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
853242|NCT01196416|Secondary|Toxicity as Assessed by NCI CTCAE v. 4.0|Reported by type, frequency and severity.- Please see adverse events section.|Up to 30 days post-treatment||||||
853243|NCT01196416|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (Phase II)|Progression-free survival curves will be generated using Kaplan-Meier methodology.|Time from start of treatment to time of progression or death, whichever occurs first, assessed up to 2 years||||||
853244|NCT01196416|Secondary|Presence or Absence of Markers of Pathway Inhibition in Patient Tumors (Phase Ib)|The association of response or clinical benefit with the presence or absence of markers of pathway inhibition in patient tumors will be tested using Fisher's exact test.|2 weeks||||||
853245|NCT01196416|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Gamma-secretase Inhibitor RO4929097 in Combination With Temozolomide (Phase IB)||At baseline, and at days 1, 2, and 3 of courses 1 and 2||||||
853250|NCT01196416|Primary|Overall Objective Response|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Progression, as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions; Stable Disease (SD), neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for disease progression|From the time measurement criteria are met for CR or PR until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented, assessed up to 2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853251|NCT01192295|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) Data of Oxycodone Hydrochloride Controlled-release Tablets|Plasma concentration data were characterized for a population PK model of oxycodone hydrochloride controlled-release tablets in opioid tolerant pediatric patients. Plasma samples were collected after the first dose on day 1 (one sample 2 to 4 hours after the dose and 1 sample 4 to 6 hours after the dose with approximately 2 hours between the samples), and immediately predose (morning or evening dose) and 2 to 4 hours after that dose at visit 2 and/or visit 3; a total of 4 to 6 samples were collected.|Day 1, week 2, and week 4||||||
853252|NCT01192295|Secondary|Parent/ Caregiver Assessed Functional Disability Inventory (FDI) for Patients Aged ≥ 12 to ≤ 16 Years|The FDI is a validated tool used to evaluate the degree to which children have reduced physical and psychosocial functioning because of their pain difficulties in the previous 2 weeks. The FDI comprises 15 items. Responses to each item were scored using a 5-point Likert scale. The individual scores are: (0) no trouble, (1) a little trouble, (2) some trouble, (3) a lot of trouble, and (4) impossible. A total score (ranging from 0 to 60) for the 15 items was calculated, with lower scores indicating less functional disability. The FDI was performed by the parent/ caregiver.|Baseline to week 4|The safety population was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853253|NCT01192295|Secondary|Parent/ Caregiver Assessed Functional Disability Inventory (FDI) for Patients Aged 6 to < 12 Years|The FDI is a validated tool used to evaluate the degree to which children have reduced physical and psychosocial functioning because of their pain difficulties in the previous 2 weeks. The FDI comprises 15 items. Responses to each item were scored using a 5-point Likert scale. The individual scores are: (0) no trouble, (1) a little trouble, (2) some trouble, (3) a lot of trouble, and (4) impossible. A total score (ranging from 0 to 60) for the 15 items was calculated, with lower scores indicating less functional disability. The FDI was performed by the parent/ caregiver.|Baseline to week 4|The safety population was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853254|NCT01192295|Secondary|Parent/ Caregiver-Assessed Global Impression of Change (PGIC)|The PGIC rating score variable was collected on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 to 7 (where 1 = very much improved; and 7 = very much worse). The PGIC is designed to assess overall satisfaction with the treatment. The number and percent of parent/caregivers reporting each category of PGIC response at the final visit was summarized for the safety population within age group.|Baseline to week 4 or early discontinuation|The safety population was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study.||participants|||Number
853255|NCT01192295|Secondary|Use of Supplemental Pain Medication|Supplemental opioid and nonopioid pain medications were permitted during the study as deemed appropriate by the investigator. The dose of supplemental analgesic medication allowed was at the discretion of the investigator and within appropriate dose ranges for age and weight.|Baseline to week 4|The safety population was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study.||participants|||Number
853256|NCT01192295|Secondary|Pain Right Now Assessment by Patients Aged ≥ 12 to ≤ 16 Years|Pain right now was assessed by patients aged ≥ 12 to ≤ 16 years using the 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). The 100-mm VAS is a 100-mm line with 1 end marked “no pain” and the opposite end marked as “pain as bad as it could be.” The patient was asked to make a mark on that line indicating his or her level of pain. The pain right now 100-mm VAS score was defined as the distance (in mm) from the “no pain” end to the patient’s mark. The scale is measured on a 100 mm line: a 0 means no pain and bigger numbers indicate more pain. Pain right now was assessed by the patient at screening; after the first dose; and, thereafter, twice daily during the AM and PM, approximately at the time of each (morning and evening) dose of oxycodone HCl CR tablets during the study treatment.|Baseline to week 4|The safety population was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853257|NCT01192295|Secondary|Pain Right Now Assessment by Patients Aged 6 to < 12 Years|Pain right now was assessed by patients aged 6 to <12 years using the Faces of Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R). The FPS-R is a horizontal row of 6 faces representing pain intensity, with “no hurt” at the far left and “hurts worst” at the far right; the 6 intensities are scored as 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, or 10 (the patient was not shown the numbers associated with the faces). A score of 0 means no pain, and a 10 means very much pain. Pain right now was assessed by the patient at screening; after the first dose; and, thereafter, twice daily during the AM and PM, approximately at the time of each (morning and evening) dose of oxycodone HCl CR tablets during the study treatment.|Baseline to week 4|The safety population was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853258|NCT01192295|Primary|The Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety.|Safety assessments consisted of reports of AEs, physical examinations, clinical laboratory test results, vital signs measurements, pulse oximetry (SpO2), and somnolence assessments. Safety variables were summarized descriptively within age group for the safety population.|Up to 4 weeks (during the study) and 7-10 days poststudy (safety follow-up assessment).|The safety population was the group of patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study.||participants|||Number
853325|NCT01108757|Primary|Number of Participants With Urinary Tract Infection|Urinary tract infection diagnosis was obtained after confirmation with urine culture microbiology report. Infection was defined as >100,000 colony forming units/mL|7 days following catheter removal|Study terminated early.||Participants|||Count of Participants
853354|NCT01009515|Secondary|Time to Progression|The time from treatment initiation to disease progression or death by any cause. Progression is evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.0). Target lesions are assessed by physical exam or computerized tomography (CT): Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD), neither sufficient decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions to qualify for Progressive Disease; Progressive Disease (PD), 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|2 years|The 16 patients who completed treatment were evaluable for progression-free survival.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
853355|NCT01009515|Secondary|Safety Profile|All toxicities encountered during the study by patients who receive at least one on-study treatment will be graded according to the NCI CTCAE (Version 3.0). The number of patients experiencing adverse events will be reported according to grade.|Up to 30 days after last on-study treatment, for up to 2 years|All patients who had received at least one dose of on-study treatment were evaluable for toxicity.||participants|||Number
853356|NCT01009515|Secondary|Overall Survival|The time from treatment initiation to death by any cause.|2 years|The 16 patients who completed treatment were evaluable for survival analysis.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
853357|NCT01009515|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|Tumor response is evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.0). Target lesions are assessed by physical exam and/or computerized tomography (CT): Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD), neither sufficient decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions to qualify for Progressive Disease; Progressive Disease (PD), 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. The Objective Response Rate (ORR) is the sum of the percentages of patients achieving CR or PR.|6 months|The 16 patients who completed treatment were evaluable for the endpoint of overall response rate.||participants|||Number
853360|NCT00996840|Secondary|Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) of SB-681323|Absolute values of the Cmax of SB-681323 were reported. PK samples were collected for cohort 1 and 3 at Day 1 (pre-dose, 4, 4.25, 5, 6, 8, 12, 18h), Day 2 (pre-dose and 4h), Day 3 (0, 4, 24, 48h) and for cohort 2 and 4 at Day 1 (pre-dose), Day (pre-dose), Day 3 (pre-dose, 24h 10 min, 24h 45min, 27, 34, 40, 80 h since doing on Day 3).|For cohort 1 and 3: Day 1 (pre-dose, 4, 4.25, 5, 6, 8, 12, 18h), Day 2 (pre-dose and 4h), Day 3 (0, 4, 24, 48h). For cohort 2 and 4: Day 1 (pre-dose), Day (pre-dose), Day 3 (pre-dose, 24h 10 min, 24h 45min, 27, 34, 40, 80 h since doing on Day 3)|PK population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
853361|NCT00996840|Secondary|Mean Average Concentration (Cavg) of SB-681323|Absolute values of mean Cavg of SB-681323 were reported. PK samples were collected for cohort 1 and 3 at Day 1 (pre-dose, 4, 4.25, 5, 6, 8, 12, 18h), Day 2 (pre-dose and 4h), Day 3 (0, 4, 24, 48h) and for cohort 2 and 4 at Day 1 (pre-dose), Day (pre-dose), Day 3 (pre-dose, 24h 10 min, 24h 45min, 27, 34, 40, 80 h since doing on Day 3).|For cohort 1 and 3: Day 1 (pre-dose, 4, 4.25, 5, 6, 8, 12, 18h), Day 2 (pre-dose and 4h), Day 3 (0, 4, 24, 48h). For cohort 2 and 4: Day 1 (pre-dose), Day (pre-dose), Day 3 (pre-dose, 24h 10minutes [min], 24h 45min, 27, 34, 40, 80 h since doing on Day 3)|PK Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
853362|NCT00996840|Secondary|Mean Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Zero (Pre-dose) to 24 Hours (AUC0-24)|Absolute values of the mean AUC 0-24 of SB-681323 were reported. PK samples were collected for cohort 1 and 3 at Day 1 (pre-dose, 4, 4.25, 5, 6, 8, 12, 18h), Day 2 (pre-dose and 4h), Day 3 (0, 4, 24, 48h) and for cohort 2 and 4 at Day 1 (pre-dose), Day (pre-dose), Day 3 (pre-dose, 24h10minutes [min], 24h45min, 27, 34, 40, 80 h since doing on Day 3).|For cohort 1 and 3: Day 1 (pre-dose, 4, 4.25, 5, 6, 8, 12, 18h), Day 2 (pre-dose and 4h), Day 3 (0, 4, 24, 48h). For cohort 2 and 4: Day 1 (pre-dose), Day (pre-dose), Day 3 (pre-dose)|Pharmacokinetic (PK) population was defined as patients in the ‘All Subjects’ population for whom a pharmacokinetic sample was obtained and analyzed. Note: Due to some placebo patients PK samples being assayed in error, the above PK population definition was adjusted to also exclude any patient receiving Placebo.||h*ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
853363|NCT00996840|Secondary|Markers of Lung Epithelial Cell Injury: Mean Myeloperoxidase (MPO) Levels|Serum samples were collected at 6, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h since first dose on Day 1. Mean absolute values of MPO levels at these specified time points were reported.|6, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h since first dose on Day 1|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||pg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
853364|NCT00996840|Secondary|Markers of Endothelial Cell/Neutrophil Interaction: Mean Soluble Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptors-I|Samples were collected at 6, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h since first dose on Day 1. Mean absolute values of soluble tumor necrosis factor receptors-I levels at these specified time points were reported.|6, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h since first dose on Day 1|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||pg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
853365|NCT00996840|Secondary|Mean Serum C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Levels|Serum samples were collected at 6, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h since first dose on Day 1. Mean absolute values of serum CRP levels at these specified time points were reported.|6, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h since first dose on Day 1|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mg/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
853366|NCT00996840|Secondary|Mean Serum CXCL8 (Interleuin-8) Levels|Serum samples were collected at 6, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h since first dose on Day 1. Mean absolute values of Serum CXCL8 (Interleuin-8) levels at these specified time points were reported.|6, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h since first dose on Day 1|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||pg/ml||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
853367|NCT00996840|Secondary|Mean Serum Interleukin-6 Levels|Serum samples were collected at 6, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h since first dose on Day 1. Mean absolute values of Serum interleukin-6 levels at these specified time oints were reported.|6, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h since first dose on Day 1|Pharmacodynamic (PD) Population was defined as patients in the ‘All Subjects’ population for whom a pharmacodynamic sample was obtained and analysed (Flow Cytometry data were excluded from the definition of pharmacodynamic sample). Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Picogram per milliliter (pg/mL)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
853368|NCT00996840|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. SAE include AEs those result in death, a life-threatening AE, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, a persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal functions, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect. Important medical events that may not result in death, be life-threatening, or require hospitalization may be considered serious when, based upon appropriate medical judgment, they may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed in this definition.|Up to Follow-up (Day 7)|All subject population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
853369|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters Including PR, QRS, QT, and QTcB, QTcF, RR Intervals|12-lead ECGs were obtained at each timepoint during the study using an ECG machine that automatically calculated the heart rate and measures RR, PR, QRS, QT, and QTc intervals. Absolute mean values of PR, QRS, QT, and QTcB, QTcF, RR intervals were reported.|Day 2, pre-dose, Day 3, pre-dose, Day 3, 24 h and Follow-up (Day 7)|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
853370|NCT00996840|Primary|Vital Signs: Mean Oxygen Requirement (FiO2) Via Pulse Oximetry|Assessment of mean FiO2 via pulse oximetry was planned for cohort 1 and 3 at Day 1 (4 h), Day 2 (pre-dose) and Day 3 (pre-dose and 24 h) and for cohort 2 and 4: Day 2 (pre-dose) and Day 3 (pre-dose and 24 h). However, the analyzable data was not collected for this parameter.|For Cohort 1 and 3: “Day 1, 4 h”, “Day 2, pre-dose”, “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”; for Cohort 2 and 4: “Day 2, pre-dose”, and “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”|All subject population. Data was not collected for this parameter.|||||
853371|NCT00996840|Primary|Vital Signs: Mean Level of Peak and Plateau Ventilator Pressures|Assessment of mean level of peak and plateau ventilator pressures was planned for cohort 1 and 3 at Day 1 (4 h), Day 2 (pre-dose) and Day 3 (pre-dose and 24 h) and for cohort 2 and 4: Day 2 (pre-dose) and Day 3 (pre-dose and 24 h). However, the analyzable data was not collected for this parameter.|For Cohort 1 and 3: “Day 1, 4 h”, “Day 2, pre-dose”, “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”; for Cohort 2 and 4: “Day 2, pre-dose”, and “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”|All subject population. Data was not collected for this parameter.|||||
853372|NCT00996840|Primary|Vital Signs: Mean Level of Positive End Expiratory Pressure|Assessment of level of positive end expiratory pressure was planned for cohort 1 and 3 at Day 1 (4 h), Day 2 (pre-dose) and Day 3 (pre-dose and 24 h) and for cohort 2 and 4: Day 2 (pre-dose) and Day 3 (pre-dose and 24 h). However, the analyzable data was not collected for this parameter.|For Cohort 1 and 3: “Day 1, 4 h”, “Day 2, pre-dose”, “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”; for Cohort 2 and 4: “Day 2, pre-dose”, and “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”|All subject population. Data was not collected for this parameter.|||||
853373|NCT00996840|Primary|Vital Signs: Mean Oxygen Saturation (SaO2) Via Pulse Oximetry|Assessment of SaO2 via pulse oximetry was planned for cohort 1 and 3 at Day 1 (4 h), Day 2 (pre-dose) and Day 3 (pre-dose and 24 h) and for cohort 2 and 4: Day 2 (pre-dose) and Day 3 (pre-dose and 24 h). However, the analyzable data was not collected for this parameter.|For Cohort 1 and 3: “Day 1, 4 h”, “Day 2, pre-dose”, “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”; for Cohort 2 and 4: “Day 2, pre-dose”, and “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”|All subject population. Data was not collected for this parameter.|||||
853374|NCT00996840|Primary|Vital Sign: Mean Percent Oxygen (O2) in Blood|Absolute values of mean percent O2 in blood were reported.|"For Cohort 1 and 3: “Day 1, 4 h”, “Day 2, pre-dose”, “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h” and Follow up (Day 7); for Cohort 2 and 4: “Day 2, pre-dose”, “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”, and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percent O2||Standard Deviation|Mean
853375|NCT00996840|Primary|Vital Parameter: Mean Heart Rate|Absolute values of mean heart rate were reported.|"For Cohort 1 and 3: “Day 1, 4 h”, “Day 2, pre-dose”, “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h” and Follow up (Day 7); for Cohort 2 and 4: “Day 2, pre-dose”, “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”, and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
853376|NCT00996840|Primary|Vital Parameter- Mean Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP)|Absolute values of SBP and DBP were reported.|"For Cohort 1 and 3: “Day 1, 4 h”, “Day 2, pre-dose”, “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h” and Follow up (Day 7); for Cohort 2 and 4: “Day 2, pre-dose”, “Day 3, pre-dose and 24 h”, and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Millimeter of Mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
853377|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Clinical Chemistry Parameters-Blood pH at Screening|Absolute values of Blood pH at screening were reported as clinical chemistry parameter.|Screening|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||pH Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
853378|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Clinical Chemistry Parameters-estradiol|Absolute values of Estradiol were reported. If sample for clinical chemistry test had been obtained for standard of care within ± 4 h of the planned assessment then it was not collected at the planned assessment time point.|Day 1 (pre-dose) and Day 3 (24 h)|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed. Data were not collected from participants in Cohort 2-SB-681323, 7.5 mg, 24 h, Cohort 3-SB-681323, 7.5 mg, 4 h, and Cohort 4-SB-681323, 10 mg, 24 h.||Picomole per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
853379|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Clinical Chemistry Parameters- Calcium, Chloride, Glucose, Bicarbonate, Potassium, Sodium and Ratio of Urea to Blood Urea Nitrogen (Urea/BUN)|Absolute values of calcium, chloride, glucose, bicarbonate, potassium, sodium and Urea/BUN were reported. If sample for clinical chemistry test had been obtained for standard of care within ± 4 h of the planned assessment then it was not collected at the planned assessment time point.|"“Day 2, pre-dose, Day 3, pre-dose, Day 3, 24 h and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Millimole per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
853380|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Clinical Chemistry Parameters- Direct Bilirubin, Total Bilirubin, Creatinine and Uric Acid|Absolute values of direct bilirubin, total bilirubin, creatinine and uric acid were reported. If sample for clinical chemistry test had been obtained for standard of care within ± 4 h of the planned assessment then it was not collected at the planned assessment time point.|"“Day 2, pre-dose, Day 3, pre-dose, Day 3, 24 h and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Micromol per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
853381|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Clinical Chemistry Parameters-alkaline Phosphatase, Alanine Amino Transferase, Aspartate Amino Transferase, Creatine Kinase and Gamma Glutamyl Transferase|Absolute values of alkaline phosphatase, alanine amino transferase, aspartate amino transferase, creatine kinase and gamma glutamyl transferase were reported. If sample for clinical chemistry test had been obtained for standard of care within ± 4 h of the planned assessment then it was not collected at the planned assessment time point.|"“Day 2, pre-dose, Day 3, pre-dose, Day 3, 24 h and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||International units per liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
853382|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Clinical Chemistry Parameters- Albumin and Total Protein|Absolute values of albumin and total protein were reported. If sample for clinical chemistry test had been obtained for standard of care within ± 4 h of the planned assessment then it was not collected at the planned assessment time point.|"“Day 2, pre-dose, Day 3, pre-dose, Day 3, 24 h and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
853383|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Hematology Parameters-reticulocytes, Red Blood Cell Count|Absolute values of reticulocytes and red blood cell count were reported. If sample for hematology test had been obtained for standard of care within ± 4 h of the planned assessment then it was not collected at the planned assessment time point.|"“Day 2, pre-dose, Day 3, pre-dose, Day 3, 24 h and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Trillion cells per liter (TI/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
853384|NCT00996840|Primary|Hematology Parameters-Mean Corpuscle Volume|Absolute values of mean corpuscle volume were reported. If sample for hematology test had been obtained for standard of care within ± 4 h of the planned assessment then it was not collected at the planned assessment time point.|"“Day 2, pre-dose, Day 3, pre-dose, Day 3, 24 h and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Femtoliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
853385|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Hematology Parameters- Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin|Hematology parameter mean corpuscle hemoglobin was reported. If sample for hematology test had been obtained for standard of care within ± 4 h of the planned assessment then it was not collected at the planned assessment time point.|"“Day 2, pre-dose, Day 3, pre-dose, Day 3, 24 h and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Picogram (pg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
853386|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Hematology Parameters- Hemoglobin, Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin Concentration (MCHC)|Mean hematology parameters including hemoglobin, MCHC were reported. If sample for hematology test had been obtained for standard of care within ± 4 h of the planned assessment then it was not collected at the planned assessment time point.|"“Day 2, pre-dose, Day 3, pre-dose, Day 3, 24 h and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Grams per liter (g/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
853387|NCT00996840|Primary|Mean Hematology Parameters Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Total Neutrophils, Platelet Count, White Blood Cell Count|Mean hematology parameters including basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, total neutrophils, platelet count, white blood cell count were reported. If sample for hematology test had been obtained for standard of care within ± 4 h of the planned assessment then it was not collected at the planned assessment time point.|"“Day 2, pre-dose, Day 3, pre-dose, Day 3, 24 h and Follow up (Day 7)"|All subject Population comprised of as all participant who received at least one dose of study medication. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Giga cells per liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
853432|NCT00866359|Secondary|Pain of Genital Ulcers as Measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Day 169|A 100-mm VAS pain scale for genital ulcers was completed by the participant at timepoints specified in the protocol. Each 100-mm VAS was presented to the participant on a single sheet of bond paper. The participant was asked to draw a single line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represented the severity of their pain during the previous week, with 0 mm (the left-hand end of the scale) representing no pain and 100 mm (the right-hand end of the scale) representing the worst pain imaginable. The distance of the perpendicular line from the left-hand end of the scale was measured by ruler and recorded. When responding to a VAS item, participants specify their level of agreement to a statement by indicating a position along a continuous line between two end-points.|Day 1 to Day 169|Not analyzed due to low numbers of genital ulcers; not considered meaningful.|||||
853424|NCT00866359|Secondary|Summary of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events During the Active Treatment-Extension Phase|A Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) is as any AE occurring or worsening on or after the first treatment of any study drug, and within 28 days after the last dose of the last study drug. A treatment related toxicity was considered by the investigator to be not suspected or suspected. Severity grades according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 (CTCAE) on a 1-5 scale: Grade 1= Mild AE, Grade 2= Moderate AE, Grade 3= Severe AE, Grade 4= Life-threatening or disabling AE, Grade 5=Death related to AE.|Day 1 to Day 197; maximum exposure was 25.1 weeks|Safety analyses for the apremilast-exposure period was based on the apremilast participants as treated (AAT) Population, and included those who were randomized (at the randomization visit) or switched (at the Day 85 visit) to apremilast 30 mg BID, and received at least one dose of apremilast after the initial randomization or switch to 30 mg BID.||particpants|||Number
853425|NCT00866359|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity as Measured by BD Current Activity Form/Index Score on Day 197|The Behçet's Disease Current Activity Index consists of three component scores, a participant's perception of disease activity, a clinician's overall perception of disease activity and a Behçet's Disease Current Activity Index Score. The score ranges from 0 to 12. A higher score indicates higher level of disease activity (worsening) and a negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Day 1 to Day 197|Includes participants who entered the Observational Follow-up Phase from either the Treatment Phase or the Extension Phase||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853426|NCT00866359|Secondary|Pain of Genital Ulcers as Measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Day 197|A 100-mm VAS pain scale for genital ulcers was completed by the participant at timepoints specified in the protocol. Each 100-mm VAS was presented to the participant on a single sheet of bond paper. The participant was asked to draw a single line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represented the severity of their pain during the previous week, with 0 mm (the left-hand end of the scale) representing no pain and 100 mm (the right-hand end of the scale) representing the worst pain imaginable. The distance of the perpendicular line from the left-hand end of the scale was measured by ruler and recorded. When responding to a VAS item, participants specify their level of agreement to a statement by indicating a position along a continuous line between two end-points.|Day 1 to Day 197|Not analyzed due to low numbers of genital ulcers; not considered meaningful.|||||
853427|NCT00866359|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Who Were Genital Ulcer-free (Complete Response)|The percentage of participants who were genital ulcer-free (complete response: free from active genital ulcers)|Day 1 to Day 197|Intent to Treat (ITT) = all randomized participants with at least one genital ulcer at baseline. A Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) approach was applied for participants terminated early. If a participant had no post-baseline genital ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||percentage of participants|||Number
853428|NCT00866359|Secondary|Pain of Oral Ulcers as Measured by VAS (VAS Score) at Day 197|A 100-mm VAS pain scale for oral ulcers was completed by the participant at timepoints specified in the protocol. Each 100-mm VAS was presented to the participant on a single sheet of bond paper. The participant was asked to draw a single line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represented the severity of their pain during the previous week, with 0 mm (the left-hand end of the scale) representing no pain and 100 mm (the right-hand end of the scale) representing the worst pain imaginable. The distance of the perpendicular line from the left-hand end of the scale was measured by ruler and recorded. When responding to a VAS item, participants specify their level of agreement to a statement by indicating a position along a continuous line between two end-points.|Day 197|Includes participants who entered the Observational Follow-up Phase from either the Treatment Phase or the Extension Phase.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853429|NCT00866359|Secondary|Number of Oral Ulcers at Day 197|The number of oral ulcers were counted at each visit and at the end of the treatment period (starting point was at baseline).|Day 197|Includes participants who entered the Observational Follow-up Phase from either the Treatment Phase or the Extension Phase||ulcers/participants||Standard Deviation|Mean
853430|NCT00866359|Secondary|Number of New Manifestations of Behçet’s Disease or Flare That Were Not Present at Day 1|"A flare was defined as the development of new manifestations of BD or worsening of existing disease, meeting the following criteria:
Organ involvement: any major organ involvement (eg, central nervous system, gastrointestinal tract);
Oral/genital ulcers: ≥ 100% increase in the number of oral or genital ulcers from Day 1 or a minimum increase of 3 in the number of oral or genital ulcers, whichever is greater;
Arthritis: ≥ 50% increase in the number of swollen joints, or a minimum increase of 3 swollen joints, whichever is greater;
Skin lesions (non-oral/genital ulcers): ≥ 50% increase in the total score of the Physician’s Global Assessment of Skin Lesions, or a minimum increase of 2 in the total score of the Physician’s Global Assessment of Skin Lesions, whichever is greater;
New onset or worsening of existing Behçet Disease-related inflammatory eye disease requiring initiation of immunosuppressive therapy (uveitis)."|Day 1 to Day 169|The ITT population included all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline evaluation). A LOCF approach was applied for participants terminated early from the study. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||participants|||Number
853431|NCT00866359|Secondary|Behçet's Disease (BD) Current Activity Index Form Score at Day 169|The Behçet's Disease Current Activity Index consists of three component scores, a participant's perception of disease activity, a clinician's overall perception of disease activity and a Behçet's Disease Current Activity Index Score. The score ranges from 0 to 12. A higher score indicates higher level of disease activity (worsening) and a negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Day 169|The ITT population included all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline evaluation). A LOCF approach was applied for participants terminated early from the study. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853433|NCT00866359|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Who Were Genital Ulcer-free (Complete Response) at Day 169|The percentage of participants who were genital ulcer-free (complete response: free from active genital ulcers)|Day 1 to Day 169|Intent to Treat (ITT) = all randomized participants with at least one genital ulcer at baseline visit. A Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) approach was applied for participants terminated early. If a participant had no post-baseline genital ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||percentage of participants|||Number
853434|NCT00866359|Secondary|Pain of Oral Ulcers as Measured by VAS (VAS Score) at Day 169|A 100-mm VAS pain scale for oral ulcers was completed by the participant at timepoints specified in the protocol. Each 100-mm VAS was presented to the participant on a single sheet of bond paper. The participant was asked to draw a single line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represented the severity of their pain during the previous week, with 0 mm (the left-hand end of the scale) representing no pain and 100 mm (the right-hand end of the scale) representing the worst pain imaginable. The distance of the perpendicular line from the left-hand end of the scale was measured by ruler and recorded. When responding to a VAS item, participants specify their level of agreement to a statement by indicating a position along a continuous line between two end-points.|Day 169|The ITT population included all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline evaluation). A LOCF approach was applied for participants terminated early from the study. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853435|NCT00866359|Secondary|Number of Oral Ulcers at Day 169|The number of oral ulcers were counted at Day 169 in reference to the participants’ first day of active treatment (Day 1 or Day 85).|Day 169|The ITT population included all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline evaluation). A LOCF approach was applied for participants terminated early from the study. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||ulcers/participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
853436|NCT00866359|Secondary|Number of New Manifestations of Behçet’s Disease or Flare During the Placebo Controlled Treatment Phase|"A flare was defined as the development of new manifestations of BD or worsening of existing disease, meeting the following criteria:
Organ involvement: any major organ involvement (eg, central nervous system, gastrointestinal tract);
Oral/genital ulcers: ≥ 100% increase in the number of oral or genital ulcers from Day 1 or a minimum increase of 3 in the number of oral or genital ulcers, whichever is greater;
Arthritis: ≥ 50% increase in the number of swollen joints, or a minimum increase of 3 swollen joints, whichever is greater;
Skin lesions (non-oral/genital ulcers): ≥ 50% increase in the total score of the Physician’s Global Assessment of Skin Lesions, or a minimum increase of 2 in the total score of the Physician’s Global Assessment of Skin Lesions, whichever is greater'
New onset or worsening of existing Behçet Disease-related inflammatory eye disease requiring initiation of immunosuppressive therapy (uveitis)."|Day 1 to Day 85|Safety population included all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of Investigational Product.||participants|||Number
853437|NCT00866359|Secondary|Number of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) During the Placebo Controlled Treatment Phase|A Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) was defined as any AE occurring or worsening on or after the first treatment of any study drug, and within 28 days after the last dose of the last study drug. A treatment related toxicity was considered by the investigator to be not suspected or suspected. Severity grades according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 (CTCAE) on a 1-5 scale: Grade 1= Mild AE, Grade 2= Moderate AE, Grade 3= Severe AE, Grade 4= Life-threatening or disabling AE, Grade 5=Death related to AE.|Day 1 to Day 85; maximum exposure to study drug was 13 weeks during treatment phase|Safety Population defined as all participants who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of Investigational Product.||participants|||Number
853438|NCT00866359|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity as Measured by BD Current Activity Form/Index Score on Day 85|The Behçet's Disease Current Activity Index consists of three component scores, a participant's perception of disease activity, a clinician's overall perception of disease activity and a Behçet's Disease Current Activity Index Score. The score ranges from 0 to 12. A higher score indicates higher level of disease activity (worsening) and a negative change from baseline indicates improvement.|Day 1 to Day 85 or to early termination visit|The ITT population included all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline evaluation). A LOCF approach was applied for participants terminated early from the study. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853439|NCT00866359|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Were Oral Ulcer-free (Complete Response), or Whose Oral Ulcers Were Reduced by ≥ 50%, (Partial Response)|Comparison of the percentage of participants who were oral ulcer-free (complete response: free from active oral ulcers), or whose oral ulcers were reduced by ≥ 50%, (partial response) between the apremilast-treated and the placebo-treated groups. In this case, partial response also includes complete response.|Baseline and Day 85|The ITT population included all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline evaluation). A LOCF approach was applied for participants terminated early from the study. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||percentage of participants|||Number
853440|NCT00866359|Secondary|Sum of the Number Oral Ulcers, Genital Ulcers or Oral Plus Genital Ulcers at Day 85|Sum of the number oral ulcers, genital ulcers or oral plus genital ulcers at Day 85|Day 85|The ITT population included all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline evaluation). A LOCF approach was applied for participants terminated early from the study. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||Ulcers/participants||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853441|NCT00866359|Secondary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) for the Number of Oral Plus Genital Ulcers From Day 1 to 85|Area under curve (AUC) from Day 1 to Day 85 (AUC^85) for the number of oral plus genital ulcers per day was determined using the trapezoidal rule and divided by the days between the date of the last observation and baseline. The AUC was determined using the LOCF approach to impute missing values.|Day 1 to Day 85|The ITT population included all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline evaluation). A LOCF approach was applied for participants terminated early from the study. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||total AUC (#ulcers*days)||Standard Deviation|Mean
853442|NCT00866359|Secondary|Area Under the Curve for the Number of Genital Ulcers From Day 1 to 85|Area under curve (AUC^85) from Day 1 to Day 85 for the number of genital ulcers per day was not analyzed.|Day 1 to Day 85|No population analyzed due to small number of participants with genital ulcers; not considered meaningful.|||||
853454|NCT00832520|Primary|Change in Weight||8 weeks|There will be no publication, as this study was terminated after the original PI left employment with the institution, and because enrollment was low (13 of a target 59) which rendered planned statistical analyses impossible.|||||
853443|NCT00866359|Secondary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) for the Number of Oral Ulcers From Day 1 to 85|Area under curve (AUC^85) from Day 1 to Day 85 for the number of oral ulcers per day was determined using the trapezoidal rule and divided by the days between the date of the last observation and baseline. The AUC was determined using the LOCF approach to impute missing values.|Day 1 to Day 85|The ITT population included all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline evaluation). A LOCF approach was applied for participants terminated early from the study. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||total AUC (#ulcers*days)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853444|NCT00866359|Secondary|Pain of Genital Ulcers as Measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scores at Day 85|A 100-mm VAS pain scale for genital ulcers was completed by the participant at timepoints specified in the protocol. Each 100-mm VAS was presented to the participant on a single sheet of bond paper. The participant was asked to draw a single line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represented the severity of their pain during the previous week, with 0 mm (the left-hand end of the scale) representing no pain and 100 mm (the right-hand end of the scale) representing the worst pain imaginable. The distance of the perpendicular line from the left-hand end of the scale was measured by ruler and recorded. When responding to a VAS item, participants specify their level of agreement to a statement by indicating a position along a continuous line between two end-points.|Baseline to Day 85|Not analyzed due to low numbers of genital ulcers; not considered meaningful.|||||
853445|NCT00866359|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Participants Who Were Genital Ulcer-free (Complete Response) at Day 85|The percentage of participants who were genital ulcer-free (complete response: free from active genital ulcers)|Baseline to Day 85|Intent to Treat (ITT) = all randomized participants with at least one genital ulcer at baseline. A Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) approach was applied for participants terminated early. If a participant had no post-baseline genital ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||percentage of participants|||Number
853446|NCT00866359|Secondary|Pain of Oral Ulcers as Measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Day 85|A 100-mm VAS pain scale for oral ulcers was completed by the participant at timepoints specified in the protocol. Each 100-mm VAS was presented to the participant on a single sheet of bond paper. The participant was asked to draw a single line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represented the severity of their pain during the previous week, with 0 mm (the left-hand end of the scale) representing no pain and 100 mm (the right-hand end of the scale) representing the worst pain imaginable. The distance of the perpendicular line from the left-hand end of the scale was measured by ruler and recorded. When responding to a VAS item, participants specify their level of agreement to a statement by indicating a position along a continuous line between two end-points.|Day 85|The ITT population included all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline evaluation). A LOCF approach was applied for participants terminated early from the study. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853447|NCT00866359|Primary|Number of Oral Ulcers at Day 85|The number of oral ulcers were counted at each visit and at the end of the treatment period (starting point was at baseline).|Day 85|Intent to Treat (ITT) = all randomized participants with at least one oral ulcer evaluation (including the baseline visit). A Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) approach was applied for participants terminated early. If a participant had no post-baseline oral ulcer assessment, the baseline value was carried forward for calculation.||ulcers/participants||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853448|NCT00832637|Secondary|Toxicity|Toxicity will be evaluated per National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0. Frequency and severity of adverse events will be tabulated using counts of frequently occurring, serious and severe events of interest (i.e. Grade 3 and Grade 4 adverse events).|Patients are followed for at least one month following end of on-study treatment. All patients who discontinue the trial secondary to an adverse event are followed until resolution, stabilization or return to a baseline condition. An average of 24 weeks|||participants|||Number
853449|NCT00832637|Secondary|Median Survival Time (MST)|Survival is defined as the time from treatment initiation to death by any cause|2 years|||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
853450|NCT00832637|Secondary|Time to Tumor Progression (TTP)|The time from treatment initiation to disease progression. Progression is evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.0). Target lesions are assessed by computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): Progressive Disease (PD), 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|2 years|||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
853451|NCT00832637|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|"Overall response rate is defined as the percentage of patients achieving a complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) at 24 weeks following treatment.
Response is evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.0). Target lesions are assessed by computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD), neither sufficient decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions to qualify for Progressive Disease; Progressive Disease (PD), 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions."|24 weeks|||percentage of evaluable participants|||Number
853452|NCT00832637|Primary|Tumor Control Rate|"Rate of tumor control is defined as the percentage of patients achieving a complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) + stable disease (SD) at 24 weeks following treatment.
Response is evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.0). Target lesions are assessed by computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Stable Disease (SD), neither sufficient decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions to qualify for Progressive Disease; Progressive Disease (PD), 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions."|24 weeks|||percentage of evaluable participants|||Number
853453|NCT00832520|Secondary|To Determine if the Quality of Life Improves After Starting Mirtazapine||8 weeks||||||
853486|NCT00722865|Secondary|Safety|Toxicities are graded 1 (mild), 2 (moderate), 3 (severe), and 4 (life-threatening)|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853487|NCT00722865|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival: patients are still alive.|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853488|NCT00722865|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival: a patient lives with the disease but it does not get worse.|2 years and medium follow-up of 18 months|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
853489|NCT00722865|Secondary|Overall Response Rate Using the Modified Cheson Criteria|Overall response = Complete response (CR) + Partial response (PR) CR = all previously enlarged fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-avid or positron emission tomography (PET)-positive lymph nodes regressed to normal size (<=1.5cm in greatest diameter) PR = >=50% decrease in SPD of up to six largest dominant masses, no increase in size of other nodes; FDG avid or PET positive before therapy, one or more nodes PET positive at previously involved site, or variably FDG avid or PET negative with regression at CT|2 years|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
853490|NCT00722865|Primary|Failure-free Survival|Failure-free survival: the absence of relapse, non-relapse mortality or addition of another systemic therapy|2 years and median follow-up of 18 months|||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
853491|NCT00704496|Secondary|Improvement of Daytime Somnolence With Pseudoephedrine as Compared to Placebo|daytime sleepiness by subjective questionnaires|3 years|data disposed of and no longer in existence|||||
853492|NCT00704496|Primary|Improvement of Sleep Associated With the Use of Pseudoephedrine as Compared to the Placebo|sleep improvement by subjective questionnaires|3 years|data disposed of and no longer in existence|||||
853705|NCT02616250|Primary|Efficacy Variable: Percentage of Patients Defined as Success on the Global Rosacea Severity Grading Scale Called Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA):|Percentage of patients defined as success as per scores of IGA; ie: clear (score=0) or almost clear (score=1)|week 12/Hour 3|Intent To Treat (ITT) Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
853565|NCT00619112|Secondary|Toxicity Associated With the Dose-intense Temozolomide Treatment Schedule as Assessed by NCI CTCAE v3.0||Study start was 10.31.2007. Enrollment was completed on 12/22/2011||||||
853566|NCT00619112|Primary|Efficacy, as Measured by 6-month Progression-free Survival, of the Dose-intense Temozolomide Treatment Schedule; This Endpoint Was Measured From the First Day of Treatment Until Progression or 6month Mark From Treatment Initiation.||Study start was 10.31.2007. Enrollment was completed on 12/22/2011|||percentage of participants|MRI of brain||Number
853654|NCT00208026|Secondary|Liver Function Tests||Each visit||||||
853655|NCT00208026|Secondary|Blood Urea Nitrogen and Creatinine||Each visit||||||
853656|NCT00208026|Secondary|Blood Electrolytes and Fasting Glucose||Each visit||||||
853657|NCT00208026|Secondary|Complete Blood Count With Differential||Each visit||||||
853658|NCT00208026|Primary|Transepidermal Water Loss||Each visit||||||
853659|NCT00208026|Primary|Pruritus Severity Assessment||Each visit||||||
853660|NCT00208026|Primary|Investigator's Global Evaluation of Disease (IGED)||Each visit||||||
853661|NCT00208026|Primary|Netherton Area and Severity Assessment (NASA)||Each visit||||||
853662|NCT00208026|Primary|Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)||Each visit||||||
853663|NCT00208026|Primary|Highest Peak Blood Concentration of Pimecrolimus Over All Study Visits|At each scheduled visit, blood concentration of pimecrolimus were obtained. This value reflects the amount of pimecrolimus in the blood. This is measured directly from the blood and provides an estimate of the degree of absorption of the treatment medication through the skin into the blood. Analysis was performed as intent-to-treat with last value carried forward, but no data points were missing.|Each visit up to 18 months|Only the highest peak level documented for the group is reported||ng/mL|||Number
853664|NCT00194129|Secondary|Change in Rate of Cocaine Use Disorders After Open-label Treatment With Lithium and Divalproex||Baseline to Month 6||||||
853665|NCT00194129|Secondary|Change in Rate of Cannabis Use Disorders After Open-label Treatment With Lithium and Divalproex||Baseline to Month 6||||||
853666|NCT00194129|Secondary|Change in Rate of Alcohol Use Disorders After Open-label Treatment With Lithium and Divalproex||Baseline to Month 6||||||
853667|NCT00194129|Secondary|Time to Treatment for Emerging Symptoms of a Depressive Episode||Up to 6 months||||||
853668|NCT00194129|Secondary|Time to Treatment for Emerging Symptoms of a Manic/Hypomanic/Mixed Episode||Up to 6 months||||||
853669|NCT00194129|Primary|Time to Treatment for Emerging Symptoms of a Mood Relapse|A relapse is a return to either a depressive, manic, hypomanic or mixed episode after a period of not have any symptoms.|Up to 6 months|||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
853694|NCT00045708|Primary|Response Rate of Patients at the MTD|"Complete Response: Complete disappearance of all tumor on MRI scan, off all glucocorticoids with stable/improving neurologic exam for min4 wks.
Partial Response: Greater than or equal to 50% reduction in tumor size on volumetric MRI scan, on a stable/decreasing dose of glucocorticoids, with stable/improving neurologic examination for min 4 wks.
Progressive Disease: Progressive neurologic abnormalities not explained by causes unrelated to tumor progression (e.g. anticonvulsant or corticosteroid toxicity, electrolyte abnormalities, hyperglycemia, etc.) or a greater than 25% increase in the volume of the tumor by MRI scan. If neurologic status deteriorates, on stable/increasing dose of steroids, or if new lesions appear on serial MRI, further study treatment will be discontinued.
Stable Disease: A patient whose clinical status and MRI volumetrics do not meet the criteria for Complete Response, Partial Response or Progressive Disease."|3 years|no objective responses observed. 19 patients treated at the MTD from during Phase 2 and 4 patients treated at the MTD during the Phase 1 nonP450 arm 2 were included in the response analysis.||participants|||Number
853695|NCT00045708|Primary|Measure Pharmacokinetic Parameters Using Volume of Distribution at Steady State as Related to BMS-247550 and Anticonvulsants|Vss = volume of distribution at steady-state (how widely distributed in the body the drug gets)|Course 1, Day 1 (pre-infusion, midpoint of infusion, 5min prior to end of infusion, 15min, 30min, 1hr, 2hr, 3hr, 4hr and 6hr post infusion|13 of the 21 samples for P450 collected day 1 sample set and 16 of the 17 samples for the nonP40 collected day 1 sample set||l/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
853696|NCT00045708|Primary|Measure Pharmacokinetic Parameters Using Clearance as Related to BMS-247550 and Anticonvulsant Measurements|CL = clearance (how much volume of blood is cleared of the drug per unIT of time|Course 1, Day 1 (pre-infusion, midpoint of infusion, 5min prior to end of infusion, 15min, 30min, 1hr, 2hr, 3hr, 4hr and 6hr post infusion|13 of the 21 samples for P450 collected day 1 sample set and 16 of the 17 samples for the nonP40 collected day 1 sample set||l/h/m2||Standard Deviation|Mean
853697|NCT00045708|Primary|Measure Pharmacokinetic Parameters Using Estimation of Half-lives Related to BMS-247550 and Anticonvulsants|T1/2,z = terminal half-life (T1/2) --- for a 2 or 3 compartment drug, idea of how long drugs stick around|Course 1, Day 1 (pre-infusion, midpoint of infusion, 5min prior to end of infusion, 15min, 30min, 1hr, 2hr, 3hr, 4hr and 6hr post infusion|13 of the 21 samples for P450 collected day 1 sample set and 16 of the 17 samples for the nonP40 collected day 1 sample set||h||Standard Deviation|Mean
853698|NCT00045708|Primary|Group A (P450) Estimated MTD and Group B (nonP450) Estimated MTD of BMS-247550 in Patients With Recurrent or Progressive Malignant Glioma|Starting dose for both Group A and Group B was 5mg/m2/day. A continuing reassessment method (CRM) was employed independently for each group to estimate the maximum tolerated dose. Only toxicity observed during 1st cycle of treatment (21 days) was used for dose finding. Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) defined as: ANC<500/ul, platelets<25,000, febrile neutropenia or treatment-related grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic toxicity with the exception of nausea and vomiting.|21 days (1 cycle)|||mg/m2/day|||Number
853699|NCT00045708|Primary|Number of Dose Limiting Toxicity to Determine Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of BMS-247550 in Patients With Recurrent or Progressive Malignant Glioma|Starting dose for both Group A and Group B was 5mg/m2/day. A continuing reassessment method (CRM) was employed independently for each group to estimate the maximum tolerated dose. Only toxicity observed during 1st cycle of treatment (21 days) was used for dose finding. Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) defined as: ANC<500/ul, platelets<25,000, febrile neutropenia or treatment-related grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic toxicity with the exception of nausea and vomiting.|21 days (1 cycle)|4 subjects from Group B (Phase 1) were included in Group 3 (Phase 2). Only those on non-anticonvulsants at the dose of 6.8mg/m2/day were treated in Phase 2. No subjects treated at the MTD for P450, as the accrual goal for phase 2 reached before MTD for p450 was determined. P450 MTD determined as 9.6mg/m2 per CRM after all enrollment of phase 2||DLTs|||Number
853742|NCT02345226|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 48 as Defined by the US FDA-defined Snapshot Algorithm|The percentage of participants achieving HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 48 was analyzed using the snapshot algorithm, which defines a patient's virologic response status using only the viral load at the predefined time point within an allowed window of time, along with study drug discontinuation status.|Week 48|Full Analysis Set: all participants who (1) were randomized into the study, (2) received at least 1 dose of study drug, and (3) were on EFV/FTC/TDF FDC prior to the screening visit||percentage of participants|||Number
853729|NCT02447848|Secondary|PI at Each Evaluation Time Point|Pain intensity at each evaluation time point after the first dose of study drug up through 5 hours is evaluated using an 11-point NRS where 0 equals no pain and 10 equals worst possible pain. The score was obtained at Baseline, 15- , 30-, 45- minutes, 1-hour, and 2-hours after the first dose for all patients, and at hours 3, 4, and 5 for cohort 2 (patients 41-76). Scores ranged from 0 -10 for the first two hours, and 2 - 10 for hours three to five.|5 hours|The first cohort of patients (N=40) received one dose of study drug and the study was completed at two hours. The second cohort of patients (N=36) had the option of remaining in the study through five hours; most patients discontinued the study at 2 hours.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
853730|NCT02447848|Secondary|TOTPAR1 (Time-weighted)|"The total pain relief (TOTPAR) is the time-weighted sum of the pain relief scores over the first hour (15 minutes, 30 minutes, 45 minutes and 1-hour after the first dose of study drug is taken) of the study period.
The minimum score is 0.00 and the maximum score is 4.00. A higher score indicates greater pain relief."|1-hour|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
853731|NCT02447848|Primary|Time-weighted Summed Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) Over the 1-hour (SPID1).|"The primary efficacy endpoint is the time-weighted SPID1 evaluated from the patient questionnaire data. Pain intensity (PI) will be measured using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) with 0 (no pain) and 10 (worst possible pain).
The patient’s rating of PI will be measured at baseline and at 0.25 (15 min), 0.5 (30 min), 0.75 (45 min), 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours following the first dose of study drug.
The PID at each evaluation time point after the initiation of the first dose is the difference in PI at the specific evaluation time point and baseline pain intensity [PID (evaluation time after the first dose) = PI(baseline) – PI(evaluation time after the first dose)]. The time-weighted SPID1 is the time-weighted summed PID over the 1-hour study period.
The observed SPID scores ranged from -.70 to 8.00. A negative score indicates an increase in pain intensity and a positive score indicates a decrease in pain intensity."|One hour|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
853736|NCT02345226|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HIV Symptoms Index Score (HIVSI)|The HIV Symptoms Index was a 20-item, self-reported measure that addressed presence and perceived distress linked to symptoms commonly associated with HIV or its treatment. Twenty HIV symptoms including Fatigue, Fever, Dizziness, Hand/Foot Pain, Memory Loss, Nausea, Diarrhea, Sadness, Nervous/anxious, Sleep Trouble, Skin Problems, Cough, Headache, Appetite Loss, Stomach Pain, Muscle/Joint Pain, Sex Problems, Change in Fat Deposits, Weight Loss, and Hair Loss were assessed. There were 5 possible responses (0 = I don’t have this symptom; 1 = It doesn’t bother me; 2 = It bothers me a little; 3 = It bothers me; and 4 = It bothers me a lot) for each HIV symptom. Total HIV Symptoms Index Score was derived from all 20 HIV symptoms by counting the number of bothersome symptoms. Total score would be missing if any of the individual items were missing.|Week 48; Week 96|"Participants in the Safety Analysis Set with available data were analyzed.
The data presented are for the Week 48 analysis."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853737|NCT02345226|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Spine Bone Mineral Density (BMD)|Spine BMD was assessed by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan.|Week 48; Week 96|"Participants in the Spine DXA Analysis Set (all randomized participants, received at least 1 dose of study drug, and had nonmissing baseline spine BMD values) with available data were analyzed.
The data presented are for the Week 48 analysis."||percentage change in spine BMD||Standard Deviation|Mean
853738|NCT02345226|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Hip Bone Mineral Density (BMD)|Hip BMD was assessed by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan.|Week 48; Week 96|"Participants in the Hip DXA Analysis Set (all randomized participants received at least 1 dose of study drug, and had nonmissing baseline hip BMD value) with available data were analyzed.
The data presented are for the Week 48 analysis."||percentage change in hip BMD||Standard Deviation|Mean
853739|NCT02345226|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ Cell Count||Week 48; Week 96|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set with on-treatment data were analyzed.
The data presented are for the Week 48 analysis."||cells/uL||Standard Deviation|Mean
853740|NCT02345226|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With HIV-1 RNA < 50 Copies/mL at Week 96 as Defined by the US FDA-defined Snapshot Algorithm||Week 96||||||
853741|NCT02345226|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA ≥ 50 Copies/mL at Weeks 48 and 96 as Defined by the US FDA-defined Snapshot Algorithm||Week 48; Week 96|"Full Analysis Set: all participants who (1) were randomized into the study, (2) received at least 1 dose of study drug, and (3) were on EFV/FTC/TDF FDC prior to the screening visit
The data presented are for the Week 48 analysis."||percentage of participants|||Number
853757|NCT02301364|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|This study will use the Macdonald criteria. Specific lesions must be evaluated serially, and comparative analysis of changes in the area of contrast enhancement, as well as the non-enhancing component, should be performed. Complete Response: Complete disappearance of all measurable and non-measurable disease. No new lesions. Partial Response: Great than or equal to 50% decrease over the baseline in the sum of products of perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions. no progression of non-measurable disease. No new lesions. Stable/No Response: Does not qualify for CT, PR, or progression. Progressive Disease: 25% increase in the sum of products of all measureable lesions over smallest sum observes (or baseline if no decrease), OR clear clinical worsening of any non-measurable disease, OR appearance of any new lesion/site, OR clear clinical worsening or failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition (unless clearly unrelated to this cancer).|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853758|NCT02301364|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival time is defined as the time from treatment start to the date of death due to any cause.|2 years|||days||Full Range|Median
853759|NCT02301364|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Adverse events be summarized based on the Common Toxicity Criteria version 4.0.|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853760|NCT02301364|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Progression-free survival (PFS) is defined as the time from the date of treatment start to the date of the first documented PD or death due to any cause. PFS will be based on the investigator’s assessment of MRI, CSF studies and clinical presentation.|2 years|||days||Full Range|Median
853761|NCT02287025|Secondary|Satisfaction of Investigator/Nurse With Enhanced Drug-specific Information Via SMART Questionnaire|Investigator comfort of managing adverse events, adjusting dosing schedule, and satisfaction with SMART application measured by a questionnaire; 10 categories were answered on a 1 - 7 scale.|Up to 1 year|The study was pre-maturely terminated. No data were collected from participants for this assessment.|||||
853762|NCT02287025|Secondary|Investigator Comfort With the Use of Regorafenib and Management of AEs as Measured by Questionnaire|Investigator comfort of managing adverse events, adjusting dosing schedule, and satisfaction with SMART application measured by a questionnaire; 10 categories were answered on a 1 - 7 scale.|Up to 1 year|The study was pre-maturely terminated. No data were collected from participants for this assessment.|||||
853763|NCT02287025|Secondary|Incidence of Grade 3 Hand-foot-skin Reaction (HFSR), Fatigue, Diarrhea, Hypertension|Documented during visits as part of the interval history. All AEs will be reported in the CRF with a diagnosis, start/stop dates, action taken.|Up to 1 year|The study was pre-maturely terminated. No data were collected from participants for this assessment.|||||
853764|NCT02287025|Secondary|Dose Intensity as Percentage of Planned Dose|Dose level 0 (standard starting dose) @ 160mg po qd. Dose level - 1 @ 120 mg po qd. Dose level - 2 @ 80 mg po qd. This schedule reflects the FDA-approved dosing specified in the prescribing information.|Up to 1 year|The study was pre-maturely terminated. No data were collected from participants for this assessment.|||||
853765|NCT02287025|Secondary|Duration of Treatment||Up to 1 year|The study was pre-maturely terminated. No data were collected from participants for this assessment.|||||
854924|NCT00907218|Secondary|Exhaled CO Levels|At baseline and all weekly study visits,exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) levels were read.|Weekly over 7 weeks|Data was not collected due to study termination, 2 subjects were recruited however their data was not analyzed|||||
853785|NCT02281773|Secondary|Change in Psychopathology Symptoms as Assessed by Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS)|Change in psychopathology symptoms as assessed by Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). It contains 30-items including seven positive symptom items, seven negative symptom items and 16 general psychopathology symptom items. Each item was scored on the same seven point severity scale. Fourteen of the PANSS items required input from an informant. Total score ranges from 30 to 210 (minimum is better). The descriptive statistics of change from baseline (CFB) in PANSS score at week 6 (W6) and week 12 (W12) are presented.|Baseline, Week 6 and Week 12|TS||Unit on Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853786|NCT02281773|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PANSS Negative Symptom Factor Score After 12 Weeks of Treatment (for Subset of Patients Diagnosed With Negative Symptom)|Change from baseline in PANSS negative symptom factor score after 12 weeks of treatment (for subset of patients diagnosed with negative symptom). This outcome measure was not analysed due to low number of patients in the PANSS negative symptom subgroup. The PANSS negative symptom scale has 7 items. Each was rated from one to 7 points. The total factor score was the summation of the 7 points for each item, leading the total score ranging from 7 to 49.|Baseline and Week 12|This endpoint was not analysed because as per internal Boehringer Ingelheim rules, descriptive statistics are not calculated if data is available for less than 2/3rds of participants.|||||
853787|NCT02281773|Secondary|Patient Global Impressions-Improvement (PGI-I) Scale Score Measured After 12 Weeks of Treatment|Patient Global Impressions-Improvement (PGI-I) scale score measured after 12 weeks of treatment. The PGI of improvement is a simple evaluation completed by the patient to assess the patient’s overall evaluation of his/her status. The PGI of improvement was rated ordinally from one to 7. Higher scores indicate more severe symptoms.|Up to 12 weeks|FAS||Unit on Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853788|NCT02281773|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) Scale Score After 12 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) scale score after 12 weeks of treatment. The CGI-S is a one-item evaluation completed by the clinician on the patient’s severity of psychopathology. The CGI-S was rated ordinally from one to 7. Higher scores indicate more severe symptoms.|Baseline and Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) was to consist of all randomisation patients who were treated with at least one dose of study drug and had a baseline and at least one post baseline on treatment primary endpoint MCCB composite score.||Unit on Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853789|NCT02281773|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Everyday Functional Capacity as Measured by Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale (SCoRS) Global Ratings After 12 Weeks of Treatment|Change from baseline in everyday functional capacity as measured by Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale (SCoRS) global ratings after 12 weeks of treatment. SCoRS is a 20-item interview-based assessment of cognitive deficits and the degree to which they affect day-to-day functions. Each item was rated on a 4-point scale. Higher ratings reflected a greater degree of impairment. The SCoRS global total scores is the sum of the 20 items and it varies from 20 to 80 with 20 being the best outcome and 80 being the worst. If any individual item was missing, it was imputed with the average of that patient's non missing responses. If >5 items were missing, the total score was missing.|Baseline and Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) was to consist of all randomisation patients who were treated with at least one dose of study drug and had a baseline and at least one post baseline on treatment primary endpoint MCCB composite score.||Unit on Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853790|NCT02281773|Primary|Suicidality as Assessed by Columbia Suicidal Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)|"C-SSRS: Number (%) of subjects with an event of Suicidal Ideation (Wish to be dead, Non−specific active suicidal thoughts, Active suicidal ideation with any methods (not plan) without intent to act, Active suicidal ideation with some intent to act without specific plan, Active suicidal ideation with specific plan and intent) or Suicidal Behavior (Preparatory acts or behavior, Aborted attempt, Interrupted attempt, Non−fatal suicide attempt, Completed suicide) or Self−injurious behavior without suicidal intent is presented. C-SSRS used only to evaluate whether the patient developed suicidal ideation or behavior and no composite score will be used. Questions in the 1st section of suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior assessments in C-SSRS are yes and no type questions. If patient had suicidal ideation or behavior, 2nd section will be performed to evaluate the details with the scale from 0 to 5 or 0 to 2 and the larger number means the more severe condition."|Up to 12 weeks|TS (Number of subjects with a post baseline C−SSRS)||Percentage of Participants|||Number
853791|NCT02281773|Primary|Dramatic Worsening of Disease State as Assessed by Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS)|Dramatic worsening of disease state as assessed by Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). It contains 30-items including seven positive symptom items, seven negative symptom items and 16 general psychopathology symptom items. Each item was scored on the same seven point severity scale. Fourteen of the PANSS items required input from an informant. Total score ranges from 30 to 210 (minimum is better). The descriptive statistics of change from baseline (CFB) in PANSS score at week 6 (W6) and week 12 (W12) are presented.|Baseline, Week 6 and Week 12|TS||Unit on Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853792|NCT02281773|Primary|Occurrence of Protocol-specified Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI)|Occurrence of Protocol-specified adverse events of special interest (AESI).|Up to 20 weeks|The treated set (TS) was to consist of all patients who were randomised and treated with at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
853793|NCT02281773|Primary|Occurrence of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) (Including the Abnormalities of Physical Examination, Vital Signs, Electrocardiogram (ECG) Test and Laboratory Tests)|Occurrence of serious adverse events (SAEs) (including the abnormalities of physical examination, vital signs, electrocardiogram (ECG) test and laboratory tests).|Up to 20 weeks|The treated set (TS) was to consist of all patients who were randomised and treated with at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
853794|NCT02281773|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Composite Score of Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) After 12 Weeks of Treatment|MCCB comprises 10 tests, which assess 7 cognitive domains, including speed of processing, attention vigilance, working memory, verbal learning, visual learning, reasoning problem solving, and social cognition. The composite score was calculated by summing over the standardised score of each domain for analysis and it varies from -20 to 99 with higher score indicating better outcome. The trial was set up as “learn and confirm” model including 2 stages. Stage 1 analysis was conducted to identify the meaningful cognition endpoint(s) (CANTAB domain(s)) and the selected endpoint(s) were to be pre-specified as the primary endpoint(s) for Stage 2 analysis. Since none of the CANTAB outcome measures was selected in the Stage 1 analysis at planned time based on the pre-specified criteria, the MCCB composite score was chosen as the primary endpoint in the Stage 2 analysis, as pre-defined.|Baseline and Week 12|The full analysis set (FAS) was to consist of all randomisation patients who were treated with at least one dose of study drug and had a baseline and at least one post baseline on treatment primary endpoint MCCB composite score.||Unit on Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
853811|NCT02249065|Secondary|Inflammatory Lesions|Change from baseline in facial inflammatory lesion count|14 days|ITT Population, Subjects who received at least 1 application of study drug, and completed at least 1 assessment||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
853812|NCT02249065|Secondary|Facial Redness Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|The number and percent of subjects in each transformed response category for the in-office subject reported facial redness VAS|14 days|ITT Population, Subjects who received at least 1 application of study drug, and completed at least 1 assessment||Participants|||Count of Participants
853813|NCT02249065|Secondary|Subject Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire|Mean Subject Treatment Satisfaction at Day 14 (Average Response Across 12 Questions)|14 days|ITT Population, Subjects who received at least 1 application of study drug, and completed at least 1 assessment||Participants||Standard Deviation|Mean
853814|NCT02249065|Secondary|Subject Facial Redness Questionnaire|Facial Redness Questionnaire at Day 1 and Day 14 (Mean Number of Subjects Who's Responses Indicate They Were/Were Not Bothered By Facial Redness, Across All 11 Facial Redness Questions)|14 days|ITT Population, Subjects who received at least 1 application of study drug, and completed at least 1 assessment||Participants||Standard Deviation|Mean
853815|NCT02249065|Primary|Pre-Treatment Clinician Erythema Assessment (CEA)|The number and percent of subjects in each CEA score category at each visit. CEA was conducted at the screening/baseline visit and all subsequent visits prior to the study drug application.|14 days|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population; Subjects who received at least 1 application of study drug, and completed at least 1 assessment||Participants|||Count of Participants
853840|NCT02207231|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Psoriasis Symptom and Sign Diary (PSSD) Symptom Score of 0 in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Adalimumab Group at Week 24|The PSSD (24-hour version) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaire designed and validated to measure the severity of psoriasis symptoms and signs for the assessment of treatment benefit. It consisted of 11 items covering symptoms (itch, pain, stinging, burning, and skin tightness) and patient-observable signs (skin dryness, cracking, scaling, shedding or flaking, redness, and bleeding) using 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable) numerical rating scales for severity. Items were averaged on the daily symptom score and sign score when at least 3 items (>=50 percentage of 5 items) on these scales are answered. The average value is converted into 0-100 scoring, such that Symptom [or Sign] score = average value*10, where, 0= least severe and 100= most severe and higher score indicates more severe disease.|Week 24|PSSD analysis set included all those participants who were randomized at Week 0 and had baseline PSSD score greater than 0.||percentage of participants|||Number
853841|NCT02207231|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Symptom and Sign Diary (PSSD) Symptom Score at Week 16 in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Placebo Group|The PSSD (24-hour version) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaire designed and validated to measure the severity of psoriasis symptoms and signs for the assessment of treatment benefit. It consisted of 11 items covering symptoms (itch, pain, stinging, burning, and skin tightness) and patient-observable signs (skin dryness, cracking, scaling, shedding or flaking, redness, and bleeding) using 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable) numerical rating scales for severity. Items were averaged on the daily symptom score and sign score when at least 3 items (>=50 percentage of 5 items) on these scales are answered. The average value is converted into 0-100 scoring, such that Symptom [or Sign] score = average value*10, where, 0= least severe and 100= most severe and higher score indicates more severe disease. This secondary outcome measure was planned to include only the placebo and guselkumab arms.|Baseline and Week 16|PSSD analysis set included all those participants who had baseline PSSD scores as the average score of at least 4 days out of the 7 days prior to the Week 0 visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853842|NCT02207231|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Scalp-specific Investigator's Global Assessment (Ss-IGA) Score of 0 or 1 and at Least a 2-Grade Improvement From Baseline at Week 16 in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Placebo Group|The ss-IGA instrument is used to evaluate the disease severity of scalp psoriasis. The lesions were assessed in terms of the clinical signs of redness, thickness, and scaliness, which are scored on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 = absence of disease, 1 = very mild disease, 2 = mild disease, 3 = moderate disease, and 4 = severe disease. This secondary outcome measure was planned to include only the placebo and guselkumab arms.|Week 16|Population analyzed included only randomized participants at Week 0 who had an ss-IGA score greater than or equal to (>=) 2 at baseline.||percentage of participants|||Number
853843|NCT02207231|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 Response in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Adalimumab Group at Week 16|The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas were assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 to 6, and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that can range from 0 to 72. A higher score indicates more severe disease. A PASI 75 response represents participants who achieved at least a 75 percent improvement from baseline in the PASI score.|Week 16|Randomized analysis set include all participants randomized at Week 0. Nonresponder imputation (participants who met treatment-failure criteria before Week 16 or who did not come for evaluation at week 16 were considered nonresponders) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
853844|NCT02207231|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 Response in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Adalimumab Group at Week 16|The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas were assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 to 6, and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that can range from 0 to 72. A higher score indicates more severe disease. A PASI 90 response represents participants who achieved at least a 90 percent improvement from baseline in the PASI score.|Week 16|Randomized analysis set include all participants randomized at Week 0. Nonresponder imputation (participants who met treatment-failure criteria before Week 16 or who did not come for evaluation at week 16 were considered nonresponders) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
853845|NCT02207231|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score of Cleared (0) or Minimal (1) in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Adalimumab Group at Week 16|The IGA documents the investigator's assessment of the participants' psoriasis at a given time point. Overall lesions are graded for induration, erythema, and scaling. The participants’ psoriasis was assessed as cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4).|Week 16|Randomized analysis set include all participants randomized at Week 0. Nonresponder imputation (participants who met treatment-failure criteria before Week 16 or who did not come for evaluation at week 16 were considered nonresponders) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
853846|NCT02207231|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score at Week 16 in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Placebo Group|The DLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on participant's quality of life. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicate more impact on quality of life. The DLQI total score ranges from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much): 0-1 = no effect at all on the participant's life; 2-6 = small effect on the participant's life; 7-12 = moderate effect on the participant's life; 13-18 = very large effect on the participant's life; 19-30 = extremely large effect on the participant's life. Higher scores indicate more impact on quality of life of participants. This secondary outcome measure was planned to include only the placebo and guselkumab arms.|Baseline, Week 16|Randomized analysis set included all participants who were randomized at Week 0 and have a baseline DLQI score.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
853847|NCT02207231|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 Response in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Adalimumab Group at Week 24 and 48|The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas were assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 to 6, and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that can range from 0 to 72. A higher score indicates more severe disease. A PASI 90 response represents participants who achieved at least a 90 percent improvement from baseline in the PASI score.|Week 24 and 48|Randomized analysis set included all participants randomized at Week 0. Nonresponder imputation (participants who met treatment-failure criteria before Week 24 or Week 48 or who did not come for evaluation at Week 24 or Week 48 were considered nonresponders, respectively, for Week 24 or Week 48 outcome measures) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
853848|NCT02207231|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score of Cleared (0) or Minimal (1) in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Adalimumab Group at Week 24 and 48|The IGA documents the investigator's assessment of the participants' psoriasis at a given time point. Overall lesions are graded for induration, erythema, and scaling. The participants’ psoriasis was assessed as cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4).|Week 24 and 48|Randomized analysis set included all participants randomized at Week 0. Nonresponder imputation (participants who met treatment-failure criteria before Week 24 or Week 48 or who did not come for evaluation at Week 24 or Week 48 were considered nonresponders, respectively, for Week 24 or Week 48 outcome measures) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
853849|NCT02207231|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score of Cleared (0) in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Adalimumab Group at Week 24 and 48|The IGA documents the investigator's assessment of the participants' psoriasis at a given time point. Overall lesions are graded for induration, erythema, and scaling. The participants’ psoriasis was assessed as cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4).|Week 24 and 48|Randomized analysis set included all participants randomized at Week 0. Nonresponder imputation (participants who met treatment-failure criteria before Week 24 or Week 48 or who did not come for evaluation at Week 24 or Week 48 were considered nonresponders, respectively, for Week 24 or Week 48 outcome measures) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
853850|NCT02207231|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 Response in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Placebo Group at Week 16|The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas were assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 to 6, and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that can range from 0 to 72. A higher score indicates more severe disease. A PASI 90 response represents participants who achieved at least a 90 percent improvement from baseline in the PASI score.|Week 16|Randomized analysis set include all participants randomized at Week 0. Nonresponder imputation (participants who met treatment-failure criteria before Week 16 or who did not come for evaluation at week 16 were considered nonresponders) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
853851|NCT02207231|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score of Cleared (0) or Minimal (1) in the Guselkumab Group Compared to the Placebo Group at Week 16|The IGA documents the investigator's assessment of the participants' psoriasis at a given time point. Overall lesions are graded for induration, erythema, and scaling. The participants’ psoriasis was assessed as cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4).|Week 16|Randomized analysis set include all participants randomized at Week 0. Nonresponder imputation (participants who met treatment-failure criteria before Week 16 or who did not come for evaluation at week 16 were considered nonresponders) was used to impute missing values.||percentage of participants|||Number
853873|NCT02132468|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|ORR is per investigator assessment of RECIST 1.1 criteria|4 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853874|NCT02132468|Primary|Change From Baseline Serotonin Biomarker Levels|Mean change from baseline in biomarker level with a 25% reduction = improved and a 25% increase = worsened;|4 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853875|NCT02132468|Primary|Change From Baseline 5-HIAA Biomarker Levels|Mean change from baseline in biomarker level with a 25% reduction = improved and a 25% increase = worsened;|4 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853876|NCT02132468|Primary|Change From Baseline CgA Biomarker Levels|Mean change from baseline in biomarker level with a 25% reduction = improved and a 25% increase = worsened;|4 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853922|NCT02096081|Secondary|Subject Perception of Treatment Peak Effect|Assessment of subject perception of date of treatment peak effect using a take-home diary|Open-ended time frame for the 4 month study duration. Data for onset and peak effect is recorded in the subject diary.|This endpoint was analyzed using observed cases in the per protocol set (PPS), defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS from whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||participants|||Number
853923|NCT02096081|Secondary|Subject Perception of Treatment Onset|Assessment of subject perception of date of treatment onset using a take-home diary|Open-ended time frame for the 4 month study duration. Data for onset and peak effect is recorded in the subject diary.|This endpoint was analyzed using observed cases in the per protocol set (PPS), defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS from whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||days||Full Range|Median
853924|NCT02096081|Secondary|Subject Satisfaction|"Assessment of subject treatment satisfaction by subject questionnaire and diary at 4 months from treatment. Extremely satisfied, satisfied, and slightly satisfied were categorized as Satisfaction and extremely dissatisfied, dissatisfied, and slightly dissatisfied were categorized as Dissatisfaction. Subjects with missing data were categorized as Missing."|4 months from baseline|This endpoint was analyzed using observed cases in the per protocol set (PPS), defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS from whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||participants|||Number
853925|NCT02096081|Secondary|Subject Satisfaction|"Assessment of subject treatment satisfaction by subject questionnaire and diary at 3 months from treatment. Extremely satisfied, satisfied, and slightly satisfied were categorized as Satisfaction and extremely dissatisfied, dissatisfied, and slightly dissatisfied were categorized as Dissatisfaction. Subjects with missing data were categorized as Missing."|3 months from baseline|This endpoint was analyzed using observed cases in the per protocol set (PPS), defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS from whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||participants|||Number
853926|NCT02096081|Secondary|Subject Satisfaction|"Assessment of subject treatment satisfaction by subject questionnaire and diary at 2 months from treatment. Extremely satisfied, satisfied, and slightly satisfied were categorized as Satisfaction and extremely dissatisfied, dissatisfied, and slightly dissatisfied were categorized as Dissatisfaction. Subjects with missing data were categorized as Missing."|2 months from baseline|This endpoint was analyzed using observed cases in the per protocol set (PPS), defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS from whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||participants|||Number
853927|NCT02096081|Secondary|Subject Satisfaction|"Assessment of subject treatment satisfaction by subject questionnaire and diary at 1 month from treatment. Extremely satisfied, satisfied, and slightly satisfied were categorized as Satisfaction and extremely dissatisfied, dissatisfied, and slightly dissatisfied were categorized as Dissatisfaction. Subjects with missing data were categorized as Missing."|1 month from baseline|This endpoint was analyzed using observed cases in the per protocol set (PPS), defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS from whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||participants|||Number
853928|NCT02096081|Secondary|Response at Maximum Frown Rated by Treating Physician|Response defined as ≥ 1 point improvement from baseline on the Facial Wrinkle Scale (0=None to 3=severe) at maximum frown as rated by the treating physicians using subject photographs at 4 months from treatment.|4 months from baseline|All efficacy analyses were performed on the per protocol set (PPS) defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS for whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||percentage of participants|||Number
853929|NCT02096081|Secondary|Response at Maximum Frown Rated by Treating Physician|Response defined as ≥ 1 point improvement from baseline on the Facial Wrinkle Scale (0=None to 3=severe) at maximum frown as rated by the treating physicians using subject photographs at 3 months from treatment.|3 months from baseline|All efficacy analyses were performed on the per protocol set (PPS) defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS for whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||percentage of participants|||Number
853930|NCT02096081|Secondary|Response at Maximum Frown Rated by Treating Physician|Response defined as ≥ 1 point improvement from baseline on the Facial Wrinkle Scale (0=None to 3=severe) at maximum frown as rated by the treating physicians using subject photographs at 2 months from treatment.|2 months from baseline|All efficacy analyses were performed on the per protocol set (PPS) defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS for whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||percentage of participants|||Number
853931|NCT02096081|Secondary|Response at Maximum Frown Rated by Treating Physician|Response defined as ≥ 1 point improvement from baseline on the Facial Wrinkle Scale (0=None to 3=severe) at maximum frown as rated by the treating physicians using subject photographs at 1 month from treatment.|1 month from baseline|All efficacy analyses were performed on the per protocol set (PPS) defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS for whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||percentage of participants|||Number
853932|NCT02096081|Secondary|Response at Maximum Frown Rated by Independent Rater|Response defined as ≥ 1 point improvement from baseline on the Facial Wrinkle Scale (0=None to 3=severe) at maximum frown as rated by an independent masked panel of physicians specifically qualified to assess study photographs using subject photographs at 4 months from baseline.|4 months from baseline|All efficacy analyses were performed on the per protocol set (PPS) defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS for whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||percentage of participants|||Number
853933|NCT02096081|Secondary|Response at Maximum Frown Rated by Independent Rater|Response defined as ≥ 1 point improvement from baseline on the Facial Wrinkle Scale (0=None to 3=severe) at maximum frown as rated by an independent masked panel of physicians specifically qualified to assess study photographs using subject photographs at 3 months from baseline.|3 months from baseline|All efficacy analyses were performed on the per protocol set (PPS) defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS for whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||percentage of participants|||Number
853934|NCT02096081|Secondary|Response at Maximum Frown Rated by Independent Rater|Response defined as ≥ 1 point improvement from baseline on the Facial Wrinkle Scale (0=None to 3=severe) at maximum frown as rated by an independent masked panel of physicians specifically qualified to assess study photographs using subject photographs at 2 months from baseline.|2 months from baseline|All efficacy analyses were performed on the per protocol set (PPS) defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS for whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||percentage of participants|||Number
853935|NCT02096081|Primary|Efficacy, Measured as the Percentage of Participants Who Responded to Treatment|Response defined as ≥ 1 point improvement from baseline (prior to treatment) on the Facial Wrinkle Scale at maximum frown as rated by an independent masked panel of physicians specifically qualified to assess study photographs using subject photographs at 1 month from treatment.|1 Month from baseline|All efficacy analyses were performed on the per protocol set (PPS) defined as the subset of subjects in the FAS for whom no major protocol deviations were identified.||percentage of participants|||Number
853966|NCT02023983|Secondary|Complications Associated With the Puncture Site Requiring Treatment in 30 Days After Myocardial Infarction (MI)|Fischer´s exact test was used for comparison of qualitative variables between two groups. For comparison of quantitative variables we applied Mann-Whitney U test, respectively Student´s t-test (age). Normality of data was assessed with Shapiro-Wilk test. Values of p < 0.05 were considered as statistically significant.|30 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853967|NCT02023983|Primary|Composite of Incidence of Death, Reinfarction, Unstable Angina Pectoris, Stroke, Unplanned Rehospitalization, Repeat Target Vessel Revascularization and Stent Thrombosis in 90 Days After Myocardial Infarction (MI)|Fischer´s exact test was used for comparison of qualitative variables between two groups. For comparison of quantitative variables we applied Mann-Whitney U test, respectively Student´s t-test (age). Normality of data was assessed with Shapiro-Wilk test. Values of p < 0.05 were considered as statistically significant.|90 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
853968|NCT02001714|Secondary|Group Behavioral Treatment Cost-effectiveness|Measure resource use and utilities and compare the difference in incontinence management costs and utilities between treatment and control group.|12 months||||||
853969|NCT02001714|Primary|Group Behavioral Treatment Effectiveness as Shown by Changes From Baseline to 3 Months in Urinary Incontinence Severity.|The primary outcome is the self-reported urinary incontinence severity as measured by the International Consultation on Incontinence questionnaire-short form (ICI-Q). This short and simple questionnaire is used to screen for incontinence (urine leakage) to obtain a brief yet comprehensive summary of the level, impact and perceived cause of symptoms of incontinence. The ICI-Q consists of four questions and numeric scales: 1. How much do you leak urine? (0-5); never - all the time, 2. How much urine do you usually leak? (0-6); none - large amount, 3. Overall, how much does leaking urine interfere with your everyday life? (0-10); not at all - a great deal, 4. When does urine leak? Multiple choices. The ICI-Q score is the sum of questions 1-3 and ranges from 0-21. The higher the score, the greater severity of incontinence. Baseline data is compared to the 3 month data for the primary outcome.|Baseline and 3 months|The Group Behavioral Treatment group population at baseline is 232. At the 3 month follow-up visit 16 had withdrawn and 7 missed the appointment, leaving 209 for the total number analyzed. For the No Treatment group, the number at baseline is 231 and by the 3 month visit 8 had withdrawn and another 11 missed the appointment, leaving 212.||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854009|NCT01966003|Secondary|Overall Survival|"Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from the randomization date to date of death. Participants alive at the end of study were censored at the last date known to be alive, derived from dates collected within the study that implied a participant was alive.
Participants were followed for survival status during the treatment phase and thereafter every 9 weeks until the end of the clinical study, consent was withdrawn, they were lost to follow-up, died, or had proscribed therapy (eg, commercial bevacizumab, non-study anti-cancer treatment)."|From randomization until the end of study; The mean actual follow-up time from randomization was 4.7 and 5.0 months for ABP 215 and bevacizumab, respectively.|Safety analysis population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854010|NCT01966003|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Developed Anti-drug Antibodies|Two validated assays were used to detect the presence of anti-ABP 215 antibodies. Samples were first tested in an electrochemiluminescence (ECL)- based bridging immunoassay to detect antibodies capable of binding to ABP 215 (Binding Antibody Assay). Samples confirmed to be positive for binding antibodies were subsequently tested in a non-cell based target binding assay to determine neutralizing activity against ABP 215 (Neutralizing Antibody Assay). If a post-dose sample was positive for binding antibodies and demonstrated neutralizing activity at the same time point, the sample was defined as positive for neutralizing antibodies.|44 weeks (6 months after end of treatment)|Safety analysis population with available data||participants|||Number
854011|NCT01966003|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"Adverse events (AEs) were graded for severity according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4, and according to the following scale: Grade 1 = Mild, Grade 2 = Moderate, Grade 3 = Severe, Grade 4 = Life-threatening and Grade 5 = Death due to AE.
A serious adverse event (SAE) is defined as an AE that meets at least 1 of the following serious criteria:
fatal
life-threatening
required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization
resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity
congenital anomaly/birth defect
other medically important serious event"|up to 19 weeks|Safety analysis population consisted of all participants who received any amount of study drug.||participants|||Number
854012|NCT01966003|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|"Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from the randomization date to the date of disease progression using RECIST v1.1 based on the central, independent, blinded radiologists’ review, or death. Participants who were alive and did not meet the criteria for progression by the end of the study were censored at their last evaluable disease assessment date. Participants with no evaluable tumor assessments after randomization who did not die by the end of the study were censored on the randomization date.
Progressive Disease was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 mm, or, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, or any new lesions."|From randomization until the end of study; The mean actual follow-up time from randomization was 4.7 and 5.0 months for ABP 215 and bevacizumab, respectively.|Intent-to-treat population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854013|NCT01966003|Secondary|Duration of Response|"Duration of response (DOR) was calculated as the time from the first objective response (PR or CR) to disease progression per RECIST v1.1 based on the central, independent, blinded radiologists’ review.
DOR was only calculated for participants with an objective response. For responders not meeting the criterion for progression by the end of the study, DOR was censored at the date of the last evaluable tumor assessment.
Progressive Disease was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 mm, or, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions, or any new lesions."|Disease assessments were performed at weeks 1, 7, 13, 19, and approximately every 9 weeks thereafter. The mean actual follow-up time from randomization was 4.7 and 5.0 months for ABP 215 and bevacizumab, respectively.|Intent-to-treat population with an objective response||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854026|NCT01832090|Secondary|Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) Ratings, by Subject, Among All Treated Subjects With and Without Retreatment|To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by live, subject-completed Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) scores between baseline and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, by subject, among treated subjects with and without retreatment|3, 6, 9, and 12 months from baseline|Single withdrawn subject did not receive treatment and is not included in this analysis.||percentage of participants|Hands||Number
854174|NCT01503164|Secondary|Glucose Effectiveness (SG)|Glucose effectiveness is the ability for glucose to move intracellularly in the absence of insulin. It is a parameter that results from the MINMOD analysis of the serum glucose and insulin levels derived from the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test. Low SG indicates a lower predisposition for glucose disposal independent of any effects of insulin.|Baseline|55 randomized to PAP (2 dropout); 56 randomized to lifestyle (1 dropout)||[min]^-1||Standard Deviation|Mean
854014|NCT01966003|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response|"Tumor assessments were performed by central, independent, blinded radiologists according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 using computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the chest and abdomen. Objective response is defined as a best overall response of partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) as defined by RECIST v1.1. All participants who did not meet the criteria for CR or PR by the end of the study were considered non-responders.
CR: Disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes must be reduced in short axis to < 10 mm.
PR: Disappearance of all target lesions with persistence of one or more non-target lesion(s) and/or maintenance of tumor marker level above the normal limits, and no new lesions, or, at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, with no progression of existing non-target lesions and no new lesions."|Disease assessments were performed at weeks 1, 7, 13, 19, and approximately every 9 weeks thereafter. The mean actual follow-up time from randomization was 4.7 and 5.0 months for ABP 215 and bevacizumab, respectively.|Intent-to-treat population which consisted of all randomized participants.||percentage of participants|||Number
854015|NCT01946529|Secondary|Local Failure Rate|Loco-regional failure is defined as the time interval from date of start of local therapy to date of loco-regional failure. Distant failure or death prior to loco-regional failure will be considered competing events in the analyses. The cumulative incidence of loco-regional failure will be estimated using methods described in Kalbfleisch and Prentice.|Maximum of 11 years after the start of therapy||||||
854016|NCT01946529|Secondary|Time to Progression|Median time to progression of group B patients will be estimated from the Kaplan-Meier curve.|Maximum of 11 years after the start of therapy||||||
854017|NCT01946529|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression free survival (PFS) is defined as the time interval from the date on study to the date of disease progression or death or the date if last follow-up. PFS will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier for group A and B participants, respectively.|Maximum of 11 years after the start of therapy||||||
854018|NCT01946529|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the time interval from the date on study to the date of death or the date of last follow-up. OS will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier for group A and B participants, respectively.|Maximum of 11 years after the start of therapy||||||
854019|NCT01946529|Primary|Response to Window Therapy (2 Courses) for Group B (High-risk) - ESFT Participants|Response rate will be defined as the proportion of patients who achieved complete response or partial response (CR+PR) using the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria evaluated after two initial courses of temsirolimus, temozolomide and irinotecan in previously untreated patients with high risk Ewing Sarcoma Family of Tumor (ESFT). Participants who are treated in Group B with Desmoplastic Small Round Cell Tumor (DSRCT) or those who do not receive window therapy will not be included in this analysis.|at 6 weeks after start of therapy (after 2 initial courses)|Of the 17 Group B participants with high-risk ESFT, 12 received window therapy and are considered evaluable for this outcome.||participants|||Number
854027|NCT01832090|Secondary|≥ 1-point Change on the Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS), by Subject, Among All Treated Subjects With and Without Retreatment|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by ≥ 1-point change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) between baseline and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, by subject, among treated subjects with and without retreatment. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3, 6, 9, and 12 months from baseline|Single withdrawn subject did not receive treatment and is not included in this analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
854028|NCT01832090|Secondary|≥ 1-point Change on the Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS), by Hand, Among All Treated Subjects With and Without Retreatment|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by ≥ 1-point change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) between baseline and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months, by hand, among treated subjects with and without retreatment. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3, 6, 9, and 12 months from baseline|Single withdrawn subject did not receive treatment and is not included in this analysis.||% hands with ≥ 1 point MHGS change|Hands||Number
854029|NCT01832090|Secondary|Mean Change on the Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS), by Hand, Among All Treated Subjects With Retreatment|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by mean change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) between baseline and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, by hand, among all treated subjects receiving retreatment. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3, 6, 9, and 12 months from baseline|Single withdrawn subject did not receive treatment and is not included in this analysis.||units on a scale|Hands|Standard Deviation|Mean
854030|NCT01832090|Secondary|Mean Change on the Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS), by Hand, Among All Treated Subjects Without Retreatment|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by mean change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) between baseline and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, by hand, among all treated subjects without retreatment. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3, 6, 9, and 12 months from baseline|Single withdrawn subject did not receive treatment and is not included in this analysis.||units on a scale|Hands|Standard Deviation|Mean
854031|NCT01832090|Secondary|Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) Ratings Among the Original Treatment Group Only|To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment by evaluating subject-reported, live Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) ratings at 3 months when compared to baseline among the original treatment group only|3 months from baseline|"Single withdrawn subject imputed as no change"||percentage of participants|Hands||Number
854032|NCT01832090|Secondary|Evenness in the Left Hand Versus the Right Hand Using the Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) Among the Original Treatment Group Only|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment by comparing the evenness in the left hand versus the right hand at 3 months using the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) among the original treatment group only. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3 months from baseline|"Single withdrawn subject imputed as no change"||percentage of participants|||Number
854033|NCT01832090|Secondary|≥ 1-point Change on Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS), by Subject, With Subjects Stratified by Age < 60 Years or ≥ 60 Years|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by a ≥ 1-point change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) between baseline and 3 months, by subject, among treated subjects and untreated controls, stratified by age < 60 years or ≥ 60 years. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3 months from baseline|"Single withdrawn subject imputed as no change"||percentage of participants|||Number
854034|NCT01832090|Secondary|≥ 1-point Change on Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS), by Hand, With Subjects Stratified by Age < 60 Years or ≥ 60 Years|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by a ≥ 1-point change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) between baseline and 3 months, by hand, among treated subjects and untreated controls, stratified by age < 60 years or ≥ 60 years. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3 months from baseline|"Single withdrawn subject imputed as no change"||percentage of hands|Hand||Number
854117|NCT01703169|Secondary|Characterization of the PK Profile of Eltrombopag in Patients With Moderate to Very Severe Aplastic Anemia. Evaluated With AUC, Cmax, Cmin, Tmax.|Samples will for PK analysis will collected as a trough level weeks 2, 6 and 12, prior to dose of eltrombopag. Additional PK level drawn at 2, 4 and 6 hours post-dose at the scheduled week 2 visit.|Weeks 2, 6 and 12|Data was not collected for this outcome variable.|||||
854035|NCT01832090|Secondary|Mean Change on Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS), by Hand, With Subjects Stratified by Age < 60 Years or ≥ 60 Years|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by mean change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) between baseline and 3 months, by hand, among treated subjects and untreated controls, stratified by age < 60 years or ≥ 60 years. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3 months from baseline|"Single withdrawn subject imputed as no change"||units on a scale|Hands|Standard Deviation|Mean
854036|NCT01832090|Primary|≥ 1-point Change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS), by Subject|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by a ≥ 1-point change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) between baseline and 3 months, by subject, among treated subjects and untreated controls. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3 months from baseline|All primary effectiveness analyses were performed based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. This population includes all subjects randomized. One subject was randomized but did not receive treatment and was imputed as “No change” for the primary endpoint.||percentage of participants|||Number
854037|NCT01832090|Primary|≥ 1-point Change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS), by Hand|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by a ≥ 1-point change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) between baseline and 3 months, by hand, among treated subjects and untreated controls. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3 months from baseline|All primary effectiveness analyses were performed based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. This population includes all subjects randomized. One subject was randomized but did not receive treatment and was imputed as “No change” for the primary endpoint.||percentage of hands|Hands||Number
854038|NCT01832090|Primary|Mean Change on Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS), by Hand|"To evaluate the efficacy of Radiesse for hand treatment as measured by a mean change on the 5-point Merz Hand Grading Scale (MHGS) between baseline and 3 months, by hand, among treated subjects and untreated controls. A measure of successful or improved treatment effect is demonstrated by a decrease in MHGS score.
MHGS categories are as follows:
0 = no loss of fatty tissue;
1 = mild loss of fatty tissue; slight visibility of veins; 3 = moderate loss of fatty tissue; mild visibility of veins and tendons; 4 = severe loss of fatty tissue; moderate visibility of veins and tendons; and 5 = very severe loss of fatty tissue; marked visibility of veins and tendons."|3 months from baseline|All primary effectiveness analyses were performed based on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. This population includes all subjects randomized. One subject was randomized but did not receive treatment and was imputed as “No change” for the primary endpoint.||units on a scale|Hands|Standard Deviation|Mean
854039|NCT01786902|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Anti-growth Hormone Antibody||baseline and 26 weeks|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
854040|NCT01786902|Secondary|Changes in Height Standard Deviation Score After 26 Weeks|The Height Standard Deviation Score was calculated as height minus reference mean height divided by the standard deviation of the reference mean height, both given by a reference growth table for the corresponding chronological age at the height measurement. Greater Height Standard Deviation Score indicates greater height.|26 weeks|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
854041|NCT01786902|Primary|Annualized Height Velocity(cm/Year) After 26 Weeks|Height Velocity calculated with height measured at Baseline and after 26 weeks was converted to annual growth rate.|26 weeks|||cm/year||Standard Deviation|Mean
854118|NCT01703169|Secondary|Number of Patients With AE to Measure Toxicity, Using NCI CTCAE|Evaluated weekly, up to 12 weeks. Association between eltrombopag use, dose, and tolerability in patients with moderate to very severe aplastic anemia|12 weeks|Data was not collected for this outcome variable.|||||
854076|NCT01732458|Primary|Percentage of Participants Discontinuing Study Due to an AE|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the SPONSOR’s product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening of a pre-existing condition which is temporally associated with the use of the SPONSOR’s product, was also an AE. Changes resulting from normal growth and development which did not vary significantly in frequency or severity from expected levels were not to be considered adverse events. Vomiting and retching were not defined as AEs during the period of data collection (24 hours following the end of surgery) unless they met the definition of an SAE. The percentage of participants discontinuing study due to an AE was reported by dose group.|From pre-operative phase up to Follow-up (Day 1 to Day 15)|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
854077|NCT01732458|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing at Least One Adverse Event (AE)|An AE was defined as any unfavorable and unintended change in the structure, function, or chemistry of the body temporally associated with the use of the SPONSOR’s product, whether or not considered related to the use of the product. Any worsening of a pre-existing condition which is temporally associated with the use of the SPONSOR’s product, was also an AE. Changes resulting from normal growth and development which did not vary significantly in frequency or severity from expected levels were not to be considered adverse events. Vomiting and retching were not defined as AEs during the period of data collection (24 hours following the end of surgery) unless they met the definition of an SAE. The percentage of participants experiencing ≥1 AE was reported by dose group.|From pre-operative phase up to Follow-up (Day 1 to Day 15)|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
854078|NCT01732458|Primary|Apparent Terminal Half-life (t ½) of Aprepitant Following Administration of Single Dose|Plasma for aprepitant t ½ assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. t ½ data were to be log transformed and analyzed via a linear mixed-effects model containing fixed effects for age for each dose level tested.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Due to the lack of samples beyond 8 hours after dose, the assessment of the terminal elimination phase of the PK profiles was limited and derivation of parameters dependent on lambda (e.g. t ½) was not possible.|||||
854079|NCT01732458|Primary|Apparent Total Clearance (CL/F) of Aprepitant From Plasma Following Administration of Single Dose|Plasma for aprepitant CL/F assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. CL/F data were to be log transformed and analyzed via a linear mixed-effects model containing fixed effects for age for each dose level tested.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Due to the lack of samples beyond 8 hours after dose, the assessment of the terminal elimination phase of the PK profiles was limited and derivation of parameters dependent on lambda (e.g. CL/F) was not possible.|||||
854080|NCT01732458|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of Aprepitant From Time 0 to Infinity (AUC0-inf) Following Administration of Single Dose|Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-inf assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. AUC0-inf data were to be log transformed and analyzed via a linear mixed-effects model containing fixed effects for age for each dose level tested.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Due to the lack of samples beyond 8 hours after dose, the assessment of the terminal elimination phase of the PK profiles was limited and derivation of parameters dependent on lambda (e.g. AUC0-inf) was not possible.|||||
854119|NCT01703169|Secondary|Hematology Labs|Association between eltrombopag use and response in hemoglobin, hematocrit, total white blood cell count, and absolute neutrophil count to be evaluate by maximal hemoglobin, hematocrit, total white blood cell count, and absolute neutrophil counts achieved in patients with moderate to very severe aplastic anemia|12 weeks|Data was not collected for this outcome variable.|||||
854081|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in Birth to <2 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged from birth to <2 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged birth to <2 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854082|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in Birth to <2 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged from birth to <2 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged birth to <2 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854083|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in Birth to <2 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged from birth to <2 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged birth to <2 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854084|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in 2 to <6 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged 2 to <6 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 2 to <6 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854085|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in 2 to <6 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged 2 to <6 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 2 to <6 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854086|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in 2 to <6 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged 2 to <6 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 2 to <6 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854120|NCT01703169|Secondary|Platelet Count Twice Baseline.|Proportion of subjects who achieve platelet counts at least twice their baseline value at any point while on study medication, in patients with moderate to very severe aplastic anemia.|Between weeks 1-12.|Data was not collected for this outcome variable.|||||
854087|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in 6 to <12 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged 6 to <12 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 6 to <12 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854088|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in 6 to <12 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged 6 to <12 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 6 to <12 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854089|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in 6 to <12 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged 6 to <12 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 6 to <12 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854090|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in 12 to 17 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged 12 to 17 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 12 to 17 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854091|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in 12 to 17 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged 12 to 17 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 12 to 17 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854092|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last Following Administration of 10 mg Dose Equivalent in 12 to 17 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 10 mg dose equivalent arm aged 12 to 17 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 12 to 17 years who received a single dose of 10 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854121|NCT01703169|Primary|Proportion of Participants With Platelet Response|Defined as a stable platelet count of 50,000/μl or more during any 4 week period within the possible 12 weeks while on study,and including maximal platelet counts achieved in patients with moderate to very severe aplastic anemia.|up to 12 weeks|||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854093|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in Birth to <2 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged birth to <2 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged birth to <2 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854094|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in Birth to <2 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged birth to <2 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged birth to <2 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed. One participant was excluded from the analysis due aprepitant concentration in the pre-dose sample.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854095|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last of Aprepitant Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in Birth to <2 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged birth to <2 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged birth to <2 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed. One participant was excluded from the analysis due aprepitant concentration in the pre-dose sample.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854096|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in 2 to <6 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged 2 to <6 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 2 to <6 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854097|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in 2 to <6 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged 2 to <6 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 2 to <6 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854098|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last of Aprepitant Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in 2 to <6 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged 2 to <6 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 2 to <6 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854099|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in 6 to <12 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged 6 to <12 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 6 to <12 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854100|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in 6 to <12 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged 6 to <12 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 6 to <12 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854101|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last of Aprepitant Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in 6 to <12 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged 6 to <12 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 6 to <12 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854102|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in 12 to 17 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged 12 to 17 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 12 to 17 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854103|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in 12 to 17 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged 12 to 17 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 12 to 17 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854104|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last Following Administration of 40 mg Dose Equivalent in 12 to 17 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 40 mg dose equivalent arm aged 12 to 17 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 12 to 17 years who received a single dose of 40 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854105|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in Birth to <2 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged birth to <2 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged birth to <2 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854106|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in Birth to <2 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged birth to <2 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged birth to <2 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed. One participant was excluded from the analysis due to aprepitant concentration in the pre-dose sample.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854107|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in Birth to <2 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged birth to <2 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged birth to <2 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed. Two participants were excluded from the analysis, due to a missing 8-hour post-dose sample and aprepitant concentration in the pre-dose sample, respectively.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854108|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in 2 to <6 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged 2 to <6 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 2 to <6 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854109|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in 2 to <6 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged 2 to <6 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 2 to <6 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854110|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in 2 to <6 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged 2 to <6 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 2 to <6 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854111|NCT01732458|Primary|Tmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in 6 to <12 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged 6 to <12 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 6 to <12 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854112|NCT01732458|Primary|Cmax of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in 6 to <12 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged 6 to <12 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 6 to <12 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854113|NCT01732458|Primary|AUC0-last of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in 6 to <12 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged 6 to <12 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 6 to <12 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854114|NCT01732458|Primary|Time to Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in 12 to 17 Year Age Group|Tmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged 12 to 17 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Tmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Tmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 12 to 17 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hour (hr)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854115|NCT01732458|Primary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of Aprepitant Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in 12 to 17 Year Age Group|Cmax was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged 12 to 17 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant Cmax assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma Cmax was evaluated using an NCA. The LOQ value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 12 to 17 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854116|NCT01732458|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of Aprepitant From Time 0 to the Last Measurable Concentration (AUC0-last) Following Administration of 125 mg Dose Equivalent in 12 to 17 Year Age Group|AUC0-last was analyzed independently for participants in the 125 mg dose equivalent arm aged 12 to 17 years old due to age- and dose-dependent differences in aprepitant absorption and clearance. Because the opportunity to collect specimens for PK analyses in children is limited, a flexible sparse sampling scheme using ranges of collection times was to be utilized which would limit the burden to participants. Plasma for aprepitant AUC0-last assessment was obtained at 30-60 minutes prior to aprepitant administration, 2-4 hours post aprepitant administration, 5-7 hours post aprepitant administration, and 8-10 hours post aprepitant administration. Post-operative aprepitant plasma AUC0-last was evaluated using a noncompartmental analysis (NCA). The limit of quantitation (LOQ) value for this analysis was 10 ng/mL.|30-60 minutes pre-administration, 2-4 hours post administration, 5-7 hours post administration, 8-10 hours post administration|Participants aged 12 to 17 years who received a single dose of 125 mg aprepitant prior to surgery with available plasma samples were analyzed.||hr*ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854133|NCT01520207|Primary|Determine the Efficacy of Mannitol Administration in Reducing the Frequency of Intra-dialytic Hypotension During the First Three Hemodialysis Initiation Sessions.|BP decline during first three sessions|First three hemodialysis sessions (5 days)|SBP decline||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
854173|NCT01503164|Secondary|Glucose Effectiveness (SG)|Glucose effectiveness is the ability for glucose to move intracellularly in the absence of insulin. It is a parameter that results from the MINMOD analysis of the serum glucose and insulin levels derived from the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test. Low SG indicates a lower predisposition for glucose disposal independent of any effects of insulin.|2 months after intervention|55 randomized to PAP (2 dropout); 56 randomized to lifestyle (1 dropout)||[min]^-1||Standard Deviation|Mean
854960|NCT00790569|Primary|Rates of Smoking Cessation Continuous From First Quit Day to 6 Months|Number of participants who self-reported continuous abstinence from their initial quit day (study day 14) to 6 Months|6-Months|||participants|||Number
854165|NCT01503164|Secondary|Area Under the Curve Assessed by Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT)|Results of the oral glucose tolerance test will be analyzed using indices derived from the serial glucose and insulin levels over a 2 hour period 2 months post intervention. This will be the area under the glucose/ insulin curves|2 month after intervention|55 randomized to PAP (2 dropout); 56 randomized to lifestyle (1 dropout)||mg/dL per 120 min||Standard Deviation|Mean
854166|NCT01503164|Secondary|Area Under the Curve Assessed by Oral Glucose Tolerance Test|Results of the oral glucose tolerance test will be analyzed using indices derived from the serial glucose and insulin levels over the 2 hour period. This will be the area under the glucose/ insulin curves|Baseline|55 randomized to PAP (2 dropout); 56 randomized to lifestyle (1 dropout)||mg/dL per 120 min||Standard Deviation|Mean
854167|NCT01503164|Secondary|Endothelial Function|Endothelial function will be assessed using peripheral arterial tonometry using the Endo-PAT device. Using the EndoPat device, the relative vasoconstriction of occluded versus non-occluded arms was derived and provided the relative hyperemic index.|2 month after intervention|Data was not collected for all participants for this outcome measure. Participants for whom data was available are included in analysis.||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
854168|NCT01503164|Secondary|Endothelial Function|Endothelial function will be assessed using peripheral arterial tonometry using the Endo-PAT device. Using the EndoPat device, the relative vasoconstriction of occluded versus non-occluded arms was derived and provided the relative hyperemic index.|Baseline|Data was unable to be collected for all participants in this outcome measure.||ratio of occluded versus non-occluded||Standard Deviation|Mean
854169|NCT01503164|Secondary|Acute Insulin Response to Glucose (AIRG)|The acute insulin response to glucose (AIRG) value is derived from the MINMOD analysis of the glucose and insulin levels obtained during the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test. A low AIRG indicates decreased ability of the pancreas to secrete insulin.|2 months after intervention|55 randomized to PAP (2 dropout); 56 randomized to lifestyle (1 dropout)||[mU/L-min]||Standard Deviation|Mean
854170|NCT01503164|Secondary|Acute Insulin Response to Glucose (AIRG)|The acute insulin response to glucose (AIRG) value is derived from the MINMOD analysis of the glucose and insulin levels obtained during the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test. A low AIRG indicates decreased ability of the pancreas to secrete insulin.|Baseline|55 randomized to PAP (2 dropout); 56 randomized to lifestyle (1 dropout)||[mU/L-min]||Standard Deviation|Mean
854171|NCT01503164|Secondary|Disposition Index (DI)|The disposition index is the mathematical product of insulin sensitivity (SI) and acute insulin response to glucose (AIRG) both of which are derived from the MINMOD analysis of the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test data.|2 months after intervention|55 randomized to PAP (2 dropout); 56 randomized to lifestyle (1 dropout)||[mU/L]^-1 x [min]^-1] x [mU/L-min]||Standard Deviation|Mean
854172|NCT01503164|Secondary|Disposition Index (DI)|The disposition index is the mathematical product of insulin sensitivity (SI) and acute insulin response to glucose (AIRG) both of which are derived from the MINMOD analysis of the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test data. A low DI is indicative of a higher risk of developing diabetes.|Baseline|55 randomized to PAP (2 dropout); 56 randomized to lifestyle (1 dropout)||[mU/L]^-1 x [min]^-1] x [mU/L-min]||Standard Deviation|Mean
854961|NCT00790569|Primary|Carbon Monoxide (CO)-Confirmed 7-day Abstinence|Number of participants reporting 7-day abstinence at 6-months, confirmed with CO measurement.|6-Months|||participants|||Number
854962|NCT00790569|Secondary|Reinforcing Effects of Smoking||12 months||||||
854175|NCT01503164|Primary|Insulin Sensitivity (SI)|"Insulin sensitivity will be determined with the insulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) before and 2-months after study intervention. This test requires administration of a weight-adjusted dose of D50W as an IV bolus at time zero. After the glucose bolus, blood samples are drawn at the scheduled times for 3-hours. At the 20-minute mark, a weight-adjusted dose of regular insulin is administered. The resulting serum is analyzed for glucose and insulin and the minimal model (MINMOD) will be used to derive insulin sensitivity. A low SI signifies low insulin sensitivity and high SI represents high insulin sensitivity."|2 months after intervention|55 randomized to PAP (2 dropout); 56 randomized to lifestyle (1 dropout)||[mU/L]^-1 x [min]^-1||Standard Deviation|Mean
854176|NCT01503164|Primary|Insulin Sensitivity (SI)|"Insulin sensitivity will be determined with the insulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) before and 2-months after study intervention. This test requires administration of a weight-adjusted dose of D50W as an IV bolus at time zero. After the glucose bolus, blood samples are drawn at the scheduled times for 3-hours. At the 20-minute mark, a weight-adjusted dose of regular insulin is administered. The resulting serum is analyzed for glucose and insulin and the minimal model (MINMOD) will be used to derive insulin sensitivity. A low SI signifies low insulin sensitivity and high SI represents high insulin sensitivity."|Baseline|55 randomized to PAP (2 dropout); 56 randomized to lifestyle (1 dropout)||[mU/L]^-1 x [min]^-1||Standard Deviation|Mean
854963|NCT00790569|Secondary|Use of Illicit Drugs as Measured by Urine Toxicologies||12 months||||||
854964|NCT00790569|Secondary|Methadone Dose Changes||12 months||||||
854965|NCT00790569|Secondary|Retention in Methadone Maintenance||12 months||||||
854966|NCT00790569|Secondary|Withdrawal Symptoms||12 months||||||
854967|NCT00790569|Secondary|Smoking Urges||12 months||||||
854222|NCT01451463|Other Pre-specified|Six Condition Romberg Test|The Six Condition Romberg Test is used assess static balance. Subjects are tested standing with their arms crossed over their chests and are assessed for 30 seconds in the following six conditions: 1) feet together, 2) feet together eyes closed, 3) feet aligned in tandem heel-to-toe position eyes open, 4) feet aligned in tandem heel-to-toe position eyes closed, 5) standing in tandem position while counting backwards by 3's from 100 with eyes open, 6) standing in tandem position while counting backwards by 3's from 100 with eyes closed. Comparison of performances were made when off stable dose of tetrabenazine for 20 hours to performance 2 hours after resumption of tetrabenazine. If a participant could not hold a stance for the full 30 seconds, then that component of the Romberg test ended at that point with the time of that component scored in seconds; 30 seconds being the maximum score for each of the 6 tests. The total score was calculated as a sum of all of the 6 subset scores.|2 hours|||Six Condition Romberg Test score||Standard Deviation|Mean
854223|NCT01451463|Secondary|Five Times Sit to Stand Test|Subjects are asked to sit in a chair with their arms across their chests and asked to stand and sit five times in a row. The time it takes to complete 5 sit to stand cycles is timed with a stop watch. Comparison is made when off stable dose of tetrabenazine for 18 hours to performance two hours after resumption of tetrabenazine. Lower time scores are associated with better balance.|18-20 hours|||seconds to complete 5 sit to stand cycle||Standard Deviation|Mean
854224|NCT01451463|Primary|Tinetti Mobility Test Score|The Tinetti Mobility Test is a clinical test used to assess balance and gait. The Balance sub-score ranges from 0-16 (with 16 reflecting better balance) while the Gait sub-score ranges from 0-12 (with 12 reflecting better gait parameters). The Total Tinetti Mobility Test Score (TMT) is a sum of the two sub-scores with a maximum score of 28. The higher the score the better the gait and balance performance. A comparison of scores off regular stable dose of tetrabenazine for >18 hours with the performance two hours after resuming tetrabenazine was made.|18-20 hours|||Total Tinetti Mobility Test Score (TMT)||Standard Deviation|Mean
854239|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response Criteria Using CRP at Year 2|"EULAR response criteria classify each participant as a good, moderate or non-responder to treatment based on the degree of improvement from baseline and the level of disease activity at the endpoint. EULAR response is derived using the individual subject's DAS28 as the measure of severity of disease.
Good or moderate response is defined as follows: Good response: DAS28 at the time point ≤ 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2 Moderate response: DAS28 at the time point > 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2, or DAS28 at the time point ≤ 5.1 and improvement from baseline > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854437|NCT01101880|Primary|Duration of Remission|With 50 patients, the rates of these endpoints will be estimated with a standard error of 5 to 7 percentage points, depending on the observed rates. Remission is defined as less than 5% blasts in the bone marrow, no appearance of blasts in the peripheral blood, and no extramedullary disease (appearance of leukemic cells in other tissues).|Up to 5 years|||weeks||Full Range|Median
854240|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve an Improvement of at Least 4 Units From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) at Year 2|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale was a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854241|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 70% Improvement (ACR 70) Response at Year 2|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% Improvement (ACR 70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Subject's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index ([HAQ-DI]); C-Reactive Protein
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854242|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 50% Improvement (ACR 50) Response at Year 2|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% Improvement (ACR 50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Subject's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [(HAQ-DI)]); C-Reactive Protein.
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854243|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve an Improvement of ≥ 0.22 Units From Baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Year 2|"The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) was a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854244|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy –Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) at Year 2|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means “not at all,” and 4 means “very much.” The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement.
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854245|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Individual American College of Rheumatology Components at Year 2|"The Individual ACR Components were defined as follows:
Tender Joint Count (out of 68 joints)
Swollen Joint Count (out of 66 joints)
Subject Assessment of Pain (0 to 100 mm VAS)
Subject Global Assessment of Disease Activity (0 to 100 mm VAS)
Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity (0 to 100 mm VAS)
HAQ-DI Score
Acute Phase Reactant High Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hsCRP, mg/dL) Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854246|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) (Using C-Reactive Protein) (CRP) at Year 2|"The DAS 28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count (TJC28)
28 swollen joint count (SJC28), which do not include the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Subject's global assessment of disease activity (SGA ). A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission.
DAS28 values range from 2.0 to 10.0 while higher values mean a higher disease activity.
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854247|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve Low Disease Activity or Remission Based on the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ≤ 10 at Year 2|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Subject's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 mm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 10 mm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 10 mm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8 Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10 Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22 High Disease Activity: > 22
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854248|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Year 2|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Subject's Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 10 mm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 10 mm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 10 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 10 mm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8 Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10 Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22 High Disease Activity: > 22
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854249|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-item (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Year 2|"The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) was a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The concepts measured by the SF-36 are not specific to any age, disease, or treatment group, allowing comparison of relative burden of different diseases and the relative benefit of different treatments. Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement.
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854250|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Year 2|"The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854251|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% Improvement (ACR 20) Response at Year 2|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% Improvement (ACR 20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Subject's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index ([HAQ-DI]); C-Reactive Protein.
The study was terminated before the 2–year time point was reached due to lack of clinical efficacy."|Baseline and Year 2|Analysis not performed.|||||
854252|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response Criteria Using CRP at Week 52|"The EULAR response criteria classify each subject as a good, moderate or non-responder to treatment based on the degree of improvement from baseline and the level of disease activity at the endpoint. EULAR response is derived using the individual subject's DAS28 as the measure of severity of disease.
Good or moderate response is defined as follows: Good response: DAS28 at the time point ≤ 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2 Moderate response: DAS28 at the time point > 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2, or DAS28 at the time point ≤ 5.1 and improvement from baseline > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2"|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Participants as Randomized/ Transitioned (AAR) Population; only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854253|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve an Improvement of at Least 4 Units From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy – Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) at Week 52|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854254|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 70% Improvement (ACR 70) Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% Improvement (ACR 70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Subject's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index ([HAQ-DI]); C-Reactive Protein"|Baseline and Week 52|Apremilast participants as randomized/transitioned (AAR Population); population consists of all participants who were randomized or transitioned to apremilast at any time during the study. Only those participants who had sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 52 are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854968|NCT00790569|Primary|Self- Reported 7-day Abstinence|Number of participants with self-reported, 7-day abstinence at 6-months|6 Months|||participants|||Number
854255|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 50% Improvement (ACR 50) Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% Improvement (ACR 50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Subject's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [(HAQ-DI)]); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 52|Apremilast participants as randomized during the apremilast exposure period.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854256|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve an Improvement of ≥ 0.22 Units From Baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 52|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) was a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854257|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the FACIT-Fatigue Scale Score at Week 52|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale was a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Participants as Randomized/ Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854258|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) at Week 52|"The erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is a blood test that can reveal inflammatory activity. The subject's blood is placed in a tall, thin tube, red erythrocytes gradually settle to the bottom. Inflammation can cause the cells to clump together. Because these clumps of cells are denser than individual cells, they settle to the bottom more quickly.
The ESR test measures the distance red blood cells fall in a test tube in one hour. The farther the red blood cells have descended, the greater the inflammatory response."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Participants as Randomized/ Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
854259|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the High Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (CRP) at Week 52|"C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is a substance produced by the liver that increases in the presence of inflammation in the body. An elevated CRP level is identified with blood tests and is considered a non-specific marker for disease."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
854260|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 52|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) was a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast Participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
854261|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Week 52|"The Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured asking the physician to assess the subject's current arthritis disease activity by placing a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents  lowest disease activity, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents  highest disease activity. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
854262|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Subject Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Week 52|"The Subject Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured asking the participant to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents  lowest disease activity, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents  highest disease activity. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
854263|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Subject Assessment of Pain at Week 52|"The Subject Assessment of Pain was measured asking the participant to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
854264|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Swollen Joint Count at Week 52|Joint swelling is soft tissue swelling that is detectable along the joint margins and is assessed by inspection and direct palpation of the joint, by the examiner. The ACR 66 swollen joint count evaluates the following joints: upper-temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular, shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal, proximal interphalangeal and distal interphalangeal; lower: knee, ankle, midtarsal, metatarsophalangeal and proximal interphalangeal.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included..||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
854265|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Tender Joint Count at Week 52|Joint tenderness is the presence of pain in a joint when pressure is applied by the examiner to elicit tenderness. The 68 tender joint count evaluates the following joints: upper-temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular, shoulder, elbow, wrist, meta-carpophalangeal, proximal interphalangeal and distal interphalangeal; lower: hip, knee, ankle, midtarsal, metatarsophalangeal and proximal interphalangeal.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
854266|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS 28) Using CRP at Week 52|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count (TJC28)
28 swollen joint count (SJC28), which do not include the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Subject’s global assessment of disease activity (SGA).
DAS28 values range from 2.0 to 10.0 while higher values mean a higher disease activity.
A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854267|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve Low Disease Activity or Remission Based on the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ≤ 10 at Week 52|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Subject’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS),, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10; Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: > 22"|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854268|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 52|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Subject’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10; Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: > 22"|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854269|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-item (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 52|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854270|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 52|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) was a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 52|The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854271|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% Improvement (ACR 20) Response at Week 52|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% Improvement (ACR 20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Subject's assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject's self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index ([HAQ-DI]); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 52|"The Apremilast participants as Randomized/Transitioned (AAR) Population; participants with a Baseline value and a Week 52 value are included.
Reporting Groups"||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854272|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response Criteria Using CRP at Week 24|"EULAR response criteria classify each participant as a good, moderate or non-responder to treatment based on the degree of improvement from baseline and the level of disease activity at the endpoint. EULAR response is derived using the individual subject's DAS28 as the measure of severity of disease.
Good or moderate response is defined as follows: Good response: DAS28 at the time point ≤ 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2 Moderate response: DAS28 at the time point > 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2, or DAS28 at the time point ≤ 5.1 and improvement from baseline > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2"|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
854273|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve an Improvement of at Least 4 Units From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy –Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) at Week 24|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||percentage of participants|||Number
854274|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve an Improvement of ≥ 0.22 Units From Baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 24|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
854275|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 24|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale was a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854276|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) at Week 24|"The erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is a blood test that can reveal inflammatory activity. The subject's blood is placed in a tall, thin tube, red erythrocytes gradually settle to the bottom. Inflammation can cause the cells to clump together. Because these clumps of cells are denser than individual cells, they settle to the bottom more quickly.
The ESR test measures the distance red blood cells fall in a test tube in one hour. The farther the red blood cells have descended, the greater the inflammatory response."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854277|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the High Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (CRP) at Week 24|"C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is a substance produced by the liver that increases in the presence of inflammation in the body. An elevated CRP level is identified with blood tests and is considered a non-specific marker for disease."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854278|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 24|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) was a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854279|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Week 24|"The Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured asking the physician to assess the subject's current arthritis disease activity by placing a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents  lowest disease activity, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents  highest disease activity. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854280|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Subject Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Week 24|"The Subject Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured asking the participant to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents  lowest disease activity, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents  highest disease activity. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854281|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Subject Assessment of Pain at Week 24|"The Subject Assessment of Pain was measured asking the participant to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854282|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Swollen Joint Count at Week 24|Joint swelling is soft tissue swelling that is detectable along the joint margins and is assessed by inspection and direct palpation of the joint, by the examiner. The ACR 66 swollen joint count evaluates the following joints: upper-temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular, shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal, proximal interphalangeal and distal interphalangeal; lower: knee, ankle, midtarsal, metatarsophalangeal and proximal interphalangeal.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854283|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Tender Joint Count at Week 24|Joint tenderness is the presence of pain in a joint when pressure is applied by the examiner to elicit tenderness. The 68 tender joint count evaluates the following joints: upper-temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular, shoulder, elbow, wrist, meta-carpophalangeal, proximal interphalangeal and distal interphalangeal; lower: hip, knee, ankle, midtarsal, metatarsophalangeal and proximal interphalangeal.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854284|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) Using CRP at Week 24|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count
28 swollen joint count, which do not include the DIP joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Subject's Global Assessment of Disease Activity.
DAS28 values range from 2.0 to 10.0 while higher values mean a higher disease activity.
A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders. LOCF imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854285|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve Low Disease Activity or Remission Based on the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ≤ 10 at Week 24|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Subject’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10; Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: > 22"|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||percentage of participants|||Number
854286|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 24|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Subject’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity.The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10; Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: > 22"|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders. LOCF imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854287|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-item (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 24|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from Baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854288|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 70% Improvement (ACR 70) Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% Improvement (ACR 70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Subject’s assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject’s global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject’s self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [(HAQ-DI)]); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set = The FAS consisted of all participants who were randomized as specified per protocol during the placebo controlled period. The last observed joint assessment (at baseline or post-baseline) was used for joints unassessed at Week 24.||percentage of participants|||Number
854289|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 50% Improvement (ACR 50) Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% Improvement (ACR 50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Subject’s assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject’s global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject’s self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [(HAQ-DI)]); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 24|Full Analysis Set = The FAS consisted of all participants who were randomized as specified per protocol during the placebo controlled period. The last observed joint assessment (at baseline or post-baseline) was used for joints unassessed at Week 24.||percentage of participants|||Number
854290|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 70% Improvement (ACR 70) Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 70% Improvement (ACR70) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from baseline were met:
≥ 70% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 70% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Subject’s assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject’s global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject’s self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index ([HAQ-DI]); C-Reactive Protein"|Baseline and Week 16|Full Analysis Set = The FAS consisted of all participants who were randomized as specified per protocol during the placebo controlled period. The last observed joint assessment (at baseline or post-baseline) was used for joints unassessed at Week 16.||percent of participants|||Number
854291|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 50% Improvement (ACR 50) Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 50% Improvement (ACR50) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 50% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 50% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters:
Subject’s assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject’s global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject’s self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index [(HAQ-DI)]); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
854292|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response Criteria Using CRP at Week 16|"EULAR response criteria classify each participant as a good, moderate or non-responder to treatment based on the degree of improvement from baseline and the level of disease activity at the endpoint. EULAR response is derived using the individual subject's DAS28 as the measure of severity of disease.
Good or moderate response is defined as follows: Good response: DAS28 at the time point ≤ 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2 Moderate response: DAS28 at the time point > 3.2 and improvement from baseline > 1.2, or DAS28 at the time point ≤ 5.1 and improvement from baseline > 0.6 and ≤ 1.2"|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
854293|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve an Improvement of at Least 4 Units From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy –Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) at Week 16|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale was a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
854294|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve an Improvement of ≥ 0.22 Units From Baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 16|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) was a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
854295|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 16|"The FACIT-Fatigue scale was a 13-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses both the physical and functional consequences of fatigue. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale, where 0 means not at all, and 4 means very much. The FACIT-Fatigue scale score ranges from 0 to 52, with higher scores denoting lower levels of fatigue.
A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854296|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) at Week 16|"The erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is a blood test that can reveal inflammatory activity. The subject’s blood is placed in a tall, thin tube, red erythrocytes gradually settle to the bottom. Inflammation can cause the cells to clump together. Because these clumps of cells are denser than individual cells, they settle to the bottom more quickly.
The ESR test measures the distance red blood cells fall in a test tube in one hour. The farther the red blood cells have descended, the greater the inflammatory response."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854297|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the High Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (CRP) at Week 16|"C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is a substance produced by the liver that increases in the presence of inflammation in the body. An elevated CRP level is identified with blood tests and is considered a non-specific marker for disease."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854298|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 16|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) was a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854299|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Week 16|"The Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured asking the physician to assess the subject’s current arthritis disease activity by placing a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents  lowest disease activity, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents  highest disease activity. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854300|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Subject Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Week 16|"The Subject Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured asking the participant to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents  lowest disease activity, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents  highest disease activity. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854301|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Subject Assessment of Pain at Week 16|"The Subject Assessment of Pain was measured asking the participant to place a vertical line on a 100-mm visual analog scale on which the left-hand boundary (score = 0 mm) represents no pain, and the right-hand boundary (score = 100 mm) represents pain as severe as can be imagined. The distance from the mark to the left-hand boundary was recorded in millimeters."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854302|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Swollen Joint Count at Week 16|Joint swelling is soft tissue swelling that is detectable along the joint margins and is assessed by inspection and direct palpation of the joint, by the examiner. The ACR 66 swollen joint count evaluates the following joints: upper-temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular, shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal, proximal interphalangeal and distal interphalangeal; lower: knee, ankle, midtarsal, metatarsophalangeal and proximal interphalangeal.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854303|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage Change From Baseline in the Tender Joint Count at Week 16|Joint tenderness is the presence of pain in a joint when pressure is applied by the examiner to elicit tenderness. The 68 tender joint count evaluates the following joints: upper-temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular, shoulder, elbow, wrist, meta-carpophalangeal, proximal interphalangeal and distal interphalangeal; lower: hip, knee, ankle, midtarsal, metatarsophalangeal and proximal interphalangeal.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF imputation was used.||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854304|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) (Using C-Reactive Protein) (CRP) at Week 16|"The DAS28 measures the severity of disease at a specific time and is derived from the following variables:
28 tender joint count (TJC28)
28 swollen joint count (SJC28), which do not include the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints, the hip joint, or the joints below the knee;
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Subject’s global assessment of disease activity (SGA )
DAS28 values range from 2.0 to 10.0 while higher values mean a higher disease activity.
A DAS28 score higher than 5.1 indicates high disease activity, a DAS28 score less than 3.2 indicates low disease activity, and a DAS28 score less than 2.6 indicates clinical remission."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
854305|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieve Low Disease Activity or Remission Based on the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ≤ 10 at Week 16|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Subject’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10; Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: > 22"|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF imputation was used.||percentage of participants|||Number
854306|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Week 16|"The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index that is calculated as the sum of the:
28 tender joint count (TJC),
28 swollen joint count (SJC),
Subject’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest;
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity -measured on a 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = lowest disease activity and 100 mm = highest.
The CDAI score ranges from 0-76 where lower scores indicate less disease activity. The following thresholds of disease activity have been defined for the CDAI:
Remission: ≤ 2.8; Low Disease Activity: > 2.8 and ≤ 10; Moderate Disease Activity: > 10 and ≤ 22; High Disease Activity: > 22"|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included. LOCF imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854307|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-item (SF-36) Physical Functioning Domain at Week 16|The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, Version 2 (SF-36) is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The concepts measured by the SF-36 are not specific to any age, disease, or treatment group, allowing comparison of relative burden of different diseases and the relative benefit of different treatments. Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. The physical functioning domain assesses limitations in physical activities because of health problems. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; LOCF imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854308|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 24|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) is a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 24 are included; LOCF imputation was used. The Week 16 value was carried over to Week 24 for participants who escaped early at Week 16.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854309|NCT01285310|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% Improvement (ACR 20) Response at Week 24|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% Improvement (ACR 20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Subject’s assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject’s global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject’s self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index ([HAQ-DI]); C-Reactive Protein"|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set; Participants who discontinued early, escaped early at Week 16 or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 24 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
854310|NCT01285310|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 16|The Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) was a patient-reported questionnaire consisting of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task are summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. Negative mean changes from Baseline in the overall score indicate improvement in functional ability.|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set; participants with a baseline value and at least 1 post-baseline value at or prior to Week 16 are included; Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854311|NCT01285310|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% Improvement (ACR 20) Response at Week 16|"Percentage of participants with an American College of Rheumatology 20% Improvement (ACR 20) response. A participant was a responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline were met:
≥ 20% improvement in 68 tender joint count;
≥ 20% improvement in 66 swollen joint count; and
≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 following parameters: Subject’s assessment of pain (measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale [VAS]); Subject’s global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Physician's global assessment of disease activity (measured on a 100 mm VAS); Subject’s self-assessment of physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index ([HAQ-DI]); C-Reactive Protein."|Baseline and Week 16|Full analysis set consisting of all participants randomized as specified in the protocol; participants who were randomized in error and did not receive any dose of study drug were excluded. Participants who withdrew early or who did not have sufficient data for a definitive determination of response status at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.||percentage of participants|||Number
854463|NCT00932152|Secondary|To Evaluate Biomarkers (ERa, ERb, PR, VEGF and Aromatase Expression) in Baseline, Archival Tumor Tissue and Correlate Their Expression With Progression-free Survival, Time to Progression, and Overall Survival.||1.5 years|No data displayed because Outcome Measure has zero total participants analyzed.|||||
854464|NCT00932152|Secondary|To Evaluate the Levels of 17b-estradiol, VEGF, E-selectin, Thrombospondin-1 and IGF-1, and Other Biomarkers in the Plasma.||1.5 years|No data displayed because Outcome Measure has zero total participants analyzed.|||||
854465|NCT00932152|Secondary|To Evaluate the Time to Overall Survival, Time to Progression, and Toxicities||1.5 years|No data displayed because Outcome Measure has zero total participants analyzed.|||||
854466|NCT00932152|Primary|To Evaluate the Progression-free Survival.||1.5 years|Analysis was not completed because the trial was stopped prematurely due to slow accrual.|||||
854433|NCT01101880|Primary|Overall Survival|With 50 patients, the rates of these endpoints will be estimated with a standard error of 5 to 7 percentage points, depending on the observed rates.|Up to 5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854434|NCT01101880|Primary|Treatment-related Mortality (TRM)|Treatment-related mortality (TRM) data was not collected.|Up to 5 years|Treatment-related mortality (TRM) data was not collected.|||||
854435|NCT01101880|Primary|Event Free Survival|Number of patients in remission at a median follow up of 15 months.|Up to 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
854436|NCT01101880|Primary|Time to Progression|With 50 patients, the rates of these endpoints will be estimated with a standard error of 5 to 7 percentage points, depending on the observed rates.|Up to 5 years|||weeks||Full Range|Median
854467|NCT00923351|Primary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the time between the first day of treatment to the day of death.|At time of patients death||02/2018||||
854438|NCT01101880|Primary|Rates of Complete Remission and Complete Remission With Incomplete Recovery of Counts|With 50 patients, the rates of these endpoints will be estimated with a standard error of 5 to 7 percentage points, depending on the observed rates. Complete remission is defined as less than 5% blast cells present in the bone marrow and count recovery (absolute neutrophil count greater than 1000/microL and platelet count greater than 100,000/microL). Complete remission with incomplete recovery of counts is defined as less than 5% blast cells present in the bone marrow without compete count recovery (absolute neutrophil count less than 1000/microL and platelet count less than 100,000/microL).|Up to 5 years|CR achieved with no AHD only applies to those who did not have AHD.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854446|NCT01079806|Secondary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Results Meeting the Criteria for Abnormality (Grades 1-4) (Continued)|Toxicities graded per Division of AIDS criteria, Version 1.0, and modified World Health Organization criteria. ALT=alanine aminotransferase; AST=aspartate aminotransferase; BUN=blood urea nitrogen; ULN=upper limit of normal; LLN=lower limit of normal. ALT, AST (*ULN): Grade 1=1.25-2; Grade 2=2.6-5; Grade 3=5.1-10; Grade 4= >10. Bilirubin (*ULN): Grade 1=1.1-1.5; Grade 2=1.6-2.5; Grade 3=2.6-5; Grade 4= >5. Albumin (g/dL): Grade 1=3- <LLN; Grade 2=2-2.9; Grade 3= <2. Lipase (*ULN): Grade 1=1.1-1.5; Grade 2=1.6-3; Grade 3=3.1-5; Grade 4= >5. BUN/urea (*ULN): Grade 1=1.25-<2.6; Grade 2=2.6-<5.1; Grade 3=5.1-10; Grade 4= >10. Chloride, high (mEq/L): Grade 1=113-<117; Grade 2=117-<121; Grade 3=121-125; Grade 4= >125. Potassium, low (mEq/L): Grade 1=3-3.4; Grade 2=2.5-<3; Grade 3=2-<2.5; Grade 4=<2. Potassium, high (mEq/L): : Grade 1= 5.6-<6.1; Grade 2=6.1-<6.6; Grade 3=6.6-7; Grade 4= >7. Sodium, high (mEq/L): Grade 1=146<151; Grade 2=151-<155; Grade 3=155-<160; Grade 4= >=160.|Day 1 through Week 48 on blinded therapy|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication; n=number of participants with laboratory results available||Participants|||Number
854447|NCT01079806|Secondary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Results Meeting the Criteria for Abnormality (Grades 1-4)|Toxicities graded per Division of AIDS criteria, Version 1.0, and modified World Health Organization criteria. INR=international normalization ratio of prothrombin time; ULN=upper limit of normal. Hemoglobin (g/dL): Grade 1=10-10.9; Grade 2=9-9.9; Grade 3=7-8.9; Grade 4= <7. Platelets (/mm^3): Grade 1=100,000-124,999; Grade 2=50,000-99,999; Grade 3=25,000-49,999; Grade 4= <25,000. INR (*ULN): Grade 1=1.1-1.5; Grade 2=1.6-2; Grade 3=2.1-3; Grade 4= >3. WBC (/mm^3): Grade 1=2000-2500; Grade 2=1500-1999; Grade 3=1000-1499; Grade 4= <1000. Neutrophils (/mm^3): Grade 1=1000-1300; Grade 2=750-999; Grade 3=500-749; Grade 4= <500.|Day 1 through Week 48 on blinded therapy|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication; n=number of participants with laboratory results available||Participants|||Number
854448|NCT01079806|Secondary|Number of Participants With Death as Outcome, Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Discontinuations Due to Adverse Events (AEs), Related AEs, Grade 2-4 Related AEs, Grade 3-4 AEs, Malignancies, ALT Flares, and Hepatic Disease Progression|AE=any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE=a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization. Related=having certain, probable, possible, or unknown relationship to study drug. Grade 1=Mild, Grade 2=Moderate, Grade 3=Severe, Grade 4=Life-threatening or disabling, Grade 5=Death. ALT=alanine aminotransferase.|Day 1 through Week 48 on blinded therapy|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug||Participants|||Number
854449|NCT01079806|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis B e (HBe) Seroconversion at Week 48|HBe seroconversion=undetectable HBe antigen and detectable anti-HBe antibodies. While the analysis of the primary endpoint was based on a randomized sample size of 123 participants (the Primary Cohort), the size of the overall study population was augmented to 180 randomized participants to meet global regulatory requirements.|At Week 48|The first 123 participants who were randomized and received treatment (referred to as the Primary Cohort)||Percentage of participants|||Number
854450|NCT01079806|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Serum Alanine Aminotransferase ≤1*Upper Limit of Normal at Week 48|While the analysis of the primary endpoint was based on a randomized sample size of 123 participants (the Primary Cohort), the size of the overall study population was augmented to 180 randomized participants to meet global regulatory requirements.|At Week 48|The first 123 participants who were randomized and received treatment (referred to as the Primary Cohort)||Percentage of participants|||Number
854451|NCT01079806|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis B Virus DNA <Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) at Week 48|LOQ=29 IU/mL. While the analysis of the primary endpoint was based on a randomized sample size of 123 participants (the Primary Cohort), the size of the overall study population was augmented to 180 randomized participants to meet global regulatory requirements.|At Week 48|The first 123 participants who were randomized and received treatment (referred to as the Primary Cohort)||Percentage of participants|||Number
854452|NCT01079806|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) DNA <50 IU/mL at Week 48|While the analysis of the primary endpoint was based on a randomized sample size of 123 participants (the Primary Cohort), the size of the overall study population was augmented to 180 randomized participants to meet global regulatory requirements.|At Week 48|The first 123 participants who were randomized and received treatment (referred to as the Primary Cohort)||Percentage of participants|||Number
854453|NCT01079806|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Combination of Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) DNA Suppression and Hepatitis B e Antigen (HBeAg) Seroconversion at Week 48|Suppression=HBV DNA<50 IU/mL (approximately 300 copies/mL) using the Roche COBAS TaqMan HBV Test for use with the High Pure System assay; seroconversion=undetectable HBeAg and detectable anti-hepatitis B e antibodies. While the analysis of the primary endpoint was based on a randomized sample size of 123 participants (the Primary Cohort), the size of the overall study population was augmented to 180 randomized participants to meet global regulatory requirements.|At Week 48|The first 123 participants who were randomized and received treatment (referred to as the Primary Cohort)||Percentage of participants|||Number
854454|NCT01062425|Secondary|Incidence of Grade 3+ Toxicities|The number of patients with reported grade 3 and higher treatment-related toxicities as assessed by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0|From randomization to six months.|All randomized and eligible patients who started protocol treatment.||participants|||Number
854455|NCT01062425|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression-free survival time is defined as time from randomization to date of first progression or death from any cause and is estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients last known to be alive without progression are censored at the date of last contact. Progression is defined as any of the following: ≥ 25% increase in sum of the products of perpendicular diameters of enhancing lesions; any new lesion; or clinical deterioration.|From randomization to time of first progression or death due to any cause. Patients are followed until death. Analysis occurs after all patients have been potentially followed for six months.|All randomized and eligible patients.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854456|NCT01062425|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and differences between treatment arms will be tested using the log rank test. Multivariate analyses with the Cox proportional hazard model for OS will be performed with the stratification variables as fixed variables to assess the treatment effect adjusting patient-specific risk factors.|From randomization to time of death due to any cause. Patients are followed until death. Analysis occurs after all patients have been potentially followed for six months.|All randomized and eligible patients.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854457|NCT01062425|Primary|6-month Progression-free Survival Rate|Six-month progression-free survival is the rate of patients who have NOT progressed at six months, where progressive disease is defined as any of the following: ≥ 25% increase in sum of the products of perpendicular diameters of enhancing lesions; any new lesion; or clinical deterioration. Progression will be determined by central review of MRI exams, assessed using MacDonald criteria for progression versus response on 2D T1 and T2 weighted images.|From randomization to 6 months.|Randomized eligible patients with evaluable data at six months. (From the randomized eligible patients, 2 patients withdrew prior to 6 months and 1 did not have an evaluable scan on the placebo arm, while 4 withdrew before 6 months, 3 did not have an evaluable scan, and 2 did not receive protocol treatment on the cediranib arm.)||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854469|NCT00923351|Primary|Number of Participants With a Positive Immune Response as Evidenced by the Delayed Type of Hypersensitivity (DTH) Reaction Assay|"A positive response to the tumor vaccine requires a positive reaction in at least one of the two assays below (immune responses to tumor lysates using ex vivo and delayed type of hypersensitivity (DTH).
The presence of a positive delayed type of hypersensitivity (DTH) reaction to the tumor lysate in a patient who did not show a positive DTH reaction prior to immunotherapy. A positive reaction is induration of at least 0.5 cm.
Immunotherapy administered to patients with recurrent or metastatic pediatric solid tumors such as Ewing's sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, or neuroblastoma. Each vaccine is given as 6 separate injections. Three intradermal on one arm or leg and three subcutaneous on the other arm or leg."|Week 8, 14, 20 (Arm A) and on Days 42, 84 and 126 (± 7 days) (Arm B)|Five of the original six participants from Arm A were analyzed because one subject was changed to a special exemption.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854470|NCT00920439|Primary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/incapacity.|During the entire study period (from Day 0 to Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of the study vaccine.||Subjects|||Number
854471|NCT00920439|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 AE = an AE which prevented normal, everyday activities. Related = AE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of the study vaccine.||Subjects|||Number
854472|NCT00920439|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Assessed solicited general symptoms were temperature [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above (≥) 37.1 degrees Celsius (°C)], drowsiness, irritability and loss of appetite. Any = all reports of the specified symptom irrespective of intensity grade and relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 drowsiness= drowsiness that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 irritability= crying that could not be comforted/ prevented normal activity. Grade 3 loss of appetite= subject did not eat at all. Grade 3 fever = fever above (>) 39.0 °C. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of the study vaccine.||Subjects|||Number
854473|NCT00920439|Primary|Number of Subjects With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Assessed solicited local symptoms were pain, redness and swelling. Any = all reports of the specified symptom irrespective of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 redness/swelling = redness/swelling spreading beyond 30 millimeters (mm) of injection site.|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated Cohort, which included all subjects with documented administration of the study vaccine.||Subjects|||Number
854474|NCT00912509|Secondary|Time to Resolution of Stromal Infiltration||day 1, day 2, day 3, day 4, day 5, day 6, day 7, week 2, week 3 (weekly assessment) until infiltrate is completely resolved|||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854475|NCT00912509|Primary|Time to Re-epithelialization||Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, (daily assessment) after study treatment until re-epithelialization is complete|||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854525|NCT00689936|Secondary|Improvement of Infection Rate by Observing the Historical Data Compared to the Clinical Data Base|Improvement of infection rate by observing historical data compared to the data within clinical database as not analyzed.|From randomization to 24 May 2013||||||
854772|NCT02105324|Secondary|Mean Nausea Index Score Using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)|Participants rated their nausea using a 0 to 10 centimeter (cm) VAS where 0=least severe nausea to 10=most severe nausea. The average nausea index scores from Day 1 to Day 5 were calculated|Day 1, Days 1-5, and Days 2-5 in each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
854526|NCT00689936|Secondary|Shift From Baseline to Most Extreme Postbaseline Value in Platelet Count During the Active Treatment Phase.|Improvement in platelets was assessed for participants from baseline grade to most extreme severity grade using the NCI CTCAE v 3.0 grading scale.|Randomization to end of treatment or the data cut off of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|Safety population; Includes participants with baseline and postbaseline platelet laboratory test grade information||participants|||Number
854527|NCT00689936|Secondary|Shift From Baseline to Most Extreme Postbaseline Value in Hemoglobin During the Active Treatment Phase|Hemoglobin was assessed for participants from baseline grade to most extreme severity grade using the NCI CTCAE v 3.0 grading scale.|Randomization to end of treatment or the data cut off of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|Safety Population; Includes participants with baseline and postbaseline hemoglobin laboratory test grade information||participants|||Number
854528|NCT00689936|Secondary|Shift From Baseline to Most Extreme Postbaseline Value in Absolute Neutrophil Count During the Active Treatment Phase|Neutrophil counts was assessed for participants from baseline grade to most extreme severity grade using the NCI CTCAE v 3.0 grading scale.|Randomization to end of treatment or the data cut off of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|Safety Population; includes participants with baseline and postbaseline absolute neutrophil laboratory test grade information||participants|||Number
854529|NCT00689936|Secondary|Shift From Baseline to Most Extreme Postbaseline Value in Creatinine Clearance (CrCl) During the Active Treatment Phase|Renal function was assessed for participants from baseline to the most extreme value in creatinine clearance calculated using the Cockcroft-Gault estimation.|Randomization to end of treatment or the data cut off of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|Safety Population with baseline and postbaseline CrCl data.||participants|||Number
854530|NCT00689936|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) During the Active Treatment Phase|A TEAE is any AE occurring or worsening on or after the first treatment of any study drug, and within 30 days after the last dose of the last study drug. Severity grades according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 (CTCAE) on a 1-5 scale: Grade 1= Mild AE, Grade 2= Moderate AE, Grade 3= Severe AE, Grade 4= Life-threatening or disabling AE, Grade 5=Death related to AE. A serious AE is any AE occurring at any dose that: • Results in death; • Is life-threatening; • Requires or prolongs existing inpatient hospitalization; • Results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; • Is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; • Constitutes an important medical event.|From first dose of study drug through 28 days following the discontinuation visit from active treatment phase; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|Safety population included all participants who received at least one dose treatment dose of treatment in any arm||Participants|||Number
854531|NCT00689936|Secondary|Healthcare Resource Utilization (HRU): Rate of Inpatient Hospitalizations Per Year|HRU was defined as any consumption of healthcare resources directly or indirectly related to the treatment of the patient. HRU Analysis may help in evaluating potential costs and budget impact of new treatments from a payer perspective. The rate of inpatient hospitalizations per patient year was calculated as the total number of hospitalizations divided by the total number of patient-years followed in the study period. Patient-years (PY) were calculated as the duration from baseline to last available HRQL assessment for each patient.|Day 1 (randomization) up to last visit completed 25 July 2016|Healthcare Resource Utilization not analyzed.|||||
854532|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Health Utility Index Score|EQ-5D is a self-administered questionnaire that assesses health-related quality of life. The EQ-5D descriptive health profile comprises five dimensions of health (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Each dimension has 3 levels of response: No problem (1), some problems (2), and extreme problems (3). A unique EQ-5D health state is defined by combining one level from each of the five dimensions into a single utility index score. EQ-5D index values range from -0.59 to 1.00 where higher EQ-5D scores represent better health status. A positive change from baseline score indicates improvement in health status and better health state.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|ITT population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854533|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) Body Image Scale|EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. EORTC QLQ-MY20 includes four scales: disease symptoms, treatment side-effects, future perspective, and body image. Questions used a 4-point scale (from 1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores were averaged, and transformed to a 0-100 scale; for the body image scale, a higher score indicates a better body image.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|ITT population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854534|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) Future Perspective Scale|EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. EORTC QLQ-MY20 includes four scales: disease symptoms, treatment side-effects, future perspective, and body image. Questions used a 4-point scale (from 1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores were averaged, and transformed to a 0-100 scale; for the future perspective scale, a higher score indicates a better perspective of the future.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|ITT population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854535|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) Side Effects Treatment Scale|EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. EORTC QLQ-MY20 includes four scales: disease symptoms, treatment side-effects, future perspective, and body image. Questions used a 4-point scale (from 1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores were averaged, and transformed to a 0-100 scale; a higher score represents a more severe overall side effect of treatment.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|ITT population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854536|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) Disease Symptoms Scale|EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. EORTC QLQ-MY20 includes four scales: disease symptoms, treatment side-effects, future perspective, and body image. Questions used a 4-point scale (from 1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores were averaged, and transformed to a 0-100 scale; a higher score indicates more severe disease symptom(s).|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|ITT population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854537|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Financial Difficulties Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Financial Difficulties Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of financial difficulties. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in financial difficulties and positive values indicate worsening of financial difficulties.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|ITT population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854538|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Diarrhea Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Diarrhea Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of diarrhea. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in diarrhea and positive values indicate worsening of diarrhea.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|ITT population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854539|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Constipation Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Constipation Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of constipation. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in constipation and positive values indicate worsening of constipation.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|ITT population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854540|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite Loss Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite Loss Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of appetite loss. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in appetite and positive values indicate worsening of appetite.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|ITT population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854541|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Insomnia Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Insomnia Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in symptoms and positive values indicate worsening symptoms.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|Intent to Treat (ITT) population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854542|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnoea Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in symptoms and positive values indicate worsening symptoms.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|ITT population includes all participants with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854574|NCT00674583|Secondary|Number of Subjects Between 2 and 5 Years of Age With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed were drowsiness, fever [defined as oral temperature ≥ 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)], irritability and loss of appetite. Any = occurrence of the general symptom regardless of intensity grade and relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 Symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Loss of appetite = did not eat at all. Grade 3 Fever = fever > 39.5°C. Related = general symptoms assessed by the investigator as causally related to vaccination|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with their symptom sheets filled in, for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854543|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Nausea/Vomiting Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Nausea/Vomiting Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in symptoms and positive values indicate worsening symptoms.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|Intent to Treat (ITT) population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854544|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Pain Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Pain Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in symptoms and positive values indicate worsening symptoms.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|Intent to Treat (ITT) population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854545|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in symptoms and positive values indicate worsening symptoms.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation|Intent to Treat (ITT) population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854546|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Social Functioning Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Social Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|Intent to Treat (ITT) population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854547|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Cognitive Functioning Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Cognitive Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Cycle 1 Day 1, (Baseline) then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|Intent to Treat (ITT) population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854548|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|Intent to Treat (ITT) population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854549|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Role Functioning Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Role Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|Intent to Treat (ITT) population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854575|NCT00674583|Secondary|Number of Subjects Between 6 and 10 Years of Age With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited symptoms assessed were: pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of any local symptom regardless of their intensity grade. Grade 3 Pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Redness and Swelling= redness/swelling spreading beyond (>) 50 millimeters (mm).|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with their symptom sheets filled in, for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854550|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|Intent to Treat (ITT) population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854551|NCT00689936|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Global Health Status Domain|The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better Global Health Status/QOL. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in QOL or functioning and positive values indicate improvement.|Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit|Intent to Treat (ITT) population with available data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854552|NCT00689936|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Myeloma Response by Uncertain Risk Cytogenetic Risk Category Based on IRAC Review|Participants were placed in adverse and non-adverse cytogenetic risk categories at baseline and response rates evaluated. Adverse Risk: t(4;14), t(14;16), del(13q) or monosomy 13, del(17p), 1q gain Favorable Hyperdiploidy: : t(11;14), gains of 5/9/15; Normal: a normal result, gains other than 5/9/15, IgH deletion Uncertain risk: probes used for analysis cannot place participant in any of the other risk categories. Objective response = best overall response including CR, VGPR or PR based on the IRAC Review; A CR is negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and ≤5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPRis serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or ≥90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is ≥50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by ≥90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a ≥50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|ITT population with a Cytogenetic Risk of Uncertain Risk||percentage of participants|||Number
854553|NCT00689936|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Myeloma Response by Normal Risk Cytogenetic Risk Category Based on IRAC Review|Participants were placed in adverse and non-adverse cytogenetic risk categories at baseline and response rates evaluated. Adverse Risk: t(4;14), t(14;16), del(13q) or monosomy 13, del(17p), 1q gain Favorable Hyperdiploidy: : t(11;14), gains of 5/9/15; Normal: a normal result, gains other than 5/9/15, IgH deletion Uncertain risk: probes used for analysis cannot place participant in any of the other risk categories. Objective response = best overall response including CR, VGPR or PR based on the IRAC Review; A CR is negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and ≤5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPRis serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or ≥90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is ≥50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by ≥90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a ≥50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|ITT population with a cytogenetic risk of normal||percentage of particpants|||Number
854554|NCT00689936|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Myeloma Response by Favorable Hyperdiploidy Risk Cytogenetic Risk Category Based on IRAC Review|Participants were placed in adverse and non-adverse cytogenetic risk categories at baseline and response rates evaluated. Adverse Risk: t(4;14), t(14;16), del(13q) or monosomy 13, del(17p), 1q gain Favorable Hyperdiploidy: : t(11;14), gains of 5/9/15; Normal: a normal result, gains other than 5/9/15, IgH deletion Uncertain risk: probes used for analysis cannot place participant in any of the other risk categories. Objective response = best overall response including CR, VGPR or PR based on the IRAC Review; A CR is negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and ≤5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPRis serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or ≥90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is ≥50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by ≥90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a ≥50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|ITT population with a Cytogenetic Risk of Favorable Hyperploidy||percentage of participants|||Number
854565|NCT00689936|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response Based on Investigator Assessment at Time of Final Analysis|Objective response according to IMWG Uniform Response Criteria was defined as a best overall response including a complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR) or partial response (PR) based on the IRAC Review. A CR is defined s: negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and ≤5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPR is serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or ≥90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is: ≥50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by ≥90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a ≥50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|ITT population includes all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not.||percentage of participants|||Number
854555|NCT00689936|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Myeloma Response by Adverse Risk Cytogenetic Risk Category Based on IRAC Review.|Participants were placed in adverse and non-adverse cytogenetic risk categories at baseline and response rates evaluated. Adverse Risk: t(4;14), t(14;16), del(13q) or monosomy 13, del(17p), 1q gain Favorable Hyperdiploidy: : t(11;14), gains of 5/9/15; Normal: a normal result, gains other than 5/9/15, IgH deletion Uncertain risk: probes used for analysis cannot place participant in any of the other risk categories. Objective response = best overall response including CR, VGPR or PR based on the IRAC Review; A CR is negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and ≤5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPRis serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or ≥90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is ≥50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by ≥90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a ≥50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|ITT population with Cytogenetic risk of Adverse Risk||Percentage of participants|||Number
854556|NCT00689936|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response After Second-line Anti-myeloma Treatment at the Time of Final Analysis|Objective response according to IMWG Uniform Response Criteria was defined as a best overall response including a complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR) or partial response (PR) based on the IRAC Review. A CR is defined s: negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and ≤5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPR is serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or ≥90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is: ≥50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by ≥90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a ≥50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment; data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|ITT population; Participants with second line AMT.||percentage of participants|||Number
854557|NCT00689936|Secondary|Kaplan Meier Estimates of Time to Second Line Therapy AMT at the Time of Final Analysis|Time to second-line anti-myeloma therapy is defined as time from randomization to the start of another non-protocol anti-myeloma therapy. Those who do not receive another anti-myeloma therapy were censored at the last assessment or follow-up visit known to have received no new therapy.|From date of randomization until the data cut-off of date 21 January 2016; median follow-up for all participants was 23.0 months|ITT population includes all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not.||months||Full Range|Median
854558|NCT00689936|Secondary|Kaplan Meier Estimates for Time to Second-line Anti-myeloma Treatment (AMT)|Time to second-line anti-myeloma therapy was defined as time from randomization to the start of another non-protocol anti-myeloma therapy.|From date of randomization until the data cut-off of 24 May 2013; median follow-up for all participants was 23.0 months|ITT population includes all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854559|NCT00689936|Secondary|Kaplan Meier Estimates of Time to Treatment Failure (TTF) at the Time of Final Analysis|TTF is defined as the time between the randomization and discontinuation of study treatment for any reason, including disease progression (determined by the investigators assessment based on the IMWG response criteria), treatment toxicity, start of another anti-myeloma therapy (AMT) or death.|From date of randomization until the data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median follow up for all participants was 16.1 months.|ITT population includes participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854560|NCT00689936|Secondary|Kaplan Meier Estimates of Time to Treatment Failure (TTF)|TTF is defined as the time between the randomization and discontinuation of study treatment for any reason, including disease progression (determined by IRAC based on the IMWG response criteria), treatment toxicity, start of another anti-myeloma therapy (AMT) or death.|From date of randomization until the data cut-off of 24 May 2013; median follow-up for all participants was 16.1 months.|ITT population includes participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854561|NCT00689936|Secondary|Time to First Response Based on the Investigator Assessment at the Time of Final Analysis|The time to first myeloma response was defined as the time from randomization to the time when the response criteria for at least a PR was first met based on the IMWG criteria assessed by the investigator.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm.|Participants who had at least a PR.||months||Full Range|Median
854562|NCT00689936|Secondary|Time to First Response Based on the Review by the IRAC|The time to first myeloma response was defined as the time from randomization to the time when the response criteria for at least a PR was first met based on the IMWG criteria.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|Participants who had at least a PR.||months||Full Range|Median
854563|NCT00689936|Secondary|Kaplan Meier Estimates of Duration of Myeloma Response as Determined by an Investigator Assessment at Time of Final Analysis|Duration of response was defined as the duration from the time when the response criteria were first met for CR or VGPR or PR based on IMWG criteria until the first date the response criteria were met for progressive disease or until the participant died from any cause, whichever occurred first.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment; data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median follow-up for responders was 19.9 months|Study participants with at least a PR||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854564|NCT00689936|Secondary|Kaplan Meier Estimates of Duration of Myeloma Response as Determined by the IRAC|Duration of response was defined as the duration from the time when the response criteria were first met for CR or VGPR or PR based on IMWG criteria until the first date the response criteria were met for progressive disease or until the participant died from any cause, whichever occurred first.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median follow-up for responders was 20.1 months|Study participants with at least a PR||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854566|NCT00689936|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response Based on IRAC Review|Objective response according to IMWG Uniform Response Criteria was defined as a best overall response including a complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR) or partial response (PR) based on the IRAC Review. A CR is defined as: negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and ≤5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPR is serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or ≥90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is: ≥50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by ≥90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a ≥50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.|Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm|ITT population includes all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not.||percentage of participants|||Number
854567|NCT00689936|Secondary|Kaplan Meier Estimates of Overall Survival at the Time of Final Analysis (OS)|Overall survival was defined as the time between randomization and death. Participants, who died, regardless of the cause of death, were considered to have had an event. All participants who were lost to follow-up prior to the end of the trial or who were withdrawn from the trial were censored at the time of last contact. Participants who were still being treated were censored at the last available date the participant was known to be alive.|From date of randomization to date of data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median follow-up for all participants was 48.3 months|ITT population included all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854568|NCT00689936|Primary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of PFS Based on the Response Assessment by the Investigator At the Time of Final Analysis|PFS was calculated as the time from randomization to the first documented PD or death due to any cause during the study, which ever occurred first based on the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria (IMWG). Those who withdrew for any reason or received another anti-myeloma therapy without documented PD were censored on the date of their last response assessment, prior to receiving any other anti-myeloma therapy. Censoring rules for PFS: - No baseline assessments and no progression or death documented within the 2 scheduled assessments; Death within the lst two assessments without any adequate response assessment; Progression documented between scheduled assessments; Death between adequate assessments; no progression; study discontinuations for reasons other than PD or death; new anti-myeloma started prior to PD; death or PD after an extended lost to follow-up time period (2 or more missed scheduled assessment's).|From date of randomization to date of data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median follow-up for all participants was 17.7 months|The intent to treat population included all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854569|NCT00689936|Primary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Progression-free Survival (PFS) Based on the Response Assessment by the Independent Review Adjudication Committee (IRAC)|PFS was calculated as the time from randomization to the first documented PD or death due to any cause during the study, which ever occurred first based on the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria (IMWG). Those who withdrew for any reason or received another anti-myeloma therapy without documented PD were censored on the date of their last response assessment, prior to receiving any other anti-myeloma therapy. Censoring rules for PFS: - No baseline assessments and no progression or death documented within the 2 scheduled assessments; Death within the lst two assessments without any adequate response assessment; Progression documented between scheduled assessments; Death between adequate assessments; no progression; study discontinuations for reasons other than PD or death; new anti-myeloma started prior to PD; death or PD after an extended lost to follow-up time period (2 or more missed scheduled assessment's).|From date of randomization until the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013. Median follow-up time for all participants was 17.1 months.|The intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized, independent of whether they received study treatment or not.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854570|NCT00674583|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or are a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|Up to six months after vaccination (Month 6)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854571|NCT00674583|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination.|During the 31-day (Days 0-30) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854572|NCT00674583|Secondary|Number of Subjects Reporting Specific Adverse Events|"Specific AEs included:
rash (hives, idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, petechiae);
new onset of chronic illness(es) (NOCI) (e.g. autoimmune disorders, asthma, type I diabetes and allergies);
conditions prompting emergency room (ER) visits."|Up to 6 months after vaccination (Month 6)|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854573|NCT00674583|Secondary|Number of Subjects Between 6 and 10 Years of Age With Any, Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed were drowsiness, fever [defined as oral temperature ≥ 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)], irritability and loss of appetite. Any = occurrence of the general symptom regardless of intensity grade and relationship to vaccination. Grade 3 Symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Loss of appetite = did not eat at all. Grade 3 Fever = fever > 39.5°C. Related = general symptoms assessed by the investigator as causally related to vaccination|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with their symptom sheets filled in, for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854576|NCT00674583|Secondary|Number of Subjects Between 2 and 5 Years of Age With Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited symptoms assessed were: pain, redness and swelling. Any = occurrence of any local symptom regardless of their intensity grade. Grade 3 Pain = cried when limb was moved/spontaneously painful. Grade 3 Redness and Swelling= redness/swelling spreading beyond (>) 30 millimeters (mm).|During the 4-day (Days 0-3) post-vaccination period|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects with their symptom sheets filled in, for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854577|NCT00674583|Secondary|Anti-meningococcal Serogroup Polysaccharides (Anti-PS) Antibody Concentrations|Anti-PSA, anti-PSC, anti-PSW-135 and anti-PSY antibody concentrations were presented as geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) and tabulated as micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL).|Prior to (Month 0) and one month after vaccination (Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination were available.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
854578|NCT00674583|Secondary|Meningococcal Serogroup A (rSBA) Antibody Titers|Antibody titers were presented as geometric mean titers (GMTs).|Prior to (Month 0) and one month after vaccination (Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination were available.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
854579|NCT00674583|Primary|Number of Subjects With Vaccine Response to Meningococcal Serogroup C Serum Based on a Bactericidal Assay Using Baby Rabbit Complement (rSBA-MenC) Antibody|"Vaccine response to MenC was defined as:
for initially seronegative subjects [i.e. rSBA-MenC titer below (<) 1:8], antibody titer greater than or equal to (≥) 1:32;
for initially seropositive (i.e. rSBA-MenC titer ≥ 1:8), antibody titer post-vaccination ≥ 4-fold the pre-vaccination antibody titer."|One month after vaccination (Month 1)|The analysis was performed on the According-to-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome measures and assay results for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854580|NCT00651794|Secondary|Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP) Quality as Assessed by Resuscitation Duration|Resuscitation duration is time required to complete the resuscitation. The total duration for each resuscitation was calculated from the start of the instructor’s reading of the scenario to the team’s statement that the infant should be transferred to the NICU. When any teaching moments occurred during the simulation, the total teaching time was subtracted from the resuscitation duration.|During the megacode, which was performed about 1 hour after the training|||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
854581|NCT00651794|Secondary|Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP) Quality as Assessed by NRP Performance Score|We analyzed 2 measures of NRP quality: performance score and resuscitation duration. The performance score was calculated by averaging the scores (ranging from 0 to 2 - higher values represent a better outcome) for each NRP step (some of which occurred multiple times). Those scores were summed and divided by the total possible score (2 times the number of steps that should have been performed). When a step was not indicated for the specific resuscitation scenario (e.g., meconium aspiration), that step was not scored by the observers and it was not included in the denominator for performance calculation. This produced a measure of performance percentage ranging from 0 percent to 100 percent (higher values represent a better outcome) for each resuscitation.|During the megacode, which was performed about 1 hour after the training|||performance percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
854582|NCT00651794|Secondary|Percentage of Time Spent on Vigilance|Vigilance percentage was calculated by summing the total time the team demonstrated vigilance behavior and dividing by the total resuscitation time.|During the megacode, which was performed about 1 hour after the training|||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854583|NCT00651794|Secondary|Percentage of Time Spent on Workload Management|Workload management percentage was calculated by summing the total time the team demonstrated workload management behavior and dividing by the total resuscitation time.|During the megacode, which was performed about 1 hour after the training|||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854584|NCT00651794|Primary|Teamwork Event Rate|The teamwork event rate was calculated by summing the number of scored teamwork events (sharing information, inquiry, assertion, teaching/advising, and evaluation of plans) and dividing by the total resuscitation time (in minutes).|During the megacode, which was performed about 1 hour after the training|||teamwork events per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
854634|NCT00424047|Post-Hoc|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Duration of Response (Cut-off at a Later Date of 03 March 2008)|Duration of response was calculated for responders and defined as the time from the first observation of a response (e.g., the first time that the appropriate decrease in M-protein level was observed for confirmed responders) to the first documented progression or relapse. Response duration was censored at the last adequate assessment showing evidence of no progression.|Up to data cut off of 03 Mar 2008; up to 51 months|Intent to Treat population includes all participants who were randomized to study drug.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854635|NCT00424047|Secondary|Time to First Worsening on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Scale (Later Cut-off Date of 02 March 2008)|The time to first worsening of the ECOG performance status was calculated as the time from randomization to the date of the first worsening compared with the last ECOG evaluation obtained prior to randomization. Data were censored at the last date that the participant was known to be unchanged or improved from before randomization for the participants who had not had worsened at the time of the analysis and for the patients who were lost to follow-up before worsening in the ECOG performance status was documented.|Randomization to cut off date of 02 March 2008; up to 51 months|Intent to Treat includes all participants who were randomized to study drug; six ECOG scores were missing at the March 2008 cut-off.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854636|NCT00424047|Secondary|Time to First Worsening on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Scale|The time to first worsening of the ECOG performance status was calculated as the time from randomization to the date of the first worsening compared with the last ECOG evaluation obtained prior to randomization. Data were censored at the last date that the participant was known to be unchanged or improved from before randomization for the participants who had not had worsened at the time of the analysis and for the patients who were lost to follow-up before worsening in the ECOG performance status was documented.|Randomization to cut off date of 03 August 2005; up to 24 months|Intent to Treat includes all participants who were randomized to study drug; a total of six ECOG scores were missing at the time of the Aug 2005 cut-off.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854637|NCT00424047|Primary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Time to Tumor Progression (TTP) (Later Cut-off Date of 02 Mar 2008)|Time to progression was calculated as the time from randomization to the first occurrence of disease progression, as determined by a detailed review of all the myeloma response assessment data using the Bladé criteria (Bladé, 1998). Disease progression was also based on bone marrow findings, worsening lytic bone disease, progressively enlarging extramedullary plasmacytomas, or hypercalcemia.|From randomization up to cut-off date of 02 March 2008; up to 51 months|Intent to treat included all participants who were randomized.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854638|NCT00424047|Post-Hoc|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Duration of Response|Duration of response was calculated for responders and defined as the time from the first observation of a response (e.g., the first time that the appropriate decrease in M-protein level was observed for confirmed responders) to the first documented progression or relapse. Response duration was censored at the last adequate assessment showing evidence of no progression.|Up to data cut off of 03 August 2005; up to 24 months|Intent to Treat population includes all participants who were randomized to study drug.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854639|NCT00424047|Secondary|Time to First Symptomatic Skeletal-related Event (SRE) (Clinical Need for Radiation or Surgery to Bone)|Time from randomization to the date of the first occurrence of a symptomatic SRE (clinical need for radiotherapy or surgery to bone).|Up to unblinding data cut off of 03 August 2005; up to 24 months|Analysis not performed due to an insufficient number of participants with SRE||participants|||Number
854640|NCT00424047|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE)|"An AE is any sign, symptom, illness, or diagnosis that appears or worsens during the course of the study. Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) are any AE occurring or worsening on or after the first treatment of the study drug and within 30 days after the last cycle end date of study drug. A serious AE = any AE which results in death; is life-threatening; requires or prolongs existing inpatient hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; constitutes an important medical event.
The severity of AEs were graded according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for AEs (CTCAE, Version 2.0): Grade 1 = Mild (no limitation in activity or intervention required); Grade 2 = Moderate (some limitation in activity; no/minimal medical intervention required); Grade 3 = Severe (marked limitation in activity; medical intervention required, hospitalization possible); Grade 4 = Life-threatening; Grade 5 = Death."|From first dose of study drug through to 30 days after the last dose, until the data cut-off date of 25 June 2013; up to 90 months|The safety population includes all participants who received at least one dose of study drug regimen||participants|||Number
854641|NCT00424047|Secondary|Myeloma Response Rates Based on the Reviewers Best Response Assessment (Later Cut-off Date of 02 March 2008)|Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of monoclonal paraprotein and maintained for ≥ 6 weeks . Remission Response (RR):75-99% reduction in the level of the serum monoclonal paraprotein compared to baseline; 90-99% reduction in 24-hr urinary light chain excretion. Partial Response (PR): 50-74% reduction in the level of monoclonal paraprotein compared to baseline; 50-89% reduction in 24-hr urinary light chain excretion. Stable Disease (SD): Criteria for PR or PD have not been met. Plateau Phase: If PR, stable monoclonal paraprotein values (within 25% above or below nadir)/stable soft tissue plasmacytomas maintained for at least 3 months. Progressive Disease (PD): Reappearance of serum or urinary monoclonal paraprotein on immunofixation or electrophoresis on two consecutive occasions at least one week apart. Increase of percentage of plasma cells in bone marrow aspirate or biopsy to ≥ 5%. Development of at least one new lytic bone lesion or soft tissue plasmacytoma.|Randomization to data cut-off of 02 Mar 2008; up to 51 months|Intent to Treat Population includes all participants who were randomized||percentage of participants|||Number
854642|NCT00424047|Secondary|Summary of Myeloma Response Rates Based on Best Response Assessment|Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of monoclonal paraprotein and maintained for ≥ 6 weeks . Remission Response (RR):75-99% reduction in the level of the serum monoclonal paraprotein compared to baseline; 90-99% reduction in 24-hr urinary light chain excretion. Partial Response (PR): 50-74% reduction in the level of monoclonal paraprotein compared to baseline; 50-89% reduction in 24-hr urinary light chain excretion. Stable Disease (SD): Criteria for PR or PD have not been met. Plateau Phase: If PR, stable monoclonal paraprotein values (within 25% above or below nadir)/stable soft tissue plasmacytomas maintained for at least 3 months. Progressive Disease (PD): Reappearance of serum or urinary monoclonal paraprotein on immunofixation or electrophoresis on two consecutive occasions at least one week apart. Increase of percentage of plasma cells in bone marrow aspirate or biopsy to ≥ 5%. Development of at least one new lytic bone lesion or soft tissue plasmacytoma.|Randomization to 03 August 2005; up to 24 months|Intent to Treat Population includes all participants who were randomized||percentage of participants|||Number
854643|NCT00424047|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Overall Survival (OS) (Later Cut-off Date of 02 March 2008)|OS was calculated as the time from randomization to death from any cause. OS was censored at the last date that the participant was known to be alive for participants who were alive at the time of analysis and for participants who were lost to follow-up before death was documented.|Randomization to data cut off of 02 March 2008; up to 51 months|Intent to Treat population includes all participants who were randomized.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854644|NCT00424047|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Overall Survival (OS)|OS was calculated as the time from randomization to death from any cause. OS was censored at the last date that the participant was known to be alive for participants who were alive at the time of analysis and for participants who were lost to follow-up before death was documented.|Randomization to data cut off of 03 August 2005; up to 24 months|Intent to Treat population includes all participants who were randomized.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854645|NCT00424047|Primary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Time to Tumor Progression (TTP)|Time to progression was calculated as the time from randomization to the first occurrence of disease progression, as determined by a detailed review of all the myeloma response assessment data using the Bladé criteria (Bladé, 1998). Disease progression was also based on bone marrow findings, worsening lytic bone disease, progressively enlarging extramedullary plasmacytomas, or hypercalcemia.|From randomization up to cut-off date of 03 August 2005; up to 24 months|Intent to treat included all participants who were randomized.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854679|NCT00304187|Primary|Gastric Emptying Rate||Measured at Week 7||||||
854680|NCT00304187|Primary|Binge Frequency|Binge frequency wass assessed by patient diary. All patients were asked to keep a diary of the number of daily binge eating and vomiting episodes which was collected at each weekly visit.|Measured at Week 7|Participants for analysis included 13 patients in the erythromycin and 13 patients in the placebo group who completed at least 5 weeks of drug treatment.||Binge Episodes/Week||Standard Deviation|Mean
854685|NCT00056160|Secondary|Time to First Worsening of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status Scale (Best Score=0, Fully Active, Able to Carry on All Pre-disease Performance Without Restriction; Worst Score=5, Dead.)|The time to first worsening on the ECOG Performance Scale was calculated as the time from randomization to the date of the first worsening compared to the last ECOG evaluation obtained prior to randomization.|30 weeks (mean time to first worsening of ECOG performance status for CC-5013/Dex treatment group)|Analysis conducted on the Intent-To-Treat (ITT) Population. The ITT Population was defined as all subjects randomized.||Weeks||Standard Deviation|Mean
854686|NCT00056160|Secondary|Myeloma Response|The overall confirmed response that was maintained for ≥6 weeks. Complete Response (CR):Disappearance of monoclonal paraprotein. Remission Response (RR):75-99% reduction in monoclonal paraprotein/90-99% reduction in 24-hr urinary light chain excretion. Partial Response (PR):50-74% reduction in monoclonal paraprotein/50-89% reduction in 24-hr urinary light chain excretion. Stable Disease (SD):Criteria for PR or PD not met. Plateau Phase:If PR, stable monoclonal paraprotein (within 25% above or below nadir)/stable soft tissue plasmacytomas. Progressive Disease (PD):Disease worsens.|Up to Unblinding (07 Jun 2005)|Analysis conducted on the Intent-To-Treat (ITT) Population. The ITT Population was defined as all subjects randomized. Results reported (Response) are numbers of subjects.||Participants|||Number
854687|NCT00056160|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was calculated as the time from randomization to death from any cause.|170 weeks (median overall survival of CC-5013/Dex treatment group)|Analysis conducted on the Intent-To-Treat (ITT) Population. The ITT Population was defined as all subjects randomized.||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854691|NCT02730819|Secondary|Investigator Assessment of Global Improvement From Baseline|The investigator compared the extent of melasma at 20 weeks to a full-face photograph obtained in a standardized manner at baseline. It is a dynamic 7-point scale (0=completely clear to 7=worse).|baseline, 20 weeks|19 participants were enrolled, but 9 participants were lost to follow-up over the course of the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854692|NCT02730819|Secondary|Change in Melasma Quality of Life Scale (MELASQOL)|The Melasma Quality of Life Scale has 10 items, with responses ranging from 0 (no response) to 7 (bothered all the time. The range of possible scores is 0-70, with a higher score indicating a worse melasma-related quality of life.|baseline, 20 weeks|19 participants were enrolled, but 9 participants were lost to follow-up over the course of the study.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
854693|NCT02730819|Primary|Change in Melasma Area and Severity Index (MASI) Score|"Severity of melasma in each of the four regions (forehead, right malar region, left malar region and chin) is assessed on % of the total area involved (A), darkness (D), and homogeneity (H).
Scoring for % area involved: 0=none; 1=<10%; 2=10-29%; 3=30-49%; 4=50-69%; 5=70-89%; and 6=90-100%. Darkness scoring (hyperpigmentation): 0=normal skin; 1=barely visible; 2=mild; 3=moderate; 4=severe. Homogeneity scoring: 0=normal skin color; 1=specks of involvement; 2=small patchy areas of involvement <1.5 cm diameter; 3=patches of involvement >2 cm diameter; 4=uniform skin involvement without any clear areas).
To calculate the MASI score, the sum of the severity grade for darkness (D) and homogeneity (H) is multiplied by the numerical value of the areas (A) involved and by the percentages of the four facial areas (10-30%). Total MASI score: Forehead 0.3 (D+H)A + right malar 0.3 (D+H)A + left malar 0.3 (D+H)A + chin 0.1 (D+H)A. The total score can range from 0 (normal) to 48 (severe)."|Baseline, 20 weeks|19 participants were enrolled, but 9 participants were lost to follow-up over the course of the study.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
854694|NCT02584790|Secondary|The Sensitivity, Specificity, Positive Predicted Valve and Negative Predicted Valve of Detecting Mucosal Residual NPC Using NBI Suspicious/ Non Suspicous Pattern|"Non suspicious pattern = grade A + grade B Suspicious pattern = grade C + D
The sensitivity, specificity, positive predicted valve and negative predicted valve of detecting mucosal residual NPC using NBI suspicious/ non suspicous pattern can be thus calculated."|Post-radiotherapy eight weeks|NBI non suspicious pattern = 36 NBI suspcious pattern = 4 Total = 40||Percentage|||Number
854695|NCT02584790|Secondary|Assocication of Residual NPC With NBI Non Suspicious Pattern Group and NBI Suspicious Pattern Group|"Non suspicious pattern = grade A + grade B Suspicious pattern = grade C + D
The sensitivity, specificity, positive predicted valve and negative predicted valve of detecting mucosal residual NPC using NBI suspicious/ non suspicous pattern can be thus calculated."|Post-radiotherapy eight weeks|NBI non suspicious pattern = 36 NBI suspcious pattern = 4 Total = 40||Participants|||Count of Participants
854696|NCT02584790|Primary|Positive Nasopharynx Biopsy Results Detected by NBI System in Those Post-radiotherapy 8th Week NPC Patient|"4 grading of NBI vessel patterns can be identified in those post-radiotherapy 8 weeks NPC patients.
Grade A: normal vessel size and length, regular pattern Grade B: normal vessel size, short, regular spiderweb like pattern Grade C: irregular vessel size and length, distorted and irregular pattern Grade D: thickened vessel size, elongated, distorted, and earthworm pattern"|Post-radiotherapy 8th week|||participants|||Number
854697|NCT02480621|Primary|Pain Levels on a Visual Analog Scale ( VAS)|A Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from 0 to 10 in increments of 1 was used to both qualitatively and quantitatively assess the level and severity of pain during the time points ranging from the immediate post-operative period through 72 hours post-operative. Each number on the scale is accompanied by a visual facial expression that indicates the level of pain, discomfort, and distress appropriate to the number on the scale. The more severe the level of pain, the higher the corresponding number and more distressing the accompanying facial expression. A VAS score of 0 indicates no active pain level and is accompanied by a pleasantly smiling face whereas a VAS score of 10 indicates the most severe active pain level and is accompanied by a visibly-distraught face that is frowning, grimacing, and sweating. The combination of facial expressions and numbers is supposed to provide a language-independent, validated means of assessing pain levels.|Immediate post-operative period until 72 hours post-operatively|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854698|NCT02478632|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Total Hip BMD T-scores and Z-scores by Baseline Third Agent|Change from Baseline to Wk 48 in total hip and lumbar spine BMD expressed as T and Z-scores assessed by third agent class. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at Wk 48 minus Baseline. T-score is the number of standard deviations above or below mean BMD of a 30-year-old of the same sex. T and Z score calculations utilised caucasian reference values and score ranges are generally diverse/wide. T-scores can be positive (above mean) or negative (below mean). T- scores ≥ -1.0 are considered normal. Z-score is the number of standard deviations above or below mean BMD for a reference population of same age and sex. Z-scores can be positive (above mean) or negative (below mean) and the range depends on extreme values representing subject data. An ANCOVA model adjusted for Baseline T/Z-score value was used to compare change from Baseline to Wk 48 in total hip BMD or in lumbar spine BMD between the arms by third agent class: INSTI, NNRTI or PI. Mean and 95 percent CI were estimated.|Baseline and Week 48|ITT-ED Population||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
854699|NCT02478632|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Total Hip BMD by Baseline Third Agent|Percent change from Baseline (Day 1) to Week 48 in total hip and lumbar spine BMD (expressed as areal density in g/cm2) assessed by third agent class at Baseline. Percent change from Baseline was calculated as value at Week 48 minus Baseline value divided by Baseline value multiplied by 100. An ANCOVA model adjusted for Baseline BMD values was used to compare the difference in percent change from Baseline to Week 48 in total hip BMD or in lumbar spine BMD between the DTG+RPV and CAR arms by third agent class: integrase inhibitor (INSTI), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) or protease inhibitor (PI). Mean and 95 percent CI were estimated. For BMD expressed as areal density (g/ cm2 ), most BMD values, statistically, would fall within + or – 3 standard deviations of what is considered normal. Only those participants with evaluable DEXA scans at Baseline and Week 48 were included.|Baseline and Week 48|ITT-ED Population||g/cm^2||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
854700|NCT02478632|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine and Total Hip BMD Assessed by T-score and Z-score|Change from Baseline in lumbar spine and total hip BMD was assessed by T-scores and Z-scores at Baseline and Week (Wk) 48. Change from Baseline (Day 1) was calculated as the value at Wk 48 minus Baseline. T-score is the number of standard deviations above or below the mean BMD of a 30-year-old of the same sex. T and Z score calculations utilised caucasian reference values and score ranges are generally diverse/wide. T-scores can be positive (above mean) or negative (below mean).T- scores ≥ -1.0 are considered normal. The Z-score is the number of standard deviations above or below the mean BMD for a reference population of same age and sex. Z-scores can be positive (above mean) or negative (below mean) and the range depends on extreme values representing subject data. An ANCOVA model adjusted for Baseline T-score/Z-score, age at study entry, Baseline BMI was used to compare the difference in change from Baseline at Wk 48 in total hip BMD and in lumbar spine BMD between arms.|Baseline and up to Week 48|ITT-ED Population||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
854701|NCT02478632|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Lumbar Spine BMD|Percent change in BMD as specified by DEXA scans of the 'lumbar spine' which included the first lumbar vertebra (L1) to the fourth lumbar vertebra (L4) was assessed by areal density at Baseline and Week 48. The difference is adjusted percent change from Baseline to Week 48 between treatment groups. The estimated value in the statitical analysis is this difference and the upper and lower limit values shown are the 95% confidence intervals. The Baseline was considered as Visit 1 value and percent change from Baseline was calculated as Value at Week 48 minus Baseline value divided by Baseline value multiplied by 100. An ANCOVA model adjusted for the Baseline BMD value, age at study entry and Baseline BMI was used to compare the difference in percentage change from Baseline at week 48 in lumbar spine BMD between the DTG+RPV and CAR arms. Mean and 95 percent CI were estimated.|Baseline and Week 48|ITT-ED Population||g/cm^2||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
854702|NCT02478632|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in Total Hip Bone Mineral Density (BMD)|Percent change in BMD (expressed as areal density in g/cm2) as specified by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans of the left ‘total hip’ which included the femoral neck, trochanter and inter-trochanter areas was assessed by areal density at Baseline and Week 48. The difference is adjusted percent change from Baseline to Week 48 between treatment groups. The estimated value in the statistical analysis is this difference and the upper and lower limit values shown are the 95% confidence intervals. The Baseline was considered as Visit 1 and percent change from Baseline was calculated as Value at Week 48 minus Baseline value divided by Baseline value multiplied by 100. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model was used to compare the difference. The analysis was performed on Intent-to-Treat exposed DEXA (ITT-ED) Population which comprised of all participants in the ITT-E Population who received at least one dose of study treatment, and who were registered for the 202094 study.|Baseline and Week 48|ITT-ED Population||gram per centimeter square (g/cm^2)||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
854703|NCT02404103|Primary|Impulse Oscillometry (IOS) Resistance 5 (R5)|Resistance of the respiratory system at 5 Hz is a measure of total airway resistance. Elevated value is indicative of respiratory dysfunction.|initial visit and six week followup|Only data for subjects who completed study are presented.||cmH2O(L/s)||Standard Deviation|Mean
854704|NCT02404103|Primary|Spirometry Forced Expiratory Flow 25-75% (FEF 25-75%)|Indirectly assess small airway function.|baseline and six week followup|Those subjects that completed the study protocol.||% of predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
854705|NCT02404103|Primary|Impulse Oscillometry (IOS) Area of Reactance (AX) After Flunisolide Treatment|A composite measure of small airway dysfunction. A reduction in IOS scores indicate an improvement.|Baseline and six week followup|Those subjects that completed the study protocol.||cmH2O/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
854706|NCT02404103|Primary|Spirometry Forced Expiratory Volume 1 (FEV1) After Flunisolide|the most used outcome in respiratory studies|Before and after treatment at baseline and six week followup|Those subjects that completed the study protocol.||% of predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
854707|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of the Metabolite to Parent Ratios of AUCtau (MRAUCtau) for AZ5104 and AZ7550 Following Administration of AZD9291 and Rosuvastatin Together|Assessment of MRAUCtau for AZ5104 and AZ7550 (calculated as AZ5104 to AZD9291 and AZ7550 to AZD9291) after multiple dosing. AZD9291 doses were first without, then with rosuvastatin (Days 4 to 31; Period 2 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected pre-dose on Days 11, 18, and 25 and on Day 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post AZD9291 dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854708|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of the Metabolite to Parent Ratios of Css,Max (MRCss,Max) for AZ5104 and AZ7550 Following Administration of AZD9291 and Rosuvastatin Together|Assessment of MRCss,max for AZ5104 and AZ7550 (calculated as AZ5104 to AZD9291 and AZ7550 to AZD9291) after multiple dosing. AZD9291 doses were first without, then with rosuvastatin (Days 4 to 31; Period 2 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected pre-dose on Days 11, 18, and 25 and on Day 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post AZD9291 dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||Ratio||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854709|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of Apparent Plasma Clearance at Steady State (CLss/F) for AZD9291 Following Administration of AZD9291 and Rosuvastatin Together|Rate and extent of absorption for AZD9291 by assessment of CLss/F after multiple dosing. AZD9291 doses were first without, then with rosuvastatin (Days 4 to 31; Period 2 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected pre-dose on Days 11, 18, and 25 and on Day 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post AZD9291 dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||L/h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854737|NCT02135848|Secondary|Relationship of Pharmacokinetic Parameters to the Pharmacodynamic Assessments Performed in This Study|A formal pharmacokinetic /pharmacodynamic analysis and pharmacokinetic /pharmacodynamic modelling for exposure relationships to endpoints was planned. The data for this outcome was not collected.|Visit 2 (Day 1): pre-dose, 1 hour, 2 hours and 3.5 hours post-dose, Visit 3 (Day 2)-post acute, Visit 4 (Day 16)-rescreen, Visit 5 (Day 23)-Baseline chronic and end of treatment (14 days after Visit 5) or early termination (between Visit 2 and 6)|The data for this outcome measure was not collected.|||||
854710|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of Minimum Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Css,Min) for AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (Metabolites) Following Administration of AZD9291 and Rosuvastatin Together|Rate and extent of absorption for AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (metabolites) by assessment of Css,min over the dosing interval. AZD9291 doses were first without, then with rosuvastatin (Days 4 to 31; Period 2 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected pre-dose on Days 11, 18, and 25 and on Day 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post AZD9291 dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nM||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854711|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Tss,Max) for AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (Metabolites) Following Administration of AZD9291 and Rosuvastatin Together|Rate and extent of absorption for AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (metabolites) by assessment of tss,max after multiple dosing. AZD9291 doses were first without, then with rosuvastatin (Days 4 to 31; Period 2 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected pre-dose on Days 11, 18, and 25 and on Day 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post AZD9291 dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||h||Full Range|Median
854712|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of Maximum Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Css,Max) for AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (Metabolites) Following Administration of AZD9291 and Rosuvastatin Together|Rate and extent of absorption for AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (metabolites) by assessment of Css,max after multiple dosing. AZD9291 doses were first without, then with rosuvastatin (Days 4 to 31; Period 2 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected pre-dose on Days 11, 18, and 25 and on Day 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post AZD9291 dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nM||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854713|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve During the Dosing Interval (AUCtau) for AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (Metabolites) Following Administration of AZD9291 and Rosuvastatin Together|Rate and extent of absorption for AZD9291, and AZ5104 and AZ7550 (metabolites) by assessment of AUCtau. AZD9291 doses were first without, then with rosuvastatin (Days 4 to 31; Period 2 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected pre-dose on Days 11, 18, and 25 and on Day 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours post AZD9291 dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nanomolar * h (nM*h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854714|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of Terminal Elimination Half-life (t1/2[lambda_z]) for Rosuvastatin After a Single Dose Alone and in Combination With AZD9291|Rate and extent of absorption of rosuvastatin by assessment of t1/2(lambda_z). Single rosuvastatin doses were first without, then with AZD9291 (Day 1; Period 1 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected on Days 1 and 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 hours post rosuvastatin dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||h||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854715|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) for Rosuvastatin After a Single Dose Alone and in Combination With AZD9291|Rate and extent of absorption of rosuvastatin by assessment of Vz/F. Single rosuvastatin doses were first without, then with AZD9291 (Day 1; Period 1 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected on Days 1 and 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 hours post rosuvastatin dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854716|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of Apparent Plasma Clearance (CL/F) for Rosuvastatin After a Single Dose Alone and in Combination With AZD9291|Rate and extent of absorption of rosuvastatin by assessment of CL/F. Single rosuvastatin doses were first without, then with AZD9291 (Day 1; Period 1 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected on Days 1 and 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 hours post rosuvastatin dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||Litre / h (L/h)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854717|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration at Time “t” (AUC0-t) for Rosuvastatin After a Single Dose Alone and in Combination With AZD9291|Rate and extent of absorption of rosuvastatin by assessment of AUC0-t. Single rosuvastatin doses were first without, then with AZD9291 (Day 1; Period 1 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected on Days 1 and 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 hours post rosuvastatin dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||ng*h/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854718|NCT02317016|Secondary|Assessment of Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) for Rosuvastatin After a Single Dose Alone and in Combination With AZD9291|Rate and extent of absorption of rosuvastatin by assessment of tmax. Single rosuvastatin doses were first without, then with AZD9291 (Day 1; Period 1 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected on Days 1 and 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 hours post rosuvastatin dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||h||Full Range|Median
854969|NCT00625404|Secondary|Participant Report of Change in Number of Sexual Partners|Difference in mean number of reported sexual partners between final study visit and enrollment visit|Up to 52 weeks|Women reporting on sexual behavior during follow-up||mean number of sexual partners||Standard Deviation|Mean
854719|NCT02317016|Primary|Assessment of AUC From Time Zero Extrapolated to Infinity for Rosuvastatin After a Single Dose Alone and in Combination With AZD9291|Rate and extent of absorption of rosuvastatin by assessment of AUC from time zero extrapolated to infinity. Single rosuvastatin doses were first without, then with AZD9291 (Day 1; Period 1 and Day 32; Period 3, respectively).|Blood samples collected on Days 1 and 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 hours post rosuvastatin dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||ng * h o u r per mL (ng*h/mL )||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854720|NCT02317016|Primary|Assessment of Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Rosuvastatin After a Single Dose Alone and in Combination With AZD9291|Rate and extent of absorption of rosuvastatin by assessment of Cmax. Single rosuvastatin doses were first without, then with AZD9291 (Day 1 [Period 1] and Day 32 [Period 3], respectively).|Blood samples collected on Days 1 and 32 at pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 hours post rosuvastatin dose in Part A.|The PK analysis set included all dosed patients who had at least 1 quantifiable plasma concentration collected post-dose without any important deviations or events that would exclude the patient.||nanogram per millilitre (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854721|NCT02260791|Other Pre-specified|Trough Adalimumab Concentration|Blood samples for the quantification of adalimumab concentration in serum were collected at Baseline (Week 0), prior to dosing at Weeks 2, 4, 12 and 20, and Week 24. Samples were taken prior to dosing (trough samples).|Week 24|The Pharmacokinetic Analysis Set (PKAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and had at least 1 serum adalimumab concentration result after receiving randomised treatment.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Least Squares Mean
854722|NCT02260791|Other Pre-specified|Percentage of Patients Developing Anti-drug Antibodies (ADAs)|Blood samples for the assessment of ADA activity were collected at Baseline (Week 0), prior to dosing at Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24.|Week 24|The Safety Analysis Set was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of randomised treatment. The Safety Analysis Set was used for all safety analyses. Patient safety data were analysed according to treatment actually received.||percentage of patients|||Number
854723|NCT02260791|Secondary|DAS28 Score Based on Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR)|The DAS28 score is a combined index that has been developed to measure the disease activity in patients with RA and has been extensively validated for its use in clinical studies. The DAS28-ESR assessment involved evaluating the number of tender (TJC) and swollen (SJC) joints (out of 28 specified joints), serum ESR, and patient global assessment of disease activity (VAS from 0 to 100, very well to extremely bad). The individual results are summed using a formula. The DAS28 is a number on a scale from 0 to 10 indicating the current activity of the patient's RA. A higher score indicates higher disease activity.|Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854724|NCT02260791|Secondary|DAS28-CRP Score Over Time|The DAS28 score is a combined index that has been developed to measure the disease activity in patients with RA and has been extensively validated for its use in clinical studies. The DAS28-CRP assessment involved evaluating the number of tender (TJC) and swollen (SJC) joints (out of 28 specified joints), serum CRP, and patient global assessment of disease activity (VAS from 0 to 100, very well to extremely bad). The individual results are summed using a formula. The DAS28 is a number on a scale from 0 to 10 indicating the current activity of the patient's RA. A higher score indicates higher disease activity.|Baseline and Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854725|NCT02260791|Secondary|Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI)|The HAQ-DI is a 20-question, self-administered instrument that measures the patient's functional ability on a 4-level difficulty scale (0 to 3, with 0 representing normal or no difficulty and 3 representing inability to perform). Eight categories of functioning are included: dressing, rising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and usual activities. This scale is sensitive to change and is a good predictor of future disability. HAQ-DI is a value of the individual ACR core set variables.|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854726|NCT02260791|Secondary|Patient's Assessment of Pain|An injection site pain visual analogue score (VAS) will be administered to the patient. To determine the extent of the pain, patients will be asked to place a small vertical mark on a horizontal scale from 0 to 100, the ends of which are labelled with the extreme responses to be measured (“No pain” at 0 and “Intolerable pain” at 100). Patient's assessment of pain is a value of the individual ACR core set variables.|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854727|NCT02260791|Secondary|Physician Assessment of Disease Activity|Physician assessment of disease activity visual analogue scale (VAS) will be assessed on 100-point scale (ranging from very low (0) to very high (100)). The physician assessment of disease activity VAS will contribute to the calculation of ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70 response.|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854970|NCT00625404|Primary|Confirmed Grade 3 or Higher AST Elevation|Grade 3 or higher AST elevation was defined as ≥ 2.6 times the upper limit of normal|Through 52 weeks on product and 4 weeks post-product|||participants|||Number
854728|NCT02260791|Secondary|Patient Assessment of Disease Activity|Patient assessment of disease activity visual analogue scale (VAS) will be assessed on 100-point scales (ranging from very well (0) to extremely bad (100)).The patient assessment of disease activity VAS will contribute to the calculation of the DAS28 score. The patient assessment of disease activity VAS will contribute to the calculation of ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70 response.|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854729|NCT02260791|Secondary|Analysis of Serum C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Concentration|Analysis of serum C-Reactive Protein (CRP) concentrations for inclusion in the ACR20/50/70 and DAS28-CRP scores was performed by a central laboratory. Elevation of CRP is a nonspecific marker of inflammation. Values above 10 mg/L were considered to be abnormally high. Decrease in level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation.|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
854730|NCT02260791|Secondary|Tender Joint Count|Counts of tender joints from amongst 68 selected joints were performed by a trained and qualified joint assessor using standardised techniques recommended by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR). Joints were classified as tender/not tender giving a total possible tender joint count score of 0 to 68 with higher scores indicating severe disease.Tender joint count is a value of the individual ACR core set variables.|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||Count / Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
854731|NCT02260791|Secondary|Swollen Joint Count|Counts of swollen joints from amongst 66 selected joints performed by a trained and qualified joint assessor using standardised techniques recommended by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR). Joints were classified as swollen/not swollen giving a total possible swollen joint count score of 0 to 66 with higher scores indicating severe disease. Swollen joint count is a value of the individual ACR core set variables.|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||Count / Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
854732|NCT02260791|Secondary|ACR70 Response Rates Over Time|"An ACR70 response meant that the patient achieved a 70% improvement in Tender Joint Count and Swollen Joint Count and in at least 3 of the other 5 Core Data Set elements listed below.
Acute phase reactant (CRP)
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient pain scale
Disability/functional questionnaire (patient completed Health AssessmentQuestionnaire Disability Index [HAQ-DI])"|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||percentage of responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854733|NCT02260791|Secondary|ACR50 Response Rates Over Time|"An ACR50 response meant that the patient achieved a 50% improvement in Tender Joint Count and Swollen Joint Count and in at least 3 of the other 5 Core Data Set elements listed below.
Acute phase reactant (CRP)
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient pain scale
Disability/functional questionnaire (patient completed Health AssessmentQuestionnaire Disability Index [HAQ-DI])"|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||percentage of responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854734|NCT02260791|Secondary|ACR20 Response Rates Over Time|"An ACR20 response meant that the patient achieved a 20% improvement in Tender Joint Count and Swollen Joint Count and in at least 3 of the other 5 Core Data Set elements listed below.
Acute phase reactant (CRP)
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient pain scale
Disability/functional questionnaire (patient completed Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index [HAQ-DI])"|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment.Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||percentage of responders||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854735|NCT02260791|Secondary|Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) Based on C-reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP) Score|The DAS28-CRP assessment involved evaluating the number of tender (TJC) and swollen (SJC) joints (out of 28 specified joints), serum CRP, and patient global assessment of disease activity (VAS from 0 to 100, very well to extremely bad). The DAS28-CRP is a number on a scale from 0 to 10 indicating the current activity of the patient’s RA. A higher score indicates higher disease activity.|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854736|NCT02260791|Primary|American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response Rate|"The primary efficacy endpoint was the ACR20 response rate at Week 24.
An ACR20 response meant that the patient achieved a 20% improvement in Tender Joint Count and Swollen Joint Count and in at least 3 of the other 5 Core Data Set elements listed below.
Acute phase reactant (CRP)
Patient global assessment of disease activity
Physician global assessment of disease activity
Patient pain scale
Disability/functional questionnaire (patient completed Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index [HAQ-DI])"|Week 24|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) was defined as the set of patients who received at least 1 dose of the randomised treatment and who had at least 1 evaluable primary efficacy measurement after their first dose of randomised treatment. Patients were analysed according to the randomised treatment in the primary analysis.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854738|NCT02135848|Secondary|Derived Plasma GSK1278863 Pharmacokinetic Parameter - Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (T-max) and Last Time Point Where the Concentration is Above the Limit of Quantification (T-last)|Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis of GSK1278863 and selected metabolites were collected at the following time points: Visit 2-Baseline acute: pre-dose, 1 hour, 2 hours and 3.5 hours post-dose, Visit 3-post acute, Visit 4-rescreen, Visit 5-Baseline chronic and end of treatment or early termination. The actual date and time of each blood sample collection was recorded.|Visit 2 (Day 1): pre-dose, 1 hour, 2 hours and 3.5 hours post-dose, Visit 3 (Day 2)-post acute, Visit 4 (Day 16)-rescreen, Visit 5 (Day 23)-Baseline chronic and end of treatment (14 days after Visit 5) or early termination (between Visit 2 and 6)|Pharmacokinetic concentration population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Hour||Full Range|Median
854739|NCT02135848|Secondary|Derived Plasma GSK1278863 Pharmacokinetic Parameter -Area Under the Curve (AUC [0-t])|Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis of GSK1278863 and selected metabolites were collected at the following time points: Visit 2-Baseline acute: pre-dose, 1 hour, 2 hours and 3.5 hours post-dose, Visit 3-post acute, Visit 4-rescreen, Visit 5-Baseline chronic and end of treatment or early termination. The actual date and time of each blood sample collection was recorded.|Visit 2 (Day 1): pre-dose, 1 hour, 2 hours and 3.5 hours post-dose, Visit 3 (Day 2)-post acute, Visit 4 (Day 16)-rescreen, Visit 5 (Day 23)-Baseline chronic and end of treatment (14 days after Visit 5) or early termination (between Visit 2 and 6)|Pharmacokinetic concentration Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Nanogram x hour/milliliter (ng*h/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854740|NCT02135848|Secondary|Derived Plasma GSK1278863 Pharmacokinetic Parameter- Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) and Trough Concentration (Ctau)|Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis of GSK1278863 and selected metabolites were collected at the following time points: Visit 2-Baseline acute: pre-dose, 1 hour, 2 hours and 3.5 hours post-dose, Visit 3-post acute, Visit 4-rescreen, Visit 5-Baseline chronic and end of treatment or early termination. The actual date and time of each blood sample collection was recorded.|Visit 2 (Day 1): pre-dose, 1 hour, 2 hours and 3.5 hours post-dose, Visit 3 (Day 2)-post acute, Visit 4 (Day 16)-rescreen, Visit 5 (Day 23)-Baseline chronic and end of treatment (14 days after Visit 5) or early termination (between Visit 2 and 6)|Pharmacokinetic concentration population comprised of all participants from whom a pharmacokinetic sample had been obtained and analyzed. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Nanogram/milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854741|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Lipids (Total Cholesterol [TC], Triglycerides [TG], High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol [HDLc] and Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol [LDLc])|Blood samples for analysis of fasting levels of lipid panel (TC, TG, HDLc and LDLc) was collected up to end of treatment or early termination. Baseline acute was Day 1 and Baseline chronic was Day 21. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Millimoles/Liter (MMOL/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
854742|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in High Sensitivity C-reactive Protein (hsCRP)|Blood samples for analysis of fasting levels of hsCRP, was collected up to end of treatment or early termination. Baseline acute was Day 1 and Baseline chronic was Day 21. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Milligrams/Liter (mg/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
854743|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hematocrit|Blood samples for analysis of fasting levels of hematocrit was collected up to end of treatment or early termination. Baseline acute was Day 1 and Baseline chronic was Day 21. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Fraction||Standard Deviation|Mean
854744|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin|Blood samples for analysis of fasting levels of hemoglobin was collected up to end of treatment or early termination. Baseline acute was Day 1 and Baseline chronic was Day 21. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Grams per Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
854745|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Erythropoietin Concentration|Blood samples for analysis of fasting levels of erythropoietin, was collected up to end of treatment or early termination. Baseline acute was Day 1 and Baseline chronic was Day 21. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Units per Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
854746|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Maximal Distance Covered During a Six-Minute Walk Test|The Six-Minute Walk Test was performed by the participant walking at a self-selected pace for 6 minutes through a pre-defined walking course. When the Six-Minute Walk Test and Bilateral Heel Raise Test were conducted at the same study visit, the participant was allowed to rest a minimum of one hour between these tests. Baseline was Day 1. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Feet||Standard Deviation|Mean
854747|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Exercise Time to Claudication-limited Maximal Muscle Performance|BHRT is a method to assess muscle performance in participants with claudication. Participants with PAD and claudication experience reproducible symptoms of leg pain during walking exercise. The symptom of claudication is due to exercise-induced ischemia of muscles in legs, most commonly in calf muscles. At Visit 1 (-21 to -10 days), the participant was introduced to the BHRT. Test familiarization consisted of the participant performing heel raises to the onset of claudication. The BHRT was conducted with an electrogoniometer instrumented on the index leg (the leg that met the inclusion symptomatic and hemodynamic criteria [ABI ≤ 0.90] with the lowest ABI considered if both legs were affected). Successive heel raise repetitions were performed once every other second until the participant stopped due to intolerable claudication pain or fatigue, or other criteria for stopping the test were met. Baseline was Day 1. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
854748|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Work Performed to Claudication-limited Maximal Muscle Performance|BHRT is a method to assess muscle performance in participants with claudication. Participants with PAD and claudication experience reproducible symptoms of leg pain during walking exercise. The symptom of claudication is due to exercise-induced ischemia of muscles in legs, most commonly in calf muscles. At Visit 1 (-21 to -10 days), the participant was introduced to the BHRT. Test familiarization consisted of the participant performing heel raises to the onset of claudication. The BHRT was conducted with an electrogoniometer instrumented on the index leg (the leg that met the inclusion symptomatic and hemodynamic criteria [ABI ≤ 0.90] with the lowest ABI considered if both legs were affected). Successive heel raise repetitions were performed once every other second until the participant stopped due to intolerable claudication pain or fatigue, or other criteria for stopping the test were met. Baseline was Day 1. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||kilogram-meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
854749|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Number of Contractions to Claudication-limited Maximal Muscle Performance|BHRT is a method to assess muscle performance in participants with claudication. Participants with PAD and claudication experience reproducible symptoms of leg pain during walking exercise. The symptom of claudication is due to exercise-induced ischemia of muscles in legs, most commonly in calf muscles. At Visit 1 (-21 to -10 days), the participant was introduced to the BHRT. Test familiarization consisted of the participant performing heel raises to the onset of claudication. The BHRT was conducted with an electrogoniometer instrumented on the index leg (the leg that met the inclusion symptomatic and hemodynamic criteria [ABI ≤ 0.90] with the lowest ABI considered if both legs were affected). Successive heel raise repetitions were performed once every other second until the participant stopped due to intolerable claudication pain or fatigue, or other criteria for stopping the test were met. Baseline was Day 1. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Contractions||Standard Deviation|Mean
854750|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Exercise Time to Onset of Claudication|BHRT is a method to assess muscle performance in participants with claudication. Participants with PAD and claudication experience reproducible symptoms of leg pain during walking exercise. The symptom of claudication is due to exercise-induced ischemia of muscles in legs, most commonly in calf muscles. At Visit 1 (-21 to -10 days), the participant was introduced to the BHRT. Test familiarization consisted of the participant performing heel raises to the onset of claudication. The BHRT was conducted with an electrogoniometer instrumented on the index leg (the leg that met the inclusion symptomatic and hemodynamic criteria [ABI ≤ 0.90] with the lowest ABI considered if both legs were affected). Successive heel raise repetitions were performed once every other second until the participant stopped due to intolerable claudication pain or fatigue, or other criteria for stopping the test were met. Baseline was Day 1. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
854751|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Work Performed to Onset of Claudication|BHRT is a method to assess muscle performance in participants with claudication. Participants with peripheral artery disease (PAD) and claudication experience reproducible symptoms of leg pain during walking exercise. The symptom of claudication is due to exercise-induced ischemia of muscles in legs, most commonly in calf muscles. At Visit 1 (-21 to -10 days), the participant was introduced to BHRT. Test familiarization consisted of the participant performing heel raises to onset of claudication. BHRT was conducted with an electrogoniometer instrumented on the index leg (leg that met the inclusion symptomatic and hemodynamic criteria [ABI ≤ 0.90] with the lowest ABI considered if both legs were affected). Successive heel raise repetitions were performed once every other second until participant stopped due to intolerable claudication pain/fatigue, or other criteria for stopping the test were met. Baseline was Day 1. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||kilogram-meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
854752|NCT02135848|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Number of Contractions to Onset of Claudication|At Visit 1 (-21 to -10 days), the participant was introduced to the bilateral heel raise test (BHRT). Test familiarization consisted of the participant performing heel raises to the onset of claudication. The BHRT was conducted with an electrogoniometer instrumented on the index leg. Successive heel raise repetitions were performed once every other second until the participant stopped due to intolerable claudication pain or fatigue, or other criteria for stopping the test were met. The index leg was defined as the leg that met the inclusion symptomatic and hemodynamic criteria (ankle brachial index [ABI] ≤ 0.90) with the lowest ABI considered if both legs were affected. Baseline was Day 1. Change from Baseline was post-Baseline values minus Baseline values.|Baseline (Day 1) to Day 39|Pharmacodynamic population comprised of all participants who provided pharmacodynamic data, i.e. bilateral heel-raise data or six-minute-walk-test data. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Contractions||Standard Deviation|Mean
854753|NCT02135848|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Hematology Abnormalities of Potential Clinical Importance|Hematology parameters included platelet count, red blood cell (RBC) count, white blood cell WBC count (absolute), hemoglobin, hematocrit, Mean corpuscular volume (MCV), Mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH), Mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC), neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils and basophils. Number of participants with clinical hematology abnormalities of potential clinical importance are presented.|Up to 67 days|Safety Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854754|NCT02135848|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Chemistry Abnormalities of Potential Clinical Importance|Clinical chemistry analyte of potential clinical concern included albumin, calcium, creatinine, glucose, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, sodium and bicarbonate. Number of participants with clinical chemistry abnormalities of potential clinical importance are presented.|Up to 67 days|Safety Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854755|NCT02135848|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs of Potential Clinical Importance|Vital signs included heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure and were performed with the participant in a supine position after the participant had rested for at least 5 minutes. Number of participants with vital signs of potential clinical importance are presented.|Up to 39 days|Safety Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854756|NCT02135848|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings|Twelve lead ECGs were recorded with the participant lying supine, having rested in this position for at least 5 minutes before each recording. Full 12 lead ECGs were recorded using an ECG device that automatically calculated the heart rate and measured PR, QRS, RR, QT and QT, QT corrected by Bazett's formula (QTcB) and QT corrected by Fridericia's formula (QTcF) intervals. Number of participants with abnormal (not clinically significant [NCS] and clinically significant [CS]) ECG findings are presented.|Up to 39 days|Safety Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854757|NCT02135848|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. For marketed medicinal products, this also includes failure to produce expected benefits (i.e., lack of efficacy), abuse or misuse. SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is medically significant.|Up to 67 days|Safety population which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854758|NCT02108977|Primary|Cost Analysis|Labor (including training) and non-labor (e.g., equipment cost) inputs required to provide counseling via telephone versus videoconferencing. Patient travels costs will be included via self-report.|Cost analysis will be conducted in months 10-12 of grant period (projected January 1-March 31, 2015)|||Loss of Productivity Cost in US Dollars||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854759|NCT02108977|Primary|Qualitative Assessment of Genetic Counseling Experience, Barriers and Facilitators by GENETIC COUNSELORS|Five counselors agreed to be interviewed. We asked them to discuss specific aspects of each modality including the ease of use, navigation, and adaptability of each modality, conveying and comprehending genetic and numeric information, and perceived advantages and disadvantages of each modality.|Within 4 weeks after study data collection was completed||||||
854760|NCT02108977|Primary|Qualitative Assessment of Genetic Counseling Experience, Barriers and Facilitators by PATIENTS|We asked the subjects to discuss specific aspects of each modality including the ease of use, navigation, and adaptability of each modality, conveying and comprehending genetic and numeric information, and perceived advantages and disadvantages of each modality.|Within six weeks of receiving genetic counseling|A subsample of patients in each modality was interviewed to qualitatively assess the satisfaction with the counseling they received, and the benefits and limitations of the modality, whether it was by phone or video.||participants|||Number
854761|NCT02108977|Primary|Satisfaction With Genetic Counseling Session Using the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale|6-question Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale using 5-point Likert scale responses Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (5)|Within two weeks of receiving genetic counseling|||points on a scale of 30 (most satisfied)||Standard Deviation|Mean
854762|NCT02108977|Primary|Assessment of Knowledge Retention of Genetic Counseling Information Via 8-Question Pre- and Post-Counseling Assessment|Subjects will be asked 8 True/False genetics-related questions before and after counseling to assess improvement and retention of genetic counseling knowledge and information|Pre- and post- (within 2 weeks) genetic counseling|||Number of correct answers (out of 8)||Standard Deviation|Mean
854763|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Using Pramlintide During the Usual Care Period|The percentage of participants who used pramlintide to manage their diabetes during the Usual Care period.|5 days|All participants who completed both periods of the study. Results are reported for the Usual Care period only.||percentage of participants|||Number
854764|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Using a Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Agonist During the Usual Care Period|The percentage of participants who used a GLP-1 agonist to manage their diabetes during the Usual Care period.|5 days|All participants who completed both periods of the study. Results are reported for the Usual Care period only.||percentage of participants|||Number
854765|NCT02105324|Secondary|Number of Unscheduled CGM Sensor Changes|The number of time a CGM sensor was replaced due to falling out or failing to report a glucose value.|5 days|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||CGM sensor changes|||Number
854766|NCT02105324|Secondary|List of Technical Faults Associated With the Bionic Pancreas Including Cause and Resolution||5 days|Data was not collected and analyzed to this level of detail.|||||
854767|NCT02105324|Secondary|Reliability Index|Reliability index was calculated as the percentage of time values were actually recorded by CGM.|Day 1, Days 1-5, and Days 2-5 in each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854768|NCT02105324|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight|The change in body weight collected at Day 5 of each period relative to Baseline. A negative change from Baseline indicates a reduction in body weight and a positive change from Baseline indicates an increase in body weight.|5 days|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
854769|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Time Without CGM Monitoring Data|Percentage of time without CGM monitoring data is the time when the participant's CGM device lost its CGM signal.|5 days|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854770|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Time Participants Were Not Under Bionic Pancreas Control During the Bionic Pancreas Period|Percentage of time that the Bionic pancreas was not functioning properly due to loss of wireless connectivity.|5 days|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study. Reported for the Bionic Pancreas period only.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854771|NCT02105324|Secondary|Number of Severe Hypoglycemic Events|A severe hypoglycemic event is an event where the participant is unable to self-treat and requires the assistance of another person.|Day 1, Days 1-5 and Days 2-5|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||severe hypoglycemic events|||Number
854971|NCT00625404|Primary|Confirmed Grade 3 or Higher ALT Elevation|Grade 3 or higher ALT elevation was defined as ≥ 2.6 times the upper limit of normal|Through 52 weeks on product and 4 weeks post-product|||participants|||Number
854773|NCT02105324|Secondary|Number of Bionic Pancreas Local Infusion Site Reactions|Local infusion site reactions are defined as pain at the infusion site of the Bionic Pancreas. Itching and redness may have also been present.|Day 1, Days 1-5 and Days 2-5|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study. Results are reported for the Bionic Pancreas period only.||infusion site reactions|||Number
854774|NCT02105324|Secondary|Number of Unscheduled Infusion Set Changes|Infusion sets for administering insulin and glucagon were placed under the skin the in the abdomen, buttocks, arms, or legs. Infusion set changes due to pain, infusion set falling out or infusion set failure are reported. Camp policy was to suspect failure of the infusion set whenever ketonemia occurred, so failures may not have actually been set failures, but rather failure to deliver enough insulin.|Days 2-5|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||unscheduled infusion set changes|||Number
854775|NCT02105324|Secondary|Number of Unscheduled Infusion Set Changes|Infusion sets for administering insulin and glucagon were placed under the skin the in the abdomen, buttocks, arms, or legs. Infusion set changes due to pain, infusion set falling out or infusion set failure are reported. Camp policy was to suspect failure of the infusion set whenever ketonemia occurred, so failures may not have actually been set failures, but rather failure to deliver enough insulin.|Days 1-5|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||unscheduled infusion set changes|||Number
854776|NCT02105324|Secondary|Number of Unscheduled Infusion Set Changes|Infusion sets for administering insulin and glucagon were placed under the skin the in the abdomen, buttocks, arms, or legs. Infusion set changes due to pain, infusion set falling out or infusion set failure are reported. Camp policy was to suspect failure of the infusion set whenever ketonemia occurred, so failures may not have actually been set failures, but rather failure to deliver enough insulin.|Day 1|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||unscheduled infusion set changes|||Number
854777|NCT02105324|Secondary|Carbohydrate Intake|Carbohydrate intake included meals, snacks and unscheduled carbohydrates administered when a participant's blood glucose was <80 mg/dl (or for symptoms at any glucose level). Carbohydrate intake per day was averaged and is reported in grams (g) per kilogram (kg) per day (g/kg/day).|Day 1, Days 1-5 and Days 2-5|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||g/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854778|NCT02105324|Secondary|Daily Bolus Insulin Dose in the Bionic Pancreas Period|The first time the bionic pancreas was used in each participant, a partial meal-priming bolus based on the participant’s body mass (0.05 units/kg) was delivered. After the first use, the size of the meal-priming bolus was adapted by the bionic pancreas to 75% of the 4-hour prandial insulin used for that meal type and size. Daily bolus insulin dose is reported in units per kilogram (kg) per day (U/kg).|Day 1 through Day 5|All participants who completed both periods of the study. Results are reported for the Bionic Pancreas period only.||U/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854779|NCT02105324|Secondary|Daily Basal Insulin Dose in the Bionic Pancreas Period|The bionic pancreas automatically adapted insulin dosing to each individual’s needs. When CGM data were not available (because of sensor failure or during the warm-up time after sensor replacement), the bionic pancreas automatically delivered a dose of basal insulin based on the mean basal dosing it had calculated at that time on previous days. Daily basal insulin dose is reported in units per kilogram (kg) per day (U/kg).|Day 1 through Day 5|All participants who completed both periods of the study. Results are reported for the Bionic Pancreas period only.||U/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854780|NCT02105324|Secondary|Glucagon Total Daily Dose Levels in the Bionic Pancreas Arm|Glucagon dose level is reported in micrograms per kilogram of body mass per day (µg/kg/day).|Day 1, Days 1-5, and Days 2-5 of each period|All participants who completed both periods of the study. Results are reported for the Bionic Pancreas period only.||µg/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854781|NCT02105324|Secondary|Insulin Total Daily Dose|Insulin total daily dose is reported in units per kilogram per day (U/kg/day).|11 days|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||U/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854782|NCT02105324|Secondary|Grams of Carbohydrate Taken for Hypoglycemia When Plasma Glucose <70 mg/dL|Fingerstick plasma glucose measurements were obtained before meals, at bedtime, at midnight, and at about 3:45 AM (six scheduled measurements). Participants were given 15 grams (g) of simple carbohydrates if their plasma glucose concentration dropped below 4.4 mmol/L. These simple carbohydrates were counted as interventions for study outcomes if the plasma glucose concentration was less than 3.9 mmol/L. A second intervention of 15 g of carbohydrate was given if a repeat measurement in 15–20 min was less than 3.9 mmol/L.|Day 1, Days 1-5, and Days 2-5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||grams of carbohydrate||Full Range|Median
854783|NCT02105324|Secondary|Number of Carbohydrate Interventions for Hypoglycemia When Plasma Glucose <70 mg/dL|Fingerstick plasma glucose measurements were obtained before meals, at bedtime, at midnight, and at about 3:45 AM (six scheduled measurements). Participants were given 15 grams (g) of simple carbohydrates if their plasma glucose concentration dropped below 4.4 mmol/L. These simple carbohydrates were counted as interventions for study outcomes if the plasma glucose concentration was less than 3.9 mmol/L. A second intervention of 15 g of carbohydrate was given if a repeat measurement in 15-20 min was less than 3.9 mmol/L. The total number of carbohydrate interventions are reported.|Day 1, Days 1-5, and Days 2-5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||carbohydrate interventions||Full Range|Median
854784|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Days That CGM Data Was Used by Participants as Part of Their Usual Care|The percentage of days during the Usual Care period that participants used CGM data as part of their diabetes management.|Day 1, Days 1-5, and Days 2-5 of the Usual Care Period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of days|||Number
854785|NCT02105324|Secondary|Number of Plasma Glucose Reported Hypoglycemic Events (< 70 mg/dL, < 60 mg/dL, <50 mg/dL)|A series of hypoglycemic measurements is defined as a single event until there is a break of ≥ 30 minutes between measurements below the defined thresholds of < 70, < 60, and <50 mg/dL.|Days 1-5|||times below threshold||Standard Deviation|Mean
854786|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Mean Plasma Glucose <183 mg/dL|Fingerstick plasma glucose measurements were obtained before meals, at bedtime, at midnight, and at about 3:45 AM (six scheduled measurements). The plasma glucose readings were averaged. 183 mg/dL was the estimated average glucose corresponding to a Hemoglobin A1C of 8.0%.|Day 1, Days 1 to 5, and Days 2 to 5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
854787|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Mean Plasma Glucose <169 mg/dL|Fingerstick plasma glucose measurements were obtained before meals, at bedtime, at midnight, and at about 3:45 AM (six scheduled measurements). The plasma glucose readings were averaged. 169 mg/dL was the estimated average glucose corresponding to a Hemoglobin A1C of 7.5%.|Day 1, Days 1 to 5, and Days 2 to 5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
854788|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Mean Plasma Glucose <154 mg/dL|Fingerstick plasma glucose measurements were obtained before meals, at bedtime, at midnight, and at about 3:45 AM (six scheduled measurements). The plasma glucose readings were averaged. 154 mg/dL was the estimated average glucose corresponding to a Hemoglobin A1C of 7.0%.|Day 1, Days 1 to 5, and Days 2 to 5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
854789|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Time With Plasma Glucose Values by Ranges on Days 2 to 5|Fingerstick plasma glucose measurements were obtained before meals, at bedtime, at midnight, and at about 3:45 AM (six scheduled measurements). The percentage of time that the plasma glucose concentration was less than the following ranges were calculated: < 70 mg/dl (3.9 mmol/L), < 60 mg/dL (3.3 mmol/L), < 50 mg/dl (2.8 mmol/L).|Days 2 to 5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of values||Standard Deviation|Mean
854790|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Time With Plasma Glucose Values by Ranges on Days 1 to 5|Fingerstick plasma glucose measurements were obtained before meals, at bedtime, at midnight, and at about 3:45 AM (six scheduled measurements). The percentage of time that the plasma glucose concentration was less than the following ranges were calculated: < 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L), < 60 mg/dL (3.3 mmol/L), < 50 mg/dL (2.8 mmol/L).|Days 1 to 5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of values||Standard Deviation|Mean
854791|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Time With Plasma Glucose Values by Ranges on Day 1|Fingerstick plasma glucose measurements were obtained before meals, at bedtime, at midnight, and at about 3:45 AM (six scheduled measurements). The percentage of time that the plasma glucose concentration was less than the following ranges were calculated: < 70 mg/dl (3.9 mmol/L), < 60 mg/dL (3.3 mmol/L), < 50 mg/dl (2.8 mmol/L).|Day 1 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of values||Standard Deviation|Mean
854792|NCT02105324|Secondary|Mean Plasma Glucose Values|Fingerstick plasma glucose measurements were obtained before meals, at bedtime, at midnight, and at about 3:45 AM (six scheduled measurements). The plasma glucose readings were averaged. The plasma glucose results on Day 1, Days 1 to 5 and Days 2 to 5 were averaged.|Day 1, Days 1 to 5, and Days 2 to 5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
854793|NCT02105324|Secondary|Number of CGMG Reported Hypoglycemic Events (< 70 mg/dL, < 60 mg/dL, <50 mg/dL)|A series of hypoglycemic measurements is defined as a single event until there is a break of ≥ 30 minutes between measurements below the defined thresholds of < 70, < 60, and <50 mg/dL.|Days 1-5|||times below threshold||Standard Deviation|Mean
854794|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Mean CGMG Glucose <183 mg/dL|Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The glucose readings were averaged. 183 mg/dL was the estimated average glucose corresponding to a Hemoglobin A1C of 8.0%.|Day 1, Days 1-5, and Days 2-5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
854795|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Mean CGMG Glucose <169 mg/dL|Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The glucose readings were averaged. 169 mg/dL was the estimated average glucose corresponding to a Hemoglobin A1C of 7.5%.|Day 1, Days 1-5, and Days 2-5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
854796|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Mean CGMG Glucose <154 mg/dL|Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The glucose readings were averaged. 154 mg/dL was the estimated average glucose corresponding to a Hemoglobin A1C of 7.0%.|Day 1, Days 1-5, and Days 2-5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
854797|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Time With CGMG Concentration by Ranges During Days 2 to 5|Glucose readings were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The percentage of time that the glucose concentration was less than the following ranges were calculated: < 50 mg/dl (2.8 mmol/L), < 70 mg/dl (3.9 mmol/L), 70-180 mg/dl (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L), > 180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L).|Days 2 to 5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854798|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Time With CGMG Concentration by Ranges During Days 1 to 5|Glucose readings were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The percentage of time that the glucose concentration was less than the following ranges were calculated: < 50 mg/dl (2.8 mmol/L), < 70 mg/dl (3.9 mmol/L), 70-180 mg/dl (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L), > 180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L).|Days 1 to 5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854799|NCT02105324|Secondary|Percentage of Time With CGMG Concentration by Ranges During Day 1|Glucose readings were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The percentage of time that the glucose concentration was less than the following ranges were calculated: < 50 mg/dL(2.8 mmol/L), < 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L), 70-180 mg/dL (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L), > 180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L).|Day 1 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854800|NCT02105324|Secondary|Mean CGMG Values|Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The glucose results for each time frame were averaged.|Day 1 and Days 1-5 in each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
854801|NCT02105324|Primary|Percentage of Time Spent With CGMG Concentration < 60 mg/dL During Days 2 to 5|Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The percentage of time that the glucose concentration was less than 60 mg/dL [3.3 millimoles/liter (mmol/L)] during Days 2 through 5 was calculated.|Days 2 to 5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854802|NCT02105324|Primary|Mean Continuous Glucose Monitoring Glucose (CGMG) Values During Days 2 to 5|Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The CGM glucose results during Days 2 through 5 were averaged.|Days 2 to 5 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||milligrams/deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
854803|NCT02092220|Other Pre-specified|CGM Mean Absolute Relative Differences (MARD) Versus Time-stamped Blood Glucose (BG) Values From Meter Downloads|This outcome measure compares the time stamped PG values from the glucose meter to the corresponding CGM glucose value to determine the overall accuracy of the CGM.|11 days|All randomized participants who completed both periods.||percent difference||Standard Deviation|Mean
854804|NCT02092220|Other Pre-specified|Mean Daily Bolus Insulin Dose|Daily bolus insulin dose reported in Units per kilogram per day (U/kg/day).|Day 1, Days 1 to 11, Days 2 to 11, each individual day 2 to 11 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||U/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854805|NCT02092220|Other Pre-specified|Mean Daily Basal Insulin Dose|Daily basal insulin dose reported in Units per kilogram per day (U/kg/day).|Day 1, Days 2 to 11, each individual day 2 to 11 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||U/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854806|NCT02092220|Other Pre-specified|Number of Unscheduled Infusion Set Replacements||11 days|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study. Glucagon infusion sets are not applicable to the Usual Care arm.||Infusion Set Relacements|||Number
854807|NCT02092220|Other Pre-specified|Reliability Index, Calculated as Percent of Possible Values Actually Recorded by CGM||11 days|All randomized participants who completed both periods.||percentage of possible values||Standard Deviation|Mean
854808|NCT02092220|Secondary|Number of Participants With Skin Rash||11 days of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854809|NCT02092220|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin|The change in the value of hemoglobin collected at Day 12 relative to Baseline. A negative change from Baseline indicates a reduction in hemoglobin and a positive change from Baseline indicates an increase in hemoglobin.|Baseline and Day 12 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||grams/deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
854810|NCT02092220|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight|The change in body weight collected at Day 12 relative to Baseline. A negative change from Baseline indicates a reduction in body weight and a positive change from Baseline indicates an increase in body weight.|Baseline and Day 12 of each period|All participants who completed both periods of the study.||kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
854811|NCT02092220|Secondary|Mean Nausea Index Score Using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS)|Participants rated their nausea using a 0 to 10 centimeter (cm) VAS where 0=least severe nausea to 10=most severe nausea. The average nausea index scores during Days 1 to 11 and Days 2 to 11 were calculated.|Day 1, Days 1 to 11, Days 2 to 11 and each individual day 2 to 11 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
854812|NCT02092220|Secondary|Percentage of Time Bionic Pancreas Off-line or Not Functioning Properly|Not functioning properly includes issues due to system crash, communication problems between CGM and bionic pancreas, communication problems between bionic pancreas and pumps and pump malfunction.|11 days|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study. Reported for the Bionic pancreas arm only||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854813|NCT02092220|Secondary|Mean Glucose Target Set by User (Time-weighted Average Over Study Period) in the Bionic Pancreas Arm||Day 1, Days 2 to 11, Days 1 to11, Overall, Daytime, Nighttime of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
854814|NCT02092220|Secondary|Glucagon Total Daily Dose Levels in the Bionic Pancreas Arm|Glucagon dose level is reported in micrograms per kilogram of body mass per day (µg/kg/day).|Day 1, Days 2 to 11, Days 1 to 11 of each period|All participants who completed both periods of the study. Results are reported for the Bionic Pancreas period only.||µg/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854815|NCT02092220|Secondary|Insulin Total Daily Dose|Insulin total daily dose is reported in units per kilogram per day (U/kg/day).|Day 1, Days 1 to 11, Days 2 to 11 of each period|All participants who completed both periods of the study.||U/kg/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854816|NCT02092220|Secondary|Total Grams of Carbohydrate Taken for Hypoglycemia|"The total grams of carbohydrate taken for hypoglycemia as reported daily by the participant were averaged.
The total number of grams of carbohydrate taken for hypoglycemia were reported daily by the participant. The total number of grams of carbohydrate taken are reported."|Day 1, Days 1 to 11 and Days 2 to 11 of each period|All participants who completed both periods of the study.||grams of carbohydrate per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854817|NCT02092220|Secondary|Number of Reported Carbohydrate Interventions for Hypoglycemia|The number of carbohydrate interventions for hypoglycemia were reported daily by the participant. The average number of carbohydrate interventions per day is reported.|Day 1, Days 1 to 11 and Days 2 to 11 of each period|All participants who completed both periods of the study.||interventions per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854818|NCT02092220|Secondary|Number of Episodes of Symptomatic Hypoglycemia|The number of episodes of symptomatic hypoglycemia were reported daily by the participant. The average number of episodes of symptomatic hypoglycemia per day was calculated.|Day 1, Days 1 to 11 and Days 2 to 11 of each period|All participants who completed both periods of the study.||episodes per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854819|NCT02092220|Secondary|Number of Participants With Severe Hypoglycemic Events|A severe hypoglycemic event is an event where the participant is unable to self-treat and requires the assistance of another person.|11 days of each period|All participants who completed both periods of the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854820|NCT02092220|Secondary|Anti-Insulin and Anti-Glucagon Antibodies on Day 12||Day 12 of each period|No data was collected for Anti-Insulin and Anti-Glucagon Antibodies.|||||
854821|NCT02092220|Secondary|1,5-anhydroglucitol on Day 12||Day 12 of each period|No data was collected for 1,5-anhydroglucitol.|||||
854822|NCT02092220|Secondary|Glycated Albumin on Day 12||Day 12 of each period|No data was collected for Glycated Albumin.|||||
854823|NCT02092220|Secondary|Percentage of Days That CGM Was Used by Participants as Part of Their Usual Care|The percentage of days that participants reported the CGM device was being worn and working properly is reported.|Days 1-11 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study. This outcome measure applies only to the Usual Care arm.||percentage of days|||Number
854881|NCT01336413|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II)|21-item, self-report rating inventory that measures characteristic attitudes and symptoms of depression. Scores range from 0 (no depression) to 63 (severe depression).|Baseline, 4 Weeks, and 8 Weeks|3 subjects in Arm 1, and 1 subject in Arm 2, withdrew prior to the final visit of the study.||Total Score||Standard Error|Mean
854824|NCT02092220|Secondary|Number of Hypoglycemic Events (< 70 mg/dL, < 60 mg/dL, <50 mg/dL)|A series of hypoglycemic measurements is defined as a single event until there is a break of ≥ 30 minutes between measurements below the defined thresholds of < 70, < 60, and <50 mg/dL. This outcome measure was not calculated. As the study progressed, the principal investigator determined that this particular analysis would not adequately reflect the amount of hypoglycemia subjects experienced and would not be a clinically significant result. This outcome measure was not calculated. Our co-primary outcome, #2, and other secondary outcomes, #4 5 and 6, are more valid and clinically relevant measures of hypoglycemia.Those outcomes quantify the amount of time subjects spent below each hypoglycemic threshold, which better reflects the degree of risk exposure the subjects experienced related to hypoglycemia. The number of times the CGM crosses below the hypoglycemia threshold, which is what this outcome measures, is a less relevant piece of information per the principal investigator.|Days 1-11|||times below threshold||Standard Deviation|Mean
854825|NCT02092220|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Mean CGMG < 154 mg/dl|Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The glucose readings were averaged. 154 mg/dL was the estimated average glucose corresponding to a Glycosylated Hemoglobin A1C of 7%.|Day 1, Days 2 to11, Days 1 to11 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of participants|||Number
854826|NCT02092220|Secondary|Percentage of Time With CGMG Concentration by Ranges During Days 2 to 11|"Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM.The percentage of time that the glucose concentration was less than the following ranges were calculated:
< 50 mg/dL (2.8 mmol/L) < 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) 70 to 120 mg/dL (3.9 to 6.7 mmol/L) 70 to180 mg/dl (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L) > 180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L) > 250 mg/dL (13.9 mmol/L)"|Days 2 to 11 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854827|NCT02092220|Secondary|Percentage of Time With CGMG Concentration by Ranges During Days 1 to 11|"Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM.The percentage of time that the glucose concentration was less than the following ranges were calculated:
< 50 mg/dL (2.8 mmol/L) < 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) 70 to 120 mg/dL (3.9 to 6.7 mmol/L) 70 to180 mg/dl (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L) > 180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L) > 250 mg/dL (13.9 mmol/L)"|Days 1 to 11 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854828|NCT02092220|Secondary|Percentage of Time With CGMG Concentration by Ranges During Day 1|"Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM.The percentage of time that the glucose concentration was less than the following ranges were calculated:
< 50 mg/dL (2.8 mmol/L) < 60 mg/dL (3.3 mmol/L) < 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) 70 to 120 mg/dL (3.9 to 6.7 mmol/L) 70 to180 mg/dl (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L) > 180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L) > 250 mg/dL (13.9 mmol/L)"|Day 1 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854829|NCT02092220|Secondary|Mean CGMG Values|Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The glucose results on Days 1 and Days 1 to 11 were averaged.|Day 1 and Days 1 to 11 in each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
854830|NCT02092220|Primary|Percentage of Time Spent With CGMG Concentration < 60 mg/dL During Days 2 to 11|Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM.The percentage of time that the glucose concentration was less than 60 mg/dL [3.3 millimoles/liter (mmol/L)] during Days 2 to 11 was calculated.|Days 2 to 11 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
854831|NCT02092220|Primary|Mean Continuous Glucose Monitoring Glucose (CGMG) Values During Days 2 to 11|Glucose reading were taken every 5 minutes by the CGM. The glucose results on Days 2 to 11 were averaged.|Days 2 to 11 of each period|All randomized participants who completed both periods of the study.||milligrams/deciliter (mg/dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
854832|NCT02037607|Primary|Number of Participants With Post-operative Ultrasound Without Evidence of Thromboembolism|The number of participants with post-operative ultrasound without evidence of thromboembolism|within 72 hours after surgery|||Participants|||Count of Participants
854833|NCT01939223|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the time (days) from randomization to death due to any cause. The OS time for subjects alive at the time of analysis was censored at their last date known to be alive.|Subjects who experienced disease recurrence (either during treatment or during Active Follow-up), or otherwise withdrew from the study for any reason other than death, were followed for overall survival unless consent was withdrawn.|Number of Participants Analyzed is 0 because this study was prematurely terminated and data were not collected for this endpoint.|||||
854834|NCT01939223|Primary|Disease Free Survival (DFS) as Assessed by the Investigator|Disease free survival was evaluated by CT / MRI scans as assessed by the investigator, which was defined as the time (in days) from date of randomization to date of first observed radiographic disease recurrence (RECIST 1.1 criteria for measurable and non-measurable disease) or death due to any cause, if death occurred before disease recurrence was documented. For subjects without documented disease recurrence or death at the time of analysis, the DFS time was censored at the date of the last evaluable CT / MRI scan.|From date of randomization to date of first observed radiographic disease recurrence (RECIST 1.1 criteria for measurable and non-measurable disease) or death due to any cause, if death occurred before disease recurrence was documented.|Number of Participants Analyzed is 0 because this study was prematurely terminated and data were not collected for this endpoint.|||||
854835|NCT01938573|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events Including Any Unfavorable and Unintended Sign, Symptom, Diagnosis, or Disease Temporally Associated With the Use of a Medicinal Product, Whether or Not Related to the Medicinal Product (Phase I and II)|Graded according to the NCI CTCAE version 4.0. Safety will be assessed through summaries of adverse events, vital signs, physical examinations, and clinical laboratory test data (including change from baseline). All adverse events resulting in discontinuation, dose modification, dosing interruption, and/or treatment delay of study drug will also be listed and tabulated by preferred term.|Up to 28 days after completion of study treatment|||Number of events|||Number
854836|NCT01938573|Primary|Percent of Patients With Pathologic Complete Response (Phase II)|The study will follow an optimal two-stage Simon design based on pathologic complete response rate.|12 weeks|Patients treated in phase 2||Participants|||Count of Participants
854837|NCT01938573|Primary|Patients With Dose Limiting Toxicity|Safety will be assessed through summaries of adverse events, vital signs, physical examinations, and clinical laboratory test data (including change from baseline).|Up to 28 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
854838|NCT01916824|Primary|Money Earned|"Change in amount of money earned between baseline and after 6 weeks of antidepressant treatment is determined through a summary score from a variety of decision-making tasks. Participants received between $5 and $40 per visit, depending on the outcomes of the decisions made on the computerized tasks. Variable payment ensured that the decision-making tasks were approached realistically, as opposed to using hypothetical “points” that do not have meaning in the real world. Greater earnings indicate better financial decision-making.
The specific tasks were:
risk task
balloon analogue risk task
temporal discounting task
ultimatum game
continuous performance task"|Baseline, Week 6|The population at each time point includes the number of participants completing the each visit.||US Dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
854845|NCT01748890|Primary|The Number of Core Biopsies in These Targeted Regions|From elastography-prostatectomy pathology correlation, the following data will be obtained, 1) The number of planned core biopsies that would intersect foci of prostate carcinoma, 2) The Gleason Score that would be obtained, assuming that elastographically targeted biopsies sample the targeted region.|Participants will be followed until prostatectomy pathology is available (average 1 week)|insufficient recruitment for analysis|||||
854846|NCT01748292|Secondary|Mean Change in Central Foveal Thickness|Mean change in central foveal thickness by SD-OCT from baseline to weeks 48-57, baseline to week 104 and baseline to week 156.|12, 24, and 36 months|All participants were included in analysis. Due to participant attrition, missed visits, and variable follow-up intervals in the Treat and Extend arm, the population analyzed at each time point is equal to or smaller than the population still enrolled at that time point.||microns||Standard Error|Mean
854847|NCT01748292|Secondary|CNVM Lesion Size|CNVM lesion size at baseline, compared to baseline to weeks 24-28, baseline to weeks 48-56, baseline to weeks 72-82, baseline to week 104, baseline to weeks 128-132 and baseline to week 156, as determined by fluorescein angiography.|6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months||06/2018||||
854848|NCT01748292|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With Persistent Leakage on Fluorescein Angiography|Percentage of subjects with persistent leakage on fluorescein angiography from baseline through weeks 24-28, baseline to weeks 48-56, baseline to weeks 72-82, baseline to week 104, baseline to weeks 128- 132 and baseline to week 156.|6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months||06/2018||||
854849|NCT01748292|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Persistent Active Exudation on SD-OCT|Percentage of subjects with persistent active exudation on SD-OCT from baseline through weeks 48-57 (week closest to week 52), baseline through week 104 and baseline through week 156.|12, 24, and 36 months|All participants were included in analysis. Due to participant attrition, missed visits, and variable follow-up intervals in the Treat and Extend arm, the population analyzed at each time point is equal to or smaller than the population still enrolled at that time point.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854882|NCT01336413|Primary|Tower of London (Subscale Test of BAC) - PRIMARY COGNITIVE OUTCOME MEASURE|Subscale test asking subjects to determine the minimum number of moves that will be required to make convert one image of colored balls on pegs into a second different image. The test administers 20 items/images, with 2 additional items if all of the first 20 are answered correctly. Thus, scores range from 0-22, with lower scores representing greater impairment. Raw scores are converted to z scores that generally range from -3 to 3, with lower scores again representing greater impairment.|Baseline, 4 Weeks, and 8 Weeks|3 subjects in Arm 1, and 1 subject in Arm 2, withdrew prior to the final visit of the study.||z Score||Standard Error|Mean
854850|NCT01748292|Secondary|Total Number of Office Visits and Imaging Studies Performed During Study Period|Total number of office visits and imaging studies performed from baseline through weeks 24-28 (week closest to week 26), baseline through weeks 48-56 (week closest to week 52), baseline through weeks 72-82 (week closest to week 78), baseline through week 104, baseline through weeks 128-132 (week closest to week 132) and baseline through week 156|6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months|Per protocol, imaging was conducted at each study visit and is assumed to be perfectly correlated with the number of visits. Therefore, only visits were specifically analyzed. Additionally, given the high correlation between number of visits and injections administered (reported previously), this analysis was performed only at M12, M24, and M36.||scheduled visits completed|||Number
854851|NCT01748292|Secondary|Total Number of Intravitreal Injections Required|Total number of intravitreal injections required from baseline through weeks 48-57 (week closest to week 52), baseline through week 104 and baseline through week 156.|12, 24, and 36 months|All participants were included in analysis. Due to participant attrition, missed visits, and variable follow-up intervals in the Treat and Extend arm, the population analyzed at each time point is equal to or smaller than the population still enrolled at that time point.||injections||Full Range|Mean
854852|NCT01748292|Secondary|Incidence and Severity of Adverse Events (Ocular and Non-ocular)|Incidence and severity of adverse events both ocular and non-ocular|36 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
854853|NCT01748292|Primary|Mean Change in BCVA by ETDRS Letter Score From Baseline|Mean change in Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) by Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letter score from baseline through weeks 24-28, baseline through weeks 48-56, baseline through weeks 72-82, baseline to week 104, baseline through weeks 128-132 and baseline to week 156. The ETDRS protocol is a widely accepted international standard for macular laser photocoagulation treatment. A higher score represents better functioning. The scale ranges from 0 to 100 letters|6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months|All participants were included in analysis. Due to participant attrition, missed visits, and variable follow-up intervals in the Treat and Extend arm, the population analyzed at each time point is equal to or smaller than the population still enrolled at that time point.||ETDRS BCVA Letters||Standard Error|Mean
854854|NCT01736397|Secondary|Change in Hemoglobin Levels From Baseline to End of Treatment|The difference in hemoglobin levels between the value at the end of treatment (week 12) minus the baseline measurement.|12 Weeks|The efficacy analyses were based on the ITT population. The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all subjects who were randomized into the study, had a baseline laboratory value, had taken at least 1 dose of study drug, and had at least 1 post-baseline laboratory value. ANCOVA with LOCF methodology was used.||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
854855|NCT01736397|Secondary|Change in Ferritin Levels From Baseline to End of Treatment|The difference in ferritin levels between the value at the end of treatment (week 12) minus the baseline measurement.|12 Weeks|The efficacy analyses were based on the ITT population. The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all subjects who were randomized into the study, had a baseline laboratory value, had taken at least 1 dose of study drug, and had at least 1 post-baseline laboratory value. ANCOVA with LOCF methodology was used.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
854856|NCT01736397|Primary|Change in Serum Phosphorus Levels From Baseline to End of Treatment|The difference in serum phosphorus between the value at the end of treatment (week 12) minus the baseline measurement.|12 Weeks|The efficacy analyses were based on the ITT population. The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population consisted of all subjects who were randomized into the study, had a baseline laboratory value, had taken at least 1 dose of study drug, and had at least 1 post-baseline laboratory value. ANCOVA with LOCF methodology was used.||mg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
854857|NCT01736397|Primary|Change in Transferrin Saturation (TSAT) From Baseline to End of Treatment|The difference in TSAT between the value at the end of treatment (week 12) minus the baseline measurement.|12 Weeks|Efficacy analyses were based on Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population, which consisted of all randomized subjects who had a baseline laboratory value, had taken at least 1 dose of study drug, & had at least 1 post-baseline laboratory value. ANCOVA with Last observation carried forward (LOCF) methodology was used.||% saturation||Standard Deviation|Mean
854858|NCT01623739|Secondary|Radiographic Bone Level|Secondary outcome measures will be recorded at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60 months after crown delivery.|Up to 5 years after baseline||||||
854859|NCT01623739|Secondary|Modified Bleeding Index|Secondary outcome measures will be recorded at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60 months after crown delivery.|Up to 5 years after baseline||||||
854860|NCT01623739|Secondary|Modified Plaque Index|Secondary outcome measures will be recorded at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60 months after crown delivery.|Up to 5 years after baseline||||||
854861|NCT01623739|Secondary|Probing Depth|Secondary outcome measures will be recorded at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60 months after crown delivery.|Up to 5 years after baseline||||||
854862|NCT01623739|Secondary|PES/WES (Pink Esthetic Score, White Esthetic Score).|Secondary outcome measures will be recorded at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60 months after crown delivery.|Up to 5 years after baseline||||||
854863|NCT01623739|Primary|Mid Facial Mucosal Level at Implant Site|Baseline will be at the time of crown delivery. Thereafter, the mid facial mucosal level at implant site will be recorded at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60 months after crown delivery.|3 months after crown delivery|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
854864|NCT01617460|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline at the Final Assessment in Aberrant Behavior Checklist Japanese Version (ABC-J) Irritability Subscale Score|The ABC-J Irritability subscale consists of 15 items. Each item scores range from 0 to 3: 0 = No problem, 1 = Mild aberrant behavior, 2 = Moderate aberrant behavior, and 3 = Severe aberrant behavior. Individual scores were summed, therefore, the overall score range was between 0-45. Higher scores represent worse condition.|Baseline, the final administration|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854865|NCT01572298|Secondary|Percentage of New Bone Formation (Histologic)||5 months after surgery||||||
854866|NCT01572298|Primary|Gain in Horizontal Ridge Dimension||5 months after surgery|||gain in ridge width (mm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
854904|NCT01114724|Secondary|Subjects With Coverage of Primary Tear||At implant|Based on number of ITT subjects with available data||participants|||Number
854905|NCT01114724|Secondary|Subjects With Successful Delivery and Deployment of the Device.||At implant.|Based on number of ITT subjects with available data||participants|||Number
854972|NCT00625404|Primary|Confirmed Grade 3 or Higher Reduction in Phosphorus|Repeat specimens were collected to confirm chemistry toxicities. Grade 3 phosphorus reduction was defined as ≤2.4mg/dL|Through 52 weeks on product and 4 weeks post-product|||participants|||Number
854867|NCT01536197|Secondary|Changes on Emotional, External and Restricted Eating Behavior and Food Craving After Bariatric Surgery-induced Weight Loss (Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding).|-Eating behavior will be measured with validated questionnaires including among others the Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire (DEBQ) and the Food Craving Inventory (FCI). The DEBQ measures three common psychological dimensions of eating behavior: 1) emotional eating , 2) external eating (an inclination to eat in response to external food cues such as the smell and taste of food), and 3) restrained eating (an inclination to consciously restrict food intake to control body weight). The FCI is a validated measure of the frequency of overall food cravings as well as cravings for specific types of foods (high fats, sweets, carbohydrates/ starches, and fast-food fats) during the past month. For the DEBQ and the FCI, subjects score their answers by using a 5-point Likert scale (1=never, 5=very often/always).Therefore, lower numbers means having less frequent food cravings (for FCI), or engaging less frequently in the particular type of eating behavior (for DEBQ).|we will measure the above outcomes before surgery and at 20% weight loss post surgery, which on average we expect will occur around 3 months post-surgery|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854868|NCT01536197|Primary|Changes on Taste Detection Thresholds After Bariatric Surgery-induced Weight Loss (Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Laparoscopic Adjustable Banding).|-Taste detection thresholds measures the lowest concentration of a tastant that can be detected (mili molar amounts).|we will measure the above outcomes before surgery and at 20% weight loss post surgery, which on average we expect will occur around 3 months post-surgery|||mmol/L||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854869|NCT01514357|Primary|Changes in Systolic Blood Pressure (BP)|The change in BP with treatment over 7 days was assessed by the mean BP on admission, (treatment day 1) mean BP 23 hours after the first injection of BNP, and mean BP 23 hours after the second injection of BNP (treatment day 2). Treatment day 2 was 7 days after admission.|baseline, treatment day 1, treatment day 2|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
854870|NCT01420926|Secondary|Adverse Events|Adverse Events: Incidence of adverse events, assessed using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Adverse events were collected every cycle during treatment and up to one month after treatment. Adverse events were summarized using summary statistics and frequency tables for each separate cohort. Per protocol, analysis was descriptive in nature. In this section, the number of patients that reported a grade 4 or higher event are summarized. A complete listing of Adverse Events is provided in the Adverse Events section below.|Duration of treatment|The 4 participants were not evaluated for adverse events were excluded from this analysis.||participants|||Number
854871|NCT01420926|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from study entry to progression or death. Progression free and surviving patients were censored at the date of last follow-up. The median DFS with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method.|Time from study entry to progression and/or death (up to 10 years)|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854872|NCT01420926|Secondary|Disease-free Survival (DFS)|Disease free survival (DFS) was defined as the time from CR to relapse or death. Relapse free and surviving patients were censored at the date of last follow-up. The median DFS with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. Relapse is defined as the reappearance of blood blasts or >= 5% marrow blasts after achieving a CR or CRi.|Time from study entry to relapse and/or death (up to 10 years)|Only participants who achieved a CR are included in this analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854873|NCT01420926|Secondary|Complete Remission Rate (CR and CRi)|Defined as the number of patients who achieve a CR or CRi divided by the total number of evaluable patients. A Complete remission (CR) requires: <5% marrow blast, > 200 nucleated cells, no blasts with auer rods, no extramedullary disease, ANC >1,000/mm^3 and platelets > 100,000/mm^3. A CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) is defined as CR with exception of ANC < 1,000/mm^3 or platelets < 100,000/mm^3.|Duration of study up to 10 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854874|NCT01420926|Primary|Overall Survival (OS) Time|Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from study entry to death of any cause. Surviving patients were censored at the date of last follow-up. The median OS with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method.|Time from study entry to death assessed up to 10 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854875|NCT01336413|Other Pre-specified|Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping/Susceptibility Tensor Imaging (Exploratory Neuroimaging Outcome)|Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping/Susceptibility Tensor Imaging (QSM/STI) to assess possible myelin brain changes related to the intervention.|10 weeks||02/2018||||
854876|NCT01336413|Other Pre-specified|Diffusion Tensor Imaging (Exploratory Neuroimaging Outcome)|Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) to assess possible white matter brain changes associated with intervention.|10 weeks||02/2018||||
854877|NCT01336413|Other Pre-specified|Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (Exploratory Neuroimaging Outcome)|Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to assess possible functional brain changes related to attention and emotion circuits associated with the intervention.|10 weeks||02/2018||||
854878|NCT01336413|Secondary|Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)|The CD-RISC was developed and tested as (i) a measure of degree of resilience, (ii) as a predictor of outcome to treatment with medication or psychotherapy, stress management and resilience-building, (iii) as a marker of progress during treatment, and (iv) as a marker of biological changes in the brain. The scale comprises 25 items, each rated on a 5-point scale (0-4) for a total range of 0-100, with higher scores reflecting greater resilience.|Baseline, 4 Weeks, and 8 Weeks|3 subjects in Arm 1, and 1 subject in Arm 2, withdrew prior to the final visit of the study.||Total Score||Standard Error|Mean
854879|NCT01336413|Secondary|CAPS Total Scores|Mean scores in posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms. Scores may range from 0 (no symptoms) to 136 (severe symptoms; score of 136 is based on the first 17 CAPS items administered). A reduced CAPS score indicates a reduction in (improvement) PTSD symptoms, while and increase in CAPS score indicates an increase (worsening) in PTSD symptoms.|Baseline, 4 Weeks, and 8 Weeks|3 subjects in Arm 1, and 1 subject in Arm 2, withdrew prior to the final visit of the study.||Total Score||Standard Error|Mean
854880|NCT01336413|Secondary|BAC Composite|Composite z scores (allowing comparison from week 2 to week 10) to assess cognitive changes. The BAC includes brief assessments of executive functions, verbal fluency, attention, verbal memory, working memory and motor speed. z scores are calculated from composite scores. Higher z scores are indicative of better cognitive performance, lower z scores are indicative of lower cognitive performance. Range of z scores anticipated to be between -3 and 3.|Baseline, 4 Weeks, and 8 Weeks|3 subjects in Arm 1, and 1 subject in Arm 2, withdrew prior to the final visit of the study.||Composite z Score||Standard Error|Mean
854883|NCT01336413|Primary|CAPS (Cluster D Symptoms) - PRIMARY BEHAVIORAL OUTCOME MEASURE|"The CAPS-IV criterion D is defined by persistent symptoms of increasing arousal (not present before the trauma), indicated by at least two of the following: difficulty falling or staying asleep, irritability or outbursts of anger, difficulty concentrating, hyper-vigilance, and exaggerated startle response There are two scales, frequency and intensity. Frequency scores range from 0 = none of the time to 4 = most or all of the time and intensity scores range from 0 = none to 4 = extreme. Severity scores are calculated from the sum of frequency and intensity scores. Five items are included in criterion D, thus the range of severity scores is 0-45. Higher scores are indicative of more symptoms."|Baseline, 4 Weeks, and 8 Weeks|3 subjects in Arm 1, and 1 subject in Arm 2, withdrew prior to the final visit of the study||Score||Standard Error|Mean
854884|NCT01187381|Secondary|Percentage of Participants by the Site of First Disease Progression||Baseline up to 5 years|Number of participants analyzed=participants who presented disease progression||percentage of participants|||Number
854885|NCT01187381|Secondary|Progression Free Survival|Progression free survival was defined as the time from first dose of trastuzumab to disease progression as assessed by treating physician. Due to observational nature of the study, there was no specific method of assessment used to define progressive disease. Progressive disease was confirmed by treating physician, based on his/her assessment according to local practice.|Baseline uo tp 5 years|Number of participants analyzed=participants who presented progression of disease||days||Full Range|Median
854886|NCT01187381|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received Trastuzumab as Adjuvant Therapy of HER2 Positive Breast Cancer||Baseline up to 5 years|All enrolled participants||percentage of participants|||Number
854887|NCT01187381|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Had Surgical Procedure for Breast Cancer|Percentage of participants who underwent different types of surgical procedures for breast cancer are reported. Different types of surgical procedures included: breast-conserving surgery; mastectomy; and other (any other surgical procedure except breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy).|Baseline up to 5 years|Number of participants analyzed=participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure||percentage of participants|||Number
854888|NCT01187381|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Received Previous Neoadjuvant Therapy|As a neoadjuvant therapy, participants received chemotherapy alone, radiotherapy alone, hormonal therapy alone or combination of these therapies. Percentage of participants who received these therapies is reported.|Baseline up to 5 years|Number of participants analyzed=participant with data available for this outcome||percentage of participants|||Number
854889|NCT01187381|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Trastuzumab Therapy According to Reasons for Discontinuation||Baseline up to 5 years|All enrolled participants||percentage of participants|||Number
854890|NCT01187381|Primary|Treatment Duration With Trastuzumab in the Routine Clinical Practice||Baseline up to 5 years|Number of participant analyzed=participants with data available for this outcome measure.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
854891|NCT01126801|Secondary|Improvement of Mood, Measured by the Self-rated Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) From Baseline to Study End.||one month|No participants were analyzed since the study was terminated due to difficulty recruiting subjects. Because data from only one subject per arm were collected, these data are not reported to preserve subject privacy.|||||
854892|NCT01126801|Primary|Improvement of Mood, Measured by the Clinician-rated Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) From Baseline to Study End.||one month|No participants were analyzed since the study was terminated due to difficulty recruiting subjects. Because data from only one subject per arm were collected, these data are not reported to preserve subject privacy.|||||
854893|NCT01114724|Secondary|Subjects With Device, Procedure and/or Aortic Related Serious Adverse Events.||at 12 months|Based on number of ITT subjects with available data. Subjects were considered unevaluable if they were withdrawn or were lost to follow-up before the lower limit of the 12 mos follow-up window.One subject was lost to follow-up and one withdrew before 12 mos. One of these subjects experienced an AE before study exit and was included in the analysis,||participants|||Number
854894|NCT01114724|Secondary|Subjects With Device, Procedure and/or Aortic Related Serious Adverse Events.||at 30 days|Based on number of ITT subjects with available data.||participants|||Number
854895|NCT01114724|Secondary|Aortic Remodeling: Subjects With Stable (+/- 5mm) or Decrease in False Lumen (>5mm) Compared to First Post-procedural CT Over the Stent Graft||at 12 months|Based on number of ITT subjects with evaluable imaging data.||participants|||Number
854896|NCT01114724|Secondary|Aortic Remodeling: Subjects With Stable (+/- 5mm) or Decrease in False Lumen (>5mm) Compared to First Post-procedural CT Over the Stent Graft||at 6 months|Based on number of ITT subjects with evaluable imaging data.||participants|||Number
854897|NCT01114724|Secondary|Aortic Remodeling: Subjects With Stable (+/- 5mm) or Increase in True Lumen (>5mm) Compared to First Post-procedural CT Over the Stent Graft||at 12 months|Based on number of ITT subjects with evaluable imaging data.||participants|||Number
854898|NCT01114724|Secondary|Aortic Remodeling: Subjects With Stable (+/- 5mm) or Increase in True Lumen (>5mm) Compared to First Post-procedural CT Over the Stent Graft||at 6 months|Based on number of ITT subjects with evaluable imaging data.||participants|||Number
854899|NCT01114724|Secondary|Aortic Remodeling: Subjects With Complete/Partial Thrombosis of the False Lumen Over the Stented Segment||At 12 months|Based on number of ITT subjects with evaluable imaging data.||participants|||Number
854900|NCT01114724|Secondary|Aortic Remodeling: Subjects With Partial/Complete False Lumen Thrombosis Over the Stented Segment||At 6 months|Based on number of ITT subjects with evaluable imaging data.||participants|||Number
854901|NCT01114724|Secondary|Subjects With Secondary Endovascular Procedures||Through12 months|Based on number of ITT subjects with available data. Subjects were considered unevaluable if they were withdrawn before the lower limit of the 12 months follow-up window or were lost to follow-up before the lower limit of the 12 months follow-up window. (One patient withdrew and one was lost to follow-up)||participants|||Number
854902|NCT01114724|Secondary|Aortic Rupture||Within 12 months|Based on number of ITT subjects with available data. Subjects were considered unevaluable if they were withdrawn before the lower limit of the 12 months follow-up window or were lost to follow-up before the lower limit of the 12 months follow-up window. (One patient withdrew and one was lost to follow-up)||participants|||Number
854903|NCT01114724|Secondary|Aortic Rupture||Within 30 days|Based on number of ITT subjects with available data.||participants|||Number
854906|NCT01114724|Secondary|All-cause Mortality||at 12 months|Based on number of ITT subjects with available data. Subjects were considered unevaluable if they were withdrawn before the lower limit of the 12 months follow-up window or were lost to follow-up before the lower limit of the 12 months follow-up window. (One patient withdrew and one was lost to follow-up)||participants|||Number
854907|NCT01114724|Primary|All Cause Mortality.||Up to 30 days after the stent graft implant.|Based on number of ITT subjects with available data||participants|||Number
854908|NCT01094743|Secondary|Subjective Assessment of Lens Comfort|Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|10 minutes after lens insertion at time of initial lens fitting|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854909|NCT01094743|Primary|Subjective Assessment of Quality of Vision|Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|after 1 week of lens wear|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854910|NCT01094743|Secondary|Bulbar Redness|Scale of 0 to 4, where 0=None, 2=Trace, 3=Mild, 4=Moderate, 5=Severe.|after 1 week of lens wear|||eyes|eyes||Number
854911|NCT01094743|Secondary|Limbal Redness|Scale of 0 to 4, where 0=None, 2=Trace, 3=Mild, 4=Moderate, 5=Severe.|after 1 week of lens wear|||eyes|eyes||Number
854912|NCT01094743|Primary|Subjective Assessment of Lens Comfort|Contact Lens User Experience (CLUE)TM questionnaire: A validated patient-reported outcomes questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft, disposable contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Scores follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response.|after 1 week of lens wear|Completed subjects||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854913|NCT01094743|Primary|Visual Acuity Binocular|Snellen binocular visual acuity measurement|after 1 week of lens wear|All completed subjects||participants|||Number
854914|NCT01094743|Primary|Visual Acuity Monocular|Snellen monocular visual acuity measurement|after 1 week of lens wear|All completed subjects||eyes|eyes||Number
854915|NCT01035606|Secondary|Change to Attention and Executive Functioning Composite Scores|"Participants completed the following neuropsychological measures of attention and executive functions before and after Arms 1 and 2, but not Arm 3.
Letter Number Sequencing from WIAT-III; Auditory Consonant Trigram: 9,18, 36 seconds; Digit Vigilance Test (Time and Errors); DKEFS subtests: Design Fluency, Verbal Fluency Switching, Inhibition (Time and Errors); and Inhibition/Switching (Time and Errors); and Trails B. Performance on these measures were scored based upon age, and when available, educational and repeated administration norms. Resultant scores were transformed into z-scores and aggregated to form a composite measure. Higher z-scores reflect better functioning.
The unit of analysis for this outcome was the change score from baseline to post-training. Positive change scores reflect improved performance over time[post-training - baseline], whereas negative change scores reflect worsening performance over time."|5 weeks (After completion of Arm 1 and Arm 2)|||Aggregate Z-scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
854916|NCT01035606|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Post-training for Task Errors on a Functional Performance Measure|Participants completed a functional assessment task, the modified Multiple Errands Task (MET). The MET is an unstructured functional task that permits assessment of participants' abilities to follow outlined rules and complete multiple 'real-world' tasks in a limited time period. Participants were provided written instructions and a map of the hospital where the assessment took place, and were instructed to complete 12 subtasks in 40 minutes while following 9 specified rules. Participants completed this at task at baseline and following Training (Arms 1 & 2, but not 3). Outcome measure was computed as post-training - baseline (negative value reflects less errors made post-training).|5 weeks (After completion of Arm 1 and Arm 2)|||Number of task failures||Standard Deviation|Mean
854917|NCT01035606|Primary|Self-report|Responses to goal processing questionnaire relating to areas of personal goal-based functioning. This scale measured participants self-perceived changes to their cognitive and emotional functioning. Participants indicated the degree to which they perceived changes to 11 questions after receiving trainings in Arm 1 and Arm 3 on a 10-point scale (1=domain became worse, 5 = no change, 10 = domain improved). Participants did not complete this measure after Arm 2.|5 Weeks (After completion of active trainings in Arm 1 and Arm 3)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
854918|NCT01005576|Secondary|Secondary Objectives: Incidence of Transplant-related Outcomes for 2 Years.|Development of graft versus host disease (GVHD)|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
854919|NCT01005576|Primary|Primary Objective: Event-free Survival at 1 Year.||1 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
854920|NCT00907218|Secondary|Spontaneous Reports of Adverse Effects|Reports of adverse events were completed at baseline and weekly visits throughout the trial.|Weekly for 7 weeks|Data was not collected due to study termination, 2 subjects were recruited however their data was not analyzed|||||
854921|NCT00907218|Secondary|Vital Signs|Vital signs were collected at each study visit, including height, weight, blood pressure, and heart rate.|Weekly for 7 weeks|Data was not collected due to study termination, 2 subjects were recruited however their data was not analyzed|||||
854922|NCT00907218|Secondary|ADHD Clinical Global Impressions Scale Improvement (CGI-I) and Severity (CGI-S)|The Clinical Global Impression Scale of ADHD for Improvement and Severity assess overall severity and change in severity of ADHD. The CGI-I scale is rated from 1 to 7 (1=very much improved; 7=very much worse). The CGI-S is rated from 1 to 7 as well (1=not ill; 7=extremely ill).|Weekly for 7 weeks|Data was not collected due to study termination, 2 subjects were recruited however their data was not analyzed|||||
854923|NCT00907218|Secondary|Rates of Smoking Cessation|Varenicline has efficacy in smoking sensation; therefore smoking cessation was measured at baseline and at all study visits.|Weekly for 7 weeks|Data was not collected due to study termination, 2 subjects were recruited however their data was not analyzed|||||
854925|NCT00907218|Primary|Time Line Follow Back of Cigarette Smoking|The reduction in cigarette smoking, defined as the change from baseline on the amount of cigarettes per day smoked (cpd), using the time-line follow back method. This method involves asking subjects to retrospectively estimate their cigarette use 7 days to 2 years prior to the interview date.|Weekly for 7 weeks|Data was not collected due to study termination, 2 subjects were recruited however their data was not analyzed|||||
854926|NCT00907218|Primary|The DSM-IV Based Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS)|The AISRS is an 18-item questionnaire administered by the clinician assessing each of the individual DSM-IV symptoms of ADHD. Each symptom is rated on a scale of severity from 0 (none) to 3 (severe), and the 18 symptom questions are summed to calculate a total score. The minimum total score is a 0, while the maximum total score is a 54.|Weekly for 7 weeks|Data was not collected due to study termination, 2 subjects were recruited however their data was not analyzed|||||
854927|NCT00899847|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|To evaluate the graft versus myeloma effect by monitoring rate of overall survival (OS)|2 years after the last participant is enrolled|Includes all study participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854928|NCT00899847|Secondary|Event-free Survival (EFS)|To evaluate the graft versus myeloma effect by monitoring rate of event-free survival (EFS)|2 years after the last participant is enrolled|Includes all study participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854929|NCT00899847|Secondary|Partial Response Rate (PRR)|"Partial response rate (PRR) was assessed as
> 50% reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein reduction by 90% or < 200 mg/24 hr
If serum M-protein is not measurable, then > 50% reduction in the involved serum free light chain
If involved serum free light chain is not measurable, then > 50% reduction in the bone marrow plasma cell percentage + > 50% reduction in the size of any soft tissue plasmacytoma."|1 year|Includes all study participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
854930|NCT00899847|Secondary|Complete Response Rate (CRR)|"Complete response rate (CRR) was assessed as all of:
Negative immunoflixation on the serum and urine
Disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas
< 5% plasma cells in bone marrow"|1 year|Includes all study participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
854931|NCT00899847|Secondary|Overall Response Rate (ORR)|Overall response rate (ORR) = Complete Response Rate (CRR) + Partial Response Rate (PRR)|1 year|Includes all study participants||Participants|||Count of Participants
854932|NCT00899847|Secondary|Median Time to Engraftment After Allo-PBSC Transplant|"Engraftment is assessed as:
Neutrophil engraftment is > 0.5 x 10⁹/L after cytopenia
Platelet engraftment is > 20 x 10⁹/L after cytopenia"|1 month|Due to the less intensive conditioning before allo-PBSC, only 2 participants experienced cytopenia, and thus only 2 participants could be evaluated for engraftment after allo-PBSC.||Days||Full Range|Median
854933|NCT00899847|Secondary|Median Time to Engraftment After Auto-PBSC Transplant|"Engraftment is assessed as:
Neutrophil engraftment is > 0.5 x 10⁹/L after cytopenia
Platelet engraftment is > 20 x 10⁹/L after cytopenia"|1 month|Includes all study participants||Days||Full Range|Median
854934|NCT00899847|Primary|Incidence of Graft Versus Host Disease (GvHD)|To evaluate the incidence acute GvHD of this tandem autologous/allogeneic transplant setting|2 years after the last participant is enrolled.|Due to the significance of the allo-PBSC transplant as a component to the treatment plan, participants who did not receive allo-PBSC are not included.||Participants|||Count of Participants
854935|NCT00888628|Secondary|Number of Participants With Severe Hypoglycemic Events|Subjects will have a decrease in severe hypoglycemic events|1 year after subject's first transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
854936|NCT00888628|Secondary|Measures of Metabolic Control||1 year after the subject's first islet transplant||||||
854937|NCT00888628|Secondary|Renal Impact Measures Including Renal Allograft Survival||1 year after the subject's first islet transplant||||||
854938|NCT00888628|Secondary|Impact on Vision||1 year after the subject's first islet transplant||||||
854939|NCT00888628|Secondary|Number of Cardiovascular Events, Cerebral Vascular Accident, and Myocardial Infarction||1 year after the subject's first islet transplant||||||
854940|NCT00888628|Secondary|Change in Urinary Albumin and Creatinine Ratio and Serum Creatinine||1 year after subjects initial islet transplant||||||
854941|NCT00888628|Secondary|Number of Participants With a Decrease in HbA1c|Subjects will have a decrease in HbA1c|1 year after subject's first islet transplant|||Participants|||Count of Participants
854942|NCT00888628|Primary|Insulin Independence With Both an HbA1c ≤ 6.5% and no Severe Hypoglycemic Events at 1 Year After the First Islet Transplant or a Reduction in HbA1c of at Least 1 Point and no Severe Hypoglycemic Events at 1 Year After the First Islet Transplant.||1 year after the subject's first islet transplant|||participants|||Number
854943|NCT00805194|Secondary|Incidence and Intensity of Adverse Events|"Incidence and intensity of adverse events according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 3.0. The worst CTCAE grade per patient is reported and MedDRA version 15.1 used.
Serious signs and symptoms of progressive disease were reported as an adverse event in analysis of this endpoint."|From the first drug administration until 28 days after the last drug administration, up to 42 months|Treated set- all randomised patients who were documented to have taken at least 1 dose of study medication . Patients were allocated to the treatment groups according to the treatment actually received.||% of participants|||Number
854944|NCT00805194|Secondary|Dose Normalised Predose Plasma Concentration at Steady State (Cpre,ss,Norm) of Nintedanib and of Its Metabolites BIBF 1202 and BIBF 1202 Glucuronide|Geometric mean of dose normalised predose plasma concentration (Cpre,ss,norm) of nintedanib and of its metabolites BIBF 1202 and BIBF 1202 glucuronide evaluated at steady state based on course 2 and 3. If only one value was available and valid, then this value was used for calculation of Cpre,ss,norm.|Before the administration of nintedanib or placebo and between a window of 30 mins to an hour after administration of trial drug during Course 2 and between 1 and 3 hours after administration of trial drug during Course 3|Pharmacokinetic set- all patients in the treated set who were documented to have received at least 1 dose of nintedanib and who had at least 1 valid drug plasma concentration available||ng/mL/mg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
854973|NCT00625404|Secondary|Pill Counts and Participant Report of Adherence to Once-daily Pill Taking|Pill counts and participant report of adherence to once-daily pill taking reported as mean days study product could have been used according to pill counts|Up to 52 weeks|All randomized participants who completed at least one follow-up visit, excluding women found to have been infected at enrollment||percentage of days||Standard Deviation|Mean
854945|NCT00805194|Secondary|Quality of Life (QoL)|"QoL was measured by standardised questionnaires (EQ-5D, EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-LC13). The EORTC QLQ-C30 comprises of 30 questions, using both multi-item scales and single-item measures. EORTC LC-13 comprises of 13 questions incorporating 1 multi-item scale and a series of single items.
The following were the main points of interest:
Time to deterioration of cough (QLQ-LC13 question 1), Time to deterioration of dyspnoea (QLQ-LC13, composite of questions 3 to 5), Time to deterioration of pain (QLQ- C30, composite of questions 9 and 19).
Time to deterioration of cough, dyspnoea and pain was defined as the time to a 10-point increase from the baseline score.
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve"|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013|Randomised set||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854946|NCT00805194|Secondary|Clinical Improvement|"Clinical improvement was defined as the time from randomisation to deterioration in body weight and/or Eastern Cooperative Oncology group performance score (ECOG PS) whichever occurred first.
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve."|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013|Randomised set||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854947|NCT00805194|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Tumour Size|"Percentage change from baseline in tumour size is defined as decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of the target lesion.
Presented means are in fact adjusted best means percentage changes generated from ANOVA model adjusted for baseline ECOG PS (0 vs. 1), tumour histology (squamous vs non-squamous), brain metastases at baseline (yes vs no) and prior treatment with bevacizumab (yes vs no)
This endpoint was analysed based on the central independent reviewer as well as the investigator."|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013|Randomised Set||percentage of change in tumor size in mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
854948|NCT00805194|Secondary|Duration of Disease Control|"The duration of disease control was defined as the time from randomisation to the date of disease progression or death (which ever occurs first) for patients with disease control.
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve.
This endpoint was analysed based on the central independent reviewer as well as the investigator."|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013|Randomised Set||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854949|NCT00805194|Secondary|Disease Control|"Disease control was defined as a best overall response of Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), or Stable Disease (SD) and evaluated according to the modified RECIST criteria version 1.0.
This endpoint was analysed based on the central independent reviewer as well as the investigator."|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013|Randomised Set||% of participants|||Number
854950|NCT00805194|Secondary|Time to Confirmed Objective Tumour Response|"Time to confirmed objective response is defined as time from randomisation to the date of first documented (CR) or (PR) and evaluated according to the modified RECIST criteria version 1.0.
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve.
This endpoint was analysed based on the central independent reviewer as well as the investigator."|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013|Randomised Set||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854951|NCT00805194|Secondary|Duration of Confirmed Objective Tumour Response|"The duration of objective response is the time from first documented (CR) or (PR) to the time of progression or death and evaluated according to the modified RECIST criteria version 1.0.
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve.
This endpoint was analysed based on the central independent reviewer as well as the investigator."|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013|Randomised Set||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854952|NCT00805194|Secondary|Objective Tumour Response|"Confirmed objective response is defined as confirmed Complete Response (CR) and Partial Response (PR) and evaluated according to the modified RECIST criteria version 1.0.
This endpoint was analysed based on the central independent reviewer as well as the investigator."|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013|Randomised Set||% of participants|||Number
854953|NCT00805194|Secondary|Follow-up Analysis of Progression Free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by Investigator|"Follow-up analysis was conducted at the time of overall survival analysis. Progression Free Survival (PFS) as assessed by investigator according to the modified RECIST (version 1.0) criteria.
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve."|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013|Randomised Set||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854954|NCT00805194|Secondary|Follow-up Analysis of Progression Free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by Central Independent Review|"Follow-up analysis was conducted at the time of overall survival analysis. Progression Free Survival (PFS) as assessed by central independent review according to the modified RECIST (version 1.0) criteria.
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve."|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013|Randomised Set||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854955|NCT00805194|Secondary|Overall Survival (Key Secondary Endpoint)|"Overall Survival (OS) defined as the duration from randomisation to death (irrespective of the reason of death). Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve.
A fixed-sequence-testing was implemented for key secondary endpoint if both the primary and the follow-up analysis showed a treatment benefit (P<0.05) of nintedanib over placebo. In this case, the OS would be tested using hierarchical testing of statistical hypotheses in (1) patients with adenocarcinoma and <9 months since start of first-line therapy, (2) patients with adenocarcinoma, and (3) all patients. Each hypothesis could be only tested at the pre-specified alpha level if the previous null hypothesis in the testing sequence had been."|From randomisation until cut-off date 15 February 2013 (approximately 48 months or 1151 deaths among all patients )|Randomised Set||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854956|NCT00805194|Primary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by Central Independent Review|"Progression Free Survival (PFS) as assessed by central independent review according to the modified RECIST (version 1.0) criteria. Progression free survival (PFS) is defined as the duration of time from date of randomisation to date of progression or death (whatever occurs earlier).
Median, 25th and 75th percentiles are calculated from an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve."|From randomisation until cut-off date 2 November 2010 (when 713 PFS events were observed)|Randomised Set||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
854957|NCT00790569|Primary|CO-confirmed 7-day Abstinence|Number of participants reporting 7-day abstinence at 12-months, confirmed with CO measurement.|12 Months|||participants|||Number
854958|NCT00790569|Primary|Self-reported 7-day Abstinence|Number of participants with self-reported 7-day abstinence at 12-months|12 Months|||participants|||Number
854959|NCT00790569|Secondary|Reduction in Cigarettes Per Day|Change in mean cigarettes per day|6-Months|||cigarettes/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
854974|NCT00625404|Secondary|Pregnancy Complications|Reported complications during pregnancy, including spontaneous abortion, vaginal or uterine bleeding, emergency c-section and other complications|up to 60 weeks|Women becoming pregnant during regular follow-up in the study (70 in Truvada group and 45 in placebo group)||participants|||Number
854975|NCT00625404|Secondary|FTC and/or Tenofovir Resistance|"Genotypic resistance to FTC and/or tenofovir at the time of HIV diagnosis and 4 weeks later. If resistance was present, testing was repeated at weeks 12, 24, 36 and 52 as necessary (resistance testing will stop if no resistance is detected).
participants were classified as having resistance if they had one or more visits in which resistance was detected, even if the resistance became undetectable over time."|up to 52 weeks|All women who seroconverted were assessed for possible resistance.||participants|||Number
854976|NCT00625404|Secondary|CD4+ T-cell Count|CD4+ T-cell Count at the Time of HIV Seroconversion through 16 weeks|Up to 16 weeks|||cells/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
854977|NCT00625404|Secondary|Plasma HIV RNA Level (HIV-1 Viral Load)|Viral load at the time of HIV detection, HIV conversion and through 16 weeks|up to 16 weeks|68 women who became infected post-enrollment were included in viral load analyses. Only 48 of these women (27 on Truvada and 21 on placebo) contributed a specimen sample for analysis at the 16-weeks post seroconversion visit||log copies/mL||Standard Deviation|Log Mean
854978|NCT00625404|Primary|Frequency and Nature of Adverse Events (AEs) During and Within 4 Weeks After Study Product Administration||10-26 months per site||||||
854979|NCT00625404|Primary|Confirmed Grade 2 or Higher Serum Creatinine Toxicity|Repeat specimens were collected to confirm chemistry toxicities. Grade 2 or higher serum creatinine toxicity was defined as ≥1.4 times the upper limit of normal|cumulative toxicity through 52 weeks of product use and 4 weeks post product|The Safety Population consisted of all women who were randomized and who had at least one follow-up visit and did not return all of their product un-used. Only women assessed for a particular safety outcome were included in analysis of that outcome.||participants|||Number
854980|NCT00625404|Primary|HIV Infection|HIV Seroconversion, with time to infection refined based on PCR results obtained from stored specimens.|Cumulative HIV infection between enrollment and 52 weeks|All randomized participants who made at least one follow-up visit and were not HIV-positive at enrollment were included in the analysis population||participants|||Number
854981|NCT00601900|Secondary|Treatment Related Toxicity|Graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Tabulated by type, grade, and arm.|Up to 5 years||||||
854982|NCT00601900|Secondary|Time-to-treatment Failure|From randomization until first disease progression, early termination of protocol therapy due to toxicity or withdrawn consent, or going onto non-protocol therapy. Defined by RECIST criteria. The proportional hazards model will be used to compare the arms on time-to-treatment-failure|Up to 5 years||||||
854983|NCT00601900|Secondary|Site of Progression||Up to 5 years||||||
854984|NCT00601900|Secondary|Probability of Surviving Until 36 Months||At 36 months||||||
854985|NCT00601900|Secondary|Duration of Tumor Response|Defined by RECIST criteria.|From the time measurement criteria are met for CR/PR (whichever is first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented, assessed up to 5 years||||||
854986|NCT00601900|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is defined as the time from study entry to death from any cause. The median OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Assessed up to 5 years|Per protocol, the analysis of the primary endpoint was restricted to patients that elected letrozole as endocrine therapy. Of the 348 patients electing Letrozole, 5 did not receive treatment (1 on Arm I, and 4 on Arm II). This left 343 patients (173 on the Arm I and 170 on Arm II) evaluable for the primary endpoint.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
854987|NCT00601900|Secondary|Objective Response Rate|Response was defined using RECIST criteria: Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR) 30% decrease in sum of longest diameter of target lesions.|Assessed up to 5 years|Per protocol, the analysis of this endpoint was restricted to patients that elected letrozole as endocrine therapy and began treatment with measureable disease. A total of 213 patients (Arm A:106; Arm B:107) had measureable disease. Of the 213, 197 (Arm A:98, Arm B:99) patients were assessed for response during treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
854988|NCT00601900|Secondary|6 Month Progression-Free Survival Rate|The 6 month progression-free survival rate was defined as the proportion of patients who were alive progression-free 6 months after registration into the study.|At 6 months|Per protocol, the analysis of the primary endpoint was restricted to patients that elected letrozole as endocrine therapy. Of the 348 patients electing Letrozole, 5 did not receive treatment (1 on Arm I, and 4 on Arm II). This left 343 patients (173 on the Arm I and 170 on Arm II) evaluable for the primary endpoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854989|NCT00601900|Secondary|12 Month Progression Free Survival Rate|The 12 month progression-free survival rate was defined as the proportion of patients who were alive progression-free 12 months after registration into the study.|At 12 months|Per protocol, the analysis of the primary endpoint was restricted to patients that elected letrozole as endocrine therapy. Of the 348 patients electing Letrozole, 5 did not receive treatment (1 on Arm I, and 4 on Arm II). This left 343 patients (173 on the Arm I and 170 on Arm II) evaluable for the primary endpoint.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854990|NCT00601900|Primary|Progression-free Survival|The Primary Endpoint for this study was to compare the progression-free survival of letrozole therapy alone with the combination of letrozole therapy plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment in women with estrogen- and/or progesterone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from randomization until disease progression or death, whichever occurs first. The median PFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Progression was assessed per RECIST criteria, and defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameters of target lesions from baseline or the appearance of new lesions.|From randomization until disease progression or death whichever occurs first, assessed up to 5 years|Per protocol, the analysis of the primary endpoint was restricted to patients that elected letrozole as endocrine therapy. Of the 348 patients electing Letrozole, 5 did not receive treatment (1 on Arm I, and 4 on Arm II). This left 343 patients (173 on the Arm I and 170 on Arm II) evaluable for the primary endpoint.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
855035|NCT00383760|Secondary|Overall Survival|Estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|At 1 year|||participants|||Number
855036|NCT00383760|Secondary|Overall Survival|Estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|At 6 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
854991|NCT00573833|Other Pre-specified|Median International Prostate Symptom Total Score|Quality of life will be assessed with the MSKCC prostate quality of life instrument. International prostate symptom score index (IPSS). The IPSS index is a seven item questionnaire designed to assess urinary functioning, specifically urinary frequency, nocturia, weak urinary stream, hesitancy, intermittence, incomplete emptying, and urgency. Questions are rated on a six point Likert scale with higher scores indicating more difficulty in urinary functioning. This measure demonstrated a high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.84) with excellent test-retest reliability (r = 0.92).|week 12 reported|||scores on a scale||Full Range|Median
854992|NCT00573833|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants Having an International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) Domain Score Greater Than or Equal to 26 Through 12-Week Endpoint|Self-reported erectile function over the past 4 weeks. IIEF- EF is the sum of Questions 1-5 and 15 of the IIEF. Questions 1-5 are scored 0 (low/no erectile function) to 5 (high erectile function) and Question 15 is scored 1 (very low confidence) to 5 (very high confidence), for a total score ranging from 1 to 30. Higher scores represent better erectile function. Data presented are the number of participants who return to normal erectile function (IIEF-EF domain score ≥26)|week 12 reported|||participants|||Number
854993|NCT00573833|Primary|Number of Patients With an Acceptable Level of Treatment Related Urinary and Rectal Toxicity as Defined at < Grade 3 CTC Toxicity|urinary and rectal toxicity-see the adverse event tables|Within 90 days of treatment (early toxicities) or after 90 days (late toxicities)|||participants|||Number
854994|NCT00573833|Primary|Number of Patients With an Acceptable Level of Severe Toxicity as Defined at < Grade 3 CTC Toxicity|Feasibility will be defined as an acceptable level of severe toxicity (both acute and late effects), and adequate dosimetric coverage. Severe toxicity will be defined as > or = grade 3 NCI CTC toxicity|At scheduled 3 month intervals for one year|||participants|||Number
854995|NCT00573872|Primary|Access Local Tumor Control|Lack of tumor growth by CT or MRI at last follow-up|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
854996|NCT00573872|Primary|Assess the Acute and Late Toxicity of Spinal Radiosurgery|CTCAE version 3. Acute toxicity will be recorded if toxicity occurs early phase or within 3 months, and late toxicity would be any toxicity that follows those 3 months.|2 years|||events|||Number
854997|NCT00573872|Primary|Estimate the Palliative Response (Pain or Relief of Neurologic Symptoms) From Single Fraction Radiosurgery Delivered With Tomotherapy|"Physician's subjective report of palliative pain relief. The maximal benefit patient received (best response) is reported. Scale is pain described as worse, stable, better, or completely resolved. In the reporting better or completely resolved indicates response to treatment."|2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
854998|NCT00432159|Secondary|Average Radiographic Disc Height (mm) - Change From Post-op||24 months|As Treated. The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
854999|NCT00432159|Secondary|Global Cervical Range of Motion - Change From Baseline||24 months|As Treated. The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
855000|NCT00432159|Secondary|Subject Satisfaction|Subject Satisfaction (Would you have this procedure again?)|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||participants|||Number
855001|NCT00432159|Secondary|Activity|Clinical Assessment of Activity|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||participants|||Number
855002|NCT00432159|Secondary|Return to Work|Estimated Proportion of Subjects Returning to Work|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||% of subjects who returned to work|||Number
855003|NCT00432159|Secondary|Work Status Assessment||24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||participants|||Number
855004|NCT00432159|Secondary|SF-36 - Mental Composite Scores (MCS) - Change From Baseline|Change from baseline in Quality of Life - Mental Composite Scores. SF-36 is based on units on a scale; where 0 is severe disability and 100 is no disability. The scores are scaled (based on weighted sum of the questions)|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855005|NCT00432159|Secondary|SF-36 - Physical Composite Scores (PCS) - Change From Baseline|Change from baseline in Quality of Life - Physical Composite Scores. SF-36 is based on units on a scale; where 0 is severe disability and 100 is no disability. The scores are scaled (based on weighted sum of the questions)|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855037|NCT00383760|Secondary|Median Survival Time|Estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Up to 3 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
855006|NCT00432159|Secondary|Dysphagia Disability Index - Change From Baseline|Change from baseline in Dysphagia Disability Index (DDI). The DDI is designed to evaluate dysphagia, difficulty in swallowing, using a 25-item questionnaire. Responses from the questionnaire were scored as “always” 4, “sometimes” 2, or “never” 0, and summed to provide a total score (range 0-100). Higher DDI scores suggest greater subjective signs of dysphagia.|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855007|NCT00432159|Secondary|Average Shoulder Pain VAS - Change From Baseline|Change from baseline in Average of the left and right shoulder VAS scores. VAS is a 100-mm visual analog scale used to assess pain. It asks the subject to place a vertical mark on a 100-mm horizontal line, with 'No pain' listed on the left (at 0 mm) and 'Very severe pain' labeled on the right (at 100 mm). The subject is instructed to indicate the amount of pain they feel in their shoulder.|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855008|NCT00432159|Secondary|Maximum Shoulder Pain VAS - Change From Baseline|Change from baseline in Maximum value of the left and right shoulder VAS scores. VAS is a 100-mm visual analog scale used to assess pain. It asks the subject to place a vertical mark on a 100-mm horizontal line, with 'No pain' listed on the left (at 0 mm) and 'Very severe pain' labeled on the right (at 100 mm). The subject is instructed to indicate the amount of pain they feel in their shoulder.|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855009|NCT00432159|Secondary|Average Arm Pain VAS - Change From Baseline|Change from baseline in average of the left and right arm VAS scores. VAS is a 100-mm visual analog scale used to assess pain. It asks the subject to place a vertical mark on a 100-mm horizontal line, with 'No pain' listed on the left (at 0 mm) and 'Very severe pain' labeled on the right (at 100 mm). The subject is instructed to indicate the amount of pain they feel in their arm.|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855010|NCT00432159|Secondary|Maximum Arm Pain VAS - Change From Baseline|Change from baseline in maximum value of the left and right arm VAS scores. VAS is a 100-mm visual analog scale used to assess pain. It asks the subject to place a vertical mark on a 100-mm horizontal line, with 'No pain' listed on the left (at 0 mm) and 'Very severe pain' labeled on the right (at 100 mm). The subject is instructed to indicate the amount of pain they feel in their arm.|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855011|NCT00432159|Secondary|Neck Pain VAS Scores - Change From Baseline|Change from baseline of the Neck Pain VAS Scores. VAS is a 100-mm visual analog scale used to assess pain. It asks the subject to place a vertical mark on a 100-mm horizontal line, with 'No pain' listed on the left (at 0 mm) and 'Very severe pain' labeled on the right (at 100 mm). The subject is instructed to indicate the amount of pain they feel in their neck.|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
855012|NCT00432159|Secondary|NDI - Change From Baseline|Change from baseline of the Neck Disability Index. NDI has a minimum score of 0 (no disability) and a maximum score of 50 (complete disability) , which is calculated based on the 6 answers to each of the 10 questions. Each answer within a question is given a numerical value 0 to 5.|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||NDI Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
855013|NCT00432159|Secondary|Device-Related SAE Component of Success|no device related serious adverse events|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||participants who are successes|||Number
855014|NCT00432159|Secondary|Subsequent Secondary Surgery Component of Success|no subsequent secondary surgical intervention at the index level|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||participants who are successes|||Number
855015|NCT00432159|Secondary|Neurological Component of Success|no new clinically significant permanent abnormalities in neurological function|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||participants who are successes|||Number
855038|NCT00383760|Secondary|Stable Disease Rate, Evaluated Using RECIST Criteria|Stable disease is defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started.|Up to 3 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
855016|NCT00432159|Secondary|NDI Success|15 point improvement in NDI. NDI has a max score of 50, which is calculated based on the 6 answers to each of the 10 questions. Each answer within a question is given a numerical value 0 to 5.|24 months|Intent to Treat (As Randomized). The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient, patients who experienced a Device Failure before the 24 month visit, and patients with no data collected for this secondary outcome (missing data).||participants who are successes|||Number
855017|NCT00432159|Primary|Overall Success|Subject must show 15 point improvement in the Neck Disability Index from baseline to 24 months post operative as well as have no device related SAE, Secondary Surgical Interventions at the index level or any new permanent neurological deterioration.|24 months|The primary outcome was analyzed with an Intent to Treat (As Randomized) analysis. The difference between the number of treated patients and the number of participants analyzed for each group at the 24 month visit is due to: death of one randomized ACDF patient and patients with no data for NDI and Neurological function (missing data).||participants who are successes|||Number
855018|NCT00414726|Primary|Primary Efficacy Outcome Measure is a Comparison of the Change in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) Scores From Baseline to 4 Hours (During Therapy) in the Two Groups.|The NIHSS score ranges from 0 (best score) to 42 (worst score).|4 hours after starting treatment|||0-4 hour change in NIHSS score||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
855019|NCT00414726|Primary|Primary Safety Outcome Measure is a Comparison of the Change in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) Scores From Baseline to 24 Hours (After Therapy) in the Two Groups.|The NIHSS score ranges from 0 (best score) to 42 (worst score).|24 hours|||0-24 hour change in NIHSS score||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
855020|NCT00409565|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR) ((Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR))|"Disease Control Rate (DCR) (or Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR)), is defined as the percentage of patients with advanced or metastatic cancer who have achieved complete response, partial response and stable disease to cetuximab and bevacizumab.
DCR = number of patients with (at least) partial response or stable disease / total number of evaluable patients"|At 12 weeks|Patients that were evaluable for 'best response' to treatment.||percentage of participants|||Number
855021|NCT00409565|Secondary|Change in Serum Cytokine Concentrations|Ratio of serum cytokines concentration after treatment with cetuximab and bevacizumab to baseline serum cytokines concentration, in picogram/milliliter (pg/ml) for 13 different cytokines. [post-treatment (pg/ml) / baseline (pg/ml)]|Up to 5 years|Patients treated with cetuximab and bevacizumab who provided baseline and post-treatment serum samples.||post-treatment/baseline pg/ml ratio|||Number
855022|NCT00409565|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|The length of time from the start of study/treatment that diagnosed patients are still alive.|Up to 5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
855023|NCT00409565|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|PFS is the length of time during and after treatment that patients are alive with the disease but it does not get worse. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST) for target lesions and assessed by computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), Progressive Disease is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.|Up to 5 years|All patients included in study are assessed for response to treatment, per protocol. Of 46 eligible patients, 45 were evaluable for response.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
855024|NCT00409565|Primary|Objective Response Rate (ORR)|ORR is the percentage of patients whose cancer shrunk or disappeared after study treatment. ORR was determined per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST) for target lesions and assessed by computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) : Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR; Progressive Disease (PD): at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions; Stable Disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started.|Up to 5 years|Assess all patients included in this study for response to treatment, per protocol. Of 46 eligible patients, 45 were evaluable for response.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
855025|NCT00401817|Secondary|Overall Survival|"The percentage of patients who have survived at the three year time point.
The 3-year OS rate was estimated based on the Kaplan-Meier analysis."|3 years|Evaluable Patients||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
855026|NCT00401817|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|"The percentage of patients who have not progressed at the three year time point.
The 3-year PFS rate was estimated based on the Kaplan-Meier analysis."|3 years|Evaluable patients||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
855027|NCT00401817|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|"Overall Response Rate measured using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis
Response criteria were those reported by Cheson et al. (1999)"|38 Months (min 33 months, max 62 months)|Evaluable patients||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
855028|NCT00401817|Primary|Number of Participants With Toxicity|Number of patients with reversible myelosuppression (Primary toxicity was reversible myelosuppression) Toxicities were graded according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0.|38 months|||participants|||Number
855029|NCT00383760|Secondary|Objective Stable Disease Rate|Objective stable disease rate Using RECIST|Upto 3 years|Data was not collected|||||
855030|NCT00383760|Secondary|Toxicity|Types of Gr 3 or greater adverse events that are atleast possibly related to study drug|All patients will be evaluable for toxicity from the time of their first treatment with E7389.|||Types of adverse event|||Number
855031|NCT00383760|Secondary|Response Duration||From the time measurement criteria are met for CR or PR (whichever is first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented, assessed up to 3 years|Data were not collected|||||
855032|NCT00383760|Secondary|Time to Progression|Estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|At 1 year|Time to progression at 1 year not analyzed|||||
855033|NCT00383760|Secondary|Time to Progression|"Estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.
Median time to progression"|At 6 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
855034|NCT00383760|Secondary|Median Time to Disease Progression|Estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Duration of time from start of treatment until the criteria for progression are met, assessed up to 3 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
855039|NCT00383760|Primary|Objective Response (Complete and Partial) Evaluated Using RECIST Criteria|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions.|Up to 3 years|||participants|||Number
855040|NCT00272844|Secondary|Number of Participants With Improved Neuropsychological Development|Improved neuropsychological development is defined as progressively achieving developmental milestones|Every 3-6 months for an approximate median of 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
855041|NCT00272844|Secondary|Number of Growth Responders|Growth response was defined as an increase in general health, growth, and behavior.|Every 3-6 months for an approximate median of 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
855042|NCT00272844|Primary|Number of Responders|Responders was defined as an increase in total serum cholesterol and a decrease in 7-DHC (7-Dehydrocholesterol), and 8-DHC (8-Dehydrocholesterol) were measured on all participants.|Every 3-6 months for an approximate median of 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
855043|NCT00142506|Primary|Assessment of Erectile Dysfunction|The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) is used for the evaluation of male sexual function and diagnostic evaluation of Erectile Dysfunction (ED) severity. There are 5 domains of the IIEF: erectile function, orgasmic function, sexual desire, intercourse satisfaction, and overall satisfaction. A score of 0-5 is awarded to each question of the IIEF. Total IIEF scores range from 0-75. Lower scores indicate severe erectile dysfunction (0=severe erectile dysfunction), while higher scores indicate less erectile dysfunction (75=no erectile dysfunction).|Baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855044|NCT00006184|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here is the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events see the adverse event module.|9 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
855045|NCT00006184|Primary|Immune Response|Immune cell depletion is defined as immunosuppression of participants T cells prior to transplant measured by cluster of differentiation 4 (CD4) counts (i.e. cells) > 50 cells per ul.Immune T-cell depletion helps to reduce the ability to reject allogeneic cells in participants and is required for engraftment. Engraftment is the body's ability to accept donor cells.|105 days|This outcome measure was only pre-specified to be measured in the recipient Arm/Group.||Particpants|||Number
855727|NCT02637804|Primary|Comfort|Subjective ratings of comfort (right after insertion, right before removal, all day long) for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A assessed at 1 week. (Scale 0-10, 0=very poor comfort, 10=very good comfort).|1 week|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855697|NCT02696317|Secondary|Pre-Lens Tear Film MPA After 10 ± 3 Days of Wear and After 3 Hours Exposure to Reduced Humidity (Post RH)|MPA is the minimum area of the contact lens surface (expressed in %) that is protected by the tear film during the entire interblink period. Pre-lens tear film MPA was assessed following 6 hours of wear including 3 hours in a reduced humidity environment (20% RH).. Higher values indicate less dry and more eye comfort.|Day 10 ± 3 days, each product|Full Analysis Set. Number Analyzed is the number of eyes with non-missing response.||percentage of contact lens surface area|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
855698|NCT02696317|Secondary|Pre-Lens Tear Film Minimum Protected Area (MPA) in a Normal Environment After 10 ± 3 Days of Wear (Pre RH)|MPA is the minimum area of the contact lens surface (expressed in %) that is protected by the tear film during the entire interblink period. Pre-lens tear film MPA was assessed in a normal environment following 3 hours of wear. Higher values indicate less dry and more eye comfort.|Day 10 ± 3 days, each product|Full Analysis Set. Number Analyzed is the number of eyes with non-missing response.||percentage of contact lens surface area|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
855699|NCT02696317|Secondary|Tear Film Evaporation Rate After 10 ± 3 Days of Wear and After 3 Hours Exposure to Reduced Humidity (Post RH)|Tear film evaporation rate (amount of tears that evaporates over a surface area per seconds) assessment was performed using the Oregon Health Sciences University Evaporometer. Measurements were taken on both the right and left eyes after 6 hours of lens wear, including 3 hours of wear in a 20% reduced humidity environment (20% RH), after 10 ± 3 days of lens wear. The temperature and humidity were measured within an air chamber around the ocular surface with the eyes opened and closed. The evaporation from the ocular surface was calculated as the difference between the evaporation rate of the skin taken during the closed eye measurement and the evaporation rate taken during the open eye measurement. The rate of evaporation was measured in g/cm2/sec for 2 humidity ranges. A higher evaporation rate can be a contributing factor to eye irritation and lens intolerance.|Day 10 ± 3 days, each product|Full Analysis Set. Number Analyzed is the number of eyes with non-missing response.||10^-7g/cm^2/s|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
855700|NCT02696317|Primary|Tear Film Evaporation Rate in a Normal Environment After 10 ± 3 Days of Wear (Pre RH)|Tear film evaporation rate (amount of tears that evaporates over a surface area per seconds) assessment was performed using the Oregon Health Sciences University Evaporometer. Measurements were taken on both the right and left eyes after 3 hours of wear in a normal environment after 10 ± 3 days of lens wear. The temperature and humidity were measured within an air chamber around the ocular surface with the eyes opened and closed. The evaporation from the ocular surface was calculated as the difference between the evaporation rate of the skin taken during the closed eye measurement and the evaporation rate taken during the open eye measurement. The rate of evaporation was measured in g/cm2/sec for 2 humidity ranges. A higher evaporation rate can be a contributing factor to eye irritation and lens intolerance.|Day 10 ± 3 days, each product|Full Analysis Set. Number Analyzed is the number of eyes with non-missing response.||10^-7g/cm^2/s|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
855703|NCT02640482|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With SVR12 in Arm A DB Active Drug With Prior SOF + RBV ± pegIFN Failure|SVR12 was defined as HCV RNA level <LLOQ 12 weeks after the last dose of active study drug.|12 weeks after the last actual dose of active study drug|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug in Arm A DB with prior SOF + RBV ± pegIFN failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
855704|NCT02640482|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Post-treatment Relapse in Arm A DB Active Drug Excluding Prior SOF + Ribavirin (RBV) ± pegIFN Failures|Post-treatment relapse was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ between the end of DB treatment and 12 weeks after the last dose of active study drug among participants who completed treatment with HCV RNA levels < LLOQ at the end of treatment, excluding reinfection.|Between End of Treatment (Week 12) and 12 weeks after the last dose of Arm A DB active drug (up to Week 24)|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug in Arm A DB with HCV RNA < LLOQ at the final treatment visit who completed the DB treatment, excluding participants with prior SOF + RBV ± pegIFN failures.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
855705|NCT02640482|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Virologic Failure in Arm A DB Active Drug Excluding Prior SOF + Ribavirin (RBV) ± pegIFN Failures|On-treatment virologic failure was defined as confirmed increase of > 1 log(subscript)10(subscript) IU/mL above the lowest value of post-baseline HCV RNA during treatment; confirmed HCV RNA ≥ 100 IU/mL after HCV RNA < LLOQ during treatment, or HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ at end of treatment with at least 6 weeks of treatment.|Up to Week 12 post baseline|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug in Arm A DB excluding participants with prior SOF + RBV ± pegIFN failures.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
855726|NCT02637804|Primary|Vision|Subjective ratings of vision (right after insertion, right before removal, all day long) for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A assessed at 1 week. (Scale 0-10, 0=very poor vision, 10=very good vision).|1 week|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855706|NCT02640482|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With SVR12 in Arm A DB Active Drug Excluding Prior SOF + Ribavirin (RBV) ± pegIFN Failures: Superiority Analysis|SVR12 was defined as plasma HCV RNA level <LLOQ 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug. The secondary efficacy endpoint was the superiority of the percentage of participants who achieved SVR12 in Arm A Double Blind (DB) Active Drug excluding prior SOF + RBV ± pegIFN failures compared with the historical control rate for patients treated with the current standard of care (SOF + RBV for 12 weeks). As pre-specified in the study protocol, the primary outcome measure and the secondary outcome measure are not tested independently from each other. Rather, the two measures are ranked in a fixed sequential testing procedure that only if success was demonstrated for the primary outcome (i.e. non-inferiority test of Arm A SVR12 rate to the standard of care) did we test the first secondary outcome (i.e. superiority test of Arm A SVR12 rate to the standard of care).|12 weeks after the last actual dose of active study drug|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug in Arm A DB excluding participants with prior SOF + RBV ± pegIFN failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
855707|NCT02640482|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12) in Arm A DB Active Drug Excluding Prior SOF + Ribavirin (RBV) ± pegIFN Failures: Noninferiority Analysis|SVR12 was defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level less than the lower limit of quantification [<LLOQ]) 12 weeks after the last dose of active study drug. The primary efficacy endpoint was the noninferiority of the percentage of participants who achieved SVR12 in Arm A Double Blind (DB) Active Drug excluding prior sofosbuvir (SOF) + ribavirin (RBV) ± pegylatedinterferon (pegIFN) failures compared with the historical control rate for patients treated with the current standard of care (SOF + RBV for 12 weeks).|12 weeks after the last actual dose of active study drug|All randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug in Arm A DB excluding participants with prior SOF + RBV ± pegIFN failures.||percentage of participants|||Number
855708|NCT02637804|Secondary|Papillary Conjunctivitis|Papillary conjunctivitis for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at 1 week. (Grading scale 0-4, 0.5 steps 0=Normal, 1=Trace 2=MIld, 3=Moderate 4=Severe)|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855709|NCT02637804|Secondary|Corneal Oedema|Corneal oedema for for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at 1 week. (Grading scale 0-4, 0.5 steps 0=Normal, 1=Trace 2=MIld, 3=Moderate 4=Severe)|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855710|NCT02637804|Secondary|Conjunctival Staining|Conjunctival staining for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at 1 week. (Grading scale 0-4, 0.5 steps 0=Normal, 1=Trace 2=MIld, 3=Moderate 4=Severe)|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855711|NCT02637804|Secondary|Corneal Neovascularization|Corneal neovascularization for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at 1 week. (Grading scale 0-4, 0.5 steps 0=Normal, 1=Trace 2=MIld, 3=Moderate 4=Severe)|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855712|NCT02637804|Secondary|Corneal Staining|Corneal staining for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at 1 week. (Grading scale 0-4, 0.5 steps 0=Normal, 1=Trace 2=MIld, 3=Moderate 4=Severe)|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855713|NCT02637804|Secondary|Limbal Redness|Limbal redness for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at 1 week. (Grading scale 0-4, 0.5 steps 0=Normal, 1=Trace 2=MIld, 3=Moderate 4=Severe)|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855714|NCT02637804|Secondary|Conjunctival Redness|Conjunctival redness for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at 1 week. (Grading scale 0-4, 0.5 steps 0=Normal, 1=Trace 2=MIld, 3=Moderate 4=Severe)|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855715|NCT02637804|Secondary|Lens Fit Overall|Lens fit evaluation overall for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at 1 week. (Optimum, Good, Acceptable, Not acceptable (cannot wear))|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855716|NCT02637804|Secondary|Lens Fit Overall|Lens fit evaluation overall for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at baseline. (Optimum, Good, Acceptable, Not acceptable (cannot wear))|Baseline|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855717|NCT02637804|Secondary|Lens Fit - Post-blink Movement|Lens fit evaluation of post-blink movement for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at 1 week. (Tight, Little tight, Optimal, Little loose, Loose)|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855718|NCT02637804|Secondary|Lens Fit - Post-blink Movement|Lens fit evaluation of post-blink movement for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at baseline. (Tight, Little tight, Optimal, Little loose, Loose)|Baseline|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855719|NCT02637804|Secondary|Lens Fit - Vertical Centration|Lens fit evaluation of vertical centration for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at 1 week. (Upper, Little upper, Centered, Little lower, Lower)|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855720|NCT02637804|Secondary|Lens Fit - Vertical Centration|Lens fit evaluation of vertical centration for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A is assessed at baseline. (Upper, Little upper, Centered, Little lower, Lower)|Baseline|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855721|NCT02637804|Secondary|Lens Fit - Horizontal Centration|Lens fit evaluation of horizontal centration for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A assessed at 1 week. (Temporal, Little temporal, Centered, Little nasal, Nasal)|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855722|NCT02637804|Secondary|Lens Fit - Horizontal Centration|Lens fit evaluation of horizontal centration for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A assessed at baseline. (Temporal, Little temporal, Centered, Little nasal, Nasal)|Baseline|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855723|NCT02637804|Primary|Lens Preference - Stenfilcon A/Delefilcon A (Group 2)|Subjective ratings of lens preference for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A assessed at 1 week. (5 possible ratings: Prefer stenfilcon A, Little Prefer stenfilcon A, No preference, little prefer delefilcon A, prefer delefilcon A).|1 week|||Participants|||Count of Participants
855724|NCT02637804|Primary|Lens Preference - Stenfilcon A/Narafilcon A (Group 1)|Subjective ratings of lens preference for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A assessed at 1 week. (5 possible ratings: Prefer stenfilcon A, Little Prefer stenfilcon A, No preference, little prefer narafilcon A, prefer narafilcon A).|1 week|||Participants|||Count of Participants
855725|NCT02637804|Primary|Handling|Subjective ratings of handling (lens insertion and lens removal) for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A assessed at 1 week. (Scale 0-10, 0=very poor handling, 10=very good handling.|1 week|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855728|NCT02637804|Primary|Dryness|Subjective ratings of dryness (right after insertion, right before removal, all day long) for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A assessed at 1 week. (Scale 0-10, 0=very dry, 10=no dryness at all.|1 week|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855729|NCT02637804|Primary|Red Eye Sensation|Subjective ratings of red eye sensation for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A assessed at 1 week. Grade 0-3, 0=No sensation, 1=Slightly: sometimes felt sensation without any trouble in wearing contact lenses, 2=Mild: always felt sensation without any trouble in wearing contact lenses, 3=Heavy: could not wear contact lense due to sensation|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855730|NCT02637804|Primary|Itching Sensation on Removal|Subjective ratings of itching sensation on insertion for each lens pair assessed at 1 week. Grade 0-3, 0=No sensation, 1=Slightly: sometimes felt sensation without any trouble in wearing contact lenses, 2=Mild: always felt sensation without any trouble in wearing contact lenses, 3=Heavy: could not wear contact lense due to sensation|1 week|||Eyes|Eyes||Number
855731|NCT02637804|Primary|Pain and Foreign Body Sensation|Subjective ratings of pain and foreign body sensation for stenfilcon A/narafilcon A and stenfilcon A/delefilcon A assessed at 1 week. Grade 0-3, 0=No sensation, 1=Slightly: sometimes felt sensation without any trouble in wearing contact lenses, 2=Mild: always felt sensation without any trouble in wearing contact lenses, 3=Heavy: could not wear contact lense due to sensation|1 week|||eyes|Eyes||Number
855732|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15)|This involves 15 questions about the mood of the subjects. Scores of 0 to 4 to be in the normal range, 5 to 9 to indicate mild depression, and 10 to 15 to indicate moderate to severe depression.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855733|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Addenbrookes Cognitive Examination (ACE-R)|The ACE-R involves testing of attention, orientation, memory, fluency, language and visuospatial abilities.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855734|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)|Different cognitive domains are assessed (attention and concentration, executive functions, memory, language, visuo-constructional skills, conceptual thinking, calculations, and orientation).|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855735|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Falls Efficacy Scale – International (FES-I)|Fear of falling will be measured using the falls efficacy scale – international version. This is a short and valid measure of fear of falling in older adults, which assesses basic and demanding activities (both physical and social). It consists of 16 scenarios (e.g. cleaning the house) and subjects must rate their fear of falling on a scale from 1 (Not at all concerned) to 4 (Very concerned).|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855736|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Freezing of Gait (FOG) Questionnaire|This is a 10 item questionnaire intended to classify freezing of gait. The questionnaire has 3 parts; distinction of freezers from non-freezers, Freezing severity, frequency and duration and impact of freezing on daily life.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855737|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Hoehn & Yahr (H & Y) Scale|The Hoehn and Yahr rating scale is a widely used clinical rating scale, which defines broad categories of motor function in Parkinson’s disease (PD). All participants’ will be tested who are in H &Y stages I-III.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855738|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS)|The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale will be used to assess motor and non-motor features of PD and disease severity. The UPDRS is scored from a total of 195 points; higher scores reflect worsening disability.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855739|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Contrast Sensitivity|CS will be measured using the Mars CS sheets placed on an adjustable holder. The sheet consists of 48 Latin letters of uniform height; the contrast from the white background decreases with subsequent letters. Room illumination is adjusted so that average CS sheet luminance is between 80 and 120cd/m² (measured via a luminance meter). Assessment is done binocularly with the average distance from the patients eyes being 50cm. Participants read aloud down the sheet starting at the top left. Errors are recorded on the pre-set score sheet and testing is terminated after 2 consecutive errors.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855740|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Visual Acuity|VA is measured binocularly used a standard LogMAR chart. Participants will be seated at a distance of 4m from the chart. Participants will be instructed to read aloud down the chart starting from the top left.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855741|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Visual Object and Space Perception Battery (VOSP)|This study will use a selection of these tests; incomplete letters, dot counting and position discrimination.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855742|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Clock Copying (CLOX 1 and 2)|Participants are required to draw a clock with the numbers and arrows pointed at a particular time. Then the subjects have to copy a clock drawn by the researcher.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855743|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|Benton’s Judgement of Line Orientation (JLO) Test|JLO is a test of visuospatial ability, which involves a subject viewing a set of numbered lines and then being shown two lines of the same orientation. Participants then have to name the numbers that the shown lines correspond to.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855744|NCT02610634|Other Pre-specified|CDR Attention Battery (Cognitive Drug Research – CDR, United Biosource Corporation, UK)|The Attention CDR involves a series of computerised tests, which the subjects respond to by pressing one of two buttons. Scores for sub-sections of Simple reaction time, Digit vigilance and Choice reaction time will be obtained.|Session 1 (full session lasts approx. 3 hours)||||||
855745|NCT02610634|Secondary|Visual Sampling Parameter: Number of Blinks During Gait|Number of blinks observed when walking, measured via EOG and Dikablis mobile eye-tracker. Walking conditions include; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins) and one week later in Session 2 for a sub-group (PD and controls n = upto 25) (lasting approx. 60mins)||||||
855746|NCT02610634|Secondary|Visual Sampling Parameter: Saccade Duration During Gait|Duration (ms) of fast eye movements observed when walking, measured via EOG and Dikablis mobile eye-tracker. Walking conditions include; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)||||||
855747|NCT02610634|Secondary|Visual Sampling Parameter: Fixation Duration During Gait|Duration (ms) of pauses (fixations) between fast eye movements observed when walking, measured via EOG and Dikablis mobile eye-tracker. Walking conditions include; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)||||||
855748|NCT02610634|Secondary|Visual Sampling Parameter: Fixation Number During Gait|Number of pauses (fixations) between fast eye movements observed when walking, measured via EOG and Dikablis mobile eye-tracker. Walking conditions include; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)||||||
855749|NCT02610634|Secondary|Visual Sampling Parameter: Saccade Acceleration During Gait|Acceleration (degrees per second squared) of fast eye movements observed when walking, measured via EOG and Dikablis mobile eye-tracker. Walking conditions include; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)||||||
855750|NCT02610634|Secondary|Visual Sampling Parameter: Saccade Amplitude During Gait|Distance (degrees) of fast eye movements observed when walking, measured via EOG and Dikablis mobile eye-tracker. Walking conditions include; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)||||||
855751|NCT02610634|Secondary|Visual Sampling Parameter: Saccade Velocity During Gait|Velocity (degrees per second) of fast eye movements observed when walking, measured via EOG and Dikablis mobile eye-tracker. Walking conditions include; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)||||||
855752|NCT02610634|Secondary|Visual Sampling Parameter: Saccade Number During Gait|Number of fast eye movements observed when walking, measured via EOG and Dikablis mobile eye-tracker. Walking conditions include; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins) and one week later in Session 2 for a sub-group (PD and controls n = upto 25) (lasting approx. 60mins)||||||
855753|NCT02610634|Secondary|Gait Parameter: Double Support Time|Measured in seconds recorded via Vicon 3D motion capture. Observed during the following walking conditions; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)||||||
855754|NCT02610634|Secondary|Gait Parameter: Single Support Time|Measured in seconds recorded via Vicon 3D motion capture. Observed during the following walking conditions; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)||||||
855755|NCT02610634|Secondary|Gait Parameter: Step Time|Measured in seconds recorded via Vicon 3D motion capture. Observed during the following walking conditions; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins) and one week later in Session 2 for a sub-group (PD and controls n = upto 25) (lasting approx. 60mins)||||||
855756|NCT02610634|Secondary|Gait Parameter: Step Length|Measured in meters recorded via Vicon 3D motion capture. Observed during the following walking conditions; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)||||||
855757|NCT02610634|Secondary|Gait Parameter: Gait Speed|Measured in meters per second observed when walking recorded via Vicon 3D motion capture. Walking conditions include; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)||||||
855758|NCT02610634|Primary|Visual Sampling Parameter: Saccade Frequency During Gait|Number of fast eye movements made per second observed when walking, measured via EOG and Dikablis mobile eye-tracker. Walking conditions include; single task, dual task, through a doorway, whilst turning and with a visual cue in place.|Session 1: observation during gait assessments (lasting approx. 90mins)|||Saccade frequency (sacc/sec)||Standard Deviation|Mean
855777|NCT02540356|Secondary|Quality of Life (QoL) Measure - European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) Questionnaire|QoL will be assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30.|Weekly from the baseline visit to the last week of safety follow-up (8 weeks or longer, if additional treatment will be implemented)|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855778|NCT02540356|Secondary|Imalumab (BAX69) Plasma Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Volume of Distribution (V)||Predose; and post-dose at 1.5, 4, 8, 24, and 72 hours|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855779|NCT02540356|Secondary|Imalumab (BAX69) Plasma Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Apparent Systemic Clearance (CL)||Predose; and post-dose at 1.5, 4, 8, 24, and 72 hours|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855780|NCT02540356|Secondary|Imalumab (BAX69) Plasma Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Half-life (t1/2)||Predose; and post-dose at 1.5, 4, 8, 24, and 72 hours|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855781|NCT02540356|Secondary|Imalumab (BAX69) Plasma Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Area Under the Concentration vs Time Curve (AUC)||Predose; and post-dose at 1.5, 4, 8, 24, and 72 hours|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855782|NCT02540356|Secondary|Imalumab (BAX69) Plasma Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Minimum Observed Concentration (Cmin)||Predose; and post-dose at 1.5, 4, 8, 24, and 72 hours|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855783|NCT02540356|Secondary|Imalumab (BAX69) Plasma Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter: Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax)||Predose; and post-dose at 1.5, 4, 8, 24, and 72 hours|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855784|NCT02540356|Secondary|Occurrence of Binding and/or Neutralizing Anti-imalumab (BAX69) Antibodies Following Treatment With Imalumab (BAX69)||Throughout the study period of approximately 22 months|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855785|NCT02540356|Secondary|Occurrence of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and/or Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Regardless of Causality or Relationship to Study Drug||Throughout the study period of approximately 22 months|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure.||Participants|||Count of Participants
855896|NCT02410200|Primary|Change in the Number of New or Newly Enlarging T2 Hyperintense Lesions on Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Scans From the Baseline Period to On-Treatment Assessment Period||Baseline Period (Week -8 to Day 0), On-Treatment Assessment Period (Week 16 to Week 24)|Primary Analysis Population: participants having new or newly enlarging T2 lesions during the Baseline period with a post-baseline assessment.||lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
855786|NCT02540356|Secondary|Changes in Ascites-related Symptoms|Ascites related symptoms: anorexia, nausea, early satiety, vomiting, abdominal pain, abdominal swelling, dyspnea, fatigue, swollen ankles, heartburn|Baseline, weekly during the treatment period, and every 2 weeks during the safety follow-up period, up to approximately 6 months)|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855787|NCT02540356|Secondary|Change in Ascites Volume Per Unit Time With Treatment|The volume of ascites from the last dose of Imalumab to the first post-treatment paracentesis per unit time will be compared to the volume of the last pre-treatment paracentesis per unit time. At each paracentesis, the volume of fluid that can be removed safely (measured by ultrasound-guided paracentesis) to achieve close to dryness should be withdrawn, measured, and documented.|Up to 4 weeks|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855788|NCT02540356|Secondary|Ratio of Time to First Paracentesis Post-treatment Over Puncture-free Interval at Baseline|Time to first paracentesis post-treatment is calculated as the time between the last dose of Imalumab to subsequent first therapeutic paracentesis.|4 weeks|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855789|NCT02540356|Primary|The Ratio of Puncture Free Survival (PuFS) Over Puncture-free Interval at Baseline|"PuFS is defined as the time from the last dose of Imalumab to the first therapeutic paracentesis after that, or death, whichever occurs first.
Puncture-free interval at baseline is calculated as the time between the last 2 therapeutic paracenteses immediately before the first dose of Imalubmab."|4 weeks|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure. Additionally, due to concerns that the participant would be at risk of being re-identified, study results are not posted.|||||
855790|NCT02540356|Primary|The Occurrence of Dose-limiting Toxicity (DLT)|"DLT is defined as any drug related treatment-emergent adverse event that occurs during the 28-day period after the first dose of Imalumab and that meets any of these criteria:
Any ≥ grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity assessed by the investigator as related to study drug (except: single lab value out of normal range not necessarily translating or considered a feature of clinical diagnosis requiring an intervention per investigator's interpretation and resolves to ≤ Grade 2 with adequate measure in 7 days; Transient grade 3 elevations of hepatic transaminases in the absence of simultaneous increase in serum bilirubin; Alopecia)
Any toxicity resulted in dose delay for ≥14 days
Any grade 4 hematologic toxicity (except lymphopenia)
Grade 3 febrile neutropenia
Grade 3 thrombocytopenia associated with bleeding
Any life-threatening complication/abnormality not covered in the NCICTCAE v4.03"|4 weeks|Study was terminated early with only one participant dosed. No statistical analysis was performed on this outcome measure.||Participants|||Count of Participants
855791|NCT02514473|Secondary|Average Pre-dose Concentration (Ctrough,Ave) and Average 3 to 6 Hours Post-dose Concentration (C3-6h,Ave) For Lumacaftor and Ivacaftor|Ctrough,ave is average of individual pre-dose observed concentrations across Week 4 and 24. C3-6h,ave is average of individual 3 to 6 hours post-dose observed concentrations across Day 1, 15 and Week 4. This outcome was not planned to be assessed in Placebo arm.|For Ctrough,ave: before morning dose on Week 4 and 24; For C3-6h,ave: 3 to 6 hours after morning dose on Day 1, 15 and Week 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) set included all randomized participants who received any amount of study drug and had a PK assessment. Here, 'Number of participants analyzed' = those participants who were evaluable for this endpoint and 'Number Analyzed' = those participants who were evaluable at the specified time points for each arm, respectively.||Nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
855792|NCT02514473|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|AE: any untoward medical occurrence in a participant during the study; the event does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment. This includes any newly occurring event or previous condition that has increased in severity or frequency after the informed consent form is signed. AE includes serious as well as non-serious AEs. SAE (subset of AE): medical event or condition, which falls into any of the following categories, regardless of its relationship to the study drug: death, life threatening adverse experience, inpatient hospitalization/prolongation of hospitalization, persistent/significant disability or incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, important medical event. Any AE that increased in severity or newly developed at or after initial dosing of study drug to Week 28 was considered treatment-emergent.|Baseline up to Week 28|Safety Set included all participants who were exposed to any amount of study drug.||participants|||Number
855793|NCT02514473|Secondary|Time-to-first Pulmonary Exacerbation|Time-to-first pulmonary exacerbation was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier estimates. Pulmonary exacerbation was defined as the treatment with new or changed antibiotic therapy (intravenous, inhaled, or oral) for greater than or equal to 4 sinopulmonary signs/symptoms.|Baseline through Week 24|FAS.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855794|NCT02514473|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With At Least 1 Pulmonary Exacerbation Event|Pulmonary exacerbation was defined as the treatment with new or changed antibiotic therapy (intravenous, inhaled, or oral) for greater than or equal to 4 sinopulmonary signs/symptoms.|Baseline through Week 24|FAS.||Percentage of participants|||Number
855795|NCT02514473|Secondary|Number of Pulmonary Exacerbation Events|Pulmonary exacerbation was defined as the treatment with new or changed antibiotic therapy (intravenous, inhaled, or oral) for greater than or equal to 4 sinopulmonary signs/symptoms. The number of events were reported.|Baseline through Week 24|FAS.||Pulmonary exacerbation events|||Number
855796|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) Domains Through Week 24|The TSQM is a 14-item self-administered questionnaire which measures participants’ experiences with their medication on four dimensions: effectiveness, side effects, convenience and global satisfaction. For each dimension, responses are added and transformed to a scale from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate greater satisfaction.|Baseline, Through Week 24|FAS. Here, ‘Number of participants analyzed’ = those participants who were evaluable for this endpoint and ‘Number Analyzed’ = those participants who were evaluable at the specified time points for each arm, respectively.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855797|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Height-for-age Z-score at Week 24|Z-score is a statistical measure to evaluate how a single data point compares to a standard. It describes whether a mean was above or below the standard. Height, adjusted for age and sex, was analyzed as height-for-age z-score (height z-score). The height-for-age z-scores were calculated using National Center for Health Statistics growth charts.|Baseline, Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Z-score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855798|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Height at Week 24||Baseline, Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Centimeter (cm)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855799|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Weight-for-age Z-score at Week 24|Z-score is a statistical measure to evaluate how a single data point compares to a standard. It describes whether a mean was above or below the standard. Weight, adjusted for age and sex, was analyzed as weight-for-age z-score (weight z-score). The weight-for-age z-scores were calculated using National Center for Health Statistics growth charts.|Baseline, Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Z-score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855800|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Weight at Week 24||Baseline, Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855801|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in BMI-for-age Z-score at Week 24|BMI was defined as weight in kg divided by height in m^2. z-score is a statistical measure to evaluate how a single data point compares to a standard. It describes whether a mean was above or below the standard. BMI, adjusted for age and sex, was analyzed as BMI-for-age z-score (BMI z-score). The BMI-for-age z-scores were calculated using National Center for Health Statistics growth charts.|Baseline, Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Z-score||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855802|NCT02514473|Secondary|Relative Change From Baseline in ppFEV1 Through Week 24|FEV1 is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out in one second, after full inspiration. Wang standards were used to calculate ppFEV1 (for age, gender, race, and height).|Baseline, Through Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855803|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (ppFEV1) Through Week 24|FEV1 is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out in one second, after full inspiration. Wang standards were used to calculate ppFEV1 (for age, gender, race, and height).|Baseline, Through Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Percent predicted of FEV1||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855804|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Sweat Chloride at Week 24|Sweat samples were collected using an approved collection device.|Baseline, Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855805|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Lung Clearance Index 5.0 (LCI5.0) Through Week 24|LCI is a measure of ventilation inhomogeneity that is derived from a multiple breath washout test using Nitrogen (N2). LCI5.0 represents the number of lung turnovers required to reduce the end tidal inert gas concentration to 1/20th of its starting value.|Baseline, Through Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855806|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) Respiratory Domain Score Through Week 24|The CFQ-R is a validated participant-reported outcome measuring health-related quality of life for participants with cystic fibrosis. Respiratory domain assessed respiratory symptoms (for example, coughing, congestion, wheezing), score range: 0-100; higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and better health-related quality of life.|Baseline, Through Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855807|NCT02514473|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI) at Week 24|BMI was defined as weight in kg divided by height in square meter (m^2).|Baseline, Week 24|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Kg/m^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855808|NCT02514473|Secondary|Average Absolute Change From Baseline in Sweat Chloride at Day 15 and Week 4|Sweat samples were collected using an approved collection device. Baseline was defined as the average of the measurements at screening and on Day 1 pre-dose. Change from Baseline in sweat chloride at Day 15 and Week 4 was calculated. The average of the 2 values (Change at Day 15 and Week 4) was reported.|Baseline, Day 15 and Week 4|FAS. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Millimole per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855809|NCT02514473|Primary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Lung Clearance Index 2.5 (LCI2.5) Through Week 24|Lung clearance index (LCI) is a measure of ventilation inhomogeneity that is derived from a multiple breath washout test using Nitrogen (N2). LCI2.5 represents the number of lung turnovers required to reduce the end tidal inert gas concentration to 1/40th of its starting value.|Baseline, Through Week 24|Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all randomized participants who received any amount of study drug. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
855829|NCT02476032|Secondary|Verbal Rating Scale: Mean Reduction in Sensitivity Between Groups|"An analysis of covariance model was used to compare mean reduction in sensitivity scores (SAS and VRS) between groups at each post-treatment time point. A linear mixed effect model with group, time and baseline score as fixed effects and a random subject effect was used to compare the sensitivity outcomes between groups across time. The effect of location was also examined using this model.
Verbal Rating Scale 0-10 Measurement of Participant's Perception of Pain
0 = No pain 1-3 = Mild Pain 4-6 = Moderate Pain 7-10 = Severe Pain"|30 Minutes Post, 4 Weeks Post, 8 Weeks Post Baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
855830|NCT02476032|Primary|Schiff Air Test: Mean Reduction in Sensitivity Between Groups|"An analysis of covariance model was used to compare mean reduction in sensitivity scores (SAS and VRS) between groups at each post-treatment time point. A linear mixed effect model with group, time and baseline score as fixed effects and a random subject effect was used to compare the sensitivity outcomes between groups across time. The effect of location was also examined using this model.
Schiff Air Scale 0-3 Measurement of Dentinal Hypersensitivity
0 Tooth/Patient did not respond to the air stimulus
Tooth/Patient responded to the air stimulus but did not request discontinuation of the stimulus
Tooth/Patient responded to the air stimulus and request discontinuation or moved from the stimulus
Tooth/Patient responded to the air stimulus, considered the stimulus painful, and requested discontinuation of the stimulus"|30 Minutes Post, 4 Weeks Post, 8 Weeks Post Baseline|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
855895|NCT02410200|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Day 8|All participants who received at least 1 dose of BG00012 and had at least 1 pharmacokinetic parameter available.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
855871|NCT02411578|Post-Hoc|Clinical Grading - Initial Treatment Correct|2 graders, blinded to treatment arm, independently graded each hypoglycemic event as a clinical failure or success based on all available BG concentrations within 1 hour of initial treatment. All BG values, along with corresponding time elapsed since treatment, were reviewed to determine whether the response would be considered a treatment success, in a clinical setting. There were no specific cut points; instead, it was a clinical assessment of the BG response. Discordant gradings (6% of events) were adjudicated by the graders to achieve a consensus grading. The number of events graded as a treatment success were reported out of the total number of hypoglycemic events, for each treatment arm.|60 minutes|"This analysis included all hypoglycemic events in which the initial treatment and dose were correct, irrespective of the timing of the BG measurements.
8 hypoglycemic events were deemed Indeterminate by the graders during the glucagon period and 4 during the glucose tabs period."||Hypoglycemic Events|Hypoglycemic Events||Count of Units
855872|NCT02411578|Post-Hoc|Clinical Grading - Initial and 15-min Treatment Correct|2 graders, blinded to treatment arm, independently graded each hypoglycemic event as a clinical failure or success based on all available BG concentrations within 1 hour of initial treatment. All BG values, along with corresponding time elapsed since treatment, were reviewed to determine whether the response would be considered a treatment success, in a clinical setting. There were no specific cut points; instead, it was a clinical assessment of the BG response. Discordant gradings (6% of events) were adjudicated by the graders to achieve a consensus grading. The number of events graded as a treatment success were reported out of the total number of hypoglycemic events, for each treatment arm.|60 minutes|"Analysis was limited to hypoglycemic events where Initial and 15-min Treatment were correct.
4 hypoglycemic events were deemed Indeterminate by the graders during the glucagon period."||Hypoglycemic Events|Hypoglycemic Events||Count of Units
855873|NCT02411578|Post-Hoc|Clinical Grading - Limited to Events in Primary Analysis|2 graders, blinded to treatment arm, independently graded each hypoglycemic event as a clinical failure or success based on all available BG concentrations within 1 hour of initial treatment. All BG values, along with corresponding time elapsed since treatment, were reviewed to determine whether the response would be considered a treatment success, in a clinical setting. There were no specific cut points; instead, it was a clinical assessment of the BG response. Discordant gradings (6% of events) were adjudicated by the graders to achieve a consensus grading. The number of events graded as a treatment success were reported out of the total number of hypoglycemic events, for each treatment arm.|60 minutes|Analysis was limited to hypoglycemic events included in the primary analysis. 3 hypoglycemic events were deemed Indeterminate by the graders during the glucagon period.||Hypoglycemic Events|Hypoglycemic Events||Count of Units
855874|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Coefficient of Variation|Coefficient of Variation from CGM data computed over entire 3 weeks of treatment period|3 weeks|Limited to participants who had at least 72 hours of CGM data during each period||percentage coefficient of variation||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855875|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Time Below 70|Percentage of time <70 mg/dL from CGM data computed over entire 3 weeks of treatment period|3 weeks|Limited to participants who had at least 72 hours of CGM data during each period||percentage of time||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855876|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Time in Range|Percentage of time 70-180 mg/dL from CGM data computed over entire 3 weeks of treatment period|3 weeks|Limited to participants who had at least 72 hours of CGM data during each period||percentage of time||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855877|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Mean Glucose|Median (IQR) reported for mean glucose from CGM data computed over entire 3 weeks of treatment period|3 weeks|Limited to participants who had at least 72 hours of CGM data during each period||mg/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855878|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Time Below 70 mg/dL|Percentage of time <70 mg/dL from CGM data, following each hypoglycemic event with starting BG 50-69 mg/dL, during first 2 hours after start of hypoglycemic event|120 Minutes|A participant had to have sufficient calibrations using study BGM to compare BGM and CGM data to ensure matching dates and times. Event level requirements: 1) initial treatment and dose had to be correct, 2) ≥6 CGM readings within 1 hour after initial treatment, and 3) first CGM glucose after the start of the hypoglycemic event had to be <80 mg/dL||percentage of time|Hypoglycemic Events|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855879|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Time in Range, Event Level|Percentage of time 70-180 mg/dL from CGM data, following each hypoglycemic event with starting BG 50-69 mg/dL, during first 2 hours after start of hypoglycemic event|120 Minutes|A participant had to have sufficient calibrations using study BGM to compare BGM and CGM data to ensure matching dates and times. Event level requirements: 1) initial treatment and dose had to be correct, 2) ≥6 CGM readings within 1 hour after initial treatment, and 3) first CGM glucose after the start of the hypoglycemic event had to be <80 mg/dL||percentage of time|Hypoglycemic Events|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855880|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Mean Glucose, Event Level|Median (IQR) reported for mean glucose from CGM data, following each hypoglycemic event with starting BG 50-69 mg/dL, during first 2 hours after start of hypoglycemic event|120 Minutes|A participant had to have sufficient calibrations using study BGM to compare BGM and CGM data to ensure matching dates and times. Event level requirements: 1) initial treatment and dose had to be correct, 2) ≥6 CGM readings within 1 hour after initial treatment, and 3) first CGM glucose after the start of the hypoglycemic event had to be <80 mg/dL||mg/dL|Hypoglycemic Events|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855881|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Maximum Glucose, Event Level|Maximum glucose from CGM data, following each hypoglycemic event with starting BG 50-69 mg/dL, during first 2 hours after start of hypoglycemic event|120 Minutes|A participant had to have sufficient calibrations using study BGM to compare BGM and CGM data to ensure matching dates and times. Event level requirements: 1) initial treatment and dose had to be correct, 2) ≥6 CGM readings within 1 hour after initial treatment, and 3) first CGM glucose after the start of the hypoglycemic event had to be <80 mg/dL||mg/dL|Hypoglycemic Events|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855882|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Minimum Glucose, Event Level|Minimum glucose from CGM data, following each hypoglycemic event with starting BG 50-69 mg/dL, during first 2 hours after start of hypoglycemic event|120 Minutes|A participant had to have sufficient calibrations using study BGM to compare BGM and CGM data to ensure matching dates and times. Event level requirements: 1) initial treatment and dose had to be correct, 2) ≥6 CGM readings within 1 hour after initial treatment, and 3) first CGM glucose after the start of the hypoglycemic event had to be <80 mg/dL||mg/dL|Hypoglycemic Events|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855883|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Time Below 70 mg/dL, Event Level|Percentage of time <70 mg/dL from CGM data, following each hypoglycemic event with starting BG 50-69 mg/dL, during first hour after start of hypoglycemic event|60 Minutes|A participant had to have sufficient calibrations using study BGM to compare BGM and CGM data to ensure matching dates and times. Event level requirements: 1) initial treatment and dose had to be correct, 2) ≥6 CGM readings within 1 hour after initial treatment, and 3) first CGM glucose after the start of the hypoglycemic event had to be <80 mg/dL||percentage of time|Hypoglycemic Events|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855884|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Time in Range, Event Level|Percentage of time 70-180 mg/dL from CGM data, following each hypoglycemic event with starting BG 50-69 mg/dL, during first hour after start of hypoglycemic event|60 Minutes|A participant had to have sufficient calibrations using study BGM to compare BGM and CGM data to ensure matching dates and times. Event level requirements: 1) initial treatment and dose had to be correct, 2) ≥6 CGM readings within 1 hour after initial treatment, and 3) first CGM glucose after the start of the hypoglycemic event had to be <80 mg/dL||percentage of time|Hypoglycemic Events|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855885|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Mean Glucose, Event Level|Median (IQR) reported for mean glucose from CGM data, following each hypoglycemic event with starting BG 50-69 mg/dL, during first hour after start of hypoglycemic event|60 Minutes|A participant had to have sufficient calibrations using study BGM to compare BGM and CGM data to ensure matching dates and times. Event level requirements: 1) initial treatment and dose had to be correct, 2) ≥6 CGM readings within 1 hour after initial treatment, and 3) first CGM glucose after the start of the hypoglycemic event had to be <80 mg/dL||mg/dL|Hypoglycemic Events|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855886|NCT02411578|Secondary|CGM Maximum Glucose, Event Level|Maximum glucose from CGM data, following each hypoglycemic event with starting BG 50-69 mg/dL, during first hour after start of hypoglycemic event|60 Minutes|A participant had to have sufficient calibrations using study BGM to compare BGM and CGM data to ensure matching dates and times. Event level requirements: 1) initial treatment and dose had to be correct, 2) ≥6 CGM readings within 1 hour after initial treatment, and 3) first CGM glucose after the start of the hypoglycemic event had to be <80 mg/dL||mg/dL|Hypoglycemic Events|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855887|NCT02411578|Secondary|Continuous Glucose Monitor (CGM) Minimum Glucose, Event Level|Minimum glucose from CGM data, following each hypoglycemic event with starting BG 50-69 mg/dL, during first hour after start of hypoglycemic event|60 Minutes|A participant had to have sufficient calibrations using study BGM to compare BGM and CGM data to ensure matching dates and times. Event level requirements: 1) initial treatment and dose had to be correct, 2) ≥6 CGM readings within 1 hour after initial treatment, and 3) first CGM glucose after the start of the hypoglycemic event had to be <80 mg/dL||mg/dL|Hypoglycemic Events|Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855888|NCT02411578|Primary|Number of Hypoglycemic Events ≥50 mg/dl 15 Minutes AND ≥ 70 mg/dl 30 Minutes After Initial Treatment||30 minutes|Limited to events with starting BG of 50-69 mg/dL||Hypoglycemic Events|Hypoglycemic Events||Count of Units
855889|NCT02410200|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Experienced Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|AE: any untoward medical occurrence that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. SAE: any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: results in death; in the view of the Investigator, places the participant at immediate risk of death (a life-threatening event); requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect; any other medically important event that, in the opinion of the Investigator, may jeopardize the participant or may require intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the definition above.|Up to Week 28|All participants who received at least 1 dose of BG00012.||participants|||Number
855890|NCT02410200|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity (AUC0-inf)||Day 8|All participants who received at least 1 dose of BG00012 and had at least 1 pharmacokinetic parameter available.||h*mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
855891|NCT02410200|Secondary|Half-Life Lambda z||Day 8|All participants who received at least 1 dose of BG00012 and had at least 1 pharmacokinetic parameter available.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
855892|NCT02410200|Secondary|Apparent Volume of Distribution (V/F)||Day 8|All participants who received at least 1 dose of BG00012 and had at least 1 pharmacokinetic parameter available.||L||Standard Deviation|Mean
855893|NCT02410200|Secondary|Apparent Clearance (CL/F)||Day 8|All participants who received at least 1 dose of BG00012 and had at least 1 pharmacokinetic parameter available.||L/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
855894|NCT02410200|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax)||Day 8|All participants who received at least 1 dose of BG00012 and had at least 1 pharmacokinetic parameter available.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
855902|NCT02317692|Secondary|Effects of Socioeconomic Status and Parental Acculturation on Treatment Outcomes (Parental Report)|Socioeconomic status computed based on parental report of education and occupation (assessed on demographic form). Acculturation based on parental report on the Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II and the Mexican American Cultural Values for Adolescents and Adults.|8 weeks|We did not examine this outcome measure due to a lack of variability on the SES and acculturation measure.|||||
855903|NCT02317692|Secondary|Change in Parental Functioning (Maternal Parenting Stress)|Pre-treatment to post-treatment change on summary score of Parenting Stress Index-Short Form (completed by mothers) Range=0-144; the larger the number, the greater stress Difference in mean pre and post scores for each group, so SD was not calculated.|8 weeks|Only mothers completed.||units on a scale|Families||Number
855904|NCT02317692|Secondary|Change in ADHD Symptoms (Inattention Subscale of Disruptive Behavior Disorders Rating Scale)|Pre-treatment to post-treatment change on inattention subscale of Disruptive Behavior Disorders Rating Scale (completed by parent) Range=0-3; the larger the number, the greater the symptoms Difference in mean pre and post scores for each group, so SD was not calculated.|Baseline to 8 weeks|||units on a scale|Families||Number
855905|NCT02317692|Primary|Acceptability of Treatment (Summary Score of Therapy Attitude Inventory)|Parental report of satisfaction with treatment (summary score of Therapy Attitude Inventory) Range=10-50; higher scores represent greater satisfaction (a better outcome)|8 weeks|||units on a scale|Families|Standard Deviation|Mean
855906|NCT02317692|Primary|Engagement in Treatment - Homework Completion (% of Completed Homework)|(recorded by clinician - homework was assigned every week and was expected to be returned at the next week's session)|8 weeks|||percentage of completed homework|Families|Standard Deviation|Mean
855907|NCT02317692|Primary|Engagement in Treatment - Sessions Attended|Number of sessions attended by each family (recorded by clinician)|8 weeks|||sessions|Families|Standard Deviation|Mean
855908|NCT02317692|Primary|Engagement in Treatment - Treatment Completion (Number of Families Who Completed Treatment)|Number of families who completed treatment (recorded by clinician)|8 weeks|||Families|Families||Count of Units
856062|NCT01942590|Secondary|Change in 6 Minute Walk Test|Assess exercise tolerance in study patients; test administered by physical therapist. Subjects were asked to walk for 6 minutes, unassisted. The distance walked was recorded in meters.|Baseline, week 18|Participants who completed 6 minute walk test||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
855920|NCT02283268|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics: Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|"This assessment is only required for subjects undergoing major surgery. Subjects will receive a PK infusion at a dose of 50±5 IU/kg rVWF:RCo within 42 days prior to surgery. Vss will be calculated as the clearance multiplied with the mean residence time.
PK analysis was performed for the following analytes:
VWF Ristocetin Cofactor Activity (VWF:RCo), VWF Antigen Activity (VWF:Ag), VWF Collagen Binding Activity (VWF:CB), VWF Activity Measured INNOVANCE VWF Ac Assay (VWF:Ac)"|PK measurements were done within 30 minutes pre-infusion, and post infusion at 30 (± 5) minutes, 60 (± 5) minutes, 6 (± 1) hours, 12 (± 1) hours, 24 (± 2) hours, 48 (± 2) hours and 72 (± 2) hours.|The PK analysis data set, including all participants who underwent PK assessment with data collected at the relevant time points, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||dL/kg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
855921|NCT02283268|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics: Elimination Phase Half-life (T1/2)|"This assessment is only required for subjects undergoing major surgery. Subjects will receive a PK infusion at a dose of 50±5 IU/kg rVWF:RCo within 42 days prior to surgery. Terminal or disposition half-life (T1/2) will be calculated as ln2/λz where λz is the terminal elimination rate constant as calculated in WinNonlin NCA using at least three quantifiable concentrations.
PK analysis was performed for the following analytes:
VWF Ristocetin Cofactor Activity (VWF:RCo), VWF Antigen Activity (VWF:Ag), VWF Collagen Binding Activity (VWF:CB), VWF Activity Measured INNOVANCE VWF Ac Assay (VWF:Ac)"|PK measurements were done within 30 minutes pre-infusion, and post infusion at 30 (± 5) minutes, 60 (± 5) minutes, 6 (± 1) hours, 12 (± 1) hours, 24 (± 2) hours, 48 (± 2) hours and 72 (± 2) hours.|The PK analysis data set, including all participants who underwent PK assessment with data collected at the relevant time points, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
855929|NCT02283268|Secondary|Occurrence of Severe Allergic Reactions (eg, Anaphylaxis)|Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and treatment emergent serious adverse events (TESAEs) will be evaluated for severe allergic reactions.|From first infusion of investigational product through study completion (ie, 14 (± 2) days post surgery)|The safety analysis data set, including all participants who received any amount of investigational product, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||Adverse Events|||Number
855930|NCT02283268|Secondary|Occurrence of Thrombotic Events|Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and treatment emergent serious adverse events (TESAEs) will be evaluated for thrombotic events.|From first infusion of investigational product through study completion (ie, 14 (± 2) days post surgery)|The safety analysis data set, including all participants who received any amount of investigational product, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||Adverse Events|||Number
855922|NCT02283268|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics: Incremental Recovery (IR)|"This assessment is only required for subjects undergoing major surgery. Subjects will receive a PK infusion at a dose of 50±5 IU/kg rVWF:RCo within 42 days prior to surgery. Incremental recovery will be calculated as (Cmax minus Cpreinfusion) divided by the dose (IU/kg) where kg refers to the body weight at the time of dosing and Cmax is the observed maximum concentration before correction for pre-infusion values.
PK analysis was performed for the following analytes:
VWF Ristocetin Cofactor Activity (VWF:RCo), VWF Antigen Activity (VWF:Ag), VWF Collagen Binding Activity (VWF:CB), VWF Activity Measured INNOVANCE VWF Ac Assay (VWF:Ac)"|PK measurements were done within 30 minutes pre-infusion, and post infusion at 30 (± 5) minutes, 60 (± 5) minutes, 6 (± 1) hours, 12 (± 1) hours, 24 (± 2) hours, 48 (± 2) hours and 72 (± 2) hours.|The PK analysis data set, including all participants who underwent PK assessment with data collected at the relevant time points, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||IU/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
855923|NCT02283268|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics: Clearance (CL)|"This assessment is only required for subjects undergoing major surgery. Subjects will receive a PK infusion at a dose of 50±5 IU/kg rVWF:RCo within 42 days prior to surgery. Clearance will be calculated as dose (IU/kg) divided by the area under the curve time 0 to infinity.
PK analysis was performed for the following analytes:
VWF Ristocetin Cofactor Activity (VWF:RCo), VWF Antigen Activity (VWF:Ag), VWF Collagen Binding Activity (VWF:CB), VWF Activity Measured INNOVANCE VWF Ac Assay (VWF:Ac)"|PK measurements were done within 30 minutes pre-infusion, and post infusion at 30 (± 5) minutes, 60 (± 5) minutes, 6 (± 1) hours, 12 (± 1) hours, 24 (± 2) hours, 48 (± 2) hours and 72 (± 2) hours.|The PK analysis data set, including all participants who underwent PK assessment with data collected at the relevant time points, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||dL/hour/kg||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
855924|NCT02283268|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics: Mean Residence Time (MRT)|"This assessment is only required for subjects undergoing major surgery. Subjects will receive a PK infusion at a dose of 50±5 IU/kg rVWF:RCo within 42 days prior to surgery. Mean residence time will be calculated as area under the first moment curve from time 0 to infinity divided by the area under the curve time 0 to infinity minus T/2 where T is the duration of the infusion.
PK analysis was performed for the following analytes:
VWF Ristocetin Cofactor Activity (VWF:RCo), VWF Antigen Activity (VWF:Ag), VWF Collagen Binding Activity (VWF:CB), VWF Activity Measured INNOVANCE VWF Ac Assay (VWF:Ac)"|PK measurements were done within 30 minutes pre-infusion, and post infusion at 30 (± 5) minutes, 60 (± 5) minutes, 6 (± 1) hours, 12 (± 1) hours, 24 (± 2) hours, 48 (± 2) hours and 72 (± 2) hours.|The PK analysis data set, including all participants who underwent PK assessment with data collected at the relevant time points, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||hours||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
855925|NCT02283268|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics: Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time 0 to Infinity (AUC 0-∞ /Dose)|"This assessment is only required for subjects undergoing major surgery. Subjects will receive a PK infusion at a dose of 50±5 IU/kg rVWF:RCo within 42 days prior to surgery. The area under the plasma concentration/time curve from time 0 to infinity and the area under the first moment curve from time 0 to infinity will be calculated as the sum of AUC or AUMC from time 0 to the time of last quantifiable concentration plus a tail area correction calculated as Ct/λz and Ct/λz(t+1/λz), respectively, where Ct is the last quantifiable concentration, t is the time of last quantifiable concentration and λz is the terminal or disposition rate constant.
PK analysis was performed for the following analytes:
VWF Ristocetin Cofactor Activity (VWF:RCo), VWF Antigen Activity (VWF:Ag), VWF Collagen Binding Activity (VWF:CB), VWF Activity Measured INNOVANCE VWF Ac Assay (VWF:Ac), FVIII Coagulation Activity (FVIII:C)"|PK measurements were done within 30 minutes pre-infusion, and post infusion at 30 (± 5) minutes, 60 (± 5) minutes, 6 (± 1) hours, 12 (± 1) hours, 24 (± 2) hours, 48 (± 2) hours and 72 (± 2) hours.|The PK analysis data set, including all participants who underwent PK assessment with data collected at the relevant time points, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||hours*IU/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
855926|NCT02283268|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics: Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to 72 Hours Post-infusion (AUC 0-72 h/Dose)|"This assessment is only required for subjects undergoing major surgery. Subjects will receive a PK infusion at a dose of 50±5 IU/kg rVWF:RCo within 42 days prior to surgery. The area under the plasma concentration/time curve from 0 to 72 hours post-infusion will be computed using the linear trapezoidal rule. For the calculation of AUC(0-72h) the levels at 72 hours will be linearly interpolated/extrapolated from the 2 nearest sampling time points.
PK analysis was performed for the following analytes:
VWF Ristocetin Cofactor Activity (VWF:RCo), VWF Antigen Activity (VWF:Ag), VWF Collagen Binding Activity (VWF:CB), VWF Activity Measured INNOVANCE VWF Ac Assay (VWF:Ac), FVIII Coagulation Activity (FVIII:C)"|PK measurements were done within 30 minutes pre-infusion, and post infusion at 30 (± 5) minutes, 60 (± 5) minutes, 6 (± 1) hours, 12 (± 1) hours, 24 (± 2) hours, 48 (± 2) hours and 72 (± 2) hours.|The PK analysis data set, including all participants who underwent PK assessment with data collected at the relevant time points, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||hours*IU/dL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
855927|NCT02283268|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Developed Antibodies to Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) Proteins, Mouse Immunoglobulin G (IgG) or Recombinant Furin (rFurin)|Participants were treated with recombinant van Willebrand Factor (rVWF) with or without ADVATE.|Testing occurred throughout the study at screening, prior PK infusion, pre-surgery, post surgery in case of excessive bleeding or unexplained bleeding, at postoperative day 7 and at study completion visit (ie. 14 (± 2) days post surgery).|The safety analysis data set, including all participants who received any amount of investigational product, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||Participants|||Count of Participants
855928|NCT02283268|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Developed Inhibitory and Total Binding Antibodies to Von Willebrand Factor (VWF) and Inhibitory Antibodies to Factor VIII (FVIII)|Participants were treated with recombinant van Willebrand Factor (rVWF) with or without ADVATE.|Testing occurred throughout the study at screening, prior PK infusion, pre-surgery, post surgery in case of excessive bleeding or unexplained bleeding, at postoperative day 7 and at study completion visit (ie. 14 (± 2) days post surgery).|The safety analysis data set, including all participants who received any amount of investigational product, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||Participants|||Count of Participants
856362|NCT01485796|Primary|Rate of Related Systemic Adverse Events (Excluding Infections) Per Infusion|A point estimate and 95% confidence interval for the rate of related systemic adverse events per infusion was derived using a Poisson model.|7 months (per subject)|||adverse events||95% Confidence Interval|Number
855931|NCT02283268|Secondary|Occurrence of Adverse Events|Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and treatment emergent serious adverse events (TESAEs) will be evaluated.|From first infusion of investigational product through study completion (ie, 14 (± 2) days post surgery)|The safety analysis data set, including all participants who received any amount of investigational product, was used for analysis of this outcome measure.||Adverse Events|||Number
855932|NCT02283268|Secondary|Daily Intra- and Postoperative Weight-adjusted Dose of rVWF With or Without ADVATE||Daily, from day of surgery through postoperative Day 14 (± 2 days)|Number of participants analyzed is different for the time points according to individual treatment. The full analysis data set, including all participants who received investigational product and have at least 1 hemostatic assessment, was used for analysis.||IU/kg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
855933|NCT02283268|Secondary|Intraoperative Hemostatic Efficacy Score as Assessed by the Operating Surgeon|"Hemostatic efficacy will be rated on a scale of excellent - good - moderate - none.
Excellent: Intraoperative hemostasis achieved with rVWF with our without ADVATE was as good or better than that expected for the type of surgical procedure performed in a hemostatically normal subject.
Good: Intraoperative hemostasis achieved with rVWF with or without ADVATE was probably as good as that expected for the type of surgical procedure performed in a hemostatically normal subject.
Moderate: Intraoperative hemostasis with rVWF with or without ADVATE was clearly less than optimal for the type of procedure performed but was maintained without the need to change the rVWF concentrate.
None: Participant experienced uncontrolled bleeding that was the result of inadequate therapeutic response despite proper dosing, necessitating a change of rVWF concentrate."|Day 0 (at completion of surgery)|Number of participants with major, minor and oral surgery and number of participant with Von Willebrand Type 1, 2A, 2B, 2M and 3 do sum up to the overall number of participants analyzed. The full analysis data set, including all participants who received investigational product and have at least 1 hemostatic assessment, was used for analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
855934|NCT02283268|Secondary|Intraoperative Actual Versus Predicted Blood Loss Score as Assessed by the Operating Surgeon|"Hemostatic efficacy will be rated on a scale of excellent - good - moderate - none.
Excellent: Intraoperative blood loss was less than or equal to the maximum blood loss expected for the type of procedure performed in a hemostatically normal subject (≤ 100%).
Good: Intraoperative blood loss was up to 50% more than the maximum expected blood loss for the type of procedure performed in a hemostatically normal subject (101-150%) Moderate: Intraoperative blood loss was more than 50% of the maximum expected blood loss for the type of procedure performed in a hemostatically normal subject (>150%).
None: Uncontrolled hemorrhage that was the result of inadequate therapeutic response despite proper dosing, necessitating a change of clotting factor replacement regimen."|Day 0 (at completion of surgery)|Number of participants with major, minor and oral surgery and number of participant with Von Willebrand Type 1, 2A, 2B, 2M and 3 do sum up to the overall number of participants analyzed. The full analysis data set, including all participants who received investigational product and have at least 1 hemostatic assessment, was used for analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
855935|NCT02283268|Secondary|Intraoperative Actual Blood Loss Relative to Predicted Blood Loss|Actual blood loss relative to predicted blood loss will be calculated as [Actual Blood loss (mL)] divided by [Predicted Blood Loss (mL) multiplied by 100.|Day 0 (at completion of surgery)|Number of participants analyzed is 11, as for 3 participants the actual and the predicted blood loss was zero and for 1 participant the predicted blood loss was not collected. Therefore 'actual blood loss relative to predicted blood loss' could not be calculated. The full analysis data set was used for the analysis of this outcome measure.||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
855936|NCT02283268|Secondary|Intraoperative Actual Versus Predicted Blood Loss as Assessed by the Operating Surgeon|"The predicted blood loss will be estimated preoperatively by the operating surgeon based on a hemostatically normal individual of the same sex, age, stature and co-morbidities as the participant.
The actual blood loss will be assessed consisting of the estimated blood loss, including into swabs, towels and suction during the procedure, per the anesthesiologist's record."|Day 0 (at completion of surgery)|For predicted blood loss the number of participants analyzed is 14 as for one participant (included in the major surgery reporting group) the predicted blood loss was not collected. The full analysis data set, including all participants who received investigational product and have at least 1 hemostatic assessment, was used for analysis.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
855937|NCT02283268|Primary|Overall Hemostatic Efficacy as Assessed by the Investigator (Hemophilia Physician)|"Hemostatic efficacy will be rated on a scale of excellent - good - moderate - none.
Excellent: Intra-, and postoperative hemostasis achieved with rVWF with our without ADVATE was as good or better than that expected for the type of surgical procedure performed in a hemostatically normal subject.
Good: Intra-, and postoperative hemostasis achieved with rVWF with or without ADVATE was probably as good as that expected for the type of surgical procedure performed in a hemostatically normal subject.
Moderate: Intra-, and postoperative hemostasis with rVWF with or without ADVATE was clearly less than optimal for the type of procedure performed but was maintained without the need to change the rVWF concentrate.
None: Participant experienced uncontrolled bleeding that was the result of inadequate therapeutic response despite proper dosing, necessitating a change of rVWF concentrate."|24 hours after last peri-operative infusion or at completion of Day 14 (± 2 days) visit, whichever occurs earlier|Number of participants with major, minor and oral surgery and number of participant with Von Willebrand Type 1, 2A, 2B, 2M and 3 do sum up to the overall number of participants analyzed. The full analysis data set, including all participants who received investigational product and have at least 1 hemostatic assessment, was used for analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
856063|NCT01942590|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST), Alanine Transaminase (ALT), and Bilirubin Representing Liver Toxicity|Liver toxicity, as defined by a >3x increase in AST or ALT from the respective baseline values and/or an increase in direct, indirect or total bilirubin of >3x the upper limit of normal|Baseline, week 18, and week 52|||participants|||Number
856064|NCT01942590|Primary|Number of Participants With a Change in Creatine Kinase (CK) Reflecting Worsening of Muscle Involvement|Worsening muscle involvement, as defined by >3x increase in CK from baseline that is >2x the upper limit of normal|Baseline, week 18, and week 52|||participants|||Number
855964|NCT02210091|Post-Hoc|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Plasma Half-life Ratio of BAX 855 to ADVATE|This is a descriptive summary of the ratio of plasma half-life in the same subject for BAX 855 compared to ADVATE based on the final covariate model (first observation tabulation).|(1) within 30 min pre-infusion; (2) 15-30 min post-infusion; (3) Day 0 either 4 or 7 hours post-infusion; Day 1 am; Day 1 pm; (4) Day 2; Day 3; or Day 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set||hours (hr)||Full Range|Mean
855965|NCT02210091|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Incremental Recovery (IR) of BAX 855 Over Time - Chromogenic Assay|"Pre- and post-infusion levels of Factor VIII (FVIII) following infusion of BAX 855 were used to determine IR.
For participants who underwent PK evaluation, baseline IR was determined from the IR measurement used in the PK analysis. Refer to data in Outcome measure 21- Pharmacokinetics (PK): Incremental Recovery (IR), for the category Chromogenic assay - BAX 855
For participants who did not undergo a PK evaluation, baseline IR was determined at the baseline visit prior to the prophylactic treatment phase and is included in this outcome measure.
Category title includes number of participants [n] < 6 yrs; ≥6 to <12 yrs and the Full Analysis Set, respectively."|Baseline, Week 5 (or 10-15 Exposure Days [EDs], whichever occurs last), Week 12, and Month 6 (Completion/Termination)|Participants from the Full Analysis Set who provided at least data from baseline, Week 5 (or 10-15 EDs, whichever occurred last), Week 12 or Month 6.||IU/dL : IU/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
855966|NCT02210091|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Incremental Recovery (IR) of BAX 855 Over Time - One Stage Clotting Assay|"Pre- and post-infusion levels of Factor VIII (FVIII) following infusion of BAX 855 were used to determine IR.
For participants who underwent PK evaluation, baseline IR was determined from the IR measurement used in the PK analysis. Refer to data in Outcome measure 21- Pharmacokinetics (PK): Incremental Recovery (IR), for the category One stage clotting assay - BAX 855
For participants who did not undergo a PK evaluation, baseline IR was determined at the baseline visit prior to the prophylactic treatment phase and is included in this outcome measure.
Category title includes number of participants [n] < 6 yrs; ≥6 to <12 yrs and the Full Analysis Set, respectively."|Baseline, Week 5 (or 10-15 EDs, whichever occurs last), Week 12, and Month 6 (Completion/Termination)|Participants from the Full Analysis Set who provided at least data from baseline, Week 5 (or 10-15 EDs, whichever occurred last), Week 12 or Month 6||IU/dL : IU/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
856363|NCT01485796|Primary|Number of Related Systemic Adverse Events (Excluding Infections)||7 months (per subject)|||adverse events|||Number
855967|NCT02210091|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Incremental Recovery (IR)|"The first PK infusion was ADVATE and the second PK infusion was BAX 855. All participants undergoing PK assessment had a 72-hour washout period before administration of ADVATE and BAX 855. There were 4 blood draws for PK analysis-1 pre-infusion and 3 post infusion. The timing of the infusion (morning [am] or afternoon [pm]) and the timing of Blood Draws 3 and 4 (3 groups for each blood draw) were determined at randomization.
The sequence was as follows:- Blood Draw 1. within 30 minutes pre-infusion [Day 0]; PK INFUSION - am or pm [Day 0]; Blood Draw 2. 15-30 minutes post-infusion [Day 0]; Blood Draw 3. 3 groups:- 7 hours post-infusion (if am PK infusion) or 4 hours post-infusion (if pm PK infusion) [Day 0], Day 1 am or Day 1 pm; Blood Draw 4. 3 groups:- Day 2, Day 3 or Day 4. A non-compartmental model approach was implemented to analyze IR data. A one-stage clotting assay was used as the primary assay and a chromogenic assay was used to provide supportive data."|(1) within 30 min pre-infusion; (2) 15-30 min post-infusion; (3) Day 0 either 4 or 7 hours post-infusion; Day 1 am; Day 1 pm; (4) Day 2; Day 3; or Day 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set||IU/dL : IU/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
855968|NCT02210091|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|"The first PK infusion was ADVATE and the second PK infusion was BAX 855. All participants undergoing PK assessment had a 72-hour washout period before administration of ADVATE and BAX 855. There were 4 blood draws for PK analysis-1 pre-infusion and 3 post infusion. The timing of the infusion (morning [am] or afternoon [pm]) and the timing of Blood Draws 3 and 4 (3 groups for each blood draw) were determined at randomization.
The sequence was as follows:- Blood Draw 1. within 30 minutes pre-infusion [Day 0]; PK INFUSION - am or pm [Day 0]; Blood Draw 2. 15-30 minutes post-infusion [Day 0]; Blood Draw 3. 3 groups:- 7 hours post-infusion (if am PK infusion) or 4 hours post-infusion (if pm PK infusion) [Day 0], Day 1 am or Day 1 pm; Blood Draw 4. 3 groups:- Day 2, Day 3 or Day 4. A nonlinear mixed effects model approach (population PK) was implemented to analyze PK data. A one-stage clotting assay was used as the primary assay and a chromogenic assay was used to provide supportive data."|(1) within 30 min pre-infusion; (2) 15-30 min post-infusion; (3) Day 0 either 4 or 7 hours post-infusion; Day 1 am; Day 1 pm; (4) Day 2; Day 3; or Day 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set||litre (L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
855969|NCT02210091|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Plasma Half-life (T1/2)|"The first PK infusion was ADVATE and the second PK infusion was BAX 855. All participants undergoing PK assessment had a 72-hour washout period before administration of ADVATE and BAX 855. There were 4 blood draws for PK analysis-1 pre-infusion and 3 post infusion. The timing of the infusion (morning [am] or afternoon [pm]) and the timing of Blood Draws 3 and 4 (3 groups for each blood draw) were determined at randomization.
The sequence was as follows:- Blood Draw 1. within 30 minutes pre-infusion [Day 0]; PK INFUSION - am or pm [Day 0]; Blood Draw 2. 15-30 minutes post-infusion [Day 0]; Blood Draw 3. 3 groups:- 7 hours post-infusion (if am PK infusion) or 4 hours post-infusion (if pm PK infusion) [Day 0], Day 1 am or Day 1 pm; Blood Draw 4. 3 groups:- Day 2, Day 3 or Day 4. A nonlinear mixed effects model approach (population PK) was implemented to analyze PK data. A one-stage clotting assay was used as the primary assay and a chromogenic assay was used to provide supportive data."|(1) within 30 min pre-infusion; (2) 15-30 min post-infusion; (3) Day 0 either 4 or 7 hours post-infusion; Day 1 am; Day 1 pm; (4) Day 2; Day 3; or Day 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set||hours (hr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
855970|NCT02210091|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Clearance (CL)|"The first PK infusion was ADVATE and the second PK infusion was BAX 855. All participants undergoing PK assessment had a 72-hour washout period before administration of ADVATE and BAX 855. There were 4 blood draws for PK analysis-1 pre-infusion and 3 post infusion. The timing of the infusion (morning [am] or afternoon [pm]) and the timing of Blood Draws 3 and 4 (3 groups for each blood draw) were determined at randomization.
The sequence was as follows:- Blood Draw 1. within 30 minutes pre-infusion [Day 0]; PK INFUSION - am or pm [Day 0]; Blood Draw 2. 15-30 minutes post-infusion [Day 0]; Blood Draw 3. 3 groups:- 7 hours post-infusion (if am PK infusion) or 4 hours post-infusion (if pm PK infusion) [Day 0], Day 1 am or Day 1 pm; Blood Draw 4. 3 groups:- Day 2, Day 3 or Day 4. A nonlinear mixed effects model approach (population PK) was implemented to analyze PK data. A one-stage clotting assay was used as the primary assay and a chromogenic assay was used to provide supportive data."|(1) within 30 min pre-infusion; (2) 15-30 min post-infusion; (3) Day 0 either 4 or 7 hours post-infusion; Day 1 am; Day 1 pm; (4) Day 2; Day 3; or Day 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set||L/hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
855971|NCT02210091|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Mean Residence Time (MRT)|"The first PK infusion was ADVATE and the second PK infusion was BAX 855. All participants undergoing PK assessment had a 72-hour washout period before administration of ADVATE and BAX 855. There were 4 blood draws for PK analysis-1 pre-infusion and 3 post infusion. The timing of the infusion (morning [am] or afternoon [pm]) and the timing of Blood Draws 3 and 4 (3 groups for each blood draw) were determined at randomization.
The sequence was as follows:- Blood Draw 1. within 30 minutes pre-infusion [Day 0]; PK INFUSION - am or pm [Day 0]; Blood Draw 2. 15-30 minutes post-infusion [Day 0]; Blood Draw 3. 3 groups:- 7 hours post-infusion (if am PK infusion) or 4 hours post-infusion (if pm PK infusion) [Day 0], Day 1 am or Day 1 pm; Blood Draw 4. 3 groups:- Day 2, Day 3 or Day 4. A nonlinear mixed effects model approach (population PK) was implemented to analyze PK data. A one-stage clotting assay was used as the primary assay and a chromogenic assay was used to provide supportive data."|(1) within 30 min pre-infusion; (2) 15-30 min post-infusion; (3) Day 0 either 4 or 7 hours post-infusion; Day 1 am; Day 1 pm; (4) Day 2; Day 3; or Day 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set||hours (hr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
855972|NCT02210091|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to ∞ Hours Post-infusion Per Dose, (AUC0-∞/Dose)||(1) within 30 min pre-infusion; (2) 15-30 min post-infusion; (3) Day 0 either 4 or 7 hours post-infusion; Day 1 am; Day 1 pm; (4) Day 2; Day 3; or Day 4|The PK parameters were derived using a non-compartmental estimation approach using a flexible sampling design to provide point and interval estimates for summary PK parameter using a batch method. AUC/Dose is not a standard output parameter so this calculation was not done.|||||
856015|NCT01987908|Secondary|Brief Pain Inventory (BPI): Interference of Pain With Aspects of Life (General Activity) During Post-treatment Observation Period - Change From Baseline|"Participants rated the degree to which their pain interfered with various daily functions by using the BPI short form. Interference with general activity was rated on a scale from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes).
Baseline was defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of the dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind dosing period."|At baseline and Day 49 during the post-treatment observation period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
855973|NCT02210091|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to ∞ Hours Post-infusion (AUC0-∞)|"The first PK infusion was ADVATE and the second PK infusion was BAX 855. All participants undergoing PK assessment had a 72-hour washout period before administration of ADVATE and BAX 855. There were 4 blood draws for PK analysis-1 pre-infusion and 3 post infusion. The timing of the infusion (morning [am] or afternoon [pm]) and the timing of Blood Draws 3 and 4 (3 groups for each blood draw) were determined at randomization.
The sequence was as follows:- Blood Draw 1. within 30 minutes pre-infusion [Day 0]; PK INFUSION - am or pm [Day 0]; Blood Draw 2. 15-30 minutes post-infusion [Day 0]; Blood Draw 3. 3 groups:- 7 hours post-infusion (if am PK infusion) or 4 hours post-infusion (if pm PK infusion) [Day 0], Day 1 am or Day 1 pm; Blood Draw 4. 3 groups:- Day 2, Day 3 or Day 4. A nonlinear mixed effects model approach (population PK) was implemented to analyze PK data. A one-stage clotting assay was used as the primary assay and a chromogenic assay was used to provide supportive data."|(1) within 30 min pre-infusion; (2) 15-30 min post-infusion; (3) Day 0 either 4 or 7 hours post-infusion; Day 1 am; Day 1 pm; (4) Day 2; Day 3; or Day 4|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Analysis Set.||IU•hr/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
855974|NCT02210091|Secondary|Positive Post-baseline Binding Antibodies to Factor VIII (FVIII), Polyethylene Glycol-Factor VIII (PEG-FVIII), PEG and Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) Proteins|"Binding antibodies to FVIII and PEG-FVIII, as well as to PEG, were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Both immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) binding antibodies for FVIII, BAX 855, and PEG were tested at each study visit. Testing for binding antibodies to CHO was performed on citrate-anti-coagulated plasma using an ELISA employing polyclonal anti-human IgG antibodies.
This outcome measure includes antibodies that were transient (antibody developed after exposure to BAX 855 but not present at study termination/completion) and pre-existent (antibody originally present before exposure to BAX 855)."|After first exposure to BAX 855 until completion of study - approx. 6 months per participant.|BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set: Data not available for 1 participant in the 6 to <12 years group as participant was prematurely withdrawn from study.||participants|||Number
855975|NCT02210091|Secondary|Number of Clinically Significant Changes in Clinical Laboratory Parameters (Hematology, Clinical Chemistry, Lipids)|"The HEMATOLOGY PANEL consisted of complete blood count: hemoglobin, hematocrit, erythrocytes (ie, red blood cell count), leukocytes (ie, white blood cell count) with differential (ie, basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, and neutrophils), mean corpuscular volume, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration, and platelet count.
The CLINICAL CHEMISTRY PANEL consisted of sodium, potassium, chloride, bicarbonate, total protein, albumin, ALT, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, and glucose.
The LIPID PANEL consisted of cholesterol, very low density lipoprotein, low density lipoprotein, high density lipoprotein, and triglycerides.
For each laboratory parameter value that changed from normal at baseline to abnormal at any subsequent study visit, the Investigator determined if the value was clinically significant, or not."|After first exposure to BAX 855 until completion of study - approx. 6 months per participant.|BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set.||clinically significant findings|||Number
855976|NCT02210091|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Vital Signs|Vital signs: body temperature (°C), respiratory rate (breaths/min), pulse rate (beats/min), and systolic and diastolic blood pressure (mmHg). For each vital sign value that changed from normal at baseline to abnormal at any subsequent study visit, the Investigator determined if the value was clinically significant (i.e. and adverse event), or not.|After first exposure to BAX 855 until completion of study - approx. 6 months per participant.|BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set.||participants|||Number
855977|NCT02210091|Secondary|Non-serious Adverse Events Possibly or Probably Related to BAX 855||After first exposure to BAX 855 until completion of study - approx. 6 months per participant.|BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set.||adverse events|||Number
855978|NCT02210091|Secondary|Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) Possibly or Probably Related to BAX 855||After first exposure to BAX 855 until completion of study - approx. 6 months per participant.|BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set.||serious adverse events|||Number
855979|NCT02210091|Secondary|Hemostatic Efficacy Rating for Bleeding Episodes Treated With BAX 855 at Resolution of Bleed|"Rating Scale for Treatment of Bleeding Episodes (BEs) (4-point ordinal scale):
Excellent: Full relief of pain and cessation of objective signs of bleeding (eg, swelling, tenderness, and decreased range of motion in the case of musculoskeletal hemorrhage) after a single infusion. No additional infusion required for the control of bleeding. Administration of further infusions to maintain hemostasis did not affect this scoring.
Good: Definite pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding after a single infusion. Possibly requires more than 1 infusion for complete resolution.
Fair: Probable and/or slight relief of pain and slight improvement in signs of bleeding after single infusion. Required more than 1 infusion for complete resolution.
None: No improvement or condition worsens."|After first exposure to BAX 855 until completion of study - approx. 6 months per participant.|Participants in the Full Analysis Set who had treated bleeding episodes.||bleeding episodes|bleeding episodes||Number
855980|NCT02210091|Secondary|Consumption of BAX 855: Weight-adjusted Dose Per Bleeding Episode||During prophylaxis period of 6 months or ≥ 50 EDs, whichever occurs last|Participants in the BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set who had treated bleeding episodes.||IU/kg|bleeding episodes|Standard Deviation|Mean
855981|NCT02210091|Secondary|Consumption of BAX 855: Number of Infusions Per Bleeding Episode||During prophylaxis period of 6 months or ≥ 50 EDs, whichever occurs last|Participants in the BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set who had treated bleeding episodes.||infusions||Standard Deviation|Mean
855982|NCT02210091|Secondary|Consumption of BAX 855: Weight-adjusted Dose of Prophylactic Infusions Per Year (Annualized) Per Participant||During prophylaxis period of 6 months or ≥ 50 EDs, whichever occurs last|BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set.||IU/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
855983|NCT02210091|Secondary|Consumption of BAX 855: Weight-adjusted Dose of Prophylactic Infusions Per Month Per Participant||During prophylaxis period of 6 months or ≥ 50 EDs, whichever occurs last|BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set.||IU/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
855984|NCT02210091|Secondary|Consumption of BAX 855: Number of Prophylactic Infusions Per Year (Annualized) Per Participant||During prophylaxis period of 6 months or ≥ 50 EDs, whichever occurs last|BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set.||infusions per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
855985|NCT02210091|Secondary|Consumption of BAX 855: Number of Prophylactic Infusions Per Month Per Participant||During prophylaxis period of 6 months or ≥ 50 EDs, whichever occurs last|BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set.||infusions per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
855986|NCT02210091|Secondary|Annualized Bleeding Rate (ABR)|"The annualized bleeding rate (ABR) during the prophylaxis period was assessed based upon each individual bleeding episode, spontaneous or traumatic, recorded in the participant´s diary and/or recorded in the physician/nurse/study site notes.
The annualized bleeding rate was analyzed using a generalized linear model framework assuming a negative binomial distribution with a logarithmic link function and presence or absence of target joints and age cohort as covariates and duration of the observation period in years as offset. Point estimates for the mean and 95% confidence intervals are presented."|During prophylaxis period of 6 months or ≥ 50 EDs, whichever occurs last|Full Analysis Set: All participants who received at least 1 dose of BAX 855 in either PK or prophylaxis part of study||bleeding episodes per year||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
855987|NCT02210091|Primary|Number of Participants With Inhibitory Antibodies to Factor VIII (FVIII)|Inhibitory antibodies to FVIII were measured using the Nijmegen modification of the Bethesda assay. Incidence of an FVIII inhibitory antibody was defined as an inhibitor level ≥0.6 Bethesda units [BU].|After first exposure to BAX 855 until completion of study - approx. 6 months per participant.|Participants in the BAX 855 Safety Analysis Set who developed an inhibitor at any time plus participants who did not develop an inhibitor, had 50 or more exposure days (EDs) to BAX 855 and had FVIII Inhibitory test results after 50 EDs.||participants|||Number
856059|NCT01942590|Secondary|Change in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) in Pulmonary Function Testing|Forced vital capacity (FVC) is the total amount of air exhaled during the lung function test.|Baseline, Week 52|participants who completed FVC testing||change in FVC measured as % expected||Standard Deviation|Mean
856006|NCT02071420|Primary|Change in Occupational Physical Activity From Baseline to 16 Weeks|Occupational physical activity (primary outcome) will be measured objectively with the GENEActiv physical activity monitor. The monitor will be worn on the right ankle and will be worn for 5 working days during all non-bathing hours. The outcome measure will be change in occupational activity (average counts/work day) from baseline to 16 weeks. The measure will be calculated as follows: 16 weeks value - baseline value.|Baseline and 16 weeks|||Average counts/work day||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
856008|NCT01989156|Primary|Levels of Carboxyhemoglobin (COHb)|Carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) is assayed from whole blood. Expressed as % of saturation of hemoglobin. Blood measurements performed in the evening of Day 5, for the smokers of all arms (mTHS, mCC and SA). Geometric Least Squares means are provided as descriptive statistics.|5 days|The analysis was performed on the Per Protocol set (PP) which included all randomized subjects who had no major protocol deviation impacting the evaluability during the confinement period.||% of saturation of hemoglobin||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856009|NCT01989156|Primary|Levels of Total 4-(Methylnitrosamino)-1-(3- Pyridyl)-1-butanol (Total NNAL)|Concentrations measured in urine, adjusted for creatinine, at Day 90 for the smokers of all arms (mTHS, mCC and SA). Geometric Least Squares means are provided as descriptive statistics.|90 days|The analysis was performed on the Per Protocol set (PP) which included all randomized subjects who had no major protocol deviation impacting the evaluability during the confinement period.||pg/mg creat||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856010|NCT01989156|Primary|Concentration of S-phenylmercapturic Acid (S-PMA)|Concentrations measured in urine, adjusted for creatinine, at Day 5 for the smokers of all arms (mTHS, mCC and SA). Geometric Least Squares means are provided as descriptive statistics.|5 days|The analysis was performed on the Per Protocol set (PP) which included all randomized subjects who had no major protocol deviation impacting the evaluability during the confinement period.||pg/mg creat||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856011|NCT01989156|Primary|Concentration of 3-hydroxypropylmercapturic Acid (3-HPMA)|Concentrations measured in urine, adjusted for creatinine, at Day 5 for the smokers of all arms (mTHS, mCC and SA). Geometric Least Squares means are provided as descriptive statistics.|5 days|The analysis was performed on the Per Protocol set (PP) which included all randomized subjects who had no major protocol deviation impacting the evaluability during the confinement period.||ng/mg creat||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856012|NCT01989156|Primary|Concentration of Monohydroxybutenylmercapturic Acid (MHBMA)|Concentrations measured in urine, adjusted for creatinine, at Day 5 for the smokers of all arms (mTHS, mCC and SA). Geometric Least Squares means are provided as descriptive statistics.|5 days|The analysis was performed on the Per Protocol set (PP) which included all randomized subjects who had no major protocol deviation impacting the evaluability during the confinement period.||pg/mg creat||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856013|NCT01987908|Secondary|Reduction in Sickle Cell-specific Complications||Throughout the study period (approximately 9 weeks)|Data not collected for this outcome measure. Study terminated early.|||||
856014|NCT01987908|Secondary|Analgesic Use|Analgesic use assessed with pain levels by numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) and brief pain inventory (BPI).|Throughout the study period (approximately 9 weeks)|Data not collected for this outcome measure. Study terminated early.|||||
856016|NCT01987908|Secondary|Brief Pain Inventory (BPI): Interference of Pain With Aspects of Life (General Activity) During Double-blind Treatment Period - Change From Baseline|"Participants rated the degree to which their pain interfered with various daily functions by using the BPI short form. Interference with general activity was rated on a scale from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes).
Baseline was defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of the dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind dosing period.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|At baseline, Day 7 and Day 28 during the double-blind treatment period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856017|NCT01987908|Secondary|Brief Pain Inventory (BPI): Worst Pain Level in Last 24 Hours (Post-treatment Observation Period) - Change From Baseline|"Participants rated the severity of their pain by using the BPI short form. Pain was rated on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine). A negative mean change denotes a pain decrease. A positive mean change denotes an increase in pain.
Baseline was defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of the dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind dosing period."|At baseline and Day 49 during the post-treatment observation period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856018|NCT01987908|Secondary|Brief Pain Inventory (BPI): Worst Pain Level in Last 24 Hours (Double-blind Treatment Period) - Change From Baseline|"Participants rated the severity of their pain by using the BPI short form. Pain was rated on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine). A negative mean change denotes a pain decrease. A positive mean change denotes an increase in pain.
Baseline was defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of the dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind dosing period.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|At baseline, Day 7 and Day 28 during the double-blind treatment period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856019|NCT01987908|Secondary|Brief Pain Inventory (BPI): Average Pain Level in Last 24 Hours (Double-blind Treatment Period) - Change From Baseline|"Participants rated the severity of their pain by using the BPI short form. Pain was rated on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine). A negative mean change denotes a pain decrease. A positive mean change denotes an increase in pain.
Baseline was defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of the dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind dosing period.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|At baseline, Day 7 and Day 28 during the double-blind treatment period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure.||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856020|NCT01987908|Secondary|Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS): Worst Pain (Weekly Average) in the Post-treatment Observation Period - Change From Last Day of Double-blind Treatment Period (Day 28) - AUC|Participants assessed their pain levels by using the 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale: 0 = No pain 1-3 = Mild pain (nagging, annoying, interfering little with activities of daily living [ADLs]) 4-6 = Moderate pain (interferes significantly with ADLs) 7-10 = Severe pain (disabling; unable to perform ADLs A negative mean change denotes a pain decrease. A positive mean change denotes an increase in pain. Baseline was defined as the most recent value obtained on the last day of the double-blind dosing period (Day 28). Area under the curve (AUC) was computed using change from baseline (Day 28) in weekly average values at Day 35, Day 42 and Day 49.|Participants assessed and recorded their pain level daily. Weekly averages were calculated for the Day 35, Day 42 and Day 49 assessments|||NPRS score*week||Standard Deviation|Mean
856021|NCT01987908|Secondary|Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS): Worst Pain (Weekly Average) in the Post-treatment Observation Period - Change From Last Day of Double-blind Treatment Period (Day 28)|"Participants assessed their pain levels by using the 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale: 0 = No pain 1-3 = Mild pain (nagging, annoying, interfering little with activities of daily living [ADLs]) 4-6 = Moderate pain (interferes significantly with ADLs) 7-10 = Severe pain (disabling; unable to perform ADLs A negative mean change denotes a pain decrease. A positive mean change denotes an increase in pain. Baseline was defined as the most recent value obtained on the last day of the double-blind dosing period (Day 28).
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|Participants assessed and recorded their pain level daily. Weekly averages were calculated for the Day 35, Day 42 and Day 49 assessments|||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856022|NCT01987908|Secondary|Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS): Worst Pain (Weekly Average) in the Post-treatment Observation Period - AUC|Participants assessed their pain levels by using the 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale: 0 = No pain 1-3 = Mild pain (nagging, annoying, interfering little with activities of daily living [ADLs]) 4-6 = Moderate pain (interferes significantly with ADLs) 7-10 = Severe pain (disabling; unable to perform ADLs A negative mean change denotes a pain decrease. A positive mean change denotes an increase in pain. Baseline was defined as the average of all measures taken from screening through the period prior to start of dosing on Day 1. Area under the curve (AUC) was computed using change from baseline in weekly average values at Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28, Day 35, Day 42 and Day 49.|Participants assessed and recorded their pain level daily. Weekly averages were calculated for the Day 35, Day 42 and Day 49 assessments|||NPRS score*week||Standard Deviation|Mean
856023|NCT01987908|Secondary|Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS): Worst Pain (Weekly Average) in the Post-treatment Observation Period - Change From Baseline|"Participants assessed their pain levels by using the 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale: 0 = No pain 1-3 = Mild pain (nagging, annoying, interfering little with activities of daily living [ADLs]) 4-6 = Moderate pain (interferes significantly with ADLs) 7-10 = Severe pain (disabling; unable to perform ADLs A negative mean change denotes a pain decrease. A positive mean change denotes an increase in pain. Baseline was defined as the average of all measures taken from screening through the period prior to start of dosing on Day 1.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|Participants assessed and recorded their pain level daily. Weekly averages were calculated for the Day 35, Day 42 and Day 49 assessments|||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856024|NCT01987908|Secondary|Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS): Worst Pain (Weekly Average) in the Double-blind Treatment Period - AUC|Participants assessed their pain levels by using the 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale: 0 = No pain 1-3 = Mild pain (nagging, annoying, interfering little with activities of daily living [ADLs]) 4-6 = Moderate pain (interferes significantly with ADLs) 7-10 = Severe pain (disabling; unable to perform ADLs A negative mean change denotes a pain decrease. A positive mean change denotes an increase in pain. Baseline was defined as the average of all measures taken from screening through the period prior to start of dosing on Day 1. Area under the curve (AUC) was computed using change from baseline in weekly average values at Day 7, Day 14, Day 21. and Day 28.|Participants assessed and recorded their pain level daily. Weekly averages were calculated for the Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, and Day 28 assessments|||NPRS score*week||Standard Deviation|Mean
856025|NCT01987908|Secondary|Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS): Worst Pain (Weekly Average) in the Double-blind Treatment Period - Change From Baseline|"Participants assessed their pain levels by using the 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale: 0 = No pain 1-3 = Mild pain (nagging, annoying, interfering little with activities of daily living [ADLs]) 4-6 = Moderate pain (interferes significantly with ADLs) 7-10 = Severe pain (disabling; unable to perform ADLs A negative mean change denotes a pain decrease. A positive mean change denotes an increase in pain. Baseline was defined as the average of all measures taken from screening through the period prior to start of dosing on Day 1.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|Participants assessed and recorded their pain level daily. Weekly averages were calculated for the Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, and Day 28 assessments|||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856026|NCT01987908|Secondary|Patients´ Global Impression of Change (PGIC) During the Post-treatment Observation Period - Change From Last Day of Double-blind Treatment Period|"Participants assessed the change in activity limitations, symptoms, emotions, and overall quality of life by using the 1- to 7-point PGIC scale. The question and scale was as follows: Since beginning treatment at this clinic, how would you describe the change in your sickle cell condition? Please circle the number that matches your overall judgment. -3 - much worse -2 - moderately worse -1 - minimally worse 0 - no change +1 - minimally improved +2 - moderately improved +3 - much improved.
Baseline was defined as the most recent value obtained on the last day of the double-blind treatment period.
Categories contain Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|At baseline and once weekly on Days 35, 42, and 49 during the post-treatment observation period|||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856027|NCT01987908|Secondary|Patients´ Global Impression of Change (PGIC) During the Post-treatment Observation Period - Change From Baseline|"Participants assessed the change in activity limitations, symptoms, emotions, and overall quality of life by using the 1- to 7-point PGIC scale. The question and scale was as follows: Since beginning treatment at this clinic, how would you describe the change in your sickle cell condition? Please circle the number that matches your overall judgment. -3 - much worse -2 - moderately worse -1 - minimally worse 0 - no change +1 - minimally improved +2 - moderately improved +3 - much improved.
Baseline defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind treatment period.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|At baseline and once weekly on Days 35, 42, and 49 during the post-treatment observation period|||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856028|NCT01987908|Secondary|Patients´ Global Impression of Change (PGIC) During the Double-blind Treatment Period - Change From Baseline|"Participants assessed the change in activity limitations, symptoms, emotions, and overall quality of life by using the 1- to 7-point PGIC scale. The question and scale was as follows: Since beginning treatment at this clinic, how would you describe the change in your sickle cell condition? Please circle the number that matches your overall judgment. -3 - much worse -2 - moderately worse -1 - minimally worse 0 - no change +1 - minimally improved +2 - moderately improved +3 - much improved.
Baseline defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind treatment period. No values available for placebo group for Day 28.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|At baseline and once weekly on Days 7, 14, 21, and 28 during the double-blind treatment period|||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856029|NCT01987908|Secondary|Exercise Tolerance: Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test [CPET]|CPET was optional, based on capacity of participant to complete the test.|On last day of double-blind treatment period (Day 28)|Following an external review and report of CPET capabilities of the external service provider, all CPET testing was suspended and the decision made to not collect or analyze CPET data.|||||
856030|NCT01987908|Secondary|Exercise Tolerance: 6-Minute Walk Distance on Day 49 of the Post-treatment Observation Period - Change From Last Day of Double-blind Treatment Period (Day 28)|Functional exercise capacity was evaluated by using the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) which measures the distance that a subject can quickly walk on a flat, hard surface in a period of 6 minutes. Guidelines developed by the American Thoracic Society were used for conducting the test and interpreting the results.|On last day of double-blind treatment period (Day 28) and on Day 49 of the post-treatment observation period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
856031|NCT01987908|Secondary|Exercise Tolerance: 6-Minute Walk Distance on Day 49 of the Post-treatment Observation Period - Change From Baseline|"Functional exercise capacity was evaluated by using the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) which measures the distance that a subject can quickly walk on a flat, hard surface in a period of 6 minutes. Guidelines developed by the American Thoracic Society were used for conducting the test and interpreting the results.
Baseline defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of dosing on Day 1."|Prior to dosing at baseline and on Day 49 of the post-treatment observation period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
856060|NCT01942590|Secondary|Change in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) in Pulmonary Function Testing|Forced vital capacity (FVC) is the total amount of air exhaled during the lung function test.|Baseline, Week 18|participants who completed FVC testing||change in FVC measured as % expected||Standard Deviation|Mean
856996|NCT02454608|Primary|Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on Sinonasal Outcomes Test-22(SNOT-22)|Minimun Score: 0 Maximum Score: 110 A higher score indicates a worse outcome|baseline to week 8|Intention-to-treat analysis||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
856032|NCT01987908|Secondary|Exercise Tolerance: 6-Minute Walk Distance During the Double-blind Treatment Period - Change From Baseline|"Functional exercise capacity was evaluated by using the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) which measures the distance that a subject can quickly walk on a flat, hard surface in a period of 6 minutes. Guidelines developed by the American Thoracic Society were used for conducting the test and interpreting the results.
Baseline defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of dosing on Day 1.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|Prior to, during and after the end of dosing in the double-blind treatment period, i.e., at baseline, Day 4, Day 7, Day 14 and Day 28|||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
856033|NCT01987908|Secondary|Body Weight - Change From Baseline|"A negative change in body weight denotes a weight decrease, a positive change in body weight denotes a weight increase.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|Prior to, during and after the end of dosing in the double-blind treatment period, i.e., at baseline, Day 1, Day 4, Day 7, Day 14, Day 21 and Day 28|||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
856034|NCT01987908|Secondary|N-terminal Pro B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) Levels- Change From Baseline|Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product.|At baseline, Day 1, Day 7, Day 14 and Day 28 during the double-blind treatment period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure. Summary tables for placebo group not done as data not collected. Study terminated early.||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856035|NCT01987908|Secondary|Serum Ferritin Levels - Change From Baseline||At baseline, Day 1 and Day 7 during the double-blind treatment period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure. Summary tables for placebo group not done as data not collected. Study terminated early.||mircograms/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856036|NCT01987908|Secondary|C Reactive Protein Levels - Change From Baseline|Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product.|At baseline, Day 1 and Day 7 during the double-blind treatment period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure. Summary tables for placebo group not done as data not collected. Study terminated early.||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856037|NCT01987908|Secondary|LDH Isoform - Change From Baseline||Prior to, during and after the end of dosing in the double-blind treatment period, i.e., at baseline, Day 1, Day 7, Day 14 and Day 28|Summary tables for this outcome measure were not done as baseline data missing. Study terminated early.|||||
856038|NCT01987908|Secondary|Direct Bilirubin - Change From Baseline|Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo.|Prior to, during and after the end of dosing in the double-blind treatment period, i.e., at baseline, Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 21 and Day 28|||mircomoles/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856039|NCT01987908|Secondary|Reticulocyte Percent- Change From Baseline|Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product.|At baseline, Day 1 and Day 7 during the double-blind treatment period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure. Summary tables for placebo group not done as data not collected. Study terminated early.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
856040|NCT01987908|Secondary|Hemoglobin Levels - Change From Baseline|"A clinical laboratory endpoint that reflects the amount of red blood cells present in the blood. Baseline defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind treatment period.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|Prior to, during and after the end of dosing in the double-blind treatment period, i.e., at baseline, Day 1, Day 4, Day 7, Day 14, Day 21 and Day 28|||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856041|NCT01987908|Secondary|Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH) Levels - Change From Baseline|"LDH levels were measured as a biomarker for intravascular hemolysis. The results are based on the LDH Total measurement. Baseline defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind treatment period.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|Prior to, during and after the end of dosing in the double-blind treatment period, i.e., at baseline, Day 1, Day 7, Day 14 and Day 28|||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856042|NCT01987908|Secondary|Hematocrit Levels - Change From Baseline|"Baseline defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind treatment period.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|Prior to, during and after the end of dosing in the double-blind treatment period, i.e., at baseline, Day 1, Day 7, Day 14 and Day 28|||L/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856043|NCT01987908|Secondary|Plasma Erythropoietin (EPO) Levels - Change From Baseline|"Erythropoietin (EPO) is a hormone produced by the kidney that promotes the formation of red blood cells by the bone marrow. EPO can be detected and measured in the blood.
Baseline defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind treatment period.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|At baseline and Day 28 during the double-blind treatment period|Participants who provided baseline data and at least one other data point for this outcome measure.||U/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856044|NCT01987908|Secondary|Oxygen Binding p50/p20 Value - Change From Baseline|"A measure of the ability of hemoglobin to bind oxygen. The p50 is the oxygen level at which 50% of the hemoglobin contains oxygen. The p20 is the oxygen level at which 20% of the hemoglobin contains oxygen. Baseline is defined as the most recent value obtained prior to start of dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind treatment period.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|During the double-blind treatment period at baseline, Day 1, Day 4 and Day 7|||ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
856061|NCT01942590|Secondary|Change in 6 Minute Walk Test|Assess exercise tolerance in study patients; test administered by physical therapist. Subjects were asked to walk for 6 minutes, unassisted. The distance walked was recorded in meters.|Baseline, week 52|Participants who completed 6 minute walk test||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
856045|NCT01987908|Secondary|Resting Oxygen Saturation as Measured by Oximetry (SpO2) - Change From Baseline|"A measure of the amount of oxygen in the blood. Oxygen saturation was determined by pulse oximetry. A pulse oximeter was placed over a nail polish-free finger nail to determine peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2).
Baseline was defined as the most recent value obtained prior to the start of dosing on Day 1 of the double-blind treatment period. A mean change from baseline >0 indicates an increase in oxygen saturation, a mean change <0 indicates a decrease in oxygen saturation.
Category title includes number of participants with available data (n) for participants treated with study product, followed by participants treated with placebo."|Prior to, during and after the end of dosing in the double-blind treatment period, i.e., at baseline, Day 4, Day 7, Day 14 and Day 28|||percent saturation||Standard Deviation|Mean
856046|NCT01987908|Primary|PK: - Plasma AUC, Cmax, Tmax, and T1/2 of Aes-103 and Its Metabolite, HMFA - RBC Hemolysate AUC (0-8h), Cmax, Tmax, and T1/2 of Aes-103 - Percentage of Hemoglobin Bound to Aes-103|"Pharmacokinetic endpoints in the study protocol were as follows:-
Plasma Area under curve (AUC), Maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), time at which Cmax observed (Tmax), and terminal half-life (T1/2) of Aes-103 and its metabolite, 5-hydroxymethyl-2-furoic acid (HMFA)
red blood cell (RBC) hemolysate Area under curve between 0 and 8 hours (AUC [0-8h]), Cmax, Tmax, and T1/2 of Aes-103
Percentage of hemoglobin bound to Aes-103"|PK blood samples were to be taken within 10 minutes before dosing and 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 6 hours after the first dose of study product on Days 1 and 7 and at the same time points on Day 28 (or early termination)|PK data were not determined as the assay collection method was found to be faulty rendering all samples unevaluable.|||||
856047|NCT01987908|Primary|Number of Clinically Significant Observations of Vital Signs, 12-lead ECGs, Clinical Laboratory Assessments, and Physical and Neurological Examinations|Vital signs, 12-lead ECGs, clinical laboratory assessments, and physical and neurological examinations that were deemed clinically significant by the investigator in agreement with the sponsor study director.|Throughout the study period (approximately 9 weeks)|safety analysis dataset||clinically significant observations|||Number
856048|NCT01987908|Primary|Number of Participants With Sickle-Cell Disease-related Symptoms||Placebo lead-in period of 14 days (Day -14 to Day -1), double-blind treatment period of 28 days (Day 1 to Day 28) and post-treatment observation period of 21 days (Day 29 to Day 49)|||participants|||Number
856049|NCT01987908|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Including Sickle-cell Specific Symptoms, During the Post-treatment Observation Period|Number of participants with adverse events (AEs) reported during the post-treatment observation period. AEs included clinically-significant changes in vital signs, ECG, clinical laboratory assessments, physical and neurological examinations. Sickle cell-specific symptoms included the development of new skin ulcers, hospitalization or ambulatory acute care, intravenous analgesics visit for pain episodes (i.e., sickle-cell disease related pain), acute chest syndrome, priapism, and stroke.|Post-treatment observation period of 21 days (Day 29 to Day 49)|||participants|||Number
856050|NCT01987908|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Including Sickle-cell Specific Symptoms, During the Placebo lead-in Period|Number of participants with adverse events (AEs) reported during the placebo lead-in period. AEs included clinically-significant changes in vital signs, ECG, clinical laboratory assessments, physical and neurological examinations. Sickle cell-specific symptoms included the development of new skin ulcers, hospitalization or ambulatory acute care, intravenous analgesics visit for pain episodes (i.e., sickle-cell disease related pain), acute chest syndrome, priapism, and stroke.|Placebo lead-in period of 14 days (Day -14 to Day -1)|||participants|||Number
856051|NCT01987908|Primary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Including Sickle Cell-specific Symptoms, During the Double-blind Treatment Period|Number of participants with adverse events (AEs) reported during the double-blind treatment period. AEs included clinically-significant changes in vital signs, ECG, clinical laboratory assessments, physical and neurological examinations. Sickle cell-specific symptoms included the development of new skin ulcers, hospitalization or ambulatory acute care, intravenous analgesics visit for pain episodes (i.e., sickle-cell disease related pain), acute chest syndrome, priapism, and stroke.|Double-blind treatment period of 28 days (Day 1 to Day 28)|||participants|||Number
856052|NCT01942590|Secondary|Maximum Expiratory Pressure (MEP)|MEP reflects the strength of the abdominal muscles and other expiratory muscles.|Baseline, Week 18, and Week 52|Participants who completed the MEP testing||percentage of MEP||Standard Deviation|Mean
856053|NCT01942590|Secondary|Predicted Maximum Inspiration Pressure (MIP)|MIP is a measurement of inspiratory muscle weakness, including weakness of the diaphragm. MIP is decreased in Pompe disease and reflects weakness of respiratory muscles.|Baseline, Week 18, and Week 52|Participants who completed the MIP testing||percentage of MIP||Standard Deviation|Mean
856054|NCT01942590|Secondary|Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI)|The Late-Life Function & Disability Instrument (Late-Life FDI) is an evaluative outcome instrument for community-dwelling older adults. Highest score 240 = normal function and no disability, lowest score 0 = low levels of frequency of participating in life tasks.|Baseline, Week 18, Week 52|Participants who completed LLFDI at the visit. Data was not collected from any participants in the placebo group.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856055|NCT01942590|Secondary|Quick Motor Function Test (QMFT)|The QMFT is a criterion referenced assessment designed to measure functional status and change in gross motor function over time and, in particular, to measure clinically relevant change. Consists of 16 motor function tests. Lowest score 0 = unable to perform motor function tests, highest score 64 = normal muscle function.|Baseline, Week 18, and Week 52|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856056|NCT01942590|Secondary|GSGC (Gait, Stairs, Gowers, Arising From a Chair.)|The GSGC is a criterion referenced assessment designed to measure functional status and change in gross motor function over time and, in particular, to measure clinically relevant change. Consists of 4 components: Gait, Climbing Stairs, Gower’s Manuever, Arising From a Chair. Lowest score 4 = normal muscle function, highest score 27 = unable to perform motor function tests.|Baseline, Week 18, and Week 52|participants who completed GSGC testing||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856057|NCT01942590|Secondary|Change in Urinary Glc4 Biomarker||Baseline, Week 52|participants who completed urinary Glc4 biomarker collection||mmol/mol CN||Standard Deviation|Mean
856058|NCT01942590|Secondary|Change in Urinary Glc4 Biomarker|The Glc4 biomarker is measured in urine and correlates with muscle glycogen content. It is a noninvasive measurement that serves as a biomarker for Pompe disease.|Baseline, Week 18|||mmol/mol CN||Standard Deviation|Mean
856111|NCT01790659|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With All Lesions Cured|• Percentage of subjects with all lesions cured, defined as: Final clinical cure as defined in primary objective (which is based solely on the index lesion); AND, Cure of all other lesions by nominal Day 168 (100% re-epithelialization of all ulcerated lesions and resolution of all other types of lesions)|168 ± 14 days|||percentage of participants|||Number
856093|NCT01828983|Primary|Spouse Self Report of Depression|Patient Health Questionnaire - Depression (PHQ)-9 measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Scores range from 0-27 with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms.|Baseline, 6 months|Participants with data at baseline and 6 months||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
856094|NCT01828983|Primary|Spouse Self Report of Anxiety|Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Scores range from 0 to 21; higher scores equal more anxiety.|baseline, and 6 months|Participants who had data at baseline and 6 months||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
856095|NCT01828983|Primary|Spouse Self-report of Resilience|Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Scores range from 0-100. Higher scores equal greater resilience.|Baseline, 6 months|Participants who had data at baseline and 6 months||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
856096|NCT01800162|Secondary|Future Fertility|Data was not analyzed as the study was closed early. Data is not anticipated to be analyzed for this study. Patients were not followed for outcome.|6 weeks||||||
856097|NCT01800162|Secondary|Acceptability|Data was not analyzed as the study was closed early. Data is not anticipated to be analyzed for this study. Patients were not followed for outcome.|6 weeks||||||
856098|NCT01800162|Secondary|Patients' Preferences|Data was not analyzed as the study was closed early. Data is not anticipated to be analyzed for this study. Patients were not followed for outcome.|6 weeks||||||
856099|NCT01800162|Secondary|Time to Resolution|Data was not analyzed as the study was closed early. Data is not anticipated to be analyzed for this study. Patients were not followed for outcome.|6 weeks||||||
856100|NCT01800162|Secondary|Number of Visits|Data was not analyzed as the study was closed early. Data is not anticipated to be analyzed for this study. Patients were not followed for outcome.|6 weeks||||||
856101|NCT01800162|Secondary|Number of Procedures (Lab Tests, Ultrasounds)|Data was not analyzed as the study was closed early. Data is not anticipated to be analyzed for this study. Patients were not followed for outcome.|6 weeks||||||
856102|NCT01800162|Secondary|Treatment Complications and Adverse Events|Data was not analyzed as the study was closed early. Data is not anticipated to be analyzed for this study. Patients were not followed for outcome.|42 days after the last dose of study medication||||||
856103|NCT01800162|Secondary|Quantification of Re-interventions Needed to Manage a Woman With a PPUL|"Outcomes include:
number of interventions beyond that of intended initial strategy in each group
additional number of MTX injections
additional surgical procedures
uterine evacuation (or dilation and curettage)
laparoscopy
laparotomy"|6 weeks||||||
856104|NCT01800162|Secondary|Number of Ruptured Ectopic Pregnancies in Each Group|Data was not analyzed as the study was closed early. Data is not anticipated to be analyzed for this study. Patients were not followed for outcome.|6 weeks||||||
856105|NCT01800162|Primary|Frequency of Clinical Resolution for the 3 Different Management Arms for a Persisting PUL.|Data was not analyzed as the study was closed early. Data is not anticipated to be analyzed for this study. Patients were not followed for outcome.|Outcome will be assessed within 6 weeks of randomization|Data was not analyzed as the study was closed early. Data is not anticipated to be analyzed for this study. Patients were not followed for outcome.|||||
856106|NCT01790659|Secondary|Median Time to Initial Clinical Cure for Index Lesions|Median time to initial clinical cure for index lesions (100% re-epithelialization of the index lesion)|When 100% re-epithelialization of the index lesion is observed at any visit Study Days (20, 35 ± 2 days, 49 ± 4 days, 63 ± 7 days, 100 ± 14 days, and 168 ± 14 days|Evaluable subjects||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856107|NCT01790659|Secondary|Number of All Lesions Meeting Criteria for Clinical Cure|Number of all lesions meeting criteria for clinical cure at each visit - evaluable subjects. Cure is defined as 100% re-epithelialization of an ulcerated lesion|baseline (before the start of treatment), and on Study Days 20, 35 ± 2 days, 49 ± 4 days, 63 ± 7 days, 100 ± 14 days, and 168 ± 14 days|Evaluable subjects||Lesions|||Number
856108|NCT01790659|Secondary|Area of Ulceration (mm^2) All Treated Lesions at Each Measurement Time Point|Area of ulceration (mm^2) of all treated lesions from baseline (before the start of treatment), and on Study Days 20, 35 ± 2 days, 49 ± 4 days, 63 ± 7 days, 100 ± 14 days, and 168 ± 14 days for mITT subjects. Data presented is as presented in the Final Clinical Study Repot; any inconsistencies can't be changed.|baseline (before the start of treatment), and on Study Days 20, 35 ± 2 days, 49 ± 4 days, 63 ± 7 days, 100 ± 14 days, and 168 ± 14 days|All lesions for mITT Subjects||mm^2|Number of lesions|Standard Deviation|Mean
856109|NCT01790659|Secondary|Area of Ulceration (mm^2) of the Index Lesion at Each Measurement Time Point|Area of ulceration (mm^2) of the index lesion at each measurement time point for mITT subjects|baseline (before the start of treatment), and on Study Days 20, 35 ± 2 days, 49 ± 4 days, 63 ± 7 days, 100 ± 14 days, and 168 ± 14 days|mITT subjects||mm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
856110|NCT01790659|Secondary|Percentage of All Lesions Cured at Day 168 (Ignores Per Subject Cure Rate)|Percentage of all lesions meeting criteria for clinical cure during the study at 168 day mark for mITT subjects|Day 168|Cure rates of all lesions over time without regard to subject for mITT subjects||percentage of lesions|||Number
856112|NCT01790659|Primary|Final Clinical Cure Change From Baseline|"The primary efficacy endpoint is number of subjects with final clinical cure. Final clinical cure is defined as follows:
Subject has initial clinical cure (100% re-epithelialization of index lesion by nominal Day 63); OR,
Subject has initial clinical improvement (> 50% re-epithelialization of index lesion by nominal Day 63) followed by 100% re-epithelialization of the index lesion on or before nominal Day 100; AND,
Subject has no relapse of index lesion."|baseline (before the start of treatment), and on Study Days 20, 35 ± 2 days, 49 ± 4 days, 63 ± 7 days, 100 ± 14 days, and 168 ± 14 days|||Participants|||Count of Participants
856122|NCT01757405|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Inhibitor Development to FVII|Development of rFVII inhibitors or FVIIa binding antibodies during the study.|6 months (throughout study period)|Safety Analysis Dataset||percent of participants|||Number
856123|NCT01757405|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability of Treatment Regimens by Clinical Assessment of Adverse Events (AEs)|"Safety was determined by the number of AEs (both serious AEs [SAEs] and non-serious AEs [nsAE]).
Tolerability was determined by the number of AEs related to rFVIIa BI (both SAEs and nsAEs) as determined by causality assessment of the AEs by the investigator. An AE was deemed Related if the investigator judges the AE to be possibly related or probably related to rFVIIa BI.
The percentage of AEs were presented by seriousness (SAE, nsAE), severity (Mild, Moderate or Severe) and causality (Related or Not Related [to rFVIIa BI])."|6 months (throughout study period)|Safety Analysis Dataset||percent of AEs|adverse events||Number
856124|NCT01757405|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability of Treatment Regimens by Clinical Assessment of Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|"Safety was determined by the number of AEs (both serious AEs [SAEs] and non-serious AEs [nsAE]).
Tolerability was determined by the number of AEs related to rFVIIa BI (both SAEs and nsAEs) as determined by causality assessment of the AEs by the investigator. An AE was deemed Related if the investigator judged the AE to be possibly related or probably related to rFVIIa BI.
The percentage of participants with AEs were presented by seriousness (SAE, nsAE), severity (Mild, Moderate or Severe) and causality (Related or Not Related to rFVIIa BI)."|6 months (throughout study period)|Safety Analysis Dataset||percent of participants with AEs|||Number
856125|NCT01757405|Secondary|Percentage of Clinical Responders (Sustained Bleeding Control) for All Acute Bleeding Episodes|Clinical responders defined as sustained bleeding control, (no additional hemostatic medication including rFVIIa BI required between 12 and 24 hours after first infusion of the successfully treated bleeding episode).|24 hours post infusion|Full Analysis Dataset||percent of bleeding episodes|Bleeding Episodes|95% Confidence Interval|Number
856126|NCT01757405|Secondary|Treatment Response for Each Bleeding Episode|"Participants rated the treatment of each bleeding episode. If treatment occurred under direct supervision of treating physician, the physician rated the response.
Ratings based on a 4 point scale; EXCELLENT - full relief of pain and cessation of objective signs of bleeding (swelling, tenderness, decrease in range of motion [for muscle bleeds]) within 9 hours of treatment initiation. No additional infusion required to control bleeding, other than prescribed dosing regimen.
GOOD - Substantial relief of pain and/or cessation of objective signs of bleeding within 9 hours of treatment initiation. No additional infusion required to control bleeding, other than prescribed dosing regimen.
MODERATE - slight relief of pain and slight improvement of signs of bleeding within 9 hours of treatment initiation. Requires additional infusion beyond treatment regimen.
NONE - No improvement or condition worsens. SUCCESSFUL = EXCELLENT or GOOD."|within 24 hours of infusion|Full Analysis Dataset||percent of bleeding episodes|Bleeding Episodes|95% Confidence Interval|Number
856127|NCT01757405|Primary|"Percentage of Bleeding Episode With Treatment Success"|No additional hemostatic product required within 12 hours of first dose other than the prescribed dosing regimen.|within 12 hours of first dose|Full Analysis Dataset||percent of bleeding episodes|Bleeding Episodes|95% Confidence Interval|Number
856128|NCT01749501|Secondary|Timing of Entire Procedure (Stopwatch)and Recording Number of Attempts to Successful Intubation Recorded.||24 hours after intubation procedure|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
856129|NCT01749501|Primary|Present the Percentage of Participants With an Excellent Ease of Intubation Rating|"percentage of participants with an excellent ease of intubation rating based on Scale of 1-4 (1 Being Excellent, 4 Being Poor),"|24 hours after intubation period|||% reported as excellent|||Number
856155|NCT01736579|Secondary|Volumetric MRI|Volumetric MRI measurements were obtained to assess rate of whole brain atrophy and ventricular enlargement. Additional volumetric measurements may be analyzed when specific hypotheses and methods are defined. Additional volumetric MRI analysis may include (but may not be limited to) one or more of the following: rate of hippocampal atrophy, entorhinal cortical thickness, and/or regional cortical thinning.|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856156|NCT01736579|Secondary|Time to Skilled Nursing Facility Placement|Time to skilled nursing facility placement is defined as permanent admission to a skilled nursing facility. Time will be defined as the number of months between enrollment into this clinical study and placement in a skilled nursing facility placement.|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856157|NCT01736579|Secondary|Caregiver Burden Questionnaire|The Caregiver burden questionnaires is a self-administered questionnaire that has been developed to measure the emotional, physical, and social impact of caregiving on Alzheimer's Disease caregivers. A Total score is calculated from this measure by summing the responses across the items. The Total score may range from 9-45, with higher scores indicating greater burden.|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856158|NCT01736579|Secondary|Healthcare Resource Utilization Questionnaire (HRUQ)|The HRUQ determines if there is a difference in healthcare utilization and health-related expenditures, most notably nursing home (ie, skilled nursing facility) admissions, when subjects are treated with study product. This assessment is performed with the primary caregiver. This assessment is descriptive and does not contain specific scores.|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856159|NCT01736579|Secondary|EQ-5D Questionnaire (Proxy Version)|"EQ-5D is a participant answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions - mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The EQ-5D total score ranges from 0 (worst health state) to 1 (perfect health state) and 1 reflects the best outcome.
The EQ-5D also includes a standard vertical 20 cm visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from best imaginable health state [100] to worst imaginable health state [0].
Caregivers are asked to describe how they believe a participant would rate his/her health state that day."|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856160|NCT01736579|Secondary|Logsdon Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease (QOL-AD)|The QOL-AD is a validated, 13-item instrument developed specifically for individuals with dementia. The assessment rates the participant’s quality of life for physical, emotional, interpersonal, and environmental domains. The QOL-AD total score ranged 13-52. Lower scores on the QOL-AD are associated with a lower quality of life.|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856161|NCT01736579|Secondary|Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) Score|The NPI is a validated instrument used to assess behavioral psychopathology in Alzheimer's Disease; it evaluates the frequency and severity of 12 neuropsychiatric features including delusions, hallucinations, dysphoria, anxiety, agitation/aggression, euphoria, disinhibition, irritability/lability, apathy, aberrant motor activity, sleep and night-time behavior change, and appetite and eating change. The NPI total score ranged 0-144, with higher scores indicating greater impairment.|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856322|NCT01488994|Secondary|Health Resource Use: Length of Hospitalization|The length of hospitalization per participant. Number of participants contributing data (N) for this outcome measure is included in the category title in the order: pediatric participants < 6 years of age; pediatric participants 6 to <12 years of age; Full Analysis Set.|Baseline (Pharmacokinetic [PK] assessment), Week 5, Week 13 and Week 26|||Days||Full Range|Median
856162|NCT01736579|Secondary|Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)|The MMSE is a test for cognitive dysfunction. The test provides a 30-point composite rating for spatial and temporal orientation, verbal recall, simple attention, working memory, naming, repetition, comprehension, writing and constructional abilities. The total score can range from 0 to 30 with a higher score indicating better function.|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856163|NCT01736579|Secondary|Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study (ADCS) - Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Inventory (ADCS-ADL/ ADCS-ADL-severe)|"The ADCS-ADL scale is a validated tool to assess instrumental and basic activities of daily living based on a 23 item structured interview of the caregiver or qualified study partner.
Scores on the ADCS-ADL range from 0-78 with lower scores indicating greater impairment; hence decreases from baseline reflect potential functional deterioration."|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856164|NCT01736579|Secondary|Total Score of the Cognitive Subscale of the Severe Impairment Battery (SIB)|The SIB is a 40-item psychometric assessment that is composed of simple one-step commands combined with gestures. The scoring range is from 0 to 100 with a lower score indicating greater cognitive impairment.|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856165|NCT01736579|Secondary|Total Score of the Cognitive Subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog)|"The ADAS-Cog is a validated psychometric instrument that evaluates memory (word recall, word recognition), attention, reasoning (following commands), language (naming, comprehension), orientation, ideational praxis (placing letter in envelope) and constructional praxis (copying geometric designs). This test was administered by experienced raters certified by Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study (ADCS) at the site.
Scores on the ADAS-Cog range from 0-70 with higher scores indicating greater impairment."|6 months|This study was terminated early. Summary tables were not provided for this outcome measure due to the small number of participants (up to 2 participants per arm) because of concerns about patient confidentiality.|||||
856166|NCT01736579|Primary|Number of Infusions Discontinued, Slowed or Interrupted Due to an Adverse Event (AE) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE)||6 months|||infusions|Infusions||Number
856167|NCT01736579|Primary|Number of Infusions Causally Associated With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||6 months|||infusions|Infusions||Number
856168|NCT01736579|Primary|Number of Infusions Temporally Associated With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||6 months|||infusions|Infusions||Number
856169|NCT01736579|Primary|Number and Severity of Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||6 months|||adverse events|||Number
856170|NCT01725126|Secondary|Tmax of Metformin During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part C|Blood samples were planned to be collected on Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8, 10 (pre-dinner), 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose. The time at which Cmax was observed was planned to be determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. The data for PK parameters of metformin during Part C was not collected due to variations in formulation and regimen.|Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8, 10 (pre-dinner), 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose|Metformin PK Population in Part C. The data for PK parameters of metformin during Part C was not collected due to variations in formulation and regimen.|||||
856171|NCT01725126|Secondary|Cmax of Metformin During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part C|Blood samples were planned to be collected on Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8, 10 (pre-dinner), 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose. The first occurrence of the Cmax was planned to be determined directly from the raw concentration-time data. The data for PK parameters of metformin during Part C was not collected due to variations in formulation and regimen.|Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8, 10 (pre-dinner), 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose|Metformin PK Population in Part C. The data for PK parameters of metformin during Part C was not collected due to variations in formulation and regimen.|||||
856172|NCT01725126|Secondary|AUC From Time Zero (Pre-dose) to Last Time of Quantifiable Concentration (AUC [0-t]) of Metformin During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part C|Blood samples were planned to be collected on Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8, 10 (pre-dinner), 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose. The AUC 0-t was planned to be determined using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the logarithmic trapezoidal rule for decreasing concentrations. The data for PK parameters of metformin during Part C was not collected due to variations in formulation and regimen.|Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8, 10 (pre-dinner), 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose|Metformin PK Population in Part C comprised of all participants in the All Subjects Population for whom a PK sample was obtained and analyzed for metformin. The data for PK parameters of metformin during Part C was not collected due to variations in formulation and regimen.|||||
856173|NCT01725126|Secondary|Tmax of Metformin During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|Blood samples were collected on Day 1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8 and 10 (pre-dinner) hours post-dose. The time at which Cmax was observed was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data.|Day 1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 5.5, 6, 8 and 10 hours post-dose|Metformin PK Population in Part A. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Hours||Full Range|Median
856174|NCT01725126|Secondary|Cmax of Metformin During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|Blood samples were collected on Day 1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8 and 10 (pre-dinner) hours post-dose. The first occurrence of the Cmax was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data.|Day 1 and Day 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 5.5, 6, 8 and 10 hours post-dose|Metformin PK Population in Part A. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed. The results from the descriptive summary used the PK Population. However, the results of the statistical analysis compared Day 42 to Day 1 PK only in the GSK2890457 group who were in the PK Population.||Nanograms/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
856175|NCT01725126|Secondary|AUC of Metformin From Time 0 to 10 Hours Post-dose (AUC [0-10 Hour]) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|Blood samples were collected on Day 1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8 and 10 (pre-dinner) hours post-dose. The AUC (0-10 hour) was determined using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the logarithmic trapezoidal rule for decreasing concentrations. The analysis population included Metformin PK Population in Part A comprising of all participants in All Subjects Population for whom a PK sample was obtained and analyzed for metformin.|Day 1 and Day 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 5.5, 6, 8 and 10 hours post-dose|Metformin PK Population in Part A. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed. The results from the descriptive summary used the PK Population. However, the results of the statistical analysis compared Day 42 to Day 1 PK only in the GSK2890457 group who were in the PK Population.||Hour*nanograms/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
856176|NCT01725126|Secondary|Time of Occurrence of Cmax (Tmax) of Liraglutide During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B|Blood samples were collected on Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8, 10 (pre-dinner), 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose. The time at which Cmax was observed was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data.|Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 5.5, 6, 8, 10, 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose|Liraglutide PK Population in Part B. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Hours||Full Range|Median
856177|NCT01725126|Secondary|Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) of Liraglutide During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B|Blood samples were collected on Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8, 10 (pre-dinner), 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose. The first occurrence of the Cmax was determined directly from the raw concentration-time data.|Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 5.5, 6, 8, 10, 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose|Liraglutide PK Population in Part B. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed. Results from descriptive summary used Liraglutide PK Population. However, results of statistical analysis compared Day 42 to Day -1 PK in GSK2890457+Liraglutide group who were in the Liraglutide PK Population.||Nanograms/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
856178|NCT01725126|Secondary|Area Under Plasma Concentration From Time Zero (Pre-dose) to Last Time of Quantifiable Concentration (AUC [0-t]) of Liraglutide During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B|Blood samples were collected on Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (pre-lunch), 5.5, 6, 8, 10 (pre-dinner), 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post dose. The AUC (0-t) was determined using the linear trapezoidal rule for increasing concentrations and the logarithmic trapezoidal rule for decreasing concentrations. The analysis population included Liraglutide Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population in Part B comprising of all participants in All Subjects Population for whom a PK sample was obtained and analyzed for Liraglutide.|Day -1 and 42 at pre-dose (0 hour), 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 5.5, 6, 8, 10, 11.5, 12, 14 and 24 hours post-dose|Liraglutide Pharmacokinetic (PK) Population in Part B. Only those participants available at specified time points were analyzed. Results from descriptive summary used Liraglutide PK Population. However, results of statistical analysis compared Day 42 to Day -1 PK in GSK2890457+Liraglutide group who were in the Liraglutide PK Population.||Hour*nanograms/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
856179|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (Safety Laboratory) Values During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28, Day 42 and Follow-up Visit. Baseline was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline (Day -1) values from the post-Baseline (Day 7, 14, 28, 42 and Follow-up visit) values.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Follow-up (Day 56)|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856180|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Matsuda Index During the Double Blind-treatment Period of Part B and C|The matsuda index was calculated from the Day -1 and Day 42 glucose and insulin results as 10,000 divided by (fasting plasma glucose x fasting plasma insulin x mean glucose at 0-2 hour post-dose x mean insulin at 0-2 hour post dose)^1/2, where glucose was measured in mmol/L and insulin in pmol/L. Baseline was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline (Day -1) values from the post-Baseline value (Day 42). Data for Part C of the study was not collected because fasting glucose and insulin were not available at the specified time points.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 42|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed. Data for Part C of the study was not collected because fasting glucose and insulin were not available at the specified time points.||Deciliter*mL/mg*mU||Standard Deviation|Mean
856181|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Homeostasis Model of Assessment–Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR]) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|HOMA-IR was calculated from the Day -1 and Day 42 fasting glucose and insulin values using dataset generated from the HOMA-2 model. It contained the estimates for HOMA-% insulin sensitivity (S) for pairs of fasting glucose and fasting insulin values. Study data was merged with the HOMA dataset by glucose and insulin. HOMA-IR was calculated as 100/HOMA-%S. HOMA-IR was not determined for any values outside the ranges of plasma glucose 3.5 to 25.0 mmol/L (63 – 450 mg/dL) and plasma insulin 20 to 400 pmol/L. Baseline was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline (Day -1) values from the post-Baseline value (Day 42). Data for Part C of the study was not collected because fasting glucose and insulin were not available at the specified time points.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 42|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed. Data for Part C of the study was not collected because fasting glucose and insulin were not available at the specified time points.||mU*mmol/L^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
856182|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|Baseline was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline (Day -1) values from the post-Baseline value (Day 42). Adjusted mean is reported as LS mean.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 42|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percent of TL hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
856183|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Insulin and Weighted Mean Insulin AUC (0-4 Hour) and AUC (0-24 Hour) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|Two fasting samples 5 minutes apart were taken for insulin. Baseline insulin level was the average of the 2 fasting samples. For insulin weighted mean AUC (0-4 hour) and weighted mean AUC (0-24 hour) was calculated for Baseline (Day -1) and end of treatment (Day 42). AUC was calculated using the linear trapezoid method that is the sum of the areas between each chronological pair of assessments at the time points (at Day -1 and Day 42). The weighted mean was then calculated by dividing the AUC by the length of the time interval over which it was calculated. Baseline was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline (Day -1) values from the post-Baseline value (Day 42). Data is reported for weighted mean insulin AUC (0-4 hour) post-breakfast and AUC (0-24 hour) post-breakfast.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 42|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856184|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Glucose During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|Baseline was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline (Day -1) values from the post-Baseline value (Day 42). Adjusted mean is reported as LS mean.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 42 of Part B and C|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
856185|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Weighted Mean Glucose Area Under the Curves From Time 0 to 24 Hours (AUC [0-24 Hours]) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|AUC was calculated using the linear trapezoid method that is the sum of the areas between each chronological pair of assessments at the time points (at Day -1 and Day 42). The weighted mean was then calculated by dividing the AUC by the length of the time interval over which it was calculated. Baseline was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline (Day -1) values from the post-Baseline value (Day 42). Data is reported for weighted mean glucose AUC (0-4 hour) post-breakfast and AUC (0-24 hour) post-breakfast. Adjusted mean is reported as least square (LS) mean.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 42|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
856186|NCT01725126|Primary|Percent Change From Baseline in In-clinic Body Weight During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|During the assessment of body weight in the unit, the participant wore lightweight indoor clothing and removed shoes. The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28, Day 42 and Day 43. Baseline value was defined as the average of Day -1 and Day 1 values. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. Percent change was calculated by multiplying the change from Baseline value with 100. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing. Day 42 value was the average of Day 42 and Day 43 values.|Baseline (Day -1 and Day 1) up to Day 42|PD Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
856187|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in In-clinic Body Weight During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|During the assessment of body weight in the unit, the participant wore lightweight indoor clothing and removed shoes. The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28, Day 42 and Day 43. Baseline value was defined as the average of Day -1 and Day 1 values. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing. Day 42 value was the average of Day 42 and Day 43 values.|Baseline (Day -1 and Day 1) up to Day 42|Pharmacodynamic (PD) Population comprised of all participants in the All Subjects Population who had Baseline and at least one post-Baseline assessment of the endpoint. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Kilograms (kg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856188|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Overall GSRS Score During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The impact of GI symptoms on health-related quality of life was assessed using the GSRS. The GSRS is a 15-item related to abdominal pain, reflux, indigestion, diarrhea and constipation syndromes, self-administered questionnaire that assesses the impact of gastrointestinal symptoms during the past week on a scale from 1 (no discomfort at all) to 7 (very severe discomfort). Overall GSRS was the mean of items 1 to 15. Possible overall scores range from 1 to 7, with lower scores indicating a better quality of life with respect to GI symptoms and higher scores indicating a lower quality of life with respect to GI symptoms. Baseline was defined as the assessment done on Day -2. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, 14, 28 and 41) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -2) up to Day 41|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856189|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in the Overall Gastrointestinal (GI) Symptoms Rating Scale (GSRS) Score During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The impact of GI symptoms on health-related quality of life was assessed using the GSRS. The GSRS is a 15-item related to abdominal pain, reflux, indigestion, diarrhea and constipation syndromes, self-administered questionnaire that assesses the impact of gastrointestinal symptoms during the past week on a scale from 1 (no discomfort at all) to 7 (very severe discomfort). Overall GSRS was the mean of items 1 to 15. Possible overall scores range from 1 to 7, with lower scores indicating a better quality of life with respect to GI symptoms and higher scores indicating a lower quality of life with respect to GI symptoms. Baseline was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, 14 and 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Scores on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856323|NCT01488994|Secondary|Health Resource Use: Number of Hospitalizations|The number of hospitalizations per participant. Number of participants contributing data (N) for this outcome measure is included in the category title in the order: pediatric participants < 6 years of age; pediatric participants 6 to <12 years of age; Full Analysis Set.|Baseline (Pharmacokinetic [PK] assessment), Week 5, Week 13 and Week 26|||Hospitalizations||Full Range|Median
856190|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in ECG Intervals During Part B and C|Single 12-lead ECGs was obtained after participants rested in a supine position for at least 10 minutes using an ECG machine that automatically calculated the HR and measured PR, QRS, QT, QTcB, QTcF and RR intervals. The assessments were done at Day -1 (pre-dose, triplicate), Day 42 (pre-dose) and Follow-up Visit. Baseline value was defined as the average of the triplicate pre-dose assessments done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 42 and Follow-up) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Follow-up (Day 56)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
856191|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Intervals During Part A|Single 12-lead ECGs was obtained after participants rested in a supine position for at least 10 minutes using an ECG machine that automatically calculated the HR and measured PR, QRS, QT, QT duration corrected for HR by Fridericia’s formula (QTcF) and QT duration corrected for HR by Bazett’s formula (QTcB intervals. The assessments were done at Day 1 (pre-dose, triplicate), Day 42 (pre-dose) and Follow-up Visit. Baseline value was defined as the average of the triplicate pre-dose assessments done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 42 and Follow-up) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Follow-up (Day 56)|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Milliseconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
856192|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Vital Sign Parameter of HR During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|Vital sign assessments were performed after resting in a supine or semi-supine position for at least 10 minutes. The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
856193|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Vital Sign Parameter of Heart Rate (HR) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|Vital sign assessments were performed after resting in a supine or semi-supine position for at least 10 minutes. The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
856194|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Vital Sign Parameter of SBP and DBP During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|Vital sign assessments were performed after resting in a supine or semi-supine position for at least 10 minutes. The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
856195|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Vital Sign Parameter of Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|Vital sign assessments were performed after resting in a supine or semi-supine position for at least 10 minutes. The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856196|NCT01725126|Primary|Mean pH Values of Urine During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|Urinalysis parameter included urine pH. pH was calculated on a scale of 0 to 14, such that, the lower the number, more acidic the urine and higher the number, more alkaline the urine with 7 being neutral. The assessments were done pre-dose on Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42.|Up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||pH||Standard Deviation|Mean
856197|NCT01725126|Primary|Mean pH Values of Urine During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|Urinalysis parameter included urine pH. pH was calculated on a scale of 0 to 14, such that, the lower the number, more acidic the urine and higher the number, more alkaline the urine with 7 being neutral. The assessments were done pre-dose on Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42.|up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||pH||Standard Deviation|Mean
856198|NCT01725126|Primary|Mean Specific Gravity Values of Urine During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|Urinary specific gravity is a measure of the concentration of solutes in urine. It measures the ratio of urine density compared with water density and provides information on the kidney's ability to concentrate urine. The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42.|Up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
856199|NCT01725126|Primary|Mean Specific Gravity Values of Urine During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|Urinary specific gravity is a measure of the concentration of solutes in urine. It measures the ratio of urine density compared with water density and provides information on the kidney's ability to concentrate urine. The assessments were done pre-dose at Da y 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42.|Up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
856200|NCT01725126|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Urinalyisis Dipstick and Microscopic Results During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. The participants were categorized as few, many, moderate, trace, +1, 2+, 3+, 0-3, 10-20, 0-5, 6-10, 20-40, 40-60. Protein and ketone ranged from trace to 1+, trace indicated lowest and 1+ indicated highest concentration. Bacteria and uric acid crystals ranged from few to moderate, few indicated lowest and moderate indicated highest concentration. Trace was the highest concentration of occult blood. Epithelial cells ranged from 0-5 to >10, 0-5 indicated lowest and >10 indicated highest concentration. Glucose ranged from trace to 3+, trace indicated lowest and 3+ indicated highest concentration. 0-1 was highest concentration for hyaline casts. RBC and WBC ranged from 0-3 to 40-60, 0-3 indicated lowest and 20-40 indicated highest concentration. Highest concentration indicated worse outcome.|Up to Day 42|All Subjects Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
856201|NCT01725126|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Urinalyisis Dipstick and Microscopic Results During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Only those parameters for which at least one value of abnormal urinalysis result was reported are summarized. The participants were categorized as few, trace, +1, 2+, 3+, 0-3, 10-20, 0-5, 6-10, and 20-40. Few was the highest concentration of bacteria. Occult blood ranged from trace to 1+, trace indicated lowest and 1+ indicated highest concentration. Epithelial cell ranged from 0-5 to 10-20, 0-5 indicated lowest and 10-20 indicated highest concentration. Glucose ranged from trace to 3+, trace indicated lowest and 3+ indicated highest concentration. 0-5 was highest concentration for hyaline casts. Ketone ranged from trace to 1+, trace indicated lowest and 1+ indicated highest concentration. RBC and WBC ranged from 0-3 to 20-40, 0-3 indicated lowest and 20-40 indicated highest concentration. Highest concentration indicated worse outcome.|Up to Day 42|All Subjects Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
856202|NCT01725126|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Urinalyisis Dipstick and Microscopic Results During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Only those parameters for which at least one value of abnormal urinalysis result was reported are summarized. The participants were categorized as rare, trace, +1, 2+, RBC’s and WBC’s as <1, 1, 2, 3 and 4. Protein concentration ranged from trace to 1+, where trace indicated lowest concentration and 1+ indicated highest concentration. Trace was the highest concentration for occult blood. Bacteria concentration ranged from rare to moderate, where rare indicated lowest concentration and moderate indicated highest concentration. Ketones ranged from trace to 1+, where trace indicated lowest concentration and 1+ indicated highest concentration. RBC and WBC ranged from <1 to 4, where <1 indicated lowest concentration and 4 indicated highest concentration. Highest concentration indicated worse outcome.|Up to Day 42|All Subjects Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
856203|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter of MCV During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Femtoliters||Standard Deviation|Mean
856204|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter of Mean Corpuscle Volume (MCV) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Femtoliters||Standard Deviation|Mean
856205|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter of MCH During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Picograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
856206|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter of Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin (MCH) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Picograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
856207|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter of Hematocrit During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
856208|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter of Hematocrit During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
856209|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters of RBC Count and Reticulocytes During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||TI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856210|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters of Red Blood Cell (RBC) Count and Reticulocytes During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Trillion cells (TI)/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856211|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters of Hemoglobin and MCHC During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856212|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters of Hemoglobin and Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin Concentration (MCHC) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856213|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters of Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Total Neutrophils, Platelet Count, WBC Count During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||GI/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856214|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameters of Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Total Neutrophils, Platelet Count, White Blood Cell (WBC) Count During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Giga cells (GI)/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856215|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Thyroid Stimulating Hormone During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Milliunits (mu/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856216|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Total Thyroxine and Total T3 During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 42) value. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Nanomoles (nmol)/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856217|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameter of Triiodothyronine (T3) Uptake During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 42) value. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
856218|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Amylase and Lipase the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B of Study|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 42) value. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) and Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Units (U)/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856358|NCT01485796|Secondary|Rate of Related Local Adverse Events (Excluding Infections) Per Infusion|A point estimate and 95% confidence interval for the rate of related local adverse events per infusion was derived using a Poisson model.|7 months (per subject)|||adverse events||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856219|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Insulin During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856220|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Insulin During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Picomoles (pmol)/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856221|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Albumin and Total Protein During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856222|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Albumin and Total Protein During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856223|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Direct Bilirubin, Total Bilirubin, Creatinine and Uric Acid During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||umol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856224|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Direct Bilirubin, Total Bilirubin, Creatinine and Uric Acid During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Micromoles (umol)/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856225|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Electrolytes, Glucose Phosphorus Inorganic, BUN and Cholesterol During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The electrolytes include calcium, chloride, carbon dioxide content/bicarbonate, potassium, magnesium and sodium. Assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856226|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Electrolytes, Glucose Phosphorus Inorganic and Urea/Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The electrolytes include calcium, chloride, carbon dioxide content/bicarbonate, potassium, magnesium and sodium. Assessments were done pre-dose at on Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Millimoles (mmol)/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856227|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of ALP, ALT, AST and GGT During the Double-blind Treatment Period of Part B and C|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day -1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day -1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day -1) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||IU/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
856228|NCT01725126|Primary|Change From Baseline in Clinical Chemistry Parameters of Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP), ALT, Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) and Gamma Glutamyltransferase (GGT) During Double-blind Treatment Period of Part A|The assessments were done pre-dose at Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42. Baseline value was defined as the assessment done on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the individual post-Baseline (Day 7, Day 14, Day 28 and Day 42) values. If either the Baseline or post-Baseline value was missing, the change from Baseline was set to be missing.|Baseline (Day 1, Randomization) up to Day 42|All Subjects Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||International unit per liter (IU/L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856229|NCT01725126|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Hypoglycemic Events During Part B and Part C|Hypoglycemia is defined as symptoms consistent with hypoglycemia (e.g. dizziness, light-headedness, shakiness) which are confirmed by glucometer measurement of CBG or plasma glucose value of <50 mg/dL for Part A or <70 mg/dL for Parts B and C (when possible, CBG values were confirmed with a laboratory measurement). In situations when no glucose sample could be measured at the time of the event, the investigator, at his or her discretion, characterized an event as ‘hypoglycemia’ based on reported signs and symptoms alone. Healthy participant also had asymptomatic blood glucose values <70 mg/dL as a physiological response to altered food intake (e.g., fasting).|Up to Follow-up (8 weeks)|All Subjects Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
856230|NCT01725126|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Hypoglycemic Events During Part A|Hypoglycemia is defined as symptoms consistent with hypoglycemia (e.g. dizziness, light-headedness, shakiness) which are confirmed by glucometer measurement of complete blood count (CBG) or plasma glucose value of <50 milligram per deciliter (mg/dL) for Part A or <70 mg/dL for Parts B and C (when possible, CBG values were confirmed with a laboratory measurement). In situations when no glucose sample could be measured at the time of the event, the investigator, at his or her discretion, characterized an event as ‘hypoglycemia’ based on reported signs and symptoms alone. Healthy participant also had asymptomatic blood glucose values <70 mg/dL as a physiological response to altered food intake (e.g., fasting).|Up to Follow-up (8 weeks)|All Subjects Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
856231|NCT01725126|Primary|Number of Participants With Any AE, SAE or Death During Part B and Part C|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in this definition, associated with liver injury and impaired liver function defined as ALT >=3 x ULN, and total bilirubin >=2 x ULN or international normalized ratio >1.5.|Up to Follow-up (8 weeks)|All Subjects Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
856232|NCT01725126|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Event (AE), Serious Adverse Event (SAE) or Death During Part A|An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose, results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, may jeopardize the participant or may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in this definition, associated with liver injury and impaired liver function defined as alanine aminotransferase (ALT) >=3 x upper limit of normal (ULN), and total bilirubin >=2 x ULN or international normalized ratio >1.5.|Up to Follow-up (8 weeks)|All Subjects Population comprised of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication (placebo or GSK2890457).||Participants|||Count of Participants
856359|NCT01485796|Secondary|Number of Related Local Adverse Events (Excluding Infections)||7 months (per subject)|||adverse events|||Number
856253|NCT01614093|Primary|Food Consumption After Intervention|"We hypothesize that participants will have greater satiety signaling, indicated by less consumption of the Test Meal consumed 90 minutes after the preload."|90 minutes|||Grams||Standard Deviation|Mean
856288|NCT01507896|Primary|Incremental Recovery (IR) at 15±5 Minutes Following Loading Dose Prior to Surgery|IR was defined as (C post-infusion - C pre-infusion) / Dose, where C post-infusion is the measured concentration achieved at 15±5 minutes for the loading dose.|Within 60 minutes prior to surgery and 15 ± 5 minutes after loading dose/rebolus, if applicable.|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (exposed to BAX326 and provided suitable hemostatic efficacy data) who provided data for incremental recovery (IR) after the loading dose prior to surgery.
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||[IU/dL] : [IU/kg]|surgeries with IR data|Standard Deviation|Mean
856360|NCT01485796|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Who Maintain a Treatment Interval of 3 or 4 Weeks in Epoch 2 for 24 Weeks||6 months (per subject)|||subjects|||Number
856361|NCT01485796|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Who Achieve a Treatment Interval of 3 or 4 Weeks in Epoch 2||6 months (per subject)|||subjects|||Number
856282|NCT01508910|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With at Least One Serious Adverse Event (SAE) From Randomization Until the End of the 24 Month Follow-up Period||From randomization until the end of the 24 month follow-up period|Safety Population as Treated.||percent|||Number
856283|NCT01508910|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Incidences of MACE From Randomization Until the End of the 24 Month Follow-up Period|"Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as death, cardiac hospitalization, non-fatal myocardial infarction and stroke, as adjudicated by an independent clinical endpoint classification (CEC) committee.
The category Total MACE includes death, cardiovascular hospitalization, myocardial infarction or stroke."|From randomization until the end of the 24 month follow-up period|Participants in the safety population as Treated.||percent||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856284|NCT01508910|Secondary|Angina Frequency (Episodes Per Week) at the 6 Month Follow-up Visit||6 month visit|Participants in the Intent to Treat population defined as participants randomized to Treatment or Active Control arms. For participants not receiving intramyocardial injections, the missing values were imputed i.e. replaced with substituted values from the baseline.||angina episodes per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
856285|NCT01508910|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Exercise Time on Exercise Tolerance Test (ETT) at the 6 Month Follow-up Visit|Baseline (BL) is the average of the two total exercise times measured during the screening period.|Baseline and 6 month visit|Participants in the Intent to Treat population defined as participants randomized to Treatment or Active Control arms. For participants not receiving intramyocardial injections, the missing values were imputed i.e. replaced with substituted values from the baseline.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
856286|NCT01508910|Secondary|Angina Frequency (Episodes Per Week) at the 12 Month Follow-up Visit|Participants self-reported angina episodes utilizing an electronic diary for 4 weeks at baseline (screening period) and in the 4 weeks before the 3, 6 and 12 month follow-up visits.|Baseline and 12 month visit|Participants in the Intent to Treat population defined as participants randomized to Treatment or Active Control arms. For participants not receiving intramyocardial injections, the missing values were imputed i.e. replaced with substituted values from the baseline.||angina episodes per week||Standard Deviation|Mean
856287|NCT01508910|Primary|Change From Baseline in Total Exercise Time on Exercise Tolerance Test (ETT) Using the Modified Bruce Protocol|Baseline (BL) is the average of the two total exercise times measured during the screening period.|Baseline and 12 month visit|Participants in the Intent to Treat population defined as participants randomized to Treatment or Active Control arms. For participants not receiving intramyocardial injections, the missing values were imputed i.e. replaced with substituted values from the baseline.||seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
856289|NCT01507896|Primary|Pre-Surgical Pharmacokinetics (PK): Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|Vss was computed as CL·MRT.|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and post-infusion timepoints of 30 minutes, 6 hr, 24 hr, 48 hr and 72 hr|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) who underwent a pre-surgical PK assessment in this study i.e.not participants who underwent a PK assessment in the pivotal study (250901).
Note: a unique participant could have a pre-surgical PK assessment for more than one surgery."||dL/kg|pre-surgical PK assessments|Standard Deviation|Mean
856290|NCT01507896|Primary|Pre-Surgical Pharmacokinetics (PK): Elimination Phase Half-life (T 1/2)|T1/2 was determined as ln2 / λz.|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and post-infusion timepoints of 30 minutes, 6 hr, 24 hr, 48 hr and 72 hr|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) who underwent a pre-surgical PK assessment in this study i.e.not participants who underwent a PK assessment in the pivotal study (250901).
Note: a unique participant could have a pre-surgical PK assessment for more than one surgery."||hours (hr)|pre-surgical PK assessments|Standard Deviation|Mean
856291|NCT01507896|Primary|Pre-Surgical Pharmacokinetics (PK): Incremental Recovery (IR) at 30 Min|IR was defined as (C post-infusion - C pre-infusion) / Dose, where C post-infusion is the measured concentration achieved at 30±5 minutes for pre-surgical PK.|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and post-infusion at 30 minutes|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) who underwent a pre-surgical PK assessment in this study i.e.not participants who underwent a PK assessment in the pivotal study (250901).
Note: a unique participant could have a pre-surgical PK assessment for more than one surgery."||IU/dL : IU/kg|pre-surgical PK assessments|Standard Deviation|Mean
856292|NCT01507896|Primary|Pre-Surgical Pharmacokinetics (PK): Factor IX (FIX) Clearance (CL)|CL is the volume of plasma which is completely cleared of study product per unit time and is calculated as the dose divided by the total area under the curve from 0 to infinity (AUC0-inf).|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and post-infusion timepoints of 30 minutes, 6 hr, 24 hr, 48 hr and 72 hr|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) who underwent a pre-surgical PK assessment in this study i.e.not participants who underwent a PK assessment in the pivotal study (250901).
Note: a unique participant could have a pre-surgical PK assessment for more than one surgery."||dL/(kg•hr)|pre-surgical PK assessments|Standard Deviation|Mean
856293|NCT01507896|Primary|Pre-Surgical Pharmacokinetics (PK): Mean Residence Time (MRT)|The MRT is the average time that the study product stays in the body (or plasma) and is calculated as: AUMC 0-inf / AUC 0-inf, where AUMC 0-inf was determined in a similar manner as AUC 0-inf.|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and post-infusion timepoints of 30 minutes, 6 hr, 24 hr, 48 hr and 72 hr|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) who underwent a pre-surgical PK assessment in this study i.e.not participants who underwent a PK assessment in the pivotal study (250901).
Note: a unique participant could have a pre-surgical PK assessment for more than one surgery."||hours (hr)|pre-surgical PK assessments|Standard Deviation|Mean
856294|NCT01507896|Primary|Pre-Surgical Pharmacokinetics (PK): Total Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve Per Dose (Total AUC/Dose)|Total AUC/Dose is also AUC0-inf (area under the plasma concentration/time curve from time 0 to infinity) and was defined as AUC0-t + Ct / λz, where t is the time of last quantifiable concentration, Ct is the last quantifiable concentration and λz is the terminal rate constant.|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and post-infusion timepoints of 30 minutes, 6 hr, 24 hr, 48 hr and 72 hr|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) who underwent a pre-surgical PK assessment in this study i.e.not participants who underwent a PK assessment in the pivotal study (250901).
Note: a unique participant could have a pre-surgical PK assessment for more than one surgery."||[IU•hour (hr)/dL] : IU/kg|pre-surgical PK assessments|Standard Deviation|Mean
856295|NCT01507896|Primary|Pre-Surgical Pharmacokinetics (PK): Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC) From 0 to 72 Hours Post-infusion Per Dose|AUC0-72h (area under the plasma concentration/time curve from time 0 to 72 hours) was computed using the linear trapezoidal method. The concentration at 72 hours was interpolated from the two nearest sampling time points or extrapolated using the last quantifiable concentration and the terminal rate constant λz. λz was estimated from the slope of natural log-linear fitting to latter quantifiable concentrations, with largest adjusted R2.|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and post-infusion timepoints of 30 minutes, 6 hr, 24 hr, 48 hr and 72 hr|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) who underwent a pre-surgical PK assessment in this study i.e.not participants who underwent a PK assessment in the pivotal study (250901).
Note: a unique participant could have a pre-surgical PK assessment for more than one surgery."||[IU•hour (hr)/dL] : IU/kg|pre-surgical PK assessments|Standard Deviation|Mean
856296|NCT01507896|Primary|Safety: Occurence of a Thrombotic Event||Throughout the study period (approximately 2 years 5 months)|"All participants in the Safety Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 during the study).
Note: a unique participant could be treated with BAX326 for more than one surgical procedure."||surgeries|treatments with BAX326 before surgery||Number
856297|NCT01507896|Primary|Safety: Number of Adverse Events Related to BAX326||Throughout the study period (approximately 2 years 5 months)|"All participants in the Safety Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 during the study).
Note: a unique participant could be treated with BAX326 for more than one surgical procedure."||adverse events|treatments with BAX326 before surgery||Number
856298|NCT01507896|Primary|Safety: Number of Participants Who Developed Total Binding Antibodies to Factor IX (FIX)|If there was more than 2-dilution increase as compared to pre-study level at screening.|Throughout the study period (approximately 2 years 5 months)|"All participants in the Safety Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 during the study).
Note: a unique participant could be treated with BAX326 for more than one surgical procedure."||participants|treatments with BAX326 before surgery||Number
856299|NCT01507896|Primary|Safety: Number of Participants Who Developed Inhibitory Antibodies to Factor IX (FIX)||Throughout the study period (approximately 2 years 5 months)|"All participants in the Safety Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 during the study).
Note: a unique participant could be treated with BAX326 for more than one surgical procedure."||participants|treatments with BAX326 before surgery||Number
856300|NCT01507896|Primary|Volume of Blood Product Transfused|Blood product transfusions consisted of packed red blood cells (PRBC) or fresh frozen plasma (FFP) or both.|From initiation of surgery until discharge from hospital (from 1-3 days postoperatively for minor surgery and approximately 2 weeks postoperatively for major surgery)|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (exposed to BAX326 and provided suitable hemostatic efficacy data) who received blood product infusions during the intraoperative and/or postoperative period.
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||mL|surgery where blood transfusion given|Standard Deviation|Mean
856301|NCT01507896|Primary|Number of Units of Blood Product Transfused|Blood product transfusions consisted of packed red blood cells (PRBC) or fresh frozen plasma (FFP) or both.|From initiation of surgery until discharge from hospital (from 1-3 days postoperatively for minor surgery and approximately 2 weeks postoperatively for major surgery)|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (exposed to BAX326 and provided suitable hemostatic efficacy data) who received blood product infusions during the intraoperative and/or postoperative period.
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||units|surgery where blood transfusion given|Standard Deviation|Mean
856302|NCT01507896|Primary|Total Weight-Adjusted Dose of BAX326 Per Participant|Assessed for the intra- and postoperative periods.|From initiation of surgery until discharge from hospital (from 1-3 days postoperatively for minor surgery and approximately 2 weeks postoperatively for major surgery)|"All participants in the Full Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) treated with BAX326 per surgical procedure.
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||IU/kg|surgeries|Standard Deviation|Mean
856303|NCT01507896|Primary|Daily Weight-Adjusted Dose of BAX326 Per Participant|"Daily weight-adjusted doses of BAX326 per participant were recorded from the day of surgery until postoperative Days 11+.
Each category in outcome measure includes number of all, major and minor surgeries, respectively, if different from the totals."|From initiation of surgery until discharge from hospital (from 1-3 days postoperatively for minor surgery and approximately 2 weeks postoperatively for major surgery)|"All participants in the Full Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) treated with BAX326 per surgical procedure.
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||IU/kg|surgeries|Standard Deviation|Mean
856304|NCT01507896|Primary|Actual Postoperative Blood Loss Compared to Average and Maximum Blood Loss Predicated Preoperatively by the Operating Surgeon|"Predicted average/maximum blood loss minus actual blood loss for participants who had a drain placed during surgery.
Prior to the surgery, the surgeon will predict the estimated volume (mL) of the expected average and maximum blood loss for the planned surgical intervention in a hemostatically normal individual of the same sex, age, and stature as the study subject for the postoperative period until drain removal."|At postoperative day 3 (approximately 72 hours postoperatively)|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) who had a drain placed during surgery (major surgeries only).
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||mL|surgeries with drain placed|Standard Deviation|Mean
856305|NCT01507896|Primary|Actual Postoperative Blood Loss|Postoperative blood loss was based on the drainage fluid and was only assessed for participants who had a drain placed during surgery.|At drain removal (from 1-3 days postoperatively)|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) who had a drain placed during surgery (major surgeries only).
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||mL|surgeries with drain placed|Standard Deviation|Mean
856306|NCT01507896|Primary|Postoperative Hemostatic Efficacy on Day of Discharge|"Assessment by the operating surgeon on a 4 point ordinal scale:
Excellent: Postoperative hemostasis achieved with BAX326 was as good or better than that expected for the type of surgical procedure performed in a hemostatically normal participant
Good: Postoperative hemostasis achieved with BAX326 was probably as good as that expected for the type of surgical procedure performed in a hemostatically normal participant
Fair: Postoperative hemostasis with BAX326 was clearly less than optimal for the type of procedure performed but was maintained without the need to change the Factor IX concentrate
None: Participant experienced uncontrolled bleeding that was the result of inadequate therapeutic response despite proper dosing, necessitating a change of Factor IX concentrate"|At discharge from hospital (from 1-3 days postoperatively for minor surgery and approximately 2 weeks postoperatively for major surgery)|"All participants in the Full Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) treated with BAX326 per surgical procedure.
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||surgeries|surgeries||Number
856307|NCT01507896|Primary|Postoperative Hemostatic Efficacy at Postoperative Day 3|"Assessment by the operating surgeon on a 4 point ordinal scale:
Excellent: Postoperative hemostasis achieved with BAX326 was as good or better than that expected for the type of surgical procedure performed in a hemostatically normal participant
Good: Postoperative hemostasis achieved with BAX326 was probably as good as that expected for the type of surgical procedure performed in a hemostatically normal participant
Fair: Postoperative hemostasis with BAX326 was clearly less than optimal for the type of procedure performed but was maintained without the need to change the Factor IX concentrate
None: Participant experienced uncontrolled bleeding that was the result of inadequate therapeutic response despite proper dosing, necessitating a change of Factor IX concentrate"|At postoperative day 3 (approximately 72 hours postoperatively)|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set who were provided with a hemostatic efficacy assessment by the operating surgeon at post operative day 3 where no drain was employed.
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||surgeries|surgeries||Number
856320|NCT01488994|Secondary|Health Resource Use: Emergency Room Visits|The number of Emergency Room visits per participant. Number of participants contributing data (N) for this outcome measure is included in the category title in the order: pediatric participants < 6 years of age; pediatric participants 6 to <12 years of age; Full Analysis Set.|Baseline (Pharmacokinetic [PK] assessment), Week 5, Week 13 and Week 26|||Visits||Full Range|Median
856321|NCT01488994|Secondary|Health Resource Use: Unscheduled Doctor's Office Visits|The number of unscheduled doctor's Office visits per participant. Number of participants contributing data (N) for this outcome measure is included in the category title in the order: pediatric participants < 6 years of age; pediatric participants 6 to <12 years of age; Full Analysis Set.|Baseline (Pharmacokinetic [PK] assessment), Week 5, Week 13 and Week 26|Participants who had unscheduled visits to a doctor's office||Visits||Full Range|Median
856308|NCT01507896|Primary|Postoperative Hemostatic Efficacy at Drain Removal|"The postoperative hemostatic efficacy was to be assessed by the operating surgeon according to the following criteria (4-point ordinal scale):
Excellent: Volume in drain was less than or equal than that expected for the type of procedure performed in a hemostatically normal participant (≤ 100% )
Good: Volume in drain was up to 50% more than expected for the type of procedure performed in a hemostatically normal participant (101% - 150%)
Fair: Volume in drain was more than 50% of that expected for the type of procedure performed in a hemostatically normal participant (> 150%)
None: Uncontrolled bleeding that was the result of inadequate therapeutic response despite proper dosing, necessitating a change of Factor IX concentrate"|At drain removal (from 1-3 days postoperatively)|"Participants in the Full Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) who had a drain placed during surgery (major surgeries only).
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure"||major surgeries with drain placed|major surgeries with drain placed||Number
856309|NCT01507896|Primary|Actual Intraoperative Blood Loss Compared to Average and Maximum Blood Loss Predicted Preoperatively by the Operating Surgeon|Predicted average/maximum blood loss minus actual blood loss. Prior to the surgery, the surgeon predicted the estimated volume (mL) of the expected average and maximum blood loss for the planned surgical intervention in a hemostatically normal individual of the same sex, age, and stature as the study participant for the intraoperative period.|On day of surgery|"All participants in the Full Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) treated with BAX326 per surgical procedure.
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||mL|surgeries|Standard Deviation|Mean
856310|NCT01507896|Primary|Actual Intraoperative Blood Loss|Actual intraoperative blood loss was determined by the drainage volume, if a drain was placed, and the estimated blood loss into swabs and towels during the procedure.|On day of surgery|"All participants in the Full Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) treated with BAX326 per surgical procedure.
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||mL|surgeries|Standard Deviation|Mean
856311|NCT01507896|Primary|Intraoperative Hemostatic Efficacy|"Assessment by the operating surgeon on a 4 point ordinal scale (according to the definitions provided below):
Excellent: Intraoperative blood loss was less than or equal to that expected for the type of procedure performed in a hemostatically normal participant (≤ 100% )
Good: Intraoperative blood loss was up to 50% more than expected for the type of procedure performed in a hemostatically normal participant (101 – 150%)
Fair: Intraoperative blood loss was more than 50% of that expected for the type of procedure performed in a hemostatically normal participant (> 150%)
None: Uncontrolled hemorrhage that was the result of inadequate therapeutic response despite proper dosing, necessitating a change of Factor IX concentrate"|On day of surgery|"All participants in the Full Analysis Set (participants exposed to BAX326 and provided data suitable for hemostatic efficacy analysis) treated with BAX326 and had surgery.
Note: a unique participant could have more than one surgical procedure."||surgeries|surgeries||Number
856319|NCT01488994|Secondary|Health Resource Use: Days Lost From School|The number of days lost from school per participant. Number of participants contributing data (N) for this outcome measure is included in the category title in the order: pediatric participants < 6 years of age; pediatric participants 6 to <12 years of age; Full Analysis Set.|Baseline (Pharmacokinetic [PK] assessment), Week 5, Week 13 and Week 26|Participants who missed days from school||Days||Full Range|Median
856324|NCT01488994|Secondary|Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Haemo-QoL, Change From Baseline in Total Score|The Haemo-QoL is a quality of life (QoL) assessment instrument for children and adolescents with haemophilia. As a hemophilia-specific instrument, this measure assesses very specific aspects of dealing with hemophilia. For the Haemo-QoL, higher scores indicate a worse quality of life. Scores on a scale range between 0 and 100.|Baseline and 6 months|Participants in the Full Analysis Set who had Haemo-QoL data for baseline and 6 months||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856325|NCT01488994|Secondary|Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL): PedsQL™ Change From Baseline in Total Score|"For this study, the PedsQL™ questionnaires for participants 2 to 7 years of age (parent-proxy versions for age groups 2-4 years and 5-7 years) and PedsQL™ Child version for participants 8 to 12 years of age were used.
The Peds-QL is a generic Health-Related Quality of Life (HR QoL) instrument designed specifically for a pediatric population. It captures the following domains: general health/activities, feelings/emotional, social functioning, school functioning. A 5-point score is used for each domain: from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, 4=0 so that higher scores indicate better quality of life (QoL). The total score is the mean (average) of all scores from the 4 domains.
The change from baseline in total score is reported- a positive score indicates a better QoL compared to baseline and a negative score indicates a poorer QoL compared to baseline."|Baseline and 6 months|Participants in the Full Analysis Set who had PedsQL™ data for baseline and 6 months||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856326|NCT01488994|Secondary|Safety: Number of Participants Who Developed Antibodies to Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) Proteins and Recombinant Furin (rFurin)|If more than 2-dilution increase as compared to pre-study level at screening and titers verified for specificity in the confirmatory assay.|Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||Participants|||Number
856327|NCT01488994|Secondary|Safety: Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Changes in Routine Laboratory Parameters (Haematology and Clinical Chemistry), and Vital Signs|"Categories consist of Clinically Significant (CS) changes in haemaotology parameters, clinical chemistry parameters and vital signs.
Abbreviations in categories; Clin=clinical; params=parameters"|Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||Participants|||Number
856328|NCT01488994|Secondary|Safety: Number of Participants With Thrombotic Events||Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||Participants|||Number
856329|NCT01488994|Secondary|Safety: Number of Participants With Severe Allergic Reactions, e.g. Anaphylaxis||Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||Participants|||Number
856330|NCT01488994|Secondary|Safety and Immunogenicity: Number of Participants Who Developed Total Binding Antibodies to Factor IX (FIX)|"If more than 2-dilution increase as compared to pre-study level at screening and titers verified for specificity in the confirmatory assay.
AB=antibodies in category for outcome measure data."|Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||Participants|||Number
856331|NCT01488994|Secondary|Safety and Immunogenicity: Number of Participants Who Developed Inhibitory Antibodies to Factor IX (FIX)||Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||Participants|||Number
856332|NCT01488994|Secondary|Consumption of BAX326: Weight-adjusted Consumption Per Event|Event includes prophylactic infusions of study product and infusions of study product for treatment of bleeding episodes (BEs).|Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||IU/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
856333|NCT01488994|Secondary|Consumption of BAX326: Weight-adjusted Consumption Per Year (Annualized)||Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||IU/kg per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
856334|NCT01488994|Secondary|Consumption of BAX326: Weight-adjusted Consumption Per Month||Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||IU/kg per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
856335|NCT01488994|Secondary|Consumption of BAX326: Number of Infusions Per Year||Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||Infusions per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
856336|NCT01488994|Secondary|Consumption of BAX326: Number of Infusions Per Month||Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||Infusions per month||Standard Deviation|Mean
856337|NCT01488994|Secondary|Hemostatic Efficacy: Prophylaxis: Annualized Bleeding Rate (ABR)|"The annualized bleeding rate (ABR) during prophylaxis was calculated only for participants who had adequate treatment time for bleeding rate assessment (i.e., more than 3 months of prophylaxis treatment). The observation period for prophylaxis was to be the time between the first and the last prophylactic infusions. The treatment period for surgery was to be excluded from the bleed rate calculation.
ABR calculated as (Number of bleeding episodes/observed treatment period in days) * 365.25."|Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|||Bleeding episodes per year||Standard Deviation|Mean
856338|NCT01488994|Secondary|Hemostatic Efficacy: Treatment of Bleeding Episodes: Overall Hemostatic Efficacy Rating at Resolution of Bleed|"Rating Scale for Treatment of bleeding episodes (4-point ordinal scale):
Excellent: Full relief of pain and cessation of objective signs of bleeding (eg, swelling, tenderness, and decreased range of motion in the case of musculoskeletal hemorrhage) after a single infusion. No additional infusion required for the control of bleeding. Administration of further infusions to maintain hemostasis did not affect this scoring.
Good: Definite pain relief and/or improvement in signs of bleeding after a single infusion. Possibly requires more than 1 infusion for complete resolution.
Fair: Probable and/or slight relief of pain and slight improvement in signs of bleeding after single infusion. Required more than 1 infusion for complete resolution.
None: No improvement or condition worsens."|Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|Participants in the Full Analysis Set who had bleeding episodes||Bleeding Episodes|Bleeding Episodes||Number
856339|NCT01488994|Secondary|Hemostatic Efficacy: Treatment of Bleeding Episodes: Number of Infusions Per Bleeding Episode||Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|Participants in the Full Analysis Set who had bleeding episodes||Bleeding Episodes|||Number
856340|NCT01488994|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Incremental Recovery (IR) Over Time|"IR calculated as follows: (FIX activity at post-infusion minus FIX activity at pre-infusion) divided by weight-adjusted dose. IR is determined at baseline (PK analysis), Week 5, Week 13 and Week 26 timepoints.
Number of participants contributing data (N) for this outcome measure is included in the category title in the order: pediatric participants > 6 years of age; pediatric participants 6 to <12 years of age; pharmacokinetic Full Analysis Set (PKFAS)."|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and 30 mins post-infusion at baseline, Week 5, Week 13 and Week 26.|||IU/dL : IU/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
856341|NCT01488994|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Volume of Distribution at Steady State (Vss)|Computed as Clearance (CL) * Mean residence time (MRT)|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and 4 post-infusion timepoints. Refer to Population Description below for more details.|"All participants randomized to 2 groups:
Group 1 - BAX326 infusion in the morning PK timepoints: Pre-infusion and post-infusion at 15-30 minutes, then 7, 28 and 52 hours Group 2 - BAX326 infusion in the afternoon PK timepoints: Pre-infusion and post-infusion of 15-30 minutes, then 4, 24 and 69 hours"||dL/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
856342|NCT01488994|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Elimination Phase Half-life (T 1/2)|Calculated as log_e2/λ, where λ is the regression slope in the terminal phase of the least absolute deviations regression model|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and 4 post-infusion timepoints. Refer to Population Description below for more details.|"All participants randomized to 2 groups:
Group 1 - BAX326 infusion in the morning PK timepoints: Pre-infusion and post-infusion at 15-30 minutes, then 7, 28 and 52 hours Group 2 - BAX326 infusion in the afternoon PK timepoints: Pre-infusion and post-infusion of 15-30 minutes, then 4, 24 and 69 hours"||hours (hr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856343|NCT01488994|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Incremental Recovery (IR)|The rise in FIX activity in IU/dL per unit dose administered in IU/kg. Calculated as follows: (FIX activity at post-infusion minus FIX activity at pre-infusion) divided by weight-adjusted dose|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and 30 mins post-infusion|||IU/dL : IU/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
856344|NCT01488994|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Factor IX (FIX) Clearance (CL)|Computed as the dose divided by total Area under the curve (AUC)|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and 4 post-infusion timepoints. Refer to Population Description below for more details.|"All participants randomized to 2 groups:
Group 1 - BAX326 infusion in the morning PK timepoints: Pre-infusion and post-infusion at 15-30 minutes, then 7, 28 and 52 hours Group 2 - BAX326 infusion in the afternoon PK timepoints: Pre-infusion and post-infusion of 15-30 minutes, then 4, 24 and 69 hours"||dL/(kg*hr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856345|NCT01488994|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Mean Residence Time (MRT)|Computed as total area under the first moment curve (total AUMC) divided by the total area under the concentration versus time curve (total AUC)|Within 30 mins pre-infusion and 4 post-infusion timepoints. Refer to Population Description below for more details.|"All participants randomized to 2 groups:
Group 1 - BAX326 infusion in the morning PK timepoints: Pre-infusion and post-infusion at 15-30 minutes, then 7, 28 and 52 hours Group 2 - BAX326 infusion in the afternoon PK timepoints: Pre-infusion and post-infusion of 15-30 minutes, then 4, 24 and 69 hours"||hours (hr)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856346|NCT01488994|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Total Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to Infinity Post-infusion Per Dose (Total AUC/Dose)||Within 30 mins pre-infusion and 4 post-infusion timepoints. Refer to Population Description below for more details.|"All participants randomized to 2 groups:
Group 1 - BAX326 infusion in the morning PK timepoints: Pre-infusion and post-infusion at 15-30 minutes, then 7, 28 and 52 hours Group 2 - BAX326 infusion in the afternoon PK timepoints: Pre-infusion and post-infusion of 15-30 minutes, then 4, 24 and 69 hours"||IU*hour (hr)/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
856347|NCT01488994|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Total Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From 0 to 72 Hours Post-infusion Per Dose (AUC 0-72h/Dose)||Within 30 mins pre-infusion and 4 post-infusion timepoints|On completion of the study, prospective changes to the planned statistical analysis were made not to analyze AUC 0-72h due to the different time points for the last PK blood sample. Only total AUC [i.e. AUC 0-infinity] was included in the PK analysis.|||||
856348|NCT01488994|Primary|Adverse Events (AEs) Possibly or Probably Related to BAX326||Throughout study period (approximately 17 months)|Full analysis set||AEs considered related to BAX326|||Number
856349|NCT01485796|Secondary|Number of Weeks to Reach Final 3 or 4-week Dose Interval|Non-parametric descriptive statistics (median, range) are provided.|7 months (per subject)|Of 36 participants treated with study drug in Epoch 2, 6 reached a final dose interval of 3 weeks and 30 reached a final dose interval of 4 weeks.||weeks||Full Range|Median
856350|NCT01485796|Secondary|Maximum Infusion Rate in Epoch 1 and Epoch 2|Non-parametric descriptive statistics (median, range) are provided.|7 months (per subject)|The number of participants analyzed for Epoch 1 is 37, as 37 participants were treated with study drug in Epoch 1. The number of participants analyzed for Epoch 2 is 36, as 36 participants were treated with study drug in Epoch 2.||mL/h||Full Range|Median
856351|NCT01485796|Secondary|Duration of Infusion in Epoch 1 and Epoch 2|Non-parametric descriptive statistics (median, range) are provided.|7 months (per subject)|The number of participants analyzed for Epoch 1 is 37, as 37 participants were treated with study drug in Epoch 1. The number of participants analyzed for Epoch 2 is 36, as 36 participants were treated with study drug in Epoch 2.||hours||Full Range|Median
856352|NCT01485796|Secondary|Number of Infusion Sites (Needle Sticks) Per Month in Epoch 1 and Epoch 2|Non-parametric descriptive statistics (median, range) are provided.|7 months (per subject)|The number of participants analyzed for Epoch 1 is 37, as 37 participants were treated with study drug in Epoch 1. The number of participants analyzed for Epoch 2 is 36, as 36 participants were treated with study drug in Epoch 2.||infusion sites (needle sticks)||Full Range|Median
856353|NCT01485796|Secondary|Number of Infusions Per Month in Epoch 1 and Epoch 2|Non-parametric descriptive statistics (median, range) are provided.|7 months (per subject)|The number of participants analyzed for Epoch 1 is 37, as 37 participants were treated with study drug in Epoch 1. The number of participants analyzed for Epoch 2 is 36, as 36 participants were treated with study drug in Epoch 2.||infusions||Full Range|Median
856354|NCT01485796|Secondary|Trough Levels of Immunoglobulin G (IgG)|IgG trough levels at the beginning of Study Epoch 1 (previous immunoglobulin treatment) and at the end of Study Epoch 2 were analyzed.|7 months (per subject)|At screening, data (ie, IgG trough levels) were available for analysis from 36 participants. At the end of Epoch 2, data were available for analysis from only 33 participants.||g/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856355|NCT01485796|Secondary|Number of Subjects Who Develop Neutralizing Antibodies to rHuPH20||7 months (per subject)|||subjects|||Number
856356|NCT01485796|Secondary|Rate of All Adverse Events (Excluding Infections) Per Infusion|A point estimate and 95% confidence interval for the rate of adverse events per infusion was derived using a Poisson model.|7 months (per subject)|||adverse events||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856357|NCT01485796|Secondary|Number of All Related Adverse Events (Excluding Infections)||7 months (per subject)|||adverse events|||Number
856517|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs) (Including and Excluding Infections) That Begin During or Within 72 Hours of Completion of Infusion Per Participant|Number of AEs that begin during or within 72 hours of completion of infusion divided by number of participants|Within 72 hours of completion of infusion|Safety Analysis Set||Adverse events per participant|||Number
856409|NCT01345669|Secondary|Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) Scores Over Time|HRQoL questionnaires focused on 3 scales: Pain scale from H&N35, Swallowing scale from H&N35 and Global health status/QoL scale from C30. Scoring of the symptom scales/items followed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) scoring manual and a linear transformation of the scores to a 0-100 point scale. Higher values are better.|Baseline and 5 years|Randomised Set (RS): Included all patients who were randomised, regardless of taking investigational treatment (as randomised)||Unit on Scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
856407|NCT01390389|Secondary|To Determine Effects of CoQ 10 on Bioenergetics (PCr and Beta NTP) in Older Adults With Bipolar Depression.|Changes in PCr and beta NTP will be demonstrated in Geri BD group challenged with CoQ10.|4-week trial|Healthy controls with no evidence of current or past psychiatric disorders, and subjects with Bipolar disorder who received CoQ10 therapy for 4 weeks. Subjects in the CoQ10 group started at 400 mg of CoQ10 a day, and increased to 800 mg a day at 2 weeks.||Integration Expressed as Arbitrary Unit||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
856408|NCT01390389|Primary|Mean Concentrations of Cerebral Energetic Metabolites in Geriatric BPD and Older Controls at Baseline|Tissue-specific (gray or white matter) concentrations of of Phosphocreatine (PCr), Beta-Nucleoside Triphosphate (bNTP), and Inorganic Phosphate (Pi) in geriatric BPD compared with healthy controls at baseline. Concentrations were measured using CSI P MRS scan at 4T. The analysis of signal intensity is done through integration of the area under the curve and is expressed in arbitrary units.|Baseline|||Integration Expressed as Arbitrary Unit||Standard Error|Mean
856518|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Serious (SAEs) and Non-serious Adverse Events (AEs) (Including and Excluding Infections) Regardless of Relationship to the Investigational Product Per Infusion|Number of all SAEs and AEs divided by number of infusions|Up to 20 months per subject (throughout entire study)||08/2017||||
856410|NCT01345669|Secondary|Time to Deterioration in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL)|HRQoL questionnaires focused on 3 scales: Pain scale from H&N35, Swallowing scale from H&N35 and Global health status/QoL scale from C30. Time to deterioration was defined as the time from randomisation to the first 10-point worsening on the 0-100 point scale. Patients with no deterioration (including those with disease recurrence/SPT) were censored at the last available HRQoL assessment date. Patients with no post-baseline assessments were censored on the day of randomisation.|Up to 5 years|Randomised Set (RS): Included all patients who were randomised, regardless of taking investigational treatment (as randomised)||Months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
856411|NCT01345669|Secondary|Patients With Improved Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL)|HRQoL questionnaires focused on 3 scales: Pain scale from H&N35, Swallowing scale from H&N35 and Global health status/QoL scale from C30. Improvement was defined as a score that improved from baseline by at least 10 points (on the 0-100 point scale) at any time during the study. If a patient had not improved, worsening was defined as a 10-point worsening at any time during the study. Patients who had neither improved nor worsened were considered as stable. Percentages of patients with improvement in HRQoL are presented.|Up to 5 years|Randomised Set (RS): Included all patients who were randomised, regardless of taking investigational treatment (as randomised)||Percentage of Patients|||Number
856412|NCT01345669|Secondary|Percentage of Patient Deaths (Overall Survival (OS))|Overall survival (OS), defined as the time from randomisation until death (regardless of cause). Due to the small event rate in both treatment arms caused by the early termination of the trial, the hazard estimate is not interpretable. Hence presented the total randomized and the percentage of patients died.|Up to 5 years|Randomised Set (RS): Included all patients who were randomised, regardless of taking investigational treatment (as randomised)||Percentage of patients|||Number
856413|NCT01345669|Secondary|Disease Free Survival (DFS) Rate at 2 Years|Disease Free Survival (DFS) rate at 2 years. Probability of being disease free at 2 years in percentage is provided based on Kaplan-Meier method.|Up to 2 years|Randomised Set (RS); ‘Overall number of participants analyzed’ are the number of patients at risk.||Probability (%)||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856414|NCT01345669|Primary|Disease Free Survival (DFS)|Disease Free Survival defined as the time from randomisation until documented tumour recurrence/ second primary tumour (SPT) or death from any cause, whichever occurred first.|Up to 5 years|Randomised Set (RS): Included all patients who were randomised, regardless of taking investigational treatment (as randomised)||Months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
856415|NCT01308567|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P):Trial Outcome Index (TOI) as a Measure of HRQoL|FACT-P was a 39-item participant rated questionnaire that measures the concerns of participants with prostate cancer. It consisted of 5 sub-scales assessing physical well-being (7 items), social/family well-being (7 items), emotional well-being (6 items), functional well-being (7 items), and prostate-specific concerns (12 items). Physical well being, functional well being, and prostate-specific concerns sub-scales of the FACT-P questionnaire were combined to calculate TOI. Total TOI score ranges from 0 to 104, with higher scores representing a better quality of life with fewer symptoms.|Baseline, Day 1 of each cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 (each cycle 21-day); post-treatment follow up 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (each up to 12 weeks)|Analysis was performed on FACT-P population that included all participants with evaluable individual FACT-P subscale score at baseline and post-baseline on at least 1 of the subscale domains.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
856416|NCT01308567|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score as a Measure of Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)|FACT-P was a 39-item participant rated questionnaire that measures the concerns of participants with prostate cancer. It consisted of 5 sub-scales assessing physical well-being (7 items), social/family well-being (7 items), emotional well-being (6 items), functional well-being (7 items), and prostate-specific concerns (12 items). FACT-P total score was the sum of all 5 subscale scores. It ranged from 0 to156 with higher score indicated better quality of life with fewer symptoms.|Baseline, Day 1 of each cycle 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 (each cycle 21-day); post-treatment follow up 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (each up to 12 weeks)|Analysis was performed on FACT-P population that included all participants with evaluable individual FACT-P subscale score at baseline and post-baseline on at least 1 of the subscale domains.||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
856417|NCT01308567|Secondary|Skeletal Related Events (SRE) Free Survival|SRE free survival was defined as the time interval between the date of randomization and the date of the occurrence of the first event defining a SRE or death due to any cause, whichever was earlier. SRE were assessed by clinical evaluation. Occurrence of SRE was defined as: pathological fracture(s) and/or spinal cord compression; need for bone irradiation, including radioisotopes or bone surgery; and change of antineoplastic therapy (including introduction of bisphosphonates or denosumab in the setting of increased pain) to treat bone pain. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline until occurrence of first SRE or death (maximum duration: 51 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population which included all randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856418|NCT01308567|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Pain Response|Pain response was defined as either a ≥2-point decrease from baseline median PPI score without increase in analgesic score, or a ≥50% decrease in analgesic use from baseline mean analgesic score (only in participants with baseline mean analgesic score≥10) without increase in the pain. Either criterion was maintained for 2 consecutive evaluations at least 3 weeks apart. PPI was rated by participant in a diary using a scale of 0=no pain, 1=mild, 2=discomforting, 3=distressing, 4=horrible 5=excruciating. Analgesic use was recorded by the participant in a diary. Analgesic score was calculated from the analgesic use data based on a table of analgesic medications, with non-narcotic medications assigned a value of 1 point and narcotic medications assigned a value of 4 points.|Baseline until pain progression, death or study cut-off date (maximum duration: 51 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with pain score with median PPI ≥2 and/or mean analgesic score≥10 points at baseline and at least one valid post-baseline value for specified outcome measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856430|NCT01305213|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events (Grade 3 or Higher) as Assessed by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v 4.0|Toxicities will be characterized by their frequency and severity. Differences in the level of toxicities by treatment regimen will be assessed by classifying them as severe or not severe and examining the relative proportion of severe toxicities.|Up to 5 years|All eligible and treated patients||Participants|||Count of Participants
856419|NCT01308567|Secondary|Time to Pain Progression Free Survival (Pain PFS)|Time to pain PFS was defined as the time interval between date of randomization and the date of the first occurrence of pain progression or death, whichever was earlier. Pain progression was defined as an increase of ≥1 point in the median present pain intensity (PPI) score from the nadir confirmed by a second assessment at least 3 weeks later or ≥25 % increase in the mean analgesic score from baseline, due to cancer related pain confirmed by a second assessment at least 3 weeks later or requirement for local palliative radiotherapy. PPI was rated by participant in a diary using a scale of 0=no pain, 1=mild, 2=discomforting, 3=distressing, 4=horrible 5=excruciating. Analgesic use was recorded by the participant in a diary. Analgesic score was calculated from the analgesic use data based on a table of analgesic medications, with non-narcotic medications assigned a value of 1 point and narcotic medications assigned a value of 4 points. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline until disease progression, death or study cut-off date (maximum duration: 51 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population which included all randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856420|NCT01308567|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With PSA Response|PSA response was defined as ≥50% decrease from baseline in serum PSA levels, confirmed by a second PSA value at least 3 weeks later in participants with baseline PSA value ≥10 ng/mL.|Baseline up to PSA progression or death due to any cause or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier (maximum duration: 51 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with PSA value ≥10 ng/mL at baseline and at least one valid post-baseline value for specified outcome measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856421|NCT01308567|Secondary|Time to Prostate Serum Antigen Progression Free Survival (PSA-PFS)|Time to PSA-PFS: time interval between date of randomization & first occurrence of PSA progression/ death, whichever was earlier. PSA progression:1) In PSA responders(≥50% decline from baseline PSA of ≥10 ng/mL):increase of ≥25%(at least 2 ng/mL)over nadir value, confirmed by second PSA value at least 3 weeks later;2)In PSA non-responders(not achieved ≥50% decline from baseline PSA ≥10 ng/mL):increase of ≥25% (at least 2 ng/mL) over baseline value, confirmed by second PSA value at least 3 weeks later;3)In participants not eligible for PSA response(baseline PSA <10 ng/mL):(a)in participants with baseline PSA>0 ng/mL&<10 ng/mL: increase in PSA by 25% (at least 2 ng/mL) above baseline level, confirmed by second PSA value at least 3weeks apart;(b)in participants with baseline value=0ng/mL: a post baseline PSA value ≥2ng/mL.Early rise in PSA only indicated progression if it was associated with another sign of DP or if it continued beyond 12 weeks. Analysis performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline up to PSA progression or death due to any cause or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier ((maximum duration: 51 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population which included all randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856422|NCT01308567|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Overall Objective Tumor Response|Overall objective tumor response was defined as having a partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) according to the RECIST version 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|Baseline up to DP or death due to any cause or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier (maximum duration: 51 months)|Analysis was performed on ITT population. Number of participants analyzed=participants with measurable disease at baseline and at least one valid post-baseline value analyzed for specified outcome measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856423|NCT01308567|Secondary|Time to Tumor Progression Free Survival|Time to tumor progression free survival was defined as the time interval between randomization and the date of first occurrence of tumor progression (assessed using RECIST version 1.1) or death, whichever was earlier. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline up to tumor progression or death due to any cause or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier (maximum duration: 51 months)|ITT population included all randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856424|NCT01308567|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS: time interval between date of randomization to date of first occurrence of any of following events: tumor progression according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1; Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) progression; pain progression or death due to any cause. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline up to tumor progression, PSA progression, pain progression or death (maximum duration: 51 months)|ITT population included all randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856425|NCT01308567|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS was defined as the time interval from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored at the last date participant was known to be alive, or at the cut-off date if the participant’s last contact was after the cut-off date. The study cut-off date for the final analysis of OS was the date when the 774th death had been observed. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.|Baseline up to death or study cut-off date, whichever was earlier (maximum duration: 51 months)|ITT population included all randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856426|NCT01305213|Secondary|Response by CA-125|The effects of treatment on the proportion responding by CA125 will be examined.|Up to 5 years|||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856427|NCT01305213|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|Differences between measurable versus non-measurable disease status on PFS and OS will be examined with plots of survival curves, estimates of quartiles and hazard ratios.|Up to 5 years|||months||90% Confidence Interval|Median
856428|NCT01305213|Secondary|Tumor Response|Complete and Partial Tumor Response by RECIST 1.0|for those patients whose disease can be evaluated by physical examination, response wa assessed prior to each 21 day cycle. CT scan or MRI if used to follow lesion for measurable disease every other cycle, up to 5 years|Patients with measurable disease||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
856429|NCT01305213|Secondary|Measurable Disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Criteria and Progression Free Survival (PFS)|Differences between measurable versus non-measurable disease status on PFS and OS will be examined with plots of survival curves, estimates of quartiles and hazard ratios.|Up to 5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856431|NCT01305213|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|The time from randomization until disease progression, death, or date of last contact. Endpoints are progression or death. Patients who are not observed with an endpoint are censored.|For those patients whose disease can be evaluated by physical examination, progression was assessed prior to each 21 day cycle. CT scan or MRI if used to follow lesion for measurable disease every other cycle, up to 5 years|All intent to treat patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856498|NCT01218438|Secondary|Quality of Life- Short-Form 36v2 (SF-36v2) for the Age Group 14 Years and Older|The PCS is a summary scale of the dimensions physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, and general health. The component score is normalized to a standard population. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. There is no total overall score; scoring is done for both sub-scores and summary scores.|Up to 20 months (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set participants aged 14 years and older with scores at each respective time point.||Scores on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856587|NCT01175213|Secondary|Number of Participants With AEs Related to Anti-rHuPH20 Titers||Throughout entire study period for 160603 (1 year 11 months) and 160902 (2 years 11 months)|All participants who had been exposed to recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) in studies 160603 or 160902.||Number of participants|||Number
856494|NCT01218438|Secondary|Life Quality Index - 13 Years and Older|"For the age group 13 years and older the respondent will be the participant.
Each of the four domains has a separate score, each has a different range as follows:
Treatment Interference Score Range: 6-42, Therapy-related Problems Score Range: 4-28, Therapy Setting Score Range: 3-21, Cost Score Range: 2-14. Higher scores represent more satisfaction with various aspects of treatment."|Up to 20 months per subject (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set - participants aged 13 years and older with data (scores) at relevant time points||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856495|NCT01218438|Secondary|Life Quality Index - 2 to 12 Years Old|"For the age group 2 to 12 years the respondent will be a parent.
Each of the four domains has a separate score, each has a different range as follows:
Treatment Interference Score Range: 6-42, Therapy-related Problems Score Range: 4-28, Therapy Setting Score Range: 3-21, Cost Score Range: 2-14. Higher scores represent more satisfaction with various aspects of treatment."|Up to 20 months (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set - participants aged 2-12 years old with data (scores) at relevant time points||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856496|NCT01218438|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) - 13 Years and Older|"TSQM; for the age group 13 years and older the observer will be the participant.
Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) is a global satisfaction scale used to assess the overall level of participant’s satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their medications. The following 3 domain were included: effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction.
The score of each of the 3 domains is based on an algorithm to create a score of 0 to 100. Higher score indicated greater satisfaction in that domain."|Up to 20 months per subject (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set - participants aged 13 years and older with data (scores) at relevant time points||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856497|NCT01218438|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) - 2 to 12 Years Old|"TSQM; for the age group 2 to 12 years the observer will be a parent.
Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) is a global satisfaction scale used to assess the overall level of participant’s satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their medications. The following 3 domain were included: effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction.
The score of each of the 3 domains is based on an algorithm to create a score of 0 to 100. Higher score indicated greater satisfaction in that domain."|Up to 20 months per subject (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set - participants aged 2-12 years old with data (scores) at relevant time points||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856516|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs) (Including and Excluding Infections) That Begin During or Within 72 Hours of Completion of Infusion Per Infusion|Number of AEs that begin during or within 72 hours of completion of infusion divided by the number of infusions|Within 72 hours of completion of infusion|Safety Analysis Set||Adverse events per infusion|Infusions||Number
856499|NCT01218438|Secondary|Quality of Life- PEDS-QL^TM (Observer: Participant) for the Age Group 8 to 13 Years of Age|The Peds-QL is a generic Health-Related Quality of Life (HR QoL) instrument designed specifically for a pediatric population. It captures the following domains: general health/activities, feelings/emotional, social functioning, school functioning. Higher scores indicate better quality of life (QoL) for all domains of the Peds-QL. This modular instrument uses a 5-point scale: from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, 4=0. 4 dimensions (physical, emotional, social, & school functioning) are scored. 2 summary scores (Psychosocial Health Summary, and Physical Health Summary) are presented, along with a total score.|Up to 20 months (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set participants aged 8 to 13 with scores at each respective time point.||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856500|NCT01218438|Secondary|Quality of Life- Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory^TM (PEDS-QL^TM) (Observer: Parent) for the Age Group 2 to 7 Years|The Peds-QL is a generic Health-Related Quality of Life (HR QoL) instrument designed specifically for a pediatric population. It captures the following domains: general health/activities, feelings/emotional, social functioning, school functioning. Higher scores indicate better quality of life (QoL) for all domains of the Peds-QL. This modular instrument uses a 5-point scale: from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Items are reversed scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, 4=0. 4 dimensions (physical, emotional, social, & school functioning) are scored. 2 summary scores (Psychosocial Health Summary, and Physical Health Summary) are presented, along with a total score.|Up to 20 months (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set (subset of participants aged 2 to 7 years)||Score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856501|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Participants With Laboratory Confirmed Hemolysis That Occurred Following Investigational Product Administration|Laboratory tests for confirmation of potential hemolysis include Coomb’s test, haptoglobin, free hemoglobin, reticulocyte count, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and urine hemosiderin.|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval- weeks 0, 10. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval- weeks 0, 9. Epoch 3: Subcutaneous (SC) week 9. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17, 18, 40|Safety Analysis Set||Participants|||Number
856502|NCT01218438|Secondary|Short Term Tolerance - Change in Body Temperature||Within 30 minutes pre-infusion, during infusion and within 30 minutes post infusion at first 3 infusions in Epoch 1 & 2||08/2017||||
856503|NCT01218438|Secondary|Short Term Tolerance - Change in Respiratory Rate||Within 30 minutes pre-infusion, during infusion and within 30 minutes post infusion at first 3 infusions in Epoch 1 & 2||08/2017||||
856504|NCT01218438|Secondary|Short Term Tolerance - Change in Heart Rate (Pulse)||Within 30 minutes pre-infusion, during infusion and within 30 minutes post infusion at first 3 infusions in Epoch 1 & 2||08/2017||||
856505|NCT01218438|Secondary|Short Term Tolerance - Change in Blood Pressure||Within 30 minutes pre-infusion, during infusion and within 30 minutes post infusion at first 3 infusions in Epoch 1 & 2||08/2017||||
856506|NCT01218438|Secondary|Percentage of Infusions Tolerated With Intravenous or Subcutaneous Administration|"An infusion will be deemed as tolerated unless one of the following occurs:
Any serious related AE(s)
Any non-serious local or systemic related AE(s) that prevent(s) completion of infusion
Any severe non-serious local or systemic related AE(s) that occur within 60 minutes of completion of the infusion"|Up to 20 months (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set||Percent of infusions|Infusions||Number
856507|NCT01218438|Secondary|Percentage of Participants for Whom the Infusion Rate Was Reduced and/or the Infusion Was Interrupted or Stopped Due to Tolerability Concerns or AEs||Up to 20 months (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set||Percent of participants|||Number
856508|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Infusions for Which the Infusion Rate Was Reduced and/or the Infusion Was Interrupted or Stopped Due to Tolerability Concerns or AEs||Up to 20 months (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set||Infusions|Infusions||Number
856509|NCT01218438|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Reporting One or More Local Non-serious Adverse Events (Non-SAEs)||Up to 20 months (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set||Percent of participants|||Number
856510|NCT01218438|Secondary|Percentage of Infusions Associated With One or More Local Non-serious Adverse Events (Non-SAEs)|The number of infusions associated with local non-SAEs divided by the total number of infusions.|Up to 20 months (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set||Percent of infusions|Infusions||Number
856511|NCT01218438|Secondary|Causally Related and/or Temporally Associated Adverse Events (AEs) Per Infusion|"The total number of all AEs (including and excluding infections) that begin during infusion or within 72 hours of completion of an infusion (temporally associated) plus the total number of AEs (including and excluding infections) starting more than 72 hours following the completion of an infusion determined by the investigator to be at least possibly related to the study drug(related), divided by the total number of infusions"|Within 72 hours post infusion for Temporally Associated AEs; End of each Study Epoch (Epoch 1, Epoch 2, Epoch 3, and Epoch 4) for Causally Related AEs|Safety Analysis Set||Adverse events per infusion|Infusions||Number
856512|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs) (Including and Excluding Infections) That Begin During or Within 1 Hour of Completion of Infusion|Number of AEs that begin during or within 1 hour of completion of infusion divided by number of infusions|Within 1 hour of completion of infusion|Safety Analysis Set||Adverse events per infusion|Infusions||Number
856513|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs) (Including and Excluding Infections) That Begin During or Within 1 Hour of Completion of Infusion Per Participant|Number of AEs that begin during or within 1 hour of completion of infusion divided by number of participants|Within 1 hour of completion of infusion|Safety Analysis Set||Adverse events per participant|||Number
856514|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs) (Including and Excluding Infections) That Begin During or Within 24 Hours of Completion of Infusion Per Infusion|Number of AEs that begin during or within 24 hours of completion of infusion divided by number of infusions|Within 24 hours of completion of infusion|Safety Analysis Set||Adverse events per infusion|Infusions||Number
856515|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs) (Including and Excluding Infections) That Begin During or Within 24 Hours of Completion of Infusion Per Participant|Number of AEs that begin during or within 24 hours of completion of infusion divided by number of participants|Within 24 hours of completion of infusion|Safety Analysis Set||Adverse events per participant|||Number
856519|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Serious (SAEs) and Non-serious Adverse Events (AEs) (Including and Excluding Infections) Regardless of Relationship to the Investigational Product Per Participant|Number of all SAEs and AEs divided by number of participants|Up to 20 months per subject (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set||Adverse events per participant|||Number
856520|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Serious (SAEs) and Non-serious Adverse Events (AEs) (Including and Excluding Infections) Deemed Related to the Investigational Product Per Infusion|Number of related SAEs and AEs divided by number of subjects and divided by number of infusions|Up to 20 months per subject (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set||Adverse events per infusion|Infusions||Number
856521|NCT01218438|Secondary|Number of Serious (SAEs) and Non-serious Adverse Events (AEs) (Including and Excluding Infections) Deemed Related to the Investigational Product Per Participant|Number of related SAEs and AEs divided by number of participants|Up to 20 months per subject (throughout entire study)|Safety Analysis Set||Adverse events per participant|||Number
856522|NCT01218438|Secondary|Correction Factor to Determine the Individually Adapted Dose in Study 170904 Epoch 4 (Dose Adjustment Table)|"There is a high degree of variability in catabolism of immunoglobulin G (IgG) between individuals.
To address this, trough levels immediately prior to the 9th weekly infusion in Epoch 3 were measured.
The ratio of the measured trough levels on subcutaneous (SC) (Epoch 3) and intravenous (IV) administration (Epoch1) were compared to the expected trough level determined in Epoch 2. This was used to determine the Individually Adapted Dose to be used in Epoch 4.
This was an interim study analysis."|29 weeks|Pharmacokinetics interim analysis set to determine the Individually Adapted Dose for Epoch 4||Correction factor|||Number
856523|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Haemophilus Influenza B Antibody: Minimum Concentration (Cmin)|The minimum concentration (Cmax) following administration of study drug (either immune globulin administered intravenously (IGIV) or immune globulin administered subcutaneously (IGSC).|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||mg/L||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856524|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Haemophilus Influenza B Antibody: Time to Maximum Concentration (Tmax)|The minimum time (Tmax) to reach the maximum concentration (Cmax)|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||Hours (s)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856525|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Haemophilus Influenza B Antibody: Maximum Concentration (Cmax)|The maximum concentration (Cmax) following administration of study drug (either immune globulin administered intravenously (IGIV) or immune globulin administered subcutaneously (IGSC).|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||mg/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856526|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Haemophilus Influenza B Antibody: Clearance (CL) for Immune Globulin Administered Intravenously (IGIV) and Apparent Clearance (CL/F) for Immune Globulin Administered Subcutaneously|Clearance (CL) or apparent clearance (CL/F) for IV and SC administration, respectively, will be determined by the formula: CL or CL/F = (Dose (mg/kg)) / (AUC 0- τ). (F= bioavailability)|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||mL/kg/days||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856527|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Haemophilus Influenza B Antibody: Dose Per Weight-adjusted Area Under the Curve (AUC)|The AUC between adjacent infusions will be calculated by the trapezoidal rule . Linear interpolation/extrapolation will be used to calculate the AUC for exact duration of the infusion intervals (21 or 28 days for IV administration and 7 days for SC administration). To allow for comparisons between Epochs 1, 2 and 4, AUC 0-τ will be standardized for the infusion intervals (3 or 4 weeks vs. 1 week) adjusted for the dose per weight.|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||(mg*days/L)/(g/kg)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856528|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Haemophilus Influenza B Antibody: Area Under the Curve (AUC)|The AUC between adjacent infusions will be calculated by the trapezoidal rule . Linear interpolation/extrapolation will be used to calculate the AUC for exact duration of the infusion intervals (21 or 28 days for IV administration and 7 days for SC administration). To allow for comparisons between Epochs 1, 2 and 4, AUC 0-τ will be standardized for the infusion intervals (3 or 4 weeks vs. 1 week )|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||mg*days/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856529|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Immunoglobulin G (IgG): Minimum Concentration (Cmin)|The minimum concentration (Cmax) following administration of study drug (either immune globulin administered intravenously (IGIV) or immune globulin administered subcutaneously (IGSC).|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||g/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856530|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Immunoglobulin G (IgG): Time to Maximum Concentration (Tmax)|The minimum time (Tmax) to reach the maximum concentration (Cmax)|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||hours (h)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856531|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Immunoglobulin G (IgG): Maximum Concentration (Cmax)|The maximum concentration (Cmax) following administration of study drug (either immune globulin administered intravenously (IGIV) or immune globulin administered subcutaneously (IGSC).|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||g/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856532|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Immunoglobulin G (IgG): Clearance (CL) for Immune Globulin Administered Intravenously (IGIV) and Apparent Clearance for Immune Globulin Administered Subcutaneously (IGSC)|Clearance (CL) or apparent clearance (CL/F) for IV and SC administration, respectively, will be determined by the formula: CL or CL/F = (Dose (mg/kg)) / (AUC 0-τ). (F= bioavailability)|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time point||mL/kg/days||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856533|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Immunoglobulin G (IgG): Dose Per Weight-adjusted Area Under the Curve (AUC)|The AUC between adjacent infusions will be calculated by the trapezoidal rule. Linear interpolation/extrapolation will be used to calculate the AUC for exact duration of the infusion intervals (21 or 28 days for IV administration and 7 days for SC administration). To allow for comparisons between Epochs 1, 2 and 4, AUC0-τ will be standardized for the infusion intervals (3 or 4 weeks vs. 1 week) adjusted for the dose per weight.|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||(g*days/L)/(g/kg)||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856534|NCT01218438|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics Parameters for Immunoglobulin G (IgG): Area Under the Curve (AUC)|The AUC between adjacent infusions will be calculated by the trapezoidal rule. Linear interpolation/extrapolation will be used to calculate the AUC for exact duration of the infusion intervals (21 or 28 days for IV administration and 7 days for SC administration). To allow for comparisons between Epochs 1, 2 and 4, AUC0-τ will be standardized for the infusion intervals (3 or 4 weeks vs. 1 week)|Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval: Weeks 10-13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Weeks 9-13. Epoch 2: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 9-10. Epoch 4: SC weeks 17-18|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||g*days/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856535|NCT01218438|Secondary|Trough Levels of Anti-Hepatitis B Antibody||"Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval- weeks 1, 4, 7, 10, 13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval- weeks 1, 5, 9, 13. Epochs 2 & 3: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 5, 9. Epoch 4: SC weeks 1, 9, 17, 29, 40 (week dependent on time to establish Adjusted Dose in Epoch 2)"|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856536|NCT01218438|Secondary|Trough Levels of Anti-Haemophilus Influenza B Antibody||"Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval- weeks 1, 4, 7, 10, 13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval- weeks 1, 5, 9, 13. Epochs 2 & 3: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 5, 9. Epoch 4: SC weeks 1, 9, 17, 29, 40 (week dependent on time to establish Adjusted Dose in Epoch 2)"|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||mg/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856537|NCT01218438|Secondary|Trough Levels of Anti-Tetanus Antibody||"Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval- weeks 1, 4, 7, 10, 13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval- weeks 1, 5, 9, 13. Epochs 2 & 3: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 5, 9. Epoch 4: SC weeks 1, 9, 17, 29, 40 (week dependent on time to establish Adjusted Dose in Epoch 2)"|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856538|NCT01218438|Secondary|Trough Levels of IgG (Total), and IgG Subclasses at the End of the Treatment Intervals||"Epoch 1: 3 week IV interval- weeks 0, 1, 4, 7, 10, 13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval- weeks 0, 1, 5, 9, 13. Epochs 2 & 3: Subcutaneous (SC) weeks 5, 9. Epoch 4: SC weeks 1, 9, 17, 29, 40 (week dependent on time to establish Adjusted Dose in Epoch 2)"|Safety Analysis Set - sub-groups with data at relevant time points||g/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856539|NCT01218438|Secondary|Bioavailability of IGSC, 20% as Measured by the Ratio of the Geometric Means of Immunoglobulin G (IgG) AUCSC (Epoch 4) to IgG AUCIV,0-τ (Standardized to 1 Week) (Epoch 1) Adjusted for Dose and Dosing Frequency (Participants ≥12 Years Old)|"IGSC, 20% = Immune Globulin Subcutaneous (Human), 20% Solution;
AUCSC = area under the concentration-time curve following subcutaneous administration;
AUCIV,0-τ = area under the concentration-time curve following intravenous administration over a dosing interval"|Epoch 1: 3 week IV administration interval: Week 10, 11, 12, 13. Epoch 1: 4 week IV interval: Week 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. Epoch 4 Subcutaneous administration weeks 17, 18|Safety Analysis Set with correctly administered IGIV 10% dose in Epoch 1||Ratio||90% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
856540|NCT01218438|Secondary|Annual Rate of Acute (Urgent or Unscheduled) Physician Visits, or Visits to the Emergency Room for Illness or Infection Per Participant||1 year|Safety Analysis Set||Estimated visits/participant||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856541|NCT01218438|Secondary|Annual Rate of Days of Hospitalizations for Illness or Infection Per Participant||1 year|Safety Analysis Set||Estimated days/participant||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856542|NCT01218438|Secondary|Annual Rate of Hospitalizations for Illness or Infection Per Participant||1 year|Safety Analysis Set||Estimated hospitalizations/participant||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856543|NCT01218438|Secondary|Annual Rate of Days on Antibiotics Per Participant||1 year|Safety Analysis Set||Estimated days/particpant||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856544|NCT01218438|Secondary|Annual Rate of Days Off School/Work or Days Unable to Perform Normal Daily Activities Due to Illness or Infection Per Participant||1 year|Safety Analysis Set||Estimated days off/participant||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856545|NCT01218438|Secondary|Annual Rate of Fever Episodes Per Participant||1 year|Safety Analysis Set||Estimated episodes/year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856546|NCT01218438|Secondary|Annual Rate of Sinus Infections Per Participant||1 year|Safety Analysis Set||Estimated infections/year||99% Confidence Interval|Number
856547|NCT01218438|Secondary|Annual Rate of All Infections Per Participant||1 year|Safety Analysis Set||Estimated infections/year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856548|NCT01218438|Primary|Rate of Acute Serious Bacterial Infections Per Year (ASBI)|"Annual rate of validated acute serious bacterial infections was calculated using a Poisson model to account for the different lengths of observation per participant.
The observation period for each participant starts with the day of the first subcutaneous (SC) infusion in Study Epoch 2 and ends with the day of the End of Study visit."|1 year|Safety Analysis Set||Estimated infections/ year|||Number
856554|NCT01178294|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Developed an Anti-host Cell Protein Baby Hamster Kidney (BHK) Antibody Titer||Through 90 days ± 7 days following final OBI-1 dose|21 subjects in the ITT population (n=29) with available baseline and follow-up test results||participants|||Number
856555|NCT01178294|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Developed de Novo Anti-OBI-1 Antibody Titers||Through 90 days ± 7 days following final OBI-1 dose|28 eligible subjects with acquired hemophilia A in the ITT population (n=29), of whom 18 had no detectable anti-porcine FVIII inhibitor titers at baseline (<0.6 BU) and 10 had detectable anti-porcine FVIII antibody titers at baseline (>=0.6 BU)||participants|||Number
856556|NCT01178294|Other Pre-specified|Anti-human Factor VIII Antibody Titer||Through 90 days ± 7 days following final OBI-1 dose|Anti-human factor VIII antibody titer data were presented in subject data listings. No statistical test was planned for anti-human factor VIII antibody titer.|||||
856557|NCT01178294|Secondary|PK Analysis- Terminal Half-life|Participation in the PK sampling was optional. PK parameters obtained from the non-bleeding state were summarized with descriptive statistics. Half-life was calculated as the time it took to reduce percent activity by half.|Pre-infusion 15-20 minutes, Post-infusion 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24 hours|PK population||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
856558|NCT01178294|Secondary|PK Analysis- Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) From Time 0 to the Last Measurable Concentration|Participation in the PK sampling was optional. PK parameters obtained from the non-bleeding state were summarized with descriptive statistics. AUC was calculated as area under the percent activity-time curve.|Pre-infusion 15-20 minutes, Post-infusion 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24 hours|PK population||percent activity*hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
856559|NCT01178294|Secondary|PK Analysis- Volume of Distribution (Vd) at Steady State|Participation in the PK sampling was optional. PK parameters obtained from the non-bleeding state were summarized with descriptive statistics.|Pre-infusion 15-20 minutes, Post-infusion 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24 hours|PK population||U/percent activity||Standard Deviation|Mean
856560|NCT01178294|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK) Analysis- Plasma Clearance|Participation in the PK sampling was optional. PK parameters obtained from the non-bleeding state were summarized with descriptive statistics.|Pre-infusion 15-20 minutes, Post-infusion 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24 hours|PK population (= all subjects in the ITT population who consent to PK draws and have factor VIII levels measured at the central reference laboratory)||U/(percent activity*hours)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856561|NCT01178294|Secondary|Correlation Between the Pre-infusion Anti-OBI-1 Antibody Titers, the Total Dose of OBI-1, the Outcome at 24 Hours and the Eventual Control of the Bleeding Episode||Through 90 days ± 7 days following final OBI-1 dose|Because of expected sparseness of positive anti-OBI-1 antibody titers, formal statistical analyses of correlation were not performed.|||||
856562|NCT01178294|Secondary|Correlation Between Response to OBI-1 Therapy at Specified Time Points and Eventual Control of Serious Bleeding Episodes at 24 Hours||24 hours|29 subjects (ITT population) had responses available at 24 hours after initial infusion of OBI-1.||participants with bleeds controlled|||Number
856563|NCT01178294|Secondary|Correlation Between Response to OBI-1 Therapy at 16 Hours and Eventual Control of Serious Bleeding Episodes at 24 Hours||24 hours|All 19 subjects in the ITT population (n=29) who had responses available at 16 hours after initial infusion of OBI-1 had a positive response.||subjects with eventual bleed control|||Number
856564|NCT01178294|Secondary|Correlation Between Positive Response to OBI-1 Therapy at 8 Hours and Eventual Control of Serious Bleeding Episodes at 24 Hours||24 hours|Of 21 subjects in the ITT population (n=29) with responses available at 8 hours after initial infusion of OBI-1, 20 had a positive response.||subjects with eventual bleed control|||Number
856565|NCT01178294|Secondary|Total Number of Infusions of OBI-1 Required to Successfully Control 'Qualifying' Bleeding Episodes|'Qualifying bleeding episode' was defined as the 'initial, serious bleeding episode'. A serious bleeding episode was considered 'successfully controlled' if the investigator had checked 'completed OBI-1 therapy as treatment success' on the eCRF.|Time of successful control of qualifying bleeding episode (varied from participant to participant)|The analysis was performed in 25 of 29 participants in the ITT population whose 'qualifying' bleeding episode was controlled successfully.||infusions per participant||Standard Deviation|Mean
856566|NCT01178294|Secondary|Total Dose of OBI-1 Required to Successfully Control 'Qualifying' Bleeding Episodes|'Qualifying bleeding episode' was defined as the 'initial, serious bleeding episode'.|Time of successful control of qualifying bleeding episode (varied from participant to participant)|The analysis was performed in 25 of 29 participants in the ITT population whose 'qualifying' bleeding episode was controlled successfully.||dose in U/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
856567|NCT01178294|Secondary|Frequency of Infusions of OBI-1 Required to Successfully Control Qualifying Bleeding Episodes|'Frequency of infusions' was calculated as the 'average number of infusions per day'. 'Qualifying bleeding episode' was defined as the 'initial, serious bleeding episode'.|Time of successful control of qualifying bleeding episode (varied from participant to participant)|The analysis was performed in 25 of 29 participants in the ITT population whose 'qualifying' bleeding episode was controlled successfully.||average number of infusions per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
856568|NCT01178294|Secondary|Percentage of Serious Bleeding Episodes Responsive to OBI-1 Therapy at Designated Assessment Time Points After the Initiation of Therapy, as Assessed by the Investigator|A 'positive response' is defined as 'effective' (bleeding stopped with clinical control and FVIII levels of 50% or higher ) or 'partially effective' (bleeding reduced with clinical stabilization and FVIII levels of 20% or higher) control of bleeding, as determined by the investigator using a 4-point rating scale (effective - partially effective - poorly effective - not effective). 'Poorly effective' is defined as 'bleeding slightly reduced or unchanged and FVIII levels of less than 50%'. 'Not effective' is defined as 'bleeding worsening and FVIII levels of less than 50%'.|16 hours|19 subjects of the ITT population (n=29) had responses available at 16 hours after initial infusion of OBI-1.||percentage of serious bleeding episodes|Responses Available at 16 hrs|95% Confidence Interval|Number
856569|NCT01178294|Secondary|Percentage of Serious Bleeding Episodes Responsive to OBI-1 Therapy at Designated Assessment Time Points After the Initiation of Therapy, as Assessed by the Investigator|A 'positive response' is defined as 'effective' (bleeding stopped with clinical control and FVIII levels of 50% or higher ) or 'partially effective' (bleeding reduced with clinical stabilization and FVIII levels of 20% or higher) control of bleeding, as determined by the investigator using a 4-point rating scale (effective - partially effective - poorly effective - not effective). 'Poorly effective' is defined as 'bleeding slightly reduced or unchanged and FVIII levels of less than 50%'. 'Not effective' is defined as 'bleeding worsening and FVIII levels of less than 50%'.|8 hours|21 subjects of the ITT population (n=29) had responses available at 8 hours after initial infusion of OBI-1.||percentage of serious bleeding episodes|Responses Available at 8 hrs|95% Confidence Interval|Number
856570|NCT01178294|Secondary|Overall Percentage of Serious Bleeding Episodes Successfully Controlled With OBI-1 Therapy, as Assessed by the Investigator|Treatment success was defined as control of qualifying bleeding episode at the time of final treatment dosing. A serious bleeding episode was considered 'successfully controlled' if the investigator had checked 'completed OBI-1 therapy as treatment success' on the eCRF.|At the time of final treatment dosing (varied from participant to participant depending on bleeding episodes)|ITT population = 29 subjects with initial serious bleeding episodes (BEs)||percentage of serious bleeding episodes|Initial Serious Bleeding Episodes|95% Confidence Interval|Number
856571|NCT01178294|Primary|Percentage of Serious Bleeding Episodes Responsive to OBI-1|"The initial serious (qualifying) bleeding episode for each subject was analyzed for the primary efficacy outcome measure. A 'positive response' is defined as 'effective' (bleeding stopped with clinical control and FVIII levels of 50% or higher ) or 'partially effective' (bleeding reduced with clinical stabilization and FVIII levels of 20% or higher) control of bleeding, as determined by the investigator using a 4-point rating scale (effective - partially effective - poorly effective - not effective). 'Poorly effective' is defined as 'bleeding slightly reduced or unchanged and FVIII levels of less than 50%'. 'Not effective' is defined as 'bleeding worsening and FVIII levels of less than 50%'."|24 hours after initiation of treatment|Intent to Treat (ITT) population = 29 subjects with initial serious bleeding episodes||percentage of serious bleeding episodes|Initial Serious Bleeding Episodes|95% Confidence Interval|Number
856572|NCT01175213|Secondary|Percentage of Infusions Associated With One or More Local AEs (Including and Excluding Infections), at Any Time During the Study||Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Set||Percentage of infusions|Infusions||Number
856573|NCT01175213|Secondary|Rate of AEs Per Infusion (Including and Excluding Infections) Temporarily Associated With the Infusion|"Categories presented as adverse event (AE) type : Total, Local, Systemic including infections, Systemic excluding infections, Seriousness: Serious AE (SAE), non-serious AE (non-SAE) and Severity (Mild, Moderate, Severe, Total).
All of these adverse events are non-serious AEs."|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs per infusion|Infusions||Number
856574|NCT01175213|Secondary|Rate of AEs Per Participant (Including and Excluding Infections) Temporarily Associated With the Infusion|"Categories presented as adverse event (AE) type : Total, Local, Systemic including infections, Systemic excluding infections, Seriousness: Serious AE (SAE), non-serious AE (nsAE) and Severity (Mild, Moderate, Severe, Total).
All of these adverse events are non-serious AEs."|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs per participant|||Number
856575|NCT01175213|Secondary|Rate of AEs Per Infusion (Including and Excluding Infections) Determined by the Investigator to be Related to the Study Drug That Occur at Any Time During the Study (“Related”)|"Categories presented as adverse event (AE) type : Total, Local, Systemic including infections, Systemic excluding infections, and Severity (Mild, Moderate, Severe, Total).
All of these adverse events are non-serious AEs."|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs per infusion|Infusions||Number
856576|NCT01175213|Secondary|Rate of AEs Per Participant (Including and Excluding Infections) Determined by the Investigator to be Related to the Study Drug That Occur at Any Time During the Study (“Related”)|"Categories presented as adverse event (AE) type : Total, Local, Systemic including infections, Systemic excluding infections, and Severity (Mild, Moderate, Severe, Total).
All of these adverse events are non-serious AEs."|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs per participant|||Number
856577|NCT01175213|Secondary|Rate of All AEs Per Infusion Categorized by MedDRA Preferred Terms, Seriousness and Severity (N-Z).|"Categories presented as Preferred term-Seriousness-Severity. The following codes are to be used:
Seriousness: non-SAE-non-serious AE; SAE-serious AE Severity: Mild; Mod (Moderate); Sev (Severe)"|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs per infusion|Infusions||Number
856578|NCT01175213|Secondary|Rate of All AEs Per Infusion Categorized by MedDRA Preferred Terms, Seriousness and Severity (G-M).|"Categories presented as Preferred term-Seriousness-Severity. The following codes are to be used:
Seriousness: non-SAE-non-serious AE; SAE-serious AE Severity: Mild; Mod (Moderate); Sev (Severe)"|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs per infusion|Infusions||Number
856579|NCT01175213|Secondary|Rate of All AEs Per Infusion Categorized by MedDRA Preferred Terms, Seriousness and Severity (A-F).|"Categories presented as Preferred term-Seriousness-Severity. The following codes are to be used:
Seriousness: non-SAE-non-serious adverse event; SAE- serious adverse event Severity: Mild; Mod (Moderate); Sev (Severe)
Preferred terms abbreviated:
ADHD - Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder COPD - Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Other abbreviations:
Inc. - Increased Dis. - Disease"|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs per infusion|Infusions||Number
856580|NCT01175213|Secondary|Rate of All AEs Per Participant Categorized by MedDRA Preferred Terms, Seriousness and Severity (N-Z).|"Categories presented as Preferred term-Seriousness-Severity. The following codes are to be used:
Seriousness: non-SAE-non-serious AE; SAE-serious AE Severity: Mild; Mod (Moderate); Sev (Severe)"|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs per participant|||Number
856581|NCT01175213|Secondary|Rate of All AEs Per Participant Categorized by MedDRA Preferred Terms, Seriousness and Severity (G-M).|"Categories presented as Preferred term-Seriousness-Severity. The following codes are to be used:
Seriousness: non-SAE-non-serious AE; SAE-serious AE Severity: Mild; Mod (Moderate); Sev (Severe)"|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs per participant|||Number
856582|NCT01175213|Secondary|Rate of All AEs Per Participant Categorized by MedDRA Preferred Terms, Seriousness and Severity (A-F).|"Categories presented as Preferred Term-Seriousness-Severity. The following codes are to be used:
Seriousness: non-SAE-non-serious AE; SAE-serious AE Severity: Mild; Mod (Moderate); Sev (Severe)
Preferred terms abbreviated:
ADHD - Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder COPD - Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Other abbreviations:
Inc. - Increased Dis. - Disease"|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs per participant|||Number
856583|NCT01175213|Secondary|Number of All AEs Categorized by MedDRA Preferred Terms, Seriousness, Relatedness to the Study Drug, and Severity (N-Z).|"Categories presented as Preferred Term-Seriousness, Relatedness, Severity. The following codes are to be used:
Seriousness: non-SAE-non-serious AE; SAE-serious AE Relatedness to study drug: R (related to either study drug); NR (not related to either or both study drugs). Study drugs are Immune Globulin Subcutaneous Solution, 10% (IGSC, 10%) and recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) Severity: Mild; Mod (Moderate); Severe
Preferred terms abbreviated:
Infection - Inf."|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs|||Number
856584|NCT01175213|Secondary|Number of All AEs Categorized by MedDRA Preferred Terms, Seriousness, Relatedness to the Study Drug, and Severity (G-M).|"Categories presented as Preferred Term-Seriousness-Relatedness-Severity. The following codes are to be used:
Seriousness: non-SAE-non-serious AE; SAE-serious AE Relatedness to study drug: R (related to either study drug); NR (not related to either or both study drugs). Study drugs are Immune Globulin Subcutaneous Solution, 10% (IGSC, 10%) and recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) Severity: Mild; Mod (Moderate); Severe"|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs|||Number
856585|NCT01175213|Secondary|Number of All AEs Categorized by MedDRA Preferred Terms, Seriousness, Relatedness to the Study Drug, and Severity (A-F).|"Categories presented as Preferred Term-Seriousness-Relatedness-Severity. The following codes are to be used:
Seriousness: non-SAE-non-serious AE; SAE-serious AE Relatedness to study drug: R (related to either study drug); NR (not related to either or both study drugs). Study drugs are Immune Globulin Subcutaneous Solution, 10% (IGSC, 10%) and recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) Severity: Mild; Mod (Moderate); Severe
Preferred terms abbreviated:
ADHD - Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder COPD - Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Other abbreviations:
CPK - Creatinine Phosphokinase Inc. - Increased Dis - Disease Sml- small"|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Data Set||Number of AEs|||Number
856586|NCT01175213|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With AEs Related to Anti-rHuPH20 Titers||Throughout entire study period for 160603 (1 year 11 months) and 160902 (2 years 11 months)|All participants who had been exposed to recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) in studies 160603 or 160902.||Percentage of participants|||Number
856588|NCT01175213|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Develop Antibodies and Neutralizing Antibodies to rHuPH20|"Participants who develop binding antibodies and/or neutralizing antibodies to recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) from study 160603 and/ or from this study (160902) are included here.
This study (160902) is an extension of study 160603. Study 160603 was divided into 2 study epochs. In epoch 1 of study 160603 participants were treated with intravenous (IV) administration of Immune Globulin Subcutaneous Solution (IGSC), 10%. In epoch 2 of study 160603 participants were treated with subcutaneous (SC) administration of IGSC, 10% after SC administration of rHuPH20. Only participants who completed study 160603 were eligible to be screened and enrolled in this study (160902).
In this study, participants started on same doses of IGSC, 10% and rHuPH20 that were used for the last infusions in epoch 2 of study 160603."|Throughout entire study period for 160603 (1 year 11 months) and 160902 (2 years 11 months)|Participants from study 160603 and this study (160902) who have received at least one infusion of rHuPH20||Percentage of participants|||Number
856589|NCT01175213|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Develop Antibodies and Neutralizing Antibodies to rHuPH20|"Participants who develop binding antibodies and/or neutralizing antibodies to recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) from study 160603 and/ or from this study (160902) are included here.
This study (160902) is an extension of study 160603. Study 160603 was divided into 2 study epochs. In epoch 1 of study 160603 participants were treated with intravenous (IV) administration of Immune Globulin Subcutaneous Solution (IGSC), 10%. In epoch 2 of study 160603 participants were treated with subcutaneous (SC) administration of IGSC, 10% after SC administration of rHuPH20. Only participants who completed study 160603 were eligible to be screened and enrolled in this study (160902).
In this study, participants started on same doses of IGSC, 10% and rHuPH20 that were used for the last infusions in epoch 2 of study 160603."|Throughout entire study period for 160603 (1 year 11 months) and 160902 (2 years 11 months)|Participants from study 160603 and this study (160902) who have received at least one infusion of rHuPH20||Number of participants|||Number
856590|NCT01175213|Secondary|Percentage of Infusions Associated With One or More Moderate or Severe AEs (Including and Excluding Infections) That Begin During or Within 72 Hours of Completion of an Infusion||Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Set||Percentage of infusions|Infusions||Number
856591|NCT01175213|Secondary|Percentage of Infusions for Which the Infusion Rate Was Reduced and/or the Infusion Interrupted or Stopped for Tolerability Concerns or for AEs||Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Set||Percentage of infusions|Infusions||Number
856592|NCT01175213|Secondary|The Annual Rate of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Related and Not Related to Study Drugs|"Separated into age groups as described below and into related (related to either study drug) and not related (not related to either or both study drugs).
Study drugs are Immune Globulin Subcutaneous Solution (IGSC), 10% and recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20)."|Throughout entire study period (up to 3 years). Duration of participation for each participant is variable depending on date of enrollment and their anti-rHuPH20 binding antibody titer.|Safety Analysis Set||SAEs/year|||Number
856593|NCT01175213|Primary|Trough Levels of IgG Maintained During the Study Period in Relation to Dose Frequency|"Immunoglobulin (IgG) steady state trough levels were measured in relation to dose frequency by measuring in relation to treatment interval (2-, 3- or 4-week intervals).
Initially participants were administered subcutaneous (SC) infusions of Immune Globulin Subcutaneous Solution (IGSC), 10%, after SC administration of human recombinant hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) [or IV infusions of IGSC, 10% only] at the treatment intervals and dose determined by epoch 2 of study 160603 (3- or 4-week intervals).
After 3 treatment intervals (either 3- or 4- week intervals), participants changed to a 2-week treatment interval, if agreed with participant and investigator, with the dose adjusted to 1/2 of the 4-week dose or 2/3 of the 3-week dose, whichever was applicable. The rHuPH20 dose was adjusted relative to the new IGSC, 10% dose in order to achieve a dose ratio of 75 U/g IgG.
This efficacy outcome measure was only applicable prior to the safety follow-up i.e. before discontinuation of rHuPH20."|Throughout the efficacy period only (from 60 to 729 days)|Safety Analysis Set||g/L||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856594|NCT01175213|Primary|Annual Rate of All Infections|"Annualized rate of infections per participant as defined by MedDRA system organ class (SOC) infections and infestations.
The point estimate of the annual rate of all infections was provided during subcutaneous (SC) administration of Immune Globulin Subcutaneous Solution (IGSC), 10%, after SC administration of human recombinant hyaluronidase (rHuPH20).
This efficacy outcome measure was only applicable prior to the safety follow-up i.e. before discontinuation of rHuPH20."|Throughout the efficacy period only (from 60 to 729 days)|Safety Analysis Set excluding the 3 participants who were treated with intravenous (IV) administration of IGSC, 10% without rHuPH20||Number of infections/year||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856595|NCT01175213|Primary|Annual Rate of Serious Bacterial Infections|"The point estimate of the annual rate of validated acute serious bacterial infections (VASBIs) per participant per year was provided during subcutaneous (SC) administration of Immune Globulin Subcutaneous Solution (IGSC), 10%, after SC administration of human recombinant hyaluronidase (rHuPH20).
This efficacy outcome measure was only applicable prior to the safety follow-up i.e. before discontinuation of rHuPH20."|Throughout the efficacy period only (from 60 to 729 days)|Safety Analysis Set excluding the 3 participants who were treated with intravenous (IV) administration of IGSC, 10% without rHuPH20||Estimated infections/year|||Number
856596|NCT01162499|Secondary|Peak Glucagon Concentration During Infusion|To examine the effect of Exendin-(9-39) on plasma glucagon levels, samples were collected at various 3 hours after the start of the infusion. The mean peak glucagon concentration for both Exendin-(9-39) doses were compared with the peak glucagon during vehicle infusion.|60 minutes before the start of the infusion, again at the start of the infusion (time 0), and then every 30 minutes until 3 hours after the start of the infusion|Differences in peak glucagon concentration were compared between the two dose levels of Exendin-(9-39) of 300pmol/kg/min (3 subjects) and 500pmol/kg/min (3 subjects) were compared to the vehicle infusion (all 6 subjects).||pg/ml||Standard Error|Mean
856700|NCT00835731|Secondary|Ease of Further Mechanical Dilation in Women Following Exposure to Either Ripening Agent, as Per MD Report|"Scale:
None needed (score of 0) Very easy (score 1) Somewhat easy (score of 2) Moderate (score of 3) Somewhat difficult (score of 4) Very difficult (score of 5)"|3-4 hours after placement of ripening agent|||Participants|||Count of Participants
856597|NCT01162499|Secondary|Peak Plasma Glucagon-like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Concentration During Infusion|To examine the effect of Exendin-(9-39) on plasma glucagon-like peptide-1 levels, samples were collected at various time points before and during the infusion [Exendin-(9-39) or vehicle] including: 60 minutes before the start of the infusion, again at the start of the infusion (time 0), and then every 30 minutes until 3 hours after the start of the infusion. The mean peak glucagon-like peptide-1 concentration for both Exendin-(9-39) doses were compared with the peak glucagon-like peptide-1 during vehicle infusion.|60 minutes before the start of the infusion, again at the start of the infusion (time 0), and then every 30 minutes until 3 hours after the start of the infusion|Differences were compared between the two dose levels of Exendin-(9-39) of 300pmol/kg/min (3 subjects) and 500pmol/kg/min (3 subjects) were compared to the vehicle infusion (all 6 subjects).||pmol/l||Standard Error|Mean
856598|NCT01162499|Secondary|Mean Acetaminophen Plasma Concentration Area Under the Curve (AUC 0-3h)|The effect of gastric emptying was examined using the acetaminophen method whereby acetaminophen (30mg/kg or maximum of 1500mg) was mixed into the Pediasure/formula during the meal tolerance testing. Blood samples were collected every 30 minutes and the absorption of acetaminophen was determined by the gastric emptying rate, as the serum concentrations correlate with gastric emptying of liquids. Mean acetaminophen levels for each group at each time point were used to calculate the Area Under the Concentration versus Time Curve (AUC expressed in μg*min/l) after the consumption of formula for each of the two Exendin-(9-39) dose levels and normal saline vehicle.|3 hours|AUC were compared between the two dose levels of Exendin-(9-39) of 300pmol/kg/min (3 subjects) and 500pmol/kg/min (3 subjects) were compared to the vehicle infusion (all 6 subjects).||μg*min/l||Standard Error|Mean
856599|NCT01162499|Secondary|Mean Plasma Insulin Area Under the Curve (AUC 0-3h)|To examine the effect of Exendin-(9-39) on plasma insulin levels, samples were collected at various time points before and during the infusion [Exendin-(9-39) or vehicle] including: 60 minutes before the start of the infusion, again at the start of the infusion (time 0), and then every 30 minutes until 3 hours after the start of the meal. Using this information, the mean plasma insulin area under the curve (AUC) from the start of the infusion to the end of the infusion (3 hours) was calculated for both doses of Exendin-(9-39) [300pmol/kg/min & 500pmol/kg/min] and compared with the vehicle.|3 hours|Changes were compared between the two dose levels of Exendin-(9-39) of 300pmol/kg/min (3 subjects) and 500pmol/kg/min (3 subjects) were compared to the vehicle infusion (all 6 subjects).||pmol*min/l||Standard Error|Mean
856600|NCT01162499|Primary|Mean Plasma Glucose Area Under the Curve (AUC 0-3h)|To examine the effect of Exendin-(9-39) on plasma glucose levels samples were collected at various time points before and during the infusion [Exendin-(9-39) or vehicle] including: 60 minutes before the start of the infusion, again at the start of the infusion (time 0), and then every 30 minutes until 3 hours after the start of the meal. Using this information, the mean plasma glucose area under the curve (AUC) from the start of the infusion to the end of the infusion (3 hours) was calculated for both doses of Exendin-(9-39) [300pmol/kg/min & 500pmol/kg/min] and compared with the vehicle.|3 hours|Changes were compared between the two dose levels of Exendin-(9-39) of 300pmol/kg/min (3 subjects) and 500pmol/kg/min (3 subjects) were compared to the vehicle infusion (all 6 subjects).||mg*min/dl||Standard Error|Mean
856601|NCT01154816|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Alisertib on the Seventh Day of Administration Prior to the Administration of the Day 7 Dose.|Serum concentration of alisertib on the seventh day of administration prior to the administration of the day 7 dose in nanograms/milliliter.|day 7 of protocol therapy|Of all eligible patients enrolled, 31 provided a seventh day of administration prior to the administration of the day 7 dose sample for analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
856602|NCT01154816|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Alisertib on the Fourth Day of Administration Prior to the Administration of the Day 4 Dose|Serum concentration of alisertib on the fourth day of administration prior to the administration of the day 4 dose in nanograms/milliliter.|day 4 of protocol therapy|Of all eligible patients enrolled, 30 provided a fourth day of administration prior to the administration of the day 4 dose sample for analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
856603|NCT01154816|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Alisertib on the First Day of Administration Six Hours After Administration|Serum concentration of alisertib on the first day of administration six hours after administration in nanograms/milliliter.|day 1 of protocol therapy|Of all eligible patients enrolled, 16 provided a first day of administration six hours after administration sample for analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
856604|NCT01154816|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Alisertib on the First Day of Administration Three Hours After Administration|Serum concentration of alisertib on the first day of administration three hours after administration in nanograms/milliliter.|day 1 of protocol therapy|Of all eligible patients enrolled, 16 provided a first day of administration three hours after administration sample for analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
856605|NCT01154816|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Alisertib on the First Day of Administration One Hour After Administration|Serum concentration of alisertib on the first day of administration one hour after administration in nanograms/milliliter.|day 1 of protocol therapy|Of all eligible patients enrolled, 16 provided a first day of administration one hour after administration infusion sample for analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
856606|NCT01154816|Secondary|Serum Concentration of Alisertib Prior to the First Day of Administration|Serum concentration of alisertib prior to the first day of administration in nanograms/milliliter.|day 1 of protocol therapy|Of all eligible patients enrolled, 32 provided a prior to the first day of administration sample for analysis.||ng/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
856607|NCT01154816|Secondary|Number of Patients Cycles With Grade 3 or Higher Adverse Event|The number of patient-cycles in which the adverse event considered grade 3 or higher AE according to National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 considered by the treating physician to be possibly, probably or definitely related to alisertib.|Up to 24 months|116 patients contributed 360 patient-cycles to the analysis.||Patient-cycle|||Number
856608|NCT01154816|Primary|Number of Participants With Overall Response|For patients with recurrent solid tumors a patient who experienced a complete or partial response according to RECIST version 1.1 criteria is considered a responder. For patients with recurrent acute lymphoblastic leukemia a patient who experiences a bone marrow evaluation with < 5% blast cells on morphological evaluation of bone marrow will be considered a responder. For patients with recurrent acute myelogenous leukemia a patient who experiences a complete remission or complete remission with partial recovery of platelet count according to the AML International Working Group Criteria will be considered a responder.|From first dose of alisertib through 6 cycles of protocol therapy or until removal from protocol therapy whichever occurred first.|Of the 118 enrolled patients, two were not evaluable for the primary outcome measure. Neither received protocol therapy. One was enrolled in arm 11, one was enrolled in Arm 1.||Patients|||Number
856701|NCT00835731|Primary|Cervical Dilation in Women Following Exposure to Either Ripening Agent||3-4 hours after placement of ripening agent|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
856642|NCT01104402|Secondary|Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|Adverse event rates will be coded by body system and MedDRA classification term. Adverse events will be tabulated by treatment group and will include the number of subjects for whom the event occurred, the rate of occurrence, and the severity and relationship to study participation or study procedures.|12 months|||proportion of participants with SAEs|||Number
856643|NCT01104402|Secondary|Change in Prevalence of Resistant Species of Bacteria|Change in prevalence of resistant species of bacteria (Methicillin Resistant S. aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Burkolderia cepacia, Stenotrophomona maltophilia, Achromobacterxylosoxidans) in sputum between baseline and final visit (Visit 5 or early withdrawal) will be summarized by treatment group.|12 months|||percentage of subjects with new MRPA|||Number
856644|NCT01104402|Secondary|Treatment Burden|Change in treatment burden as measured by the Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire revised (CFQ-R)will be analyzed using a linear mixed effects model incorporating baseline randomization factors FEV1 (<50%, 50-75%, and >75% predicted) and age (14-18 & 19+), treatment group, time (in weeks) and the interaction between treatment and time. Scores range from 0-100 with higher scores indicating less treatment burden.|Change from baseline to 12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856665|NCT00939393|Primary|Mean Intra-patient Change in SNOT-20 Score at 24 Weeks Post-procedure Compared to Baseline|The 20 question Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20) will be used to evaluate sinus symptoms and sinus-symptom related quality of life (QOL) at baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, 24 weeks and 52 weeks post-procedure. The change in SNOT-20 score at each post-procedure time point will be evaluated compared to baseline SNOT-20 score. Each of the 20 questions in the SNOT-20 survey is scored on a scale of 0 to 5, where '0' represents 'no problem' and '5' represents 'problem as bad as it can be'. The 20 questions are expressed as a mean of the scores. Therefore, the minimum mean score is zero and the maximum mean score is 5.|24 weeks|Eleven (11) In-Office subjects and 10 Operating Room subjects were missing data for this outcome measure.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856645|NCT01104402|Secondary|Change in Health Related Quality of Life Scores as Assessed by the Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire Revised (CFQ-R) (Respiratory Subscale Only(|Change in health related quality of life as measured by the Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire revised (CFQ-R)will be analyzed using a linear mixed effects model incorporating baseline randomization factors FEV1 (<50%, 50-75%, and >75% predicted) and age (14-18 & 19+), treatment group, time (in weeks) and the interaction between treatment and time. The CFQ-R measures functioning in a variety of domains, including Physical Functioning, Vitality, Health Perceptions, Respiratory Symptoms, Treatment Burden, Role Functioning, Emotional Functioning, and Social Functioning. Only the respiratory subscale of the the CFQ-R was evaluated. This ranges from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better respiratory quality of life. A negative number indicates a decrease in respiratory quality of life.|Change from baseline to 12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856646|NCT01104402|Secondary|Pulmonary Exacerbations|Percentage of participants who experienced at least one acute pulmonary exacerbation|12 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
856647|NCT01104402|Secondary|Cystic Fibrosis Respiratory Symptom Diary (CFRSD)|Change in CF respiratory symptoms as measured by the CFRSD. The CFRSD consists of 8 items which quantify symptom severity for the previous 24 hours to capture the magnitude of symptoms in stable CF, during medically treated CF exacerbations, and during recovery from an exacerbation. The CFRSD also includes emotional and activity impacts. Emotional impacts include frustration, sadness/depression, irritability, worry, and difficulty sleeping. Activity impacts include time spent sitting or lying down, reduction of usual activities, and missing school or work. will be analyzed using a linear mixed effects model incorporating baseline randomization factors FEV1 (<50%, 50-75%, and >75% predicted) and age (14-18 & 19+), treatment group, time (in weeks) and the interaction between treatment and time. The range of scores is 8 to 40 with higher scores indicating more severe symptoms.|12 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856648|NCT01104402|Primary|Change in FEV1|The primary outcome variable is FEV1 which will be obtained at quarterly study visits. The primary analysis will use a linear mixed effects model incorporating all FEV1 measurements to estimate the 52-week change in FEV1|12 months|||Liters||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
856649|NCT01101867|Secondary|1,5-anhydroglucitol Change|change in short-term measure of glycemia|day 1 to day 3||||||
856650|NCT01101867|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction|treatment satisfaction questionnaire validated in-hospital|day 3||||||
856651|NCT01101867|Secondary|Rate of Change in Glucose||72 hour||||||
856652|NCT01101867|Secondary|Hypoglycemia|Number of patients with any hypoglycemic event (<70 mg/dl or <40 mg/dl)|72 hour|||participants|||Number
856653|NCT01101867|Secondary|Postprandial Glucose|Mean postprandial glucose was calculated per participant from the average of glucose values (post-breakfast, lunch, dinner) at day 3.|day 3|Data were only available in 79 subjects on day 3 due to hospital discharge or NPO status.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
856654|NCT01101867|Primary|Mean Glucose|Mean glucose was calculated per participant from the average of glucose values over the 7-point (pre- and post-breakfast, lunch, dinner, and bed) glucose profile at day 3|day 3|Data were only available in 79 subjects on day 3 due to hospital discharge or NPO status.||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
856660|NCT01015807|Primary|Wound Hyperalgesia Index (WHA) Assessed 48 Hrs After Block Placement in the Different Groups|Determine which of three different TAP formulations (Placebo, TAP, Clo-TAP) has the most beneficial effect on the postoperative area of hyperalgesia 48hrs after the start of the cesarean section. The smaller the area of WHA, assessed in cm2, the better the outcome. Area sizes may range from 0 to any size.|48hrs after CS|||cm^2||Inter-Quartile Range|Mean
856666|NCT00939393|Secondary|Mean Intra-patient Change in SNOT-20 Score at 52 Weeks Post-procedure Compared to Baseline|The 20 question Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20) will be used to evaluate sinus symptoms and sinus-symptom related quality of life (QOL) at baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, 24 weeks and 52 weeks post-procedure. The change in SNOT-20 score at each post-procedure time point will be evaluated compared to baseline SNOT-20 score. Each of the 20 questions in the SNOT-20 survey is scored on a scale of 0 to 5, where '0' represents 'no problem' and '5' represents 'problem as bad as it can be'. The 20 questions are expressed as a mean of the scores. Therefore, the minimum mean score is zero and the maximum mean score is 5.|52 weeks|Sixteen (16) In-Office subjects and 24 Operating Room subjects were missing data for this outcome measure.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856667|NCT00939393|Secondary|Mean Intra-patient Change in SNOT-20 Score at 4 Weeks Post-procedure Compared to Baseline|The 20 question Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20) will be used to evaluate sinus symptoms and sinus-symptom related quality of life (QOL) at baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, 24 weeks and 52 weeks post-procedure. The change in SNOT-20 score at each post-procedure time point will be evaluated compared to baseline SNOT-20 score. Each of the 20 questions in the SNOT-20 survey is scored on a scale of 0 to 5, where '0' represents 'no problem' and '5' represents 'problem as bad as it can be'. The 20 questions are expressed as a mean of the scores. Therefore, the minimum mean score is zero and the maximum mean score is 5.|4 weeks|Six (6) In-Office subjects and 2 Operating Room subjects were missing data for this outcome measure.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856668|NCT00939393|Secondary|Mean Intra-patient Change in SNOT-20 Score at 1 Week Post-procedure Compared to Baseline|The 20 question Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20) will be used to evaluate sinus symptoms and sinus-symptom related quality of life (QOL) at baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, 24 weeks and 52 weeks post-procedure. The change in SNOT-20 score at each post-procedure time point will be evaluated compared to baseline SNOT-20 score. Each of the 20 questions in the SNOT-20 survey is scored on a scale of 0 to 5, where '0' represents 'no problem' and '5' represents 'problem as bad as it can be'. The 20 questions are expressed as a mean of the scores. Therefore, the minimum mean score is zero and the maximum mean score is 5.|1 week|Five (5) In-Office subjects and 2 Operating Room subjects were missing data for this outcome measure.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856669|NCT00939393|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With Post-operative Sinus Infections|Investigators reported the sinus infections as secondary to chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) or other pre-existing conditions such as allergies. The rates of these sinus infections are consistent with the disease burden of the subjects and consistent with post procedure symptomatology associated with endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS).|52 weeks|||participants|||Number
856670|NCT00939393|Secondary|Proportion of Participants With Revisions (IO Only)|After sinus surgery, the patient may require a subsequent sinus procedure (a revision procedure) to address recurrence of disease. These revision procedures are assessed in this outcome measure.|52 weeks|||participants|||Number
856671|NCT00939393|Secondary|Mean Number of Debridements Per Participant (IO Only)|A debridement is a procedure to remove post-surgical crusts, mucus, and fibrin from obstructed nasal and sinus cavities after functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Each physician visit in which a debridement was performed was counted as one debridement.|52 weeks|||debridements||Standard Deviation|Mean
856672|NCT00939393|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Reporting No Pain or Pain of Low Intensity (IO Only)|Participants evaluated the per-procedural pain of their balloon dilation in office (IO = In Office) procedure on a scale from zero to 5, where '0' represented 'no pain' and '5' represented 'intense pain'. Scores of 0 through 2 were considered ratings of no pain or pain of low intensity. The endpoint reports the proportion of participants reporting no pain or pain of low intensity.|Day 0|One (1) In-Office subject was missing data for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
856673|NCT00939393|Secondary|Proportion of Participants Rating Procedure as Tolerable (IO Only)|Participants evaluated the tolerability of their balloon dilation in office (IO = In Office) procedure on a scale from zero to 5, where '0' represented 'not tolerated' and '5' represented 'highly tolerable'. Scores of 3 through 5 were consdered tolerable ratings. The endpoint reports the proportion of participants rating the procedure as tolerable.|Day 0|Eight (8) In-Office subjects were missing data for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
856674|NCT00939393|Secondary|Mean Intra-patient Change in Lund-MacKay CT Score [24 Weeks]|The Lund-MacKay (LMK) CT (computed tomography) score is a scoring system to evaluate radiographic opacification of the paranasal sinuses. The LMK score will be evaluated at 24 weeks post-procedure compared to baseline. The LMK scoring system rates each of both the left and right frontal, maxillary, sphenoid, ostiomeatal complex, anterior ethmoid and posterior ethmoid sinuses on a scale of 0 to 2, where '0' is 'no opacification' and '2' is 'complete opacification'. The scores for a given subject are totaled and expressed as the LMK score, where zero is the minimum score, and 24 is the maximum score. A higher score represents greater sinus disease burden.|24 weeks|Eight (8) In-Office subjects and 15 Operating Room subjects were missing data for this outcome measure.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856695|NCT00835731|Secondary|Women's Satisfaction With Cervical Ripening Method|"Scale:
1 = very dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3 = neutral, 4 = satisfied, 5 = very satisfied"|5 hours after placement of ripening agent|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
856696|NCT00835731|Secondary|Subject Pain During Dilation and Evacuation|"Measure assesses subject pain during dilation and evacuation. Pain was assessed immediately after the D&E procedure. Subjects were asked to rate pain on a 6 point Likert scale:
0 = no pain 1-2 = mild pain 3 = moderate pain 4-5 = severe pain
Higher values represent a worse outcome."|3-4 hours after placement of ripening agent|||Scores on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
856697|NCT00835731|Secondary|Subject Pain During Ripening|"Measure assesses patient pain during cervical preparation. Pain was assessed after cervical ripening was complete, immediately before D&E procedure. Subjects were asked to rate pain on a 6 point Likert scale:
0 = no pain 1-2 = mild pain 3 = moderate pain 4-5 = severe pain
Higher values represent a worse outcome."|3-4 hours after placement of ripening agent|||Scores on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
856698|NCT00835731|Secondary|Number of Patients for Whom Physician Was Able to Complete Dilation and Evacuation Procedure on First Attempt||3-4 hours after placement of ripening agent|||participants|||Number
856699|NCT00835731|Secondary|Procedure Time for Dilation and Evacuation||3-4 hours after placement of ripening agent|||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
856733|NCT00781898|Primary|Relapse|A relapse event was defined as 10 or more days of opioid use in a 28-day (4-week) period as assessed by self-report or by testing of urine samples obtained every 2 weeks; a positive or missing sample was computed as 5 days of opioid use.|6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
856757|NCT00661427|Secondary|Safety|Terminology Criteria Version 3.0 or study specific toxicity tables provided in the protocol define severity.|at least weekly||||||
856758|NCT00661427|Primary|Number of Patients With Overall Objective Response|Patients will be evaluated for response according to a modified version of the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines|Approximately every 8 weeks with imaging up to two years|||participants|||Number
856776|NCT00571324|Secondary|Mean Plasma Insulin Area Under the Curve (AUC 0-6h)|To examine the effect of Exendin-(9-39) on plasma insulin levels, samples were collected at various time points before and during the infusion [Exendin-(9-39) or vehicle] including: 60 minutes before the start of the infusion, again at the start of the infusion (Time 0), and then every 20 minutes until 6 hours after the start of the infusion. Using this information, the mean plasma insulin area under the curve (AUC) from the start of the infusion to the end of the infusion (360 minutes) was calculated for each both Exendin-(9-39) and vehicle and compared.|6 hours|Subjects served as their own control for comparison between effects of Exendin-(9-39) and the normal saline vehicle.||pmol*min/L||Standard Error|Mean
856777|NCT00571324|Primary|Mean Blood Glucose Area Under the Curve (AUC 0-6h)|To examine the effect of Exendin-(9-39) on fasting blood glucose levels, samples were collected at various time points before and during the infusion [Exendin-(9-39) or vehicle] including: 60 minutes before the start of the infusion, again at the start of the infusion (Time 0), and then every 20 minutes until 6 hours after the start of the infusion. Using this information, the mean blood glucose area under the curve (AUC) from the start of the infusion to the end of the infusion (360 minutes) was calculated for each both Exendin-(9-39) and vehicle and compared.|6 hours|Subjects served as their own control for comparison between effects of Exendin-(9-39) and the normal saline vehicle.||mmol*min/L||Standard Error|Mean
856778|NCT00570089|Secondary|Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ)|"Questionnaires will be completed (SAQ - Seattle Angina Questionnaire) at the end of each treatment period.
The Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) is a self-administered, 19-item questionnaire, a cardiac disease-related quality-of-life measure. The SAQ is well validated and sensitive to clinical changes. It has five subscales: physical limitation, angina stability, angina frequency, treatment satisfaction, and disease perception. The possible range of scores for each of the five subscales is 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life. A change of 10 points in any of the subscales is considered to be clinically important.
Each final SAQ domain ranges from 0-100, where higher is a better outcome score. Subscales are not combined. Median, SD and range are calculated for each domain."|4 weeks and 10 weeks|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
856779|NCT00570089|Primary|Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMRs)|Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMRs) (CMR 1 and CMR 2) end of the 4th week of treatment 1 and treatment 2 respectively, 4 hours after the morning dose of study drug was performed to measure myocardial perfusion defect in percentage.|4 weeks and 10 weeks|||Percentage of ischemic myocardium||Full Range|Median
856780|NCT00496964|Secondary|Muscle Activation During Maximal Contractions and Fatigue Contractions|muscle activation as EMG ratios of VMO/VL at 30 degrees maximal isometric contraction at 30degrees|4, 6, 12 weeks|||ratio VMO EMG to VL EMG||Standard Deviation|Mean
856781|NCT00496964|Secondary|Knee Extensor Fatigue|This is not available due to data collection errors|4, 6, 12 weeks|This is not available due to data collection errors|||||
856782|NCT00496964|Secondary|Maximal Knee Extensor Force During Concentric and Isometric Contractions||4, 6, 12 weeks|||Nm||Standard Deviation|Mean
856783|NCT00496964|Primary|Lower Extremity Functional Scale|The lower extremity functional scale (LEFS) is a self report questionnaire. Subjects rate 19 items related to general activities that require the lower extremities on a scale of 0 - 4. 0 = extreme difficulty or unable to perform the activity, 4 = No difficulty performing the activity. The total of all rankings are summed and divided by the maximum score (76). The score is reported as a percentage. 100% = no difficulty in performing any of the tasks. 0% = extreme difficulty or unable to perform all of the tasks.|4, 6, 12 weeks|No statistical analysis due to small number of subjects||percentage of total possible score||Standard Deviation|Mean
856784|NCT00496964|Primary|Functional Index Questionnaire|The Functional Index Questionnaire (FIQ) is a self report functional rating scale. Individuals rate eight-activities. Each activity is rated from 0 - 2 with ) being unable to perform the activity and 2 being able to perform the activity without difficulty. The total score is summed for a final score of 0 - 16. 0 indicates that the individual is ubable to perform any of the tasks, 16 indicates that the subject is able to perform all tasks without difficulty. The eight items include: walking (1 block and 1 mile), climbing stairs (2 flights and 4 flights), squatting, kneeling, prolonged sitting, and running|4, 6, 12 weeks|No statistical analysis due to small number of subjects||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856785|NCT00496964|Primary|Change in Anterior Knee Pain Scale.|"Anterior Knee Pain Scale: a 13-item questionnaire; a TOTAL score of 0 = severe disability; a score of 100 = no pain or disability. (items are scored 0-5 or 0-10).
Change scores at 12 wks are reported. Inverted so positive values reflect improvement.
Included items: difficulty with: weight bearing, walking, stairs, squat, run, jump, prolonged sitting; presence of limp, swelling, patellar subluxation, atrophy of thigh, reduced knee flexion. Reference: Kujala et al: Scoring of Patellofemoral Disorders. J Arthroscopic Rel Surg, 9(2)159-163, 1993"|4, 6, 12 weeks|The Anterior Knee Pain Scale is a 13-item questionnaire; a score of 0 = severe disability; a score of 100 = no pain or disability. Change scores are reported. Positive values = improvement in symptoms.||Units on Scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856786|NCT00496964|Primary|Visual Analog Scale Pain Ratings (VAS)|Visual Analog Scale pain rating (VAS). 10 cm line with anchors at 0 (no pain) and 10 cm (worst imaginable pain). Scores are in cm (0 - 10) 0 no pain, higher values greater pain. Results given are for change at 12 weeks compared to baseline (week 12 score - baseline score)|4, 6, 12 weeks|analysis per protocol. Drop out not included in analysis. mean reduction in Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS) from start to 12 weeks.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
856792|NCT00464568|Secondary|Mean Levels of Total Vasodilator Stimulated Phosphoprotein (VASP) Protein, Phosphorylated(Phospho)157 VASP (pVASP) and phospho239 VASP in Lavage Cells|Nasal lavage were taken 2 to 3 hour post morning dose; bilateral nasal lavage was conducted before the scrape. Nasal lavage samples were analyzed to explore the effects of GSK256066 on novel protein biomarkers including pVASP. Markers indicative of PDE4 inhibition such as VASP protein levels and phospho157 VASP were also measured in this study, in lavage cells, following positive data in an enabling study which showed increases in such protein levels in participants with allergic rhinitis following a single intranasal dose of salbutamol. Nasal lavage data from earlier studies showed that pVASP157 is the best marker and not pVASP239. pVASP239 was therefore not collected or analyzed as planned.|Day 1|All subjects population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
856793|NCT00464568|Secondary|Nasal Lavage Concentrations of GSK256066|Nasal lavage samples were taken 2 -3 hour post morning dose and analyzed for GSK256066. Quantifiable levels of GSK256066 were observed in nasal lavage samples obtained 2-3 hours post-dose.|Day 1|PK concentration population.||Picogram/milliliter (pg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
856794|NCT00464568|Secondary|Tmax and Tlast of Active Metabolite GSK614917|The PK of GSK614917 were assessed in plasma by determining Tmax and Tlast. All participants who received at least one dose of the study drug provided at least one sample for plasma PK analysis. Tmax and Tlast could not be determined for any participant at the 1 mcg GSK256066 dose.|Pre-dose, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3 and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|PK parameter population.||Hour||Full Range|Median
856795|NCT00464568|Secondary|Time to Maximum Observed Plasma Drug Concentration (Tmax) and Time to Last Observed Plasma Drug Concentration (Tlast) of GSK256066|The PK of GSK256066 were assessed in plasma by determining Tmax and Tlast. All participants who received at least one dose of the study drug provided at least one sample for plasma PK analysis. Blood samples for PK were collected pre-dose, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3 and 4 hours post-dose and analyzed for GSK256066.|Pre -dose, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3 and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|PK Parameter population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Hour||Full Range|Median
856796|NCT00464568|Secondary|Cmax of Active Metabolite GSK614917|The PK of GSK614917 were assessed in plasma by determining AUC(0-last). All participants who received at least one dose of the study drug provided at least one sample for plasma PK analysis. C max was not calculable for any participant at the 1 mcg GSK256066 dose.|Pre-dose, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3 and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|PK parameter population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
856797|NCT00464568|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Drug Concentration (Cmax) of GSK256066|The PK of GSK256066 were assessed in plasma by determining Cmax. All participants who received at least one dose of the study drug provided at least one sample for plasma PK analysis. Blood samples for PK were collected pre-dose, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3 and 4 hours post-dose and analyzed for GSK256066.|Pre-dose, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3 and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|PK Parameter population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Picogram per mililiter (pg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
856798|NCT00464568|Secondary|AUC (0-last) of Active Metabolite GSK614917|The PK of GSK256066 were assessed in plasma by determining AUC(0-last). All participants who received at least one dose of the study drug provided at least one sample for plasma PK analysis. AUC (0-last) was not calculable in any participant at the 1, 10 or 50 mcg GSK256066 dose.|Pre-dose, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3 and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|PK parameter population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||pg * hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
856799|NCT00464568|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Drug Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC0-last) of GSK256066|The pharmacokinetics (PK) of GSK256066 were assessed in plasma by determining AUC(0-last). All participants who received at least one dose of the active investigational product provided at least one sample for plasma PK analysis. Blood samples for PK were collected pre-dose, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3 and 4 hours post-dose and analyzed for GSK256066. AUC (0-last) was not calculable for any participant at 1 mcg GSK256066 dose.|Pre-dose, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3 and 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|PK parameter population comprised of all participants from the PK Concentration population (comprised of all participants from the All Subjects population for whom blood or nasal samples were taken for assaying study drug) for whom PK parameters were available. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Picogram*hour per milliliter (pg*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
856800|NCT00464568|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinical Chemistry Values of Potential Clinical Concern|Blood samples for clinical chemistry were taken before dosing. Whole blood samples were collected and processed according to the local procedures at site. The samples were transferred to the local laboratory for analysis. The participants with clinical chemistry values of potential clinical concern are reported. The potential clinical concern ranges (low and high) were given as: for total bilirubin levels (clinical concern upper value: >31 micromole/liter) and inorganic phosphorus level (normal range: 0.7-1.5 millimole/liter).|Up to 9 weeks|All subjects population.||Participants|||Number
856801|NCT00464568|Secondary|Number of Participants With Hematology Values of Potential Clinical Concern|Blood samples for hematology were taken before dosing. Whole blood samples were collected and processed according to the local procedures at site. The samples were transferred to the local laboratory for analysis. The participants with hematology of potential clinical concern are reported. The potential clinical concern ranges (low and high) were given as: for white blood cell count (clinical concern range: 3 to 20 giga cells/liter), neutrophils (normal range: 2.1 to 10.0 giga cells/liter), hemoglobin (clinical concern upper value: >180 grams/liter). Only those parameters for which at least one value of potential clinical concern was reported are summarized.|Up to 9 weeks|All subjects population.||Participants|||Number
856802|NCT00464568|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AE) and Serious Adverse Events (SAE)|AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product. For marketed medicinal products, this also includes failure to produce expected benefits (i.e., lack of efficacy), abuse or misuse. SAE is any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is medically significant.|Up to 9 weeks|All subjects population.||Participants|||Number
856803|NCT00464568|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Values|Electrocardiogram variables evaluated included PR interval, QRS duration, QT interval, QT corrected by Bazett's formula (QTcB), QT corrected by Fridericia's formula (QTcF) and RR interval. ECG was performed pre-dose, one hour and four hour post-dose. The ECG measurements were made with the participant in a supine position having rested in this position for at least 10 minutes before each time-point. Baseline was defined as the pre-dose measurement on Day 1. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting Baseline values from post-Baseline values|Baseline (Day 1) to 9 weeks|All subjects population.||Millisecond (msec)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856804|NCT00464568|Secondary|Mean Heart Rate Over Study Period|Vital signs included heart rate. Heart rate was measured pre-dose. The measurements were taken at 5 minutes interval during each treatment period. Vital signs measurements were made with the participant in a supine position having rested in this position for at least 5 minutes before the first reading at each time point. Measurements that deviated substantially from previous readings were repeated immediately.|Up to 9 weeks|All subjects population.||Beats/minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
856805|NCT00464568|Secondary|Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) and Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) Over Study Period|Vital signs included SBP and DBP. SBP and DBP were measured pre-dose. The measurements were taken at 5 minutes interval during each treatment period. Vital signs measurements were made with the participant in a supine position having rested in this position for at least 5 minutes before the first reading at each time point. Measurements that deviated substantially from previous readings were repeated immediately.|Up to 9 weeks|All subjects population.||Millimetres of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856806|NCT00464568|Secondary|Mean Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1)|The FEV1 is the volume of air forcefully exhaled in 1 second. The highest FEV1 value amongst the three recorded FEV1 readings was used for all FEV1 calculations. FEV1 was recorded pre-dose and at follow-up.|Up to 9 weeks|All subjects population.||Liters (L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
856807|NCT00464568|Primary|Mean Messenger Ribonucleic Acid (mRNA) Concentrations as a Measure of Gene Expression|The effect of GSK256066 on ribonucleic acid (RNA) levels indicative of Phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE4) inhibition in nasal scrape samples and on protein biomarkers of PDE4 inhibition in lavage samples was evaluated. Nasal lavage and scrapes were taken 2 to 3 hour post morning dose; bilateral nasal lavage was conducted before the scrape. Nasal scrape samples were taken from alternate nostrils. The novel RNA markers presented are cAMP responsive element modulator (CREM), dual specificity phosphatase 1(DUSP1), fos-like antigen 2(FOSL2), insulin receptor substrate 2 (IRS2), nuclear receptor subfamily 4, group A, member 2 (NR4A2), Phosphodiesterase-4A (PDE4A), Regulator of G-protein signalling 1 (RGS1), Serine/threonine protein kinase SNF1 like kinase (SNF1LK). Nasal lavage cytospins were stained with a SNF1LK specific monoclonal antibody by indirect immunofluorescence. Adjusted Geometric Mean and Standard error logs are presented.|Day 1|All Subjects population comprised of all participants randomized to treatment who received at least one dose of study treatment (including placebo).||COPIES/50 nanogram (NG)||Standard Error|Geometric Mean
856809|NCT00381797|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Hazard Ratio by VEGF-R2 Expression|The association of VEGF-R2 expression with progression-free survival will be investigated for those strata that have a sufficient number of participants with VEGF-R2 measurements.|From start of treatment until the earliest of progressive disease, death, second malignancy or off study|Only the number of patients in strata E was sufficient to perform the analysis exploring the association of VEGF-R2 expression with progression-free survival.||Hazard Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856810|NCT00381797|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Hazard Ratio by VEGF-A Expression|The association of VEGF-A expression with progression-free survival will be investigated for those strata that have a sufficient number of participants with VEGF-A measurements.|From start of treatment until the earliest of progressive disease, death, second malignancy or off study|Only the number of patients in strata E was sufficient to perform the analysis exploring the association of VEGF-A expression with progression-free survival.||Hazard Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856811|NCT00381797|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Hazard Ratio by Carbonic Anhydrase 9 (CA9) Expression|The association of CA9 expression with progression-free survival will be investigated for those strata that have a sufficient number of participants with CA9 measurements.|From start of treatment until the earliest of progressive disease, death, second malignancy or off study|Only the number of patients in strata E was sufficient to perform the analysis exploring the association of carbonic anhydrase 9 (CA9) expression with progression-free survival.||Hazard Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856812|NCT00381797|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Hazard Ratio by Hypoxia Inducible Factor-2alpha Expression|The association of hypoxia inducible factor-2alpha expression with progression-free survival will be investigated for those strata that have a sufficient number of participants with hypoxia inducible factor-2alpha measurements. The hazard ratio was reported for patients who had hypoxia inducible factor-2alpha expression.|From start of treatment until the earliest of progressive disease, death, second malignancy or off study|The number of patients in strata C and D was not sufficient to perform the analysis exploring the association of hypoxia inducible factor-2alpha expression with progression-free survival. Thus the association analysis was performed for the patients in Stratum E only.||Hazard Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856813|NCT00381797|Secondary|Number of Patients With High VEGF-R2 Expression at Baseline|The expression of Hypoxia inducible factor-2α, carbonic anhydrase IX (CA9), VEGF-A, and VEGF-R2 will be estimated by immunohistochemistry of paraffin sections in the medulloblastoma,ependymoma and low grade glioma strata. Reported separately for each stratum.|Baseline|Only strata were reported, in which the patients had tissue samples available.||participants|||Number
856814|NCT00381797|Secondary|Number of Patients With High VEGF-A Expression at Baseline|The expression of Hypoxia inducible factor-2α, carbonic anhydrase IX (CA9), VEGF-A, and VEGF-R2 will be estimated by immunohistochemistry of paraffin sections in the medulloblastoma,ependymoma and low grade glioma strata. Reported separately for each stratum.|Baseline|Only strata were reported, in which the patients had tissue samples available.||participants|||Number
856815|NCT00381797|Secondary|Number of Patients With High Carbonic Anhydrase 9 Expression at Baseline|The expression of Hypoxia inducible factor-2α, carbonic anhydrase IX (CA9), VEGF-A, and VEGF-R2 will be estimated by immunohistochemistry of paraffin sections in the medulloblastoma,ependymoma and low grade glioma strata. Reported separately for each stratum.|Baseline|Only strata were reported, in which the patients had tissue samples available.||participants|||Number
856816|NCT00381797|Secondary|Number of Patients With High Hypoxia Inducible Factor-2alpha Expression at Baseline|The expression of Hypoxia inducible factor-2α, carbonic anhydrase IX (CA9), VEGF-A, and VEGF-R2 will be estimated by immunohistochemistry of paraffin sections in the medulloblastoma,ependymoma and low grade glioma strata. Reported separately for each stratum.|Baseline|Only strata were reported, in which the patients had tissue samples available.||participants|||Number
856817|NCT00381797|Secondary|Correlation of the Change in Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-2 (VEGF-R2) Expression in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMC) From Baseline With the Change in Perfusion From Magnetic Resonance Imaging|Spearman correlation coefficient is used to measure the correlation of the changes in VEGF-R2 with the changes in perfusion ratios. The changes are calculated by values at Day 15 minus values at baseline for VEGF-2 in Section 17 above and perfusion in Section 18 above, respectively. The correlation coefficients are reported in each stratum separately.|Baseline and Day 15 (after 2 doses of Bevacizumab) of course 1|The analyses are performed for the patients who had the changes in both VEGF-R2 and perfusion.||Correlation Coefficient|||Number
856818|NCT00381797|Secondary|Descriptive Statistics for the Change of Perfusion in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Concurrently Measured With the Change in Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-2 (VEGF-R2) Expression in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMC)|The change of perfusion in magnetic resonance imaging is calculated by taking the difference between the Day-15 measurements and the Baseline measurements for patients who had the changes of VEGF-R2. The purpose of reporting the descriptive statistics is to provide the information for the correlation coefficients reported in the next section, Section 19. MR perfusion ratio is the ratio of the perfusion measurements in the tumor and the perfusion measurerement in comparative frontal while matter, which is the comparative healthy part of the brain.|Baseline and Day 15 (after 2 doses of Bevacizumab) of course 1|The analyses are performed for the patients who had the changes in both VEGF-R2 and perfusion.||Ratio||Standard Error|Mean
856819|NCT00381797|Secondary|Descriptive Statistics for the Changes in Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-2 (VEGF-R2) Expression in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMC) Concurrently Measured With the Changes in Perfusion From Magnetic Resonance Imaging|The changes in VEGF-R2 are calculated by values at Day 15 minus values at baseline for the patients who had the changes in perfusion from magnetic resonance perfusion imaging. The purpose of reporting descriptive statistics of changes of VEGF-R2 is to provide the information for the correlation coefficients in Section 19.|Baseline and Day 15 (after 2 doses of Bevacizumab) of course 1|The analyses are performed for the patients who had the changes in both VEGF-R2 and perfusion.||Ratio||Standard Error|Mean
856820|NCT00381797|Secondary|Change in Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-2 (VEGF-R2) Expression in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMC) From Baseline to Day-15|The change in VEGF-R2 was calculated from baseline to the time of the 2nd dose (values of 24-48 hours after the 2nd dose at Day 15 - values of pre-dose 1 Day1, i.e., baseline). VEGF-R2 is measured in the relative phosphorylation score which is generated as a ratio of normalized phosphorylated VEGF-R2 versus normalized total VEGF-R2 protein.|Baseline and 24-48 hours after the 2nd dose of Bevacizumab in course 1|||Ratio||Full Range|Median
856821|NCT00381797|Secondary|Terminal Half-life|"Blood specimens were collected on the days listed for pharmacokinetic studies for Bevacizumab. These specimens were analyzed to produce steady-state plasma Bevacizumab concentration-time data in study participants. The concentration-time data were analyzed to provide an estimate of the PK parameters. The data were collected but the analyses of the PK data were conducted by Genentech using a broader cohort of pediatric patients from multiple trials in the paper Bevacizumab dosing strategy in paediatric cancer patients based on population pharmacokinetic analysis with external validation published by British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology,2016 volume 81(1):148-160. The estimates of the terminal half-life were calculated by the method described in the paper."|Baseline, Course 1 Day 1, Course 1 Day 15, Course 2 Day 1, Course 3 Day 1, Course 4 Day 1, and Course 5 Day 1|The study participants across the strata (stratum A, stratum B, stratum C, stratum D, and stratum E) were combined for this secondary objective. The number of participants with data was available.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
856822|NCT00381797|Secondary|Systemic Clearance|"Blood specimens were collected on the days listed for pharmacokinetic studies for Bevacizumab. These specimens were analyzed to produce steady-state plasma Bevacizumab concentration-time data in study participants. The concentration-time data were analyzed to provide an estimate of the systemic clearance. The data were collected but the analyses of the PK data were conducted by Genentech using a broader cohort of pediatric patients from multiple trials in the paper Bevacizumab dosing strategy in paediatric cancer patients based on population pharmacokinetic analysis with external validation published by British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2016 volume 81(1):148-160. The estimates of the systemic clearance were calculated by the model described in the paper."|Baseline, Course 1 Day 1, Course 1 Day 15, Course 2 Day 1, Course 3 Day 1, Course 4 Day 1, and Course 5 Day 1|The study participants across the strata (stratum A, stratum B, stratum C, stratum D, and stratum E) were combined for this secondary objective. The number of participants with data was available.||ml/h||Standard Deviation|Mean
856948|NCT02542072|Secondary|Overall Fit Acceptance|Overall fit acceptance for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenses. Scale 0-4, 0=Should not be worn, 1=Borderline but unacceptable, 2=Minimum acceptable, early review, 3=Not perfect but okay to dispense, 4=Perfect|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856823|NCT00381797|Secondary|Volume of Distribution|"Blood specimens were collected on the days listed for pharmacokinetic studies for Bevacizumab. These specimens were analyzed to produce steady-state plasma Bevacizumab concentration-time data in study participants. The concentration-time data were analyzed to provide an estimate of the volume of distribution. The data were collected but the analyses of the PK data were conducted by Genentech using a broader cohort of pediatric patients from multiple trials in the paper Bevacizumab dosing strategy in paediatric cancer patients based on population pharmacokinetic analysis with external validation published by British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology ,2016 volume 81(1):148-160. The estimates of the volume of distribution were calculated by the model described in the paper."|Baseline, Course 1 Day 1, Course 1 Day 15, Course 2 Day 1, Course 3 Day 1, Course 4 Day 1, and Course 5 Day 1|The study participants across the strata (stratum A, stratum B, stratum C, stratum D, and stratum E) were combined for this secondary objective. The number of participants with data was available.||ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
856824|NCT00381797|Secondary|Association of Log-transformed Tumor Perfusion Ratio With Progression-free Survival (PFS) Using Hazard Ratio Estimates|Using Cox Proportional Hazards Models, the association of tumor perfusion ratio with progression-free survival will be investigated. Magnetic resonance (MR) perfusion imaging is performed to investigate surrogate markers of tumor growth. Tumor perfusion ratios were longitudinal. As we are not comparing the strata or study arms, analyses will be done in each stratum separately, and thus we cannot report the Cox model results in the Statistical Analysis section. We consider these estimates 'descriptive' within each stratum. In this analysis, the hazard ratio is a relative measure of likelihood that a study participant experiences the event of interest compared to another participant who has a one-unit lower Log-transformed tumor volume perfusion ratio. The Cox survival model provides the mean hazard ratio along with its 95% confidence interval, which we report below.|From start of treatment until the earliest of progressive disease, death, second malignancy or off study, OR up to 2 years|The analyses cannot be performed with the Cox proportional hazard model since there are no sufficient measurements of perfusion ratio and events.|||||
856825|NCT00381797|Secondary|Association of Log-transformed Tumor Diffusion Ratio With Progression-free Survival (PFS) Using Hazard Ratio Estimates|Using Cox Proportional Hazards Models, the association of tumor diffusion ratios with progression-free survival will be investigated. Magnetic resonance (MR) diffusion imaging is performed to investigate surrogate markers of tumor growth. Tumor diffusion ratios were longitudinal. As we are not comparing the strata or study arms, analyses will be done in each stratum separately, and thus we cannot report the Cox model results in the Statistical Analysis section. And we consider these estimates 'descriptive' within each stratum. In this analysis, the hazard ratio is a relative measure of likelihood that a study participant experiences the event of interest compared to another participant who has a one-unit lower Log-transformed tumor diffusion ratio. The Cox survival model provides the mean hazard ratio along with its 95% confidence interval, which we report below.|From start of treatment until the earliest of progressive disease, death, second malignancy or off study|Patients had diffusion ratio at pre-treatment scans and at least one on treatment scans.||Hazard Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
856826|NCT00381797|Secondary|Association of Log-transformed Volume of Cystic Necrosis With Progression-free Survival (PFS) Using Hazard Ratio Estimates|Using Cox Proportional Hazards Models, the association of cystic necrosis with progression-free survival will be investigated. Volumetric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is performed to investigate surrogate markers of tumor growth. Volumes of cystic necrosis were longitudinal. As we are not comparing the strata or study arms, analyses will be done in each stratum separately, and thus we cannot report the Cox model results in the Statistical Analysis section and we consider these estimates 'descriptive' within each stratum. In this analysis, the hazard ratio is a relative measure of likelihood that a study participant experiences the event of interest compared to another participant who has a one-unit lower Log-transformed tumor volume based on cystic necrosis. The Cox survival model provides the mean hazard ratio along with its 95% confidence interval, which we report below.|From start of treatment until the earliest of progressive disease, death, second malignancy or off study, OR up to 2 years|Patients had volume of cystic necrosis at Pre-treatment and at least one on treatment.||Hazard Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
856827|NCT00381797|Secondary|Association of Log-transformed Tumor Enhancing Volume With Progression-free Survival (PFS) Using Hazard Ratio Estimates|Using Cox Proportional hazards Models, the association of Log-transformed tumor enhancing volume with progression-free survival will be investigated. Volumetric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is performed to investigate surrogate markers of tumor growth. Tumor enhancing volumes were longitudinal. As we are not comparing the strata or study arms, analyses will be done in each stratum separately, and thus we cannot report the Cox model results in the Statistical Analysis section and we consider these estimates 'descriptive' within each stratum. In this analysis, the hazard ratio is a relative measure of likelihood that a study participant experiences the event of interest compared to another participant who has a one-unit lower Log-transformed tumor enhancing volume. The Cox survival model provides the mean hazard ratio along with its 95% confidence interval, which we report below.|From start of treatment until the earliest of progressive disease, death, second malignancy or off study, OR up to 2 years|Patients had tumor enhancing volume at Pre-treatment and at least one on treatment.||Hazard Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
856828|NCT00381797|Secondary|Association of Log-transformed Tumor Volume Based on FLAIR With Progression-free Survival (PFS) Using Hazard Ratio Estimates|Using Cox proportional hazards models, the association of tumor volume based on FLAIR images with PFS will be investigated for those strata that have a sufficient number of participants with volume FLAIR measurements. Volumetric magnetic resonance imaging is performed to investigate surrogate markers of tumor growth. Volume FLAIR measurements were longitudinal. As we are not comparing the strata, analyses will be done in each stratum separately, and thus we cannot report the Cox model results in the Statistical Analysis section. We consider these estimates 'descriptive' within each stratum. In this analysis, the hazard ratio is a relative measure of likelihood that a study participant experiences the event of interest compared to another participant who has a one-unit lower Log-transformed tumor volume based on FLAIR. The Cox survival model provides the mean hazard ratio along with its 95% confidence interval, which we report below.|From start of treatment until the earliest of progressive disease, death, second malignancy or off study OR up to 2 years|Patients had Flair volume at Pre-treatment and at least one on treatment.||Hazard Ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
856829|NCT00381797|Secondary|Change in Diffusion Ratio Between the Baseline and Day 15 Brain Image|Diffusion ratio obtained from magnetic resonance (MR) diffusion imaging may explain changes in the tumor after therapy. Changes in the diffusion ratio will be reported for those strata that have a sufficient number of participants with MR diffusion imaging. The change was calculated from diffusion ratio at Baseline to diffusion ratio at Day 15 (values of diffusion ratio at Day 15 -values of diffusion ration at baseline). The higher of diffusion ratio is better. MR diffusion ratio is the diffusion solid part of tumor divided by the diffusion frontal white matter. There is no a unit available.|Baseline and day 15|There are no sufficient data for the analyses in the Medulloblastoma arm.||Ratio||Full Range|Median
856830|NCT00381797|Secondary|Change in Perfusion Ratio Between the Baseline and Day 15 Brain Imaging|"Perfusion ratio obtained from magnetic resonance(MR) diffusion imaging may explain changes in the tumor after therapy. Changes in the perfusion ratio will be reported for those strata that have a sufficient number of participants with MR diffusion imaging. The change was calculated from perfusion ratio at Baseline to perfusion ratio at Day 15(values of perfusion ratio at Day 15 - values of perfusion ratio at baseline). The higher of perfusion ratio is worse.
MR perfusion ratio is perfusion solid part of tumor from CBV divided by perfusion frontal while matter. There is no a unit available."|Baseline and day 15|There are no sufficient data for the analyses in the Medulloblastoma arm and Ependymoma arm.||Ratio||Full Range|Median
856831|NCT00381797|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-Free survival is the interval of time between of protocol treatment and minimum date of documentation of progressive Disease,second malignancy,death due to any cause, or date of last follow-up. Progressive neurologic abnormalities or worsening neurologic status not explained by causes unrelated to tumor progression,OR the appearance of new tumor OR a > 25% increase in the sum of the products of two longest perpendicular diameters of all measurable tumors. K-M method was used to estimate progression-free survival.|From start of treatment up to 2 years|The patients were treated with any dose treatment.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
856832|NCT00381797|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Sustained Objective Responses|Cumulative incidence of sustained objective response provides a percentage of participants experiencing the event of interest at a given follow-up time point (for example, 6-months, 1-year, etc.) in the presence of competing events such as progressive disease or death, and it is estimated using the event data for both the event of interest and the competing events experienced by the study participants. In this sense, it is different than the incidence rates estimated in epidemiological studies in terms of 'incidences per 1000 person years. 6-month Cumulative incidence of sustained objective responses will be reported separately for each stratum.|From the first imaging after treatment up to 2 years|Two patients in the Stratum A,one patient in the Stratum C, and one patient in the Stratum D were inevaluable for this outcome measure.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
856833|NCT00381797|Secondary|Number of Study Participants With Grade 3 or 4 Treatment-related Toxicity|Adverse events are monitored and graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. The grade 1 = mild, grade 2=moderate, grade 3 =severe, grade 4=life threatening/disabling, grade 5=death.|From day 1 of treatment until off study|The patients were treated with any dose treatment.||participants|||Number
856834|NCT00381797|Primary|Sustained Disease Stabilization Rate Associated With Bevacizumab and Irinotecan in Patients With Recurrent or Progressive Low-grade Glioma (Stratum E)|Disease stabilization is defined as a complete response(CR) or partial response(PR) observed during the first four courses and sustained for 8 weeks; or stable disease (SD) sustained for 6 courses characterized by SD at the end of course 2, at the end of course 4 and at the end of course 6. CR is complete disappearance of all enhancing tumor. PR is >= 50% reduction in tumor size. SD is at least stable and maintenance corticosteroid dose not increased in neurologic examination.|From day 1 of treatment up to 24 weeks|Patients with recurrent or progressive low grade glioma were treated with any courses.||participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
856835|NCT00381797|Primary|Objective Response Rate Sustained for ≥ 8 Weeks|Objective response is either a complete response or a partial response observed during the first four courses of treatment and sustained for 8 weeks. The objective response rate will be reported separately for patients with recurrent/progressive malignant glioma(Stratum A), recurrent/progressive instrinsic brain stem tumors(Stratum B), recurrent/progressive medulloblastoma(Stratum C), and recurrent/progressive ependymoma(Stratum D). CR is complete disappearance of all enhancing tumor. PR is >= 50% reduction in tumor size. This outcome measures is not defined for the Stratum E in the protocol.|From day 1 of treatment up to 24 weeks|Two patients in the Stratum A,one patient in the Stratum C, and one patient in the Stratum D were inevaluable for this outcome measure.||participants|||Number
856836|NCT00376688|Primary|Clinical Benefit Rate (Complete Response, Partial Response, or Stable Disease)|"Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) criteria version 1.0 was used for response evaluation. Clinical benefit rate is defined as the proportion of subjects experiencing a complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) for at least 24 weeks.
Evaluation of target lesions: Complete Response (CR)-- Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR)-- At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD; Stable Disease (SD)-- Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started;
Evaluation of non-target lesions: Complete Response (CR)-- Disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level; Incomplete Response/ Stable Disease (SD)-- Persistence of one or more non-target lesion(s) or/and maintenance of tumor marker level above the normal limits"|Up to 24 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
856837|NCT00357656|Secondary|Incidence of Factor VIII Inhibitory Antibody (≥0.4 Bethesda Units Using the Nijmegen Modification of the Bethesda Assay Formation)|Number of participants that developed Factor VIII inhibitory antibody during the study.|Throughout the study period of approximately 9-26 weeks per participant|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set treated with at least one ADVATE infusion.||Participants|||Number
856838|NCT00357656|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events Related to the Administration of the Study Product.|All AEs from the first study drug exposure until the study completion/discontinuation date were to be recorded. Each AE was to be evaluated by the investigator for causal relationship (i.e., unrelated, possibly related or probably related) to the study product.|From first study drug exposure until study completion/discontinuation (approximately 9-26 weeks per subject)|Participants in the Safety Analysis Set treated with at least one ADVATE infusion.||Adverse Events|||Number
856839|NCT00357656|Secondary|Number of Units of Packed Red Blood Cells Transfused||During the first postoperative 24 hours|"All subjects who were randomized to receive BI or CI and have observed drainage volumes up to 24 hours including hematocrit results for these drainage fluids.
The overall number of participants treated by BI and CI comprises the number of participants in Stratum A, B and C for BI and CI."||PRBC Units||Standard Deviation|Mean
856840|NCT00357656|Secondary|Number of Bleeding Episodes During Treatment With Continuous or Bolus Infusion|To simplify the results below: Bleeding episodes were reported for 4 subjects (3 subjects on bolus infusion: 2 in Stratum A and 1 in Stratum B, and 1 subject on continuous infusion/Stratum B). The 4 subjects had 1 bleeding episode each. No bleeding episodes were reported for Stratum C.|Through Postoperative Day 7|"All subjects who were randomized to receive BI or CI and have observed drainage volumes up to 24 hours including hematocrit results for these drainage fluids.
The overall number of participants treated by BI and CI comprises the number of participants in Stratum A, B and C for BI and CI."||Bleeding Episodes||Standard Deviation|Mean
856841|NCT00357656|Secondary|Actual Postoperative Blood Loss Compared to the Expected Average Blood Loss Until Drain Removal as Predicted Preoperatively by the Surgeon|"The total blood loss for the postoperative period (from end of surgery until drain removal) was adjusted for the expected blood loss by applying a log-transformation of the blood loss data.
The drainage volume was measured every 8 hours +/- 30 minutes during the first 24 hours. If the drainage continued beyond 24 hours, the PRBC volume and hemoglobin was to be measured cumulatively every 24 hours or whenever the drainage bottle was emptied and at the time of drain removal. Prior to surgery, the operating surgeon was to predict the estimated duration of surgery and the volume (mL) of the estimated expected blood loss for the surgery in a hemostatically normal individual of the same sex, age, and stature as the study subject for the first 24 hours postoperatively, and for the postoperative period until drain removal, if drainage continued beyond 24 hours.
Units: Milliliter of blood"|From end of surgery (application of compressive dressing and release of tourniquet, if applicable) until drain removal (up to postoperative day 7).|"All subjects who were randomized to receive BI or CI and have observed drainage volumes up to 24 hours including hematocrit results for these drainage fluids.
The overall number of participants treated by BI and CI comprises the number of participants in Stratum A, B and C for BI and CI."||Milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
856842|NCT00357656|Secondary|Actual Postoperative Blood Loss During the First 24 Hours Compared With the Average Blood Loss as Predicted Preoperatively by the Operating Surgeon|"Drainage fluid volume was to be measured cumulatively and recorded every 8 hours ± 30 minutes during the first 24 hours following surgery. Prior to surgery, the operating surgeon was to predict the estimated duration of surgery and the volume (mL) of the estimated expected blood loss for the surgery in a hemostatically normal individual of the same sex, age, and stature as the study subject 1) for the intraoperative procedure (defined as the time period from incision to application of compressive dressing and release of tourniquet, if applicable), 2) for the first 24 hours postoperatively, and 3) for the postoperative period until drain removal, if drainage continued beyond 24 hours.
Units: Milliliter of blood"|During the first 24 postoperative hours blood loss was measured every 8 hours ± 30 minutes|"All subjects who were randomized to receive BI or CI and have observed drainage volumes up to 24 hours.
The overall number of participants treated by BI and CI comprises the number of participants in Stratum A, B and C for BI and CI."||Milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
856843|NCT00357656|Primary|Cumulative Packed Red Blood Cell (PRBC) Volume in the Drainage Fluid During the First 24 Hours Following Surgery in Subjects Receiving ADVATE (rAHF-PFM) by Bolus (BI) or Continuous Infusion (CI)|"Drainage fluid volume was to be measured cumulatively and recorded every 8 hours ± 30 minutes during the first 24 hours following surgery.
Unit of measure: Tera per Liter is the PRBC concentration in 10^12 units per 1 liter of drainage fluid."|During the first postoperative 24 hours every 8 hours ± 30 minutes the drainage fluid was to be recorded..|"All subjects who were randomized to receive BI or CI and have observed drainage volumes up to 24 hours including hematocrit results for these drainage fluids.
The overall number of participants treated by BI and CI comprises the number of participants in Stratum A, B and C for BI and CI."||Tera per Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
856949|NCT02542072|Secondary|Lens Tightness Push-up|"Investigator assessment of lens tightness push-up for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenses.
Scale 0%-100% continuous scale, 100%=No movement, 50%=Optimum, 0%=Falls from cornea without lid support"|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||percentage of mean lens tightness|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
856950|NCT02542072|Secondary|Primary Gaze Lag|Investigator assessment of primary gaze lag for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenses. Scale 0-4, 0=Insufficient, unacceptable movement, 1=Minimal, but acceptable movement, 2=Optimal movement, 3=Moderate, but acceptable movement, 4=Excessive, unacceptable movement|Baseline, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks|||units on a scale|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
856951|NCT02542072|Secondary|Post-Blink Movement|Post-blink movement for comifilcon A and samfilcon A lenses are assessed. 0=Insufficient, unacceptable movement, 1=Minimal, but acceptable movement, 2=Optimal movement, 3=Moderate, but acceptable movement, 4=Excessive, unacceptable movement|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||units on a scale|Eyes|Standard Deviation|Mean
856947|NCT02542072|Secondary|Dryness|Subjective response of dryness for comfilcon A and samfilcon A lenses during a typical day of wear and prior to removal. Scale of 0-10, 10=No dryness, 0=Extremely dry|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856964|NCT02542072|Primary|Comfort|Subjective ratings of comfort (comfort after insertion, typical comfort just prior to removal, and overall comfort) for comfilcon A and samfilcon A assessed at baseline, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks. Scale of 0-10 (0=painful, 10=can't feel the lenses).|Baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks|Number of participants analyzed is different from participant flow due to protocol deviations.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856995|NCT02454608|Primary|Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(VAS)|Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 100 A higher score indicates a worse outcome.|baseline to week 8|Intention-to-treat analysis||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
856990|NCT02454608|Other Pre-specified|Diastolic Blood Pressure||Mean change between baseline and week 8 measurements|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
856991|NCT02454608|Other Pre-specified|Systolic Blood Pressure||Mean change between baseline and week 8 measurements|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
856992|NCT02454608|Other Pre-specified|Heart Rate||Mean change between baseline and week 8 measurements.|||beats per minute||Standard Deviation|Mean
856993|NCT02454608|Secondary|Objective Sinonasal Symptoms on Lund-McKay Score(LMS)|Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 24 Higher value represents worse outcome.|Week 8|Intention-to-treat analysis||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
856994|NCT02454608|Secondary|Objective Sinonasal Symptoms on Lund-Kennedy Score(LKS)|Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 12 Higher value represents worse outcome.|baseline to week 8|Intention-to-treat analysis||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857006|NCT02422797|Secondary|Change From Baseline Treatment Satisfaction Using the HIV Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (HIV TSQ) at Weeks 4, 24 and 48 or Withdrawal From the Study|The HIV TSQ is a 10-item self-reported scale that measures overall satisfaction with treatment and by specific domains e.g., convenience, flexibility. Each item is scored 0-6 where a higher score indicates the greater improvement in the past few weeks. These items are summed up to produce a treatment satisfaction total score (0 to 60) and 2 subscales: general satisfaction/clinical and lifestyle/ease subscales (0 to 30). The HIV TSQ was administered as a paper questionnaire. Between and within treatment group comparisons were assessed on change from Baseline treatment satisfaction using the HIV TSQ at Weeks 4, 24 and 48 or withdrawal from the study. Total score, lifestyle/ease score and General satisfaction/clinical sub-score (CS) have been summarized. LOCF was used as primary method of analysis. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Up to Week 48|ITT-E Population||Score on a scale||Full Range|Median
857007|NCT02422797|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pre-specified Treatment Symptoms Using the Symptom Distress Module at Weeks 4, 24 and 48 or Withdrawal From the Study|The Symptom Distress Module, also called the HIV Symptom Index or Symptoms Impact Questionnaire, is a 20-item self-reported measure that addresses the presence and perceived distress linked to symptoms commonly associated with HIV or its treatment. Between and within treatment group comparisons were assessed on change from Baseline in pre-specified treatment symptoms using the Symptom Distress Module at Weeks 4, 24 and 48 or withdrawal from the study. Change from Baseline in Symptom count and symptom bother score have been summarized. The symptom bother score is based on the score for each symptom present ranging from 1 (it doesn't bother me) to 4 (it bothers me a lot). The symptom bother score ranges from 0 to 80. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was used as primary method of analysis. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Up to Week 48|ITT-E Population||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857008|NCT02422797|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Lipids at Weeks 24 and 48 by Baseline Third Agent Treatment Class|Blood samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1), 24 and 48 to assess fasting lipids which included total cholesterol (CHO), LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglycerides. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Baseline and up to Week 48|Safety Population||mmol/ L||Standard Deviation|Mean
857009|NCT02422797|Secondary|Number of Participants With Observed Phenotypic Resistance for Participants Meeting Virologic Withdrawal Criteria by Baseline Third Agent Treatment Class|For all participants who meet virologic withdrawal criteria, plasma samples with HIV-1 RNA level >=200 c/mL were to be analyzed in an attempt to obtain phenotype data on as many samples as possible. Samples for drug resistance testing (phenotypic) were to be collected at Day 1. Number of participants with phenotypic resistance to CAR and to DTG or RPV for those meeting virologic withdrawal criteria in subgroups stratified based on Baseline third agent treatment class (INSTI, NNRTI, PI) were to be summarized. This outcome was not analyzed as the number of participants was low (1 CVW per arm) and summaries by Baseline third agent were not provided. Therefore, data are not available for this outcome measure due to the insufficient number of participants with events.|Week 48|CVW Population|||||
857010|NCT02422797|Secondary|Number of Participants With Observed Genotypic Resistance for Participants Meeting Virologic Withdrawal Criteria by Baseline Third Agent Treatment Class|For all participants who meet virologic withdrawal criteria, plasma samples with HIV-1 RNA level >=200 c/mL were to be analyzed in an attempt to obtain genotype data on as many samples as possible. Samples for drug resistance testing (genotypic) were to be collected at Day 1. Number of participants with genotypic resistance to CAR and to DTG or RPV for those meeting virologic withdrawal criteria in subgroups stratified based on Baseline third agent treatment class (INSTI, NNRTI, PI) were to be summarized. This outcome has not been analyzed as the number of participants was low (1 CVW per arm) and summaries by Baseline third agent were not provided. Therefore, data are not available for this outcome measure due to the insufficient number of participants with events.|Week 48|CVW Population|||||
857011|NCT02422797|Secondary|Number of Participants With Maximum Post-baseline Emergent Hematology Toxicities Over 48 Weeks by Baseline Third Agent Treatment Class|Blood samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and at Week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36 and 48 to evaluate hemoglobin, hematocrit, basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, MCV, RBC count, WBC count and platelet count. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Number of participants who experienced maximum toxicity grade post-baseline in hematology parameters over 48 weeks by Baseline third agent treatment class (INSTI, NNRTI, PI) was summarized.|Up to 48 weeks|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
857012|NCT02422797|Secondary|Number of Participants With Maximum Post-baseline Emergent Chemistry Toxicities Over 48 Weeks by Baseline Third Agent Treatment Class|Blood samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and at Week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36 and 48 to evaluate ALT, albumin, ALP, AST, total bilirubin, chloride, creatinine, glucose, potassium, phosphate, sodium, BUN, total carbon dioxide, lipase, creatine phosphokinase and creatinine clearance. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Number of participants who experienced maximum toxicity grade post-baseline in chemistry parameters over 48 weeks by Baseline third agent treatment class (INSTI, NNRTI, PI) was summarized.|Up to 48 weeks|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
857013|NCT02422797|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any AE, AELD or AE With Grade 1, 2, 3 or 4 Toxicity Over 48 Weeks by Baseline Third Agent Treatment Class|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Number of participants with any AE, AELD or AE with maximum grade toxicity experienced by any one participant over 48 weeks by Baseline third agent class (INSTI, NNRTI, or PI) was summarized. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Up to 48 weeks|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
857014|NCT02422797|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Cluster Designation (CD)4+ Lymphocyte Count at Week 48 by Baseline Third Agent Treatment Class|Blood for CD4 cell count assessment by flow cytometery was carried out at Baseline (Day 1), Week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36 and 48 to assess the impact of Baseline third agent class (INSTI, NNRTI, or PI) on efficacy, safety and tolerability of DTG +RPV compared to continuation of CAR. The full set of lymphocyte sub sets was not evaluated. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Baseline and up to Week 48|ITT-E Population||Cells per mm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
857015|NCT02422797|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Plasma HIV 1 RNA <50 c/mL at Week 48 Using Snapshot Algorithm by Baseline Third Agent Treatment Class|Percentage of participants with plasma HIV 1 RNA < 50 c/mL at Week 48 using the FDA snapshot algorithm was assessed by Baseline third agent class to assess the impact of Baseline third agent class (INSTI, NNRTI, or PI) on efficacy, safety and tolerability of DTG +RPV compared to continuation of CAR. Plasma samples were collected for HIV-1 RNA at Baseline (Day 1), Week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36 and 48. The analysis was done using cochran-mantel haenszel test stratified by current antiretroviral third-agent class. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Up to Week 48|ITT-E Population||Percentage of participants|||Number
857016|NCT02422797|Secondary|Pre-dose Concentrations of DTG and RPV at Weeks 2, 4 and 8 in the First 20 Participants Who Switch From Efavirenz (EFV) or Nevirapine (NVP) to DTG + RPV|Two blood samples were collected pre-dose for DTG and RPV at Weeks 2 and 8 only for the first 20 participants who switch from EFV or NVP to DTG+RPV, in addition to the pre-dose blood sample collected at Week 4 for all subjects. One blood sample was collected pre-dose for EFV or NVP at Week 2 for the first 20 participants who switch from EFV or NVP to DTG + RPV. PK Parameter NNRTI Subset Extra Sampling Population consisted of the first approximately 20 participants in the PK Parameter NNRTI Subset population who have extra PK samples at weeks 2 and 8. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Pre-dose at Week 2, 4 and 8|PK Parameter NNRTI Subset extra sampling Population||ug/ L||Standard Deviation|Mean
857017|NCT02422797|Secondary|Pre-dose Concentrations of DTG and RPV at Weeks 4, 24 and 48 or Withdrawal in Participants Switching to DTG + RPV|Two separate blood samples for DTG and RPV were collected pre-dose at Weeks 4, 24 and 48. Pre-dose concentrations of DTG and RPV at Weeks 4, 24 and 48 or withdrawal were summarized for the participants switching to DTG + RPV in the early switch phase. Pharmacokinetic (PK) Parameter Population consisted of all participants who received DTG +RPV and provided at least one evaluable estimate of predose concentration (C0). Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Pre-dose at Week 4, 24 and 48 or at withdrawal visit|PK Parameter Population||ug/ L||Standard Deviation|Mean
857018|NCT02422797|Secondary|Phenotypic Resistance Data for Drugs Received for Participants Meeting Confirmed Virologic Withdrawal Criteria|Phenotypic resistance data for drugs received for participants meeting confirmed virologic withdrawal criteria are presented below. Confirmed Virologic Withdrawal (CVW) Population consisted of all participants in the ITT-E Population who met CVW (1 CVW per arm). NA indicates Not applicable based on drugs were not received. Phenotypic Resistance Data only shown for Drugs Received for Participants Meeting Confirmed Virologic Withdrawal Criteria.|Week 48|CVW Population||Participants|||Number
857019|NCT02422797|Secondary|Genotypic Resistance Data for Drugs Received for Participants Meeting Confirmed Virologic Withdrawal Criteria|Genotypic resistance data for drugs received for participants meeting confirmed virologic withdrawal criteria are presented below. Confirmed Virologic Withdrawal (CVW) Population consisted of all participants in the ITT-E Population who met CVW (1 CVW per arm). NA indicates Not applicable based on drugs were not received. Genotypic Resistance Data only shown for Drugs Received for Participants Meeting Confirmed Virologic Withdrawal Criteria.|Week 48|CVW Population||Participants|||Number
857020|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Fasting Lipids at Weeks 24 and 48|Blood samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1), Week 24 and Week 48 to assess fasting lipids which included total cholesterol, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and triglycerides. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||Millimoles (mmol)/ L||Standard Deviation|Mean
857021|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Insulin Resistance Based on Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) at Week 48|Blood biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess insulin resistance. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. The homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR ) index , the product of basal glucose and insulin levels divided by 22.5, is regarded as a simple , inexpensive , and reliable surrogate measure of insulin resistance.|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||HOMA-IR Score||Standard Deviation|Mean
857022|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Interleukin 6 (IL-6) at Week 48|Blood biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess IL-6. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value.|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||Nanograms (ng)/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
857023|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Bone-specific Alkaline Phosphatase, Procollagen 1 N-terminal Propeptide, Osteocalcin, Type 1 Collagen C-telopeptides and Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) at Week 48|Blood biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, procollagen 1 N-terminal propeptide, osteocalcin, Type 1 Collagen C-telopeptides and sVCAM. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). For bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, procollagen 1-N-propeptide, osteocalcin and type 1 collagen C-telopeptide, analyses of changes from Baseline were performed on log-transformed data. Results were transformed back via exponential transformation such that treatment comparisons are assessed via odds ratios.|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||Microgram (ug)/ L||Standard Deviation|Mean
857024|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Urine Albumin/Creatinine Ratio and Urine Protein/Creatinine Ratio at Week 48|Urine biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess urine albumin/creatinine ratio and urine protein/creatinine ratio. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||Grams (g)/ mol||Standard Deviation|Mean
857025|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Beta-2-microglobulin (B2M) (Blood and Urine), Urine RBP and 25 Hydroxy-vitamin D at Week 48|Blood biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess B2M and 25 hydroxy-vitamin D. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). For 25 hydroxy-vitamin D, analysis of changes from Baseline was performed on log-transformed data. Results were transformed back via exponential transformation such that treatment comparisons are assessed via odds ratios.|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||Nanomoles (nmol)/ L||Standard Deviation|Mean
857026|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Urine Phosphate at Week 48|Urine biomarker samples were collected to at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess urine phosphate. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value.|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||Millimoles (mmol)/ L||Standard Deviation|Mean
857027|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Retinol Binding Protein (RBP), Serum Creatinine and Glucose at Week 48|Blood biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess RBP, serum creatinine and glucose. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||mg/ deciliter (dL)||Standard Deviation|Mean
857028|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Soluble CD163 and Oxidized Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL) at Week 48|Blood biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess soluble CD163 and oxidized LDL. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||Microgram/Liter||Standard Deviation|Mean
857029|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Fatty Acid Binding Protein 2 (FABP) and Soluble CD14 at Week 48|Blood biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess FABP and soluble CD14. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||Nanogram/milliliter||Standard Deviation|Mean
857030|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in D-Dimer at Week 48|Blood biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess D-Dimer. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value.|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||Nanomole (nmol)/L FEU||Standard Deviation|Mean
857031|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Cystatin C at Week 48|Blood biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and Week 48 to assess cystatin C. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value.|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
857032|NCT02422797|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) at Week 48|Blood biomarker samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and 48 to assess hs-CRP. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value.|Up to Week 48|Safety Population||mg/ Liter (L)||Standard Deviation|Mean
857033|NCT02422797|Secondary|Number of Participants With Maximum Post-baseline Emergent Hematology Toxicities Over 48 Weeks|Blood samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and at Week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36 and 48 to evaluate hemoglobin, hematocrit, basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, mean corpuscular volume (MCV), red blood cell (RBC) count, white blood cell (WBC) count and platelet count. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Number of participants who experienced maximum grade toxicity post-baseline in hematology over 48 weeks was summarized.|Up to 48 weeks|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
857034|NCT02422797|Secondary|Number of Participants With Maximum Post-baseline Emergent Chemistry Toxicities Over 48 Weeks|Blood samples were collected at Baseline (Day 1) and at Week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36 and 48 to evaluate alanine aminotransferase (ALT), albumin, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), total bilirubin, chloride, creatinine, glucose, potassium, phosphate, sodium, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), total carbon dioxide, lipase, creatine phosphokinase and creatinine clearance. Value obtained at Day 1 was considered as Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Number of participants who experienced maximum grade toxicity post-baseline in clinical chemistry over 48 weeks was summarized. Participants were graded using the Division of AIDS Table for Grading Severity of Adult and Pediatric Adverse Events. Grade 1=mild; grade and grade 4=potentially life-threatening. For all laboratory parameters, one assessment out of range was sufficient to be considered a chemistry toxicity.|Up to 48 weeks|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
857035|NCT02422797|Secondary|Number of Participants With Common Non-serious Adverse Event (AE), Any Serious AE (SAE), AE of Maximum Toxicity Grade 1, 2, 3 or 4 and AE Leading to Discontinuation (AELD)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Any untoward event resulting in death, life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, any other situation according to medical or scientific judgment that may not be immediately life-threatening or result in death or hospitalization but may jeopardize the participant or may require medical or surgical intervention were categorized as SAE. Number of participants with common non-serious AE, SAE, drug related AE or SAE, AELD or AE with maximum grade toxicity was summarized. Common AEs were those with >5 percent incidence for either treatment. Safety Population included all randomly assigned participants who have received at least one dose of study drug.|Up to Week 52|Safety Population||Participants|||Number
857036|NCT02422797|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Plasma HIV 1 RNA <50 c/mL at Week 24 Using Snapshot Algorithm|Percentage of participants with plasma HIV 1 RNA < 50 c/mL at Week 24 using the FDA snapshot algorithm was assessed to evaluate the antiviral activity of DTG +RPV once daily compared to continuation of CAR. Virologic success or failure was determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the participant was on-treatment within the window of the visit of interest. Plasma samples were collected for HIV-1 RNA at Baseline(Day 1), Week 4, 8, 12 and 24.|Week 24|ITT-E Population||Percentage of participants|||Number
857037|NCT02422797|Secondary|Changes From Baseline in Cluster Designation (CD)4+ Lymphocyte Count at Weeks 24 and 48|Blood was collected and CD4+ cell count assessment by flow cytometery was carried out at Baseline (Day 1), Week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36 and 48 to evaluate the immunological activity of DTG + RPV once daily compared to continuation of CAR. The full set of lymphocyte sub sets was not evaluated. Change from Baseline was calculated as value at indicated time point minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles).|Week 24 and 48|ITT-E Population||Cells per millimeter (mm)^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
857059|NCT02255097|Secondary|OS in Strong PD-L1-Positive Participants|Participants with a strong PD L-1 expression status were evaluated for OS. The expression of PD L-1 was determined by IHC and strong PD-L1 positive was defined as a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥50% by IHC. OS was defined as the time from the first day of study treatment to death due to any cause. OS was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method for censored data and reported in months.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a Tumor Proportion Score ≥50%||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857038|NCT02422797|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) 1 Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <50 Copies/Milliliter (c/mL) at Week 48 Using Snapshot Algorithm|Percentage of participants with plasma HIV 1 RNA < 50 c/mL at Week 48 using the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm was assessed to demonstrate the non-inferior antiviral activity of switching to DTG+RPV once daily compared to continuation of CAR over 48 weeks in HIV-1 infected antiretroviral therapy (ART)-experienced participants. Virologic success or failure was determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the participant was on-treatment within the window of the visit of interest. Plasma samples were collected for HIV-1 RNA at Week 0 (Day 1), Week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36 and 48. Treatment with DTG + RPV were declared non-inferior to CAR if the lower end of a two-sided 95% confidence interval for the difference between the two groups in response rates at Week 48 lies above -10% by Cochran-Mantel Haenszel test. The Intent-to-Treat Exposed (ITT-E) population consisted of all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study drug.|Week 48.|ITT-E Population||Percentage of participants|||Number
857048|NCT02302716|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Hypoglycemic Events|The percentage of participants (with at least 1 hypoglycemic event (total, severe, nocturnal, and others) or incidence during the study was analyzed using Fisher's exact test. A hypoglycemic event is defined as any time a participant has a blood glucose (BG) level of ≤70 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) even if the event was not associated with signs, symptoms, or treatment consistent with current guidelines (American Diabetes Association 2005). Nocturnal hypoglycemia is defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurs between bedtime and waking. Severe hypoglycemia is defined as a hypoglycemic event requiring assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrates, glucagons, or other resuscitative actions. Severe Hypoglycemic events may or may not have a reported BG ≤70 mg/dL. These events may be associated with sufficient neuroglycopenia to induce seizure or coma.|Endpoint [up to 24 weeks]|All randomized participants who had a post-baseline measurement for Hypoglycemic Events; last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Percentage of participants|||Number
857116|NCT02147184|Primary|Osteocalcin to C-terminal Telopeptide Ratio|Osteocalcin (ng/mL) is a bone formation marker and C-terminal telopeptide (ng/mL) a marker of bone resorption.|At baseline and every 4 months up to 2 years.|The figures below may be lower based on availability of serum, performance of the assay, and premature attrition.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
857049|NCT02302716|Secondary|Rate of Hypoglycemic Events Adjusted Per 1 Year|The rate of hypoglycemic events were analyzed at baseline, titration, maintenance, and overall study periods and at endpoint using the Wilcoxon test. In addition, a negative binomial model was used as a sensitivity analysis. A hypoglycemic event is defined as any time a participant has a blood glucose (BG) level of ≤70 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) even if the event was not associated with signs, symptoms, or treatment consistent with current guidelines (American Diabetes Association 2005). Nocturnal hypoglycemia is defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurs between bedtime and waking. Severe hypoglycemia is defined as a hypoglycemic event requiring assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrates, glucagons, or other resuscitative actions. Severe Hypoglycemic events may or may not have a reported BG ≤70 mg/dL. These events may be associated with sufficient neuroglycopenia to induce seizure or coma.|Baseline through Endpoint [up to 24 weeks]|All randomized participants who received at 1 dose of study drug with Baseline at least 1 post-Baseline hypoglycemic event; last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Hypoglycemic events per 1 year||Standard Deviation|Mean
857050|NCT02302716|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Detectable Anti-Drug Antibodies to LY2963016 or LANTUS®|The percentage of participants with detected insulin antibodies were summarized as counts and percentages at baseline, at each visit, at the 24-week endpoint (LOCF), and overall for the 24-week treatment period.|Endpoint [up to 24 weeks]|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with a Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline with detectable anti-drug antibodies; last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Percentage of participants|||Number
857051|NCT02302716|Secondary|Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (ITSQ) Score|ITSQ is a validated instrument containing 22 items that assess treatment satisfaction for participants with diabetes and on insulin. Items divided into 5 domains of satisfaction: Inconvenience of Regimen [(IR) 5 items: domain scores range (DSR) 5-35], Lifestyle Flexibility [(LF) 3 items: DSR 3-21], Glycemic Control [(GC) 3 items: DSR 3-21], Hypoglycemic Control [(HC) 5 items: DSR 5-35], Insulin Delivery Device [(IDD) 6 items: DSR 6-42]. All items measured on a 7-point scale: 1 (no bother at all) to 7 (a tremendous bother), with lower scores reflecting better outcomes. ITSQ Total Overall Raw Scores range from 22-154. Both raw domain and overall scores are transformed on a scale of 0-100, where transformed score=100*[(7-mean raw score)/6]. Higher scores indicate better treatment satisfaction. LS means was determined by MMRM with baseline of response, baseline HbA1c, country, sulfonylurea use, basal insulin status at study entry, visit, treatment and visit*treatment in the model.|Week 4 and Week 24|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug with Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline ITSQ measure.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857052|NCT02302716|Secondary|Change From Baseline to 24 Weeks in Body Weight|Change from baseline in body weight. Least Squares (LS) means was determined by mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) methodology with baseline of response, baseline HbA1c, country, sulfonylurea use, basal insulin status at study entry, visit, treatment and visit*treatment in the model.|Baseline, 24 Weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug with Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline body weight measure.||Kilogram (kg)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857053|NCT02302716|Secondary|Basal Insulin Dose Per Body Weight (U/kg/Day)|Basal Insulin dose in units (U) per body weight in kilograms (kg) per day. Least Squares (LS) means was determined by mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) methodology with baseline of response, baseline HbA1c, country, sulfonylurea use, basal insulin status at study entry, visit, treatment and visit*treatment in the model.|Week 24|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug with Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline Basal Insulin Dose per Body Weight measure.||units per kilogram per day (U/kg/day)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857054|NCT02302716|Secondary|Basal Insulin Dose Units Per Day|Units of Basal Insulin dose taken per day (U/day). Least Squares (LS) means was determined by mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) methodology with baseline of response, baseline HbA1c, country, sulfonylurea use, basal insulin status at study entry, visit, treatment and visit*treatment in the model.|Week 24|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug with Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline Basal Insulin Dose.||Units per day (U/day)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857055|NCT02302716|Secondary|Intra-Participant Variability in Fasting Blood Glucose (FBG)|Fasting blood glucose (FBG) is a test to determine how much glucose (sugar) is in a blood sample after an overnight fast. Intra-Participant FBG variability was calculated based on the standard deviation (SD) of the morning pre-meal BG value. Least Squares (LS) means was determined by mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) methodology with baseline HbA1c, country, sulfonylurea use, basal insulin status at study entry, visit, treatment and visit*treatment in the model.|Week 24|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug with Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline fasting blood glucose measure.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857056|NCT02302716|Secondary|Change From Baseline in 7-point Self-Monitored Blood Glucose (SMBG) Values|Seven-point SMBG are completed at the following timepoints: Before Morning Meal, 2 Hours After Morning Meal, Before Mid-Day Meal, 2 Hours After Mid-Day Meal, Before Evening Meal, Bed Time and 03:00 AM hours. Least Squares (LS) means was determined by mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) methodology with baseline HbA1c, country, sulfonylurea use, basal insulin status at study entry, visit, treatment and visit*treatment in the model.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug with Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline SMBG measure.||Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857057|NCT02302716|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With HbA1c <7% and ≤6.5%|Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is the glycosylated fraction of hemoglobin A. HbA1c is measured primarily to identify average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time.|Endpoint [up to 24 weeks]|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug with Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline HbA1c measure; last observation carried forward (LOCF).||Percentage of participants|||Number
857058|NCT02302716|Primary|Change From Baseline to 24 Weeks in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)|"HbA1c is the glycosylated fraction of hemoglobin A. HbA1c is measured primarily to identify average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time.
Least Squares (LS) mean was determined by mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM) model with baseline of response, treatment (LY2963016, LANTUS), pooled country, basal insulin at entry (yes/no), sulfonylurea (SU) use (yes/no), visit, treatment and visit*treatment in the model."|Baseline, 24 weeks|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with a Baseline and at least 1 post-Baseline HbA1c measure.||Percentage of glycosylated hemoglobin||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857060|NCT02255097|Secondary|OS in PD-L1-Positive Participants|Participants with a positive PD L-1 expression status were evaluated for OS. The expression of PD L-1 was determined by IHC and PD-L1 positive was defined as a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥1% by IHC. OS was defined as the time from the first day of study treatment to death due to any cause. OS was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method for censored data and reported in months.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a Tumor Proportion Score ≥1%||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857061|NCT02255097|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) in All Participants|OS was defined as the time from the first day of study treatment to death due to any cause. OS was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method for censored data and reported in months.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857062|NCT02255097|Secondary|PFS in Strong PD-L1-Positive Participants|Participants with a strong PD L-1 expression status were evaluated for PFS by modified RECIST 1.1. The expression of PD L-1 was determined by IHC and strong PD-L1 positive was defined as a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥50% by IHC. PFS was defined as the time from the first day of study treatment to the first documented PD per RECIST 1.1 or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Using RECIST 1.1, PD was defined as either a 20% relative increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study OR an absolute increase of >5 mm the sum of lesions, OR the appearance of new lesions. PFS was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method for censored data and reported in months.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a Tumor Proportion Score ≥50%||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857063|NCT02255097|Secondary|PFS in PD-L1-Positive Participants|Participants with a positive PD L-1 expression status were evaluated for PFS. The expression of PD L-1 was determined by IHC and PD-L1 positive was defined as a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥1% by IHC. PFS was defined as the time from the first day of study treatment to the first documented PD per RECIST 1.1 or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Using RECIST 1.1, PD was defined as either a 20% relative increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study OR an absolute increase of >5 mm the sum of lesions, OR the appearance of new lesions. PFS was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method for censored data and reported in months.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a Tumor Proportion Score ≥1%||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857064|NCT02255097|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) in All Participants|PFS was defined as the time from the first day of study treatment to the first documented PD per RECIST 1.1 or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Using RECIST 1.1, PD was defined as either a 20% relative increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study OR an absolute increase of >5 mm the sum of lesions, OR the appearance of new lesions. PFS was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method for censored data and reported in months.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857065|NCT02255097|Secondary|DOR in Strong PD-L1-Positive Participants|Participants with a strong PD L-1 expression status were evaluated for DOR based n RECIST 1.1. The expression of PD L-1 was determined by IHC and strong PD-L1 positive was defined as a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥50% by IHC. DOR was measured from the time measurement criteria were first met for CR/PR (whichever was first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or PD was objectively documented (taking as reference for PD the smallest measurements recorded on study). DOR was censored at the last tumor assessment date if a responder did not have PD or death. Non-responders were not included in the analysis. The lower and upper limits were estimated at the time of data cutoff. DOR was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method for censored data and reported in months.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a Tumor Proportion Score ≥50% and a best overall response as confirmed complete response or partial response||Months||Full Range|Median
857066|NCT02255097|Secondary|DOR in PD-L1-Positive Participants|Participants with a positive PD L-1 expression status were evaluated for DOR based on RECIST 1.1. The expression of PD L-1 was determined by IHC and PD-L1 positive was defined as a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥1% by IHC. DOR was measured from the time measurement criteria were first met for CR/PR (whichever was first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or PD was objectively documented (taking as reference for PD the smallest measurements recorded on study). DOR was censored at the last tumor assessment date if a responder did not have PD or death. Non-responders were not included in the analysis. The lower and upper limits were estimated at the time of data cutoff. DOR was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method for censored data and reported in months.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a Tumor Proportion Score ≥1% and a best overall response as confirmed complete response or partial response||Months||Full Range|Median
857067|NCT02255097|Secondary|Response Duration (DOR) in All Participants|DOR was based on RECIST 1.1 and measured from the time measurement criteria were first met for CR/PR (whichever was first recorded) until the first date that recurrent or PD was objectively documented (taking as reference for PD the smallest measurements recorded on study). DOR was censored at the last tumor assessment date if a responder did not have PD or death. Non-responders were not included in the analysis. The lower and upper limits were estimated at the time of data cutoff. DOR was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method for censored data and reported in months.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a best overall response as confirmed complete response or partial response||Months||Full Range|Median
857068|NCT02255097|Secondary|ORR by Modified RECIST Version 1.1 in Strong PD-L1-Positive Participants|Participants with a strong PD L-1 expression status were evaluated for ORR by modified RECIST 1.1. The expression of PD L-1 was determined by IHC and strong PD-L1 positive was defined as a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥50% by IHC. ORR was assessed by performing study imaging every 6-9 weeks after the first dose of study treatment. ORR was defined as the proportion of participants in the analysis population who had a CR defined as a disappearance of all target lesions with pathological lymph nodes having a reduction in short axis to <10 mm) or PR defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, using the baseline sum diameters as a reference. If imaging shows disease progression (PD) imaging was repeated 4 weeks later to confirm progression. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions and new measurable lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum recorded since treatment started.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a Tumor Proportion Score ≥50%||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857069|NCT02255097|Secondary|ORR by Modified RECIST Version 1.1 in PD-L1-Positive Participants|Participants with a positive PD L-1 expression status were evaluated for ORR by modified RECIST 1.1. The expression of PD L-1 was determined by IHC and PD-L1 positive was defined as a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥1% by IHC. ORR was assessed by performing study imaging every 6-9 weeks after the first dose of study treatment. ORR was defined as the proportion of participants in the analysis population who had a CR defined as a disappearance of all target lesions with pathological lymph nodes having a reduction in short axis to <10 mm) or PR defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, using the baseline sum diameters as a reference. If imaging shows disease progression (PD) imaging was repeated 4 weeks later to confirm progression. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions and new measurable lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum recorded since treatment started.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a Tumor Proportion Score ≥1%||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857070|NCT02255097|Secondary|ORR by Modified RECIST Version 1.1 in All Participants|ORR was assessed by modified RECIST 1.1 by performing study imaging every 6-9 weeks after the first dose of study treatment. ORR was defined as the proportion of participants in the analysis population who had a CR defined as a disappearance of all target lesions with pathological lymph nodes having a reduction in short axis to <10 mm) or PR defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, using the baseline sum diameters as a reference. If imaging shows disease progression (PD) imaging was repeated 4 weeks later to confirm progression. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions and new measurable lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum recorded since treatment started.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857071|NCT02255097|Secondary|ORR by RECIST Version 1.1 in Human Papilloma Virus (HPV)-Positive Tumors|Participants with a HPV-positive tumor biopsy were evaluated for ORR by RECIST 1.1. ORR was assessed by performing study imaging every 6-9 weeks after the first dose of study treatment. ORR was defined as the proportion of participants in the analysis population who had a CR defined as a disappearance of all target lesions with pathological lymph nodes having a reduction in short axis to <10 mm) or PR defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, using the baseline sum diameters as a reference.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a HPV-positive tumor||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857072|NCT02255097|Secondary|ORR by RECIST 1.1 in PD-L1-Positive Participants|Participants with a positive PD L-1 expression status were evaluated for ORR by RECIST 1.1. The expression of PD L-1 was determined by IHC and PD-L1 positive was defined as a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥1% by IHC. ORR was assessed by performing study imaging every 6-9 weeks after the first dose of study treatment. ORR was defined as the proportion of participants in the analysis population who had a CR defined as a disappearance of all target lesions with pathological lymph nodes having a reduction in short axis to <10 mm) or PR defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, using the baseline sum diameters as a reference.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a Tumor Proportion Score ≥1%||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857073|NCT02255097|Primary|Number of Participants Discontinuing Study Drug Due to an AE|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which did not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE could therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product/protocol-specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product/protocol-specified procedure. Any worsening of a preexisting condition temporally associated with the use of the product was also an AE. A serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE that resulted in death, was life threatening, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, resulted in or prolonged an existing inpatient hospitalization, was a congenital anomaly/birth defect, was a cancer, was associated with an overdose, was another important medical event.|From first dose to last dose of treatment; up to 25 months|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Participants|||Number
857074|NCT02255097|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing an Adverse Event (AE)|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which did not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE could therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product/protocol-specified procedure, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product/protocol-specified procedure. Any worsening of a preexisting condition temporally associated with the use of the product was also an AE. A serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE that resulted in death, was life threatening, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, resulted in or prolonged an existing inpatient hospitalization, was a congenital anomaly/birth defect, was a cancer, was associated with an overdose, was another important medical event.|From first dose to last dose of treatment plus 2 months of follow-up, up to 27 months|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Participants|||Number
857075|NCT02255097|Primary|ORR by RECIST Version 1.1 in Strong Programmed Cell Death Ligand 1 (PD-L1)-Positive Participants|Participants with a strong PD L-1 expression status were evaluated for ORR by RECIST 1.1. The expression of PD L-1 was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and strong PD-L1 positive was defined as a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥50% by IHC. ORR was assessed by performing study imaging every 6-9 weeks after the first dose of study treatment. ORR was defined as the proportion of participants in the analysis population who had a CR defined as a disappearance of all target lesions with pathological lymph nodes having a reduction in short axis to <10 mm) or PR defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, using the baseline sum diameters as a reference.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication with a Tumor Proportion Score ≥50%||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857076|NCT02255097|Primary|Overall Response Rate (ORR) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) in All Participants|ORR was assessed by RECIST 1.1 by performing study imaging every 6-9 weeks after the first dose of study treatment. ORR was defined as the proportion of participants in the analysis population who had a Complete Response (CR) defined as a disappearance of all target lesions with pathological lymph nodes having a reduction in short axis to <10 mm) or Partial Response (PR) defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, using the baseline sum diameters as a reference.|Up to 3 years|All participants who received at least one dose of study medication||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857078|NCT02229396|Secondary|Change in Systolic Blood Pressure From Baseline to Week 28|To compare the change from baseline to Week 28 in systolic blood pressure between exenatide once weekly (EQW) 2 mg and dapagliflozin 10 mg administered simultaneously compared to EQW 2 mg alone and dapagliflozin 10 mg alone.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
857079|NCT02229396|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving HbA1c <7% at Week 28|To compare the percentage of patients achieving HbA1c <7% at 28 weeks between exenatide once weekly (EQW) 2 mg and dapagliflozin 10 mg administered simultaneously compared to EQW 2 mg alone and dapagliflozin 10 mg alone.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||% of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857080|NCT02229396|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose From Baseline to Week 2|To compare the change from baseline to Week 2 in fasting plasma glucose between exenatide once weekly (EQW) 2 mg and dapagliflozin 10 mg administered simultaneously compared to EQW 2 mg alone and dapagliflozin 10 mg alone.|Baseline to Week 2|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
857081|NCT02229396|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving Weight Loss ≥5.0% at Week 28|To compare the percentage of patients achieving weight loss ≥5.0% at 28 weeks between exenatide once weekly (EQW) 2 mg and dapagliflozin 10 mg administered simultaneously compared to EQW 2 mg alone and dapagliflozin 10 mg alone.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||% of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857082|NCT02229396|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in 2-hour Postprandial Glucose After a Standard Meal Tolerance Test|To compare the change from baseline to Week 28 in 2-hour postprandial glucose after a standard Meal Tolerance Test between exenatide once weekly (EQW) 2 mg and dapagliflozin 10 mg administered simultaneously compared to EQW 2 mg alone and dapagliflozin 10 mg alone.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
857083|NCT02229396|Secondary|Change in Fasting Plasma Glucose From Baseline to Week 28|To compare the change from baseline to Week 28 in fasting plasma glucose between exenatide once weekly (EQW) 2 mg and dapagliflozin 10 mg administered simultaneously compared to EQW 2 mg alone and dapagliflozin 10 mg alone.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
857084|NCT02229396|Secondary|Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 28|To compare the change from baseline to Week 28 in body weight between exenatide once weekly (EQW) 2 mg and dapagliflozin 10 mg administered simultaneously compared to EQW 2 mg alone and dapagliflozin 10 mg alone.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
857085|NCT02229396|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 28|To compare the change from baseline to Week 28 in HbA1c between exenatide once weekly (EQW) 2 mg and dapagliflozin 10 mg administered simultaneously compared to EQW 2 mg alone and dapagliflozin 10 mg alone.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||% HbA1c||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
857111|NCT02147184|Other Pre-specified|The Moderating Effect of the Short Allele of the Serotonin Transporter-Linked Polymorphic Region (5HTTLPR) Gene on the Association Between SSRI Use and the Primary Outcomes||2 years||12/2019||||
857112|NCT02147184|Secondary|Cortical Thickness at 20% Radius|This is cortical thickness as measured by pQCT.|At baseline and every 4 months up to 2 years.|The figures below may be lower than the overall numbers above due to exclusions for movement artifacts and premature drop outs.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
857113|NCT02147184|Secondary|Cortical Volumetric BMD at 20% Radius||At baseline and every 4 months up to 2 years.|This was the original sample size per group but the figures below reflect attrition and data exclusion due to movement artifacts.||mg/cm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
857114|NCT02147184|Secondary|Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Z-score|This is a Z-score adjusted for sex, age, race, and height.|At baseline and every 8 months up to 2 years.|This was the initial sample size per group but the figures below reflect attrition or data excluded due to artifact.||Z-score (Age-Sex-Height-Race Specific)||Standard Deviation|Mean
857115|NCT02147184|Primary|Bone-specific Alkaline Phosphatase to C-terminal Telopeptide Ratio|Bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (ng/mL) is a marker of bone formation while C-terminal telopeptide (ng/mL) is a marker of bone resorption.|At baseline and every 4 months up to 2 years.|The figures below might be less than the stated numbers above depending on availability of serum samples, the performance of the assay, and premature attrition.||Ratio||Standard Deviation|Mean
857117|NCT02147184|Primary|Trabecular Volumetric Bone Mineral Density at the Ultradistal Radius|Volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) at the nondominant radius (4% and 20% sites) was measured, at study entry and every four months, with peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT), using a Stratec XCT‐2000 scanner (Stratec, Inc., Pforzheim, Germany). Image analysis was performed using the manufacturer’s software package, version 6.0. pQCT scans compromised by movement were rejected. Quality control and calibration of the equipment were performed daily.|At baseline and every 4 months up to 2 years.|This was the starting sample size. However, the figures below reflect participant attrition and exclusion of scans due to movement artifact.||mg/cm^3||Standard Deviation|Mean
857118|NCT02147184|Primary|Total Body Less Head Bone Mineral Content (TBLH BMC) Z-score (Adjusted for Age-sex-height-race)|Whole-body dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan was obtained using a Hologic QDR DELPHI-4500A unit or a Hologic Discovery A unit (Hologic, Inc, Bedford, MA). The two DXA units were cross-calibrated.|At baseline and every 8 months up to 2 years.|These are the starting sample size but the figures below reflect participant attrition.||Z score (age-sex-height-race specific)||Standard Deviation|Mean
857119|NCT02133508|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE is an unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with a clinical study, regardless of causality.|Up to 8 months|All eligible participants||percentage of participants|||Number
857120|NCT02133508|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the time from the beginning of therapy with erlotinib to death from any cause.|Up to 8 months|All eligible participants||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857121|NCT02133508|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) According to RECIST v1.1|PFS was defined as the time from the beginning of therapy with erlotinib to the first occurrence of disease progression, as determined by the investigator using RECIST v1.1 criteria, or death from any cause. Disease progression was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions.|Up to 8 months|All eligible participants||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857122|NCT02133508|Primary|Duration of SD or Objective Response According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1|The duration of SD or objective response (CR+PR) was defined as the time from first occurrence of SD or objective response to the time of PD, or death for any cause. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. Objective response was defined as having a CR or PR. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions, and all pathological lymph nodes must have decreased to <10 mm in short axis. PR was defined as at least 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. PD was defined as at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and an absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions.|Up to 8 months|All eligible participants||percentage of participants|||Number
857123|NCT02133508|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Stable Disease (SD) or Objective Response (Complete and Partial Response [CR + PR] According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1|SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease (PD), taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. Objective response was defined as having a CR or PR. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and no new lesions, and all pathological lymph nodes must have decreased to <10 millimeters (mm) in short axis. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions (taking as reference the baseline sum diameters), no progression in non-target lesions, and no new lesions. PD was defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and an absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions.|Up to 8 months|All eligible participants||percentage of participants|||Number
857186|NCT01788358|Secondary|Blood Pressure Response Rate at Weeks 28 and 52|Response rate was defined as the percentage of subjects who achieved a systolic blood pressure response (MSSBP of <140 mmHg or a reduction of MSSBP of more than (>) 20 mmHg from baseline value), or a diastolic blood pressure response (MSDBP of <90 mmHg or a reduction of MSDBP of >10 mmHg from baseline value).|Weeks 28 and 52|mITT||percentage of subjects|||Number
857187|NCT01788358|Secondary|Blood Pressure Control Rate at Weeks 28 and 52|Control rate was defined as the percentage of subjects that reached a predetermined blood pressure (BP) target of BP less than (<) 140/90 mmHg.|Weeks 28 and 52|mITT||percentage of subjects|||Number
857188|NCT01788358|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Seated Diastolic Blood Pressure (MSDBP) at Weeks 28 and 52||Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 28 and 52|mITT||millimeter of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
857189|NCT01788358|Secondary|Change From Baseline In Mean Seated Systolic Blood Pressure (MSSBP) At Weeks 28 And 52||Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 28 and 52|Modified intention-to-treat analysis set (mITT): All the subjects enrolled into the open-label treatment period and took at least one unit of the study medication.||millimeter of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
857190|NCT01788358|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Clinically Relevant Changes in Laboratory Parameters|Laboratory evaluations of blood and urine samples were performed, including hematology (hematocrit, hemoglobin, red blood cells count, white blood cells count, neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, basophils, platelets), blood chemistry (sodium, potassium, chloride, bicarbonate, uric acid, total protein, albumin, calcium, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, aspartate transaminase, alanine transaminase, lactate dehydrogenase, gamma glutamyl transferase, alkaline phosphatase, creatine kinase, total bilirubin, direct bilirubin, total cholesterol, low density lipoprotein cholesterol, high density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, fasting glucose), urinalysis (pH, blood, specific gravity, glucose, protein, cells/sediment). A laboratory test abnormality considered clinically relevant, for example, causing withdrawal by subject, requiring treatment or causing apparent clinical manifestations, or judged relevant by the investigator, were reported as AEs.|Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 52/EOS|SAF||Subjects|||Number
857191|NCT01788358|Primary|Number of Subjects With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) of Special Interest up to Week 52/End of Study (EOS)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence (that is, any unfavorable and unintended sign [including abnormal laboratory findings], symptom or disease) in a subject or clinical investigation subject after providing written informed consent for participation in the study. AEs were considered to be treatment-emergent if they had started or worsened after first application of study medication. TEAEs of special interest included the incidence of symptomatic hypotension and the incidence and severity of vasodilatory adverse events (such as oedema, headache, and flushing). Only subjects who had TEAEs of special interest as mild, moderate or severe were reported.|From the time of study treatment up to Week 52/EOS|SAF||Subjects|||Number
857192|NCT01788358|Primary|Number of Subjects With All Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Drug-related TEAEs up to Week 52/End of Study (EOS)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence (that is, any unfavorable and unintended sign [including abnormal laboratory findings], symptom or disease) in a subject or clinical investigation subject after providing written informed consent for participation in the study. AEs were considered to be treatment-emergent if they had started or worsened after first application of study medication.|From the time of first study drug administration up to Week 52/EOS|SAF||Subjects|||Number
857193|NCT01788358|Primary|Number of Subjects With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) of Special Interest up to Week 28|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence (that is, any unfavorable and unintended sign [including abnormal laboratory findings], symptom or disease) in a subject or clinical investigation subject after providing written informed consent for participation in the study. AEs were considered to be treatment-emergent if they had started or worsened after first application of study medication. TEAEs of special interest included the incidence of symptomatic hypotension and the incidence and severity of vasodilatory adverse events (such as oedema, headache, and flushing). Only subjects who had TEAEs of special interest as mild, moderate or severe were reported.|From the time of first study drug administration up to Week 28|SAF||Subjects|||Number
857194|NCT01788358|Primary|Number of Subjects With All Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Drug-related TEAEs up to Week 28|An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence (that is, any unfavorable and unintended sign [including abnormal laboratory findings], symptom or disease) in a subject or clinical investigation subject after providing written informed consent for participation in the study. AEs were considered to be treatment-emergent if they had started or worsened after first application of study medication.|From the time of first study drug administration up to Week 28|Safety Analysis Set (SAF): All the subjects enrolled into the open-label treatment period and took at least one unit of the study medication.||Subjects|||Number
857229|NCT01692691|Secondary|Median Survival of Patients Treated With Combination.||8 weeks||||||
857230|NCT01692691|Secondary|Median Duration of Response||8 weeks||||||
857231|NCT01692691|Secondary|Response Rate||8 weeks|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857232|NCT01692691|Primary|Progression Free Survival of Patients With Stage IV Melanoma Who Have Had Disease Progression on at Least One Prior Systemic Therapy||8 weeks|||participants|||Number
857250|NCT01658813|Secondary|Median Survival|Median survival was measured from date of entry on study until date of death|up to 2 years|all 18 patients were analyzed.||months||Full Range|Median
857251|NCT01658813|Secondary|Median Duration of Response|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by radiographic imaging: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up tp 2 years|2 partial responses were seen.||months||Full Range|Median
857252|NCT01658813|Secondary|Response Rate|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by radiographic imaging: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|up to 2 years|||percentage of patients responding||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857253|NCT01658813|Secondary|Number of Responses|Radiographic studies to evaluate for response were done at 8 weeks (after 1 cycle). Standard RECIST response criteria were utilized. Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by CT scan: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|up to 2 years.|||number of patients responding|||Number
857254|NCT01658813|Primary|Progression Free Survival|Progression Free Survival (PFS) was calculated as the time (months) from date of the start of treatment to the date of first observed disease progression (per standard Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors [RECIST] or date of death from any cause, whichever came first, assessed up to 2 years. The actual date of tumor assessments was used for this calculation. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of one or more new lesions.|Assessed up tp 2 years|||months||Full Range|Median
857340|NCT01452529|Primary|"Mean Pain Intensity for Average Pain Over the Last 24 Hours Score"|"Mean pain intensity for average pain over the last 24 hours score (on an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine)."|Week 12|The full analysis population (N = 588) was the group of subjects who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of double-blind study drug||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857670|NCT00470366|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions|Up to 8 years|||years||Full Range|Median
857308|NCT01515189|Secondary|Overall Survival of Participants With Brain Metastases at Baseline|OS for each participant with brain metastases at baseline was measured as the time between randomization date and death due to any cause. The survival time for participants who had not died was censored at the last known alive date. Median OS, and associated 2-sided 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Brookmeyer and Crowley method.|From date of randomization until 540 death events occurred (approximately 48 months)|All randomized participants with brain metastases at baseline||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857309|NCT01515189|Secondary|Rate of Overall Survival|OS is defined for each participant as the time between randomization date and death due to any cause. The survival time for participants who had not died was censored at the last known alive date. Survival rates were calculated based on Kaplan-Meier estimation with log-log transformed confidence intervals. The survival rate at x year(s) is defined as the probability that a subject is alive at x year(s) following randomization.|From date of randomization until 5 years (ongoing)|All randomized participants||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857320|NCT01495988|Secondary|Overall Survival|Compare overall survival (OS) of patients with stage IV, BRAFV600E/K melanoma treated with vemurafenib/cobimetinib versus vemurafenib/cobimetinib and bevacizumab.|Time between randomization and death due to any cause (overall survival rates also to be assessed at 12 and 18 months)|The trial was terminated prematurely during the phase Ib safety lead-in and outcome measures were not analyzed due to significantly underpowered data and the MTD being undetermined.|||||
857310|NCT01515189|Secondary|Duration of Stable Disease by mWHO Criteria|Duration of stable disease was defined for participants whose BOR was SD as the time between when SD was first documented and the date of PD or death (whichever occurred first). For a participant who underwent tumor resection following Week 12 but prior to disease progression, duration of stable disease was censored on the date of the last evaluable tumor assessment prior to resection. For participants who had BOR of SD at Week 12, the date of PD following thereafter (where available) was used in the analysis of duration of stable disease. For participants with BOR of SD who had not subsequently progressed and who remained alive, duration of stable disease was censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment. Median and associated 2-sided 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Brookmeyer and Crowley method.|From date of randomization until 540 death events occurred (approximately 48 months)|All randomized participants||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857311|NCT01515189|Secondary|Duration of Response by mWHO Criteria|Duration of response for participants whose BOR was CR or PR was defined as the time between the date measurement criteria were first met for overall response of PR or CR (whichever status was recorded first) and the date of disease progression or death (whichever occurred first). For participants who underwent tumor resection following response but prior to disease progression, duration of response was censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment prior to resection. For participants who had BOR of SD, PR or CR at Week 12, or a confirmed response of PR or CR before Week 12, the date of PD following thereafter (where available) was used in the analysis of duration of response. For those participants who remained alive and had not progressed following response, duration of response was censored on the date of last evaluable tumor assessment. Median and associated 2-sided 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Brookmeyer and Crowley method.|From date of randomization until 540 death events occurred (approximately 48 months)|All randomized participants||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857312|NCT01515189|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR) by mWHO Criteria|DCR by treatment arm was defined as the total number of randomized participants in the arm whose BOR is CR, PR or SD, divided by the total number of randomized participants in the arm. Any participant who was unevaluable for Disease Control (DC), (e.g. on account of missing or “not evaluable” assessments), was included in the denominator of the calculation (i.e. was considered a non-responder with respect to the DCR endpoint). 95% 2-sided exact confidence intervals were computed using the Clopper and Pearson method.|From date of randomization until 540 death events occurred (approximately 48 months)|All randomized participants||percentage of participants with DC||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857313|NCT01515189|Secondary|Best Overall Response Rate (BORR) by mWHO Criteria|BORR by treatment arm was defined as the total number of randomized participants in the arm whose BOR is CR or PR, divided by the total number of randomized participants in the arm. Any participant who was unevaluable for BOR, e.g. on account of missing or “not evaluable” assessments, was included in the denominator of the calculation (i.e. was considered a non-responder with respect to the BORR endpoint). 95% 2-sided exact confidence intervals were computed using the method of Clopper and Pearson.|From date of randomization until 540 death events occurred (approximately 48 months)|All randomized participants||percentage of participants with BORR||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857314|NCT01515189|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS) by mWHO Criteria|PFS was defined as the time between randomization date and the date of progression or death, whichever occurred first. A participant who died without reported prior progression was considered to have progressed on the date of death. For a participant who underwent resection post randomization, PFS was censored on last tumor assessment date prior to resection. For those who remained alive and had not progressed, PFS was censored on last evaluable tumor assessment date. Participants who had not died and had no recorded post-baseline tumor assessment were censored at the day of randomization. For participants who had Progressive Disease (PD) prior to Week 12 and a subsequent assessment of Stable Disease (SD), Partial Response (PR), or Complete Response (CR), the date of PD following response was used in the analysis of PFS; otherwise these participants were censored on the date of their last tumor assessment. Median and 2-sided 95% CIs were calculated with Brookmeyer Crowley method.|From date of randomization until 540 death events occurred (approximately 48 months)|All randomized participants.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857315|NCT01515189|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is defined for each participant as the time between randomization date and death due to any cause. The survival time for participants who had not died was censored at the last known alive date. Median and associated 2-sided 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|From date of randomization until 540 death events occurred (approximately 48 months)|All randomized participants||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857316|NCT01495988|Secondary|Correlate Blood Markers of B-RAFV600 Mutation With Treatment Efficacy|Assess the effectiveness of blood reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay for BRAFV600 as a surrogate biomarker for tumor response and resistance in patients receiving vemurafenib/cobimetinib +/- bevacizumab.|Upon completion of the protocol (3 years)|The trial was terminated prematurely during the phase Ib safety lead-in and outcome measures were not analyzed due to significantly underpowered data and the MTD being undetermined.|||||
857317|NCT01495988|Secondary|Effects of the Addition of Bevacizumab on Tumor Angiogenesis, Resistance Mechanisms and Immune Function|Perform a variety of correlative studies aimed at understanding the effects of vemurafenib/cobimetinib, and bevacizumab administration relative to vemurafenib/cobimetinib on tumor angiogenesis, resistance mechanisms and immune function.|Upon completion of the protocol (3 years)|The trial was terminated prematurely and outcome measures were not analyzed.|||||
857318|NCT01495988|Secondary|Toxicity and Safety Profile|Describe the toxicity and safety profile of treatment with vemurafenib/cobimetinib versus vemurafenib/cobimetinib and bevacizumab in patients with stage IV, BRAFV600E/K melanoma.|Until study completion|The trial was terminated prematurely during the phase Ib safety lead-in and outcome measures were not analyzed due to significantly underpowered data and the MTD being undetermined.|||||
857319|NCT01495988|Secondary|Response Rates|Compare response rate (RR) of patients with stage IV, BRAFV600E/K melanoma treated with vemurafenib/cobimetinib versus vemurafenib/cobimetinib and bevacizumab.|From time of randomization to time of disease progression (restaging for tumor response to occur every 8 wks until wk 48, then every 12 wks thereafter)|The trial was terminated prematurely during the phase Ib safety lead-in and outcome measures were not analyzed due to significantly underpowered data and the MTD being undetermined.|||||
857321|NCT01495988|Primary|Median Progression-free Survival|To compare median progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with stage IV, BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K melanoma treated with vemurafenib/cobimetinib versus vemurafenib/cobimetinib and bevacizumab.|Time between randomization and disease progression (~10-15 months)|The trial was terminated prematurely during the phase Ib safety lead-in and outcome measures were not analyzed due to significantly underpowered data and the MTD being undetermined.|||||
857322|NCT01495988|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose|To establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of bevacizumab in combination with vemurafenib and cobimetinib.|Until MTD determined (up to 6 months)|The trial was terminated prematurely during the phase Ib safety lead-in and outcome measures were not analyzed. MTD could not be determined.|||||
857323|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in NRS After Box Lift|Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain score was given verbally after completing functional box lift test on a scale 0-10 (0=none, and 10=the worst).|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||NRS pain score||Standard Error|Mean
857324|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in NRS After Sit to Stand Repetitions|Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain score was given verbally after completing functional sit to stand test on a scale 0-10 (0=none, and 10=the worst).|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||NRS pain score||Standard Error|Mean
857325|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in NRS After Treadmill Walk|Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain score was given verbally after completing functional treadmill walk test on a scale 0-10 (0=none, and 10=the worst).|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||NRS pain score||Standard Error|Mean
857326|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in NRS After Stair Climb|Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain score was given verbally after completing functional stair climb test on a scale 0-10 (0=none, and 10=the worst).|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||NRS pain score||Standard Error|Mean
857327|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in Time to Lift Box|Time to lift 13 pound box to floor and back up to table.|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||seconds per lift||Standard Error|Mean
857328|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in Distance to Floor|Distance from fingers to Floor when bending forward. A functional test of flexibility|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||centimeters||Standard Error|Mean
857329|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in Sit to Stand Repetitions|Sit to stand repetitions completed in 1 minute|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||number of repetitions||Standard Error|Mean
857330|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in Treadmill Distance Walked|Treadmill distance walked in 6 minutes|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||miles||Standard Error|Mean
857331|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in Stair Climb Time|Time to climb 1 flight of stairs|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||seconds||Standard Error|Mean
857332|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in Pain Disability|The Pain Disability Index (PDI) is a seven-item, validated instrument that assesses perceived disability in seven key life areas. It provides a total disability score, and is an indirect measure of self efficacy. The Pain Disability Scale is a scale from 0 - 70, where 0 = no Disability and 70 = the most Disability.|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857333|NCT01455519|Secondary|Change in PASS|Anxiety scores were collected at least two data points. The Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale (PASS) is a scale from 0 - 100, where 0 = no anxiety and 100 = the most anxiety.|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857334|NCT01455519|Primary|Change in VAS|Visual Analogue Scale is a self report pain scale on a scale 0(no pain) to 100 (the worst pain imaginable).|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857335|NCT01455519|Primary|Change in McGill Pain Questionnaire – Short Form|The McGill Pain Questionnaire – Short Form (MPQ-SF) is a well-validated pain measure that permits separation of the sensory and affective components of pain, which are added together to compute a total score. The scale ranges from 0-45 (0=no pain, 45=the most pain).|Collected at 2 visits over 8-10 weeks: Visit 1 and Visit 4. Change values were calculated from Baseline to post intervention|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857336|NCT01452529|Secondary|Responder Analysis for Subjects With a ≥ 50% Reduction in Pain Compared to Baseline|A subject’s response to treatment was defined as the percentage reduction from the screening mean pain score to the mean pain intensity at week 12 of the double-blind period.|Week 12||||||
857337|NCT01452529|Secondary|Responder Analysis for Subjects With a ≥ 30% Reduction in Pain Compared to Baseline|A subject’s response to treatment was defined as the percentage reduction from the screening mean pain score to the mean pain intensity at week 12 of the double-blind period.|Week 12||||||
857338|NCT01452529|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)|"The PGIC observational scale was completed by the subject. Subjects were asked to assess the change in overall status relative to the start of the study. The scale has only 1 item, which measures global change of overall status by the subject on a 7-point scale (Very much improved, Much improved, Minimally improved, No change, Minimally worse, Much worse, Very much worse), where 1 = very much improved and 7 = very much worse. The proportion of subjects responding much improved and very much improved was summarized by treatment group and compared between groups using an exact test."|Week 12||||||
857339|NCT01452529|Secondary|Medical Outcome Study Sleep Scale - Revised (MOS Sleep-R)|The scale consists of 12 individual items categorized into a sleep problems index and 6 subscales: 4 sleep disturbance, 2 sleep adequacy, 1 quantity of sleep, 3 daytime somnolence, 1 snoring, 1 shortness of breath. Scores range from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate greater sleep disturbance.|Weeks 4, 8, and 12||||||
858146|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Total Testosterone Measuring Minimum Concentration Observed (Cmin)|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858408|NCT01245062|Secondary|Overall Survival in All Participants|Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause.|Day 1 until death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|ITT Population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857357|NCT01400139|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (TSQ) - Part II|The TSQ is a self-administered questionnaire that consists of 2 parts. Part II has 2 questions that measure the subject's willingness to continue the use of study drug as pain medication (Q1), and to recommend the study drug to someone else (Q2). Question 1 consists of 6 categories of response rated on a scale from 1 (very willing to continue) to 6 (very unwilling to continue): 1=Very willing to continue; 2=Willing to continue; 3=Somewhat willing to continue; 4=Somewhat unwilling to continue; 5=Unwilling to continue; 6=Very unwilling to continue. Question 2 consists of 3 categories of response: 1=yes; 2=no; 3=undecided.|At Week 52 or upon early discontinuation at or before Week 4 in maintenance and at Week 24 in extension||||||
857358|NCT01400139|Secondary|Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (TSQ) - Part I|The TSQ is a self-administered questionnaire that consists of 2 parts. Part I has 6 questions (Q1 to Q6) that ask the subject to rate the experience with use of the study drug in comparison to the prestudy pain medication regarding ease of use, convenience, frequency, pain control, and overall satisfaction. Each question was rated on a scale from 1 (extremely satisfied) to 6 (extremely dissatisfied): Q1=Satisfaction with study drug; Q2=Ease of study drug use to treat pain; Q3=Convenience of study drug to treat pain; Q4=Overall drug satisfaction managing pain; Q5=Satisfaction with frequency of use; Q6=Ease of planning study drug use. TSQ - Part I was not administered in the extension period.|At Week 52 or upon early discontinuation at or before Week 4 in maintenance||||||
857359|NCT01400139|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)|The PGIC is an ordinal scale of global evaluation that assesses the change in overall status relative to the start of the study. The scale has only 1 item that measures global change of overall status (improvement or worsening) by the subject on a 7-point scale (Very much improved, Much improved, Minimally improved, No change, Minimally worse, Much worse, Very much worse. The proportion of subjects with a response of “much improved” (category 2) and “very much improved” (category 1), is provided along with 95% confidence intervals for the proportion.|At Week 52 in maintenance and at Week 24 in extension||||||
857360|NCT01400139|Secondary|Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form (SF-36)|The SF-36 is a generic health survey with 36 items that measure functional health and well-being from the subject’s perspective. The 36 questions are grouped into 11 sections. Some of the sections consist of multiple questions. The survey is summarized into 8 dimensions/scales: physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional, and mental health. From the 8 health dimensions, physical component summary, and mental component summary measures are derived. For SF-36, a higher score indicates a better perception of health.|Up to 52 weeks in maintenance and up to 24 weeks in extension||||||
857361|NCT01400139|Secondary|Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF) - Pain Interference|The BPI-SF questionnaire was used to assess the severity of pain and the interference of pain on daily functions. It consists of 9 sections that measure pain location, intensity, pain treatment, and functional interference of pain on mood and every day activities. Four of the items (questions 3 through 6) assess the severity of pain and 7 items (questions 9A through 9G) assess the interference of pain. The pain severity subscale was determined by calculating the arithmetic mean of the responses to items 3, 4, 5 and 6. For BPI, a lower score indicates a lower pain.|Up to 52 weeks in maintenance and up to 24 weeks in extension||||||
857362|NCT01400139|Secondary|Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Scale - Revised (MOS Sleep-R)|The MOS Sleep-R is a brief, self-administered 12-item assessment designed to measure key aspects of sleep: sleep problems index II and 6 subscale scores – sleep disturbance, sleep adequacy, daytime somnolence, snoring, awaken short of breath or with headache, and quantity of sleep. For the derived scores in the MOS Sleep-R, a higher score indicates a better sleep pattern.|Up to 52 weeks in the Core Study maintenance period, and up to 24 weeks in the Extension Period||||||
857363|NCT01400139|Secondary|"Pain Right Now Score"|"“Pain right now” scores were collected using an 11-point scale where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine. The pain right now scores were only collected during the Core Study. “Pain right now” scores were not assessed during the Extension Period."|Week 12||||||
857364|NCT01400139|Primary|"Daily Average Pain Over the Last 24 Hours"|"Average pain over the last 24 hours score (on an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine)."|Core study: from start to end of maintenance period (up to 52 weeks); Extension study: from start of maintenance to end of extension (up to 76 weeks)|The Core Study population analyzed (N=727) was the group of subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the maintenance period. The Extension Period population analyzed (N=106) was the group of core study safety population subjects who entered the extension period and received at least 1 dose of study drug in the extension period.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857365|NCT01400139|Primary|The Number of Participants With Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety|Safety assessments included AEs, clinical laboratory test results, vital sign measurements, ECG findings, and audiology assessments.|Up to 84 weeks|The Core Study safety population (N=922) was defined as the group of subjects who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study. The Extension Period safety population (N=106) was the group of core study safety population subjects who entered the extension period and received at least 1 dose of study drug in the extension period.||participants|||Number
857392|NCT01288534|Secondary|Frequency of Required Interventions.|To assess the frequency of required interventions (interruptions) based on real-time prostate translations and rotations to verify that the proposed planning target volume(PTV) margins and action level are appropriate and practical. This will be assessed by the percentage of patients with no interventions for any fraction, the percentage of patients with 1-2 fractions interrupted and the percentage of patients with more than two fractions interrupted and the percentage of patients that had an interruption of the beam at least once for all 5 fractions.|5 years|||percentage of participants|||Number
857393|NCT01288534|Secondary|Relation Between Reconstructed Delivered Dose Distributions.|To determine the relation between reconstructed delivered dose distributions, accounting for prostate translation and rotation, and tumor control probabilities.|5 years|Data was not collected in full by some centers for their patients and these endpoints couldn't be analyzed|||||
857394|NCT01288534|Secondary|Relation Between Dose Distribution and Toxicities.|To look at the relation between dose distribution and toxicities and to determine if reconstructed delivered doses are more predictive of toxicity than planned doses.|5 years|Data was not collected in full by some centers for their patients and these endpoints couldn't be analyzed.|||||
857395|NCT01288534|Secondary|Percentage of Patients With a PSA Nadir of <3.35 ng/ml at 12 Months|To estimate one year prostate specific antigen (PSA)control of prostate cancer when treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using continuous real-time evaluation of prostate motion.|1 Year|||percentage of patients|||Number
857396|NCT01288534|Primary|Percentage of Patients With a Minimally Detected Decline (MDD) in Quality of Life (QOL)|"To evaluate the safety of the proposed hyperfractionation regimen of 5 fractions of radiation to treat prostate cancer with guidance of radiation using the Calypso 4D Treatment System (Calypso, and to compare it to that expected from conventional treatment, which would involve 40-42 smaller radiation fractions over 8-9 weeks.
Percentage of patients with a MDD in Quality of Life (QOL) surveys for urinary incontinence (UI), urinary obstructive (UO), bowel (BS), and sexual (SS) domains were reviewed at 6 months and 24 months."|24 months|||percentage of patients|||Number
857467|NCT01147653|Post-Hoc|Change in Whole Brain Connectivity Measured by Diffusion Tensor Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of All Subjects 1 Year Post-infusion With Autologous UCB|Change in whole brain connectivity measured by diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Changes in connectivity are normalized to white matter volume.|1 year post-infusion with autologous umbilical cord blood|This group combines patients who received Autologous Umbilical Cord Blood whether at baseline or 1 year post-infusion with Placebo and is limited to patients without morphologic brain abnormalities that prevented accurate anatomical image parcellation. Low/High dose is defined as the median dose infused in all 63 enrolled patients, 2x10e7 TNCC/kg.||Number of connections x10e5||Standard Deviation|Mean
857454|NCT01223352|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients With Treatment-emergent Hemoglobin Abnormalities|"Number of patients with marked hemoglobin decreases (absolute values below 10 g/dL). The worst post-baseline value was considered.
The treatment-emergent period was defined as study treatment start date up to 7 calendar days after study treatment end date."|24 Weeks on average|All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and with available data.||Participants|||Number
857455|NCT01223352|Other Pre-specified|Number of Patients With Treatment-emergent Liver Function Abnormalities|Number of patients with increase in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and / or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) above 3 times upper limit of normal (ULN). The worst post-baseline value was considered. The treatment-emergent period was defined as study treatment start date up to 7 calendar days after study treatment end date.|24 Weeks on average|All randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug and with available data.||Participants|||Number
857456|NCT01223352|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Global Clincial Impression Scale (GCIS) at End of Study|The GCIS is an assessment tool providing a single global assessment of the patient’s current overall clinical condition: Very Good, Good, Neither Good or Bad, Bad and Very Bad. The assessment was performed both by the physician and the parents / legal representatives independently. Global clinical impression (GCI) at end of study was compared to GCI at baseline and the number of patients with clinical condition considered as worsened, improved or unchanged are determined.|Baseline, up to Week 24 on average|All-randomized set. Because all 64 randomized patients were treated with at least one dose of study drug, the All-randomized set was identical to the All-treated set.||Participants|||Number
857457|NCT01223352|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in WHO Functional Class at End of Study|"The World Health Organization (WHO) defines 4 classes to classify the functional status of patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH):
Class I (FC I): No limitation of physical activity. Class II (FC II): Slight limitation of physical activity. Class IIII (FC III): Marked limitation of physical activity. Class IV (FC IV): Inability to carry out any physical activity without symptoms.
Number of patients with improvement (shift from a higher to a lower class), worsening (shift from a lower to a higher class) or no change in WHO functional class at end of study compared to baseline are determined."|Baseline, up to Week 24 on average|All-randomized set. Because all 64 randomized patients were treated with at least one dose of study drug, the All-randomized set was identical to the All-treated set.||Participants|||Number
857507|NCT01012492|Secondary|The Rate of Grades III-IV Acute GVHD at 2 Years.|The rates of Grades III-IV acute GVHD were measured at 2 years according to standard Glucksberg criteria, which was 10%.|2 years after transplant|||percentage of participants|||Number
857458|NCT01223352|Other Pre-specified|Dose-corrected Daily Exposure [AUC(0-24c)] to Bosentan Metabolites (Ro 478634, Ro 485033, Ro 641056)|Concentrations of the metabolites were measured directly in blood samples collected prior to study drug administration and up to 8 hours or up to 12 hours post-dose for the t.i.d and b.i.d. dosing regimen, respectively. Daily exposure to the metabolites corresponds to the area under the concentration-time curve [AUC(0-24)] of the corresponding metabolite over a period of 24 hours, and was calculated in the same manner as the primary endpoint. AUC(0-24c) was corrected to 2 mg/kg (target dose) [AUC(0-24c)].|0, 0.5, 1, 3, 5 (or 7.5), 8 (or 12 hours) post-dose at Week 4, after at least 2 weeks of stable study drug treatment|Per protocol PK analysis set (PK set): All patients included in the bosentan 2 mg/kg b.i.d. and bosentan 2 mg/kg t.i.d. groups who received at least one dose of bosentan and who were able to provide at least 5 blood samples for PK assessments and who did not violate the protocol in a way that might affect the evaluation of the PK main endpoint.||h*ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
857459|NCT01223352|Other Pre-specified|Time to Reach Cmax [Tmax] of Bosentan|"Concentrations of bosentan were measured directly in blood samples collected prior to study drug administration and up to 8 hours or up to 12 hours post-dose for the t.i.d and b.i.d. dosing regimen, respectively.
tmax was obtained directly from the measured plasma concentrations."|0, 0.5, 1, 3, 5 (or 7.5), 8 (or 12 hours) post-dose at Week 4, after at least 2 weeks of stable study drug treatment|Per protocol PK analysis set (PK set): All patients included in the bosentan 2 mg/kg b.i.d. and bosentan 2 mg/kg t.i.d. groups who received at least one dose of bosentan and who were able to provide at least 5 blood samples for PK assessments and who did not violate the protocol in a way that might affect the evaluation of the PK main endpoint.||hours||Full Range|Median
857460|NCT01223352|Other Pre-specified|Dose-corrected Maximum Plasma Concentration [Cmaxc] of Bosentan|"Concentrations of bosentan were measured directly in blood samples collected prior to study drug administration and up to 8 hours or up to 12 hours post-dose for the t.i.d and b.i.d. dosing regimen, respectively.
The peak plasma concentration (Cmax) of bosentan was directly obtained from the measured plasma concentrations and was dose-corrected to the target dose of 2 mg/kg (Cmaxc)."|0, 0.5, 1, 3, 5 (or 7.5), 8 (or 12 hours) post-dose at Week 4, after at least 2 weeks of stable study drug treatment|Per-protocol PK analysis set (PK set): All patients included in the bosentan 2 mg/kg b.i.d. and bosentan 2 mg/kg t.i.d. groups who received at least one dose of bosentan and who were able to provide at least 5 blood samples for PK assessments and who did not violate the protocol in a way that might affect the evaluation of the PK main endpoint.||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
857461|NCT01223352|Primary|Dose-corrected Daily Exposure [AUC(0-24c)] to Bosentan|"Daily exposure was measured by the area under the plasma concentration-time curve over a period of 24 hours [AUC(0-24)].
Concentrations of bosentan were measured directly in blood samples collected prior to study drug administration and up to 8 hours or up to 12 hours post-dose for the t.i.d and b.i.d. dosing regimen, respectively. AUC(0-24) was calculated as a multiple of AUCtau, which is the AUC over a dosing interval (AUCtau x 2 for the b.i.d. dosing regimen and AUCtau x 3 for the t.i.d. regimen). As the smallest dose unit was 8 mg (1/4 tablet), it was not possible to achieve the exact target dose of 2 mg/kg. Therefore, AUC(0-24) was corrected to 2 mg/kg (target dose) [AUC(0-24c)]."|0, 0.5, 1, 3, 5 (or 7.5), 8 (or 12 hours) post-dose at Week 4, after at least 2 weeks of stable study drug treatment|Per-protocol PK analysis set (PK set): All patients included in the bosentan 2 mg/kg b.i.d. and bosentan 2 mg/kg t.i.d. groups who received at least one dose of bosentan and who were able to provide at least 5 blood samples for PK assessments and who did not violate the protocol in a way that might affect the evaluation of the PK main endpoint.||h*ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
857508|NCT01012492|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Grade III-IV Acute GVHD by Day 100.|Grade III-IV Acute GVHD by Day 100. The incidence of Gr III-IV acute GVHD was measured by the modified Glucksburg scale.|Day 100 post-transplant|||percentage of participants|||Number
857468|NCT01147653|Post-Hoc|Peabody Gross Motor Quotient Change Score 1 Year After Receiving Autologous UCB.|The Peabody Developmental Motor Scales - Second Edition (PDMS-2), Gross Motor Quotient change score was calculated for each patient at 1 year after infusion with autologous umbilical cord blood. Analyzed by infused dose, above or below the median. The Gross Motor Quotient score from the PDMS-2 was used in this study to evaluate gross motor function. The Gross Motor Quotient measures the ability to use large muscle systems for locomotion, maintain a stable posture when not moving, and throw/catch objects. The range of possible scores is 41 to 164. High scores indicate better gross motor function. Lower scores indicate less gross motor function ability.|1 year post-infusion with autologous umbilical cord blood|This group combines patients who received Autologous Umbilical Cord Blood at baseline or 1 year post-infusion with Placebo, and who are within the age range specified for the PDMS-2. The threshold defining Low/High dose is the median dose infused in all 63 enrolled patients, 2x10e7 TNCC/kg.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857469|NCT01147653|Post-Hoc|Observed Minus Expected GMFM-66 Change Score of All Subjects Receiving Autologous UCB and Who Are Greater Than or Equal to 2 Years of Age|Validated functional curves were used to identify the expected 1-year change in GMFM-66 score given each child's age and Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) Level at baseline. The difference between observed change (in this study) and expected change was then calculated for each participant. The threshold defining Low/High dose is the median dose infused in all 63 enrolled patients, 2x10e7 TNCC/kg.|1 year post-infusion with autologous umbilical cord blood|Patients who received cord blood at baseline and 1 year post-infusion with Placebo, and who are >=2 years old (to allow calculation of expected GMFM-66 change scores from published data). An additional 6 are excluded because change scores were not observable due to subject withdrawal (5) or inability to comply due to a broken leg (1).||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857470|NCT01147653|Post-Hoc|Gross Motor Function Measure 66 (GMFM-66) Change Score at 1 Year by Infused Dose|Gross Motor Function Measure 66 (GMFM-66) Change Score at 1 Year. Analyzed by infused dose, above or below the median. The GMFM-66 is a clinical tool used to evaluate gross motor function in children with cerebral palsy and is scored using a propriety software program called the Gross Motor Ability Estimator (GMAE) that produces an interval level continuous score ranging from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate better motor function. A negative change in GMFM-66 score indicates a reduction in motor function, a positive change indicates improvement in motor function, and zero indicates no change in motor function.|1 Year|Patients randomized to Autologous Umbilical Cord Blood were divided into two groups for this analysis: Low and High dose. The median dose infused in these 32 patients was used as the cut point to define Low and High doses: 1.98x10e7 total nucleated cells per kilogram of patient weight (TNCC/kg).||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857471|NCT01147653|Other Pre-specified|Change in Barry-Albright Dystonia Total Score From Baseline to Year 1|The Barry-Albright Dystonia Scale measures generalized dystonia in eight body regions (eyes, mouth, neck, trunk, and the four extremities) using an ordinal scale (0=no dystonia, 1=slight dystonia, 2=mild dystonia, 3=moderate dystonia, and 4=severe dystonia). Individual scores for each region are summed to obtain a total score. The total score can range from 0 to 32 and higher scores indicate an overall greater degree of dystonia. The change in Barry-Albright Dystonia Total Score was evaluated from Baseline to Year 1. Positive numbers indicate increasing dystonia, negative numbers indicate a decrease in dystonia, and zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857472|NCT01147653|Secondary|Parent Experience of Child Illness|This outcome measure was not used in this study because it had not been validated for children with Cerebral Palsy.|Baseline to Year 1||||||
857473|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Bruininks-Oseretsky-2 Total Motor Composite From Baseline to Year 1|The Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, Second Edition, (BOT-2) evaluates motor function in four areas: stability, mobility, strength, coordination, and object manipulation. A Total Motor Composite is then calculated and expressed on a normal distribution with mean 50 and standard deviation of 10. Higher scores indicate better motor function. The BOT-2 Total Motor Composite was used to measure motor function in children at age 6 in this study. The study intended to evaluate change in the BOT-2 Total Motor Composite from Baseline to Year 1, where positive change indicates improvement in motor function, negative change indicates decrease in motor function, and zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|The BOT-2 Total Motor Composite was available at Baseline and Year 1 in only 1 subject. The change score for that subject is reported here.||units on a scale|||Number
857474|NCT01147653|Secondary|Modified Ashworth Scale at Year 1|The Modified Ashworth Scale uses a 6 point scale (range 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4) to measure spasticity in 5 body regions (central, right upper extremity, left upper extremity, right lower extremity, and left lower extremity). Scores of 0 indicate no increase in muscle tone whereas a score of 4 indicates rigidity in flexion or extension.|Year 1|Patients are classified by their maximum score, regardless of body region.||Participants|||Count of Participants
857475|NCT01147653|Secondary|Modified Ashworth Scale at Baseline|The Modified Ashworth Scale uses a 6 point scale (range 0, 1, 1+, 2, 3, or 4) to measure spasticity in 5 body regions (central, right upper extremity, left upper extremity, right lower extremity, and left lower extremity). Scores of 0 indicate no increase in muscle tone whereas a score of 4 indicates rigidity in flexion or extension.|Baseline|Patients are classified by their maximum score, regardless of body region.||Participants|||Count of Participants
857476|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Difficult Child Score From Baseline to Year 1|Parent stress was evaluated with the Parenting Stress Index - Short Form for children aged 0-12 years, which measures stress in three domains: Parental Distress, Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction, and Difficult Child. Results in each domain are expressed as percentiles. Scores from the 15th-80th percentile are considered to be within the normal range. Scores at or above the 85th percentile considered high distress. Scores greater than the 89th percentile indicate clinically significant levels of distress. Analysis focused on changes in percentile scores between Baseline and Year 1. Positive numbers represent an increase in distress, negative numbers represent a decrease in distress, and zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|No participants were outside the age range for this test but change scores could not be calculated for some participants due either to missing data at the Baseline or Year 1 visit.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857477|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction From Baseline to Year 1|Parent stress was evaluated with the Parenting Stress Index - Short Form for children aged 0-12 years, which measures stress in three domains: Parental Distress, Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction, and Difficult Child. Results in each domain are expressed as percentiles. Scores from the 15th-80th percentile are considered to be within the normal range. Scores at or above the 85th percentile considered high distress. Scores greater than the 89th percentile indicate clinically significant levels of distress. Analysis focused on changes in percentile scores between Baseline and Year 1. Positive numbers represent an increase in distress, negative numbers represent a decrease in distress, and zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|No participants were outside the age range for this test but change scores could not be calculated for some participants due either to missing data at the Baseline or Year 1 visit.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857478|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Parental Distress From Baseline to Year 1|"Parent stress was evaluated with the Parenting Stress Index – Short Form for children aged 0-12 years, which measures stress in three domains: Parental Distress, Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction, and Difficult Child. Results in each domain are expressed as percentiles. Scores from the 15th-80th percentile are considered to be within the normal range.
Scores at or above the 85th percentile considered high distress. Scores greater than the 89th percentile indicate clinically significant levels of distress. Analysis focused on changes in percentile scores between Baseline and Year 1. Positive numbers represent an increase in distress, negative numbers represent a decrease in distress, and zero indicates no change."|Baseline to Year 1|No participants were outside the age range for this test but change scores could not be calculated for some participants due either to missing data at the Baseline or Year 1 visit.||Change in percentile score||Standard Error|Mean
857479|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) Z-score Total Problems From Baseline to Year 1|Two versions of the CBCL exist for children ages 1.5 to 5 years and ages 6-18 years. The CBCL evaluates internalizing and externalizing behaviors and total problems using 99-item assessments that are scored on an ordinal scale as 0 for “not true of the child,” 1 for “somewhat or sometimes true of the child,” and 2 for “very true or often true of the child” based on behavior in the preceding two months. Scores are expressed on a standard normal distribution with mean 50 and standard deviation 10. Z scores were created for analysis. A Z-score represents the distance from the population mean in terms of the number of standard deviations. The change in Z-score from Baseline to Year 1 was calculated for each patient. A positive number indicates an increase in the behavior, a negative number indicates a decrease in the behavior, and a zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|Evaluations done outside the age ranges specified for the assessments were excluded, the majority being assessments that were done on patients who were not yet 1.5 years of age.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857480|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) Z-score Externalizing Problems From Baseline to Year 1|Two versions of the CBCL exist for children ages 1.5 to 5 years and ages 6-18 years. The CBCL evaluates internalizing and externalizing behaviors and total problems using 99-item assessments that are scored on an ordinal scale as 0 for “not true of the child,” 1 for “somewhat or sometimes true of the child,” and 2 for “very true or often true of the child” based on behavior in the preceding two months. Scores are expressed on a standard normal distribution with mean 50 and standard deviation 10. Z scores were created for analysis. A Z-score represents the distance from the population mean in terms of the number of standard deviations. The change in Z-score from Baseline to Year 1 was calculated for each patient. A positive number indicates an increase in the behavior, a negative number indicates a decrease in the behavior, and a zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|Evaluations done outside the age ranges specified for the assessments were excluded, the majority being assessments that were done on patients who were not yet 1.5 years of age.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857481|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) Z-score Internalizing Problems From Baseline to Year 1|Two versions of the CBCL exist for children ages 1.5 to 5 years and ages 6-18 years. The CBCL evaluates internalizing and externalizing behaviors and total problems using 99-item assessments that are scored on an ordinal scale as 0 for “not true of the child,” 1 for “somewhat or sometimes true of the child,” and 2 for “very true or often true of the child” based on behavior in the preceding two months. Scores are expressed on a standard normal distribution with mean 50 and standard deviation 10. Z scores were created for analysis. A Z-score represents the distance from the population mean in terms of the number of standard deviations. The change in Z-score from Baseline to Year 1 was calculated for each patient. A positive number indicates an increase in the behavior, a negative number indicates a decrease in the behavior, and a zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|Evaluations done outside the age ranges specified for the assessments were excluded, the majority being assessments that were done on patients who were not yet 1.5 years of age.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857482|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Pediatric Evaluation of Disability (PEDI) Social Function Score|The Pediatric Evaluation of Disability is used to evaluate functional skills in children aged 6 months to 7 years in three areas: Self Care, Mobility, and Social Function. The score in each area can range from 10-90. Higher scores indicate higher function. The change from Baseline to Year 1 in the Social Function score is presented here. Positive scores indicate increased function, negative scores indicate a decrease, and zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|Patients were excluded if change scores were not observable due to missing data at Baseline or Year 1.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857483|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Pediatric Evaluation of Disability (PEDI) Mobility Score|The Pediatric Evaluation of Disability is used to evaluate functional skills in children aged 6 months to 7 years in three areas: Self Care, Mobility, and Social Function. The score in each area can range from 10-90. Higher scores indicate higher function. The change from Baseline to Year 1 in the Mobility score is presented here. Positive scores indicate increased function, negative scores indicate a decrease, and zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|Patients were excluded if change scores were not observable due to missing data at Baseline or Year 1.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857484|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Pediatric Evaluation of Disability (PEDI) Self Care Score|The Pediatric Evaluation of Disability is used to evaluate functional skills in children aged 6 months to 7 years in three areas: Self Care, Mobility, and Social Function. The score in each area can range from 10-90. Higher scores indicate higher function. The change from Baseline to Year 1 in the Self Care score is presented here. Positive scores indicate increased function, negative scores indicate a decrease, and zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|Patients were excluded if change scores were not observable due to missing data at Baseline or Year 1.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857485|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA) Score From Baseline to Year 1|The Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA) measures the use of hemiplegic cerebral palsy patients' involved hand in tasks involving two hands. The test is valid for ages 18 months to 12 years. The score is an interval scale ranging from 22 to 88 with higher numbers indicating more effective use of the affected hand in performance of bimanual tasks. Change in this score was evaluate between Baseline and Year 1. Positive numbers indicate more effective use of the affected hand, negative numbers indicate a reduction in the effective use of the affected hand, and a zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|Participants who were less than 18 months old, or had diplegia or quadriplegia were excluded. For those with unspecified typography, AHA scores were excluded if scores on either the Modified Ashworth Scale or Barry-Albright Dystonia scale indicated neither or both of the upper extremities were involved.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857486|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Cognitive Z-Score From Baseline to Year 1|Because patients in this study were evaluated with different cognitive assessments based on their age at the time of assessment (The Bayley-III Cognitive Composite, the WPSSI-III Full Scale IQ, and the WISC-IV Full Scale IQ Composite), with some patients being assessed using different tools at subsequent visits during the trial, a method for combining the assessments was employed to evaluate change in cognitive function over time in as many patients as possible. A cognitive Z-score was calculated for each participant at Baseline and Year 1 by adjusting each score by the relevant assessments’ population mean and standard deviation. The Z-scores represent the distance from the population mean, as measured by standard deviations. The analysis presented here summarizes the change in Z-score between Baseline and Year 1. A positive number indicates an increase in cognitive function, a negative number indicates a decrease, and zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|When using all available cognitive assessments, the change in cognitive Z-score was available for 42 of the 63 participants.||Z scores||Standard Error|Mean
857487|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-IV) From Baseline to Year 1.|Cognitive function was assessed in English-speaking study participants using one of three different tools depending on the age of the patient at the time of assessment: The Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III), the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-IV), and the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI-III). Some patients were assessed with different tools at subsequent visits as they aged during the conduct of the trial. The WISC-IV is designed for children 6 years 0 months to 16 years 11 months. This study used the Full Scale IQ, which ranges from 45 to 155 with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15. Higher scores indicate stronger cognitive function. Scores between 90 and 110 are considered to be within the range of average IQ.|Baseline to Year 1|Only one patient in this trial was evaluated with the WISC-IV and thus change over time could not be evaluated using this outcome measure. The single value for this patient is reported here.||Full Scale IQ Points|||Number
857488|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI) III Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (IQ) for Younger Children (Ages 2 Years & 6 Months to 3 Years & 11 Months) From Baseline to Year 1.|Cognitive function was assessed in English-speaking study participants using one of three different tools depending on the age of the patient at the time of assessment: The Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III), the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-IV), and the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI-III). Some patients were assessed with different tools at subsequent visits as they aged during the conduct of the trial. There are two versions of the WPPSI-III for two different age ranges: 2 years & 6 months to 3 years & 11 months, and 4 years to 7 years & 3 months. The Full Scale IQ is calculated for both age ranges and provides a continuous score with an average of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. Change from Baseline to Year 1 was evaluated, with positive numbers indicating an increase in cognitive ability, negative numbers indicating a decrease in cognitive ability, and zero indicating no change.|Baseline to Year 1|Change scores were evaluable in only 2 subjects who were assessed with the WPPSI-III at both Baseline and Year 1. One subject was randomized to Autologous Cord Blood and the other to Placebo.||units on a scale|||Number
857489|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development-III, Cognitive Composite From Baseline to Year 1|Cognitive function was assessed in English-speaking study participants using one of three different tools depending on the age of the patient at the time of assessment: The Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III), the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-IV), and the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI-III). Some patients were assessed with different tools at subsequent visits as they aged during the conduct of the trial. The Bayley-III is designed to assess developmental functioning of infants and toddlers. Scores for the Cognitive Composite range from 1 to 19 and results in the range of 8 to 12 are considered average. The outcome measure reported here is the change in Cognitive Composite between Baseline to Year 1. Positive numbers indicate increases in cognitive functioning, negative numbers indicate a decrease, and zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|The Bayley III is an age-specific test and was used for 42 patients at Baseline. A total of 27 of these patients were also scored with the Bayley III at Year 1. The results here represent change from Baseline to Year 1 in the 27 participants assessed with the Bayley III at both time points.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857490|NCT01147653|Secondary|Correlation Between Clinical Response and RNA Expression of Neural, Endothelial and Inflammatory Cytokines Measured by RNA Arrays in Cord Blood Cells Given to These Patients.|Various pre-selected neural, angiogenic, and anti-inflammatory markers expressed by UCB cells and clinical response will be evaluated.|2 years||01/2022||||
857491|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Loes Score of Functional MRI From Baseline to Year 1 and From Year 1 to Year 2|No data were collected from this procedure because enrolled subjects who were eligible to receive fMRI were unable to comply with the procedure.|Baseline, Year 1, Year 2|No data was available.|||||
857492|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Whole Brain Connectivity Measured by Diffusion Tensor Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)|Change in number of connections in the brain as measured by diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Changes in connectivity are normalized to white matter volume of the brain. A positive number indicates an increase in connections, a negative number indicates a decrease, and zero indicates no change. The number of connections is expressed in terms of 10e5. For example, a change of 1 indicates an increase of 1x10e5 or 100,000 connections.|Baseline to Year 1|Patients without substantial morphologic brain abnormalities that prevented accurate anatomical image parcellation.||Number of connections x10e5||Full Range|Median
857493|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in CP-QOL Score|Children age four years or older at study entry were assessed using the disease-specific “CP-QOL Child” assessment tool as completed by a parent. The CP-QOL Child primary-caregiver proxy form is designed for children 4 – 12 with cerebral palsy and contains 66 items which assess physical, emotional, and social well being as well as access to services and acceptance by others. Scores are summarized in seven topic areas. Scores in each area range from 0 (worst health) to 100 (best health). The change score from Baseline to Year 1 is summarized here for each item. Negative scores indicated a decrease in quality of life, positive scores indicate an increase and zero indicates no change.|Baseline, Year 1|The analysis includes patients whose parents reported scores on each item at both Baseline and Year 1 and whose children met the age criteria for the questionnaire at both time points.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857494|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in IT-QOL Questionnaire Score|The Infant and Toddler Quality of Life Questionnaire (IT-QOL) was utilized for children ages one to three years at study entry.This 97-item questionnaire is completed by the parents and covers 12 concepts related to the physical, mental, and social well being of the child and the impact of their illness on the family. Scores range from 0 (worst health) to 100 (best health). The change from Baseline to Year 1 is summarized here for each of the 12 items on the questionnaire. Negative values indicate a decline in quality of life over time, positive values indicate an improvement, and zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|The analysis includes patients whose parents reported scores on each item at both Baseline and Year 1 and whose children met the age criteria for the questionnaire at both time points.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857495|NCT01147653|Secondary|Change in Peabody Gross Motor Quotient From Baseline to Year 1|The Peabody Developmental Motor Scales - Second Edition (PDMS-2) measures gross and fine motor skills in children from birth through five years of age. The Gross Motor Quotient score from the PDMS-2 was used in this study to evaluate gross motor function. The Gross Motor Quotient measures the ability to use large muscle systems for locomotion, maintain a stable posture when not moving, and throw/catch objects. The range of possible scores is 41 to 164. High scores indicate better gross motor function. Lower scores indicate less gross motor function ability. The change in Gross Motor Quotient from Baseline to Year 1 was evaluated in this study. Positive numbers indicate an increase in gross motor ability, negative numbers indicate decreases in gross motor function, and a zero indicates no change.|Baseline to Year 1|Participants outside of the applicable age range for the PDMS-2 at Baseline or Year 1 were excluded from the analysis.||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
857496|NCT01147653|Primary|Change in Gross Motor Function Measure 66 (GMFM-66) Score|Change in Gross Motor Function Measure 66 (GMFM-66) Score from Baseline to Year 1. The GMFM-66 is a clinical tool used to evaluate gross motor function in children with cerebral palsy and is scored using a propriety software program called the Gross Motor Ability Estimator (GMAE) that produces an interval level continuous score ranging from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate better motor function. A negative change in GMFM-66 score indicates a reduction in motor function, a positive change indicates improvement in motor function, and zero indicates no change in motor function.|Baseline to Year 1|All enrolled patients were analyzed as randomized from Baseline to Year 1.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857505|NCT01012492|Secondary|Protective Immunity||3 years after transplant||||||
857506|NCT01012492|Secondary|Immunology||3 years||||||
857527|NCT00924729|Secondary|Disk Diffusion Assay of Collected Aqueous Humor|A disk diffusion assay was performed to determine the relative antimicrobial activity of the study drug in the aqueous humor. The reference organism used was a clinical isolate of S. epidermidis that will be grown and adjusted to a 0.5 MacFarland turbidity standard. The standardized suspension was inoculated onto a Mueller-Hinton II agar. A sample of the aqueous humor was applied to 6 mm sterile disks, dried, and then placed onto the inoculated Mueller-Hinton II agar plates. The plates were incubated for 24 hours at 35° C. The zone sizes were then recorded.|Approximately 3-4 months.|The amount of aqueous concentration of antibiotic agent was not enough to perform a secondary analysis|||||
857528|NCT00924729|Primary|Aqueous Humor Concentration of Study Drug|Patients were randomly assigned to receive one drop of either moxifloxacin or besifloxacin every 10 minutes for a total of 4 doses, with the last dose given 30 minutes prior to the time of the cataract incision. The aqueous humor was corrected through the paracentesis site. The specimen was transferred immediately to a polypropylene tube and stored upright at ≤ 20° C. Moxifloxacin and besifloxacin concentrations in the aqueous humor were determined using a validated high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-tandem mass spectrometry method.|approximately 3 to 4 months|||µg/ml||Standard Deviation|Mean
857550|NCT00853112|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Pulmonary Artery Pressure (mPAP), Systolic Pulmonary Artery Pressure (sPAP), Diastolic Pulmonary Artery Pressure (dPAP), Right Atrial Pressure (RAP) at Hour 1, 2, 3 and 4 Post Dose|Hourly changes from baseline in hemodynamic parameters were reported. Hemodynamic parameters including mPAP, sPAP, dPAP and RAP were measured using a pressure transducer positioned at the mid-axillary line with the participant in the supine position. All hemodynamic pressure measurements were performed as triplicate measurements and average was used.|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|FAS included all randomized participants who received study medication. Here, 'Number Analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at given time points for each group.||millimeters of mercury (mmHg)||Standard Deviation|Mean
857543|NCT00853112|Secondary|Plasma Concentration of PF-00489791 and Sildenafil||1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 hours post-dose on Day 1, follow up (Day 3 to 5)|Data was not reported for this outcome measure because the study was terminated and as per change in planned analysis, the pharmacokinetic parameters were not to be summarized.|||||
857544|NCT00853112|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Mean Partial Pressure of Oxygen (PaO2) and Carbon Dioxide (PaCO2) at Hour 1 and 4 Post Dose|Arterial blood samples for PaO2 and PaCO2 collected via an arterial line were assessed. PaO2 is the measure of oxygen level in the arterial blood and PaCO2 is the measure of carbon dioxide level in the arterial blood.|Baseline; 1, 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|Safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received study medication. Here, N (overall number of participants analyzed) = participants evaluable for this measure and 'Number Analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at given time points for each group.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
857545|NCT00853112|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Change in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Values|Criteria for clinically significant changes (changes of potential clinical concern) in ECG parameters: increase from baseline of >=30 to <60 milliseconds (msec) or >=60 msec in corrected QT interval (QTc), QT interval corrected using Fridericia’s correction (QTcF) and QT interval corrected using Bazett’s correction (QTcB); Increase from baseline of >= 25% (when baseline was >200 msec) or increase from baseline of >=50% (when baseline was <=200 msec) in PR interval; and Increase from baseline of >= 25% (when baseline was >100 msec) or increase from baseline of >=50% (when baseline was <=100 msec) in QRS interval. Number of participants with any clinically significant change in ECG values were reported.|Baseline up-to follow up (Day 3 to 5)|Safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received study medication.||Participants|||Count of Participants
857546|NCT00853112|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Laboratory Values|Criteria for clinically significant laboratory values:hemoglobin, hematocrit and red blood cells(less than[<]0.8*lower limit of normal[LLN]); leucocytes (<0.6*LLN/greater than[>]1.5*upper limit of normal[ULN]);platelets (<0.5*LLN></0>1.75* ULN);neutrophils, lymphocytes(<0.8*LLN></0>1.2* ULN); eosinophils, basophils, monocytes (>1.2*ULN);bilirubin (>1.5*ULN);aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase(>3*ULN);creatinine, blood urea nitrogen (>1.3*ULN);glucose(<0.6*LLN></0>1.5* ULN); uric acid(>1.2*ULN);sodium(<0.95*LLN></0>1.05*ULN); potassium, chloride, calcium(<0.9*LLN></0>1.1* ULN); albumin, total protein(<0.8></0>1.2* ULN); creatine kinase(>2.0*ULN);urine red blood cells(RBCs), urine white blood cells(WBCs)(>=6 per high-powered field);qualitative urine glucose, urine ketones, urine protein, urine blood/hemoglobin(>=1); urine bacteria(>20 per high-powered field); pregnancy test, urine protein, quantitative random serum pregnancy test (>=1).|Baseline up-to follow up (Day 3 to 5)|Safety analysis set included all randomized participants who received study medication.||Participants|||Count of Participants
857547|NCT00853112|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (HR) at Hour 1, 2, 3 and 4 Post Dose|Hourly changes from baseline in HR were reported.|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|FAS included all randomized participants who received study medication.||beats per minute (bpm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
857548|NCT00853112|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Pulmonary Vascular Resistance (PVR) and Systemic Vascular Resistance (SVR) at Hour 1, 2, 3 and 4 Post Dose|Hourly changes from baseline in PVR and SVR were reported. PVR was calculated by: PVR (Wood units) = (mean PAP minus PCWP) divided by CO (taken as the average of the triplicate measurements). SVR (Wood units) = (mean SAP minus RAP) divided by CO (taken as the average of the triplicate measurements).|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|FAS included all randomized participants who received study medication. Here, 'Number Analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at given time points for each group.||Wood units||Standard Deviation|Mean
857549|NCT00853112|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pulmonary Capillary Wedge Pressure (PCWP), Mean Systemic Arterial Pressure (SAP), Systolic Systemic Arterial Pressure (sSAP) and Diastolic Systemic Arterial Pressure (dSAP) at Hour 1, 2, 3 and 4 Post Dose|Hourly changes from baseline in hemodynamic parameters were reported. Hemodynamic parameters including PCWP, SAP, sSAP and dSAP were measured using a pressure transducer positioned at the mid-axillary line with the participant in the supine position. All hemodynamic pressure measurements (except PCWP for which 1 measurement is sufficient) were performed as triplicate measurements and average was used.|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|FAS included all randomized participants who received study medication. Here, 'Number Analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at given time points for each group.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
857551|NCT00853112|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cardiac Index (CI) at Hour 1, 2, 3 and 4 Post Dose|CI was calculated as: CI (liters per minute per square meter [L/min/m^2]) = CO (taken as the average of the triplicate measurements) divided by BSA. BSA (m^2) = (0.007184) multiplied by (height in cm)^0.725 multiplied by (weight in kg)^0.425.|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|FAS included all randomized participants who received study medication. Here, N (overall number of participants analyzed) = participants evaluable for this measure and 'Number Analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at given time points for each group.||L/min/m^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
857552|NCT00853112|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Systemic Vascular Resistance Index (SVRI) at Hour 1, 2, 3 and 4 Post Dose|SVRI is the product of SVR and BSA. SVR equals to (mean SAP subtracted by RAP) divided by CO (taken as the average of the triplicate measurements). BSA (m^2) equals to 0.007184 times height (cm)^0.725 times weight (kilogram) ^0.425. Wood unit equals to 79.9 dyne*second/cm^5. Hourly changes from baseline in SVRI was reported.|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|FAS included all randomized participants who received study medication. Here, N (overall number of participants analyzed) = participants evaluable for this measure and 'Number Analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at given time points for each group.||(dyne*s*m^2)/cm^5||Standard Deviation|Mean
857553|NCT00853112|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pulmonary Vascular Resistance Index (PVRI) at Hour 1, 2, 3 and 4 Post Dose|PVRI was calculated as: PVR multiplied by BSA. PVR = (mean PAP minus PCWP) divided by CO (taken as the average of the triplicate measurements). BSA (m^2) = 0.007184 times height (cm)^0.725 times weight (kilogram)^0.425. Wood unit equals to 79.9 dyne*second/cm^5. Hourly changes from baseline in PVRI was reported.|Baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|FAS included all randomized participants who received study medication. Here, N (overall number of participants analyzed) = participants evaluable for this measure and 'Number Analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at given time points for each group.||(dyne*s*m^2)/cm^5||Standard Deviation|Mean
857554|NCT00853112|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Systemic Vascular Resistance Index (SVRI) Over 4 Hours Post Dose|SVRI was calculated as: SVRI (Wood units*m^2) = SVR multiplied by BSA. SVR (Wood units) = (mean SAP minus RAP) divided by CO (taken as the average of the triplicate measurements). BSA (m^2) = (0.007184) multiplied by (height in cm)^0.725 multiplied by (weight in kg)^0.425. SVRI values were converted to dyne*s*m^2/cm^5 from Woods units by multiplying by a factor of 79.9. The change from baseline in SVRI over 4-hour interval was calculated as the average of the change from baseline values at 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours post dose on Day 1.|Baseline, up to 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|FAS included all randomized participants who received study medication. Here, N (overall number of participants analyzed) = participants evaluable for this measure.||(dyne*s*m^2)/cm^5||Standard Deviation|Mean
857555|NCT00853112|Secondary|Greatest Reduction From Baseline in Pulmonary Vascular Resistance Index (PVRI) and Systemic Vascular Resistance Index (SVRI) Over 4 Hours Post Dose|PVRI was calculated as: PVRI (in Wood units*m^2) = PVR multiplied by BSA. PVR (in Wood units) = (mean PAP minus PCWP) divided by CO (taken as the average of the triplicate measurements). SVRI was calculated as: SVRI (Wood units*m^2) = systemic vascular resistance (SVR) multiplied by BSA. SVR (Wood units) = (mean systemic arterial pressure [mean SAP] minus right atrial pressure [RAP]) divided by CO (taken as the average of the triplicate measurements). BSA (m^2) = (0.007184) multiplied by (height in cm)^0.725 multiplied by (weight in kg)^0.425. PVRI and SVRI values were converted to dyne*s*m^2/cm^5 from Woods units by multiplying by a factor of 79.9. For each participant the greatest reduction (GR) from baseline in PVRI and SVRI over 4-hour interval was defined as the maximum reduction (greatest decrease or smallest increase) observed at 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours post dose on Day 1.|Baseline, up to 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants who received study medication. Here, N (overall number of participants analyzed) = participants evaluable for this measure and 'Number Analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at given time points for each group.||(dyne*s*m^2)/cm^5||Standard Deviation|Mean
857556|NCT00853112|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Pulmonary Vascular Resistance Index (PVRI) Over 4 Hours Post Dose|PVRI was calculated as: PVRI (in Wood units*meter^2 [m^2]) = pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) multiplied by body surface area (BSA). PVR (in Wood units) = (mean pulmonary artery pressure [mean PAP] minus pulmonary capillary wedge pressure [PCWP]) divided by cardiac output (CO, taken as the average of the triplicate measurements). BSA (m^2) = (0.007184) multiplied by (height in centimeters [cm])^0.725 multiplied by (weight in kilograms [kg])^0.425. PVRI values were converted to dyne*second (s)*m^2/centimeter (cm)^5 from Woods units by multiplying by a factor of 79.9. The change from baseline in PVRI over 4-hour interval was calculated as the average of the change from baseline values at 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours post dose on Day 1.|Baseline, up to 4 hours post-dose on Day 1|Full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants who received study medication. Here, N (overall number of participants analyzed) = participants evaluable for this measure and 'Number Analyzed' = participants who were evaluable at given time points for each group.||(dyne*s*m^2)/cm^5||Standard Deviation|Mean
857582|NCT00788697|Secondary|Specific Diagnosis of Malignant FLLs|"SonoVue-enhanced versus unenhanced ultrasound for specific diagnosis of malignant FLLs, using the diagnosis provided by each of the 3 off-site assessors (blinded to patient data) for the ITD population. Unit of analysis was the lesion, equivalent to the subject, since each subject had a single lesion that was to be characterized.
Among the 124 ITD participants with malignant lesions based on the truth standard, only 115 participants (lesions) were characterized as either hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) lesions or metastatic lesions.
Truth standard: CE-CT and /or CE-MRI examination OR tissue pathology/histology from surgical resection/biopsy OR 6-month follow up. Calculated as (number of correctly characterized lesions/number of lesions per truth standard) x 100."|24 hours to 6 months|||Malignant lesions|Malignant lesions to be characterized||Number
857583|NCT00788697|Secondary|Negative Predictive Value (NPV)|"Negative Predictive Value of SonoVue-enhanced versus unenhanced ultrasound for characterization of FLLs, using the diagnosis provided by each of the 3 off-site assessors (blinded to patient data) for the ITD population. Unit of analysis was the lesion, equivalent to the subject, since each subject had a single lesion that was to be characterized.
True negative: subject with a target lesion characterized as benign by both ultrasonography and the truth standard.
Among the 240 ITD participants, the number of participants (lesions) assessed as benign varied based on the evaluation of the UE-US and CE-US made by each off-site Reader.
Truth standard: CE-CT and /or CE-MRI examination OR tissue pathology/histology from surgical resection/biopsy OR 6-month follow up. Calculated as (number of true negative lesions/number of benign lesions per ultrasound) x 100."|24 hours to 6 months|||Percent negative lesions by ultrasound|Negative lesions|95% Confidence Interval|Number
857584|NCT00788697|Secondary|Positive Predictive Value (PPV)|"Positive Predictive Value of SonoVue-enhanced versus unenhanced ultrasound for characterization of FLLs, using the diagnosis provided by each of the 3 off-site assessors (blinded to patient data) for the ITD population. Unit of analysis was the lesion, equivalent to the subject, since each subject had a single lesion that was to be characterized.
True positive: subject with a target lesion characterized as malignant by both ultrasonography and the truth standard.
Among the 240 ITD participants, the number of participants (lesions) assessed as malignant varied based on the evaluation of the UE-US and CE-US made by each off-site Reader.
Truth standard: CE-CT and /or CE-MRI examination OR tissue pathology/histology from surgical resection/biopsy OR 6-month follow up. Calculated as (number of true positive lesions/number of malignant lesions per ultrasound) x 100."|24 hours to 6 months|||Percent positive lesions by ultrasound|Positive lesions|95% Confidence Interval|Number
857585|NCT00788697|Secondary|Accuracy|"The Accuracy of SonoVue-enhanced versus unenhanced ultrasound for characterization of malignant and benign FLLs, using the diagnosis provided by each of the 3 off-site assessors (blinded to patient data) for the ITD population Unit of analysis was the lesion, equivalent to the subject, since each subject had a single lesion that was to be characterized.
True positive: subject with a target lesion characterized as malignant by both ultrasonography and the truth standard.
True negative: subject with a target lesion characterized as benign by both ultrasonography and the truth standard.
Truth standard: CE-CT and /or CE-MRI examination OR tissue pathology/histology from surgical resection/biopsy OR 6-month follow up. Calculated as (number of true positive and true negative lesions/number of total lesions per truth standard) x 100."|24 hours to 6 months|||Percent true positive and negative lesio|Total lesions|95% Confidence Interval|Number
857586|NCT00788697|Primary|Specificity|"Specificity of SonoVue-enhanced versus unenhanced ultrasound for characterization of benign FLLs, using the diagnosis provided by each of the 3 off-site assessors (blinded to patient data) for the ITD population. Unit of analysis was the lesion, equivalent to the subject, since each subject had a single lesion that was to be characterized.
True negative: subject with a target lesion characterized as benign by both ultrasonography and the truth standard.
Among the 240 ITD participants, only 116 participants (lesions) were benign based on the truth standard.
Truth standard: CE-CT and /or CE-MRI examination OR tissue pathology/histology from surgical resection/biopsy OR 6-month follow up. Calculated as (number of true negative lesions/number of benign lesions per truth standard) x 100."|24 hours to 6 months|||Percentage of true negative lesions|Benign lesions|95% Confidence Interval|Number
857587|NCT00788697|Primary|Sensitivity|"Sensitivity of SonoVue-enhanced ultrasound (SonoVue CE-US) versus unenhanced ultrasound (UE-US) for characterization of malignant focal liver lesions (FLLs), using the diagnosis provided by each of the 3 off-site assessors (blinded to patient data) for the Intent-to-Diagnose (ITD) population. Unit of analysis was the lesion, equivalent to the subject, since each subject had a single lesion that was to be characterized.
True positive: subject with a target lesion characterized as malignant by both ultrasonography and the truth standard.
Among the 240 ITD participants, only 124 participants (lesions) were malignant based on the truth standard.
Truth standard: contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE CT) and /or contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) examination OR tissue pathology/histology from surgical resection/biopsy OR 6-month follow up. Calculated as (number of true positive lesions/number of malignant lesions per truth standard) x 100."|24 hours to 6 months|||Percentage of true positive lesions|Malignant lesions|95% Confidence Interval|Number
857671|NCT00470366|Primary|Rate of Complete Response|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions|3 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
857627|NCT00596011|Other Pre-specified|Effect of Polyphenon E on the Fundamental Molecular Pathways|Explore the effects of Polyphenon E on the fundamental molecular pathways contributing to chemopreventive activity of Polyphenon E in the prostate. This exploratory aim is ongoing.|12 months||||||
857628|NCT00596011|Other Pre-specified|Change in Scores - Lower Urinary Tract Symptom (LUTS)|Change in score from baseline to 1 year. LUTS represent a common conglomeration of storage, voiding, and post-micturition symptoms with reported debilitating effect on quality of life. Symptom severity related to urinary frequency, nocturia, weak urinary stream, hesitancy, intermittency, incomplete bladder emptying and urinary urgency are assessed. We utilized the American Urological Association Symptom Score for the evaluation LUTS in this patient population. Symptom Frequency Scores: 0 = Not at all, 1 = Less than 1 time in 5, 2 = Less than half the time, 3 = About half the time, 4 = More than half the time, 5 = Almost always. Total Symptom Score = Sum of individual scores of the 7 symptoms. (minimum possible score=0; maximum possible score =35; Range of scores and significance: 0-7 mild symptoms; 8-19 moderate symptoms; 20-35 severe symptoms.|1 year|Participants with LUTS symptom scores available at baseline and at one year||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857629|NCT00596011|Secondary|Median Serum Total Prostatic Specific Antigen (tPSA)|Median ng/mL serum tPSA post treatment, per treatment arm.|12 months|All participants||ng/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Median
857630|NCT00596011|Secondary|Occurrence of Grade 3 or Higher Adverse Events (AEs)|Number of participants with AEs grade 3 or higher, per treatment arm.|12 months|All participants||participants|||Number
857631|NCT00596011|Secondary|Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs)|Safety of Polyphenon E (200 mg EGCG bid for one year) in men with HGPIN or ASAP. Number of participants with AEs Possibly or Probably related to treatment.|12 months|All participants||participants|||Number
857632|NCT00596011|Primary|Rate of Progression From HGPIN to ASAP or PCa|Analyses of participants reaching a definitive endpoint. Number of baseline HGPIN participants who progressed to ASAP or PCa.|12 months|Baseline HGPIN participants||participants|||Number
857633|NCT00596011|Primary|Rate of Progression to Prostate Cancer (PCa)|Number of participants with diagnosis of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) or atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) who progressed to prostate cancer (PCa) at one year.|12 months|All participants||participants|||Number
857669|NCT00470366|Secondary|Participants' Overall Response|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions|3 years|Of the 60 participants, 56 were evaluable for response.||Participants|||Count of Participants
857665|NCT00575042|Secondary|Quality of Life According to NIDDK Questionnaire||1 year||||||
857666|NCT00575042|Primary|Serum Level of Alkaline Phosphatase|We analyzed whether there was a difference in median ALP at 1 year compared to baseline values.|1 year|||U/L||Full Range|Median
857667|NCT00470366|Secondary|Number of Patients With Treatment Related Toxicity|Toxicity evaluated and graded according to the National Cancer Institute, Version 3.0|3 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
857668|NCT00470366|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Progression Free Survival|Progression Free Survival at 3 years. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions|3 years|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857734|NCT00116428|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Experienced Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence During the Two-year Follow up.|At the 2 year follow-up visit, Atrial Fibrillation recurrence was assessed by subject interview without documentation.|During the two years of post procedure|Subjects who completed two years follow up||Percentage of Participants|||Number
857735|NCT00116428|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Who Achieved Acute Success.|Acute success was defined as confirmation of entrance block in all targeted pulmonary veins. The study protocol considered subjects that had more than 2 AF ablation procedures within the 90 day blanking period immediately following their index study procedure or subjects that had additional ablation procedures greater than 80 days following their original study ablation procedure as acute failures.|90 days post study procedure|This analysis population is based on the first study ablation procedure.||Percentage of participants|||Number
857736|NCT00116428|Primary|The Percentage of Subjects Who Experienced Incidences of Early Onset (Within 7 Days of Ablation Procedure) Serious Catheter-related Adverse Events|Catheter-related adverse events include death, myocardial infarction, pulmonary vein stenosis,diaphragmatic paralysis, atrio-esophageal fistula,transient ischemic attack,stroke,cerebrovascular accident, thromboembolism, pericarditis, cardiac tamponade,pericardial effusion,pneumothorax,atrial perforation,vascular access complications,pulmonary edema,hospitalization (initial and prolonged), and heart block.|Within 7 Days of Ablation Procedure|Analysis population includes those enrolled subjects undergoing a study ablation procedure. A total of 139 underwent the procedure, including 36 AAD (control) group subjects who underwent the procedure after failing the effectiveness endpoint. The remaining 25 AAD (control) subjects didn't have the ablation procedure.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
857737|NCT00116428|Primary|The Percentage of Chronic Success of the NAVISTAR THERMOCOOL Catheter for the Treatment of Symptomatic Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation (PAF)|Chronic success was defined as freedom of documented symptomatic Atrial Fibrillation episodes based on electrocardiographic data and no changes in antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) regimen during comparable evaluation periods for the THERMOCOOL and AAD (Control) groups through 12 and 9 months of follow-up, respectively.|The evaluation time frame for the THERMOCOOL catheter subjects is 91-361 days (12 months) post procedure; for Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy subjects the time frame is 15-285 days (9 months) post procedure.|||Percentage of participants|||Number
858147|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Total Testosterone Measuring Average Steady State Concentration (Cave)|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859178|NCT01002742|Secondary|Incidence of GVHD Flares Requiring Increased Therapy|Flares are defined as any progression of acute GVHD after an initial response (i.e., earlier CR or PR) that requires re-escalation of steroid dosing, or initiation of additional topical or systemic therapy.|Day 90|||participants|||Number
859179|NCT01002742|Secondary|Percentage of Surviving Participants With Complete Response (CR)|CR is defined as a score of 0 for the GVHD grading in all evaluable organs.|Days 14, 28, and 56|||percentage of participants|||Number
859180|NCT01002742|Primary|GVHD-free Survival|Success is defined as alive and free of GVHD at day 56 after randomization, all others are considered to be a study failure.|Day 56|||participants|||Number
859181|NCT00912223|Secondary|Serum Rituximab (RTX) Levels|RTX concentration levels within participants|Baseline, Days 28 and 365|Serum RTX concentrations were collected at baseline (n=57), day +28 (n=56), and day +365 (n=44) for a compliance rate of 92%, 90%, and 80% at the assigned time points.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
859182|NCT00912223|Secondary|Incidence of Toxicities|Number of participants that experiences at least one grade 3 - 5 toxicity during the first two years, where grade 5 is worst. Toxicity grades are based on the NCI CTCAE Version 3.0.|Year 2|||participants|||Number
859183|NCT00912223|Secondary|Immunologic Reconstitution|Quantitative immunoglobulins (IgG)|Year 1|||mg/dL||Full Range|Median
859184|NCT00912223|Secondary|Quality of Life||Year 2|No data collected|||||
859185|NCT00912223|Secondary|Infections||Year 2|no data collected|||||
859186|NCT00912223|Secondary|Treatment-related Mortality (TRM)|The event is death occurring in patients in continuous complete remission. The TRM distribution will be estimated by the Kaplan-Meier curve.|Year 3|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859187|NCT00912223|Secondary|Overall Survival|The event is death from any cause.|Years 2 and 3|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859188|NCT00912223|Secondary|Chronic GVHD|The event is the incidence and severity of chronic GVHD from day of transplant, a cumulative incidence curve will be computed along with a 95% confidence interval at two years post-transplant. Death prior to occurrence of chronic GVHD will be considered as a competing risk.|Year 2|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859189|NCT00912223|Secondary|Acute Graft-versus-Host Disease (GVHD)|The event is the incidence of grades II-IV acute GVHD from day of transplant, where grade IV is worst. The first day of acute GVHD onset at a certain grade will be used to calculate a cumulative incidence curve for that acute GVHD grade. GVHD should be monitored in accordance with BMT CTN manual of procedures guidelines. Acute GVHD grading was based on the consensus conference criteria (Przepiorka, et. al., 1994) and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) grading criteria.|Day 100|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859190|NCT00912223|Secondary|Time to Neutrophil Recovery|Neutrophil Recovery is defined as ANC > 500/mm^3 for 3 consecutive days.|Day 60|||days||Full Range|Median
859191|NCT00912223|Secondary|Donor Cell Engraftment|Donor engraftment is defined as > 5% donor peripheral blood T cell chimerism by Day +30 post-transplant in the setting of Absolute Neutrophil Count (ANC) recovery (ANC >500/mm^3 for 3 consecutive days).|Days 30 and 100|||percentage of donor T-cell chimerism||Full Range|Median
859192|NCT00912223|Secondary|Graft Failure|Primary graft failure is defined as a donor peripheral blood T cell chimerism < 5% at Day +30 post-transplant. Secondary Graft Failure is defined as documented engraftment followed by loss of graft as defined by donor peripheral blood T cell chimerism < 5%.|Day 30|||participants|||Number
859193|NCT00912223|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|Patients are considered a failure for this endpoint if they die, or if they relapse/progress or receive anti-lymphoma therapy not including planned post-transplant radiation.|Year 2|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859194|NCT00910962|Secondary|Mean Hyperenhancement Score Index at Week 12|The myocardium was divided into 17 segments. A score ranging from 0 to 4 was visually attributed to each of the 17 segments according to the transmural extent of the hyperenhancement: score 0=0%, 1=>0-25%, 2=>25-50%, 3=>50-75% and 4=>75-100%. All these 17 scores were summed. The resulting summed score ranged in theory from 0 to 68 and was thereafter expressed as a percentage of the maximum possible score of 68. Cardiac MRIs were performed at qualified sites on participants who agree to participate in the MRI sub-study. A total of 15 participants out of 93 MRI ITT participants were excluded from the analysis due to missing Baseline cTnI (10 participants) and onset chest pain duration (9 participants). Four participants had both covariate values missing. Statistical analysis was performed on LS mean value using repeated measures ANCOVA.|At week 12|MRI ITT Population. Only those participants with data available at week 12 were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859195|NCT00910962|Secondary|Mean Regional Wall Motion Score Index at Week 12|Wall motion score index is a semi-quantitative analysis of regional systolic function. Each segment is analyzed individually and scored on the basis of its motion and systolic thickening. This score is a 5-level score defines as: 1=normokinesis or hyperkinesis, 2=hypokinesi, 3=akinesis, 4=dyskinesis, 5=aneurysm. Wall motion score index is derived as a sum of all scores divided by the number of segments visualized. Larger score index indicates higher degree of abnormalities. Cardiac MRIs were performed at qualified sites on participants who agree to participate in the MRI sub-study. A total of 15 participants out of 93 MRI ITT participants were excluded from the analysis due to missing Baseline cTnI (10 participants) and onset chest pain duration (9 participants). Four participants had both covariate values missing.|At Week 12|MRI ITT Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859196|NCT00910962|Secondary|Mean Left Ventricular Mass at Week 12|Statistical analyses of the treatment differences was performed to compare the left ventricular mass (via MRI) at Week 12, and for the change from Day 3 to Week 12 via repeated measures ANCOVA between study drug and placebo.Cardiac MRIs were performed at qualified sites on participants who agree to participate in the MRI sub-study. A total of 15 participants out of 93 MRI ITT participants were excluded from the analysis due to missing Baseline cTnI (10 participants) and onset chest pain duration (9 participants). Four participants had both covariate values missing.|At Week 12|MRI ITT Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||grams (gm)||Standard Deviation|Mean
857774|NCT00003659|Secondary|Overall Survival Status|The 5 year survival rate. The survival of patients with this disease is dependent on the stage of disease. Two useful staging systems are: Three-stage Rai System Clinical Feature and the Binet System.|up to 5 years|All assessable patients as indicated in the protocol.||participants|||Number
857775|NCT00003659|Secondary|Utilize Flow Cytometry and Polymerase Chain Reaction as Sensitive Measures of Minimal Residual Disease|The flow cytometric response and the molecular polymerase chain reaction (PCR) response was captured as indicated in the protocol. Immunophenotypic analysis of bone marrow and/ or peripheral blood demonstrate a normal k:λ ratio and a normal number of CD5/CD19 (or CD5/CD20) dual staining cells (<5% of the lymphocyte gate).|3 years|All assessable patients as indicated in the protocol||participants|||Number
857776|NCT00003659|Primary|Overall Response Rate|Response was determined as indicated in the protocol. The categories are: complete response, nodular partial response, partial response and failure. The major criteria for determination of response to therapy in patients with CLL include physical examination and examination of the peripheral blood and bone marrow. The laboratory and radiographic studies which were abnormal pre-study, will be repeated to document the degree of maximal response.|3 years|There were 36 assessable patients as described in the protocol||participants|||Number
857777|NCT00038727|Secondary|Quality of Life and Economic Analyses|Quality of life measurements include Beck, SF-36, and QWB.|2002-2013||||||
857778|NCT00038727|Secondary|Subclinical Atherosclerosis|Measured using coronary artery calcification.|2012||||||
857779|NCT00038727|Secondary|Aging Related Outcomes - Cognitive and Physical Function|Cognitive function defined as a composite measure constructed from tests of memory (English Spanish Verbal Learning Test) and executive function (word fluency and Digit Symbol Substitution Test ). Physical function assessed with the same two well-validated composite measures : the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and the Cardiovascular Health Study Frailty criteria. The SPPB is comprised of measures of 1) time to walk 3-4 meters, 2) balance, i.e., side-by-side stand, semi-tandem stand, and tandem stand, and 3) repeated chair stands. Frailty is classified based on 5 frailty characteristics: slow walking speed, low energy expenditure, exhaustion, weak grip strength, and unintentional weight loss.|2010 and 2012||||||
857780|NCT00038727|Secondary|Microvascular and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors|Blood pressure, lipids, medication use, weight, insulin resistance, HbA1c, physical activity by MAQ.|2021||04/2022||||
857781|NCT00038727|Primary|MACE|Defined as MI, stroke and CVD death|1996-2025||06/2025||||
857782|NCT00038727|Primary|Total Cancer Except Non-melanoma Skin Cancer|All primary incident cancers except non-melanoma skin cancer|1996-2021||06/2021||||
857783|NCT00038727|Primary|Prevalence of Aggregate Microvascular Complication|Aggregate microvascular disease is defined as the average prevalence of 3 components: (1) retinopathy measured by photography (ETDRS of 20 or greater); (2) neuropathy detected by Semmes Weinstein 10 gram monofilament, and (3) nephropathy based on eGFR by CKD-Epi (<45 ml/min, confirmed) and albumin-to-creatinine ratio in spot urine (> 30mg/gm, confirmed).|2012-2013|Number with microvascular outcome data and included in the primary outcome analysis||average percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857784|NCT00038727|Primary|Development of Diabetes.|Primary outcome for years 2002-2008 defined according to American Diabetes Association criteria (fasting plasma glucose level >= 126 mg/dL [7.0 mmol/L] or 2-hour plasma glucose >= 200 mg/dL [11.1 mmol/L], after a 75 gram OGTT, and confirmed with a repeat test).|2008|||diabetes incidence (cases per 100 person||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857785|NCT03044431|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Interstitial Lung Disease Reporting an Improvement in 6 Month-Post Treatment QOL Scores|Number of patients with a diagnosis of Interstitial Lung Disease who reported an improved perceived quality of life 6 months post-treatment as measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ).|Measurements for ILD pre-treatment and then at 6 months post-treatment|23 patients with ILD completed a 6 month post-treatment QOL survey||Participants|||Count of Participants
857786|NCT03044431|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With Interstitial Lung Disease Reporting an Improvement in 3 Month-Post Treatment QOL Scores|Number of patients with a diagnosis of Interstitial Lung Disease who reported an improved perceived quality of life 3 months post-treatment as measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ).|Measurements for ILD pre-treatment and then at 3 months post-treatment|28 patients with ILD completed a 3 month post-treatment QOL survey||Participants|||Count of Participants
857787|NCT03044431|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With COPD Reporting an Improvement in 6 Month-Post Treatment QOL Scores|Number of patients with a diagnosis of COPD who reported an improved perceived quality of life 6 months post-treatment as measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ).|Measurements for COPD pre-treatment and then at 6 months post-treatment|101 patients with COPD completed a 6 month post-treatment QOL survey||Participants|||Count of Participants
857788|NCT03044431|Other Pre-specified|Number of Participants With COPD Reporting an Improvement in 3 Month-Post Treatment QOL Scores|Number of patients with a diagnosis of COPD who reported an improved perceived quality of life 3 months post-treatment as measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ).|Measurements for COPD pre-treatment and then at 3 months post-treatment|120 patients with COPD completed a 3 month post-treatment QOL survey||Participants|||Count of Participants
857789|NCT03044431|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting an Improvement in 6 Month-Post Treatment QOL Scores, All Diagnoses|Number of patients in the total sample who reported an improved perceived quality of life 6 months post-treatment as measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ).|Measurements pre-treatment and then at 6 months post-treatment among all diagnoses|124 patients completed a 6 month post-treatment QOL survey||Participants|||Count of Participants
857790|NCT03044431|Primary|Number of Participants Reporting an Improvement in 3 Month-Post Treatment QOL Scores, All Diagnoses|Number of patients in the total sample who reported an improved perceived quality of life 3 months post-treatment as measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ).|Measurements pre-treatment and then at 3 months post-treatment for all diagnoses|148 of 207 enrolled participants completed the 3 month post-treatment QOL survey||Participants|||Count of Participants
857791|NCT03044431|Primary|Change in FEV1 From Baseline Among COPD Patients|Change from baseline (among COPD patients only) as measured by pulmonary function testing/spirometry at baseline and again at 6 months post- treatment|Measurements pre-treatment and then at 6 months post- treatment|All patients with COPD were asked to provide a 6 month post-treatment pulmonary function test. 5 participants completed and returned the test.||percentage of change in FEV1||Full Range|Mean
857792|NCT02798289|Primary|Tear Meniscus Height Captured by Optical Coherence Tomography|Tear meniscus Height was measured before and after stimulation with Oculeve Intranasal Neurostimulator using Optical Coherence Tomography.|Day 1|Safety population included all subjects who received device intervention.||µm||Standard Deviation|Mean
857793|NCT02750943|Secondary|Number of Participants With Visible Blood in Expectorate (Presence [Trace, Substantial]/Absence) at Week4 and Week 12|Visible blood in expectorate for each participant was classified as (i) Present (Trace or Substantial) (ii) Absent. The number of participants with blood ‘Present’ (Trace or Substantial) or ‘absent’ in expectorate was analyzed.|Week 4, Week 12|Intent to treat (ITT) population which included all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study product and had at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement. Number of participants analyzed is the number of participants from ITT population evaluated for this outcome at specific time points for respective treatment arm.||number of participants|||Number
857794|NCT02750943|Secondary|Modified Gingival Index (MGI) at Week 4 and Week 12|MGI was assessed on facial and lingual surfaces at two sites on each tooth (papillae and margin). The scoring of the MGI was performed under dental office conditions using a standard dental light for illuminating the oral cavity. This procedure was performed by a single examiner. The MGI scoring system is as follows: 0 = absence of inflammation; 1 = mild inflammation; slight change in color, little change in color; little change in texture of any portion of the marginal or papillary gingival unit; 2 = mild inflammation; criteria as above but involving the entire marginal or papillar gingival units; 3= moderate inflammation; glazing, redness, edema, and/ or hypertrophy of the marginal or papillary gingival unit; 4 = severe inflammation; marked redness, edema and/or hypertrophy of the marginal or papillary gingival unit, spontaneous bleeding, congestion, or ulceration.|Week 4, Week 12|Intent to treat (ITT) population which included all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study product and had at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement. Number of participants analyzed is the number of participants from ITT population evaluated for this outcome at specific time points for respective treatment arm.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857795|NCT02750943|Secondary|Bleeding Index (BI) at Week 4 and Week 12|BI was assessed by a single examiner using a color coded periodontal probe. The probe was engaged approximately 1mm into the gingival crevice. A moderate pressure was used whilst sweeping from interproximal to interproximal along the sulcular epithelium. The BI scoring system to be used is as follows: 0= No bleeding after 30 seconds; 1= Bleeding upon probing after 30 seconds; 2= Immediate bleeding observed|Week 4, Week 12|Intent to treat (ITT) population which included all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study product and had at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement. Number of participants analyzed is the number of participants from ITT population evaluated for this outcome at specific time points for respective treatment arm.||score on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857796|NCT02750943|Secondary|Number of Bleeding Sites at Week 4|Number of bleeding sites was measured as BI via a single examiner using a color coded periodontal probe. The probe was engaged approximately 1 mm into the gingival crevice. A moderate pressure was used whilst sweeping from interproximal to interproximal along the sulcular epithelium. The BI was assessed on the facial and lingual gingival surfaces of each scorable tooth (7-7 in each arch). The BI scoring system used to measure bleeding sites is as follows: 0= No bleeding after 30 seconds; 1= Bleeding upon probing after 30 seconds; 2= Immediate bleeding observed. Bleeding sites were assessed as the number of bleeding sites with a BI score of 1 or 2.|Week 4|Intent to treat (ITT) population which included all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study product and had at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement. Number of participants analyzed is the number of participants from ITT population evaluated for this outcome at Week 4 for respective treatment arm.||number of bleeding sites||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857797|NCT02750943|Primary|Number of Bleeding Sites at Week 12|Number of bleeding sites was measured as bleeding index (BI) via a single examiner using a color coded periodontal probe. The probe was engaged approximately 1 millimetre (mm) into the gingival crevice. A moderate pressure was used whilst sweeping from interproximal to interproximal along the sulcular epithelium. The BI was assessed on the facial and lingual gingival surfaces of each scorable tooth (7-7 in each arch). The BI scoring system used to measure bleeding sites is as follows: 0= No bleeding after 30 seconds; 1= Bleeding upon probing after 30 seconds; 2= Immediate bleeding observed. Bleeding sites were assessed as the number of bleeding sites with a BI score of 1 or 2.|Week 12|Intent to treat (ITT) population which included all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study product and had at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement. Number of participants analyzed is the number of participants from ITT population evaluated for this outcome at Week 12 for respective treatment arm.||number of bleeding sites||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857808|NCT02643862|Secondary|Sustained Unresponsiveness to Increased Doses Measured by Proportion of FA Participants Who Pass a DBPCFC to 4,000 mg Each of 2 Allergens at Week 36|"Proportion of FA participants who pass a DBPCFC to 4,000 mg each of 2 allergens at week 36.
Greater than 3 foods at 36 weeks for
Xolair: 21/26 (80.8%) Placebo: 2/7 (28.6%)"|36 weeks|We analyzed an ITT||Participants|||Count of Participants
857809|NCT02643862|Primary|Tolerance Measured by Proportion of Food Allergic (FA) Participants Who Pass a DBPCFC to 2,000 mg Protein for Each of 2 Allergens at Week 36|"Proportion of food allergic (FA) participants who pass a DBPCFC to 2,000 mg protein for each of 2 allergens at week 36.
Xolair arm: 30/36 (83.3%) Placebo arm: 4/12 (33.3%)"|36 weeks|this is an ITT population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857810|NCT02642432|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Post-treatment Relapse|Post-treatment relapse was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ between the end of treatment and 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug among participants who completed treatment with HCV RNA levels < LLOQ at the end of treatment, excluding reinfection.|From the end of treatment through 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, completed treatment, and had HCV RNA <LLOQ at the final treatment visit.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857811|NCT02642432|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Virologic Failure|On-treatment virologic failure was defined as confirmed increase of > 1 log(subscript)10(subscript) IU/mL above the lowest value post-baseline HCV RNA during treatment; confirmed HCV RNA ≥ 100 IU/mL after HCV RNA < LLOQ during treatment, or HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ at end of treatment with at least 6 weeks of treatment.|Treatment Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 (end of treatment) or premature discontinuation from treatment|All participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (ITT population).||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857812|NCT02642432|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level less than the lower limit of quantification [<LLOQ]) 12 weeks after the last dose of study drug.|12 weeks after the last actual dose of study drug|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug; participants with missing data after backwards imputation were imputed as nonresponders.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
857833|NCT02513160|Secondary|Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE)|An adverse event was defined in the protocol as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Severity was rated by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate and severe, with severe= an inability to carry out usual activities. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator. Serious AEs include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or an important medical event that may not result in death, be life-threatening, or require hospitalization, but may jeopardize the patient and may require medical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed in this definition.|Day 0 to Week 6|The safety analysis set included all randomly assigned patients (ITT analysis set) who received at least 1 dose of study drug. In this analysis set, treatment was assigned based on the treatment patients actually received, regardless of the treatment to which they were randomly assigned.||Participants|||Count of Participants
857834|NCT02513160|Secondary|Count of Participants Withdrawn From Study Drug Treatment Due to Meeting Stopping Criteria for Worsening Asthma|"Number of participants who were withdrawn from study drug due to worsening asthma. Alert criteria for individual patients with worsening asthma were designed to ensure patient safety. The investigator determined whether the patient’s overall clinical picture was consistent with worsening asthma and if the patient should be withdrawn from study drug treatment (but not the study) and be placed on appropriate asthma therapy in the interest of patient safety. An example of an alert criteria is:
Morning FEV1 by handheld spirometer as measured at home falls below the FEV1 stability limit (FEV1 <80%) as calculated at the screening visit for the Run-in Period and at the randomization visit (Day 0) for the Treatment Period on 4 or more days out of any 7-day period."|Day 0 to Week 6|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set included all patients in the ITT analysis set and included the available data for those patients until they discontinued study drug treatment at treatment visit week 6 or last available study visit.||Participants|||Count of Participants
857835|NCT02513160|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Total Daily Asthma Symptom Score Over the 6-Week Treatment Period|Asthma symptom scores were recorded in the patient’s diary each morning and evening before determining FEV1 and PEF and before administration of study or rescue medications. The Daytime Symptom Score was recorded in the evening on a scale of 0 (No symptoms during the day) to 5 (Symptoms so severe that I could not go to work or perform normal daily activities) plus the Nighttime Symptom Score in the morning on a scale of 0 (No symptoms during the night) to 4 (Symptoms so severe that I did not sleep at all) for a total score range of 0-9. Baseline was defined as the average of recorded daily asthma symptom scores (average of daytime and nighttime score) over the 7 days prior to the first dose of double-blind study treatment, including the morning assessment at the randomization visit. The LS means, difference of LS means and its 95% CI, and p value are obtained from the mixed model for repeated measures analysis with covariate adjustment for baseline, sex, age, current asth|Baseline (Day -7 to Day 0 which is part of the Run-in Period); Treatment Period from Day 0 up to 6 weeks|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set included all patients in the ITT analysis set and included the available data for those patients until they discontinued study drug treatment at treatment visit week 6 or last available study visit.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857836|NCT02513160|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Total Daily (24-Hour) Rescue Medication Use Over the 6-Week Treatment Period|Change from baseline in the weekly average of total daily (24-hour) use of albuterol/salbutamol inhalation aerosol over weeks 1 through 6. Patients recorded the number of inhalations (puffs used) of rescue medication (albuterol/salbutamol HFA MDI [90 mcg ex-actuator] or equivalent) each morning and evening in the diary. The average number of daily inhalations over the 7 days before the randomization visit was the baseline value and was compared with the rescue medication use during the 6-week treatment period.|Baseline (Day -7 to Day 0 which is part of the Run-in Period); Treatment Period from Day 0 up to 6 weeks|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set included all patients in the ITT analysis set and included the available data for those patients until they discontinued study drug treatment at treatment visit week 6 or last available study visit.||number of inhalations||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857837|NCT02513160|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Trough Morning Forced Expiratory Volume in One Minute (FEV1) Rate Over the 6-Week Treatment Period|Change from baseline in the weekly average of daily trough morning (pre-dose and pre-rescue bronchodilator) FEV1 by handheld spirometer over the 6-week treatment period. FEV1 were determined twice daily, in the morning and in the evening, before administration of study drug or rescue medications. A handheld spirometer was provided to patients and used to determine the morning and evening FEV1 throughout the study. The spirometer was programmed to record the highest FEV1 obtained from 3 valid attempts. Baseline was defined as the average of recorded trough morning FEV1 assessments over the 7 days prior to the first dose of double-blind study treatment, including the morning assessment at the randomization visit. The LS means, difference of LS means and its 95% confidence interval, and p value are obtained from the mixed model for repeated measures analysis with covariate adjustment for baseline, sex, age, current asthma therapy, treatment, week, and treatment by week interaction.|Baseline (Day -7 to Day 0 which is part of the Run-in Period); Treatment Period from Day 0 up to 6 weeks|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set included all patients in the ITT analysis set and included the available data for those patients until they discontinued study drug treatment at treatment visit week 6 or last available study visit.||milliliters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857838|NCT02513160|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Trough Morning Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) Rate Over the 6-Week Treatment Period|Change from baseline in the weekly average of daily trough morning (pre-dose and pre-rescue bronchodilator) PEF by handheld spirometer over the 6-week treatment period. PEF were determined twice daily, in the morning and in the evening, before administration of study drug or rescue medications. A handheld spirometer was provided to patients and used to determine the morning and evening PEF throughout the study. The spirometer was programmed to record the highest PEF obtained from 3 valid attempts. Baseline was defined as the average of recorded trough morning PEF assessments over the 7 days prior to the first dose of double-blind study treatment, including the morning assessment at the randomization visit. The LS means, difference of LS means and its 95% confidence interval, and p value are obtained from the mixed model for repeated measures analysis with covariate adjustment for baseline, sex, age, current asthma therapy, treatment, week, and treatment by week interaction.|Timeframes: Baseline (Day -7 to Day 0 which is part of the Run-in Period); Treatment Period from Day 0 up to 6 weeks|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set included all patients in the ITT analysis set and included the available data for those patients until they discontinued study drug treatment at treatment visit week 6 or last available study visit.||liters/minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857839|NCT02513160|Primary|Standardized Baseline-Adjusted Trough Morning Forced Expiratory Volume in One Minute (FEV1) Area Under the Effect Curve From Time Zero to 6 Weeks (AUEC(0-6wk))|The primary efficacy variable was the standardized baseline-adjusted trough morning (pre-dose and pre-rescue bronchodilator) FEV1 AUEC(0-6wk). Pulmonary function measurements such as FEV1 were obtained electronically by spirometry at the randomization visit, each treatment visit (Weeks 2, 4 and 6) and any unscheduled visit (such as the early termination visit). The highest FEV1 value from 3 acceptable and 2 repeatable maneuvers (maximum of 8 attempts) was used. The least-square (LS) means, difference of LS means and its 95% confidence interval (CI), and p-value represent the results obtained from the analysis of covariance with covariate adjustment for baseline, sex, age, current asthma therapy, and treatment.|Baseline (Day 0 of Treatment Period), weeks 2, 4, 6|The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis set included all patients in the ITT analysis set and included the available data for those patients until they discontinued study drug treatment at treatment visit week 6 or last available study visit.||milliliters||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
857840|NCT02487771|Secondary|Adaptive Regulation Assessment|The Parent Rating Scales of the Behavior Assessment System for Children 2nd Edition measures different aspects of a child’s behaviors as reported by a parent. Externalizing Problems is a measure of Aggression and Hyperactivity. Internalizing Problems is a measure of Anxiety, Depression, and Somatization. The Behavioral Symptoms Index is a more global measure of behavior problems and combines Externalizing Problems with the measure of Depression from Internalizing Problems, and additional measures of Atypicality, Withdrawal, and Attention Problems. Adaptive Skills is a measure of Adaptability, Social Skills, Activities of Daily Living, Functional Communication, and at age 6 years Leadership. All scores are derived from the general, combined sex normative tables of T-Scores. For Adaptive Skills higher T-Scores reflect a more optimal outcome. For all other measures lower T-Scores reflect a more optimal outcome. All T-Scores were standardized with a Mean = 50, St Dev = 10.|72 Months|Missing data due to attrition, missed appointments, refusals.||T-scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
857841|NCT02487771|Secondary|Adaptive Regulation Assessment|The Parent Rating Scales of the Behavior Assessment System for Children 2nd Edition measures different aspects of a child’s behaviors as reported by a parent. Externalizing Problems is a measure of Aggression and Hyperactivity. Internalizing Problems is a measure of Anxiety, Depression, and Somatization. The Behavioral Symptoms Index is a more global measure of behavior problems and combines Externalizing Problems with the measure of Depression from Internalizing Problems, and additional measures of Atypicality, Withdrawal, and Attention Problems. Adaptive Skills is a measure of Adaptability, Social Skills, Activities of Daily Living, Functional Communication, and at age 6 years Leadership. All scores are derived from the general, combined sex normative tables of T-Scores. For Adaptive Skills higher T-Scores reflect a more optimal outcome. For all other measures lower T-Scores reflect a more optimal outcome. All T-Scores were standardized with a Mean = 50, St Dev = 10.|60 Months|Missing data due to attrition, missed appointments, refusals.||T-scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
857842|NCT02487771|Secondary|Adaptive Regulation Assessment|The Parent Rating Scales of the Behavior Assessment System for Children 2nd Edition measures different aspects of a child’s behaviors as reported by a parent. Externalizing Problems is a measure of Aggression and Hyperactivity. Internalizing Problems is a measure of Anxiety, Depression, and Somatization. The Behavioral Symptoms Index is a more global measure of behavior problems and combines Externalizing Problems with the measure of Depression from Internalizing Problems, and additional measures of Atypicality, Withdrawal, and Attention Problems. Adaptive Skills is a measure of Adaptability, Social Skills, Activities of Daily Living, Functional Communication, and at age 6 years Leadership. All scores are derived from the general, combined sex normative tables of T-Scores. For Adaptive Skills higher T-Scores reflect a more optimal outcome. For all other measures lower T-Scores reflect a more optimal outcome. All T-Scores were standardized with a Mean = 50, St Dev = 10.|48 Months|Missing data due to attrition, missed appointments, refusals.||T-scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
857843|NCT02487771|Secondary|Adaptive Regulation Assessment|The Parent Rating Scales of the Behavior Assessment System for Children 2nd Edition measures different aspects of a child’s behaviors as reported by a parent. Externalizing Problems is a measure of Aggression and Hyperactivity. Internalizing Problems is a measure of Anxiety, Depression, and Somatization. The Behavioral Symptoms Index is a more global measure of behavior problems and combines Externalizing Problems with the measure of Depression from Internalizing Problems, and additional measures of Atypicality, Withdrawal, and Attention Problems. Adaptive Skills is a measure of Adaptability, Social Skills, Activities of Daily Living, Functional Communication, and at age 6 years Leadership. All scores are derived from the general, combined sex normative tables of T-Scores. For Adaptive Skills higher T-Scores reflect a more optimal outcome. For all other measures lower T-Scores reflect a more optimal outcome. All T-Scores were standardized with a Mean = 50, St Dev = 10.|36 Months|Missing data due to attrition, missed appointments, refusals.||T-scores||Standard Deviation|Mean
858019|NCT01981057|Secondary|Carbohydrates|"Prescriptions for carbohydrates in parenteral nutrition solutions will be ordered individually and flipped with Numeta or vice versa. This mirroring will be performed with the Cato-Pan prescription software. Subsequently the following nutrients will be calculated and compared with each other and with the ESPGHAN recommendations"|6 weeks||||||
857844|NCT02487771|Primary|Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition; Verbal IQ|The Verbal IQ score from the Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition is a standardized measure of a child’s verbal ability based upon assessments of vocabulary, general knowledge, and reasoning. At three years the Verbal IQ score has a range of 49 (poorest performance) to 150 (best performance). For the older ages the score can range from 46 to 155. For all ages the assessment is normed to a Mean = 100, St Dev = 15.|72 Months|Missing data due to attrition, missed appointments, refusals, or questionable test||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857845|NCT02487771|Primary|Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition; Verbal IQ|The Verbal IQ score from the Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition is a standardized measure of a child’s verbal ability based upon assessments of vocabulary, general knowledge, and reasoning. At three years the Verbal IQ score has a range of 49 (poorest performance) to 150 (best performance). For the older ages the score can range from 46 to 155. For all ages the assessment is normed to a Mean = 100, St Dev = 15.|48 Months|Missing data due to attrition, missed appointments, refusals, or questionable test||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857846|NCT02487771|Primary|Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition; Verbal IQ|The Verbal IQ score from the Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition is a standardized measure of a child’s verbal ability based upon assessments of vocabulary, general knowledge, and reasoning. At three years the Verbal IQ score has a range of 49 (poorest performance) to 150 (best performance). For the older ages the score can range from 46 to 155. For all ages the assessment is normed to a Mean = 100, St Dev = 15.|36 Months|Missing data due to attrition, missed appointments, refusals, or questionable test||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857847|NCT02487771|Primary|Cognitive Function Score - Test of Preschool Early Literacy|The Test of Preschool Early Literacy provides a standardized Early Literacy Index score, a measure of general, early literacy skills that relate to later reading and writing skill acquisition. The score is based on assessments of vocabulary, print knowledge, and phonological awareness. The score can range from 40 (poorest performance) to 144 (best performance) and has been normed to a Mean = 100, St Dev = 15.|42 Months|Missing data due to attrition, missed appointments, refusals, or questionable test.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857848|NCT02487771|Primary|Cognitive Function Score - Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test|The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, 3rd Edition provides a standardized assessment of a person’s receptive vocabulary. The Standard Score can range from 40 (poorest performance) to 160 (best performance) and has been normed to a Mean = 100, St Dev = 15.|60 Months|Missing data due to attrition, missed appointments, refusals, or questionable test.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857849|NCT02487771|Primary|Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition; Full Scale IQ|The Full Scale IQ score from the Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition is a standardized measure of a child’s general intellectual ability based upon assessments of verbal, cognitive, and performance domains. At three years the Full Scale IQ score has a range of 41 (poorest performance) to 155 (best performance). For the older ages the score can range from 40 to 160. For all ages the assessment is normed to a Mean = 100, St Dev = 15.|72 Months|Missing data for participants dues to attrition, missed appointments, refusals, or questionable test.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857850|NCT02487771|Primary|Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition; Full Scale IQ|The Full Scale IQ score from the Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition is a standardized measure of a child’s general intellectual ability based upon assessments of verbal, cognitive, and performance domains. At three years the Full Scale IQ score has a range of 41 (poorest performance) to 155 (best performance). For the older ages the score can range from 40 to 160. For all ages the assessment is normed to a Mean = 100, St Dev = 15.|48 Months|Missing data for participants dues to attrition, missed appointments, refusals, or questionable test.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857851|NCT02487771|Primary|Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition; Full Scale IQ|The Full Scale IQ score from the Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, 3rd Edition is a standardized measure of a child’s general intellectual ability based upon assessments of verbal, cognitive, and performance domains. At three years the Full Scale IQ score has a range of 41 (poorest performance) to 155 (best performance). For the older ages the score can range from 40 to 160. For all ages the assessment is normed to a Mean = 100, St Dev = 15.|36 Months|Missing data for participants dues to attrition, missed appointments, refusals, or questionable test.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857852|NCT02478580|Secondary|The Aldrete Score|Aldrete score used for readiness of PACU discharge by assigning numeric values to the criteria including activity, respiration, circulation, consciousness, and color. Each criterion is rated from 0 to 2, with a maximum score of 10. Scores in the range of 9 to 10 are considered satisfactory for PACU discharge.|2 hours after extubation|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
857853|NCT02478580|Primary|Postoperative Care Unit (PACU) Recovery Time|Participants will be followed for the duration of PACU stay, an expected average of 3 hours.|Immediate postoperative period (up to 3 hours)|Patient with obstructive sleep apnea undergoing surgery||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
857890|NCT02345772|Primary|Pathological Complete Remission Rate|To determine pathological complete remission rate at the time of surgery in ER-positive and HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (docetaxel, trastuzumab, pertuzumab) concurrently with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy with fulvestrant. Note: pCR, defined as the absence of invasive neoplastic cells of the primary tumor in the breast, remaining in-situ lesions are allowed, ypT0-is;|one year||||||
858020|NCT01981057|Secondary|Energy|"Prescriptions for energy in parenteral nutrition solutions will be ordered individually and flipped with Numeta or vice versa. This mirroring will be performed with the Cato-Pan prescription software. Subsequently the following nutrients will be calculated and compared with each other and with the ESPGHAN recommendations"|6 weeks||||||
857869|NCT02464163|Secondary|Unsolicited Adverse Events (UAEs) During Days 0-42 Following the First Administration of Study Vaccine|Unsolicited adverse events (UAEs) Days 0-42.|42 Days|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857870|NCT02464163|Secondary|Long-term Safety Assessed by Incidence of SAEs, NOCIs. AESs Over 12 Months Following Vaccination||13 months|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857871|NCT02464163|Secondary|Reactogenicity Immediately After Each Injection, Extending to Day 7|Solicited events of local and systemic reactogenicity Days 0-7|7 Days|Reactogenicity Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857872|NCT02464163|Primary|Demonstrate That the Immunogenicity of Adjuvanted Panblok H7 rHA is Sufficient to Support Emergency Use Authorization in the Event of a Declared Pandemic.|The primary endpoint will be “seroprotection rate” to the selected dose of adjuvanted H7 rHA, defined by a post-vaccination HAI titer ≥40 on Day 42. The definition of success will be a lower bound of the two-sided 95% CI ≥ 70% for adults <65 and ≥60% for adults ≥65 years of age.|42 Days|Modified Per Protocol Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857873|NCT02434146|Primary|Time to Onset of Grade 3 Oral Mucositis|Will be analyzed using a parametric (one-parameter exponential) cure rate model. Will be performed in both the extended cohort as well as in the historical controls.|Time between the first date of radiation or cyclophosphamide treatment to the date of the onset of grade 3 oral mucositis, assessed up to 3 months|This study was closed prematurely due to decreased numbers of eligible subjects. The full target accrual number was not achieved, and time to onset of grade 3 oral mucositis could not be analyzed.|||||
857874|NCT02434146|Primary|Time to Onset of Grade 2 Oral Mucositis|Will be analyzed using a parametric (one-parameter exponential) cure rate model. Will be performed in both the extended cohort as well as in the historical controls.|Time between the first date of radiation or cyclophosphamide treatment to the date of the onset of grade 2 oral mucositis, assessed up to 3 months|This study was closed prematurely due to decreased numbers of eligible subjects. The full target accrual number was not achieved, and time to onset of grade 2 oral mucositis could not be analyzed.|||||
857875|NCT02434146|Primary|Recommended Phase IIa Dose|The dose of topical phenylephrine solution which will be recommended for a larger follow-up phase II efficacy study will be established after the dose cohort at the MTD has been expanded to a total of 12 patients.|During the conditioning regimen (radiation and cyclophosphamide treatment), which is anticipated to last 1 week.|This study was closed prematurely due to decreased numbers of eligible subjects. The full target accrual number was not achieved, and the dose of topical phenylephrine solution for a larger follow-up phase II efficacy study could not be recommended.|||||
857876|NCT02434146|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD), Defined as the Highest Dose Level of Phenylephrine Applied to the Oral Mucosa Where 0/3, 0/6, or 1/6 Patients Experience a Dose-limiting Toxicity|Determine Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD), the highest dose level of phenylephrine applied to the oral mucosa|During the conditioning regimen (radiation and cyclophosphamide treatment), which is anticipated to last 1 week.|This study was closed prematurely due to decreased numbers of eligible subjects. The full target accrual number was not achieved, and MTD could not be determined.|||||
857877|NCT02434146|Primary|Incidence of Adverse Events, Graded According to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0|Adverse events (AEs) will be presented in the summary tables by preferred term nested within the System Organ Class. Verbatim description, preferred term, and system organ class for all AEs will be contained in the patient data listings. All AEs occurring after enrollment and throughout the study period will be recorded. Each toxicity event will be assigned an attribution: unrelated, unlikely, possibly, probably, or definitely phenylephrine treatment related.|Up to 3 months|This study was closed prematurely due to decreased numbers of eligible subjects. The full target accrual number was not achieved, and no study conclusions could be made.|||||
857878|NCT02434146|Primary|Efficacy Response Rate for Preventing Oral Mucositis With Sufficient Accuracy|If a patient experiences no higher than grade 2 oral mucositis, then s/he will be defined as a responder. If a patient experiences grade >= 3 oral mucositis, s/he will be defined as a non-responder. Specifically, the efficacy response rate will be estimated with a standard error of less than 15% and the length of the 95% confidence interval will be less than 50%. The efficacy response rate will be summarized in tabular format. The Wilson score method will be used to calculate the 95% confidence interval for the efficacy response rate for the extended cohort.|Up to 3 months|This study was closed prematurely due to decreased numbers of eligible subjects. The full target accrual number was not achieved, and the efficacy response rate could not be estimated.|||||
857879|NCT02434146|Primary|Duration of Grade 3 Oral Mucositis|If the grade 3 oral mucositis has not been resolved (to a grade < 3) by the last day of toxicity assessment, then the duration will be censored at the last date of toxicity assessment. Will be analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median duration of grade 2/grade 3 oral mucositis will be calculated and reported along with the corresponding 95% confidence interval. This analysis will be performed in both the extended cohort as well as in the historical controls.|Date of onset of grade 3 oral mucositis to the date of resolution to grade < 3 oral mucositis, assessed up to 3 months|This study was closed prematurely due to decreased numbers of eligible subjects. The full target accrual number was not achieved, and the median duration of oral mucositis could not be analyzed.|||||
857880|NCT02434146|Primary|Duration of Grade 2 Oral Mucositis|If the grade 2 oral mucositis has not been resolved (to a grade < 2) by the last day of toxicity assessment, then the duration will be censored at the last date of toxicity assessment. Will be analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median duration of grade 2/grade 3 oral mucositis will be calculated and reported along with the corresponding 95% confidence interval. This analysis will be performed in both the extended cohort as well as in the historical controls.|Date of onset of grade 2 oral mucositis to the date of the resolution of the grade 2 oral mucositis, assessed up to 3 months|This study was closed prematurely due to decreased numbers of eligible subjects. The full target accrual number was not achieved, and the median duration of oral mucositis could not be analyzed.|||||
857881|NCT02434146|Primary|Area Under the Curve (AUC) for the Oral Mucositis Severity|The mucositis AUC will be estimated using the trapezoid method and summarized in terms of means, standard deviation, median and range. This analysis will be performed in both the extended cohort as well as in the historical controls.|Up to 3 months|This study was closed prematurely due to decreased numbers of eligible subjects. The full target accrual number was not achieved, and AUC could not be estimated or analyzed.|||||
857882|NCT02408692|Secondary|Maximum Serum Concentration Between Obese BMI Women Ingesting 1.5mg of Levonorgestrel and Then the Same Obese BMI Women Ingesting 3mg Levonorgestrel|Pharmacokinetic sampling at 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, and 2.5 hours were performed after ingestion of 3mg of levonorgestrel|Follicular phase of menstrual cycle|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
857883|NCT02408692|Primary|Maximum Serum Concentration Between Normal and Obese BMI Women Ingesting 1.5mg Levonorgestrel|Pharmacokinetic sampling at 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, and 2.5 hours were performed after ingestion of 1.5mg of levonorgestrel|Follicular phase of menstrual cycle and PK sampling at 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5|||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
857884|NCT02395653|Secondary|Number Of Participants To Experience Clinically Relevant Respiratory Depression (CRRD)|Respiratory function and occurrence of CRRD was defined as simultaneous occurrence of bradypnoea (respiratory rate <10 breaths per minute for participants 9-15 years of age and sustained for 1 minute, or <8 breaths per minute for participants 16-17 years of age), with excessive sedation (that is, the participant is not easily aroused).|From the time of application of the first system through 7 days following end of study drug administration.|The Evaluable Population consists of all participants who received fentanyl from the SSEC for at least 3 hours.||participants|||Number
857885|NCT02395653|Secondary|Change From Baseline To 1 Hour And 24 Hours In Skin Irritation Score After SSEC Removal|Skin irritation at the SSEC application site was to be assessed immediately prior to placement of the study system and at 1 and 24 hours after removal of each study system. The application site was to be scored using the following scale: 0=No evidence of irritation; 1=Minimal erythema, barely perceptible; 2=Definite erythema, readily visible, minimal edema, or minimal papular response; 3=Erythema and papules; 4=Definite edema; 5=Erythema, edema, and papules; 6=Vesicular eruption; 7=Strong reaction spreading beyond the application site.|Baseline, 1 hour and 24 hours after SSEC removal.|The Evaluable Population consists of all participants who received fentanyl from the SSEC for at least 3 hours.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857886|NCT02395653|Primary|Assessment Of Adherence Of The SSEC System To Skin|The adhesion of each SSEC was evaluated immediately prior to removal at each 24-hour time point, or at early withdrawal. Adhesion was recorded using the following classification: System adhered to at least 90% of the application area with no edges unattached; System adhered between 75% and 89%; System was <75% adhered and not taped; System was secured with tape. The number of SSEC systems for all time points in each category is presented. Because of the descriptive nature of this study, no formal statistical hypothesis testing was performed.|Immediately prior to removal at each 24-hour time point, or at early withdrawal, for up to 3 consecutive days (up to 72 hours)|The Evaluable Population consists of all participants who received fentanyl from the SSEC for at least 3 hours.||SSEC systems|SSEC systems used by 61 participants||Number
857887|NCT02395653|Primary|Assessment Of Participant's Ability To Use The SSEC|Investigator's assessment of participant's ability to use the SSEC system safely and effectively. The assessment consisted of a 4-level categorical evaluation (poor, fair, good, and excellent). Because of the descriptive nature of this study, no formal statistical hypothesis testing was performed.|Completed at the time of the participant’s termination of study treatment (up to 72 hours after study drug administration)|The Evaluable Population consists of all participants who received fentanyl from the SSEC for at least 3 hours.||participants|||Number
857888|NCT02345772|Secondary|QTA (Quantitative Texture Analysis)|QTA (Quantitative Texture Analysis): will be obtained from baseline mammogram and the correlation with clinical outcome after neoadjuvant therapy will be performed.|One year||||||
857889|NCT02345772|Secondary|Partial Pathological Response Rate|Partial pathological response rate at the time of surgery and biomarker changes in breast cancer (biopsy vs residual tumor) before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy Note: pPR, defined as residual invasive disease of 1cm, ypT1a-b.|One Year||||||
857925|NCT02241720|Primary|Disease Stability at Eight Weeks Post the End of Treatment Visit||5 months - 3 months treatment and 8 weeks post end of treatment visit|3 subjects did not complete an 8 week EOT visit for: Death, Patient W/D, AE.||Participants|||Count of Participants
857944|NCT02166476|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Characterization Of Plasma Exposure Of Meropenem/Vaborbactam|This outcome measure focused on PK assessment of participants in the meropenem/vaborbactam group who met MITT criteria and had at least 1 plasma PK sample drawn. PK samples on Day 1 were taken 3-3.5 hours and 5-6 hours after the start of the first 3-h IV study drug infusion. Samples were not collected around the 30-minute infusions. Samples were collected from both groups to maintain the blind; however, only PK samples for the meropenem/vaborbactam group were analyzed. The area under the concentration-time curve during 24 hours (AUC0-24) for Day 1 and at steady-state are presented in micrograms (ug)·hour/mL.|Day 1|PK Population: Participants in the MITT Population (all participants screened, randomized, and received at least one dose of study drug) and had at least one plasma PK sample drawn. Due to renal impairment, 28 participants received a reduced dose of the study drug (1 g meropenem/1 g vaborbactam).||ug·hour/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
857945|NCT02166476|Secondary|Per-Pathogen Microbiological Outcome (EMA) In The ME Population|This secondary outcome measure focused on the per-pathogen (E. cloacae, E. faecalis, E. coli, K. pneumoniae) microbiological outcome of Eradication in the ME population at 5 time points: Day 3, EOIVT, EOT, TOC, and LFU. Eradication was defined per the EMA criteria as a reduction in baseline bacterial pathogen(s) to <10^3 CFU/mL of urine culture and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as an uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture).|Day 3, EOIVT (Days 5-14), EOT (Days 10-14), TOC (Days 15-23), and LFU (Days 22-30)|ME Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857946|NCT02166476|Secondary|Per-Pathogen Microbiological Outcome (EMA) In The m-MITT Population|This secondary outcome measure focused on the per-pathogen (E. cloacae, E. faecalis, E. coli, K. pneumoniae) microbiological outcome of Eradication in the m-MITT population at 5 time points: Day 3, EOIVT, EOT, TOC, and LFU. Eradication was defined per the EMA criteria as a reduction in baseline bacterial pathogen(s) to <10^3 CFU/mL of urine culture and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as an uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture).|Day 3, EOIVT (Days 5-14), EOT (Days 10-14), TOC (Days 15-23), and LFU (Days 22-30)|m-MITT Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857947|NCT02166476|Secondary|Per-Pathogen Microbiological Outcome (FDA) In The ME Population|This secondary outcome measure focused on the per-pathogen (E. cloacae, E. faecalis, E. coli, K. pneumoniae) microbiological outcome of Eradication in the ME population at 5 time points: Day 3, EOIVT, EOT, TOC, and LFU. Eradication was defined per the FDA criteria as a reduction in baseline bacterial pathogen(s) to <10^4 CFU/mL of urine culture and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as an uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture).|Day 3, EOIVT (Days 5-14), EOT (Days 10-14), TOC (Days 15-23), and LFU (Days 22-30)|ME Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857948|NCT02166476|Secondary|Per-Pathogen Microbiological Outcome (FDA) In The m-MITT Population|This secondary outcome measure focused on the per-pathogen (Enterobacter cloacae [E. cloacae], Enterococcus faecalis [E. faecalis], Escherichia coli [E. coli], Klebsiella pneumoniae [K. pneumoniae]) microbiological outcome of Eradication in the m-MITT population at 5 time points: Day 3, EOIVT, EOT, TOC, and LFU. Eradication was defined per the FDA criteria as a reduction in baseline bacterial pathogen(s) to <10^4 CFU/mL of urine culture and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as an uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture).|Day 3, EOIVT (Days 5-14), EOT (Days 10-14), TOC (Days 15-23), and LFU (Days 22-30)|m-MITT Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857949|NCT02166476|Secondary|Proportion Of Participants With A Clinical Outcome Of Cure In The ME Population|This secondary outcome measure focused on a clinical outcome of Cure in the ME population. A clinical outcome of Cure was defined as the following: at EOIVT, the complete resolution or significant improvement of the baseline signs and symptoms of cUTI or AP; at EOT, TOC, and LFU, the complete resolution or significant improvement of the baseline signs and symptoms of cUTI or AP such that no further antimicrobial therapy was warranted. Symptom resolution did not necessarily include baseline symptoms associated with anatomic abnormalities that predisposed to cUTI, such as symptoms associated with the presence of an indwelling urinary catheter. The clinical outcome of Cure was reported only at the EOIVT, EOT, TOC, and LFU visits, and improvement was reported only at the Day 3, EOIVT, and EOT visits.|Day 3, EOIVT (Days 5-14), EOT (Days 10-14), TOC (Days 15-23), and LFU (Days 22-30)|ME Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857950|NCT02166476|Secondary|Proportion Of Participants With A Clinical Outcome Of Cure In The Clinical Evaluable (CE) Population|This secondary outcome measure focused on a clinical outcome of Cure in the CE population. A clinical outcome of Cure was defined as the following: at EOIVT, the complete resolution or significant improvement of the baseline signs and symptoms of cUTI or AP; at EOT, TOC, and LFU, the complete resolution or significant improvement of the baseline signs and symptoms of cUTI or AP such that no further antimicrobial therapy was warranted. Symptom resolution did not necessarily include baseline symptoms associated with anatomic abnormalities that predisposed to cUTI, such as symptoms associated with the presence of an indwelling urinary catheter. The clinical outcome of Cure was reported only at the EOIVT, EOT, TOC, and LFU visits, and improvement was reported only at the Day 3, EOIVT, and EOT visits.|Day 3, EOIVT (Days 5-14), EOT (Days 10-14), TOC (Days 15-23), and LFU (Days 22-30)|CE Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857951|NCT02166476|Secondary|Proportion Of Participants With A Clinical Outcome Of Cure In The m-MITT Population|This secondary outcome measure focused on a clinical outcome of Cure in the m-MITT Population. A clinical outcome of Cure was defined as the following: at EOIVT, the complete resolution or significant improvement of the baseline signs and symptoms of cUTI or AP; at EOT, TOC, and LFU, the complete resolution or significant improvement of the baseline signs and symptoms of cUTI or AP such that no further antimicrobial therapy was warranted. Symptom resolution did not necessarily include baseline symptoms associated with anatomic abnormalities that predisposed to cUTI, such as symptoms associated with the presence of an indwelling urinary catheter. The clinical outcome of Cure was reported only at the EOIVT, EOT, TOC, and LFU visits, and improvement was reported only at Day 3, EOIVT, and EOT visits.|Day 3, EOIVT (Days 5-14), EOT (Days 10-14), TOC (Days 15-23), and LFU (Days 22-30)|m-MITT Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857952|NCT02166476|Secondary|Proportion Of Participants In The ME Population Who Achieved A Microbiologic Outcome Of Eradication|This secondary outcome measure focused on a microbiological outcome of Eradication in the ME population at 5 time points: Day 3, EOIVT, EOT, TOC, and LFU. Eradication was defined as a reduction in baseline bacterial pathogen(s) to <10^4 CFU/mL of urine culture (FDA) or <10^3 CFU/mL (EMA), and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as an uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture).|Day 3, EOIVT (Days 5-14), EOT (Days 10-14), TOC (Days 15-23), and LFU (Days 22-30)|ME Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857953|NCT02166476|Secondary|Proportion Of Participants In The m-MITT Population Who Achieved A Microbiologic Outcome Of Eradication|This secondary outcome measure focused on a microbiological outcome of Eradication in the m-MITT population at 5 time points: Day 3, EOIVT, end of treatment (EOT), TOC, and late follow up (LFU). Eradication was defined as a reduction in baseline bacterial pathogen(s) to <10^4 CFU/mL of urine culture (FDA) or <10^3 CFU/mL (EMA), and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as a uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture).|Day 3, EOIVT (Days 5-14), EOT (Days 10-14), TOC (Days 15-23), and LFU (Days 22-30)|m-MITT Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857954|NCT02166476|Secondary|Proportion Of Participants In The ME Population With Overall Success|This secondary outcome measure focused on the overall success in the ME population at the EOIVT and TOC visits. Overall success was defined as a clinical outcome of Cured or Improvement and a microbiologic outcome of Eradication. Cured was defined as the complete resolution or significant improvement of the baseline signs and symptoms of cUTI or AP. Improvement was defined as lessening, incomplete resolution, or no worsening of the baseline signs and symptoms of cUTI or AP, but continued IV therapy was warranted. Eradication was defined using the FDA's CFU/mL criteria that the bacterial pathogen(s) found at baseline was/were reduced to <10^4 CFU/mL of urine culture and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as an uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture).|EOIVT (Days 5-14) and TOC (Days 15-23)|ME Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857955|NCT02166476|Secondary|Proportion Of Participants In The m-MITT Population With Overall Success|This secondary outcome measure focused on the overall success in the ME population at the EOIVT and TOC visits. Overall success at TOC was defined as a clinical outcome of Cured and a microbiologic outcome of Eradication. Overall success at EOIVT was defined as a clinical outcome of Cured or Improvement and a microbiologic outcome of Eradication. Cured was defined as the complete resolution or significant improvement of the baseline signs and symptoms of cUTI or AP. Improvement was defined as lessening, incomplete resolution, or no worsening of the baseline signs and symptoms of cUTI or AP, but continued IV therapy was warranted. Eradication was defined using the FDA's CFU/mL criteria that the bacterial pathogen(s) found at baseline was/were reduced to <10^4 CFU/mL of urine culture and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as an uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture).|EOIVT (Days 5-14) and TOC (Days 15-23)|m-MITT Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857956|NCT02166476|Primary|Proportion Of Participants In The Microbiological Evaluable (ME) Population Who Achieved A Microbiologic Outcome Of Eradication At The TOC Visit|This was the primary outcome measure for the EMA. For this measure, a microbiologic outcome of Eradication was defined using the EMA’s CFU/mL criteria: bacterial pathogen(s) found at baseline was reduced to <10^3 CFU/mL of urine culture and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as an uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture). The ME population included all participants who met m-MITT criteria and had a clinical outcome and microbiologic outcome at EOIVT or earlier; received <80% or >120% of expected IV doses; missed no more than 1 IV dose in the first 48 h, missed no more than 2 consecutive IV doses; received no less than 6 doses for failure or no less than 9 doses for cure.|TOC (Days 15-23)|ME Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857957|NCT02166476|Primary|Proportion Of Participants In The m-MITT Population Who Achieved A Microbiologic Outcome Of Eradication At The Test Of Cure Visit|This was the primary outcome measure for the European Medicines Agency (EMA). For this measure, a microbiologic outcome of Eradication was defined using the EMA’s CFU/mL criteria: bacterial pathogen(s) found at baseline was reduced to <10^3 CFU/mL of urine culture and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as an uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture).|Test of cure (TOC) (Days 15-23)|m-MITT Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
857958|NCT02166476|Primary|Proportion Of Participants In The Microbiological Modified Intent-To-Treat (m-MITT) Population Who Achieved Overall Success At The End Of Intravenous Treatment Visit|This was the primary outcome measure for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For this composite outcome measure, overall success was achieved with a clinical outcome of Cure or Improvement and microbiologic outcome of Eradication at the end of intravenous treatment (EOIVT). Cure was defined as the complete resolution or significant improvement of the baseline signs and symptoms. Improvement was defined as lessening, incomplete resolution, or no worsening of the baseline signs and symptoms. Eradication was defined using the FDA's CFU/mL criteria that the bacterial pathogen(s) found at baseline was/were reduced to <10^4 colony-forming units (CFU)/mL of urine culture and a negative blood culture for an organism that was identified as an uropathogen (if repeated after positive at baseline blood culture).|EOIVT (Days 5-14)|The m-MITT population included all participants who were randomized, received at least 1 dose of study drug, and had a baseline bacterial pathogen(s) of ≥10^5 CFU/mL of urine at baseline urine culture or the same bacterial pathogen present in concurrent blood and urine cultures.||Participants|||Count of Participants
857959|NCT02149264|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter - Minimum Concentration Observed (Cmin) for Total Testosterone and Dihydrotestosterone|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone and dihydrotestosterone.|Samples collected at pre-dose, 2, 4, 6, 8 & 24 hours post-dose on Days 14, 35 & 56, and at pre-dose, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18 & 24 hours post-dose on Day 90|FAS population was used and included subjects who had sufficient pharmacokinetic data to determine a Cave(0-24) on Days 14, 35, 56, or 90, or discontinued the study early due to medical or safety reasons. Of 155 subjects, one subject discontinued due to an adverse event after Day 14 visit and not included in the analysis.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
857960|NCT02149264|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter - Maximum Concentration Observed (Cmax) for Total Testosterone and Dihydrotestosterone|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone and dihydrotestosterone.|Samples collected at pre-dose, 2, 4, 6, 8 & 24 hours post-dose on Days 14, 35 & 56, and at pre-dose, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18 & 24 hours post-dose on Day 90|FAS population was used and included subjects who had sufficient pharmacokinetic data to determine a Cave(0-24) on Days 14, 35, 56, or 90, or discontinued the study early due to medical or safety reasons. Of 155 subjects, one subject discontinued due to an adverse event after Day 14 visit and not included in the analysis.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
857961|NCT02149264|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter - Time at Which the Maximum Concentration Occurs (Tmax) for Total Testosterone and Dihydrotestosterone|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone and dihydrotestosterone.|Samples collected at pre-dose, 2, 4, 6, 8 & 24 hours post-dose on Days 14, 35 & 56, and at pre-dose, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18 & 24 hours post-dose on Day 90|FAS population was used and included subjects who had sufficient pharmacokinetic data to determine a Cave(0-24) on Days 14, 35, 56, or 90, or discontinued the study early due to medical or safety reasons. Of 155 subjects, one subject discontinued due to adverse event after Day 14 visit and not included in the analysis.||hr||Full Range|Median
857962|NCT02149264|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter - Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUCτ) for Total Testosterone and Dihydrotestosterone|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone and dihydrotestosterone.|Samples collected at pre-dose, 2, 4, 6, 8 & 24 hours post-dose on Days 14, 35 & 56, and at pre-dose, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18 & 24 hours post-dose on Day 90|FAS population was used and included subjects who had sufficient pharmacokinetic data to determine a Cave(0-24) on Days 14, 35, 56, or 90, or discontinued the study early due to medical or safety reasons. Number of subjects was less than 155 in some group(s) as parameter could not be calculated due to missing concentrations for that time-point.||ng*hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
857963|NCT02149264|Secondary|Pharmacokinetic Parameter - Average Concentration (Cave) for Total Testosterone and Dihydrotestosterone|A validated high pressure liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry detection (LC/MS/MS) method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone and dihydrotestosterone.|Samples collected at pre-dose, 2, 4, 6, 8 & 24 hours post-dose on Days 14, 35 & 56, and at pre-dose, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18 & 24 hours post-dose on Day 90|FAS population was used and included subjects who had sufficient pharmacokinetic data to determine a Cave(0-24) on Days 14, 35, 56, or 90, or discontinued the study early due to medical or safety reasons. Number of subjects was less than 155 in some group(s) as parameter could not be calculated due to missing concentrations for that time-point.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
857964|NCT02149264|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Score|"Data collected from the SF-12 questionnaire, based on the norm-based scores was used to assess improvement in the psychometrically-based physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). Both PCS and MCS contained four sub-domains:
PCS:
Physical Functioning (2 items, questions 2-3)
Role-Physical (2 items, questions 4-5)
Bodily Pain (1 item, question 8)
General Health (1 item, question 1)
MCS:
Vitality (1 item, question 10)
Social Functioning (1 item, question 12)
Role-Emotional (2 items, questions 6-7)
Mental Health (2 items, questions 9 and 11)
PCS and MCS composite scores are computed using the scores of the 12 questions and range from 0-100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health. Positive change from baseline indicated improvement in physical and mental health."|At Days 35 and 90|FAS population was used and included subjects who had sufficient pharmacokinetic data to determine a Cave(0-24) on Days 14, 35, 56, or 90, or discontinued the study early due to medical or safety reasons.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857965|NCT02149264|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) Score|"The MAF contains four sub-domains:
Severity (2 items, questions 1-2) (Score range: 2-20)
Distress (1 item, question 3) (Score range: 1-10)
Degree of interference in activities of daily living (11 items, questions 4-14) (Score range: 11-110)
Timing (2 items, questions 15-16) (Score range: 5-20)
A score of 1-10 is awarded to each of the 14 questions across the 3 domains. The timing domain (categorical in nature) are scored from 1-4. The scores are converted to 1-10 scale by multiplying each score by 2.5. Lower score in each domain indicates improvement in fatigue.
To calculate GFI : Score of question 15 is converted to a 0-10 scale by multiplying each score by 2.5 and then sum questions 1, 2, 3, average of 4-14, and newly scored question 15. A score of zero is assigned to question 2-16, if patient select 'no fatigue' to question 1. Question 16 is not included in GFI calculation. The GFI ranged from 1 (no fatigue) to 50 (severe fatigue)."|At Days 35 and 90|FAS population was used and included subjects who had sufficient pharmacokinetic data to determine a Cave(0-24) on Days 14, 35, 56, or 90, or discontinued the study early due to medical or safety reasons.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857966|NCT02149264|Secondary|Change From Baseline in International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Score|"Data collected from the five domains of sexual functions were summarized by descriptive statistics. The domains were:
Erectile function (6 items, questions 1-5 and 15) (Score range:1-30)
Orgasmic function (2 items, questions 9-10) (Score range: 0-10)
Sexual desire (2 items, questions 11-12) (Score range: 2-10)
Intercourse satisfaction (3 items, questions 6-8) (Score range: 0-15)
Overall satisfaction (2 items, questions 13-14) (Score range: 2-10)
A score of 0-5 is awarded to questions 1 to 10 and a score of 1-5 is awarded to questions 11 to 15. Total score was calculated by summing up scores of each domain and ranged from 5 to 75. Low score indicates severe dysfunction and a high score indicates no dysfunction in sexual function."|At Days 35 and 90|FAS population was used and included subjects who had sufficient pharmacokinetic data to determine a Cave(0-24) on Days 14, 35, 56, or 90, or discontinued the study early due to medical or safety reasons.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
857967|NCT02149264|Secondary|The Percentage of Subjects Whose Cave(0-24) Serum Total Testosterone Levels Are ≥300 and ≤1050 ng/dL|The data were presented using descriptive statistics. No statistical analysis was performed.|At 14, 35 and 56|FAS population was used and included subjects who had sufficient pharmacokinetic data to determine a Cave(0-24) on Days 14, 35, 56, or 90, or discontinued the study early due to medical or safety reasons.||percentage of subjects|||Number
857968|NCT02149264|Primary|The Percentage of Subjects Whose Average Concentration (Cave(0-24)) Serum Total Testosterone Levels Are ≥300 and ≤1050 ng/dL|The data were presented using descriptive statistics. The 95% confidence interval (CI) of the proportion (response) was estimated using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution. The study was considered to have met its efficacy criteria if the percentage was ≥ 75% and the lower bound of the 95% CI was ≥ 65%.|At Day 90|Full Analysis Set (FAS) population was used and included subjects who had sufficient pharmacokinetic data to determine a Cave(0-24) on Days 14, 35, 56, or 90, or discontinued the study early due to medical or safety reasons.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858018|NCT01981057|Secondary|Fat|"Prescriptions for fat in parenteral nutrition solutions will be ordered individually and flipped with Numeta or vice versa. This mirroring will be performed with the Cato-Pan prescription software. Subsequently the following nutrients will be calculated and compared with each other and with the ESPGHAN recommendations"|6 weeks||||||
857991|NCT02076243|Secondary|Safety and Tolerability|number of participants with adverse events as a measure of safety and tolerability|up to 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
857992|NCT02076243|Secondary|Treatment Response|correlation of response to first line treatment with Nab-Paclitaxel with SPARC expression, with target lesions measured at the longest diameter of each non-lymph node lesion and the short axis for target lymph nodes|at week 8 post treatment|study terminated, results not collected|||||
857993|NCT02076243|Secondary|Prevalence of SPARC Expression|prevalence of SPARC expression in advanced squamous cell cancer of the skin. The tumor specimen used to determine SPARC expression wll be obtained from a biopsy previously performed as standard of care (such as to establish the diagnosis).|at baseline|study terminated, results not collected|||||
857994|NCT02076243|Secondary|Median Progression Free Survival|every eight weeks will reassess efficacy by imaging and can continue treatment if no progression and expect will be up to an average 5 years|average 5 years|study terminated, results not collected|||||
857995|NCT02076243|Primary|Response Rate|the percentage of subjects who develop Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)|at week 8 post treatment|study terminated, results not collected|||||
858007|NCT02035553|Primary|Antipsychotic Efficacy|Change from Baseline to Day 43 in the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home Version (NPI-NH) psychosis score (Delusions [Domain A]+Hallucinations [Domain B]) in the Full Analysis Set (FAS). The NPI-NH is a questionnaire that quantifies behavioral changes in dementia in nursing home patients and evaluates 12 behavioral domains. For each of the 12 behavioral domains the Frequency (scale:1=occasionally to 4=very frequently) is multiplied by the Severity (scale:1=Mild to 3=Severe) to obtain a domain score (frequency x severity), The NPI-NH Psychosis Subscale consists of the two domains of Delusions and Hallucinations, calculated by adding the Individual domain scores, to yield a possible total score of 0 to 24. Lower scores correspond to less severity. A negative change score from baseline indicates improvement.|Day 43|All randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study treatment and have both a Baseline and at least one post-Baseline NPI-NH psychosis score evaluation.||Score on the NPI-NH scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858008|NCT02019472|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 24|The ACR 20 Response is defined as >= 20% improvement in swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) and >=20% improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments: subject’s assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 mm, 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain), subject’s global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, [0 mm=no pain to 100 mm=worst possible pain]), physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS, subject’s assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas. The derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum CRP.|Week 24|Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants who received at least 1 (partial or complete) dose of study agent.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858009|NCT02019472|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) Using Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) Remission at Week 24|"The Disease Activity Index Score 28 using ESR [DAS28 (ESR)] is a derived score combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), ESR, and Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity. The 28 joints evaluated for swelling and tenderness were shoulder, elbow, wrist, MCP1, MCP2, MCP3, MCP4, MCP5, PIP1, PIP2, PIP3, PIP4, PIP5 joints of the upper right and upper left extremities as well as the knee joints of the lower right and lower left extremities. The DAS28-ESR is expressed on a score range of 0-10, with the minimum score= 0 (best) to maximum score= 10 (worst). The DAS28 (ESR) remission is defined as a DAS28 (ESR) value of less than 2.6 at a visit."|Week 24|Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants who received at least 1 (partial or complete) dose of study agent.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858010|NCT02019472|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response at Week 24|The ACR 50 Response is defined as greater than or equal to (>=) 50 percent (%) improvement in swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) and >= 50% improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments: subject’s assessment of pain using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (0-10 millimeter [mm], 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain), subject’s global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, [0 mm=no pain to 100 mm=worst possible pain]), physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), participant’s assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum C-Reactive Protein (CRP).|Week 24|Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants who received at least 1 (partial or complete) dose of study agent.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858011|NCT02019472|Primary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) at Week 24|"The Disease Activity Index Score 28 using ESR [DAS28 (ESR)] is a derived score combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), ESR, and Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity. The 28 joints evaluated for swelling and tenderness were shoulder, elbow, wrist, MCP1, MCP2, MCP3, MCP4, MCP5, PIP1, PIP2, PIP3, PIP4, PIP5 joints of the upper right and upper left extremities as well as the knee joints of the lower right and lower left extremities. The DAS28-ESR is expressed on a score range of 0-10, with the minimum score= 0 (best) to maximum score= 10 (worst)."|Baseline and Week 24|Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants who received at least 1 (partial or complete) dose of study agent. Participants with missing DAS28 (ESR) at baseline were excluded from the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858012|NCT01981057|Secondary|Osmolarity|"Osmolarity in parenteral nutrition solutions will be calculated individually and flipped with Numeta or vice versa. This mirroring will be performed with the Cato-Pan prescription software. Subsequently the following nutrients will be calculated and compared with each other and with the ESPGHAN recommendations"|6 weeks||||||
858013|NCT01981057|Secondary|Phosphorous|"Prescriptions for phosphorous in parenteral nutrition solutions will be ordered individually and flipped with Numeta or vice versa. This mirroring will be performed with the Cato-Pan prescription software. Subsequently the following nutrients will be calculated and compared with each other and with the ESPGHAN recommendations"|6 weeks||||||
858014|NCT01981057|Secondary|Magnesium|"Prescriptions for magnesium in parenteral nutrition solutions will be ordered individually and flipped with Numeta or vice versa. This mirroring will be performed with the Cato-Pan prescription software. Subsequently the following nutrients will be calculated and compared with each other and with the ESPGHAN recommendations"|6 weeks||||||
858015|NCT01981057|Secondary|Calcium|"Prescriptions for calcium in parenteral nutrition solutions will be ordered individually and flipped with Numeta or vice versa. This mirroring will be performed with the Cato-Pan prescription software. Subsequently the following nutrients will be calculated and compared with each other and with the ESPGHAN recommendations"|6 weeks||||||
858016|NCT01981057|Secondary|Potassium|"Prescriptions for Potassium in parenteral nutrition solutions will be ordered individually and flipped with Numeta or vice versa. This mirroring will be performed with the Cato-Pan prescription software. Subsequently the following nutrients will be calculated and compared with each other and with the ESPGHAN recommendations"|6 weeks||||||
858017|NCT01981057|Secondary|Sodium|"Prescriptions for sodium in parenteral nutrition solutions will be ordered individually and flipped with Numeta or vice versa. This mirroring will be performed with the Cato-Pan prescription software. Subsequently the following nutrients will be calculated and compared with each other and with the ESPGHAN recommendations"|6 weeks||||||
858021|NCT01981057|Primary|Protein|"Prescriptions for protein in parenteral nutrition solutions will be ordered individually and flipped with Numeta or vice versa. This mirroring will be performed with the Cato-Pan prescription software. Subsequently the following nutrients will be calculated and compared with each other and with the ESPGHAN recommendations."|6 weeks|||g/kg/d||Full Range|Median
858022|NCT01972568|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Responder Index (SRI) Response at Week 24 Using Day 1 as Baseline|SRI response, a composite measure of reduced SLE disease activity, was defined as a reduction in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) disease activity score of greater than or equal to (>=) 4 points; no significant worsening in Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) score (<10 % increase, defined as <0.3 point increase for statistical analyses); no new British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) A organ domain scores and <=1 (defined as no more than one) new BILAG B organ domain score.|Week 24|mITT analysis set included all randomized subjects who had received at least 1 dose of IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
858023|NCT01972568|Post-Hoc|High Disease Activity Subpopulation (SLEDAI-2K >=10 at Screening): Logistic Regression of Percentage of Subjects With SRI-6 Response at Week 24|SRI-6 response, a composite measure of reduced SLE disease activity, was defined as a reduction in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) disease activity score of greater than or equal to (>=) 6 points; no significant worsening in Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) score (<10 % increase, defined as <0.3 point increase for statistical analyses); no new British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) A organ domain scores and <=1 (defined as no more than one) new BILAG B organ domain score. Logistic regression of number of subjects with SRI-6 response was analyzed by using Logistic regression model.|Week 24|mITT_HDA analysis set included mITT population with high disease activity (HDA) defined as screening SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) >=10.||percentage of subjects|||Number
858024|NCT01972568|Secondary|Change From Week 0 (Day 1) in SF-36 Components at Week 24|The 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. These 8 aspects can also be summarized as physical and mental component summary scores. Total of 10 variables were analyzed (8 aspects, 2 component summary scores). The score for each of the 8 aspects and 2 component summary scores was scaled from 0 to 100, where 0 = lowest level of functioning and 100 = highest level of functioning.|Week 0 (Day 1) and Week 24|"mITT analysis set included all randomized subjects who had received at least 1 dose of IMP. Here Number Analyzed signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified categories."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858025|NCT01972568|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious TEAEs|An AE was defined as any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of study drug, whether or not considered related to the study drug. A serious AE was an AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death; life threatening; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; congenital anomaly/birth defect or was otherwise considered medically important. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 48 weeks. TEAEs include both Serious TEAEs and non-serious TEAEs.|Baseline up to 24 weeks after last dose of study drug (assessed up to maximum of 48 weeks)|Safety analysis set included all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
858026|NCT01972568|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)-Based Combined Lupus Assessment (BICLA) Response at Week 24|The BICLA response is defined as BILAG-2004 improvement (all screening visit BILAG A improving to B/C/D, all screening visit BILAG B to C/D, and <=1 new BILAG B and no new BILAG A); no deterioration in SLEDAI total score; PGA increase by <10% (defined as <0.3 point increase for the statistical analyses) and no nonpermitted medication/treatment.|Week 24|mITT analysis set included all randomized subjects who had received at least 1 dose of IMP. Here “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies those subjects who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of subjects|||Number
858027|NCT01972568|Secondary|Time From Randomization to First SRI Response During Treatment Period|SRI response, a composite measure of reduced SLE disease activity, was defined as a reduction in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) disease activity score of greater than or equal to (>=) 4 points; no significant worsening in Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) score (<10 % increase, defined as <0.3 point increase for statistical analyses); no new British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) A organ domain scores and <=1 (defined as no more than one) new BILAG B organ domain score. Time to first SRI response during treatment period was presented.|Baseline up to 24 Weeks|mITT analysis set included all randomized subjects who had received at least 1 dose of IMP.||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858028|NCT01972568|Secondary|Change From Screening in Prednisolone-Equivalent Corticosteroid (CS) Daily Dose at Week 24|Change From screening visit to Week 24 of prednisolone-equivalent CS daily dose was presented.|Screening and Week 24|mITT analysis set included all randomized subjects who had received at least 1 dose of IMP.||mg per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
858029|NCT01972568|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Categories at Week 24|The PGIC is self-rated scale that asks the subject to describe the change in activity limitations, symptoms, emotions, and overall Quality of life (QoL) related to the subject's painful condition on the following scale: 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (minimally improved), 4 (no change), 5 (minimally worse), 6 (much worse) and 7 (very much worse). Percentage of subjects in the PGIC categories of very much or much improved (1 or 2), minimally improved or no change or minimally worse (3 or 4 or 5) and much or very much worse (6 or 7) at Week 24 were presented.|Week 24|mITT analysis set included all randomized subjects who had received at least 1 dose of IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
858059|NCT01871805|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) After Single Dose of Alectinib: Phase I|Cmax was expressed in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL).|Pre-dose (0 hour), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 24, 32 and 48 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day -3|Pharmacokinetic (PK) Evaluable Population included all participants who received any dose of alectinib and who had at least one post-baseline PK sample available. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants available for the analysis for this outcome measure.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858030|NCT01972568|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects at Week 24 Whose Prednisone-Equivalent Corticosteroid (CS) Dose Reduced From Screening by >=25% and to a Dose of =<7.5mg/Day, and no British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) A or 2B Flare in Disease Activity|BILAG A or 2B flare is defined by 1 new BILAG A organ domain score and/or 2 new BILAG B organ domain scores compared to the Screening Visit. The BILAG disease activity index evaluates systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) activity in 8 organ systems, using a separate alphabetic score (A to E) assigned to each organ system defined as follows. BILAG A: Disease sufficiently active requiring disease-modifying treatment (prednisone >20 mg daily or immunosuppressants); BILAG B: moderate disease activity requiring treatment with systemic low-dose oral glucocorticoids, intramuscular or intra-articular or soft tissue CS injection, topical CS or immunosuppressants, or symptomatic therapy such as antimalarials or NSAIDs. BILAG C: mild disease; BILAG D: system previously affected but now inactive and BILAG E: system never involved.|Week 24|mITT analysis set included all randomized subjects who had received at least 1 dose of IMP. Here “Number of Participants Analyzed” signifies those subjects whose CS dose >=10 mg at Screening.||percentage of subjects|||Number
858031|NCT01972568|Primary|Percentage of Subjects With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Responder Index (SRI) Response at Week 24 Using Screening Visit as Baseline|SRI response, a composite measure of reduced SLE disease activity, was defined as a reduction in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) disease activity score of greater than or equal to (>=) 4 points; no significant worsening in Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) score (<10 % increase, defined as <0.3 point increase for statistical analyses); no new British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) A organ domain scores and <=1 (defined as no more than one) new BILAG B organ domain score.|Week 24|mITT analysis set included all randomized subjects who had received at least 1 dose of IMP.||percentage of subjects|||Number
858032|NCT01944098|Primary|Postoperative Pain|Analysis of patient outcome will involve a series of visual analogue scale pain evaluations during mobilization, coughing, and resting. VAS, 0 cm as no pain - 10 cm as maximum pain|24 hours post-surgery|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
858033|NCT01944098|Primary|Postoperative Pain|Analysis of patient outcome will involve a series of visual analogue scale (VAS, 0 cm as no pain – 10 cm as maximum pain) pain evaluations during mobilization, coughing, and resting|18 hours post-surgery|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
858034|NCT01944098|Primary|Postoperative Pain|Analysis of patient outcome will involve a series of visual analogue scale (VAS, 0 cm as no pain – 10 cm as maximum pain) pain evaluations during mobilization, coughing, and resting|12 hours post-surgery|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
858035|NCT01944098|Primary|Postoperative Pain|Analysis of patient outcome will involve a series of visual analogue scale pain evaluations during mobilization, coughing, and resting. VAS, 0 cm as no pain - 10 cm as maximum pain|6 hours post-surgery|||units on a scale||Full Range|Median
858039|NCT01936974|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Evaluate progression-free survival between the two regimens.|One Year|Data were not collected|||||
858148|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Total Testosterone Measuring Maximum Concentration Observed (Cmax)|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858060|NCT01871805|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CNS Progression According to RANO by IRC: Phase II|CNS disease progression was defined as a new CNS lesion or progression of pre-existing CNS lesions according to RANO criteria . As per RANO criteria, progression was defined as 25% or more increase in SPD of measurable enhancing (measurable) compared to the best response after initiation of therapy or Screening; increase (significant) in non-enhancing T2/FLAIR lesions, not attributable to other non-tumor causes; any new lesions; and clinical deterioration (not attributable to other non-tumor causes and not due to steroid decrease).|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1 at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cutoff date of 24 October 2014)|Safety Population in Phase II.||percentage of participants|||Number
858052|NCT01877564|Primary|IHC-based Tissue Markers of Proliferation||1 year|data were not collected|||||
858053|NCT01871805|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EORTC QLQ-LC13: Phase II|EORTC QLQ-LC13: consisted of 13 questions with one symptom scale for dyspnea of 3 items and 10 single items (cough, haemoptysis, sore mouth, dysphagia, peripheral neuropathy, alopecia, pain in chest, pain in arm/shoulder, other pain, pain medication). Questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at all' to 4 'Very much'. Scores were averaged and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score=better level of functioning or greater degree of symptoms.|Baseline, Weeks 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 33, 36, 42, 48, last visit (Week 60; data cutoff date of 24 October 2014)|Safety Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants available for the analysis for this outcome measure. Here, n = number of participants available for the analysis at specified timeframe for this outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858054|NCT01871805|Secondary|Change From Baseline in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30): Phase II|EORTC QLQ-C30: included functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), global health status, symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting) and single items (dyspnoea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation/diarrhea and financial difficulties). Most questions used 4-point scale (1 ‘Not at all’ to 4 ‘Very much’; 2 questions used 7-point scale [1 ‘very poor’ to 7 ‘Excellent’]). Scores were averaged and transformed to lie between 0-100 scale; for each of the symptom scales, higher score=better level of functioning or greater degree of symptoms and lower score indicates lower level of that particular symptom.|Baseline, Weeks 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 33, 36, 42, 48, last visit (Week 60; data cutoff date of 24 October 2014)|Safety Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants available for the analysis for this outcome measure. Here, n = number of participants available for the analysis at specified timeframe for this outcome measure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858055|NCT01871805|Secondary|Ctrough After Multiple Dose of Alectinib: Phase II||Pre-dose (0 hour) on Day 1 of Cycles 2, Cycle 3, Cycle 4, Cycle 5|PK Evaluable Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants available for the analysis for this outcome measure. Here, n = number of participants available for the analysis at specified timeframe in specified group.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858056|NCT01871805|Secondary|AUC From Time Zero to Last Measurable Concentration (AUClast) After Multiple Dose of Alectinib: Phase I||Pre-dose (0 hour), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 hours post-dose on Cycle 2 Day 1|PK Evaluable Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants available for the analysis for this outcome measure.||hour*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858057|NCT01871805|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration (AUC) Versus Time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (AUCinf) After Single Dose of Alectinib: Phase I|AUCinf = AUC from time zero (pre-dose) to extrapolated infinite time. It is obtained from AUC (0- t) plus AUC (t-inf). AUC is expressed in hour*ng/mL.|Pre-dose (0 hour), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 24, 32 and 48 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day -3|PK Evaluable Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants available for the analysis for this outcome measure.||hour*ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858058|NCT01871805|Secondary|Cmax After Multiple Dose of Alectinib: Phase I||Pre-dose (0 hour), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 hours post-dose on Cycle 2 Day 1|PK Evaluable Population. Here, number of participants analyzed = participants available for the analysis for this outcome measure.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858061|NCT01871805|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With CNS Progression According to RECIST v1.1 by IRC: Phase II|CNS disease progression was defined as a new CNS lesion or progression of pre-existing CNS lesions according to RECIST 1.1. PD: at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|Safety Population in Phase II.||percentage of participants|||Number
858062|NCT01871805|Secondary|CDOR According to RANO by IRC: Phase II|CDOR was defined as the time from the first observation of a CNS response of CR or PR according to RANO criteria until first observation of CNS progression or death from any cause. An analysis by RANO criteria was performed. Definitions of CR or PR as per RANO was included in description of Outcome Measure 15. As per RANO criteria, progression was defined as 25% or more increase in SPD of measurable enhancing (measurable) compared to the best response after initiation of therapy or Screening; increase (significant) in non-enhancing T2/FLAIR lesions, not attributable to other non-tumor causes; any new lesions; and clinical deterioration (not attributable to other non-tumor causes and not due to steroid decrease) and clear worsening of neurological status with respect to the previous timepoint. DOR curves and the median time to the event was estimated using the methodology of Kaplan and Meier and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)||09/2017||||
858063|NCT01871805|Secondary|CNS Duration of Response (CDOR) According to RECIST v1.1 by IRC: Phase II|CDOR was defined for CNS responders as the time from the first observation of a CNS response of CR or PR until first observation of CNS progression or death from any cause. An analysis by IRC using RECIST v1.1 was performed. PD: at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. Refer “Outcome Measure 2” for the definition of CR and PR. DOR curves and the median time to the event was estimated using the methodology of Kaplan and Meier and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)||09/2017||||
858064|NCT01871805|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With COOR According to Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) by IRC: Phase II|CORR was defined as the proportion of participants who had a CR or PR according to RANO criteria of the baseline CNS lesions. As per RANO criteria, CR was defined as disappearance of all enhancing measurable and non-measurable disease, and no new lesions along with stable or clinically improved status, participants off corticosteroids (or on physiologic replacement doses only) and stable or improved non enhancing T2/FLAIR lesions; PR was defined as 50% or more decrease in sum of the products of the diameters (SPD) of measurable enhancing measurable lesions, no new lesion along with stable or clinically improved status, participants off corticosteroids (or on physiologic replacement doses only) and no progression of non-measurable disease (enhancing and non-enhancing T2/FLAIR lesions. Clopper and Pearson method was used to calculate 95% CI.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|Safety population. Here number of participants analyzed = participants with measurable CNS lesions at baseline based on RANO according to IRC.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858065|NCT01871805|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Central Nervous System Objective Response Rate (CORR) Among Participants With Measurable Central Nervous System Lesions at Baseline According to RECIST v1.1 by IRC: Phase II|CORR was defined as the proportion of participants who had a CR or PR of the baseline CNS lesions, based on RECIST v.1.1. CNS responses according to RECIST v1.1 did not have to be confirmed. Refer “Outcome Measure 2” for the definition of CR and PR. 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|Safety population. Number of participants analyzed = participants with measurable CNS lesions at baseline based on RECIST according to IRC.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858066|NCT01871805|Secondary|DOR Assessed by Investigator: Phase II|DOR was defined for responders (CR or PR) as the time from when response was first documented, to first documented disease progression according to RECIST 1.1 or death (whichever occurred first). Participants who did not progress or did not die after they had a confirmed response were censored at the date of their last tumor measurement. PD: at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. Refer “Outcome Measure 2” for the definition of CR and PR. DOR curves and the median time to the event was estimated using the methodology of Kaplan and Meier and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|Investigator RE Population who had best overall response of CR or PR were included for analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858067|NCT01871805|Secondary|DOR Assessed by IRC: Phase II|DOR was defined for responders (CR or PR) as the time from when response was first documented, to first documented disease progression according to RECIST 1.1 or death (whichever occurred first). Participants who did not progress or did not die after they had a confirmed response were censored at the date of their last tumor measurement. PD: at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. Refer “Outcome Measure 2” for the definition of CR and PR. DOR curves and the median time to the event was estimated using the methodology of Kaplan and Meier and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|IRC RE Population who had best overall response of CR or PR were included for analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858139|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of DHT Measuring Tmin|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of DHT.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||hour||Full Range|Median
858068|NCT01871805|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) Time: Phase II|OS was defined as the time between date of first dose and date of death due to any cause. Participants without an event were censored at the date last known to be alive. Participants without any follow up information were censored at the date of first dose. OS curves and the median time to the event was estimated using the methodology of Kaplan and Meier and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Baseline up to death (any cause) (data cutoff 24 October 2014, maximum follow up 60 weeks)|Safety Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858069|NCT01871805|Secondary|PFS by Investigator: Phase II|PFS was defined as the time between first dose of alectinib and date of first documented disease progression according to RECIST 1.1 or death, whichever occurred first. Participants who have neither progressed nor died at the time of the last clinical cut-off or who lost to follow-up were censored at the date of the last tumor assessment showing no progression of disease either during the study treatment or during follow-up. Participants with no post-baseline assessments were censored at the date of first dose. Progression of disease is defined as at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. PFS curves and the median time to the event was estimated using the methodology of Kaplan and Meier and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|RE Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858070|NCT01871805|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Progression or Death by IRC: Phase II|Participants who have neither progressed according to RECIST 1.1 nor died at the time of the last clinical cut-off or who lost to follow-up were censored at the date of the last tumor assessment showing no progression of disease either during the study treatment or during follow-up. Participants with no post-baseline assessments were censored at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|Safety Population||percentage of participants|||Number
858071|NCT01871805|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) by IRC: Phase II|PFS was defined as the time between first dose of alectinib and date of first documented disease progression according to RECIST 1.1 or death, whichever occurred first. Participants who have neither progressed nor died at the time of the last clinical cut-off or who lost to follow-up were censored at the date of the last tumor assessment showing no progression of disease either during the study treatment or during follow-up. Participants with no post-baseline assessments were censored at the date of first dose. Progression of disease is defined as at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. PFS curves and the median time to the event was estimated using the methodology of Kaplan and Meier and 95% CI for median was computed using the method of Brookmeyer and Crowley.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|Safety Population||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858072|NCT01871805|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control by Investigator: Phase II|Disease control rate assessed according to RECIST 1.1 was defined as the percentage of participants with a best overall response of CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) lasting for at least 12 weeks, after the first dose of alectinib. SD: neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD taking as reference the smallest sum of diameters on study. PD: at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. Refer “Outcome Measure 2” for the definition of CR and PR. 95% CI for rates were constructed using Clopper-Pearson method.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|RE Population comprised all participants with measurable disease at baseline according to the investigator who had a baseline tumor assessment and received at least one dose of alectinib.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858073|NCT01871805|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to RECIST v1.1 by Investigator: Phase II|The objective response rate was defined as the proportion of responders in the response evaluable population, where responders were defined as participants determined to have a best overall response of CR or PR based on the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Refer “Outcome Measure 2” for the definition of CR and PR. CR and PR were to be confirmed by repeat assessments ≥4 weeks after initial documentation. Clopper-Pearson method was used to calculate 95% CI.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1 at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|RE Population comprised all participants with measurable disease at baseline according to the investigator who had a baseline tumor assessment and received at least one dose of alectinib.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858074|NCT01871805|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR) Assessed by Investigator: Phase I|DOR was defined for responders (CR or PR) as the time from when response was first documented, to first documented disease progression (according to RECIST 1.1) or death (whichever occurred first). Participants who did not progress or did not die after they had a CR were censored at date of their last tumor measurement. Progressive disease (PD): at least 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions compared to the smallest sum of diameters on-study and absolute increase of at least 5 mm, progression of existing non-target lesions, or presence of new lesions. Refer “Outcome Measure 2” for the definition of CR and PR. DOR curves and the median time to the event was estimated using the methodology of Kaplan and Meier and Brookmeyer and Crowley method was used to calculate 95% CI.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 105; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)||09/2017||||
858140|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of DHT Measuring Cmin|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of DHT.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858075|NCT01871805|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to RECIST v1.1 by Investigator: Phase I|The objective response rate was defined as the proportion of responders in the response evaluable population, where responders were defined as participants determined to have a best overall response of CR or PR based on the RECIST v1.1 criteria. Refer “Outcome Measure 2” for the definition of CR and PR. Clopper-Pearson method was used to calculate 95% CI.|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 105; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|RE Population comprised all participants with measurable disease at baseline according to the investigator who had a baseline tumor assessment and received at least one dose of alectinib.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858076|NCT01871805|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) by Independent Review Committee (IRC): Phase II|The objective response rate assessed by IRC was defined as the proportion of responders in the response evaluable population, where responders were defined as participants determined to have a best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on the RECIST 1.1 criteria. CR: disappearance of all target and non-target lesions (TLs) and normalization of tumor markers. Pathological lymph nodes must have short axis measures less than (<) 10 millimeter (mm). PR: at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of measures (longest diameter for tumor lesions and short axis measure for nodes) of TLs, taking as reference the baseline sum of diameters. CR and PR were to be confirmed by repeat assessments ≥4 weeks after initial documentation. Clopper-Pearson method was used to calculate 95% confidence interval (CI).|Every 6 weeks from Cycle 1 Day 1, at Cycles 2, 4, and 6 between Days 14-21, and every 3 cycles thereafter (assessed up to Week 60; data cut-off date 24 October 2014)|Response Evaluable (RE) Population comprised all participants with measurable disease at baseline according to the IRC who had a baseline tumor assessment and received at least one dose of alectinib.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858077|NCT01871805|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) - Phase I|The DLTs were defined as any which included Grade 4 thrombocytopenia or Grade 3 thrombocytopenia with bleeding or Grade 4 neutropenia continuing for greater than equal to (>=) 7 consecutive days, non-hematological toxicity of Grade 3 or higher (excluding transient electrolyte abnormalities, diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting that recovers to Grade 2 or lower with appropriate treatment and participants having Grade 2 aspartate transaminase (AST) and/or alanine transaminase (ALT) at baseline must have Grade 3 AST/ALT for 7 days or Grade 4 AST/ALT to be considered a DLT), and adverse events (AEs) that required suspension of treatment for a total of >=7 days which the Investigator could not rule out as been related to alectinib.|Cycle 1 of Phase I (21 days)|Safety Population||participants|||Number
858080|NCT01860040|Primary|Rate of Pathologic Complete Responses (pCR) at the Time of Definitive Surgical Resection of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by Magnetic Resonance Imagery (MRI): Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions|One year||||||
858081|NCT01744483|Primary|Percentage of Patients With Tracheal Bacterial Colonization|The percentage of patients with quantitative culture growth from tracheal aspirate specimens of >1,000,000 CFU between Day 2 and Day 4 of tracheal intubation/mechanical ventilation. Percentage of patients will be compared between the three study arms.|Tracheal colonization by Day 4 or extubation|||percentage of tracheal colonization|||Number
858082|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #9|On a 0-10 scale, how satisfied are you with the results of your pain treatment with 0 being extremely dissatisfied and 10 being extremely satisfied. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858083|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #8|On a 0-10 scale, were you allowed to participate in decisions about your pain treatment as much as you wanted to with 0 being not at all and 10 being entirely. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858084|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #7|Select the percentage (from 0%-100%) of pain relief you received from all medical and non-medical treatments in the first 24 hours. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||percentage of pain relieved||Standard Error|Mean
858141|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of DHT Measuring Cave|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of DHT.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858085|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #6d|On a 0-10 scale, how severe was your dizziness where 0 is not at all and 10 is extremely. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858086|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #6c|On a 0-10 scale, how severe was your itching where 0 is none and 10 is severe. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858087|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #6b|On a 0-10 scale, how severe was your drowsiness where 0 is none and 10 is severe. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858088|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #6a|On a scale of 0-10, what was the severity of your nausea where 0 is none and 10 is severe. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858089|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #5d|How much, on a scale of 0-10, did the pain cause you to feel helpless where 0 is not at all and 10 is extremely. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858090|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #5c|How much, on a scale of 0-10, did the pain cause you to feel frightened where 0 is not at all and 10 is extremely. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858091|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #5b|On a scale of 0-10, how much did pain cause you to feel depressed where 0 is not al all and 10 is extremely. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858092|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #5a|On a scale of 0-10, how much did the pain cause you to feel anxious where 0 is not at all anxious and 10 is extremely anxious. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858093|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #4d|How much, on a scale of 0-10, did pain interfere with staying asleep where 0 is does not interfere and 10 is completely interferes. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858094|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #4c|How much, on a 0-10 scale, did pain interfere with falling asleep where 0 is does not interfere and 10 is completely interferes. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858095|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #4b|How much, on a 0-10 scale, did pain interfere with doing activities out of bed (walking, sitting in chair, standing at sink) where 0 is does not interfere and 10 is completely interferes. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858096|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #4a|How much, on 0-10 scale, did pain interfere with doing activities in bed (turning, sitting up, repositioning) where 0 is does not interfere and 10 is completely interferes. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858142|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of DHT Measuring Cmax|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of DHT.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||ng/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858097|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #3|How often were you in severe pain in the first 24 hours (percentage 0-100%). 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||percentage of time||Standard Error|Mean
858098|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #2|On 0-10 scale, indicate the worst pain you had in first 24 hours. 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst pain possible. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858099|NCT01741259|Secondary|American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire #1|Please indicate on 0-10 scale the least pain you had in first 24 hours. 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst pain possible. 122 patients in the Meperidine PCEA no basal group completed their questionnaires while 118 in the Meperidine PCEA with basal group completed a questionnaire. Some patients did not answer all the questions on the questionnaire, if a question was left blank, it was not analyzed for that patient but the rest of the questionnaire was included.|Survey day epidural stopped|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858100|NCT01741259|Secondary|Total Drug Dose|Pharmacy will generate a report of the drug total from the pump on return to pharmacy.|48 hours post-op or when the epidural is stopped|||milligrams of drug per hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
858101|NCT01741259|Secondary|Adverse Outcomes|Adverse outcomes such as seizures or respiratory depression will be reported to anesthesia personnel by nursing if they occur. Patients are monitored for respiratory rate and sedation every 1 hour for 24 hours, then every 2 hours for 24 hours. Pulse, blood pressure, and neurocirculatory checks are performed every 2 hours for 24 hours and then every 4 hours per our nursing protocol.|36-48 hours post-op (until the epidural is stopped)|||participants|||Number
858102|NCT01741259|Secondary|Inadequate Analgesia|Patients routinely get scheduled ibuprofen as an adjunct to the epidural infusion. The record will be reviewed to see if ketorolac is substituted for ibuprofen or other pain medications such as acetaminophen either alone or in combination with oxycodone or other narcotic pain relievers are administered. The record will also be reviewed if an epidural is discontinued earlier than the morning of the second post-operative day to find out if inadequate analgesia was the cause.|36-48 hours post-op (until the epidural is stopped)|||participants|||Number
858103|NCT01741259|Secondary|Dysphoria|The incidence of dysphoria will be captured when a nurse calls the anesthesia team to alert them. This information is tracked on the physician rounding sheet. The record will also be reviewed if an epidural is discontinued earlier than the morning of the second post-operative day to find out if dysphoria was the cause.|36-48 hours post-op (until epidural is stopped)|||participants|||Number
858104|NCT01741259|Secondary|Pruritus|The incidence of pruritus will be estimated by the administration of diphenhydramine or nalbuphine during the study period as recorded in the patient record.|36-48 hours post-op (until the epidural is stopped)|||participants|||Number
858105|NCT01741259|Secondary|Nausea and Vomiting|The incidence of nausea and vomiting will be estimated by the administration of ondansetron during the study period as recorded in the patient record.|36-48 hours post-op (until epidural is stopped)|||participants|||Number
858106|NCT01741259|Primary|Verbal Pain Score With Movement|Verbal Pain Score on a 0-10 scale is recorded by the nurse at 0, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36,40, 44, and 48 hours after transfer to the post-partum floor. On this scale, 0 represents no pain at all and 10 represents the worst pain imaginable. Because we were relying on nurses to capture this data in the course of normal patient care, scores within 1 hour before or after the goal time were accepted. For each patient, the average of all pain scores was taken and this was considered to be the average pain score while the epidural meperidine was being given.|36-48 hours post-op (until epidural is stopped)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858107|NCT01709409|Secondary|Curosurf-01|7. Mortality prior to discharge|36 weeks GA||||||
858108|NCT01709409|Secondary|Curosurf-01|6. Bronchopulmonary dysplasia, defined as oxygen or respiratory support requirement at 36 weeks corrected GA|36 Weeks GA||||||
858109|NCT01709409|Secondary|Curosurf-01|5. Adverse events during or after administration of surfactant|36 weeks GA||||||
858110|NCT01709409|Secondary|Curosurf-01|4. Number of doses of surfactant received|36 weeks GA||||||
858111|NCT01709409|Secondary|Curosurf-01|3. Total duration of respiratory support (ventilator and nCPAP) and total number of days of oxygen requirement|36 weeks GA||||||
858112|NCT01709409|Secondary|Curosurf-01|2. Duration of first intubation (in hours/days)|36 weeks GA||||||
858113|NCT01709409|Secondary|To Compare the Duration of Respiratory Support, Extubation Failure Rates, Need for Additional Surfactant Doses, Adverse Events (During and Following Administration), Survival and Pulmonary Morbidities During Hospital Admission Between the Two Groups.|1. Extubation failure|36 weeks GA||||||
858114|NCT01709409|Primary|The Primary Objective of the Study is to Compare Between the Two Groups, the Number of Subjects Alive and Extubated at 48 Hours Post Surfactant Administration. Extubation|"rate on ventilator ≤40 per minute and
mean airway pressure ≤ 10 cm H20 and
fi02 ≤ 30%"|48 hours|||Participants|||Count of Participants
858143|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of DHT Measuring Tmax|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of DHT.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||hour||Full Range|Median
858144|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of DHT (Dihydrotestosterone) Measuring AUCτ|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of DHT.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||ng*hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858145|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Total Testosterone Measuring Time of Minimum Observed Concentration (Tmin)|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||hour||Full Range|Median
858136|NCT01665599|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the SF-12 Health Questionnaire|"Data collected from the SF-12 questionnaire was used to assess improvement in the psychometrically-based physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). Both PCS and MCS contains four sub-domains:
PCS: General Health (1 item), Physical Functioning (2 items), Role-Physical (2 items), Bodily Pain (1 item)
MCS: Role-Emotional (2 items), Mental Health (2 items), Vitality (1 item), Social Functioning (1 item)
The scale scores are calculated by summing responses across scale items and then transforming these raw scores to a 0–100 scale. Computerized scoring algorithms are used to produce norm-based scores for each scale (mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10) as well as the PCS and MCS summary scores. A zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health.
The data were presented using descriptive statistics."|Day 91|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858137|NCT01665599|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) Questionnaire|"The MAF contains four sub-domains:
Severity (2 items, questions 1-2) (Score range: 2-20)
Distress (1 item, question 3) (Score range: 1-10)
Degree of interference in activities of daily living (11 items, questions 4-14) (Score range: 11-110)
Timing (2 items, questions 15-16) (Score range: 5-20)
A score of 1-10 is awarded to each of the 14 questions across the 3 domains. The timing domain is categorical and was converted to 1-10 scale by multiplying each score by 2.5. Lower score in each domain indicates improvement in fatigue.
To calculate GFI : Score of question 15 is converted to a 0-10 scale by multiplying each score by 2.5 and then sum questions 1, 2, 3, average of 4-14, and newly scored question 15. A score of zero is assigned to question 2-16, if patient select 'no fatigue' to question 1. Question 16 is not included in GFI calculation. Range of GFI: 1 (no fatigue) to 50 (severe fatigue).
The data were presented using descriptive statistics."|Day 91|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858138|NCT01665599|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the International Index of Erectile Dysfunction (IIEF) Questionnaire|"Data collected from the five domains of sexual functions were summarized by descriptive statistics. The domains are:
Erectile function (6 items, questions 1-5 and 15) (Score range: 1-30)
Orgasmic function (2 items, questions 9-10) (Score range: 0-10)
Sexual desire (2 items, questions 11-12) (Score range: 2-10)
Intercourse satisfaction (3 items, questions 6-8) (Score range: 0-15)
Overall satisfaction (2 items, questions 13-14) (Score range: 2-10)
A score of 0-5 is awarded to questions 1 to 10 and a score of 1-5 is awarded to questions 11 to 15. Total score was calculated by summing up scores of each domain and ranged from 5 to 75. Low score indicates severe dysfunction and a high score indicates no dysfunction in sexual function."|Day 91|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858149|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Total Testosterone Measuring Time of Maximum Observed Concentration (Tmax)|A validated LC/MS/MS method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||hour||Full Range|Median
858150|NCT01665599|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Total Testosterone Measuring Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From the Last Dose and 24 Hours Post-dose (AUCτ)|A validated high pressure liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry detection (LC/MS/MS) method was used to determine the levels of total testosterone.|Day 1; Day 90|ITT population was used which comprised of all participants who received at least one dose of IMP.||ng*hr/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858151|NCT01665599|Secondary|The Percentage of Participants on Day 1 Whose Serum Cavg (0-24) Serum Total Testosterone Levels Are Between 300 and 1050 ng/dL|The data were presented using descriptive statistics. No statistical analysis was performed.|Day 1|FAS population was used which comprised of subjects who had any available PK data for testosterone on Day 90.||percentage of participants|||Number
858152|NCT01665599|Primary|The Percentage of Subjects on Day 90 Whose Cavg (0-24) Serum Total Testosterone Levels Are Between 300 and 1050 ng/dL|The data were presented using descriptive statistics. No statistical analysis was performed.|Day 90|Full Analysis set (FAS) population was used which comprised of subjects who had any available pharmacokinetic (PK) data for testosterone on Day 90.||percentage of participants|||Number
858153|NCT01655719|Other Pre-specified|Lipid Accumulation in Tumor|Determine (by MRI) if pioglitazone induces lipid accumulation in follicular-patterned thyroid carcinomas that contain the PAX8-PPARgamma fusion gene.|24 weeks||||||
858154|NCT01655719|Other Pre-specified|Sensitization to Radioiodine Therapy|Determine if pioglitazone induces a clinically significant level of radioiodine uptake in the residual thyroid carcinoma, and if so, whether there is a therapeutic response to radioiodine. This will be addressed in a separate follow-up protocol available to subjects completing this study.|24 weeks||||||
858155|NCT01655719|Other Pre-specified|Biomarkers|Define predictive markers of response or insensitivity to pioglitazone. Unstained tumor tissue slides from archival paraffin blocks, fresh biopsy specimens from measurable metastases, and blood samples (serum and peripheral blood cells) will be collected on enrolled patients who consented for the optional correlative studies. These will be used to identify factors that predict efficacy of pioglitazone. Analyses may include measures of expression of specific RNAs and proteins, and DNA sequence analysis.|24 weeks||||||
858156|NCT01655719|Secondary|Toxicity|Toxicities experienced by patients with PAX8-PPARgamma fusion gene-positive follicular-patterned thyroid carcinomas treated with pioglitazone are indicated by presence of Serious Adverse Events (that show relatedness).|24 weeks|||serious adverse events|||Number
858157|NCT01655719|Secondary|Change in Serum Thyroglobulin|Determine if pioglitazone decreases serum thyroglobulin in patients with follicular-patterned thyroid carcinomas that contain the PAX8-PPARgamma fusion gene.|Baseline and 24 weeks|||ng/mL|||Number
858158|NCT01655719|Primary|Tumor Response (Change)|Response is measured by change in Tumor size (cm)|Baseline and 24 weeks|||cm|||Number
858159|NCT01650545|Secondary|Cytokine Analysis From BAL Fluid in Lung|This is a surrogate marker of lung inflammation that may be used in addition to biopsy data|2 years||||||
858160|NCT01650545|Primary|Number Of Participants With Chronic Rejection Who Expired||up to 5 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
858161|NCT01650545|Primary|The Number of Lung Allograft Recipients Randomized With Bronchiolitis Obliterans Whom Had Progression of Disease in the L-CsA Arm Versus the Standard of Care Arm Receiving Conventional Immune Suppression Exclusively.|Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) progression of disease defined by >= 20% decline in FEV1 from randomization or re-transplant of the lung allograft or death|1 year post randomization|||Participants|||Count of Participants
858168|NCT01624233|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving ACR20|ACR20 response is defined as ≥20% improvement from baseline for TJC and SJC and in at least 3 of the following 5 criteria: participant's assessment of Joint Pain VAS, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, Physician's Global Assessment of the Disease Activity VAS, participant's assessment of physical function using the HAQ-DI, or CRP or the ESR.|Wk 100 and Wk 292||09/2018||||
858169|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Participants Assessment of Joint Pain VAS|The pain VAS is a participant-administered single-item scale designed to measure current joint pain from PsA using a 100-mm horizontal VAS. Overall severity of participant's joint pain from PsA is indicated by placing a single mark on the horizontal 100-mm scale from 0mm (no pain) to 100 mm (pain as severe as you can imagine).|Baseline, Wk 100; Baseline, Wk 292||09/2018||||
858170|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in DLQI Score|DLQI is a participant-administered, 10-question, validated, quality-of-life questionnaire that covers 6 domains, including symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure, work and school, personal relationships, and treatment. Response categories include 0 (not at all), 1 (a little), 2 (a lot), and 3 (very much) and unanswered (“not relevant”) responses were scored as “0.” Total scores range from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating greater quality of life impairment. A 5-point increase in total score from baseline is considered clinically relevant.|Baseline, Wk 100; Baseline, Wk 292||09/2018||||
858171|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Itch NRS Score|The Itch NRS is a participant-administered, 11-point horizontal scale anchored at 0 (no itch) and 10, (worst itch imaginable). Overall severity of a participant's itching from Ps is indicated by circling the number that best describes the worst level of itching in the past 24 hours.|Baseline, Wk 100; Baseline, Wk 292||09/2018||||
858172|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in QIDS-SR16 Score|QIDS-SR16 is a participant-administered, 16-item instrument intended to assess the existence and severity of symptoms of depression. A participant is asked to consider each statement as it relates to the way they have felt for the past 7 days and rate each on a 4-point scale: 0 (best) to 3 (worst) scale. The sum of the 16 items corresponding to 9 depression domains [sad mood, concentration, self-criticism, suicidal ideation, interest, energy/fatigue, sleep disturbance (initial, middle and late insomnia or hypersomnia), decrease/increase in appetite/weight, and psychomotor agitation/retardation] give a single total scores range from 0 to 27, with higher scores indicating greater symptom severity.|Baseline, Wk 100; Baseline, Wk 292||09/2018||||
858173|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PSSI|The PSSI is a physician assessment of erythema, induration and desquamation and percent of scalp that is covered with a scores range from 0 (none) to 4 (very severe). The composite score is derived from the sum of scores for erythema, induration, and desquamation multiplied by the score recorded for the extent of the scalp area involved, 1 (<10%) to 6 (90%-100%) with a total scores range from 0 to 72, with lower scores indicating less severity.|Baseline, Wk 100; Baseline, Wk 292||09/2018||||
858174|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in NAPSI|The NAPSI is a numeric, reproducible, objective tool for evaluation of fingernail Ps. This scale is used to evaluate the severity of fingernail bed Ps and fingernail matrix Ps by area of involvement in the fingernail unit. The fingernail is divided with imaginary horizontal and longitudinal lines into quadrants. Each fingernail is given a score for fingernail bed Ps 0 (none) to 4 (Ps in 4 quadrants of the fingernail) and fingernail matrix Ps 0 (none) to 4 (Ps in 4 quadrants in matrix), depending on the presence (score of 1) or absence (score of 0) of any of the features of fingernail bed or matrix Ps in each quadrant. The NAPSI score of a fingernail is the sum of scores in fingernail bed and fingernail matrix from each quadrant (maximum of 8). Each fingernail is evaluated, then the sum of all the fingernails equals the total NAPSI score with a range 0 to 80. Higher scores indicate more severe psoriasis.|Baseline, Wk 100; Baseline, Wk 292||09/2018||||
858175|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percent of BSA Involvement|BSA is a physician rating of the percentage of involvement of Ps for each participant. BSA is assessed on a continuous scale from 0% (no involvement) to 100% (full involvement), in which 1% corresponds to the size of the participants hand (includes the palm, fingers and thumb).|Baseline, Wk 100; Baseline, Wk 292||09/2018||||
858176|NCT01624233|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With sPGA (0 or 1) and sPGA (0)|The sPGA is the physician's determination of the participant's Ps lesions overall at a given time point. Lesions were categorized by descriptions for induration, erythema, and scaling. Participants Ps were assessed as 0 (clear) or 1 (minimal).|Wks 100 and 292||09/2018||||
858177|NCT01624233|Secondary|Percent of Participants Achieving PASI 75%, 90% and/or 100% Improvement|The PASI combines the extent of body surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs). For each region the percent area of skin involved was estimated: 0 (0%) to 6 (90%-100%) and severity was estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration and scaling, with a scores range from 0 (no involvement) to 4 (severe involvement). Each area is scored by itself and the scores were then combined for the final PASI. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each region * area score * weighing factor [head (0.1), upper limbs (0.2), trunk (0.3), lower limbs (0.4)]. Overall scores range from 0 (no Ps) to 72 (the most severe disease).|Wks 100 and 292||09/2018||||
858178|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Participants Assessment of Joint Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With PsA Pain VAS)|The pain VAS is a participant-administered single-item scale designed to measure current joint pain from PsA using a 100-mm horizontal VAS. Overall severity of participant's joint pain from PsA is indicated by placing a single mark on the horizontal 100-mm scale from 0 mm (no pain) to 100 mm (pain as severe as you can imagine).|Baseline, Wk 12; Baseline, Wk 52|Participants with PsA who had 3 or more tender joints and 3 or more swollen joints at screening and baseline.||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
858179|NCT01624233|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Improvement [Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) as Measured by ACR20]|ACR20 response is defined as a ≥20% improvement from baseline for tender joint count (TJC) and swollen joint count (SJC) and in at least 3 of the following 5 criteria: participant's assessment of Joint Pain visual analog scale (VAS), Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, Physician's Global Assessment of the Disease Activity VAS, participant's assessment of physical function using the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), or C-reactive protein (CRP) or the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR).|Wks 12, 24 and 52|Participants with PsA who had 3 or more tender joints and 3 or more swollen joints at screening and baseline.||participants|||Number
858180|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score|DLQI is a participant-administered, 10-question, validated, quality-of-life questionnaire that covers 6 domains, including symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure, work and school, personal relationships, and treatment. Response categories include 0 (not at all), 1 (a little), 2 (a lot), and 3 (very much) and unanswered (“not relevant”) responses were scored as “0.” Total scores range from 0 to 30, with higher score indicating greater quality of life is impairment. A 5-point increase in total score from baseline is considered clinically relevant.|Baseline, Wk 12; Baseline, Wk 24; Baseline, Wk 52|Participants with Plaques Ps who had DLQI at baseline and at least 1 post-dose result. Participants with missing DLQI at Wks 12 and 52 were imputed by LOCF.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858181|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Itch Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Score|The Itch NRS is a participant-administered, 11-point horizontal scale anchored at 0 (no itch) and 10 (worst itch imaginable). Overall severity of a participant's itching from Ps is indicated by circling the number that best describes the worst level of itching in the past 24 hours.|Baseline, Wk 12; Baseline, Wk 24; Baseline, Wk 52|Participants with Plaque Ps who had Itch NRS at baseline and at least 1 post-dose result. Participants with missing Itch NRS at Wks 12 and 52 were imputed by LOCF.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858182|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Reported 16 Items (QIDS-SR16) Score [Quality of Life and Outcome Assessments. Measures: Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO)]|QIDS-SR16 is a participant-administered, 16-item instrument intended to assess the existence and severity of symptoms of depression. A participant is asked to consider each statement as it relates to the way they have felt for the past 7 days and rate each on a 4-point scale: 0 (best) to 3 (worst). The sum of the 16 items corresponding to 9 depression domains [sad mood, concentration, self-criticism, suicidal ideation, interest, energy/fatigue, sleep disturbance (initial, middle and late insomnia or hypersomnia), decrease/increase in appetite/weight, and psychomotor agitation/retardation] to give a single total scores range from 0 to 27, with higher scores indicating greater symptom severity.|Baseline, Wk 12; Baseline, Wk 24; Baseline, Wk 52|Participants with Plaque Ps who had QIDS-SR16 at baseline and at least 1 post-dose result. Participants with missing QIDS-SR16 at Wks 12 and 52 were imputed by LOCF.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858183|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Psoriasis Scalp Severity Index (PSSI)|The PSSI is a physician assessment of erythema, induration and desquamation and percent of scalp that is covered with a scores range from 0 (none) to 4 (very severe). The composite score is derived from the sum of scores for erythema, induration, and desquamation multiplied by the score recorded for the extent of the scalp area involved, 1 (<10%) to 6 (90%-100%) with a total scores range from 0 to 72, with lower scores indicating less severity.|Baseline, Wk 12; Baseline, Wk 24; Baseline, Wk 52|All participants with Plaque Ps with a PSSI baseline and at least 1 post-dose result. Participants with missing PSSI at Wks 12 and 52 were imputed by LOCF.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858184|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI)|The NAPSI is a numeric, reproducible, objective tool for evaluation of fingernail Ps. This scale is used to evaluate the severity of fingernail bed Ps and fingernail matrix Ps by area of involvement in the fingernail unit. The fingernail is divided with imaginary horizontal and longitudinal lines into quadrants. Each fingernail is given a score for fingernail bed Ps 0 (none) to 4 (Ps in 4 quadrants of the fingernail) and fingernail matrix Ps 0 (none) to 4 (Ps in 4 quadrants in matrix), depending on the presence (score of 1) or absence (score of 0) of any of the features of fingernail bed or matrix Ps in each quadrant. The NAPSI score of a fingernail is the sum of scores in fingernail bed and fingernail matrix from each quadrant (maximum of 8). Each fingernail is evaluated, then the sum of all fingernails equals the total NAPSI score with a range from range 0 to 80. Higher scores indicated more severe psoriasis.|Baseline, Wk 12; Baseline, Wk 24; Baseline, Wk 52|All participants Plaque Ps with NAPSI at baseline and at least 1 post dose result. Participants with missing NAPSI at Wks 12 and 52 were imputed by LOCF.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858185|NCT01624233|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percent of Body Surface Area (BSA) Involvement|BSA is a physician rating of the percentage of involvement of Ps for each participant. BSA is assessed on a continuous scale from 0% (no involvement) to 100% (full involvement), in which 1% corresponds to the size of the participants hand (includes the palm, fingers and thumb).|Baseline, Wk 12; Baseline, Wk 24; Baseline, Wk 52|All participants with Plaque Ps with a baseline and at least 1 post-dose result. Participants with missing BSA at Wks 12 and 52 were imputed by last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of BSA||Standard Deviation|Mean
858186|NCT01624233|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Static Physician Global Assessment (sPGA) (0 or 1) or sPGA (0) (Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis Measure: sPGA)|The sPGA is the physician's determination of the participant's Ps lesions overall at a given time point. Lesions were categorized by descriptions for induration, erythema, and scaling. Participants Ps were assessed as 0 (clear) or 1 (minimal).|Wks 12, 24 and 52|All participants with Plaque Ps who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-dose measurement of sPGA after study treatment. Participants who discontinued treatment at any time prior to the specified time points were defined as non-responders for NRI analysis for Wks 12 and 52.||percentage of participants|||Number
858187|NCT01624233|Secondary|Percent of Participants Achieving PASI 90% and 100% Improvement|The PASI combines the extent of body surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs). For each region the percent area of skin involved was estimated from 0 (0%) to 6 (90%-100%) and severity was estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration and scaling with a scores range from 0 (no involvement) to 4 (severe involvement). Each area is scored by itself and the scores were then combined for the final PASI. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each region * area score * weighing factor [head (0.1), upper limbs (0.2), trunk (0.3), lower limbs (0.4)]. Overall scores range from 0 (no Ps) to 72 (the most severe disease).|Wks 12, 24 and 52|All participants with Plaque Ps who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-dose measurement of PASI after study treatment. Participants who discontinued treatment at any time prior to the specified time points were defined as non-responders for NRI at Wks 12 and 52.||percentage of participants|||Number
858188|NCT01624233|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-Ixekizumab Antibodies|Treatment-emergent immunogenicity is defined as any occurrence of a 4-fold or 2-dilution increase in titer over the pretreatment baseline titer. In the case of a negative result at baseline, treatment-emergent immunogenicity is defined as an increase in titer to ≥1:10.|Baseline through Wk 52|All participants with Plaque Ps, Pustular Ps or Erythrodermic Ps who received at least 1 dose of study drug.||participants|||Number
858189|NCT01624233|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics (PK): Ctrough at Steady State (Ctrough ss) of Ixekizumab|PK samples were from 1 or 2 sampling cohorts. Ctrough is the minimum observed concentration of ixekizumab at steady state. Steady-state ixekizumab trough concentrations were summarized for the induction dosing period at week 12, the time of the primary efficacy assessment. Steady-state ixekizumab trough concentrations were summarized for the maintenance dosing period at week 24.|Wks 12 and 24|All participants with Plaque Ps, Pustular Ps or Erythrodermic Ps who had at least 1 dose of study drug and evaluable Ctrough data at the specified time points.||micrograms/milliliter (µg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
858190|NCT01624233|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥75% Improvement in PASI|The PASI combines the extent of body surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs). For each region, the percent area of skin involved was estimated from 0 (0%) to 6 (90%-100%) and severity was estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration and scaling with a scores range from 0 (no involvement) to 4 (severe involvement). Each area is scored by itself and the scores were then combined for the final PASI. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each region * area score * weighing factor [head (0.1), upper limbs (0.2), trunk (0.3), lower limbs (0.4)]. Overall scores range from 0 (no Ps) to 72 (the most severe disease).|Wks 24 and 52|All participants with Plaque Ps who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 measurement of PASI after study treatment. Non-responders and participants who discontinued at any time prior to Wk 52 were defined as non-responders for NRI analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
858191|NCT01624233|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥75% Improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) (Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis. Measure: PASI)|The PASI combines the extent of body surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs). For each region the percent area of skin involved was estimated from 0 (0%) to 6 (90%-100%) and severity was estimated by clinical signs of erythema, induration and scaling with a scores range from 0 (no involvement) to 4 (severe involvement). Each area is scored by itself and the scores were then combined for the final PASI. Final PASI=sum of severity parameters for each region * area score * weighing factor [head (0.1), upper limbs (0.2), trunk (0.3), lower limbs (0.4)]. Overall scores range from 0 (no Ps) to 72 (the most severe disease).|Week (Wk) 12|All participants with Plaque Ps who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least 1 measurement of PASI after study treatment. Non-responders and participants who discontinued at any time prior to specified time points were defined as non-responders for Non-Responder Imputation (NRI) analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
858213|NCT01531374|Secondary|Prosthetic Valve Dysfunction (PVD)|"PVD was defined according to VARC using the site reported echocardiography assessments including aortic regurgitation (AR) and aortic stenosis (AS) evaluations. Total AR reported as moderate or severe was considered PVD. AS was defined as significant stenosis and considered PVD if one of the following was met:
Peak velocity >4 m/s
Mean gradient >35 mmHg
EOA < 0.8 cm2
TVIV1 / TVIV2 < 0.25"|30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with a valve implanted.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858214|NCT01531374|Secondary|Procedural Success|Defined as device success and absence of in-hospital MACCE.|Number of days from admission to discharge|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an index procedure who were evaluable for procedural success.||percentage of participants|||Number
858215|NCT01531374|Secondary|Device Success|"Defined as:
Successful vascular access, delivery and deployment of the device, and successful retrieval of the delivery system,
Correct position of the device in the proper anatomical location (placement in the annulus with no impedance on device function),
Intended performance of the prosthetic valve (aortic valve area > 1.2 cm2 for 26, 29 and 31mm valves, ≥ 0.9 cm2 for 23mm valve (by echocardiography using the continuity equation) and mean aortic valve gradient < 20 mmHg or peak velocity < 3 m/sec, without moderate or severe prosthetic valve aortic regurgitation)
Only one valve implanted in the proper anatomical location"|Number of days from admission to discharge|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with a TAVR index procedure who were evaluable for device success.||percentage of participants|||Number
858216|NCT01531374|Secondary|Length of Index Procedure Hospital Stay||Number of days from admission to discharge|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
858217|NCT01531374|Secondary|Index Procedure Related MAEs||Procedure|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants|||Number
858218|NCT01531374|Secondary|Strokes and Transient Ischemic Attacks (TIAs)|Strokes (of any severity) and TIAs|30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858219|NCT01531374|Secondary|Cardiovascular Deaths and Valve-Related Deaths||30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858220|NCT01531374|Secondary|Aortic Valve Hospitalizations||30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858221|NCT01531374|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Valve Performance|"Using the following measure:
- Degree of Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular and Paravalvular) analyzed overall per Extreme Risk or High Risk. Iliofemoral access and non-iliofemoral access are not reported separate because this is a valve performance measurement."|30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with a valve implanted.||percentage of participants|||Number
858222|NCT01531374|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Valve Performance|"Using the following measure:
• Transvalvular Mean Gradient analyzed overall per Extreme Risk or High Risk. Iliofemoral access and non-iliofemoral access are not reported separate because this is a valve performance measurement."|30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with a valve implanted.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
858223|NCT01531374|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Valve Performance|"Using the following measure:
• Effective Orifice Area (EOA) analyzed overall per Extreme Risk or High Risk. Iliofemoral access and non-iliofemoral access are not reported separate because this is a valve performance measurement."|30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with a valve implanted.||cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
858224|NCT01531374|Secondary|Quality of Life (QoL) Change|"QoL summary score change from baseline using the following measures:
Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ): Quantifies physical function, symptoms, social function, self-efficacy and knowledge, and quality of life. Scores are transformed to a range of 0-100, in which higher scores reflect better health status.
12 Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12): Measures functional health and well-being. Scores are transformed to a range of 0-100, in which higher scores reflect better health status.
European QoL (EQ-5D): Measures 5 domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) that can be converted to utilities using an algorithm. Utilities range from 0 to 1, with 1 representing perfect health, and 0 corresponding to the worst imaginable health state."|30 day, 6 month, 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858225|NCT01531374|Secondary|Ratio of Days Alive Out of Hospital at 365 Days Post Procedure Versus Total Days Alive||1 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||ratio of days alive and out of hospital||Standard Deviation|Mean
858226|NCT01531374|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Distance Walked During 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT)|Change in distance walked during 6MWT from baseline|Baseline to 30 days, baseline to 1 year|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
858227|NCT01531374|Secondary|Change From Baseline in NYHA Class|"Change from baseline (continuous variable). A positive number corresponds to NYHA worsening; a negative number corresponds to NYHA improvement.
NYHA Classification:
Class I: Subjects with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity.
Class I: Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity.
Class III: Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity.
Class IV: Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort."|Baseline to 30 days, baseline to 6 months, baseline to 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||average classification level change||Standard Deviation|Mean
858228|NCT01531374|Secondary|Conduction Disturbance Requiring Permanent Pacemaker Implantation||30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858229|NCT01531374|Secondary|Major Adverse Events (MAEs)|"MAEs Include:
MACCE
Acute Kidney Injury
Cardiac Tamponade
Prosthetic Valve Dysfunction
Cardiogenic Shock
Valve Endocarditis
Life-Threatening, Disabling or Major Bleeding
Major Vascular Complication
Cardiac Perforation
Device Migration/Valve Embolism"|30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858230|NCT01531374|Secondary|The Occurrence of Individual MACCE Components|"Individual MACCE Components Include:
All Cause Mortality
MI
All stroke
Reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)"|30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858231|NCT01531374|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)|"MACCE is defined as a composite of:
All-Cause Death
Myocardial Infarction (MI)
All Stroke
Reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)"|30 day, 6 months, and 1 year. The 2-5 year outcome data will be reported once data set is complete.|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858232|NCT01531374|Primary|Extreme Risk: All-cause Death or Major Stroke; High Risk Surgical: All-cause Mortality|All-cause Death or Major Stroke (Extreme Risk- Medtronic CoreValve® System); All-cause Mortality (High Risk Surgical- Medtronic CoreValve® System vs. Surgical Valve)|1 year|Participant Population = Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858244|NCT01449929|Secondary|Human Immunodeficiency Virus Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (HIVTSQ) Convenience Score at Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|Participant treatment satisfaction was measured using the self-reported scale (HIVTSQ), which consists of 10 items (1-satisfaction, 2-HIV control, 3-adverse effects, 4-level of demand, 5-convenience, 6-flexibility, 7-knowledge, 8-life habits, 9-recommendability, and 10-willingness to continue). Items are scored from 0 (very dissatisfied) to 6 (very satisfied), other than item 4, which has an inverted score from 6 (very demanding) to 0 (very undemanding). The convenience score is the score for item 5 (range: 0-6).|Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|HIVTSQ mITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different visits, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the HIVTSQ mITT-E population.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858245|NCT01449929|Secondary|Human Immunodeficiency Virus Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (HIVTSQ) Lifestyle/Ease Sub Score at Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|Participant treatment satisfaction was measured using the self-reported scale (HIVTSQ), which consists of 10 items (1-satisfaction, 2-HIV control, 3-adverse effects, 4-level of demand, 5-convenience, 6-flexibility, 7-knowledge, 8-life habits, 9-recommendability, and 10-willingness to continue). Items are scored from 0 (very dissatisfied) to 6 (very satisfied), other than item 4, which has an inverted score from 6 (very demanding) to 0 (very undemanding). The lifestyle/ease score is the sum of items 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 (range: 0-30).|Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|HIVTSQ mITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different visits, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the HIVTSQ mITT-E population.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858246|NCT01449929|Secondary|Human Immunodeficiency Virus Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (HIVTSQ) Total Score at Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|Participant treatment satisfaction was measured using the self-reported scale (HIVTSQ), which consists of 10 items (1-satisfaction, 2-HIV control, 3-adverse effects, 4-level of demand, 5-convenience, 6-flexibility, 7-knowledge, 8-life habits, 9-recommendability, and 10-willingness to continue). Items are scored from 0 (very dissatisfied) to 6 (very satisfied), other than item 4, which has an inverted score from 6 (very demanding) to 0 (very undemanding). The treatment satisfaction score (range: 0-60) was the sum of the individual items. HIVTSQ mITT-E Population=Only participants from USA, France, Germany, Italy, Spain for whom valid translations were available from the mITT-E Population.|Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|HIVTSQ mITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different visits, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the HIVTSQ mITT-E population.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858247|NCT01449929|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Thermometer Scores at Week 24 and Week 48|The European Quality of Life -5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) is a 5-question quality of life instrument that provides a utility score and visual analogue scale score that describes the participants’ health status. The primary reason for including the EQ-5D is to elicit utility values for potential cost-effectiveness analysis for submission to health technology assessment agencies. Thermometer score is based on a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 100 (best imaginable health state) to 0 (worst imaginable health state).Values represented are for adjusted mean. Estimates are calculated from an ANCOVA model adjusting for age, sex, race, Baseline viral load, background dual NRTI therapy and Baseline EQ-5D thermometer score. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline, Week 24, and Week 48|mITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different visits, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the mITT-E Population.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858248|NCT01449929|Secondary|Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Utility Scores at Week 24 and Week 48|The European Quality of Life -5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) is a 5-question quality of life instrument that provides a utility score and visual analogue scale score that describes the participants’ health status. The primary reason for including the EQ-5D is to elicit utility values for potential cost-effectiveness analysis for submission to health technology assessment agencies. The EQ-5D total score ranges from 0 (worst health state) to 1 (perfect health state) and 1 reflects the best outcome. Values represented are for adjusted mean. Estimates are calculated from an ANCOVA model adjusting for age, sex, race, baseline viral load, background dual NRTI therapy and Baseline EQ-5D utility score. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline, Week 24, and Week 48|mITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different visits, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the mITT-E Population.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858249|NCT01449929|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) Symptom Distress Module (SDM) Bother Score at Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|SDM is a 20-item self-reported measure that addresses the presence and perceived distress linked to symptoms commonly associated with HIV or its treatment. Each item is rated from 0 to 4 where 0 (complete absence of symptom) and 4 (very bothersome symptom). Overall score calculated as the sum of the scores for each of the 20 items of the questionnaire and ranged from 0 (best health) and 80 (worst health). Values represented are for adjusted mean. Estimates are calculated from an ANCOVA model adjusting for age, sex, race, baseline viral load, background dual NRTI therapy and baseline symptom bother score. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. A positive change from Baseline indicates a decline in a participant’s quality of life over that period.|Baseline, Week 4, Week 24, and Week 48|mITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different visits, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the mITT-E Population.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
858250|NCT01449929|Secondary|Number of Participants (Par.) With Detectable Virus That Has Genotypic or Phenotypic Evidence of Treatment-emergent Resistance to DTG, DRV+RTV and Other On-study ART at Time of Protocol Defined Virology Failure (PDVF)|An assessment was made of every change across all amino acids within the integrase (IN), reverse transcriptase (RT), and Protease (PRO) encoding region at Baseline and at time of suspected PDVF. PDVF is defined as the confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA >200 c/mL >=Week 24.|Baseline until PDVF up to Week 48|PDVF Genotypic Population: all participants in the mITT-E population with available on-treatment genotypic resistance data, at time of PDVF. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Number
858251|NCT01449929|Secondary|Number of Participants With the Indicated Grade 3 and Grade 4 Maximum Post-Baseline Chemistry and Hematology Laboratory Toxicities|Hematology and clinical chemistry data were summarized according to the division of AIDS (DAIDS) table for grading the Severity of adverse events, version 1.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3 (G3), Severe; Grade 4 (G4), Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for only those parameters for which an increase to Grade 3 or Grade 4 occurred.|From Baseline through Week 48|mSafety Population||Participants|||Number
858252|NCT01449929|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Grade 2 or Higher Abnormalities in Fasting LDL Cholesterol Through Week 48|Hematology and clinical chemistry data were summarized according to the division of AIDS (DAIDS) table for grading the Severity of adverse events, version 1.0. Grade 1, Mild; Grade 2, Moderate; Grade 3 (G3), Severe; Grade 4 (G4), Life-threatening or disabling; Grade 5, Death. Data are presented for which an increase in fasting LDL cholesterol to Grade 2 or higher occurred.|From Baseline through Week 48|mSafety Population. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
858253|NCT01449929|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Low-density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol Through Week 48|Fasting LDL cholesterol change from Baseline was analyzed. Values represented are for adjusted means. Estimates are calculated from a repeated measures model including the following covariates: treatment, visit, Baseline plasma HIV-1 RNA, background dual NRTI therapy, Baseline LDL cholesterol, treatment*visit interaction and Baseline LDL cholesterol*visit interaction. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|From Baseline through Week 48|mSafety Population. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Mean
858254|NCT01449929|Secondary|Number of Participants With HIV-1 Associated Disease Progression With the Indicated Shift to CDC Class C, or New CDC Class C or Death at Week 48|The number of participants with HIV-1 disease progression (AIDS or death) was assessed per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 1993 revised classification system for HIV infection and expanded surveillance case definition for AIDS among adolescents and adults. The CDC classifies HIV infection as Category A (participants with asymptomatic HIV infection, acute HIV infection with accompanying illness, or persistent generalized lymphadenopathy), Category B (participants with symptomatic non-AIDS condition, i.e., conditions that are attributed to HIV infection or are indicative of a defect in cell-mediated immunity; or conditions are considered by physicians to have a clinical course or to require management that is complicated by HIV infection), and Category C (includes AIDS indicator conditions as defined by diagnostic or presumptive measures).|Week 48|mITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
858255|NCT01449929|Secondary|Change From Baseline in CD4+ and CD8+ Cell Counts|Change from Baseline in CD4+ cell counts was assessed at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 36 and 48. Change from Baseline in CD8+ cell counts was assessed at Weeks 4, 12, 24 and 48. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 36 and 48 for CD4+ and Baseline and Weeks 4, 12, 24 and 48 for CD8+|mITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different visits and parameters, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the mITT-E Population.||Cells per millimeters cubed (cells/mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
858256|NCT01449929|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Plasma HIV-1 RNA (log10 c/mL) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36 and 48|Change from Baseline in plasma HIV-1 RNA (log10 c/mL) was assessed at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36 and 48 . Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36 and 48|mITT-E Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X, X in the category titles). Different participants may have been analyzed for different visits, so the overall number of participants analyzed reflects everyone in the mITT-E Population.||Log10 copies per mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858257|NCT01449929|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 (HIV-1) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <400 c/mL at Week 48|"The percentage of participants with Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 (HIV-1) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <400 c/mL at Week 48 was assessed using Missing, Switch or Discontinuation = Failure (MSDF), as codified by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm. This algorithm treated all participants without HIV-1 RNA data at Week 48 as nonresponders, as well as participants who switched their concomitant ART prior to Week 48 as follows: background ART substitutions non-permitted per protocol (one background ART substitution was permitted for safety or tolerability); background ART substitutions permitted per protocol unless the decision to switch was documented as being before or at the first on-treatment visit where HIV-1 RNA was assessed. Otherwise, virologic success or failure was determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the participant was on-treatment in the snapshot window (Week 48 +/- 6 weeks)."|Week 48|mITT-E Population||Percentage of participants|||Number
858258|NCT01449929|Secondary|Time to Virologic Suppression (<50 Copies/mL) Through Week 48|The time to viral suppression (i.e. first viral load value <50 copies/mL) through Week 48 was derived and summarized using Kaplan-Meier plots. Participants who withdrew for any reason without having suppressed prior to the analysis were censored. Confidence intervals were estimated using the Brookmeyer-Crowley method.|From Baseline through Week 48|mITT-E Population||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858259|NCT01449929|Primary|Percentage of Participants With HIV-1 RNA <50 Copies/Milliliter (c/mL) at Week 48|"The percentage of participants with Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 (HIV-1) Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) <50 c/mL at Week 48 was assessed using Missing, Switch or Discontinuation = Failure (MSDF), as codified by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm. This algorithm treated all participants without HIV-1 RNA data at Week 48 as nonresponders, as well as participants who switched their concomitant ART prior to Week 48 as follows: background ART substitutions non-permitted per protocol (one background ART substitution was permitted for safety or tolerability); background ART substitutions permitted per protocol unless the decision to switch was documented as being before or at the first on-treatment visit where HIV-1 RNA was assessed. Otherwise, virologic success or failure was determined by the last available HIV-1 RNA assessment while the participant was on-treatment in the snapshot window (Week 48 +/- 6 weeks)."|Week 48|Modified Intent-To-Treat Exposed (mITT-E) Population: all randomized participants who received at least one dose of investigational product excluding one participant at one site, which was closed due to Good Clinical Practice (GCP) non-compliance issues in another ViiV Healthcare sponsored trial.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858349|NCT01311687|Secondary|Time to First Worsening of Quality of Life (QOL) Domains|"Time to worsening in quality of life domains was calculated as the time from Baseline to the first worsened minimally important difference (MID), defined as the smallest change in a QOL score considered important to patients that would lead the patient or clinician to consider a change in therapy. MID thresholds were calculated in Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) units using the Baseline QOL data. Based on the MID, participants were classified as worsened according to the following:
For the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status and functional scales and the EQ-5D health utility score, participants were classified as worsened if their change from Baseline score was less than -1 SEM.
For the EORTC QLQ-C30 symptom scores (fatigue and pain) and EORTC QLQ-MY20 disease symptoms and side effects scales, participants were classified as worsened if their change from Baseline score was greater than 1 SEM.
See previous outcome measures for definitions of each scale."|Assessed on Day 1 of the first 6 treatment cycles.|PRO population||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858350|NCT01311687|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS) With a Later Cut-off Date|"Progression-free survival was calculated as the time from randomization to disease progression as determined by the Independent Response Adjudication Committee based on the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria (IMWG), or death on study, whichever occurred earlier.
Progressive disease requires 1 of the following:
Increase of ≥ 25% from nadir in:
Serum M-component (absolute increase ≥ 0.5 g/dl);
Urine M-component (absolute increase ≥ 200 mg/24 hours);
Bone marrow plasma cell percentage (absolute % ≥ 10%);
Development of new or increase in the size of existing bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytomas;
Development of hypercalcemia (corrected serum calcium > 11.5 mg/dl) attributed solely to plasma cell proliferative disease."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum duration of follow-up for PFS assessments was 74 weeks.|Intent-to-treat population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858351|NCT01311687|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Utility Index Score|EQ-5D is a self-administered questionnaire that assesses health-related quality of life (QOL). The EQ-5D descriptive health profile comprises five dimensions of health (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Each dimension has 3 levels of response: No problem (1), some problems (2), and extreme problems (3). A unique EQ-5D health state is defined by combining one level from each of the five dimensions into a single utility index score. EQ-5D index values range from -0.59 to 1.00 where an EQ-5D score of 1.00 equals “perfect health”, a score of 0 equals “death” and a score of -0.59 equals worst imaginable health state. A positive change from Baseline score indicates improvement in health status. A negative change from Baseline score indicates worsening in health status. Negative scores represent the possible though unlikely situation that a patient's QOL is worse than death, i.e. they would rather be dead than living with that QOL|Day 1 of Cycle 1 (Baseline), and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|"PRO population with available data at Baseline and each time point (indicated by n)."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858409|NCT01245062|Secondary|PFS in BRAF V600E Mutation-positive Participants Without a History of Brain Metastases and With Prior Chemotherapy as Assessed by the Investigator|PFS is defined as the time from the date of randomization to the first documented occurrence of PD or death. Investigator-assessed PFS was summarized per RECIST, Version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or the appearance of one or more new lesions, or the worsening of non-target lesions significant enough to require study treatment discontinuation.|Day 1 until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|Primary Efficacy Population. Only those participants with prior chemotherapy were analyzed.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858352|NCT01311687|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-MY20 Side Effects Domain|"The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire for Patients with Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) is a 20-question tool used in clinical research to assess health-related quality of life in multiple myeloma patients. The QLQ-MY20 includes four domains (Disease Symptoms, Side-Effects of Treatment, Body Image and Future Perspective).
The EORTC QLQ-MY20 Side Effects Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score reflecting a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate reduction in side effects (i.e.improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increase in side effects (i.e. worsening of symptom)."|Day 1 of Cycle 1 (Baseline), and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|"PRO population with available data at Baseline and each time point (indicated by n)."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858353|NCT01311687|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) Disease Symptoms|"The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire for Patients with Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) is a 20-question tool used in clinical research to assess health-related quality of life in multiple myeloma patients. The QLQ-MY20 includes four domains (Disease Symptoms, Side-Effects of Treatment, Body Image and Future Perspective).
The EORTC QLQ-MY20 Disease Symptoms Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score reflecting a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate reduction (i.e. improvement) in symptoms and positive values indicate increase (i.e. worsening) of symptoms."|Day 1 of Cycle 1 (Baseline), and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|"PRO population with available data at Baseline and each time point (indicated by n)."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858354|NCT01311687|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Pain Domain|"The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact).
The EORTC QLQ-C30 Pain Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate reductions in pain (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increases in pain (i.e. worsening of symptom)."|Day 1 of Cycle 1 (Baseline), and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|"PRO population with available data at Baseline and each time point (indicated by n)."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858355|NCT01311687|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Domain|"The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact).
The EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate reduction in fatigue (i.e. improvement in symptom) and positive values indicate increases in fatigue (i.e. worsening of symptom)."|Day 1 of Cycle 1 (Baseline), and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|"PRO population with available data at Baseline and each time point (indicated by n)."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858356|NCT01311687|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning Domain|"The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact).
The EORTC QLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement."|Day 1 of Cycle 1 (Baseline), and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|"PRO population with available data at Baseline and each time point (indicated by n)."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858357|NCT01311687|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Domain|"The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact).
The EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement."|Day 1 of Cycle 1 (Baseline), and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|"PRO population with available data at Baseline and each time point (indicated by n)."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858358|NCT01311687|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Global Health Status Domain|"The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact).
The EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better Global Health Status/QOL. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in QOL or functioning and positive values indicate improvement."|Day 1 of Cycle 1 (Baseline), and Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6|"The Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) study population includes any intent-to-treat study participants with 1 active treatment and 1 PRO measurement item completed. Only participants with available data at Baseline and each time point (indicated by n) are included."||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858359|NCT01311687|Secondary|Time to Improvement in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status|"Time to improvement in ECOG performance status defined as the time from randomization until at least a one category improvement from Baseline in ECOG performance status score.
The categories of the ECOG Performance Status Scale are as follows:
0: Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction;
1: Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry our work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light housework, office work;
2: Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any work activities. Up and about more than 50% of waking hours.
Patients with a score of 3, 4 or 5 were excluded from participating in the study."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on follow-up was 93 weeks.|Intent-to-treat population with improvement in ECOG performance status during the study||weeks||Full Range|Median
858360|NCT01311687|Secondary|Time to Improvement in Renal Function|"Time to improvement in renal function is defined as the time from randomization to at least one category improvement from Baseline in renal function.
Renal Function was categorized as (from best to worst):
Normal: creatinine clearance ≥80 mL/min;
Grade 1: creatinine clearance ≥60 to <80 mL/min;
Grade 2 : creatinine clearance ≥45 to < 60 mL/min.
Participants with creatinine clearance < 45 mL/min at baseline were be excluded from the study."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on follow-up was 93 weeks.|Intent-to-treat population with improvement in renal function||weeks||Full Range|Median
858361|NCT01311687|Secondary|Time to Improvement in Bone Pain|"Time to improvement in bone pain is defined as the time from randomization to at least one category improvement from Baseline in bone pain category.
Bone pain was categorized (from best to worst) according to answers to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire for patients with Multiple Myeloma Module (QLQ-MY20), Question 1, “Have you had bone aches or pain?”:
Not at all,
A little,
Quite a bit, or
Very much."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on follow-up was 93 weeks.|Intent-to-treat population with improvement in bone pain||weeks||Full Range|Median
858362|NCT01311687|Secondary|Time to the First Hemoglobin Improvement|"Time to increased hemoglobin, defined as the time from randomization to at least one category improvement from Baseline in common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) grade for hemoglobin level. Hemoglobin categories are:
Normal;
CTCAE Grade 1: < lower limit of normal (LLN) to 10.0 g/dL;
CTCAE Grade 2: < 10.0 to <8.0 g/dL.
Participants with CTCAE Grade 3 anemia or worse at Baseline were excluded from the study."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on follow-up was 93 weeks.|Intent-to-treat population with improvement in hemoglobin during the study||weeks||Full Range|Median
858363|NCT01311687|Secondary|Duration of Response|Duration of response (calculated for responders only) is defined as time from the initial documented response (partial response or better) to confirmed disease progression, based on IMWG criteria assessed by the Independent Response Adjudication Committee.|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on follow-up was 93 weeks.|Intent-to-treat responder population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858364|NCT01311687|Secondary|Time to Response|"Time to response is calculated as the time from randomization to the initial documented response (partial response or better) based on IMWG criteria.
SCR: CR and normal free light chain (FLC) ratio and no clonal cells in bone marrow; CR: Negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and ≤ 5% plasma cells in bone marrow; VGPR: Serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or ≥ 90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level < 100 mg/24 hours; PR: ≥ 50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by ≥ 90% or to < 200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a ≥ 50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas is also required."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on follow-up was 93 weeks.|Intent-to-treat responder population||weeks||Full Range|Median
858365|NCT01311687|Secondary|Time to Progression|"Time to progression (TTP) is calculated as the time from randomization to the first documented progression confirmed by a blinded, independent Response Adjudication Committee and based on the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria (IMWG).
Progressive disease requires 1 of the following:
Increase of ≥ 25% from nadir in:
Serum M-component (absolute increase ≥ 0.5 g/dl);
Urine M-component (absolute increase ≥ 200 mg/24 hours);
Bone marrow plasma cell percentage (absolute % ≥ 10%);
Development of new or increase in the size of existing bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytomas;
Development of hypercalcemia (corrected serum calcium > 11.5 mg/dl) attributed solely to plasma cell proliferative disease."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on follow-up was 93 weeks.|Intent-to-treat population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858366|NCT01311687|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response According to European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) Criteria|"Objective response defined as a best overall response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on the Independent Response Adjudication Committee:
CR requires all of the following:
Absence of original monoclonal paraprotein in serum and urine by immunofixation maintained at least 42 days.
<5% plasma cell in bone marrow aspirate and on bone marrow biopsy, if performed.
No increase in size or number of lytic bone lesions.
Disappearance of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
PR requires all of the following:
≥ 50% reduction in level of serum monoclonal paraprotein, maintained at least 42 days.
Reduction in 24-hour urinary light chain extraction by ≥ 90% or to < 200 mg, maintained at least 42 days.
For patients with non-secretory myeloma, ≥ 50% reduction in plasma cells in bone marrow aspirate and on biopsy, if performed, for at least 42 days.
≥ 50% reduction in the size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
No increase in size or number of lytic bone lesions."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on follow-up was 93 weeks.|Intent-to-treat population||percentage of participants|||Number
858410|NCT01245062|Secondary|PFS in BRAF V600E Mutation-positive Participants Without a History of Brain Metastases and Without Prior Chemotherapy as Assessed by the Investigator|PFS is defined as the time from the date of randomization to the first documented occurrence of PD or death. Investigator-assessed PFS was summarized per RECIST, Version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or the appearance of one or more new lesions, or the worsening of non-target lesions significant enough to require study treatment discontinuation.|Day 1 until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|Primary Efficacy Population. Only those participants without prior chemotherapy were analyzed.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858367|NCT01311687|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response According to International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Uniform Response Criteria|"Objective response is defined as a best overall response of stringent complete response (SCR), complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR) or partial response (PR) based on the Independent Response Adjudication Committee:
SCR: CR and normal free light chain (FLC) ratio and no clonal cells in bone marrow; CR: Negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and ≤ 5% plasma cells in bone marrow; VGPR: Serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or ≥ 90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level < 100 mg/24 hours; PR: ≥ 50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by ≥ 90% or to < 200 mg/24 hours. In addition to the above, if present at baseline a ≥ 50% reduction in the size of soft tissue plasmacytomas is also required."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on follow-up was 93 weeks.|Intent-to-treat population||percentage of participants|||Number
858368|NCT01311687|Secondary|Overall Survival With a Later Cut-off Date|Overall survival is calculated as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Overall survival was censored at the last date that the participant was known to be alive for participants who were alive at the time of analysis and for participants who were lost to follow-up before death was documented.|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on follow-up for survival was 93 weeks.|Intent-to-treat||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858369|NCT01311687|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is calculated as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Overall survival was censored at the last date that the participant was known to be alive for participants who were alive at the time of analysis and for participants who were lost to follow-up before death was documented.|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 07 September 2012. Maximum time on follow-up for survival was 70 weeks.|Intent-to-treat||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858370|NCT01311687|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|"An adverse event is any noxious, unintended, or untoward medical occurrence that may appear or worsen in a participant during the course of a study. A serious AE is any AE occurring at any dose that:
Results in death;
Is life-threatening;
Requires or prolongs existing inpatient hospitalization;
Results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity;
Is a congenital anomaly/birth defect;
Constitutes an important medical event.
The Investigator assessed the relationship of each AE to study drug and graded the severity according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, Version 4.0):
Grade 1 = Mild (no limitation in activity or intervention required); Grade 2 = Moderate (some limitation in activity; no/minimal medical intervention required);-Grade 3 = Severe (marked limitation in activity; medical intervention required, hospitalization possible); Grade 4 = Life-threatening; Grade 5 = Death."|From first dose of study drug through to 30 days after the last dose, until the data cut-off date of 01 March 2013. Maximum time on treatment was 93 weeks.|Safety population (all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug (either Pomalidomide or Dexamethasone)).||participants|||Number
858371|NCT01311687|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|"Progression-free survival was calculated as the time from randomization to disease progression as determined by the Independent Response Adjudication Committee based on the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria (IMWG), or death on study, whichever occurred earlier.
Progressive disease requires 1 of the following:
Increase of ≥ 25% from nadir in:
Serum M-component (absolute increase ≥ 0.5 g/dl);
Urine M-component (absolute increase ≥ 200 mg/24 hours);
Bone marrow plasma cell percentage (absolute % ≥ 10%);
Development of new or increase in the size of existing bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytomas;
Development of hypercalcemia (corrected serum calcium > 11.5 mg/dl) attributed solely to plasma cell proliferative disease."|From randomization until the data cut-off date of 07 September 2012. Maximum duration of follow-up for PFS assessments was 57 weeks.|Intent-to-treat population||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858372|NCT01307891|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression is defined using the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) as a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study. In addition, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. The appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression.|Baseline through 24 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858373|NCT01307891|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events|Patients will be assessed throughout the study for Grade 4 or 5 toxicities utilizing the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0.|Baseline to 6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
858374|NCT01307891|Primary|Objective Response Rate|Patient response rates will be measured by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by MRI. Responses include the following: Complete Response (CR) disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR) at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) best response from the start of treatment until disease progression.|Baseline to 6 months|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858382|NCT01264601|Secondary|Influence of Atopic Co-morbidities on Severe Reactivity to Vaccine as it Was Administered|"Rates of co-morbid allergic disease, size and magnitude of egg skin and ImmunoCAP tests, presence of other food allergy, and tolerance of baked egg will be assessed through a screening questionnaire and chart review, and compared between the groups to assess for any significant differences that may predict TIV tolerance."|6 months|Because no participants had systemic/severe reactivity, there were no participants who were TIV intolerant, and therefore no meaningful analysis of correlation of baseline characteristics to intolerance could be performed. All Baseline Characteristics collected for the original purpose of such correlation are reported in Baseline Characteristics.|||||
858383|NCT01264601|Primary|Categorical Reactivity to Vaccine as it Was Administered|"After randomization, group 1 will receive a 10%/90% (or 20%/80% for 0.25ml) graded challenge of the age appropriate TIV dose, separated by 30 minutes for observation. Group 2 will receive a first dose consisting of normal saline at a volume equal to 10% of their age appropriate dose, and the second dose will consist of their full age appropriate dose as the 90% equivalent, also separated by 30 minutes of observation. For children receiving a 0.25ml dose, a 20%/80% split will be used for ease of administration in drawing up the dose. All parties will report any adverse reactions occurring in the next 48 hours after vaccination that were not observed at the time of in office observation."|48 hours|||Participants|||Count of Participants
858384|NCT01247324|Secondary|Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) to Ocrelizumab|Number of participants positive for anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) to ocrelizumab is the number of post- baseline evaluable participants determined to have treatment-induced ADA or treatment-enhanced ADA during the study period.|Baseline up to week 96|Baseline evaluable participants with an ADA assay result from a baseline sample(s). The safety population included all participants who received any study drug. Here, n signifies the number of participants evaluable at the specified time points.||Participants|||Number
858385|NCT01247324|Secondary|Exposure to Ocrelizumab (Area Under the Concentration - Time Curve, AUC)|AUC represents total drug exposure for one dosing interval after the 4th dose.|Pre-infusion at Weeks 1, 24, 48, 72; and 30 minutes post-infusion at Week 72; at any time during Weeks 84 and 96|The pharmacokinetics (PK) population included all participants in the ocrelizumab group who had at least 1 measurable concentration value.||micrograms per milliliter*day||Standard Deviation|Mean
858386|NCT01247324|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs)|AEs included infusion related reactions (IRRs) and serious MS relapses, but excluded non-serious MS relapses. Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) included serious MS relapses and serious IRRs.|Baseline up to Week 96|The safety population included all participants who received any study drug.||Participants|||Number
858387|NCT01247324|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Have No Evidence of Disease Activity (NEDA) up to Week 96|NEDA was defined only for participants with a baseline EDSS score >=2.0. The EDSS scale ranges from 0 (normal neurological exam) to 10 (death due to multiple sclerosis). Participants who completed the 96- week treatment period were considered as having evidence of disease activity if at least one protocol- defined relapse (PDR), a confirmed disability progression (CDP) event or at least one MRI scan showing MRI activity (defined as Gd-enhancing T1 lesions, or new or enlarging T2 lesions) was reported during the 96-week treatment period, otherwise the participant was considered as having NEDA.|Week 96|ITT population included all randomized participants in the study. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies number of participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858388|NCT01247324|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Short Form Health Survey-36 (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score at Week 96|The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the PCS and mental composite t-score (MCS). The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t- scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.|Baseline, Week 96|Descriptive statistics at baseline include participants with assessment at baseline and at least one post- baseline value. ITT population included all randomized participants in the study. Here, n signifies the number of participants evaluable at specified time points.||t-score||Standard Error|Mean
858389|NCT01247324|Secondary|Percent Change in Brain Volume as Detected by Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) From Week 24 to Week 96|"Brain volume was recorded as an absolute normalized value at the baseline visit then recorded at subsequent visits as a percentage change relative to the absolute value at the baseline visit. Therefore, brain volume at Week 24 was calculated as the brain volume at the baseline visit multiplied by 1 + ([percentage change in brain volume from baseline visit to Week 24]/100). Estimates are from analysis based on mixed-effect model of repeated measures (MMRM) using unstructured covariance matrix: Percentage Change = Brain Volume at Week 24 + Geographical Region (US vs. ROW) + Baseline EDSS (< 4.0 vs. >= 4.0) + Week + Treatment + Treatment*Week (repeated values over Week) + Brain Volume at Week 24*Week."|From Week 24 up to Week 96|ITT population included all randomized participants in the study. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies number of participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||percent change||Standard Error|Mean
858439|NCT01186692|Secondary|Changes in NYHA Functional Classification|Change in NYHA functional class from pre-implant to 6 month post-implant|6 Months|The implanted >24 hours cohort consists of all subjects who had a Melody TPV implanted which remained implanted for greater than 24 hours. Of this population those with evaluable paired NYHA data were included in the analysis.||participants|||Number
858390|NCT01247324|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) Score to Week 96|MSFC score consists of: A) Timed 25-Foot walk; B) 9-Hole Peg Test (9-HPT); and C) Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT-3 version). The MSFCS is based on the concept that scores for these three dimensions (arm, leg, and cognitive function) are combined to create a single score (the MSFC) that can be used to detect change over time in a group of participants with MS. Since the three primary measures differ in what they actually measure, a common composite score for the three different measures i.e., Z- score was selected for the purpose. MSFC Score = {Z arm, average + Z leg, average + Z cognitive} / 3.0. The results from each of these three tests are transformed into Z-scores and averaged to yield a composite score for each participant at each time point. A score of +1 indicates that, on average, an individual scored 1 standard deviation (SD) better than the reference population and a score of -1 indicates that an individual scored 1 SD worse than the reference population.|Baseline, Week 96|ITT population included all randomized participants in the study. Here, n signifies the number of participants evaluable at specified time points.||Z-score||Standard Error|Mean
858391|NCT01247324|Secondary|Number of T1 Hypointense Lesions During the Double-Blind Treatment|The total number of new T1-Hypo-Intense Lesions (Chronic Black Holes) for all participants in the treatment group was calculated as the sum of the individual number of new lesions at Weeks 24, 48, and 96.|Baseline up to Week 96|ITT population included all randomized participants in the study.||lesions|||Number
858392|NCT01247324|Secondary|Time to Onset of Confirmed Disability Progression (CDP) for at Least 24 Weeks During the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Disability progression was defined as an increase in the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of: A) >=1.0 point from the baseline EDSS score when the baseline score was less than or equal to (<=) 5.5 B) >=0.5 point from the baseline EDSS score when the baseline score was >5.5 The EDSS scale ranges from 0 (normal neurological exam) to 10 (death due to multiple sclerosis). This outcome measure was considered confirmatory only when results of both studies WA21092 and WA21093 were combined. Disability progression was considered confirmed when the increase in the EDSS was confirmed at a regularly scheduled visit at least 24 weeks after the initial documentation of neurological worsening. Participants who had initial disability progression with no confirmatory EDSS assessment and who were on treatment at time of clinical cut-off date were censored at the date of their last EDSS assessment.|Week 108|ITT population included all randomized participants in the study.||weeks||Full Range|Median
858393|NCT01247324|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Disability Improvement (CDI) for at Least 12 Weeks|Disability improvement was assessed only for the subgroup of participants with a baseline EDSS score of >= 2.0. It was defined as a reduction in EDSS score of: A) >=1.0 from the baseline EDSS score when the baseline score was >=2 and <=5.5 B) >= 0.5 when the baseline EDSS score > 5.5. The EDSS scale ranges from 0 (normal neurological exam) to 10 (death due to multiple sclerosis). This outcome measure was considered confirmatory only when results of both studies WA21092 and WA21093 were combined.|Week 96|ITT population included all randomized participants in the study. Here, number of participants analyzed signifies number of participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858394|NCT01247324|Secondary|Number of New, and/or Enlarging T2 Hyperintense Lesions as Detected by Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) During the Double Blind Treatment|The total number of new and/or enlarging T2 lesions for all participants in the treatment group was calculated as the sum of the individual number of lesions at Weeks 24, 48, and 96.|Baseline up to Week 96|ITT population included all randomized participants in the study.||lesions|||Number
858395|NCT01247324|Secondary|Number of T1 Gadolinium (Gd)-Enhancing Lesions as Detected by Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) During the Double-Blind Treatment|The total number of T1 gadolinium-enhancing lesions for all participants in the treatment group was calculated as the sum of the individual number of lesions at Weeks 24, 48, and 96.|Baseline up to Week 96|ITT population included all randomized participants in the study.||lesions|||Number
858396|NCT01247324|Secondary|Time to Onset of Confirmed Disability Progression (CDP) for at Least 12 Weeks During the Double-Blind Treatment Period|Disability progression was defined as an increase in the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of: A) >=1.0 point from the baseline EDSS score when the baseline score was less than or equal to (<=) 5.5 B) >=0.5 point from the baseline EDSS score when the baseline score was >5.5 The EDSS scale ranges from 0 (normal neurological exam) to 10 (death due to multiple sclerosis). This outcome measure was considered confirmatory only when results of both studies WA21092 and WA21093 were combined. Disability progression was considered confirmed when the increase in the EDSS was confirmed at a regularly scheduled visit at least 12 weeks after the initial documentation of neurological worsening. EDSS assessment and who were on treatment at time of clinical cut-off date were censored at the date of their last EDSS assessment.|Week 108|ITT population included all randomized participants in the study.||weeks||Full Range|Median
858397|NCT01247324|Primary|Annualized Relapse Rate (ARR) in Participants With Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis (MS) at 96 Weeks|ARR was protocol-defined and calculated as the total number of relapses for all participants in the treatment group divided by the total participant-years of exposure to that treatment.|Week 96|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants in the study.||relapses/participant year of treatment||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858398|NCT01245062|Secondary|PFS Following Cross-over to Trametinib as Assessed by the Investigator|PFS is defined as the time from the first dose of cross-over therapy to the first documented occurrence of PD or death. PFS was summarized per RECIST, Version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or the appearance of one or more new lesions, or the worsening of non-target lesions significant enough to require study treatment discontinuation.|Day 1 of cross-over therapy until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 2.72 months)|Cross-over Population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858411|NCT01245062|Secondary|Progression-free Survival in All Participants|PFS is defined as the time from the date of randomization to the first documented occurrence of PD or death. Investigator-assessed and BRIC-assessed PFS were summarized per RECIST, Version 1.1. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or the appearance of one or more new lesions, or the worsening of non-target lesions significant enough to require study treatment discontinuation.|Day 1 until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|ITT Population: all randomized participants regardless of whether or not treatment was administered||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858399|NCT01245062|Secondary|DR for All Responders (CR or PR) Following Cross-over to Trametinib as Assessed by the Investigator|DR is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of CR (disappearance of all extranodal lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 mm in the short axis) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions) until PD or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or the appearance of one or more new lesions, or the worsening of non-target lesions significant enough to require study treatment discontinuation. DR data were summarized per RECIST, Version 1.1.|Day 1 of cross-over therapy until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 2.72 months)|Cross-over Population. Only those participants with confirmed response (CR and PR) were analyzed.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858400|NCT01245062|Secondary|DR for All Confirmed Responders (CR or PR) as Assessed by the Investigator or Independent Review|DR is defined as thetime from the first documented evidence of CR (disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 mm in the short axis) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions) until PD or death due to any cause. PD is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or the appearance of one or more new lesions, or the worsening of non-target lesions significant enough to require study treatment discontinuation. DR for the INVA and INDA response data was summarized per RECIST, Version 1.1.|Day 1 until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|"ITT Population. Only those participants with confirmed response (CR and PR) were analyzed. The n in the category title reflects the number of participants with a confirmed response assessed by the Investigator and by Independent Review. The same participants were not necessarily assessed by both."||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858401|NCT01245062|Secondary|Duration of Response (DR) for All BRAF V600E Mutation-positive Participants Without a Prior History of Brain Metastases Classifed as Confirmed Responders (CR or PR) as Assessed by the Investigator and Independent Review|DR is defined as the time from the first documented evidence of CR (disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 mm in the short axis) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions) until PD (at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 mm or the appearance of one or more new lesions, or the worsening of non-target lesions significant enough to require study treatment discontinuation) or death due to any cause. DR for the investigator-assessed (INVA) and independently-assessed (INDA) response data were summarized per RECIST, Version 1.1.|Day 1 until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|"Primary Efficacy Population. Only those participants (par.) with a confirmed response (CR and PR) were analyzed. The n in the category title reflects the par. assessed by the Investigator and by Independent Review; the same par. were not necessarily assessed by both."||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858402|NCT01245062|Secondary|Number of Participants With OR Following Cross-over to Trametinib|OR is defined as the number of participants with evidence of CR (disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 millimeters in the short axis) or PR (at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions) evaluated by the Investigator in participants following cross-over to Trametinib. The evaluation was carried out by the Investigator per RECIST, Version 1.1.|Day 1 of cross-over therapy until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 2.72 months)|Cross-over Population: the subset of participants who were randomized to CT and who elected to cross-over to Trametinib following disease progression on CT. Only participants who received at least one dose of Trametinib were included in this population.||Participants|||Number
858403|NCT01245062|Secondary|Number of BRAF V600K Mutation-positive Participants Classified as Confirmed Responders (CR and PR) as Assessed by the Investigator|OR is defined as the number of participants with evidence of complete response (CR; disappearance of all extranodal lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 mm in the short axis) or partial response (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions) evaluated by the Investigator per RECIST, Version 1.1.|Day 1 until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|ITT Population: only those participants withV600K mutation-positive melanoma were assessed.||Participants|||Number
858404|NCT01245062|Secondary|Number of BRAF V600E Mutation-positive Participants Classified as Confirmed Responders (CR and PR) as Assessed by the Investigator|OR is defined as the number of participants with evidence of complete response (CR; disappearance of all extranodal lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 mm in the short axis) or partial response (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions) evaluated by the Investigator per RECIST, Version 1.1.|Day 1 until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|ITT Population: only those participants withV600E mutation-positive melanoma were assessed.||Participants|||Number
858405|NCT01245062|Secondary|Number of Participants With OR as Assessed by the Investigator and Independent Review|OR is defined as the number of participants with evidence of complete response (CR; disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 mm in the short axis) or partial response (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions) evaluated by the Investigator and an independent review per RECIST, Version 1.1.|Day 1 until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|ITT Population||Participants|||Number
858406|NCT01245062|Secondary|Number of BRAF V600E Mutation-positive Participants Without a History of Brain Metastases With Overall Response (OR) as Assessed by the Investigator and Independent Review|OR is defined as the number of participants with evidence of complete response (CR; disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph node must be less than 10 mm in the short axis) or partial response (PR: at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions) evaluated by the Investigator and an independent review per RECIST, Version 1.1.|Day 1 until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|Primary Efficacy Population||participants|||Number
858407|NCT01245062|Secondary|Overall Survival in BRAF V600E Mutation-positive Participants Without a History of Brain Metastases|Overall survival was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause.|Day 1 until death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|Primary Efficacy Population||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858412|NCT01245062|Primary|Progression-free Survival in BRAF V600E Mutation-positive Participants Without a History of Brain Metastases as Assessed by the Investigator and Independent Review|Progression-free survival (PFS) is defined as the time from randomization to the first documented occurrence of disease progression or death. PFS for investigator-assessed and blinded, independent, central review committee (BRIC)-assessed responses was summarized per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), Version 1.1, which is a set of published rules defining when cancer patients improve (respond), stay the same (stabilize), or worsen (progress) during treatment. Disease progression is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the diameters of target lesions with an absolute increase of at least 5 millimeters (mm) or the appearance of at least 1 new lesion, or the worsening of non-target lesions significant enough to require study treatment discontinuation.|Day 1 until the earliest date of disease progression or death due to any cause (average of 4.8 months)|Primary Efficacy Population: All participants with BRAF V600E mutation-positive melanoma without a history of brain metastases||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858413|NCT01243177|Primary|Number of Subjects With at Least One Treatment-emergent Serious Adverse Event (SAE) During the Treatment Phase (up to 113 Weeks)|"An Adverse Event is any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product.
A Serious Adverse Event must meet 1 or more predefined criteria like death, life-threatening, etc. Treatment-emergent AEs were defined as AEs that started on or after the date of first dose of study medication and within 30 days following the date of final study medication administration, or AEs whose intensity worsened on or after the date of first dose of study medication and within 30 days following the date of last dose."|Duration of the Treatment Phase (up to 113 weeks)|Safety Analysis Set consisting of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
858414|NCT01243177|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Remaining Seizure Free for 12 Consecutive Months (52 Consecutive Weeks) Following Stabilization at the Last Evaluated Dose for Each Subject|The proportion of subjects remaining seizure free for 12 months (52 weeks) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods.|12 consecutive months of treatment following stabilization at the last evaluated dose for each subject|Full Analysis Set (FAS), consisting of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of study medication.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858415|NCT01243177|Primary|Number of Subjects Who Withdraw From the Study Due to a Treatment-emergent Adverse Event (AE) During the Treatment Phase (up to 113 Weeks)|An Adverse Event is any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product. Treatment-emergent AEs were defined as AEs that started on or after the date of first dose of study medication and within 30 days following the date of final study medication administration, or AEs whose intensity worsened on or after the date of first dose of study medication and within 30 days following the date of last dose.|Duration of the Treatment Phase (up to 113 weeks)|Safety Analysis Set consisting of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
858416|NCT01243177|Primary|Number of Subjects With at Least One Treatment-emergent Adverse Event (AE) During the Treatment Phase (up to 113 Weeks)|An Adverse Event is any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product. Treatment-emergent AEs were defined as AEs that started on or after the date of first dose of study medication and within 30 days following the date of final study medication administration, or AEs whose intensity worsened on or after the date of first dose of study medication and within 30 days following the date of last dose.|Duration of the Treatment Phase (up to 113 weeks)|Safety Analysis Set consisting of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of study medication.||Participants|||Number
858417|NCT01243177|Primary|Proportion of Subjects in the Per Protocol Set (PPS) Remaining Seizure Free for 6 Consecutive Months (26 Consecutive Weeks) of Treatment Following Stabilization at the Last Evaluated Dose for Each Subject|The proportion of subjects remaining seizure free for 6 months (26 weeks) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods.|6 consecutive months (26 consecutive weeks) of treatment|The Per Protocol Set (PPS) was defined as containing all subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) who did not have any important protocol deviations determined to impact the interpretation of primary efficacy.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858418|NCT01243177|Primary|Proportion of Subjects in the Full Analysis Set (FAS) Remaining Seizure Free for 6 Consecutive Months (26 Consecutive Weeks) of Treatment Following Stabilization at the Last Evaluated Dose for Each Subject|The proportion of subjects remaining seizure free for 6 months (26 weeks) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods.|6 consecutive months (26 consecutive weeks) of treatment following stabilization at the last evaluated dose for each subject|Full Analysis Set (FAS), consisting of all randomized subjects who took at least 1 dose of study medication.||percentage of subjects||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858419|NCT01240902|Secondary|Prosthetic Valve Dysfunction (PVD)|"PVD was defined according to VARC I using the Core Lab Echocardiography assessments including aortic regurgitation (AR) and aortic stenosis (AS) evaluations. Total AR reported as moderate or severe was considered PVD. AS was defined as significant stenosis and considered PVD if one of the following was met:
Peak velocity >4 m/s
Mean gradient >35 mmHg
EOA < 0.8 cm2
TVIV1 / TVIV2 < 0.25"|30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with a valve implanted.||percentage of participants|||Number
858420|NCT01240902|Secondary|Procedural Success|"Medtronic CoreValve® System subjects only.
Defined as device success and absence of in-hospital MACCE."|Number of days from admission to discharge|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with a TAVR index procedure who were evaluable for procedural success.||percentage of participants|||Number
858421|NCT01240902|Secondary|Device Success|"Medtronic CoreValve® System subjects only.
Defined as:
Successful vascular access, delivery and deployment of the device, and successful retrieval of the delivery system,
Correct position of the device in the proper anatomical location (placement in the annulus with no impedance on device function),
Intended performance of the prosthetic valve (aortic valve area > 1.2 cm2 for 26, 29 and 31mm valves, ≥ 0.9 cm2 for 23mm valve (by echocardiography using the continuity equation) and mean aortic valve gradient < 20 mmHg or peak velocity < 3 m/sec, without moderate or severe prosthetic valve aortic regurgitation)
Only one valve implanted in the proper anatomical location"|Number of days from admission to discharge|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with a TAVR index procedure who were evaluable for device success.||percentage of participants|||Number
858422|NCT01240902|Secondary|Length of Index Procedure Hospital Stay||Number of days from admission to discharge|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
858423|NCT01240902|Secondary|Index Procedure Related MAEs||Procedure|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants|||Number
858424|NCT01240902|Secondary|Strokes and Transient Ischemic Attacks (TIAs)|Strokes (of any severity) and TIAs|30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858425|NCT01240902|Secondary|Cardiovascular Deaths and Valve Related Deaths||30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858426|NCT01240902|Secondary|Aortic Valve Hospitalizations||30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858427|NCT01240902|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Valve Performance|"Using the following measure:
- Degree of Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular and Paravalvular)"|30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with a valve implanted.||percentage of participants|||Number
858428|NCT01240902|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Valve Performance|"Using the following measures:
- Transvalvular Mean Gradient"|30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with a valve implanted.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
858429|NCT01240902|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Valve Performance|"Using the following measures:
- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)"|30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with a valve implanted.||cm^2||Standard Deviation|Mean
858430|NCT01240902|Secondary|Quality of Life (QoL) Change|"QoL summary score change from baseline using the following measures:
Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ): Quantifies physical function, symptoms, social function, self-efficacy and knowledge, and quality of life. Scores are transformed to a range of 0-100, in which higher scores reflect better health status.
12 Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12): Measures functional health and well-being. Scores are transformed to a range of 0-100, in which higher scores reflect better health status.
European QoL (EQ-5D): Measures 5 domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) that can be converted to utilities using an algorithm. Utilities range from 0 to 1, with 1 representing perfect health, and 0 corresponding to the worst imaginable health state."|30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858431|NCT01240902|Secondary|Ratio of Days Alive Out of Hospital Versus Total Days Alive||1 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||ratio of days alive and out of hospital||Standard Deviation|Mean
858432|NCT01240902|Secondary|Change in Distance Walked During 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT)|Change in distance walked during 6MWT from baseline|30 day, 1 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
858433|NCT01240902|Secondary|Change in NYHA Class|"Change from baseline (continuous variable). A positive number corresponds to NYHA worsening; a negative number corresponds to NYHA improvement.
New York Heart Association (NYHA) Classification:
Class I: Subjects with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity.
Class I: Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity.
Class III: Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity.
Class IV: Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort."|30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||average classification level change||Standard Deviation|Mean
858434|NCT01240902|Secondary|Conduction Disturbance Requiring Permanent Pacemaker Implantation||30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858435|NCT01240902|Secondary|Major Adverse Events (MAEs)|"MAEs Include:
MACCE
Acute Kidney Injury
Cardiac Tamponade
Prosthetic Valve Dysfunction
Cardiogenic Shock
Valve Endocarditis
Life-Threatening, Disabling or Major Bleeding
Major Vascular Complication
Cardiac Perforation
Device Migration/Valve Embolism"|30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858436|NCT01240902|Secondary|The Occurrence of Individual MACCE Components|"Individual MACCE Components Include:
All Cause Mortality
MI
All stroke
Reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)"|30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858437|NCT01240902|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)|"MACCE is defined as a composite of:
All Cause Mortality
Myocardial infarction (MI)
All Stroke
Reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)"|30 day, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858438|NCT01240902|Primary|Extreme Risk: All-cause Death or Major Stroke; High Risk Surgical: All-cause Mortality|All-cause Death or Major Stroke (Extreme Risk- Medtronic CoreValve® System); All-cause Mortality (High Risk Surgical- Medtronic CoreValve® System vs. Surgical Valve)|1 year|Participant Population= Consisted of all subjects with an attempted implant procedure.||percentage of participants, Kaplan-Meier|||Number
858440|NCT01186692|Secondary|Serious Device-related Adverse Events|A device-related event is defined as an event that is associated with the TPV by the chronology or physiology and was caused by the the TPV (e.g. embolization of the TPV and any adverse events which follow).|6 months|The implanted cohort consists of all subjects who underwent catheterization and a Melody TPV was implanted.||percentage of patients|||Number
858441|NCT01186692|Secondary|Serious Procedural Adverse Events|A procedure-related event is defined as an event that is associated with the implant procedure by the chronology or physiology and was caused by the implant procedure (e.g. rupture of the conduit or damage to an intra-cardiac or intravascular structure by the delivery system).|6 Months|The catheterized cohort consists of all subjects who underwent catheterization for possible implantation of the Melody TPV.||percentage of patients|||Number
858442|NCT01186692|Secondary|Procedural Success|"Procedural success is defined as a composite of the following:
The TPV is fixated within the desired location, and
The RV-PA peak-to-peak gradient measured in the catheterization lab after TPV implantation is less than 35 mmHg, and
There is no more than trivial pulmonary regurgitation by angiography
The subject is free from explantation of the TPV at 24 hours post-implant"|6 Months|The attempted implant cohort consists of all subjects who underwent catheterization and a Melody TPV implantation was attempted (Melody TPV valve opened).||percentage of patients|||Number
858443|NCT01186692|Primary|Acceptable TPV Hemodynamic Function at Six Months After Successful TPV Implantation|"Acceptable TPV hemodynamic function at six months after successful TPV implantation is determined as a composite of the following:
Mean RVOT gradient is less than or equal to 30 mmHg as measured by CW Doppler, and
Severity of pulmonary regurgitation is less than moderate by Doppler echocardiography, and
Free from RVOT conduit reoperation or catheter re-intervention at six months after TPV implantation.
The endpoint is defined as the percentage of subjects with acceptable TPV hemodynamic function at six months after Melody valve implantation."|6 months|The implanted >24 hours cohort consists of all subjects who had a Melody TPV implanted which remained implanted for greater than 24 hours. Of this population those with evaluable echo data at 6 months post implant were included in the analysis.||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858444|NCT01144455|Primary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions|From date of randomization until the date of first documented progression or date of death from any cause, whichever came first|||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858461|NCT01129245|Secondary|Change in Luteal Phase Progesterone Levels|progesterone levels during study|completion of study (1 year)||||||
858462|NCT01129245|Primary|Menstrual Length When Taken After Ovulation: Extended Luteal Phase|average menstrual cycle length in days during active drug exposure|Completion of study (1 year)|||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
858468|NCT01071512|Secondary|Change Over Time in Normalized Hippocampal Volume|Measured on MRI scan|Baseline, 48 weeks, 96 weeks|Summary statistics are based on subjects completing all treatment||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858469|NCT01071512|Secondary|Change Over Time in Normalized Thalamic Volume|Measured on MRI scan|Baseline, 48 weeks, 96 weeks|Summary statistics are based on subjects completing all treatment||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
858470|NCT01071512|Secondary|Change Over Time in Brain Parenchymal Fraction|Measured based on MRI scan on a 3T Phillips scanner. This is a measure of brain atrophy (i.e., brain volume loss) with lower values indicating greater atrophy (possible range 0-1).|Baseline, 48 weeks, 96 weeks|Summary statistics are based on subjects completing treatment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858471|NCT01071512|Secondary|Change Over Time in Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness|Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer (RNFL) thickness was measured using spectral domain OCT scans by a trained technician. Scans were performed without pupil dilation.|Baseline, 24, 48, 72, and 96 weeks|Summary statistics are provided based on subjects completing all treatment||micrometer||Standard Deviation|Mean
858472|NCT01071512|Primary|Change in Cognitive Function Over Time|Cognitive function was assessed using the oral version of the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT). The number of correct responses in 90 seconds was recorded (possible range 0-110). For analysis, SDMT scores were converted to z-scores using published age and education based norms. A negative z-score indicates a SDMT score below the mean based on the age and education based norms, for example a z-score of -2 = 2 standard deviations below the mean; a positive z-score indicating a score above the mean. Higher scores indicate better cognitive function.|Baseline, 48 weeks, 96 weeks|Summary statistics are based on the 15 subjects who completed treatment||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858479|NCT01004003|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival was defined as the duration from date of randomisation to the date of death.|From randomization until data cut-off (15 July 2014); Up to 1031 days|Treated set, only phase II participants||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858480|NCT01004003|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS)|PFS by RECIST 1.0 was defined as the duration from date of randomisation to date of progression or death, whichever occurred earlier, based on central independent review.|From randomization until data cut-off (15 July 2014); Up to 1031 days|Treated set, only phase II participants||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858481|NCT01004003|Secondary|Objective Tumour Response by RECIST|"Objective RECIST 1.0 tumour response was defined as Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) and was derived from the patient's best objective RECIST 1.0 response based on central independent review.
95% Confidence Interval presented below are computed by Clopper and Pearson method."|From randomization until data cut-off (15 July 2014); Up to 1031 days|Treated set, phase II participants only||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858482|NCT01004003|Secondary|Incidence of Dose Limiting Toxicity in Phase I|Number of patients with dose limiting toxicity are presented|4 weeks|Treated set (Phase I patients from the dose escalation part that were not replaced for MTD determination).||participants|||Number
858483|NCT01004003|Primary|Time to Progression (TTP) in Phase II|TTP according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) 1.0 criteria based on central independent review. TTP RECIST 1.0 was defined as the time from randomisation to disease progression according to RECIST 1.0.|From randomization until data cut-off (15 July 2014); Up to 1031 days|Treated set, only phase II participants.||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858484|NCT01004003|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose in Phase I|The MTD was defined as the highest dose studied for which the incidence of dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) was 0/3 or less than 2/6 patients during the first treatment course.|4 weeks|Treated set which included all patients who received at least one single dose of trial medication, including phase I patients from the dose escalation part that were not replaced for MTD determination.||mg bid|||Number
858500|NCT00937937|Secondary|Number of Patients With Gr 3 Through 5 Adverse Events That Are Related to Study Drugs|Adverse Events (AEs) are reported by CTCAE Version 3.0. Only adverse events that are possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug are reported. The outcome measure here is different from Serious Adverse Event, whose definition could be more strict and specific. The number of patients who suffers the certain adverse event listed here could be larger than the number listed in following serious adverse event.|Toxicity assessment was evaluated after each cycle (21 days), up to 3 years.|Eligible patients who had received the protocol treatments were included in the adverse event summaries. Any CTCAE 3.0 event of Grade 3 (serious), Grade 4 (life threatening) or Grade 5 (fatal) which were deemed to be related to protocol treatment are included.||Participants|||Number
858621|NCT00731731|Secondary|Incidence of Adverse Events, Based on CTC (Common Toxicity Criteria) Severity Grade|Safety variables will be summarized by descriptive statistics. Adverse Events (AEs) that occur will be reported for each phase and dose level and described in terms of incidence and severity. Parameters will be described based on the CTC severity grading. Distribution by CTC severity grade and clinical relevance will be given.|Up to 5 years|||participants evaluable for toxicity|||Number
858501|NCT00937937|Secondary|Response Rate (Confirmed and Unconfirmed Complete and Partial Responses) Assessed by RECIST|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Disease assessments for response were performed every 6 weeks, up to 3 years|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858502|NCT00937937|Secondary|Progression-free Survival Assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria for Solid Tumors (RECIST)|Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions. The duration from the date of randomization to the date of first documentation of progressive disease, symptomatic deterioration, or death dure to any cause.|Disease assessment was performed every 6 weeks, up to 3 years.|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858503|NCT00937937|Primary|Overall Survival|From date of registration to date of death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive are censored at date of last contact.|Weekly, up to 3 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858504|NCT00931632|Secondary|Severity of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia||36 weeks|Number of subjects within the Intent-to-treat population with available data||Participants|||Count of Participants
858505|NCT00931632|Secondary|Number of Days of Oxygen Use||Birth to hospital discharge|Number of subjects within the Intent-to-treat population with available data||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
858506|NCT00931632|Secondary|Systemic Use of Postnatal Corticosteroids for Any Medical Reason||Start of drug through hospital discharge|Intent-to-treat population||Participants|||Count of Participants
858507|NCT00931632|Secondary|Use of Postnatal Corticosteroids for Any Medical Reason||Start of drug through hospital discharge|Intent-to-treat population||Participants|||Count of Participants
858508|NCT00931632|Secondary|Use of Postnatal Corticosteroids for Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia||Start of drug through hospital discharge|Intent-to-treat population||Participants|||Count of Participants
858509|NCT00931632|Secondary|Length of Birth Hospitalization||Baseline to hospital discharge|Number of subjects within the Intent-to-treat population with available data||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
858510|NCT00931632|Secondary|Days of Airway Pressure Support - Intent-to-treat Population|Airway pressure support includes conventional mechanical ventilation, conventional, high frequency oscillatory ventilation, jet, continuous positive airway pressure, and other.|during birth hospitalization|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
858511|NCT00931632|Primary|Survival Without BPD at 36 Weeks||Baseline, 36 weeks PMA|Subjects with missing primary outcome or who crossed over to open-label iNO during the blinded treatment period were considered as failures||participants|||Number
858604|NCT00811317|Secondary|Percentage of Time Spent Within 70-180 mg/dl||24 hours|||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
858605|NCT00811317|Primary|Average Blood Glucose Over the Closed-loop Control Period||24 hours|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
858569|NCT00857220|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pediatric Quality of Life Scale|The SF-10™ Health Survey for Children is a 10-item care-giver completed assessment designed to measure children's health-related quality of life. The scale asked questions about the child's physical wellness, feelings, behavior, and activities at school and with family and friends. The SF-10 physical and psychosocial summary measures were scored such that higher scores indicated more favorable functioning. The Physical Summary Score is computed by summing values for questions 1, 2a, 2b, 3 and 5 and standardizing scores by normalizing to a total possible score of 0-100 with higher scores representing more positive indications. The Psychosocial Summary Score is computed by summing questions 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 and standardizing scores by normalizing to a total possible score of 0-100 with higher scores representing more positive indications.|Baseline and 12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to treat population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858570|NCT00857220|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Month 12 in Subjective Total Sleep Time (TST).|The sleep questionnaire, a Sponsor produced questionnaire used in previous eszopiclone studies, asked the subject or parent/guardian to report information about the subject’s sleep and daytime functioning since the last visit. This questionnaire provided a subjective assessment of the subject’s sleep over a predefined time period. TST was assessed based on the responses to the sleep questionnaire.|Baseline and 12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to treat population||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
858571|NCT00857220|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Month 12 in Subjective Number of Awakening After Sleep Onset (NAASO)|The sleep questionnaire, a Sponsor produced questionnaire used in previous eszopiclone studies, asked the subject or parent/guardian to report information about the subject’s sleep and daytime functioning since the last visit. This questionnaire provided a subjective assessment of the subject’s sleep over a predefined time period. NAASO was assessed based on the responses to the sleep questionnaire.|Baseline and 12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to treat population||Number of Awakenings||Standard Deviation|Mean
858572|NCT00857220|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Month 12 in Subjective Wake Time After Sleep Onset (WASO)|The sleep questionnaire, a Sponsor produced questionnaire used in previous eszopiclone studies, asked the subject or parent/guardian to report information about the subject’s sleep and daytime functioning since the last visit. This questionnaire provided a subjective assessment of the subject’s sleep over a predefined time period. WASO was assessed based on the responses to the sleep questionnaire.|Baseline and 12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to treat population||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
858573|NCT00857220|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Conners’ Continuous Performance Test II (CCPT II)|The CCPT-II is a computer-based 14-minute, visual-performance task. During an administration, respondents were required to press the space bar or click the mouse whenever any letter except the target letter appears on the screen. The speed at which the letters were presented varied during the administration. There were 6 blocks, with 3 sub-blocks, each containing 20 trials (letter presentations). The interstimulus intervals (ISIs) were 1, 2, and 4 seconds with a display time of 250 milliseconds. The order in which the different ISIs were presented varied between blocks. Conners’ CCPT-II provides the following measures:% Omissions,% Commissions, Hit Reaction Time, Hit Reaction Time Standard Error,Variability of Standard Error, Detectability (d’), Response Style (beta), Perseverations, Hit Reaction Time Block Change (Vigilance Measure), Hit Standard Error Block Change (Vigilance Measure), Hit Reaction Time ISI change, and Hit Standard Error ISI Change, Confidence Index.|Baseline and 12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to treat population||percentage of score||Standard Deviation|Mean
858574|NCT00857220|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pediatric Daytime Sleepiness Scale (PDSS)at Month 12|The PDSS total score ranges from a low of 0 where the individual is endorsing each item at the lowest level of daytime sleepiness to a high of 32 where the individual is endorsing each item at the highest level of daytime sleepiness.|Baseline and 12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to Treat Population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858575|NCT00857220|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL)|CBCL was completed by parents or guardians who saw the child in home-like settings. It includes several competence items, open-ended items for describing the child's illnesses, disabilities, concerns about the child, best things about the child, and several items to rate behavioral, emotional, and social problems. Responses are recorded on a Likert scale: 0 = Not True, 1 = Somewhat or Sometimes True, 2 = Very True or Often True. The checklist contains 120 questions. The standardized score is computed by determining the z-score by subtracting the mean for the subject’s age group and gender from the raw score and then dividing this by the standard deviation for the subject’s age group and gender. Next, multiply the zscore by 15 and then add 100. For activities scale, social scale, school scale, and total competence scale, higher values indicate higher competencies. For Internalizing problems, externalizing problems, and total problems, higher values indicate more problems.|Baseline and 12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to treat population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858576|NCT00857220|Secondary|Change From Baseline at Month 12 in Subjective Sleep Latency (SL)|Sleep latency is the amount of time it takes to fall asleep after the lights have been turned off.|Baseline and 12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to treat population||Minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
858577|NCT00857220|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Improvement Score as Assessed by Parent/Caregiver or Child at Month 12|A 7-point scale was used for improvement with numeric values assigned to each of the responses: very much improved (1), much improved (2), minimally improved (3), no change (4), minimally worse (5), much worse (6), and very much worse (7).|Baseline and 12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to treat population||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858606|NCT00780715|Primary|HbA1c Change|Units are absolute difference in %HbA1c (HbA1c being the percentage of glycated Haemoglobin, reflecting glucose exposure over the last 3 months)|6 months|Modified Intention to treat||absolute change in %HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
858669|NCT00658814|Primary|30-Day Survival|Patients surviving more than 30 days after study registration|30 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858578|NCT00857220|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Coding Copy Subtest A or B, or Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST)at Month 12|These tests are standardized information processing tasks to assess recognition and recoding of sensory information. The subject was given 90 seconds to complete as many substitutions of symbols as possible according to a code provided on top of the sheet. The Coding Copy Subtest A was used for subjects 6 to 7 years of age, the Coding Copy Subtest B was used for subjects 8 to 16 years of age, and the DSST was used for subjects 17 years of age. The DSST consists of rows containing small blank squares, each paired with a randomly assigned numbers 1-9. Above the rows is a key that pairs each number with a symbol. The subject must fill in the blank spaces with the matching symbol that is in the key. For the Subcopy tests the subject simply copies the symbol above each empty square. Scaled scores are used to account for age differences among test takers. Scaled scores range from 1 to 19, and higher scores indicate higher cognitive function.|Baseline and 12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to Treat Population||score||Standard Deviation|Mean
858579|NCT00857220|Secondary|Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Item Responses|The C-SSRS is a physician-completed scale to assess any suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior. The C-SSRS contained questions about suicidal behavior and suicidal ideation. Subjects were placed into categories for suicidal behavior and for suicidal ideation based on their responses to various questions. Any suicidality was defined as suicidal behavior or suicidal ideation. The suicidal behavior categories were determined based on the response to the questions under suicidal behavior (Completed Suicide, Actual Attempt, Interrupted Attempt, Aborted Attempt, Preparatory Acts or Behavior).The suicidal ideation categories were determined by examining the response to 5 questions under suicidal ideation (Wish to be Dead, Nonspecific Active Suicidal Thoughts, Active Suicidal Ideation with Any Methods (Not Plan) without Intent to Act, Active Suicidal Ideation with Some Intent to Act, without Specific Plan, Active Suicidal Ideation with Specific Plan and Intent).|12 Months|Intent to treat population||Subjects|||Number
858580|NCT00857220|Secondary|Overall Incidence of Skin Reactions: Number of Participant Affected||12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to treat population||participants|||Number
858581|NCT00857220|Secondary|Overall Incidence of Skin Reactions: Number of Events||12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|Intent to treat population||Events|||Number
858582|NCT00857220|Primary|Overall Incidence of Adverse Events||12 Months (from the 1st dose to the end of study)|The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consisted of all enrolled subjects who had taken any study medication. One subject did not receive study medication||participants|||Number
858583|NCT00811317|Secondary|Insulin and Glucagon Levels During Closed Loop and Open Loop Admissions of Diabetic Subjects Compared to the Comparable 24 Hour Period During the Admission of Non-diabetic Subject||24 hours|This outcome was not analyzed. There were no experiments in non-diabetic subjects that we were able to make a comparison with|||||
858584|NCT00811317|Secondary|Set Point Using CGM Data as the Input to the Controller for Future Studies|The algorithm in the Bionic Pancreas must have a pre-specified target glucose it is trying to achieve in order to make dosing decisions. Using data from this study, investigators planned to determine what an appropriate glucose target should be for future studies.|24 hours|||mg/dl|||Number
858585|NCT00811317|Secondary|Sensitivity for Hypo- and Hyperglycemia of the CGM Devices Using the BG Measurement as the Standard|Mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of CGM and BG glucose readings in hypoglycemia (< 70 mg/dl) and hyperglycemia (>180 mg/dl) in three different CGM devices: Dexcom, Navigator and Guardian|24 hours|||percent absolute difference||Standard Deviation|Mean
858586|NCT00811317|Secondary|Insulin and Glucagon Levels During the Closed-loop Admission as Compared to the Comparable 24 Hour Period During the Open Loop Admission of Diabetic Subjects||24 hours|This outcome was not analyzed. There were no open loop experiments in diabetic subjects that we were able to make a comparison with|||||
858587|NCT00811317|Secondary|Average Glucose and Glycemic Variability During Closed Loop Control in Diabetic Subjects Compared to the Comparable 24 Hour Period in Non-diabetic Subjects||24 hours|This outcome was not analyzed. There were no experiments in non-diabetic subjects that we were able to make a comparison with|||||
858588|NCT00811317|Secondary|Accuracy of the Continuous Glucose Monitor (CGM) Using Blood Glucose Measurement as the Standard|Measuring the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between the blood glucose measurement and CGM glucose readings, on three different CGM devices: Dexcom, Guardian and Navigator|24 hours|||percent absolute difference||Standard Deviation|Mean
858589|NCT00811317|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving a Stable Glucose Response to Insulin Dosing Around Idle Times Prior to Meals||24 hours|||participants|||Number
858590|NCT00811317|Secondary|Number of Participants Achieving a Stable Glucose Response to Insulin Dosing||24 hours|||participants|||Number
858591|NCT00811317|Secondary|Number of Carbohydrate Interventions||24 hours|||number of interventions|||Number
858592|NCT00811317|Secondary|Average Glucose and Glycemic Variability (MAGE) During Closed Loop Control in Diabetic Subjects Compared to the Comparable 24-hour Period the Day Prior to Admission as Measured by Navigator CGM Data||24 hours|Navigator CGM data from the day prior to admission was not obtained|||||
858593|NCT00811317|Secondary|Blood Glucagon Levels||24 hours|||microgram/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
858594|NCT00811317|Secondary|Total Glucagon Dose||24 hours|||mcg/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
858595|NCT00811317|Secondary|Glucagon T-max|Time to maximum peak glucagon concentration|24 hours|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
858596|NCT00811317|Secondary|Total Insulin Dose||24 hours|||u/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
858597|NCT00811317|Secondary|Percentage of Time Spent With BG > 180 mg/dl||24 hours|||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
858598|NCT00811317|Secondary|Nadir Blood Glucose Level for Each Hypoglycemic Event||24 hours|||mg/dl|||Number
858599|NCT00811317|Secondary|Number of Hypoglycemic Events|This outcome captures the number of hypoglycemic events that occurred throughout the entire study|24 hours|||Number of events|||Number
858600|NCT00811317|Secondary|Percentage of Time Spent With BG < 70 mg/dl||24 hours|||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
858601|NCT00811317|Secondary|Percentage of Peak Post-prandial Hyperglycemias < 180 mg/dl (ADA Target)||24 hours|||percentage of blood glucose measurements|||Number
858602|NCT00811317|Secondary|Percentage of Time Spent in Hyperglycemia (BG> 180 mg/dl) After Meals||After each of 3 meals|||percentage of time||Standard Deviation|Mean
858603|NCT00811317|Secondary|Peak Hyperglycemia Following Each Meal||After each of 3 meals|||mg/dl||Standard Deviation|Mean
858622|NCT00731731|Primary|Overall Survival at 15 Months (Phase II)|The primary endpoint will be survival status at 15 months (OS15). In addition, survival will be estimated using a Kaplan-Meier curve. For this analysis, patients who are still alive at the time of analysis have survival time censored at the last contact date.|Time from study registration to the date of death from any cause, assessed up to 5 years|||percentage of phase II patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858623|NCT00731731|Primary|Maximum Tolerated Dose of Vorinostat, Defined as the Dose at Which Fewer Than One-third of Patients Experience DLTs, Graded According to NCI CTCAE (Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Effects) Version 3.0 (Phase I)|"The Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) will be based on the assessment of Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT) during the first 10 weeks of treatment only, and will be defined as the dose at which fewer than one-third of patients experience a DLT to vorinostat. The MTD is the dose level at which 0/3 or 1/6 patients experience DLT with the next higher dose having at least 2/3 or 2/6 patients encountering DLT.
>
>
DLT will be defined as any of the following events occurring during treatment with vorinostat and temozolomide and attributable to one or both study drugs:
Grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia, grade 4 anemia or grade 4 neutropenia lasting > 7 days
Any non-hematologic grade 3 or greater adverse event, excluding alopecia and venous thromboembolism
Grade 4 radiation-induced skin changes
Failure to recover from toxicities to be eligible for re-treatment with vorinostat and temozolomide ≤ 14 days of the last dose of the two drugs"|10 weeks|||number of patients with DLT|||Number
858624|NCT00725322|Secondary|NRS Score Three Weeks After Injection|The NRS scores range from 0-100, where 0 indicated no pain and 100 indicated the worst pain.|Three weeks after injection|Although 27 participants completed the study, 3 participants were excluded from analysis of the NRS score because they had missing data.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858625|NCT00725322|Primary|Time Until Analgesic Failure|Participants made daily NRS reports via Palm Pilot, and “failure” was defined as (Pre-injection baseline NRS) – (Mean NRS for any 3 preceding days) ≤ 0; or 9 months|Each participant was assessed for up to 224 days per intervention (injection) or until they returned to NRS baseline|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
858626|NCT00699816|Secondary|Cancer-specific Survival Rate|Cancer-specific survival rate was measured from the date of randomization until death resulting from HCC.|Every 3 months from baseline for 24 months, and then every 3-6 months until the data cut-off date, up to LSLV(Last Subject Last Visit)|||percentage of participants|||Number
858627|NCT00699816|Secondary|Overall Survival(OS) Rate|Overall survival rate was measured from the date of randomization until death from any cause.|Every 3months from the baseline for 24 months, and then every 3-6 months until the data cut-off date, up to LSLV(Last Subject Last Visit)|||percentage of participants|||Number
858628|NCT00699816|Primary|Recurrence Free Survival(RFS) Rate|RFS rate was measured from the date of randomization to the first recurrence or to death from any cause.|Every 3months from the baseline for 24 months, and then every 3-6 months until the data cut-off date, up to LSLV(Last Subject Last Visit)|||percentage of participants|||Number
858629|NCT00699816|Secondary|Cancer-specific Survivals|Cancer-specific survival was measured from the date of randomization until death resulting from HCC.|Every 3 months from baseline for 24 months, and then every 3-6 months until the data cut-off date, up to LSLV(Last Subject Last Visit)|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858630|NCT00699816|Secondary|Overall Survival(OS)|Overall survival was measured from the date of randomization until death from any cause.|Every 3months from the baseline for 24 months, and then every 3-6 months until the data cut-off date, up to LSLV(Last Subject Last Visit)|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858631|NCT00699816|Primary|Recurrence Free Survival(RFS)|RFS was measured from the date of randomization to the first recurrence or to death from any cause.|Every 3months from the baseline for 24 months and then every 3-6 months until the data cut-off date, up to LSLV(Last Subject Last Visit)|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858670|NCT00658814|Primary|Complete Response|Morphologic complete remission (CR): ANC >=1,000/mcL, platelet count >=100,000/mcL, <5% bone marrow blasts, no Auer rods, no evidence of extramedullary disease. Morphologic complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi): Same as CR but ANC may be <1,000/mcL and/or platelet count <100,000/mcL.|Up to 60 days|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858793|NCT00126581|Other Pre-specified|Overall Response Rate by EGFR Mutation Status|Response and EGFR mutation status are defined in previous outcome measures.|Duration of study (up to 3 years)|EGFR mutation analysis was successfully performed in 164 participants; 17 participants had insufficient material or DNA for analysis.||percentage of participants|||Number
858671|NCT00658814|Secondary|Number of Patients With Grade 3 Through 5 Adverse Events That Are Related to Study Drug|Only adverse events that are possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug are reported.|Up to 5 years|Eligible patients who received any treatment were included in the adverse event summaries. Any CTCAE 3.0 event of Grade 3 (severe), Grade 4 (life threatening) or Grade 5 (fatal) which were deemed to be related to protocol treatment are included.||Participants|||Number
858661|NCT00676715|Secondary|Total Number of Gadolinium-Enhancing T1 Lesions at Weeks|Total number of gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions at weeks were reported.|Weeks 4 to Week 24|The intent-to-treat population includes all randomized participants who had received any study drug. Here, number of participants analysed signifies the participants who were evaluable for the outcome.||Lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
858662|NCT00676715|Secondary|Total Number of New Gadolinium-Enhancing T1 Lesions Observed by MRI Scans of the Brain|Total number of new gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions observed by MRI scans of the brain were reported.|Weeks 4 to Week 24|The intent-to-treat population includes all randomized participants who had received any study drug. Here, number of participants analysed signifies the participants who were evaluable for the outcome.||Lesions||Standard Deviation|Mean
858663|NCT00676715|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Total Volume of T2 Lesions on MRI Scans of the Brain at Week 24|Change from baseline in total volume of T2 lesions on MRI scans of the Brain at week 24 was reported.|Baseline, Week 24|The intent-to-treat population includes all randomized participants who had received any study drug. Here, n signifies the number of participants evaluated at specified time points.||Cubic Millimeter (mm^3)||Standard Deviation|Mean
858664|NCT00676715|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Remained Relapse Free at Week 24|Percentage of participants who remained relapse free at week 24 were reported.|Week 24|The intent-to-treat population includes all randomized participants who had received any study drug.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858665|NCT00676715|Secondary|Annualized Protocol Defined Relapse Rate at Week 24|Adjusted annualized relapse rate for geographical region.|Week 24|The intent-to-treat population includes all randomized participants who had received any study drug.||Number of relapses||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858666|NCT00676715|Primary|Total Number of Gadolinium-Enhancing T1 Lesions Observed on MRI Scans of the Brain|Mean of total number of gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions observed on MRI scans of the brain at Weeks 12, 16, 20, 24 was determined using average imputation method.|Week 12 to Week 24|The intent-to-treat population includes all randomized participants who had received any study drug. Here, number of participants analysed signifies the participants who were evaluable for the outcome.||Lesion||Standard Deviation|Mean
858667|NCT00672204|Primary|The Proportion of Insulin-independent Subjects With Full Islet Graft Function|"Islet transplant recipients will be considered insulin-independent with full islet graft function if they are able to titrate off insulin therapy for at least 1 week and all of the following criteria are met:
HbA1c < 7.0% or a ≥2.5% decrease from baseline;
fasting capillary glucose level should not exceed 140 mg/dL (7.8 mmol/L) more than three times in the past week (based on measuring capillary glucose levels a minimum of 7 times in a seven day period);
2-hour post-prandial capillary glucose should not exceed 180 mg/dl (10.0 mmol/L) more than three times in the past week (based on measuring capillary glucose levels a minimum of 21 times in a seven day period);
fasting serum glucose level ≤126 mg/dL (7.0 mmol/L); if the fasting serum glucose level is >126 mg/dL (7.0 mmol/L), it must be confirmed in an additional one out of two measurements;
evidence of endogenous insulin production defined as fasting or stimulated C-peptide levels ≥0.5 ng/mL (0.16 nmol/L)."|1 year following the first islet transplant|Raptiva was removed from market after 3 subjects were transplanted||participants|||Number
858668|NCT00658814|Secondary|Relapse-free Survival|Relapse-free survival (RFS) is defined for all patients who achieve CR or CRi. RFS is measured from the date CR or CRi is first achieved until relapse or death form any cause, with observation censored on the date of last contact for patients last known to be alive without report of relapse. Relapse from CR/CRi is defined as reappearance of leukemic blasts in the peripheral blood; or > 5% blasts in the bone marrow not attributable to another cause; or appearance or reappearance of extramedullary disease.|Up to 5 years|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858672|NCT00616759|Primary|Wechsler Memory Scale-III (WMS-III) Auditory Delayed Index|WMS-III Auditory Delayed Index is a measure of memory functioning. The results given are the post-ECT testing results. A smaller number indicates less memory disturbance on this scale. The range of scores is between 0-140 with higher scores indicating better memory function.|Pre-tesing within 36 hours before first ECT; Post-testing within 36 hours of 6th ECT.|The measurements listed are post-ECT testing for both groups||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858673|NCT00616759|Secondary|California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT)|CVLT consists of a number of individual subtests of various aspects of memory. Higher scores indicate better memory function.|Within one week pre-ECT and within 48 hours after the 6th ECT||||||
858674|NCT00586339|Primary|CMI (B-cell Responses) Related to HPV 16/18 Virus-like Particles (VLPs) Measured by Flow Cytometry|The CMI response is expressed by the number of subjects with B-cell response to VLP-16 and VLP-18 above (>) 0 as measured by Flow cytometry.|At Month 12|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available at the considered time points.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858675|NCT00586339|Primary|CMI (B-cell Responses) Related to HPV 16/18 Virus-like Particles (VLPs) Measured by Flow Cytometry|The CMI response is expressed by the number of subjects with B-cell response to VLP-16 and VLP-18 above (>) 0 as measured by Flow cytometry.|At Month 7|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available at the considered time points.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858676|NCT00586339|Primary|CMI B-cell Responses Related to HPV 16/18 Virus-like Particles (VLPs) Measured by Flow Cytometry|The CMI response is expressed by the number of subjects with B-cell response to VLP-16 and VLP-18 above (>) 0 as measured by Flow cytometry.|At Month 2|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available at the considered time points.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858677|NCT00586339|Primary|Cell Mediated Immune Response (CMI) (B-cell Responses) Related to HPV 16/18 Virus-like Particles (VLPs) Measured by Flow Cytometry|The CMI response is expressed by the number of subjects with B-cell response to VLP-16 and VLP-18 above (>) 0 as measured by Flow cytometry.|At Month 0|The analysis was performed on the ATP cohort for immunogenicity, which included all evaluable subjects for whom data concerning immunogenicity outcome variables were available at the considered time points.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858678|NCT00586339|Primary|Cell Mediated Immune Response (CMI) (T-cell Responses) Related to HPV-16 and HPV-18 Measured by Intracellullar Cytokine Staining (ICS)|The CMI response is the measure of the cytokines production (i.e. Cluster of Differentiation 40 Ligand (CD40L), Interferon gamma (IFN-γ), interleukin-2 (IL-2) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) by HPV-antigen specific T lymphocytes and measured by intracellular cytokine staining assay. The results were expressed as a frequency of positive CD4 or CD8 T cell producing at least 1 cytokine within the CD4 or CD8 T cell sub-population. All doubles= T cell expressing at least 2 cytokines.|At Months 0, 2, 7 and 12|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects (i.e. those HPV DNA- subjects during the vaccination phase) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available. This included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component post-vaccination.||Cells||Inter-Quartile Range|Geometric Mean
858679|NCT00586339|Primary|Concentrations for HPV-16 and HPV-18 Antibodies|"Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean antibody concentrations (GMCs) and were given in EL.U/mL.
The antibody concentrations against HPV-16 and HPV-18 were determined by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The cut-off values of the assay were 8 EL.U/mL for anti-HPV-16 and 7 EL.U/mL for anti-HPV-18."|At Month 12|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects (i.e. those HPV DNA- subjects during the vaccination phase) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available. This included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component post-vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858680|NCT00586339|Primary|Concentrations for HPV-16 and HPV-18 Antibodies|"Concentrations were expressed as geometric mean antibody concentrations (GMCs) and were given in EL.U/mL.
The antibody concentrations against HPV-16 and HPV-18 were determined by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The cut-off values of the assay were 8 EL.U/mL for anti-HPV-16 and 7 EL.U/mL for anti-HPV-18."|At Months 0, 2 and 7|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects (i.e. those HPV DNA- subjects during the vaccination phase) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available. This included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component post-vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858681|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for HPV-16 and HPV-18 Antibodies|"Seroconversion was defined as the appearance of anti-HPV-16 and/or anti-HPV-18 antibodies (anti-HPV-16 titers ≥ 8 ELISA units per milliliter (EL.U/mL) and anti-HPV-18 titers ≥ 7 EL.U/mL) in the serum of subjects seronegative before vaccination.
A seronegative subject was a subject whose antibody titres are below the cut-off value.
Due to the high proportion of initially seropositive subjects in the study population, seroconversion rates were considered for all subjects in the ATP cohort for immunogenicity regardless of baseline serostatus."|At Month 12|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects (i.e. those HPV DNA- subjects during the vaccination phase) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available. This included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component post-vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858682|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Seroconverted Subjects for HPV-16 and HPV-18 Antibodies.|"Seroconversion was defined as the appearance of anti-HPV-16 and/or anti-HPV-18 antibodies (anti-HPV-16 titers ≥ 8 ELISA units per millilitre (EL.U/mL) and anti-HPV-18 titers ≥ 7 EL.U/mL) in the serum of subjects seronegative before vaccination.
A seronegative subject was a subject whose antibody titres are below the cut-off value.
Due to the high proportion of initially seropositive subjects in the study population, seroconversion rates were considered for all subjects in the ATP cohort for immunogenicity regardless of baseline serostatus."|At Months 2 and 7|The According-To-Protocol cohort for immunogenicity included evaluable subjects (i.e. those HPV DNA- subjects during the vaccination phase) for whom data concerning immunogenicity measures were available. This included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least 1 study vaccine antigen component post-vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858683|NCT00586339|Primary|HIV Viral Load at Each Time Point in All HIV+ Subjects|The viral load was calculated by estimating the amount of virus in blood samples and was given in number of Ribonucleic acid (RNA) copies per milliliter.|At Month 10 and Month 12|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||RNA copies/mL (in log10)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858684|NCT00586339|Primary|HIV Viral Load at Each Time Point in All HIV+ Subjects|The viral load was calculated by estimating the amount of virus in blood samples and was given in number of Ribonucleic acid (RNA) copies per milliliter.|At pre-vaccination and at Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||RNA copies/mL (in log10)||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858685|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of CD4+ Cells Per Cubic Millimeter at Each Time Point in All HIV+ Subjects|The number of CD4+ cells per cubic millimeter at each time point in all HIV+ subjects is reported.|At Month 10 and Month 12|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||cells/mm^3||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858686|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of CD4+ Cells Per Cubic Millimeter at Each Time Point in All HIV+ Subjects|The number of CD4+ cells per cubic millimeter at each time point in all HIV+ subjects is reported.|At pre-vaccination and at Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||cells/mm^3||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858687|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects in Each World Health Organisation (WHO) HIV Clinical Stage at Each Time Point by Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4+) Cell Count Category at Baseline in All HIV+ Subjects.|CD4+ cell count categories, at baseline, assessed were (i) below 200 CD4+ cells per cubic millimetre (mm^3), (ii) between 200 and 500 CD4+ cells/mm^3 and (iii) above 500 CD4+ cells/mm^3. WHO classification of HIV-associated clinical disease: 1 = Asymptomatic HIV-associated symptoms = WHO clinical stage 1 2 = Mild HIV-associated symptoms = WHO clinical stage 2 3 = Advanced HIV-associated symptoms = WHO clinical stage 3 4 = Severe HIV-associated symptoms = WHO clinical stage 4|At Month 10 and Month 12|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858688|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects in Each World Health Organisation (WHO) HIV Clinical Stage at Each Time Point by Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4+) Cell Count Category at Baseline in All HIV+ Subjects.|"CD4+ cell count categories, at baseline, assessed were (i) below 200 CD4+ cells per cubic millimetre (mm^3), (ii) between 200 and 500 CD4+ cells/mm^3 and (iii) above 500 CD4+ cells/mm^3.
WHO classification of HIV-associated clinical disease:
= Asymptomatic HIV-associated symptoms = WHO clinical stage 1
= Mild HIV-associated symptoms = WHO clinical stage 2
= Advanced HIV-associated symptoms = WHO clinical stage 3
= Severe HIV-associated symptoms = WHO clinical stage 4"|At Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858689|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinically Relevant Abnormalities in Biochemical and Haematological Laboratory Parameters Assessed.|Laboratory parameters assessed were alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), creatinine (CREA), white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NEU), lymphocytes (LYM), monocytes (MON), eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS), red blood cells (RBC), haemoglobin (Hgb), haematocrit (Hct) and platelets (PLA). For each parameter and by pre-vaccination status, it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or in the normal range (missing values are also indicated). Parameters presented in this table are NEU, PLA, RBC and WBC.|At Month 10 and Month 12|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858690|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinically Relevant Abnormalities in Biochemical and Haematological Laboratory Parameters Assessed.|Laboratory parameters assessed were alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), creatinine (CREA), white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NEU), lymphocytes (LYM), monocytes (MON), eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS), red blood cells (RBC), haemoglobin (Hgb), haematocrit (Hct) and platelets (PLA). For each parameter and by pre-vaccination status, it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or in the normal range (missing values are also indicated). Parameters presented in this table are ALAT, BAS, CREA, EOS, Hct, Hgb, LYM and MON.|At Month 10 and Month 12|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858691|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinically Relevant Abnormalities in Biochemical and Haematological Laboratory Parameters Assessed.|"Laboratory parameters assessed were alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), creatinine (CREA), white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NEU), lymphocytes (LYM), monocytes (MON), eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS), red blood cells (RBC), haemoglobin (Hgb), haematocrit (Hct) and platelets (PLA).
For each parameter and by pre-vaccination status, it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or in the normal range (missing values are also indicated).
The parameter presented in this table is alanine aminotransferase (ALAT)."|At Day 7 and at Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858692|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinically Relevant Abnormalities in Biochemical and Haematological Laboratory Parameters Assessed.|"Laboratory parameters assessed were alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), creatinine (CREA), white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NEU), lymphocytes (LYM), monocytes (MON), eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS), red blood cells (RBC), haemoglobin (Hgb), haematocrit (Hct) and platelets (PLA).
For each parameter and by pre-vaccination status, it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or in the normal range (missing values are also indicated).
Parameters presented in this table are eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS) and creatinine (CREA)."|At Day 7 and at Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858731|NCT00392236|Primary|Percent of Prescribed Medication Taken as Assessed by the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS)|Estimated percent of prescribed medication taken during month 6 of the study was calculated using all available data sources (MEMS supplemented by subject interview and pill counts).|Measured at Month 6|||percentage of prescribed medication take||Standard Deviation|Mean
858732|NCT00390429|Secondary|Correlation of EGFR Polymorphisms With Treatment Response and Clinical Outcome||Completion of study||||||
858693|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinically Relevant Abnormalities in Biochemical and Haematological Laboratory Parameters Assessed.|"Laboratory parameters assessed were alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), creatinine (CREA), white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NEU), lymphocytes (LYM), monocytes (MON), eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS), red blood cells (RBC), haemoglobin (Hgb), haematocrit (Hct) and platelets (PLA).
For each parameter and by pre-vaccination status, it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or in the normal range (missing values are also indicated).
Parameters presented in this table are lymphocytes (LYM) and monocytes (MON)."|At Day 7 and at Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858694|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinically Relevant Abnormalities in Biochemical and Haematological Laboratory Parameters Assessed.|"Laboratory parameters assessed were alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), creatinine (CREA), white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NEU), lymphocytes (LYM), monocytes (MON), eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS), red blood cells (RBC), haemoglobin (Hgb), haematocrit (Hct) and platelets (PLA).
For each parameter and by pre-vaccination status, it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or in the normal range (missing values are also indicated).
Parameters presented in this table are white blood cells (WBC) and neutrophils (NEU)."|At Day 7 and at Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858695|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinically Relevant Abnormalities in Biochemical and Haematological Laboratory Parameters Assessed|"Laboratory parameters assessed were alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), creatinine (CREA), white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NEU), lymphocytes (LYM), monocytes (MON), eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS), red blood cells (RBC), haemoglobin (Hgb), haematocrit (Hct) and platelets (PLA).
For each parameter and by pre-vaccination status, it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or in the normal range (missing values are also indicated).
Parameters presented in this table are red blood cells (RBC) and platelets (PLA)."|At Day 7 and at Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858696|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Clinically Relevant Abnormalities in Biochemical and Haematological Laboratory Parameters Assessed|Laboratory parameters assessed were alanine aminotransferase (ALAT), creatinine (CREA), white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NEU), lymphocytes (LYM), monocytes (MON), eosinophils (EOS), basophils (BAS), red blood cells (RBC), haemoglobin (Hgb), haematocrit (Hct) and platelets (PLA). For each parameter and by pre-vaccination status, it was assessed whether the post-vaccination values of the parameter were above, below or in the normal range (missing values are also indicated). Parameters presented in this table are haemoglobin (Hgb) and haematocrit (Hct).|At Day 7 and at Months 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858697|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects With Pregnancies and Their Outcome|Pregnancy outcome with live infant having no apparent congenital anomaly.|From Day 0 up to Month 12|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858698|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life-threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|From Day 0 up to Month 12|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858699|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects With Medically Significant Conditions|"MSCs were collected regardless of causal relationship to vaccination and intensity.
Medically significant conditions were defined as adverse events (AEs) prompting emergency room or physician visits that were not (1) related to common diseases or (2) routine visits for physical examination or vaccination, or serious adverse events (SAEs) that were not related to common diseases. Common diseases include upper respiratory infections, sinusitis, pharyngitis, gastroenteritis, urinary tract infections, cervico-vaginal yeast infections, menstrual cycle abnormalities and injury."|From Day 0 up to Month 12|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858700|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|SAEs assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life-threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, result in disability/incapacity or a congenital anomaly/birth defect in the offspring of a study subject.|From Day 0 up to Month 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858701|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects With Medically Significant Conditions (MSCs)|"Medically significant conditions (MSCs) were collected regardless of causal relationship to vaccination and intensity.
Medically significant conditions were defined as adverse events (AEs) prompting emergency room or physician visits that were not (1) related to common diseases or (2) routine visits for physical examination or vaccination, or serious adverse events (SAEs) that were not related to common diseases.
Common diseases include upper respiratory infections, sinusitis, pharyngitis, gastroenteritis, urinary tract infections, cervico-vaginal yeast infections, menstrual cycle abnormalities and injury."|From Day 0 up to Month 7|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858733|NCT00390429|Secondary|Correlation of Phospho-EGFR With Increased p27 and Clinical Outcome||Completion of study||||||
858734|NCT00390429|Secondary|Correlation of Basal Levels of p27 With Response Rate and Overall Survival||Completion of study (up to 36 months)||||||
858735|NCT00390429|Secondary|Correlation of Baseline EGFR Levels With Clinical Outcome||Completion of study (up to 36 months)||||||
858736|NCT00390429|Secondary|Prognostic Significance of Epithelial Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Expression||Completion of study (up to 36 months)||||||
858737|NCT00390429|Secondary|Frequency and Severity of Toxicities (Phase II)|Treatment-related adverse events Grade ≥3 by NCI CTCAE 2.0.|Completion of study (up to 36 months)|||participants|||Number
858702|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Grade 3 and Related Unsolicited Symptoms|An unsolicited AE covers any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product and reported in addition to those solicited during the clinical study and any solicited symptom with onset outside the specified period of follow-up for solicited symptoms. Any was defined as the occurrence of any unsolicited AE regardless of intensity grade or relation to vaccination. Grade 3 AE = an AE which prevented normal, everyday activities. Related = AE assessed by the investigator as related to the vaccination.|Within 30 days (Days 0-29) after vaccination|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858703|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any, Severe (Grade 3) and Related Solicited General Symptoms|"Solicited general symptoms assessed were arthralgia, fatigue, fever [defined as axillary temperature equal to or above (≥) 37.5 degrees Celsius (°C)], gastrointestinal, headache, myalgia, rash and urticaria.
Any = occurrence of any solicited general symptom regardless of their intensity grade or relationship.
Grade 3 Symptom = symptom that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 Urticaria = Urticaria distributed on at least 4 body areas. Related = symptom assessed by the investigator as causally related to the vaccination."|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after each dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858704|NCT00586339|Primary|Number of Subjects Reporting Any and Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|"Solicited local symptoms assessed were pain and swelling. Any = occurrence of any solicited local regardless of intensity grade. Grade 3 pain = pain that prevented normal activity. Grade 3 swelling = swelling spreading beyond 50 millimeters (mm) of injection site.
Solicited local symptoms were assessed as related to the study vaccination."|Within 7 days (Days 0-6) after each dose and across doses|The analysis was performed on the Total Vaccinated cohort, which included all vaccinated subjects for whom data were available.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858738|NCT00390429|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (Phase II)||Completion of study (up to 65 months)|||months||Full Range|Median
858739|NCT00390429|Secondary|Overall Survival (Phase II)||Up to 65 months|||months||Full Range|Median
858740|NCT00390429|Secondary|Maximum Tolerated Dose of Two Different Schedules of Erlotinib Hydrochloride and Docetaxel (Phase I [Completed as of 12/01/2004])|Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) defined as the highest dose level at which no more than one patient experienced DLT when at least 6 patients were treated at that dose level and were assessable for toxicity, graded according to NCI CTCAE 2.0.|up to 36 months|"Phase I, arm A, MTD: erlotinib 600-1000 mg d 2, 9, and 16; and docetaxel 70 mg/m^2 d 1 on a 21-d cycle.
Phase I, arm B, MTD: erlotinib 150-300 mg d 2 and 16; and docetaxel 70 mg/m^2 d 1 on a 21-d cycle."||mg|||Number
858741|NCT00390429|Secondary|Comparison of Toxicity of Two Different Schedules of Erlotinib Hydrochloride and Docetaxel (Phase I [Completed as of 12/01/2004])||up to 36 months|||participants|||Number
858742|NCT00390429|Primary|Response Rate (Phase II)|Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria for target lesions and assessed by CT: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 36 months|All participants for whom response evaluation measurements were recorded at Baseline and after 2 cycles.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858743|NCT00390429|Primary|Safety and Toxicity of Erlotinib Hydrochloride and Docetaxel as Measured by NCI CTC v3.0 on Day 8 of Course 1 and on Day 1 of Every Subsequent Course (Phase I [Completed as of 12/01/2004])||Up to 36 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
858744|NCT00331409|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|"Toxicity assessments will be obtained as follows:
Cycle 1: Weeks 1,2,3 Cycle 2: Weeks 6,9 Cycle 3: Weeks 12, 15 Cycle 4: Weeks 18, 21 Cycle 5: Weeks 24, 27 Cycle 6+: Every visit during these cycles
Safety assessments will consist of evaluating adverse events and serious adverse events."|Duration of study, Up to 4 years|||participants|||Number
858745|NCT00331409|Secondary|Number of Subjects That Demonstrated a Reduction in Tumor Measurements.|Number of subjects that received at least one post-baseline scan that demonstrated a reduction in sum target lesions per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria.|Up to 4 years|2 subjects were not evaluable. Reduction in target lesion sum did not meet the criteria for Partial Response (PR) for any of the subjects. Partial Response, per RECIST, includes at least a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858746|NCT00331409|Secondary|Median Time to Progression||Time to progression|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858747|NCT00331409|Primary|Overall Number of Participants Who Achieve a Response Rate (Complete Response, Partial Response, and Stable Disease) at 3 Months||Up to 4 years|||participants|||Number
858748|NCT00331409|Primary|Progression-free Survival at 3 Months||3 months post 1st dose|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858754|NCT00321685|Secondary|5-year Recurrence-free Survival Rate|Recurrence free survival is defined as time from surgery to disease recurrence or death without recurrence (whichever occurred first) among resected patients. 5-year recurrence-free survival rate is estimated using Kaplan-Meier method, with 90% confidence interval calculated using Greenwood's formula.|recurrence follow-up began after post-operative chemotherapy, assessed every 3 months for patients 3-5 years from registration, every 6 months for patients 5-10 years from registration and every 12 months for patients 10 years from registration|Eligible and treated patients who underwent surgery after neoadjuvant therapy||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
858755|NCT00321685|Secondary|5-year Overall Survival Rate|Overall survival is defined as time from registration to death from any cause. 5-year overall survival rate is estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.|survival follow-up began after post-operative chemotherapy, assessed every 3 months for patients 3-5 years from registration, every 6 months for patients 5-10 years from registration and every 12 months for patients 10 years from registration|Eligible and treated patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
858756|NCT00321685|Secondary|Resection Rate for T4 Rectal Cancers|Resection rate is defined as number of patients with T4 rectal cancer who underwent curative surgical resection among all eligible and treated patients with T4 rectal cancers|Assessed at surgery time|eligible and treated patients with T4 rectal cancers||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
858757|NCT00321685|Secondary|Resection Rate for T3 Rectal Cancers|Resection rate is defined as number of patients with T3 rectal cancer who underwent curative surgical resection among all eligible and treated patients with T3 rectal cancers|Assessed at surgery time|eligible and treated patients with T3 rectal cancers||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
858758|NCT00321685|Primary|Pathologic Complete Response Rate|Pathologic complete response to preoperative therapy was determined at the time of surgical resection. Pathologic complete response (pCR) is defined as no evidence of invasive cells on pathologic examination of the primary rectal cancer (or tissue from the area where the tumor had been if there is a complete clinical response). Pathologic complete response rate is calculated as number of patients achieving pathologic complete response divided by all eligible and treated patients|Assessed at surgery time|Eligible and treated patients||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
858759|NCT00310401|Secondary|Chest X-ray Findings|Chest radiographs were scored using a radiographic score that scored each quadrant for extent of radiographic infiltrates on a scale of 0 to 4, then summed each quadrant for a total score from 0 (no infiltrates) to 16 (extensive infiltrates in all 4 radiographic quadrants).|change from enrollment to organ procurement (about ~40h after enrollment)|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858760|NCT00310401|Secondary|Pulmonary Vascular Resistance||72 hours|Insufficient data available to analyze this outcome|||||
858761|NCT00310401|Secondary|Lung Compliance||baseline and at organ procurement (about ~40h after enrollment)|||ml/cmH2O||Standard Deviation|Mean
858762|NCT00310401|Secondary|Donor Lung Utilization||72 hours|||Participants|||Count of Participants
858763|NCT00310401|Primary|Donor Oxygenation|The primary outcome was the change in oxygenation as measured by change in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio from study enrollment to organ procurement|Change from enrollment to organ procurement (about ~40h after enrollment)|||cmH2O||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858769|NCT00249444|Primary|Depression Score on Hamilton - Depression 25 Item|Participants those who had a 50% decrease in HAM-D scores from baseline at end of study. The outcome measured is 50% drop in Hamilton score at week 8 or last week of study participation compared to baseline. We looked at the difference between baseline score and score at week 8 or last week of study participation.|End of 8 week study or last week of participation|||participants|||Number
858770|NCT00249444|Primary|Cocaine Abstinence During Last Three Weeks of Study|measured daily by self report and confimed by urine toxicology for 8 weeks of the trial or length of study participation|measured daily by self report and confimed by urine toxicology for 8 weeks of the trial or length of study participation|||participants|||Number
858771|NCT00233324|Secondary|Cerebral Palsy||18-22 months||||||
858772|NCT00233324|Secondary|Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC)||120 days||||||
858773|NCT00233324|Secondary|Received Postnatal Steroids||120 days||||||
858774|NCT00233324|Secondary|Blindness in at Least One Eye||18-22 months||||||
858775|NCT00233324|Secondary|Pulse Oximetry Values > 90%||120 days||||||
858776|NCT00233324|Secondary|Duration of Oxygen Supplementation||120 days||||||
858777|NCT00233324|Secondary|Endotracheal Intubation||Before 10 minutes of age||||||
858778|NCT00233324|Secondary|Threshold ROP Requiring Surgery||120 days||||||
858779|NCT00233324|Secondary|Periventricular Leukomalacia (PVL)||120 days||||||
858780|NCT00233324|Secondary|Severe Intraventricular Hemorrhage (IVH)||120 days||||||
858781|NCT00233324|Secondary|Death||18-22 months||||||
858782|NCT00233324|Secondary|Bronchopulmonary Disease (Using the Physiologic Definition of BPD)||36 weeks||||||
858783|NCT00233324|Secondary|Incidence of Air Leaks||120 days||||||
858784|NCT00233324|Secondary|Received Surfactant Treatment||120 days||||||
858785|NCT00233324|Secondary|Survival Without Ventilation||By day 7||||||
858786|NCT00233324|Secondary|Duration of Mechanical Ventilation||During entire NICU stay||||||
858787|NCT00233324|Secondary|Death or Neurodevelopmental Impairment||18-22 months|||participants|||Number
858788|NCT00233324|Other Pre-specified|Apgar Score||5 minutes||||||
858789|NCT00233324|Primary|Survival Without Severe Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) (Threshold Disease or the Need for Surgery)||55 weeks|49 infants in the lower oxygen saturation group and 46 infants in the higher oxygen saturation group that had unknown retinopathy of prematurity outcome||participants|||Number
858790|NCT00233324|Primary|Survival Without Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia (BPD)||36 weeks|||Participants|||Number
858791|NCT00126581|Other Pre-specified|Overall Response Rate With KRAS Mutational Status|Overall response is defined in previous outcome measures. GIven the small number of KRAS mutant participants in each treatment arm, the analysis combines data from both arms.|Duration of study (up to 3 years)|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858792|NCT00126581|Other Pre-specified|Progression Free Survival With KRAS Mutation Status|Progression free survival is defined in previous outcome measures. GIven the small number of KRAS mutant participants, the analysis combines data from both arms.|Duration of study (up to 3 years)|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858794|NCT00126581|Other Pre-specified|Progression Free Survival (PFS) by Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Mutation Status|"PFS was defined as the time from registration until disease progression or death, whichever occurs first. The median PFS with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Progression is defined as in the primary outcome measure.
EGFR mutations were performed at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute using a sensitive heteroduplex method coupled with enzymatic digestion as previously reported (Janne PA, et al: A rapid and sensitive enzymatic method for epidermal growth factor receptor mutation screening. Clin Cancer Res 12:751-758, 2006). All positive findings were independently verified and subjected to sequencing. The mutation analyses were blinded to the participants' clinical outcome."|Duration of treatment (up to 3 years)|EGFR mutation analysis was successfully performed in 164 participants; 17 participants had insufficient material or DNA for analysis.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858795|NCT00126581|Other Pre-specified|Overall Survival|Overall survival (OS) is defined as the time from patient randomization (arm assignment) to death from any cause. The median OS with 95% CI was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.|Time from randomization to death (up to 3 years)|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858796|NCT00126581|Secondary|Number of Participants With Grade 3, 4 or 5 Adverse Event at Least Possibly Related to Treatment.|"The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE) version 3.
Grade 1: Mild; Grade 2: Moderate; Grade 3: Severe; Grade 4: Life Threatening; Grade 5: Death."|Duration of study (up to 3 years)|||participants|||Number
858797|NCT00126581|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|"The proportion of patients who respond (completely or partially) to each combination regimen will be estimated. An exact binomial confidence interval will be computed for these estimates.
Response was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria:
Complete Response (CR): disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR) 30% decrease in sum of longest diameter of target lesions"|Duration of Study (up to 3 years)|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858798|NCT00126581|Primary|18 Weeks Progression Free Survival (PFS) Rate|"The product limit estimator developed by Kaplan Meier will be used to graphically describe progression free survival for patients randomized to each study arm.
The 18 week progression-free survival rate was defined as the proportion of patients that were alive progression-free 18 weeks after registration into the study. Disease progression was assessed per modified RECIST criteria, and defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameters of target lesions, in either primary or nodal lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum longest diameter recorded since the baseline measurements, or the appearance of new lesions. Kaplan-Meier estimate of 18-week progression-free survival was calculated."|At 18 weeks|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858801|NCT00114101|Post-Hoc|Number of Participants With Progression, Death or Diagnosis of Second Primary Malignancy|Patients who develop progression (defined in primary outcome measure), died or develop a new primary malignancy (cancer) will summarized in this outcome.|Duration of study (up to 10 years)|||participants|||Number
858802|NCT00114101|Other Pre-specified|Overall Survival|Overall Survival was measured from the date of randomization to date of death due to any cause. OS was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method.|Duration of study (up to 10 years)|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858803|NCT00114101|Secondary|Response to Autologous Hematopoietic Stem-cell Transplant (HSCT) at Day 100|"Response was defined according to International Myeloma Working Group criteria (2006)
Complete Response: Complete disappearance of M-protein from serum & urine on immunofixation, normalization of Free Light Chain (FLC) ratio & <5% plasma cells in bone marrow (BM)
Partial Response: >= 50% reduction in serum M-Component and/or Urine M-Component >= 90% reduction or <200 mg per 24 hours; or >= 50% decrease in difference between involved and uninvolved FLC levels
Marginal Response: 25-49% reduction in serum M-component & urine M-component by 50-89% which still exceeds 200mg/24hour
Progressive Disease: Defined in primary outcome measure
Stable Disease: Not meeting any of the criteria above"|Day 100|||participants|||Number
858804|NCT00114101|Primary|Time to Progression|"Time to progression (TTP) was defined as the date of transplant to date of progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurs first. TTP was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method.
Progression was defined per the International Myeloma Working Group definition as one more of the following:
25% increase in serum M-component (absolute increase >= 0.5g/dl)
25% increase in urine M-component (absolute increase >= 200mg/24hour
25% increase in the difference between involved and uninvolved Free Light Chain levels (absolute increase >= 10mg/dl)
25 % increase in bone marrow plasma cell percentage (absolute increase of >=10%)
Definite development of new bone lesion or soft tissue plasmacytomas
Development of hypercalcemia"|Duration of study (up to 10years)|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858805|NCT00098475|Secondary|Proportion of Patients With Objective Response (First Phase, Step 2)|"Objective response is defined as either complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). Patients who have complete disappearance of an M-protein and no evidence of myeloma in the bone marrow are considered to have CR. PR requires all the following: (1) ≥50% reduction in the level of the serum monoclonal paraprotein. (2) Reduction in 24-hour urinary light chain excretion either by ≥90% or to <200 mg. (3)For patients with non-secretory (or oligosecretory) myeloma only, a ≥50% reduction in plasma cells in a bone marrow aspirate and on trephine biopsy must be documented. (4)50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytoma (by radiography or clinical examination). (5) No increase in the number or size of lytic bone lesions (development of a compression fracture does not exclude response).
As the expansion phase was a substudy terminated early with only 7 patients enrolled, the clinical results presented are mainly for the first phase only."|Assessed every 4 weeks for 16 weeks during Step 2|Only eligible patients were included in this analysis.||Proportion of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858806|NCT00098475|Primary|Proportion of Patients With Objective Response (First Phase, Step 1)|"Objective response is defined as either complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). Patients who have complete disappearance of an M-protein and no evidence of myeloma in the bone marrow are considered to have CR. PR requires all the following: (1) ≥50% reduction in the level of the serum monoclonal paraprotein. (2) Reduction in 24-hour urinary light chain excretion either by ≥90% or to <200 mg. (3)For patients with non-secretory (or oligosecretory) myeloma only, a ≥50% reduction in plasma cells in a bone marrow aspirate and on trephine biopsy must be documented. (4)50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytoma (by radiography or clinical examination). (5) No increase in the number or size of lytic bone lesions (development of a compression fracture does not exclude response).
As the expansion phase was a substudy terminated early with only 7 patients enrolled, the clinical results presented are mainly for the first phase only."|Assessed every 4 weeks for 16 weeks during Step 1|Only eligible patients were included in this analysis.||Proportion of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858807|NCT00095784|Secondary|Hemoglobin F|"Percentage of hemoglobin F as a proportion of total Hb (%HbF) measured by HPLC on peripheral blood samples.
Midpoint of 0.5% imputed for values reported as below limit of detection (1.0%). Hemoglobin F has been previously shown to be upregulated by decitabine in other hematologic disorders- sickle cell disease specifically. The rationale for exploring it in this study was to evaluate its potential utility as a biomarker of drug effect/PD marker."|Cycle 2, Day 12|Seven patients had missing data.||percentage of HbF||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858808|NCT00095784|Secondary|Hemoglobin F|"Percentage of hemoglobin F as a proportion of total Hb (%HbF) measured by HPLC on peripheral blood samples.
Midpoint of 0.5% imputed for values reported as below limit of detection (1.0%). Hemoglobin F has been previously shown to be upregulated by decitabine in other hematologic disorders- sickle cell disease specifically. The rationale for exploring it in this study was to evaluate its potential utility as a biomarker of drug effect/PD marker."|Cycle 2, Day 5|Seven patients had missing data.||percentage of HbF||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858809|NCT00095784|Secondary|Hemoglobin F|"Percentage of hemoglobin F as a proportion of total Hb (%HbF) measured by HPLC on peripheral blood samples.
Midpoint of 0.5% imputed for values reported as below limit of detection (1.0%). Hemoglobin F has been previously shown to be upregulated by decitabine in other hematologic disorders- sickle cell disease specifically. The rationale for exploring it in this study was to evaluate its potential utility as a biomarker of drug effect/PD marker."|Cycle 2, Day 1|Nine patients had missing data.||percentage of HbF||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858810|NCT00095784|Secondary|Hemoglobin F|"Percentage of hemoglobin F as a proportion of total Hb (%HbF) measured by HPLC on peripheral blood samples.
Midpoint of 0.5% imputed for values reported as below limit of detection (1.0%). Hemoglobin F has been previously shown to be upregulated by decitabine in other hematologic disorders- sickle cell disease specifically. The rationale for exploring it in this study was to evaluate its potential utility as a biomarker of drug effect/PD marker."|Cycle 1, Day 12|Three patients had missing data.||percentage of HbF||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858811|NCT00095784|Secondary|Hemoglobin F|"Percentage of hemoglobin F as a proportion of total Hb (%HbF) measured by HPLC on peripheral blood samples.
Midpoint of 0.5% imputed for values reported as below limit of detection (1.0%). Hemoglobin F has been previously shown to be upregulated by decitabine in other hematologic disorders- sickle cell disease specifically. The rationale for exploring it in this study was to evaluate its potential utility as a biomarker of drug effect/PD marker."|Cycle 1, Day 5|Three patients had missing data.||percentage of HbF||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858812|NCT00095784|Secondary|Hemoglobin F|"Percentage of hemoglobin F as a proportion of total Hb (%HbF) measured by HPLC on peripheral blood samples.
Midpoint of 0.5% imputed for values reported as below limit of detection (1.0%). Hemoglobin F has been previously shown to be upregulated by decitabine in other hematologic disorders- sickle cell disease specifically. The rationale for exploring it in this study was to evaluate its potential utility as a biomarker of drug effect/PD marker."|Cycle 1, Day 1|Four patients had missing data.||percentage of HbF||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858813|NCT00095784|Secondary|CXCR4|CXCR4 gene expression level measured by real-time RT_PCR. Ratio of CXCR4 vs a housekeeping gene (i.e., ABL)|Cycle 2, Day 12|Eleven patients had missing data.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858814|NCT00095784|Secondary|CXCR4|CXCR4 gene expression level measured by real-time RT_PCR. Ratio of CXCR4 vs a housekeeping gene (i.e., ABL)|Cycle 2, Day 5|Seven patients had missing data.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858815|NCT00095784|Secondary|CXCR4|CXCR4 gene expression level measured by real-time RT_PCR. Ratio of CXCR4 vs a housekeeping gene (i.e., ABL)|Cycle 2, Day 1|Seven patients had missing data.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858816|NCT00095784|Secondary|CXCR4|CXCR4 gene expression level measured by real-time RT_PCR. Ratio of CXCR4 vs a housekeeping gene (i.e., ABL)|Cycle 1, Day 12|Three patients had missing data.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858817|NCT00095784|Secondary|CXCR4|CXCR4 gene expression level measured by real-time RT_PCR. Ratio of CXCR4 vs a housekeeping gene (i.e., ABL)|Cycle 1, Day 5|Three patients had missing data.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858818|NCT00095784|Secondary|CXCR4|CXCR4 gene expression level measured by real-time RT_PCR. Ratio of CXCR4 vs a housekeeping gene (i.e., ABL)|Cycle 1, Day 1|Four patients had missing data.||ratio||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858819|NCT00095784|Secondary|CD34+ Cells|CD34 positive(+) cells are determined by flow immunostaining and light scatter in peripheral blood. Samples are then analyzed by flow cytometry, and CD34+ cells quantitated after 75,000 CD45 events are studied. (At least 75,000 CD45 events must be studied to ensure accuracy of the assay). Absolute numbers are determined by multiplying the % CD34+ cells by the total white blood cell count obtained on a CBC that is processed simultaneously.|Cycle 2, Day 12|Six patients had missing data.||cells x 10^6/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858820|NCT00095784|Secondary|CD34+ Cells|CD34 positive(+) cells are determined by flow immunostaining and light scatter in peripheral blood. Samples are then analyzed by flow cytometry, and CD34+ cells quantitated after 75,000 CD45 events are studied. (At least 75,000 CD45 events must be studied to ensure accuracy of the assay). Absolute numbers are determined by multiplying the % CD34+ cells by the total white blood cell count obtained on a CBC that is processed simultaneously.|Cycle 2, Day 5|Six patients had missing data.||cells x 10^6/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858821|NCT00095784|Secondary|CD34+ Cells|CD34 positive(+) cells are determined by flow immunostaining and light scatter in peripheral blood. Samples are then analyzed by flow cytometry, and CD34+ cells quantitated after 75,000 CD45 events are studied. (At least 75,000 CD45 events must be studied to ensure accuracy of the assay). Absolute numbers are determined by multiplying the % CD34+ cells by the total white blood cell count obtained on a CBC that is processed simultaneously.|Cycle 2, Day 1|Five patients had missing data.||cells x 10^6/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858822|NCT00095784|Secondary|CD34+ Cells|CD34 positive(+) cells are determined by flow immunostaining and light scatter in peripheral blood. Samples are then analyzed by flow cytometry, and CD34+ cells quantitated after 75,000 CD45 events are studied. (At least 75,000 CD45 events must be studied to ensure accuracy of the assay). Absolute numbers are determined by multiplying the % CD34+ cells by the total white blood cell count obtained on a CBC that is processed simultaneously.|Cycle 1, Day 12|Three patients had missing data.||cells x 10^6/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858823|NCT00095784|Secondary|CD34+ Cells|CD34 positive(+) cells are determined by flow immunostaining and light scatter in peripheral blood. Samples are then analyzed by flow cytometry, and CD34+ cells quantitated after 75,000 CD45 events are studied. (At least 75,000 CD45 events must be studied to ensure accuracy of the assay). Absolute numbers are determined by multiplying the % CD34+ cells by the total white blood cell count obtained on a CBC that is processed simultaneously.|Cycle 1, Day 5|One patient had missing data.||cells x 10^6/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858824|NCT00095784|Secondary|CD34+ Cells|CD34 positive(+) cells are determined by flow immunostaining and light scatter in peripheral blood. Samples are then analyzed by flow cytometry, and CD34+ cells quantitated after 75,000 CD45 events are studied. (At least 75,000 CD45 events must be studied to ensure accuracy of the assay). Absolute numbers are determined by multiplying the % CD34+ cells by the total white blood cell count obtained on a CBC that is processed simultaneously.|Cycle 1, Day 1|One patient had missing data.||cells x 10^6/L||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858825|NCT00095784|Primary|Incidence of Toxicities, Graded According to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE) v3.0|Percentage of patients experiencing any toxicity, any grade level. Additional details on adverse events are reported in Adverse Events section.|Up to 30 days of last dose of decitabine|||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858826|NCT00095784|Primary|Response Rate (Complete Response, Partial Response, or Hematologic Improvement.|"Complete response is normalization of counts and transfusion-independence.
Partial response is hemoglobin increase to normal levels, multilineage improvement including absolute neutrophil count (ANC) and/or platelets.
Hematologic improvement is red cell transfusion-independence or >50% increase in platelet levels."|Up to 36 weeks (6 cycles)|Two patients were non-evaluable for response.||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
858827|NCT00070499|Secondary|Toxicity|Number of patients with Grade 3-5 adverse events that are related to study drug by given type of adverse event|Patients were assessed for adverse events monthly every 4 weeks for the first year, every 6 months for years 2 and 3, and annually for years 4 and 5.|Eligible patients who started therapy||Participants with a given type of AE|||Number
858828|NCT00070499|Secondary|Two Year Relapse-free Survival|Relapse-free survival is measured from the date of documented (possibly unconfirmed) hematologic complete remission until loss of hematologic complete remission or death from any cause. Observations are censored at the date of last contact for patients last known to be alive with report of loss of hematologic complete remission.|every 3 months for the first year, every six months for years 2 and 3, annually for years 4 and 5|Eligible, treated patients who achieved a hematologic complete remission||Percent of population|||Number
858829|NCT00070499|Secondary|2-year Overall Survival (OS)|Overall survival was measured from the date of registration to study until death from any cause with observations censored at the date of last contact for patients last known to be alive.|Every three months for the first year, every six months in years 2 and 3, and annually for years 4 and 5|All eligible patients who were treated||Percent of population|||Number
858830|NCT00070499|Secondary|Hematologic Response|Hematologic response assesses whether patients' blood counts return to normal|1 month after starting treatment|Eligible, treated patients who were evaluable for hematologic response||participants|||Number
858831|NCT00070499|Primary|Molecular Response Rate at 12 Months|Median value of baseline bcr-abl/bcr ratio from pretreatment was used as the baseline value for assessing each patient's molecular response. Molecular response criteria were: 1) not failed treatment on or before 12-month evaluation; 2) met criteria for hemalotogic response; 3) bcr-abl/bcr ration at 12-months must be 10,000 times smaller than the pretreatment ratio.|pretreatment and after 12 months of treatment|Patients with follow-up specimens assayed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)||participants|||Number
858832|NCT00060528|Secondary|The Number of Participants With Adverse Events|Here are the total number of participants with adverse events. For the detailed list of adverse events see the adverse event module.|77.5 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
858833|NCT00060528|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival is defined as the date of on-study to the date of death from any cause or last follow-up.|50 months|||Months||Full Range|Median
858834|NCT00060528|Secondary|Number of Participants With an Objective Response|Objective response is determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria defined as: measurable disease (at least one measurable lesion), measurable lesions (lesions that can be accurately measured in at least one dimension with longest diameter >/= 20 mm using conventional techniques or >/= 10 mm with spiral CT scan. Non-measurable lesions (all other lesions, including small lesions (longest diameter < 20 mm with conventional techniques or < 10 mm with spiral CT scan), i.e. bone lesions, leptomeningeal disease, ascites, pleural/pericardial effusion...|53 months|All 12 participants with measurable disease were evaluated.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858835|NCT00060528|Secondary|Percent of Participants With a Decrease (i.e. Greater Than or Equal to 30%) in PSA Levels|PSA level at the time treatment is initiated compared to the PSA level at Day 85 and monthly thereafter while the patient continues on trial)|53 months|PSA was taken at multiple time points and proportion of patients (pts) who had a decrease in PSA of at least 30% was reported. This is standard reporting procedures for tumor markers (proportion of patients with a response);similar to RECIST reporting where there may be multiple scans obtained but one reports the proportion of pts with a response||Percentage of participants|||Number
858836|NCT00060528|Primary|Number of Participants With an Immune Response|Immune response is defined as an enhanced PSA specific T-cell immune response greater than or equal to twofold post-vaccination. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were collected by apheresis prior to treatment with vaccination and after approximately three months of therapy.|48 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
858837|NCT02647944|Secondary|Gastric Accommodation Volume at 16 Weeks|Change between postprandial and fasting whole gastric volume by 99mTc-SPECT Imaging. A noninvasive SPECT method was used to measure gastric volume during fasting and 32 min after a liquid nutritional supplement meal. Subjects reported to the clinic after an overnight fast. 99mTC was given by an intravenous injection in the forearm. The first fasting scan was obtained, and the study medication was given s.c. After 10 min, a 2nd fasting post medication scan was obtained, and the meal consumed; then two serial postprandial scans were obtained. Each scan required 9-12 min. Tomographic images of the gastric wall were obtained throughout the long axis of the stomach using a dual-head gamma camera that rotates around the body. This allows assessment of the radiolabeled circumference of the gastric wall, rather than the intragastric content.|16 weeks (approximately 1 hour after 99mTC injection)|Intent to treat analysis; data were imputed for the 5 participants who dropped out.||mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858838|NCT02647944|Secondary|Gastric Postprandial Volume at 16 Weeks|Gastric fasting volume was measured by single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging of the stomach after intravenous injection of 99mTC-pertechnetate, which is taken up by the gastric mucosa.|16 weeks|Intent to treat analysis; data were imputed for the 5 participants who dropped out.||mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858839|NCT02647944|Secondary|Gastric Fasting Volume at 16 Weeks|Gastric fasting volume was measured by single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging of the stomach after intravenous injection of 99mTC-pertechnetate, which is taken up by the gastric mucosa.|16 weeks|Intent to treat analysis; data were imputed for the 5 participants who dropped out.||mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858840|NCT02647944|Secondary|Satiation Maximum Tolerated Volume at 16 Weeks|After drinking Ensure, participants recorded their sensations every 5 minutes using a numerical scale from 0 to 5, with level 0 being no symptoms, level 3 corresponding to fullness sensation after a typical meal and level 5 corresponding to the maximal tolerated volume (maximum or unbearable fullness/satiation).|16 weeks|Intent to treat analysis; data were imputed for the 5 participants who dropped out.||mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858841|NCT02647944|Secondary|Satiation Volume to Fullness at 16 Weeks|After drinking Ensure, participants recorded their sensations every 5 minutes using a numerical scale from 0 to 5, with level 0 being no symptoms, level 3 corresponding to fullness sensation after a typical meal and level 5 corresponding to the maximal tolerated volume (maximum or unbearable fullness/satiation).|16 weeks|Intent to treat analysis; data were imputed for the 5 participants who dropped out.||mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858842|NCT02647944|Secondary|Satiety by Buffet Meal, Total Calories Ingested at 16 Weeks|"Satiety (a measure of appetite) was appraised by free feeding buffet meal consisting of standard foods of known nutrient composition. The total amount of food consumed was analyzed by the study dietitian."|16 weeks|Intent to treat analysis; data were imputed for the 5 participants who dropped out.||kcal||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858843|NCT02647944|Secondary|Weight Change at 16 Weeks|Body weight in kg was measured at 16 weeks and compared to baseline.|baseline, 16 weeks|Intent to treat analysis; data were imputed for the 5 participants who dropped out.||kg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858844|NCT02647944|Secondary|Weight Change at 5 Weeks|Body weight in kg was measured at 5 weeks and compared to baseline.|baseline, 5 weeks|Intent to treat analysis; data were imputed for the 5 participants who dropped out.||kg||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858845|NCT02647944|Primary|Gastric Emptying of Solids Half-time (T1/2) at 16 Weeks|Gastric emptying of solids was assessed by scintigraphy using a 320 Kcal 99mTc-radiolabeled egg, solid-liquid meal. Gastric Emptying Half-time was the linear interpretation of time to when 50% of radiolabeled meal emptied from the stomach.|16 weeks|Intent to treat analysis; data were imputed for the 5 participants who dropped out.||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858846|NCT02647944|Primary|Gastric Emptying of Solids Half-time (T1/2) at 5 Weeks|Gastric emptying of solids was assessed by scintigraphy using a 320 Kcal 99mTc-radiolabeled egg, solid-liquid meal. Gastric Emptying Half-time was the linear interpretation of time to when 50% of radiolabeled meal emptied from the stomach.|5 weeks|Intent to treat analysis; data were imputed for the 5 participants who dropped out.||minutes||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
858847|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Cardiovascular Fitness|Cardiovascular fitness will be calculated using the Single Stage Treadmill Walking Test. Predictions of VO2max will be made from heart rate (measured with a heart rate monitor), walking speed, age and gender.|Week 1 and Week 13|Due to equipment problems, 2 participants from the Exercise Group were not able to complete the Single Stage Treadmill Walking Test.||Change in ml/kg/min||Standard Deviation|Mean
858848|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Isometric Knee and Hip Extensor and Flexor Strength|The peak torque developed during knee and hip extension and flexion during a maximum isometric contraction will be measured by use of a Biodex System 2 isokinetic dynamometer. Data will be presented as Nm/kg (torque/body mass).|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in Nm/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
858849|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Grip Strength (Relative)|Grip strength will be assessed using a Jamar hand dynamometer. The hand dynamometer will be set to a fixed position and all values of grip force will be expressed in kg/kg (grip force/body mass).|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in kg/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
858850|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Grip Strength (Absolute)|Grip strength will be assessed using a Jamar hand dynamometer. The hand dynamometer will be set to a fixed position and all values of grip force will be expressed in kg.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
858851|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Depression Status|Depression will be assessed with the Centre of Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale, a 20-item scale developed for the general population with emphasis on affect. Elements of affect include mood, guilt, worthlessness, helplessness, appetite, and sleep. Each item is scored from 0 (rarely or none of the time), to 3 (most of the time). The items are summed to produce a total score between 0 and 60 with a score of 16 or higher indicating depression.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858896|NCT02302092|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Change in Vital Signs|Vital signs included body temperature (axillary measurement), diastolic and systolic blood pressure (5 minutes), respiratory rate, and pulse (bpm).|Day 1 up to Day 21|The safety population included all participants who received any dose of planned study medication.||participants|||Number
858852|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Arthritis-related Self-efficacy|The Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale (ASES) measures arthritis-specific beliefs regarding perception of performance on certain tasks to cope with the disease. The ASES is measured using 20 questions on a 10-100 scale with respect to three main areas: pain management (5 questions), physical function (9 questions), and other symptoms (6 questions). Each question is scored from 10 (very uncertain), to 100 (very certain), in 10-point increments. The minimum score for each subscale is 10, and the maximum score for each subscale is 100. The scores from each subscale are averaged to produce a normalized total score. Scores closer to 100 indicate greater certainty that a participant can cope with a particular task as a consequence of their disease.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858853|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Mobility Performance (Timed Up and Go Test)|Mobility performance will be measured using the Timed Up and Go Test. This test measures the time taken to rise from a standard chair with arm rests, walk 3 metres, and return to a seated position. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
858854|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Mobility Performance (30-second Chair Stand Test)|Mobility performance will be measured using the 30-second Chair Stand Test. This test measures the number of times participants can rise and lower from a standard height chair, without using arm rests, in a 30-second period.This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in number of sit-to-stand cycles||Standard Deviation|Mean
858855|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Mobility Performance (Stair Descent)|Mobility performance will be measured using the Stair Descent Test. For this test, the time taken to descend nine stairs is recorded in seconds. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
858856|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Mobility Performance (Stair Ascent)|Mobility performance will be measured using the Stair Ascent Test. For this test, the time taken to ascend nine stairs is recorded in seconds. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
858857|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Mobility Performance (40 Metre Walk Test)|Mobility performance will be measured using the 40 Metre Walk Test. This test measures the time taken to complete a fast-paced 40 metre walk. The time taken to walk 40 metres is recorded in seconds. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
858858|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Mobility Performance (Six-Minute Walk Test)|Mobility performance will be measured using the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). For this test, participants are instructed to walk as far as possible in 6 minutes. The distance covered in 6 minutes is recorded in metres. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in Metres||Standard Deviation|Mean
858859|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Resilience|Resilience will be measured using the Resilience Scale 25 Survey, which is a 25-item questionnaire designed to evaluate a participants ability to adapt to stress and adversity. The test is scored out of 175 (scores ranging from 25 to 175), with higher scores indicating higher resilience.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858860|NCT02609672|Secondary|Change in Self-reported Knee and Hip Pain|Change in self-reported knee and hip pain will be assessed with 3 valid and reliable questionnaires: the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), and the Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP) score. The KOOS and HOOS pain scores represent a normalized score from 0 (extreme symptoms) to 100 (no symptoms). KOOS and HOOS scores closer to 100 indicate fewer symptoms. The ICOAP consists of two sub-scales: constant pain (5 items) and intermittent pain (6 items). The score from each subscale represents a normalized score from 0 (no pain) to 100 (extreme pain). ICOAP scores closer to 0 indicate less pain. The items from each subscale are averaged to produce a normalized ICOAP total score, ranging from 0 (no pain) to 100 (extreme pain).|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858861|NCT02609672|Primary|Change in Lower Extremity Function|The Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS) consists of 20 items, on an adjectival scale, that assess difficulty during mobility tasks ranging from transfers to running. Each item is scored from 0 (extreme difficulty or unable to perform activity), to 4 (no difficulty to perform activity). The minimum possible score is 0, and the maximum possible score is 80. Scores closer to 80 represent better self-reported physical function. It is reliable and valid in knee OA and has superior sensitivity to change compared to similar measures.|Week 1 and Week 13|||Change in scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858862|NCT02517515|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Post-treatment Relapse by Post-treatment Week 24|Post-treatment relapse was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ between the end of treatment and 24 weeks after the last dose of active study drug among participants who completed treatment with HCV RNA levels < LLOQ at the end of treatment.|From the end of treatment through 24 weeks after the last dose of active study drug|All participants who received at least 1 dose of active study drug, completed treatment, and had HCV RNA <LLOQ at the final treatment visit, who had HCV RNA data available during the SVR24 period.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858863|NCT02517515|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Post-treatment Relapse by Post-treatment Week 12|Post-treatment relapse was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ between the end of treatment and 12 weeks after the last dose of active study drug among participants who completed treatment with HCV RNA levels < LLOQ at the end of treatment.|From the end of treatment through 12 weeks after the last dose of active study drug|All participants who received at least 1 dose of active study drug, completed treatment, and had HCV RNA <LLOQ at the final treatment visit, who had HCV RNA data available during the SVR12 period.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858864|NCT02517515|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With On-treatment Virologic Failure|On-treatment virologic failure was defined as confirmed HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ after HCV RNA < LLOQ during active treatment; confirmed increase of > 1 log(subscript)10(subscript) IU/mL above the lowest value post-baseline in HCV RNA during active treatment; or all on-treatment values of HCV RNA ≥ LLOQ with at least 6 weeks of active treatment.|up to 12 weeks|All participants who received at least 1 dose of active study drug.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858865|NCT02517515|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 24 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR24)|SVR24 was defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level less than the lower limit of quantification [<LLOQ]) 12 weeks after the last dose of active study drug. The primary efficacy endpoint was superiority of the percentage of treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced HCV subgenotype 1b (GT1b)-infected participants treated with 3-DAA (ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir [25 mg/150 mg/100 once daily] and dasabuvir [250 mg twice daily]) who achieved SVR24 compared with the historical control rate for comparable patients treated with telaprevir (TVR) plus pegylated interferon (pegIFN) and RBV.|24 weeks after the last actual dose of active study drug|All treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced participants who received at least 1 dose of active study drug; participants with missing data after backward imputation were counted as nonresponders.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858866|NCT02517515|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Sustained Virologic Response 12 Weeks Post-treatment (SVR12)|SVR12 was defined as plasma hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA) level less than the lower limit of quantification [<LLOQ]) 12 weeks after the last dose of active study drug. The primary efficacy endpoint was superiority of the percentage of treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced HCV subgenotype 1b (GT1b)-infected participants treated with 3-DAA (ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir [25 mg/150 mg/100 once daily] and dasabuvir [250 mg twice daily]) who achieved SVR12 compared with the historical control rate for comparable patients treated with telaprevir (TVR) plus pegylated interferon (pegIFN) and RBV.|12 weeks after the last actual dose of active study drug|All treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced participants who received at least 1 dose of active study drug; participants with missing data after backward imputation were counted as nonresponders.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858867|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Short Form 36 (SF-36) Response at Week 4, 16 and 24|"SF-36 is a generic indicator of health status for use in population surveys and evaluative studies of health policy. The SF-36 included 36 items in a Likert-type or forced-choice format measured on eight dimensions. The scores for each domain range from 0 to 100, with high scores indicating a better status. SF-36 responder is defined as subject reaching at least an improvement of minimum important difference (MID). The SF-36 measure dimensions and their MID includes:
Physical Functioning:4.3
Role-Physical: 3.4
Bodily Pain: 6.2
General Health: 7.2
Vitality: 6.2
Social Functioning: 6.9
Role-Emotional: 4.5
Mental Health: 6.2
Two component scores and their MID which were derived from the above mentioned 8 domains includes-:
Physical component summary: 3.4
Mental component summary: 4.6"|Week 4, 16 and 24|The analysis was performed on FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies the participants evaluable for SF-36 response at week 4, 16 and 24||Percentage of participants|||Number
858868|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With DLQI 0/1 Response at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|DLQI is a 10-item general dermatology disability index designed to assess health-related quality of life in adult subjects with skin diseases such as eczema, psoriasis, acne, and viral. The measure was self-administered and included domains of daily activities, leisure, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, treatment, and work/school. Each item had four response categories ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much). “Not relevant” was also a valid response and was scored as 0. The DLQI total score was a sum of the 10 questions. Scores ranged from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating greater impairment in health related quality of life. DLQI 0/1 response was the achievement of a DLQI score of 0 or 1.|Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed on FAS population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858869|NCT02474082|Secondary|Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|DLQI is a 10-item general dermatology disability index designed to assess health-related quality of life in adult subjects with skin diseases such as eczema, psoriasis, acne, and viral. The measure was self-administered and included domains of daily activities, leisure, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, treatment, and work/school. Each item had four response categories ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much). “Not relevant” was also a valid response and was scored as 0. The DLQI total score was a sum of the 10 questions. Scores ranged from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating greater impairment in health related quality of life.|Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed on FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies the participants evaluable for DLQI at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24.||Score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858870|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With IGA Mod. 2011 0/1-response at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The IGA mod 2011 scale has been developed based on a previous version of the scale used in secukinumab phase II studies in collaboration with health authorities, in particular the FDA. The explanations/descriptions of the points on the scale have been improved to ensure appropriate differentiation between the points. The IGA mod 2011 used in this study is static, i.e. it refers exclusively to the subject’s disease state at the time of the assessments, and does not attempt a comparison with any of the subject’s previous disease states, whether at baseline or at a previous visit.IGA mod 2011 has a scale of 0-4 with the lower scores correlating to better performance. A score of 0= clear skin, 1= almost clear skin, 2=mild, 3=moderate,4=severe. IGA 0/1 responders: who achieved score of 0/1 and improved by at least 2 points on the IGA scale compared to baseline.|Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed on FAS population.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858871|NCT02474082|Secondary|Number of Participants With Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA Mod 2011) at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|IGA mod 2011 is a global static severity rating scale referring exclusively to the participant’s disease state at the time of the assessments and don’t attempt comparison with participant’s any previous disease states at baseline or visit. IGA mod 2011 has a scale of 0-4 with the lower scores correlating to better performance. Scores used were: 0/Clear: no signs of psoriasis, Post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation may be present; 1/almost clear: Normal to pink coloration of lesions/no thickening/no to minimal focal scaling; 2/Mild: Pink to light red coloration/just detectable to mild thickening/predominantly fine scaling; 3/Moderate: Dull bright red, clearly distinguishable erythema/clearly distinguishable to moderate thickening/moderate scaling; 4/Severe: Bright to deep dark red coloration/severe thickening with hard edges/severe or coarse scaling covering almost all or all lesions.|Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed in FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies the participants evaluable for IGA mod 2011 at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858872|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) 100 Response at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|NAPSI was used to assess psoriatic nail involvement in participants with nail psoriasis. NAPSI score was calculated as total of nail matrix and nail bed score, ranging from 0-8 per nail. Total NAPSI score ranges from 0 to 80 for all fingernails. Each nail was divided with imaginary horizontal and longitudinal lines into quadrants. Each nail was given a score of 0 - 4 for nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis 0–4 (0: for none, 1: for 1 quadrant, 2: for 2 quadrants, 3: for 3 quadrants, 4: for all 4 quadrants), based on presence of any feature of nail psoriasis in that quadrant. Nail matrix psoriasis feature includes: pitting, leukonychia red spots in lunula, crumbling. Nail bed psoriasis feature includes: onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, “oil drop” (salmon patch dyschroma). NPASI 100 responders were participants who PASI 100 responders were participants who achieved complete clearance of psoriasis.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed on FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies the participants evaluable for NAPSI 100 response at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858873|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) 90 Response at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|NAPSI was used to assess psoriatic nail involvement in participants with nail psoriasis. NAPSI score was calculated as total of nail matrix and nail bed score, ranging from 0-8 per nail. Total NAPSI score ranges from 0 to 80 for all fingernails. Each nail was divided with imaginary horizontal and longitudinal lines into quadrants. Each nail was given a score of 0 - 4 for nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis 0–4 (0: for none, 1: for 1 quadrant, 2: for 2 quadrants, 3: for 3 quadrants, 4: for all 4 quadrants), based on presence of any feature of nail psoriasis in that quadrant. Nail matrix psoriasis feature includes: pitting, leukonychia red spots in lunula, crumbling. Nail bed psoriasis feature includes: onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, “oil drop” (salmon patch dyschroma). NPASI 90 responders were participants who achieved >=90% improvement (reduction) in NPASI score compared to baseline.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed on FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies the participants evaluable for NAPSI 90 response at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858874|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) 75 Response at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|NAPSI was used to assess psoriatic nail involvement in participants with nail psoriasis. NAPSI score was calculated as total of nail matrix and nail bed score, ranging from 0-8 per nail. Total NAPSI score ranges from 0 to 80 for all fingernails. Each nail was divided with imaginary horizontal and longitudinal lines into quadrants. Each nail was given a score of 0 - 4 for nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis 0–4 (0: for none, 1: for 1 quadrant, 2: for 2 quadrants, 3: for 3 quadrants, 4: for all 4 quadrants), based on presence of any feature of nail psoriasis in that quadrant. Nail matrix psoriasis feature includes: pitting, leukonychia red spots in lunula, crumbling. Nail bed psoriasis feature includes: onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, “oil drop” (salmon patch dyschroma). NPASI 75 responders were participants who achieved >=75% improvement (reduction) in NPASI score compared to baseline.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed on FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies participants evaluable for NAPSI 75 at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8,12,16, 20 and 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858875|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) 50 Response at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|NAPSI was used to assess psoriatic nail involvement in participants with nail psoriasis. NAPSI score was calculated as total of nail matrix and nail bed score, ranging from 0-8 per nail. Total NAPSI score ranges from 0 to 80 for all fingernails. Each nail was divided with imaginary horizontal and longitudinal lines into quadrants. Each nail was given a score of 0 - 4 for nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis 0–4 (0: for none, 1: for 1 quadrant, 2: for 2 quadrants, 3: for 3 quadrants, 4: for all 4 quadrants), based on presence of any feature of nail psoriasis in that quadrant. Nail matrix psoriasis feature includes: pitting, leukonychia red spots in lunula, crumbling. Nail bed psoriasis feature includes: onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, “oil drop” (salmon patch dyschroma). NPASI 50 responders were participants who achieved >=50% improvement (reduction) in NPASI score compared to baseline.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed on FAS population. Here ‘number analyzed’ signifies participants evaluable for NAPSI 50 at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,12,16, 20 and 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858876|NCT02474082|Secondary|Body Surface Area (BSA) at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The Body surface area (BSA) affected by plaque-type psoriasis was the total of percentages of areas affected, including head, trunk, upper limbs and lower limbs. Each reported percentage was multiplied by its respective body region corresponding factor (head = 0.1, trunk = 0.3, upper limbs = 0.2, lower limbs = 0.4). The resulting four percentages were added to estimate the total BSA affected by plaque-type psoriasis.|Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed in FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies participants evaluable for BSA at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24.||Percentage of area||Standard Deviation|Mean
858877|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 100 Response at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|PASI score is an average degree of severity of signs in head [H], trunk [T], upper limbs [U] and lower limbs [L], assessed separately for erythema [E], thickening (plaque elevation, induration) [I], and scaling (desquamation) [D]. Area [A] covered by lesions on each body region was estimated as a percentage (%) of total area of that particular body region and was assigned a score of 0=0%; 1=1-9%; 2=10-29%; 3=30-49%; 4=50-69%; 5=70-89%; 6=90-100%. The head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs correspond to approximately 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% of the body surface area, respectively. PASI score was calculated as: PASI = 0.1(EH+IH+DH) AH + 0.2(EU+IU+DU) AU + 0.3(ET+IT+DT) AT + 0.4(EL+IL+DL) AL. PASI scores can range from 0 (no signs) to a maximum of 72.0. PASI 100 responders were participants who achieved complete clearance of psoriasis (PASI=0).|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed in FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies participants evaluable for PASI 100 at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858897|NCT02302092|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Laboratory Values|The number of participants with any markedly abnormal (above or below normal ranges) standard safety laboratory values was collected throughout study.|Day 21|The safety population included all participants who received any dose of planned study medication.||participants|||Number
858878|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 Response at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|PASI score is an average degree of severity of signs in head [H], trunk [T], upper limbs [U] and lower limbs [L], assessed separately for erythema [E], thickening (plaque elevation, induration) [I], and scaling (desquamation) [D]. Area [A] covered by lesions on each body region was estimated as a percentage (%) of total area of that particular body region and was assigned a score of 0=0%; 1=1-9%; 2=10-29%; 3=30-49%; 4=50-69%; 5=70-89%; 6=90-100%. The head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs correspond to approximately 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% of the body surface area, respectively. PASI score was calculated as: PASI = 0.1(EH+IH+DH) AH + 0.2(EU+IU+DU) AU + 0.3(ET+IT+DT) AT + 0.4(EL+IL+DL) AL. PASI scores can range from 0 (no signs) to a maximum of 72.0. PASI 90 responders were participants who achieved >=90% improvement (reduction) in PASI score compared to baseline.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed in FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies participants evaluable for PASI 90 at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858879|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 Response at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 20|PASI score is an average degree of severity of signs in head [H], trunk [T], upper limbs [U] and lower limbs [L], assessed separately for erythema [E], thickening (plaque elevation, induration) [I], and scaling (desquamation) [D]. Area [A] covered by lesions on each body region was estimated as a percentage (%) of total area of that particular body region and was assigned a score of 0=0%; 1=1-9%; 2=10-29%; 3=30-49%; 4=50-69%; 5=70-89%; 6=90-100%. The head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs correspond to approximately 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% of the body surface area, respectively. PASI score was calculated as: PASI = 0.1(EH+IH+DH) AH + 0.2(EU+IU+DU) AU + 0.3(ET+IT+DT) AT + 0.4(EL+IL+DL) AL. PASI scores can range from 0 (no signs) to a maximum of 72.0. PASI 75 responders were participants who achieved >=75% improvement (reduction) in PASI score compared to baseline.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 20|The analysis was performed in FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies participants evaluable for PASI 75 at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 20.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858880|NCT02474082|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 50 Response at Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|PASI score is an average degree of severity of signs in head [H], trunk [T], upper limbs [U] and lower limbs [L], assessed separately for erythema [E], thickening (plaque elevation, induration) [I], and scaling (desquamation) [D]. Area [A] covered by lesions on each body region was estimated as a percentage (%) of total area of that particular body region and was assigned a score of 0=0%; 1=1-9%; 2=10-29%; 3=30-49%; 4=50-69%; 5=70-89%; 6=90-100%. The head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs correspond to approximately 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% of the body surface area, respectively. PASI score was calculated as: PASI = 0.1(EH+IH+DH) AH + 0.2(EU+IU+DU) AU + 0.3(ET+IT+DT) AT + 0.4(EL+IL+DL) AL. PASI scores can range from 0 (no signs) to a maximum of 72.0. PASI 50 responders were participants who achieved >=50% improvement (reduction) in PASI score compared to baseline.|Baseline, Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24|The analysis was performed in FAS population. Here 'number analyzed' signifies participants evaluable for PASI 50 at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858881|NCT02474082|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 Response at Week 24|PASI score is an average degree of severity of signs in head [H], trunk [T], upper limbs [U] and lower limbs [L], assessed separately for erythema [E], thickening (plaque elevation, induration) [I], and scaling (desquamation) [D]. Area [A] covered by lesions on each body region was estimated as a percentage (%) of total area of that particular body region and was assigned a score of 0=0%; 1=1-9%; 2=10-29%; 3=30-49%; 4=50-69%; 5=70-89%; 6=90-100%. The head and neck, upper limbs, trunk and lower limbs correspond to approximately 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% of the body surface area, respectively. PASI score was calculated as: PASI = 0.1(EH+IH+DH) AH + 0.2(EU+IU+DU) AU + 0.3(ET+IT+DT) AT + 0.4(EL+IL+DL) AL. PASI scores can range from 0 (no signs) to a maximum of 72.0. PASI 75 responders were participants who achieved >=75% improvement (reduction) in PASI score compared to baseline.|Baseline, Week 24|The analysis was performed in Full analysis set (FAS) population, defined as all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858882|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in Additional Self-Report Physical Activity Items|Number of minutes per week, on average, they are completing strengthening, stretching, and aerobic exercises. The minimum score is 0, and there is no maximum score; higher scores indicate more weekly activity.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||minutes per week||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858883|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE)|"The Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE) is a self-report, 12-item scale that measures level occupational, household, and leisure activity during a one-week period. This scale was particularly developed for use among older adults; although all participants in the proposed study will not be age 65 or over, patients with knee OA typically have more limited physical activity than the general population. Therefore we believe this scale will be more applicable to our participant group than scales that were developed for younger adults.
The typical range for the total PASE score is 0-400, with higher scores indicating greater activity."|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858884|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in the The Brief Fear of Movement Scale|The Brief Fear of Movement Scale is a six item scale for assessing fear of movement in OA. The scale specifically assesses activity avoidance due to pain-related fear of movement. All items are measured on a 4-point scale from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree.” The score ranges from 0-24 with higher scores indicating more fear of movement.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858895|NCT02302092|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Change in Physical Examination Findings|Physical examination consists of examinations of the following body systems: (1) cardiovascular system; (2) dermatologic system (3) ears, nose, throat; (4) extremities; (5) eyes; (6) gastrointestinal system; (7) genitourinary system; (8) lymph nodes; (9) musculoskeletal system; (10) nervous system; (11) respiratory system.|Day 1 up to Day 21|The safety population included all participants who received any dose of planned study medication.||participants|||Number
858885|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in The PROMIS Fatigue Instrument|The PROMIS Fatigue instruments evaluate a range of self-reported symptoms, from mild subjective feelings of tiredness to an overwhelming, debilitating, and sustained sense of exhaustion that likely decreases one’s ability to execute daily activities and function normally in family or social roles. Fatigue is divided into the experience of fatigue (frequency, duration, and intensity) and the impact of fatigue on physical, mental, and social activities. It assesses fatigue over the past seven days, This scale includes 8 items, each measured on a 5-point Likert scale. Per PROMIS scoring instructions, raw scores are converted into standardized t-scores with a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10. T-scores can range from 33.1-77.8; higher scores indicate worse fatigue.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858886|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in The PROMIS Sleep-related Impairment Instrument|The PROMIS adult sleep related impairment item bank focuses on self-reported perceptions of alertness, sleepiness, and tiredness during usual waking hours, and the perceived functional impairments during wakefulness associated with sleep problems or impaired alertness. It assesses sleep-related impairment over the past seven days. This scale includes 8 items, each measured on a 5-point Likert scale. Per PROMIS scoring instructions, raw scores are converted into standardized t-scores with a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10. T-scores can range from 30.5-77.6; higher scores indicate worse sleep impairment.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858887|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to Month 12 in The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)|The KOOS is a patient-reported outcome measurement instrument, developed to assess the patient’s opinion about their knee and associated problems. Five KOOS subscale scores were administered: Pain (9 items), Function in daily living (17 items), Function in Sport and Recreation (5 items), and knee-related Quality of Life (4 items). All items are scored on 5-point Likert scales. A normalized score (100 indicating no symptoms and 0 indicating extreme symptoms) is calculated for each subscale|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858888|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in the Patient Health Questionnaire-8|Depressive symptoms and severity will be assessed using the PHQ-8, a reliable and valid measure of depression71. The PHQ-8 is an eight-item survey derived from the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) diagnostic tool, and consists of items corresponding to the depression criteria listed in the Diagnostic and Statistics Manual Fourth Edition (DSM-IV). Each of the eight questions is scored as 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day), so that total scores range from 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858889|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in Objective Physical Function- Timed Up and Go|One of 4 tests that objectively assessed physical function. These 4 tests included: unilateral stand time; time to rise from a chair and return to the seated position for 30 seconds; timed up and go- rise from a seated position, walk a short distance and return to seated position; and a 2 minute step test. For this outcome measure, the timed up and go, there are no minimum or maximum scores (participants complete the task as quickly as they are able); shorter (lower) times indicate better function.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858890|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in Objective Physical Function - 30 Second Chair Stand|One of 4 tests that objectively assessed physical function. These 4 tests included: unilateral stand time; time to rise from a chair and return to the seated position for 30 seconds; timed up and go- rise from a seated position, walk a short distance and return to seated position; and a 2 minute step test. For this outcome measure, the 30 second chair stand test, the minimum is 0 stands and there is no maximum scale score (participants complete as many stands as they can in 30 seconds; greater numbers of stands indicate better function.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||number of stands from a chair in 30 sec||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858891|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in Objective Physical Function- Unilateral Stand Time|One of 4 tests that objectively assessed physical function. These 4 tests included: unilateral stand time; time to rise from a chair and return to the seated position for 30 seconds; timed up and go- rise from a seated position, walk a short distance and return to seated position; and a 2 minute step test. For this outcome measure, the unilateral stand test, scores scan range from 0-10 seconds, with higher time indicating better balance.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||seconds||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858892|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in Objective Physical Function - 2 Minute Step Test|One of 4 tests that objectively assessed physical function. These 4 tests included: unilateral stand time; time to rise from a chair and return to the seated position for 30 seconds; timed up and go- rise from a seated position, walk a short distance and return to seated position; and a 2 minute step test. For this outcome measure, the 2 minute step test, the minimum is 0 steps and there is no maximum scale score (participants complete as many steps as they can in 2 minutes); greater steps indicate better function.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||number of steps taken in 2 minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858893|NCT02312713|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in the Satisfaction With Physical Function Scale|This is a validated, 5-item questionnaire that assesses patients’ satisfaction with their ability to complete basic functional tasks that are often affected by lower extremity OA, including stair-climbing, walking, doing housework (light and heavy, and lifting and carrying). All 5 items are rated on a 7 point scale ranging from Very Dissatisfied (-3) Very Satisfied (+3). The total scale ranges from -15 to +15,with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction with function.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858894|NCT02312713|Primary|Change From Baseline to Month 4 and Change From Baseline to 12 Month in Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) Index Score|Change over time in the primary outcome measure for this study, the WOMAC is a measure of lower extremity pain (5 items), stiffness (2 items), and function (17 items). The scale ranges from 0-96 with higher scores indicating worse symptoms and function.|baseline, 4 months, and 12 months|||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
858898|NCT02302092|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Treatment-Emergent-Adverse Events (TEAEs)|An Adverse Event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a drug; it does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (eg, a clinically significant abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a drug, whether or not it is considered related to the drug. A treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) is defined as an adverse event with an onset that occurs after receiving study drug. A Serious Adverse Event (SAE) A serious is any experience that suggests a significant hazard, contraindication, side effect or precaution that: results in death, is life-threatening, required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or is medically significant.|Baseline up to Day 30|The safety population included all participants who received any dose of planned study medication.||participants|||Number
858899|NCT02302092|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Superinfection at the EOT and TOC Visits|A urine sample was collected from the participants at the EOT (Days 7 to 14) and TOC (Days 14 to 21) visits to determine the level of uropathogen. Cultures of the urine sample were processed by using a calibrated loop to identify a quantitative count of bacteria, with a lower limit of 10^4 CFU/mL. A superinfection was defined as growth of a uropathogen other than the original pathogen at a level greater than or equal to 10^4 CFU/mL at any time during the course of active therapy.|Baseline, Day 7 to 14 and 14 to 21|Due to premature trial termination and small sample size, data for superinfection due to particular pathogen numbers in different time periods was not determined.|||||
858900|NCT02302092|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a New Infection at the EOT and TOC Visits|A urine sample was collected from the participants at the EOT (Days 7 to 14) and TOC (Days 14 to 21) visits to determine the level of uropathogen. Cultures of the urine sample were processed by using a calibrated loop to identify a quantitative count of bacteria, with a lower limit of 10^4 CFU/mL. A new infection was defined as the isolation and growth of a uropathogen other than the original pathogen.|Baseline, Days 7 to 14 and 14 to 21|Due to premature trial termination and small sample size, data for new infection due to particular pathogen numbers in different time periods was not determined.|||||
858901|NCT02302092|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Microbiologic Persistence of the Unique Pathogen at the EOT and TOC Visits|A urine sample was collected from the participants at the EOT (Days 7 to 14) and TOC (Days 14 to 21) visits to determine the level of uropathogen. Cultures of the urine sample was processed by using a calibrated loop to identify a quantitative count of bacteria, with a lower limit of 10^4 CFU/mL. Microbiological response at the TOC visit was be based on the same grades as for the EOT visit. The infection was considered to be persistent if the level of the uropathogen has increased by greater than or equal to 10^4 CFU/mL from the time of study entry to that of the EOT and TOC visits.|Baseline, Days 7 to 14 and 14 to 21|Due to premature trial termination and small sample size, data for persistence of particular pathogen numbers in different time periods was not determined.|||||
858902|NCT02302092|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Microbiologic Eradication of the Unique Pathogen at the EOT and TOC Visits|A urine sample was collected from the participants at the EOT (Days 7 to 14) and TOC (Day 14 to 21) visits to determine the level of uropathogen. Cultures of the urine sample were processed by using a calibrated loop to identify a quantitative count of bacteria, with a lower limit of 10^4 CFU/mL. Microbiological response at the TOC visit was based on the same grades as for the EOT visit. The infection was considered to be eradicated if all uropathogens isolated at study entry at a level equal to or greater than 10^4 CFU/mL have decreased to less than 10^4 CFU/mL.|Baseline, Days 7 to 14 and 14 to 21|Due to premature trial termination and small sample size, data for eradication for particular pathogen numbers in different time periods was not determined.|||||
858903|NCT02302092|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Clinical Resolution of Symptoms of a cUTI at Visit 3, TOC and Late Follow-up (LFU) Visits|At Visit 3 (Day 3) and at the TOC (Days 14 to 21) and LFU visits (Day 30), the Investigator collected information about each symptom and performed a judgement about the participant's status. Clinical symptoms present at trial entry were considered to be resolved if the participant has no pyuria; no fever; no malaise, flank pain, back pain, and/or costo-vertebral angle pain or tenderness; and no symptoms of dysuria, urinary urgency, urinary frequency, suprapubic discomfort, new urinary incontinence, or worsening of pre-existing incontinence. Resolution of all clinical symptoms of cUTI were assessed relative to baseline.|Baseline, Days 3, 14 to 21 and 30|The micro-ITT population included all participants who were randomized and had a baseline bacterial pathogen on culture of urine that causes UTI against which the investigational drug has antibacterial activity.||percentage of participants|||Number
858904|NCT02302092|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Success at the EOT and Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visits|A urine sample was collected at EOT (Days 7 to 14) and TOC (Days 14 to 21) visits to determine level of uropathogen. Cultures of urine sample were processed by calibrated loop to identify a quantitative count of bacteria, with a lower limit of 10^4 colony forming units per milliliter (CFU/mL). Microbiological success was defined as bacterial uropathogen level of <10^4 CFU/mL. Microbiological response was categorized as:microbiological eradication/persistence/new infection/superinfection. An infection was eradicated if all uropathogens isolated at study entry at a level ≥10^4 CFU/mL have decreased to <10^4 CFU/mL, persistent if level of uropathogen has increased by ≥10^4 CFU/Ml. A new infection, if there is isolation and growth of a uropathogen other than original pathogen and superinfection if there is growth of a uropathogen other than original pathogen at a level ≥10^4 CFU/mL. Microbiological success was assessed relative to baseline.|Baseline, Days 7 to 14 and 14 to 21|The micro-ITT population included all participants who were randomized and had a baseline bacterial pathogen on culture of urine that causes UTI against which the investigational drug has antibacterial activity.||percentage of participants|||Number
858920|NCT02224846|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Normal Erectile Functioning|Participants achieving a normal erectile functioning (defined as having an IIEF-EF Domain score of >=26) at Month 1 and Month 3.|Month 1, Month 3|All enrolled subjects who fulfill the study entry criteria, receive at least one dose of tadalafil, and have both baseline and postbaseline data.||Percentage of partcipants|||Number
859149|NCT01141712|Secondary|Lymphoma Disease-free Survival|This will be assessed in patients with CR. Patients are considered failure for this end point if they die or if they relapse after complete remission. Patients with no history of relapse or death after complete remission are censored at time of last follow up.|Year 2|No data collected to analyze this outcome measure.|||||
858905|NCT02302092|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Resolution of All Clinical Symptoms of a Complicated Urinary Tract Infection (cUTI) at the End of Treatment (EOT) Visit|At the EOT visit (Days 7 to 14), the Investigator collected information about each symptom and performed a judgement about the participant's status. Clinical symptoms present at trial entry were considered to be resolved if the participant has no pyuria; no fever; no malaise, flank pain, back pain, and/or costo-vertebral angle pain or tenderness; and no symptoms of dysuria, urinary urgency, urinary frequency, suprapubic discomfort, new urinary incontinence, or worsening of pre-existing incontinence. Resolution of all clinical symptoms of cUTI were assessed relative to baseline.|Baseline and Days 7 to 14|The micro-intent to treat (ITT) population included all participants who were randomized and had a baseline bacterial pathogen on culture of urine that causes UTI against which the investigational drug has antibacterial activity.||percentage of participants|||Number
858906|NCT02285998|Secondary|Number of Participants With Systemic Reactogenicity|Solicited events of systemic reactogenicity reported during Day 0-7.|Days 0 through 7|Solicited systemic reactogenicity events include subjects who recorded any systemic reaction data.||participants|||Number
858907|NCT02285998|Secondary|Measure of Post-vaccination HAI GMTs|GMT titers for all four antigens in a preselected subset of subjects.|Days 0 through 28|The immunogenicity population includes all randomized subjects at the specific study sites pre-selected for serology who received study vaccine and provided serum samples on Days 0 and 28 for serologic testing.||titer||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
858908|NCT02285998|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Medically-attended Adverse Events (MAEs)|"Serious adverse events (SAEs) and medically-attended adverse events (MAEs) occurring during the period of follow-up through the influenza season (at least 6 months post-vaccination).
A MAE is an event that prompts an unplanned visit to a medical professional for diagnosis and/or treatment."|Day 0 through and up to 32 weeks post vaccination|The safety population includes all randomized and vaccinated subjects who provided any safety data (solicited or unsolicited) following administration of study vaccine.||participants|||Number
858909|NCT02285998|Secondary|Number of Participants With Unsolicited Adverse Events|Unsolicited adverse events reported in the 28 days following vaccine administration.|Days 0 through 28|The safety population includes all randomized and vaccinated subjects who provided any safety data (solicited or unsolicited) following administration of study vaccine.||participants|||Number
858910|NCT02285998|Secondary|Number of Participants With Local Injection Site Reactogenicity|Solicited events of injection site reactogenicity reported during Day 0-7.|Days 0 through 7|Solicited local reactogenicity events include subjects who recorded any injection site reaction data.||participants|||Number
858911|NCT02285998|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Seroconversion|Seroconversion rates (SCR) for all four antigens in a preselected subset of subjects.|Days 0 through 28|The immunogenicity population includes all randomized subjects at the specific study sites pre-selected for serology who received study vaccine and provided serum samples on Days 0 and 28 for serologic testing.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858912|NCT02285998|Secondary|Number of Participants With rtPCR-confirmed CDC-defined Influenza-Like Illness|rtPCR-confirmed CDC-defined ILI that begins at least 14 days post-vaccination caused by any influenza strain.|14 days post vaccination through and up to 32 weeks post vaccination|The efficacy population includes all randomized subjects who received study vaccine and provided any follow-up for ILI beginning at least 14 days following vaccine administration.||participants|||Number
858913|NCT02285998|Secondary|Number of Participants With Culture-confirmed CDC-defined Influenza-Like Illness|"Culture-confirmed CDC-defined Influenza-Like Illness (ILI) that begins at least 14 days post-vaccination caused by an influenza strain (identified from the same clinical sample) antigenically matched to those in the study vaccines.
CDC-defined ILI is defined as body temperature ≥100°F accompanied by cough and/or sore throat."|14 days post vaccination through and up to 32 weeks post vaccination|The efficacy population includes all randomized subjects who received study vaccine and provided any follow-up for ILI beginning at least 14 days following vaccine administration.||participants|||Number
858914|NCT02285998|Secondary|Number of Participants With Culture-confirmed Influenza-Like Illness|"Culture-confirmed protocol-defined Influenza-Like Illness (ILI) that begins at least 14 days post-vaccination caused by an influenza strain (identified from the same clinical sample) antigenically matched to those strains represented in the study vaccines.
Protocol-defined ILI is defined as at least one of the following respiratory symptoms accompanied by at least one of the following systemic symptoms:
Respiratory symptoms: sore throat, cough, sputm production, wheezing, difficulty breathing Systemic symptoms: fever, chills (shivering), tiredness (fatigue), headache, myalgia (muscle ache)"|14 days post vaccination through and up to 32 weeks post vaccination|The efficacy population includes all randomized subjects who received study vaccine and provided any follow-up for ILI beginning at least 14 days following vaccine administration.||participants|||Number
858915|NCT02285998|Primary|Number of Participants With rtPCR-confirmed Influenza-Like Illness|rtPCR-confirmed, protocol-defined Influenza-Like Illness (ILI) caused by any influenza strain that begins at least 14 days post-vaccination|14 days post vaccination through and up to 32 weeks post vaccination|The efficacy population includes all randomized subjects who received study vaccine and provided any follow-up for ILI beginning at least 14 days following vaccine administration.||participants|||Number
858916|NCT02224846|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants With Yes Responses to Global Assessment Questions(GAQ)1 and GAQ2"||Month 24||09/2018||||
858917|NCT02224846|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants With Yes Responses to Global Assessment Questions(GAQ)1 and GAQ2"|"Participants with “yes” responses to GAQ Question 1 (GAQ1) and GAQ Question 2 (GAQ2) of the GAQ questionnaire at Month 3 and Month 12.
GAQ1: Has the treatment you have been taking during this study improved your erections? GAQ-2: “If yes, has the treatment improved your ability to engage in sexual activity?”"|Month 3, Month12|All randomized participants who had evaluable data for Global Assessment Questions(GAQ)1 and GAQ2.||percentage of participants|||Number
858918|NCT02224846|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Normal Erectile Functioning of 5 mg Tadalafil Treatments||Month 18, Month 24||09/2018||||
858919|NCT02224846|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Normal Erectile Functioning of 5 mg Tadalafil Treatments|Participants achieving a normal erectile functioning (defined as having an IIEF-EF Domain score of >=26) at Month 6 and Month 12.|Month 6, Month 12|All enrolled subjects who fulfill the study entry criteria, receive at least one dose of tadalafil, and have both baseline and postbaseline data.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858921|NCT02224846|Secondary|"Percentage of Participants With Yes Responses to Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) Diary"|Participant-assessed diary has 5 questions: 4 of the 5 questions were analyzed. Q2: successful penetration, Q3: successful intercourse, Q4: satisfied with erection, and Q5: satisfied with sexual experience) for each sexual encounter made over a specified period of time. SEP Q1-Q5 scores were determined as the percentage of 'Yes' responses to each of the 5 questions out of all sexual attempts recorded during the time period.|Month 1, Month 3|All enrolled subjects who fulfill the study entry criteria, receive at least one dose of tadalafil, and have both baseline and postbaseline data.||Percentage of participants||Standard Deviation|Mean
858922|NCT02224846|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the IIEF-EF Domain Questionnaire Score of 5 mg Tadalafil Treatments||Baseline, Month 18; Baseline, Month 24||09/2018||||
858923|NCT02224846|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the IIEF-EF Domain Questionnaire Score of 5 mg Tadalafil Treatments|IIEF- EF is the sum of Questions 1-5 and 15 of the IIEF. Questions 1-5 are scored 0 (no sexual activity for Question 1, no sexual stimulation for Question 2 and did not attempt intercourse for Questions 3-5) to 5 (high erectile function) and Question 15 is scored 1 (very low confidence) to 5 (very high confidence), for a total score ranging from 1 to 30. Higher scores represent better erectile function. Least Squares (LS) mean of the change from baseline is from Mixed effect Model Repeat Measurement (MMRM) model. The model included covariates baseline + visit + pooled investigator + baseline*visit, where participant is a random effect.|Baseline, Month 6; Baseline, Month 12|All enrolled participants who fulfill the study entry criteria, receive at least one dose of tadalafil, and have both baseline and postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858924|NCT02224846|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the International Index of Erectile Function- Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) Domain Questionnaire Score|IIEF- EF is the sum of Questions 1-5 and 15 of the IIEF. Questions 1-5 are scored 0 (no sexual activity for Question 1, no sexual stimulation for Question 2 and did not attempt intercourse for Questions 3-5) to 5 (high erectile function) and Question 15 is scored 1 (very low confidence) to 5 (very high confidence), for a total score ranging from 1 to 30. Higher scores represent better erectile function. Least Squares (LS) mean of the change from baseline is from Mixed effect Model Repeat Measurement (MMRM) model.The model included covariates baseline + visit + pooled investigator + baseline*visit, where participant is a random effect.|Baseline, Month 1; Baseline, Month 3|All enrolled participants who fulfill the study entry criteria, receive at least one dose of tadalafil, and have both baseline and postbaseline data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858925|NCT02224846|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing at Least One Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (Serious or Non-Serious)|A Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) was defined as an event that first occurs or worsens (increases in severity) after baseline, regardless of causality or severity. The percentage of participants with TEAEs was calculated by dividing the number of participants with at least 1 TEAE over the 12-Month treatment period by the total number of participants analyzed, multiplied by 100%. A summary of serious and other non-serious adverse events, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.|Baseline through Month 12|All enrolled participants who fulfill the study entry criteria and who receive at least one dose of tadalafil.||Percentage of participants|||Number
858926|NCT02211534|Secondary|Change in Pain Intensity - Average Pain Intensity|Pain Intensity (PI): a validated 11-point Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) with scores (0-10) collected as patient-reported outcomes on an electronic diary (ePRO).|At Days 75, 90, 150 and 240, as compared to Baseline|Data were not collected.|||||
858927|NCT02211534|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Peripheral Edema - Maximal Circumference of Calf (cm)|The maximal circumference of the calf and circumference of the thigh at 10 cm and 15 cm cranial to the superior pole of the patella of the index knee will be measured using a tape measure.|Day 75|Discrepancy in Numbers of Participants Analyzed is due to the number of subjects completing the Day 75 assessment. Not all subjects that were enrolled and had baseline data captured completed the Day 75 assessment. Subjects without a Day 75 assessment were left out of the analysis.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
858928|NCT02211534|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Range of Motion (ROM)|The degree of passive (movement of the knee with the aid of study personnel) and active (subject moving the knee) knee flexion and extension tolerated by the subject will be recorded. ROM will be assessed in the sitting position using a goniometer.|Days 0 (Baseline) and Day 75|||degrees of motion||Standard Deviation|Mean
858929|NCT02211534|Secondary|Analgesic Consumption|Consumption of opioid analgesics in the preceding 24 hours will be self-reported by the subject in the ePRO diary on a daily basis during the 10-day run-in period, treatment period and through Day 75. The results below display the difference in opioid analgesic consumption from baseline to Day 56-60. Subject recorded the number of tablets consumed.|Day 56 to Day 60 (compared to baseline)|Number of Participants Analyzed differs from numbers above due to the number of subjects reporting opioid analgesic consumption in their ePRO diary.||Number of tablets taken||Standard Deviation|Mean
858930|NCT02211534|Secondary|Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)|"Responder Analysis at Day 75 (patents stating they are Improved to Much Improved) using the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). PGIC is a 7-point validated categorical scale of overall change in status since initiation of treatment with the study device. PGIC allows subjects to integrate into one overall evaluation the different aspects of their response to treatment, including pain reduction, improvement in functioning and side effects. Subjects select one of the following response at the end of treatment: Very Much Worse, Much Worse, Minimally Worse, No Change, Minimally Improved, Improved, or Much Improved."|Day 75|Discrepancy in Numbers of Participants Analyzed is due to the number of subjects completing the Day 75 assessment. Not all subjects that were enrolled and had baseline data captured completed the Day 75 assessment. Subjects without a Day 75 assessment were left out of the analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858931|NCT02211534|Secondary|Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)|"Responders: Defined as subjects with a 5-point decrease in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) score.
BDI is a validated self-reported assessment of current symptoms of depressive disorders, with total scores ranging from 0 to 63. The BDI scale consists of 21 groups of statements with each score/response ranging from 0 to 3. Higher scores represent greater depression. The BDI was conducted at baseline prior to study device treatments and again at Day 61."|Responders at Day 75 (compared to baseline)|Discrepancy in Numbers of Participants Analyzed is due to the number of subjects completing the Day 75 assessment. Not all subjects that were enrolled and had baseline data captured completed the Day 75 assessment. Subjects without a Day 75 assessment were left out of the analysis.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858932|NCT02211534|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)|Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): a validated knee-specific instrument that measures the short-term and long-term symptoms and function associated with knee injury. KOOS consists of 5 categories: pain, other symptoms, function in daily living, function in sport and recreation, and knee related quality of life. Patients are asked to answer questions relating to these categories and respond with Never/None/Not at all, Rarely/Monthly/Mild, Sometimes/Moderate/Weekly, Often/Severe/Daily or Always/Extreme/Totally/Constantly. Each response gets a score from 0 to 4. A normalized score (100 indicating no symptoms and 0 indicating extreme symptoms) is calculated for each subscale. The mean change in score from baseline to Day 75 is displayed below.|Mean change from Day 0 to Day 75|Discrepancy in Numbers of Participants Analyzed is due to the number of subjects completing the Day 75 assessment. Not all subjects that were enrolled and had baseline data captured completed the Day 75 assessment. Subjects without a Day 75 assessment were left out of the analysis.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858933|NCT02211534|Primary|Change in Pain Intensity|"Percent change from Baseline in Pain Intensity (PI): a validated 11-point Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) with scores (0-10) collected as patient-reported outcomes on an electronic diary (ePRO). A score of 0 represents 'No Pain' while a score of 10 represents Worst Pain Imaginable."|Assessed at Day 60 as compared to Baseline|Discrepancy in Numbers of Participants Analyzed is due to the number of subjects completing the Day 60 assessment. Not all subjects that were enrolled and had baseline data captured completed the Day 60 assessment. Subjects without a Day 60 assessment were left out of the analysis.||Units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858934|NCT02136004|Secondary|Procedure Success|Secondary efficacy endpoint - attainment of final arterial hemostasis using any method and freedom from major access site closure-related complications through 30 days|through 30 days +/- 7 days|All subjects enrolled.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858935|NCT02136004|Secondary|Rate of Combined Minor Access Site Closure-related Complications|Secondary safety endpoint - rate of combined minor access site closure-related complications|through 30 +/- 7 days|All subjects enrolled||complications|||Number
858936|NCT02136004|Secondary|Device Success|Secondary efficacy endpoint - the ability to deploy the system, deliver the implant, and achieve arterial hemostasis with the Closer VSS alone or with post-hemostasis adjunctive compression|procedural, usually within 15 minutes of enrollment|All subjects enrolled||Participants|||Count of Participants
858937|NCT02136004|Secondary|Time to Hospital Discharge|Secondary efficacy endpoint - elapsed time between Closer VSS delivery system removal and when subject is actually physically discharged from the hospital ward|through hospital discharge, usually within 24 hours|All subjects enrolled||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858938|NCT02136004|Secondary|Time to Discharge Eligibility|Secondary efficacy endpoint - elapsed time between Closer VSS delivery system removal and when subject's access site is assessed to be hemodynamically stable, as determined by the investigator or his/her designee(s)|prior to hospital discharge, usually within 24 hours|All subjects enrolled||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858939|NCT02136004|Secondary|Time to Ambulation|Secondary efficacy endpoint - elapsed time between the Closer VSS delivery system removal and when subject stands and walks 20 feet without evidence of arterial re-bleeding from the access site|prior to hospital discharge, usually within 24 hours|All subjects enrolled||hours||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858940|NCT02136004|Primary|Rate of Combined Major Access Site Closure-related Complications|Primary safety endpoint - rate of combined major access site closure-related complications|Through 30 days +/- 7 days|All subjects enrolled||complications|||Number
858941|NCT02136004|Primary|Time to Hemostasis|Primary effectiveness endpoint - elapsed time between the Closer VSS delivery system removal and first observed and confirmed arterial hemostasis|procedural, usually within 15 minutes of enrollment|All subjects enrolled||minutes||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
858942|NCT02108951|Secondary|Mean M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory - Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (MDASI-CML)|"Quality of life was assessed using the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory - Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (MDASI-CML) self-administered questionnaire for adult CML patients. The questionnaire consisted of 13 core questions in part I measuring the severity of symptoms, 6 questions in part 2 assessing the interference of symptoms on daily living. The CML component of the MDASI provided an additional 7 CML-specific symptom items: diarrhea, swelling, rash/skin change, muscle soreness/cramping, bruising/bleeding easily, malaise, and headache. In part I (13 questions) and the CML component (7 questions) each question was scored from 0 to 10 where 0 indicates a symptom is not present and 10 indicate the symptom is as bad as you can imagine. For part 1 the total score can therefore range from 0 to 130 and for CML 0 to 70. Part 2 is also recorded on a 0 to 10 scale, but 0 now indicates that the symptom “did not interfere” and 10 “interfered completely”. The total score can range from 0 to 60."|Baseline, week 12, 24, 48, 96|The full analysis set (FAS) consists of all patients enrolled into the study. 'n' in the categories represents the number of patients with evaluable data for MDASI part 1/MDASI part 2/CML component at different time points. Week 96 includes end of study results for patients that did not complete the study.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858943|NCT02108951|Secondary|Number of Patients With Events Reported at Baseline That Have Shown an Improvement in Non-hematological AE Severity Compared to Week 12 Visit|The total number of patients that have showed improvement with respect to CTCAE grades at the time of the 12-week visit are reported. Improved is defined as prior to, or at the time of the 12-week visit, the AE has completely resolved.|Baseline, week 12 (month 3)|The Safety Set (SS) consisted of all patients in the FAS who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline safety assessment.||Participants|||Count of Participants
858944|NCT02108951|Secondary|Time to Event Free Survival (EFS)|"EFS was defined as the time from date of baseline visit to the first occurrence of any of the following: Disease progression, treatment failure or death from any cause, whichever was earlier. Patients who did not have an event of interest were censored at earliest of the following:
the date of the 24-month visit;
the date of loss to follow-up;
the date of withdrawal from the study for any reason other than lack of efficacy/progressive disease, tolerance to reduced dose or death"|96 weeks (24 months)|There were no patients in the study who were recorded as experiencing treatment failure.|||||
858970|NCT01911169|Secondary|Change in Interferon Signature|This outcome was not measured as planned|from zero to sixteen weeks||||||
858945|NCT02108951|Secondary|Time to Progression-free Survival (PFS)|"PFS was defined as the time from the date of baseline visit to the date of earliest progression-defining event: namely progression (or withdrawal due to progression to blast crisis (BC) or accelerated phase (AP) disease), or death from any cause.
Patients who did not progress were censored at earliest of the following:
the date of the 24-month visit;
the date of loss to follow-up;
the date of discontinuation of study treatment for any reason other than progression to BC, or AP disease, or death"|96 weeks (24 months)|The FAS consists of all patients enrolled into the study. There were no withdrawals due to progression to BC or AP disease, and there were no recorded deaths during the study.|||||
858946|NCT02108951|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Time to Deep Molecular Response (MR4.5)|"Breakpoint cluster region - Abelson murine leukemia (BCR-ABL) levels is measured in patients by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) testing of peripheral blood by the 24 months following the commencement of nilotinib therapy. MR4.5 corresponds to a
BCR-ABL ratio 0.0032% IS using RQ-PCR. The derivation of time to molecular response for patients in the study was measured from the date of first nilotinib use, defined as follows:
Days to MR4.5 = date of assessment where BCR-ABL ratio is 0.0032% IS - date of baseline + 1."|96 weeks (24 months)|The full analysis set (FAS) consists of all patients enrolled into the study. N represents all patients in FAS who achieved MR4.5.||days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
858947|NCT02108951|Secondary|Kinetics of Molecular Response: Percentage of Patients With MR4.5 Based on BCR-ABL Over Time After the Switch to Nilotinib|MR4.5 corresponds to a BCR-ABL ratio 0.0032% international scale (IS) using Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR).|Baseline, week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96|Full analysis set. n = number of patients with evaluable data at the defined time point||percentage of patients|||Number
858948|NCT02108951|Secondary|Kinetics of Molecular Response: Percentage of Patients With MR4.0 Based on BCR-ABL Over Time After the Switch to Nilotinib|MR4.0 corresponds to a BCR-ABL ratio 0.01% international scale (IS) using Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR).|Baseline, week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96|Full analysis set||percentage of patients|||Number
858949|NCT02108951|Secondary|Kinetics of Molecular Response: Percentage of Patients With MMR Based on BCR-ABL Over Time After the Switch to Nilotinib|MMR corresponds to a BCR-ABL ratio 0.1% international scale (IS) using Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR).|Baseline, week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72 and 96|Full analysis set. n = number of patients with evaluable data at the defined time point||percentage of patients|||Number
858950|NCT02108951|Secondary|Kinetics of Molecular Response: Percentage of Patients With no Response Based on BCR-ABL Over Time After the Switch to Nilotinib|No response corresponds to a BCR-ABL ratio < 0.1% international scale (IS) using Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR).|Baseline, week 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96|Full analysis set. n = number of patients with evaluable data at the defined time point||percentage of patients|||Number
858951|NCT02108951|Primary|Number of Patients With MR4.5 Response by Baseline BCR-ABL Response Level Within 24 Months|"Deep Molecular Response (MR4.5) rate is defined as the percentage of patients who have achieved a 4.5 -log reduction in Breakpoint cluster region - Abelson murine leukemia (BCR-ABL) levels. BCR-ABL levels are measured in patients by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) testing of peripheral blood by the 24 months following the commencement of nilotinib therapy.
MR4.5 corresponds to a BCR-ABL ratio 0.0032% international scale (IS) using RQ-PCR. If a post-baseline value for BCR-ABL is < 0.1 X the baseline value, the patient were classified as achieving a 1 log reduction in BCR-ABL."|Baseline, 96 weeks (24 months)|The full analysis set (FAS) consists of all patients enrolled into the study. 'n' in categories indicates patients achieved or did not achieve MR4.5 during 24 months||Participants|||Count of Participants
858952|NCT02108951|Primary|Duration of Prior TKI Therapy for Patients Based on MR4.5 Achievement Status Within 24 Months|"Breakpoint cluster region - Abelson murine leukemia (BCR-ABL) levels are measured in patients by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) testing of peripheral blood by the 24 months following the commencement of nilotinib therapy.
Deep molecular response (MR4.5) rate was defined as the percentage of patients who have achieved a 4.5-log reduction (MR4.5) in BCR-ABL levels during the 24 months following the commencement of nilotinib therapy. MR4.5 corresponds to a BCR-ABL ratio 0.0032% IS using RQ-PCR. If a post-baseline value for BCR-ABL is < 0.1 X the baseline value, the patient were classified as achieving a 1 log reduction in BCR-ABL."|Baseline, 96 weeks (24 months)|The full analysis set (FAS) consists of all patients enrolled into the study.||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
858953|NCT02108951|Primary|Major Molecular Response (MMR) Rate: Percentage of Patients Who Have Achieved a 3 Log Reduction in BCR-ABL Levels Within 12 Months and 24 Months|Major Molecular Response (MMR) rate is defined as the percentage of patients who have achieved a 3 log reduction in BCR-ABL levels at 12 months and at 24 months following the commencement of nilotinib therapy. Breakpoint cluster region - Abelson murine leukemia (BCR-ABL) levels are measured in patients by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) testing of peripheral blood at the 12 and 24 months following the commencement of nilotinib therapy. MMR corresponds to a BCR-ABL ratio 0.1% international scale (IS) using RQ-PCR. If a post-baseline value for BCR-ABL is < 0.1 * the baseline Value, the patient will be classified as achieving a 1 log drop.|Baseline, 48 weeks (12 months), 96 weeks (24 months)|The full analysis set (FAS) consists of all patients enrolled into the study.Analysis of MMR was undertaken on the subgroup of the FAS that was not at MMR at baseline.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858954|NCT02108951|Primary|Molecular Response (MR4.0) Rate: Percentage of Patients Who Have Achieved a 4.0-log Reduction in BCR-ABL Level Within 12 Months and 24 Months|"Molecular Response (MR4.0) rate is defined as the percentage of patients who have achieved a 4-log reduction in BCR-ABL levels at 12 months and 24 months following the commencement of nilotinib therapy. Breakpoint cluster region - Abelson murine leukemia (BCR-ABL) levels are measured in patients by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) testing of peripheral blood by the 24 months following the commencement of nilotinib therapy.
MR4.0 corresponds to a BCR-ABL ratio 0.01% international scale (IS) using RQ-PCR. If a post-baseline value for BCR-ABL is < 0.1 X the baseline value, the patients were classified as achieving a 1 log reduction in BCR-ABL."|Baseline, 48 weeks (12 months), 96 weeks (24 months)|The full analysis set (FAS) consists of all patients enrolled into the study. Analysis of MR4.0 was undertaken on the subgroup of the FAS that was not at MR4.0 at baseline.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858955|NCT02108951|Primary|Deep Molecular Response (MR4.5) Rate: Percentage of Patients Who Have Achieved a 4.5-log Reduction in BCR-ABL Level Within 24 Month|"Deep Molecular Response (MR4.5) rate is defined as the percentage of patients who have achieved a 4.5 -log reduction in Breakpoint cluster region - Abelson murine leukemia (BCR-ABL) levels. BCR-ABL levels are measured in patients by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) testing of peripheral blood by the 24 months following the commencement of nilotinib therapy.
MR4.5 corresponds to a BCR-ABL ratio 0.0032% international scale (IS) using RQ-PCR. If a post-baseline value for BCR-ABL is < 0.1 X the baseline value, the patient were classified as achieving a 1 log reduction in BCR-ABL."|Baseline, 96 weeks (24 months)|The full analysis set (FAS) consists of all patients enrolled into the study.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858956|NCT02057952|Secondary|Diastolic Blood Pressure|Diastolic blood pressure. Measured using blood pressure cuff and sphygmomanometer. Units in Milometers of Mercury (mmHg). Scale range is based on participants' actual blood pressure (change baseline to 12 months; positive value indicates decrease in blood pressure).|12 Months|Participants who completed 12 month follow-up||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
858957|NCT02057952|Secondary|Change in Baseline Blood Pressure at 12 Months||12 Months||||||
858958|NCT02057952|Secondary|Change in Baseline Blood Pressure at 6 Months||12 Months||||||
858959|NCT02057952|Secondary|Change From 6 Month SF 36 at 12 Months|The Short Form 36 survey or SF 36 is a patient report survey where the lower the score the more disability the patient reports having.|12 Months||||||
858960|NCT02057952|Secondary|Change From Baseline SF 36 at 6 Months|The Short Form 36 survey or SF 36 is a patient report survey where the lower the score the more disability the patient reports having.|12 Months||||||
858961|NCT02057952|Secondary|Cost-effectiveness|Cost effectiveness is a survey that measures how much money in US Dollars the participant has had to spend to take part in the program.|12 months||||||
858962|NCT02057952|Secondary|Systolic Blood Pressure|Systolic blood pressure. Measured using blood pressure cuff and sphygmomanometer. Units in Milometers of Mercury (mmHg). Scale range is based on participants' actual blood pressure (change baseline to 12 months). Positive value indicates decrease in blood pressure).|12 Months|Participants who completed 12 month follow-up||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
858963|NCT02057952|Secondary|Short Form 36 Survey|The Short Form 36 survey or Short-Form 36 is a patient report survey. Scores range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) and represent overall health-related quality of life.|Baseline to 12 Months|The analysis of change based on participants with complete Short Form 36 (SF36) scores at baseline and 12 months.||score on scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858964|NCT02057952|Primary|Change in Body Weight From Baseline to 6 Months.|Pounds lost from baseline to 6 months.|12 months|Analysis are based on number of participants with complete weight data at baseline and 6 months.||pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
858965|NCT02057952|Primary|Attendance Reported in Minutes|Minutes of participation in study sessions.|12 Months|Usual care participants didn't have access to the experimental treatments. In person and video conference arm participants were all eligible for participation.||minutes||Full Range|Median
858966|NCT02057952|Primary|Body Weight|Change in weight from baseline to 12 months reported in pounds.|Baseline to 12 Months|The number of participants analyzed is based on the number of participants who completed weight data at baseline and 12 months.||pounds||Standard Deviation|Mean
858967|NCT01943435|Other Pre-specified|Sense Wear Armband|Our secondary aim was to measure the change in physical activity between baseline and 8 weeks using the Sense Wear armband (SWA). The outcome measure was the average number of minutes spent daily performing physical activities >1.5 metabolic equivalents (METs).The SWA is a small device that collects information from multiple sensors: a triaxial accelerometer, heat flux, skin temperature, and galvanic signal. The information is integrated and processed by software using proprietary algorithms utilizing subjects' demographic characteristics (gender, age, height, and weight) to provide minute-by-minute estimates of physical activity. The SWA has shown good reliability and validity. The research participants in our study will wear the SWA for a week before and after they complete the treatment interventions.|Primary End-Point was analysis of between-group changes at 8 weeks ( 2 weeks after completion of 6-week intervention).|Intent to treat population. Analysis performed on all participants who attended at least one intervention session and had a follow-up examination at 8 weeks. Linear mixed models were used to account for missing data, which did not change the results of our multivariable linear regression models.||minutes per day||Standard Deviation|Mean
858968|NCT01943435|Secondary|Self Paced Walking Test (SPWT)|Our primary aim also included a performance-based outcome measure, which was the distance walked during the SPWT. The analysis was a comparison of between-group changes in SPWT between baseline and 8 weeks. The Self-Paced Walking Test (SPWT) is a validated objective measure of a patient's walking capacity, which is performed on a level walking surface. The patient is instructed to walk at their own pace and to stop when the symptoms are troublesome enough that s/he needs to sit down to rest. The total time and total distance walked are measured by the research assistant. Our unit of measure was the total distance walked, expressed in meters.|Primary end-point was analysis of between-group changes at 8 weeks ( 2 weeks after 6 week intervention is completed).|Intent to treat population. Analysis performed on all participants who attended at least one intervention session and had a follow-up examination at 8 weeks. Linear mixed models were used to account for missing data, which did not change the results of our multivariable linear regression models.||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
858969|NCT01943435|Primary|Swiss Spinal Stenosis (SSS) Questionnaire Score (Symptom Severity Subscore)|Our primary aim included a primary outcome measure of self-reported pain/function, which was the change in SSS symptom severity subscore between baseline and 8 weeks. The Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire (SSS) is a validated 12-item condition-specific instrument for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. It provides a patient self-report measure of pain and physical function. Higher scores represent worse symptoms and less physical function. The 12-item SSS consists of two subscores: 1) the 7-item symptom severity subscore (range 7-35) and 2) the 5-item physical function subscore (range 5-20). For our analysis, we compared the change in the 7-item symptom severity subscore from baseline to 8 weeks.|Primary End-Point was analysis of between-group changes at 8 weeks ( 2 weeks after completion of 6-week intervention).|Intent to treat population. Analysis performed on all participants who attended at least one intervention session and had a follow-up examination at 8 weeks. Linear mixed models were used to account for missing data, which did not change the results of our multivariable linear regression models.||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858971|NCT01911169|Primary|Change at Week 16 in % Flow Mediated Dilation in Those Who Did and Did Not Replete Vitamin D|Measures were be performed with a Phillips iU22 Ultrasound system and a L9-3 9 mHz probe in 2D mode by a single operator using EKG gating. Baseline measures of brachial artery diameter will be made after the 10 minutes of rest. The blood pressure cuff, placed on the ipsilateral forearm, was inflated to 50 mmHg above the patient's systolic blood pressure for five minutes and then released. Endothelium-dependent FMD was measured continuously during and for three minutes after cuff release. Subjects rested for 10 minutes. Then, endothelium-independent dilation was measured 3 minutes after administration of 0.4 mg of sublingual nitroglycerine. The outcome (%FMD) was the difference between the average endothelium dependent diameter after cuff deflation and the average baseline diameter. The absolute difference between the % FMD at baseline and 16 week follow up was reported.|from zero to sixteen weeks|||Absolute change in % FMD||Standard Deviation|Mean
858972|NCT01905683|Secondary|Changes in Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM)-66 Score From Baseline to All Injection Visits and End of Study|The GMFM-66 is a standardized observational 66-item instrument designed and validated to measure change in gross motor function over time in participants with cerebral palsy. Score values represent the total GMFM-66 score. Total GMFM scores range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best).|Baseline to Day 1 of 2nd (V5), 3rd (V7), 4th (V9) IC and End of study (Week 44-68) (V11)|The FAS was the subset of participants in the SES for whom at least a baseline value (Day 1 of the first cycle, Visit 2) of AS score of PF was available. For participants from lead-in study at least one post-baseline value was available. Therefore all participants from lead-in study were included in FAS.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858973|NCT01905683|Secondary|Change in Scores of Pain Intensity (From Participants) and Frequency (From Parent/Caregiver) From Baseline to All Visits, From Day 1 of Each IC to Day 29 (Week 4), Day 57 (Week 8, 1st IC Cycle Only) and Day 99 (Week 14) of Respective Injection|The questionnaire on pain caused by Spasticity (QPS) is a participant-reported outcome for children and adolescents (2-17 years) with cerebral palsy on spasticity-related pain. Pain intensity (from participants) and pain frequency (from parent/caregiver) to be assessed with QPS. The QPS total score for pain intensity ranges from 0 (’No Hurt’) to 10 (’Hurt Worst’). The QPS total score for the observed pain frequency ranges from 0 (Never) to 4 (Always). V3 = Week 4 of 1st IC; V4 = Week 8 of 1st IC; V5= Day 1 of 2nd IC; V6 = Week 4 of 2nd IC; V7 = Day 1 of 3rd IC; V8 = Week 4 of 3rd IC; V9 = Day 1 of 4th IC; V10 = Week 4 of 4th IC; V11 = Week 14 of 4th IC = end of study visit.|Baseline (Day 1, Visit [V] 2) to all other visits (V3, V4, V5, V6, V7, V8, V9, V10, and V11); From Day 1 of Each IC to Day 29 (Week 4), Day 57 (Week 8, 1st IC cycle only) and Day 99 (Week 14) of the respective IC|The FAS was the subset of participants in the SES for whom at least a baseline value (Day 1 of the first cycle, Visit 2) of AS score of PF was available. For participants from lead-in study at least one post-baseline value was available.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858974|NCT01905683|Secondary|Changes in Modified Tardieu Scale (MTS) of Left and Right PF From Baseline to All Other Visits, From Day 1 of Each Injection Cycle (IC) to Day 29 (Week 4), Day 57 (Week 8, 1st IC Only) and Day 99 (Week 14) of the Respective Injection Cycle|"The MTS assesses spastic muscle tone by subtraction of two angles measured at different conditions of passive muscle stretch. R2 is the angle of passive range of motion with a passive movement at slow speed. R1 is the angle where a catch-and-release or clonus can be triggered at the fastest possible speed. Score values represent the measured (R2-R1) difference, that is, the dynamic tone component of the examined muscle(s). Decreases of (R2-R1) represent reductions in the dynamic component of spasticity, that is, improvement of dynamic muscle spasticity. V3 = Week 4 of 1st IC; V4 = Week 8 of 1st IC; V5 = Day 1 of 2nd IC; V6 = Week 4 of 2nd IC; V7 = Day 1 of 3rd IC; V8 = Week 4 of 3rd IC; V9 = Day 1 of 4th IC; V10 = Week 4 of 4th IC; V11 = Week 14 of 4th IC = end of study visit."|Baseline (Day 1, Visit [V] 2) to all other visits (V3, V4, V5, V6, V7, V8, V9, V10, and V11); From Day 1 of Each IC to Day 29 (Week 4), Day 57 (Week 8, 1st IC cycle only) and Day 99 (Week 14) of the respective IC|The FAS was the subset of participants in the SES for whom at least a baseline value (Day 1 of the first cycle, Visit 2) of AS score of PF was available. For participants from lead-in study at least one post-baseline value was available.||Degrees||Standard Deviation|Mean
858975|NCT01905683|Secondary|Investigator's Global Impression of Change of Plantar Flexor Spasticity Scale (GICS-PF) of Left and Right PF at Day 29 (Week 4) of Each Injection Cycle|The GICS are global outcomes to assess the impression of change due to treatment. GICS were assessed by the investigator, by the participant (if feasible) and by parents'/caregiver (if applicable). GICS is a 7-Point Likert Scale ranging from +3 (very much improved function) to -3 (very much worse function). For participants with bilateral pes equinus, the body side for efficacy analysis that is “primary body side” was decided by investigator at screening and was kept throughout the entire study.|Day 29 (Week 4) of 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th injection cycle|The FAS was the subset of participants in the SES for whom at least a baseline value (Day 1 of the first cycle, Visit 2) of AS score of PF was available. For participants from lead-in study at least one post-baseline value was available.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858976|NCT01905683|Secondary|Investigator's, Child's/Adolescent's, and Parent's/Caregiver's Global Impression of Change Scale (GICS) at Day 29 (Week 4) of Each Injection Cycle|The GICS are global outcomes to assess the impression of change due to treatment. GICS were assessed by the investigator, by the participant (if feasible) and by parents'/caregiver (if applicable). GICS is 7-Point Likert Scale ranging from +3 (very much improved function) to -3 (very much worse function).|Day 29 (Week 4) of 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th injection cycle|The FAS was the subset of participants in the SES for whom at least a baseline value (Day 1 of the first cycle, Visit 2) of AS score of PF was available. For participants from lead-in study at least one post-baseline value was available.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858987|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score Fingernail Involvement at Baseline|The NAPSI scale is used to evaluate the severity of fingernail bed Ps and fingernail matrix Ps by area of involvement. The fingernail is divided into quadrants. Each fingernail is given a score for fingernail bed Ps 0 (none) to 4 (Ps in 4 quadrants of the fingernail) and fingernail matrix Ps 0 (none) to 4 (Ps in 4 quadrants of the matrix), depending on the presence (score of 1) or absence (score of 0) of any of the features of fingernail bed or matrix Ps in each quadrant. The sum of all fingernails equals the total NAPSI score range is from 0 (no effect) to 80 (more severe psoriasis). LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline cDMARD experience, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants who had baseline fingernail involvement, baseline NAPSI score and post baseline NAPSI score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858977|NCT01905683|Secondary|Changes in AS Score of Left and Right Plantar Flexors (PF) From Baseline to All Other Visits, From Day 1 of Each Injection Cycle to Day 29 (Week 4), Day 57 (Week 8, 1st Injection Cycle Only) and Day 99 (Week 14) of the Respective Injection Cycle|The Ashworth Scale (AS) is a well-known and commonly used scale in clinical trials with spasticity. In spastic muscles the resistance to passive movement is assessed. It is a 5-point scale that ranges from 0 (= no increase in tone) to 4 (=limb rigid in flexion or extension). For participants with bilateral pes equinus, the body side for efficacy analysis that is, “primary body side” was decided by investigator at screening and was kept throughout the entire study. V3 = Week 4 of 1st Injection Cycle; V4 = Week 8 of 1st Injection Cycle; V5 = Day 1 of 2nd Injection Cycle; V6= Week 4 of 2nd Injection Cycle; V7 = Day 1 of 3rd Injection Cycle; V8 = Week 4 of 3rd Injection Cycle; V9 = Day 1 of 4th Injection Cycle; V10 = Week 4 of 4th Injection Cycle; V11= Week 14th of 4th Injection Cycle = end of study visit.|Baseline (Day 1, Visit [V] 2) to all other visits (V3, V4, V5, V6, V7, V8, V9, V10, and V11); From Day 1 of Each Injection Cycle to Day 29 (Week 4), Day 57 (Week 8, 1st Injection Cycle only) and Day 99 (Week 14) of the respective Injection Cycle|The full analysis set (FAS) was the subset of participants in the SES for whom at least a baseline value (Day 1 of the first cycle, Visit 2) of AS score of PF was available. For participants from lead-in study at least one post-baseline value was available.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
858978|NCT01905683|Secondary|Investigator’s Global Assessment of Tolerability at Day 99 (Week 14) of Each Injection Cycle|The investigator’s global assessment of tolerability was assessed on a 4-point ordinal scale where 1 = very good, 2 = good, 3 = moderate, and 4 = poor. Results for Day 99 (Week 14) of 4th injection cycles were collected at the end of study visit.|Day 99 (Week 14) of 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th injection cycle|The SES was the subset of all participants treated with IP at least once.||participants|||Number
858979|NCT01905683|Primary|Occurrence of Treatment-emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs) Overall and Per Injection Cycle|TESAEs are events observed from the time point of first injection until end of study visit (Week 50-66). Values reported here refer to the number of participants affected.|From the timepoint of first injection until end of study visit (Week 50-66)|The SES was the subset of all participants treated with IP at least once.||participants|||Number
858980|NCT01905683|Primary|Occurrence of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (TEAESI) Overall and Per Injection Cycle|TEAEs occurring after treatment that were thought to possibly indicate toxin spread throughout the trial conduct are defined as TEAESI. Values reported here refer to the number of participants affected.|From the timepoint of first injection until end of study visit (Week 50-66)|The SES was the subset of all participants treated with IP at least once.||participants|||Number
858981|NCT01905683|Primary|Occurrence of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Overall and Per Injection Cycle|TEAEs are events observed from the time point of first injection until end of study visit (Week 50-66). Values reported here refer to the number of participants affected.|From the timepoint of first injection up to end of study visit (Week 50-66)|The SES was the subset of all participants treated with IP at least once.||participants|||Number
858982|NCT01867710|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Response Rate [Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 50 Percent (%) Decline From Baseline] at Week 12|The PSA response is defined as a >= 50% decline from baseline according to the adapted Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 (PCWG2) criteria. For a PSA response to be confirmed, an additional PSA measurement obtained 4 or more weeks later has to show >=50% decline from baseline.|Week 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants regardless of whether they received any study treatment. Here “N” (Number of Participants Analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858983|NCT01867710|Primary|Percentage of Participants Experiencing Neither of the 2 Mineralocorticoid Excess Toxicity During the First 24 Weeks of Treatment|No mineralocorticoid excess is defined as experiencing neither of the 2 mineralocorticoid excess toxicities, that is, neither hypokalemia nor hypertension.|Week 24|Safety population included all randomized and treated participants. Here “N” (Number of Participants Analyzed) signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
858984|NCT01695239|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Anti-Ixekizumab Antibodies (TE-ADA) and Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb)|Number of participants with positive treatment emergent anti-ixekizumab antibodies and NAb was summarized by treatment group.|Baseline to Week 24|All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of ixe and had evaluable anti-ixekizumab antibody measurement at baseline and postbaseline or had no evaluable baseline anti-ixekizumab antibody measurements. Immunogenicity data was not collected during the double-blind treatment period for participants in the adalimumab treatment group.||participants|||Number
858985|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)|The BASDAI is a self-administered measure used to answer 6 questions with a 0 to 10 centimeter (cm) VAS pertaining to the 5 major symptoms of axial activity. To give each symptom equal weighting, the mean of the 2 scores relating to morning stiffness was taken. The resulting 0 to 50 score was divided by 5 to give a final 0 to 10 BASDAI Score. BASDAI ranges from 0-10. Higher scores represent greater disease activity. LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline cDMARD experience, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants who had baseline axial involvement defined as baseline BASDAI score >4, baseline BASDAI score and post baseline BASDAI score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858986|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Leeds Dactylitis Index-Basic (LDI-B)|The LDI-B measures the severity of dactylitis. In each digit, the ratio of the circumference of the affected digit to the circumference of the digit on the opposite hand or foot measured in mm. Each dactylitic digit was defined by a minimum increase of 10% in circumference over the contra-lateral digit. If the same digits on each hand or foot were thought to be involved, the clinician referred to a table of normative values for a value which was used to provide the comparison. The calculated ratio was multiplied by a tenderness score of 0 (not tender) or 1 (tender). Tenderness was assessed in the area between the joints. The results of each digit were then added to produce a total score. LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline cDMARD experience, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants who had baseline dactylitis, baseline LDI-B score and post baseline LDI-B score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858988|NCT01695239|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Body Surface Area (BSA)|The investigator evaluated the percentage involvement of psoriasis on each participant's BSA on a continuous scale from 0% = no involvement to 100% = full involvement, where 1% corresponded to the size of the participant’s handprint including the palm, fingers, and thumb. LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline cDMARD experience, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants who have plaque psoriasis at baseline and who had baseline and post baseline BSA data.||percent change in BSA||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858989|NCT01695239|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Static Physician Global Assessment (sPGA) of 0 or 1 and With at Least a 2-point Improvement From Baseline|The sPGA is the physician’s determination of the severity of the participant’s psoriasis lesions overall at a given time point. Overall lesions were categorized by descriptions for induration, erythema, and scaling. For the analysis of responses, the participant’s psoriasis was assessed at a given time point on in which 0 = clear, 1 = minimal, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, 4 = severe, 5 = very severe.|Week 24|All randomized participants who have plaque psoriasis and sPGA ≥3 at baseline. NRI is applied for inadequate responders at Week 16 and participants who had missing data at Week 24 for any reason including discontinuation.||percentage of participants|||Number
858990|NCT01695239|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Meeting the Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC Modified)|The PsARC is a composite criteria reported in terms of the percentage of participants achieving response according to the following criterion: TJC, SJC, PGA, and PatGA. Overall response is defined by improvement from baseline assessment in 2 of 4 criteria, 1 of which must be a joint count; there must not be worsening in any of the 4 criteria: at least 30% reduction in TJC, at least 30% reduction in SJC, at least a 20 millimeter (mm) reduction in PGA and at least a 20 mm reduction in PatGA which is equivalent to 20 mm reduction. The results from the 2 VAS measures were assessed as a difference from baseline in mm.|Week 24|All randomized participants. NRI is applied for inadequate responders at Week 16 and participants who had missing data at Week 24 for any reason including discontinuation.||percentage of participants|||Number
858991|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score (28 Diarthrodial Joint Count) Based on C-ReactiveProtein (DAS28-CRP) Measure: Non-Arthritic Disease|The DAS28-CRP is a measure of disease activity in 28 joints that consists of a composite numerical score with the following variables: TJC28, SJC28, hs-CRP (measured in mg/L), and Participant’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity recorded by participants on a 0 to 100 millimeter (mm) VAS. For DAS28-CRP, the Tender Joint Count 28 (TJC28) and Swollen Joint Count (SJC28) are a subset of TJC and SJC, and include 14 joints on each side of the body: 2 shoulders, 2 elbows, 2 wrists, 10 metacarpophalangeal joints, the 2 interphalangeal joints of the thumb, the 8 proximal interphalangeal joints, and the 2 knees. DAS28 values range from 0 to 9.4. Higher values indicate more severe symptoms and greater functional impairment. LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline cDMARD experience, visit, and treatment-by-visit.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants who had baseline and post baseline DAS28-CRP data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858992|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Reported 16 Items (QIDS-SR16) (Quality of Life and Outcome Assessments. Measures: Patient Reported Outcomes [PRO])|The QIDS-SR16 is a self-administered 16-item instrument intended to assess the existence and severity of symptoms of depression. A participant is asked to consider each statement as it relates to the way they have felt for the past 7 days. Each item scaled from 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (all symptoms). The 16 items corresponding to 9 depression domains are summed to give a single score ranging from 0 to 27, with higher scores denoting greater symptom severity. LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline cDMARD experience, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants who had baseline and post baseline QIDS-SR16 data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858993|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36): Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) (Quality of Life and Outcome Assessments Measures: Participant Reported Outcomes [PRO])|SF-36 is a standardized participant-administered measure designed to evaluate 8 domains of functional health and well being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role (role-physical, role-emotional) limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health with 2 components (physical component score [PCS] and mental component score [MCS]). The PCS and MCS scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better levels of function and/or better health. LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline cDMARD experience, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants who had baseline and post baseline PCS data. All randomized participants who had baseline and post baseline MCS data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858994|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Joint Space Narrowing Score (JSN) And Bone Erosion Score (BES)|JSN score (a component of the modified Total Sharp Score [mTSS]) measures the extent of joint space narrowing in peripheral joints. JSN (20 joints per hand and 6 joints per foot), with higher scores representing greater damage. JSN score range is 0 (no narrowing) to 208 (high narrowing). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening. BES (a component of the [mTSS]) measures the extent of bone erosion in peripheral joints. BES measures the extent of joint erosions (20 joints per hand and 12 joints per foot), with higher scores representing greater damage. Erosion score range is from 0 (no erosion) to 320 (high erosion). LS mean was calculated using linear extrapolation for ANCOVA analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, and baseline cDMARD experience.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants who had baseline and post baseline JSN data. All randomized participants who had baseline and post baseline BES data. Linear extrapolation was used to impute missing data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859003|NCT01695239|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20 Response at Week 12|ACR20 response is defined as a ≥20% improvement from baseline for TJC and SJC and in at least 3 of the following 5 criteria: Participant's assessment of Joint Pain VAS, Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, Physician's Global Assessment of the Disease Activity VAS, Participant's Assessment of Physical Function using the HAQ-DI, or hs-CRP.|Week 12|All randomized participants. NRI is applied for inadequate responders at Week 16 and participants who had missing data at Week 24 for any reason including discontinuation.||percentage of participants|||Number
858995|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fatigue Severity Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Score (Quality of Life and Outcome Assessments Measures: Participant Reported Outcomes [PRO])|The Fatigue Severity NRS is a participant-administered single-item 11-point horizontal scale anchored at 0 and 10, with 0 representing “no fatigue” and 10 representing “as bad as you can imagine.” Participants rated their fatigue (feeling tired or worn out) by circling the 1 number that described their worst level of fatigue during the past 24 hours. LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline cDMARD experience, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants who had baseline and post baseline fatigue NRS data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858996|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Itching Severity Using the Itch Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) (Quality of Life and Outcome Assessments Measures: Participant Reported Outcomes [PRO])|The Itch NRS is a participant-administered, 11-point horizontal scale anchored at 0 and 10, with 0 representing “no itch” and 10 representing “worst itch imaginable.” Overall severity of a participant's itching from psoriasis was indicated by circling the number that best described the worst level of itching in the past 24 hours. LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline cDMARD experience, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who had baseline psoriatic lesion(s) involving >=3% BSA, baseline itch NRS score and post baseline itch NRS score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858997|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI)|The LEI was developed specifically for use in PsA. It measures enthesitis at 6 sites (lateral epicondyle, left and right; medial femoral condyle, left and right; Achilles tendon insertion, left and right). Each site was assigned a score of 0 (absent) or 1 (present); the results from each site were then added to produce a total score (range 0 to 6). LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline cDMARD experience, visit, treatment by visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 12|All randomized participants who had baseline enthesitis, baseline LEI score and post baseline LEI score.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
858998|NCT01695239|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75%, 90%, 100% (PASI 75, 90, 100)|The PASI is an index that combines assessments of the extent of body-surface involvement in 4 anatomical regions (head, trunk, arms, and legs) and the severity of desquamation, erythema, and plaque induration/infiltration (thickness) in each region, yielding an overall score of 0 for no psoriasis to 72 for the most severe disease. Participants achieving PASI 75 were defined as having an improvement of at least 75% in the PASI compared to their baseline measures. Participants achieving PASI 90 were defined as having an improvement of ≥90% in the PASI score compared to baseline. Participants achieving PASI 100 were defined as having an improvement of 100% in the PASI score compared to baseline.|Week 12|All randomized participants with baseline psoriatic lesion(s) involving ≥3% BSA. NRI is applied for inadequate responders at Week 16 and participants who had missing data at Week 24 for any reason including discontinuation.||percentage of participants|||Number
858999|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) (Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With Active Psoriatic Arthritis. Measure: Modified Total Sharp Score [mTSS])|The mTSS measures the extent of bone erosions (20 joints per hand and 12 joints per foot) and joint space narrowing (20 joints per hand and 6 joints per foot), with higher scores representing greater damage. An increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening. Scores range from 0-528. LS mean was calculated using MMRM analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, and baseline cDMARD experience, visit, treatment by visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants with baseline and post baseline mTSS data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859000|NCT01695239|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Scores (Quality of Life and Outcome Assessments Measures: Participant Reported Outcomes [PRO])|HAQ-DI is a participant reported questionnaire that measures disease-associated disability (physical function). It consists of 24 questions with 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and other daily activities. The disability section scores the participant’s self-perception on the degree of difficulty (0 = without any difficulty, 1 = with some difficulty, 2 = with much difficulty, and 3 = unable to do), covering the 8 domains. The HAQ-DI is a composite ranging from 0-3 with lower scores indicating less functional disability. The reported use of special aids or devices and/or the need for assistance of another person to perform these activities is assessed. Least Square (LS) mean was calculated using Mixed Model Repeated Measurements (MMRM) analysis with treatment, baseline score, geographic region, baseline conventional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (cDMARD) experience, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction.|Baseline, Week 24|All randomized participants with baseline and post baseline HAQ-DI data.||units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859001|NCT01695239|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Score at Week 24|ACR70 response is defined as a ≥70% improvement from baseline for TJC and SJC and in at least 3 of the following 5 criteria: Participant's assessment of Joint Pain VAS, Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, Physician's Global Assessment of the Disease Activity VAS, Participant's Assessment of Physical Function using the HAQ-DI, or hs-CRP.|Week 24|All randomized participants. NRI is applied for inadequate responders at Week 16 and participants who had missing data at Week 24 for any reason including discontinuation.||percentage of participants|||Number
859002|NCT01695239|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 24|ACR50 response is defined as a ≥50% improvement from baseline for TJC and SJC and in at least 3 of the following 5 criteria: Participant's assessment of Joint Pain VAS, Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, Physician's Global Assessment of the Disease Activity VAS, Participant's Assessment of Physical Function using the HAQ-DI, or hs-CRP.|Week 24|All randomized participants. NRI is applied for inadequate responders at Week 16 and participants who had missing data at Week 24 for any reason including discontinuation.||percentage of participants|||Number
859018|NCT01606124|Secondary|Tolerability as Estimated Using the Percent Dose of Treatment Received at 6 Months|Tolerability as estimated using the percent dose of treatment received for each patient by dividing the total dose received by the targeted (i.e., protocol specified) total dose.|6 months|||percentage of targeted dose||Standard Deviation|Mean
859004|NCT01695239|Primary|Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 24 (Efficacy of Ixekizumab in Participants With Active Psoriatic Arthritis. Measure: American College of Rheumatology 20 Index [ACR20])|ACR20 response is defined as a ≥20% improvement from baseline for tender joint count (TJC) and swollen joint count (SJC) and in at least 3 of the following 5 criteria: Participant's assessment of Joint Pain visual analog scale (VAS), Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS (PatGA), Physician's Global Assessment of the Disease Activity VAS (PGA), Participant's Assessment of Physical Function using the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), or Acute Phase Reactant as measured by high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP).|Week 24|All randomized participants. Nonresponder Imputation (NRI) is applied for inadequate responders at Week 16 and participants who had missing data at Week 24 for any reason including discontinuation.||percentage of participants|||Number
859005|NCT01639443|Secondary|Cost Comparisons|For cost comparisons, the investigators will aggregate total provider overtime costs for colonoscopies performed. Cost is reported per day.|After 12 months of running study in clinic|These 1672 patients are a subset of all patients who were enrolled in this study. We dropped data on a first wave of participants (69 Fast-tracked and 3294 Controls) because of problems incorporating recruitment strategy into clinic. However, data from these individuals was used to build predictive model.||dollars||Standard Deviation|Mean
859006|NCT01639443|Secondary|Length of Workday|Length of Workday in hours (comparing days with Fast-Tracked Appointments to Control days without)|After 12 months of running study in clinic|These 1672 patients are a subset of all patients who were enrolled in this study. We dropped data on a first wave of participants (69 Fast-tracked and 3294 Controls) because of problems incorporating recruitment strategy into clinic. However, data from these individuals was used to build predictive model.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
859007|NCT01639443|Secondary|Advanced Adenoma Detection/Cecal Intubation Rates|The investigators will compare daily advanced adenomatous polyp detection and daily cecal intubation rates between groups.|After 20 months of running study in clinic|We only collected data on polyp detection for the first half of our Fast-tracked participants and all Controls seen over the same time period (4897 in total).||Number of Polyps Detected per patient||Standard Deviation|Mean
859008|NCT01639443|Secondary|"Daily Service Denials (Bumps)"|The investigators will compare the number of patients bumped per day between scheduling approaches|After 12 months of running study in clinic|These 1672 patients are a subset of all patients who were enrolled in this study. We dropped data on a first wave of participants (69 Fast-tracked and 3294 Controls) because of problems incorporating recruitment strategy into clinic. However, data from these individuals was used to build predictive model.||participants|||Number
859009|NCT01639443|Secondary|Scheduling-to-procedure Lag Time|The investigators will calculate the mean daily lag time for all colonoscopy and upper endoscopies performed per day|After 12 months of running study in clinic|These 1672 patients are a subset of all patients who were enrolled in this study. We dropped data on a first wave of participants (69 Fast-tracked and 3294 Controls) because of problems incorporating recruitment strategy into clinic. However, data from these individuals was used to build predictive model.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
859010|NCT01639443|Primary|Percentage of GI Clinic Capacity Filled|Investigators' primary objective will be to evaluate the impact of no-show predictive overbooking on percentage of the GI endoscopy clinic that are filled on a given day. Days where at least one Fast-tracked patient attended an appointment were compared to days where only Control patients attended appointments. Percentage of GI Clinic Capacity is calculated as the number of appointments completed divided by number of appointment spots available on a given day. This percentage was compared between Fast-tracked days and Control days, using data from 1672 patients.|After 12 months of running study in clinic|These 1672 patients are a subset of all patients who were enrolled in this study. We dropped data on a first wave of participants (69 Fast-tracked and 3294 Controls) because of problems incorporating recruitment strategy into clinic. However, data from these individuals was used to build predictive model.||percentage of clinic capacity filled||Standard Deviation|Mean
859011|NCT01618162|Secondary|Number of Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom or disease temporally associated with the use of a product, whether or not considered related to the product. Reported values are hypoglycemia event rate per 100 PYE.|After 26 weeks of treatment|Safety analysis set.||event rate per 100 PYE|||Number
859012|NCT01618162|Secondary|Number of Treatment Emergent (Confirmed) Hypoglycaemic Episodes|"An event was treatment emergent if the onset of the episode occurs after the first administration of trial product and no later than 7 days after last trial product administration.
Confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes were defined as hypoglycaemic episodes that were either severe or minor.
Minor hypoglycaemic episodes were defined as:
An episode with symptoms consistent with hypoglycaemia and confirmed by blood glucose value <2.8 mmol/L (50 mg/dL) or plasma glucose <3.1 mmol/L (56 mg/dL) and which was handled by the subject himself/herself.
Any asymptomatic PG value <3.1 mmol/L (56 mg/dL) or blood glucose value <2.8 mmol/L (50 mg/dL).
Severe hypoglycemia was defined as an episode requiring assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions.
Reported values are hypoglycemia event rate per 100 patient-years of exposure (PYE)."|After 26 weeks of treatment|Safety analysis set included all subjects receiving at least one dose of the trial product.||event rate per 100 PYE|||Number
859013|NCT01618162|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight|Change from baseline in body weight at week 26.|Week 0, week 26|Full analysis set.||kilogram||Standard Deviation|Mean
859014|NCT01618162|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)|Change from baseline in FPG at week 26.|Week 0, week 26|Full analysis set. Number of subjects analyzed=subjects with data available for FPG.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
859015|NCT01618162|Secondary|Responders Achieving Pre-defined Target: HbA1c Below or Equal to 6.5% (48 mmol/Mol)|Percentage of subjects having HbA1c below 6.5% at week 26|Week 26|Full analysis set.||percentage of subjects|||Number
859016|NCT01618162|Secondary|Responders Achieving Pre-defined Target: HbA1c Below 7.0% (53 mmol/Mol)|Percentage of subjects having HbA1c below 7% at week 26.|Week 26|Full analysis set.||percentage of subjects|||Number
859017|NCT01618162|Primary|Change in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c)|Change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks.|Week 0, Week 26|Full analysis set.||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
859066|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)||6 months|||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
859019|NCT01606124|Primary|Percent Change in Rectal ACF, Pre- and Post Intervention at 6 Months|The primary endpoint is based on a modified intent-to-treat procedure which includes all patients with baseline and 6-month ACF data. The percent change in rectal ACF (≤ 15 cm from the anal verge) for each patient is calculated as their Pre-Registration number of rectal ACF minus the number of rectal ACF present at the 6-month post-intervention exam, divided by the number of rectal ACF present at Pre-Registration times 100.|6 months|Patients with baseline and 6-month ACF data were included in this analysis.||percentage change||Standard Deviation|Mean
859020|NCT01544179|Secondary|Time to Worsening in Lung Cancer Subscale|A worsening is defined as a change from baseline of ≤ -2 (0-28 score range). Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Lung Cancer (FACT-L) questionnaire|At visits 2-8, then every 6 weeks until progression, at progression or treatment discontinuation, and every 8 weeks after progression until PFS analysis data cut off.|Evaluable-for-QoL||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859021|NCT01544179|Secondary|Improvement in Lung Cancer Subscale|An improvement is defined as a change from baseline of ≥ +2 (0-28 score range). Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Lung Cancer (FACT-L) questionnaire|At visits 2-8, then every 6 weeks until progression, at progression or treatment discontinuation, and every 8 weeks after progression until PFS analysis data cut off.|Evaluable-for-QoL||Number of participants improving|||Number
859022|NCT01544179|Secondary|Time to Worsening in FACT-L Total Score|A worsening is defined as a change from baseline of ≤ -6 (0-136 score range). Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Lung Cancer (FACT-L) questionnaire|At visits 2-8, then every 6 weeks until progression, at progression or treatment discontinuation, and every 8 weeks after progression until PFS analysis data cut off.|Evaluable-for-QoL||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859023|NCT01544179|Secondary|Improvement in FACT-L Total Score|An improvement is defined as a change from baseline of ≥ +6 (0-136 score range). Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Lung Cancer (FACT-L) questionnaire|At visits 2-8, then every 6 weeks until progression, at progression or treatment discontinuation, and every 8 weeks after progression until PFS analysis data cut off.|Evaluable-for-QoL||Number of patients improving|||Number
859024|NCT01544179|Secondary|Time to Worsening in Trial Outcome Index|A worsening is defined as a change from baseline of ≤ -6 (0-84 score range). Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Lung Cancer (FACT-L) questionnaire|At visits 2-8, then every 6 weeks until progression, at progression or treatment discontinuation, and every 8 weeks after progression until PFS analysis data cut off.|Evaluable-for-QoL||Weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859025|NCT01544179|Secondary|Improvement in Trial Outcome Index|An improvement is defined as a change from baseline of ≥ +6 (0-84 score range). Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Lung Cancer (FACT-L) questionnaire.|At visits 2-8, then every 6 weeks until progression, at progression or treatment discontinuation, and every 8 weeks after progression until PFS analysis data cut off.|Evaluable-for-QoL||Number of participants improving|||Number
859026|NCT01544179|Secondary|Disease Control Rate (DCR)|DCR is the percentage of patients who achieve disease control at 6 weeks following randomisation. DCR is defined as a Best Objective Response (BOR) of Complete Response, Partial Response or Stable Disease, as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT or MRI. CR, Disappearance of all target lesions; PR, ≥30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; SD, neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR not sufficient increase to qualify for Progressive Disease (PD); PD, ≥20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study, and the sum must have shown an absolute increase of ≥5mm|Radiologic evaluations were carried out every 6 weeks from randomization until documented progression, withdrawal of consent, loss to follow up, death or the primary data cut off (DCO) for the analysis.|Full analysis set||Percentage of Participants|||Number
859027|NCT01544179|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (ORR) (Site Read Data)|ORR rate is defined as the number (%) of subjects with at least one visit response of Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) , as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST v1.1) for target lesions and assessed by CT or MRI. CR, Disappearance of all target lesions; PR, ≥30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions. Data obtained up until progression, or last evaluable assessment in the absence of progression, was included in the assessment of ORR.|Radiologic evaluations were carried out every 6 weeks from randomization until documented progression, withdrawal of consent, loss to follow up, death or the primary data cut off (DCO) for the analysis.|Full analysis set||Percentage of Participants|||Number
859028|NCT01544179|Secondary|Median Overall Survival (OS) at Time of PFS Analysis||Baseline and then every 6 weeks after randomization until objective disease progression. OS is then assessed 8 weekly following PFS progression up to PFS analysis data cut off.|Full analysis set||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859029|NCT01544179|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is the time from the date of randomisation until death due to any cause. Any subject not known to have died at the time of analysis will be censored based on the last recorded date on which the subject was known to be alive.|Following progression survival data was collected every 8 weeks until documentation of death, withdrawal of consent, loss to follow-up or the final data cut-off, whichever occurs first.|Full analysis set||Number of patients with an OS event|||Number
859030|NCT01544179|Primary|Median Progression-Free Survival (Site Read, Investigator Assessment)|PFS is the time from randomisation until the date of objective disease progression as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1) or death (by any cause in the absence of progression). Progression is defined using RECIST (v1.1), as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5mm.|Radiologic evaluations were carried out every 6 weeks from randomization until documented progression, withdrawal of consent, loss to follow up, death or the primary data cut off (DCO) for the analysis, assessed up to 50 weeks|Full analysis set (all treated patients)||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859067|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)||30 days|||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
859150|NCT01141712|Secondary|Time to Progression After CR|This will be assessed in patients with CR. Patients are considered failure for this end point if they relapse after complete remission. Surviving patients with no history of relapse/progression are censored at time of last follow-up.|Year 2|No data collected to analyze this outcome measure|||||
859031|NCT01544179|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (Site Read, Investigator Assessment)|PFS is the time from randomisation until the date of objective disease progression as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1) or death (by any cause in the absence of progression). Progression is defined using RECIST (v1.1), as at least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum on study. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5mm.|Radiologic evaluations were carried out every 6 weeks from randomization until documented progression, withdrawal of consent, loss to follow up, death or the primary data cut off (DCO) for the analysis, assessed up to 50 weeks|Full analysis set (all treated patients)||Patients with a progression event|||Number
859032|NCT01512693|Secondary|Apparent Terminal Half-life (t1/2) of MK-0822 After Single Dose|Apparent terminal half-life is the time required to divide the plasma (serum) concentration by two after reaching pseudo-equilibrium. (Note: it is not the time required to eliminate half the administered dose.) For healthy and moderate hepatic insufficiency participants, plasma samples were collected from predose to 336 hours postdose for determination of t1/2. Results are presented using harmonic mean and jackknife standard deviation.|Pre-dose and 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 32, 48, 72, 96, 120, 168, 240, and 336 hours postdose|The per protocol population consisted of all participants who complied with the protocol sufficiently to ensure that results will likely exhibit the effects of treatment according to the underlying scientific model.||hr||Standard Deviation|Mean
859033|NCT01512693|Secondary|Time to Maximum Concentration (Tmax) of MK-0822 After Single Dose|For healthy and moderate hepatic insufficiency participants, plasma samples were collected from predose to 336 hours postdose for determination of Tmax.|Pre-dose and 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 32, 48, 72, 96, 120, 168, 240, and 336 hours postdose|The per protocol population consisted of all participants who complied with the protocol sufficiently to ensure that results will likely exhibit the effects of treatment according to the underlying scientific model.||hr||Full Range|Median
859034|NCT01512693|Secondary|Maximum Concentration (Cmax) of MK-0822 After Single Dose|For healthy and moderate hepatic insufficiency participants, plasma samples were collected from predose to 336 hours postdose for determination of Cmax.|Pre-dose and 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 32, 48, 72, 96, 120, 168, 240, and 336 hours postdose|The per protocol population consisted of all participants who complied with the protocol sufficiently to ensure that results will likely exhibit the effects of treatment according to the underlying scientific model.||nM||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859035|NCT01512693|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve of MK-0822 From Time 0 to Infinity (AUC0-∞) After Single Dose|For healthy and moderate hepatic insufficiency participants, plasma samples were collected from predose to 336 hours postdose for determination of AUC0-∞ (Total AUC). AUC0-∞ is a measure of total drug exposure.|Pre-dose and 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 16, 24, 32, 48, 72, 96, 120, 168, 240, and 336 hours postdose|The per protocol population consisted of all participants who complied with the protocol sufficiently to ensure that results will likely exhibit the effects of treatment according to the underlying scientific model.||μM*hr||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859036|NCT01468896|Secondary|Time to Disease Progression (Phase II)|The Kaplan-Meier method will be used to estimate time to progression distributions.|From date of registration to date of progression, assessed up to 1 year|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859037|NCT01468896|Secondary|Proportion of Patients Who Are Progression-free (Phase I)|Summarized by simple descriptive summary statistics. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|6 months|||proportion of patients|||Number
859038|NCT01468896|Secondary|Overall Survival (Phase II)|The Kaplan-Meier method will be used to estimate overall survival distribution.|From the date of registration to date of death, assessed up to 1 year|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859039|NCT01468896|Secondary|Number of Confirmed Clinical Responses (Phase I)|Summarized by simple descriptive summary statistics. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 6 months|||Participants|||Count of Participants
859040|NCT01468896|Secondary|Induction of Systemic Plasma Levels of Interferon-gamma|Explores graphically how changes in this marker differ between those with versus without an objective response to therapy as well as other potential factors.|Baseline up to day 50|Unable to compare the plasma levels of interferon-gamma between those with versus without an objective response to therapy due to no objective response seen for Phase I or Phase II patients.|||||
859041|NCT01468896|Primary|Proportion of Patients Who Have Any Response to Treatment (Complete Response or Partial Response), Determined According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (Phase II)|The proportion of successes will be estimated by the number of successes divided by the total number of evaluable patients. Ninety percent confidence intervals for the true success proportion will be calculated according to the approach of Duffy and Santner. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR.|Up to 6 months|||proportion of patients|||Number
859042|NCT01468896|Primary|Number of Dose-limiting Toxicity Incidents to Determine the Maximum Tolerated Dose of IL-12, Evaluated Using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0 (Phase I)||14 days|||Dose limiting toxicities|||Number
859043|NCT01437098|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessment Using SF-36 Questionnaire - Physical Component Summary (Paired Change From Baseline) (Q of L)|The SF-36 assessment was used to evaluate subject Quality of life (QoL) by assessing change in physical function and general health status. The SF-36 v2TM Scoring Program2,3 was used to convert raw scores ranging from 0 to 100 into norm-based scores, allowing direct comparison to the reference values for the Japanese population. A norm-based score of less than 50 was interpreted as below average when compared to the Japanese population whereas norm-based scores greater than 50 were interpreted as above average.|Baseline to 36 Months|||Points||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
859171|NCT01002742|Secondary|Incidence of Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV)-Associated Lymphoma||12 months|||participants|||Number
859044|NCT01437098|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessment Using SF-36 Questionnaire - Physical Component Summary (Paired Change From Baseline) (Q of L)|The SF-36 assessment was used to evaluate subject Quality of life (QoL) by assessing change in physical function and general health status. The SF-36 v2TM Scoring Program2,3 was used to convert raw scores ranging from 0 to 100 into norm-based scores, allowing direct comparison to the reference values for the Japanese population. A norm-based score of less than 50 was interpreted as below average when compared to the Japanese population whereas norm-based scores greater than 50 were interpreted as above average.|Baseline to 24 Months|||Points||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
859045|NCT01437098|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessment Using SF-36 Questionnaire - Physical Component Summary (Paired Change From Baseline) (Q of L)|The SF-36 assessment was used to evaluate subject Quality of life (QoL) by assessing change in physical function and general health status. The SF-36 v2TM Scoring Program2,3 was used to convert raw scores ranging from 0 to 100 into norm-based scores, allowing direct comparison to the reference values for the Japanese population. A norm-based score of less than 50 was interpreted as below average when compared to the Japanese population whereas norm-based scores greater than 50 were interpreted as above average.|Baseline to 12 months|||Points||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
859046|NCT01437098|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessment Using SF-36 Questionnaire - Physical Component Summary (Paired Change From Baseline) (Q of L)|The SF-36 assessment was used to evaluate subject Quality of life (QoL) by assessing change in physical function and general health status. The SF-36 v2TM Scoring Program2,3 was used to convert raw scores ranging from 0 to 100 into norm-based scores, allowing direct comparison to the reference values for the Japanese population. A norm-based score of less than 50 was interpreted as below average when compared to the Japanese population whereas norm-based scores greater than 50 were interpreted as above average.|Baseline to 6 months|||Points||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
859047|NCT01437098|Secondary|Quality of Life Assessment Using SF-36 Questionnaire - Physical Component Summary (Paired Change From Baseline) (Q of L)|The SF-36 assessment was used to evaluate subject Quality of life (QoL) by assessing change in physical function and general health status. The SF-36 v2TM Scoring Program2,3 was used to convert raw scores ranging from 0 to 100 into norm-based scores, allowing direct comparison to the reference values for the Japanese population. A norm-based score of less than 50 was interpreted as below average when compared to the Japanese population whereas norm-based scores greater than 50 were interpreted as above average.|Baseline to 30 days|The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had Q of L available at this visit were analyzed. Not everyone followed to this visit had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.||Points||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
859048|NCT01437098|Secondary|Valve-related Deaths||0 day to 36 months|||prob of freedom from event @ 1095 days|||Number
859049|NCT01437098|Secondary|Valve-related Deaths||0 day to 24 months|||prob of freedom from event @ 730 days|||Number
859050|NCT01437098|Secondary|Valve-Related Deaths||0 day to 12 months|||prob of freedom from event @ 365 days|||Number
859051|NCT01437098|Secondary|Valve-related Deaths||0 day to 6 months|||prob of freedom from event @ 183 days|||Number
859052|NCT01437098|Secondary|Valve-related Deaths||0 day to 30 days|||prob of freedom from event @ 30 days|||Number
859053|NCT01437098|Secondary|Repeat Hospitalization||0 day to 36 months|||prob of freedom from event @ 1095 days|||Number
859054|NCT01437098|Secondary|Repeat Hospitalization||0 day to 24 months|||prob of freedom from event @ 730 days|||Number
859055|NCT01437098|Secondary|Repeat Hospitalization||0 day to 12 months|||prob of freedom from event @ 365 days|||Number
859056|NCT01437098|Secondary|Repeat Hospitalization||0 day to 6 months|||prob of freedom from event @ 183 days|||Number
859057|NCT01437098|Secondary|Repeat Hospitalization||0 day to 30 days|||prob of freedom from event @ 30 days|||Number
859058|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Total Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular & Paravalvular) (Total AR)||36 months|The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had LVEF measurement available at 36 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 36 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
859059|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Total Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular & Paravalvular) (Total AR)||24 months|The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had Total AR available at 24 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 24 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
859060|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Total Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular & Paravalvular) (Total AR)||12 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
859061|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Total Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular & Paravalvular) (Total AR)||6 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
859062|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Total Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular & Paravalvular) (Total AR)||30 days|||percentage of participants|||Number
859063|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)||36 months|The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had LVEF measurement available at 36 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 36 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
859064|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)||24 months|The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had LVEF measurement available at 24 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 24 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
859065|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)||12 months|||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
859068|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)||36 months|The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had LVEF measurement available at 36 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 36 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.||cm²||Standard Deviation|Mean
859069|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)||24 months|The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had EOA measurement available at 24 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 24 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.||cm²||Standard Deviation|Mean
859070|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)||12 months|||cm²||Standard Deviation|Mean
859071|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)||6 months|||cm²||Standard Deviation|Mean
859072|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)||30 days|||cm²||Standard Deviation|Mean
859073|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Mean Gradient||36 months|The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had LVEF measurement available at 36 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 36 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
859074|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Mean Gradient||24 months|The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had mean gradients available at 24 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 24 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
859075|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Mean Gradient||12 months|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
859076|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Mean Gradient||6 months|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
859077|NCT01437098|Secondary|Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Mean Gradient||30 days|||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
859078|NCT01437098|Secondary|Procedural Success, Defined as Device Success and Absence of In-hospital MACCE.||after procedure or discharge|||percentage of participants|||Number
859079|NCT01437098|Secondary|Device Success as Defined in the Description.|"successful vascular access, delivery and deployment of the device, and successful retrieval of the delivery system
correct position of the device in the proper anatomical location (placement in the annulus with no impedance on device function)
Intended performance of the prosthetic valve (aortic valve area >1.2 cm² (by echocardiography using the continuity equation) and mean aortic valve gradient < 20 mmHg or peak velocity < 3 m/sec, without moderate or severe prosthetic valve AR)
Only one valve implanted in the proper anatomical location"|after procedure or discharge|The AT cohort that went through an index procedure were analyzed for Device Success. Also, all components that went into the success measures had to be non-missing. Therefore n=53.||percentage of participants|||Number
859080|NCT01437098|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)|"MACCE is defined as a composite of:
all-cause death
myocardial infarction (MI)
all stroke, and
reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)"|0 day to 36 months|The Kaplan-Meier Method was used to calculate the number.||prob of freedom from event at 1095 days|||Number
859081|NCT01437098|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)|"MACCE is defined as a composite of:
all-cause death
myocardial infarction (MI)
all stroke, and
reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)"|0 day to 24 months|The Kaplan-Meier Method was used to calculate the number.||prob of freedom from event at 730 days|||Number
859082|NCT01437098|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)|"MACCE is defined as a composite of:
all-cause death
myocardial infarction (MI)
all stroke, and
reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)"|0 day to 12 months|The Kaplan-Meier Method was used to calculate the number.||prob of freedom from event @ 365 days|||Number
859083|NCT01437098|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)|"MACCE is defined as a composite of:
all-cause death
myocardial infarction (MI)
all stroke, and
reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)"|0 day to 6 months|The Kaplan-Meier Method was used to calculate the number.||prob of freedom from event @ 183 days|||Number
859084|NCT01437098|Secondary|Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)|"MACCE is defined as a composite of:
all-cause death
myocardial infarction (MI)
all stroke, and
reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)"|0 day to 30 days|The Kaplan-Meier Method was used to calculate the number.||prob of freedom from event @ 30 days|||Number
859085|NCT01437098|Secondary|NYHA Classification Over Time|"NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION CLASSIFICATION (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased."|36 Months|||percentage of participants|||Number
859086|NCT01437098|Secondary|NYHA Classification Over Time|"NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION CLASSIFICATION (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased."|24 Months|||percentage of participants|||Number
859087|NCT01437098|Secondary|NYHA Classification Over Time|"NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION CLASSIFICATION (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased."|12 Months|||percentage of participants|||Number
859088|NCT01437098|Secondary|NYHA Classification Over Time|"NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION CLASSIFICATION (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain. Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased."|6 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
859089|NCT01437098|Secondary|NYHA Classification Over Time|"NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION CLASSIFICATION (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain. Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased."|30 days|NYHA denominators included deaths (n=2). Taken deaths out, you have n=51 at 30 days.||percentage of participants|||Number
859090|NCT01437098|Primary|Composite Success of Improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class and a Performance Goal for Effective Orifice Area (EOA).|The primary endpoint was defined as the proportion of implanted subjects with improvement of at least 1 NYHA class from baseline to 6 months and EOA greater than 1.2 cm² at 6 months.|baseline and 6 months|All subjects implanted with the MDT-2111 device.||percentage of participants|||Number
859091|NCT01392573|Secondary|Change in Body Weight|Observed mean change from baseline in body weight after 26 Weeks of treatment.|Week 0, week 26|Full analysis set. Missing data was imputed using LOCF.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
859092|NCT01392573|Primary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c (Glycosylated Haemoglobin)|Observed mean change from baseline in HbA1c after 26 Weeks of treatment.|Week 0, week 26|Full analysis set. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
859093|NCT01387282|Secondary|Change in Body Weight|Change in body weight (BW) from baseline overall (i.e., over 12 weeks) for the MITT Population.|Change in Body Weight from Baseline Over 12 Weeks|Modified Intent-to-Treat Population||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859094|NCT01387282|Secondary|Change in FACIT-F Fatigue Domain Score|"The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) fatigue domain is a 13-item scale that is part of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System. Each item is answered on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much).
The 13-items are summed together to obtain the domain score. Note that negatively phrased questions are reverse scored so that higher scores always represent improvement/less symptom burden. The total possible score for the FACIT-F fatigue domain ranges from 0 (worst) to 52 (best)."|Change in FACIT-F Fatigue Domain Score from Baseline Over 12 Weeks|Modified Intent-to-Treat Population||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859095|NCT01387282|Secondary|Change in A/CS Domain Score|"The Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Treatment (FAACT) Additional Concerns Subscale (A/CS domain) is a 12-item scale that is part of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System. Each item is answered on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much).
The 12-items are summed together to obtain the domain score. Note that negatively phrased questions are reverse scored so that higher scores always represent improvement/less symptom burden. The total possible score for the A/CS domain ranges from 0 (worst) to 48 (best)."|Change in FAACT A/CS Domain Score from Baseline Over 12 Weeks|Modified Intent-to-Treat Population||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859126|NCT01352221|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects That Achieved ≥2 g/dL Change From Baseline in Hb Concentration at Week 12 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Logistic regression analysis of proportion of subjects that achieved ≥2 g/dL change from baseline in Hb concentration at Week 12 in the double-blind phase|Baseline to Week 12 - double-blind phase|FAS||Participants|||Count of Participants
859172|NCT01002742|Secondary|Incidence of Systemic Infections|Number of participants that experienced at least one infection.|6 Months|||participants|||Number
859096|NCT01387282|Primary|Change in Handgrip Strength|Change in Handgrip Strength (HGS) of the non-dominant hand from baseline over 12 weeks for the ITT Population. Change from baseline over 12 weeks was defined as the average of the change from baseline at Week 6 and the change from baseline at Week 12.|Change in Handgrip Strength of the Non-Dominant Hand from Baseline Over 12 Weeks|Intent-to-Treat Population. Some patients in the ITT population were excluded from the primary LBM/HGS analysis (i.e., multiple imputations/ranking method) if they survived to Week 12 but missed their baseline covariates including LBM, HGS, or ECOG OR had Week 6 and Week 12 outcomes that were outside the visit windows.||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859097|NCT01387282|Primary|Change in Lean Body Mass|Change in Lean Body Mass (LBM) from baseline over 12 weeks for the ITT Population. Change from baseline over 12 weeks was defined as the average of the change from baseline at Week 6 and the change from baseline at Week 12.|Change in Lean Body Mass from Baseline Over 12 Weeks|Intent-to-Treat Population. Some patients in the ITT population were excluded from the primary LBM/HGS analysis (i.e., multiple imputations/ranking method) if they survived to Week 12 but missed their baseline covariates including LBM, HGS, or ECOG OR had Week 6 and Week 12 outcomes that were outside the visit windows.||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859098|NCT01387269|Secondary|Change in Body Weight|Change in body weight (BW) from baseline overall (i.e., over 12 weeks) for the MITT Population.|Change in Body Weight from Baseline Over 12 Weeks|Modified Intent-to-Treat Population||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859099|NCT01387269|Secondary|Change in FACIT-F Fatigue Domain Score|"The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) fatigue domain is a 13-item scale that is part of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System. Each item is answered on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much).
The 13-items are summed together to obtain the domain score. Note that negatively phrased questions are reverse scored so that higher scores always represent improvement/less symptom burden. The total possible score for the FACIT-F fatigue domain ranges from 0 (worst) to 52 (best)."|Change in FACIT-F Fatigue Domain Score from Baseline Over 12 Weeks|Modified Intent-to-Treat Population||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859100|NCT01387269|Secondary|Change in A/CS Domain Score|"The Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Treatment (FAACT) Additional Concerns Subscale (A/CS domain) is a 12-item scale that is part of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System. Each item is answered on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much).
The 12-items are summed together to obtain the domain score. Note that negatively phrased questions are reverse scored so that higher scores always represent improvement/less symptom burden. The total possible score for the A/CS domain ranges from 0 (worst) to 48 (best)."|Change in FAACT A/CS Domain Score from Baseline Over 12 Weeks|Modified Intent-to-Treat Population||scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859101|NCT01387269|Primary|Change in Handgrip Strength|Change in Handgrip Strength (HGS) of the non-dominant hand from baseline over 12 weeks for the ITT Population. Change from baseline over 12 weeks was defined as the average of the change from baseline at Week 6 and the change from baseline at Week 12.|Change in Handgrip Strength of the Non-Dominant Hand from Baseline Over 12 Weeks|Intent-to-Treat Population. Some patients in the ITT population were excluded from the primary LBM/HGS analysis (i.e., multiple imputations/ranking method) if they survived to Week 12 but missed their baseline covariates including LBM, HGS, or ECOG OR had Week 6 and Week 12 outcomes that were outside the visit windows.||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859102|NCT01387269|Primary|Change in Lean Body Mass|Change in Lean Body Mass (LBM) from baseline over 12 weeks for the ITT Population. Change from baseline over 12 weeks was defined as the average of the change from baseline at Week 6 and the change from baseline at Week 12.|Change in Lean Body Mass from Baseline Over 12 Weeks|Intent-to-Treat Population. Some patients in the ITT population were excluded from the primary LBM/HGS analysis (i.e., multiple imputations/ranking method) if they survived to Week 12 but missed their baseline covariates including LBM, HGS, or ECOG OR had Week 6 and Week 12 outcomes that were outside the visit windows.||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859103|NCT01352221|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Score at Week 64 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|"Change from baseline in Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score at Week 64 (FAS), after 12-week double blind phase and 52 weeks open-label ST10 treatment (in participants with CD only).
The CDAI is a research tool used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's disease. CDAI score can range from 0 to approximately 600. Traditionally, for clinical trials, clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score <150, clinical response is a decrease in CDAI score of 70-100. Mildly active Crohn's disease is defined as a CDAI score 150–220, moderate–severe Crohn's is typically a CDAI 220–450, and severe disease is defined as a CDAI >450."|Baseline to Week 64 - open-label phase|FAS||score on a scale||Full Range|Median
859104|NCT01352221|Other Pre-specified|Change From Baseline in Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Score at Week 12 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|"Change from baseline (randomisation) in Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score at Week 12 (FAS), end of double-blind phase (in subjects with CD).
The CDAI is a research tool used to quantify the symptoms of patients with Crohn's disease. CDAI score can range from 0 to approximately 600. Traditionally, for clinical trials, clinical remission is defined as a CDAI score <150, clinical response is a decrease in CDAI score of 70-100. Mildly active Crohn's disease is defined as a CDAI score 150–220, moderate–severe Crohn's is typically a CDAI 220–450, and severe disease is defined as a CDAI >450."|Baseline to Week 12 - double-blind phase|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||score on a scale||Full Range|Median
859105|NCT01352221|Other Pre-specified|Irritable Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) Score at Week 64 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|"Irritable Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) score at Week 64 (FAS), after 12-week double-blind phase and 52 weeks of open-label ST10 treatment.
The IBDQ was developed as an activity index for determining the effect of Crohn's disease symptoms on perceived quality of life. It is a 32-item questionnaire with four dimensions: bowel function, emotional status, systemic symptoms and social function. Total IBDQ score ranges from 32 to 224, with higher scores indicating better quality of life. The score of patients in remission usually is between 170 and 190."|Week 64 - open-label phase|FAS||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859127|NCT01352221|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects That Achieved ≥1 g/dL Change From Baseline in Hb Concentration at Week 12 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Logistic regression analysis of proportion of subjects that achieved ≥1 g/dL change from baseline in Hb concentration at Week 12 in the double-blind phase|Subjects that achieved ≥1 g/dL change from baseline in Hb concentration at Week 12 - double-blind phase|FAS||Participants|||Count of Participants
859106|NCT01352221|Other Pre-specified|Irritable Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) Score at Week 12 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|"Irritable Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) score at Week 12 (FAS), end of double-blind phase.
The IBDQ was developed as an activity index for determining the effect of Crohn's disease symptoms on perceived quality of life. It is a 32-item questionnaire with four dimensions: bowel function, emotional status, systemic symptoms and social function. Total IBDQ score ranges from 32 to 224, with higher scores indicating better quality of life. The score of patients in remission usually is between 170 and 190."|Week 12 - double-blind phase|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||score on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859107|NCT01352221|Other Pre-specified|Change in Serum TSAT% From Baseline to Week 64 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in serum TSAT% from Baseline to Week 64 (Full Analysis Set), after 12-week double-blind phase and 52 weeks open-label ST10 treatment|Baseline to Week 64 - open-label phase|FAS||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
859108|NCT01352221|Other Pre-specified|Change in Serum Ferritin Concentration From Baseline to Week 64 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in serum Ferritin concentration from Baseline to Week 64 (FAS), after 12-week double-blind phase and 52 weeks open-label ST10 treatment|Baseline to Week 64 - open-label phase|FAS||μg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859109|NCT01352221|Other Pre-specified|Change in Serum TSAT% From Baseline to Week 12 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in serum TSAT% from Baseline to Week 12 (FAS), after 12-week double-blind phase|Baseline to Week 12 - double-blind phase|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
859110|NCT01352221|Other Pre-specified|Change in Serum Ferritin Concentration From Baseline to Week 12 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in serum Ferritin concentration from Baseline to Week 12 (Full Analysis Set), after 12-week double-blind phase|Baseline to Week 12 - double-blind phase|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||μg/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859111|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration From Baseline to Week 12 (Full Analysis Set [FAS] LOCF)|ANCOVA sensitivity analysis of the Primary efficacy endpoint analysis on the FAS LOCF - Change in Haemoglobin Concentration from Baseline to Week 12|Baseline to Week 12 - double-blind phase|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859112|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration From Baseline to Week 12 (Per Protocol Analysis Set, PPAS)|ANCOVA sensitivity analysis of the Primary efficacy endpoint analysis on the PPAS - Change in Haemoglobin Concentration from Baseline to Week 12|Baseline to Week 12 - double-blind phase|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859113|NCT01352221|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects That Achieved Haemoglobin Concentration Within Normal Range at Week 64 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Proportion of subjects that achieved Haemoglobin Concentration within normal range at Week 64 (Full Analysis Set), after 12-week double-blind phase and 52 weeks of open-label ST10 treatment|Baseline to Week 64 - open-label phase|FAS||Participants|||Count of Participants
859114|NCT01352221|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects That Achieved Haemoglobin Concentration Within Normal Range at Week 36 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Proportion of subjects that achieved Haemoglobin Concentration within normal range at Week 36 (Full Analysis Set), after 12-week double-blind phase and 24 weeks of open-label ST10 treatment|Baseline to Week 36 - open-label phase|FAS||Participants|||Count of Participants
859115|NCT01352221|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects That Achieved Haemoglobin Concentration Within Normal Range at Week 16 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Proportion of subjects that achieved Haemoglobin Concentration within normal range at Week 16 (Full Analysis Set), after 12-week double-blind phase and first 4 weeks of open-label ST10 treatment|Baseline to Week 16 - open-label phase|FAS||Participants|||Count of Participants
859116|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration From Baseline to Week 64 EOS (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration from Baseline to Week 64 EOS (FAS) - Week 64 was re-categorised as Week 64 EOS for those subjects who withdrew from the study early and the ‘Week 64’ visit was outside the visit window of 64 weeks ± 2 days|Baseline to Week 64 EOS - open-label phase|FAS||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859117|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration From Baseline to Week 64 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration from Baseline to Week 64 (FAS), after 12-week double-blind phase and then 52 weeks of open-label ST10 treatment|Baseline to Week 64 - open-label phase|FAS||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859118|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration From Baseline to Week 48 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration from Baseline to Week 48 (FAS), after 12-week double-blind phase and then 36 weeks of open-label ST10 treatment|Baseline to Week 48 - open-label phase|FAS||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859119|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration From Baseline to Week 36 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration from Baseline to Week 36 (FAS), after 12-week double-blind phase and then 24 weeks of open-label ST10 treatment|Baseline to Week 36 - open-label phase|FAS||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859120|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration From Baseline to Week 24 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration from Baseline to Week 24 (FAS), after 12-week double-blind phase and then 12 weeks of open-label ST10 treatment|Baseline to Week 24 - open-label phase|FAS||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859121|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration From Baseline to Week 20 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration from Baseline to Week 20 (FAS), after 12-week double-blind phase and then 8 weeks of open-label ST10 treatment|Baseline to Week 20 - open-label phase|FAS||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859122|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration From Baseline to Week 16 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Change in Haemoglobin Concentration from Baseline to Week 16 (FAS), after 12-week double-blind phase and first 4 weeks of open-label ST10 treatment.|Baseline to Week 16 - open-label phase|FAS||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859123|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Hb Concentration From Baseline to Week 8 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|ANCOVA analysis of Change in Hb concentration from Baseline to Week 8 of double-blind phase - FAS, multiple imputation|Baseline to Week 8 - double-blind phase|FAS||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859124|NCT01352221|Secondary|Change in Hb Concentration From Baseline to Week 4 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|ANCOVA analysis of the change in Hb concentration from Baseline to Week 4 of the double-blind phase - Full Analysis Set, multiple imputation|Baseline to Week 4 - double-blind phase|||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859125|NCT01352221|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects That Achieved Hb Concentration Within Normal Range at Week 12 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Logistic regression analysis of proportion of subjects that achieved Hb concentration within normal range at Week 12 end of double-blind phase|Baseline to Week 12 - double-blind phase|FAS||Participants|||Count of Participants
859128|NCT01352221|Primary|Change in Haemoglobin (Hb) Concentration From Baseline to Week 12 (Full Analysis Set, FAS)|Primary efficacy endpoint, defined as the change in Hb concentration from Baseline to Week 12. Baseline was defined as the pre-dose Hb concentration measured at the Randomisation Visit (Week 0). Missing Randomisation Hb values were replaced by Screening Hb values, if the randomisation was within the protocol-specified window. Hb concentration (g/dL) was analysed by a central laboratory from blood samples collected at every clinic visit: Screening, Randomisation (Week 0), Weeks 4, 8, 12, 14, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48, 64, Weeks 14 to 64 were open-label. The baseline, absolute concentration and change from baseline in Hb at all post-randomisation visits were listed and summarised by week using descriptive statistics. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to analyse the primary endpoint; this included treatment, gender and disease as factors and baseline Hb as a covariate.|Baseline to Week 12 - double-blind phase|Full Analysis Set (FAS)||g/dL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859129|NCT01320072|Secondary|Change in Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) in Aspirin Exacerbated Respiratory Disease (AERD) Patients|We will assess FEV1% change from baseline at 12 months in AERD patients who have been on aspirin treatment for 12 months (current standard of care)|12 months|AERD patients will continue aspirin treatment for 12 months and the change from baseline in their FEV1% predicted will be monitored during this time||change in percent predicted FEV1||Standard Error|Mean
859130|NCT01320072|Secondary|Treatment-Related Adverse Events|Adverse reactions defined as bronchospasm requiring endotracheal intubation. The adverse reactions will be assessed through a post challenge follow-up with the patient at baseline and 24 hours after the challenge|24 hours after the challenge|||participants|||Number
859131|NCT01320072|Primary|Eicosanoid Metabolites Concentration|eicosanoid metabolites concentration in plasma and urine 2 h post ASA challenge|2 hours|||log-pg/mg creatinine||Standard Error|Mean
859132|NCT01286012|Secondary|Iron Delivery to the Erythron as Estimated by Hemoglobin Generation in Response to Erythropoietin (ESA Response Index, or ERI, Calculated as ESA Dose/Hgb). The ERI Will Also be Divided by Body Weight in Kilograms to Obtain a Modified ERI (ERI/kg).||Hemoglobin measured weekly; ESA dose recorded at each visit for 36 weeks, pre-dialysis body weight recorded at each visit for the first four weeks of the study and then weekly for the rest of the study.||||||
859133|NCT01286012|Secondary|Markers of Inflammation and Oxidative Stress||measured pre and post-dialysis at Week 1 Visit 2 and pre-dialysis at Weeks 4, 12, 24, and 36 of the study.||||||
859134|NCT01286012|Secondary|The Amount of Supplemental Intravenous (IV) Iron Needed.||Recorded at every dialysis session for 36 weeks|||mg/week||Standard Deviation|Mean
859135|NCT01286012|Secondary|Stability of Hemoglobin Over Time (Maintenance of Hemoglobin Between 9.5-11.5 g/dL, and Variability in Hemoglobin [Hgb-var]).||measured weekly for 36 weeks.||||||
859136|NCT01286012|Secondary|"The Incidence of Patient Failures, Defined as ≥ 25% Increase From Baseline in ESA Dose Sustained Continuously for ≥ 8 Weeks."||ESA dose is monitored and recorded at each dialysis session for 36 weeks.||||||
859137|NCT01286012|Secondary|"The Incidence of Patient Responders Defined as ≥ 25% Decrease From Baseline in ESA Dose Sustained Continuously for ≥ 8 Weeks."||ESA dose is monitored and recorded at each dialysis session for 36 weeks.||||||
859138|NCT01286012|Primary|The Percent Change From Baseline in ESA Dose Required to Maintain Hemoglobin in the Target Range, Adjusted for Hgb.|The statistical endpoint is the change from baseline between groups at End of Treatment, where the baseline prescribed ESA dose (expressed as U/week epoetin) per subject is defined as the average weekly dose of ESA prescribed for administration over the two-week period of time immediately prior to randomization. The end-of-treatment prescribed ESA dose (expressed as U/week epoetin) per subject is defined as the average weekly dose of ESA prescribed for administration over the last two weeks of the treatment period.|Hemoglobin measured weekly and serum ferritin and Transferrin Saturation (TSAT) determined every other week; ESA dose recorded at each visit for 36 weeks.|MITT population: Randomized subjects who received at least one dose of study drug and also received ESA during the treatment period.||Percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859139|NCT01141712|Secondary|Ig and Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) DNA in Blood|The presence of clonal Ig DNA in plasma will be assessed, as will EBV copy number in plasma and in peripheral blood|Day 100, 180, and 365|No data collected to analyze this outcome measure.|||||
859140|NCT01141712|Secondary|Microbial Translocation Markers|Level of microbial translocation markers will be determined by nonparametric Mann-Whitney tests comparing the distribution of prior microbial translocation markers between patients.|Day 30 and 100|No data collected to analyze this outcome measure.|||||
859141|NCT01141712|Secondary|HIV Single-Copy Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)|HIV RNA assay will be performed at the specified time points and summarize the assessments of the viral copy number using descriptive statistics.|Baseline, Days 100, 180, 365, and 730|Participants with an undetectable (<50 copies/mL) viral load are not included in this analysis (Baseline = 32, Day 100 = 19, Day 180 = 20, Day 365 = 19, and Day 730 = 21)||copies/mL||Full Range|Median
859142|NCT01141712|Secondary|Immunologic Reconstitution|Immunologic Reconstitution will be assessed by quantitative immunoglobulin measurement (IgM, IgG and IgA)|Year 1|||mg/dL||Full Range|Median
859143|NCT01141712|Secondary|Treatment-Related Mortality (TRM)|TRM is defined as death occurring in a patient from causes other than relapse or progression. A cumulative incidence curve will be computed along with a 95% confidence interval at 100 days post-transplant.|Day 100|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859144|NCT01141712|Secondary|Number of Participants Experiencing Infections|Microbiologically documented infections will be reported by site of disease, date of onset, severity, and resolution, if any.|Year 1|||participants|||Number
859145|NCT01141712|Secondary|Number of Participants Experiencing Toxicity|Toxicities will be defined by using the version 3.0 NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) criteria. Only grade 3 and higher toxicities will be collected.|Year 2|||participants|||Number
859146|NCT01141712|Secondary|Hematologic Function|Hematologic function will be defined as ANC > 1500 neutrophils/μL, Hemoglobin> 10g/dL without transfusion support, and platelets > 100,000/μL|Days 100 and 365|||participants|||Number
859147|NCT01141712|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Platelet Recovery|Platelet recovery is defined as a platelet count greater than 20,000/μL for the first of two consecutive labs with no platelet transfusions 7 days prior.|Day 100|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859173|NCT01002742|Secondary|Incidence of Chronic GVHD||12 months post-randomization|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859151|NCT01141712|Secondary|Complete Remission (CR) and/or Partial Response (PR)|The frequencies and proportions of patients who have a CR or PR. CR is defined as the disappearance of all evidence of disease, and PR is defined as the regression of measurable disease and no new sites.|Day 100|One participant died at day 64 and was not included in analysis||participants|||Number
859152|NCT01141712|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS)|The time to this event is the time from enrollment until death, relapse/progression, receipt of anti-lymphoma therapy, or last follow up, whichever comes first. Progression-free survival (PFS) will be estimated using the Kaplan Meier product limit estimator. The PFS probability and confidence interval will be calculated at two years post-transplant.|Year 2|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859153|NCT01141712|Secondary|Relapse/Progression|Relapse is defined as the appearance of any new lesion more than 1.5 cm in any axis during or at the end of therapy, even if other lesions are decreasing in size. Progression is defined as a lymph node with a diameter of the short axis of less than 1.0 cm must increase by >= 50% and to a size of 1.5 x 1.5 cm or more than 1.5 cm in the long axis.|Year 2|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859154|NCT01141712|Primary|Overall Survival (OS)|Assess the OS after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) for chemotherapy-sensitive aggressive B cell lymphoma or Hodgkin's lymphoma in patients with HIV using BEAM for pre-transplant conditioning. The primary analysis will consist of estimating the 1 year OS probability from the time of transplantation based on the Kaplan-Meier product limit estimator. The 1 year and 2 year OS and confidence interval will be calculated.|Year 1 and 2|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859155|NCT01120782|Primary|Prescription Equivalence|Number of subjects whose prescription is the same for the two lenses tested.|after 15 minutes of lens wear|All completed subjects.||participants|||Number
859156|NCT01111305|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Who Clear Blood Microfilariae||3, 7, and 28 days after initiation of treatment with DEC|||Participants|||Count of Participants
859157|NCT01111305|Secondary|Markers of Eosinophil Activation Including Levels of Eosinophil Surface Marker Expression and Serum Levels of Eosinophil Granule Proteins||through study completion||12/2017||||
859158|NCT01111305|Secondary|Frequency of AE's|Adverse events during the first week of DEC treatment|7 days following initiation of DEC treatment|Subjects who received DEC treatment||adverse events|||Number
859159|NCT01111305|Primary|Change in Peak Eosinophil Count Measure as a Percent of Baseline Count.|Peak absolute eosinophil count during the week following DEC treatment as a percent of baseline eosinophil count|during the first 7 days of DEC treatment|Subjects who received diethylcarbamazine treatment||percentage of baseline||Full Range|Geometric Mean
859160|NCT01042535|Other Pre-specified|Phase 2 - Change in Biomarker Level|Biomarkers include serum kynurenine, serum tryptophan, C reactive protein, and circulating T-regulatory cell levels (CD4+ 25+ CD127low forkhead box protein 3+ (FoxP3+). Appropriate t-tests and/or Wilcoxon test will be employed to study changes over time.|Baseline to week 16||||||
859161|NCT01042535|Secondary|Phase 2 – Median Progression Free Survival (PFS) in Weeks|Progressive Disease (PD): Appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. PFS: Time from study entry to documentation of radiologic progressive disease or death, assessed up to 3 years.|Up to 3 years|All evaluable participants at time of analysis||weeks||Full Range|Median
859162|NCT01042535|Secondary|Phase 2 – Number of Participants With Clinical Benefit From Chemotherapy After Vaccination|Clinical response rate evaluated using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions. Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the diameter (LD) of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum LD. Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started.|Up to 3 years|All evaluable participants at time of analysis||participants|||Number
859163|NCT01042535|Secondary|Phase 1 - Number of Participants With Objective Response at 6 Weeks|Immunologic Response defined as Interferon-γ (IFN-γ) p53 T cell specific enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay count Summarized using both point estimates and the 95% exact confidence intervals based on the binomial distribution. Briefly, 2x10^5 mononuclear cells obtained from the peripheral blood of patients will be plated in quadruplicates in 96-well multiscreen mixed cellulose ester (HA) filtration plates, processed and incubated, spots will be visualized. The number of spots will be calculated per 10^6 cells. Untreated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMNC) will represent a negative control and PBMNC stimulated with 10 µg/ml Concanavalin A (ConA) – positive control.|At 6 weeks|Phase I Participants who Received at Least 1 Dose of Ad.p53DC+indoximod||participants|||Number
859164|NCT01042535|Primary|Phase 2 – Number of Participants With Stable Disease In Response to Study Therapy|Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum LD since the treatment started.|Up to 16 weeks|All evaluable participants at time of analysis||participants|||Number
859165|NCT01042535|Primary|Phase 1 - Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) in Milligrams (mg)|MTD of 1-methyl-d-tryptophan (indoximod) given by mouth (PO), twice a day (BID), with up to 6 fixed doses Ad.p53 DC vaccinations every 2 weeks (q2wks). This phase 1 study used a 3+3 design with 7 indoximod dose levels (DL) (100 mg, 200 mg, 400 mg, 800 mg daily (QD) then 800 mg, 1,200 mg, and 1,600 mg PO BID +up to 6 fixed dose Ad.p53 DC vaccinations q2wks. Toxicity was assessed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE) v4.0. The MTD is the highest dose level below the maximally administered dose (MAD) that is safely tolerated among 6 treated patients, that is, 0 or 1 out of 6 patients experiences a dose limiting toxicity (DLT).|Up to 4 weeks|Phase I Participants who Received at Least 1 Dose of Ad.p53DC+indoximod||indoximod dose in mg|||Number
859166|NCT01002742|Secondary|Change in Patient Reported Outcomes From Enrollment to Day 56||Day 56|No data collected|||||
859167|NCT01002742|Secondary|Treatment Related Mortality (TRM)||Year 1|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859168|NCT01002742|Secondary|Disease-Free Survival (DFS) Post-Randomization|DFS includes death or progression/relapse of malignancy|Year 1|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859169|NCT01002742|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of a Severe/Life-threatening/Fatal Infections||Year 1|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859170|NCT01002742|Secondary|Incidence of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Reactivation||Year 1|||percentage of participants|||Number
859197|NCT00910962|Secondary|Mean Left Ventricular End-diastolic Volume (LVEDV) and Left Ventricular End-systolic Volume (LVESV) at Week 12|Statistical analyses of the treatment differences was performed to compare the LVEDV and LVESV (via MRI) at Week 12, and for the change from Day 3 to Week 12 via repeated measures ANCOVA between study drug and placebo. Cardiac MRIs were performed at qualified sites on participants who agree to participate in the MRI sub-study. A total of 15 participants out of 93 MRI ITT participants were excluded from the analysis due to missing Baseline cTnI (10 participants) and onset chest pain duration (9 participants). Four participants had both covariate values missing.|At Week 12|MRI ITT Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859198|NCT00910962|Secondary|Mean Percent Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) at Week 12|Statistical analyses of the treatment differences was performed to compare the LVEF (via MRI) at Week 12, and for the change from Day 3 to Week 12 via repeated measures ANCOVA between study drug and placebo. Cardiac MRIs were performed at qualified sites on participants who agree to participate in the MRI sub-study. A total of 15 participants out of 93 MRI ITT participants were excluded from the analysis due to missing Baseline cTnI (10 participants) and onset chest pain duration (9 participants). Four participants had both covariate values missing.|At Week 12|MRI ITT Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Percent||Standard Deviation|Mean
859199|NCT00910962|Secondary|Mean Infarct Size Prior to Discharge From Hospital (Approximately Day 3) and at Week 12|Statistical analyses was performed to compare the infarct size (via MRI) at Week 12 via repeated measures ANOVA between study drug and placebo using Bayesian methods for inference. Myocardial infarct size was measured by delayed enhancement magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as: Infarct size (% of left ventricular myocardium [% of LV]) for infarct 1. The infarct region 1 was the infarct region which the MRI interpretation process identified as the primary infarct region of the index hospitalization. Participants were included in the analyses, provided they have data for derivation of the measures of interest (MR infarct size). A total of 15 participants out of 93 MRI ITT participants were excluded from the analysis due to missing Baseline cTnI (10 participants) and onset chest pain duration (9 participants). Four participants had both covariate values missing.|Prior to discharge (visit 1) and at Week 12|MRI ITT Population was subset of participants in the ITT Population who had at least one MRI scan. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percent of left ventricle||Standard Deviation|Mean
859200|NCT00910962|Secondary|Mean Brain Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) at Discharge and Week 12|Statistical analyses was performed to compare BNP levels between study drug and placebo. Log transformed ratio to Baseline BNP was analyzed using repeated measures ANCOVA including a term for treatment, adjusting for Baseline BNP as a covariate, and accounting for other covariates as appropriate to the study design.|At discharge and Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||pg/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
859201|NCT00910962|Secondary|Peak cTnI Over 72 Hours Post-randomization or Until Hospital Discharge (Whichever Comes First)|Statistical analyses was performed to compare cTnI levels between study drug and placebo. Log transformed ratio to Baseline cTnI was analyzed using repeated measures ANCOVA including a term for treatment, adjusting for Baseline cTnI as a covariate, and accounting for other covariates as appropriate to the study design.|Up to 72 hours|ITT Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
859202|NCT00910962|Secondary|Mean Creatine Kinase (MB Isoenzyme) (CK-MB) AUC Over 72 Hours Post-randomization or Until Hospital Discharge (Whichever Comes First)|Statistical analyses was performed to compare CK-MB levels between study drug and placebo. Log transformed ratio to Baseline CK-MB was analyzed using repeated measures ANCOVA including a term for treatment, adjusting for Baseline CK-MB as a covariate, and accounting for other covariates as appropriate to the study design.|At pre-dose and at hours 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 72|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
859203|NCT00910962|Secondary|Mean Interleukin-6 (IL-6) Value at 24 Hours Post-randomization and at Weeks 2 and 12|Statistical analyses was performed to compare IL-6 levels between study drug and placebo. Log transformed ratio to Baseline IL-6 was analyzed using repeated measures ANCOVA including a term for treatment, adjusting for Baseline IL-6 as a covariate, and accounting for other covariates as appropriate to the study design.|24 hours post-randomization and at Weeks 2 and 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
859204|NCT00910962|Secondary|Mean hsCRP Over Hospitalization Period and Through Week 14|Analysis of hsCRP included all participants who provided data at Baseline and at least one post-Baseline measure. The sample had a collection window of +/- 8 hours. Statistical analyses was performed to compare hsCRP levels between study drug and placebo. Log transformed ratio to Baseline hsCRP was analyzed using ANCOVA including a term for treatment, adjusting for Baseline hsCRP as a covariate, and accounting for other covariates as appropriate to the study design.|Up to Week 14|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||mg/L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
859205|NCT00910962|Primary|Mean Cardiac Troponin I (cTnI) Area Under Concentration-time Curve (AUC) Over 72 Hours Post-randomization or Until Hospital Discharge (Whichever Comes First)|cTnI AUC was the average concentration of cTnI during hospital stay. Statistical analyses was performed to compare cTnI levels between study drug and placebo, via ANCOVA.|At pre-dose and at 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 72 hours|ITT Population. Only those participants available at 72 hours were analyzed.||nonograms*hour per milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
859206|NCT00910962|Primary|Mean High-sensitive C-Reactive Protein (hsCRP) Value at Week 12|Analysis of hsCRP included all participants who provided data at Baseline and at least one post-Baseline measure. Statistical analyses was performed to compare hsCRP levels between study drug and placebo. Log transformed ratio to Baseline hsCRP was analyzed using repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) including a term for treatment, adjusting for Baseline hsCRP as a covariate, and accounting for other covariates as appropriate to the study design.|At Week 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population comprised all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication and at least one on treatment assessment. Only those participants with data available at Week 12 were analyzed.||mg per liter (mg/L)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
859207|NCT00910962|Primary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs of PCI at Any Visit Post-Baseline|Vital signs (PCI range): Systolic blood pressure (SBP) (<75 and >200 millimeter of mercury [mmHg]), Diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (<40 and >120 mmHg) and Heart rate (<30 and >200 beats per minute [bpm]) were analyzed and were presented at any visit post-Baseline. Participants with both Normal and Low values were counted once under their worst case (Low). Participants with both Normal and High values were counted once under their worst case (High). Participants with both High and Low values were counted under both categories. All heart rate values were within normal range, hence not presented.|Up to Week 14|Safety Population. Number of participants with analyzable samples at the time of analysis were included.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859208|NCT00910962|Primary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings at Any Time Post-Baseline|A single 12-lead ECG was obtained using an ECG machine that automatically calculates the heart rate and measures PR, QRS, QT, and QT corrected (QTc) intervals. ECG findings were presented as Normal, Abnormal - Not clinically significant and Abnormal – Clinically significant at any time post-Baseline.|Up to Week 14|Safety Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859209|NCT00910962|Primary|Number of Participants With Liver Function Test Elevations at Any Time Post-Baseline|Liver function test parameters: Alanine aminotransferase (ALT), Total Bilirubin (T. Bilirubin), Aspartate aminotransferase (AST), Alkaline Phosphatase, Gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT) and Creatine Kinase were analyzed and presented as elevated test values at any time post-Baseline. The elevations were presented as >=2xULN, >=3xULN, >=5xULN, >=10xULN, and >=20xULN. n= number of participants with at least one non-missing result of the particular lab test post-Baseline.|Up to Week 14|Safety Population. Number of participants with analyzable samples at the time of analysis were included.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859210|NCT00910962|Primary|Number of Participants With Clinical Chemistry Data of PCI at Any Visit Post-Baseline|Clinical chemistry parameters (PCI range): Alanine Amino Transferase (ALT) (>=3x upper limit normal [ULN] units per liter [U/L]), Albumin (<25.6 or >60 g/L), Alkaline Phosphatase (>=2x ULN U/L), Aspartate Amino Transferase (AST) (>=3x ULN U/L), Calcium (<2.0776 or >2.6112 millimoles per liter [mmol/L]), Carbon dioxide content/Bicarbonate (CO2/HCO3) (<19.6 or >32.64 mmol/L), Chloride (<93.1 or >110.16 mmol/L), Creatinine (<39.6 or >136.4 micromole per liter [µmol/L]) , Glucose (<3.51 or >6.05 mmol/L), Potassium (<3.43 or >5.406 mmol/L), Sodium (<132.3 or >148.92 mmol/L), Total Bilirubin (T. bilirubin) (>=1.5xULN µmol/L) , Total Protein (<50 or >95 g/L), Urea/Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) (<2.25 or >11.55 mmol/L) and Uric acid (<135 or >495 µmol/L) were analyzed. The data was presented as High and low, at any visit post-Baseline. Only parameters with observed abnormal values were presented.|Up to Week 14|Safety Population. Number of participants with analyzable samples at the time of analysis were included.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859211|NCT00910962|Primary|Number of Participants With Hematology Data of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI) at Any Visit Post-Baseline|Hematology parameters (PCI range): Eosinophils (<0.045 or >0.605 Giga cells per liter [GI/L]), Hematocrit (<0.297 or >0.506 ratio), Hemoglobin (<85 or >200 grams per liter [g/L]), Lymphocytes (<0.765 or >4.51GI/L), Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin (MCH) (<24.3 or >38.5 picograms [PG]), Mean Corpuscle Hemoglobin Concentration (MCHC) (<256 or >432 g/L), Mean Corpuscle Volume (MCV) (<70 or >115 femtoliter [FL]), Monocytes (<0.18 or >1.21 GI/L), Platelet count (<104 or >480 GI/L), Red Cell Distribution Width (RDW) (<7.2 or >18%), Red Blood Cell (RBC) count (<2.88 or >6.12 trillion per liter [TI/L] for females and <3.52 or >6.96 TI/L for males) , Reticulocytes (<22.5 or >93.5 10^9/L), Total Absolute Neutrophil Count (ANC) (<1.62 or >8.8 GI/L), White Blood Cell (WBC) count (<3.04 or >12 GI/L) were analyzed. The data was presented as High and low, at any visit post-Baseline. Only parameters with observed abnormal values were presented.|Up to Week 14|Safety Population. Number of participants with analyzable samples at the time of analysis were included.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859212|NCT00910962|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Pure MACE|Pure MACE was defined as all-cause death, adjudicated myocardial infarction or stroke/transient ischemic attack.|Up to Week 14|Safety Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859213|NCT00910962|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE)|MACE was defined as all-cause death, adjudicated myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischemic attack, heart failure or recurrent ischemia requiring urgent revascularization.|Up to Week 14|Safety Population||Participants|||Count of Participants
859214|NCT00910962|Primary|Number of Participants With Any Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. SAE was any untoward event resulting in death, life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect or any other situation according to medical or scientific judgment.|Up to Week 14|Safety Population consisted of all participants randomized to treatment, who had taken at least one dose of study medication.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859215|NCT00908388|Primary|Exclusion of Primary Entry Tear|Number of subjects with successful coverage of Primary Entry Tear as assessed by the Core Lab using contrast-enhanced CT imagery|1 month|||participants|||Number
859216|NCT00908388|Secondary|Additional Dissection Based Intervention Rate|Number of participants that required additional dissection-based interventions defined as interventions related to malperfusion, rupture, or both, as adjudicated by CEC or Sponsor. Additional dissection based interventions included: peripheral stenting, fenestration, implantation of additional endovascular stent-grafts or other surgeries.|Last available follow-up through 5 years|||participants|||Number
859217|NCT00908388|Secondary|Aortic Rupture|Number of participants with thoracic aortic rupture|Last available follow-up through 5 years|||participants|||Number
859218|NCT00908388|Secondary|False Lumen Thrombosis|Number of participants with partial or complete False Lumen Thrombosis in the region of the aorta covered by the Conformable TAG device.|Last available follow-up through 5 years|Participants with contrast-enhanced CT imagery performed during the specified follow-up period were included in this analysis||participants|||Number
859219|NCT00908388|Primary|All-cause Mortality Incidence Through 30 Days Post-treatment||30 Days Post-Treatment|All subjects were analyzed. One subject whose vital status could not be confirmed was included as a death in this analysis.||participants|||Number
859220|NCT00864227|Secondary|Platelet Recovery to 50K|Platelet recovery is defined as the first day of a minimum of three consecutive measurements on different days such that the patient has achieved a platelet count >50,000/mm3 with no platelet transfusions in the preceding seven days.|Measured at Days 56, 90, and 100|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859221|NCT00864227|Secondary|Incidence of Infections|Number of participants that experienced at least one infection.|Measured at Year 1|||Infections|||Number
859222|NCT00864227|Secondary|Treatment-related Mortality (TRM)||Measured at 6 months and 1 year|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859223|NCT00864227|Secondary|Progression-free Survival|Progression-free survival is defined as the minimum time interval to relapse/ recurrence/progression, to death or to last follow-up.|Measured at Year 1|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859224|NCT00864227|Secondary|Chronic GVHD||Measured at Year 1|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859225|NCT00864227|Secondary|Acute Graft-versus-host Disease (GVHD)||Measured at Day 100|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859226|NCT00864227|Secondary|Donor Cell Engraftment|Marrow or Blood Sample. Donor cell engraftment is defined as donor chimerism ≥ 5% on Day ≥ 56 after transplantation. Chimerism should be evaluated on Days ~28, ~56, ~180, and ~365 after transplantation. Chimerism may be evaluated in whole blood or mononuclear fraction.|Measured at Day 56|||participants|||Number
859227|NCT00864227|Secondary|Platelet Recovery to 20K|Platelet recovery is defined as the first day of a minimum of three consecutive measurements on different days such that the patient has achieved a platelet count >20,000/mm3 with no platelet transfusions in the preceding seven days.|Measured at Days 56, 90, and 100|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859228|NCT00864227|Secondary|Secondary Graft Failure|Secondary graft failure is defined initial recovery followed by neutropenia with < 5% donor chimerism.|Measured at Day 100|||participants|||Number
859229|NCT00864227|Secondary|Primary Graft Failure|Primary graft failure is defined as < 5% donor chimerism on all measurements prior to and day-100.|Measured at Day 100|||participants|||Number
859230|NCT00864227|Secondary|Neutrophil Recovery|Neutrophil recovery is defined as achieving an absolute neutrophil count ≥ 500/mm3 for three consecutive measurements on different days.|Measured at Days 28, 56, 90, and 100|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859231|NCT00864227|Primary|Overall Survival at 180 Days From the Time of Transplant||Measured at Month 6 and Year 1|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859232|NCT00859040|Secondary|Overall Survival|Percentage of participants alive 34 months after initiating study treatment. Median Overall Survival has not yet been reached for one study group; therefore, we are reporting Overall Survival rates by the end of the study time frame.|34 months|||percentage of participants|||Number
859233|NCT00859040|Secondary|Median Time to Progression|Per protocol, the study’s secondary objectives are to be evaluated “for the estimate of median ... PFS ... at time of interest.” At this time, all study participants have been followed for progression for a minimum of 34 months (final patient to accrue to study was registered to trial on 06/14/2011), and study manuscript is currently being written-up with this information.|34 months|"Time to progression only reported for the 32 patients who have progressed (either on treatment or in follow-up).
[NOTE: The other 2 patients who were treated on study each remain progression-free after > 1000 days.]"||days||Full Range|Median
859234|NCT00859040|Secondary|Median Progression-Free Survival||5 years|||weeks||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859235|NCT00859040|Secondary|Treatment-related Events|All Grade 3-4-5 adverse events with a treatment attribution of probable, possible or definite based on CTCAE (v3.0) as reported on case report forms|5 years|||events|||Number
859236|NCT00859040|Secondary|Response Rate|"Number of participants to experience complete or partial response on study treatment.
For response per Modified Macdonald Criteria, all measurable and evaluable lesions and sites must be assessed using the same techniques as baseline.
Complete Response (CR): Complete disappearance of all measurable and evaluable disease. No new lesions. No evidence of non-evaluable disease. Patients must be on no steroids.
Partial Response (PR): Greater than or equal to 50% decrease under baseline in the sum of products of perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions. No progression of evaluable disease. No new lesions. The steroid dose at the time of the scan evaluation should be no greater than the maximum dose used in the first 8 weeks from initiation of therapy."|5 years|||participants|||Number
859237|NCT00859040|Primary|6 Month Progression Free Survival|Progression is defined using Modified Macdonald Criteria , using a >/= 25% increase in the sum of products of all measurable lesions over smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease) using the same techniques as baseline, OR clear worsening of any evaluable disease, OR appearance of any new lesion/site, OR clear clinical worsening or failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition (unless clearly unrelated to this cancer).|6 months|||percentage of patients|||Number
859238|NCT00694551|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Did Not Have PSA Doubling|Number of participants who did not have a PSA doubling before their last study visit, median 458 days from baseline PSA (55-613).|Up to 48 months|29 patients who had serial PSA data, normalized by date and PSA.||participants|||Number
859239|NCT00694551|Secondary|Number of Participants With Prostatic Specific Antigen (PSA) Doubling|"Number of Participants Who Had a Doubling of the PSA or Proceeded to Another Therapy.
Assess the impact of the vaccine on the pattern of PSA change in patients with castrate testosterone level and in patients with non-suppressed testosterone level not on hormone therapy."|Up to 48 months|29 patients who had serial PSA data, normalized by date and PSA.||participants|||Number
859240|NCT00694551|Primary|Occurrence of Related Adverse Events - Grade 3 or Higher|Number of participants with related Grade 3 or higher adverse events. Establish the safety and toxicity of varying doses of polypeptide vaccines PSMA and TARP administered with a fixed dose of Poly IC-LC as an adjuvant.|Up to 48 months|All participants who received treatment.||participants|||Number
859241|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|Serious adverse events (SAEs) assessed include medical occurrences that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization or result in disability/ incapacity.|Throughout the entire study period, from Month 0 to Month 3|The Total Vaccinated Cohort included all evaluable subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859242|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Unsolicited Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. “Any” was defined an incidence of an unsolicited AE regardless of intensity or relationship to study vaccination.|Within the 31-day (Days 0-30) follow-up periods post vaccination, across doses and across vaccines|The Total Vaccinated Cohort included all evaluable subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859243|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Fever (Temperature Measured Rectally) > the Cut-off|The cut-off for the assay was > 39.0°C.|Within the 4-day (Days 0 to 3) follow-up periods after each vaccination, across doses and across vaccines|The Total Vaccinated Cohort included all evaluable subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859244|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Any Grade 3 and Related Solicited General Symptoms|Solicited general symptoms assessed include drowsiness, fever (defined as rectal temperature ≥ 38.0°C), irritability, and loss of appetite. “Any” was defined as incidence of the specified symptom regardless of intensity or relationship to study vaccination. Grade 3 drowsiness was defined as drowsiness which prevented normal everyday activities. Grade 3 fever was defined as fever (rectal temperature) greater than (>) 40.0 degree Celsius (°C). Grade 3 irritability was defined as crying that could not be comforted/ preventing normal activity. Grade 3 loss of appetite was defined as the subject not eating at all.|Within the 4-day (Days 0 to 3) follow-up periods after each vaccination, across doses and across vaccines|The Total Vaccinated Cohort included all evaluable subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859245|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Any and Any Grade 3 Solicited Local Symptoms|Solicited local symptoms assessed included pain, redness and swelling. Grade 3 pain was defined as crying when limb was moved/ spontaneously painful. Grade 3 swelling/ redness was defined as swelling/ redness greater than (>) 30 millimeters (mm). “Any” was defined as incidence of the specified symptom regardless of intensity.|Within the 4-day (Days 0 to 3) follow-up periods after each vaccination, across doses and across vaccines|The Total Vaccinated Cohort included all evaluable subjects.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859246|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected as Regards Anti-Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBs) Antibodies.|The seroprotection cut-off values considered for this endpoint were an anti-HBs antibody concentration ≥ 10 and 100 milli-international units per millliter (mIU/mL).|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Tritanrix HepB/ Hiberix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859247|NCT00678301|Secondary|Anti-hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBs) Antibody Concentrations|The seroprotection cut-off for the endpoint was an anti-HBs antibody concentration ≥ 10 milli-international units per millliter (mIU/mL).|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Tritanrix -HepB /Hiberix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||mIU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
859248|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected as Regards Anti-polyribosyl-ribitol Phosphate (Anti-PRP) Antibodies ≥ the Cut-off|Anti-PRP antibody concentrations were expressed in microgram per milliliter (μg/mL). The seroprotection cut-off applied for the assay was ≥ 1 μg/mL.|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Tritanrix -HepB/ Hiberix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859249|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected as Regards Anti-polyribosyl-ribitol Phosphate (Anti-PRP) Antibodies ≥ the Cut-off.|Anti-PRP antibody concentrations were expressed in microgram per milliliter (μg/mL). The seroprotection cut-off applied for the assay was ≥ 0.15 μg/mL.|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Tritanrix -HepB/ Hiberix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859250|NCT00678301|Secondary|Anti-polyribosyl-ribitol-phosphate (Anti-PRP) Antibody Concentrations|Anti-PRP antibody concentrations were measured and tabulated in microgram per milliliter (μg/mL). Cut-off for the assay was ≥ 0.15 μg/mL.|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Tritanrix -HepB/ Hiberix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
859251|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected as Regards Anti-diphtheria (Anti D) and Anti-tetanus Toxoids (Anti TT) Antibodies|A seroprotected subject as regards anti-D/-TT antibodies was defined as a subject with an Anti-D/-TT antibody concentration ≥ 0.1 IU/mL.|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Tritanrix -HepB/ Hiberix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859252|NCT00678301|Secondary|Anti-diphtheria (Anti-D) and Anti-tetanus Toxoids (Anti-TT) Antibody Concentrations|The seroprotection cut-off for the assay was an anti-diphtheria toxoid or anti-tetanus toxoid antibody concentrations ≥ 0.1 international unit per millliter (IU/mL).|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Tritanrix -HepB/ Hiberix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||IU/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
859253|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive as Regards Anti-Bordetella Pertussis (Anti-BPT) Antibodies|Seropositivity cut-off for the assay was defined as an anti-BPT antibody concentration ≥ 15 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) unit per milliliter (EL.U/mL).|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of DTPw-HBV/Hib vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859254|NCT00678301|Secondary|Anti-Bordetella Pertussis (Anti-BPT) Antibody Concentrations|Anti-BPT antibody concentrations were expressed in enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) unit per millilitre (EL.U/mL). Seropositivity cut-off for the assay was defined as an anti-BPT antibody concentrations ≥ 15 EL.U/mL|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
859255|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive as Regards Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Cross-reactive Pneumococcal Serotypes|Pneumococcal serotypes assessed were cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 6A and 19A. Seropositivity status was defined as an opsonophagocytic activity against cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 6A and 19A (OPA-6A and 19A) ≥ 8.|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859256|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive as Regards Opsonophagocytic Activity Against Vaccine Pneumococcal Serotypes|Pneumococcal serotypes assessed were vaccine pneumococcal serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. Seropositivity status was defined as an opsonophagocytic activity against vaccine pneumococcal serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F (OPA-1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F) ≥ 8.|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859257|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive as Regards Antibodies Against Protein D (Anti-PD Antibodies)|Seropositivity cut-off for the assay was an anti-PD antibody concentrations ≥ 100 EL.U/mL.|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859258|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected as Regards Antibodies Against Cross-reactive Pneumococcal Serotypes 6A and 19A (Anti-6A and -19A)|Serotypes assessed were cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 6A and 19 A. Seroprotection cut-off for the assay was an anti-6A/19A antibody concentrations ≥ 0.2 microgram per milliliter (μg/mL).|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859259|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive as Regards Antibodies Against Cross-reactive Pneumococcal Serotypes 6A and 19A (Anti-6A and -19A)|Serotypes assessed were cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 6A and 19A. Seropositivity status was defined as anti-pneumococcal cross-reactive serotypes 6A/19A antibody concentrations (Anti-6A/19A) ≥ 0.05 microgram per milliliter (μg/mL).|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859260|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seroprotected as Regards Antibodies Against Vaccine Pneumococcal Serotypes|Pneumococcal serotypes assessed were vaccine pneumococcal serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. Seroprotection cut-off for the assay was an anti-pneumococcal serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F antibody (Anti-1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F) concentrations ≥ 0.2 microgram per milliliter (μg/mL).|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859261|NCT00678301|Secondary|Number of Subjects Seropositive for Antibodies Against Vaccine Pneumococcal Serotypes|Pneumococcal serotypes assessed were vaccine pneumococcal serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. Seropositivity cut-off for the assay was an anti-pneumococcal serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F antibody (Anti-1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F) concentrations ≥ 0.05 microgram per milliliter (μg/mL).|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859262|NCT00678301|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity (OPA) Against Cross-reactive Pneumococcal Serotypes|Pneumococcal serotypes assessed were cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 6A and 19A. Seropositivity status was defined as an opsonophagocytic activity against cross-reactive pneumococcal serotypes 6A and 19A (OPA-6A and 19A) ≥ 8.|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titres||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
859263|NCT00678301|Secondary|Titers for Opsonophagocytic Activity (OPA) Against Vaccine Pneumococcal Serotypes|Pneumococcal serotypes assessed were vaccine pneumococcal serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. Seropositivity status was defined as an opsonophagocytic activity against vaccine pneumococcal serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F (OPA-1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F) ≥ 8.|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||Titers||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
859264|NCT00678301|Secondary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Cross-reactive Pneumococcal Serotypes 6A and 19A (Anti-6A and -19A)|Seropositivity status was defined as anti-pneumococcal cross-reactive serotypes 6A/19A antibody concentrations (Anti-6A/19A) ≥ 0.05 microgram per milliliter (μg/mL).|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
859265|NCT00678301|Primary|Antibody Concentrations Against Protein D (Anti-PD Antibodies)|Anti-PD antibody concentrations were expressed in enzyme-linked immunorbent assay (ELISA) units per milliliter (EL.U/mL). Seropositivity cut-off for the assay was an anti-PD antibody concentrations ≥ 100 EL.U/mL.|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||EL.U/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
859266|NCT00678301|Primary|Concentrations of Antibodies Against Vaccine Pneumococcal Serotypes|Pneumococcal serotypes assessed were vaccine pneumococcal serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F. Seropositivity cut-off for the assay was an anti-pneumococcal serotypes 1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F antibody (Anti-1, 4, 5, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F) concentrations greater than or equal to (≥) 0.05 microgram per milliliter (μg/mL).|At Month 3, one month after the administration of the third dose of Synflorix vaccine|The According-To-Protocol (ATP) cohort for immunogenicity included all evaluable subjects with available immunogenicity data. The ATP cohort for immunogenicity included subjects for whom assay results were available for antibodies against at least one study vaccine antigen component after vaccination.||μg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Geometric Mean
859267|NCT00581308|Secondary|Secondary Outcome: Days in Hospital for Procedure||Post Procedure|||Days||Full Range|Median
859268|NCT00581308|Secondary|Days in Hospital for Procedure||Post Procedure|||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
859269|NCT00581308|Secondary|Secondary Outcome: Total Time Under Fluoroscopy||Procedure|||minutes||Full Range|Median
859270|NCT00581308|Secondary|Total Time Under Fluoroscopy||Procedure|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
859271|NCT00581308|Secondary|Secondary Analyses Will be Performed on All Patients Enrolled With a Device Implanted, Regardless of Meeting Inclusion / Exclusion Criteria or Anatomic Suitability Criteria, Using Data From All Visit Evaluations.||1 year postprocedure||||||
859272|NCT00581308|Primary|Clinical Success Endpoint||12 months|Subjects with Successful Device Delivery||Participants|||Number
859273|NCT00554515|Post-Hoc|Objective Response Rate (Investigator Assessment)|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) on treatment based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks. Response status was determined by investigator assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859274|NCT00554515|Other Pre-specified|VHL Genotype Status|VHL genotype status will be determined based on establish methods.|Determined from baseline sample.||06/2018||||
859275|NCT00554515|Other Pre-specified|Serum Arginine Levels|Serum arginine levels will be determined based on establish immunohistochemical methods.|Determined from baseline sample.||06/2018||||
859276|NCT00554515|Other Pre-specified|KIR Genotype Status|Killer-immunoglobulin-like receptor (KIR) genotype status determined based on establish methods.|Determined from baseline sample.||06/2018||||
859277|NCT00554515|Secondary|Progression-Free Survival|Progression-free survival based on the Kaplan-Meier method is defined as the duration of time from treatment start to date of disease progression (PD) or death. Per WHO criteria: PD is a >/=25% increase in the sum of products of the perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions. Further, PD is the appearance of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Participants who were event-free were censored at the date of their last disease evaluation.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Long-term follow-up occurred every 3 m for 2 yrs, semi-annually for yr 3 and annually for yrs 4 and 5. Median survival follow-up was X months (95% CI: ).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859278|NCT00554515|Secondary|Objective Response Rate by CA-9 SNP|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) on treatment based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks. Response status was determined by independent assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients with available tumor tissue/data.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859279|NCT00554515|Secondary|Objective Response Rate by B7-H3 Tumor|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) on treatment based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks. Response status was determined by independent assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients with available tumor tissue/data.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859280|NCT00554515|Secondary|Objective Response Rate by PD-L1 Tumor|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) on treatment based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks. Response status was determined by independent assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients with available tumor tissue/data.||proportion of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859281|NCT00554515|Secondary|Objective Response Rate by CA-9 Score (CAIX Classification)|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) on treatment based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks. Response status was determined by independent assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients with available tumor tissue/data.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859282|NCT00554515|Secondary|Objective Response Rate by Clear Cell Histology Risk Group|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Response status was confirmed by an independent assessment of radiographs. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients with available tumor tissue/data.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859283|NCT00554515|Secondary|Objective Response Rate by Tumor Type|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) on treatment based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks. Response status was determined by independent assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients with available tumor tissue/data.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859284|NCT00554515|Secondary|Objective Response Rate by UCLA SANI Score|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) on treatment based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks. Response status was determined by independent assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients with available tumor tissue/data.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859285|NCT00554515|Secondary|Objective Response Rate by MSKCC Risk Group|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) on treatment based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks. Response status was determined by independent assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients with available tumor tissue/data.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859286|NCT00554515|Secondary|3-Year Progression-Free Survival Rate|3-year progression-free survival rate is defined as the proportion of patients absent death or progression based on WHO criteria by 3 years since time of treatment start. PD is a >/=25% increase in the sum of products of the perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions. Further, PD is the appearance of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Long-term follow-up occurred every 3 m for 2 yrs, semi-annually for yr 3 and annually for yrs 4 and 5. Relevant for this endpoint was disease status at 3 y.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859287|NCT00554515|Secondary|Overall Survival|Overall survival based on the Kaplan-Meier method is defined as the time from treatment start to date of death or censored at the date of last documented contact.|Participants were followed for survival up to 7 years.|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859288|NCT00554515|Secondary|Objective Response Rate (Independent Assessment)|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) on treatment based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks.. Response status was determined by independent assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859289|NCT00554515|Secondary|Objective Response Rate in ISM Poor Risk Group|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) based on treatment on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks. Response status was determined by independent assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients with available tumor tissue/data for ISM analysis and classified as ISM poor risk.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859290|NCT00554515|Primary|Objective Response in ISM Good Risk Group|The objective response rate (ORR) was defined as the proportion of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) on treatment based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. [Miller et al. Cancer 1981] Per WHO, evaluation of tumor measurements of measurable lesions centers on the percent change from baseline in the sum of the perpendicular diameters. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all clinical and laboratory evidence of disease; Partial Response (PR) is a >/= 50% decrease. PR status also requires no simultaneous increase in the size of any metastatic lesion, absence of one or more new metastatic lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. CR and PR status needs confirmation within 4 weeks. Response status was determined by investigator assessment of radiographs.|Disease was evaluated radiologically at baseline and during weeks 8 and 12 of each course. Participants received up to 3 courses of 12 weeks duration each. Median (range) days on treatment: 20 (1-262).|The analysis dataset is comprised of all treated patients with available tumor tissue/data for ISM analysis and classified as ISM good risk.||proportion of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859291|NCT00483496|Secondary|Adverse Events||all over the study|||Participants|||Count of Participants
859292|NCT00483496|Primary|Assessment of the Minimal Urticaria Dose (MUD) on Each Test Site, After Application of the Test Products|"MUD was defined as the minimal dose for occurrence of objective signs of SU (wheal, flare) under exposure to the solar simulator. Results are expressed as photodermatosis protection factor (PPF), calculated by dividing the MUD of protected skin (sessions 2 to 5) by the MUD of the unprotected skin (session 1) in each treatment group.
Procedure: At baseline, 4 grids of 8 adjacent test areas on the patient back were defined. The defined test areas of each grid were applied with the respective test products by the investigating staff at the beginning of each session, according to a predefined randomisation schedule. Grids were sequentially irradiated one by one with 1 MUD (session 2) , 3 MUD (session 3) , 5 MUD (session 4), and 7 MUD (session 5), respectively. After product removal at each session, patients were observed for 30 min for the development of SU lesions. Final reading of all areas was performed at the end of each session, by the investigator masked to product site assignment."|During each one of the 5 sessions, at study day|||Photodermatosis Protection Factor||Full Range|Mean
859293|NCT00326417|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS)|OS is defined as alive at 1 year, the event is death from any cause. Patients alive at the time of last observation, for statistical purposes, will have a survival time which is censored.|Day 365|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859294|NCT00326417|Secondary|Chronic GVHD|Chronic GVHD is scored according to the BMT CTN MOP. The first day of chronic GVHD onset will be used to calculate cumulative incidence curves.|Day 365|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859295|NCT00326417|Secondary|Acute Graft vs Host Disease (GVHD)|All GVHD grades 2-4 will be graded according to the BMT CTN Manual of Procedures (MOP)|Day 100|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859296|NCT00326417|Secondary|Cumulative Incidence of Graft Failure|Primary and secondary graft failure are included, secondary graft failure is defined by initial neutrophil engraftment followed by subsequent decline in the ANC to less than 0.5 x 10^9/L for three consecutive measurements on different days, unresponsive to growth factor.|Day 365|||percentage of participants|||Number
859297|NCT00326417|Primary|Disease-free Survival (DFS)|DFS includes graft failure, regimen-related toxicity (RRT), and early death. Graft Failure is defined by lack of neutrophil engraftment (ANC less than 0.5 x 10^9/L for 3 consecutive days on different days). Major RRT is defined as severity of grade 4 in any organ system or grade 3 for pulmonary, cardiac, renal, oral mucosal or hepatic. Early death is defined as death prior to Day 100 post-transplant.|Day 100|||participants|||Number
859298|NCT00290693|Secondary|Rate of Toxicity in Study Participants|Rate of toxicity (serious adverse events or adverse events) in study participants receiving at least one cycle of protocol therapy.|Up to 1 year|Number of participants who received at least one dose of protocol therapy.||participants|||Number
859299|NCT00290693|Secondary|Rate of Participants Achieving a 50% or More Reduction in CA 19-9 Levels|Rate of participants achieving a 50% or more reduction in CA 19-9 levels after receiving protocol therapy. Baseline CA-19-9 will be compared to the lowest recorded value on patients receiving therapy on protocol. A 50% drop in CA 19-9 in patients with baseline levels above 100 U/ml will be recorded as a CA 19-9 response if the > 50% drop can be confirmed with at least one more CA 19-9 level thereafter with > 50% drop compared to baseline.|Up to 1 year|Participants who had available baseline CA19-9 levels above 100 U/ml.||participants|||Number
859300|NCT00290693|Secondary|Progression-free Survival (PFS)|Progression-free survival (PFS) is measured the time from the start of protocol therapy to disease progression or death from any cause.|Up to 1 year|Number of participants who completed at least one cycle of protocol therapy.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859301|NCT00290693|Secondary|Overall Surival (OS)|Overall survival is measured from the time from date of initial protocol therapy to date of death. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time will be censored to last date of follow-up.|Up to 1 year|Number of participants who completed at least one cycle of protocol therapy.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859302|NCT00290693|Primary|Rate of Participants Achieving Complete Response or Partial Response to Therapy.|Rate of participants achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to Captere therapy according to RECIST criteria v 1.0. Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by MRI: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions.|Up to 1 year|Number of participants evaluable for response, that is, who completed at least one cycle of protocol therapy.||participants|||Number
859303|NCT00125762|Primary|Diagnostic Accuracy of VCTE for the Prediction of Metavir Fibrosis Scores by Differentiating no/Mild (F0/F1) From Severe Fibrosis (F2 - F4)|95% CI for Metavir Fibrosis stage 0 -1 consistent with no or mild fibrosis compared to Metavir 2 - 4 which represents significant fibrosis or cirrhosis|Liver Biopsy and VCTE within a time frame of 6 months|456 patients with matching liver biopsy and fibroscan||ROC area||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
859304|NCT00125762|Primary|Diagnosis Performance of VCTE for Determination of Cirrhosis (Metavir F4) in Patients With Chronic Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) and Hepatitis C Virus (HCV)|VCTE was used to diagnose cirrhosis F4 in 748 patients undergoing liver biopsy and VCTE within a 28 day time period.|28 days|748 patients were eligible for analysis with matching valid liver biopsies and VCTE measurements.||ROC area||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
859909|NCT02507388|Primary|Concentration of RTH258 Obtained 24 Hours Post Day 56 Injection [C24hr (ng/mL)]|Serum concentration at the specified collection time point was quantitated, where possible, using a validated immunoassay method. The data were analyzed using a noncompartmental pharmacokinetic (PK) method.|Day 57|PK analysis set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859910|NCT02507388|Primary|Concentration of RTH258 Obtained 24 Hours Post Day 0 Injection [C24hr (ng/mL)]|Serum concentration at the specified collection time point was quantitated, where possible, using a validated immunoassay method. The data were analyzed using a noncompartmental pharmacokinetic (PK) method.|Day 1|PK analysis set||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859911|NCT02507388|Primary|Elimination Half-life in Serum [t1/2 (h)]|Serum concentrations at each collection time point were quantitated, where possible, using a validated immunoassay method. These data were analyzed using a noncompartmental pharmacokinetic (PK) method.|Day 0 (predose), 6 hr, 24 hr, 72 hr, 168 hr, 336 hr, 504 hr, 672 hr|PK analysis set. Harmonic mean and jackknife estimate of the standard deviation are presented.||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
859912|NCT02507388|Primary|Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From 0 to Infinity [AUC0-inf (ng*h/mL)]|Serum concentrations at each collection time point were quantitated, where possible, using a validated immunoassay method. These data were analyzed using a noncompartmental pharmacokinetic (PK) method.|Day 0 (predose), 6 hr, 24 hr, 72 hr, 168 hr, 336 hr, 504 hr, 672 hr|PK analysis set||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859913|NCT02507388|Primary|Area Under the Serum Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration [AUC0-tlast (ng*h/mL)]|Serum concentrations at each collection time point were quantitated, where possible, using a validated immunoassay method. These data were analyzed using a noncompartmental pharmacokinetic (PK) method.|Day 0 (predose), 6 hr, 24 hr, 72 hr, 168 hr, 336 hr, 504 hr, 672 hr|PK analysis set||ng*h/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859914|NCT02507388|Primary|Time to Reach Maximum Analyte Serum Concentration [Tmax (h)]|Serum concentrations at each collection time point were quantitated, where possible, using a validated immunoassay method. These data were analyzed using a noncompartmental pharmacokinetic (PK) method.|Day 0 (predose), 6 hr, 24 hr, 72 hr, 168 hr, 336 hr, 504 hr, 672 hr|PK analysis set||hours||Standard Deviation|Mean
859915|NCT02507388|Primary|Maximum Analyte Serum Concentration [Cmax (ng/mL)]|Serum concentrations at each collection time point were quantitated, where possible, using a validated immunoassay method. These data were analyzed using a noncompartmental pharmacokinetic (PK) method.|Day 0 (predose), 6 hr, 24 hr, 72 hr, 168 hr, 336 hr, 504 hr, 672 hr|The PK analysis set included all subjects who received an intravitreal (IVT) injection with evaluable PK data and with no major protocol deviations that could have had an impact on the PK analysis.||ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
859916|NCT02494076|Secondary|Rate of Inpatient Hospitalization|Count of patients admitted|After intervention or control and until follow-up phone call 72 hours after disposition|2 patients excluded due to missing data and protocol error||Participants|||Count of Participants
859917|NCT02494076|Secondary|Need for Additional Second Line Therapies After Administration of Intervention or Control|Second line therapies include: continuous albuterol, intravenous magnesium sulfate, subcutaneous or intravenous terbutaline, non-invasive ventilation (BiPAP or CPAP), and supplemental oxygen. The need for these second line therapies will be assessed by the child's treating team in the Emergency Department.|participants will be followed for the duration of ED stay, an expected average of 6-8 hours|2 subjects excluded from analysis due to missing data||Participants|||Count of Participants
859918|NCT02494076|Primary|Change in Pulmonary Asthma Score (PAS)|The primary outcome was the change in asthma severity as determined by change in Pulmonary Asthma Score (PAS) before and after administration of intervention (or control). The same trained, blinded physician assessor, who was not involved in the care of the patient, assessed PAS scores for study subjects before intervention (or control), and 15 minutes after completion of administration. The PAS is a pediatric asthma severity scoring system adapted from previously validated scores, and includes measures of respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, auscultory findings, retractions, and dyspnea. Values from each category are summed producing a total score between 5 and 15. Total scores < 7 correspond with mild asthma exacerbations, while scores ≥ 7 and < 12 indicate moderate asthma, and scores ≥12 to 15 indicate severe asthma.|0-30 minutes|2 patients in EzPAP group were excluded from analysis due to protocol error and missing data.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859919|NCT02493855|Primary|Slope of the Second Phase Decline in Plasma HCV Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) Levels During Treatment|HCV viral kinetics in plasma during therapy were modeled through non-linear mixed effect models, including a rapid first phase of initial decline and a slower second phase decline. The slope of the second phase decline was estimated for each treatment arm.|From Week 0 to Week 2|Participants with evaluable HCV RNA to calculate the slope of the second phase. Three participants were excluded due to algorithm non-convergence in the non-linear modeling process.||1/day||Full Range|Median
859920|NCT02480153|Primary|Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Week 12 in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population|ACR20 is a categorical variable indicating a 20% or greater improvement in tender and swollen joint counts and 20% or greater improvement in 3 of the 5 other ACR-core set measures: participant's assessment of arthritis pain; participant's global assessment of arthritis; physician's global assessment of arthritis; high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP); and Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI).|Week 0, week 2, week 4, week 6, week 8 and week 12|The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population was defined as all participants who were randomized to study treatment. Non-responder imputation was applied.||percentage of participants|||Number
859921|NCT02471326|Secondary|Subjects Who Met Criteria to Restart Antiretroviral Therapy|The secondary endpoint was the number of subjects who met protocol defined virologic (sustained HIV RNA >1000 copies/mL by Abbott HIV RTPCR at 2 consecutive visits), immunologic (a confirmed >30% decline in CD4 cell count or an absolute CD4 cell count < 350 cells/mm3), or clinical criteria (HIV-related symptoms) to discontinue VRC01 infusions and restart Antiretroviral Therapy (ART).|From Day 3 post initial infusion until up to 28 weeks.|The analyses included all subjects who received at least one infusion of VRC-HIVMAB060-00-AB (VRCO1).||Participants|||Count of Participants
859922|NCT02471326|Primary|Number of Grade 3 or Higher Adverse Events|The primary endpoint was the number of grade 3 or higher adverse events, including serious adverse events, that were possibly related to VRC-HIVMAB060-00-AB (VRCO1).|From the start of the initial infusion until up to 48 weeks.|The analyses included all subjects who received at least one infusion of VRC-HIVMAB060-00-AB (VRCO1).||Events|||Number
859998|NCT01999920|Secondary|Change From Baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 17-item Total Score|This standard scale will be used to assess severity of depression, looking at change in total score from baseline to week 12, rating severity of depression on a scale from 0 (least depression) to 50 (greatest depression).|Up to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859999|NCT01999920|Primary|Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Scale|"Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Scale rating at week 12 A quickly administered and widely used observer rating, with ratings from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). Responder is a score of 1 or 2."|Up to 12 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
860056|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Major Amputation Caused by PAD|Participants with major amputation caused by PAD. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
859896|NCT03109769|Primary|Change in Gingival Index|Gingival index: 0, normal gingiva, 1, mild inflammation - slight change in color, slight edema and no bleeding on probing, 2, moderate inflammation - redness, edema and glazing and bleeding on probing, 3, severe inflammation - marked redness and edema, ulceration and tendency to spontaneous bleeding.|At baseline and after 4 weeks.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859897|NCT03109769|Primary|Change in Plaque Index|Plaque index: 0, no plaque, 1, plaque seen on the tip of the explorer or with disclosing agent, 2. plaque seen with the naked eye, 3, abundance of plaque.|At baseline and after 4 weeks.|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859898|NCT02706327|Other Pre-specified|Vertical Jump Height Was Measured With a Special Mat|"Sensor mat was used in vertical jump measurement. The result is the distance (cm) that was jumped vertically and it is normalized by dividing the distance to length of subject in order to get percentage of jump distance.
Higher values mean better vertical jump performance. Participants were assessed after using the insoles for 8 weeks in order to get compliance.
Measurements were taken in the same day with and without insoles in shoes. Difference between with and without insole was calculated by subtracting the result with insole from the result without insole.
Therefore, positive changes mean better score with insole."|In the same session after 8 weeks|Two participants (1 CAD/CAM, 1 Semi-custom) did not bring their insole equipped shoes.||percentage of distance||Standard Deviation|Mean
859899|NCT02706327|Other Pre-specified|Six-minute Walk Physiological Cost Index Was Calculated|"Physiological cost index was calculated by taking heart rate with finger oximeter and walking distance after a six-minute walk test.
The result is calculated by dividing one minute heart rate (beat) to walking distance (meter).
Lower values mean better physiological cost. Participants were assessed after using the insoles for 8 weeks in order to get compliance.
Measurements were taken in the same day with and without insoles in shoes. Difference between with and without insole was calculated by subtracting the result with insole from the result without insole.
Therefore, negative changes mean better score with insole."|In the same session after 8 weeks|Two participants (1 CAD/CAM, 1 Semi-custom) did not bring their insole equipped shoes.||beat/meter||Standard Deviation|Mean
859900|NCT02706327|Other Pre-specified|Balance Was Assessed With a Dynamic Platform|"Dynamic platform was the equipment used in balance assessment. Participants were assessed after using the insoles for 8 weeks in order to get compliance.
Measurements were taken in the same day with and without insoles in shoes. The software calculates balance value between 0 and 5 that lower value means better balance score.
Difference between with and without insole was calculated by subtracting the result with insole from the result without insole.
Therefore, negative changes mean better balance score with insole."|In the same session after 8 weeks|Two participants (1 CAD/CAM, 1 Semi-custom) did not bring their insole equipped shoes.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859901|NCT02706327|Secondary|Change in Quality of Life Assessed With Short Form-36 Scale|"The scale scores the health related quality of life with 0 and 100, minimum and maximum levels.
Each question is scored between 0-100 and the total score is found by dividing to number of question.
Higher score or positive change mean better quality of life in the scale. We used physical health part of it.
Changes were calculated as the difference between 8-week follow-up and baseline results."|Baseline and week 8|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859902|NCT02706327|Primary|Change in Pain Intensity Measured by 100 mm Visual Analog Scale|"The scale scores the pain intensity with 0 and 100 mm, minimum and maximum levels.
Higher score means worse pain and also negative changes mean reduced pain. Participants were asked to rate the maximum level of foot pain they had in the last week.
Changes were calculated as the difference between 8-week follow-up and baseline results."|Baseline and week 8|||milimiters||Standard Deviation|Mean
859903|NCT02543398|Primary|Radiographic Bone Changes|The width and the height of the alveolar ridge will be measured (in mm) on the initial (i.e. following tooth extraction) Cone Beam CT and on the CBCT taken prior to implant placement (i.e. 3 months after tooth extraction)|3 months after tooth extraction|||millimeter||Standard Error|Mean
859904|NCT02526290|Other Pre-specified|Device-related Adverse Events|Number of subjects who experienced any device-related adverse events.|6 months|The safety population included all subjects who received an investigational device and initiated neurostimulation.||participants|||Number
859905|NCT02526290|Secondary|Slit Lamp Biomicroscopy|Number of subjects with clinically significant (CS) findings noted from the slit lamp biomicroscopy examinations. A slit lamp biomicroscopy examination of the eyelids, cornea, conjunctiva, anterior chamber, and lens was performed at each visit for each eye. The results were graded as normal, abnormal not clinically significant (NCS), or abnormal CS. In addition, the cornea was scored specifically for corneal edema using a 4-point scale (0=None, +1=Mild, +2=Moderate and +3=Severe). An increase in corneal edema grade of two or more was considered clinically significant and evaluated as a potential AE by the investigator.|6 months|The safety population included all subjects who received an investigational device and initiated neurostimulation.||participants|||Number
859906|NCT02526290|Secondary|Corrected Distance Visual Acuity|Change from baseline (Day 0) in corrected distance visual acuity at Day 180. Corrected visual acuity was obtained using the subject’s own glasses (for subjects that wear glasses) and measured in logMAR (log of the Minimum Angle of Resolution) units using an appropriate eye chart. A logMAR score of 0.0 is equivalent to a visual acuity of 20/20 and larger logMAR values indicate a poorer visual acuity (eg. A value of 0.3 corresponds to a visual acuity of 20/40).|Baseline and 6 months|The safety population included all subjects who received an investigational device and initiated neurostimulation.||LogMAR||Standard Deviation|Mean
859907|NCT02526290|Primary|Stimulated Acute Tear Production|Stimulated acute tear production in the study eye at Day 180 as measured by the difference between the Schirmer test score during stimulation and the test score before stimulation (basal). The Schirmer strip is placed just under the eyelid and wicks up the tears. It measures tear production on a linear scale of 0-35 mm.|The stimulated and prestimulation (basal) measures were both performed at Day 180.|The Full Analysis Set (FAS) population included all subjects who received an investigational device and initiated neurostimulation.||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859908|NCT02507388|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Positive Anti-drug Antibody (ADA) Status (Test)|A positive ADA status is defined as induced ADA status with ADA negative at predose and with a post-dose titer value increase of 2 or more dilutions at any time point or boosted ADA status with ADA positive at predose and a post-dose titer value increase by more than 3-fold (1 dilution) at any time point.|Day 0 (predose), Day 28, Day 84|PK analysis set||percentage of participants|||Number
859923|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Entecavir or Tenofovir: Time of Cmax (Tmax)||Through 24 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520 treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859924|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Entecavir or Tenofovir: Cmax||Through 24 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on subjects receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520 treated subjects had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859925|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Entecavir or Tenofovir: AUClast||Through 24 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520 treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859926|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of Entecavir or Tenofovir: AUC0-24||Through 24 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520 treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859927|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of ARC-520: Terminal Elimination Half-Life (t1/2)||Through 48 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520 treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859928|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of ARC-520: Terminal Elimination Rate Constant (Kel)||Through 48 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520 treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859929|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of ARC-520: Apparent Volume of Distribution (V)||Through 48 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520 treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859930|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of ARC-520: Apparent Clearance (CL)||Through 48 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520 treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859931|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of ARC-520: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax)||Through 48 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520 treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859932|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of ARC-520: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinity (AUCinf)||Through 48 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520 treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859933|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of ARC-520: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to the Last Quantifiable Plasma Concentration (AUClast)||Through 48 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520-treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859934|NCT02452528|Secondary|Pharmacokinetics of ARC-520: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From Time 0 to 24 Hours (AUC0-24)||Through 48 hours post-dosing on Days 1 and 57|Pharmacokinetic evaluation was to be performed only on participants receiving ARC-520. At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520-treated participants had been enrolled and therefore pharmacokinetic samples were not processed and no statistical analysis was performed.|||||
859935|NCT02452528|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Deaths, and Discontinuations Due to Adverse Events (AEs)|An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with treatment. An SAE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose: results in death; is life-threatening; requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of an existing hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or is a medically important event or reaction. An AE was classified as a TEAE if the AE was not present prior to the first study medication administration and started at or after the time of initiation of administration of study medication, or if the AE presented prior to initiation of administration of study medication, continued and increased in intensity after administration of study medication.|From time of informed consent through Day 147 ± 3 days|All participants who received at least 1 dose of ARC-520 or placebo||participants|||Number
859936|NCT02452528|Primary|Change From Baseline in Quantitative Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (Log qHBsAg) at Day 85||Baseline, Day 85|At the time of study termination only 2 ARC-520-treated and 2 placebo-treated participants had been enrolled. Due to the small sample size, analysis of this primary endpoint was not performed.|||||
859937|NCT02433483|Secondary|1-year Cumulative Incidence of Chronic Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD)|All grades of GVHD will be reported.|From start of therapy through completion of therapy (approximately 1 year)|No patient survived long enough to evaluate chronic GVHD.|||||
859938|NCT02433483|Other Pre-specified|Percent Donor Chimerism|Percent donor chimerism in blood and bone marrow.|At weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4 after infusion of HPC-A|||Percentage of donor chimerism||Full Range|Mean
860057|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Any Amputation Caused by PAD|Participants with any amputation caused by peripheral arterial disease (PAD). If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
859939|NCT02433483|Secondary|1-year Cumulative Incidence of Acute Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD)|"Children’s Oncology Group (COG) Stem Cell Committee Consensus Guidelines for Establishing Organ Stage and Overall Grade of Acute Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD) were used. Overall clinical grade was based on the highest stage obtained:
Grade 0: no stage 1-4 of any organ
Grade I: stage 1-2 skin and no liver or gut involvement
Grade II: stage 3 skin, or stage 1 liver involvement, or stage 1 GI
Grade III: stage 0-3 skin, with stage 2-3 liver, or stage 2-3 GI
Grade IV: stage 4 skin, liver or GI involvement"|From start of therapy through completion of therapy (approximately 1 year)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
859940|NCT02433483|Secondary|Time to Platelet Recovery|"The time to platelet recovery will be summarized using descriptive statistics. If there are no deaths prior to recovery of platelets, nonparametric confidence intervals for the median time to recovery will be computed by inverting the sign test. Otherwise, we will compute cumulative incidence curves to describe the time to platelet and neutrophil recovery while adjusting for competing events.
Due to the small number of patients enrolled, the data is presented by patient."|From start of therapy to completion of therapy (approximately 1 year)|Platelet recovery for Patient #1 could not be determined due to transfusions.||days|||Number
859941|NCT02433483|Secondary|Median Time to Neutrophil Recovery|The time to neutrophil recovery will be summarized using descriptive statistics. If there are no deaths prior to recovery of neutrophils, nonparametric confidence intervals for the median time to recovery will be computed by inverting the sign test. Otherwise, we will compute cumulative incidence curves to describe the time to platelet and neutrophil recovery while adjusting for competing events.|From start of therapy to completion of therapy (approximately 1 year)|||Days||Full Range|Median
859942|NCT02433483|Secondary|3-year Overall Survival (OS)|We will use the Kaplan-Meier method to describe overall survival. Overall survival will be defined as the time from enrollment to death, with living subjects’ time censored at the date of last follow-up|3 years after enrollment of the last participant|||Percentage of participants|||Number
859943|NCT02433483|Secondary|3-year Event Free Survival (EFS)|We will use the Kaplan-Meier method to describe event-free survival. EFS will be defined as the time from enrollment to death, relapse, or refractory disease with event-free subjects’ time censored at the date of last follow-up.|3 years after enrollment of the last participant|||Percentage of participants|||Number
859944|NCT02433483|Primary|Proportion of Participants Who Experience Therapeutic Success|"All patients will be counted towards this two-stage design. Therapeutic success for patients at time of enrollment is defined as:
Patients with fewer than 5% blasts, a ≥ 10-fold decrease in level of minimal residual disease after completion of 1 or 2 cycles of therapy.
Patients with greater than 5% in leukemic blasts in the marrow, achieving CR or CRi after completion of 1 or 2 cycles of therapy.
In terms of efficacy, patients who die before achieving therapeutic success will be counted as a failure, and all patients who receive ≥ 1 dose of protocol chemotherapy will be counted as a failure or success. Only subjects who withdraw or die prior to receiving the first dose of protocol chemotherapy will be considered inevaluable and replaced. The evaluation of tolerability and this phase II design will be performed concurrently, i.e., the first enrollees will be counted for both tolerability and efficacy."|At the end of therapy cycle 2 (approximately 2-3 months)|||proportion|||Number
859945|NCT02433483|Primary|Number of Participants by Stratum Who Complete 2 Cycles of Therapy|If two or more patients die from causes other than leukemia progression or experience ≥ Grade 3 GVHD that is associated with detectable donor chimerism due to this protocol, or demonstrate persistent engraftment defined as >5% donor chimerism at the time of count recovery (ANC > 0.3 x 10^9/L and platelet count > 30 x 10^/L), then the cohort will close due to intolerability. Any subject who transfers to transplant prior to completion of two courses without experiencing an unacceptable toxicity is considered inevaluable for purposes of evaluating tolerability. Accrual will be halted for intolerability if there are two or more failures in tolerability among the first six subjects who are evaluable for tolerability.|At the end of therapy cycle 2 (approximately 2-3 months)|||Participants|||Count of Participants
859946|NCT02390219|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire – Revised (CFQ-R) Respiratory Domain Score Through Week 24|The CFQ-R is a validated participant-reported outcome measuring health-related quality of life for participants with cystic fibrosis. Respiratory domain assessed respiratory symptoms (for example, coughing, congestion, wheezing), the scaled score range: 0-100; higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and better health-related quality of life. Results were reported as planned, as a combined single LUM/IVA arm irrespective of permitted dose modification.|Baseline, Through Week 24|"FAS included all participants who were enrolled and administered any amount of study drug. Here, Number of Participants Analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859947|NCT02390219|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Sweat Chloride at Average of Day 15 and Week 4|Sweat samples were collected using an approved collection device. Baseline was defined as the average of the measurements at screening and on Day 1 pre-dose. The average absolute change from baseline in sweat chloride was derived as: (Average of Day 15 and Week 4 value) minus Baseline value. Results were reported as planned, as a combined single LUM/IVA arm irrespective of permitted dose modification.|Baseline, Day 15 and Week 4|"FAS included all participants who were enrolled and administered any amount of study drug. Here, Number of Participants Analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||Millimoles per litre (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Median
859948|NCT02390219|Secondary|Number of Hospitalizations|Number of hospitalizations (all causes) through Week 24 was summarized. Results were reported as planned, as a combined single LUM/IVA arm irrespective of permitted dose modification.|Baseline through Week 24|"FAS included all participants who were enrolled and administered any amount of study drug. Here, Number of Participants Analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||Hospitalizations|||Number
859949|NCT02390219|Secondary|Duration For Which Participants Received Intravenous (IV) Antibiotics|The duration for which participants received IV antibiotics for sinopulmonary signs and symptoms were reported. Results were reported as planned, as a combined single LUM/IVA arm irrespective of permitted dose modification.|Baseline through Week 24|"FAS included all participants who were enrolled and administered any amount of study drug. Here, Number of Participants Analyzed signifies those participants who received at least one IV antibiotic for sinopulmonary signs and symptoms."||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
860142|NCT01641471|Primary|Narcotic Usage|Measured as the amount of pain medication and equianalgesic equivalents to morphine.|Through 6 weeks after surgery|||morphine equivalents||Standard Deviation|Mean
859950|NCT02390219|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Up to Week 24|FEV1 is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out in one second, after full inspiration. Hankinson and Wang standards were used to calculate FEV1 (for age, gender, race, and height). The Hankinson standard was used for male participants 18 years and older and female participants 16 years and older. The Wang standard was used for male participants aged 12 to 17 years and for female participants aged 12 to 15 years. Results were reported as planned, as a combined single LUM/IVA arm irrespective of permitted dose modification.|Baseline, Up to Week 24|"FAS included all participants who were enrolled and administered any amount of study drug. Here, Number of Participants Analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||Liter (L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859951|NCT02390219|Secondary|Absolute Change From Baseline in Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1) Up to Week 24|FEV1 is the volume of air that can forcibly be blown out in one second, after full inspiration. Hankinson and Wang standards were used to calculate percent predicted FEV1 (for age, gender, and height). The Hankinson standard was used for male participants 18 years and older and female participants 16 years and older. The Wang standard was used for male participants aged 12 to 17 years and for female participants aged 12 to 15 years. Results were reported as planned, as a combined single LUM/IVA arm irrespective of permitted dose modification.|Baseline, Up to Week 24|"Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all participants who were enrolled and administered any amount of study drug. Here, Number of Participants Analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure."||Percent predicted of FEV1||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859952|NCT02390219|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|AE: any untoward medical occurrence in a participant during the study; event does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. This includes any newly occurring event/previous condition that has increased in severity/frequency after informed consent form is signed. AE includes serious as well as non-serious AEs. SAE (subset of AE): medical event, which falls into any of the following categories, regardless of its relationship to study drug: death, life threatening adverse experience, in-patient hospitalization/prolongation of hospitalization, persistent/significant disability or incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, important medical event. TEAEs: AEs that started/ worsened on/after the start of study drug through the Safety Follow up Visit (4 weeks after the last dose of study drug). Results were reported as planned, as a combined single LUM/IVA arm irrespective of permitted dose modification.|Day 1 up to Week 28|Safety Set included all participants who were exposed to any amount of study drug.||Participants|||Number
859953|NCT02340715|Primary|Number of Participants Successfully Contributing MRI Data|We tested these Advanced MR protocols to evaluate which ones would best visualize the target region. This helped us determine the optimum MR SIM protocols for different sites that became clinical standard.|up to 4 weeks from imaging|||Participants|||Count of Participants
859954|NCT02301975|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PM PEF|PEF was measured using an electric flow meter each evening. Change from Baseline (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants) was calculated as the value of the averaged daily PM PEF over the 24-week treatment period minus the Baseline value. Statistical analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age and treatment and least square mean and standard error were calculated.|Baseline and Weeks 1-24|ITT Population||L/min||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859955|NCT02301975|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Asthma Control Test (ACT) Score Greater Than or Equal to 20|The ACT was a five-item questionnaire developed as a measure of participant’s asthma control. The percentage of participants controlled, defined as having ACT score greater than or equal to 20 at the end of Week 24 were analyzed using logistic regression model with covariates of Baseline ACT score, region, sex, age and treatment group.|Week 24|ITT Population||Percentage of participants|||Number
859956|NCT02301975|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Morning (Ante Meridiem [AM]) Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF)|PEF was measured using an electric flow meter each morning. Change from Baseline (defined as the last 7 days prior to randomization of the participants) was calculated as the value of the averaged daily AM PEF over the 24-week treatment period minus the Baseline value. Statistical analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age and treatment and least square mean and standard error were calculated.|Baseline and Weeks 1-24|ITT Population||Liter per minute (L/min)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859957|NCT02301975|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Symptom-free 24-hour Periods|Change from Baseline in the percentage of symptom-free 24 hour period was evaluated. A 24-hour (hr) period in which a participant’s responses to both the morning and evening assessments indicated no symptoms was considered to be symptom free. The Baseline value was derived from the last 7 days of the daily eDiary prior to the randomization of the participant. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged value during the 24-week treatment period minus the Baseline value.Statistical analysis was performed using an ANCOVA model with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age and treatment and least square mean and standard error were calculated.|Baseline and Weeks 1-24|ITT Population||Percentage of symptom-free 24 hour perio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859958|NCT02301975|Secondary|Change From Baseline in the Percentage of Rescue-free 24-hour Periods|The number of inhalations of rescue medication used during the day and night were recorded by participants using an electronic diary (e-diary). A 24-hour (hr) period in which a participant’s responses to both the morning and evening assessments indicated no use of rescue medication was considered to be rescue free. The Baseline value was derived from the last 7 days of the daily eDiary prior to the randomization of the participant. Change from Baseline was calculated as the averaged value during the 24-week treatment period minus the Baseline value. Statistical analysis was performed using an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model with covariates of Baseline, region, sex, age and treatment and least square mean and standard error were calculated.|Baseline and Weeks 1-24|ITT Population||Percentage of rescue-free 24-hr periods||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859996|NCT01999920|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Enjoyment & Satisfaction Questionnaire|Measure Description: (10 min) Quality of Life Enjoyment & Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q, Endicott et al, 1993): self-rated assessment of quality of life. 16 items related to life quality, each rated on a score of 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good), with a minimum total score of 16, and a maximum total score of 80.|Up to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859959|NCT02301975|Primary|Change From Baseline in PM FEV1 Using Per Protocol (PP) Population|FEV1 was defined as the volume of air that can be forced out in one second after taking a deep breath. FEV1 (pre-bronchodilator and pre-dose) was measured at Baseline up to Week 24 at evening using spirometry. Repeated Measures analysis was adjusted for Baseline, region, sex, age, treatment, visit, visit by Baseline interaction and visit by treatment interaction. Visit 3 values were taken as Baseline value and change from Baseline was defined as the difference between the value of the endpoint at the time point of interest and the Baseline value. Statistical analysis was performed using the MMRM models and least square mean and standard error were calculated. The analysis was performed on PP Population which comprised of all participants in the ITT Population who did not had any full protocol deviations.|Baseline and Week 24|PP Population||L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859960|NCT02301975|Primary|Change From Baseline in Evening (Post Meridiem [PM]) Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1) Using Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population|FEV1 was defined as the volume of air that can be forced out in one second after taking a deep breath. FEV1 (pre-bronchodilator and pre-dose) was measured at Baseline up to Week 24 at evening using spirometry. Repeated Measures analysis was adjusted for Baseline, region, sex, age, treatment, visit, visit by Baseline interaction and visit by treatment interaction. Visit 3 values were taken as Baseline value and change from Baseline was defined as the difference between the value of the endpoint at the time point of interest and the Baseline value. Statistical analysis was performed using the mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) model and least square mean and standard error were calculated. The analysis was performed on ITT Population which comprised of all participants randomized to treatment and who received at least one dose of study medication.|Baseline and Week 24|ITT population||Liter (L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859961|NCT02229383|Secondary|Change in Seated SBP From Baseline to Week 28|To compare the change from baseline in seated systolic blood pressure achieved with EQW added to titrated basal insulin glargine to placebo added to titrated basal insulin glargine, with or without metformin, after 28 weeks of double-blind treatment.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||mmHg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859962|NCT02229383|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving HbA1c <7.0% at Week 28, no Weight Gain at Week 28, and no Major Hypoglycemia Over 28 Weeks|To compare the percentage of patients achieving HbA1c <7.0% at Week 28, no weight gain at Week 28, and no major hypoglycemia over 28 weeks between EQW added to titrated basal insulin glargine to placebo added to titrated basal insulin glargine, with or without metformin.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||% of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859963|NCT02229383|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in Daily Insulin Dose|To compare the change from baseline in daily insulin dose achieved with EQW added to titrated basal insulin glargine to placebo added to titrated basal insulin glargine, with or without metformin, after 28 weeks of double-blind treatment.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||units||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859964|NCT02229383|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Achieving HbA1c <7.0% at Week 28|To compare the percentage of patients achieving HbA1c <7.0% between EQW added to titrated basal insulin glargine to placebo added to titrated basal insulin glargine, with or without metformin, after 28 weeks of double-blind treatment.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||% of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
859965|NCT02229383|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Week 28 in 2-hour Postprandial Glucose After a Standard Meal Tolerance Test|To compare the change from baseline in 2-hour postprandial glucose after a standard Meal Tolerance Test achieved with EQW added to titrated basal insulin glargine to placebo added to titrated basal insulin glargine, with or without metformin, after 28 weeks of double-blind treatment.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859966|NCT02229383|Secondary|Change in Body Weight From Baseline to Week 28|To compare the change from baseline in body weight achieved with EQW added to titrated basal insulin glargine to placebo added to titrated basal insulin glargine, with or without metformin, after 28 weeks of double-blind treatment.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||kg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859967|NCT02229383|Primary|Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 28|To compare the change from baseline in HbA1c achieved with EQW added to titrated basal insulin glargine to placebo added to titrated basal insulin glargine, with or without metformin, after 28 weeks of double-blind treatment.|Baseline to Week 28|All randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and had at least 1 post-baseline HbA1c assessment.||% HbA1c||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859968|NCT02210000|Secondary|Trough Plasma Concentration of Camicinal on Day 28 and Day 84|A pre-dose blood sample was collected on Days 28 and 84 for pharmacokinetic analysis. This analysis was applicable only for Camicinal arm and thus, no participants from Placebo arm were analyzed.|Day 28 and Day 84|Safety Population. One participant randomized to Placebo arm had quantifiable concentration of Camicinal in blood and therefore was analyzed in the Camicinal group.||NANOGRAM PER MILLILITER (NG/ML)||Standard Deviation|Mean
859969|NCT02210000|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), and Adverse Events Leading to Discontinuation of the Study Drug|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. Serious adverse event (SAE) is an adverse event that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or extends a current hospital stay, results in an ongoing or significant incapacity or interferes substantially with normal life functions, or causes a congenital anomaly or birth defect. Medical events that do not result in death, are not life-threatening, or do not require hospitalization may be considered serious adverse events if they put the participant in danger or require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the results listed above. Any AE or SAE that led discontinuation of the study drug either by participant or by investigator was considered as an AE leading to discontinuation of the study drug.|Up to end of follow up (100 days)|Safety Population. One participant randomized to Placebo arm had quantifiable concentration of Camicinal in blood and therefore was analyzed in the Camicinal group.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859970|NCT02210000|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline Clinical Chemistry Abnormalities of PCI by Treatment and Visit Over Period|Clinical chemistry laboratory analysis was performed at screening (fasted) and during the study at each indicated time point. Albumin low (<30 G/L), calcium low (<2 or >2.75 millimoles per Liter [mmol/L]), creatinine (>44 micromoles per Liter change from baseline), Glucose (<3 or >18 mmol/L), potassium (<3.0 or >5.5 mmol/L), sodium (<130 or >150 mmol/L), and carbon di oxide (CO2) (<18 or >35 mmol/L) were analyzed for their low (L) or high (H) values. Participants with abnormalities in changes from Baseline values were recorded. Change from Baseline is the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.|Up to 100 days|Safety Population. One participant randomized to Placebo arm had quantifiable concentration of Camicinal in blood and therefore was analyzed in the Camicinal group.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859971|NCT02210000|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Hematological Abnormalities of PCI by Treatment and Visit Over Period|Hematology analysis was performed at screening (fasted) and during the study at each indicated time point. Participants with abnormalities in changes from Baseline values were recorded. Total absolute neutrophil count (tANC <1.5 Giga per Liter [G/L]), hemoglobin (<25 or >25 G/L), hematocrit (<0.075 or >0.075 %), platelet count (<100 or >500 G/L), lymphocytes low (<0.8 G/L), and white blood cells (WBC <3 G/L or >20G/L) were analyzed for their low (L) or high (H) values. Change from Baseline (CFB) was the post-Baseline value minus then Baseline value. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. One participant was randomized to Placebo arm; however, was included within the Camicinal treatment group as they reported at least one PK trough concentration >53 nano-grams per milliliter (ng/mL).|Up to 100 days|Safety Population. One participant randomized to Placebo arm had quantifiable concentration of Camicinal in blood and therefore was analyzed in the Camicinal group.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859972|NCT02210000|Secondary|Number of Participants With Normal and Abnormal 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) Measurements Over 100 Days|The 12-lead ECG was analyzed as a measure of safety and tolerability. Number of participants with normal ECG, abnormal clinically significant, and abnormal clinically not significant ECG were reported. PR interval of < 110 and > 220 milliseconds (msec), QRS interval of <75 and > 110 msec, absolute QTc interval of > 450 to ≤ 480 or > 480 to ≤ 500 or >500 msec, and increase from Baseline in QTc of > 30 to ≤ 60 msec or >60 msec was considered as of abnormal.|Up to 100 days|Safety Population. One participant randomized to Placebo arm had quantifiable concentration of Camicinal in blood and therefore was analyzed in the Camicinal group.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859973|NCT02210000|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline (Day 1) in Heart Rate of PCI Over 100 Day|Abnormal values of heart rate over 100 days was analyzed and reported. Participants were counted only once per parameter. Participant may have had more than 1 abnormal parameter. Only worst post baseline CFB values were considered. The categories mentioned for data values indicate the heart rate ranges of clinical concern.|Up to 100 days|Safety Population. One participant randomized to Placebo arm had quantifiable concentration of Camicinal in blood and therefore was analyzed in the Camicinal group.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859974|NCT02210000|Secondary|Number of Participants With Change From Baseline (Day 1) in Blood Pressure of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI) Over 100 Days|Abnormal values of systolic and diastolic blood pressure were measured. If the value for a participant at a given visit was outside the PCI, the participants were further categorized as per the increase or decrease of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) from Baseline by 10, 20 and 40 millimeters of mercury (mm of Hg). Number of participants with absolute (ABS) SBP (>160 mm Hg) and ABS DBP (100 mm Hg) were also analyzed. Change from Baseline (CFB) is the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Participants were counted only once per parameter. Participant may have had more than 1 abnormal parameter. Only worst post-Baseline CFB values were considered. The categories mentioned for data values indicate the blood pressure ranges of clinical concern.|Up to 100 days|Safety Population comprised of participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and were followed-up for at least one post-Baseline safety assessment; however, one participant randomized to Placebo arm had quantifiable concentration of Camicinal in blood and therefore was analyzed in the Camicinal group.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859975|NCT02210000|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Individual Items, Subscales and Total Score of GCSI-DD at Week 12|Items of GCSI-DD for gastroparesis (GP) symptom assessment included: 3-nausea, 4-feeling full after meals, 5-bloating, 6-unable to finish normal meal, 7-retching, 8-vomiting, 9-stomach visibly larger, 10-stomach fullness, 11-loss of appetite, 12-upper abdominal pain, 13-upper abdominal discomfort and 14-overall severity of GP symptoms. Each symptom was rated on a 6-point scale from 0 to 5 where 0 indicated absence of symptom and higher score indicated greater severity of symptom. Score of nausea/vomiting subscale was mean of items 3, 7 and 8, fullness/early satiety subscale was mean of items 4, 6, 10 and 11 and bloating subscale was mean of items 5 and 9; higher score indicated greater severity. Total GCSI-DD score was mean of 3 subscales; higher score indicated greater severity. Baseline was defined as weekly average of last 7 daily scores recorded during screening period. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting mean score for Baseline from weekly average score of Week 12.|Baseline (Screening) and Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the time of assessment were included in the analysis.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
859976|NCT02210000|Primary|Percentage of Responders Based on the Fullness/Early Satiety Subscale (Responders) as Assessed by Gastrointestinal Cardinal Symptom Index-Daily Diary (GCSI–DD) at Week 12|The GCSI-DD consists of nine symptom severity items covering the following domains: nausea/vomiting; fullness/early satiety, and bloating. In addition, the GCSI-DD contains two symptom severity items upper abdominal pain and overall rating of gastroparesis symptoms. Participants were asked to rate each symptom on a 6-point scale from 0 to 5 with lower scores representing less symptom severity and higher scores indicating more severe symptoms. Fullness/early satiety response is defined as an improvement from Baseline by at least one point in the weekly average for the subscale. A participant was defined as a responder if the participant's weekly average change from Baseline in the fullness/early satiety response score improved by at least 1 point. Percentage of participants showing response were presented.|Week 12|Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population comprised of all randomized participants.||Percentage of responders|||Number
860177|NCT01454076|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Vital Sign Abnormalities||Cycle 1 Day 1 up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Arm 1 and 5: Cycle 19 Day 45; Arm 2: Cycle 7 Day 45; Arm 3: Cycle 22 Day 45; Arm 4: Cycle 25 Day 45|The safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
859977|NCT02164916|Other Pre-specified|Overall Response Rate in Patients Who Register to Arm 3 (Crossover) After Disease Progression on Arm 1|Confirmed response (CR) is two or more objective statuses of CR a minimum of four weeks apart documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration. Partial response (PR) is two or more objective statuses of PR or better a minimum of four weeks apart documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration. Unconfirmed CR is one objective status of CR documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration but not qualifying as CR or PR. Unconfirmed PR is one objective status of PR documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration but not qualifying as CR, PR or unconfirmed CR.|Up to 3 years from randomization|Eligible and analyzable patients with measurable disease.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859978|NCT02164916|Other Pre-specified|Overall Survival in Patients Who Register to Arm 3 (Crossover) After Disease Progression on Arm 1|From date of randomization to date of death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive are censored at date of last contact.|Up to 3 years from randomization|Eligible and analyzable patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859979|NCT02164916|Other Pre-specified|Progression-free Survival in Patients Who Register to Arm 3 (Crossover) After Disease Progression on Arm 1|From date of Step 3 Crossover registration to date of first documentation of progression or symptomatic deterioration, or death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive without report of progression are censored at date of last contact. Progression is defined as one or more of the following: 20% increase in the sum of appropriate diameters of target measurable lesions over smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease during therapy) using the same techniques as baseline, as well as an absolute increase of at least 0.5 cm; unequivocal progression of non-measurable disease in the opinion of the treating physician; appearance of any new lesion/site; and/or death due to disease without prior documentation of progression and without symptomatic deterioration.|Up to 3 years from randomization|All eligible and analyzable patients.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859980|NCT02164916|Other Pre-specified|Overall Response Rate|Confirmed response (CR) is two or more objective statuses of CR a minimum of four weeks apart documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration. Partial response (PR) is two or more objective statuses of PR or better a minimum of four weeks apart documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration. Unconfirmed CR is one objective status of CR documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration but not qualifying as CR or PR. Unconfirmed PR is one objective status of PR documented before progression or symptomatic deterioration but not qualifying as CR, PR or unconfirmed CR.|Up to 3 years from randomization|All eligible and analyzable patients with measurable disease.||Participants|||Count of Participants
859981|NCT02164916|Other Pre-specified|Overall Survival|From date of randomization to date of death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive are censored at date of last contact.|Up to 3 years from randomization|Eligible and analyzable patients||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859982|NCT02164916|Secondary|Number of Patients With Grade 3 Through 5 Adverse Events That Are Related to Study Drug|Only adverse events that are possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug are reported.|Up to 3 years|Eligible patients who received any treatment and were assessed for adverse events are included in this summary.||Participants|||Number
859983|NCT02164916|Primary|Progression-free Survival|From date of randomization to date of first documentation of progression or symptomatic deterioration, or death due to any cause. Patients last known to be alive and progression free are censored at date of last contact. Progression is defined as one or more of the following: 20% increase in the sum of appropriate diameters of target measurable lesions over smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease during therapy) using the same techniques as baseline, as well as an absolute increase of at least 0.5 cm; unequivocal progression of non-measurable disease in the opinion of the treating physician; appearance of any new lesion/site; and/or death due to disease without prior documentation of progression and without symptomatic deterioration.|Up to 3 years from randomization|Eligible and analyzable patients.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
859984|NCT02116309|Secondary|Number of Patients Who Developed Severe Post-ERCP Pancreatitis|Severity of PEP defined using the consensus grading as Mild PEP that results in hospitalization (or prolongation of existing hospitalization) for ≤3 days. Moderate PEP will be defined as PEP that results in hospitalization (or prolongation of existing hospitalization) for 4-10 days. Severe PEP will be defined as PEP that results in hospitalization (or prolongation of existing hospitalization) for > 10 days, or leads to the development of pancreatic necrosis or pseudocyst, or requires additional endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical intervention.|up to 30 days after ERCP|||Participants|||Count of Participants
859985|NCT02116309|Primary|Number of Patients Who Developed Post-ERCP Pancreatitis|The primary outcome variable of interest is the incidence of post ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) as defined by the consensus guidelines as 1) New or increased abdominal pain that is clinically consistent with a syndrome of acute pancreatitis and 2) amylase or lipase ≥ 3x the upper limit of normal 24 hours after the procedure and 3) Hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization for at least 2 days.|24 hours after ERCP|||Participants|||Count of Participants
859986|NCT02099110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Sitting Systolic Blood Pressure at Week 26: Excluding Rescue Approach|This change from baseline reflects the Week 26 systolic blood pressure minus the Week 0 systolic blood pressure. Excluding recue approach data analysis excluded all data following the initiation of rescue therapy at any time point, in order to avoid the confounding influence of the rescue therapy.|Baseline and Week 26|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had a baseline measurement or a post-randomization measurement for the systolic blood pressure change from baseline at Week 26 analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment.||mm Hg||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859997|NCT01999920|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Attachment Style Questionnaire Score|Measure Description: (15 min) Attachment Style Questionnaire (Feeney at al., 1994) 40 items relating to quality of adult relationships. Questionnaire includes questions concerning Confidence (8 items, minimum score=8, maximum score=48), Discomfort (10 items, minimum score=10, maximum score=60), Relationships as Secondary (7 items, minimum score=7, maximum score=42), Need for Approval (7 items, minimum score=7, maximum score =42), and Preoccupation with Relationships (8 items, minimum score = 8, maximum score=48), each self-rated on a six-point scale, each self-rated from 1 (totally disagree) to 6 (totally agree).|Up to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859987|NCT02099110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Static Beta-Cell Sensitivity to Glucose Index at Week 26; Excluding Rescue Approach|Static beta-cell sensitivity to glucose index (SBCSGI) estimates the ratio of insulin secretion (expressed in pmol/min) related to above-basal glucose concentration (expressed in mmol/L * L) following a meal. Blood samples were collected before and after a standard meal and glucose, insulin, and C-peptide levels were analyzed. The C-peptides minimal model was used to estimate the insulin secretion rate (ISR). Analysis included both non-model-based [including insulinogenic index with C-peptide, glucose area under the curve (AUC)/insulin AUC] and model-based [beta cell function and insulin secretion rate at 9 mM glucose] testing. Analysis was performed with non-linear least squares using the Software Architecture Analysis Method (SAAM) II software. SBCSGI was expressed in units of 10^-9 min^-1. Excluding rescue approach data analysis excluded all data following the initiation of rescue therapy at any time point, in order to avoid the confounding influence of the rescue therapy.|30 min. before and 0, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, and 180 minutes following the start of the standard meal at Baseline and Week 26|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had a baseline measurement or a post-randomization measurement for the beta-cell responsivity static component change from baseline at Week 26 analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment.||SBCSGI (10^-9min^-1)||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859988|NCT02099110|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Achieving a Hemoglobin A1C of <7% (<53 mmol/Mol) (Raw Proportions): Excluding Rescue Approach|A1C is blood marker used to report average blood glucose levels over a prolonged periods of time and is reported as a percentage (%). Excluding recue approach data analysis excluded all data following the initiation of rescue therapy at any time point, in order to avoid the confounding influence of the rescue therapy.|Week 26|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had a post-randomization measurement for the A1C change from baseline at Week 26 analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
859989|NCT02099110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 26 - Excluding Rescue Approach|Blood glucose was measured on a fasting basis after at least a 10-hour fast. This change from baseline reflects the Week 26 FPG minus the Week 0 FPG. Excluding recue approach data analysis excluded all data following the initiation of rescue therapy at any time point, in order to avoid the confounding influence of the rescue therapy.|Baseline and Week 26|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had a baseline measurement or a post-randomization measurement for the FPG change from baseline at Week 26 analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment.||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859990|NCT02099110|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 26: Excluding Rescue Approach|This change from baseline reflects the Week 26 body weight minus the Week 0 body weight. Excluding recue approach data analysis excluded all data following the initiation of rescue therapy at any time point, in order to avoid the confounding influence of the rescue therapy.|Baseline and Week 26|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had a baseline measurement or a post-randomization measurement for the body weight change from baseline at Week 26 analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment.||Kilograms||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859991|NCT02099110|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Study Treatment Due to an AE: Including Rescue Approach|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease associated with the use of a medical treatment or procedure, regardless of whether it is considered related to the medical treatment or procedure, that occurs during the course of the study. Including rescue approach data analysis included data following the initiation of rescue therapy.|Up to 52 weeks|The analysis population consists of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
859992|NCT02099110|Primary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced an Adverse Event (AE): Including Rescue Approach|An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease associated with the use of a medical treatment or procedure, regardless of whether it is considered related to the medical treatment or procedure, that occurs during the course of the study. Including rescue approach data analysis included data following the initiation of rescue therapy.|Up to 54 weeks|The analysis population consists of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
859993|NCT02099110|Primary|Change From Baseline in A1C at Week 26: Excluding Rescue Approach|A1C is blood marker used to report average blood glucose levels over prolonged periods of time and is reported as a percentage (%). This change from baseline reflects the Week 26 A1C minus the Week 0 A1C. Excluding recue approach data analysis excluded all data following the initiation of rescue therapy at any time point, in order to avoid the confounding influence of the rescue therapy.|Baseline and Week 26|The analysis population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment, had a baseline measurement or a post-randomization measurement for the A1C change from baseline at Week 26 analysis endpoint subsequent to at least one dose of study treatment.||Percentage||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
859994|NCT01999920|Secondary|Change From Baseline on Adult Separation Anxiety - 27 Scale|Measure Description: (15 min) Adult Separation Anxiety - 27 Scale 27 items pertaining to adult separation anxiety, each self-rated on a four-point scale, 0=best, 3=worse. Minimum Total Score=0 (better); Maximum Total Score = 81 (worse)|Up to 12 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
859995|NCT01999920|Secondary|Change From Baseline on Structured Clinical Interview for Separation Anxiety Disorder|The Structured Clinical Interview for Separation Anxiety Disorder was modified for DSM-5. The eight separation anxiety disorder criteria are rated for both childhood (rated at baseline only) and past week time frames, scored as 0 (not at all), 1 (sometimes), 2 (often) or ? (don’t recall). In keeping with the DSM-5 guidelines, endorsement of three or more of the eight criterion symptoms (symptoms rated as ‘2’ or ‘often’) is used as a threshold to determine categorical (yes/no) diagnosis of separation anxiety disorder. Scores on each of the eight items are also summed to produce a continuous measure of separation anxiety symptoms experienced during childhood and adulthood (range for each scale=0–16).|Baseline and week 12|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860000|NCT01999322|Secondary|Number of Premature Infusion Set Changes|"A premature infusion set change was defined as not being a routine change. This was defined as an infusion set changed at home due to suspicion of occlusion, leakage, unexplained hyperglycaemic episode, infusion site reaction, technical reason, or other. The change of infusion set at a site visit was considered a routine change unless an occlusion was actually suspected at the site."|During 6 weeks of treatment|||Episodes|||Number
860001|NCT01999322|Secondary|Number of Episodes of Possible Infusion Set Occlusions|Episodes of possible infusion set occlusions were defined as infusion sets changed due to suspicion of occlusion, leakage or unexplained hyperglycaemic episode. Possible occlusion excluded technical reasons. This endpoint was calculated from the recorded date/times of changes of infusion set combined with the subjects’ own assessment.|During 6 weeks of treatment|||Episodes|||Number
860002|NCT01999322|Secondary|Number of Unexplained Episodes of Hyperglycaemia (Confirmed by Self-measured Plasma Glucose (SMPG))|Unexplained hyperglycaemia was defined as a confirmed plasma glucose value ≥ 16.7 mmol/L (300 mg/dL) and was unexplained (i.e., no apparent medical, dietary, insulin dosage or pump failure reason)|During 6 weeks of treatment|||events|||Number
860003|NCT01999322|Primary|Number of Microscopically Confirmed Episodes of Infusion Set Occlusions|The number of microscopically confirmed episodes of infusion set occlusions during 6 weeks of treatment. Episodes of infusion set occlusions were confirmed by microscopic examination of the infusion sets at each routine weekly visit and infusion sets that had been changed prematurely because of leakage, unexplained hyperglycaemia or suspicion of occlusion (observation of a plug).|During 6 weeks of treatment|FAS: included all randomised subjects. In exceptional cases subjects could be excluded from the full analysis set. In such cases the reason for exclusion was to be justified and documented. Subjects in the full analysis set contribute to the evaluation “as randomised”.||Episodes|||Number
860004|NCT01994395|Secondary|Berg Balance Scale (BBS)|The BBS is a 14-item objective measure designed to assess static balance and fall risk in adult populations and is a well-accepted measure in the stroke literature. The functional activities that are assessed include sitting and standing balance during transfers, altered base of support, reaching, turning, eyes open and closed. Each item is scored from 0 to 4 points. The maximum score is 56 points. A score from 0 to 20 represents balance impairment, 21 to 40 represents acceptable balance, and 41-56 represents good balance. The minimal detectable change score for individuals with acute stroke is 6.9 points16 and 4.66 points in chronic stroke17.|Baseline Assessment (Visit 1), Mid Training Assessment (Visit 10), Post Training Assessment (Visit 18), 3 Month Post Training Assessment (3 Month Follow-up)|One subject dropped out at baseline screening, prior to assignment to any group. One subject from SMA group and 2 from impairment based therapy group dropped due to scheduling conflicts prior to starting any training.||units on a scale, each item scored 0-4||Standard Deviation|Mean
860005|NCT01994395|Secondary|Change in 6 Minute Walk Test From Baseline in Distance (6MWT)|"The 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT) is a test of endurance, by measuring the distance a subject can walk indoors on a flat, hard surface in a period of 6 minutes, using assistive devices, as necessary.The distance is measured with a measuring wheel. The instructions are Walk covering as much ground as you can in 6 min. You can stop to sit or stand if needed, but time will keep running. The change in the distance walked in the 6-minute walk can be used to evaluate the efficacy of an exercise-training program or to trace the natural history of change in exercise capacity over time. The 6MWT is measured in meters."|Baseline Assessment (Visit 1), Mid Training Assessment (Visit 10), Post Training Assessment (Visit 18), 3 Month Post Training Assessment (3 Month Follow-up)|One subject from SMA group and 2 from impairment based therapy group dropped due to scheduling conflicts prior to starting any training.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860006|NCT01994395|Secondary|Participants Receiving Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS)|To compare the effect of training on the connections between the brain and leg muscles (descending corticomotor drive) using a non-invasive brain stimulation called transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). TMS is a safe, non-invasive, painless method of brain stimulation that has been widely used to study the physiology of the representations of muscles in the motor cortex in healthy and neurologically disordered individuals13. Very short duration (< 1 ms) magnetic pulses are applied via an insulated wire coil placed on the intact scalp overlaying the motor cortical area projecting to a target muscle. Each pulse induces a motor evoked potential (MEP) in a target muscle that can be readily monitored by recording Electromyogram (EMG) from that muscle. A figure-of-eight or double cone coil is typically used to deliver focal magnetic pulses to a number of scalp sites over the cortical area representing a muscle of interest.|Session 0 (initial visit);Session 20 (between 6-8 weeks)|One subject dropped before being assigned to a group. One subject from SMA group and 2 from impairment based therapy group dropped due to scheduling conflicts prior to starting any training.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860007|NCT01994395|Secondary|Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)|PHQ-9 is a 9-item self-report questionnaire designed to diagnose both the presence of depressive symptoms as well as to characterize the severity of depression. A single question rates how difficult problems have made it to do work, take care of things at home or get along with other people using a 4 level scale (not difficult at all to extremely difficult). Each item is scored from 0-3; total scores may be 0-27, with higher scores representing increased severity of depression.|Baseline Assessment (Visit 1), Mid Training Assessment (Visit 10), Post Training Assessment (Visit 18), 3 Month Post Training Assessment (3 Month Follow-up)|One subject dropped out at baseline screening, prior to assignment to any group. One subject from SMA group and 2 from impairment based therapy group dropped due to scheduling conflicts prior to starting any training.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860008|NCT01994395|Secondary|The Modified Falls Efficacy Scale (mFES)|14 item questionnaire assessing individuals' confidence in their ability to perform tasks without falling. Individuals rate their confidence from 0 (not confident at all) to 100 (completely confident).|Baseline Assessment (Visit 1), Mid Training Assessment (Visit 10), Post Training Assessment (Visit 18), 3 Month Post Training Assessment (3 Month Follow-up)|One subject dropped out at baseline screening, prior to assignment to any group. One subject from SMA group and 2 from impairment based therapy group dropped due to scheduling conflicts prior to starting any training.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860178|NCT01454076|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant TEAEs Related to Laboratory Abnormalities||Cycle 1 Day 1 up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Arm 1 and 5: Cycle 19 Day 45; Arm 2: Cycle 7 Day 45; Arm 3: Cycle 22 Day 45; Arm 4: Cycle 25 Day 45|The safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
860009|NCT01994395|Secondary|Stroke Specific Quality of Life Scale (SS-QOL)|A 49 item assessment grouped into 12 domains of health-related quality of life in stroke survivors; including areas of mobility, energy, upper extremity function, work and productivity, mood, self-care, social roles, family roles, vision, language, thinking, personality. Each individual domain consists of 3 to 10 items that are averaged to generate an overall score, each item is rated on a 5- point Likert scale, with a minimum value of 1 (meaning the worst outcome) and a maximum value of 5 (meaning the best outcome). Domains scores (non-weighted average of item scores) and a summary score (non-weighted average of all 12 domain scores) are computed. Summary scores range from 49-245, with higher scores indicating better functioning.|Baseline Assessment (Visit 1), Mid Training Assessment (Visit 10), Post Training Assessment (Visit 18), 3 Month Post Training Assessment (3 Month Follow-up)|One subject dropped out at baseline screening, prior to assignment to any group. One subject from SMA group and 2 from impairment based therapy group dropped due to scheduling conflicts prior to starting any training.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860010|NCT01994395|Secondary|Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)|The NPRS is an 11-point scale from 0-10 where patients verbally select a value that is most in line with the intensity of pain that they have experienced in the last 24 hours from 0 (no pain) to 10 (the most intense pain imaginable).|Baseline Assessment (Visit 1), Mid Training Assessment (Visit 10), Post Training Assessment (Visit 18), 3 Month Post Training Assessment (3 Month Follow-up)|One subject dropped out at baseline screening, prior to assignment to any group. One subject from SMA group and 2 from impairment based therapy group dropped due to scheduling conflicts prior to starting any training.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860011|NCT01994395|Secondary|Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC)|ABC is a 16-item self-report measure in which patients rate their balance confidence in performing various ambulatory activities without falling. Items are rated on a scale ranging from 0-100, with zero representing no confidence and 100 representing complete confidence.|Baseline Assessment (Visit 1), Mid Training Assessment (Visit 10), Post Training Assessment (Visit 18), 3 Month Post Training Assessment (3 Month Follow-up)|One subject from SMA group and 2 from impairment based therapy group dropped due to scheduling conflicts prior to starting any training.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860012|NCT01994395|Primary|Change in 10 Meter Walk Test From Baseline in Gait Speed|"Measure of self selected and fast walking speeds by measuring the time it takes an individual to walk 10 meters. The test is performed using a flying start, patient walks 10 meters (33 ft) and the time is measured when the leading foot crosses the start line and the finish line. The instructions are: Please walk this distance at your normal pace when I say go. and repeated Please walk this distance as fast as you can safely when I say go."|Baseline Assessment (Visit 1), Mid Training Assessment (Visit 10), Post Training Assessment (Visit 18), 3 Month Post Training Assessment (3 Month Follow-up)|One subject from SMA group and 2 from impairment based therapy group dropped due to scheduling conflicts prior to starting any training.||meters per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
860013|NCT01945021|Secondary|Change From Baseline Scores on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Lung Cancer Module 13|The QLQ-LC13 consisted of 1 multi-item scale and 9 single items that assessed specific symptoms (dyspnea, cough, hemoptysis, and site-specific pain), side effects (sore mouth, dysphagia, neuropathy, and alopecia), and pain medication use. Negative change from baseline scores indicated an improvement in symptoms, decreased functioning, or decreased global QOL, while positive change from baseline scores indicated an improvement in functioning, improvement in global QOL, or a worsening of symptoms. Scores on each sub-scale range from 0 - 100. A clinically meaningful change was defined as a >/= 10-point change in mean scores. Changes were described as statistically significant if the 95% CI for the change did not include 0.|From the date of informed consent every 8 weeks or 12 weeks until cycle 8|Number of participants that had both a baseline assessment and an assessment at cycle 8||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860014|NCT01945021|Secondary|Change From Baseline Scores on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life (QOL) Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30)|The QLQ-C30 consists of 30 questions which are incorporated into 5 functional domains (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social domains); a global health status/global QOL scale; 3 symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea and vomiting scales); and 6 single items that assess the additional symptoms (dyspnea, appetite loss, sleep disturbance, constipation, and diarrhea) and the perceived financial burden of treatment. Scores for each sub-scale range from 0 to 100. Negative change from baseline scores indicated an improvement in symptoms, decreased functioning, or decreased global QOL, while positive change from baseline scores indicated an improvement in functioning, improvement in global QOL, or a worsening of symptoms. A clinically meaningful change was defined as a >/= 10-point change in mean scores. Changes were described as statistically significant if the 95% CI for the change did not include 0.|From the date of informed consent every 8 weeks or 12 weeks until cycle 8|Number of participants that had both a baseline assessment and an assessment at cycle 8||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860015|NCT01945021|Secondary|Number of Patients With a Shift of Chemistry Laboratory Results From Grade </= 2 to Grade 3 or Grade 4|A summary of the number of patients in the safety population with available laboratory data whose chemistry laboratory results shifted from a baseline value of Grade </=2 to a post-baseline result of Grade 3 or Grade 4|From time of baseline screening test every 4, 8, or 12 weeks until 28 days from last dose of study treatment|||participants|||Number
860016|NCT01945021|Secondary|Number of Patients With a Shift in Hematology Laboratory Results From Grade </=2 to Grade 3 or Grade 4|A summary of the number of patients in the safety population with available laboratory data whose hematology laboratory results shifted from a baseline value of Grade </=2 to a post-baseline result of Grade 3 or Grade 4|From time of baseline screening test every 4, 8, or 12 weeks until 28 days from last dose of study treatment|||participants|||Number
860017|NCT01945021|Secondary|Type, Incidence, Severity, Seriousness and Relationship to Study Medications of Adverse Events (AE) and Any Laboratory Abnormalities|Incidence of patients experiencing a treatment emergent adverse events were summarized by type, incidence, severity, seriousness and relationship to study medication.|From the date of signed informed consent, then a minimum of every 4 weeks until 32 weeks, then a minimum of every 8 weeks, or until 4 weeks after last dose of treatment|||percentage of patients|||Number
860365|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Pressure||Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||mmHg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860018|NCT01945021|Secondary|Overall Survival||Assessed from date of date of the first dose of crizotinib until the date of death from any cause, assessed up to 6 months after the last subject is enrolled on the trial|OS is defined as the time from the date of the first dose of crizotinib to the date of death due to any cause. For patients still alive at the time of analysis, the OS time will be censored on the last date the patients were known to be alive.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860019|NCT01945021|Secondary|Progression Free Survival Assessed by Independent Radiology Review|Progression Free Survival is defined as the time from the date of the first dose of crizotinib to first documentation of objective disease progression or to death on study due to any cause, whichever occurs first. Patients who had neither progression nor death without objective progression were censored at the time of data cut off.|From the date of first dose of crizotinib every 8 weeks or 12 weeks until the first documentation of objective disease progression or death|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860020|NCT01945021|Secondary|Disease Control Rate at 8 Weeks by Independent Radiology Review|The Disease Control Rate at 8 weeks is defined as the number of patients with a confirmed CR, confirmed PR, or SD at 8 weeks, respectively, according to RECIST v1.1 (as determined by IRR), relative to the total population of response evaluable patients.|Measured once at 8 weeks after the start of study treatment|||participants|||Number
860021|NCT01945021|Secondary|Time to First Response|Time to response is defined as the time from the date of first dose to first documentation of objective tumor response (CR or PR), as assessed by Independent Radiology Review, that is subsequently confirmed. For patients proceeding from PR to CR, the onset of PR is taken as the onset of response.|From date of first dose of crizotinib every 8 weeks or 12 weeks until first documentation of objective response is observed, until 6 months after the last subject is enrolled on the trial|Analysis is based on 88 patients who achieved an objective response as assessed by Independent Radiology Review||months||Full Range|Median
860022|NCT01945021|Secondary|Duration of Response by Independent Review|The time from the first documentation of objective tumor response (CR or PR) according to Independent Review and that was subsequently confirmed to the first documentation of objective disease progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurs first. It was calculated for the response evaluable population in the subgroup of patients with a confirmed objective response and who had a subsequent event of progression or death without progression. Patients who did not meet these criteria were censored on the date of the last on-study tumor assessment.|Every 8 or 12 weeks until 6 months after the last patient was enrolled in the trial|Duration of response was calculated for the response evaluable population in the subgroup of patients with a confirmed objective response by Independent Review and who either subsequently had objective progression or died, whichever occurred first.||months||Standard Deviation|Mean
860023|NCT01945021|Primary|Independent Radiology Reviewed Overall Objective Response (ORR)|Overall Objective Response (ORR) was defined as the number of patients with a best overall response of confirmed Complete Response or confirmed Partial Response according to RECIST v1.1 (as determined by Independent Radiology Review [IRR]), relative to the total population of response-evaluable patients (n=127). Confirmed responses were those that persisted on repeat imaging at least 4 weeks after the initial documentation of response.|Starting from the first dose study treatment until the first documented CR or PR.|||participants|||Number
860024|NCT01752712|Secondary|Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) Psychosis Score|"The psychosis score is calculated by adding the scores for scales #4 Conceptual Disorganization, #11 Suspiciousness, #12 Hallucinatory Behavior, and #15 Unusual Thought Content. Each scale ranges from 1=Not Present to 7=Very Severe. The minimum psychosis score is 4 and the maximum psychosis score is 28. A higher score indicates a more severe psychosis rating."|Every 4 weeks during the treatment phase, plus follow-up week 36|Only participants who were enrolled in the study and had completed a BPRS assessment were analyzed at each study time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860025|NCT01752712|Secondary|Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) Total Score|"The total BPRS score is calculated by adding the scores for scales #1-#18. Each scale ranges from 1=Not Present to 7=Very Severe. Total scores range from a minimum score of 18 to a maximum score of 126. A higher total score indicates a more severe psychiatric symptom rating."|Every 4 weeks during the treatment phase, plus follow-up week 36|Only participants who were enrolled in the study and had completed a BPRS assessment were analyzed at each study time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860026|NCT01752712|Secondary|Schedule for Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) Total Score|SANS total score range = 0-85. Higher scores indicate more severe negative symptoms.|Every 4 weeks during the treatment phase, plus follow-up week 36|Only participants who were enrolled in the study and had completed a SANS assessment were analyzed at each study time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860027|NCT01752712|Secondary|Asocial Belief Scale (ABS) Total Score|Determine if CBSST + oxytocin compared to CBSST + placebo is associated with asocial beliefs. The total ABS score is calculated by adding the scores for items #1-#15. Each scale is provided a True/False response, with True responses equaling 1 point and False responses equaling 0 points. In calculating the ABS total score, four of the 15 items of the ABS were reverse scored. A lower total score indicates more severe asocial beliefs.|Treatment weeks 0, 12, and 24, plus follow-up week 36|Only participants who were enrolled in the study and had completed a ABS assessment were analyzed at each study time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860028|NCT01752712|Secondary|Defeatist Performance Attitudes Scale (DPAS) Total Score|"Determine if CBSST + oxytocin compared to CBSST + placebo is associated with defeatist performance beliefs. The total DPAS score is calculated by adding the scores for scales #1-#18. Each scale ranges from 1=Agree Totally to 7=Disagree Totally. Total scores range from a minimum score of 18 to a maximum score of 126. Reverse scoring was applied to make higher scores indicate a stronger defeatist attitude."|Treatment weeks 0, 12, and 24, plus follow-up week 36|Only participants who were enrolled in the study and had completed a DPAS assessment were analyzed at each study time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860029|NCT01752712|Primary|Birchwood Social Function Scale (BSFS) Total Score|Determine if CBSST + oxytocin compared to CBSST + placebo is associated with improved social function. The total BSFS score is calculated by adding the total scores from each of the 7 sections, with a maximum total score of 247. A lower total score indicates a lower social function rating.|Treatment weeks 0, 12, and 24, plus follow-up week 36|Only participants who were enrolled in the study and had completed a BSFS assessment were analyzed at each study time point.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860030|NCT01740427|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs; All Causalities)|An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation patient administered a product or medical device; the event need not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment or usage. An SAE is any untoward medical occurrence at any dose that results in death; is life-threatening; requires hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability or in congenital anomaly/birth defect. Severity will be graded by the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE), Version 4.0.|From the participant randomization up to 28 days after last dose of study drug, up to 2.5 years|AT population = ITT population because all the participants randomized were treated with study drugs per study design.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
860031|NCT01740427|Secondary|Change From Baseline Between Treatment Comparison in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -Breast (FACT-B)|FACT is a modular approach to assess participant health-related quality of life using a ‘core’ set of questions (FACT-G) as well as a cancer site-specific module. The FACT-G is a 27-item compilation of general questions divided into 4 domains: Physical Well-Being, Social/Family Well-Being, Emotional Well-Being, and Functional Well-Being. The FACT-B consisted of the FACT-G (27-item) and a breast-specific module: a 10-item instrument designed to assess participant concerns relating to breast cancer. For all questions, participants were asked to respond to a five-level scale where 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=somewhat, 3=quite a bit, and 4=very much. FACT-B total score = Physical Well-Being + Social/Family Well-Being + Emotional Well-Being + Functional Well-Being + Breast Cancer Subscale. As each of the items ranges from 0-4, the range of possible scores is 0-144, with 0 being the worst possible score and 144 the best.|From Baseline up to 2.5 years|Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Analysis Set is a subset of ITT participants, who had both baseline and at least one follow-up PRO assessment.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860032|NCT01740427|Secondary|Change From Baseline Between Treatment Comparison in Euro Quality of Life (EQ-5D) Index|The EuroQol EQ-5D is a 6-item instrument designed to assess health status in terms of a single index value or utility score. It contains 5 descriptors of current health state (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression) with each dimension having 3 levels of function (1=no problem, 2=some problem, and 3=extreme problem). The scores on the 5 descriptors are summarized to create a single summary score. An overall utility score is calculated based on these domains, with a range score from 0 (worse health scenario) to a maximum of 1.0 (best health scenario).|From Baseline up to 2.5 years|Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Analysis Set is a subset of ITT participants, who had both baseline and at least one follow-up PRO assessment.||Units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860033|NCT01740427|Secondary|Observed Plasma Trough Concentration (Ctrough) at Steady-State|Summary of Plasma Palbociclib Within-Patient Mean Steady-State Trough Concentrations.|0 hour (predose) on Day 14 of cycles 1 and 2|Pharmacokinetic analysis set was a subset of AT participants, who were treated with Palbociclib and had at least one measured plasma concentration.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860034|NCT01740427|Secondary|Corrected QT Interval (QTc)|Triplicate 12-lead ECG measurements (each recording separated by approximately 2 minutes) were performed and sent to a central laboratory for blinded manual adjudication. The average was calculated. The time corresponding to beginning of depolarization to repolarization of the ventricles (QT interval) was adjusted for RR interval using QT and RR from each ECG by Fridericia's formula (QTcF = QT divided by cube root of RR), by Bazette's formula (QTcB = QT divided by square root of RR) and corrected QT interval according to study-specific criteria (QTcS). Percentage of participants with post-baseline maximum absolute values and maximum increase from baseline were summarized for the safety analysis population.|For safety monitoring triplicate ECGs were obtained at 0 hour (pre-dose) on Day 1 of Cycle 1, Day 14 of Cycles 1 and Cycle 2, then on Day 1 of Cycles 4, 7, and 10. ECGs beyond Cycle 10 were performed as clinically indicated|The AT population or safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication, with treatment assignments designated according to actual study treatment received.||Percentage of participants|||Number
860035|NCT01740427|Secondary|Corrected QT Interval (QTc) Time-matched Change From Baseline on Cycle 1 Day 14|Triplicate 12-lead ECG measurements (each recording separated by approximately 2 minutes) were performed and sent to a central laboratory for blinded manual adjudication. The average was calculated. The time corresponding to beginning of depolarization to repolarization of the ventricles (QT interval) was adjusted for RR interval using QT and RR from each ECG by Fridericia's formula (QTcF = QT divided by cube root of RR), by Bazette's formula (QTcB = QT divided by square root of RR) and corrected QT interval according to study-specific criteria (QTcS). Time-matched change from baseline values were reported for QTc analysis population.|Time-matched triplicate ECGs were collected at 0 (predose), 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours on Day 0 and on Cycle1 Day14|QTc analysis set is a subset of as treated (AT) population who were in Group 1; their QTc was used to study the effect of palbociclib on QT interval via serial triplicate ECGs with PK draws; and who had ≥ 1 pair of time-matched Day 0 and palbociclib postdose (Cycle1 Day14) measurements.||msec||90% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
860036|NCT01740427|Secondary|Tumor Tissue Biomarkers, Including Genes (eg, Copy Numbers of CCND1, CDKN2A), Proteins (eg, Ki67, pRb), and RNA Expression (eg, cdk4, cdk6): Protein Biomarker Analyses by Using Immunohistochemistry Are Presented|"PFS survival by biomarker status by Investigator assessment. Progression is defined using RECIST v1.1, as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.
Positive is defined as H-Score ≥1 and negative as H-Score <1. H-Score is calculated as the sum of the % of cells at each level of staining intensity (0, 1+, 2+, and 3+) multiplied by the staining intensity value: H-Score = (% at 0)*0 + (% at 1+)*1 + (% at 2+)*2 + (% at 3+)*3. H-Score values range from 0 to 300.
ER stands for estrogen receptor and Rb stands for retinoblastoma susceptibility gene product."|From randomization until end of treatment (up to approximately 24 Months)|ITT population or full analysis set included all participants who were randomized, with study medication, regardless of whether participants received study medication or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860055|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|CV-related Hospitalization|Participants with hospitalization associated with CV death, hospitalization due to MI, ischemic stroke, lower extremity revascularization, major amputation due to PAD, transient ischemic attack (TIA), coronary revascularization or unstable angina. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860037|NCT01740427|Secondary|Disease Control (DC)/Clinical Benefit Response (CBR)|DC is defined as the overall CR, PR, or stable disease (SD) ≥24 weeks according to the RECIST version 1.1. Disease Control Rate (DCR) is defined as the patients with CR, PR, or SD ≥24 weeks relative to all randomized participants. Participants who do not have on-study radiographic tumor reevaluation, who received anti-tumor treatment, a best response of SD≥24 weeks, or who died, progressed,or dropped out for any reason prior to achieving reaching a CR or PR and a best response of SD≥24 weeks was counted as non-responders in DCR. Per RECIST v1.1, CR: Complete disappearance of target lesions with exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis <10mm). PR: ≥30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter is used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter is used in the sum for all other target lesions. SD: neither sufficient shrinkage nor increase to qualify for disease progression|From randomization until end of treatment (up to approximately 2.5 years)|ITT population or full analysis set included all participants who were randomized, with study medication, regardless of whether participants received study medication or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860038|NCT01740427|Secondary|Duration of Response (DR)|DR is defined as the time from the first documentation of objective tumor response (CR or PR) to the first documentation of disease progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurs first. If tumor progression data included more than 1 date, the first date will be used. DR was calculated as [the date response ended (i.e. date of PD or death) – first CR or PR date + 1)]/30.4. DR would only be calculated for the subgroup of patients with an objective tumor response. Per RECIST v1.1, CR: Complete disappearance of target lesions with exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis <10mm). PR: ≥30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions.The short diameter is used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter is used in the sum for all other target lesions. Stable Disease: neither sufficient shrinkage nor increase to qualify for disease progression.|From randomization until end of treatment (up to approximately 2.5 years)|Patients who had tumor response with CR or PR during study. A total of 206 and 85 patients had objective response in the palbociclib plus letrozole and placebo plus letrozole arms, respectively.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860039|NCT01740427|Secondary|Objective Response: Patients With Measurable Disease at Baseline as Assessed by the Investigator|The OR is defined as the overall CR or PR according to the RECIST v1.1. ORR is defined as proportion of patients with CR or PR relative to all randomized patients with measurable disease at baseline. Patients who do not have on-study radiographic tumor re-evaluation, who received anti-tumor treatment, or who died, progressed/ dropped out for any reason prior to reaching a CR or PR were counted as non-responders in the assessment of ORR. Per RECIST v1.1, CR: Complete disappearance of target lesions with exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis <10mm). PR: ≥30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions. The short diameter is used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter is used in the sum for all other target lesions. Stable Disease: neither sufficient shrinkage nor increase to qualify for disease progression.|From randomization until end of treatment (up to approximately 2.5 years)|Patients who had measurable disease at baseline. A total of 338 and 171 patients had measurable disease at baseline in the palbociclib plus letrozole and placebo plus letrozole arms, respectively.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860040|NCT01740427|Secondary|Objective Response as Assessed by the Investigator|Objective Response (OR) is defined as the overall complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the RECIST v1.1. Objective Response Rate (ORR) is defined as proportion of patients with CR or PR relative to all randomized patients with measurable disease at baseline. Patients who do not have on-study radiographic tumor re-evaluation, who received anti-tumor treatment, or who died, progressed/ dropped out for any reason prior to reaching a CR or PR were counted as non-responders in the assessment of ORR. Per RECIST v1.1, CR: Complete disappearance of target lesions with exception of nodal disease. All target nodes must decrease to normal size (short axis <10mm). PR: ≥30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target measurable lesions.The short diameter is used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter is used in the sum for all other target lesions. Stable Disease: neither sufficient shrinkage nor increase to qualify for disease progression.|From randomization until end of treatment (up to approximately 2.5 years)|ITT population or full analysis set included all participants who were randomized, with study medication, regardless of whether participants received study medication or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860041|NCT01740427|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by the Investigator.|PFS is defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the first documentation of objective tumor progression as per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1) or death due to any cause in the absence of documented PD, whichever occurs first. If tumor progression data include more than 1 date, the first date will be used. PFS (in months) will be calculated as (first event date − randomization date +1)/30.4. Progression is defined using RECIST v1.1, as a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target measurable lesions above the smallest sum observed (over baseline if no decrease in the sum is observed during therapy), with a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm, or unequivocal progression of pre-existing non-target lesions, or the appearance of new lesions.|From randomization date to date of first documentation of progression OR death (up to approximately 2.5 years)|ITT population or full analysis set included all participants who were randomized, with study medication, regardless of whether participants received study medication or received a different drug from that to which they were randomized.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860042|NCT01737268|Secondary|Number of Participants With Adverse Events|An adverse event (AE) is defined as any undesirable or unintended sign (including abnormal laboratory test values), symptom, or disease occurring while the study drug was administered, regardless of whether or not there was a causal relationship with the study drug. A serious AE is defined as a an event resulting in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity or congenital anomaly or birth defect, was life-threatening, re quire d or prolonged hospitalization or was considered medically important.|From first dose of study drug up to week 52 (52 weeks)|Safely Analysis Set (SAF), which included participants who received at least one dose of study drug.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860043|NCT01737268|Secondary|CGI-BP-C: Mania|The CGI-BP-C is a scale which assesses the degree of change or improvement from baseline for each of overall bipolar illness, depression and mania, by grading it using 8 grades, from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse) or 8 (not applicable). Grade 8 (not applicable) was regarded as a missing value for purposes of calculating the mean score.|Week 52 (or the time of last assessment for participants who discontinued earlier)|FAS population; last assessment value is used for participants who discontinued before week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860044|NCT01737268|Secondary|CGI-BP-C: Depression|The CGI-BP-C is a scale which assesses the degree of change or improvement from baseline for each of overall bipolar illness, depression and mania, by grading it using 8 grades, from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse) or 8 (not applicable). Grade 8 (not applicable) was regarded as a missing value for purposes of calculating the mean score.|Week 52 (or the time of last assessment for participants who discontinued earlier)|FAS population; last assessment value is used for participants who discontinued before week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860045|NCT01737268|Secondary|Clinical Global Impression-Bipolar-Change (CGI-BP-C): Overall Bipolar Illness|The CGI-BP-C is a scale which assesses the degree of change or improvement from baseline for each of overall bipolar illness, depression and mania, by grading it using 8 grades, from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse) or 8 (not applicable). Grade 8 (not applicable) was regarded as a missing value for purposes of calculating the mean score.|Week 52 (or the time of last assessment for participants who discontinued earlier)|FAS population; last assessment value is used for participants who discontinued before week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860046|NCT01737268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Last Assessment in Treatment Period in Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D17) in CGI-BP-S: Mania|The CGI-BP-S is a scale which assesses a participant's severity of their overall bipolar illness, depression, and mania as assessed by the clinician using a scale from with the scale from 1 (Normal, not ill) to 7 (very severely ill).|Baseline and and week 52 (or the time of last assessment for participants who discontinued earlier)|FAS population; last assessment value is used for participants who discontinued before week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860047|NCT01737268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Last Assessment in Treatment Period in CGI-BP-S: Depression|The CGI-BP-S is a scale which assesses a participant's severity of their overall bipolar illness, depression, and mania as assessed by the clinician using a scale from with the scale from 1 (Normal, not ill) to 7 (very severely ill).|Baseline and week 52 (or the time of last assessment for participants who discontinued earlier)|FAS population; last assessment value is used for participants who discontinued before week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860048|NCT01737268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Last Assessment in Treatment Period in Clinical Global Impression-Bipolar-Severity of Illness (CGI-BP-S): Overall Bipolar Illness|The CGI-BP-S is a scale which assesses a participant's severity of their overall bipolar illness, depression, and mania as assessed by the clinician using a scale from with the scale from 1 (Normal, not ill) to 7 (very severely ill).|Baseline and week 52 (or the time of last assessment for participants who discontinued earlier)|FAS population; last assessment value is used for participants who discontinued before week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860049|NCT01737268|Secondary|Change From Baseline to Last Assessment in Treatment Period in Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D17)|The HAM-D17 is a clinician-rated 17-item scale for assessing the severity of depression symptoms. The scores for each item range from 0 to 4 or 0 to 2, where 0 represents no symptoms. The rating is based on the past 7 days prior to the time of assessment. The total score ranges from 0 to 52 with lower scores indicating less depressive symptoms.|Baseline and week 52 (or the time of last assessment for participants who discontinued earlier)|FAS population; last assessment value is used for participants who discontinued before week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860050|NCT01737268|Primary|Change From Baseline to Last Assessment in Treatment Period in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score|The MADRS is a 10-item scale to measure the severity of depressive episodes, where each item is rated on a scale from 0 to 6. The MADRS total score ranges from 0 to 60 with lower scores indicating less depressive symptoms.|Baseline and week 52 (or the time of last assessment for participants who discontinued earlier)|FAS population; last assessment value is used for participants who discontinued before week 52.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860051|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Premature Permanent Discontinuation of Study Drug Due to Any Bleeding Event|Participants with a permanent discontinuation of study drug due to any bleeding event. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (last endpoint assessment date, death date, 7 days after last dose of study drug)|From the date of first dose and up to and including 7 days following the date of last dose of study drug|The population was the saftey analysis set, which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of randomized ticagrelor or clopidogrel and for whom post-dose data are available||Participant|||Number
860052|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|PLATO Major Bleeding Events|Participants with PLATO major bleeding event. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (last endpoint assessment date, death date, 7 days after last dose of study drug)|From the date of first dose and up to and including 7 days following the date of last dose of study drug|The population was the safety analysis set, which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of randomized ticagrelor or clopidogrel and for whom post-dose data are available||Participant|||Number
860053|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|TIMI Major or Minor Bleeding Events|Participants with TIMI major or minor bleeding event. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (last endpoint assessment date, death date, 7 days after last dose of study drug)|From the date of first dose and up to and including 7 days following the date of last dose of study drug|The population was the safety analysis set, which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of randomized ticagrelor or clopidogrel and for whom post-dose data are available||Participant|||Number
860054|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|TIMI Major Bleeding Events|Participants with TIMI major bleeding event. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (last endpoint assessment date, death date, 7 days after last dose of study drug)|From the date of first dose and up to and including 7 days following the date of last dose of study drug|The population was the safety analysis set, which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of randomized ticagrelor or clopidogrel and for whom post-dose data are available||Participant|||Number
860058|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Change in ABI/TBI From Baseline|"Change in ankle brachial index (ABI) / toe brachial index (TBI).
Ankle brachial index (ABI) is the ratio of blood pressures from the ankle and arm and is used for diagnosing peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD):
Normal: 1 to 1.29 Borderline: 0.91 to 0.99 Mild PAOD: 0.71 to 0.90 Medium severe PAOD: 0.41 to 0.7 Severe PAOD: <0.4
Toe brachial index (TBI) is the ratio between the toe pressure and the higher brachial pressure, used for diagnosing PAOD when the ABI cannot be used:
Normal: >0.7 Mild: 0.5-0.7 Moderate: 0.35-0.5 Moderate-Severe: <0.35 and toe pressure 40 mmHg Severe: <0.35 and toe pressure < 30 mmHg"|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Change in ABI/TBI||Standard Deviation|Mean
860059|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Rutherford Classification|"Progression of the clinical/symptomatic status of the limb by changes in Rutherford classification.
Category 0 – Asymptomatic Category 1 – Mild claudication Category 2 – Moderate claudication – The distance that delineates mild, moderate and severe claudication is not specified in the Rutherford classification, but is mentioned in the Fontaine classification as 200 meters.
Category 3 – Severe claudication Category 4 – Rest pain Category 5 – Ischemic ulceration not exceeding ulcer of the digits of the foot Category 6 – Severe ischemic ulcers or frank gangrene"|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860060|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Fontaine Stage|"Progression of the clinical/symptomatic status of the limb by changes in Fontaine stage.
Stage I – Asymptomatic Stage IIa – Intermittent claudication after more than 200 meters of pain free walking Stage IIb – Intermittent claudication after less than 200 meters of walking Stage III – Rest pain Stage IV – Ischemic ulcers or gangrene"|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860061|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Non-CV Death|Participants with non-CV death. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, CV death)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860062|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Net Clinical Benefit (Composite of All-cause Mortality/MI/Ischemic Stroke/ALI/Major Amputation/TIMI Major Bleeding)|Participants with all-cause death, MI, ischemic stroke, ALI, major amputation or Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major bleeding. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860063|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Net Clinical Benefit (Composite of All-cause Mortality/MI/Ischemic Stroke/ALI/Major Amputation/Fatal Bleeding/Intracranial Bleeding)|Participants with all-cause death, MI, ischemic stroke, ALI, major amputation, fatal bleeding or intracranial bleeding. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860064|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Net Clinical Benefit (Composite of All-cause Mortality/MI/Ischemic Stroke/Fatal Bleeding/Intracranial Bleeding)|Participants with all-cause death, MI, ischemic stroke, fatal bleeding or intracranial bleeding. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860065|NCT01732822|Other Pre-specified|Net Clinical Benefit (Composite of CV Death/MI/Ischemic Stroke/Fatal Bleeding/Intracranial Bleeding)|Participants with CV death, MI, ischemic stroke, fatal bleeding or intracranial bleeding. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, non-CV death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860066|NCT01732822|Secondary|Any Revascularisation (Coronary, Peripheral [Limb, Mesenteric, Renal, Carotid and Other])|Participants with any revascularization. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860067|NCT01732822|Secondary|Lower Extremity Revascularization|Participants with lower extremity revascularization (LER). If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860068|NCT01732822|Secondary|ALI|Participants with ALI. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860069|NCT01732822|Secondary|Composite of CV Death, MI, and All-cause Stroke (Ischemic or Hemorrhagic)|Participants with CV death, MI or all-cause stroke. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, non-CV death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860070|NCT01732822|Secondary|All-cause Mortality|Participants with all-cause death. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860071|NCT01732822|Secondary|MI|Participants with MI. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860072|NCT01732822|Secondary|CV Death|Participants with CV death. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, non-CV death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860073|NCT01732822|Secondary|Composite of CV Death, MI, Ischemic Stroke, and ALI|Participants with CV death, MI, ischemic stroke or acute limb ischemia (ALI). If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (PACD, last endpoint assessment date, non-CV death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients||Participant|||Number
860074|NCT01732822|Primary|Composite of Cardiovascular (CV) Death/MI/Ischemic Stroke|Participants with CV death, myocardial infarction (MI) or ischemic stroke. If no event, censoring occurs at the minimum of (primary analysis censoring date (PACD), last endpoint assessment date, non-CV death date)|From randomization to PACD, an average of 2.5 years|The population was the full analysis set, which included all randomized patients.||Participants|||Number
860075|NCT01702909|Secondary|Median Survival|from time of study entry until death|measured from date of first dose until date of death|Data were not collected|||||
860076|NCT01702909|Secondary|Median Duration of Response|Duration of response is calculated as the time (months) from the date at which response is first observed (per standard Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors [RECIST] to the date of first observed disease progression or date of death from any cause, whichever came first, assessed up to 2 years. The actual date of tumor assessments was used for this calculation. Progression is defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of one or more new lesions.|Measured from first response until Disease Progression or death from any cause up to 2 years|Data were not collected|||||
860077|NCT01702909|Primary|Number of Participants With Response Using RECIST Criteria|Radiographic studies to evaluate for response were done after every 2 cycles (6 weeks) until disease progression or death from any cause up to 2 years. Standard RECIST response criteria were utilized. Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by CT scan: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response Rate (ORR) = 100%(CR + PR/total number of patients receiving Interleukin-2).|Measured until Disease Progression or death from any cause up to 2 year|||Participants|||Count of Participants
860078|NCT01688921|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Received a PJ Stratis Injection Would Choose to Receive This Type of Injection Again||28 Days|Safety population||Percent of Participants|||Number
860079|NCT01688921|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Spontaneously Reported Adverse Events|"Subjects will be asked to report any other symptoms experienced in addition to the solicited immediate and vaccine reactogenicity events. Any other events reported will be tabulated as spontaneously reported adverse events."|28 days|The safety population included 1247 subjects (N=624 PJ Stratis, N=623 NS).||participants with spontaneous AEs|||Number
860080|NCT01688921|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Vaccine Reactogenicity Events|Vaccine reactogenicity will be collected on a patient-completed diary card during checkout from Day 0 and on the next six evenings post-vaccination. The following adverse events will be solicited on the diary card: pain at injection site, tenderness at injection site, redness where the injection is given; induration/swelling (lump) where the injection is given; bruising where the injection is given; itching where the injection is given; headache; tiredness/fatigue (asthenia, lethargy, malaise); general muscle ache (myalgia); chills; nausea; vomiting. Subjects will also record their oral temperature on the diary card each evening.|Day 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6|The safety population included 1247 subjects (N=624 PJ Stratis, N=623 NS). Eight subjects (624-616) in the PJ Stratis group and 16 (623-607) in the NS group did not return the 7-Day Diary Card.||participants|||Number
860081|NCT01688921|Secondary|Number of Subjects With Complaints Within 30 Minutes Following Vaccination||Within 30 minutes post-vaccination|The safety population included 1247 subjects (N=624 PJ Stratis, N=623 NS).||participants|||Number
860082|NCT01688921|Primary|Anti Influenza Type B Seroconversion|Seroconversion is defined as a 4-fold rise in HAI titer in post-immunization serum relative to pre-immunization serum, or if pre-immunization serum had an undetectable titer (<1:10), attainment of a post-immunization titer of ≥1:40.|28 days|The immunogenicity analyses were conducted using data from subjects in the Immunogenicity Population.||Percent of Participants|||Number
860083|NCT01688921|Primary|Anti Influenza Type A/H3N2 Seroconversion|Seroconversion is defined as a 4-fold rise in HAI titer in post-immunization serum relative to pre-immunization serum, or if pre-immunization serum had an undetectable titer (<1:10), attainment of a post-immunization titer of ≥1:40.|28 days|||Percent of Participants|||Number
860084|NCT01688921|Primary|Anti Influenza Type A/H1N1 Seroconversion|Seroconversion is defined as a 4-fold rise in HAI titer in post-immunization serum relative to pre-immunization serum, or if pre-immunization serum had an undetectable titer (<1:10), attainment of a post-immunization titer of ≥1:40.|28 days|The immunogenicity analyses were conducted using data from subjects in the Immunogenicity Population.||Percent of Participants|||Number
860085|NCT01688921|Primary|Anti Influenza Type B Hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) Antibody Geometric Mean Titer (GMT)|The GMT criterion for non-inferiority for the upper limit of the 95% CIs of the GMT ratio(GMT with NS / GMT with PJ Stratis) for each antigen to not exceed 1.5 fold.|28 days|The immunogenicity analyses were conducted using data from subjects in the Immunogenicity Population.||Titers||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
860086|NCT01688921|Primary|Anti Influenza Type A/H2N3 Hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) Antibody Geometric Mean Titer (GMT)|The GMT criterion for non-inferiority for the upper limit of the 95% CIs of the GMT ratio(GMT with NS / GMT with PJ Stratis) for each antigen to not exceed 1.5 fold.|28 days|The immunogenicity analyses were conducted using data from subjects in the Immunogenicity Population.||Titers||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
860087|NCT01688921|Primary|Anti Influenza Type A/H1N1 Hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) Antibody Geometric Mean Titer (GMT)|The GMT criterion for non-inferiority for the upper limit of the 95% CIs of the GMT ratio(GMT with NS / GMT with PJ Stratis) for A/H1N1 antigen will not exceed 1.5 fold.|28 days|The immunogenicity analyses were conducted using data from subjects in the Immunogenicity Population.||Titers||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
860088|NCT01684215|Secondary|Presence of Tumor Tissue Biomarkers- Estrogen Receptor (ER) H-Score, Retinoblastoma (Rb) H-Score, B-cell Lymphoma-1 (BCL-1) H-Score, P16 H-Score: Phase 2|Tumor tissue biomarkers ER, Rb, BCL-1 and P16 were analyzed to investigate possible associations with resistance or sensitivity to treatment with study drugs and were selected based on their known relevance to mechanisms involved in cell cycle regulation. Number of participants with positive ER (H-Score), Rb (H-Score), BCL-1 (H-Score) and P16 (H-Score) tumor tissue biomarkers were reported. The H-score is a method of assessing the extent of nuclear immunoreactivity, applicable to steroid receptors.|Baseline (Day 1)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||participants|||Number
860089|NCT01684215|Secondary|Presence of Tumor Tissue Biomarker- Ki67: Phase 2|Tumor tissue biomarker, Ki67 was analyzed to investigate possible associations with resistance or sensitivity to treatment with study drugs and was selected based on its known relevance to mechanisms involved in cell cycle regulation. Number of participants with less than or equal to and greater than 20 percent of Ki67 tumor tissue biomarker were reported.|Baseline (Day 1)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||participants|||Number
860090|NCT01684215|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Trial Outcome Index (TOI): Phase 2 at Day 1 of Cycle 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21 and End of Treatment|FACT is a modular approach to assess participant’s health-related quality of life. TOI total score was derived from the sum of these 3 sub-scale scores: physical well-being, functional well-being (both sub-scales consisting of 7 items ranging from 0 to 28, where higher scores indicating better quality of life) and breast cancer subscale (consists of 9 items and ranging from 0 to 36, where higher scores indicating better quality of life). Each individual item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (not at all good) to 4 (very well), where higher scores indicating better quality of life. FACT-B total score range was of 0 (not at all good) to 92 (very well), where higher scores indicating better quality of life.|Baseline (Day 1 of Cycle 1), Day 1 of Cycle 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, End of treatment (Day 677)|"PRO analysis set was a subset of the full analysis set and included participants with both baseline and at least 1 complete post-baseline PRO assessment. Here, n signifies number of participants evaluable for specified time points."||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860091|NCT01684215|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G): Phase 2 at Day 1 of Cycle 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21 and End of Treatment|FACT is a modular approach to assess participant’s health-related quality of life. FACT-G total score was derived from the sum of these 4 sub-scale scores: physical well-being, social/family well-being and functional well-being (all 3 sub-scales consisting of 7 items ranging from 0 to 28, where higher scores indicating better quality of life), emotional well-being (consists of 6 items and ranging from 0 to 24, where higher scores indicating better quality of life. Each individual item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (not at all good) to 4 (very well), where higher scores indicating better quality of life. FACT-G total score range was of 0 (not at all good) to 108 (very well), where higher scores indicating better quality of life.|Baseline (Day 1 of Cycle 1), Day 1 of Cycle 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, End of treatment (Day 677)|"PRO analysis set was a subset of the full analysis set and included participants with both baseline and at least 1 complete post-baseline PRO assessment. Here, n signifies number of participants evaluable for specified time points."||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860092|NCT01684215|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer (FACT-B): Phase 2 at Day 1 of Cycle 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21 and End of Treatment|The functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT) is a modular approach to assess participant’s health-related quality of life. FACT-B total score was derived from the sum of these 5 sub-scale scores: physical well-being, social/family well-being and functional well-being (all 3 sub-scales consisting of 7 items ranging from 0 to 28, where higher scores indicating better quality of life), emotional well-being (consists of 6 items and ranging from 0 to 24, where higher scores indicating better quality of life, and a breast cancer subscale (consists of 9 items and ranging from 0 to 36, where higher scores indicating better quality of life). Each individual item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (not at all good) to 4 (very well), where higher scores indicating better quality of life. FACT-B total score range was of 0 (not at all good) to 144 (very well), where higher scores indicating better quality of life.|Baseline (Day 1 of Cycle 1), Day 1 of Cycle 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, End of treatment (Day 677)|"Patient reported outcome (PRO) analysis set was a subset of the full analysis set and included participants with both baseline and at least 1 complete post-baseline PRO assessment. Here, n signifies number of participants evaluable for specified time points."||units on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860093|NCT01684215|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS): Phase 2|Overall survival was defined as the time from first dose of study treatment to date of death due to any cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored to last date the participant was known to be alive. OS was estimated with Kaplan-Meier method.|From initiation of treatment up to follow-up period (up to 21 months)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860094|NCT01684215|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease Control (DC): Phase 2|Disease control was defined as CR, PR or stable disease for >=24 weeks according to the RECIST version 1.1 recorded in the time period between first dose of study treatment and disease progression or death to any cause. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes reduced to normal size (short axis <10 millimeter [mm]). PR was defined as >=30 percent decrease in sum of the longest dimensions of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum longest dimensions. Stable disease was defined as not achieving an objective response with confirmed CR or PR according to RECIST version 1.1, as determined by the investigators, relative to the response evaluable population, but remained stable for at least 24 weeks after first dose, then the best overall response for such a participant was considered as stable disease. Percentage of participants with disease control were reported.|From initiation of treatment up to disease progression (up to 21 months)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||percentage of participants|||Number
860095|NCT01684215|Secondary|Progression Free Survival (PFS): Part 2 Phase 1|PFS was defined as the time from first dose of study treatment to the date of the first documentation of objective progression of disease (PD) or death due to any cause in the absence of documented PD, whichever occurs first. PD was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|From initiation of treatment up to disease progression (up to 30 months)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991). Data for this outcome measure was not summarized and individual participant's data was reported.||months|||Number
860096|NCT01684215|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR): Phase 2|Duration of response was defined as the interval from the first documentation of objective tumor response in participants with CR (disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes reduced to normal size (short axis <10 millimeter [mm]) or PR (a >=30 percent decrease in sum of the longest dimensions of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum longest dimensions) according to RECIST version 1.1 to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first.|From initiation of treatment up to disease progression (up to 21 months)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991). Here, number of participants analyzed (N) signifies the participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860097|NCT01684215|Secondary|Duration of Response (DOR): Part 2 Phase 1|Duration of response was defined as the interval from the first documentation of objective tumor response in participants with CR (disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes reduced to normal size (short axis <10 millimeter [mm]) or PR (a >=30 percent decrease in sum of the longest dimensions of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum longest dimensions) according to RECIST version 1.1 to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first.|From initiation of treatment up to disease progression (up to 30 months)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991). Data for this outcome measure was not summarized and individual participant's data was reported. Here, number of participants analyzed (N) signifies the participants evaluable for this outcome measure.||months|||Number
860098|NCT01684215|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response: Phase 2|Objective response was defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the RECIST version 1.1 recorded from first dose of study treatment until disease progression or death due to any cause. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes reduced to normal size (short axis <10 millimeter [mm]). PR was defined as a >=30 percent decrease in sum of the longest dimensions of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum longest dimensions. Percentage of participants with objective response (who achieved CR or PR) were reported.|From initiation of treatment up to disease progression (up to 21 months)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||percentage of participants|||Number
860099|NCT01684215|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Objective Response: Phase 1|Objective response was defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the RECIST version 1.1 recorded from first dose of study treatment until disease progression or death due to any cause. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions with the exception of nodal disease. All target nodes reduced to normal size (short axis <10 millimeter [mm]). PR was defined as a >=30 percent decrease in sum of the longest dimensions of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum longest dimensions. Percentage of participants with objective response (who achieved CR or PR) were reported.|From initiation of treatment up to disease progression (up to 30 months)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||percentage of participants|||Number
860100|NCT01684215|Secondary|Pre-dose Plasma Concentration (Ctrough) of PD-0332991: Phase 2|Ctrough is pre-dose concentration during multiple dosing which is observed directly from the actual time-concentration data.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 24 hours post dose on Cycle 1 Day 15|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860101|NCT01684215|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of PD-0332991: Phase 2|Tmax is time at which maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) was observed. It was observed directly from data as time of first occurrence.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 24 hours post dose on Cycle 1 Day 15|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||hour||Full Range|Median
860102|NCT01684215|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) Of PD-0332991: Phase 2|Cmax is maximum plasma concentration which is observed directly from the actual time-concentration data.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 24 hours post dose on Cycle 1 Day 15|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860103|NCT01684215|Secondary|Apparent Oral Clearance of PD-0332991: Phase 2|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. It was calculated by dividing the given oral dose by AUCtau. AUCtau is the area under the plasma concentration-time curve over dosing interval which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 24 hours post dose on Cycle 1 Day 15|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||L/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860104|NCT01684215|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve Over Dosing Interval (AUCtau) of PD-0332991: Phase 2|AUCtau is area under the plasma concentration-time curve over dosing interval which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|0 (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 24 hours post dose on Cycle 1 Day 15|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860105|NCT01684215|Secondary|Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) of PD-0332991 Following Single Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|Vz/F is apparent volume of distribution estimated from terminal phase, which is calculated as CL/F/kel. Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. It was calculated by dividing the given oral dose by area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method (AUCinf). kel is the terminal phase rate constant calculated by a linear regression of the log-linear concentration-time curve.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7)|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||liter||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860106|NCT01684215|Secondary|Terminal Half-Life (t1/2) of PD-0332991: Part 1 Phase 1|t1/2 is terminal elimination half-life which is calculated by loge(2)/kel, where kel is the terminal phase rate constant calculated by a linear regression of the log-linear concentration-time curve.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose),1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7), Multiple dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 8|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
860107|NCT01684215|Secondary|Time to Reach Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Tmax) of PD-0332991: Part 1 Phase 1|Tmax is time at which maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) was observed. It was observed directly from data as time of first occurrence.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose),1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7), Multiple dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 8|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||hour||Full Range|Median
860108|NCT01684215|Secondary|Linearity (Rss) of PD-0332991 Following Multiple Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|Rss is the ratio of AUCtau (after multiple doses) to AUCinf (after single dose). AUCtau is area under the plasma concentration-time curve over dosing interval which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method. AUCinf is area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7), Multiple dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 8|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ratio||Full Range|Median
860109|NCT01684215|Secondary|Accumulation Ratio (Rac) of PD-0332991 Following Multiple Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|Rac is the ratio of AUCtau (after multiple doses) to AUCtau (after single dose). AUCtau is area under the plasma concentration-time curve over dosing interval which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7), Multiple dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 8|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ratio||Full Range|Median
860110|NCT01684215|Secondary|Pre-dose Plasma Concentration (Ctrough) of PD-0332991 Following Multiple Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|Ctrough is pre-dose concentration during multiple dosing which is observed directly from the actual time-concentration data.|Multiple dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 8|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860111|NCT01684215|Secondary|Cmax Dose Normalized to 125 mg of PD-0332991: Part 1 Phase 1|Cmax Dose Normalized to 125 mg is maximum plasma concentration dose normalized to 125 mg which is observed directly from the actual time-concentration data.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose),1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7), Multiple dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 8|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860112|NCT01684215|Secondary|Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) Of PD-0332991: Part 1 Phase 1|Cmax is maximum plasma concentration which is observed directly from the actual time-concentration data.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose),1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7), Multiple dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 8|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860113|NCT01684215|Secondary|Apparent Oral Clearance of PD-0332991: Part 1 Phase 1|Clearance of a drug is a measure of the rate at which a drug is metabolized or eliminated by normal biological processes. It was calculated by dividing the given oral dose by AUCinf. AUCinf is area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose),1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7), Multiple dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 8|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||liter per hour (L/hr)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860114|NCT01684215|Secondary|AUClast Dose Normalized to 125 mg of PD-0332991 Following Single Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|AUClast Dose Normalized to 125 mg is area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to time of last measurable concentration dose normalized to 125 mg which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7)|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860115|NCT01684215|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From 0 to Time of Last Measurable Concentration (AUClast) of PD-0332991 Following Single Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|AUClast is area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to time of last measurable concentration which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7)|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860116|NCT01684215|Secondary|AUCinf Dose Normalized to 125 mg of PD-0332991 Following Single Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|AUCinf Dose Normalized to 125 mg is area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity dose normalized to 125 mg which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7)|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860117|NCT01684215|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From 0 to Infinity (AUCinf) of PD-0332991 Following Single Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|AUCinf is area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7)|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860118|NCT01684215|Secondary|AUC24 Dose Normalized to 125 mg of PD-0332991 Following Single Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|AUC24 Dose Normalized to 125 mg is area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to time 24 hours dose normalized to 125 mg which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7)|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860119|NCT01684215|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Curve From 0 to Time 24 Hours (AUC24) of PD-0332991 Following Single Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|AUC24 is area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to time 24 hours which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Single dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24 hours post-dose in Lead-in period (Day -7)|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860120|NCT01684215|Secondary|AUCtau Dose Normalized to 125 Milligram (mg) of PD-0332991 Following Multiple Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|AUCtau Dose Normalized to 125 mg is area under the plasma concentration-time curve over dosing interval dose normalized to 125 mg which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Multiple dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 8|PK parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||ng*hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860121|NCT01684215|Secondary|Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve Over Dosing Interval (AUCtau) of PD-0332991 Following Multiple Dose: Part 1 Phase 1|AUCtau is area under the plasma concentration-time curve over dosing interval which is calculated by log-linear trapezoidal method.|Multiple dose: 0 hour (pre-dose), 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours post-dose on Cycle 1 Day 8|Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter analysis set included treated participants who had at least 1 of the PK parameters of primary interest in at least 1 PK sampling period.||nanogram*hour per milliliter (ng*hr/mL)||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860122|NCT01684215|Secondary|Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Laboratory Abnormalities|Abnormality criteria: hemoglobin: <0.8*lower limit of normal [LLN], platelets: <0.5*LLN or >1.75*upper limit of normal [ULN], leukocytes: <0.6*LLN or >1.5*ULN, lymphocytes, total neutrophils: <0.8*LLN or >1.2*ULN, basophils, eosinophil,monocytes: >1.2*ULN); aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, gamma glutamyl transferase (GT): >0.3*ULN, total protein, albumin: <0.8*LLN or >1.2*ULN, total bilirubin, direct bilirubin: >1.5*ULN; blood urea nitrogen, creatinine: >1.3*ULN, uric acid: >1.2*ULN; sodium: <0.95*LLN or >1.05*ULN, potassium, chloride, calcium, magnesium: <0.9*LLN or >1.1*ULN, phosphate: <0.8*LLN or >1.2*ULN; creatine kinase: >2.0*ULN, glucose fasting: <0.6*LLN or >1.5*ULN, glycosylated haemoglobin: >1.3*ULN;urinalysis dipstick (urine protein, urine blood >=1); urine protein 24 hour: >1.1*ULN; coagulation Activated partial thromboplastin time [APTT], Prothrombin, prothrombin international ratio: >1.1*ULN.|Lead- in period (Day -7) up to end of treatment (Day 677)|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||participants|||Number
860123|NCT01684215|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) By Severity: Phase 1 (Part 1) and Phase 2|AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An AE was considered treatment emergent if occurred for the first time after the start of study treatment or occurred prior to the start of treatment but increased in NCI CTCAE grade during study treatment period. AE severity was defined to be the maximum toxicity grade of the TEAEs experienced by the participants during the study. AE was assessed according to severity as: Grade 1 (mild AE), Grade 2 (moderate AE), Grade 3 (severe AE), Grade 4 (life-threatening consequences) and Grade 5 (death related to AE).|Part 1 Phase 1: Lead-in period (Day -7) up to 28 days after last dose of study drug (Day 308), Phase 2: Baseline (Day 1) up to 28 days after last dose of study drug (Day 677)|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||participants|||Number
860124|NCT01684215|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Related Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs): Phase 1 (Part 1) and Phase 2|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. A SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. AEs included both serious and non-serious adverse events.|Part 1 Phase 1: Lead-in period (Day -7) up to 28 days after last dose of study drug (Day 308), Phase 2: Baseline (Day 1) up to 28 days after last dose of study drug (Day 677)|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||participants|||Number
860125|NCT01684215|Primary|Percentage of Participants With 1 Year Progression Free Survival (PFS): Phase 2|PFS was defined as the time from first dose of study treatment to the date of the first documentation of objective progression of disease (PD) or death due to any cause in the absence of documented PD, whichever occurs first. PD was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.1), as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.1-year PFS was defined as the percentage of participants without PFS events (PD or death due to any cause) at 12 months based on the Kaplan-Meier estimate. Percentage of participants with 1-year PFS with 90% confidence interval (CI) were reported.|From initiation of treatment up to follow-up period (up to 12 months)|Full analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||percentage of participants||90% Confidence Interval|Number
860126|NCT01684215|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) By Severity: Part 2 Phase 1|AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An AE was considered treatment emergent if occurred for the first time after the start of study treatment or occurred prior to the start of treatment but increased in National Cancer Institute (NCI) CTCAE grade during study treatment period. AE severity was defined to be the maximum toxicity grade of the TEAEs experienced by the participants during the study. AE was assessed according to severity as: Grade 1 (mild AE), Grade 2 (moderate AE), Grade 3 (severe AE), Grade 4 (life-threatening consequences) and Grade 5 (death related to AE).|Baseline (Day 1) up to 28 days after last dose of study drug (Day 677)|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||participants|||Number
860127|NCT01684215|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Related Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs): Part 2 Phase 1|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. A SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. AEs included both serious and non-serious adverse events.|Baseline (Day 1) up to 28 days after last dose of study drug (Day 677)|Safety analysis set included all enrolled participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug (PD-0332991).||participants|||Number
860128|NCT01684215|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLT): Part 1 Phase 1|DLT was classified as per common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) version 4.0 as any of the events occurring during 28 days of Cycle 1,attributed to study drug:grade 4 neutropenia(for a duration of greater than [>]7 days); febrile neutropenia (grade greater than or equal to [>=]3 neutropenia,body temperature >=38.5 degree Celsius);grade >=3 thrombocytopenia with bleeding episode;grade 4 thrombocytopenia;grade >=3 non-hematologic toxicity except grade 3 or more nausea, vomiting,electrolyte abnormality(if controllable by therapy);grade 3 QTc prolongation(>500 millisecond [msec])persist after correction of reversible cause such as electrolyte abnormalities or hypoxia. Lack of hematologic recovery (platelets less than [<]50,000/microliter [mcL],absolute neutrophil count <1,000/mcL,hemoglobin <8.0 gram/deciliter [g/dL]) or prolonged non hematologic toxicities that delays initiation of next dose by >7 days;receipt of <75 percent of planned dose in first cycle due to toxicity.|Lead-in period (Day -7) up to Day 28 (Cycle 1)|DLT analysis set included all participants whom DLTs were evaluable in Part 1 Phase 1.||participants|||Number
860129|NCT01668784|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Hematology and Serum Chemistry Laboratory Parameters by Worse CTC Grade - SI Units|Common Terminology Criteria (CTC) version 4.0 in International System of Units (SI); Gr 3=Severe, Gr 4= Potentially Life-threatening or disabling. Hematology parameters=Hemoglobin (Gr 3: < 8.0 g/dL), Platelet Count (Gr 3: 25.0 -< 50.0*10^9 c/L; Gr 4: < 25.0*10^9 c/L), Leukocyte Count (Gr 3: 1.0 -< 2.0*10^3 c/µL; Gr4: < 1.0*10^3 c/µL), Absolute Lymphocyte Count (Gr 3: 0.2 -< 0.5*10^3 c/µL; Gr 4: < 0.2*10^3 c/µL), Absolute Neutrophil Count (Gr 3: 0.5 - < 1.0*10^3 c/µL; Gr 4: < 0.5*10^3 c/µL). Liver Function parameters=Alkaline Phosphatase (Gr 3: > 5.0 - 20.0 U/L * ULN; Gr 4: > 20.0 U/L * ULN), AST (Gr 3: > 5.0 - 20.0 U/L * ULN; Gr 4: > 20.0 U/L * ULN), ALT (Gr 3: > 5.0 - 20.0 U/L * ULN; Gr 4: > 20.0 U/L * ULN), tBIL (Gr 3: > 3.0 - 10.0 mg/dL * ULN; Gr 4: > 10.0 mg/dL * ULN). Renal parameter=Creatinine (Grade: Gr3: > 3.0 - 6.0 mg/dL *ULN; Gr4: > 6.0 mg/dL *ULN). Cells per microliter (c/µL). Cells per Liter (c/L). Grams per deciliter (g/dL). Milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL).|Day 1 to 30 days post last dose, up to May 2015 (approximately 30 months)|All treated participants; all participants who received at least one dose of nivolumab or everolimus and at least one measureable on-treatment measurement of the corresponding laboratory parameter||participants|||Number
860130|NCT01668784|Secondary|Number of Participants Meeting Marked Laboratory Abnormality Criteria in Specific Liver and Thyroid Tests at Primary Endpoint|Aspartate aminotransferase, AST. Alanine aminotransaminase, ALT. Total bilirubin, tBIL. Thyroid stimulating hormone, TSH. Upper limit of normal (ULN). Units per Liter (U/L). Results reported in International System of Units (SI).|Day 1 to 30 days post last dose, up to May 2015 (approximately 30 months)|All treated participants who received at least one dose of nivolumab or everolimus and had at least one measureable on-treatment measurement of the corresponding laboratory parameters||participants|||Number
860131|NCT01668784|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Disease-related Symptom Progression (DRSP) at Primary Endpoint|Disease-related symptom progression rate (DRSPR)=a decrease of two points in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Kidney Symptom Index - Disease Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS) questionnaire relative to the participant's baseline FKSI-DRS score with no later increase above this threshold observed during the course of the study. The 9 items of the FKSI-DRS were summarized into a symptom scale ranging in score from 0 to 36, with 0 being the worst possible score and 36 being the best possible score. A single measure reporting a decrease of at least 2 units was considered disease-related symptom progression only if it was the last one available for the participant. In order to consider a questionnaire received as valid, over 50% of the items were to be completed. Calculated by the Clopper-Pearson method for each treatment group.|Randomization until 398 deaths, up to May 2015 (approximately 30 months)|All randomized participants; any participants that was randomized to any treatment group in the study.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860132|NCT01668784|Secondary|Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events, Death, Discontinuation Due to Adverse Events at Primary Endpoint|Adverse event (AE) defined: any new unfavorable symptom, sign, or disease or worsening of a preexisting condition that may not have a causal relationship with treatment. Serious adverse event (SAE) defined: a medical event that at any dose results in death, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or drug dependency/abuse; is life-threatening, an important medical event, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or requires or prolongs hospitalization.|Day of first dose to 30 days post final dose, up to May 2015 (approximately 30 months)|All treated participants; all participants who received at least one dose of nivolumab or everolimus||participants|||Number
860179|NCT01454076|Secondary|Number of Participants Reporting One or More Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)||Cycle 1 Day 1 up to 30 days after last dose of study drug (Arm 1 and 5: Cycle 19 Day 45; Arm 2: Cycle 7 Day 45; Arm 3: Cycle 22 Day 45; Arm 4: Cycle 25 Day 45)|The safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug.||participants|||Number
860133|NCT01668784|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) by Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) Expression Level at Primary Endpoint|Quantifiable PD-L1 expression=percent of tumor cell membrane staining in a minimum of 100 evaluable tumor cells per Dako PD-L1 IHC assay. If the PD-L1 staining could not be quantified it was classified as: indeterminate=tumor cell membrane staining hampered for reasons attributed to biology of tumor biopsy specimen and not due to improper sample preparation or handling; not evaluable=tumor biopsy specimen was not optimally collected or prepared. Not evaluable determined from H&E process before the tumor biopsy specimen was sent for evaluation or from H&E process during PD-L1 evaluation; baseline PD-L1 expression=if more than one tumor biopsy specimen was available, the most recently collected specimen with a quantifiable result. If all specimens for a given participant are either indeterminate or not evaluable, then the PD-L1 expression was considered indeterminate as long as at least one specimen is indeterminate. Otherwise, PD-L1 expression was considered not evaluable.|Randomization to date of death or date of last contact for patients without documentation of death, up to May 2015 (approximately 30 months)|PD-L1 quantifiable participants; All randomized participants with quantifiable PD-L1 expression at baseline||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860134|NCT01668784|Secondary|Investigator-assessed Time of Progression-free Survival (PFS) at Primary Endpoint|PFS=time from randomization to date of first documented tumor progression as determined by investigator (per RECIST 1.1 criteria or clinical) or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Participants who die without a reported prior progression and without subsequent anti-cancer therapy were considered to have progressed on the date of their death. Participants who did not progress or die were censored on the date of their last evaluable tumor assessment. Participants who did not have any on-study tumor assessments and did not die were censored on the date they were randomized. Participants who received any subsequent anti-cancer therapy without a prior reported progression were censored at the last evaluable tumor assessment prior to or on initiation date of the subsequent anti-cancer therapy. Progressive disease: >=20% increase in sum of target lesion diameters and sum must show absolute increase of >=5mm; smallest sum on study as reference. Based on Kaplan-Meier Estimates.|Randomization until 398 deaths, up to May 2015 (approximately 30 months)|All randomized participants; any participants that was randomized to any treatment group in the study.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860135|NCT01668784|Secondary|Investigator-assessed Time to Objective Response at Primary Endpoint|Time to objective response is defined as the time from randomization to first response (complete response, CR or partial response, PR). CR=Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm.; PR=At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, the baseline sum diameters used as reference.|Randomization to date of first response, up to May 2015 (approximately 30 months)|All randomized participants with a response; any participants that was randomized to any treatment group in the study and that had a response.||months||Full Range|Median
860136|NCT01668784|Secondary|Investigator-assessed Duration of Objective Response at Primary Endpoint|Duration of objective response is defined as the time from first response (complete response, CR or partial response, PR) to the date of the first documented tumor progression as determined by the investigator (per RECIST 1.1 criteria or clinical) or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. For participants who neither progress nor die, the duration of objective response were censored at the same time they were censored for the primary definition. CR=Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm.; PR=At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, the baseline sum diameters used as reference. Based on Kaplan-Meier Estimates.|From date of first response to date of disease progression or death or censoring if no progression or death occurred, up to May 2015 (approximately 30 months)|All randomized participants with a response; any participants that were randomized to any treatment group in the study and that had a response.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860137|NCT01668784|Secondary|Investigator-assessed Objective Response Rate (ORR) at Primary Endpoint|ORR=number of participants with a best response of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) divided by number of randomized participants. CR=Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm.; PR=At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, the baseline sum diameters used as reference. Tumor assessments began at 8 weeks following randomization and continued every 8 weeks for the first year, then every 12 weeks thereafter until disease progression or death. CIs used Clopper and Pearson.|At 8 weeks post randomization, every 8 weeks for 12 months, and every 12 weeks until date of disease progression or death, up to May 2015 (approximately 30 months)|All randomized participants; any participants that was randomized to any treatment group in the study.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860138|NCT01668784|Primary|Overall Survival (OS) at Primary Endpoint|"Overall Survival (OS) was defined as the time from randomization to the date of death. Participants that had not died were censored at last known date alive. Median OS time was calculated using Kaplan-Meier Estimates. Interim analysis for the Primary Endpoint occurred after 398 deaths (70% of the total OS events needed for final analysis). At that time the data monitoring committee noted that the pre-specified boundary for OS (nominal significance level p < 0.0148) was crossed while no new safety signals that would affect continuation of the study were found.
The study was stopped early by the Sponsor, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) and the interim analysis became the final analysis. As a result, participants in the everolimus groups could be assessed for a crossover to nivolumab treatment if they met all inclusion criteria."|Randomization until 398 deaths, up to May 2015 (approximately 30 months)|All randomized participants; any participants that was randomized to any treatment group in the study.||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860139|NCT01641471|Secondary|Clinical Outcomes (Functional & General Health)|Measured from modified KOOS and SF-12 v2 questionnaires.|Within 30 days before surgery, 2 weeks (+/- 3 days) after surgery, 4 weeks (+/- 3 days) after surgery, 6 weeks (+/- 3 days) after surgery||||||
860140|NCT01641471|Secondary|Functional Assessments|Measured from ROM measurement and timed up and go (TUG) test.|Within 30 days before surgery, daily during hospital stay (an expected average of 4 days), 2 weeks (+/- 3 days) after surgery, 4 weeks (+/- 3 days) after surgery, 6 weeks (+/- 3 days) after surgery||||||
860141|NCT01641471|Secondary|Visual Analog Pain Score (VAS)||Within 30 days before surgery, daily during hospital stay (an expected average of 4 days), 2 weeks (+/- 3 days) after surgery, 4 weeks (+/- 3 days) after surgery, 6 weeks (+/- 3 days) after surgery||||||
860143|NCT01625182|Secondary|Change From Baseline for Rasch-Built Linearly Weighted Overall Disability Scale (R-ODS)|This questionnaire was constructed using the patients’ perception of their ability to perform daily and social activities. The questionnaire comprises 24 items ranging from ability to read a book or newspaper (as the easiest item to accomplish) to ability to run (most difficult item to accomplish). The obtained raw summed score was translated subsequently to a convenient centile metric score ranging from 0 (most severe disability) to 100 (no disability at all). A higher score indicated a better health status. A negative change from baseline indicates deterioration.|baseline, Month 6, Month 12|Only participants from the FAS, who had non-missing baseline values and the given post-baseline values, were included in the analysis. The FAS included all participants who were assigned randomly to receive treatment.||score on a scale||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
860144|NCT01625182|Secondary|Change From Baseline for Grip Strength, Non-dominant Hand|Grip strength measurements were done using a vigorimeter. With this device, the pressure in the bulb exercised by the participant was registered on a manometer via a rubber junction tube. Both the dominant and non-dominant hands were tested. A negative change from baseline indicates deterioration.|baseline, Month 6, Month 12|Only participants from the FAS, who had non-missing baseline values and the given post-baseline values, were included in the analysis. The FAS included all participants who were assigned randomly to receive treatment.||kPa||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
860145|NCT01625182|Secondary|Change From Baseline for Grip Strength, Dominant Hand|Grip strength measurements were done using a vigorimeter. With this device, the pressure in the bulb exercised by the participant was registered on a manometer via a rubber junction tube. Both the dominant and non-dominant hands were tested. A negative change from baseline indicates deterioration.|baseline, Month 6, Month 12|Only participants from the FAS, who had non-missing baseline values and the given post-baseline values, were included in the analysis. The FAS included all participants who were assigned randomly to receive treatment.||kPa||95% Confidence Interval|Least Squares Mean
860146|NCT01625182|Primary|Time to First Confirmed Worsening on the Adjusted Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) Disability Scale|Confirmed worsening in CIDP was measured by the adjusted INCAT Disability Scale. The adjusted INCAT disability scale measures arm disability and leg disability. For arm disability the scale ranges from 0 (no upper limb problems) to 5 (inability to use either arm for any purposeful movement). The leg disability scale ranges from 0 (walking not affected) to 5 (restricted to wheelchair, unable to stand and walk a few steps with help). The total adjusted INCAT disability score is calculated by the sum of the arm and leg disability scores where the total score ranges from 0 to 10. A confirmed worsening was defined as an increase by 1 or more points on the adjusted INCAT disability scale from the value at baseline.|Month 12|The full analysis set, which included all participants who were assigned randomly to receive treatment, was analyzed.||Days||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860147|NCT01615731|Secondary|Adverse Events|uterine perforation, uterine injury, etc.|Intraoperatively and 2 weeks post operatively|||participants|||Number
860148|NCT01615731|Secondary|Overall Patient Experience|Used a Visual Analogue Scale to determine the patient's overall satisfaction with her experience. The VAS ranges from 0-100. 0 being a worse than expected experience, 50 being what the patient expected and 100 being a better than expected experience.|Measured post operatively (at least 30 minutes, on average 1.5 hours) prior to discharge|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860149|NCT01615731|Secondary|Pain Perceived by Patient|Used a Visual Analogue Scale to determine the pain perceived by the patient pre-operatively (after misoprostol, immediately before transport to OR) and post-operatively (in recovery room, on average 1.5 hours post-operatively). The VAS ranges from 0-100. 0 being no pain felt by the patient and 100 being the worst pain imaginable felt by the patient.|Measured pre-operatively (after misoprostol, immediately before transport to OR) and post-operatively (in recovery room, on average 1.5 hours post-operatively)|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860150|NCT01615731|Secondary|Ease of Procedure by Blinded Surgeon|Used a Visual Analogue Scale to determine the ease of procedure by blinded surgeon. The VAS ranges from 0-100. 0 being the easiest procedure the surgeon felt they had every performed and 100 being the most difficult procedure imaginable by the surgeon.|Measured Immediately after procedure|||units on a scale||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860151|NCT01615731|Secondary|Adverse Events (EBL)|One adverse event: Estimated Blood Loss|Intraoperatively|||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860152|NCT01615731|Secondary|Maximum Cervical Dilation|Measured by estimate with bimanual exam and passage of largest dilator immediately prior to procedure.|Measured intra-operatively|"Data missing for one subject in Mifepristone plus one set of dilators arm."||participants|||Number
860153|NCT01615731|Primary|Procedure Time|Measured as time from speculum insertion to removal|Intraoperative Time|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
860154|NCT01607346|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PVR Volume by Bladder Ultrasound at Visits 3, 4, 5 and 6|PVR is the the amount of urine left in the bladder after urination. Bladder ultrasound was performed to assess PVR at Baseline/Visit 2 (Day -1), Visit 3 (Day 21), Visit 4 (Day 35), Visit 5 (Day 49) and Visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860155|NCT01607346|Secondary|Cystometry Assessment at Visits 3, 4, 5 and 6|Cystometry is a test of bladder function in which pressure and volume of fluid in the bladder is measured during filling, storage, and voiding. Cystometry was assessed at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visit 3 (Day 21), visit 4 (Day 35), visit 5 (Day 49) and visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). The requirement for cystometry was discovered by the study monitor and discussed with the GSK medical monitor after the participants had completed the study.|Up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Data were not collected, although 3 participants met at least 1 of the criteria for multichannel cystometry during the study, the assessment was not performed.|||||
860212|NCT01272232|Secondary|Change (%-Points) From Baseline in HbA1c (Glycosylated Haemoglobin A1c)|Change in HbA1c (%-points) was calculated as the difference between the HbA1c (%) at Week 0 and Week 56.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) data. Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||percentage point change of HbA1c||Standard Deviation|Mean
860156|NCT01607346|Secondary|Change From Baseline in American Urological Association Symptom Index (AUA SI) at Visits 3, 4, 5 and 6|The America Urological Association Symptom Index is a 7-item Likert-scored scale describing urinary bladder function. It is the sum of the responses to the 7 AUA symptom questions. Score ranges from 0 to 5 (0=not at all and 5=almost always for questions 1 to 6; 0=None and 5=five times or more for question 7). The total score ranges from 0-35 where higher scores indicate more severe symptoms. It was completed by the investigator at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visit 3 (Day 21), visit 5 (Day 49) and visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). Measurement at visit 2 (Day -1) was considered as Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||Scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860157|NCT01607346|Secondary|Volume Voided as Recorded on the Voiding Diary for 2 Days Prior to Each Post-baseline Visit|The participants were asked to complete a voiding diary for two days preceding each visit. Volume voided for 2 days prior to each visit was defined as sum of urine recorded within 2 days prior to each post-baseline visit. Voiding diary was assessed at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visit 3 (Day 21), visit 4 (Day 35), visit 5 (Day 49) and visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860158|NCT01607346|Secondary|Frequency of Micturition as Recorded on the Voiding Diary for 2 Days Prior to Each Visit|The participants were asked to complete a voiding diary for two days preceding each visit. Frequency of micturition for 2 days prior to dach visit was defined as total number of entries recorded within 2 days prior to each post-baseline visit. Voiding diary was assessed at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visit 3 (Day 21), visit 4 (Day 35), visit 5 (Day 49) and visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||Micturition voided||Standard Deviation|Mean
860159|NCT01607346|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Average Flow Rate (Qmean) at Visits 3, 4, 5 and 6|Average flow rate was measured by uroflowmetry test. It is a non-invasive diagnostic test that measures the speed of urinary flow. Uroflowmetry was assessed at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visit 3 (Day 21), visit 4 (Day 35), visit 5 (Day 49) and visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). Measurement at visit 2 (Day -1) was considered as Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||mL per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
860160|NCT01607346|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Flow Time at Visits 3, 4, 5 and 6|Flow time was measured by uroflowmetry test. It is a non-invasive diagnostic test that measures the speed of urinary flow. Uroflowmetry was assessed at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visit 3 (Day 21), visit 4 (Day 35), visit 5 (Day 49) and visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). Measurement at visit 2 (Day -1) was considered as Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
860161|NCT01607346|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Time to Maximum Flow at Visits 3, 4, 5 and 6|Time to maximum flow was measured by uroflowmetry test. It is a non-invasive diagnostic test that measures the speed of urinary flow. Uroflowmetry was assessed at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visits 3 (Day 21), visit 4 (Day 35), visit 5 (Day 49) and visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). Measurement at visit 2 (Day -1) was considered as Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||Seconds||Standard Deviation|Mean
860162|NCT01607346|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Voided Volume (VV) at Visits 3, 4, 5 and 6|The volume of urine voided was measured by uroflowmetry test. Uroflowmetry was assessed at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visits 3 (Day 21), visit 4 (Day 35), visit 5 (Day 49) and visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). Measurement at visit 2 (Day -1) was considered as Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860163|NCT01607346|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Percentage Residual Urinary Volume (RUV) at Visits 3, 4, 5 and 6|Percentage residual urinary volume is a standardized measure of post-residual volume and is defined as residual devided by residual plus voided multiplied by 100 where 'residual' is the post-void residual (PVR) volume collected on the bladder ultrasound and 'voided' is the voided volume collected on the uroflowmetry. Measurement at visit 2 (Day -1) was considered as Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated as post-baseline minus Baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles)|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||Percentage of residual urinary volume||Standard Deviation|Mean
860164|NCT01607346|Secondary|Percent Change From Baseline in Qmax at Visits 3, 4, 5 and 6|Maximum urine flow rate was measured by uroflowmetry test. It is a non-invasive diagnostic test that measures the speed of urinary flow. Uroflowmetry was assessed at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visits 3 (Day 21), visit 4 (Day 35), visit 5 (Day 49) and visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). Measurement at visit 2 (Day -1) was considered as Baseline value. The percentage change from Baseline was calculated as post-baseline value minus Baseline value divided by Baseline value multiplied by 100. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles)|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||Percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
860165|NCT01607346|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Maximum Flow Rate (Qmax) at Visits 3, 4 and 6|Maximum urine flow rate was measured by uroflowmetry test. It is a non-invasive diagnostic test that measures the speed of urinary flow. Uroflowmetry was assessed at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visits 3 (Day 21), visit 4 (Day 35), visit 5 (Day 49) and visit 6 (follow-up visit within 14 days after the end-of-treatment eye examination). Measurement at visit 2 (Day -1) was considered as Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-baseline value. Only those participants with data available at the specified time points were analyzed (represented by n=X in the category titles).|Baseline (Day -1) and up to Day 80 (Visit 6)|Safety Population||mL per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
860166|NCT01607346|Primary|Change From Baseline in Maximum Flow Rate (Qmax) at Visit 5.|Maximum urine flow rate was measured by uroflowmetry test. It is a non-invasive diagnostic test that measures the speed of urinary flow. Uroflowmetry was assessed at Baseline visit 2 (Day -1) and on visits 3, 4 and 5 (Days 21, 35 and 49 respectively). Measurement at visit 2 (Day -1) was considered as Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the Baseline value from the post-baseline value at Visit 5. Safety Population was defined as all participants who received more than or equal to one dose of study medication.|Baseline (Day -1) and on Day 49 (Visit 5)|Safety Population||Milliliter (mL) per second||Standard Deviation|Mean
860167|NCT01572389|Primary|Change in Patient Health Questionnaires-9 During Intervention|"The Patient Health Questionnaires-9 assesses depressive symptoms during the course of the intervention. The PHQ-9 ranges in score from 0 - 27; where higher numbers represent increase levels of depression. Scores from 5 - 9 represent minimal symptoms of depression; 10 - 14 represent minor depression, dysthymia, or major depression - mild; 15 - 19 represent major depression, moderately severe; and scores of 20 and above is considered major depression, severe. Participants with that scored a 10 or above were eligible for the study."|PHQ-9 will be assessed at baseline, 6-, and 12- months.|The number analyzed at each timepoint decreased due to non-completion of the assessment by participants.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860168|NCT01572389|Primary|Change in Hemoglobin A1C|Measures of Hemoglobin A1C will be taken to assess average blood glucose levels throughout the study as an indicator of diabetes control. Hemoglobin A1C is a blood test taken to assess average blood glucose levels in the body. Normal range of A1C level is below 5.7. Eligible participants had an A1C of 7.5 or higher. The higher the A1C the more a person's diabetes is uncontrolled.|Hemoglobin A1C levels will be measured at baseline, 6-, and 12- months.|The number analyzed at each timepoint decreased due to non-completion of the A1C blood draw by participants.||percentage of glycated hemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
860169|NCT01557166|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) (%)|Observed mean change from baseline in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) (%) after 32 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, week 32|Full analysis set (FAS) - included all randomised subjects. 345 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis||percentage of glycosylated haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
860170|NCT01557166|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose|Observed mean change from baseline in fasting plasma glucose (mmol/L) after 32 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, week 32|Full analysis set (FAS) - included all randomised subjects. 355 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis.||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
860171|NCT01557166|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Weight (kg)|Observed mean change from baseline in fasting body weight (kg) after 32 weeks of treatment.|Week 0, week 32|Full analysis set (FAS) - included all randomised subjects. 353 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
860172|NCT01557166|Primary|Change From Baseline in Apnoea-hypopnoea Index (AHI)|Observed mean change from baseline in AHI (events/hour) after 32 weeks of treatment. AHI (apnoea and hypopnoea events per hour of sleep) is a measure used for the diagnosis and severity classification of obstructive sleep apnoea. AHI severity category: none ≤4.9; mild 5.0−14.9; moderate 15.0−29.9; severe ≥30.0 events/hour.|Week 0, Week 32|Full analysis set (FAS) - included all randomised subjects. 334 subjects contributed to the statistical analysis.||events/hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
860173|NCT01496846|Secondary|Anesthetic Success Rate of an IANB With Articaine|Success rate of an IANB with articaine using a conventional IANB technique|15 min after injection|"All enrolled participants (N=201) received an IANB with Articaine. Two participants were excluded from data analysis due to inadequate lip numbness (IANB was considered missed block); thus N=199 were analyzed for success rate."||Participants|||Count of Participants
860174|NCT01496846|Primary|Anesthetic Success Rate of Supplemental Infiltration Injection|Following an unsuccessful IANB, supplemental infiltration anesthesia with either articaine or lidocaine was given to achieve complete pulpal anesthesia|5 min after injection|||Participants|||Count of Participants
860175|NCT01454076|Primary|Tmax: Time to Reach the Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) for Ixazomib||Arm 1:Days 1, 15 and Arm 5:Day 6 pre-dose and at multiple time points(up to 264 hrs)post-dose;Arm 2, 3:Days 1,15 pre-dose and at multiple time points(up to 216 hrs)post-dose;Arm 4:Day 8 pre-dose and at multiple time points(up to 168 hrs)post-dose|The PK-evaluable population included all participants who received protocol-specified dose in Cycle 1 without dose reductions/interruptions, did not receive any excluded concomitant medication during PK sampling, and had sufficient concentration-time data to permit estimation of PK parameters by noncompartmental analysis methods.||hours||Full Range|Median
860176|NCT01454076|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Best Overall Response|Best overall response for a participant is best observed post-baseline disease response as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1: Complete response (CR) was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and non-target disease, with the exception of nodal disease. All nodes, both target and non-target, must decrease to normal (short axis less than (<) 10 millimeter [mm]). No new lesions. Partial response (PR) was defined as greater than or equal to (>=) 30% decrease under baseline of the sum of diameters of all target lesions. The short axis was used in the sum for target nodes, while the longest diameter was used in the sum for all other target lesions. No unequivocal progression of non-target disease. No new lesions. Stable disease (SD) was defined as not qualifying for CR, PR, Progressive Disease (PD). An increase of >=20% from the nadir (or baseline, if it represents the point at which the sum of target disease was lowest) represents PD.|Baseline up to end of treatment (approximately 1.9 years)|The response-evaluable population included participants who had measurable disease at baseline, received at least 1 dose of any study drug, and had at least 1 postbaseline response assessment.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860180|NCT01454076|Primary|AUClast: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to the Time of the Last Quantifiable Concentration for Ixazomib||Arm 1:Days 1, 15 and Arm 5:Day 6 pre-dose and at multiple time points(up to 264 hrs)post-dose;Arm 2, 3:Days 1,15 pre-dose and at multiple time points(up to 216 hrs)post-dose;Arm 4:Day 8 pre-dose and at multiple time points(up to 168 hrs)post-dose|The PK-evaluable population included all participants who received protocol-specified dose in Cycle 1 without dose reductions/interruptions, did not receive any excluded concomitant medication during PK sampling, and had sufficient concentration-time data to permit estimation of PK parameters by noncompartmental analysis methods.||nanogram*hour per milliliter (ng*hr/mL)]||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
860181|NCT01454076|Primary|Cmax: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration for Ixazomib||Arm 1:Days 1, 15 and Arm 5:Day 6 pre-dose and at multiple time points(up to 264 hours[hrs])post-dose;Arm 2, 3:Days 1,15 pre-dose and at multiple time points(up to 216 hrs)post-dose;Arm 4:Day 8 pre-dose and at multiple time points(up to 168 hrs)post-dose|The pharmacokinetic (PK)-evaluable population included all participants who received protocol-specified dose in Cycle 1 without dose reductions/interruptions, did not receive any excluded concomitant medication during PK sampling, and had sufficient concentration-time data to permit estimation of PK parameters by noncompartmental analysis methods.||nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL)||Standard Deviation|Geometric Mean
860182|NCT01416584|Other Pre-specified|Entered Methadone Treatment|Did the participant enter methadone treatment at any point in the 6-month treatment period?|6 months|We did not analyze this measure. This grant has ended and there is no funding to conduct more analyses.|||||
860183|NCT01416584|Other Pre-specified|In Methadone Treatment at End of Treatment|Was each participant in methadone treatment at the end of the 6-month intervention evaluation period?|6 months|We did not analyze this measure. This grant has ended and there is no funding to conduct more analyses.|||||
860184|NCT01416584|Other Pre-specified|Did Participant Inject Drugs?|Percent of months that participants reported injecting drugs.|6 months|We did not analyze this measure. This grant has ended and there is no funding to conduct more analyses.|||||
860185|NCT01416584|Other Pre-specified|Went to Shooting Gallery/House or Other Place Where Users go to Shoot-up?|The percent of months that participants reported going to a shooting gallery/hour or other place where users go to shoot-up.|6 months|Due to the very low rate of reports of going to a shooting gallery/house or other place where users go to shoot-up in all groups, we did not analyze this measure. This grant has ended and there is no funding to conduct more analyses.|||||
860186|NCT01416584|Other Pre-specified|Did Participant Share Needles or Works?|Percent of months that participants reported sharing needles or works.|6 months|Due to the very low rate of reports of sharing needles or works in all groups, we did not analyze this measure. This grant has ended and there is no funding to conduct more analyses.|||||
860187|NCT01416584|Secondary|Percentage of M,W,F Urine Samples Negative for Opiates|Was each participant's urine sample negative for opiates at each of the Monday, Wednesday, Friday urine samples scheduled throughout the intervention evaluation period?|6 months|intent to treat||percentage of M,W,F urine samples||Full Range|Mean
860188|NCT01416584|Secondary|Percentage of M,W,F Urine Samples Negative for Cocaine|Was each participant's urine sample negative for cocaine at each of the Monday, Wednesday, Friday urine samples scheduled throughout the intervention evaluation period?|6 months|intent to treat||percentage of urine samples||Full Range|Mean
860189|NCT01416584|Primary|Percentage of Monthly Urine Samples Negative for Cocaine|Was the participant's urine sample negative for cocaine at each of the six 30-day assessments scheduled throughout the intervention evaluation period?|6 months|intent to treat||percentage of cocaine negative||Full Range|Mean
860190|NCT01416584|Primary|Percentage of Monthly Urine Sample Negative for Opiates|Percentage of urine sample negative for opiates at each of the six 30-day assessments scheduled throughout the intervention evaluation|6 months|Intent to treat||percentage of opiate negative||Full Range|Mean
860191|NCT01416584|Primary|Percentage of Months in Methadone Treatment|The percentage of months in which participants were enrolled in methadone treatment during the 6-month intervention evaluation period?|6 months|Intent to treat||percent of months in methadone treatment||Full Range|Mean
860192|NCT01415232|Primary|Correlation Between Actual Epidural Needle Depth (ND) and Estimated Epidural Depth (Est-D)|Measured using the Pearson correlation coefficient between actual epidural needle depth (ND) and epidural depth as estimated by the epidural depth equation (EQ-US) followed by ultrasound (longitudinal and transverse planes) measurement.|at the time of labor epidural catheter insertion (an average of 5 minutes for ultrasound visualization)|per protocol||correlation coefficient||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860193|NCT01371110|Secondary|Percentage of Patients Who Meet Response and Remission|Percentage of patients who meet response (defined as 25% reduction in Y-BOCCS score) and remission (defined as Y-BOCS score ≤10) criteria at 24 hrs post-infusion and durability of efficacy up to two weeks after administration. Assessments will be performed 24, 48 and 72 hrs post-infusion and after 7, 10, and 14 days.|up to 14 days|||percentage of participants|||Number
860194|NCT01371110|Primary|Change in Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCCS) Rating OCD Symptom Severity From Baseline to 24-hours After Ketamine Administration|"The primary efficacy outcome is change in the Y-BOCCS rating score on a scale from baseline to 24 hrs post-administration of ketamine.
The 10 Y-BOCCS items are each scored on a four-point scale from 0 = no symptoms to 4 = extreme symptoms. The sum of the first five items is a severity index for obsessions. The sum of the last five an index for compulsions. A translation of total score into an approximate index of overall severity is: 0-7 - subclinical; 8-15 - mild; 16-23 - moderate; 24-31 - severe; 32-40 - extreme."|Baseline and 24 Hours|||Units on a scale||Full Range|Mean
860195|NCT01344824|Secondary|Subjects Experiencing Toxicity|Toxicity will be evaluated using CTCAE criteria, version 3, all grade 3 and 4 events.|90 days|All patients who received treatment were evaluated||participants|||Number
860196|NCT01344824|Secondary|Overall Survival|Time of enrollment to date of death.|1400 days|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860197|NCT01344824|Primary|Progression-free Survival|Documented radiographic response per Per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria (RECIST v1.0) for target lesions and assessed by imaging: Complete Response (CR), Disappearance of all target lesions; Partial Response (PR), >=30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions; Overall Response (OR) = CR + PR. criteria each year, until subject death|1400 days|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860198|NCT01313676|Secondary|Number of Participants With First On-treatment Cardiovascular (CV) Composite Events Occured on or Before Common End Date|On-treatment CV composite event is comprised of the first event that is adjudicated as on-treatment CV death, myocardial infarction, stroke, unstable angina, or transient ischemic attack experienced by a participant. The events that occurred no more than 7 days after the participants last dose of IP are considered as on-treatment adverse events. Common end date is the study end date where approximately 1000 deaths would have occurred in the ITT-E Population. Cox PH Model was used to assess time to first on-treatment CV composite event. Cox PH Model was adjusted for age, gender and indicators of ischemic and vascular disease, including all four treatment arms. A hazard ratio less than 1 indicates a lower risk of a first CV event rate versus placebo or any arm.|From the start of IP to first on treatment CV event till 7 days after the last dose of IP (average of 2 study years)|ITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
860199|NCT01313676|Secondary|Decline in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (FEV1)|FEV1 is a measure of lung function and is defined as the maximal amount of air that can be forcefully exhaled in one second. The effect of treatment on decline of post bronchodilator FEV1 recorded during the treatment period was analyzed using a particular form of a mixed effect model - a random coefficients model. FEV1 was fitted as the response variable with treatment group, age, gender, baseline FEV1 and time on treatment as fixed effects. Time on treatment was treated as a continuous variable. This model allowed for an initial increase in FEV1, but then tested the difference in slopes from the first post-baseline measurement which was at 3 months. A negative slope indicates a decline. A positive treatment difference indicates a slower rate of decline vs Placebo or Component. Only participants with at least one on-treatment post-bronchodilator FEV1 measurement were analyzed.|From start date of IP until IP stop date + 1 (assessed up to 4 years)|ITT-E Population||milliliter/year||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860200|NCT01313676|Primary|Number of Participants With Death (Both on and Off Treatment) Due to Any Cause, Time up to or on the Pre-determined Common End Date|Death from any cause: which occurred from the day of starting IP until the Commone End Date (CED). Common End Date (CED) is the study end date that was pre determined where approximately 1000 deaths would have occurred in the Intent-toTreat Efficacy (ITT-E) Population. Only deaths which occurred on or before the CED were used for the primary analysis. Those who had not died by CED, but who were known to be alive on or after the CED, were censored at the CED. Cox Proportional Hazards (PH) Model was adjusted for age, and gender, including all 4 arms. A hazard ratio of less than 1 indicates a lower death rate versus placebo or other arm. ITT-E Population consisted of all participants in the Safety Population (i.e. randomized to IP and who received at least one dose of IP), with the exception of those recruited at sites that were closed.|From the date of randomization until date of death due to any cause (average of 2 study years)|ITT-E Population||Participants|||Number
860201|NCT01284504|Secondary|Surveys to Evaluate Patient Pain, Fatigue, and Quality of Recovery, Recorded From Day of Surgery to 30 Days Post-op.||30 days||||||
860202|NCT01284504|Primary|Blood Samples Taken Before Initiation of Study, Day of Surgery, Days 1 and 3 Post-op, and 30 Days Post-op. Analyzed for 50 Serum Cytokines, Cell-specific Gene Expression, and TCR Repertoire.||2 years||||||
860203|NCT01284504|Primary|Tumor Sample - Analyzed for TCR Repertoire and Global Transcription Profiling|One patient was accrued and withdrawn after signing consent; None was treated.|2 years||||||
860204|NCT01272232|Secondary|Incidence of Hypoglycaemic Episodes|Hypoglycaemic episodes were classified according to American Diabetes Association (ADA) definitions as well as to the Novo Nordisk definition of a minor hypoglycaemic event (blood glucose level below approximately 2.8 mmol/L [50 mg/dL] or plasma glucose level below 3.1 mmol/L [56 mg/dL]).|Weeks 0-56|Safety analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least one dose of trial product.||Episodes/100 years of patient exposure|||Number
860205|NCT01272232|Secondary|Change From Week 56 to 68 in Waist Circumference||Week 56, week 68|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) data. Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
860206|NCT01272232|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Waist Circumference||Week 0, week 68|Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
860207|NCT01272232|Secondary|Change (%) From Week 56 to 68 in Body Weight (Fasting)|Weight was recorded to the nearest 0.1 kg for a subject in the fasting state with an empty bladder, without shoes and only wearing light clothing. The same calibrated scale was used throughout the trial.|Week 56, week 68|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) data. Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
860208|NCT01272232|Secondary|Change (%) From Baseline in Body Weight (Fasting)|Weight was recorded to the nearest 0.1 kg for a subject in the fasting state with an empty bladder, without shoes and only wearing light clothing. The same calibrated scale was used throughout the trial.|Week 0, week 68|Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
860209|NCT01272232|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Waist Circumference||Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) data. Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
860210|NCT01272232|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Reaching Target HbA1c Below or Equal to 6.5%||at 56 weeks|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) data. Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||percentage of subjects|||Number
860211|NCT01272232|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Reaching Target HbA1c Below 7%||at 56 weeks|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) data. Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||percentage of subjects|||Number
860255|NCT01142297|Primary|Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ)|resonance frequency analysis employed to determine implant stability quotient on a 1-100 point scale with 100 representing the greatest stability.|4 months|||units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
860213|NCT01272232|Primary|Proportion of Subjects Losing More Than 10% of Baseline Body Weight|Weight was recorded to the nearest 0.1 kg for a subject in the fasting state with an empty bladder, without shoes and only wearing light clothing. The same calibrated scale was used throughout the trial.|at 56 weeks|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) data. Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||percentage of subjects|||Number
860214|NCT01272232|Primary|Proportion of Subjects Losing at Least 5% of Baseline Body Weight|Weight was recorded to the nearest 0.1 kg for a subject in the fasting state with an empty bladder, without shoes and only wearing light clothing. The same calibrated scale was used throughout the trial.|at 56 weeks|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) data. Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||percentage of subjects|||Number
860215|NCT01272232|Primary|Change (%) From Baseline in Body Weight (Fasting)|Weight was recorded to the nearest 0.1 kg for a subject in the fasting state with an empty bladder, without shoes and only wearing light clothing. The same calibrated scale was used throughout the trial.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) data. Full analysis set, comprising all randomised subjects who had been exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
860216|NCT01272219|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Body Weight (%) (Re-randomised Subjects With No Pre-diabetes)|The observed mean change from baseline in fasting body weight (%) in re-randomised subjects (with no pre-diabetes at baseline) after 68 weeks of treatment (main + re-randomised treatment period).|Week 0, Week 68|The FAS included all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and who provided at least one post-baseline efficacy value. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
860217|NCT01272219|Secondary|Change From Week 56 in Fasting Body Weight (%) (Re-randomised Subjects With No Pre-diabetes)|The observed mean change in fasting body weight (%) from week 56 to week 68 in re-randomised subjects (with no pre-diabetes at baseline) after 12-weeks of treatment (re-randomised treatment period).|Week 56, Week 68|The FAS included all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and who provided at least one post-baseline efficacy value. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
860218|NCT01272219|Secondary|Proportion of Subjects Losing at Least 5% and Proportion of Subjects Losing More Than 10% of Baseline Fasting Body Weight (Subjects With Pre-diabetes at Baseline)|Percentage of subjects losing >=5% and percentage of subjects losing >10% of baseline fasting body weight (pre-diabetic subjects at baseline) after 160-weeks of treatment (main + extension treatment period). Subjects included in FAS, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment (i.e., excluding 37 subjects with pre-diabetes who entered the re-randomised period and including 6 subjects without pre-diabetes incorrectly stratified to the 160-week treatment period).|At 160 weeks|Subjects included in the FAS, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment; all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and with at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||percentage of subjects|||Number
860219|NCT01272219|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Fasting Body Weight (Subjects With Pre-diabetes at Baseline)|The observed mean change from baseline in fasting body weight (subjects with pre-diabetes at baseline) after 160 weeks of treatment (main + extension treatment period). Subjects included in FAS, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment (i.e., excluding 37 subjects with pre-diabetes who entered the re-randomised period and including 6 subjects without pre-diabetes incorrectly stratified to the 160-week treatment period).|Week 0, week 160|Subjects included in the FAS, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment; all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and with at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
860220|NCT01272219|Secondary|Pre-diabetes Status in Subject With Pre-diabetes at Baseline After 160 Weeks of Treatment|Observed percentage of subjects (subjects with pre-diabetes at baseline) with pre-diabetes status after 160 weeks of treatment (main + extension treatment period). Subjects included in FAS, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment (i.e., excluding 37 subjects with pre-diabetes who entered the re-randomised period and including 6 subjects without pre-diabetes incorrectly stratified to the 160-week treatment period).|Week 0, week 160|Subjects included in the FAS, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment; all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and with at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||percentage of subjects|||Number
860221|NCT01272219|Secondary|Pre-diabetes Status After 56 Weeks of Treatment|Observed percentage of subjects with pre-diabetes status after 56 weeks of treatment (main treatment period).|Week 0, Week 56|The FAS included all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and who provided at least one post-baseline efficacy value. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||percentage of subjects|||Number
860222|NCT01272219|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Waist Circumference (Subjects With Pre-diabetes at Baseline)|The observed mean change from baseline in waist circumference (subjects with pre-diabetes at baseline) after 160 weeks of treatment (main + extension treatment period). Subjects included in FAS, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment (i.e., excluding 37 subjects with pre-diabetes who entered the re-randomised period and including 6 subjects without pre-diabetes incorrectly stratified to the 160-week treatment period).|Week 0, week 160|Subjects included in the FAS, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment; all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and with at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
860256|NCT01108445|Other Pre-specified|Changes in Copy Number, RNA Expression, and Immunohistochemical Profiles|To evaluate in an exploratory fashion changes in copy number, RNA expression, and immunohistochemical profiles by microarray between primary non-clear cell RCC tumors and metastatic samples|36 months||||||
860223|NCT01272219|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Waist Circumference (cm)|The observed mean change from baseline in waist circumference (cm) after 56-weeks of treatment (main treatment period).|Week 0, Week 56|The FAS included all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and who provided at least one post-baseline efficacy value. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
860224|NCT01272219|Primary|Proportion of Subjects With Onset of Type 2 Diabetes|Proportion of subjects with onset of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) at week 160 (main + extension treatment period) among subjects with pre-diabetes at baseline - evaluated as time to onset of T2DM. Subjects included in FAS, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment (i.e., excluding 37 subjects with pre-diabetes who entered the re-randomised period and including 6 subjects without pre-diabetes incorrectly stratified to the 160-week treatment period).|At 160 weeks|Subjects included in the FAS, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment; all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and with at least one post-baseline efficacy measurement, who were stratified to 160-weeks of treatment. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||Subject|||Number
860225|NCT01272219|Primary|Proportion of Subjects Losing More Than 10% of Baseline Fasting Body Weight|Percentage of subjects losing >10% of baseline fasting body weight after 56-weeks of treatment (main treatment period).|At 56 weeks|The FAS) included all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and who provided at least one post-baseline efficacy value. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||percentage of subjects|||Number
860226|NCT01272219|Primary|Proportion of Subjects Losing at Least 5% of Baseline Fasting Body Weight.|Percentage of subjects losing at least 5% of baseline fasting body weight after 56-weeks of treatment (main treatment period).|At Week 56|The FAS included all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and who provided at least one post-baseline efficacy value. Missing data were imputed using LOCF.||percentage of subjects|||Number
860227|NCT01272219|Primary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Body Weight|The observed mean change from baseline in fasting body weight (%) after 56-weeks of treatment (main treatment period).|Week 0, Week 56|The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomised subjects who were exposed to at least one dose of trial product (liraglutide 3.0 mg or liraglutide placebo) and who provided at least one post-baseline efficacy value. Missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF).||percent change||Standard Deviation|Mean
860228|NCT01263717|Secondary|Hemostatic Markers|Tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) measured in serum.|6 months|Please note that we do not have data for these markers (neither PAI1 or tPA) because we did not have adequate funds to assess these.|||||
860229|NCT01263717|Secondary|Adiponectin|adiponectin.|6 months|All available data were used. Data were not available for 1 subject.||Change in ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860230|NCT01263717|Secondary|Glucose Tolerance|Glucose tolerance as measured by standard oral glucose tolerance test. 2-hour glucose is given.|6 months|All available data were used; data were not available for some subjects.||Change in 2-hour glucose, mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860231|NCT01263717|Secondary|Carotid Intimal Medial Thickness (cIMT)|Carotid Intimal Medial Thickness (cIMT).|6 months|All available data were used.||Change in mm||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860232|NCT01263717|Secondary|Lipid Panel|Fasting lipids. Triglyceride value is given.|6 months|All available data were used; data were not available for one subject.||Change in triglyceride, mg/dL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860233|NCT01263717|Secondary|Insulin Like Growth Factor 1 (IGF-I)|Insulin Like Growth Factor 1 (IGF-I).|6 months|All available data were used; data were not available for one subject.||Change in ng/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860234|NCT01263717|Secondary|HbA1c|Hemoglobin A1c.|6 months|All available data were used; data were not available for one subject.||Change in %||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860235|NCT01263717|Secondary|Insulin Sensitivity|In a subgroup of 1/2 of the subjects, euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp will be performed to assess insulin-stimulated glucose uptake. Insulin stimulated glucose uptake (M) calculated using the method of DeFronzo is shown.|6 months|All available data were used; data were not available for some subjects.||Change in mg/kg/min||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860236|NCT01263717|Secondary|Endogenous Growth Hormone Secretion|Endogenous growth hormone (GH) concentrations measured by overnight frequent blood sampling every 20 minutes. Mean overnight GH concentration is given.|6 months|All available data were used; data were not available for some subjects.||Change in ng/mL||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860237|NCT01263717|Secondary|Intramyocellular Lipid|Intramyocellular lipid (IMCL) as measured by magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy of the calf. Soleus IMCL normalized to creatinine (IMCL/Cr based on areas determined by spectroscopy) was measured. The change over 6 months is reported.|6 months|All available data were used; data were not available for some subjects. Data from 1 patient who was discontinued between the 3 and 6mo visits for adverse event are included. These data were obtained at a termination visit.||Change in ratio of IMCL/Cr||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860238|NCT01263717|Primary|Visceral Adipose Tissue|Change in visceral adipose tissue area as measured by single-slice computed tomography (CT) scan at the L4 vertebra.|6 months|Data from 1 patient who was discontinued between the 3 and 6mo visits for adverse event are included. These data were obtained at a termination visit.||change in cm^2 after 6 months||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860239|NCT01263717|Primary|Liver Fat|Hepatic fat as measured by magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy, and expressed by normalizing lipid to water and expressing as a percent (lipid-to-water percent).|6 months|All available data were used; data were not available for some subjects. Data from 1 patient who was discontinued between the 3 and 6mo visits for adverse event are included. These data were obtained at a termination visit.||Change in hepatic lipid-to-water %||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860257|NCT01108445|Secondary|Change in Quality-of-life|To compare change in quality-of-life, as measured by the FACT-KSI scale at baseline and end of treatment per subject in each treatment arm. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index. FKSI is a questionnaire for FACT–Kidney Symptom Index used to assess QoL/participant-reported outcomes for participants diagnosed with renal cell cancer. The FKSI contained 15 questions each ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) so that FKSI ranged between 0-60 where higher scores reflects better functioning and fewer symptoms.|baseline, up to 40 months|All participants who completed the End of treatment visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860240|NCT01243762|Secondary|Number of Participants Whose Best Response is a Partial Response (PR) or Complete Response (CR)|Best response was determined for the maximum tolerated dose from the start of treatment until disease progression, recurrence, or completion of 6 months of treatment. Lesions were measured by computed tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Partial response (PR), defined as a tumor burden decrease of 30%, or complete response (CR) was determined using Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 for participants with at least one measurable target lesion at baseline.|Up to 7 months|All participants who received at least one dose of study therapy and had baseline data for those analyses that required baseline data. The analysis was planned to be performed on the 3 arms in Part 2 only. The study was terminated prior to completion of this analysis.||Participants|||Number
860241|NCT01243762|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose-limiting Toxicities (DLTs)|DLTs were defined as follows: 1) non-hematological toxicity ≥Grade 3 according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 except for Grade 3 nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and/or dehydration; Grade 3 or 4 hyperglycemia; alopecia; inadequately treated hypersensitivity reactions; dalotuzumab infusion-related reactions; Grade 3 transaminases ≤1 week in duration; or clinically non-significant, treatable or reversible lab abnormalities; 2) Grade 4-5 hematologic toxicity, with the exception of Grade 4 neutropenia <6 days in duration; 3) Grade 3 or Grade 4 neutropenia with fever >38.5 degrees C; 4) Grade 4 thrombocytopenia ≤25.0 x 10^9/Liter; 5) drug-related adverse experience leading to a dose modification during Cycle 1; 6) unresolved drug-related toxicity that causes ≥3 week delay of the next scheduled dose of study medication; 7) persistent increases in QTc interval >60 milliseconds from baseline, or clinically significant bradycardia.|Cycle 1-28 Days|All participants who received at least one dose of study therapy in Cycle 1||Participants|||Number
860242|NCT01234831|Secondary|Rate of Recolonization or Documented Infection With MRSA|Prospective review of microbiological data for patients enrolled in the trial to determine rate of recolonization or documented infection. Subjects in the Intervention Arm of the study who had documented clearance of colonization and met criteria for discontinuation of contract precautions, and had CP discontinued by staff (N=69) were included. Subjects who had a visit at MGH through 12/31/2012 during which a microbiology sample was obtained and MRSA was recovered (clinical or surveillance) were included.|2 years|We reviewed the data on the 69 subjects who were enrolled in the intervention arm of the trial who were cleared of colonization based on the study intervention.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860243|NCT01234831|Secondary|Specificity of First PCR Assay.|Specificity of the first PCR assay for subjects enrolled in active arm of trial.|1 year|||percentage of true negatives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860244|NCT01234831|Secondary|Sensitivity of First PCR Assay|Sensitivity of the first PCR assay for subjects enrolled in active arm of trial.|1 year|||percentage of true positives||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860245|NCT01234831|Secondary|Number of Subjects With a Single Positive PCR Result and at Least 1 Positive Culture Assay|This outcome is the positive predictive value of a single PCR assay for subjects with a history of prior MRSA infection or colonization who completed the 3 swab protocol.|1 year|Number of participants in the Active Screening arm who had completed the 3-swab protocol.||participants|||Number
860246|NCT01234831|Primary|Discontinuation of Contact Precautions in Both Trial Arms|"Patients known to have MRSA require Contact Precautions based on current recommendations from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Contact Precautions mean that hospitalized patients with a history of MRSA infection or colonization are isolated in a private room or together with patients who have the same Contact Precautions status (i.e. both with MRSA). Healthcare workers caring for such patients must wear protective gowns and gloves during interactions and use of equipment dedicated to that patient is recommended. For this study, Contact Precautions are discontinued refers to the practice of discontinuation of Contact Precautions once subjects meet criteria based on institutional infection control policy: history of MRSA but no positive culture in preceding 90 days and three negative nasal surveillance cultures obtained at least 24 hours apart in the absence of concurrent antibiotic use."|1 year|Analysis was performed on patients in both the Active Screening arm and Passive Screening arm who had completed the 3-swab protocol and all 3 swabs were negative.||percentage of MRSA CP discontinued|||Number
860247|NCT01234831|Primary|Completion of Screening Protocol in Both Trial Arms|Rate at which subjects in both trial arms complete the 3-swab protocol.|1 year|Participants in both the Active Screening arm and Passive Screening arm who completed the 3-swab protocol.||percentage of subjects completed 3 swabs|||Number
860248|NCT01234831|Primary|Number of Subjects With Single Negative Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Result and 3 Negative Culture Assays|This outcome is the negative predictive value of a single PCR assay for subjects with a history of prior MRSA infection or colonization.|1 year|Only patients randomized to the Active Screening arm who had 3 pairs of completed nasal swabs could be analyzed for this outcome measure which is the negative predictive value of the first PCR sample compared to three culture samples for subjects with a history of prior MRSA infection or colonization.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860249|NCT01200355|Secondary|To Compare Overall Survival Rates at 6 Weeks||6 weeks from randomization between the two treatment arms.|||Participants|||Count of Participants
860250|NCT01200355|Secondary|Prophylaxis Failure of Study Medication for Any Reason Between Patients Who Receive Posaconazole and Those Who Receive Micafungin.||2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
860251|NCT01200355|Secondary|To Compare the Incidence of Possible, Probable or Proven Invasive Fungal Infections Between Patients Who Receive Posaconazole and Those Who Receive Micafungin During Treatment Phase||2 years|||Participants|||Count of Participants
860252|NCT01200355|Secondary|To Compare the Number of Days on Study Drug Between Patients Who Receive Posaconazole and Patients Who Receive Micafungin.||2 years|Results reflect patients who discontinued prophylaxis for suspected IFI (invasive fungal infection)||days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860253|NCT01200355|Primary|Time to Failure|Clinical failure is defined as: 1) need for systemic antifungal therapy (AmBisome) for > 3 consecutive days for presumptive fungal infection, toxicity or intolerance of study medication or 2) death.|2 years|Analysis based on a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) approach, with the use of data from patients who underwent randomization and received 2 or more doses of prophylaxis. Trial designed w/ power to detect absolute differences of ~25% of prophylaxis failure in the two groups with ~ 80% power and a significance level of 5% using a two-tail test.||Days||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860254|NCT01142297|Secondary|Clinical Success of Implants||1 year||||||
860258|NCT01108445|Secondary|Change in Quality-of-life|To compare change in quality-of-life, as measured by the FACT-KSI scale at baseline and cycle 6 day1 per subject in each treatment arm. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index. FKSI is a questionnaire for FACT–Kidney Symptom Index used to assess QoL/participant-reported outcomes for participants diagnosed with renal cell cancer. The FKSI contained 15 questions each ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) so that FKSI ranged between 0-60 where higher scores reflects better functioning and fewer symptoms.|baseline, cycle 6 day 1|All participants who completed the cycle 6 day 1 visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860259|NCT01108445|Secondary|Change in Quality-of-life|To compare change in quality-of-life, as measured by the FACT-KSI scale at baseline and cycle 3 day 1 per subject in each treatment arm. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index. FKSI is a questionnaire for FACT–Kidney Symptom Index used to assess QoL/participant-reported outcomes for participants diagnosed with renal cell cancer. The FKSI contained 15 questions each ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) so that FKSI ranged between 0-60 where higher scores reflects better functioning and fewer symptoms.|baseline, cycle 3 day 1|All participants who completed the cycle 3 day 1 visit.||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860260|NCT01108445|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Adverse Events|To assess toxicities associated with everolimus or sunitinib using NCI CTC version 4.0 criteria|24 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860261|NCT01108445|Secondary|Time-to-new Metastatic Disease in Each Treatment Arm|To compare the time-to-new metastatic disease in each treatment arm, defined from the date of first study agent administration to the onset of a new evaluable site of disease, excluding the primary site and all sites documented at baseline|36 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860262|NCT01108445|Secondary|Median OS|To compare the median OS in each treatment arm.|Up to 40 months|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860263|NCT01108445|Secondary|Median Duration of Response (CR, PR, and SD)|To compare the median duration of response (CR, PR, and SD) in each treatment arm. According to RECIST 1.1, Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. Partial Response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.|24 months|||months||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860264|NCT01108445|Secondary|Clinical Measures of Response and PFS With Baseline and Time-dependent Levels of Biomarkers|To correlate clinical measures of response and PFS with baseline and time-dependent levels of biomarkers. These biomarkers include plasma angiokine levels, tissue immunohistochemical and genomic profiles, copy number as assessed by array-based comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), and known mutations in non-clear cell RCC|36 months||||||
860265|NCT01108445|Secondary|Best Tumor Shrinkage as a Percentile in Each Arm|To compare the best tumor shrinkage as a percentile in each treatment arm. The percentile change at each follow up visit is calculated by measuring the percentage change in the Sum of lesion measurement from baseline. The best tumor shrinkage is lowest percentile change. A decrease is indicated by a negative percentage.|24 months|||percentile decrease||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860266|NCT01108445|Secondary|Overall Survival Rates|To compare overall survival (OS) rates at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months and over time in each treatment arm.|6, 12, 24, 36 months|||percentage probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860267|NCT01108445|Secondary|12 Week Clinical Benefit Rate as Percentage|Rate of complete or partial response or stable disease by the RECIST 1.1 criteria lasting ≥ 12 weeks prior to progression. Benefit rate is defined as complete response [CR] and partial response [PR] and stable disease [SD] by RECIST 1.1 criteria in each treatment arm. Benefit rate = CR + PR + SD. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. Partial Response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.|Baseline to 36 months|||percentage of particpants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860268|NCT01108445|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Stable Disease (SD)|Percentage of participants with stable disease during treatment is defined as stable disease [SD] by RECIST 1.1 criteria as calculated in each treatment arm. Stable Disease (SD) is defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.|Baseline to 36 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860269|NCT01108445|Secondary|Overall Response Rate|Defined as complete response [CR] and partial response [PR] by RECIST 1.1 criteria in each treatment arm.Overall Response Rate (ORR) = CR + PR. Complete Response (CR) is disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to <10 mm. Partial Response (PR) is at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.|24 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860270|NCT01108445|Secondary|PFS Expressed in Months|Progression-free survival (PFS) expressed in months as compared to an historic control (interferon-treated clear cell RCC control arm from the sunitinib phase III study). Progressive disease is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression).|24 months|||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860271|NCT01108445|Secondary|Progression Free Survival Rates|6-, 12-, and 24-month rates of PFS in each arm will be compared for each treatment arm. Progressive disease is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression).|6, 12 and 24 months|||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860299|NCT00981149|Primary|Pain.|From zero to 100 with 100 being the worst pain.|1, 3, 6 weeks|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860272|NCT01108445|Primary|Anti-tumor Activity as Measured by Median Progression Free Survival Time|The primary objective will be to compare the anti-tumor activity of everolimus and sunitinib in subjects with mRCC with non-clear cell pathology, as measured by progression-free survival (PFS) following treatment initiation according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. Progressive disease is defined as at least a 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions, taking as reference the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions. In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression).|24 Months|||Months||80% Confidence Interval|Median
860273|NCT01078909|Secondary|Change in Lipid Mediators|0 Participants Analyzed; Lipid mediators were unable to be detected therefore there are no data to report.|1, 2, 3 and 5 days post LPS administration|Lipid mediators were unable to be detected; Data were not collected.|||||
860274|NCT01078909|Primary|Mean Concentrations of CRP Following 5 Months of Treatment||5 months|One individual was removed from the analysis due to having very high RBC EPA+DHA content at study entry (>8%)||mg/dL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860275|NCT01078909|Primary|Mean Concentrations of Inflammatory Markers (TNF-alpha and IL-6) Following 5 Months of Treatment||5 months|One individual was removed from the analysis due to having very high RBC EPA+DHA content at study entry (>8%)||pg/mL||95% Confidence Interval|Mean
860276|NCT01036321|Secondary|Biomarkers of Disease Progression - Total Testosterone|Median change from baseline to post intervention. Steroid hormones: pre-treatment (Pre:) versus post treatment (Post:).|Up to 6 weeks|All participants who were randomized to a study arm.||ng/dL||Full Range|Median
860277|NCT01036321|Secondary|Biomarkers of Disease Progression - Sex Hormone-binding Globulin (SHBG)|Median change from baseline to post intervention. Steroid hormones: pre-treatment (Pre:) versus post treatment (Post:).|Up to 6 weeks|All participants who were randomized to a study arm.||nmol/L||Full Range|Median
860278|NCT01036321|Secondary|Biomarkers of Disease Progression - IGF-1|Median change from baseline to post intervention. Steroid hormones: pre-treatment (Pre:) versus post treatment (Post:).|Up to 6 weeks|All participants who were randomized to a study arm.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
860279|NCT01036321|Secondary|Biomarkers of Disease Progression - Insulin Like Growth Factor (IGF) Binding Protein -3|Median change from baseline to post intervention. Steroid hormones: pre-treatment (Pre:) versus post treatment (Post:).|Up to 6 weeks|All participants who were randomized to a study arm.||mg/L||Full Range|Median
860280|NCT01036321|Secondary|Biomarkers of Disease Progression - Free Testosterone|Median change from baseline to post intervention. Steroid hormones: pre-treatment (Pre:) versus post treatment (Post:).|Up to 6 weeks|All participants who were randomized to a study arm.||pg/ml||Full Range|Median
860281|NCT01036321|Secondary|Biomarkers of Disease Progression - Estradiol|Median change from baseline to post intervention. Steroid hormones: pre-treatment (Pre:) versus post treatment (Post:).|Up to 6 weeks|All participants who were randomized to a study arm.||pmo/L||Full Range|Median
860282|NCT01036321|Secondary|Change in Plasma Concentrations of Isoflavone|Plasma concentrations of isoflavone: Genistein from baseline to post intervention by study arm.|Up to 6 weeks|All participants who were randomized to a study arm.||mg||Full Range|Median
860283|NCT01036321|Secondary|Biomarkers of Disease Progression - Serum PSA|Median change from baseline to post intervention: Prostatic specific antigen (PSA). All Participants (ALL); Caucasian Men only (CM only); African American Men only (AAM only).|Up to 6 weeks|All participants who were randomized to a study arm.||ng/mL||Full Range|Median
860284|NCT01036321|Primary|Number of Toxicity Events by Final Attribution and Treatment Arm|Safety: Incidence of Adverse Events (AEs) occurring during intervention with either 20 mg purified isoflavones bid or placebo. Serious Adverse Event (SAEs) and other Adverse Event (AE) details are also reported in the Adverse Event sections.|Up to 6 weeks|All participants who were randomized to a study arm.||Toxicity Events|||Number
860285|NCT01036321|Primary|Median Change in Percent Ki-67 From Baseline|Efficacy: Change in percent Ki-67 evaluated in prostate cancer (PCa) tissue specimens after 3-6 weeks of intervention with purified isoflavones (40 mg daily) vs. Placebo.|Baseline to post intervention - up to 6 weeks|All participants who were randomized to a study arm.||percentage of tumor cells||Full Range|Median
860286|NCT01014533|Secondary|Relapse to Any Drinking|Relapse to any drinking is counted as participants who drank any beverage alcohol from end of sleep laboratory study (night 10) to twelve weeks later|12 weeks|||Participants|||Count of Participants
860287|NCT01014533|Primary|Changes in Sleep Laboratory Recordings Pre- and Post- Study Medication (WASO)|Wake time after sleep onset (WASO) (number of minutes awake throughout the night after initial sleep onset)|1 week|||minutes||Standard Deviation|Mean
860288|NCT01014533|Primary|Changes in Sleep Laboratory Recordings Pre- and Post-study Medication (Stage 2 Percent)|Electrophysiological measures of sleep stages: percent of total sleep time in stage 2 sleep|1 week|||percentage of total sleep time||Standard Deviation|Mean
860289|NCT01000506|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) Score Over the 52-week Treatment Period|The ACQ-6 is a six-item questionnaire. The six questions enquire about the frequency and/or severity of symptoms (nocturnal awakening on waking in the morning, activity limitation, shortness of breath, wheeze) and use of short-acting bronchodilator over the previous week. The response options for all these questions consist of a 0 (no impairment/limitation) to 6 (total impairment/ limitation) scale. The overall ACQ score is calculated as the mean of the 6 questions and therefore ranges between 0 (totally controlled) and 6 (severely uncontrolled). Change from BL is defined as the difference between the value of the endpoint at the time point of interest and BL value. Analysis was performed using mixed model repeated measures with covariates of BL, region, BL maintenance OCS therapy (OCS vs. no OCS), exacerbations in the year prior to the study (as an ordinal variable), BL % predicted FEV1, treatment and visit, plus interaction terms for visit by BL and visit by treatment group.|From Baseline up to Week 52 or EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed for each treatment and represented as n=X, X, X, X respectively.||Scores on a scale||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860310|NCT00950300|Secondary|Tmax of Trastuzumab After Surgery|PK samples were obtained after surgery (Cycle 12). The Tmax during Cycle 12 was recorded, averaged among all participants, and expressed in days.|Pre-dose (0 hours) and at end of 30-minute infusion (Herceptin IV only) on Day 1 of Cycle 12; on Days 2, 4, 8, 15 of Cycle 12; pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 13 (cycle length of 21 days)|Secondary PKPP Population; only those participants who provided evaluable data were included.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
860290|NCT01000506|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinic Post-bronchodilator FEV1 Over the 52-week Treatment Period|FEV1 is defined as the volume of air forcefully expelled from the lungs in 1 second. Post-bronchodilator FEV1 measurements were taken by spirometry at Baseline, Week 16, Week 32 and Week 52. Post bronchodilator values were recorded following reversibility testing, using the maximum post bronchodilator method. Participants unable to achieve >=12% reversibility and 200 mL change at Visit 1, reversibility test was repeated at Visit 2. These procedures to achieve the maximum post-bronchodilator are generated by the Asthma Clinical Research Network. The change from Baseline is defined as the difference between the value of the endpoint at the time point of interest and the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using mixed model repeated measures with covariates of Baseline, region, Baseline maintenance OCS therapy (OCS vs. no OCS), exacerbations in the year prior to the study (as an ordinal variable), treatment and visit, plus interaction terms for visit by Baseline and visit by treatment|From Baseline up to Week 52 or EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed for each treatment and represented as n=X, X, X, X respectively.||mL||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860291|NCT01000506|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Clinic Pre-bronchodilator FEV1 Over the 52-week Treatment Period|FEV1 is defined as the volume of air forcefully expelled from the lungs in 1 second. Pre-bronchodilator FEV1 measurements were taken by spirometry at each clinic visit. The change from Baseline is defined as the difference between the value of the endpoint at the time point of interest and the Baseline value. Analysis was performed using mixed model repeated measures with covariates of Baseline, region, Baseline maintenance OCS therapy (OCS vs. no OCS), exacerbations in the year prior to the study (as an ordinal variable), treatment and visit, plus interaction terms for visit by Baseline and visit by treatment group.|From Baseline up to Week 52 or EW|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed for each treatment and represented as n=X, X, X, X respectively.||Milliliters (mL)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860292|NCT01000506|Secondary|Time to First All Recorded Exacerbation|All recorded exacerbations are defined as those recorded by investigators, regardless of the outcome of the exacerbation review process. In the case, an event described as an exacerbation was not associated with a deterioration in at least one of the objectives of eDiary parameters, the investigator provided an explanation to support the decision for defining the event as an exacerbation. Kaplan-Meier estimates of the probability of an exacerbation is expressed as percentage of participants with an exacerbation over time (by week 16, week 32 and week 52).|From randomization (Week 0) to Week 52 or EW|ITT Population||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860293|NCT01000506|Secondary|Number of All Recorded Exacerbations Per Year|Clinically significant exacerbations (ex) of asthma are defined as worsening of asthma which required use of oral/systemic corticosteroids (for par. on maintenance OCS, an ex requiring OCS is defined as the use of oral/systemic corticosteroids at least double the existing maintenance dose for at least 3 days) and/or hospitalization and/or ED visit. In the case, an event described as an ex was not associated with a deterioration in >=1 of the objectives of eDiary parameters, the investigator (inv) provided an explanation to support the decision for defining the event as an ex. All recorded ex were defined as those recorded by inv, regardless of the outcome of the ex review process. Analysis was performed using Negative Binomial regression model with covariates of treatment group, BL maintenance OCS therapy (OCS vs. no OCS), region, ex in the year prior to the study (as an ordinal variable) and BL % predicted FEV1, and with logarithm of time on treatment as an offset variable.|From randomization (Week 0) to Week 52 or EW|ITT Population||Exacerbations per year|||Number
860294|NCT01000506|Secondary|Time to First Exacerbation Requiring Hospitalization or ED Visit|Exacerbations of asthma requiring hospitalization or ED visit were assessed. Kaplan-Meier estimates of the probability of an exacerbation is expressed as percentage of participants with an exacerbation over time (by Week 16, Week 32 and Week 52).|From randomization (Week 0) to Week 52 or EW|ITT Population||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860295|NCT01000506|Secondary|Number of Exacerbations Requiring Hospitalization (Including Intubation and Admittance to an Intensive Care Unit [ICU]) or ED Visit Per Year|The frequency of exacerbations of asthma requiring hospitalization (including intubation and admittance to an intensive care unit [ICU]) or ED visit over the 52-week treatment period is expressed as exacerbation rate per year. Analysis of the number of exacerbations was performed using a negative binomial regression model with covariates of treatment group, Baseline (BL) maintenance OCS therapy (OCS vs. no OCS), region, exacerbations in the year prior to the study (as an ordinal variable) and BL percent (%) predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), and with logarithm of time on treatment as an offset variable.|From randomization (Week 0) to Week 52 or EW|ITT Population||Exacerbations per year|||Number
860296|NCT01000506|Secondary|Time to First Clinically Significant Exacerbation Requiring Oral or Systemic Corticosteroid, Hospitalization and/ or ED Visit|Clinically significant exacerbations of asthma are defined as worsening of asthma which required use of oral/systemic corticosteroids (for participants on maintenance OCS, an exacerbation requiring OCS is defined as the use of oral/systemic corticosteroids at least double the existing maintenance dose for at least 3 days) and/or hospitalization and/or ED visit. Kaplan-Meier estimates of the probability of an exacerbation is expressed as percentage of participants with an exacerbation over time (by Week 16, Week 32 and Week 52).|From randomization (Week 0) to Week 52 or EW|ITT Population||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860297|NCT01000506|Primary|Number of Clinically Significant Exacerbations of Asthma Per Year|Clinically significant exacerbations of asthma are defined as worsening of asthma which required use of oral/systemic corticosteroids (for participants on maintenance oral corticosteroids [OCS], an exacerbation requiring OCS is defined as the use of oral/systemic corticosteroids at least double the existing maintenance dose for at least 3 days) and/or hospitalization and/or emergency department (ED) visit. The frequency of clinically significant exacerbations of asthma over the 52-week treatment period is expressed as exacerbation rate per year. Analysis of the number of exacerbations was performed using a negative binomial regression model with covariates of treatment group, Baseline (BL) maintenance OCS therapy (OCS vs. no OCS), region, exacerbations in the year prior to the study (as an ordinal variable) and BL percent (%) predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), and with logarithm of time on treatment as an offset variable|From randomization (Week 0) to Week 52 or early withdrawal (EW)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized and who received at least one dose of study medication.||Exacerbations per year|||Number
860298|NCT00981149|Secondary|Evoked Pain .|Digital palpation.|6 weeks||||||
860300|NCT00950300|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With ADAs Against Recombinant Human Hyaluronidase (rHuPH20)|Participants in the Herceptin SC arm provided samples for evaluation of anti-rHuPH20 antibodies. The cumulative percentage of participants with ADAs against rHuPH20 (an excipient unique to the SC formulation) at any time during or after treatment was reported.|Baseline; pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycles 2, 5, 13, 18 (cycle length of 21 days); and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48 from last dose of Cycle 18|Safety Population; only participants with evaluable Baseline and post-Baseline data for ADAs against rHuPH20 were included.||percentage of participants|||Number
860301|NCT00950300|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Against Trastuzumab|Participants provided samples for evaluation of anti-trastuzumab antibodies. The cumulative percentage of participants with ADAs against trastuzumab at any time during or after treatment was reported.|Baseline; pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycles 2, 5, 13, 18 (cycle length of 21 days); and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48 from last dose of Cycle 18|Safety Population: All participants who received at least one dose of study medication. Only participants with evaluable Baseline and post-Baseline data for ADAs against trastuzumab were included.||percentage of participants|||Number
860302|NCT00950300|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) as of Clinical Cutoff in January 2014|OS was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Participants who were alive at the time of analysis were censored at the day of last study drug administration, last recorded visit, or last survival follow-up information.|Continuously during treatment (up to 12 months); at Months 1, 3, 6 from last dose of Cycle 18 (cycle length of 21 days); then every 6 months until withdrawal for any reason (approximately 4 years as of January 2014 data cutoff)|ITT Population.||months||Full Range|Median
860303|NCT00950300|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Died as of Clinical Cutoff in January 2014|The percentage of participants who died at any time during the study was reported.|Continuously during treatment (up to 12 months); at Months 1, 3, 6 from last dose of Cycle 18 (cycle length of 21 days); then every 6 months until withdrawal for any reason (approximately 4 years as of January 2014 data cutoff)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
860304|NCT00950300|Secondary|Event-Free Survival (EFS) as of Clinical Cutoff in January 2014|Protocol-defined events included local, regional, or distant recurrence, contralateral breast cancer, or death from any cause. After the last dose of treatment, imaging was performed at specified visits and participants were followed for survival status. EFS was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and defined as the time from randomization to the first protocol-defined event. For participants without an event at the time of analysis, EFS was censored and the date of censoring was the date of last tumor assessment or last recorded visit for the participant.|Screening; Day 1 of Cycle 18 (cycle length of 21 days); and Months 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 from last dose of Cycle 18; then every 6 months until withdrawal for any reason (approximately 4 years as of January 2014 data cutoff)|ITT Population.||months||Full Range|Median
860305|NCT00950300|Secondary|Percentage of Participants Who Experienced a Protocol-Defined Event as of Clinical Cutoff in January 2014|Protocol-defined events included local, regional, or distant recurrence, contralateral breast cancer, or death from any cause. After the last dose of treatment, imaging was performed at specified visits and participants were followed for survival status. The percentage of participants who experienced a protocol-defined event at any time during the study was reported.|Screening; Day 1 of Cycle 18 (cycle length of 21 days); and Months 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 from last dose of Cycle 18; then every 6 months until withdrawal for any reason (approximately 4 years as of January 2014 data cutoff)|ITT Population.||percentage of participants|||Number
860306|NCT00950300|Secondary|Time to Response According to RECIST Version 1.0, Among Those With Measurable Disease at Baseline|Tumor response was assessed using RECIST version 1.0. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions and short-axis reduction of any pathological lymph nodes to <10 mm with no prior assessment of PD. PR was defined as ≥30% decrease from Baseline in sum diameter of target lesions with no prior assessment of PD. Time to response was defined as the time from first dose of study medication to the first assessment of CR or PR, which was the date the response was first documented by objective evidence, among participants with an overall response of CR or PR.|Tumor assessments at Baseline; on Day 1 Cycles 3, 5, 7 (cycle length of 21 days); and at time of surgery following eight cycles of chemotherapy (approximately 6 months overall)|EPP Population; only participants with measurable disease at Baseline and a response of CR or PR were included.||weeks||Full Range|Median
860307|NCT00950300|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR) According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Version 1.0, Among Those With Measurable Disease at Baseline|Tumor response was assessed using RECIST version 1.0. CR was defined as disappearance of all target lesions and short-axis reduction of any pathological lymph nodes to less than (<) 10 millimeters (mm) with no prior assessment of progressive disease (PD). PR was defined as greater than or equal to (≥) 30% decrease from Baseline in sum diameter of target lesions with no prior assessment of PD. The percentage of participants with overall response of CR or PR at the end of neoadjuvant treatment was reported, and the 95% CI for one-sample binomial was constructed using the Pearson-Clopper method.|Tumor assessments at Baseline; on Day 1 of Cycles 3, 5, 7 (cycle length of 21 days); and at time of surgery following eight cycles of Herceptin + chemotherapy (approximately 6 months overall)|EPP Population; only participants with measurable disease at Baseline were included.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860308|NCT00950300|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Total Pathological Complete Response (tpCR)|Participants were evaluated following eight cycles of treatment and after surgery to assess for tpCR, defined as absence of neoplastic invasive cells in the breast and axillary lymph nodes according to pathologist examination. The percentage of participants with tpCR was reported, and the 95% CI for one-sample binomial was constructed using the Pearson-Clopper method.|After surgery following eight cycles of Herceptin + chemotherapy (approximately 6 months from Baseline)|EPP Population.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860309|NCT00950300|Secondary|AUC21d of Trastuzumab After Surgery|PK samples were obtained after surgery (Cycle 12). Values were extrapolated beyond Day 15 to produce the area over the full 21-day cycle. The AUC21d value at Cycle 12 was calculated from trastuzumab concentration-time profiles using standard non-compartmental PK methods, averaged among all participants, and expressed in d*μg/mL.|Pre-dose (0 hours) and at end of 30-minute infusion (Herceptin IV only) on Day 1 of Cycle 12; on Days 2, 4, 8, 15 of Cycle 12; pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 13 (cycle length of 21 days)|Secondary PKPP Population; only those participants who provided evaluable data were included.||d*μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860311|NCT00950300|Secondary|Cmax of Trastuzumab After Surgery|PK samples were obtained after surgery (Cycle 12). The Cmax during Cycle 12 was recorded, averaged among all participants, and expressed in μg/mL.|Pre-dose (0 hours) and at end of 30-minute infusion (Herceptin IV only) on Day 1 of Cycle 12; on Days 2, 4, 8, 15 of Cycle 12; pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 13 (cycle length of 21 days)|Secondary PKPP Population; only those participants who provided evaluable data were included.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860312|NCT00950300|Secondary|Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve From 0 to 21 Days (AUC21d) of Trastuzumab Prior to Surgery|PK samples were obtained prior to surgery (Cycle 7). Values were extrapolated beyond Day 15 to produce the area over the full 21-day cycle. The AUC21d value at Cycle 7 was calculated from trastuzumab concentration-time profiles using standard non-compartmental PK methods, averaged among all participants, and expressed in days multiplied by micrograms per milliliters (d*μg/mL).|Pre-dose (0 hours) and at end of 30-minute infusion (Herceptin IV only) on Day 1 of Cycle 7; on Days 2, 4, 8, 15 of Cycle 7; pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 8 (cycle length of 21 days)|Primary PKPP Population; only those participants who provided evaluable data were included.||d*μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860313|NCT00950300|Secondary|Time of Maximum Serum Concentration (Tmax) of Trastuzumab Prior to Surgery|PK samples were obtained prior to surgery (Cycle 7). The Tmax during Cycle 7 was recorded, averaged among all participants, and expressed in days.|Pre-dose (0 hours) and at end of 30-minute infusion (Herceptin IV only) on Day 1 of Cycle 7; on Days 2, 4, 8, 15 of Cycle 7; pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 8 (cycle length of 21 days)|Primary PKPP Population; only those participants who provided evaluable data were included.||days||Standard Deviation|Mean
860314|NCT00950300|Secondary|Maximum Serum Concentration (Cmax) of Trastuzumab Prior to Surgery|PK samples were obtained prior to surgery (Cycle 7). The Cmax during Cycle 7 was recorded, averaged among all participants, and expressed in μg/mL.|Pre-dose (0 hours) and at end of 30-minute infusion (Herceptin IV only) on Day 1 of Cycle 7; on Days 2, 4, 8, 15 of Cycle 7; pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 8 (cycle length of 21 days)|Primary PKPP Population; only those participants who provided evaluable data were included.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860315|NCT00950300|Secondary|Number of Participants With Ctrough of Trastuzumab >20 μg/mL After Surgery|Pre-dose samples were obtained after surgery (Cycle 13). The number of participants who had an observed Ctrough >20 μg/mL was reported.|Pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 13 (cycle length of 21 days)|Secondary PKPP Population.||participants|||Number
860316|NCT00950300|Secondary|Number of Participants With Ctrough of Trastuzumab >20 μg/mL Prior to Surgery|Pre-dose samples were obtained prior to surgery (Cycle 8). The number of participants who had an observed Ctrough >20 μg/mL was reported.|Pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 8 (cycle length of 21 days)|Primary PKPP Population.||participants|||Number
860317|NCT00950300|Secondary|Predicted Ctrough of Trastuzumab After Surgery|Predicted Ctrough at pre-dose after surgery (Cycle 13) was determined on the basis of a population PK model from Study BP22023 (NCT00800436). The mean predicted Ctrough was expressed in μg/mL.|Pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 13 (cycle length of 21 days)|PKPP Population; only participants with a Cycle 13 pre-dose PK measurement were included in the analysis.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860318|NCT00950300|Secondary|Predicted Ctrough of Trastuzumab Prior to Surgery|Predicted Ctrough at pre-dose prior to surgery (Cycle 8) was determined on the basis of a population PK model from Study BP22023 (NCT00800436). The mean predicted Ctrough was expressed in μg/mL.|Pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 8 (cycle length of 21 days)|PKPP Population: All participants with at least one measurable trastuzumab serum concentration.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860319|NCT00950300|Secondary|Observed Ctrough of Trastuzumab After Surgery|Pre-dose samples were obtained after surgery (Cycle 13). The observed Ctrough was recorded, averaged among all participants, and expressed in μg/mL.|Pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 13 (cycle length of 21 days)|Secondary PKPP Population: All participants with at least one measurable trastuzumab serum concentration and who did not have any major protocol violations related to PK sampling for the secondary endpoint.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860320|NCT00950300|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Pathological Complete Response (pCR)|Participants were evaluated following eight cycles of treatment and after surgery to assess for pCR, defined as absence of neoplastic invasive cells in the breast according to pathologist examination. The percentage of participants with pCR was reported, and the 95% CI for one-sample binomial was constructed using the Pearson-Clopper method.|After surgery following eight cycles of Herceptin + chemotherapy (approximately 6 months from Baseline)|Efficacy (E) PP Population: All participants with at least one on-treatment efficacy assessment who received a full eight cycles of study treatment according to randomization and who met additional protocol-specified criteria.||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860321|NCT00950300|Primary|Observed Serum Trough Concentration (Ctrough) of Trastuzumab Prior to Surgery|Pre-dose samples were obtained prior to surgery (Cycle 8). The observed Ctrough was recorded, averaged among all participants, and expressed in micrograms per milliliter (μg/mL).|Pre-dose (0 hours) on Day 1 of Cycle 8 (cycle length of 21 days)|Primary Pharmacokinetic (PK) Per Protocol (PP) Population: All participants with at least one measurable trastuzumab serum concentration and who did not have any major protocol violations related to PK sampling for the primary endpoint.||μg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860322|NCT00868608|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With QTc Interval Corrected Using Fridericia’s Formula (QTcF) by Category (Safety Population)|Triplicate 12-lead ECG measurements (each recording separated by approximately 2 minutes) were performed and average was calculated. The time corresponding to the beginning of depolarization to repolarization of the ventricles (QT interval) was adjusted for RR interval using QT and RR from each ECG by Fridericia’s formula (QTcF = QT divided by cube root of RR). Maximum QTcF was categorized as less than or equal to (≤) 450 msec, >450 msec to ≤480 msec, >480 msec to ≤500 msec and >500 msec. Participants are reported only once under the maximum QTcF interval observed at any of the time-points. Maximum increase from baseline was categorized as <30 msec, ≥30 to <60 msec (borderline) and ≥60 msec (prolonged) were summarized.|Screening; Cycle 1: pre-dose & 1 hour; Cycles 3 and 4: pre-dose, 1, 3, 48, and 168 hours; Cycle 6: pre-dose; end of treatment: 28 to 56 days post-last dose.|Safety Population||Percentage of Participants|||Number
860348|NCT00845182|Primary|HbA1c|change in HbA1c was measured before and after treatment in three groups|baseline and 6 months|There was a greater improvement in HbA1c from baseline after combined treatment with Pioglitazone and Exenatide when compared with either therapy alone.||percent point decrease from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
860323|NCT00868608|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With a Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) (Safety Population)|Includes all TEAEs: any event that emerged after the first dose of the study treatment during the treatment period that was absent before administration of any study treatment, or worsened during the treatment period relative to the pre-treatment state.|Protocol reporting period: from informed consent to at least 28 days after the last dose.|Safety Population - includes all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication. This population only excluded participants who never received any study medication.||Percentage of Participants|||Number
860324|NCT00868608|Secondary|Median Induced Change From Baseline of QT Study Specific Correction (QTcS) by Cycle Based on Median Maximum Calicheamicin Concentration (Cmax)|Triplicate 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) measurements were performed approximately 2 minutes apart. ECG assessments were pre-specified in the protocol to be time-matched with selected pharmacokinetic (PK) samples in order to conduct a concentration-QTc analysis. A study-specific QT correction factor was estimated using the un-averaged triplicate data and was used to calculate the study-specific corrected QT (QTcS). QTcS interval versus serum concentrations were modeled using a population analysis approach to identify potential effects of total calicheamicin exposure. Results for drug effects were based on the median Cmax for total calicheamicin across all participants: median Cmax was 61.3 ng/mL|Cycle 1: pre-dose, 1 hour; Cycle 3 & 4: pre-dose, 1, 3, 48, 168 hours; Cycle 6 (if applicable): pre-dose; end of treatment: during clinic visit|There were 80 participants in the analysis dataset, but time-matched PK-ECG data only existed for 73 participants (35 female).||Milliseconds (msec)||90% Confidence Interval|Median
860325|NCT00868608|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Esitmates of the Probability of Survival at 6, 12 and 24 Months in Participants With Follicular NHL|Kaplan-Meier: a rule for calculating an estimate of survival. OS was defined as the time from enrollment to death from any cause. For participants without death, censorship occurred at the date of last contact.|6, 12 and 24 months|ITT population (participants with NHL type defined as follicular).||Probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860326|NCT00868608|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of the OS in Participants With Follicular NHL|Kaplan-Meier: a rule for calculating an estimate of survival. OS was defined as the time from enrollment to death from any cause. For participants without death, censorship occurred at the date of last contact.|Any time up to 2 years after enrollment. Follow-up period may have been extended beyond 2 years due to dosing delays and allowed study visit windows.|ITT population (participants with NHL type defined as follicular).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860327|NCT00868608|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of the Probability of Survival at 6, 12 and 24 Months in Participants With Indolent NHL|Kaplan-Meier: a rule for calculating an estimate of survival. OS was defined as the time from enrollment to death from any cause. For participants without death, censorship occurred at the date of last contact.|6, 12 and 24 months|ITT population.||Probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860328|NCT00868608|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of the Overall Survival (OS) in Participants With Indolent NHL|Kaplan-Meier: a rule for calculating an estimate of survival. OS was defined as the time from enrollment to death from any cause. For participants without death, censorship occurred at the date of last contact.|Any time up to 2 years after enrollment. Follow-up period may have been extended beyond 2 years due to dosing delays and allowed study visit windows.|ITT population.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860329|NCT00868608|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of the Probability of Being Alive and Free From PD or New Anticancer Therapy at 6, 12 and 24 Months in Participants With Follicular NHL|Kaplan-Meier: a rule for calculating an estimate of survival. PFS was defined as time from enrollment to progression of disease or death from any cause. Events were defined as death from any cause without progression, progression during and after treatment, and initiation of all new anti-cancer treatments for the lymphoma. For participants with no event, censorship occurred at the date of last valid disease assessment. PD was defined in accordance with the International Response Criteria for NHL: 1) New lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from nadir, 2) New lesion(s) >1.5 cm (any axis); ≥50% increase in SPD of >1 node; or ≥50% increase in longest diameter of previously identified node >1 cm in short axis, 3) >50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previous lesions (splenic or hepatic) and 4) New or recurrent involvement in bone marrow.|6, 12 and 24 months|ITT population (participants with NHL type defined as follicular).||Percenr probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860330|NCT00868608|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of the PFS in Participants With Follicular NHL|Kaplan-Meier: a rule for calculating an estimate of survival. PFS was defined as time from enrollment to progression of disease or death from any cause. Events were defined as death from any cause without progression, progression during and after treatment, and initiation of all new anti-cancer treatments for the lymphoma. For participants with no event, censorship occurred at the date of last valid disease assessment. PD was defined in accordance with the International Response Criteria for NHL: 1) New lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from nadir, 2) New lesion(s) >1.5 cm (any axis); ≥50% increase in SPD of >1 node; or ≥50% increase in longest diameter of previously identified node >1 cm in short axis, 3) >50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previous lesions (splenic or hepatic) and 4) New or recurrent involvement in bone marrow.|Assessed for up to 2 years, including planned assessments every 8 to 12 weeks from first dose of study drug. Follow-up period may have been extended beyond 2 years due to dosing delays and allowed study visit windows.|ITT population (participants with NHL type defined as follicular).||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860331|NCT00868608|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimates of the Probability of Being Alive and Free From PD or New Anticancer Therapy at 6, 12 and 24 Months in Participants With Indolent NHL|Kaplan-Meier: a rule for calculating an estimate of survival. PFS was defined as time from enrollment to death from any cause without progression, progression during and after treatment, and initiation of all new anti-cancer treatments for the lymphoma. For participants with no event, censorship occurred at the date of last valid disease assessment. PD was defined in accordance with the International Response Criteria for NHL: 1) New lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from nadir, 2) New lesion(s) >1.5 cm (any axis); ≥50% increase in SPD of >1 node; or ≥50% increase in longest diameter of previously identified node >1 cm in short axis, 3) >50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previous lesions (splenic or hepatic) and 4) New or recurrent involvement in bone marrow.|6, 12 and 24 months|ITT population.||Percent Probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860332|NCT00868608|Secondary|Kaplan-Meier Estimate of the Progression-Free Survival (PFS) in Participants With Indolent NHL|Kaplan-Meier: a rule for calculating an estimate of survival. PFS was defined as time from enrollment to death from any cause without progression, progression during and after treatment, and initiation of all new anti-cancer treatments for the lymphoma. For participants with no event, censorship occurred at the date of last valid disease assessment. PD was defined in accordance with the International Response Criteria for NHL: 1) New lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from nadir, 2) New lesion(s) >1.5 cm (any axis); ≥50% increase in SPD of >1 node; or ≥50% increase in longest diameter of previously identified node >1 cm in short axis, 3) >50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previous lesions (splenic or hepatic) and 4) New or recurrent involvement in bone marrow.|Assessed for up to 2 years, including planned assessments every 8 to 12 weeks from first dose of study drug. Follow-up period may have been extended beyond 2 years due to dosing delays and allowed study visit windows.|ITT population.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860333|NCT00868608|Secondary|Probability of Maintaining a Response at 6, 12 and 24 Months in Participants With Follicular NHL|Duration of response was measured from the first date of response until the first date that the objective PD or symptomatic deterioration or initiation of new anticancer therapy for the lymphoma or death from any cause is documented. Participants without an event were censored at the date of the last valid tumor assessment. A valid tumor assessment visit was defined as the tumor assessment visit with overall response of CR, PR, stable disease (SD), or PD, but not ‘Not Done’ or ‘Unknown’. PD was defined according to the International Response Criteria for NHL: 1) New lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from nadir, 2) New lesion(s) >1.5 cm (any axis); ≥50% increase in SPD of >1 node; or ≥50% increase in longest diameter of previously identified node >1 cm in short axis, 3) >50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previous lesions (splenic or hepatic) and 4) New or recurrent involvement in bone marrow.|6, 12 and 24 months|Participants with Follicular NHL who responded.||Probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860334|NCT00868608|Secondary|Duration of Response in Participants With Follicular NHL|Duration of response was measured from the first date of response until the first date that the objective PD or symptomatic deterioration or initiation of new anticancer therapy for the lymphoma or death from any cause is documented. Participants without an event were censored at the date of the last valid tumor assessment. A valid tumor assessment visit was defined as the tumor assessment visit with overall response of CR, PR, stable disease (SD), or PD, but not ‘Not Done’ or ‘Unknown’. PD was defined according to the International Response Criteria for NHL: 1) New lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from nadir, 2) New lesion(s) >1.5 cm (any axis); ≥50% increase in SPD of >1 node; or ≥50% increase in longest diameter of previously identified node >1 cm in short axis, 3) >50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previous lesions (splenic or hepatic) and 4) New or recurrent involvement in bone marrow.|Assessed for up to 2 years, including planned assessments every 8 to 12 weeks from first dose of study drug. Follow-up period may have been extended beyond 2 years due to dosing delays and allowed study visit windows.|Participants with Follicular NHL who responded.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860335|NCT00868608|Secondary|Probability of Maintaining a Response at 6, 12 and 24 Months in Participants With Indolent NHL|Duration of response was measured from the first date of response until the first date that the objective PD or symptomatic deterioration or initiation of new anticancer therapy for the lymphoma or death from any cause is documented. Participants without an event were censored at the date of the last valid tumor assessment. A valid tumor assessment visit was defined as the tumor assessment visit with overall response of CR, PR, stable disease (SD), or PD, but not ‘Not Done’ or ‘Unknown’. PD was defined according to the International Response Criteria for NHL: 1) New lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from nadir, 2) New lesion(s) >1.5 cm (any axis); ≥50% increase in SPD of >1 node; or ≥50% increase in longest diameter of previously identified node >1 cm in short axis, 3) >50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previous lesions (splenic or hepatic) and 4) New or recurrent involvement in bone marrow.|6, 12 and 24 months|Participants with Indolent NHL who responded.||Probability||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860336|NCT00868608|Secondary|Duration of Response in Participants With Indolent NHL|Duration of response was measured from the first date of response until the first date that the objective progression of disease (PD) or symptomatic deterioration or initiation of new anticancer therapy for the lymphoma or death from any cause is documented. Participants without an event were censored at the date of the last valid tumor assessment. A valid tumor assessment visit was defined as the tumor assessment visit with overall response of CR, PR, stable disease (SD), or PD, but not ‘Not Done’ or ‘Unknown’. PD was defined according to the International Response Criteria for NHL: 1) New lesion or increase by ≥50% of previously involved sites from nadir, 2) New lesion(s) >1.5 cm (any axis); ≥50% increase in SPD of >1 node; or ≥50% increase in longest diameter of previously identified node >1 cm in short axis, 3) >50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previous lesions (splenic or hepatic) and 4) New or recurrent involvement in bone marrow.|Assessed for up to 2 years, including planned assessments every 8 to 12 weeks from first dose of study drug. Follow-up period may have been extended beyond 2 years due to dosing delays and allowed study visit windows.|Participants with Indolent NHL who responded.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860337|NCT00868608|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Follicular NHL Achieving a CR According to International Response Criteria for NHL|CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and disease-related symptoms; all nodes must have decreased to normal (≤1.5 cm in their greatest transverse diameter for nodes >1.5 cm before therapy) or ≤1 cm (short axis) in previously involved node; enlarged spleen prior to therapy must have regressed and be non-palpable; bone marrow lymphoma: infiltrate must have been cleared on repeat bone marrow aspirate and biopsy.|Assessed for up to 2 years, including planned assessments every 8 to 12 weeks from first dose of study drug. Follow-up period may have been extended beyond 2 years due to dosing delays and allowed study visit windows.|ITT population (participants with NHL type defined as follicular).||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860349|NCT00845182|Primary|Effect of Pioglitazone, Exenatide and Combined Pioglitazone and Exenatide on Body Weight|Effect of Pioglitazone, Exenatide and combined Pioglitazone and Exenatide on body weight and beta cell function|baseline and 6 months|we analyzed the weight at the end of study completion||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
860338|NCT00868608|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Indolent NHL Achieving a CR According to International Response Criteria for NHL|CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and disease-related symptoms; all nodes must have decreased to normal (≤1.5 cm in their greatest transverse diameter for nodes >1.5 cm before therapy) or ≤1 cm (short axis) in previously involved node; enlarged spleen prior to therapy must have regressed and be non-palpable; bone marrow lymphoma: infiltrate must have been cleared on repeat bone marrow aspirate and biopsy.|Assessed for up to 2 years, including planned assessments every 8 to 12 weeks from first dose of study drug. Follow-up period may have been extended beyond 2 years due to dosing delays and allowed study visit windows.|ITT population.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860339|NCT00868608|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Follicular NHL Achieving CR or PR According to International Response Criteria for NHL|CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and disease-related symptoms; all nodes must have decreased to normal (≤1.5 cm in their greatest transverse diameter for nodes >1.5 cm before therapy) or ≤1 cm (short axis) in previously involved node; enlarged spleen prior to therapy must have regressed and be non-palpable; bone marrow lymphoma: infiltrate must have been cleared on repeat bone marrow aspirate and biopsy. PR was defined as >50% decrease in the SPD of up to 6 index lesions. No increase in size of other nodes, liver or spleen. Splenic and hepatic nodules must have regressed by ≥50% in the SPD or greatest transverse diameter (for single nodules). With exception of splenic and hepatic nodules, involvement of other organs was usually assessable and no measurable disease should be present. No progression of non-target disease or new lesions.|Assessed for up to 2 years, including planned assessments every 8 to 12 weeks from first dose of study drug. Follow-up period may have been extended beyond 2 years due to dosing delays and allowed study visit windows.|ITT population (participants with NHL type defined as follicular).||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860340|NCT00868608|Primary|Percentage of Participants With Indolent NHL Achieving CR or Partial Response (PR) According to International Response Criteria for NHL|CR was defined as complete disappearance of all target lesions and disease-related symptoms; all nodes must have decreased to normal (less than or equal to [≤]1.5 cm in their greatest transverse diameter [GTD] for nodes more than [>]1.5 cm before therapy) or ≤1 cm (short axis) in previously involved node; enlarged spleen prior to therapy must have regressed and be non-palpable; bone marrow lymphoma: infiltrate must have been cleared on repeat bone marrow aspirate and biopsy. PR was defined as >50% decrease in the sum of the product diameters (SPD) of up to 6 index lesions. No increase in size of other nodes, liver or spleen. Splenic and hepatic nodules must have regressed by greater than or equal to [≥]50% in the SPD or GTD (for single nodules). With exception of splenic and hepatic nodules, involvement of other organs was usually assessable and no measurable disease should be present. No progression of non-target disease or new lesions.|Assessed for up to 2 years, including planned assessments every 8 to 12 weeks from first dose of study drug. Follow-up period may have been extended beyond 2 years due to dosing delays and allowed study visit windows.|Intent to treat (ITT) population: all participants who were enrolled into the study.||Percentage of Participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860341|NCT00860743|Primary|Heart Rate Variability (Aim 2)|Heart rate variability (HRV) was measured before and after exposure to intermittent hypoxia following administration of a placebo or antioxidant cocktail. Heart rate variability refers to beat-to-beat alterations in heart rate. Under resting conditions, the electrocardiogram of healthy individuals reveals periodic variation in R-R intervals. To measure HRV, R-R interval data are presented in a graph, in which the y-axis plots the R-R intervals (ms2), and the x-axis the total number of beats. Spectral analysis of the graph transforms the signal from time to frequency on the x-axis (Hz), by representing the signal as a combination of sine and cosine waves, with different amplitudes and frequencies. The approach uses Fourier transforms. The heart rate spectrum contains a high frequency (0.15-0.4 Hz) component, which is synchronous with respiration and a low frequency (0.04 to 0.15 Hz) component that appears to be mediated by both the vagus and cardiac sympathetic nerves.|Within the same experimental session|Measurements were made before and after intermittent hypoxia following administration of a placebo or antioxidant cocktail. Please note that analysis of the heart rate variability measures for the healthy group have not been completed to date.||ms2/Hz||Standard Error|Mean
860342|NCT00860743|Primary|Ventilation (Aim 1)|Ventilation was measured before and after exposure to intermittent hypoxia in males and females. Ventilation was measured using a pneumotachograph, which is a flow measuring device.|Within the same experimental session|||fraction of baseline||Standard Error|Mean
860343|NCT00858494|Secondary|Parental Report of an Adverse Event After a Dose of Study Medication|After each dose of study medication parents reported the presence of any adverse events|data collected after doses occurring up to 10 days after index visit|Study logs were returned in 37 of 49 enrolled participants. After each dose of study medication, the participant's parent indicated in the study log whether any adverse events were noted.||doses|doses||Number
860344|NCT00858494|Primary|Relief of Upper Respiratory Tract Infection (URI) Symptoms (Cough, Runny Nose, Nasal Congestion, Sneezing)1 Hour After Dose of Homeopathic Remedy.|For each dose of study medication, parents indicated which of the symptoms were present (runny nose, cough, nasal congestion, sneezing). Parents rated change in each symptom present one hour after a dose of study medication for up to 6 doses in study logs. Responses were dichotomized as at least some improvement or better (improvement) vs. no improvement or worse. The outcome measure is number of times that improvement in a specific symptom was noted after a dose of the homeopathic remedy. Completed study logs were received from 37 of 49 enrolled participants.|up to 10 days from index visit|Some symptoms were not present at each dose of the homeopathic remedy. Number of doses at which symptom was present: runny nose: 135, nasal congestion: 152, cough: 154, sneezing 81. The outcome is number of times improvement in each symptom was noted.||doses|doses||Number
860345|NCT00858494|Secondary|Side Effects Related to the Study Medication||10 days||||||
860346|NCT00858494|Primary|Severity of Cold Symptoms||one hour after receiving dose||||||
860347|NCT00845182|Secondary|Effect Pioglitazone, Exenatide, and Pioglitazone Plus Exenatide on • Insulin Sensitivity • Inflammatory Cytokines • Glucagon and Free Fatty Acids • Plasma Lipids|"Effect pioglitazone, exenatide, and pioglitazone plus exenatide on
Insulin sensitivity
Inflammatory cytokines
glucagon and free fatty acids
plasma lipids measured over a 6 month period"|6 months||11/2017||||
860350|NCT00781937|Secondary|Binge Eating Scale Scores by Week and Severity|Binge Eating Scale (BES) scores are based on responses to the Binge Eating Scale Questionnaire, a 16-item self-reporting diagnostic tool scaled 0-46 (Non-binging: 0-17; Moderate: 17-26; Severe: 27-46)|Week 0, week 50 and week 57|Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||scores on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860351|NCT00781937|Secondary|Number of Subjects Using Concomitant Medications (Antihypertensive Medications, Lipid Lowering Medications, or Antipsychotic Medications)|Number of subjects using concomitant medications at Week 0 and Week 56, respectively|Week 0 and week 56|Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||Subjects|||Number
860352|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycaemic Control Parameter: HbA1c (Glycosylated Haemoglobin)|Change in HbA1c percent values from Week 0 (X%) to Week 56 (Y%) was calculated [X% - Y%].|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percentage point||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860353|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycaemic Control Parameter: Fasting Serum Insulin|Subjects were tested having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||pmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860354|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycaemic Control Parameter: Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)|Subjects were tested having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860355|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycaemic Control Parameter: HOMA-IR (Homeostasis Model Assessment - Insulin Resistance)|Change in insulin resistance values from Week 0 (X) to Week 56 (Y) was calculated [X - Y]. Insulin resistance was derived from fasting serum insulin levels in blood samples using the HOMA method, which is based on the assumption that normal-weight subjects without diabetes aged <35 years have median insulin resistance indexed at 1.00.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||proportion||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860356|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Glycaemic Control Parameter: HOMA-B (Homeostasis Model Assessment - Beta Cell Function)|Change in beta-cell function percent values from Week 0 (X%) to Week 56 (Y%) was calculated [X% - Y%]. Beta-cell function was derived from fasting plasma glucose readings in blood samples using the HOMA method, which is based on the assumption that normal-weight subjects without diabetes aged <35 years have median beta-cell function indexed at 100%.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percent change||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860357|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI)||Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||kg/m^2||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860358|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Waist Circumference||Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||cm||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860359|NCT00781937|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Meeting Metabolic Syndrome Criteria: ATP (Adult Treatment Panel) III at Week 56|Metabolic syndrome status required at least 3 of 5 criteria met: Waist circumference (men ≥102cm, women ≥88cm); Triglycerides >1.7mmol/L; High density lipoprotein cholesterol (men <0.9mmol/L, women <1.1mmol/L) or on drug therapy; Blood pressure ≥130mmHg systolic or ≥85mmHg diastolic or on drug therapy; Fasting glucose ≥5.5mmol/L or on drug therapy.|Week 56|Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percentage of subjects|||Number
860360|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Cardiovascular Biomarker: High Sensitivity C-reactive Protein (hsCRP)||Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||nmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860361|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Lipid Profile: Total Cholesterol|Subjects were tested having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860362|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Lipid Profile: Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol|Subjects were tested having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860363|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Lipid Profile: Triglycerides|Subjects were tested having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860364|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Pulse||Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||beats/minute||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860366|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Weight for Subjects Completing the Main Trial Period and Entering the Follow-up Period|Subjects were weighed having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 68|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860367|NCT00781937|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Weight|Subjects were weighed having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||kg||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860368|NCT00781937|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Greater Than 75% of Fasting run-in Weight Loss Maintained From Week 0|Subjects were weighed having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percentage of subjects|||Number
860369|NCT00781937|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Greater Than 50% of Fasting run-in Weight Loss Maintained From Week 0|Subjects were weighed having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percentage of subjects|||Number
860370|NCT00781937|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Weight Regain (Fasting) More Than or Equal to 10% From Week 0|Subjects were weighed having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percentage of subjects|||Number
860371|NCT00781937|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects With Weight Regain (Fasting) More Than or Equal to 5% From Week 0|Subjects were weighed having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percentage of subjects|||Number
860372|NCT00781937|Secondary|Percentage of Subjects Who Lost More Than 10% of Fasting Body Weight From Week 0|Subjects were weighed having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percentage of subjects|||Number
860373|NCT00781937|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Who Lost More Than or Equal to 5% of Fasting Body Weight From Week 0|Subjects were weighed having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percentage of subjects|||Number
860374|NCT00781937|Primary|Percentage of Subjects Who Maintained Their run-in Fasting Weight Loss From Week 0|Subjects who had a weight regain less than or equal to 0.5% of weight from Week 0 were regarded as maintenance of run-in fasting weight loss. Subjects were weighed having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percentage of subjects|||Number
860375|NCT00781937|Primary|Mean Percentage Change in Fasting Body Weight From Baseline|Subjects were weighed having fasted (consumed only water) since midnight the night before the visit.|Week 0, week 56|Last Observation Carried Forward, Full Analysis Set (includes all randomised subjects exposed to at least 1 dose of trial product and with at least 1 post-randomisation assessment of any efficacy endpoint.)||percentage||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860376|NCT00721409|Secondary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Related Adverse Events at Phase 2|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|Maximum treatment duration (approximately 41 months)|As treated set included all treated participants classified by the treatment actually received.||Participants|||Number
860377|NCT00721409|Secondary|Number of Participants With TEAEs (All Causalities) at Phase 2|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. Serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment emergent adverse events were those with initial onset or that worsen in severity after the first dose of study medication.|Maximum treatment duration (approximately 41 months)|As treated set included all treated participants classified by the treatment actually received.||Participants|||Number
860378|NCT00721409|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Tumor Expression of CYP19A1 and CCND1 Genotypes at Phase 2|One 2-mL blood specimen was collected for the analysis of germline polymorphism in CYP19A1 and CCND1 genes. A single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs4646 as defined in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) database in the aromatase gene (CYP19A1) was analyzed. A germline polymorphism G/A870 (rs9344) in the CCND1 gene was analyzed.|Screening visit (≤ 28 Days prior to dosing)|Polymorphism analysis set included participants in the safety analysis set who had at least 1 polymorphism assessment.||Percentage of participants|||Number
860379|NCT00721409|Secondary|Summary of Copy Number for CCND1 (CCND1/CEP11) and p16/INK4A (p16/CEP9) at Phase 2|Gene copy number for CCND1 (CCND1/CEP11) and p16/INK4A (p16/CEP9) were evaluated. This analysis was done for Phase 2 combined group.|Screening visit (≤ 28 Days prior to dosing)|Copy number analysis set included participants in the Safety Analysis Set who had at least 1 of the biomarker assessments.||Copy number||Standard Deviation|Mean
860380|NCT00721409|Secondary|Presence or Absence of Tumor Tissue Biomarkers at Phase 2 - Tumor Retinoblastoma (RB) and CyclinD1|Presence or absence of tumor RB and CyclinD1 were evaluated. The following definitions of expression applied in the below table: Positive: any expression >0 and Negative: any expression=0.|Screening visit (≤ 28 Days prior to dosing)|Protein biomarkers analysis set included all participants in the safety analysis set who had at least protein biomarker assessment.||Participants|||Number
860381|NCT00721409|Secondary|Presence or Absence of Tumor Tissue Biomarkers at Phase 2 - Ki67|Frequency of tumor tissue biomarker Ki67 was evaluated in across treatment groups.|Screening visit (≤ 28 Days prior to dosing)|All participants in the Safety Analysis set who had a Ki67 protein biomarker assessment.||Participants|||Number
860382|NCT00721409|Secondary|Presence or Absence of Tumor Tissue Biomarkers at Phase 2 - p16/INK4A, CCND1|Tissue samples were used for retrospective biomarker analyses. For Phase 2 Part 2, the tissue samples were sent to a central laboratory for the assessment of participant selection biomarkers. For Phase 2 Part 1, the assessment of the biomarkers (CCND1 amplification and/or loss of p16) were performed retrospectively from the available samples.|Screening visit (≤ 28 Days prior to dosing)|Copy number analysis set included participants in the Safety Analysis Set who had at least 1 of the biomarker assessments.||Participants|||Number
860383|NCT00721409|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Modified Brief Pain Inventory in Pain Interference Scale (mBPI-sf) Questionnaire at Phase 2|The mBPI-sf is a validated and reliable self-report questionnaire which consists of 13 questions that assess the severity and impact of pain on daily function. The 13 items of the questionnaire make up two scales and two single items. The scales include the 4-item Pain Severity Scale (worst pain, least pain, average pain, and pain right now) and the 7-item Pain Interference Scale (general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life). Each item of the pain severity and pain interference scales are based on a 11-point numeric rating scale from 0 (“no pain” or “does not interfere”) to 10 (“pain as bad as you can imagine” or “completely interferes”).|Baseline, End of treatment (approximately 41 months)|Patient reported outcome evaluable participants included participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication, had baseline data, and at least one post-baseline measurement.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
860384|NCT00721409|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Modified Brief Pain Inventory in Pain Severity Scale (mBPI-sf) Questionnaire at Phase 2|The mBPI-sf is a validated and reliable self-report questionnaire which consists of 13 questions that assess the severity and impact of pain on daily function. The 13 items of the questionnaire make up two scales and two single items. The scales include the 4-item Pain Severity Scale (worst pain, least pain, average pain, and pain right now) and the 7-item Pain Interference Scale (general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life). Each item of the pain severity and pain interference scales are based on a 11-point numeric rating scale from 0 (“no pain” or “does not interfere”) to 10 (“pain as bad as you can imagine” or “completely interferes”).|Baseline, End of treatment (approximately 41 months)|Patient reported outcome evaluable participants included participants who had received at least 1 dose of study medication, had baseline data, and at least one post-baseline measurement.||Units on a scale||Standard Error|Mean
860385|NCT00721409|Secondary|Time to Tumor Progression (TTP) at Phase 2-Investigator Assessment|Time in weeks, (months or years) from randomization or (start of study treatment for non-randomized studies) to first documentation of objective tumor progression. TTP was calculated as (first event date or last known progression-free date minus the date of randomization [or first dose of study medication for non-randomized studies] plus 1) divided by 7 or 30.44 if in months. Tumor progression was determined from oncologic assessment data (where data meet the criteria for progressive disease [PD] per RECIST).|From randomization up to the end of treatment (approximately 41 months)|ITT was used. This represented all randomized participants from Ph2P1or Ph2P2 or Ph2P1+Ph2P2, where participants were classified according to the randomized treatment regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860386|NCT00721409|Secondary|Number of Participants With CBR at Phase 2 - Investigator Assessment|CBR is defined as a confirmed complete response (CR), confirmed partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) for at least 24 weeks on study according to RECIST.|From randomization up to the end of treatment (approximately 41 months)|ITT was used. This represented all randomized patients from Ph2P1or Ph2P2 or Ph2P1+Ph2P2, where participants were classified according to the randomized treatment regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860387|NCT00721409|Secondary|Duration of Response at Phase 2 - Investigator Assessment|Time in weeks, (months or years) from randomization or (start of study treatment for non-randomized studies) to first documentation of objective tumor progression. TTP was calculated as (first event date or last known progression-free date minus the date of randomization [or first dose of study medication for non-randomized studies] plus 1) divided by 7 or 30.44 if in months. Tumor progression was determined from oncologic assessment data (where data meet the criteria for progressive disease [PD] per RECIST).|From randomization up to the end of treatment (approximately 41 months)|A subset of ITT population i.e., participants who had response was used for this analysis.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860388|NCT00721409|Secondary|Objective Response Rate - Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Objective Response in Participants With Measurable Disease at Phase 2- Investigator Assessment|Percentage of participants with objective response based assessment of confirmed CR or PR according to RECIST. Confirmed responses are those that persist on repeat imaging study at least 4 weeks after initial documentation of response. Per RECIST v1.0: CR defined as disappearance of all target lesions and non-target lesions. PR defined as ≥30% decrease in sum of the LD of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum LD according to RECIST associated to non-progressive disease response for non target lesions. Measurable disease referred to the lesions that was accurately measured in at least 1 dimension (longest diameter to be recorded) as ≥20 mm with conventional techniques or as ≥10-16 mm with spiral computer tomography scan (depending on reconstruction interval). Clinical lesions were only be considered measurable when they were superficial (eg, skin nodules, palpable lymph nodes).|From randomization up to the end of treatment (approximately 41 months)|Participants in ITT population with measurable disease were used.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860389|NCT00721409|Secondary|Objective Response Rate - Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Objective Response at Phase 2- Investigator Assessment|Percentage of participants with objective response based assessment of confirmed CR or confirmed PR according to RECIST. Confirmed responses are those that persist on repeat imaging study at least 4 weeks after initial documentation of response. Per RECIST v1.0: CR defined as disappearance of all target lesions and non-target lesions. PR defined as ≥30% decrease in sum of the longest diameters (LD) of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum LD according to RECIST associated to non-progressive disease response for non target lesions.|From randomization up to the end of treatment (approximately 41 months)|ITT was used. This represented all randomized participants from Ph2P1or Ph2P2 or Ph2P1+Ph2P2, where participants were classified according to the randomized treatment regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860390|NCT00721409|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) at Phase 2|Time in weeks or months from randomization to date of death due to any cause. OS was calculated as (the death date or last known alive date (if death date unavailable) minus the date of randomization plus 1) divided by 7 or 30.44 if in months.|From randomization until death (assessed up to 41 months)|ITT was used. This represented all randomized participants from Ph2P1or Ph2P2 or Ph2P1+Ph2P2, where participants were classified according to the randomized treatment regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860391|NCT00721409|Secondary|Number of Participants With Increase From Baseline in Corrected QT (QTc) Interval at Phase 1|Triplicate 12-lead ECG measurements (each recording separated by approximately 2 minutes) were performed and average was calculated. The time corresponding to beginning of depolarization to repolarization of the ventricles (QT interval) was adjusted for RR interval using QT and RR from each ECG by Fridericia’s formula (QTcF = QT divided by cube root of RR), by Bazette’s formula (QTcB = QT divided by square root of RR) and corrected QT interval according to study-specific criteria (QTcS). Participants with maximum increase from baseline of 30 to less than (<) 60 msec(borderline) and greater than or equal to (>=) 60 msec (prolonged) were summarized.|Cycle 1 Day 1 prior to dosing, Cycle 1 Day 14 (2, 4 [prior to meal], 8, 24, 48, and 96 hours after dosing of Palbociclib), Cycle 2 Day 1 and Day 14 (prior to and 4 hours after dosing of letrozole)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any agent of the combination.||Participants|||Number
860392|NCT00721409|Secondary|Summary of Plasma Letrozole Pharmacokinetic Parameter Following Letrozole Alone and in Combination With Palbociclib: Tmax at Phase 1|On Cycle 2 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples for Palbociclib and letrozole were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after Palbociclib and letrozole dosing. On Cycle 2 Day 28, plasma pharmacokinetic samples were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after letrozole dosing.|Cycle 2 Day 14, and Cycle 2 Day 28|The pharmacokinetic concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 concentration measurement in at least 1 pharmacokinetic assessment day. The pharmacokinetic parameter analysis set consisted of all participants treated who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest.||Hour||Full Range|Median
860393|NCT00721409|Secondary|Summary of Plasma Letrozole Pharmacokinetic Parameter Following Letrozole Alone and in Combination With Palbociclib: Cmax at Phase 1|On Cycle 2 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples for Palbociclib and letrozole were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after Palbociclib and letrozole dosing. On Cycle 2 Day 28, plasma pharmacokinetic samples were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after letrozole dosing.|Cycle 2 Day 14, and Cycle 2 Day 28|The pharmacokinetic concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 concentration measurement in at least 1 pharmacokinetic assessment day. The pharmacokinetic parameter analysis set consisted of all participants treated who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860394|NCT00721409|Secondary|Summary of Plasma Letrozole Pharmacokinetic Parameter Following Letrozole Alone and in Combination With Palbociclib: AUC24 at Phase 1|On Cycle 2 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples for Palbociclib and letrozole were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after Palbociclib and letrozole dosing. On Cycle 2 Day 28, plasma pharmacokinetic samples were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after letrozole dosing.|Cycle 2 Day 14, Cycle 2 Day 28|The pharmacokinetic concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 concentration measurement in at least 1 pharmacokinetic assessment day. The pharmacokinetic parameter analysis set consisted of all participants treated who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest.||ng·hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860395|NCT00721409|Secondary|Summary of Plasma Palbociclib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Parameter Following Palbociclib Alone and in Combination With Letrozole: Apparent Volume of Distribution (Vz/F) at Phase 1|On Cycle 1 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 96 and 120 hours after Palbociclib dosing. On Cycle 2 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples for Palbociclib and letrozole were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after Palbociclib and letrozole dosing.|Cycle 1 Day 14, and Cycle 2 Day 14|The pharmacokinetic concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 concentration measurement in at least 1 pharmacokinetic assessment day. The pharmacokinetic parameter analysis set consisted of all participants treated who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest.||L||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860396|NCT00721409|Secondary|Summary of Plasma Palbociclib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Parameter Following Palbociclib Alone and in Combination With Letrozole: Apparent Clearance (CL/F) at Phase 1|On Cycle 1 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 96 and 120 hours after Palbociclib dosing. On Cycle 2 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples for Palbociclib and letrozole were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after Palbociclib and letrozole dosing.|Cycle 1 Day 14, and Cycle 2 Day 14|The pharmacokinetic concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 concentration measurement in at least 1 pharmacokinetic assessment day. The pharmacokinetic parameter analysis set consisted of all participants treated who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest.||L/hr||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860466|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Pressure at Week 104|Calculated as mean blood pressure at week 104-baseline.|Week 0, week 104|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set using (LOCF) last observation carried forward is all randomised and exposed subjects from the double-blind period, who have been exposed to at least one dose of trial product||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
860397|NCT00721409|Secondary|Summary of Plasma Palbociclib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Parameter Following Palbociclib Alone and in Combination With Letrozole: Terminal Plasma Half-life (t1/2) at Phase 1|On Cycle 1 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 96 and 120 hours after Palbociclib dosing. On Cycle 2 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples for Palbociclib and letrozole were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after Palbociclib and letrozole dosing.|Cycle 1 Day 14, and Cycle 2 Day 14|The pharmacokinetic concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 concentration measurement in at least 1 pharmacokinetic assessment day. The pharmacokinetic parameter analysis set consisted of all participants treated who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest.||Hour||Standard Deviation|Mean
860398|NCT00721409|Secondary|Summary of Plasma Palbociclib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Parameter Following Palbociclib Alone and in Combination With Letrozole: Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration (Tmax) at Phase 1|On Cycle 1 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 96 and 120 hours after Palbociclib dosing. On Cycle 2 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples for Palbociclib and letrozole were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after Palbociclib and letrozole dosing.|Cycle 1 Day 14, and Cycle 2 Day 14|The pharmacokinetic concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 concentration measurement in at least 1 pharmacokinetic assessment day. The pharmacokinetic parameter analysis set consisted of all participants treated who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest.||Hour||Full Range|Median
860399|NCT00721409|Secondary|Summary of Plasma Palbociclib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Parameter Following Palbociclib Alone and in Combination With Letrozole: Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Cmax) at Phase 1|On Cycle 1 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 96 and 120 hours after Palbociclib dosing. On Cycle 2 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples for Palbociclib and letrozole were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after Palbociclib and letrozole dosing.|Cycle 1 Day 14, and Cycle 2 Day 14|The pharmacokinetic concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 concentration measurement in at least 1 pharmacokinetic assessment day. The pharmacokinetic parameter analysis set consisted of all participants treated who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest.||ng/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860400|NCT00721409|Secondary|Summary of Plasma Palbociclib Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Parameter Following Palbociclib Alone and in Combination With Letrozole: Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to 24 Hours (AUC24) at Phase 1|On Cycle 1 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 96 and 120 hours after Palbociclib dosing. On Cycle 2 Day 14, plasma pharmacokinetic samples for Palbociclib and letrozole were collected prior to and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after Palbociclib and letrozole dosing.|Cycle 1 Day 14, and Cycle 2 Day 14|The pharmacokinetic concentration set included all participants who were treated and had at least 1 concentration measurement in at least 1 pharmacokinetic assessment day. The pharmacokinetic parameter analysis set consisted of all participants treated who had at least 1 of the pharmacokinetic parameters of primary interest.||ng·hr/mL||Geometric Coefficient of Variation|Geometric Mean
860401|NCT00721409|Secondary|Percentage of Participants With Clinical Benefit Response (CBR) at Phase 1|CBR is defined as a confirmed CR, confirmed PR, or stable disease (SD) for at least 24 weeks on study according to RECIST. Confirmed responses are those that persisted on repeat imaging >= 4 weeks after initial response.|From Baseline up to end of study (assessed up to 55 months)|Efficacy analysis set included all enrolled participants with the disease under study, adequate baseline disease assessment, and who started study treatment.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860402|NCT00721409|Secondary|Objective Response Rate - Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Objective Tumor Response at Phase 1|Percentage of participants with objective response based assessment of confirmed complete response (CR) or confirmed partial response (PR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Confirmed responses are those that persist on repeat imaging study at least 4 weeks after initial documentation of response. Per RECIST v1.0: CR defined as disappearance of all target lesions and non-target lesions. PR defined as ≥30% decrease in sum of the longest diameters (LD) of the target lesions taking as a reference the baseline sum LD according to RECIST associated to non-progressive disease response for non target lesions.|From Baseline up to end of study (assessed up to 55 months)|Efficacy analysis set included all enrolled participants with the disease under study, adequate baseline disease assessment, and who started study treatment.||Percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860403|NCT00721409|Primary|Progression-Free Survival (PFS) at Phase 2 - Investigator Assessment|PFS was defined as the time from randomization (or the first dose of study treatment for non-randomized studies) to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or to death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. PFS calculated as (Weeks or Months) = (first event date minus randomization or the first dose date plus 1) divided by 7 (or 30.44 if in months). PFS is usually characterized by the median, 25% percentile,75% percentile and their 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs).|From randomization date to date of first documentation of progression or death (assessed up to 41 months)|Intent-to-Treat (ITT) was used. This represented all randomized participants from Ph2P1 or Ph2P2 or Ph2P1+Ph2P2, where participants were classified according to the randomized treatment regardless of what treatment, if any, was received.||Months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860404|NCT00721409|Primary|Number of Participants With Dose Limiting Toxicities at Phase 1|Dose limiting toxicity was defined as any of the following TEAEs occurring during the second cycle of treatment and possibly attributable to the combination of letrozole plus Palbociclib: 1. Grade 4 hematologic toxicity (including platelets <25,000/μL, ANC <500/μL). 2. Grade 3 neutropenia associated with a documented infection or fever ≥38.5°C. 3. Grade ≥3 non-hematologic toxicities, except those that have not been maximally treated (eg, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hypertension). 4. Delay by ≥1 week in receiving the next scheduled dose of either study treatment due to persisting treatment-related toxicities (platelet count <50,000/μL; ANC <1,000/μL; nonhematologic toxicities of Grade ≥3 severity). 5. Inability to deliver at least 80% of the planned Palbociclib or letrozole doses during Cycle 2 due to toxicity possibly attributable to the study treatment.|Cycle 2 (4 weeks)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any agent of the combination.||Participants|||Number
860405|NCT00721409|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Related Adverse Events at Phase 1|An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|Maximum treatment duration (approximately 55 months)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any agent of the combination.||Participants|||Number
860406|NCT00721409|Primary|Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs; All Causalities) at Phase 1|An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. Serious adverse event (SAE) was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly.|Maximum treatment duration (approximately 55 months)|Safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of any agent of the combination.||Participants|||Number
860407|NCT00719186|Secondary|Neonatal Complication Rate||September 2008 - December 2011|Neonatal complications reported per infant, an infant could have more than one complication.||participants|||Number
860408|NCT00719186|Secondary|Number of Serious Adverse Events||as few as 5 months, up to 16 months|||events|||Number
860409|NCT00719186|Secondary|Number of Ovulations||as few as 5 months, up to 16 months|||ovulations|||Number
860410|NCT00719186|Secondary|Number of Pregnancy||as few as 5 months, up to 16 months|||participants|||Number
860411|NCT00719186|Primary|Live Birth|The primary outcome measure is the occurrence of a live birth during the study period. Safety measures will be the number and type of reported adverse events in subjects and offspring.|as few as 5 months, up to 16 months|||participants|||Number
860412|NCT00690924|Primary|Grade III-IV Toxicities or Any Grade II Toxicities Lasting More Than 2 Weeks|"Number of participants with Adverse Events, Grade II lasting more than two weeks or Grade III or higher, graded according to CTEP Version 4 of the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) will be utilized for AE reporting.
CTEP Version 4 of the CTCAE is identified and located at:
http://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/electronic_applications/ctc.htm."|3 months|All treated and eligible patients||participants|||Number
860413|NCT00581529|Secondary|Mean Percentage of Reference Volume Receiving 19.25 Gy and 38.5Gy for Patients With Acceptable and Unacceptable Cosmesis|One of the studies secondary outcomes was to evaluate the impact of short term accelerated partial breast radiation therapy on cosmetic results. To determine the association between dosimetric factors and cosmesis, the mean percentage of prescription dose received to WBV (Whole breast volume: corresponding region typically encompassed by traditional tangent fields) was compared among participants who developed fair/poor (F/P) cosmetic outcomes (unacceptable cosmesis) and participants who maintained excellent/good (E/G) cosmetic outcomes (acceptable cosmesis).|5 years|34 for patients were enrolled and treated. 2 patients were excluded from all analysis due to fair baseline cosmesis.||Percentage of reference volume||Full Range|Mean
860414|NCT00581529|Secondary|Dosimetric and Volumetric Differences Between Treatment Plans for Partial Breast Irradiation and Other Treatment Planning Methods|Dosimetric and volumetric differences between treatment plans for partial breast irradiation and other treatment planning methods for the target (partial breast) and organs at risk (e.g. heart, ipsilateral lung, contralateral breast)a subset of 20.|not specific|At the time the study was written, we planned to compare treatment methods. Over the course of the study, it was determined additional analysis was not needed due to the analysis and publication of this outcome by several other investigators.|||||
860415|NCT00581529|Primary|Percentage of Participants That Experience Cosmetic Adverse Events (AEs)|The primary outcome was to determine the rate of acute cosmetic adverse events and late cosmetic adverse events at follow-up visits over 5 years. To determine the rate of adverse events, the percentage of participants experiencing no cosmetic AEs, at least 1 grade 1 toxicity, at least 1 grade 2 toxicity, and at least 1 grade 3 toxicity were calculated.|5 years|34 for patients were enrolled and treated. 2 patients were excluded from all analysis due to fair baseline cosmesis. 2 additional patients underwent mastectomies and were therefore excluded from analysis (cosmesis could not be assessed at 5 years). 30 patients were analyzed.||percentage of participants|||Number
860416|NCT00581529|Primary|Rate of Local Control at 5 Years|The primary objective was to determine the rate of local control (the arrest of cancer growth at the site of origin) of cancer in the treated breast at 5 years following breast-conserving surgery and partial breast radiotherapy using IMRT.|5 years|34 for patients were enrolled and treated.||percentage of participants|||Number
860417|NCT00581256|Secondary|The Number of Participants That Experience Pericarditis and Pneumonitis|"To compare rates of pericarditis and pneumonitis by treatment arm.
Pericarditis (inflammation of the pericardium):
Grade1: Asymptomatic, ECG or physical exam; changes consistent with pericarditis Grade 2: Symptomatic pericarditis Grade 3: Pericarditis with physiologic consequences Grade 4: Life-threatening Pneumonitis (inflammation of the walls of the alveoli in the lungs) Grade 1: Asymptomatic, radiographic findings only Grade 2: Symptomatic, not interfering with ADL (activities of daily living) Grade 3: Symptomatic, interfering with ADL Grade 4: Life-threatening"|approx 1 year|||participants|||Number
860418|NCT00581256|Secondary|Number of Participants With New Lung Perfusion Defects|To compare changes in lung perfusion defects by treatment arm. Perfusion defects (PD) were assessed by comparing normalized perfusion distributions against our institution’s normal polar map databases for the left anterior descending artery (LAD).|baseline to approx 1 year|One patient randomized to the IMRT arm did not receive her post-RT lung SPECT scan therefore pre- and post-radiotherapy Lung SPECT scans were available for 53 patients.||participants|||Number
860419|NCT00581256|Secondary|Mean Percent Change in Ejection Fraction (LVEF)|To compare change in ejection fraction between treatment arms.|baseline to approx 1 year|||percent change||Full Range|Mean
860435|NCT00495469|Secondary|Number of Participants With Vital Signs of Potential Clinical Importance (PCI) at Any Time on Therapy|Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), heart rate (HR) were measured pre-dose in duplicate, after the participant has been lying quietly for 5 minutes, and then in duplicate 3 minutes after standing up. Participants were asked to refrain from smoking for at least 30 minutes prior to vital sign measurements.|Up to Week 12|Safety Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860420|NCT00581256|Primary|The Number of Participants With a Significant Increase in Perfusion Defects (PD)|To compare the extent of new myocardial perfusion defects following breast cancer radiotherapy using the best standard 3-D radiotherapy technique, partially wide tangent fields, versus the best optimized technique. Perfusion defects (PD) were assessed by comparing normalized perfusion distributions against our institution’s normal polar map databases for the left anterior descending artery (LAD) using thresholds of 2.5-SD (standard deviation) and 1.5-SD below the normal mean. On the basis of interest variability, a PD increase greater than 5% or 10% was considered significant for 2.5- and 1.5-SD thresholds, respectively.|1 Year|||participants|||Number
860421|NCT00578331|Secondary|Average Number of Days of Rescue Medication Taken||Month 1 through Month 12|12 patients had missing average use of rescue medication data.||Days||Standard Deviation|Mean
860422|NCT00578331|Primary|Mean Response at Day 30 to the Patient-rated Relief Assessment Questionnaire|Mean Patient-Rated Relief Assessment at Day 30. The patient-rated relief assessment (PRRA) was a 4-point scale with 1=Complete Relief; 2=Moderate Relief; 3=Mild Relief; and 4=No Relief.|day 30|29 patients had missing mean patient-rated relief assessment data.||Unit on PRRA scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860423|NCT00542425|Secondary|Change in Bone Mineral Density, Total Spine.|Total analyzable spine bone mineral density (BMD) was analyzed by DXA at Week 48.|12 months|The extension population included any patient who continued in the extended 24 weeks of treatment; N=55. 49 of the 55 extension patients had data available for analysis at Week 48.||Percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
860424|NCT00542425|Secondary|Change in Bone Mineral Density, Total Hip.|Total analyzable hip bone mineral density (BMD) was analyzed by DXA at Week 24.|6 months|The intent to treat (ITT) population included any patient who received at least one dose of study medication; N=221. 182 of the 221 ITT patients had data available for analysis at Week 24.||Percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
860425|NCT00542425|Secondary|Change in Bone Mineral Density, Femoral Neck.|Femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) was analyzed by DXA at Week 24.|6 months|The intent to treat (ITT) population included any patient who received at least one dose of study medication; N=221. 182 of the 221 ITT patients had data available for analysis at Week 24.||Percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
860426|NCT00542425|Primary|Change in Bone Mineral Density, Total Spine.|Total analyzable spine bone mineral density (BMD) was analyzed by DXA at Week 24.|6 months|The intent to treat (ITT) population included any patient who received at least one dose of study medication; N=221. 187 of the 221 ITT patients had data available for analysis at Week 24.||Percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
860427|NCT00542425|Primary|Change in Marker of Bone Metabolism, PINP|PINP, N-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen, is a marker of anabolic bone growth.|6 months|The intent to treat (ITT) population included any patient who received at least one dose of study medication; N=221. 193 of the 221 ITT patients had data available for analysis at Week 24.||Percent change from baseline||Standard Deviation|Mean
860428|NCT00537290|Secondary|The Efficacy of Rituximab|Outcome measures scored as complete response(CR),partial(PR),and none(NR) at 24 weeks.For thrombocytopenia,CR defined as a platelet count of ≥150×109/μl,PR as 100–149,and NR as <100.For CVD,CR defined as the disappearance of cardiac lesions,PR as 50%improvement,and NR as no change.For skin ulcer,CR defined as disappearance,PR as 50% improvement,and NR as no change.For aPL nephropathy,CR defined as a normal serum creatinine level,inactive urinary sediment,and urinary protein:creatinine 0.5;PR as a serum cr level 15%above baseline,RBCs per high-power field 50%above baseline with no casts,50%improvement in the urinary prt:cr,and estimated GFR 10%above baseline;and NR as the absence of C/PR.For cognitive dysfunction,CR defined as normalization of the cognitive impairment index with 50%improvement,PR as abnormal index with 50%,and NR as no change.|24 weeks|All patients enrolled in the study||Participants|||Count of Participants
860429|NCT00537290|Primary|Number of Participants Experiencing Serious and Non Serious Adverse Events|Serious and non-serious adverse events were evaluated throughout 52 weeks + additional 4 months for the patients with low B cell counts.|52 weeks + additional 4 months if needed|All patients enrolled in the study.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860430|NCT00521885|Secondary|Deep Vein Thrombosis|Confirmed by Lower Extremity Ultra-sonogram|14 Days||||||
860431|NCT00521885|Primary|Bleeding Rate Study Day 1-14 (Minor vs Major) With 30 Day f/u|Bleeding Rate- Major bleeding defined as one or a combination of the following: Fatal; Bleeding at critical organ sites (intracranial, retroperitoneal, intraocular, pericardial, spinal or adrenal). Minor Bleeding defined as clinically overt bleeding that is not major bleeding.|14 days||||||
860432|NCT00495469|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Hematology Value of PCI at Any Time on Therapy|Hematology parameters: Hemoglobin, Hematocrit, Platelet count and White blood cells were assessed for abnormal PCI values. Participants were instructed to fast for at least 8 hours prior to all study visits for the collection of laboratory samples. Samples were collected at Baseline, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12 and at Week 14 (follow up).|Up to Week 12|Safety population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860433|NCT00495469|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Chemistry Value of PCI at Any Time on Therapy|Chemistry parameters: Albumin, Alkaline phosphatase, Alanine animotransferase, Aspartate aminotransferase, Total billirubin, Calcium, Carbon dioxide/Bicarbonate, Glucose, Potassium, Sodium, Phosphorus and Total protein were assessed for abnormal PCI values. Participants were instructed to fast for at least 8 hours prior to all study visits for the collection of laboratory samples. Samples were collected at Baseline, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12 and at Week 14 (follow up).|Up to Week 12|Safety Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860434|NCT00495469|Secondary|Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings at Any Time Post-Baseline|Full 12-lead ECGs were recorded at Randomization (Week 0), Week 4, and Week 12 or early withdrawal. If the QTc was >500 milliseconds on the locally read ECG recording, an additional 2 ECG recordings at 10 minute intervals were made at that visit. If the average QTc for the 3 recordings was >500 milliseconds, the participant was withdrawn from the study.|Up to Week 12|Safety Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860436|NCT00495469|Secondary|Number of Participants With On-therapy Hypoglycemia|Participants were provided with a Daily Glucose Monitoring Log to record glucose meter readings and to record symptoms of hypoglycemia. A separate electronic case report form (eCRF) page was provided to capture events of hypoglycemia.|Up to Week 12|Safety Population.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860437|NCT00495469|Secondary|Number of Participants With Any On-therapy Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)|AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant, temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not considered related to the medicinal product. SAE was defined as any untoward event resulting in death, life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect or any other situation according to medical or scientific judgment.|Up to Week 12|Safety Population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study medication.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860438|NCT00495469|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Body Weight|Body weight measurement was taken at Baseline, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12 and at Week 14 (follow up). Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. Adjusted mean is presented as LS mean.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 12|ITT Population with LOCF.||kilograms||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860439|NCT00495469|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Total Cholesterol/HDL-c Ratio|Blood samples were collected at Baseline and at Week 12 (or early withdrawal). Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. Adjusted mean is presented as LS mean.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 12|ITT Population with LOCF. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860440|NCT00495469|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in LDL-c/HDL-c Ratio|Blood samples were collected at Baseline and at Week 12 (or early withdrawal). Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. Adjusted mean is presented as LS mean.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 12|ITT Population with LOCF. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Ratio||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860441|NCT00495469|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-c)|Blood samples were collected at Baseline and at Week 12 (or early withdrawal). Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. Adjusted mean is presented as LS mean.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 12|ITT Population with LOCF. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860442|NCT00495469|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-c)|Blood samples were collected at Baseline and at Week 12 (or early withdrawal). Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. Adjusted mean is presented as LS mean.|Baseline (Week 0) and Week 12|ITT Population with LOCF. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860443|NCT00495469|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Total Cholesterol|Samples were collected at Baseline and at Week 12 (or early withdrawal). Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. Adjusted mean is presented as LS mean.|Baseline (Week 0) and at Week 12|ITT Population with LOCF. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860444|NCT00495469|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Triglycerides|Samples were collected at Baseline and at Week 12 (or early withdrawal). Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. Adjusted mean is presented as LS mean.|Baseline (Week 0) and at Week 12|ITT Population with LOCF. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||mmol/L||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860445|NCT00495469|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Responders at Week 12|Differences between treatment groups in the proportion of participants who achieved FPG targets of <7.0 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) (126 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL]) and <7.8 mmol/L (140 mg/dL) at Week 12 in the ITT population with LOCF were assessed based on a logistic regression model with terms included for treatment and Baseline FPG. The proportion of participants who achieved the target of <5.5 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) at Week 12 within each treatment group were summarized only. Differences between treatment groups in the proportion of participants who achieved a clinically meaningful decreases from Baseline in FPG (1.7 mmol/L [>=30 mg/dL]) at Week 12 were assessed in the same manner.|Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860446|NCT00495469|Secondary|Number of Participants Who Were HbA1c Responders at Week 12|Differences between treatment groups in the proportion of participants who achieved HbA1c targets of <=6.5% and <7% at Week 12 in the ITT population with LOCF were assessed based on a logistic regression model with terms included for treatment and Baseline HbA1c. Differences between treatment groups in the proportion of participants who achieved a clinically meaningful decreases from Baseline in HbA1c (>=0.7%) at Week 12 were assessed in the same manner.|Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Participants|||Count of Participants
860465|NCT00425802|Primary|Overall Survival at 1 Year||1 year|Data for the remaining 10 patients was not fully collected or analyzed for publication||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860447|NCT00495469|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Fructosamine (Corrected)|The blood samples were collected at Baseline, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12 and Week 14 (follow up). Participants were asked to be on fast for at least 8 hours prior to each study visits and collection of lab samples. Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. The primary analysis was performed on the ITT Population with LOCF. Adjusted mean is presented as LS mean.|Baseline (Week 0) and at Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||micromoles per liter (µmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860448|NCT00495469|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)|The samples were collected at Baseline, Week 2, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12 and Week 14 (follow up). Participants were asked to be on fast for at least 8 hours prior to each study visits and collection of lab samples. Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. The primary analysis was performed on the ITT Population with LOCF. Adjusted mean is presented as LS mean.|Baseline (Week 0) and at Week 12|ITT Population. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||millimoles per liter (mmol/L)||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860449|NCT00495469|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in HbA1c at Weeks 4 and 8|The blood samples were collected at Baseline, Week 4, Week 8 and at Week 12 (or early withdrawal). Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 4 and 8 minus Baseline value. The primary analysis was performed on the ITT Population with LOCF.|Baseline (Week 0) and at Week 4 nad 8|ITT Population. Only those participants available at the specified time points were analyzed.||Percentage||Standard Deviation|Mean
860450|NCT00495469|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (Glycosylated Hemoglobin) (HbA1c) at Week 12|The blood samples were collected at Baseline, Week 4, Week 8 and at Week 12 (or early withdrawal). Baseline was defined as the period immediately preceding treatment with study medication (Week 0). For participants with missing Baseline assessment, the last pre-therapy value prior to the Baseline visit was used as the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was the value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. The primary analysis was performed on the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population with Last observation carried forward (LOCF). Adjusted mean is presented as least square (LS) mean.|Baseline (Week 0) and at Week 12|ITT Population consisted of all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study medication, had a Baseline assessment, and had at least one corresponding on-therapy efficacy assessment. Only those participants with data available at the indicated time points were analyzed.||Percentage||Standard Error|Least Squares Mean
860451|NCT00442611|Secondary|Change in Scleroderma Health Assessment Questionnaire|"The HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI) includes 20 items in 8 functional domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities) assessing the patient’s usual abilities in the past seven days. Each item is scored on a 0-3 scale (0=without any difficulty; 1=with some difficulty; 2=with much difficulty; 3=unable to do). The use of assistive devices for any domain increases the domain score by 1 point to a maximum of 3. The overall score is calculated by summing the highest item score in each of the domains and dividing the sum by 8, with an overall score of 0 indicating no disability, and a score of 3 indicating severe disability.
The time points compared were 6 months to baseline (6 months minus baseline)."|6 months|Participants with available data were analyzed.||HAQ-DI score||Standard Deviation|Mean
860452|NCT00442611|Secondary|Change in Pulmonary Function Tests|FVC (Forced Vital Capacity) is the amount of air that can be forcibly exhaled from the lungs after taking the deepest possible breath. DLCO (Diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide) is the extent to which oxygen passes from the lungs to the blood.|6 months|Participants with available data were analyzed.||% Predicted||Standard Deviation|Mean
860453|NCT00442611|Secondary|Digital Ulcerations at Baseline and Month 6||Baseline; Month 6|||ulcers||Standard Deviation|Mean
860454|NCT00442611|Secondary|Hand Extension at Baseline and Month 6||Baseline; Month 6|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
860455|NCT00442611|Secondary|Oral Aperture at Baseline and Month 6||Baseline; Month 6|||mm||Standard Deviation|Mean
860456|NCT00442611|Primary|Change in Modified Rodnan Skin Score|Modified Rodnan Skin Score measures skin thickness and is the sum of scores from 17 surface anatomic areas rated on a 0–3 scale (0=normal skin; 1=mild thickness; 2=moderate thickness; 3=severe thickness with inability to pinch the skin into a fold). Total modified Rodnan Skin Score ranges from 0 (best possible outcome) to 51 (worst possible outcome).|6 months|||MRSS score||Standard Deviation|Mean
860457|NCT00425802|Secondary|Immune Reconstruction/CD4+ Count at 1 Year||1 year|Data for the remaining 10 patients was not fully collected or analyzed for publication||cells/microliter||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860458|NCT00425802|Secondary|Immune Reconstruction/CD4+ Count at 6 Months||6 months|Data for the remaining 10 patients was not fully collected or analyzed for publication||cells/microliter||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860459|NCT00425802|Secondary|Response to Treatment||2 years|Data for the remaining 10 patients was not fully collected or analyzed for publication||Participants|||Count of Participants
860460|NCT00425802|Secondary|Immune Reconstruction/CD4+ Count at 3 Months||3 months|Data for the remaining 10 patients was not fully collected or analyzed for publication||cells/microliters||Inter-Quartile Range|Median
860461|NCT00425802|Secondary|Incidence of Chronic GVHD at 1 Year||1 year|Data for the remaining 10 patients was not fully collected or analyzed for publication||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860462|NCT00425802|Secondary|Incidence of Moderate to Severe Grades II to IV Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD) at 100 Days||100 days|Data for the remaining 10 patients was not fully collected or analyzed for publication||percentage of patients||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860463|NCT00425802|Secondary|Time to Platelet Engraftment||1 year|Data for the remaining 10 patients was not fully collected or analyzed for publication||days||Full Range|Median
860464|NCT00425802|Secondary|Time to Neutrophil Engraftment||2 years|Data for the remaining 10 patients was not fully collected or analyzed for publication||days||Full Range|Median
860467|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Blood Pressure at Week 20|Calculated as mean blood pressure at week 20-baseline.|Week 0, week 20|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set using (LOCF) last observation carried forward is all randomised and exposed subjects from the double-blind period, who have been exposed to at least one dose of trial product||mmHg||Standard Deviation|Mean
860468|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Waist Circumference at Week 104|Calculated as mean waist circumference at week 104-baseline.|Week 0, week 104|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
860469|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Waist Circumference at Week 20|Calculated as mean waist circumference at week 20-baseline.|Week 0, week 20|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||cm||Standard Deviation|Mean
860470|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Adiponectin at Week 104|Calculated as mean adiponectin at week 104-baseline. A low adiponectin level is associated with greater cardiovascular risk|Week 0, week 104|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860471|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Adiponectin at Week 20|Calculated as mean adiponectin at week 20-baseline. A low adiponectin level is associated with greater cardiovascular risk|Week 0, week 20|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||mcg/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860472|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fibrinogen at Week 104|Calculated as mean fibrinogen at week 104 - baseline. High fibrinogen is associated with greater cardiovascular risk|Week 0, week 104|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
860473|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fibrinogen at Week 20|Calculated as mean fibrinogen at week 20 - baseline. High fibrinogen is associated with greater cardiovascular risk|Week 0, week 20|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||g/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
860474|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PAI-1 (Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor 1) at Week 104|Calculated as mean PAI-1 (plasminogen activator inhibitor 1) at week 104-baseline. High PAI-1 is associated with greater cardiovascular risk|Week 0, week 104|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||U/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860475|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in PAI-1 (Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor 1) at Week 20|Calculated as mean PAI-1 (plasminogen activator inhibitor 1) at week 20-baseline. High PAI-1 is associated with greater cardiovascular risk|Week 0, week 20|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||U/mL||Standard Deviation|Mean
860476|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in hsCRP (Highly Sensitive C-reactive Protein) at Week 104|Calculated as mean hsCRP (highly sensitive C-reactive protein) at week 104- baseline. High hsCRP level is associated with greater cardiovascular risk|Week 0, week 104|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
860477|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in hsCRP (Highly Sensitive C-reactive Protein) at Week 20|Calculated as mean hsCRP (highly sensitive C-reactive protein) at week 20-baseline. High hsCRP level is associated with greater cardiovascular risk|Week 0, week 20|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||mg/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
860478|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c (Glycosylated Haemoglobin A1c) at Week 104|Calculated as mean HbA1c (glycosylated haemoglobin A1c) at week 104 - baseline|Week 0, week 104|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||percentage (%) of total haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
860479|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in HbA1c (Glycosylated Haemoglobin A1c) at Week 20|Calculated as mean HbA1c (glycosylated haemoglobin A1c) at week 20 - baseline|Week 0, week 20|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||percentage (%) of total haemoglobin||Standard Deviation|Mean
860480|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Insulin at Week 104|Calculated as mean fasting insulin at week 104 - baseline|Week 0, week 104|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
860481|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Insulin at Week 20|Calculated as mean fasting insulin at week 20 - baseline|Week 0, week 20|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set, only subjects with a valid assessment (LOCF, last observation carried forward not applied).||pmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
860482|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 104|Calculated as mean fasting plasma glucose at week 104 - baseline|Week 0, week 104|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set using (LOCF) last observation carried forward is all randomised and exposed subjects from the double-blind period, who have been exposed to at least one dose of trial product||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
860483|NCT00422058|Secondary|Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose at Week 20|Calculated as mean fasting plasma glucose at week 20 - baseline|Week 0, week 20|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set using (LOCF) last observation carried forward is all randomised and exposed subjects from the double-blind period, who have been exposed to at least one dose of trial product||mmol/L||Standard Deviation|Mean
860484|NCT00422058|Secondary|Mean Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 104|Calculated as mean body weight at week 104 - baseline|Week 0, week 104|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) is all randomised and exposed subjects from the double-blind period, who have been exposed to at least one dose of trial product.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
860485|NCT00422058|Primary|Mean Change From Baseline in Body Weight at Week 20|Calculated as mean body weight at week 20 - baseline|Week 0, week 20|ITT (intention to treat) analysis set using LOCF (last observation carried forward) is all randomised and exposed subjects from the double-blind period, who have been exposed to at least one dose of trial product.||kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
860486|NCT00359736|Primary|Change in 6-minute Walk Test|Distance in meters -- Distance (meters) walked in 6 minutes|0 - 6 months|||meters||Standard Deviation|Mean
860487|NCT00359736|Secondary|Dyspnea Score (Borg Scale)|"The Dyspnea score or Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) Scale score is a subjective rating of perceived exertion. In medicine this is used to document the patient's effort and exertion, breathlessness and fatigue during a physical test.
The Dyspnea score ranges from 0 (No breathlessness at all) to 10 (Maximum or extremely strong breathlessness).
IN this study the Specific Objective 2 was to assess and compare changes from baseline in pre- and post-exercise dyspnea in the sildenafil and placebo control groups."|0 - 6 months|||units on a scale||Standard Deviation|Mean
860488|NCT00331344|Secondary|Time to Progression (Phase II)|Measured from the start of protocol therapy until RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors Criteria) v1.0 progression. Progression is defined as a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions, or a measurable increase in a non-target lesion, or the appearance of new lesions.|Every 3 months until cancer progression/excessive toxicity or death|||months||95% Confidence Interval|Median
860489|NCT00331344|Primary|Dose Limiting Toxicities for Each Dose Level of Ixabepilone, Mitoxantrone Hydrochloride, and Prednisone in Patients With Hormone-refractory Metastatic Prostate Cancer That Progressed During or After Taxane-based Chemotherapy (Phase I).|Cohorts of 3 patients will be enrolled at each dose level; if 1 dose limiting toxicity (DLT) is observed then the cohort will be expanded to 6 patients. If a second DLT is observed, the previous dose level will be considered the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). If all observed DLT are due to neuropathy (specific to ixabepilone), then we would consider the previous dose level of Ixabepilone the MTD for that drug, and escalate mitoxantrone hydrochloride as described above to a maximum dose of 12 mg/m^2. Toxicities will be tabulated by grade for each dose cohort and overall for all patients accrued to the phase I study.|Course 1 (first 21 days)|Dose escalation safety study (Phase I)||Participants|||Count of Participants
860490|NCT00331344|Primary|Safety of the Combination of Ixabepilone, Mitoxantrone Hydrochloride, and Prednisone in Patients With Hormone-refractory Metastatic Prostate Cancer That Progressed During or After Taxane-based Chemotherapy (Phase I)|This study will utilize the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v3.0 for adverse event monitoring and reporting. The cumulative grade 3 or higher adverse events for all dose levels are noted below and in the table of adverse events.|Every 21 days until cancer progression/excessive toxicity or death|Phase I dose escalation study participants||Adverse Events (above threshold)|||Number
860491|NCT00331344|Primary|Proportion Responding to Treatment With of the Combination of Ixabepilone and Mitoxantrone Hydrochloride With Prednisone in Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer Patients Who Have Had Prior Taxane Chemotherapy Based Upon a PSA Decline of > 50% (Phase II)|"Descriptive statistics will be calculated to characterize the disease and treatment factors including the proportion responding with a 95% confidence interval. If accrual is completed and more than 15 of 58 patients show > 50% Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) declines after 3 courses, then the null hypothesis of a 20% response proportion will be rejected. PSA declines for individual patients will be plotted in the form of a waterfall diagram of maximal PSA declines.
58 patients were enrolled for phase II, two were ineligible so 56 patients were analyzed."|Every 3 courses until cancer progression/excessive toxicity or death|||Participants|||Count of Participants
860492|NCT00266864|Secondary|Resting Energy Expenditure|Resting Energy Expenditure was obtained by the measurement of exhaled air from fractions of mixed expired oxygen and carbon dioxide by a process known as indirect calorimetry. Data was collected under steady state conditions. Participants arrived at the laboratory for testing between the hours of 8:00 and 10:00 in the morning, following a 12-h fast, with a minimum of 24 h free from any type of exercise.|12 months|||kcal/day||Standard Deviation|Mean
860493|NCT00266864|Primary|Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) Assessment of Lean Tissue Mass (LTM)|Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry assessment of lean tissue mass (LTM) at 12 months. Total body scans were performed and the energy level used for each total body scan was based on subject thickness (e. g., thin, standard, or thick). To analyze the results of each total body scan, proprietary software algorithms were used to segment the body into trunk, pelvis, and upper and lower extremities using the standard regions of interest. In accordance with International Society for Clinical Densitometry guidelines, total body scans were repeated on 30 spinal cord injury subjects by the “on-and-off -the-table” method (i. e., subjects were repositioned between scans) and our precision error was equal to 1.2 % for LTM.|12 months|||kilograms||Standard Deviation|Mean
860494|NCT00249470|Secondary|HIV Risk Behaviors|Report no injection drug use or crack cocaine use.|every month for 6 months|The data represent the mean percentage of participants that reported no injection drug use or crack cocaine use. Missing assessments were considered positive (i.e., injection drug or crack cocaine use).||percentage of participants||Full Range|Mean
860495|NCT00249470|Secondary|Percent Opiate Negative|(total number of opiate-negative urine samples divided by the total number of urine samples provided)*100|every month for 6 months|intent to treat||percentage of opiate negative||Full Range|Mean
860496|NCT00249470|Primary|Cocaine Abstinence|Percentage of Monday, Wednesday, Friday urine samples that are negative for cocaine|6 months|||percentage of cocaine negative||Full Range|Mean
860497|NCT00223795|Primary|Peak Vertical Force on Affected Limb|An in-shoe dynamic, pressure distribution system (Pedar-X System, Novel Electronics, Inc., St. Paul, MN) was utilized to measure the vertical ground reaction force at the baseline visit and at the end of the first intervention period (two months) gait evaluations for both the control arm and cane user arm. The control arm was not given a cane to use at home during the two month intervention period. Peak vertical force on the affected limb was measured in the laboratory setting when both control group and cane user group walked with and without a cane at baseline and at the end of the first intervention period (2 months).|Baseline and end of first intervention period (2 months)|||N/kg||Standard Deviation|Mean
860498|NCT00005044|Secondary|Treatment-induced Morbidity (Highest Grade Toxicity Reported Per Patient)|Acute drug therapy and radiation (<= 90 days from start of RT) toxicity was graded using the Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) v.2.0 criteria; late toxicity was graded using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Late Radiation Morbidity Scoring schema. Grade refers to the severity of the toxicity. The CTC v2.0 assigns Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each toxicity based on this general guideline: Grade 1 Mild toxicity, Grade 2 Moderate toxicity, Grade 3 Severe toxicity, Grade 4 Life-threatening or disabling toxicity, Grade 5 Death related to toxicity. The highest grade acute and late toxicity was determined for each patient.|From randomization to 10 years. (Patients are followed until death or study termination, whichever occurs first.)|Eligible patients with adverse event data in corresponding time frame (during hormone therapy and <=90 days from RT start; > 90 days from RT start)||percentage of participants|||Number
860499|NCT00005044|Secondary|Time to Second Biochemical Failure (SBF) (10-year Rates Reported)|Time to SBF measured from date of randomization to the date of PSA increase of ≥1.0 ng/mL (from the nadir PSA after completion of protocol-specified therapy) after salvage androgen suppression was started; competing risks LRP, DM, and death without SBF; all others are censored. SBF is estimated using the cumulative incidence method. Ten-year rates are reported.|From randomization to 10 years. (Patients are followed until death or study termination, whichever occurs first.)|Eligible patients with follow-up data||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860500|NCT00005044|Secondary|Time to First Biochemical Failure (BF) (10-year Rates Reported)|"Protocol definition: Time to BF measured from date of randomization to first of (1) the midway date between the last non-rising PSA and the first rising PSA of three consecutive rises or (2) the date of the initiation of salvage hormone therapy; competing risks are LRP, DM, and death without BF; all others are censored.
Phoenix definition: Time to BF measured from date of randomization to first of (1) the date of documented rise of 2 ng/ml above the post-treatment(RT end date) nadir or (2) the date of the initiation of salvage hormone therapy; competing risks are LRP, DM, and death without BF; all others are censored. For both definitions BF is estimated using the cumulative incidence method. Ten year rates reported."|From randomization to 10 years. (Patients are followed until death or study termination, whichever occurs first.)|Eligible patients with follow-up data||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860501|NCT00005044|Secondary|Clinical Patterns of Tumor Recurrence: Time to Locoregional Progression (LRP) and Time to Distant Metastasis (DM) (10 Year Rates Reported)|Time to distant metastasis measured from date of randomization to date of documented distant metastasis; competing risks are BF, LRP, and death without DM; all others are censored. Time to locoregional progression measured from date of randomization to date of documented local or regional progression; competing risks are BF [protocol definition- first of (1) the midway date between the last non-rising PSA and the first rising PSA of three consecutive rises or (2) the date of the initiation of salvage hormone therapy], DM, and death without LRP; all others are censored. LRP and DM are estimated using the cumulative incidence method. Ten -year rates are reported.|From randomization to 10 years. (Patients are followed until death or study termination, whichever occurs first.)|Eligible patients with follow-up data||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860502|NCT00005044|Secondary|Disease-free Survival (DFS) (10-year Rates Reported)|Disease-free survival time is defined as time from randomization to the date of disease progression or death from any cause and is estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients last known to be alive are censored at the date of last contact. Ten-year rate is reported.|From randomization to 10 years. (Patients are followed until death or study termination, whichever occurs first.)|Eligible patients without follow-up data||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860503|NCT00005044|Secondary|Overall Survival (OS) (10-year Rates Reported)|Survival time is defined as time from randomization to the date of death from any cause and is estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients last known to be alive are censored at the date of last contact. Ten-year rate is reported.|From randomization to 10 years. (Patients are followed until death or study termination, whichever occurs first.)|Eligible patients with follow-up data||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
860504|NCT00005044|Primary|Disease-specific Survival (DSS) (10-year Rates Reported)|Disease-specific survival time is measured from date of randomization to death due to prostate cancer based on study chair review, with prostate-cancer death defined as (1) primary cause of death certified as due to prostate cancer, (2) complication of therapy, irrespective of disease status, (3) disease progression in the absence of any anti-tumor therapy, or (4) a 1.0 ng/ml-exceeding-rise in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level on at least two consecutive occasions that occurs during or after salvage androgen suppression therapy. Death due to other causes is considered a competing risk. All others are censored. DSS is estimated using the cumulative incidence method. Ten-year rate is reported.|From randomization to 10 years. (Patients are followed until death or study termination, whichever occurs first.)|Eligible patients with follow-up data||percentage of participants||95% Confidence Interval|Number
